Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-qxsvm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-12T22:27:26.931Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Some Notes and Remarks on the Bionomics of Glossina morsitans

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Rupert W. Jack
Affiliation:
Agricultural Entomologist, S.Rhodesia.

Extract

In the foregoing pages the following tentative views have been put forward in the hope that they may receive either confirmation or criticism from other investigators : (1). The latter part of the dry season is probably, in general, the most favourable portion of the year to the fly. (2). The later the onset of the rains the greater the capacity for increase. (3). Seasons of unusually heavy rainfall are inimical, at least in certain areas. (4).A series of years of lew rainfall is favourable. (5).Regions where the fly commonly attains the greatest concentration of numbers are the regions where it is most liable to be reduced or to die out,namely, parts of the infested areas where first-grade foci predominate. (6).In Southern Khodesia the passage of grass fires has, as a rule, no appreciable effect on the numbers of the fly. (7).Mopani belts are probably of considerable value to the fly in providing limited areas attractive to game in the wet season, where the grass remains short; they possibly also afford a convenient refuge from grass fires in the dry season. (8).The fly does not migrate under the stimulus of hunger or in company with game. (9).The fly as a whole does not follow game about infested areas. (10).The maximum distance at which a hungry fly readily detects its hosts is a short one, possibly less than 100 yards. (11).The maximum following distance of the females remains to be determined ; the writer is not yet convinced that the females seek animals and humanbeings only for the purpose of feeding, though this appears probable.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1920

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

page 114 note * Bull. Ent. Res. x, p. 20, lines 1113, and elsewhere.Google Scholar

page 114 note † Bull. Ent. Res. ii, pp. 357361.Google Scholar

page 116 note * The writer is largely repeating results obtained by others in Central and East Africa, although observations in S. Rhodesia are entirely in accord.

page 121 note * The writer is aware that observations havebeen published of fly having been encountered in quantity at certain spots on one occasion and only in very small numbers at the next visit. During the wet season this is quite likely, as the fly is not confined by lack of shade, and when carried even for a short distance is hardly likely to return to exactly the same spot. Even in the dry season the passage of a herd of game might make a very material difference for a few hours, the hungry fliesfeeding and seeking seclusion, and the non-hungry males following the herd.Nevertheless, allowing for the difference in distribution in the wet and dry seasons, the statement is substantially correct.

page 123 note * Bull. Ent. Res. x, p. 83.Google Scholar

page 124 note * In connection with the comparative smallness of the numbers quoted here and elsewhere it should be noted that no trained natives were available and that the pupae and flies were practically all collected by the writer personally.

page 128 note * No fly has as yet been found west of the Gwaai, but outbreaks of trypanosomiasis have occurred during the past three wet seasons.