Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Apparatus for image capture and fly detection 5 surfaces of a Jackson trap.

Four cameras were used to image two internal surfaces, both top surfaces and the bottom of the trap. We did not image the sticky panel at the bottom of the internal area. The tub used to collect flies that dies without being captured on the sticky panel is also pictured.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Sample raw and processed images.

Raw images captured at 08:33 on 23 June 2014 of a Jackson trap baited with a TML plug and no insecticide: A) Internal, East; B) Internal, West; C) Top, West and East; D) Bottom. Processed images: E) Image from A after background subtraction; F) Image from B after background subtraction and segmentation (region of interest marked in red); G) Image from C after background subtraction and segmentation; H) Image from D after background subtraction, segmentation and automated detection (outlines of detected flies are marked and numbered).

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 1.

Two-way ANOVA of the effect of bait type and surface on the number of flies observed.

Levels of factor “Bait” are Control, TML, and TML-DDVP. For “Surface”, levels are Internal East, Internal West, Top East, Top West, and Bottom. Response variable is the number of flies automatically detected (log transformed).

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 3.

Average and SE of the number of flies automatically detected on each monitored surface of the Jackson traps by treatment.

The mean number of flies per image was statistically significantly different for the internal panels. See text for more details.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 2.

Number of flies captured in traps and found in tub per treatment.

More »

Table 2 Expand