Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-59b7f5684b-qn7h5 Total loading time: 0.405 Render date: 2022-09-27T04:00:10.589Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": false, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

Participatory evaluation of synthetic and botanical pesticide mixtures for cotton bollworm control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2006

A.A.C. Sinzogan*
Affiliation:
Faculté des Sciences Agronomiques, Université d'Abomey Calavi, 01BP 526, Cotonou, Benin Laboratory of Entomology, PO Box 8031, 6700 EH, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands
D.K. Kossou
Affiliation:
Faculté des Sciences Agronomiques, Université d'Abomey Calavi, 01BP 526, Cotonou, Benin
P. Atachi
Affiliation:
Faculté des Sciences Agronomiques, Université d'Abomey Calavi, 01BP 526, Cotonou, Benin
A. van Huis
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Entomology, PO Box 8031, 6700 EH, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands
*

Abstract

The bioefficacy of various plant extracts, namely Azadirachta indica A. Juss, Khaya senegalensis Desrousseaux (A. Jussieu) and Hyptis suavuolens (L.) Poit, either alone or in combination with half the recommended dose of synthetic pesticides, was studied with farmers to find a more sustainable strategy for the management of bollworms in cotton. A number of treatments were farmer innovations. The treatments were compared six times during the season to the application of the fully recommended dose of synthetic pesticides and to a control with no pesticide application. Applications of either the fully recommended dose of the synthetic pesticides or the combinations with a neem seed extract (6 kg/ha) were most effective in reducing bollworm incidence and damage. Both the treatments gave the highest yields of cottonseed, the latter being the most cost-effective. All the pesticides used, except neem alone, had a toxic effect on bollworm predators. This study has increased farmers' confidence in endogenous technology. The researcher's interaction among the local learning group members, who conducted the experiments, facilitated the introduction of a cost-effective alternative to the standard full-dose synthetic pesticide recommendation.

Dans le but de trouver une méthode de lutte durable contre les chenilles ravageuses du cotonnier, I’efficacité biologique de différents extraits de plantes (Azadirachta indica, Kaya senegalensis et Hyptis suavolens) a été évaluée, en milieu paysan, seule ou en association avec des demi-doses d'insecticides de synthèse. Certains des traitements sont le résultat d'innovations paysannes. Les traitements ont été comparés six fois au cours de la saison culturale à des applications normales d'insecticides ou la combinaison de synthèse et á des traitements témoins. Les traitements, avec des doses normales d'insecticides ou la combinaison de I'extrait de graine de neem (6 kg/ha) associé à une demi-dose d'insecticides de sysynthèse, ont été les plus efficaces pour réduire la densité des chenilles et leurs dégâts. Ces deux traitements ont donné les meilleurs rendements avec un ratio coût/bénéfice plus avantageux pour la mixture insecticide de synthése-exrait de graine de neem. Tous les insecticides utilisés à I'exception de I'extrait de neem utilisé seul, ont eu un effet toxique sur les prédateurs des ravageurs du cotonnier. Cette étude accroît la confiance des fermiers dans les locales. L'interaction entre le chercheur et les actuers locaux, qui ont participé à l'étude, a innovations facilité I'introduction d'une méthode alternative plus économique que le programme standard d' insecticides de synthèse recommandés.

Type
Research Paper
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ascher, K. R. S., Meisner, J. and Klein, M. (1996) Efficacy of commercial neem products against lepidopteran pests, leafhoppers and thrips, and improving homemade preparations by adjuvant. A paper presented at the Fifth International Neem Conference, 4–9 February 1996. University of Queensland, Australia.Google Scholar
Bharpoda, T. M., Patel, G. P., Patel, U., Patel, J. J. and Patel, J. R. (2000) Need based control of cotton bollworms with mixtures of synthetic and botanical pesticides. Indian Journal of Plant Protection 28, 7477.Google Scholar
Bruno, M., Togola, M., Téréta, I. and Traoré, N. (1997) La lutte contre les ravageurs du cotonnier au Mali: Problématique et évolution récente. Cahier d'étude et de Recherche 9, 109115.Google Scholar
Cherry, A., Cock, M., Van den Berg, H. and Kfir, R. (2003) Biological control of Helicoverpa armigera in Africa, pp. 329346. In Biological Control in IPM Systems in Africa (Edited by Neuenschwander, P., Borgemeister, C. and Langewald, J.). CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
CRA-CF (2003) Projet d' amélioration et de diversification des systémes d' exploitation. Volet Lutte Etagée ciblée – coton, Centre de Recherche Agricole Coton et Fibres, Cotonu, Benin. 12 pp..Google Scholar
Dhawan, A. K. and Simwat, G. S. (1993) Field evaluation of some botanical pesticides alone or in combination with other pesticides for management of bollworms complex on cotton, pp. 484491. In Neem and Environment (Edited by Singh, R. P., Chari, M. S., Raheja, A. K. and Krauss, W.). Oxford and IBH publishing, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Gahukar, R. T. (2000) Use of neem products/pesticides in cotton pest management. International Journal of Pest Management 46, 149–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gupta, G. P. and Sharma, K. (1997) Neem based pest management strategy in cotton system. Pesticide Research Journal 9, 190197.Google Scholar
INRAB, (2002) Principaux ravageurs et maladies du cotonnier au Bénin. Institut National de Recherches Agricoles au Bénin. Cotonou, Bénin. pp. 24.Google Scholar
Jeyakumar, P. and Gupta, G. P. (2002) Utilisation of neem and Bt for managing bollworms in cotton. Indian Journal of Entomology 64, 424433.Google Scholar
Kossou, K. D., Gbèhounou, G., Bouraïma, Y., van Huis, A., Ahanchedé, A., Ahohuendo, B. and Bokonon-Ganta, A. H. (2001) Extrait aqueux de Hyptis suaveolens, plante nouvellement identifiée au Bénin pour le contrôle des insectes nuisibles de niébé. Poster présenté aux journées scientifiques de l'Université d'Abomey Calavi 10 au 13 octobre 2001.Google Scholar
Ma, D. L., Gordh, G. and Zalucki, M. P. (2000) Toxicity of bio rational pesticides to Helicoverpa spp. (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and predators in cotton field. International Journal of Pest Management 46, 237240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansour, A., Ascher, K. R. S. and Omari, N. (1986) Toxicity of neem (Azadirachta indica) seed kernel extracts prepared with different solvents on the spider, Chiranthium mildei. Phytoparasitica 14, 73–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, T., Ochou, G. O., Hala, N. F., Vassal, J. M. and Vaissayre, M. (2000) Pyrethroid resistance in the cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner), in West Africa. Pest Management Science 56, 549554.3.0.CO;2-Y>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, G. A. (Ed.) (1989) Cotton Insects Pests and Their Management. Longman Singapore Publisher (Pte) Ltd, 192 pp.Google Scholar
Meir, C. (1999) Natural crop protection techniques, pp. 267282. In Protection Naturelle des Végétaux en Zones Tropicales. Vers une Dynamique de l'Information (Edited by Stoll, G.). Margraf Verlag, Germany.Google Scholar
Meir, C. and Williamson, S. (2005) Farmer decision-making and ecological pest management, pp. 83–96. In The Pesticide Detox: Solutions for Safe Agriculture (Edited by Pretty, J.). Earthscan, London.Google Scholar
Morse, S. and Buhler, W. (1997) IPM in developing countries: The danger of an ideal. Integrated Pest Management Reviews 2, 175–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MSU (2003) Cotton Insect Scouting Methods. Mississippi State University Extension, Mississippi, USA. 1 pp.Google Scholar
Murray, K. D., Alford, A. R., Groden, E., Drummond, F. A., Storch, R. H., Bentley, M. D. and Sugatapala, P. M. (1993) Interactive effects of an antifeedant used with Bacillus thuringiensis var. delta endotoxin on Colorado potato beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 86, 17931801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Natarajan, K. (1990) Natural enemies of Bemisia tabaci Gennadius and effect of pesticides on their activity. Journal of Biological Control 4, 8688.Google Scholar
OBEPAB, (2002) Organic Spray Ingredients for Cotton Production in Benin. Organisation Beninoise de la Promotion de l'Agriculture Biologique. Cotonou, Benin. 20 pp.Google Scholar
Ochou, G. O. and Martin, T. (2002) Pyrethroïd resistance in Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner): Recent developments and prospects for its management in Côte d'Ivoire, West Africa. Resistant Pest Management Newsletter 12, 1.Google Scholar
PAN, (2000) Learning to Cut the Chemicals in Cotton. Pesticide Action Network UK, Eurolink Centre, London. 91 pp.Google Scholar
Patel, M. C. and Vyas, R. N. (2000) Field bioefficacy of Bacillus thuringiensis var kurstaki and neem based formulation against cotton bollworms. Indian Journal of Plant Protection 28, 78–83.Google Scholar
Raja, N., Jeyasankar, A. and Jeyakumar, S. (2005) Efficacy of Hyptis suaveolens against lepidopteran pests. Scientific correspondence in Current Science 88, 220222.Google Scholar
Rawale, B. N., Kausale, P. P., Munde, A. T., Kedar, P. B., Sonkamble, M. M. and Waghmode, D. B. (2002) Efficacy of pesticides and neem seed extract against cotton bollworms on NHH-44. Journal of Soils and Crops 12, 75–77.Google Scholar
Reddy, G. V. P. and Manjunatha, M. (2000) Laboratory and field studies on the integrated pest management of Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) in cotton, based on pheromone trap catch threshold level. Journal of Applied Entomology 124, 213221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuthiravelu, and David, B. V. (1990) Bioefficacy of neem oil and deltamethrin against spotted bollworm Earias vitella (Fab.) on cotton (MCU-5). Madras Agriculture Journal 77, 294298.Google Scholar
Sarode, S. V., Chaudhary, A. E. and Sonalkar, V. U. (2000) Evaluation of neem products against cotton bollworms complex. Journal of Entomological Research 24, 319332.Google Scholar
Schmutterer, H. (1990) Properties and potential of natural pesticides from the neem tree, Azadirachta indica. Annual Review of Entomology 35, 271290.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmutterer, H. (Ed.) (1995) The Neem Tree. VCH-Verlagsgesllschaft, Weiheim, Germany.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schouwbroeck, F. (1999) Learning to fight a fly: Developing citrus IPM in Bhutan. PhD thesis. Wageningen Agricultural University, Wageningen. 200 pp.Google Scholar
Silvie, P., Deguine, J. P., Nibouche, S., Michel, B. and Vaissayre, M. (2001) Potential of threshold-based interventions for cotton pest control by small farmers in West Africa. Crop Protection 20, 297301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinzogan, A. C., van Huis, A., Kossou, D. K., Jiggins, J. and Vodouhè, S. (2004) Participatory diagnosis of production constraints and opportunities of cotton farmers in Bénin. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 52, 285304.Google Scholar
Sinzogan, A. C., Jiggins, J., Vodouhè, S., Kossou, D. K., Totin, E. and van Huis, A. (2007) Cotton industry institutional linkages in Benin: Stakeholder analysis and actor perspectives. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability (in press).Google Scholar
Spollen, K. M. and Isman, M. B. (1996) Acute and sublethal effects of a neem pesticide on the commercial biological control agents, Phytoseiulus persimilis and Amblyseius cucumeris (Acari: Phytoseiidae) and Aphidoletes aphidimyza (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 89, 13791386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoll, G. (Ed.) (2002) Protection Naturelle des Végétaux en Zones Tropicales. Vers une Dynamique de l'Information. Margraf Verlag, Germany. 327 pp.Google Scholar
Strud, A. and Kirkby, R. (2000) FSR in technology choice and development: the application of FSR to technology development, pp. 95–112. In A History of Farming Systems Research (Edited by Collinson, M.). CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sumberg, J. and Okali, C. (1997) Farmers' Experiments: Creating Local Knowledge. Lynne Rienner, Boulder Colorado and London, UK.Google Scholar
Ton, P. (2001) Cotton Production and Rural Livelihoods in West Africa Occasional Papers, no. 219. ENDA, Dakar, Senegal.Google Scholar
Ton, P. (2002) Organic Cotton Production in Sub-Saharan Africa. PAN UK, Pesticides, Policy and Livelihoods Series.Google Scholar
Ton, P., Tovignan, S. and Vodouhe, S. D. (2000) Endosulfan deaths and poisoning in Benin. Pesticides Use 47, 12–14.Google Scholar
Trisiyono, A. and Whalon, M. E. (1999) Toxicity of neem applied alone and in combinations with Bacillus thuringiensis on Colorado potato beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 92, 12811288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van den Berg, H. (1993) Natural control of Helicoverpa armigera in smallholder crops in East Africa. PhD thesis, Wageningen Agricultural University, Wageningen. 223 pp.Google Scholar
Van den Berg, H. and Cock, M. J. W. (Eds) (1993) African Bollworm and Its Natural Enemies. International Institute of Biological Control-Kenya Station (an Institute of CAB International). 51 pp.Google Scholar
Van de Veire, M., Smagghe, G. and Deghede, D. (1996) Laboratory test method to evaluate the effect of 31 pesticides on the predatory bug, Orius laevigatus (Het.: Anthocoridae). Entomophaga 41, 235–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Huis, A. and Meerman, F. (1997) Can we make IPM work for resource-poor farmers in sub-Saharan Africa? International Journal of Pest Management 43, 313320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wazunj, A. R., Mote, U. N., Desai, A. C. and Parikh, K. M. (1996) Evaluation of ZA 199: A new neem based pesticide against bollworm complex of cotton. Pestology 20, 26–28.Google Scholar
Williamson, S., Ferrigno, S. and Vodouhe, S. D. (2005) Needs-based decision-making for cotton problems in Africa: a response to Hillocks. International Journal of Pest Management 51, 219–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Youdeowei, A. (2001) Cotton sector reform program (CSRP). Pest management plans for cotton production in Benin. World Bank/FAO. 61 pp.Google Scholar

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Participatory evaluation of synthetic and botanical pesticide mixtures for cotton bollworm control
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Participatory evaluation of synthetic and botanical pesticide mixtures for cotton bollworm control
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Participatory evaluation of synthetic and botanical pesticide mixtures for cotton bollworm control
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *