Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T08:44:02.489Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Influence of some Physical and Chemical Conditions of Water on May-fly Larvae (Cloëon dipterum, L.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Hem Singh Pruthi
Hem Singh Pruthi
Affiliation:
Assistant Superintendent, Zoological Survey of India.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Numerous experiments have been performed to study the specific effect of hydrogen ion concentration, CO2 and oxygen content of water on may-fly larvae, which warrant the following conclusions :—

1. While hydrogen ion concentration is a factor of great significance, the carbon dioxide pressure is of greater importance and should afford a very reliable index of the suitability of water as a habitat for true aquatic insects.

2. May-fly larvae, and presumably other insects as well, can stand a very low concentration of oxygen, below 1·0 cc. per litre. In view of the fact that in nature oxygen content seldom goes down to such a low figure, insects should not, as a rule, die of lack of oxygen.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , March 1927 , pp. 279 - 284
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1927

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

*Barber, M. A. & Komp, W. H. W., 1922. Trans. 4th Conf. Malaria Field Workers,Chattanooga, Tenn.,1922. Public Health Bull. no. 137. (Sum. in Pub. Health Eng. Abstracts, Washington, 1924.)Google Scholar
Birge, E. A. & Juday, C., 1911. Wisconsin Survey Bull. no. 22.Google Scholar
Bodine, J. H., 1923. Biol. Bull., xlv, p. 149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, W. M., 1922. “ The Determination of Hydrogen Ions.” Baltimore.Google Scholar
Cole, A. E., 1921. Jl. Exp. Zool., xxxiii, p. 293.Google Scholar
Fraser, L. M., 1925. Ann. Jl. Phys., lxxii, p. 119.Google Scholar
Hacker, H. P., 1918–1920. F.M.S. Malaria Bur. Reports.Google Scholar
Haywood, C., 1925. Jl. Gen. Phys., vii, p. 693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob, M. H., 1920. Ann. Jl. Phys., li, p. 321, & liii, p. 457.Google Scholar
Jewell, M. E., 1922. Ecology, iii, p. 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juday, C., 1908. Trans. Wis. Acad. Sc., Arts & Lett., xvi, p. 10.Google Scholar
Juday, C., 1920. Ant. Rec., xvii, p. 340.Google Scholar
Lamborn, W. A., 1922. Bull. Ent. Res., xiii, p. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leathers, A. L., 1922. Bull. Bur. Fish., xxxviii, no. 915, p. 1.Google Scholar
MacGregor, M. E., 1921. Parasitology, xiii, p. 348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClendon, J. F., 1917. Jl. Biol. Chem., xxx, pp. 225 & 265.Google Scholar
Saunders, J. T., 1926. Brit. Jl. Exp. Biol., iii (in press).Google Scholar
Senior-White, R., 1926. Bull. Ent. Res., xvi, p. 187.Google Scholar
Singh Pruthi, H., 1926. Brit. Jl. Exp. Biol. (in press).Google Scholar
Smith, H. W. & Clowes, G. H. A., 1923–1924. Ann. Jl. Phys., lxiv, p. 144, & lxviii, p. 183.Google Scholar
Stickney, F., 1922. Ecology, iii, p. 250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walling, E. V., 1926. Jl. Exp. Zool., iii, p. 621.Google Scholar
*Wesenburg-Lund, C., 1921. D. Kgl. Danske Vidensk. Selsk. Skrifter, Naturv. og Math., Afd. 8, Raekke vii, pp. 1–208.Google Scholar
Willis, J. A., 1925. Biol. Bull., xlviii, p. 209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar