Next Article in Journal
A Comparative Review of Six Invasive Nassella Species in Australia with Implications for Their Management
Previous Article in Journal
Metabolic Alterations in Pisum sativum Roots during Plant Growth and Arbuscular Mycorrhiza Development
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Bioacaricidal Potential of Moringa oleifera Ethanol Extract for Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux (Acari: Tetranychidae) Control

1
Faculty of Agronomy and Veterinary, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, Soledad de Graciano Sánchez 78321, San Luis Potosí, Mexico
2
Faculty of Chemical Science, Universidad Autónoma de Coahuila, Saltillo 25280, Coahuila, Mexico
3
Faculty of Business and Engineering San Quintín, Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, San Quintín 22930, Baja California, Mexico
4
Parasitology Department, Universidad Autónoma Agraria Antonio Narro, Saltillo 25315, Coahuila, Mexico
5
Institute of Applied Ecology, Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas, Victoria City 87019, Tamaulipas, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2021, 10(6), 1034; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10061034
Submission received: 25 April 2021 / Revised: 12 May 2021 / Accepted: 20 May 2021 / Published: 21 May 2021

Abstract

:
The Tetranychidae family includes mites causing severe damage to agricultural fields. The red spider mite, Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux (Acari: Tetranychidae), causes severe damage to several plant species grown as cash crops. Current red spider mite control depends mainly on chemical insecticides. There is a need for alternate control measures that are environmentally friendlier than chemical pesticides. The aim of the study was to assess the effects of Moringa oleifera leaf ethanolic extract at different concentrations (0.1, 0.5, 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20% (v/v)) against T. merganser females. Such effects can serve as a basis to include this compound in integrated pest management programs for the control of red spider mites. Mites treated with 20% (v/v) killed 86.67%, 13.70%, and 96.30% at 24, 48, and 72 h, respectively, as compared to the control treatment. Oviposition, egg hatching, and the damage caused by red spider mites were all reduced at high concentrations. Moringa oleifera leaf ethanolic extract can be used as a powerful bioacaricide for the control of T. merganser.

1. Introduction

Tetranychidae are distributed all over the world, encompassing a little more than 1300 mite species, clustered in over 70 genera that are divided into two sub-families, including Bryobinae and Tetranychinae [1,2,3]. Most agricultural mite pests belong to the Tetranychinae sub-family [1,2]. Species within the Tetranychus Dufour genus tend to group in colonies wrapped around in silk. Some of these species show extreme polyphagia and they thrive optimally in a large number of plant species, leading to a widespread global distribution [4]. The Red Spider Mite, Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux (Acari: Tetranychidae), is distributed in China, USA, Australia, and Mexico, where it attacks different families of plant hosts, including Solanaceae, Rosaceae, Oleaceae, Acuifoliaceae, Ranunculaceae, Caricaceae, and Cactaceae. This mite has a high reproductive potential and short life cycle [5,6]. The damage that T. merganser causes to plants can begin with the development of white spots close to the foliar veins. After some time, and under severe infestations, these spots can merge, turning the leaves white [7].
Arthropod pest control with chemical insecticides faces economic and ecological challenges all over the world, due to the impact on human health and on the environment. The identification of new alternatives is crucial to fight the resistance that arthropod pests have developed to chemical pesticides. Plant extracts are environmentally and human-friendly options that can help manage agricultural pests [8,9,10].
The tree Moringa oleifera Lamarck (Moringaceae) has agricultural importance in Mexico and in other tropical countries of the world [11]. People eat the fruits, seeds, and roots. The stalks are used as animal feed and the seed oils are part of lubricants, cosmetics, and biofuels [12,13]. The original research works that studied the different parts of the M. oleifera tree show different medicinal properties, such as anti-tumor, anti-pyretic, anti-epileptic, anti-inflammatory, anti-ulcer, anti-diabetic, anti-oxidizing, anti-fungal, anti-bacterial, and anti-carcinogenic effects [14]. Several research works have reported the insect pest control properties of M. oleifera. Furthermore, M. oleifera oils have shown to produce an anti-feeding effect on Spodoptera frugiperda Walker larvae (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) [15] and Spodoptera littoralis Boisd (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) [16]. The leaf powder of M. oleifera produces anti-egg-laying activity on Callosobruchus maculatus F. (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) [17] and Tribolium castaneum Herbst (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) [18]. By the same token, lectins in M. oleifera seeds have larvicidal properties against the Mediterranean flour moth Ephestia kuehniella Zeller (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) [19] and mosquito Aedes aegypti L. (Diptera: Culicidae) [20]. The aim of this research work was to assess the effects of M. oleifera leaf ethanolic extract at different concentrations on T. merganser, in order to include this compound in integrated pest management (IPM) programs for the control of red spider mites.

2. Results

2.1. Phytochemical Analysis

The phytochemical analysis of the M. oleifera leaf ethanolic extract showed several groups of secondary metabolites, such as phenols, alkaloids, flavonoids, tannins, saponins, carbohydrates, and quinones, among others (Table 1).

2.2. Acaricidal Effect of M. oleifera Extract on T. merganser

2.2.1. Mortality

The ethanolic extract of M. oleifera leaf showed acaricidal activity at different concentrations and different times against T. merganser females. The concentrations (0.1, 0.5, 1, 5, 10, and 20% (v/v)) caused acute toxicity to female mites at 24 h (F = 47.50; df = 6, 14; p < 0.0001), 48 h (F = 63.58; df = 6, 14; p < 0.0001), and 72 h (F = 94.05; df = 6, 14; p < 0.0001). Red spider mites treated with 0.1 and 20% (v/v) killed 0.00% and 46.67%, 6.67% and 86.67%, and 13.70% and 96.30%, at 24, 48, and 72 h, respectively, as compared to the control group (Table 2), showing that T. merganser mortality depends on the applied concentration rates.

2.2.2. Toxicity of the Extract

Table 3 shows the relative toxicity results of the M. oleifera leaf ethanolic extract. The values of LC50 and LC90 were 6.06% and 17.59% (v/v), indicating that 50% and 90% of T. merganser population died at these concentration rates, respectively.

2.2.3. Oviposition

Egg production by T. merganser females that could still oviposit was significantly different at 24 (F = 940.69; df = 7, 16; p < 0.0001), 48 (F = 2070.21; df = 7, 16; p < 0.0001), and 72 h (F = 4026.22; df = 7, 16; p < 0.0001). Females treated with 0.1 and 20% (v/v) laid a lower number of eggs: 2.54 to 94.69%, 17.35 to 96.31%, and 23.18 to 97.63% less than the control group at 24, 48 and 72 h, respectively. The growth rate of the spider mite was significantly different among the treatments (F = 681.08; df = 7, 16; p < 0.0001) and it decreased as the concentration increased (Table 4).

2.2.4. Hatched Eggs

The number of eggs hatched on the fourth day was significantly different among the treatments (F = 1227.42; df = 7, 16; p < 0.0001). The percentage of hatched eggs in the control group was 96.74%; while in treated females, this percentage ranged from 79.46% (0.1% (v/v)) to 0.00% (20.0 % (v/v)) (Table 5). This is an indication that the different concentrations had a residual effect on the eggs laid during the first 24 h, which were supposed to hatch four days after being laid.

2.2.5. Food Intake

The percentage of damage was significantly different among treatments at 24 (F = 58.04; df = 7, 16; p < 0.0001), 48 (F = 367.99; df = 7, 16; p < 0.0001), and 72 h (F = 298.32; df = 7, 16; p < 0.0001). Tetranychus merganser females treated with 0.1 and 20% (v/v) decreased their feed intake by 13.05 and 80.31%, 13.27 and 84.19%, and 7.94 and 85.48% at 24, 48, and 72 h, respectively, in comparison to the control group (Table 6).

3. Discussion

Just like in other reports, in this work we found that M. oleifera leaf ethanolic extract has different bioactive ingredients, including flavonoids, phenols, alkaloids, carotenoids, tannins, saponins, and carbohydrates. This result coincides with several past research works [14,21,22]. Some phytochemicals in the plant, such as flavonoids, alkaloids, glycosides, esters, and fatty acids, affect the behavior (repelling, deterring/anti-feeding, and alluring) as well as the physiology (toxic, growth retarding, and chemo sterilizing) of several insect and herbivore species [23]. These effects are the result of several toxic compounds acting in synergy within the extract [24].
The literature does not refer to other studies on the use of M. oleifera for the control of Tetranychus spp. However, other studies have researched the anti-insect properties of different M. oleifera leaf and seed extracts, and their findings are very similar to ours. This research work showed that the mortality of T. merganser increases as the concentration of M. oleifera extract increases. Likewise, the egg-hatching, growth rate, oviposition, and feeding rates decrease with higher concentrations of the ethanolic extract. Moawad and Sadek [16] reported that a 10% (v/v) concentration rate of M. oleifera oil kills 66 and 76% of the first and third larval instars of Spodoptera littoralis in 24 h. Kamel [15] found that an increase in the mortality (42.2–100%) of Spodoptera frugiperda was due to the concentration rates (1.25–10% (v/v)) of M. oleifera oil. On the other hand, Adenekan et al. [25] reported that pulverized leaves and stems of M. oleifera (0.5 g of powder with 30 g of cowpea seeds, Vigna unguiculata Walp (Fabaceae)) caused 85% and 70% mortality in Callsobruchus maculatus after 24 h. On the other hand, Ojo et al. [17] reported that 2 g of M. oleifera leaf powder with 20 g of cowpea seeds led to 36.33% mortality in Callosobruchus maculatus. Anita et al. [18] found that a concentration of 2.0 g of M. oleifera per 10 g of wheat (Triticum aestivum L. (Poaceae)) kills 100% of T. castaneum. While Hamza et al. [26] found that different concentrations (4, 8, 16, 32, and 64 ppm) of M. oleifera leaf ethanolic and aqueous extracts have larvicidal and anti-feeding effects on cotton worm, Spodoptera littoralis. With the ethanolic extract, mortality increased between 23.3 and 46.7%, 50.0 and 83.3%, and 56.7 and 96.7%; and the aqueous extract killed 13.3 and 26.7%, 36.7 and 43.3%, and 4.7 and 90.0% in 1, 3, and 5 days, respectively.
In this research work, the number of T. merganser hatched eggs decreased according to the concentration increase, indicating that all the concentration rates have residual toxic effect on the eggs laid and/or on T. merganser females’ biology, and have a negative effect on the growth rate (ri) of the red spider mite. Moawad and Sadek [16] reported that M. oleifera oil concentrations of 5, 7.5, and 10% (v/v) reduce the egg viability of cotton leaf worm, Spodoptera littoralis, by 50.07, 75.41, and 88.90, respectively, as compared to the control. Derbalah et al. [27] mentioned that the bioactive compounds with egg-killing effect affect the embryo formation and the developing larvae within the egg’s membrane, before hatching. In this regard, Fetoh and Al-Shammery [28] mentioned that the chemical substances present in plants are able to block out the micropyle region of the egg, impairing gas exchange and leading to the embryo’s death inside the egg. On the other hand, Hosny et al. [29] mentioned that adult mite females exposed to discs treated with acaricides could be subject to partial or temporary sterility, leading to a lower number of eggs laid by females per day, as well as leading to a lower number of viable eggs, as compared to the control. According to the previous information, although more research is required, the extract of M. oleifera leaves causes these two effects and could be characterized as having sterilizing effect.
Feed intake was assessed based on the percentage of damage, which decreased as the concentration rates increased. Hamza et al. [26] reported that concentrations of 4.539 and 3.264 ppm of M. oleifera aqueous and ethanolic extracts reduced the feed intake of Spodoptera littoralis fourth larval instars by 14.43 and 24.51%, respectively. Moawad and Sadek [16] documented that 5% (v/v) of M. oleifera oil inhibited feeding in Spodoptera littoralis by 20%, as compared to the control. On the other hand, Tridiptasari et al. [30] found that 20% (v/v) of M. oleifera ethanolic leaf and seed extracts caused an anti-feeding effect on the third (54.66 and 43.62%), fourth (53.57 and 43.33%), and fifth (55.11 and 45.34%) instars of Spodoptera litura (Fab.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) at 12 h. Furthermore, Ojo et al. [17] found that M. oleifera leaf powder (0.1 at 2 g/20g of cowpea) reduced the damage caused by Callosobruchus maculatus to V. unguiculata seeds.
This research work demonstrated that M. oleifera has potential to control T. merganser, since it lowered its reproduction and survival rates. Rattan [31] mentioned that this successful plant species synthesize a broad range of slightly toxic secondary metabolites, or a small quantity of bioactive highly toxic compounds. Therefore, M. oleifera can be considered a successful biopesticide [21]. To conclude, the results of our research work showed that M. oleifera has potential as biological control of red spider mites. The extract caused chronic toxicity in females, reducing egg viability, damage by feeding, and the number of eggs laid by T. merganser females. Further research is necessary on the behavior and biology of the nymphs (hatched eggs) emerging from the eggs exposed to the residual extract effects; also, to study other developmental stages of this spider mite. Such research might give us a clearer idea of the scope of the effects of M. oleifera. Furthermore, other types of M. oleifera extracts to control T. merganser and other mite species of agricultural importance need further research. It is important to assess the extract against the natural enemies of red spider mites.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Red Spider Mite Colony

A colony of T. merganser was obtained from infested papaya plants (Carica papaya L. (Caricaceae)), in Ciudad Victoria (23°44’38.4” N and 99°9’57.599” W, 329 m above sea level), Tamaulipas, Mexico. Tetranychus merganser was identified according to Baker and Tuttle’s [32] taxonomic key. In order to increase the red spider mite population, T. merganser females were placed on bean plants (Phaseolus vulgaris L. (Fabaceae)) under greenhouse conditions (29 ± 4 °C and 60 ± 15% relative humidity (RH)).

4.2. Preparation of the Extract and the Plant Material

We collected visibly clean leaves of M. oleifera in the Applied Ecology Institute at Universidad Autonoma de Tamaulipas, Tamaulipas, Mexico. The Moringa tree was two year old and the leaves were mature. The leaves were dried in a conventional oven (Quincy lab, Chicago, IL, USA model 20GCE-LT) at 60 °C during three days, until obtaining a consistent weight. The sample was ground (Miller CUISINART, Stamford, CT, USA, model DBM-8) until forming particles of 1 mm [33]. The powder was stored in dark bottles at ambient temperature in preparation for the extraction.
During three days, with the aid of a stirrer in total darkness, we blended 14 g of the dry homogenized M. oleifera leaf powder with 200 mL of absolute ethanol at ambient temperature. The blend was filtered with Whatman No. 1. filter paper. We used a rotary evaporator (IKA-RV 10 digital V, Staufen Baden Württemberg, Germany) to eliminate the solvent, at temperatures lower than 40 °C, under reduced pressure. Finally, we eliminated the remaining ethanol placing the flask on the kiln drier until obtaining a consistent weight (three days) [34]. The extract was scraped off and stored in Eppendorf tubes and kept in a freezer at −10 °C before conducting the bioassays.

4.3. Phytochemical Extract Analysis

We performed the ethanolic extract analysis of M. oleifera in order to do the qualitative detection tests of the phytochemicals. The tests included alkaloids (Dragendorff & Sonheschain reagent), phenols (Iron Chloride test FeCl3), carbohydrates (Molisch reagent), carotenoids (H2SO4 and FeCl3 reagents), coumarins (Erlich reagent), flavonoids (Shinoda reagent and NaOH at 1%), free reducing sugar (Fehling and Benedict reagent), cyanogenic glycosides (Grignard reagent), purines (HCl test), quinones (NH4OH and H2SO4 reagents by anthraquinone and Börntraguer test by benzoquinone), saponins (foam test, Bouchard reagent for steroid saponins and Rosenthaler reagent), terpenoids (Ac2O reagent), soluble starch (KOH and H2SO4 test), and, finally, tannins (FeCl3 reagent and iron cyanide) [35,36,37].

