Dust Bags Research Articles

Dust from carpeted and smooth floors: IV. Solid material, proteins and allergens collected in the different filter stages of vacuum cleaners after ten days of use in schools.

The accumulation of dust, proteins and allergens from alder, birch, timothy, cat, dog, mite, hen egg white, codfish and mould in schools was investigated by analysing the content of vacuum cleaners after 10 days of use. The main goals were to compare the dust accumulation on carpeted and smooth floors and to estimate to what degree the three vacuum cleaner filter stages (i.e. the disposable bag, the main filter and the microfilter) collected dust, proteins and allergens. Carpeted floors accumulated more dust, proteins and allergens per unit area than smooth floors. Histamine release studies of some of the dust extracts showed that the dust from carpeted floors released histamine from passively sensitized basophils at concentrations for which dust from smooth floors gave low or no histamine release. The analyses showed that most of the dust, proteins and allergens were retained in the dust bags. Less than 1 % of the vacuumed material had accumulated in the main filters, which, according to the manufacturer, detain 99.5% of particles > 2 μm. By the use of a scanning electron microscope (SEM), particle deposits were observed in the microfilters. These deposits, which represented < 0.1 % of the total mass, showed no significant allergenic activity. Thus, for the field conditions of this study, the microfilters were not needed for cleaning the exit air of allergens, although they were useful for removing fine (< 2 μm) particles.

Efficacy of Yt-609 Ear Tags on Pyrethroid-Resistant Horn Flies, Gudmundsen Sandhills Laboratory, Whitman, Nebraska, 1988

Abstract YT-609 ear tags were compared with Tomahawk and Terminator ear tags and 1% Co-Ral free-choice dust bags. One-hundred yearling steers were each tagged with one YT-609 tag 19 May. Tomahawk and Terminator ear tags were applied to 59 and 44 cow/calf pairs (one tag/cow), respectively on 2 Jun. A group of 200 cow/calf pairs were provided 1% Co-Ral free-choice dust bags and 45 cow/calf pairs remained untreated. The 2 groups were sent to pasture on 2 Jun. Fly numbers were recorded weekly by counting both sides of a cow, with a minimum of 15 cows/group counted/observation.

The cost of anaplasmosis in the Red River Plains and south-east areas of Louisiana.

Losses from morbidity and mortality due to anaplasmosis were assessed in beef and dairy cattle of the Red River Plains and south-east areas of Louisiana. The cost of treatment and prevention of anaplasmosis and losses in milk production and those due to deaths or culling were valued at $0.5 million for the year 1983 in these two areas. The cost of prevention included the use of tetracyclines in feed and salt-mineral supplements, injectable tetracycline, vaccination and an estimated 10% of the cost of insecticidal ear tags, sprays, pour-on applications and dust bags. The remainder of these costs and the total cost of vector control in dairy cattle was attributed to the control of fly annoyance. Treatment costs included veterinary fees and the owner's treatment costs, including labour costs.

Dust bag and backrubber applications of insecticides for control of pyrethroid-resistant horn flies, Haematobia irritans (L.)

Pyrethroid-resistant horn flies, Haematobia irritans (L.), were controlled (92–100%) by fenvalerate, permethrin, coumaphos, dioxathion, crotoxyphos, malathion and chlorpyrifos applied by dust bags or backrubbers. Only methoxychlor and stirofos were not effective, indicating possible cross resistance to these insecticides. Pyrethroids, which were not effective when applied from ear tags, were effective in dust bags or oil-type backrubbers, indicating that resistance may be overcome by high doses of insecticides. Except for methoxychlor and stirofos, it appears that insecticides being recommended for horn fly control in dust bags and backrubbers are effective against pyrethoid-resistant horn flies.

Cattle, Face and Horn Fly Control on Beef Cattle with Dust Bags, 1980

Abstract Three tests were conducted in Montgomery Co, VA, in Jul, Aug, and Sep with insecticides in dust bags applied to mixed breed beef cattle to measure control of face and horn flies. In Test A 2 dust bags containing 12 lb each of 1% Co-Ral (Coumaphos) were suspended 30 in above the ground at 2 entrances to a mineral box on Jul 24. Thirty mixed breed heifers were in the treated herd.

Control of the Face Fly and Horn Fly on Beef Cattle, 1982

Abstract Several insecticides and application methods were evaluated Jun through Sep on 5 separate herds of beef cattle, located in Montgomery Co, Blacksburg, VA. Herd no 1 consisted of ca 20 mixed breed heifers and cows with calves, treated with a burlap backrubber and a mineral feeder type burlap facerubber, charged with 1 pt Ravap EC and 3.5 gal diesel fuel. Herd no 2 consisted of ca 25 mixed breed heifers and cows with calves, treated with a burlap backrubber and a mineral feeder equipped with reservoir type facerubber cords, charged with 1 pt Ravap EC and 3.5 gal diesel fuel. Herd no 3 consisted of 14 Angus heifers treated with 2 Ectrin 8% ear tags per animal. Herd no 4 consisted of ca 55 mixed breed cows with calves, treated with a mineral feeder type ‘Dustacator’ and later changed (wk 10) to standard dust bags. Both applicators were charged with Ectiban 0.25% dust. Herd no 5 consisted of ca 30 mixed breed cows and heifers, treated with a burlap backrubber and a mineral feeder type facerubber, charged with 1 pt Ectiban 5.7%EC and 5 gal diesel fuel. Comparative efficacy was based on an untreated control herd, consisting of ca 20 mixed breed cows with calves. All herds were within ca 2 miles of each other. Weekly fly counts were made on 10 animals per herd and are expressed as the mean number of face and horn flies per treatment. The same person performed the weekly fly counts to eliminate inaccuracy due to subjectivity.

Use of insecticide-impregnated ear tags for the control of face flies and horn-flies on pastured cattle.

Three studies were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of insecticide-impregnated ear tags in controlling face flies, Musca autumnalis DeGeer, and horn flies, Haematobia irritans (Linn.), on pastured beef cattle. In one 16-week trial, polyvinyl chloride (PVC) ear tags treated with stirofos (Rabon) insecticide reduced horn fly numbers by 79% (P less than .05) and face fly numbers by 30% (P less than .05). Coumaphos (Co-Ral) insecticide dust bags used in a separate herd produced an 86% (P less than .05) reduction in horn flies and an 18% (P less than .05) reduction in face flies. In the second study, 5 and 10% permethrin (Atroban), PVC-treated ear tags in a one-piece design were tested. In this 11 week trial, horn fly control averaged 95% (P less than .05) with the 10% tag and 77% (P less than .05) with the 5% tag. Face fly control averaged 49% (P less than .05) for 8 weeks with the 10% permethrin tag. No significant face fly control was achieved with the 5% permethrin tag. In a herd treated with coumaphos dust bags, horn fly control averaged 93% (P less than .05) and face fly control averaged 34% (P less than .05). The third study tested 5 and 10% permethrin, PVC-treated ear tags in a two-piece design and two-piece 5% permethrin-treated ear tags in a polyurethane matrix. Fourteen-week horn fly control averaged 88% (P less than .05) with the 10% PVC-treated tag, 83% (P less than .05) with the 5% PVC-treated tag, 71% (P less than .05) with the 5% polyurethane-treated tag and 74% (P less than .05) with coumaphos dust bags. Face fly control averaged less than 50% (P greater than .05) throughout the trial with all treatments.

Effect of horn flies on weight gains of beef cattle.

Haematobia irritans (L.) was controlled by exposing yearling steers to dust bags containing 1% coumaphos installed at entrances to salt box enclosures. Weight gains of treated steers during 6 yr, 1971–1976, increased an avg of 5 and 3 kg/head more than untreated steers during early and late grazing periods, respectively. The total gain advantage for horn fly control at time of slaughter, following a feedlot phase, was 10 kg/head.

Effect of horn fly control on cows as expressed by increased weaning weights of calves.

The economic effects of Haematobia irritans (L.) on beef cattle as demonstrated by calf weaning weights were determined on Nebraska sandhill range cattle. Horn fly control ( 97% ) was achieved by forced use of dust bags (June 1 to Oct. 30). The average steer calf weaning weight from cows using dust bags was 386.66 lb as opposed to 373.74 lb for calves from the cows with no fly control. The 12.92 lb difference was significant at the 0.05 level of probability (T test).

