Environmental Management of Poultry Houses: Controlling the Proliferation of Insect Pests in Togo

Environmental Management of Poultry Houses: Controlling the Proliferation of Insect Pests in Togo | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Environmental Management of Poultry Houses: Controlling the Proliferation of Insect Pests in Togo Guénnolé VINAKPON, Komi AGBOKA, Serge Edgard. Paulin MENSAH, Hoeness NASSI GUIDI, and 2 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4688030/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 4 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Modern poultry farming in West Africa is crucial for food security and financial security, but it coexists with insects, which can be harmful and vectors of diseases. This study aims to explore the diversity of insects in the litter and poultry farms, and to determine the factors behind their proliferation in the Maritime Region of Togo. Ninety (90) layer farms were sampled for this study. Insect collection was carried out in two phases: collection of insects around and inside the poultry house, and in the litter. Insects were identified using entomological keys. In the litter, the results showed that Alphitobius diaperinus (black beetle) is the most abundant (92.28%), with an average population of 270.5 ± 10.8 (n=120) and an average density of 164.87 ± 8.47 per square meter. Around and inside the poultry houses, Diptera were identified as the most abundant (91.99%), with an average population of 3472.2 ±31.2 (n=120). The density of insects in the litter was higher under the drinkers and feeders than in other areas (p<0.0001). The proliferation of insects in the litter is strongly linked to the duration of use of this litter (p<0.0001). The moisture content of the litter also facilitates the proliferation of insects under the drinkers and feeders (p=0.010 and p=0.001, respectively). In conclusion, poultry farms harbour a diversity of insects, some of which could be vectors of pathologies. These results highlight the importance of environmental and litter management to limit the proliferation of insects in these farms. Poultry farming Insects Management Maritime region Poultry house Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Highlights • Delayed moisture and litter renewal promote the proliferation of litter insects; • Diptera is the most abundant order around the poultry house; • Periodic cleaning of poultry houses reduces the density of insects in the poultry house. Introduction Modern poultry farming is an essential sector for developing countries. The environment in which this livestock is practised is populated by other living organisms. This cohabitation of other beings in these production environments is possible thanks to several factors. The strong odour of moist poultry droppings contains numerous nutrients that attract the attention of fly larvae (Sankara et al., 2022 ). Layer chicken farms are intensive agroecosystems that integrate a wide diversity of arthropods, including poultry parasites and arthropods present in the manure (detritivores, predators, etc.) (Zriki et al., 2020 ). Several species of beetles and flies are considered pests in chicken coops, particularly the small beetle Alphitobius diaperinus, which can carry viral and bacterial pathogens (Crippen and Poole, 2012 ; Donoso et al., 2020 ; Tambourro et al., 2022). Alphitobius diaperinus thrives in manure and chicken litter. According to McAlister et al. (1995), the poultry industry is faced with a significant constraint related to the aggressiveness of diseases, one of the potential vectors is Alphitobius diaperinus. The research work of (Johnson et al., 2018 ) has shown that this beetle is the most prevalent in chicken droppings and could be a vector of Gumboro, Newcastle and Marek's diseases. Culicoides spp. are also biological vectors of viruses, protozoa and filarial nematodes affecting birds, humans and other animals (Purse et al., 2015 ). (O'Connor, 1987) reported that the environmental conditions in the controlled production systems of chicken coops (temperature, humidity, feed, litter, etc.) provide a favourable habitat for the development, survival and proliferation of insects. Musca domestica (house fly) and other manure flies also pose a significant threat to farmers and poultry industry stakeholders. However, in Togo, most studies have focused on poultry nutrition and health, without addressing the factors that could hinder the success of animal production. Little research has focused on the entomofauna of litter, with the exception of the work of Johnson and Yao on the entomofauna of waste in West Africa, as well as the study of Hulley in South Africa and Banjo in Nigeria (Johnson et al., 2018 ; Yao et al., 2022 ; Banjo et al., 1999). Therefore, there is practically no database on the entomofauna in poultry farms in Africa and more specifically in the Republic of Togo. The objective of this study was to explore the diversity of insects in indoor and outdoor litter and to determine the factors behind their proliferation in poultry farms. Materials and Methods Study Area The study area is located in Togo, a West African country situated between 6° and 11° North latitude and 0° and 12° East longitude. Togo comprises five regions, including the Maritime Region. The Maritime Region is situated in the southern part of Togo, bordering the Atlantic Ocean (Sodjinou et al., 2022). This region is bounded to the north by the Plateau Region, to the west by the Republic of Ghana, to the east by the Republic of Benin, and to the south by the Atlantic Ocean. It spans between 6°00' and 6°50' North latitude and 0°25' and 2°00' East longitude (Fig. 1 ). Its total area is 6,395 km², accounting for 11.30% of the national territory (Sodjinou et al., 2022). This region hosts the largest poultry farms within a subtropical climate, characterised by a prolonged rainy season from March to July (with a maximum of 1,200 mm in June) and a shorter rainy season from September to November (with a maximum of 1,000 mm in October). These two rainy seasons are interrupted by an extended dry season and a brief dry season, resulting in a bimodal rainfall pattern with unequally high peaks or troughs. The minimum rainfall for the two seasons is 184.4 mm and 6.9 mm, respectively. The mean annual temperature is approximately 27.5°C, with a maximum of around 35.1°C during the dry season. Field survey The study on the entomofauna (insect fauna) of the litter in poultry houses and the surrounding areas of poultry buildings in the Maritime Region was conducted in three different communes, such as the commune of Golf, the commune of Avé, and the commune of Vo. The "snowball" method was used to conduct the survey. A questionnaire was administered to 90 laying hen farmers. The questionnaire focused on the inventory of farms, the duration of building use, and the frequency of litter changes. The survey was carried out using an Infinix Hot 20i Android smartphone, manufactured in China and equipped with the Epicollect5 platform application. The number of poultry farmers interviewed was determined using the formula from (Anderson et al., 2005 ) (Eq. 1): \(\:n=\frac{{\left(\frac{Z\alpha\:}{2}\right)}^{2}P\left(1-P\right)N}{{\left(\frac{Z\alpha\:}{2}\right)}^{2}P\left(1-P\right)+\left(N-1\right){e}^{2}}\) (Equation 1) Where: n = sample size N = size of the parent population P = proportion (set at 50%) e = margin of error (5%) Zα/2 = 1.96 for a 95% confidence interval Insect Collection The insect collection was carried out in two phases. The first phase involved collecting insects around and inside the poultry buildings. The second phase involved collecting insects from the litter of the chicken coops, within a randomly selected and delineated area of 0.5 m². In total, 120 chicken coops were sampled, with 60 in the Vo District, 40 in the Avé District, and 20 in the Golf District. Each of these buildings had an average area of 230 m² ± 11.2, with a density of 7 laying hens per square meter. A prospective study was conducted to establish typologies of farmers concerning the frequency of litter renewal. During the collection of insects around and inside the livestock buildings, the sweep net method (Olea et al., 2016 ; Babapene et al., 2017 ) was used twice a week to capture flying insects. Yellow plastic buckets containing soapy water (filled three-quarters) and protected on the surface by large wire mesh nets were placed inside the buildings (Babapene et al., 2017 ). Outside, yellow dishes containing soapy water were placed around the buildings, 1 m apart, with 5 m between each trap. These traps were checked every 24 hours for two weeks to avoid the decomposition of the insects. The collected insects were stored in tubes containing 70% ethanol and then transported to the laboratory for identification using the determination keys of Delobel and Tran ( 1993 ). The relative frequency (F) of insects around and inside the buildings was calculated using Eq. 2: \(\:F=\frac{\text{n}\text{u}\text{m}\text{b}\text{e}\text{r}\:\text{o}\text{f}\:\:\text{i}\text{n}\text{d}\text{i}\text{v}\text{i}\text{d}\text{u}\text{a}\text{l}\:\text{i}\text{n}\text{s}\text{e}\text{c}\text{t}\text{s}\:\text{t}\text{r}\text{a}\text{p}\text{p}\text{e}\text{d}}{\text{t}\text{o}\text{t}\text{a}\text{l}\:\text{n}\text{u}\text{m}\text{b}\text{e}\text{r}\:\text{o}\text{f}\:\text{i}\text{n}\text{s}\text{e}\text{c}\text{t}\text{s}\:trapped}X100\) (Equation 2) The insect collection in the litter was carried out by taking litter samples from an area of 0.5 m², defined as a plot, which is 1/10 of the surface area of the laying hen house (Johnson et al., 2018 ). The collection was conducted over a period of 6 months, with 6 visits per farm at regular 2-week intervals. The final collection coincided with the typical litter renewal period for laying hen farmers, which is at 3, 4, 5, and 6 months. The collection areas were divided into 3 zones: the watering zone (ZA), the feeding zone (ZM), and the zones without drinkers or feeders (ZSAM). The samples were collected using a trowel and placed in biodegradable bags for counting and identification of the insects. During each visit, the insects were counted by collection zone and by plot (Fig. 3 ). The temperature and humidity of the litter were measured for 5 minutes using a FEKU brand thermometer-hygrometer (reference HT6C, France). Sterile gloves and masks were used to avoid contamination risks and ensure biosecurity. The insects were identified at the LARASE laboratory of the University of Lomé and the LASNAH laboratory of the Benin Agricultural Research Center, using the identification keys of Delobel and Tran ( 1993 ) and a binocular microscope. The relative frequency (F) of insects in the litter was calculated using Eq. 3: \(\:F=\frac{\text{n}\text{u}\text{m}\text{b}\text{e}\text{r}\:\text{o}\text{f}\:\text{i}\text{n}\text{d}\text{i}\text{v}\text{i}\text{d}\text{u}\text{a}\text{l}\:\text{i}\text{n}\text{s}\text{e}\text{c}\text{t}\text{s}\:\text{i}\text{n}\:\text{l}\text{i}\text{t}\text{t}\text{e}\text{r}\:}{\text{t}\text{o}\text{t}\text{a}\text{l}\:\text{n}\text{u}\text{m}\text{b}\text{e}\text{r}\:\text{o}\text{f}\:\text{i}\text{n}\text{s}\text{e}\text{c}\text{t}\text{s}\:\text{i}\text{n}\:\text{l}\text{i}\text{t}\text{t}\text{e}\text{r}\:\:}X100\) (Eq. 3) The density of insects per sampled area unit was also calculated using the formula (Eq. 4): \(\:\text{D}\text{e}\text{n}\text{s}\text{i}\text{t}\text{y}\:(\text{N}\text{u}\text{m}\text{b}\text{e}\text{r}\:\text{o}\text{f}\:\text{i}\text{n}\text{s}\text{e}\text{c}\text{t}\text{s}/\text{m}2)=\frac{\text{n}\text{u}\text{m}\text{b}\text{e}\text{r}\:\text{o}\text{f}\:\text{i}\text{n}\text{s}\text{e}\text{c}\text{t}\text{s}\:\text{p}\text{e}\text{r}\:\text{p}\text{l}\text{o}\text{t}}{\text{s}\text{a}\text{m}\text{p}\text{l}\text{e}\text{d}\:\text{a}\text{r}\text{e}\text{a}\:\text{u}\text{n}\text{i}\text{t}\:\left(\text{m}2\right)}X100\) (Eq. 4) Data processing The Student's t-test at the 5% threshold was used to compute the average numbers of insects and compare the average numbers of Alphitobius diaperinus to those of other insect species in the litters, as well as the average numbers of Diptera inside and outside the buildings to those of other orders. The average number of insects between farms in the same zone and litter was compared using the Newman-Keuls test with a 5% threshold. We used Pearson correlation tests to investigate the association between temperature, humidity, and insect growth. Dependency tests were used to investigate variations in the number of insects observed by locale. All data were analysed using R software. Results Entomofauna of Poultry House Litters Table 1 presents the different categories of insects inventoried in the poultry house litters in the localities of Vo, Ave, and Golf. The analysis of this table shows that 35,180 individuals belonging to 9 orders, 11 families, 16 genera, and 16 species were counted in the litters of the laying hen houses. The order Coleoptera was predominant, representing 33,306 individuals, or a relative frequency of 94.67%. In addition, Alphitobius diaperinus is the most abundant species, with a relative frequency of 92.28% and an average number of 270.5 ± 10.8 individuals (n = 120) in the litter, compared to only 1.7 ± 0.3 individuals (n = 120) for the other insect species. This predominance of Coleoptera, and particularly the species Alphitobius diaperinus, could be explained by several factors. Table 1 Number of insects recorded in the litters of the livestock buildings in the localities of Vo, Ave, and Golf Orders Family Genus Species Population Relative frequency Dictyoptera Blatidae Periplaneta Periplaneta americana (Linnaeus, 1758) 464 1.32 Periplaneta Periplaneta fuliginosa (Serville, 1838) 49 0.14 Ectobiidae Blattella Blattella germanica (Linnaeus, 1767) 876 2.49 Coleoptera Tenrbrionidae Alphitobius Alphitobius diaperinus (Panzer, 1796) 32464 92.28 Tenebrio Tenebrio Guineensis (Imhoff, 1843) 362 1.03 Tribolium Tribolium castaneun (Herbst, 1797) 256 0.73 Scarabidae Labarus Labarrus lividus (Olivier, 1789) 82 0.23 Histeridae Dendrophilus Dendrophilus xavieri (Marseul, 1873) 96 0.27 Carcinops Carcinops pumilio (Erichson, 1834) 46 0.13 Dermattera Forficulidae Forficula Forficula decipiens (Géné, 1832) 36 0.10 Hymenoptera Salenopsis Solenopsis invicta (Buren, 1972) 56 0.16 Formicidae Camponotus Camponotus pennsylvanius (De Geer, 1773) 25 0.07 Camponotus Camponotus castaneus (Latreille, 1802) 80 0.23 pseudomyrmex Pseudomyrmex gracilis (Fabricius, 1804) 52 0.15 Dermestidae Attagenus Attagenus pellio (Linnaeus, 1758) 86 0.24 Pseudoscorpionida Cheliferidae Chelifer Chelifer cancroides (Linnaeus, 1758) 150 0.43 Variation in the Number of Insects by Collection Zone According to the Stage of Insect Development Table 2 displays the variation in the number of insects counted in the litter according to their stage of development and the collection zone. Analysis of this table reveals that insects at the adult and larval stages were more numerous under the feeders and drinkers than at the pupal stage. The feeding zones (under the feeders and drinkers) are therefore the preferred areas for insects at the adult and larval stages. Table 2 Number of insects per collection zone according to the stage of insect development District Targeted areas Number of insects sampled Insects Adults Larvae Pupae Golf Excluding feeder and drinker 62 61 01 00 Under feeder 2058 1756 300 02 Under drinker 3541 3448 82 11 Ave Excluding feeder and drinker 14 13 01 00 Under feeder 6768 6613 105 50 Under drinker 6491 6200 215 76 Vo Excluding feeder and drinker 19 17 02 00 Under feeder 11271 11084 125 62 Under drinker Total 4956 35180 4866 34058 82 913 08 209 Average Density of Alphitobius diaperinus Figure 4 presents the variation in the density of the species Alphitobius diaperinus per square metre in the litter, according to each study locality. The average density of Alphitobius diaperinus was 164.87 ± 8.47 individuals per square metre across all the sampled localities. More specifically, this density was 191.3 ± 10.0 individuals/m² in the locality of Ave, 100.3 ± 9.3 individuals/m² in the locality of Golf, and 203.0 ± 6.1 individuals/m² in the locality of Vo. The highest densities of Alphitobius diaperinus were observed in the localities of Ave and Vo. Entomofauna Variation in the studies localities Table 3 presents the relative frequencies of the most abundant insects inside and outside the laying hen farming buildings. The study of the dispersion of the different species showed that the overall mean number of individuals across all species was 1,261, and that 50% of the species had at least 146 individuals for the same collection duration (p ≤ 0.005). Furthermore, this table indicates that the species Musca domestica and Calliphora vicina have the highest frequencies. Their relative abundance could be related to various environmental and atmospheric factors. Table 3 Numbers of the Most Abundant Insects Recorded Inside and Outside the Agricultural Facilities in the Localities of Vo, Ave and Golf. No. Species Population Relative frequency (%) 1 Musca_domestica 16524 19.90 2 Calliphora vicina 12350 14.88 3 Chrysomya megacephala 10785 12.99 4 Sarcophaga carnaria 9845 11.86 5 Stomoxys calcites 9687 11.67 6 Lucilia_sericata_ 8456 10.18 7 Chironomus plumosus 1328 1.60 8 Camponotus pennsylvanicus 1328 1.55 9 Camponotus_pennsylvanicus 1287 1.55 Distribution of Insects Inside and Outside of the Buildings The analysis of the Table 3 showing the different categories of insects recorded inside and outside the laying hen farms in the localities of Vo, Ave and Golf reveals that a total of 83,032 individual insects were counted, distributed across 11 orders, 37 families, 58 genera and 58 species. The order Diptera was the most predominantly represented, with a total of 76,389 individuals and a relative frequency of 91.99%. The statistical comparison between the mean number of Diptera and that of the other orders counted inside and outside the poultry houses revealed that the Diptera (3,472.2 ± 31.2, n = 120) were significantly more abundant than the other insects (160.8 ± 12.06, n = 120), with a notable statistical difference (p = 0.0028). Furthermore, the total number of insects was higher outside (53,478 individuals) than inside (29,554 individuals), with a significant difference (p = 0.0001). This same difference was observed for most of the insects collected, with the exception of Jikradia olitoria (p = 0.573) and Ectobius pallidus (p = 0.070). Table 4 Number of Insects Recorded in the Agricultural Facilities of the Localities of Vo, Ave and Golf. Famille Espèces Effectif Milieu de collectes P-value Intérieur Extérieur Tephritidae Cyclorrhapha larva (Brauer, 1863) 1200 00 1200 0.0001 Cyclorrhapha pupa (Brauer. 1863) 795 00 795 0.0001 Culicidae Culex pipiens (linnaeus. 1758) 52 10 42 0.0001 Chagasia bathana (Cruz. 1906) 36 21 15 0.021 Muscidae Musca domestica (Linnaeus. 1758) 16524 5317 11207 0.0001 Stomoxys calcitrans (Linnaeus. 1758) 9687 6062 3625 0.0001 Phaonia pallida (Fabricius. 1787) 980 285 695 0.0001 Calliphoridae Calliphora vicina (Robineau-Desvoïdy. 1830) 12358 3958 8400 0.0001 Lucilia sericata (Meigen. 1826) 8456 2452 6004 0.0001 Chrysomya megacephala . (Fabricius. 1794) 10785 6528 4257 0.0001 Diopsidae Teleopsis amnoni (Rondani. 1875) 875 17 858 0.0001 Chironomidae Chironomus plumosus (Linnaeus. 1758) 1328 489 839 0.0001 Drosophilidae Drosophila melanogaster (Meigen. 1830) 70 11 59 0.0001 Dolichopodidae Condylostylus patibulatus (Say. 1823) 725 00 725 0.0001 Sarcophagidae Sarcophaga carnaria (Linnaeus. 1758) 9845 4283 5562 0.0001 Stratiomyidae Hermetia illucens (Linnaeus. 1758) 387 00 387 0.0001 Ptecticus tenebrifer (Walker. 1849) 645 00 645 0.0001 Ptecticus aurifer (Walker. 1854) 85 00 85 0.0001 Syrphidae Copestylum mexicanum (Macquart. 1842) 1187 00 1187 0.0001 Lauxaniidae Tricholauxania praeusta (Fallen. 1820) 181 00 181 0.0001 Platystomatidae Pogonortalis doclea (Walker. 1849) 60 00 60 0.0001 Psychodidae Telmatoscopus albipunctata (Williston. 1893) 128 00 128 0.0001 Cartharidae Cartharis flavilabris (Fallen. 1807) 147 00 147 0.0001 Dryophthoridae Sitophilus oryzae Linnaeus. 1763) 52 00 52 0.0001 Rutelidae Pelidnota punctata (Linnaeus. 1758) 896 00 896 0.0001 Formicidae Camponotus pennsylvanicus (De Ger. 1773) 1287 00 1287 0.0001 Anoplolepis gracilipes (Smith. 1857) 98 22 76 0.0001 Ichneumonidae Acrotaphus wiltii (Cresson. 1870) 157 00 157 0.0001 Diplazon laetatorius (Fabricius. 1781) 56 00 56 0.0001 Sphecidae Eremnophila aureonotata (Cameron. 1888) 40 00 40 0.0001 Isodontia mexicana ( Saussure. 1867) 30 00 30 0.0001 Stenopsocidae Graphopsocus cruciatus ( Linnaeus. 1768 ) 70 00 70 0.0001 Cicadelledae Jikradia olitoria (Say. 1830) 11 06 05 0.573 Aphrophoridae Phylaenus Spumarius (Linnaeus. 1758) 126 35 91 0.0001 Platastidae Megacopta cribraria (Fabricius. 1798) 105 43 62 0.0003 Geometridae Scopula imitaria (Hubner. 1799) 201 00 201 0.0001 Gracillariidae Phyllonorycter harrissella (Linnaeus. 1761) 182 00 182 0.0001 Pyraliddae Plodia interpunctella (Hübner. 1813) 89 00 89 0.0001 Pieridae Catopsilia pyranthe (Linnaeus. 1758) 306 00 306 0.0001 Pieris rapae (Linnaeus. 1758) 85 00 85 0.0001 Thespidae Thesprotia graminis (Scudder.1878) 86 00 86 0.0001 Agelenidae Tegenaria domestica (Clerck. 1757) 552 00 552 0.0001 Lycosidae Tigrosa annexa (Chamberlin & Ivie. 1944) 26 00 26 0.0001 Gryllidae Hapithus saltator (Uhler. 1864) 165 00 165 0.0001 Grylllus bimaculatus (De Geer. 1773) 225 00 225 0.0001 Acheta domestica (Linnaeus. 1758) 498 00 498 0.0001 Tetrigidae Tetrix tenuicornis (Sahlberg. 1891) 66 00 66 0..0001 Paratettix meridionalis (Rambur. 1838) 20 00 20 0.001 Acrididae Chrysochraon dispar (Germar. 1834) 23 00 23 0.001 Euchorthippus declivus (Brisout de Barneville. 1848) 145 00 145 0.0001 oedaleus decorus (Germar. 1825) 23 00 23 0.001 Acrida cinerea (Thunberg. 1815) 12 00 12 0.001 Trigonidiidae Nemobius sylvestris (Bosc. 1792) 156 00 156 0.0001 Phyllopalpus pulchellus (Uhler. 1864) 236 00 236 0.0001 Tettigoniidae Amblycorypha oblongifolia (De Geer. 1773) 325 00 325 0.0001 Hexacentrus unicolor (Serville. 1831) 32 00 32 0.0001 Conocephalus maculatus (Le Guillou. 1841) 16 00 16 0.001 Libellulidae Pantala hymenaea (Say. 1839) 87 11 76 0.0001 Ectobiidae Ectobius pallidus (Olivier. 1789) 12 04 08 0.070 Total 83032 29554 53478 0.0001 Distribution of Insects Inside and Outside of the Buildings Figure 5 presenting the proportions of all the insects sampled according to the localities reveals an unequal distribution of the proportions of insects inside and around the farming buildings in the three localities. The highest proportion was observed in the locality of Ave (49%), while the lowest was recorded in the locality of Golf (13%). However, the dependence test applied to analyse the variation in the number of insects recorded per locality did not show a non-significant difference (p = 0.08). Thus, the variation in the number of insects is not related to the locality, despite the unequal distribution observed between the different zones. Factors Influencing Insect Proliferation in Poultry Farming Environments Physical Conditions-Related Factors Figure 6 shows the variation in the litter renewal age in relation to insect proliferation by feeding zone. Analysis of this figure showed that the number of insects varies from one zone to another and depends on the litter renewal period. Insects were more numerous under the drinkers (ZA) and feeders (ZM), particularly in the litter where laying hens are kept for more than three months before replacement (p < 0.0001). Similarly, the variation in the number of insects is related to the duration of the litter in the poultry houses (p < 0.0001, df = 2). Insect production is very low in areas devoid of feeders and drinkers. Thus, the feeding zones attract more insects when the litter remains in the poultry houses for more than three months. Ecological Conditions-Related Factors Figure 7 indicates the variation in the number of insects under the feeders and under the drinkers as a function of the relative humidity of the litter. The analysis of the variation in the number of insects and the ecological conditions (temperatures and relative humidity) of the litter in the zones identified as being the most conducive to insects (under the drinkers: ZA and under the feeders: ZM) showed that the number of insects collected is not correlated with temperature, regardless of the zone (p = 0.10 for ZA and p = 0.9 for ZM). However, the analysis of the figure shows that the variation in the number of insects is strongly related to the humidity data under the drinkers (ZA) and under the feeders (ZM) (p = 0.010 and p = 0.001, respectively). The highest correlation was observed with the data collected under the feeders (r = 0.61). Insect production is more significant under the drinkers when humidity exceeds 80%, while it is higher under the feeders when humidity is less than 80%, or even beyond this value. Therefore, humidity appears to be a determining factor in the proliferation of insects, both under the drinkers and under the feeders, when it is around 80%. The dominance of Coleoptera in poultry house litter may be attributable to other factors. Discussion The dominance of Coleoptera in poultry house litter could be explained by several factors, such as the climatic conditions of the environment, their reproductive cycle, and the availability of nutrients in the litter. These results corroborate those obtained by Yao in Côte d'Ivoire, where Coleoptera were the most abundant order in manure with an automatic watering system (Yao et al., 2022 ). The high abundance of the Coleoptera Alphitobius diaperinus in the litter insect population suggests that these litters constitute favourable biotopes for this species, due to the availability of food debris, water, their reproductive system, and the atmospheric conditions conducive to their multiplication. Several authors have also shown that many Coleoptera species are associated with poultry farms, and that Alphitobius diaperinus is often the dominant species (Rowland et al. 2007 ; Johnson et al. 2018 ). This Coleoptera is a very common polyphagous species in poultry litters, present in many countries. It can have a detrimental effect by destroying poultry structures (Rowland et al. 2007 ). Furthermore, it has been identified as a vector for the transmission of avian pathologies such as Newcastle disease, Gumboro disease, and Marek's disease (Johnson et al. 2018 ). The strong correlation between the presence of Alphitobius diaperinus in the litter and poultry mortality observed in Bingerville corroborates these findings. Many studies have also reported a high relative frequency of Alphitobius diaperinus in poultry houses, up to 93.33% (Sanver and Tezcan, 2016 ) and 96.63% (Johnson et al., 2018 ), which is consistent with the observations of this study. Several factors can explain the massive presence of Alphitobius diaperinus in poultry farms in southern Togo, mainly related to the age of the litter and buildings. Its high density in the alignment zones of the feeders and drinkers, as well as the presence of crushed cereals served to the poultry, could also favour. Furthermore, the presence of overflowing water from the troughs and moistening the litter provides a suitable environment for the development of this insect. In this study, other insect species were also counted in the litter, including Periplaneta americana, Periplaneta fuliginosa, Blatella germanica, Folicula decipiens, Chelifer cancroides, Attagenus pellio , and Pseudomyrmex gracilis , which did not appear in the studies of (Sanver and Tezcan, 2016 ; Johnson et al., 2018 ). This implies that there is a diversity of fauna in the litter of poultry houses. Studies have reported that the production system and agricultural practices influence the development and composition of the arthropod community in livestock buildings (Roy et al., 2017 ). Our findinds differ from those reported by Aak and Ottesen in southern Norway, where the species Carcinops pumilio was the most abundant (Aak and Ottesen, 2002 ). This same species was observed in abundance, with a relative frequency of 64.09%, in a study on automatic manure irrigation in poultry houses in Côte d'Ivoire (Yao et al., 2022 ). This difference could be explained by factors such as humidity and freshness, which would justify the abundance of the species Carcinops pumilio in relation to the species Alphitobius diaperinus and vice versa. The average number and average density per square metre of Alphytobius diaperinus , found are slightly higher than those respectively obtained (211.08 ± 44.97 n = 90 and 107.21 ± 45.12) by (Johnson et al. 2018 ). This difference could be related to the reproductive activity of the insects and their consumption by birds, which could lead to their death through the transmission of various pathogens. The abundance of insects of the order Diptera, particularly Musca domestica and Calliphora vicina , around and inside the buildings could be explained by their attraction to the odours released by these poultry houses, as well as their search for food debris and watering. Calliphora vicina, Sarcophaga carnaria and Lucilia sericata have been described as facultative myiasis agents in birds (Bermudez et al., 2007 ; Dik and Kandir, 2021 ). From a medical and veterinary point of view, Lucilia sericata is reported as a primary and facultative myiasis agent, mainly in sheep, but also in other wild and domestic animals, as well as in humans (Hall and Wall, 1995 ). Forty-six (46) cases of myiasis have been confirmed in birds, in the oral cavity, the eyes, the cloaca and the phallus, caused by Lucilia sericata. Chrysomya albiceps and Chrysomya megacephala are disease vectors and are responsible for myiasis (Verves, 2007 ). Finally, blood-sucking species such as Culex pipiens , Culiseta longiareolata and Stomoxys calcitrans are considered a nuisance source by transmitting pathogens to humans (Baldacchino et al., 2013 ). Poultry farmers could be victims of these pathogens given that they are in permanent contact with the poultry transported by these insects. Livestock buildings constitute a privileged area for these insects due to the favourable climatic conditions such as humidity and temperature. The high number of Diptera compared to other insects demonstrates their significant presence in the dwellings, particularly around the poultry buildings. Some authors have shown that Diptera such as Culicinae (mosquitoes) and Simulidae (black flies) are vectors transmitting haemoparasites to chickens (Kaufmann, 1996 ). (Rodhain ( 2015 ) reported that some biting flies are important vectors of human and animal diseases worldwide and can transmit them mechanically and/or biologically through their bites. The elevated number of insects under the drinkers and feeders is linked to the increase in humidity, which favours their hatching and development. Humidity is a determining factor for the reproduction and survival of these insects. The longer the litter renewal, the higher the prevalence of Alphitobius diaperinus (poultry darkling beetle) in the feeding and watering areas. This abundance could be explained by their search for food and water for their survival, and the decomposition of the litter creates favourable microclimates for these insects. These results corroborate those obtained by (Johnson et al., 2018 ) who reported that the age of the litter influences the proliferation of Alphitobius diaperinus and its predilection for the poultry feeding areas. The proliferation of this insect is facilitated by the presence of water overflowing from the drinkers and the humidity of the litter, providing it with a suitable vital environment. (Sauvage, 1993) observed that excessive drying of the litter, due to the use of nipples in farms, causes nocturnal attacks of Alphitobius diaperinus on poultry due to the lack of water, thus confirming the role of humidity in the survival and proliferation of these insects. Gupta reported that the humidity of the litter favours the presence of moulds, algae and heterotrophic bacteria (Gupta et al., 2004 ). In summary, laying hen houses host a diversity of insects, with humidity and long litter renewal time being the main factors responsible for their proliferation and development. Some of these insects can threaten the life of laying hens and undermine the development of poultry farming. Conclusion In light of the findings above, the entomofauna of the litter, around and inside laying hen buildings has revealed a diversity of insects, with the orders of Coleoptera and Diptera being the most dominant. Within the litter, Alphitobius diaperinus is the most abundant species, exhibiting a high density. Around and inside the buildings, the most abundant species are Musca domestica, Stomoxys calcitrans, Calliphora vicina, Lucilia sericata, Sarcophaga carnaria, Chrysomya megacephala, Chironomus plumosus , and Camponotus pennsylvanicus . The relative humidity of the litter is a factor that promotes the proliferation of these insects as well as the renewal of the litter beyond three months. Regarding the role of these dominant insects in the transmission of pathogens to laying hens, it would then be important to implement biological control measures in order to reduce their adverse impacts. Periodic renewal of the litter and regular cleaning of the livestock buildings would help to decrease the number of insects present and thus reduce the mortality in the poultry houses related to various pathogens. Declarations Acknowledgements We express our gratitude to the World Bank Group for funding the project through the Regional Center of Excellence in Poultry Science (CERSA). Data Availability The data supporting the conclusions of this study are available from the corresponding author [G. Vinakpon] upon request. Disclosure Statement The author declare no conflict of interest for this work. Author Contributions Conceptualization: G. Vinakpon, K. Agboka, SEP Mensah, , and K. Tona Data Collection and Analysis: G. Vinakpon, K. Agboka, SEP Mensah, H. Nassi Guidi, and K. G.G Mlaga Original Draft Writing: G. Vinakpon Review and Editing: K. Agboka, Supervision and Revision: K. Agboka and SEP Mensah Funding This work was funded by the Regional Center of Excellence in Poultry Science (CERSA) of the World Bank Group [IDA 65120] and [IDA 5360]. References Aak A, Ottesen PS (2002). Factors Affecting Diversity of Poultry House Insects. with emphasis on beetles (Coleoptera) (Facteurs affectant la diversité des insectes des poulaillers. en particulier les coléoptères). Norw. J. Entomol. 49: 1-17.https://urlz.fr/q3Zt Anderson DR, Sweendey DJ, Williams TA (2005). Statistics for business and economics (9th edition). Mason; OH: South-Western College Publishing. ISBN 0-324-2008252 https://urlz.fr/q4ib Babapene A, Alara A, Kankonda M, Kada K, Mpiana PT, Ngoma N, AKAIBED, MBUMBA J (2017). Diversité et écologie des parasitoïdes Hyménoptères de la région de Kisangani. République démocratique du Congo. Internati. j.innovation sci. res. . 32 (1): 57-63. https://urlz.fr/q40U Baldacchino F, MuenwornV, Desquesnes M, Desoli F, Charoenviriyaphap T, Duvallet G (2013). Transmission of pathogens by Stomoxys flies (Diptera. Muscidae): a review. Parasite. 20 (26): 1-13 DOI: 10.1051/parasite/2013026 Banjoband AD, Soyoye OY (1999). The diversity of insect fauna in poultry houses in southwest Nigeria. Discovery and Innovation. 11(3-4):181-184. DOI: 10.4314/dai.v11i3.15551 Bermudez SE, Espinosa JD, Cielo AB, Clavel E, Subia J, Barrios S, Medianero E ( 2007) . Incidence of myiasis in Panama during the eradication of Cochliomyia hominivorax (Coquerel 1858. Diptera: Calliphoridae). Mem. Inst. Oswaldo Cruz. 102: 675–679 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0074-02762007005000074 CrippenTL, Zeng L, Sheffield C L, Tomberlin JK, Beier RC, Zu Z (2012). Rétention intestinale transitoire et persistance de salmonella pendant la métamorphose chez le petit ver de farine. Alphitobius diaperinus (Coleoptera : Penebrionidae)- Journal of applied Microbiologie 112(1) : 920-926 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2012.05265.x Crippen TL, Poole TL (2012). “Lesser mealworm on poultry farms: a potential arena for the dissemination of pathogens and antimicrobial resistance.” in On-Farm Strategies to Control Foodborne Pathogens. eds T. Callaway and T. Edrington (New York: NOVA Science Publishers). 233–272 https://www.ars.usda.gov/research/publications/publication/?seqNo115=270023 Delobel A, Tran M (1993). Les Coléoptères des denrées alimentaires entreposées dans les régions chaudes. Faune Tropicale. Paris ISBN 2-7099-1130-2 442 .https://urlz.fr/q43e Dik B, Kandir EH (2021). Ectoparasites in some wild birds (Aves) in Turkey. Prog. Nutr. 23: 261. DOI: 1023751/pn.v23iS211919 Donoso A, Paredes N, Retamal P (2020). Detection of antimicrobial resistant Salmonella enterica strains in larval and adult forms of lesser mealworm (Alphitobius diaperinus) from industrial poultry farms. Front. Vet. Sci. 7: 577-848. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2020.577848 Farkas R, Szanto Z, HALL M (2001). Traumatic myiasis of geese in Hungary. Vet. Parasitol. 95: 45–52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4017 (00)00409-X) Gupta G, Bhaskaran H, Kananen G, Okoh J (2004). Biodegradation of 2.4-dinitrotoluene using poultry litter leachate. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 113(1-3):137-140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2004.05.023 Hall M, Wall R (1995). Myiasis of humans and domestic animals. Adv. Parasitol. 35: 257–334.DOI : https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-308X (08)60073-1 Hulley P, Pfleiderer M (1988). The Coleoptera in poultry manure – potential predators of house flies. Musca domestica Linnaeus (Diptera: Muscidae). Journal of the Entomological Society of South Africa . 51 (1): 17-29. https://urlz.fr/q44h Johnson F, Gbon Gueu A, Boga JP (2018). Insectes des Bâtiments d’élevages avicoles des fermes de Bingerville. Côte d’Ivoire: Alphitobius diaperinus (Panzer. 1797) (Coleoptera:Tenebrionidae). European Scientific Institue. ESI 14(27):215. DOI: 10.19044/esj.2018.v14n27p215 Kaufmann J (1996). Parasitic infections of domestic animaIs: A diagnostic manual. Basel. Boston. Berlin: Birkhauser ISBN 978-3-0348-7668-1. 423. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-0348-7666-7 McAllister JC, Steelman CD, Skeeles JK (1994). Reservoir competence of the lesser mealworm (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) for Salmonella Typhimurium (Eubacteriales: Enterobacteriaceae). Journal of medical entomology . 31: 369-372. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jmedent/31.3.369 McAllister JC, Steelman CD, Skeeles JK, Newbery LA, Gbur EE (1996). Reservoir competence of Alphitobius diaperinus (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) for Escherichia coli (Eubacteriales: Enterobacteriaceae). Journal of medical entomology . 33: 983-987. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jmedent/33.6.983 O’Connor JP (1987). Alphitobius diaperinus (Panzer) (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) damaging polystyrene insulation on an Irish piggery. Entomologist's Monthly Magazine. 123: 1472-1475. DOI: doi/full/10.5555/19870541366 Olea MS, Patitucci LD, Mariluis JC, Alderete M, Mulieri PR (2016). Assessment of sampling methods for sarcosaprophagous species and other guilds of Calyptratae (Diptera) in temperate forests of southern south America. J. med. entomol. .0 (0): 1-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jme/tjw164 Purse B, Carpenter BV, Venter S, Bellis GJ, Mullens BA (2015). Bionomics of temperate and tropical Culicoides midges: knowledge gaps and consequences for transmission of Culicoides-borne viruses. Annu Rev Entomol. 60: 373-392. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-010814-020614 Rowland R, Macklin K, Simpson G, Donald J, Compbell A (2007).Comprendre et contrôler de Coléoptère http://www.aces.edu/poultryventilation/document/Nwsltr50 Darkling Beetles.pdf-(Date d’accès: 31 juillet2023) Roy L, Adouzi MFL, Moraza ML, Chiron G, Villeneuve De Janti E, Le Peutrec G, Bonato, O (2017). Arthropod communities of laying hen houses: An integrative pilot study towardconservation biocontrol of the poultry red mite Dermanyssus gallinae . Biol. Control 114: 176–194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2017.08.006 Rodhain F (2015). Insects as vectors: Systematics and biology. Revue scientifique et technique (international office of Epizootics) 34 (1): 83-96. 67-82. https://urlz.fr/q45n Sankara F, Pousga S, Bamogo1 WJM, Coulibaly K, Nacoulma JP, Somda I, Kenis M (2022). Influence des attractifs sur la production des larves de la mouche domestique (Musca domestica L. (1758)) pour l’alimentation avicole dans la zone ouest du Burkina Faso Int. J. Biol. Chem. Sci. 16(3):1217-1231. DOI:.4314/ijbcs.v16i3.25 Sanver U, Tezcan S (2016). Coleoptera fauna of poultry litter in Izmir province of Turkey. Journal of entomology . 12 (37): 217-244. https://urlz.fr/q4hp Tamburro M, Sammarco M, Trematerra P, Colacci M (2022). Alphitobius diaperinus panzer (insecta. coleoptera) in a single house of a broiler production facility as a potential source of pathogenic bacteria for broilers and humans. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 74 : 883–892. DOI: 10.1111/lam.13679 Savage S (1993). Le scarabée noir ne peut pas être éradiqué de l’élevage. juste contrôlé. Poultry Times 15(6) 11-13 . https://urlz.fr/q4hM Verves YG (2007).The new faunistic data on Calliphoridae and Sarcophagidae (Diptera) of the Republic of Seychelles. Phelsuma. 15: 71-81. https://urlz.fr/q4hR Yao JLK, Boga JP, Gnahoua JBG, Dao H, Yao T (2022).Inventory of Litter Insects in Traditional Automatic Watering Poultry Buildings in Côte d'IvoireAmerican Journal of Entomology. 6(3): 72-78. DOI: 10.11648/j.aje.20220603.12 Zriki G, Blatrix R, Roy L (2020). Etude intégrative des interactions au sein d’une association lâche (hôte-microprédacteur-arthropodes non hématophages cohabitant avec lui): vers une gestion agro-écologique des bâtiments d’élevage des volailles. Thèse de doctorat unique. Université de MONPELLIER. 1-171. https://urlz.fr/q4i1 Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Reviewers agreed at journal 05 Jul, 2024 Reviewers invited by journal 05 Jul, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 05 Jul, 2024 First submitted to journal 04 Jul, 2024 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-4688030","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":323068377,"identity":"8fd49398-c243-48e5-9b6e-edf319bc8c97","order_by":0,"name":"Guénnolé VINAKPON","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Lome: Universite de Lome","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Guénnolé","middleName":"","lastName":"VINAKPON","suffix":""},{"id":323068378,"identity":"9a5331ce-d4b3-4cc1-9fc5-abf2b1181840","order_by":1,"name":"Komi AGBOKA","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Lome: Universite de Lome","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Komi","middleName":"","lastName":"AGBOKA","suffix":""},{"id":323068379,"identity":"5a66eb7e-4191-4a04-ba67-9b5c67e5401c","order_by":2,"name":"Serge Edgard. Paulin MENSAH","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Benin","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Serge","middleName":"Edgard. Paulin","lastName":"MENSAH","suffix":""},{"id":323068380,"identity":"64e4ae80-60b8-4f21-8a1a-7aff45a50f8f","order_by":3,"name":"Hoeness NASSI GUIDI","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Lome: Universite de Lome","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hoeness","middleName":"NASSI","lastName":"GUIDI","suffix":""},{"id":323068381,"identity":"c53b7df9-38f9-4731-ab13-df0f4ed1655c","order_by":4,"name":"Kodjo Gnatepe MLAGA","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Lome: Universite de Lome","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kodjo","middleName":"Gnatepe","lastName":"MLAGA","suffix":""},{"id":323068382,"identity":"56e27f6c-cef5-43c8-a88c-b327ffbeb939","order_by":5,"name":"Kokou TONA","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Lome: Universite de Lome","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kokou","middleName":"","lastName":"TONA","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-07-04 17:30:15","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4688030/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4688030/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":61435830,"identity":"066907f4-8ce2-4c7d-99bc-5bc5ca064111","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-30 17:33:10","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":116406,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMap of the study area\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4688030/v1/ead8cf1d317fb3993b3e2e15.png"},{"id":61435409,"identity":"066891fe-abbe-46e4-a40c-68a464eafd86","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-30 17:17:10","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":102148,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eExperimental Design for Insect Collection in the Litter, Around, and Inside the Livestock Building\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4688030/v1/745df92799067304b4d6ccd5.png"},{"id":61435582,"identity":"b863528c-bfa6-4985-8e58-0da5f229303b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-30 17:25:10","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":117997,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eExperimental design for insect collection in the litter (230 m² ± 11.2 sampled at 1/10)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4688030/v1/c377caea9368de21b7f94e67.png"},{"id":61435412,"identity":"adaff433-5d35-4ef2-a439-8a5e3961a5a9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-30 17:17:10","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":9899,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eAverage Density (± Standard Error) of Insects per Square Metre by Collection Zone\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4688030/v1/26d4d4926c21aadfabb4a237.png"},{"id":61435410,"identity":"a71c1c0b-9ebb-43c6-bc5d-501749f34ea0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-30 17:17:10","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":130107,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDistribution of Insects Around and Inside the Livestock Buildings by Study Area.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4688030/v1/f84a0a904d073c3595612c10.png"},{"id":61435413,"identity":"e53d5182-85d4-4b43-b2ae-ad661bb82f74","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-30 17:17:11","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":22731,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eProgression of Litter Insect Proliferation as a Function of Litter Age and Collection Zone\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eZA: Zone under drinkers. ZM: Zone under feeders. ZSAM: Zone without feeders or drinkers.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4688030/v1/8c8ff5a52489705194353ee1.png"},{"id":61435414,"identity":"6e09e9ca-c099-4b8f-b542-ff48e6f1be7b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-30 17:17:11","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":10043,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eCorrelation Between Insect Variation and Humidity\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eZA: Zone under Drinkers\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eZM: Zone under Feeders\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4688030/v1/ec6ff58ff93b2914a9427d7a.png"},{"id":61436142,"identity":"c64f9907-a254-4c1c-b343-6603711ac4b6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-30 17:41:12","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1495038,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4688030/v1/3fe33227-38f1-4652-90fd-5ce01e4f5999.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"Environmental Management of Poultry Houses: Controlling the Proliferation of Insect Pests in Togo","fulltext":[{"header":"Highlights","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Delayed moisture and litter renewal promote the proliferation of litter insects;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Diptera is the most abundant order around the poultry house;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Periodic cleaning of poultry houses reduces the density of insects in the poultry house.\u003c/p\u003e\n"},{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eModern poultry farming is an essential sector for developing countries. The environment in which this livestock is practised is populated by other living organisms. This cohabitation of other beings in these production environments is possible thanks to several factors. The strong odour of moist poultry droppings contains numerous nutrients that attract the attention of fly larvae (Sankara et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Layer chicken farms are intensive agroecosystems that integrate a wide diversity of arthropods, including poultry parasites and arthropods present in the manure (detritivores, predators, etc.) (Zriki et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Several species of beetles and flies are considered pests in chicken coops, particularly the small beetle Alphitobius diaperinus, which can carry viral and bacterial pathogens (Crippen and Poole, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Donoso et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Tambourro et al., 2022). Alphitobius diaperinus thrives in manure and chicken litter. According to McAlister et al. (1995), the poultry industry is faced with a significant constraint related to the aggressiveness of diseases, one of the potential vectors is Alphitobius diaperinus. The research work of (Johnson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) has shown that this beetle is the most prevalent in chicken droppings and could be a vector of Gumboro, Newcastle and Marek's diseases. Culicoides spp. are also biological vectors of viruses, protozoa and filarial nematodes affecting birds, humans and other animals (Purse et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). (O'Connor, 1987) reported that the environmental conditions in the controlled production systems of chicken coops (temperature, humidity, feed, litter, etc.) provide a favourable habitat for the development, survival and proliferation of insects. Musca domestica (house fly) and other manure flies also pose a significant threat to farmers and poultry industry stakeholders. However, in Togo, most studies have focused on poultry nutrition and health, without addressing the factors that could hinder the success of animal production. Little research has focused on the entomofauna of litter, with the exception of the work of Johnson and Yao on the entomofauna of waste in West Africa, as well as the study of Hulley in South Africa and Banjo in Nigeria (Johnson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Yao et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Banjo et al., 1999). Therefore, there is practically no database on the entomofauna in poultry farms in Africa and more specifically in the Republic of Togo. The objective of this study was to explore the diversity of insects in indoor and outdoor litter and to determine the factors behind their proliferation in poultry farms.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStudy Area\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study area is located in Togo, a West African country situated between 6\u0026deg; and 11\u0026deg; North latitude and 0\u0026deg; and 12\u0026deg; East longitude. Togo comprises five regions, including the Maritime Region. The Maritime Region is situated in the southern part of Togo, bordering the Atlantic Ocean (Sodjinou et al., 2022). This region is bounded to the north by the Plateau Region, to the west by the Republic of Ghana, to the east by the Republic of Benin, and to the south by the Atlantic Ocean. It spans between 6\u0026deg;00' and 6\u0026deg;50' North latitude and 0\u0026deg;25' and 2\u0026deg;00' East longitude (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Its total area is 6,395 km\u0026sup2;, accounting for 11.30% of the national territory (Sodjinou et al., 2022).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis region hosts the largest poultry farms within a subtropical climate, characterised by a prolonged rainy season from March to July (with a maximum of 1,200 mm in June) and a shorter rainy season from September to November (with a maximum of 1,000 mm in October). These two rainy seasons are interrupted by an extended dry season and a brief dry season, resulting in a bimodal rainfall pattern with unequally high peaks or troughs. The minimum rainfall for the two seasons is 184.4 mm and 6.9 mm, respectively. The mean annual temperature is approximately 27.5\u0026deg;C, with a maximum of around 35.1\u0026deg;C during the dry season.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eField survey\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study on the entomofauna (insect fauna) of the litter in poultry houses and the surrounding areas of poultry buildings in the Maritime Region was conducted in three different communes, such as the commune of Golf, the commune of Av\u0026eacute;, and the commune of Vo. The \"snowball\" method was used to conduct the survey. A questionnaire was administered to 90 laying hen farmers. The questionnaire focused on the inventory of farms, the duration of building use, and the frequency of litter changes. The survey was carried out using an Infinix Hot 20i Android smartphone, manufactured in China and equipped with the Epicollect5 platform application. The number of poultry farmers interviewed was determined using the formula from (Anderson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e) (Eq.\u0026nbsp;1):\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e \u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:n=\\frac{{\\left(\\frac{Z\\alpha\\:}{2}\\right)}^{2}P\\left(1-P\\right)N}{{\\left(\\frac{Z\\alpha\\:}{2}\\right)}^{2}P\\left(1-P\\right)+\\left(N-1\\right){e}^{2}}\\)\u003c/span\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003csup\u003e(Equation 1)\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhere:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003en\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;sample size\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eN\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;size of the parent population\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eP\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;proportion (set at 50%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ee\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;margin of error (5%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eZα/2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.96 for a 95% confidence interval\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eInsect Collection\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe insect collection was carried out in two phases. The first phase involved collecting insects around and inside the poultry buildings. The second phase involved collecting insects from the litter of the chicken coops, within a randomly selected and delineated area of 0.5 m\u0026sup2;.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn total, 120 chicken coops were sampled, with 60 in the Vo District, 40 in the Av\u0026eacute; District, and 20 in the Golf District. Each of these buildings had an average area of 230 m\u0026sup2; \u0026plusmn; 11.2, with a density of 7 laying hens per square meter. A prospective study was conducted to establish typologies of farmers concerning the frequency of litter renewal.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring the collection of insects around and inside the livestock buildings, the sweep net method (Olea et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Babapene et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) was used twice a week to capture flying insects. Yellow plastic buckets containing soapy water (filled three-quarters) and protected on the surface by large wire mesh nets were placed inside the buildings (Babapene et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Outside, yellow dishes containing soapy water were placed around the buildings, 1 m apart, with 5 m between each trap. These traps were checked every 24 hours for two weeks to avoid the decomposition of the insects.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe collected insects were stored in tubes containing 70% ethanol and then transported to the laboratory for identification using the determination keys of Delobel and Tran (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe relative frequency (F) of insects around and inside the buildings was calculated using Eq.\u0026nbsp;2:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e \u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:F=\\frac{\\text{n}\\text{u}\\text{m}\\text{b}\\text{e}\\text{r}\\:\\text{o}\\text{f}\\:\\:\\text{i}\\text{n}\\text{d}\\text{i}\\text{v}\\text{i}\\text{d}\\text{u}\\text{a}\\text{l}\\:\\text{i}\\text{n}\\text{s}\\text{e}\\text{c}\\text{t}\\text{s}\\:\\text{t}\\text{r}\\text{a}\\text{p}\\text{p}\\text{e}\\text{d}}{\\text{t}\\text{o}\\text{t}\\text{a}\\text{l}\\:\\text{n}\\text{u}\\text{m}\\text{b}\\text{e}\\text{r}\\:\\text{o}\\text{f}\\:\\text{i}\\text{n}\\text{s}\\text{e}\\text{c}\\text{t}\\text{s}\\:trapped}X100\\)\u003c/span\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003csup\u003e(Equation 2)\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe insect collection in the litter was carried out by taking litter samples from an area of 0.5 m\u0026sup2;, defined as a plot, which is 1/10 of the surface area of the laying hen house (Johnson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The collection was conducted over a period of 6 months, with 6 visits per farm at regular 2-week intervals. The final collection coincided with the typical litter renewal period for laying hen farmers, which is at 3, 4, 5, and 6 months.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe collection areas were divided into 3 zones: the watering zone (ZA), the feeding zone (ZM), and the zones without drinkers or feeders (ZSAM). The samples were collected using a trowel and placed in biodegradable bags for counting and identification of the insects. During each visit, the insects were counted by collection zone and by plot (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe temperature and humidity of the litter were measured for 5 minutes using a FEKU brand thermometer-hygrometer (reference HT6C, France). Sterile gloves and masks were used to avoid contamination risks and ensure biosecurity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe insects were identified at the LARASE laboratory of the University of Lom\u0026eacute; and the LASNAH laboratory of the Benin Agricultural Research Center, using the identification keys of Delobel and Tran (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e) and a binocular microscope.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe relative frequency (F) of insects in the litter was calculated using Eq.\u0026nbsp;3:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e \u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:F=\\frac{\\text{n}\\text{u}\\text{m}\\text{b}\\text{e}\\text{r}\\:\\text{o}\\text{f}\\:\\text{i}\\text{n}\\text{d}\\text{i}\\text{v}\\text{i}\\text{d}\\text{u}\\text{a}\\text{l}\\:\\text{i}\\text{n}\\text{s}\\text{e}\\text{c}\\text{t}\\text{s}\\:\\text{i}\\text{n}\\:\\text{l}\\text{i}\\text{t}\\text{t}\\text{e}\\text{r}\\:}{\\text{t}\\text{o}\\text{t}\\text{a}\\text{l}\\:\\text{n}\\text{u}\\text{m}\\text{b}\\text{e}\\text{r}\\:\\text{o}\\text{f}\\:\\text{i}\\text{n}\\text{s}\\text{e}\\text{c}\\text{t}\\text{s}\\:\\text{i}\\text{n}\\:\\text{l}\\text{i}\\text{t}\\text{t}\\text{e}\\text{r}\\:\\:}X100\\)\u003c/span\u003e \u003c/span\u003e (Eq.\u0026nbsp;3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe density of insects per sampled area unit was also calculated using the formula (Eq.\u0026nbsp;4):\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e \u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:\\text{D}\\text{e}\\text{n}\\text{s}\\text{i}\\text{t}\\text{y}\\:(\\text{N}\\text{u}\\text{m}\\text{b}\\text{e}\\text{r}\\:\\text{o}\\text{f}\\:\\text{i}\\text{n}\\text{s}\\text{e}\\text{c}\\text{t}\\text{s}/\\text{m}2)=\\frac{\\text{n}\\text{u}\\text{m}\\text{b}\\text{e}\\text{r}\\:\\text{o}\\text{f}\\:\\text{i}\\text{n}\\text{s}\\text{e}\\text{c}\\text{t}\\text{s}\\:\\text{p}\\text{e}\\text{r}\\:\\text{p}\\text{l}\\text{o}\\text{t}}{\\text{s}\\text{a}\\text{m}\\text{p}\\text{l}\\text{e}\\text{d}\\:\\text{a}\\text{r}\\text{e}\\text{a}\\:\\text{u}\\text{n}\\text{i}\\text{t}\\:\\left(\\text{m}2\\right)}X100\\)\u003c/span\u003e \u003c/span\u003e (Eq.\u0026nbsp;4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eData processing\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Student's t-test at the 5% threshold was used to compute the average numbers of insects and compare the average numbers of Alphitobius diaperinus to those of other insect species in the litters, as well as the average numbers of Diptera inside and outside the buildings to those of other orders. The average number of insects between farms in the same zone and litter was compared using the Newman-Keuls test with a 5% threshold. We used Pearson correlation tests to investigate the association between temperature, humidity, and insect growth. Dependency tests were used to investigate variations in the number of insects observed by locale. All data were analysed using R software.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eEntomofauna of Poultry House Litters\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTable \u003cspan\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e presents the different categories of insects inventoried in the poultry house litters in the localities of Vo, Ave, and Golf. The analysis of this table shows that 35,180 individuals belonging to 9 orders, 11 families, 16 genera, and 16 species were counted in the litters of the laying hen houses. The order Coleoptera was predominant, representing 33,306 individuals, or a relative frequency of 94.67%. In addition, Alphitobius diaperinus is the most abundant species, with a relative frequency of 92.28% and an average number of 270.5\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;10.8 individuals (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;120) in the litter, compared to only 1.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.3 individuals (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;120) for the other insect species. This predominance of Coleoptera, and particularly the species Alphitobius diaperinus, could be explained by several factors.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e \u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of insects recorded in the litters of the livestock buildings in the localities of Vo, Ave, and Golf\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrders\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFamily\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGenus\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSpecies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePopulation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRelative frequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDictyoptera\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBlatidae\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePeriplaneta\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePeriplaneta americana\u003c/em\u003e (Linnaeus, 1758)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e464\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePeriplaneta\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePeriplaneta fuliginosa\u003c/em\u003e (Serville, 1838)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEctobiidae\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBlattella\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBlattella germanica\u003c/em\u003e (Linnaeus, 1767)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e876\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eColeoptera\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTenrbrionidae\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAlphitobius\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAlphitobius diaperinus\u003c/em\u003e (Panzer, 1796)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32464\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e92.28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTenebrio\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTenebrio Guineensis\u003c/em\u003e (Imhoff, 1843)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e362\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTribolium\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTribolium castaneun\u003c/em\u003e (Herbst, 1797)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e256\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.73\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eScarabidae\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLabarus\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLabarrus lividus\u003c/em\u003e (Olivier, 1789)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHisteridae\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDendrophilus\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDendrophilus xavieri (Marseul, 1873)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e96\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCarcinops\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCarcinops pumilio\u003c/em\u003e (Erichson, 1834)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDermattera\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eForficulidae\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eForficula\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eForficula decipiens\u003c/em\u003e (G\u0026eacute;n\u0026eacute;, 1832)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHymenoptera\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSalenopsis\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSolenopsis invicta\u003c/em\u003e (Buren, 1972)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFormicidae\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCamponotus\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCamponotus pennsylvanius\u003c/em\u003e (De Geer, 1773)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCamponotus\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCamponotus castaneus\u003c/em\u003e (Latreille, 1802)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003epseudomyrmex\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePseudomyrmex gracilis\u003c/em\u003e (Fabricius, 1804)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDermestidae\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAttagenus\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAttagenus pellio\u003c/em\u003e (Linnaeus, 1758)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePseudoscorpionida\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCheliferidae\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eChelifer\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eChelifer cancroides\u003c/em\u003e (Linnaeus, 1758)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e150\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.43\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariation in the Number of Insects by Collection Zone According to the Stage of Insect Development\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTable \u003cspan\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e displays the variation in the number of insects counted in the litter according to their stage of development and the collection zone. Analysis of this table reveals that insects at the adult and larval stages were more numerous under the feeders and drinkers than at the pupal stage. The feeding zones (under the feeders and drinkers) are therefore the preferred areas for insects at the adult and larval stages.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e \u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of insects per collection zone according to the stage of insect development\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDistrict\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTargeted areas\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of insects sampled\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInsects\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAdults\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLarvae\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePupae\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGolf\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExcluding feeder and drinker\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnder feeder\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2058\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1756\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e300\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnder drinker\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3541\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3448\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAve\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExcluding feeder and drinker\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnder feeder\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6768\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6613\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e105\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnder drinker\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6491\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6200\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e215\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExcluding feeder and drinker\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnder feeder\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11271\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11084\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e125\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnder drinker\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4956\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e35180\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4866\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e34058\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e913\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e209\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eAverage Density of Alphitobius diaperinus\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e presents the variation in the density of the species Alphitobius diaperinus per square metre in the litter, according to each study locality. The average density of Alphitobius diaperinus was 164.87\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.47 individuals per square metre across all the sampled localities. More specifically, this density was 191.3\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;10.0 individuals/m\u0026sup2; in the locality of Ave, 100.3\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;9.3 individuals/m\u0026sup2; in the locality of Golf, and 203.0\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.1 individuals/m\u0026sup2; in the locality of Vo. The highest densities of Alphitobius diaperinus were observed in the localities of Ave and Vo.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eEntomofauna Variation in the studies localities\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTable \u003cspan\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e presents the relative frequencies of the most abundant insects inside and outside the laying hen farming buildings. The study of the dispersion of the different species showed that the overall mean number of individuals across all species was 1,261, and that 50% of the species had at least 146 individuals for the same collection duration (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.005). Furthermore, this table indicates that the species Musca domestica and Calliphora vicina have the highest frequencies. Their relative abundance could be related to various environmental and atmospheric factors.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e \u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumbers of the Most Abundant Insects Recorded Inside and Outside the Agricultural Facilities in the Localities of Vo, Ave and Golf.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSpecies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePopulation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRelative frequency (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMusca_domestica\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16524\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCalliphora vicina\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12350\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.88\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eChrysomya megacephala\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10785\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.99\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSarcophaga carnaria\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9845\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eStomoxys calcites\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9687\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLucilia_sericata_\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8456\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eChironomus plumosus\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1328\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCamponotus pennsylvanicus\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1328\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCamponotus_pennsylvanicus\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1287\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eDistribution of Insects Inside and Outside of the Buildings\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe analysis of the Table \u003cspan\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e showing the different categories of insects recorded inside and outside the laying hen farms in the localities of Vo, Ave and Golf reveals that a total of 83,032 individual insects were counted, distributed across 11 orders, 37 families, 58 genera and 58 species. The order Diptera was the most predominantly represented, with a total of 76,389 individuals and a relative frequency of 91.99%. The statistical comparison between the mean number of Diptera and that of the other orders counted inside and outside the poultry houses revealed that the Diptera (3,472.2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;31.2, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;120) were significantly more abundant than the other insects (160.8\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;12.06, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;120), with a notable statistical difference (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0028). Furthermore, the total number of insects was higher outside (53,478 individuals) than inside (29,554 individuals), with a significant difference (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0001). This same difference was observed for most of the insects collected, with the exception of Jikradia olitoria (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.573) and Ectobius pallidus (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.070).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e \u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of Insects Recorded in the Agricultural Facilities of the Localities of Vo, Ave and Golf.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFamille\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEsp\u0026egrave;ces\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEffectif\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMilieu de collectes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eP-value\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInt\u0026eacute;rieur\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExt\u0026eacute;rieur\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTephritidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCyclorrhapha larva\u003c/em\u003e (Brauer, 1863)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1200\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1200\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCyclorrhapha pupa\u003c/em\u003e (Brauer. 1863)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e795\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e795\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCulicidae\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCulex pipiens\u003c/em\u003e (linnaeus. 1758)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eChagasia bathana\u003c/em\u003e (Cruz. 1906)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.021\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMuscidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMusca domestica\u003c/em\u003e (Linnaeus. 1758)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16524\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5317\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11207\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eStomoxys calcitrans\u003c/em\u003e (Linnaeus. 1758)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9687\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6062\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3625\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePhaonia pallida\u003c/em\u003e (Fabricius. 1787)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e980\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e285\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e695\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCalliphoridae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCalliphora vicina\u003c/em\u003e (Robineau-Desvo\u0026iuml;dy. 1830)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12358\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3958\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8400\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLucilia sericata\u003c/em\u003e (Meigen. 1826)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8456\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2452\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6004\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eChrysomya megacephala\u003c/em\u003e. (Fabricius. 1794)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10785\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6528\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4257\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDiopsidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTeleopsis amnoni\u003c/em\u003e (Rondani. 1875)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e875\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e858\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChironomidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eChironomus plumosus\u003c/em\u003e (Linnaeus. 1758)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1328\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e489\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e839\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDrosophilidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDrosophila melanogaster\u003c/em\u003e (Meigen. 1830)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e59\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDolichopodidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCondylostylus patibulatus\u003c/em\u003e (Say. 1823)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e725\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e725\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSarcophagidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSarcophaga carnaria\u003c/em\u003e (Linnaeus. 1758)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9845\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4283\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5562\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStratiomyidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHermetia illucens\u003c/em\u003e (Linnaeus. 1758)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e387\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e387\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePtecticus tenebrifer\u003c/em\u003e (Walker. 1849)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e645\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e645\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePtecticus aurifer\u003c/em\u003e (Walker. 1854)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSyrphidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCopestylum mexicanum\u003c/em\u003e (Macquart. 1842)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1187\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1187\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLauxaniidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTricholauxania praeusta\u003c/em\u003e (Fallen. 1820)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e181\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e181\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePlatystomatidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePogonortalis doclea\u003c/em\u003e (Walker. 1849)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePsychodidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTelmatoscopus albipunctata\u003c/em\u003e (Williston. 1893)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e128\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e128\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCartharidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCartharis flavilabris\u003c/em\u003e (Fallen. 1807)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e147\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e147\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDryophthoridae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSitophilus oryzae\u003c/em\u003e Linnaeus. 1763)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRutelidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePelidnota punctata\u003c/em\u003e (Linnaeus. 1758)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e896\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e896\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFormicidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCamponotus pennsylvanicus\u003c/em\u003e (De Ger. 1773)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1287\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1287\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnoplolepis gracilipes (Smith. 1857)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e98\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIchneumonidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAcrotaphus wiltii\u003c/em\u003e (Cresson. 1870)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e157\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e157\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDiplazon laetatorius (Fabricius. 1781)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSphecidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEremnophila aureonotata (Cameron. 1888)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIsodontia mexicana (\u003c/em\u003eSaussure. 1867)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStenopsocidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGraphopsocus cruciatus (\u003c/em\u003eLinnaeus. 1768\u003cem\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCicadelledae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eJikradia olitoria\u003c/em\u003e (Say. 1830)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.573\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAphrophoridae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePhylaenus Spumarius\u003c/em\u003e (Linnaeus. 1758)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e126\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePlatastidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMegacopta cribraria\u003c/em\u003e (Fabricius. 1798)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e105\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0003\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGeometridae\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eScopula imitaria\u003c/em\u003e (Hubner. 1799)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e201\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e201\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGracillariidae\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePhyllonorycter harrissella\u003c/em\u003e (Linnaeus. 1761)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e182\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e182\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePyraliddae\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePlodia interpunctella\u003c/em\u003e (H\u0026uuml;bner. 1813)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePieridae\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCatopsilia pyranthe (Linnaeus. 1758)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e306\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e306\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePieris rapae\u003c/em\u003e (Linnaeus. 1758)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThespidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eThesprotia graminis\u003c/em\u003e (Scudder.1878)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAgelenidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTegenaria domestica\u003c/em\u003e (Clerck. 1757)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e552\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e552\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLycosidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTigrosa annexa\u003c/em\u003e (Chamberlin \u0026amp; Ivie. 1944)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGryllidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHapithus saltator\u003c/em\u003e (Uhler. 1864)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e165\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e165\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGrylllus bimaculatus\u003c/em\u003e (De Geer. 1773)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e225\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e225\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAcheta domestica\u003c/em\u003e (Linnaeus. 1758)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e498\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e498\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTetrigidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTetrix tenuicornis (Sahlberg. 1891)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0..0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eParatettix meridionalis\u003c/em\u003e (Rambur. 1838)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAcrididae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eChrysochraon dispar\u003c/em\u003e (Germar. 1834)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEuchorthippus declivus\u003c/em\u003e (Brisout de Barneville. 1848)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e145\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e145\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eoedaleus decorus\u003c/em\u003e (Germar. 1825)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAcrida cinerea\u003c/em\u003e (Thunberg. 1815)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTrigonidiidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNemobius sylvestris\u003c/em\u003e (Bosc. 1792)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e156\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e156\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePhyllopalpus pulchellus\u003c/em\u003e (Uhler. 1864)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e236\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e236\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTettigoniidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAmblycorypha oblongifolia\u003c/em\u003e (De Geer. 1773)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e325\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e325\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHexacentrus unicolor\u003c/em\u003e (Serville. 1831)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eConocephalus maculatus\u003c/em\u003e (Le Guillou. 1841)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLibellulidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePantala hymenaea\u003c/em\u003e (Say. 1839)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e87\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEctobiidae\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEctobius pallidus\u003c/em\u003e (Olivier. 1789)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.070\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e83032\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29554\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e53478\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eDistribution of Insects Inside and Outside of the Buildings\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e presenting the proportions of all the insects sampled according to the localities reveals an unequal distribution of the proportions of insects inside and around the farming buildings in the three localities. The highest proportion was observed in the locality of Ave (49%), while the lowest was recorded in the locality of Golf (13%). However, the dependence test applied to analyse the variation in the number of insects recorded per locality did not show a non-significant difference (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.08). Thus, the variation in the number of insects is not related to the locality, despite the unequal distribution observed between the different zones.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eFactors Influencing Insect Proliferation in Poultry Farming Environments\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003ePhysical Conditions-Related Factors\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFigure 6 shows the variation in the litter renewal age in relation to insect proliferation by feeding zone. Analysis of this figure showed that the number of insects varies from one zone to another and depends on the litter renewal period. Insects were more numerous under the drinkers (ZA) and feeders (ZM), particularly in the litter where laying hens are kept for more than three months before replacement (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001). Similarly, the variation in the number of insects is related to the duration of the litter in the poultry houses (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2). Insect production is very low in areas devoid of feeders and drinkers. Thus, the feeding zones attract more insects when the litter remains in the poultry houses for more than three months.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eEcological Conditions-Related Factors\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFigure 7 indicates the variation in the number of insects under the feeders and under the drinkers as a function of the relative humidity of the litter. The analysis of the variation in the number of insects and the ecological conditions (temperatures and relative humidity) of the litter in the zones identified as being the most conducive to insects (under the drinkers: ZA and under the feeders: ZM) showed that the number of insects collected is not correlated with temperature, regardless of the zone (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.10 for ZA and p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.9 for ZM). However, the analysis of the figure shows that the variation in the number of insects is strongly related to the humidity data under the drinkers (ZA) and under the feeders (ZM) (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.010 and p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.001, respectively). The highest correlation was observed with the data collected under the feeders (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.61). Insect production is more significant under the drinkers when humidity exceeds 80%, while it is higher under the feeders when humidity is less than 80%, or even beyond this value. Therefore, humidity appears to be a determining factor in the proliferation of insects, both under the drinkers and under the feeders, when it is around 80%. The dominance of Coleoptera in poultry house litter may be attributable to other factors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe dominance of Coleoptera in poultry house litter could be explained by several factors, such as the climatic conditions of the environment, their reproductive cycle, and the availability of nutrients in the litter. These results corroborate those obtained by Yao in C\u0026ocirc;te d'Ivoire, where Coleoptera were the most abundant order in manure with an automatic watering system (Yao et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). The high abundance of the Coleoptera Alphitobius diaperinus in the litter insect population suggests that these litters constitute favourable biotopes for this species, due to the availability of food debris, water, their reproductive system, and the atmospheric conditions conducive to their multiplication. Several authors have also shown that many Coleoptera species are associated with poultry farms, and that Alphitobius diaperinus is often the dominant species (Rowland et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e; Johnson et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis Coleoptera is a very common polyphagous species in poultry litters, present in many countries. It can have a detrimental effect by destroying poultry structures (Rowland et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, it has been identified as a vector for the transmission of avian pathologies such as Newcastle disease, Gumboro disease, and Marek's disease (Johnson et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The strong correlation between the presence of \u003cem\u003eAlphitobius diaperinus\u003c/em\u003e in the litter and poultry mortality observed in Bingerville corroborates these findings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMany studies have also reported a high relative frequency of \u003cem\u003eAlphitobius diaperinus\u003c/em\u003e in poultry houses, up to 93.33% (Sanver and Tezcan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) and 96.63% (Johnson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), which is consistent with the observations of this study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeveral factors can explain the massive presence of \u003cem\u003eAlphitobius diaperinus\u003c/em\u003e in poultry farms in southern Togo, mainly related to the age of the litter and buildings. Its high density in the alignment zones of the feeders and drinkers, as well as the presence of crushed cereals served to the poultry, could also favour. Furthermore, the presence of overflowing water from the troughs and moistening the litter provides a suitable environment for the development of this insect. In this study, other insect species were also counted in the litter, including \u003cem\u003ePeriplaneta americana, Periplaneta fuliginosa, Blatella germanica, Folicula decipiens, Chelifer cancroides, Attagenus pellio\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003ePseudomyrmex gracilis\u003c/em\u003e, which did not appear in the studies of (Sanver and Tezcan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e ; Johnson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). This implies that there is a diversity of fauna in the litter of poultry houses. Studies have reported that the production system and agricultural practices influence the development and composition of the arthropod community in livestock buildings (Roy et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur findinds differ from those reported by Aak and Ottesen in southern Norway, where the species \u003cem\u003eCarcinops pumilio\u003c/em\u003e was the most abundant (Aak and Ottesen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). This same species was observed in abundance, with a relative frequency of 64.09%, in a study on automatic manure irrigation in poultry houses in C\u0026ocirc;te d'Ivoire (Yao et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). This difference could be explained by factors such as humidity and freshness, which would justify the abundance of the species \u003cem\u003eCarcinops pumilio\u003c/em\u003e in relation to the species \u003cem\u003eAlphitobius diaperinus\u003c/em\u003e and vice versa.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe average number and average density per square metre of \u003cem\u003eAlphytobius diaperinus\u003c/em\u003e, found are slightly higher than those respectively obtained (211.08\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;44.97 n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;90 and 107.21\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;45.12) by (Johnson et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). This difference could be related to the reproductive activity of the insects and their consumption by birds, which could lead to their death through the transmission of various pathogens.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe abundance of insects of the order Diptera, particularly \u003cem\u003eMusca domestica\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eCalliphora vicina\u003c/em\u003e, around and inside the buildings could be explained by their attraction to the odours released by these poultry houses, as well as their search for food debris and watering. \u003cem\u003eCalliphora vicina, Sarcophaga carnaria\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eLucilia sericata\u003c/em\u003e have been described as facultative myiasis agents in birds (Bermudez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e; Dik and Kandir, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). From a medical and veterinary point of view, \u003cem\u003eLucilia sericata\u003c/em\u003e is reported as a primary and facultative myiasis agent, mainly in sheep, but also in other wild and domestic animals, as well as in humans (Hall and Wall, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e). Forty-six (46) cases of myiasis have been confirmed in birds, in the oral cavity, the eyes, the cloaca and the phallus, caused by \u003cem\u003eLucilia sericata. Chrysomya albiceps\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eChrysomya megacephala\u003c/em\u003e are disease vectors and are responsible for myiasis (Verves, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). Finally, blood-sucking species such as \u003cem\u003eCulex pipiens\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eCuliseta longiareolata\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eStomoxys calcitrans\u003c/em\u003e are considered a nuisance source by transmitting pathogens to humans (Baldacchino et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePoultry farmers could be victims of these pathogens given that they are in permanent contact with the poultry transported by these insects. Livestock buildings constitute a privileged area for these insects due to the favourable climatic conditions such as humidity and temperature. The high number of Diptera compared to other insects demonstrates their significant presence in the dwellings, particularly around the poultry buildings. Some authors have shown that Diptera such as Culicinae (mosquitoes) and Simulidae (black flies) are vectors transmitting haemoparasites to chickens (Kaufmann, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1996\u003c/span\u003e). (Rodhain (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) reported that some biting flies are important vectors of human and animal diseases worldwide and can transmit them mechanically and/or biologically through their bites.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe elevated number of insects under the drinkers and feeders is linked to the increase in humidity, which favours their hatching and development. Humidity is a determining factor for the reproduction and survival of these insects. The longer the litter renewal, the higher the prevalence of Alphitobius diaperinus (poultry darkling beetle) in the feeding and watering areas. This abundance could be explained by their search for food and water for their survival, and the decomposition of the litter creates favourable microclimates for these insects.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese results corroborate those obtained by (Johnson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) who reported that the age of the litter influences the proliferation of \u003cem\u003eAlphitobius diaperinus\u003c/em\u003e and its predilection for the poultry feeding areas. The proliferation of this insect is facilitated by the presence of water overflowing from the drinkers and the humidity of the litter, providing it with a suitable vital environment. (Sauvage, 1993) observed that excessive drying of the litter, due to the use of nipples in farms, causes nocturnal attacks of \u003cem\u003eAlphitobius diaperinus\u003c/em\u003e on poultry due to the lack of water, thus confirming the role of humidity in the survival and proliferation of these insects. Gupta reported that the humidity of the litter favours the presence of moulds, algae and heterotrophic bacteria (Gupta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn summary, laying hen houses host a diversity of insects, with humidity and long litter renewal time being the main factors responsible for their proliferation and development. Some of these insects can threaten the life of laying hens and undermine the development of poultry farming.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn light of the findings above, the entomofauna of the litter, around and inside laying hen buildings has revealed a diversity of insects, with the orders of Coleoptera and Diptera being the most dominant. Within the litter, \u003cem\u003eAlphitobius diaperinus\u003c/em\u003e is the most abundant species, exhibiting a high density. Around and inside the buildings, the most abundant species are \u003cem\u003eMusca domestica, Stomoxys calcitrans, Calliphora vicina, Lucilia sericata, Sarcophaga carnaria, Chrysomya megacephala, Chironomus plumosus\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eCamponotus pennsylvanicus\u003c/em\u003e. The relative humidity of the litter is a factor that promotes the proliferation of these insects as well as the renewal of the litter beyond three months. Regarding the role of these dominant insects in the transmission of pathogens to laying hens, it would then be important to implement biological control measures in order to reduce their adverse impacts. Periodic renewal of the litter and regular cleaning of the livestock buildings would help to decrease the number of insects present and thus reduce the mortality in the poultry houses related to various pathogens.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe express our gratitude to the World Bank Group for funding the project through the Regional Center of Excellence in Poultry Science (CERSA).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Availability\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data supporting the conclusions of this study are available from the corresponding author [G. Vinakpon] upon request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDisclosure Statement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe author declare no conflict of interest for this work.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor Contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConceptualization: G. Vinakpon, K. Agboka, SEP Mensah, , and K. Tona\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eData Collection and Analysis: G. Vinakpon, K. Agboka, SEP Mensah, H. Nassi Guidi, and K. G.G Mlaga\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOriginal Draft Writing: G. Vinakpon\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eReview and Editing: K. Agboka, Supervision and Revision: K. Agboka and SEP Mensah\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis work was funded by the Regional Center of Excellence in Poultry Science (CERSA) of the World Bank Group [IDA 65120] and [IDA 5360].\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAak A, Ottesen PS (2002). Factors Affecting Diversity of Poultry House Insects. with emphasis on beetles (Coleoptera) (Facteurs affectant la diversit\u0026eacute; des insectes des poulaillers. en particulier les col\u0026eacute;opt\u0026egrave;res). Norw. J. Entomol. 49: 1-17.https://urlz.fr/q3Zt\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAnderson DR, Sweendey DJ, Williams TA (2005). Statistics for business and economics (9th edition). Mason; OH: South-Western College Publishing. ISBN 0-324-2008252 https://urlz.fr/q4ib\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBabapene A, Alara A, Kankonda M, Kada K, Mpiana PT, Ngoma N,\u003cbr\u003e AKAIBED, MBUMBA J (2017). Diversit\u0026eacute; et \u0026eacute;cologie des parasito\u0026iuml;des Hym\u0026eacute;nopt\u0026egrave;res de la r\u0026eacute;gion de Kisangani. R\u0026eacute;publique d\u0026eacute;mocratique du Congo. \u003cem\u003eInternati. j.innovation sci. res.\u003c/em\u003e. 32 (1): 57-63. https://urlz.fr/q40U\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBaldacchino F, MuenwornV, Desquesnes M, Desoli F, Charoenviriyaphap T, Duvallet G (2013). Transmission of pathogens by Stomoxys flies (Diptera. Muscidae): a review. Parasite. 20 (26): 1-13 DOI: 10.1051/parasite/2013026\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBanjoband AD, Soyoye OY (1999). The diversity of insect fauna in poultry houses in southwest Nigeria. Discovery and Innovation. 11(3-4):181-184. DOI: 10.4314/dai.v11i3.15551\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBermudez SE, Espinosa JD, Cielo AB, Clavel E, Subia J, Barrios S, Medianero E\u003cstrong\u003e (\u003c/strong\u003e2007)\u003cstrong\u003e. \u003c/strong\u003eIncidence of myiasis in Panama during the eradication of Cochliomyia hominivorax (Coquerel 1858. Diptera: Calliphoridae). Mem. Inst. Oswaldo Cruz. 102: 675\u0026ndash;679 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0074-02762007005000074\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCrippenTL, Zeng L, Sheffield C L, Tomberlin JK, Beier RC, Zu Z (2012). R\u0026eacute;tention intestinale transitoire et persistance de salmonella pendant la m\u0026eacute;tamorphose chez le petit ver de farine. \u003cem\u003eAlphitobius diaperinus (Coleoptera : Penebrionidae)- \u003c/em\u003eJournal of applied Microbiologie 112(1) : 920-926 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2012.05265.x \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCrippen TL, Poole TL (2012). \u0026ldquo;Lesser mealworm on poultry farms: a potential arena for the dissemination of pathogens and antimicrobial resistance.\u0026rdquo; in On-Farm Strategies to Control Foodborne Pathogens. eds T. Callaway and T. Edrington (New York: NOVA Science Publishers). 233\u0026ndash;272 https://www.ars.usda.gov/research/publications/publication/?seqNo115=270023\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDelobel A, Tran M (1993). Les Col\u0026eacute;opt\u0026egrave;res des denr\u0026eacute;es alimentaires entrepos\u0026eacute;es dans les r\u0026eacute;gions chaudes. Faune Tropicale. Paris ISBN 2-7099-1130-2 442 .https://urlz.fr/q43e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDik B, Kandir EH (2021). Ectoparasites in some wild birds (Aves) in Turkey. Prog. Nutr. 23: 261. DOI: 1023751/pn.v23iS211919\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDonoso A, Paredes N, Retamal P (2020). Detection of antimicrobial resistant Salmonella enterica strains in larval and adult forms of lesser mealworm (Alphitobius diaperinus) from industrial poultry farms. Front. Vet.\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003eSci. 7: 577-848. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2020.577848\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFarkas R, Szanto Z, HALL M (2001). Traumatic myiasis of geese in Hungary. Vet. Parasitol. 95: 45\u0026ndash;52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4017 (00)00409-X)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGupta G, Bhaskaran H, Kananen G, Okoh J (2004). Biodegradation of 2.4-dinitrotoluene using poultry litter leachate. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 113(1-3):137-140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2004.05.023\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHall M, Wall R (1995). Myiasis of humans and domestic animals. Adv. Parasitol. 35: 257\u0026ndash;334.DOI\u003cstrong\u003e: \u003c/strong\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-308X (08)60073-1\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHulley P, Pfleiderer M (1988). The Coleoptera in poultry manure \u0026ndash; potential predators of house flies. \u003cem\u003eMusca domestica \u003c/em\u003eLinnaeus (Diptera: Muscidae). \u003cem\u003eJournal of the Entomological Society of South Africa\u003c/em\u003e. 51 (1): 17-29. https://urlz.fr/q44h\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJohnson F, Gbon Gueu A, Boga JP (2018). Insectes des B\u0026acirc;timents d\u0026rsquo;\u0026eacute;levages avicoles des fermes de Bingerville. C\u0026ocirc;te d\u0026rsquo;Ivoire: Alphitobius diaperinus (Panzer. 1797) (Coleoptera:Tenebrionidae). European Scientific Institue. ESI 14(27):215. DOI: 10.19044/esj.2018.v14n27p215\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKaufmann J (1996). Parasitic infections of domestic animaIs: A diagnostic manual.\u003cbr\u003e Basel. Boston. Berlin: Birkhauser ISBN 978-3-0348-7668-1. 423. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-0348-7666-7\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcAllister JC, Steelman CD, Skeeles JK (1994). Reservoir competence of the lesser mealworm (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) for \u003cem\u003eSalmonella Typhimurium \u003c/em\u003e(Eubacteriales: Enterobacteriaceae).\u003cem\u003eJournal of medical entomology\u003c/em\u003e. 31: 369-372. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jmedent/31.3.369\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcAllister JC, Steelman CD, Skeeles JK, Newbery LA, Gbur EE (1996). Reservoir competence of \u003cem\u003eAlphitobius diaperinus \u003c/em\u003e(Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) for \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli \u003c/em\u003e(Eubacteriales: Enterobacteriaceae). \u003cem\u003eJournal of medical entomology\u003c/em\u003e. 33: 983-987. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jmedent/33.6.983 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eO\u0026rsquo;Connor JP (1987). \u003cem\u003eAlphitobius diaperinus \u003c/em\u003e(Panzer) (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) damaging polystyrene insulation on an Irish piggery. \u003cem\u003eEntomologist\u0026apos;s Monthly Magazine. \u003c/em\u003e123: 1472-1475. DOI: doi/full/10.5555/19870541366\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOlea MS, Patitucci LD, Mariluis JC, Alderete M, Mulieri PR (2016). Assessment of sampling methods for sarcosaprophagous species and other guilds of Calyptratae (Diptera) in temperate forests of southern south America. \u003cem\u003eJ. med. entomol.\u003c/em\u003e.0 (0): 1-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jme/tjw164\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePurse B, Carpenter BV, Venter S, Bellis GJ, Mullens BA (2015). Bionomics of temperate and tropical Culicoides midges: knowledge gaps and consequences for transmission of Culicoides-borne viruses. Annu Rev Entomol. 60: 373-392. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-010814-020614\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRowland R, Macklin K, Simpson G, Donald J, Compbell A (2007).Comprendre et contr\u0026ocirc;ler de Col\u0026eacute;opt\u0026egrave;re \u003cstrong\u003ehttp://www.aces.edu/poultryventilation/document/Nwsltr50\u003c/strong\u003eDarkling Beetles.pdf-(Date d\u0026rsquo;acc\u0026egrave;s: 31 juillet2023)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRoy L, Adouzi MFL, Moraza ML, Chiron G, Villeneuve De Janti E, Le Peutrec G, Bonato, O (2017). Arthropod communities of laying hen houses: An integrative pilot study towardconservation biocontrol of the poultry red mite \u003cem\u003eDermanyssus gallinae\u003c/em\u003e. Biol. Control 114: 176\u0026ndash;194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2017.08.006\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRodhain F (2015). Insects as vectors: Systematics and biology. Revue scientifique et technique (international office of Epizootics) 34 (1): 83-96. 67-82. https://urlz.fr/q45n\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSankara F, Pousga S, Bamogo1 WJM, Coulibaly K, Nacoulma JP, Somda I, Kenis M (2022). Influence des attractifs sur la production des larves de la mouche domestique (Musca domestica L. (1758)) pour l\u0026rsquo;alimentation avicole dans la zone ouest du Burkina Faso Int. J. Biol. Chem. Sci. 16(3):1217-1231. DOI:.4314/ijbcs.v16i3.25\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSanver U, Tezcan S (2016). Coleoptera fauna of poultry litter in Izmir province of Turkey. \u003cem\u003eJournal of entomology\u003c/em\u003e. 12 (37): 217-244. https://urlz.fr/q4hp\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTamburro M, Sammarco M, Trematerra P, Colacci M (2022). Alphitobius diaperinus panzer (insecta. coleoptera) in a single house of a broiler production facility as a potential source of pathogenic bacteria for broilers and humans. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 74 : 883\u0026ndash;892. DOI: 10.1111/lam.13679\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSavage S (1993). Le scarab\u0026eacute;e noir ne peut pas \u0026ecirc;tre \u0026eacute;radiqu\u0026eacute; de l\u0026rsquo;\u0026eacute;levage. juste contr\u0026ocirc;l\u0026eacute;. Poultry Times 15(6) 11-13\u003cstrong\u003e. \u003c/strong\u003ehttps://urlz.fr/q4hM\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVerves YG (2007).The new faunistic data on Calliphoridae and Sarcophagidae (Diptera) of the Republic of Seychelles. Phelsuma. 15: 71-81. https://urlz.fr/q4hR\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYao JLK, Boga JP, Gnahoua JBG, Dao H, Yao T (2022).Inventory of Litter Insects in Traditional Automatic Watering Poultry Buildings in C\u0026ocirc;te d\u0026apos;IvoireAmerican Journal of Entomology. 6(3): 72-78. DOI: 10.11648/j.aje.20220603.12\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZriki G, Blatrix R, Roy L (2020). Etude int\u0026eacute;grative des interactions au sein d\u0026rsquo;une association l\u0026acirc;che (h\u0026ocirc;te-micropr\u0026eacute;dacteur-arthropodes non h\u0026eacute;matophages cohabitant avec lui): vers une gestion agro-\u0026eacute;cologique des b\u0026acirc;timents d\u0026rsquo;\u0026eacute;levage des volailles. Th\u0026egrave;se de doctorat unique. Universit\u0026eacute; de MONPELLIER. 1-171. https://urlz.fr/q4i1 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"international-journal-of-tropical-insect-science","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"jtis","sideBox":"Learn more about [International Journal of Tropical Insect Science](http://link.springer.com/journal/42690)","snPcode":"42690","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/jtis/default2.aspx","title":"International Journal of Tropical Insect Science","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"Poultry farming, Insects Management, Maritime region, Poultry house","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4688030/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4688030/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eModern poultry farming in West Africa is crucial for food security and financial security, but it coexists with insects, which can be harmful and vectors of diseases. This study aims to explore the diversity of insects in the litter and poultry farms, and to determine the factors behind their proliferation in the Maritime Region of Togo. Ninety (90) layer farms were sampled for this study. Insect collection was carried out in two phases: collection of insects around and inside the poultry house, and in the litter. Insects were identified using entomological keys.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the litter, the results showed that \u003cem\u003eAlphitobius diaperinus\u003c/em\u003e (black beetle) is the most abundant (92.28%), with an average population of 270.5 ± 10.8 (n=120) and an average density of 164.87 ± 8.47 per square meter. Around and inside the poultry houses, Diptera were identified as the most abundant (91.99%), with an average population of 3472.2 ±31.2 (n=120). The density of insects in the litter was higher under the drinkers and feeders than in other areas (p\u0026lt;0.0001). The proliferation of insects in the litter is strongly linked to the duration of use of this litter (p\u0026lt;0.0001). The moisture content of the litter also facilitates the proliferation of insects under the drinkers and feeders (p=0.010 and p=0.001, respectively).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, poultry farms harbour a diversity of insects, some of which could be vectors of pathologies. These results highlight the importance of environmental and litter management to limit the proliferation of insects in these farms.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Environmental Management of Poultry Houses: Controlling the Proliferation of Insect Pests in Togo","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-07-30 17:17:06","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4688030/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"","date":"2024-07-05T10:17:03+00:00","index":0,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-07-05T09:06:10+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-07-05T05:57:13+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"International Journal of Tropical Insect Science","date":"2024-07-04T13:30:02+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"international-journal-of-tropical-insect-science","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"jtis","sideBox":"Learn more about [International Journal of Tropical Insect Science](http://link.springer.com/journal/42690)","snPcode":"42690","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/jtis/default2.aspx","title":"International Journal of Tropical Insect Science","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"b78889b5-a6a4-4834-b9db-139f44358eea","owner":[],"postedDate":"July 30th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-07-30T17:17:06+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-07-30 17:17:06","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4688030","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4688030","identity":"rs-4688030","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}