Assessment of Clarias Gariepinus As a Biological Control Agent Against Mosquito Larvae Buze Chala Arba Minch University
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Florida International University FIU Digital Commons All Faculty 5-31-2016 Assessment of Clarias gariepinus as a biological control agent against mosquito larvae Buze Chala Arba Minch University Berhanu Erko Addis Ababa University Abebe Animut Addis Ababa University Abraham Degarege Addis Ababa University; Department of Epidemiology, Robert Stempel College of PublicHealth and Social Work, Florida International University Beyene Petros Addis Ababa University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/all_faculty Recommended Citation Chala, Buze; Erko, Berhanu; Animut, Abebe; Degarege, Abraham; and Petros, Beyene, "Assessment of Clarias gariepinus as a biological control agent against mosquito larvae" (2016). All Faculty. 128. https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/all_faculty/128 This work is brought to you for free and open access by FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Faculty by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Chala et al. BMC Ecol (2016) 16:27 DOI 10.1186/s12898-016-0081-0 BMC Ecology RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Assessment of Clarias gariepinus as a biological control agent against mosquito larvae Buze Chala1, Berhanu Erko2*, Abebe Animut2, Abraham Degarege2,3 and Beyene Petros4 Abstract Background: The emergence and spread of insecticide resistant mosquitoes renewed interest in investigating the use of larvivorous fish as a biological control agent. The potential of Clarias gariepinus fish in controlling Anopheles arabiensis and culicine larvae was assessed under laboratory and semi-field conditions. Results: Small size (15–20 cm) C. gariepinus fish consumed greater number of mosquito larvae than the large size fish (25–40 cm) in the multivariate regression model (β 13.36, 95 % CI 4.57, 22.15). The Anopheles larvae consumed was greater in number than the culicines larvae consumed= by the fish= (β 12.10, 95 % CI 3.31, 20.89). The num- ber of larvae consumed was greater during the night hours than during the= light hours (β = 30.06, 95 % CI 21.27, 38.85). Amount of supplementary fish food did not cause significant differences in the =number of mosquito= larvae consumed by the fish among different groups. C. gariepinus was observed to feed on mosquito larvae under labora- tory and semi-field conditions. Conclusion: C. gariepinus fed on the larvae of An. arabiensis and culicines readily. Hence, it can be used as an alterna- tive mosquito control agent in Ethiopia where the breeding habitats are small and localized. Keywords: Clarias gariepinus, Biological control, Larvae, Anopheles arabiensis, Culex, Ethiopia Background Over the past 100 years, several fish species have been Current malaria vector control strategies depend mainly documented to feed on mosquito larvae in different parts on long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor of the world among which many are proved effective residual spraying (IRS). These interventions contributed [6, 7]. One of these species is Clarias gariepinus [7–9]. to the reduction of malaria-related cases and deaths glob- It is an opportunistic feeder targeting insects, worms, ally. However, the gains are threatened due to the emer- mollusks, gastropods, crustaceans, small fishes, aquatic gence and spread of vectors that are physiologically and plants and debris that can fit into its mouth [8]. In an behaviourally resistant to the insecticides [1–3]. effort to control mosquito-borne diseases, targeting the Besides the development of insecticide resistance in immature stages of mosquitoes (eggs, larvae and pupae) malaria vectors, increased concern of environmental pol- can be more effective as these stages are confined within lution with insecticides have aroused interest in devel- relatively small aquatic habitats, relatively immobile and oping environment-friendly approaches such as the use cannot readily escape the fish. In Ethiopia,C. gariepinus of biological control agents [4, 5] including larvivorous occurs almost in all water bodies that can support fish fishes. [10]. However, the efficacy of this fish in devouring mos- quito larvae is poorly understood. In the present study, we assessed the efficacy of C. gariepinu as a biological *Correspondence: [email protected]; [email protected] control agent against mosquito (Anopheles and Culex) 2 Aklilu Lemma Institute of Pathobiology, Addis Ababa University, larvae in laboratory and semi-field conditions. P. O. Box 1176, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © 2016 The Author(s). This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/ publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. Chala et al. BMC Ecol (2016) 16:27 Page 2 of 7 Methods 3rd group, respectively. No fish was introduced into the Clarias gariepinus fish 4th group (control). Supplementary fish food was added in A colony of C. gariepinus fish and its supplementary food each of the experimental groups, but not in the control. was obtained from the Sebeta National and Other Liv- ing Aquatic Resources Research Center (NFLARRC) of Data analysis Ethiopia, near Sebeta Town, located at 20 km on the road Data were double entered in excel-sheet and analyzed to Jimma Town. The fish was maintained in glass aquaria using STATA version 11 (STATA Corporation, College (60 × 40 × 35 cm) and acclimatized at room tempera- Station, Texas, USA). Percentage of mosquito larvae con- ture (25 ± 2 °C) before the experiment began. Aquaria air sumed was calculated by dividing the number of mos- pumps were used to aerate the water in the aquaria. quito larvae consumed by the number of mosquito larvae exposed. Z test was used to compare the percentage of Anopheles and Culex larvae mosquito (anopheline or culicines) larvae consumed by Anopheles arabiensis larvae used in the experiment was small and large sized fish during night and light hours. obtained from the Aklilu Lemma Institute of Pathobi- Multivariable regression analysis was used to quantify ology (ALIPB) insectary whereas culicine larvae were the impact of fish size, exposure hour (day light hour obtained from the ponds of the ALIPB. and night hour), mosquito genus (Anopheles or Culex), number of mosquito larvae exposed and amount of sup- Laboratory based mosquito predation experiment plementary food added on the feeding efficacy of the fish. Nine clean glass aquaria (each 40 × 20 × 26 cm), each 95 % CI values were calculated for the average mean dif- filled with 15 L of aged tap water, were arranged in three ference of mosquito larvae consumed between different groups. A total of 50, 100 or 150 An. arabiensis/culicine groups. Values were considered significant when p < 0.05 larvae were introduced into the 1st, 2nd and 3rd in tripli- or when 95 % CI values did not include zero. cates. The first group was supplied with adequate supple- mentary fish food, the second with inadequate food and Results the third with no food. Inadequate food is supplementary Feeding activity of Clarias gariepinus on Anopheles food given for each C. gariepinus, which was about 2 % arabiensis larvae in the laboratory of each fish body weight while adequate food was about Clarias gariepinus was found to feed on most mos- 4 % of each fish body weight as previously used [11]. quito larvae it encountered both in the laboratory and Either small (15–20 cm) or large (25–40 cm) fish was in the semi-field conditions. Small size C. gariepinus placed into the first, second and third (control) groups. consumed most of the An. arabiensis larvae it encoun- The experiment was conducted in the day light (12 h) tered and the night hour consumption (96.9 %) was sig- and night dark hours (12 h) to compare larval preda- nificantly (p < 0.01) higher than the light hours (83.8 %) tion by the catfish. The experiment for the day light hour (Table 1). Likewise, large size C. gariepinus consumed all started in the morning (6:00 am) and larval predation by larvae (100 %) during night hours, which was a signifi- the fish was recorded in the early evening (6:00 pm). The cantly (p < 0.01) higher rate compared to the light hours experiment for the day night hour was started in the early (78.6 %). There was no significant difference in the -lar evening (6:00 pm) and larval predation by the fish was val consumption by large size C. gariepinus, among the recorded in the early morning (6:00 am). groups having 50, 100 and 150 larvae. The percentage of larval consumption was similar among the groups with Semi‑field based Anopheles arabiensis larvae predation the different amount of supplementary fish food. experiment Small size C. gariepinus consumed larger number of Semi-field larval predation experiment was carried out in An. arabiensis than the large size C. gariepinus. During four ponds of equal size (1.05 m × 0.40 m × 1 cm) built the light hours, larval consumption by small size fish on the premises of the ALIPB. The ponds were washed (83.7 %) was greater than the consumption by the large and covered with mosquito proof net before and after size fish (78.6 %). During the night hours, percentage of introducing catfish and mosquito larvae. This was done to larvae consumed by large size C. gariepinus (100 %) was prevent escape of emerging adult mosquitoes and incom- slightly greater than the percentage consumed by small ing egg laying mosquitoes. About 0.21 m3 of water and 300 size C. gariepinus (96.9 %).