Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:52:13.478Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sterility and the mated status test in tepa-treated male sheep blow-flies, Lucilia sericata (Mg.) (Dipt., Calliphoridae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

J. N. Pollock
J. N. Pollock
Affiliation:
Imperial College Field Station, Ashurst Lodge, Sunninghill, Ascot, Berkshire, England
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Laboratory experiments showed that the mated status of male sheep blowflies (Lucilia sericata (Mg.)) can be reliably detected a week after mating, but subsequently the test is less accurate. Injection of 4–36 Ϝg tepa/male fly induced approximately 95% sterility. Tepa-injected flies mated freely, and the treatment did not interfere with the mated status test subsequently performed. The test has potential value in sterile male release studies.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 60 , Issue 4 , June 1971 , pp. 663 - 669
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1971

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

Donnelly, J. (1965). Possible causes of failure in a field test of the ‘sterile males’ method of control.—Proc. XIIth Int. Congr. Ent. London, 1964, 253–254.Google Scholar
Macleod, J. & Donnelly, J. (1961). Failure to reduce an isolated blowfly population by the sterile males method.—Entomologia exp. appl. 4, 101–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muirhead-Thomson, R. C. (1968). Ecology of insect vector populations.—174 pp. London &c, Academic Pr.Google Scholar
Pollock, J. (1969). Test for the mated status of male sheep blowflies.—Nature, Lond. 223, 1287–1288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, J. W. & Carlysle, T. C. (1967). A characteristic indicating the mating status of male fall armyworm moths.—Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 60, 1071–1074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar