Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:25:00.923Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Observations on the Behaviour of some Mosquitos of the Kenya Coast

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

E. C. C. Van Someren ,
R. B. Heisch  and
M. Furlong
E. C. C. Van Someren
Affiliation:
Division of Insect-borne Diseases, Medical Research Laboratory, Nairobi, Kenya.
R. B. Heisch
Affiliation:
Division of Insect-borne Diseases, Medical Research Laboratory, Nairobi, Kenya.
M. Furlong
Affiliation:
Division of Insect-borne Diseases, Medical Research Laboratory, Nairobi, Kenya.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The mosquitos of two villages on the Kenya coast were studied over a period of two and a half years, which included years of very light, average and very heavy rainfall. A survey was made of the species occurring in the bush and in the houses, and in addition 24-hour biting catches were done and window-trap catches were examined to obtain information on the movement of species in and out of houses.

Sixty five species were taken in net catches in the bush but only 19 were taken regularly; five (Taeniorhynchus uniformis (Theo.) and T. africanus (Theo.), Aëdes woodi Edw., Culex invidiosus Theo. and C. guiarti Blanch.) were abundant. In the houses, two species, C. pipiens fatigans Wied. and Aë. aegypti occurred regularly, the former being abundant and the latter not uncommon. Anopheles gambiae Giles and A. funestus Giles were seasonal; A. funestus appeared only after exceptionally heavy rain. The in-going window trap attracted only an occasional mosquito seeking shelter during the day and only six species were taken. Thirty species were found in the out-going trap but only seven occurred regularly. A. gambiae, A. funestus, T. uniformis, T. africanus and C. p. fatigans were most active during the hours of darkness, with the main activity in the four hours before dawn. Aë. aegypti had two waves of activity, in the four-hour periods before dawn and before sunset, respectively; the sunset peak was higher and the main activity probably occurred between 18 and 19 hr., as previously recorded for this species in Mombasa.

Thirty five species were taken biting in the 24-hour catches in situations designated bush, house and compound, respectively. The biting cycles of A. gambiae, Aë. aegypti and C. p. fatigans have been compared in the three situations. The biting rhythm of each species was much the same in the different environments but the time and magnitude of the main peaks varied. In the case of Aë. aegypti, which probably includes two different forms, there is a marked difference in the magnitude of the evening peak in the bush and house. The biting cycles in the bush are given for A. squamosus Theo., T. uniformis, T. africanus, Aë. fryeri, Aë. metallicus (Edw.), Aë. albicosta (Edw.) and C. antennatus (Becker) and their occurrence in the other two situations is noted. The cycles of T. uniformis and Aë. fryeri agree with previous findings, but that of T. africanus differs from other cycles recorded for this species by having the main biting after midnight. The remaining species were rare, but one catch of 274 specimens of A. funestus was recorded.

Resting mosquitos were more numerous in the second half of the year from August to December, a period of light rainfall and high temperatures. Biting mosquitos were more commonly taken, especially in the bush, in the second quarter of the year, during the main rainy season. The biting activity of some species increased in the houses in the second half of the year, when there are high winds, and biting in the bush was minimal.

Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 49 , Issue 4 , December 1958 , pp. 643 - 660
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1958

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Haddow, A. J. (1945). The mosquitoes of Bwamba County, Uganda. II. Biting activity with special reference to the influence of microclimate.—Bull. ent. Res., 36, pp. 33–73.Google Scholar
Haddow, A. J. (1954). Studies of the biting-habits of African mosquitos. An appraisal of methods employed, with special reference to the twenty-four-hour catch.—Bull. ent. Res., 45, pp. 199–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddow, A. J., Gillett, J. D. & Highton, R. B. (1947). The mosquitoes of Bwamba County, Uganda. V. The vertical distribution and biting-cycle of mosquitoes in rain-forest, with further observations on microclimate.—Bull. ent. Res., 37, pp. 301–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lumsden, W. H. R. (1955). Entomological studies, relating to yellow feverepidemiology, at Gede and Taveta, Kenya.—Bull. ent. Res., 46, pp. 149–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattingly, P. F. (1949 a). Studies on West African forest mosquitos. Part I. The seasonal distribution, biting cycle and vertical distribution of four of the principal species.—Bull. ent. Res., 40, pp. 149–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattingly, P. F. (1949 b). Studies on West African forest mosquitos. Part II. The less commonly occurring species.—Bull. ent. Res., 40, pp. 387–402.Google Scholar
Mattingly, P. F. (1957). Genetical aspects of the Aëdes aegypti problem. I. Taxonomy and bionomics.—Ann. trop. Med. Parasit., 51, pp. 392–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teesdale, C. (1955). Studies on the bionomics of Aëdes aegypti (L.) in its natural habitats in a coastal region of Kenya.—Bull. ent. Res., 46, pp. 711–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Someren, E. C. C., Teesdale, C. & Furlong, M. (1955). The mosquitos of: the Kenya coast; records of occurrence, behaviour and habitat.—Bull. ent. Res., 46, pp. 463–493.Google Scholar