Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-zklqj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T19:29:59.858Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A method for measuring the acaricide-susceptibility of the cattle tick Boophilus microplus (Can.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

B. F. Stone  and
K. P. Haydock
B. F. Stone
Affiliation:
C.S.I.R.O., Division of Entomology, Veterinary Parasitology Laboratory, Yeerongpilly, Queensland, Australia
K. P. Haydock
Affiliation:
C.S.I.R.O., Division of Mathematical Statistics, Cunningham Laboratory, St. Lucia, Queensland, Australia.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A simple method is described of testing the susceptibility to acaricides of larvae of the cattle tick Boophilus microplus (Can.) in Queensland, Australia, by enclosing them in packets made from rectangular filter papers, folded once and secured along the remaining three sides by spring clips, that had been impregnated with Risella-oil solutions of DDT, dieldrin, or Bayer 21/199 (coumaphos), or with deposits from xylene solutions of Dilan. The response of susceptible engorged adult females to dieldrin was tested similarly. Five out of six experiments showed statistical evidence of repeatability of results in determination of relative DDT-resistance of larvae. There was a slight increase in susceptibility of non-resistant larvae to DDT with increasing age between 7 and 28 days for fresh packets but not for re-used packets. In three out of four tests, re-used packets were significantly more toxic (up to 1·40 times) to susceptible larvae than fresh packets. In one test a loss of toxicity occurred after storage of Bayer 21/199 packets for 23 days. The possible use of this method for measuring resistance in ticks is discussed.

Information

Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 53 , Issue 3 , October 1962 , pp. 563 - 578
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1962

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anon. (1954). Technique for assessing susceptibility of Anophelines to insecticides.—Tech. Rep. Ser. World Hlth Org. no. 80 pp. 30–32.Google Scholar
Ansari, N., Baghdiantz, A., Nanaghi, P. & Saebi, E. (1956). Preliminary study for assessing susceptibility of ticks to different insecticides and their selection for tick control.—4 pp., multigraph. Teheran, Institute of Parasitology and Malariology.Google Scholar
Busvine, J. R. & Nash, R. (1953). The potency and persistence of some new synthetic insecticides.—Bull. ent. Res. 44 pp. 371–376.Google Scholar
Finney, D. J. (1946). The analysis of a factorial series of insecticide tests.—Ann. appl. Biol. 33 pp. 160–165.Google Scholar
Finney, D. J. (1952a). Probit analysis.—2nd edn., 318 pp. Cambridge, Univ. Pr.Google Scholar
Finney, D. J. (1952b). Statistical methods in biological assay.—661 pp. London, C. Griffin.Google Scholar
Gerolt, P. (1959). “Vapour toxicity” of solid insecticides.—Nature, Lond. 183 pp. 1121–1122.Google Scholar
Hansens, E. J. (1956). Chlordane-resistant brown dog ticks and their control.—J. econ. Ent. 49 pp. 281–283.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, L. F. (1955). Studies on the non-parasitic stages of the cattle tick, Boophilus microplus (Canestrini) (Acarina: Ixodidae).—Aust. J. Zool. 3 pp. 295–311.Google Scholar
Hoskins, W. M. & Gordon, H. T. (1956). Arthropod resistance to chemicals.—Annu. Rev. Ent. 1 pp. 89–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laws, S. G. (1948). A biological test for assessing the acaricidal properties of DDT and “Gammexane” preparations.—Bull. ent. Res. 39 pp. 277–279.Google Scholar
Stone, B. F. (1957). Resistance to DDT in the cattle tick, Boophilus microplus (Canestrini).—Aust. J. agric. Res. 8 pp. 424–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, B. F. & Webber, L. G. (1960). Cattle ticks, Boophilus microplus, resistant to DDT, BHC, and dieldrin.—Aust. J. agric. Res. 11 pp. 105–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, G. B. (1958). Acaricide resistance in the blue tick, Boophilus decoloratus (Koch). Part I.—Bull. ent. Res. 49 pp. 661–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, G. B. & Baker, J. A. F. (1961). Acaricide resistance in the red tick, Rhipicephalus evertsi Neumann.—Bull. ent. Res. 51 pp. 755–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar