Method for evaluating pest control efficacy

Abstract

To provide a method that enables easy visualization of the exterminating, inactivating, and removing effects on mites through use of removal means including a vacuum cleaner or an adhesive roller, following treatment with a pest control component at a place where mites inhabit or are likely to inhabit.SOLUTION: A method for evaluating pest control efficiency comprises: a contact step in which living mites are contacted with a pest control composition; a preparation step of preparing a sample including the mites contacted with the pest control composition on a substrate at such a density as to be visually observable; a trial step in which removal of the mites from the sample is attempted using removal means; and a confirmation step in which the effect of the pest control composition is verified based on the sample after attempting removal of the mites.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to a method for evaluating control efficacy. [Background technology]

[0002] Mites that live in homes mainly in carpets and other floor coverings, tatami mats, futons, sofas, etc. These mites are considered to be an important cause of bronchial asthma, allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, etc., and have become a problem in recent years. In response to this, various mite control formulations have been developed, and their use forms vary. For example, they are used by being held in insect repellent paper for tatami mats or carpets, or by being directly scattered or sprayed.

[0003] For example, Patent Document 1 discloses a miticide characterized by containing dimethyl alkyl betaine, and its effectiveness is evaluated by vacuuming up mites from a carpet treated with the miticide and measuring the mortality rate among the mites sucked up. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0004] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 01-100102 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0005] Although such evaluations are accurate, they are time-consuming for users to perform and require specialized equipment, making them difficult to check easily.

[0006] The present invention has been made in consideration of the above-mentioned problems, and aims to provide a method for easily visualizing the effects of exterminating, inactivating, and removing mites by applying a control component to an area where mites live or may live, and then using a removal means such as a vacuum cleaner or adhesive roller.

[0007] Another object of the present invention is to provide a method for demonstrating to consumers the effectiveness of exterminating, inactivating, and eliminating mites using the method. [Means for solving the problem]

[0008] That is, the present invention is as follows. [1] a contacting step of contacting the control composition with living mites; A preparation step of preparing a sample containing the mites contacted with the control composition on a substrate at a high density so that the mites are visible; a trial step of attempting to remove the mites from the sample using a removal means; A confirmation step of confirming the effectiveness of the control composition based on the sample after attempting to remove the mites. Method for evaluating control efficacy. [2] In the confirmation step, the sample after attempting to remove the mites; The effect of the control composition is confirmed based on a comparison with a sample that has not been subjected to at least one of the trial step and the contact step, or with a substrate before the mites are placed on the substrate. The method for evaluating control efficacy according to claim 1. [3] A preparation step of preparing a sample containing mites living on a substrate at a high density so that they are visible; a post-treatment step of treating the sample with a pest control composition; a trial step of attempting to remove the mites from the sample using a removal means; A confirmation step of confirming the effectiveness of the control composition based on the sample after attempting to remove the mites. Method for evaluating control efficacy. [4] In the confirmation step, the sample after attempting to remove the mites; The effect of the control composition is confirmed based on a comparison with a sample that has not been subjected to at least one of the trial step and the post-treatment step, or with a substrate before the mites are placed on the substrate. The method for evaluating control efficacy according to claim 3. [5] a pretreatment step of treating the substrate with a pest control composition; a placement step of placing live mites on the treated substrate at a high density so that they can be seen visually, thereby obtaining a sample; a trial step of attempting to remove the mites from the sample using a removal means; A confirmation step of confirming the effectiveness of the control composition based on the sample after attempting to remove the mites. Method for evaluating control efficacy. [6] In the confirmation step, the sample after attempting to remove the mites; The effect of the control composition is confirmed based on a comparison with a sample that has not been subjected to at least one of the trial step and the pretreatment step, or with a substrate before the mites are placed thereon. The method for evaluating control efficacy according to claim 5. [7] As the substrate, a substrate having a color that clearly contrasts with the mites is used. 6. The method for evaluating control efficacy according to claim 1, 3, or 5. [Effects of the Invention]

[0009] According to the present invention, a method can be provided for easily visualizing the effects of exterminating, inactivating, and removing mites by applying a control component to an area where mites live or may live, and then using a removal means such as a vacuum cleaner or adhesive roller. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0010] [Figure 1] 1 is a flowchart of a method for evaluating control efficacy in a first embodiment. [Figure 2] 1 is a flowchart of a method for evaluating control efficacy in a second embodiment. [Figure 3] 10 is a flowchart of a method for evaluating control efficacy in a third embodiment. [Figure 4] 10 is a photograph showing the state of a sample before and after trial step S13 in Example 1 (specimen 1). [Figure 5] 10 is a photograph showing the state of a sample before and after trial step S13 in Comparative Example 1 (Specimen 1). [Figure 6] 10 is a stereomicroscope image showing the state of a sample before and after trial step S13 in Example 1 (specimen 1). [Figure 7] 10 is a photograph showing the state of the sample in Example 1 (specimens 2 to 4) before and after the trial step S13, and the state of the sample in Example 1 (specimen 5) before and after the trial step S33. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0011] The following describes in detail an embodiment of the present invention (hereinafter referred to as "the present embodiment"); however, the present invention is not limited to this embodiment, and various modifications are possible without departing from the spirit of the present invention.

[0012] In this embodiment, the "substrate" refers to a background material used in the method for evaluating control efficacy, in which mites are placed or removed from the substrate to confirm the mite removability. The substrate is not particularly limited, but examples thereof include carpets, rugs, rugs, mats, bedding, clothing, woven or knitted fabrics such as fabrics or tatami mats, and flooring materials such as flooring. The material of the substrate is also not particularly limited, but examples thereof include wool, nylon, polyester, polypropylene, rayon, vinyl chloride, and acrylic.

[0013] For the above-mentioned purpose, it is preferable to use a substrate of a color that clearly contrasts with the mites, for example, a relatively dark color such as black, gray, navy blue, blue, red, or green. This makes it easy to visually confirm the presence of mites if they have not been removed. Furthermore, if they have been removed, the mites cannot be visually confirmed, allowing for a quick and clear evaluation of their removability.

[0014] Furthermore, the term "sample" refers to a substrate after mites have been placed on it in the method for evaluating control efficacy. Therefore, for example, even if an attempt to remove mites from a sample results in the mites being completely removed, leaving only the substrate, the substrate is still referred to as a sample.

[0015] 1. First embodiment: Method for evaluating control efficacy In the first embodiment, mites pretreated with a control composition are placed on a substrate, and the mite-removal ability is evaluated. The method for evaluating control efficacy in the first embodiment includes a contact step S11 of bringing the control composition into contact with living mites, a preparation step S12 of preparing a sample on a substrate containing mites contacted with the control composition at a high enough density to be visible, a trial step S13 of attempting to remove the mites from the sample using a removal means, and a confirmation step S14 of confirming the effectiveness of the control composition based on the sample after the trial of mite removal.

[0016] FIG. 1 shows a flowchart of the method for evaluating control efficacy in the first embodiment.

[0017] The contact step S11 is a step of contacting the control composition with living mites. The control composition is not particularly limited, but examples thereof include commercially available mite control formulations. The method of applying the control composition to mites is not particularly limited as long as it is in accordance with the usage of commercially available mite control formulations. For example, the method of using the control composition may include spraying a liquid agent using an aerosol or pump spray, or may include spraying by thermal evaporation or dust application. The same interpretation of treatment using the control composition applies to the second and third embodiments.

[0018] In the contact step S11, the control composition may be applied to mites separated from the culture medium, i.e., only mites, or the mites may be handled in a culture medium that already contains mites at a high density, and the control composition may be applied to that culture medium.

[0019] The preparation step S12 is a step of preparing a sample containing mites contacted with the pest control composition on a substrate at a high enough density to be visible. If a medium on which mites have been placed at a high density in advance is used in the contact step S11, the mites separated from the medium may be placed on the substrate, or the medium may be placed on the substrate to prepare the sample.

[0020] Here, the term "high density so that it can be seen by the naked eye" is not particularly limited as long as a person can see the mites from a distance of 1 to 2 m from the sample. The number of mites per unit area when it is "high density so that it can be seen by the naked eye" is not particularly limited, but for example, it is 10 mites / cm. 2 More than 100 head / cm 2 or more than 1000 heads / cm 2 In the method for evaluating control efficacy of this embodiment, mites are used at a high density that is visible to the naked eye, which is not normally found in nature, so that the control efficacy of the control composition can be easily confirmed in the confirmation step described below. Note that the same interpretation of "high density that is visible to the naked eye" applies to the second and third embodiments.

[0021] The trial step S13 is a step of trialing the removal of mites from the sample using a removal means. The removal means 40 is not particularly limited, but examples thereof include commercially available vacuum cleaners and adhesive rollers. The removal method using the removal means is similar in the second and third embodiments.

[0022] The confirmation step S14 is a step of confirming the effectiveness of the control composition based on a sample taken after the mites have been removed. In the confirmation step S14, the effectiveness of the control composition may be confirmed by comparing the sample taken after the mites have been removed with a sample that has not been subjected to at least one of the trial step and the contact step, or with the substrate before the mites have been placed.

[0023] By comparing the sample after the attempted removal of mites with the sample before the attempted removal of mites, it is possible to compare the samples before and after the trial step S13, and to grasp the degree of removal when the removal means is used on mites that have come into contact with the control composition.

[0024] By comparing the sample after attempting to remove mites with a sample containing mites on a substrate at a high enough density to be visible without contacting the control composition, it is possible to determine the degree of removal when using the removal means on mites that have been contacted with the control composition.

[0025] By comparing a sample after attempting to remove mites with a sample after attempting to remove mites, which contains mites on a substrate at a high enough density to be visible but has not been contacted with the control composition, it is possible to understand the difference in effectiveness when using the same removal means when the control composition is contacted with mites and when it is not.

[0026] By comparing the sample after the attempted removal of mites with the substrate before the mites were placed, it is possible to understand how close the removal of mites is to the original substrate when the removal means is used on mites that have come into contact with the control composition.

[0027] In addition to the above, a sample prepared by performing the contact step but not the trial step may be compared with a sample prepared by performing neither the contact step nor the trial step. This makes it possible to understand the effect of treatment with the control composition on the activity and behavior of mites, particularly when comparing videos taken with a stereomicroscope.

[0028] The comparison may also be performed visually. For example, if the number of mites arranged at a high density so that they are visible to the naked eye is clearly reduced or becomes invisible to the naked eye, the effectiveness of the control composition can be adequately evaluated.

[0029] The comparison may also be performed using image data of life-size still images or video. Comparison using life-size image data is essentially the same as visual comparison. When comparing using image data, the image data of the samples to be compared is acquired using an imaging device.

[0030] In addition to the above, the comparison may be performed using a stereomicroscope or by using still or video image data at a magnification. This allows the change in mite behavior depending on whether or not a contact step is performed to be evaluated. Even if the contrast between the color of the substrate and the color of the mites is not clear, it is possible to evaluate whether the mites have been significantly removed. Furthermore, even if the mites have been removed to a state where they are not visible to the naked eye, it is possible to evaluate in more detail whether the mites have been significantly removed, thereby allowing the effectiveness of the control composition to be fully evaluated.

[0031] The above comparison method is the same in the second and third embodiments.

[0032] As described above, according to the first embodiment, by applying the control component to an area where mites live or may live, and then using a removal means such as a vacuum cleaner or sticky roller, a method can be provided for easily visualizing the effects of exterminating, inactivating, and removing mites, and a method can be provided for demonstrating to consumers the effects of exterminating, inactivating, and removing mites.

[0033] 2. Second embodiment: Method for evaluating control efficacy In the second embodiment, mites placed on a substrate are treated with a control composition, and the mite removal ability is evaluated. The method for evaluating control efficacy in the second embodiment includes a preparation step S21 of preparing a sample containing mites living on the substrate at a high enough density to be visible, a post-treatment step S22 of treating the sample with the control composition, a trial step S23 of attempting to remove mites from the sample using a removal means, and a confirmation step S24 of confirming the effectiveness of the control composition based on the sample after the trial of mite removal.

[0034] FIG. 2 shows a flowchart of the method for evaluating control efficacy in the second embodiment.

[0035] The preparation step S21 is a step of preparing a sample containing mites living on a substrate at a high density so that they can be seen by eye. At this time, mites separated from a medium in which mites have been previously placed at a high density may be placed on the substrate, or the sample may be prepared by placing the medium on the substrate.

[0036] The post-treatment step S22 is a step in which the sample obtained as described above is treated with a pest control composition. In actual use, the pest control composition is likely to be sprayed onto carpets or the like where mites live, and this post-treatment step S22 can be said to be a step similar to that situation.

[0037] The trial step S23 is a step of trialing removal of mites from the sample using the removal means.

[0038] The confirmation step S24 is a step of confirming the effectiveness of the control composition based on a sample after the attempted removal of mites. In the confirmation step S24, the effectiveness of the control composition may be confirmed based on a comparison of the sample after the attempted removal of mites with a sample that has not been subjected to at least one of the trial step and the post-treatment step, or with the substrate before the mites were placed thereon.

[0039] By comparing the sample after the attempted removal of mites with the sample before the attempted removal of mites, it is possible to compare the samples before and after the trial step S23, and to grasp the degree of removal when the removal means is used on mites that have come into contact with the control composition.

[0040] By comparing samples taken after attempting to remove mites with samples that were not treated with the control composition, it is possible to determine the degree of removal when using a removal means on mites that have come into contact with the control composition.

[0041] By comparing a sample after an attempt to remove mites with a sample after an attempt to remove mites, which had not been contacted with the control composition and contained mites living on the substrate at a high density so that they were visible, it is possible to understand the difference in effectiveness when using the same removal means when treated with the control composition and when not treated.

[0042] By comparing the sample after the attempted removal of mites with the substrate before the mites were placed, it is possible to understand how close the removal of mites is achieved to the original substrate when the removal means is used on mites that have come into contact with the control composition.

[0043] In addition to the above, a sample prepared with the post-treatment step but without the trial step may be compared with a sample prepared without the post-treatment step and the trial step. This makes it possible to understand the effect of treatment with the control composition on the activity and behavior of mites, particularly when comparing videos taken with a stereomicroscope.

[0044] Incidentally, the comparison can be made by visual inspection or by image data in the same manner as in the first embodiment.

[0045] As described above, according to the second embodiment, a method can be provided for easily visualizing the effects of exterminating, inactivating, and removing mites by applying the control component to an area where mites live or may live, in a situation similar to when the control composition is actually used, where mites are present on a carpet or the like, and then using a removal means such as a vacuum cleaner or sticky roller, thereby providing a method for demonstrating to consumers the effects of exterminating, inactivating, and removing mites.

[0046] 3. Third embodiment: Method for evaluating control efficacy In the third embodiment, mites are placed on a substrate that has been pre-treated with a control composition, and the mite-removal ability is evaluated. The method for evaluating control efficacy in the third embodiment includes a pretreatment step S31 in which the substrate is treated with the control composition, an arrangement step S32 in which live mites are arranged on the treated substrate at a high density so that they are visible to the naked eye to obtain a sample, a trial step S33 in which mites are attempted to be removed from the sample using a removal means, and a confirmation step S34 in which the effectiveness of the control composition is confirmed based on the sample obtained after the trial of mites removal.

[0047] FIG. 3 shows a flowchart of the method for evaluating control efficacy in the third embodiment.

[0048] The pretreatment step S31 is a step of treating a substrate with a control composition. In actual use of the control composition, it is conceivable to apply the control composition preventatively to a substrate not inhabited by mites, and this pretreatment step S31 can be said to be a step similar to that situation.

[0049] The placement step S32 is a step of arranging live mites on the treated substrate at a high density so that they can be seen visually to obtain a sample. At this time, mites separated from a medium on which mites have been previously placed at a high density may be placed on the substrate, or the sample may be prepared by placing the medium on the substrate.

[0050] The trial step S33 is a step of trialing removal of mites from the sample using the removal means.

[0051] The confirmation step S34 is a step of confirming the effectiveness of the control composition based on a sample after the attempted removal of mites. In the confirmation step S34, the effectiveness of the control composition may be confirmed based on a comparison between the sample after the attempted removal of mites and a sample that has not been subjected to at least one of the trial step and the pretreatment step.

[0052] By comparing the sample after the attempted removal of mites with the sample before the attempted removal of mites, it is possible to compare the samples before and after the trial step S33, and to grasp the degree of removal when the removal means is used on mites that have come into contact with the control composition.

[0053] By comparing the sample after the attempted removal of mites with a sample obtained by placing live mites at a high density so that they are visible on a substrate that has not been treated with the control composition, it is possible to determine the degree of removal when using a removal means on mites that have come into contact with the control composition.

[0054] By comparing a sample taken after an attempt to remove mites with a sample taken after a trial process was carried out on a substrate that had not been treated with the control composition, in which living mites were arranged at a high density so that they were visible, it is possible to understand the difference in preventive effect when the same removal means is used in cases where the control composition has been treated and in cases where it has not been treated.

[0055] By comparing the sample after the attempted removal of mites with the substrate before the mites were placed, it is possible to understand how close the removal of mites is to the original substrate when the removal means is used on mites that have come into contact with the control composition.

[0056] In addition to the above, a sample prepared with the post-treatment step but without the trial step may be compared with a sample prepared without the post-treatment step and the trial step. This allows one to understand the effect of treatment with the control composition on the activity and behavior of mites, particularly when comparing videos taken with a stereomicroscope.

[0057] Incidentally, the comparison can be made by visual inspection or by image data in the same manner as in the first embodiment.

[0058] As described above, according to the third embodiment, the control composition is used preventively when mites are not present on carpets, etc., in a situation similar to the actual use of the control composition. By applying the control component to an area where mites live or may live, and then using a removal means such as a vacuum cleaner or sticky roller, a method can be provided for easily visualizing the effects of exterminating, inactivating, and removing mites, and a method can be provided for demonstrating to consumers the effects of exterminating, inactivating, and removing mites.

[0059] 4. Control composition The control composition used in this embodiment is not particularly limited as long as it contains a control component, and may contain, for example, a fragrance component, a deodorizing component, a disinfecting / bactericidal component, and the like.

[0060] Examples of pest control components include pyrethroid compounds such as permethrin, pyrethrins, allethrin, phthalthrin, resmethrin, furamethrin, fenothrin, cyfluthrin, tralomethrin, prallethrin, cyphenothrin, imiprothrin, transfluthrin, metofluthrin, empenthrin, dimefluthrin, and mepafluthrin; organophosphorus compounds such as fenitrothion, dichlorvos, chlorpyrifos-methyl, diazinon, and fenthion; carbamate compounds such as carbaryl and propoxur; methoprene and pyriproxyfen Compounds such as phenoxyethanol, methoxadiazone, fipronil, amidoflumet, broflanilide, DEET, and ethyl butylacetylaminopropionate; peppermint oil, orange oil, fennel oil, cinnamon oil, clove oil, turpentine, eucalyptus oil, cypress oil, jasmine oil, neroli oil, peppermint oil, bergamot oil, butygrain oil, lemon oil, lemongrass oil, cinnamon oil, citronella oil, geranium oil, citral, l-menthol, d-menthol, thymol, citronellyl acetate, cinnamic aldehyde, terpineol, and nonyl alcohol , cis-jasmone, limonene, linalool, 1,8-cineole, geraniol, α,β-pinene, α,β-terpineol, p-menthane-3,8-diol, eugenol, menthyl acetate, cinnamyl acetate, benzyl cinnamate, methyl cinnamate, benzoic acid esters such as methyl benzoate, hexyl benzoate, benzyl benzoate, amyl benzoate, and isoamyl benzoate, salicylic acid esters such as benzyl salicylate, amyl salicylate, isoamyl salicylate, and hexyl salicylate, and various other essential oil components; propylene glycol monopropylene glycol glycol ethers such as ethylene glycol monoisobutyl ether, propylene glycol monobutyl ether, dipropylene glycol monopropyl ether, dipropylene glycol monobutyl ether, dipropylene glycol dimethyl ether, ethylene glycol monoisobutyl ether, diethylene glycol monoisobutyl ether, diethylene glycol dibutyl ether, diethylene glycol dimethyl ether, and triethylene glycol dimethyl ether; and dibasic acid esters such as dibutyl adipate and dioctyl sebacate.These may be used alone or in combination of two or more.

[0061] Aromatic components are components that emit a fragrance. Examples of aromatic components include the essential oil components described above, as well as natural fragrances such as anise oil, lavender oil, rose oil, rosemary oil, and grapefruit oil; and synthetic fragrances such as camphene, p-cymene, citronellol, nerol, benzyl alcohol, n-butyraldehyde, isobutyraldehyde, coumarin, and cineole. These may be used alone or in combination of two or more.

[0062] Deodorizing components are components that can eliminate odors. Examples of deodorizing components include components that neutralize or adsorb odorous components such as green tea extract, persimmon tannin, lauric acid methacrylate, methyl benzoate, methyl phenylacetate, geranyl crotrate, acetophenone myristate, benzyl acetate, benzyl propionate, and silver, as well as components that mask odorous components such as the above-mentioned aromatic components. These may be used alone or in combination of two or more.

[0063] The disinfecting and sterilizing ingredients are ingredients that remove or kill microorganisms, molds, and bacteria. Examples of disinfecting and sterilizing ingredients include ethanol, hinokitiol, 2-mercaptobenzothiazole, 2-(4-thiazolyl)benzimidazole, 5-chloro-2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one, triforine, p-chlorometaxylenol, 3-methyl-4-isopropylphenol, ortho-phenylphenol, chlorhexidine gluconate, methyl parahydroxybenzoate, butyl polylysine parahydroxybenzoate, chitosan, tetrahydrolinalool, dialkyldimethylammonium chloride, cetylpyridinium chloride, bamboo extract, etc. These may be used alone or in combination of two or more.

[0064] The pest control composition may contain a solvent for purposes such as adjusting the viscosity of the concentrate, improving production suitability, and increasing the penetration of the pesticide into pests. Examples of such solvents include the above-mentioned glycol ethers, hydrocarbon solvents, alcohol solvents, aromatic solvents, and ester solvents. Water and surfactants may also be used.

[0065] Examples of hydrocarbon solvents include aliphatic hydrocarbons and alicyclic hydrocarbons such as paraffinic hydrocarbons and naphthenic hydrocarbons, with kerosene such as JIS No. 1 kerosene being preferred. Specific examples include normal paraffin and isoparaffin. Typical normal paraffins have a carbon number of 8 to 16, such as Neo Thiosol manufactured by Sanko Chemical Industry Co., Ltd., and normal paraffin MA and normal paraffin SHLA manufactured by ENEOS Corporation. Typical isoparaffins have a carbon number of 8 to 16, such as IP Clean LX and Supersol FP25 manufactured by Idemitsu Kosan Co., Ltd.

[0066] Examples of alcohol-based solvents include lower alcohols such as ethanol, propanol, and isopropanol, and polyhydric alcohols such as glycerin and ethylene glycol.

[0067] Examples of aromatic solvents include toluene and xylene.

[0068] Examples of ester solvents include isopropyl myristate, hexyl laurate, and isopropyl palmitate.

[0069] The control composition may further contain a vaporization promoter, such as a sublimable substance such as adamantane, cyclododecane, cyclodecane, norbornane, trimethylnorbornane, naphthalene, camphor, etc. Synergists such as α-[2-(2-butoxyethoxy)ethoxy]-4,5-methylenedioxy-2-propyltoluene (piperonyl butoxide), N-(2-ethylhexyl)bicyclo[2.2.1]hept-5-ene-2,3-dicarboximide (MGK-264), octachlorodiisopropyl ether (S-421), and cynepirin 500 may also be mixed.

[0070] The control composition can be used in the form of a spray formulation such as a spray or aerosol. [Example]

[0071] The present invention will be described in more detail below using examples and comparative examples, but the present invention is not limited to the following examples.

[0072] 1. Specimen Preparation 1.1. Sample 1 [Preparation of aerosol stock solution] An aerosol concentrate was prepared by adding No. 1 kerosene (trade name: Neothiosol, manufactured by ENEOS Corporation) to 62.5 g of fenothrin, an ingredient for controlling mites, and diluting the mixture to 100 mL.

[0073] [Preparation of acaricide composition] A pressure-resistant aerosol can (full capacity: 100 mL) was filled with 3.8 mL of the above aerosol concentrate, and after closing it with a metered-dose valve (amount sprayed per spray: 0.2 mL), 11.2 mL of liquefied petroleum gas (0.49 MPa (25°C)) was pressurized and filled as a propellant. A spray button (nozzle hole diameter: 1 mm) was attached to the metered-dose valve, and a metered-dose pest control aerosol (sample 1) was obtained, with a spray amount of 0.2 mL per spray and an ejection amount of 31.7 mg of pest control ingredient.

[0074] 1.2. Sample 2 [Preparation of aerosol stock solution] An aerosol concentrate was prepared by adding isopropanol as a solvent to 3 g of broflanilide, an ingredient for controlling mites, and diluting the mixture to 100 mL.

[0075] [Preparation of acaricide composition] A pressure-resistant aerosol can (full capacity: 100 mL) was filled with 30 mL of the above aerosol concentrate and closed with a metered-dose valve (amount sprayed per spray operation: 1 mL). Then, 45 mL of dimethyl ether was pressurized and filled into the can. A spray button (nozzle hole diameter: 1 mm) was attached to the metered-dose valve, and a metered-dose aerosol for mite control (Sample 2) was obtained, which sprayed 1 mL per spray operation and delivered 12 mg of the mite control ingredient, broflanilide.

[0076] 1.3.Sample 3 [Preparation of aerosol stock solution] An aerosol concentrate was prepared by adding ethanol as a solvent to 44.4 g of the mite control ingredient fenothrin and 2 g of the synergist MGK-264 and diluting the mixture to 100 mL.

[0077] [Preparation of acaricide composition] A pressure-resistant aerosol can (full capacity: 100 mL) was filled with 30 mL of the above aerosol concentrate and closed with a metered-dose valve (amount sprayed per spray: 0.4 mL), after which 15 mL of liquefied petroleum gas (0.49 MPa (25°C)) was pressure-filled as a propellant. A spray button (nozzle hole diameter: 0.75 mm) was attached to the metered-dose valve, and a metered-dose aerosol for mite control (sample 3) was obtained, which sprayed 0.4 mL per spray and delivered 88.8 mg of the mite control ingredient fenothrin.

[0078] 1.4. Sample 4 [Preparation of stock solution] A stock solution was prepared by adding ethanol as a solvent to 1 g of cinnamyl acetate, a mite control ingredient, and diluting the mixture to 100 mL.

[0079] [Preparation of acaricide composition] A pump spray container (full capacity: 450 mL) was filled with 350 mL of the above concentrate, and a trigger sprayer (T95, manufactured by Canyon Co., Ltd., nozzle diameter: 0.75 mm) was attached to obtain a pump spray for mite control (sample 4) with a spray volume of 1 mL per spray operation and an ejection volume of 10 mg of the mite control ingredient, cinnamyl acetate.

[0080] 1.5. Sample 5 [Preparation of aerosol stock solution] An aerosol concentrate was prepared by adding No. 1 kerosene (trade name: Neothiosol, manufactured by ENEOS Corporation) as a solvent to the mite control ingredients 0.5 g of fenothrin, 0.5 g of metoxadiazone, and 0.4 g of amidoflumet, and diluting the mixture to 200 mL.

