Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:03:00.085Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A dipping technique for selecting house-flies, Musca domestica L., for resistance to insecticides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

R. M. Sawicki  and
A. W. Farnham
R. M. Sawicki
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts.
A. W. Farnham
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A dipping technique for exposing large numbers of house-flies (Musca domestica L.) to measured doses of insecticide is described. It is suitable for selecting resistant populations and, while giving consistent results, is more rapid than other techniques used for this purpose.

Up to 2,000 flies of both sexes, less than 24 hr. old, are immersed for three minutes in 100 ml. of a 70 per cent, mixture of acetone and water containing the required concentration of insecticide, using a 9-cm. sintered glass Büchner funnel as the immersion chamber. The liquid is then removed by suction, the sides of the funnel are wiped with filter paper, and the flies are allowed to drain for three minutes; they are then transferred in small batches to plastic recovery chambers containing food. Mortality is recorded next day, and the survivors are released into breeding cages.

Experiments showed that immersion for three minutes in 70 per cent, acetone was virtually harmless to the flies and that the amount of insecticide deposited on individual flies was reasonably uniform (coefficient of variation about 20%). Batches of 2,000 flies, but not more, could be treated at one time.

When the dipping technique was compared with topical application of measured drops of insecticide, using a susceptible strain of house-flies and two other strains that were resistant to DDT and diazinon, dipping gave steeper log-probit regression lines than topical application, and the LD50's and resistance factors of the resistant strains were smaller. With flies resistant to DDT, dipping gave straight regression lines whereas topical application gave compound lines.

Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 55 , Issue 3 , December 1964 , pp. 541 - 546
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1964

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

Busvine, J. R. (1957). A critical review of the techniques for testing insecticides.— 208 pp. London, Commw. Inst. Ent.Google Scholar
Fay, R. W., Kilpatrick, J. W. & Morris, G. C. (1958). Malathion resistance studies on the house fly.—J. econ. Ent. 51 pp. 452–453.Google Scholar
Keiding, J. (1960). Resistance to organo-phosphorus compounds in laboratory strains.—Rep. Govt Pest Infest. Lab., Springforbi 1956–57 pp. 58–59.Google Scholar
McIntosh, A. H. (1958). Dipping methods.—In Shepard, H. H., Ed. Methods of testing chemicals on insects, I pp. 130–153.Google Scholar
Saccà, G. (1957). La resistenza di Musca domestica L. agli esteri fosforici in provincia di Latina.—Riv. Parassit. 18 pp. 289–292.Google Scholar
Sawicki, R. M. (1961). A technique for the topical application of poisons to non-anaesthetised house-flies for knockdown assessments.—Bull. ent. Res. 51 pp. 715–722.Google Scholar
Sawicki, R. M. & Green, G. (In press.) Changes in the susceptibility of susceptible and resistant adult house-flies (Musca domestica L.) to diazinon with age.—Bull. ent. Res.Google Scholar
Sawicki, R. M. & Thain, E. M. (1961). Chemical and biological examination of commercial pyrethrum extracts for insecticidal constituents.—J. Sci. Fd Agric. 2 pp. 137–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, H. G., LaBrecque, G. C., Gahan, J. B. & Smith, C. N. (1959). Insecticide resistance in seven Orlando house fly colonies.—J. econ. Ent. 52 pp. 308–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar