Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T09:12:39.489Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Study of the Blackfly, Simulium ornatum Mg. (Diptera), with particular Reference to its Activity on Grazing Cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

L. Davies
L. Davies
Affiliation:
Zoology Department, Durham Colleges in the University of Durham.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Samples of aquatic stages, taken from a small lowland stream near Durham, England, showed that the blackfly, Simulium ornatum Mg., emerged in quantity from April to October (7 months) and that oviposition took place between May and October. Oviposition was confined to the period between sunset and dusk.

Flies emerging in the early summer of 1952 were smaller than those emerging in the spring and late summer of that year.

S. ornatum landed on cattle from dawn to dusk, with usually a small peak 2–4 hrs. after dawn, and a large peak between sunset and dusk on warm, sunny days. On cool, cloudy days the number of flies landing showed irregular fluctuations throughout the day.

The number of flies landing on untethered cattle was not markedly dependent on air temperature or saturation deficiency. Winds of over 5 m.p.h. markedly decreased or inhibited landing activity.

On average about 70 per cent, of all blackflies landing spent less than 10 min. on cattle after landing, and this interval sometimes decreased as the total number of flies landing per unit time increased.

Of the flies which landed, some 8 to 25 per cent, were calculated to bite the cow, and the proportion which bit varied significantly from day to day. The number of bites sustained by cattle in the district appeared to cause no ill-effect, apart from the formation of scar tissue in the navel region where most bites were inflicted.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 48 , Issue 2 , June 1957 , pp. 407 - 424
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1957

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

Berzina, A. N. (1953). Parazit. Sborn, 15, pp. 353–385.Google Scholar
Breev, K. A. (1950). Parazit. Sborn, 12, pp. 167–198.Google Scholar
Broadbent, L., Doncaster, J. P., Hull, R. & Watson, M. A. (1948). Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond, (A) 23, pp. 57–58.Google Scholar
Davies, D. M. (1950). Trans. R. Canad. Inst, 28, pp. 121–159.Google Scholar
Davies, D. M. (1952). Canad. J. Zool, 30, pp. 287–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, L. (1955). Nature, Lond, 176, pp. 979–980.Google Scholar
Edwards, F. W. (1920). Bull. ent. Res, 11, pp. 211–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fredeen, F. J. H., Rempel, J. G. & Arnason, A. P. (1951). Canad. Ent, 83, pp. 73–76.Google Scholar
Smart, J. (1934). Proc. R. phys. Soc. Edinb, 22, pp. 217–238.Google Scholar
Steward, J. S. (1937). Parasitology, 29, pp. 212–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu Yi, Fang. (1931). Pap. Mich. Acad. Sci, 13, pp. 543–599.Google Scholar
Zahar, A. R. (1951). J. Anim. Ecol, 20, pp. 33–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar