石蜡毒饵块防制列车鼠患的效果

Efficacy of Eradicating. Rodents Infestion in Trains with Wax Block Baits.

用抗凝血灭鼠剂毒饵进行旅客列车灭鼠试验。3种毒饵剂型试验11列客车:0.01%大隆石蜡毒饵块处理4列,0.025%杀鼠灵石蜡毒饵块处理4列,0.025%杀鼠灵颗粒毒饵处理3列。毒饵装到纸板盒里,放在车厢夹层和茶几或餐桌下的双暖管之间。投药后每隔15天或30天检查一次消耗,吃光的饵点补充,变质的毒饵更换;在投饵和检查消耗的同时,用粉迹法调查鼠密度。试验结果,3种毒饵灭鼠效果差别很大。以大隆蜡块效果最好:处理15天,平均鼠密度从60.5%降至24.2%;30天降至2.4%。杀鼠灵蜡块处理15天,平均鼠密度从57.5%降至40.0%;30天和90天分别降至9.3%和5.7%。杀鼠灵颗粒效果最差,投药后15天平均鼠密度没有下降,30天由42.1%降至26.3%,60天和90天处理期才分别降至21.1%和13.2%。文中详细讨论了导致效果差的原因。

Trialf of eradicating rodents infesting trains were carried out using anticoagulant rodenticidcs. Three different kinds of poisoned baits were used, the first being 0.01% brodifacoum in wax block formulation, the second 0.025% warfarin in wax block form- ulation and the third 0.025% warfarin in pellet formulation. 11 trains were selected for test and divided into three groups: in the first there were four trains treated with brodifacoum wax blocks, in the second there were four trains treated with warfarin wax blocks and in the third there were three trains treated with warfarin pollets. The cardboard boxes containing the baits were put into the interspaces above the carriage ceiling and between two waterpipes near the floor. The consumption of the baits was cheched once every 15 or 30 days after baiting and additional supply or replacement given as needed, and at the same time density of rodents in the tested train was determined withy the dust tracking method. The results revealed that differences in efficacy among the three kinds of poisonedbaits were very apparent. The brodifacoum wax block gave the best results, the mean density of rodent in the tested trains declined from 60.5% to 24.2% in 15 days and to 2.4% in 30 days.With warfarin wax block, the mean density of rodent in the tested trains declined, from 57.5% to 40.0% in 15 days, and to 9.3% and 5.7% in 30 and 90 days respectively. The warfarin pellet was the least effective, the mean density of rodent in the tested trains did not decrease in 15 days, but declined from 42.1% to 26.3%. 21.1% and 13.2% in 30, 60 and 90 days respectively. Probable causes of the difference in efficacy are dlscussed.