Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T18:27:04.620Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Persistence and Fate of DDT on Foliage. I.—The Influence of Plant Wax on the Toxicity and Persistence of Deposits of DDT Crystals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

P. E. Burt  and
J. Ward
P. E. Burt
Affiliation:
Department of Insecticides and Fungicides, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts.
J. Ward
Affiliation:
Department of Insecticides and Fungicides, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The persistence and toxicity of DDT crystals on thin layers of plant wax were studied. Deposits of crystalline DDT at rates of 2 to 8 microgm. per sq. cm. were applied to glass plates, plain or coated with a 0·5 μ layer of wax obtained from leaves of sisal or cabbage. The plates were stored for various periods at 18°C. and at 43°C. (representing temperature and tropical leaf-temperatures). DDT remaining after storage was estimated biologically by means of its contact action on adult Tribolium castaneum (Hbst.), and chemically by a modification of the Schechter-Haller method. At 18°C, there was no significant change in any of the deposits when estimated chemically. But biological estimation showed that, although the toxicity of the deposits on waxed plates was unchanged, that on glass plates was doubled after storage for eight days. The reason for this change was not discovered. At 43°C., the amount of DDT, estimated both chemically and biologically, diminished rapidly and was negligible after 26 days. The loss of toxicity at 43°C. was shown to be accompanied by loss of weight of the deposits. Loss at 43°C. from plain glass plates could be much reduced by storing them in an atmosphere saturated with DDT vapour. It appeared, therefore, that loss of toxicity at the higher temperature was due to volatilisation of DDT and not to decomposition.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 46 , Issue 1 , April 1955 , pp. 39 - 56
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1955

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

Bliss, C. I. (1934). The method of probits.—Science, 79, p. 38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brunson, M. H. & Koblitsky, L. (1953). Parathion, DDT and EPN deposits on peach foliage and fruit.—J. econ. Ent., 45, p. 953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgess, A. F. & Sweetman, H. L. (1949). The residual property of DDT as influenced by temperature and moisture.—J. econ. Ent., 42, p. 420.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chisholm, R. D., Nelson, R. H. & Fleck, E. E. (1949). The toxicity of DDT deposits as influenced by sunlight.—J. econ. Ent., 42, p. 154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curtis, O. F. (1936). Transpiration and the cooling of leaves.—Amer. J. Bot., 23, p. 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtis, O. F. (1938). Wallace and Clum, “Leaf Temperatures”: a critical analysis with additional data.—Amer. J. Bot., 25, p. 761sss.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Decker, G. C., Weinman, C. J. & Bann, J. M. (1950). A preliminary report on the rate of insecticide residue loss from treated plants.—J. econ. Ent., 43, p. 919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downing, G. & Norton, L. B. (1951). Modification of Schechter method of estimating DDT residue.—Analyt. Chem., 23, p. 1870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finney, D. J. (1947). Probit Analysis.—Cambridge, Univ. Pr.Google Scholar
Fleck, E. E. (1948). Residual action of organic insecticides.—Industr. Engng Chem., 40, p. 706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleck, E. E. (1949). The action of ultraviolet light on DDT.—J. Amer. chem. Soc., 71, p. 1034.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fogg, G. E. (1948 a). The penetration of 3:5-dinitro-o-cresol into leaves.—Ann. appl. Biol., 35, p. 315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fogg, G. E. (1948 b). Leaf penetration of spray chemicals.—Chem. Prod., 11, p. 58.Google Scholar
Gahan, J. B., Travis, B. V. & Lindquist, A. W. (1945). DDT as a residual-type spray to control disease-carrying mosquitoes: laboratory tests.—J. econ. Ent., 38, p. 236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, J. T. jr & Stearns, C. R. jr (1949). The effects of airplane DDT applications on citrus groves in Florida.—J. agric. Res., 78, p. 471.Google Scholar
Gunther, F. A., Carman, G. E. & Elliot, M. I. (1948). Inhibition of the field decomposition of DDT spray deposits on citrus; preliminary results.—J. econ. Ent., 41, p. 895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunther, F. A., Lindgren, D. L., Elliot, M. I. & Ladue, J. P. (1946). Persistence of certain DDT deposits under field conditions.—J. econ. Ent., 39, p. 624.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hadaway, A. B. & Barlow, F. (1949). Further studies on the loss of insecticides by absorption into mud and vegetation.—Bull. ent. Res., 40, p. 323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hopkins, L., Norton, L. B. & Gyrisco, G. G. (1952). Persistence of insecticide residues on forage crops.—J. econ. Ent., 45, p. 213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoskins, W. M. (1949). Deposit and residue of recent insecticides resulting from various control practices in California.—J. econ. Ent., 42, p. 966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huffaker, C. B. (1948). A technique for translocation of DDT in plants.—J. econ. Ent., 41, p. 650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kozlova, E. N. & Dvortsova, E. I. (1952). Rendering plants toxic with organic insecticides. [In Russian.]—Dokl. vsesoyuz. Akad. sel-khoz. Nauk Lenina, 17, no. 4, p. 41.Google Scholar
Lindgren, D. L. & Boyce, A. M. (1944). Results with dichloro-diphenyl-trichloro-ethane in control of the California red scale.—J. econ. Ent., 37, p. 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindquist, A. W., Jones, H. A. & Madden, A. H. (1946). DDT residual-type sprays as affected by light.—J. econ. Ent., 39, p. 55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McIntosh, A. H. (1947). Relation between particle size and shape of insecticidal suspensions and their contact toxicity. I.—Ann. appl. Biol., 34, p. 586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mistric, W. J. jr & Gaines, J. C. (1953). Effect of wind and other factors on the toxicity of certain insecticides.—J. econ. Ent., 46, p. 341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munger, F. (1948). Body-temperature measurements of the California red scale.—J. econ. Ent., 41, p. 422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plummer, B. E. jr & Carter, R. H. (1946). Translocation of DDT to potato tubers.—Bull. Maine agric. Exp. Sta., no. 442 (Rep. 1945–6), p. 140.Google Scholar
Potter, C. (1952). An improved laboratory apparatus for applying direct sprays and surface films, with data on the electrostatic charge on atomized spray fluids.—Ann. appl. Biol., 39, p. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sloan, M. J., Rawlins, W. A. & Norton, L. B. (1951). Factors affecting the loss of DDT and parathion residues on lettuce.—J. econ. Ent., 44, p. 701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stafford, E. M. & Hinkley, H. S. (1946). DDT and related compounds for control of black scale on olives.—Circ. Calif, agric. Exp. Sta., no. 365, p. 91.Google Scholar
Symes, C. B., Hadaway, A. B., Barlow, F. & Galley, W. (1948). Field experiments with DDT and benzene hexachloride against tsetse (Glossina palpalis).—Bull. ent. Res., 38, p. 591.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teotia, T. P. S. & Dahm, P. A. (1950). The effect of temperature, humidity and weathering on the residual toxicities to the house fly of five organic insecticides.—J. econ. Ent., 43, p. 864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waggoner, P. E. & Shaw, R. H. (1952). Temperature of potato and tomato leaves.—Plant Physiol., 27, p. 710.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wallace, R. H. & Clum, H. H. (1938). Leaf temperatures.—Amer. J. Bot., 25, p. 83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wichman, H. J., Patterson, W. I., Clifford, P. A., Klein, A. K. & Claborn, H. V. (1946). Decomposition and volatility of DDT and some of its derivatives.—J. Ass. off. agric. Chem., Wash., 29, p. 218.Google Scholar