三种方法测定地面游离蚤的效果观察

目的比较水盘法、粘蚤纸法及粘蝇板法等三种方法现场测定地面游离蚤的效果。方法选择云南省景洪市景讷乡4个村54户家庭作为研究对象,其中2个村同时布放水盘及粘蚤纸,另外2个村同时放置水盘及粘蝇板测定地面游离蚤,分别计算不同方法对地面游离蚤的捕获率,并进行结果比较。结果同时布放粘蚤纸及水盘的勐混和小寨,粘蚤纸法和水盘法的捕获率分别为44.50%(283/636)和80.85%(494/611),两种方法对地面游离蚤的捕获率差异有统计学意义(χ2=175.33,P0.01);同时布放粘蝇板及水盘的大寨和新寨,粘蝇板法及水盘法捕获率分别为54.06%(353/653)和69.78%(448/642),捕获率测定结果差异有统计学意义(χ2=33.09,P0.01)。不同村寨水盘法的捕获率80.85%(494/611)和69.78%(449/642),与粘蚤纸法和粘蝇板法的捕获率44.50%(283/636)和54.06%(353/653)交叉比较,差异有统计学意义(χ2=83.40,P0.01和χ2=102.48,P0.01)。分别布放在不同村寨的粘蚤纸及粘蝇板对地面游离蚤的捕获率44.50%(283/636)和54.06%(353/653),差异有统计学意义(χ2=11.78,P0.01)。结论水盘法对地面游离蚤的收集效果明显优于粘蚤纸法及粘蝇板法,粘蝇板法虽然捕获率优于粘蚤纸法,但实际应用中存在缺点。水盘法更适合在基层鼠疫监测工作中使用。

Effect of capturing floor flea with three methods

Objective To analyze the effect of capturing floor flea with water-containing plate method,sticky flea paper method and sticky fly board method.Methods The 54 households from 4 villages in Jinghong City were selected as study sites.Water- containing plate method and flea sticky paper method were used out in 2 villages,meanwhile watercontaining plate method and fly sticking board method were used in the other 2 villages.Capture rates of different methods were compared.Results The capture rates of sticky flea paper method and water-containing plate method at Menghun Village and Xiaozhai Village were 44.50%（283/636） and 80.85%（449/642）（x~2=175.33,P0.01）.showing significant difference.The capture rates of sticky fly board method and water-containing plate method at Xinzhai Village and Dazhai Village were 54.06%（353/653）and 69.78%（x~2=33.09,P0.01）,demonstrating significant difference.There was significant difference（x~2=83.40,P0.01）in the capture rate between water-containing plate method at Dazhai village and Xinzhai village（69.78%） and sticky fly board method in Menhun Village and Xiaozhai Village 44.50%（283/636）.Significant difference of the capture rate（x~2=102.48,P0.01）was also found between water containing method at Menghun village and Xiaozhai village 80.85%（448/642） and sticky fly board at Dazhai Village and Xinzhou Village 54.06%（353/653）.Significant difference in the capture rate was found between sticky flea paper and sticky fly paper in different Villages（x~2=11.78,P0.01）.Conclusion Water-containing plate method had significantly better effect than sticky paper method and fly sticking board method for capturing floor fleas.The sticky fly board method had disadvantage in practical use although its capture rate is higher than sticky flea paper.Thus it is suggested that the water-containing plate be a preferable method for plague surveillance.