1970
DOI: 10.1016/0022-1910(70)90275-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Antimicrobials: ‘Safe’ levels in a synthetic diet of an insect, Agria affinis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
26
0

Year Published

1971
1971
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
1
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Other investigators have found the rate of larval development to be the most sensitive criterion for measuring the effect of antimicrobials in insect diet (Clark et al 1961, Ouye 1962, Singh and House 1970. We found delays in development, decreased insect size (mass), decreased fecundity, and an increase in insect death in our tests of different antifungal agents.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 45%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Other investigators have found the rate of larval development to be the most sensitive criterion for measuring the effect of antimicrobials in insect diet (Clark et al 1961, Ouye 1962, Singh and House 1970. We found delays in development, decreased insect size (mass), decreased fecundity, and an increase in insect death in our tests of different antifungal agents.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 45%
“…Methyl paraben, while widely used with great success with other insect species (Kishaba et al 1968, Hedin et al 1974, was shown to have signiÞcant negative effects in L. hesperus. Ethanol is used as the solvent for methyl paraben and has been shown to interfere with the normal development of some insects (Bass andBarnes 1969, Singh andHouse 1970). Ethanol, used alone as a dietary additive, is detrimental to L. hesperus biological Þtness (J.A., unpublished data).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Since the presence of moulds and bacteria will often make itself f e l t in a matter of hours, and since, even i f the diet i s still palatable to the insect it will have been altered in some unknown and uncontrollable manner, some other means of control i s necessary. Chemical suppressants are often the only remedy and although the real criteria are the sensitivity of the insect being cultured, and the local mould and bacterial flora (which can vary enormously), useful information on the properties of suppressants i s available (Greenberg, 1970;Singh and House, 1970;Smith, 1966;Ouye, 1962). Nipagen-M (methyl phydroxybenzoate), sorbic acid, and forrnalin are tolerated by many insects and are widely used.…”
Section: The Use Of Chemical Suppressants Of Moulds and Bacteriamentioning
confidence: 98%