Advertisement

Effects of host resistance and plant-derived insecticides on mortality of Sitophilus zeamais (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) adults in stored maize

  • L. C. NwosuEmail author
  • C. O. Adedire
Original Research Article
  • 12 Downloads

Abstract

The effect of host resistance and plant-derived insecticides on the mortality of adults of the maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais, in maize was determined at ambient temperature (30.7 °C) and relative humidity (70.4%) using a 2-factor factorial arrangement in a Randomized Complete Block Design. Powders of pepper fruit (Dennettia tripetala) seeds, mistletoe (Viscum album) leaf, garlic (Allium sativum) bulbs, and clove (Syzygium aromaticum) inflorescence were applied separately to 2000SYNEE-WSTR (highly resistant to S. zeamais), TZBRCOMP.2C1F1 (resistant), ART/98/SW4-OB (moderately resistant), and PVASYN-3F2 (susceptible) maize varieties at the rates of 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 g per 20 g of grains. The same rate of permethrin (BEST 0.6% D) and an untreated control were included. A similar experiment was conducted using extracts applied at the rate of 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 ml per 20 g of grains with permethrin (BEST 10% EC) and acetone serving as the control treatments. Denettia tripetala and S. aromaticum at 1.0 and 1.5 g or ml per 20 g grains matched the efficacy of permethrin by the 3rd and 4th day post-exposure, irrespective of maize resistance rating. Across test plants and rates of application, the use of botanicals added value significantly in a progressive way to host resistance. There were no variety or variety x protectant interaction effects on mortality of adult S. zeamais observed for four days at concentrations of 0.5–1.5% w/w or ml/ 20 g grains. There is need for further evaluation of the complementary action of varietal resistance and D. tripetala and S. aromaticum under long-duration storage conditions.

Keywords

Resistance rating Botanical insecticides Integrated pest management 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Thanks to International Institute for Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria for supplying the maize varieties used for this study. We also thank Professor E.O. Ogunwolu (University of Agriculture, Makurdi, Benue State, Nigeria) and Professor M.O. Ashamo (Federal University of Technology Akure, Ondo State, Nigeria) for their assistance. The paper is a product of the first author’s Ph.D. work in Federal University of Technology Akure, Ondo State, Nigeria.

References

  1. Abebe F, Tefera T, Mugo S, Beyene Y, Vidal S (2009) Resistance of maize varieties to the maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais (Motsch.) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Afri J Biotech 8:5937–5943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Achinewhu SG, Ogbonna C, Hard AD (1995) Chemical composition of indigenous wild herbs, spices, fruits, nuts and leafy vegetables used as food. Plts Fd Hum Nut 48:341–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adedire CO (2001) Biology, ecology and control of insect pests of stored cereal grains. In: Ofuya TI, Lale NES (eds) Pests of Stored Cereal and Pulses in Nigeria: Biology, Ecology and Control. Dave Collins Publications, Akure, pp 59–94Google Scholar
  4. Adedire CO, Lajide L (1999) Toxicity and oviposition deterrency of some plant extracts on cowpea storage bruchid, Callosobruchus maculatus Fabricius. J Plt Dis Pro 106:647–653Google Scholar
  5. Adedire CO, Akinkurolere RO, Ajayi OO (2011) Susceptiblity of some maize cultivars in Nigeria to infestation and damage by maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais (Motsch.) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Nig J Ento 28:55–63Google Scholar
  6. Agbakwuru EOP, Osisiogu IUW, Ugochukwu EN (1978) Insecticides of Nigerian vegetable origin: some nitroalkanes as protectants of stored cowpeas and maize against insects pests. Nig J Sci 12:493–504Google Scholar
  7. Arannilewa ST, Ekrakene T, Akinneye JO (2006) Laboratory evaluation of four medicinal plants as protectants against the maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais (Motschulsky). Afric J Biotech 5:2032–2036Google Scholar
  8. Asawalam EF, Emosairue SO, Ekeleme F, Wokocha RC (2006) Insecticidal effects of powdered parts of eight Nigerian plant species against maize weevil Sitophilus zeamais Motschulsky (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Nig Agric J 37:106–113Google Scholar
  9. Ashamo MO (2001) Varietal resistance of maize to the maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais Motsch. (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Z Pflanzenkr Pflanzen 108:314–319Google Scholar
  10. Ashamo MO (2005) Integration of varietal resistance and nutmeg, Myristica fragrans (Houtt.) oil in protecting post-harvest infestation by Sitophilus oryzae (L.) in rice. J Ent Res 29:259–263Google Scholar
  11. Banso A, Ayodele PO, Vunchi MA, Jiya AG (2010) The effect of Allium sativum and Xylopia aethiopica extracts on the growth of fungi in sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas) juice. Nig J Biotech 21:46–49Google Scholar
  12. CGIAR (Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research) (1997) CGIAR Newsletter 4:1–2Google Scholar
  13. Charleston DS, Kfir R, Dicke M, Vet LEM (2005) Impact of botanical pesticides derived from Mella azedarach and Azadirachta indica on the biology of two parasitoid species of the diamondback moth. Biol Control 33:131–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Duke OS (1990) Natural pesticides from plants. In: Janick J, Simon JE (eds) Advances in new crops. Timber Press, Portland, pp 511–517Google Scholar
  15. Eicher CK, Byerlee D (1997) Accelerating maize production: synthesis. In: Byerlee D, Eicher CK (eds) Africa’s emerging maize revolution. Lynne Rienner, Colorado, pp 247–262Google Scholar
  16. Ejechi BO, Akpomedaye DE (2005) Activity of essential oil and phenolic acid extracts of pepper fruit (Dennetia tripetala G. Barker; Anonaceae) against some food borne microorganisms. Afric. J. Biotech 4:258–261Google Scholar
  17. Enobakhare DA, Law-Ogbomo KE (2002) Reduction of postharvest loss caused by Sitophilus zeamais (Motsch.) in three varieties of maize treated with plant products. Post Harvest Science 1:1–6Google Scholar
  18. FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization) (1992) The role of ruminant livestock in food security in developing countries. FAO committee on world food security, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  19. Garcia–Lara S, Bergvinson DJ, Burt AJ, Ramputh AI, Diaz–Pontones DM, Arnason JT (2004) The role of pericarp cell wall components in maize weevil resistance. Crop Sci 44:1546–1552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hassanali A, Lwande W, Ole-Sitayo N, Moreka L, Nokoe S, Chapya A (1990) Weevil repellent constituents of Ocimum suave leaves and Eugenia caryophylla cloves used as grain protectant in parts of East Africa. Disc Innov 2:91–95Google Scholar
  21. Lajide L, Adedire CO, Muse WA, Agele S (1998) Insecticidal activity of powders of some Nigerian plants against the maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais Motsch. In: Lale NES, Molta NB, Donli PO, Dike MC, Aminu–Kano M (eds) Entomology in the Nigerian economy: research focus in the 21st century. Entomological Society of Nigeria (ESN), vol 31. ESN Occasional Publication, Maiduguri, pp 227–235Google Scholar
  22. Lale NES (1995) Laboratory study of comparative toxicity of products from three spices of maize weevil. Postharv Biol Tech 2:61–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lale NES (2002) Stored-product entomology and acarology in tropical africa. Mole Publications Ltd, Maiduguri, p 204Google Scholar
  24. Lale NES, Mustapha A (2000) Potential of combining neem (Azadirachta indica a. Juss) seed oil with varietal resistance for the management of the cowpea bruchid, Callosobruchus maculatus (F.). J Stored Prod Res 36:215–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lebouef M, Caver A (1972) Alkaloids desecoces I: Uvariopsine guineensis. Phytochem. 11:28–33Google Scholar
  26. McCann JC (2006) Maize and grace: Africa’s encounter with a New World crop. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  27. Morah SC, Mbata GN (1982) Assessment of the relative susceptibility of some maize varieties to post harvest infestation by the maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais Motsch. Tech Rep 5:63–68Google Scholar
  28. Muller HG, Tobin G (1980) Nutrition and food processing. Groom Helm Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  29. Munyiri SW, Mugo SN, Otim M, Mwololo JK, Okori P (2013) Mechanisms and sources of resistance in tropical maize inbred lines to Chilo partellus stem borers. J Agric Sci 5:51–60Google Scholar
  30. Mwololo JK, Mugo S, Okori P, Tefera T, Otim M, Munyiri SW (2012) Sources of resistance to the maize weevil Sitophilus zeamais in tropical maize. J Agric Sci 4:206–215Google Scholar
  31. Nakatani N (1994) Antioxidants from spices and herbs. In: Ho CT, Osawa T, Huang MT, Rosen RT (eds) Food phytochemicals for Cancer prevention II: teas, spices and herbs, ACS symposium series, vol 547. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, pp 264–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nwosu LC (2016) Chemical bases for maize grain resistance to infestation and damage by the maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais Motschulsky. J Stored Prod Res 69:41–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nwosu LC, Nwosu UI (2012) Assessment of maize cob powder for the control of weevils in stored maize grain in Nigeria. J. Ent. Res. 36:21–24Google Scholar
  34. Odeyemi OO, Masika P, Afolayan AJ (2008) A review of the use of phytochemicals for insect pest control. Afric Plt Protec 14:1–7Google Scholar
  35. Ofuya TI, Lale NES (2001) Pests of stored cereals and pulses in Nigeria: Biology, ecology and control. Dave Collins Publications, AkureGoogle Scholar
  36. Okwu DE, Morah FNI (2004) Mineral and nutritive value of Dennettia tripetala fruits. Fruits 59:437–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pimentel D (2007) Area-wide pest management: environmental, economic and food issues. In: Vreysen RAS, Hendrichs M, B J (eds) Area-wide control of insect pests. Springer, Netherlands, pp 35–47.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6059-52 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schwab AJ, Jager I, Stoll G, Georgen R, Prelexler SS, Altenburger R (1995) Pesticides in tropical agriculture: hazards and alternatives. Trop Agro-Ecol 3:282 PAN, CTA, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  39. Shazia OWMR, Minza M, Rhodes M, Robert NM, Bukheti K, Maulid M, Herman FL, Christine GI, Dastun GM, Loth SM (2006) Control of cowpea weevil (Callosobruchus maculatus L.) in stored cowpea (Vigna unguiculatus L.) grains using botanicals. Asian J Plant Sci 5:91–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sulehrie MA, Golob P, Tran BMD, Farrel G (2003) The effects of the attributes of Vigna spp. on the bionomics of Callosobruchus maculatus. Entomol Exp Appl 106:159–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© African Association of Insect Scientists 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Crop and Soil Science, Faculty of AgricultureUniversity of Port HarcourtPort HarcourtNigeria
  2. 2.Department of BiologyFederal University of Technology AkureAkureNigeria

Personalised recommendations