Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T13:49:49.625Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

DDT residual Films

I.—The Persistence and Toxicity of Deposits from Kerosene Solutions on Wall-board

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

E. A. Parkin  and
A. A. Green
E. A. Parkin
Affiliation:
Pest Infestation Laboratory, Slough, Bucks.
A. A. Green
Affiliation:
Pest Infestation Laboratory, Slough, Bucks.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Exposure of house-flies to residual films of DDT, deposited on wall-board from kerosene solutions, has shown that the initial toxicity increases (1) as the deposit of DDT per unit area increases, and (2) as the concentration of DDT in the solution increases, although the amount of DDT applied is kept constant. In practice, DDT in kerosene should be applied to absorbent materials at as high a concentration as possible, consistent with reasonable coverage, in order to avoid much of the DDT being carried by the solvent into the substrate, where it is no longer available for contact with the insects.

With wall-board, a critical value for the product of concentration and deposit of DDT has been shown to exist, above which any mechanical stimulus, including movement of flies on the treated surface, will cause the DDT present in supersaturated solution to crystallise, with consequent marked increase in toxicity of the film. Under some circumstances, removal of the crystal carpet is followed by its partial regeneration. If the product of the concentration and deposit falls below the critical value, the residual film is at no time very effective and soon loses its initial toxicity.

The persistence of toxic films of DDT on wall-board has been shown, over an exposure period of 18 months, to be closely bound up with the crystallisation of the deposits and their powers of regeneration during intermittent exposure to flies.

This work has been carried out as part of the programme of research of the Pest Infestation Laboratory, and this account is published by permission of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 38 , Issue 2 , August 1947 , pp. 311 - 325
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1947

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

Barnes, S. (1946). The influence of certain biological factors on the resistance of bed-bugs (Cimex lectularius, L.) to DDT.—Bull. ent. Res., 36, pp. 419–422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fay, R. W., Simmons, S. W. & Clapp, J. M. (1945). Laboratory investigations on the toxicity of DDT residues to adults of Anopheles quadrimaculatus.—Publ. Hlth Rep. Wash., Suppl., no. 186, pp. 21–34.Google Scholar
Gahan, J. B.,Travis, B. V. & Lindquist, A. W. (1945). DDT as a residual-type spray to control disease-carrying mosquitoes; laboratory tests.—J. econ. Ent., 38, pp. 236–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindquist, A. W., Madden, A. H., Wilson, H. G. & Jones, H. A. (1944). The effectiveness of DDT as a residual spray against houseflies.—J. econ. Ent., 37, pp. 132–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parkin, E. A. & Green, A. A. (1945a). The toxicity of DDT to the house-fly, Musca domeslica, L.— Bull. ent. Res., 36, pp. 149–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parkin, E. A. & Green, A. A. (1945b). Residual films of DDT.—Nature, London, 155, p. 668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West, T. F. & Campbell, G. A. (1946). DDT—the Synthetic Insecticide. Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar