两种苍蝇密度监测方法的比较分析  

Monitoring of fly density with two methods

作　　者：侯秀华[1] 杨劲英[1] 黄远威[1] 

机构地区：[1]梅州市疾病预防控制中心,广东梅州523000

出　　处：《中国热带医学》2011年第6期708-709,共2页China Tropical Medicine

摘　　要：目的比较笼诱法和粘蝇纸法在苍蝇密度监测中的差异,为选择更合适的苍蝇密度调查和灭效评估方法提供科学依据。方法在同一环境地点中同时布放粘蝇纸和捕蝇笼进行比对试验,分析比较2种方法的监测结果。结果粘蝇纸法的平均密度为6.44只/张,笼诱法的平均密度为1.81只/笼,经统计学分析P<0.01,具有显著性差异。粘蝇纸法和笼诱法所诱捕的优势蝇种均为家蝇,其次为丝光绿蝇,在诱捕成蝇的种群方面两者没有显著差别。结论粘蝇纸法能捕获监测环境中更多的苍蝇,更能真实反映实际的苍蝇密度。Aim To compare the methods of monitoring fly density by cage trapping and paper-sticking capture. Methods Fly density was monitored in the field with two methods of cage trapping and paper-staicking capture and the results were compared. Results The average density of paper-sticking capture was 6.44/piece,and that of cage trapping was 1.81/cage,showing statistically significant difference between two methods （P〈0.01）. Musca domesica,and Lucilia sercata predominated. Conclusion Paper-sticking capture could caought more flies and reflected the real density of the flies.

关 键 词：苍蝇 密度监测 笼诱法 粘蝇纸法 结果分析 

分 类 号：R184.33[医药卫生—流行病学]