EVALUATION OF CDC LIGHT TRAP, BG SENTINEL TRAP, AND MMX TRAP FOR THE COLLECTION OF SALT MARSH MOSQUITOES IN ANASTASIA STATE PARK, SAINT AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA DANIEL DIXON1, JOSEPH D’AMATO, AND RUI-DE XUE Anastasia Mosquito Control District, 120 EOC Drive, Saint Augustine, FL 32092 Current address: USDA/CMAVE, 1600 SW 23rd Drive, Gainesville, FL 32608 Guest Editor: Emad Khater ABSTRACT Salt marsh mosquitoes are major nuisance pests during the periods of high mosquito activity, especially after major storm events. In 2016-2017, Saint John’s County, Florida, USA was struck by two major hurricanes that resulted in multiple outbreaks of salt marsh mosquito populations. To optimize the surveillance of two salt marsh mosquitoes, (Aedes taeniorhynchus and Ae. sollicitans, three types of traps (the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Light trap, Bio- gents Sentinel (BG) trap and Counter Flow Geometry Model (MMX) trap were tested for their capacity to capture the highest numbers of high quality live specimens for laboratory bioassays. Each trap type was tested in Anastasia State Park, located along a major salt marsh area in Saint John’s County. Although the MMX trap captured most of the salt marsh mosquitoes collected, the numbers of mosquitoes captured was not statistically significant compared to the other trap types. However, there was a significant difference in the numbers betweenAe. taeniorhynchus and Ae. sollicitans in the MMX traps. The MMX trap is preferred for capturing salt marsh mosquitoes that are in high quality for the CDC bottle bioassays. Key Words: Aedes taeniorhynchus, Aedes sollicitans, surveillance, salt marsh, CDC light trap Salt marsh mosquitoes are nuisance St. Augustine, FL to control. Aedes taenio- pests to Florida residents and tourists due rhynchus, also known as the Black Salt Marsh to their aggressive biting behavior and long mosquito, breeds in brackish water in North, flight range (Rey et al. 2012; Nayar 1985; Central, and South America; while Ae. sollici- Hribar et al. 2010). These mosquitoes are tans, also known as the Eastern Salt Marsh also of a public health concern to people mosquito, is found in saline wetlands, dense due to allergic reactions caused by their salt marshes, shallow pools, and inland in bites and their potential as vectors of dis- collected brackish water. In the 2016-2017, ease pathogens such as the dog heartworm Saint John’s County was hit by thunder- and Venezuelan Eastern Encephalitis virus, storms throughout the summer and two hur- both to dogs and residents in Saint John’s ricanes (Matthew and Irma) that accounted County, Florida, USA, respectively (Peng for over 56 cm of rain levels. Over 200 ser- et al. 2004; Sudia et al. 1971; Weaver et al. vice requests per day were raised from the 1996). It was noted that seasonality, temper- residents living near salt marsh habitats in ature, flood conditions and hurricanes are Anastasia Island. Accordingly, and in prompt the major factors that affecting egg hatch- response, AMCD sent multiple teams of ing rates, which result in noticeable increas- technicians to treat the island using insecti- es in populations of salt marsh mosquitoes cides, like Mosquito Mist and Aqualuer 20- (Hribar et al. 2010). 20 at night and Talstar-P and DUET during Two salt marsh mosquito species, Aedes the day. However, the repeated and intensive taeniorhynchus (Weidemann) and Ae. sollici- treatments against the salt marsh mosquito tans (Walker) are primarily targeted by An- populations raised concerns of the potential astasia Mosquito Control District (AMCD), risk of insecticide resistance development in 64 Dixon et al.: Trap comparisons 65 the targeted mosquito populations. To test a mosquito from initial exposure to knock- for insecticide resistance in the salt marsh down and then final death. mosquito populations, AMCD used the CDC Optimized trapping protocols are para- bottle bioassay, a method that determines mount for the CDC bottle bioassay due to the time required for an insecticide to affect the large numbers of intact live mosquitoes Figure 1. Placement of each MMX trap, CDC light trap, and BG trap. Each replicate (Rep) is encircled by a grey polygon. Within each Rep, the blue blips represent the positions of MMX traps, the purple blips represent the positions of CDC light traps, and the orange blips represent the positions of BG traps. The black scale bar on the right bottom represents 17 meters. 66 Journal of the Florida Mosquito Control Association, Vol. 66, 2019 needed to test for susceptibility/resistance non-normal, heteroscedastic behavior. Thus, bioassays. Most of the previous research has a non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test was ap- focused on the capture of salt marsh mosqui- plied to the data to determine if trap capture toes for studying attractant combinations for differences were statistically significant. the CDC light trap (Kline and Lemire, 1995; The abundance of the two salt marsh mos- Rueda et al. 2001). However few studies had quitoes, Ae. taeniorhynchus and Ae. sollicitans been conducted to assess the differences in captured in the MMX trap, CDC Light trap, capture rate of salt marsh mosquitoes by mul- and BG trap was analyzed and presented in tiple trap types (Smith et al. 2016). Three Table (1). A total of 697 Ae. taeniorhynchus and types of traps, the Centers for Disease Control 154 Ae. sollicitans, with an average across all (CDC) Light trap, Biogents Sentinel (BG) three replicates at 232 Ae. taeniorhynchus and trap and the Counter Flow Geometry Model 51 Ae. sollicitans were captured in the MMX (MMX) trap were used in this study for salt trap. In the CDC light trap, a total of 499 Ae. marsh mosquito collections. This was with taeniorhynchus and 149 Ae. sollicitans, with an av- the purpose to test the differential capacity of erage across all three replicates at 166 Ae. tae- these traps for capturing high quality live salt niorhynchus and 50 Ae. sollicitans were captured. marsh mosquitoes for lab bioassay. The BG trap captured the lowest number of Three of each trap type were set at a pic- mosquitoes, with a total of 16 Ae. taeniorhynchus nic area in Anastasia State Park (29.866186 and 39 Ae. sollicitans and an average across all N, 81.272030 W), and each trap was placed at three replicates at fiveAe. taeniorhynchus and 9.1–36.6 m apart. All traps were baited with dry 13 Ae. sollicitans. Although it seemed to per- ice (carbon dioxide source) as an attractant, form well, the mosquito numbers captured by but the CDC traps (John W. Hock Company, the MMX traps were not statistically significant Gainesville, FL, USA) and BG traps (Biogents compared to those captured by the CDC light AG, Regensburg, Germany) were also baited traps and BG traps. However, there was a sig- with Octenol (Biosensory, Putnam, CT, USA) nificant difference in abundance betweenAe. and BG lure (ADAPCO, Sanford, FL, USA), taeniorhynchus and Ae. sollicitans in the MMX respectively. The MMX traps (American Bio- trap, though the difference is marginal (N = 6, physics Corp., RI) and CDC traps were hung χ2 = 3.8571, DF = 4, P = 0.0497). with shepherd’s hooks at one m above ground, Despite the comparable salt marsh mos- while the BG traps were placed on the ground. quitoes capturing efficacy between the three CDC traps were hooked up to 6-volt batteries; tested trap types, the MMX trap is preferred while the BG and MMX traps were hooked up for capturing live mosquitoes suitable for to 12-volt batteries. the CDC bottle bioassay, due to its counter All traps were set in the afternoon and flow updraft system, which collects mosqui- collected the next day. All specimens from toes unharmed in the clear plastic capture each trap were identified to species and chamber. Unlike the MMX traps, CDC light counted to determine the trap that col- traps suck mosquitoes into capture jars using lected the highest abundance of salt marsh suction force generated through miniature mosquitoes. A goodness-of-fit test was used fans. The mosquitoes contact the suction fan to determine that the datasets conformed to blades upon capture, which potentially dam- Table 1. Average numbers of Aedes taeniorhynchus and Ae. sollicitans captured in the MMX trap, CDC light trap, and BG trap. MMX trap CDC light traps BG traps Species Average Average Average Aedes taeniorhynchus 232.3 ± 83.5Ba 166.3 ± 126.9Aa 5.3 ± 3.5Aa Ae. sollicitans 51.3 ± 19.5Aa 49.7 ± 27.1Aa 13.0 ± 9.1Aa N = 3 traps. Lowercase superscript letters indicate no significant difference for total species between trap types. Uppercase superscript letters indicate a significant difference in abundance between the two species (P-value = 0.0497). Dixon et al.: Trap comparisons 67 ages major appendages and thus confounds REFERENCES CITED bottle bioassays. The CDC bottle bioassay Hribar LJ, DeMay DJ, Lund UJ. 2010. “The association detects mosquito susceptibility levels or re- between meteorological variables and the abun- sistance to active ingredients in insecticides dance of Aedes taeniorhynchus in the Florida Keys.” by measuring their morbidity and mortality Journal of Vector Ecology 35 :339-346. Kline DL, Lemire, GF. 1995. Field evaluation of heat over designated exposure time (CDC, 2010). as an added attractant to traps baited with carbon Damage to mosquitoes before testing can dioxide and octenol for Aedes taeniorhynchus. Journal have a significant impact on the rate of mor- of the American Mosquito Control Association-Mosquito News 11:454-456. tality in control and treatment groups. For Nayar JK. 1985. Bionomics and physiology of Aedes tae- this reason, minimizing damage to mosqui- niorhynchus and Aedes sollicitans, the salt marsh mos- toes during trap capture is a major consid- quitoes of Florida: University of Florida. Peng ZK, Beckett AN, Engler RJ, Hoffman DR, Ott NL, eration when collecting them from the field.