The present invention relates to insect eradication, and more particularly to a device and method for the dispensing insecticide.
Specific examples have been chosen for purposes of illustration and description, and are shown in the accompanying drawings, forming a part of the specification.
Insecticide dispensing devices and methods of the present technology provide for the prolonged release of insecticide for the eradication of insect populations.
One example of an insecticide dispensing device 100 of the present technology is shown in
As can be seen in
One example formulation for an attractive toxic sugar bait of the present technology is:
Referring back to
Each aperture 110 is be located in such a manner as to allow a gaseous compound, such as carbon dioxide produced by the attractive toxic sugar bait once it is activated, to exit the internal cavity 108. Each aperture 110 is also located and sized to allow a target insect to access (and consume) the attractive toxic sugared bait. In some examples, the at least one aperture 110 is sized to allow the target insect to enter into the internal cavity to access the attractive toxic sugar bait. While the insecticide dispensing devices of the present technology may be useful to dispense insecticide to various types of insects, the target insect for at least some examples may be a mosquito. In such examples, the at least one aperture 110 may have a diameter of up to about ¼ inches, or from about 1/16 inches to about 3/16 inches. The apertures may all be the same size, or have different sizes. However, the size of each aperture should be selected to allow the mosquito to feed from the attractive toxic sugar bait in the device, while preventing other insects, such as honeybees, and animals, such as hummingbirds, to access and feed from the attractive toxic sugar bait.
As can be seen in
Additionally, the housing 202 has a vertical length 212 having a top end 214 and a bottom end 216. As can be seen in
Each aperture 210 is located in such a manner as to allow a gaseous compound, such as carbon dioxide produced by the attractive toxic sugar bait once it is activated, to exit the internal cavity 208. Each aperture 210 is also located and sized to allow a target insect to access (and consume) the attractive toxic sugared bait. In some examples, the at least one aperture 210 is sized to allow the target insect to enter into the internal cavity to access the attractive toxic sugar bait. As discussed above with respect to device 100, the target insect for device 200 may be a mosquito. In such examples, the at least one aperture 210 may have a diameter of up to about ¼ inches, or from about 1/16 inches to about 3/16 inches. The apertures may all be the same size, or have different sizes. However, the size of each aperture should be selected to allow the mosquito to feed from the attractive toxic sugar bait in the device, while preventing other insects, such as honeybees, and animals, such as hummingbirds, to access and feed from the attractive toxic sugar bait.
Insecticide dispensing devices of the present technology may include at least one mounting fixture 124, 224 attached to the housing 102, 202 and configured to allow the device to be mounted vertically or substantially vertically. Examples of suitable mounting fixtures include eyelet hook 124 (
Insecticide dispensing devices of the present technology may include at least one resealable sealing closure, which can be opened to allow access to the internal cavity and closed to seal or reseal the device 100, 200. Examples of resealable sealing closures include cap 126 (
From the foregoing, it will be appreciated that although specific examples have been described herein for purposes of illustration, various modifications may be made without deviating from the spirit or scope of this disclosure. It is therefore intended that the foregoing detailed description be regarded as illustrative rather than limiting, and that it be understood that it is the following claims, including all equivalents, that are intended to particularly point out and distinctly claim the claimed subject matter.
This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 62/361,054, filed on Jul. 12, 2016, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4328636 | Johnson | May 1982 | A |
4442624 | Browne | Apr 1984 | A |
5189831 | Miller | Mar 1993 | A |
5413784 | Wright | May 1995 | A |
5452540 | Dowd | Sep 1995 | A |
5540011 | Groom | Jul 1996 | A |
5749168 | Chrysanthis | May 1998 | A |
6189259 | Soller | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6209256 | Brittin | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6425202 | Lin | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6886293 | Forehand | May 2005 | B2 |
6978572 | Bernklau et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
7694456 | Curtis | Apr 2010 | B1 |
9192151 | Koehler | Nov 2015 | B2 |
20040128903 | Wexler | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20050011110 | Lin | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20060236592 | Hall, Jr. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20090274644 | Rees | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20120285076 | Banfield | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20130067795 | Wesson et al. | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130247451 | Vanhercke | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130303574 | Gaugler | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20140100175 | Ford | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140173971 | Boyd | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20160007585 | Jany et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160157496 | Nchekwube | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160242403 | Gaugler | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160270393 | Takken | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20170000101 | Gaugler | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170208797 | Murray | Jul 2017 | A1 |
