Abstract
Abstract Two field experiments were conducted in the Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia in the hot and cool dry seasons of 2016/2017 with the objective to develop an insecticide resistance management program on thrips infesting onion. The first experiment dealt with the evaluation of four different insecticides namely profenofos, λ–cyhalothrin, imidacloprid, and spinetoram in different sequences on thrips population and their effect on yield. The second experiment examined the effect of admixing the surfactant organosilicone with imidacloprid, spinetoram and dimethoate. A Randomized Complete Block Design with three replications was used for both experiments. Data on number of thrips, bulb yield and economic returns were collected. The insecticide imidacloprid and spinetoram resulted in fewer numbers of thrips and higher yields than profenofos and λ –cyhalothrin. Application of the more effective insecticides when the thrips population was high followed by less effective insecticides resulted in better control and higher economic return. Surfactant added insecticides gave a fewer numbers of thrips and higher yields than the corresponding insecticides applied without surfactant. The sequential application of spinetoram and imidacloprid with less effective λ-cyhalothrin and profenofos by mixing with adjuvant are recommended for thrips control as an integral component of thrips management in the Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Imidacloprid and spinetoram yielded fewer thrips than profenofos and lambda-cyhalothrin.
- Taxon
- onion
Allium cepat0 - Treatment
- imidacloprid and spinetorame0
- Outcome
- numbers of thripse0
- Direction
- fewere0
- Comparator
- profenofos and λ –cyhalothrine0
ThripsOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The insecticide imidacloprid and spinetoram resulted in fewer numbers of thrips and higher yields than profenofos and λ –cyhalothrin”
t0“onion”
t1“thrips”
Claim · model-written summary
Imidacloprid and spinetoram gave higher onion yields than profenofos and lambda-cyhalothrin.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- imidacloprid and spinetorame0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- profenofos and λ –cyhalothrine0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The insecticide imidacloprid and spinetoram resulted in fewer numbers of thrips and higher yields than profenofos and λ –cyhalothrin”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Applying more effective insecticides at high thrips populations followed by less effective insecticides improved control.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- more effective insecticides when the thrips population was high followed by less effective insecticidese0
- Outcome
- controle0
- Direction
- bettere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of the more effective insecticides when the thrips population was high followed by less effective insecticides resulted in better control and higher economic return”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
That insecticide sequence gave a higher economic return.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- more effective insecticides when the thrips population was high followed by less effective insecticidese0
- Outcome
- economic returne0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of the more effective insecticides when the thrips population was high followed by less effective insecticides resulted in better control and higher economic return”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Surfactant added insecticides reduced thrips numbers relative to insecticides without surfactant.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- Surfactant added insecticidese0
- Outcome
- numbers of thripse0
- Direction
- fewere0
- Comparator
- corresponding insecticides applied without surfactante0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Surfactant added insecticides gave a fewer numbers of thrips and higher yields than the corresponding insecticides applied without surfactant”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Surfactant added insecticides increased onion yield relative to insecticides without surfactant.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- Surfactant added insecticidese0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- corresponding insecticides applied without surfactante0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Surfactant added insecticides gave a fewer numbers of thrips and higher yields than the corresponding insecticides applied without surfactant”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend sequential spinetoram and imidacloprid with less effective insecticides and adjuvant for onion thrips control.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Outcome
- sequential application of spinetoram and imidacloprid with less effective λ-cyhalothrin and profenofos by mixing with adjuvante0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The sequential application of spinetoram and imidacloprid with less effective λ-cyhalothrin and profenofos by mixing with adjuvant are recommended for thrips control”
t0“onion”
The same questions in other papers
imidacloprid · yield · Allium cepa (onion)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
imidacloprid · Thrips · Allium cepa (onion)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
surfactant · Thrips · Allium cepa (onion)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
Spinetoram · Thrips · Allium cepa (onion)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
surfactant · yield · Allium cepa (onion)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
Thrips · yield · Allium cepa (onion)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
Spinetoram · yield · Allium cepa (onion)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
insecticide · yield · Allium cepa (onion)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →8 of 9 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.