Ortho-aminoacetophenone, a non-lethal repellent : the effect of volatile cues vs. direct contact on avoidance behavior by rodents and birds

S. Wager-Pagé, J. Mason
{"title":"Ortho-aminoacetophenone, a non-lethal repellent : the effect of volatile cues vs. direct contact on avoidance behavior by rodents and birds","authors":"S. Wager-Pagé, J. Mason","doi":"10.1002/(SICI)1096-9063(199601)46:1<55::AID-PS313>3.0.CO;2-#","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Taxonomic differences in responsiveness to chemosensory irritants are prevalent among avian and mammalian species and represent a major obstacle to the development of general vertebrate repellents. We evaluated the effect of ortho-aminoacetophenone (OAP), a potent avian repellent, on ingestive behavior of two rodent species, Prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster), Deer Mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus Wagn.), and an avian species, European starling (Sturnus vulgarus L.) utilizing similar experimental conditions to facilitate inter-species comparisons. All three species avoided OAP-treated food. Apple consumption by voles was decreased from a baseline of theoretical zero% by OAP (0.01-10.0 ml liter -1 ), P < 0.00001, while mice avoided all but the lowest concentration of OAP (0.01-10 ml liter -1 ), P < 0.00001. A repellent should elicit avoidance behavior prior to the animal having physical contact with the commodity, ideally producing aversion via volatile cues rather than through direct contact. Therefore, we utilized two delivery methods for presentation of the test solutions to evaluate the repellency of OAP in the presence and absence of direct contact. Apple consumption by birds following exposure to OAP by either direct contact or volatile cues differed from a baseline of theoretical zero% consumption, P < 0.001. When birds had access to OAP through both direct and volatile exposures, reduction in apple consumption by European starlings was greater than observed following contact with the compounds volatile cues alone, P < 0.03. These findings argue against a major role for olfaction or naso-trigeminal chemoreception in avoidance of OAP-treated food. Instead, taste or oral trigeminal chemoreception appear to mediate responding.","PeriodicalId":19985,"journal":{"name":"Pesticide Science","volume":"10 1","pages":"55-60"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1996-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pesticide Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9063(199601)46:1<55::AID-PS313>3.0.CO;2-#","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

Taxonomic differences in responsiveness to chemosensory irritants are prevalent among avian and mammalian species and represent a major obstacle to the development of general vertebrate repellents. We evaluated the effect of ortho-aminoacetophenone (OAP), a potent avian repellent, on ingestive behavior of two rodent species, Prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster), Deer Mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus Wagn.), and an avian species, European starling (Sturnus vulgarus L.) utilizing similar experimental conditions to facilitate inter-species comparisons. All three species avoided OAP-treated food. Apple consumption by voles was decreased from a baseline of theoretical zero% by OAP (0.01-10.0 ml liter -1 ), P < 0.00001, while mice avoided all but the lowest concentration of OAP (0.01-10 ml liter -1 ), P < 0.00001. A repellent should elicit avoidance behavior prior to the animal having physical contact with the commodity, ideally producing aversion via volatile cues rather than through direct contact. Therefore, we utilized two delivery methods for presentation of the test solutions to evaluate the repellency of OAP in the presence and absence of direct contact. Apple consumption by birds following exposure to OAP by either direct contact or volatile cues differed from a baseline of theoretical zero% consumption, P < 0.001. When birds had access to OAP through both direct and volatile exposures, reduction in apple consumption by European starlings was greater than observed following contact with the compounds volatile cues alone, P < 0.03. These findings argue against a major role for olfaction or naso-trigeminal chemoreception in avoidance of OAP-treated food. Instead, taste or oral trigeminal chemoreception appear to mediate responding.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
邻氨基苯乙酮,一种非致死性驱蚊剂:挥发性线索与直接接触对啮齿动物和鸟类回避行为的影响
鸟类和哺乳动物对化学感觉刺激反应的分类差异是普遍存在的,这是开发一般脊椎动物驱避剂的主要障碍。为了便于种间比较,我们利用相似的实验条件,对两种啮齿动物草原田鼠(Microtus ochrogaster)、鹿鼠(Peromyscus maniculatus Wagn.)和一种鸟类欧洲椋鸟(Sturnus vulgarus L.)的摄食行为进行了研究,研究了一种强效的鸟类驱避剂邻氨基苯乙酮(OAP)。这三个物种都避免了经过oap处理的食物。OAP (0.01-10.0 ml l -1)使田鼠的苹果食用量从理论基线的0%下降,P < 0.00001,而小鼠除了最低浓度的OAP (0.01-10 ml l -1)外,都避免食用,P < 0.00001。驱虫剂应该在动物与商品有身体接触之前引起回避行为,理想情况下,通过挥发性线索而不是通过直接接触产生厌恶。因此,我们使用两种递送方法来展示测试溶液,以评估OAP在存在和不存在直接接触的情况下的驱避性。通过直接接触或挥发性线索暴露于OAP后,鸟类的苹果食用量与理论零食用量基线不同,P < 0.001。当鸟类通过直接接触和挥发性接触接触OAP时,欧洲椋鸟的苹果消费量减少幅度大于单独接触化合物挥发性线索时,P < 0.03。这些发现反驳了嗅觉或鼻-三叉神经化学感受在回避经oap处理的食物中的主要作用。相反,味觉或口服三叉神经化学感受似乎介导了反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effect of paraoxon‐methyl and parathion‐methyl on DNA in human lymphocytes and protective action of vitamin C Review Methods of analysis of dithiocarbamate pesticides: A review Communication to the editor piperonyl butoxide-mediated inhibition of cytochrome P450-catalysed insecticide metabolism: A rational approach In-vitro study on the effect of pesticides on neuronal activity Monitoring of the photochemical degradation of metamitron and imidacloprid by micellar electrokinetic chromatography and differential-pulse polarography
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1