Simple jQuery Dropdowns
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHamady Diengen_US
dc.contributor.authorTomomitsu Sathoen_US
dc.contributor.authorNurul Atieqah Binti Arzemien_US
dc.contributor.authorNur Ezzati Aliasanen_US
dc.contributor.authorFatimah Abangen_US
dc.contributor.authorErida Wydiamalaen_US
dc.contributor.authorFumio Miakeen_US
dc.contributor.authorWan Fatma Zuharahen_US
dc.contributor.authorNur Faeza Abu Kassimen_US
dc.contributor.authorRonald E. Morales Vargasen_US
dc.contributor.authorNoppawan P. Moralesen_US
dc.contributor.authorGabriel Tonga Nowegen_US
dc.contributor.otherLambung Mangkurat Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherFukuoka Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversiti Malaysia Sarawaken_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversiti Sains Malaysiaen_US
dc.identifier.citationActa Tropica. Vol.185, (2018), 230-238en_US
dc.description.abstract© 2018 Food location by mosquitoes is mediated by resource-derived olfactory and visual signals. Smell sensation is intermittent and dependent on the environment, whereas visual signals are continual and precede olfactory cues. Success of mosquito bait technology, where olfactory cues are used for attraction, is being impeded by reduced attractiveness. Despite proof that mosquitoes respond to colored objects, including those mimicking floral shape, and that they can discriminate among flowers, the impacts of artificial flowers on foraging remain unexplored. Using artificial flowers with sugar rewards, we examined the foraging responses of Aedes aegypti to various colors in equal choice bioassays. Starved adults were exposed to single flowers with petals of a given color (Single Blue Flowers [SBFs]; Single Red Flowers [SRFs]; Single Yellow Flowers [SYFs]; Single Pink Flowers [SPIFs]; and Single Purple Flowers [SPFs]) and two others with white petals (SWFs). Discrepancies in response time, visitation, feeding, and resting of both sexes were compared between colored flowers and SWFs. Ae. aegypti exhibited shorter response times to colored flowers compared to SWFs, but this behavior was mostly seen for SBFs or SYFs in females, and SRFs, SYFs, SPIFs, or SPFs in males. When provided an option to land on colored flowers and SWFs, female visitation occurred at high rates on SBFs, SRFs, SYFs, SPIFs, and SPFs; for males, this preference for colored flowers was seen to a lesser degree on SBF and SPIFs. Both sexes exhibited preference for colored flowers as sugar sources, but with different patterns: SPIFs, SRFs, SYFs, and SPFs for females; SYFs, SPFs, SPIFs and SRFs for males. Females preferentially rested on colored flowers when in competition with SWFs, but this preference was more pronounced for SPFs, SRFs, and SBFs. Males exhibited an increased preference for SRFs, SPFs, and SYFs as resting sites. Our results indicated the attraction of Ae. aegypti to rewarding artificial flowers, in some cases in ways similar to live flowering plants. The discovery that both male and female Ae. aegypti can feed on nectar mimics held by artificial flowers opens new avenues for improving sugar bait technology and for developing new attract-and-kill devices.en_US
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.subjectImmunology and Microbiologyen_US
dc.titleExposure of a diurnal mosquito vector to floral mimics: Foraging responses, feeding patterns, and significance for sugar bait technologyen_US
Appears in Collections:Scopus 2018

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.