IJOEAR-MAY-2017-9

Views:
 
     
 

Presentation Description

Biotermiticides to Protect the Soil Health

Comments

Presentation Transcript

slide 1:

International Journal of Environmental Agriculture Research IJOEAR ISSN:2454-1850 Vol-3 Issue-5 May- 2017 Page | 73 Biotermiticides to Protect the Soil Health K. J. Kamble 1 Thakor N. J. 2 Deptartment of Agricultural Process Engineering CAET Dr.BSKKV Dapoli Abstract— Chemical termiticides are hazardous to biotic and abiotic factors in the environment and hence banned in US and European countries but are still in use in developing countries. They are applied in huge quantity reaching to potable water ways food and fodder and killing soil microbiological components. It has been observed from the study that these hazardous termiticides can be replaced by ecofriendly and cheap Biotermiticides made from the plant based oils. Four tree borne oils CNSL50-100 Neemseed oil10-25 Karanj seed oil10-25 and Markingnut oil10-25 and three chemicals Chlorpyrifos10-50 Coppernaphthenate10-50 and Boric acid10-50 were used in different proportions to formulate CNSL based termiticides. Specimen samples were treated and exposed to termites for 60 days. The mass loss after 60 days was noted and results were analyzed. Chlorpyrifos and Coppernaphthenate 100 have shown better termite control property than boric acid. Commercial termiticides their own might be effective against termite but except Chlorpyrifos and other two have shown not much promising results in CNSL based formulation when compared with the oil formulations. It was observed that CNSL50-80 + NO 10-25 + BSL10-25 and CNSL50-80 + NO10-25 + KO10-25 formulations can act as an effective termiticides. All four oils if used 100 have shown good resistant against termites. Keywords— CNSL- Cashew nut shell liquid NO- Neemseed oil KO- Karanj oil BSL- Bhilawan shell liquid. I. INTRODUCTION Termites are a group of eusocial insects of infraorder Isoptera or as epifamiliy Termitoidae within the cockroach order Blattodea Beccaloni and Paul 2013. They are of four groups: dampwood living and feeding in very moist wood drywood termites do not require contact with moisture or soil and subterranean termites live and breed in soil and arboreal/mound builders. Termite mounds are commonly found in Africa Australia Southeast Asia and parts of South America Krishna 1969 Inward et al. 2007. They are polymorphic living in colonies comprising reproductives king queen soldiers and workers called castes. The queen in ‘Royal Chamber’ is very much bigger than the king and is capable of laying eggs at the rate of 36000 a day for as long as 50 years. Single subterranean termite colony may contain millions of workers and may forage a distance of up to 100 m 2 . Su Scheffrahn 1988. Termites help in aeration of the soil due to burrowing activities the breakdown and release of organic matter as termites eat and digest soil improvement of soil fertility when termite mounds which are rich in minerals are crushed down and incorporated into the soil as a source of minerals for cattle who lick the mounds and as a source of protein rich food for many organisms including ants guinea fowl and other mammals including humans HDRA 2001. It is also observed that termite in its natural environment improve soil pH organic carbon content water content and porosity by recycling dead organics Abdel and Skai 2011. Although there are some benefits of termites in soil reclamation but they are often called the “Silent Destroyer” as they may be secretly hiding and thriving in homes without any immediate signs of damage. About 10 of species of the termite are economically significant as pests and consume cellulose-based plant materials and destroy valuable property documents furniture and furnishings anything that contains cellulose silently and swiftly before becoming aware of the damage done. Termites also cause damage to living trees crop plants wooden electric poles railway sleepers telephone and electrical cables etc. Krishna and Weesner 1970 Pardeshi et al. 2010 Mitchell 2003 Ogedegbe and Eloka 2015. The economic losses associated with termite damage for Malaysia India Australia China Japan and the United States are 10 35 100 375 800 and 1000 million US dollars respectively Abdel and Skai 2011. In Indian region about 35 species have been reported to damage about 10-25 agricultural crops and timber in buildings Rajgopal 2002. It is observed that due to termite attack on wheat paddy cotton sugarcane groundnut in Punjab Rajasthan Delhi Uttar Pradesh Andhra Pradesh Bihar and Gujarat Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra faced major loss in crop production Patel and Patel 1954

slide 2:

International Journal of Environmental Agriculture Research IJOEAR ISSN:2454-1850 Vol-3 Issue-5 May- 2017 Page | 74 Chhotani 1980 Verma et al. 2009. As many as 13 species of termite are reported to cause 30-60 destruction of buds of sugarcane in India Roonwal 1981 and are responsible for plant mortality 5-50 and pod damage 46 in groundnut Rajgopal 2002. Not only crops and wood but the cash ornaments and saving documents kept in banks have been found attacked by termite in India Indian Express News 22 Apr 2016 TNN. Apr 5 2008. Chemical termiticides used to control the termite include liquid termiticides termite baits building materials impregnated with termiticides and wood treatments. Chemical treatments on broad base can be of two types repellent termiticide and non- repellent termiticide. These chemicals do not kill the termites they simply deter them from entering the treated soil and building tunnels. Ex. Cypernethrin Bifenthrin Fenitrothion Permethrin and Fenvalerate Chlorpyrifos. Non-repellent chemicals do not prevent termites from tunneling they only kill the termites upon ingestion or contact. An example is imidacloprid Aldrin Heptachlor Chlordane Coppernaphthenate Boric acid etc. Grace et al.1993 reported that the toxicity of aldrin chlordane DDT dieldrin and heptachlor was observed 17202428 and 33years after treatment in Hawaii. These are applied in huge quantity in soil or poured in mounds to destroy it. These chemicals are very toxic to all the biotic factors in soil and on the earth leading to hazardous effects and diseases. This may is one of the threats to the human existence on the earth through soil pollution. It is necessary to search the alternative safe termiticides to the commercial hazardous chemicals damaging soil health and ultimately the environment as a whole. Therefore the study was undertaken in the College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology DBSKKV Dapoli on “Development of Cashew nut shell liquid based termiticide’. The main objective of study was developing and testing cashew nut shell liquid based termiticide by using Neemseed oil Karanj seed oil and Markingnut shell oil in different proportions and field tested for termite response. II. MATERIALS AND METHODS In this study four tree borne oils Cashew nut shell liquid CNSL Neemseed oil Karanj seed oil and Markingnut oilBSL and three chemicals Boric acid Chlorpyrifos and Coppernaphthenate were used in different proportions Table 1. Treatment detail is shown in Table 2 and Table 3. Wood specimens 30cm long and 2.5cm diameter of Giripushpa Gliricidia sepium were dried and weighed before the subsequent treatment. As per the treatments CNSL based oil and chemical formulations were made. Then dry weighed specimens were treated with both the formulations by surface area application and dipping into the solution up to 10cm and room dried for 24 hrs. Then specimens were again weighed to know the percent weight of termiticide absorbed by the surface area of each wood sample. The detail experimental design of the present investigation is as shown in fig.1. Treated specimen samples were placed in the mound holes 10cm deep by breaking mound soil cap and exposed to termites up to 60 days. TABLE 1 TREATMENT DETAILS OF THE EXPERIMENT 1 Experiment—I Oil Formulation Material Levels CNSL 50607080100 Neemseed Oil 10 15 2025100 Karanj seed Oil 10 15 2025100 BSL 10 15 2025100 2 Experiment-II Chemical Formulation with CNSL Material Levels CNSL 5060708090100 Chlorpyriphos 1020304050100 Coppernaphthanate 1020304050100 Boric acid 1020304050100

slide 3:

International Journal of Environmental Agriculture Research IJOEAR ISSN:2454-1850 Vol-3 Issue-5 May- 2017 Page | 75 TABLE 2 TREATMENT COMBINATION FOR OIL FORMULATION Sr. No. Treatment Oils CNSL Neem oil Karanj oil BSL 1 TO 1 100 0 0 0 2 TO 2 0 100 0 0 3 TO 3 0 0 100 0 4 TO 4 0 0 0 100 5 TO 5 80 10 10 0 6 TO 6 80 10 0 10 7 TO 7 80 0 10 10 8 TO 8 70 15 15 0 9 TO 9 70 15 0 15 10 TO 10 70 0 15 15 11 TO 11 60 20 20 0 12 TO 12 60 20 0 20 13 TO 13 60 0 20 20 14 TO 14 50 25 25 0 15 TO 15 50 25 0 25 16 TO 16 50 0 25 25 17 TO 17 Control 0 0 0 0 TO- Treatment of oil formulation TABLE 3 TREATMENT COMBINATION FOR CHEMICAL FORMULATION WITH CNSL. Sr. No. Treatment CNSL Chlorpyrifos Coppernaphthanate Boric acid 1 TC 1 100 0 0 0 2 TC 2 0 100 0 0 3 TC 3 0 0 100 0 4 TC 4 0 0 0 100 5 TC 5 90 10 0 0 6 TC 6 90 0 10 0 7 TC 7 90 0 0 10 8 TC 8 80 20 0 0 9 TC 9 80 0 20 0 10 TC 10 80 0 0 20 11 TC 11 70 30 0 0 12 TC 12 70 0 30 0 13 TC 13 70 0 0 30 14 TC 14 60 40 0 0 15 TC 15 60 0 40 0 16 TC 16 60 0 0 40 17 TC 17 50 50 0 0 18 TC 18 50 0 50 0 19 TC 19 50 0 0 50 20 TC 20 Control 0 0 0 0 TC - Treatment of chemical formulation with CNSL

slide 4:

International Journal of Environmental Agriculture Research IJOEAR ISSN:2454-1850 Vol-3 Issue-5 May- 2017 Page | 76 Oil Formulation Chemical Formulation with CNSL Oils - 4 Types  CNSL  Neemseed oil  Karanj oil  BSL Oil 1 + Chemicals 3  CNSL  Chlorpyriphos  Coppernaphthanate  Boric acid Formulation Levels - 5 Formulation Levels - 6 Treatments – 17Table 5 Treatments – 20Table 6 Testing Testing FT60days LT20days FT60days LT20days SA DI SA DI SA DI SA DI Mass loss Mass loss Mass loss Mass loss Termite Infestation Termite Mortality Termite Infestation Termite Mortality FT - Field Test LT - Laboratory Test SA - Surface area application DI - Dipping into solution FIG.1 FLOW DIAGRAM OF EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN. After 60 days wood specimens were removed from the termite mounds and weighed to know the mass loss by termite attack which was calculated as below. Mass loss ML The termite attack to the specimen samples placed on the mound will be quantified by calculating the weight after 60 days. X 100 1 Where M 1 and M 2 are initial before exposure and final after exposure weight g of the wood sample EN 118 2005.

slide 5:

