ANALYSIS OF SPECIALIZED PESTICIDE PROBLEMS
INVERTEBRATE CONTROL AGENTS - EFFICACY TEST METHODS
VOLUME VII
HUMAN AND PET TREATMENTS
EPA-540/10-77-005
-------
FEPCRT To THE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ANALYSIS CF SPECIALIZED PESTICIDE PROBLEMS
INVERTEBRATE CONTROL AGENTS - EFFICACY TEST METHODS
VOLUME VII
HUMAN AMD PET TREATMENTS
The work upon which this publication is based was performed in whole or
in part under Contract No. 68-01-2457 with the Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
Report To The
Environmental Protection Agency
By The
American Institute of Biological Sciences
Arlington, Virginia 22209
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This Report has been reviewed by the Office of Pesticide Programs,
Criteria and Evaluation Division, and approved for publication.
Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor
does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute
endorsement of recommendation for use.
-------
HUMAN AND PET TREATMENTS TASK GROUP
Chairman:
PR. HARRV L, HA WES
Union Carbide Corporation
PR. V. E. H0WELL PR. FREP W. KWAPP
Oklahoma State University University of Kentucky
PR. CARROLL W. SMITH
Gainesville, Florida
EPA Observer: AIBS Coordinators:
MR. ROGER PIERP0WT MS. PATRICIA RUSSELL
Criteria and Evaluation Division MR. POWALP R. SEEM
-------
HUMAN AND PET TREATMENTS
Table of Contents
Page
1. Human Treatments 2
1.1 Materials for the Control of Lice on Humans 2
1.11 The Body Louse 2
1.111 Infestation 2
1.112 Testing Procedures 2
1.112.1 Field Evaluation Of Insecticidal Powders 3
1.112.11 Tata Reporting 3
1.112.12 Evaluation of Tests 3
1.112.2 Simulated Field Tests 4
1.112.3 Sleeve Tests with Pesticidal Powders 4
1.112.4 Tests with Impregnated Clothing 4
1.113 Insecticide Resistance in Lice 5
1.12 Head Lice and Crab Lice 6
1.2 Mites 7
1.3 Mosquitoes 8
1.31 Application to Skin 8
1.32 Application to Clothing 9
1.33 Application to Bed Nets, Head Nets, and Net Jackets . 9
1.4 Biting Flies 12
1.5 Fleas 13
1.6 Ticks 15
2. Pet Treatments 16
2.1 Fleas and Ticks 16
2.11 Dogs and Cats 16
2.111 Controlled Laboratory Testing 16
2.111.1 Number of Test Animals 16
2.111.2 Housing and Conditioning Animals 16
2.111.3 Preparation for Testing 16
2.111.4 Testing Considerations - Placebo 17
2.111.5 Testing Considerations - Standard 17
2.111.6 Testing Considerations - Water 17
2.112 Simulated Field Conditions 17
2.113 Consumer Field Testing 17
2.114 Test Arthropods 17
2.114.1 Ticks 18
2.114.2 Fleas 18
2.115 Infestation Methods 18
2.115.1 Ticks 18
2.115.2 Fleas 18
-------
Table of Contents Continued
Page
2.116 Observations 18
2.116.1 Qualifications 18
2.116.2 Pretreatment , . . . . 19
2.116.3 Toxicity 19
2.117 Duration of Effectiveness 19
2.118 Types of Treatments and Testing Variations 19
2.118.1 Collars, Tags, Lockets 19
2.118.2 Types of Treatments 20
2.118.3 Systemics 20
2.12 Miscellaneous Other Animals 20
2.2 Lice 22
2.21 Dogs and Cats 22
2.22 Other Mammals . 22
2.23 Birds 22
2.3 Mites 23
2.4 Biting Flies 24
2.5 Mosquitoes 24
-------
INTRODUCTION
Testing procedures stated and referenced in this document are accepted
methods for determining the effectiveness of pesticides against pests of
humans and pets. The procedures mentioned are not intended to exclude
other procedures. This document may serve as a guideline for the develop-
ment of information relating to pesticide efficacy.
Species named in this document are not necessarily the only ones
which might be used. Other species may also be considered when of economic
importance or when they provide practical data. However, specie(s) used
should be identified.
Because efficacy studies against a few human pests were discontinued
after World War II and the Korean conflict, no recent studies are available.
The war time data are still valid as the testing procedures have not
changed. However, conducting efficacy studies against pests of humans has
changed in that tighter restrictions have been placed on the use of human
as test subjects.
When numbers of test animals are referred to in this document, the
minimums are given. However, the researcher may want to increase numbers
of test subjects, animals or other organisms when practical or economically
feasible.
Generally control of a pest by a new product whould be as effective
as that by an established commercial product, or the new product should
have some other significant contribution such as safety or economy.
There are many factors involved in actual use conditions that testing
cannot always adequately evaluate. The habits of the host animals, the
infestation pressures of the parasite, the exposure to rain, dew, sun-
light or even the pH of water and other geographical considerations can
result in a change in the degree or duration of efficacy for a particular
product. Therefore, in order to make claims more meaningful, an accurate
description of product performance under any of the varied conditions
which may be encountered in the field should be recorded.
-------
-2-
1. Human Treatments
1.1 Materials for the Control of Lice on Humans
Humans may be infested by three types of lice: the body louse,
Pediculus hwnanus humanus L. ; the head louse, Ped-iculus hwnanus capitis
De Geer; and the crab louse, Pthirus pub-is (L.). Pesticides that are
effective against one species are usually effective against others, but
this may not be true for new pesticides. The demonstration of effective-
ness against any species or subspecies, if available, should therefore,
be based on tests against lice of that particular type. Methods of
application, and evaluation, differ according to the differences in the
habits of these types of lice.
1.11 The Body Louse
1.111 Infestation
All stages of body lice infest the clothing, particularly the under-
wear, and heavy infestations may build up when the clothing is not laundered
at frequent intervals. The eggs are attached to the cloth, not to the
body hairs, and the nymphs and adult lice hide in seams and other protected
parts of the clothing except when actually feeding through the skin.
1.112 Testing Procedures
Pesticide tests are most indicative of the practical effectiveness
of control measures when they are conducted on groups of persons whose
clothing, habits, and environments are typical of those of the populations
in which the measures are intended for use. However, since body lice are
vectors of typhus, relapsing fever, and other diseases (Pan American Health
Organization 1973), experiments including controls and pesticides of unproven
effectiveness should be made only with infestations of lice that are known to
be free of such diseases. Although toxicological clearance of new pesticides
must precede field experimentation, such experiments should also be utilized
for surveillance for potential physiological effects (e.g. cholinesterase
inhibition) under conditions approximating the anticipated actual use.
In field experiments with naturally infested populations it is
rarely possible to obtain all the conditions or observations that would
be desired in an ideal evaluation of a pesticide treatment. Investigators
should be alert to certain problems that are likely to be encountered in
experiments with naturally infested populations. Even persons who ignore
body lice under normal conditions may become sensitive to their presence
under experimentation, and pick the lice from their clothing between obser-
vations. Some persons who give every assurance of full cooperation may
-------
secretly attempt to remove the treatment from their clothing, and others
may add such additional treatments as may be available to them.
Pesticides for the control of body lice have usually been incorpor-
ated in dusting powders, but the impregnation of clothing has also been
used (Pan American Health Organization 1973).
1.112.1 Field Evaluation of Insecticidal Powders
Some methods used in field evaluations of insecticidal powders were
given by Eddy (1952) Barnes et al. (1962), and Steinberg et al. (1971).
Although the procedures may differ, they include essential features required
to produce acceptable data.
1.112.11 Data Reporting
An adequate description of the technique includes pesticides used,
powder carrier, pesticide concentration, dosage applied per person or per
garment, application method (such as application to removed clothing or
to clothing being worn by the test subject), sites of application (neck,
sleeves, etc), the habit of the subjects, records of any medical treat-
ments received by the subjects while under test, and history of known
allergic reactions of the subjects.
Groups of subjects treated with different materials should be as
uniform as possible in all respects. Groups including adult males only
are satisfactory. At least one group should be treated with each experi-
mental pesticide, one group with a standard pesticide of known effective-
ness to demonstrate the suitability of the testing conditions, and one
group (the control) with a placebo consisting of the carrier powder with-
out a pesticide.
1.112.12 Evaluation of Tests
Efficacy of the treatment is based on the numbers of lice per person
before treatment and at intervals after treatment. If the original infesta-
tion is small, counts may be based on all the lice found in the clothing,
or on the number which can be found in a unit period of time if the infest-
ations are heavier. Other methods of assessment might also be devised.
The same methods should be used for counting lice at intervals after
treatment (3, 7, 14, 21 days, etc). The degree of control obtained may be
based entirely on the reduction of lice on the treated subjects if infest-
ations in the control group remain uniform, or adjusted to compensate for
changes in the control group (Abbott 1952). It is desirable that the
treatment kill lice as quickly as possible, preferably within 24 hours.
However, it is often impractical to make field observations of large groups
of people within 24 hours after treatment, and the speed of action of the
insecticides can be demonstrated in laboratory tests. The length of time
-------
-4-
the powders remain effective is important in protecting against reinfesta-
tion, hence the observations should be continued over several weeks to
determine duration of effectiveness. Unless the pesticides are ovicidal,
extremely young nymphs may appear briefly even on effective treatments,
1.112.2 Simulated Field Tests
Simulated field test methods in which subjects wearing treated clothing
are artificially infested with lice after various periods of wear have been
conducted (Bushland et al. 1944). Experiments of this type are designed to
approximate the expected conditions of actual use as closely as possible,
except that the reinfestation pressure is precisely controlled. The report-
ing requirements are the same as those in section 1.112.11.
1.112.3 Sleeve Tests with Pesticidal Powders
Tests with treated sleeves worn by human subjects provide information
approaching that obtainable in field tests as to the duration of effective-
ness. They actually provide better information than that obtainable in
field tests on quickness of kill, and are helpful in the clearance of com-
pounds for field trials. They have the advantage of permitting a balanced
incomplete block test design, since experimental compounds can be compared
with standards on opposite arms and legs of the same subject under identical
conditions, and reinfestation pressures are precisely though artifically
simulated. This is the ideal stage for establishing the minimum effective
concentration.
In the sleeve technique the powders are applied to a 1-sq. ft. inside
area of cloth sleeves. The sleeves are fastened to the arms and legs of
research subjects, worn for various periods of time, and infested with
known numbers of lice after fixed periods of wear. The mortality of the
lice is usually determined after 24 hours, but can be determined after
shorter periods. In some tests with this method, the sleeves have been
worn continuously for periods ranging up to 28 days (Bushland et al. 1944 ,
Cole and Clark 1962), and the lice were introduced into the sleeves while
they were on the human subject. Comparable results in terms of duration
of effectiveness were obtained when the sleeves were worn 12 hours per day
for 4 days each week and tested off the host at weekly intervals (Cole et
al. 1967, Hirst et al. 1970).
Reports of tests by this method should specify the pesticides, concen-
tration, amount of powder per unit area, method of application, periods of
wear between exposures of lice, number of lice of each stage or sex used,
and the percent mortality.
1.112.4 Tests with Impregnated Clothing
Clothing can be impregnated with pesticides for protection from body
lice (Bushland et al. 1944, Pan American Health Organization 1973). Reports
-------
-5-
of test techniques and results with this method of application are similar
to those for tests with powder treatments. The information should include
specifications regarding the formulation used, the method of impregnation,
and the amount of actual pesticide picked up by the treated garments.
1.113 Insecticide Resistance in Lice
In certain areas body lice have developed resistance to DDT, lindane,
and other pesticides. Consequently, it is necessary to determine whether
the strains of lice being used are resistant to the standard pesticides,
and whether this has induced cross resistance to the experimental pesticides.
Such determinations should be made in controlled laboratory tests by means
of established resistance-test procedures, (Cole et al. 1957, 1973', Stein-
berg et al. 1971", Pan American Health Organization 1973).
REFERENCES
Barnes, W.W., B.F. Eldridge, J.H. Greenberg, and S. Vivona. 1962. A field
evaluation of malathion dust for the control of body lice. J. Eoon.
Entomol. 55:591-94
Bushland, R.C., L.C. McAlister, Jr., G.W. Eddy, and H.A. Jones. 1944. DDT
for the control of human lice. J. Eoon. Entomol. 37:126-27-
Cole, M.M., and P.H. Clark. 1962. Toxicity of various carbamates and
synergists to several strains of body lice. J. Eoon. Entomol. 55:98-102.
Cole, M.M. , P.H. Clark, F. Washington, W. Ellerbe, and D.L. VanNatta. 1973.
Resistance to malathion in a strain of body lice from Burundi. J. Eoon.
Entomol. 66:118-19.
Cole, M.M., M.D. Couch, G.S. Burden, and I.H. Gilbert. 1957- Further
studies on resistance of human body lice to insecticides. J. Eoon.
Entomol. 50:556-59.
Cole, M.M., S.A. White, and J. G. McWilliams. 1967. Louse powders tested
by a new method of sleeve tests. J. Eoon. Entomol. 60:546-48.
Eddy, G.W. 1952. Effectiveness of certain insecticides against DDT-
resistant body lice in Korea. J. Eoon. Entomol. 45:1043-51.
Hirst, J.M., M.M. Cole, I.H. Gilbert, and C.T. Adams. 1970. Further
sleeve tests of new powders for control of body lice. J. Eoon.
Entomol. 63:861-62.
-------
-6-
Pan American Health Organization. 1973. Proceedings International
Symposium on the Control of Lice and Louse-Borne Diseases. Scientific
Pub. No. 263. PAHO, Washington. 311 pp.
Steinberg, M., M.M. Cole, E.S. Evans, J.T. Whitlaw, and J.J. Yoon. 1971.
Toxicological and entomological field evaluation of the effects of Mobam
powder against body lice. J. Med. Entomol. 8:68-72.
1.12 Head Lice and Crab Lice
Materials that will control body lice often are effective against head
lice and crab lice, although the methods of application may differ. Since
head lice and crab lice remain on the head or body hairs, rather than on
the clothing, and attach their eggs to the hairs, liquid preparations are
frequently preferred over powders. Evaluation of pesticides for the control
of these species requires the same items of information as those mentioned
for body lice (Section 1.11) and as given by Cowan et al. (1947) and Eddy
(1948). Attention should be given to the age and sex of the subjects,
previous pesticide treatments, concurrent drug treatment, and environmental
conditions. The degree of infestation before or after treatment is based
on the numbers of nymphal and adult lice, not on the presence of eggs,
since even dead or hatched eggs remain on the hair for several days. The
residual effectiveness of the treatment and the necessary intervals between
retreatments should be determined.
REFERENCES
Cowan, F.A., T. McGregor, and N.M. Randolph. 1947. DDT dust for the
control of head lice. Amer. J. Trap. Med. 27:67-68.
Eddy, G.W. 1948. The treatment of head lice with the MYL and DDT louse
powders and the NBIN emulsion. Amer. J. Hyg. 47:29-32.
-------
-7-
1.2 Mites
Several species of mites attack humans, but the only groups for which
pesticides or repellents are regularly applied to the skin or clothing are
the itch mite, Sareoptes scabiei (De Geer), and the larvae of trombiculid
mites known as chiggers or redbugs. Mites that are parasites of rodents
or birds may infest houses and become human pests. These include the
tropical rat mite, Ornithonyssus bacoti (Hirst) and the house mouse mite,
Allodermanyssus sangu-ineus (Hirst) , which are controlled by premise treat-
ments.
Materials for protection from chiggers are most widely used by applica-
tion to the clothing. These materials may sometimes be referred to as re-
pellents because of their chemical identity with mosquito repellents. How-
ever, usually they function against mites as knockdown agents or toxicants.
They may provide protection against other mites as well as chiggers. Many
materials applied to the clothing will withstand some washing and still
remain effective (USDA 1967). Evaluations of new materials should include
a determination of the amount of washing the treatments will withstand.
However, even materials which do not withstand washing may be highly useful
for protection from chiggers if they are effective when freshly applied.
Field tests under practical or simulated practical conditions provide
the best evaluation of chigger toxicants. These materials may provide
adequate protection when applied to limited parts of the clothing (socks,
trouser cuffs, waist band, and other openings) but final evaluations are
usually based on the impregnation of all outer clothing.
Methods for the field evaluation of outer clothing (Snyder and Morton
1946, Cross and Snyder 1948) should specify: the compounds used, garments
treated, method of impregnation, impregnating formulation, amount of toxi-
cant deposited per garment or per unit area of cloth, aging period or the
amount of washing or wear, method and period of exposure to chiggers, and
the interval between the exposure and the counting of attached chiggers.
The most conclusive indications of effectiveness are obtained when the
treatment is compared to a standard treatment and untreated clothing.
Treated sleeves may be used to obtain preliminary or supplemental
information (Cross and Fye 1949). This method has the advantage of pro-
viding direct comparisons between materials on opposite limbs of the same
subject exposed at the same time.
REFERENCES
Cross, H.F., and R. Fye. 1949. The use of sleeves for evaluating acaricides
as clothing treatments. J. Eaon. Entomol, 42:878-80.
-------
Cross, H.F., and F.M. Snyder. 1948. Field tests of uniforms impregnated
with mite toxicants: I. Protection studies. J. Econ. Entomol.
41:936-40.
Snyder, F.M., and F.A. Morton. 1946. Materials as effective as benzyl
benzoate for impregnating clothing against chiggers. -7. Econ. Entomol.
39:385-87.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1967- Materials Evaluated as Insecticides,
Repellents, and Chemosterilants at Orlando and Gainesville, Florida.
Agric. Handb. 340. ARS, USDA, Washington. 424 pp.
1.3 Mosquitoes
Materials applied to humans for protection from mosquitoes are usually
repellents rather than insecticides.
Evaluation of mosquito repellents for practical use is based on the
length of time they remain effective (USDA 1967). Mosquito repellents
are applied to the skin, to clothing, or to wide-meshed netting for use
in bed nets, head nets, or jackets.
1.31 Application to the Skin
The principal method used in the evaluation of mosquito repellents is
the application of the material to the skin of the forearm or sometimes the
lower leg. These areas are then protected from rubbing and exposed to
mosquitoes in the laboratory or the field, either continuously or at
specified periods, to determine the length of time the treatment provides
complete protection or a high level of protection (Bacot and Talbot 1919,
Granett 1940, Granett and Haynes 1945, Christophers 1947, McCulloch and
Waterhouse 1947, Travis et al. 1949, Gilbert et al. 1957, Gerberg 1966,
USDA 1967, Weaving and Sylvester 1967, and Altman 1969). Liquid repellents
are frequently tested at full strength. The dosage most commonly used is
1 g applied evenly to the forearm or 1.5 g applied to the leg between the
ankle and the knee. In laboratory tests the treated limbs are exposed to
caged mosquitoes for 2 to 5 minutes at intervals of 30 to 60 minutes,
whereas field tests require continuous exposure. The protection time is
considered to be the time interval between treatment and the time required
to receive the first confirmed bite, or the time to receive 2, 5 or more
bites. However, actual protection times vary widely with differences in
the hosts, the avidity of the mosquitoes, and the environmental conditions;
therefore the most reliable criterion of effectiveness is the ratio of the
protection time of the experimental repellent to that of a standard re-
pellent tested at the same time on the opposite limb of the same subject.
If several experimental repellents are to be tested at the same time, the
number of replications of the standard can be reduced by the use of an in-
complete block design (Gilbert et al. 1955, Gilbert 1957, Smith 1958).
-------
-9-
If protection times are impractically long it may be necessary to use
dilutions of the repellents in alcohol or other solvents (Gilbert et al.
1955, 1957, Altman and Smith 1955, Altman 1969).
Repellents vary in the amount per unit area of skin required to provide
protection under any given set of conditions (minimum effective dose). The
protection time represents the time required for the repellent to reach a
minimum effective dose. When skin is protected from rubbing, the modes of
loss are evaporation and absorption (Smith et al. 1963). When repellents
are used under conditions that induce sweating the rate of loss is greatly
increased, and complete evaluation of new repellents should include com-
parisons with a standard under sweating conditions in laboratory or field
tests (Gilbert et al. 1957).
In actual use, much of the repellent is lost from the skin by rubbing
against the clothing or other objects, and the protection time is greatly
reduced. Determining the resistance of a repellent to removal by rubbing
or wiping is, therefore, an important part of its evaluation (Christophers
1947, Smith 1958).
Repellents vary in effectiveness against different species of mosquitoes,
and a complete evaluation should, therefore, include tests against a variety
of species. Aedes aegypt-i (Linnaeus) is the species most commonly used in
the laboratory, although several species of Anopheles are frequently used.
Field tests should range over various species of Aedes, Anopheles, Psoro-
phora, Mansonia, and Culex.
1.32 Application to the Clothing
Evaluations of materials as clothing impregants should specify the
following: repellent used, impregnating formulation, method of impregna-
tion., garments treated, amount of repellent absorbed per unit area of gar-
ment, interval between treatment and each exposure to the mosquitoes,
method an conditions of exposure, and the number of bites received per unit
of time ( e.g., Smith and Cole 1951, Smith and Gilbert 1953, Gilbert et al.
1957, Traub and Elisberg 1962). The efficacy of test repellents is most
indicative when compared to that of standard repellents.
1.33 Application to Bed Nets, Head Nets, and Net Jackets
Repellents may be used to treat wide-mesh netting used for bed nets,
head nets, or loose jackets. Although laboratory studies are useful in the
selection of compounds for full evaluation, definitive demonstrations of
the practicality of the treatments depend on evaluations of their effective-
ness under field conditions. Methods used in the field evaluation of
repellent-treated netting under practical conditions or simulated practical
conditions have been described by Gouck et al. (1967, 1971), Hirst et al.
(1968), Gouck and Moussa (1969), Grothaus et al. (1972, 1974), and McDonald
and Grothaus (1973).
-------
-10-
Reports of field tests with treated netting should include the: type
of netting (the type of fiber is important because cotton absorbs repell-
ents to a much greater extent than synthetic materials), mesh size and weight
per unit area of netting, impregnating formulation, method of impregnation,
amount of repellent absorbed per unit area or weight of netting, construction
of the experimental item (e.g., bed net), and method of exposure. In general,
the subjects protected by treated netting should be compared to subjects
protected by untreated netting as well as to subjects not protected by
netting. Efficacy is determined by the numbers of mosquitoes penetrating
the nets, biting the protected subjects, and biting the unprotected subjects
in a specified exposure period. Mosquitoes should be identified to permit
evaluation of the effectiveness against different species. Record the time
between treatment and subsequent exposures, method of storage between
exposures, and any adverse conditions between exposures (e.g., the amount
of rainfall) to which the treated nets are exposed. Comparisons of experi-
mental repellents with a standard repellent are advisable.
REFERENCES
Altman, R.M. 1969. Repellent tests against Anopheles albimanus Wiedemann
in the Panama Canal Zone. Mosquito News 29:110-112.
Altman, R.M., and C.N. Smith. 1955. Investigations of Repellents for
Protection against Mosquitoes in Alaska, 1953. J. Eoon. Entomol
48:67-72.
Bacot, A, and G. Talbot. 1919. The comparative effectiveness of certain
culicifuges under laboratory conditions. Pavasitology 11:221-36.
Christophers, S.R. 1947. Mosquito repellents, being a report of the
work of the mosquito repellent inquiry, Cambridge 1943-5. J. Hyg.
45:176-231.
Gerberg, E.J. 1966. Field and laboratory repellency tests with 2,2,4-
trimethyl-l,3-pentanediol (TMPD). J. Eoon. Entomol. 59:872-75.
Gilbert, I.E., H.K. Gouck, and C.N. Smith. 1955. New mosquito repellentss.
J. Eoon. Entomol. 48:741-43.
Gilbert, I.E., H.K. Gouck, and C.N. Smith. 1957. New insect repellent.
Part I. Soap Chem. Spec. 33(5):115-17, 129-33; Part II. Ibid. 33(6):
95-99, 109.
Gouck, H.K., and M.A. Moussa. 1969. Field tests with bed nets treated
with repellents to prevent mosquito bites. Mosquito News 29:263-64.
Gouck, H.K., D.R. Godwin, C.E. Schreck, and N. Smith. 1967- Field tests
with repellent-treated netting against black salt-marsh mosquitoes.
J. Econ. Entomol. 60:1451-52.
-------
-11-
Gouck, H.K., D.R. Godwin, K. Posey, C.E. Schreck, and D.E. Weidhaas. 1971.
Resistance to aging and rain of repellent-treated netting used against
salt-marsh mosquitoes in the field. Mosquito News, 31:96-99.
Granett, P. 1940. Studies of mosquito repellents. I. Test procedure and
method of evaluating test data. J. Eoon. Entomol. 33:563-65.
Granett, P., and Haynes, H.L. 1945. Insect-repellent properties of 2-
ethyl-hexanediol-1,3. J. Eoon. Entomol. 38:671-675.
Grothaus, R.H., J.M. Hirst, H.K. Gouck, and D.E. Weidhaas. 1972. Field
tests with repellent-treated wide-mesh netting against mixed mosquito
populations. J. Med. Entomol. 9:149-52.
Grothaus, R.H., H.K. Gouck, D.E. Weidhaas, and S.C. Jackson. 1974. Wide-
mesh netting, an improved method of protection against blood-feeding
Diptera. Amer. J. Trap. Med. Hyg. 23:533-37-
Hirst, J.M., J.G. McWilliams, H.K. Gouck, C.R. Schreck, and N. Smith. 1968
Prevention of mosquito-borne diseases in military personnel. Space
repelents. Proc. Ann. Meet. New Jersey Mosquito Extermination Assoo.
55th: 29-36
McCulloch, R.N., and D.F. Waterhouse. 1947- Laboratory and Field Tests
of Mosquito Repellents. Commonwealth Australia Council Scientific
Industrial Res. Bull. 213. 28 pp.
McDonald, J.L., and R.H. Grothaus. 1973. Field studies using wide-mesh
mosquito bed nets in Taiwan and Indonesia. J. Med. Entomol. 10:299.
Smith, C.N. 1958. Insect repellents. Soap Chem. Spec. 34(2): 105-12,
203; 34(3):126-33.
Smith, C.N., and M.M. Cole. 1951. Mosquito repellents for application
to clothing. J. Nat. Malaria Soc. 10:206-12.
Smith, C.N., and I.H. Gilbert. 1953. Effectiveness against mosquitoes of
general-purpose repellent mixtures for application to the clothing.
J. Eoon. Entomol. 46:671-74.
Smith, C.N., I.H. Gilbert, H.K. Gouck, M.C. Bowman, F. Acree, Jr., and
C.H. Schmidt. 1963. Factors Affecting the Protection Period of Mos-
quito Repellents. ARS, USDA, Tech. Bull. 1285. 36 pp.
Traub, R., and B.L. Elisberg. 1962. Comparative efficacy of diethylto-
luamide skin-application repellent (deet) and M-1960 clothing impregnant
against mosquitoes in the nipah palm-mangrove swamps in Malaya.
Pacific Insects. 4:314-18
Travis, B.V., F.A. Morton, H.A. Jones, and J.H. Robinson. 1949. The more
effective mosquito repellents tested at the Orlando, Fla. laboratory,
1942-47. J. Eoon. Entomol. 42:686-94.
-------
-12-
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1967- Materials Evaluated as Insecticides,
Repellents, and Chemosterilants at Orlando and Gainesville, Florida Agric.
Handb. 340, ARS, USDA, Washington. 424 pp.
Weaving, A.J.S., and N.K. Sylvester. 1967. Pyrethrum as an insect re-
pellent. Part II. A laboratory technique for its evaluation as a mos-
quito repellent, and the influence of formulation on persistence.
Pyrethrum Post 9(1):31-35.
1.4 Biting Flies
Methods of evaluating repellents applied to humans for protection from
biting flies are similar to those described for the evaluation of repellents
against mosquitoes (Applewhite and Cross 1951, Gilbert et al. 1957, Gerberg
1966). Behavioral variations between species may necessitate minor adjust-
ments in techniques; for example, deer flies (Chrysops spp.J are attracted
to moving objects and test subjects usually remain in motion with upraised
arms during exposures to these species (Gilbert et al. 1957, Schreck et al.
1976). The intensity of sunlight is also a factor.
Although black flies (Simuliidae) may bite viciously in some localities,
evaluations in other localities have been based on a long period of protection
without bites rather than protection time to the first bite (Travis et al.
1951). The tendency of black flies and snipe flies, Rhagionidae, to alight
on the shirt and then crawl over the edges of the sleeves onto skin un-
treated by repellent should also be taken into account in evaluations
against these pests.
Biting midges (Culicoides spp.J present problems in evaluation as
they may be extremely active for a few hours and then cease activity com-
pletely. Under these conditions a determination of relative protection
periods requires treatment several hours in advance of the anticipated
activity of the midges. These midges also have a tendency to land on
treated skin even when the repellent is adequate to prevent actual biting
(Applewhite and Cross 1951).
The methods used in the evaluation of repellent-treated bed nets and
net jackets against various types of biting flies are also similar to those
used in evaluations against mosquitoes (Frommer et al. 1975, Mulrennan et
al. 1975, Sholdt et al. 1975).
-------
-13-
REFERENCES
Applewhite, K. H., and H. F. Cross. 1951. Further studies of repellents in
Alaska. J. Econ. Entomol. 44:19-22.
Frommer, R. L., R. R. Carestia, and R. W. Vavra, Jr. 1975. Field evaluation
of deet-treated mesh jacket against black flies (Simuliidae). J. Med
Entomol. 12:558-61.
Gerberg, E. J. 1966. Field and laboratory repellency tests with 2,2,4-trimethyl-
i,3-pentanediol (TMPD). J. Boon. Entomol. 59:872-75
Gilbert, I. H., H. K. Gouck, and C. N. Smith. 1957. New insect repellent,
Part I. Soap Chem. Spec. 33(5):115-17, 129-33.
Mulrennan, J. A., L. A. Lewis, and R. H. Grothaus. 1975. Field tests with
repellent treated wide-mesh netted jackets against the valley black gnat,
Leptoconops cavtep-i. Mosquito New 35:228-29.
Schreck, C. E., N. Smith, and H. K. Gouck. 1976. Repellency of N;,N-diethyl-m-
toluamide (deet) and 2-hydroxethyl cyclohexanecarboxylate against the deer
flies Chrysops atlanticus Pechuman and Chvysops flawidus Wiedmann. J. Med.
Entomol. In Press.
Sholdt, L. L., R. H. Grothanus, C. E. Schreck, and H. K. Gouck. 1975. Field
studies using repellent-treated wide-mesh net jackets against Glossina
morsitans in Ethiopia. East African Med. J. 52(5):277-83.
Travis, B. V., A. L. Smith, and A. H. Madden. 1951. Effectiveness of insect
repellents against black flies. J. Econ. Entomol. 44:813-14.
1.5 Fleas
Humans may become infested with many species of fle^s (Rubbard 1947, Holland
1949) but are more commonly infested with fleas from hosts with which
they are closely associated. These fleas are the cat flea, Ctenocep'halia'es
felis Bouche), and the dog flea, C. canis (Curtis), but may be the oriental
rat flea, Xenopsylla cheopis (Rothschild), or the human fleas, Pulex irritans
and P. simulons (Linnaeus), which are very important in cities and towns of
the Southwest and occasionally become abundant on farms in the Midwest and
Southern U.S. Many people are bitten by small insects popularly known as
"sand fleas". In the North, these are usually the cat or dog fleas. In the
West, they may be the human flea, sometimes associated with squirrels or
prairie dogs whereas in the South, they may be the sticktight flea Ec'kidnop'baga
gallinacea (Westwood), but are usually the dog and cat fleas. Flea control
is usually divided into two categories: control on pets or premises
treatments (see analysis of Specialized Pesticide Problems Invertebrate
control agents, Vol. V) and control on rodents for disease prevention.
-------
-14-
Materials for human protection may be applied to the skin as repellents
(Lindquist et al. 1944, Travis et al. 1946, Bar-Zeev and Gothilf 1972), but
in areas of heavy flea infestation, clothing treated with repellents is pre-
ferable and affords better protection (Linduska et al. 1946, Smith and Burnett
1948, Gilbert et al. 1957). Initial testing should be conducted on humans as
described in the literature cited above. In general, a repellent is effective
against more than one pest of humans and therefore the screening and testing
methods will be similar to that described in sections 1.111 - 1.114, 1.2 and
1.3.
Unfed fleas at least 12 hours old should be used in testing programs.
Dog fleas, cat fleas, or Oriental rat fleas (Xenopsylla cheopis Rothschild)
are useful laboratory test organisms; however, field testing should be con-
ducted against fleas endemic to the area.
REFERENCES
Bar-Zeev, M., and S. Gothilf. 1972. Laboratory evaluation of flea repellents.
J. Med. Entomol. 9(3):215-18.
Busvine, J.R., and J. Lien. 1961. Methods for measuring insecticide suscepti-
bility levels in bed bugs, cone-nosed bugs, fleas and lice. Bull. Wld. Elth.
Org. 24:509-17.
Gilbert, I.H., H.K. Gouck, and C.N. Smith. 1957- New insect repellent, Part I.
Soap Chem. Spec. 33(5):115-17, 129-33; Part II. Ibid. 33(6):95-99, 109.
Holland, G.P. 1949. The Siphonoptera of Canada. Ottawa, Canada Dept. Agric.
Tech. Bull. 70. 306 pp.
Hubbard, C.A. 1947. Fleas of Western North America Ames, Iowa State College
Press. 533 pp.
Linduska, J.P., J.H. Cochran, and F.A. Morton. 1946. Flea repellents for use
on clothing. J. Econ. Entomol. 39(6):767-69.
Lindquist, A.W., A.H. Madden, and C.N. Watts. 1944. The use of repellents
against fleas. J. Econ. Entomol. 37(4):485-6.
Smith, C.N. and D. Burnett, Jr. 1948. Laboratory evaluation of repellents and
toxicants as clothing treatments for personal protection from fleas and ticks.
Amer. J. Trap. Med. 28:299-607.
Travis, B.V., F.A. Morton, and J.H. Cochran. 1946. Insect repellents used as
skin treatments by the armed forces. J. Econ. Entomol. 39:627-30.
U.S. Dept. Agriculture. 1955. Insecticides and Repellents for the Control of
Insects of Medical Importance to the Armed Forces. USDA Circ. 977. 90 pp.
-------
-15-
1.6 Ticks
Several species of ticks occur on humans. These represent soft ticks
(Argasidae) which in the nymphal and adult stages feed for brief periods only
and the hard ticks (Ixodidae) which feed for several days and may react dif-
ferently to pesticides. Two species that personal insect repellents are
effective against are the lone star tick, Amblyomma amerioanwn (L.) and the
American dog tick, Dermaoentor vaTi-abilis (Say).
Tick repellents for use on skin and clothing can be tested by procedures
similar to those described for mosquitoes (Sections 1.3, 1.31, 1.32 and 1.33)
and chiggers (Sections 1.2 and 1.21).
Selected references for testing tick repellents are provided.
REFERENCES
Cole, M.M., and G.W. Lloyd. 1952. Field tests of selected repellents against
the American dog tick. J. Eoon. Entomol. 45:1025-26.
Cole, M.M., and C.N. Smith. 1950. Tick repellent investigations at Bull's
Island, S.C., 1948. J. Eoon. Entomol. 42:880-83.
Gilbert, I.H., H.K. Gouck, and C.N. Smith. 1957- New insect repellent, Part I.
Soap Chem. Spec. 33(5):115-17, 129-33; Part II. Ibid. 33(6) 95-99, 109.
Gouck, H.K., and I.H. Gilbert. 1955. Field tests with new tick repellents in
1954. J. Eoon. Entomol. 48:499-500.
Gouck, H.K., and I.H. Gilbert. 1960. Field tests with new tick repellents in
1955, 1956 and 1959. Fla. Entomol. 53:189-94.
Granett, P., and C.F. French. 1950. Field tests of clothing treated to repel
American dog ticks. J. Eoon. Entomol. 43(l):41-44.
Smith, C.N. 1965. Insect repellents—their present usefulness and future
developments. Proo. 12th Int. Congr. Entomol. 507-09.
Smith, C.N. and D. Burnett, Jr. 1948. Laboratory evaluation of repellents and
toxicants as clothing treatments for personal protection from fleas and ticks.
Amer. J. Trop. Med. 28:599-607.
Smith, C.N., M.M. Cole, I.H. Gilbert, and H.K. Gouck. 1954. Field tests with
tick repellents - 1949, 1950 and 1952. J. Eoon. Entomol. 47(1):13-19.
-------
-16-
2. Application to pets
2.1 Fleas and ticks
2.11 Dogs and cats
Dogs and cats are usually infested with fleas and ticks although ticks
occur more commonly on dogs.
Methods of testing the efficacy of pesticides against these pests are
similar for both the dog and the cat, therefore, the method described below
can be interchangeable for either animal.
2.111 Controlled Laboratory testing
Animals should be selected for testing based upon the following.
2.111.1 Number of test animals
At least six (6) animals per treatment (control animals are considered
a treatment) with equal numbers of each sex and divided as equally as possi-
ble between the various factors as to breed, approximate age, weight, and
hair coat, i.e., length and texture. These variables must be recorded.
2.111.2 Housing and conditioning animals
Housing conditions for animals vary (Section 2.118). However, animals
should be housed in individual pens if at all possible. For dogs the holding
environment should provide outdoor and indoor exposure.
Untreated animals should be housed in the same general area but away
from the treated animals by at least 8 to 10 feet.
All animals should be properly conditioned for at least 7 days prior to
testing. To assure survival during the test period all animals should be
immunized during the conditioning period. All records of any medication admin-
istered to the animals during the course of the study should be recorded.
Avoid using disinfectants for cleaning during the testing period. Other pesti-
cides should not be used in or around the test area during the study.
2.111.3 Preparation for testing
All animals should be checked for natural infestation of the arthropod
to be tested. These parasites should be counted (see Section 2.115) and
some removed for proper identification. Animals not having a satisfactory
infestation should be infested 2 days prior to treatment to allow proper
-------
-17-
adjustments to the host. Not all individual animals are susceptible to arthro-
pods. Those that will not take an infestation should be replaced with suscepti-
ble animals.
2.111.4 Testing Considerations - Placebo
A placebo treatment containing all ingredients except the pesticide should
be administered to the untreated (control) animals.
2.111.5 Testing Considerations - Standard
It is advisable to run a registered treatment as a standard as an aid in
evaluating the efficacy of the test product.
2.111.6 Testing Considerations - Water
Depending upon label claims, the effect of water wetting the animals ver
sus the treatment should be established and recorded.
2.112 Simulated field conditions
The conditions which would be most likely to result in pest infestation in
the field can be duplicated under a controlled research project (Knapp 1976).
2.113 Consumer field testing
When adequate data are obtained from laboratory and/or simulated field
testing, additional regional field testing by consumers or by veterinarians
is desirable. All of these tests should be supervised by a professional ento-
mologist experienced in the specific testing area.
In these types of tests, it is important that an equal number of consumers
receive an unknown placebo treatment.
Data to be recorded should be the geographical region; treatment date;
environmental conditions; the hosts' age, breed, sex, hair (length and texture);
health conditions (medication and other pest treatment received prior to or
during the course of the test); habits (for example, free to roam, yard pet,
house pet, sleeping area, etc.); and the pest organism being controlled and
information as to the reinfestation pressures. At least 20 acceptable hosts
should be utilized in each field or consumer geographical testing region. The
comment of the owner is often useful information in judging the effectiveness
of a product.
