Light and Color Reactions of Musca domestica
Under Different Conditions
t
2
By
Department
OTTO
HECHT
of Zoology, Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Biol6gicas, Instituto
APartado Postal 42-186, Mexico, D.F.
In studying the responses of insects to light and colored
lights one has to take into account the wavelength composition and intensity of the light source.
were covered with a sticky colorless substance and placed
upon rectangular di fferently colored papers of slightly
smaller size, laid on the white floor. In tests with white
and black rectangles, about % of the flies settled on black
and ~fl on white. The colored rectangles attracted the
flies only to the same slight degree as the white rectangles, with the exception of red, which was as attractive
as black.
In studying the responses to painted, dyed, or otherwise
pigment-containing surfaces it must be borne in mind that
their colors are characterized by various attributes.
1.
The principal quality is the color in the proper sense or
hue, which is defined by the composition of reflected
wavelengths. 2. Another property is the brightness of the
reflected light (brightness respectively darkness, or lighter
respectively darker shades). The hue is lighter or darker
in accordance with the amount of white or black pigment
added to the basic color, in the same way as different
shades of gray are prepared by mixing black and white in
varying proportions, black, gray, and white not being
colors in the proper sense, but shades. 3. A further attribute of a colored surface is the saturation or purity.
Di fferent grades of saturation are obtained by adding to
the basic color varying amounts of gray of the same
brightness as the basic color shows, a color being more
saturated when the amount of added gray is smaller. 4.
One must determine whether the colored surface has a
luster (shine or glossiness), i.e. whether the light is
reflected from a specular surface (which produces a moreor-less distinct mirror - image), or whether the surface is
mat (without luster), the reflected light being completely
diffused (d. Committee on Colorimetry 1953; Burnham
et al. 1963).
Almost
responses
and hues
areas or
color, and
Nava (1967)3 introduced flies into circular 80-cm-diam.
boxes, the bottom and walls of which, divided into 6 sections, were covered alternately with 2 differently colored
cardboards. Black was more attractive than all the hues;
among these, red was preferred above all, blue least frequented, and the responses of the flies to brown, gray,
yellow, and green varied in accordance with the combination of colors tested. The tested colors were arranged by
Hecht et al. (1968) in a series which represents their
attractiveness:
black 67 (which means that black in the
di fferent tests vs. other colors attracted an average of
67% of the flies), red 43, yellow 24, gray 17, brown 16,
green 8.5, white 8, and blue O. Similar results with respect to color selection were obtained by Quijano (1969),'
when she investigated the possibility of trapping flies
which had been introduced into a cubical cage of 1 m3,
in 17-cm-diam, 9-cm deep colored pans, filled with water
to which a small amount of a detergent had been added.
Awati (1920), who was probably the first to study the
attraction of house flies toward colored papers, obtained
results quite different from those of the later authors,
just cited. In his experiment yellow was the most, and
red and violet were the least attractive colors. For a
conjectural explanation of this discrepancy, see following.
all authors who in the last decades studied the
of Musca. domestiea L. toward different shades
found that the flies prefer to settle on black
objects, or on the darker shades of a single
that they frequently rest on red surfaces.
Various authors performed tests using colored lights.
Awati (1920) performed some tests at night using small
lamps with windows of different colored glass. Red,
green, and violet were the least attractive lights, a yellow
light was the most attractive, and those of blue and
orange occupied an intermediate position.
Many of these observations had been made in attempts
to trap the flies on bands impregnated with insecticides
and sugar and hung up horizontally across stables (Wiesmann 1960, 1962), on similarly treated cords hung from
the roof (Fay and Lindquist 1954), or in choice experiments, made in cages in the laboratory.
Waterhouse
(1948) lined the corners of a Peet-Grady chamber with
colored materials and found that the color chosen least
frequently was white, and that the flies settled in ascending order on sky blue, light gray, green, yellow, gray,
dark blue, and red.
Deay and Taylor (1962) studied the attraction toward
colored electric bulbs, and Cameron (1938) and 11azochin-Porshnjakov
(1960) investigated the responses of
M. dOlllestica to monochromatic lights; observing the
high responsiveness of flies to ultraviolet radiation at
wavelengths between 320 and 380 nm with a maximum
at about 365 nm.
