December, 1958 



Decker: Economic Entomology 



125 



development of some new fact, some bio- 

 logical or chemical law or principle re- 

 ferred to as a "break-through," discov- 

 ered by scientists pursuing basic research. 



Practically all entomologists agree that 

 Nature is more efficient than man in con- 

 trolling insects; there is an urgent need 

 for a return to the basic study of insect 

 biolog\' and ecology and for expanded 

 work in the promising field of biological 

 control. With a more thorough knowl- 

 edge of the environmental factors that 

 favor insect reproduction and survival 

 and of those factors detrimental to these 

 processes, man might conceivably control 

 some pests by diminishing the favorable 

 factors, enhancing the unfavorable fac- 

 tors, or pursuing both courses. This type 

 of basic research is expensive, and prog- 

 ress comes slowly, but successful projects 

 based on the accumulated results of such 

 research pay handsome dividends. 



While more intensive studies in insect 

 genetics, ecology, and biology may play 

 increasingly important roles in the devel- 

 opment of new insect control procedures, 

 man will for many years find it necessary 

 to rely on chemical weapons — insecticides 

 — to fight many of his insect pests. As 

 more and more toxic insecticides are de- 

 veloped, it becomes increasingly important 

 that they be thoroughly tested for safety 

 before they are placed in general use. The 

 evaluation of insecticide residues, their 

 degradation products, and possible ad- 

 verse effects on man and other animals, 

 is currently time consuming and expen- 

 sive. We must undertake considerable 

 basic research to discover and to develop 

 basic principles or natural laws that will 

 simplify insecticide evaluation and reduce 

 the cost of pursuing such routine studies. 



Come what may, man must never be- 

 come complacent with his temporary suc- 

 cesses nor assume that the insects have 

 given up or will give up their struggle for 

 supremacy. We must be ever mindful of 

 the theses of L. O. Howard (1933) that 

 insects are better equipped to occupy the 

 earth than are humans ; insects have been 

 on earth for 40,000,000 years, while the 

 human race is only 400,000 years old. As 

 Forbes (1915:2) soberly asserted: 



The struggle between man and insects began 

 long before the dawn of civilization, has con- 

 tinued without cessation to the present time, 



and will continue, no doubt, as long as the hu- 

 man race endures. It is due to the fact that 

 both men and certain insect species constantly 

 want the same things at the same time. Its 

 intensity is owing to the vital importance to 

 both of the things they struggle for, and its 

 long continuance is due to the fact that the 

 contestants are so equally matched. We com- 

 monly think of ourselves as the lords and con- 

 querors of nature, but insects had thoroughly 

 mastered the world and taken full possession 

 of it long before man began the attempt. They 

 had, consequently, all the advantage of a pos- 

 session of the field when the contest began, 

 and they have disputed every step of our in- 

 vasion of their original domain so persistently 

 and so successfully that we can even yet 

 scarcely flatter ourselves that we have gained 

 anv very important advantage over them. 



There seems to be little question that 

 insects will continue to demand tribute of 

 enormous proportions which will have to 

 be paid in terms of damage, pain, and 

 suflering caused by the insects, or in ex- 

 penditures for insect control. Man may, 

 through judicious expenditures for re- 

 search and practical insect control meas- 

 ures, reduce or minimize the tribute to be 

 paid, but he can never eliminate it entire- 

 ly. In this connection, it should again be 

 noted that entomology is not static. In- 

 sects, as highly versatile living organisms, 

 are constantly changing to meet each 

 change in the environment, whether it be 

 biological, physical, or chemical. If we 

 are to hold our own in this continuing 

 battle, research must be carried on un- 

 diminished, and, if we are to make prog- 

 ress, research must be expanded. 



At the moment, entomology and re- 

 lated biological sciences appear to be los- 

 ing ground. State and federal appropria- 

 tions have not kept pace with rising costs. 

 Basic research is currently financed 

 largely by grants from the principal en- 

 dowed foundations. If it were not for 

 funds made available by chemical and 

 other large industrial companies, applied 

 research in entomology would have been 

 greatlv handicapped and curtailed in the 

 last decade. 



Today, faced with the fact that an- 

 other nation was the first to launch a 

 man-made earth satellite, America is sub- 

 jecting her own research facilities and 

 educational system to critical review. At 

 the moment, the physical sciences are in 

 the limelight and apparently stand to 

 profit from increased emphasis. That the 



