Patent Application
20120151821
This invention relates to a novel design of a trap for flying insects. In particular, the invention relates to a hangable or self-supporting and re-usable trap for wasps, yellowjackets and flies.
Wasps are classified in the group Vespoidea. The wasps most frequently encountered by humans belong to the genera Vespula, Dolichovespula, and Vespa (yellowjackets and hornets). These pests are of medium size (10-25 mm), and are readily distinguished by the bands of black and yellow or white on their abdomens. The most aggressive species encountered is the German yellowjacket, Vespula germanica. These wasps have a habit of scavenging in city garbage cans. Wasps are capable of repeatedly stinging their victim as well as inflicting painful bites. Yellowjackets are a common sight in urban and rural areas throughout North America and are the most common stinging menace in many North American cities. In some cases, severe allergic reactions to the wasp venom have resulted in death.
Flies in many families, e.g. Muscidae, Calliphoridae, Anthomyiidae, constitute a nuisance whenever they are encountered by humans. They are also capable of transmitting a variety of diseases, and are recognized as a threat to public health. While the presence of flies in a person's dwelling is unwelcome, they are even less welcome in restaurants. The presence of flies is potentially dangerous in hospitals. Many chemical insecticides are used to control flies, and numerous traps of various designs are used to remove flies from man-made structures, and their environs.
A number of devices have been disclosed for trapping wasps and flies. One such device is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,551,941 by Schneidmiller. This device relies on a volatile olfactory attractant. Another device is exemplified in U.S. Pat. No. 6,637,149 by Bauer. This device appears to comprise a number of discrete parts and as a consequence would be expensive to manufacture and therefore costly to ordinary consumers.
US Patent Application 2005/0005503, Bragg, discloses a hanging fly trap in the form of an artificial plant basket. This device must be hung out of sight and so some effort is required to monitor the number of flies caught by the trap and then retrieve the trap for cleaning and replacement of adhesive surfaces.
There is a growing need for effective, safe and inexpensive traps for wasps and flies around human habitation.
The invention is directed to a trap for insects comprising: a bag having a first generally flat collapsed configuration for storage and a second expanded configuration for operation thereby forming an internal chamber for trapping insects, said bag comprising a first side wall and a second opposite side wall; an entry portal for insects, said entry portal penetrating said first side wall and communicating with said internal chamber; and a suitable attractant in the bag for attracting insects to the entry portal.
The trap can include a second opposite entry portal for insects, the second circular entry portal penetrating the second side wall and communicating with the internal chamber.
The bag can be formed of a resilient plastic. The plastic can include a bonded barrier material. The one or more side walls can be transparent. The interior of the chamber can contain a fluid.
The bag can have a sealable top end. The bag can have a bottom surface comprising an oval-shaped bottom member having a longitudinal axis.
The longitudinal axis can comprise a fold line so that when the bag is in a generally flat configuration the oval-shaped bottom member folds symmetrically along the fold line and when the bag is in the expanded operating configuration the oval-shaped bottom member unfolds to form a self-supporting base.
The first and second transparent side walls can include a translucent, low reflective, rectangular or variously shaped appropriate portion having a colour suitable for attracting insects. The first portal and the second portal can be offset laterally from each other.
The fluid can be a predetermined volume of water for drowning insects, the predetermined volume of water stabilizing the trap when placed on a level surface. The water can contain an attractive chemical lure. An insect attractant can be located within the interior of the trap above the two portals.
The top region of the trap can include a releasable pressure sealing strip. The top region of the trap can include an eyelet which enables the trap to be suspended from an object.
Exemplary embodiments are illustrated in referenced figures of the drawings. It is intended that the embodiments and figures disclosed herein are to be considered illustrative rather than restrictive.
Throughout the following description specific details are set forth in order to provide a more thorough understanding to persons skilled in the art. However, well known elements may not have been shown or described in detail to avoid unnecessarily obscuring the disclosure. Accordingly, the description and drawings are to be regarded in an illustrative, rather than a restrictive, sense.
Referring to
As seen in
As seen in
The bag 12, as seen in
The trap 10 can have a first generally flat configuration for storage as shown in
Referring specifically to
Referring specifically to
Continuing to refer to
Prototype bag traps were manufactured from commercially-available plastic bags (19×30 cm). The bags tapered to a zip-lock top and the bottom expanded when liquid was added (approximately 425 mL per bag.
The bags were fitted with small or large entry ports made from funnels used to deliver food pastes (e.g. mustard) from squeezed plastic containers. The inward-directed funnels were on opposite sides of the bags, and were offset laterally, so that the bags laid quite flat when not in use. They were placed vertically at mid-level of 10×16 cm bogus labels on each side of the bags made by painting the area with yellow paint (Painter's Touch Sun Yellow gloss latex, RUST-OLEUM Corp, Toronto, Ontario). The bogus labels were located 7 cm from the bottom of the traps. It is known that yellowjackets are attracted to “buttercup yellow”, which Sun Yellow paint mimics.
Experiments were set up as randomized, complete blocks, with 12 replicates. Between trap distance was ≧5 m. Experiments were run in commercial orchards east of Kelowna, BC, Canada. All traps were baited with one heptyl butyrate flexlure (Contech Enterprises Inc., Delta, BC, Canada) taped to the inside of the trap. The fluid in the bottom of the trap was 50% apple juice with a dash of laundry detergent added to ensure capture of wasps. Captured yellowjackets were identified to species in the field using a pictorial key (Akre, R. D. et al. 1980, Yellowjackets of America north of Mexico, USDA Agriculture Handbook No. 552, p. 23). Means were analyzed by ANOVA followed by the Tukey-Kramer LSD test. In all cases, α=0.05.
Experiment 1 was run at the Brar Orchard from 8-10 Jul. Sufficient numbers of yellowjackets were captured (1-2 per trap) to conduct a statistical analysis, but only for all species combined and not to compare means. To test the new disposable traps against larger populations, two additional experiments were run, both with treatments identical to those in Experiment 1. Experiment 2 was run at the Runzer Orchard from 7-13 Aug., and Experiment 3 was run at the Brar Orchard from 13-15 Aug.
There was no significant difference in Experiment 1 between large standard control traps (Contech Inc.) baited with heptyl butyrate and 50% apple juice, and any disposable bag trap (2 or 4 small entry ports or two large entry ports) baited with the same lures (Table 1). Numerically, traps with two small entry ports were superior at a mean of two wasps per trap.
The inventors considered the lack of difference to be significant because it appeared that the bag trap was competitive with the standard large control trap. Also significant is that about two hours after experimental set up, many of the disposable traps had already caught yellowjackets, while very few of the large control traps had done so. However, the inventors judged that further experimentation would be needed with larger populations.
Vespula pennsylvanica 36.0%, V. atropilosa 36.0%,
V. vulgaris 22.7% and V. consobrina 5.3%.
1ANOVA statistics: F = 0.44, df = 3.44, P = 0.7230.
The results in Experiments 2 and 3 generally upheld those in Experiment 1 (Table 2). In Experiment 2, there were significant differences among treatments for V. pennsylvanica and all yellowjackets combined, but only for V. pennsylvanica were the differences great enough for a comparison between means. This comparison showed that traps with two large entry ports, or two small ones caught statistically similar numbers of yellowjackets as the standard large (control) traps, while those with four small entry ports caught significantly fewer yellowjackets than the controls. In Experiment 3, there was no significant difference among treatments, either for V. pennsylvanica or for all yellowjackets combined.
On balance, the results of Experiments 2 and 3 showed that bag traps with two large entry ports performed more consistently than traps with two small entry ports (Table 2). Therefore, traps with two large entry ports were chosen for further commercial development.
Vespula pennsylvanica 68.7%, V. atropilosa 25.8%, and V. vulgaris 7.4%.
Vespula pennsylvanica 90.67%, V. atropilosa 4.7%, and V. vulgaris 5.1%.
V. pennsylvanica
V. pennsylvanica
aANOVA statistics Exp. 2: V. pennsylvanica: F = 3.86, df = 3.44, P = 0.016; all yellowjackets combined: F = 3.26, df = 3.44, P = 0.030. Means for V. pennsylvanica followed by the same letter are not significantly different, Tukey's HSD test, P ≦ 0.05.
bANOVA statistics Exp. 3: V. pennsylvanica: F = 2.05, df = 3.44, P = 0.120; all yellowjackets combined: F = 1.82, df = 3.44, P = 0.157.
Bag traps manufactured with two large entry ports were tested in comparison with a commercial plastic jar trap fitted with a cylindrical cross bridge open at each end for flies to enter, and with a cut out portion allowing flies to pass from the cylinder into the interior chamber of the trap. Both types of traps were baited with a protein-based lure (Contech Enterprises Inc., Delta, BC, Canada) in water with a dash of detergent added to ensure that captured flies sank below the surface and drowned.
The experiment was run on a dairy farm in Delta, BC from 4-8 Sep. 2009. Eight randomized pairs of traps were suspended from fencing wire, with the between-traps distance ≧5 m. Captured flies in the suborder Brachycera (short-horned flies) were counted, but not sorted further by taxa. The mean catches were compared by a t-test.
The results unexpectedly showed that the bag trap captured twice as many flies (mean±SE=86.5±14.0) as the commercial trap (mean±SE=42.0±7.6). This difference was significant (t=2.84, df=10, P=0.018) This result indicates that the bag trap as designed for yellowjacket wasps is also suitable for other insects.
While a number of exemplary aspects and embodiments have been discussed above, those of skill in the art will recognize certain modifications, permutations, additions and sub-combinations thereof. It is therefore intended that the following appended claims and claims hereafter introduced are interpreted to include all such modifications, permutations, additions and sub-combinations as are within their true spirit and scope.
| Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCT/CA2009/001273 | 9/10/2009 | WO | 00 | 7/5/2011 |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 61096737 | Sep 2008 | US |
