4.3 Article

Investigation of relationships between temperature and developmental rates of tick Ixodes scapularis (Acari: Ixodidae) in the laboratory and field

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ENTOMOLOGY
卷 41, 期 4, 页码 622-633

出版社

ENTOMOLOGICAL SOC AMER
DOI: 10.1603/0022-2585-41.4.622

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Relationships between temperature and preoviposition, preeclosion, and premolt developmental periods for the tick Ixodes scapularis Say were investigated by holding field-collected ticks in the laboratory at temperatures of 0 to 32degreesC at constant daylength. The duration of these developmental periods decreased significantly with increasing temperature. Host of origin, prior storage at 4degreesC, and season of collection of the ticks were also significantly associated with variations in the duration of the preoviposition period. For each developmental stage, the effect of temperature on development rate was best described as a power relationship. Laboratory-derived relationships were used to predict dates for molting, oviposition, and eclosion of engorged larvae and nymphs, engorged adult females and egg masses, respectively, placed in the field during 1989-1992. Predicted dates for oviposition by adult females, eclosion of eggs, and molting of engorged larvae were within 2 wk of the observed dates, and field-observed seasonal activity of questing larvae and nymphs also was predicted well by laboratory data. Molting of engorged nymphs and seasonal activity of questing adult ticks were, however, poorly predicted. Our findings suggest that duration of development in the field, of larvae from engorged adult females, and of nymphs from engorged larvae, may be explained largely by temperature effects alone, whereas emergence of adult I. scapularis from engorged nymphs may depend on temperature-independent diapause phenomena. The significance of these findings for understanding current and future distributions of I. scapularis, and of the pathogens it transmits, is discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据