Abstract
Tuber crops including aroids fulfil ample demands of global food supply and utilized as feed of animals along with processed products for human consumption. Aphid (Aphis gossypii), an oligophagous pest, known to cause considerable qualitative and quantitative losses to the cultivation of aroids in general and taro in particular. This study reports the field bio-efficacy of some insecticides of plant and chemical origin against aphid as well as residue dynamics of most effective insecticides in leaves and tubers of taro. For residue analysis QuEChERS methodology was standardized for extraction and clean up followed by estimation through UHPLC. Among different insecticides evaluated, single spray of imidacloprid both at single and double doses was found most effective in managing the aphid population with a remarkable higher tuber yield. The initial deposit of imidacloprid in the leaves of taro was 0.65 and 1.32 mg kg -1 with half-life value of 1.04 and 1.41 days at single and double dose, respectively. The dietary exposure of the measured residues was found lower than the maximum permissible intake (MPI) of 0.33 mg person-1day-1 on all the sampling days at both the doses. However, considering the default Maximum Residue Limit (MRL) of imidacloprid as 0.01 mg kg-1 on taro leaves and safety of the consumers the pre harvest intervals of 7 days may be suggested for effective dose following good agricultural practices.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
A single imidacloprid spray at either dose was most effective at managing aphids.
- Taxon
- Taro
_Colocasia_esculenta_-_Les_Martels%2C_Giroussens_Tarn.jpg?width=60)
Colocasia esculentat0 - Treatment
- single spray of imidacloprid both at single and double dosese0
- Interactor
- aphide0pest
- Outcome
- aphid populatione0
- Direction
- most effectivee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_Colocasia_esculenta_-_Les_Martels%2C_Giroussens_Tarn.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“single spray of imidacloprid both at single and double doses was found most effective in managing the aphid population”
t0“Taro”
Claim · model-written summary
Imidacloprid spraying gave higher tuber yield.
- Taxon
- TaroColocasia esculentat0
- Treatment
- single spray of imidacloprid both at single and double dosese0
- Outcome
- tuber yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“single spray of imidacloprid both at single and double doses was found most effective in managing the aphid population with a remarkable higher tuber yield”
t0“Taro”
Claim · model-written summary
Initial leaf imidacloprid deposit at the single dose was 0.65 mg kg -1.
- Taxon
- taroColocasia esculentae0
- Organ / stage
- leavese0
- Treatment
- singlee0
- Outcome
- initial deposit of imidaclopride0
- Value
- 0.65e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The initial deposit of imidacloprid in the leaves of taro was 0.65 and 1.32 mg kg -1 with half-life value of 1.04 and 1.41 days at single and double dose, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Initial leaf imidacloprid deposit at the double dose was 1.32 mg kg -1.
- Taxon
- taroColocasia esculentae0
- Organ / stage
- leavese0
- Treatment
- double dosee0
- Outcome
- initial deposit of imidaclopride0
- Value
- 1.32 mg kg -1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The initial deposit of imidacloprid in the leaves of taro was 0.65 and 1.32 mg kg -1 with half-life value of 1.04 and 1.41 days at single and double dose, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
The leaf residue half-life at the single dose was 1.04 days.
- Taxon
- TaroColocasia esculentat0
- Treatment
- singlee0
- Outcome
- half-life valuee0
- Value
- 1.04e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“with half-life value of 1.04 and 1.41 days at single and double dose, respectively”
t0“Taro”
Claim · model-written summary
The leaf residue half-life at the double dose was 1.41 days.
- Taxon
- TaroColocasia esculentat0
- Treatment
- double dosee0
- Outcome
- half-life valuee0
- Value
- 1.41 dayse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“with half-life value of 1.04 and 1.41 days at single and double dose, respectively”
t0“Taro”
Claim · model-written summary
Measured dietary exposure was below the permissible intake on all sampling days at both doses.
- Taxon
- TaroColocasia esculentat0
- Outcome
- dietary exposure of the measured residuese0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Qualifier
- 0.33 mg person-1day-1e0
- Comparator
- maximum permissible intake (MPI)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The dietary exposure of the measured residues was found lower than the maximum permissible intake (MPI) of 0.33 mg person-1day-1 on all the sampling days at both the doses.”
t0“Taro”
Claim · model-written summary
A seven-day preharvest interval is suggested for the effective dose.
- Taxon
- TaroColocasia esculentat0
- Outcome
- pre harvest intervals of 7 dayse0
- Qualifier
- effective dosee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the pre harvest intervals of 7 days may be suggested for effective dose following good agricultural practices”
t0“Taro”
The same questions in other papers
application · yield · Colocasia esculenta (taro)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
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.