In the laboratory experiments of Arevad (1965) the
flies rested for a long time on rough surfaces, for instance
on jute sacking, and seldom settled on smooth surfaces,
especially when they were light colored. Similar observations had already been made by Freeborn and Berry
(1935) in a closed stable, where the flies preferred to
rest on rough, dark-colored surfaces and avoided sitting
on a sheet of aluminum or on a white-painted surface.
Pospisil (1962) observed that the flies flew much more
frequently toward white, purple, blue-violet, and blue lights
than toward red, yellow, and green lights of the same
intensity.
A comparison of the results on colored surfaces with
those obtained by use of colored lights shows that con-
In experiments by Pospisil (1962) the flies in a large
cage were trapped on two 9X 12-cm glass plates, which
1
2
Diptera:
Received
Muscidae.
for publication
March
Politccnico Nacional
3 A. Nava.
1967. Prefereneins
de Mltsea domestica en la seloc·
ci6n de superficies de color. Tesis profesional.
Escuela Nacional de
Cieneias rliologicas,
Inst. Politecnico
Nal., Mexico, D.F.
• A. E. Quijano.
1968. La atraceion
par colores en la captura
de Musca domestica
L. mediante "trampas de agua" en una jaula
de amplio espaeio.
Escuela
Nacional
de Cicncias
Biologicas,
Inst.
Politecnico
Nal., Mexico, D.F.
15, 1970.
94
siderable di fferences exist with respect to the attraction
of the same hues between light sources on the one hand
and reflecting surfaces on the other, a discrepancy which
became most obvious in the already cited work of Pospisil,
who studied attraction both toward colored light and
painted surfaces.
photographic film. In general, it would be better to
restrict phrases like "attraction to lighter or darker
colored surfaces."
The outcome of using certain colored surfaces with the
aim to attract the flies probably depends not so much
on the brightness or darkness of the surface as on the
circumstance whether the color contrasts in a higher or
lesser degree with the background. The conspicuousness
of a colored surface or object depends in turn not only
on the wavelength composition of the color but also on
its degree of saturation, and the more saturated colors
will contrast in a higher degree with a monotonous
background, in which gray and brown frequently prevail.
Yellow, which was found to be the most attractive color in
the outdoor tests, is a very conspicuous color for M. domes/ica, when it contrasts with the grayness of the pavement, concrete walls, etc. in the dairy farm, where the
experiments were made (Hecht et at. 1969).
In addition to these differences in attraction by radiant
and reflected colored light, different preferences to the
same sets of colored surfaces were observed between tests
in the open air and laboratory tests, when Muniz (1967)"
studied fly behavior in a dairy farm, using the same cardboards as N ava (1%7)" did in her laboratory experiments.
Cardboard sheets of 100X 50 cm were laid in pairs of
<Ii fferent colors on the concrete floor of the courtyard, at
places where many flies were present because of remnants of manure or scattered forage. Where in the laboratory the flies settled in descendant order on black, red,
yellow, gray, brown, green, white, and blue, the list of
preferences in the open air was very distinct; the most
attractive color was yellow, 86 (i.e. with 86% of the flies
settling on same, this average resulting from all the tests
made in pairs with yellow as the one color), and there
followed in descendant order: red 49, white 44, blue 42,
green 35, gray 23, black 10, and brown 0 (Hecht et at.
1968).
When determined that there hardly ever is any concordance between the results of the tests performed in the
laboratory and the outcome of the field experiments, it
was believed that the responses of the flies might be influenced by temperature, but the regularly performed measurements, and mainly those during the open-air experiments made in different seasons (Muniz 1967)" showed
that the choice of colors is independent of temperature.
Moreover, Nava (1967)" studied the settling of the flies
on white and black and recently on colored cardboards
(yet unpublished results) at constant temperatures of 15,
20, 25, 30, 35 and 40°C, measured within the test boxes.
It was shown that at temperatures between 25° and 35°
the distribution of the flies was always about the same
and that at lower temperatures the preference for black
or for certain hues is even accentuated. At 40" the flies
became very excited. The preferences, however, remained
the same as at the medium temperatures, and for black
and for several hues they were again accentuated.
The disparity between laboratory and field experiments
was most striking when the relative attraction of white
and black cardboards was measured. In the experiments
made by Nava (1967)" in the laboratory room, the flies
being enclosed in the circular test box and light entering
through a lid of transparent plastic, about 75% of them
settled on the black sectors of the floor and wall, and
about 25% on the white ones, whereas in the open air
more than 80,/,o of the flies which flew toward the test
surfaces settled on the wbite and less than 20% on the
black cardboard.
Considering this strong attraction of black in comparison with gray and with the almost complete avoidance of
white in the laboratory experiments, and observing the
fairly strong attraction to yellow and white and a repellency by black in the outdoor experiments, it could be
suggested that darker colors are preferred in the indoor
tl'sts and lighter colors in the outdoor tests. However, in
spite of the possible influence of the darker or lighter
shades of a colored surface, these are not invariably preferred. For in the indoor experiments, the flies in several
cases preferred to rest on colored cardboards which had
a lighter shade, and in several cases of the outdoor tests
the majority settled on a colored cardboard which had a
darker shade, according to the measurements of reflected
light made with a photometer, or to the results which
had bl~1l obtained by summing up the spectrophotometric
data of reflectancy in a wide zone of the spectrum, including "ncar ultraviolet" (Nava 1%7," Hecht et al. 1968).
Contrary to this fairly equal behavior of flies in different temperatures with regard to the attraction toward
colored surfaces, :Morgan (1967), and Morgan and Pickens (1968) found that the responses of M. domes/ica in
relation to colored lights di ffer, depending on temperature.
As outdoor experiments provided no indication that
weather factors like heat, humidity, or wind have a decisive influence on the choice of shades and hues (Muniz
1967)", it is supposed that in the open air the ultraviolet
of sunlight might be the factor which makes the white
cardboard attractive for M. domes/ica.
This idea was
supported by the measurements of the considerable reflection of near ultraviolet by this cardboard, and by
laboratory experiments (DtLVila 1967)" made in a wide
container of transparent plastic with a "black-light" tube
installed in its upper part and with its floor alternately
covered with the test papers, in pairs of different colors,
and using white papers with a different texture or sheets
coated with chemically different white paints. It was
found that a white surface, provided that it reflects near
ultraviolet to a high degree. attracted the flies and reduced the number of specimens which selected other
colors, whereas white surfaces that did not reflect near
ultraviolet did not attract the flies.
From the foregoing it can be concluded without lessening some importance of the attractiveness
of darker
shaded colors in indoor tests, and on the other hand of
lighter shaded colors in the open air, that the selection of
colors is principally determined by the color in the proper
sense or the hue. 1Ioreover, one must bear in mind that
the hrightness or the darkness of color perceived by the
l'ye of the fly is rather different from that observed by
the human eye, and from the sensitivity of a panchromatic
Although these studies suggest some physical explanation for the different responses to the black and white
6 O. Davila. 1967.
Influencia de la luz ultravioleta en la selccL. Tesis "ro·
{esional. Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Biol6gicas,Ins!. Politecnico
Nal., lIIexico,D.F.
"R. Muiiiz. 1967. Observacionessabre la busqueda de sitios
de rt'lHISO y ('studio (·xJI<.'rimental .sobre la seleccion de colores par
Musca domestira ,'n d amhiente natural. Tesis de Maestria. Escuela
cion de su"erficies de rc"oso "or MlIJCa domestiea
l\'acional de Ciencias Biologicas,Inst. Politecnico Nal., Mexico,D.F.
9S
di fferences between the
pigmented surfaces, we
environmental conditions
the insects motivates the
<:ardboards used, ~t is not yet possible to explain the differences in the behavior of flies toward the various hues.
The ultraviolet reRection to a more moderate degree (by
gray, blue, and yellow) may be just one of several factors
which work together in making the respective colors attractive in the open air.
reactions to lights and those to
may assume that not only some
but also a certain disposition of
different kinds of reactions.
In a general way, Oldroyd (1968) recently discussed
such divergencies in the behavior of insects. He hypothesized that the discrepancies in color attraction, in part at
least, are a consequence of the way in which the experiments are arranged, and he put some stress on the circumstance that lights of different colors have usually
been compared for their stimulating effect. A lamp, for
instance, may incite an insect to seek a source of food
in the place where the light is situated; on the other
hand, flies may select a colored surface for resting. This
interpretation,
however, does not hold good for the
outdoor tests (Muiiiz 1967) ,. because in these experiments flies flew toward the cardboards to be tested,
but alighted on them only for seconds. In these tests it
was necessary to cover the cardboards with a layer of
sugar, so that the flies would remain for a while and
their distribution on the di fferently colored papers could
be recorded.
Awati (1920), as just mentioned, had shown that a
yellow paper was the most attractive, a finding that is
not in accordance with the results of the later laboratory
tests made by Pospisil (1962) and by Nava (1967)." It
is now possible to explain the discrepancy directing attention to a detail of Awati's experiment. He had placed
the test papers upon a table situated very near an open
window so that his experiments correspond to those
made in the open air, in which the yellow paper provided
to be the most attractive.
Before entering into a further discussion of probable
reasons for the different attraction of flies with regard
to color, some experiments about the entrance of flies
into light and dark spaces should be reported. These
studies (Hecht 1963) were performed in a Y -shaped apparatus, made of transparent plastic. The stem of the Y
was the 20X 12X IS-em entrance chamber into which the
flies were introduced. Its walls and top had been dusted
with talcum, which prevented most of the flies from
settling there and compelled them to fly into the 35-cmlong, 12-cm-high, and 8-cm-wide tubular arms. The great
majority of flies entered the arm darkened with a black
cloth and settled on its (undusted) walls, a minority remained in the entrance chamber, and a similarly small
number entered the lighted arm.
Interpreting
the laboratory experiments by Pospisil
(1962), Oldroyd said that lights excite the insects which
therefore are attracted in greater numbers toward the
lights that seem to them the brightest (white, violet, and
blue lights), whereas colored backgrounds have a sedative effect. As black and red surfaces seem to be the
darkest to the flies and give them the least visual stimu]ation, they will be preferred. On the other hand, yellow,
green, and blue surfaces will be less frequented, as Pospisil
(1962) in fact demonstrated. The data Pospisil gathered
when testing pigmented surfaces were supplemented by
those communicated by Hecht et a1. (1968), al ready mentioned. In indoor tests yellow, medium gray, and brown
were somewhat more attractive than green and white,
and no flies settled on blue areas.
When the black cloth was taken away from the darkened arm and was put around the other arm, the sudden
illumination of the first arm did not incite all the flies to
immediately fly in search of a less illuminated place. An
increasing number of flies only gradually returned from
the now lighted arm to the entrance chamber and from
there into the darkened arm. It can be concluded that a
sudden increase of illumination is not a stimulus to which
all flies quickly respond, and it is supposed that the avoidance of light places and the entrance into dark spaces
are made mainly by individuals already on the wing.
Their flights may have been induced by other stimuli, for
instance the excitation caused when the insects are introduced into test chambers. The search for dark spaces
may be interpreted as a withdrawal of the flies to secluded
places where they remain for a temporary or for a prolonged rest, and it can be assumed that the attraction of
black surfaces in choice experiments and the preferential
entering of the dark arm in the Y -shaped apparatus derive
from the same tendency, scototaxis.
It seems that ideas similar to those outlined by Oldroyd
could be applied to the contrary responses which had been
observed when comparing the selection of colored backgrounds in indoor and outdoor tests, though in both
cases the reactions are not in accordance wi th those toward lights.
The observations in the courtyard of a dairy farm
suggested that flies in the open air are more active
than those in a confined space, as they probably explore
the environment for edible objects. These flies may be attracted to colors which appear more conspicuous to them,
as for instance to a saturated yellow or to ultravio]et
reflecting surfaces; i.e. mainly to colors which stand out
more distinctly from the monotonous surroundings, whereas
the flies which were tested in the special laboratory contrivance of Nava (1967)3 (where they most presumably
are less active) frequently preferred black surfaces or
those with colors which may appear to them as the darkest, in some analogy to their entering into a dark space.
It was also observed that with the change of illumination in the arms of the Y-shaped contrivance, the flies,
and particu]arly females, which had no possibility to feed
for 24 hours prior to the start of an experiment, remained
in the now lighted arm for a longer time than flies fed
more recently. Hunger, or the necessity of searching for
food, seems to incite the flies to remain in light places.
The objection which might be made to this interpretation
-why hungry flies entered into the dark arm at all-is
refuted through the observation that when they were introduced with the aid of an aspirator tube into the entrance chamber, they became very excited and went according]y into hiding in the dark arm.
In contrast to the flies' movements in closed spaces
toward the greatest darkness, cases may be observed in
which they fly toward brightness.
On the occasion of
some experiments with the object of trapping flies in 2
water pans of the same attractive color, placed on the
floor of a 13-m" empty room (Hecht et a!. 1969), the
difficulty arose that a great majority of the about 1000
flies used in each test flew toward a window which occupied almost the entire length of one wall and rested on
the window panes for several hours. Analogous]y to the
Considering the discrepancies between the results in the
outdoor and indoor test and also taking into account the
96
aforementioned withdrawal of the flies into darkness under certain conditions, a reaction toward brightness was
observed. In this case of a positive phototaxis, though
these flies were looking for an exit, it should, however,
be regarded as a reaction of withdrawal. Flies which fly
toward bri~htness do not fly in search of shelter but to
reach lighter surroundings where they will develop greater
activity (d. Hecht 1970) and consequently have a chance
to find some source of food, a mate, or some material
suitable for egg laying.
Musca or other muscoid flies do not react to colors in
the same way as M. domestica. A slight difference was
found with M. domes/ica vidna Macquart by Asher and
Hirsch (1965) ; greater di fferences became evident l:Jythe
studies of Hafez (1958) referring to M. sorb ens Wiedemann; of PospiSil and idarek
(1965); of Muniz and
Hecht (1968); and of Nava (personal communication)
with regard to Stomoxys caEdtrans (L.).
There is still one peculiarity of colored surfaces which
has to be taken into account when we study visual attraction. On the occasion of some experiments with the object to attract flies in the open air toward large iron
sheets, painted with a saturated yel10w and provided
with a coat of sugar and insecticide (Hecht et al. 1969),
at first lacquer was used (the type used for automobiles),
which produced a reflecting luster. The result was that
almost no flies settled on these sheets. However, when
using a vinyl acrylic paint, which produced a color without luster, the flies were attracted in rapidly increasing
numbers shortly after the sheets had been laid out.
Arevad, K. 1965. On the orientation ')f houseflies to
various surfaces. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 8: 175-88.
Ascher, K. R. S., and I. Hirsch. 1965. The housefly
and the cube of sugar. World Rev. Pest Contr. 4:
103-11.
Awati, P. R. 1920. Bionomics of houseflies. II. Attraction of houseflies to different colours. Indian J.
Med. Res. Sec. D. 16: 553-9.
Burnham, R. W., R. M. Hanes, and C. J. Bartleson,
1963. Color: a guide to basic facts and concepts.
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York-London. 249 p.
Cameron, J. W. M. Bn. 1938. The reactions of the
housefly, Musca domes/ica Linn. to light of different
wavelengths. Can. J. Res. Sec. D. 16: 307-41.
Committee on Colorimetry.
Optical Soc. Amer. 1953.
The Science of Color. Thomas Y. Crowell Co.
385 p.
Deay, H. 0., and }. G. Taylor.
1962. Response of the
house fly Musca domes/ica to electric lamps. Proc.
Ind. Acad. Sci. 72: 161-6.
Fay, R. W., and D. A. Lindquist.
1954.. Laboratory
studies on factors influencing the efficiency of insecticide impregnated cords for house fly control. J.
Econ. Entomol. 47: 975-80.
Freeborn, S. B., and 1. J. Berry. 1935. Color preferences of the house fly Musca domestica L. Ibid. 28:
913-6.
Hafez, M. 1958. Studies on the ecology of Musca
sorbells Wied. in Egypt. Bull. Soc. Entomol. Egypte
REFERENCES
Based on this experience, some contradictions, resulting
from the laboratory work of various authors, perhaps
have an explanation.
