Abstract
The tomato leaf miner, Tuta absoluta (Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae), has invaded most parts of Nepal and threatens tomato production. Their management primarily relies on insecticides in Nepal. Market-available and locally-madeplant-based pesticides are not equally effective in managingT. absoluta. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of such potential insecticides in managing T. absoluta in open-field conditions. This study was carried out in the Salyan district of Nepal in 2021 and treatments were designed in a randomized complete block design (RCBD)with seven treatments and three replications. All treatments were sprayed at12-dayintervalsfor two times. The treatments used were Emamect in benzoate 5% SC, Imidacloprid 17.8 SL, Jholmol (botanical mixture extract and urine mixture), Chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SC, Spinosad 45 SC, Azadirachtin 300ppm and Control. The results showed that the lowest percentage of leaves and fruit damage was recorded in Chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SC and Spinosad 45 SC sprayed plots. Insecticide efficiency was ranked as Chlorantraniliprole > Spinosad>Ema-mectin Benzoate > Azadirachtin >Imidaclroprid>Jholmol>Control. Marketable yield was obtained highest in Chlorantraniliprole (85.26 t/ha) treated plots followed by Spinosad (79.26 t/ha); both were not significantly different. This study provides an opportunity to select the most suitable and effective pesticides for the management of tomato leaf miners and can be used in integrated pest management strategies as a selective insecticides.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Chlorantraniliprole and Spinosad gave the lowest leaf and fruit damage by Tuta absoluta.
- Taxon
- Tomato
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Treatment
- Chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SC and Spinosad 45 SCe1
- Interactor
- Tuta absoluta
.jpg?width=60)
Tuta absolutat0pest - Outcome
- percentage of leaves and fruit damagee1
- Direction
- loweste1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
t0“Management of Tomato Leaf Miner, Tuta absoluta (Meyrick)”
e1“the lowest percentage of leaves and fruit damage was recorded in Chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SC and Spinosad 45 SC sprayed plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Insecticide efficiency was ranked Chlorantraniliprole > Spinosad > Emamectin benzoate > Azadirachtin > Imidacloprid > Jholmol > Control.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- Chlorantraniliprole > Spinosad>Ema-mectin Benzoate > Azadirachtin >Imidaclroprid>Jholmole2
- Interactor
- Tuta absolutaTuta absolutat0pest
- Outcome
- Insecticide efficiencye2
- Direction
- was ranked ase2
- Comparator
- Controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Management of Tomato Leaf Miner, Tuta absoluta (Meyrick)”
e2“Insecticide efficiency was ranked as Chlorantraniliprole > Spinosad>Ema-mectin Benzoate > Azadirachtin >Imidaclroprid>Jholmol>Control”
Claim · model-written summary
Chlorantraniliprole gave the highest marketable tomato yield (85.26 t/ha), not significantly different from Spinosad.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- Chlorantraniliprolee3
- Outcome
- Marketable yielde3
- Direction
- higheste3
- Value
- 85.26 t/hae3
- Comparator
- Spinosade4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Management of Tomato Leaf Miner, Tuta absoluta (Meyrick)”
e3“Marketable yield was obtained highest in Chlorantraniliprole (85.26 t/ha) treated plots”
e4“followed by Spinosad (79.26 t/ha); both were not significantly different”
Claim · model-written summary
Spinosad gave marketable tomato yield of 79.26 t/ha, following Chlorantraniliprole and not significantly different from it.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- Spinosade4
- Outcome
- Marketable yielde3
- Direction
- followed bye4
- Value
- 79.26 t/hae4
- Comparator
- Chlorantraniliprolee3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Management of Tomato Leaf Miner, Tuta absoluta (Meyrick)”
e3“Marketable yield was obtained highest in Chlorantraniliprole (85.26 t/ha) treated plots”
e4“followed by Spinosad (79.26 t/ha); both were not significantly different”
Claim · model-written summary
The tested pesticides can be used in integrated pest management of tomato leaf miner as selective insecticides.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- can be used in integrated pest management strategiese5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Management of Tomato Leaf Miner, Tuta absoluta (Meyrick)”
e5“can be used in integrated pest management strategies as a selective insecticides”
The same questions in other papers
chlorantraniliprole · Tuta absoluta · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
13 papers more in this group
See all 17 papers →chlorantraniliprole · quality: postharvest · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
spinosad · quality: postharvest · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →azadirachtin · Tuta absoluta · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree
9 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →spinosad · Tuta absoluta · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree
15 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 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.