Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:21:28.329Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mosquito (Dipteral Culicidae) flight behaviour near conspicuous objects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

W. L. Bidlingmayer  and
D. G. Hem
W. L. Bidlingmayer
Affiliation:
Florida Medical Entomology Laboratory, P.O. Box 520, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, USA.
D. G. Hem
Affiliation:
Florida Medical Entomology Laboratory, P.O. Box 520, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted in Florida to investigate the behaviour of night-flying mosquitoes including Aedes sollicitans (Wlk.), Ae. taeniorhynchus (Wied.), Anopheles atropos D. & K., An. crucians Wied., Culex nigripalpus Theo., Culiseta melanura (Coq.), Deinocerites cancer Theo., Psorophora columbiae (D. & K.) and (Uranotaenia lowii Theo.) in relation to visually conspicuous objects. Adults of all species except Ae. sollicitans were taken in greater numbers in a large weathered plywood suction trap covered with black panels than in one without panels. However, both traps were attractive, as a transparent plastic suction trap covered with weathered plywood panels took larger numbers of all species except U. lowii than a transparent trap without panels. Buried suction traps furnished with visible risers (extensions) that made captures at 1·2 m elevations always captured proportionately larger numbers than buried traps with visible baffles that captured mosquitoes at ground level. A woodland species, C. nigripalpus, was captured in larger numbers toy traps furnisihed with visible risers and baffles than in traps furnished with transparent risers and baffles; however, collections of field species, e.g. Ae. taeniorhynchus, were smaller. The distribution of blood-fed and gravid females in collections from these traps provided some evidence that blood-seeking females are more responsive to visible objects than engorged or gravid females. These results are compatible with the hypotheses that (1) mosquitoes are attracted from a distance to visible objects, (2) in close proximity an avoidance action occurs and mosquitoes then pass over or around the visible object and (3) woodland species approach visible objects closely (<30 cm), whereas field species pass by at greater mean distances. Consequently, a larger percentage of visually attracted woodland mosquitoes than of visually attracted field species will be captured by suction traps. Depending upon trap design and specific behaviour, increasing the visibility of a suction trap can either increase or decrease trap collections

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 69 , Issue 4 , December 1979 , pp. 691 - 700
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1979

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

Bidlinomayer, W. L. (1967). A comparison of trapping methods for adult mosquitoes: species response and environmental influence. — j. med. Ent. 4, 200–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bidlingmayer, W. L. (1974). The influence of environmental factors and physiological stage on flight patterns of mosquitoes taken in the vehicle aspirator and truck, suction, bait and New Jersey light traps.—J. med. Ent. 11, 119–146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bidlingmayer, W. L. (1975). Mosquito flight paths in relation to the environment. Effect of vertical and horizontal visual barriers. — Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 68, 51–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bracken, G. K..,Hanec, W. & Thorsteinson, A. J. (1962). The orientation of horse flies and deer flies (Tabanidae: Diptera). II. The role of some visual factors in the attractiveness of decoy silhouettes.— Can. J. Zool. 40, 685–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brett, G. A. (1938). On the relative attractiveness to Aëdes aegypti of certain coloured cloths.— Trans. R. Soc. trop. Med. Hyg. 32, 113–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, H. E. (1966). The behaviour patterns of solitary wasps. — A. Rev. Ent. 11, 123–154.Google Scholar
Gillies, M. T. & Wilkes, T. J. (1974). The range of attraction of birds as baits for some West African mosquitoes (Diptera, Culicidae). — Bull. ent. Res.. 63, 573–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gjullin, C. M. (1947). Effect of clothing color on the rate of attack of Aëdes mosquitoes.— J.econ. Ent. 40, 326–327.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haufe, W. O. & Burgess, L. (1960). Design and efficiency of mosquito traps based on visual response to patterns.— Can. Ent. 92, 124–140.Google Scholar
Hocking, B. (1953). The intrinsic range and speed of flight of insects. — Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 104, 222–345.Google Scholar
Hocking, B. (1964). Aspects of insect vision.— Can. Ent. 96, 320–334.Google Scholar
Jander, R. (1963). Insect orientation. — A. Rev. Ent. 8, 95–114.Google Scholar
Kennedy, J. S. (1940). The visual responses of flying mosquitoes.— Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. {A) 109, 221–242.Google Scholar
Kennedy, J. S. (1951). The migration of the desert locust (Schistocerca gregaria Forsk). I. The behaviour of swarms. II. A theory of long-range migrations.— Phil. Trans.R. Soc, Ser. B 235, 163–290.Google Scholar
Lewis, T. & Taylor, L. R. (1965). Diurnal periodicity of flight by insects— Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 116, 393–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, K. R. S. & Morris, M. G. (1949). The use of traps against tsetse in West Africa.— Bull. ent. Res. 39, 491–528.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nielsen, E. T. (1961). On the habits of the migratory butterfly Ascia monuste L.— Biol. Meddr. 23, 1–81.Google Scholar
Peschken, D. & Thorsteinson, A. J. (1965). Visual orientation of black flies (Simuliidae: Diptera) to colour, shape and movement of targets. — Entomologia exp. appl. 8, 282–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rainey, R. C. (Ed.) (1976). Insect flight. — Symp. R. ent. Soc. Lond. no. 7, 287 pp. London, Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
Sippell, W. L.. & Brown, A. W. A. (1953). Studies of the responses of the female Aëdes mosquito. Part V. The role of visual factors. — Bull. ent. Res. 43, 567–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, W. F. (1975). The vertical distribution of flying mosquitoes (Diptera, Culicidae) in West African savanna. — Bull. ent. Res. 65, 269–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, W. F. (1976). The direction of flight of mosquitoes (Diptera, Culicidae) near the ground in West African savanna in relation to wind direction, in the presence and absence of bait. — Bull. ent. Res. 65, 555–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zetek, J. (1915). Behaviour of Anopheles albimanus Wiede. and tarsimaculata Goeldi. — Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 8, 221–271.Google Scholar