ET-233 sttate ^!^^BOABl> August 1946 Ihilted States Departaent of Agriculture Agricultural Research Administration Bureau of EntoBologj and Plant Quarantine A SISTEll OF FILING AND ROUTING SAMPLES OF CHEMICALS FOR INSECTICIDE TESTING 1/ By Marion W. Oberg, Honard A. Jones, and E. F. Knipling, Division of Insects Affecting Man and Animals Fr«i April 19^2 to October 19^5 the Orlando, Fla., laboratory received 10,368 eaaplee of chemicals for testing as insecticides and repellents. The numbeivof samples received from various sources during two 6-month periods — the first early in the project and the second for a recent period of operation — are shonn in table 1. The largest nuBber of samples received in a single month was 9i^9 for March 19^5* Table I.— ■Sai^)le8 received by the Orlando laboratory in two 6-month periods from various sources. : : s Universities : Date : Commercial : Government : under contract* Total : 1 { swith O.S.R.D. s 1942 July U9 90 — 239 August 161 U — 175 September in 35 — U6 October 57 AB — 105 November 66 yu .^ 100 December 7P Jk — M6 Total 6U 297 911 19^5 January do 32. 271 383 February 60 25 264 349 March 365 48 536 949 April 118 29 220 367 May 119 lU 340 573 June .aa Uk 227 i6g Total 961 362 1858 3181 1/ This work was eRWducted under a transfer of funds, recommended by the CoMnittee on Medical Research, from the Office of Scientific Research and Development to the Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine. S£-p li ^946 - 2 - To handle this large nimber of materials expeditiously it was neoessary to develop a system of filing and of routing. The methods used in this laboratory are given briefly hero for the benefit of other labora- tories that may be required to handle samples in large numbers for inseoticidal testing. Filing Each compound was assigned a code niunber. To prevent duplication in testing, samples were first checked to see whether they had previously been received. Any duplicate semples were assigned a subletter under the original code number. Master code books were maintained which included the code n\mber, date of coding, name and sovirce of sample, date of letter of transmittal, amovmt, and whether solid or liquid. If the sample was a single compound, the molecular formula was included. Four card files of samples were maintained-- namely, a molecular-formula file, an alphabetical name file, a structiiral- formula file, and a code-number file. Most of the samples received were individual organic ccmpoxmds. The molecular-formula file was maintained principally to facilitate the checking for duplication of materials, and was particularly useful when a compound was received xinder different names. The alphabetical name file was especially useful in checking for duplication of materials for which no molecular formula could be written, such as nattural products, prepared mixtures, and proprietary jnaterials. This index also served as a further check in preventing duplica- tion of organic compounds. Since these cards also contained the code number, they served as a simple means for the staff to locate a desired material on the stock shelves. The stiructural-forraula file was set up so that chemically related organic compounds could be located easily and rapidly. This file proved useful in following out relationships between inseoticidal or repellent properties and chemical structure. For example, if a certain substance proved to have miticidal value, other compovmds of closely related structure were selected for further testing. Orgemic com- pounds were classified as hydrocarbons, alcohols, ethers, acids, esters, aldehydes, ketones, amines, amides, sulfur compounds, etc. Some of these classes were divided into subclasses. For example, alcohols were divided into mono-, di-, and poly-hydric alcohols; esters were divided into esters of mono-, di-, tri-, and poly-basic acids j and sulfur compounds were divided into sulfides, sulfones, sulfoxides, and sulfonamides. Compounds having more than one characteristic group - 3 - were listed vmder the last class in which they could be placed. For example, hydroxyacids were placed under acids, and ethor-esters under esters. These mixed functions were grouped in separate sub- classes so that the groups would be small and comprise closely related compounds. In general, in each class or subclass the aliphatic and alicyclio compounds were listed first in order of increasing carbon content, then aromatic compounds in the same order. Compounds containing nitro or halogen groups were not placed in separate classes or subclasses, but were placed immediately after the corresponding compounds without such groups. For example, p-nitrobenzoic acid, ethyl ester, followed benzoic acid, ethyl ester. The code-number file was maintained for identification of samples v\*ien they were referred to only by number, as in laboratory notes. Routing When a sample had been assigned a code nvunber, it was prepared for testing and routed to the various entomological sections of the laboratory for evaluation. Materials were routinely screened as lousioides and louse ovicides, miticides, mosquito larvicides, and mosquito repellents. Samples were usually grouped in lots as received and routed in these groups. For some of the routine tests solutions of the samples were prepared. A data sheet accompanied the samples to facilitate assembling and reporting of the results. The sheet gave the source of the samples, the date of the letter of transmittal, the code niimbers and names of the samples, and allowed space for enterixig the entomological data. The data sheet was made in triplicate~one copy to be retained by the chemistry section, another by the entomological section making the test, the third, with complete data, to be returned with the samples to the chemistry section. A copy of the completed data sheet was attached to the incoming letter of transmittal and for- warded to the stenographic section for typing of the letter report- ing the results obtained, Vihen the testing was completed all the samples for the group were shelved according to their code numbers^ In most cases individual sets of data were reported as obtained. For example, if data on the repellent effect of a group of samples were received first, the results were immediately reported to the source; later when larvicidal results were received, they v/ere reported, smd so on. In special oases, however, the data for the entire group - 4 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA iiiilliilH 3 1262 09240 9043 were held until all entomologioal results were complete, and then assembled and reported as a whole. In general the entire testing and reporting procedures required from 1 to 3 months. To facilitate locating samples during the testing period, as well as to ascertain quickly when the results on sajnples had been reported, routing books were kept in which the dates of assignment to, and return by, each section were recorded, Subsamples of all liquids to be tested as repellents were sub- mitted to the U. S. Food and Dirug Administration for simple irritation tests to determine ^-^ether they v:ere safe for application to the skin, before they v;ere tested for repellency. In the meantime they were tested for their insectioidal and miticidal properties. Any liquids reported by the Food and Drug Administration as unsafe for skin testing were prepared in solution and submitted to the repellent section of the laboratory for tests on cloth. Usually all data on repellency from both skin and cloth tests vras assembled before a' report was made.