Paper · 1995 · Journal of Entomological Research

Bio-efficacy of ‘Neem Azal’ (azadirachtin 10,000 ppm) against cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera Hubner

Bharathi Rama Rao; P. Rajasekhar; M. Venkataiah; et al.

4
claims
8
verbatim quotes
2
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Bio-efficacy of Neem Azal was studied against the insecticide-resistant populations of Helicoverpa armigera Hub. The effects of this new botanical neem formulation on larval growth and development were quite significant. The LC50 values for neonate and the second instar larvae were 0.002 and 0.004%, when fed on Neem Azal treated cotton leaves continuously. However, the LC50 values were 0.005, 0.02 and 0.03% for the I, II and III instar larvae of H. armigera when the exposure was limited to 48 h. Also, the neonate and second instar larvae were exposed to different concentrations of azadirachtin and the growth effects were estimated until pupal stage. Of the different concentrations, the highest dose of 0.04% proved to be the most toxic by recording 100 per cent mortality. The mean larval weight was 191.6 g when maintained on treated (200 ppm) leaves as compared to 337.8 g on normal leaves. The reduction in azadirachtin concentration improved the larval and pupal weights considerably. Even, the lowest concentrations, viz., 0.000625 and 0.0003125 per cent showed phagostimulant effects, the larval weights being 245.3 and 249.6 g as against 244.6 g in the control larvae. However, the growth disrupting effects were clearly evident with increasing dosages. Neem Azal, too, affected the pupal weight besides resulting in the formation of deshaped structures by incomplete metamorphosis.

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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Neem Azal significantly affected larval growth and development.

Treatment
botanical neem formulatione0
Interactor
Helicoverpa armigeraHelicoverpa armigerat0pest
Outcome
larval growth and developmente0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Helicoverpa armigera
Helicoverpa armigera · InteractorRaimundo Pastor · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The effects of this new botanical neem formulation on larval growth and development were quite significant.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 113–220 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera Hubner”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–106 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Continuous feeding on treated cotton leaves gave neonates an LC50 of 0.002%.

Treatment
Neem Azal treated cotton leavese0
Interactor
Helicoverpa armigeraHelicoverpa armigerat0pest
Outcome
LC50 values for neonatee0
Value
0.002e0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Helicoverpa armigera
Helicoverpa armigera · InteractorRaimundo Pastor · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The LC50 values for neonate and the second instar larvae were 0.002 and 0.004%, when fed on Neem Azal treated cotton leaves continuously.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 221–358 · show in text ↑
t0

“Helicoverpa armigera Hubner”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–106 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Continuous feeding on treated cotton leaves gave second instar larvae an LC50 of 0.004%.

Treatment
Neem Azal treated cotton leavese0
Interactor
Helicoverpa armigeraHelicoverpa armigerat0pest
Outcome
LC50 values for neonate and the second instar larvaee0
Value
0.004%e0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Helicoverpa armigera
Helicoverpa armigera · InteractorRaimundo Pastor · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The LC50 values for neonate and the second instar larvae were 0.002 and 0.004%, when fed on Neem Azal treated cotton leaves continuously.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 221–358 · show in text ↑
t0

“Helicoverpa armigera Hubner”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–106 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The highest azadirachtin dose caused complete larval mortality.

Treatment
0.04%e0
Interactor
Helicoverpa armigeraHelicoverpa armigerat0pest
Outcome
mortalitye0
Direction
most toxice0
Value
100 per cente0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Helicoverpa armigera
Helicoverpa armigera · InteractorRaimundo Pastor · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the highest dose of 0.04% proved to be the most toxic by recording 100 per cent mortality.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 691–781 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera Hubner”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–106 · show in text ↑

Azadirachta indica · Helicoverpa armigera · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

botanical · Helicoverpa armigera · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 6 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 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.