Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T15:17:42.124Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Management of Culex quinquefasciatus (Diptera: Culicidae) in packaged plant sewage systems: exploring efficacy of five industry-standard insecticides in Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 November 2010

Paul J. Clayson  and
Mark P. Nelder
Paul J. Clayson*
Affiliation:
Mosquito Research and Control Unit, Cayman Islands Government, George Town, Grand Cayman, PO Box 486, KY1-1106, British West Indies
Mark P. Nelder
Affiliation:
Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, Enteric, Zoonotic and Vector-Borne Diseases Unit, 1075 Bay Street, 11th Floor, Toronto, ON, CanadaM5S 2B1
*
*E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Following observations by a service engineer (mid-2007), 12 of the hundreds of installed packaged plant (PP) sewage systems were producing relatively large numbers of Culex quinquefasciatus (Say) and a variety of filth flies in George Town, Grand Cayman. Due to the vector potential of C. quinquefasciatus in the Caribbean, we explored the efficacy of industry-standard insecticides against C. quinquefasciatus. Since PP systems contain an organic biofilm on the water surface, we devised a modified technique for collecting immatures and for the application of insecticides. We treated functioning and non-functioning PP systems with Bacillus sphaericus (VectoLex® WDG), Bacillus thuringiensis var. israelensis (Bti; VectoBac® CG), temephos (Abate® 4-E), monomolecular film or ethyoxylated alcohol surfactant (Agnique® MMF) and (S)-methoprene (Altosid® Pro-G). B. thuringiensis var. israelensis gave control for 35 and 48 days for functioning and non-functioning systems, respectively, with less control from B. sphaericus (high label rate) (c. 25 and 35 days) and temephos (suggested label rate) (c. 27 and 33 days). B. sphaericus (low label rate), monomolecular film and (S)-methoprene gave limited control of immatures (i.e. no mortality detected after 24 h). Treatment options for PP systems are discussed with regard to economics, operational feasibility, and within the context of integrated mosquito management. Functioning systems were recolonized at a faster rate than those that were not functioning, but the level of infestation in the non-functioning systems was considerably greater.

Keywords

Culex quinquefasciatusBacilluslarvicidespupicidessewage treatmenttemephostropical mosquito controlvector
Type
Research Paper
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , December 2010 , pp. 214 - 220
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 2010

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

Ahid, S. M., Vasconcelos, P. S. and Louren-de-Oliveira, R. (2000) Vector competence of Culex quinquefasciatus (Say) from different regions of Brazil to Dirofilaria immitis. Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 95, 769–775.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Axtell, R. C. (1979) Principles of integrated pest management (IPM) in relation to mosquito control. Mosquito News 39, 709–718.Google Scholar
Barrera, R., Amador, M., Diaz, A., Smith, J., Munoz-Jordan, J. and Rosario, Y. (2008) Unusual productivity of Aedes aegypti in septic tanks and its implications for dengue control. Medical and Veterinary Entomology 22, 62–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burke, R., Barrera, R., Lewis, M., Kluchinsky, T. and Claborn, D. (2010) Septic tanks as larval habitats for the mosquitoes Aedes aegypti and Culex quinquefasciatus in Playa-Playita, Puerto Rico. Medical and Veterinary Entomology 24, 117–123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cetin, H., Dechant, P. and Yanikoglu, A. (2007) Field trials with tank mixtures of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. israelensis and Bacillus sphaericus formulations against Culex pipiens larvae in septic tanks in Antalya, Turkey. Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association 23, 161–165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cetin, H., Yanikoglu, A., Kocak, O. and Cilek, J. (2006) Evaluation of temephos and chlorpyrifos-methyl against Culex pipiens (Diptera: Culicidae) larvae in septic tanks in Antalya, Turkey. Journal of Medical Entomology 43, 1195–1199.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chavasse, D. C., Lines, J. D., Ichimori, K. and Marijani, J. (1995) Mosquito control in Dar es Salaam: 1 Assessment of Culex quinquefasciatus breeding sites prior to intervention. Medical and Veterinary Entomology 9, 141–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayson, P. J. (2009) The Dr. G legacy: 40 years of Cayman Islands mosquito control. Wing Beats 20, 12–14.Google Scholar
Fortin, C., Maire, A. and Leclair, R. (1987) The residual effect of temephos (Abate 4-E) on non-target communities. Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association 3, 282–288.Google Scholar
Halstead, S. B., Streit, T. G., Lafontant, J. G., Putvatana, R., Russell, K., Sun, W., Kanesa-Thasan, N., Hayes, C. G. and Watts, D. M. (2001) Haiti: absence of dengue hemorrhagic fever despite hyperendemic dengue virus transmission. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 65, 180–183.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huffaker, C. B. and Back, R. (1943) A study of methods of sampling mosquito populations. Journal of Economic Entomology 36, 561–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klargester, (2008) Pollution prevention, pumping and drainage. Kingspan Environmental. County Armagh, Northern Island (accessed 4 February 2009). http://www.klargester.co.uk.Google Scholar
Mackay, A. J., Amador, M., Diaz, A., Smith, J. and Barrera, R. (2009) Dynamics of Aedes aegypti and Culex quinquefasciatus in septic tanks. Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association 25, 409–416.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McKinley, V. L. and Vestal, J. R. (1984) Biokinetic analyses of adaptation and succession: microbial activity in composting municipal sewage sludge. Applied Environmental Microbiology 45, 933–941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mariappan, T., Somachary, N. and Das, P. K. (1984) Efficacy of Monox CI-FCM in Culex quinquefasciatus control in an urban situation. Indian Journal of Medical Research 80, 78–80.Google Scholar
Nishiura, J. T., Ho, P. and Ray, K. (2003) Methoprene interferes with mosquito midgut remodeling during metamorphosis. Journal of Medical Entomology 40, 498–507.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paing, M., Thu, M. and Sebastian, A. (1987) Laboratory evaluation of Bacillus sphaericus 1593–4 and preliminary field trials for control of Culex quinquefasciatus in septic tanks. Journal of Communicable Diseases 19, 164–167.Google ScholarPubMed
Raccurt, C. P. (1999) Filariasis in Haiti: a century of history. Bulletin de la Société de Pathologie Exotique 92, 355–359.Google ScholarPubMed
Rawlins, S. C. (1999) Emerging and re-emerging vector-borne diseases in the Caribbean region. West Indian Medical Journal 48, 252–253.Google ScholarPubMed
SAS (2003) SAS/STAT User's Manual, Version 9.1. SAS Institute, Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Vincent, A. L., Gonzalvo, A. and Cowell, B. C. (1987) A survey of Bancroftian filariasis in the Dominican Republic. Journal of Parasitology 73, 839–840.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wada, A., Saijo, Y. and Takeshi, Y. S. (1964) The breeding habits of Culex pipiens molestus in septic tanks and their control experiments. Japanese Journal of Sanitary Zoology 15, 187–193.Google Scholar