See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/271073676

Botanicals as biopesticides: Active chemical

constituents and biocidal action

Chapter · November 2014

DOI: 10.13140/2.1.2182.4802

CITATION READS

1 1,232

5 authors, including:

H.O. Saxena YOGESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI

Tropical Forest Research Institute Forest Research Institute Dehradun
24 PUBLICATIONS 162 CITATIONS 252 PUBLICATIONS 338 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Naseer Mohammad
Tropical Forest Research Institute
23 PUBLICATIONS 9 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Assessment of genetic structure, linkage disequilibrium and marker-wood trait association in CPTs of
teak (Tectona grandis L.f.) maintained at National Teak Germplasm Bank, Chandrapur (M.S.), using
molecular markers View project

The Identifying, Preparation and Drafting a Project Proposal as well its Implementation on
Suitainable Ecotourism for Development View project

All content following this page was uploaded by YOGESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI on 28 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

CHAPTER- 21

BOTANICALS AS BIOPESTICIDES: ACTIVE

CHEMICAL CONSTITUENTS AND BIOCIDAL ACTION

H. O. SAXENA, Y.C. TRIPATHI, GANESH PAWAR, A. KAKKAR, & N. MOHAMMAD

INTRODUCTION
Pesticides are synonymous with modern agriculture and provide the most effective and
economically efficient means of controlling thousands of species of insect pests, weeds, fungi
and nematodes that compete for our food and fibre. Chemical pesticides in general and broad
spectrum pesticides in particular have provided convincing means of controlling the pests, since
1950 (Ennis and McClellan, 1964). The estimated 30% losses from pests that would occur in
the absence of pesticides, would spell economic and human disaster for many developing
countries around the world. Outbreaks of forest insects alone damage some 35 million hectares
of forests annually, primarily in the temperate and boreal zones (FAO, 2010a). Chemical,
biological and technological advancements in agriculture have successfully boosted the
production of food grains and vegetables for ever growing population and saved mankind from
hunger and pestilence. This has been achieved through high-tech agro-practices supported by
heavy use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Several examples highlight the value of
pesticides in reducing crop losses. In Ghana, which is the world's premier cocoa exporting
country, the application of insecticides has almost trebled the yields by effectively controlling
the damage to the crop by the capsid bug, and in Pakistan extensive use of insecticides on the
sugar crop increased the yield by 50% (Tripathi, 1998).
The United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) have remarked that without the
use of pesticides a considerable amount of agricultural production in developing countries would
be destroyed by pests. Green revolution boosted the agricultural production in India making the
country self-sufficient in food supplies (Swaminathan, 1995) that highlight the value of
pesticides in reducing crop losses. Thus, the use of pesticides has gradually become a part of our
modern agriculture practices (Levitan et al., 1995) and their consumption has also increased
remarkably in the recent past causing serious ecological and health problems all over the world.
FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 219
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

Current views are therefore to examine and introduce ecologically sound and environmentally
safer alternative means of plant protection that help sustained agricultural production and forest
productivity in future.
ORIGIN OF SYNTHETIC PESTICIDES
Synthetic pesticides, developed during the World War II dramatically increased the potential for
controlling pests and till the first two decades of this pesticide revolution emphasis was placed
on their positive and beneficial aspects. Dr. Paul Muller in 1939 discovered the powerful
insecticidal properties of Dichloro-diphenyl-trichloro ethane (DDT) which soon became the
most widely used single insecticide in the world. Although, the 1930 represents the beginning of
modern era of synthetic organic pesticides namely, alkyl thiocyanate (1930), salicylanilide
(1931), the first organic fungicide, dithiocarbamate (1934), chloranil (1938) and phenyl
crotonate or dinocap (1946). Other organic compounds developed during this period were
azobenzene, ethylene dibromide, ethylene oxide, methyl bromide and carbon disulphide as
fumigants; phenothiazine, p-dichlorobenzene, naphthalene and thiodiphenylamine as insecticide.
Spurred on by the success of DDT, the chemical industry began an intensive search for other
synthetic organic pesticide and a steady stream of new insecticides, herbicides, fungicides and
other pesticidal products began to appear in the market. Several useful synthetic insecticides
viz., chlorinated hydrocarbon cyclodiene (benzene hexa chloride, aldrin, dieldrin, heptachlor and
eldrin etc.); organophosphorous compounds (schradan, parathion, malathion, menazon);
carbamate esters (sevin); herbicides (2-methyl-4-chloro and 2,4-dichloro-2,4-D-phenoxyacetic
acid); fungicides (captan, oxathiins, benzamidazoles, thiophanates, pyrimidines) have been
developed during 1950-66 (Cremlyn, 1978). In 1967, benzimidazole fungicides and in 1975
photo-stable pyrethroids were important additions in the world of pesticides. Since then the
discovery, use and increase in types and their production started very fast. Over 1 billion
pounds of pesticides are used in the United State (US) each year and approximately 5.6
billion pounds are used worldwide (Donaldson et al., 1999, Michael and Alavanja, 2009).
In India, the plant protection became effective with the popularity of BHC and DDT in the early
1950's which was further supported by the introduction of organophosphorous and carbamates.
Now, India after Japan is the largest manufacturer of pesticides in South Asian and African
countries.

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 220
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

PESTICIDAL ABUSE AND HAZARDOUS CONSEQUENCES

Indiscriminate use of synthetic pesticides over the years has resulted different types of hazards
and toxicity. Pesticides residue may constitute a significant source of contamination of air water,
soil and food which could become a threat to the plant and animal communities. A large amount
of pesticides is released into atmosphere during use thereby inviting adverse climatic changes. A
variety of undesirable environmental effects of pesticides has been reported from many
countries. The effects include excessive mortality and reduced reproductive potential in
organisms, changes in the abundance of species and the diversity of ecosystem, reduction in the
productive potential of natural resources and the development of pesticide resistance in target
and non-target species (Koeman, 1978). Irrespective of the method of application (soil
incorporation, broadcasting, dusting or foliar spray), soil serves as the ultimate sink for all the
pesticide applied (Flury, 1996). After reaching the soil, the pesticides are decomposed either by
leaching, surface runoff, absorption/desorption, volatilization, microbial metabolism or a
combination of these processes. As a result, world soils are accumulating ever increasing
amount of residues of wide variety of pesticides which can move into the bodies of
invertebrates, pass into air or water, absorbed by plants or broken down into other toxic
products. The presence of pesticides in soil therefore, continues to be of interest to
environmental scientists. Leaching of pesticides to groundwater or nearby rivers, simultaneous
non-selective killing of pests, accidents with toxic pesticides, pesticide residues of food crops
and the disappearance of certain vertebrates have become more or less synonymous with
modern intensive agriculture. Less than 0.1% pesticides reach the target pest and remainder
negatively affects humans, livestock and natural biota (Pimentel, 1992). In general the
indiscriminate and heavy use of pesticides in agriculture and forestry plantations has
contaminated the food grains, dairy products, fruits, vegetables, fodders, horticulture land,
drinking water and the living environment as a whole. Aquatic living species die as the
pesticides washed down from the fields to rivers, tanks and other water reservoirs.
Majority of synthetic pesticides are not easily degradable and tend to enter food chains. They
spread their toxic effects through ecological cycling and biological magnification and cause
serious health problems in human and animal subjects. Organochlorine and organophosphorous
compounds are now predominately used. The former is stable and extremely slow degradable

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 221
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

under various environmental conditions. The environmental half-life of such chemicals has been
reported to be 10 years or more (Brooks, 1976). The stability and persistence of these materials
in the environment, their accumulation in the tissues of living organisms and their lack of
selectivity were major factors in the development of pest resistance and in their deleterious
impact on beneficial species. The pesticidal residue in plants produce, soil, water, wildlife and
animal tissues is responsible for various carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic and catratogenic
defect in human society. Liver and kidney damages are observed in response to a long exposure
to organochlorine pesticides whereas organo-phosphorous toxicity results decline of memory
(Korsak and Sato, 1977). Sometimes they may even result in mutation of genes and these
changes become prominent only after a few generations. According to an estimate, heavy use of
chemical pesticides cause about 50,000 cases of pesticide poisoning every year in the under
developed countries. According to WHO estimate, pesticide related deaths in developing nations
are 10,000 per year and about 2 million people suffer from acute pesticidal poisoning.
Increased use of organochlorine pesticides in agriculture is causing severe damages to the
environment. These chemicals liberate chlorine which enters into stratosphere above the
atmosphere and diminishes the volume of ozone allowing more ultraviolet rays of the sun to
penetrate into the atmosphere which is very harmful to the human health. Another problem with
the use of chemical pesticide is the resistance developed by a number of pests as a result of their
prolong use. Most pesticides have a limited effective life. Resistance has been reported in almost
500 species of insects and mites, 100 species of plant pathogens, 50 species of insects and
rodents and 2 species of nematodes (Georghiou, 1986). Synthetic pyrethroids have induced
resistance in bollworm, one of the most destructive pests of cotton. Further the use of these
chemical insecticides has also resulted in secondary pest outbreaks. Insects such as the whitefly,
mites and aphids, which had never been a serious threat to cotton, are now emerged as major
pests. Residues of DDT and other toxic insecticides have been found not only in the fat and
blood of the people in the various part of India but also in the breast milk of lactating mother
(Tripathi, 1998).
GLOBAL APPREHENSION
Despite the appearance of pest resistance and recognition of some adverse effects on non-target
species, little serious thought was given to the potential long-term consequences of pesticide use

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 222
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

in terms of human health. The continual addition of large amount of persistent pesticides to the
environment has caused widespread destruction of soil fertility and endangered the ecological
security of food, farmer and farmland. In the most natural situation, the plants, animals and
micro-organisms of the soil are absolutely essential for its fertility. The soil contains
microorganisms that are responsible for the conversion of nitrogen, phosphorous and sulphur to
the forms available for plants. Use of these pesticides has either been banned or discouraged in
developed countries as they create several environmental and health hazards. Recognizing the
fact that most of the complex physical and chemical processes responsible for soil fertility are
dependent on soil microorganisms, use of DDT has been banned in many countries. DDT
registered for use on some 334 crops and agricultural commodities in 1961, was banned in the
USA in 1972 and the use of most other chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide were either banned
or severely restricted during the next decades. The environmental biologists are opposed to the
continuing treatment of soil with heavy doses of deadly and persistent toxicants. In Netherlands
several pesticides have been removed from the market and the overall uses of crop protection
agents has to diminish by at least 50 %.
This situation has led to much greater emphasis on the judicious use of pesticides and to develop
the methods that are capable of reducing the large scale utilization of chemical pesticides by
encouraging eco-friendly biopesticides (Zechendorf, 1996). To overcome the problem of
pesticidal hazards, there is a growing appreciation about biopesticides, which only attack the
target pests and also harmless to animals, fish, human beings and wildlife as well. One of the
best control measures is the use of plant origin chemicals in the form of antifeedants, repellents,
protectants, growth disrupting hormones and insecticides because of their biodegradability, least
persistence and least toxic to non-target organisms. The presence of biologically active
principles in certain plants and their extraordinary pest management traits have, in recent years,
raised considerable interest among the scientists all over the world and a fairly good amount of
data has been generated on several plant species regarding their pest control potential.
BOTANICALS AS BIOPESTICIDES – AN ECOFRIENDLY AND SAFE OPTION
The development and promotion of eco-friendly bio-pesticides which only attack the target
pest and harmless to beneficial biota are being stressed all over the world. Plants have
evolved over some 400 million years and they have developed a number of protective,

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 223
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

genetically acquired inbuilt mechanisms, such as repellency and insecticidal action etc to
protect themselves from pest attack. As such, plant products are regarded as an effective
substitute for chemical pesticides. Botanicals or their derivatives of plant origins have good
capability to regulate and control of harmful pests.
Plants are known to provide a vast reservoir of biologically active chemical constituents.
However, not more than 10% of these have so far been examined in detail for their biological
activity against human diseases (Nitya Nand, 1977) and much less against plant diseases. The
earliest mention of poisonous plants or those with pest control properties is found in ancient
Indian literatures. Democritus tried plant extract for controlling plant diseases as early as in 470
BC (Sherville, 1960). Pest control through pesticides of plant origin has a long history and
farmers have used pesticides prepared from seeds of resistant plants. Thus, a large number of
different plant species contain natural insecticidal materials. Some of these have been used by
man as insecticides since very early times. But many of them can not be profitably extracted.
However, several of these extracts have provided valuable contact insecticides which possess the
advantage that their use does not appear to result in the emergence of resistant insect strains in
the same degrees as the application of synthetic insecticides do. As early as in 1690, the water
extract of tobacco leaves was being used to kill the sucking insects of garden pest and against
mildew diseases of trees (Forsyth, 1802). Plants are known to biosynthesize a dazzling array of
structural variety which exhibit an almost equally dazzling array of anti-insect biological
activities. The grain protection activity of neem seeds and tobacco extract is in practice for more
than 300 year in Indian and Europe (Jotwani and Sirkar, 1965; Pathak et al., 1995a, Kulkarni
and Joshi, 1998b). The farmers in Tamilnadu and Karnataka use Vitex negundo and Karanja as
grain protectants (Ahmed and Koppel, 1987). Kulkarni (2001) in a detailed review, has
discussed biological activities exhibited by some important plant species known till date, against
insect pests, either in the form of crude extracts or purified isolated compounds.
Pesticidal products of plant origins have been found remarkably effective in the form of
antifeedant, repellent, protectants and growth disrupting hormones and as other biocides
(Kulkarni, 2001). The active principle in tobacco extract was later shown to be the alkaloid
nicotine which is the first naturally occurring insecticide isolated in 1828. Nicotine functions as
a non-persistent contact insecticide against aphids, capsids, leaf miner, codling moth and thrips

