Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Investigations into the Toxic and Repellent Effects of Propiconazole on the Wool-Digesting Carpet Beetle Larvae Anthrenocerus australis (Coleoptera: Dermestidae)

  • Published:
Journal of Insect Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous work had shown propiconazole applied to wool gave a protective effect against the keratinophagous insect larvae of the Australian carpet beetle Anthrenocerus australis. To elucidate the mode of action of propiconazole on Anthrenocerus australis, repellency trials were carried out using untreated control and propiconazole-treated wool. A reversible choice experiment using Petri dishes, and an irreversible olfactometer choice experiment were carried out. Treated surface repellency trials were also carried out. No repellency effect was detected with any of these experiments. Direct contact experiments were carried out by application of propiconazole solutions directly to Anthrenocerus australis larvae and by feeding larvae propiconazole-treated wool. No short or long-term toxic effects were detected, and subsequent feeding on untreated wool was not reduced. These results suggest an anti-feeding and/or gut-specific mode of action of propiconazole on Anthrenocerus australis that is likely to be different to that of the commonly used wool insecticides. This provides an opportunity to research a new approach to the control of this wool pest.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allanach D, Shaw T (1989) Mothproofing and the environment. In: Proceedings of TIFCON’89 – Carpets what’s afoot? Conference of the Textile Institute’s Floorcoverings Group, Paper 4, Blackpool, United Kingdom

  • Barton J (2000) It’s a bugs life – or is it? Intl Dyer 185(9):14–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Campo ML, Miles CI (2003) Chemosensory tuning to a host recognition cue in the facultative specialist larvae of the moth Manduca sexta. J Exp Biol 206:3979–3990

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Christeller JT, Markwick NP, Burgess EPJ (1994) Midgut proteinase activities of three keratinolytic larvae, Hofmannophila pseudospretella, Tineola bisselliella, and Anthrenocerus australis and the effect of proteinase inhibitors on proteolysis. Arch Insect Biochem Physiol 25(2):159–173

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Diaz-Montano J, Trumble JT (2013) Behavioral responses of the potato psyllid (Hemiptera: Triozidae) to volatiles from dimethyl disulphide and plant essential oils. J Insect Behav 26(3):336–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingham PE, McNeil SJ, Sunderland MR (2012) Functional finishes for wool – Eco considerations. Adv Mater Res 441:33–43

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lamb KP (1952) Note on the survival without food of Australian carpet beetle larvae (Anthrenocerus australis (Hope)) (Coleoptera: Dermestidae). N Z J Sci Technol A 34(1):67–68

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonald LL, Guy RH, Speirs RO (1970) Preliminary evaluation of new candidate materials as toxicants, repellents and attractants against stored product insects. Marketing Research Report Number 882. Washington Agricultural Research Service, US Dep Agric p. 8

  • Mill W (2007) Beating moths the clean way. Wool Rec 166(3758):30

    Google Scholar 

  • Nenaah GE (2014) Chemical composition, insecticidal and repellence activities of essential oils of three Achillea species against the Khapra beetle (Coleoptera: Dermestidae). J Pest Sci 87:273–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osipitan AA, Owoseni JA, Odeyemi IS, Somade AA (2010) Assessment of extracts from some tropical plants in the management of termite (Termitidae: Isoptera) in Ogun state, Nigeria. Arch Phytopathol PFL 43(10):962–971

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Raffa KF, Havill NP, Nordheim EV (2002) How many choices can your test animal compare effectively? Evaluating critical assumption of behavioral preference tests. Oecologia 133(3):422–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoonhoven LM, van Loon JJA (2002) An inventory of taste in caterpillars: each species its own key. Acta Zool Acad Sci Hung 48(Suppl 1):215–263

    Google Scholar 

  • Stratton GW, Corke CT (1981) Interaction of permethrin with Daphnia magna in the presence and absence of particulate material. Environ Pollut 24(2):135–144

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sunderland MR, Cruickshank RH, Leighs SJ (2014) The efficacy of antifungal azole and antiprotozoal compounds in protection of wool from keratin-digesting insect larvae. Tex Res J 84(9):924–931

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Svoboda JA (1994) Steroid metabolism as a target for insect control. Biochem Soc Trans 22(3):635–641

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tomlin CDS (1997) A world compendium: the pesticide manual, 11th edn. Farnham, British Crop Protection Council, p. 944

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Environmental Protection Agency (2006) Reregistration eligibility decision (RED) for propiconazole. http://epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/propiconazole_red.pdf. Accessed 18 June 2014

  • Wools of New Zealand Test Method 25 (1996) Biological assay of insect resistance

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are thankful to Dr Chikako van Koten for her help with statistical analyses. This work was supported by the Wool Research Organisation of New Zealand Inc., and the New Zealand Wool Industry Charitable Trust.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Food & Bio-based Products Section, AgResearch Limited, Christchurch, 8140, New Zealand

    Matthew Richard Sunderland

  2. Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Lincoln University, Lincoln, New Zealand

    Robert Hamish Cruickshank

Authors
  1. Matthew Richard Sunderland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert Hamish Cruickshank
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew Richard Sunderland.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sunderland, M.R., Cruickshank, R.H. Investigations into the Toxic and Repellent Effects of Propiconazole on the Wool-Digesting Carpet Beetle Larvae Anthrenocerus australis (Coleoptera: Dermestidae). J Insect Behav 29, 57–68 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10905-015-9542-0

Download citation

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10905-015-9542-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation