Evaluation of a non-chemical compared to a non-chemical plus silica gel approach to bed bug management

7Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Bed bug resistance to commonly used pesticide sprays has led to exploring new pesticides and other strategies for bed bug management. Non-chemical methods are effective in bed bug management; however, they do not provide residual protection. Compared to insecticide sprays, dust formulations are considered to provide longer residual control. We evaluated two bed bug management programs in apartment buildings. A building-wide inspection was initially conducted to identify bed bug infested apartments. Selected apartments were divided into two treatment groups: non-chemical plus silica gel dust treatment (10 apartments) and non-chemical treatment (11 apartments). After initial treatment, apartments were re-visited monthly for up to 6 months. During each visit, the total bed bug count per apartment was obtained by examining interceptor traps placed in the apartments and conducting a visual inspection. Mean bed bug count was reduced by 99% and 89% in non-chemical plus silica gel dust and non-chemical treatment, respectively. Non-chemical plus silica gel dust treatment caused significantly higher bed bug count reduction than the non-chemical treatment at 6 months. Bed bugs were eradicated from 40% and 36% of apartments treated with non-chemical plus silica gel dust treatment and non-chemical treatment, respectively.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Abbar, S., Wang, C., & Cooper, R. (2020). Evaluation of a non-chemical compared to a non-chemical plus silica gel approach to bed bug management. Insects, 11(7), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11070443

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free