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

INTEGRATED TICK MANAGEMENT IN 2016 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 Integrated Pathogen Management Kirby Stafford • Personal protection measures • Habitat Management • Chemical control Barnstable Co. Coop. Ext. Synthetic insecticides Botanicals, “natural” compounds • Biopesticides • Host reduction or exclusion • Host-targeted acaricides Skip Weisenburger • Host-targeted vaccines • Anti-tick vaccines

WHAT IS INTEGRATED PEST 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?

Away from Indoors at home home 21% 0% Neighborhood 5% K. Stafford Outdoors at home 74% Camping 1%Outdoor job Yard work 5% Gardening 18% 12% Walking dog Hiking 7% 4% Pfizer Other 4% Outdoor Event Play outdoors 2% 47% LYME DISEASE RISK ALDF Data: Stamford Health Department 1989-2000, n = 4551 records and 2001, n = 266 records

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? KAB Survey (1999-2004) – cost tick control Willingness to use chemical pesticide future? 60 51 WWHD 60 50 45 51 TAHD 1999 48 47 50 40 LLHD 2002 42 42 37 40 2004 27 30 26 23 30 20 17 17 20 13 12 20 10 10 4 4 3 3 10 0 0 0 $0 $1-99 $100-299 $300-499 >$500 WWHD TAHD LLHD

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 organic land care to their clients

TICK (PEST) MANAGEMENT NOFA STANDARDS ORGANIC LAND CARE • 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.

J. Public Health Mgt. Practice. 1999. 5:85-92  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. No. Lyme e dise iseas ase cases es prevent ented ed Inte tervent ntion on 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 0 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 Land Between the Lakes 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 CO 2 sample based on attack rate of less than 1 tick per human visitor per day. Bloemer et al. 1990. J. Med. Entomol. 27(4):543-550.

INTEGRATED USE 4-POSTER, BAIT BOXES AND ACARICIDE APPLICATIONS  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 Aerial photograph area Millstone Township, NJ showing bait box deployment sites, locations 4-poster devices, and control areas. Schulze et al. 2007. J. Med. Entomol. 44(5):830-839

INTEGRATED TICK MANAGEMENT (ITM) CONNECTICUT CDC COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT AND US BIOLOGIC, INC. PI’S KIRBY STAFFORD, SCOTT WILLIAMS, GOUDARZ MOLAEI  (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.) ITM Treat atment ment Neighb hborho hoods RTV Treat atment ment Neighb hborho hoods

RESERVOIR TARGETED VACCINE (RTV) IN CONNECTICUT Danbury News Times 2014  Inactivated, recombinant OspA vaccine coated on small bait pellets.  Used Sidekick bait boxes  2014, bait consumption study over 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, 4/4/2014

TICK-BORNE DISEASE TOOLBOX Personal nal Treatm tment/ nt/ Lands dscape cape/ Killing ng host- Rodent nt - Deer-targe targeted ed pro rotection ction vaccinat nation on ve vegetation ation seekin king g targe geted ed appro roac aches hes meas asures ures in humans ans management nagement ticks ks appro roac aches hes Avoid tick habitat Antibiotic Xeroscaping/ Synthetic Topical acaricide Topical acaricide prophylaxis after hardscaping chemical bait box feeding station tick bite acaricide Protective clothing Human vaccine Short grass, remove Natural product- Oral vaccine Deer reduction weeds based acaricide Tick checks & Remove leaf litter Fungal acaricide Oral antibiotic bait Deer fencing prompt removal ticks and brush Synthetic chemical Remove rodent Acaricide with Oral tick growth Oral tick growth repellent harborage semiochemicals regulator regulator Natural product- Anti-tick vaccine based repellent for deer Permethrin-treated clothing Natural product- based soap/lotion denotes intervention used in combination with another tick control method denotes intervention with some supporting data on reduction Lyme disease Adapted from slide by Ben Beard, CDC-Division Vector-Borne Diseases

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?  There are many tools available for killing ticks  Killing ticks in your own yard doesn’t necessarily equate to reducing risk of illness K. Stafford  Tick control responsibility should ALDF 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 Pfizer K. Stafford local settings Adapted from slide by Ben Beard, CDC-Division Vector-Borne Diseases

CAES TICK TEAM Megan Linske Dr. Goudarz Molaei Dr. Laura Hayes Saryn Kunajukar (now at CT DPH) Heidi Stuber Numerous seasonal Dr. Kirby Stafford Michael Short assistants Dr. Scott Williams