Abstract
Monitoring house fly (Diptera: Muscidae) activity on animal facilities is a necessary component of an integrated pest management (IPM) program to reduce the negative impacts of these flies. This article describes monitoring methods appropriate for use on animal facilities with discussion of monitoring device use and placement. Action thresholds are presented where these have been suggested by researchers. Sampling precision is an important aspect of a monitoring program, and the number of monitoring devices needed to detect a doubling of fly activity is presented for monitoring methods where this information is available. It should be noted that both action thresholds and numbers of monitoring devices will be different for every animal facility. Suggested action thresholds and numbers of monitoring devices are presented only to provide guidance when initiating a fly monitoring program. Facility managers can adjust these values based upon the fly activity data recorded at their facility. Spot cards are generally recommended as an easy-to-use method for monitoring fly activity for most animal facilities. Fly ribbons or similar sticky devices are recommended where several pest fly species may be abundant and identifying the activity of each species is important, but a sampling period of <7 d may be needed in dusty conditions or when fly density is high. Fly ribbons are not recommended for outdoor use. Insecticide-baited traps may be used in outdoor locations where environmental conditions limit the use of spot cards, fly ribbons, and sticky traps.
Highlights
The house fly (Musca domestica L.) (Diptera: Muscidae) is a ubiquitous pest often associated with animal production facilities where these flies develop in the animal feces and decaying organic matter that is often abundant at these facilities (Geden and Hogsette 1994)
Considering the purpose to monitor house flies is to reduce the negative impacts of these flies, monitoring methods that reliably provide an index of house fly activity are most appropriate
Regardless of the monitoring method selected, once suitable locations have been identified for placing monitoring devices these locations must remain unchanged as variation in fly activity estimate is expected according to specific location even within the same animal housing structure
Summary
Methods for monitoring house fly activity at poultry facilities have been previously described for caged-layer houses with either a narrow or high-rise (deep-pit) house design (Anderson and Poorbaugh 1964; Axtell 1970a,b; Rutz and Axtell 1979; Burg and Axtell 1984; Beck and Turner 1985; Lysyk and Axtell 1986). To detect a doubling of fly activity at the lowest action threshold, a minimum of five or six baited jug traps are needed (per narrow house or high-rise house, respectively) though only two baited jug traps are needed for a broiler-breeder house (Lysyk and Axtell 1985, 1986). These minimum trap numbers are similar to the 2–8 traps recommended by Rutz (1981). While baited jug traps would seem a good method for monitoring house fly activity since flies are captured and identified without the sticky mess of fly ribbons, this method is not recommended for long-term house fly monitoring since house flies can rapidly become resistant to insecticides present in baits (Kaufman et al 2010, Hubbard and Gerry 2020) and any increase in insecticide resistance will prevent direct comparison of fly activity estimates from pre- and post-resistance monitoring periods
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call