Attractive Toxic Sugar Bait (ATSB) For Control of Mosquitoes and Its Impact on Non-Target Organisms: A Review

Mosquito abatement programs contend with mosquito-borne diseases, insecticidal resistance, and environmental impacts to non-target organisms. However, chemical resources are limited to a few chemical classes with similar modes of action, which has led to insecticide resistance in mosquito populations. To develop a new tool for mosquito abatement programs that control mosquitoes while combating the issues of insecticidal resistance, and has low impacts of non-target organisms, novel methods of mosquito control, such as attractive toxic sugar baits (ATSBs), are being developed. Whereas insect baiting to dissuade a behavior, or induce mortality, is not a novel concept, as it was first introduced in writings from 77 AD, mosquito baiting through toxic sugar baits (TSBs) had been quickly developing over the last 60 years. This review addresses the current body of research of ATSB by providing an overview of active ingredients (toxins) include in TSBs, attractants combined in ATSB, lethal effects on mosquito adults and larvae, impact on non-target insects, and prospects for the use of ATSB

Applying next generation sequencing to detect tick-pathogens in Dermacentor nuttalli, Ixodes persulcatus, and Hyalomma asiaticum collected from Mongolia

Ticks and tick-borne diseases represent major threats to the public health of the Mongolian population, of which an estimated 26% live a traditional nomadic pastoralist lifestyle that puts them at increased risk for exposure. Ticks were collected by dragging and removal from livestock in Khentii, Selenge, Tuv, and Umnugovi aimags (provinces) during March-May 2020. Using next-generation sequencing (NGS) with confirmatory PCR and DNA sequencing, we sought to characterize the microbial species present in Dermacentor nuttalli (n = 98), Hyalomma asiaticum (n = 38), and Ixodes persulcatus (n = 72) tick pools. Rickettsia spp. were detected in 90.4% of tick pools, with Khentii, Selenge, and Tuv tick pools all having 100% pool positivity. Coxiella spp. were detected at an overall pool positivity rate of 60%, while Francisella spp. were detected in 20% of pools and Borrelia spp. detected in 13% of pools. Additional confirmatory testing for Rickettsia-positive pools demonstrated Rickettsia raoultii (n = 105), Candidatus Rickettsia tarasevichiae (n = 65) and R. slovaca/R. sibirica (n = 2), as well as the first report of Candidatus Rickettsia jingxinensis (n = 1) in Mongolia. For Coxiella spp. reads, most samples were identified as a Coxiella endosymbiont (n = 117), although Coxiella burnetii was detected in eight pools collected in Umnugovi. Borrelia species that were identified include Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato (n = 3), B. garinii (n = 2), B. miyamotoi (n = 16), and B. afzelii (n = 3). All Francisella spp. reads were identified as Francisella endosymbiont species. Our findings emphasize the utility of NGS to provide baseline data across multiple tick-borne pathogen groups, which in turn can be used to inform health policy, determine regions for expanded surveillance, and guide risk mitigation strategies