[0081] [Preparation of acaricide composition] 200 mL of the above aerosol concentrate was filled into a pressure-resistant aerosol can (full capacity: 377 mL) and closed with an aerosol valve (stem hole diameter: 0.4 mm), after which 100 mL of dimethyl ether was pressure-filled as a propellant. A spray button (nozzle hole diameter: 3 mm) was attached to the aerosol valve, and a continuous spray type aerosol for mite control (sample 5) was obtained.

[0082] 1.6. Sample 6 [Preparation of stock solution] A stock solution was prepared by adding ethanol as a solvent to 1.998 g of fenothrin, an acaricide ingredient, and 6 g of MGK-264, a synergist, and diluting the mixture to 300 mL.

[0083] [Preparation of acaricide composition] A pump spray container (full capacity: 400 mL) was filled with 300 mL of the above concentrate, and a trigger sprayer (YT-97100, manufactured by Yoshino Kogyosho Co., Ltd., nozzle diameter: 0.6 mm, spray amount: 1 mL) was attached to obtain a pump spray for mite control with a spray amount of 1 mL per spray operation and an ejection amount of 6.7 mg of the mite control ingredient fenothrin.

[0084] 2. Preparation of Mites Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus mites cultured in dry medium were placed on a paper wrapper along with the dry medium and left to stand for 15 minutes. The medium on the paper wrapper was removed and the mites were transferred to a high-waisted glass petri dish with the opening coated with Vaseline. This resulted in Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus mites separated from the medium being prepared on the high-waisted petri dish. The mites were adjusted to 8 mg (equivalent to approximately 5,000 mites) to provide a visually high density of mites for transfer to the substrate.

[0085] 3. Evaluation Example 1 A tall glass petri dish containing Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus was placed on the floor. Each of the control compositions (samples 1 to 4) prepared as described above was fixed at a position where the height from the floor to the tip of the nozzle was 1 m. The composition was sprayed once at a downward angle of 30° from the horizontal to the mites on the tall glass petri dish (contact step S11). The mites contacted with each of the control compositions (samples 1 to 4) were placed on a substrate (black carpet) and allowed to stand for 3 minutes to prepare a sample containing mites at a high density where they could be seen (preparation step S12). Next, a removal tool (vacuum cleaner, manufactured by Hitachi, Ltd.) was passed back and forth five times over the substrate (black carpet) to attempt to remove mites from the sample (trial step S13). Finally, the effectiveness of each control composition (samples 1 to 4) was confirmed based on the sample after the attempted removal of mites (confirmation step S14).

[0086] FIG. 4 shows a comparison of an image of the control composition (specimen 1) before trial step S13 and an image of the sample after trial step S13. Note that FIG. 4 shows a normal-magnification image and an enlarged image. As shown in FIG. 4, mites were confirmed to be removed by the method of this embodiment. Furthermore, FIG. 6 shows a comparison of a stereomicroscope image of the control composition (specimen 1) when the contact step was performed (stereomicroscope image in FIG. 4) and a stereomicroscope image of a sample prepared without the contact step. By comparing the stereomicroscope images in this way, it was confirmed that mites were completely removed.

[0087] Furthermore, the control compositions (samples 2 to 4) also gave results similar to those of the control composition (sample 1).

[0088] 3.2. Comparative Example 1 In addition, each step was carried out using the same method as above, using an amount of mites that could not be visually confirmed (5 Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus isolated from the culture medium). Figure 5 shows a comparison of images of the sample before trial step S13 and after trial step S13. Note that Figure 5 shows images taken from a distance of 1.7 m and from a distance of 0.1 m. As shown in Figure 5, it was unclear whether the mites had been removed in this comparison experiment.

[0089] Example 2 By placing live mites on a substrate (black carpet), samples containing mites at a high density so that they were visible were prepared (preparation step S21). Then, each of the control compositions (samples 1, 5, and 6) prepared as described above was sprayed onto the sample once to treat it (post-treatment step S22). Next, a removal tool (vacuum cleaner, manufactured by Hitachi, Ltd.) was passed back and forth five times over the substrate (black carpet) to attempt to remove mites from the sample (trial step S23). Finally, the effectiveness of each control composition (samples 1, 5, and 6) was confirmed based on the sample after the attempted removal of mites (confirmation step S24).

[0090] The spraying conditions were as follows: the control composition was fixed at a position where the height from the floor to the tip of the nozzle was 1 m, and the composition was sprayed at a downward angle of 60° relative to the horizontal, and the amount of the control composition (amount of aerosol concentrate + propellant) was 4.8 g / m 2 The spray was performed so that the

[0091] As a result, as in Example 1, the removal of mites was confirmed by the method of this embodiment, and when a control experiment was conducted using an amount of mites that could not be detected visually, it was unclear whether the mites had been removed or not.

[0092] Example 3 A substrate (black carpet) was treated by spraying the control composition (sample 1) prepared as described above once (pretreatment step S31). Then, live mites were placed on the treated substrate at a high density so that they were visible to the naked eye to obtain a sample (placement step S32). Next, an attempt was made to remove mites from the sample using a removal means (vacuum cleaner, manufactured by Hitachi, Ltd.) (trial step S33). Finally, the effectiveness of the control composition (sample 1) was confirmed based on the sample after the attempt to remove mites (confirmation step S34).

[0093] As a result, as in Example 1, it was confirmed that mites were removed by the method of this embodiment, and when a control experiment was conducted using a quantity of mites that could not be detected visually, it was not possible to visually confirm whether the mites had been removed or not.

[0094] Example 4 A substrate (gray carpet) was treated by spraying each of the control compositions (samples 5 and 6) prepared as described above once (pretreatment step S31). Then, live mites were placed on the treated substrate at a high density so that they were visible, to obtain a sample (placement step S32). Next, a removal tool (adhesive cleaner (product name: Korokoro High Grade Strong Adhesive Scut Cut, manufactured by Nitoms Corporation)) was used to move back and forth over the substrate five times to attempt to remove mites from the sample (trial step S33). Finally, the effectiveness of each control composition (samples 5 and 6) was confirmed based on the sample after the attempted removal of mites (confirmation step S34).

[0095] As a result, as in Example 1, it was confirmed that mites were removed by the method of this embodiment, and when a control experiment was conducted using a quantity of mites that could not be detected visually, it was not possible to visually confirm whether the mites had been removed or not.

[0096] A substrate (gray carpet) was treated by spraying each of the control compositions (samples 5 and 6) prepared as described above once (pretreatment step S31). Then, live mites were placed on the treated substrate at a high density so that they were visible, to obtain a sample (placement step S32). Next, a removal tool (adhesive cleaner (product name: Korokoro High Grade Strong Adhesive Scut Cut, manufactured by Nitoms Corporation)) was used to move back and forth over the substrate five times to attempt to remove mites from the sample (trial step S33). Finally, the effectiveness of each control composition (samples 5 and 6) was confirmed based on the sample after the attempted removal of mites (confirmation step S34).

[0097] As a result, as in Example 1, it was confirmed that mites were removed by the method of this embodiment, and when a control experiment was conducted using a quantity of mites that could not be detected visually, it was not possible to visually confirm whether the mites had been removed or not. [Industrial Applicability]

[0098] The present invention has industrial applicability as a method for evaluating the efficacy of a control composition when used against mites.

Claims

1. a contacting step of contacting the control composition with living mites; A preparation step of preparing a sample containing the mites contacted with the control composition on a substrate at a high density so that the mites are visible; a trial step of attempting to remove the mites from the sample using a removal means; A confirmation step of confirming the effectiveness of the control composition based on the sample after attempting to remove the mites. Method for evaluating control efficacy.

2. In the confirmation step, the sample after attempting to remove the mites; The effect of the control composition is confirmed based on a comparison with a sample that has not been subjected to at least one of the trial step and the contact step, or with a substrate before the mites are placed on the substrate. The method for evaluating control efficacy according to claim 1.

3. A preparation step of preparing a sample containing mites living on a substrate at a high density so that they are visible; a post-treatment step of treating the sample with a pest control composition; a trial step of attempting to remove the mites from the sample using a removal means; A confirmation step of confirming the effectiveness of the control composition based on the sample after attempting to remove the mites. Method for evaluating control efficacy.

4. In the confirmation step, the sample after attempting to remove the mites; The effect of the control composition is confirmed based on a comparison with a sample that has not been subjected to at least one of the trial step and the post-treatment step, or with a substrate before the mites are placed on the substrate. The method for evaluating control efficacy according to claim 3.

5. a pretreatment step of treating the substrate with a pest control composition; a placement step of placing live mites on the treated substrate at a high density so that they can be seen visually, thereby obtaining a sample; a trial step of attempting to remove the mites from the sample using a removal means; A confirmation step of confirming the effectiveness of the control composition based on the sample after attempting to remove the mites. Method for evaluating control efficacy.

6. In the confirmation step, the sample after attempting to remove the mites; The effect of the control composition is confirmed based on a comparison with a sample that has not been subjected to at least one of the trial step and the pretreatment step, or with a substrate before the mites are placed thereon. The method for evaluating control efficacy according to claim 5.

7. As the substrate, a substrate having a color that clearly contrasts with the mites is used. The method for evaluating control efficacy according to claim 1 , 3 , or 5 .

Images