4.4. Experimental Design

We used the sand technique described by Ahmadi [38] with a slight modification. Bean discs of 2.5 cm in diameter were cut and placed on water-soaked cotton with the underside facing up. With the help of a sterile punch with a diameter of 2.5 cm, the bean leaf discs were cut. We placed a disc inside a 5 cm-wide Petri dish, with ten T. merganser females per bean disc. The experiment was done under laboratory conditions at 27 ± 1 °C and 70–80% relative humidity (RH), with a photoperiod of 12:12 h (light:darkness). The bean leaf discs were split at random in eight groups: a control group and seven treatment groups, one per extract concentration. The bean leaf disc was the replicate. We had three replicates per group. Ten mite females were placed on each bean leaf disc and they were sprayed two times (0.7 ± 0.1 mL per spray) with each concentration, from a distance of 30 cm between the sprayer and the leaf discs. We prepared the different concentrations (0.1, 0.5, 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 % v/v (ethanol/water)), starting from an initial solution of 1000 ppm of powdered M. oleifera extract in ethanol. Immediately, we used a manual sprayer (Truper® Model 14687, Ciudad de Victoria, Mexico) to apply the different concentrations of the extract. The control treatments were sprayed with water only. We recorded the number of dead mites at 24, 48, and 72 h. Red spider mites with ataxia (active, apparently messy movement) were considered dead, as well as mites lying on their backs, legs up, or without moving. We also counted the number of eggs laid and we observed the damage caused by the spider mite.
On the fourth day, after applying the extract, we recorded the number of hatched eggs per disc, in order to assess the residual effect on the eggs laid during the first 24 h. Ten adult T. merganser females and five males were put onto each bean leaf disc to enhance reproduction and oviposition. After 24 h, males were removed, leaving only females. The time that an egg of T. merganser takes to hatch is around 3.6 ± 0.3 days, at 27.5 °C on bean discs (P. vulgaris), with a photoperiod of 16:8 h light:darkness and 60–70% RH [5]. The hatching time on papaya discs (C. papaya) is around 4.10 ± 0.52 days, at 27.0 °C with a photoperiod of 14:10 h L:D and 60 ± 2% RH [39]. The eggs that did not hatch within that time were considered non-viable. We used a dissection microscope (UNICO Stereo and Zoom Microscopes ZM180, Dayton, NJ, USA) to do the counting and damage observations.

4.5. Tetranychus merganser Mortality Essay

We corrected the mortality data using Abbott’s formula on the control group [40].
MC = [(%MT − %MC)/(100 − %MC)] × 100,
where %MT is the mortality percentage in the treated group and %MC is the mortality percentage in the control group.

4.6. Tetranychus merganser Oviposition and Hatched Eggs

We used Kramer and Mulla’s formula [41] to determine the oviposition activity percentage (OAP) in each concentration.
OAP = [(NT − NC)/(NT + NC)] × 100,
where NC is the number of eggs in the control group and NT is the number of eggs in the treated group. The percentage values ranged between +100 and −100. The positive values indicate that we observed more oviposition in the treatment than in the control group (showing that the treatment stimulated oviposition activity). In contrast, more oviposition in the control group than in the treatment resulted in a negative OAP, indicating that the treatment inhibited oviposition.
In order to measure the residual effect of the extract on the spider mites’ egg hatching, we recorded the number of hatched eggs after the fourth day. The hatching percentage was calculated using the next formula (E24h/E4d) × 100, where E24h is the number of eggs laid on the first 24 h and E4d is the number of eggs that hatched on the fourth day. We used four days as the basis to calculate the time that an egg of T. merganser takes to hatch on bean leaf discs [5].

4.7. Tetranychus merganser Anti-Feeding

We assessed the anti-feeding effect through the inhibition percentage of T. merganser feed intake on bean leaf discs, as compared to the control group. At 72 h, we classified the symptoms observed on the bean leaf discs according to an ordinal scale developed by Hussey and Parr [42] and Nachman and Zemek [43]. We converted them into percentages: 0 = 0% damage (with no feeding damage); 1 = 1–20%; 2 = 21–40%; 3 = 41–60%; 4 = 61–80%; and 5 = 81–100% of feeding damage (dense marks, or wilting, after eating all the bean disc). Kramer and Mulla’s [41] formula criterion was used to measure the females’ feed intake. The positive values show that there was more damage in the treatment group than in the control group, indicating that the treatments stimulated feeding. The negative values represent more severe damage to the control group than to the treatment group, indicating that feeding was inhibited in the treatment group [44].

4.8. Tetranychus merganser Growth Population

The growth rate (ri) parameter was used to determine the extract’s impact on the red spider mite population. We used the following equation to calculate ri:
ri = (Nf/NO)/∆t
where NO is the initial number of individuals (10 adult females by replicate), Nf is the final number of individuals (adult surviving females plus the eggs laid at the end of the bioassay), and Δt is the number of days elapsed from the beginning until the end of the bioassay (equal to 3 days). Positive values of ri indicate a growing population. The negative values indicate a declining population, and ri = 0 indicates a stable population [45,46].

4.9. Statistical Analysis

The number of laid eggs, egg viability, the percentage of feeding damage, and the growth rate were statistically analyzed using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the means compared with Tukey’s HSD (p ≤ 0.05). Mortality percentage was analyzed by using PROC GLM and to separate the means of the treatments we applied Tukey’s HSD (p ≤ 0.05) test. Probit analysis was used to estimate the lethal concentration (LC50(90)), causing 50(90)% mortality in the T. merganser population on the third day after application of the extract, as well as for estimating the confidence intervals of 95% (CI95) for LC50(90) [47]. We used the SAS/STAT program in our analysis [48].

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.C.C.-H. and R.T.Q.H.-C.; methodology, J.C.C.-H., A.H.-J. and H.M.-C.; validation, J.C.C.-H.; formal analysis, J.C.C.-H. and S.O.-S.; resources, R.A.-V.; data curation, J.C.C.-H., and R.T.Q.H.-C.; writing—original draft preparation, J.C.C.-H., R.T.Q.H.-C.; writing—review and editing, J.C.C.-H., R.T.Q.H.-C.; R.A.-V.; visualization, A.H.-J., H.M.-C., and S.O.-S.; supervision, J.C.C.-H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Zhang, Z.Q. Mites of Greenhouses: Identification, Biology and Control; CABI Publishing: London, UK, 2003; p. 257. [Google Scholar]
  2. Hoy, A.M. Agricultural Acarology: Introduction to Integrated Mite Management; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2011; p. 430. [Google Scholar]
  3. Migeon, A.; Dorkeld, F. Spider Mites Web: A Comprehensive Database for the Tetranychidae. Available online: http://www1.montpellier.inra.fr/CBGP/spmweb (accessed on 25 January 2021).
  4. Ferragut, F.; Santonja, M.C. Taxonomía y distribución de los ácaros del género Tetranychus Dufour 1832 (Acari: Tetranychidae), en España. Bol. Sanidad Vegegetal. Plagas 1989, 15, 271–281. [Google Scholar]
  5. Ullah, M.S.; Moriya, D.; Badii, M.H.; Nachman, G.; Gotoh, T. A comparative study of development and demographic parameters of Tetranychus merganser and Tetranychus kanzawai (Acari: Tetranychidae) at different temperatures. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2011, 54, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Ullah, M.S.; Moriya, D.; Kongchuensin, M.; Konvipasruang, P.; Gotoh, T. Comparative toxicity of acaricides to Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux and Tetranychus kanzawai Kishida (Acari: Tetranychidae). Int. J. Acarol. 2011, 37, 535–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. López-Bautista, E.; Santillán-Galicia, M.T.; Suárez-Espinosa, J.; Cruz-Huerta, N.; Bautista-Martínez, N.; Alcántara-Jiménez, J.A. Damage caused by mite Tetranychus merganser (Trombidiformes: Tetranychidae) on Carica papaya (Violales: Caricaceae) plants and effect of two species of predatory mite. Int. J. Acarol. 2016, 6, 3003–3309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. El-Wakeil, N.E. Botanical pesticides and their mode of action. Gesunde Pflanz. 2013, 65, 125–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Senthil-Nathan, S. A review of biopesticides and their mode of action against insect pests. In Environmental Sustainability: Role of Green Technologies; Thangavel, P., Sridevi, G., Eds.; Springer: New Delhi, India, 2015; pp. 49–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Pavela, R. History, presence and perspective of using plant extracts as commercial botanical insecticides and farm products for protection against insects—A Review. Plant Protect. Sci. 2016, 52, 229–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Olson, M.; Fahey, J. Moringa oleifera: Un árbol multiusos para las zonas tropicales secas. Rev. Mex. Biodivers. 2011, 82, 1071–1082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Da Silva, J.P.V.; Serra, T.M.; Gossmann, M.; Wolf, C.R.; Meneghetti, M.R.; Meneghetti, S.M.P. Moringa oleifera oil: Studies of characterization and biodiesel production. Biomass Bioenerg. 2010, 34, 1527–1530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Pérez, R.; De la Cruz, O.; Vázquez, E.; Francisco, J. Moringa Oleifera, una Alternativa Forrajera Para Sinaloa; Fundación Produce, Sinaloa AC: Sinaloa, Mexico, 2010; p. 29. [Google Scholar]
  14. Gokila Devi, T.; Revathi, A.; Gopinath, L.R.; Suryadevara, N.; Archaya, S.; Bhuvaneswari, R. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of secondary metabolites of Moringa oleifera and its anticancer activity. Int. J. Adv. Interdiscip. Res. 2017, 4, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Kamel, A.M. Can we use moringa oil as a botanical insecticide against Spodoptera frugiperda? Acad. J. Entomol. 2010, 3, 59–64. [Google Scholar]
  16. Moawad, S.S.; Sadek, H.E. Evaluation of two eco-friendly botanical oils on cotton leafworm, Spodoptera littoralis (Boisd) (Lepidoptera/Noctuidae). Ann. Agric. Sci. 2018, 63, 141–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ojo, J.A.; Olunloyo, A.A.; Akanni, E.O. Efficacy of Moringa oleifera leaf powder against Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) on stored cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp). Researcher 2013, 5, 240–244. [Google Scholar]
  18. Anita, S.; Sujatha, P.; Prabhudas, P. Efficacy of pulverized leaves of Annona squamosa (L.), Moringa oleifera (Lam.), and Eucalyptus globulus (Labill.) against the stored grain pest, Tribolium castaneum (Herbst.). Recent Res. Sci. Technol. 2012, 4, 19–23. [Google Scholar]
  19. Martinez, D.S.T.; Freire, M.G.M.; Mazzafera, P.; Araujo-Júnior, R.T.; Bueno, R.D.; Macedo, M.L.R. Insecticidal effect of labramin, a lectin–like protein isolated from seeds of the beach apricot tree, Labramia bojeri, on the Mediterranean flour moth, Ephestia kuehniella. J. Insect Sci. 2012, 12, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Agra-Neto, A.C.; Napoleão, T.H.; Pontual, E.V.; Santos, N.D.; de Andrade Luz, L.; de Oliveira, C.M.; de Melo-Santos, M.A.; Coelho, L.C.; Navarro, D.M.; Paiva, P.M. Effect of Moringa oleifera lectins on survival and enzyme activities of Aedes aegypti larvae susceptible and resistant to organophosphate. Parasitol. Res. 2014, 113, 175–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Leone, A.; Spada, A.; Battezzati, A.; Schiraldi, A.; Aristil, J.; Bertoli, D. Cultivation, genetic, ethnopharmacology, phytochemistry and pharmacology of Moringa oleifera leaves: An overview. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2015, 16, 12791–12835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Vergara-Jimenez, M.; Almatraf, M.M.; Fernandez, M.L. Bioactive Components in Moringa oleifera leaves protect against chronic disease. Antioxidants 2017, 6, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Hikal, W.M.; Baeshen, R.S.; Said-Al Ahl, H.A.H. Botanical insecticide as simple extractives for pest control. Cogent Biol. 2017, 3, 1404274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Rincón, R.A.; Rodríguez, D.; Coy-Barrera, E. Botanicals against Tetranychus urticae Koch under laboratory conditions: A survey of alternatives for controlling pest mites. Plants 2019, 8, 272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Adenekan, M.O.; Okpeze, V.E.; Ogundipe, W.F.; Oguntade, M.I. Evaluation of Moringa oleifera powders for the control of bruchid beetles during storage. Int. J. Agric. Policy Res. 2013, 1, 305–310. [Google Scholar]
  26. Hamza, A.F.; Sayed, R.M.; Zahran, N.F. Toxic and antifeedant activity of Moringa oleifera leaf extracts and/or gamma radiation against Spodoptera littoralis (Boisd.) larvae. Egypt. J. Biol. Pest Control 2016, 26, 551–556. [Google Scholar]
  27. Derbalah, A.S.; Keratrum, A.Y.; El-Dewy, M.E.; El-Shamy, E.H. Efficacy of some insecticides and plant extracts against Tetranychus urticae under laboratory conditions. Egypt. J. Plant Pro. Res. 2013, 1, 47–70. [Google Scholar]
  28. Fetoh, B.E.A.; Al-Shammery, K.A. Acaricidal ovicial and repellent activities of some plant extracts on the date palm dust mite, Oligonychus afrasiaticus Meg. (Acari: Tetranychidae). Int. J. Environ. Sci. Eng. 2011, 2, 45–52. [Google Scholar]
  29. Hosny, A.H.; Keratum, A.Y.; Hasan, N.E. Comparative efficiency of pesticides and some predators to control spider mites: II- Biological and behavioral characteristics of predators Stethorus gilvifrons, Amblyseius gossipi and Phytoseiulus macropili and their host two spotted spider mite, Tetranychus urticae under some chemicals treatments. J. Plant Prot. Path. Mansoura Univ. 2010, 1, 1065–1085. [Google Scholar]
  30. Tridiptasari, A.; Leksono, A.S.; Siswanto, D. Antifeedant effect of Moringa oleifera (L.) leaf and seed extract on growth and feeding activity of Spodoptera litura (Fab.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J. Exp. Life Sci. 2019, 9, 25–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Rattan, R.S. Mechanism of action of insecticidal secondary metabolites of plant origin. Crop Prot. 2010, 29, 913–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Baker, E.W.; Tuttle, D.M. A Guide to the Spider Mites (Tetranychidae) of the United States; Indira Publishing House: West Bloomfield, MI, USA, 1994; p. 347. [Google Scholar]
  33. Castillo, F.; Gallegos, G.; Mendez, M.; Rodríguez, R.; Reyes, A.; Aguilar, C. In vitro antifungal activity of plant extracts obtained with alternative organic solvents against Rhizoctonia solani Kühn. Ind. Crop Prod. 2010, 32, 324–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Shami, A.M.M.; Philip, K.; Muniady, S. Synergy of antibacterial and antioxidant activities from crude extracts and peptides of selected plant mixture. BMC Complement. Altern. Med. 2013, 13, 360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Kuklinski, C. Farmacognosia: Estudio de las Drogas y Sustancias Medicamentosas de Origen Natural; Omega: Barcelona, Spain, 2000; p. 528. [Google Scholar]
  36. Tiwari, P.; Kumar, B.; Kaur, M.; Kaur, G.; Kaur, H. Phytochemical screening and extraction: A Review. Int. Pharm. Sci. 2011, 1, 98–106. [Google Scholar]
  37. Mujeeb, F.; Bajpai, P.; Pathak, N. Phytochemical evaluation, antimicrobial activity, and determination of bioactive components from leaves of Aegle marmelos. BioMed Res. Int. 2014, 497606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Ahmadi, A. Demographic toxicology as a method for studying the dicofol-twospotted spider mite (Acari: Tetranychidae) system. J. Econ. Entomol. 1983, 76, 239–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Reyes-Pérez, N.; Villanueva-Jiménez, J.A.; de la Cruz Vargas-Mendoza, M.; Cabrera-Mireles, H.; Otero-Colina, G. Population parameters of Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux (Acari: Tetranychidae) in papaya (Carica papaya L.) at different temperaturas. Agrociencia 2013, 47, 147–157. [Google Scholar]
  40. Abbott, W.S. A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. J. Econ. Entomol. 1925, 18, 265–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kramer, W.L.; Mulla, S. Oviposition attractants and repellents of mosquitoes: Oviposition responses of Culex1 mosquitoes to organic infusions. Environ. Entomol. 1979, 8, 1111–1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Hussey, N.W.; Parr, W.J. The effect of glasshouse red spider mite (Tetranychus urticae Koch) on the yield of cucumbers. J. Hortic. Sci. 1963, 38, 255–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Nachman, G.; Zemek, R. Interactions in a tritrophic acarine predator-prey metapopulation system III: Effects of Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae) on host plant condition. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2002, 26, 27–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Montelongo-Ruíz, G.; Chacón-Hernández, J.C.; Reyes-Zepeda, F.; Octavio-Aguilar, P.; Heinz-Castro, R.T.Q.; Juárez, L.; Ordaz-Silva, S. The stimulatory effect of Chamaedorea radicalis ethanolic extract on Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux (Acari: Tetranychidae). Int. J. Acarol. 2020, 46, 318–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Marčić, D.; Međo, I. Acaricidal activity and sublethal effects of an oxymatrine-based biopesticide on two-spotted spider mite (Acari: Tetranychidae). Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2014, 64, 375–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Marčić, D.; Međo, I. Sublethal effects of azadirachtin-A (NeemAzal-T/S) on Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae). Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2015, 20, 25–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Finney, D.J. Probit Analysis, 3rd ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1971; p. 331. [Google Scholar]
  48. SAS Institute. SAS/STAT 9.1: User’s Guide; SAS Institute Inc.: Cary, NC, USA, 2002; pp. 3703–3796. [Google Scholar]
Table 1. Secondary metabolites (“+” = present; “−” = absent) in Moringa oleifera leaf ethanolic extract.
Table 1. Secondary metabolites (“+” = present; “−” = absent) in Moringa oleifera leaf ethanolic extract.
Bioactive
Compound
TestBioactive
Compound
Test
Phenols+FeCl3Carbohydrates+Molisch’s
Flavonoids+Shinoda for flavanone’sAlkaloids+Dragendorff’s
+NaOH at 1% for flavanone’s or Xanthone+Sonheschain’s
Tannins+FeCl3 for gallic acidQuinones+H2SO4 for anthraquinone
+Ferrocyanide for phenols+Bröntraguer’s for benzoquinone
+Jelly+NH4OH for anthraquinone
Saponins+Bouchard for steroidal saponinsCarotenoids+H2SO4 and FeCl3 reagents
FoamSugar reducers+Fehling’s
Rosenthale +Benedict’s
Coumarins+Erlich’sCyanogenic glycosides+Grignard’s
PurinesHClTerpenoidsAc2O
Soluble starch+KOH and H2SO4
Table 2. Effect of Moringa oleifera leaf ethanolic extract at different concentrations on Tetranychus merganser females under controlled laboratory conditions (n = 3 with 10 red spider mites per replicate).
Table 2. Effect of Moringa oleifera leaf ethanolic extract at different concentrations on Tetranychus merganser females under controlled laboratory conditions (n = 3 with 10 red spider mites per replicate).
TreatmentsCorrected Mortality (±SE) Average *
244872
0.10.00 ± 0.00 e6.67 ± 3.33 e13.70 ± 3.16 c
0.510.00 ± 0.00 d10.00 ± 0.00 e20.74 ± 0.74 c
113.33 ± 3.33 cd20.00 ± 0.00 d27.41 ± 2.59 c
523.33 ± 3.33 bc33.33 ± 3.33 cd55.19 ± 2.89 b
1030.00 ± 0.00 b43.33 ± 3.33 bc68.89 ± 5.88 b
1543.33 ± 3.33 a56.67 ± 6.67 b92.96 ± 3.53 a
2046.67 ± 3.33 a86.67 ± 3.33 a96.30 ± 3.70 a
* Mean values and ± standard errors (SE) are presented. Different letters within a column indicate significant differences (p < 0.05; ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD test).
Table 3. Estimation of the LC50(90) for ethanolic extract of Moringa oleifera leaves on Tetranychus merganer females, after the third day, with n = 3 and 10 red spider mites per replicate.
Table 3. Estimation of the LC50(90) for ethanolic extract of Moringa oleifera leaves on Tetranychus merganer females, after the third day, with n = 3 and 10 red spider mites per replicate.
LC50(CI95)LC90(CI95)b ± SEχ2Pr > χ2
6.0617.594.75 ± 0.8630.52<0.0001
(4.25–7.39)(14.51–24.74)
LC: Lethal concentration that kills 50% (90%) of the population. CI: Confidence interval at 95%. b: slope ± standard error. χ2: Chi-square value.
Table 4. Effects of Moringa oleifera leaf ethanolic extract on oviposition and the growth rate of Tetranychus merganser.
Table 4. Effects of Moringa oleifera leaf ethanolic extract on oviposition and the growth rate of Tetranychus merganser.
Concentrations (% v/v)Eggs Number ± SE *OAP (%) ± SEEggs Number ± SEOAP(%) ± SEEggs Number ± SEOAP (%) ± SEGrowth Rate ± SE
24 h48 h72 h
Control61.33 ± 0.88 a 142.00 ± 2.08 a 222.33 ± 1.76 a 1.04 ± 0.00 a
0.158.33 ± 1.76 a−2.54 ± 1.31100.00 ± 1.15 b−17.35 ± 0.51138.67 ± 1.86 b−23.18 ± 0.920.89 ± 0.00 b
0.547.00 ± 0.58 b−13.23 ± 0.5681.67 ± 0.88 c−26.96 ± 1.16107.33 ± 1.76 c−34.89 ± 0.950.81 ± 0.00 b
130.00 ± 0.58 c−34.31 ± 0.6646.67 ± 0.88 d−50.52 ± 1.0758.67 ± 0.88 d−58.25 ± 0.330.62 ± 0.00 c
528.00 ± 0.58 c−37.30 ± 1.5032.67 ± 1.45 e−62.61 ± 1.3633.33 ± 0.88 e−73.93 ± 0.530.44 ± 0.01 d
104.33 ± 0.33 d−86.83 ± 0.7713.33 ± 0.33 f−82.82 ± 0.6214.00 ± 0.58 f−88.15 ± 0.530.18 ± 0.01 e
152.33 ± 0.33 d−92.66 ± 1.094.00 ± 0.58 g−94.54 ± 0.724.67 ± 0.67 g−95.89 ± 0.57−0.22 ± 0.05 f
201.67 ± 0.33 d−94.69 ± 1.092.67 ± 0.33 g−96.31 ± 0.472.67 ± 0.33 g−97.63 ± 0.30−0.40 ± 0.00 g
* Mean values and ± standard errors (SE) are presented. Different letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05; ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD test). OAP, percentage of oviposition activity.
Table 5. Mean values (±SE) of hatched eggs laid by Tetranychus merganser females during the first 24 h.
Table 5. Mean values (±SE) of hatched eggs laid by Tetranychus merganser females during the first 24 h.
Concentration % (v/v)Mean Values of Hatched Eggs *Mean Values Hatching Percentage
Control59.33 ± 0.88 a96.74 ± 0.05
0.146.33 ± 1.20 b79.45 ± 0.39
0.532.67 ± 0.67 c69.49 ± 0.79
119.00 ± 0.58 d63.31 ± 0.71
514.00 ± 0.58 e49.96 ± 1.03
101.00 ± 0.00 f23.33 ± 1.67
150.00 ± 0.00 f0.00 ± 0.00
200.00 ± 0.00 f0.00 ± 0.00
* Mean values and ± standard errors (SE) are presented. Different letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05; ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD test).
Table 6. Effects of Moringa oleifera leaf ethanolic extract of on Tetranychus merganser feeding rate.
Table 6. Effects of Moringa oleifera leaf ethanolic extract of on Tetranychus merganser feeding rate.
Concentration
% (v/v)
Average Damage (%) ± SEFood Intake (%) ± SEAverage Damage (%) ± SEFood Intake (%) ± SEAverage Damage (%) ± SEFood Intake (%) ± SE
24 h *48 h72 h
Control15.67 ± 1.20 a 20.00 ± 0.58 a 34.00 ± 0.58 a
0.112.00 ± 0.58 b−13.05 ± 3.7520.67 ± 0.33 b−13.27 ± 1.7829.00 ± 0.58 b−7.94 ± 1.59
0.59.33 ± 0.67 bc−25.04 ± 6.7817.00 ± 0.58 c−22.74 ± 2.3020.00 ± 0.58 c−25.93 ± 1.88
17.33 ± 0.88 cd−36.57 ± 1.9310.00 ± 0.58 d−45.97 ± 2.8217.33 ± 0.88 c−35.51 ± 2.82
54.67 ± 0.33 de−53.67 ± 5.046.67 ± 0.67 e−60.56 ± 2.5310.667 ± 1.20 d−52.42 ± 4.19
102.33 ± 0.33 e−73.73 ± 4.623.33 ± 0.33 f−78.10 ± 1.565.00 ± 0.58 e−74.39 ± 2.82
152.00 ± 0.58 e−77.05 ± 6.662.67 ± 0.33 f−82.05 ± 2.113.67 ± 0.33 e−80.55 ± 1.65
201.67 ± 0.33 e−80.31 ± 4.602.33 ± 0.33 f−84.19 ± 1.782.67 ± 0.33 e−85.48 ± 1.72
* Mean values and ± standard errors (SE) are presented. Different letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05; ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD test).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Heinz-Castro, R.T.Q.; Arredondo-Valdés, R.; Ordaz-Silva, S.; Méndez-Cortés, H.; Hernández-Juárez, A.; Chacón-Hernández, J.C. Bioacaricidal Potential of Moringa oleifera Ethanol Extract for Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux (Acari: Tetranychidae) Control. Plants 2021, 10, 1034. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10061034

AMA Style

Heinz-Castro RTQ, Arredondo-Valdés R, Ordaz-Silva S, Méndez-Cortés H, Hernández-Juárez A, Chacón-Hernández JC. Bioacaricidal Potential of Moringa oleifera Ethanol Extract for Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux (Acari: Tetranychidae) Control. Plants. 2021; 10(6):1034. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10061034

Chicago/Turabian Style

Heinz-Castro, Rapucel Tonantzin Quetzalli, Roberto Arredondo-Valdés, Salvador Ordaz-Silva, Heriberto Méndez-Cortés, Agustín Hernández-Juárez, and Julio Cesar Chacón-Hernández. 2021. "Bioacaricidal Potential of Moringa oleifera Ethanol Extract for Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux (Acari: Tetranychidae) Control" Plants 10, no. 6: 1034. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10061034

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop