嘉義沿海地區登革熱病媒蚊之分布調查及其原因探討

The Distribrtion of Dengue Vectors and Its Possible Explanation in the Coastal Area of Chiayi County

鄧華真(Hwa-Jen Teng) ； 鍾兆麟(Chao-Lin Chung) ； 王昇燦(Sheng-Tsan Wang) ； 侯春錦(Tran-Jing Ho)

《中華昆蟲》 16卷3期 (1996/09) Pp. i+155-165

https://doi.org/10.6660/TESFE.1996016

摘要

本報告調查埃及斑蚊分布最北之嘉義縣沿海地區(布袋鎮、東石鄉及義竹鄉)之埃及斑蚊Aedes aegypti及白線斑蚊Ae. albopictus幼蟲孳生情形，藉以界定埃及斑蚊最北分布的區域，並了解該地幼蟲棲所分布之狀況。此調查採三層取樣方法，以50戶為一取樣單位，各村里調查30%之家戶(含78-83年已調查之戶數)。共取布袋鎮3183戶，義竹鄉2494戶及東石鄉2664戶。扣除78-83年已稠查之戶數，於83年7月-84年4月再調查布袋鎮1066戶，義竹鄉1495戶及東石鄉1360戶。經調查結果顆示埃及斑蚊僅發現於嘉義縣布袋鎮復興里、新民里、新岑里、光復里、九龍里、岱江里、岑海里、興中里等八里，而新厝里及義竹鄉官順村列為邊界村里。白線斑蚊則遍布此三鄉鎮。針對發現埃及斑蚊之村里及其旁邊之村里做積水容器之特性比較，不管是容器位置、材質、大小或沒有容器之戶數，皆沒有顯著性差異。此結果表示該二地區皆有適合斑蚊孳生之積水容器。白線斑蚊對孳生容器位置之喜好性與同地區之埃及斑蚊沒有顯著性差異(x=3.1,P＞0.05)，而與其旁邊村里之白線斑蚊則有極顯著性差異(x=19,4,P之0.01)。在孳生埃及斑蚊之村里，埃及斑蚊陽性容器所在戶內及戶外位置之比為33.3%:66.7%，而白線斑蚊之比值為18.8%:81.2%。其旁邊之村里之白線斑蚊的比值則為5.6%:94.4%。埃及斑蚊對孳生容器材質之喜好性與同地區及其旁邊村里之白線斑蚊有極顯著不同(χ2=19.4,P＜0.01; x=34.8, P＜0.01)。在孳生埃及斑蚊村里之白線斑蚊對孳生容器材質之喜好性,則與其旁邊村里之白線斑蚊沒有顯著性不同 (χ2=11.0,P＞0.05)。埃及斑蚊之陽性孳生容器在嘉義縣沿海三鄉鎮以塑膠類(32.11%)為主。白線斑蚊以陶磁類(38.6%-41.9%)為主。此次調查簇蟲(Ascogregarina sp.)盛行率，除東石鄉東石村(63.7%)外，皆低於33.3%以下。另外，於孳生埃及斑蚊之村里，除義竹鄉官順村外，所採集到之白線斑蚊幼蟲，皆沒有發現簇蟲寄生。簇蟲在限制埃及斑蚊分布應扮演著部份角色，而其重要性因低感染率及低死亡率而大幅降低。依據本次調查結果推測有可能是因房屋與房屋之距離為造成埃及斑蚊在嘉義縣分布之主要原因。在孳生埃及斑蚊之村里中，其房屋間隔較擁擠，而其旁邊村里之房屋間隔較空曠，屬鄉村型。

關鍵字

登革熱病媒蚊 ； 埃及斑蚊 ； 白線斑蚊 ； 分布

並列摘要

A survey was conducted in the coastal areas of Chiayi County including Putai, Tungshih, and Ichu townships to understand the distribution of Aedes aegypti and Ae. albopicuts. A- 3-stage sampling method was used. Every 50 houses was a cluster. The total numbers of houses surveyed between August 1994 and June 1995 were 1066, 1495, and 1360 for Putai, Ichu, and Tungshih, respectively. Aedes aegypti was found in Fusing, Hsingming, Hsingtsai, Krungfu, Jueloung, Taichiang, Tsaihai and Hsingchung Villages in Putai County while Hsingtsu in Putai County and Kaishung Village in Ichu County were listed as borders. Aedes albopictus was collected n all 3 townships. No significant differences were found in the nature of water containers between villages in which Ae. aegypti occurred and villages nearby. This implies that larval habitats were available in those nearby villabes. The ratio of the position of breeding containers was not significantly different for these 2 Aedes species in the villages with Ae. aegypti. However, significant differences were found for preference of container materials between these 2 mosquitoes. For Ae. aegypti, larvae were found mostly in containers made of plastic (32.1%). For Ae. albopictus, larvae were found mostly in containers made of ceramics (38.6%-41.9%). Except for Tungshih Village, the infection rates of Ascogregarina parasites in larvae of Aedes spp. were below 33.3%. Aedes albopictus larvae collected from 4 villages with Ae. aegypti were found with no parasites. Therefore, it is likely that Ascogregarina spp. may play an role in limiting the distribution of Ae. aegypti in Chiayi County. However, its improtance is largely decreased by the low infection rates and low mortality of these parasites. The distance between houses was more likely to be the explanation for the distribution of these 2 mosquitoes in the coastal area in Chiayi County.