Dataset Information

Field evaluation of four widely used mosquito traps in Central Europe.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To monitor adult mosquitoes several trapping devices are available. These are differently constructed and use various mechanisms for mosquito attraction, thus resulting in different trapping sensitivities and efficacies for the various species. Mosquito monitoring and surveillance programs in Europe use various types of mosquito traps, but only a few comparisons have been conducted so far. This study compared the performance of four commercial trapping devices, which are commonly used in Europe.

Methods

Four different traps, Biogents Sentinel trap (BG trap), Heavy Duty Encephalitis Vector Survey trap (EVS trap), Centres for Disease Control miniature light trap (CDC trap) and Mosquito Magnet Patriot Mosquito trap (MM trap) were compared in a 4?×?4 latin square study. In the years 2012 and 2013, more than seventy 24-hour trap comparisons were conducted at ten different locations in northern and southern Germany, representing urban, forest and floodplain biotopes.

Results

Per 24-hour trapping period, the BG trap caught the widest range of mosquito species, the highest number of individuals of the genus Culex as well as the highest number of individuals of the species Ochlerotatus cantans, Aedes cinereus/geminus, Oc. communis and Culex pipiens/torrentium. The CDC trap revealed best performance for Aedes vexans, whereas the MM trap was most efficient for mosquitoes of the genus Anopheles and the species Oc. geniculatus. The EVS trap did not catch more individuals of any genus or species compared to the other three trapping devices. The BG trap caught the highest number of individuals per trapping period in urban environments as well as in wet forest, while the CDC trap caught the highest number of individuals in the floodplain biotopes. Additionally, the BG trap was most efficient for the number of mosquito species in urban locations.

Conclusion

The BG trap showed a significantly better or similar performance compared to the CDC, EVS or MM trap with regard to trapping efficacy for most common mosquito species in Germany, including diversity of mosquito species and number of mosquitoes per trapping period. Thus, the BG trap is probably the best solution for general monitoring or surveillance programs of adult mosquitoes in Central Europe.

SUBMITTER: Luhken R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4064298 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Field evaluation of four widely used mosquito traps in Central Europe.

Lühken Renke R Pfitzner Wolf Peter WP Börstler Jessica J Garms Rolf R Huber Katrin K Schork Nino N Steinke Sonja S Kiel Ellen E Becker Norbert N Tannich Egbert E Krüger Andreas A

Parasites & vectors 20140612

<h4>Background</h4>To monitor adult mosquitoes several trapping devices are available. These are differently constructed and use various mechanisms for mosquito attraction, thus resulting in different trapping sensitivities and efficacies for the various species. Mosquito monitoring and surveillance programs in Europe use various types of mosquito traps, but only a few comparisons have been conducted so far. This study compared the performance of four commercial trapping devices, which are commo ...[more]

PMID: 24924481

Similar Datasets

Project description:Sampling for adult mosquito populations is a means of evaluating the efficacy of vector control operations. The goal of this study was to evaluate and identify the most efficacious mosquito traps and combinations of attractants for malaria vector surveillance along the Thai-Myanmar border.In the first part of the study, the BG-Sentinel™ Trap (BGS Trap) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention miniature light trap (CDC LT) baited with different attractants (BG-lure® and CO2) were evaluated using a Latin square experimental design. The six configurations were BGS Trap with BG-lure, BGS Trap with BG-lure plus CO2, BGS Trap with CO2, CDC LT with BG-lure, CDC LT with BG lure plus CO2, and CDC LT with CO2. The second half of the study evaluated the impact of light color on malaria vector collections. Colors included the incandescent bulb, ultraviolet (UV) light-emitting diode (LED), green light stick, red light stick, green LED, and red LED.A total of 8638 mosquitoes consisting of 42 species were captured over 708 trap-nights. The trap types, attractants, and colored lights affected numbers of female anopheline and Anopheles minimus collected (GLM, P < 0.01). Results revealed that BGS Trap captured many anophelines but was significantly less than the CDC LT. The CDC LT, when baited with BG-lure plus CO2 captured the greatest number of anopheline females with a catch rate significantly higher than the CDC LT baited with BG-lure or CO2 alone (P < 0.05). The number of anopheline females collected from the CDC LT baited with CO2 was greater than the CDC LT baited with BG-lure (646 vs 409 females). None of the alternative lights evaluated exceeded the performance of the incandescent light bulb in terms of the numbers of anopheline and An. minimus collected.We conclude that the CDC LT augmented with an incandescent light shows high potential for malaria vector surveillance when baited with CO2 and the BG-lure in combination and can be effectively used as the new gold standard technique for collecting malaria vectors in Thailand.

Project description:BackgroundDifferent trapping devices and attractants are used in the mosquito surveillance programs currently running in Europe. Most of these devices target vector species belonging to the genera Culex or Aedes, and no studies have yet evaluated the effectiveness of different trapping devices for the specific targeting of Anopheles mosquito species, which are potential vectors of malaria in Europe. This study aims to fill this gap in knowledge by comparing the performance of trapping methods that are commonly used in European mosquito surveillance programs for Culex and Aedes for the specific collection of adults of species of the Anopheles maculipennis complex.MethodsThe following combinations of traps and attractants were used: (i) BG-Sentinel 2 (BG trap) baited with a BG-Lure cartridge (BG + lure), (ii) BG trap baited with a BG-Lure cartridge and CO2 (BG + lure + CO2), (iii) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-like trap (CDC trap) baited with CO2 (CDC + CO2), (iv) CDC trap used with light and baited with BG-Lure and CO2 (CDC light + lure + CO2). These combinations were compared in the field using a 4 × 4 Latin square study design. The trial was conducted in two sites in northeastern Italy in 2019. Anopheles species were identified morphologically and a sub-sample of An. maculipennis complex specimens were identified to species level by molecular analysis.ResultsForty-eight collections were performed on 12 different trapping days at each site, and a total of 1721 An. maculipennis complex specimens were captured. The molecular analysis of a sub-sample comprising 254 specimens identified both Anopheles messeae/Anopheles daciae (n = 103) and Anopheles maculipennis sensu stricto (n = 8) at site 1, while at site 2 only An. messeae/An. daciae (n = 143) was found. The four trapping devices differed with respect to the number of An. messeae/An. daciae captured. More mosquitoes were caught by the BG trap when it was used with additional lures (i.e. BG + lure + CO2) than without the attractant, CO2 [ratioBG+lure vs BG+lure+CO2 = 0.206, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.101-0.420, P < 0.0001], while no significant differences were observed between CDC + CO2 and CDC light + lure + CO2 (P = 0.321). The addition of CO2 to BG + lure increased the ability of this combination to capture An. messeae/An. daciae by a factor of 4.85, and it also trapped more mosquitoes of other, non-target species (Culex pipiens, ratioBG+lure vs BG+lure+CO2 = 0.119, 95% CI 0.056-0.250, P < 0.0001; Ochlerotatus caspius, ratioBG+lure vs BG+lure+CO2 = 0.035, 95% CI 0.015-0.080, P < 0.0001).ConclusionsOur results show that both the BG-Sentinel and CDC trap can be used to effectively sample An. messeae/An. daciae, but that the combination of the BG-Sentinel trap with the BG-Lure and CO2 was the most effective means of achieving this. BG + lure + CO2 is considered the best combination for the routine monitoring of host-seeking An. maculipennis complex species such as An. messeae/An. daciae. The BG-Sentinel and CDC traps have value as alternative methods to human landing catches and manual aspiration for the standardized monitoring of Anopheles species in Europe.

Dataset Information

Field evaluation of four widely used mosquito traps in Central Europe.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Field evaluation of four widely used mosquito traps in Central Europe.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets