Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T15:55:38.459Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Toxicity of Limewash containing DDT or “Gammexane” to Mosquitos (Aëdes aegypti, L.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

J. Hadjinikolau  and
J. R. Busvine
J. Hadjinikolau
Affiliation:
Entomology Department, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
J. R. Busvine
Affiliation:
Entomology Department, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Limewashes containing DDT or “Gammexane” were tested for insecticidal action on mosquitos (Aëdes aegypti) by confining the latter in cages with treated walls and ceilings. Only about 60 per cent, of the total internal surface of the cages were treated but the mosquitos were averse to settling on the floor, window, etc., which constituted a large part (28 per cent.) of the untreated area.

Limewashes containing 160 mg. DDT per square foot gave a high kill of mosquitos after two hours' exposure in the cage; and 8 mg. per square foot of the active principle of “Gammexane” gave a high kill with a one hour exposure.

Both treatments remained effective for 6–8 weeks under temperate conditions.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 39 , Issue 1 , May 1948 , pp. 179 - 183
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1948

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

David, W. A. L., Bracey, P. & Harvey, A. (1944). Bull. ent. Res., 35, p. 227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleck, E. E. & Haller, H. L. (1944). J. Amer. chem. Soc., 66, p. 2095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, J. S. (1947). Bull. ent. Res., 37, p. 593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muirhead Thomson, R. C. (1947). Trans. roy. Soc. trop. Med. Hyg., 40, p. 511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar