Paper · 2024 · International Journal of Advanced Biochemistry Research

Management of diamondback moth (DBM) Plutella xylostella (L.) by bio-pesticides and botanicals

Pinkesh Meena; Pradeep Kumar; AK Chaudhary; et al.

9
claims
23
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The experiment was conducted in Rabi 2023 at Organic Research Farm, under Department of Entomology, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi to evaluate the efficacy of bio-pesticides and botanicals against the infestation of diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella L.) in cauliflower. Nine treatments included control (Untreted) were used in 9 plots with 3 replications, all the treatments were sprayed in three times and data collected at 3 days, 7 days and 14 days after applications. The investigation resulted all the treatments were found significantly effective over control. The minimum larval population of DBM was recorded under Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hac as per with Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hac and Neem oil 2% and Metarhizium anisopliae@ 1.5 kg/hac also give similar result as neem oil. The highest crop yield and C:B ratio was obtained under Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hac (210.89 and 1:3.94) as per with Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hac (190.65 and 1:3.48).

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 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

All tested treatments significantly controlled diamondback moth relative to control.

Treatment
all the treatmentse0
Interactor
diamondback mothPlutella xylostellae1pest
Outcome
effectivee0
Direction
effectivee0
Comparator
controle0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. botrytis
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis · TaxonSusan Slater · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Plutella xylostella
Plutella xylostella · InteractorPlease report references to olei@despammed.com . · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“all the treatments were found significantly effective over control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 539–605 · show in text ↑
e1

“The experiment was conducted in Rabi 2023 at Organic Research Farm, under Department of Entomology, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi to evaluate the efficacy of bio-pesticides and botanicals against the infestation of diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella L.) in cauliflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–308 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacillus thuringiensis treatment gave the minimum moth larval population.

Treatment
Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hace0
Interactor
DBMe0pest
Second interactor
Bacillus thuringiensisBacillus thuringiensise0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
larval population of DBMe0
Direction
minimume0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. botrytis
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis · TaxonSusan Slater · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Bacillus thuringiensis
Bacillus thuringiensis · Second interactorSam LaRussa · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The minimum larval population of DBM was recorded under Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hac as per with Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hac and Neem oil 2% and Metarhizium anisopliae@ 1.5 kg/hac also give similar result as neem oil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 607–834 · show in text ↑
e1

“The experiment was conducted in Rabi 2023 at Organic Research Farm, under Department of Entomology, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi to evaluate the efficacy of bio-pesticides and botanicals against the infestation of diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella L.) in cauliflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–308 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Beauveria bassiana gave larval control comparable to Bacillus thuringiensis.

Treatment
Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hace0
Interactor
DBMe1pest
Second interactor
Beauveria bassianaBeauveria bassianae0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
larval population of DBMe1
Direction
as per withe0
Comparator
Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hace0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. botrytis
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis · TaxonSusan Slater · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Beauveria bassiana
Beauveria bassiana · Second interactorBealeiderman · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hac as per with Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hac”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 663–742 · show in text ↑
e1

“The minimum larval population of DBM was recorded under Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hac as per with Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hac and Neem oil 2% and Metarhizium anisopliae@ 1.5 kg/hac also give similar result as neem oil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 607–834 · show in text ↑
e2

“cauliflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 297–308 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Neem oil gave larval control comparable to Bacillus thuringiensis.

Treatment
Neem oil 2%e0
Interactor
DBMe1pest
Outcome
larval population of DBMe1
Direction
as per withe0
Comparator
Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hace0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. botrytis
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis · TaxonSusan Slater · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hac as per with Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hac and Neem oil 2%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 663–758 · show in text ↑
e1

“The minimum larval population of DBM was recorded under Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hac as per with Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hac and Neem oil 2% and Metarhizium anisopliae@ 1.5 kg/hac also give similar result as neem oil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 607–834 · show in text ↑
e2

“cauliflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 297–308 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Metarhizium anisopliae gave a result similar to neem oil.

Treatment
Metarhizium anisopliae@ 1.5 kg/hace0
Interactor
DBMe1pest
Second interactor
Metarhizium anisopliaeMetarhizium anisopliaee0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
similar resulte0
Direction
similare0
Comparator
neem oile0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. botrytis
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis · TaxonSusan Slater · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Metarhizium anisopliae
Metarhizium anisopliae · Second interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryChengshu Wang and Yuxian Xia · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Metarhizium anisopliae@ 1.5 kg/hac also give similar result as neem oil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 763–834 · show in text ↑
e1

“The minimum larval population of DBM was recorded under Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hac as per with Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hac and Neem oil 2% and Metarhizium anisopliae@ 1.5 kg/hac also give similar result as neem oil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 607–834 · show in text ↑
e2

“cauliflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 297–308 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacillus thuringiensis gave the highest cauliflower yield, 210.89.

Treatment
Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hace0
Interactor
Bacillus thuringiensisBacillus thuringiensise0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
crop yielde0
Direction
higheste0
Value
210.89e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. botrytis
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis · TaxonSusan Slater · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Bacillus thuringiensis
Bacillus thuringiensis · InteractorSam LaRussa · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The highest crop yield and C:B ratio was obtained under Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hac (210.89 and 1:3.94)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 836–947 · show in text ↑
e2

“cauliflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 297–308 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacillus thuringiensis gave the highest C:B ratio, 1:3.94.

Treatment
Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hace0
Interactor
Bacillus thuringiensisBacillus thuringiensise0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
C:B ratioe0
Direction
higheste0
Value
1:3.94e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. botrytis
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis · TaxonSusan Slater · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Bacillus thuringiensis
Bacillus thuringiensis · InteractorSam LaRussa · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The highest crop yield and C:B ratio was obtained under Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hac (210.89 and 1:3.94)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 836–947 · show in text ↑
e2

“cauliflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 297–308 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Beauveria bassiana produced crop yield of 190.65.

Treatment
Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hace0
Interactor
Beauveria bassianaBeauveria bassianae0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
crop yielde1
Value
190.65e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. botrytis
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis · TaxonSusan Slater · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Beauveria bassiana
Beauveria bassiana · InteractorBealeiderman · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hac (190.65 and 1:3.48)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 960–1011 · show in text ↑
e1

“The highest crop yield and C:B ratio was obtained under Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hac (210.89 and 1:3.94) as per with Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hac (190.65 and 1:3.48)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 836–1011 · show in text ↑
e2

“cauliflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 297–308 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Beauveria bassiana produced a C:B ratio of 1:3.48.

Treatment
Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hace0
Interactor
Beauveria bassianaBeauveria bassianae0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
C:B ratioe1
Value
1:3.48e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. botrytis
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis · TaxonSusan Slater · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Beauveria bassiana
Beauveria bassiana · InteractorBealeiderman · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hac (190.65 and 1:3.48)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 960–1011 · show in text ↑
e1

“The highest crop yield and C:B ratio was obtained under Bacillus thuringiensis @ 1.5 kg/hac (210.89 and 1:3.94) as per with Beauveria bassiana @ 1.5 kg/hac (190.65 and 1:3.48)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 836–1011 · show in text ↑
e2

“cauliflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 297–308 · show in text ↑

Bacillus thuringiensis · yield · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

Beauveria bassiana · pest · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 6 positive, 2 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

Bacillus thuringiensis · pest · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Results agree

5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

Beauveria bassiana · yield · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Results agree

5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

botanical · pest · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results

78 papers: 65 positive, 13 negative or no effect

64 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

74 papers more in this group

See all 78 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.