Patent Application
20090288333
The present invention relates to an insect trap and, more particularly, an insect trap including UV light and bait.
Insect traps with insect attractant light sources and immobilization devices are commonly used to attract and trap insects within the traps. The present invention addresses the problems associated with the prior art devices and provides for an insect trap including UV light and bait.
Problems associated with prior devices are addressed by embodiments of the present invention and will be understood by reading and understanding the present specification. The following summary is made by way of example and not by way of limitation. It is merely provided to aid the reader in understanding some of the aspects of the invention.
An embodiment insect trap comprises a housing, an ultraviolet light with a peak wavelength of 340 to 380 nm operatively connected to the housing, and a bait including an attractant proximate the ultraviolet light. The ultraviolet light and the bait in the housing have a synergistic effect that is greater than a sum of the ultraviolet light alone and the bait alone.
An embodiment insect trap comprises a housing, an ultraviolet light, a bait, and a glueboard. The housing includes a cavity and an opening providing access to the cavity. The ultraviolet light has a peak wavelength of 340 to 380 nm and is operatively connected to the housing within the cavity. The ultraviolet light emits light through the opening of the housing. The bait includes an attractant within the cavity proximate the ultraviolet light. The glueboard is positioned within the cavity. The ultraviolet light and the bait in the housing have a synergistic effect that is greater than a sum of the ultraviolet light alone and the bait alone.
An embodiment insect trap comprises a housing, an ultraviolet light, and a bait. The housing has a front, a back, a bottom, an opening, and an internal reflective surface. The opening is upwardly facing for insect entry, and the back is configured and arranged to be mounted on a mounting surface. The ultraviolet light has a peak wavelength of 340 to 380 nm and is operatively connected to the housing. The ultraviolet light is placed in the housing below an edge of the upwardly facing opening. The internal reflective surface directs light from the ultraviolet light onto the mounting surface and forms a diffused light pattern on the mounting surface. The bait is operatively connected to at least one of the front, the back, and the bottom. The ultraviolet light and the bait in the housing have a synergistic effect that is greater than a sum of the ultraviolet light alone and the bait alone.
An embodiment method of increasing efficacy of an insect trap including a housing comprises operatively connecting an ultraviolet light with a peak wavelength of 340 to 380 nm to the housing, positioning a bait including an attractant proximate the ultraviolet light, wherein the ultraviolet light and the bait in the housing have a synergistic effect that is greater than a sum of the ultraviolet light alone and the bait alone, and supplying power to the ultraviolet light.
The present invention can be more easily understood, and further advantages and uses thereof can be more readily apparent, when considered in view of the detailed description and the following Figures in which:
In accordance with common practice, the various described features are not drawn to scale but are drawn to emphasize specific features relevant to the present invention. Reference characters denote like elements throughout the Figures and the text.
In the following detailed description, reference is made to the accompanying drawings, which form a part hereof, and in which is shown by way of illustration embodiments in which the inventions may be practiced. These embodiments are described in sufficient detail to enable those skilled in the art to practice the invention, and it is to be understood that other embodiments may be utilized and mechanical changes may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention. The following detailed description is, therefore, not to be taken in a limiting sense, and the scope of the present invention is defined only by the claims and equivalents thereof.
The term “insect trap” is used herein to include an insect trap or an insect station including at least one of the following: a light source, a bait, and a glueboard. The insect trap preferably includes a housing made of plastic or any other suitable material.
The term “bait” is used herein to include a bait including at least one of the following: an attractant, a poison, and a fluorescent property.
An embodiment of the present invention is an insect bait station that could be used in indoor and outdoor locations utilizing ultraviolet (“UV”) light such as a light emitting diode (“LED”) with a peak wavelength between approximately 340 and 380 nanometers (“nm”), preferably approximately 350 to 370 nm, and bait. The UV light is used in combination with the bait to increase attraction to the insect bait station. Attraction is increased due to the UV light, the attractants of the bait, and any fluorescent properties of the bait. Although bait including fluorescent properties is preferred, other suitable types of bait could be used. An example of suitable bait that could be used is ELECTOR™ bait manufactured by Elanco.
Generally, the ultraviolet light and the bait used together have a synergistic effect that is greater than a sum of the ultraviolet light used alone and the bait used alone. Initial testing found that a relatively small amount of UV light used in combination with the bait in a bait station increased attraction and efficacy by approximately at least three times as compared to bait alone. This initial testing is described in Example 1.
Furthermore, the relatively small amount of UV light required to increase the bait station efficacy could enable the UV light to be powered with batteries rather than a power cord. Using batteries could also allow the bait station to be portable and used in locations where power outlets are not available. In order to save battery power, the LEDs could be pulsed or otherwise turned on and off, however, any florescent properties of the bait would make the bait seem to constantly glow.
The bait could be regularly wetted or allowed to drip onto a porous surface so that the bait has enough pigment to keep fluorescing longer. The bait station could also include a container, perhaps holding liquid, beneath the bait to contain any flying insects that have died while feeding on the bait.
An embodiment of the present invention is an insect bait station including a light source, at least one glueboard, and bait. Existing light traps typically use an electric zapper or a mechanical glueboard to kill or trap flying insects. However, not all flying insects attracted to the light land and are killed by the electric zapper or become trapped on the glueboard. This embodiment utilizes bait with an attractant in combination with a glueboard light trap to increase the overall efficacy of the bait station via two modes. First, overall attraction to the device is increased with the addition of the bait attractant. It is believed that the attraction of the UV and the bait together in the same device is greater than the sum of the attraction to these separately, one using UV and the other using bait. Second, the overall efficacy of the device is increased because flying insects that do not land on the glueboard but consume the bait are killed by the bait. Furthermore, this embodiment provides efficacy after the glueboards are full or otherwise not operational due to moisture, dust, or other contaminants because of the bait.
Initial testing of a glueboard light trap with bait showed an average increase in the efficacy of approximately 80%. Furthermore, the testing showed continued efficacy of the trap when the glueboards were removed from the trap. This initial testing is described in Example 2.
An embodiment of the present invention could be used with the STEALTH™ MAXIMA flying insect trap manufactured by Ecolab Inc. Bait could be mounted in between the bulbs in a similar fashion as the glueboard bracket disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/928,623, which is incorporated by reference herein. Bait could also be mounted proximate the front, the back, and/or the bottom of the trap. In addition, bait could also be applied to the glueboards that are mounted proximate the front, the back, the bottom, and/or in between the bulbs. The bait could also be in a pouch/bait station that slides into and out of the brackets or connectors for easy installation and maintenance. The bait could also be a disposable type pouch that is used then discarded when the bait is gone or when the active ingredient(s) loses efficacy due to time, UV degradation, or other factors.
An example of a bait station that could be used with the present invention is shown in
The bait could be in granular, pellet, liquid, or solid block form. The bait could be a pouch of bait. The bait could also be incorporated into the glueboard (in the glue). The bait could also be painted, sprayed, or otherwise coated on the housing or impregnated into the housing.
An embodiment of the present invention is using a UV light with a bait station, and this embodiment is shown in
An embodiment of the present invention is using a UV light with a bait station and a glueboard, and this embodiment is shown in
Testing comparing the use of bait stations with and without UV lights was conducted. The protocol for the testing was as follows:
1. 6 standard 2 feet×2 feet×2 feet boxes with plastic wrap tops;
2. 3 bait stations without UV lights—containers including 50 grams of ELECTOR™ bait, each container included three holes ¼ inch in diameter to allow the flies to enter and exit the container;
3. 3 bait stations with UV lights—containers including 50 grams of ELECTOR™ bait and a bracket connecting UV LED lights (quantity of 20 Nichia NSSU100AT LEDs, with a peak wavelength of approximately 365 nm, mounted on a single board per bait station) above the bait and inside the container, each container included three holes ¼ inch in diameter to allow the flies to enter and exit the container;
4. house fly food;
5. small water bottles; and
6. house flies.
One bait station was placed in each box. Thirty (30) flies, 1 tablespoon house fly food sprinkled with 1 teaspoon sugar, and one bottle of water were placed in each box. The boxes were placed randomly around the room. A temperature of approximately 75° F. was maintained, and 12 hour day and 12 hour night cycles were provided. Data points of the number of dead flies in the box were taken at 1 hour, 2 hours, 4 hours, 24 hours, 48 hours, 72 hours, and 1 week. When taking data points, the number of flies in each box were counted to make sure any flies that have escaped are not included in the number of dead flies in the box.
The results after 1 week are shown in
Testing comparing the effect of adding bait to a standard flying insect trap was conducted. The goal was to evaluate the improvement in attraction of UV light and bait together in the same flying insect trap versus UV light and bait in separate conditions. The protocol for the testing was as follows:
A STEALTH™ DECORA flying insect trap was hung in a standard Ecolab Inc. flight room with bait, and a STEALTH™ DECORA flying insect trap was hung in a standard Ecolab Inc. flight room without bait as a control. 128 flies were released in each room. Flies caught on the glueboards and dead on the floor were counted each hour for a total of 4 hours. The glueboards were then removed and, at periods of 24 hours, 48 hours, and 72 hours, the flies dead on the floor were counted to determine if any flies were eating the bait and not landing on the glueboards.
The flying insect trap including the bait and the control (no bait) were run in two separate rooms over the same 72 hour period. The units were then switched between the rooms, and the test was repeated twice, for a total of three tests. The data is shown in
As shown in
Testing comparing the effect of adding bait to a standard flying insect trap was conducted. The goal was to evaluate the improvement in attraction of UV light and bait together in the same flying insect trap versus UV light and bait in separate conditions. The protocol for the testing was as follows:
Two identical standard Ecolab Inc. flight rooms were used at the same time, each with two standard STEALTH™ MAXIMA flying insect traps hung in equivalent locations in each room. Each trap contained a standard glueboard. Each of the four STEALTH™ MAXIMA flying insect traps was set up in one of the following configurations:
1. UV light and Bait: lights on, bait added to center bracket;
2. No UV light and No Bait: lights off, no bait added to center bracket;
3. UV light and No Bait: lights on, no bait added to center bracket; and
4. No UV light and Bait: lights off, bait added to center bracket.
The rooms and lights were then paired so as to test all combinations of configurations over four separate replications. For each replication, 500 flies were released in each flight room. The fly catch was recorded on the glueboard at 1 hour, 2 hours, 3 hours, and 4 hours. At each point the glueboard was replaced with a new glueboard. At 4 hours, all STEALTH™ MAXIMA flying insect traps (with glueboards and bait) were removed from both flight rooms. Fly death in each room was then monitored at the 4 hour point, 8 hour point, and 24 hour point. The test was repeated four times. The data is shown in
In this configuration, as shown in
The STEALTH™ MAXIMA flying insect trap used in this example has a relatively high amount of UV light and resulting attraction (2×25 W bulbs). Comparatively, the UV light and resulting attraction of the STEALTH™ DECORA flying insect trap used in Example 2 (1×9 W bulb) and the LED array used in Example 1 (20×0.1 W) were both much lower. This demonstrates that at the lower levels of UV light, there is a much more pronounced increase in attraction when adding bait to the UV light. However, as the UV light reaches a threshold in which the light attraction overpowers the attraction of the bait, there is no significant improvement in attraction when using UV light and bait. This implies the most relative benefit from combining UV light and bait to increase solely attraction may be reached with a bait station with a relatively small amount of UV light added. This design has the benefit of using small amounts of UV light that can be generated from small LEDs that could be battery powered.
This test configuration shows that regardless of increase (or no increase) in glueboard catch, the overall performance of killing flies, including those that are not caught on the glueboard, increases by adding the bait. In this example, even though there was no significant increase in glueboard catch, the number of flies dead in the room after 24 hours for the UV light and bait together in the same flying insect trap was approximately 74% higher than the total flies dead after 24 hours for bait without the UV light. This increase from 32 to 55 flies killed on average when putting the UV light and bait together versus separate is shown in
This finding indicates that even though the initial attraction of the UV light and bait versus UV light alone was not significantly different (based on the glueboard catch), many flies that were initially attracted to the UV light and bait consumed the bait but did not get caught on the glueboard. These flies then left the flying insect trap and died at a later time (between 4 and 24 hours) from the insecticide in the bait. This is consistent with the known kill time of the fly bait used in the study, which is shown in
An additional observation test was conducted to validate the theory that flies were attracted to the UV light and bait, ate the bait, and then exited the light without getting caught on the glueboard. A STEALTH™ MAXIMA flying insect trap configured with bait and a glueboard was placed in a standard Ecolab Inc. flight room. 128 flies were released in the room, and fly activity on the bait and glueboard was counted every minute over a 1 hour period. Results of this test are shown in
Summarizing this example, the findings indicate that adding bait to higher power UV lights does not appear to improve attraction or catch on the glueboard. However, it still increases performance by killing flies that do not ultimately land on the glueboard. In this case it was approximately a 74% increase in non-glueboard total fly death. This implies that great benefit can also be seen for instances when the glueboards are full and cannot hold more flies, or when the glueboards are not present or effective for other reasons (e.g., old, wet, covered in dust, etc.).
One challenge to adding UV light and bait together is that the UV light can degrade the bait attractant or efficacy properties. To demonstrate the feasibility of this invention, the bait used in this study was aged and tested under the following study.
Samples of ELECTOR™ bait manufactured by Elanco were placed in a Petri dish under direct UV light from the STEALTH™ MAXIMA flying insect trap (2 bulbs×25 W) to age for 30 days and 60 days. The bait was then removed and not disturbed, so that the outer layer of bait with the visual UV light degradation was the only bait surface that was exposed for subsequent testing. The aged bait was then tested using the same method as described in Example 1. Each bait sample was placed in a 2 feet by 2 feet by 2 feet box with alternative food (sugar) and water. Ten flies were released and monitored over 48 hours for mortality. Efficacy was recorded at intervals of 1 hour, 2 hours, 4 hours, 8 hours, 24 hours, and 48 hours. Three samples each of the 30 day aged, 60 day aged, and fresh bait were tested for a total of three replicated tests.
Death recorded of each sample with averages and 95% confidence intervals are shown in
The above specification, examples and data provide a complete description of the manufacture and use of the composition of the invention. Since many embodiments of the invention can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention, the invention resides in the claims hereinafter appended.
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/055,532, filed May 23, 2008.
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 61055532 | May 2008 | US |
