<%BANNER%>

Public Perceptions of Urban Pest Management and the Toxicity of Fatty Acid Salts to Cockroaches


PAGE 1

PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF URBAN PEST MANAGEMENT AND THE TOXICITY OF FATTY ACID SALTS TO COCKROACHES By REBECCA FRANCES WILLIAMS BALDWIN A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2005

PAGE 2

Copyright 2005 by Rebecca Frances Williams Baldwin

PAGE 3

For my loving family without whose prayers, love and encouragement this would not have been possible.

PAGE 4

iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the following people for their support and encouragement throughout my tenure at the University of Florid a. I would first like to thank my family: Richie for being my encouragement and shoulder to lean on and my parents and grandparents for all of their pr ayers and confidence in me. I would also like to thank my committee for their patience in molding me into a professional entomologist. I thank Dr. Phil Koehler, for teaching me that I can succeed in research. I appreciate all the road trips where great ideas were bor n. I thank Dr. Faith Oi, for her friendship and instruction on how to build an extension program. I thank Dr. Norm Leppla and Dr. Marshall Breeze, for their suggestions and review of my manuscript. I apprec iate all of your time and dedication. My thanks to Dr. Ken Portier for his statistical expe rtise, to Dr. Mike Scharf for the use of his lab, and Drs. Mike Scicchitano and Tracy Johns for their revision of my survey. I would also like to thank Dr. Don Hall a nd Mrs. Debbie Hall for helping me to be a successful teacher. Thanks also to all of the friends I have made at the University of Florida and in Windsor. Their friendships have truly made Florida home. This dissertation is an an swer to prayer and I th ank God for this blessing.

PAGE 5

v TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................................................................iv LIST OF TABLES...........................................................................................................viii LIST OF FIGURES.............................................................................................................x OBJECT......................................................................................................................... ....xi ABSTRACT......................................................................................................................x ii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW....................................................1 Pest Status of Cockroaches...........................................................................................1 Biology and Distribution.......................................................................................1 Medical Implications.............................................................................................3 Management Measures and Resistance.................................................................5 Integrated Pest Management Strategies.................................................................7 Cultural Methods: Educa tion and Sanitation.................................................8 Mechanical Methods: Exclusion and Physical Removal of Cockroaches.....9 Chemical Methods: Traditional......................................................................9 History of Soap as an Insecticide................................................................................10 Toxicity of Soap..................................................................................................10 Chemical Structure of Fatty Acids......................................................................12 Chemical Structure of Potassium Fatty Acid Salts..............................................13 Insecticidal Uses of Potassium Fatty Acid Salts.................................................13 Potential Mode of Action of Potassium Fatty Acid Salts....................................20 Statement of Purpose..................................................................................................22 2 PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF PEST PROBLEMS....................................................28 Introduction.................................................................................................................28 Materials and Methods...............................................................................................29 Results........................................................................................................................ .31 Demographics......................................................................................................31 Importance of Categories of Urban Pests............................................................31 Factors Related to a Behavioral Change.............................................................32

PAGE 6

vi Homemade Product Use as a Pest Management Option......................................35 Discussion...................................................................................................................36 3 PUBLIC ATTITUDES AND BE HAVIORS TOWARDS HOUSEHOLD PESTICIDE USAGE..................................................................................................51 Introduction.................................................................................................................51 Materials and Methods...............................................................................................52 Results........................................................................................................................ .54 Responses of Consumers That Utilize Pesticides................................................54 Responses of Consumers That Do Not Utilize Pesticides...................................57 Responses of Consumers That Would Never Utilize Pesticides.........................58 Responses of All Consumers...............................................................................58 Demographics......................................................................................................58 Discussion...................................................................................................................59 4 TOXICITY OF COMMERCIAL LY AVAILABLE DISHWASHING DETERGENTS AND HOUSEHOLD CL EANERS ON COCKROACHES BLATTELLA GERMANICA (L.), AND PERIPLANETA AMERICANA (L.).............73 Introduction.................................................................................................................73 Materials and Methods...............................................................................................74 Insects..................................................................................................................74 Immersion Assay.................................................................................................75 Comparison of Modified Immersi on and Spray Applications using Dishwashing Soap and Household Cleaners....................................................76 Analysis...............................................................................................................78 Results........................................................................................................................ .79 Immersion Assay.................................................................................................79 Comparison of Modified Immersi on and Spray Applications using Dishwashing Soap and Household Cleaners....................................................80 Discussion...................................................................................................................82 5 TOXICITY AND NEUROPHYSIOLOGI CAL EFFECTS OF INDIVIDUAL FATTY ACID SALTS ON AMERICAN AND GERMAN COCKROACHES........91 Introduction.................................................................................................................91 Materials and Methods...............................................................................................93 Insects..................................................................................................................93 Treatments...........................................................................................................93 Immersion Bioassay............................................................................................94 Neurophysiology Bioassay -Equipment............................................................95 Neurophysiology Bioassay -Insect Preparation and Recording........................95 Analysis...............................................................................................................97 Results........................................................................................................................ .97 Discussion.................................................................................................................100

PAGE 7

vii 6 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION.........................................................................107 APPENDIX: PEST MANAGEME NT SURVEY INSTRUMENT................................110 LIST OF REFERENCES.................................................................................................119 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH...........................................................................................130

PAGE 8

viii LIST OF TABLES Table page 1-1 Insecticide classes and modes of action.....................................................................6 1-2 Common potassium salts..........................................................................................13 1-3 Selected references testing various soap solutions against arthropods....................23 2-1 Demographic profile of the 600 participan ts in the Florida perceptions of pests survey.......................................................................................................................39 2-2 Demographic differences between chemically sensitive people and people allergic to insects and insect bites............................................................................40 2-3 Response to the question, "Which of the following categories of insect pests . ...41 2-4 Pesticide users reasons for purchasi ng pest control products or services and their importance (N=492).........................................................................................42 2-5 Responses for pest factors influencin g purchase of pest control products or services based on gender..........................................................................................43 2-6 Non-pesticide users rank of the import ance of some reasons for purchasing pest control products or services (n=59)..........................................................................45 2-7 Response from non-pesticide users to the question, "How lik ely are you to take that (pest control) action to solve a problem? (n=59).............................................46 2-8 Response of people who would never use pesticides to the qu estion: "How likely would you be to take the following actions to solve a pest problem in or around your home? (n=48).................................................................................................48 2-9 Comments specified by people who indi cated they would never use pesticides (n=48).......................................................................................................................49 3-1 Demographic responses for willingness to use over-the-counter pesticides............64 3-2 Formulation preference of over-the -counter pesticide users (N=387).....................65 3-3 Demographic responses for willingness to use professional pest control products or services.................................................................................................................66

PAGE 9

ix 3-4 Importance of purchasing variables fr om pesticide users for over-the-counter and professional pest control services (n=387)........................................................67 3-5 Demographic responses for factors in fluencing purchase of over-the-counter pesticides..................................................................................................................68 3-6 Demographic responses for factors infl uencing purchase of professional pest control products or services......................................................................................69 3-7 Importance of purchasing variables from non-pesticide users for over-thecounter and professional pest control services (n=59).............................................70 3-8 Demographic profile of the 600 participan ts in the Florida perceptions of pest management survey..................................................................................................71 3-9 Demographic differences between chemically sensitive people and people allergic to insects and insect bites............................................................................72 4-1 Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German cockroach males when exposed to Palmolive dishwashing liquid by immersion......................................85 4-2 Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German cockroach males when exposed to different formulations of dishwashing liquid by immersion..................86 4-3 Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German and American cockroach males when exposed to Palmolive dishwashing liquid (formula 47937) (n=25)..87 4-4 Toxicity of Palmolive dishwashing li quid to adult male German and American cockroaches with two ap plication techniques..........................................................88 4-5 Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German and American cockroach males when exposed to household cleane rs by a spray or immersion application (n=25).......................................................................................................................89 5-1 Toxicity of sodium and potassium laur ate to adult male German and American cockroaches............................................................................................................101 5-2 Toxicity of fatty acid salts (FAS ) to adult male German or American cockroaches............................................................................................................102

PAGE 10

x LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1-1 Representative fatty acid salt chains, C8 and C18.....................................................12 4-1 German cockroach, Blattella germanica posture following a 30 s exposure to 1.4% Palmolive Green A pple dishwashing liquid................................................79 5-1 Spontaneous electrical ac tivity from representative P. americana neural preparation. Baseline electrical act ivity in physiological saline (A), physiological saline disturbance (B), base line electrical activ ity in physiological saline (C), potassium laurate (1 ml at 0.75%) in physiological saline (D). The threshold was set at 500 baseline counts per min...................................................104 5-2 Spontaneous electrical activity for three American cockroaches, A, B, and C before and after treatment with 1 ml potassium laurate (0.75%)...........................105 5-3 Change in electrical bursting activity fr om baseline to the first and last 2.5 min after treatment of 1 ml potassium laurate (0.75%).................................................106

PAGE 11

xi OBJECT Object page 4-1 Cockroach exposure to 1.4% Palmolive dishwashing liquid or water (6.46 MB, soap_exposure_video.wmv.1:21.)............................................................................79

PAGE 12

xii Abstract of Dissertation Pres ented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF URBAN PEST MANAGEMENT AND THE TOXICITY OF FATTY ACID SALTS TO COCKROACHES By Rebecca Frances Williams Baldwin December 2005 Chair: Philip G. Koehler Major Department: Entomology and Nematology To better understand the pub lics perceptions of urban pests and urban pest management strategies a computer aided te lephone survey of 600 Florida residents was conducted. Insect pests were considered somewhat or very harmful by 68% of the population. Crawling pests were the most costly (50%) and di fficult (42%) to control. The majority of the population (82%) used pe sticides with 79% using over-the-counter pest control products and 54% hiring pr ofessional pest control services. Toxicity of commercially available fatty acid salt blends, including dishwashing liquids and household cleaners, was investig ated by a spray or immersion application against adult male German and American cockroaches. German cockroach nymphs and adults were both equally sus ceptible to a 1.4 % soap soluti on (94-100% mortality). All formulations of soaps (1%) and cleaners with an immersion application were equally as toxic to adult cockroaches achieving 83-100% mortality. The LC50 value for dishwashing liquid against German cockroach es was 0.54% with a spray application and

PAGE 13

xiii 0.56% with an immersion application. The LC50 value was 0.24% for the immersion application, but the spray app lication was ineffective agains t American cockroaches. There was no difference in cockroach mortalit y between different brands or formulations of dishwashing liquids. Cockroaches th at were knocked down immediately after exposure remained so and were dead at 24 h. Soaps were further tested against Ameri can and German cockroaches by evaluating the individual fatty acid salts which make up the active ingredient of soap solutions. Even-numbered fatty acid salts, C8 C18, were evaluated for toxicity by a 30 s immersion. There was no difference between potassium (LC50 0.49%) and sodium (0.42%) laurate on the mortality of German cockroaches or between American cockroaches (LC50 of 0.28% and 0.18% respectively). Potassium oleate wa s the most toxic to both American (LC50 0.17%) and German (LC50 0.36%) cockroaches. Neurophysiological recordings of spontaneous electrical activit y of American cockroaches exposed to potassium laurate (0.75%) indicated that the fa tty acid salt had an effect on the nervous system. Spontaneous electrical bursts increased 5 tim es that of baseline activity for two minutes post exposure and then quieted. The quieting of electrical activity corresponded with the apparent death of the specimen 2.5 minutes post soap exposure.

PAGE 14

1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW Periplaneta americana (L.), and Blattella germanica (L.), are two of the most common species of domiciliary pests. Th ese cockroach species are among the most prolific and most repulsive pe sts found in association with humans. When asked what they disliked most about cockroaches, public housing residents in Virginia and Maryland said that just having them was the thing that bothered them the most, and the presence of cockroaches was a source of emba rrassment (Wood et al. 1981). Pest Status of Cockroaches Biology and Distribution The phylogeny of cockroach families has been analyzed both morphologically and genetically and relationships have not been positively concluded (Grandcolas and DHaese 2001). The most commonly used co ckroach taxonomic classification divides the order Blattodea into five families, two of which are the Blattidae and Blattellidae (McKittrick 1964). The family Blattidae c ontains the peridomestic cockroaches, including the American cockroach. The fa mily Blattellidae contains the domestic cockroaches including as a representativ e, the German cockroach. These pest cockroaches, erroneously named American and German, originated in Africa. As man left the cradle of civilization and began to disperse throughout the world, he inadvertently carried these close associates as stowaway s on trade ships (Cornwell 1968). Over time these cockroaches continued their journey with man and are now worldwide in their distribution.

PAGE 15

2 American cockroaches are large ranging from 28-44 mm in length and are capable of flight. These cockroaches are gregar ious and exhibit aggregation through both pheromone and tactile stimuli from conspeci fics (Burk and Bell 1973). Before becoming adults, they molt from 6-14 times depending on physical and environmental conditions and may live an average of a year or more. At peak reproductive capacity, the female may deposit two oothecae a week, and usually produces 10 to 15 oothecae in a lifetime. Each ootheca contains up to 18 eggs with an average hatch of 12 nymphs per ootheca which is a contributor to th eir pest status. The American cockroach is oviparous, depositing or gluing her sclerotized egg cas e onto a substrate (Roth and Willis 1958). American cockroaches are opportunistic feeder s that prefer warm moist environments and are active at night. American cockroach es may excite allergic reactions in humans (Bell and Adiyodi 1981). Allergens associ ated with American cockroaches include periplanone A-D (Ka ng et al. 1989). Cockroaches are easy to breed and keep in the laboratory. This makes them model organisms for biological research (Guhl 1999) Cockroaches are the most frequently used biological model for studies in ins ect behavior and physiology (Gordon 1996), and have been extensively studied as a neurophysiological mode l (Scharrer 1987). Adult German cockroaches are 15 mm in length, and although they have fully developed wings, are incapable of flight. These cockroaches are shorter lived than American cockroaches with a lifespan of 210 days for females and 115 days for males. These pest cockroaches undergo five to seven molts depending on environmental conditions. Once reaching adulthood, the fema le German cockroach attracts the male with a sex pheromone, the volatile compound, bl attellaquinone (Nojim a et al. 2005), and

PAGE 16

3 while she may mate multiple times, only one mating is needed for the production of viable offspring throughout her lifetime (C ochran 1979). The German cockroach is classified as ovoviviparous by some and ovi parous by others (Roth and Willis 1958). The female extrudes the ootheca and then ro tates and withdraws it partially into her abdomen. She carries the egg case for about 30 days, and then deposits it several hours before hatch. An ootheca may contain as many as 46 eggs and may hatch 35-40 nymphs (Rust et al 1995). German cockroaches are gregarious and aggregra te based on olfactory cues from cuticular hydrocarbons (Rivault et al. 1998). Medical Implications Humans have historically combated co ckroaches in their domiciles (Roth and Willis 1960). German and American cockroaches are commonly found in homes, restaurants, schools, cafeterias, health car e centers, nursing home s, zoo, warehouses and other public areas. Not only are these cock roaches nuisance pests, but they are of medical significance as well. Since Worl d War II, many studies have been done to investigate the transmission of infectious ag ents from cockroaches to humans (Roth and Willis 1957). Recent studies have shown pathogenic Escherichia coli F18 from swine can survive in cockroach feces for up to ei ght days (Zurek and Schal 2004) and viable Salmonella enterica can be recovered from inoculated cockroach cuticle five days after exposure (Branscome 2004). Historical studies have shown that some Salmonella spp. could be recovered from cockroaches up to 72 days after inoculation and that Salmonella could survive on human foodstu ffs for up to four years (Olson and Rueger 1950, Rueger and Olson 1969). Cockroaches, especially German cockro aches, inhabit kitche ns and bathrooms where moisture is provided (Cornwell 1968). Humans can be exposed to the pathogens

PAGE 17

4 carried by cockroaches if food, eating utensils or hygienic items such as toothbrushes become contaminated. Cockroaches can al so contaminate human food and habitation through their excrement and molted skins. Their presence can cause respiratory and psychological problems as well (Brenner 1995, Codina et al. 2002, Kang et al 1992 and Kellert 1993). Sensitivity to cockroach allergens is direc tly related to the magnitude of exposure to cockroach infestations in the living environment (Kang et al. 1989). It has been demonstrated that dust samples from inne r-city and low-income homes contain high levels of German cockroach allergens, Bla g 1 and Bla g 2 (Arbes et al. 2004, Rosenstreich et al. 1997). Cockroach allergen s are measured in units per gram of dust, and the threshold for cockroach allergens is 8 units per gram. Allergen levels above the threshold are considered to be high. Cockroach allergens have been implicated in many cases of asthma, especially in children (Arlian 2002, Jones 1998). Rosenstreich et al. (1997) looked at asthmatic child ren in eight inner city areas in the United States. They found that 85% of the homes with asthmatic ch ildren had detectible levels of cockroach allergens and 50.2% had high levels of the allergen in bedroo m dust. When screened for allergies to cockroaches, 36.8% of the as thmatic children test ed positive. These allergens are prevalent not only in homes, but also in schools. Sarpong et al. (1997) found that 69% of schools tested in Balt imore, MD, had detectible levels of Bla g 1 with significantly higher le vels in food service areas th an in classrooms. Besides having an adverse health effect, these alle rgens have an economic impact as well. Children with cockroach allergies have signifi cantly more missed days of school (7.65 as opposed to 5.67 over a three month period) and their caregivers have to change their

PAGE 18

5 plans more often (15.52 times a year vers us 9.13) than children without cockroach allergies or who are not exposed to cockroach allergens (Rosenstreich et al. 1997). The missed school days not only result in the child falling behind in course work, but result in missed work days for parents. This study al so showed that allerg ic children who were exposed to the cockroach allergens in thei r homes had significantly more unscheduled medical visits (2.56 as opposed to 1.44) each year and spent significantly more time in the hospital (0.37 versus 0.11 vi sits) than other children. Management Measures and Resistance While cockroach infestations can have adverse health effects on humans, the measures used to control the infestation may also result in additional health risks. Treatment of infestations may inappropriately include insecticidal spraying of baseboards resulting in unnecessary pestic ide exposure. Cockroaches are nocturnal and prefer to inhabit small cracks and crevices of st ructures. Inappropr iate and unnecessary applications of insecticides often result in insecticide resistance (Rust and Reirson 1981, Valles 2004). Resistance to organophosphate s and carbamates was first documented in the 1950s and 1960s, and cockroaches, mainly German cockroaches, have demonstrated some form of resistance to mo st insecticide classes, used against them since (Cornwell 1976, Koehler and Patterson 1986). Because cock roaches have developed resistance to several insecticide classes, many pest mana gement professionals utilize a chemical rotation system to manage the resistance. In this system, chemicals are rotated by class, and in addition, suitable mixtures of chemi cals are used (Cochran 1995). Cockroaches have yet to develop resistance to insect gr owth regulators and some of the traditional cockroach controls including the slow acting in organic insecticides su ch as boric acid and diatomaceous earth. Cockroaches are, however resistant to many of the plant derived

PAGE 19

6 botanical insecticides such as pyrethrum and the syntheti c pyrethroids (Valles 2004). Cockroaches are also demonstrating resist ance to fipronil (H olbrook et al. 2003). Fipronil was introduced as a cockroach bait in 1999, so the resistance is likely a crossresistance in cockroach strains resistant to cyclodienes which have a similar mode of action (Holbrook et al. 2 003) (Table 1-1). Table 1-1. Insecticide cla sses and modes of action. Insecticide Insecticide Class Mode of Action Diatomaceous Earth Inorganic Water balance disruption Boric Acid Inorganic Feeding disruption Silicia Gel Inorganic Water balance disruption Pyrethrum Botanical Sodium channel modulator Rotenone Botanical Site I electron transport inhibitor Permethrin Pyrethroid Sodium channel modulator Bifenthrin Pyrethroid Sodium channel modulator Chlorpyrifos Organophosphate A cetylcholine esterase inhibitor Propoxur Carbamate Acetylcholine esterase inhibitor Hydroprene Insect Growth Regul ator Juvenile hormone analog Pyriproxyfen Insect Growth Regul ator Juvenile hormone mimic Hydramethylnon Amidinohydrazone Site II electron transport inhibitor Abamectin Macrocyclic lactone glyc oside Chloride channel activators Sulfluramid Sulphonamide Uncouples oxidative phosphorylation Fipronil Phenylpyrazole GAB A chloride channel blocker Thiamethoxam Neonicotinoid Ni cotinic acetylch oline receptor agonists/antagonists Imidacloprid Neonicotinoid Nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonists/antagonists Since the 1980s, targeted app lications of pesticides in a bait formulation have been used to reduce pesticide application and combat pesticide re sistance. Bait formulations to manage cockroaches is a preferred form of pest control because th e bait is placed in enclosed stations or targeted in crack and crevice areas minimizing exposure. Since most bait formulations are not aerosolized, the adve rse health effects a ssociated with spray

PAGE 20

7 applications of pesticide are also re duced. Abamectin, fipronil, imidacloprid, hydramethylnon, and sulfluramid are each available in cockroach bait formulations (Barcay 2004). Since baiting has become the pr edominant form of cockroach control, the phenomenon of behavioral aversion to th e bait formulation has been documented (Bieman et al. 1993, Silverman and Bieman 1993, Silverman and Ross 1994, Wang et al. 2004). This resistance is di fferent from the metabolic resistance where the insect detoxifies the chemical. The resistance lies in the behavior of the cockroach that reduces its exposure to a toxic substance. The cockro ach is averse to feeding on the bait matrix, usually containing glucose, thus the toxicant is not or is sparingly ingested, resulting in low to no mortality (Valles 2000). Integrated Pest Mana gement Strategies Integrated pest management was firs t put into practice by the agricultural community in an effort to protect crops (S tern et al 1959). In the 1980s the idea of integrated control migrated to the urba n environment (Kramer 2004). In 1996, Congress passed the Food Quality Protection Act. This ac t, in part, stated that federal agencies must undertake integrated pest management (IPM) (USFDA 1996). In the urban environment, integrated pest management advocates sanitation a nd exclusion along with the judicious use of insectic ides (Rust 1994). Cockroach integrated pest management models differ greatly according to the lo cation and building si tuation (Zungoli and Robinson 1986). The cockroach integrated pest management strategy that follows is a general model that can be used in most ot her urban pest situations. For an existing cockroach infestation, the first step of an integrated pest management program is to identify the pest species. Knowing the speci es of the cockroach will provide information on the biology and behavior of the organism whic h is critical in being able to manage the

PAGE 21

8 population with the least environm ental impact. Infestations can be confirmed visually or through the use of sticky traps as monitors. Sticky traps come in various shapes with or without pheromone lures. Cockroaches respond to odors from a distance, so traps may be enhanced by the addition of foodstuffs such as peanut butter, distil lers grain, or boiled raisins (Nalyanya and Schal 2001, Rust and Re irson 1981). After a set amount of time, the traps should be checked for the life st age, and numbers of a given species. The cockroach trap count will give an estimate of the population in the immediate area. The presence of nymphs will indi cate whether the cockroaches have an established breeding population in the area. Once the presence a nd location of an infestation has been determined, a treatment plan can be formed. Cultural Methods: Education and Sanitation Cultural practices involve factors that are influenced by people and their environment (Kramer 2004). Integrated pest management is people management. The first step in an integrated pest management treatment is to educate the clientele. The inhabitants of the area should be educated about the pest bi ology and behavior in relation to the problem. They should also be inform ed about monitoring and treatment measures that are planned to meet their pest problem (Rust 1994). It is important to know the attitudes and perceptions of the clientele so an effective management strategy can be implemented. Many times this is assessed by a survey of the inhabitants of the area (Robinson et al. 1981, Zungoli and Robinson 1986). To have successful management of a pest, clients must be educated on how clutte r contributes to pest problems (Schal and Hamilton 1990). Cockroaches need food, water and harborage to survive, so sanitation is an integral part of the integrated management proce ss. Sanitation includes removing clutter,

PAGE 22

9 particularly cardboard in whic h cockroaches can thrive. Sc hal (1988) demonstrated that poor sanitation, including the presence of clutter, was positively correlated with cockroach population density. Sanitation also includes removing access to food and water. For example, any open containers of food should be placed in sealable plastic containers and all trash shoul d be removed daily. Finally, sanitation also includes good housekeeping practices. Areas under and around fu rniture should be cleaned of any food debris, and grease should be cleaned from cooking areas. Th e method of cleaning is an important factor in allergen control. Cockroach alle rgens are extremely stable compounds, and may last years in the environment (Brenner et al. 1998). Mechanical Methods: Exclusion and Ph ysical Removal of Cockroaches To exclude the cockroaches, cracks and escutcheon plates should be caulked and doors and windows fitted with weather stripping and door sweeps. Once the area has been cleaned and sealed, it is important to continue monitoring as there may be a reintroduction of the pe st (Barcay 2005). Chemical Methods: Traditional Studies have been completed comparing traditional and integrated models of cockroach management in schools and public housing. Although th e authors concluded that the integrated model proved more expens ive, it was significantly more effective in suppressing and maintaining management of cockroach populations (Miller and Meek 2004). The expense evaluation in this study di d not take into account the cost of callback visits, so the actual cost of integr ated pest management may very well be less expensive than traditi onal models. Williams et al. ( 2005) demonstrated that the labor costs for integrated pest management in public schools ($6.66.47) was higher than the

PAGE 23

10 labor costs for a conventional program ($4.69 0.34); however, the cost of materials was less for the integrated progr am ($1.91.34 versus $2.80.29). Many public buildings, including schools, ar e considered sensitive environments. The utmost care should be taken when d ealing with a cockroach problem so that cockroaches and their allergens are removed without endangering the inhabitants of the building. One potential tool th at could be used as a stop-ga p cockroach control in these sensitive environments is soap. History of Soap as an Insecticide There is documentation that soaps were used as insecticides in Europe as far back as 1787 (Matsumura 1980, Shepard 1951). In 19 35, Dills and Menusan relayed that there were several thousand references in literature on the use of soaps as insecticides. Prior to 1900, fish or whale oil soaps were the most commonly used insecticidal soaps (Puritch 1981). Soaps have changed a lot since then, yet they still prov e to be an effective control of certain insect pests. Toxicity of Soap Soaps are salts of fatty acids. Fatty ac ids are long hydrocarbo n chains that are naturally derived from plant oils and animal tallow (Puritch 1981). Plants and animals have differing amounts and combinations of fa tty acids. For example, caprylic, capric, lauric and myristic acids are a ll constituents of coconut oil (Pryde 1979). Some plant oils have a large proportion of one fatty acid. Peanut oil is 51% oleic aci d, coconut oil is 48% lauric acid, while palm oil is 47% palmitic acid. Corn, sunflower and safflower oil are made mainly of linoleic acid. Animal fat such as lard contains 44% oleic acid while beef tallow is 44% linoleic acid. Tallow also contains 29% palmitic and 19% stearic acid

PAGE 24

11 (Weiss 1970). These insoluble fatty oils are di stilled or pressed from their source and are exposed to a metal radical or organic base to produce soap (Willcox 1993). As of 1992, there were 24 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) registrations for soap salts (EPA 1992). There are three docu mented active ingredients of soluble soap salts; sodium, ammonium and potassium. Potassi um salts are soft soaps that have listed uses as insecticides, acaricides, he rbicides, and algaecides (Ware 1994). Not all commercially available insecticidal soaps are pure fatty acid salts; some contain other active ingredients such as pyr ethrum or neem (Quarles 2003). These combination insecticidal soaps must be re gistered for each active ingredient. The majority of the registered fatty acid salts include C8-C18 potassium laurate, potassium myristate, potassium oleate, and potassium ricino leate. These salts may be used singly or as mixtures as the EPA considers all potassi um fatty acid salts to be the same active ingredient. Potassium fatty acid salts are generally recognized as safe by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the EPA has exempted them from tolerance levels for all raw agricultural commodities. These soft soaps, such as oleic acid, have an oral LD50 of 74,000 mg/kg which places them in the lowest toxicity category, Category IV (Nautral Toxins Research Center [NPTN] 2004). These potassium fatty acid salt s also have low to very low dermal toxicity, and may cause mild irritation if applied directly to the eyes. These salts have a half-life of less than a day and are readily broken down by soil microbes (EPA 1992). Naturally occurring fa tty acids are found in every human cell membrane and are a normal part of the human diet (Puritch 1981). While they may cause vomiting if ingested, these fa tty acids pose no known health risks (EPA 1996) and are not toxic to birds (EPA 1992).

PAGE 25

12 Chemical Structure of Fatty Acids Fatty acids are carboxylic acids. They are made of long unbranched hydrocarbon chains ending with a car boxyl group (Figure 1-1). Figure 1-1. Representative fatty acid salt chains, C8 and C18. Most naturally occurring fatty acids cont ain an even number of carbons in their chain with C16 and C18 being the most common (Weiss 1970). These chains are building blocks for more complex fatty acids that are used as energy stores in many organisms. Fatty acids may be saturated or unsaturated with unsaturated fatty acids being the most abundant in living organisms. Shorter fatty acid chains are water sol uble but become less so as the chain lengthens (Siegler and Popenoe 1925, Shepard 1951). The longer chains are viscous and form a gel in water. To increase solubility of fatty acids, a cation in the form of a mineral salt, potassium, sodium, or ammonium, must be added (E.g. potassium caprylate CH3CH2-CH2-CH2-CH2-CH2-CH2-COO-K+). The addition of the salt causes hydrolysis of the carboxyl end of the fatty acid resulting in a bond with the salt. This formation of the fatty acid chain and mineral sa lt is commonly called a fatty acid salt or soap salt. O OH O OH Capryllic acid Stearic acid

PAGE 26

13 Chemical Structure of Potassium Fatty Acid Salts The fatty acids that are most commonly used in soap production are saturated, straight chain, monocarboxylic groups with even numbered carbon members (Puritch 1981). After the fatty acid is saponified w ith potassium hydroxide, a potassium fatty acid salt is precipitated (Table 1-2). Table 1-2 Common potassium salts. Technical Name Structural Name Chemical Formula Molecular Weight K+ caprylate octanoic acid C8H15KO2 182 K+ capryate decanoic acid C10H19KO2 210 K+ laurate dodecanoic acid C12H23KO2 238 K+ myristate tetradecanoic acid C14H27KO2 266 K+ palmitate hexadecanoic acid C16H31KO2 294 K+ stearate octadecanoic acid C18H35KO2 322 K+ oleate 9-octadecanoic acid C18H33KO2 320 K+ ricinoleate ricinoleic acid C18H33KO3 336 All examples are saturated except for K+ oleate (unsaturated) and K+ ricinoleate (unsaturated alcohol). The carboxyl end of the soap salt is hydrophi lic and carries a ne gative charge. The soap has a pH of 10 and is generally used as a cleaner (Willcox 1993). When in water, the negatively charged hydrophilic ends of the soap salts repel each other forming a spherical structure called a micelle. Non-polar soil or oil particles become suspended in the micelle and are held in solution (Knowlt on 1993). This action is known as surface active, or surfactant. Although th e mode of action is unclear wh en used as an insecticide, fatty acids and their salts have been s hown to have insecticidal properties. Insecticidal Uses of Potassium Fatty Acid Salts There is documented use of soaps as inse cticides from as early as 1781 (Shepard 1951). From 1880s through the early 1900s, cottonseed oil soaps and fish oil soaps

PAGE 27

14 were used by C.V. Riley, Albert Koebele, a nd Quayle to control scale insects. In 1925, Siegler and Popenoe documented that between 90 and 99% of Anuraphis sanburni Gill, black chrysanthemum aphids, we re killed with caproic, ca pric, and lauric fatty acid sprays. Myristic acid, however, demonstrated significantly less toxicity. These sprays were mixed with equal parts benzol and gasolin e to increase the solubility of the fatty acid salt. Powdered glue was also added to some of the solutions as a colloidal stabilizer. The mortality as a result of the above additives was not documented. It was noted that soap salts, potassium, sodium, and ammonium required higher concentrations to meet the same mortality as the fatty acids plus a dditives. This was later found that fatty acid salts could produce mortality rates as high or higher than the fatty acids alone (Puritch 1975). Siegler and Popenoe noted that aphid exposure to the soap salts resulted in paralysis where the dead insect remained att ached to the plant by th eir inserted beaks. After comparing fatty acids to fatty acid sa lts, the authors surmised that the free fatty acids were the toxic agents and were ab sorbed through the insect membranes and tracheae. In 1929, Van der Meulen and Van Leeuwen found that sodium and potassium soap salts from an assortment of animal a nd plant sources produced various amounts of mortality to the Japanese beetle, Popillia japonica Newman. The highest mortalities were found from palm oil, beef tallow, and co conut oil (65-85% mortality). Beetles were treated with a drenching spray in cages with foliage, and mortality was recorded at 24 h. In 1930, the efficacy of resin fish oil soap (6%) and a commercial soap, Crystal Cocoa (2%), on harlequin bugs, Murgantia histrionica (Hahn), Colorado potato beetles, Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say), and an aphid species was test ed by dipping or spraying

PAGE 28

15 the insects (Fulton 1930). The author theo rized that the soap solution covered the spiracles with a film that bloc ked the air supply to the insect s. In order to test this hypothesis, Murgantia histrionica (Hahn ) were submerged in water for 25 minutes. All insects fully recovered and had no ill effects from the treatment. In comparison, after a five second soap exposure, 92% of the insect s were killed. To further investigate the hypothesis, India ink, as a dye marker, was added to the soap solution to visualize the penetration of the soap solution into the insect. Insects that died after soap exposure had ink that penetrated deep into the thoracic spir acles. The author concluded that soap did not cause mortality by blockage. He did note that since soap is always on hand in the household there is no reason why it should not be more extensively used as an insecticide for home gardens (Fulton 1930, p. 630). One of the most thorough studies of fatty acids and their soaps was performed by Dills and Menusan (1935). One important issu e that they addressed was the formulation changes in commercially available soaps. They found that soaps available in New York during the time of the study ranged from 30-70% water by weight. They stated that the use of soaps are not reliable because of produc t changes and that studies are of transient value because they must be repeated each time a new brand appears on the market. Instead of evaluating commercial soaps, th is study evaluated fatty acids and their potassium salts against the rose aphid, Macrosiphum rosae L., and the bean aphid, Aphis rumicus L. Because fatty acids have low solubi lity in water, sulphonated cod oil was added to the solution as an emul sifier. Aphids exposed to co d oil (0.5%) alone resulted in 9% mortality. Aphids exposed to capric acid (0.17%) and cod oil ( 0.5%) or lauric acid (0.17%) and cod oil (0.5%) resulted in the highest mortalit y at 45% and 42%

PAGE 29

16 respectively; however, there wa s some phytotoxicity. The fatt y acids that were the most toxic to the insects, lauric and capric aci ds, also caused plant injury to tomato, Lycopersicon esculentum Mill., tobacco, Nicotiana tabacum L. potato, Solanum tuberosum L., bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L. cabbage, Brassica oleracea L. and nasturtium, Tropaeolum minus L. Aphids exposed to 0.5% po tassium oleate and 0.5% potassium laurate resulted in 89% and 67% mortality respectively. The authors also compared potassium oleate with sodium oleate at concentrations from 0.125 to 1%. Mortality of 98% was reached with concentrations 0.5%. The order of toxicity of the potassium soaps at 0.5% : oleate > laurate > caprate > caprylate > myristate > palmitiae. There was no significant mortality of aphids exposed to potassium caproate and potassium stearate when compared to controls. Dills and Menusan (1935) also attempted to relate the toxicity of soaps to their surface tension measurements. Surface tensi on was measured by the drop weight method and the angle of contact was measured. The angle of contact is the angle between the solid surface and the tangent to the liquid su rface. It was concluded that neither the surface tension nor the contact angles were good indicators of effectiveness of the soaps as contact insecticides. To verify tracheal penetration of the soa p, the authors submerged aphids in 0.5% potassium oleate with carbon black dye. They observed tracheal penetration into the large tracheae. Richards and Weygandt (1945) used various solvents, including kerosenes, mineral oils, hexane, pentane, and others, to trace penetration of substances into the nervous system of mosquito larvae. Detergents incl uding Tergitol #7, and a fatty acid, oleic acid, were introduced into the respiratory siphon. None of the detergents migrated to the

PAGE 30

17 nervous tissue of the insect. The oleic ac id had good diffusion into the tracheae but had less, or erratic penetration into the nervous tissue. Soaps as an insecticide and spreading agent was evaluated in 1956 (Srivastava a nd Srivastava 1956). A spreading agent increases the surface area of a liquid allowing the liquid to wet or st ick to a surface. When plants containing the mustard aphid, Siphocoryne indo-brassicae Das.were sprayed with a 4% solution of soap (unknown type), 100% mortality was achieved. When applied to leaves, the minimum percen tage of soap needed for complete wetting was 0.2-0.5% and the surface tension of 25.23 dynes/cm spread successfully on most plants. The creation of the Environmental Prot ection Agency in 1970 prompted new research on soaps as insecticides. After an application of a 0.1% coconut oil soap spray, Aphis gossypii Glover was reduced by 79% and A. spiraecola Pagenstecher by 72% on roadside plantings in California (Pinnock et al. 1974). One study found that 1% solutions of C10 capric and C18:1 oleic acid were most effec tive on balsam woolly aphids, Adelges piceae (Ratzburg) (Puritch 1975). To increase solubility of the fatty acids, 0.1% Tween, a non-ionic surfactant, was added to the so lutions. Unlike the results of Dills and Menusan (1935), when compared with the potas sium fatty acid salts, the potassium soaps performed better than the fatty acids alone. Potassium oleate LC50 was 0.20%. Puritch continued research on the effect of potassium salts of fatty acids on forest insect pests (Pruitch 1975, Pruitch 1978). Similar results were found with the highest mortality, 80100%, at a 1% solution of C10 potassium caprate and C18:1 potassium oleate. Insects tested included the balsam woolly aphid, Adelges piceae (Ratzburg), spruce gall aphid Adelges cooleyi (Gillette), western blackheaded budworm, Acleris gloverana (Walsingham), western spruce budworm, Choristonerua occidentalis Freeman, false

PAGE 31

18 hemlock looper, Nepytia freemani Monroe, forest-tent caterpillar, Malaacosoma disstria Hubner, and the Douglas -fir tussock moth, Orgyia pseudotsugata McDonnough. Interestingly, Puritch (1978) demonstrat ed that immersions of yellow mealworm, Tenebrio molitor L. pupae in 5% solutions of olei c acid, linoleic acid, potassium oleate, and potassium linoleate caused early death. The author desc ribed the growth inhibition as juvenile hormone-like (Puritch 1978 p 108). In 1979, Ivory dishwashing liquid (Proctor and Gamble, Cincinnati, OH), A cco Highway Plant Spray soap (38.5% coconut oil soap) (Acme Chemical Co., Blue Bell, PA), Shaklees Basic laundry bar soap (Shaklee, Pleasantville, CA) and Tide detergent (Proctor a nd Gamble, Cincinnati, OH) were tested on thrips Heliothrips haemorrhoidalis (Bouche), mites, Panonychus citri (McGregor), psyllids, Psylla uncatoides (Ferris and Klyver) and aphids, Myzus persicae (Sulzer), Aphis citricola (van der Goot), and A. fabae in the home landscape (Moore et al. 1979). Ivory dishwashing liqui d at 1-2% provided the most consistent results. It was noted that soaps do not provide any residua l activity and must be applied often. Osborne provided a series of studies throughout the 1980s using soaps to control mites and plant diseases (Chase and Osborne 1983, Osborne 1982, Osborne 1984, Osborne and Henley 1982, Osborne and Pe titt 1985). Lindquist (1981) showed a reduction in the citrus mealybug on greenhouse plants when exposed to several soaps including Safers Insecticidal Soap and Murphys Oil Soap Koehler et al. (1983) found that Ivory dishwashing detergent, Acco Highway Plant Spray soap and Safers Insecticidal Soap significantly re duced numbers of whiteflies on vegetable plants. The reduction of pest numbers by the soaps was no different from an application of malathion. The authors noted that application at frequent intervals, weekly depending

PAGE 32

19 on crop, is necessary for maximum efficacy. Safer soap applications (weekly for six weeks) led to reduction in harves t weight (23%) of cabbage. Other solutions that have been tested include: a 4% solution of Fossil Flowers insecticidal soap against th e spruce budworm (Smith and Hubbes 1988), various cooking oils and liquid detergents against vegeta ble and cotton pests (B utler and Henneberry 1990, and Butler et al. 1993), a 4% solution of Impede insecticidal soap against thrips (Oetting and Latimer 1995), Safers insecticidal soap against deer ticks (Patrican and Allan 1995), a 2% solution of Mpede insecticidal soap agai nst psyllids (Weissling et al. 1997), Safers insecticidal soap against aphi ds on lettuce (Fournier and Brodeur 2000), and Savona insecticidal soap against whiteflies (Javed and Matthews 2002). It has been determined that certain fatt y acids can inhibit the growth of some crickets (McFarlane and Henneberry 1965). In one study with mosquito larvae, it was shown that fatty acid esters were not effec tive as insecticides (M axwell and Piper 1968). A 1955 test of short chain fatty acids demonstrat ed that the injection of sodium salts into various animals including dogs, rats, mice and frogs resulted in a comatose state for several minutes (Samson and Dahl 1955). A 1999 study showed that octanoic acid acts as an inhibiter to oviposition of Drosophila melanogaster Meigen and is an ovipostition stimulant to D. sechellia (Legal et al. 1999). The majority of the studies involving th e use of fatty acids and their salts as insecticides use them against softbodied in sects. A few of the previously mentioned studies from 1929 and 1930 tested soaps on hard -bodied insects such as harlequin bugs, Colorado potato beetles and Japanese beet les (Fulton 1930, and Van der Meulen and Van Leeuwen 1929). Attempts were not made on more sclerotized insects again until the

PAGE 33

20 1980s. Abbasi et al. (1984) tested two commercially ava ilable soaps, Chandrika and Surf against crickets, Gryllus sigillatus (Walker), and cockroaches, Periplaneta Americana L. When used as a contact insectic ide by splashing, a 0.5% solution of the Chandrika or Surf soaps achieved 100% mo rtality of crickets, and a 2% solution achieved 100% mortality in cockroaches. The authors theorized that the soaps cause spiracle blockage, and they noted that a soap-water spray may prove a safe and economical solution to insect pests. In 2002, Szumlas examined the behavioral responses and mortality of German cockroaches af ter exposure to Dawn dishwashing liquid (Proctor and Gamble, Cincinnati, OH) Szumlas (2002) found an overall LD50 of 0.4% and determined that females were more difficu lt to kill than nymphs or males. For a listing of selected studies using soaps agai nst arthropods refer to Table 1-3. Females exposedby a drenching spray to soap concentr ations greater than 1% resulted in 95% mortality. For all cockroach stages, exposur e to concentrations of 3% soap solution resulted in 100% mortality within 72 h. The author suggests that the mode of action is asphyxiation due to spiracle or tracheae blockage. Potential Mode of Action of Potassium Fatty Acid Salts The two most probable modes of action include cuticle disruption or spiracle blockage. Research has shown that fatty acids and their salts are contact only insecticides. They provide no residual activity. Cuticle disruption Olkowski et al. (1996) states that the mode of action of pesticidal soaps is dehydration after contact. The fa tty acid penetrates the cuticle and disrupts the cellular integrity causing leakage and collapse. Insect s susceptible to soap are often instantly paralyzed after contact. The Olympic Ho rticultural Products Insecticidal Soap 49.52

PAGE 34

21 CF label states that the mode of action is a disruption of the outer waxy layer that causes damage to the cuticle. The result is desicc ation and death. Puritc h (1981) agrees with this theory stating that the soap disrupts the lipoprotein matrix of the cellular membranes resulting in leakage and cellular death. Spiracle blockage and asphyxiation Ware (1994) combines two theories. The fi rst that the cuticle is disrupted causing the breakdown of cellular membranes and the se cond that due to the reduction of surface tension, water rushes into the spiracles re ducing oxygen availability to the insect. It seems that the majority of researchers lean towards the mechanical blockage of the spiracles or tracheae as the source of mortal ity in insects (Abbasi et al. 1984, Dills and Menusan 1935, Fulton 1930, Richards and We ygandt 1945, Szumals 2002). This theory seems plausible because soap is able to en ter and may be actively pumped in through the respiratory system of the insect. Unde r normal conditions, water cannot enter the spiracles of insects. Cockroaches undergo discontinuous gas exchange where the spiracles open and close in a gas exchange cycle (Lighton 1996). Insects also actively respire using muscles to pump air in a nd out of the tracheal system (Slama 1999, Westneat 2003). Because of this air excha nge system, many insects are able to close their spiracles, and some have a ring of hydrophobic hairs surr ounding the spiracular opening. Besides physical structures, the chem ical nature of water also aids in the waterproofing of the insect respiratory sy stem. Water has a high surface tension so cannot enter the tracheal system of insects. When the surface tensi on is reduced to half of that of water by an emulsion, the soluti on may enter the tracheae. A soap solution would be an example of this (Behrens 1964, Wilcoxon and Hartzell 1931). Once inside,

PAGE 35

22 the liquid can spread along th e walls of the tracheal tubes (Brown 1951). Tattersfield and Gimingham (1927) note that rapid paralysis occurs after soap solutions enter the tracheal system. They attribute this to haemolytic action. In summary, cockroaches in the urban e nvironment pose a health risk to humans via their allergens and potent ial to spread communicable disease. Environmental and health concerns have led many to combat the cockroach prob lem by way of an integrated pest management system including iden tification and monitoring, sanitation and exclusion, education, and chemical control. Potassium fatty acid salts have insecticidal properties and may serve as a stop-gap measure to control cockroaches in sensitive environments. Statement of Purpose The goals of this research were to firs t determine general views and behaviors of the Florida population towards common insect pests and pesticide usage. Secondly, to determine the toxicity of comme rcial blends of fatty acid salt s by a comparative bioassay. The assay considered knockdown and mortalit y by formulation type, application method, life stage and cockroach species. Thirdly, to determine the toxicity of individual fatty acid salt chains by comparison of increasing c oncentrations. Lastly to determine the mode of action of potassium fatty acid salts through electrophysio logical examination.

PAGE 36

23Table 1-3. Selected references testing va rious soap solutions against arthropods. Author and Date Insect Common Name % soap soap ~ % mortality Siegler and Popenoe 1925 Anuraphis roseus Baker rosy apple aphid Aphis pomi DeGreer green apple aphid 0.00008% capric and lauric acids >96% Aphis rumicis Linn bean aphid Anuraphis sanburni Gill black chrysanthemum aphid 0.002% caprylic acid >90% Myzus cerasi Fab black cherry aphid Macrosiphum rudbeckiae Fitch aster aphid Tattersflield and Gimingham 1927 Aphis rumicis L. bean aphid 0.5% fatty acids and salts 100% Van der Meulan and Van Leeuwen 1929 Popillia japonica Newman Japanese beetle 0.45% (sodium) coconut oil 85% 0.45% (sodium) palm oil 73% 0.45% (potassium) palm oil 70% 0.45% (potassium) beef tallow 68% Fulton 1930 Murgantia histrionica (Hahn) harlequin bug 2.00% Crysta l cocoa soap (Palmolive-Peet Co.) 92% 6.00% resin fish oil soap high Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say) Colorado potato beetle 2.00% Crystal cocoa soap (Palmolive-Peet Co.) 50% Unknown aphid from Lactuca lettuce 2.00% Crystal cocoa soap (Palmolive-Peet Co.) 97% Fleming and Baker 1934 In Shepard 1951 Popillia japonica Newman Japanese beetle ------------------------

PAGE 37

24Table 1-2 continued. Author and Date Insect Common Name % soap soap ~% mortality Dills and Menusan 1935 Aphis rumicis L. bean aphid 0.17% capric acid + 0.25% cod oil 45% 0.17% lauric acid + 0.25% cod oil 42% 0.50% sodium oleate 82% 1.00% sodium oleate 98% 0.05% potassium oleate 81% 1.00% sodium oleate 98% 0.05% oleic acid 85% 1.00% coconut oil soap 99% 1.00% palm oil soap 100% 1.00% cottonseed oil soap 100% Macrosiphum rosae (L.) rose a phid 0.05% oleic acid 89% Hyalopterus arundinis Fab. plum aphid 1.00% coconut oil soap 97% Thrips tabaci (Lindeman). onion thrips 1.00% olive oil soap 80% Srivastava and Srivastava 1956 Siphocoryne indo-brassicae Das. mustard aphid 4.00% soap 100% Pinnock et al. 1974 Aphis gossypii Glover melon aphid 1.00% coconut oil soap 79% 0.05% coconut oil soap 60% 0.01% coconut oil soap 75% Aphis spiraecola Pagenstecher green citrus aphid 1.00% coconut oil soap 72% 0.05% coconut oil soap 72% 0.01% coconut oil soap 47%

PAGE 38

25Table 1-2 continued. Author and Date Insect Common Name % soap soap ~ % mortality Puritch 1975 Adelges piceae (Ratzburg) balsam woolly adelgid 1.00% Potassium oleate 98% 1.50% Potassium caprate 30% 1.00% Potassium caprate 34% 0.50% Potassium oleate 89% 0.50% Potassium caprate 39% 0.1% Potassium oleate 23% Puritch 1987 Adelges piceae (Ratzburg) balsam woolly aphid 1.00% Potassium caprate 93% Adelges cooleyi (Gillette) spruce gall aphid 1.00% Potassium caprate 82% Acleris gloverana (Walsingham) western blackheaded budworm1.00% Potassium oleate 91% Choristoneura occidentalis Freemanwestern spruce budworm 1.00% Potassium laurate 99% Nepytia freemani Monroe false hemlock looper 1.00% Potassium caprate 99% Malacosoma disstria Hubner forest-tent caterpillar 1.00% Potassium oleate 64% Orgyia pseudotsugata McDonnough Douglas-fir tussock moth 1.00% Potassium oleate 98% Tenebrio molitor L yellow mealworms 5.00% Potassium oleate 100% Moore et al. 1979 Heliothrips haemorrhoidali (Bouche) greenhouse thrips 1.00% Acco Plant Spray 99% Panonychus citri (McGregor) citrus red mite 1.00% Ivory 85% Psylla uncatoides (Ferris and Klyver) acacia psyllid 3.00% Ivory 43% Myzus persicae (Sulzer) green peach aphid 1.50% Ivory 98% Aphis citricola (van der Goot) brown citrus aphid 1.50% Ivory 98% Aphis fabae black bean aphid 1.50% Ivory 98% Lindquist 1981 Planococcus citri citrus mealybug 0.06% Safers Insecticidal Soap 90%

PAGE 39

26Table 1-2 continued. Author and Date Insect Common Name % soap soap (up to) % mortality Osborne and Henley 1982 Tetranychus urticae Koch two-spotted spider mite 3.13% Safers Insecticidal Soap 89% Koehler et al. 1983 Trialeurodes vaporariourm (Westwood) greenhouse whitefly ----Ivory 99% 38.5% Acco Plant Spray 95% 50.5% Safers Insecticidal Soap 89% Macrosiphum euphorbiae (Thomas) potato aphid ----Ivory 34%% 38.5% Acco Plant Spray 37% 50.5% Safers Insecticidal Soap 40% Tetranychus urticae Koch two-spotted spider ----Ivory 58% 38.5% Acco Plant Spray 32% 50.5% Safers Insecticidal Soap 11% Osborne 1984 Phytoseiulus persimilis Athias-Henriot predatory mite 0.01% Insecticidal soap 100% Abbasi et al. 1984 Gryllus sigtllatus (L.) house cricket 0.5% Chandrika and Surf 100% Periplaneta Americana (L.) American cockroach 2.0% Chandrika and Surf 100% Smith and Hubbes 1988 Choristoneura fumiferana (Clemens) spruce budworm 4.0% Fossil Flowers Insecticidal Soap 100% Butler and Henneberry 1990 Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) sweetpotato whitefly 6.0% Dawn, Dove, Ivory, Joy + oils 99% Tetranychus spp. spider mites 6.0% Dawn, Dove, Ivory, Joy + oils 99%

PAGE 40

27Table 1-2 continued. Author and Date Insect Common Name % soap soap ~% mortality Butler et al. 1993 Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) sweetpotato whitefly 1.0% insecticidal soaps and detergents 100% Oetting and Latimer 1995 Neoseiulus cducumeris (Oudermans) thrips predator 4.0% insecticidal soap <50% Patrican and Allan 1995 Ixodidae scapularis Say deer tick 40% Safers Insecticidal Soap 100% Wessling et al. 1997 Cacopsylla pyricola (Foerster) pear psylla 2.0% M-Pede Insecticidal Soap N/A Fournier and Brodeur 2000 Macrosiphum euphorbiae (Thomas) potato aphid 0.25-5% Safers Insecticidal Soap 100% Myzus persicae (Sulzer) green peach aphid 0.255% Safers Insecticidal Soap 100% Nasonovia ribisnigri (Mosley) lettuce aphid 0.25-5% Safers Insecticidal Soap 100% Javed and Matthews 2002 Trialeurodes vaporariorum whitefly ----insecticidal soap 69% Szumlas 2002 Blattella germanica (L.) German cockroach 3.0% Dawn 100%

PAGE 41

28 CHAPTER 2 PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF PEST PROBLEMS Introduction Historically, insects have been an infl uential part of human culture. Insect influence can be found in our language, ar t, history, philosophy and religion (Hogue 1987, Berenbaum 2001, Capinera 2003, Capine ra 2005, Cherry 2002, Rutledge 2003.) While insects are a cultural influence, many observe them with aversion, fear and loathing (Kellert 1993). Surveys concerning insects and their control have been utilized by urban entomologists to gauge public opinion for more than a quarter of a century. Frankie and Levenson (1978) compared how city and rural residents of Texas related to insects. Wood et al. 1981 surveyed att itudes towards and knowledge of cockroaches in public housing in Virginia and Maryland. Levenson and Frankie (1983) studi ed attitudes about pests and pesticides used. They compared socioeconomic groups from Texas, California and New Jersey. In 1983, Bennett et al. survey ed people in Indiana a bout their pattern of pesticide use in homes. In Arizona, Byrne et al. (1984) surveyed public attitudes towards arthropods both in and outside the home. Zungoli and Robinson (1984) surveyed public housing residents in Virginia and Maryland fo r their attitudes rega rding the asthetic injury caused by cockroaches. Kellert (1993) su rveyed people of Connecticut about their basic values regarding inve rtebrates and their conservation. In 1995, Hahn and Ascerno surveyed the Minnesota public for their pe rceptions of urban arthropods and in 1998, Potter and Bessin conducted a telephone surv ey in Kentucky to determine attitudes

PAGE 42

29 towards urban arthropods and their perceptions about pest control prac tices. The state of Florida, with all of its pest pressures has only been addressed in a few questions by The Agriculture Institute of Florida annual su rvey (Agriculture Institute 1999). Although many of these studies have addressed the publics attitude towards insect pests, few have addressed behavioral response toward the inse cts. The objectives of this study were to address the importance of categories of ur ban pests, determine thresholds where participants exhibit behavioral changes to ta ke action against a pest and to evaluate the likelihood that people would cons ider using homemade products such as soap to solve a pest problem. Materials and Methods A survey was conducted 27 March to 4 Ma y 2004 through the office of the Florida Survey Research Center (FSRC) at the Univer sity of Florida. The survey was delivered using a computer aided telephone interview (CATI) with a randomdigit dialing (RDD) system. The telephone sample was obtain ed by generating random telephone numbers from existing area codes and prefixes from areas throughout the stat e of Florida. The FSRC makes every effort to complete survey interviews from the initial random list of telephone numbers. If an initia l call resulted in no answer, a systematic call back system was used where the number was called at a di fferent time on a different day of the week until a person was reached. If no one was r eached after four attempts, that number was deleted from the list and was replaced with a new number. If the call was answered, but the person was unable to complete the intervie w at that time, every effort was made to schedule a more convenient time for the interview. Calls we re scheduled at different times of the day on weekdays and weekends to evenly sample employed persons. Interviewers were FSRC employees who ha d been trained in telephone interview

PAGE 43

30 techniques, and interviews at the FSRC were randomly monitored by a manager for quality control. Interviewers had no prev ious entomological tr aining and were only allowed to expand on instrument questions with provided examples. The survey instrument was pilot tested prior to actual data collection to ensure that the questions and delivery methods were appropriate. Interviews (n=600) were successfully completed from a total of 4501 calls to active phone numbers. There were 1394 refusals for a response rate of 44.9% and a completion rate of 13.3%. The remainder of calls resulted in no answer after 4 attempts. The survey instrument consisted of 54 base questi ons with 62 secondary and 16 demographic questions (Appendix A). The average inte rview time was 12 min 38 sec. After completion, responses were split into two sect ions, one of questions dealing with insect pests and one with pesticide usage. The FSRC monitors gender and race to ensure that residents of the state are accurately represen ted. All interviews were made of persons over 18 years of age. Frequency tables were generated for each survey question and associations among demographic variables were tested with a Pear sons chi-square test of homogeneity (SAS Institute 2001). It is important to note that a small number of part icipants chose not to answer certain questions or responded with dont know. Percent response for each question not totaling 100% i ndicates a number of no response or do not know responses. Do not know and no respons e categories were omitted from the chisquare analysis.

PAGE 44

31 Results Demographics The survey population consisted of 61% females and 39% males. Ninety-five percent maintained full-time residency in Flor ida. A quarter of the survey population had moved to the state in the last decade, and 81% were homeowners. Pets were owned by 57% of the population and 78% kept them inside the home. Fifty-eight percent y of the population had an income greater than fifty thousand dollars per year. The average age of the survey participant was 49, and 44% of the population had a college degree (Table 2-1). The average number of adults per ho me was 2.01 and the average number of children per home was 1.99. Th irty-six percent of homes contained children under the age of 5. One quarter of the population indicate d that they were allergic to insects or insect bites and 14% indicated that they had allergies or were chemically sensitive to pesticides. More women than men indicated th at they were both chemically sensitive to pesticides and allergic to insect s and insect bites (Table 2-2). Importance of Categories of Urban Pests To begin the survey, a question was asked to allow the interviewee to focus their thoughts on the survey topic. The initial ques tion was, How harmful do you think insect pests are to your household? Insect pests being very harmful was indicated by 16% of the survey population, 52% said they were some what harmful, 30% said they were not at all harmful. Two percent said that they di d not know how harmful insect pests were to their household. Insect pests were divided into four ca tegories, crawling, flying, wood destroying, and lawn and tree pests. Examples of craw ling insects included ants and cockroaches,

PAGE 45

32 flying insects included mosquitoes, flies, and wasps, wood destroying insects included termites and lawn and tree insects included fire ants, mole crickets, and chinch bugs. A second question was asked in three parts. Which of the four categories of insect pests is the most difficult for you to control, do you think is most harmful to peoples health, and do you spend the most money trying to contro l? There were no significant differences in response to these questions based on gende r or the presence of children less than 5 years of age in the home. Fo rty-two percent of the survey respondents felt that crawling pests were the most difficult to control fo llowed by 22% that said lawn and tree pests were most difficult. Half (50%) said that flying insect pests were the most harmful followed by 30% that said crawling insects. Fifty percent of the population believed that they spent more money controlling crawling pe sts than any other pe st category (Table 23). This question addressed the perception of how much money a pe rson spent on insect control and did not qua ntify how much money was actually spent. After the initial questions, the sample of interviewees (N=600) was divided into those who indicated that they used pesticides (82%), thos e that do not use pesticides (18%) and of those non-pesticide users, thos e who would never use pesticides (8%). Factors Related to a Behavioral Change Of consumers who use pesticides, the prim ary factor for purchasing pest control products was seeing insect damage in or around the home (89%) followed by knowledge that insect pests posed a health hazard (88 %) or feeling pests were a danger to the household (85%) (Table 2-4). Of the survey population that responded very important for the following categories of pest factors in fluencing their purchase of pest control, 72% responded that seeing live insects was very important; 51% responded that knowing there was a potential for insect damage in or around their homes was very important;

PAGE 46

33 74% responded that knowing there was a health hazard associated with pests was very important and 76% responded that feeling pest s posed a danger to their family was very important. Additionally, roughly twice as many women when compared with men felt that seeing live insects was a very importa nt factor when deciding to purchase pest control (Table 2-5). In contrast to participants who use pesticides, participants who do not use pesticides felt that their primary factor for purchasing pest control products and services was feeling that insect pests posed a dange r to the family (86%), followed by seeing insect damage in or around the home (82%), and knowledge that insect pests posed a health hazard (82%) (Table 2-6). After determining what insect related f actors prompted the typical non-pesticide user to take action, the action the non-pestic ide would take against the insect pest was identified. Respondents were asked to rank how likely they would be to take a certain action against a particular cate gory of insect pests. When asked how non-pesticide users would deal with flying insects, their most likely pest control action would be to repair or install screens on windows and doors (68%), and the second most likely action was physical removal of the pest (59%) (Table 2-7). When asked how they would solve a probl em with termites, non-pesticide users would be more likely to re pair damage and eliminate w ood to ground contact (73%) and then would be likely to apply a long lasting so il or slab treatment (68%). Interestingly, 32% said that they would likely physically remove the termites (Table 2-7). The likely action against crawling insects would be exclusion by applying caulking to cracks (79%) and secondarily to spot treat as needed (63%). Lawn and tree insects

PAGE 47

34 would likely be dealt with by spot treati ng areas as needed (59%) and testing and fertilizing soil to maintain healthy plants (55%) (Table 2-7). Eight percent (N=48) of the survey populat ion indicated that they would never use pesticides. This group was asked how they d ealt with certain groups of insect pests. Choices such as physical removal by st omping, swatting, sweeping, or trapping, or exclusionary measures such as caulking cracks, screening windows and doors, and repairing wood damage, or maintaining hea lthy plants, were given. In open-ended questions, respondents were also allowed to co mment on other actions they were likely to take to combat the pests. For each pest ca tegory, respondents indicated that they were most likely to perform some exclusionary m easures to keep pests out (78% for flying insect pests, 67% for termites, 67% for crawli ng pests, and 50% for lawn and tree pests). They were also likely to physically remove th e insect pest (59% for flying insect pests, 35% for termites, 63% for crawling pests, and 35% for lawn and tree pests) (Table 2-8). Those who would never use pesticides were asked if they used other method of controls, besides physical removal or exclus ion. For flying insect control, 14% (N=7) would use another control method with 86% be ing likely or very likely to choose that alternative option. For termite control, 37% (N=18) would try a nother control method with 89% likely or very likely to choose th at option. For crawling insects, 25% (N=12) would choose another control method with 100% being likely to c hoose that option, and for lawn and tree insects 15% (N=8) would sele ct an alternative control option with 100% likely or very likely to try that option. When asked in an open-ended question a bout which control method they would use instead of exclusion or physical removal, although they claimed they would never use

PAGE 48

35 pesticides, many indicated some sort of chem ical control. Fifty-seven percent (N=4) would choose a professional or pesticide opti on for flying insects. Ninety-four percent (N=17) would hire a professional or use a pest icide to control termites. Half (50%, N=6) would use pesticides to control crawling pe sts, and 100% (N=8) would use a professional or pesticide to control lawn a nd tree pests. Some alternativ e options that were listed by the survey population included, sanitation, light traps, sprayi ng with hair spray, spraying with Lysol, using boric acid, and biological control by allowing pets to eat the pests (Table 2-9). Homemade Product Use as a Pest Management Option All respondents were asked whether they had tried any kind of homemade product, including soaps and cleaners, to control insect pests. Forty-two percent of the survey population (N=253) had tried a homemade pe st control product. Seventy percent (N=177) of those had tried their homemade pr oduct to control craw ling insects. Fewer had tried to control lawn and tree insects, 28% (N=72), fl ying insects, 15% (N=38) and wood destroying insects, 6% (N=14). In an open-ended question asking what other insects they had used the homemade product to control, 6% (N=15) of the survey population indicated that they had attempted c ontrol of garden pests including aphids and another 6% (N=15) had attempted flea cont rol. When asked how effective these homemade treatments were, 48% (N =122) felt that they were e ffective or very effective, 26% (N=65) were neutral in th eir opinion and 23% (N=59) fe lt they were ineffective. More pet owners (64.5%) were more likely to have tried a homemade pest control solution than respondents who did not own pets (35.5%) ( x2=8.05, df=1, P =0.0045). To determine which insect pests were probl ematic within the last year, respondents were asked which category of in sect pests they had combated in the last year. Crawling

PAGE 49

36 pests were the primary problem, 71% (N=428) followed by lawn pests, 55% (N=335), flying pests, 38% (N=230), garden pests, 27% (N=159), stored product pests, 13% (N=80) and termites, 10% (N=59). Discussion Sixty-eight percent of the Fl orida population felt that in sect pests were somewhat or very harmful to their household. Previous surveys found that people have an aversion to insects in their home and they would like to completely eliminate cockroaches from existence (Kellert 1993). Byrne et al. ( 1984) found that 88% of an Arizona survey population was afraid or disliked arthropods indoors, yet the arthropods listed by respondents were not structurally damagi ng, and few presented a health hazard. Similarly, Hahn and Ascerno (1991) found that 86% of a Minnesota population disliked or were afraid of indoor arthropods. A po ssible explanation for the difference in the populations is that the Arizona and Minneso ta studies focused on indoor arthropods, while this survey asked only about insect pests and did not specify a location. Also, the term pest was not defined for the survey pa rticipant, so the answ ers were based on the persons perception of a pest. The most important category of urban pest in my survey, based on perceived cost and difficulty to control, was the crawli ng pest. Additionally, 71% of the survey population in my study reportedly had a problem with crawling insects in the previous year. This response rate may be due to a lo w tolerance for crawling insects. Potter and Bessin (1998) found that the to lerance for indoor ar thropods in Kentucky was low. For example, the tolerance for crawling insects such as cockroaches was 0-1. Many public-health related i ssues, such as sting or bite reaction, and disease transmission are associated with flying inse cts. The Florida survey population perceived

PAGE 50

37 flying insects as the most harmful category of insect pests. Pest control companies are beginning to adapt to this pe rception and are including public-h ealth related pest control to their services (McKenna 2005). Many times surveys only establish attitudes and do not reveal the behaviors of the survey population. Because behavior is less likely to be influenced by extraneous variables, it is considered to be a true i ndicator of a persons attitude (Levenson and Frankie 1983). When something is of concern to a person, there is a threshold that is met before action is taken. The action in this ca se is the behavior. Pesticide users and nonpesticide users had differing thresholds when ta king action against insect pests. Pesticide users felt that seeing insect damage in or around the home was the primary impetus for taking action against insect pests by purchasi ng pest management products or services. Non-pesticide users indicated th at they took action when they felt that insect pests posed a danger to the family. This survey revealed that those participants who indicated that they would never use pesticides would in fact resort to pesticides when faced with a pest problem. Potter and Bessin (1998) reported that 96.2% of their survey population could not define integrated pest management in the cont ext of pest control. Furthermore, 66% of the survey population would be more inclined to use naturally derived products in their homes (Potter and Bessin 1998). While the public may not be able to define integrated pest management, my survey indicated that a portion of the populati on is practicing it. Besides pesticides, the Florida survey population seemed willing to try alternative control strategies including exclusion and homemade products. Controlling insect pests, mainly crawling pests, with an alte rnative control method was impor tant enough that 42% of the

PAGE 51

38 total survey population had created and used some form of homemade pest control product. Nearly half of the homemade pest control users felt that their method was effective. Conservatively, more than 20% of pest co ntrol companies in the United States are located in the state of Florida (FDACS 2005, NPMA 2005). Therefore, the motivations regarding pest management practices of the Florida population have economic implications. People are motivated by perc eived damage or danger to their home or family to act against insect pests. In 2002, $5.65 billion dollars were spent in the United States on professional pest control services and currently termites are estimated to cause over $2.5 billion dollars in damage each year (FPMA 2005). For extension entomologists and the pest c ontrol industry to properly ed ucate their clientele about reduced risk approaches to pest problems, knowledge of the attitudes and perceptions of the Florida population is important.

PAGE 52

39 Table 2-1. Demographic profile of the 600 partic ipants in the Florida perceptions of pests survey. Demographic N % respondents Gender Male 232 38.67 Female 368 61.33 Age 18-29 93 19.18 30-39 94 29.81 40-49 119 19.84 50-65 179 15.67 >65 115 15.50 Education level
PAGE 53

40Table 2-2. Demographic differences between chemically sensitiv e people and people allergic to insects and insect bites. % Response Yes No x2 df P Insect allergies Total population 25.33 71.67 Gender (n=582) Male 15.77 84.23 Female 32.50 67.50 19.93 1 <0.0001 Chemically sensitive Total population 13.83 78.67 Gender (n=555) Male 8.64 91.36 Female 19.10 80.90 11.44 1 0.0007

PAGE 54

41Table 2-3. Response to the question, "Which of th e following categories of insect pests . Which of the following categories. . N pest category % responses is most difficult to control? 589 flying 14.83 crawling 41.67 wood destroying 15.83 lawn and tree 22.17 is most harmful? 566 flying 49.67 crawling 29.67 wood destroying 7.83 lawn and tree 5.50 costs more to control? 580 flying 9.50 crawling 49.50 wood destroying 16.67 lawn and tree 17.17 Percent response for each question not to taling 100% indicates a number of no response or do not know responses.

PAGE 55

42Table 2-4. Pesticide users reasons for purchasing pest co ntrol products or services and their importance (N=492). % Response1 Question important2 neutral not important3 Seeing live insects in or around your home 85.16 9.35 5.08 Seeing dead insects in or around your home 56.09 20.33 22.16 Seeing insect damage in or around your home 89.03 4.88 4.67 Knowing the potential for insect damage in or around your home 71.34 19.51 7.73 Knowing there is a health hazard associ ated with pests 87.60 6.71 4.88 Feeling pests pose a danger to your family 84.96 7.32 6.71 1Percent response for each quest ion not totaling 100% indicates a number of no response or do not know responses. Responden ts were allowed to select multiple reasons for purchasing pest control services. 2Survey categories very important and somewhat important were combined 3Survey categories not important and somewhat unimportant were combined

PAGE 56

43Table 2-5. Responses for pest factors influencing purchase of pest control products or services based on gender. % Response Not Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very x2 df P important unimportant important important Seeing live insects Gender (n=490) Male 50.00 46.15 54.35 53.03 33.99 Female 50.00 53.85 45.65 46.97 66.01 14.59 4 0.0056 Percent of total 2.45 2.65 9.39 13.47 72.04 Knowing there is a potential for inse ct damage in or around your home Gender (n=485) Male 29.41 47.62 48.96 49.02 30.92 Female 70.59 52.38 51.04 50.98 69.08 16.45 4 0.0025 Percent of total 3.51 4.33 19.79 21.03 51.34

PAGE 57

44Table 2-5 continued % Response Not Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very x2 df P important unimportant important important Knowing there is a health hazard associated with pests Gender (n=488) Male 70.00 42.86 57.58 50.00 34.35 Female 30.00 57.14 42.42 50.00 65.65 15.73 4 0.0034 Percent of total 2.05 2.87 6.76 14.34 73.98 Feeling that pests pose a danger to your family Gender (n=487) Male 64.29 42.11 61.11 52.08 34.59 Female 35.71 56.89 38.89 47.92 65.41 17.61 4 0.0015 Percent of total 2.87 3.90 7.39 9.86 75.98 Response columns for male and female total 100%.

PAGE 58

45Table 2-6. Non-pesticide users rank of the importance of some r easons for purchasing pest contro l products or services (n=59). %Response1 Question important2 neutral not important3 Seeing live insects in or around your home 67.86 19.64 10.72 Seeing dead insects in or around your home 55.36 16.07 28.57 Seeing insect damage in or around your home 82.15 8.93 8.93 Knowing the potential for insect dama ge in or around your home 64.29 16.07 16.07 Knowing there is a health hazard associated with pests 82.14 10.71 5.36 Feeling pests pose a danger to your family 85.71 7.14 7.14 1Percent response for each quest ion not totaling 100% indicates a number of no response or do not know responses. Responden ts were allowed to select multiple reasons for purchasing pest control services. 2Survey categories very important and somewhat important were combined 3Survey categories not important and somewhat unimportant were combined

PAGE 59

46Table 2-7. Response from non-pesticide users to the question, "How likely are you to take that (p est control) action to solve a problem? (n=59) % response1 Insect Problem Pest Control Solution likely2 neutral not likely3 Flying insects (flies, mosquitoes, and wasps) Apply a long lasting spray 33.92 25.00 41.08 Fog the area as needed 35.71 16.07 48.21 Physical removal by swatti ng, sweeping or trapping 58.93 16.07 23.22 Repair or install screens on windows or doors 67.85 10.71 21.43 Termites Apply a long lasting soil or slab treatment 67.86 3.57 19.65 Spot treat or bait as needed 62.50 16.07 16.07 Physical removal by stomping, sweeping or trapping 32.15 10.71 53.57 Repair damage and eliminate wood to ground contact 73.21 8.93 14.29

PAGE 60

47Table 2-7 continued % response1 Insect Problem Pest Control Solution likely2 neutral not likely3 Crawling insects (cockroaches, fleas and ants) Apply a long lasting spray 51.78 19.64 26.78 Spot treat or bait as needed 62.50 12.50 19.64 Physical removal by swatti ng, sweeping or trapping 58.93 21.43 19.65 Apply caulking to cracks to pr event insect entrance 78.57 10.71 10.72 Lawn and tree insects (mole cric kets, chinch bugs, fire ants) Apply a long lasting spray 48.22 25.00 19.65 Spot treat the area as needed 58.93 19.64 17.86 Physical removal by trapping 25.00 21.43 51.79 Test and fertilize soil to maintain plant health 55.35 17.86 21.43 1Percent response for each que stion not totaling 100% indicates a number of no response or do not know responses. Respondents were allowed to select multiple reasons for purchasing pest control services. 2Survey categories very likely and somewhat likely were combined 3Survey categories not likely and somewhat unlikely were combined

PAGE 61

48Table 2-8. Response of people who would neve r use pesticides to the que stion: "How likely would you be to take the following actions to solve a pest problem in or around your home? (n=48) % response Insect Problem Pest Control Solution likely neutral not likely Flying insects (flies, mosquitoes, and wasps) Physical removal by swatting, sweeping or trapping 59.18 10.20 28.57 Repair or install screens on windows or doors 77.55 6.12 14.28 Termites Physical removal by stompi ng, sweeping or trapping 34.69 10.20 51.02 Repair damage and eliminate wood to ground contact 67.34 8.16 20.41 Crawling insects (cockroaches, fleas and ants) Physical removal by swatting, sweeping or trapping 63.27 12.24 22.45 Apply caulking to cracks to pr event insect entrance 67.35 12.24 16.32 Lawn and tree insects (mole cric kets, chinch bugs, fire ants) Physical removal by trapping 34.70 8.16 51.02 Test and fertilize soil to maintain plant health 46.93 10.20 38.77 1Percent response for each quest ion not totaling 100% indicates a number of no response or do not know responses. Responden ts were allowed to select multiple reasons for purchasing pest control services. 2Survey categories very likely and somewhat likely were combined. 3Survey categories not likely and somewhat unl ikely were combined.

PAGE 62

49 49Table 2-9. Comments specified by people who indicat ed they would never use pesticides (n=48). Insect Problem Control Solution Numb er of responses % of never use population Flying insects (flies, mosquitoes, and wasps) (N=7) Use a light trap 1 2.08 Call an exterminator/professional or use a pesticide 4 8.33 Remove food sources 1 2.08 Spray with hair spray 1 2.08 Termites (N=18) Call an exterminator/professiona l or use a pesticide 17 35.42 Alternative recourse 1 2.08 Crawling insects (cockroaches, fleas and ants) (N=12) Clean area and eliminate food source 3 6.25 Spray with Lysol 1 2.08 Use boric acid 1 2.08 Let cat eat the insects 1 2.08 Call an exterminator/professiona l or use a pesticide 6 12.50

PAGE 63

50 50Table 2-9 continued. Insect Problem Control Solution Numb er of responses % of never use population Lawn and tree insects (mole crickets chinch bugs, fire ants) (N=8) Call an exterminator/professiona l or use a pesticide 8 16.67 These comments were open ended responses given when asked what ot her action they would take in c ontrolling a part icular categor y of insect pests.

PAGE 64

51 CHAPTER 3 PUBLIC ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOR S TOWARDS HOUSEHOLD PESTICIDE USAGE Introduction To combat arthropods in or around their home and to improve aesthetics, people rely on pesticides (Potter and Bessin 1998). Bennett et al. (1983) in Indiana, and Byrne and Carpenter (1983) in Arizona, found that 78 and 87.1% of their survey population, respectively, used pesticides in or around th eir homes. Florida, with its temperate and tropical ecosystems, has pest pressures year round. The Agriculture Institute of Florida found that 82.2% of the Florida public felt that the hom e use of pesticides for pest control was important to their lifestyle, and nearly half of those indicated that they hired professional services to manage their pest problems (Ag Institute 1999). In a state with over 17 million residents, these factors have lead to a booming pest control industry. In 2005, the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services listed 2500 pest control companies with 4300 certified operators and 250 special identification card holders. For pests to be ma naged effectively and pesticides to be used safely, consumers must understand what the pest problem is and what options they have in solving it. Understanding how the public feels about sc ience and technology can help us to determine how public policy is decided (Wei ss and Rajotte 2001). As an example, in September 2005, Senator Frank Lautenberg (Dem ocrat-NJ) reintroduced legislation to the United States Senate for the School Envi ronmental Protection Act (SEPA). This

PAGE 65

52 potential law would restrict th e use of pesticides in and around schools and would require schools to notify parents prior to pesticid e applications (US Senate 2005). School integrated pest management (IPM) programs have increased in many states because of childrens environmental health concerns. Integrated pest ma nagement is the process of using a variety of technologi cal and management practices to achieve long-term, environmentally sound pest suppression. Nine percent of the 2004 growth market for pest control was in IPM contra cts (McKenna 2005) with a vast majority of the companies claiming they offer some form of IPM service. Knowing the audience is a basic principle of marketing (Frankie et al. 1996). For IPM practices to work in home pest control, the audience pe rceptions must be addressed. The objective of this study wa s to evaluate pesticide use patterns and satisfaction with non-chemical control methods. Materials and Methods A survey was conducted 27 March to 4 Ma y 2004 through the office of the Florida Survey Research Center (FSRC) at the Univer sity of Florida. The survey was delivered using a computer aided telephone interview (CATI) with a randomdigit dialing (RDD) system. The telephone sample was obtain ed by generating random telephone numbers from existing area codes and prefixes from areas throughout the stat e of Florida. The FSRC makes every effort to complete survey interviews from the initial random list of telephone numbers. If an initia l call resulted in no answer, a systematic call back system was used where the number was called at a di fferent time on a different day of the week until a person was reached. If no one was r eached after four attempts, that number was deleted from the list and was replaced with a new number. If the call was answered, but the person was unable to complete the intervie w at that time, every effort was made to

PAGE 66

53 schedule a more convenient time for the interview. Calls we re scheduled at different times of the day on weekdays and weekends to evenly sample employed persons. Interviewers were FSRC employees who ha d been trained in telephone interview techniques, and interviews at the FSRC were randomly monitored by a manager for quality control. Interviewers had no prev ious entomological tr aining and were only allowed to expand on instrument questions with provided examples. The survey instrument was pilot tested prior to actual data collection to ensure that the questions and delivery methods were appropriate. Interviews (N=600) were successfully completed from a total of 4501 calls to active phone numbers. There were 1394 refu sals for a response rate of 44.9% and a completion rate of 13.3%. The remainder of calls resulted in no answer after 4 attempts. The survey instrument consisted of 54 base questions with 62 secondary and 16 demographic questions (Appendix A). The average interview time was 12 min 38 s. After completion, responses were split into tw o sections, one of questions dealing with insect pests and one with pesticide usage. The FSRC monitors gender and race to ensure that residents of the state are accurately represented. All interviews were made of persons over 18 years of age. Frequency tables were generated for each survey question and associations among demographic variables were tested with a Pear sons chi-square test of homogeneity (SAS Institute 2001). It is important to note that a small number of part icipants chose not to answer certain questions or responded with dont know. Percent response for each question not totaling 100% i ndicates a number of no response or do not know

PAGE 67

54 responses. Do not know and no respons e categories were omitted from the chisquare analysis. Results Responses of Consumers That Utilize Pesticides Eighty-two percent of people us e pesticides in their home or yard. Indoor pesticide use was indicated by 34% of pesticide users, outdoor use by 43% a nd pesticide use both indoors and outdoors by 23%. The percent of pesticide users that sometimes use pesticides indoors was 75%, and 71% outdoors. About 22% and 25% respectively used pesticides often in those locations. Of the survey population that said they di d not used pesticides (18% of the total survey population), 86% believed that they were chemically sensitive. Interestingly, of the survey population that sa id they did use pesticides (82% of the total survey population), 68% also said that they believed themselves to be chemically sensitive ( x2=16.13, df=1, P <0.0001). Of those surveyed who use pesticides, 79% use over-the-counter (OTC) pesticides and 54% use professional services. That im plies that a quarter of consumers use both over-the-counter pesticides and professional services to contro l their pest problems. The majority of all survey respondents expre ssed a willingness to use over-the-counter pesticides at all income levels (Table 3-1) More over-the-counter pesticide users have used spray pesticides (89%) and have used a spray formulation most often (56%) than other common over-the-counter formulations (Table 3-2). These over-the-counter pesticide users (82%) indicated that they use over-the-counte r products less than once per month. The majority of those who utilize pr ofessional services have scheduled service, monthly (24%), quarterly (18%) or annually (17%). Another 33% of professional pest

PAGE 68

55 control consumers have irregul ar service less than 12 times a year and about 5% require pest control services more than once per month. To establish important factors that influe nce consumers to employ either over-thecounter or professional pest co ntrol services, the interviewe es were asked the importance of cost, convenience, odor and residue, effec tiveness, safety, and ma nufacturer reputation in the decision for them to purchase products. The most important factor in purchasing both over-the-counter pesticides and professional pest contro l services was effectiveness in killing pests. Of those respondents w illing to purchase professional pest control products or services, 60% had in comes >$25,000 (Table 3-3). Effectiveness in killing pests, safety for household members, odor and residue, and convenience each had similar ratings when comparing over-the-counter versus professional services. Cost and reputation of the manufacturer were important factors to 81.7% of respondents when purchasing professi onal services. Of respondents purchasing over-the-counter products, 58.9% said that reputation of the manufacturer was an important variable (Table 3-4). Of people who believed they suffered from allergies to insects, 45.1% responded that cost was a very important factor influencing the purchase of over-the-counter pesticides. Of the survey population, bot h males (74.5% of all males) and females (89.1% of all females) rated safety of hous ehold members as a very important factor influencing the purchase of over-t he-counter pesticides. Finally, of all the females in the survey population, 66.4% rated odor and residue as a very importa nt factor in influencing the purchase of over-the-counter pesticides; wh ile 41.8% of all males rated odor as very important (Table 3-5).

PAGE 69

56 Both male (77.1% of all male responde nts) and female (89.8% of all female respondents) believed that safety of househol d members was a very important factor in influencing the purchase of prof essional pest control products or service. (Table 3-6). Of those stating that they used over-the-c ounter pesticide, 83% indicated that they spot treated a pest prone area, 57% repaired screens or cr acks, 43% applied a residual spray and 41% physically removed the pest. Physically removing the pest was deemed an effective method of pest control by 76% of those stating that they used over-thecounter pesticides. Of over-the-counter pest icide users, 70% indicated that they were likely to read all of the label instructions on a pesticide that they had never previously used. Professional pest control users indicate d that 70% of the time believed that professionals used residual sprays, 52% spot treated pest prone areas, 12% physically removed the pest, and 15% made repairs to screens or caulk cracks. Although only 12% physically removed the pest by vacuuming or trapping, it was deemed an effective pest control method by 48% those who used profession al pest control services or products. Since IPM strategies focus on excluding pests, consumers who hire professional pest control services were asked if they woul d consider hiring a pr ofessional service to repair window screening and wood damage and cau lk cracks to exclude pests. Fifty-five percent said that they would likely hire such a service w ith 20% being neutral to the concept and 23% saying that they were unl ikely to employ such a service. The professional pest control consumers were then asked how satisfied they would be if their professional service could control their pest problem without spra ying any pesticides.

PAGE 70

57 Only 3% said they would not be satisfied w ith 87% saying they would be satisfied with an effective pest control strategy wit hout utilizing pesticidal sprays. Responses of Consumers That Do Not Utilize Pesticides Interviewees who indicated that they do not use pesticides (18% of the survey population) were divided on whether they would, 55%, or would never, 45%, use pesticides. Those who said that they w ould consider using pesticides indicated a preference for outdoor use (64%) over indoor use (22%). If needed, 42% said that they would use pesticides to control crawling ins ects, 24% indicated use to control lawn and tree pests, 17% to control wood destroying pest s and 12% to control flying pests. Nonpesticide users said that they would consider the use of over-the-count er pesticides (81%) and professional pest control services (69 %) if they judged that pest control was necessary. To ascertain what would persuade non-pest icide users to purcha se over-the-counter pesticides or professional pest control services, interviewees were asked to rate the importance of cost, convenience, odor a nd residue, effectiveness, safety, and manufacturer reputation. The most important factor in purchasing both over-the-counter pesticides and professional pest control servic es was effectiveness in killing pests (92 and 88%, respectively). The second influencing f actor was safety of household members (88 and 93%, respectively). Odor and residue, convenience and cost were more important factors when deciding to purchase professi onal pest services ( over over-the-counter products 88, 73, 54% and 60, 50, and 29% respec tively) (Table 3-7). The non-pesticide users specified that 56% would be willi ng, 20% were neutral and 24% would be unwilling to hire a professional pest control service to repair window screening, fix wood damage and caulk cracks.

PAGE 71

58 Responses of Consumers That Would Never Utilize Pesticides Consumers that indicated that they woul d never use pesticides (n=48, 8% of the survey population) were asked to select all applicable reasons for their concern from a list or provide an open ended res ponse detailing their reasons fo r not using pesticides. The instrument-provided list of re sponses included, allergies or chemical sensitivity, safety concerns, health concerns, or no need of pe sticides. Health and safety were equally weighted as primary concerns, 35.4%. Fewe r respondents indicated that they did not need pesticides (19%) or were chemically sens itive or allergic to pe sticides (16.7%). In the open ended comments, 8% indicated e nvironmental concerns associated with pesticide use, 4% expressed concern over usin g pesticides with children living in the home and 4% stated that a lack of pesticid e knowledge deterred thei r use of pesticides. Other comments included the use of oatmeal fo r pest control, allowing pets to eat the insects, and not having a de sire to kill any insect. Responses of All Consumers A final question was asked to the interview ee asking them if they would regard as credible, a pest control company that adve rtised pest elimination that was healthconscious and environmentally friendly. Responses were that 39% of the survey population would consider that statement to be credible, 31% were neutral and 26% considered it to be unrealistic. Demographics The survey population consisted of 61% fema les and 39% males. The majority of the population, 95%, were full-time residents of Florida. A quarter of the survey population had moved to the state in the last decade, and 81% were home owners. Pets were owned by 57% of the population with 78% keeping them inside the home. The

PAGE 72

59 majority of the population, 58%, had an income greater than $50K per year. The average age of the survey particip ant was 49, and 44% of the population had a college degree (Table 3-8). The average number of adults per ho me was 2.01 and the average number of children per home was 1.99. There were 36% of homes with children under the age of 5. One quarter of the population indi cated that they were allergic to insects or insect bites and 14% indicated that they had allergies or were chemically sensitive to pesticides (Table 3-8). Of the women respondents 32.5% in dicated that they ha d insect a llergies, compared with 15.8% of male respondents. Of the women respondents 19.1% indicated that they were chemically sensitive to pesticides, compared with 8.6% of male respondents (Table 3-9). Discussion This survey was designed to not only judge the attitudes of the population, but to also gauge the behavior. Indica tors of behavior are considered to be the truest measure of a persons attitude (Leavenson and Frankie 19 83). Indicators used in this survey were, for example, formulations of pesticides used as opposed to just pe sticide use in general and what actions are taken to combat pest s as opposed to, do you take action? This study indicated that a la rge portion of the public util izes pesticides (82%). The large percentage of pesticide users is no t out of line with prev ious studies throughout the United States. Frankie and Leavenson ( 1978) found that an average of 66% of the Texas survey population used insecticides indoors and 47% outdoors. In a different study, Leavenson and Frankie, 1983, documented that 62% of Texans used pesticides indoors with an average of 10 applications per year, and 52% used pesticides outdoors. Bennett et al. (1983) found that pesticide us e was the most common pest control method

PAGE 73

60 used in the home and that an average of 79% of the Indiana survey population used pesticides. In 1999, the Florida Agriculture In stitute documented that 82% of the Florida public considered home use of pesticides to be very or somewhat important to their lifestyle. Based on willingness to use pesticides, you would surmise that the population had a positive demeanor regarding pesticides. This is a perception that is difficult to access because people are sensitive when it comes to infestations and there are psychological influences in their actions against insect pests (Majekodunmi et al. 2002). Byrne and Carpenter (1986) concluded th at homeowners do not weigh the risks and benefits of pesticide use when confronted with a pest pr oblem. Since most people, 86%, dislike or are afraid of arthropods in the home (Hahn and Ascerno 1995), it would make sense that they would forgo apprehension of pesticide use to remove the pest problem. In any case, whether people consider pests to be harmfu l or not, most are willing to use pesticides both indoors (57%) and outdoors (66%) to control them. Of a variety of pest control methods, pe ople considered physical removal of pests to be the most effective, although not the most frequently employed, method of pest control. This was true of both over-the-counter and professional pest control users. All label instructions for a novel pesticide were said to be read before use by 70% of the survey population. This number may be skew ed because of the inhibition of people to admit that they have not read the instructi ons for a potentially dangerous substance they are using in their home. Frankie and Leavenson (1978) documented that 90% of the population felt that pesticides did good with only 16% believing that pesticides c ould do harm. Although

PAGE 74

61 pesticides, especially spray formulations, ar e still primarily used, pesticide applicators may soon add screening and caulkin g to their service vehicle. Fifty-five percent of the Florida survey population indicated that they would hire a professional to make repairs, including screening and caulking, to exclude inse ct pests. Eighty-seven percent specified that they would be satisfied w ith a professional pest control service that could effectively control pests without using pesticidal sp rays. Although the population seems willing shift from pesticidal spray formulations they are still guarded when it comes to certain pest control claims. Only 39% of intervie wees believed that a pest control company could do an effective job while being envi ronmentally friendly and health conscious. Spray and bait formulations are the most popularly used formulation types amongst this population. When considering factors that may influence purchase of over-thecounter or professional pest co ntrol services, pesticide user s and non-pesticide users alike felt that effectiveness in killing pests a nd safety for household members were the two primary influences. Cost was less of an infl uence for over-the-counter purchases than for professional services and was even less of a factor for non-pesticide users than pesticide users. Reputation of the manufacturer was more of a purchasing influence for professional services for both pesticide and non-pe sticide users. It is important to note that the term manufacturer was not defined to the interviewee and could mean either the chemical manufacturer or the service provider. A small percentage by comparison, 18%, si gnified that they were not pesticide users. Of that 18%, nearly half, 45% (8% of total population), indicated that they would never use pesticides. Health and safety were the primary reasons for this groups unwillingness to utilize pesticides.

PAGE 75

62 This survey only reached homes with had active telephones. Th ere were a larger proportion of female respondents (61%) than the Florida census indicated for the state population (51.2%) (US census 2000). One quarter of the survey population indicated an allergy to insects or insect bites and 14% considered themse lves chemically sensitive. More women than men indicated that they we re both chemically sensitive to pesticides and allergic to insects and insect bites. The survey population was well educated with 44.33% having college degrees as compared to only 23.3% of the Florida population. A higher percentage of the survey populati on was homeowners, 80.5%, as compared to 70.1% in the 2000 Florida census population. Most consumers, regardless of their age, residential status, or educational level, mainly rely on pesticides to remediate their pest problems. Not only does a high percentage (79%) of the Flor ida population use over-the-counter pesticides, but a large number (54%) hire professional services to co mbat their pest problems. Both pesticide users and the non-pesticide user s agree that effectiveness is the number one determinant for purchasing pest control services be it ove r-the-counter or profe ssional. Those who do purchase professional pest control services c onsider cost and manufact urer reputation in their decision to purchase the service. No matter what pesticide formulation is used by either homeowners with over-the-counter pr oducts or professionals with professional grade products, consumers consider physical rem oval of the pest to be the most effective method of pest control. While that stat ement seems like it would lead you to the conclusion that consumers would embrace a more environmentally friendly type of pest control, less than half (3 9%) of the survey population be lieved that a pest control

PAGE 76

63 company that advertised pest elimination th at was health-conscious and environmentally friendly was credible.

PAGE 77

64Table 3-1. Demographic responses for willi ngness to use over-the-counter pesticides. % Response Yes No x2 df P Income Range (n=319) $25-34,999 92.11 7.89 $35-49,999 83.75 16.25 $50-74,999 81.01 18.99 $75-99,999 79.63 20.37 >$100,000 64.71 35.29 13.74 4 0.0082

PAGE 78

65Table 3-2. Formulation preference of ove r-the-counter pesticide users (N=387). Formulation n % responses for use % used most often Sprays 345 89.14 56.32 Baits 172 44.40 8.30 Traps 87 22.50 4.69 Granular Products 169 43.67 24.19 Dusts 84 21.70 6.50 Percent response for each question not tota ling 100% indicates a number of no res ponse or do not know responses. Responden ts were allowed to select multiple formulations.

PAGE 79

66Table 3-3. Demographic responses for willingness to us e professional pest contro l products or services. % Response Yes No x2 df P Household income (n=428) <$25,000 39.74 57.14 >$25,000 60.26 42.86 7.77 1 0.0053

PAGE 80

67Table 3-4. Importance of purchasing variable s from pesticide users for over-the-counter and professional pest control services (n=387). % response over-the-counter % response professional Variable important neutral not im portant important neutral not important cost 40.83 34.37 24.03 58.93 27.00 13.68 convenience 68.22 20.16 10.83 69.97 18.63 10.26 odor and residue 74.67 11.63 13.18 78.32 11.03 9.50 effectiveness in killing pests 96.64 2.07 1.29 95.81 1.90 1.90 safety for household members 92.24 3.88 3.88 94.68 2.66 2.66 reputation of the manufacturer 58.91 22.74 17.57 81.74 10.65 6.84 Percent response for each question not tota ling 100% indicates a number of no res ponse or do not know responses. Responden ts were allowed to select multiple influences.

PAGE 81

68Table 3-5. Demographic responses for factors infl uencing purchase of over-t he-counter pesticides. % Response Not Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very x2 df P important unimportant important important Importance of cost Insect allergies (n=372) Yes 14.71 3.92 29.41 6.86 45.10 No 15.19 11.11 36.67 12.96 24.07 18.73 4 0.0009 Safety for household members Gender (n=387) Male 1.27 3.82 5.10 15.29 74.52 Female 2.17 0.87 3.04 4.78 89.13 19.14 4 0.0007 Importance of odor and residue Gender (n=385) Male 8.97 14.10 16.03 19.23 41.67 Female 2.62 3.93 8.73 18.34 66.38 33.45 4 <0.0001

PAGE 82

69Table 3-6. Demographic responses for fact ors influencing purchase of professiona l pest control products or services. % Response Not Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very x2 df P important unimportant important important Importance of safety for household members Gender (n=263) Male 1.04 1.04 2.08 18.75 77.08 Female 1.80 1.20 2.99 4.19 89.82 15.18 4 0.0043

PAGE 83

70Table 3-7. Importance of purchasing variable s from non-pesticide users for over-the-count er and professional pest control servi ces (n=59). % response over-the-counter % response professional Variable important neutral not impor tant important neutral not important cost 29.16 22.92 47.91 53.66 29.27 17.08 convenience 50.00 27.08 20.84 73.17 21.95 4.88 odor and residue 60.41 16.67 20.84 87.81 9.76 2.44 effectiveness in killing pests 91.67 6.25 2.08 95.12 0.00 4.88 safety for household members 87.50 6.25 4.17 92.68 0.00 7.32 reputation of the manufacturer 54.15 20.83 20.84 85.36 9.76 4.88 Percent response for each question not tota ling 100% indicates a number of no res ponse or do not know responses. Responden ts were allowed to select multiple influences.

PAGE 84

71 Table 3-8. Demographic profile of the 600 partic ipants in the Florida perceptions of pest management survey. Demographic N % respondents Gender Male 232 38.67 Female 368 61.33 Age 18-29 93 19.18 30-39 94 29.81 40-49 119 19.84 50-65 179 15.67 >65 115 15.50 Education level
PAGE 85

72Table 3-9. Demographic differences between chemically sensitiv e people and people allergic to insects and insect bites. % Response Yes No x2 df P Insect allergies Total population 25.33 71.67 Gender (n=582) Male 15.77 84.23 Female 32.50 67.50 19.93 1 <0.0001 Chemically sensitive Total population 13.83 78.67 Gender (n=555) Male 8.64 91.36 Female 19.10 80.90 11.44 1 0.0007

PAGE 86

73 CHAPTER 4 TOXICITY OF COMMERCIALLY AVAI LABLE DISHWASHING DETERGENTS AND HOUSEHOLD CLEANERS ON COCKROACHES BLATTELLA GERMANICA (L.), AND PERIPLANETA AMERICANA (L.) Introduction Concern over health implications from the use of residual and broad spray treatments for management of cockroaches, Blattella germanica (L.) and Periplaneta americana (L.), in sensitive environments has expe dited research on insecticides of low mammalian toxicity. For over 200 years, soaps, especially potassium salts, or soft soaps have been reported to exhibit insecticidal pr operties. Most of the research has been conducted on soft-bodied insects such as whiteflies (Butler et al. 1993, Javed and Matthews 2002), aphids (Fournier and Brode ur 2000, Fulton 1930, Pinnock et al. 1974), scales (Riehl and Carman 1953), mites (O sborne 1984), thrips (Oetting and Latimer 1995), mealybugs (Lindquist 1981), and ticks (P atrican and Allan 1995). In the 1920s and 1930s, research was done on heavily chitini zed insects such as Japanese beetles (van der Meulen and Van Leeuwen 1929), harlequi n bugs (Fulton 1930), and Colorado potato beetles (Fulton 1930). With the discovery of pesticides, such as DDT in 1939, research on the insecticidal properties of soaps was intermittent and did not appear to resurface in the literature again until the 1970s and 80s where it was us ed against various plant pests (Pinnock et al. 1974, Puritch 1975, 1978; Osborne and Henley 1982). Soft soaps were registered as pesticides in 1947. Currently so ft soaps, including potassium salts of fatty acids, are considered to be in secticides, acaricides, herbicides, and algaecides. As a food

PAGE 87

74 substance, they are generally recognized as safe by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). With the need for least hazardous pest management in sensitive environments, soaps and detergents should be more extens ively investigated as a pest management option. Comparing the toxicity of several dishwashing liquid brands, formulations, and application methods has not been previously reported. Additionally, the toxicity of household cleaners against cockroaches has not been documented. The purpose of this study was to determine the knockdown and mortality of German and American cockroaches after exposure to commercially available household dishwashing detergents and cleaners with differe nt application methods. Materials and Methods Insects B. germanica and P. americana were reared in plastic tubs with harborage. Dry food (Lab Diet 5001 rodent Diet, PMI Nutri tion International, In c., Brentwood, MO) and water were provided ad libitum Cockroaches were maintained at 23.6 2.5C and 51 16% RH with a photoperiod of 12:12 (L:D). Adult males, B. germanica and P. americana, and gravid females, B. germanica were randomly selected and removed from the colony with featherweight forceps, sepa rated by sex, and held in separate clothcovered Mason glass jars (0.946 liter) with f ood and water. Cloth c overs were held in place by a rubber band. Adult males were remove d from the colony within 24 h of trial. After the nymphs emerged, adult females we re discarded and first and second instar nymphs were held until trial.

PAGE 88

75 Immersion Assay The toxicity of commercially availabl e dishwashing detergents and household cleaners was tested using a modified Corn well immersion technique against German cockroaches (Cornwell 1976). The PVC imme rsion apparatus (15 by 10 cm diam.) was coated with a 1:1 mixture of petroleum jelly/m ineral oil within appr oximately 5 cm of the upper interior rim of to prevent cockroach es from escaping. The lower end of the apparatus was covered with nylon mesh (Inte x strainer, Reaves and Co., Durham, NC) and held in place by a rubber band. Unanesthe tized cockroaches were removed from the holding jar and placed into the immersion appa ratus. The fluid level in the reservoir came to just below the petroleum jelly coati ng to ensure that the cockroaches would be fully wetted. Upon initiation of the trial, the apparatus was lowered into the solution then gently shaken to ensure that all cockroach es were submerged. After a 30 s immersion, the apparatus was lifted from the reservoi r and allowed to drain for 15 s. The cockroaches were removed with featherwei ght forceps to clean, cloth-covered jars containing food, water, and harbor age as previously described. The toxicity of Palmolive Green Apple dishwashing liquid (product no. 47937) (Colgate-Palmolive, New York, NY) was tested on adult male German cockroaches. The soap was mixed at 0.33%, 0.7%, 1.4 % (vol:vol ) with tap water for a total volume of 400 ml. Tap water was selected because it w ould be the most likely solvent a homeowner would use. Tap water was used as the untreated control. Soap solutions were stirred for 30 s. Excess foam was skimmed from the liqui d surface prior to trial. Solutions were mixed at ambient temperature and a fres h solution was mixed for each repetition. Six replications of 10 male adults were run at 0.33% and 0.7%, while 11 replications of 10 male adults were run at 1.4%. Cockroaches were immersed for ~30 s.

PAGE 89

76 Percent knockdown immediately after immersion and mortality at 1, 3 and 24 h were recorded. Knockdown was defined as the in ability of the cockroach to right itself immediately after exposure and mortality was defined as having no response to probing at the specified observation inte rval. The immersion apparatus, mesh, and reservoir were each emptied and triple rinsed wi th tap water between each trial. In order to compare the relative toxicity of dishwashing detergents to nymphs and adults, Palmolive Green Apple dishwash ing liquid (product no. 47937) was tested on German cockroach nymphs and adult males. Fi ve replications of 10 early instar nymphs and adult males each were tested at 1.4% Nymphs were tapped into the immersion apparatus while adults were remove d with featherweight forceps. In order to determine the toxicities between commercially available soap formulations, three formulations of Palmo live dishwashing soap, (product nos. 356140, 47937 and 359140), and one formulation each of Joy (product no. 36045) (Proctor and Gamble, Cincinnati, OH), and Dawn (p roduct no. 33154) (Proctor and Gamble, Cincinnati, OH) were compared at a concentration of 1.0%. Fi ve replications of 5 adult male German cockroaches were tested. Comparison of Modified Immersion and Spray Applications using Dishwashing Soap and Household Cleaners. The Cornwell immersion technique was compared with a spray technique to further test the toxicity of Palmolive Green Appl y(product no. 47937) and to establish toxicity of household cleaners including, Formula 409 (product no. 00628) (Clorox Co., Oakland, CA), Fantastik (product no. 10294) (S.C. Johns on and Son, Inc., Racine, WI), Fantastik Orange Action (product no. 18292) (S.C. Johns on and Son, Inc., Racine, WI), Dawn

PAGE 90

77 Power Dissolver (product no. 376320) (Proctor & Gamble, Cincinnati, OH) and Greased Lightning (product no. 19853) (A & M Cleaning Products, In c., Clemson, SC). Adult male German cockroaches and adult male American cockroaches were tested using the two application types at 0. 05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, and 0.8% concentrations of Palmolive (47937), and 100% concentrati on of the cleaners except Dawn Power Dissolver which, due to its viscosity, was te sted at 50% concentra tion. Soap solutions and cleaners, 100 ml each, were prepared in deli cups (473 ml) and cockroaches were immersed using a modification of the previous ly described method. Modifications to the previously described immersion assay desi gn included using a PVC compression couplet (Size 50-2, American Value, Greensboro, NC) as an immersion apparatus. To prepare the immersion apparatus, gaskets and one c ouplet nut were remove d and discarded. The remaining couplet nut was fitted with nylon mesh (M-D Building Products, Greensboro, NC) over the external opening using hot glue The mesh fitted couplet nut was then reattached to the PVC shaft. This modi fied compression couplet was used as the immersion apparatus and its use allowed for easier removal of the test subjects after treatment. In the airbrush technique, the cockro aches were placed into a petroleum jelly/mineral oil rimmed deli cup (473 ml ) which was placed on a 10 by 10 cm square. The airbrush well was filled with 2 ml of solution and the line purged of air. The airbrush (Paasche Type H, Chicago, IL) was ca librated to distribute 2 ml of water over 10 s. Starting with the top left corner of the square, the solution was emptied over the deli container in a zigzag pattern. This amount of solution allowed for runoff with minimal pooling. The airbrush was triple rinsed w ith 1 ml acetone and then tap water between

PAGE 91

78 each trial. Upon completion of each trial, cockroaches were tapped into plastic deli containers (236.6 ml) supplied with filter paper for substrate and food and water ad libitum Five replications of 5 cockroaches were made for each. Analysis Control mortality was adjusted with Abbotts correction for both treatment knockdown and treatment mortality (Abbott 1925). Data that did not meet the assumptions for an analysis of variance ( ANOVA) were ranked. Normality was tested with the Shapiro-Wilk test (P=0.05). In the case of the immersion assa y, percent knockdown and mortality by concentration were analyzed by analysis of variance. When P-values were significant, means were compared by Student Newman-Keuls test ( =0.05). Time observations were analyzed by a two-way analysis of varian ce where time after treatment and soap concentration were the main effects. K nockdown and mortality of nymphs compared with adults was analyzed by a t-test and analysis of variance was run to determine variability between soap formulations. In the modified Palmolive concentration trial, for each species of cockroach and application type, LC50s were estimated by probit analysis Significant differences were determined by non-overlap of the 95% confidence intervals (CI). To determine if soap caused mortality in each cockroach species, da ta were analyzed by a two-way analysis of variance with application method and concentrat ion as the main effects. When P-values were significant, means were compared by Student Newman-Keuls test ( =0.05). Knockdown and mortality for each cockroach species were analyzed for the household cleaners by a three-way analysis of variance with cleaner, application type and species as the main effects. If interactions were present, data were analyzed by a two-

PAGE 92

79 way analysis of variance with cleaner and sp ecies by application as the main effects. When P-values were significant, means were compared by Student Newman-Keuls test ( =0.05). All data analyses were performed with SAS ( P = 0.05; SAS Institute 2001). Results Immersion Assay Cockroaches exhibited escape behavior when submerged in the soap solutions. Upon wetting, cockroaches arched their abdomens, lifted their wings, and sank to the bottom of the container (Fig. 4-1). After a few seconds, air bubbles escaped from the spiracles. Cockroaches in the water controls did not exhibit this behavior and remained at the surface (O bject 4-1). Figure 4-1. German cockroach, Blattella germanica posture following a 30 s exposure to 1.4% Palmolive Green Apple dishwashing liquid. Object 4-1. Cockroach exposure to 1.4% Palm olive dishwashing liquid or water (6.46 MB, soap_exposure_video.wmv.1:21.) In the immersion test with Palmolive Green Apple dishwashing liquid as the toxicant, soap concentration was the only significant main effect for both knockdown ( F =24.67, df=2; P <0.0001) and mortality ( F =18.94; df=2; P <0.0001) (Table 4-1). There

PAGE 93

80 were no significant differences in co ckroach knockdown or mortality between observation times nor was there a significant in teraction between time and concentration. There were no significant differences in knockdown or mortality between nymphal versus adult male German cockroaches. Mean knockdown for nymphs was 98.89.11% and mean mortality was 98.98.02%. Mean knockdown for adult males was 94.32.16% and mean mortality was 96.13. 16%. There were no significant differences between soap formulations for knockdown or mortality (Table 4-2). Comparison of Modified Immersion and Spray Applications using Dishwashing Soap and Household Cleaners. In the modified toxicity assay for Germ an cockroaches immersed in Palmolive Green Apple dishwashing soap, there was no significant interaction between application method and soap concentration. When knoc kdown was the response variable, the main effects, application method ( F =11.16, df=1, P =0.0018) and soap concentration ( F =23.90, df=4, P =<0.0001) were significant. When mortality was the response variable, the main effects, application method (( F =5.40, df=1, P =0.0253) and soap concentration ( F =30.05, df=4, P =<0.0001) also were signi ficant (Table 4-3). In the modified toxicity assay for Amer ican cockroaches immersed in Palmolive Green Apple dishwashing soap, there was a si gnificant interaction between application method and soap concentration fo r response variable knockdown ( F =24.86, df=4, P =<0.0001) and mortality ( F =13.16, df=4, P =<0.0001). Because interactions were significant, one-way analyses of variance we re done by application method with soap concentration as the main effect. Th ere was no knockdown when spraying was the application method for all soap concentrations. There was no significant mortality with spray as the application type for all soap concentrations.

PAGE 94

81 The highest knockdown (100%) and mo rtality (84.00.00%) was achieved through the immersion application against Amer ican cockroaches. The airbrush spray application against American cockroaches was the least effectiv e application method achieving 0% knockdown and only 8.00.90% mortality at the highest soap concentration of 0.8%. Probit analyses for German cockroaches indicated that the KD50 concentration values were lower than the LC50 values for both the spray (KD50 = 0.3655, LC50 = 0.5399) and immersion (KD50 = 0.1666, LC50 = 0.5602) application types. There was no significant difference between application types for German cockroach mortality although it took a significantly lower soap c oncentration to achieve knockdown with the immersion application. When compared with the concentration needed to achieve LC50 for German cockroaches (LC50 = 0.56%), it took a significa ntly lower concentration of soap to achieve LC50 for American cockroaches usi ng the immersion application (LC50 = 0.24%) (Table 4-4). When comparing the toxicity of household cleaners, there was no significant threeway interaction between cleaners, applic ation type and species for knockdown or mortality. Interestingly, the only signif icant interaction was between species and application type ( F =12.56, df=1; P =0.0007) and the only significant main effects were species ( F =10.99, df=1; P= 0.0014) and application type ( F =12.56, df=2; P <0.0001). For both knockdown and mortality, the combined variable species-application type and cleaner became the main effects for a two-wa y analysis of variance where the interaction was not significant. The combined variable species-application type was significant for knockdown ( F =29.7, df=3; P =<0.0001) and mortality ( F =12.04, df=3; P=< 0.0001).

PAGE 95

82 Means separation using SNK indicated that American cockroaches that were sprayed were significantly lower in knockdown (56.8 %) and mortality (75.2%) when compared with all other combinations of cockroach species and a pplication methods (99-100%). Discussion Historically, soaps were only considered effective against soft bodied insects. However, Abbasi (1984) reported that a spla sh of commercially available soaps would kill American cockroaches at a 1-2% solu tion. Szumlas (2002) reported that the LC50 for Dawn Ultra dishwashing liquid sprayed on German cockroaches was 0.4% and soap concentrations higher than 1% achieved a 95% or greate r knockdown or mortality. The results from this study are in close agreement with Szumlas (2002) and Abbasi (1984). However, this study differed from the ot hers in that soaps and cleaners used were quantified. The close agreement of the LC50s between the current and Szumlas (2002) study indicates that the airbrush technique is a valid method for delivering a measurable dose of soap or cleaner as a toxicant. The LC50 for a 2 ml spray on German cockroaches was 0.54% and was 0.56% when exposed by immersion for 30 s. The LC50 for American cockroaches exposed by immersion was 0.24%, less, but not significantly less, than the LC50 (0.56%) for the German cockroaches. To achieve 95% morta lity with an immersion application, soap solutions at 2.07% are needed for Germ an cockroaches and 1.75% for American cockroaches respectively. Both adult and nymphal cockroaches were equally affected by the soap concentrations, a nd after the 30 s immersion pe riod, cockroaches that were knocked down remained so and never recovered. There was no difference in knockdown or mortality between five soaps or five cleaners formulations using two application t ypes tested. The airbrush spray application

PAGE 96

83 was equally as effective as the immersion ap plication for German cockroaches, but was less effective for American cockroaches. All cleaners tested achie ved 92-100% mortality for the German cockroaches by both the spra y and immersion app lications. As an immersion application, 100% mortality was ach ieved for the American cockroaches. The spray application was less effective for Am erican cockroaches with some cleaners achieving only 38% mortality and ot hers reaching 100% mortality. Soap solutions act as contact insecticides and have no residual activity. The blend of fatty acid salts in commercially available formulations is proprietary information, but the soft soaps that make up these formulati ons are made of sodium or potassium fatty acid salts. A problem with usi ng commercially available soaps is that the formulations often change. In fact, by the conclusion of this study, the Fantastik Orange Action formulation had been replaced on the store sh elves with Fantastik Lemon. Because of the rapid knockown, my hypothesis is that soap s and cleaners act as nerve toxicants that result in paralysis and death of the insect. Other mode-of-action th eories include spiracle blockage, cellular disrupti on and cuticle dessication (Olkowski and Olkowski 1996, Puritch 1981, Ware 1994), but thes e modes of action would not result in such rapid death. Soap solutions, due to their low mammalian toxicity, have potential for use as a pest management options in sensitive environments such as occupied hospital rooms, in classrooms with children, and in daycare cent ers while children are present. Dishwashing liquid and household cleaners are readily available and are common items already found in the home. The results of this study indi cate that different br ands and formulations knocked-down and killed cockroaches equally effectively. Not only were the soaps effective against adult cockroaches, but they were equally as effective against the

PAGE 97

84 cockroach nymphs, which make up the majo rity of household cockroach populations. The effectiveness is further supported in the fact that there was little if any recovery of the cockroaches after the init ial knockdown. Soaps are inexpe nsive and concentrations of soap needed to knockdown or kill pest cockroach es are very low. This results in not only an effective, but economical pest manageme nt option. While soap solutions may not completely replace the currently used pesticidal baits and sprays, they have a place as a sanitation tool that may aid in cockroach management.

PAGE 98

85Table 4-1. Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German cockro ach males when exposed to Palmolive dishwashing liquid by immersion. Palmolive Green Apple n % Knockdown SE % Mortality SE 0.33% 60 11.67 6.54a 10.48 6.21a 0.7% 60 98.25 1.75b 85.00 15.00b 1.4% 110 96.26 2.09b 96.26 2.09b Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P=0.05, Student Newman-Keuls test [SAS Institute 2001]). Control mortality was 2.5% for both KD and M and was adjusted by Abbotts formula.

PAGE 99

86Table 4-2. Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German cockroach males when exposed to differe nt formulations of dishwashin g liquid by immersion. Soap formulation n % Knockdown SE % Mortality SE Palmolive Green Apple (47937) 25 100 0.00 100 0.00 Palmolive Anti-Bacterial (359140) 25 95.83 4.17 96.00 4.00 Palmolive Original (356140) 25 100 0.00 100 0.00 Dawn Plus Ultra (33154) 25 100 0.00 100 0.00 Lemon Joy (36045) 25 100 0.00 96.00 4.00 Control mortality was 4% for KD and 0% for M. C ontrol mortality was adjusted by Abbotts formula.

PAGE 100

87Table 4-3. Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German a nd American cockroach males when exposed to Palmolive dishwashing liquid (formula 47937) (n=25). German Cockroaches American Cockroaches Application % Palmolive % Knockdown SE % Mortality SE % Knockdown SE % Mortality SE Immersion 0.05% 4.00 4.00a 0.00 0.00a 24.00 7.48a 12.00 8.00a 0.1% 36.00 11.66b 4.00 4.00a 80.00 6.32b 20.00 8.94a 0.2% 64.00 4.00c 4.00 4.00a 84.00 4.00b 44.00 9.80b 0.4% 72.00 10.20c 36.00 11.66b 88.00 8.00bc 68.00 4.90c 0.8% 96.00 4.00d 68.00 10.2c 100.00 0.00c 84.00 4.00c Airbrush Spray 0.05% 0.00 0.00a 3.33 3.33a 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.1% 12.00 12.00a 7.50 7.50a 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.2% 24.00 7.48ab 22.50 11.30a 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.4% 68.00 8.00b 58.33 6.50b 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.8% 68.00 18.55b 79.11 11.41b 0.00 0.00 8.00 4.90 Means within a column followed by the same letter are not si gnificantly different (P=0.05, Student Newman-Keuls test [SAS Institute 2001]). German cockroach control mortality was 0% for KD and 4% for M and was adjusted by Abbotts calculation before analysis. The American cockroach assay had 0% control mortality.

PAGE 101

88Table 4-4. Toxicity of Palmolive dishwashing liquid to adult male German and American cock roaches with two application techniques. Knockdown Mortality Application Species n Slope SE KD50 95% CI x2 Slope SE LC50 95% CI x2 Spray German 150 2.02 0.43 0.37% 0.26750.5348 3.37 2.65 0.49 0.54% 0.41620.7843 0.22 Immersion German 150 2.35 0.37 0.17% 0.12600.2158 4.42 2.89 0.57 0.56% 0.43750.8010 2.03 American 150 2.07 0.85 ----------------------6.96 1.90 0.32 0.24% 0.1758-5.309 0.34 Significant differences determined by nonoverlap of th e 95% confidence intervals [SAS Institute 2001].

PAGE 102

89Table 4-5. Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German and Am erican cockroach males when e xposed to household cleaners by a spray or immersion application (n=25). Species Application cleaner % Knockdown SE % Mortality SE German Spray 409 100 0.00 100 0.00 Fantastik 100 0.00 100 0.00 Fantastik Orange Action 96 4.00 100 0.00 Dawn Power Dissolver (50%) 100 0.00 96 4.00 Greased Lightning 100 0.00 100 0.00 German Immersion 409 100 0.00 100 0.00 Fantastik 100 0.00 100 0.00 Fantastik Orange Action 100 0.00 96 4.00 Dawn Power Dissolver (50%) 100 0.00 100 0.00 Greased Lightning 100 0.00 100 0.00

PAGE 103

90Table 4-5 continued. Species Application cleaner % Knockdown SE % Mortality SE American Spray 409 60 18.97 56 17.20 Fantastik 72 17.44 92 4.90 Fantastik Orange Action 48 19.60 64 14.70 Dawn Power Dissolver (50%) 32 10.20 84 16.00 Greased Lightning 72 19.60 80 20.00 American Immersion 409 100 0.00 100 0.00 Fantastik 100 0.00 100 0.00 Fantastik Orange Action 100 0.00 100 0.00 Dawn Power Dissolver (50%) 100 0.00 100 0.00 Greased Lightning 100 0.00 100 0.00

PAGE 104

91 CHAPTER 5 TOXICITY AND NEUROPHYSIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF INDIVIDUAL FATTY ACID SALTS ON AMERICAN AND GERMAN COCKROACHES Introduction Cockroaches are urban pests th at can be difficult to control especially in sensitive environments. Concern over health implicat ions from the use of residual and broad insecticidal spray treatments for control of cockroaches, Blattella germanica (L.) and Periplaneta americana (L.), in sensitive environments has necessitated research on lowimpact insecticides. Commercially available fatty acid salt blends, such as dishwashing liquids and household cleaners, have been te sted in this capacity and proved to be effective against pest cockroaches (Abba si 1984, Szumlas 2002, Baldwin 2005). Besides cockroaches, commercial soaps have proven an effective toxicant on other hard-bodied insects such as beetles (van der Meul en and Van Leeuwen 1929), bugs (Fulton 1930), crickets (Abbasi 1984), and ants (Baldwin 2005). Because commercial soap formulations ar e proprietary and may often be changed, it is difficult to predict their toxicity. To quantify the toxicity of individual fatty acids and their salts, Siegler and Popenoe 1925, Dills and Menusan 1935, Puritch 1975 and Puritch 1978 tested individual fatty acids and their salts on soft-bodied aphids. It was found through the aphid studies that the toxicity of the satura ted fatty acids increases as the chain length increases peaking at C10 and then decreases until another peak at both the saturated and unsaturated C18 chains.

PAGE 105

92 Fatty acids are hydrocarbon ch ains that are natu rally derived from plant oils and animal tallow (Puritch 1981). The hydrocarbon chai n of a fatty acid ends with an acidic carboxyl group that is readily hydrolyzed in the presence of bases such as sodium or potassium hydroxide. The addition of a salt ca tion to the fatty acid chain forms a soap salt. This saponification process increases the water solubility of the fatty acid. While soaps have proven to be toxic to certa in insect pests, scie ntists are unsure of their mode(s) of action. Severa l theories on the mode of action of fatty acid salts include spiracle blockage (Fulton 1930, Dills a nd Menusan 1935, Richards and Weygandt 1945, Abbasi et al. 1984, Ware 1994 and Szumals 2002) and cuticle disruption and dehydration (Olkowski and Olkowski 1996, Puritch 1981, and Wa re 1994). In any case, research has shown that fatty acids and their salts are contact-only insecticid es and do not provide residual pesticidal activity. The fatty acids that are most commonly us ed in soap production are composed of saturated, straight chain, monocarboxylic groups with even numbered carbon members. With this in mind, the first objective of this study was to determine the importance of the cation in the toxicity of fatty acid salts to two pest cockroach species, B. germanica and P. americana The second objective was to determin e which potassium fatty acid salts, having even numbers of carbon atoms (C10C18), elicit the most to toxicity against German and American cockroaches. The fi nal objective of this study was to use neurophysiological techniques to investigate American cockro ach neural responses to a fatty acid salt.

PAGE 106

93 Materials and Methods Insects German cockroaches, B. germanica, and American cockroaches, P. americana were reared at the University of Florida (Gai nesville, FL) in plas tic tubs (57 L). Harborage consisted of rolle d corrugated cardboard for B. germanica and PVC tubes for P. americana Dry food (Lab Diet 5 001 rodent Diet, PMI Nutri tion International, Inc., Brentwood, MO), and water were provided ad libitum Cockroaches were maintained at 23.6 2.5C, at 51 16% RH and at a phot operiod of 12:12 (L:D). Adult males, B. germanica and P. americana, were randomly selected and removed from the colony with featherweight forceps. Cockroaches were held in separate cloth-c overed glass jars (4 liter) with food, water, and cardboard harbor age for up to 72 hours until trial. Cloth covers were held in place by a rubber band. Treatments Soaps tested included potassium caprylate (C8), sodium caprylate (C8), potassium laurate (C10), sodium laurate (C10), potassium caprate (C12), potassium myristate (C14), potassium palmitate (C16), potassium stearate (C18, saturated), potassium oleate (C18, unsaturated), and potassium ricinoleate (C18, unsaturated alcohol). Sodium salts (98-99% purity) were obtained through Acros Organics (Morris Plains, NJ) and potassium salts (99-100% purity) through the Viva Corporation (Mumbai, India). All tested fatty acid salts were creamy-white to white in color and powder in form. Fatty acid salt powders were added to warm deionized water (51.7 C). Soap solutions, 200 ml each, were prepared in de li cups (473 ml) by serial dilution at concentrations of 0.125, 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0%. Solu tions were stirred with a glass stir rod until dissolution, and were allowed to cool to ambien t temperature before use in

PAGE 107

94 testing. Deionized water was used as the contro l. Prepared solutions in their respective deli cup comprise the immersion reservoir. Fresh solutions were prepared for each replicate. Immersion Bioassay The toxicity of individual fatty acid sa lts was tested using a modified Cornwell immersion technique against German and Am erican cockroaches (Cornwell 1976). A modified PVC compression c ouplet (Size 50-2, American Value, Greensboro, NC) was used as the immersion apparatus. To prepar e the immersion apparatus, gaskets and one couplet nut were removed from the compre ssion couplet and discar ded. The remaining couplet nut was fitted with nylon mesh (M -D Building Products, Greensboro, NC) over the external opening using hot glue. The in side edge (3.81 cm) of the PVC shaft was coated with a 1:1 mixture petroleum jelly/ mineral oil to prevent cockroaches from escaping. The mesh-fitted couplet nut was then reattached to the uncoated end of the PVC shaft. This modified compression coupl et allowed for easy removal of the test subjects after treatment. A separate immersi on apparatus was used for each fatty acid salt to prevent contamination. Each fatty acid salt concentration and water control was tested separately against German (n=5) and American (n=3) cockroach es. Cockroaches, one species at a time, were removed from their holding containers and placed into the immersion apparatus. Each immersion apparatus was then lowered co nsecutively into the reservoir containing the corresponding concentration of the fatty acid salt solution. After a 30 s immersion, each apparatus was raised from the reservoi r and allowed to drain on a paper towel. Cockroaches were then removed, by tapping, to plastic observation containers (236.6 ml) and were supplied with food and water ad libitum

PAGE 108

95 Knockdown (KD) after 30 s immersion a nd mortality (M) 24 h after immersion were recorded. Knockdown was defined as the inability of the cockroach to right itself immediately after exposure, and mortality wa s defined as having no response to probing 24 h after exposure. Each immersion apparatu s was triple rinsed with tap water between each repetition. Five repetitions of 3 cockro aches were made for American cockroaches and 4 repetitions of 5 cockroaches were made for German cockroaches for each fatty acid soap concentration. A total of 1200 German and 900 American cockroaches were tested. Neurophysiology Bioassay -Equipment Methods followed those of Scharf & Sieg fried (1999) and Durham et al. (2002). A suction-type recording electrode fitted w ith a 1l microdispenser capillary tube (Drumond Scientific, Broomall, PA) was pulled to a fine point with a micropipette puller (Pul-1; World Precision Instruments, Sarasota, FL) and used for all neurophysiological recordings. The recording and reference elect rodes were made from silver wire (0.68 mm dia) and were connected to a different ial amplifier (EX-1; Dagan Corporation, Minneapolis, MN). The differential amplifie r was interfaced with a computerized fourchannel chart recorder (C hart 5 version 5.2; ADIstruments, Milford, MA) through PowerLab hardware (PowerLab 4sp; ADIstruments). Neurophysiology Bioassay -Insect Preparation and Recording One adult male American cockroach wa s used in each recording session. The cockroaches were removed from the colony w ithin three hours of the recording session and all recordings were made on live specime ns. The specimen was prepared by clipping the wings to expose the abdomen and then pinning the cockroach, dorsal side up, through the pronotum to a recording chamber. The re cording chamber consisted of a wax-filled square polystyrene dish (100 x 100 x 15 mm; Fi sher Scientific, Pittsburgh, PA) with a 60

PAGE 109

96 x 30 x 5 mm depression to hold the specimen. A vertical incisi on was made dorsally from the terminalia to the metathorax and then horizontally across the 1st terga to the lateral pleura on each side. The exoskeleton was then gently pulled apart at the site of the vertical incision and pinned back to form a pocket exposing the internal organs. The specimen was bathed in physiological sali ne (185 mM sodium chloride, 10 mM potassium chloride, 5 mM calcium chloride 5 mM magnesium chloride, 5 mM HEPES sodium salt, and 20 mM glucose, pH 7.1) to maintain favorable osmotic conditions for nervous system function. Excess fat bodies we re rinsed from the abdominal pocket with physiological saline and the digestive system gently moved and secured to the side to expose the ventral nerve cord. A segment of the paired longitudinal nerve cord between the 7th and 9th abdominal ganglia was raised with a pin and one half of the paired nerve cord was severed leaving the othe r half of the pair intact. By use of a micromanipulator, the severed end of the nerve co rd was carefully suctioned into the capillary tube of the recording electrode The reference electrode attached to a metal pin, was placed in contact with the physiological saline near the severed nerv e cord. The abdominal pocket remained filled with physiological saline throughout recording. Standard electrophysiological techniques were used in the baseline and treatment recordings of spontaneous el ectrical activity from the ve ntral nerve cord preparation (Scharf and Siegfried 1999, Durham et al. 2001 ). The recording chamber was screened with an aluminum foil barrier to reduce poten tial environmental e ffects. The counter function of the software was set to obtain ~ 500 threshold-surpassing el ectrical bursts per minute. The potassium laurate treatment wa s prepared by dissolving the soap salt in physiological saline. The solution was stirred immediately prior to testing to minimize

PAGE 110

97 settling. For each cockroach preparation, base line data was recorded for 5 min and then was briefly stopped while 1 ml of 0.75% potassium laurate was added to the physiological saline in the abdominal pocket. Immediately after the addition of the soap solution, recording was resumed for 5 min. Due to physiological differences between cockroach individuals, the baseline data serv ed as the control for each preparation. An additional saline disturbance control was also tested where 1 ml phys iological saline was added in place of the soap treatment. Thr ee replicates were performed using potassium laurate as the treatment. Analysis In the immersion bioassa y, control mortality (5%) wa s adjusted with Abbotts formula for German cockroaches in the sodium caprylate, potassium capric and potassium oleate treatments (Abbott 1925). The remaining trials with German cockroaches and all trials with American cock roaches resulted in 0% control mortality. KD50 and LC50 values were estimated by Probit analysis (SAS Institute 2001). Significant differences were determined by non-overlap of the 95% confidence intervals (CI), and Pearson chi square values indicat ed goodness-of-fit. In the neurophysiology bioa ssay, the effect of potassi um laurate on spontaneous electrical activity was quan tified by comparison of the ch ange in counts every 30 sec from the average baseline count. Neurological effects were quantified by comparing the baseline count to the post disturbance count every 30 sec. Results When comparing the sodium and potassium ions on the same fatty acid chain, the sodium laurate was slightly more toxic, but not signifi cantly more toxic than the potassium laurate within a species. When co mparing species, it took significantly more

PAGE 111

98 potassium laurate to kill German cockroach es, about twice as much, as needed for American cockroaches. Both the sodium and potassium treatments were more toxic to American cockroaches than to German cockroaches as exhibited by non-overlap of confidence intervals (Table 5-1). There was difficulty in testing some of th e salts. Several of the soaps, sodium caprylate, potassium palmitiate and potassium st earate resulted in a poor Probit model fit. The poor fit was due to lack of mortality at concentrations <2%, not because of uncontrolled experimental conditions. These soaps are fairly insoluble in water and readily precipitated out of solu tion at concentrations above 2% These three soaps, due to their non-practicality of use, were discarded from the study. For the remainder of the study, only potassium salts were tested. When comparing the potassium soap salts, potassium oleate was the most toxic to both male German and male American cockro aches. Potassium laurate was equally as toxic as potassium oleate to German cockro aches, and all potassium soaps tested, with the exception of potassium caprylate, were equa lly as toxic to American cockroaches as seen by the nonoverlap of confid ence intervals (Table 5-2). The high pesticid ial activity on American cockroaches, 100% mortality at >1% soap concentration, caused a poor Probit model fit for C8 potassium caprylate. According to the Probit model, potassium ricinoleate, caprate, and capryla te were all equally as toxi c to German cockroaches. These soaps achieved 70-90% mortality, but we re less toxic than th e potassium oleate or laurate which achieved 89-95% mortality at 2% concentration. Although potassium myristate achieved 65% mortal ity at 2% concentration, it was not a good Probit fit having extremely wide confidence intervals. All te sts on American cockroaches with potassium

PAGE 112

99 salts resulted in 100% mortal ity at a 2% soap concentration. Tests on German cockroaches resulted in a range of 65% mo rtality with potassium myristate to 95% mortality with potassium laurat e at a 2% soap concentration. Neurophysiological recordings of spontane ous electrical activity from isolated sections of the ventral nerve cord of adult male American cockroaches are presented in Fig. 5-1. Recordings A and C are representative of cockroach baseline electrical activity. Recording B illustrates that the addition of 1 ml physiological saline does not elicit neurological activity changes from baseline electri cal activity. Recording D is representative of the increase in electrical bursts immediat ely after the potassium laurate treatment was added to the cockroach preparation. Variation in baseline electr ical activity between cockroach nerve preparations was encountered. Baseline electrical bursts over fi ve minutes ranged from 170 to 650 bursts depending on the individual cockroach specimen. The data from the three cockroach preparations was pooled and an average ch ange from baseline was calculated for each 30 sec. interval of baseline electrical activity. The average baseline electrical burst over 5 min was 4.98. Upon addition of the treatment, there was an increase in bursting activity in each specimen tested (Fig. 5-2). The bursts ranged from 505 to 829 over a five minute interval. The increas e in bursts was contained to the first 2 to 2.5 min and was then followed by a reduction in activity. This suppr ession of electrical ac tivity was slightly lower than the baseline average, and it corres ponded with the apparent onset of death in the specimen. The average change from ba seline post treatment for the three specimens was 25.39 counts for the first 2.5 min and 4.89 for the subsequent 2.5 min of recording (Fig. 5-3).

PAGE 113

100 Discussion Consumers are in a constant battle with trying to c ontrol insect pests while remaining environmentally and health conscious. The use of soap salts as a pest control tool is a viable option to meet the need for a least toxic pesticide. Abbasi et al. (1984) and Szumlas (2002) demonstrated that comm ercially available dishwashing soaps can cause mortality to German cockroaches. Mo rtality from soap exposure was also shown herein for both German and American cockro aches exposed to individual fatty acid salt chains. There was no difference in toxicity between sodium or potassium salts indicating that while aiding in solubilit y, the cation does not play an im portant role in toxicity. In my study, there was no peak of t oxicity for American cockroaches; each potassium fatty acid salt C10 to C 18 was equally as toxic. German cockroaches had a different pattern of mortality fo r the fatty acid salt chains than the American cockroaches. There was high mortality 84-95% at C8-C12 then there was a drop in mortality until a second peak at C18. Due to its ease in solubility and high mort ality to American cockroaches, potassium laurate was chosen as the toxicant for th e neurophysiological study. Based on personal observations and documented by Dills and Me nusan (1935), the mode of entry of the fatty acid salts is through the tracheal system yet the mode of acti on for soaps has been debated for nearly a century. The results from this present study indicated that indeed potassium and sodium salts are toxic to cockroaches and th e neurophysiological recordings support the h ypothesis that the soaps act, at le ast partially, via a neurological mode of action.

PAGE 114

101Table 5-1. Toxicity of sodium and potassium laurate to adult male German and American cockroaches. Knockdown Mortality Species Slope SE KD50 (95% CI) x2 P Slope SE LC50 (95% CI) x2 P soap salt German (n=100) potassium laurate 2.95 0.56 0.55% (0.406-0.712) 3.05 0.22 3.08 0.60 0.49% (0.361-0.629) 1.31 0.52 sodium laurate 5.04 1.04 0.42% (0.341-0.515) 0.68 0.41 5.04 1.04 0.42% (0.341-0.515) 0.68 0.41 American (n=75) potassium laurate 5.36 1.16 0.30% (0.241-0.381) 3.22 0.20 5.15 1.13 0.28% (0.220-0.351) 0.86 0.65 sodium laurate 3.26 0.83 0.18% (0.118-0.246) 0.59 0.74 3.72 0.94 0.18% (0.121-0.235) 0.22 0.90 Significant differences determined by non-overlap of the 95% confidence intervals [SAS Institute 2001].

PAGE 115

102Table 5-2. Toxicity of fatty acid salts (FAS) to adult male Ge rman or American cockroaches. Knockdown Mortality Species Slope SE KD50 (95% CI) x2 P Slope SE LC50 (95% CI) x2 P FAS German (n=100) potassium caprylate 3.06 0.59 0.85% (0.623-1.252) 1.97 0.16 2.63 0.48 0.83% (0.598-1.280) 3.85 0.15 potassium laurate 2.95 0.56 0.55% (0.406-0.712) 3.05 0.22 3.08 0.60 0.49% (0.361-0.629) 1.31 0.52 potassium caprate 3.49 0.81 1.15% (0.899-1.557) 1.90 0.17 3.39 0.67 1.20% (0.939-1.630) 4.51 0.11 potassium myristate 0.89 0.45 0.56% (--------------) 0.14 0.71 1.51 0.68 0.93% (--------------) 0.04 0.84 potassium oleate 2.57 0.53 0.28% (0.200-0.377) 3.09 0.21 2.12 0.38 0.36% (0.249-0.491) 2.28 0.52 potassium ricinoleate 1.86 0.47 0.86% (0.582-1.375) 1.22 0.54 1.74 0.36 0.84% (0.586-1.386) 0.62 0.89 American (n=75) potassium laurate 5.36 1.16 0.30% (0.241-0.381) 3.22 0.20 5.15 1.13 0.28% (0.220-0.351) 0.86 0.65 potassium caprate 4.53 0.97 0.28% (0.217-0.358) 0.14 0.93 4.26 0.90 0.30% (0.236-0.393) 0.38 0.83 potassium myristate 4.12 1.09 0.20% (0.145-0.258) 2.22 0.14 4.63 1.16 0.21% (0.160-0.269) 1.66 0.20 potassium oleate 1.44 0.65 0.07% (0.001-0.171) 1.97 0.16 2.27 0.92 0.17% (0.004-0.288) 0.21 0.16

PAGE 116

103Table 5-2 continued. Knockdown Mortality Species Slope SE KD50 (95% CI) x2 P Slope SE LC50 (95% CI) x2 P FAS potassium ricinoleate 4.25 1.30 0.15% (0.091.191) 0.34 0.56 2.90 0.77 0.17% (0.097.235) 0.76 0.68 Significant differences determined by non-overl ap of the 95% confidence intervals [SAS Institute 2001]. Potassium myristate ha d extremely wide CI.

PAGE 117

104 A B C D Figure 5-1. Spontaneous electrical activity from representative P. americana neural preparation. Baseline electrical act ivity in physiological saline (A), physiological saline disturbance (B), baseline electrical activity in physiological saline (C), potassium la urate (1 ml at 0.75%) in physiological saline (D). The threshold was se t at 500 baseline counts per min. Baseline (5 min) Saline Disturbance (5 min) Baseline(5min) Treatment(5min) 1000 mV -1000 2000 mV -2000

PAGE 118

105 Cockroach A Cockroach B Cockroach C. Figure 5-2. Spontaneous electri cal activity for three American cockroaches, A, B, and C before and after treatment with 1 ml potassium laurate (0.75%). 0 5 10 15 20 25 00.511.522.533.544.55 00.511.522.533.544.55 Baseline timeTreatment time 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 00.511.522.533.544.55 00.511.522.533.544.55 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 00.511.522.533.544.55 00.511.522.533.544.55 Baseline timeTreatment time Spontaneous Electrical Activity Change from avg. baseline Spontaneous Electrical Activity Baseline timeTreatment time Spontaneous Electrical Activity Change from avg. baseline Change from avg. baseline

PAGE 119

106 Change in average electrical burst0 10 20 30 40 50 60Burst Count Treatment added Baseline 5 min Treatment 0-2.5 min2.5-5 min Figure 5-3. Change in electrica l bursting activity from baselin e to the first and last 2.5 min after treatment of 1 ml potassium laurate (0.75%).

PAGE 120

107 CHAPTER 6 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION A survey was conducted to determine the publics perceptions of urban pests and pest management practices in and around the home. People who regularly use pesticides determine whether they need to take action against an insect pest by the presence of insect damage. People who consider themselv es non-pesticide users take action if they have the feeling that the insect may be a danger to the household. Crawling insects such as ants and cockroaches are considered the primary pests and are the most difficult and costly to control of the urban insects. The majority of people use pesticides to combat their pest problems and they employ over-the-c ounter pest control products as well as hiring professional services. Pe ople treat both the inside and outside of their homes with pesticides and typically use some form of pe sticide at least every other month. Although pesticide use is prevalent, the most effective form of pest control was considered to be physical removal of the pest. One in five pe ople would prefer an a lternative to pesticide use, and many would consider environmentally fr iendly pest control to be a credible pest management option. Many people had attempte d household pest control with a soap or borax solution. The toxicity of commercially availabl e soaps Palmolive, Dawn and Joy, and household cleaners 409, Fantastik, Fantasti k Orange, Dawn Power Dissolver, and Greased Lightning against adult male German, Blattella germanica (L.), and American ( Periplaneta americana ), cockroaches was investig ated. Immersion and spray applications were evaluated at a 30 s exposur e. Soaps at a 1.4 % concentration killed

PAGE 121

108 both German cockroach nymphs and adults after a 30 s exposure. Adult cockroaches from both cockroach species, American and Ge rman, were susceptible to the soaps and cleaners by immersion at a 1% concentration. All brands and formulations of the soaps and cleaners were toxic to cockroaches. A sp ray application of th e soaps was effective against German cockroaches, but not American cockroaches. To further investigate the toxicity of the soaps, the soap active ingredients, fatty acid salts, were tested by 30 s immersion against adult male German and American cockroaches. Sodium and potassium salts we re both equally toxic to cockroaches. Because potassium salts have higher water solubility, they were used in the study. Potassium oleate, C18, proved to be the most toxic of th e potassium fatty acid salts to both cockroach species. Potassium salts with carbon chains of 8-18 are each toxic to American cockroaches. German cockroaches were susceptible to potassium salts with carbon chains of 8, 10, 12, 14, and 18 (unsaturated). C16 and C18 (saturated) were not toxic to German cockroaches. To test the mode of action of the fatty acid salts, neurophysio logical tests were performed. Neural preparati ons in physiological saline were made using American cockroaches, and spontaneous elec trical activity was recorded. After th e application of 1 ml of a potassium laurate solution (0.75%) in physiological saline to the preparation, spontaneous electrical activit y increased over a two minute time period and then quieted. The reduction in nervous activity corresponded with the apparent onset of death in the cockroach specimen, leading to the conclusi on that soaps cause a breakdown of the nervous system resulting in the death of the organism.

PAGE 122

109 Soaps are inexpensive and concentrations of soap needed to knock down or kill pest cockroaches are very low. They are naturally derived, work quickly and have no residual activity, giving them as pects of an environmentally fr iendly pest control option. Consumers are willing to try a lternative pest controls like soaps. Soaps as part of a sanitation program may be an effect ive aid in cockroach control.

PAGE 123

110 APPENDIX A PEST MANAGEMENT SURVEY INSTRUMENT Hello, my name is %name and I am calli ng you from the Florida Survey Research Center at the University of Florida. In cooperation with the Res earchers in the Urban Entomology Center at the University of Florida, we are conducting a survey about peoples opinions of insects and the use of pe sticides in and around the home. This is not a sales call and your answers ar e confidential. The survey should take about 10 minutes to complete. You may stop this interview at any time. May I pleas e speak to the person in your household who is 18 or ol der and has the next birthday? Ill begin by asking you a few general quest ions about your views on common insect pests like mosquitoes, cockroaches, termites, ants and garden pests. 1. How harmful do you think insect pests are to your household? Would you say that insect pests are very harmful, somewhat harm ful, or not at all harmful? [VH, SH, NH, DR] 2. Which of the following categories of insect pests _____? [Flying insects such as flies and wasps; Crawling insects such as cockroaches and an ts; Wood destroying insects such as termites; Lawn and tree insects such as chinch bugs and fire ants; None; DK; R] A. is the most difficult for you to control? B. do you think is most harmful to peoples health? C. do you spend the most money trying to control? Now, Id like to ask you about pesticides. 3. Do you use pesticides in your home or lawn? [YNDR] IF NO: GO TO Q7 IF YES: 3A. Where are you most likely to use pest icides, indoors or outdoors? [indoors, outdoors, same amount for each, DR] IF Indoors: 3B. Using a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is never and 5 is very often, how often would you say you use pesticid es indoors? [1-5, DR] IF Outdoors: 3C. Using a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is never and 5 is very often, how often would you say you use pesticid es outdoors? [1-5, DR]

PAGE 124

111 Now, Id like you think about pesticides th at you may buy in the store and use in your home. 4. Do you use over the counter pesticides that you can purchase in a store and use in your home [Prompt if needed: such as Raid, Amdro, or Round-up]? [YNDR] IF NO: GO TO Q5 IF YES: 4A. How many times a year do you use th ese over the counter pest control products? [#, DR] 4B. Ill read you a list of different types of over the counter pesticides, please tell me which of these formulations youve used. And which of these do you use most often? [MMI: Sprays ; Baits; Traps; Granular Products; Dusts; DK; R] 4C. Next, Ill read you a list of factors that may influe nce your purchase of over the counter pesticides. Please rank each on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not important and 5 is very important. 4C1. How important is cost when purc hasing over the counter pest control products? [1-5, DR] 4C2. convenience? [1-5, DR] 4C3. odor and residue? [1-5, DR] 4C4. effectiveness in killing pests? [1-5, DR] 4C5. safety for household members? [1-5, DR] 4C6. reputation of the manufacturer? [1-5, DR] 4D. Ill read you a list of diffe rent ways to deal with household pests. Please tell me which of these kinds of pest c ontrol treatments youve done yourself: [checkbox MMI: Applied a long lasting spray to cover a large ar ea; Spot treated a small area as needed; Physically rem oved a pest by trapping or vacuuming; Repaired screens or caulked in cracks to prevent insects from entering your home] IF More Than One: In your opinion, which of these is most effective? 4E. Assume that you have purchased an ove r the counter pesticide to use in and around your home that youve never used before. Using a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is very unlikely and 5 very likel y, please tell me how likely it is that you would read all of the instructions on the pest control pro ducts label before using it. [1-5, DR]

PAGE 125

112 Now, Id like you to think about pesticide tr eatments that may be applied in or around your home by a professional. 5. Do you use professional pesticide services [Prompt if needed: such as Orkin or Terminix]? [YNDR] IF YES: 5A. How many times in the past year did a professional pesticide company service your home? [#, DR] 5B. Next, Ill read you a lis t of factors that may in fluence your purchase of professional pest control services. Please rank each on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not important and 5 is very important. 5B1. How important is cost when pu rchasing professional pest control services? [1-5, DR] 5B2. convenience? [1-5, DR] 5B3.odor and residue? [1-5, DR] 5B4. effectiveness in killing pests? [1-5, DR] 5B5. safety for household members? [1-5, DR] 5B6. reputation of the service provider? [1-5, DR] 5C. Ill read you a list of different ways th at professionals can deal with pests in your home. Please tell me which of the fo llowing kinds of pest control treatments youve had a professional do in you r home: [checkbox MMI: Applied a long lasting spray to cover a large area; Spot treated a small area as needed; Physically removed a pest by trapping or vacuuming; Repaired screens or caulked in cracks to prevent insects from entering your home] IF More Than One: In your opinion, which of these is most effective? IF No Use of Repair/Caulking: 5C1. Using a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is very unlikely and 5 is very likely, how likely would you be to use a professional service to repair window screening, caulk cracks, and repair wood damage in order to exclude pests from entering your house? [1-5, DR] 5D. Using a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is completely unsatisfied and 5 is very satisfied, how satisfied do you think you woul d be with a professional pest control service if they could control a pest pr oblem in your home without spraying any pesticides? [1-5, DR]

PAGE 126

113 IF YES to Q4 AND/OR Q5: 6. Ill read you a list of reasons that people often gi ve for purchasing pest control products or services. Please tell me how important each of these is to you, using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 is not im portant and 5 is very important. A. How important is seeing live insects in or around your home in your decision to purchase pest control? [1-5, DR] B. Seeing dead insects in or around your home? [1-5, DR] C. Seeing insect damage in or around your home? [1-5, DR] D. Knowing that there is pot ential for insect damage in or around your home? [15, DR] E. Knowing that there is a health haza rd associated with pests? [1-5, DR] F. Feeling that pests pose a da nger to your family? [1-5, DR] [ GO TO Q20 ] IF NO TO Q3 (Do NOT Use Pesticides): 7. Would you use ever use pesticides in or around your home? [YNDR] IF NO: GO TO Q15 IF YES: 7A. Where would you be most likely to use pesticides, indoors or outdoors? [indoors, outdoors, DR] IF Indoors: 7B. Using a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is never and 5 is very often, how often would you say you use pesticid es indoors? [1-5, DR] IF Outdoors: 7C. Using a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is never and 5 is very often, how often would you say you use pesticid es outdoors? [1-5, DR] 7D. What pests would you be most likely to use pesticides on? [Flying insects such as flies and wasps; Crawling ins ects such as cockro aches and ants; Wood destroying insects such as te rmites; Lawn and tree insect s such as chinch bugs and fire ants; None; DK, R]

PAGE 127

114 Now, Id like you think about pesticides th at you may buy in the store and use in your home. 8. Would you ever use over the counter pestic ides that you can purchase in a store and use in your home [Prompt if needed: such as Raid, Amdro, or Round-up]? [YNDR] IF YES: 8A. Next, Ill read you a list of factors that might in fluence your decision to purchase over the counter pesticides. Pl ease rank each on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not important and 5 is very important. 8A1. How important would cost be in your decision to purchase over the counter pest control products? [1-5, DR] 8A2. convenience? [1-5, DR] 8A3. odor and residue? [1-5, DR] 8A4. effectiveness in killing pests? [1-5, DR] 8A5. safety for household members? [1-5, DR] 8A6. reputation of the manufacturer? [1-5, DR] Now, Id like you to think about pesticide tr eatments that may be applied in or around your home by a professional. 9. Would you ever use professional pesticide serv ices [Prompt if needed: such as Orkin or Terminix]? [YNDR] IF YES: 9A. Ill read you a list of f actors that might influence your decision to purchase professional pest control services. Please rank each on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not important and 5 is very important. 9A1. How important would cost be in your decision to purchase professional pest control products? [1-5, DR] 9A2. convenience? [1-5, DR] 9A3. odor and residue? [1-5, DR] 9A4. effectiveness in killing pests? [1-5, DR] 9A5. safety for household members? [1-5, DR] 9A6. reputation of the service provider? [1-5, DR] 9B. Using a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is very unlikely and 5 is very likely, how likely would you be to use a professional service to repair window screen ing, caulk cracks, and repair wood damage in order to exclude pests from entering your house? [1-5, DR]

PAGE 128

115 IF YES to Q8 AND/OR Q9: 10. Ill read you a list of reasons that people often gi ve for purchasing pest control products or services. Please tell me how important each of these would be in your decision, using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 is not important and 5 is very important. A. How important would seeing live ins ects in or around your home be in your decision to purchase pest control? [1-5, DR] B. Seeing dead insects in or around your home? [1-5, DR] C. Seeing insect damage in or around your home? [1-5, DR] D. Knowing that there is pot ential for insect damage in or around your home? [15, DR] E. Knowing that there is a health haza rd associated with pests? [1-5, DR] F. Feeling that pests pose a da nger to your family? [1-5, DR] Now, Id like to ask you about soluti ons for specific types of pests. 11. Ill read you a list of pest control solutions. Using a s cale from 1 to 5, where 1 is not likely and 5 is very likely, pl ease tell me how likely it is that you would take that action to solve a problem with flying insect s (like flies, mosquitoes, wasps) in or around your home. A. How likely would you be to apply, or ha ve applied, a long lasting broadcast spray? [1-5, DR] B. Fog the area as needed? [1-5, DR] C. Physically remove the flying insects by swatting, sweeping, or trapping? [1-5, DR] D. Repair or install screens on windows or door? [1-5, DR] 12. Using the same scale [Repeat if needed], how would rate these actions to solve a problem with termites in or around your home? A. How likely would you be to apply, or have applied, a long lasting soil or slab treatment? [1-5, DR] B. Treat or bait as needed? [1-5, DR] C. Physically remove the termites by stom ping, sweeping, or trapping? [1-5, DR] D. Repair damage and eliminate untreated wood to ground contact? [1-5, DR] 13. Using the same scale [Repeat if needed], how would you rate these actions to solve a problem with crawling insects (like cockro aches, fleas, or ants) in or around your home? A. How likely would you be to apply, or ha ve applied, a long lasting broadcast spray? [1-5, DR] B. Treat or bait as needed? [1-5, DR] C. Physically remove the crawling insect s by stomping, sweeping, or trapping [15, DR] D. Apply caulking to crack to prevent in sects from entering your home? [1-5, DR]

PAGE 129

116 14. Again, using the same scale [Repeat if needed], how would you rate these actions to solve a problem with lawn and tree insects ( like mole crickets, chinch bugs, and fire ants) around your home? A. How likely would you be to apply, or ha ve applied, a long lasting broadcast spray? [1-5, DR] B. Spot treat the area as needed? [1-5, DR] C. Physically remove the lawn or tree insects by trap ping? [1-5, DR] D. Test and fertilize soil to maintain healthy plants? [1-5, DR] [ GO TO Q20 ] IF NO TO Q3 AND Q7 (Do NOT Use, Would NOT Use): 15. Why dont you use pesticides? [Mark all th at apply; Do NOT Read.] [Checkbox: Chemically Sensitive/Allergic, Safety Con cerns, Health Concerns Dont Need Them; Other (describe); DK; R] Id like to ask you about solutions for specific types of pests. 16. Using a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is not lik ely and 5 is very likely, please tell me how likely it is that you woul d take each of the following actions to solve a problem with flying insects (like flies, mosqui toes, wasps) in or around your home. A. Physically remove the flying insects by swatting, sweeping, or trapping? [1-5, DR] B. Repair or install screens on windows or door? [1-5, DR] C. Other? (Describe) [1-5, DR] 17. Using the same scale [Repeat if needed], how would you rate these actions to solve a problem with termites in or around your home? A. Physically remove the termites by stom ping, sweeping, or trapping? [1-5, DR] B. Repair damage and eliminate untreated wood to ground contact? [1-5, DR] C. Other? (Describe) [1-5, DR] 18. Using the same scale [Repeat if needed], how would you rate these actions to solve a problem with crawling insects (like cockro aches, fleas, or ants) in or around your home? A. Physically remove the crawling insect s by stomping, sweeping, or trapping [15, DR] B. Apply caulking to crack to prevent in sects from entering your home? [1-5, DR] C. Other? (Describe) [1-5, DR]

PAGE 130

117 19. Again, using the same scale [Repeat if needed], how would you rate these actions to solve a problem with lawn and tree insects ( like mole crickets, chinch bugs, and fire ants) around your home? A. Physically remove the lawn or tree insects by trap ping? [1-5, DR] B. Test and fertilize soil to maintain healthy plants? [1-5, DR] C. Other? (Describe) [1-5, DR] ALL RESPONDENTS : 20. Have you ever used homemade solutions, like soap or borax, to solve a pest problem? [YNDR] IF YES: 20A. Which of the following types of pe sts did you use homemade solutions to control? [Checkbox: Flying insects (such as flies and wasps); Cr awling insects (such as cockroaches or ants); Wood destroying insects (termites); La wn and tree insects (chinch bugs, mole crickets ); Other (describe); DR] 20B. Using a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is not at all effective and 5 is very effective, how effective would you say these homemade solutions were in solving your pest problem? [1-5, DR] 21. Ill read you a list of common pest problems. Please tell me which of these youve had a problem with in the past year. A. Flying insects (flies, gnats, wa sps, yellowjackets) [YNDR] B. Crawling insects (cockroaches, fl eas, ants, silverfish) [YNDR] C. Termites [YNDR] D. Stored product pests (weevils, grain beetles, moths) [YNDR] E. Lawn pests (mole crickets, chinch bugs, fire ants) [YNDR] F. Garden pests (caterpillars, aphids) [YNDR] 22. Suppose that representatives from the pest control industry told you that they could eliminate pests in your home while bei ng health-conscious and environmentallyfriendly. Using a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is not at all credible and 5 is very credible, how would you eval uate this statement? Finally, I just have a few demographi c questions for statistical purposes. 23. Gender {dont ask, just record} [male, female] 24. Are you a seasonal or full-time resident of Florida? [Seasonal, Full-time, DR] 25. In what year did you begin living in Florida, either fullor part-time? [year, DR] 26. Do you own your home or rent? [own, rent, DR]

PAGE 131

118 27. Do you have a pet? [YNDR] IF YES: 23A. Does your pet spend the majority of its time inside or outside? [inside, outside, DR] 28. Is your familys total yearly income befo re taxes is less than $25,000 or more than $25, 000? [less, more, DK, R] IF More than $25,000: 28A. And is that: [$25,000 to $35,000; $35,001 to $50,000; $50,001 to $75,000; $75,001 to $100,000; more than $100,00; DK; R] 29. In what year were you born? [year, DR] 30. What is the highest level of education you have completed? [8th grade or less; Some high school; High school graduate; Technical / Vocational; Some college; College graduate; Graduate / Prof essional School; Refused] 31. Including yourself, what is the total number of adults over the age of 18 in your household? [#, R] 32. And, how many children under the age of 18 live in your household? [#, DR] IF 1 or More: 29A. Are any of these children age 5 or under? [YNDR] 33. Are you allergic to any insect s or insect bites? [YNDR] 34. Are you chemically sensitive or allergic to any pesticides? [YNDR] 35. Do you have any questions regarding this study or your rights as a participant? [YNDR1289] %if q35=1 For questions regarding this study you may c ontact Dr. Mike Scicch itano at the Florida Survey Research Center toll free at 866-3923475. For questions rega rding your rights as a participant you may contact th e University of Florida Inte rnal Review Board at 352392-0433. That concludes our survey. Thank you for your time and participation.

PAGE 132

119 LIST OF REFERENCES Abbasi, S.A., P.C. Nipaney and R. Soni. 1984. So ap solution as an environmentally safe pesticide for household insects. Comp. Physiol. Ecol. 9:46-48. Abbott, W.S. 1925. A method for computing eff ectiveness of an insecticide. J. Econ. Entomol. 18:265-267. Agriculture Institute of Florida, Inc. 1999. Agri culture Institute Consumer Survey. Citrus Vegetable Mag. A1-A8. Arbes, S.J., M. Sever, J. Metha, J.C. Gore C. Schal, B. Vaughn, H. Mitchell and D.C. Zeldin. 2004. Abatement of cockroach alle rgens (Bla g1 and Bla g 2) in lowincome urban housing: Month 12 continua tion results. Environ. Occ. Dis. Jan:109 -114. Arlian, L.G. 2002. Arthropod allergens and human health. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 47:395433. Barcay, S.J. 2004. Cockroaches. In Moreland, D. [Ed.], Handbook of pest control Mallis. 9th Ed. GIE Media, Inc. Cleveland. Barcay, S.J. 2005. IPM for cockroach infe stations. Pest Control Technol. 6:44-48. Bell, W.J. and K.G. Adiyodi. 1981. The American cockroach. Chapman and Hall. New York. Behrens. 1964. The physical and chemical prope rties of surfactants and their effects on formulated herbicides. Weeds 12:255-258. Bennett, G.W., E.S. Runstrom and E.A. Wi eland. 1983. Pesticide use in homes. Bull. Entomol. Soc. Am. 29:31-38. Berenbaum, M. 2001. Caught in the net. Am. Entomol. 47(1):4-5. Bieman, D., J. Silverman, Y.R. Mehra, D. S. Lesiewicz, and J. Tomeu. 1993. A sweet solution. Pest Control Technol. 9. Branscome, D. 2004. Interactions of enteri c bacteria with American cockroaches ( Periplaneta americana ) and pharaoh ants ( Monomorium pharaonis ). PhD. Disseration, University of Florida 81 pp.

PAGE 133

120 Brenner R.J. 1995. Economics and medical importance of German cockroaches. pp. 8691. In M.K. Rust, J.M. Owens, and D.A. Reirson [eds.], Understanding and controlling the German cockroach. Oxford University Press, New York. Brenner, R. 1998. Curbing cockroaches and their allergens. Agri. Res. Mag. 46(6). Brenner, R.J., D. Focks, M. Anderson, E. Horowitz, A. Togias, R. Kramer, G. Williams, G. Weichmann, and D. Milne. 1999. Sp acial environment assessment and mitigation of German cockroach (Blattari a: Blattellidae) and allergens using polyclonal detection assays and prec ision targeting software. Proc. 3rd. Intl Conf. on Urban Pests. Prague, Czech Republic, 19-22. Brown, A.W.A. 1951. Insect control by ch emicals. Chapman & Hall, New York. Burk, T. and W.J. Bell. 1973. Cockroach a ggregation pheromone: inhibition of locomotion. J. Kansas Entomol Soc. 46:36-41. Butler, G.D. and T.J. Henneberry. 1990. Pest control on vegetables and cotton with household cooking oils and liquid dete rgents. Southwest. Entomol. 15(2):123-131. Butler, G.D., T.J. Henneberry, P.A. Stansly, an d D.J. Schuster. 1993. Insecticidal effects of selected soaps, oils and detergents on the sweetpotato whit efly: (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Florida Entomol. 76(1):161-167. Byrne, D.N., and E.H. Carpenter 1986. Attitude s and actions of urbanites in managing household arthropods, pp. 13-24. In G.W. Bennett and J.M. Owens [eds.]. Advances in urban pest manage ment. Van Nostrand, Reinhold, N.Y.. Byrne, D.N., E.H. Carpenter, E.M. Thoms, and S.T. Cotty 1984. Public attitudes toward urban arthropods. Bull. Entomol. Soc.Am. 30:40-44. Capinera, J.L. 1993. Insects in art and religion: the American southwest. Am. Entomol. 39(4):221-229. Capinera, J.L. 1995. Humpbacked flute play er and other entomomorphs from the American southwest. Am. Entomol. 83-88. Chapman, R.F. 1982. The Insects: structure and function. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Chase, A.R. and L.S. Osborne. 1983. Influence of an insecticidal so ap on several foliar diseases of foliage plants. Plant Disease 67:1021-1023. Cherry, R. 2002. The functions of insects in mythology. Am. Entomol. 48(3): 134-136.

PAGE 134

121 Cochran, D.G. 1979. A genetic determination of insemination frequency and sperm precedence in the German cockroach. Ent. Exp. App. 26:259-266. Cochran, D.G. 1995. Insecticide resistance. Pp 176-178. In M.K. Rust, J.M. Owens, and D.A. Reirson [eds.], Understanding a nd controlling the German cockroach. Oxford University Press, New York. Codina, R. C. Jaen, and R. F. Lockey. 2002. Cockroach debris in purchased flour. Allergy Net. 57:260-271. Cornwell, P.B. 1968. The cockroach vol. 1. Hutchinson, London. Cornwell, P.B. 1976. The cockroach vol. 2. Hutchinson, London. Dills, L.E. and H. Menusan. 1935. A study of some fatty acids and their soaps as contact insecticides. Contributions from Boyce Thompson Institute 7:63-82. Durham, E.W., M.E. Scharf, and B.D. Si egfried. 2001. Toxicity and neurophysiological effects of fipronil and its oxidative su lfone metabolite on European corn borer larvae (Lepidoptera: Crambidae). Pe sticide Biochem. Physiol. 71:97-106. Environmental Protection Agency. 1992. Reregist ration eligibility docum ent: soap salts. EPA-738-F-92-013. Environmental Protection Agency 1996. Fatty ac ids (amm.salts) proposed tolerance 40 CFR Part 180. http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu/prof iles/miscpesticides/alphaalkylmetaldehyde/fatty-acid-ammsalt.htm. Last accessed July 19, 2004. Florida Department of Agriculture and Cons umer Services 2005. Licensed pest control Companies. http://www.safepesticideuse.com/search/CompanySearch.asp Last accessed November 15, 2005. Florida Pest Management Associ ation Inc. 2005. Industry FAQ. http://www.fpca.org/pmps /industry_fact_sheet.htm Last accessed November 15, 2005. Fournier, V. and J. Brodeur. 2000. Dose-res ponse susceptibility of pest aphids (Homoptera: Aphidae) and th eir control on hydroponically grown lettuce with the entomopathogenic fungus Verticillium lecanii, azadirachtin and insecticidal soap. Environ. Entomol. 29(3):568-578. Frankie, G.W., J.I. Gieshop, J.K. Grace and J.B. Fraser. 1996. Education, information transfer, and information exchange, pp.163-184. In G.W. Bennett and J.M. Owens [eds.]. Advances in urban pest mana gement. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.

PAGE 135

122 Frankie, G.W and H. Leavenson. 1978. Insecticid e problems and insecticide use: public opinions, information, and behavior. Pp. 359-399. In G. W. Frankie and C.S. Koehler [eds.]. Perspectives in urban entomology. Academic, New York. Fulton, B.B. 1930. The relation of evaporation to killing efficiency of soap solutions on the harlequin bug and other inse cts. J. Econ. Entomol 23:625-630. Grandcolas, P., C. DHaese. 2000. The phylogeny of cockroach families: is the current molecular hypothesis robus t?. Cladistics. 17:48-55. Guhl, W. 1999. The possibility of testing anti parasitical substances using the cockroach as a model. Parasitol. Res. 85:945-947. Guthrie, D.M. and A.R. Tindall. 1968. Th e biology of the cockroach. Edward Arnold Publishers, London. Hahn, J.D. and M.E. Ascerno. 1991. Public atti tudes toward urban arthropods in Minnesota. Am. Entomol. 37: 179-184. Hogue, A. 1987. Cultural Entomology. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 32:181-199. Holbrook, G.L., J. Roebuck, C.B. Moore, M. G. Waldvogel, and C. Schal. 2003. Origin and extent of resistance to fipronil in the German cockroach, Blattella germinica (L.) (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 96:1548-1558. Javed, M.A. and G.A. Matthews. 2002. Biores idual and integrated pest management status of a biorational agen t and a novel insecticide ag ainst whitefly and its key parasitoids. International J. Pest Management 48(1):13-17. Jones, A.P. 1998. Asthma and domestic ai r quality. Social Sci. Med. 47(6):755-764. Kang, B.C., J.L. Chang, and J. Johnson. 1989. Char acterization and partia l purification of the cockroach antigen in rela tion to housedust mite (D.f .) antigens. Ann. Allergy. 63(3):207-12. Kang, B.C., C.W. Wu and J. Johnson. 1992. Char acteristics and diagnoses of cockroachsensitive bronchial asthma. Ann. Allergy 68(3):237-44. Kellert, S.R. 1993. Values and perceptions of invertebrates. Conser vation Biology 7(4) 845:855. Knowlton, J.L. 1993. In Pouchers perfumes, cosmetics and soaps. Volume 3: Cosmetics. Chapman and Hall, London.

PAGE 136

123 Koehler, C.S., L.W. Barclay, and T.M. Kret chun. 1983. Soaps as insecticides. California Agriculture 5:11-13. Koehler, P.G. and R.S. Patterson. 1986. A comp arison of insecticide susceptibility in seven nonresistant strains of the German cockroach Blattella germanica (Dictyoptera:Blattellidae). J.Med. Entomol. 23(3):298-299. Kramer, R. 2004. Integrated pest management. In Moreland, D. [Ed.], Handbook of pest control Mallis. 9th Ed. GIE Media, Inc. Cleveland. Lavin, D. and D.W. Maynard. 2001. Standa rdization vs. rapp ort: respondent laughter and intervierer reaction duri ng telephone surveys. Am. Sociol. Rev. 66:453-479. Lavrakas, P.J. 1993. Telephone survey methods: sampling, selection, and supervision volume 7 Applied Social Res earch Methods Series. Sage Publishers, London. Leavenson, H. and G.W. Frankie. 1983. A st udy of homeowner attit udes and practices toward arthropod pests and pesticides in three U.S. metropolitan areas. pp 67-106. In G. W. Frankie and C.S. Koehler [eds .]. Urban entomology: interdisciplinary perspectives. Praeger, New York. Legal, L. B. Moulin, and J.M. Jallon. 1999. Th e relation between structures and toxicity of oxygenated aliphatic compounds homologous to the insecticide octanoic acid and the chemotaxis of two species of Drosophilia Pesticide Biochem. and Psych. 65(2):90-101. Lighton, J.R.B. 1996. Discontinuous gas exchan ge in insects. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 41:309-324. Lindquist, R.K. 1981. Controlling the citrus mealybug on greenhouse foliage plants. Ohio Florists Association Bulletin 622:6-8. Majekodunmi, A., M.T. Howard, and V. Sh ah. 2002. The perceived importance of cockroach [ Blatta orientalis (L.) and Blatella germanica (L).] infestation to social housing residents. J.Envoron. Health Res. 1(2):27-34. Matsumura, F. 1980. Toxicology of ins ecticides. Plenum Press, New York. Maxwell, K.E. and W.D. Piper 1968. Molecula r structure of nonionic surfactants in relation to laboratory ins ecticidal activity. J. Ec on. Entomol. 61(6):1633-1636. McFarlane and Henneberry. 1965. Inhibition of gr owth by fatty acids. J. Insect Phys. 11:1247-1252.

PAGE 137

124 McGovran, E.R. 1929. Increasing the effectiv eness of the nicotin e insecticidal unit charge. J. N.Y. Entom. Soc. 37:513-531. McKenna, L. 2005. State of the Indus try. Pest Control Tech. 10:2-:23. McKittrick, F.A. 1964. Evolutionary studies of cockroaches. Corne ll Univ. Agri. Exp. Sta. Memoir 389:16-18. Miller, D.M. and F. Meek. 2004. Cost and e fficacy comparison of integrated pest management strategies with monthly spra y insecticide applications for German cockroach (Dictyoptera:Blattellidae) cont rol in public housin g. J. Econ. Entomol. 97(2):560-569. Moore, W.S., J.C. Profita, and C.S. Koeh ler. 1979. Soaps for home landscape insect control. California Agri. 6:13-14. Nalyanya, G. and C. Schal. 2001. Evaluation of attractants for mon itoring populations of the German cockroach (Dictyoptera: Bl attellidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 94:208-214 National Pesticide Telecommunications Netw ork. 2001. Potassium salts of fatty acids Technical Fact Sheet. Organ State University. http://nptn.orst.edu last accessed September 1, 2005. Nautral Toxins Research Center 2004. Texas A&M University. http://ntri.tamuk.e du/cell/lipid.html last accessed July 19, 2004. Nojima, S., C. Schal, F.X. Webster, R. G. Santangelo, and W.L. Roelofs. 2005. Identification of the sex pherom one of the German cockroach, Blattella germanica. Science. 307: 1104-1106. Oetting, R.D. and J.G. Latimer. 1995. Effects of soaps, oils, and plant growth regulators (PGRs) on Neoseiulus cucumeris (Oudemans) and PGRs on Orius insidious (Say). J. Agri. Entomol. 12(2-3):101-109. Olkowski, W., S. Daar, and H. Ollkowski. 1996. Common-sense pest control. Taunton Press, Newton, CT. Olson T.A. and M.E. Rueger. 1950. Experimental inoculation of Salmonella oranienburg through cockroaches. Public Health Reports 65:531-540. Olympic Horticultural Products Insectic idal Soap 49.52 1998. Technical Bulletin 210. http://www.hortnet.com/olympic/ last accessed June 20, 2005. Osborne and Henley. 1982. Evaluation of Safer Agro-Chems insecticidal soap for the control of mites in the interior environment. Foliage Digest 5(4):10-11.

PAGE 138

125 Osborne L. 1982. Is soap a viable method for controlling Tetranychus urticae on plants in the interior environment? Proc. Fla. State Hortic. Soc. 95:149-151. Osborne, L.S. 1984. Soap spray: an alternative to a conventional acarici de for controlling the two-spotted spider mite (Acari: Tetr anychidae) in greenhouses. J. Econ. Entomol. 77:734-737. Osborne, L.S. and F.L. Petitt. 1985. Insect icidal soap and the predatory mite, Phytoseiulus persimilis used in management of the twospotted spider mite on greenhouse grown foliage plants J. Econ. Entomol. 78:687-691. Page, K.L. 2003. When bugs are busting. J.Exp. Biol. 206:934-935. Patrican, L.A. and S.A. Allan. 1995. Laboratory evaluation of desiccants and insecticidal soap applied to various substrat es to control the deer tick Ixodes scapularis. J. Med. Vet. Entomol. 9:293-299. Pinnock, D.E., R.J. Brand, J.E. Milstead, and N.F. Coe. 1974 Suppression of populations of Aphis gossypii and A. spiraecola by soap sprays. J. Econ. Entomol. 67:783784. Potter M.F. and R.T. Bessin. 1998. Pest control, pesticides, and the public: attitudes and implications. Am. Entomol. 44(3):142-147. Pridgeon, J.W., A.G. Appel, W.J. Moar a nd N. Liu. 2002. Variability of resistance mechanisms in pyrethroid resistant German cockroaches (Dictyoptera: Blatellidae). Pesticide Bi ochem. Physiol. 73:149-156. Pryde, E.H. 1979. Fatty acids. The American Oil Chemists Society, Champaign, IL. Puritch, G.S. 1981. Pesticidal soaps and adj uvants what are they and how do they work? Proceedings of the 23rd annual Lower Mainland Horticultural Improvement Association Growers Short Course, Abbotsford, B.C. Puritch, G. S. 1978. Biocidal effects of fatty aci d salts on various forest insect pests. The American Oil Chemists Society, Champain, IL. Puritch, G.S. 1975. The toxic effects of fatty aci ds and their salts on the balsam woolly aphid, Adelges picese (Ratz). Canadian J. Forest Res. 5:515-522. Quarles, W. 2003. 2004 Directory of least-toxi c pest control products. IPM Practitioner 25(11):1-28. Richards, A.G. and J.L. Weygandt. 1945. The sel ective penetration of fat solvents into the nervous system of mosquito larvae. J. New York Entomol. Soc. 23:153-165.

PAGE 139

126 Riehl, L.A. and G.G.Carman 1953. Narrow-cut petroleum fractions of naphthenic paraffinic composition for control of Calif ornia red sacle. J. Econ. Entomol. 46:100713. Rivault, C., A. Cloarec, L. Sreng. 1998. Cutic ular exracts inducing aggregation in the German cockroach, Blattella germanica (L.) J. Insect Physiol. 44:909-918. Robinson, W.H., P.A. Zungoli, F.E.Wood, and S.K. Kraft. 1981. Pest Control Technol. 5:38-41. Rosenstreich, D.L., P. Eggleston, M. Kattan, D. Baker, R.G. Slavin, P. Gergen, H. Mitchell, K. McNiff-Mortimer, H. Ly nn, D. Ownby, F. Malveaux. 1997. The role of cockroach allergy and exposure to cock roach allergen in causing morbidity among inner-city children with as thma. New Eng. J. Med. 226:1356-1363. Roth, L.M. and E.R. Willis. 1957. The medical and veterinary importance of cockroaches. Smithsonian Misce llaneous Collection 134(10):1-47. Roth, L.M. and E.R. Willis. 1958. An analysis of oviparity and viviparity in the Blattaria. Trans. Am. Entomol. Soc. 83:221-238. Roth, L.M. and E.R. Willis. 1960. The biotic associations of cockroaches. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collection 141:16-20. Roy, D. N., S.M. Ghosh, and R.N. Chopra. 1943. The mode of action of pyrethrum on the cockroach Periplaneta americana An. Appl. Biol. 30:42-47. Rueger, M.E., and T.A. Olson. 1969. Cockroac hes (Blattaria) as vectors of food poisoning and food infection organisms. J. Med. Ent. 6:185-189. Rust, M. K. 1994. Implementing cockroach IP M programs. Proc. National Conf. Urban Entomol. Rust, M.K., J.M. Owens and D.A. Reir son. 1995. Understanding and controlling the German cockroach. Oxford University Press. New York. Rust, M.K. and D.A. Reirson. 1981. Attraction a nd performance of insectidal baits for German cockroach control. International Pest Control: 106-109. Rutledge, L.C. 2003. Emily Dickinsons ar thropods. Am. Entomol. 49(2): 70-74. Scharrer, B. 1987. Insects as models in neur oendocrine research. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 32:1-16. Statistical Analysis Software (SAS) Institute. 2001. Statistical analysis software program, version 8.1. SAS Institute, Cary, NC.

PAGE 140

127 Samson and Dahl. 1955. Coma induced by short ch ain fatty acids. American Physiol. Soc. Fed. Proc. 14:129. Sarpong SB, Wood RA, Karrison T, Eggleston PA 1997. Cockroach allergen (Bla g 1) in school dust. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol 99:486 92 Schal, C. 1988. Relation among efficacy of insect icides, resistance levels, and sanitation in the control of the Garman cockroach (Dictyoptera: Blat tellidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 81:536-544 Schal, C. and R.L. Hamilton. 1990. Integrated suppression of synanthropic cockroaches. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 35:521-552. Scharf, M.E. and B.D. Siegfried. 1999. Toxi city and neurophysiol ogical effects of fipronil and fipronil sulfone on West ern corn rootworm (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 40:150-156. Shepard, H.H. 1951. The chemistry and action of insecticides. McGraw-Hill, New York. Siegler, E.H., and C.H. Popenoe. 1925. The fatty acids as contact inse cticides. J. Econ. Entomol. 18:292-299. Silverman, J. and D.N. Bieman. 1993. Gluc ose aversion in the German cockroach, Blattella germanica J Insect Phys iol. 39:925-933. Silverman, J. and M.H. Ross. 1994. Behavioral resistance of field-collected German cockroaches (Blatodea: Bla ttellidae) to baits containing glucose. Physiol. Chem. Ecol. 23:425-430. Slama, K. 1999. Active regulation of insect respiration. Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 92(6): 916929. Smith,S.M. and M. Hubbes. 1988. Evaluation of the toxicological effects and field efficacy of an insecticidal soap against the spruce budworm (Lepidoptera:Tortricidae). Proc. En tomol. Soc. Ontario. 119:53-62. Srivastava U.S. and P.D. Srivastava. 1956. Soap as spreader and insecticide. J. Econ. Entomol. 49(2):266. Stern, V. M., R. F. Smith, R. van den Bosch, and K. S. Hagen. 1959. The integrated control concept. Hilgardia 29:81-101. Szumals, D.E. 2002. Behavioral responses and mortality in German cockroaches (Blattodea: Blatellidae) after exposure to dishwashing liquid. J. Econ. Entomol. 95(2):390-398.

PAGE 141

128 Tattersfield, F. and C.T. Gimingham. 1927. Studies on contact insecticides. Part IV. The insecticidal action of the fatty acids, their methyl esters, and sodium and ammonium salts. Ann. App. Biol. 14:331-358. United States Census Bureau. 2000. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/12000.html Last accessed September 25, 2005. United States Food and Drug Ad ministration. 1996. Food quality and protection act. Sect. 303. http://www.fda.gov/apacom/laws/foodqual/fqpa3.htm Last accessed September 6, 2005. United States Senate. 2005. http://www.senate.gov/~lautenberg/press/2003/01/2005908628.html Last accessed September 16, 2005. Valles, S. 2000. What makes roaches re sistant?. Pest Control Mag. 4:58-61. Valles, S.M. 2004. Effects of cypermethrin selection on expression of insecticide resistance mechanisms in the German co ckroach (Blattaria:Blattellidae). J. Entomol. Sci. 39(1):84-93. Van der Meulen, P.A., and E.R. Van Leeuwen. 1929. A study of the insecticidal properties of soap against the Japanese beetle. J. Econ. Entomol. 22:812-814. Wang, C.M., M. E. Scharf and G.W. Be nnett.2004. Behavioral and physiological resistance of the German cockroach to ge l baits (Blattodea: Blatellidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 97(6):2067-2072. Ware, G.W. 1994. The pesticide bBook. Sh epard Poorman Graphics. Fresno, CA. Weiss, T.J. 1970. Food oils and their uses. AVI Publishing Comapany, Inc. Connecticut. Weiss, R. and EG Rajotte. 2001. IPM, science and science education: the best of three worlds. Amer. Entomol. 47(2)74-77. Weissling, T.J. T.M. Lewis, L.M. McD onough, and D.R. Horton. 1997 Reduction in pear psylla (Homoptera:Psyllid ae) oviposition and feeding by foliar application of various materials. Canadian Entomol. 129:637-643. Westneat, M.W., O. Betz, R.W. Blob, K. Fezzaa, W.J. Copper, and W. Lee. 2003. Trachael respiration in insects visualized with synchrotron x-ray imaging. Science 299: 558-560.

PAGE 142

129 Wilcoxon F. and A. Hartzell. 1931. Some factor s affecting the efficiency of contact insecticides. I. Surface for ces as related to wetting and tracheal penetration. Contributions from Boyce Thompson Institute 3:1-12. Willcox. 1993. In Poucher’s perfumes, cosmetics and soaps. Volume 3: Cosmetics. Chapman and Hall London. Williams, D. F., H.L. Collins, and D.H. Oi. 2001. The red imported fire ant (Hymenoptera:Formicidae) An historical perspective of treatment programs and the development of chemical baits fo r control. Am. Entomol. 47(3): 146-159. Williams, G.M., H.M. Linker, M.G. Waldvogel, R.B. Leidy, C. Schal. 2005. Comparison of conventional and integrat ed pest management programs in public schools. J Econ Entomol. 98(4):1275-83. Wood, F.E., W.H. Robinson, S.A. Kraft and P. A. Zungoli. 1981. Survey of attitudes and knowledge of public housing residents toward cockroaches. Ent. Soc. Amer. Bulletin 27(1):9-13. Zungoli, P.A. and W.H. Robinson. 1984. Feasibility of establishing an aesthetic injury level for German cockroach pest management programs. Environ. Entomol. 13: 1453-1458. Zungoli, P.A. and W.H. Robinson. 1986. Contro lling cockroaches the IPM way. Pest Management 7:22-24. Zurek, L. and C. Schal. 2004. Evaluation of the German cockroach ( Blattella germanica ) as a vector for verotoxigenic Escherichia coli F18 in confined swine production. Vet. Micro. 101(4):263-267.

PAGE 143

130 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Rebecca Frances Williams Baldwin was born in West Monroe, Louisiana, April 14, 1975, the daughter of Malcom Glenn and Mary Frances Wade Williams. She is the granddaughter of James Chester and Frances Elaine Odom Williams and Benjamin Larkin and Frances Louise Durden Wade. Sh e has two siblings, Eric Glenn Williams and Jennifer Renee Williams Speights. After gr aduating from West Monroe High School in 1993, she entered the baccalaureat e program at Northeast Louisiana University. On May 30, 1998, she married Richard Edward Baldwin of Chalmette, Louisiana. In August of 1998, she received her Bachelor of Genera l Studies degree and honors diploma and entered the graduate program in biology at th e University of Louisi ana at Monroe. She graduated with her Master of Science de gree in December 2000. Rebecca began her doctoral studies in the Entomology and Nema tology Department at the University of Florida in January of 2001. While at the Univ ersity of Florida, Rebecca taught Principles of Entomology and Graduate Survey of En tomology and their corresponding labs. She also assisted in teaching the labs for Ins ect Classification and Medical and Veterinary Entomology. While at UF, Rebecca was a me mber of the Entomology and Nematology Student Organization, the Urba n Entomological Society, and the Linnaean Team, was cochair of the School IPM advisory board a nd worked with the departmental outreach program.


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20110330_AAAAMF INGEST_TIME 2011-03-30T19:31:32Z PACKAGE UFE0012931_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 1237 DFID F20110330_AABUYV ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH baldwin_r_Page_059.txt GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
47505c1d52c658941543bfe0c211e529
SHA-1
e46a1a0da9ed7bd941257cff5ce8dbee827a74a3
22516 F20110330_AABVFE baldwin_r_Page_084.pro
0ec1d5125222a17035a4f12ab2b84cb4
7cbcf8dd105006ff3845944a43a93742cf2472ac
49458 F20110330_AABVEQ baldwin_r_Page_070.pro
1d058749266b78422f0c91a79aca1341
c8f9b95194745a4e7b67ca465861fd036c3d4f67
2001 F20110330_AABUZK baldwin_r_Page_074.txt
570d7d33ab1c04dc97f1f6a086cc6804
e7441f675b2a274d193b6a72a4ff9bcef9f75034
1704 F20110330_AABUYW baldwin_r_Page_060.txt
a12f85fc8bcaf71c23febbfc76cf8b43
67d3fb4bfdd1e728918e1c890235bd34d13162c6
11900 F20110330_AABVFF baldwin_r_Page_085.pro
7d563d8f538e4cd1cbd2b548d9599b39
16e8310172b8c437ed06e9e1dfb14dc11a722878
47473 F20110330_AABVER baldwin_r_Page_071.pro
e4b55729ba40bcdc27fc69eb2e73fb8a
c200ccd0d5ce1dbdad61121508c7f15bb43e5df2
1789 F20110330_AABUYX baldwin_r_Page_061.txt
38d0ff597abef5b2c5bed2d43a334a95
cddadcfb3276142fd62b04a0f836ed9528f0c314
43887 F20110330_AABVFG baldwin_r_Page_086.pro
9f54377dec7446ab7a2294960c9352ae
7bcf8ec3d4254fc219978233dbce3fd3ed54ae27
49047 F20110330_AABVES baldwin_r_Page_072.pro
d5c75def1063095c5bc85f35e6948fc1
ba82d912ce583e071e49c79fcf3560d641a3be35
1931 F20110330_AABUZL baldwin_r_Page_075.txt
5c10dbf857530c642a85e12613c99d14
5457e26b48317151754204d1929d96286ecfa7bb
1599 F20110330_AABUYY baldwin_r_Page_062.txt
501a0c5af9ff8a7f181b1588d7a1693a
a818d081aca1f4edda974149a508b417f780ec22
40573 F20110330_AABVFH baldwin_r_Page_087.pro
c0e49b8b631f5a541421afd0473415c4
afefb1091863ad32332e3d63bda8339c044512df
47903 F20110330_AABVET baldwin_r_Page_073.pro
a2b31c1f25498e0803144cb10a324bad
7b4ec3549cfd80544107747fcb46ba83e21fefd4
172 F20110330_AABUZM baldwin_r_Page_076.txt
14f18d25f84dd44b63d1b012068b21b2
58908ea74a359f7198f9e5800b4cea5320ba21b1
564 F20110330_AABUYZ baldwin_r_Page_063.txt
2fa84f81f1db55c378370ef3176c1cd7
169ae26752481212ec2300b0bd0a90ae4d07a7ab
51067 F20110330_AABVFI baldwin_r_Page_088.pro
b1cbb9b980c14ccead88d11c9993ddd1
8a334d59f85a86563068e5b53c53f974d7b68aa4
50727 F20110330_AABVEU baldwin_r_Page_074.pro
5dff57abbb47cedca99fd8a2864a4063
3f84f37562af47bbf73e3f01398930e854ce4162
494 F20110330_AABUZN baldwin_r_Page_077.txt
8a4e47e794a7d954b4f0762bd9f68a6f
ea4b99ef62cfddff8dadcb55ba3355692a65cac9
47160 F20110330_AABVFJ baldwin_r_Page_089.pro
bec952083d69a11bfdb718bbfa64dfb0
a0d122e1f6c4a83cb3fa45d7ca71d512b83bec73
915 F20110330_AABUZO baldwin_r_Page_078.txt
5d7bf5b09ab1badb9565488c0f195b4e
11026de0033527842a7a67bbc4fdc3ca5bf83ed6
49211 F20110330_AABVFK baldwin_r_Page_090.pro
636433b4007670d0374783038d2ac88e
5993724a88e09473f013fe4eea5a87a56fd7e8e8
48897 F20110330_AABVEV baldwin_r_Page_075.pro
21179fa5079606ba2960853a7dae23cc
0759a3a5ee5e07fd8b1ed946d50e136563e79e53
429 F20110330_AABUZP baldwin_r_Page_079.txt
fb136db6c7032159826127698eb40837
7646aa7e08cd517a364c8e3a67d67e0cfc410997
47925 F20110330_AABVFL baldwin_r_Page_091.pro
efa8ea2449b0f4e8e0358d6367fb1a19
8d05f2ccc2fb84d4370a270139483a8b9313d3cd
3223 F20110330_AABVEW baldwin_r_Page_076.pro
56a0c2f8b82db7619ada023b26714add
1ca632425fe94231ada9adf068d8956fe2522628
1297 F20110330_AABUZQ baldwin_r_Page_080.txt
889f3a1e2572393fa605a9ab9b86cf84
1c75a2f9690118aa59a77e3747848544382c14ef
30616 F20110330_AABVFM baldwin_r_Page_092.pro
a9f514b3ee1a01452e23192273e4bf99
1b55d553ae1acfd543f29128658604fca71f5a5d
8310 F20110330_AABVEX baldwin_r_Page_077.pro
dd85f4e7040a212991760ad598c88b65
63681580dea54fd12e9ebc17df8e78c78c807ca2
1038 F20110330_AABUZR baldwin_r_Page_081.txt
e4a5cbd05a486f00f373889f4178a06c
a2676ef18f5ae930233983854a02ae5e145f5fbf
46765 F20110330_AABVGA baldwin_r_Page_106.pro
aa94f5f046faa9cfdce2f24d40866ed6
f073454abecfd4d4eca87b1fd101215e4de70275
49103 F20110330_AABVFN baldwin_r_Page_093.pro
28a5df97463e8e0bffc2b429b80f1a48
26d3d5374021d1b35acb8c7cb8522be37924ea92
16835 F20110330_AABVEY baldwin_r_Page_078.pro
59374857a9d1cb138db96cf8607272cc
9b005fbd5ae5f9c7525294b6ab6a9c0e777c37b1
678 F20110330_AABUZS baldwin_r_Page_082.txt
6760aa685e85e77df86bb86bcda0513e
f4b847b877acee9a7d05929833de9c2334dc8a2a
47890 F20110330_AABVGB baldwin_r_Page_107.pro
96f51722159b6bde02705f53b4ba9667
121e1774c6c6a367298af9b3b92bcd818ad6ee61
47319 F20110330_AABVFO baldwin_r_Page_094.pro
680be3a6cf15c631191e532ea7bcafa5
ac76d3a557e73e79c3c0ff83532d9c024c3edb5a
7168 F20110330_AABVEZ baldwin_r_Page_079.pro
f138a08aa266e8dbee404c79d35b740c
26c71464f6659bda7f987e0f79efbd69a8048f15
1299 F20110330_AABUZT baldwin_r_Page_083.txt
4370626629e902d803c2456a56c69567
6e6524a2a0efc5b150eac4cfca9503fa4c3f8a86
51259 F20110330_AABVGC baldwin_r_Page_108.pro
4444415fb4a7ebe168a6d8794a2b9e78
b2f205dfec4ac15faaab691ee16884807e5ef5c4
48979 F20110330_AABVFP baldwin_r_Page_095.pro
a1bb13dd6ecdc76458d62d7e1e4016d3
9077ea908358c2b93d7a8e0cfc0896be7d2efba1
1109 F20110330_AABUZU baldwin_r_Page_084.txt
ea1c5fdd66ae1159d4f35b90d394c454
4c3dadb1f4f2431f0d2b259d134b85a9451e5b4f
52022 F20110330_AABVGD baldwin_r_Page_109.pro
a2205405b938287e617f04a01dd8123e
41545f165425eac42ad97e791410a9fef4df4dab
51949 F20110330_AABVFQ baldwin_r_Page_096.pro
f400daeae17508c8fc37b1c92e898ff0
e276f9b9328112e4bec67a6e638ef6ac3d9b941b
709 F20110330_AABUZV baldwin_r_Page_085.txt
2c966f8f855598bc754ba782c4785f42
f4607198877c0b4603f00a56bd0b9d6545e0cc88
46642 F20110330_AABVGE baldwin_r_Page_110.pro
306ae96001a127d6ab0cb850c5dbce0e
3d3d7b4c8657e25b0990ce4c8bc156000b99d6a8
15440 F20110330_AABVFR baldwin_r_Page_097.pro
fb67428915cc95bad373dde89a4c75bf
a20338b8a72070b222b7f577faef96daf6db149b
1824 F20110330_AABUZW baldwin_r_Page_086.txt
e9667c97ae83f5cf597a4de878787adf
1e426fe1f82d019d36ba99ae608c9e9aa41e4349
49118 F20110330_AABVGF baldwin_r_Page_112.pro
6c0b6c5583223d5dab5707be1edc0ba9
544b348e141c05d0945d6384b8151b65547c2d6d
16675 F20110330_AABVFS baldwin_r_Page_098.pro
24485458968b60c6ee6ee6774d76f588
cb889c722a54a09709ed56e10b9eae1ace75305f
1646 F20110330_AABUZX baldwin_r_Page_087.txt
82e6284f8fdaf4961879b25c9b5cccb1
3fa184fe75bae1ac10c533d2785e66dec90411e3
44431 F20110330_AABVGG baldwin_r_Page_113.pro
c62eedcc6eb2392113a2cedf81a82b1d
84407209f2785864343f7fbf3b72cf4c3859f786
18684 F20110330_AABVFT baldwin_r_Page_099.pro
3bd4313de4d4cfffaedb3e660240ab04
3bd12d4b73c93131d642ebb1ad616d78eecad12e
2015 F20110330_AABUZY baldwin_r_Page_088.txt
8569965f860c644683c7c132ca279a03
876889171be00c8af2b8a6ae3db1277d8652acbe
21151 F20110330_AABVGH baldwin_r_Page_114.pro
80ce079ccecb7e1528c0b3108ad3df1e
74c4789fafcd3ecb3068d5a31fe6189a27e48fa5
36495 F20110330_AABVFU baldwin_r_Page_100.pro
ad3d62c0ea98064758394de997badcca
db7fd59db90588a4f73977525822f90b14ae7f12
1881 F20110330_AABUZZ baldwin_r_Page_089.txt
e71d8589008ea357495b859fce6f49e7
af5bfcfca50cba8cb45051ce2d9993d05974ba08
35683 F20110330_AABVGI baldwin_r_Page_115.pro
8c6cc99ed842e58bb005ca826f7603a5
7bb3887aef7c620a36bc516629d80d2022a7187d
17508 F20110330_AABVFV baldwin_r_Page_101.pro
a6a060014d4c7cb12b1509d8caa5a2c2
7b4237613640041a4058799d88dada92bcde3866
11124 F20110330_AABVGJ baldwin_r_Page_116.pro
db8634829deb89995fc95716a2fe5a6d
42c840434ed8cbe20d8c3574f6bdfa88f4393b76
15851 F20110330_AABVGK baldwin_r_Page_117.pro
b686f7ccf434b8e697ca873c520a8b3a
829b7e29a8bb9b11f0d84ea9b11d09199a9f81ca
21973 F20110330_AABVFW baldwin_r_Page_102.pro
54b902280efb65f4fdf10904335a1b4b
2e4460b3ddee40337dd0964717d25e136a611a6b
18535 F20110330_AABVGL baldwin_r_Page_118.pro
4edabe1a610e84dcccb4decdc1bb0842
ff2bbffd95e4861bc445c7b71889d26a1651d7e1
14516 F20110330_AABVFX baldwin_r_Page_103.pro
010d6c2c35589a989627c975d79ec03f
d304aac8512a82de4edc4f3ed7272cc878d9d93a
57005 F20110330_AABVHA baldwin_r_Page_134.pro
006d057ea069343e34a246185ae629f1
29bc53be0f13d80da0babdc9a432cbcad68dafa7
7937 F20110330_AABVGM baldwin_r_Page_119.pro
e27ea6a12aa86ea408c2e5398b9967bd
1eae398a51612cc13e5cc294dca547bed87cd6c6
40346 F20110330_AABVFY baldwin_r_Page_104.pro
9a1c6104ddf005e03ba969357f20fee8
86c68c838971b6a4d472b7b594570e72af0fd39d
53505 F20110330_AABVHB baldwin_r_Page_135.pro
bff90954317d5d75e231d52d5d564323
2e032e6c755b7cf5a2efcd272647bd0acdc91553
44859 F20110330_AABVGN baldwin_r_Page_120.pro
aadcad7e1beddcebcaa0f5872e1b713b
875561c6a715ddfa98fcbe0c599fc29d344660c2
44329 F20110330_AABVFZ baldwin_r_Page_105.pro
7e7ead62075f8da9f78ae7569cd746e5
b3c972d467e7b9c9f3e2b536ef25b549af2c13ed
55755 F20110330_AABVHC baldwin_r_Page_136.pro
9e2251e913395b0dff6155a503b82f0e
a191a4284bb1c5d2c4bf86f76152b91149c00761
46480 F20110330_AABVGO baldwin_r_Page_121.pro
550203e40e4d7aafaa7e9bbf062353c4
cc34bcf71d3bb39fd2420e87e97950f9d269f8d3
55689 F20110330_AABVHD baldwin_r_Page_137.pro
cc547f77db3942ce1fc39192755fa009
6cc1fabf41aa1d3268064d467a5cf2dbfd8ab0b4
10936 F20110330_AABVGP baldwin_r_Page_122.pro
3b42c2df1d6fb3e2bfa80d60dd9249ad
6736acff98f062e8124e8cc0bc6b3476d8c38988
58598 F20110330_AABVHE baldwin_r_Page_138.pro
548c0c441bd2ce9a85aeaffe0bebf574
4208c19299cd89912aa552357073fe11f45ff621
50367 F20110330_AABVGQ baldwin_r_Page_123.pro
56b8c926f5fcfab04032faafe90b9254
73a02c5ea464ce2be467d6ffa41386e14feeb9a6
55571 F20110330_AABVHF baldwin_r_Page_139.pro
6794374b483eb2a4b40c8f3978d6ae99
f540bc520d290e4fade29a915c7f1ed821337193
50354 F20110330_AABVGR baldwin_r_Page_124.pro
5e1a303cf5a5dcc05efa0a6c179c7c1b
d9044172eec003e3bdabed472ad1f85e0b318c2f
52489 F20110330_AABVHG baldwin_r_Page_140.pro
471c67fff53f8bfa658d164685192261
94bf62da347f547a68e5db773693d4976adcbfa1
50428 F20110330_AABVGS baldwin_r_Page_125.pro
955200ca7ce8d45638c730bea43556f6
ecb1aa509e12be32346591c4d6cbda65107ee6c8
50875 F20110330_AABVHH baldwin_r_Page_141.pro
2d4d8908c0202de07134c56cd686056d
6ae0059eb266140390ca105ab5709647d791fcaa
39995 F20110330_AABVGT baldwin_r_Page_126.pro
13a932e67993dedb4e49282a0f955c24
cfd9e71a4e6b689642943a887d71da10c4da16b8
36744 F20110330_AABVHI baldwin_r_Page_142.pro
fa5dc79e2368faddad26ea1494602285
8dc7b73be8c65a30f158ccd736526ce31b3bdf8c
47927 F20110330_AABVGU baldwin_r_Page_127.pro
0bcfbce6c85a5175e315d4bd5543e615
116860b4e8b835ce5e659b6b28e578590b5f4f06
38117 F20110330_AABVHJ baldwin_r_Page_143.pro
c0c99d796eaefabde37d47a8dc0be94f
aac335df9eac92e54e2b555eee0caecee1ab3e9b
60663 F20110330_AABVGV baldwin_r_Page_128.pro
d90a05c1687c05e81c2b5079ef70558b
da11d534ee3fd3221cb2494067ca4c0e60d192e4
23958 F20110330_AABVHK baldwin_r_Page_001.jpg
2f2d4912f160c2b4bd42f16af9352e5a
c6a0e0a35fce31b6b4b287b2eb26eb717b2c0dcf
54772 F20110330_AABVGW baldwin_r_Page_130.pro
dfc8b9f6b28da89663e85e81dad318d9
eaf9ed396d558c83503e39ff7b164115e7220c36
4797 F20110330_AABVHL baldwin_r_Page_002.jpg
bf74c70e5d21b8d760c92207a24e750f
aa88f0af691cfea5a209c2c0f267c8fd9ceb52b8
1625 F20110330_AABVHM baldwin_r_Page_002.QC.jpg
087802e6523c3c017ad10ea5f49bc2b7
47331dd0ea3b1c1d64ab8ed9bc6b26257ab7cef2
39880 F20110330_AABVGX baldwin_r_Page_131.pro
cbb8ebe65e9f6848de53373457ffecc5
3c33ff84be3a5d08165d81da57ea7095d5908e6a
12751 F20110330_AABVIA baldwin_r_Page_010.QC.jpg
93071656b5dc981911c05b7b1f2db2cc
7b46deedeaaf75063013dc2798f4fe7e9c1dee53
7770 F20110330_AABVHN baldwin_r_Page_003.jpg
d2fe1ceddb0e6bfe70755b506dd8aedb
e1a8aa95e20983e72015de3174e3c15c5648d6e7
43800 F20110330_AABVGY baldwin_r_Page_132.pro
5c6baf76328a3eacd32b46a9d9ee0c7f
21d037c28fadd325bd3b65324381545ac51138f7
12633 F20110330_AABVIB baldwin_r_Page_011.jpg
6238bc8583261e8432943b154ed18213
51ab9475a5c7a662a0c73288331f875e6d51c4e4
1899 F20110330_AABVHO baldwin_r_Page_003.QC.jpg
6bd28239e6f0ce97920623116c7c5f93
dcb76df0b283afd525127577aaad55ae1d6a4b51
57277 F20110330_AABVGZ baldwin_r_Page_133.pro
4ad05cb4077d0c3bc84e1e0be2dcbbc9
e051d84acd45f8a3065c77673f299ee7b24c326c
3600 F20110330_AABVIC baldwin_r_Page_011.QC.jpg
6a5de6c1a12cc976912bfe5bc67d41a6
5922de3aa4afeb43e5d9f2af83284b305c62b75a
18526 F20110330_AABVHP baldwin_r_Page_004.QC.jpg
5c3b9507718cb39fb28cf5a417b6bc47
90b34a3231433de5039788410325fa9d5780a43b
20341 F20110330_AABVID baldwin_r_Page_012.QC.jpg
93d51dfa4dcc1ea9d8f3c40770ffccee
d7023c97b74a0255185e6ad1bb3ea04f31932738
78896 F20110330_AABVHQ baldwin_r_Page_005.jpg
e79a65248c3ef59212f582cecd4096ea
c1e07ee4891efb92d921680a75bff5b7d86fc131
62865 F20110330_AABVIE baldwin_r_Page_013.jpg
35e94cc9cc690fd4158e70aea7b493ec
2e5f0666ee2010e60805665cfd47607fde22bec2
17444 F20110330_AABVHR baldwin_r_Page_005.QC.jpg
028fd611d7e596455925513cb0ed72ed
8c769fba1ce17f96fbf8a87e25bcf9b37d6afc70
19673 F20110330_AABVIF baldwin_r_Page_013.QC.jpg
5391410a1fea973e5734ee5b037608fa
114131dea5450c9a14b60cca118227bdfbc45e9f
105620 F20110330_AABVHS baldwin_r_Page_006.jpg
26e20300091f824d0945c5b33e9adaf6
e06c3dffd6424c556a7148824ebd552ee988d827
70068 F20110330_AABVIG baldwin_r_Page_014.jpg
4c3359439c7f7e49acc12a4582d40303
00f37a987ddc0021c518727219c9d95d7d827ced
23720 F20110330_AABVHT baldwin_r_Page_006.QC.jpg
8f5afdb3d785a794f6a2f49b519e4716
6729ce7bb9af77801520c09d2446e91034b19fec
21876 F20110330_AABVIH baldwin_r_Page_014.QC.jpg
288ddb98b3b2d0e7c8d84331c1d6f58e
073dbf5d0b0e195ec6f8440b08a777bd4f928e64
5280 F20110330_AABVHU baldwin_r_Page_007.QC.jpg
8e0759bc58b3b31900b2b3d75459e4fc
8cf9ed9c76faf2ef98063ae9c4b1d9fb4adfbaa2
83546 F20110330_AABVII baldwin_r_Page_015.jpg
be2c281f33d43b3cc4a6542e891120ef
20b3d54d540d7ae344ff772237215c4a35d9bbdc
92547 F20110330_AABVHV baldwin_r_Page_008.jpg
38f456daaf508b96ffef5056afcee89b
2ea8ed9c3dd856e71833b50f6edf49fdacdccae9
26153 F20110330_AABVIJ baldwin_r_Page_015.QC.jpg
8f0b09340ac21894adc3139d19c29f56
faad75cdbe31a049578ff819f4150474eb66fd2d
24028 F20110330_AABVHW baldwin_r_Page_008.QC.jpg
e5723148d4cc4e38f6d7893e6b50e478
d81b00ee09391f4d520a3c66e25c6a0e0c35c709
83764 F20110330_AABVIK baldwin_r_Page_016.jpg
6524f48250d211a7fc626b6859d83a59
bdf0bf20b63dd3ee267b1caacdbf39806b545cf6
95121 F20110330_AABVHX baldwin_r_Page_009.jpg
e2f07daade647c6f2a84d4dd6d60ca17
5923349ca9f1fb017f39ba8c04d0fd588834f277
26577 F20110330_AABVIL baldwin_r_Page_016.QC.jpg
cde85cd649ee1d3a8fe26db902b63228
74245907b1afe7438b1ccd295d7aa6929f25e270
25973 F20110330_AABVJA baldwin_r_Page_024.QC.jpg
b42315d4bba17ae5013c8461696e4f27
9023bd7a6d8cca56421992ff0dc2a8ddda4a1148
83565 F20110330_AABVIM baldwin_r_Page_017.jpg
cbcda4bff1006c871105910d500e0f60
9f7a57fb41472b3c2cc1853a2012a4090942b095
24448 F20110330_AABVHY baldwin_r_Page_009.QC.jpg
2fd4baa5bca265de3fe3e38fa7053dd0
9730ca19f8055449834ce75a379157713d126241
60095 F20110330_AABVJB baldwin_r_Page_025.jpg
84b98ee8a5b7d879c7b89046a722de7f
e1fa20352636d4f2683bff2b038e1aac215e1782
25952 F20110330_AABVIN baldwin_r_Page_017.QC.jpg
4e2b044ba02281cb137de6253d5feae6
823483d74fb9c3d7333933ba3c8ea33d28ad01e3
49501 F20110330_AABVHZ baldwin_r_Page_010.jpg
ffc23799a1ad748a64e697d1eeda0925
7605a1dc012b91ce87f272729a5cf18dedea48db
20099 F20110330_AABVJC baldwin_r_Page_025.QC.jpg
85bd56af90b0011b0e60974c16f2ec50
0272493cb7cab8a3b3151703a8fcd65f355a8c43
87375 F20110330_AABVIO baldwin_r_Page_018.jpg
a4a475bdcc7e9d9f90c1efcd2640cf74
e76c1e0f9a2e738187ca3c34bb87eed131139946
80503 F20110330_AABVJD baldwin_r_Page_026.jpg
7d682adc4616bd534524d109faa0ca7f
de79b90b39983a2c12dddb1ba70b3edbb779ddb3
27679 F20110330_AABVIP baldwin_r_Page_018.QC.jpg
3f931aee2dfaf55148bf06931f2378ca
6321985597dc2cd9a62bdabe6b3827f12247dbbb
24358 F20110330_AABVJE baldwin_r_Page_026.QC.jpg
26cf80bebf13c4556ee23da0ef3e26b2
886cc8519b005070cda1e75022ad6d75e0460872
24626 F20110330_AABVIQ baldwin_r_Page_019.QC.jpg
fded2b3924f93b5abb6888bf9a799429
47fd0f1fc0e2a0a211422f5af9a9cecb6854c354
83262 F20110330_AABVJF baldwin_r_Page_027.jpg
0d50f2a6d231b63ebccc7d2384605942
e98729c1fd36c0d3c7c868cd53c2f0d8b4116b9d
86930 F20110330_AABVIR baldwin_r_Page_020.jpg
394254ba246b413d2d51071a2678087f
7e72716ebf4e918343db0a05128336cbf552f15f
25739 F20110330_AABVJG baldwin_r_Page_027.QC.jpg
dfbe1ee7e92ad603c995fb62ade03897
e039d9114b9ae6f82bdf52677121042b574d0336
26829 F20110330_AABVIS baldwin_r_Page_020.QC.jpg
94877f60ce2c23d5ed322aa715e62a5a
196fac757c165aa8b1392e486685a50480b3fc93
85032 F20110330_AABVJH baldwin_r_Page_028.jpg
5bf884c829449d013e4028c446967d8f
bf06bed3f6d4dd6cb93cbc6754e320908bd9c927
84781 F20110330_AABVIT baldwin_r_Page_021.jpg
5ef66f0291e9f3015623255371dee823
cdf21f331b6989d81ec70785134a2cd11882177a
26435 F20110330_AABVJI baldwin_r_Page_028.QC.jpg
609dd4897c6a98c96fd9bfeed568b306
50e838c87ade9edac82176e78be8286942da7be5
26389 F20110330_AABVIU baldwin_r_Page_021.QC.jpg
9dddf6923d7f9aff7fac369107425e59
dbb39ce0a5eda77db65a15f7e9617b628ce89cb9
80644 F20110330_AABVJJ baldwin_r_Page_029.jpg
a965f744a0cfa96503762be507c687ef
47e6bcf29cca745df7421d9c179339fe649b9d2c
82493 F20110330_AABVIV baldwin_r_Page_022.jpg
8b2784cb20daa80548c80e17a8ef28ed
3d91be4eda43a6845436d18353d8a026518c557c
24744 F20110330_AABVJK baldwin_r_Page_029.QC.jpg
42d6e849b180fa74ddd441a31c77974c
9baf19e655c547b95f2ff734cabe93a5a8683374
25565 F20110330_AABVIW baldwin_r_Page_022.QC.jpg
e3ad70e7c9a9dcbaffc2b52c28043d01
d7b4e51fe9ea9452e339ccaaa917805794793074
86982 F20110330_AABVJL baldwin_r_Page_030.jpg
ded9477ebed46bb5ba9b4ed29784228d
611726f3faafb080ef849c440bfae0eef828ecbc
76478 F20110330_AABVIX baldwin_r_Page_023.jpg
5be795095127e2dafed7a18a95e59b07
ff8431a8783a169cee8dd3f4fa44526b1075d8ec
8797 F20110330_AABVKA baldwin_r_Page_037.QC.jpg
a020b454580fcdf05bb66cdf04fb1632
54b126725838628d580f548ab2f9f7a7ab0f8dfc
27150 F20110330_AABVJM baldwin_r_Page_030.QC.jpg
4eda8a129fd4ded1bd3ff1f03e777614
bb7fb64a0ee4d183b48775106253d99ebab687e6
24161 F20110330_AABVIY baldwin_r_Page_023.QC.jpg
cdd05432a2c75f8791285fe8607a423d
1a7b3b518c473a961acc06c4c15d6a6321fd347f
42549 F20110330_AABVKB baldwin_r_Page_038.jpg
c9c662dd9cfca7781dd69a2ac93f7955
87245caf022b9ae195a8a534c87771923e16efb8
87196 F20110330_AABVJN baldwin_r_Page_031.jpg
83a4f54d444ab84e48e153b99b0b9176
438cf284c6c849206e7e21221ee5284217dcaacc
11222 F20110330_AABVKC baldwin_r_Page_038.QC.jpg
736de1360ac347095998e10d55759d8e
e4f2adf949e78b0451fd40d781439efd24ec7ef7
27094 F20110330_AABVJO baldwin_r_Page_031.QC.jpg
850930ca9d66b7880b05e260d668fd86
6dbc7f2158db023bbc4d9a20141df3092cf4472d
84560 F20110330_AABVIZ baldwin_r_Page_024.jpg
6649fdd21fa2f1b036c3b26e2d1a81d1
96532947be6a0d604bd41e0370c479249e50c07d
37978 F20110330_AABVKD baldwin_r_Page_039.jpg
ce5a25789726e728fc72831a51d6c1a0
05da5df5cfd3e57f1cf7908faa163480c2a63160
83561 F20110330_AABVJP baldwin_r_Page_032.jpg
3695683944bd32ed4ab57b486f1d2e8b
737d691702b67be1ecda02a6dbeed069cfb94c8c
11301 F20110330_AABVKE baldwin_r_Page_039.QC.jpg
d5b3fa8e80674108c072e5647befd111
4399b53855583c3824de0f2a6dcbd56305077cb3
25710 F20110330_AABVJQ baldwin_r_Page_032.QC.jpg
22ee3ece8e1a2395b2eeaa7a41e45272
d6b16877830261dae3dec561717c3b191543ca0d
28497 F20110330_AABVKF baldwin_r_Page_040.jpg
bc4612577b7aff34c906bd712c103922
d6a94dec19907165153d869e6c7f8bb0d93ae287
81976 F20110330_AABVJR baldwin_r_Page_033.jpg
fa4c819f826c4e4a2d4ca764f743d0c9
5e635eec730ed1085269053d74529f610111b3e8
8452 F20110330_AABVKG baldwin_r_Page_040.QC.jpg
ff850588a581ca626d8dee58e3a1a6d2
0ed3ce7ee18159895dd3bed8aa9af78494c6b95b
26075 F20110330_AABVJS baldwin_r_Page_033.QC.jpg
6415d84d7e3096ba3c412f24c6f13fb4
9720d55cc4f97d687095e71495b64ec1d7203392
22994 F20110330_AABVKH baldwin_r_Page_041.QC.jpg
79eb6fa51a756ee79e1d754ba575b628
bd4c81b96556530a4c97e692cd005b572faab83a
82756 F20110330_AABVJT baldwin_r_Page_034.jpg
522866c9e8cc845f59976d12fe00e751
c3cea4117f72815bd97ee8a994bc8577aa65af72
85948 F20110330_AABVKI baldwin_r_Page_042.jpg
70242f3c771880ccaa70c869773a4f1b
fdc5a532247a1b4d2922c97578ceaca42ad3c0d3
26050 F20110330_AABVJU baldwin_r_Page_034.QC.jpg
29689c8df2773470c52834b26c55c60b
a93915204215e6c212bc0ae2e168fbff4ea7e756
26959 F20110330_AABVKJ baldwin_r_Page_042.QC.jpg
e3d7a301cc02f5fbf622893facb78789
cb2a2317bfab9f88d55b90d1fefa4aa868705c12
63287 F20110330_AABVJV baldwin_r_Page_035.jpg
fc0e46dcd8ab0ec32dee3b9292b426b4
b6f1a070c95ff76c3e2587ebf96a3e332efc7a07
72076 F20110330_AABVKK baldwin_r_Page_043.jpg
a9669f0c302bc657d6ee82eb09a2dbe6
8319dfc3475d9eb0d1601d61a20682b6a08c19f5
19228 F20110330_AABVJW baldwin_r_Page_035.QC.jpg
dfa495cba91b980e5f1a225b77bac369
d3a013a654f68e72f10d5eb55b0a5478d795466f
22552 F20110330_AABVKL baldwin_r_Page_043.QC.jpg
d974f222d4116cdcca02fcfbfec3ce45
68d06149ae99d18c5b56605e558f8d0b2a147f5d
36279 F20110330_AABVJX baldwin_r_Page_036.jpg
992d0e53373be4dd1f76605e07503d83
13a2434030664766b29dfb4c4271832fdad86331
74702 F20110330_AABVKM baldwin_r_Page_044.jpg
a7eacbb5096831daecf4e1a31ff9fcc1
f2db79234376b84bf1ccbb7af93a3a1e666989d9
10988 F20110330_AABVJY baldwin_r_Page_036.QC.jpg
c06bfcbcd33a1731a1eb17a9a4f92178
a75fa17f282151cfb8269dff19f653a8ef09256d
45793 F20110330_AABVLA baldwin_r_Page_051.jpg
00830766da3df5207d9873c0551ce87b
1f93d20007249b3bafe04e0e191419fe03cd920e
23585 F20110330_AABVKN baldwin_r_Page_044.QC.jpg
e879444471aa33bb656adf11cf0ddee8
197646be927a1e4d63abab9f1255a324232cd83f
29882 F20110330_AABVJZ baldwin_r_Page_037.jpg
3f2a456c431a5c0ae4cf7d7786ee0950
beb19e284b9782fbf5aded3bdcc32c60b3c208e3
14618 F20110330_AABVLB baldwin_r_Page_051.QC.jpg
c5577fa77a17ab39547f4d6c65ab961c
fdb25dd75768018326bf40d270d67d47abd18ba0
87891 F20110330_AABVKO baldwin_r_Page_045.jpg
33d76adfcae73d061b24baa850b4f6a8
86aa39d7daa3af51a17fc41aba0b76e4601b94d0
43797 F20110330_AABVLC baldwin_r_Page_052.jpg
797ce9e4c4ccf13e35db0e4fee246adb
862536b46133c8cf22105db8cb35e2cfb772c12d
28561 F20110330_AABVKP baldwin_r_Page_045.QC.jpg
977f653d591d39f2556e654d1b5fce4b
0482a5a5957ab31b3b4fa3b6f033f30f873bc1f0
12853 F20110330_AABVLD baldwin_r_Page_052.QC.jpg
0f448c398cd0af5825b412138fa4b937
e4f908f3dc899d492beb160771b1ba0a8c3a4938
79531 F20110330_AABVKQ baldwin_r_Page_046.jpg
509fd71144d6c69f4eee54331161cac0
6a871be5023b6fa8f4bb8df836a0216f84a290e6
15943 F20110330_AABVLE baldwin_r_Page_053.jpg
699b62ff9b47d2240862a55b5e84200a
81eda26865126118727554cf0ae6b6d863ced90c
24835 F20110330_AABVKR baldwin_r_Page_046.QC.jpg
504c602bb2ced45d543dbd9347043e52
56d7a15ad4d8cb228a3bd8353b9cc6b2f6375db0
5840 F20110330_AABVLF baldwin_r_Page_053.QC.jpg
b9db353f652aef8f669cca398937a2fc
745012a82e3345a2a87cd42de1d5a88a9165008f
84121 F20110330_AABVKS baldwin_r_Page_047.jpg
299d5395c5e6e4627bb84094a233c014
8af30afdcc5f0127e0a40ba02cdd43da19f1fc1f
21398 F20110330_AABVLG baldwin_r_Page_054.jpg
a5659deb869d2429a7d427693a198f60
062a026380ad0207972477927ab5781adff43080
26352 F20110330_AABVKT baldwin_r_Page_047.QC.jpg
83ffc6cd14778fd88feccef707b944a7
cae6cdb4aa205fbe84f6af065b91c28bcfa61e93
7252 F20110330_AABVLH baldwin_r_Page_054.QC.jpg
213d1165cfc2bc464684f7bce64ac9d4
8807aeedad5052b5e1825f76fe7c245db4890557
87195 F20110330_AABVKU baldwin_r_Page_048.jpg
e55e2e8f34ddcd98414587856976e631
d8f370dc40f9ea92214a30bea3ebd762fd98b3b4
29663 F20110330_AABVLI baldwin_r_Page_055.jpg
c07a1cc1222730aa101f1c1f59acd776
27fbc0e28bb7be191c53a361689df66f87bf1839
27915 F20110330_AABVKV baldwin_r_Page_048.QC.jpg
397ea06f2681320c5b3ab268c229ead7
8423e03aee33ce033c053893725394c72d3347ab
9167 F20110330_AABVLJ baldwin_r_Page_055.QC.jpg
fcf65ddc427690c40a983e13e1606baa
70f1879e57d1c6df1eb584ae0eb2461d52368b1c
82378 F20110330_AABVKW baldwin_r_Page_049.jpg
490406ed9ba28b1ea972f6e65d9c8c5a
86a007b8510ef3ff4d45f313a771140047fbb692
22790 F20110330_AABVLK baldwin_r_Page_056.jpg
3a5a093260b1d14fc73f363a0ce417de
9d99889dc06ff47e9cb49b09570536cfddac7dd1
26600 F20110330_AABVKX baldwin_r_Page_049.QC.jpg
f0f7149f3f65bf10091bf9107b98be03
016c5a7e69756ecb878202b745730abbe45cefbe
7642 F20110330_AABVLL baldwin_r_Page_056.QC.jpg
67cb573902d710118f4c897aa735e023
2644d4f2145eabae35d4c81112f87a9dc0ce1b70
70914 F20110330_AABVMA baldwin_r_Page_064.jpg
16108e03d8bfe625c66dfbdb9150c500
1a60f64895c4d5dc2b5bbc6d08f832c1ae6bc66c
22537 F20110330_AABVLM baldwin_r_Page_057.jpg
fecc6c9c5947a354d3ea9ec9547af961
5d34904788bda462046efe663152aad7f131c485
83007 F20110330_AABVKY baldwin_r_Page_050.jpg
b8a0d730e9306f124378de7b9a141d47
5d820a075db0759a6ececc2d7e85e70c171aae42
22534 F20110330_AABVMB baldwin_r_Page_064.QC.jpg
75fc11245364243d1c4974891f8e1342
e44e2bc894af14f8edc16ac41b5711e42d714f49
7885 F20110330_AABVLN baldwin_r_Page_057.QC.jpg
954cad72864a2b6edb3f85b5eb0b1ae2
033839a43d8783e6d87388f24beb03e76d109012
25519 F20110330_AABVKZ baldwin_r_Page_050.QC.jpg
7a7510eb13f192e84946918e91822700
a44ff3a99686efb78cd94548e5c94c7a1d5fdfa8
84968 F20110330_AABVMC baldwin_r_Page_065.jpg
f6d668d7ca9c9d1d296efd5d77cadf8a
56880e9c45fbdf9347b250c4758153bfdd315989
30203 F20110330_AABVLO baldwin_r_Page_058.jpg
37c139535f625571c08e7d7d3524c683
e273cccb9bf3f9cc88471e786f465a51621324dd
27433 F20110330_AABVMD baldwin_r_Page_065.QC.jpg
e8967b0c60d50a852bb0f2e6ba13a7b5
25d6b25ce77eb048cb335220c33e02ebf2c64992
9344 F20110330_AABVLP baldwin_r_Page_058.QC.jpg
c3daa24c1e95fe9f880f514623d71b8b
861196c0c4672fc0a90543ca1ee860f133d02cb5
76843 F20110330_AABVME baldwin_r_Page_066.jpg
30f39ac2884aba511f353c9c416a6f38
7bfdc0d144246a7619ff0cc85a478e7fdd923842
26307 F20110330_AABVLQ baldwin_r_Page_059.jpg
68be430e2fe0fedbe9af3176f624a513
0508570235562f311c8235a25d5a9366656e9dfc
24389 F20110330_AABVMF baldwin_r_Page_066.QC.jpg
3a25308e62fca667f6616c0b05cfca1b
b5eb1b669bd75f5eee05d664b349e884369d526c
7732 F20110330_AABVLR baldwin_r_Page_059.QC.jpg
d537ad2b22a15f367066184aa142033a
d5ecf56157be49f38295629fa4fcbf5c3b018b47
78366 F20110330_AABVMG baldwin_r_Page_067.jpg
18608cc5ec40705449d5ae1003a4b218
f197aa11a026ba0130de826ce414c3351c044c28
32590 F20110330_AABVLS baldwin_r_Page_060.jpg
f7d2b8daedf17f960307a303699dd470
a4b0aeeb737114ad81496f5ce0b618a5950a921f
24609 F20110330_AABVMH baldwin_r_Page_067.QC.jpg
5881276171b5ede1c37ccb54aa9e4cb1
bdc55d774f90fb7b5e66c8907c85da98cf678f6a
10039 F20110330_AABVLT baldwin_r_Page_060.QC.jpg
47e99690510849b8a1e9294989af25c9
84cc8cad2b67cf1135d346c90c828bdc975b8c27
79061 F20110330_AABVMI baldwin_r_Page_068.jpg
a6b26e2ec422cd3d6177dcc7f166a7e2
4670bcb6bc721f612762e0ec39879c1d5681cf96
41321 F20110330_AABVLU baldwin_r_Page_061.jpg
28d47a2cb9e1c7516a13be9c2882edde
c19b56487e8520a4261ffe63a0d4b2d965b4835f
24342 F20110330_AABVMJ baldwin_r_Page_068.QC.jpg
2f7708650f8c508d3d03cc3343b7adce
759ed66d379e923fedcc3e510c08416bc0a169db
12449 F20110330_AABVLV baldwin_r_Page_061.QC.jpg
60fb97493afbaa1730fbe3b72c753cac
a59df0e60b7caa81faed8f080144c854ed7d0ee9
79915 F20110330_AABVMK baldwin_r_Page_069.jpg
6db4bf481d5d2b9543e8306be59f3407
0cf7c9f54a8c8c72ed6d7c3a00d2b46f272114ff
24197 F20110330_AABVLW baldwin_r_Page_062.jpg
81e9644e0a10d9f213ef5d670e4ff907
a1a46c4a9051c204acec50fa2203b6a99d7c891b
24654 F20110330_AABVML baldwin_r_Page_069.QC.jpg
3cd0ef5a605028cd58b6a454a070c3a1
97c95971b825ff07789f7ac527f6c0ce09794ed5
7723 F20110330_AABVLX baldwin_r_Page_062.QC.jpg
2fea2e80efbf08bde1a09f2505162381
c2d42f9c7296a7bf59344e804420f21130aec907
26314 F20110330_AABVMM baldwin_r_Page_070.QC.jpg
11bef046bccbbacdcd634113a8d3264e
990759cfde6870485bb80f3921a96370b053e820
15845 F20110330_AABVLY baldwin_r_Page_063.jpg
d80b286ce1e6e0eff381c8873c8ca0ee
bb791689fb7daa8d0b426b2986f6bb826327d266
4573 F20110330_AABVNA baldwin_r_Page_077.QC.jpg
f7ee56123d35e3bc12d31e007b9caf39
2b98c4633d2d0340cebf6ce9177830e504c43424
F20110330_AABVMN baldwin_r_Page_071.jpg
85e38e0c911875ed37d0deb548f957c5
b2deecfacde8e091ebe583f8d3e21ddfc953b021
4931 F20110330_AABVLZ baldwin_r_Page_063.QC.jpg
636136630c45fc4c5fbd9325da05edd0
c5f721eb0a0e4f3368f48060fa0054e67f9fe4cf
17747 F20110330_AABVNB baldwin_r_Page_078.jpg
e75b7a962813c9dc649b8691ae4096f5
903bd2272a1185e45c6eb0d6a3f81b5b0d39822c
25042 F20110330_AABVMO baldwin_r_Page_071.QC.jpg
8f9a11f10124ac4ee523f4577533591c
b36ac4c59e32d308785832f0b90ed8f9ae96a42c
5610 F20110330_AABVNC baldwin_r_Page_078.QC.jpg
13b638820a9574723b81a23a353a643c
dbd02c91eef15dcf1948921f53e6f04fb5711f00
83571 F20110330_AABVMP baldwin_r_Page_072.jpg
47db58cfcc1c74bead93205b4d690454
1bc8605373c0c2bf891da616b39cb74631cf03ac
10533 F20110330_AABVND baldwin_r_Page_079.jpg
c01eeade48064a775e10c347299c23bb
d27afbadd2b10d6d091b2e1ec23c334811e3263f
26450 F20110330_AABVMQ baldwin_r_Page_072.QC.jpg
76b76ee3356c0d4c1fb0e75a136e5fd8
d68ecccabb8f8f92c7aa550617d930336ee352f3
3949 F20110330_AABVNE baldwin_r_Page_079.QC.jpg
6059f2af1ffc19e07cdebdae68ab150d
d6a33ecf19925d1c7fe830f4ea74aa2f55105044
79985 F20110330_AABVMR baldwin_r_Page_073.jpg
0502d1aec736f9b46f512715f81080c4
69ed3ab531fd62f626a6429780c3a2c632475294
26401 F20110330_AABVNF baldwin_r_Page_080.jpg
fa1052db60ad6a800ef65dc41a6731f7
49282729d7156073201d129f16ec6560ac1196ce
F20110330_AABVMS baldwin_r_Page_073.QC.jpg
e2137d05c15aaa81191ad9f7c29b25f0
6229e2003913d4e0565762f79dd5f2c6cf8f8825
8471 F20110330_AABVNG baldwin_r_Page_080.QC.jpg
afe49e4473ac921e23d6e242f218d4a9
e8b502e1f4803e807910ead6e9ca778e656157ac
83047 F20110330_AABVMT baldwin_r_Page_074.jpg
1226e0f953fc4c994e8981708d29a2cc
7bc9388d1384020167eedd3df115c9415075e183
22813 F20110330_AABVNH baldwin_r_Page_081.jpg
bcdf1f0905c02d772f6dbf969a240b1f
52e5d5da90ddedc816fadfc4bd5aa507ba321663
25725 F20110330_AABVMU baldwin_r_Page_074.QC.jpg
10eac70fe8807b77c3f658cad40878a1
6005db2be98f22f3c9962180e6bc0494a7aac809
7972 F20110330_AABVNI baldwin_r_Page_081.QC.jpg
faa3ded21e5b21fb34995cd401547955
90cd896a6863ceb5f28a3a966b3478fc13a96079
81902 F20110330_AABVMV baldwin_r_Page_075.jpg
07d54ded3b421b6dd24f3050d2c8911e
02813b214ffadbd21a78faadd605d1e9e174a449
15212 F20110330_AABVNJ baldwin_r_Page_082.jpg
feb81cc742872e6a3e0d186d58e67ca7
fbb0b132ffeb3c5f70261d49f930d259e0223177
25510 F20110330_AABVMW baldwin_r_Page_075.QC.jpg
57efea9c9b32f01b8baf6f5520bb1ec5
4a3350ffd72b3bbfaed714550bc0ec1162db3d7e
5188 F20110330_AABVNK baldwin_r_Page_082.QC.jpg
403eaf93b24fd23097d834ab65035565
c6d943eb479dba45d9c35d8fbc83dbd26a1cb95e
7653 F20110330_AABVMX baldwin_r_Page_076.jpg
923df025d45ea46a6b51623e33fd76e4
f708f342aa46e4d8a47dfe2b2e50b1ea826ee67a
26210 F20110330_AABVNL baldwin_r_Page_083.jpg
7d364c13efec146e9fac3bc4346086d7
ffa85e282c5c716b263d0e701fe9f03ef75520ea
2740 F20110330_AABVMY baldwin_r_Page_076.QC.jpg
74038c307c3b0ec77cf9668643504d6b
28612b0f38b2b2389d02d2f490d39966e2a4712f
26143 F20110330_AABVOA baldwin_r_Page_090.QC.jpg
3c764aa09814c6137cf85c54401b5d94
86918f6c15df68af9b776484a6dd9e10949b32d2
8473 F20110330_AABVNM baldwin_r_Page_083.QC.jpg
0cac0337e4c8a397620a251a52930c8e
69c3bd8b110ddb1f269862bedef13d76bd1fcf3c
11956 F20110330_AABVMZ baldwin_r_Page_077.jpg
ee2c70aa436fcdfd62c5a43eceaaf600
1e7cedc8a27a04cf56ed01c379abc0cab62343be
25914 F20110330_AABVOB baldwin_r_Page_091.QC.jpg
e0867810ce39cd0ed60c19353045d66f
ba00967ddd0b5da14a7e96b21d70897ba52ef529
44347 F20110330_AABVNN baldwin_r_Page_084.jpg
2de0da81ee2ce9e2f819d08c99e47d65
9e4cd8ae58022669c1604e39768e0334934c3df0
63913 F20110330_AABVOC baldwin_r_Page_092.jpg
03993aa7c4f55942e0b550b9d460820d
0f99c56470ebbc3381484da19aa3b5e0f252a6f0
12918 F20110330_AABVNO baldwin_r_Page_084.QC.jpg
0f91e12c7ef0a06f2fc74330dd0dba63
bdedeadf1e9cc61e44996264075c9333579aaac2
20557 F20110330_AABVOD baldwin_r_Page_092.QC.jpg
de17342330037d138ef7d55906785ab0
c009fec272b3c0ae736433f6c0e91182aead7bf2
16105 F20110330_AABVNP baldwin_r_Page_085.jpg
551cfc72d60ba88e24d028506e09d1ef
5fa5a464f26e8b4277689a23c274e1ab81a41993
84540 F20110330_AABVOE baldwin_r_Page_093.jpg
c181c117a55168aa28369617f3566acd
c2f3aed6e5938ad35117bb9056e7a0c4418ba76c
5830 F20110330_AABVNQ baldwin_r_Page_085.QC.jpg
aa8b4e2217a0b4c28dd68656ed720fe1
bf85878aa108ecd68d9f6e869a5d3c540007dfaf
26699 F20110330_AABVOF baldwin_r_Page_093.QC.jpg
c540137de07cbc288f8e8fbef15fd167
089a1a6e79e1f8d0bfe23d0ee891d4e158fab3f5
77885 F20110330_AABVNR baldwin_r_Page_086.jpg
e61c65fa2879910084f093f0658b9fe1
3de1b233d3bbb2e0923ce9c7209a8fd2a3aca505
81676 F20110330_AABVOG baldwin_r_Page_094.jpg
c07dc68d73a98a7dba6942079c5db8bb
0285e75a493d1b16b5cf8e4f8728b0ac25268d9d
24193 F20110330_AABVNS baldwin_r_Page_086.QC.jpg
4439d116bcad2647b3c2fa68438b20dd
c07efbb97f4db7e9079ef3b391a401c8885a321b
25233 F20110330_AABVOH baldwin_r_Page_094.QC.jpg
f00006bf60f628930efbe42e5f49c98c
5bcc93f26e5b5c38269637fe01e22e76a0bf7e2b
69993 F20110330_AABVNT baldwin_r_Page_087.jpg
6199c645ce1d1704f0fb5fa27c2f9264
bacbc173ef92a7dc6de9f2b4f75a23b1842e1d30
F20110330_AABVOI baldwin_r_Page_095.jpg
1ac24622b4bc93cbc469e5753e73dec5
87c4c1bd8ebdb74bc663bc249a7e3be80125b39f
21850 F20110330_AABVNU baldwin_r_Page_087.QC.jpg
28b52d981da56e455a98c0c93e525313
a204003087b685564245e53da50a33eec9c1309a
26774 F20110330_AABVOJ baldwin_r_Page_095.QC.jpg
0111af146e8a7f1ad300e8e02e9968f8
80d4d08de44bcfbc4b30dac901fc422ebf4e65ca
85930 F20110330_AABVNV baldwin_r_Page_088.jpg
4a9ac0a02c7580d465aef1caa39a7489
8d5d5345f8e5c1152fb2452fe5e55c42baeee6c3
86173 F20110330_AABVOK baldwin_r_Page_096.jpg
bf20b6a4398caa2ddb54d8e03afe8128
fb9c869cf87bb17fb779cd80ce73e0c7d55883a1
26899 F20110330_AABVNW baldwin_r_Page_088.QC.jpg
3e2c5232a4c00003c1d01dde60ea603f
e2f87b64f3b9cb8a1d7d4cac0d72e976b3515d98
26697 F20110330_AABVOL baldwin_r_Page_096.QC.jpg
198e6b95ba7309f3ac7e993272d2d2c5
1ee193510250336ad4955dd365e657de9618ab22
82111 F20110330_AABVNX baldwin_r_Page_089.jpg
80f51dd5e0c7855761cf88f1c11d9b34
b799305720a7f3ed14c1900ec832539131472f61
69953 F20110330_AABVPA baldwin_r_Page_104.jpg
51f5a972480977deb7061dd5e424aa2f
c3491af6aa436088a394c7513cdce56269f92d35
28154 F20110330_AABVOM baldwin_r_Page_097.jpg
fad348c9bfc25a8109a0c7c4b07acf72
6e14e90a2dc25c4191986d9c6c7ca4b5b53f20ed
25595 F20110330_AABVNY baldwin_r_Page_089.QC.jpg
fcb22e963ab08f24402427f17ee841ad
9db7ede8b77af771c86b8d0de2b5ee474e967a17
21788 F20110330_AABVPB baldwin_r_Page_104.QC.jpg
aa70f9445f10c87cddfb2133e00e8212
7db1b8320e83f078650faf62dde959d1ff6a8fa9
9220 F20110330_AABVON baldwin_r_Page_097.QC.jpg
91719f0176109dbe378e074ee81501b8
7594315ad3dcffa6a4e73bc45680de44dd17e078
83511 F20110330_AABVNZ baldwin_r_Page_090.jpg
cd7226db030bf2b04510276b364f2a9b
b6fa659e68ff7a386b9c8719462aaa857ac5c2fb
74772 F20110330_AABVPC baldwin_r_Page_105.jpg
c6ffc240c6178a6f34bf1ad81f29d46d
730c6b0161d5226e9455a97a9ce973a53e12bcee
18984 F20110330_AABVOO baldwin_r_Page_098.jpg
61936bb3ae87acd7c650101b24ca599f
246258518646536ab26bc69a914d1ab419f3f3d9
23636 F20110330_AABVPD baldwin_r_Page_105.QC.jpg
c136a05749f66767acc256b56ef55f21
54282b77eebaeb0275f52189784632125b42cf9d
6111 F20110330_AABVOP baldwin_r_Page_098.QC.jpg
fdb259242293fccaa8e4007aced87617
0bb8fc436d8ddae96e1c78a3d9d729b236e5d1e8
79005 F20110330_AABVPE baldwin_r_Page_106.jpg
2d3e88fd658bb126ba87b3473b8fa4d9
61dc8e781ba2a098b9cef360d6334582c7aae27c
20480 F20110330_AABVOQ baldwin_r_Page_099.jpg
938b4b65128be75a097e7d807ecf60cc
d956d87a751bb5b34fcd3eda82d7589acf56ccb9
24516 F20110330_AABVPF baldwin_r_Page_106.QC.jpg
dbfd24197f890ee3b5c8606e867c4141
69ef1d63b0a019e0499d151e49987ae5846f90cc
6646 F20110330_AABVOR baldwin_r_Page_099.QC.jpg
1a56d52ebe5b35d9f3ee0b0bfc4091bf
39d140862e00d40e975a28298b390f9f72c20e21
80596 F20110330_AABVPG baldwin_r_Page_107.jpg
62ed1656544da20a41efb5e9cd0fa127
44349c9b8f3a4fd48abe8214b290c33110c1dfb0
35015 F20110330_AABVOS baldwin_r_Page_100.jpg
0553086e07491f9ef008b12c5c0032ef
2691fa429e65c441f9c73b83907473b5ff0bf9bb
25716 F20110330_AABVPH baldwin_r_Page_107.QC.jpg
79f0ba74a42569cf5bf427ce2e38c2f5
b682d0e77732c53de07c1459f8711b8438ae6e51
11700 F20110330_AABVOT baldwin_r_Page_100.QC.jpg
3e2449e2eb323e3d74f1e1f20c3dfc52
48e4920a48be63804c0b092afbd9669dee65e294
86467 F20110330_AABVPI baldwin_r_Page_108.jpg
cac4ad898f6c56152ebd1c61418de296
4d29df802d5883bde08acacb625e7d9bbeaf1901
23191 F20110330_AABVOU baldwin_r_Page_101.jpg
6db8da50a5ff647c17a273157e6b57f2
313eab40b4650e4f029825abfaaf2cfa18135203
27933 F20110330_AABVPJ baldwin_r_Page_108.QC.jpg
9f2fc8d6f2efef24378f324c1c546b27
1e0fb88575cf5b633f965cf1225ce636672c5bac
7916 F20110330_AABVOV baldwin_r_Page_101.QC.jpg
9c72d257dffb72067a022f170c2e175f
acaa0887ad8c6addd3d7f1d8e3dd81c06190400d
86816 F20110330_AABVPK baldwin_r_Page_109.jpg
b7b52034b9965a80f60c160458d95c1d
a5ca602dc2e055dc5130ce4ee1e36cba95b5c9f7
23008 F20110330_AABVOW baldwin_r_Page_102.jpg
0f0dc5dc06275fdda24faf75b6c14692
89404c7e111cf88168913a4177e1d0e2751749d5
26771 F20110330_AABVPL baldwin_r_Page_109.QC.jpg
990d4291b34628528b663cb8527fc6fa
61af8075d546a6bbb01d39191a4b5d66747e0a1b
7950 F20110330_AABVOX baldwin_r_Page_102.QC.jpg
5907d003a89800850ba23e76449fb17d
1c32631570fa08c66a4f550321f3abda20db2e29
41446 F20110330_AABVQA baldwin_r_Page_117.jpg
3556f781dc6a86b080c6b781a1ea7937
fdf186e9c53b2d8bb59767ba691a40bdf77840d9
76987 F20110330_AABVPM baldwin_r_Page_110.jpg
47dc2c1f7259aab84d0cae26420390a5
bfe8eb0dabb37b2087b48191b3817ea398e18cd6
21711 F20110330_AABVOY baldwin_r_Page_103.jpg
b98b09bdc2604308045ced70ded3c0f9
140b2a0a4f8605fde87349dec1fa2d4714a80834
25270 F20110330_AABVPN baldwin_r_Page_110.QC.jpg
7fe545a35e5b8c471979549c5b818c87
0a053a723353d121268617538e400fa419891652
7358 F20110330_AABVOZ baldwin_r_Page_103.QC.jpg
a6e2f0fd5a29a28fb724b350a7e94c46
dfd838b566a2cf5177075aa383c5299ad6f818dc
13170 F20110330_AABVQB baldwin_r_Page_117.QC.jpg
24f2c451b8da96669694f07377ec56a6
5caac992fe89bde1b9c636efc51aa12339ea1abe
81561 F20110330_AABVPO baldwin_r_Page_111.jpg
38b27d70bc0c1a5dc2e707801102737d
33355fddc17e896c89dbd283225832a81dbb7bef
12040 F20110330_AABVQC baldwin_r_Page_118.QC.jpg
fe5c2b8cb04ec9305d97e080403ddebf
38546da936d9792dbdde36e8e5dba8cd8d4b1138
25294 F20110330_AABVPP baldwin_r_Page_111.QC.jpg
f2c4b25831141ec32eaa8f55b194a19d
c2f98bc5f844a33cec9332eaa7ea517dec765507
19303 F20110330_AABVQD baldwin_r_Page_119.jpg
50e47d5668ec8b8c0477ee4974fbbd1c
bc335d6d7b20a16eb36ab5d33992fd8283b9d345
80920 F20110330_AABVPQ baldwin_r_Page_112.jpg
45be69f737de5ddefb8f212d0c3f8b79
f311619b75118ab40679b716721c9ee3ff27d9bb
6239 F20110330_AABVQE baldwin_r_Page_119.QC.jpg
1c437bb554fa2262c142e8a4d8481337
deb79a6b74958b738843deafda4158babe145420
24917 F20110330_AABVPR baldwin_r_Page_112.QC.jpg
a593c5683d11a6c62015d410dc1c862f
8c5d71f9f7c4af9ec2091470955f7d1c904556ae
23651 F20110330_AABVQF baldwin_r_Page_120.QC.jpg
1cecd8b51e4fd6bc296ea9680d119113
f3ada1572300fdcf0c705248de738c1180ff1bfa
73980 F20110330_AABVPS baldwin_r_Page_113.jpg
d0cebeab1aa23cad4c28ab8895a8a3f2
6fa489a8850b9fa365b819bc80cd55d485545a2b
77972 F20110330_AABVQG baldwin_r_Page_121.jpg
f96e21a903c00704b704e0ed2dca2e1d
6c6f9a96282e200b336234213cd8d17b9952f13c
22469 F20110330_AABVPT baldwin_r_Page_113.QC.jpg
b3cd29354cab5d2a43b957fbba1b0c50
bb1576f8d593fad0275b6e164a7c8c62f2fb3966
23966 F20110330_AABVQH baldwin_r_Page_121.QC.jpg
4c660aec3fa5b63fed8fde7efe30b3a5
6e93eb9db092f52d0e93b87d08c1e02c51335814
28613 F20110330_AABVPU baldwin_r_Page_114.jpg
2b0ba71c192b20a23a3b287977c6c33b
fbaea14d97fc0e6d4afb16c9373d980a818e872e
20567 F20110330_AABVQI baldwin_r_Page_122.jpg
97a61ac263cd99e87c9db1134902c5dd
ce9c2af17953103e9abce171243abc187bce082f
6652 F20110330_AABVQJ baldwin_r_Page_122.QC.jpg
669febcac4ebdf6bba561a0ad1b1d918
e02a385ff1788e890411157bdc52038440c06b9e
9200 F20110330_AABVPV baldwin_r_Page_114.QC.jpg
fbd22ebf254e86aaed6f882fa0f023a5
a534d0819ac431d5963a253e70ae770e3efdbf53
83629 F20110330_AABVQK baldwin_r_Page_123.jpg
840d6659c15f870299930bf7ab2675b7
3e56995cac06d58e3305f3b8d33e29562c54d7ed
41818 F20110330_AABVPW baldwin_r_Page_115.jpg
f639c9ea0234d54922ef68b3cad3817e
62d487ed8a889e6152eebd68e607ae4477fa67ed
66610 F20110330_AABVRA baldwin_r_Page_131.jpg
0737ad27ec632aeefd4812e925ed08b9
4cf8147fbe9aabf6fe3fc3c087d760c227a4b254
22768 F20110330_AABVQL baldwin_r_Page_123.QC.jpg
8abec01c1ed12bf11d6b0e6e6fe8a22e
98ace6b110f3970e95b4899633b835ae964febb9
13693 F20110330_AABVPX baldwin_r_Page_115.QC.jpg
f074a17b828f71383abc9de298948baa
ea45280c0647e9796e91c413d90cf180a2217024
19132 F20110330_AABVRB baldwin_r_Page_131.QC.jpg
0aeb2a1d482402bc2e3e349e230257e3
917ec38856743996504951926faf38f66ab1c4c2
80355 F20110330_AABVQM baldwin_r_Page_124.jpg
e8738dcc89e092c2968433a6016c86fd
bb8632f9c1ae83ac7ac34ebae4a527834e408340
15132 F20110330_AABVPY baldwin_r_Page_116.jpg
e4030daaaf29d504a9032b5ffe6923db
b7b61c76804b77d59e4c85d56d6ca7b2ff8f1ea2
21768 F20110330_AABVQN baldwin_r_Page_124.QC.jpg
bbe9abf8a4542342347cfe469e6ed896
65f15a2fb4efa8baf2c8f34df6d9eed87f40ed68
4995 F20110330_AABVPZ baldwin_r_Page_116.QC.jpg
ee99b18a65a870dfd29d7d3782955ee2
4ff66031ae23d1eb4554a7b759b8334a60e42b89
72375 F20110330_AABVRC baldwin_r_Page_132.jpg
7e170d0841e1f52e4b42473f49990b6f
3761493165b13578a54c17c1009379918458bb56
