秘鲁亚马逊地区沙蝇(双翅目:沙蝇科:白蛉科)商业诱蚊灯现场监测评价及库斯科省新种记录。

IF 1.3 3区 农林科学 Q2 Environmental Science
Sergio Méndez-Cardona, Alejandro Lopera-Toro, Juliana A Morales-Monje, Adrian Forsyth, Olga L Cabrera-Quintero
{"title":"秘鲁亚马逊地区沙蝇(双翅目:沙蝇科:白蛉科)商业诱蚊灯现场监测评价及库斯科省新种记录。","authors":"Sergio Méndez-Cardona, Alejandro Lopera-Toro, Juliana A Morales-Monje, Adrian Forsyth, Olga L Cabrera-Quintero","doi":"10.52707/1081-1710-50.1-60","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The CDC light trap with incandescent light is the most commonly used method for conducting sand fly surveillance. However, new trap models that use LED lights might provide a more cost-effective alternative. This study compared the efficacy of a modified commercial Katchy light trap with two CDC light trap models in capturing sand flies in the Amazonian rainforest of Peru. Using a 3 x 3 randomized Latin square design, the light traps were compared based on phlebotomine sand fly species total abundance, species richness, sex-specific collections, and efficiency in capturing potential vector species. A total of 1,184 sand flies were collected, representing nine genera and 25 species, including three species that had not been previously reported in the Cusco department. Significant differences in sand fly collections based on trap type were found, with the modified Katchy light trap capturing significantly higher total abundance and species richness compared to CDC light traps. This pattern held for both female and male sand flies, with the modified Katchy trap also collecting more potential vector species in terms of both abundance and species richness, although differences in potential vector species richness were only significant compared to the incandescent CDC light trap. These results suggest that the modified Katchy trap is a viable, cost-effective alternative for sand fly surveillance, offering potential improvements in leishmaniasis vector monitoring.</p>","PeriodicalId":56065,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vector Ecology","volume":"50 1","pages":"60-68"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Field evaluation of a commercial light trap for sand fly (Diptera: Psychodidae: Phlebotominae) surveillance in the Peruvian Amazon and new species records for Cusco Department.\",\"authors\":\"Sergio Méndez-Cardona, Alejandro Lopera-Toro, Juliana A Morales-Monje, Adrian Forsyth, Olga L Cabrera-Quintero\",\"doi\":\"10.52707/1081-1710-50.1-60\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The CDC light trap with incandescent light is the most commonly used method for conducting sand fly surveillance. However, new trap models that use LED lights might provide a more cost-effective alternative. This study compared the efficacy of a modified commercial Katchy light trap with two CDC light trap models in capturing sand flies in the Amazonian rainforest of Peru. Using a 3 x 3 randomized Latin square design, the light traps were compared based on phlebotomine sand fly species total abundance, species richness, sex-specific collections, and efficiency in capturing potential vector species. A total of 1,184 sand flies were collected, representing nine genera and 25 species, including three species that had not been previously reported in the Cusco department. Significant differences in sand fly collections based on trap type were found, with the modified Katchy light trap capturing significantly higher total abundance and species richness compared to CDC light traps. This pattern held for both female and male sand flies, with the modified Katchy trap also collecting more potential vector species in terms of both abundance and species richness, although differences in potential vector species richness were only significant compared to the incandescent CDC light trap. These results suggest that the modified Katchy trap is a viable, cost-effective alternative for sand fly surveillance, offering potential improvements in leishmaniasis vector monitoring.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56065,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Vector Ecology\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"60-68\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Vector Ecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52707/1081-1710-50.1-60\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Environmental Science\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Vector Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52707/1081-1710-50.1-60","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Environmental Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

CDC白炽灯诱光器是最常用的沙蝇监测方法。然而,使用LED灯的新型捕集器可能会提供一种更具成本效益的替代方案。本研究比较了改良的商用Katchy捕光器和两种CDC捕光器在秘鲁亚马逊雨林捕获沙蝇的效果。采用3 × 3随机拉丁方设计,以白蛉总丰度、物种丰富度、性别特异性收集量和潜在病媒生物捕获效率为指标,对不同光诱法进行比较。共捕获沙蝇1184只,隶属9属25种,其中库斯科省未见沙蝇3种。不同类型的沙蝇捕获量存在显著差异,改良型Katchy灯诱捕获的沙蝇总丰度和物种丰富度显著高于CDC灯诱。这种模式在雌蝇和雄蝇中都存在,改进的Katchy诱捕器在丰度和物种丰富度方面也收集到更多的潜在媒介物种,尽管潜在媒介物种丰富度与白炽灯CDC诱捕器相比差异显著。这些结果表明,改进的Katchy诱捕器是一种可行的、具有成本效益的沙蝇监测替代方法,为利什曼病媒介监测提供了潜在的改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Field evaluation of a commercial light trap for sand fly (Diptera: Psychodidae: Phlebotominae) surveillance in the Peruvian Amazon and new species records for Cusco Department.

The CDC light trap with incandescent light is the most commonly used method for conducting sand fly surveillance. However, new trap models that use LED lights might provide a more cost-effective alternative. This study compared the efficacy of a modified commercial Katchy light trap with two CDC light trap models in capturing sand flies in the Amazonian rainforest of Peru. Using a 3 x 3 randomized Latin square design, the light traps were compared based on phlebotomine sand fly species total abundance, species richness, sex-specific collections, and efficiency in capturing potential vector species. A total of 1,184 sand flies were collected, representing nine genera and 25 species, including three species that had not been previously reported in the Cusco department. Significant differences in sand fly collections based on trap type were found, with the modified Katchy light trap capturing significantly higher total abundance and species richness compared to CDC light traps. This pattern held for both female and male sand flies, with the modified Katchy trap also collecting more potential vector species in terms of both abundance and species richness, although differences in potential vector species richness were only significant compared to the incandescent CDC light trap. These results suggest that the modified Katchy trap is a viable, cost-effective alternative for sand fly surveillance, offering potential improvements in leishmaniasis vector monitoring.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Vector Ecology
Journal of Vector Ecology Environmental Science-Ecology
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
5.90%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: The Journal of Vector Ecology is an international journal published by the Society for Vector Ecology. It is concerned with all aspects of the biology, ecology, and control of arthropod and vertebrate vectors and the interrelationships between the vectors and the agents of disease that they transmit. The journal publishes original research articles and scientific notes, as well as comprehensive reviews of vector biology based on presentations at Society meetings. All papers are reviewed by at least two qualified scientists who recommend their suitability for publication. Acceptance of manuscripts is based on their scientific merit and is the final decision of the editor, but these decisions may be appealed to the editorial board. The journal began publishing in 1974 and now publishes on-line only.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信