Fipronil: An Ultra-Low-Dose Bait Toxicant for Control of Red Imported Fire Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Collins, H. L.; Callcott, A. M.

doi:10.2307/3495930

Cited by 38 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…27) The red imported fire ant (Solenopsis invicta) is another insect highly sensitive to fipronil, with granular baits containing 3-30 mg/mg eliminating colonies within 8-11 weeks after treatment. 28) A corresponding field trial by the same authors showed that 15 mg/mg granular bait provided over 80% colony mortality at six and 12 weeks after application. Further, Costa and Rust 29) reported the mortality rates of Ն93% on Argentine ant (Linepithema humile) colonies in as little as one week; queen ants were killed within four weeks after exposure to fipronil.…”

Section: Insectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental fate and toxicology of fipronil

Gunasekara¹,

Truong²,

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Insectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental fate and toxicology of fipronil

Gunasekara¹,

Truong²,

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Despite the labels, homeowners and some pest control professionals still claim that applying bait on and around pre-disturbed mounds via foot-kicking or racking or shoveling provides better control. Up to date, research on baits has focused on what makes the best active ingredients 5,7,[8][9][10][11][12][13] or bait formulations. 14,15 The only research on the impact of not following label suggestions reported no signifi cant effect on mound disturbance concerning the total amount of bait removed by fi re ants.…”

Section: Abstract: Solenopsis Invicta Individual Mound Treatment Bamentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Mound Disturbance and Bait Placement Affect Bait Removal and Treatment Efficacy in Red Imported Fire ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) at Different Seasons?

Ding

2009

Int J�Insect�Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:This study provides empirical evidence that disturbing mound immediately before application, as opposed to label recommendation, did not reduce foraging activity of the red imported fi re ant, Solenopsis invicta Buren, except for about 10-min delay in foraging. Despite the delayed foraging, there was no signifi cant difference in the amount of baits foraged between disturbed and undisturbed colonies. Eventually, Ͼ96% of the baits were foraged, with the maximum removal occurred by 2 and 3 h, respectively, in summer and spring trial. The fastest and great amount of bait removal 1 h post-treatment occurred to baits placed on mound, followed by 0.18-0.3-m from mound base, and the slowest 1.08-1.2-m from mound base. All treatment gave 100% control 1 mo later, regardless of the season, without colony relocation or new colony invasion in the test plots. Keywords: solenopsis invicta, individual mound treatment, bait application, season effectThe red imported fi re ant, Solenopsis invicta (Buren) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), is a major constant pest in agricultural and urban sectors in the southeastern United State 1,2 and has substantial impact on humans, wildlife, and agriculture. 3,4 One approach to manage fi re ants is the use of toxic baits in which a toxicant, a food attractant, and a carrier are combined into granular bait and applied broadcast or to individual mounds. Baits are often promoted to the public as the most practical, economic and effective component in integrated fi re ant management programs because they allow the dissemination of the active ingredients to an entire colony via social feeding behavior. 5,6 Registration labels on commercial fi re ant baits generally suggest, with no research-based data, not to disturb fi re ant mound and to place baits on the ground in a circle Ͻ1.2 m around the mound but not directly on mound. Despite the labels, homeowners and some pest control professionals still claim that applying bait on and around pre-disturbed mounds via foot-kicking or racking or shoveling provides better control. Up to date, research on baits has focused on what makes the best active ingredients 5,7,[8][9][10][11][12][13] or bait formulations. 14,15 The only research on the impact of not following label suggestions reported no signifi cant effect on mound disturbance concerning the total amount of bait removed by fi re ants. The research was conducted in winter season when foraging activity was low. 16 The resulting bait consumption was Ͻ44% regardless of whether the colonies were disturbed. Additionally, that study did not evaluate treatment effi cacy.Fire ants are known for seasonally changing foraging activity 17,18 and bait preference. 19 We conducted this study in spring and summer seasons of the year 2008. Our objectives were to determine: 1) whether disturbing mound before bait application reduces fi re ant foraging activity; 2) whether bait placed on mound is less accessible, as opposed to that around the mound; 3) whether mound disturbance will reduce treatment effi cacy; and ...

show abstract

“…The insecticide shows much greater effectiveness at blocking this complex in insects (LD50 housefly 0.13 mg/kg) than in mammals (LD50 mouse 41 mg/ kg) (Hainzl & Casida 1996). Strategies for the use of fipronil have been developed for a wide range of invertebrate pests from fleas (Siphonaptera) (Atwell et al 1997) to fire ants (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) (Collins & Callcot 1998). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of baits containing fipronil and sulfluramid for the control ofVespulawasps

Harris¹,

Etheridge²

2001

New Zealand Journal of Zoology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fipronil is a new insecticide being trialed in baits for control of introduced social wasps (Vespula spp.). The efficacy of fipronil was compared with sulfluramid (Finitron® wasp bait). In a laboratory bioassay, fipronil was faster acting and equally as toxic at concentrations over 1000 times lower than sulfluramid. Doses of 0.2 mg of fipronil active (0.2 g of bait when used at 0.1%) were sufficient to reduce colony activity by 90%. Trials in a 300-ha site in beech forest used a single poison operation, without prefeeding, and bait stations in either a 50 × 50 m or 100 × 50 m grid. Use of fipronil reduced colony activity within the treated area by 99.7%, whereas sulfluramid had minimal effect on colony activity. Some foragers reinvaded the treated blocks after treatment with fipronil, but wasp densities remained below estimated ecological damage thresholds for vulnerable invertebrates in this habitat. Baiting in lines resulted in variable control of nearby colonies. Despite the low doses of fipronil needed to kill colonies, low bait attractiveness may limit the success of control operations using fipronil in some situations.

show abstract

Fipronil: An Ultra-Low-Dose Bait Toxicant for Control of Red Imported Fire Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Cited by 38 publications

References 9 publications

Environmental fate and toxicology of fipronil

Environmental fate and toxicology of fipronil

Do Mound Disturbance and Bait Placement Affect Bait Removal and Treatment Efficacy in Red Imported Fire ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) at Different Seasons?

Comparison of baits containing fipronil and sulfluramid for the control ofVespulawasps

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About