The use of aerosol repellents as an avian deterrent strategy (original) (raw)
Related papers
Bird repellents: development of avian-specific tear gases for resolution of human–wildlife conflicts
International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, 1998
The use of bird repellents may be required when human activities place birds in danger\ e[g[\ hazardous waste sites\ or when birds cause damage to crops\ architectural structures\ or are a source of zoonotic disease[ Typical protective measures to keep birds away from areas include exclusion by use of netting\ hazing "i[e[\ scaring tactics# and chemical repellents[ Birds can rapidly habituate to visual and auditory hazing if the use of these tactics falls into a predictable pattern\ or if the sign stimuli are not coupled with a salient aversive reinforcing stimulus[ Chemical repellents are typically used to render a resource unpalatable and\ as a consequence\ create a disincentive for a bird to visit a particular area[ Methyl anthranilate "MA# is a potent avian chemosensory irritant[ In this paper\ we explore the possibility of employing MA aerosols as a bird deterrent strategy[ We determine the behavioral response of starlings "Sturnus vulgaris# to each of three aerosols] water or yucca extract "controls# and ReJeX!iT TP!39 TM "a 39) MA solution#\ and found that starlings were irritated by exposure to the MA aerosol[ Moreover\ starlings did not habituate to repeated exposure to MA aerosols[ We determined in the laboratory that the starlings| threshold for irritation to a formulated aerosol was 7) MA[ Þ 0887 Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved[
Avian Repellents: Options, Modes of Action, and Economic Considerations
The present manuscript considers visual, auditory, tactile, chemosensory, and physiologic repellents currently available for use in the United States. Discussion of tactile, chemosensory, and physiologic repellents is emphasized for three reasons. First, these products are preferred by users. Second, application of these substances is regulated by state and federal agencies. Third, only four active ingredients are legally available at the present time. This lack reflects difficulties in obtaining regulatory approval and limited market size.
Bird repellents: interaction of chemical agents in mixtures
Physiology & Behavior, 1998
studies characterize the concentration-behavioral response for odorants, tastants, and irritants. However, to achieve ecological validity, interaction of agents in mixtures must be considered. Equiresponse and equimolar molar models of interactions have been proposed, and methods for testing whether agents in mixture interact independently have been evaluated. Yet these averaging models cannot a priori predict whether agents will interact antagonistically, independently, or synergistically. I studied the bird repellent properties of several structurally similar and well-described trigeminally mediated avian irritants, singly and in mixture. Compounds within a chemical class, in which the electron withdrawing groups were similar, interacted independently to produce their repellent effects, e.g., 2-amino methyl benzoate v methyl-2-methoxy benzoate, and o-aminoacetophenone v 2-methoxy acetophenone. The response to mixtures drawn from compounds of dissimilar chemical class, e.g., 2-amino methyl benzoate v o-aminoacetophenone, interacted antagonistically at concentrations below 10 mM, suggesting meditation by a different mechanism within the trigeminally mediated sensory modality. At 10 mM and near saturation of the solutions, there was no evidence of interaction between agents, suggesting responses became saturated. These observations underscore our previous findings for the importance of the molecular properties of the carbonyl group for aromatic bird repellents and suggests the possible existence of multiple receptor mechanisms for avian trigeminal repellents. These data also underscore the importance of attending to interactions of agents in mixtures when designing repellents as tools for the management of wildlife and resolution of conflicts between humans and wildlife.
Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference
Despite a general perception that there is an abundance of nonlethal control technologies, the fact remains that there are fewer registered products and active ingredients for repellents in the U.S. than there were 10 and 20 years ago. This review discusses the technical issues relating to the discovery, formulation, and delivery of chemical repellents, and suggests future avenues of research that would improve our ability to develop effective chemical repellents.
1992
Repellents substances and devices cause pest species to avoid otherwise attractive or palatable materials. For birds, repellents can be visual, auditory, pyrotechnic, tactile, chemosensory, physiologic, or physical. Here, we consider chemical agents only. Few substances are registered with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and thus legally available for use. This lack of available bird repellent technology reflects the small demonstrable economic impact of many agricultural bird damage problems. Accurate information about damage and market size is virtually nonexistent, and private companies are reluctant to invest resources in the unknown. To successfully commercialize new repellents, clearly lucrative markets must be identified. Efforts must be made to empirically quantify damage and to estimate whether control methods are economical relative to the protection that they confer. We intend the present manuscript as a first step in these directions.
Reconciling sensory cues and varied consequences of avian repellents
Physiology & Behavior, 2011
We learned previously that red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus) use affective processes to shift flavor preference, and cognitive associations (colors) to avoid food, subsequent to avoidance conditioning. We conducted three experiments with captive red-winged blackbirds to reconcile varied consequences of treated food with conditioned sensory cues. In Experiment 1, we compared food avoidance conditioned with lithium chloride (LiCl) or naloxone hydrochloride (NHCl) to evaluate cue-consequence specificity. All blackbirds conditioned with LiCl (gastrointestinal toxin) avoided the color (red) and flavor (NaCl) of food experienced during conditioning; birds conditioned with NHCl (opioid antagonist) avoided only the color (not the flavor) of food subsequent to conditioning. In Experiment 2, we conditioned experimentally naïve blackbirds using free choice of colored (red) and flavored (NaCl) food paired with an anthraquinone-(postingestive, cathartic purgative), methiocarb-(postingestive, cholinesterase inhibitor), or methyl anthranilate-based repellent (preingestive, trigeminal irritant). Birds conditioned with the postingestive repellents avoided the color and flavor of foods experienced during conditioning; methyl anthranilate conditioned only color (not flavor) avoidance. In Experiment 3, we used a third group of blackbirds to evaluate effects of novel comparison cues (blue, citric acid) subsequent to conditioning with red and NaCl paired with anthraquinone or methiocarb. Birds conditioned with the postingestive repellents did not avoid conditioned color or flavor cues when novel comparison cues were presented during the test. Thus, blackbirds cognitively associate pre-and postingestive consequences with visual cues, and reliably integrate visual and gustatory experience with postingestive consequences to procure nutrients and avoid toxins.
Evaluation of a pelleted bait containing methyl anthranilate as a bird repellent
Pesticide Science, 1993
No-till agriculture involves the use of granular pesticide formulations, chemically treated seeds, and pelleted baits. Some of these may accidentally kill birds. We have tested whether methyl anthranilate (MA), a known bird repellent, would eliminate consumption of a pelleted bait. In two laboratory experiments and an outdoor aviary trial, cowbirds (Molothrus ater Bodd.) were presented with pellets containing pesticide and MA, pellets containing pesticide but no MA, and carrier pellets without pesticide or MA. Consumption of any formulation was low, but the addition of MA significantly decreased bait loss in the laboratory, and prevented the disappearance of bait in the outdoor trial.
Chemical repellency in birds: Relationship between chemical structure and avoidance response
Journal of Experimental Zoology, 1991
We examined how molecular structure of 24 anthranilate and benzoic acid derivatives correlated with drinking behavior in European starlings Sturnus vulgaris. The effectiveness of bird repellents was associated with basicity, the presence of an electron-donating group in resonance with an electron-withdrawing carboxylic group on a phenyl ring, and a heterocyclic ring in the same pi cloud plane as the phenyl ring. Of the benzoic acid derivatives tested in this study, methyl, ethyl, dimethyl, and linalyl anthranilate as well as anthranilic acid and 4-ketobenztriazine were repellent to birds. Water consumption was significantly reduced relative to control levels at concentrations as low as 0.05% (weight/volume) for the best repellents. Further statistical tests showed that reduction in consumption for the best repellents was absolute, not significantly different from zero consumption. Anthranilic acid isomers were moderately good repellents. The ability to generate a model predicting repellency allows for the efficient identification and development of ecologically sound, nonlethal, taxa-specific repellents to be used for the protection of wildlife in agricultural and industrial applications.