INTEGRATED TICK MANAGEMENT IN 2016 Kirby C. Stafford III, Ph.D. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Kirby C. Stafford III, Ph.D. Chief Scientist, State Entomologist CT Agricultural Experiment Station New Haven, CT Tick IPM Symposium Washington, D.C. May 16, 2016

INTEGRATED TICK MANAGEMENT IN 2016

Barnstable Co. Coop. Ext. Skip Weisenburger Kirby Stafford

• Personal protection measures
• Habitat Management
• Chemical control

Synthetic insecticides Botanicals, “natural” compounds

• Biopesticides
• Host reduction or exclusion
• Host-targeted acaricides
• Host-targeted vaccines
• Anti-tick vaccines

Integrated Tick Management

Integrated Pathogen Management

 Classic IPM involves the selection, integration, and implementation of several pest control actions based on predicted ecological, economic, and sociological consequences.  Difference between control and management, which implies an acceptable level of pest abundance and acceptable level of damage or loss (i.e., for ticks the risk of disease).  Objective of IPM is reduction pest level (or pathogen prevalence) below the economic injury level, the density at which the losses exceed cost of control (cost-benefit analysis).  Level tolerated likely different for recreational areas and residential areas. Acceptable level risk or cost considerations for some homeowners may be extremely low.  How much reduction in the risk of transmission or disease incidence is the goal?

WHAT IS INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT?

LYME DISEASE RISK

Away from home 21% Indoors at home 0%

Neighborhood 5%

Outdoors at home 74%

Camping 1%Outdoor job 5% Gardening 12% Hiking 7% Other 4% Outdoor Event 2% Play outdoors 47% Walking dog 4% Yard work 18%

Data: Stamford Health Department 1989-2000, n = 4551 records and 2001, n = 266 records

• K. Stafford

Pfizer ALDF

INTEGRATED TICK MANAGEMENT (ITM)

HOMEOWNER OR COMMUNITY INITIATIVE

 Scale of the management or control method Spraying more likely choice for some individual properties Vegetative approaches both home or community -based Deer management community or area wide-based  Acceptance and cost for tick control strategy, demonstrated efficacy Low acceptance chemical acaricides Must be affordable Increased interest in organic land care, how do standards fit in?

12 26 27 10 13 23 45 17 4 4 17 51 20 3 3 10 20 30 40 50 60 $0 $1-99 $100-299 $300-499 >$500 WWHD TAHD LLHD

48 42 47 51 37 42 10 20 30 40 50 60 WWHD TAHD LLHD 1999 2002 2004

KAB Survey (1999-2004) – cost tick control Willingness to use chemical pesticide future?

Town of Wilton, CT Resident KAB-style survey. 2002.

NOFA Standards for Organic Land Care

• This is the heart of the

Organic Land Care Program

• Provides a definition of

“organic” in land care

• National standards don’t

apply to land care (Organic Materials Review Institute, OMRI)

• Also specifies materials and

practices that professionals pledge to use in providing

• rganic land care to their

clients

• Preferred

Tick bite prevention (avoid tick areas, pants in socks, repellents?) Tick checks to detect and remove before pathogen transmission Environmental modifications (landscape practices) Host management (deer fencing & herbal, soap, human hair as repellents)

• Allowed

Biological agents (parasites & pathogens) Diatomaceous earth & insecticidal soaps Botanical insecticides such as pyrethrum, 24b insecticides. Plant extracts. Sprays of oils derived from plant or animal sources Horicultural oil sprays derived from petroleum distillates which do not contain aromatic compounds such as toluene, benzene, or xylene

• Prohibited

All synthetic insecticides and piperonyl butoxide as an insecticide synergist Any pesticide formulated with any inert ingredient on the EPA List 1: Inert Ingredients of Toxicological Concern.

TICK (PEST) MANAGEMENT

NOFA STANDARDS ORGANIC LAND CARE

 Assessed the prevention effectiveness of a number of single interventions against blacklegged ticks in a hypothetical community of 10,000 individuals in the northeastern United States using LYMESIM model.  Estimates made for baseline, worst-case, and best-case scenarios for each intervention to prevent Lyme disease under varying assumptions of engagement and efficacy.

• J. Public Health Mgt. Practice. 1999. 5:85-92
• No. Lyme

e dise iseas ase cases es prevent ented ed

Inte tervent ntion

• n

Worst scenario Baseline Best scenario Granular acaricide to habitat 36 156 (2) 278 (3) Acaricide to nesting mice 1 35 120 Acaricide to white-tailed deer 113 (1) 272 (1) 306 (2) Removal of white-tailed deer 97 (2) 121 158 Fencing deer out of properties 50 101 151 Reduction of habitat vegetation 15 94 179 Repellent and tick checks 44 252 (4) Lyme disease vaccine 74 (3) 148 (3) 361 (1)

STATE OF TICK IPM

 Management lone star ticks recreational area (Bloemer et al. 1990)  Combinations of acaricide applications + vegetative management, acaricide applications + host management, and acaricide applications + vegetative management + host management produced 94, 89, and 96% mean control of all life stages, respectively.  Economic threshold for lone star tick in recreational areas proposed of 0.65 ticks per 1-hour CO2 sample based on attack rate of less than 1 tick per human visitor per day.

Land Between the Lakes

Bloemer et al. 1990. J. Med. Entomol. 27(4):543-550.

 Conducted 2003-2005 in Millstone Township, Monmouth Co., NJ  One 4-poster per 20 ha Maxforce TMS fipronil bait boxes Barrier application granular deltamethrin  Reduced larval & nymphal tick burdens 92.7 & 95.4%, respectively  Control host-seeking nymphs, larvae, and adult I. scapularis by 94.3, 90.6, and 87.3%, respectively

INTEGRATED USE 4-POSTER, BAIT BOXES AND ACARICIDE APPLICATIONS

Schulze et al. 2007. J. Med. Entomol. 44(5):830-839 Aerial photograph area Millstone Township, NJ showing bait box deployment sites, locations 4-poster devices, and control areas.

(ITM) Project Application Met52 EC Biopesticide Select TCS Rodent Bait Boxes Deer Reduction Reservoir-Targeted Vaccine (RTV)(oral rodent Lyme vaccine bait from US Biologic, Inc.)

INTEGRATED TICK MANAGEMENT (ITM) CONNECTICUT

CDC COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT AND US BIOLOGIC, INC. PI’S KIRBY STAFFORD, SCOTT WILLIAMS, GOUDARZ MOLAEI

ITM Treat atment ment Neighb hborho hoods RTV Treat atment ment Neighb hborho hoods

RESERVOIR TARGETED VACCINE (RTV) IN CONNECTICUT

Danbury News Times, 4/4/2014

 Inactivated, recombinant OspA vaccine coated on small bait pellets.  Used Sidekick bait boxes  2014, bait consumption study

• ver summer at 22 residences

and bait was amended with the dye Rhodamine-B in late summer  91% of mice showed evidence of consuming the Rhodamine-B laced bait either through visual inspection or whisker analysis  2015, vaccine coated bait distributed 23 residential sites  Trials are being repeated in 2016

Danbury News Times 2014

TICK-BORNE DISEASE TOOLBOX

Personal nal pro rotection ction meas asures ures Treatm tment/ nt/ vaccinat nation

• n

in humans ans Lands dscape cape/ ve vegetation ation management nagement Killing ng host- seekin king g ticks ks Rodent nt - targe geted ed appro roac aches hes Deer-targe targeted ed appro roac aches hes

Avoid tick habitat Antibiotic prophylaxis after tick bite Xeroscaping/ hardscaping Synthetic chemical acaricide Topical acaricide bait box Topical acaricide feeding station Protective clothing Human vaccine Short grass, remove weeds Natural product- based acaricide Oral vaccine Deer reduction Tick checks & prompt removal ticks Remove leaf litter and brush Fungal acaricide Oral antibiotic bait Deer fencing Synthetic chemical repellent Remove rodent harborage Acaricide with semiochemicals Oral tick growth regulator Oral tick growth regulator Natural product- based repellent Anti-tick vaccine for deer Permethrin-treated clothing Natural product- based soap/lotion Adapted from slide by Ben Beard, CDC-Division Vector-Borne Diseases denotes intervention with some supporting data on reduction Lyme disease denotes intervention used in combination with another tick control method

 There are many tools available for killing ticks  Killing ticks in your own yard doesn’t necessarily equate to reducing risk of illness  Tick control responsibility should be shared between homeowners and local communities  Safe and effective (and affordable) prevention tools & ITM data badly needed  In the absence of a human vaccine, the best solutions will probably be IPM methods evaluated across a variety of local settings

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

Adapted from slide by Ben Beard, CDC-Division Vector-Borne Diseases

ALDF

• K. Stafford
• K. Stafford

Pfizer

CAES TICK TEAM

• Dr. Laura Hayes

(now at CT DPH)

• Dr. Goudarz Molaei

Saryn Kunajukar Heidi Stuber Michael Short

• Dr. Scott Williams

Megan Linske Numerous seasonal assistants

• Dr. Kirby Stafford

The foulest and nastiest creatures that be.

Pliny the Elder, Roman Writer, Historia Naturalis

This small vile creature [the tick] may, in the future, cause the inhabitants of this land [U.S.] great damage unless a method is discovered which will prevent it from increasing at such a shocking rate.

Pehr Kalm, 1754

Almost everyone would agree that humans would be better off without ticks.

Jesse L. Goodman, et.al. [ed.] 2005 Tick-Borne Diseases of Humans

Few agricultural or health problems confronting human societies have proved as intractable as control of ticks and the many diseases they transmit.

Dan Sonenshine Biology of Ticks, Vol. 2, 1993

TICKS!

Kirby by C. Stafford

• rd III,

, Ph.D. CT Agricultural Experiment Station 123 Huntington Street-Box 1106, New Haven, CT 06504 Ph: (203) 974-8485; Email: Kirby.Stafford@ct.gov