Search

Numerous tick species are undergoing significant range expansion in Canada, including several Dermacentor spp Koch (Acari: Ixodidae). With the recent description of Dermacentor similis Lado in the western United States, additional research is required to determine the current range of this species. Five hundred ninety-eight Dermacentor spp. were collected from companion animals in the western Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, and Saskatchewan. Ticks were morphologically identified to species, followed by PCR and gel electrophoresis of the ITS-2 partial gene target (n = 595). Ninety-seven percent (n = 579/595) generated valid banding patterns. The banding pattern for the majority (74%, n = 206/278) of Dermacentor spp. from southern British Columbia was consistent with D. variabilis (Say), while 26% (n = 72/278) was consistent with D. andersoni Stiles. For samples from Alberta, 38% (n = 3/8) had banding patterns consistent with D. variabilis and 63% (n = 5/8) with D. andersoni. All (n = 293) ticks from Saskatchewan had banding patterns consistent with D. variabilis. After the description of D. similis was published, DNA sequencing of mitochondrial (16S rDNA gene, COI gene) and nuclear (ITS-2) markers was used to confirm the identity of 40 samples. Twenty-seven samples that had banding patterns consistent with D. variabilis from British Columbia were confirmed to be D. similis. One sample from Alberta and five from Saskatchewan were confirmed to be D. variabilis and seven samples from British Columbia were D. andersoni. The ITS-2 amplicons were not useful for differentiating between D. variabilis and D. similis. These results provide evidence of D. similis in western Canada and highlight that sequences of the mitochondrial genes are effective for distinguishing D. andersoni, D. variabilis, and D. similis., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America.© His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2024.)

The use of insects as animal feed has the potential to be a green revolution for animal agriculture as insects are a rich source of high-quality protein. Insect farming must overcome challenges such as product affordability and scalability before it can be widely incorporated as animal feed. An alternative is to harvest insect pests from the environment using mass trapping devices and use them as animal feed. For example, intensive agricultural environments generate large quantities of pestiferous insects and with the right harvest technologies, these insects can be used as a protein supplement in traditional animal daily rations. Most insect trapping devices are limited by the biomass they can collect. In that context, and with the goal of using wild collected insects as animal feed, the United States Department of Agriculture-Biomass Harvest Trap (USDA-BHT) was designed and built. The USDA-BHT is a valuable mass trapping device developed to efficiently attract, harvest, and store flying insects from naturally abundant agricultural settings. The trap offers a modular design with adjustable capabilities, and it is an inexpensive device that can easily be built with commonly available parts and tools. The USDA-BHT is also user-friendly and has customizable attractants to target various pest species., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America 2024.)

The demand for animal protein grows as the human population increases. Technological and genetic advances in traditional animal agriculture will not produce enough protein to meet future needs without significant innovations such as the use of insects as protein sources. Insect farming is growing insects, whereas insect harvesting is collecting insects from their natural habitats to produce high-quality protein for animal feed or human food. Intensive agricultural environments produce tremendous quantities of pestiferous insects and with the right harvest technologies these insects can be used as a protein supplement in traditional animal daily rations. An avenue to exploit these insects is to use traps such as the United States Department of Agriculture-Biomass Harvest Trap (USDA-BHT) to efficiently attract, harvest, and store insects from naturally abundant agricultural settings. The modular design allows for a low cost, easy to build and fix device that is user friendly and has customizable attractants to target various pest species. Although insect harvesting faces substantial challenges, including insect biomass quantity, seasonal abundance and preservation, food safety, and economic and nutritional evaluation, the potential for utilizing these pests for protein shows tremendous promise. In this forum, insect harvesting is discussed, including its potential, limitations, challenges, and research needs. In addition, the use of a mass trapping device is discussed as a tool to increase the biomass of insects collected from the environment., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America 2024.)

Insects are a promising source of high-quality protein, and the insect farming industry will lead to higher sustainability when it overcomes scaling up, cost effectiveness, and automation. In contrast to insect farming (raising and breeding insects as livestock), wild insect harvesting (collecting agricultural insect pests), may constitute a simple sustainable animal protein supplementation strategy. For wild harvest to be successful sufficient insect biomass needs to be collected while simultaneously avoiding the collection of nontarget insects. We assessed the performance of the USDA Biomass Harvest Trap (USDA-BHT) device to collect flying insect biomass and as a mosquito surveillance tool. The USDA-BHT device was compared to other suction traps commonly used for mosquito surveillance (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) light traps, Encephalitis virus surveillance traps, and Biogents Sentinel traps). The insect biomass harvested in the USDA-BHT was statistically higher than the one harvested in the other traps, however the mosquito collections between traps were not statistically significantly different. The USDA-BHT collected some beneficial insects, although it was observed that their collection was minimized at night. These findings coupled with the fact that sorting time to separate the mosquitoes from the other collected insects was significantly longer for the USDA-BHT, indicate that the use of this device for insect biomass collection conflicts with its use as an efficient mosquito surveillance tool. Nevertheless, the device efficiently collected insect biomass, and thus can be used to generate an alternative protein source for animal feed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America 2024.)

Dermacentor variabilis is the most widely distributed three-host tick in North America, and transmits a variety of pathogens. Within the United States, this species has a discontinuous distribution, widespread east of the Rocky Mountains and with a few populations west of the Rockies. Phylogenetic evidence based on individual markers or relatively small data sets has suggested that populations at both sides of this geographic barrier may correspond to two different species. In this study, we further explore this hypothesis using an integrative taxonomy framework. Both molecular (mitochondrial and nuclear markers) and morphological analyses of specimens collected from central-eastern and western states were performed to explore species delimitation in this taxon. Results from these analyses were consistent, and provide strong evidence that D. variabilis actually corresponds to two species. Herein, the western populations are described as a new species, Dermacentor similis n. sp. The usefulness of integrative taxonomy in the context of species delimitation is also discussed., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)