Translator Disclaimer
23 September 2021 Comparison of Modified CDC Gravid, BG-Bowl, and CDC Autocidal Gravid Ovitraps to Collect Gravid and Host-Seeking Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) in Northeastern Florida
Rui-De Xue, Jacob Dilla, Lea R. Bangonan
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

There are several kinds of commercial traps available in the market for surveillance and control of female mosquitoes. Usually these traps target only host–seeking or gravid individuals but not both. This study examined whether CDC gravid, BG-Bowl, and a fan-operated CDC-autocidal gravid ovitrap, each baited with a BG lure and southern live oak (Quercus virginiana Mill.; Fagaceae) leaf litter infusion, could collect host-seeking and gravid Aedes aegypti (L.) (Diptera: Culicidae) simultaneously. These traps were evaluated initially in a semi-field environment that consisted of outdoor screened enclosures where 200 female Ae. aegypti were released (half were gravid). For the field study, traps were placed at 3 sites in downtown St. Augustine, Florida, USA. All traps captured host-seeking and gravid females in the semi-field enclosures, but some did not collect both physiological stages in the field study. Only the BG-bowl trap in the semi-field and field studies collected the greatest number of females that included host-seeking and gravid Aedes.

Aedes aegypti (L.) (Diptera: Culicidae) is the primary arboviral vector of yellow fever, dengue fever, chikungunya, and Zika (Smith et al. 2018). Population surveillance of container-inhabiting mosquitoes, specifically Ae. aegypti, is an important priority of Anastasia Mosquito Control District (Dixon et al. 2020). There are several types of adult mosquito traps available commercially for surveillance and control of mosquitoes (Popko & Walton 2016), but most primarily collect either gravid or host-seeking mosquitoes but not both. For example, Reiter et al. (1986) reported on a trap designed for the collection of gravid Culex mosquitoes referred to as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) gravid trap. Later, Mackay et al. (2013) and Barrera et al. (2014a) reported on the development of the CDC's autocidal gravid ovitrap designed to collect container-inhabiting gravid Aedes. Later this trap proved to be a useful method for trapping local populations of Ae. aegypti in Puerto Rico (Barrera et al. 2014b). Eiras et al. (2014) also reported on another gravid trap that was later commercially developed as the Biogents Gravid (BG) Aedes Trap. A smaller economical version, called the BG Bowl Trap, was later developed by the company and marketed primarily for residential use for the control of container Aedes. All these traps use some form of fermented vegetative infusion to lure mosquitoes into them. During Anastasia Mosquito Control District surveillance and control operations, local residents and our mosquito control technicians always have been interested in commercial mosquito traps with multiple functions that could collect host-seeking and gravid mosquitoes simultaneously. Recently, Liu et al. (2019) reported on efforts to increase the collection of host-seeking and gravid Ae. aegypti into the CDC-autocidal gravid ovitrap trap by using a BG lure, whereas Zhu et al. (2019) added a suction fan to this trap for the same purpose. We report here on the continuation of a project to increase the functionality of commercial mosquito traps for simultaneous surveillance and control of host-seeking as well as gravid container-inhabiting Aedes.

Materials and Methods

A CDC gravid trap (John W. Hock, Gainesville, Florida, USA), BG-bowl trap (Biogents AG, Regensburg, Germany), and a modified CDC-autocidal gravid ovitrap trap, as described by Zhu et al. (2019), were used in this study. Each trap contained 200 mL of southern live oak (Quercus virginiana Mill. [Fagaceae]) leaf litter infusion (10 g of leaf litter per liter of reverse osmosis water fermented after 2 wk) plus a proprietary BG lure (Biogents AG, Regensburg, Germany) suspended inside (Fig. 1).

SEMI-FIELD TEST

Evaluations were conducted in 3 screened enclosures (5 × 6 × 13 m) with a centrally located 11 m2 covered pavilion on the grounds of the Anastasia Mosquito Control District. In each cage, 100 gravid (7–10 d old previously blood-fed 3 d prior) and 100 host-seeking Ae. aegypti mosquitoes (non-blood fed of similar age) were released into each screened outdoor enclosure that contained a single trap. Gravid status was sampled from the blood fed cage and determined by dissection of females with positive eggs in her ovaries before release. Study design followed a 3 × 3 Latin square rotation between enclosures. Mosquitoes were collected from traps after 24 h. The experiment was repeated 3 times for a total of 27 testing dates.

FIELD TEST

All 3 trap types, baited with BG lures, were placed together at 3 different sites in downtown St. Augustine (29.8946889°N, 81.3145194°W), Florida, USA. Specific locations were: South Street, Miruela Street, and Magnolia Street, which were selected based on previous Ae. aegypti larval surveillance (Dixon et al. 2020). Prior to placement, all traps were filled with 200 mL of southern oak leaf litter infusion as mentioned earlier in the semi-field study. A BG Bowl trap modified with a small catch mesh bag was attached to the bottom of the fan inside the trap to collect mosquitoes. All traps were placed in shaded locations 30 m apart, and collections removed at 24, 48, and 72 h post deployment. Batteries were replaced at the time of each mosquito collection. Mosquitoes were identified using the taxonomic key of Darsie and Morris (2003), and gravid status was verified by the presence of eggs in the ovaries after dissection under a stereomicroscope (United Scope LLC, Irvine, California, USA).

Fig. 1.

Mean dissected female mosquitoes with non-gravid and gravid Ae. aegypti collected by 3 modified commercial mosquito traps after release in screened outdoor enclosures.

img-z2-13_162.jpg

Mean trap data in the semi-field and field studies were subjected separately to a multivariate ANOVA using JMP statistic software (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina, USA). All differences were considered significant at P ≤ 0.05. Due to the small data sets, the Tukey-Kramer HSD test was not performed.

Results

In the semi-field experiments, average numbers of female mosquitoes collected by BG Bowl, autocidal gravid ovitrap, and CDC-gravid traps were 100 ± 15, 65.6 ± 3, and 50 ± 8, respectively. We dissected an average of 96.6 ± 0.6 females caught by BG Bowl, 65.5 ± 0.4 females caught by autocidal gravid ovitrap, and 43 ± 0.3 females caught by the CDC-gravid trap. Averages of 72.7 ± 0.53 females caught by BG Bowl were host-seeking and non-gravid, 60 ± 0.4 females caught by autocidal gravid ovitrap trap were host-seeking and non-gravid, and 33.3 ± 0.2 females caught by CDC-gravid traps were host-seeking and non-gravid. We found a significant difference (F2, 6 = 5.58; P = 0.043) between the mean numbers of host-seeking and gravid Ae. aegypti collected by each of the 3 traps in the screened outdoor enclosures; the BG-Bowl trap collected the most. However, there was no difference (F2, 6 = 3.22; P = 0.112) between traps when comparing the mean number of gravid mosquitoes collected.

In field trials, a total of 443 adult female mosquitoes were captured, of which 94% were Ae. aegypti, 1% Ae. albopictus (Skuse) (Diptera: Culicidae), and 5% Culex quinquefasciatus Say (Diptera: Culicidae). The overall percentage of Ae. aegypti host-seeking and gravid individuals from all traps was 40% and 60%, respectively. Field collection site significantly influenced (F = 3.93; P = 0.008) the average number of mosquitoes of both physiological groups in traps, with the greatest number obtained from South Street (4.6) compared with the other 2 locations. The BG-bowl trap significantly collected the greater number of mosquitoes than the other 2 traps (F = 13.27; P < 0.0001).

Discussion

Traps combined with attractants have been found to increase the collection of adult mosquitoes (Xue & Smith 2013; Irish et al. 2015, Acevedo et al. 2020). Our study showed that the CDC gravid trap baited with Southern oak leaf infusion and a BG lure collected more Ae. aegypti mosquitoes than Culex, the latter for which it was originally designed in the field. A previous study by Cilek et al. (2017) showed that the BG Aedes trap, CDC-autocidal gravid ovitrap, and CDC gravid trap each baited with Southern oak leaf infusion collected Ae. aegypti, Ae. albopictus, and Cx. quinquefasciatus mosquitoes in northeastern Florida. In that study, the CDC gravid trap collected significantly more gravid Cx. quinquefasciatus mosquitoes than the other 2 trap types. But the CDC-autocidal gravid ovitrap and the BG Aedes trap collected a similar number of gravid Aedes mosquitoes (Cilek et al 2017). Our results also showed that the 3 modified traps collected host-seeking as well as gravid Ae. aegypti in a similar region of northeastern Florida.

In summary, a simple addition to the BG-Bowl trap, baited Southern oak leaf infusion, and BG lure (including a small mesh collection bag), collected significantly more host-seeking and gravid Ae. aegypti in the semi-field and field studies, compared with the other 2 traps in our study. Moreover, we found that the CDC gravid trap similarly modified, collected a greater number of host-seeking and gravid Ae. aegypti compared with the CDC-autocidal gravid ovitrap that added a suction fan. This finding indicates that the modified BG-Bowl trap and CDC gravid trap could be used for the surveillance, and possibly as a control trap tool, for host-seeking and gravid container-inhabiting Aedes.

Acknowledgment

We thank C. Efstathion, M. Pearson, T. Columbus, K. Blore, K. Gaines, V. Aryaprema, E. Zeszutko, and C. Cunningham for their technical help. We also thank the local St. Augustine residents for allowing us to use their properties for the study. This is a research report only. The name of the commercial products mentioned in this publication does not constitute nor imply endorsement by the Anastasia Mosquito Control District, and is used only for more complete information.

References Cited

1.

Acevedo N, Efstathion C, Autry D, Aryaprema VS, Xue RD, Qualls WA. 2020. Gravid infusion water comparison for collection of the West Nile virus vector Culex quinquefasciatus Say. Journal of the Florida Mosquito Control Association 67: 10–14. Google Scholar

2.

Barrera R, Amador M, Acevedo V, Caban B, Felix G, Mackay AJ. 2014a. Use of the CDC autocidal gravid ovitrap to control and prevent outbreaks of Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae). Journal of Medical Entomology 51: 145–154. Google Scholar

3.

Barrera R, Amador M, Acevedo V, Hemme RR, Felix G. 2014b. Sustained, area-wide control of Aedes aegypti using CDC Autocidal Gravid Ovitraps. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 91: 1269–1276. Google Scholar

4.

Cilek JE, Knapp JA, Richardson AG. 2017. Comparative efficiency of Biogents gravid Aedes trap, CDC autocidal gravid ovitrap, and CDC gravid trap in Northeastern Florida. Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association 33: 103–107. Google Scholar

5.

Darsie RF, Morris CD. 2003. Keys to the adult females and fourth instar larvae of the mosquitoes of Florida (Diptera: Culicidae). Technical Bulletin of the Florida Mosquito Control Association 1: 1–159. Google Scholar

6.

Dixon D, Autry D, Martin J, Xue RD. 2020. Surveillance of Aedes aegypti after resurgence in downtown St. Augustine, Northeastern Florida. Journal of the Florida Mosquito Control Association 67: 15–22. Google Scholar

7.

Eiras AE, Buhagiar TS, Ritchie SA. 2014. Development of the gravid Aedes trap for the capture of adult female container-exploiting mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae). Journal of Medical Entomology 51: 200–209. Google Scholar

8.

Irish SR, Batengana BM, Eiras AE, Cameron MM. 2015. Evaluation of the AtrAedes lure for collection of Culex quinquefasciatus in gravid traps. Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association 31: 107–109. Google Scholar

9.

Liu H, Dixon D, Bibbs CS, Xue RD. 2019. Autocidal gravid ovitrap incorporation with attractants for control of gravid and host-seeking Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae). Journal of Medical Entomology 65: 576–578. Google Scholar

10.

Mackay AJ, Amador M, Barrera R. 2013. An improved autocidal gravid ovitrap for the control and surveillance of Aedes aegypti. Parasites & Vectors 6: 225. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-3305-6-225 Google Scholar

11.

Popko DA, Walton WE. 2016. Large-volume gravid traps enhance collection of Culex vectors. Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association 32: 91–102. Google Scholar

12.

Reiter P, Jakob WL, Francy DB, Mullenix JB. 1986. Evaluation of the CDC gravid trap for the surveillance of St. Louis encephalitis vectors in Memphis, Tennessee. Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association 2: 209–211. Google Scholar

13.

Smith M, Dixon D, Bibbs CS, Autry D, Xue RD. 2018. Diel patterns of Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) after resurgence in St. Augustine, Florida as collected by a mechanical rotator trap. Journal of Vector Ecology 43: 201–204. Google Scholar

14.

Xue RD, Smith ML. 2013. Field evaluation of octenol, Lurex3, BG-lure, and octenol+Lurex3 combination as baits in BG sentinel traps to collect Aedes albopictus. Technical Bulletin of the Florida Mosquito Control Association 9: 21–23. Google Scholar

15.

Zhu D, Khater EM, Chao S, Dixon D, Bibbs CS, Xue RD. 2019. Modifying the autocidal gravid ovitraps (AGO) with a powered suction fan and additional lures to increase the collection of released Aedes aegypti and a natural population of Ae. albopictus (Diptera: Culicidae). Journal of Vector Ecology 44: 282–284. Google Scholar
Rui-De Xue, Jacob Dilla, and Lea R. Bangonan "Comparison of Modified CDC Gravid, BG-Bowl, and CDC Autocidal Gravid Ovitraps to Collect Gravid and Host-Seeking Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) in Northeastern Florida," Florida Entomologist 104(3), 162-164, (23 September 2021). https://doi.org/10.1653/024.104.0303
Published: 23 September 2021
JOURNAL ARTICLE
3 PAGES


SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
Back to Top