International Journal of Environmental Agriculture Research IJOEAR ISSN:2454-1850 Vol-3 Issue-5 May- 2017 Page | 77 TABLE 4 MASS LOSS OBSERVED IN OIL FORMULATION TREATMENTS Sr. No. Treatment CNSL:NO:KO:BSL Surface Application Dipping Wt.Loss Wt.Loss T1 100:0:0:0 5.37 3.46 T2 0:100:0:0 0.00 4.44 T3 0:0:100:0 0.00 0.00 T4 0:0:0:100 5.90 3.56 T5 80:10:10:0 0.00 0.000 T6 80:10:0:10 0.00 0.000 T7 80:0:10:10 10.16 6.21 T8 70:15:15:0 0.00 0.00 T9 70:15:0:15 0.00 0.00 T10 70:0:15:15 7.56 4.23 T11 60:20:20:0 0.00 0.00 T12 60:20:0:20 0.00 0.00 T13 60:0:20:20 5.07 0.00 T14 50:25:25:0 0.00 0.000 T15 50:25:0:25 4.44 0.00 T16 50:0:25:25 0.00 2.69 T17 0 19.94 38.94 III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In the oil formulation experiment from surface application treatments it was observed that specimens of T 2 T 3 T 5 T 6 T 8 T 9 T 11 T 12 T 14 T 16 were not attacked by termite where as among rest of the treatments specimens of T 7 was attacked causing highest mass loss 10.16 and in treatment T 15 it was lowest i.e 4.44 as against control treatment T 17 in which the mass loss was 19.94. In the same experiment with specimens dipping in formulation specimens of treatments T 3 T 5 T 6 T 8 T 9 T 11 T 12 T 13 T 14 T 15 were not attacked by termite whereas among rest of the treatments specimens of T 7 was attacked causing highest mass loss 6.2 and in treatment T 16 it was lowest i.e. 2.69 as against control treatment T 17 in which the mass loss was 38.94. The results indicate that synergistic effect of oils in treatments CNSL +Neemseed oil + Karanj oil and CNSL +Neemseed oil + BSL has positive effect on termite control in both surface application and dipping treatments of oil formulation experiment. It is clear that presence of Neemseed oil with CNSL stands more effective against termite attack. In the chemical formulation experiment from surface application treatments it was observed that specimens of T 2 T 5 T 8 T 10 T 11 T 17 were not attacked by termite where as among rest of the treatments specimens of T 4 was attacked causing highest mass loss 79.13 and in treatment T 3 it was lowest i.e 4.43 as against control treatment T 20 in which the mass loss was 85.40. In the same experiment with specimens dipping in formulation specimens of treatments T 2 T 3 T 8 T 10 T 11 T 12 T 14 T 17 were not attacked by termite whereas among rest of the treatments specimens of T 4 was attacked causing highest mass loss 73.56 and in treatment T 5 it was lowest i.e. 4.84 as against control treatment T 20 in which the mass loss was 87.73. In chemical formulation treatments it is observed that specimens from treatments CNSL with boric acid were highly attacked in comparison to other treatments whereas only one treatment with Chlorpyrifos was attacked by termite may be because of its repellent nature. Boric acid is slow poison it shows its effect after ingestion and hence the specimens treated with it might be attacked more but after effect is unknown. Coppernaphthenate treated specimens were attacked by termite unevenly with increase in its proportion with CNSL it might be because of synergistic effect.

slide 6:

International Journal of Environmental Agriculture Research IJOEAR ISSN:2454-1850 Vol-3 Issue-5 May- 2017 Page | 78 TABLE 5 MASS LOSS IN CHEMICAL FORMULATION TREATMENTS CNSL- Cashew nut shell liquid CF- Chlorpyrifos CN- Coppernaphthenate BA- Boric acid IV. CONCLUSION From the results it can be concluded that Chlorpyrifos and Coppernaphthenate 100 have shown better termite control property than boric acid. Commercial termiticides individually are effective against termite but except Chlorpyrifos other two have shown not much promising results in CNSL based formulation when compared with the oil formulations. It can also be concluded that CNSL 50-80 + NO 10-25 + BSL10-25 and CNSL50-80 + NO10-25 + KO10- 25 formulations can act as an effective termiticide. All four oils if used 100 have shown good resistant against termites. Results of oil formulations are near about and better than the chemical formulations. It is found from this study that a Biotermiticide i.e. Cashew nut shell liquid based oil formulation termiticide has a potential to act as an alternative to the commercial termiticides in the market. Also it will help to reduce the harmful effects and cost required for chemical formulations and to maintain the health of soil microbiology. REFERENCES 1 Abdel G. and S. Edwards 2011. Termite Damage to Buildings: Nature of attacks and preventive construction methods. Am. J. of Engg and Applied Sciences 42: 187-200. 2 Beccaloni George Eggleton Paul. 2013. "Order Blattodea" . ZOOTAXA. Zhang Z.-Q. ed. Animal Biodiversity: An Outline of Higher-level Classification and Survey of Taxonomic RichnessAddenda 2013 1 3703: 46–48. doi:10.11646/zootaxa.3703.1.10. 3 Chhotani O. B. 1980. Termite pests of Agriculture in Indian region and their control. Tech. Monograph. 4: 1-84. 4 HDRA 2001. The organic organization of United Kingdom published a Booklet‘Termite Control’. 5 Indian Express News Ahmedabad Fri22 Apr 2016.Termites eat up Rs. 1 lakh in bank locker. 6 Inward D. G. Beccaloni P. Eggleton. 2007. Death of an order: a comprehensive molecular phylogenetic study confirms that termites are eusocial cockroaches.Royal Society Pub. Biology Letters. .DOI: 10.1098. Sr. No. Treatment CNSL:CF:CN:BA Surface Application Dipping Wt.Loss Wt.Loss T1 100:00:00:00 58.49 35.81 T2 0:100:00:00 0.00 0.00 T3 0:00:100:00 4.43 0.00 T4 0:00:00:100 79.13 73.56 T5 90:10:00:00 0.00 4.84 T6 90:00:10:00 48.62 5.69 T7 90:00:00:10 40.43 9.33 T8 80:20:00:00 0.00 0.00 T9 80:00:20:00 21.09 30.81 T10 80:00:00:20 0.00 0.00 T11 70:30:00:00 0.00 0.00 T12 70:00:30:00 20.84 0.00 T13 70:00:00:30 15.27 5.01 T14 60:40:00:00 0.00 0.00 T15 60:00:40:00 11.63 0.00 T16 60:00:00:40 66.92 47.89 T17 50:50:00:00 0.00 0.00 T18 50:00:50:00 30.65 6.17 T19 50:00:00:50 19.71 40.20 T20 00:00:00:00 85.40 87.73

slide 7:

International Journal of Environmental Agriculture Research IJOEAR ISSN:2454-1850 Vol-3 Issue-5 May- 2017 Page | 79 7 EN 118. 2005. European Committee for Standardization. Wood preservatives- determination of toxic values action against Reticulitermes species European Termites: 17-118. http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/op/chlorpyrifos/efedrra1.pdf. 8 J. K. Grace J. R. Yates M. Tamashiro and R. T. Yamamoto. 1993. Persistence of organochlorine insecticides for Formosan subterranean termiteIsoptera: Rhinotermitidae control in Hawaii. J. Econ. Entomol. 863: 761-766. 9 Krishna K. 1969. Introduction. In Biology of termites. A book edited by K. Krishna and F. M. Weesner 1: 1–17. New York: Academic press xiii + 598 pp. 10 Krishna K. and F. M. Weesner 1970. Taxonomy Phylogeny and Distribution. In: Biology of Termites. Academic Press New York: 643. 11 Michael J. B. D. G. Wujek F. L. Thomas Jr. G. A. Lyon T. Matsumoto A. S. Robertson. 2000.Methods and apparatuses for monitoring or controlling pests Especially Termite. US 6016625 A. 12 Ogedegbe A. B.O. and E. V. Eloka. 2015. Biodiversity of Termites on Farmlands in Local Government Ugoniyekorhionmwon Orhionwmon Area Edo State Nigeria. Int. J. Pure Appl. Sci. Technol. 272: 65-76. 13 Pardeshi M. and B. A. K. Prusty 2010. Termites as ecosystem engineers and potentials for soil restoration. Curr. Sci. 99: 11-11. 14 Patel G.A. H.K. Patel 1954. Seasonal incidence of termite injury in the northern parts of the Bombay State. Indian 1. Entomol. 154 : 376-378. 15 Rajagopal D. 2002. Economically important termite species in India. Sociobiology 40: 33-46. 16 Roonwal M.L. 1981. Termites of Agricultural Importance in India and their Importance. In: Progress in Soil Biology and Ecology in India Veeresh G.K. Ed.. University of Agricultural Science Hebbal Bangalore : 253-265. 17 Su N.Y. and R. H. Scheffrahn. 1988. Foraging population and territory of the Formosan subterranean termite Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae in an urban environment. Sociobiology 14: 353-359. 18 TNN. Apr 5 2008 01.19 AM IST. Tamil Nadu News.Termites eat up cash FDs in bank locker. 19 Varma M. S. Sharma and R. Prasad. 2009. Biological alternatives for termite control: A review. Int. Biodeteriration and Biodegration 63: 959-972. 20 US EPA 2000. Reregistration eligibility science chapter for chlorpyrifos. Fate and environmental risk assessment chapter. 21 U.S. Geological Survey. Circular 1225. Reston VA: USGS 1999. The quality of our nations waters – nutrients and pesticides. http://water.usgs.gov/pubs/circ/circ1225/.

authorStream Live Help