Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-rvbq7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-08T09:27:52.735Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Moth Pests in Cocoa and Confectionery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Winefred M. Noyes
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The chief pests of cocoa and chocolate are the Pyralid moths, Ephestia elutella (cocoa moth), E. kühniella (Mediterranean flour moth), E. cautella (fig moth), and Plodia interpunctella (Indian meal moth).

2. Beans are infested before arrival at the factory, this infestation commencing on the plantation and increasing during the various stages of transit to the factory. The docks, in particular, may be the most important source of infestation owing to the fact that there fresh consignments may be brought into direct contact with much older consignments already heavily infested.

3. The steps recommended for factory use are:—

(a) General cleanliness in all parts of the factory, avoidance of dead spaces which offer opportunities for breeding and pupation, removal of all waste material, constant sweeping, frequent whitewashing and distempering, etc.

(b) Heat treatment of beans on arrival at the factory and subsequent storage where they will not be liable to re-infestation. The heat treatment to consist of subjection to a temperature of 60° C.–65° C. for a time dependent on quantity of beans.

(c) The use of traps in the factory in order to keep down the numbers of stray moths. Such traps may consist of vinegar and syrup.

(d) The protection of all finished goods by means of fine-mesh materials so far as possible.

4. No insect life survives either roasting or any stage of manufacture in which the chocolate is in a molten condition.

5. Although parasites exist which prey on the larvae of these moths, it is not considered that extermination by means of them would be practicable.

6. Fumigation of warehouses, especially at the docks, is under consideration by the Empire Marketing Board, and any recommendation they may make will probably be applicable to factories. At the present stage, however, it is premature to make suggestions.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , March 1930 , pp. 77 - 121
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1930

