Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Behavioral Neurobiology
Avian Chemical Repellency: A Structure-Activity Approach And Implications, Pankaj Shah, Russell Mason, Larry Clark
Avian Chemical Repellency: A Structure-Activity Approach And Implications, Pankaj Shah, Russell Mason, Larry Clark
Larry Clark
Until recently, the discovery of avian sensory repellents has been empirical (MaRnn, AnAmR 'Inn l;qr\r FlR'l), Hm> !ilv!ilr, recent liltudilillil in our laboratory have shown that many avian repellents have similar perceptual and structural properties (Mason et al. 1989; Mason Clark and Shah 1991; Clark and Shah 1991; Clark, Shah and Mason 1991; Shah, Clark and Mason 1991). For example, methyl anthranilate, which has a grapy odor, is repel lent to birds (Kare and Pick, 1960). Ortho-aminoacetophenone has an odor and structure similar to that of methyl anthranilate, differing only in the substitution of a ketone for an ester group …
Taxonomic Differences Between Birds And Mammals In Their Responses To Chemical Irritants, Russell Mason, Larry Clark, Pankaj Shah
Taxonomic Differences Between Birds And Mammals In Their Responses To Chemical Irritants, Russell Mason, Larry Clark, Pankaj Shah
Larry Clark
Ninety-five products are registered with the u.s. Environmental Pro tection Agency as bird damage control chemicals, but 38 (40%) are non lethal chemical repellents (Eschen and Schafer, 1986). Of these products, the active ingredients in 27 (71%) are methiocarb (a physiologic repellent that acts through food avoidance learning) or polybutene (a tactile repel lent). In general, chemical repellents are effective either because of aversive sensory effects (irritation), or because of post-ingestional ma laise (sickness). If the former, then chemicals are usually stimulants of trigeminal pain receptors (i.e., undifferentiated free nerve endings) in the nose, mouth, and eyes (Mason and Otis, …