20180014526 | Hirsch | Jan 2018 | A1 |
20180092344 | Tyler | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180213765 | Liang | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20180325109 | Mafra-Neto | Nov 2018 | A1 |
20190014769 | Itano | Jan 2019 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
108094389 | Jun 2018 | CN |
20080097860 | Nov 2008 | KR |
WO 2012158192 | Nov 2012 | WO |
Entry |
---|
International Search Report and Written Opinion from PCT/US2017/041546 dated Oct. 7, 2017. |
El Salvador Office Action cited in Application No. 5670.18 dated Sep. 30, 2019. |
Thailand Office Action in Application No. 1801002283 dated Mar. 25, 2019. |
E. E. Revay, “Control of Aedes albopictus with attractive toxic sugar baits (ATSB) and potential impact on non-target organisms in St. Augustine, FL”, Parasitol Res., vol. 113, pp. 73-79, (2014). |
K. Khallaayoune, et al., “Attractive Toxic Sugar Baits: Control of Mosquitoes With the Low-Risk Active Ingredient Dinotefuran and Potential Impacts on Nontraget Organisms in Morocco”, Environmental Entomology, 42(5), pp. 7, (2013). |
D. P. Naranjo, et al., “Evaluation of boric acid sugar baits against Aedes albopictus (Diptera: Culicidae) in tropical environments”, Parasitol Res, vol. 112, pp. 1583-1597, (2013). |
A. Ali, et al., “Effects of Sublethal Exposure to Boric Acid Sugar Bait on Adult Survival, Host-Seeking, Bloodfeeding Behavior, and reproduction of Stegomyia Albopicta”, pp. 464-468, vol. 22(3), (2006). |
G. Mueller, et al.,“Successful field trial of attractive toxic sugar bait (ATSB) plant-spraying methods against malaria vectors in the Anopheles gambiae complex in Mali, West Africa”, Malaria Journal, pp. 7, (2010). |
F. Wang, et al., “Control of male Aedes albopictus Skuse (Diptera: Culicidae) using boric acid sugar ait and its impact on female fecundity and fertility”, Journal of Vector Ecology, pp. 203-206, vol. 42, No. 1, (Jun. 2017). |
G. C. Muller, et al., et al., “Field experiments of Anopheles gambiae attraction to local fruits/seedpods and flowering plants in Mali to otimize strategies for malaria vector control in Africa using attractive toxic sugar bait methods”, Malaria Journal, pp. 1-11, (2010). |
Y. Schlein, et al., “Diurnal resting behavior of adult Culex pipiens in an arid habitat in Israel and possible control measurements with toxic sugar baits”, Acta Tropica, 124, pp. 48-53, (2012). |
J. C. Beier, et al., “Attractive toxic sugar bait (ATSB) methods decimate populations of Anopheles malaria vectors in arid environments regardless of the local availability of favoured sugar-source blossoms”, Malaria Journal, pp. 7, (2012). |
A. Junnila, et al., “Efficacy of attractive toxic sugar baits (ATSB) against Aedes albopictus with garlic oil encapsulated in beta-cyclodextrin as the active ingredient”, Acta Tropica, 152, pp. 195-200, (2015). |
G. C. Muller, “Seed pods of the carob tree Ceratonia silique are a favored sugar source for the mosquito Aedes albopictus in coastal Israel”, Acta Tropica, 118, pp. 135-239, (2010). |
L. C. Bahmi, et al., “Boric acid ovicidal trap for the management of Aedes species”, J. Vector Borne Dis., 52, pp. 147-152, (Jun. 2015). |
Z. P. Stewart, “Indoor Application of Attractive Toxic Sugar Bait (ATSB) in Combination with Mosquito Nets for Control of Pyrethroid-Resistant Mosquitoes”, PLOS One, vol. 8, Issue 12, pp. 1-7, (Dec. 2013). |
T. T. Hossain, et al., “Evaluation of Boric Acid Sugar Baits Sprayed on Plants Against the Salt Marsh Mosquito, Aedes taeniorhynchus (Dipstera: Culicidae)”, Florida Entomologist 97(4), pp. 1867-1870, (Dec. 2014). |
Yan-Mei Ding, et al.; “Laboratory evaluation of differential attraction of Culex pipiens pallens to fruit-based sugar baits”, Acta Tropica, 163; pp. 20-25, (2016). |
J. Chad Gore, et al., “Laboratory Evaluation of Boric Acid-Sugar Solutions as Baits for Management of German Cockroach Infestations”, Journal of Economic Entomogoly, vol. 97, No. 2, pp. 581-587; (2004). |
J. Marshall, et al., “Quantifying the mosquito's sweet tooth: modelling the effectiveness of attractive toxic sugar baits (ATSB) for malaria vector control”, Malaria Journal, pp. 1-13, (2013). |
L. McPhatter, et al., “Effect of CO2 concentration on mosquito collection rate using odor-baited suction traps”, Journal of Vector Ecology, pp. 44-50, (Jun. 2017). |
W. A. Qualls, et al., “Evaluation of attractive toxic sugar bait (ATSB)—Barrier for control of vector and nuisance mosquitoes and its effect on non-target organisms in sub-tropical environments in Florida”, Acta Tropica, pp. 104-110, (2014). |
W. A. Qualls, et al., “Evaluation and Adaption of Attractive Toxic Sugar Baits for Culex tarsalis and Culex quinquefasciatus Control in the Coachella Valley, Southern California”, Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association, Inc., pp. 292-299, (2016). |
E. E. Revay, “Formulation of attractive toxic sugar bait (ATSB) with safe EPA-exempt substance significantly diminishes the Anopheles sergentii population in a desert oasis”, Acta Tropica, pp. 29-34, (2015). |
G. E. Rivera, “Developing a Novel Attractive Toxic Sugar Bait (ATSB) Device for Intra-domiciliary Controld of Aedes aegypti”, pp. 30, (2016). |
P. F. Zermoglio, et al., “What does heat tell a mosquito? Characterization of the orientation behavior of Aedes aegypti towards heat sources”, Journal of Insect Physiology, pp. 9-14, (2017). |
G. C. Muller, et al., “Differential attraction of Aedes albopictus in the field to flowers, fruits and honeydew”, Acta Tropica, pp. 45-49, (2011). |
File History of U.S. Appl. No. 16/811,749, dated Jun. 11, 2020. |
Written Opinion cited in Application No. PCT/US20/021446 dated May 22, 2020. |
International Search report cited in Application No. PCT/us20/021446 dated May 22, 2020. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20180014526 A1 | Jan 2018 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62361054 | Jul 2016 | US |