COMPARING THE EFFICIENCY OF DIFFERENT CARBON DIOXIDE SOURCES IN COLLECTING MOSQUITO VECTOR SPECIES ON THE TEMPE CAMPUS OF ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY.

Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI:10.2987/22-7094
Ndey Bassin Jobe, Silvie Huijben, James B Will, John Townsend, Krijn P Paaijmans
{"title":"COMPARING THE EFFICIENCY OF DIFFERENT CARBON DIOXIDE SOURCES IN COLLECTING MOSQUITO VECTOR SPECIES ON THE TEMPE CAMPUS OF ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY.","authors":"Ndey Bassin Jobe,&nbsp;Silvie Huijben,&nbsp;James B Will,&nbsp;John Townsend,&nbsp;Krijn P Paaijmans","doi":"10.2987/22-7094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We compared the effectiveness of 4 different carbon dioxide (CO2) sources (sugar-fermented BG-CO2, sugar-fermented Fleischmann yeast, dry ice, and compressed gas cylinders) in attracting different mosquito species in 2 separate 4 × 4 Latin square trials. The CO2 generated by dry ice and the gas cylinders collected more Culex quinquefasciatus than the sugar-fermented BG-CO2 and Fleischmann yeasts during the 1st trial (16-h surveillance periods), but there was no significant difference in Aedes aegypti numbers. There were no significant differences between the different CO2 sources in collecting Cx. quinquefasciatus and Ae. aegypti mosquitoes in the 2nd trial (24-h surveillance periods). Catches for Culiseta inornata and Cx. tarsalis were too low in both experiments for formal statistical analysis. Data can be used to inform local mosquito surveillance programs, but the selection of a CO2 source will also depend on financial and logistical constraints.</p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2987/22-7094","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We compared the effectiveness of 4 different carbon dioxide (CO2) sources (sugar-fermented BG-CO2, sugar-fermented Fleischmann yeast, dry ice, and compressed gas cylinders) in attracting different mosquito species in 2 separate 4 × 4 Latin square trials. The CO2 generated by dry ice and the gas cylinders collected more Culex quinquefasciatus than the sugar-fermented BG-CO2 and Fleischmann yeasts during the 1st trial (16-h surveillance periods), but there was no significant difference in Aedes aegypti numbers. There were no significant differences between the different CO2 sources in collecting Cx. quinquefasciatus and Ae. aegypti mosquitoes in the 2nd trial (24-h surveillance periods). Catches for Culiseta inornata and Cx. tarsalis were too low in both experiments for formal statistical analysis. Data can be used to inform local mosquito surveillance programs, but the selection of a CO2 source will also depend on financial and logistical constraints.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
比较不同二氧化碳源对美国亚利桑那州立大学坦佩校区蚊媒采集效率。
在2个单独的4 × 4拉丁方试验中,我们比较了4种不同二氧化碳源(糖发酵BG-CO2、糖发酵弗莱施曼酵母、干冰和压缩气瓶)吸引不同蚊子种类的效果。在第1次试验(监测周期16 h)中,干冰和气瓶产生的CO2比糖发酵BG-CO2和Fleischmann酵母收集到的致倦库蚊更多,但埃及伊蚊的数量差异不显著。不同CO2源对Cx的收集无显著差异。致倦库蚊和伊蚊。第2期(24小时监测期)为埃及伊蚊。渔获量:在两个实验中,Tarsalis的含量太低,无法进行正式的统计分析。数据可以用来为当地的蚊子监测项目提供信息,但是二氧化碳源的选择也将取决于财政和后勤方面的限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1