2008 Research Topics from MADs

Please send your comments to the individuals listed and/or to Gregory Lanzaro< gclanzaro[at]ucdavis.edu>. Please also copy them to the Vector Control Research Committee members:
Costal: Noor Tietze < Noor.Tietze[at]deh.sccgov.org>, Santa Clara County MAD
Sacramento Valley: Paula Macedo < pmacedo[at]fightthebite.net>
N. San Joaquin: Stacy Bearden < sjcmvcdento[at]worldnet.att.net>
S. Joaquin: Steve Mulligan < conmad[at]pacbell.net>
Southern CA: Min-Lee Cheng < mcheng[at]wvmvcd.org>
DPH: Kerry Padgett < Kerry.Padgett[at]cdph.ca.gov>

From Allan Inman <mcmadmanager[at]vtlnet.com>

Manager, Merced County MAD
Date: Nov 29, 2007

I have suggested this on a number of occasions. I would like a predictive diapause model for Culex tarsalis and Culex pipiens complex. I would like a similar model to the one developed by researchers at Texas A&M for calculating the percentage of diapause female Ps. columbiae. This model used minimum and maximum temperature and day length for the calculation. I would utilize the model to coordinate late season adulticiding targeting diapause C.t. and C. p. complex to limit the "seed crop" for the following year. I successfully used this strategy in Arkansas to control P.c.. Our District completes late season adulticiding in our wetland areas. The diapause model would create greater efficacy and would be part of our overall West Nile Virus prevention strategy (in conjunction with our early season adulticiding program.).

Additionally, I would like an Ag economist to assess the value of a mosquito abatement program (I've also requested this project before). This has been done in Texas, Arkansas, and Mississippi using survey information where "willingness to pay" was used as a proxy for the value of the program. I am keenly interested in determining the savings in the cost of medical care provided by our programs. I have developed a figure based on the number of cases that Merced County would have experienced if the infections rates were similar to Colorado (2003) and the average medical costs per case in Louisiana ($25,000?).

And finally, I want someone to look at our data for the last four years to show we actually had a statistically significant reduction in mosquito populations due to our control efforts! We will keep Turlock MAD and Greater LA County out of the assessment to remain politically correct.

From Dave Brown <dabrown[at]sac-yolomvcd.com>

Manager, Sacramento/Yolo MVCD
Date: Dec 3, 2007

I have the following suggestions

1. Evaluation of adult mosquito control efficacy – urban vs.rural vs. species
2. Evaluation of alternative adult mosquito control measures
3. Evaluation of Larviciding i.e. can larviciding alone stop an epidemic?
4. Standardized trap attractants
   1. Light traps in urban settings
   2. CO2 traps (quantity or CO2, etc…)
   3. Gravid trap solutions
5. Evaluation of risk of other introduced mosquito-borne diseases to California
6. Evaluation of California's mosquito and mosquito borne-disease response plan

I would like to add new products, but remember Federici saying this wouldn't happen unless interest was generated from the companies.

These are rather broad, but should start some discussion.

NEW TOPIC
Date: Feb 5, 2008

Min-Lee Cheng wrote:

Aurélie

Here is another suggested research topic for MRP website. Thanks!

MLC

From: Dave Brown [mailto:dabrown@sac-yolomvcd.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 9:59 AM
To: Min-Lee Cheng; Greg Lanzaro (UC Davis)
Subject: Another Research topic

Hi Min-Lee:

I forgot to add one more research topic I have been very interested in relative to rice fields. I think one of the faulty components of our rice field treatments is our surveillance of larvae in a rice field. I would like to look at some other way of determining larval density within large acreages and be able to treat selectively based on where the larvae are.

This is a tough one…Washino did work on anopheles, but I am not aware of any work that has been done with culex.

Dave

David Brown
8631 Bond Road
Elk Grove Ca 95624
(916) 685-1022 x2059

From Steven TY Su < tsu[at]wvmvcd.org> and Min-Lee Cheng < mcheng[at]wvmvcd.org>

West Valley MVCD
Date: Dec 7, 2007

• Surveillance/Vector-borne disease related
  1. Development of rapid screening test for seroconversions in sentinel chickens to WNV, SLE, and WEE viruses;
  2. Re-evaluation of role of sentinel chickens in arbovirus surveillance as an early warning tool;
  3. Development of attractants for gravid Culex tarsalis in rural and suburban areas;
  4. Biology (fecundity, longevity, flight range, etc) of mosquitoes with multiple arboviral infections (e.g. WNV, WEE, SLE).
  


• Control/Operation related
  5. Detailed characterization and efficacy evaluation of ground and aerial ULV adulticiding;
  6. Risk assessment of ULV adulticides (pyrethrins, pyrethroids and their synergists)
  7. Development and evaluation of environmentally friendly predators, pathogens or parasites that are compatible with regulation compatibility for mosquito control;
  8. Genetic mechanism of susceptibility/resistance development of mosquitoes to commonly used bio-rational pesticides
  9. Development and evaluation of new mosquito larvicides, including new active ingredients and new formulations;
  


• Public relation related
  10. Evaluation the relationship of vector populations and vector-borne disease epidemiology and socio-economic status;
  11. Evaluation of urbanization, economic and environmental development on vector production and vector-borne disease incidence;
  12. Quantitative evaluation of the impact by services provided by the vector control agencies on incidence of West Nile virus;
  13. Quantification of the impact of community education on vector populations and the incidence of vector-borne disease;
  14. Evaluation of public perception of adulticiding for mosquito control.

From Branka B. Lothrop < blothrop[at]cvmvcd.org>

Scientific Operational Manager
CVMVCD
Date: Dec 11, 2007

Below find the research topics of interest for the Coachella Valley Mosquito and Vector Control District:

In next 5 years the District focus in regard to research should be in the topics listed below:

1. To effectively address emerging infectious diseases; improve surveillance to detect, investigate, and monitor emerging pathogens in California. All the research should provide applicable results for vector surveillance and control, and it should integrate laboratory, field research and epidemiology to optimize public health practice.
2. New/botanical products, without the PBO synergist. Evaluate as possible additions/replacements to current barrier and ULV formulations, including defining rates and field application.
3. Resistance to current larvacides and adulticide products; set-up the standards for evaluation protocols and base line susceptibility for vector species in California
4. Ecology and genetics of WNV in California; what we have learned after 5 years about WNV; how we can use the experience/knowledge.
5. Evaluation of the current assay detection system for vector-borne viruses with varying sensitivity; set-up the standard system for multi-virus detection.
6. Evaluation of native fish (no need for US/CA FW permit) for California to be used as a biocontrol agent for different habitats; including, man-made and natural, low and high organic content, low and high vegetation aquatic habitats.
7. Evaluation of the role of different bio-rational/biological agents in IPM programs

I also have suggestions about the criteria that need to be applied at the time of evaluation of each research proposal:

1. District’s interest for improvement in prevention, surveillance, and control programs in California.
2. Interest for MVCAC Association/other districts in California to improve prevention, surveillance and control programs.
3. Contributions to scientific knowledge that will improve directly or indirectly the vector control agency operation in a particular region, or California at large, in an effort to detect, prevent and suppress vector/nuisance species and current or emerging diseases.

From Art Colwell < lcvcd[at]mchsi.com

Manager, Lake County VCD
Date: Dec 14, 2007

1. Research with possible new mosquito larvicides and adulticides.
2. What WNV overwintering mechanisms need further study and what are the implications for vector control agencies?
3. Is transovarial transmission more important during certain months of the year? Should districts submit mosquito larvae (or larvae reared to adults in the lab) for WNV testing?
4. In addition to mosquitoes, what other possible vectors (e.g., Acarina, Ceratopogonidae, Hippoboscidae, Tabanidae, Rhagionidae, Cimicidae) should be further studied for possible involvement in WNV transmission cycles?
5. Are counties which have had major crow die-offs at less risk for WNV in 2008 than nearby areas where crows are still abundant? Is the percentage of immune birds in an area correlated with WNV risk?
6. What vectors transmit WNV to tree squirrels and what is the diel periodicity?
7. Research with Deltafix and development of other time-release formulations of Bacillus thuringiensis var. israelensis.
8. Evaluation of Sperifix or other controlled release formulations of Bacillus sphaericus against various species of California mosquitoes in various larval sources.
9. Develop larval attractants and phagostimulants to enhance mosquito feeding on formulations of Bacillus thuringiensis var. israelensis or Bacillus sphaericus.
10. Comparison of bottle bioassay results with ULV field application rate results for various California mosquitoes under various environmental conditions.
11. Research with plant extracts as mosquito repellents, larvicides, or adulticides.
12. Development of resistance management strategies for different mosquito control agents and for various species of California mosquitoes.
13. Develop host-seeking attractants for species (e.g., Culex stigmatosoma) which may be underrepresented in carbon dioxide-baited trap collections.
14. What factors are associated with high Minimum Infection Rates of mosquitoes?
15. Develop a blood-meal identification laboratory which would analyze blood-fed mosquitoes submitted by vector control districts.
16. Identification of Integrated Pest Management thresholds for the treatment of larvae or adults to control WNV.
17. Studies to develop statewide standardized procedures for adult mosquito surveillance. Should EVS traps use similar amounts of dry ice in similar containers at similar hours of the day for statewide comparisons? Should gravid trap media formulations and days of fermentation be standardized for California comparisons?
18. What native species of fish (or invertebrate) could be utilized instead of Gambusia affinis in environmentally-sensitive areas?

From Yolanda Lourenco < lourencoy[at]sbcglobal.net>

Assistant Manager/Biologist
Delta VCD
Date: Dec 14, 2007

Dear Dr. Lanzaro,

In response to your earlier communication, I believe that most Districts would benefit from research which would define where, and in which organisms, West Nile virus most efficiently overwinters, in both urban and rural environments. Is a particular avian host more likely than another, or is there a more random distribution among species? Numerous species of birds are abundant in our area, and knowing how their presence in a particular area will impact our control efforts would be most beneficial.

Yolanda Lourenco

From Stacy Bearden < sjcmvcdento[at]worldnet.att.net>

Entomologist, San Joaquin Co. MVCD
Date: Dec 21, 2007

Greg,

I have sent out a second request to the members of my region asking them to consider submitting research topics for the MRP proposals. I have attached a few of the suggestions that I have come up with.

1. Interested in finding a gravid attractant for Cx. tarsalis.
   
2. I am curious to find out if there is a point in time at which MIRs are no longer a true assessment of virus activity in our populations. For instance, as our Cx. tarsalis populations start to wane off in the fall, a single positive pool could indicate an arbitrarily high MIR. Should the MIRs be removed from the Emergency Response Plan at this point?
   
3. In addition, I would like someone to reevaluate the value of sentinel chickens in the surveillance of WNV. I understand its value in the early detection of WEE and SLE but its value as an early detection tool for WNV has been lacking. Mosquito control districts with limited funding would gain more value from testing mosquito pools than maintaining and testing chicken sera.
   
4. Furthermore, there are some questions about evaluating the success of aerial adulticiding. We have been very fortunate that we have not had the media frenzy that Sac-Yolo has had in regards to aerial spraying, but what the public and the press want to know is did we accomplish what we set out to. Someone needs to evaluate aerial spraying and determine what level of control is considered a good kill and below what value we need to consider a failure.
   
5. In addition, should everyone treat their locations one time or should we spray three consecutive nights to break the transmission cycle? If we are in the same media market as a district that sprays three consecutive times, would a district that sprays only once get bad press for not protecting their constituents or vice versa would the district that sprays three times get bad publicity because they overexposed their constituents. It would be nice to have a researcher answer these questions so that a district can use this information to guide their spray program and then defend their actions.



I will forward other comments to you as I receive them.