Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T20:10:34.935Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Extinction probabilities and times to extinction for populations of tsetse flies Glossina spp. (Diptera: Glossinidae) subjected to various control measures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

J.W. Hargrove
J.W. Hargrove*
Affiliation:
9 Monmouth Road, Avondale, Harare, Zimbabwe
*
*Fax: (2634) 308042 E-mail: jhargrove@zvitambo.co.zw
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A stochastic branching process was used to derive equations for the mean and variance of the probability of, and time to, extinction in tsetse populations. If the remnant population is a single inseminated female, the extinction probability increases linearly with adult mortality and is always certain if this mortality >3.5% per day even for zero pupal mortality. If the latter mortality is 4% per day, certain extinction is only avoided if adult mortality <1.5% per day. For remnant female populations >1, the extinction probability increases in a non-linear manner with adult mortality. Extinction is still certain for adult mortality >3.5% per day but, when the remnant population is >16, extinction is highly unlikely for adult mortality <2.5% per day if all females are inseminated. Extinction probability increases with increasing probability of sterile mating in much the same way as it does with increasing adult mortality. Extinction is assured if the probability of insemination can be reduced to 0.1. The required reduction decreases with increasing adult mortality. For adult mortality = 6–8% per day, the time to extinction increases only by one generation per order of magnitude increase in the starting population. Time to extinction is less sensitive to changes in the pupal than in the adult mortality. Reductions in the probability of insemination only become important when adult mortality is small; if the adult mortality is 8% per day, reducing the insemination probability from 1 to 0.1 only reduces the expected time to extinction by two generations. Conversely, increases in adult mortality produce important reductions in the required time even when the probability of insemination is 0.1. The practical, economic implication for the sterile insect technique is that the low-tech methods used to suppress tsetse populations should not be halted when the release of sterile males is initiated. The sterile insect technique should only be contemplated when it has been demonstrated that the low-tech methods have failed to effect eradication. The theory is shown to be in good accord with the observed results of tsetse control campaigns involving the use of odour-baited targets in Zimbabwe and the sterile insect technique on Unguja Island, Zanzibar.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 95 , Issue 1 , February 2005 , pp. 13 - 21
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2005

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

Barclay, H.J. & Hargrove, J.W. (2004) Probability models to facilitate a declaration of pest-free status, with special reference to tsetse (Diptera: Glossinidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research 95, 1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtis, C.F. (1968) Radiation sterilization and effect of multiple mating of females of G. austeni. Journal of Insect Physiology 14, 1365–1380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hargrove, J.W. (1988) Tsetse: the limits to population growth. Medical and Veterinary Entomology 2, 203–217CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hargrove, J.W. (2000) A theoretical study of the invasion of cleared areas by tsetse flies (Diptera: Glossinidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research 90, 201–209CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hargrove, J.W. (2003a) Tsetse eradication; sufficiency, necessity and desirability 133+ix pp. DFID Animal Health Programme, Edinburgh, UKGoogle Scholar
Hargrove, J.W. (2003b) Optimized simulation of the control of tsetse flies Glossina pallidipes and G. m. morsitans using odour-baited targets in Zimbabwe. Bulletin of Entomological Research 93, 19–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hargrove, J.W. & Williams, B.G. (1998) Optimized simulation as an aid to modelling, with an application to the study of a population of tsetse flies, Glossina morsitans morsitans Westwood (Diptera: Glossinidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research. 88, 425–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knipling, E.F. (1963) Potential role of the sterility principle for tsetse fly eradication. WHO/Vector Control/27. WHO/EBL/9.Google Scholar
Lange, K. (2003) Applied probability. New York, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Lange, K., Boehnke, M. & Carson, R. (1981) Moment computations for subcritical branching processes. Journal of Applied Probability 18, 52–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Politzar, H., Cuissance, D. (1984) An integrated campaign against riverine tsetse, Glossina palpalis gambiense and Glossina tachinoides by trapping and the release of sterile males. Insect Science and its Application 5, 439–442Google Scholar
Rogers, D.J. (1990) A general model for tsetse populations. Insect Science and its Application 11, 331–346Google Scholar
Takken, W., Oladunmade, M.A., Dengwat, L., Feldmann, H.U., Onah, J.A., Tenabe, S.O. & Hamman, H.J. (1986) The eradication of Glossina palpalis palpalis (Robineau-Desvoidy) (Diptera: Glossinidae) using traps, insecticide-impregnated targets and the sterile insect technique in central Nigeria. Bulletin of Entomological Research 76, 275–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vale, G.A., Hargrove, J.W., Cockbill, G.F. & Phelps, R.J. (1986) Field trials of baits to control populations of Glossina morsitans morsitans Westwood and G. pallidipes Austen (Diptera: Glossinidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research 76, 179–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vale, G.A., Lovemore, D.F., Flint, S. & Cockbill, G.F. (1988) Odour-baited targets to control tsetse flies, Glossina spp. (Diptera: Glossinidae), in Zimbabwe. Bulletin of Entomological Research 78, 31–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vreysen, M.J.B., Saleh, K.M., Ali, M.Y., Abdulla, A.M., Zhu, Z.-R., Juma, K.G., Dyck, V.A., Msangi, A.R., Mkonyi, P.M. & Feldmann, H.U. (2000) The use of the sterile insect technique (SIT) for the eradication of the tsetse fly Glossina austeni (Diptera: Glossinidae) on the Island of Unguja (Zanzibar). Journal of Economic Entomology 93, 123–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, B., Dransfield, R. & Brightwell, R. (1990) Tsetse fly (Diptera: Glossinidae) population dynamics and the estimation of mortality rates from life-table data. Bulletin of Entomological Research 80, 479–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, B., Dransfield, R. & Brightwell, R. (1992) The control of tsetse flies in relation to fly movement and trapping efficiency. Journal of Applied Ecology 29, 163–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar