Urban Insect Pests: Sustainable Management Strategies

Urban Insect Pests

Sustainable Management Strategies

Urban Insect Pests

Sustainable Management Strategies

Edited by

Partho Dhang

Independent Consultant Manila, Philippines

CABI is a trading name of CAB International

© CAB International 2014. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronically, mechanically, by photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owners.

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library, London, UK.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Urban insect pests: sustainable management strategies / edited by Partho Dhang, PhD.

      pages cm

  Includes bibliographical references and index

  ISBN 978-1-78064-275-8 (hbk : alk. paper) 1. Insect pests--Control--Environmental aspects. 2. Urban pests--Control--Environmental aspects. I. Dhang, Partho. II. C.A.B. International.

  SB938.U72 2014

632’.7--dc23

                                      2014011551

ISBN-13:  978  1  78064  275  8

Commissioning editor: Rachel Cutts

Editorial assistant: Emma McCann

Production editor: Laura Tsitlidze and Claire Sissen

Typeset by Columns Design XML Ltd, Reading, UK.

Printed and bound in the UK by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY.

Contents

Contributors

Acknowledgements

1 Urban Insect Pests: Sustainable Management Strategies

Partho Dhang

2 Bed Bug Management

Clive Boase and Richard Naylor

3 Emerging Technologies for Urban Mosquito Management

Julian Entwistle

4 Filth Fly Management in Urban Environments

Roberto Pereira, John Cooksey, Rebecca Baldwin and Philip Koehler

5 Sustainable Cockroach Management Using Insecticidal Baits: Formulations, Behavioural Responses and Issues

Hui-Siang Tee and Chow-Yang Lee

6 Fleas and Flea Management

Clive Boase, Alica Kocisova and Frantisek Rettich

7 Products and Strategies for Nuisance Urban Ant Management

Grzegorz Buczkowski and Changlu Wang

8 Management Strategies for Subterranean Termites

Michael Rust

9 Management of Drywood Termites: Past Practices, Present Situation and Future Prospects

Vernard Lewis and Brian Forschler

10 Urban Timber Pest Beetles: Risks and Management

Donald Ewart

11 Molecular Ecology Meets Urban Entomology: How Molecular Biology is Changing Urban Pest Management

Edward Vargo

12 Controlling Haematophagous Insects: The Quality-of-Life Scenario

Rajeev Vaidyanathan

13 Urban Pest Management: the Need for a Correct Mixture of Knowledge and Practice

Grzegorz Buczkowski

14 Marketing Integrated Pest Management as a Value-Added Service

Partho Dhang

15 Plants with Pest Control Properties Against Urban Pests

Partho Dhang and K. Purusotaman Sanjayan

Index

Contributors

Rebecca Baldwin, University of Florida, Entomology & Nematology Department, University of Florida, Building 970, Natural Area Drive, Gainesville, Florida 32611, USA. Email: rpereira@ufl.edu

Clive Boase, The Pest Management Consultancy, Cowslip Pightle, Hazel Stub Camps Road, Haverhill, Suffolk CB9 9AF, UK. Email: clive@pest-management.com

Grzegorz Buczkowski, Purdue University, Department of Entomology Centre for Urban and Industrial Pest Management, Smith Hall, 901 West State Street, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA. Email: gbuczkow@purdue.edu

John Cooksey, University of Florida, Entomology & Nematology Department, University of Florida, Building 970, Natural Area Drive, Gainesville, Florida 32611, USA. Email: JCooksey@mccallservice.com

Partho Dhang, Independent Consultant, 2410 Hen Belarmino Street, Bangkal, Makati City, 1233, Philippines. Email: partho@urbanentomology.com

Julian Entwistle, Xenex Associates Ltd, Chapel House, Barns Green, Horsham, West Sussex RH13 OPR, UK. Email: julian@xenexassociates.com

Donald Ewart, Consultant, PO Box 1044 Research 3095, Victoria, Australia. Email: don@drdons.net

Brian Forschler, University of Georgia, Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA. Email: bfor@uga.edu

Alica Kocisova, Department of Parasitology, University of Veterinary Medicine and Pharmacy, Komenského 73, 041 81 Košice, Slovak Republic. Email: kocisova@uvlf.sk

Philip Koehler, University of Florida, Entomology & Nematology Department, University of Florida, Building 970, Natural Area Drive, Gainesville, Florida 32611, USA. Email: pgk@ufl.edu

Chow-Yang Lee, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia. Email: chowyang@me.com

Vernard Lewis, University of California, Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management. University of California, Richmond Field Station, 1301 South 46th Street Building 478, Richmond, California 94804-4698, USA. Email: urbanpests@berkeley.edu

Richard Naylor, The Bed Bug Foundation, Prior’s Loft, Coleford Road Tidenham, Chepstow, Monmouthshire NP16 7JD, UK. Email: rich.naylor@gmail.com

Roberto Periera, University of Florida, Entomology & Nematology Department, University of Florida, Building 970, Natural Area Drive, Gainesville, Florida 32611, USA. Email: rpereira@ufl.edu

Frantisek Rettich, National Institute of Public Health, Czech Republic National Institute of Public Health, Prague, Srobarova 48, 100 42 Czech Republic. Email: rettich@szu.cz

Michael Rust, University of California, College of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, University of California, Riverside, California 92521, USA. Email: michael.rust@ucr.edu

Purusotaman Sanjayan, Guru Nanak College, Department of Zoology, Velachary, Chennai 42, India. Email: kpsanjayan@yahoo.com.in

Hui-Siang Tee, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia.

Rajeev Vaidyanathan, SRI International, 140 Research Drive, Harrisonburg, Virginia 22802, USA. Email: rajeev.vaidyanathan@sri.com

Ed Vargo, North Carolina State University, 3309 Gardner Hall, Department of Entomology, Campus Box 7613, 100 Derieux Place, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695-7613, USA. Email: elvargo@ncsu.edu

Changlu Wang, Rutgers University, Department of Entomology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901, USA. Email: cwang@AESOP.Rutgers.edu

Acknowledgements

I am thankful to all individual contributors for their valuable insights. All the information and expertise they shared in this book will remain immeasurable. I would also like to thank Ms Elaine Joshi of the Philippine Rice Research Institute, Munoz, who painstakingly checked through individual references, and my son Aman and my wife Dr Rinku who kept a count on the number of chapters I completed.

I wish to acknowledge my special appreciation to the publisher CAB International for accepting this book for publication.

Partho Dhang

15 November 2013

Manila, Philippines

1 Urban Insect Pests: Sustainable Management Strategies

Partho Dhang*

Independent Consultant, Philippines

Introduction

Urban insects, like any other insects, are resilient and successful organisms in the natural world. A failure to understand their bioecology has resulted in such insects being considered as intruders in the urban environment. Their encounters with humans are mostly reported with alarm and distress and their control procedures are designed to be one-sided, often leading to failure. Increasing reliance on chemicals to manage urban insects has diverted the subject away from the realms of natural science. The modern pest control industry, including books, magazines, exhibitions and conferences, has further diverted the focus of practitioners towards products. This has resulted in the bulk of the industry evolving around products. Such products have, in turn, stimulated marketing, and made the subject of pest management resemble any other commodity industry.

Trade in Pest Control

The world is blessed with many charming, pleasurable, glamorous and enticing subjects on which to ponder, and pest management is not one of these (Geiger and Cox, 2012). Pest control is, however, becoming a necessity for humans. Human activity contributes greatly to allowing the initiation of an infestation. Also any structure constructed without incorporating measures to prevent pests will invariably face pest infestation. Once a pest has invaded, the sight of the pest triggers various types of negative behaviour, including anger and disgust, and often the choice of a toxic chemical spray is almost involuntary. This human behaviour has made pest control an easily tradable profession and business. The degree of the trade is, however, dependent on the nature of the service the practitioner is offering and the environment where the service is required. An occasional trail of ants in the home may be a mere nuisance but even a single ant in a surgical ward can have grave consequences (Imholte and Imholte-Tauscher, 1999). Consequently, tolerance to pest infestations varies and ideally pest control should be considered at the design stage. Institutional kitchens, healthcare facilities, and missioncritical manufacturing facilities demand detailed and careful design and planning to exclude potential pests (Imholte and Imholte-Tauscher, 1999) compared with a home or a recreation centre.

When a building owner trades the elimination of a pest for a sum of money to a pest control practitioner, the owner is aware that the cost he is paying has a share of profit for the operator. He simply does not know how much. This uncertain value makes him reluctant to pay and at times may bargain for a lower price than quoted. The product, a service in this situation, being invisible often affects the trade. Because customers are the eventual source for revenue, the practitioners providing services have an arduous task to work on persuasive strategies. As a result, the efficiency of pest control service obviously suffers. A simple trade of removing a pest for a sum of money ultimately becomes a complicated transaction. Furthermore, to make a decision, the homeowner reviews the company profile, the proficiency of the company, reviews the clientele of the company and even the smartness and etiquette of the salesman. Essentially what determines the nature of transaction is very complex.

The information disparity regarding pests, between the buyer (such as a homeowner) and the seller (a pest control practitioner), has, however, been successfully utilized to make pest control services quite tradable. Practitioners often help bridge gaps with the information asymmetry by providing literature, client references and web reviews about the products to be used in the service, to gain confidence. This is a common practice and manufacturers of various products update their product pages with research and findings to help buyers gather reassuring information so as to help such transactions. Another way of going around this information asymmetry and making the business more tradable is by offering warranties to gain the buyer’s trust. Pest control companies often provide various types of service and product warranties. Such warranties could be in many forms such as re-treatment without incurring extra cost in case the pest resurfaces. Practitioners have even experimented with offers of damaged property replacement warranties.

Trends in Pest Control

The history of organized pest control is recent and it has seen regular changes. Current trends indicate that pest control has deviated from a practice to more product marketing. Pest management has become an industry-formalized practice focused on products and their usage, as described lucidly by Forschler (2011). Forschler quoted Rambo (1991) and Peterson et al. (2006) to show that the last Approved Reference Procedures (ARP) published by the National Pest Control Association in 1991 had 10 pages devoted to construction and cultural control, whereas chemical application covered 131 pages (92%). However, the latest revision of the Home and Garden Bulletin, volume 64, shifted to contain slightly fewer pages on treatment techniques versus biology and construction (8 of 26 pages or 31%). Similarly, exhibitions, magazines and journals dedicate vast resources and space to products compared with those dedicated to knowledge and practices. This forces pest control practitioners to become more product centric rather than skill oriented.

The trend towards over-reliance on product and industry-designed practices has prevented the development of skills among practitioners. The application of chemicals by sprayers remains the most dominant work in pest control activity. This act is less skilful and less time consuming. Sprayers help achieve the easy spread of the chemical in a large area in less time. In addition, sprayers cover solid surfaces and water bodies, help treat cracks and crevices and even take care of space. The fewer technical skills required to operate sprayers and their ease of use in turn promoted liquid formulations. Overall, controlling pests has become a simple act, requiring little or no specialized training and knowledge. Forschler (2011) described how termite management continues operating under a 50-year-old insecticide-based business model that has little relevance to the academic knowledge base. But consumers and regulatory agencies remain unaware of the gulf between knowledge and practice. Forschler (2011) went on to make an important note that industry acceptance of a knowledge-based practice model is hindered by business practice based on insecticide treatment.

It is noticeable that pest management professionals often choose products based on the treatment cost; sprayable formulations are often the cheapest. A number of studies have shown the relative ineffectiveness of conventional sprays compared with knowledge-based intervention methods. In a study conducted by Sever et al. (2007), commercial pest control companies were shown to be unsuccessful, compared to a group of entomologists, at removing cockroaches and their allergens from homes in inner-city multi-unit dwellings. The pest controllers relied on calendarbased (monthly, bimonthly or quarterly) applications of sprays and dust insecticide formulations to baseboards and cracks and crevices. None of the contract-based pest control companies used traps to monitor the cockroach infestation. The pest control companies usually treated only the kitchen and bathrooms, unless specifically requested by the residents to treat other areas. The majority of their initial treatments relied heavily on spray and dust formulations and used smaller amounts of gel baits. To improve their effectiveness, the authors (Sever et al., 2007) had suggested additional training for pest control operators to increase their knowledge about the most effective treatment methods and educating the public to be diligent in reporting cockroach sightings to the companies and requesting additional service visits.

It is clearly evident that the unanticipated act of spraying pesticides was indiscriminate and unplanned, resulting in control failures. This led to the realization that judicious use of pesticide is needed to overcome control failures, and, to sustain growth, new avenues have to be explored on application methods. Consequently, dramatic changes in pest control strategies have taken place, which are noticeable globally. Conventional sprayers and indiscriminate sprays have been replaced by precise and targeted delivery systems. Even in the case where a spray is a must, a longlasting residual formulation is used so that the number of sprays is reduced. The advent of baits for a variety of pests has further reduced regular insecticide sprays as residuals. Baits also removed the use of the sprayer to a great extent from the indoor environment.

Sustainable Pest Control

The market presents various choices of pest control products; however, none permanently eliminates the pest problem or makes a structure foolproof against pest attack. This often forces the use of multiple methods, including chemical, physical, mechanical and cultural methods, rendering pest control jobs time consuming, laborious and expensive. Thus long-term pest management has to rely on sustainable methods that combine pest elimination, cost-effectiveness and environmental concerns together.

It is generally concluded that fundamental design problems in both buildings and landscapes are partly to blame for pest infestation (Geiger and Cox, 2012). It is also a common understanding that pests in the urban environment cannot be permanently eradicated. Thus there is a need to develop sustainable methodologies to contain pests. These methodologies would be key to the development of repeatable practices. Eventually, the quality of pest control will depend on such time-tested practices.

Successful pest control relies on continuous monitoring and maintenance. This realization in recent times has encouraged the invention of a number of pest control products, delivery systems and application methods. Product development led to new methods of application, based on rational approaches. The impetus to develop alternative control methods allowed research on insect baits. Conceptually, the baiting system used major behavioural cues of insect pests that made application methods practical. This appealed to serious pest control practitioners. Baiting soon grew in its popularity and acceptance. Insecticide baits remain the best example of how the practitioners’ approach to pest management has shifted favourably towards sustainable methods.

The success of a sustainable pest control largely remains dependent on understanding the nature of the infested habitat and pest behaviour. For example, a retrospective analysis of termite management showed that structures with surrounding landscape owned by the middle class and constructed by developers have significantly more infestation than the rest (Dhang, 2011). Such intrinsic information on infestation pattern could be useful for designing sustainable pest management strategies and programmes. Foolproofing structures by sound engineering methods is thus the best method for preventing termite entry. Recently, the Asian market has seen the use of a number of physical barriers such as stainless steel mesh, special grades of cement and resin mixtures, and insecticideimpregnated plastic sheets in termite proofing of buildings. These products take care of construction gaps, cracks and gaps in and around service penetrations and, when skilfully installed, prevent termite entry through concealed points in a building. The popularity of using them is gaining momentum, thanks to the realization of keeping chemical insecticides out of some construction sites and ‘building green’. There is, however, little evidence that such physical barriers would guarantee termite proofing but it allows the possibility of blocking possible entry points. Also the cost of such installation could prove prohibitive (Lloyd and Meiracker, 2011) and may make construction unsustainable.

It has been shown that incorporating relatively simple designs can substantially reduce long-term pest control costs in buildings and landscapes, while also cutting the health and environmental impacts of pesticide use (Geiger and Cox, 2012). The San Francisco Department of the Environment has taken an ambitious step towards green building by unveiling a new resource for designing buildings that are more resistant to common pests, such as rats, termites, pigeons and cockroaches. The free guidelines aim to reduce both pests and the use of pesticides for the lifetime of a building, thereby improving indoor air quality, reducing toxics exposure and more effectively managing pests (Rodriguez, 2013). It will, however, be a test for the residents of such buildings to change their regular habits to keep the building pest proof.

Pest Control Tools

Inspection and monitoring are crucial in making pest control operations sustainable. Both help practitioners determine the right strategy for a job. The knowledge from an inspection is important in making the pest control programme successful. Pest management professionals who understand the behaviour of their target pest species are more efficient and effective at controlling the pests than those who lack this knowledge (Duggal, 2011). Knowing common travel routes and typical breeding, hiding and feeding places helps the professional conduct a focused inspection. Instead of wasting time looking where the pest probably is not present, time is better spent looking where the pest is most likely to be (Duggal, 2011). This helps reduce the cost of treatment and time spent on the job, each important in making the work sustainable.

The use of pest monitoring or intercepting devices has gained interest in recent times. These devices help detect the presence of a pest, determine location or active areas of infestation and also indicate pest population. Each of these pieces of information is a critical determinant in deciding a suitable pest control strategy. Several active and passive monitors/interceptors are commercially available but it is a challenge for the practitioners to select the right one. Most of these monitors and devices remain untested and unproven. Many more are deceptively advertised with explicit claims about the product’s ability. Others are featured in carefully crafted magazine articles that overshadow the limitations. Overall, making a choice for the right tool is often challenging for practitioners.

Pest control tools vary in efficacy and performance and making a wrong choice could cost a practitioner vital information in addition to revenue. It has been shown that cockroach susceptibility to trapping varies with trap type and cockroach size. Small nymphs are more likely to be trapped by sticky traps than large nymphs (Wang and Bennett, 2006a). In a study, Nalyanya and Schal (2001) found claims of attractiveness of a number of commercially used cockroach traps and lures to be unsupported by both laboratory and field results. The same study also showed not all lures used in cockroach control are equally attractive, and indeed the most attractive baits were ‘off-the-shelf’ foods (e.g. peanut butter) and industrial by-products (distiller’s grain). Also, Wang and Bennett (2006b) found the most efficient trap only trapped an average of 3.7% of the cockroaches per day when around 170 cockroaches were present in 1 × 1 m arenas.