80933 F20110330_AABVQO baldwin_r_Page_125.jpg
a40e5852720966a8f21d093ea5f498a6
454a0a721bc37382700b94826d422b915f616b07
20894 F20110330_AABVRD baldwin_r_Page_132.QC.jpg
33cd1f4b42a5912a75a76e10df509834
8606cd167cfac7c18f0c2898c40870911a90cfd6
22058 F20110330_AABVQP baldwin_r_Page_125.QC.jpg
75cdf3c817e010f130d558f510eef6a2
78363dfe56a73e9fa165b94173865998ec8fac2b
93529 F20110330_AABVRE baldwin_r_Page_133.jpg
129c6ee09747224f77f17874e52bc4cd
f2d74a053bbc528715630bb9bd3fbfedf28b702e
66941 F20110330_AABVQQ baldwin_r_Page_126.jpg
edc1319c6e87a89fb2f584538129e4e4
0e4ce218eb851e94ac59c0951047ee0fa4dcce02
26173 F20110330_AABVRF baldwin_r_Page_133.QC.jpg
dde6caf1b54049ddc4e6acf013d26ef7
9252d97c41e2271e788ef3a5540f90b014fce58e
19009 F20110330_AABVQR baldwin_r_Page_126.QC.jpg
2e38bec4613d68efff84556817f2a31f
96172c60e45cbaec7ea6bdb7389bd7c672dd5625
99303 F20110330_AABVRG baldwin_r_Page_134.jpg
7888aeedf2e4ae04433a8d9dc0b9d6a1
04f2c77c21f894577080bf47ff0f2a30ff0d19f5
74249 F20110330_AABVQS baldwin_r_Page_127.jpg
a636ce9a71ab890f011e8d4fbf5ee6f1
d1260dddaef66d2146b0b341904458b2dfeffaaa
26853 F20110330_AABVRH baldwin_r_Page_134.QC.jpg
895a6107a35d496209fb17c3ec687e8b
04b1f76ebc033df61886605c5ab3529bba1dfb59
21580 F20110330_AABVQT baldwin_r_Page_127.QC.jpg
b48d945dbd7354c84db9d665a196de2f
b4e04805ed1d1cddf9cbdb6384f0064cf86329c8
89675 F20110330_AABVRI baldwin_r_Page_135.jpg
36ae9294527958e41e0b5cad4fdc2dd8
9f9691ff17ae96fbf61102ce0c0747a03fb3c773
98875 F20110330_AABVQU baldwin_r_Page_128.jpg
33cafad11d4c9ba2ff0db510344145a5
cfc5db0897bfb8236b8bd17d61ce212e2debd8c0
24723 F20110330_AABVRJ baldwin_r_Page_135.QC.jpg
dca0ac4582ec55189f101e13dd559455
1257b54b7f63e5595c91cce8088f659ac2373639
26448 F20110330_AABVQV baldwin_r_Page_128.QC.jpg
faac2f27d458cc039be12b3fdc41167b
a9937f03920e861f7d0020bd15e3c31023ea9b5b
93096 F20110330_AABVRK baldwin_r_Page_136.jpg
f79cfef4d89dc7f72edb96d9bb27ae0e
d0ecb2add2d288700eeb7c87e3baab704e350bad
85972 F20110330_AABVQW baldwin_r_Page_129.jpg
2fcc6af3171523d9416291c222b7dcbd
b8371f68eb8357c4a8ef5f7ec586ec122c3208f1
25131 F20110330_AABVRL baldwin_r_Page_136.QC.jpg
f2821b0058ff18015577c284e844f9bf
005519b7481805af5a45b1ec6d8856bdb64dd948
24462 F20110330_AABVQX baldwin_r_Page_129.QC.jpg
f02687cabe6ccce2ecf480f2e788c89b
befd1367d585256e66451ebe4ea82ae9e3c2d929
9537 F20110330_AABVSA baldwin_r_Page_003.jp2
d0c584f960a949c7a4456b5a0d6d5025
55c8b1481bfd0e54056f0612cf8f3c1b299b45ce
94444 F20110330_AABVRM baldwin_r_Page_137.jpg
dadde9c141df3fe10c5bb5b6ae940d6c
3cc9281f8a9eb265cf8de08d6d7dbdf49aceac3e
92408 F20110330_AABVQY baldwin_r_Page_130.jpg
ed6c8b8aeb863e5b0cba2fe2849159d5
115417f20cd48db48f21a39d69c91351c662c461
74003 F20110330_AABVSB baldwin_r_Page_004.jp2
dde6af2df1074baf2b3a38258de01d53
2a3e68bafbe83eb8990cbbbc0de35b8f6a819773
26074 F20110330_AABVRN baldwin_r_Page_137.QC.jpg
ec96166c8986c8087f641683fb391ce5
6df694a174151042d1c10bc3a5850477bba2234a
24971 F20110330_AABVQZ baldwin_r_Page_130.QC.jpg
089f3147536573f7c8f0403a4c24d2f0
4633caffabee39da7f7f49155a1fa5210b33cb36
1051982 F20110330_AABVSC baldwin_r_Page_005.jp2
8b815ea1acc788108d09d2b620023799
3d653c9dc2fb84bfcfe08a54ebbfb730c30a287c
97584 F20110330_AABVRO baldwin_r_Page_138.jpg
761c2e09540e5e5199fdcde47a68fc64
9766d220515d215786fe6427ae28edcb27256fd4
26783 F20110330_AABVRP baldwin_r_Page_138.QC.jpg
f78ba79fa4fb05a4fd7904097df16166
eae9dbab9adbd0c94b94f4b96edb4143383ac4db
F20110330_AABVSD baldwin_r_Page_006.jp2
90420470dc6de686f00bd73d3254e40c
f7aaff9b3730932ffe68804be0cd87b7249d49d1
92241 F20110330_AABVRQ baldwin_r_Page_139.jpg
46d5655c3bfa24008d3e0602d3ba0b27
6ba0fca15bd9a561309f906972eb6c8ef2126c9b
342611 F20110330_AABVSE baldwin_r_Page_007.jp2
e79ae11551a8cf12184d307cb6bd8af9
0da8b176a0f2bd6e11699cadb31cccbc5803dba4
26106 F20110330_AABVRR baldwin_r_Page_139.QC.jpg
bf8375fd5a8705e9d41b95838a1b4192
e9a6ef12441ab0d5d456562677fb79787b968c16
1051966 F20110330_AABVSF baldwin_r_Page_008.jp2
6d0004a8372bdf7161dfe898df8f103a
17259827c08a5068b7cf2294ff890a9beb45f64b
86419 F20110330_AABVRS baldwin_r_Page_140.jpg
526b33c1fe05f50d5ce2ba2b9735968e
0fd2e20eb039461406e2d991a0e6a9078e11561b
1051984 F20110330_AABVSG baldwin_r_Page_009.jp2
a09deae69c76e0a6e5d0d4a90e3ea1ba
419bebd81522f9c9678603682cd296aae5b32617
24760 F20110330_AABVRT baldwin_r_Page_140.QC.jpg
f9314c5bf3845c5c124656d36deb45fe
16c0c9368eae9dc017f94ca7c87a52259f935046
1051963 F20110330_AABVSH baldwin_r_Page_010.jp2
633ba801d7dc71f39cf53e52f95f02fd
8b1154620e9516b8aa6d0011a81e97018f716361
24375 F20110330_AABVRU baldwin_r_Page_141.QC.jpg
88babeecf9423f18ed29a0b89f32ee40
a1dbb9337796e626e12eebbdb34c196d7b2a930c
216172 F20110330_AABVSI baldwin_r_Page_011.jp2
3dc07d8b1c4207bd1bac442baaaf7d2c
6bcf4b69c259cbcb436fff5c5c93554e2a430541
17244 F20110330_AABVRV baldwin_r_Page_142.QC.jpg
6036183a93fc6f30d8383540bf19fac9
c6611e6b7d27358096d61ae143e744e614c81b7f
89211 F20110330_AABVSJ baldwin_r_Page_012.jp2
e707d83d22830956f8036a7b56edfeb7
571a649fed6473811b0d23ce9fa90747cfc13aa7
67902 F20110330_AABVRW baldwin_r_Page_143.jpg
d7ef2a4582cd20340474ef8ab830c73e
c3cc8d2ed26582e4da6976bd02fca05db1fef0b2
90771 F20110330_AABVSK baldwin_r_Page_014.jp2
2a4981064463be6a75e2cdfb54c8a336
d5f6f806db4cd93ede7708b19ea76e45960bb009
21103 F20110330_AABVRX baldwin_r_Page_143.QC.jpg
812fcca977c0e8b17a2ddeea45221ee8
44c12ae8683e1db73a9a343b02910d12007d8b02
115735 F20110330_AABVTA baldwin_r_Page_030.jp2
6f04d90b34d8917907ddff374b28401f
309738ea29bec9a20b2a5090097235b933086e22
110536 F20110330_AABVSL baldwin_r_Page_015.jp2
91ac192cc423f2dc240953e2608919e4
557e6374d426a90b6832837058b4b546bd69e005
27116 F20110330_AABVRY baldwin_r_Page_001.jp2
d8edbd86f26bc9eceac5771b2b379034
79745dbb41c8fed442ce1a606f83b29283354bd7
115804 F20110330_AABVTB baldwin_r_Page_031.jp2
75e31de6ce625fbd85ac2c8598e24de0
44bec7c300bca3ed75551a36434b0177595e3faa
110668 F20110330_AABVSM baldwin_r_Page_016.jp2
2c212e490ea17efcd7998b6da8dbbc57
db42f805d7411818c1020be76196a7bd430f0b95
7042 F20110330_AABVRZ baldwin_r_Page_002.jp2
83aa52a59614f42a71738bb73737d46d
c60849aed7a05b42d4ad1796daddfe1f47b446ea
111995 F20110330_AABVTC baldwin_r_Page_032.jp2
3ba2765daeb72bf178942cfc81ebd56d
9ac3a48831215917c8eabdc99c9432272489f0c9
109664 F20110330_AABVSN baldwin_r_Page_017.jp2
146272f92a4ec5a80c117138b3a1c6ca
b4a6d742bd0020ee2efb95251a032dc2c392e318
1952 F20110330_AABUQB baldwin_r_Page_033.txt
c1242a67d796e3d1796b9de6f1b054dc
d4ffaccdca9991c81288040c90744e5583417c2a
109288 F20110330_AABVTD baldwin_r_Page_033.jp2
06acb5c1f4dd7791168cdf1f71978483
84f4b65f5d2bcbbcb13728106893d423636866f7
115702 F20110330_AABVSO baldwin_r_Page_018.jp2
62b4904d1dbb8d2778ae4d4fd459c6dc
3cf7ccfda3ae477e0d2e37088af2df91d26f08b7
111958 F20110330_AABVSP baldwin_r_Page_019.jp2
80de9dfee09988731b38ff61517c8b62
8190b1ac311482bf7e9d59d74c1f708321f4bb47
1526 F20110330_AABUQC baldwin_r_Page_054.txt
0a358036c866a6b9c3291534b8cba3c4
09b8c33e61a05d11eb8dc0e07d951ba0370e7d98
108760 F20110330_AABVTE baldwin_r_Page_034.jp2
0097de74c896224946b8c0406af0fecc
3aa683a0dbf2fd019e43e9d9564776bdbb7ff503
112511 F20110330_AABVSQ baldwin_r_Page_020.jp2
a9f461ca20564482adc14c6ec204dc2a
3905bbec61c7db99a063f0b0d2d270c08c05dd5d
74326 F20110330_AABUQD baldwin_r_Page_041.jpg
5eda586d981828d9663ff727e99d1950
db147eb4c7a306735943084fb279b84dc359168a
81438 F20110330_AABVTF baldwin_r_Page_035.jp2
abf583f7dc8754e7cccb51e0c60f5077
e98cbed92b04be152d20d95bc9736662b48e004d
109419 F20110330_AABVSR baldwin_r_Page_021.jp2
cb3091b3a43084d3efb01c80ae479f2c
099850cb90ddae0694728ea8dab5dc49ea3a4474
42336 F20110330_AABUQE baldwin_r_Page_038.pro
87d3a519a760e0859b5258aecf199414
af6f889753bf01c7cb597cbd643a15b9fa00d967
770596 F20110330_AABVTG baldwin_r_Page_036.jp2
1c18f77452114a44c6489497965b6acf
7b03be92d6a2430d36d12f03891a3d67f5ab751e
106926 F20110330_AABVSS baldwin_r_Page_022.jp2
eddc692c7adc948c720851217a3360ae
324f2e439ef4c5e6e74d39ccb41da12833dbdf1e
6278 F20110330_AABUQF baldwin_r_Page_074thm.jpg
64b6c7dd42d391d9d56c3621ab17a7a1
5dc531e705ab93218a7ece93256685ef102d2429
64933 F20110330_AABVTH baldwin_r_Page_037.jp2
17bf2dbf63b43a69c0662d73d2396a13
238da030352d11e4e493f35e979e1f4d4e4ac367
101541 F20110330_AABVST baldwin_r_Page_023.jp2
302bd6b41a35ff307b12233a9ffde4f7
9a5a9a8c864e1c087e02bf539909a7f54526ff4b
5131 F20110330_AABUQG baldwin_r_Page_014thm.jpg
a26171ca47fb9e56d4392cd5499d56b4
a0471b66f7416a948c340c193fe638237e002b36
94809 F20110330_AABVTI baldwin_r_Page_038.jp2
03af98d65ce51786bd8666cabb2959b8
5dfb38d1b3469910ac219f7357f7f5388de1645d
110342 F20110330_AABVSU baldwin_r_Page_024.jp2
1e7ec38796f9320f324f26ecb5ef3361
eacd2d5e0e4bf556a124f128175242e587d864a8
108762 F20110330_AABUQH baldwin_r_Page_050.jp2
a6233096c41372693b1f2aa230551e35
e24fbbad3a6ca5889298abffdb7da69e426197f9
82387 F20110330_AABVTJ baldwin_r_Page_039.jp2
a4585e73f1fb22e06cfd6fa6f1da42f1
fd608f84b6133558e7a4b48f88d2be1eb7c8738f
77410 F20110330_AABVSV baldwin_r_Page_025.jp2
f4a4c59bf31fa361b040d3de6ad59e1c
3973bc9bb551f88a770a886b8ed5e24022959841
1054428 F20110330_AABUQI baldwin_r_Page_057.tif
d1345620e882d61257fbe84f69bd4d3c
716e982c0f188be2ac00ababfdb9837565cfe1a5
64585 F20110330_AABVTK baldwin_r_Page_040.jp2
027a2e1331f86e7248af72d39f9ea728
1a333f575649744a097766769c4dd89b37caf986
101838 F20110330_AABVSW baldwin_r_Page_026.jp2
250c07ec9231369f3e414f7ce90f1926
7b9a1abfc6270870808f943257a449d8365eebde
42553 F20110330_AABVUA baldwin_r_Page_057.jp2
6ce1741ce6f03d004b3911aeb180d624
87b980edd92fcfbedf5a22e9071af61346fb73d7
1053954 F20110330_AABUQJ baldwin_r_Page_044.tif
21276b0d57e8817868929a10933dbc5b
c0aec2f95d8a02f5e1dcf36f5e3298caba45a6d7
94835 F20110330_AABVTL baldwin_r_Page_041.jp2
838ab155ef6299bbd39d6b3fe7f40079
503d95c1a782d00c9daf889ef1451c23eea72adf
1051908 F20110330_AABVSX baldwin_r_Page_027.jp2
d55d98afdb91c2a6f463834aaa79a12c
61aafb57c09badbd21ae8bbb799cb04b0cd116fc
59960 F20110330_AABVUB baldwin_r_Page_058.jp2
c1866a4744c048183e8e91c7a45d7b7d
1c0aa9875918db4e161723469d3f73abaf0cefda
49388 F20110330_AABUQK baldwin_r_Page_111.pro
c45b06413a7a9acb6aa6d0a136ed85a3
8ff84ff3e2f7d453668a4774f355a5b66d4382e5
111363 F20110330_AABVTM baldwin_r_Page_042.jp2
00da438ba7ae156896201127866efb7c
768391df3143aab9348bb023de4d7d5a418ab2eb
111883 F20110330_AABVSY baldwin_r_Page_028.jp2
326c5982258d6177825501d6d64690c9
78fd6e6d1f265fc3708750ea1405cbce3ab76355
36595 F20110330_AABURA baldwin_r_Page_118.jpg
923ec8a9faf0a68fdaff2204b7cf3a1b
c81eae411694a679ed86117c863d271c1eea71c2
63414 F20110330_AABVUC baldwin_r_Page_060.jp2
c2293343b1faa5b4c6b9004a2e208cbe
e351b7b967579a0edd5ce0b284f1513d0947045a
1849 F20110330_AABUQL baldwin_r_Page_120.txt
f59c9c3bec74e2d7d093b96b35ab8107
cf1440716b99d9e4bcd28bb5c9fbe6a55a7f1488
93064 F20110330_AABVTN baldwin_r_Page_043.jp2
16bfa2d9ae7a38bbf1c48fb982c71518
b82437fe42d5608a2561116bdc10bd4ed2042610
108943 F20110330_AABVSZ baldwin_r_Page_029.jp2
c15b24036b5dacf8284ec8407d6430f2
dc365f4b227c72d945463b56fa8a0f5d4fbfe600
90351 F20110330_AABURB baldwin_r_Page_141.jpg
880bbbb80a8c0a50dc5cb135c25fd6f7
065ac4ba5bacebfe11e3a9a45c863d3711e091d8
81279 F20110330_AABVUD baldwin_r_Page_061.jp2
1f7f26a19d30b63eec78d8a332ffab67
c3e06bd5b4ffe5b9677208461f160b74b3adea3e
F20110330_AABUQM baldwin_r_Page_025.tif
7908cc5d40f29c439e355e120fb01f0e
8b34cd06b473bd687b0c89894d2f4ee20df93c03
98454 F20110330_AABVTO baldwin_r_Page_044.jp2
6763f76bec677a9fa9a028cf91930779
ae0367acb2e736b0cc020db77f2873ba0069c6a4
68937 F20110330_AABURC baldwin_r_Page_012.jpg
88e23d5c9bdcc278ae9d8df6fef0013d
2c34bae53a2959df351c36900c0d968b6c4380a7
48763 F20110330_AABVUE baldwin_r_Page_062.jp2
4491906b6c58f91f059b3b5da812323f
28ecaf6e5e281d37b50124367ed3d95bc8d81d97
82662 F20110330_AABUQN baldwin_r_Page_070.jpg
c5dd27f35a51e310cbdb555030d4a7c6
64773267a282fbbc860ab14cd4d74a3392f52dae
116203 F20110330_AABVTP baldwin_r_Page_045.jp2
b6e6e2a622d9ba639cbf5ba2b29d2aad
0e644f6217d2f988a83af808de9e529948a58482
83863 F20110330_AABUQO baldwin_r_Page_013.jp2
17d374ea3f299c5fcdb6eb448c33b176
e501a0f2f0711f0eefc7a4ea4a970c779b3bb4a3
106365 F20110330_AABVTQ baldwin_r_Page_046.jp2
87c9b6556aeec53230a0e3963da9c592
ce6a0059117dce81562b1fdd77f578d4ae6c0398
6359 F20110330_AABWAA baldwin_r_Page_072thm.jpg
39f0ed728566474c8a3e78b2f47e80b6
efc860a1ee4b4efa08335ca95876e36044e4ef16
58601 F20110330_AABURD baldwin_r_Page_004.jpg
984dd76cb71642a763262898058cde18
fd58de1ccff5ba50de7897a7e85342f7e65ea88b
27392 F20110330_AABVUF baldwin_r_Page_063.jp2
d998d84f11b76c5539a85505fc66c41e
2ed1c9937433c3a9145f47d648ecd849c9f7dee2
F20110330_AABUQP baldwin_r_Page_138.tif
92ad6a46653a4cb3727cffee08cde952
47f20aac7e81f4d32c4866d0733506b3c88bf2b8
110476 F20110330_AABVTR baldwin_r_Page_047.jp2
ebb963a1a5f6866757e64d5a5c85167b
30cfc649c0d4b5b7a05683c55b530c7a9ffb3ce4
6221 F20110330_AABWAB baldwin_r_Page_073thm.jpg
011412907903914df681bec127f5a295
e79b07bf92faa95acd6fa5221f7dae58079ef1e9
80115 F20110330_AABURE baldwin_r_Page_091.jpg
6aea6b5e24412991db9748018fade643
c9152ceb4bb965b115c1c707e06e6345b23a5a39
91018 F20110330_AABVUG baldwin_r_Page_064.jp2
ae00b0688c9e85bd5c4980aa7cb1bc40
83efbd2bb4a85aa000ad5c766b5032e6e64b43ae
87065 F20110330_AABUQQ baldwin_r_Page_019.jpg
74f0e1bbb5cfb7f47b42c6d5f0ed61b6
ffe0b5df40087e3438e99dab65ee4d484694de03
113494 F20110330_AABVTS baldwin_r_Page_048.jp2
ab955ee92bb759ef243acea0b96fc000
c89c982e67ef1dfc70654430349d722e7799d14d
6171 F20110330_AABWAC baldwin_r_Page_075thm.jpg
e262c4b5d9b748385cf839283ae80843
d034b337c9b24cd4f93e793595acb61c34bc23a2
110650 F20110330_AABVUH baldwin_r_Page_065.jp2
665495ae4b81d1d1a25a15de90057404
910d10e2c9ef4943ca020d787d39de5a3514f0d8
7159 F20110330_AABURF baldwin_r_Page_001.QC.jpg
40c566e29c4f08ff614417f2165c9631
1aa28465f2099faec766720dc3cd6da453dabf6c
17911 F20110330_AABUQR baldwin_r_Page_007.jpg
d2cf3b818c2c1c8c59cee3d9edc4d3bb
84ce0b60a72123264fc4bcff4d1223925074cc38
107742 F20110330_AABVTT baldwin_r_Page_049.jp2
66ad430470350d9714a396c41e87d103
3f278fc93a9a24e7decb273ae231d26fbcbfc2aa
759 F20110330_AABWAD baldwin_r_Page_076thm.jpg
18f95f2c56daf2f5551b1e92e52687f7
d39c47e141a69115adba27538d3f4d35cd0fdd8d
101514 F20110330_AABVUI baldwin_r_Page_066.jp2
70923b639f510c92370497074d56590f
522ae4702f236b8a38d34bb59baa8b9fbb01e4aa
F20110330_AABURG baldwin_r_Page_053.tif
4b4eb7095de4a79f58937b6cb3c08f65
0855e30778bc1121935985eab5577b7b33221bc5
F20110330_AABUQS baldwin_r_Page_098.tif
b3f0c2ca107e0d0aac345ed85428599f
76a568a48da8a54e112317254268954d592e3f5b
58884 F20110330_AABVTU baldwin_r_Page_051.jp2
a182b6f57f2ab196134715468fa6e2b9
4552cfddc0775c7774a4c93d7c66a9c67d2457ca
1669 F20110330_AABWAE baldwin_r_Page_077thm.jpg
29d171d99bcd8dfc8778e565a4dae519
602452eac576b685811024d7adc8214da7ccf2f1
103566 F20110330_AABVUJ baldwin_r_Page_067.jp2
4747faf4fd6d13444556b530947aaf7d
ba32a9bd34013a2389af3c5b72171a57b8457d87
4223 F20110330_AABUQT baldwin_r_Page_142thm.jpg
49299462a7e65dbb4db6835a64201f7c
47caa72b022674b76eced184630062389eab4986
54973 F20110330_AABVTV baldwin_r_Page_052.jp2
e8495eacb60e0beb8788e290da42e46c
8745be3d95d95c602df880db2b55baeffda91bab
76228 F20110330_AABURH baldwin_r_Page_120.jpg
b848f93148a6ab5660c63bcca6507562
a91e68e03f11da44bde6f1c301f2d3d7fde2cffa
1621 F20110330_AABWAF baldwin_r_Page_078thm.jpg
345c5191ab860c42f17275df669a720a
18509e5783484f705455dd41f9071ca27bebe0a3
104748 F20110330_AABVUK baldwin_r_Page_068.jp2
4761fbec1ef7bda7090f016cd52f61bb
d6946f2042b8affe489094058107c5bf2837ad84
25271604 F20110330_AABUQU baldwin_r_Page_006.tif
c1d2cbe20a53d5462bf1589269c44d41
7779fcba159e82e126daa5244ecc6dece5ce6d14
31301 F20110330_AABVTW baldwin_r_Page_053.jp2
8bcdb90932bdcd183dd05586b40c13c0
26df849e5522cc9b3ea8830a0abdc3b07bd6877d
1886 F20110330_AABURI baldwin_r_Page_107.txt
de34dcb51dd57c601851156d74895ce4
9795ee51a4148b2d277c1b38efe7cf9b10854d3b
1424 F20110330_AABWAG baldwin_r_Page_079thm.jpg
3a8d2d324f0af89fef9d266d6131584b
dde5a46820bc7cbc89e2f59e68d66db13d0eb893
55547 F20110330_AABVVA baldwin_r_Page_084.jp2
7590de779a603c924933de25d555ea6c
e727cf24707b499cc86c87ab2480e4f23a6e082c
105033 F20110330_AABVUL baldwin_r_Page_069.jp2
30d210f8bf255cb3544b4b9961f5569e
3ae3bd663e821dfca2dafbb688084885bf41022c
63260 F20110330_AABUQV baldwin_r_Page_142.jpg
f440495bc28c42af75255d5a53548107
b5051f2aac4ff2ae5d02aba99e8bf709c2ac295a
41356 F20110330_AABVTX baldwin_r_Page_054.jp2
c5d599107f935dbd52481d256b532bc0
3ec3c82878605a1b33a8c22994954391ff7f297c
232029 F20110330_AABURJ UFE0012931_00001.xml FULL
667ed2fb2db75945ba612781d1324ae7
0ced35c5d22220c57130e1d437ac8f5206eab27f
2495 F20110330_AABWAH baldwin_r_Page_080thm.jpg
a76a380987f14274d3b293240abdb6cf
2ed2f09eae768e38d8379eda8bed712329378922
31408 F20110330_AABVVB baldwin_r_Page_085.jp2
22cae1adf6a3501a621d4d257716711c
c8fb18b5e7b74eebdcc8faef33ce965b6899cd26
110701 F20110330_AABVUM baldwin_r_Page_070.jp2
39b8c50afef899a93376d90e10e565e3
60fb2f10aedcfb94ace01a405244c84f9b2d7bcd
F20110330_AABUQW baldwin_r_Page_067.tif
35a62896d41a2215314198d826e06861
c3f6a94cbbd59d2a1407cd4056d97d2d1edd9bd9
59388 F20110330_AABVTY baldwin_r_Page_055.jp2
964658a12fd24c28aaff86845cb98072
ef98a90024cb42e2668c55ae955f484755ae2b6d
2643 F20110330_AABWAI baldwin_r_Page_081thm.jpg
a5dc3aa4ee464f5baac1e7695c249083
6ff408a5b589198b2bfc659a0a7701bcfb07b90a
99611 F20110330_AABVVC baldwin_r_Page_086.jp2
bc662338a4f22da5ad495422782d3428
1052805df6f1be499b1f6b0912800dbcc48d41ab
105228 F20110330_AABVUN baldwin_r_Page_071.jp2
e0242770635c2d33623bb7720e8e07ec
9f5fa5ebe6be20839d7f84d9c411dd8a948cca13
50146 F20110330_AABUQX baldwin_r_Page_059.jp2
97273513a2598f9ad23584d03005ab4c
0df8bed84f0c43a7751736011be1a33af61790a9
44349 F20110330_AABVTZ baldwin_r_Page_056.jp2
90ae597c23cba0141b68b06e26d0f0bb
7fd68219101e949c42a1446c6c42e13a7e67a457
F20110330_AABUSA baldwin_r_Page_016.tif
df57b81737a090b83b0fd59e5a6c6814
1217c3dfbac5939ad479c593090bafd163c3552f
1778 F20110330_AABWAJ baldwin_r_Page_082thm.jpg
d43062cc711ee3b018573efc12bfed3f
d51ac3d8407be9fa641ded25c001aee69a02b0fd
92153 F20110330_AABVVD baldwin_r_Page_087.jp2
0147aa5535e2c7bd5df260c4c66cce0a
b517799a49268963337b4a1889512b2b982a9caf
108151 F20110330_AABVUO baldwin_r_Page_072.jp2
c46e6db7bc02a5e87f7dfc4676d8ba62
0559a0a831421d65274326218ff49225911cf6bd
5149 F20110330_AABUQY baldwin_r_Page_127thm.jpg
b56c51de93a3db9c382f6a04667ae4ff
0470fab8030380150c3e209bb119e8c3bc33c984
F20110330_AABUSB baldwin_r_Page_017.tif
03ab0bc74a422bb7a509478876b7417a
3a6ee60ba27635cc79d11a37e5f29907c7b31849
F20110330_AABURM baldwin_r_Page_001.tif
5d38a46e2d9b443973a3545e00f3441e
4672ed40256905e6c96de33c56e212943909e882
2510 F20110330_AABWAK baldwin_r_Page_083thm.jpg
15eda074d20534b99bc6b5ba83c98725
588e57444620ffdd18701d0c918e2de59a6607c2
111252 F20110330_AABVVE baldwin_r_Page_088.jp2
32ab7fed925fab4939fdbda7f96bfbcc
934528c7e31eda8a83a0b3998689210064e1d240
104848 F20110330_AABVUP baldwin_r_Page_073.jp2
50d7636598fa1a0bb1ecce6e721293f8
6c8b085b83e7940f2867c4640d8688e499b8f0e3
50883 F20110330_AABUQZ baldwin_r_Page_129.pro
218f6b6f9724efdef9045cf4677016a3
9be3a85b73ada167a45f117dd59c7d45ca135f2d
F20110330_AABUSC baldwin_r_Page_018.tif
36c6c0d42569408e5577ba053c2d5060
e3c5fc42b09789a1e19236849d1861df7bb7a7e0
F20110330_AABURN baldwin_r_Page_002.tif
564f96fe1a03ee5a131acbca5e2052e2
a63c9d72ea33bfc7924d0607f3e338a0d8d8a9c3
3628 F20110330_AABWAL baldwin_r_Page_084thm.jpg
9d58f9d43c226c0c98cdca23f26473f9
a879ca56bc18f8231d4e97e8d9d4035f5d7ccf46
105721 F20110330_AABVVF baldwin_r_Page_089.jp2
81b187f5ab3e6e430210641bf6dccbbb
92c2f6c9abc7ff126c00eeb4b05a00ac3aedbab4
109194 F20110330_AABVUQ baldwin_r_Page_074.jp2
f6ade81d0dbe343182d7f35e5858b066
84d0fca65df298d82059b1d3961d50cc98fa4011
F20110330_AABUSD baldwin_r_Page_019.tif
de6567ea3dc474065a79093a58a327a4
a8b8f989f4a6958e68ddf60dd0494b745da4e73b
F20110330_AABURO baldwin_r_Page_003.tif
3b79d0fba14de4d4381243fcf8e824c2
cac13cb2ff474288e7331a3e62d0d217bf03e8a6
1976 F20110330_AABWBA baldwin_r_Page_099thm.jpg
907708905d5f23025aa5ffb70cac17cf
7928f43d6b5a3e530dfcec870da7d54dabe6ea51
2093 F20110330_AABWAM baldwin_r_Page_085thm.jpg
4903182e6bf7b6a1fa94ee362917c34f
c92d4ef3690d465c7677000cec2d219f13302ac9
107137 F20110330_AABVUR baldwin_r_Page_075.jp2
eb99f6e48d9e39232b50e66b533ac6b9
5d2b5dbd2515df6c0fcb8169c181700d1445e276
F20110330_AABURP baldwin_r_Page_004.tif
a299f54a2f025c828a1eb7ab28c9efea
74b5c7138769f208b1646e3d45345eeb57a6fe53
2974 F20110330_AABWBB baldwin_r_Page_100thm.jpg
a449b21f1ca5dc9302c93c48c0bdc482
3f5dfc3f6249009607876516294ede4eb6250d95
5516 F20110330_AABWAN baldwin_r_Page_086thm.jpg
d11cc4642d7962cb08669dd458c75b85
1aba83db6df1999581b14cec6986ad00f194cc0c
107650 F20110330_AABVVG baldwin_r_Page_090.jp2
0e33b21a2951a6c1618daa899352a48c
f29e87767f67b75992bab6d97c7547a840cdb784
10355 F20110330_AABVUS baldwin_r_Page_076.jp2
8714ce8f8247a6a3db2374f5ae7871f6
e31ac76445c8be87cde57a12cc3836bd53fb620f
F20110330_AABUSE baldwin_r_Page_020.tif
890f1310bc41288f18a416238aa128b7
b480c324063c0c927afae9f94b419d1298ab3c29
F20110330_AABURQ baldwin_r_Page_005.tif
6bd2b05018b643676eb114e36b41e01e
5893d4a220689a76e8136dc8bab4c9d5e2830013
2112 F20110330_AABWBC baldwin_r_Page_101thm.jpg
4c779e76d098dc736f0b527d21a42147
e62bdc5ff7a222a6d4c157d4881d5f4fc44e2bd4
5488 F20110330_AABWAO baldwin_r_Page_087thm.jpg
a38d7451a4dda9c30c19c347054c1dce
c03cec8b2eaf839ff4207a26a2d9a8db70d2e3b1
106838 F20110330_AABVVH baldwin_r_Page_091.jp2
3292d8847fff1d4b07ad56cf32cf5178
f822e8d409fa5af74dcd68f3c341a9dc83aa7bbe
23287 F20110330_AABVUT baldwin_r_Page_077.jp2
d559b65b5fbbacb9b9c9aec2e6e94dc9
251400318e102fd2d00068f15fd7a4325d40293f
F20110330_AABUSF baldwin_r_Page_021.tif
6d2b4c1201b57074f1218534f9c7fdfd
6e2ed5e79d273b0ee4d5bca6c3498944eb871ef7
F20110330_AABURR baldwin_r_Page_007.tif
95f40fef5ebefea6c6eaf2869a76d1e7
9dcb983f9c527004854451c92fae197bda7e6f71
2192 F20110330_AABWBD baldwin_r_Page_102thm.jpg
4590a260f25e3978fd66e0d9300f4986
4888d690e16c8667cf17e170103355dd74354727
6312 F20110330_AABWAP baldwin_r_Page_088thm.jpg
9155f7b47d33e659f9387146457a15ce
c879e28adfbb256cfb7513abb6c4a08a83760a63
966414 F20110330_AABVVI baldwin_r_Page_092.jp2
bc0e90e6266af8d1f30b070140d7c189
9409e9b64fdea3442c218a7b01cb7eae90a0137d
32360 F20110330_AABVUU baldwin_r_Page_078.jp2
5a22ba833b6b9492ffd254c83f15d0d2
621442bab38c71b3501cb60e658c3b7efddd51d9
F20110330_AABUSG baldwin_r_Page_022.tif
d2feb09e1b647df55e2052fbaed0abf5
ace8e7300943303a9c5ef111ebd5879af7aec729
F20110330_AABURS baldwin_r_Page_008.tif
ee9b8336ad541803ba0cb73be4b40674
438335c01b467934da9297de92880ca456b43871
2142 F20110330_AABWBE baldwin_r_Page_103thm.jpg
a0bce15c0626ffc7753e76fd3a9edb07
690e35a44217e336d2ac6807609401aa0a4ff763
110337 F20110330_AABVVJ baldwin_r_Page_093.jp2
d474cdce17373037d661cca45ea2bde6
5bc3885414c8bcf0a39d3a58304ecd62b022a2d4
20132 F20110330_AABVUV baldwin_r_Page_079.jp2
a39790e919021f5b50c1875438832ebd
ce02422fd611d4398ecab775abefb839e2dd4a03
F20110330_AABUSH baldwin_r_Page_023.tif
c290ca996d9b843f6b2dd29451f97e20
5c0ff2671a307cb668a7d4d59bb3c8ac10332b67
F20110330_AABURT baldwin_r_Page_009.tif
ecc88d8c50a4d41b2681c12e37cf9c98
83ffd1a9ee06f4d2650e72af73f27d1b51e69499
5240 F20110330_AABWBF baldwin_r_Page_104thm.jpg
238347fbbf5396e2d3e48a7bd9d16b16
bb0802bedda27ad4ab4087fe00c066a069956923
6310 F20110330_AABWAQ baldwin_r_Page_089thm.jpg
c22140bed9839b2ab90889ea432d56ec
2c54796ff54be5089bc8dd9ab10b011796165d90
106514 F20110330_AABVVK baldwin_r_Page_094.jp2
20c571440161467c7619240836687b99
4abf35e14f31e1fa2402d7947f530170ce041d10
52299 F20110330_AABVUW baldwin_r_Page_080.jp2
f385a37d233aa3630118be84eba8e5e8
6f015d93b8a4091025c6d22f070d368d650c56d4
F20110330_AABUSI baldwin_r_Page_024.tif
49e8d8ccf332861b4993455c5787e551
3fe9a821a5383f560d77f6fc0e314545fbabd167
F20110330_AABURU baldwin_r_Page_010.tif
052289b5cf0b67060f66fe064472355a
2ecad114aee6f28ed4422e37338c3556f9727861
5607 F20110330_AABWBG baldwin_r_Page_105thm.jpg
6d7f85ff5fc8abeb2e5d07ce960ff88c
2a2e47a8eb13d6463ad823b9ce51a75a37133b7e
6521 F20110330_AABWAR baldwin_r_Page_090thm.jpg
4958e93316f83a0a8e824bba35e7392c
996820d41ff111e148fe86725cc9e4c14503f3d2
103817 F20110330_AABVWA baldwin_r_Page_110.jp2
2e7ed8415b9a08f235b554a46c649a61
25d6164b3389ac679a31887aa004824fd84f7e12
111370 F20110330_AABVVL baldwin_r_Page_095.jp2
25e4ea7ceef452614fec4f67b9391820
41feb89dbe2d853b415be4b03b1feeb3c09a228c
43969 F20110330_AABVUX baldwin_r_Page_081.jp2
a7a946da62498e21f1a36b74c1d5f2d9
e1fbec2db6f7eeabc68b15c2f959e7a97e2c8dde
F20110330_AABUSJ baldwin_r_Page_026.tif
588d2d60d825dab1ae7858a31b1e88cf
a88b5943cd844fe3e9e051072806e5f4543b579e
F20110330_AABURV baldwin_r_Page_011.tif
3e9430c06fe9c46eb9954b197c1bf158
d0a49dc262c2ca4724526322ee68e2f5eb680d92
5805 F20110330_AABWBH baldwin_r_Page_106thm.jpg
bfc7fe42e61c97520b117c7efeff7b82
90929ebb0123dad55b7a443dee87e08c4b76701c
6177 F20110330_AABWAS baldwin_r_Page_091thm.jpg
0ada3a4a4d9a186d3d817893135bfd88
7b470ee03426d5cfc1f1048ce1fa282b1e390521
109051 F20110330_AABVWB baldwin_r_Page_111.jp2
76d6b209603af9829a85e6dd9ad2145a
11d1c62c189f5750fe8cdedd2be2b4bb0177cfa1
113321 F20110330_AABVVM baldwin_r_Page_096.jp2
e1061ab70efa3685e7c099fc6365817e
68f9f3ea0e1ef8d2ab574cbffc016d8a8c7338d4
29133 F20110330_AABVUY baldwin_r_Page_082.jp2
4cefd9ee3cf2745628586f721d85f57c
195dadcdb20ab25e896567fd5cc308d17cd3bb7c
F20110330_AABUSK baldwin_r_Page_027.tif
2036bd06ea76ccd88e61106bed57cc74
492932829c5cd2f7acba11c64785da87a2d081ac
F20110330_AABURW baldwin_r_Page_012.tif
9a2c509e2ec4b7f215166ae5ab2e73a4
09ea913f62b3664d66dbaaa24a787c1d465bd45a
6147 F20110330_AABWBI baldwin_r_Page_107thm.jpg
ab56ad5b8412b459cb73fcb12fb52dc9
359283e4654db6d38dd90780d19e39bca60539f6
5543 F20110330_AABWAT baldwin_r_Page_092thm.jpg
181756110fe0a5efd3c8b5af76d12b9b
251767308949ed53b5c53ffa85ae971da41f6504
106983 F20110330_AABVWC baldwin_r_Page_112.jp2
e1c93fce41b81efdb7b4328550c33f9e
dbeb7c08dfa8e7b2f941baa5332d6211634b2d58
36888 F20110330_AABVVN baldwin_r_Page_097.jp2
19ef246ceb9f27fddc6513854746808a
73c39ab2438618ea212b61b98dd3f10dfe653730
52528 F20110330_AABVUZ baldwin_r_Page_083.jp2
0a85b4151293926f433a88830a015637
6c6d8f437c47f0a1c93d8612d0bc276c39b47450
F20110330_AABUTA baldwin_r_Page_043.tif
82d54b27f6fe70d72e2f01f327bc3c94
1ff74ff14b5b3dc4d7d5cd570e99c7205acadc18
F20110330_AABUSL baldwin_r_Page_028.tif
047bf2d0ae40da621b9e1187b11f2d73
4101be202779d69fe1a22552682dc0165255b55f
F20110330_AABURX baldwin_r_Page_013.tif
636d23ca7720818d4b9520479b3d2103
3129abdba35b5d6e1f399afa7cd9e3ed3cd19b10
6532 F20110330_AABWBJ baldwin_r_Page_108thm.jpg
a9cad1e0f04f7e0dd4f388419fa3303c
a8194bdb99c0cfa8648672dd53892fbee080d8a4
6322 F20110330_AABWAU baldwin_r_Page_093thm.jpg
91c61af88be3a5eb364be327338d76f8
3859df3ee5e40a93d0540552585db42e1a00889f
97811 F20110330_AABVWD baldwin_r_Page_113.jp2
08c274c80e319a80590bb8dc4d20e38b
e650dffb15b92dd87e34a92e098bce27b07c6ec9
38105 F20110330_AABVVO baldwin_r_Page_098.jp2
0f66c2ee0716ec559a41eb44bfcf717e
f832fb2e06545049727fdd29a771770daf93a9a2
F20110330_AABUTB baldwin_r_Page_045.tif
2d1b5362201f23698176789b55b76ad4
e9d3c008f7f8bb7513efec8cbb63cbe1432f0647
F20110330_AABUSM baldwin_r_Page_029.tif
6fdb02dc35bff0c83a7745927fa47dcd
d77ef1953978fdec00501acb6b3a96710733b876
F20110330_AABURY baldwin_r_Page_014.tif
a8cbf87fa24c941ee92b751107880971
2384b760242f534bbbfc3ded8ca1dd11cff139d9
6482 F20110330_AABWBK baldwin_r_Page_109thm.jpg
529f82e03257fc867fac374e815ab02f
5790a16f0e54a5809982f74dd083d6f0ec8289d1
6126 F20110330_AABWAV baldwin_r_Page_094thm.jpg
db2b6932057e674286f6d1fa76b6e060
50363aa280e3662b285880e18c0ef4bdd109d94f
51978 F20110330_AABVWE baldwin_r_Page_114.jp2
8264e25ac05ab3d480a07b2a292b01bc
150ddd482a2d0d723100282705bacdd7163aaed8
41269 F20110330_AABVVP baldwin_r_Page_099.jp2
80a789c2c7ae5057f313d6124db1d81d
b5d53fbe530fcf5469e88b20af066e31ce79fb62
F20110330_AABUTC baldwin_r_Page_046.tif
0ae4b8cd7b06be72760d53154612242b
cdfd5e9fbe049a1fd1a9e1c8546d5d50433877a7
F20110330_AABUSN baldwin_r_Page_030.tif
d9d1b828b668451c5d6ffff8c28a0c75
6e092dabd742fde7d7d7ba50c5640267ee97827a
F20110330_AABURZ baldwin_r_Page_015.tif
1a2867c57adfda689128ba3a402da5a1
a83234a0de6e9ed646255eaa55c7e670107592c7
5938 F20110330_AABWBL baldwin_r_Page_110thm.jpg
51fed869e7285c232a0e68cd196f2dc8
2263346ff0094a86b00cb5cd722487b00b6fa468
6393 F20110330_AABWAW baldwin_r_Page_095thm.jpg
b3256fab5062a6d9afa13251a12fc62d
437aaa69a8ab703e1761750997e4b2920fe7fffb
81472 F20110330_AABVWF baldwin_r_Page_115.jp2
ca205548245f4a7b4fdae3372c00a32b
2383d9c6a9e9fadfefaed56464a3413b5c213f3c
72481 F20110330_AABVVQ baldwin_r_Page_100.jp2
c2007fe0091d95be31bd930eacb4c2d4
844c96639bb2892b3e2018d7133179ccd9b20f8b
F20110330_AABUTD baldwin_r_Page_047.tif
3577877687debda9f073b2b67ad284a1
7dffd4bb9a8a804b3c756a483bc18b463b562eec
F20110330_AABUSO baldwin_r_Page_031.tif
276f18c3ce7aa5d2ea16b855669f5784
32e072006b3b60b00e15f2344f5ec1414eea3031
5127 F20110330_AABWCA baldwin_r_Page_125thm.jpg
38580c64b0a0114a6e832dab0170c145
637f06616890c45986615c15e2dbddcd0fefc8ed
6343 F20110330_AABWBM baldwin_r_Page_111thm.jpg
5c0bac993b2174e6587ceebed15726c8
2ba4742c1be4de2ec3d8e74b325b3a24b2b36b8b
6495 F20110330_AABWAX baldwin_r_Page_096thm.jpg
c8720d9fb18ef58fa0b5d983e85704d3
d05f81a364d281167a53338a3f3ce46a95ccf1bd
29003 F20110330_AABVWG baldwin_r_Page_116.jp2
06c727c20b800c30afe2058f9cbbf2af
ac46b49c79f6847f13a5646ef9dac6b8b53b3b69
43592 F20110330_AABVVR baldwin_r_Page_101.jp2
d0d36bd085ead06e949ae2c1028abbe0
e25417c14685a6c16168982c477705436128ad20
F20110330_AABUTE baldwin_r_Page_048.tif
6993015f57924bfb2308df008e448fce
83d6d28278e0a9e2d7bd50e0c736ce28f186194f
F20110330_AABUSP baldwin_r_Page_032.tif
5b1f00a9beacaf89a6defca0adb8f7a2
f4dbedf57970d763abdbf97e774737d0fcced46e
4777 F20110330_AABWCB baldwin_r_Page_126thm.jpg
aad3381d8d9d92bcafa5a0013b36c665
a54370faad941d7f0f03efac6fdca1db7e48e82a
6125 F20110330_AABWBN baldwin_r_Page_112thm.jpg
ceee6de845efc4ae22e3945fc08ddd1a
74f94d15180fb851c3a534f90510f55f3cbd61e4
2256 F20110330_AABWAY baldwin_r_Page_097thm.jpg
89d494bd6def50368575d7219d49bc58
50c2be0899c7658770fcd7c6ac376d8fdba547ae
47724 F20110330_AABVVS baldwin_r_Page_102.jp2
1787739724e0967645c45531f8ea73e9
8aa5f055a3fb42ccf24256a1427cefdc8c4a4b32
F20110330_AABUSQ baldwin_r_Page_033.tif
6ce7d14cfd08d512b3addc446aaaec04
f2c69fdf54e7debc9d7cd39a2eda71b5996d49d1
6201 F20110330_AABWCC baldwin_r_Page_128thm.jpg
46d68a7211134f6cdbeafd78bad87b1e
4d68a78d133b8b0bfb710c44c03910344aedab59
5451 F20110330_AABWBO baldwin_r_Page_113thm.jpg
ef53304ab66c41967c012bd83c185042
294f339be3fd07c8aae855dabe11655e0b3cefae
1731 F20110330_AABWAZ baldwin_r_Page_098thm.jpg
d14e197ab2b1aa9d9608051400bb9a47
6b949cd36ca612ae8d45114b0e1c5982d83eec76
465000 F20110330_AABVWH baldwin_r_Page_117.jp2
b1da337d1fad9e22921ea21e78ca106b
49e7cedce8eaeb6d17db76ef60235000d2908531
38838 F20110330_AABVVT baldwin_r_Page_103.jp2
0fcbd4f9f4000842d1d3ecb7806f9b54
9c0857a96cee94ba56c110062682d0c8ace0fb48
F20110330_AABUTF baldwin_r_Page_049.tif
f8cc764c9628e1c941521f7d205a1251
d56b5189bd7cb8bd44bfe468a4b4e26df2b4135b
F20110330_AABUSR baldwin_r_Page_034.tif
f633144edf758e1bb640994f0697caee
d6ea74c077f61781ba6a71398447a0865391e630
5922 F20110330_AABWCD baldwin_r_Page_129thm.jpg
d7055b61588948bed35913a2d1389b33
5f25ad15b6dd5e3731c72181d4db1afc3480954d
2323 F20110330_AABWBP baldwin_r_Page_114thm.jpg
06074f9583817096b68fbf92bb7b660e
f75fa7bf958814b451c2cefb3968195be19974a6
46363 F20110330_AABVWI baldwin_r_Page_118.jp2
9c38d115cb30d376e3c70a60eaa00ecc
a5f7131a686b58f97bef6a8f4d2132e132c68486
90812 F20110330_AABVVU baldwin_r_Page_104.jp2
91cc34a4a2dc52ceacc37eb33f2b5b10
cf0cb5a7178ff541f80eaa5006cdfced1e3b675b
F20110330_AABUTG baldwin_r_Page_050.tif
e5b6d957d1bb2c2d69e516aec1e4b9eb
ea0758299e61f9bea1cac5b318a894ff84fc7e3a
F20110330_AABUSS baldwin_r_Page_035.tif
1c9514161208443910bfe8f7770678e0
fbadcd14e7f684958b0c00c5d125dfa2f9653b6b
5675 F20110330_AABWCE baldwin_r_Page_130thm.jpg
2f547ce31791a228f88c2be80b25157e
4df095436f8bbd5e364daffd89e90987c84f505e
3425 F20110330_AABWBQ baldwin_r_Page_115thm.jpg
5d71d17bbc4c4fb3c2cfbb21d613c08b
66d973d7b176042a8d7db0094dbd014c3540efed
195965 F20110330_AABVWJ baldwin_r_Page_119.jp2
79cd1a5ff3b060fafcb2ccc72ca90a15
dd7c1b37e1f9fd0b421d9a42eb4c1f4d77079223
97432 F20110330_AABVVV baldwin_r_Page_105.jp2
70fa3b0045bce58ffd00b119434a17ac
3ca093e987ba1a346633857f834d9d3e1467d116
F20110330_AABUTH baldwin_r_Page_051.tif
5eed210c0d17add373df1f60978e3c68
67f187ddafde30bc2f9b62f7ef06564b9eb25147
25265604 F20110330_AABUST baldwin_r_Page_036.tif
c06500c5bbe5720dbd256ef5768d8d88
a7b54b9a6d6acda8497acf5888253ddaf450a834
5025 F20110330_AABWCF baldwin_r_Page_131thm.jpg
1408f8947516f9b0b50f2ae49c68cc6d
1803548144002d28c6fcf66c07e7453196be1cd3
100208 F20110330_AABVWK baldwin_r_Page_120.jp2
55e5813fbb8e523940113ce3aa6ea252
77fb172aab691bec9a7ecef521afd07873a95aaf
102940 F20110330_AABVVW baldwin_r_Page_106.jp2
f74a2e78ad45bd64cd872fddcdfd919f
f2a80f43a14f5331385580e14621b3232a8cf889
F20110330_AABUTI baldwin_r_Page_052.tif
54b87a88543b940b90d918797b657e71
bf84fc4e6345e4ec870317e97aeb1ea3faee11ca
F20110330_AABUSU baldwin_r_Page_037.tif
b847ff325dd01c2d43aca7a00b5642ad
66290234d99fc762285681792beff2ebb63a33f4
5534 F20110330_AABWCG baldwin_r_Page_132thm.jpg
8c553e1b1b556a26620941ca52cab624
61d9ce4589948b1c89fd167f44500599982d9e50
1572 F20110330_AABWBR baldwin_r_Page_116thm.jpg
52c8ffc93d0d11a8b190da9cc1ce884c
b318c09cf37dd7fbf6f3b260ca8cc07d41d28ac2
117914 F20110330_AABVXA baldwin_r_Page_136.jp2
9657de0cb360ecc9c3d5a35ca0092714
f5ff94a0f9f79512844bd4883c37af6c3e060d14
102996 F20110330_AABVWL baldwin_r_Page_121.jp2
ec48dd3bbc1f71ca717320e36a56e5f5
2ab010e6a5255246efb5242023a3cd9ec88df880
106112 F20110330_AABVVX baldwin_r_Page_107.jp2
894d736172e93acb6f624b054f0dc5ce
eab2925cc5f2b9db76f7670fed32ccef30e6cf46
F20110330_AABUTJ baldwin_r_Page_054.tif
77290321bc0e3239201c8cd9f164ad3f
8be5d9838929e5d15d2f49f0e501fab12c473e34
F20110330_AABUSV baldwin_r_Page_038.tif
0868a3f43323b0966a3ae3b65e8e29eb
d6c6f36f6c17bd81f6ac578df455bb599bc74986
6584 F20110330_AABWCH baldwin_r_Page_133thm.jpg
9fd7e5e8f0c0e491ff13805e3f71ac87
ab474e66faa7e052bde280a610a287e4df325b7e
4186 F20110330_AABWBS baldwin_r_Page_117thm.jpg
cdbe1c87be44c67f0917e9872dcaabfd
1c41c528ae255a332371ca8632eb0c5c677b3125
F20110330_AABVXB baldwin_r_Page_137.jp2
6dc2499ced69e7b51e23b8074882574d
252b7885e8e2de6ecc3a0ed966ead8a12a39d884
26999 F20110330_AABVWM baldwin_r_Page_122.jp2
494629f7353c400ca04e75da9cd56d4e
3db4144146c51d1d27f8452dde797c464c040983
114019 F20110330_AABVVY baldwin_r_Page_108.jp2
48baa6340635310f979f45848eab4b42
092fe4b73b620b7500f135a6f3c901046dd5990b
F20110330_AABUTK baldwin_r_Page_055.tif
81d473838ab2e1a94d3dc44cfcd696a9
0dfb6e84793bb0bdc3f70ebcfb4aedfff443680e
F20110330_AABUSW baldwin_r_Page_039.tif
f8688956998f1de7dbcd72d658d704d3
b0f888967bc1afa644fdfc0c47c0b26e8b847a83
6630 F20110330_AABWCI baldwin_r_Page_134thm.jpg
0b0a67403371f972b03754e83061cc9a
4fa48f0796abe60ff03e44aea03e2ef220a4e075
3800 F20110330_AABWBT baldwin_r_Page_118thm.jpg
b92fd058db1d227d848b8340c62fe26c
8a64c3169d4fec76017f37ee75990198994d2f60
121791 F20110330_AABVXC baldwin_r_Page_138.jp2
0b108aac6be15db26366c4f50417d189
c1611a8685b5b8309cb0432879f6b1f1dd4a2cf3
103816 F20110330_AABVWN baldwin_r_Page_123.jp2
144634522efec06ee4cc04dff1fca40a
6b24f71cd8ac3a2e193fe4d9a41e940945f6a17c
112104 F20110330_AABVVZ baldwin_r_Page_109.jp2
6148d05642f6d3e06debd5b087739e31
bac1db46d3bd9dcb9848e1275619abe4425a7688
F20110330_AABUTL baldwin_r_Page_056.tif
e970460b400e1333e42392ad0f4a27f7
db67e2f2813b54def0e7c1c09a392e8c50cb251e
F20110330_AABUSX baldwin_r_Page_040.tif
6bb24a8ec469e4b9efffa5b430dc571e
75d673c939b6b66d8d85b916ce473491c779a30e
F20110330_AABUUA baldwin_r_Page_073.tif
3bf47db7aeea7cdbedaeb38d1d27de45
c80a6045185298a96cc0fb55b03b2b11fdab14b5
6167 F20110330_AABWCJ baldwin_r_Page_135thm.jpg
dd86ee129c632237696ba0c9e2c97b45
7086d7aa5830e8e635d6958971d952b1ce4adb5f
2096 F20110330_AABWBU baldwin_r_Page_119thm.jpg
3299b2ab6fe673cd26544a9114d681d9
13fdf455ce555001141b6c28164f3d0633fbb760
116525 F20110330_AABVXD baldwin_r_Page_139.jp2
6a28224cbbd6efbd7ba7b976db6e6a4f
a6cdab41861dd0d1accbfb14633c17b36f23eb4d
102373 F20110330_AABVWO baldwin_r_Page_124.jp2
951c6edc76b4d60a94b5a5494ec4dfbe
6a4ddfdf93e9eb7221b1ab38bba234e1defb5fec
F20110330_AABUTM baldwin_r_Page_058.tif
6769c33a0ff496316a7b9bf0a0f83dea
49ec83f1ac9000fa4090b4e5c427a145b67642c8
F20110330_AABUSY baldwin_r_Page_041.tif
1a34e573766fcacf5394403de05c467d
ff5eaab6c04970be68eab3c1f975eecdca0d9c2c
F20110330_AABUUB baldwin_r_Page_074.tif
d83298405c3a9f410845534f20723aa3
3931a98a9df0be9feae9af9392d91729ba5aafb0
6196 F20110330_AABWCK baldwin_r_Page_136thm.jpg
5da916a2b71fbc372b43393d68bdfdd8
dffb38b3002820a5dd284cd9355ea0c0dc20837c
5603 F20110330_AABWBV baldwin_r_Page_120thm.jpg
6dd8d37274f2751838e43e7520d0b88d
1760bd140655d39595ce6447da93c0f5fcb2841b
1051972 F20110330_AABVXE baldwin_r_Page_140.jp2
03ec8fad93f54adab7453d4c21638a9b
273a15922fff7e8e6031f049c94d1ebf75d7e11d
103658 F20110330_AABVWP baldwin_r_Page_125.jp2
8dbb72158fab1ca11c352342958bca71
d67e0c80d490ad509c9f7cd69c99e44478e8149f
F20110330_AABUTN baldwin_r_Page_059.tif
f68e472ce04beb866ad4013c3521bbc4
a487e2ddfe2494cc4b0cb7ab8c44dd0a9dc6b4f4
F20110330_AABUSZ baldwin_r_Page_042.tif
0057e3704b799233c2a83861d5c5af55
daeb983299f68182d2d7ac0e6fe7ace39ddb324b
F20110330_AABUUC baldwin_r_Page_075.tif
078d16bc45298a97505c89b899df6fc3
7ead251b415ed365ad38e781975380f145d3b6be
6582 F20110330_AABWCL baldwin_r_Page_137thm.jpg
e7aedde34db63ce3f734bc3a55f923ea
04159bc870ebd351a5ecc3124bf24ab9ecba322e
5811 F20110330_AABWBW baldwin_r_Page_121thm.jpg
4144d21dbb69fbcb6b3959c2766b70b0
0eb651c9b025dfecab456afaa67a4f7219ea7dd0
1051927 F20110330_AABVXF baldwin_r_Page_141.jp2
fcdcb6262885e9029ff0e6a8e0abb976
1a9985cfdd3420f33aa1e5c1c5dde24c9e830364
85079 F20110330_AABVWQ baldwin_r_Page_126.jp2
09c496f99330871fc3e430f3449c19c1
4a88918b1a9697b5018858d0f70df39863d58cb8
F20110330_AABUTO baldwin_r_Page_060.tif
9b6e0e91965b4e12fa2aab2541794572
d0b103f5ec9424d33683f581e6f921a7d1dede95
F20110330_AABUUD baldwin_r_Page_076.tif
8911c1e8f2896bba891f9cddbad49836
468172a847152715f9b281995e2405400c424acf
6653 F20110330_AABWCM baldwin_r_Page_138thm.jpg
b86e9f09212e4c848d941d03e77b14dd
87ecfbd489db00a6d28b148aa09a7916f915063e
1627 F20110330_AABWBX baldwin_r_Page_122thm.jpg
b7beb13279bd2cf9dd5ef97b0d0fb780
e6b8e1a0dc50cab37be36403dcfe14f067fec460
79967 F20110330_AABVXG baldwin_r_Page_142.jp2
6ab9752512b5c5a31c63b6334cf8c9eb
18b9c3e5e0fca3240259bb89de6b95dad7de4ce1
98723 F20110330_AABVWR baldwin_r_Page_127.jp2
d7e8a5a3ab991b456394e66728ddccfb
236a483cb986a1c20e17ecf6011aa03f25a628ab
F20110330_AABUTP baldwin_r_Page_061.tif
6bf4572a214cd7d4261fc9a157b4a606
94c1ab06a9d35eca2a93c9dd40a96154ad364ddf
F20110330_AABUUE baldwin_r_Page_077.tif
48b6626f01781d7802f972188abec13e
17001f24c3d8482adc6b796d9e620af3266c0496
6642 F20110330_AABWCN baldwin_r_Page_139thm.jpg
9dbd68fa2559db1dfcb7c0cb054494eb
2df1f0e12361a621b17d3124cb8cbb91f5170bc3
5366 F20110330_AABWBY baldwin_r_Page_123thm.jpg
f0987c0b621126817d8eacd9a33f47a7
4fecc2caf3f1c79a3c8a42e5f85e8d84472427d5
88309 F20110330_AABVXH baldwin_r_Page_143.jp2
9ba852424f683311bc04d4783b95ca82
0c3cbf748757996b960ba12a49788deb314330a8
122392 F20110330_AABVWS baldwin_r_Page_128.jp2
1c84df8b368e56171fe4706158f7af6e
1a14a04c1e459521366ca353e45757ee0cbaa9e8
F20110330_AABUTQ baldwin_r_Page_062.tif
49b90e9518e70913f37999ef36523d7e
d0e791e6002eaefc233b1008e8ebf27e9781724b
F20110330_AABUUF baldwin_r_Page_078.tif
53f09ff7caabddb2c61eee54e4ebbf2e
9251b709783f09453ed12deac2da3bec6f01cb7b
6104 F20110330_AABWCO baldwin_r_Page_140thm.jpg
4e9d924cd120aa759efa767727975c4c
185f7620699b737880101903b38de1f88fbb669c
5380 F20110330_AABWBZ baldwin_r_Page_124thm.jpg
4f6d4678b9e2d6fb06812e585e55bbdd
8d2204f86631b71f47a425f97a119f987cf07488
107109 F20110330_AABVWT baldwin_r_Page_129.jp2
7646a71047806d862a252ef655962f94
100eae04dc903ddfcdacb688aba132abf8b3eca6
F20110330_AABUTR baldwin_r_Page_063.tif
3f4c9946ec161cd8a28ae0d94c06038d
513e7c6627731540253283cebe0f0be5f7099d4c
1940 F20110330_AABVAA baldwin_r_Page_090.txt
57afc7e6b3da003576e4b9b9142578f2
cd685853d84ebd8dce4260fc4e9f35c81490c458
6155 F20110330_AABWCP baldwin_r_Page_141thm.jpg
f0132dd214e0e9d29789cdcf103a319a
c29606c0f45274a38b4ceec2fcecbd26deaecbf2
1950 F20110330_AABVXI baldwin_r_Page_001thm.jpg
92dccb6411c5672d46745a6a186c41dd
c759ab46b2142cfff0682ed8d1ec1d2b5ed237b4
113100 F20110330_AABVWU baldwin_r_Page_130.jp2
338ea7889441b0e1321fe56032bfcf2d
80fcf1cc8d3ef01eb271b59930401538822db507
F20110330_AABUTS baldwin_r_Page_064.tif
db129c7d3406ca1c8103c017c54520ef
e8fcc1b1e20f04912f43b63d841d6945a76e5a9f
1896 F20110330_AABVAB baldwin_r_Page_091.txt
02f987cd67e5f621b57629961913f990
d5fdd26edc4bc7fb0b31deb76786304c6c6eda4d
F20110330_AABUUG baldwin_r_Page_079.tif
a6cc947030559943884d8ad85a0e5b10
85bd9506b855d2dd6f3c66f9516adfe43fe76b13
5310 F20110330_AABWCQ baldwin_r_Page_143thm.jpg
0f01ff05041641ed6b28005b048e0569
b0832b19ab9341d99511a2393f12191c7f2f1b70
607 F20110330_AABVXJ baldwin_r_Page_002thm.jpg
3a831710ed732ac0a66c758ba2690cab
ff39aa316ee5e983f9f4ae9a51ad51af705ba47c
87747 F20110330_AABVWV baldwin_r_Page_131.jp2
fbe9ba95a49fda2c1b8d317beb303084
5c2ac891d57630d9f424b2e47579ac0dda1e6f94
F20110330_AABUTT baldwin_r_Page_065.tif
7bc2d6c919d6f5e8e1807559c63f9b98
1499e363b5988cf92659ab4b53488e16ac5c1e25
1300 F20110330_AABVAC baldwin_r_Page_092.txt
34f8815261c7111fafb06769b00cdee0
3ffe6426fdc7c48168a8bc24de5572877671c847
F20110330_AABUUH baldwin_r_Page_080.tif
51de5ef118d67b3dff3debfb293b0dda
4322fa32147ef1907758eac3a9c97f773e55fab2
2066642 F20110330_AABWCR baldwin_r.pdf
f6d24ec5d02f02c7788d31d06983d40c
68bdf82c635e5e961ed13dbc98ffcd849732d255
765 F20110330_AABVXK baldwin_r_Page_003thm.jpg
a7bc7333587e5418821db81047cf9c97
4468c22b60c352b3226605f16c9ff1f2e9c44ef5
93493 F20110330_AABVWW baldwin_r_Page_132.jp2
c74e5e2b7c63ab8c7c28fd2320d278e8
bcf744c7477a0ab0761035f12eb85addf50d8853
F20110330_AABUTU baldwin_r_Page_066.tif
0057ef6b93cac8ff4d39439422e58a57
b7806ffd18353ea2c13057867340b32e5a470681
F20110330_AABVAD baldwin_r_Page_093.txt
06830e3c84ab7d272b6dc992fe8266af
185db54c31ed0e13d102b29149d2dbfae785778a
F20110330_AABUUI baldwin_r_Page_081.tif
dd80f2ca4e7ed019ded11d304d036387
efc7850d996c34f557ea4d9869a4dd13c366c414
F20110330_AABVYA baldwin_r_Page_020thm.jpg
6ce4b076597718eff3599defeb573b47
9260fc1d3a0e95628173c1b81d57a5f0ff6a81ad
4538 F20110330_AABVXL baldwin_r_Page_004thm.jpg
a3e45a0402ce293cba83ead9953bf1a3
84761f61f7229cdbe21d49357870cf702d980442
119889 F20110330_AABVWX baldwin_r_Page_133.jp2
cc52c0a89120ecc821c7f30865ab2f09
2ea86d3ce777987ea7ab75beaaa512d8b6f839f9
F20110330_AABUTV baldwin_r_Page_068.tif
e7b0d1301cb50f426c9455d389c9be33
5001b71a24c6784e1fe73e3a2a02693d8f05de1d
1876 F20110330_AABVAE baldwin_r_Page_094.txt
107231cc4e559ce18b23035b5bd0ecea
b6e869816f00dd163990fc17dfbd6b8376bd0928
F20110330_AABUUJ baldwin_r_Page_082.tif
6711a4b652c999b9898389c47d812e86
ceaebddb0a92fc678cab289c97125ac34096e6b4
6780270 F20110330_AABWCS soap_exposure_video.wmv
1b39d51db6875a1c9caa82c9e4296c2a
e638871e26ffad5e871920400157b2281e7e0344
6372 F20110330_AABVYB baldwin_r_Page_021thm.jpg
768951f5fe07a7ecf1e21ab09b6d4dbe
5188f8b225343c2442c197e2a4485c6e7aa4286b
4258 F20110330_AABVXM baldwin_r_Page_005thm.jpg
35c519c2236fe7ecb4140c8ef6c9d71a
e369b0e95c2b114339eb88cf2af6bb7e2a5a5820
1051976 F20110330_AABVWY baldwin_r_Page_134.jp2
803a50a74a710c21477ea1bfabc19d28
ab405737c80224de149cc159ff94d0cef170f580
F20110330_AABUTW baldwin_r_Page_069.tif
740968641dd5c041bcae1ec058cf8c16
e1951a86fba3cafc8ba450f5e7000fdfe0b2b252
1974 F20110330_AABVAF baldwin_r_Page_095.txt
120f0b650b80fb3e9823d6a1c2653247
588fe1dc2370c48831e0aa692cc4a2fb742f8a56
F20110330_AABUUK baldwin_r_Page_083.tif
e3b5fc9bb01a4bd8f609b363ae49968b
c5307a88120e152c4750de45c3388903552a300e
168432 F20110330_AABWCT UFE0012931_00001.mets
59148e3ac4d2846dff2c9678239614b7
2dcd77ab7fc2a023ce9b4bb602f64a5699ea1655
F20110330_AABVYC baldwin_r_Page_022thm.jpg
e09480314543c09d85ea65086f88ea5f
b1248a051f9f440a46a21347074efbf508dd5883
5485 F20110330_AABVXN baldwin_r_Page_006thm.jpg
8e92fd66f99dc76eccbb412eda079303
d7885c61bf8af78fe386adb5fcbf955e11382c1b
113442 F20110330_AABVWZ baldwin_r_Page_135.jp2
db517796edda148fdc68e74e3a0830f8
5b9c13329bb4d6d8aab29a002a496d1fe76332e5
F20110330_AABUTX baldwin_r_Page_070.tif
ec3f8207a7f566a2258328d120114991
6d6465695cf0cd43f8f60d9c4aa45bad166d8c6e
2042 F20110330_AABVAG baldwin_r_Page_096.txt
c31de199e378c2bac2dd5f0f9cf321aa
0a501e3b97f2dc969691b206e481de452153e095
F20110330_AABUVA baldwin_r_Page_100.tif
ac2d127bb2c3402431fce14ae2e8c0ba
64cfaa589065426a6ac62c800fc682fc89ca2d32
F20110330_AABUUL baldwin_r_Page_084.tif
bc10d8510ffdad302f75cf6487c5a7f7
d0cd78d8ba2e03d05c68a6fc549865879a257217
5923 F20110330_AABVYD baldwin_r_Page_023thm.jpg
e6666107a1d4bc537532bd97fd44c320
90501a9e996738b68bdcf60f8b20f33a1668d24f
F20110330_AABVXO baldwin_r_Page_007thm.jpg
077a927416cd79bdaa4776a0ce0c7361
4d50e59b0df949755273162da61f05ebe83c83f6
F20110330_AABUTY baldwin_r_Page_071.tif
7843fac82a518ccda700c74a50215873
8bd496fb05ca92310f52cf6c0fd3d80b0289eebf
652 F20110330_AABVAH baldwin_r_Page_097.txt
30b1c8713ad9a1003d6caa2163380fd7
cdea6fc184643ca290475c94eff789de5543b4b2
F20110330_AABUVB baldwin_r_Page_101.tif
cafaadd2c09449eec01c3aaa9c930aa2
7cfd419ec98681163e5168561eb85a8ea332ac2e
F20110330_AABUUM baldwin_r_Page_085.tif
34e8110ec7a4a89958cb5d1c90a75819
709f47935eb9c3b42d53f68f2f4892e39bd3bb57
6329 F20110330_AABVYE baldwin_r_Page_024thm.jpg
1846a7670826f2e33e941bfc6b637d0c
ca1cb67deb0d7a30f4eee03d9477cee0a0d19b65
5686 F20110330_AABVXP baldwin_r_Page_008thm.jpg
af3363444d8b0bbfbfeaeb76377cae35
57d0aeb2283d7a26946e0cc806a9c3fd1bd1b7f6
F20110330_AABUTZ baldwin_r_Page_072.tif
50a4ac84a4f196ba5888396a34132c19
be36464299b2bdb8ff78d9572dbc1202300a7620
825 F20110330_AABVAI baldwin_r_Page_098.txt
042c0e61ee939ced11feb68ca9bcd413
e8dff451692c62fc06cba45c1b9b108c6d9c12fe
F20110330_AABUVC baldwin_r_Page_102.tif
1824dd3852be6b48c6ad506ee3ab2aa6
5ab341dd8debb22863a35a5240629167faac3a8c
F20110330_AABUUN baldwin_r_Page_086.tif
e4a1611c2b3d5ca5d3d14232fe0ba672
d1bdaffa1105757c19bfd0f027e9d7c2c36b9bfe
4977 F20110330_AABVYF baldwin_r_Page_025thm.jpg
eedb9ba9ee5f0f8a5cee442a23abf6e6
15e2d64b8b8f37317de8fa2e9215904beabe97fc
5734 F20110330_AABVXQ baldwin_r_Page_009thm.jpg
ffe12e127d746070b8e6c61fa7b66f60
5ecd54d27fdc5b35618b23889777f1e1a2479bc0
1096 F20110330_AABVAJ baldwin_r_Page_099.txt
792f5eb51f20ad9062e8c089c9840225
cf63c410515fe03894eadde9f5b8b86625bc9a06
F20110330_AABUVD baldwin_r_Page_103.tif
a6c0d64e4d43aae5f706d5b0ffc1d8a6
d46663bb613adbbe554cf887eea57d44b641baf0
F20110330_AABUUO baldwin_r_Page_087.tif
ba9d7a3644ec5a49c00152e8493ef019
a1b2bbb3535959b297e62e519791c86493535da8
5908 F20110330_AABVYG baldwin_r_Page_026thm.jpg
1816ed54400a28d137fedaf5fc06515f
027d297446c31c08a0cf9eb0d53ba11bfcbf5e2f
3162 F20110330_AABVXR baldwin_r_Page_010thm.jpg
f588d1b35d28715aa5d48132dc07fe1b
a43ec6b5bd6d865a91ec46b06da2bcaaff245c92
1902 F20110330_AABVAK baldwin_r_Page_100.txt
5553e3bcd0cf9f171e6396c903a437af
e84fa9d3205eadbd597efeb92c37eb81fb137198
F20110330_AABUVE baldwin_r_Page_104.tif
0e211d252fca114b2f63c8b457e529dd
bd0b6e8badf8496bea0f1dd9ae2305d134f24664
F20110330_AABUUP baldwin_r_Page_088.tif
ce5317226030716a067565f4ad0bdc7e
6c0f4a599241dd627b574e345efb51c164508573
6341 F20110330_AABVYH baldwin_r_Page_027thm.jpg
307f21129a911bbc52b8839c50c175bb
5e56d89a154c0aa55cb4a8f30d5d5ee8ffa8a67d
1223 F20110330_AABVXS baldwin_r_Page_011thm.jpg
5001fe482b05179d456c9bb24b22e699
df44be474b00020990e9688bf7c694df77ddd76e
841 F20110330_AABVAL baldwin_r_Page_101.txt
53612bbecc3e9f78461be4fba2f89f90
106806979bbf146f0a42c507406f6d741182b382
F20110330_AABUVF baldwin_r_Page_105.tif
09e5894ed06ff1d4ce7e1cc86e9121bf
11bc96284a1dea8872f01b6fc6f5519c29738495
F20110330_AABUUQ baldwin_r_Page_089.tif
576919e7c4da34e69f7c3779bc79464d
f780df6588c57657c0b246aac91dcceae3e1b5bf
6568 F20110330_AABVYI baldwin_r_Page_028thm.jpg
82ad22a88adc2eca2ea20a843f038bca
3ff88c57bf17e2167abf62c2dc4ad1e9e59691cb
4978 F20110330_AABVXT baldwin_r_Page_012thm.jpg
9400b248f70a4abdcb9d0e21f9562825
72fbc61b6586caa84dfac212977f9ebccf69e928
1449 F20110330_AABVAM baldwin_r_Page_102.txt
e91299c6472ea48dd7e348540232e1f6
16e6021711f998d77fb876e992354a83eb92a165
F20110330_AABUVG baldwin_r_Page_106.tif
d4976ecf319a91fe0bc7b8d0d3360f9e
2c8131eff5c022b128b754c0d82bf6ef8427caac
F20110330_AABUUR baldwin_r_Page_090.tif
a688cca3ea1a61f5c1f0b6ace8a15e66
14eb0c3c76e5f94d3f02cc7f163c6100356ddf6e
789 F20110330_AABVBA baldwin_r_Page_117.txt
76a8b039004b3eab29635266b839fa8e
4a00ceff9c8fcf1c7f4ce69eadc598d561cde750
4842 F20110330_AABVXU baldwin_r_Page_013thm.jpg
a22b012dbb8b78358be41885f67c5fad
dc440c6622a94394cba5e57668fa81e01c371cb4
701 F20110330_AABVAN baldwin_r_Page_103.txt
32af3400b0b95a3d111257c9e79cf294
39a23903836245a292b18e5a1925f4f01e03c4e1
F20110330_AABUUS baldwin_r_Page_091.tif
f0ecc9e6949a3a29949e040d3a95369f
e30896ada44da7c50c2b4b4fbe1cb2c63cf371a6
867 F20110330_AABVBB baldwin_r_Page_118.txt
c9e9493dbd7d8c4261e5756a8c81af31
65dce04a76307fa624f3a5e881769dca32b48fc2
6198 F20110330_AABVYJ baldwin_r_Page_029thm.jpg
2d1e453900050ed10a8a7fe000fc34b8
bcf6a270597f880525bba5b64f2dd8a1e288db70
6298 F20110330_AABVXV baldwin_r_Page_015thm.jpg
822289c1a19dccd89dbfab5e4170c4a1
34323c7695536ef400db6dc972181cedeb920b58
1686 F20110330_AABVAO baldwin_r_Page_104.txt
5f38f718581423360fea8e4a660ce9e7
0d8c2ba4e0e8df3a9a464683f3ce645a2d7ce4b3
F20110330_AABUVH baldwin_r_Page_107.tif
30a4d8b3fbdd0c2eb622aa2aec1946bb
d4c08161498da094d707df71351d66feae7617e3
F20110330_AABUUT baldwin_r_Page_092.tif
53db1e472f3f4cda8449112345ecd70d
986ceaade5c110159ba6d93dcfa200ef3ffade20
379 F20110330_AABVBC baldwin_r_Page_119.txt
5f08efedb8c019780d33bfb522d8f418
d3f9010a540ad9f3c6961f95521430a44aa74c62
6515 F20110330_AABVYK baldwin_r_Page_030thm.jpg
7f89fe68786642cf555709aa24f3a222
76fb7a3fd1b9dc4bcf0f892dc056e6f80d5a2609
F20110330_AABVXW baldwin_r_Page_016thm.jpg
9642d160bf84006471afd66f4449d2c1
d975e53d27ab611d4920d169f58fcf9810ec4196
1770 F20110330_AABVAP baldwin_r_Page_105.txt
01622ac21066af56e9624a3fbb6a2665
c806991b425cdefb25316cb7b8e0f2e8c70dba78
F20110330_AABUVI baldwin_r_Page_108.tif
f2e52583d9ff5cd4615a7875bd1f698f
6add0f6f953d3695d63c499129c483e512a1fb80
F20110330_AABUUU baldwin_r_Page_093.tif
fcdbbd6c8303bdd4a525bacb18fd9961
0d795f1438882bddc6335244aeb9c58b6c25eacd
1840 F20110330_AABVBD baldwin_r_Page_121.txt
fe035290ad92afe5b75685682339d4d0
cc385b38a498b59a5e523b6eafe110b98f4c386f
6405 F20110330_AABVZA baldwin_r_Page_046thm.jpg
d1191f9a21e2a22c1a3e2f319ed6408c
9d23997af103fdff13abd2dd4622a4eb61023719
6519 F20110330_AABVYL baldwin_r_Page_031thm.jpg
8db27cdbcc6444342f4507ab58aa34c7
634b027cad61e100f2554d042081cbc72be7d9e5
6335 F20110330_AABVXX baldwin_r_Page_017thm.jpg
4bc4ee799ddf2d3bbdc3608bfa274b6a
bce62c063b626cac9354e77b6ddb99ab756102b4
1882 F20110330_AABVAQ baldwin_r_Page_106.txt
5cd005688a6a968b1c7a4c14417064fa
a76c77bd2fcb18fe31c422e6b1cf9afba9bbde55
F20110330_AABUVJ baldwin_r_Page_109.tif
d3275fdb5f43b640c68e0c4d6203bf7e
92a63bf50f117cad07d993eeff48892e86686c84
F20110330_AABUUV baldwin_r_Page_094.tif
6943f606660d8490a129db957ca97c1b
b1c2a467a02bbeb4a6ec25894a58141c7cf0acb3
482 F20110330_AABVBE baldwin_r_Page_122.txt
5b82c88751311d7f93e61dd0f55825f7
0736f9c701f78ac54a68ffa16902364f6c38016d
6324 F20110330_AABVZB baldwin_r_Page_047thm.jpg
c34364c7f0b77dd2a9634b53fe1f08df
9d316c08a6ba4e8016115fb2c574ef7b0c5397bb
6408 F20110330_AABVYM baldwin_r_Page_032thm.jpg
28e594949952339a8750f5bbdfa7728c
7a07cacc3a787ce8517bb63c86ab19bc086a22fa
6191 F20110330_AABVXY baldwin_r_Page_018thm.jpg
1f687a0b890a4b28355fc4096ab90d65
d5ca0c707ff20250af88e43f7876ee2ef4e3f314
F20110330_AABUVK baldwin_r_Page_110.tif
08d6821c2606d65aa77014cb611797ec
2cdbb4a89ad3c102b7d28a628174f223fab26e05
F20110330_AABUUW baldwin_r_Page_095.tif
416e86a93c838ef3eb6f1b2bfd44a760
320c5317d5007b0fd29f32d20a03346b9a77ea68
2106 F20110330_AABVBF baldwin_r_Page_123.txt
8fe8a9887d0b1b8c757a53397327717a
2bd777dd5d4024a0f622c510e83b5dcc85845569
6415 F20110330_AABVZC baldwin_r_Page_048thm.jpg
9dfc0787a669d4d62ad5ad674638e6d3
5c1ab21f2e6bc4dd8188dd75915a76785d76994c
6011 F20110330_AABVYN baldwin_r_Page_033thm.jpg
b2527389e452b59c20c79d1fc39d6478
ae691dd53c1ddbdd7eab8d0541f5ce52e4afeccd
5833 F20110330_AABVXZ baldwin_r_Page_019thm.jpg
4f316352f099e1478adacc90baa7f763
f7c28ce3de9d51a2fff8a3ecedb3ae40148ac451
F20110330_AABUWA baldwin_r_Page_126.tif
8ddfc4f538d7df0347752fb1edabaa4b
5fe0560802ef486ce96b432ec124e312bba2e2d1
2018 F20110330_AABVAR baldwin_r_Page_108.txt
91e4869cda2bc86eabf03c751dab1315
0f2bc9abaa8e302958703b3baa8b1a99b9869c53
F20110330_AABUVL baldwin_r_Page_111.tif
be9657c56d8829e19924e23e9cb0dd12
b843124c572ddc268b1ba7043a8269c15101f3ec
F20110330_AABUUX baldwin_r_Page_096.tif
18a11d339ef7d237471b8532e1f7ec5a
2559d5324ad8d6b16e236cfd8b8b0b1572d9fa68
2228 F20110330_AABVBG baldwin_r_Page_124.txt
7fcf46963170971bc92ece83472485f8
16fe1bb3266dfbaa15ba2da783fdf5d606286e5f
6461 F20110330_AABVZD baldwin_r_Page_049thm.jpg
f1ead9dcbfe3d96d9fddc4dfb79fd9ef
7c3bd60c5e9f6a140b1dcf55ec8961183d847f17
6348 F20110330_AABVYO baldwin_r_Page_034thm.jpg
95dd9ef1b8c3b504aaf0d224c39efe41
e16fdeb751a47524907a97e4dc21282f5ed693ce
F20110330_AABUWB baldwin_r_Page_127.tif
9ff7c4ccc7a60e6b6e98ab14653e3641
c90de0cf7eb7516130e2dca2cf4e749eead86e39
2040 F20110330_AABVAS baldwin_r_Page_109.txt
c52a9b4cdc6ae4b3e713dd73c233b9da
5273b9557ff70be14f00a8d86a481cb2f7be8079
F20110330_AABUVM baldwin_r_Page_112.tif
063e9ff03fa0d5368fa6a9f4505a2a4a
8c432fad0d47a4df62cbd3b9b584b28d4d535208
F20110330_AABUUY baldwin_r_Page_097.tif
2b009bc8dad1fa410f0e8a9d4b0f9c4f
d8b4d6a4d61f91702e3c41129d6f1a8b336e3a16
2259 F20110330_AABVBH baldwin_r_Page_125.txt
d9a3475382734186954105380f27b488
7a6d7aa678ce5bbdda41b0413765bb33edc5878a
6429 F20110330_AABVZE baldwin_r_Page_050thm.jpg
556e3d4b086aa1abddb80c554a87a5e5
babbd8fe41d4aa6eaf499cdc6c40daa860db478c
4757 F20110330_AABVYP baldwin_r_Page_035thm.jpg
f56de3e5759f4f61bd0d5c62f28f5d56
a7c65d7b967186bbd5599be238a0d6b50b8cbf4d
F20110330_AABUWC baldwin_r_Page_128.tif
ed7e9d090d864d5c538656fc04848cfc
45827f91166bbb756d42756595130131dfff4b7b
1888 F20110330_AABVAT baldwin_r_Page_110.txt
21a1fea963db0ae323137d8b72350d42
278600abc175adef84f7cae180833b9751210b3e
F20110330_AABUVN baldwin_r_Page_113.tif
8d139304b01f9308acc51b0b2fe29b0a
60b6ab684de5e4f7159125bd80f76e95138a910c
F20110330_AABUUZ baldwin_r_Page_099.tif
f809f9f80db1d028ce67bb01eb3f38b9
7281ef20c256e0e8e6afa47062af25ce9dddbeed
1741 F20110330_AABVBI baldwin_r_Page_126.txt
5fd96e778a599159e535556d742a4dac
af9ca9fad49bd0b59248ba781a15cac8ddc75d93
3583 F20110330_AABVZF baldwin_r_Page_051thm.jpg
00bcb47270e870f259d2afc04ff6e99a
8df7f0333e7a72633833069112828283013f0cdc
2852 F20110330_AABVYQ baldwin_r_Page_036thm.jpg
0fd415995afb2518c729a7d8c1c33fc6
7c5dd4967acdbc484e15e552b033153b2bd3924c
F20110330_AABUWD baldwin_r_Page_129.tif
43bd76de7e5e5fb565bae2c15cf0d7b7
8a125ea4f1e3386ca89289e0618ca2a4eefc2a75
1945 F20110330_AABVAU baldwin_r_Page_111.txt
5fbacce16d2b4eb160316b7b30229960
ca319276e58dc2d1bb2a96bc794e9c578e3be89b
F20110330_AABUVO baldwin_r_Page_114.tif
52d83cfa514082abe550e33f917f33ab
6a7b8c8030618fbf7141f053371c5fd5e75b7404
2125 F20110330_AABVBJ baldwin_r_Page_127.txt
4e9fc006569ff631b959b2276729f4ff
0ede32afaed10b34464f886b4081824275729a80
3610 F20110330_AABVZG baldwin_r_Page_052thm.jpg
dae19fb9c912d5d8727649f078924e1d
dba9f9390624f489b71fcfd62cff11712e04cce6
2450 F20110330_AABVYR baldwin_r_Page_037thm.jpg
2a15637fa609f15d3b6ad3f1855a6f21
5396e5e5502b8beaaf5de11b2834fd4fc1893b5f
F20110330_AABUWE baldwin_r_Page_130.tif
e1fd7772c55015f6ab199f66dd435566
a2c657a5776e07af2be6e170fcdf6e3d3427f93b
F20110330_AABVAV baldwin_r_Page_112.txt
67fc29e63e2783aef1e40969a40803a3
f0e43a81b4aa583d8f3692ac0895d18aec0e8e66
F20110330_AABUVP baldwin_r_Page_115.tif
b15de741fc793a6caa6489199f9c9cc1
28db848192d777075ef3de2291daf45ddaf2b61f
2575 F20110330_AABVBK baldwin_r_Page_128.txt
36982e9b8b02373c9db67f83cc80108b
35908871db8155be3dce5fc13e37f83a28de591e
2086 F20110330_AABVZH baldwin_r_Page_053thm.jpg
69687630f66a4380c0b6710763d7a33e
2c82f0170336be6c8f22cf5811a8ad8aec854b7d
2994 F20110330_AABVYS baldwin_r_Page_038thm.jpg
88d61e481448ba4a051c4047b5b6df0f
a559fb51db7c185e895ac7a9513840cea6c7be8e
1807 F20110330_AABVAW baldwin_r_Page_113.txt
50b1e45a97fe6f8dbeff39742236b1e7
49a12f084d2a71b9ff4608afad37d152e674ced4
F20110330_AABUVQ baldwin_r_Page_116.tif
167676ffa4276b1dc5ba5f6382b68a74
f46cab96857023cfbb4d0ddfb7e954fe2635646e
2141 F20110330_AABVBL baldwin_r_Page_129.txt
fe4c724c86bdec06040e5517acdbc60a
7fb308de135bcf7e93307b3d4d9b4eef82419376
F20110330_AABUWF baldwin_r_Page_131.tif
6c28872fcafc971742462f98a629c7b4
22caea9e8abebef08c0dac84144b08b5a1c32f95
2130 F20110330_AABVZI baldwin_r_Page_054thm.jpg
dc8ba0c8b8e5157151b35fe6f4c5914c
06d0e574d92a9c670d71d629b84bd73ba5e443d1
3240 F20110330_AABVYT baldwin_r_Page_039thm.jpg
e020e4cbf76b51c6822d57aa52d8fd78
187f0b2b096de9340f9c10ccef4f9554b8a14797
955 F20110330_AABVAX baldwin_r_Page_114.txt
51b2ca139f31ee88ad064c310ef9fffd
3a8a76c2af869d9257ac529e693fd4fbf6458c08
F20110330_AABUVR baldwin_r_Page_117.tif
a022262eafcf2ab11247907c7ecac2cf
756b355eeaa299decd8125ed2ecbdb87ca06b946
9175 F20110330_AABVCA baldwin_r_Page_001.pro
8599bb7476dcf4865bcddc24f1dfbec8
8a751032ac7fc1958a6a12dbeb87f93203c8f3a7
2248 F20110330_AABVBM baldwin_r_Page_130.txt
026fe14ff6a689d52498210e1ba11bee
b38cddd71435db84ea1a68348ecf024ea2d15be9
F20110330_AABUWG baldwin_r_Page_132.tif
43baa459112442552feb9f7da5f02f50
a1d3982e83b0710131fb5b108d20d2e69f361082
2486 F20110330_AABVZJ baldwin_r_Page_055thm.jpg
e84cd61f42ae54674ab37db4cd7e33f1
94b03847d1de89364f1db0d6b542ddf1686c005f
2555 F20110330_AABVYU baldwin_r_Page_040thm.jpg
62ece41775a23eda1083e729d64820b6
a17b9c7721619d7130776d150059fd40468da2b5
1616 F20110330_AABVAY baldwin_r_Page_115.txt
9147922f38d82cdda8f547be91664e8c
3da1bab5f3d4b90a3354a4e8b450ba5ba1da51ff
F20110330_AABUVS baldwin_r_Page_118.tif
ddab6b0d33cf4ebaaa6554cc54aa58fc
511c433f8021c0f04eb7d3db55bcf3379bc636c6
1618 F20110330_AABVCB baldwin_r_Page_002.pro
9a7c552b2f65baa2bb2fcb200416e9d3
bda07631774bc17e8b2dbbc9ab5e31cd248dd278
1623 F20110330_AABVBN baldwin_r_Page_131.txt
ecbbdc3ca66e9470468b04c3cd7225c9
569c5d61dd44c63c538fb4b030e2be79e54d339c
F20110330_AABUWH baldwin_r_Page_133.tif
4821a2b850e8bae6f2a5139cc96d0dd8
13b104321822df815ecc5c12978e39a9996aff8b
5599 F20110330_AABVYV baldwin_r_Page_041thm.jpg
1cde2feb9f13634073e5b4fa06780dfc
9420f13d8a2dc5ce4ed0bc932984cbda6c603338
543 F20110330_AABVAZ baldwin_r_Page_116.txt
f4c1faaac975e9bdd1fd6a7953be0644
336b36e5fd2b57ad866dd82faedd01e6410b0ba1
8423998 F20110330_AABUVT baldwin_r_Page_119.tif
a866973e8d5724f6058ca29e6576bbf7
62f266870aa6ecca35f39fb63facede69b815398
2929 F20110330_AABVCC baldwin_r_Page_003.pro
740237d9c491aa104f7b6e70203988db
57e2ba7aee15059841c086eb58cd10d6a3d1b9c8
1811 F20110330_AABVBO baldwin_r_Page_132.txt
c0d43b7a6a23fe4d64c8f39d5bfe128d
15626cd1ec5b646c94461e88440ab2571eef4c61
2451 F20110330_AABVZK baldwin_r_Page_056thm.jpg
ea113ae352484398241add7d4b212dc9
cf6e5aec66919cb10c2ddb483550a125161441cc
6497 F20110330_AABVYW baldwin_r_Page_042thm.jpg
23e06706097dee4b68d913f03b75caa2
72e9620bebed0d0e65ecc4518b0b4c13ccd04c39
F20110330_AABUVU baldwin_r_Page_120.tif
48ebb76bda8d8a78f48a4218040a75f2
001c376d5d70195c74a1f70cbd084c26aef573fa
34340 F20110330_AABVCD baldwin_r_Page_004.pro
d0d509f12c196fe64a5d8100886187c4
cb3335d6f5f9f6c5cd80a2e571c3bf742eb7bce0
2350 F20110330_AABVBP baldwin_r_Page_133.txt
83a8d70ff9b9ba38e1feda8e4b29da92
8725c666793730cfd8e608d4db92f2d4a7e59180
F20110330_AABUWI baldwin_r_Page_134.tif
71e139b0e41133854e17b6ceef04d601
46b6ac835479149ec3b95d74c66c08ff8c79b497
2483 F20110330_AABVZL baldwin_r_Page_057thm.jpg
b568fbc80220bc90c8c0d294985de598
0fa2873d8bb8e06b59acd6f333852a5792557911
5384 F20110330_AABVYX baldwin_r_Page_043thm.jpg
8f51ec96766677c8e0b761fe659ddce1
ce42e74c5ccb67e972eb3d3c9b5564f20121ef8b
F20110330_AABUVV baldwin_r_Page_121.tif
c9e48644217fd7d1bb116f9cf9548f79
cd2919fdd6fdf05992f69fdab8313dd2ac4340ba
75424 F20110330_AABVCE baldwin_r_Page_005.pro
b40657d6e21bf422d83ea658bc3e6e06
eac256eb1eaa632f9365f110fc23fbc11f075948
2342 F20110330_AABVBQ baldwin_r_Page_134.txt
617b24ec331860c8ab469bbf04c20a0d
ca7311d7380d3c1c6896ff4ac6e834ae36ac7f39
F20110330_AABUWJ baldwin_r_Page_135.tif
09d579a08d98d9df23406f974b858ec0
e3a3070d9ffc51c3c8fac41bad405d74439c21d7
2490 F20110330_AABVZM baldwin_r_Page_058thm.jpg
dc776dbffe694774161a42bbf0a09246
4040e33b5122496d7621a0a639924ea3b67e680f
6230 F20110330_AABVYY baldwin_r_Page_044thm.jpg
4c01bbffb519fe340af93f4d6ec429f4
1d3f171e8db0e1f1f1519b425a65c330d71e8b9f
F20110330_AABUVW baldwin_r_Page_122.tif
e61eed5b9d62c96b274a2c2e3e32bca4
7d2c1e40f225cde116ae976be1c4f69bcb7d626b
97422 F20110330_AABVCF baldwin_r_Page_006.pro
af2b60446a5a9d55c7188cd47c8f80ae
d16b214a8907c77aa394a55ec17d439cbfe9fcea
2200 F20110330_AABVBR baldwin_r_Page_135.txt
89c5effe1f04de26c548a001743d0f21
18999c366f89641c79c521b190a6f88dc42a30b5
F20110330_AABUWK baldwin_r_Page_136.tif
3388e22a156fb1dd6a243b7fa0a5780d
51058e911a897eb71b3483ec84365a41f57705e7
F20110330_AABVZN baldwin_r_Page_059thm.jpg
3ff076c49b250e58f1160ec1df2efc2a
1125e0763cd6a2a9a7eb5f2b2975d679d4a185c3
F20110330_AABVYZ baldwin_r_Page_045thm.jpg
d3f7432f955fadd81f59d4f4f87ba96f
45020c9af2219cacbb7dfd6ef8c8682d1f28af3f
F20110330_AABUVX baldwin_r_Page_123.tif
e5184001171053e79ecdfd1776c2e7a7
3e5fc07d8ea178d6c289b5d7cae1a8d7f2ffcccc
11103 F20110330_AABVCG baldwin_r_Page_007.pro
63730ced1a6c9109c02984dfeadbb573
bf90dcc33c4001afd4f546de119cc4e2131c544b
1240 F20110330_AABUXA baldwin_r_Page_010.txt
2b07f31a2decbec775daf152badbcdcc
778346267e0d406917a080be840cdd3074e5bbff
F20110330_AABUWL baldwin_r_Page_137.tif
fa576b0f5f589100d2c6ed39df1a4214
297f508d088f8accabc87a9444c238ff0f6a81a4
2907 F20110330_AABVZO baldwin_r_Page_060thm.jpg
0084bd1abb96c4057c6a7b4b1020c7f0
5c6d874ad08bba3322a75ba1ea6915972412722b
F20110330_AABUVY baldwin_r_Page_124.tif
026f725349f10b4eb331a02a5f1fd460
31e82511f1cda23eb2054e6c91a03f5d2781c763
63799 F20110330_AABVCH baldwin_r_Page_008.pro
03d60d7f525d1f93963e6ad4cded175c
887a0d02321d615488c3bc90ddcce80ff0745aed
345 F20110330_AABUXB baldwin_r_Page_011.txt
7cfcef52628b46de387da05da703731f
67036802ba3b090ceab02de215c33e7357a0d648
2303 F20110330_AABVBS baldwin_r_Page_136.txt
0d1ceb7984a7ca217b01ccbfbbe7837a
cb0b98e92aeabc472760a82db9b3850e16f72919
F20110330_AABUWM baldwin_r_Page_139.tif
2a846da5f86517b3d5d695aa125f6c96
7f4fdf9abc49828a659740f9afaf6543ef13c574
3250 F20110330_AABVZP baldwin_r_Page_061thm.jpg
3c04ac5d402c3bbe9a6add72ce8d44d9
f6d3104df39133d4eed8286e57d17bdbdd8fb317
F20110330_AABUVZ baldwin_r_Page_125.tif
6563aecaf586e2b41c9d5c3d5072e010
fa1272f7949efb784e59891f53ef5496cc7d3f26
61107 F20110330_AABVCI baldwin_r_Page_009.pro
0376541f10c788b9433c6f7769909982
0ad0e487c043fe8bdc145c3c330e0e34c262bf4a
1701 F20110330_AABUXC baldwin_r_Page_012.txt
2ce2b7d2f16bc66004e46f07c0d70e77
f352a778728b0c83b3f42db9d38ac945e1b2d2c4
2287 F20110330_AABVBT baldwin_r_Page_137.txt
27d8d9f475360e715f388c057239f378
ffa4149121459c7f3ba3198e9fccb88e35bebe17
F20110330_AABUWN baldwin_r_Page_140.tif
77bfafc590632989505a3a018c7d8afc
e64c7f8be45ccbc237a35ceb77d09b6a2134691f
2458 F20110330_AABVZQ baldwin_r_Page_062thm.jpg
993860e2f9151423102b7dd897978a41
0cf9b0588edd411362494501da4c82ebfd62d941
29127 F20110330_AABVCJ baldwin_r_Page_010.pro
fc13a3533ff1dbabc2d02494e267ccc0
55084d75ed63f5389b9babfffb56ff71175494ce
1439 F20110330_AABUXD baldwin_r_Page_013.txt
a879a8e1df85284fbd6b335f4b63e8b9
7b94ab3a37dfade53f654181256b7cbd6a449f49
2402 F20110330_AABVBU baldwin_r_Page_138.txt
d2b607d74266bc78bd42d907e97c8b10
70bc88172ff74a634101c0f0a3c93667ffe22633
F20110330_AABUWO baldwin_r_Page_141.tif
d0b78d03fc7fd3d21c738a85d4cc70ef
7c189d0390d7ce453997d64aebbdf4408662daf0
1403 F20110330_AABVZR baldwin_r_Page_063thm.jpg
3bb4cc4fa93503206ea2389ef631ddaf
13eb0dc3ec37ffd03029e5c5697123681a578342
6543 F20110330_AABVCK baldwin_r_Page_011.pro
9360906550714cce1c5b4c31995d45a8
3d2eb168b4900dd72be0db14388fc099fdaa66c6
1675 F20110330_AABUXE baldwin_r_Page_014.txt
d98b75fd039d27fc625e8578943e9db2
ef1c3f33d9f863b9fa2efb1a61cbfc65623f60f1
2270 F20110330_AABVBV baldwin_r_Page_139.txt
ed59ce4635427cca1acb2c32d372f5a7
3207b75d44f615b310fb83306664994c0319ee89
F20110330_AABUWP baldwin_r_Page_142.tif
4575e3906c47dfd22088da3485626949
71c4a6b938f6ae4a2278928a08c889a3cbc6fed9
5600 F20110330_AABVZS baldwin_r_Page_064thm.jpg
879b04d8f8da9665217045677fdd13c1
0d75cbcd9db96088e5dd287e85a08cb1b0cb56ad
38882 F20110330_AABVCL baldwin_r_Page_012.pro
58c2778a1a04bff0e2d407867923918a
85ba454f12a401e09117bf4c4f44e432cfb9c7f4
1959 F20110330_AABUXF baldwin_r_Page_015.txt
9ea47182535da3add5ade0aac30880d4
699cbc7e5e3d684bcc5cb2d4afbce7e64b75c0ee
2168 F20110330_AABVBW baldwin_r_Page_140.txt
58e1c918f1848559862a70cb7ea549ce
8cf90488f29bcf6167a97e7991d3473f1f4b7a64
F20110330_AABUWQ baldwin_r_Page_143.tif
6b0b2e6b0f82c9b4e2f2dfcb87463862
ee808733d2169b97bc5ec623579546048d44c6b7
6266 F20110330_AABVZT baldwin_r_Page_065thm.jpg
5a88ae037950ec3983df3fb914595597
50eb26c90dd3bb5e32a329f88b553dc48e3fd312
50554 F20110330_AABVDA baldwin_r_Page_027.pro
fdcb448d47bacaa3758302d5f1ddd34e
cb43b1a0c671aacf77b3df5e616033031f3e3c93
36097 F20110330_AABVCM baldwin_r_Page_013.pro
657fe38f9f77781f486a1ddd546c72ac
2ea1748c39b34167fac3d57c8e911d7b2b171139
1943 F20110330_AABUXG baldwin_r_Page_016.txt
46a5c72217707e39a3ca85a35121b078
fefb5dd91fd27a5104c77e8f43de4b83ee7f44c3
2105 F20110330_AABVBX baldwin_r_Page_141.txt
3c493bcbb0854eb0af2ad2ba865e830d
4bfed16b14f40b1970d1ea62edb95ba24efd87a1
479 F20110330_AABUWR baldwin_r_Page_001.txt
7e598aa290e022cfcf93eccaedb457e1
b2dada16d15ad04b4f756cfe0ba7b5f2531ab628
5940 F20110330_AABVZU baldwin_r_Page_066thm.jpg
640d44f5c35b9f8c8699f48f0dbbf1f5
f7fe28ba710a9202200a4d7a4ec524eb5e9a90fc
51635 F20110330_AABVDB baldwin_r_Page_028.pro
2e29b3d8dbb865c35bb730d22aee61b7
b0572ecb981cc9c281fef7c10ab3cd9ba5289679
40082 F20110330_AABVCN baldwin_r_Page_014.pro
97fb9c6b3cff8b1dad82e315e9b84230
2e9db1b77db2421345fb8628fefa06fec2872430
1975 F20110330_AABUXH baldwin_r_Page_017.txt
843a02dcd96299f799ffac141ab1d2d8
02c493a3693bb856d23c0ded12ac449e635410d2
1540 F20110330_AABVBY baldwin_r_Page_142.txt
0e0e635e470d911efff4e768571df694
51892498c8b47580239209709cc6b21f6539bf47
135 F20110330_AABUWS baldwin_r_Page_002.txt
6d6a2132b055493ab2b0e22811ddbb6e
e1261916507f749e73fbe8777e9902c72e557a9a
6014 F20110330_AABVZV baldwin_r_Page_067thm.jpg
317ccc07168350ad639a6acc814605c9
7c0cd0fb095793bc249d4403bf54c6b8d3d5cdce
49567 F20110330_AABVCO baldwin_r_Page_015.pro
e09ab93931401f4b5563165ab8114557
ecb5bf8e46e9dd157e00875a5ab74d9b95f6837d
2074 F20110330_AABUXI baldwin_r_Page_018.txt
86dd780a5c0404cef6ed6ae6fb91804e
81b9e71ebf85a36f544502600877f8061aa0bb2f
1549 F20110330_AABVBZ baldwin_r_Page_143.txt
f0e55b4944304bd29164af1c80fa5a21
dd5fa2844847f1f96f5b578c2ecddb654fcf4c5b
196 F20110330_AABUWT baldwin_r_Page_003.txt
1a7727dd2c19562be9da2de06ea5a18c
2cc5e37fb3539e7568c6d5b09affd885aaea7f9f
49224 F20110330_AABVDC baldwin_r_Page_029.pro
f952c54a6264e3e97e457861603e4ab3
842cd616df3f4401edd85bc65bac1c5a31899f27
6037 F20110330_AABVZW baldwin_r_Page_068thm.jpg
bd6645c1bf74b7eea4afa22572f51144
17169426d872a316bed133e9065e0d88cf94a95d
49293 F20110330_AABVCP baldwin_r_Page_016.pro
9a1ad5f7d2cecc1cb3b60dd2501fe68f
82cb4e81cc9de0afc60052b566c78ab8ec711a0c
1409 F20110330_AABUWU baldwin_r_Page_004.txt
0bc7f4d3fabee0bb119b0b2dc3cfcf66
f6e56852380c44a0b21bb1c9921bda8c01c9925e
52054 F20110330_AABVDD baldwin_r_Page_030.pro
3eb20a57914917caa9f637c4a1c08f2a
31521f35aca8ac497899be7a1b06ea2c1b210eb6
6179 F20110330_AABVZX baldwin_r_Page_069thm.jpg
87c1d82e2ac667b4c71e99ff42a601c0
8e42ec014ef6ddf3cdbae9d57f0ba85e01b29e18
50156 F20110330_AABVCQ baldwin_r_Page_017.pro
97c4e7e5ee4055656c4255cac95c9042
6c40e305a300c371499b583555c673513fff1fa7
2488 F20110330_AABUXJ baldwin_r_Page_019.txt
0c78f947ed69c4f4bb71eb8a346239c4
ed09973384ef20960903e83c6384508ce38aecb2
3129 F20110330_AABUWV baldwin_r_Page_005.txt
28b1bd59a545cd56ca31452bb85a94a0
02810593346653ca02ecf9c83f75f62b62812fe1
51105 F20110330_AABVDE baldwin_r_Page_031.pro
616caf507c67842550cba4d33cec60e7
2860bf0b1cd489d8a2b9a3f8a0ec7a6769b59738
6238 F20110330_AABVZY baldwin_r_Page_070thm.jpg
aa189a6bd49e50346dcbb3c396b83eae
edca1fc32b20dae3592cd730baa7ca73e3ef7ed2
53020 F20110330_AABVCR baldwin_r_Page_018.pro
b0724f42688445cc6003c6b622b82a29
cd4942fb845b0a51cbdeb767770850778dbaf836
2027 F20110330_AABUXK baldwin_r_Page_020.txt
b70934198c1fd1b3dc35324b41b90e7e
dd392ef308b4f218149d3346bf1d6a3593fee6d7
3926 F20110330_AABUWW baldwin_r_Page_006.txt
b1c26a591007ad69a62807c4e518f7c7
f79ce191e640a88dae82ffc4be2672eee6564aeb
50608 F20110330_AABVDF baldwin_r_Page_032.pro
340131c7bf583a3c83dff4a3ee2427d0
e1858e36b2910a5b3c5352164929d53950cd07b5
5882 F20110330_AABVZZ baldwin_r_Page_071thm.jpg
c31a4ce1d17a426375d756910a125ed8
d856871e4518f0c72c5bb7402108c87f09a51f37
1269 F20110330_AABUYA baldwin_r_Page_037.txt
bbfbca29ba2a5d6318e3b9ae43753f22
ffe9595117feff5d9b0b3c609d80b4da0d188320
55612 F20110330_AABVCS baldwin_r_Page_019.pro
6f8e7fc382463d73a70a37da9b5f6fff
7ca67fd4c8c85be64615af738f5e0bc4a61204c2
1993 F20110330_AABUXL baldwin_r_Page_021.txt
4d6b40f1d21cebd083238b717cdf403b
a79ffe6674e2293f08aa0380cd568f8a986f9b1c
441 F20110330_AABUWX baldwin_r_Page_007.txt
d3b93bfb8c042d9e9d8d8dc3845526c1
030d49f8fc6a09faee1d7bea6e5a88a051781ede
49145 F20110330_AABVDG baldwin_r_Page_033.pro
26de968ebbc48582b9526bbaeab1e1f0
61dc684a9e3caeb800f0f7be2671d7ecdbfb6d7d
1833 F20110330_AABUYB baldwin_r_Page_038.txt
7af4628b01b38e7e4562b9b289b6817b
3309da6807c2e8907fac9e655ae1f3ae8b917612
1904 F20110330_AABUXM baldwin_r_Page_022.txt
59ee7608dd425489cab69f8179b76db1
a914f67aa0e3b7248198d7df76bdba9fe3e18d0c
2564 F20110330_AABUWY baldwin_r_Page_008.txt
8ed6f5cf7452b6eb3b3fbd92e176ee3b
ceab6516aa1fea1659f2df3f45449163e97ec342
50069 F20110330_AABVDH baldwin_r_Page_034.pro
f5f9038fcf863a2d642caa1f138202ca
6d89a2c2e441a69c4c2d78934e0f01052e418e54
1548 F20110330_AABUYC baldwin_r_Page_039.txt
7311aa77f0b8a7c436b7eea5e6fea8e7
8b0ac86111a3b5c3c362c8144f4aa0bb48cd1f6c
51777 F20110330_AABVCT baldwin_r_Page_020.pro
5b4f49597a42e2a8b158dffd73dbc187
236e00e4be37fad7e44043144a59f1cb6e7c1070
1866 F20110330_AABUXN baldwin_r_Page_023.txt
40d73cd347d7c278d1a2abcadfd9af85
4b8f5fe5208ffa233a4c7abe10d9f8d1d0c4fa9a
F20110330_AABUWZ baldwin_r_Page_009.txt
6d3fe8f340ccfc61d31d4a388dc5b893
828e487ffbdf465b28dc7e10d0db1c28ef387388
36138 F20110330_AABVDI baldwin_r_Page_035.pro
329a1abd79d78092815131fd674af271
7a88963ac03b5d33574b9cff2bf57122cdad91fa
1276 F20110330_AABUYD baldwin_r_Page_040.txt
39c9d96304b55d3facb7c6d804e055c6
201476536d7160648e58b6f23a74020e6c04b721
50578 F20110330_AABVCU baldwin_r_Page_021.pro
8e80dff58004aeb9ef648c88f7984406
8e172a16d192ce3ae7417987faa7ba3eb6121960
F20110330_AABUXO baldwin_r_Page_024.txt
522780aba37c00685cd12d8cd77d5d2c
8b14d4ed091eb27097192577f92778a0f94d4bdc
32570 F20110330_AABVDJ baldwin_r_Page_036.pro
267b8260ab80e504e1c2f7e2b06a8dd7
c1bc02359a3605d675574764c1b770632f14458d
1787 F20110330_AABUYE baldwin_r_Page_041.txt
f68d65026c0066c7ffcf2e824fdb3d6c
c3377f906120ee2c4388c568b66f00232c5acdbf
48215 F20110330_AABVCV baldwin_r_Page_022.pro
d7f16673731b0d153b3452a5aeba43c9
312915dc4a6072d67ceea7c606dfde28f36078b6
1562 F20110330_AABUXP baldwin_r_Page_025.txt
1140405d34fbb22ae991c0ca27e2f095
da2686bfe063ec5ae9b3a447616398b7384ae66f
28456 F20110330_AABVDK baldwin_r_Page_037.pro
a534ee3bc8083b8596ee2320c7cd5b95
9250dc7fc944aa1f11b0815ddbd308faf0252b59
2039 F20110330_AABUYF baldwin_r_Page_042.txt
7058c20adbee3057e05049e980284879
e5aab80ef44faf0447bd8c50936fc47d45ea82a2
46303 F20110330_AABVCW baldwin_r_Page_023.pro
5794e74a0f01d4fc3abad8f60390cd68
a1613374f9b6c55eb32d9f46a8aa39f33bdb144d
2044 F20110330_AABUXQ baldwin_r_Page_026.txt
ee896352ce9b4c187be33c5caf16906d
63c12d722a78f3a0df2a745b65a23aeb313fd244
34305 F20110330_AABVDL baldwin_r_Page_039.pro
43fad8f1777d8fce051b2832d8b6ea44
d5ba2f3f5bb1ee80cb0a61af19611703c8916864
1670 F20110330_AABUYG baldwin_r_Page_043.txt
c56b01b6deb67dfda54433eddf2b0920
b2e6a6c5284591a2de3440296390a7019bc10422
50514 F20110330_AABVCX baldwin_r_Page_024.pro
816cf6e1318da55ce0fc6d7c4ffb7efc
b2c82f1c931af7162cc188b61c2ae12f2527fb6a
1990 F20110330_AABUXR baldwin_r_Page_027.txt
9181cba95f0545b22855e0491c98cd21
9a67886e73caac290d2e7ff1fc73f39995f95f21
19680 F20110330_AABVEA baldwin_r_Page_054.pro
50681c0c7c95f20f1587131aa16ee038
6204951f1903a62013fb3fcf6ed381f66fe7ea95
27804 F20110330_AABVDM baldwin_r_Page_040.pro
73a608b26961d8b96505d49005f29a14
f55edc73728606e6fb9c48caebe1d51c17e5a748
1820 F20110330_AABUYH baldwin_r_Page_044.txt
3893797e21ea7fea91d54cc85dc0de15
1809f1329ce4fd5243b6d23b162d3aa8f980bfb7
33590 F20110330_AABVCY baldwin_r_Page_025.pro
51390ea51df90442070b1f891efddd15
30005a04355ec83a142125d036dce773fccd8f89
2026 F20110330_AABUXS baldwin_r_Page_028.txt
5c5090d0a780ebfdb2b1d2c9856826ec
f3e245431356f139813658ab8bfa5751a5357cf7
27248 F20110330_AABVEB baldwin_r_Page_055.pro
dcb1b34af76611394ae66ff3315e9f01
c795adbcdb025451b48ef57aedae11a44a4fc3cf
42876 F20110330_AABVDN baldwin_r_Page_041.pro
b742ef73a5e0a10353c0197288b9b075
29a537c72e203ba809936e230c221ae90ff0ab7b
2100 F20110330_AABUYI baldwin_r_Page_045.txt
c80dc8c968007bdebc32552a9e3ed8ef
e83a9006df53b4754d8d590b697906926f54d636
48080 F20110330_AABVCZ baldwin_r_Page_026.pro
78be9d4e3447670e82d20ffac31c29b4
9bbae97ad340a60b242021e21459a410da7f1e44
F20110330_AABUXT baldwin_r_Page_029.txt
1ad45b970517a2e62bdf04aa9915ef2d
5481febfc1e3bf90bf0cf1795970db92162113b4
18188 F20110330_AABVEC baldwin_r_Page_056.pro
92ee118c8b0fb3ac18e5bd9500703e7b
f51f82dd01276fc5c7bd50d6b70c8359042d5c60
51265 F20110330_AABVDO baldwin_r_Page_042.pro
d81c5cfe5c4953a665f93b0b7ddea9e1
7854585a0fb59ef3792e90b1028ba831f615a962
1895 F20110330_AABUYJ baldwin_r_Page_046.txt
8e5a7f23b8d532e40f5ab2d823e00b17
041f2afa1f7395ac8b7d94be765c2f03dce5c3f2
2043 F20110330_AABUXU baldwin_r_Page_030.txt
f1a1bfa6af24047f32357dc863b19c3a
4b15283be8ef1f34095c337fb787df0bb90ea3be
18894 F20110330_AABVED baldwin_r_Page_057.pro
2388d12401d72c610cb0fa670df128b8
7181ae2bb4d91b6a052ca3a4091bedd211f4969c
41874 F20110330_AABVDP baldwin_r_Page_043.pro
bfc76dbe7d863351a0db140c8e66d89e
09ce6755df3948cb38c2fef99a1acf9d706d8130
2023 F20110330_AABUXV baldwin_r_Page_031.txt
62abcb1b765ff1ec2f13da68ee1e5f9a
7618bb16ed5ceb0d7a1a454e8dcfe2a19a04efb1
27465 F20110330_AABVEE baldwin_r_Page_058.pro
4c4bd2da9c01777255e2308445b19dfb
7423dfb14de95feffdfaed328248fb0daba2983d
44740 F20110330_AABVDQ baldwin_r_Page_044.pro
0bc61bda1592dac2610f21d48cd5b148
ce1dec3ee087ab39ab6a837b0a23dd25d38b8573
1982 F20110330_AABUYK baldwin_r_Page_047.txt
86d144dafc0f4517775a87442a3fd80b
65daffa29e776ea93e9528a398c5149e74a82bc2
2006 F20110330_AABUXW baldwin_r_Page_032.txt
ab89643c39608b3b26678ac1e12c0975
99c235660c201885a35d41985f88acd58260aef5
21075 F20110330_AABVEF baldwin_r_Page_059.pro
94cfe62b70fa6282e13e4b0906a1362e
0e63f31a7ee605b9eabd66b74836250a383e1097
53515 F20110330_AABVDR baldwin_r_Page_045.pro
70ceb9f90cf6bd3ce9a27a02cbc5bc8e
c27b54a630246e4968952370cbc11c0d1546ecb5
2025 F20110330_AABUYL baldwin_r_Page_048.txt
d4f12727f9dbea8bc59c48f648a33ca4
f8e427e37090ee4d221ed3c4dd855524a57a6c25
1971 F20110330_AABUXX baldwin_r_Page_034.txt
b2339f540e4d862c95b264642239bc9a
40346d63151372dba4a853465a9217d2298dd416
30485 F20110330_AABVEG baldwin_r_Page_060.pro
09615a795b0d6929b87cfd8e10d54ce1
2499706337a59d6ed0460c974558285cbe0202a1
1749 F20110330_AABUZA baldwin_r_Page_064.txt
9b1df87d02ff1890b2c2a0c2dffa96bf
f5fe1037b8b38e6d80cb98a313fe131c64422f61
47749 F20110330_AABVDS baldwin_r_Page_046.pro
7bdf86dbd896a106c99edaf7297519bc
324561b789526f9bca8eafc903ff13b5b6e2669e
1973 F20110330_AABUYM baldwin_r_Page_049.txt
a919f0e3c789c643dec7a5cebcd7ecde
6502248e8156ffe176bb3af4906ee1a8342bc2b7
1482 F20110330_AABUXY baldwin_r_Page_035.txt
d226b2284ed7ef62a5c4d98ace1ac725
6900d420cbb14bc2294dceebf147612729c100ec
36772 F20110330_AABVEH baldwin_r_Page_061.pro
eab3370126ca4389c4c4f8f7b574c944
42aa1edf9615877e6aa5624261320dc6297d8b53
2021 F20110330_AABUZB baldwin_r_Page_065.txt
e16fb9158c11e5aa2759c665207aa1b4
d816399c06fdc98c574ffa21a8237e28e4c1c63b
50087 F20110330_AABVDT baldwin_r_Page_047.pro
0a6f931816b6bba6e8313a5e78a9d346
9bc3cf6124b8280960090c1ea823da1617e2a20e
1983 F20110330_AABUYN baldwin_r_Page_050.txt
c1b5ce41bc39a7edbbc8a2ef8b37e4d0
e5670e9870008d9024789896e9d9c5c9f7b8f6b1
1408 F20110330_AABUXZ baldwin_r_Page_036.txt
1e45def3fa7febafc8ced4a472f59d73
6b36b706e570347c7ba5afdd560b2cff6abd167e
26536 F20110330_AABVEI baldwin_r_Page_062.pro
d4c701b0f58d5d018864b5b9d2391d99
3779b411cbec2ff78bc9ea2272c13a1fe41a1f32
F20110330_AABUZC baldwin_r_Page_066.txt
ad004d332a06e64fcda2ed40bce58831
0c70ea93aa8d2c828d0936c156184b9f48237684
1022 F20110330_AABUYO baldwin_r_Page_051.txt
e147b1168fd8fb9fd30cbf5c7b04bf12
60a5fc5b0b61373419d6aeb643d57549b53c363d
11139 F20110330_AABVEJ baldwin_r_Page_063.pro
5dac58dd667a6db2cad7430b37859c51
80d5ecb0ac23f68dcbf5b7fad3bea091ccaeee94
F20110330_AABUZD baldwin_r_Page_067.txt
034e0dbf65943bfba9e50ed858aa4845
a910f65b97ebf7b3a3c5dae9f8dcc6ad9ea39e4e
51474 F20110330_AABVDU baldwin_r_Page_048.pro
9a9700f7fe19359c195ab7bc271e0e26
f89f56a64746c7afdb44c028b18c178a76d6ab05
1118 F20110330_AABUYP baldwin_r_Page_052.txt
f0496e2dff5b4415cd03e1134f607dfe
c2d6512e785883843fd884efee35f1de25d0f47d
41299 F20110330_AABVEK baldwin_r_Page_064.pro
56316ad750074d9b8f7275dc77df96cf
1e828b426afd5d39f2dee6178e08ffe8bb487004
1893 F20110330_AABUZE baldwin_r_Page_068.txt
7d8ec0c86c8437db211d8526fee7b995
32d03342b2196ab7b785c4031139f7d333c2cb9d
49070 F20110330_AABVDV baldwin_r_Page_049.pro
9f8739be1fb10b4ba4eddc4a20c8b5ff
0dc188c09c6efd0d7ddf7b9814c07d32160d7813
F20110330_AABUYQ baldwin_r_Page_053.txt
e05d742b413b677483310e55d5034e23
73796b44390ab22e3b33709777ed35f6d00020dc
50695 F20110330_AABVEL baldwin_r_Page_065.pro
0470a8417a41453d8e2df2132a025661
f79c3e34114d02e7a79f1f9f5a4fb5573d1ba41e
1885 F20110330_AABUZF baldwin_r_Page_069.txt
3355d879c465db2391a1d5d02172bd76
d6e1d127366246f9a1a27c834336b6e2401ab19f
50402 F20110330_AABVDW baldwin_r_Page_050.pro
7b9220c6142ef6b02482898da150019f
584d871c3822d7ce26258793e61b3fbfb5c176a4
1326 F20110330_AABUYR baldwin_r_Page_055.txt
2d3bc6f11cc964cd43499d03d3a4e823
54d202be3c885bb553ec8886f32dfc963ca8bbb2
25065 F20110330_AABVFA baldwin_r_Page_080.pro
7cde44edd36747c2dd4d1ff4c55ead7a
41b4e961a3b82c95fc5940b7e4ff8ec0ed4aa28c
45809 F20110330_AABVEM baldwin_r_Page_066.pro
45891cdab0c69b369142384602e4f142
b420f7a45fa9eaf21944e121d33eaf88886e2695
1949 F20110330_AABUZG baldwin_r_Page_070.txt
3eaa74a6f4c851baca044dfc778dc8a1
4f6d321945a3fc5745724951a618adac01a3dc0e
25507 F20110330_AABVDX baldwin_r_Page_051.pro
34fc58ef11f50c6be4152ea6929b05cb
0977d57d0086e13c86fbc158d1f16744abf59f75
1042 F20110330_AABUYS baldwin_r_Page_056.txt
ce6458b7b04afbdb01882cf626b351bc
14eeec8e662978ae6ad9347123d2d0632c59b84d
17731 F20110330_AABVFB baldwin_r_Page_081.pro
12e179d26b3161569f2997a1eb94a8aa
75240dec28cf9011add5e8b9017e1727c4c26429
46484 F20110330_AABVEN baldwin_r_Page_067.pro
bfe1b4c74551310b81bad59334b57bb5
559c4e4973f60bb81d004fe5c4fa471973c6b9af
1880 F20110330_AABUZH baldwin_r_Page_071.txt
a639d9fb32bfdc3980d26b0408b88d58
7e11cca2f8aba2dfe7b517f357452e238e49b383
22256 F20110330_AABVDY baldwin_r_Page_052.pro
b3df84267bf6d1025304d54a39eed4c0
bc6201b360ffe1b875e399e7ceb8f3935c94f063
1074 F20110330_AABUYT baldwin_r_Page_057.txt
59e38bfd892fa8cb08aa01d2399d01cd
8ec60e5d93196883fa6bd99b899986c5b128f09b
11672 F20110330_AABVFC baldwin_r_Page_082.pro
9b40933fb080634113d2fb178839e8fa
634b1aa1dc3a228fc9447791e01b617c2c8fddab
47774 F20110330_AABVEO baldwin_r_Page_068.pro
09aab4cfa21c12140093350b0e550891
2068ea581f6475be1c0cfffde3051f04cc8d6996
F20110330_AABUZI baldwin_r_Page_072.txt
59e35c15a2f59a348019a6ed610eff75
91249c3018f8ccbdf6a85ee2a78b13576a44e931
F20110330_AABVDZ baldwin_r_Page_053.pro
34be6bd9b6a8357e37072de62e0e7c86
743afffda95739b981c7f29097d207692b26e51a
1331 F20110330_AABUYU baldwin_r_Page_058.txt
c0ff5f2d38c835dc2894326168db2847
a6cf96c65e4671e671a9baf2e46bd9751480fcb0
24919 F20110330_AABVFD baldwin_r_Page_083.pro
5b97a42f4be498b4ca5334d5b41b02b8
d8125538d0c19acc70eee8a02f670a107a508d31
47399 F20110330_AABVEP baldwin_r_Page_069.pro
5cbd37b4a0d002fb54bf67ee3075dbcc
e0f7c892ba3921a59de3353c708baedcf2a64e78
F20110330_AABUZJ baldwin_r_Page_073.txt
ac6e82908a98e2a632ec70ba572c2ae9
f1903d2b29564e396313d1867f65ff12c8d36af6


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0012931/00001

Material Information

Title: Public Perceptions of Urban Pest Management and the Toxicity of Fatty Acid Salts to Cockroaches
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0012931:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0012931/00001

Material Information

Title: Public Perceptions of Urban Pest Management and the Toxicity of Fatty Acid Salts to Cockroaches
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0012931:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text












PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF URBAN PEST MANAGEMENT AND THE TOXICITY
OF FATTY ACID SALTS TO COCKROACHES













By

REBECCA FRANCES WILLIAMS BALDWIN


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


2005





























Copyright 2005

by

Rebecca Frances Williams Baldwin

































For my loving family without whose prayers, love and encouragement this would not
have been possible.















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank the following people for their support and encouragement

throughout my tenure at the University of Florida. I would first like to thank my family:

Richie for being my encouragement and shoulder to lean on and my parents and

grandparents for all of their prayers and confidence in me. I would also like to thank my

committee for their patience in molding me into a professional entomologist. I thank Dr.

Phil Koehler, for teaching me that I can succeed in research. I appreciate all the road

trips where great ideas were born. I thank Dr. Faith Oi, for her friendship and instruction

on how to build an extension program. I thank Dr. Norm Leppla and Dr. Marshall

Breeze, for their suggestions and review of my manuscript. I appreciate all of your time

and dedication. My thanks to Dr. Ken Portier for his statistical expertise, to Dr. Mike

Scharf for the use of his lab, and Drs. Mike Scicchitano and Tracy Johns for their revision

of my survey. I would also like to thank Dr. Don Hall and Mrs. Debbie Hall for helping

me to be a successful teacher. Thanks also to all of the friends I have made at the

University of Florida and in Windsor. Their friendships have truly made Florida home.

This dissertation is an answer to prayer and I thank God for this blessing.
















TABLE OF CONTENTS



A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S ................................................................................................. iv

LIST OF TABLES .......................... ........... ....... ........... .. viii

LIST OF FIGURES ............................... ... ...... ... ................. .x

OBJECT ......... .. ....... ................. ....... ........ ........ xi

ABSTRACT ............... ..................... ......... .............. xii

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................1

P est Statu s of C ockroaches .............................................................. .....................
Biology and D distribution ............................................................ ...............
M medical Im plications ........................................... .. ... .... ............ ...
Management Measures and Resistance.......................................................5
Integrated Pest M anagem ent Strategies...................................... .....................7
Cultural Methods: Education and Sanitation .......................................... 8
Mechanical Methods: Exclusion and Physical Removal of Cockroaches .....9
Chemical Methods: Traditional ........................................... ...............9
H history of Soap as an Insecticide........................................... .......... ............... 10
T ox city of S o ap ................................................... ................ 10
Chemical Structure of Fatty Acids .................................................. 12
Chemical Structure of Potassium Fatty Acid Salts............................................13
Insecticidal Uses of Potassium Fatty Acid Salts .............................................. 13
Potential Mode of Action of Potassium Fatty Acid Salts............................... 20
State ent of P purpose ....................................................................... ..................... 22

2 PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF PEST PROBLEMS .................................... .........28

In tro d u ctio n ........................................................................................................... 2 8
M materials and M methods ....................................................................... ..................29
R e su lts ................................................................................................................... 3 1
Demographics................................................ 31
Importance of Categories of Urban Pests.......................................................... 31
Factors Related to a Behavioral Change .................................. ............... 32


v









Homemade Product Use as a Pest Management Option....................................35
D isc u ssio n .................................................................... ................ 3 6

3 PUBLIC ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS TOWARDS HOUSEHOLD
PESTICIDE U SA GE ................. ............... ............... ........... ... ............... 51

Introduction ................................ ........................... .... ..... ......... 51
M materials and M methods ....................................................................... ..................52
R esults.......................... ............. .. ...................... ...... 54
Responses of Consumers That Utilize Pesticides....................................54
Responses of Consumers That Do Not Utilize Pesticides.............................. 57
Responses of Consumers That Would Never Utilize Pesticides......................58
Responses of All Consumers................. ...................................58
D em graphics ............................................ 58
D iscu ssio n ......... .................................... ............................5 9

4 TOXICITY OF COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE DISHWASHING
DETERGENTS AND HOUSEHOLD CLEANERS ON COCKROACHES
BLA TTELLA GERMANICA (L.), AND PERIPLANETA AMERICANA (L.) .............73

Introduction .............. .... ... ......... ....... ...... ........................ .. 73
M materials and M methods ....................................................................... ..................74
In se c ts ............. ..... ............ ................. .................................................7 4
Im m version A ssay ....... ...... .......... .......... ........................ .. ............ .... .. 75
Comparison of Modified Immersion and Spray Applications using
Dishwashing Soap and Household Cleaners........................................76
A n aly sis ............. ................. ................................................................7 8
Results ................. ..... ............ ............. ...............79
Im m version A ssay ....... ...... .......... .......... ........................ .. ............ .... .. 79
Comparison of Modified Immersion and Spray Applications using
Dishwashing Soap and Household Cleaners........................................80
D iscu ssion ............... .................................... ............................82

5 TOXICITY AND NEUROPHYSIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF INDIVIDUAL
FATTY ACID SALTS ON AMERICAN AND GERMAN COCKROACHES........91

In tro d u ctio n ...................................... ................................................ 9 1
M materials and M methods ....................................................................... ..................93
Insects ................................... ........................... ..... ..... ........ 93
T re a tm e n ts ..................................................................................................... 9 3
Immersion Bioassay ............................. .......... ............ ............... 94
Neurophysiology Bioassay -- Equipment........................................95
Neurophysiology Bioassay -- Insect Preparation and Recording........................95
A n a ly sis .............................................. .. ................. ................ 9 7
R e su lts ...................... .. .. ......... .. .. .................................................... 9 7
D iscu ssio n ...................... .. .. ......... .. .. .......... ......................................10 0









6 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION .........................................................................107

APPENDIX: PEST MANAGEMENT SURVEY INSTRUMENT..............................110

L IST O F R E F E R E N C E S ........................................................................ .................... 119

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .............................................................. ...............130
















LIST OF TABLES


Table page

1-1 Insecticide classes and modes of action. ....................................... ............... 6

1-2 C om m on potassium salts ........................................................................... ...... 13

1-3 Selected references testing various soap solutions against arthropods ..................23

2-1 Demographic profile of the 600 participants in the Florida perceptions of pests
survey ..............................................................................39

2-2 Demographic differences between chemically sensitive people and people
allergic to insects and insect bites. ........................................ ....................... 40

2-3 Response to the question, "Which of the following categories of insect pests ....41

2-4 Pesticide users' reasons for purchasing pest control products or services and
their im portance (N =492) ......................................................... ............... 42

2-5 Responses for pest factors influencing purchase of pest control products or
services based on gender. ............................................... ............................... 43

2-6 Non-pesticide users rank of the importance of some reasons for purchasing pest
control products or services (n=59)............................................... ............... 45

2-7 Response from non-pesticide users to the question, "How likely are you to take
that (pest control) action to solve a problem?" (n=59)..............................46

2-8 Response of people who would never use pesticides to the question: "How likely
would you be to take the following actions to solve a pest problem in or around
your hom e?" (n=48) ......................... ....... ... .. ...... ...............48

2-9 Comments specified by people who indicated they would never use pesticides
(n= 4 8). ............................................................................... 4 9

3-1 Demographic responses for willingness to use over-the-counter pesticides............64

3-2 Formulation preference of over-the-counter pesticide users (N=387).....................65

3-3 Demographic responses for willingness to use professional pest control products
or services............................................................................................. .66









3-4 Importance of purchasing variables from pesticide users for over-the-counter
and professional pest control services (n=387)........................................... ........... 67

3-5 Demographic responses for factors influencing purchase of over-the-counter
p esticid es. ......................................................... ................ 6 8

3-6 Demographic responses for factors influencing purchase of professional pest
control products or services........................................................... ............... 69

3-7 Importance of purchasing variables from non-pesticide users for over-the-
counter and professional pest control services (n=59). ........................................70

3-8 Demographic profile of the 600 participants in the Florida perceptions of pest
m anagem ent survey .................. ................................................. 71

3-9 Demographic differences between chemically sensitive people and people
allergic to insects and insect bites. ........................................ ....................... 72

4-1 Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German cockroach males when
exposed to Palmolive dishwashing liquid by immersion................... ................85

4-2 Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German cockroach males when
exposed to different formulations of dishwashing liquid by immersion..................86

4-3 Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German and American cockroach
males when exposed to Palmolive dishwashing liquid (formula 47937) (n=25)..87

4-4 Toxicity of Palmolive dishwashing liquid to adult male German and American
cockroaches with two application techniques. ................... ................ ........ 88

4-5 Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German and American cockroach
males when exposed to household cleaners by a spray or immersion application
(n= 2 5). ............................................................................... 89

5-1 Toxicity of sodium and potassium laurate to adult male German and American
cockroaches. ........................................................................10 1

5-2 Toxicity of fatty acid salts (FAS) to adult male German or American
cockroaches. .........................................................................102















LIST OF FIGURES


Figure page

1-1 Representative fatty acid salt chains, Cs and C18. ........................................... 12

4-1 German cockroach, Blattella germanica, posture following a 30 s exposure to
1.4% Palmolive Green Apple dishwashing liquid. .............................................79

5-1 Spontaneous electrical activity from representative P. americana neural
preparation. Baseline electrical activity in physiological saline (A),
physiological saline disturbance (B), baseline electrical activity in physiological
saline (C), potassium laurate (1 ml at 0.75%) in physiological saline (D). The
threshold was set at 500 baseline counts per min.............................104

5-2 Spontaneous electrical activity for three American cockroaches, A, B, and C
before and after treatment with 1 ml potassium laurate (0.75%). ..........................105

5-3 Change in electrical bursting activity from baseline to the first and last 2.5 min
after treatment of 1 ml potassium laurate (0.75%) ............................................106
















OBJECT

Object page

4-1 Cockroach exposure to 1.4% Palmolive dishwashing liquid or water (6.46 MB,
soap_exposurevideo.w m v. 1:21.)................................................. ....... ........ 79















Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF URBAN PEST MANAGEMENT AND THE TOXICITY
OF FATTY ACID SALTS TO COCKROACHES

By

Rebecca Frances Williams Baldwin

December 2005

Chair: Philip G. Koehler
Major Department: Entomology and Nematology

To better understand the public's perceptions of urban pests and urban pest

management strategies a computer aided telephone survey of 600 Florida residents was

conducted. Insect pests were considered somewhat or very harmful by 68% of the

population. Crawling pests were the most costly (50%) and difficult (42%) to control.

The majority of the population (82%) used pesticides with 79% using over-the-counter

pest control products and 54% hiring professional pest control services.

Toxicity of commercially available fatty acid salt blends, including dishwashing

liquids and household cleaners, was investigated by a spray or immersion application

against adult male German and American cockroaches. German cockroach nymphs and

adults were both equally susceptible to a 1.4 % soap solution (94-100% mortality). All

formulations of soaps (1%) and cleaners with an immersion application were equally as

toxic to adult cockroaches achieving 83-100% mortality. The LC5o value for

dishwashing liquid against German cockroaches was 0.54% with a spray application and









0.56% with an immersion application. The LC5o value was 0.24% for the immersion

application, but the spray application was ineffective against American cockroaches.

There was no difference in cockroach mortality between different brands or formulations

of dishwashing liquids. Cockroaches that were knocked down immediately after

exposure remained so and were dead at 24 h.

Soaps were further tested against American and German cockroaches by evaluating

the individual fatty acid salts which make up the active ingredient of soap solutions.

Even-numbered fatty acid salts, Cs C18, were evaluated for toxicity by a 30 s immersion.

There was no difference between potassium (LC5o 0.49%) and sodium (0.42%) laurate on

the mortality of German cockroaches or between American cockroaches (LC5o of 0.28%

and 0.18% respectively). Potassium oleate was the most toxic to both American (LC5o

0.17%) and German (LC5o 0.36%) cockroaches. Neurophysiological recordings of

spontaneous electrical activity of American cockroaches exposed to potassium laurate

(0.75%) indicated that the fatty acid salt had an effect on the nervous system.

Spontaneous electrical bursts increased 5 times that of baseline activity for two minutes

post exposure and then quieted. The quieting of electrical activity corresponded with the

apparent death of the specimen 2.5 minutes post soap exposure.














CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW

Periplaneta americana (L.), and Blattella germanica (L.), are two of the most

common species of domiciliary pests. These cockroach species are among the most

prolific and most repulsive pests found in association with humans. When asked what

they disliked most about cockroaches, public housing residents in Virginia and Maryland

said that just having them was the thing that bothered them the most, and the presence of

cockroaches was a source of embarrassment (Wood et al. 1981).

Pest Status of Cockroaches

Biology and Distribution

The phylogeny of cockroach families has been analyzed both morphologically and

genetically and relationships have not been positively concluded (Grandcolas and

D'Haese 2001). The most commonly used cockroach taxonomic classification divides

the order Blattodea into five families, two of which are the Blattidae and Blattellidae

(McKittrick 1964). The family Blattidae contains the peridomestic cockroaches,

including the American cockroach. The family Blattellidae contains the domestic

cockroaches including as a representative, the German cockroach. These pest

cockroaches, erroneously named American and German, originated in Africa. As man

left the cradle of civilization and began to disperse throughout the world, he inadvertently

carried these close associates as stowaways on trade ships (Comwell 1968). Over time

these cockroaches continued their journey with man and are now worldwide in their

distribution.









American cockroaches are large ranging from 28-44 mm in length and are capable

of flight. These cockroaches are gregarious and exhibit aggregation through both

pheromone and tactile stimuli from conspecifics (Burk and Bell 1973). Before becoming

adults, they molt from 6-14 times depending on physical and environmental conditions

and may live an average of a year or more. At peak reproductive capacity, the female

may deposit two oothecae a week, and usually produces 10 to 15 oothecae in a lifetime.

Each ootheca contains up to 18 eggs with an average hatch of 12 nymphs per ootheca

which is a contributor to their pest status. The American cockroach is oviparous,

depositing or gluing her sclerotized egg case onto a substrate (Roth and Willis 1958).

American cockroaches are opportunistic feeders that prefer warm moist environments

and are active at night. American cockroaches may excite allergic reactions in humans

(Bell and Adiyodi 1981). Allergens associated with American cockroaches include

periplanone A-D (Kang et al. 1989).

Cockroaches are easy to breed and keep in the laboratory. This makes them model

organisms for biological research (Guhl 1999). Cockroaches are the most frequently

used biological model for studies in insect behavior and physiology (Gordon 1996), and

have been extensively studied as a neurophysiological model (Scharrer 1987).

Adult German cockroaches are 15 mm in length, and although they have fully

developed wings, are incapable of flight. These cockroaches are shorter lived than

American cockroaches with a lifespan of 210 days for females and 115 days for males.

These pest cockroaches undergo five to seven molts depending on environmental

conditions. Once reaching adulthood, the female German cockroach attracts the male

with a sex pheromone, the volatile compound, blattellaquinone (Nojima et al. 2005), and









while she may mate multiple times, only one mating is needed for the production of

viable offspring throughout her lifetime (Cochran 1979). The German cockroach is

classified as ovoviviparous by some and oviparous by others (Roth and Willis 1958).

The female extrudes the ootheca and then rotates and withdraws it partially into her

abdomen. She carries the egg case for about 30 days, and then deposits it several hours

before hatch. An ootheca may contain as many as 46 eggs and may hatch 35-40 nymphs

(Rust et al 1995). German cockroaches are gregarious and aggregrate based on olfactory

cues from cuticular hydrocarbons (Rivault et al. 1998).

Medical Implications

Humans have historically combated cockroaches in their domiciles (Roth and

Willis 1960). German and American cockroaches are commonly found in homes,

restaurants, schools, cafeterias, health care centers, nursing homes, zoo, warehouses and

other public areas. Not only are these cockroaches nuisance pests, but they are of

medical significance as well. Since World War II, many studies have been done to

investigate the transmission of infectious agents from cockroaches to humans (Roth and

Willis 1957). Recent studies have shown pathogenic Escherichia coli F18 from swine

can survive in cockroach feces for up to eight days (Zurek and Schal 2004) and viable

Salmonella enterica can be recovered from inoculated cockroach cuticle five days after

exposure (Branscome 2004). Historical studies have shown that some Salmonella spp.

could be recovered from cockroaches up to 72 days after inoculation and that Salmonella

could survive on human foodstuffs for up to four years (Olson and Rueger 1950, Rueger

and Olson 1969).

Cockroaches, especially German cockroaches, inhabit kitchens and bathrooms

where moisture is provided (Cornwell 1968). Humans can be exposed to the pathogens









carried by cockroaches if food, eating utensils, or hygienic items such as toothbrushes

become contaminated. Cockroaches can also contaminate human food and habitation

through their excrement and molted skins. Their presence can cause respiratory and

psychological problems as well (Brenner 1995, Codina et al. 2002, Kang et al 1992 and

Kellert 1993).

Sensitivity to cockroach allergens is directly related to the magnitude of exposure

to cockroach infestations in the living environment (Kang et al. 1989). It has been

demonstrated that dust samples from inner-city and low-income homes contain high

levels of German cockroach allergens, Bla g 1 and Bla g 2 (Arbes et al. 2004,

Rosenstreich et al. 1997). Cockroach allergens are measured in units per gram of dust,

and the threshold for cockroach allergens is 8 units per gram. Allergen levels above the

threshold are considered to be high. Cockroach allergens have been implicated in many

cases of asthma, especially in children (Arlian 2002, Jones 1998). Rosenstreich et al.

(1997) looked at asthmatic children in eight inner city areas in the United States. They

found that 85% of the homes with asthmatic children had detectible levels of cockroach

allergens and 50.2% had high levels of the allergen in bedroom dust. When screened for

allergies to cockroaches, 36.8% of the asthmatic children tested positive.

These allergens are prevalent not only in homes, but also in schools. Sarpong et al.

(1997) found that 69% of schools tested in Baltimore, MD, had detectible levels of Bla g

1 with significantly higher levels in food service areas than in classrooms. Besides

having an adverse health effect, these allergens have an economic impact as well.

Children with cockroach allergies have significantly more missed days of school (7.65 as

opposed to 5.67 over a three month period) and their caregivers have to change their









plans more often (15.52 times a year versus 9.13) than children without cockroach

allergies or who are not exposed to cockroach allergens (Rosenstreich et al. 1997). The

missed school days not only result in the child falling behind in course work, but result in

missed work days for parents. This study also showed that allergic children who were

exposed to the cockroach allergens in their homes had significantly more unscheduled

medical visits (2.56 as opposed to 1.44) each year and spent significantly more time in

the hospital (0.37 versus 0.11 visits) than other children.

Management Measures and Resistance

While cockroach infestations can have adverse health effects on humans, the

measures used to control the infestation may also result in additional health risks.

Treatment of infestations may inappropriately include insecticidal spraying of baseboards

resulting in unnecessary pesticide exposure. Cockroaches are nocturnal and prefer to

inhabit small cracks and crevices of structures. Inappropriate and unnecessary

applications of insecticides often result in insecticide resistance (Rust and Reirson 1981,

Valles 2004). Resistance to organophosphates and carbamates was first documented in

the 1950's and 1960s, and cockroaches, mainly German cockroaches, have demonstrated

some form of resistance to most insecticide classes, used against them since (Cornwell

1976, Koehler and Patterson 1986). Because cockroaches have developed resistance to

several insecticide classes, many pest management professionals utilize a chemical

rotation system to manage the resistance. In this system, chemicals are rotated by class,

and in addition, suitable mixtures of chemicals are used (Cochran 1995). Cockroaches

have yet to develop resistance to insect growth regulators and some of the traditional

cockroach controls including the slow acting inorganic insecticides such as boric acid and

diatomaceous earth. Cockroaches are, however, resistant to many of the plant derived









botanical insecticides such as pyrethrum and the synthetic pyrethroids (Valles 2004).

Cockroaches are also demonstrating resistance to fipronil (Holbrook et al. 2003).

Fipronil was introduced as a cockroach bait in 1999, so the resistance is likely a cross-

resistance in cockroach strains resistant to cyclodienes which have a similar mode of

action (Holbrook et al. 2003) (Table 1-1).

Table 1-1. Insecticide classes and modes of action.


Insecticide Insecticide Class Mode of Action

Diatomaceous Earth Inorganic Water balance disruption
Boric Acid Inorganic Feeding disruption
Silicia Gel Inorganic Water balance disruption
Pyrethrum Botanical Sodium channel modulator
Rotenone Botanical Site I electron transport inhibitor
Permethrin Pyrethroid Sodium channel modulator
Bifenthrin Pyrethroid Sodium channel modulator
Chlorpyrifos Organophosphate Acetylcholine esterase inhibitor
Propoxur Carbamate Acetylcholine esterase inhibitor
Hydroprene Insect Growth Regulator Juvenile hormone analog
Pyriproxyfen Insect Growth Regulator Juvenile hormone mimic
Hydramethylnon Amidinohydrazone Site II electron transport inhibitor
Abamectin Macrocyclic lactone glycoside Chloride channel activators
Sulfluramid Sulphonamide Uncouples oxidative phosphorylation
Fipronil Phenylpyrazole GABA chloride channel blocker
Thiamethoxam Neonicotinoid Nicotinic acetylcholine receptor
agonists/antagonists
Imidacloprid Neonicotinoid Nicotinic acetylcholine receptor
agonists/antagonists



Since the 1980's, targeted applications of pesticides in a bait formulation have been

used to reduce pesticide application and combat pesticide resistance. Bait formulations to

manage cockroaches is a preferred form of pest control because the bait is placed in

enclosed stations or targeted in crack and crevice areas minimizing exposure. Since most

bait formulations are not aerosolized, the adverse health effects associated with spray









applications of pesticide are also reduced. Abamectin, fipronil, imidacloprid,

hydramethylnon, and sulfluramid are each available in cockroach bait formulations

(Barcay 2004). Since baiting has become the predominant form of cockroach control, the

phenomenon of behavioral aversion to the bait formulation has been documented

(Bieman et al. 1993, Silverman and Bieman 1993, Silverman and Ross 1994, Wang et al.

2004). This resistance is different from the metabolic resistance where the insect

detoxifies the chemical. The resistance lies in the behavior of the cockroach that reduces

its exposure to a toxic substance. The cockroach is averse to feeding on the bait matrix,

usually containing glucose, thus the toxicant is not or is sparingly ingested, resulting in

low to no mortality (Valles 2000).

Integrated Pest Management Strategies

Integrated pest management was first put into practice by the agricultural

community in an effort to protect crops (Stern et al 1959). In the 1980's the idea of

integrated control migrated to the urban environment (Kramer 2004). In 1996, Congress

passed the Food Quality Protection Act. This act, in part, stated that federal agencies

must undertake integrated pest management (IPM) (USFDA 1996). In the urban

environment, integrated pest management advocates sanitation and exclusion along with

the judicious use of insecticides (Rust 1994). Cockroach integrated pest management

models differ greatly according to the location and building situation (Zungoli and

Robinson 1986). The cockroach integrated pest management strategy that follows is a

general model that can be used in most other urban pest situations. For an existing

cockroach infestation, the first step of an integrated pest management program is to

identify the pest species. Knowing the species of the cockroach will provide information

on the biology and behavior of the organism which is critical in being able to manage the









population with the least environmental impact. Infestations can be confirmed visually or

through the use of sticky traps as monitors. Sticky traps come in various shapes with or

without pheromone lures. Cockroaches respond to odors from a distance, so traps may be

enhanced by the addition of foodstuffs such as peanut butter, distiller's grain, or boiled

raisins (Nalyanya and Schal 2001, Rust and Reirson 1981). After a set amount of time,

the traps should be checked for the life stage, and numbers of a given species. The

cockroach trap count will give an estimate of the population in the immediate area. The

presence of nymphs will indicate whether the cockroaches have an established breeding

population in the area. Once the presence and location of an infestation has been

determined, a treatment plan can be formed.

Cultural Methods: Education and Sanitation

Cultural practices involve factors that are influenced by people and their

environment (Kramer 2004). Integrated pest management is people management. The

first step in an integrated pest management treatment is to educate the clientele. The

inhabitants of the area should be educated about the pest biology and behavior in relation

to the problem. They should also be informed about monitoring and treatment measures

that are planned to meet their pest problem (Rust 1994). It is important to know the

attitudes and perceptions of the clientele so an effective management strategy can be

implemented. Many times this is assessed by a survey of the inhabitants of the area

(Robinson et al. 1981, Zungoli and Robinson 1986). To have successful management of

a pest, clients must be educated on how clutter contributes to pest problems (Schal and

Hamilton 1990).

Cockroaches need food, water and harborage to survive, so sanitation is an integral

part of the integrated management process. Sanitation includes removing clutter,









particularly cardboard in which cockroaches can thrive. Schal (1988) demonstrated that

poor sanitation, including the presence of clutter, was positively correlated with

cockroach population density. Sanitation also includes removing access to food and

water. For example, any open containers of food should be placed in sealable plastic

containers and all trash should be removed daily. Finally, sanitation also includes good

housekeeping practices. Areas under and around furniture should be cleaned of any food

debris, and grease should be cleaned from cooking areas. The method of cleaning is an

important factor in allergen control. Cockroach allergens are extremely stable

compounds, and may last years in the environment (Brenner et al. 1998).

Mechanical Methods: Exclusion and Physical Removal of Cockroaches

To exclude the cockroaches, cracks and escutcheon plates should be caulked and

doors and windows fitted with weather stripping and door sweeps. Once the area has

been cleaned and sealed, it is important to continue monitoring as there may be a

reintroduction of the pest (Barcay 2005).

Chemical Methods: Traditional

Studies have been completed comparing traditional and integrated models of

cockroach management in schools and public housing. Although the authors concluded

that the integrated model proved more expensive, it was significantly more effective in

suppressing and maintaining management of cockroach populations (Miller and Meek

2004). The expense evaluation in this study did not take into account the cost of "call-

back" visits, so the actual cost of integrated pest management may very well be less

expensive than traditional models. Williams et al. (2005) demonstrated that the labor

costs for integrated pest management in public schools ($6.660.47) was higher than the









labor costs for a conventional program ($4.690.34); however, the cost of materials was

less for the integrated program ($1.910.34 versus $2.800.29).

Many public buildings, including schools, are considered sensitive environments.

The utmost care should be taken when dealing with a cockroach problem so that

cockroaches and their allergens are removed without endangering the inhabitants of the

building. One potential tool that could be used as a stop-gap cockroach control in these

sensitive environments is soap.

History of Soap as an Insecticide

There is documentation that soaps were used as insecticides in Europe as far back

as 1787 (Matsumura 1980, Shepard 1951). In 1935, Dills and Menusan relayed that there

were several thousand references in literature on the use of soaps as insecticides. Prior to

1900, fish or whale oil soaps were the most commonly used insecticidal soaps (Puritch

1981). Soaps have changed a lot since then, yet they still prove to be an effective control

of certain insect pests.

Toxicity of Soap

Soaps are salts of fatty acids. Fatty acids are long hydrocarbon chains that are

naturally derived from plant oils and animal tallow (Puritch 1981). Plants and animals

have differing amounts and combinations of fatty acids. For example, caprylic, capric,

lauric and myristic acids are all constituents of coconut oil (Pryde 1979). Some plant oils

have a large proportion of one fatty acid. Peanut oil is 51% oleic acid, coconut oil is 48%

lauric acid, while palm oil is 47% palmitic acid. Corn, sunflower and safflower oil are

made mainly of linoleic acid. Animal fat such as lard contains 44% oleic acid while beef

tallow is 44% linoleic acid. Tallow also contains 29% palmitic and 19% stearic acid









(Weiss 1970). These insoluble fatty oils are distilled or pressed from their source and are

exposed to a metal radical or organic base to produce soap (Willcox 1993).

As of 1992, there were 24 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) registrations

for soap salts (EPA 1992). There are three documented active ingredients of soluble soap

salts; sodium, ammonium and potassium. Potassium salts are soft soaps that have listed

uses as insecticides, acaricides, herbicides, and algaecides (Ware 1994).

Not all commercially available insecticidal soaps are pure fatty acid salts; some

contain other active ingredients such as pyrethrum or neem (Quarles 2003). These

combination insecticidal soaps must be registered for each active ingredient. The

majority of the registered fatty acid salts include Cs-C18 potassium laurate, potassium

myristate, potassium oleate, and potassium ricinoleate. These salts may be used singly or

as mixtures as the EPA considers all potassium fatty acid salts to be the same active

ingredient. Potassium fatty acid salts are generally recognized as safe by the Food and

Drug Administration (FDA), and the EPA has exempted them from tolerance levels for

all raw agricultural commodities. These soft soaps, such as oleic acid, have an oral LD50

of 74,000 mg/kg which places them in the lowest toxicity category, Category IV (Nautral

Toxins Research Center [NPTN] 2004). These potassium fatty acid salts also have low to

very low dermal toxicity, and may cause mild irritation if applied directly to the eyes.

These salts have a half-life of less than a day and are readily broken down by soil

microbes (EPA 1992). Naturally occurring fatty acids are found in every human cell

membrane and are a normal part of the human diet (Puritch 1981). While they may cause

vomiting if ingested, these fatty acids pose no known health risks (EPA 1996) and are not

toxic to birds (EPA 1992).









Chemical Structure of Fatty Acids

Fatty acids are carboxylic acids. They are made of long unbranched hydrocarbon

chains ending with a carboxyl group (Figure 1-1).




0


OH

Capryllic acid O


OH
Stearic acid

Figure 1-1. Representative fatty acid salt chains, C8 and C1s.



Most naturally occurring fatty acids contain an even number of carbons in their

chain with C16 and C8i being the most common (Weiss 1970). These chains are building

blocks for more complex fatty acids that are used as energy stores in many organisms.

Fatty acids may be saturated or unsaturated with unsaturated fatty acids being the most

abundant in living organisms.

Shorter fatty acid chains are water soluble but become less so as the chain

lengthens (Siegler and Popenoe 1925, Shepard 1951). The longer chains are viscous and

form a gel in water. To increase solubility of fatty acids, a cation in the form of a mineral

salt, potassium, sodium, or ammonium, must be added (E.g. potassium caprylate CH3-

CH2-CH2-CH2-CH2-CH2-CH2-COO-K+). The addition of the salt causes hydrolysis of

the carboxyl end of the fatty acid resulting in a bond with the salt. This formation of the

fatty acid chain and mineral salt is commonly called a fatty acid salt or soap salt.









Chemical Structure of Potassium Fatty Acid Salts

The fatty acids that are most commonly used in soap production are saturated,

straight chain, monocarboxylic groups with even numbered carbon members (Puritch

1981). After the fatty acid is saponified with potassium hydroxide, a potassium fatty acid

salt is precipitated (Table 1-2).

Table 1-2 Common potassium salts.

Technical Name Structural Name Chemical Formula Molecular Weight

K caprylate octanoic acid CsH15KO2 182
K capryate decanoic acid C1oH19K02 210
K+ laurate dodecanoic acid C12H23KO2 238
K+ myristate tetradecanoic acid C14H27K02 266
K palmitate hexadecanoic acid C16H31KO2 294
K stearate octadecanoic acid C18H35K02 322
K+ oleate 9-octadecanoic acid C18H33KO2 320
K+ ricinoleate ricinoleic acid C18H33KO3 336

All examples are saturated except for K+ oleate (unsaturated) and K+ ricinoleate
(unsaturated alcohol).


The carboxyl end of the soap salt is hydrophilic and carries a negative charge. The

soap has a pH of 10 and is generally used as a cleaner (Willcox 1993). When in water,

the negatively charged hydrophilic ends of the soap salts repel each other forming a

spherical structure called a micelle. Non-polar soil or oil particles become suspended in

the micelle and are held in solution (Knowlton 1993). This action is known as surface

active, or surfactant. Although the mode of action is unclear when used as an insecticide,

fatty acids and their salts have been shown to have insecticidal properties.

Insecticidal Uses of Potassium Fatty Acid Salts

There is documented use of soaps as insecticides from as early as 1781 (Shepard

1951). From 1880's through the early 1900's, cottonseed oil soaps and fish oil soaps









were used by C.V. Riley, Albert Koebele, and Quayle to control scale insects. In 1925,

Siegler and Popenoe documented that between 90 and 99% ofAnuraphis sanburni Gill,

black chrysanthemum aphids, were killed with caproic, capric, and lauric fatty acid

sprays. Myristic acid, however, demonstrated significantly less toxicity. These sprays

were mixed with equal parts benzol and gasoline to increase the solubility of the fatty

acid salt. Powdered glue was also added to some of the solutions as a colloidal stabilizer.

The mortality as a result of the above additives was not documented. It was noted that

soap salts, potassium, sodium, and ammonium, required higher concentrations to meet

the same mortality as the fatty acids plus additives. This was later found that fatty acid

salts could produce mortality rates as high or higher than the fatty acids alone (Puritch

1975). Siegler and Popenoe noted that aphid exposure to the soap salts resulted in

paralysis where the dead insect remained attached to the plant by their inserted beaks.

After comparing fatty acids to fatty acid salts, the authors surmised that the free fatty

acids were the toxic agents and were absorbed through the insect membranes and

tracheae.

In 1929, Van der Meulen and Van Leeuwen found that sodium and potassium soap

salts from an assortment of animal and plant sources produced various amounts of

mortality to the Japanese beetle, Popilliajaponica Newman. The highest mortalities

were found from palm oil, beef tallow, and coconut oil (65-85% mortality). Beetles were

treated with a drenching spray in cages with foliage, and mortality was recorded at 24 h.

In 1930, the efficacy of resin fish oil soap (6%) and a commercial soap, Crystal

Cocoa (2%), on harlequin bugs, Murgantia histrionica (Hahn), Colorado potato beetles,

Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say), and an aphid species was tested by dipping or spraying









the insects (Fulton 1930). The author theorized that the soap solution covered the

spiracles with a film that blocked the air supply to the insects. In order to test this

hypothesis, Murgantia histrionica (Hahn) were submerged in water for 25 minutes. All

insects fully recovered and had no ill effects from the treatment. In comparison, after a

five second soap exposure, 92% of the insects were killed. To further investigate the

hypothesis, India ink, as a dye marker, was added to the soap solution to visualize the

penetration of the soap solution into the insect. Insects that died after soap exposure had

ink that penetrated deep into the thoracic spiracles. The author concluded that soap did

not cause mortality by blockage. He did note that since "soap is always on hand in the

household there is no reason why it should not be more extensively used as an insecticide

for home gardens" (Fulton 1930, p. 630).

One of the most thorough studies of fatty acids and their soaps was performed by

Dills and Menusan (1935). One important issue that they addressed was the formulation

changes in commercially available soaps. They found that soaps available in New York

during the time of the study ranged from 30-70% water by weight. They stated that the

use of soaps are not reliable because of product changes and that studies are of transient

value because they must be repeated each time a new brand appears on the market.

Instead of evaluating commercial soaps, this study evaluated fatty acids and their

potassium salts against the rose aphid, Macrosiphum rosae L., and the bean aphid, Aphis

rumicus L. Because fatty acids have low solubility in water, sulphonated cod oil was

added to the solution as an emulsifier. Aphids exposed to cod oil (0.5%) alone resulted in

9% mortality. Aphids exposed to capric acid (0.17%) and cod oil (0.5%) or lauric acid

(0.17%) and cod oil (0.5%) resulted in the highest mortality at 45% and 42%









respectively; however, there was some phytotoxicity. The fatty acids that were the most

toxic to the insects, lauric and capric acids, also caused plant injury to tomato,

Lycopersicon esculentum Mill., tobacco, Nicotiana tabacum L. potato, Solanum

tuberosum L., bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L. cabbage, Brassica oleracea L. and nasturtium,

Tropaeolum minus L. Aphids exposed to 0.5% potassium oleate and 0.5% potassium

laurate resulted in 89% and 67% mortality respectively.

The authors also compared potassium oleate with sodium oleate at concentrations

from 0.125 to 1%. Mortality of 98% was reached with concentrations >0.5%. The order

of toxicity of the potassium soaps at 0.5%: oleate > laurate > caprate > caprylate >

myristate > palmitiae. There was no significant mortality of aphids exposed to potassium

caproate and potassium stearate when compared to controls.

Dills and Menusan (1935) also attempted to relate the toxicity of soaps to their

surface tension measurements. Surface tension was measured by the drop weight method

and the angle of contact was measured. The angle of contact is the angle between the

solid surface and the tangent to the liquid surface. It was concluded that neither the

surface tension nor the contact angles were good indicators of effectiveness of the soaps

as contact insecticides. To verify tracheal penetration of the soap, the authors submerged

aphids in 0.5% potassium oleate with carbon black dye. They observed tracheal

penetration into the large tracheae.

Richards and Weygandt (1945) used various solvents, including kerosenes, mineral

oils, hexane, pentane, and others, to trace penetration of substances into the nervous

system of mosquito larvae. Detergents including Tergitol #7, and a fatty acid, oleic acid,

were introduced into the respiratory siphon. None of the detergents migrated to the









nervous tissue of the insect. The oleic acid had good diffusion into the tracheae but had

less, or erratic penetration into the nervous tissue. Soaps as an insecticide and spreading

agent was evaluated in 1956 (Srivastava and Srivastava 1956). A spreading agent

increases the surface area of a liquid allowing the liquid to wet or stick to a surface.

When plants containing the mustard aphid, Siphocoryne indo-brassicae Das.were sprayed

with a 4% solution of soap (unknown type), 100% mortality was achieved. When applied

to leaves, the minimum percentage of soap needed for complete wetting was 0.2-0.5%

and the surface tension of 25.23 dynes/cm spread successfully on most plants.

The creation of the Environmental Protection Agency in 1970 prompted new

research on soaps as insecticides. After an application of a 0.1% coconut oil soap spray,

Aphis gossypii Glover was reduced by 79% and A. spiraecola Pagenstecher by 72% on

roadside plantings in California (Pinnock et al. 1974). One study found that 1% solutions

of C10 capric and C1s:1 oleic acid were most effective on balsam woolly aphids, Adelges

piceae (Ratzburg) (Puritch 1975). To increase solubility of the fatty acids, 0.1% Tween,

a non-ionic surfactant, was added to the solutions. Unlike the results of Dills and

Menusan (1935), when compared with the potassium fatty acid salts, the potassium soaps

performed better than the fatty acids alone. Potassium oleate LC5o was 0.20%. Puritch

continued research on the effect of potassium salts of fatty acids on forest insect pests

(Pruitch 1975, Pruitch 1978). Similar results were found with the highest mortality, 80-

100%, at a 1% solution of C10 potassium caprate and C1s:i potassium oleate. Insects

tested included the balsam woolly aphid, Adelgespiceae (Ratzburg), spruce gall aphid

Adelges cooleyi (Gillette), western blackheaded budworm, Acleris gloverana

(Walsingham), western spruce budworm, Choristonerua occidentalis Freeman, false









hemlock looper, Nepytiafreemani Monroe, forest-tent caterpillar, Malaacosoma disstria

Hubner, and the Douglas-fir tussock moth, Orgyiapseudotsugata McDonnough.

Interestingly, Puritch (1978) demonstrated that immersions of yellow mealworm,

Tenebrio molitor L. pupae in 5% solutions of oleic acid, linoleic acid, potassium oleate,

and potassium linoleate caused early death. The author described the growth inhibition

as "juvenile hormone-like" (Puritch 1978 p 108). In 1979, Ivory dishwashing liquid

(Proctor and Gamble, Cincinnati, OH), Acco Highway Plant Spray soap (38.5%

coconut oil soap) (Acme Chemical Co., Blue Bell, PA), Shaklee's Basic laundry bar

soap (Shaklee, Pleasantville, CA) and Tide detergent (Proctor and Gamble, Cincinnati,

OH) were tested on thrips Heliothrips haemorrhoidalis (Bouche), mites, Panonychus citri

(McGregor), psyllids, Psylla uncatoides (Ferris and Klyver) and aphids, Myzuspersicae

(Sulzer), Aphis citricola (van der Goot), and A. fabae in the home landscape (Moore et al.

1979). Ivory dishwashing liquid at 1-2% provided the most consistent results. It was

noted that soaps do not provide any residual activity and must be applied often.

Osborne provided a series of studies throughout the 1980s using soaps to control

mites and plant diseases (Chase and Osborne 1983, Osborne 1982, Osborne 1984,

Osborne and Henley 1982, Osborne and Petitt 1985). Lindquist (1981) showed a

reduction in the citrus mealybug on greenhouse plants when exposed to several soaps

including Safer's Insecticidal Soap and Murphy's Oil Soap. Koehler et al. (1983)

found that Ivory dishwashing detergent, Acco Highway Plant Spray soap and

Safer's Insecticidal Soap significantly reduced numbers of whiteflies on vegetable

plants. The reduction of pest numbers by the soaps was no different from an application

of malathion. The authors noted that application at frequent intervals, weekly depending









on crop, is necessary for maximum efficacy. Safer soap applications (weekly for six

weeks) led to reduction in harvest weight (23%) of cabbage.

Other solutions that have been tested include: a 4% solution of Fossil Flower's

insecticidal soap against the spruce budworm (Smith and Hubbes 1988), various cooking

oils and liquid detergents against vegetable and cotton pests (Butler and Henneberry

1990, and Butler et al. 1993), a 4% solution of Impede insecticidal soap against thrips

(Oetting and Latimer 1995), Safer's insecticidal soap against deer ticks (Patrican and

Allan 1995), a 2% solution of M-pede insecticidal soap against psyllids (Weissling et al.

1997), Safer's insecticidal soap against aphids on lettuce (Fournier and Brodeur 2000),

and Savona insecticidal soap against whiteflies (Javed and Matthews 2002).

It has been determined that certain fatty acids can inhibit the growth of some

crickets (McFarlane and Henneberry 1965). In one study with mosquito larvae, it was

shown that fatty acid esters were not effective as insecticides (Maxwell and Piper 1968).

A 1955 test of short chain fatty acids demonstrated that the injection of sodium salts into

various animals including dogs, rats, mice and frogs resulted in a comatose state for

several minutes (Samson and Dahl 1955). A 1999 study showed that octanoic acid acts as

an inhibitor to oviposition of Drosophila melanogaster Meigen and is an ovipostition

stimulant to D. sechellia (Legal et al. 1999).

The majority of the studies involving the use of fatty acids and their salts as

insecticides use them against soft- bodied insects. A few of the previously mentioned

studies from 1929 and 1930 tested soaps on hard-bodied insects such as harlequin bugs,

Colorado potato beetles and Japanese beetles (Fulton 1930, and Van der Meulen and Van

Leeuwen 1929). Attempts were not made on more sclerotized insects again until the









1980s. Abbasi et al. (1984) tested two commercially available soaps, Chandrika and

Surf against crickets, Gryllus sigillatus (Walker), and cockroaches, Periplaneta

Americana L. When used as a contact insecticide by splashing, a 0.5% solution of the

Chandrika or Surf soaps achieved 100% mortality of crickets, and a 2% solution

achieved 100% mortality in cockroaches. The authors theorized that the soaps cause

spiracle blockage, and they noted that a soap-water spray may prove a safe and

economical solution to insect pests. In 2002, Szumlas examined the behavioral responses

and mortality of German cockroaches after exposure to Dawn dishwashing liquid

(Proctor and Gamble, Cincinnati, OH). Szumlas (2002) found an overall LD50 of 0.4%

and determined that females were more difficult to kill than nymphs or males. For a

listing of selected studies using soaps against arthropods refer to Table 1-3. Females

exposedby a drenching spray to soap concentrations greater than 1% resulted in 95%

mortality. For all cockroach stages, exposure to concentrations of 3% soap solution

resulted in 100% mortality within 72 h. The author suggests that the mode of action is

asphyxiation due to spiracle or tracheae blockage.

Potential Mode of Action of Potassium Fatty Acid Salts

The two most probable modes of action include cuticle disruption or spiracle

blockage. Research has shown that fatty acids and their salts are contact only

insecticides. They provide no residual activity.

Cuticle disruption

Olkowski et al. (1996) states that the mode of action of pesticidal soaps is

dehydration after contact. The fatty acid penetrates the cuticle and disrupts the cellular

integrity causing leakage and collapse. Insects susceptible to soap are often instantly

paralyzed after contact. The Olympic Horticultural Products Insecticidal Soap 49.52









CF label states that the mode of action is a disruption of the outer waxy layer that causes

damage to the cuticle. The result is desiccation and death. Puritch (1981) agrees with

this theory stating that the soap disrupts the lipoprotein matrix of the cellular membranes

resulting in leakage and cellular death.

Spiracle blockage and asphyxiation

Ware (1994) combines two theories. The first that the cuticle is disrupted causing

the breakdown of cellular membranes and the second that due to the reduction of surface

tension, water rushes into the spiracles reducing oxygen availability to the insect. It

seems that the majority of researchers lean towards the mechanical blockage of the

spiracles or tracheae as the source of mortality in insects (Abbasi et al. 1984, Dills and

Menusan 1935, Fulton 1930, Richards and Weygandt 1945, Szumals 2002). This theory

seems plausible because soap is able to enter and may be actively pumped in through the

respiratory system of the insect. Under normal conditions, water cannot enter the

spiracles of insects. Cockroaches undergo discontinuous gas exchange where the

spiracles open and close in a gas exchange cycle (Lighton 1996). Insects also actively

respire using muscles to pump air in and out of the tracheal system (Slama 1999,

Westneat 2003). Because of this air exchange system, many insects are able to close

their spiracles, and some have a ring of hydrophobic hairs surrounding the spiracular

opening. Besides physical structures, the chemical nature of water also aids in the

waterproofing of the insect respiratory system. Water has a high surface tension so

cannot enter the tracheal system of insects. When the surface tension is reduced to half

of that of water by an emulsion, the solution may enter the tracheae. A soap solution

would be an example of this (Behrens 1964, Wilcoxon and Hartzell 1931). Once inside,









the liquid can spread along the walls of the tracheal tubes (Brown 1951). Tattersfield and

Gimingham (1927) note that rapid paralysis occurs after soap solutions enter the tracheal

system. They attribute this to haemolytic action.

In summary, cockroaches in the urban environment pose a health risk to humans

via their allergens and potential to spread communicable disease. Environmental and

health concerns have led many to combat the cockroach problem by way of an integrated

pest management system including identification and monitoring, sanitation and

exclusion, education, and chemical control. Potassium fatty acid salts have insecticidal

properties and may serve as a stop-gap measure to control cockroaches in sensitive

environments.

Statement of Purpose

The goals of this research were to first determine general views and behaviors of

the Florida population towards common insect pests and pesticide usage. Secondly, to

determine the toxicity of commercial blends of fatty acid salts by a comparative bioassay.

The assay considered knockdown and mortality by formulation type, application method,

life stage and cockroach species. Thirdly, to determine the toxicity of individual fatty

acid salt chains by comparison of increasing concentrations. Lastly to determine the

mode of action of potassium fatty acid salts through electrophysiological examination.












Table 1-3. Selected references testing various soap solutions against arthropods.


Common Name


rosy apple aphid
green apple aphid
bean aphid
black chrysanthemum aphid
black cherry aphid
aster aphid


bean aphid


Van der Meulan and Van Leeuwen 1929
Popilliajaponica Newman Japanese beetle




Fulton 1930
Murgantia histrionica (Hahn) harlequin bug

Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say) Colorado potato beetle
Unknown aphid from Lactuca lettuce

Fleming and Baker 1934 In Shepard 1951
Popilliajaponica Newman Japanese beetle


% soap


soap


% mortality


0.00008% capric and lauric acids


Author and Date Insect
Siegler and Popenoe 1925
Anuraphis roseus Baker
Aphis pomi DeGreer
Aphis rumicis Linn
Anuraphis sanburni Gill
Myzus cerasi Fab
Macrosiphum rudbeckiae Fitch

Tattersflield and Gimingham 1927
Aphis rumicis L.


caprylic acid




fatty acids and salts


(sodium) coconut oil
(sodium) palm oil
(potassium) palm oil
(potassium) beef tallow


Crystal cocoa soap (Palmolive-Peet Co.)
resin fish oil soap
Crystal cocoa soap (Palmolive-Peet Co.)
Crystal cocoa soap (Palmolive-Peet Co.)


0.002%




0.5%


0.45%
0.45%
0.45%
0.45%


2.00%
6.00%
2.00%
2.00%


>96%

>90%




100%


85%
73%
70%
68%


92%
high
50%
97%













Table 1-2 continued.
Author and Date Insect
Dills and Menusan 1935
Aphis rumicis L.










Macrosiphum rosae (L.)
Hyalopterus arundinis Fab.
Thrips tabaci (Lindeman).


Srivastava and Srivastava 1956
Siphocoryne indo-brassicae Das.

Pinnock et al. 1974
Aphis gossypii Glover


Aphis spiraecola Pagenstecher


Common Name


bean aphid










rose aphid
plum aphid
onion thrips


mustard aphid


melon aphid


green citrus aphid


% soan


0.17%
0.17%
0.50%
1.00%
0.05%
1.00%
0.05%
1.00%
1.00%
1.00%
0.05%
1.00%
1.00%


4.00%


1.00%
0.05%
0.01%
1.00%
0.05%
0.01%


soan


capric acid + 0.25% cod oil
lauric acid + 0.25% cod oil
sodium oleate
sodium oleate
potassium oleate
sodium oleate
oleic acid
coconut oil soap
palm oil soap
cottonseed oil soap
oleic acid
coconut oil soap
olive oil soap


soap


coconut oil soap
coconut oil soap
coconut oil soap
coconut oil soap
coconut oil soap
coconut oil soap


,% mortality


45%
42%
82%
98%
81%
98%
85%
99%
100%
100%
89%
97%
80%


100%


79%
60%
75%
72%
72%
47%


__________ ______ ______P ____P _________













Table 1-2 continued.
Author and Date Insect
Puritch 1975
Adelges piceae (Ratzburg)


c rmm rn NTHmp


balsam woolly adelgid


o man n


1.00%
1.50%
1.00%
0.50%
0.50%
0.1%


Puritch 1987
Adelgespiceae (Ratzburg) balsam woolly aphid 1.00%
Adelges cooleyi (Gillette) spruce gall aphid 1.00%
Acleris gloverana (Walsingham) western blackheaded budworml.00%
Choristoneura occidentalis Freemanwestern spruce budworm 1.00%
Nepytiafreemani Monroe false hemlock looper 1.00%
Malacosoma disstria Hubner forest-tent caterpillar 1.00%
Orgyiapseudotsugata McDonnough Douglas-fir tussock moth 1.00%
Tenebrio molitor L. yellow mealworms 5.00%


Moore et al. 1979
Helitlil i,,\ haemorrhoidali (Bouche)
Panonychus citri (McGregor)
Psylla uncatoides (Ferris and Klyver)
Myzus persicae (Sulzer)
Aphis citricola (van der Goot)
Aphis fabae


greenhouse thrips
citrus red mite
acacia psyllid
green peach aphid
brown citrus aphid
black bean aphid


1.00%
1.00%
3.00%
1.50%
1.50%
1.50%


man


Potassium oleate
Potassium caprate
Potassium caprate
Potassium oleate
Potassium caprate
Potassium oleate


Potassium caprate
Potassium caprate
Potassium oleate
Potassium laurate
Potassium caprate
Potassium oleate
Potassium oleate
Potassium oleate


Acco Plant Spray
Ivory
Ivory
Ivory
Ivory
Ivory


Lindquist 1981
Planococcus citri


Safer's Insecticidal Soap 90%


o/, mnrtalitxr


98%
30%
34%
89%
39%
23%


93%
82%
91%
99%
99%
64%
98%
100%


99%
85%
43%
98%
98%
98%


C'nmmnn NI*IIIUnmp 0/ vul mnrtnlLII L


citrus mealybug 0.06%












Table 1-2 continued.
Author and Date Insect Comr
Osborne and Henley 1982
Tetranychus urticae Koch

Koehler et al. 1983
Trialeurodes vaporariourm (Westwood)


Macrosiphum euphorbiae (Thomas)



Tetranychus urticae Koch



Osborne 1984
Phytoseiulus persimilis Athias-Henriot

Abbasi et al. 1984
Gryllus sigtllatus (L.)
Periplaneta Americana (L.)

Smith and Hubbes 1988
Choristoneura fumiferana (Clemens)

Butler and Henneberry 1990
Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius)
Tetranychus spp.


nmn Namp


o smnn


two-spotted spider mite 3.13%


greenhouse whitefly


potato aphid



two-spotted spider




predatory mite


house cricket
American cockroach


spruce budworm


38.5%
50.5%

38.5%
50.5%


38.5%
50.5%


0.01%


0.5%
2.0%


4.0%


sweetpotato whitefly 6.0%
spider mites 6.0%


soan


Safer's Insecticidal Soap


Ivory
Acco Plant Spray
Safer's Insecticidal Soap
Ivory
Acco Plant Spray
Safer's Insecticidal Soap

Ivory
Acco Plant Spray
Safer's Insecticidal Soap


Insecticidal soap


Chandrika and Surf
Chandrika and Surf


Fossil Flower's Insecticidal Soap


Dawn, Dove, Ivory, Joy + oils
Dawn, Dove, Ivory, Joy + oils


u( to} % mortality


89%


99%
95%
89%
34%%
37%
40%

58%
32%
11%


100%


100%
100%


100%


99%
99%


npVnjj u ju ju \p pV I y












Table 1-2 continued.
Author and Date Insect C
Butler et al. 1993
Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius)
Getting and Latimer 1995
Neoseiulus cducumeris (Oudermans)


Patrican and Allan 1995
Ixodidae scapularis Say


Wessling et al. 1997
Cacopsylla pyricola (Foerster)

Foumier and Brodeur 2000
Macrosiphum euphorbiae (Thomas)
Myzus persicae (Sulzer)
Nasonovia ribisnigri (Mosley)


Javed and Matthews 2002
Trialeurodes vaporariorum

Szumlas 2002
Blattella germanica (L.)


common Name


sweetpotato whitefly

thrips predator


deer tick


pear psylla


potato aphid
green peach aphid
lettuce aphid


whitefly


% soan


1.0%

4.0%


40%


2.0%


0.25-5%
0.25-5%
0.25-5%


soan


insecticidal soaps and detergents

insecticidal soap


Safer's Insecticidal Soap


M-Pede Insecticidal Soap


Safer's Insecticidal Soap
Safer's Insecticidal Soap
Safer's Insecticidal Soap


insecticidal soap


Dawn 100%


-% mortality


100%

<50%


100%


N/A


100%
100%
100%


69%


. . . .. .. .. ------ ... . --


German cockroach 3.0%














CHAPTER 2
PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF PEST PROBLEMS

Introduction

Historically, insects have been an influential part of human culture. Insect

influence can be found in our language, art, history, philosophy and religion (Hogue

1987, Berenbaum 2001, Capinera 2003, Capinera 2005, Cherry 2002, Rutledge 2003.)

While insects are a cultural influence, many observe them with aversion, fear and

loathing (Kellert 1993).

Surveys concerning insects and their control have been utilized by urban

entomologists to gauge public opinion for more than a quarter of a century. Frankie and

Levenson (1978) compared how city and rural residents of Texas related to insects.

Wood et al. 1981 surveyed attitudes towards and knowledge of cockroaches in public

housing in Virginia and Maryland. Levenson and Frankie (1983) studied attitudes about

pests and pesticides used. They compared socioeconomic groups from Texas, California

and New Jersey. In 1983, Bennett et al. surveyed people in Indiana about their pattern of

pesticide use in homes. In Arizona, Byrne et al. (1984) surveyed public attitudes towards

arthropods both in and outside the home. Zungoli and Robinson (1984) surveyed public

housing residents in Virginia and Maryland for their attitudes regarding the asthetic

injury caused by cockroaches. Kellert (1993) surveyed people of Connecticut about their

basic values regarding invertebrates and their conservation. In 1995, Hahn and Ascerno

surveyed the Minnesota public for their perceptions of urban arthropods and in 1998,

Potter and Bessin conducted a telephone survey in Kentucky to determine attitudes









towards urban arthropods and their perceptions about pest control practices. The state of

Florida, with all of its pest pressures has only been addressed in a few questions by The

Agriculture Institute of Florida annual survey (Agriculture Institute 1999). Although

many of these studies have addressed the public's attitude towards insect pests, few have

addressed behavioral response toward the insects. The objectives of this study were to

address the importance of categories of urban pests, determine thresholds where

participants exhibit behavioral changes to take action against a pest, and to evaluate the

likelihood that people would consider using homemade products such as soap to solve a

pest problem.

Materials and Methods

A survey was conducted 27 March to 4 May 2004 through the office of the Florida

Survey Research Center (FSRC) at the University of Florida. The survey was delivered

using a computer aided telephone interview (CATI) with a random-digit dialing (RDD)

system. The telephone sample was obtained by generating random telephone numbers

from existing area codes and prefixes from areas throughout the state of Florida. The

FSRC makes every effort to complete survey interviews from the initial random list of

telephone numbers. If an initial call resulted in no answer, a systematic call back system

was used where the number was called at a different time on a different day of the week

until a person was reached. If no one was reached after four attempts, that number was

deleted from the list and was replaced with a new number. If the call was answered, but

the person was unable to complete the interview at that time, every effort was made to

schedule a more convenient time for the interview. Calls were scheduled at different

times of the day on weekdays and weekends to evenly sample employed persons.

