Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T22:30:06.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Latent toxicity of dieldrin in the housefly, Musca domestica L. (diptera, muscidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

P. Gerolt
P. Gerolt
Affiliation:
Shell Research Limited, Woodstock Laboratory, Sittingbourne Research Centre, Sittingbourne, Kent ME9 8AG, U.K.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The effects on the emerging adult of topical application of 14C-dieldrin to third-instar larvae of Musca domestica L., and the distribution of the insecticide in the fly, the puparial case, and the holding medium, were examined. The dose ranged from 0·04 to ca 13 μg/larva. All flies emerging after treatments of 1 μg and above showed symptoms of poisoning some time after emergence. With the larger doses an increasing number of flies, although they escaped the puparium, were unable to reach the surface of the holding medium. With the two top doses some were unable to escape fully from the puparial case. These flies contained amounts of dieldrin well in excess of the LD99 dose. However, even the highest dose allowed some flies to emerge normally. None of the treatments affected metamorphosis and all flies appeared morphologically normal. The data provided evidence that the transfer of dieldrin to the adult via the pupal stage accounts for the effects in the newly emerged fly.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 65 , Issue 4 , February 1976 , pp. 651 - 657
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1976

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

Allison, D., Kalliman, B. J., Cope, O. B. & Van Valin, C. C. (1963). Insecticides: effects on cutthroat trout of repeated exposure to DDT.—Science, N.Y. 142, 958–961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyce, C. B. C., Tieze-Dagevos, J. W. & Larman, V. N (1967). The susceptibility of Biomphalaria glabrata throughout its life-history to N-tritylmorpholine.—Bull. Wld Hlth Org. 37, 13–21.Google ScholarPubMed
Burdick, G. E., Harris, E. J., Dean, H. J., Walker, T. M., Skea, J. & Colby, D. (1964). The accumulation of DDT in lake trout and the effect on reproduction.—Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 93, 127–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunachie, J. F. & Fletcher, W. W. (1966). Effect of some insecticides on the hatching rate of hens' eggs.—Nature, Lond. 212, 1062–1063.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gerolt, P. (1965). The fate of dieldrin in insects.—J. econ. Ent. 58, 849–857.Google Scholar
Holz, W. (1949). Wirkung von E605-f auf Eier verschiedener Insekten.—Anz. Schädlingak. 22, 134–138.Google Scholar
Kalina, B. F. (1950), Development and viability of Drosophila melanogaster on a medium containing DDT.—Science, N.Y. 111, 39–40.Google Scholar
Koeman, J. H., Oudejans, R. C. H. M. & Huisman, E. A. (1967). Danger of chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides in birds' eggs.—Nature, Lond. 215, 1094–1096.Google Scholar
MacCuaig, R. D. & Yeates, M. N. D. B. (1964). The toxicity of some insecticides to first-instar nymphs of the desert locust, Schistocerca gregaria (Forsk.).—Ann. appl. Biol. 54, 415–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moriarty, F. (1968). The toxicity and sublethal effects of pp'-DDT and dieldrin to Aglais urticae (L.) (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) and Chorthippus brunneus (Thumberg) (Saltatoria: Acrididae).—Ann. appl. Biol. 62, 371–393.Google Scholar
O'brien, R. D. (1960). Toxic phosphorus esters.—434 pp. London, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Perry, A. S. (1960). Metabolism of insecticides by various insect species.—J. Agric. Fd Chem. 8, 266–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuhmann, G. (1953). Investigations on the effect of phosphoric acid esters on pests occurring in stone fruit (Rhagoletis cerasi L., Laspeyresia funebrana Tr., Hoplocampa minuta Christ, and Hoplocampa flava L.).—Höfchenbr. Bayer PflSchutz-Nachr. 6, (Engl. Ed.), 233–282.Google Scholar
Schwartz, E. (1950). Wirkung von E605-f auf Eier des Kartoffelkäfers.—Anz. Schädlingsk. 23, 87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, M. & Sanchez, F. F. (1964). Latent toxicity of insecticides to resistant and susceptible strains of the housefly.—J. econ. Ent. 57, 842–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Speyer, W. (1950). Haben die modernen Kontaktgifte eine ovicide Wirkung?— NachrBl. dt. PflSchutzdienst. Stuttg. 2, 2–3.Google Scholar
Sternburg, J., Chang, S. C. & Kearns, C. W. (1959). The release of a neuroactive agent by the American cockroach after exposure to DDT or electrical stimulation.—J. econ. Ent. 52, 1070–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tamashiro, M. & Sherman, M. (1955). Direct and latent toxicity of insecticides to oriental fruit fly larvae and their internal parasites.—J. econ. Ent. 48, 75–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, C. M., Narahashi, T. & Yamada, M. (1971). The neurotoxic action of dieldrin and its derivatives in the cockroach.—Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 1, 84–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watts, W. S. (1969). Transmission of dieldrin from insects to their progeny.—Nature, Lond. 221, 762–763.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
West, L. S. (1951). The housefly: its natural history, medical importance, and control.—584 pp. Ithaca, N.Y., Comstock.Google Scholar
Wigglesworth, V. B. (1972). The principles of insect physiology. 7th edn.—827 pp. London, Chapman & Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar