Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T12:24:53.063Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Insecticide tolerance of pregnant females of Glossina palpalis palpalis (Robineau-Desvoidy) (Diptera: Glossinidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

E. K. Riordan
E. K. Riordan
Affiliation:
Nigerian Institute for Trypanosomiasis Research, PMB2077, Kaduna, Kaduna State, Nigeria
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Females of Glossina palpalis palpalis (Robineau-Desvoidy) caught in Nigeria were treated topically with acetone or different doses of insecticides. None was fed after treatment. Flies later larvipositing were considered to have been pregnant and those neither aborting nor larvipositing as nonpregnant. Pregnant flies were 1·3 times as heavy as non-pregnant ones. Relative tolerances were assessed by comparing LD50s. For organochlorines (DDT, dieldrin and endosulfan), pregnant females were 2·5—4 times as tolerant as non-pregnant ones, doubtless due to diversion of insecticideinto lipid-rich larval food during late pregnancy. Data for pregnant flies did not indicate any increased tolerance of organophosphates (malathion, fenitrothion, tetrachlorvinphos and pirimiphos-methyl), possibly due to the low lipid solubility of these insecticides.Pregnant and non-pregnant females were equally tolerant of the pyrethroid Sumithrin ((lR)-cis-trans-isomer of phenothrin); accelerated larviposition prevented diversion of insecticide into in utero larvae. Pregnant females were 2·6 times as tolerant of tetramethrin (pyrethroid) as non-pregnant ones. Twenty-five per cent, of flies treated with acetone or low insecticide-doses larviposited, but the results indicated that larviposition was inhibited by high doses of most insecticides, which killed before larviposition, and, noticeably, by intermediate doses of some pyrethroids (fenvalerate, permethrin and deltamethrin), probably causing prolonged paralysis of uterine and larval muscles. The results did not indicate there was raised tolerance of fenvalerate, permethrin or deltamethrin among pregnant females, but calculations including assumed pregnant ones (unrecognized due to inhibited larvipositions) suggested that pregnant females were 2·5–5·5 times as tolerantas non-pregnant ones. Other investigations showed that flies surviving for several days after treatment with pyrethroids can feed and thrive; if this allows time for the reversalof delayed larviposition, then pregnant females could be significantly more tolerant of some pyrethroids than non-pregnant ones.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 77 , Issue 2 , June 1987 , pp. 213 - 226
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

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

BALDRY, D. A. T., MOLYNEUX, D. H.& VAN WETTERE, P. (1978). The experimental application of insecticide from a helicopter for the control of riverine populations of Glossina tachinoides in West Africa. V. Evaluation of decamethrin applied as a spray.—Pest Artic. & News Summ. 24, 447–454.Google Scholar
BURNETT, G. F. (1962 a). The susceptibility of tsetse flies to topical applications of insecticides.III.—.The effects of age and pregnancy on the susceptibility of adults of Glossina morsitans Westw.—Bull. ent. Res. 53, 337–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BURNETT, G. F. (1962 b). The susceptibility of tsetse flies to topical applications of insecticides. IV.—Wild-caught adults of Glossina swynnertoni Aust.—Bull. ent. Res. 53, 347–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BURNETT, G. F. (1963 a). The susceptibility of tsetse flies to topical applications of insecticides. VI.—Data on more chlorinated hydrocarbons and organophosphates, and a general discussion.—Bull. ent. Res. 53, 753–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BURNETT, G. F. (1963 b). The susceptibility of tsetse flies to topical applications of insecticides.— 10pp. Geneva, Wld Hlth Org. (WHO/Vector Control/37, 24 May 1963).Google Scholar
BUSVINE, J. R. (1957). A critical review of the techniques for testing insecticides.–208 pp. London,Commonw. Inst.Ent.Google Scholar
CHALLIER, A. (1965).Amélioration de la méthode de détermination de l'âge physiologique des glossines.Etudes faites sur Glossina palpalis gambiensis Vanderplank, 1949.—Bull. Soc. Path. exot. 58, 250–259.Google Scholar
DAVIES, J. E. (1978). The use of ageing techniques to evaluate the effects of aerial spraying against Glossina morsitans centralis Machado (Diptera: Glossinidae) in northern Botswana.—Bull. ent. Res. 68, 373–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DENLINGER, D. L. & Ma, W. C. (1974). Dynamics of the pregnancy cycle in the tsetse Glossina morsitans.—J. Insect Physiol. 20, 10151026.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
HADAWAY, A. B. (1972). Toxicity of insecticides to tsetse flies.— Bull. Wld Hlth Org. 46, 353–362.Google ScholarPubMed
IRVING, N. S. (1968). The absorption and storage of insecticide by the in utero larva of the tsetse fly Glossina pallidipes Aust.—Bull. ent. Res. 58, 221–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KWAN, W. H. & GATEHOUSE, A. G. (1978). The effects of low doses of three insecticides on activity, feeding, mating, reproductive performance and survival in Glossina morsitans morsitans (Glossinidae).—Entomologia exp. appl. 23, 201–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KWAN, W. H., GATEHOUSE, A. G. & KERRIDGE, E. (1982). Effectsof endosulfan on pregnant females of Glossina morsitans morsitans Westwood (Diptera: Glossinidae) and their offspring.—Bull. ent. Res. 72, 391–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LANGLEY, P. A. (1977). Physiology of tsetse flies (Glossina spp.) (Diptera: Glossinidae): a review.— Bull. ent. Res. 67, 523–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langley, P. A. & Pimley, R. W. (1975). Quantitative aspects of reproduction and larval nutrition in Glossina morsitans morsitans Westw. (Diptera, Glossinidae) fed in vitro.—Bull. ent. Res. 65, 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Litchfield, J. T. & Wilcoxon, F. (1949). A simplified method of evaluating dose-effect experiments.—J. Pharmacol. 96, 99–113.Google ScholarPubMed
RIORDAN, E. K. (1986). Abortion by the tsetse fly Glossina palpalis palpalis after treatment with insecticides.—Entomologia exp. appl. 41, 193–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
RIORDAN, E. K. (1987). Condition and fate of larvae from insecticide-treated female tsetse flies, Glossina palpalis.Entomologia exp. appl. 43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
RIORDAN, E. K. & GREGORY, W. G. (1985). Toxicity of insecticides to the tsetse fly, Glossina palpalis palpalis, in Nigeria and comparison of tolerancesin 1974–1975 and 1979–1982.—Tropical Pest Management 31, 264–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SEKETELI, A. & KUZOE., F. A. S. (1983). Essais d'épandage au sol de trois pyrethroides de synthese (cypermethrine, décamethrine, permethrine) contre Glossina palpalis s.l. dans une zone pré-forestiére de Cote d'lvoire; caractéristiques physiques des gouttelettes et effets sur la densité des populations vectrices.—pp. 589–608 in International Scientific Council for Trypanosomiasis Research and Control. Seventeenth Meeting, Arusha, Tanzania, 19–24 October1981.–664 pp. Nairobi, OAU/STRC (publication no. 112).Google Scholar
SPIELBERGER, U., NA'ISA, B. K., KOCH, K., MANNO, A., SKIDMORE, P. R. & COUTTS, H. H. (1979). Field trials with the synthetic pyrethroids permethrin, cypermethrin and decamethrin against Glossina (Diptera: Glossinidae) in Nigeria.—Bull. ent. Res. 69, 667–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WHO (WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION) (1975). Tentative instructions for determining the susceptibility or resistance of houseflies, tsetse, stableflies, blowflies, etc. to insecticides.—5 pp. Geneva, Wld Hlth Org. (WHO/VBC/75.590).Google Scholar