诱蚊诱卵器法与人诱停落法在伊蚊密度监测中的比较

职业与健康 ›› 2024, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (5): 662-665.

诱蚊诱卵器法与人诱停落法在伊蚊密度监测中的比较

叶独秋^1,2, 庞博文², 张驰², 陶骏捷², 吕锡宏²

1.复旦大学公共卫生学院,上海 200032;
2.上海市松江区疾病预防控制中心传染病防制科,上海 201620

收稿日期:2023-07-06 修回日期:2023-08-14 发布日期:2026-03-16
通信作者: 吕锡宏,副主任医师,E-mail：xihonglv@126.com
作者简介:叶独秋,男,在读硕士研究生,研究方向为病媒生物预防与控制。
基金资助:
上海市松江区医学重点学科建设项目（ZK2019A10）

Comparative analysis of mosquito ovitrap and human landing trap in monitoring Aedes mosquito density

YE Duqiu^1,2, PANG Bowen², ZHANG Chi², TAO Junjie², LYU Xihong²

1. School of Public Health,Fudan University,Shanghai,200032, China;
2. Department of Infectious Disease Prevention and Control,Songjiang Center for Disease Control and Prevention,Shanghai,201620, China

Received:2023-07-06 Revised:2023-08-14 Published:2026-03-16
Contact: LYU Xihong,Associate chief physician,E-mail：xihonglv@126.com

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的观察白纹伊蚊密度监测时诱蚊诱卵指数（mosquito and oviposition positive index,MOI）和伊蚊成蚊停落指数（landing index,LI）变化趋势,分析不同生境和时期下2种监测方法指标（MOI和LI）相关性及风险等级评估一致性。方法 2021年6—9月,每月在上海市松江区15个街道、镇监测点运用诱蚊诱卵器法监测伊蚊密度,在放置诱蚊诱卵器的7 d前、当天以及回收7 d后分别开展人诱停落法监测,计算MOI和LI_{7 d前}、LI_当天、LI_{7 d后},采用Spearman相关进行MOI与LI_{7 d前}、LI_当天、LI_{7 d后}的相关分析,Kappa检验进行风险评估一致性评价,灰色关联度方法分析与温度、湿度、风速的关联程度。结果 6—9月上海市松江区MOI和LI均呈现先升后降变化趋势,MOI在8月达到最高值19.46,平均LI在7月达到最高值3.51,轮胎聚集地、公园密度较高,学校、医院密度低于其他生境。MOI与LI_{7 d前}、LI_当天、LI_{7 d后}的Spearman相关系数分别为0.393、0.396和0.342（均P<0.05）,Kappa值分别为-0.084、0.012和-0.075（均P>0.05）;MOI与温度、湿度、风速的灰色关联度为0.784、0.771和0.751,LI_当天则为0.793、0.785和0.774。结论 MOI与LI具有一定相关性,且2种指标均与主要气象因素的关联较紧密,但在登革热风险等级评估上不存在一致性,指标MOI较LI更加灵敏。

关键词: 白纹伊蚊, 诱蚊诱卵指数, 停落指数, 相关性, 一致性

Abstract: Objective To observe the variation trends of mosquito and oviposition positive index（MOI） and landing index（LI）,compare their correlation and consistency of risk grade assessment under different habitats and periods during the surveillance of Aedes albopictus. Methods Surveillance by mosquito-ovitrap was conducted at 15 street and town monitoring sites in Songjiang District of Shanghai City from June to September 2021,while human landing catch was used 7 days before the laying of mosquito-ovitrap（LI_7d-before）,on the same day（LI_day） and 7 days after the collection of mosquito-ovitrap（LI_7d-after） to calculate MOI and LI_7d-before,LI_day,LI_7d-after. Spearman correlation was used for correlation analysis,and Kappa test was used for risk assessment consistency evaluation between MOI and LI and gray correlation degree analysis for their correlation degree with temperature,humidity and wind speed. Results From June to September in Songjiang District,both MOI and LI increased first and then decreased. MOI reached the highest value of 19.46 in August,and average LI reached the highest value of 3.51 in July. The densities of Aedes albopictus in the tire gathering place and parks were higher than other habitats,and those in schools and hospitals were lower. Spearman correlation coefficients of MOI and LI_7d-before,LI_day,LI_7d-after were 0.393,0.396 and 0.342,respectively,with statistical significance（all P<0.05）,Kappa values were -0.084,0.012 and -0.075（all P>0.05）. The grey correlation degree of MOI with temperature,humidity and wind speed was 0.784,0.771 and 0.751,which of LIday was 0.793,0.785 and 0.774. Conclusion There was a certain correlation between MOI and LI,and both indexes were closely correlated with major meteorological factors. While there was no consistency in the assessment of dengue risk grade. Compared with LI,MOI was more sensitive.

Key words: Aedes albopictus, Mosquito and oviposition positive index, Landing index, Correlation, Consistency

中图分类号:

叶独秋, 庞博文, 张驰, 陶骏捷, 吕锡宏. 诱蚊诱卵器法与人诱停落法在伊蚊密度监测中的比较. [J]职业与健康, 2024, 40(5): 662-665.

YE Duqiu, PANG Bowen, ZHANG Chi, TAO Junjie, LYU Xihong. Comparative analysis of mosquito ovitrap and human landing trap in monitoring Aedes mosquito density. [J]OCCUPATION AND HEALTH, 2024, 40(5): 662-665.

参考文献

[1] BENEDICT M Q,LEVINE R S,HAWLEY W A,et al.Spread of the tiger:Global risk of invasion by the mosquito Aedes albopictus[J].Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis,2007,7(1):76-85.
[2] 刘杰,袁俊,何时雨,等.不同干预措施对居民小区白纹伊蚊防制效果和经济成本比较研究[J].中国媒介生物学及控制杂志,2022,33(5):753-759.
[3] 刘起勇. 我国登革热流行新趋势、防控挑战及策略分析[J].中国媒介生物学及控制杂志,2020,31(1):1-6.
[4] 马海芳. 登革热流行病学的研究进展[J].职业与健康,2020,36(1):137-139,144.
[5] 马德珍,宋伟,徐燕,等.3种白纹伊蚊种群密度监测方法的效果比较研究[J].中国媒介生物学及控制杂志,2022,33(3):336-339.
[6] 曹淦,陈安喜,杨晓,等.蚊虫密度监测方法的研究进展[J].中华卫生杀虫药械,2022,28(5):471-475.
[7] 王力,张文革.诱蚊诱卵器法与人诱停落法在伊蚊监测中的效果比较[J].上海预防医学,2019,31(8):623-626.
[8] 陈红,单宁,冷培恩.外环境中布雷图指数和诱蚊诱卵器指数的差异研究[J].中国热带医学,2022,22(6):517-521,534.
[9] 中华人民共和国卫生健康委员会.病媒生物密度监测方法蚊虫:GB/T 23797—2020[S].北京:人民卫生出版社,2020:3-4,11.
[10] 中华人民共和国疾病预防控制中心.登革热媒介伊蚊监测指南[EB/OL].(2018-01-04)[2023-04-10].https://www.chinacdc.cn/jkzt/crb/zl/dgr/jszl_2235/201810/P020181010391458962110.pdf.
[11] 陈燕霞,张希如,叶双岚,等.三种白纹伊蚊监测方法在登革热风险指示中的适用性探讨[J].中华疾病控制杂志,2019,23(6):723-727.
[12] 吕锡宏,郭晓芹,费胜军,等.上海市松江区2017—2018年登革热媒介伊蚊幼蚊监测分析[J].中国媒介生物学及控制杂志,2020,31(1):78-82.
[13] 薛海滨,孟金霞,任乐,等.山东省临沂市2018—2020年白纹伊蚊幼蚊监测与风险评估[J].中国媒介生物学及控制杂志,2021,32(6):686-690.
[14] 林立丰,段金花,李荣彪,等.现场比较诱蚊诱卵器与传统幼虫监测效果的研究[J].中国媒介生物学及控制杂志,2006,17(6):454-457.
[15] 冯笑,申同洋,刘国涛,等.3种方法对白纹伊蚊的监测结果分析[J].中华卫生杀虫药械,2018,24(5):472-474.
[16] 任飞林,沈建勇,刘婷,等.布雷图指数法与诱蚊诱卵指数法监测白纹伊蚊幼虫密度相关性分析[J].疾病监测,2021,36(9):888-893.
[17] 闫冬明,黄坤,赵春春,等.常用蚊虫监测方法和技术研究进展[J].中国媒介生物学及控制杂志,2020,31(1):108-112.
[18] GAO Q,WANG F,LV X,et al.Comparison of the human-baited double net trap with the human landing catch for Aedes albopictus monitoring in Shanghai,China[J].Parasit Vectors,2018,11(1):483.
[19] 杨迎宇,王莹莹,陈芸,等.上海市宝山区登革热媒介白纹伊蚊密度指数与气象因素的关系[J].中华疾病控制杂志,2021,25(4):466-471.
[20] 林良强,张韶华,朱子犁,等.2017年深圳市登革热白纹伊蚊密度与气象因素关系研究[J].中华卫生杀虫药械,2022,28(2):140-143.
[21] 梁娜,毛树存,刘吉起,等.2015—2019年洛阳市孟津县登革热媒介伊蚊布雷图指数监测及气象因素分析[J].河南预防医学杂志,2021, 32(9):728-730.
[22] LIU Y,WANG X,TANG S,et al.The relative importance of key meteorological factors affecting numbers of mosquito vectors of dengue fever[J].PLoS Negl Trop Dis,2023,17(4):e0011247.
[23] 申同洋,周小洁,王佳男,等.人诱停落法与CO₂诱蚊灯法对白纹伊蚊的监测分析[J].中华卫生杀虫药械,2021,27(5):436-438.
[24] 吕榜军,俞泉宇.2016年柳州市蚊媒及蚊媒传染病与气候的关系[J].职业与健康,2018,34(2):245-248.
[25] 周毅彬,冷培恩,顾君忠,等.上海市白纹伊蚊密度与气象因素关系的研究[J].中国媒介生物学及控制杂志,2014,25(5):405-407.