4.5 Article

Are traditional neem extract preparations as efficient as a commercial formulation of azadirachtin A?

期刊

CROP PROTECTION
卷 30, 期 3, 页码 318-322

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cropro.2010.11.022

关键词

Azadirachtin A; Neem extract; Neemazal T/S; Bioassays

类别

资金

  1. Cooperazione inter-universitaria Torino-Sahel in the Piemonte Region of Italy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Neem seeds contain many substances with insecticidal properties, the main insecticidal ingredient being azadirachtin A. In developing countries such as Mali, a neem seed water extract is prepared by soaking ground seeds in water for three or seven days. The aim of this study was to check the effectiveness of this extract in terms of azadirachtin A extraction yield and insecticidal activity. The yield of extraction was 019 g azadirachtin A/100 g seeds. The concentration of azadirachtin A in the seed extract was approximately 200 mg l(-1), eight times higher than the recommended concentration of commercial products (25 mg l(-1)). A comparison of the extractive capacity of different solvents indicated that the best solvents were water and methanol. The azadirachtin A concentration declined in extracts stored for more than 3 days at a temperatures higher than 30 degrees C. Bioassays were performed on target insects (the leafhopper Macrosteles quadripunctulatus, the moth Spodoptera littoralis and the tobacco whitefly Bemisia tabaci) in order to compare the insecticidal activity of the neem extract with that of the commercial product Neemazal T/S and of a solution of pure azadirachtin A. The bioassays conducted on the leafhopper and the moth demonstrated that the neem extract at the recommended concentration (25 mg l(-1) active ingredient) was as effective as the azadirachtin-based commercial product at the same concentration, while for the control of the whitefly B. tabaci a higher concentration of the water extract was needed. (c) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据