The Use of adhesive Agents in DDT Sprays

Extract

A previous investigation by the writer established that the minimum deposit of DDT on both cement and old painted wood necessary to ensure complete mortality of bed-bugs 48 hours after spraying was 0·2 mg. per sq. cm., and that the toxicity of both surfaces diminished slowly over a period of six months. The present work has shown that when DDT is applied with an adhesive agent, the minimum deposit of insecticide necessary on these surfaces to yield a similar kill at the same interval after treatment was only 0·06 mg. per sq. cm. The addition of an adhesive agent to a DDT spray thus effects considerable economy in the use of DDT. Campbell and West (1944), investigating the toxicity to houseflies of coumarine resin and DDT dissolved in white spirit, have reported an increase in the efficiency of DDT when sprayed with an adhesive agent. These authors confined their investigation to a resin only and they suggested that the coumarone resin conferred, in a manner not specified, increased insecticidal activity on the DDT. The present work has shown that relatively small doses of DDT are highly effective in the presence of at least three dissimilar adhesive agents. It is possible, therefore, that instead of increasing the activity of DDT, the agent merely blocks the minute pores of the treated surface, and by minimising absorption of the solution, increases the amount of DDT available to the insect. Alternatively, the adhesive agent may have some affinity for substances on the surface of the bug's tarsi and so assist transfer of DDT from the sprayed surface to the insect.

The residual toxicity of cement treated with DDT and an adhesive agent, like that of a similar surface treated with DDT alone, diminished slowly. The toxicity of painted wood, on the other hand, treated with doses of DDT and adhesive agent ranging from 0·005 to 0·02 mg. per sq. cm., decreased within one month, irrespective of the adhesive agent used. This fall in toxicity is puzzling, particularly in view of the fact that no such decrease occurred when the surface was treated with a heavier deposit of DDT and adhesive agent, namely 0·06 mg. of each per sq. cm. This latter observation seems to preclude a possible interference with the efficiency of DDT by a slow interaction of the paint constituents and the adhesive agent.

The application of these adhesive agents, even in relatively high doses, failed to prevent the removal of DDT from a smooth surface by repeated washing and rubbing; furthermore, an increase in the deposit of adhesive agent does not markedly increase the insecticidal efficiency of a given deposit of DDT.