ORIGINAL ARTICLE
 
HIGHLIGHTS
  • Nanotechnology silver whitefly eggplant
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
The normal formulation of etofenprox was developed to nanoformulation and used against the adults of silver whitefly, Bemisia tabaci in eggplant fields. Three concentrations of both the normal and nanoformulations were used. The concentrations of etofenprox nanoformulation were one-fifth of the normal formulation. The nanosize of etofenprox ranged from 225 to 489 nm. The loading capacity of etofenprox was 60.7 ± 5.7%. The obtained results showed that the LC50 of the normal formulation was four times more than the nanoformulation. The LC50 for the nanoformulation was 0.9 and 3.5 ppm for the normal formulation of etofenprox. This means that the nanoformulation of etofenprox was more effective than the normal. The residues of both nano and normal formulations were determined in eggplant fruits after three applications. The obtained results showed that the residue of nanoformulation after 1 hour of treatment was 0.51 ± 0.03 compared with 0.62 ± 0.03 mg · kg–1 ± SD in normal formulation. After 1 hour of treatment the residue of etofenprox was reduced to 0.11 ± 0.1 and 0.22 ± 0.02 mg · kg–1 ± SD in nano and normal formulations, respectively. The dissipation rates of both nano and normal formulations after 1 hour were 78.3 and 64.5%, respectively. The degradation rate (K) in nanoformulation and normal etofenprox was 1.33 and 0.73 mg · kg–1 ± SD, respectively. The residue half-life (LR50) was 0.52 and 1 day, respectively. The preharvest interval (PHI) was 6 days for both nano and normal etofenprox formulations. The results confirmed that nanoetofenprox was more effective against B. tabaci adults, with lower persistence and lower residue than the normal formulation of etofenprox.
RESPONSIBLE EDITOR
Piotr Kaczyński
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have declared that no conflict of interests exist.
 
REFERENCES (25)
1.
Costat S.S. 1990. Microcomputer program analysis version 4.20. Cohort Software, Berkeley.
 
2.
Deka B., Babu A., Baruah C., Barthakur M. 2021. Nanopesticides: A systematic review of their prospects with special reference to tea pest management. Frontiers in Nutrition 8: 686131. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2....
 
3.
Demir E. 2020. Drosophila as a model for assessing nanopesticide toxicity. Nanotoxicology 14 (9): 1271–1279. DOI: 10.1080/17435390.2020.1815886.
 
4.
Hasan I., Rasul S., Malik T.H., Qureshi M.K., Aslam K., Shabir G., Athar H., Manzoor H. 2019. Present status of cotton leaf curl virus disease (CLCUVD): A major threat to cotton production. International Journal of Cotton Research Technology 1:1–13.
 
5.
He Q., Zhang H., Li L.X., Zhou X.T., Li J.P. Kan C.Y. 2017. Preparation and properties of lambda-cyhalothrin/polyurethane drug-loaded nanoemulsions. Royal Society of Chemistry 7: 52684–52693. DOI: 10.1039/C7RA10640H.
 
6.
Henderson C.F., Tilton E.W. 1955. Tests with acaricides against the brow wheat mite. Journal of Economic Entomology 48: 157–161.
 
7.
Hirano K., Budiyanto E., Swastika N., Fujii, K. 1995. Population dynamics of the whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae), in Java, Indonesia, with special reference to spatiotemporal changes in the quantify of food resources. Ecological Research, Carlton South, 10: 7585.
 
8.
Hwang K.W., Bang W.S., Jo H.W., Moon J.K. 2015. Dissipation and removal of the etofenprox residue during processing in spring onion. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 63 (30): 6675–6680.
 
9.
Lee H, Im MH. 2021. Residual characteristics of etofenprox in the processing stages of rice cakes and cookies. PLoS One 16 (8): e0255751. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255751.
 
10.
Lehotay S.J., Son K.A., Kwon H., Koesukwiwat U., Fu W., Mastovska K., Hoh E., Leepipatpiboon N. 2010. Comparison of QuEChERS sample preparation methods for the analysis of pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables. Journal Chromatography A 1217 (16): 2548–2560. DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2010.01.044.
 
11.
Malhat F., Abdallah H., Nasr I. 2012. Estimation of etofenprox residues in tomato fruits by QuEChERS methodology and HPLC–DAD. Bulletin Environment and Contamination Toxicology 88: 891–893. DOI: 10.1007/s00128-012-0627-6.
 
12.
Mohd A., Kumar N.K., Rajesh K., Madhuban G., Chitra S., Weqar S. 2017. Development and evaluation of chitosan-sodium alginate based etofenprox as nanopesticide. Advanced Science, Engineering and Medicine 9 (2): 137–143.
 
13.
Moye H.A., Malagodi M.H., Yoh J., Leibee G.L., Ku C.C., Wislocki P.G. 1987. Residues of avermectin B1a rotational crop and soils following soil treatment with (14C) avermectin B1a. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry 35: 859–864.
 
14.
Palumbo J.C, Horowitz A.R, Prabhaker N. 2001. Insecticidal control and resistance management for Bemisia tabaci. Crop Protection 20 (9): 739–765. DOI: 10.1016/S0261-2194(01)00117-X.
 
15.
Sabry K.H., Salem L.M., Ali N.I., Ahmed S.S.D. 2018. Genotoxic effect of flonicamid and etofenprox on mice. Bioscience Research 15 (3): 2295–2303.
 
16.
Sabry K.H., Hussein M.A. 2002. Evaluation of conventional and nanoformulations of some pesticides against the adults of chocolate banded snail, Eobania vermiculata (O.F. Müller, 1774). Egyptian Journal Chemistry 65 10: 625–629. DOI: 10.21608/ejchem.2022.114534.5229.
 
17.
Sani I., Ismail S.I., Abdullah S., Jalinas J., Jamian S., Saad N. 2020. A review of the biology and control of whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae), with special reference to biological control using entomopathogenic fungi. Insects 11 (9): 619. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/insect... 11090619.
 
18.
Shahid M., Naeem-Ullah U., Khan W.S., Saeed S, Razzaq K. 2022. Biocidal activity of green synthesized silver nanoformulation by Azadirachta indica extract a biorational approach against notorious cotton pest whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera; Aleyrodidae). International Journal of Tropical Insect Science 42: 2443–2454. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42690....
 
19.
Shanmugapriya S., Jeya S.S.D., Karthikeyan G., Subramanian K.S. 2019. Bioassay of azadirachtin nanoformulation against Bemisia tabaci, the vector of mungbean yellow mosaic virus. Madras Agricultural Journal 106 (7–9): 522–527. DOI: 10.29321/MAJ 2019.000293.
 
20.
Timme G., Frehse H. 1980. Statistical interpretation and graphic representation of the degradation behavior of pesticide residues. Pflanzenschutz-Nachrichten Bayer 33: 47–60.
 
21.
Touhidul I.M., Shunxiang R. 2009. Effect of sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) infestation on eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) leaf. Journal of Pest Science 82: 211–215. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340....
 
22.
Vaezifar S., Razavi S., Golozar M.A., Karbasi S., Morshed M., Kamali M. 2013. Effects of some parameters on particle size distribution of chitosan nanoparticles prepared by ionic gelation method. Journal of Cluster Science 24: 891–903.
 
23.
Wang F., Liu J., Chen P., Li H.Y., Ma J.J., Liu Y.J., Wang K. 2020. Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) insecticide resistance in Shandong Province, China. Journal of Economic Entomology 113 (2): 911–917. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/to....
 
24.
Watanabe E., Baba K. 2015. Highly sensitive quantification of pyrethroid insecticide etofenprox in vegetables with highperformance liquid chromatography and fluorescence detection. Journal of Chromatography A. 13 (1385): 35–41.
 
25.
Zaki S.F.A., Mukhtar M., Pandit A., Murtaza I., Nazir N., Hakeem K. 2019. A critical study of reduced pesticide application rates of nano-deltamethrin in comparison to its conventional analogue against Trialeurodes vaporariorum. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies 7 (2): 969–974.
 
eISSN:1899-007X
ISSN:1427-4345
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top