Biological control of mosquito populations through frogs: Opportunities & constrains

Indian Journal of Medical Research

Volumn 128, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 22-25

  Raghavendra, Kamarajur ^a   Sharma, P ^a   Dash, A P ^a  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MALARIA RESEARCH   (India)

Author keywords

Frog; Mosquito; Tadpole; Vector control

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL PEST CONTROL; CHIKUNGUNYA ALPHAVIRUS; DENGUE; DISEASE CARRIER; EPIDEMIC ENCEPHALITIS; FILARIASIS; FROG; HUMAN; INDIA; INSECT CONTROL; MALARIA; MOSQUITO; NONHUMAN; PARASITE SURVIVAL; PARASITE VECTOR; PREDATOR PREY INTERACTION; REVIEW; TADPOLE; VIRUS CARRIER; YELLOW FEVER;

ANIMALS; ANURA; CULICIDAE; INDIA; MOSQUITO CONTROL; PREDATORY BEHAVIOR;

EID: 55849133368     PISSN: 09715916     EISSN: 09715916     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. The Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, amended in 2002, Schedule IV, Notification published in the Gazette of India. Extraordinary, Pt.II, Sec-3(i), dated 5th October, 1977, Available from: http://envfor.nic.in/legis/wildlife/wildlife2s4.pdf, accessed on June 26, 2007.
2. Abdulali H. On the export of frog legs from India. J Bombay Nat Hist Soc 1985; 82: 347-75.
3. Hagman M, Shine R. Effects of invasive cane toads on Australian mosquitoes: does the dark cloud have a silver lining? Biol Invasions 2007; 9: 445-52.
4. Frog-Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frogs, accessed on June 26, 2007.
5. Frost Dr. Amphibian species of the world 5.0, an Online reference 2006. American Museum of natural history, New York, U.S.A. Electronic database accessible at (http://research.amnh.org/heterpetology/amphibia/ index.php) accessed on July 02, 2007.
6. Alford RA, Richards SJ. Global amphibian declines: a problem in applied ecology. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 1999; 30: 133-65.
7. Houlahan JE, Findlay CS, Schmidt BR, Meyer AH, Kuzmin SL. Quantitative evidence for global amphibian population declines. Nature 2000; 404: 752-5.
8. Kiesecker JM, Blaustein AR. Effects of introduced bullfrogs and small mouth bass on the microhabitat use, growth and survival of native red-legged frogs. Conserv Biol 1998; 12: 776-87.
9. Diamond J, Case TJ. Overview: introductions, extinctions, exterminations, and invasions. In: Diamond J, Case TJ, editors. Community ecology,. New York, USA: Harper & Row; 1986.
10. Wake DB. Declining amphibian populations. Science 1991; 253: 860.
11. Blaustein AR, Wake DB. The puzzle of declining amphibian populations. Sci Am 1995; 272: 52-7.
12. Stuart SN, Chanson JS, Cox NA, Young BE, Rodrigues AS, Fischman DL, et al. Status and trends of amphibian declines and extinctions worldwide. Science 2004; 306: 1783-6.
13. TED Case Studies: Frog Trade. Available from: http://www.american.edu/TED/FROG.HTM, accessed on July 2, 2007.
14. Rozendaal JA. Mosquitoes and other biting Diptera. In: Vector Control - Methods for use by individuals and communities. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1997. p. 7-177.
15. Parthiban M, David BV. Mosquito. In: Manual of household & public health pests and their control. Chennai, India: Namrutha Publications; 2007. p. 7-34.
16. Mokany A, Shine R. Competition between tadpoles and mosquito larvae. Oecologia 2003; 135: 615-20.
17. Blaustein AR, Kiesecker JM. Complexity in conservation: lessons from the global decline of amphibian populations. Ecol Lett 2002; 5: 597-608.
18. Emerging disease issues - Diseases that may affect humans or animals: Biological mosquito control. Available from: http://www.michigan.gov/ emergingdiseases/0,1607,7-186-25805_25824-75797-,00.html, accessed on June 20, 2007.
19. Kumar R, Muhid P, Dahms, H-U, Tseng L-C, Hwang J-S. The potential of three aquatic predators to control mosquitoes in the presence of alternative prey: a comparative experimental assessment. Mar Freshwater Res (in press).
20. Kumar R, Hwang JS. Larvicidal efficiency of aquatic predators - a perspective in mosquito biocontrol. Zool Stud 2006; 45: 447-66.
21. Marten GG, Reid JW, Cyclopoid copepods. Am Mosquito Control Assoc Bull 2007; 23: 65-92.
22. Nam VS, Yen NT, Kay BH, Marten GG, Reid JW. Eradication of Aedes aegypti from a village in Vietnam using copepod and community participation. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1998; 59: 657-60
23. Kumar R, Rao TR. Predation on mosquito (Anopheles stephensi and Culex quinquefasciatus) larvae by Mesocyclops thermocyclopoides (Copepoda; Cyclopoida) in the presence of alternate prey. Int Rev Hydrobiol 2003; 88: 570-81.
24. Blaustein L, Margalit J. Priority effects in temporary pools: nature and outcome of mosquito larva-toad tadpole interactions depend on order of entrance. J Anim Ecol 1996; 65: 77-84.
25. Williams KJ, Webb CE, Russell RC. Tadpoles of four common Australian frogs are not effective predators of the common pest and vector mosquito Culex annulrostris skuse. J Am Mosquito Control Assoc 2005; 21: 492-4.
26. Goodsell JA, Kats LB. Effect of introduced mosquito fish on Pacific tree frogs and the role of alternative prey. Conserv Biol 1999; 13: 921-4.
27. Mokany A. Impact of tadpoles and mosquito larvae on ephemeral pond structure and processes. Mar Freshwater Res 2007; 58: 436-44.
28. Komak S, Crossland MR. An assessment of the introduced mosquito fish ( Gambusia affinis holbrooki) as a predator of eggs, hatchlings and tadpoles of native and non-native anurans. Wildlife Res 2000; 27: 185-9.
29. Blaustein L, Margalit J. Mosquito larvae (Culiseta longiareolata) prey upon and compete with toad tadpoles (Bufo virdis). J Anim Ecol 1994; 63: 841-50.
30. Mokany A, Shine R. Pond attributes influence competitive interactions between tadpoles and mosquito larvae. Austral Ecol 2002; 27: 396-404.
31. Marian MP, Christopher MSM, Selvaraj AM, Pandian TJ. Studies on predation of the mosquito Culex fatigans by Rana tigrina tadpoles. Hydrobiologia 1983; 106: 59-63.
32. Spielman A, Sullivan JJ. Predation on peridomestic mosquitoes by Hylid tadpoles on Grand Bahama Island. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1974; 23: 704-9.
33. Blaustein L, Chase JM. Interactions between mosquito larvae and species that share the same trophic level. Annu Rev Entomol 2007; 52: 489-507.