Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T17:00:29.391Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Contamination of Insects of different Species exposed to Dust Deposits*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

M. Gratwick
M. Gratwick
Affiliation:
Imperial College Field Station, Sunninghill, Berks.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The quantities of lipophilic dyestuff picked up by specimens of five insect species, namely Vespula vulgaris (L.), Feronia madida (F.), Rhagonycha fulva (Scop.), Dysdercus fasciatus Sign, and Notostira erratica (L.), in their first few steps on a dust deposit of the dyestuff have been estimated. The uptakes per step by insects of different size and structure were shown to differ only slightly. While the uptake was found to be greater for the larger insects, the smaller insects picked up more particles per unit body weight at each step.

The ratios of the actual amounts (estimated by a colorimetric method) picked up by the different pairs of legs are similar for all the insects that have been studied and in all cases the hind legs were shown to pick up an amount at least equal to the sum picked up by the fore- and middle legs.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 48 , Issue 4 , December 1957 , pp. 741 - 753
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1957

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

David, W. A. L. & Gardiner, B. O. C. (1950). Factors influencing the action of dust insecticides.—Bull. ent. Res., 41, pp. 1–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gratwick, M. (1957). The uptake of DDT and other lipophilic particles by blowflies walking over deposits.—Bull. ent. Res., 48, pp. 733–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holway, R. T. (1935). Preliminary note on the structure of the pretarsus and its possible phylogenetic significance.—Psyche, 42, pp. 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, C. T. (1954 a). Studies concerning the uptake of contact insecticides. I. The anatomy of the tarsi of certain Diptera of medical importance.—Bull. ent. Res., 45, pp. 711–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, C. T. (1954 b). The contamination and penetration of the integument of the blowfly, Protophormia terraenovae R.-D., by contact insecticides.— Ph.D. thesis, Univ. London.Google Scholar
Lewis, C. T. & Hughes, J. C. (1957). Studies concerning the uptake of contact insecticides. II. The contamination of flies exposed to particulate deposits.—Bull. ent. Res., 48, pp. 755–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slifer, E. H. (1950). Vulnerable areas on the surface of the tarsus and pretarsus of the grasshopper (Acrididae, Orthoptera); with special reference to the arolium.—Ann. ent. Soc. Amer., 43, pp. 173–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar