Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-lvtdw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-22T02:45:53.237Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

GRASSHOPPER CONTROL: LABORATORY TESTING AS A MEANS OF EVALUATING FIELD PERFORMANCE1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

K. S. McKinlay
Affiliation:
Research Station, Canada Department of Agriculture, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan

Abstract

Fourteen insecticides were tested by direct contact against second-instar nymphs of a grasshopper, Melanoplus sanguinipes F. Of these, seven were judged to be sufficiently promising to be compared for toxicity and persistence as deposits on wheat seedlings. Comparison with a dieldrin standard showed that Dursban, Dibrom, and malathion were extremely effective by contact but had little persistence on growing wheat. Baygon was extremely effective by contact and showed some persistence. CIBA 9643 and dimethoate were the only two compounds to show persistent effects almost equivalent to dieldrin, and CIBA 9643 was more toxic than dieldrin by direct contact.It was concluded that CIBA 9643 was the only compound, of those tested, which might give grasshopper control equivalent to, or better than, dieldrin or the currently recommended dimethoate.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1969

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

McDonald, H., and McKinlay, K. S.. 1962. Chemical control of grasshoppers. Canada Department of Agriculture, Pesticide Research Report 1962.Google Scholar
McDonald, H., and McKinlay, K. S.. 1963. Chemical control of grasshoppers. Canada Department of Agriculture, Pesticide Research Report 1963.Google Scholar
Sun, Y. P. 1966. Correlation between laboratory and field data on testing insecticides. J. econ. Ent. 59: 11311133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar