Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-x5cpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-05T06:20:18.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A new matrix for toxic baits for control of the leaf-cutting ant Acromyrmex octospinosus (Reich) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

A. R. Jutsum  and
J. M. Cherrett
A. R. Jutsum
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Zoology, University College of North Wales, Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2UW, UK
J. M. Cherrett
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Zoology, University College of North Wales, Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2UW, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A new easily-produced cheap compound for use as a bait matrix is described. The light-weight matrix of polyurethane is prepared from dense precursors into which suitable attractants and toxicants can be incorporated for the pest species in question. It has a high bait effectiveness/weight ratio, and so is very suitable for aerial application as large economically viable payloads can be achieved. When tested both in the laboratory and in the field on a small scale against the leaf-cutting ant Acromyrmex octospinosus (Reich), the bait was highly acceptable to the ants. Some formulations, especially those coated with mirex gave excellent control of ants in the field in Trinidad, killing all occupants of nests within four days of baiting. The bait exhibited good weathering properties, was resistant to fungus attack, and allowed the slow release of pheromones. It was much cheaper than the citrus pulp baits normally used in Trinidad.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 71 , Issue 4 , December 1981 , pp. 607 - 616
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

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

Amante, E. (1964). Saúva ant abatement in Brazil.—Biokemia 6, 5–8.Google Scholar
Ascher, K. R. S. & Nemny, N. E. (1979). Use of foamed polyurethane as a carrier for phagostimulant assays with Spodoptera littoralis larvae.—Entomologia exp. appl. 25, 346–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, N. T. J. (1959). Statistical methods in biology.—200 pp. London, English Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Cherrett, J. M. (1969). Baits for the control of leaf-cutting ants. I.—Formulation.—Trop. Agric., Trin. 46, 81–90.Google Scholar
Cherrett, J. M. & Merrett, M. R. (1969). Baits for the control of leaf-cutting ants. III.—Waterproofing for general broadcasting.—Trop. Agric., Trin. 46, 221–231.Google Scholar
Cherrett, J. M. & Perdgrine, D. J. (1976). A review of the status of leaf-cutting ants and their control.—Ann. appl. Biol. 84, 124–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherrett, J. M. & Sims, B. G. (1969). Baits for the control of leaf-cutting ants. II.—Toxicity evaluation.—Trop. Agric., Trin. 46, 211–219.Google Scholar
Cramer, H. H. (1967). Plant protection and world crop production.—PflSchutz-Nachr. Bayer 20, 1–524.Google Scholar
Echols, H. W. (1966). Assimilation and transfer of mirex in colonies of Texas leaf-cutting ants.—J. econ. Ent. 59, 1336–1338.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Etheridge, P. & Phillips, F. T. (1976). Laboratory evaluation of new insecticides and bait matrices for the control of leaf-cutting ants (Hymenoptera Formicidae).—Bull. ent. Res. 66, 569–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, T. (1973). Aerial baiting to control leaf-cutting ants (Formicidae, Attini) in Trinidad. II. Field application, nest mortality and the effect on other animals.—Bull. ent Res. 63, 275–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, T. & Norton, G. A. (1973). Aerial baiting to control leaf-cutting ants (Formicidae, Attini) in Trinidad. III. Economic implications.—Bull. ent. Res. 63, 289–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, T. & Phillips, F. T. (1973). Aerial baiting to control leaf-cutting ants (Formicidae, Attini) in Trinidad. I. The bait, its production, and the effects of weathering on attractiveness and persistence of toxicants.—Bull. ent. Res. 63, 263–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, F. T., Etheridge, P. & Martin, A. P. (1979). Further laboratory and field evaluations of experimental baits to control leaf-cutting ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Brazil.—Bull. ent. Res. 69, 309–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, F. T., Etheridge, P. & Scott, G. C. (1976). Formulation and field evaluation of experimental baits for the control of leaf-cutting ants (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) in Brazil.—Bull. ent. Res. 66, 579–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quinlan, R. J. & Cherrett, J. M. (1977). The role of substrate preparation in the symbiosis between the leaf-cutting ant Acromyrmex octospinosus (Reich) and its food fungus.—Ecol. Ent. 2, 161–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quinlan, R. J. & Cherrett, J. M. (1978). Aspects of the symbiosis of the leaf-cutting ant Acromyrmex octospinosus (Reich) and its food fungus.—Ecol. Ent. 3, 221–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, S. W. (1979). Leaf-cutting ant control schemes in Paraguay, 1961–1977. Some failures and some lessons.—PANS 25, 386–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, S. W. & Cherrett, J. M. (1975). Some reactions of leaf-cutting ants (Attini: Formicidae) to a synthetic scent trail pheromone.—pp. 91–97in Noirot, C., Howse, P. E. & Le Masne, G. (Eds.). Pheromones and defensive secretions in social insects. The proceedings of a symposium held on 18th, 19th and 20th September, 1975, at the University of Dijon.—248 pp. Dijon, France, Int. Un. Study Social Ins.Google Scholar
Smith, F. F. & Boswell, A. L. (1970). New baits and attractants for slugs.—J. econ. Ent. 63, 1919–1922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. (1956). Statistical methods applied to experiments in agriculture and biology.—5th edn, 534 pp. Ames, Iowa St. Coll. Pr.Google Scholar
Weber, N. A. (1972). Gardening ants: the attines.—Mem. Am. phil. Soc. 92, 1–146.Google Scholar
Wheeler, W. M. (1907). The fungus-growing ants of North America.—Bull. Am. Mus. nat. Hist. 23, 669–807.Google Scholar