Paper · 2023 · Environment Conservation Journal

Field bio-efficacy, phytotoxicity of different insecticides against invasive leafminer, Liriomyza huidobrensis in potato and its safety to natural enemies

Monica S S; Vinothkumar Bojan

7
claims
12
verbatim quotes
2
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc

Abstract

In order to assess the efficiency of different pesticides, their phytotoxicity, and the safety of natural enemies in potato fields of the Nilgiris district against the recently existing invasive pest, Liriomyza huidobrensis, two field experiments were conducted at two different locations, namely Kukkal in Kotagiri and Kappachi in Ooty, both located in the district Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu. The outcomes showed that cyantraniliprole 10.26 OD @ 75 g a.i. /ha and chlorantraniliprole 18.5 S @ 30 g a.i. /ha were helpful for managing L. huidobrensis. Following spraying, coccinellid and spider populations first declined, but gradually rose. Following it, Profenofos 50 EC @ 500 g a.i. /ha was also demonstrated to yield favourable results, but it was rejected because it significantly reduced the population of natural enemies. Additionally, it was discovered that none of the pesticides had any phototoxic effects on potato during the trial. In light of the fact that profenofos 50 EC has a similar impact on the natural enemy population as cyantraniliprole 10.26 OD and chlorantraniliprole 18.5 S @ 30 g a.i. ha-1, they can be used successfully as a management strategy for potato leaf miner.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. 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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cyantraniliprole helped manage potato leafminer.

Treatment
cyantraniliprole 10.26 OD @ 75 g a.i. /hae0
Interactor
L. huidobrensisLiriomyza huidobrensise0pest
Outcome
L. huidobrensise0
Direction
helpfule0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Liriomyza huidobrensis
Liriomyza huidobrensis · InteractoriNaturalist.org (Diego Almendras) (Diego Almendras) · CC BY 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cyantraniliprole 10.26 OD @ 75 g a.i. /ha and chlorantraniliprole 18.5 S @ 30 g a.i. /ha were helpful for managing L. huidobrensis”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 414–544 · show in text ↑
t0

“potato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 114–120 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chlorantraniliprole helped manage potato leafminer.

Treatment
chlorantraniliprole 18.5 S @ 30 g a.i. /hae0
Interactor
L. huidobrensisLiriomyza huidobrensise0pest
Outcome
L. huidobrensise0
Direction
helpfule0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Liriomyza huidobrensis
Liriomyza huidobrensis · InteractoriNaturalist.org (Diego Almendras) (Diego Almendras) · CC BY 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“chlorantraniliprole 18.5 S @ 30 g a.i. /ha were helpful for managing L. huidobrensis”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 460–544 · show in text ↑
t0

“potato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 114–120 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmixedmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Coccinellid and spider populations initially fell following spraying, then rose.

Treatment
sprayinge0
Interactor
coccinellide0other
Outcome
coccinellid and spider populationse0
Direction
declinede0

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Following spraying, coccinellid and spider populations first declined, but gradually rose.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 546–636 · show in text ↑
t0

“potato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 114–120 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Profenofos produced favorable leafminer management results.

Treatment
Profenofos 50 EC @ 500 g a.i. /hae0
Interactor
Liriomyza huidobrensisLiriomyza huidobrensist0pest
Outcome
favourable resultse0
Direction
favourablee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Liriomyza huidobrensis
Liriomyza huidobrensis · InteractoriNaturalist.org (Diego Almendras) (Diego Almendras) · CC BY 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Profenofos 50 EC @ 500 g a.i. /ha was also demonstrated to yield favourable results”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 651–734 · show in text ↑
t0

“Liriomyza huidobrensis in potato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 88–120 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Profenofos significantly reduced natural enemy populations.

Treatment
Profenofos 50 EC @ 500 g a.i. /hae0
Interactor
natural enemiese0other
Outcome
population of natural enemiese0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Profenofos 50 EC @ 500 g a.i. /ha was also demonstrated to yield favourable results, but it was rejected because it significantly reduced the population of natural enemies”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 651–822 · show in text ↑
t0

“potato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 114–120 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

None of the pesticides caused phytotoxic effects on potato in the trial.

Treatment
pesticidese0
Outcome
phototoxic effectse0
Direction
nonee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“none of the pesticides had any phototoxic effects on potato during the trial”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 861–937 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend cyantraniliprole and chlorantraniliprole for potato leaf miner management.

Treatment
cyantraniliprole 10.26 ODe0
Outcome
management strategy for potato leaf minere0

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cyantraniliprole 10.26 OD and chlorantraniliprole 18.5 S @ 30 g a.i. ha-1, they can be used successfully as a management strategy for potato leaf miner”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1038–1189 · show in text ↑

profenofos · Liriomyza huidobrensis · Solanum tuberosum (potato)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
See all 2 papers →

profenofos · pest · Solanum tuberosum (potato)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 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.