Shoo fly, don't bother me! Efficacy of traditional methods of protecting cattle from tsetse

Authors

  • S. J. TORR,

    Corresponding author
    1. Agriculture, Health and Environment Department, Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, Chatham Maritime, U.K.
    Search for more papers by this author
  • T. N. C. MANGWIRO,

    1. Division of Tsetse Control, Department of Veterinary Services, Harare, Zimbabwe
    2. Department of Science, Mathematics and Technology, Faculty of Science, Zimbabwe Open University, Harare, Zimbabwe
    Search for more papers by this author
  • D. R. HALL

    1. Agriculture, Health and Environment Department, Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, Chatham Maritime, U.K.
    Search for more papers by this author

Professor S. J. Torr, Natural Resources Institute, Chatham Maritime, Kent ME4 4TB, U.K. Tel.: +44 1634 883304; Fax: +44 1634 883379; E-mail: s.torr@gre.ac.uk

Abstract

Studies were made of the efficacy of using smoke and housing to protect cattle from tsetse (Diptera: Glossinidae) in Zimbabwe. The efficacy of smoke was assessed by its effect on catches in Epsilon traps baited with a blend of acetone, 1-octen-3-ol, 4-methylphenol and 3-n-propylphenol. The efficacies of different types of kraal (enclosure) were gauged according to the catches of electrocuting targets (E-targets), baited with natural ox odour, placed within various designs of kraal. Smoke from burning wood (Colophospermum mopane) or dried cow dung reduced the catch of traps by ∼50–90%. Kraals with a continuous wooden or netting wall, 1.5 m high, reduced catches of E-targets by ∼75%. Arrangements of electric nets were used to assess the numbers of tsetse attacking live cattle within kraals and/or near sources of smoke. The results confirmed findings with traps and E-targets: kraals reduced the numbers of tsetse that fed by ∼80% and smoke reduced the numbers attracted by ∼70%; the use of both reduced overall attack rates by ∼90%. The inclusion of 4-methylguaiacol, a known repellent for tsetse and a natural component of wood smoke, halved the catches of traps and E-targets and the numbers of tsetse attacking cattle. The practical benefits and difficulties of using repellents and/or housing to manage trypanosomiases are discussed.

Ancillary