Toxicities of Antimicrobial Agents to White-Fringed Beetle Larvae and the Effectiveness of Certain of These Agents Against Microbial Growth1

Effect of Antifungal Agents on Biological Fitness of <I>Lygus hesperus</I> (Heteroptera: Miridae)

“…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 Ethanol, used alone as a dietary additive, is detrimental to L. hesperus biological Þtness (J.A., unpublished data).…”

“…White fringed beetles, Graphognathous spp., have been difÞcult to rear due to antifungal toxicity problems. Bass and Barnes found that 100% of larvae died within 10 d when a number of different antifungal agents were used in concentrations high enough for microbial control (Bass and Barnes 1969). These studies and others emphasize the importance of determining the toxicity of an anitmicrobial agent to a particular species of insect before adding it to the diet.…”

“…Often antimicrobials are added to artiÞcial diets based more on traditional insect diet recipes rather than taking into account the additiveÕs effect on insect health or the effectiveness of the compound in suppressing microbial growth. Many antimicrobials have been shown to have detrimental effects on some insects (Ouye 1962, Kishaba et al 1968, Bass and Barnes 1969, Toba et al 1969, Singh and House 1970. At concentrations above ÔsafeÕ levels determined by Singh and House, many antimicrobials delayed development and increased mortality in larval and pupal stages of Agria affinis (Singh and House 1970).…”

Effets nocifs de la nipagine M sur le parasitoidePhryxe caudata [Dipt.: Tachinidae]

“…Diff&ents auteurs ont d6termin6 les concentrations en nipagine permettant un certain contr61e des bact6ries et des champignons (Bass & BARNES, 1969;CLARK et al, 1961;KISHABA et al, 1968;OUYE, 1962). Les r6sultats sont tr6s variables car ils d6pendent de la composition de l'aliment artificiel it prot6ger, de la dur6e de l'inhibition souhait6e et surtout de la qualit6 et de la quantit6 des contaminants de l'inoculum.…”

“…(BURKHOLDER et al, 1973), Graphognathus sp. (BAss & BARNES, 1969); 16pidopt6res, Trichoplusia ni HB. (KISHABA et aL, 1968), Pecti-nophora gossypiella SAUNDERS (OuYE, 1962, CLARK et ai., 1961; dipt6res, Drosophila melanogaster MEIG.…”