Horn Fly Control with a New Insecticide Barizon by Self Treatment Dust Bags

Horn Fly Control with a New Insecticide Barizon by Self Treatment Dust Bags

Dust bag treatments in improved pastures to control horn flies and cattle grubs.

Summer dust bag applications of insecticides to cattle on a free-choice basis were tested in improved pastures in south Florida for effectiveness against the horn fly, Haematobia irritans (L.), and the common cattle grub. Hypoderma lineatum (de Villers). A 3-year study included various combinations of treatments of 1 and 5% coumaphos, 5 and 10% Prolate® ( O, O -dimethyl phosphorodithioate S -ester with N -(mercaptomethyl) phthalimide)), and 10% methoxychlor. When compared with untreated checks, all were effective ( P < 0.01) in controlling the horn fly on Brahman-Angus or Brahman-Hereford crossbred steers. No difference was found between 4.5- and 11.3-kg dust bags containing 1% coumaphos. With the exception of 10% methoxychlor, all insecticides were effective ( P < 0.05) in reducing the number of grubs.

Evaluation of Dust Bags for Horn Fly Control on Cattle12

Information on self-dusting stations and the efficacy of several different insecticides used therein for control of Haematobia irritans (L.) are presented. Several different dust bags which were placed in different situations were tested during the summer of 1965 and 1966. Dusts included 3% and 5% Rabon® (2-chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate), 5% coumaphos, 3% malathion, 5% ronnel, 5% fenthion, and 3% crotoxyphos. Out of 43 different tests, only one with 3% crotoxphos, two with 5% ronnel, and three with 3% malathion showed less than 90% effectiveness in reduction of the horn fly.

Dust bags for fly control under range conditions

Cattlemen have traditionally used various methods to control horn flies and, more recently, face flies. Many methods used require various amounts of labor and handling of cattle. Most recent efforts have stressed minimum labor. Dust bags that cattle rub to disperse insecticide is such a method. A study of the dust bag method of fly control is reported here.

Comparison of Dust Bags to Backrubbers for Control of Horn Flies and Face Flies on Beef Cattle in East-Central South Dakota12

In 1970, a study was conducted in east-central South Dakota to compare effectiveness of dust bags to back rubbers in controlling horn flies. Haematobia irritans (L.), and face flies, Musca autumnalis De Geer, on beef Cattle. These devices were placed in a self-applicatory situation. The dust hags were tilled with 1.816 kg of 3% crotoxyphos, and the back rubber contained a mixture of 0.946 liter toxaphene 6 EC to 18.925 liters used motor oil. Both self-applicatory devices provided excellent horn fly control on cows and calves throughout the test period, but face fly control was much less effective.

Cattle grub control in Wyoming with a late-Summer dust-bag application of prolate.

One-half of a (cow-antl-calf herd was forced to use 10% Prolate® ( O, O -dimethyl S -phthalimidomethyl phosphorodithioate) in dust bags to obtain drinking water Aug. 30-Sept. 19, 1969. A dosage of 0.37 oz per animal per day reduced Hypoderma lineatum (de Villers) from 17.7 to 2.2 grubs per calf and from 4.4 to 1.1 grubs per cow, and H. bovis (L.) from 4.4 to 1.1 grubs per calf and from 3.1 to 0.1 grubs per cow. The technique is extremely promising. as it eliminates labor required by conventional methods of grub control.

Horn Fly and Face Fly Control on Beef Cattle Using Back Rubbers and Dust Bags Containing Coumaphos or Fenthion12

Cooperative studies were conducted at various locations in South Dakota during the summers of 1967 and 1968 to determine effectiveness of dust bags containing 1.0 or 5.0% coumaphos or 5.0% fenthion and back rubbers containing 1.0% coumaphos or 0.25, 0.5, or 1.0% fenthion for controlling horn flies and face flies. Both chemicals, regardless of concentrations, provided good horn fly, Haematobia irritans (L.), control and aided in reducing face fly, Musca autumnalis De Geer, populations. Complete control of face flies was obtained in I experiment using a tank-type back rubber containing 1% fenthion. The degree of horn fly and face fly control obtained in all experiments was associated closely with utilization of back rubbers and dust bags by cattle.

Horn fly control with coumaphos.

Beef cattle in a test area of 510 acres of pastures in the Everglades were treated with coumaphos for control of Haematobia irritans (L..). There was no significant difference in the degree of control obtained by self-treatment dust bags containing 1 and 5% coumaphos and coumaphos provided in a mineral mixture fed free-choice (insecticide averaging 1.39 mg per kg body weight per day). Horn fly counts in all treatments were significantly lower than in tile check; in the check within the test area they declined below numbers in the surrounding country.

Dust stations for control of the face fly in South Carolina.

Self-applicatory devices consisting of shed-protected dust bags were installed in 24 pastures to control the face fly, Musca autumnalis De Geer, on beef cattle in Oconee and Pickens counties, South Carolina. Dust formulations of dimetilan 2% and 1%, ronnel 5%, coumaphos 5%. malathion 5%, SD-8447 (2-chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) vinyl dimethyl phosphate) 5%, and pyrophyllite (check) placed in the bags resulted in 54 to 84% reduction in counts of face flies on the cattle. (Average of 15-4.2 flies per head during treatment period.) The number of flies per face in the insecticide-dust treatments were reduced significantly below those on the controls (average of 9.1 flies per head) within 1 week post treatment and remained at lower levels for the duration of the experiment. There were no significant differences between treatments. The amount of dust used per cow per day was approximately 6-11 g.

A Simplified Dusting Station to Control Face Flies and Horn Flies on Cattle1

This paper presents the design of a self-applicating dusting station for polled or dehorned cattle. Stations built to the specifications presented in this paper have been used for 2 seasons in South Carolina to control the face fly, Musca autumnalis De Geer, and the horn fly, Haematobia irritans (L.). Basically the unit consisted of a flat 6-ft-square galvanized metal roof attached to a wooden frame mounted on top of two 8-ft posts which were imbedded 2 ft in the ground. A board containing six 3 5/8-or 4¼-inch porch swing hooks supported 2 dust bags which were hung 4 inches apart. The board was positioned so that the bottoms of the bags were 18-24 inches above the ground. A dust bag consisted of two 10-oz 40-cut X 42-inch burlap sacks one inside the other. Two no. 4 grommets were installed in the upper corners of each bag, and 2 grommets were installed in the center of each side of the open end so that the inner sack could be opened for refilling, The bags were suspended from the hooks by the grommets. Reinforcement to prevent tearing of the bag at the grommets was not necessary when double sacks were used. If 1 sack was used, 2 inches of the top was folded down over a strip of canvas reinforcement before installing the 4 grommets. Not more than 10 lb of dust was maintained in each bag. The total cost of materials excluding insecticide was approximately $13.00 per unit.

Face Fly and Horn Fly Control on Cattle—1962-6412

Investigations were conducted during the fly seasons in 1962, 1963, and 1964 to control the face fly, Musca autumnalis De Geer, and the horn fly, Haematobia irritans (L.), with various insecticides applied under field conditions. Self-treatment devices such as the 3-cable back rubber and dust bags were used mainly; some salt-insecticide mixtures were included. The insecticides included in the fly-control applications were: ronnel, coumaphos, dichlorvos, carbaryl, diazinon, malathion, lindane, methoxychlor, dimethoate, dimetilan, Silikil® (amorphous silica gel 95.5%, ammonium fluosilicate 1.5%, inert ingredients 3.0%), azinphosmethyl, trichlorfon; fenthion; Baygon® (O-isopropoxyphenyl methylcarbamate); Ciodrin® (alpha-methylbenzyl 3-hydroxycrotanate dimethyl phosphate); famphur; Bayer 37344 (4-(methylthio)-3,5-xylyl methylcarbamate); and Imidan® (O, O-dimethyl S-phthalimidomethyl phosphorodithioate). The most effective treatments for face fly reduction were hand-applied dust treatments of azinphosmethyl 50.0% WP, Ciodrin 5.0%, dimetilan 50.0% WP, and dust-bag-applications with azinphosmethyl (10.0 and 2.0%) and Baygon (2.0%). The azinphosmethyl (2.0%) back rubber also was effective. Three-cable back rubber applications provided excellent horn fly control with methoxychlor (2.0%), Imidan (2.0%), malathion (2.0%), dimethoate (2.0%), and fenthion (2.0%). Horn fly control with Baygon (2.0%) and fenthion (2.0%) dust bags also was excellent.