Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T01:36:58.166Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The sensitivity of Musca domestica nebulo F. and M. domestica vicina Macq. to DDT, BHC and dieldrin, as shown by dosage-mortality curves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

S. Jamilur Rahman ,
Nuzhat Riaz  and
Nawab H. Khan
S. Jamilur Rahman
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, Muslim University, Aligarh, India
Nuzhat Riaz
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, Muslim University, Aligarh, India
Nawab H. Khan
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, Muslim University, Aligarh, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The susceptibility of Musca domestica nebulo F. and M. d. vicina Macq. to topical applications of p,p' DDT, technical dieldrin and γ BHC was determined in Aligarh, India, and the effects of using acetone, Eisella oil or ethanol as solvents were also investigated. Of the three insecticides examined, BHC was found to be the most toxic to both forms of house-fly, and DDT the least toxic, though the latter would be effective for control purposes at concentrations exceeding 1 per cent. Solutions of the insecticides in ethanol were more toxic than solutions at the same concentration in Eisella oil, and the latter were slightly more toxic than solutions in acetone. The two forms of house-fly were about equally susceptible to DDT, but M. d. vicina was somewhat more susceptible to dieldrin and BHC than M. d. nebulo. Males of both forms were more susceptible than females to all three insecticides.

Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 55 , Issue 2 , August 1964 , pp. 355 - 365
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1964

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

Abedi, Z. H. (1958). Insecticide resistance in the Indian house-fly.—Proc. Pan. Indian Ocean Sci. Conf. pp. 85–90.Google Scholar
Karani, N. D. P. & Balarama, Menon P. (1960). Susceptibility of houseflies in Poona cantonments to DDT.—Armed Forces med. J. (Ind.) 16 pp. 22–26.Google Scholar
Hoskins, W. M. & Gordon, H. T. (1956). Arthropod resistance to chemicals.—Annu. Rev. Ent. 1 pp. 89–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, P. (1959). Insecticide resistance in houseflies (Musca domestica vicina) of Calcutta.—Bull. Calcutta Sch. trap. Med. 7 12–13 (WHO Inf. Girc. Insect. Resist, no. 17 (1959) pp. 3–4).Google Scholar
Vittal, M. (1958). Experiments on the use of insecticides in the control of fly nuisance.—Indian J. Ent. 20 pp. 1–6.Google Scholar