Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T11:08:17.925Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Field Tests of Dry Baiting against the Desert Locust, Schistocerca gregaria (Forsk.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

D. L. Gunn
D. L. Gunn
Affiliation:
Anti-Locust Research Centre, London.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Field trials in British Somaliland and in the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan showed that dry bran bait can be used for complete destruction of Desert Locust hoppers (Schistocerca gregaha). Wet bait was never found to be completely effective when dry bait was ineffective.

Failures of dry baiting were found which were attributable to several causes : hoppers not feeding just before moulting ; ground too hot for hoppers to remain on it ; too low or too patchy a deposit of bait ; adult locusts probably not making contact with bait. None of these failures could be attributed to the bait being dry.

The main constituent of standard bait, wheat bran, should not be replaced by barley husks or peanut flour, but dom flour could be used and dura and maize flours could be tried instead of bran.

The use of dry bait makes it convenient and practical for locust scouts who use camels, vehicles, etc. to destroy small bands of hoppers as soon as they find them.

Dry baiting against marching bands and ring baiting can be done very conveniently and speedily by means of the Shendi Funnel, designed to be tied to the back of a vehicle.

Area baiting can be done rapidly by blowing dry bait up from a dusting machine, so that the wind spreads it. An area-dosage of 25 lb./acre is recommended, and a rate of ½-acre/minute should be readily achieved.

The amount of labour required is reduced to about 25% by the use of dry bait instead of wet. Dry baiting by machine uses only 10 per cent. of the labour required for dry-baiting by hand, but the cost would not fall as much as this, because higher wages would have to be paid for the greater skill necessary.

Adults can be killed by baiting, but it is much more difficult than with hoppers to ensure that the locusts make contact with the bait.

The insecticides already in use against the Desert Locust, arsenic and benzene hexachloride, can completely destroy hoppers when applied in bait. An insecticide is required with a long persistence like that of arsenic and a low mammalian toxicity like that of BHC.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 42 , Issue 4 , January 1952 , pp. 675 - 690
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1952

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

BeǏ-Bienko, G. Ya. (1934). Control of injurious Acrididae. Technique, methods, organisation. [In Russian.] 96 pp. Moscow, OGIZ.Google Scholar
del Cañizo, J. (1941). Spain : the Moroccan Locust, Dociostaurus maroccanus, in 1939–1940.—Int. Bull. Pl. Prot., 15, pp. 3—4.Google Scholar
Common, I. F. B. (1948). The yellow-winged locust, Gastrimargus musicus Fabr., in central Queensland.—Qd. J. agric. Sci., 5, pp. 153–219.Google Scholar
Douence, A. (1929). Les appâts empoisonnés. Leur utilisation dans la lutte contre les ennemis des cultures.—Ann. Epiph., 15, pp. 1–96.Google Scholar
Ellis, P. E. (1951). The marching behaviour of hoppers of the African Migratory Locust (Locusta migratoria migratorioides R. & F.) in the laboratory.—Anti-Locust Bull., no. 7, 46 pp.Google Scholar
Fraenkel, G. (1929). Untersuchungen über Lebensgewohnheiten, Sinnesphysiologie und Sozialpsychologie der wandernden Larven der afrikanischen Wanderheuschrecke Schistocerca gregaria (Forsk.).—Biol. Zbl., 49, pp. 657–680.Google Scholar
Husain, M. A., Mathur, C. B. & Roonwal, M. L. (1949). Studies on Schistocerca gregaria (Forskål). XIII. Food and feeding habits of the Desert Locust.—Indian J. Ent., 8, pp. 141–163.Google Scholar
Hussein, M. (1950). A comparison of wet and dry bran baits.—Bull. Soc. Fouad 1er Ent., 34, pp. 243–246.Google Scholar
Joyce, R. J. V. (1952). Field trials with various dry baits against the Desert Locust, Schistocerca gregaria Forsk.—Bull. ent. Res., 42, pp. 691–696.Google Scholar
King, H. H. (1929). A note on the use of dried poison bait against locusts in the Sudan.—Bull. ent. Res., 20, pp. 99–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langford, G. S. (1930). Some factors relating to the feeding habits of grasshoppers, with special reference to Melanoplus bivittatus.—Bull. Colo. agric. Exp. Sta., no. 354, 53 pp.Google Scholar
Notley, F. B. (1946). Tests on locust baits in Somalia.—Bull. ent. Res., 37, pp. 89–94.Google Scholar
Parker, J. R. (1924). Observations on the clear-winged grasshopper (Camnula pellucida Scudder).—Bull. Minn. agric. Exp. Sta., no. 214, 44 pp.Google Scholar
Parker, J. R. (1930). Some effects of temperature and moisture upon Melanoplus mexicanus mexicanus Saussure and Camnula pellucida Scudder (Orthoptera).—Bull. Mont. agric. Exp. Sta., no. 223, 132 pp.Google Scholar
Parker, J. R. (1934). The grasshopper problem in Canada and the United States.—Proc. 5th Pacif. Sci. Congr. Canada 1933, 5, pp. 3459–3471.Google Scholar
Parker, J. R., Shotwell, R. L. & Morton, F. A. (1934). The use of oil in grasshopper baits.—J. econ. Ent., 27, pp. 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parry, D. A. (1951). Microclimate close to the ground.—Nature, 167, pp. 73–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paul, L. C. (1942). A dry bait for grasshopper control.—Canad. Ent., 74, pp. 77–78.Google Scholar
du Plessis, C. & Nolte, M. C. A. (1941). Laboratory experiments on the improvement of poison baits for hoppers of the Red Locust: 1936–37.—Sci. Bull. Dep. Agric. S. Afr., no. 227, 44 pp.Google Scholar
Riley, C. V. (1891). Destructive locusts. A popular consideration of a few of the more injurious locusts (or “ grasshoppers ”) of the United States, together with the best means of destroying them.—Bull. U.S. Bur. Ent. (O.S.) no. 25, 62 pp.Google Scholar
Rungs, C. (1946). Rapport sur les essais de lutte contre les adultes de Schistocerca gregaria Forsk. au Maroc français, au printemps de 1945.—Bull Off. nat. anti-acrid., no. 2, pp. 41–87.Google Scholar
Shotwell, R. L. (1942). Evaluation of baits and bait ingredients used in grasshopper control.—Tech. Bull. U.S. Dep. Agric., no. 793, 51 pp.Google Scholar
Shotwell, R. L. (1949). The comparative effectiveness of poisoned bait and sprays for grasshopper control in Lyman county, S. Dak., 1947.—U.S. Dep. Agric. Bur. Ent., E-771, 22 pp.Google Scholar
Smit, C. J. B. (1951). Field and laboratory experiments with insecticides against locust hoppers.—Sci. Bull. Dep. Agric. S. Afr., no. 304, 78 pp.Google Scholar
Uvarov, B. P. (1928). Locusts and Grasshoppers. A handbook for their study and control.—xiii + 352 pp. London, Imp. Bur. Ent.Google Scholar
Wakeland, C. & Parker, J. R. (1949). Grasshopper control improved by new insecticides.—U.S. Dep. Agric. Bur. Ent., EC-7, 8 pp. multigraph.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Wet, W. J. (1941). Field experiments in baiting fliers of the Brown Locust, with notes on physical ecology.—Sci. Bull. Dep. Agric. S. Afr., no. 31, 44 pp.Google Scholar