Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
ABSTRACT. Movement of host odour was modelled in natural tsetse habitats with smoke and ultra‐light 7‐cm‐long wind vanes; the speed and direction of the air movements were analysed from video recordings thereof. Wind of 10 m across) often changed direction together. The rate of this change of direction (meander) correlated negatively with windspeed. In open woodland with a shrubby understorey (in which windspeed was reduced by a factor of >5 from that above the canopy, to ax 0.3 m s ‐1 ), this wind meander fell by 2d̀ s ‐1 change of direction for each 0.1 m s ‐1 increase in windspeed (r 2 =0.96). Over open ground without shrub cover, the meander fell by 0.5d̀ s ‐1 per 0.1 m s ‐1 increase in windspeed (r 2 =0.85). In both situations, such meandering virtually ceased in winds of > 1 m s ‐1 . In woodland, the relationship between the direction of air movement near the surface of bare earth (one potential tsetse landing site) and that c. 0.5 m above ground level (flight height) was often weak (r 2 =0.2‐0.4), but this problem would be reduced if the fly averaged the ground‐level wind for at least 30 s. Odour (smoke) travelling from a source 15 m ‘upwind’ over open ground arrived at a notional tsetse fly for 80% of the time from a direction within 10d̀ of the true source direction. In typical tsetse woodland, however, the ‘odour’ arrived from all directions (including >90d̀ away from the source), with only a 30% bias towards the true source direction (±10d̀). Evidently, tsetse must navigate up odour plumes by means that get round these difficulties‐simple, moth‐type upwind anemotaxis alone seems unlikely to be adequate.
Brady et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: