Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T07:43:56.705Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Seasonal abundance, diel biting activity and parity of Aedes polynesiensis marks and A. samoanus (Grünberg) (Diptera: Culicidae) in Samoa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

W. A. Samarawickrema ,
Fola Sone  and
R. F. Cummings
W. A. Samarawickrema
Affiliation:
WHO Samoa Filariasis Research Project, P.O. Box 77, Apia, Samoa
Fola Sone
Affiliation:
WHO Samoa Filariasis Research Project, P.O. Box 77, Apia, Samoa
R. F. Cummings
Affiliation:
WHO Samoa Filariasis Research Project, P.O. Box 77, Apia, Samoa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The seasonal abundance, biting cycle, age composition and survival of females of Aedes polynesiensis Marks and A. samoanus (Grünberg), the major vectors of subperiodic bancroftian filariasis, were studied in Samoa. A. polynesiensis density was low during the high rainfall months and increased immediately following them. A. samoanus density showed no clear relation to rainfall. A. polynesiensis was active throughout the day, with peaks indoors and out at 08.00–09.00 h and 16.00–18.00 h. The nulliparous and parous populations showed similar patterns of activity. The biting cycles of 2-parous and 3- plus 4-parous females were asymmetric with time. A. samoanus was active throughout the night, with highest activity at 23.00– 01.00 h. A minor peak at 19.00–20.00 h was more pronounced among older females than among younger ones. Night biting by A. polynesiensis and day biting by A. samoanus were rare. The parous proportion of A. polynesiensis ranged from 36·3 to 59·5% and the epidemiologically significant 3- plus 4-parous proportion ranged from 1·0 to 6·7%. The parous proportion of A. samoanus was 37·9–49·7% and the 3- plus 4-parous proportion 1·4–2·6%. The proportions found to be parous in both vectors were generally higher in the cool than the warm season, suggesting higher daily survival during that period.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 77 , Issue 2 , June 1987 , pp. 191 - 200
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bryan, J. H. & Southgate, B. A. (1976). Some observations on filariasis in Western Samoa after mass administration of diethylcarbamazine.—Trans. R. Soc. trop. Med. Hyg. 70, 39–48.Google Scholar
Davidson, G. (1954). Estimation of the survival-rate of anopheline mosquitoes in nature.—Nature, Lond. 174, 792–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Desowitz, R. S. & Southgate, B. A. (1973). Studies on filariasis in the Pacific: 2. The persistence of microfilaraemia in diethylcarbamazine treated populations of Fiji and Western Samoa: diagnostic application of the membrane-filtration technique.—Southeast Asian J. Trop. Med. & Public Health 4, 179–183.Google Scholar
Detinova, T. S. (1962). Age-grouping methods in Diptera of medical importance, with special reference to some vectors of malaria.—Monograph Ser. W.H.O. no. 47, 216 pp.Google ScholarPubMed
Haddow, A. J. (1954). Studies of the biting-habits of African mosquitos. An appraisal of methods employed, with special reference to the twenty-four-hour catch.—Bull. ent. Res. 45, 199–242.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, J. C. Jr. (1970). Evaluation of filariasis mosquito surveys based on the physiological age of the vector.—J. Parasit. 56 (no. 4 sect. II pt. 1), 149.Google Scholar
Jachowski, L. A. Jr. (1954). Filariasis in American Samoa. V. Bionomics of the principal vector, Aedes polynesiensis Marks.—Am. J. Hyg. 60, 186–203.Google ScholarPubMed
Macdonald, G. (1957). The epidemiology and control of malaria.—201 pp. London, Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Ramalingam, S. (1968). The epidemiology of filarial transmission in Samoa and Tonga.—Ann. trop. Med. Parasit. 62, 305–324.Google Scholar
Samarawickrema, W. A., Sone, F. & Cummings, R. F. (1987). Natural infections of Wuchereria bancrofti in Aedes (Stegomyia) polynesiensis and Aedes (Finlaya) samoanus in Samoa.—Trans. R. Soc. trop. Med. Hyg. 81, 124–128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Samarawickrema, W. A., Spears, G. F. S., Sone, F., Ichimori, K. & Cummings, R. F. (1985 a). Filariasis transmission in Samoa. I. Relation between density of microfilariae and larval density in laboratory-bred and wild-caught Aedes (Stegomyia) polynesiensis (Marks) and wild-caught Aedes (Finlaya) samoanus (Gruenberg).—Ann. trop. Med. Parasit. 79, 89–100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Samarawickrema, W. A., Spears, G. F. S., Sone, F., Ichimori, K. & Cummings, R. F. (1985 b). Filariasis transmission in Samoa. II. Some factors related to the development of microfilariae in the intermediate host.—Ann. trop. Med. Parasit. 79, 101–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, T. & Sone, F. (1974). The bionomics of filariasis vectors in Western Samoa.—Jap. J. sanit. Zool. 25, 251–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar