| Title: | Assessment of synthetic floral-based attractants and sugar baits to capture male and female Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) |
| Author(s): | Fikrig K; Johnson BJ; Fish D; Ritchie SA; |
| Address: | "Yale School of Public Health, Yale University, 60 College Street, P.O. Box 208034, New Haven, CT, 06520, USA. kmfikrig@gmail.com. College of Public Health, Medical and Veterinary Sciences, James Cook University, PO Box 6811, Cairns, QLD, 4870, Australia. Yale School of Public Health, Yale University, 60 College Street, P.O. Box 208034, New Haven, CT, 06520, USA. Australian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine, James Cook University, PO Box 6811, Cairns, QLD, 4870, Australia" |
| DOI: | 10.1186/s13071-016-1946-y |
| ISSN/ISBN: | 1756-3305 (Electronic) 1756-3305 (Linking) |
| Abstract: | "BACKGROUND: The viruses transmitted by Aedes aegypti, including dengue and Zika viruses, are rapidly expanding in geographic range and as a threat to public health. In response, control programs are increasingly turning to the use of sterile insect techniques resulting in a need to trap male Ae. aegypti to monitor the efficacy of the intervention. However, there is a lack of effective and cheap methods for trapping males. Thus, we attempted to exploit the physiological need to obtain energy from sugar feeding in order to passively capture male and female Ae. aegypti (nulliparous and gravid) in free-flight attraction assays. Candidate lures included previously identified floral-based (phenylacetaldehyde, linalool oxide, phenylethyl alcohol, and acetophenone) attractants and an attractive toxic sugar bait-based (ATSB) solution of guava and mango nectars. A free-flight attraction assay assessed the number of mosquitoes attracted to each candidate lure displayed individually. Then, a choice test was performed between the best-performing lure and a water control displayed in Gravid Aedes Traps (GAT). RESULTS: Results from the attraction assays indicated that the ATSB solution of guava and mango nectars was the most promising lure candidate for males; unlike the floral-based attractants tested, it performed significantly better than the water control. Nulliparous and gravid females demonstrated no preference among the lures and water controls indicating a lack of attraction to floral-based attractants and sugar baits in a larger setting. Although the guava-mango ATSB lure was moderately attractive to males when presented directly (i.e. no need to enter a trap or other confinement), it failed to attract significantly more male, nulliparous female, or gravid female Ae. aegypti than water controls when presented inside a Gravid Aedes Trap. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the use of volatile floral-based attractants and sugar mixtures that have been identified in the literature is not an effective lure by which to kill Ae. aegypti at ATSB stations nor capture them in the GAT. Future trapping efforts would likely be more successful if focused on more promising methods for capturing male and female Ae. aegypti" |
| Keywords: | "Aedes/*physiology Animals Behavior, Animal Female *Insect Vectors Male Mangifera Mosquito Control/methods *Odorants *Plant Nectar Psidium *Sugars Aedes aegypti Dengue Entomological surveillance Floral lures Mosquito trap Sugar lures Zika;" |
| Notes: | "MedlineFikrig, Kara Johnson, Brian J Fish, Durland Ritchie, Scott A eng Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't England 2017/01/18 Parasit Vectors. 2017 Jan 17; 10(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s13071-016-1946-y" |
