Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:14:23.384Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies on the Ecology of the Levant House Fly (Musca domestica vicina Macq.).*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

B. Feldman-Muhsam
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Cow dung was found to be suitable for breeding M. domestica vicina.

The dependence of the duration of development on the temperature was investigated for all stages of development and could be suitably expressed by the formula of an equilateral hyperbola.

Adult longevity was studied under various conditions of temperature and humidity. The maximum length of life in captivity was found to be 106 days, the average being 20–30 days. As the temperature rises, longevity decreases. Above 20°C, life is longest at a relative humidity of 42–55 per cent., whereas below 20°C., a lower humidity (30–40 per cent. R.H.) is favourable.

Fertility was studied from the point of view of size of individual egg hatches and the frequency of oviposition.

The mean number of eggs deposited by a female fly per day of adult life does not depend on the duration of adult life and does not change considerably during life.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 35 , Issue 1 , April 1944 , pp. 53 - 67
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1944

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

Bonnier, G. (1926). Temperature and time of development in the two sexes in Drosophila.—Brit. J. exp. Biol., 4, p. 186.Google Scholar
Cousin, G. (1932). Etude expérimentale de la diapause des insectes.—Bull. Biol. Fr. Belg., Suppl. 15.Google Scholar
Derbeneva-Ukhova, P. V. (1935). The influence of the conditions of adult feeding on the development of the ovaries of M. domestica.—Med. Parasitol., Moscow, 4, p. 394.Google Scholar
Derbeneva-Ukhova, P. V. (1935 a). On the number of generations of M. domestica.—Med. Parasitol., Moscow, 4, p. 404.Google Scholar
Dunn, L. H. (1923). On the oviposition of the housefly, M. domestica, L., in Panama.—Bull. ent. Res., 13, p. 301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hase, A. (1935). Über die Wärmeentwicklung in Massenzuchten von Insekten, sowie über ein einfaches Verfahren, Stubenfliegen dauernd zu züchten.—Zool. Anz., 112, p. 291.Google Scholar
Hewitt, C. G. (1914). The House-fly.—Cambridge.Google Scholar
Howard, L. O. (1912). The House fly—disease carrier.—London.Google Scholar
Kobayashi, H. (1935). The influence of temperature upon the development of larvae of M. domestica.—Trud. Dinam. Razvit., 10, p. 385.Google Scholar
Kobayashi, H. (1937). The relationship between laboratory temperature and the development of flies.—Keijo J. Med., 8, p. 19.Google Scholar
Kusina, O. S. (1936). Fecundity and pre-adult mortality in M. domestica.—Med. Parasitol., Moscow, 5, p. 329.Google Scholar
Lörincz, F. & Makara, G. (1935). Observations and experiments on fly control and the biology of the housefly.—L.o.N., Hlth Org., C. H. Hyg. rur. E. H. 5.Google Scholar
Petrishcheva, P. A. (1932). The biology of the house-fly under the conditions of the town of Samara.—Mag. Parasit., Léningr., 3, p. 161.Google Scholar
Richardson, H. H. (1932). An efficient medium for rearing house flies throughout the year.—Science, 76, p. 350.Google Scholar
Tishchenko, O. D. (1929). On the question of the hibernation of the house-fly.—Sanit. ent. Byull., 1, no. 2, p. 10.Google Scholar