Translator Disclaimer
1 June 2011 Evaluation of Surveillance Methods for Monitoring House Fly Abundance and Activity on Large Commercial Dairy Operations
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

Relative house fly, Musca domestica L., activity at three large dairies in central California was monitored during the peak fly activity period from June to August 2005 by using spot cards, fly tapes, bait traps, and Alsynite traps. Counts for all monitoring methods were significantly related at two of three dairies; with spot card counts significantly related to fly tape counts recorded the same week, and both spot card counts and fly tape counts significantly related to bait trap counts 1-2 wk later. Mean fly counts differed significantly between dairies, but a significant interaction between dairies sampled and monitoring methods used demonstrates that between-dairy comparisons are unwise. Estimate precision was determined by the coefficient of variability (CV) (or SE/mean). Using a CV = 0.15 as a desired level of estimate precision and assuming an integrate pest management (IPM) action threshold near the peak house fly activity measured by each monitoring method, house fly monitoring at a large dairy would require 12 spot cards placed in midafternoon shaded fly resting sites near cattle or seven bait traps placed in open areas near cattle. Software (FlySpotter;  http://ucanr.org/sites/FlySpotter/download/) using computer vision technology was developed to count fly spots on a scanned image of a spot card to dramatically reduce time invested in monitoring house flies. Counts provided by the FlySpotter software were highly correlated to visual counts. The use of spot cards for monitoring house flies is recommended for dairy IPM programs.

© 2011 Entomological Society of America
Alec C. Gerry, G. E. Higginbotham, L. N. Periera, A. Lam, and C. R. Shelton "Evaluation of Surveillance Methods for Monitoring House Fly Abundance and Activity on Large Commercial Dairy Operations," Journal of Economic Entomology 104(3), 1093-1102, (1 June 2011). https://doi.org/10.1603/EC10393
Received: 21 October 2010; Accepted: 1 January 2011; Published: 1 June 2011
JOURNAL ARTICLE
10 PAGES

This article is only available to subscribers.
It is not available for individual sale.
+ SAVE TO MY LIBRARY

SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission
Back to Top