论文部分内容阅读
目的比较诱蚊灯法和人工小时法2种捕蚊方法的现场捕蚊效果,为开展科学规范的蚊虫调查或监测方法提供参考。方法沿三峡库区按距离大坝远近不同选择3个点,同时使用2种捕蚊方法对居民区及其周围环境进行蚊虫种类及其构成调查。结果诱蚊灯法和人工小时法均能捕获库区的主要蚊种,但在蚊种构成上有差异,诱蚊灯法捕获的三带喙库蚊数量大于人工小时法,而人工小时法捕获的骚扰阿蚊数量远大于诱蚊灯法;诱蚊灯法适用范围比人工小时法更广泛,可应用于林地、稻田等没有空间限制的环境。结论 2种蚊虫采集方法分别具有不同的优势和劣势;在长期系统的调查或监测中,建议使用诱蚊灯法。
OBJECTIVE To compare the mosquito-killing effects of two methods of mosquito-killing by artificial mosquito-lamp method and artificial-hour method, and to provide reference for carrying out scientific and standardized mosquito surveys or monitoring methods. Methods Three points along the Three Gorges Reservoir Area were selected according to the distance from the dam. Two kinds of mosquito traps were used to investigate the species and their composition of mosquitoes in residential areas and their surroundings. Results Both mosquito lamp method and artificial hour method were able to capture the major mosquito species in the reservoir area, but there were differences in mosquito species composition. The number of Culex tritaeniorhynchus captured by the trapping lamp method was greater than that of artificial hours method, while the artificial hour method The number of harassment A mosquito is much larger than that of the mosquito lamp. The range of application of the mosquito lamp is broader than that of the artificial hourly method, and can be applied to the environment without space restriction such as woodland and rice paddies. Conclusion The two methods for collecting mosquitoes have different advantages and disadvantages respectively. In the long-term systematic investigation or monitoring, it is recommended to use the mosquito lamp method.