Next Article in Journal
Burnout Syndrome and Work-Related Stress in Physical and Occupational Therapists Working in Different Types of Hospitals: Which Group Is the Most Vulnerable?
Next Article in Special Issue
Mapping the Potential Distribution of Major Tick Species in China
Previous Article in Journal
Inhalation Exposure to Gaseous and Particulate Bound Mercury Present in the Ambient Air over the Polluted Area of Southern Poland
Previous Article in Special Issue
Consolidation of Aedes albopictus Surveillance Program in the Autonomous Community of the Region of Murcia, Spain
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 17
Issue 14
10.3390/ijerph17145000
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Breeding Habitat Preferences of Major Culicoides Species (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) in Germany

by
Doreen Werner
1,*,
Sarah Groschupp
1,
Christian Bauer
2 and
Helge Kampen
3
1
Research Area 2 “Land Use and Governance”, Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), 15374 Müncheberg, Germany
2
Working Group “Epidemiology”, Institute of Parasitology, Justus Liebig University, 35392 Giessen, Germany
3
Institute of Infectology, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, 17493 Greifswald, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(14), 5000; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17145000
Submission received: 4 May 2020 / Revised: 1 July 2020 / Accepted: 6 July 2020 / Published: 11 July 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ecology, Epidemiology, Surveillance, and Control of Vectors and Vector-Borne Pathogens in Temperate Regions)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Biting midges of the genus Culicoides (Diptera, Ceratopognidae) are demonstrably or putatively involved in the transmission of both bluetongue (BTV) and Schmallenberg viruses (SBV) in Central Europe. Although these insects are ubiquitous in Europe, relatively little is known about their requirements in terms of breeding habitats and substrates. Culicoides species composition and relative abundance in potential breeding habitats were therefore studied at various locations in Northeastern Germany and one location in Western Germany by emergence trap collections. Forty-three potential breeding sites were analyzed in ten landscape structures, with 28,091 adult biting midges emerging from them. Among these, 2116 specimens belonged to the genus Culicoides. Species of the culicoid subgenus Avaritia were most abundant (70.6% of all specimens) and widespread (91.6% of all sites), while the subgenus Culicoides accounted for 15.6% of the specimens registered but emerged from 70.8% of all sites sampled. Culicoides species of other subgenera were collected in 75.0% of all studied sites, with a relative abundance of 8.7%. The results indicate that various types of dung, but probably also some landscape habitats, offer suitable substrates for the development of potential Culicoides vector species. Adaptations in dung management on farms and landscape design and use might therefore be appropriate approaches to reduce the risk of BTV or SBV transmission.

1. Introduction

Due to their painful bites and often high abundances, female biting midges of numerous species of the genus Culicoides are well-known pests affecting humans and livestock [1]. In addition, some species are vectors of disease agents [2]. In Central and Northern Europe, the transmission of pathogens by biting midges was regarded as exotic until the advent of bluetongue disease (BT) in 2006 [3]. Globalization and modern transportation technologies involving long-distance animal movement facilitate the travel of both infected vertebrates and vectors to reach almost any place in the world within a short time [4]. Thus, when animals infected with a vector-borne disease agent are imported, indigenous competent vectors, which may ingest and replicate the pathogen, pose a significant risk of local transmission. In the case of small insects like biting midges, passive drift by wind over hundreds of kilometres is discussed, too, allowing for biting midge-borne pathogens to be introduced via their vectors [5].
Soon after the onset of the BT epidemic in Central Europe, it became clear that the Old World’s major vector of BT virus (BTV), Culicoides imicola Kieffer, 1913 had not spread from its Mediterranean distribution areas to the affected regions. Instead, European Culicoides species belonging to the Obsoletus Complex (subgenus Avaritia) and the Pulicaris Complex (subgenus Culicoides) were strongly suspected as candidates for virus transmission and have been incriminated as potential BTV vectors in Europe [3,6,7]. BTV has now repeatedly been demonstrated in field collections of these species [8], but evidence from experimental transmission is still lacking, not the least because these species cannot be reared in the laboratory. The large geographic distribution over much of Europe of most of the species, which tested virus-positive, could explain the rapid spread of BT between 2006 and 2009 as well as that of the subsequent Schmallenberg disease from 2011 to 2013 [9], and it may support future outbreaks of culicoid-borne diseases in this region [10].
In contrast to the adults of many Culicoides species, the females of which are traditionally collected by UV-light traps, scarce knowledge exists on the preimaginal developmental stages. Little is known, for example, about the breeding habitat selection and adaptation of the various species, and, in many cases, their preimaginal stages and their breeding sites are completely unknown [11].
Generally, culicoid larvae and pupae are supposed to develop in wet and humid habitats of all types, where they can be found in the top layer of the ground [12,13]. These habitats range from bogs over wetlands to saltwater marshes [14]. Additionally, numerous species have been demonstrated in aquatic zones of flowing and stagnant waters [15,16,17]. Some species, however, seem to avoid flooded areas [18] and prefer dung habitats [19,20,21,22], while still others use compost for immature development [23,24]. The further characterization of these habitats may provide important clues about the species composition of the respective biotopes.
Adults are usually found close to the larval habitats. In contrast to many other nematocerans, biting midges are considered poor flyers and have limited activity ranges. Actively, they rarely cover distances of more than 3 km [25].
All stages of biting midges are sensitive to environmental changes. Thus, they are strongly temperature-sensitive, and, depending on the ambient temperature, the completion of their development takes between a few days and several weeks or even months in winter [26,27].
The BT epidemic in 2006–2009 caused by BTV serotype 8 (BTV-8) was finally controlled by vaccination [28], whereas the Schmallenberg disease outbreak in 2011–2012 probably subsided due to herd immunity [29]. While Schmallenberg virus (SBV) never completely disappeared from Central Europe [30,31], BTV-8 re-emerged in France in 2015 and has since kept circulating [32], with new cases in Germany in 2018 [33].
Since diseases, including vector-borne ones, may nowadays emerge and resurge at any time and in any place in the world thanks to globalization, targeted disease control, e.g., by vaccination, can only be accomplished with delay. Vector control, however, is independent of the specific disease as long as the vector species are known. Therefore, vector populations should be managed where, when and if possible, be it proactively to prevent outbreaks or reactively during an outbreak, as a supplementary measure. This strategy is generally pursued with mosquitoes and mosquito-borne diseases, where mosquito larval stages and habitats are the first targets of intervention [34,35]. A prerequisite for this approach, however, is a fundamental knowledge of the biology and breeding characteristics of the vector species, which is scarce regarding Culicoides biting midges.
To contribute to unveiling the breeding habitat and substrate specialization of culicoids, data from various emergence trap collection studies targeting biting midges were analyzed. The results were expected to provide a better understanding of the ecological requirements of the immature developmental stages of potential Culicoides vectors and, consequently, of distribution areas and barriers which are caused by the presence or absence of breeding habitats. Such information could help predict the occurrence of biting midges in selected biotopes and improve risk assessments of culicoid-borne diseases.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Sites and Trapping Procedure

Freshly emerged adult biting midges were collected in Western and Northeastern Germany by emergence traps, from May to December 1994, 2005 and 2007–2012 (Table S1). The traps were located in ten wet or humid landscape structures, such as river banks and floodplains, along the rivers Oder, Spree and Rhin, in the reed belts of lakes, wetlands and grasslands (both with and without bushes and trees), swampy forests and renaturation areas. The latter were only represented by floodplains along small streams. These areas had once been converted to forests for wood production and to greenlands for silage production and have only recently been restored to their natural status as floodplains. Further traps were positioned in specific “habitats”: on liquid manure, compost and different types of dung (two to three days old), on animal holdings and on meadows and pastures with animal husbandry in Oderbruch floodplain areas in the German federal states of Brandenburg and Saxony-Anhalt (Figure 1). All collection sites had a damp underground.
In addition to “landscape structure” and “habitat”, the terms “(study) region”, “location” and “(study) site” are used in this contribution. The “study region” refers to the greater geographical region where the study was performed, as depicted in Figure 1. A “study region” can include several “locations”, which are smaller administrative units specified by the local name. Finally, a “study site” defines the exact place where an emergence trap was operated.
A detailed compilation of the geographic regions, locations, study sites, numbers of used traps and landscape structures, as based on the CORINE (Coordination of Information on the Environment) land cover index but modified for small-scale assessments, is provided in Table S1. CORINE land cover indices were used to relate land cover and use to Culicoides occurrence.
Traps of 1 × 1 m2 ground area were mostly used, except for some dung and liquid manure substrates, where traps of 0.5 × 0.5 m2 were used, based on the habitat dimensions. All data collected were converted to the 0.5 × 0.5 m2 scale to facilitate comparison between collection sites.
Insects emerging from the soil covered by the traps were collected in plastic containers mounted on top of the traps and filled with 70% ethanol to kill and preserve the material. All traps were run once per month for 48 h.
At site 29 (River Oder, Güstebieser Loose), in the floodplains of the river Oder, site 31 (River Spree, Mönchwinkel), in the floodplains of the river Spree, and site 34 (Backwater River Oder, Platkow), on the banks of a backwater of the river Oder, emergence traps were set up on meadows where cattle, sheep or domestic ducks were maintained. For comparison, emergence traps were placed at three sites (sites 1, 2, 3) in the same region on floodplains without livestock and contamination by excreta. Like other floodplains of lowland rivers sampled in the study (sites 5, 7), these regions are characterized by open grasslands and dominated by abandoned agricultural meadows.
In addition to these field areas, eleven farms in the same region were included, according to the keeping of livestock producing various types of dung (Table S1). For setting the traps, both homogeneous and mixed types of dung were selected. As for the latter, mixed sheep/horse and goat/horse dung could be studied in Kiehnwerder (site 32) and mixed cattle/horse dung in Rosenthal (site 33).
Soil pH values were measured under each emergence trap using a Multi 3410 measuring device (WTW, Germany), and they were analyzed using SPSS 24.0 statistical software (IBM, Amonk, NY, USA).

2.2. Biting Midge Identification

Culicoides biting midges were sorted from the catches and morphologically identified mostly to species level or to a lower taxonomic resolution when this was not possible, using various Diptera-specific identification keys [36,37,38,39,40].
Within the subgenus Avaritia, the females of the Obsoletus Complex (C. obsoletus (Meigen, 1818), C. scoticus (Downes and Kettle, 1952)) cannot be morphologically distinguished. Additionally, the identification of C. chiopterus (Meigen, 1830) and C. dewulfi (Goetghebuer, 1935) is challenging, particularly so when caught by emergence traps. Firstly, specimens often become conserved in the fixative before hardening of the chitinous parts and acquiring their final coloration. Secondly, samples exposed to the sunlight, as was the case in the present study due to the transparent construction material of the collection boxes of the emergence traps used, tend to bleach. Therefore, only a fraction of the Avaritia females could be identified to species level. Thus, the focus was on males, as these can be reliably identified to species by their genitalia. If males were not available, randomly selected females were processed by species-specific diagnostic PCR assays [41,42]. Some culicoids were subjected to COI barcoding using primers LCO1490 and HCO2198 (Eurofins Genomics, Ebersberg, Germany) [43] or primers PanCuli-COX1-211F and PanCuli-COX1-727R (Eurofins) [42] for reliable species identification.

2.3. Data Analysis

Data were analyzed in R version 3.5.2 (R Foundation, Vienna, Austria) [44] using the vegan package [45]. Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) was used to plot the relative habitat preferences of the subgenera Avaritia and Culicoides and of the group of species belonging to other subgenera, as well as of species of subgenera other than Avaritia. The subgenus Avaritia was not considered in the second analysis, since only a fraction of the females was identified to species level and unidentified females could have a major impact on the data analysis should they not display the same species ratio as that of the identified specimens. To harmonize the collection data, the analysis was based on the average number of emergent culicoid specimens per trap and year. The suitability of the data was demonstrated by a stress test before applying the NMDS, using the Bray–Curtis similarity index with 100 iterations for reaching a stable solution.

3. Results

In 2160 48-h collections, more than one million insects were caught by emergence trap sampling, the majority (79.4%) of which belonged to dipteran species. In addition to Sphaeroceridae (43%), Psychodidae (14%), Sciaridae (7.0%), Sepsidae (4.3%), Chironomidae (3.1), Stratiomyiidae (1.8%) and Ceratopogonidae (0.5%), other families such as Drosophilidae, Muscidae, Cecidomyiidae and Calliphoridae were registered with low specimen numbers. Family and species diversity varied depending on landscape and breeding habitat, although 91.8% of all insects were collected from dung.
In single 48-h catches, the percentage of Ceratopogonidae varied from 0.1% to 32%. Many ceratopogonid specimens belonged to the genus Forcipomyia and to further genera other than Culicoides (Table 1 and Table 2). Culicoids were found in 817 collections (37.8%).
Considering individual landscapes and habitats, the total number of emerged culicoids varied between very few or even single specimens per 48 h in swampy forest areas (sites 16, 17) or liquid manure habitats (sites 42, 43) to more than 50 in renaturation areas (site 6) and dung sites on farms (sites 32, 33).
Twenty-one species of the genus Culicoides were identified. In total, the proportion of biting midges of this genus accounted for 0.2% (2116 specimens) of the total insect catches. These included all four species of the subgenus Avaritia occurring in Germany (C. obsoletus, C. scoticus, C. chiopterus, C. dewulfi). Furthermore, four members of the subgenus Culicoides were found: C. delta (Edwards, 1939), C. pulicaris (Linnaeus, 1758), C. punctatus (Meigen, 1804) and C. newsteadi (Austen, 1921), with the latter three grouped into the Pulicaris Complex. The remaining Culicoides species belonged to subgenera other than Avaritia or Culicoides (Table 1).
Based on the male Avaritia and Culicoides specimens (female specimens were not included due to the Avaritia females not being reliably identified to species level), 92.6% of Culicoides specimens belonged to the Avaritia subgenus and 6.7% to the Culicoides subgenus. Culicoides obsoletus and C. scoticus as members of the Obsoletus Complex were particularly abundant (83.3% and 10.4% of all Avaritia males, respectively), while C. chiopterus (5.2%) and C. dewulfi (1.1%) males were found in low numbers. In the subgenus Culicoides, C. delta accounted for most of the collected specimens (37.1% including females).
Subgenera were differently represented with respect to landscapes and habitats (Table 1). Species of the subgenus Avaritia were predominant in most landscape structures, such as floodplains (67.3% of all culicoids), meadows (80.0%), reed belts (65.7%) and boglands (78.2%). In “compost” and “dung” habitats, they reached a particularly high share of 96.3% and 88.7%, respectively, while no Avaritia specimens were found in renaturation areas or liquid manure. Species of the subgenus Culicoides were common in the “renaturation area/floodplain” landscape (93.9% of all culicoids) but emerged in small numbers only from almost all other studied types of landscapes and habitats, i.e., floodplains (22.7%), meadows (19.4%), grassland/wetlands (32.4%), banks of rivers and lakes (10.5%), swampy forests (1.4%), reed belts (32.5%), boglands (13.9%), compost (3.6%) and dung (2.5%) (Table 1).
In “mixed grassland/wetland with bushes and trees”, subgenus Culicoides specimens accounted for 33.4%, while the species of the subgenus Avaritia, which was represented by the Obsoletus Complex only, accounted for 41.9%, and species of other subgenera (C. achrayi, C. fagineus, C. minutissimus, C. nubeculosus) for 24.5% of the culicoid biting midges. Banks of rivers and lakes seemed to be attractive for members of the subgenus Avaritia (C. obsoletus, C. scoticus, C. chiopterus), which made up 47.6%, while individuals of other subgenera (C. achrayi, C. circumscriptus, C. fagineus, C. kibunensis) reached 41.8% and those of the subgenus Culicoides (C. pulicaris, C. punctatus) reached 10.4% of all culicoid biting midges collected. Single individuals of three species of other subgenera, C. nubeculosus, C. riethi and C. festivipennis, were found in liquid manure.
According to the NMDS analysis, which calculates a relative habitat preference (i.e., the result for one subgenus/species depends on the consideration of all other subgenera/species), the subgenus Avaritia was strongly associated with compost and dung habitats and the subgenus Culicoides with wetland, grassland, floodplain, meadows, mixed grassland/wetland with and without bushes and trees and reed belt landscapes, and the group of species belonging to other subgenera was associated with swampy forests and the banks of rivers and lakes (Figure 2A). In this analysis, it should be taken into account that the grouping eliminates ecological differences between species, which is particularly relevant with regard to the species belonging to the subgenera Avaritia and Culicoides as these are systematically more mixed and might be only distantly related.
When individual sites are considered, the highest numbers of Culicoides species and specimens emerged from dung sites (sites 24, 29, 33, 36) and a renaturation area/floodplain (site 6) and the lowest number from meadows (site 5). In the subgenus Avaritia, high numbers of specimens were obtained from dung habitats (sites 32, 33, 36), floodplains (site 1) and compost (sites 24, 26), and low numbers were obtained from swampy forests (sites 16, 17) and boglands (site 23). The highest numbers of subgenus Culicoides specimens were collected in renaturation areas (site 6), mixed grassland/wetland with bushes and trees (sites 9, 11) and reed belts (site 21), and low numbers were collected from swampy forests (site 16) and meadows (site 4).
The highest number of a species of the subgenus Avaritia, C. obsoletus, was collected from cowpats and llama/alpaca dung (sites 29, 36), while in the subgenus Culicoides, C. delta reached the highest collection numbers in a renaturation area (site 6). Among the species belonging to other subgenera, C. achrayi was the most abundant, namely in mixed grassland/wetland with and without bushes and trees (sites 12, 14, 15) and on the banks of rivers (site 21).
The NMDS analysis for landscape/habitat preferences of species (except for Avaritia species) shows C. sphagnumensis to be most closely associated with reed belts; C. manchuriensis and C. circumscriptus with floodplains; C. kibunensis with the banks of rivers and lakes; C. minutissimus with mixed grasslands/wetlands without bushes and trees and the banks of rivers and lakes; C. achrayi with mixed grassland/wetland without bushes and trees; C. punctatus with mixed grassland/wetland without bushes and trees and boglands; C. vexans and C. impunctatus with boglands; C. pulicaris with boglands and reed belts; C. nubeculosus with mixed grassland/wetland without bushes and trees and renaturation areas; C. delta with renaturation areas; C. riethi with liquid manure; C. albicans, C. fagineus and C. festivipennis with swampy forests and C. newsteadi with meadows (Figure 2B).
Special attention was given to the study of dung as a potential breeding substrate, as species of the subgenus Avaritia are supposed to preferentially develop in organic-rich material [46]. Accordingly, pure dung substrates, where Avaritia species in fact predominated, produced twice as many specimens as the studied landscape habitats, with a particularly clear preference of both species of the Obsoletus Complex, C. obsoletus and C. scoticus, as well as C. chiopterus for dung habitats (Table 1). Depending on the origin of the dung, differences in the abundance and composition of the various emerging species became apparent (Table 2).
Culicoides obsoletus was mainly found to emerge from decaying cowpats, the stacked dung of cattle, llamas and alpacas and all types of mixed dung. The latter also served as substrates for C. dewulfi and C. scoticus. In addition, C. scoticus was collected from cowpats and the dung of sheep and horses, whereas C. chiopterus and C. dewulfi were found in rotten cattle dung as well as in dung of mixed composition. Culicoides chiopterus developed quite frequently in cowpats and stacked cattle dung, horse dung and, to a lesser extent, in mixed sheep/horse dung, but also in duck feces. In summary, C. scoticus seems to be the Avaritia species that is least adapted to a specific kind of dung. Culicoides dewulfi was found at two of the studied dung sites only. It was the only species developing in chicken dung. Lower numbers of species, but higher numbers of specimens, of the subgenus Avaritia were recovered from llama and alpaca dung as compared to cattle or mixed dung.
For dung substrates, numbers of emerged specimens of the subgenus Culicoides were also much lower than those of the subgenus Avaritia, and no individuals of the subgenus Culicoides at all emerged from llama, alpaca, chicken and pig dung. Of C. pulicaris and C. punctatus, only single individuals could be found in rabbit, deer, sheep and duck dung and mixed goat/horse dung, and only a few more were found in mixed sheep/horse dung.
An NMDS test according to dung type was not possible due to insufficient data (stress value too small).
Muddy substrates used in renaturation areas, swampy forest areas, floodplains or meadows along streams were found to have a neutral pH value (Figure 3A). By contrast, substrates from grassland/wetland and compost habitats (rotten vegetables) were slightly alkaline, while samples from dung were strongly alkaline. Overall, the higher occurrence probability of Avaritia and Culicoides species was associated with neutral or low pH values (Figure 3A). The unexpected collection of culicoids from chicken, duck and pig dung indicates their potential to adapt to extreme breeding habitats with higher pH values (Figure 3B).
A total of 27.5% of the Culicoides samples collected by the emergence traps were males, 36.0% within the subgenus Avaritia, 16.6% within the subgenus Culicoides and 1.0% within other subgenera of the genus Culicoides. The highest percentage of C. obsoletus males was caught in September 2008 from a cattle dung heap, the highest percentage of C. chiopterus males in May 2008 from cowpats, the highest percentage of C. scoticus males in June and August 2009 from mixed cattle/horse dung and the highest percentage of C. dewulfi in May and September 2009 from cattle dung. In the Pulicaris Complex, the highest numbers of C. pulicaris and C. punctatus males were caught in floodplain areas and mixed grassland/wetland covered with bushes and trees in May and June 2008 and 2009, respectively.

4. Discussion

Despite recent extensive research on biting midge vectors, data on habitat binding and substrate preference by the various Culicoides species are still widely missing. One reason may be that data are almost impossible to generate by standardized methods and on a quantitative basis, since most biting midge species cannot be reared in the laboratory. Field data on breeding site productivity can rarely be quantitative and compared between locations and regions, even if the breeding sites are thoroughly characterized. Most likely, several additional unknown factors that determine productivity, not least the general composition of an area’s biting midge fauna, are not taken into account when data are analyzed. Even with UV-light traps, commonly used for collecting adult biting midges, it is not possible to assess an area’s general species composition satisfactorily, since not all species are attracted to these traps [47].
Moreover, UV-light traps commonly used for collecting adult culicoids [48,49,50,51,52] provide no information on Culicoides breeding sites or substrates. The above-mentioned limitations were partially overcome in the present study with the use of emergence traps, enabling the detection of Culicoides species freshly emerging from their developmental substrates. The advantages over manually collecting larvae from their substrates are manifold. Firstly, emerged adults can be morphologically identified much more easily than larvae or pupae, which are mostly difficult to identify or even unidentifiable at species level. Secondly, the emergence method is surface-related and can at least be standardized in this regard as the caught insects emerge from a well-defined area of the ground surface. Thirdly, it is not truly known how deep larvae wander into the ground in different habitats (e.g., under cowpats). Collecting potential breeding substrates from the ground surface might therefore miss developmental stages from below. Finally, the emergence trap technique is not invasive, so the soil biocenosis is not disturbed.
The study also showed that the CORINE land cover system, which is based on squares of 25 ha, is not appropriate for assigning potential breeding sites to landscape structures. Areas that are suitable or unsuitable as Culicoides breeding habitats differ on a much smaller scale. For the purpose of data analysis, the landscape structures in which traps were placed were therefore manually adjusted to real land use.
So far, 333 species of Ceratopogonidae have been described for Germany, with 57 of them belonging to the genus Culicoides [53,54]. In the present investigation, 21 Culicoides species were found in different German federal states by emergence traps, but the species diversity between sampling habitats and sites differed strongly. Some of the collected species seem to be ubiquitous, others to have a very limited and local distribution or to occur sympatrically with other species.
Species of the Obsoletus and Pulicaris Complexes occur almost worldwide [36] and are found all over Europe, whereby the taxonomic assignment of species to complexes (or “groups”) is unclear and inconsistently practiced, resulting in tremendous difficulties in biological analyses [55,56]. Culicoides dewulfi, for example, is traditionally considered a member of the Obsoletus Complex due to its morphological similarity to C. obsoletus and C. scoticus, but its taxonomic status is still controversially discussed [57,58].
In the subgenus Avaritia, most of the female specimens collected in the present study were not identified to species level. The correlation between species and substrate was done on the morphological identification of males and the genetic identification of selected females. According to this, C. obsoletus, followed by C. chiopterus and C. scoticus, seems to be the species of the subgenera Avaritia, which accepts the most diverse breeding substrates. In the present investigation, these three species were caught at almost all sampling sites, especially often in floodplains, wetlands and the silting zones of lakes, and they were generally extremely abundant in all types of dung accumulations. González et al. [18] found species of the Obsoletus Complex in different types of manure and rotten organic material, while both Ninio et al. [20] and Thompson et al. [59] collected Obsoletus Complex specimens predominantly from cattle dung. Although Zimmer et al. [60] also detected C. obsoletus and C. scoticus in silage, these findings suggest that the dung of vertebrates is an important breeding habitat for the species of the subgenus Avaritia.
Regarding the variety of breeding habitats used, a similar situation is true for the subgenus Culicoides, which seems to occur ubiquitously in Germany [61,62,63]. Although the number of collected specimens of the subgenus Culicoides (mainly C. pulicaris and C. punctatus) was much lower than the number of specimens of the subgenus Avaritia in the present study, these species were found in almost all studied habitats, e.g., floodplains, grassland/wetland, banks of lakes, boglands and dung substrates (except manure). Thompson et al. [60] also noted species of the Pulicaris Complex in various types of dung, while González et al. [18] found C. punctatus to commonly develop in the mud of pond margins. In the present study, C. deltus developed in the same habitats as C. pulicaris and C. punctatus but, as opposed to those, had extremely high densities in renaturation areas. Culicoides newsteadi was found in meadows only.
Apart from the subgenus Avaritia, the most abundant and widespread group in the present study, all Culicoides species, including those of the Pulicaris Complex, were collected in small numbers. This may suggest that Culicoides species not belonging to the subgenus Avaritia are much more specialized and stenoecious regarding eco-climatic conditions. Although the data do not allow a founded phenological analysis, the collection data seem to suggest that the general emergence of culicoid species seems to peak twice annually, in May–June and in August–September. Differences in the abundance of the species of the subgenus Avaritia and of other subgenera occurred throughout the season, which is in agreement with the findings of Saerle et al. [64,65]. The species composition varied considerably between the sampled sites, with a clear tendency of numbers of species and specimens increasing with humidity and portion of decaying organic matter. It remains unclear, however, whether the low emergence rate in some habitats was a result of a low oviposition rate and, as a consequence, a low larval occurrence or of a combination of other biotic and/or abiotic factors.
The species C. achrayi, C. circumscriptus, C. festivipennis and C. nubeculosus are known to breed in organic-rich matter [66]. Hence, it is not surprising that these species were demonstrated in or alongside floodplains, river banks, reed belts, boglands and swampy areas. A similar investigation from Turkey [67] showed C. circumscriptus and C. festivipennis to be common in comparable habitats, while Uslu and Dik [68] found C. festivipennis, C. punctatus and C. brunnicans particularly often in mud at pond margins.
Observations that neutral or low pH values of substrates were associated with a higher occurrence probability of species of the subgenera Avaritia and Culicoides in contrast to alkaline substrates were already made by Steinke et al. [21] for C. obsoletus, C. chiopterus and C. dewulfi reared from cowpats. In this study, high pH values were also registered for the breeding substrates of C. nubeculosus and C. festivipennis. Both species had previously been found in slushy dung next to natural water reservoirs characterized by alkaline pH values [68,69]. Blackwell et al. [70] did not find any relationship between larval density and soil pH value for C. impunctatus in woodland and coastal habitats.
The present study tried to correlate landscape structures/habitats and breeding sites to subgenus and species, although the latter was not possible within the subgenus Avaritia due to the uncertain species assignment of the majority of females collected. The analysis shows a wide variability of breeding options accepted by many species, with a certain species-specific tendency of preferences. However, the data are still preliminary and should be supplemented by further studies.

5. Conclusions

Numerous studies have demonstrated that it is extremely difficult to define the requirements of biting midge species by their developmental substrates since their breeding habitats are widely unknown. Thus, even the identification of single emerging adults can be helpful to specify the adaptation of species.
Breeding habitats of putative Culicoides vector species, in which specimens develop in significant numbers, were identified for the subgenera Avaritia, mainly the Obsoletus Complex, in the form of dung substrates. Preferences of species in dung selection could be detected depending on the origin and the quality of the dung. Thus, in order to control the main vectors of BTV and SBV in Northern Europe which are considered to belong to the Obsoletus Complex [71,72], it may be an important step to properly manage dung deposition, storage and processing on farms. The breeding habitat preferences of other species including secondary vectors might affect landscape design and use.
Although this study has expanded the knowledge of habitats and dung substrates as Culicoides breeding sites, the selection and ecology of these are far from being defined. Further studies providing more detailed knowledge about the breeding sites and microhabitats of Culicoides biting midges in different landscape structures are urgently needed for the risk assessment of culicoid-borne diseases and targeted vector control.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/14/5000/s1, Table S1: Detailed list of sites, locations, study regions and landscape/habitat types sampled for emerging adult biting midges.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, D.W., C.B. and H.K.; Data curation, D.W.; Methodology, D.W., S.G., C.B. and H.K.; Project administration, D.W.; Visualisation, D.W., S.G. and H.K.; Validation, S.G. and H.K.; Formal analyses, D.W., S.G., C.B. and H.K.; Writing—original draft, D.W.; Writing—review and editing, S.G., C.B. and H.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

We greatly appreciate the help of all farmers and supporters (Abromeit, Bölk, Grätz, Hans, Heckel, Messing, Pawlischok, Porath, Richter, Stubbe and Werner families) and their willingness to tolerate the emergence traps on their premises or even to take care of them. Many thanks go to Peter Havelka (State Museum of Natural History Karlsruhe) for cross-checking the morphological identification of voucher specimens and to Jutta Falland, Brigitte Dannenfeld, Laura Werner and Oliver Tauchmann for technical assistance.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Hendry, G.A.F.; Godwin, G. Biting midges in Scottish forestry. A costly irritant or a trivial nuisance? Scott. For. 1988, 42, 113–119. [Google Scholar]
  2. Werner, D.; Kampen, H. Gnitzen (Diptera, Ceratopogonidae) und ihre medizinische Bedeutung. In Krank durch Arthropoden; Aspöck, H., Ed.; Biologiezentrum des Oberösterreichischen Landesmuseums: Linz, Austria, 2010; Volume 30, pp. 245–260. [Google Scholar]
  3. Meiswinkel, R.; Baldet, T.; De Deken, R.; Takken, W.; Delecolle, J.C.; Mellor, P.S. The 2006 outbreak of bluetongue in northern Europe–The entomological perspective. Prev. Vet. Med. 2008, 87, 55–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Tatem, A.J.; Huang, Z.; Das, A.; Qi, Q.; Roth, J.; Qiu, Y. Air-travel and vector-borne diseases movement. Parasitology 2012, 139, 1816–1830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Sanders, C.J.; Shortall, C.R.; Gubbins, S.; Burgin, L.; Gloster, J.; Harrington, R.; Reynolds, D.R.; Mellor, P.S.; Carpenter, S. Influence of season and meteorological parameters on flight activity of Culicoides biting midges. J. Appl. Ecol. 2011, 48, 1355–1364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Mellor, P.S.; Wittman, E.J. Bluetongue virus in the Mediterranean basin 1998–2001. Vet. J. 2002, 164, 20–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Meiswinkel, R.; Van Rijn, P.; Leijs, P.; Goffredo, M. Potential new Culicoides vector of bluetongue virus in northern Europe. Vet. Rec. 2007, 161, 564–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  8. Carpenter, S.; Groschup, M.H.; Garros, C.; Felippe-Bauer, L.; Purse, B.V. Culicoides biting midges, arbovirus and public health in Europe. Antivir. Res. 2013, 100, 102–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Afonso, A.; Abrahantes, J.C.; Conraths, F.; Veldhuis, A.; Elbers, A.; Roberts, H.; Van der Stede, Y.; Méroc, E.; Gache, K.; Richardson, J. The Schmallenberg virus epidemic in Europe-2011–2013. Prev. Vet. Med. 2014, 116, 391–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wilson, A.; Mellor, P. Bluetongue in Europe: Vectors, epidemiology and climate change. Parasitol. Res. 2008, 103 (Suppl. 1), 69–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Braverman, Y.; Chizov-Ginzburg, A.; Eldor, H.; Mumcuoglu, K.Y. Overview and features of larval developmental sites of biting midge species associated with livestock in Israel with implications to their control. Vet. Parasitol. Reg. Stud. Rep. 2018, 14, 204–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Boorman, J. British Culicoides (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae): Notes on distribution and biology. Entomol. Gaz. 1986, 37, 253–266. [Google Scholar]
  13. Bishop, A.L.; McKenzie, H.J.; Barchia, M.; Harris, A.M. Effect of temperature regimes on the development, survival and emergence of Culicoides brevitarsis Kieffer (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) in bovine dung. Austr. J. Entomol. 1996, 35, 361–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Uslu, U.; Dik, B. Vertical distribution of Culicoides larvae and pupae. Med. Vet. Entomol. 2006, 20, 350–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Kettle, D.S.; Lawson, J.W.H. The early stages of British biting midges Culicoides Latreille (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) and allied genera. Bull. Ent. Res. 1952, 43, 421–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Cannon, L.R.G.; Reye, E.J. A larval habitat of the biting midge Culicoides brevitarsis Kieffer (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Austr. J. Entomol. 1966, 5, 7–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Havelka, P.; Caspers, N. Die Gnitzen (Diptera, Nematocera, Ceratopogonidae) eines kleinen Waldbaches bei Bonn. Decheniana 1981, 25, 1–100. [Google Scholar]
  18. González, M.; López, S.; Mullens, A.; Baldet, T.; Goldarazena, A. A survey of Culicoides developmental sites on a farm in northern Spain, with a brief review of immature habitats of European species. Vet. Parasitol. 2013, 191, 81–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Conte, A.; Ippoliti, C.; Meiswinkel, R. Influence of biotic and abiotic factors on the distribution and abundance of Culicoides imicola and the Obsoletus Complex in Italy. Vet. Parasitol. 2007, 150, 333–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ninio, C.; Augot, D.; Dufour, B.; Depaquit, J. Emergence of Culicoides obsoletus from indoor and outdoor breeding sites. Vet. Parasitol. 2011, 183, 125–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Steinke, S.; Lühken, R.; Balcun, C.; Kiel, E. Emergence of Culicoides obsoletus group species from farm-associated habitats in Germany. Med. Vet. Entomol. 2016, 30, 174–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Harrup, L.E.; Purse, B.V.; Golding, N.; Mellor, P.S.; Carpenter, S. Larval development and emergence sites of farm-associated Culicoides in the United Kingdom. Med. Vet. Entomol. 2013, 27, 441–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Werner, D. Die Dipterenfauna verschiedener Mülldeponien und Kompostierungsanlagen in der Umgebung von Berlin unter besonderer Berücksichtigung ihrer Ökologie und Bionomie. Studia Dipterol. 1997, 1, 1–176. [Google Scholar]
  24. Meiswinkel, R.; Venter, G.J.; Nevill, E.M. Vectors: Culicoides spp. In Infectious Diseases of Livestock, 2nd ed.; Coetzer, J.A.W., Tustin, R.C., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Cape Town, South Africa, 2005; Volume 1, pp. 93–136. [Google Scholar]
  25. Mellor, P.S.; Boorman, J.; Baylis, M. Culicoides biting midges: Their role as arbovirus vectors. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2000, 45, 307–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Lühken, R.; Kiel, E.; Steinke, S. Culicoides biting midge density in relation to the position and substrate temperature in a cattle dung heap. Parasitol. Res. 2014, 113, 4659–4662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Verhoef, A.A.; Venter, G.J.; Weldon, C.W. Thermal limits of two biting midges, Culicoides imicola Kieffer and C. bolitinos Meiswinkel (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Parasit. Vectors 2014, 7, 384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Baetza, H.J. Eradication of bluetongue disease in Germany by vaccination. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 2014, 158, 116–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wernike, K.; Hoffmann, B.; Conraths, F.J.; Beer, M. Schmallenberg virus recurrence, Germany, 2014. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2015, 21, 1202–1204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Gache, K.; Touratier, A.; Bournez, L.; Zientara, S.; Bronner, A.; Dion, F.; Garin, E.; Calavas, D. Detection of Schmallenberg virus in France since 2012. Vet. Rec. 2017, 180, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Wernike, K.; Beer, M. Schmallenberg virus: A novel virus of veterinary importance. Adv. Virus Res. 2017, 99, 39–60. [Google Scholar]
  32. Sailleau, C.; Bréard, E.; Viarouge, C.; Vitour, D.; Romey, A.; Garnier, A.; Fablet, A.; Lowenski, S.; Gorna, K.; Caignard, G.; et al. Re-emergence of bluetongue virus serotype 8 in France, 2015. Transbound. Emerg. Dis. 2017, 64, 998–1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Gethmann, J.; Probst, C.; Conraths, F.J. Economic Impact of a bluetongue serotype 8 epidemic in Germany. Front. Vet. Sci. 2020, 7, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Bellini, R.; Zeller, H.; Van Bortel, W. A review of the vector management methods to prevent and control outbreaks of West Nile virus infection and the challenge for Europe. Parasit. Vectors 2014, 7, 323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Baldacchino, F.; Caputo, B.; Chandre, F.; Drago, A.; della Torre, A.; Montarsi, F.; Rizzoli, A. Control methods against invasive Aedes mosquitoes in Europe: A review. Pest. Manag. Sci. 2015, 71, 1471–1485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  36. Campbell, J.A.; Pelham-Clinton, E.C. A taxonomic review of the British species of Culicoides Latreille (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Proc. R Soc. Edinb. 1960, 67, 181–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Delécolle, J.-C. Nouvelle contribution à l’étude systématique et iconographique des espèces du genre Culicoides (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) du Nord-Est de la France. Ph.D. Thesis, Université Louis Pasteur, Strasbourg, France, 1985. [Google Scholar]
  38. Glukhova, V.M. Blood-sucking midges of the genera Culicoides and Forcipomyia (Ceratopogonidae). Fauna USSR 1989, 139, 1–408. [Google Scholar]
  39. Glukhova, V.M. Culicoides (Diptera, Ceratopogonidae) of Russia and adjacent lands. Int. J. Dipterol. Res. 2005, 16, 3–75. [Google Scholar]
  40. Mathieu, B.; Cêtre-Sossah, C.; Garros, C.; Chavernac, D.; Balenghien, T.; Carpenter, S.; Setier-Rio, M.L.; Vignes-Lebbe, R.; Ung, V.; Candolfi, E.; et al. Development and validation of IIKC: An interactive identification key for Culicoides (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) females from the western Palaearctic region. Parasit. Vectors 2012, 5, 137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Mathieu, B.; Perrin, A.; Baldet, T.; Delécolle, J.C.; Albina, E.; Cêtre-Sossah, C. Molecular identification of western European species of Obsoletus Complex (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) by an internal transcribed spacer-1 rDNA multiplex polymerase chain reaction assay. J. Med. Entomol. 2007, 44, 1019–1025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Lehmann, K.; Hoffmann, B.; Kampen, H. PCR identification of culicoid biting midges (Diptera, Ceratopogonidae) of the Obsoletus Complex including putative bluetongue and Schmallenberg virus vectors. Parasit. Vectors 2012, 5, 213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Folmer, O.; Black, M.; Hoeh, W.; Lutz, R.; Vrijenhoek, R. DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. Mol. Mar. Biol. Biotechnol. 1994, 3, 294–299. [Google Scholar]
  44. Team, R.C. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. 2018. Available online: https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed on 1 May 2020).
  45. Oksanen, J.; Blanchet, F.G.; Friendly, M.; Kindt, R.; Legendre, P.; McGlinn, D.; Minchin, P.R.; O’Hara, R.B.; Simpson, G.L.; Solymos, P.; et al. Vegan: Community Ecology Package. R Package Version 2.5-6. 2019. Available online: http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan (accessed on 1 May 2020).
  46. European Food Safety Authority. Scientific Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare on the EFSA Selfmandate on ‘Bluetongue origin and occurrence’. EFSA J. 2007, 408, 1–20. [Google Scholar]
  47. Probst, C.; Gethmann, J.; Kampen, H.; Beer, M.; Werner, D.; Conraths, F.J. A comparison of four light trap for collecting Culicoides biting midges. Parasitol. Res. 2015, 114, 4717–4727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Baldet, T.; Delecolle, J.C.; Cetre-Sossah, C.; Mathieu, B.; Meiswinkel, R.; Gerbier, G. Indoor activity of Culicoides associated with livestock in the bluetongue virus (BTV) affected region of northern France during autumn 2006. Prev. Vet. Med. 2008, 87, 84–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Goffredo, M.; Meiswinkel, R. Entomological surveillance of bluetongue in Italy: Methods of capture, catch analysis and identification of Culicoides biting midges. Vet. Ital. 2004, 40, 260–265. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  50. Purse, B.V.; Caracappa, S.; Marino, A.M.; Tatem, A.J.; Rogers, D.J.; Mellor, P.S.; Baylis, M.; Torina, A. Modelling the distribution of outbreaks and Culicoides vectors in Sicily: Towards predictive risk maps for Italy. Vet. Ital. 2004, 40, 303–310. [Google Scholar]
  51. Miranda, M.A.; Rincón, C.; Borràs, D. Seasonal abundance of Culicoides imicola and C. obsoletus in the Balearic Islands. Vet. Ital. 2004, 40, 292–295. [Google Scholar]
  52. Werner, D.; Will, M.; Groschupp, S.; Dähn, O.; Kampen, H. Monitoring of biting midges (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae), potential vectors of bluetongue and Schmallenberg viruses, in Germany. Mitt. Dtsch. Ges. Allgem Angew. Ent. 2020, 22. in press. [Google Scholar]
  53. Havelka, P.; Aguilar, M. Ceratopogonidae. In Checkliste der Dipteren Deutschlands; Schumann, H., Bährmann, R., Stark, A., Eds.; Ampyx-Verlag: Halle, Germany, 1999; pp. 33–38. [Google Scholar]
  54. Ayllón, T.; Nijhof, A.M.; Weiher, W.; Bauer, B.; Allène, X.; Clausen, P.H. Feeding behaviour of Culicoides spp. (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) on cattle and sheep in northeast Germany. Parasit. Vectors 2014, 7, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Meiswinkel, R.; Gomulski, L.M.; Delécolle, J.C.; Goffredo, M.; Gasperi, G. The taxonomy of Culicoides vector complexes–unfinished business. Vet. Ital. 2004, 40, 151–159. [Google Scholar]
  56. Harrup, L.E.; Bellis, G.A.; Balenghien, T.; Garros, C. Culicoides Latreille (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) taxonomy: Current challenges and future directions. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2015, 30, 249–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Schwenkenbecher, J.M.; Mordue, A.J.; Piertney, S.B. Phylogenetic analysis indicates that Culicoides dewulfi should not be considered part of the Culicoides obsoletus complex. Bull. Entomol. Res. 2009, 99, 371–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Augot, D.; Mathieu, B.; Hadj-Henni, L.; Barriel, V.; Zapata Mena, S.; Smolis, S.; Slama, D.; Randrianambinintsoa, F.J.; Trueba, G.; Kaltenbach, M.; et al. Molecular phylogeny of 42 species of Culicoides (Diptera, Ceratopogonidae) from three continents. Parasite 2017, 24, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  59. Thompson, G.M.; Jess, S.; Murchie, A.K. Differential emergence of Culicoides (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) from on-farm breeding substrates in Northern Ireland. Parasitology 2013, 140, 699–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Zimmer, J.Y.; Saegerman, C.; Losson, B.; Beckers, Y.; Haubruge, E.; Francis, F. Chemical composition of silage residues sustaining the larval development of the Culicoides obsoletus/Culicoides scoticus species (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Vet. Parasitol. 2013, 191, 197–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Kiel, E.; Liebisch, G.; Focke, R.; Liebisch, A. Monitoring of Culicoides at 20 locations in northwest Germany. Parasitol. Res. 2009, 105, 351–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Mehlhorn, H.; Wachendörfer, V.; Klimpel, S.; Schaub, G.; Kiel, E.; Focke, R.; Liebisch, G.; Liebisch, A.; Werner, D.; Geier, M.; et al. Bluetongue disease in Germany (2007–2008): Monitoring of entomological aspects. Parasitol. Res. 2009, 105, 313–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Vorsprach, B.; Meiser, C.K.; Werner, D.; Balczun, C.; Schaub, G.A. Monitoring of Ceratopogonidae in southwest Germany. Parasitol. Res. 2009, 105, 337–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Searle, K.R.; Blackwell, A.; Falconer, D.; Sullivan, M.; Butler, A.; Purse, B.V. Identifying environmental drivers of insect phenology across space and time: Culicoides in Scotland as a case study. Bull. Entomol. Res. 2013, 103, 155–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Searle, K.R.; Barber, J.; Stubbins, F.; Labuschagne, K.; Carpenter, S.; Butler, A.; Denison, E.; Sanders, C.; Mellor, P.S.; Wilson, A.; et al. Environmental drivers of Culicoides phenology: How important is species-specific variation when determining disease policy? PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e111876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Zimmer, J.Y.; Brostaux, Y.; Haubruge, E.; Francis, F. Larval development sites of the main Culicoides species (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) in northern Europe and distribution of coprophilic species larvae in Belgian pastures. Vet. Parasitol. 2014, 205, 676–686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Uslu, U.; Dik, B. Description of breeding sites of Culicoides species (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) in Turkey. Parasite 2007, 14, 173–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  68. Uslu, U.; Dik, B. Chemical characteristics of breeding sites of Culicoides species (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Vet. Parasitol. 2010, 169, 178–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Kitaoka, S.; Morii, T. Observation on the breeding habitats of some biting midges and seasonal population dynamics in the life cycle of C. arakawae in Tokyo and its vicinity. Nat. Inst. Anim. Health Q 1963, 3, 198–208. [Google Scholar]
  70. Blackwell, A.; Young, M.R.; Mordue, W. The microhabitat of Culicoides impunctatus (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) larvae in Scotland. Bull. Ent. Res. 1994, 84, 295–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Hoffmann, B.; Bauer, B.; Bauer, C.; Bätza, H.-J.; Beer, M.; Clausen, P.-H.; Geier, M.; Gethmann, J.M.; Kiel, E.; Liebisch, G.; et al. Monitoring of putative vectors of bluetongue virus serotype 8, Germany. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2009, 15, 1481–1484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Elbers, A.R.W.; Meiswinkel, R.; van Weezep, E.; Sloet van Oldruitenborgh-Oosterbaan, M.M.; Kooi, E.A. Schmallenberg virus in Culicoides spp. biting midges, the Netherlands, 2011. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2013, 19, 106–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijerph 17 05000 g001 550
Figure 1. Geographical allocation of study regions sampled for emerging adult biting midges. A: Two locations with seven study sites; B: Two locations with three study sites; C: Two locations with three study sites; D: Four locations with six study sites; E: Two locations with four study sites; F: One location with two study sites; G. One location with two study sites; H: One location with six study sites; I: Five locations with seven study sites; J: One location with two study sites; K: One location with one study site.
Figure 1. Geographical allocation of study regions sampled for emerging adult biting midges. A: Two locations with seven study sites; B: Two locations with three study sites; C: Two locations with three study sites; D: Four locations with six study sites; E: Two locations with four study sites; F: One location with two study sites; G. One location with two study sites; H: One location with six study sites; I: Five locations with seven study sites; J: One location with two study sites; K: One location with one study site.
Ijerph 17 05000 g001
Ijerph 17 05000 g002 550
Figure 2. Two-dimensional NMDS ordination plot of habitat preference by culicoid subgenus/group (A) and species (B—subgenus Avaritia excluded for species). Distance of habitats (black points) to biting midge subgenus and species (green triangles) are a measure of habitat preference. Abbreviations of landscape/habitat types: grass-/wetland without—mixed grassland/wetland without bushes and trees; grass-/wetland with—mixed grassland/wetland with bushes and trees.
Figure 2. Two-dimensional NMDS ordination plot of habitat preference by culicoid subgenus/group (A) and species (B—subgenus Avaritia excluded for species). Distance of habitats (black points) to biting midge subgenus and species (green triangles) are a measure of habitat preference. Abbreviations of landscape/habitat types: grass-/wetland without—mixed grassland/wetland without bushes and trees; grass-/wetland with—mixed grassland/wetland with bushes and trees.
Ijerph 17 05000 g002
Ijerph 17 05000 g003 550
Figure 3. Box plots of pH values of the studied landscape/habitat types (A) and the types of dung (B), showing median, 25th and 75th percentiles and minimum and maximum values. Circles indicate outliers.
Figure 3. Box plots of pH values of the studied landscape/habitat types (A) and the types of dung (B), showing median, 25th and 75th percentiles and minimum and maximum values. Circles indicate outliers.
Ijerph 17 05000 g003
Table
Table 1. Emergence of biting midge subgenera and species according to landscape/habitat type (adjusted to a covered ground area of 0.5 x 0.5 m2), based on both qualitative and quantitative data from the years 1994, 2005 and 2007–2012 (females/males; +—present, −—no record; 1—on lakes; 2—on rivers; 3—on liquid cattle manure; 4—on liquid sheep manure; numbers in parentheses represent the number of genetically identified females).
Table 1. Emergence of biting midge subgenera and species according to landscape/habitat type (adjusted to a covered ground area of 0.5 x 0.5 m2), based on both qualitative and quantitative data from the years 1994, 2005 and 2007–2012 (females/males; +—present, −—no record; 1—on lakes; 2—on rivers; 3—on liquid cattle manure; 4—on liquid sheep manure; numbers in parentheses represent the number of genetically identified females).
SpeciesLandscape/Habitat Type
FloodplainMeadowRenaturation Area/FloodplainMixed Grassland/Wetland without Bushes and TreesMixed Grassland/Wetland with Bushes and TreesSwampy Forest AreasBanks of Rivers and LakesReed BeltBoglandCompostDungLiquid Manure
Genus Culicoides
Subgenus Avaritia (Fox, 1955)
C. chiopterus (Meigen, 1830)+(3)/5+(2)/2–+/2–+(4)/1+/2+/3 1–+/2+(3)/11–
C. obsoletus (Meigen, 1818)+(1)/20+/9–+(1)/9+(2)/4–+(2)/10+(2)/8 1+(1)/8+(4)/32+(5)/354–
C. scoticus (Downes and Kettle, 1952)+(2)/10––+(5)/8+/4–+/5+(4)/0 1––+(1)/23–
C. dewulfi (Goetghebuer, 1935)+(1)/2–––––––+/1–+/3–
Total number of females/males belonging to subgenus Avaritia31/3717/110/022/1981/823/124/1764/1181/946/34567/3910/0
Genus Culicoides
Subgenus Culicoides (Latreille, 1809)
C. delta (Edwards, 1939)1/1–116/8–1/0–––2/0–5(1)/1–
C. pulicaris (Linnaeus, 1758)2/1––18(3)/024(3)/21/02/032/5 1,25(1)/63/02(8)/0–
C. punctatus(Meigen, 1804)14(2)/2––1/235(2)/4–4/3–1/1–8(1)/0–
C. newsteadi (Austen, 1921)–(4)/3––––––––(1)/0–
Total number of females/males belonging to subgenus Culicoides19/44/3116/822/265/61/06/332/59/73/026/10/0
Genus Culicoides
Species of other subgenera
C. achrayi (Kettle and Lawson, 1955)––3/015/131(2)/0–27/01/0 11/0–74/0–
C. albicans (Winnertz, 1852)–(1)/0–––1/0––––16/0–
C. circumscriptus (Kieffer, 1918)4(2)/0–––––2(1)/0–––––
C. fagineus (Edwards, 1939)––––11/013/14/0–––1/0–
C. festivipennis (Kieffer, 1914)––1/0––31/2–––––(1)/0 4
C. impunctatus (Goetghebuer, 1920)––(2)/0–––––2/0–––
C. kibunensis (Tokunaga, 1937)––––––(1)/0–––––
C. manchuriensis (Tokunaga, 1941)(2)/0–––––––––(1)/0–
C. minutissimus(Zetterstedt, 1855)––––(1)/0–––––(2)/0–
C. nubeculosus(Meigen, 1930)2/0–––7/0–––1/0–1/02/0 3,4
C. riethi (Kieffer, 1914)–––––––––––(1)/0 4
C. sphagnumensis (Williams, 1955)–––––––1/0 2––––
C. vexans (Staeger, 1839)––2/0–––––5/0–––
Total number of females/males of other subgenera10/01/08/015/152/045/335/02/09/00/095/04/0
Atrichopogon spec.––––+––+ 1,2–+––
Forcipomyia spec.+––+++++ 1,2++++
Dasyhelea spec.––––––––––+–
Palomyia spec.–––––––+ 1+–––
Serromyia spec.––––––––+–––
Table
Table 2. Emergence of biting midge subgenera and species from various types of dung (adjusted to a covered ground area of 0.5 x 0.5. m2), based on both qualitative and quantitative data from the years 1994, 1995 and 2007–2012 (females/males; +—present, −—no record; numbers in parentheses represent the number of genetically identified females).
Table 2. Emergence of biting midge subgenera and species from various types of dung (adjusted to a covered ground area of 0.5 x 0.5. m2), based on both qualitative and quantitative data from the years 1994, 1995 and 2007–2012 (females/males; +—present, −—no record; numbers in parentheses represent the number of genetically identified females).
SpeciesDung type
Llama/AlpacaChickenCattleCowpatDeerHorseDuckRabbitSheepPigMixed Cattle/HorseMixed Sheep/HorseMixed Goat/Horse
Genus Culicoides
Subgenus Avaritia (Fox, 1955)
C. chiopterus (Meigen, 1830)––+(1)/43+(2)/21+/2+(2)/19+/4––––+(2)/27–
C. obsoletus (Meigen, 1818)(89)/9–+(4)/50+/10–+(1)/8–+/5+(1)/13+(3)/0+(1)/24+/8+(2)/24
C. scoticus (Downes and Kettle, 1952)(1)/6––+/2+(2)/5+/0––+(1)/9–+(2)/7+/16+(3)/0
C. dewulfi (Goetghebuer, 1935)–+/4+/18+/28–––+/4+/4–+(1)/0+/3+/18
Total number of females/males belonging to subgenus Avaritia90/158/456/11134/6112/765/2713/421/921/263/057/3158/54129/42
Genus Culicoides
Subgenus Culicoides (Latreille, 1809)
C. delta (Edwards, 1939)––––––––(1)/0––––
C. pulicaris (Linnaeus, 1758)––−−(2)/0––1/03/0––(1)/11/0
C. punctatus(Meigen, 1804)––––––5/0-––−6/0–
C. newsteadi (Austen, 1921)––−––(6)/0–––––––
Total number of females/males belonging to subgenus Culicoides0/00/00/00/02/06/05/01/04/00/00/07/11/0
Genus Culicoides
Species of other subgenera
C. achrayi (Kettle and Lawson, 1955)50(1)/0–––––––8/0––––
C. albicans(Winnertz, 1852)(16)/0––––––––––––
C. fagineus (Edwards, 1939)––2/0––––––––––
C. minutissimus(Zetterstedt, 1855)(1)/0––––––––––(1)/0–
C. nubeculosus(Meigen, 1930)1/01/0––––––2(1)/03/04/0–4/0
Total number of females/males of other subgenera69/01/02/00/00/00/00/00/011/03/04/01/04/0
Dasyhelea spec.+––––––––––––
Atrichopogon spec.––––––+––––––
Forcipomyia spec.++++–++++++++

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Werner, D.; Groschupp, S.; Bauer, C.; Kampen, H. Breeding Habitat Preferences of Major Culicoides Species (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) in Germany. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 5000. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17145000

AMA Style

Werner D, Groschupp S, Bauer C, Kampen H. Breeding Habitat Preferences of Major Culicoides Species (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) in Germany. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(14):5000. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17145000

Chicago/Turabian Style

Werner, Doreen, Sarah Groschupp, Christian Bauer, and Helge Kampen. 2020. "Breeding Habitat Preferences of Major Culicoides Species (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) in Germany" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 14: 5000. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17145000

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop