目的 比较新型灭鼠盒与传统粘鼠板的灭鼠效果，以筛选效果较好的灭鼠器械进行鼠害防治。方法 2016年6月26日在河南省荥阳市某鸽厂选取面积相同的6个棚舍，每个鸽棚前后分别放置新型灭鼠盒与传统粘鼠板，观察灭鼠效果。结果 新型灭鼠盒与传统粘鼠板的灭鼠率差异无统计学意义（F=0.168，P=0.690）。两种灭鼠方法连续灭鼠10 d后，鼠密度均下降至5.00%左右；灭鼠30 d后，鼠密度降至1.00%以下，灭鼠率>97.00%。结论 新型灭鼠盒灭鼠效果优良，同时具有安全、不易被污染等优点，可作为控制鼠类种群密度的重要技术手段。
Objective To compare the efficacy of new rodenticide boxes and traditional glue boards, and search for new rodent control devices. Methods We put new rodenticide boxes and traditional glue boards in the front and back of 6 pigeon sheds in Xingyang city to compare the effect of two deratization devices. Results The new rodent control boxes and traditional glue boards showed no significant difference(P=0.690)in efficacy. After 10 d experiments, the mouse density was reduced for approximately 5.00%; 30 d later, the mouse density decreased below 1.00%, the deratization rate achieved was greater than 97.00%. Conclusion The new rodent control box is excellent, with advantages of being safe and environmentally friendly, so it can be used as an important technical means to control the rodent populations.
[1] 侯银续,张跃玉,吴丽琴,等. 马鞍山市鼠类密度监测分析[J]. 中华卫生杀虫药械, 2015, 21(2):160-161.
[2] 沈培谊. 食品行业有害生物综合防治(二):食品行业有害生物的物理防治[J]. 中华卫生杀虫药械, 2012, 18(4):352-355, 357.
[3] 孙毅,郭天宇,董天义. 家栖鼠抗药性研究进展[J]. 中华卫生杀虫药械, 2004, 10(3):164-167.
[4] 张文香,韩雪玲,沈兆媛,等. 一种简易防鼠器的研制及其在医院病房的应用[J]. 中华卫生杀虫药械, 2015, 21(1):100-101.
[5] 康立. 郑州铁路局旅客列车鼠蟑防制研究[J]. 医学动物防制, 2011, 27(2):132-133.
[6] 沈福杰,楼菊萍,邵志萍. 重点单位防鼠设施状况与鼠密度关系初步调查[J]. 中国媒介生物学及控制杂志, 2000, 11(4):256.
[7] 王晓东,李鹤. 海军舰艇防鼠板悬挂情况调查与对策[J]. 中华卫生杀虫药械, 2010, 16(6):476-477.
[8] 陆年宏,谭伟龙,贾德胜,等. 粘鼠板控制特殊场所鼠害效果观察[J]. 中国媒介生物学及控制杂志, 1999, 10(6):477.