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 224
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

on a wide variety of crops (Busbey, 1950-51). Around 1850, two important natural insecticides
were introduced namely rotenone and dihydrorotenone from the roots of the plant Derris
elliptica (Fukami and Nakajima, 1971) and they were being used for the control of caterpillars.
Pyrethrum extracted from the flower heads of Chrysanthemum cinerariaefolium was used for
pest control in the past and it is still one of the important pesticides at present (Matsui and
Yamamoto, 1971). Bradely (1983) used pepper dust to protect trees against blight to their
blossoms. A real breakthrough in pesticidal applications of plants and plant produces occurred
during early sixties when Pradhan et al. (1962) first reported the antifeedant properties of Neem
seed kernel against desert locust Schistocerca gregaria (Kulkarni, 2001).
BOTANICAL PRODUCT EXPLOITATION
Contrary to the problems associated with the use of synthetic chemicals, botanicals are
environmentally non-pollutive, renewable, inexhaustible, indigenously available, easily
accessible, largely non-phytotoxic, systemic ephemeral thus readily biodegradable, relatively
cost effective and hence find a very promising role as a plant protectant in the strategy of
integrated pest management. A large number plant species containing natural insecticidal
material have also been examined for their pesticidal properties. There are approximately 2000
plant species all over the world which have been found to exhibit biocidal activity (Grainge and
Ahmed, 1988) and some of them have been recommended for the control of pest and diseases of
various agricultural, horticultural, fruit, other economical crops and plant species (Table 1).
Neem finds an important place amongst plant origin pesticides by virtue of multifacial
biological activities exhibited against wide range of insect pests in the world (Schmutterer,
1995). The eco-friendliness, easy availability and renewable nature helped to prepare
different pesticides from its various parts and major chemical constituent, azadirachtin.
Azadirachtin is found to be effective as feeding deterrent, repellent, toxicant, sterilant and
growth disruptant for insects at a dosage as low as 0.1 ppm (Miana et al., 1996). Neem
extracts have been reported as quite effective against more than 300 insect pests of different
orders (Marippan, 1995). In India neem has been evaluated against 195 species of insects
belonging to ten different orders viz. Orthoptera, Dictyoptera, Lepidoptera, Hemiptera,
Diptera, Coleoptera, Hymenoptera, Isoptera, Thysanoptera, and Siphnoptera. The diversified
biocidal activities of neem are highly influenced by the chemically diverse and structurally

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 225
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

complied tetranortrierpenoids (limonoids) isolated and characterized from different parts of

neem. Various workers have examined bio-efficacy of its pure individual principles. Almost
every parts of the neem are bitter but the seeds possess maximum detergency. Keeping the
pesticide potential of Neem and its domestic as well as international market in view, some
Indian companies have launched neem-based pesticides during past few years (Tripathi,
2000). Schmutterer (1995) in his report included a few insect pests of forestry importance,
susceptible to neem and its products. Recent reports on the efficacy of neem extracts and
some marketed products against some major forest insect pests damaging forest nurseries,
plantations and natural forests (Meshram et al., 1994, Kulkarni et al., 1995, 1996a,b, 1998b).
The presence of biologically active principles in seed and other parts and their extraordinary
pest management traits have in recent years raised considerable interest among the scientists
all over the world and a fairly good amount of data has been generated on several plant
species regarding their pest control potential (Tripathi and Tripathi, 1999). Scientists from all
over the world have evaluated a number of plants chemically and biologically and a fairly
good amount of data has been generated on several plant species regarding their pest control
potential.
The most promising botanical pesticides for use at present and probably in future, are derived
from species of the families Meliaceae, Rutaceae, Asteraceae, Annonaceae, Labiateae and
Canellaceae (Miana et al., 1996). Aphicidal properties of crude aqueous extract of Aconitum
ferox has been reported against red pumpkin beetle, wheat aphid, mustard fly, kharif
grasshopper, radish aphid and mustard aphid (Jacobson, 1975). Leaf extract of Acorus
calamus has been found to possess insecticidal, antifeedant and repellent properties. Leaf
extract of Aegle marmelos and seed extract of Annona squamosa exhibited antifeedant
activity and significantly protect grains from storage pests. Crude extract of bulb of Allium
cepa and Allium sativum showed insecticidal, repellent, nematicidal and fungicidal activities
(Prakash Rao, 1987). Leaf extract of Artemisia vulgaris was reported to act as repellent
against stored grain pests and flour beetle.
Aqueous and alcoholic extracts and powder of Balanite egyptica bark showed insecticidal
activity against the aphids and the grasshoppers (McIndoo, 1983). Oil cake of Indian mustard,
Brassica juncea show repellency to rice weevil and reduce its oviposition in stored maize

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 226
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

grain and its seed extract shows antifeedant activity against the hairy caterpillar on groundnut
crop (Bowry et al., 1984). Extract of whole plant of Calotropis procera, Datura metel and D.
strumanium in water, alcohol and petroleum ether has been reported to have insecticidal
activity when tested against red pumpkin beetle and the cabbage butterfly (Khanvilkar, 1983).
Leaf of Cannabis sativa, Lanatana camara, Jatopha carcus and Nerium indicum act as
protectants against stored grains. Methanolic extract of various parts of Capparis deciduas
have shown aphidicidal activity against peach aphid (Sundasraraj et al., 1998). Crude seed
extract of Cassia fistula is reported to inhibit the metamorphosis of the 5th instar larvae of
cotton strainer (Jaipal et al., 1983). Aqueous extract of Catharanthus roseus was reported to
show insecticidal activity against the yellow stem borer of rice, cotton strainer and act as an
antifeedant when sprayed on black gram pod borer. Extracts of its leaf, flower and whole
plant showed repellent activity when tested against stored grain pests. Leaf extract of the
plant can also reduce the infestation of the sweet potato weevil in the crop. Turmeric powder
(Curcuma longa) has been reported as a repellent and protectants of stored grains. Spray of
its rhizome extract on moth bean crop provides leaf protection against the attack of moth
bean defoliator.
Leaf extract of Eucalyptus sp. showed repellency to the woolly apple aphid and screw worn
and reported to realty impair the fecundity of the pulse beetle. Its powder admixtures with
rice grains reduces the populations of the paddy moth and checks the cross infestation of the
lesser grain borer. Seed oil of Gossypium hirsutum protects stored bean seed against the
bruchid, maize, sorghum and wheat grains from the infestation of Angoumois grain moth and
rice weevil without affecting their viability (Oca et al., 1978). Leaf and flower extracts of
Ipomea cornea in benzene showed repellency to pulse beetle and reduce their oviposition and
multiplication in stored green gram (Pandey, 1986). Its wood, leaf, fruit and seed extracts in
water were reported to be toxic to the leaf cutting larvae. Its seed extract is reported to reduce
oviposition of the potato tuber moth (Shelke, 1987). Aqueous suspension of stem extract
(1%) of Lantana camara showed inhibitory activity against 4th instar larvae of silk moth
(Gopalkumer, 1993). Refined linseed (Linum usitatissimum ) oil acts as surface coating agent
for endosulfan encapsulated formulations and increases efficacy of the chemical against the
sorghum stalk borer (Srivastava and Saxena, 1986). Whole plant extract of Nerium indicum

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 227
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

as well as extracts of its various parts in water, ether and alcohol are toxic to the vinegar fly
and rice weevil (Jacobson, 1975). Volatile oil from the leaves of Ocimum sanctum inhibits
oviposition of the cotton leafhopper (Saxena and Basit, 1982). Petroleum ether extracts of the
whole plant and leaves of Parthenium hysterosphorus showed juveno - mimetic activity to
the 5th instar larvae of the cotton stainer resulting morphogenetic changes in the larvae
(Rajendran and Gopalan, 1979) and antifeedant activity to the cotton leaf armyworm, brinjal
leaf beetle, cabbage leaf webber and migratory grasshopper also.
Root and bark extracts of Plumbago zeylanica in alcohol and ether show toxicity to aphid,
cotton stainer, Mexican bean beetle and hairy caterpillar (Mclndoo, 1983). Oil of castor
(Ricinus communis) has been found to inhibit the multiplication of pulse beetle and the
storage weevil and showed repellent activity to the rice weevil and is toxic to the leaf cutting
ants and inhibits the oviposition of leafhopper. Leaf extract of Swertia chirata inhibited the
development and growth of sun-hemp pest (Singh and Pandey, 1979) and has been found to
be toxic to the Japanese beetle (McIndoo, 1983). Root and leaf extracts of Teprosia purpurea
in water and ether have been reported to be toxic and act as repellent to the hairy caterpillar
and cotton leaf armyworm. Leaf, flower and bud extracts of Thevetia peruiana show
repellency to pulse beetle and reduce their oviposition and multiplication (Pandey et al.,
1986). Its leaf and fruit extracts in water show toxicity against cowpea aphid and jute hairy
caterpillar. Leaf extract of Toona ciliata has been reported to show antifeedant activity
against the attack of the Mahogany shoot borer. Its oil acts as protectants against the stored
wheat grains. Ethereal extract of flowers Tribulus terrestris was reported to show insecticidal
and antifeedant activities against the cotton strainer, the fall armyworm and the gram pod
borer. Root extract of Khus (Vetiver zizanioides) shows inhibition in growth and development
of the cotton stainer and also reduces the longevity of the cotton leaf armyworm. Aqueous
and alcoholic extract of branch, leaf and seeds of Vitex negundo and its oil reported to be
insecticidal, repellent, juvenile hormone mimetic and antifeedant activities against a wide
range of storage and Lepidoptereran pests (David et al., 1988)
Besides the above, some natural forest products have long been known to possess
insecticidal, insect growth regulating and antifeedant properties. Effecacy of ethanol, acetone
and ether extracts of Acorus calamus, Lantana camara, Adhatoda vasica and Melia

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 228
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

azadarach reported in killing Ailanthus webworm, Atteva fabriciella (Ahmed, et al., 1991).
Acetone and alcoholic extracts of bark and roots of Dalbergia stipulacea, leaves of
Eucalyptus hybrid and Adina cordifiolia, ursolic acid and bryonolic acid were evaluated as
insect antifeedant against Poplar defoliator Clostera cupreta (Ahmed et al., 1991). Aqueous
leaf extracts of leaf and roots of Linostoma decundrum wall (Thymelaeaceae) were reported
to have antifeedant, insecticidal, antiovipositional and ovicidal properties against red spider
mite (RSM), Oligonychus coffeae (Tetranychidae), a major pest of tea and chrysomelid
beetle, Calopepla leyana Latr. (Chrysomelidae: Coleoptera), a serious pest of Gamari
(Gmelina arborea) a valuable timber species of northeast region of India (Bora et al., 1999).
BOTANICAL FUNGICIDES
Although, there have been reported many insecticides of plant origin, it is also worth
considering the potential of higher plant as fungicides. The production of phyto-fungicides is
found to be more complex than the phyto-insecticides. Secondary metabolites that produced
by certain higher plants are being reported to have antifungal properties (Benner, 1996). The
alcoholic extract of the plant Tiliacora racemosa which is regarded as an antidote to snake
bite, found to show a mild antifungal activity (Tripathi and Dwivedi, 1989). Its alkaloidal
constituent, tiliacorinine showed promising antifungal activity against Alternaria leaf blight
of pigeon pea (Singh et al., 1991). Capillin obtain from Artemisia capillaries Thunb is being
reported as effective to a range of plant pathogens (Benner, 1996). Sclareol produced by
Salvia scarea L. And Nicotiana glutinosa is claimed to show in vivo control of plant
pathogens by Bailey et al., 1975 (as quoted by Benner, 1996) including Uromyces fabae.
Many essential oils extracted from higher plants have shown fungi-toxicity against fungal
pathogens (Fawcett et al., 1990; Dewedi et al., 1990 Singh, et al., 1993 and Singh, 1996).
The essential oils have been reported as a good source of phyto-fungicides.
Essential oils derived from medicinal and aromatic plant species, such as Citrus sinensis,
Cuminum cyminum, Hyptis suaveolens, Aegle marmalos, Seseli indicum etc. have been
reported to have the potentiality to act as fungicides against a broad spectrum of fungi such as
Aspergillus spp, fuserium spp, Helmenthsporium spp, Rhizocotonia solani, Pythium spp,
Colletrotium spp. curviularia lunata, Periconia artopurpuria, etc. (Singh et al., 1999). The
antifungal activity of polyphenolic complex of 50% extract of Acacia nilotica Bark has

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 229
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

inhibitory effect on Fusarium oxysporum (Bhargava et al., 1998). Plant saponins,

Medicagogenic acid of Medicago sativa L., pterocarpans in Erythrina crista galli L., and
allicin in Garlic (Allium sativum, L.) have been reported to have antifungal properties by
different workers as quoted by Benner, 1996). Narayan Bhat et al, (1994) reported a few
plant species for their antifungal activity against the Brinjal damping off disease caused by
Pythium aphanidermatium, of which cold-water leaf extract of Polylthia longifolia inhibited
56.6%, Ceasalpinia pauciflora inhibited 85.5%, Minikara kauki (78.8%) and hot water
extract of Eucalyptus microtheca showed 90% inhibition of mycelial growth. Gupta et al.,
(1996) reported inhibitory affect of leaf extracts of Azadirachta indica, Calotropis gigantean,
Eucalyptus sp., Parthenium hystrophorous and Pongamia pinnata against Fusarium
pallidorosum and F. Moniliformis that caused leaf blight and F. oxysporum that caused leaf
spot diseases in mulberry (Morus alba).
Biocidal properties of some other plants viz. Abelmoshus esculentus, Amaranthus spinosus,
Andropogone sorghum, Apios Americana, Brassica nigra, Carica papaya, Cassia sophera,
Chrysanthumum cinerarietolium, Cocos nuifera, Corchous capsularis Andrographis
peniculata, Curcumon domestica, Cymbopogon nardus, Datura metel, Euphorbia
pulsherrima, Faericulum vulgare, Holarrena antidysenterica, Hydrocarpus kuzil,
Lonchocarpus spp, Madhuca indica, Mentha spp, Michelia champaca, Moringa oelifera,
Nictiana tibacum, Ocimum basillicum, Opuntia spp., Piper nigram, Prosopis cineraria,
Ryania speciosa, Semecarpus anacardium, Trigonella foenumgraecum etc. have also been
investigated by several researchers.
ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS
Botanical pesticides have certain advantages/characters over synthetic chemicals.
Such pesticidal products are reported to cause no adverse effects on non-target biota. They
are unstable as deriving from plants extract and therefore, biodegradable, particularly when
exposed to light. They pose no threat to the environment and harmless to beneficial insects.
They are soluble in water, highly biodegradable and therefore, low persistence as they start
degrading soon after applied. Thus most of the crops sprayed with botanical pesticides are
quite safe for consumption after a short period after spraying (Chomchalow, 1993). There is
no such evidence reported so far that the disease pests have developed resistance over