A difference in efficacy and performance of monitoring devices for other pests exists. Wang and Cooper (2011) described several bed bug-monitoring devices that offered alternative harbourages to bed bugs looking for a hiding place. The monitors are placed on or near beds or sofas. Infestations are identified by the presence of bed bugs or their faeces and cast skins. These passive monitors rely on bed bugs’ harbourageseeking behaviour. The research shows varying efficacy and effectiveness between commercially available interceptors, some brands significantly outperforming others. Similarly, Diclaro et al. (2012) reported a difference in efficacy of six commercially available fly traps for capturing house flies.

In view of the differences in efficacy and performance between various monitoring and detection devices made available commercially to pest control practitioners, much needs to be done to standardize the right protocol and methodology to evaluate them. Research is needed for better understanding of the most efficient way of evaluating these devices because a host of parameters influences trap catches. Also, the field of insect communication, including pheromones and semiochemicals, is yet to be deciphered fully to understand insect behaviour. For example, the use of light traps using colour, design and attractant is one area where great disparity remains in determining what influences house fly attraction. Most data on efficacy is made available in sales literature, which is subjective in nature. The success of this approach, however, relies on the effective attraction of house flies with olfactory or visual stimuli (Hanley et al., 2009). However, the lack of common methodology and a unified method of data presentation (Green, 2011), and the variability of data on the environment, make the field confusing for practitioners. Although parameters such as colour, shape and attractant have been shown to determine catch rates (Cottee, 2004), the study by Hanley et al. (2009) surprisingly showed that neither the use of trap colours employed to specifically match the peaks in house fly spectral sensitivity nor groups of recently killed house flies affixed to traps resulted in significantly improved house fly attraction. Also, the study was unable to detect any variation in male and female catch rates on the basis of sex-specific olfactory stimuli. The above facts show possible limitations of insect light traps and allow their use only in controlled environments as support systems.

Green Pest Control

The colour and the word ‘green’ is commonly associated with nature, vivacity, life, springtime, freshness, youth, inexperience, hope, safety, permission, etc. The 20th century saw green as environmentalism and an environment-related movement. The practice of pest control also used ‘green’ to depict many virtues. Recent trends show, however, a large increase and indiscriminate use of ‘green’ and ‘organic’ in pest control. The definition differs between practitioners but generally it refers to safety, responsibility, less use of pesticide or use of an alternative to pesticide, etc. Currently there are no regulations on the use of the term ‘Green Pest Control’ (Wikipedia, 2013). Pest control companies freely use the term and advertise about providing a ‘Green Pest Control Service’. Others name their company using the word green. The use of a green colour in advertising company items such as logo, service vehicles, uniform or products is also commonly practised.

As ‘green’ is synonymized with a clean and safe environment, there is an urgent need to protect consumers from being misled. It is time for consumer protection and regulatory bodies to take note of this indiscriminate event. Efforts to move towards standardization are being sought by the pest control industry. The National Pest Management Association’s (NPMA) GreenPro Accreditation or private certification resources such as GreenShield Certification are examples of such efforts in the USA. This accreditation and certification under the word ‘green’ does not mean that pesticides will not be used but it is a step towards rationalizing pesticide use. An example of the scope of the NPMA Greenpro compliance is:

1. Employ a comprehensive, environmentally friendly approach when treating a property.

2. Investigate the source of the problem – and eliminate it – before applying pesticides.

3. Apply pesticides only when necessary.

Conclusion

Pest control is predominantly an art and requires a dynamic mixture of skill and knowledge to practise. The dominant work involved in pest control is, however, the industry-formalized insecticide spray. The insecticide spray using poison satiates the human anger and revulsion towards invading pests and has remained acceptable among practitioners and consumers alike. It is cheap and provides immediate relief. The popularity of the chemical spray inhibited the acquisition of knowledge on pests, and has kept the introduction of sustainable technologies, tools and methods such as integrated pest management (IPM) away from common practice. Chemical sprays are often indiscriminate, miss the source of the infestation and are at times unnecessary. As the restriction on indoor insecticide usage and the evidence of insecticide resistance are growing, an increased emphasis is now placed on lure-and-kill control methods. Lure-and-kill methods are effective in controlling small, low-density, isolated populations, and also in eradication programmes of invasive species by being inverse density dependent (El-Sayed et al., 2009). Consequently, lure-and-kill technology, using insecticides and non-insecticides, has become increas ingly popular and is widely used in pest control programmes. This trend is most noticeable in the current industry. As a result, there is a flurry of activity in manufacturing baits, traps and devices to fill the growing industry.

The pest control industry is sustained on eliminating pest infestation from homes and buildings. But most pest control actions never address possibilities of future infestations and leave gaps for easy re-infestation. With improved designs, modification of environment and public awareness, pest infestations will reduce considerably and the role of practitioners will shift more towards keeping human habitats away from pest invasion. Practitioners’ action will move into monitoring goods and items getting into buildings and treating infestation outside the building. Their future role would be to inspect and monitor and run programmes as auditors.

References

Cottee, P. (2004) Green light: a holistic view; a review of the literature and research on the attraction of insects to lights of different wavelengths. Available at: http://www.technosa.ch/IOC/insect-O-Cutor/green_light.pdf (accessed 15 June 2013).

Dhang, P. (2011) A retrospective analysis of structures infested by subterranean termites in Philippines. In: Robinson, W.H. and de Carvalho Campos, A.E. (eds) Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Urban Pests. Instituto Biologico, Brazil, pp. 183–188.

Diclaro II, J.W., Hertz, J.C., Welch, R.M., Koehler, P.G. and Pereira, R.M. (2012) Integration of fly baits, traps, and cords to kill house flies (Diptera: Muscidae) and reduce annoyance. Journal of Entomological Science 47, 56–64.

Duggal, N. (2011) Digital governance in urban entomology: an innovative approach. In: Dhang, P. (ed.) Urban Pest Management: an Environmental Perspective. CABI, Wallingford, UK, pp. 64–82.

El-Sayed, A.M., Suckling, D.M., Byers, J.A., Jang, E.B. and Wearing, C.H. (2009) Potential of lure and kill in long-term pest management and eradication of invasive species. Journal of Economic Entomology 102, 815–835.

Forschler, B. (2011) Sustainable termite management using an integrated pest management approach. In: Dhang, P. (ed.) Urban Pest Management: an Environmental Perspective. CABI, Wallingford, UK, pp. 133–144.

Geiger, C.A. and Cox, C. (2012) Pest prevention by design. Available at http://www.sfenvironment.org/sites/default/files/fliers/files/final_ppbd_guidelines_12-5-12.pdf (accessed 15 September 2013).

Green, M. (2011) Catch rate of Musca domestica in laboratory tests: contrasting ultraviolet light traps with their surroundings. In: Robinson, W.H. and de Carvalho Campos, A.E. (eds) Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Urban Pests. Instituto Biologico, Brazil, pp. 137–140.

Hanley, M.E., Cruickshanks, K.L., Dunn, D., Stewart-Jones, A. and Goulson, D. (2009) Luring house flies (Musca domestica) to traps: do cuticular hydrocarbons and visual cues increase catch. Medical and Veterinary Entomology 23, 26–33.

Imholte, T. and Imholte-Tauscher, T. (1999) Engineering for Food Safety and Sanitation: A Guide to the Sanitary Design of Food Plants and Food Plant Equipment, 2nd edn. Technical Institute of Food Safety, Woodinville, WA.

Lloyd, J. and Meiracker, K. van den (2011) Termite control with experience from the USA. Proceedings of the 8th Conference of the Pacific Rim Termite Research Group, 28 February 2011, Bangkok, Thailand.

Nalyanya, G. and Schal, C. (2001) Evaluation of attractants for monitoring populations of the German cockroach (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 94, 208–214.

NPMA – National Pest Management Association (2013) NPMA greenpro. Available at: http://www.npmagreenpro.com (accessed 15 July 2013).

Peterson, C., Wagner, T.L., Mulrooney, J.E. and Shelton, T.G. (2006) Subterranean termites – their prevention and control in buildings. Home and Garden Bulletin 64, 1–32.

Rambo, G.W. (ed.) (1991) Approved Reference Procedures for Subterranean Termite Control. National Pest Control Association, Dunn Loring, VA.

Rodriguez, G. (2013) First-ever national guidelines published on designing buildings to prevent pests. Available at: http://www.sfenvironment.org/news/press-release/firstever-national-guidelines-published-on-designing-buildings-to-prevent-pests (accessed 15 July 2013).

Sever, M.L., Arbes Jr., S.J., Gore, J.C., Santangelo, R.G., Vaughn, B., Mitchell, H., Schal, C. and Zeldin, D.C. (2007) Cockroach allergen reduction by cockroach control alone in low-income urban homes: a randomized control trial. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 120, 849–855.

Wang, C. and Bennett, G.W. (2006a) Comparison of cockroach traps and attractants for monitoring German cockroaches (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae). Environmental Entomology 35, 765–770.

Wang, C. and Bennett, G.W. (2006b) Comparative study of integrated pest management and baiting for German cockroach management in public housing. Journal of Economic Entomology 99, 879–885.

Wang, C. and Cooper, R. (2011) Environmentally sound bed bug management solutions. In: Dhang, P. (ed.) Urban Pest Management: an Environmental Perspective. CABI, Wallingford, UK, pp. 44–63.

Wikipedia (2013) Green pest management. Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Pest_Management (accessed 15 July 2013).

2 Bed Bug Management

Clive Boase¹* and Richard Naylor²

¹The Pest Management Consultancy, UK; ²The Bed Bug Foundation, UK

Introduction

Once thought to be consigned to the history books, bed bugs were a pest of a bygone era. Even the name ‘bed bug’ would probably have been long forgotten had it not been immortalized in the popular bedtime nursery rhyme. And yet, despite our best efforts, at the start of the 21st century this tenacious little insect made a comeback, reemerging as one of our most detested urban pests.

The bed bug resurgence has been attributed to a range of factors influencing their survival, reproduction and spread. For example, their ability to become concealed within luggage and personal effects facilitates their dispersal around the world, while the lack of bed bug awareness in today’s urban residents allows infestations to become well established before being detected (Reinhardt et al., 2008). One of the biggest challenges for bed bug control today is, however, the emergence of insecticide resistance to some of the commonly used insecticides (Boase, 2001; Romero et al., 2007; Davies et al., 2012). As a result treatment failures are now commonplace.

The bed bug resurgence has not only had a profound impact on the housing and hospitality sectors, it also has provided a major stimulus to research on this pest. As a result, the number of publications has increased dramatically over the last decade. This has greatly improved our understanding of this challenging pest and has hopefully provided the pest control industry with at least some of the tools required to turn the resurgence into a downturn.

Significance of Bed bugs

Medical

Skin responses to bed bug bites can vary considerably from one person to the next. For the most part bites appear as raised, itchy, red areas of inflammation between 5 and 10 mm in diameter, although it may take several exposures and up to 2 weeks before the inflammation appears (Reinhardt et al., 2009).

For a fortunate few, there may be no visible bite response even after multiple exposures to bed bugs (Reinhardt et al., 2009). However, this can be a mixed blessing as infestations can go undetected, allowing them to become more established and harder to treat. In a minority of cases sufferers exhibit blistering skin eruptions at the bite site and in the most severe cases anaphylaxis-like systemic responses have also been reported (Doggett et al., 2012).

The potential for bed bugs to vector human pathogens has been extensively investigated, and while some human pathogens can persist in or on the bed bug, there is no evidence to suggest that these can be transmitted back to humans (Reinhardt and Siva-Jothy, 2007; Doggett and Russell, 2009). As with any open skin lesion, there is the potential for bed bug bites to provide a route for environmental pathogens to enter the body, resulting in secondary infections such as methicillinresistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (Lowe and Romney, 2011).

For many sufferers, the psychological impact of a bed bug infestation can be much more severe than the physical symptoms. Anxiety, stress, sleep deprivation and depression are widely reported, and in many cases these symptoms persist long after the infestation has been eliminated.

In a minority of cases an infestation can be the trigger for a psychological condition known as delusional parasitosis, where the sufferer believes that they and/or their surroundings are covered with parasites, or specifically bed bugs. Sufferers become obsessed by minute fragments of debris or marks on or around the bed, believing them to be associated with an infestation. In extreme cases sufferers can have hallucinations of insects crawling over or burrowing into their skin (Hinkle, 2000).

Social

The social impact of a bed bug infestation can be severe. The false belief that bed bugs are only associated with dirty environments generates a stigma, which in many cases works in the bed bug’s favour because people are reluctant to approach neighbours or seek help for risk of reprisal.

It is common for people living with a bed bug infestation to become isolated. Friends and family refuse to visit for fear of taking bed bugs home and may also be reluctant to let the bed bug sufferer visit them for the same reason. This in turn can exacerbate the symptoms of anxiety and depression that the sufferer may already be feeling (Doggett et al., 2012).

The authors are aware of one scenario where nursing care was withdrawn from an elderly and infirm lady whose home became infested with bed bugs. Care was not reinstated until after the bed bugs had been eradicated. Needless to say, this should never be allowed to happen. By taking some simple precautions, such as avoiding sofas and armchairs and keeping bags and coats off the floor, the risk of accidentally taking bed bugs away from an infestation can be minimized.

Economic

The costs associated with a bed bug infestation can vary considerably depending on the location, severity and control options employed. For a domestic premises with a minor infestation, the treatment cost could be in the region of one to a few hundred pounds. Further costs may result from additional services such as canine scent detection and/or monitoring systems to confirm that the treatment has been successful. There may also be costs associated with replacing furniture and furnishings that are deemed too heavily infested or difficult to treat to be saved.

The financial impact of a bed bug infestation in a hotel can be considerably higher and harder to calculate. Costs can arise from the following:

• treatment and monitoring;

• room closures;

• replacement of room décor;

• customer compensation;

• legal costs if a customer sues; and

• negative publicity.

