evaluation of fly traps under desert conditions usda-ars, center for medical, agricultural and...

Evaluation of Fly Traps Under Desert Conditions

USDA-ARS, Center for Medical, Agricultural and Veterinary Entomology (CMAVE)

1600 S. W. 23rd Drive, Gainesville, Florida 32608, USA

Jerome A. Hogsette

House Fly Trap Evaluation in Cairo

Attraction of Moisture-Deprived House Flies to Dry Baits

House Fly Ultraviolet Light Trap Studies

2009 Projects

Stable Fly Repellent Studies

Cairo, 2009: No project proposals from foreign scientists were approved by the Egyptian Ministry of Health .

Off the job…

Evaluation of BugJammer traps for trapping house flies at the Vaccine

Institute, Cairo, Egypt

Jerome A. Hogsette1, Hanafi A. Hanafi2, Ulrich R. Bernier1, Daniel L. Kline1, Emad Y. Fawaz2, Barry D.

Furman2, and David F. Hoel3

1USDA-AS, CMAVE, Gainesville, FL, 2NAMRU-3, Cairo, Egypt,

3Program Manager, Medical Entomology Collaborations, Navy Marine Corps Public Health

Center Detachment, CMAVE, Gainesville, FL

BugJammer traps - evaluated in Aswan in 2008 against sand flies.

What is the BugJammer Trap?

Housing covered by a sticky sleeve.

Speaker

PVC tube with electronics inside

Base

Power

Underneath the speaker are 4 ‘D’ cell batteries to power a microchip…

…on which is recorded the heartbeat of a dog in a

continuous loop.

To compare the efficacy of the BugJammerfly traps, with and without sound, with

the standard Captivator fly trapsbaited with the Farnam fly bait.

Performance of fly traps is dependent on geographic location and

environmental conditions.

Although they have been designed as a trap for stable flies, BugJammer

traps will attract and capture house flies outdoors as well as indoors.

Objective:

Hypothesis:

Military Relevance:

Vaccine Institute

Trap placement

1. The traps were rotated through the 3 trap sites.

2. The traps were left at each site for 24 hours, then flies were counted.

4. Tests were replicated 3 times.

3. Captivator trap was emptied and recharged with water and bait. Clean sticky paper was put on the Bug Jammer traps.

Experimental design:2009

Three traps – BugJammer on, BugJammer off, Captivator with bait.

The wet jar trap (Farnam Captivator) captured significantly more house flies.

Mean = 5958.9 (± 905.8)a

BugJammer

Mean = 1322.8 (± 377.2)b

2009Results

Captivator

Bugjammer Sound On:

Mean = 1383.7 (± 341.0)b

Bugjammer Sound Off:

However, it appears that the BugJammer trap may have captured the maximum number of flies it could hold within the 24-hr test period.

USDA-ARS, Center for Medical, Agricultural and Veterinary Entomology (CMAVE)

1600 S. W. 23rd Drive, Gainesville, Florida 32608, USA

Jerome A. Hogsette

House Fly Ultraviolet Light Trap Studies

UV Light traps

To compare the effects of housing design on fly attraction and capture.

Trap housings that allow for maximum exposure of fluorescent tubes will

attract and catch the most flies.

UV light traps used by the military should provide the highest

level of control possible.

Objective:

Hypothesis:

Military Relevance:

How does design affect efficacy?

First Component

1. Housing: Open front or closed front.

First Component

1. Housing: Open front vs restricted open front.

Second Component

2. Main attractant: UV light.

Currently, all tubes used in light traps are standard models.

Standard UV tubes – 350 – 370 nm.

Black light blue tubes – 350 nm and higher.

Third Component

3. Glue Boards: With or without pheromone.

Traps about 90 cm above the floor.

Room size: 3.3 by 6.0 m.

Tube type/trap housing type/glue board typecombinations rotated after every test.

Experimental Design

Fifty house flies counted and released.

Counts made 1, 4, and 24 hours after flies were released.

Experimental Design

Open grid housing – 15.3 ± 1.8a

Closed grid housing – 13.5 ± 1.5a

Results

BL tube in open grid housing – 20.2 ± 2.6a

BLB tube in open grid housing – 10.3 ± 1.7b

Results

BL tube in closed grid housing – 13.6 ± 2.3a

BLB tube in closed grid housing – 13.5 ± 1.9a

Results

Glue board with pheromone – 17.7 ± 3.1a

Glue board without pheromone – 22.7 ± 4.2a

Glue board with pheromone – 7.7 ± 1.8b

Glue board without pheromone – 13.0 ± 2.6b

Results

Open grid housing and BL tube with:

Open grid housing and BLB tube with:

Glue board with pheromone – 15.8 ± 2.5c

Glue board without pheromone – 11.3 ± 3.6c

Glue board with pheromone – 12.2 ± 1.2d

Glue boards without pheromone – 14.8 ± 3.7d

Results

Closed grid housing and BL tube with:

Closed grid housing and BLB tube with:

Grid type Tube type Glue board type

Open – 15.3 ± 1.8a

Closed – 13.5 ± 1.5a

BL – 20.2 ± 2.6a

BLB – 10.3 ± 1.7b

BL – 13.6 ± 2.3c

BLB – 13.5 ± 1.9c

P – 17.7 ± 3.1a

P – 7.7 ± 1.8b

N – 22.7 ± 4.2a

N – 13.0 ± 2.6b

P – 15.8 ± 2.5c

P – 12.2 ± 1.2d

N – 11.3 ± 3.6c

N – 14.8 ± 3.7d

Results

NSN for the Terminator trap.

Similar trap/bait evaluations are planned in other geographical locations in different climatic zones, eg. Northern Australia and Peru.

Future Direction:

Technology Transfer:Manuscripts in preparation.

The End