Mosquito communities with trap height and urban-rural gradient in Adelaide, South Australia: implications for disease vector surveillance

Abstract

Understanding the factors influencing mosquito distribution is important for effective surveillance and control of nuisance and disease vector mosquitoes. The goal of this study was to determine how trap height and distance to the city center influenced the abundance and species of mosquitoes collected in Adelaide, South Australia. Mosquito communities were sampled at two heights (<2m and ~10m) along an urban-rural gradient. A total of 5,133 mosquitoes was identified over 176 trap nights. Aedes notoscriptus, Ae. vigilax, and Culex molestus were all more abundant in lower traps while Cx. quinquefasciatus (an ornithophilic species) was found to be more abundant in high traps. Distance to city center correlated strongly with the abundance of Ae. vigilax, Ae. camptorhynchus, Cx. globocoxitus, and Cx. molestus, all of which were most common at the sites farthest from the city and closest to the saltmarsh. Overall, the important disease vectors in South Australia (Ae. vigilax, Ae. camptorhynchus, Ae. notoscriptus, and Cx. annulirostris) were more abundant in low traps farthest from the city and closest to the saltmarsh. The current mosquito surveillance practice of setting traps within two meters of the ground is effective for sampling populations of the important disease vector species in South Australia. Journal of Vector Ecology 39 (1): 48-55. 2014.

Improving public health intervention for mosquito-borne disease: the value of geovisualization using source of infection and LandScan data

“…This finding is supported by studies across Australia which have found that RRV infection rates (human and mosquito) vary at a relatively small scale [4,[35][36][37]. The fine-scale variation in disease rates we see here could be due to variation in reporting/testing by medical practitioners, behavioural differences of the patients or could represent variation in transmission ecology [19,34]; potentially all three factors are influencing disease rates to some degree. The fine-scale variation in disease rates we see here could be due to variation in reporting/testing by medical practitioners, behavioural differences of the patients or could represent variation in transmission ecology [19,34]; potentially all three factors are influencing disease rates to some degree.…”

“…The scale at which RRV risk operates in SA is unknown but different RRV ecologies exist across the state [28] and vector and virus prevalence appears to vary at the scale of kilometres [34]. The scale at which RRV risk operates in SA is unknown but different RRV ecologies exist across the state [28] and vector and virus prevalence appears to vary at the scale of kilometres [34].…”

Zika vector transmission risk in temperate Australia: a vector competence study

“…The case of Ae. camptorhynchus is quite different: its ecology is restricted to coastal areas, or around inland brackish zones [49], with a lower abundance in urban areas [50], with local exceptions in suburb areas around Melbourne, Victoria (SL, pers. Comm.).…”

Interpreting mosquito feeding patterns in Australia through an ecological lens; an analysis of blood meal studies.

“…quiquefasciatus were caught in traps set at least 8m off the ground, whilst a higher abundance of Ae. vigilax were found in traps 1.5m off the ground, for the same locations [47, 48]. In our meta-analysis, Cx.…”