Investigation on Plant Derived Products as Control

Agents for House fly and Development of

Formulation

INTRODUCTION:

Plant materials as insecticide (Shaalan et al. 2005; Isman 2006)

Traditional medicine
Easily accessible to Rural population
Chemical Insecticides: Costly, Insect develop Resistance (Shen et
al.,1990;Oi et al.,1992)

Desirable characteristics of Plant materials for use in

pest control:

Should be safe to use

Non hazardous to environment
Should be easy to extract and formulate

Target organism: house fly

Why ?
Vectors of pathogens which cause human and
livestock diseases (Howard 2001).
Irritate livestock and working personnel affecting
their productive efficiency (Fogg, 1971)
Very few studies available on eco-friendly house
fly control (Malik et al., 2007)
Systematic studies lacking as difficult to culture
under laboratory condition

Objectives:
To control different stages of house fly with
application of different botanicals and oil
To formulate these botanicals and oils to
make it easy for application

Screening of Plants :

Eucalyptus
leaf

Mentha piperita leaf

Lemon grass leaf

Essential oils
Formulation of Essential oils

Turmeric

Repellency
Larvicidal
Pupacidal

Formulation of Botanicals
Repellency

Khus

Life cycle of House fly

Repellency

Pupacidal

Larvicidal

Repellency of field flies with

different Essential Oils
LARGER
CHAMBER

OUTER
CHAMBER

Petri plate containing

Oil on filter paper

REPELLENCY CHAMBER

Results for repellency experiment:

Conc. Of oil used: 0.28 l/cm2

*max repellency=70% by Mentha Piperita

Conc. Of oil used: 0.7 l/cm2

**repellency inc. to 88 % at higher conc

***Mentha Citrata become more effective at higher conc. Of oil

Larvicidal & Pupacidal with Essential oil

Larvae (10) + essential oil (1 ml in 0.01 % Tween 80)

Results for larvicidal experiment:

Dead larvae after

treatment with oil

Live larvae

Pupae (20) + essential oil (200l in 0.01 % Tween 80)

Results for pupacidal experiment:

%IR=95 (Lemon grass),

55 (Turmeric)

Types of formulation

Formulation

The main factors governing the choice of formulation are

Physico-chemical properties
Biological activity and mode of action
Method of application
Safety in use
Formulation costs
Market preference

Preparation of Emulsion from Essential oil (40 EC)

[40 EC stands for 40 % of Active Ingredients in the mixture]
Active Ingredient
Solvent (xylene)
gm)
Co- surfactant (Butanol-1)
Surfactant
gm)
Code A- NP20
Code B- Castor oil ethoxalate

: 40 % (4 gm)
: 45 % (4.5
: 3 % (0.3 gm)
: 12 % (1.2

S no.

Formulation

Code A

Code B

EC I

0.7

0.5

EC II

0.5

0.7

EC III

0.6

0.6

EC IV

0.8

0.4

EC V

0.4

0.8

EC VI

1.0

0.2

EC VII

0.2

1.0

EC VIII

0.9

0.3

EC IX

0.3

0.9

Preparation of formulation from essential oil:

40 EC Mentha piperita
Active Ingredients (Eucalyptus oil):
Solvent (xylene):
Co-Surfactant (Butanol):
Surfactant: NP 20
Castor Oil Ethoxalate

4.0 g
4.5 g
0.3 g
0.7 g
0.5 g

40 EC Eucalyptus
Active Ingredients (Eucalyptus oil):
Solvent (xylene):
Co-Surfactant (Butanol):
Surfactant: NP 20
Castor Oil Ethoxalate

4.0 g
4.5 g
0.3 g
0.7 g
0.5 g

Measure the requisite amount of ingredients and

mix properly
Keep it for 24 h

Results for repellency experiment (with formulated Essential oil)

40 EC Mentha Piperita

40 EC Eucalyptus

Conc. Of pure oil=0.7l/cm2

Conc. of formulated Mentha
Piperita & Eucalyptus=
0.000028l/cm2

Fig. Comparative efficacy between oil and its formulation

*Formulated product of oil is better control agent for House fly than pure oil
** Formulated Mentha Piperita is more effective than the formulated form of Eucalyptus

Results for larvicidal experiment (with formulated Essential oil)

40 EC Mentha piperita

40 EC Eucalyptus

* Formulated product of oil is better larvicidal for House fly than pure oil
** Formulation of both Mentha Piperita and Eucalyptus has similar in efficiency (76.6%) at 10% conc. of product

Results for pupacidal experiment (with formulated Essential oil)

* Control showed 80% fly emergence

** IR (%)= 83.75 (M. piperita) & 87.5 (Eucalyptus) at 5% conc. of formulation
*** Both the formulation were at par for their efficiency

Preparation of Dhoop-batti formulation with plant extracts

Essential oils: Need rigorous extraction
Need extensive mechanization
Expensive

Not feasible in
Rural Areas

Constituents: Cow dung, ghee, rice particle and raal powder (5:1:1:1)
Active ingredient equivalent to the amount of cow dung
Result: Caused less than 10% repellency

FIELD EXPERIMENTS

Experimental Site: Gaushala, Karol bagh

DUMP SITE
HOSPITAL
BULL SHED
TREE

OPEN
AREA

C
L
O
S
E
D
S
H
E
D

CALF
AREA

CALF
AREA

CALF
AREA

FROM RIGHT SIDE

AREA OF PROBLEM
FROM FRONT

Surface application on the body surface of animal

M. piperita (40 EC)

Before Application

Hind portion of an injured animal

infested with House flies

Vol.-100ml

Conc.-10%

After Application

No flies

Before Application

After Application

* Cows sprayed with formulation of M. piperita was visited by an average of 20 flies/hour

(percentage reduction of 96.08 flies/hour)
** Control was visited by 509 flies/ hour for the same time period

Surface application
Before Application

M. piperita (40 EC)

Area-2x2 m2
Vol.-25ml

After Application

% Reduction of
90.8 flies

%Reduction of
98.9 flies

*Treated surfaces with 40 EC formulation of M. piperita was visited by 151 flies/hour (10% conc.)
and 17 flies/hour at 100% conc.
**Control was visited by 1645 flies/ hour for the same time period

References:
Fogg. C.E., 1971. Livestock waste management and the conservation plan.
In: Livestock Waste Management and Pollution Abatement, Proceedings of
the International Symposium on Livestock Wastes, Am. Soc. Agric. Eng., St.
Joseph, Mich., pp. 34--35.
Howard. J.,2001 Nuisance flies around landfill;pattern of abundance and
distribution. Waste management. Res.19, 308-313.
Isman, M.B.. Botanical insecticides, deterrents, and repellents in modern
agriculture and an increasingly regulated world. Annual review of Entomology
2006, 51, 45-66.
Oi, M.; Dauterman, W.; Motoyama, N. Toxico kinetic analysis of dermally
applied diazinon in resistant and susceptible house flies, Musca domestica L.
Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1992, 27, 371383.
Malik, A.; Singh, N.; Satya, S. 2007. Journal of Environmental Science and
Health Part B (2007) 42, 453469
Shaalan, E.A.S.; Canyon, D.; Younes, M.W.F.; Wahab, H.A.; Mansour, A.H.
2005. A review of botanical phytochemicals with mosquitocidal potential.
Environ. Int., 31, 1149-1166.
Shen, J.; Plapp, Jr. F. W. Cyromazine resistance in the house fly (Diptera:
Muscidae): Genetics and cross resistance to diflubenzuron. J. Econ. Entomol.
1990, 83, 16891697.

THANK YOU