Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-15T03:26:39.993Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Measurements by two methods of the susceptibility to DDT and Dieldrin of Glossina palpalis (R.-D.) in Northern Nigeria

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

K. Riordan
Affiliation:
Nigerian Institute for Trypanosomiasis Research,*Kaduna, Northern Nigeria

Extract

The susceptibilities to DDT and to dieldrin of one-day-old teneral examples of Glossina palpalis (R. -D.), obtained from pupae collected from the field, were measured in the laboratory in Nigeria by two methods, one recommended by the W.H.O. Expert Committee on Insecticides (1963) and the other described by Kernaghan & Johnston (1962).

Pupae were kept in dry sand at a controlled temperature of 78–79°F. and 70–80 per cent. relative humidity until the adult flies emerged, and the latter were then kept individually in 3 × 1 in. glass tubes. All exposures to insecticides were carries out at room temperatures. Five flies were exposed together for one hour in the W.H.O. method, and flies were exposed individually for 1 1/2 minutes in the other method. After exposure, they were kept in a cabinet at 78–79°F. and 60–70 per cent. relative humidity. Mortalities were assessed 8, 24 and 48 hr. after the end of exposure, but only the 24-hr. results are presented. Regression lines and values for LC50’s were calculated by the method of probits

The mortalities amongst untreated flies averaged 5.6 per cent. for males and 5.1 for females, the latter value being insignifiantly affected by the method used. Dieldrin was far more toxic than DDT to both sexes, and females were apparently more susceptible than males to both insecticides; it is suggested that females pick up relatively more of a given deposit because of their greater weight.

The slope of the regression line relating mortality to insecticide concentration was steeper for long exposures than for short ones; it is suggested that this comes about because some insecticide picked up by the flies is lost after they are removed from the treated surface, the loss being relatively greater when greater discussed, and it is concluded that exposure for 1 1/2 minutes is long for satisfactory assessment of susceptibility when continuous contact with the insecticide is ensured (as in the method used for this period), but that exposure for 1 hour, ensuring 100 per cent. mortality at some concentrations, is preferable for detection of resistance. Although mortality from an insecticide may not be completed until 72 hr. after exposure, observations 24 hr. after are considered adequate.

The relative merits of the two methods of testing susceptibility are discussed. It is concluded than the method of Kernaghan & Johnston, which involves less handling and therefore less stimulation of the flies, is the more precise. The impregnated papers available from W.H.O. are a convenient means of exposing flies to known deposits of insecticide.

Type
Research Paper
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1966

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

Abbott, W. S. (1925). A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide.—J. econ. Ent. 18 pp. 265267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldry, D. A. T. (1962). Notes on the suitability of the adult mosquito test kit as a standard test apparatus for tsetse fly susceptibility tests.—Unpublished working paper submitted to the Expert Committee on Insecticides of the W.H.O.Google Scholar
Baldry, D. A. T. (1963a). Some aspects of the toxicity of DDT emulsion deposits to Glossina palpalis (R.-D.). I. The detection and fate of DDT-poisoned G. palpalis.—Rep. 9th Mtg int. scient. Comm. Tryp. Res. pp. 205208.Google Scholar
Baldry, D. A. T. (1963b). An evaluation by bioassay of the persistence of DDT deposits on riverine vegetation in the Northern Guinea Savannah vegetation zone of Nigeria and observations on the factors influencing the availability of deposits to Glossina palpalis (R.-D.).—Bull. ent. Res. 54 pp. 497508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldry, D. A. T. (1964a). An assessment by bioassay of the comparative toxicity and persistence of dieldrin and isobenzan deposits on riverine vegetation in the Northern Guinea Savannah zone of Nigeria in relation to the control of Glossina palpalis (R.-D.).—Bull. ent. Res. 55 pp. 4952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldry, D. A. T. (1964b). Some effects of sublethal quantities of insecticides on the longevity and fecundity of females of Glossina palpalis (R.-D.).—WHO/Vector Control/90.Google Scholar
Bransey-Williams, W. R. (1959). Susceptibility tests for tsetse flies.—Unpublished working paper of the Expert Committee on Insecticides of the W.H.O. Geneva no. 13, 141909, 1959.Google Scholar
Burnett, G. F. (1961). The susceptibility of tsetse flies to topical applications of insecticides. I. Young adults of Glossina morsitans Westw. and chlorinated hydrocarbons.—Bull. ent. Res. 52 pp. 531539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busvine, J. R. (1957). A critical review of the techniques for testing insecticides.—208 pp. London, Commonw. Inst. Ent.Google Scholar
Challier, A. (1963). Sensibilité de Glossina palpalis gambiensis Vanderplank, 1949 au DDT et à la dieldrine, determinée au moyen de la trousse standard O.M.S. pour moustiques adultes.—Bull. Soc. Path. exot. 56 pp. 519533.Google Scholar
Kernaghan, R. J. & Johnston, M. R. L. (1962). A method of determining insecticide persistence in tsetse fly control operations.—Bull. Wld Hlth Org. 26 pp. 139141.Google ScholarPubMed
Lewis, C. T. & Hughes, J. C. (1957). Studies concerning the uptake of contact insecticides. II. The contamination of flies exposed to particulate deposits.—Bull. ent. Res. 48 pp. 755768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
W.H.O. Expert Committee on Insecticides (1963). Provisional instructions for determining the susceptibility or resistance of tsetse flies and certain higher Diptera to insecticides.—Tech. Rep. Ser. Wld Hlth Org. no. 265 pp. 9198.Google Scholar