Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-05T23:49:26.843Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bioassay of Organic Insecticides, in Terms of Contact Toxicity, to the Black Cutworm, Agrotis ypsilon (Rott.)1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

C. R. Harris
Affiliation:
Entomology Laboracory, Chatham, Ontario
J. H. Mazurek
Affiliation:
Entomology Laboracory, Chatham, Ontario

Extract

In recent years the black cutworm, Agrotis ypsilon (Rott.), has been the predominant species of economic importance in southwestern Ontario. Relatively small populations of this insect can cause extensive damage to widely-spaced cash crops such as tobacco, tomatoes, and sugar beets.

Present control recommendations are based primarily on results obtained from field trials. These results are often inconclusive because cutworm outbreaks are difficult to predict and usually unevenly distributed. Therefore, it is necessary to develop laboratory techniques to assist in assessing the comparative toxicity of insecticides and their formulations.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1961

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: 265267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, S. D., Lilly, J. H., and Stauffer, J. F.. 1949. Nutrition of the European corn borer, Pyrausta nubilalis (Hbn.) I. Development of a satisfactory purified diet for larval growth. Ann. Ent. Soc. America 42: 483496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Begg, J. A., Harris, C. R., and Manson, G. F.. Control of an artificial infestation of the black cutworm, Agrotis ypsilon (Rott.), in flue-cured tobacco with five soil insecticides. In preparation.Google Scholar
Bliss, C. I. 1952. Statistics of Bioassay, Section VIII, 1A.Google Scholar
Brown, A. W. A., Hopewell, W. W., Wenner, B. J., and McDonald, H.. 1947. Laboratory assessment of organic insecticides for control of certain lepidopterous larvae. Canad. Ent. 79: 161166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busvine, J. R. 1957. A critical review of the techniques for testing insecticides. Eastern Press Limited, London, England.Google Scholar
Finney, D. J. 1952. Probit analysis. A statistical treatment of the sigmoid response curve. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.Google Scholar
Harris, C. R., Begg, J. A., and Mazurek, J. H.. 1958. A laboratory method of mass rearing the black cutworm, Agrotis ypsilon (Rott.), for insecticide tests. Canad. Ent. 90: 328331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lord, K. A. 1948. The contact toxicity of a number of DDT analogues and of four isomers of benzene hexachloride to Macrosiphoniella sanborni and Oryzaephilus surinamensis. Ann. App. Biol. 35 (4): 505526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepard, H. H. 1958. Methods of testing chemicals on insects. Vol. I. Burgess Publishing Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota.Google Scholar
Tattersfield, F., and Morris, H. M.. 1924. An apparatus for testing the toxic values of contact insecticides under controlled conditions. Bull. Ent. Res. 14: 223233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinman, C. J., and Decker, G. C.. 1951. The toxicity of eight organic insecticides to the armyworm. J. Econ. Ent. 44: 547552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar