International Journal of Pure and Applied Zoology

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.

Research Article - International Journal of Pure and Applied Zoology (2019) Volume 7, Issue 3

ANTIFEEDANT ACTIVITY OF FOUR PLANT ESSENTIAL OILS AGAINST MAJOR STORED PRODUCT INSECT PESTS

Jyotika Brari* and Varun Kumar

Department of Zoology, Abhilashi University, Mandi, India

Corresponding Author:
Jyotika Brari
Department of Zoology
Abhilashi University
Mandi, India
E-mail: [email protected]

Received Date: 21st May, 2019; Accepted Date: 05th June, 2019; Published Date: 15th June, 2019

Visit for more related articles at International Journal of Pure and Applied Zoology

Abstract

Experiments were carried out in the laboratory to determine antifeedant activity of four plant essential oils of Rabdosia rugosa (Wall. ex Benth), Zanthoxylum armatum (DC.), Artemisia maritima (L.) and Colebrookea oppositifolia (Sm.) against four stored product insect pests viz. Tribolium castaneum (Herbst.), Sitophilus oryzae (L.), Stegobium paniceum (L.) and Plodia interpunctella (Hubner). Feeding deterrence indices (FDI) showed that the plant essential oils had antifeedant action against the four insect pests at different concentrations. R. rugosa and Z. armatum oil at a high concentration of 300 µl/g resulted in 5.22 ± 0.21 and 6.42 ± 0.32% grain damage as compared to 70.32 ± 0.28% damage under control and FDI of 86.17 ± 0.25 and 85.71 ± 0.27% was recorded for T. castaneum followed by S. oryzae with a FDI of 70.58 ± 0.21 and 67.68 ± 0.19% and grain damage of 15.42 ± 0.12 and 16.31 ± 0.21% as compared to 85.36 ± 0.09% grain damage in control for similar concentrations of above oils. A. maritima oil at 100 µl/g showed 76.31 ± 0.16% FDI followed by C. oppositifolia oil obtaining 75.11 ± 0.35% feeding deterrence against T. castaneum whereas 65.99 ± 0.32% and 65.46 ± 0.14% FDI was obtained for similar concentrations of these oils against S. oryzae. FDI of 62.82 ± 0.32 and 60.03 ± 0.26% was observed for R. rugosa and Z. armatum oil at 300 µl/g against S. paniceum followed by 64.97 ± 0.14 and 53.35 ± 0.18% against P. interpunctella for similar concentration of oils. The present study indicated that R. rugosa and Z. armatum were highly effective followed by A. maritima and C. oppositifolia against all the insect pest.

Keywords

Essential oils; Antifeedant activity; Deterrence, Grain damage; Insect pests

Introduction

Stored grain insect pests can cause reductions in weight, quality, commercial value and seed viability. Seventyfive percent of these insects are Coleopterans and the most damaging species of storage insects are in the genera Sitophilus and Tribolium (Marsans, 1987; Khan and Selman, 1988; Pinto et al., 1997). S. paniceum is the most extensively distributed insect pest causing serious damages to stored products (Can et al., 2004; Guilin and Wangxi, 1996). Indian meal moth, P. interpunctella (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), is a serious pest of stored products like grains, seeds, flour and other milled products and has a universal distribution (Nansen et al., 2004). The use of chemical agents to prevent or control insect infestations has been the main method of grain protection, since it is the simplest and most cost-effective means of dealing with stored product pests (Hidalgo et al., 1998). Although effective, their repeated use for decades has disrupted biological control by natural enemies and led to resurgence of stored-product insect pests (Brower et al., 1995), sometimes resulted in the development of resistance (Champ and Dyte, 1977; Subramanyam and Hagstrum, 1995; White and Leesch, 1995), had undesirable effects on nontarget organisms, and fostered environmental and human health concerns (Brown, 1978; Hayes and Laws, 1991; White and Leesch, 1995). Much effort has, therefore, been focused on plant-derived materials as potential sources of commercial insect-control agents (Hill and Schoonhoven, 1981; Coats et al., 1991; Konstantopoulou et al., 1992). The biggest impetus for the growth of biopesticides comes from the growing awareness by farmers of the value of integrated pest management as a more environmentally sound, economical, safer and a selective approach to crop protection (Menn, 1996). A large number of plant-derived substances possess various physiological and behavioral activities against storedproduct insects. These include toxic, repellent and antifeedant effects (Amason et al., 1989; Grainge and Ahmed, 1988; Jacobson, 1990). Pesticides based on plant essential oils or their constituents have demonstrated efficacy against a range of stored product pests, domestic pests, blood feeding pests and certain soft bodied agricultural pests, as well as against some plant pathogenic fungi responsible for pre and postharvest diseases. They may be applied as fumigants, granular formulations or direct sprays with a range of effects from lethal toxicity to repellence and oviposition deterrence in insects. These features indicate that pesticides based on plant essential oils could be used in a variety of ways to control a large number of pests. Essential oils, which are volatile oils from plants and their constituents, have been shown to be a potent source of botanical pesticides (Singh and Upadhyay, 1993). The present study was carried out in the laboratory to determine antifeedant activity of four plant essential oils of Rabdosia rugosa (Wall. ex Benth), Zanthoxylum armatum (DC.), Artemisia maritima (L.) and Colebrookea oppositifolia (Sm.) against four stored product insect pests viz. Tribolium castaneum (Herbst.), Sitophilus oryzae (L.), Stegobium paniceum (L.) adults and larvae of Plodia interpunctella (Hubner).

Materials And Methods

Extraction of essential oils

Essential oils were extracted from leaves of R. rugosa, Z. armatum, A. maritima and C. oppositifolia collected from the local areas of Shimla district of Himachal Pradesh, India. The leaves were dried in shade at room temperature (30 ± 5℃) and grounded by domestic mixer. The dried powdered material was hydro-distilled in Clevenger apparatus. Conditions of extraction were: 50 g of air-dried sample in 1:10 plant material/water volume ratio for 4 hrs distillation. Oil yield (2.9% w/w) was calculated on a dry weight basis.

Test insects

Laboratory cultures of P. interpunctella, T. castaneum, S. oryzae and S. paniceum were maintained at 28 ± 2°C and 68 ± 2% relative humidity. Adult insects of T. castaneum, S. oryzae and S. paniceum were reared on wholemeal wheat flour plus brewer’s yeast (19:1) and larvae of P. interpunctella was reared on a diet of 80% ground rice, 10% glycerin, 5% yeast in plastic containers (30 cm length × 20 cm width × 8 cm height). Mouth of the containers was covered with fine mesh cloth for ventilation as well as to prevent escape of the insects.

Antifeedant activity of essential oils

The bioassay experiment was conducted for evaluating essential oils as potential seed protectants against T. castaneum, S. oryzae, S. paniceum (5-10 day old) adults and larvae (16 day old) of P. interpunctella. To determine antifeedant activity of essential oils a no-choice test was carried out as described by Huang et al. (2002) and Gomah (2011) with some modifications. 1 ml of prepared concentrations of 100 and 300 μl of essential oils dissolved in methanol and 1 ml solvent alone as control were applied on to a 5 g grinded mixture of pulses and rice kernels. The treated mixture of food media were placed in Petri dishes after evaporating the solvent. 10 adults of T. castaneum, S. oryzae, S. paniceum and larvae of P. interpunctella were transferred to each pre-weighed food media in Petri dishes. After feeding for 72 hrs under laboratory conditions food media was re-weighed and mortality of insects was recorded. Nutritional indices and weight loss were calculated as previously described by Mahdi (2008) and Huang et al. (2002).

Weight loss (%WL)=(IW-FW) × 100/ IW, where the IW is the initial weight and FW is the final weight.

Feeding Deterrence Index was calculated by (Isman et al. 1990; Huang Ho et al. 2003) using the formula,

FDI (%)=(C–T)/(C+T) × 100, where C is weight loss of control rice kernels and T is weight loss of treated rice kernels.

Statistical analysis

All the data concerning mortality were corrected by using Abbott’s formula (Abbott, 1925). Tests for antifeedant activity were performed in triplicate and data presented are mean ± SE. The mean values were compared by one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s multiple comparison tests using software SPSS, version 11.5.

Results

Antifeedant activity of essential oils against T. castaneum

5.22 ± 0.21 and 6.42 ± 0.32% grain damage was observed for R. rugosa and Z. armatum oil at a high concentration of 300 μl/g as compared to 70.32 ± 0.28% damage under control and FDI of 86.17 ± 0.25 and 85.71 ± 0.27% was recorded for T. castaneum. A. maritima oil at 100 μl/g showed 76.31 ± 0.16% FDI with 9.25 ± 0.26% grain damage followed by C. oppositifolia oil obtaining 75.11 ± 0.35% feeding deterrence with 9.48 ± 0.18% grain damage (Table 1).

Essential oils Doses µl/g Grain damage (%) Weight loss (%) FDI (%)
R. rugosa 100 7.32  ±  0.16a 5.42  ±  0.32a 78.60  ±  0.09b
300 5.22  ±  0.21b 3.36  ±  0.26b 86.17  ±  0.25c
Z. armatum 100 8.54  ±  0.11a 5.56  ±  0.17a 78.11  ±  0.13b
300 6.42  ±  0.32b 3.48  ±  0.21b 85.71  ±  0.27c
A. maritima 100 9.25  ±  0.26c 6.08  ±  0.35c 76.31  ±  0.16b
300 6.52  ±  0.09b 4.24  ±  0.09d 82.86  ±  0.08a
C. oppositifolia 100 9.48  ±  0.18a 6.43  ±  0.16c 75.11  ±  0.35b
300 7.05  ±  0.32a 4.46  ±  0.23d 82.05  ±  0.09a
Control _ 70.32  ±  0.28ab 45.25  ±  0.32ab _

Table 1: Antifeedant activity of essential oils against T. castaneum (Values are mean ± SE).

Antifeedant activity of essential oils against S. oryzae

R. rugosa and Z. armatum oil at 300 μl/g showed high FDI of 70.58 ± 0.21 and 67.68 ± 0.19% with 15.42 ± 0.12 and 16.31 ± 0.21% grain damage as compared to 85.36 ± 0.09% grain damage in control. 65.99 ± 0.32 and 58.94 ± 0.09% FDI was obtained at 100 and 300 μl/g of A. maritima oil while 65.46 ± 0.14 and 56.99 ± 0.26% feeding deterrence was observed by C. oppositifolia oil against S. oryzae (Table 2).

Essential oils Doses µl/g Grain damage (%) Weight loss (%) FDI (%)
R. rugosa 100 19.42 ± 0.33a 12.32 ± 0.22b 65.60 ± 0.19a
300 15.42 ± 0.12b 10.23 ± 0.15b 70.58 ± 0.21b
Z. armatum 100 20.25 ± 0.27a 13.16 ± 0.33b 63.68 ± 0.17a
300 16.31 ± 0.21b 11.43 ± 0.11a 67.68 ± 0.19c
A. maritima 100 22.42 ± 0.13c 15.32 ± 0.09c 58.94 ± 0.09d
300 18.45 ± 0.22b 12.15 ± 0.26a 65.99 ± 0.32a
C. oppositifolia 100 23.18 ± 0.36a 16.25 ± 0.17c 56.99 ± 0.26d
300 19.32 ± 0.20b 12.38 ± 0.08a 65.46 ± 0.14a
Control _ 85.36 ± 0.09ab 59.32 ± 0.26ab _

Table 2: Antifeedant activity of essential oils against S.oryzae (Values are mean ± SE).

Antifeedant activity of essential oils against S. paniceum

FDI of 62.82 ± 0.32 and 60.03 ± 0.26% was observed for R. rugosa and Z. armatum oil at 300 μl/g followed by 57.71 ± 0.09 and 54.80 ± 0.13% at 100 μl/g. 19.48 ± 0.15 and 20.05 ± 0.34% grain damage was recorded at 300 μl/g of A. maritima and C. oppositifolia oil with 54.70 ± 0.28 and 50.09 ± 0.11% FDI against S. paniceum and 79.32 ± 0.30% grain damage in control (Table 3).

Essential oils Doses µl/g Grain damage (%) Weight loss (%) FDI (%)
R. rugosa 100 18.32 ± 0.23a 13.15 ± 0.17b 57.71 ± 0.09a
300 15.00 ± 0.09b 11.20 ± 0.32b 62.82 ± 0.32b
Z. armatum 100 20.05 ± 0.23a 14.32 ± 0.19b 54.80 ± 0.13c
300 17.36 ± 0.17a 12.25 ± 0.09a 60.03 ± 0.26d
A. maritima 100 22.43 ± 0.32c 16.41 ± 0.32b 49.86 ± 0.33bc
300 19.48 ± 0.15a 14.36 ± 0.14b 54.70 ± 0.28c
C. oppositifolia 100 23.26 ± 0.15c 18.10 ± 0.12b 46.09 ± 0.15bc
300 20.05 ± 0.34a 16.31 ± 0.28b 50.09 ± 0.11c
Control _ 79.32 ± 0.30ab 49.05 ± 0.36ab _

Table 3: Antifeedant activity of essential oils against S. paniceum (Values are mean ± SE).

Antifeedant activity of essential oils against P. interpunctella

R. rugosa oil at lowest concentration of 100 μl/g showed 59.30 ± 0.18% feeding deterrency with 21.32 ± 0.13% grain damage followed by Z. armatum oil producing 45.93 ± 0.24 feeding deterrency with 23.16 ± 0.17% grain damage as compared to 78.26 ± 0.34% grain damage in control against P. interpunctella. Similarly A. maritima and C. oppositifolia oil obtained 41.71 ± 0.09 and 36.70 ± 0.30% FDI at 100 μl/g and 51.85 ± 0.28 and 46.51 ± 0.17% FDI was recorded at a concentration of 300 μl/g respectively (Table 4).

Essential oils Doses µl/g Grain damage (%) Weight loss (%) FDI (%)
R. rugosa 100 21.32 ± 0.13a 11.32 ± 0.11b 59.30 ± 0.18a
300 18.42 ± 0.09b 9.41 ± 0.21a 64.97 ± 0.14a
Z. armatum 100 23.16 ± 0.17c 16.41 ± 0.17c 45.95 ± 0.24c
300 20.42 ± 0.34a 13.48 ± 0.32b 53.35 ± 0.18d
A. maritima 100 24.31 ± 0.21c 18.23 ± 0.24c 41.71 ± 0.09c
300 21.27 ± 0.35a 14.05 ± 0.16b 51.85 ± 0.28d
C. oppositifolia 100 27.16 ± 0.14d 20.52 ± 0.21c 36.70 ± 0.30bc
300 22.09 ± 0.25a 16.18 ± 0.09c 46.51 ± 0.17c
Control _ 78.26 ± 0.34ab 44.32 ± 0.18ab _

Table 4: Antifeedant activity of essential oils against P. interpunctella (Values are mean ± SE).

Discussion And Conclusion

Feeding deterrence indices (FDI) showed that the tested plant essential oils had antifeedant action against the four insect pests at different concentrations. In a related study Kumar et al. (2007) and Varma and Dubey (2001) investigated that essential oil of Cymbopogon martinii, Caesulia axillaris and Mentha arvensis protected stored gram and wheat from Callosobruchus chinensis, S. oryzae and T. castaneum for first 12 months of storage. R. rugosa and Z. armatum oil at a high concentration of 300 μl/g showed 86.17 ± 0.25 and 85.71 ± 0.27% FDI for T. castaneum followed by S. oryzae (70.58 ± 0.21 and 67.68 ± 0.19), S. paniceum (62.82 ± 0.32 and 60.03 ± 0.26) and P. interpunctella (64.97 ± 0.14 and 53.35 ± 0.18). Kumar et al. (2008) recorded 91.51, 97.26, 98.02 and 6.18% feeding deterrent index of essential oil of Aegle marmelos for C. chinensis, Rhizopertha dominica, S. oryzae and T. castaneum with 100% grain damage in T. castaneum while 7.0, 3.67 and 1.67% grain damage was found in C. chinensis. R. dominica and S. oryzae infested grains respectively. A. maritima and C. oppositifolia oil at 300 μl/g obtained 82.86 ± 0.08 and 82.05 ± 0.09% FDI for T. castaneum whereas 65.99 ± 0.32 and 65.46 ± 0.14% against S. oryzae. The result of present investigation are also similar to the observations of Shukla et al. (2011) who reported significant deterrent effects of essential oils of Lippia alba and Callistemon lanceolatus and their constituents on the feeding behaviour of C. chinensis and all the treatments showed significantly better results than the controls. Khani et al. (2013) investigated that petroleum ether extract of Piper nigrum and Jatropha curcas showed a positive dose dependent antifeedant activity and reduced consumption of rice kernels treated with both plant extract by Corcyra cephalonica larvae. R. rugosa oil at a concentration of 100 μl/g showed 59.30 ± 0.18% feeding deterrency with 21.32 ± 0.13% grain damage followed by Z. armatum oil producing 45.93 ± 0.24 feeding deterrency with 23.16 ± 0.17% grain damage as compared to 78.26 ± 0.34% grain damage in control against P. interpunctella. Least antifeedent activity was observed for C. oppositifolia oil towards all insect species. Essential oils inhibits locomotion which affect mating activities and sexual communication as well as deterring females from laying eggs, as well as complete suppression of the developmental stages of insects which have been reported by a number of authors (Ivbijaro and Agbaje, 1986; Ofuya, 1992; Okonkwo and Okoye, 1996; Adedire 2002). Compounds with feeding deterrents are generally toxic to insects or cause physiological disturbances of development or oviposition (Nawrot and Harmantha, 1994).

References