(03-27-2013 7:39 AM)veramis Wrote: [ -> ]"Using supramolecular self-assembly principles and nanotechnology we have been able to achieve an increased shelf-life of the pheromone (ME) when immobilized in a nanogel. We demonstrate here that such pheromone nanogels exhibit high residual activity, excellent efficacy in open orchard even during adverse seasons and are also environment friendly."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3575019/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_Molecular-Mass_Organic_Gelators
![[Image: srep01294-f7.jpg]](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3575019/bin/srep01294-f7.jpg)
The blue on chart letter e shows a definite difference in both the number of catches and also the total amount of days.
Neat.
I wish they had compared it to other fixative methods, oils, perfume fixatives, etc. They mention hydrogels in the writeup, in passing. I actually have some of those lying about. You can buy them pretty easily. Unfortunately, I don't know if I have any clear gels and It'd be odd walking around wearing blue mush...
(04-05-2013 3:08 AM)wiserd Wrote: [ -> ]I wish they had compared it to other fixative methods, oils, perfume fixatives, etc. They mention hydrogels in the writeup, in passing. I actually have some of those lying about. You can buy them pretty easily. Unfortunately, I don't know if I have any clear gels and It'd be odd walking around wearing blue mush...
What I like about the test is they didn't apply it to skin, it was kept in a container. I think it may make more sense to keep the pheromones off the skin, say in a container you can wrap around your wrist or clip on your belt. It may need a heat source or some other means of diffusion though, but can get the benefit of having diffusion adjusted according to ambient conditions. Not sure how the absence of skin bacteria would affect things though.