Literature DB >> 16156581

Comparison of conventional and integrated pest management programs in public schools.

Gregory M Williams1, H Michael Linker, Michael G Waldvogel, Ross B Leidy, Coby Schal.   

Abstract

This study compared an integrated pest management (IPM) program with conventional, calendar-based pest control in nine North Carolina elementary schools. Both programs primarily targeted the German cockroach, Blattella germanica (L.). The IPM program relied heavily on monitoring and baiting, whereas the conventional approach used baseboard and crack-and-crevice sprays of insecticides. Within the constraints of an existing pest management contract, we quantified service duration, materials used, cost, levels of cockroach infestation, and the pesticide residues generated by the two service types. IPM services were significantly more time-consuming than conventional services, resulting in a significantly higher cost associated with labor. Nevertheless, the two types of treatments incurred similar total costs, and the efficacy of both treatments was also similar. Most importantly, pest monitoring, a central element of the IPM program, revealed few cockroaches and indicated that most of the conventional treatments were unnecessary. Environmental residues of the organophosphate pesticides acephate, chlorpyrifos, and propetamphos were significantly higher in swab samples taken in the conventionally treated schools. This study demonstrates that an IPM program is an appropriate and preferable alternative to conventional methods of pest control in the school environment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16156581     DOI: 10.1603/0022-0493-98.4.1275

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Econ Entomol        ISSN: 0022-0493            Impact factor:   2.381


  1 in total

1.  Exposure risks and ineffectiveness of total release foggers (TRFs) used for cockroach control in residential settings.

Authors:  Zachary C DeVries; Richard G Santangelo; Jonathan Crissman; Russell Mick; Coby Schal
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2019-01-28       Impact factor: 3.295

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.