IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ijag24/340577.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of toxicity of five medicinal plant extracts on maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais (Mots.) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) on stored maize

Author

Listed:
  • Fatematuzzjohora
  • Ahad, Abdul
  • Rubiya Khatun, Most
  • Hossain, M.A.

Abstract

The experiments were conducted in the laboratory of the Department of Entomology and Department of Agricultural Chemistry, Hajee Mohammad Danesh Science and Technology University (HSTU), Dinajpur during May-December 2017 to evaluate the toxicity of five medicinal plant extracts (water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes, swamp smartweed Polygonum coccineum, ariach Cassia tora, wild capsicum Croton bonplandianum and hill glory bower Clerodendrum viscosum) against maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais (Mots.) on stored maize. The wild capsicum extract provided the highest average mortality (93.33 ± 3.33), following the hill glory bower (86.67 ± 3.33) and swamp smartweed (86.67 ± 3.33) at 3% concentration. But it was zero in control. The average numbers of lowest numbers of adult emergence among the five weed extracts were found in wild capsicum (3.00 ± 0.39) following Swamp smartweed (5.11 ± 0.95) at 3% concentration; whereas, in control it was (54.00 ± 1.15). The lowest percent of seed damage were found in wild capsicum (3.00 ± 0.38%) following Swamp smartweed (4.22 ± 0.58). But in control, it was 44.00 ± 1.15. Repellency class of different plant extracts at different concentration level varied between I to IV. But the hill glory bower at 3.0% showed statistically best as it showed the highest repellency rate was 66.0 ± 5.31% and the group were IV. However, the toxicity order was wild capsicum > swamp smartweed > hill glory bower > water hyacinth >, ariach.

Suggested Citation

  • Fatematuzzjohora & Ahad, Abdul & Rubiya Khatun, Most & Hossain, M.A., 2021. "Evaluation of toxicity of five medicinal plant extracts on maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais (Mots.) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) on stored maize," International Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Technology (IJAGST), SvedbergOpen, vol. 1(2), May.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ijag24:340577
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.340577
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/340577/files/Fatematuzzjohora.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.340577?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McDonald, Lehman L. & Guy, Richard H. & Speirs, Roy D., 1970. "Preliminary Evaluation of New Candidate Materials as Toxicants, Repellents, and Attractants Against Stored-Product Insects—I," Marketing Research Reports 312345, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Transportation and Marketing Program.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dahou Moutassem & Yuva Bellik & Mohamed El Hadi Sannef, 2021. "Toxicity and repellent activities of Thymus pallescens and Cymbopogon citratus essential oils against Sitophylus granarius," Plant Protection Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 57(4), pages 297-309.
    2. Rachid El Baghazaoui & Saadia Belmalha & Abdellatif Boutagayout & Laila Nassiri & Salma El Alami & Jean-Michel Savoie & El Houssine Bouiamrine, 2024. "Insecticidal Properties and Chemical Characterization of Laurus nobilis L. Essential Oils from Two Regions of Morocco against Callosobruchus maculatus (Coleoptera: Bruchinae)," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-19, July.
    3. Polyxeni Nikolaou & Paweł Marciniak & Zbigniew Adamski & Nikoletta Ntalli, 2021. "Controlling Stored Products’ Pests with Plant Secondary Metabolites: A Review," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-36, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Crop Production/Industries;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ijag24:340577. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inrapfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.