In an age where almost everybody has access to the internet through their phones, laptops and other mobile devices, the threat of negative publicity has never been more real. Websites such as tripadvisor.co.uk and bedbugregistry.com give the disgruntled guest the power to blacklist an infested hotel even before the guest leaves the room.

Basic Bed Bug Biology

Life cycle

Bed bugs have incomplete metamorphosis, meaning that they progress through a series of nymphal stages (instars) that broadly resemble the adult (Fig. 2.1).

Fig. 2.1. The life cycle of the bed bug. A single blood feed is required to progress between each of the five nymphal instars and from 5th instar to adult. This occurs at approximately weekly intervals at normal room temperature.

A single blood feed from a vertebrate host is required to progress from one instar to the next. This occurs at approximately weekly intervals under warm conditions with unrestricted access to food. However, development time is highly influenced by temperature and food availability. At 18°C the life cycle (egg to adult) can take more than 4 months (Johnson, 1942). At temperatures below 13°C development ceases entirely (Jones, 1930; Mellanby, 1935). In the host’s absence bed bugs have been known to survive for more than a year without food (Bacot, 1914).

Adult bed bugs copulate shortly after reaching maturity and females begin laying eggs within about 1 week. Like development time, egg-laying rate is a function of temperature and food availability. At a temperature of 23°C, and with 1–2 feeds per week, a female can be expected to lay 6–12 eggs per week (Johnson, 1941). For females to sustain continuous, fertile egg production, they must copulate approximately every 5–6 weeks, although natural mating rates are believed to be much higher (Stutt and Siva-Jothy, 2001). They must also feed frequently as egg production ceases rapidly in the absence of food (Reinhardt and Siva-Jothy, 2007).

Identification

Identification of the live stages of bed bug can be made by comparison with Fig. 2.1. Adults are broadly similar in size and shape to an apple seed, whereas nymphs vary in size considerably; first instars (the smallest) being approximately the size of a grain of brown sugar.

Like all true bugs (Order: Hemiptera), bed bugs possess a proboscis through which they feed. This structure functions like a drinking straw and is clearly visible protruding downwards from the front of the head. Anther notable feature is the absence of wings, which are present in the adults of most other true bugs.

Unfed bed bugs are dorsoventrally flattened but swell during feeding. This also corresponds to a change in colour, from chestnut brown to dark red or almost black in adults, and from pale yellow-brown to bright red in nymphs, as the colour of the blood shows through their thin cuticle.

Bed bugs closely resemble a number of other species from the same family (Cimicidae) that are occasionally associated with human hosts. These include several species of bat bug, swallow bug, martin bug and also the tropical bed bug. These bed bug relatives are not as ubiquitous as the common bed bug so local knowledge can be helpful in determining which species are likely to be encountered. Usinger (1966) has described the biological keys and other notes on the identification of the species within the Cimicidae.

Behaviour (feeding, harbourage seeking, dispersal)

Bed bugs are frequently considered to be nocturnal; however, they readily adapt to the behaviour of their host and will infest anywhere that is regularly occupied for prolonged periods. This includes sofas and armchairs, and seats of buses, trains and aeroplanes.

In addition to regular access to a host, bed bugs require a harbourage in which to hide between feeds. A typical harbourage consists of a narrow crevice between two hard surfaces in close proximity to the feeding site. This is where the bed bugs spend the majority of their time and consequently these crevices quickly become littered with cast skins, eggs and faecal material (see Fig. 2.2d).

Bed bugs prefer to reside together in aggregations of tens or even hundreds of individuals, spanning all age classes and both sexes. It is believed that this behaviour helps conserve water (Benoit et al., 2007). They emit aggregation pheromones, which aid in locating each other and also enable them to relocate harbourages after feeding (Siljander et al., 2008).

Hungry bed bugs can initiate foraging behaviour spontaneously, although it is more commonly triggered by elevated carbon dioxide from the host (Reinhardt and Siva-Jothy, 2007). Foraging bed bugs locate the host by a combination of host cues. Carbon dioxide is probably the longest ranging cue that the bed bugs can detect but their ability to follow up a carbon dioxide concentration gradient is unknown. Host body heat is an important directional cue for bed bugs within 1.5 m of the host (Reinhardt and Siva-Jothy, 2007). Sweat and sebaceous gland secretions are important for close range host location just prior to contact (Aboul-Nasr and Erakey, 1968).

Bed bugs can disperse actively, by walking to a neighbouring room or apartment, or passively, when they are carried accidentally on luggage or furniture.