Submitted to: Journal of Vector Ecology
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: January 19, 2011
Publication Date: March 11, 2011
Citation: Junnila, A., Kline, D.L., Mueller, G.C. 2011. Comparative efficacy of small commercial traps for the capture of adult Phlebotomus papatasi. Journal of Vector Ecology. 36(1):172-178.
Interpretive Summary: Sand flies transmit the causative agent of cutaneous leishmaniasis, which is a resurging protozoan disease in the Middle East that adversely impacts military personnel stationed there. The goal of this study was to identify the best performing commercial mosquito traps for attracting and catching sand flies. The performance of 10 commercial mosquito traps were tested. This study was a collaborative study between scientists of the Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, Kuvin Center for the Study of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel, and the USDA-ARS Center for Medical and Veterinary Entomology, Gainesville, Florida, USA. The study took place in the lower Jordan Valley, Israel, at a large date plantation. There were clear differences in the performance of the traps tested. It was demonstrated that traps that have been effective in catching mosquitoes are also effective in catching sand flies. Traps baited with carbon dioxide caught up to 69X more sand flies than non-baited traps.
In this study, we tested the performance of 10 commercial mosquito traps, with varying attractive features, against three CDC traps (an unlit model 512, an incandescently lit model 512, and a UV lit model 1212) as well as simple sticky paper, for their ability to attract and capture Phlebotomus papatasi in the field. The commercial traps tested, were the Sentinel 360, the Combo Trap, The Mega Catch, the Bug Eater, the Eco Trap, the Galaxie Power-Vac, the Biter Fighter, the Black Hole, the Mosquito Trap, the Mosquito Catcher, the Sonic Web, the Solar Pest Killer, and a Bug Zapper. The four best performing traps with the highest daily catches were the Sentinel 360 (85.96 ± 19.34), the Combo Trap (70.0 ± 7.78), the Mega Catch (51.93 ± 1.82) and the UV lit CDC 1212 trap (47.64 ± 3.43). These four traps did not differ significantly from each other in average daily catch. Five traps, the Mosquito Trap, the Mosquito Catcher, the Sonic Web, the Solar Pest Killer and the Bug Zapper, performed exceptionally poor, catching an average of less than 2 sand flies per day. To our knowledge, this is the first attempt to evaluate commercial traps for their effectiveness in catching sand flies, and we show here that some traps that have been effective in catching mosquitoes are also effective in catching sand flies.