Jump to content

UEFA Euro 2020 - Croatia v Scotland

Stand Free!

So...


mizer
 Share
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 423
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Apparantly the apartment mikey stole maddie is up for sale, we could have a whip sound, get her out of his loft?

 

Fuck that its in Portugal!

 

Surveillance of potential Blutongue Vectors in Northern Europe: Light Traps versus Semiochemical-Based Traps?

 

SIR, - Carpenter and colleagues (J. Appl. Ecol. 2008, 45, 1237-1245) recently described a comparison of light-traps with drop-trap catches on sheep, concluding that lighttrapping does not accurately represent the proportions of different Culicoides species biting in the field. Light traps are used widely across Europe for Culicoides surveillance; clearly, if they are missing potential bluetongue virus (BTV) vectors, risk assessments based on such data may be skewed. In particular, this study found that light-traps substantially underestimated the numbers of Culicoides chiopterus on sheep – a species that, due to generally low numbers caught with light traps across Northern Europe, to date has not been considered a serious candidate to vector BTV. Semiochemical-based traps are now used widely for the management of Culicoides, mainly in relation to leisure and tourism. For the first time, we report their potential within the livestock industry, presenting preliminary results from a direct comparison of lighttraps and semiochemical-based traps.

 

Eight ‘Midg-it’ traps (www.midgeater.co.uk) were operated over a 4-week period (May – June 2008) on a farm in South-East Scotland. Warmed CO2 (4000-6000 ppm) was produced and mixed with a variety of experimental lures. Of 6,056 Culicoides spp trapped, 9% belonged to the C. obsoletus group, with an ammonium bicarbonate salt/octenol lure catching significantly more C.obsoletus than any of the other test lures, including octenol alone, possibly explaining previous suggestions that CO2/octenol traps were not suitable for this species group. When compared against light traps, the odour traps under-performed in terms of C. obsoletus but the addition of a black-light source rectified this, both increasing the proportion of the C. obsoletus group in the semiochemical traps from < 1% to >60% and also, increasing the overall midge catch to 5 times that seen in light traps in the same site. In addition, 6 ‘Midg-it’ semiochemical traps have been operated on a North-Wales farm, April – August 2008, with catches identified to C. obsoletus species complex level based on morphological characteristics, followed by individual Culicoides within this complex being sub-sampled and identified to species level using a multiplex PCR assay (adapted from Nolan et al, 2007, Vet. Microbiol., 124, 82-94). Comparisons were made with lighttrap catches from this site and an adjacent farm. All four members of the C. obsoletus group were trapped at the site (i.e. C. obsoletus Meigen, C. scoticus Downes & Kettle, C. dewulfi Goetghebuer and C. chiopterus Meigen). Within the semiochemical-based traps, the overall proportion of C. obsoletus trapped identified as C. chiopterus was 25.3%, whereas in light-trap catches it was 4.6%. In addition, analysed by month, semiochemical-based traps revealed a seasonality pattern for C. chiopterus, with catch proportions varying between 5% and 89%, peaking in June.

These studies are ongoing and full data will be reported shortly. Whilst semiochemical traps alone will not replace light-traps, we suggest that strategic use in areas of high C. obsoletus populations may assist in an accurate determination of potential vector species.

 

Alison Blackwell & David Falconer, Advanced Pest Solutions Ltd, University of Edinburgh, Darwin Building, King’s Buildings, Edinburgh EH9 3JR, UK. ablackwell@advancedpestsolutions.co.uk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck that its in Portugal!

 

Surveillance of potential Blutongue Vectors in Northern Europe: Light Traps versus Semiochemical-Based Traps?

 

SIR, - Carpenter and colleagues (J. Appl. Ecol. 2008, 45, 1237-1245) recently described a comparison of light-traps with drop-trap catches on sheep, concluding that lighttrapping does not accurately represent the proportions of different Culicoides species biting in the field. Light traps are used widely across Europe for Culicoides surveillance; clearly, if they are missing potential bluetongue virus (BTV) vectors, risk assessments based on such data may be skewed. In particular, this study found that light-traps substantially underestimated the numbers of Culicoides chiopterus on sheep – a species that, due to generally low numbers caught with light traps across Northern Europe, to date has not been considered a serious candidate to vector BTV. Semiochemical-based traps are now used widely for the management of Culicoides, mainly in relation to leisure and tourism. For the first time, we report their potential within the livestock industry, presenting preliminary results from a direct comparison of lighttraps and semiochemical-based traps.

 

Eight ‘Midg-it’ traps (www.midgeater.co.uk) were operated over a 4-week period (May – June 2008) on a farm in South-East Scotland. Warmed CO2 (4000-6000 ppm) was produced and mixed with a variety of experimental lures. Of 6,056 Culicoides spp trapped, 9% belonged to the C. obsoletus group, with an ammonium bicarbonate salt/octenol lure catching significantly more C.obsoletus than any of the other test lures, including octenol alone, possibly explaining previous suggestions that CO2/octenol traps were not suitable for this species group. When compared against light traps, the odour traps under-performed in terms of C. obsoletus but the addition of a black-light source rectified this, both increasing the proportion of the C. obsoletus group in the semiochemical traps from < 1% to >60% and also, increasing the overall midge catch to 5 times that seen in light traps in the same site. In addition, 6 ‘Midg-it’ semiochemical traps have been operated on a North-Wales farm, April – August 2008, with catches identified to C. obsoletus species complex level based on morphological characteristics, followed by individual Culicoides within this complex being sub-sampled and identified to species level using a multiplex PCR assay (adapted from Nolan et al, 2007, Vet. Microbiol., 124, 82-94). Comparisons were made with lighttrap catches from this site and an adjacent farm. All four members of the C. obsoletus group were trapped at the site (i.e. C. obsoletus Meigen, C. scoticus Downes & Kettle, C. dewulfi Goetghebuer and C. chiopterus Meigen). Within the semiochemical-based traps, the overall proportion of C. obsoletus trapped identified as C. chiopterus was 25.3%, whereas in light-trap catches it was 4.6%. In addition, analysed by month, semiochemical-based traps revealed a seasonality pattern for C. chiopterus, with catch proportions varying between 5% and 89%, peaking in June.

These studies are ongoing and full data will be reported shortly. Whilst semiochemical traps alone will not replace light-traps, we suggest that strategic use in areas of high C. obsoletus populations may assist in an accurate determination of potential vector species.

 

Alison Blackwell & David Falconer, Advanced Pest Solutions Ltd, University of Edinburgh, Darwin Building, King’s Buildings, Edinburgh EH9 3JR, UK. ablackwell@advancedpestsolutions.co.uk

 

Eh?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck that its in Portugal!

 

Surveillance of potential Blutongue Vectors in Northern Europe: Light Traps versus Semiochemical-Based Traps?

 

SIR, - Carpenter and colleagues (J. Appl. Ecol. 2008, 45, 1237-1245) recently described a comparison of light-traps with drop-trap catches on sheep, concluding that lighttrapping does not accurately represent the proportions of different Culicoides species biting in the field. Light traps are used widely across Europe for Culicoides surveillance; clearly, if they are missing potential bluetongue virus (BTV) vectors, risk assessments based on such data may be skewed. In particular, this study found that light-traps substantially underestimated the numbers of Culicoides chiopterus on sheep – a species that, due to generally low numbers caught with light traps across Northern Europe, to date has not been considered a serious candidate to vector BTV. Semiochemical-based traps are now used widely for the management of Culicoides, mainly in relation to leisure and tourism. For the first time, we report their potential within the livestock industry, presenting preliminary results from a direct comparison of lighttraps and semiochemical-based traps.

 

Eight ‘Midg-it’ traps (www.midgeater.co.uk) were operated over a 4-week period (May – June 2008) on a farm in South-East Scotland. Warmed CO2 (4000-6000 ppm) was produced and mixed with a variety of experimental lures. Of 6,056 Culicoides spp trapped, 9% belonged to the C. obsoletus group, with an ammonium bicarbonate salt/octenol lure catching significantly more C.obsoletus than any of the other test lures, including octenol alone, possibly explaining previous suggestions that CO2/octenol traps were not suitable for this species group. When compared against light traps, the odour traps under-performed in terms of C. obsoletus but the addition of a black-light source rectified this, both increasing the proportion of the C. obsoletus group in the semiochemical traps from < 1% to >60% and also, increasing the overall midge catch to 5 times that seen in light traps in the same site. In addition, 6 ‘Midg-it’ semiochemical traps have been operated on a North-Wales farm, April – August 2008, with catches identified to C. obsoletus species complex level based on morphological characteristics, followed by individual Culicoides within this complex being sub-sampled and identified to species level using a multiplex PCR assay (adapted from Nolan et al, 2007, Vet. Microbiol., 124, 82-94). Comparisons were made with lighttrap catches from this site and an adjacent farm. All four members of the C. obsoletus group were trapped at the site (i.e. C. obsoletus Meigen, C. scoticus Downes & Kettle, C. dewulfi Goetghebuer and C. chiopterus Meigen). Within the semiochemical-based traps, the overall proportion of C. obsoletus trapped identified as C. chiopterus was 25.3%, whereas in light-trap catches it was 4.6%. In addition, analysed by month, semiochemical-based traps revealed a seasonality pattern for C. chiopterus, with catch proportions varying between 5% and 89%, peaking in June.

These studies are ongoing and full data will be reported shortly. Whilst semiochemical traps alone will not replace light-traps, we suggest that strategic use in areas of high C. obsoletus populations may assist in an accurate determination of potential vector species.

 

Alison Blackwell & David Falconer, Advanced Pest Solutions Ltd, University of Edinburgh, Darwin Building, King’s Buildings, Edinburgh EH9 3JR, UK. ablackwell@advancedpestsolutions.co.uk

 

Geek!!!!

 

So this alison blackwell.... wid ye??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...