JP5302986B2 - Deer repellent - Google Patents

Description

The present invention relates to a deer repellent used for suppressing agricultural and forestry damage caused by wild animals , particularly deer .

  In recent years, the damage of agriculture and forestry caused by wild animals has become serious throughout the country, and various measures such as population adjustment, physical control, and chemical control have been taken as countermeasures.

  The population adjustment is a method in which the number of wild animals grown is investigated and adjusted so as to achieve an appropriate number of growth through hunting and protection. One example is the adjustment of the population of sika deer based on the Hokkaido sika deer conservation management plan formulated in 2000. However, the continuation of this population adjustment is becoming severe due to the decrease and aging of hunters and the increase in the number of inhabitants in banned areas such as urban areas.

  Physical control is a method of preventing the invasion of wild animals by installing an intrusion prevention fence or the like. This physical control is said to be the most effective countermeasure among wildlife agricultural and forestry damage countermeasures (for example, see Non-Patent Document 1). However, if even one location is broken against a vast agricultural and forestry area, it will cause enormous damage, so the annual maintenance cost is often high.

  Chemical control is a method using a pesticide, a carnivore or a plant-derived wildlife repellent component. Commercially available products include those containing wildlife repellent components such as capsaicin contained in agricultural chemicals such as thyllium agents (see, for example, Non-Patent Document 1), urine of wolf or capsicum. In addition, repellent components derived from feces of carnivorous animals such as lions are currently being developed (see, for example, Patent Document 1). Chemical control using these pesticides and wildlife repellent components is expected as an inexpensive measure compared with physical control.

JP 2007-254385 A

“Basic knowledge of wildlife damage management in agriculture and forestry”, Forest Research Institute, 2003

However, chemical control has not reached widespread use mainly for the following three reasons.
(1) When a pesticide such as a thyllium agent is applied to a plant, a repellent effect is exhibited immediately after the application, but a newly grown portion after application is damaged by the absence of a tyrium agent or the like.
(2) Since the repellent components derived from carnivores have a wide variety of chemical compositions, the effects of the repellent components are not clear.
(3) The carnivorous animal-derived repellent component has problems in terms of hygiene and stable supply because the excrement of carnivores is a raw material.

The present invention has been made in view of the above-mentioned problems, and the object of the present invention is easy to install, does not require a great deal of labor and expense for maintaining the control effect, and further provides hygiene and stable supply. It is to provide an excellent deer repellent in terms of

To achieve the above object, deer repellent of the present invention includes dimethyl disulfinate de as an active ingredient.

Since the active ingredient of the deer repellent of this invention is clear, the formulation can be adjusted according to the situation. Further, since the deer repellent of the present invention can use a chemical reagent as a raw material, it is manufactured hygienically and stably, is easy to install, and does not require much labor and cost.

It is a figure which shows the result of the repellent effect confirmation test 1. FIG. FIGS. 1A and 1B are photographs of test plots of a repellent containing dimethyl disulfide. Moreover, FIG.1 (C) and (D) are the photographs of the test area of only a granular base material. It is a figure for demonstrating the repellent effect confirmation test 2, and is a schematic diagram of the sugar beet field which tested.

  Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described. However, the material and numerical conditions of each component are merely suitable examples. Therefore, the present invention is not limited to the following embodiments, and many changes or modifications that can achieve the effects of the present invention can be made without departing from the scope of the configuration of the present invention.

The deer repellent (hereinafter also referred to as wild animal repellent ) of this invention contains one or more of dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid and allyl isothiocyanate as an active ingredient. As dimethyl disulfide, for example, a reagent (catalog number: 040-25622) with a purity of 99% or more manufactured by Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd. can be used. Further, as pentanoic acid, for example, a reagent (catalog number: 225-01295) having a purity of 95% or more manufactured by Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd. can be used. As allyl isothiocyanate, a reagent (catalog number: 010-01466) with a purity of 99% or more manufactured by Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd. can be used.

  If the wild animal repellent contains any one of dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid and allyl isothiocyanate as an active ingredient, the repellent effect is exhibited. In addition, the wild animal repellent according to various cases can be provided by combining two or more active ingredients.

  For example, the components or component ratios blended every year can be changed. Further, the component ratio may be changed as time passes, such as changing the holding carrier for each component.

  Hereinafter, examples of wild animal repellents will be described. In the following examples, wildlife repellents include, but are not limited to, dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid and allyl isothiocyanate. The wild animal repellent may contain at least one of dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid, and allyl isothiocyanate.

(Liquid repellent)
As one example of the wild animal repellent, a liquid repellent will be described. The liquid repellent is obtained by adding dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid and allyl isothiocyanate to a medium such as water. For example, a liquid repellent can be obtained by mixing 0.19.7 g each of dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid and allyl isothiocyanate with 999.7 g of water. At this time, the concentrations of dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid and allyl isothiocyanate are each 0.01% by weight.

The density of dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid and allyl isothiocyanate, respectively 1.06 g ^/ cm 3, a 0.94 g / cm ³ and 1.013g / cm ^3. Therefore, in the case of mass production, for example, 94 μL (microliter) of dimethyl disulfide, 106 μL of pentanoic acid and 99 μL of allyl isothiocyanate are put into a 1 liter graduated cylinder, and then water is added to make the total amount 1 L. Etc.

(Gel repellent)
As another example of the wild animal repellent, a gel repellent will be described. The gel repellent is produced, for example, as follows. First, 1% agar solution is prepared by dissolving agar in boiling water. Next, after cooling the agar solution to around 50 ° C., dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid and allyl isothiocyanate are added. The addition amount at this time can be set to be 0.01% by weight, for example, in the same manner as the above liquid repellent. Next, when the agar solution to which dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid and allyl isothiocyanate are added is stirred, a gel repellent is obtained.

(Granular repellent)
As another example of a wild animal repellent, a granular repellent will be described. First, dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid and allyl isothiocyanate are added to water to prepare a liquid repellent having a concentration of 0.01% by weight as a repellent stock solution. Next, the repellent stock solution is absorbed into the granular substrate. As the granular substrate, for example, a used desulfurizing agent or zeolite can be used. At this time, by making the granular base material: repellent stock solution = 2: 5 in a weight ratio, for example, by making the repellent stock solution excessive with respect to the granular base material, as much repellent components as possible are adsorbed on the granular base material. Is good.

  Thus, a granular repellent is obtained by making a granular base material adsorb a repellent component. The surface of the particulate repellent may be coated with a biodegradable coating agent such as shellac varnish. By covering the surface of the granular repellent with a biodegradable coating material, the sustainability of the effect can be improved.

(Sheet repellent)
A sheet-like repellent will be described as another example of a wild animal repellent. First, a biodegradable resin such as polycaprolactone is dissolved in an organic solvent such as acetone. Next, dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid, and allyl isothiocyanate are added to this solution so that the respective weights relative to the biodegradable resin are 0.01%. Next, the solution is molded into a sheet and then allowed to stand at room temperature. As a result, the organic solvent is volatilized and a sheet repellent is obtained.

(Repellent effect confirmation test 1)
The repellent effect of a wild animal repellent containing dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid and allyl isothiocyanate alone as active ingredients was confirmed.

  Here, four test plots were provided at the place where the sika deer appeared, and 200 g of pumpkin slices were placed as food in each test plot. These test sections were set at 10 m intervals.

  300g of the above-mentioned granular repellent was placed around the bait. In the three test sections, granular repellents containing dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid, and allyl isothiocyanate alone as active ingredients were used. Moreover, in the remaining one test section, only the granular base material which does not contain dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid and allyl isothiocyanate was installed. After installation, the feeding status was confirmed by visual observation once a day. In addition, it was determined whether or not the food was eaten by sika deer based on the footprints around the bait.

  The results are shown in Table 1 and FIG.

  In Table 1, no eating is indicated by a circle (◯), about half of the eating is indicated by a triangle (Δ), and all eating is indicated by a cross (×).

  1A to 1D show photographs of the test section. FIGS. 1A and 1B are photographs of test plots of a repellent containing dimethyl disulfide. Moreover, FIG.1 (C) and (D) are the photographs of the test area of only a granular base material. 1 (A) and 1 (C) are photographs immediately after installing a repellent and the like. 1B and 1D are photographs two days after installation.

  In the test group with only the granular substrate, all food was consumed in one day. On the other hand, when any of dimethyl disulfide, pentanoic acid, and allyl isothiocyanate is included, the intake is about half of that at the time of installation for at least 7 days. In particular, the test plot where the repellent containing dimethyl disulfide was installed was hardly eaten.

(Repellent effect confirmation test 2)
The repellent effect confirmation test 2 will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 2 is a diagram for explaining the repellent effect confirmation test 2 and is a schematic diagram of a sugar beet field in which the test was performed.

  The above-mentioned granular repellent was installed in a place where sika deer caused damage, and its repellent effect was confirmed. This test was conducted in the sugar beet field 10 where sika deer broke through the installed intrusion prevention net 20 and the damage caused by the damage was serious.

  In this test, a bag filled with about 500 g of a granular repellent in a plastic bag (Shinwa Co., Ltd .: 71-403PF) excellent in air permeability and waterproofness was used for 10 intrusion deer intrusions on the intrusion prevention net 20. And each was installed to hang three bags. Here, as the particulate repellent, a surface coated with shellac varnish was used.

  As a result of the test, for 1 month from the installation of the granular repellent to the harvest of sugar beet, there was no deer damage in this sugar beet field 10, although footprints and feces of sika deer were seen in places other than where the granular repellent was installed. . Here, the entrance / exit 25 of the tractor or the like did not have an intrusion prevention net, but no damage was caused.

  On the other hand, in the surrounding field 30 where sugar beet, potatoes, and beans are cultivated other than the sugar beet field 10 in which the granular repellent is installed, the damage by sika deer increased.

  Thus, it was confirmed that this wild animal repellent was effective in repelling wild animals.

(Repellent effect confirmation test 3)
In the repellent effect confirmation test 1 described above, a particulate repellent was installed around the bait. However, in the repellent effect confirmation test 3, a test was performed in which the repellent was sprayed directly on the bait.

  Dimethyl disulfide is contained in garlic, and allyl isothiocyanate is contained in wasabi. Therefore, three kinds of wild animal repellent samples were prepared using garlic containing dimethyl disulfide and wasabi powder containing allyl isothiocyanate.

  Sample 1 is obtained by adding 200 mL of water to 100 g of peeled garlic and pasting it with a juicer. Sample 2 was prepared by adding 15 g of wasabi powder to 200 mL of water and stirring. Sample 3 was prepared by adding 15 g of wasabi powder to Sample 1 and stirring it. The peeled garlic and wasabi powder used here are both commercially available products.

  The bait was installed in the same manner as in the repellent effect confirmation test 1 described above. That is, four test plots were provided at intervals of 10 m at the place where the sika deer appeared, and 200 g of pumpkin slices were placed as food in each test plot.

  Sample 1, Sample 2 and Sample 3 were directly sprayed on the food of the three test sections, respectively. In the remaining one test section, the repellent was not sprayed. After installation, the feeding status was confirmed by visual observation once a day. In addition, it was determined whether or not the food was eaten by sika deer based on the footprints around the bait.

  The results are shown in Table 2.

  In Table 2, no feeding is indicated by a circle (◯), and all feeding is indicated by a cross (×).

  In the test area without spraying, all food was consumed in one day. On the other hand, in the test group sprayed with samples 1 and 3 containing dimethyl disulfide, no food was consumed for 7 days. On the other hand, in the test group sprayed with sample 2 containing allylisothioanate and not containing dimethyl disulfide, an effect of about one day was seen as compared to the test group without spraying.

10 side dish
20 Intrusion prevention net 25 Doorway 30 Field

Claims (10)

Deer repellents containing dimethyl disulfinate de as an active ingredient. Furthermore, the deer repellent of Claim 1 which contains any one or both of pentanoic acid and allyl isothiocyanate as an active ingredient. The deer repellent according to claim 2, wherein a component ratio of the active ingredient changes with time . The deer repellent which added the deer repellent of Claim 1 or 2 to water. Deer repellent was gelled deer repellent agent according to claim 1 or 2. Deer repellent was supported deer repellent according to particulate substrate to Claim 1 or 2. The deer repellent according to claim 6, wherein the surface of the granular base material is coated with a biodegradable coating agent. Deer repellents deer repellent agent according to claim 1 or 2, mixed with a biodegradable resin, and molded into a sheet. Deer repellent made by adding water to garlic to make a paste. Furthermore, the deer repellent of Claim 9 containing a wasabi.