James R. BusvineYupha RongsriyamDavid BrunoLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical MedicineMahidol University2018-04-192018-04-191976-01-01Pesticide Science. Vol.7, No.2 (1976), 153-160109690630031613X2-s2.0-84981656332https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/10871The compounds tested were isopropyl (±)‐(E,E)‐11 ‐methoxy‐3,7,11‐trimethyl‐dodeca‐2,4‐dienoate (ZR 515) and 6,7‐epoxy‐3‐ethyl‐7‐methylnonyl 4‐ethylphenyl ether (R 20458) (two juvenile hormone mimics); 2,6‐di‐tert‐butyl‐4‐(αα‐dimethyl‐benzyl)phenol (MON 0585) (which inhibits melanisation during pupation); diflubenzuron and 1‐(4‐chlorophenyl)‐3‐(2,6‐dichlorobenzoyl)urea (PH 60:38) (which affect chitinisation during moulting); and (E)‐oct‐2‐enoic acid and (E)‐non‐2‐enoic acid (all of which are claimed to have “teratogenic” effects on insects). The relative potencies of these chemicals were assessed on eggs, larvae and pupae of several mosquito species. Their characteristic delayed harmful effects are described and related to various stages of metamorphosis. Copyright © 1976 John Wiley & Sons, LtdMahidol UniversityImmunology and MicrobiologyArticleSCOPUS10.1002/ps.2780070209