Wiesmann (1962) used a yellow
glazed paller which attracted almost no flies. It seems
to me that this paper perhaps had a luster comparable to
that of our first yel10w metal sheets, and contrary to the
yellow cardboard used by Kava (1967),' which showed a
moderate attraction in the laboratory.
Also Arevad's observation (1965) that flies do not
gather on glazed tiles and completely avoid a plate of
aluminum or galvanized iron could be due not only to
the smoothness of these materials but also to their luster.
Many flies are occasionally resting on windowpanes;
but these do not glitter when they are looked at from
inside, though they are as smooth as the mentioned metal
sheets.
From the reaction to different yellows we cannot conclude that glazed papers of colors other than yellow do
not attract the flies, as Wiesmann using differently colored
glazed papers had found that black, red, and orange papers
were attractive.
42: 83-121.
Hecht, O. 1963. On the visual orientation of houseflies in their search of resting sites. Entomol. Exp.
Appl. 6: 107-13.
1970. Ecologia y comportamiento de moscas domesticas. Parte I: Musca domes/ica L. Depto. Publicaciones Instituto Politecnico Nacional, Mexico, D. F.
113 p.
Hecht, 0., R. Muniz, and A. Nava. 1968. Contrary responses of Musca domestica L. concerning their
selection of different shades and hues. Entomol. Exp.
Appl. 11: 1-14.
Hecht, 0., A. Quijano, R. Muniz, and G. Landgrave.
1969. Indicaciones sabre el aproveChamiento de la
atracci6n a colores en Musca d01l1cs/ica con prop6sitos de combate. Acta Zool. Mex. IX (5): 9-24.
Mazochin-Porshnjakov,
G. A. 1960. Neues tiber den
Mechanismus des Farbensehens der Insekten. XI
Int. Kongr. Entomol. Wien, Bd.I, Sekt. 1-6: 667-70.
1969. Insect Vision. Plenum Press, New York. 306 p.
Morgan, N. O. 1967. House fly response to light traps.
Folia Entom. Mexic. 1968 (18-19) : 79.
Morgan, N. 0., and 1. G. Pickens. 1968. Influence of
air temperature on the attractiveness of electric lamps
to house flies. J. Econ. Entomol. 61: 1257-9.
Muniz, R., and O. Hecht. 1968. Observaciones sobre
la distribuci6n de Stomoxys caEcitraJls en un predio
ganadero y ensayos sobre la selecci6n de superficies
Olivos7 recently started some laboratory experiments
in which the flies had to choose between mat papers and
glazed pallers of the same color. When certain colors
were used, the mat colors were selected by a majority
of flies, whereas with some other colors the glossy colors
were preferred. It will be rather difficult to find a satisfactory eXlllanation of these varied responses.
It should be. taken into account that glossy surfaces
polarize the light (d. Committee on Colorimetry 1953;
;\fazochin-Porshnjakov
1969). Shinning areas and mat
areas of the same color may appear almost identical to
the human eye, but not to the eye of insects, in which
each ommatidium functions as a set of analyzers of polarized light. The insect perceives from a glossy surface
beside the color a pattern which would be absent on a
surface without gloss. About perception of polarized
light by M. dOlllcs/iea d. Mazochin-Porshnjakov
(1969).
Finally,
CITED
it must be pointed out that other species of
7 S. C. Olivos.
1970. La atraccion de Musca d011lestica L. a
I'ap~l~s mat~ Y Ilapeles satinados, del mismo color. Tesis Profes·
Illnal. Escu~la Nacional de Ciencias Biologicas, Inst. Politecnico
Nal., Mexico. D.F. In preparation.
97
de colores al aire libre. Anal. Escue1a Nal. Ciencias
BioI. XVII: 225-43.
Oldroyd, H. 1968. Elements of Entomology. Wiedenfeld and Nicolson, London. 312 p.
pospml, J. 1962. On visual orientation of the house
fly (MlIsca domcstica) to colours. Acta Soc. Entomol. Cechosloveniae 59: 1-8.
pospim, J., and J. Zdarek,
1965. On the visual orientation of the stable fly (Stomoxys ca/citrans L.) to
colours. Acta Entomol. Bohemoslov. 63: 85-91.
Waterhouse, D. F. 1948. The effect of colour on the
numbers of house flies resting on painted surfaces.
Austr. J. Res. 1: 65-75.
Wiesmann, R. 1960. Neue Mittel und Methoden zur
Fliegenbekampfung
im Stall. Schweiz. Arch. Tierheilk. 102: 134-46.
1962. Neue Erkenntnisse aus der Biologie von Musca
dOlllcstica L. im Zusammenhang mit der Insektizidresistenz. J. Hyg. Epidemiol. Microbiol. Immuno!.
(Prague) 6: 303-21.
FUTURE MEETINGS
Members are encouraged to attend this and other meetings in which our Society participates.
First National
Biological Congress
Rocky Mountain
The First National Biological Congress will be held
in Detroit, Michigan November 6-10, 1970. The Congress, a new concept in scientific meetings, is being cosponsored by the American Institute of Biological Sciences and the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology with a theme, "Man and Environment."
Conference
of Entomologists
The 41st Rocky Mountain Conference of Entomologists
will be held at Cameron Pass 4-H Camp. Gould, Colorado, on August 9-13, 1970. The traditions of this Conference will be maintained with a informal program
August 10 through 12, with the 11th reserved for sightseeing and recreation. As always, entomologists are encouraged to bring their families for a mountain vacation.
For additional information write to Chris C. Burkhardt, Secretary, Rocky Mountain Conference of Entomologists, Department
of Entomology,
University of
Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming 82070.
Morning sessions will be devoted to Basic Science
Symposia covering topics important to Biology as well
as to man and the environment.
This will provide an
opportunity for the scientific community to enter into a
free and frank debate with public policy makers and with
the public.
Canadian
Agricultural
Chemicals Association
The 18th Annual Meeting and Conference of the Canadian Agricultural Chemicals Association will be held at
Jasper Park Lodge, Jasper, Alberta, September 13-16,
1970.
Afternoon scientific sessions are planned for over 40
professional societies which include the Entomological
Society of America. Evening symposia, concerned with
man, environment and public policy, will bring together
environmentalists and lawmakers from federal, state and
local jurisdictions. Students are encouraged to participate
in all aspects of the Congress and special activities are
being planned for them. Dr. Thomas Moore of the University of Michigan has been designated to be ESA's
representative to this Congress and will present a symposium entitled, "Insects and Human Environment."
CORRECTION
The address of P. B. Kannowski, Vice Chairman of
Sub-section Cb, Apiculture and Social Insects, listed on
page 53 of the March BULLETIN, Vol. 16, No.1, was
erroneously shown as Beltsville, Maryland. The address
should be Grand Forks, North Dakota.
ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
CHAIRMEN
OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES
Committee on Insecticide Resistance to Chemicals
H. T. REYNOLDS,Riverside, California
1970
Committee on Education
L. BERNER,Gainesville, Florida
Committee on Local Arrangements
H. D. BOWMAN,Miami, Florida
Bussart Award Committee
A. W. LINDQUIST,Bridgeport,
Committee on Photo Salon
P. D. SLOCUM,Winter Haven, Florida
Kansas
Committee on Youth Science Program
J. M. MAGNER,St. Louis, Missouri
Committee on International
Relations
H. C. Cox, Beltsville, Maryland
Development
Committee on Resolutions
H. O. LUND, Athens, Georgia
Nominations to Standing Committees
J. S. ROUSSEL,Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Committee on Society Publications
H. D. NEWSON,Washington, D. C.
Committee on Retrieval of Scientific Information
R. H. FOOTE,Beltsville, Maryland
Committee on International
Congress
E. G. LINSLEY, Berkeley, California
of Entomology
Committee on Program Evaluation
W. H. LUCKMANN, Urbana, Illinois
Committee on Reis Memorial Slide Library
D. L. SCHUDER,Lafayette, Indiana
Committee on Student Membership
W. G. EDEN, Gainesville, Florida
Committee on Affects of Persistent
R. L. METCALF,Urbana, Illinois
Criteria
98
Pesticides