Next Article in Journal
A Blind-Identification Test on Criconema annuliferum (de Man, 1921) Micoletzky, 1925 Species Complex Corroborate the Hyper-Cryptic Species Diversity Using Integrative Taxonomy
Previous Article in Journal
Simulation of Photosynthetic Quantum Efficiency and Energy Distribution Analysis Reveals Differential Drought Response Strategies in Two (Drought-Resistant and -Susceptible) Sugarcane Cultivars
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Plants
Volume 12
Issue 5
10.3390/plants12051043
plants-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effects of Piper nigrum L. Fruit Essential Oil Toxicity against Stable Fly (Diptera: Muscidae)

by
Thekhawet Weluwanarak
1,
Tanasak Changbunjong
1,2,
Arpron Leesombun
2,
Sookruetai Boonmasawai
2 and
Sivapong Sungpradit
2,*
1
The Monitoring and Surveillance Center for Zoonotic Diseases in Wildlife and Exotic Animals (MoZWE), Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom 73170, Thailand
2
Department of Pre-Clinic and Applied Animal Science, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom 73170, Thailand
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2023, 12(5), 1043; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12051043
Submission received: 25 January 2023 / Revised: 15 February 2023 / Accepted: 22 February 2023 / Published: 24 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Phytochemistry)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The efficacy of Piper nigrum L. fruit essential oil (EO) against Stomoxys calcitrans (stable fly), a blood-feeding fly distributed worldwide, was investigated. This study aimed to evaluate the insecticidal activity of EO based on contact and fumigant toxicity tests. Chemical analysis of the EO using gas chromatography–mass spectrometry revealed that sabinene (24.41%), limonene (23.80%), β-caryophyllene (18.52%), and α-pinene (10.59%) were the major components. The results demonstrated that fly mortality increased with increasing EO concentration and time during the first 24 h of exposure. The median lethal dose was 78.37 µg/fly for contact toxicity, while the 90% lethal dose was 556.28 µg/fly. The median lethal concentration during fumigant toxicity testing was 13.72 mg/L air, and the 90% lethal concentration was 45.63 mg/L air. Our findings suggested that essential oil extracted from P. nigrum fruit could be a potential natural insecticidal agent for control of stable fly. To examine the insecticidal properties of P. nigrum fruit EO, further field trials and investigation into the efficacy of nano-formulations are required.

1. Introduction

Stable fly [Stomoxys calcitrans (Diptera: Muscidae)], an insect belonging to the order Diptera, is distributed worldwide. Stable flies carry bovine life-threatening viral pathogens including lumpy skin disease virus, bovine herpes virus, and bovine leukosis virus [1]. Furthermore, in the equine industry, stable fly acts as a mechanical vector of equine infectious anemia virus [1,2] and Trypanosoma evansi [3]. Moreover, stable fly plays an important role as the biological vector of the equine stomach nematode Habronema microstoma [4]. This vector has been demonstrated to cause economic impact in equine and livestock husbandry by disease transmission, annoyance, and stress in affected animals [1,5].
Various chemical products have been used to control insect vectors. In an experiment involving stable flies, the toxicity of semiochemicals including aliphatic alcohols, terpenoids, ketones, and carboxylic esters was studied, with the median lethal concentration (LC50) ranging from 16.30–40.41 μg/cm2 [6]. Recently, cypermethrin (group A) demonstrated an excellent repellent effect with an LC50 of 1.52 μg/mL [7]. However, the emergence of flies resistant to these chemical substances has been reported worldwide [8,9], and furthermore the chemical residue causes environmental pollution [10].
To control diseases caused by the stable fly vector using green or environmentally friendly products, plant essential oil (EO) has been proposed as an alternative method for insecticidal and repellent insect-vector control. By its volatile properties, EO affects the flight behavior of stable fly and peripheral olfactory networks in the antennae [11]. A repellency study in stable fly using a human hand bioassay demonstrated that various EOs such as patchouli [Pogostemon cablin (Blanco) Bentham], clove (Eugenia caryophyllata Thunberg) buds and leaves, and lovage (Levisticum officinale L. Koch) roots, had the potential to repel female flies [12]. Catnip EO (Nepeta cataria L.), whose main active ingredient is nepetalactone, demonstrated feeding and oviposition repellence against stable flies [13]. Recently, Melaleuca alternifolia EO, with a high 1,8-cineole component, was investigated for its insecticidal activity against adult stable flies, using surface application and oil-impregnated paper exposure testing [14].
The insecticidal effects of potential medicinal plant essential oils have been tested against stable fly. Catnip EO (90% ZE- and EZ-nepetalactone and 10% caryophyllene) had an LC50 of 7.7 mg/cm3 and an LC90 of 18.15 mg/cm3 for contact toxicity, and an LC50 of 10.7 mg/cm3 and an LC90 of 23.90 mg/cm3 for fumigant toxicity [15]. Recently, bitter orange [Citrus aurantium (L.)] EO, which primarily contains limonene, had a reported LD50 of 105.88 µg/fly and an LD90 of 499.25 µg/fly for contact toxicity, and an LC50 of 13.06 mg/L air and an LC90 of 43.13 mg/L air for fumigant toxicity within 24 h [16]. Additionally, the semiochemicals rosalva, geranyl acetone, and citronellol were studied for their fumigant toxicity in stable fly, using a residual contact bioassay in glass jars. The LC50 of rosalva (from the rose), geranyl acetone (from cardamom, citrus, and petitgrain oil), and citronellol (from eucalyptus) were 13.10 µg/cm2, 25.20 µg/cm2, and 35.69 µg/cm2, respectively, while the LC90 values were 18.54 µg/cm2, 34.97 µg/cm2, and 50.10 µg/cm2, respectively, after 24 h exposure [6]. Overall, however, the study of potential volatile plant oil for controlling the stable fly insect vector has been limited.
Piper nigrum L. is widely employed as a food ingredient to increase taste and is found mainly in tropical zones throughout the world [17]. A previous study reported that green or unripe pepper EO had stronger antibacterial and antifungal properties compared with black pepper EO [18]. The EO from green pepper was analyzed and found to have the same primary components including β-pinene, δ-3-carene, limonene, α-pinene, and caryophyllene oxide [18]. Another study found that air-dried green pepper EO consisted primarily of terpinen-4-ol, β-caryophyllene, hedycaryol, limonene, and sabinene. Moreover, green pepper oil contained the highest levels of sesquiterpenes such as β-caryophyllene and oxygenated terpenoids such as caryophyllene oxide, hedycaryol, β-eudesmol, and eugenol when compared with black and white peppers [19].
Black pepper oil contained primarily monoterpene hydrocarbons (47–64%) and sesquiterpene hydrocarbons (30–47%) [20]. The EO from black pepper was analyzed, and the primary components were found to be β-caryophyllene, limonene, β-pinene, α-pinene, δ-3-carene, sabinene, and myrcene [21]. A study of black pepper components found that piperine, an alkaloid, had multiple pharmacological effects, including insecticidal, larvicidal, antibacterial, antifungal, and antioxidant activity [22], while β-caryophylline, a sesquiterpene, demonstrated a larvicidal effect on Aedes aegypti mosquito larvae [23]. Fumigant toxicity and the biochemical effects of P. nigrum EO were studied in the adult and larval stages of the pulse beetle Callosobruchus chinensis (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) [24] and the adult red flour beetle Tribolium castaneum (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) [25]. However, study of green pepper fruit EO, which has a different chemical composition, remains limited.
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of unripe or green P. nigrum fruit EO insecticidal activities against S. calcitrans, using in vitro contact toxicity and fumigant toxicity methods. Thereafter, the EO was analyzed for its chemical composition using gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS).

2. Results

2.1. Essential Oil Extraction and Quantification

The yield of P. nigrum L. EO obtained from fresh fruit was 0.96% volume/weight (v/w). The oil was clear in color with a pH of 5, a density of 0.87 g/mL at 20 °C, and a refractive index of 1.48. The chemical constituents of P. nigrum EO were determined by GC-MS techniques. A total of twenty-one compounds were identified accounting for 99.41% of the total oil including the retention time (min), classes, compounds, formula, chemical structure, peak area (%), and % similarity index (Table 1). A chromatogram of the primary components of P. nigrum EO is shown in Figure 1. The major components were sabinene (24.41%), limonene (23.80%), β-caryophyllene (18.52%), and α-pinene (10.59%). Limonene and β-caryophyllene were used to quantify the EO, and the concentrations were 0.18% and 0.10% weight/volume (w/v), respectively.

2.2. Contact Toxicity Test

The contact toxicity of P. nigrum EO against S. calcitrans was studied at various EO concentrations. The test was validated using acetone, with no insecticidal activity, as a negative control. When EO treatments at 43.25 µg/µL, 86.50 µg/µL, 216.25 µg/µL, and 432.50 µg/µL were compared with cypermethrin, EO was found to have little to no insecticidal efficacy (Table 2). From 1–24 h after treatment, EO at a concentration of 865.00 µg/µL demonstrated insecticidal activity comparable to cypermethrin. The results showed that S. calcitrans mortality increased with higher EO concentration and time. The interaction between EO concentration and time was statistically significant for S. calcitrans mortality (time, F(2.35, 33.01) = 32.61, p < 0.001; treatment, F(6, 33.01) = 244.77, p < 0.001; treatment × time, F(14.15, 33.01) = 4.64, p < 0.001). The LD50 and LD90 values were 15.68% and 111.23% (w/v) or 78.37 µg/fly and 556.28 µg/fly, respectively (Table 3).

2.3. Fumigant Toxicity Test

The fumigant toxicity of P. nigrum EO against S. calcitrans was assessed at various EO concentrations. The test was validated using acetone, which has no insecticidal activity, as a negative control. At EO concentrations < 25.95 mg/L, the EO had little or no insecticidal action for S. calcitrans (Table 4). From 6–24 h after treatment, the EO at a concentration of 25.95 mg/L demonstrated insecticidal activity comparable to cypermethrin. The results showed that S. calcitrans mortality increased with the increased EO concentration and time. The interaction between concentration and time was statistically significant for S. calcitrans mortality (time, F(2.28, 31.97) = 75.47, p < 0.001; treatment, F(6, 31.97) = 158.11, p < 0.001; treatment × time, F(13.70, 31.97) = 24.20, p < 0.001). The LC50 and LC90 values were 13.72 mg/L air and 45.63 mg/L air, respectively (Table 5).

3. Discussion

This investigation utilized P. nigrum fruit EO for in vitro contact and fumigant toxicity testing against wild-caught stable flies from a rural horse farm. Since the wild-caught flies varied in age, sex, and nutritional and physiological status, these factors should be considered when comparing the results from this study with those of laboratory studies [26]. While the laboratory-reared stable fly is suitable for insecticide-sensitivity and vector-competency experiments under controlled conditions [1,27], the field-caught stable fly might better represent the actual response to the plant’s insecticidal toxicity under real field conditions [16,28].
Previous reports have described the repellent and insecticidal effects of P. nigrum EO. The fumigation activity of P. nigrum EO has been reported against Tribolium castaneum (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) [25,29]. EOs obtained from black pepper had repellent, insecticidal, oviposition inhibitory, and acetylcholinesterase (AChE) enzyme inhibitory activities against maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais [30]. A fumigation toxicity assay measured an LC50 of 0.287 μL/cm3 and 0.152 μL/cm3 after 24 and 48 h exposure periods, and a contact toxicity assay reported an LC50 of 0.208 μL/cm2 and 0.126 μL/cm2 after 24 and 48 h exposure periods, respectively [30]. In addition, chitosan-encapsulated nanoparticles of P. nigrum EO demonstrated insecticidal activity via the AChE function against insect pest species T. castaneum and Sitophilus oryzae [31].
In this study, unripe P. nigrum fruit EO was shown to have insecticidal effects, via contact and fumigant toxicity studies. The four most important chemical compounds identified in this study were sabinene (24.41%), limonene (23.80%), β-caryophyllene (18.52%), and α-pinene (10.59%), which altogether represented approximately 77.32% of all P. nigrum EO. Sabinene, limonene, and α-pinene belong to the monoterpene group, which is the predominant class of terpene found in P. nigrum oil [32], while β-caryophyllene belongs to the sesquiterpene group [22]. The chemical composition of P. nigrum fruit EO in this study was similar to that in other reports [21]. However, differences in chemical composition are likely; EO obtained from black pepper grown in Madagascar and Brazil had varying compositions of sabinene (0.1–13.9%), limonene (15.1–38.1%), β-caryophyllene (<0.05–14.8%), and α-pinene (5.1–28.7%) [21]. Another study of P. nigrum fruit cultivated in Brazil found the main volatile compounds in the monoterpene group to be α-pinene (6.91–10.67%), β-pinene (22.61–35.05%), and limonene (21.0–31.77%) [33]. Thus, various geographic locations, seasons of the year, and extraction methods all affect the chemical composition of the EO [21].
Medicinal plant EOs containing at least two of the major compounds sabinene, limonene, β-caryophyllene, or α-pinene have been reported to have insecticidal effects. Xylopia aethiopica EO containing sabinene (26.1 ± 3.1%), β-pinene (17.4 ± 1.9%), and α-pinene (9.6 ± 1.6%) had contact toxicity against the house fly (Musca domestica) and exhibited an LD50 of 61.5 µg/adult and LC90 of 178.5 µg/adult in males, and an LD50 of 30.7 µg/adult and LC90 164.2 µg/adult in females [34]. When sabinene was applied as a single component to the female M. domestica, there was a higher LD50 of 109.7 µg/adult and LC90 of 213.8 µg/adult. This was similar to the results when α-pinene was applied to the female M. domestica, with a higher LD50 of 69.7 µg/adult and LC90 of 254.7 µg/adult. In contrast to its effects in females, the LD50 and LC90 values of sabinene decreased to 10.4 µg/adult and 117.5 µg/adult in male M. domestica, and the LD50 and LC90 of α-pinene decreased to 8.6 µg/adult and 100.2 µg/adult, respectively. This suggests that major and minor compounds, acting synergistically or antagonistically, are responsible for the insecticidal activity [34]. EO extracted from Schinus areira seeds containing the monoterpenes sabinene (39.15%), α-pinene (14.96%), and β-pinene (8.75%) also showed insecticidal activity against the seed beetle, Rhipibruchus picturatus. Using a molecular docking assay, the main component from S. areira leaves was found to bind the AChE enzyme’s active site [35]. Aloysia citriodora EO containing sabinene (22.9%), limonene (7.4%), and caryophyllene (2.4%) was evaluated against the southern green stinkbug Nezara viridula (L.), using fumigant activity in an enclosed chamber. The toxicity of A. citriodora increased with increasing concentration and exposure time. Fumigant activity had an LC50 of 13.5 μg/mL air 24 h after treatment and contact toxicity had an LC50 of 8.1 μg/cm2 [36]. Haplopappus foliosus EO consisted of limonene (28.0%), caryophyllene (3.97%), β-pinene (1.43%), sabinene (0.93%), and α-pinene (0.89%), with an LC50 value of 4.43 mg/dm3 air against M. domestica [37].
This study noted a contact toxicity LD50 of 78.37 µg/fly and an LD90 of 566.28 µg/fly 24 h after exposure, which differs slightly from the toxicity of citrus EO for the stable fly (LD50 of 105.88 µg/fly and LD90 of 499.25 µg/fly). However, the fumigant toxicity values of an LC50 of 13.72 mg/L air and an LD90 of 45.63 mg/L air were consistent with a previous report (LC50 of 13.06 mg/L air and LC90 of 43.13 mg/L air) [16]. Furthermore, the percentage of mortality from citrus EO at 25.20 mg/L air was similar to that of 1% cypermethrin, from 2–24 h after treatment. This was somewhat better than the results of the current study (25.95 mg/L air from 6–24 h after treatment). Limonene (93.79%) is the major compound found in citrus EO [16], while sabinene (24.41%), limonene (23.80%), β-caryophyllene (18.52%), and α-pinene (10.59%) are the major compounds found in P. nigrum EO. Prior studies have reported the insecticidal effects of compounds found in essential oil. Sabinene is reportedly insecticidal against Aphis pomi [38], has a repellent effect against Tribolium castaneum [39], and exhibits strong fumigant toxicity against maize weevils [40]. Limonene has insecticidal activity against mealybugs and scale insects [41], horn flies [42], and the tomato leaf miner [43]. Combinations of these compounds can exert insecticidal activity. Sabinene has additive effects with α-pinene, 1,8-cineole, 1-octen-3-ol, and linalool, and limonene has a synergistic effect with α-pinene and sabinene [44]. β-caryophyllene and α-pinene are toxic to Aphis gossypii Glover (Homoptera: Aphididae) by inhibiting AChE activity, polyphenol oxidase, carboxylesterase, and glutathione S-transferases in A. gossypii [45].
The cytotoxicity of P. nigrum EO has been investigated on a normal cell line, human fetal lung fibroblast (MRC-5), and five different tumor cell lines including human cervical carcinoma (HeLa), human myelogenous leukemia (K562), lung adenocarcinoma (A549), colon cancer (LS-174), and melanoma (FemX). The results indicate that P. nigrum EO exhibited lower cytotoxic activity, with an IC50 of 25.57–56.74 µg/mL after 48 h of treatment compared with cisplatin (IC50, 2.34–9.08 µg/mL) as a positive control [46]. The toxicity of P. nigrum EO at concentrations of 5, 10, or 50 mg/kg was evaluated for 21 days in adult male albino Swiss mice. None of the P. nigrum EO doses induced signs of toxicity, such as irritability, reaction to contact, gripping the tail, twisting, writhing, grip strength, ataxia, tremor, convulsion, lacrimation, piloerection, changes in respiratory frequency, changes in body weight, or abnormalities in biochemical parameters [47]. Based on the LD90 of 556.28 (325.89–1475.26) µg/fly and the LC90 of 45.63 mg/L air obtained in the current study, we expected that the P. nigrum EO used in this study should not affect horses and livestock, the primary hosts of the stable fly.
Although this study did not investigate the molecular mechanism of EO effect, the insecticidal activities of EO have been reported. Plant-derived EOs, primarily monoterpenes, exhibit their neurotoxic effects by the inhibition of AChE in the octopamine pathway in insects, alongside the essential detoxification enzymes glutathione S-transferase and catalase. They are also capable of inhibiting gamma-aminobutyric acid receptors [25,48,49]. However, P. nigrum EO and the compounds sabinene, limonene, β-caryophyllene, and α-pinene should be the subjects of future studies of the EO insecticidal mechanism of action.

4. Conclusions

This study demonstrated the toxicity of unripe P. nigrum fruit EO, primarily containing sabinene, limonene, β-caryophyllene, and α-pinene, as an environmentally friendly insecticidal agent against stable fly (S. calcitrans), using contact and fumigant toxicity tests. The synergistic effects of the components of this EO on the insect’s neuromuscular system should be investigated further. As there are limited reports available discssing the insecticidal activities of P. nigrum fruit EO on horse and livestock vectors such as horse fly, horn fly, and midges, the study of P. nigrum fruit EO should be expanded and its nano-formulation for open field trials should be implemented.

5. Materials and Methods

5.1. Ethical Statement

This study protocol was approved by the Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University Animal Care and Use Committee (Ref. MUVS-2020-12-63).

5.2. Insects

Populations of S. calcitrans used in this study were collected using Nzi Traps [50], from a horse farm in Nakhon Pathom Province (13°45′43.4″ N, 100°08′15.7″ E), between March and May 2021. To the best of our knowledge, insecticides had never been used on that farm. The traps were set up at the collection site from 16:00 to 19:00. All flies were stored in plastic cups and transported in Styrofoam boxes containing ice packs to the Pharmacology Laboratory, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University. Male and female S. calcitrans were tested and were selected from groups of undamaged flies under a stereomicroscope (SMZ745, Nikon, Tokyo, Japan). Blood-fed flies were separated out of this study. The samples were preserved between 27–29 °C and 70–80% relative humidity upon arrival at the laboratory until testing.

5.3. Essential Oil Extraction and Quantification

Piper nigrum L. fruit (Figure 2) was obtained from Nakhon Pathom Province in central Thailand (13°45′12.3″ N, 100°16′13.2″ E) and was pesticide-free. The plant was identified and delivered to the Department of Pharmaceutical Botany, Faculty of Pharmacy, Mahidol University (PBM No.005504-6). The EO was extracted from 50 kg of fruit, within 6 h of arrival, by the steam distillation process, where the fruits were immersed in water and the system was heated to 100 °C. The EO produced was stored in amber bottles at 4 °C until use. The EO yield is expressed in % (v/w) based on the fresh plant material weight.
The EO’s physical properties were analyzed as follows: color was visually verified by three different individuals, pH was measured with pH-indicator strips (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany), density was measured with a density meter (DA-100M, Tokyo, Japan), and the refractive index was calculated with a refractometer (RX-5000CX, Atago, Tokyo, Japan).
The EO’s chemical composition was determined using a GC-MS model 7890A-MS5975C (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) equipped with a DB-5HT capillary column (length, 30 m; inner diameter, 0.25 mm; film thickness, 0.1 µm). The sample was injected in split mode with a 1:10 split ratio. Helium was used as the carrier gas, with a flow rate of 1 mL·min−1. The injection port temperature was 250 °C, and the column temperature schedule was as follows: 50 °C for 2 min followed by a rise to 250 °C at a rate of 10 °C per minute, then maintained at 250 °C for 5 min. The MS included an ion source temperature of 230 °C, an ionization energy of 70 eV, and a mass scan range of 350–550 amu. Components were identified by comparing their mass spectra with data from the Wiley 7th edition mass spectrometry library. Concentrations of the principal components were calculated by comparing the peak area of the sample with the peak area of the standard.

5.4. Contact Toxicity Test

Contact toxicity of the EO from P. nigrum L. to S. calcitrans was achieved by topical application as described by Leesombun et al., with some modifications [22]. Preliminary studies were performed to determine appropriate test range concentrations. The various concentrations of P. nigrum EO were prepared in a 1.5 mL microcentrifuge tube using acetone as a solvent. Five EO concentrations were used in this trial: 43.25 µg/µL, 86.50 µg/µL, 216.25 µg/µL, 432.50 µg/µL, and 865.00 µg/µL, representing 5%, 10%, 25%, 50%, and 100% (v/v) of S. calcitrans (mixed sexes). Flies were anesthetized at −20 °C for 30–45 s, and 0.5 µL of EO at each concentration was applied directly to the fly’s chest using a micropipette. Acetone and cypermethrin (1% w/v) were applied at the same volume for negative and positive controls, respectively. Each treatment was performed in three iterations on 10 flies each time. After application, the treated flies were placed in a clear plastic cup (10 flies/cup), and the cup was covered with a fine mesh fabric and fastened with rubber bands. A honey solution (10%) on cotton was layered over the mesh fabric, for the flies to consume. The flies were brought to recovery at 27–29 °C and 70–80% relative humidity. Mortality was recorded at 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, and 24 h after treatment. Flies were determined to be dead when they did not move after being mechanically stimulated with a brush.

5.5. Fumigant Toxicity Test

Fumigant toxicity of the EO from P. nigrum active against S. calcitrans was examined according to the procedures reported by Leesombun et al., with some modifications [22]. This test was performed in a 1 L clear plastic container with a lid. Preliminary studies were performed to determine the appropriate range of test concentrations. Different amounts of EO (0.47, 0.93, 1.87, 2.8, and 4.67 mg) dissolved in 100 µL of acetone were pipetted separately onto a 55-mm diameter Whatman No. 1 filter paper (GE Healthcare, Buckinghamshire, UK) and placed on the bottom of a glass petri dish (55 mm diameter). The solvent on each filter paper in the petri dish was allowed to evaporate for 2–3 min, and then the petri dish was covered with a fine mesh fabric which was fastened with rubber bands to prevent contact between the filter paper and the flies. Acetone and cypermethrin (1% w/v) were used as negative and positive controls, respectively. The petri dishes were placed on the bottom of the plastic container. Honey solution (10%) on cotton wool was placed on the bottom of the plastic container. Mixed sexes of S. calcitrans were used for testing. Flies were anesthetized at −20 °C for 30–45 s, placed in the plastic containers, and each container was closed. Each treatment was performed with ten flies in 3 iterations. Flies were allowed to recover and were maintained at 27–29 °C with 70–80% relative humidity. Mortality was recorded at 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, and 24 h after treatment. Flies were determined to be dead when they did not move.

5.6. Data Analysis

Insect mortality was calculated and the mortality data were corrected using Abbott′s formula [51], when the control mortality ranged between 5–20%. Normality and homogeneity of the variables were verified using the Shapiro–Wilk and Levene tests, respectively. Statistical comparisons of mortality between treatments were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by post hoc analysis (Tukey’s honest significant difference test), in SPSS software version 21.0 (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA). Repeated ANOVA and Greenhouse–Geisser corrections were applied to compare the effects of the treatment concentrations and exposure times on mortality, using SPSS version 21.0 software. Exposure interval was the repeated factor and insect mortality was the response variable, with treatment as the main effect. A p value < 0.05 was considered significant. Probit analysis to calculate toxicity values, mean lethal dose (LD50) and 90% lethal dose (LD90) at 24 h after treatment, and mean lethal concentration (LC50) and 90% lethal concentration (LC90) at 24 h after processing was performed using LdP series software (Ehab Mostafa Bakr, Dokki, Cairo, Egypt). The software can be downloaded free of charge from http://www.ehabsoft.com/ldpline/ and was accessed on 6 November 2022.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.C., S.S.; methodology, T.C., A.L., S.S., S.B. and T.W.; validation, T.C., S.S. and A.L.; investigation, T.C., A.L., S.S., S.B. and T.W.; resources, T.C.; data curation, T.W. and S.S.; writing-original draft preparation, T.W., T.C., A.L. and S.S.; writing—review and editing, T.C., A.L., S.S. and S.B.; project administration, T.C.; funding acquisition, T.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by a grant from Agricultural Research Development Agency (Public Organization) (Grant number CRP6305032170).

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was approved by the Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University Animal Care and Use Committee (Ref. MUVS-2020-12-63).

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available within the article.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the authorities of the Monitoring and Surveillance Center for Zoonotic Diseases in Wildlife and Exotic Animals for their kind cooperation and assistance in the study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Baldacchino, F.; Muenworn, V.; Desquesnes, M.; Desoli, F.; Charoenviriyaphap, T.; Duvallet, G. Transmission of pathogens by Stomoxys flies (Diptera, Muscidae): A review. Parasite 2013, 20, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Onmaz, A.C.; Beutel, R.G.; Schneeberg, K.; Pavaloiu, A.N.; Komarek, A.; Van den Hoven, R. Vectors and vector-borne diseases of horses. Vet. Res. Commun. 2013, 37, 65–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Desquesnes, M.; Dargantes, A.; Lai, D.H.; Lun, Z.R.; Holzmuller, P.; Jittapalapong, S. Trypanosoma evansi and surra: A review and perspectives on transmission, epidemiology and control, impact, and zoonotic aspects. Biomed. Res. Int. 2013, 2013, 321237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Naem, S. First SEM observations on adult Habronema microstoma (Spirurida: Habronematidae), a parasite of the horse. Parasitol. Res. 2007, 101, 743–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Malaithong, N.; Duvallet, G.; Ngoen-Klan, R.; Bangs, M.J.; Chareonviriyaphap, T. Stomoxyinae Flies in Thailand: A Précis, with abridged taxonomic key to the adult species. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2019, 19, 385–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Mann, R.S.; Kaufman, P.E.; Butler, J.F. Evaluation of semiochemical toxicity to houseflies and stable flies (Diptera: Muscidae). Pest Manag. Sci. 2010, 66, 816–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Odeniran, P.O.; Ademola, I.O. Comparative insecticidal activity of cypermethrin and cypermethrin-mix applications against stomoxyine vectors. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2019, 51, 637–642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Barros, A.T.M.; Rodrigues, V.D.; Cançado, P.H.D.; Domingues, L.N. Resistance of the stable fly, Stomoxys calcitrans (Diptera: Muscidae), to cypermethrin in outbreak areas in Midwestern Brazil. Rev. Bras. Parasitol. Vet. 2019, 28, 802–806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Reissert-Oppermann, S.; Bauer, B.; Steuber, S.; Clausen, P.H. Insecticide resistance in stable flies (Stomoxys calcitrans) on dairy farms in Germany. Parasitol. Res. 2019, 118, 2499–2507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Kaushal, J.; Khatri, M.; Arya, S.K. A treatise on organophosphate pesticide pollution: Current strategies and advancements in their environmental degradation and elimination. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2021, 207, 111483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hieu, T.T.; Jung, J.; Kim, S.I.; Ahn, Y.J.; Kwon, H.W. Behavioural and electroantennogram responses of the stable fly (Stomoxys calcitrans L.) to plant essential oils and their mixtures with attractants. Pest Manag. Sci. 2014, 70, 163–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Hieu, T.T.; Kim, S.I.; Lee, S.G.; Ahn, Y.J. Repellency to Stomoxys calcitrans (Diptera: Muscidae) of plant essential oils alone or in combination with Calophyllum inophyllum nut oil. J. Med. Entomol. 2010, 47, 575–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Zhu, J.J.; Berkebile, D.R.; Dunlap, C.A.; Zhang, A.; Boxler, D.; Tangtrakulwanich, K.; Behle, R.W.; Baxendale, F.; Brewer, G. Nepetalactones from essential oil of Nepeta cataria represent a stable fly feeding and oviposition repellent. Med. Vet. Entomol. 2012, 26, 131–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Dillmann, J.B.; Cossetin, L.F.; de Giacometi, M.; Oliveira, D.; de Matos, A.F.I.M.; Avrella, P.D.; Garlet, Q.I.; Heinzmann, B.M.; Monteiro, S.G. Adulticidal activity of Melaleuca alternifolia (Myrtales: Myrtaceae) essential oil with high 1,8-Cineole content against stable flies (Diptera: Muscidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 2020, 113, 1810–1815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zhu, J.J.; Li, A.Y.; Pritchard, S.; Tangtrakulwanich, K.; Baxendale, F.P.; Brewer, G. Contact and fumigant toxicity of a botanical-based feeding deterrent of the stable fly, Stomoxys calcitrans (Diptera: Muscidae). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2011, 59, 10394–10400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  16. Changbunjong, T.; Boonmasawai, S.; Sungpradit, S.; Weluwanarak, T.; Leesombun, A. Contact and fumigant activities of Citrus aurantium essential oil against the stable fly Stomoxys calcitrans (Diptera: Muscidae). Plants 2022, 11, 1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Takooree, H.; Aumeeruddy, M.Z.; Rengasamy, K.R.R.; Venugopala, K.N.; Jeewon, R.; Zengin, G.; Mahomoodally, M.F. A systematic review on black pepper (Piper nigrum L.): From folk uses to pharmacological applications. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2019, 59, S210–S243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Nikolić, M.; Stojković, D.; Glamočlija, J.; Ćirić, A.; Marković, T.; Smiljković, M.; Soković, M. Could essential oils of green and black pepper be used as food preservatives? J. Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 52, 6565–6573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Orav, A.; Stulova, I.; Kailas, T.; Müürisepp, M. Effect of storage on the essential oil composition of Piper nigrum L. fruits of different ripening states. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52, 2582–2586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Zacharia, T.J.; Gopalam, A. Nature, production and quality of essential oils of pepper, ginger, turmeric, cardamom and tree spices. Indian Perfum. 1987, 31, 188–205. [Google Scholar]
  21. Dosoky, N.S.; Satyal, P.; Barata, L.M.; da Silva, J.K.R.; Setzer, W.N. Volatiles of black pepper fruits (Piper nigrum L.). Molecules 2019, 24, 4244. [Google Scholar]
  22. Salehi, B.; Zakaria, Z.A.; Gyawali, R.; Ibrahim, S.A.; Rajkovic, J.; Shinwari, Z.K.; Khan, T.; Sharifi-Rad, J.; Ozleyen, A.; Turkdonmez, E.; et al. Piper Species: A comprehensive review on their phytochemistry, biological activities and applications. Molecules 2019, 24, 1364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Huong, L.T.; Hung, N.H.; Dai, D.N.; Tai, T.A.; Hien, V.T.; Satyal, P.; Setzer, W.N. Chemical compositions and mosquito larvicidal activities of essential oils from Piper species growing wild in central Vietnam. Molecules 2019, 24, 3871. [Google Scholar]
