Insecticidal activity of several Tunisian essential oils against two major pests of stored grain Rhyzopertha dominica (Fabricius, 1792) and Tribolium castaneum (Herbest 1797)

Abstract

Essential oils (EOs) extracted by hydrodistilation from fifteen Tunisian plant species namely Pistacia for their insecticidal activities on adults of both pests of stored grains Rhyzopertha dominica (Bostrichidae) and Tribolium castaneum (Tenebrionidea). Fumigant toxicity bioassays showed that R. dominica is more sensitive towards these EOs than T. castaneum. L. angustifoliais the most effective essential oil followed by R. chalepensis essential oil with LC 50 values of 11.14 and 14.82μl/l air,respectively. Moreover, M. pulegium and R. officinalis oils also exibited significant fumigant toxicity with LC 50 values of ~ 16.6μl/l air. Besides, T. castaneum was more tolerant to these EO except those from R. chalepensis(LC 50 = 21.03 μl /l air) and M. pulegium(LC 50 = 49.84μl /l air). Repellent activity against both insects showed th atC. sempervirens EO was the most effective against T. castaneumcompared with other treatments; it caused 100% repellency after 6 hours of exposure to the dose 0.15μl /cm² while M. communis EO was the most effective againstR. dominica after 24 hours of exposure at the dose of 0.076μl /cm². The ingestion toxicity of R. chalepensis and M. pulegium EOs showed the most important activity against the two insects withLC 50 values of 131.86μl / l and 55.5μl / L forR. dominica respectively and with LC 50 values of 121.8μl / l and 178.46μl / l for T. castaneum respectively. These results pointed out that among EO tested, those extracted from R. chalpensis, M. pulegium could be the target of further research to demonstrate their efficacy as biopesticides against stored grain insects.

Full text

Volume 66(5). Published October, 01, 2019
www.jnsciences.org
E-ISSN 2286-5314
NCIBI et al. (2019) / Journal of new sciences, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 66(5), 4182-4194 4182
Insecticidal activity of several Tunisian essential oils against two
major pests of stored grain Rhyzopertha dominica (Fabricius,
1792) and Tribolium castaneum (Herbest 1797)
SARA NCIBI1, NAIMA BARBOUCHE1, SOUMAYA HAOUEL-HAMDI2, MOHAMED AMMAR1
1Laboratoire de Bio-Agresseurs et Protection Intégrée en Agriculture, Institut National Agronomique
de Tunisie, Université de Carthage, 43 Avenue Charles Nicolle 1082, Tunis, Tunisie
2 Laboratoire de Biotechnologie Appliquée à l'Agriculture, Institut National de la Recherche
Agronomique de Tunisie ,Université de Carthage, Rue Hedi Karray, 1004 El Menzah Tunis
*Corresponding author: s.ncibi@gmail.com
Abstract - Essential oils (EOs) extracted by hydrodistilation from fifteen Tunisian plant species
namely Pistacia lentiscus, Artemisia arborescens, Artemisia herba-alba, Cupressus sempervirens,
Juniperus communis, Pelargonium graveolens, Lavandula angustifolia, Mentha pulegium, Rosmarinus
officinalis, Salvia officinalis, Thymbra capitata, Laurus nobilis, Myrtus communis, Citrus aurantium,
Ruta chalepensis, are tested for their insecticidal activities on adults of both pests of stored grains
Rhyzopertha dominica (Bostrichidae) and Tribolium castaneum (Tenebrionidea).
Fumigant toxicity bioassays showed that R. dominica is more sensitive towards these EOs than T.
castaneum. L. angustifoliais the most effective essential oil followed by R. chalepensis essential oil
with LC50 values of 11.14 and 14.82μl/l air,respectively. Moreover, M. pulegium and R. officinalis oils
also exibited significant fumigant toxicity with LC50 values of ~ 16.6μl/l air. Besides, T. castaneum
was more tolerant to these EO except those from R. chalepensis(LC50 = 21.03 μl /l air) and M.
pulegium(LC50 = 49.84μl /l air).
Repellent activity against both insects showed th atC. sempervirens EO was the most effective against
T. castaneumcompared with other treatments; it caused 100% repellency after 6 hours of exposure to
the dose 0.15μl /cm² while M. communis EO was the most effective againstR. dominica after 24 hours
of exposure at the dose of 0.076μl /cm².
The ingestion toxicity of R. chalepensis and M. pulegium EOs showed the most important activity
against the two insects withLC50values of 131.86μl / l and 55.5μl / L forR. dominica respectively and
with LC50values of 121.8μl / l and 178.46μl / l for T. castaneum respectively.
These results pointed out that among EO tested, those extracted from R. chalpensis, M. pulegium
could be the target of further research to demonstrate their efficacy as biopesticides against stored
grain insects.
Keywords: bioinsecticide, essential oils, Ruta chalepensis, Mentha pulegium, Rhyzopertha dominican,
Tribolium castaneum.
1. Introduction
Considerable losseson stored grains during the storage period in developing countries may reach more
than 20% and are mainly caused by insect pests affecting the quantity and quality of grain (Jood et al.
1993; Tripathi 2018).
The grain borer, Rhyzopertha dominica (F.) (Coleoptera: Bostrichidae) and red flour beetle, Tribolium
castaneum (Herbest) (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) are among the most important insect pests of stored
grain in Tunisia and North Africa (Balachowsky and Pierre 1962; Jerraya 2003). R. dominica, a
primary pest of stored-products, is able to infect healthy grains easily, while T. castaneum is
considered a secondary colonizer because it grows easily on broken grains, flour or grains already
infested by a primary insect (Vayias et al. 2010). Adults and larvae of both species are serious

Volume 66(5). Published October, 01, 2019
www.jnsciences.org
E-ISSN 2286-5314
NCIBI et al. (2019) / Journal of new sciences, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 66(5), 4182-4194 4183
economic pests causing serious quantitative and qualitative losses (Banga et al. 2018)and these require
effective solutions to protect cereal stocks (Pires and Nogueira, 2018).
To control insect pests of stored grains, synthetic products were used mainly fumigants such as
phosphine (Daghlish et al. 2018; Wijayaratne and Rajapakse2018). However, excessive use of
synthetic insecticides has resulted in many negative consequences such as the loss of efficiency for the
resurgence of pests developing resistance, human and environmental toxicity (Daglish 2004; Lorini et
al. 2007; Okonkwo and Okoye. 1996; Sousa et al. 2009).
Furthermore, interest augmented to look for natural products such as plant extracts including essential
oils to control insect pest in stored-grains because they have the advantage of rapid degradation and
have a low environmental and mammalian toxicity (Campolo et al. 2014; Gonzalez-Coloma et al.
2013;Mediouni-Ben Jemâa et al. 2012b; Ogendo et al. 2008; Rajendran and Sriranjini 2008; Suthisut
et al. 2011;Tampe et al. 2016;Wong et al. 2005).
Essential oils have various insecticidal activities. They may act by fumigation, have
repellent and antifeedant activities, or may affect biological parameters such as growth rate, life cycle
and fecondity (Isman 2006; Shayaa et al. 1997; Stamopoulos 1991). The bioactivity of essential oils is
related to their chemical composition, part of plant from which oil was extracted, the environmental
conditions and the extraction method(Angioni et al. 2006; Isman 2000;Nerio et al. 2010;Zapata and
Smagghe 2010).
This study aimed to evaluate the insecticidal activities of essential oils extracted from fifteen plants
species collected from different regions of Tunisia. The biological tests of EO were done on two major
insect pests of stored grains: R. dominica and T. castaneum.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1 Plant Material
Fifteen plant species belonging to eight different botanical families, were collected from different
regions in Tunisia except essential oil of C. aurantium (Neroli) that was purchased from Tunisia
(Table 1). The plant collection was carried out during their flowering period in 2015.
Table 1: List of plant species tested for their insecticidal and repellent activities, plant part used, site of collecting and yield
in 2015
Plant Family
Scientific name
Simpled site
Plant organ
Yields(%)
Anacardiaceae
Pistacia lentiscus
Tabarka
Leaves, fruits
0.16
Asteraceae
Artemisia arborescens L.
Bousalem
Leaves, fruits
0.13
Artemisia herba-alba
Zaghouen
Aerial parts
0.17
Cupressaceae
Cupressus sempervirens
INAT (Tunisia)
Leafy stems and berries
0.12
Juniperus communis
Tbourba
Leafy stems and berries
0.22
Geraniaceae
Pelargonium graveolens
Monastir
Leaves, flowers
0.09
Lamiaceae
Lavandula angustifolia
Kef
Flowers
0.67
Mentha pulegium
Bizerte
Aerial parts
0.685
Rosmarinus officinalis
Monastir
Aerial parts
0.096
Salvia officinalis
INAT (Tunisia)
Leaves, flowers
0.03
Thymbra capitata (L.) Cav.
Monastir
Aerial parts
0.346
Lauraceae
Laurus nobilis
Dar Chaaben
Leaves
0.1
Myrtaceae
Myrtus communis
Tabarka
Leaves
0.18
Rutaceae
Citrus aurantium
__
__
__
Ruta chalepensis L.
Bousalem
Leaves, flowers
0.2
2.2 Extraction of essential oils
Essential oils were extracted by steam distillation of fresh aerial parts of plant species using a
Clevenger-type apparatus. Essential oils were kept in tinted glass vials tightly closed at 4 ° C until
used in the bioassays.

Volume 66(5). Published October, 01, 2019
www.jnsciences.org
E-ISSN 2286-5314
NCIBI et al. (2019) / Journal of new sciences, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 66(5), 4182-4194 4184
2.3 Insect material
Rhyzopertha dominicaand Tribolium castaneum were collected from infested storage wheat in Tunisia.
Adults of both insects were reared under constant conditions of temperature (28 ± 1 ° C ) and relative
humidity (60% ± 5%) at complete darkness in the laboratory of Zoology at National Agronomic
Institute of Tunisia (INAT). The rearing of R. dominica was done on whole wheat, whereas of T.
castaneum rearing was done on wheat flour. Unsexed adults of both insects were used for bioassays
tests.
2.4 Repellent effect of essential oils
To evaluate the repellent activities of essential oils, we used the method of the preferred zone at 25 ° C
± 1 ° C and 65% ± 5% RH.
This method consist to use filter paper discs Whatman n°1 (diameter 8 cm) placed in Petri dishes glass
(diameter 9 cm). The filter paper discs are cut into two equal parts. Five doses of EO (1, 2, 4, 8 and 10
µl) were prepared by dissolving in acetone to have 0.5 ml of each concentration. Solutions are
homogeneously applied to half a filter paper disc using a micropipette, while the other half of the disk
is treated only with 0.5 ml of acetone and is considered as a control. After complete evaporation of the
solvent, the treated and untreated half discs were attached with adhesive tape in the Petri dishes. Ten
unsexed adults were placed in the center of each filter paper disc. The Petri dishes were covered and
sealed with Parafilm. Five replications were performed for each essential oil dose. Observations were
done after 3, 6 and 24h of the beginning of the treatment to count the number of adults present on
each half filter paper disc. Percentage repellency (PR) were calculated according toCosimi et al.
(2009) andNerio et al. (2009) et formula as follow:
PR = [(Nc-Nt) / (Nc+Nt)]*100
Nc: The number of insects on the untreated half filter paper disc
Nt: The number of insects on the treated half filter paper disc with essential oil
2.5 Fumigant toxicity bioassays
To evaluate the fumigant activity of essential oils at the concentrations: 23.58; 47.17; 94.34; 188.68
and 235.85 µl/l air, filter paper discs (Whatman No. 1) 2 cm diameter, were impregnated with essential
oils and air-dried. Filter paper discs were then attached to the lids Plexiglas spittoon of 42.4 ml
volume. The spittoon is then closed hermetically. Ten unsexed adults of each insect species were
added to the Plexiglas spittoon and tightly sealed. For the control, ten adult insects were placed into
empty spittoons in the same conditions as the treated one and didn't receive any treatment. Each
treatment was replicated five times. Insect mortality was recorded every 3, 6, 24, 48, 72, 96 and 120
hours. Insects were considered dead when it is completely motionless with no movement in the legs
and antennae.
The tests are conducted to determine median lethal concentrations LC50 and median lethal time LT50.
The values of LC50 and LT50 are determined using Probit analysis (Finney 1971).
2.6 Antifeedant activities on wheat treated with essential oils
Batches of 20g of uninfested wheat were weighed and placed in vials of 250 ml. Two EOs doses were
added 8 and 10 µl corresponding to 160 and 200 µl/l air, respectively. EOs doses were dissolved in
1ml of acetone. Wheat grains were treated with the different doses. The vials were sealed, well shaken
for 5 minutes to obtain a homogeneous mixture. Then, grains were air-dried for 20 minutes. The
Whole were transferred into a 50 ml glass vials to which were added 20 adult insects. The control was
treated only with acetone. The glass vials were sealed and kept in the dark at 29 ° C and 65% RH.
Each treatment was replicated five times and insect mortality was recorded every 24h until 120h.
2.7 Data Analysis
Mortality rates were corrected using Abbott's formula (Abbott 1925). (MC) designate the corrected
insect mortality, (M0) is the insect mortality in the treated population insects and (Mt) is the insect
mortality in controls: MC = (M0-Mt / 100-Mt) * 100
All data were subjected to the analysis of variance and means were processed using the Statistical
Analysis System (SAS, 2007) and the PDMix procedure to detect the difference between insects,
essential oils, concentrations and time at the 5% probability level. Probit analysis (Finney 1971) is

Volume 66(5). Published October, 01, 2019
www.jnsciences.org
E-ISSN 2286-5314
NCIBI et al. (2019) / Journal of new sciences, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 66(5), 4182-4194 4185
used to estimate the concentrations that kill 50% of the insects population (LC50) and the time that kills
50% of the population (LT50).
3. Results and discussion
3.1 Essential oils extraction yields
Essential oil yields were presented in (Table 1).M. pulegium presented the most important essential oil
yield (0.685%) followed by L. angustifolia. Both plant species belong to Lamiaceae family. The
distillation of the leafy branches and berries of J. communis yielded 0.22 %. 0.03% was the essential
oil yield of S. officinalis and it was the lowest in comparison with other plant species distilled in this
study.
3.2 Repellent effect of essential oils
3.2.1 Rhyzopertha dominica
The Chi-2 test (chi-square) shows that the fourteen EO have significant repellent activity against
adults R. dominica (Table 2).Some essential oils are repulsive at the lowest concentration (0.038μl /
cm²) and the shortest exposure time (3h and 6h). Indeed EO of L. angustifolia, A. arborescens L. and
R. officinalis have shown an effective repellent activity against R. domoinica.
M. pulegium EO showed a significant repellency at the low-dose and after a short time of exposure of
3 to 6 hours. The doses 0.076 and 0.31μl / cm² were highly repulsive after 6 hours of exposure (Table
2).
T. capitata EO recorded a slight repellent activity during the first hours of exposure to 0.038 and
0.076μl / cm². This repellency turned into attractiveness with the higher doses. Indeed, (-44%), (-24%)
and (-16%) repellency percentage were obtained after 24 hours of exposure to 0.15 µl / cm², 0.31
µl/cm² and 0.38 μl/cm², respectively. T. capitata EO has an attractive activity on R. dominica adults
that can be interesting for the oral toxicity tests (Table 2).
The EO extracted from R. chalepensis showed no repellent activity against R. dominica at the
concentrations 0.038 and 0.076μl/cm². This repellency was manifested at the dose 0.15μl /cm² with
80% recorded after 24 hours of exposure (Table 2).
EOs from L. nobilis, P. lentiscus, J. communis, P. graveolens, C. sempervirens, A. herba-alba, M.
communis and C. aurantium showed very repellent activities at different doses tested and after
different exposure periods against R. dominica.
3.1.2 Tribolium castaneum
The Chi-2 test (chi-square) (χ²) revealed that the fourteen essential oils have a significant repellent
effect on T. castaneum. Repellent activity of EO was manifested by their migration into the control
part of the filter paper disc.
Indeed, EOs from C. aurantium, L. nobilis, A. herba-alba, A. arborescens, P. lentiscus, C.
sempervirens, R. officinalis, P. graveolens exhibited highly significant repellency against T.
castaneum for the various tested doses (0.038; 0.076; 0.15; 0.31 and 0.38 µl/cm²) and different
exposure times (3, 6, 24 hours) (Table 2). R. chalepensis EO leaded a very important repellency except
at the dose 0.076 µl/cm² where the repellent activity was not significant after 24 hours of exposure to
treatment. Moreover, EO of L. angustifolia was very repellent after 3 hours of exposure starting from
the dose 0.15μl/cm². Besides, after 3 hours of exposure to different concentrations, M. pulegium EO
showed a significant repellent activity against T. castaneum with the highest percentage at the high
dose 0.38μl/cm².
EO of T. capitata, M. communis and J. communis leaded a highly significant repellency after various
periods of exposure towards T. castaneum at the different doses.
3.2 Fumigant toxicity test
3.2.1 Rhyzopertha dominican
The screening of essential oils and their fumigant effect on R. donimica had identified EOs showing an
important insecticidal effect at low-dose and a short exposure time. LC50 and TL50values are reported
in Table 3.
Generally the mortality rate of R. dominica increases with the dose applied for the fourteen essential
oils tested (P. lentiscus, A. arborescens, A. herba-alba, J. communis, P. graveolens, L. angustifolia, M.

Volume 66(5). Published October, 01, 2019
www.jnsciences.org
E-ISSN 2286-5314
NCIBI et al. (2019) / Journal of new sciences, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 66(5), 4182-4194 4186
pulegium, R. officinalis, S. officinalis, T. capitata, L. nobilis, M. communis, C. aurantium, R.
chalepensis) except the essential oil of C. sempervirens, which remains a constant mortality (Table 3).
J. communis and C. sempervirens belonging the Cupressaceae family showed the least effective effect
with percentage mortality not exceeding 50%. These EO didn't have an insecticidal effect against R.
dominica even at high doses and extended of exposure period.

Volume 66(5). Published October, 01, 2019
www.jnsciences.org
E-ISSN 2286-5314
ZAHIR et al. (2019) / Journal of new sciences, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 66(5), 4182-4194 4186
Table 2: Effect repellent essential oils on adults of Tribolium castaneum (Tc) and Rhyzopertha dominica (Rd) depending on the dose and exposure time.
Oil
Dose (µl
/ cm²)
3h
6h
24
Tc
Rd
Tc
Rd
Tc
Rd
χ²r
χ²s
χ²r
χ²s
χ²r
χ²s
χ²r
χ²s
χ²r
χ²s
χ²r
χ²s
C.aurantium
0.038
38.74
39.7 **
23.14
27.3 **
23.14
24.9 **
8.02
10.9 *
11.54
42.1 **
3.94
5.7ns
0.076
46.10
46.9 **
18.02
22.5 **
35.30
36.1 **
23.90
27.3 **
38.74
39.7 **
25.94
29.3 **
0.15
25.94
28.5 **
28.90
31.3 **
28.90
30.5 **
28.90
33.7 **
42.34
43.3 **
38.74
40.5 **
0.31
35.30
36.9 **
6.50
9.7 *
38.74
39.7 **
2.90
5.2ns
35.30
37.7 **
2.02
3.2ns
0.38
35.30
36.9 **
5.14
17.2 **
32.02
34.9 **
0.00
10.8 *
28.90
30.5 **
0.34
7.6ns
R.chalepensis
0.038
2.02
16.0 **
6.50
8.1ns
13.54
19.3 **
6.50
12.9 *
9.70
13.6 **
13.54
15.3 **
0.076
38.74
39.7 **
3.94
9.6 *
23.14
24.1 **
2.02
12.9 *
0.34
7.6ns
9.70
12.1 *
0.15
38.74
40.5 **
15.70
18.1 **
23.14
26.5 **
11.54
15.6 **
20.50
27.7 **
32.02
34.1 **
0.31
28.90
30.5 **
11.54
15.6 **
13.54
20.9 **
11.54
21.3 **
11.54
17.2 **
6.50
8.1ns
0.38
6.50
14.5 **
11.54
14.1 **
18.02
21.7 **
3.94
5.6ns
3.94
14.5 **
13.54
15.3 **
L.nobilis
0.038
42.34
44.1 **
9.70
12.1 *
38.74
40.5 **
23.14
25.7 **
25.94
30.1 **
20.50
23.7 **
0.076
38.74
40 .5 **
5.14
12.5 *
28.90
32.1 **
11.54
23.7 **
32.02
33.3 **
15.70
23.7 **
0.15
42.34
44.1 **
5.14
10.9 *
23.14
24.1 **
2.02
12.1 *
50.02
50.5 **
2.02
19.3 **
0.31
25.94
28.5 **
11.54
14.9 **
18.02
27.3 **
18.02
19.3 **
25.94
27.7 **
11 .54
14.8 **
0.38
42.34
44.1 **
18.02
20.1 **
25.94
27.7 **
0.74
9.7 *
23.14
24.9 **
0.10
11.3 *
A.herba-alba
0.038
42.34
43.3 **
9.70
16.0 **
38.74
40.5 **
8.02
17.1 **
28.90
30.5 **
23.14
24.1 **
0.076
32.02
32.5 **
2.02
4.4ns
32.02
33.3 **
1.30
4.2ns
23.14
24.1 **
15.7
18.1 **
0.15
46.10
46.9 **
0.00
9.3ns
35.30
36.9 **
0.34
2ns
32.02
33.3 **
5.14
9.1ns
0.31
18.02
19.3 **
2.90
9.2ns
25.94
27.7 **
0.10
11.3 *
13.54
18.4 **
0.74
11.1 *
0.38
20.50
26.0 **
2.90
9.2ns
13.54
17.6 **
2.90
11.6 *
18.02
22.5 **
0.00
1.0ns
T.capitata
0.038
6.50
8.8ns
2.02
16.0 **
11.54
20.5 **
9.70
14.4 **
9.70
12.9 *
5.14
12.5 *
0.076
13.54
18.4 **
0.74
7.1ns
2.02
8.9ns
20.50
23.7 **
3.94
4.9ns
0.74
8.7ns
0.15
25.94
28.5 **
3.94
13.6 **
2.90
10.9 *
18.02
19.3 **
9.70
16.9 **
9.70
17.7 **
0.31
3.94
12.8 *
0.10
3.2ns
2.90
4.4ns
3.94
17.6 **
6.50
14.5 **
2.90
4.4ns
0.38
9.70
19.3 **
1.30
3.4ns
0.74
7.1ns
23.14
27.3 **
11.54
14.1 **
1.30
4.4ns
L.angustifolia
0.038
0.10
10.2 *
5.14
9.2ns
15.70
18.1 **
5.14
6.9ns
6.50
20.0 **
0.34
4.2ns
0.076
0.74
18.5 **
0.74
25.7 **
9.70
12.8 *
2.90
22.1 **
8.02
10.1 *
1.30
7.6ns
0.15
20.50
22.1 **
0.10
12.1 *
0.10
4.9ns
3.94
11.2ns
0.10
3.3ns
1.30
4.4ns
0.31
18.02
23.2 **
0.34
10.1 *
2.90
9.3ns
0.10
8.9ns
6.50
10.4 *
0.34
4.3ns
0.38
25.94
26.9 **
0.74
8.1ns
11.54
13.3 **
2.90
10.9 *
15.70
22.0 **
0.34
11.6 *
A.arborescens
0.038
25.94
32.5 **
8.02
11.6 *
42.34
44.1 **
13.54
16.9 **
35.30
36.9 **
13.54
14.5 **
0.076
32.02
34.9 **
5.14
10.9 *
32.02
34.9 **
8.02
13.3 **
35.30
36.9 **
8.02
10.1 *
0.15
35.30
36.9 **
1.30
7.6ns
35.30
36.9 **
0.34
7.7ns
28.90
31.3 **
0.10
12.9 *
0.31
13.54
16.9 **
2.90
6.0ns
13.54
16.9 **
0.10
6.4ns
32.02
33.3 **
0.10
6.4ns
0.38
32.02
34.1 **
1.30
10.8 *
32.02
34.1 **
0.34
19.7 **
28.90
31.3 **
0.74
8.9ns

Volume 66(5). Published October, 01, 2019
www.jnsciences.org
E-ISSN 2286-5314
NCIBI et al. (2019) / Journal of new sciences, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 66(5), 4182-4194 4187
**, significant differences at p <0.05 and p <0.01
Data are tested by applying the Chi-2 test (chi-square test);
The total number of insects for each concentration is 50 individuals.
P.lentiscus
0.038
9.70
17.7 **
2.90
16.5 **
0.74
17.7 **
1.30
5.2ns
6.50
29.6 **
8.02
11.6 *
0.076
42.34
43.3 **
25.94
29.3 **
25.94
27.7 **
28.90
32.1 **
0.74
20.8 **
25.94
30.9 **
0.15
32.02
33.3 **
20.50
22.1 **
32.02
37.3 **
5.14
9.9 *
23.14
26.5 **
6.50
7.3ns
0.31
38.74
39.7 **
15.70
18.1 **
46.10
46.9 **
28.90
32.1 **
25.94
27.7 **
20.50
23.7 **
0.38
46.10
46.9 **
35.30
36.9 **
32.02
33.3 **
25.94
29.3 **
20.50
25.3 **
20.50
26.9 **
J. communis
0.038
2.02
12.9 *
9.70
18.3 **
0.74
11.3 *
11.54
18.1 **
23.14
34.5 **
0.74
3.2ns
0.076
32.02
33.3 **
9.70
12.9 *
0.74
11.3 *
18.02
19.3 **
11.54
23.7 **
6.50
9.6 *
0.15
38.74
40.5 **
9.70
10.5 *
42.34
43.3 **
9.70
14.4 **
18.02
22.5 **
2.90
10.9 *
0.31
38.74
39.7 **
23.14
25.7 **
35.30
36.1 **
28.90
30.5 **
20.50
22.1 **
23.14
24.9 **
0.38
46.10
46.9 **
6.50
12.1 *
35.30
37.7 **
9.70
13.6 **
15.70
24.4 **
0.74
12.9 *
M.pulegium
0.038
35.30
38.5 **
8.02
15.7 **
32.02
33.3 **
9.70
16 **
8.02
15.7 **
2.90
6.0ns
0.076
13.54
16.1 **
2.90
9.3ns
6.50
12.1 *
0.34
14.1 **
5.14
10.1 *
0.00
10.9 *
0.15
2.90
5.1ns
1.30
7.6ns
0.34
5.3ns
0.10
6.4ns
0.10
11.3 *
0.10
6.4ns
0.31
15.70
19.7 **
1.30
7.6ns
15.70
18.1 **
5.14
20.5 **
8.02
10.8 *
3.94
21.7 **
0.38
23.14
27.3 **
0.74
4.9ns
11.54
19.7 **
0.34
10.9 *
2.90
13.3 **
0.74
12.1 *
M.communis
0.038
13.54
15.3 **
20.50
40.5 **
25.94
28.5 **
13.54
18.5 **
28.90
32.1 **
32.02
33.3 **
0.076
38.74
39.7 **
28.90
32.1 **
23.14
25.7 **
35.30
40.9 **
18.02
20.9 **
42.34
43.3 **
0.15
28.9
33.7 **
28.90
31.3 **
23.14
25.7 **
38.74
40.5 **
9.70
12.1 *
32.03
34.1 **
0.31
38.74
40.5 **
42.34
43.3 **
25.94
28.5 **
38.74
40.5 **
18.02
20.1 **
23.14
30.4 **
0.38
38.74
39.7 **
38.74
40.5 **
42.34
44.1 **
35.30
36.1 **
42.34
43.3 **
38.74
39.7 **
C.sempervirens
0.038
42.34
43.3 **
6.50
11.2 *
42.34
43.3 **
18.02
19.3 **
32.02
37.3 **
0.74
7.1ns
0.076
38.74
40.5 **
13.54
15.3 **
42.34
43.3 **
3.94
18.5 **
32.02
34.1 **
5.14
11.6 *
0.15
35.30
38.5 **
8.02
12.4 *
50.02
50.5 **
6.50
8.9ns
28.90
30.5 **
8.02
10.8 *
0.31
42.34
43.3 **
8.02
16.5 **
46.10
46.5 **
13.54
17.7 **
35.30
38.5 **
6.50
14.5 **
0.38
50.02
50.5 **
32.02
34.9 **
42.34
43.3 **
23.14
29.6 **
42.34
43.3 **
20.50
22.1 **
R.officinalis
0.038
42.34
43.3 **
15.70
27.7 **
28.90
31.3 **
23.14
33.7 **
38.74
39.7 **
0.10
12.9 *
0.076
50.02
50.5 **
8.02
23.7 **
38.74
40.5 **
6.50
22.5 **
46.10
46.9 **
3.94
16.0 **
0.15
38.74
40.5 **
2.02
5.4ns
46.10
46.9 **
2.90
9.2ns
42.34
43.3 **
0.10
16.9 **
0.31
23.14
28.9 **
6.50
12.9 *
35.30
36.9 **
8.02
16.5 **
32.02
34.1 **
2.90
18.1 **
0.38
25.94
26.9 **
0.10
1.5ns
32.02
34.1 **
0.10
1.5ns
20.50
22.9 **
0.74
1.5ns
P.graveolens
0.038
35.30
36.9 **
8.02
11.7 *
32.02
33.3 **
2.90
13.3 **
25.94
26.9 **
8.02
13.9 **
0.076
50.02
50.5 **
1.30
5.9ns
50.02
50.5 **
2.02
12.1 *
50.02
50.5 **
2.02
8.0ns
0.15
50.02
50.5 **
3.93
11.8 *
35.30
36.9 **
2.90
11.6 *
42.34
43.3 **
2.90
16.5 **
0.31
38.74
39.7 **
0.00
22.0 **
35.30
37.7 **
2.90
12.4 *
38.74
40.5 **
13.54
16.1 **
0.38
35.30
36.9 **
0.74
17.7 **
23.14
24.1 **
0.10
17.6 **
28.90
30.5 **
8.02
14.0 **

Volume 66(5). Published October, 01, 2019
www.jnsciences.org
E-ISSN 2286-5314
ZAHIR et al. (2019) / Journal of new sciences, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 66(5), 4182-4194 4188
Table 3: LC50 and LT50 values of essential oils from Tunisia plant species against adults of R. dominica and T. castaneum
R. dominica
T. castaneum
LC50(µl/lair)
LT50 (h)
LC50(µl/lair)
LT50 (h)
L. angustifolia
11,14
3,624
>150
>150
R. chalepensis
14,82
3,595
21.033
12,324
M.pulegium
16,6
7,011
49.844
7,519
R. officinalis
16,66
26,779
>150
>150
T. capitata
35,41
37,471
>150
>150
M.communis
46,35
172,792
>150
>150
S.officinalis
49,4
141,026
>150
>150
L.nobilis
60,12
429,737
>150
>150
A. herba-alba
62,95
14,492
>150
>150
A. arborescens
105,86
84,776
>150
>150
P.lentiscus
120,69
>150
>150
>150
P. graveolens
137,81
>150
>150
>150
C. aurantium
>150
>150
>150
>150
*TL50 presented in the table were calculated at the concentration 23,58(µl/l)
Results indicated that EOs extracted from L. angustifolia, M. pulegium, R. officinalis, R. chalepensis
appear to be the most effective against R. dominica. Fifty percentage of insects mortalities were
reached at lower concentrations 11.14 µl/l air, 14.82 µl/l air of L. angustifolia and R. chalepensis,
respectively. EOs of C. aurantium, P. graveolens, A. arborescens and P. lentiscus presented the
highest LC50 values and they were the less effective against R. dominica.
3.2.2 Tribolium castaneum
In most cases, T. castaneum mortality percentages increased with the concentration except the
essential oils of T. capitata and C. aurantium which there was no mortality recorded even at the
highest dose after 24 hours of exposure. Under the same conditions, essential oils of J. communis and
P. graveolens didn't exceeded 5% of mortality (Table3).
Essential oils that showed over 50% of mortality after 24 hours (R. chalepensis, M. pulegium, A.
herba-alba, R. officinalis and M. communis) seemed to be interesting to be used as an alternative to
synthetic insecticides. The rest of EO requires higher concentrations to cause the mortality of the
insect and did not present an economically profitable insecticidal interest. At the lowest concentration
(23.58μl /l air) M. pulegium was more effective than R. chalepensis, causing 50% of mortality after
about 8h and 12h , respectively (Table3).
Except M. pulegium and R. chalepensis essential oils, the rest of EOs recorded TL50 higher than120h.
At 235,85(µl/l) A. herba-alba , M. communis, R. officinalis and reached TL50 equal to11,879; 19,595
and 29,929 h , respectively.
3.3 Antifeedant activities on wheat treated with essential oils
Based on the results of fumigant toxicity bioassays, essential oils extracted from A. arborescens , M.
pulegium and R. chalepensis were chosen following their effectiveness on both insects R. dominica
and T. castaneum, to be tested for their antifeedant activities. Mortality rates reached almost 100% for
the three EOs tested after 120 hours of exposure at the dose 235.85μl / l air.
R. chalepensis essential oil was very effective against R. dominica. It caused 76% and 94% of
mortality after 24 hours and 48h and reached 100% mortality after 72 hours at 160μl/l air.
M. pulegium EO caused 95% of mortality after 24 hours at the dose of 160 µl /l air. 48h later, the
mortality reached 98%. However, the EO from A. arborescens caused a mortality rate of 76% after 24
hours of treatment at the dose 160 µl/l air (Table 4).
Results indicated that EO from R. chalepensis was more toxic than the EO from M. pulegium against
T. castaneum. Indeed, after 24 hours of exposure at 160μl/l air, R. chalepensis caused 80% of
mortality. Whearas M. pulegium achieved only 37%. Thus, the EO from R. chalepensis caused the
largest antifeedant activity in comparison with those from A. arborescens and M. pulegium (Table 4).

Volume 66(5). Published October, 01, 2019
www.jnsciences.org
E-ISSN 2286-5314
NCIBI et al. (2019) / Journal of new sciences, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 66(5), 4182-4194 4189
Table 4: Percentage of mortality of R. dominica (R.d) and T. castaneum (T.c) in wheat grain treated with essential oils
24
48h
72h
96h
120h
EOs
Doses (µl /l)
R.d
T.c
R.d
T.c
R.d
T.c
R.d
T.c
R.d
T.c
R. chalepensis
160
76
80
94
90
100
100
100
100
100
100
200
59
88
90
100
93
100
95
100
97
100
M. pulegium
160
95
37
95
71
98
86
98
91
98
94
200
91
62
98
90
98
98
98
100
98
100
A. arborescens
160
76
2
28
5
33
7
39
7
49
12
200
43
5
65
8
67
11
67
14
72
19
The EO which had the most important toxic activity required minimal time to kill half of the tested
population. The lethal time 50% of the population depended upon the concentration. It is inversely
proportional with the latter (Table 5). M. pulegium had an immediate effect on R. dominica at 200µl/l.
CL50 = 55,49 µl/l air was the lowest and it represents the TL50=0,069h. The LC50 and LT50 of EO of A.
arborescens were very high, it exceeded 150 hours for the two insects therefore it does not show any
interest antifeedant activity (Table 5).
Table 5: LC50 and LT50 essential oils applied to wheat grain against R. donimica (Rc) and T. castaneum (Tc)
LC50 (µl / l air)
LT50 (h)
160μl / l air
200 µl / l air
R. d
T. c
R. d
T. c
R. d
T. c
A. arborescens
296.039
477.08
153.096
> 150
33.165
> 150
M. pulegium
55.49
178.46
1.613
31.186
0.069
19.995
R. chalepensis
131.859
123.818
16.522
20.83
14.367
8.304
Discussion
Several scientific researchers were investigated to study essential oils yields and activities against
many arthropods (Abderrahim et al. 2019;Ait-Ouazzou et al. 2012; Attia et al. 2012; Blažekovic et al.
2018; Cardia et al. 2018; Lakehal et al. 2016). Studies reported that variations in EOs yields
considerably depend on plant species, geographic location, the method or extraction time, the plant
parts used the collecting period, etc (Mejri et al. 2010; Teles et al. 2013).
In this study plant species with the most important essential oil yields were L. angustifolia (0.67% ), T.
capitata (0.35%) and J. communis (0.23%).
L. angustifolia essential oil yield (0.67% ) was higher compared to a study carried out by Cardia et al.
(2018) which was (0.14%). While Blažekovic et al.(2018) showed a higher essential oil yield (0.9%).
In the present study the yield of T. capitata EO was 0.35% , whereas, Aazza et al. (2016) presented
that its EO yield was 1.3%. Moreover, Abderrahim et al. (2019) showed differences in essential oil
yields from A. arborescens growing in three areas in Bejaia and in comparison with EO yield in this
study.
Many essential oils from plant species were investigated for their insecticidal activities to control
insect pests of stored grain (Ben Chaaban et al. 2019; Campolo et al. 2018;Chiluwal et al. 2017). They
are tested for their repellent (Bougherra et al. 2015, Taban et al. 2017), fumigant (Bachrouch et al.
2010) and antifeedant activities (Lee et al. 2004, Upadhyay et al. 2018).
In the current study R. dominica seems more tolerant to the repellent effect of EOs than T. castaneum
which showed greater sensitivity. Pistacia lentiscus esential oil showed repellent activity against R.
dominica and T. castaneum. Our results are in accordance with a study investigated by Bougherra et
al. (2015) showing that P. lentiscus exerted repellent activities on R. dominica, Sitophilus zeamais,
Tribolium confusum with a superior resistance of R. dominica. Similarly, Bachrouch et al. (2010),
recorded the insecticidal activity of P. lentiscus on the third instar larvae and the adult of T. castaneum
with LC50 equal to 112.12 and 28.03 μl / l air, respectively. However, in this study we noted a very
lower efficiency against T. castaneum. This difference in efficiency may be explained by the
geographic origin of plants and therefore the essential oil composition.
Furthermore, in 2012, Mediouni-Ben Jemâa et al. (2012) recorded significant variation in repellent and
fumigant activities of three L. nobilis essential oils from Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia against R.

