Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Repellency
Pupacidal
Larvicidal
Repellency of field flies with
different Essential Oils
LARGER
CHAMBER
OUTER
CHAMBER
60 80
70
50
Repellency (%)
60
40
50
30
40
20 30
10 20
0 10
Mentha Eucalyptus Lemon grass Mentha Khus khus Turmeric 0
piperita citrata Mentha piperita Eucalyptus Mentha citrata Lemon grass Khus khus Turmeric
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
pe
rit
a
rm
in
t
yp
tu
s
gr
as
s
m
er
ic
n tr
ol %IR=95 (Lemon grass),
Pi pe al r Co
on
en
th
a Pi E uc
Le
m
Tu
55 (Turmeric)
M
Oil
96h 144h
Formulation
Types of formulation
40 EC Mentha piperita
Active Ingredients (Eucalyptus oil): 4.0 g
Solvent (xylene): 4.5 g
Co-Surfactant (Butanol): 0.3 g
Surfactant: NP 20 0.7 g
Castor Oil Ethoxalate 0.5 g
40 EC Eucalyptus
Active Ingredients (Eucalyptus oil): 4.0 g
Solvent (xylene): 4.5 g
Co-Surfactant (Butanol): 0.3 g
Surfactant: NP 20 0.7 g
Castor Oil Ethoxalate 0.5 g
80
80
70
70
100
90
80
70 Conc. Of pure oil=0.7µl/cm2
Repellency (%)
*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)
100 100
60 60
40 40
20 20
0
0
2% 5% 10% Neat
2% 5% 10% Neat
80
Larval moratality
60
40
20
0
pure oil (Mentha) M. piperita & M. piperita (10%) Eucalyptus (10%)
Eucalyptus (Neat)
* 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)
100
80
60
40
20
0
2% 5% 10% Neat
Conc. of formulation
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 C CALF
L AREA
BULL SHED O
S
TREE
E
D CALF
AREA
OPEN S
AREA H
E
CALF
D AREA
AREA OF PROBLEM
FROM FRONT
Surface application on the body surface of animal
550
500
450
400
No. of flies /hr
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Control Cow Treated Cow
1650
1500
1350
1200 % Reduction of
M. piperita (40 EC) 1050
No. of flies/hr
90.8 flies
900
750
Area-2x2 m2 600
Vol.-25ml 450
%Reduction of
300
150
98.9 flies
0
Control Mentha piperita M. piperita
(10%) (undiluted)
*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, 371–383.
Malik, A.; Singh, N.; Satya, S. 2007. Journal of Environmental Science and
Health Part B (2007) 42, 453–469
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, 1689–1697.
THANK YOU