. Deterministic model for simulating the predation of Toxorhynchites rutilus rutilus on Aedes aegypti. Mathematical models; Mosquitoes, Control, Biological control, United States. pendent of the number and stages used in ini- tializing the model. The graphs were smoothed by plotting 4-day moving averages. The cyclic nature of the daily-rain situation in figures 5 and 7 dampened with time, A comparison can be made from table 6 be- tween the number of Ae. aegypti individuals per stage per container observed by Southwood et al. (1972) and the number of individuals per stage per container generate

- Image ID: RCT2GC
. Deterministic model for simulating the predation of Toxorhynchites rutilus rutilus on Aedes aegypti. Mathematical models; Mosquitoes, Control, Biological control, United States. pendent of the number and stages used in ini- tializing the model. The graphs were smoothed by plotting 4-day moving averages. The cyclic nature of the daily-rain situation in figures 5 and 7 dampened with time, A comparison can be made from table 6 be- tween the number of Ae. aegypti individuals per stage per container observed by Southwood et al. (1972) and the number of individuals per stage per container generate
Paul Fearn / Alamy Stock Photo
Image ID: RCT2GC
. Deterministic model for simulating the predation of Toxorhynchites rutilus rutilus on Aedes aegypti. Mathematical models; Mosquitoes, Control, Biological control, United States. pendent of the number and stages used in ini- tializing the model. The graphs were smoothed by plotting 4-day moving averages. The cyclic nature of the daily-rain situation in figures 5 and 7 dampened with time, A comparison can be made from table 6 be- tween the number of Ae. aegypti individuals per stage per container observed by Southwood et al. (1972) and the number of individuals per stage per container generated by the model when no control measures were applied. The total number of immatures per container generated by the model exceeded the total reported by Southwood et al. This disparity was allowed to remain be- cause the difference was not large, especially in Table 6âNumber of Aedes aegypti per stage per container as reported by Southwood et al. (1972) and the number generated by the model Southwood Model etal. No rain Rain1 Average Larvae: 1st- and 2d-instar 20.0 ⢠30.0 70.0 50.0 3d-instar 9.5 8.0 5.0 6.5 4th-instar 8.0 8.0 5.0 6.5 Pupae 2.0 2.2 1.5 1.9 Total 395 4872 81.5 64.9 Adults 7.3 8.0 5.0 6.5 ' Situation modeled is that all containers receive daily rain. Table 7.âMean number of Aedes aegypti per container after contact adulticide application and after application when adult density exceeded seven or four adults per container1 Stage No treatment-' Single application- 7 Adults per container'⢠4 Adults per container' Adult Immature ⢠â â 8 49 8 49 3 28 2 21 1 See figures 8-13. -' Daily immature survival (SI) of 75%. Daily immature survival of 84%. 15 applications in 262 days. 1 Daily immature survival of 88%. 21 applications during period 98-360 days.. 0 65 131 196 262 327 Days FIGURE 8.âAedes aegypti adult density following contact adulticide application on day 90 (no rain). The result was 95% adult mortality with no residual effects. 9. Please note that th

Similar stock images