Volume 66(5). Published October, 01, 2019
www.jnsciences.org
E-ISSN 2286-5314
NCIBI et al. (2019) / Journal of new sciences, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 66(5), 4182-4194 4190
dominica and T. castaneum with a higher repellency against the latter. The insecticidal effects of EOs
could be attributed to the geographic origin of plant and the tolerance of insect species to EOs (Teles
et al. 2013; Tunç et al. 2000).
In the same context, Bett et al. (2016) showed the insecticidal and repellent of two essential oils
extracted from the leaves of Cupressus lusitanica Miller and Eucalyptus saligna Smith against adult
Tribolium castaneum, Acanthoscelides obtectus, Sitotroga cerealella and Sitophilus zeamais with
highest repellency of the four EOs against T. casaneum (65–92.5%).
A study investigated by Cosimi et al. (2009) showed that 24h after treatment Citrus bergamia EO(or
Citrus aurantium) carried the highest repulsion on maize weevil and Cryptolestes ferrgineus.
R. dominica adults (CL50=11,14 µl/l) were significantly more susceptible than T. castaneum
(CL50>150 µl//l) to the fumigant effect of essential oils from L. angustifolia. This susceptibility was
confirmed by Ebadollahi et al. (2010) with LC50 = 5.66 µl/l and 39.685 µl/l 24 h after treatment
against R. dominica and T. castaneum, respectively.
M. communis investigated in this study seems less effective against R. dominica and T. castaneum.
According to Ayvaz et al. (2010), M. communis essential oil showed an insecticidal effect against
three different stored product insects Ephestia kuehniella, Plodia interpunctella and Acanthoscelides
obtectus with LC50 values of 12.74; 22.61 and 49.58μl / l air 24h after treatment , respectively.
Several scientific researchers were investigated to show the insecticidal effects of essential oils such P.
graveolens (Kabera et al. 2011), R. officinalis (Ben Slimane et al. 2015, Lee et al. 2002) , R.
chalepensis (Majdoub et al.2014) and M. pulegium(Aziz and Abbass 2010; Ben Chaaban et al. 2019),
against pest insects of stored grains (Upadhyay et al. 2018).
Another study investigated by Taban et al. (2017) showed the insecticidal and repellent activities of
essential oils on T. castaneum. In fact, EOs from of three species of Satureja spp. (S. Khuzestanica, S.
rechingeri and S. bachtiarica) were strongly repellent against T. castaneum adults at the concentration
tested (1% v / v) with a highest repellency of S. khuzestanica (98% to 100%) after 4 hours of exposure
and fumigant toxicity at the lowest dose with 2.51 mg /L air.
In contrary to our results, Lee et al. (2002) showed that R. officinalis was potentially toxic to T.
castaneum with LC50=7.8μl/l air whereas in the present study LC50 is highly superior(199,6 μl/l air).
On the other hand, efficiency of both Thymus vulgaris were important with LC50>100 µl/lair.
T. castaneum seems to be more resistant to the fumigant activity than R. dominica. In this regards,
Shaaya et al. (1997) showed that a large number of EOs were assessed against four major stored-
product insects S. oryzae, R. dominica, Oryzaephilus surinamensis and T. castaneum. The latter was
found to be the most resistant to the fumigant activity of EOs(Nenaah 2011). Our findings were
confirmed with a study carried out by Rozman et al. (2007) and showed that T. castaneum is very
tolerant in comparison to R. dominica and S. oryzae exposed to EOs extracted from L. angustifolia, R.
officinalis, T. vulgaris and L. nobilis. Another study investigated by Lee et al. (2004) recorded that S.
oryzae was more tolerant than T. castaneum and R. dominica to essential oils from Myrtaceae for
their fumigant activities with and without wheat.
Previous studies showed that the geographical origin and climate factors, the seasonal and genetic
variation and stage of development can influence the chemical composition of the essential oils
(Anwar et al. 2009; Milios et al. 2001; Shahat et al. 2011; Teles et al. 2013) and therefore their
biological activities. In 2010, Mejri et al. demonstrated that the chemical composition of the essential
oil could be influenced by the method of distillation, the distilled part of the plant also its state(fresh or
dried). These could explain the differences recorded in their biological effects between scientific
research.
To summarize, the biological activities of essential oils considerably depended upon their
phytochemical profile and the insect species, concentrations and time of exposure to the treatment.
In this study, several essential oils were tested for their insecticidal and repellent activities against two
major insect pest of stored grain. Essential oils from M. pulegium, R.chalepensis were the most
effective against both insects Future research efforts should be directed towards the method of
application of essential oils since they are volatile, looking for other plant extracts more effective
preserving human and environmental health.

Volume 66(5). Published October, 01, 2019
www.jnsciences.org
E-ISSN 2286-5314
NCIBI et al. (2019) / Journal of new sciences, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 66(5), 4182-4194 4191
4. Conclusion
This study was carried out to determine the insecticidal effects of fifteen essential oils from Tunisia
throughout three bioassays: Repellent, fumigant and antifeedant activities against two pest major of
stored-grains R.dominica and T. castaneum. Most essential oils showed significant insecticidal
activities against both insects depending upon plant species, insect tolerance, concentrations and
exposure time.
R. chalepensis and M. pulegium were the most effective essential oils towards both insects. Future
research efforts should be focused on investigate chemical compounds of essential oils, toxicity of
major compounds on human, mammal and non-target organisms.
5. References
Aazza S, El-Guendouz S, Miguel MG, Antunes M D, Faleiro M L, Correia AI, Figueiredo AC
(2016) Antioxidant, Anti-inflammatory and Anti-hyperglycaemic Activities of Essential Oils
from Thymbra capitata, Thymus albicans, Thymuscaespititius, Thymus carnosus, Thymus
lotocephalus and Thymusmastichina from Portugal. Natural Product Communications 11 (7):
1029-1038
Abbott WS (1925) A method for computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. J. Econ. Entomol. 18:
265-267
Abderrahim A, Belhamel k, Chalard P, Figuérédo G (2019) Chemotypes and
radical scavenging activity of the essential oils from Artemisia arborescens L. growing in
three areas of Bejaia (Algeria). Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-019-00169-6
Ait-Ouazzou A, Loran S, Arakrak A, Laglaoui A, Rota C, Herrera A, Pagan R, Conchello P
(2012) Evaluation of the chemical composition and antimicrobial activity of Mentha pulegium,
Juniperus phoenicea, and Cyperus longus essential oils from Morocco, Food Research
International 45: 313-319
Angioni A, Barra A, Coroneo V, Dessi S, Cabras P (2006) Chemical composition, seasonal
variability, and antifungal activity of Lavandula stoechas L. ssp. stoechas essential oils from
stems / leaves and flowers. J. Agric. Food Chem. 54:4364-4370
Anwar F, Ali M, Hussain AI, Shhid M (2009) Antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of essential
oil and extracts of fennel (Foeniculum vulgare Mill.) seeds from Pakistan. Flavor and Fragrance
Journal 24( 4):170-176
Attia S, Grissa KL, Ghrabi ZG, Mailleux AC, Lognay G, Hance T (2012) Acaricidal activity of 31
essential oils extracted from plants collected in Tunisia. The Journal of Essential Oil Research
24(3): 279–288
Ayvaz A, Sagdic O, Karaborklu S, Ozturk I (2010) Insecticidal activity of the essential oils from
different plants against three stored-product insects, Journal of Insect Science, 10, Article 21.
Aziz EE, Abbass MH (2010) Chemical composition and efficiency of five essential oils against
Callosobruchus maculates (F) on Vigina radiata seeds. American-Eurasian J. Agric. About. Sci.
8: 411-419
Bachrouch O, Mediouni-Ben Jemaa J, Chaieb IW, Talu T, Marzouk B, Abderraba M (2010)
Insecticidal activity of Pistacia Lentiscus essential oil on Tribolium castaneum as an alternative to
chemical control in storage, Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 5( 1): 63-70
Balachowsky AS, Peter F (1962) Family Tenebrionidae. In Entomology applied to agriculture.
Treaty edited by AS Balachowsky Masson et Cie Editors. Volume I, Coleoptera 1: 374-392
Banga K S, Kotwaliwale N, Mohapatra D, Giri SK (2018). Techniques for Insect Detection in
Stored Food Grains: An Overview, Food Control 94: 167-176
Ben Chaaban S, Hamdi SH, Mahjoub K, Ben Jemâa JM (2019) Composition and insecticidal
activity of essential oil from Ruta graveolens, Mentha pulegium and Ocimum basilicum
against Ectomyelois ceratoniae Zeller and Ephestia kuehniella Zeller (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae).
Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection126(3): 237–246
Ben Slimane B, Ezzine O, Dhahri S, Chograni H, Ben Jamâa M L (2015) Chemical composition
of Rosmarinus and Lavandula essential oils and their insecticidal effects on Orgyia trigotephras
(Lepidoptera, Lymantriidae). Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Medicine 2: 98-103
Bett PK, Denga AL, Ogendob OJ, Kariukia ST, Kamatenesi-MM, Mihaled JM, Torto B (2016)
Chemical composition of Cupressus lusitanica and Eucalyptus saligna leaf essential oils and

Volume 66(5). Published October, 01, 2019
www.jnsciences.org
E-ISSN 2286-5314
NCIBI et al. (2019) / Journal of new sciences, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 66(5), 4182-4194 4192
bioactivity against major insect pests of stored food grains. Industrial Crops and Products 82: 51-
62
Blažekovic B, Yang W, Wang Y, Li C, Kindl M, Pepeljnjak S, Vladimir-Kneževic S (2018)
Chemical composition, antimicrobial and antioxidant activities of essential oils of Lavandula ×
intermedia ‘Budrovka’ and L. angustifolia cultivated in Croatia. Industrial Crops & Products 123:
173–182
Bougherra HH, Bedini S, Flamini G, Cosci F, Belhamel K, Conti B (2015) Pistacia lentiscus
essential oil HAS repellent effect against three major insect pests of pasta. Industrial Crops and
Products 63:249-255
Bnina EB, Hammami S, Daamii-Remadi M, Jannet HB, Mighiri Z (2010) Chemical composition
and antimicrobial effects of Tunisian Ruta chalepensis L. essential oils, Journal of the Chemical
Society in Tunisia 12:1-9
Campolo O, Giunti G, Russo A, Palmeri V, Zappalà L (2018) Essential Oils in Stored Product
Insect Pest Control. Journal of Food Quality, Volume 2018, 18 pages.
Cardia GFE, Silvia-Filho SE, Silva EL, Uchida N S, Cavalcante HAO, Cassarotti LL, Salvadego
VEC, Spironello RA, Bersani-Amado CA, Cuman RKN (2018) Effect of Lavender
(Lavandula angustifolia) Essential Oil on Acute Inflammatory Response. Evidence-Based
Complementary and Alternative Medicine , Volume 2018, 10 pages.
Chiluwal K, Kim J, Bae SD, Park CG (2017) Essential oils from selected wooden species and their
major components as repellents and oviposition deterrents of Callosobruchus chinensis (L.).
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 17(4): 1447-1453. doi: 10.1016 / j.aspen.2017.11.011
Copping LG, Menn JJ (2000) Biopesticides: a review of their action applications and efficacy. Pest
Management Science 56: 651-676
Cosimi S, Rossi E, Cioni PL, Canale A (2009) Bioactivity and qualitative analysis of some essential
oils from Mediterranean plants against stored-product pests: Evaluation of repellency against
Sitophilus zeamais Motschulsky, Cryptolestes ferrugineus (Stephens) and Tenebrio molitor (L.).
J. Stored Prod. Res. 45: 125-132
Daglish GJ (2004) Effect of exposure period on degree of dominance of phosphine resistance in
adults of Rhyzopertha dominica (Coleoptera: Bostrychidae) and Sitophilus oryzae (Coleoptera:
Curculionidae). Pest Manag. Sci. 60:822-826
Daghlish G J, Nayak M K, Arthur F H, Athanassiou C G (2018) Insect Pest Management in
Stored Grain. Recent Advances in Stored Product Protection 3:45 - 64
Ebadollahi A, Safaralizadeh MH, Pourmirza AA (2010) Fumigant toxicity of Lavandula stoechas
L. oil against three insect pests attacking stored products. Journal of plant protection research
50(1): 56-60
Finney DJ (1971) Probit Analysis, third ed. Cambridge University Press, London.
Isman MB (2000) Plant essential oils for pest and disease management. Crop Prot. 19: 603-608
Isman MB (2006) Botanical insecticides, deterrents, and repellents in modern agriculture and an
increasingly regulated world. Annual Review of Entomology 51: 45-66
Jerraya A. (2003) Nuisibles des denrées stockées, Principaux nuisibles des plantes cultivées et des
denrées stockées en Afriques du Nord : Leur biologie, leurs ennemis naturels, leurs dégâts et leur
contrôle, Edition Climat Pub , pp 357-392
Jood S, Kapoor A C, Singh R (1993) Effect of insect infestation on the organoleptic characteristics
of Stored cereals. Postharvest Biology and Technology 2: 341-348
Kabera J, Gasogo A, Uwamariya A, Ugirinshuti V, Nyetera P (2011) Insecticidal effects of
essential oils of Pelargonium graveolens and Cymbopogon citratus on Sitophilus zeamais
(Motsch.), African Journal of Food Science 5 (6): 366-375
Lakehal S, Meliani A, Benmimoune S, Bensouna SN, Benrebiha FZ, Chaoui C (2016) Essential
Oil Composition and Antimicrobial Activity of Artemisia herba–alba Asso Grown in Algeria.
Medicinal chemistry 6(6): 435-439
Lee BH, Lee SE, Annis PC, Pratt SJ, Park B-S, Tumaalii F (2002) Fumigant toxicity of essential
oils and monoterpenes against the red flour beetle, Tribolum castanum Herbest. J. Asia-Pasifik
Entomol. 5 (2): 237-240
Lee B H, Annis PC, Tumaalii F, Choi W-S (2004) Fumigant toxicity of essential oils from the
Myrtaceae family and 1,8-cineole against 3 major stored-grain insects, J . Stored Prod. Res. 40:
553-564

Volume 66(5). Published October, 01, 2019
www.jnsciences.org
E-ISSN 2286-5314
NCIBI et al. (2019) / Journal of new sciences, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 66(5), 4182-4194 4193
Lorini I, Collins PJ, Daglish GJ, Nayak K, Pavic H (2007) Detection and characterization of strong
resistance to phosphine in Brazilian Rhyzopertha dominica (F.) (Coleoptera: Bostrychidae). Pest
Manag. Sci. 63: 358-364
Majdoub O, Dhen N, Souguir S, Haouas D, Baouandi M, Laarif A, Chaieb I (2014) Chemical
composition of Ruta chalepensis essential oils and their insecticidal activity against Tribolium
castaneum. Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 9:83-90
Mediouni-Ben Jemâa J, Tersim, N, Toudert KT, Kouja ML (2012) Insecticidal activities of
essential oils from leaves of Laurus nobilis L. from Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco, and
comparative chemical composition. Journal of Stored Products Research 48: 97-104
Mejri J, Abderrabba M, Mejri M (2010) Chemical composition of essential oil of Ruta chalepensis
L: Influence of drying, hydro-distillation duration and plant parts. Ind. Crop. Prod. 32: 671-673
Milios M, Radonic A, Bezic N, Dunkic V (2001) Localities and seasonal variations in the chemical
composition of essential oils of Satureja montana L. and S. cuneifolia Ten. Flavour and Fragrance
Journal 16 (3): 157-160
Nenaah G (2011) Toxicity and growth inhibitory activities of methanol extract and the β-carboline
alkaloids of Peganum harmala L. against two coleopteran stored-grain pests, J. Stored Prod. Res.
47: 255-261
Nerio LS, Olivero-Verbel J, Stashenk EE (2009) Repellent activity of essential oils from seven
aromatic plants grown in Colombia against Sitophilus zeamais Motschlsky (Coleoptera), J.
stored-Prod. Res. 45: 212-214
Nerio LS, Olivero-Verbel J, Stashenko E (2010) Repellent activity of essential oils: a review.
Bioresource Technol. 101:372-378
Okonkwo EU, Okoye WJ (1996) The efficacy of four seed powders and the essential oils as
protectants of cowpea and maize grains against infestation by Callosobruchus
maculatus (Fabricus) (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) and Sitophilus zeamais (Motschulsky) (Coleoptera:
Curculionidae) in Nigeria. Int. J. Pest Manag. 42: 143-146
Pires, E M and Nogueira, R M(2018) Damage caused by Rhyzopertha dominica (Fabricius, 1792)
(Coleoptera: Bostrichidae) in stored Brazil nuts. Scientific Electronic Archives 11 (1): 57-61
Rajendran S, Sriranjini V (2008) Plant products as fumigants for stored-product insect control.
Journal of Stored Products Research 44: 126–135.
Rozman V, Kalinović I, Korunić Z (2007) Toxicity of naturally Occurring Compounds of
Lamiaceae and Lauraceae to three stored products insects. J. Stored Prod. Res. 43: 349-355
Shaaya E, Kostjukovsky M, Eilberg J, Sukprakarn C (1997) Plant oils as fumigants and contact
insecticides for the control of stored-product insects. J. Stored Prod. Res. 33: 7-15
Shahat AA, Ibrahim AY, Hendawy SF, Omer EA, Hammouda FM, Abdel-Rahman FH, Saleh
MA (2011) Chemical composition, antimicrobial and antioxidant activities of essential oils from
organically cultivated Fennel Cultivars. Molecules 16: 1366-1377
Sousa AH, Faroni LRDA, Pimentel MAG, Guedes, RNC (2009) Developmental and population
growth rates of phosphine-resistant and susceptible population of stored-product insect pests. J.
Stored Prod. Res. 45: 241-246
Stamopoulos DC (1991) Effects of four essential oil vapours on the oviposition and fecundity of
Acanthoscelides obtectus (Say) (Coleoptera: Bruchidae): laboratory evaluation. J. Stored Prod.
Res., 27: 199-203
Taban A, Saharkhiz MJ, Hooshmandi M (2017) Insecticidal and repellent activity of three Satureja
species against adult red flour beetles, Tribolium castaneum (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae), Acta
Ecologica Sinica 37: 201-206
Teles S, Pereira JA, Santos CHB, Menezes RV, Malheiro R, Angelica M, Lucchese AM, Silva F
(2013) Effect of geographical origin on the essential oil content and composition of fresh and
dried Mentha×villosa Hudson leaves. Industrial Crops and Products 46:1– 7
Tripathi AK (2018) Pests of Stored Grains. Pests and Their Management, pp 311–359
Tunç I, Berger BM, Erler F, Daģli (2000) Ovicidal activity of essential oils from five plants against
two stored-product insects, Journal of Stored Products Research 36(2):161-168
Ukeh DA, Birkett MA, Bruce TJA, Allan EJ, Pickett JA, Bitten (Luntz) AJ (2010) Behavioural
responses of the maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais, to Host (maize grain) and non-host plant
volatiles. Pest Manag. Sci. 66: 44-50

Volume 66(5). Published October, 01, 2019
www.jnsciences.org
E-ISSN 2286-5314
NCIBI et al. (2019) / Journal of new sciences, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 66(5), 4182-4194 4194
Upadhyay N, Dwivedy AK, Kumar M, Prakash B, Dubey NK (2018) Essential Oils as Eco-friendly
Alternatives to Synthetic Pesticides for the Control of Tribolium castaneum (Herbst) (Coleoptera:
Tenebrionidae). Journal of Essential Oil Bearing Plants 21(2): 282-297, DOI:
10.1080/0972060X.2018.1459875
Vayias BJ, Athanassiou CG, Milonas DN, Mavrotas C (2010) Persistance and efficacy of spinosad
on wheat, maize and barley grains against four major stored product pests. Crop Prot. 29: 496-505
Wijayaratne L KW, Rajapakse RHS (2018) Effects of spinosad on the heat tolerance and cold
tolerance of Sitophilus oryzae L. (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) and Rhyzopertha dominica F.
(Coleoptera: Bostrichidae). Journal of Stored Products Research 77: 84 – 88
Zaouli Y, Bouzaine T, Boussaid M (2010) Essential oils composition in two Rosmarinus officinalis
L. varieties and incidence for antimicrobial and antioxidant activities, Food and Chemical
Toxicology 48(11): 3144-3152
Zapata N, Smagghe G (2010) Repellency and toxicity of essential oils from the leaves and bark of
Laurelia sempervirens and Drimys winteri against Tribolium castaneum, Industrial Crops and
Products 32:405-410.