  24. Chaubey, M.K. Fumigant toxicity of essential oils from some common spices against pulse beetle, Callosobruchus chinensis (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). J. Oleo Sci. 2008, 57, 171–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Oviedo-Sarmiento, J.S.; Bustos Cortes, J.J.; Delgado Ávila, W.A.; Cuca Suárez, L.E.; Herrera Daza, E.; Patiño-Ladino, O.J.; Prieto-Rodríguez, J.A. Fumigant toxicity and biochemical effects of selected essential oils toward the red flour beetle, Tribolium castaneum (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2021, 179, 104941. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  26. Sungvornyothin, S.; Chareonviriyaphap, T.; Prabaripai, A.; Thirakhupt, V.; Ratanatham, S.; Bangs, M.J. Effects of nutritional and physiological status on behavioral avoidance of Anopheles minimus (Diptera: Culicidae) to DDT, deltamethrin and lambdacyhalothrin. J. Vector Ecol. 2001, 2, 202–215. [Google Scholar]
  27. Salem, A.; Franc, M.; Jacquiet, P.; Bouhsira, E.; Liénard, E. Feeding and breeding aspects of Stomoxys calcitrans (Diptera: Muscidae) under laboratory conditions. Parasite 2012, 4, 309–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Leesombun, A.; Sungpradit, S.; Boonmasawai, S.; Weluwanarak, T.; Klinsrithong, S.; Ruangsittichai, J.; Ampawong, S.; Masmeatathip, R.; Changbunjong, T. Insecticidal activity of Plectranthus amboinicus essential oil against the stable fly Stomoxys calcitrans (Diptera: Muscidae) and the horse fly Tabanus megalops (Diptera: Tabanidae). Insects 2022, 13, 255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Tripathi, A.K.; Upadhyay, S.; Bhuiyan, M.; Bhattacharya, P.R. A review on prospects of essential oils as biopesticide in insect-pest management. J. Pharmacogn. Phytother. 2009, 1, 52–63. [Google Scholar]
  30. Chau, M. Evaluation of insecticidal properties of Cuminum cyminum and Piper nigrum essential oils against Sitophilus zeamais. J. Entomol. 2017, 14, 148–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Rajkumar, V.; Gunasekaran, C.; Dharmaraj, J.; Chinnaraj, P.; Paul, C.A.; Kanithachristy, I. Structural characterization of chitosan nanoparticle loaded with Piper nigrum essential oil for biological efficacy against the stored grain pest control. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2020, 166, 104566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Al-Sayed, E.; Gad, H.A.; El-Kersh, D.M. Characterization of four Piper essential oils (GC/MS and ATR-IR) coupled to chemometrics and their anti-Helicobacter pylori activity. ACS Omega 2021, 6, 25652–25663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Barata, L.M.; Andrade, E.H.; Ramos, A.R.; De Lemos, O.F.; Setzer, W.N.; Byler, K.G.; Maia, J.G.S.; Da Silva, J.K.R. Secondary metabolic profile as a tool for distinction and characterization of cultivars of black pepper (Piper nigrum L.) cultivated in Pará State, Brazil. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Wandjou, J.G.N.; Baldassarri, C.; Ferrati, M.; Maggi, F.; Pavela, R.; Tsabang, N.; Petrelli, R.; Ricciardi, R.; Desneux, N.; Benelli, G. Essential oils from Cameroonian aromatic plants as effective insecticides against mosquitoes, houseflies, and moths. Plants 2022, 11, 2353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Mattar, V.T.; Borioni, J.L.; Hollmann, A.; Rodriguez, S.A. Insecticidal activity of the essential oil of Schinus areira against Rhipibruchus picturatus (F.) (Coleoptera: Bruchinae), and its inhibitory effects on acetylcholinesterase. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2022, 185, 105134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Werdin González, J.O.; Gutiérrez, M.M.; Murray, A.P.; Ferrero, A.A. Biological activity of essential oils from Aloysia polystachya and Aloysia citriodora (Verbenaceae) against the soybean pest Nezara viridula (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). Nat. Prod. Commun. 2010, 5, 301–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Palacios, S.M.; Bertoni, A.; Rossi, Y.; Santander, R.; Urzúa, A. Efficacy of essential oils from edible plants as insecticides against the house fly, Musca domestica L. Molecules 2009, 14, 1938–1947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Zhou, S.; Wei, C.; Zhang, C.; Han, C.; Kuchkarova, N.; Shao, H. Chemical composition, phytotoxic, antimicrobial and insecticidal activity of the essential oils of Dracocephalum integrifolium. Toxins 2019, 11, 598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. Wang, Y.; You, C.X.; Yang, K.; Wu, Y.; Chen, R.; Zhang, W.J.; Liu, Z.L.; Du, S.S.; Deng, Z.W.; Geng, Z.F.; et al. Bioactivity of essential oil of Zingiber purpureum rhizomes and its main compounds against two stored product insects. J. Econ. Entomol. 2015, 108, 925–932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Wang, C.F.; Yang, K.; Zhang, H.M.; Cao, J.; Fang, R.; Liu, Z.L.; Du, S.S.; Wang, Y.Y.; Deng, Z.W.; Zhou, L. Components and insecticidal activity against the maize weevils of Zanthoxylum schinifolium fruits and leaves. Molecules 2011, 16, 3077–3088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Hollingsworth, R.G. Limonene, a citrus extract, for control of mealybugs and scale insects. J. Med. Entomol. 2005, 98, 772–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Showler, A.T.; Harlien, J.L.; Perez de Léon, A.A. Effects of laboratory grade limonene and a commercial limonene-based insecticide on Haematobia irritans irritans (Muscidae: Diptera): Deterrence, mortality, and reproduction. J. Med. Entomol. 2019, 56, 1064–1070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Zarrad, K.; Hamouda, A.B.; Chaieb, I.; Laarif, A.; Jemâa, J.M.-B. Chemical composition, fumigant and anti-acetylcholinesterase activity of the Tunisian Citrus aurantium L. essential oils. Ind. Crops Prod. 2015, 76, 121–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Jankowska, M.; Rogalska, J.; Wyszkowska, J.; Stankiewicz, M. Molecular targets for components of essential oils in the insect nervous system—A review. Molecules 2017, 23, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Liu, Y.Q.; Xue, M.; Zhang, Q.C.; Zhou, F.Y.; Wei, J.Q. Toxicity of β-caryophyllene from Vitex negundo (Lamiales:Verbenaceae) to Aphis gossypii Glover (Homoptera: Aphididae) and its action mechanism. Acta Entomol. Sin. 2022, 53, 396–404. [Google Scholar]
  46. Nikolić, M.M.; Jovanović, K.K.; Marković, T.L.; Marković, D.L.; Gligorijević, N.N.; Radulović, S.S.; Kostić, M.; Glamočlija, J.M.; Soković, M.D. Antimicrobial synergism and cytotoxic properties of Citrus limon L., Piper nigrum L. and Melaleuca alternifolia (Maiden and Betche) Cheel essential oils. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 2017, 69, 1606–1614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Ghosh, S.; Kumar, A.; Sachan, N.; Chandra, P. Anxiolytic and antidepressant-like effects of essential oil from the fruits of Piper nigrum Linn. (Black pepper) in mice: Involvement of serotonergic but not GABAergic transmission system. Heliyon 2021, 7, e06884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Anderson, J.A.; Coats, J.R. Acetylcholinesterase inhibition by nootkatone and carvacrol in arthropods. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2012, 102, 124–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Dassanayake, M.K.; Chong, C.H.; Khoo, T.J.; Figiel, A.; Szumny, A.; Choo, C.M. Synergistic field crop pest management properties of plant-derived essential oils in combination with synthetic pesticides and bioactive molecules: A review. Foods 2021, 10, 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Tunnakundacha, S.; Desquesnes, M.; Masmeatathip, R. Comparison of Vavoua, Malaise and Nzi traps with and without attractants for trapping of Stomoxys spp. (Diptera: Muscidae) and tabanids (Diptera: Tabanidae) on cattle farms. Agric. Nat. Resour. 2017, 51, 319–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Abbott, W.S. A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. J. Econ. Entomol. 1925, 18, 265–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Plants 12 01043 g001 550
Figure 1. Gas chromatography–mass spectrometry chromatogram of Piper nigrum L. essential oil. The major peaks were α-pinene, sabinene, limonene, and β-caryophyllene, respectively.
Figure 1. Gas chromatography–mass spectrometry chromatogram of Piper nigrum L. essential oil. The major peaks were α-pinene, sabinene, limonene, and β-caryophyllene, respectively.
Plants 12 01043 g001
Plants 12 01043 g002 550
Figure 2. Piper nigrum L. fruit used in this study.
Figure 2. Piper nigrum L. fruit used in this study.
Plants 12 01043 g002
Table
Table 1. Chemical composition of Piper nigrum L. essential oil.
Table 1. Chemical composition of Piper nigrum L. essential oil.
No.Retention Time
(min)		ClassesCompoundsFormulaChemical StructurePeak Area (%)% Similarity Index
14.10Monoterpeneα-PineneC10H16Plants 12 01043 i00110.5996
24.34MonoterpeneCampheneC10H16Plants 12 01043 i0020.5391
34.80MonoterpeneSabineneC10H16Plants 12 01043 i00324.4194
45.09Monoterpeneβ-MyrceneC10H16Plants 12 01043 i0042.6997
55.32Monoterpene3-CareneC10H16Plants 12 01043 i0054.2097
65.63MonoterpeneLimoneneC10H16Plants 12 01043 i00623.8097
76.42Monoterpeneα-TerpinoleneC10H16Plants 12 01043 i0070.3997
86.72MonoterpeneL-LinaloolC10H18OPlants 12 01043 i0080.3480
97.58Monoterpene4-TerpineolC10H18OPlants 12 01043 i0090.3083
109.28Sesquiterpeneδ-ElemeneC15H24Plants 12 01043 i0100.5699
119.45Sesquiterpeneα-CubebeneC15H24Plants 12 01043 i0110.2498
129.86SesquiterpeneCopaeneC15H24Plants 12 01043 i0123.4899
1310.07SesquiterpeneGermacrene DC15H24Plants 12 01043 i0130.6696
1410.37Sesquiterpeneα-GurjuneneC15H24Plants 12 01043 i0140.1493
1510.61Sesquiterpeneβ-CaryophylleneC15H24Plants 12 01043 i01518.5299
1611.22Sesquiterpeneβ-SelineneC15H24Plants 12 01043 i0161.3497
1712.08Sesquiterpeneγ-ElemeneC15H24Plants 12 01043 i0170.6281
1812.19Sesquiterpeneα-MuuroleneC15H24Plants 12 01043 i0180.6195
1912.38Sesquiterpeneβ-BisaboleneC15H24Plants 12 01043 i0193.0698
2012.70Sesquiterpeneδ-CadineneC15H24Plants 12 01043 i0202.7598
2124.51PhthalatesBis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalateC24H38O4Plants 12 01043 i0210.1891
Total 99.41
Table
Table 2. Insecticidal activity of Piper nigrum L. essential oil against Stomoxys calcitrans by contact toxicity testing.
Table 2. Insecticidal activity of Piper nigrum L. essential oil against Stomoxys calcitrans by contact toxicity testing.
ConcentrationMortality (%, ± SD)
1 h2 h4 h6 h12 h24 h
Negative control0 a0 a0 a0 a0 a0 a
Cypermethrin (1%)100 d100 d100 d100 d100 d100 e
P. nigrum EO (µg/µL)
43.250 a0 a6.7 ± 5.8 a6.7 ± 5.8 a13.3± 5.8 ab23.3± 5.8 b
86.5020.0 ± 0.0 b26.7 ± 5.8 b26.7 ± 5.8 b30.0 ± 10.0 b30.0 ± 10.0 b36.7 ± 11.6 bc
216.2536.7 ± 5.8 c40.0 ± 0.0 c40.0 ± 0.0 bc40.0 ± 0.0 bc50.0 ± 0.0 c53.3 ± 5.8 cd
432.5036.7 ± 5.8 c46.7 ± 5.8 c50.0 ± 10.0 c56.67 ± 11.6 c60.0 ± 10.0 c63.3± 5.8 d
865.0099.3 ± 5.8 d93.3 ± 5.8 d96.7 ± 5.8 d96.7 ± 5.8 d96.7 ± 5.8 d96.7 ± 5.8 e
df6, 146, 146, 146, 146, 146, 14
F352.111341.778167.500111.333118.417107.333
p<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001
Post hoc analysis: significant differences (p < 0.05) between treatments are indicated by different letters.
Table
Table 3. Lethal dose (LD50 and LD90) of Piper nigrum L. essential oil against Stomoxys calcitrans according to contact toxicity testing 24 h after treatment.
Table 3. Lethal dose (LD50 and LD90) of Piper nigrum L. essential oil against Stomoxys calcitrans according to contact toxicity testing 24 h after treatment.
TreatmentContact Toxicity Test
LD50 [µg/fly] (95% CL)78.37 (57.83–110.16)
LD90 [µg/fly] (95% CL)556.28 (325.89–1475.26)
Slope ± SE1.51 ± 0.25
χ25.16
95% CL, 95% confidence limit; SE, standard error; χ2 = chi-square.
Table
Table 4. Insecticidal activity of Piper nigrum L. essential oil against Stomoxys calcitrans by fumigant toxicity testing.
Table 4. Insecticidal activity of Piper nigrum L. essential oil against Stomoxys calcitrans by fumigant toxicity testing.
ConcentrationMortality (%)
1 h2 h4 h6 h12 h24 h
Negative control0 a0 a0 a0 a0 a0 a
Cypermethrin (1%)100 b100 c100 c100 c100 c100 c
P. nigrum EO (mg/L air)
0.87
0 a0 a0 a0 a3.3 ± 5.8 a3.3 ± 5.8 a
4.330 a3.3 ± 5.8 a6.7 ± 5.8 a6.7 ± 5.8 a10.0 ± 0.0 a10.0 ± 0.0 a
8.650 a3.3 ± 5.8 a3.3 ± 5.8 a13.3 ± 15.3 a13.3 ± 15.3 a16.7 ± 15.3 a
17.300 a0 a6.7 ± 5.8 a33.3 ± 5.8 b36.7 ± 11.6 b50.0 ± 17.3 b
25.953.3 ± 5.8 a20.0 ± 10.0 b66.7 ± 5.8 b90.0 ± 0.0 c93.3 ± 5.8 c93.3 ± 5.8 c
df6, 146, 146, 146, 146, 146, 14
F891.000170.73353.842128.03788.30863.741
p<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001
Post hoc analysis significant differences (p < 0.05) between treatments are indicated by different letters.
Table
Table 5. Lethal concentration (LC50 and LC90) of Piper nigrum L. essential oil against Stomoxys calcitrans by fumigant toxicity testing 24 h after treatment.
Table 5. Lethal concentration (LC50 and LC90) of Piper nigrum L. essential oil against Stomoxys calcitrans by fumigant toxicity testing 24 h after treatment.
TreatmentFumigant Toxicity Test
LC50 [mg/L air] (95% CL)13.72 (5.71–79.85)
LC90 [mg/L air] (95% CL)45.63 (n/a)
Slope ± SE2.46 ± 0.43
χ228.95
95% CL, 95% confident limit; SE, standard error; χ2, chi-square; n/a, not available.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Weluwanarak, T.; Changbunjong, T.; Leesombun, A.; Boonmasawai, S.; Sungpradit, S. Effects of Piper nigrum L. Fruit Essential Oil Toxicity against Stable Fly (Diptera: Muscidae). Plants 2023, 12, 1043. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12051043

AMA Style

Weluwanarak T, Changbunjong T, Leesombun A, Boonmasawai S, Sungpradit S. Effects of Piper nigrum L. Fruit Essential Oil Toxicity against Stable Fly (Diptera: Muscidae). Plants. 2023; 12(5):1043. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12051043

Chicago/Turabian Style

Weluwanarak, Thekhawet, Tanasak Changbunjong, Arpron Leesombun, Sookruetai Boonmasawai, and Sivapong Sungpradit. 2023. "Effects of Piper nigrum L. Fruit Essential Oil Toxicity against Stable Fly (Diptera: Muscidae)" Plants 12, no. 5: 1043. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12051043

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