中国媒介生物学及控制杂志  2020, Vol. 31 Issue (6): 685-689

扩展功能

文章信息

马德珍, 明明, 陆华
MA De-zhen, MING Ming, LU Hua
光催化诱蚊灯与BG-trap捕蚊器诱蚊效果比较研究
Mosquito-trapping effect of photocatalysis mosquito lamp versus BG-trap mosquito lamp
中国媒介生物学及控制杂志, 2020, 31(6): 685-689
Chin J Vector Biol & Control, 2020, 31(6): 685-689
10.11853/j.issn.1003.8280.2020.06.012

文章历史

收稿日期: 2020-06-01
光催化诱蚊灯与BG-trap捕蚊器诱蚊效果比较研究
马德珍 , 明明 , 陆华     
泰安市疾病预防控制中心消毒管理与病媒生物防制科, 山东 泰安 271000
摘要: 目的 评价光催化诱蚊灯与BG-trap捕蚊器的诱蚊效果,为登革热媒介伊蚊监测提供更有效的方法。方法 2019年8-9月,在山东省泰安市岱岳区按不同地理位置选择城镇居民区、农户、轮胎厂、废品收购站4种生境各1处作为监测点,同时布放光催化诱蚊灯和BG-trap捕蚊器,2种诱蚊工具相隔距离100 m,于当日15:00接通电源,直至次日09:00收回。每月上、中、下旬各监测1次,捕获蚊虫带回实验室冷冻处死,分类鉴定、计数。采用Excel 2010、SPSS 16.0软件进行统计学分析,构成比(率)的比较采用χ2检验。结果 泰安市主要优势蚊种是白纹伊蚊和淡色库蚊。光催化诱蚊灯合计捕获雌蚊212只,以淡色库蚊为主(49.53%);BG-trap捕蚊器合计捕获雌蚊1 005只,以白纹伊蚊为主(55.32%)。2种诱蚊工具对不同蚊种捕获率差异均有统计学意义(均P < 0.05),BG-trap捕蚊器对白纹伊蚊、骚扰阿蚊捕获率高于光催化诱蚊灯,而光催化诱蚊灯对淡色库蚊、三带喙库蚊和中华按蚊捕获率高于BG-trap捕蚊器。轮胎厂捕蚊数量最多,优势种群是白纹伊蚊(65.22%);其次是农户,以淡色库蚊为主(47.40%)。淡色库蚊、白纹伊蚊、骚扰阿蚊捕获率在不同生境间差异均有统计学意义(均P < 0.05)。轮胎厂BG-trap捕蚊器的捕获数占蚊虫总数量的65.90%,以白纹伊蚊为主(89.37%);农户2种诱蚊工具对白纹伊蚊、骚扰阿蚊、中华按蚊捕获率差异均有统计学意义(均P < 0.05),其中BG-trap捕蚊器对白纹伊蚊、骚扰阿蚊诱捕效果(捕获率分别为17.48%和12.59%)高于光催化诱蚊灯(捕获率均为2.74%),对中华按蚊诱捕效果(20.28%)低于光催化诱蚊灯(42.47%)。结论 BG-trap捕蚊器对白纹伊蚊捕获效果较好,推荐应用于登革热媒介伊蚊监测和孳生地调查研究。
关键词: 光催化诱蚊灯    BG-trap捕蚊器    捕获率    
Mosquito-trapping effect of photocatalysis mosquito lamp versus BG-trap mosquito lamp
MA De-zhen , MING Ming , LU Hua     
Tai'an Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Tai'an 271000, Shandong Province, China
Abstract: Objective To investigate the mosquito-trapping effect of photocatalysis mosquito lamp versus BG-trap mosquito lamp, and to provide a more effective method for the surveillance of dengue vector Aedes. Methods From August to September in 2019, one site each was selected from the four types of habitats of urban residential area, farm house, tire factory, and salvage station as the surveillance sites in Daiyue district of Tai'an in Shandong province, China, and photocatalysis mosquito lamp and BG-trap mosquito lamp were set up at the same time, with a distance of 100 m between the two types of mosquito lamps. Power supply was turned on at 15:00, and the lamps were collected at 09:00 on the next day. Surveillance was performed once in the first, middle, and last ten days of each month, and the mosquitoes were taken back to the laboratory and were frozen and sacrificed for taxonomic identification and counting. Excel 2010 and SPSS16.0 softwares were used for statistical analysis, and the χ2 test was used for the comparison of composition ratio (rate). Results The dominant mosquito species were Aedes albopictus and Culex pipiens pallens in Tai'an. A total of 212 female mosquitoes were captured by photocatalysis mosquito lamp, mainly Cx. pipiens pallens (49.53%), and a total of 1 005 female mosquitoes were captured by BG-trap mosquito lamp, mainly Ae. albopictus (55.32%). There were significant differences in the trapping rates of different mosquito species between the two types of mosquito traps (all P < 0.05); the BG-trap mosquito lamp had significantly higher trapping rates of Ae. albopictus and Armigeres subalbatus than the photocatalysis mosquito lamp, while the photocatalysis mosquito lamp had significantly higher trapping rates of Cx. pipiens pallens, Cx. tritaeniorhynchus, and Anopheles sinensis than the BG-trap mosquito lamp. The highest number of mosquitoes were captured in the tire factory, with the dominant species of Ae. albopictus (65.22%), followed by the farm house, with the dominant species of Cx. pipiens pallens (47.40%). There were significant differences in the trapping rates of Cx. pipiens pallens, Ae. Albopictus, and Ar. subalbatus between different habitats (all P < 0.05). For the tire factory, the mosquitoes trapped by BG-trap mosquito lamp accounted for 65.90% of all mosquitoes, mainly Ae. albopictus (89.37%); for the farm house, there were significant differences in the trapping rates of Ae. albopictus, Ar. subalbatus, and An. sinensis between the two types of mosquito traps (all P < 0.05), and compared with the photocatalysis mosquito lamp, the BG-trap mosquito lamp had higher trapping rates of Ae. albopictus (17.48% vs 2.74%) and Ar. subalbatus (12.59% vs 2.74%) and a lower trapping rate of An. sinensis (20.28% vs 42.47%). Conclusion BG-trap mosquito lamp has a relatively good trapping effect on Ae. albopictus, and it is recommended to be used in the surveillance of dengue vector Aedes and the investigation of breeding sites.
Key words: Photocatalysis mosquito lamp    BG-trap mosquito lamp    Trapping rate    

近年来,登革热、黄热病及寨卡病毒病等蚊媒传染病在国内外不同地区相继暴发流行,我国面临的疾病防控形势也日益严峻[1]。我们不仅要开展蚊虫监测,掌握蚊虫种群分布、密度及季节消长,还要大量地采集蚊虫标本,从蚊虫携带病原体以及基因测序等分子生物学层面进行研究,才能更好地防控蚊媒传染病的发生与流行。本文采用光催化诱蚊灯、BG-trap捕蚊器2种类型的诱蚊工具开展蚊虫监测,以评价2种诱蚊工具的诱蚊效果,为登革热媒介伊蚊监测提供数据支持。

1 材料与方法 1.1 监测点选择

在山东省泰安市岱岳区辖区内按不同地理位置选择城镇居民区、农户、轮胎厂、废品收购站4种类型的生境各1处作为监测点,监测时间为8-9月,监测频次为每月上、中、下旬各监测1次。监测时,在监测点内同时布放光催化诱蚊灯和BG-trap捕蚊器各1台,相隔距离100 m。每次监测时,选择监测点内的不同区域,以避免连续监测对蚊密度造成影响。同时为消除位置效应,对光催化诱蚊灯和BG-trap捕蚊器2种监测工具在8和9月布放位置进行对换。

1.2 监测工具及方法 1.2.1 光催化诱蚊灯

“功夫小帅”牌吸入式诱蚊灯,由紫光灯管、吸蚊扇、供电器3部分组成。选择远离干扰光源和避风的场所作为挂灯点,每个监测点放置1台光催化诱蚊灯。诱蚊灯光源离地1.5 m。于当日15:00接通电源,开启诱蚊灯诱捕蚊虫,直至次日09:00回收。密闭收集器后,再关闭电源,将集蚊袋取出,带回实验室,冰箱冷冻处死,鉴定种类、雌雄并计数。

1.2.2 BG-trap捕蚊器

BG-trap捕蚊器,设定流量0.5 kg/d,增加CO2供给,以Biogents引诱剂为诱饵。选择远离干扰光源和避风的场所作为布灯点,将BG-trap诱蚊灯置于地面。于15:00接通电源,开启诱蚊灯诱捕蚊虫,直至次日09:00回收。密闭收集器后,关闭CO2供给,再关闭电源,将集蚊袋取出,再取出引诱剂密封保存,蚊虫标本带回实验室,冰箱冷冻处死,鉴定种类、雌雄并计数。引诱剂为缓释剂,有效期2年(未开封),开封后在完全暴露状态下,可连续缓释24 h×60 d,每次用完后用自封袋密封包装,放置冰箱冷藏,以备下次使用。

1.3 统计学分析

采用Excel 2010、SPSS 16.0软件进行统计学分析。构成比(率)的比较采用χ2检验,P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

2 结果 2.1 蚊种构成

共捕获蚊虫4属5种,雌蚊1 217只。其中伊蚊属(Aedes)白纹伊蚊(Ae. albopictus)583只,占47.90%;其次是库蚊属(Culex)淡色库蚊(Cx. pipiens pallens)341只,占28.02%,三带喙库蚊(Cx. tritaeniorhynchus)10只,占0.82%;阿蚊属(Armigeres)骚扰阿蚊(Ar. subalbatus)192只,占15.78%;按蚊属(Anopheles)中华按蚊(An. sinensis)91只,占7.48%;主要优势种群是白纹伊蚊和淡色库蚊。

2.2 诱蚊数量比较

光催化诱蚊灯捕获雌蚊212只,占捕蚊总数量的17.42%(212/1 217),其中淡色库蚊占比最大,为49.53%(105/212)。BG-trap捕蚊器捕获1 005只雌蚊,占捕蚊总数量的82.58%(1 005/1 217),其中白纹伊蚊占比最大,为55.32%(556/1 005)。2种诱蚊工具对蚊虫捕获率差异有统计学意义(均P<0.05),其中BG-trap捕蚊器对白纹伊蚊、骚扰阿蚊捕获率(55.32%和17.81%)高于光催化诱蚊灯(12.74%和6.13%),光催化诱蚊灯对淡色库蚊、三带喙库蚊和中华按蚊捕获率(49.53%、2.36%和29.24%)高于BG-trap捕蚊器(23.48%、0.50%和2.89%)。见表 1

表 1 光催化诱蚊灯与BG-trap捕蚊器诱蚊数量比较 Table 1 Comparison of the number of mosquitoes trapped by the photocatalysis mosquito lamp and BG-trap mosquito lamp
2.3 不同生境捕蚊数量比较

不同生境诱蚊种类和数量不同,在农户捕获到三带喙库蚊和中华按蚊,其他生境中未捕到。轮胎厂捕蚊数量最多,为828只,优势种是白纹伊蚊,占65.22%(540/828),其次是农户(289只),以淡色库蚊为主,占47.40%(137/289),城镇居民区、废品收购站均以淡色库蚊为主(分别占51.61%和72.46%)。淡色库蚊、白纹伊蚊和骚扰阿蚊捕获率在不同生境间差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.001),其中淡色库蚊在废品收购站捕获率高于其他生境,白纹伊蚊在轮胎厂捕获率高于其他生境,骚扰阿蚊在城镇居民区捕获率高于其他生境。见表 2

表 2 2019年山东省泰安市不同生境捕蚊数量比较 Table 2 Comparison of the mosquitoes trapped in different habitats in Tai'an city in 2019, Shandong province
2.4 不同生境2种诱蚊工具诱蚊数量比较

BG-trap捕蚊器在轮胎厂的诱蚊效果较好,共捕获蚊虫802只,占捕获蚊虫总数量的65.90%(802/1 217);捕获白纹伊蚊521只,占捕获白纹伊蚊总数量的89.37%(521/583)。在轮胎厂2种诱蚊工具对骚扰阿蚊捕获率差异有统计学意义(χ2=5.048,P=0.025),BG-trap捕蚊器捕获效果高于光催化诱蚊灯。在农户2种诱蚊工具诱蚊数量均以淡色库蚊为主(71/146,66/143),对白纹伊蚊、骚扰阿蚊、中华按蚊捕获率差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05),其中BG-trap捕蚊器对白纹伊蚊、骚扰阿蚊捕获效果高于光催化诱蚊灯,对中华按蚊捕获效果低于光催化诱蚊灯;对淡色库蚊、三带喙库蚊捕获率差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。城镇居民区和废品收购站2种诱蚊工具对蚊虫捕获率差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。见表 3

表 3 不同生境中光催化诱蚊灯与BG-trap捕蚊器诱蚊数量比较 Table 3 Comparison of the number of mosquitoes trapped by the photocatalysis mosquito lamp and BG-trap mosquito lamp in different habitats
3 讨论

蚊虫是世界性分布的卫生害虫,不仅对人骚扰、吸血,而且传播多种疾病,严重危害人类健康。国家标准《病媒生物密度监测方法蚊虫》(GB/T 23797-2009)[2]中规定的成蚊监测方法有很多。光催化诱蚊灯是最常用的监测工具,常被用于蚊虫密度的常规监测,是《全国病媒生物监测实施方案》中推荐选用的监测工具。近几年,新推出的BG-trap捕蚊器作为一种新型监测工具受到很多监测机构的青睐。国际上BG-trap捕蚊器监测白纹伊蚊密度被广泛使用[3-5]。本研究采用光催化诱蚊灯和BG-trap捕蚊器进行诱蚊效果的调查比较,为登革热媒介伊蚊监测提供更有效可靠的方法。

本次调查发现,泰安市主要蚊种构成有5种:淡色库蚊、白纹伊蚊、骚扰阿蚊、中华按蚊和三带喙库蚊,其中主要优势种群是白纹伊蚊和淡色库蚊。白纹伊蚊是我国大陆地区登革病毒最主要的传播媒介,分布纬度广[6]。淡色库蚊是丝虫病和流行性乙型脑炎(乙脑)的主要传播媒介。三带喙库蚊是乙脑的主要传播媒介,也是乙脑病毒的长期储存宿主[7]。中华按蚊是丝虫病和疟疾的重要传播媒介[8]。有研究表明,随着全球气候变暖和降雨模式的改变,蚊种的地理分布可能改变,如白纹伊蚊在近20年的地理范围内不断扩大[9]。白纹伊蚊栖息地范围扩大,是研究蚊虫入侵、传病范围扩张和气候适应过程的一个很好机会,在研究中获得的结果有助于制定控制带病毒蚊虫的新策略[10]。因此了解蚊虫种群分布,加强蚊虫防控,有效降低蚊媒传染病风险迫在眉睫。

本次调查通过2种诱蚊工具诱蚊效果的比较,发现从诱蚊数量上看,BG-trap捕蚊器对白纹伊蚊的引诱效果要远高于光催化诱蚊灯,与Li等[11]、刘彬彬等[12]的研究结果一致。分析可能的原因是,光催化诱蚊灯是以光催化分解空气中有机物污染物转换成CO2气体的原理,仿生制造人体释放的CO2气味,辅以蚊虫敏感的365 nm光波来诱捕蚊虫,但是白纹伊蚊的活动高峰在15:00-18:00,光的引诱就几乎不起作用;而BG-trap捕蚊器既有CO2供给,又有以乳酸、己酸、碳酸氢铵等为主要成分的引诱剂为诱饵,双重诱蚊方式,所以具有较好的引诱效果。

从蚊种构成上可以看出,光催化诱蚊灯捕获蚊虫以淡色库蚊为主(占49.53%),BG-trap捕蚊器捕获蚊虫以白纹伊蚊为主(55.32%),结果表明,BG-trap捕蚊器对白纹伊蚊、骚扰阿蚊捕获率高于光催化诱蚊灯,光催化诱蚊灯对淡色库蚊、三带喙库蚊、中华按蚊捕获率高于BG-trap捕蚊器,与Li等[11]的研究结果一致。BG-trap捕蚊器对白纹伊蚊具有较好的引诱效果,在登革热疫情监测中可以选用BG-trap捕蚊器,与韦凌娅等[13]的研究结果较一致;对于蚊虫密度的常规监测,选用成本低、便于携带的光催化诱蚊灯更为节能、省力。

有文章报道了巴西圣保罗9个城市公园蚊虫的组成,表明其和病原体传播风险之间可能存在联系[14]。另外,温、湿度是影响蚊虫生存的重要因素[15]。本次调查发现,不同生境的诱蚊数量不同,其中在轮胎厂捕蚊最多,为828只,优势种是白纹伊蚊,占65.22%。这可能由于8月初,第9号台风“利奇马”席卷泰安市后,各县(市、区)不同程度地遭受了台风带来的强降水影响,雨水量增多,大量积水清理不及时,特别是轮胎厂,轮胎内的大量积水为白纹伊蚊孳生提供了有利条件。在农户中,2种诱蚊工具诱蚊均以淡色库蚊为主,BG-trap捕蚊器捕获白纹伊蚊效果高于光催化诱蚊灯,诱蚊总数量基本一致。在蚊虫密度相对较低的生境中(如城镇居民区),BG-trap捕蚊器与光催化诱蚊灯的监测效果无差别。蚊虫密度高的生境(如轮胎厂),BG-trap捕蚊器捕获效率较高。

综上,不同生境使用光催化诱蚊灯和BG-trap捕蚊器2种诱蚊工具捕获的蚊种和数量有所不同,应根据不同的监测目的选择合适的监测方法。光催化诱蚊灯捕获杂虫数量较多,干扰因素较大,BG-trap捕蚊器捕获的多为蚊虫和其他吸血昆虫,其诱蚊效果优于光催化诱蚊灯,特别是对白纹伊蚊和骚扰阿蚊有较好的捕获效果。但是在使用过程中,BG-trap捕蚊器会出现CO2气瓶瓶口漏气或者CO2气瓶容量不足等问题,影响监测进度,建议有关厂家进一步改进、测试后再投入使用。

参考文献
[1]
刘华, 曲建强, 王学军, 等. 2种监测方法在登革热媒介监测中的应用效果评价[J]. 中华卫生杀虫药械, 2018, 24(3): 243-246.
Liu H, Qu JQ, Wang XJ, et al. Evaluation of the application effect of two monitoring methods in dengue media monitoring[J]. Chin J Hyg Insect Equip, 2018, 24(3): 243-246.
[2]
中华人民共和国卫生部. GB/T 23797-2009病媒生物密度监测方法蚊虫[S].北京: 中国标准出版社, 2009.
Ministry of Health of People's Republic of China. GB/T 23797-2009 Surveillance methods for vector density-Mosquito[S]. Beijing: China Standard Press, 2009.
[3]
Kröckel U, Rose A, Eiras ÁE, et al. New tools for surveillance of adult yellow fever mosquitoes:comparison of trap catches with human landing rates in an urban environment[J]. J Am Mosq Control Assoc, 2006, 22(2): 229-238. DOI:10.2987/8756-971X(2006)22[229:NTFSOA]2.0.CO;2
[4]
Gama RA, da Silva IM, Eiras M, et al. Development of the BG-Malaria trap as an alternative to human-landing catches for the capture of Anopheles darlingi[J]. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz, 2013, 108(6): 763-771. DOI:10.1590/0074-0276108062013013
[5]
Tangena JAA, Thammavong P, Hiscox A, et al. The human-baited double net trap:an alternative to human landing catches for collecting outdoor biting mosquitoes in Lao PDR[J]. PLoS One, 2015, 10(9): e0138735. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0138735
[6]
王佳璐, 谭梁飞. 白纹伊蚊的饲养技巧及其卵巢的解剖方法[J]. 中国媒介生物学及控制杂志, 2011, 22(4): 366-367.
Wang JL, Tan LF. Aedes albopictus rearing and ovarian dissection methods[J]. Chin J Vector Biol Control, 2011, 22(4): 366-367.
[7]
杨绍基, 任红. 传染病学[M]. 7版. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2008: 92-93.
Yang SJ, Ren H. Infectious diseases[M]. 7th ed. Beijing: People's Medical Publishing House, 2008: 92-93.
[8]
郑学礼. 我国蚊媒研究概况[J]. 中国病原生物学杂志, 2014, 9(2): 183-187.
Zheng XL. Advances in research on mosquitoes in China[J]. J Pathog Biol, 2014, 9(2): 183-187. DOI:10.13350/j.cjpb.140222
[9]
Waldock J, Chandra NL, Lelieveld J, et al. The role of environmental variables on Aedes albopictus biology and chikungunya epidemiology[J]. Pathog Glob Health, 2013, 107(5): 224-241. DOI:10.1179/2047773213Y.0000000100
[10]
Armbruster PA. Photoperiodic diapause and the establishment of Aedes albopictus (Diptera:Culicidae) in North America[J]. J Med Entomol, 2016, 53(5): 1013-1023. DOI:10.1093/jme/tjw037
[11]
Li YJ, Su XH, Zhou GF, et al. Comparative evaluation of the efficiency of the BG-Sentinel trap, CDC light trap and Mosquito-oviposition trap for the surveillance of vector mosquitoes[J]. Parasit Vectors, 2016, 9: 446. DOI:10.1186/s13071-016-1724-x
[12]
刘彬彬, 王家豪, 位广帅, 等. 诱蚊诱卵器与BGS-trap捕蚊器应用效果研究[J]. 河南大学学报:医学版, 2018, 37(4): 254-256, 264.
Liu BB, Wang JH, Wei GS, et al. Study on the efficiency between ovitrap and BG-Sentinel trap[J]. J Henan Univ:Med Ed, 2018, 37(4): 254-256, 264.
[13]
韦凌娅, 孔庆鑫, 王慧敏. 双层叠帐法与BG-trap诱捕器法在登革热应急蚊媒监测中的捕蚊效果比较[J]. 中国媒介生物学及控制杂志, 2019, 30(1): 65-68.
Wei LY, Kong QX, Wang HM. Effectiveness of double mosquito net and BG-trap for emergency vector surveillance during dengue fever epidemics:a comparative study[J]. Chin J Vector Biol Control, 2019, 30(1): 65-68. DOI:10.11853/j.issn.1003.8280.2019.01.014
[14]
Medeiros-Sousa AR, Fernandes A, Ceretti-Junior W, et al. Mosquitoes in urban green spaces:using an island biogeographic approach to identify drivers of species richness and composition[J]. Sci Rep, 2017, 7: 17826. DOI:10.1038/s41598-017-18208-x
[15]
Schmidt CA, Comeau G, Monaghan AJ, et al. Effects of desiccation stress on adult female longevity in Aedes aegypti and Ae. albopictus (Diptera:Culicidae):results of a systematic review and pooled survival analysis[J]. Parasit Vectors, 2018, 11(267). DOI:10.1186/s13071-018-2808-6