Interviewers were FSRC employees who had been trained in telephone interview









techniques, and interviews at the FSRC were randomly monitored by a manager for

quality control. Interviewers had no previous entomological training and were only

allowed to expand on instrument questions with provided examples. The survey

instrument was pilot tested prior to actual data collection to ensure that the questions and

delivery methods were appropriate.

Interviews (n=600) were successfully completed from a total of 4501 calls to active

phone numbers. There were 1394 refusals for a response rate of 44.9% and a completion

rate of 13.3%. The remainder of calls resulted in no answer after 4 attempts. The survey

instrument consisted of 54 base questions with 62 secondary and 16 demographic

questions (Appendix A). The average interview time was 12 min 38 sec. After

completion, responses were split into two sections, one of questions dealing with insect

pests and one with pesticide usage. The FSRC monitors gender and race to ensure that

residents of the state are accurately represented. All interviews were made of persons

over 18 years of age.

Frequency tables were generated for each survey question and associations among

demographic variables were tested with a Pearson's chi-square test of homogeneity (SAS

Institute 2001). It is important to note that a small number of participants chose not to

answer certain questions or responded with "don't know." Percent response for each

question not totaling 100% indicates a number of"no response" or "do not know"

responses. "Do not know" and "no response" categories were omitted from the chi-

square analysis.









Results

Demographics

The survey population consisted of 61% females and 39% males. Ninety-five

percent maintained full-time residency in Florida. A quarter of the survey population had

moved to the state in the last decade, and 81% were homeowners. Pets were owned by

57% of the population and 78% kept them inside the home. Fifty-eight percent y of the

population had an income greater than fifty thousand dollars per year. The average age

of the survey participant was 49, and 44% of the population had a college degree (Table

2-1).

The average number of adults per home was 2.01 and the average number of

children per home was 1.99. Thirty-six percent of homes contained children under the

age of 5. One quarter of the population indicated that they were allergic to insects or

insect bites and 14% indicated that they had allergies or were chemically sensitive to

pesticides. More women than men indicated that they were both chemically sensitive to

pesticides and allergic to insects and insect bites (Table 2-2).

Importance of Categories of Urban Pests

To begin the survey, a question was asked to allow the interviewee to focus their

thoughts on the survey topic. The initial question was, "How harmful do you think insect

pests are to your household?" Insect pests being very harmful was indicated by 16% of

the survey population, 52% said they were somewhat harmful, 30% said they were not at

all harmful. Two percent said that they did not know how harmful insect pests were to

their household.

Insect pests were divided into four categories, crawling, flying, wood destroying,

and lawn and tree pests. Examples of crawling insects included ants and cockroaches,









flying insects included mosquitoes, flies, and wasps, wood destroying insects included

termites and lawn and tree insects included fire ants, mole crickets, and chinch bugs. A

second question was asked in three parts. "Which of the four categories of insect pests is

the most difficult for you to control, do you think is most harmful to people's health, and

do you spend the most money trying to control?" There were no significant differences

in response to these questions based on gender or the presence of children less than 5

years of age in the home. Forty-two percent of the survey respondents felt that crawling

pests were the most difficult to control followed by 22% that said lawn and tree pests

were most difficult. Half (50%) said that flying insect pests were the most harmful

followed by 30% that said crawling insects. Fifty percent of the population believed that

they spent more money controlling crawling pests than any other pest category (Table 2-

3). This question addressed the perception of how much money a person spent on insect

control and did not quantify how much money was actually spent.

After the initial questions, the sample of interviewees (N=600) was divided into

those who indicated that they used pesticides (82%), those that do not use pesticides

(18%) and of those non-pesticide users, those who would never use pesticides (8%).

Factors Related to a Behavioral Change

Of consumers who use pesticides, the primary factor for purchasing pest control

products was seeing insect damage in or around the home (89%) followed by knowledge

that insect pests posed a health hazard (88%) or feeling pests were a danger to the

household (85%) (Table 2-4). Of the survey population that responded "very important"

for the following categories of pest factors influencing their purchase of pest control,

72% responded that seeing live insects was very important; 51% responded that knowing

there was a potential for insect damage in or around their homes was very important;









74% responded that knowing there was a health hazard associated with pests was very

important and 76% responded that feeling pests posed a danger to their family was very

important. Additionally, roughly twice as many women when compared with men felt

that seeing live insects was a very important factor when deciding to purchase pest

control (Table 2-5).

In contrast to participants who use pesticides, participants who do not use

pesticides felt that their primary factor for purchasing pest control products and services

was feeling that insect pests posed a danger to the family (86%), followed by seeing

insect damage in or around the home (82%), and knowledge that insect pests posed a

health hazard (82%) (Table 2-6).

After determining what insect related factors prompted the typical non-pesticide

user to take action, the action the non-pesticide would take against the insect pest was

identified. Respondents were asked to rank how likely they would be to take a certain

action against a particular category of insect pests. When asked how non-pesticide users

would deal with flying insects, their most likely pest control action would be to repair or

install screens on windows and doors (68%), and the second most likely action was

physical removal of the pest (59%) (Table 2-7).

When asked how they would solve a problem with termites, non-pesticide users

would be more likely to repair damage and eliminate wood to ground contact (73%) and

then would be likely to apply a long lasting soil or slab treatment (68%). Interestingly,

32% said that they would likely physically remove the termites (Table 2-7).

The likely action against crawling insects would be exclusion by applying caulking

to cracks (79%) and secondarily to spot treat as needed (63%). Lawn and tree insects









would likely be dealt with by spot treating areas as needed (59%) and testing and

fertilizing soil to maintain healthy plants (55%) (Table 2-7).

Eight percent (N=48) of the survey population indicated that they would never use

pesticides. This group was asked how they dealt with certain groups of insect pests.

Choices such as physical removal by stomping, swatting, sweeping, or trapping, or

exclusionary measures such as caulking cracks, screening windows and doors, and

repairing wood damage, or maintaining healthy plants, were given. In open-ended

questions, respondents were also allowed to comment on other actions they were likely to

take to combat the pests. For each pest category, respondents indicated that they were

most likely to perform some exclusionary measures to keep pests out (78% for flying

insect pests, 67% for termites, 67% for crawling pests, and 50% for lawn and tree pests).

They were also likely to physically remove the insect pest (59% for flying insect pests,

35% for termites, 63% for crawling pests, and 35% for lawn and tree pests) (Table 2-8).

Those who would never use pesticides were asked if they used other method of

controls, besides physical removal or exclusion. For flying insect control, 14% (N=7)

would use another control method with 86% being likely or very likely to choose that

alternative option. For termite control, 37% (N=18) would try another control method

with 89% likely or very likely to choose that option. For crawling insects, 25% (N=12)

would choose another control method with 100% being likely to choose that option, and

for lawn and tree insects 15% (N=8) would select an alternative control option with 100%

likely or very likely to try that option.

When asked in an open-ended question about which control method they would use

instead of exclusion or physical removal, although they claimed they would never use









pesticides, many indicated some sort of chemical control. Fifty-seven percent (N=4)

would choose a professional or pesticide option for flying insects. Ninety-four percent

(N=17) would hire a professional or use a pesticide to control termites. Half (50%, N=6)

would use pesticides to control crawling pests, and 100% (N=8) would use a professional

or pesticide to control lawn and tree pests. Some alternative options that were listed by

the survey population included, sanitation, light traps, spraying with hair spray, spraying

with Lysol, using boric acid, and biological control by allowing pets to eat the pests

(Table 2-9).

Homemade Product Use as a Pest Management Option

All respondents were asked whether they had tried any kind of homemade product,

including soaps and cleaners, to control insect pests. Forty-two percent of the survey

population (N=253) had tried a homemade pest control product. Seventy percent

(N=177) of those had tried their homemade product to control crawling insects. Fewer

had tried to control lawn and tree insects, 28% (N=72), flying insects, 15% (N=38) and

wood destroying insects, 6% (N=14). In an open-ended question asking what other

insects they had used the homemade product to control, 6% (N=15) of the survey

population indicated that they had attempted control of garden pests including aphids and

another 6% (N=15) had attempted flea control. When asked how effective these

homemade treatments were, 48% (N=122) felt that they were effective or very effective,

26% (N=65) were neutral in their opinion and 23% (N=59) felt they were ineffective.

More pet owners (64.5%) were more likely to have tried a homemade pest control

solution than respondents who did not own pets (35.5%) (x2=8.05, df=l, P=0.0045).

To determine which insect pests were problematic within the last year, respondents

were asked which category of insect pests they had combated in the last year. Crawling









pests were the primary problem, 71% (N=428), followed by lawn pests, 55% (N=335),

flying pests, 38% (N=230), garden pests, 27% (N=159), stored product pests, 13%

(N=80) and termites, 10% (N=59).

Discussion

Sixty-eight percent of the Florida population felt that insect pests were somewhat

or very harmful to their household. Previous surveys found that people have an aversion

to insects in their home and they would like to completely eliminate cockroaches from

existence (Kellert 1993). Byrne et al. (1984) found that 88% of an Arizona survey

population was afraid or disliked arthropods indoors, yet the arthropods listed by

respondents were not structurally damaging, and few presented a health hazard.

Similarly, Hahn and Ascerno (1991) found that 86% of a Minnesota population disliked

or were afraid of indoor arthropods. A possible explanation for the difference in the

populations is that the Arizona and Minnesota studies focused on indoor arthropods,

while this survey asked only about insect pests and did not specify a location. Also, the

term pest was not defined for the survey participant, so the answers were based on the

person's perception of a pest.

The most important category of urban pest in my survey, based on perceived cost

and difficulty to control, was the crawling pest. Additionally, 71% of the survey

population in my study reportedly had a problem with crawling insects in the previous

year. This response rate may be due to a low tolerance for crawling insects. Potter and

Bessin (1998) found that the tolerance for indoor arthropods in Kentucky was low. For

example, the tolerance for crawling insects such as cockroaches was 0-1.

Many public-health related issues, such as sting or bite reaction, and disease

transmission are associated with flying insects. The Florida survey population perceived









flying insects as the most harmful category of insect pests. Pest control companies are

beginning to adapt to this perception and are including public-health related pest control

to their services (McKenna 2005).

Many times surveys only establish attitudes and do not reveal the behaviors of the

survey population. Because behavior is less likely to be influenced by extraneous

variables, it is considered to be a "true" indicator of a person's attitude (Levenson and

Frankie 1983). When something is of concern to a person, there is a threshold that is met

before action is taken. The action in this case is the behavior. Pesticide users and non-

pesticide users had differing thresholds when taking action against insect pests. Pesticide

users felt that seeing insect damage in or around the home was the primary impetus for

taking action against insect pests by purchasing pest management products or services.

Non-pesticide users indicated that they took action when they felt that insect pests posed

a danger to the family. This survey revealed that those participants who indicated that

they would never use pesticides would in fact resort to pesticides when faced with a pest

problem.

Potter and Bessin (1998) reported that 96.2% of their survey population could not

define integrated pest management in the context of pest control. Furthermore, 66% of

the survey population would be more inclined to use naturally derived products in their

homes (Potter and Bessin 1998). While the public may not be able to define integrated

pest management, my survey indicated that a portion of the population is practicing it.

Besides pesticides, the Florida survey population seemed willing to try alternative control

strategies including exclusion and homemade products. Controlling insect pests, mainly

crawling pests, with an alternative control method was important enough that 42% of the









total survey population had created and used some form of homemade pest control

product. Nearly half of the homemade pest control users felt that their method was

effective.

Conservatively, more than 20% of pest control companies in the United States are

located in the state of Florida (FDACS 2005, NPMA 2005). Therefore, the motivations

regarding pest management practices of the Florida population have economic

implications. People are motivated by perceived damage or danger to their home or

family to act against insect pests. In 2002, $5.65 billion dollars were spent in the United

States on professional pest control services and currently termites are estimated to cause

over $2.5 billion dollars in damage each year (FPMA 2005). For extension

entomologists and the pest control industry to properly educate their clientele about

reduced risk approaches to pest problems, knowledge of the attitudes and perceptions of

the Florida population is important.









Table 2-1. Demographic profile of the 600
survey.


participants in the Florida perceptions of pests


Demographic N % respondents


Gender
Male
Female
Age
18-29
30-39
40-49
50-65
>65
Education level
High School degree
Technical/Vocational school
Some college
College degree
Post graduate
Florida residency (years)
<5
5-9
10-19
20-29
>30
Annual household income ($)
<25,000
25,001- 50,000
50,001 75,000
75,001-100,000
>100,001
Domicile
Own
Rent


232
368


38.67
61.33

19.18
29.81
19.84
15.67
15.50

5.34
21.33
3.33
23.67
29.33
15.00

12.39
11.99
18.50
20.00
35.83

18.33
23.50
15.33
10.67
13.83

80.50
18.50


74
72
111
120
207


483
111


Percent response for each question not totaling 100% indicates a number of "do not
know" or "refuse to answer" responses.












Table 2-2. Demographic differences between chemically sensitive people and people allergic to insects and insect bites.

% Response

Yes No x2 df P


Insect allergies

Total population

Gender (n=582)

Male

Female

Chemically sensitive

Total population

Gender (n=555)

Male

Female


25.33



15.77

32.50


13.83


8.64

19.10


71.67


84.23

67.50


19.93


<0.0001


78.67


91.36

80.90


11.44


0.0007












Table 2-3. Response to the question, "Which of the following categories of insect pests ...

Which of the following categories. .. N pest category % responses

is most difficult to control? 589 flying 14.83

crawling 41.67

wood destroying 15.83

lawn and tree 22.17

is most harmful? 566 flying 49.67

crawling 29.67

wood destroying 7.83

lawn and tree 5.50

costs more to control? 580 flying 9.50

crawling 49.50

wood destroying 16.67

lawn and tree 17.17

Percent response for each question not totaling 100% indicates a number of"no response" or "do not know" responses.












Table 2-4. Pesticide users' reasons for purchasing pest control products or services and their importance (N=492).

% Response1

Question important2 neutral not important3

Seeing live insects in or around your home 85.16 9.35 5.08

Seeing dead insects in or around your home 56.09 20.33 22.16

Seeing insect damage in or around your home 89.03 4.88 4.67

Knowing the potential for insect damage in or around your home 71.34 19.51 7.73

Knowing there is a health hazard associated with pests 87.60 6.71 4.88

Feeling pests pose a danger to your family 84.96 7.32 6.71

IPercent response for each question not totaling 100% indicates a number of "no response" or "do not know" responses. Respondents
were allowed to select multiple reasons for purchasing pest control services.
2Survey categories "very important" and "somewhat important" were combined
3Survey categories "not important" and "somewhat unimportant" were combined












Table 2-5. Responses for pest factors influencing purchase of pest control products or services based on gender.

% Response

Not Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very x2 df P
important unimportant important important


Seeing live insects

Gender (n=490)

Male

Female

Percent of total

Knowing there is a potential

Gender (n=485)

Male

Female

Percent of total


50.00 46.15 54.35

50.00 53.85 45.65

2.45 2.65 9.39

for insect damage in or around your home


29.41

70.59

3.51


47.62

52.38

4.33


48.96

51.04

19.79


53.03

46.97

13.47






49.02

50.98

21.03


33.99

66.01

72.04






30.92

69.08

51.34


14.59 4 0.0056










16.45 4 0.0025












Table 2-5 continued


% Response

Not Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very x2 df P
important unimportant important important

Knowing there is a health hazard associated with pests

Gender (n=488)

Male 70.00 42.86 57.58 50.00 34.35

Female 30.00 57.14 42.42 50.00 65.65 15.73 4 0.0034

Percent of total 2.05 2.87 6.76 14.34 73.98

Feeling that pests pose a danger to your family

Gender (n=487)

Male 64.29 42.11 61.11 52.08 34.59

Female 35.71 56.89 38.89 47.92 65.41 17.61 4 0.0015

Percent of total 2.87 3.90 7.39 9.86 75.98

Response columns for male and female total 100%.












Table 2-6. Non-pesticide users rank of the importance of some reasons for purchasing pest control products or services (n=59).

%Response1

Question important2 neutral not important3

Seeing live insects in or around your home 67.86 19.64 10.72

Seeing dead insects in or around your home 55.36 16.07 28.57

Seeing insect damage in or around your home 82.15 8.93 8.93

Knowing the potential for insect damage in or around your home 64.29 16.07 16.07

Knowing there is a health hazard associated with pests 82.14 10.71 5.36

Feeling pests pose a danger to your family 85.71 7.14 7.14

Percent response for each question not totaling 100% indicates a number of "no response" or "do not know" responses. Respondents
were allowed to select multiple reasons for purchasing pest control services.
2Survey categories "very important" and "somewhat important" were combined
3Survey categories "not important" and "somewhat unimportant" were combined












Table 2-7. Response from non-pesticide users to the question, "How likely are you to take that (pest control) action to solve a
problem?" (n=59)

% response1


Insect Problem Pest Control Solution

Flying insects (flies, mosquitoes, and wasps)

Apply a long lasting spray

Fog the area as needed

Physical removal by swatting, sweeping or trapping

Repair or install screens on windows or doors

Termites

Apply a long lasting soil or slab treatment

Spot treat or bait as needed

Physical removal by stomping, sweeping or trapping

Repair damage and eliminate wood to ground contact


likely neutral not likely'


33.92

35.71

58.93

67.85



67.86

62.50

32.15

73.21


25.00

16.07

16.07

10.71


3.57

16.07

10.71

8.93


41.08

48.21

23.22

21.43


19.65

16.07

53.57

14.29











Table 2-7 continued


% response'

Insect Problem Pest Control Solution likely2 neutral not likely3

Crawling insects (cockroaches, fleas and ants)

Apply a long lasting spray 51.78 19.64 26.78

Spot treat or bait as needed 62.50 12.50 19.64

Physical removal by swatting, sweeping or trapping 58.93 21.43 19.65

Apply caulking to cracks to prevent insect entrance 78.57 10.71 10.72

Lawn and tree insects (mole crickets, chinch bugs, fire ants)

Apply a long lasting spray 48.22 25.00 19.65

Spot treat the area as needed 58.93 19.64 17.86

Physical removal by trapping 25.00 21.43 51.79

Test and fertilize soil to maintain plant health 55.35 17.86 21.43

IPercent response for each question not totaling 100% indicates a number of "no response" or "do not know" responses.
Respondents were allowed to select multiple reasons for purchasing pest control services.
2Survey categories "very likely" and "somewhat likely" were combined
3Survey categories "not likely" and "somewhat unlikely" were combined












Table 2-8. Response of people who would never use pesticides to the question: "How likely would you be to take the following
oitca ns to solve a est problem in or aro )


% response


Insect Problem Pest Control Solution likely neutral not likely

Flying insects (flies, mosquitoes, and wasps)

Physical removal by swatting, sweeping or trapping 59.18 10.20 28.57

Repair or install screens on windows or doors 77.55 6.12 14.28

Termites Physical removal by stomping, sweeping or trapping 34.69 10.20 51.02

Repair damage and eliminate wood to ground contact 67.34 8.16 20.41

Crawling insects (cockroaches, fleas and ants)

Physical removal by swatting, sweeping or trapping 63.27 12.24 22.45

Apply caulking to cracks to prevent insect entrance 67.35 12.24 16.32

Lawn and tree insects (mole crickets, chinch bugs, fire ants)

Physical removal by trapping 34.70 8.16 51.02

Test and fertilize soil to maintain plant health 46.93 10.20 38.77

'Percent response for each question not totaling 100% indicates a number of "no response" or "do not know" responses. Respondents
were allowed to select multiple reasons for purchasing pest control services. 2Survey categories "very likely" and "somewhat likely"
were combined. 3Survey categories "not likely" and "somewhat unlikely" were combined.












Table 2-9. Comments specified by people who indicated they would never use pesticides (n=48).

Insect Problem Control Solution Number of responses % of never use population

Flying insects (flies, mosquitoes, and wasps) (N=7)

Use a light trap 1 2.08

Call an exterminator/professional or use a pesticide 4 8.33

Remove food sources 1 2.08

Spray with hair spray 1 2.08

Termites (N=18)

Call an exterminator/professional or use a pesticide 17 35.42

Alternative recourse 1 2.08

Crawling insects (cockroaches, fleas and ants) (N=12)

Clean area and eliminate food source 3 6.25

Spray with Lysol 1 2.08

Use boric acid 1 2.08

Let cat eat the insects 1 2.08

Call an exterminator/professional or use a pesticide 6 12.50






50





Table 2-9 continued.


Insect Problem Control Solution Number of responses % of never use population

Lawn and tree insects (mole crickets, chinch bugs, fire ants) (N=8)

Call an exterminator/professional or use a pesticide 8 16.67

These comments were open ended responses given when asked what other action they would take in controlling a particular category
of insect pests.














CHAPTER 3
PUBLIC ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS TOWARDS HOUSEHOLD PESTICIDE
USAGE

Introduction

To combat arthropods in or around their home and to improve aesthetics, people

rely on pesticides (Potter and Bessin 1998). Bennett et al. (1983) in Indiana, and Byrne

and Carpenter (1983) in Arizona, found that 78 and 87.1% of their survey population,

respectively, used pesticides in or around their homes. Florida, with its temperate and

tropical ecosystems, has pest pressures year round. The Agriculture Institute of Florida

found that 82.2% of the Florida public felt that the home use of pesticides for pest control

was important to their lifestyle, and nearly half of those indicated that they hired

professional services to manage their pest problems (Ag Institute 1999).

In a state with over 17 million residents, these factors have lead to a booming pest

control industry. In 2005, the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services

listed 2500 pest control companies with 4300 certified operators and 250 special

identification card holders. For pests to be managed effectively and pesticides to be used

safely, consumers must understand what the pest problem is and what options they have

in solving it.

Understanding how the public feels about science and technology can help us to

determine how public policy is decided (Weiss and Rajotte 2001). As an example, in

September 2005, Senator Frank Lautenberg (Democrat-NJ) reintroduced legislation to the

United States Senate for the School Environmental Protection Act (SEPA). This









potential law would restrict the use of pesticides in and around schools and would require

schools to notify parents prior to pesticide applications (US Senate 2005). School

integrated pest management (IPM) programs have increased in many states because of

children's environmental health concerns. Integrated pest management is the process of

using a variety of technological and management practices to achieve long-term,

environmentally sound pest suppression. Nine percent of the 2004 growth market for

pest control was in IPM contracts (McKenna 2005) with a vast majority of the companies

claiming they offer some form of IPM service.

Knowing the audience is a basic principle of marketing (Frankie et al. 1996). For

IPM practices to work in home pest control, the audience perceptions must be addressed.

The objective of this study was to evaluate pesticide use patterns and satisfaction with

non-chemical control methods.

Materials and Methods

A survey was conducted 27 March to 4 May 2004 through the office of the Florida

Survey Research Center (FSRC) at the University of Florida. The survey was delivered

using a computer aided telephone interview (CATI) with a random-digit dialing (RDD)

system. The telephone sample was obtained by generating random telephone numbers

from existing area codes and prefixes from areas throughout the state of Florida. The

FSRC makes every effort to complete survey interviews from the initial random list of

telephone numbers. If an initial call resulted in no answer, a systematic call back system

was used where the number was called at a different time on a different day of the week

until a person was reached. If no one was reached after four attempts, that number was

deleted from the list and was replaced with a new number. If the call was answered, but

the person was unable to complete the interview at that time, every effort was made to









schedule a more convenient time for the interview. Calls were scheduled at different

times of the day on weekdays and weekends to evenly sample employed persons.

Interviewers were FSRC employees who had been trained in telephone interview

techniques, and interviews at the FSRC were randomly monitored by a manager for

quality control. Interviewers had no previous entomological training and were only

allowed to expand on instrument questions with provided examples. The survey

instrument was pilot tested prior to actual data collection to ensure that the questions and

delivery methods were appropriate.

Interviews (N=600) were successfully completed from a total of 4501 calls to

active phone numbers. There were 1394 refusals for a response rate of 44.9% and a

completion rate of 13.3%. The remainder of calls resulted in no answer after 4 attempts.

The survey instrument consisted of 54 base questions with 62 secondary and 16

demographic questions (Appendix A). The average interview time was 12 min 38 s.

After completion, responses were split into two sections, one of questions dealing with

insect pests and one with pesticide usage. The FSRC monitors gender and race to ensure

that residents of the state are accurately represented. All interviews were made of

persons over 18 years of age.

Frequency tables were generated for each survey question and associations among

demographic variables were tested with a Pearson's chi-square test of homogeneity (SAS

Institute 2001). It is important to note that a small number of participants chose not to

answer certain questions or responded with "don't know." Percent response for each

question not totaling 100% indicates a number of"no response" or "do not know"









responses. "Do not know" and "no response" categories were omitted from the chi-

square analysis.

Results

Responses of Consumers That Utilize Pesticides

Eighty-two percent of people use pesticides in their home or yard. Indoor pesticide

use was indicated by 34% of pesticide users, outdoor use by 43% and pesticide use both

indoors and outdoors by 23%. The percent of pesticide users that sometimes use

pesticides indoors was 75%, and 71% outdoors. About 22% and 25% respectively used

pesticides often in those locations.

Of the survey population that said they did not used pesticides (18% of the total

survey population), 86% believed that they were chemically sensitive. Interestingly, of

the survey population that said they did use pesticides (82% of the total survey

population), 68% also said that they believed themselves to be chemically sensitive

(x2=16.13, df=l, P<0.0001).

Of those surveyed who use pesticides, 79% use over-the-counter (OTC) pesticides

and 54% use professional services. That implies that a quarter of consumers use both

over-the-counter pesticides and professional services to control their pest problems. The

majority of all survey respondents expressed a willingness to use over-the-counter

pesticides at all income levels (Table 3-1). More over-the-counter pesticide users have

used spray pesticides (89%) and have used a spray formulation most often (56%) than

other common over-the-counter formulations (Table 3-2). These over-the-counter

pesticide users (82%) indicated that they use over-the-counter products less than once per

month. The majority of those who utilize professional services have scheduled service,

monthly (24%), quarterly (18%) or annually (17%). Another 33% of professional pest









control consumers have irregular service less than 12 times a year and about 5% require

pest control services more than once per month.

To establish important factors that influence consumers to employ either over-the-

counter or professional pest control services, the interviewees were asked the importance

of cost, convenience, odor and residue, effectiveness, safety, and manufacturer reputation

in the decision for them to purchase products. The most important factor in purchasing

both over-the-counter pesticides and professional pest control services was effectiveness

in killing pests. Of those respondents willing to purchase professional pest control

products or services, 60% had incomes >$25,000 (Table 3-3).

Effectiveness in killing pests, safety for household members, odor and residue, and

convenience each had similar ratings when comparing over-the-counter versus

professional services. Cost and reputation of the manufacturer were important factors to

81.7% of respondents when purchasing professional services. Of respondents purchasing

over-the-counter products, 58.9% said that reputation of the manufacturer was an

important variable (Table 3-4).

Of people who believed they suffered from allergies to insects, 45.1% responded

that cost was a very important factor influencing the purchase of over-the-counter

pesticides. Of the survey population, both males (74.5% of all males) and females

(89.1% of all females) rated safety of household members as a very important factor

influencing the purchase of over-the-counter pesticides. Finally, of all the females in the

survey population, 66.4% rated odor and residue as a very important factor in influencing

the purchase of over-the-counter pesticides; while 41.8% of all males rated odor as very

important (Table 3-5).









Both male (77.1% of all male respondents) and female (89.8% of all female

respondents) believed that safety of household members was a very important factor in

influencing the purchase of professional pest control products or service. (Table 3-6).

Of those stating that they used over-the-counter pesticide, 83% indicated that they

spot treated a pest prone area, 57% repaired screens or cracks, 43% applied a residual

spray and 41% physically removed the pest. Physically removing the pest was deemed

an effective method of pest control by 76% of those stating that they used over-the-

counter pesticides. Of over-the-counter pesticide users, 70% indicated that they were

likely to read all of the label instructions on a pesticide that they had never previously

used.

Professional pest control users indicated that 70% of the time believed that

professionals used residual sprays, 52% spot treated pest prone areas, 12% physically

removed the pest, and 15% made repairs to screens or caulk cracks. Although only 12%

physically removed the pest by vacuuming or trapping, it was deemed an effective pest

control method by 48% those who used professional pest control services or products.

Since IPM strategies focus on excluding pests, consumers who hire professional

pest control services were asked if they would consider hiring a professional service to

repair window screening and wood damage and caulk cracks to exclude pests. Fifty-five

percent said that they would likely hire such a service with 20% being neutral to the

concept and 23% saying that they were unlikely to employ such a service. The

professional pest control consumers were then asked how satisfied they would be if their

professional service could control their pest problem without spraying any pesticides.









Only 3% said they would not be satisfied with 87% saying they would be satisfied with

an effective pest control strategy without utilizing pesticidal sprays.

Responses of Consumers That Do Not Utilize Pesticides

Interviewees who indicated that they do not use pesticides (18% of the survey

population) were divided on whether they would, 55%, or would never, 45%, use

pesticides. Those who said that they would consider using pesticides indicated a

preference for outdoor use (64%) over indoor use (22%). If needed, 42% said that they

would use pesticides to control crawling insects, 24% indicated use to control lawn and

tree pests, 17% to control wood destroying pests and 12% to control flying pests. Non-

pesticide users said that they would consider the use of over-the-counter pesticides (81%)

and professional pest control services (69%) if they judged that pest control was

necessary.

To ascertain what would persuade non-pesticide users to purchase over-the-counter

pesticides or professional pest control services, interviewees were asked to rate the

importance of cost, convenience, odor and residue, effectiveness, safety, and

manufacturer reputation. The most important factor in purchasing both over-the-counter

pesticides and professional pest control services was effectiveness in killing pests (92 and

88%, respectively). The second influencing factor was safety of household members (88

and 93%, respectively). Odor and residue, convenience and cost were more important

factors when deciding to purchase professional pest services (over over-the-counter

products 88, 73, 54% and 60, 50, and 29% respectively) (Table 3-7). The non-pesticide

users specified that 56% would be willing, 20% were neutral and 24% would be

unwilling to hire a professional pest control service to repair window screening, fix wood

damage and caulk cracks.









Responses of Consumers That Would Never Utilize Pesticides

Consumers that indicated that they would never use pesticides (n=48, 8% of the

survey population) were asked to select all applicable reasons for their concern from a list

or provide an open ended response detailing their reasons for not using pesticides. The

instrument-provided list of responses included, allergies or chemical sensitivity, safety

concerns, health concerns, or no need of pesticides. Health and safety were equally

weighted as primary concerns, 35.4%. Fewer respondents indicated that they did not

need pesticides (19%) or were chemically sensitive or allergic to pesticides (16.7%). In

the open ended comments, 8% indicated environmental concerns associated with

pesticide use, 4% expressed concern over using pesticides with children living in the

home and 4% stated that a lack of pesticide knowledge deterred their use of pesticides.

Other comments included the use of oatmeal for pest control, allowing pets to eat the

insects, and not having a desire to kill any insect.

Responses of All Consumers

A final question was asked to the interviewee asking them if they would regard as

credible, a pest control company that advertised pest elimination that was health-

conscious and environmentally friendly. Responses were that 39% of the survey

population would consider that statement to be credible, 31% were neutral and 26%

considered it to be unrealistic.

Demographics

The survey population consisted of 61% females and 39% males. The majority of

the population, 95%, were full-time residents of Florida. A quarter of the survey

population had moved to the state in the last decade, and 81% were home owners. Pets

were owned by 57% of the population with 78% keeping them inside the home. The









majority of the population, 58%, had an income greater than $50K per year. The average

age of the survey participant was 49, and 44% of the population had a college degree

(Table 3-8).

The average number of adults per home was 2.01 and the average number of

children per home was 1.99. There were 36% of homes with children under the age of 5.

One quarter of the population indicated that they were allergic to insects or insect bites

and 14% indicated that they had allergies or were chemically sensitive to pesticides

(Table 3-8). Of the women respondents 32.5% indicated that they had insect allergies,

compared with 15.8% of male respondents. Of the women respondents 19.1% indicated

that they were chemically sensitive to pesticides, compared with 8.6% of male

respondents (Table 3-9).

Discussion

This survey was designed to not only judge the attitudes of the population, but to

also gauge the behavior. Indicators of behavior are considered to be the "truest" measure

of a person's attitude (Leavenson and Frankie 1983). Indicators used in this survey were,

for example, formulations of pesticides used as opposed to just pesticide use in general

and what actions are taken to combat pests as opposed to, "do you take action?"

This study indicated that a large portion of the public utilizes pesticides (82%).

The large percentage of pesticide users is not out of line with previous studies throughout

the United States. Frankie and Leavenson (1978) found that an average of 66% of the

Texas survey population used insecticides indoors and 47% outdoors. In a different

study, Leavenson and Frankie, 1983, documented that 62% of Texans used pesticides

indoors with an average of 10 applications per year, and 52% used pesticides outdoors.

Bennett et al. (1983) found that pesticide use was the most common pest control method









used in the home and that an average of 79% of the Indiana survey population used

pesticides. In 1999, the Florida Agriculture Institute documented that 82% of the Florida

public considered home use of pesticides to be very or somewhat important to their

lifestyle.

Based on willingness to use pesticides, you would surmise that the population had a

positive demeanor regarding pesticides. This is a perception that is difficult to access

because people are sensitive when it comes to infestations and there are psychological

influences in their actions against insect pests (Majekodunmi et al. 2002). Byrne and

Carpenter (1986) concluded that homeowners do not weigh the risks and benefits of

pesticide use when confronted with a pest problem. Since most people, 86%, dislike or

are afraid of arthropods in the home (Hahn and Ascerno 1995), it would make sense that

they would forgo apprehension of pesticide use to remove the pest problem. In any case,

whether people consider pests to be harmful or not, most are willing to use pesticides

both indoors (57%) and outdoors (66%) to control them.

Of a variety of pest control methods, people considered physical removal of pests

to be the most effective, although not the most frequently employed, method of pest

control. This was true of both over-the-counter and professional pest control users. All

label instructions for a novel pesticide were said to be read before use by 70% of the

survey population. This number may be skewed because of the inhibition of people to

admit that they have not read the instructions for a potentially dangerous substance they

are using in their home.

Frankie and Leavenson (1978) documented that 90% of the population felt that

pesticides did good with only 16% believing that pesticides could do harm. Although









pesticides, especially spray formulations, are still primarily used, pesticide applicators

may soon add screening and caulking to their service vehicle. Fifty-five percent of the

Florida survey population indicated that they would hire a professional to make repairs,

including screening and caulking, to exclude insect pests. Eighty-seven percent specified

that they would be satisfied with a professional pest control service that could effectively

control pests without using pesticidal sprays. Although the population seems willing

shift from pesticidal spray formulations they are still guarded when it comes to certain

pest control claims. Only 39% of interviewees believed that a pest control company

could do an effective job while being environmentally friendly and health conscious.

Spray and bait formulations are the most popularly used formulation types amongst

this population. When considering factors that may influence purchase of over-the-

counter or professional pest control services, pesticide users and non-pesticide users alike

felt that effectiveness in killing pests and safety for household members were the two

primary influences. Cost was less of an influence for over-the-counter purchases than for

professional services and was even less of a factor for non-pesticide users than pesticide

users. Reputation of the manufacturer was more of a purchasing influence for

professional services for both pesticide and non-pesticide users. It is important to note

that the term manufacturer was not defined to the interviewee and could mean either the

chemical manufacturer or the service provider.

A small percentage by comparison, 18%, signified that they were not pesticide

users. Of that 18%, nearly half, 45% (8% of total population), indicated that they would

never use pesticides. Health and safety were the primary reasons for this group's

unwillingness to utilize pesticides.









This survey only reached homes with had active telephones. There were a larger

proportion of female respondents (61%) than the Florida census indicated for the state

population (51.2%) (US census 2000). One quarter of the survey population indicated an

allergy to insects or insect bites and 14% considered themselves chemically sensitive.

More women than men indicated that they were both chemically sensitive to pesticides

and allergic to insects and insect bites. The survey population was well educated with

44.33% having college degrees as compared to only 23.3% of the Florida population. A

higher percentage of the survey population was homeowners, 80.5%, as compared to

70.1% in the 2000 Florida census population.

Most consumers, regardless of their age, residential status, or educational level,

mainly rely on pesticides to remediate their pest problems. Not only does a high

percentage (79%) of the Florida population use over-the-counter pesticides, but a large

number (54%) hire professional services to combat their pest problems. Both pesticide

users and the non-pesticide users agree that effectiveness is the number one determinant

for purchasing pest control services be it over-the-counter or professional. Those who do

purchase professional pest control services consider cost and manufacturer reputation in

their decision to purchase the service. No matter what pesticide formulation is used by

either homeowners with over-the-counter products or professionals with professional

grade products, consumers consider physical removal of the pest to be the most effective

method of pest control. While that statement seems like it would lead you to the

conclusion that consumers would embrace a more environmentally friendly type of pest

control, less than half (39%) of the survey population believed that a pest control






63


company that advertised pest elimination that was health-conscious and environmentally

friendly was credible.












Table 3-1. Demographic responses for willingness to use over-the-counter pesticides.

% Response

Yes No x2 df P


Income Range (n=319)

$25-34,999

$35-49,999

$50-74,999

$75-99,999

>$100,000


92.11

83.75

81.01

79.63

64.71


7.89

16.25

18.99

20.37

35.29


13.74


0.0082












Table 3-2. Formulation preference of over-the-counter pesticide users (N=387).

Formulation n % responses for use % used most often

Sprays 345 89.14 56.32

Baits 172 44.40 8.30

Traps 87 22.50 4.69

Granular Products 169 43.67 24.19

Dusts 84 21.70 6.50

Percent response for each question not totaling 100% indicates a number of "no response" or "do not know" responses. Respondents
were allowed to select multiple formulations.












Table 3-3. Demographic responses for willingness to use professional pest control products or services.

% Response

Yes No x2 df P

Household income (n=428)

<$25,000 39.74 57.14

>$25,000 60.26 42.86 7.77 1 0.0053












Table 3-4. Importance of purchasing variables from pesticide users for over-the-counter and professional pest control services
(n=387).

% response over-the-counter % response professional

Variable important neutral not important important neutral not important

cost 40.83 34.37 24.03 58.93 27.00 13.68

convenience 68.22 20.16 10.83 69.97 18.63 10.26

odor and residue 74.67 11.63 13.18 78.32 11.03 9.50

effectiveness in killing pests 96.64 2.07 1.29 95.81 1.90 1.90

safety for household members 92.24 3.88 3.88 94.68 2.66 2.66

reputation of the manufacturer 58.91 22.74 17.57 81.74 10.65 6.84

Percent response for each question not totaling 100% indicates a number of "no response" or "do not know" responses. Respondents
were allowed to select multiple influences.












Table 3-5. Demographic responses for factors influencing purchase of over-the-counter pesticides.

% Response

Not Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very x2 df P
important unimportant important important


Importance of cost

Insect allergies (n=372)

Yes

No

Safety for household members

Gender (n=387)

Male

Female

Importance of odor and residue

Gender (n=385)


Male


14.71

15.19






1.27

2.17


8.97

2.62


Female


3.92

11.11






3.82

0.87


14.10

3.93


29.41

36.67






5.10

3.04


16.03

8.73


6.86

12.96






15.29

4.78


19.23

18.34


45.10

24.07






74.52

89.13


41.67

66.38


18.73 4 0.0009








19.14 4 0.0007


33.45 4 <0.0001












Table 3-6. Demographic responses for factors influencing purchase of professional pest control products or services.

% Response

Not Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very x2 df P
important unimportant important important

Importance of safety for household members

Gender (n=263)

Male 1.04 1.04 2.08 18.75 77.08

Female 1.80 1.20 2.99 4.19 89.82 15.18 4 0.0043












Table 3-7. Importance of purchasing variables from non-pesticide users for over-the-counter and professional pest control services
(n=59).

% response over-the-counter % response professional

Variable important neutral not important important neutral not important

cost 29.16 22.92 47.91 53.66 29.27 17.08

convenience 50.00 27.08 20.84 73.17 21.95 4.88

odor and residue 60.41 16.67 20.84 87.81 9.76 2.44

effectiveness in killing pests 91.67 6.25 2.08 95.12 0.00 4.88

safety for household members 87.50 6.25 4.17 92.68 0.00 7.32

reputation of the manufacturer 54.15 20.83 20.84 85.36 9.76 4.88

Percent response for each question not totaling 100% indicates a number of "no response" or "do not know" responses. Respondents
were allowed to select multiple influences.









Table 3-8. Demographic profile of the 600
management survey.


participants in the Florida perceptions of pest


Demographic N % respondents


Gender
Male
Female
Age
18-29
30-39
40-49
50-65
>65
Education level
High School degree
Technical/Vocational school
Some college
College degree
Post graduate
Florida residency (years)
<5
5-9
10-19
20-29
>30
Annual household income ($)
<25,000
25,001- 50,000
50,001 75,000
75,001-100,000
>100,001
Domicile
Own
Rent


232
368


38.67
61.33

19.18
29.81
19.84
15.67
15.50

5.34
21.33
3.33
23.67
29.33
15.00

12.39
11.99
18.50
20.00
35.83

18.33
23.50
15.33
10.67
13.83

80.50
18.50


74
72
111
120
207


483
111


Percent response for each question not totaling 100% indicates a number of "do not
know" or "refuse to answer" responses.












Table 3-9. Demographic differences between chemically sensitive people and people allergic to insects and insect bites.

% Response

Yes No x2 df P


Insect allergies

Total population

Gender (n=582)

Male

Female

Chemically sensitive

Total population

Gender (n=555)

Male

Female


25.33



15.77

32.50


13.83


8.64

19.10


71.67


84.23

67.50


19.93


<0.0001


78.67


91.36

80.90


11.44


0.0007














CHAPTER 4
TOXICITY OF COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE DISHWASHING DETERGENTS
AND HOUSEHOLD CLEANERS ON COCKROACHES BLATTELLA GERMANICA
(L.), AND PERIPLANETA AMERICANA (L.)

Introduction

Concern over health implications from the use of residual and broad spray

treatments for management of cockroaches, Blattella germanica (L.) and Periplaneta

americana (L.), in sensitive environments has expedited research on insecticides of low

mammalian toxicity. For over 200 years, soaps, especially potassium salts, or soft soaps

have been reported to exhibit insecticidal properties. Most of the research has been

conducted on soft-bodied insects such as whiteflies (Butler et al. 1993, Javed and

Matthews 2002), aphids (Fournier and Brodeur 2000, Fulton 1930, Pinnock et al. 1974),

scales (Riehl and Carman 1953), mites (Osborne 1984), thrips (Oetting and Latimer

1995), mealybugs (Lindquist 1981), and ticks (Patrican and Allan 1995). In the 1920's

and 1930's, research was done on heavily chitinized insects such as Japanese beetles (van

der Meulen and Van Leeuwen 1929), harlequin bugs (Fulton 1930), and Colorado potato

beetles (Fulton 1930). With the discovery of pesticides, such as DDT in 1939, research

on the insecticidal properties of soaps was intermittent and did not appear to resurface in

the literature again until the 1970's and 80's where it was used against various plant pests

(Pinnock et al. 1974, Puritch 1975, 1978; Osborne and Henley 1982). Soft soaps were

registered as pesticides in 1947. Currently soft soaps, including potassium salts of fatty

acids, are considered to be insecticides, acaricides, herbicides, and algaecides. As a food









substance, they are generally recognized as safe by the Food and Drug Administration

(FDA).

With the need for least hazardous pest management in sensitive environments,

soaps and detergents should be more extensively investigated as a pest management

option. Comparing the toxicity of several dishwashing liquid brands, formulations, and

application methods has not been previously reported. Additionally, the toxicity of

household cleaners against cockroaches has not been documented. The purpose of this

study was to determine the knockdown and mortality of German and American

cockroaches after exposure to commercially available household dishwashing detergents

and cleaners with different application methods.

Materials and Methods

Insects

B. germanica and P. americana were reared in plastic tubs with harborage. Dry

food (Lab Diet 5001 rodent Diet, PMI Nutrition International, Inc., Brentwood, MO) and

water were provided ad libitum. Cockroaches were maintained at 23.6 2.50C and 51 +

16% RH with a photoperiod of 12:12 (L:D). Adult males, B. germanica and P.

americana, and gravid females, B. germanica, were randomly selected and removed from

the colony with featherweight forceps, separated by sex, and held in separate cloth-

covered Mason glass jars (0.946 liter) with food and water. Cloth covers were held in

place by a rubber band. Adult males were removed from the colony within 24 h of trial.

After the nymphs emerged, adult females were discarded and first and second instar

nymphs were held until trial.









Immersion Assay

The toxicity of commercially available dishwashing detergents and household

cleaners was tested using a modified Cornwell immersion technique against German

cockroaches (Comwell 1976). The PVC immersion apparatus (15 by 10 cm diam.) was

coated with a 1:1 mixture of petroleum jelly/mineral oil within approximately 5 cm of the

upper interior rim of to prevent cockroaches from escaping. The lower end of the

apparatus was covered with nylon mesh (Intex strainer, Reaves and Co., Durham, NC)

and held in place by a rubber band. Unanesthetized cockroaches were removed from the

holding jar and placed into the immersion apparatus. The fluid level in the reservoir

came to just below the petroleum jelly coating to ensure that the cockroaches would be

fully wetted. Upon initiation of the trial, the apparatus was lowered into the solution then

gently shaken to ensure that all cockroaches were submerged. After a 30 s immersion,

the apparatus was lifted from the reservoir and allowed to drain for 15 s. The

cockroaches were removed with featherweight forceps to clean, cloth-covered jars

containing food, water, and harborage as previously described.

The toxicity of Palmolive Green Apple dishwashing liquid (product no. 47937)

(Colgate-Palmolive, New York, NY) was tested on adult male German cockroaches. The

soap was mixed at 0.33%, 0.7%, 1.4 % (vol:vol) with tap water for a total volume of 400

ml. Tap water was selected because it would be the most likely solvent a homeowner

would use. Tap water was used as the untreated control. Soap solutions were stirred for

30 s. Excess foam was skimmed from the liquid surface prior to trial. Solutions were

mixed at ambient temperature and a fresh solution was mixed for each repetition.

Six replications of 10 male adults were run at 0.33% and 0.7%, while 11

replications of 10 male adults were run at 1.4%. Cockroaches were immersed for -30 s.









Percent knockdown immediately after immersion and mortality at 1, 3 and 24 h were

recorded. Knockdown was defined as the inability of the cockroach to right itself

immediately after exposure and mortality was defined as having no response to probing

at the specified observation interval. The immersion apparatus, mesh, and reservoir were

each emptied and triple rinsed with tap water between each trial.

In order to compare the relative toxicity of dishwashing detergents to nymphs and

adults, Palmolive Green Apple dishwashing liquid (product no. 47937) was tested on

German cockroach nymphs and adult males. Five replications of 10 early instar nymphs

and adult males each were tested at 1.4%. Nymphs were tapped into the immersion

apparatus while adults were removed with featherweight forceps.

In order to determine the toxicities between commercially available soap

formulations, three formulations of Palmolive dishwashing soap, (product nos. 356140,

47937 and 359140), and one formulation each of Joy (product no. 36045) (Proctor and

Gamble, Cincinnati, OH), and Dawn (product no. 33154) (Proctor and Gamble,

Cincinnati, OH) were compared at a concentration of 1.0%. Five replications of 5 adult

male German cockroaches were tested.

Comparison of Modified Immersion and Spray Applications using Dishwashing
Soap and Household Cleaners.

The Comwell immersion technique was compared with a spray technique to further

test the toxicity of Palmolive Green Apply(product no. 47937) and to establish toxicity

of household cleaners including, Formula 409 (product no. 00628) (Clorox Co., Oakland,

CA), Fantastik (product no. 10294) (S.C. Johnson and Son, Inc., Racine, WI), Fantastik

Orange Action (product no. 18292) (S.C. Johnson and Son, Inc., Racine, WI), Dawn









Power Dissolver (product no. 376320) (Proctor & Gamble, Cincinnati, OH) and Greased

Lightning (product no. 19853) (A & M Cleaning Products, Inc., Clemson, SC).

Adult male German cockroaches and adult male American cockroaches were tested

using the two application types at 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, and 0.8% concentrations of

Palmolive (47937), and 100% concentration of the cleaners except Dawn Power

Dissolver which, due to its viscosity, was tested at 50% concentration. Soap solutions

and cleaners, 100 ml each, were prepared in deli cups (473 ml) and cockroaches were

immersed using a modification of the previously described method. Modifications to the

previously described immersion assay design included using a PVC compression couplet

(Size 50-2, American Value, Greensboro, NC) as an immersion apparatus. To prepare

the immersion apparatus, gaskets and one couplet nut were removed and discarded. The

remaining couplet nut was fitted with nylon mesh (M-D Building Products, Greensboro,

NC) over the external opening using hot glue. The mesh fitted couplet nut was then

reattached to the PVC shaft. This modified compression couplet was used as the

immersion apparatus and its use allowed for easier removal of the test subjects after

treatment.

In the airbrush technique, the cockroaches were placed into a petroleum

jelly/mineral oil rimmed deli cup (473 ml) which was placed on a 10 by 10 cm square.

The airbrush well was filled with 2 ml of solution and the line purged of air. The

airbrush (Paasche Type H, Chicago, IL) was calibrated to distribute 2 ml of water over 10

s. Starting with the top left corer of the square, the solution was emptied over the deli

container in a zigzag pattern. This amount of solution allowed for runoff with minimal

pooling. The airbrush was triple rinsed with 1 ml acetone and then tap water between









each trial. Upon completion of each trial, cockroaches were tapped into plastic deli

containers (236.6 ml) supplied with filter paper for substrate and food and water ad

libitum. Five replications of 5 cockroaches were made for each.

Analysis

Control mortality was adjusted with Abbott's correction for both treatment

knockdown and treatment mortality (Abbott 1925). Data that did not meet the

assumptions for an analysis of variance (ANOVA) were ranked. Normality was tested

with the Shapiro-Wilk test (P=0.05).

In the case of the immersion assay, percent knockdown and mortality by

concentration were analyzed by analysis of variance. When P-values were significant,

means were compared by Student Newman-Keuls test (a=0.05). Time observations were

analyzed by a two-way analysis of variance where time after treatment and soap

concentration were the main effects. Knockdown and mortality of nymphs compared

with adults was analyzed by a t-test and analysis of variance was run to determine

variability between soap formulations.

In the modified Palmolive concentration trial, for each species of cockroach and

application type, LC5os were estimated by probit analysis. Significant differences were

determined by non-overlap of the 95% confidence intervals (CI). To determine if soap

caused mortality in each cockroach species, data were analyzed by a two-way analysis of

variance with application method and concentration as the main effects. When P-values

were significant, means were compared by Student Newman-Keuls test (a=0.05).

Knockdown and mortality for each cockroach species were analyzed for the

household cleaners by a three-way analysis of variance with cleaner, application type and

species as the main effects. If interactions were present, data were analyzed by a two-









way analysis of variance with cleaner and species by application as the main effects.

When P-values were significant, means were compared by Student Newman-Keuls test

(a=0.05). All data analyses were performed with SAS (P = 0.05; SAS Institute 2001).

Results

Immersion Assay

Cockroaches exhibited escape behavior when submerged in the soap solutions.

Upon wetting, cockroaches arched their abdomens, lifted their wings, and sank to the

bottom of the container (Fig. 4-1). After a few seconds, air bubbles escaped from the

spiracles. Cockroaches in the water controls did not exhibit this behavior and remained

at the surface (Object 4-1).















Figure 4-1. German cockroach, Blattella germanica, posture following a 30 s exposure to
1.4% Palmolive Green Apple dishwashing liquid.

Object 4-1. Cockroach exposure to 1.4% Palmolive dishwashing liquid or water (6.46
MB, soap_exposurevideo.wmv.1:21.)

In the immersion test with Palmolive Green Apple dishwashing liquid as the

toxicant, soap concentration was the only significant main effect for both knockdown

(F=24.67, df=2; P<0.0001) and mortality (F=18.94; df=2; P<0.0001) (Table 4-1). There









were no significant differences in cockroach knockdown or mortality between

observation times nor was there a significant interaction between time and concentration.

There were no significant differences in knockdown or mortality between nymphal

versus adult male German cockroaches. Mean knockdown for nymphs was 98.891.11%

and mean mortality was 98.981.02%. Mean knockdown for adult males was

94.322.16% and mean mortality was 96.132.16%. There were no significant

differences between soap formulations for knockdown or mortality (Table 4-2).

Comparison of Modified Immersion and Spray Applications using Dishwashing
Soap and Household Cleaners.

In the modified toxicity assay for German cockroaches immersed in Palmolive

Green Apple dishwashing soap, there was no significant interaction between application

method and soap concentration. When knockdown was the response variable, the main

effects, application method (F= 11.16, df=l, P=0.0018) and soap concentration (F=23.90,

df=4, P=<0.0001) were significant. When mortality was the response variable, the main

effects, application method ((F=5.40, df=l, P=0.0253) and soap concentration (F=30.05,

df=4, P=<0.0001) also were significant (Table 4-3).

In the modified toxicity assay for American cockroaches immersed in Palmolive

Green Apple dishwashing soap, there was a significant interaction between application

method and soap concentration for response variable knockdown (F=24.86, df=4,

P=<0.0001) and mortality (F=13.16, df=4, P=<0.0001). Because interactions were

significant, one-way analyses of variance were done by application method with soap

concentration as the main effect. There was no knockdown when spraying was the

application method for all soap concentrations. There was no significant mortality with

spray as the application type for all soap concentrations.









The highest knockdown (100%) and mortality (84.004.00%) was achieved

through the immersion application against American cockroaches. The airbrush spray

application against American cockroaches was the least effective application method

achieving 0% knockdown and only 8.004.90% mortality at the highest soap

concentration of 0.8%.

Probit analyses for German cockroaches indicated that the KD50 concentration

values were lower than the LC5o values for both the spray (KD50 = 0.3655, LC5o =

0.5399) and immersion (KD5o= 0.1666, LC5o = 0.5602) application types. There was no

significant difference between application types for German cockroach mortality

although it took a significantly lower soap concentration to achieve knockdown with the

immersion application. When compared with the concentration needed to achieve LC5o

for German cockroaches (LC5o = 0.56%), it took a significantly lower concentration of

soap to achieve LC5o for American cockroaches using the immersion application (LC5o =

0.24%) (Table 4-4).

When comparing the toxicity of household cleaners, there was no significant three-

way interaction between cleaners, application type and species for knockdown or

mortality. Interestingly, the only significant interaction was between species and

application type (F=12.56, df=l; P=0.0007) and the only significant main effects were

species (F=10.99, df=l; P 0.0014) and application type (F=12.56, df=2; P<0.0001). For

both knockdown and mortality, the combined variable species-application type and

cleaner became the main effects for a two-way analysis of variance where the interaction

was not significant. The combined variable species-application type was significant for

knockdown (F=29.7, df=3; P=<0.0001) and mortality (F=12.04, df=3; P=<0.0001).









Means separation using SNK indicated that American cockroaches that were sprayed

were significantly lower in knockdown (56.8%) and mortality (75.2%) when compared

with all other combinations of cockroach species and application methods (99-100%).

Discussion

Historically, soaps were only considered effective against soft bodied insects.

However, Abbasi (1984) reported that a splash of commercially available soaps would

kill American cockroaches at a 1-2% solution. Szumlas (2002) reported that the LC50 for

Dawn Ultra dishwashing liquid sprayed on German cockroaches was 0.4% and soap

concentrations higher than 1% achieved a 95% or greater knockdown or mortality.

The results from this study are in close agreement with Szumlas (2002) and Abbasi

(1984). However, this study differed from the others in that soaps and cleaners used were

quantified. The close agreement of the LC50s between the current and Szumlas' (2002)

study indicates that the airbrush technique is a valid method for delivering a measurable

dose of soap or cleaner as a toxicant.

The LC5o for a 2 ml spray on German cockroaches was 0.54% and was 0.56%

when exposed by immersion for 30 s. The LC5o for American cockroaches exposed by

immersion was 0.24%, less, but not significantly less, than the LC5o (0.56%) for the

German cockroaches. To achieve 95% mortality with an immersion application, soap

solutions at 2.07% are needed for German cockroaches and 1.75% for American

cockroaches respectively. Both adult and nymphal cockroaches were equally affected by

the soap concentrations, and after the 30 s immersion period, cockroaches that were

knocked down remained so and never recovered.

There was no difference in knockdown or mortality between five soaps or five

cleaners formulations using two application types tested. The airbrush spray application









was equally as effective as the immersion application for German cockroaches, but was

less effective for American cockroaches. All cleaners tested achieved 92-100% mortality

for the German cockroaches by both the spray and immersion applications. As an

immersion application, 100% mortality was achieved for the American cockroaches. The

spray application was less effective for American cockroaches with some cleaners

achieving only 38% mortality and others reaching 100% mortality.

Soap solutions act as contact insecticides and have no residual activity. The blend

of fatty acid salts in commercially available formulations is proprietary information, but

the soft soaps that make up these formulations are made of sodium or potassium fatty

acid salts. A problem with using commercially available soaps is that the formulations

often change. In fact, by the conclusion of this study, the Fantastik Orange Action

formulation had been replaced on the store shelves with Fantastik Lemon. Because of

the rapid knockown, my hypothesis is that soaps and cleaners act as nerve toxicants that

result in paralysis and death of the insect. Other mode-of-action theories include spiracle

blockage, cellular disruption and cuticle dessication (Olkowski and Olkowski 1996,

Puritch 1981, Ware 1994), but these modes of action would not result in such rapid death.

Soap solutions, due to their low mammalian toxicity, have potential for use as a pest

management options in sensitive environments such as occupied hospital rooms, in

classrooms with children, and in daycare centers while children are present. Dishwashing

liquid and household cleaners are readily available and are common items already found

in the home. The results of this study indicate that different brands and formulations

knocked-down and killed cockroaches equally effectively. Not only were the soaps

effective against adult cockroaches, but they were equally as effective against the






84


cockroach nymphs, which make up the majority of household cockroach populations.

The effectiveness is further supported in the fact that there was little if any recovery of

the cockroaches after the initial knockdown. Soaps are inexpensive and concentrations of

soap needed to knockdown or kill pest cockroaches are very low. This results in not only

an effective, but economical pest management option. While soap solutions may not

completely replace the currently used pesticidal baits and sprays, they have a place as a

sanitation tool that may aid in cockroach management.












Table 4-1. Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German cockroach males when exposed to Palmolive dishwashing liquid by
immersion.

Palmolive Green Apple n % Knockdown SE % Mortality SE

0.33% 60 11.67 6.54a 10.48 6.21a

0.7% 60 98.25 1.75b 85.00 15.00b

1.4% 110 96.26 2.09b 96.26 2.09b

Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P=0.05, Student Newman-Keuls test
[SAS Institute 2001]). Control mortality was 2.5% for both KD and M and was adjusted by Abbott's formula.












Table 4-2. Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German cockroach males when exposed to different formulations of dishwashing
liquid by immersion.

Soap formulation n % Knockdown SE % Mortality SE

Palmolive Green Apple (47937) 25 100 + 0.00 100 + 0.00

Palmolive Anti-Bacterial (359140) 25 95.83 4.17 96.00 + 4.00

Palmolive Original (356140) 25 100 + 0.00 100 + 0.00

Dawn Plus Ultra (33154) 25 100 + 0.00 100 + 0.00

Lemon Joy (36045) 25 100 0.00 96.004.00
00
Control mortality was 4% for KD and 0% for M. Control mortality was adjusted by Abbott's formula.













Table 4-3. Percent knockdown and mortality of adult German and American cockroach males when exposed to Palmolive
dishwashing liquid (formula 47937) (n=25).

German Cockroaches American Cockroaches

Application % Palmolive % Knockdown SE % Mortality SE % Knockdown SE % Mortality SE

Immersion 0.05% 4.00 + 4.00a 0.00 + 0.00a 24.00 + 7.48a 12.00 + 8.00a

0.1% 36.00 + 11.66b 4.00 + 4.00a 80.00 + 6.32b 20.00 + 8.94a

0.2% 64.00 + 4.00c 4.00 + 4.00a 84.00 + 4.00b 44.00 + 9.80b

0.4% 72.00 + 10.20c 36.00+ 11.66b 88.00 + 8.00bc 68.00 4.90c

0.8% 96.00 + 4.00d 68.00 + 10.2c 100.00 + 0.00c 84.00 + 4.00c

Airbrush Spray 0.05% 0.00 + 0.00a 3.33 + 3.33a 0.00 + 0.00 0.00 + 0.00

0.1% 12.00 + 12.00a 7.50 + 7.50a 0.00 + 0.00 0.00 + 0.00

0.2% 24.00 7.48ab 22.50 + 11.30a 0.00 + 0.00 0.00 + 0.00

0.4% 68.00 + 8.00b 58.33 + 6.50b 0.00 + 0.00 0.00 + 0.00

0.8% 68.00 + 18.55b 79.11 + 11.41b 0.00 +0.00 8.00 4.90

Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P=0.05, Student Newman-Keuls test
[SAS Institute 2001]). German cockroach control mortality was 0% for KD and 4% for M and was adjusted by Abbott's calculation before analysis. The
American cockroach assay had 0% control mortality.