Abstract
Laboratory investigations were carried out to compare the efficacy of root, bark and leaf powders of Dracaena arborea for the control of Sitophilus zeamais and Callosobruchus maculatus on stored maize and cowpea grains, respectively. Two levels of concentration (1 and 5%) of the different powders were admixed with grains to determine the contact toxicity, damage assessment, progeny development and grain germination. The leaf powder at 5% concentration was more effective than the bark and root powders against the two insect species. The leaf powder at 5% concentration recorded a significant (P < 0.05) mortality of 26% against S. zeamais and 83% mortality against C. maculatus after 96 h of exposure. Mean damage in treated grains was as low as 1.09 to 3.23% compared with 4.64 to 16.16% in the control. Progeny production was significantly (P < 0.05) inhibited in treated grains while grain treatment did not affect germination.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 6
Claim · model-written summary
At 5%, leaf powder was more effective than bark and root powders against storage pests.
- Taxon
- maize and cowpea grains
Vigna unguiculata
Zea mayse1 - Treatment
- leaf powder at 5% concentratione0
- Outcome
- more effectivee0
- Direction
- more effectivee0
- Qualifier
- two insect speciese0
- Comparator
- bark and root powderse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Dracaena arborea”
e0“The leaf powder at 5% concentration was more effective than the bark and root powders against the two insect species”
e1“stored maize and cowpea grains, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf powder at 5% caused 26% mortality of S. zeamais after 96 h.
- Treatment
- leaf powder at 5% concentratione0
- Interactor
- S. zeamais
Sitophilus zeamaise0pest - Outcome
- mortalitye0
- Value
- 26%e0
- Qualifier
- after 96 h of exposuree0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The leaf powder at 5% concentration recorded a significant (P < 0.05) mortality of 26% against S. zeamais and 83% mortality against C. maculatus after 96 h of exposure”
e1“stored maize and cowpea grains, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf powder at 5% caused 83% mortality of C. maculatus after 96 h.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae1
- Treatment
- leaf powder at 5% concentratione0
- Interactor
- C. maculatus
Callosobruchus maculatuse0pest - Outcome
- mortalitye0
- Value
- 83%e0
- Qualifier
- after 96 h of exposuree0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The leaf powder at 5% concentration recorded a significant (P < 0.05) mortality of 26% against S. zeamais and 83% mortality against C. maculatus after 96 h of exposure”
e1“stored maize and cowpea grains, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Treated grains had 1.09 to 3.23% damage versus 4.64 to 16.16% in controls.
- Taxon
- maize and cowpea grainsVigna unguiculataZea mayse1
- Treatment
- treated grainse0
- Outcome
- Mean damagee0
- Direction
- as low ase0
- Value
- 1.09 to 3.23%e0
- Qualifier
- 4.64 to 16.16%e0
- Comparator
- the controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mean damage in treated grains was as low as 1.09 to 3.23% compared with 4.64 to 16.16% in the control”
e1“stored maize and cowpea grains, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Powder treatment significantly inhibited storage-pest progeny production.
- Taxon
- maize and cowpea grainsVigna unguiculataZea mayse1
- Treatment
- treated grainse0
- Outcome
- Progeny productione0
- Direction
- inhibitede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Progeny production was significantly (P < 0.05) inhibited in treated grains”
e1“stored maize and cowpea grains, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain treatment did not affect germination.
- Taxon
- maize and cowpea grainsVigna unguiculataZea mayse1
- Treatment
- grain treatmente0
- Outcome
- germinatione0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“grain treatment did not affect germination”
e1“stored maize and cowpea grains, respectively”
The same questions in other papers
botanical · Sitophilus zeamais · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
112 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
113 papers more in this group
See all 117 papers →botanical · Callosobruchus maculatus · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results
157 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
159 papers more in this group
See all 163 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.