2.114 Test arthropods
-------
-18-
2.114.1 Ticks
Unfed adult ticks are recommended for testing. When ticks are in great
numbers in the area they can be trapped using C02 traps (Semtner and Hair 1975)
or using a flannel cloth drag. Another method of collecting is to remove the
unengorged adult ticks from stray dogs and use these to infest the treated dogs.
When natural tick populations are not available, they can be laboratory reared
(Gregson 1966 and Srivastava and Varna 1964).
2.114.2 Fleas
The dog flea and cat flea interchange host readily, and are equally sus-
ceptible to most pesticides. Therefore, data derived on one species will sup-
port the claim for the other species. However, the species used in the study
should be reported.
2.115 Infestation methods
2.115.1 Ticks
All tested dogs, including those untreated, should be infested with a
minimum of 25 ticks each. This should be accomplished by placing unfed, 10
to 14 day old adult ticks in the housing or sleeping area of the dog. This
allows the tick to become attached in a natural way. Ticks can also be
deposited directly onto the dog's back as the hair is ruffled with the hand
by a forward brushing motion. Some ticks will attach immediately but most
will crawl over the body to seek a site for attachment. Reinfestations
should be done 2-3 days prior to each post treatment observations.
2.115.2 Fleas
Cat or dog fleas can be easily reared in the laboratory (Smith and Eddy
1954, Hudson 1958). Infestations of the cat or dog can be accomplished by
depositing 50-100 unfed adult fleas either directly onto the animal or in
the bedding or by placing flea pupae in a holding container in the housing
area and allowing the adults to seek the host upon emergence. If the pupal
exposure method is used, care should be taken to assure emergence of the
fleas 2 days prior to the post treatment counts. Reinfestations should be
made 2 days prior to each post treatment count.
2.116 Observations
2.116.1 Qualifications
Satisfactory observations require qualified personnel supervised by a
professional entomologist.
-------
-19-
2.116.2 Pretreatment
A pretreatment count of test arthropods should be made immediately prior
to treatment and then periodic counts are made throughout the study, depending
upon the degree of time the treatment is expected to last. (See Section
2.117).
These inspections should indicate the number of test organisms and sex
found and in case of ticks whether attached or crawling; the viability (liv-
ing or dead) and area of the body in which found. These data should be
recorded as days after treatment started and compared to counts found on the
untreated and the standard treatment if one is used.
All ticks found should be counted. It may not be possible to count all
fleas and perhaps a rating system such as light (1-25), med. (26-50) and heavy
(50 or more) can be used for the flea counts.
2.116.3 Toxicity
All toxic symptoms of the host animal during the course of the study
should be noted and recorded. If death occurs a post mortem report is useful
in clarifying cause of death.
2.117 Duration of Effectiveness
The greatest importance is the degree of control afforded by the treatment.
Such claims as "controls" must be supported by data which indicate that the
treatment will effectively reduce substantial populations of pest arthropods
to a level equal to or greater than comparable commercially used products. For
all practical purposes, this would be control to the extent that the user would
not usually be required to rely on other pesticides or methods of control
during the time period specified on the labeling.
2.118 Type of treatments and testing variations
2.118.1 Collars or medallions (tags, lockets, etc.)
There are many commercially produced impregnated materials for the con-
trol of ticks and/or fleas on pets. The general testing procedures to obtain
the data acceptable for label claims have been presented in sections 2.111 -
2.117. There are many variations to these procedures. For instance some flea
researchers confine cats to closed individual housing and vary in their infesta-
tion rate and methods (Fox et al. 1969 and 1969a, Knapp 1976). Others use
dogs under natural conditions (Knapp 1976, Quick 1971, Kalkofen and Green-
berg 1974, 1974a) and controlled conditions (Knapp 1976 and Kibble 1968). All
of the above methods cited have produced reliable data.
-------
-20-
Information on reinfestation rates with impregnated collars or medallions
is not usually needed during the early weeks of the test unless the control
claim is less than 1 month. Post treatment infestations for long-lasting col-
lars can be done at 1, 2, and 3 months and at weekly intervals thereafter to
establish the duration of effectiveness. Usually when control drops below
80%, the test is terminated. All test animals should be wetted at least
monthly. Records should be kept of any abnormalities to the host due to the
treatment such as neck rashes.
2.118.2 Shampoos, dips, songes, aerosols,
sprays, dusts, spot-treatments.
Various commercial products containing pesticides are available for tick
and flea control. Test procedures for these products are essentially the same
as described in sections 2.111 - 2.117 with the exception that flea and tick
counts are made more frequently due to the short residual effectiveness of the
treatment. (Lindquist et al. 1944, Sweetman 1946, Hansen 1956, Hopwood and
Migden 1965, Stampa 1970, Butt 1971, and Knapp 1976).
2.118.3 Systemics
Some systemic insecticides are available to veterinarians for adminis-
tering to pets for external parasite control. These are considered drugs
but the initial test procedures are essentially the same as those of Hill
et al. (1963) and Clark et al. (1971).
2.12 Miscellaneous other animals
Fleas and ticks attack other animals such as commercial fur-bearing
animals and zoo animals. A few exotic pet animals are also subject to
becoming infested with fleas and ticks.
There is no testing protocol established on these animals but if one
wishes to establish a label claim for one species or a general claim for
several animals then the guide lines established for dogs and cats may be
followed probably with only few modifications.1 The guide lines established
for testing pesticides against livestock pests may be helpful, especially for
the larger, closely related, zoo animals.
REFERENCES
Butt, K.M. 1971. The use of Bromocyclen for the control of the cat flea
(Ctenooephalides felis). The Veterinary Record. 88:253-4.
Clark, P.H., M.M. Cole, D.Z. Forcum, J.R. Wheeler, K.W. Weeks, and B.E. Miller.
1971. Preliminary evaluation of three systemic insecticides in baits for
control of fleas of wild rats and rabbits. J. Boon. Entomol. 64:1190-2.
-------
-21-
Fox, I., G.A. Rivera, and I.G. Bayons, 1969. Controlling eat fleas with
dichlorvos impregnated collars. J. Eoon. Entomol. 62(5):1246-48.
Fox, I., I.E. Bayona, and J.L. Armstrong. 1969a. Cat flea control through
use of dichlorvos impregnated collars. J. Eoon. Entomol, 155(10):
1621-23.
Gregson, J.D. 1966. Ticks. Page 59 in C.N. Smith, ed. Insect Colonization
and Mass Production. Academic Press, New York and London.
Hansen, E.J. 1956. Chlordane-resistant brown dog ticks and their control.
J. Eoon. Entomol. 49(2):281-83.
Hill, A. Jr., F.W. Knapp, and H. Knutson. 1963. Laboratory studies with
systemic insecticides for control of the oriental rat flea on white rats.
J. Eoon. Entomol. 56:390-4.
Hopwood, R.T., and W. Migden. 1965. Elimination of fleas from an animal
by aerosol insecticides applied in a closed environment. J. Am. Vet.
Med. Assoo. 146:1115-16.
Hudson, B.W. 1958. A method for large scale rearing of the cat flea
Ctenocephalides felis (Bouchi). Bull WHO. 19:26-29.
Kalkofen, U.P- and J. Greenberg 1974. Echidnophaga gallinaaea infestation
on dogs. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoo. 165:447-8.
Kalkofen, U.P- and J. Greenberg 1974a. Public health implication of
Pulex irr-itans infestations of dogs. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoo.
165:903-4.
Kibble, R.M. 1968. Effectiveness of Dichlorvos impregnated collars in
controlling fleas on dogs. Aust. Vet. J. 44:456-58.
Knapp, F.W. 1976. Fleas and tick control on dogs and cats. Unpublished
data. University of Kentucky, College of Agriculture, Lexington, Ky.
40506. Protocols furnished upon request.
Lindquist, A.W., A.H. Madden, and E.F. Knipling. 1944. DDT as a
treatment for fleas on dogs. J. Eoon. Entomol. 39:138.
Quick, H.L. 1971. Control of flea infestation of dogs. Vet. Med. Small
Anim. Clin. 773-4.
Semtner, P.J., and J.A. Hair. 1975. Evaluation of C02 baited traps for
survey of Amblyomma maoulatum Koch and Dermacentor var-iabilis (Acarina:
Ixodidae). J. Med. Entomol. 12(1):137-38.
Smith, C.N., and G.W. Eddy. 1954. Techniques for rearing and handling
body lice, oriental rat fleas and cat fleas. Bull. MO. 10, 127-37.
Srivastava, S.C., and M.G.R., Varma 1964. The culture of the tick
Rhipicephalus sanguineus (Latreille) (Ixodidae) in the laboratory.
J. Med. Entomol. l(2):154-57.
-------
-22-
Stampa, S, 1970. Test work with BolfoQO a carbamate insecticide for the
control of fleas on dogs and ticks on livestock. Vet, Med, Rev.
3:211-17.
Sweetman, H,L. 1946. DDT to control cat and dog fleas and dog lice.
J. Econ. Entomol. 39-417-8.
2.2 Lice
2.21 Dogs and Cats
In the United States dogs are infested by two lice, Triahodeetes
canis (De Geer) and Heterodoxus spiniger (Enderlein) whereas cats are
parasitized by three, Fel-ioola subrostratus (Burneister) , Tr-ic'hol'i-
peurus liperuro-ides(Megnin) and T. parallelus (Osborn). However, dogs
and cats infested by these lice in any great quantities are rare. Usually
lice on dogs or cats are controlled by the same treatments approved for
fleas or ticks (Sweetmen 1946).
Tests for cnducting efficacy studies of pesticides against lice on
dogs and cats can be similar to those for livestock (Babcock 1944) or
similar to the methods for fleas and ticks (Section 2.1). However, tests
should be conducted in areas endemic to the infestation of the dog and
cat lice.
2.22 Other mammals
Guinea pigs and other small mammals as well as coyotes, wolves, larger
zoo animals and exotic pets (Emerson 1962a) may become infested with lice.
Efficacy studies similar to those discussed in Sections 2.1 and 2.31 can
be used to evaluate pesticides for their control.
2.23 Birds
Usually only chewing lice (Mallophaga) infest birds (Emerson 1962) .
They are found in all areas of the body but certain species may be more
prevalent in specific areas than other species. In general, lice on
domestic pet birds are not a serious problem. However, the pigeon has
two lice, Companulates bidentatus (Scopoli) and Columbicola columbae
(Linnaeus) which live among the feathers of both old and young birds and
interfere with profitable raising of these fowls. Usually the control
methods used for domestic fowls have been adopted for use on other birds.
Tests should be conducted in areas endemic to the infestations.
-------
-23-
KEFEEENCES
Eabcock, O.G. 1944. DDT for the control of goat lice. J. Econ. Fntomol.
37:138.
Emerson, K.C. 1962, A Tentative List of Mallophaga for North American
Birds (North of Mexico). Dugvay Proving Ground, Dugway, Utah. 217 p.
Emerson, K.C. 1962a. A Tentative List of Mallophaga for North American
Mammals (North of Mexico). Dugway Proving Ground, Dugway, Utah. 20 p.
Emerson, K.C. 1964. Checklist of the Mallophaga of North America (North
of Mexico). Dugway Proving Ground, Dugway, Utah.
Sweetman, E.L. 1946. DDT to control cat and dog fleas and dog lice.
J. Econ. Entomol. 39:417-8.
2.3 Mites
Mites cause injury to small animals, especially dogs and cats.
Probably most important is sarcoptic acariasis or mange. The common
mange of dogs is caused by Saraoptes sodbiei var. oanis (Gerloch). Mange
of cats is caused by Notoedres oati (Hering) . Auricular mites cause oto-
acariasis of cats and dogs. These mites literally swarm in the ears of
their host. The rabbit fur mite, Cheylet-iella paras •it'ivor'Lx (Megnin) , is
occasionally found on cats and dogs. Symptoms include the loss of hair,
cracked skin, loss of appetite and extreme discomfort.
Testing procedure can generally follow that outlined under 2.1 to 2.114
in this section.
Ear mites require more specialized treatment. Controlled evaluation
provides the most useful data (see Tonn 1959); but field testing is also
necessary. Infestations vary greatly from animal to animal (approximately
20) as possible to insure that uniform numbers of mites are used in the
tests. Frequently less than 50% of dogs will have adequate numbers of
mites for use in evaluation. Working dogs which have contact with other
animals and are exposed to variations in the environment provide better
data than controlled dogs. The same situation is true for cats.
REFERENCES
Tonn, Robert J. 1959. Morphological and experimental studies on Otodeotes
aynotis (Hering 1838). PhD Thesis. Oklahoma State University, Still-
water, Oklahoma. 166 pp.
-------
-24-
2.4 Biting Flies
Small animals, especially dogs and cats, are bothered by biting flies
of the same species that attack humans and livestock. Species that attack
dogs include stable flies (Stomoxys calaitrans)3 horn flies (Haematobia
irritansjj biting midges (Culiaoides spp.) and black flies (Simul-iidae) -_
Shortness of hair increases annoyance to these animals. The face and ears
of dogs are especially attractive to biting flies. These areas require
special attention and they are difficult to treat because repellents do
irritate mucus membranes.
Repellents normally acceptable for use on humans and horses may be
used on dogs. There is no testing protocol established for these animals.
2.5 Mosquitoes
Repellents are applied to dogs and to a lesser extent to cats for
protection from mosquitoes. Mosquitoes that attack humans also feed on
dogs and cats and other small animals. The same guidelines noted for
biting flies (2.4) can be applied for testing against mosquitoes.
------- |