Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:48:32.482Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The loss of activity of pyrethrum. II

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

F. Tattersfield  and
J. T. Martin
F. Tattersfield
Affiliation:
(Department of Insecticides and Fungicides, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts.)
J. T. Martin
Affiliation:
(Department of Insecticides and Fungicides, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts.)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

1. The loss of activity of pyrethrum flowers and preparations has been studied.

2. The degree of concordance between the content of pyrethrin I, as determined by the acid method, and the insecticidal value of pyrethrinised dusts, before and after exposure to air and artificial illumination, has been statistically examined. The pyrethrin I values, corrected for a small residual amount of extraneous matter, indicate fairly closely the degree of activity of the samples. The loss of pyrethrins on exposure has been traced out quantitatively.

3. A comparison was made between two samples of pyrethrum flowers, one rich and the other poor in pyrethrins, in order to determine the degree of concordance between the pyrethrin I content and their toxicity. The pyrethrin I value as determined by the acid method, subject to a small correction, gave a good indication of the relative activities of the samples.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , October 1934 , pp. 598 - 626
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1934

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

REFERENCES

(1)Bliss, C. I.Science (1934), 79, 38, 409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2)Fisher, R. A.Statistical Methods for Research Workers (1930), 3rd ed. London: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
(3)Gaddum, J. H.Reports on Biological Standards (1933), Med. Res. Council Special Rep. Series, No. III, No. 183.Google Scholar
(4)Gnadinger, C. B.Pyrethrum Flowers (1933). Minneapolis: McGill Lithograph Co.Google Scholar
(5)Gnadinger, C. B. and Corl, C. S.Ind. Eng. Chem. (1932), 24, 901.Google Scholar
(6)Hemmingsen, A. M.Quart. J. Pharm. (1933), 6, 39.Google Scholar
(7)McCallan, S. E. A. and Wilcoxon, F.Contrib. Boyce Thompson Inst. (1933), 5, 173.Google Scholar
(8)Tattersfield, F.J. Agric. Sci. (1932), 22, 396. (Rothamsted Memoirs, 17.)Google Scholar
(9)Tattersfield, F. and Morris, H. M.Bull. Ent. Res. (1924), 14, Pt. 3, p. 223. (Rothamsted Memoirs, 12.)Google Scholar
(10)Tattersfield, F., Hobson, R. P. and Gimingham, C. T.J. Agric. Sci. (1929), 19, 266. (Rothamsted Memoirs, 14.)Google Scholar