Abstract
Okra cultivation is plagued by pests that affect productivity. Consequently, the use of chemical pesticides causes problems. The present study was conducted to assess the impact of plant extracts of Azadirachta indica, Hyptis suaveolens and Solanum lycopersicum on the abundance of insect pests of the Hiré and Clemson okra varieties. To do this, a factorial block design was set up and foliar applications of these extracts were made, after which the insects were quantified. The extracts significantly reduced the abundance of Podagrica decolorata (p = 0.0009), Amrasca biguttula (p = 0.01), Zonocerus variegatus (p = 0.02) and Jacobiasca lybica (p = 0.009). Chemical treatment was effective on Podagrica decolorata with an average abundance of 40±10.2, followed by hydroetanolic treatment of Hyptis suaveolens (43.3±15.4). On Amrasca biguttula, the hydro-anolic extract of the Azadirachta indica + Solanum lycopersicum combination was effective with an average abundance of 39.7±3.2. On Jacobiasca lybica, the chemical treatment was more effective (18±6.2), followed by the hydroethanolic treatments of Azadirachta indica (27±2.1) and Hyptis suaveolens (29±6.2). The aqueous extract of Hyptis suaveolens considerably reduced the abundance of Zonocerus variegatus (3.7±4.6) after the chemical treatment (3.5±5.7). However, no significant difference was observed between these extracts and the chemical control (p > 0.05). Yields showed a higher average number of fruits (131.83±45.6) in the chemically treated plot, followed by the plot treated with the hydroethanol extract of Hyptis suaveolens and Solanum lycopersicum (128.83±15.2).
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 15
Claim · model-written summary
Extracts significantly reduced Podagrica decolorata abundance.
- Taxon
- okra
.jpg?width=60)
Abelmoschus esculentuse1 - Treatment
- extractse0
- Interactor
- Podagrica decoloratae0pest
- Outcome
- abundance of Podagrica decoloratae0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“The extracts significantly reduced the abundance of Podagrica decolorata (p = 0.0009)”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Extracts significantly reduced Amrasca biguttula abundance.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Interactor
- Amrasca biguttulaAmrasca biguttulae0pest
- Outcome
- Amrasca biguttulae0
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Amrasca biguttula (p = 0.01)”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Extracts significantly reduced Zonocerus variegatus abundance.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Interactor
- Zonocerus variegatus
.jpg?width=60)
Zonocerus variegatuse0pest - Outcome
- Zonocerus variegatuse0
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Zonocerus variegatus (p = 0.02)”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Extracts significantly reduced Jacobiasca lybica abundance.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Interactor
- Jacobiasca lybica
Jacobiasca lybicae0pest - Outcome
- Jacobiasca lybicae0
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Jacobiasca lybica (p = 0.009)”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Chemical treatment gave Podagrica abundance of 40±10.2.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Treatment
- Chemical treatmente0
- Interactor
- Podagrica decoloratae0pest
- Outcome
- Podagrica decoloratae0
- Value
- 40±10.2e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Chemical treatment was effective on Podagrica decolorata with an average abundance of 40±10.2”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Hyptis suaveolens hydroethanolic treatment gave Podagrica abundance of 43.3±15.4.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Treatment
- hydroetanolic treatment of Hyptis suaveolense0
- Outcome
- hydroetanolic treatment of Hyptis suaveolense0
- Value
- 43.3±15.4e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“hydroetanolic treatment of Hyptis suaveolens (43.3±15.4)”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Azadirachta plus Solanum extract gave Amrasca abundance of 39.7±3.2.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Treatment
- hydro-anolic extract of the Azadirachta indica + Solanum lycopersicum combinatione0
- Interactor
- Amrasca biguttulaAmrasca biguttulae0pest
- Outcome
- Amrasca biguttulae0
- Value
- 39.7±3.2e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“On Amrasca biguttula, the hydro-anolic extract of the Azadirachta indica + Solanum lycopersicum combination was effective with an average abundance of 39.7±3.2”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Chemical treatment gave Jacobiasca abundance of 18±6.2.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Treatment
- chemical treatmente0
- Interactor
- Jacobiasca lybicaJacobiasca lybicae0pest
- Outcome
- Jacobiasca lybicae0
- Direction
- more effectivee0
- Value
- 18±6.2e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“On Jacobiasca lybica, the chemical treatment was more effective (18±6.2)”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Azadirachta treatment gave Jacobiasca abundance of 27±2.1.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Treatment
- hydroethanolic treatments of Azadirachta indicae0
- Outcome
- hydroethanolic treatments of Azadirachta indicae0
- Value
- 27±2.1e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“hydroethanolic treatments of Azadirachta indica (27±2.1)”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Hyptis treatment gave Jacobiasca abundance of 29±6.2.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Treatment
- Hyptis suaveolense0
- Outcome
- Hyptis suaveolense0
- Value
- 29±6.2e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Hyptis suaveolens (29±6.2)”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Aqueous Hyptis extract reduced Zonocerus abundance to 3.7±4.6.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Treatment
- aqueous extract of Hyptis suaveolense0
- Interactor
- Zonocerus variegatusZonocerus variegatuse0pest
- Outcome
- abundance of Zonocerus variegatuse0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 3.7±4.6e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The aqueous extract of Hyptis suaveolens considerably reduced the abundance of Zonocerus variegatus (3.7±4.6)”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Chemical treatment gave Zonocerus abundance of 3.5±5.7.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Treatment
- chemical treatmente0
- Outcome
- chemical treatmente0
- Value
- 3.5±5.7e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“chemical treatment (3.5±5.7)”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Extracts did not differ significantly from chemical control.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Treatment
- these extractse0
- Outcome
- differencee0
- Direction
- no significant differencee0
- Comparator
- chemical controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no significant difference was observed between these extracts and the chemical control (p > 0.05)”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Chemical treatment yielded an average 131.83±45.6 fruits.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Treatment
- chemically treated plote0
- Outcome
- number of fruitse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 131.83±45.6e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“a higher average number of fruits (131.83±45.6) in the chemically treated plot”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Hyptis plus Solanum hydroethanol treatment yielded 128.83±15.2 fruits.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Treatment
- hydroethanol extract of Hyptis suaveolens and Solanum lycopersicume0
- Outcome
- plot treatede0
- Value
- 128.83±15.2e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“plot treated with the hydroethanol extract of Hyptis suaveolens and Solanum lycopersicum (128.83±15.2)”
e1“Hiré and Clemson okra varieties”
The same questions in other papers
Azadirachta indica · organism · Abelmoschus esculentus (okra)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
botanical · pest · Abelmoschus esculentus (okra)Positive and negative results
50 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
51 papers more in this group
See all 55 papers →botanical · Amrasca biguttula · Abelmoschus esculentus (okra)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- 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.