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 230
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

phytopesticides (Cameron, 1974). Phytopesticides even those derived from a single plant has
many active ingredients of low potency. This may be one of the reason that disease pest
unable to develop resistance against these phytopesticides since it requires several
simultaneous mutations to acquire genetic constituents to overcome all active ingredients of
botanical pesticides (Chomchalow, 1993). Phytopesticides are highly selective and therefore,
effective against a specific pest species only, while other non-target species (e.g. beneficial
insects and predators etc.) are not affected, thus minimizing the impact on natural
environment. However some exceptions have been also reported. For example, neem seed
extract has been reported to be effective against 200 species of insects, mites and nematodes,
including major pests such as locust, rice and maize borers, pulse beetles (Chomchalow,
1993). Phytopesticides are reported to have very low mammalian toxicity except a few such
products e.g. from Derris sp., tobacco, etc. Some extracts, for example neem seed does not
harm birds and beneficial insects such as bees (Chomchalow, 1993). Phytopesticides are
commonly applied as extracts, suspensions in water base, spray formulation etc. Various
additives as anivaporants, pH regulators and other ingredients are used in the spray
formulation. The spray formulations are atomized into drops by conventional nozzles
producing various drop - size spectra (Boving et al, 1971). The research and development
cost and the time required for the discovery of phytopesticides is much lesser as compared to
chemical pesticides. The raw materials for the production of phytopesticides are the agro-
byproduct and plants, which are affordable and production technology is relatively simple.
Therefore phytopesticides are much cheaper than chemical pesticides.
Inspite of so many benefits of phytopesticides, they have some limitations as well.
Phytopesticides have a short shelf life and must be used soon after preparation. Normal self-
life of botanical pesticides is ranged from one week to one day only, if not stabilized by
chemical process (Chomchalow, 1993). Some active ingredients of certain phytopesticides
may also be lost during production and processing while over crude process. The
effectiveness of these active ingredients may also be lost due to lack of quality control, short
self-life and low concentration of active ingredients. Therefore, the claim for effectiveness in
certain cases may not exist up to their promising level. Availability of raw materials in large

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 231
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

scale and imbalance among the production, demand and market availability are some
common constrains of botanical pesticides.
CONCLUSION
Utilization of botanical pesticides in agriculture and plantation forestry is now emerging as
one or the prime means to protect crop produce and plantations to save the environment from
pesticidal pollution. They are preferred over chemical pesticides on account of their low
mammalian toxicity, no hazards to environment and human health. To fulfill the demand of
food for ever-growing population, agricultural productivity enhancement is essential; hence
use of pesticides seems to be indispensable. However use of harmful chemical pesticides
should be managed in such a way that it will not pose any serious threat to environment and
human life (Fig. 1). Moreover, plant products from diverse plant genetic resources of tropical
& sub – tropical countries must be formulated and their shelf-life, thermal and phytolytic
activity must be evaluated for developing more effective biopesticides.
Table30: Botanical with their probable active chemical constituents responsible for
Insecticidal, Herbicidal, Fungicidal & other pesticidal activities

S. Plant species Common Plant part Probable active chemical Biological

No. Names used constituents (s) activity
1. Abies balsamea Balsam fir Leaves Juvabione, dehyojuvabione Hormonal (JH)
2. Aconitum ferox Indian Whole plant Psuedaconitine, Aphicidal,
Aconite, chasmaconitine, indaconitine, toxic to beetles
Bishnag bikhaconitine & diacetyl
pseudaconitine
3. Acorus calamus Bachh Leaves Trans - asarone, cis - asarone, Repellent,
isoasarone antifeedant

4. Adhatoda Adusa Leaves Vasicine, vasicinone, Insecticidal,

vasica vasicinol, antifeedant
limonene,
5. Aegle marmelos Bael/ Essential oil Limonene, α pinene, Feeding
Bilva from leaves sabinene, deterrence,
ocimene and p -caryophyllene fungicidal

6. Allium sativum Wild Pyaj Bulbs Diallyl di-sulfide, diallyl tri- Insecticidal
sulfide
7. Allium cepa Pyaj Bulbs and Quercetin & phenolic Insecticidal
leaves compounds
8. Andrographis Kalmegh Leaves Andrographolide Insecticidal
paniculata

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 232
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

9. Anethum sowa Dill Seeds, Carvone, dillapiole Insecticidal

leaves, stem
10. Anacardium Kaju Cashew nut Phenolic constituents Insecticidal
occidentale shell oil
11. Annona Ramphal Roots, stems,Anonaine, liriodenine, Insecticidal
reticulata leaves, seedsreticuline,
norushinsunine
12. Annona Sharifa Fruit & Seed Annonacin, annonin, Antifeedant,
squamosa Exts. Annonelliptine, repellent
asimicin, annonidines
13. Aquilaria Agar- Agarwood α- guaiene, caryophellene Protection,
malaccensis wood dust oxide, eudesmol repellent

14. Argemone Satyanashi Leaves Protopine nitrate, Berberine Protection

maxicana nitrate, Ceryl alcohol, -
sitostero
15. Artemisia Mugwort Leaves 1,8-cineole, camphor and α- Repellent,
vulgaris terpineol insecticidal
16. Artemisia Seeta-bani Leaves Bornyl acetate, capillarin, Feeding
capillaris capillen deterrent
17. Azadirachta Neem Leaves and Limonoids, azadirachtins, Insecticidal,
indica diff. parts salanin, Hormonal
nimbin (JH),
antifeedant,
multifacial
18. Bambusa Bamboo Fresh & Benzoic acid, cyanogenic Insecticidal
arundinacea young shoots glucoside
19. Bixa orellana Latkan, Seed coats Bixin Repellent
Annatto
20. Brassica Sarson Seeds 2- Phenylethyl isothiocyanate Fecundity
comprastis reducing

21. Butea Palash Flowers Chalcones and Aurones Termicide

monosperma
22. Caesalpinia Latakaranj Seeds Karajin, fatty acids Antifeedant,
crista a insecticidal,
repellant
23. Calotropis Aak Leaves Latex containing poisonous Antifeedant
procera constituents
24. Camellia spp. Camellia Leaves Shikinic acid, caeffin & Insecticidal,
tannins repellent
25. Cannabis sativa Bhang Leaves Resinoid Protectant
tetrahydrocannabinol, a
phenolic type substance
26. Capsicum Lal mirch Fruits Capsaicin Insecticidal
frutescens
27. Carica papaya Papaya Leaves Carpaine Insecticidal

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 233
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

28. Cassia Cassia Leaves Emodin Insecticidal

nigricans

29. Cassia Chakunda, Leaves Emodin Insecticidal

occidentalis Kasonda
30. Cassia alata Dadmurda Seeds Cassiaxanthone, kaempferol Meamorphosis
n and its glycosides, inhibitor
aloeemodin, chrysophanol,
isochrysophanol, –
sitosterol rhein physicion – 1-
glucoside
31. Cassia tora Charota Leaves Chrysophanic – 9 - anthrone Antifeedant

32. Catharanthus Sadabahar Whole plant Several alkaloids Insecticidal,

roseus Antifeedant
33. Chenopodiun Chenopodi Seeds Essential oil having Insecticidal
anthelminticum um ascaridole
34. Chrysanthemum Guldaudi Flowers Pyrethrins I & II, cinerins I & Antifeedant
spp. II, and jasmolins I & II
35. Cinchona Cinchona Bark Quinine, quinidine, Insecticidal
officinalis cinchonine &
cinchonidine
36. Cinnamomum Kapur All parts of Camphor oil Insecticidal
camphora tree
37. Citrus limon Nimbu Leaves and Limonin, nomilin, obacunone Antifeedant,
fruits toxicant
38. Citrus spp. Nimbu Leaves, twigs Citropin, dl- limonens, Insecticidal
& peels linalool, glucosides, acids,
terpenes etc.
39. Cymbopogan Nimbu Leaves – cardiaene, elemicin, citral Insecticidal,
spp. ghas repellent

40. Curcuma longa Haldi Turmeric Curcumene, Termerone, Repellent,

powder dehydro- protectant
termerone, α- phellandrene
41. Curcuma longa Turmeric Essential oil α-Phellandrene Growth
from leaves inhibition and
larval
mortality
42. Datura metel Datura Leaves Hyoscine Antifeedant

43. Derris elliptica Derris Roots Rotenone and Insecticidal

dihydrorotenone
44. Eucalyptus Safeda Leaves 1,8 - Cineole, α-phellandrene, Antifeedant
hybrid linalyl isovalerate, isoamyl
isovalerate etc.
45. Eucalyptus Blue Leaf ext. 1,8 - Cineole, caryophyllene, Protection
globulus Eucalyptus globul ol, α-phellandrene, -

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 234
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

eudesmol etc.
46. Eucalyptus Murray Leaves 1,8 - Cineole, α-phellandrene Anti-
rostrata red gum etc. Fecundity
47. Euphorbia Tridhara Latex Latex contains 4.0 – 6.4 % Antifeedant
antiquorum caoutchouc
48. Foeniculam Moti Leaves Fenicularin Repellent
vulgare Saunf

49. Ginkgo biloba Balkuwari Leaves Salicylic acid derivatives, Feeding

bilobalide, ginkgolide – A detterent
and B
50. Glycine max Soybean Leaves Glyceollins, daidzein Antifeedant,
toxicant

51. Hydrocarpus Calmogara Seeds Hydnocarpic acid, Repellent,

spp. , Jangli Chaulmoogric acid, Gallic oviposition
badam acid & other fatty acids reducer

52. Ipomea carnea Behaya Leaves Essential oil having Insecticidal

alantolactone
53. Jatropha carcus Ratanjot Leaves and Isovitexin, vitexin, – Protectant,
seeds sitosterol Curcine, curcasin, repellent
fatty acids etc.
54. Lantana camera Raimuniya Leaves Caryophyllene, cineol and - Protectant
pinene
55. Lawsonia Mehandi Leaves Tannin, saponin, Antifeedant
inermis anthraquinone flavonoids,
glucosides and alkaloids
56. Lycopersicon Jangli Leaves 2-tridecanone, trans - Repellency,
hirsutum Tamatar caryophyllene toxicity

57. Melia Bakain Leaves Tetraterpenoids, toosendanin, Antifeedant,

azedarach meliandiol, melianone, ovipositon
meliantriol, nimbolidin A, deterrent,
volkensin antifertility,
toxicant
58. Mentha spicata Pudina Flowering Cineole, carvone, Antifeedant,
tops caryophyllene, menthol toxicant
59. Moringa Senjana Leaves Niazirin, niazirinin Growth
oleifera inhibitor

60. Nerium Kaner Leaves Cardiotonic, oleandrin, Inhibit

oleander neridin oviposition
61. Nicotiana Tambaku Seeds Nicotine, nornicotine, Insecticidal,
tabacum anabasine antifeedant
62. Ocimum Ram Tulsi Leaves and Juvocimene I, II, linalool, Antifeedant,
basillicum seeds methyl chavicol, eugenol, toxicant

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 235
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

methyl eugenol, geraniol,

geranial, neral
63. Ocimum Tulsi Leaves, Linalool, chavicol, eugenol, Insecticidal,
sanctum seeds eugenol methyl ether, cineole, repellent
caryophyllene
64. Parthenium Gajar ghas Whole plant Parthenin, 1,8-cineole, Feeding
hysterophorus coronopilin deterrent,
growth
inhibitor
65. Piper nigrum Kali Mirch Fruits or Piperine, piperitine Insecticidal,
seeds repellent
66. Plumbago Chitrak Roots and Pumbagin, juglone Antifeedant,
zeylanica leaves repellent
67. Pongamia Karanj Leaves Karanjin Insecticidal,
pinnata aphicidal
68. Pidium guajava Amrood Leaves - sitosterol, maslinic acid, Insecticidal,
guijavalic acid repellent
69. Ricinus Arandi Leaves and Ricinine & fatty acids Repellent
communis seeds
70. Sapindus Ritha Seeds Saponins Insecticidal
mukorossi
71. Sesamum Safed til Roots Fatty oil contains sesamin, Antifeedant
indicum sesamolin, sesangolin etc.
72. Tagetes minuta Genda Flowers Tagetes oil having terthienyl - Larvicidal,
(β,β’,5’,β’’-terthiophene), E- repellent
ocimenone

73. Tephrosia Sharpunkh Roost & Ratenoids Insecticidal

purpurea a seeds

74. Tephrosia Fish bean Leaves Ratenoids Insecticidal

vogelii

75. Vinca rosea Sadabaha Leaves Toxic alkaloids & Phenolics Repellent

76. Vetiveria Khas Roots Vetiver oil having - Growth

zizanioides vetivene, azulene, zizanene disrupter,
leavojujenol etc. repellent
77. Vitex negundo Nirgundi Leaves & Rotundial Repellent,
seed insecticidal
78. Zanthoxylum Yellow Bark Zanthophylline Feeding
monophyllum Prickle deterrent

79. Zanthoxylum Yellow Fruits Essential oil having 1,8 - Insecticidal

monophyllum Prickle cineole,trans - sabinene
hydrate and cis - sabinene
hydrate
80. Zinziber officinale Adrak Rhizomes Gingerdione, paradol, Antifeedant,

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 236
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

gingerol, shogaol growth

inhibitior
Source: Subramaniam, 1993, Tripathi, 1998, Kulkarni, 2001 and Dhaliwal & Koul, 2007

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ahmed, P.Y.A. and Ahmed, S.M. (1991). Potential of some rhizome of Zingiberaceae family
as grain protectants against storage insect pests, J. Food Sci. Technol., 28: 375-377.
Ahmed, M., Gupta, B.K. and Bhandari, R. (1991). Efficacy of some plant extracts against
Ailanthus web worm: Atteva fabriciella. Ind. For. 14 (1): 5-7.
Ahmed, M., Dayal, R., Mishra, R.K. and Dobhal, P.C. (1997). Antifeedant potency of some
plants produce against defoliating pest of Poplar, Clostera cupreata. Ind. For. 123(3): 821-
826.
Bernner, J.P. (1996). Pesticides from nature, Part I: Crop protection agents from higher
plants: an overview. In: Crop protection agents from nature, Natural products and
analogues. Leonard G. Copping (ed.) pp. 217-129. The Royal society of Chemistry, Thomas
Graham House, Science park, Milton Road, Cambridge CB44WF, UK.
Bhargava, A., Srivastava, Anubha and Kumhira, V. (1998). Antifungal activity of
polyphenolic complex of Acacia nilotica Bark. Ind. For. 124 (5): 292-298.
Bhat, N., Sivaprakasan, M.K. and Jeyaranjan, R. (1994). Antifungal activity of some Plant
Extracts. Ind. J.For. 17(1): 10-14.
Bora, H.R., Hazarika, L.K. and Dutta, Nizora. (1999). Botanicals for forest and tea pest
management. In: Green pesticides crop protection and safty evaluatuion. N.P. Agnihotri, S.
Walia, and V.T. Gajbhiye (eds.). Scociety of pesticide Science, New Delhi.
Boving, P.A., Maksymiuk, B., Winertfedl, R.G. and Orchard, R.D. (1971). Equipments needs
for aerial application of microbial insecticides. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. Trans.14: 48-51.
Bowry, S.K., Pandey, N.D. and Tripathi., R.A. (1984). Evaluation of certain oilseed cake
powders as grain protectant against Sitophilus oryzae. Ind. J of Ent., 48: 196-200.
Bradley, R. (1983). New Improvements of Planting and Gardening – Both Philosophical and
Practical. Butterworeth, Hitch, Pemberton, Knapton and Brown, London, pp. 221.
Brooks, G.T. (1976). Chlorinated Insecticides, CRC Press Inc., Cleveland, Ohio.
Busbey R.L. (1950-51). “Plant that help to kill insect”. In: The Yearbook of Agriculture: Crop
in peace and War. United States Department of Agriculture, pp. 765-771. Govt. Printing
Office, Washington D.C.
Chomchalow, Norang (1993). The use of medicinal and aromastic plants as botanical
pesticides. In: Medicinal and Aromatic Plants in Asia, Breeding and Improvement. N.
Chomchalow & Hans V. Henle (eds.). Rupa Publication, 1993/19.
Cremlyn, R. (1978). Pesticides, Preparation & Mode of action. John Wiley & Sons, 2-7 p.
David .B.V, Sukumeran, D. and Kandaswamy, C. (1988). The Indian privet, Vitex negundo
Linn., a plant possessing promising pesticidal activity. Pesticides. 21(2): 27-30.
Dewedi, S.K. and Kishor, N. (1990). Fungitoxicity of some essential oils against
Macrophomina phyoseolina. Indian Perfumer, 34: 20-21.
Dhaliwal, G.S. and Koul, O. (2007). Biopesticides and pest management (Convetional &
Biotechnological Approaches). Kalyani Publishers, Ludhiana, India.

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 237
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

Donaldson, D., Kiely, T. and Grube, A. (1999). Pesticide's industry sales and usage 1998-
1999 market estimates. US Environmental Protection Agency; Washington (DC): Report No.
EPA-733-R-02-OOI. Available from: http: //www.epa.gov/oppbead/ pesticides/99
pestsales/market-estimates.pdf.
Ennis, W. B., Jr., and McClellan, W.D. (1964). Chemicals in Crop Production, in Yearbook
of Agriculture, USDA, Washington, DC.
FAO. (2010a). Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010 – Key findings. Brochure. Rome.
Fawcett C.H. and Spancer, D.M. (1990). Plant chemotherapy with natural products: A
review. Phytopath. 8: 403-418.
Flury, M. (1996). Experimental evidence of tranport of pesticides through field soils. A
Review. J Environ.Quality, 25: 25-45.
Forsyth, W. (1802). Treatise on the culture and management of fruit trees. Longman Rees,
Cadel, Davis and Debrett, London, pp. 250.
Fukami, H and Nkajima, M. (1971). “Rotenone and the Rotenoides”. In: Naturally Occurring
Insecticides. M. Jacobson & D.G. Crosby (eds.) pp. 71-79. Marchel Dekker, New York.
Georghiou, G.P. (1986). The magnitude of the resistance problem. In: Pesticide Resistance:
Strategies and Tactics for Management. Pp. 14 - 44. National Academy Press, Washington,
USA.
Gopal Kumar, B., Kumeresan, D. and Varadarsan, S. (1993). Evaluation of pesticides from
Neem and Lantana camara Linn. Pests of Cardamom. World Neem Conference, Bangalore,
India, 24-28 Feb. (Abstract.11p)
Grainge, M. and Ahmed, S. (1988). Hand book of plants with pest control properties. John
Wiley and sons, New York, pp. 180.
Gupta, V., Govidaiah, P. and. Dutta. R.K. (1996). Plant extracts: A non- chemical approach
to control Fusarium disease of Mulnberry. Cur.Sci. 71(5): 406-409.
Jacobson, M. (1975). Insecticides from plants, A review of literatre (1945-1971) USDA
Agric. Hand Book, Govt. Printing Office, Washington D.C, pp. 461.
Jaipal, S., Singh, Z. and Chauhan, R. (1983). Juvanile hormone like activity of some common
Indian plants. Indian J.Agric. Sci. 53 (8): 730-733. 1983.
Jotwani, M.G. and Sirkar, P. (1965). Neem as protectant against stored grain pests infesting
wheat seed. Indian J. Ent. 27: 160 – 164.
Khanvilkar,V.G. (1983). Plant species reportedly possessing pest control properties. An
EWC/UHDATABASE, Univ. of Hawai, pp. 249.
Koeman, J.H. (1978). In: Advances in pesticide Science, Part-I, H. Geissbuhler (ed.) pp. 25-
38. Pergaman Press, New York.
Korsak, R.J. and Sato, M.M. (1977). Effects of chronic organophosphate pesticide exposure on
central nervous system, Clinical Toxicology, 11: 83.
Kulkarni, N. (2001). Anti-insect bioactivities of some botanicals: their prospects as
component of Integrated Pest Control System. In: Recent Trends in Insect Pest Control to
Enhance Forest Productivity. P.K. Shukla, and K.C. Joshi (eds.) pp. 95-137. Published by
Tropical Forest Research Institute, Jabalpur (M.P.) India.
Kulkarni, N. and Joshi, K.C. (1998b). Antifeedant properties of some botanical extracts
against maharukha webworm, Atteva fabriciella Swed. (Lepidoptera: Yponomeutidae).
Journal of Tropical Forest Products, 4 (1): 11 – 16.

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 238
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

Kulkarni, N., Singh, Neelu, Joshi, K.C. and Bhargava, Alka. (1995). Neem tree (Azadirachta
indica A. Juss) as a potent source of biopesticide: application in forest insect control. Journal
of Tropical Forestry, 13(iii): 166 – 174.
Kulkarni, N., Joshi, K.C. and Meshram, P.B. (1996a). Bio-activity of methanolic neem seed
extract against the teak skeletonizer, Eutectona machaeralis Walk. (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae).
J. Environ. Biol. 17 (3): 189 – 195.
Kulkarni, N., Joshi, K.C. and Rama Rao N. (1996b). Screening of some plant extracts for
feeding inhibition property against major forest insect pests. Myforest, 32(2): 118 – 127.
Levitan, L., Merwin, I. and Kovach, J. (1995). Assessing the relative environmental impacts of
agricultural pesticides: The quest for a holistic method. Agril. Ecosyst. Environ. 55: 153-158.
Marippan, V. (1995). Neem for Management of crop Diseases. Associated Publishing Co.,
New Delhi.
Matsui, M. and Yamaoto, I. (1971). “Pyrethroids”, In: Naturally Occurring Insecticides. M.
Jacobson and D. G. Crosby (eds.) pp. 3-70. Marcel Dekker, New York.
McIndoo, I. (1983). USDA. Bur. Entomol. and Pl. Quar. Pers. Commn. In Michel et al, 1985,
Plant species reportedly possessing pest control properties. An EWC/UHDATABASE, pp.
249, Univ. of Hawai.
Meshram, P.B., Kulkarni, N. and Joshi, K.C. (1994). Antifeedant activity of certain plant
products against teak skeletonizer, Eutectona machaeralis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Ann.
Entomol. 12 (2): 4 - 5.
Miana, G.A., Atta-Ur Rahaman, M., Choudhury, Iqbal, Jilani, G. and Hafsa Bibi. (1996).
Pesticides from Nature: Present and Future Perspectives. In: Crop protection agents from
nature, Natural products and analogues. L.G. Copping (ed.) pp. 241-153. The Royal society
of Chemistry, Thomas Graham House, Science park, Milton Road, Cambridge CB44WF,
UK.
Michael, C.R. and Alavanja, P.H. (2009). Pesticides Use and Exposure Extensive Worldwide.
Rev Environ Health. 24(4): 303–309.
Nitya Nand. (1977). Research on Indigenous Drugs, Sci. & Cult. 43: 17-21.
Oca, G., Montes, D., Garica, F. and Schoonhoven, A.V. (1978). Effect of four vegetable oils
on Sitophilus oryzae and Sitotroga cerealla in stored maize, Sorghum and wheat. South-
Weasern Entomolgist, 11: 63-68.
Pandey, N.D., Mathur, K.K., Pandey, S. and Tripathi, R.A. (1986). Effect of some plant
extracts against pulse beetle., Callosobruchus chinensis Linn., Ind. J. Ent. 48(1): 85-90.
Pathak, S.C., Kulkarni, N. and Meshram, P.B. (1995a). Forest Insect control. Encyclopedia of
Environmental Biology, 3: 119 – 130. Academic Press, London (U.K.).
Pimental, D. (1992). Forward. In: Ecological Processes in Agroecosystems. M. Shiomi, E.
Yano, H. Koizumi, D. A. Andow and N.Hokyo (eds.), pp. 1-2. Yokkendo Publishers Tokyo,
Japan.
Pradhan, S., Jotwani, M.G. and Rai, B.K. (1962). The Neem seeds, deterrent to locust. Ind.
Farming. 12: 7-11.
Prakash Rao, A.J. (1987). Use of chemicals as grain protectants in storage ecosystem and its
consequences. Bull. Grain Tech 25: 65-69.
Rajendran, B. and Gopalan, M. (1979). Note on juveno-mimetic activity of some plants.
Indian J. Agric. Sci. 49(4): 295-297.

FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 239
 TAXONOMY AND ITS IMPORTANCE

Saxena, K.N. and Basit, A. (1982). Inhibition of oviposition by volatiles of certain plants and
chemicals of the leafhopper Amrasca devasca Distant. J. chem. Ecol. 8(2): 329-334.
Schmutterer, H. (1995). The Neem Tree.VCH Verlagsgesellschaft, Weinheim (FRG), VCH
Publishers Inc., New York, pp. 696.
Sharville, E.G. (1960). The nature and use of modern fungicides. Burgess Publishing Co.,
Minnesota, USA, pp. 3.
Shelke, S.S, Jakhav, L.D. and Sahinkhe, G.N. (1987). Ovicidal action of some vegetable oils
and extracts in storage pest of potato. Phthorimaria Operculella, Zell. Bioviggyanam. 13(1):
40-41.
Singh, H. and. Pandey, P.N. (1979). Effect of chirata on development and growth of
Utethesia pulchella Linn. (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae). Zeistschrift fur Agewandte Zoologie.
66(1): 15-20.
Singh, K.P., Pandey, V.B., Tripathi, Y.C. and Singh, U.P., (1991). Tiliacorinine, a new
systemic fungicide effective against Alternaria blight of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan),
Zeitschrift fur Pflanzenkrankheiten und Pflanzenschutz, 98 (2): 213-219.
Singh, G and Upadhya, R.K., (1993). Essential Oils: A Potent Source of Natural Pesticides. J.
Sci Ind.Res. 52: 676-683.
Singh, G. (1996). Studies of fungicidal activity of essential oils. Euro cosmetics 4: 27-32.
Singh, G., Kapoor, I.P.S. Pandey, S.K. and Rao, G.P. (1999). Botanical Fungicides. In: Green
pesticides crop protection and safty evaluatuion. N.P. Agnihotri, S. Walia, and V.T.
Gajbhiye, (eds.) pp. 132-137. Society of pesticide Science, New Delhi.
Srivastava, K. P.and Saxena, V.S. (1986). Linseed oil as binding agents for pesticides
granules Endosulfan, Indian J. Ent. 48(1): 43-45.
Subramaniam, S. (1993). Potential pesticidal plants of India. In: Botanicals & Biopesticides.
B.S. Parmar and C. Devakumar (eds.) pp. 74 – 100. Westvill Publishing House, New Delhi,
India.
Sundararaj, R., Rathore, M. and Tripathi, Y.C. (1998). Aphicidal potential of Capparis
decidua (Forxk) against green peach aphid Mysus persicae (Green) (Aphidiae: Homoptera)
on Cabbage. Pestology XXII (1): 38-41.
Swaminathan, M.S. (1995). The Hindu Survey of Indian Agriculture. N. Ravi (ed.) pp.7.
National Press, Madras, India
Tewari, D.N. (1992). Monograph on Neem (Azadirachta indica A. Juss.) pp. 275.
Tripathi, Y.C. and Dwivedi, R.K. (1989). Antifungal activity of alkaloids of Tiliacora
racemosa, Nat. Acad. Sci. Letters, 12(3): 69-71.
Tripathi, Y.C. (1998). Phytopesticides, an ecofriendly approach for pest control, Ind. J.
Environ. Sci. 2(2): 63-71.
Tripathi, Y.C. and Tripathi, G. (1999). Importance of phytopesticides in environmental
protection. In: Modern trends in Environmental pollution and Ecoplanning. A. Kumar, (ed.)
pp. 82-96. ABD Publishers, Jaipur, India.
Tripathi, Y.C. (2000). Potential of neem constituents in pest management. Everyman’s Sci.,
XXXV(2): 78-84.
Zechendorf, B. (1996). Biopesticides as integrated pest management strategy in agriculture. In:
Novel Approaches to Integrated Pest Management. R. Reuveni (ed.) pp. 231-260. Lewis
Publishers Inc., Florida, USA.
FAMILIARIZING WITH LOCAL BIODIVERSITY: Notes on Systematics Of Plants And Insects Page 240

View publication stats