Interaction Between Sensory and Postingestional Repellents in Starlings: Methyl Anthranilate and Sucrose

Clark, Larry; Mason, J M

doi:10.2307/1941829

Cited by 22 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2002), the role of dispersal‐phase VOCs in attracting or repelling birds is completely unexplored. We found methyl anthranilate [a bird‐ and mammal‐repellent compound (Mason, Adams & Clark 1989; Clark & Mason 1993; Nolte, Mason & Clark 1993)] in the gall figs of both F. hispida (in very high quantities) and F. exasperata but none in the seed figs of either species. Figs are thus possibly using specific compounds to repel dispersal agents from gall figs and to facilitate preferential consumption of seed figs, as earlier predicted.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

The chemical ecology of seed dispersal in monoecious and dioecious figs

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary 1.In the nursery pollination system of figs ( Ficus , Moraceae), flower-bearing receptacles called syconia breed pollinating wasps and are units of both pollination and seed dispersal. Pollinators and mammalian seed dispersers are attracted to syconia by volatile organic compounds (VOCs). In monoecious figs, syconia produce both wasps and seeds, while in (gyno)dioecious figs, male (gall) fig trees produce wasps and female (seed) fig trees produce seeds. 2. VOCs were collected using dynamic headspace adsorption methods on freshly collected figs from different trees using Super Q® collection traps. VOC profiles were determined using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). 3. The VOC profile of receptive and dispersal phase figs were clearly different only in the dioecious mammal-dispersed Ficus hispida but not in dioecious bird-dispersed F. exasperata and monoecious bird-dispersed F. tsjahela . 4. The VOC profile of dispersal phase female figs was clearly different from that of male figs only in F. hispida but not in F. exasperata , as predicted from the phenology of syconium production which only in F. hispida overlaps between male and female trees. Greater difference in VOC profile in F. hispida might ensure preferential removal of seed figs by dispersal agents when gall figs are simultaneously available. 5. The VOC profile of only mammal-dispersed female figs of F. hispida had high levels of fatty acid derivatives such as amyl-acetates and 2-heptanone, while monoterpenes, sesquiterpenes and shikimic acid derivatives were predominant in the other syconial types. A bird-and mammal-repellent compound methyl anthranilate occurred only in gall figs of both dioecious species, as expected, since gall figs containing wasp pollinators should not be consumed by dispersal agents.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

The chemical ecology of seed dispersal in monoecious and dioecious figs

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Methyl anthranilate acts as a primary repellent (Rogers 1974). Primary repellents do not require learning, because they are based on congenital avoidance of irritating stimuli (Clark and Mason 1993). Successful delivery strategies target the animal's receptor fields, such as mucous membranes of the eyes, mouth and nose.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a Methyl Anthranilate‐Based Bird Repellent: Toxicity to Channel Catfish Ictalurus punctatus and Effect on Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias Feeding Behavior

Dorr

Clark

Glahn

et al. 1998

J World Aquaculture Soc

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract— We evaluated the methyl anthranilate‐based bird repellent, ReJeX‐iT TP‐40™ (TP‐40), for 1) its toxicity to channel catfish fingerlings (catfish), Ictalurus punctatus; 2) its effect on great blue heron (heron), Ardea herodias feeding behavior; 3) its efficacy in reducing heron predation on catfish; and 4) its effects on catfish growth. TP‐40 effectively maintained MA concentrations near the water's surface and below toxic levels for catfish in the water column. Water samples collected from 0.03 and 0.35 m below the surface of catfish rearing tanks (6,664 L) treated at application rates up to the equivalent of 200 kg/ha contained less than 5 ppm active ingredient, which is less than the no observable effect limit for catfish fry. No treatment‐related mortality of catfish was observed. Handling times of catfish fingerlings captured by herons from tubs treated with TP‐40 initially increased at application rates of 19.6 kgha or greater but decreased as a function of the number of catfish captured. Under simulated aquaculture conditions, TP‐40 did not affect the number of catfish eaten by herons from ponds treated at surface application rates of 0, 2, 22, and 220 kglha. TP‐40 had no affect on the time herons spent handling live or dead catfish. Ponds treated with TP‐40 at 220 kgha had a 46% increase in visibility (secchi disk method) and a 58% reduction in total suspended solids, suggesting the formulation was phytotoxic. TP‐40 did not affect fish growth. Analysis of individual behavior showed that herons may have habituated or become indifferent to the effects of the repellent after repeated exposure. Under the conditions of the study, herons did not maintain their body weight unless catfish were made available by disease or supplemental feeding, suggesting that herons may be inefficient at capturing healthy catfish. Surface applications of TP‐40 at 20 to 220 kg/ha were not effective in limiting predation by herons.

show abstract

“…Based on the Agricultural Research Services' National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference (release 24) blueberries contain 9.96 g of sugar per 100 g with 1% of that sugar being sucrose, whereas sweet corn contains 6.26 g sugar per 100 g with 14.2% of that sugar being sucrose. Martinez del Rio et al (1988) showed that starlings lack sucrase, the enzyme needed to hydrolyze sucrose, and Avery et al (1995) showed that starlings will respond negatively to artificial fruits having 12.8% sucrose, but starlings show no difference in consumption for solutions below 10% sucrose (Clark and Mason, 1993). We believe that the inability to digest sucrose may explain the difference in consumption of the two-test fruit diets at similar levels of repellent.…”

Section: Fruit/sucrose Matrixmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…The anthraquinone residue levels on the sweet corn in our starling experiment were lower or similar to those reported for the Carlson et al (2013) red-winged blackbird experiment however, consumption of sweet corn by starlings in our experiment decreased for both treated and untreated groups as anthraquinone concentration increased. Based on previous studies (Clark and Mason, 1993;Avery et al, 1995) it is possible that there is an interaction between the sucrose levels of the sweet corn and the anthraquinone levels that resulted in decreased consumption of both treated and untreated sweet corn. The results of our fruit experiments led us to evaluate the SucraShield product for efficacy as a chemical repellent for starlings.…”

Section: Fruit/sucrose Matrixmentioning

confidence: 99%

European starling feeding activity on repellent treated crops and pellets

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe varied diet of European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris L.) can present challenges when working with starlings in experimental testing and holding situations and should be taken into account when testing repellents applied to food. Our purpose was to evaluate an anthraquinone-based repellent (Arkion Life Sciences, New Castle, DE, USA; active ingredient 50% 9,10-anthraquinone; hereafter anthraquinone) and SucraShieldÔ (Natural Forces, Davidson, NC, USA; active ingredient 40% sucrose octanoate esters) repellent for non-lethal protection of specialty crops (i.e., fruit, sweet corn) and grains. Our objectives were to evaluate (1) laboratory efficacy of anthraquinone applied topically to blueberries and sweet corn, (2) laboratory efficacy of anthraquinone applied to two pellet matrices, and (3) laboratory efficacy of SucraShieldÔ as a chemical repellent for European starlings. We found that anthraquinone was not an effective repellent for blueberries or sweet corn, although consumption of each matrix varied potentially due to sucrose content. Anthraquinone was an effective repellent on CU Bird Carrier pellets with 6275 ppm needed to achieve 80% repellency, whereas up to 35,000 ppm anthraquinone was not effective when the anthraquinone was not topically applied. SucraShield was not an effective repellent for starlings and in fact increased consumption of CU Bird Carrier as concentration increased.Published by Elsevier Ltd.

show abstract

Interaction Between Sensory and Postingestional Repellents in Starlings: Methyl Anthranilate and Sucrose

Cited by 22 publications

References 25 publications

The chemical ecology of seed dispersal in monoecious and dioecious figs

The chemical ecology of seed dispersal in monoecious and dioecious figs

Evaluation of a Methyl Anthranilate‐Based Bird Repellent: Toxicity to Channel Catfish Ictalurus punctatus and Effect on Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias Feeding Behavior

European starling feeding activity on repellent treated crops and pellets

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About