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

(1) Anon. 1878. Nature, 17: 402.Google Scholar
(2)Atmore, E. A. 1884. Ent. Mon. Mag., 20: 258.Google Scholar
(3)Back, E. A. & Cotton, R. T., 1925. A newly recommended fumigant, Ethyl Acetate in Combination with Carbon Tetrachloride. J. Econ. Ent., 18: 302–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4)Bryce, P. H. 1889. Ontario Proc. Bd. Health, Bull. 1.Google Scholar
(5)Buckler, W. 1882. Natural History of Ephestia passulella.—Ent. Mon. Mag., 20: 104–106.Google Scholar
(6)Buxton, P. A. 1920. Insect Pests of Dates and the Date Palm in Mesopotamia and elsewhere. Bull. Ent. Res., 11: 287–303, 1 pl. 1 fig.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(7)Chittenden, F. H. 1897. A new Storehouse Moth new to the U.S. with notes on other Species [E. cahiritella, Zell. (Dried Currant Moth].—Bull. U.S. Dept. Agric. Div. Ent., N.S. 8: 7.Google Scholar
(8)Chittenden, F. H. & Smyth, E. G. 1911. The Fig Moth in Smyrna [E. cautella].—Bull. U.S. Dept. Agric. Bur. Ent., 104: 9–40, pls. i–iv Chittenden; & 41–65, pls. v–xvi, Smyth.Google Scholar
(9)Danysz, J. 1893. Origine et Multiplication de l'E. kühniella, Zell., dans les Moulins en France.—C. R. Acad. Sci. Fr., cxvi: 206–209.Google Scholar
(10)Danysz, J. 1893. L'Organe pigmente (testicule embryonnaire) de la chenille de l'Ephestia kühniella.—Ann. Soc. ent. Fr., 72 (Bull.): clxxviii.Google Scholar
(11)Durrant, J. H. & Beveridge, W. W. O. 1913–1914. [Report on the Army Biscuit Enquiry, 1913.] [Reprinted 1918.] J. R. Army Med. Corps 20: 615–634, 7 pls.;Google Scholar
(11)Durrant, J. H. & Beveridge, W. W. O. 1913–1914. [Report on the Army Biscuit Enquiry, 1913.] [Reprinted 1918.] J. R. Army Med. Corps 22: 208–209. British Museum (Nat. His.) [Pubs.] 24 pp., 7 pls.Google Scholar
(12)Fallou, J. & Ragonot, E. L. 1871.—Ann. Soc. ent. Fr.. (5), 1 (Bull.): xxiv & lxx.Google Scholar
(13)Fletcher, J. 1890. The Mediterranean Flour Moth (Ephestia kühniella Zeller).—Canad. Ent., 22: 41–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(14)Froggatt, W. W. 1910. The Miller's Pest. The Mediterranean Flour Moth (E. kühniella, Zell).—Agric. Gaz. N.S.W., 21: 1076–1080, 1 pl.Google Scholar
(15)Goodwin, W. H. 1914. Some Factors affecting Results in the Use of Hgh Temperatures for the Control of Insects injuring Cereal Products.—.J. Econ. Ent., 7: 313–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(16)Hauswaldt, & Stollwerck, . 1891. Korresp. Verbd. Deutsch. Schokladefabrik, No. 5.Google Scholar
(17)Johnson, W. G. 1895. The Mediterranean Flour Moth (Ephestia kühniella, Zeller) in Europe and America.—Rep. State Ent. Illinois, 19 appx. 65 pp., 7 figs.Google Scholar
(18)Johnson, W. G. 1899. Ent. News, 10: 207.Google Scholar
(19)Johnson, W. H. 1912. Cocoa: its Cultivation and Preparation, pp. 159–160.Google Scholar
(20)Kehring, H. 1914. (Abstracts in Rev. App. Ent., Ser. A. 3: 382; Mon. Bull. Agric. Intell. Pl. Dis., Rome, 6: 319–320) Bull. Soc. Nat. Agric. fr., Paris, 74: 864–866.Google Scholar
(21)Kempf, N. W. 1926. Control of Insect Infection in Nutmeats.—Manuf. Confect., 6, no. 1,: 20–22;Google Scholar
Kempf, N. W. 1926. Control of Insect Infection in Nutmeats.—Manuf. Confect., 6, no. 2: 22–23;Google Scholar
Kempf, N. W. 1926. Control of Insect Infection in Nutmeats.—Manuf. Confect., 6, no. 5: 13–15.Google Scholar
(22)Klein, Sidney. 1887. Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1887: lii.Google Scholar
(23)Knapp, A. W. 1912. Insect Pests in the Cocoa Store.—Bull. Imp. Inst., 19: 189–200.Google Scholar
(24)Lovett, A. L. 1921. The Indian Meal Moth (Plodia interpunctella, Hübn.).—16th Bien. Rep. Bd. Hort. Oregon: 118–123, 4 figs.Google Scholar
(25)Maskew, F. 1912. A Serious Walnut Pest (Ephestia elutella, Hübn.).—Mon. Bull. State Comm. Hort. Calif., 1: 366–372, 7 figs.Google Scholar
(26)MacRobertson, 's (Melbourne). Care of Sweets.—Confect. Union, 06 15th, 1926.Google Scholar
(27)Ormerod, E. A. 1888–1890. (E. kühniella in Flour Mills and Stores).—Reports of Observations on injurious Insects, Nos. 12, 13, 14.Google Scholar
(28)Porritt, G. T. 1880. Ent. Mon. Mag., 16: 261;Google Scholar
Porritt, G. T. 1880. Ent. Mon. Mag., 17: 44.Google Scholar
(29)Poulton, E. B. 1888. The Determination of Sex in Certain Living Lepidopterous Larvae (E. kühniella).—Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1888: 598–599, pl. xvii, figs. 9 & 10.Google Scholar
(30)Prest, W. 1877. Entomologist, 10: 212–213.Google Scholar
(31)Reinhardt, G. 1891. Korresp. Verbd. Deutsch. Schokladefabrik, no. 7.Google Scholar
(32)Riley, C. V. & Howard, L. O. 1889. The so-called Mediterranean Flour Moth (Ephestia kühniella Zeller).—Insect Life, 2: 166–171, 3 figs.Google Scholar
(33)Riley, C. V. & Howard, L. O. 1893. [Comment on paper on E. kühniella Danysz, J., 1893.]—Mem. Lab. Parasit. Vég. Bourse de Commerce, 1, Paris.—Insect Life, 5: 290.Google Scholar
(34)Wadsworth, J. T. 1919. Notes on the Life History of E. kühniella.—Ann. App. Biol., 203–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(35)Whymper, 1921. Cocoa and Chocolate, pp. 131–132.Google Scholar
(36)Zeller, P. C. 1879. Ent. Ztg. (Stettin), 40: 466–471.Google Scholar
(37)Zipperer, P. 1902. The Manufacture of Chocolate, pp. 99–100.Google Scholar