Background: Aedes (Stegomyia) albopictus (Skuse) is an important disease vector and biting nuisance. During the 2009 active season, six ∼1000‐parcel sites were studied, three in urban and three in suburban areas of New Jersey, United States, to examine the efficacy of standard integrated urban mosquito control strategies applied area wide. Active source reduction, larviciding, adulticiding and public education (source reduction through education) were implemented in one site in each county, an education‐only approach was developed in a second site and a third site was used as an untreated experimental control. Populations were surveyed weekly with BG‐Sentinel traps and ovitraps.Results: A substantial reduction in Ae. albopictus populations was achieved in urban sites, but only modest reductions in suburban sites. Education alone achieved significant reductions in urban adult Ae. albopictus. Egg catches echoed adult catches only in suburban sites.Conclusions: There are significant socioeconomic and climatic differences between urban and suburban sites that impact upon Ae. albopictus populations and the efficacy of the control methods tested. An integrated pest management approach can affect abundances, but labor‐intensive, costly source reduction was not enough to maintain Ae. albopictus counts below a nuisance threshold. Nighttime adult population suppression using truck‐mounted adulticides can be effective. Area‐wide cost‐effective strategies are necessary. Published 2013. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA
The number of honey bee colonies in the United States has declined to half of its peak level in the 1940s, and colonies lost over the winter have reached levels that are becoming economically unstable. While the causes of these losses are numerous and the interaction between them is very complex, the role of insecticides has garnered much attention. As a result, there is a need to better understand the risk of insecticides to bees, leading to more studies on both toxicity and exposure. While much research has been conducted on insecticides and bees, there have been very limited studies to elucidate the role that bee genotype and age has on the toxicity of these insecticides. The goal of this study was to determine if there are differences in insecticide sensitivity between honey bees of different genetic backgrounds (Carniolan, Italian, and Russian stocks) and assess if insecticide sensitivity varies with age. We found that Italian bees were the most sensitive of these stocks to insecticides, but variation was largely dependent on the class of insecticide tested. There were almost no differences in organophosphate bioassays between honey bee stocks (<1-fold), moderate differences in pyrethroid bioassays (1.5 to 3-fold), and dramatic differences in neonicotinoid bioassays (3.4 to 33.3-fold). Synergism bioassays with piperonyl butoxide, amitraz, and coumaphos showed increased phenothrin sensitivity in all stocks and also demonstrated further physiological differences between stocks. In addition, as bees aged, the sensitivity to phenothrin significantly decreased, but the sensitivity to naled significantly increased. These results demonstrate the variation arising from the genetic background and physiological transitions in honey bees as they age. This information can be used to determine risk assessment, as well as establishing baseline data for future comparisons to explain the variation in toxicity differences for honey bees reported in the literature.
The goal of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a public health educational campaign to reduce backyard mosquito-larval habitats. Three communities each, within two New Jersey counties, were randomly selected to receive: (1) both education and mosquito control, (2) education only, and (3) no education or mosquito control. Four separate educational events included a 5-day elementary school curriculum in the spring, and three door to door distributions of educational brochures. Before and after each educational event, the numbers of mosquito-larval container habitats were counted in 50 randomly selected homes per study area. Container surveys allowed us to measure source reduction behavior. Although we saw reductions in container habitats in sites receiving education, they were not significantly different from the control. Our results suggest that traditional passive means of public education, which were often considered the gold standard for mosquito control programs, are not sufficient to motivate residents to reduce backyard mosquito-larval habitats.
Mosquito species that utilize peridomestic containers for immature development are commonly aggressive human biters, and because they often reach high abundance, create significant nuisance. One of these species, the Asian tiger mosquito Aedes albopictus, is an important vector of emerging infectious diseases, such as dengue, chikungunya, and Zika fevers. Integrated mosquito management (IMM) of Ae. albopictus is particularly difficult because it requires access to private yards in urban and suburban residences. It has become apparent that in the event of a public health concern due to this species, homeowners will have to be active participants in the control process by reducing mosquito habitats in their properties, an activity known as source reduction. However, limited attempts at quantifying the effect of source reduction by homeowners have had mixed results. Of note, many mosquito control programs in the US have some form of education outreach, however the primary approach is often passive focusing on the distribution of education materials as flyers. In 2010, we evaluated the use of active community peer education in a source reduction program, using AmeriCorps volunteers. The volunteers were mobilized over a 4-week period, in two areas with approximately 1,000 residences each in urban Mercer and suburban Monmouth counties in New Jersey, USA. The volunteers were first provided training on peridomestic mosquitoes and on basic approaches to reducing the number of container habitats for mosquito larvae in backyards. Within the two treatment areas the volunteers successfully engaged 758 separate homes. Repeated measures analysis of variance showed a significant reduction in container habitats in the sites where the volunteers actively engaged the community compared to untreated control areas in both counties. Our results suggest that active education using community peer educators can be an effective means of source reduction, and a critical tool in the arsenal against peridomestic mosquitoes.