The Termiticidal Potential of Chromolaena odorata (L.) RM King & H Robinson

THE TERMITICIDAL POTENTIAL OF Chromolaena odorata (L.) R.M. KING & H. ROBINSON (HAGONOY)

RALPH STEPHEN E. CACAPIT

IZAVELO RAPHAEL J. LLOREN

CALEB MARK D. QUIAMBAO

DENNIS BRYAN A. VALDEZ

Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University South La Union Campus College of Education

Laboratory High School Agoo, La Union

Elective II (Research)

March 2009

THE TERMITICIDAL POTENTIAL OF Chromolaena odorata (L.) R.M. KING & H. ROBINSON (HAGONOY)

RALPH STEPHEN E. CACAPIT

IZAVELO RAPHAEL J. LLOREN

CALEB MARK D. QUIAMBAO

DENNIS BRYAN A. VALDEZ

Submitted to Tessie Q. Peralta, Ph. D.

Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University South La Union Campus College of Education

Laboratory High School Agoo, La Union

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in Elective II (Research)

March 2009

APPROVAL SHEET

This is to certify that this study, entitled: “THE TERMITICIDAL POTENTIAL OF

Chromolaena odorata (L.) R.M. KING & H. ROBINSON (HAGONOY)” presented and

submitted by Ralph Stephen E. Cacapit, Izavelo Raphael J. Lloren, Caleb Mark D. Quiambao,

and Dennis Bryan A. Valdez, to fulfill part of the requirements in Elective II (Research), was

examined and passed on March 4, 2009 by the Research Committee composed of:

TESSIE Q. PERALTA(Sgd)

Adviser

FLORDILIZA B. DALUMAY(Sgd)

Critic

LILIA L. MADRIAGA(Sgd)

Chairman

MARICON C. VIDUYA(Sgd)

Member

Accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements in Elective II

(Research) on March 4, 2009.

MERCEDITA A. MABUTAS(Sgd) PURIFICACION B. VERCELES(Sgd) OIC – Principal Chairman

Laboratory High School Bachelor of Secondary Education Department

MANUEL T. LIBAO(Sgd) Dean

College of Education

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The researchers would like to extend their thanks to the people who helped in the

realization and success of this study:

Dr. Tessie Q. Peralta, their subject teacher for her encouragement and motivation

throughout the development of this manuscript;

Prof. Mercedita A. Mabutas, the principal of the DMMMSU – SLUC, College of

Education, Laboratory High School, Agoo, La Union, for her encouragement toward a

deeper pursuit of knowledge;

Ms. Flordiliza B. Dalumay, their critic, and Prof. Lilia L. Madriaga, the Chairman of

the panel, for sharing their ideas, professional expertise, constructive criticisms, and

invaluable assistance towards the refinement of this study;

Ms. Maricon C. Viduya, the member of the panel, for sharing her expertise in

English grammars, and checking and editing this manuscript;

Dr. Raquel D. Quiambao, for sharing her expertise in the statistical part of the study;

Mr. Tristan B. Villanueva, the Laboratory Custodian of the DMMMSU – SLUC,

College of Sciences, for making the laboratory equipment and materials available to the

researchers;

Dr. Wilfredo F. Vendivil, the Senior Researcher of the National Museum, Botany

Division, for sharing his precious moments in determining and verifying the plant material

used in the study;

Ms. Adoracion A. Ceniza, the Chief, Baguio Pesticide Analytical Laboratory Satellite,

Bureau of Plant Industry, Baguio National Crop Research and Development Center, for the

bulk extraction of the hagonoy methanol leaf extract;

Their parents, for their love, guidance, encouragement, cooperation, inspiration,

and financial support;

Their brothers, sisters, friends, and relatives, for their unstinted support and

cooperation;

Their classmates, for the encouragement, moral support, help, and assistance; and

Above all, the Almighty God, for the spiritual enlightenment, guidance and support;

and for the strength and wisdom that enabled the researchers to achieve this undertaking.

The Researchers

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Title Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

Approval Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

Acknowledgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii

List of Experimental Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

List of Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x

Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi

Chapter I Introduction

Background of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Objectives of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Null Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Significance of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Scope and Limitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Time and Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Conceptual Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Chapter II Review of Literature

Termites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Chromolaena odorata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Solignum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Chapter III Methodology

Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Collection and Preparation of Plant Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Preparation of Decoction from C. odorata Leaves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Preparation of Expressed Juice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Preparation of the Methanol Leaf Extract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Test Organism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Application of the Test Substances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Data Gathered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Chapter IV Results and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Chapter V Summary, Conclusion, and Recommendation

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Experimental Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table Title Page

1 Length of time in minutes for the termites to die due to various

treatments

30

2 One‐Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Summary Table

32

3 Pairwise Comparison of the Mean Time using Scheffé's Test

33

vii

http://isi.cbs.nl/glossary/term2931.htm

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Title Page

1 Problem Tree (Termites) 4

2 Problem Tree (Dependence on Insecticides) 5

3 The Conceptual Framework 9

4 Research Flowchart 29

5 Length of time in minutes for the termites to die due to various

treatments

31

viii

LIST OF EXPERIMENTAL PLATES

Plates Title Page

1 Chromolaena odorata in its natural environment 42

2 Fresh leaves of Chromolaena odorata 42

3 The experimental set‐up 43

4 The separation of test organism from the soil 43

5 The test organisms placed on the dish 44

6 Decoction of Chromolaena odorata leaves 44

7 Pounding of fresh Chromolaena odorata leaves 45

8 Air dried Chromolaena odorata leaves 45

9 Preparation of Extract 46

10 Laboratory personnel of the Bureau of Plant Industry –

National Pesticide Analytical Laboratory performing the Rotavation

46

11 The test organisms administered by positive control (Solignum) 47

12 The test organisms administered by leaf decoction from hagonoy 47

13 The test organism administered by expressed juice from hagonoy 48

14 The test organism administered by 30% leaf extract solution 48

15 The test organisms administered by 60% leaf extract solution 49

16 The test organisms as affected by the various treatments 49

17 The researchers introducing the various test substances to the termites 50

18 Researcher of the National Museum, Botany Division determining the plant material used in the study

50

ix

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Title Page

A Sample Computation for Methanol Leaf Extract Solutions 51

B Statistical Formula 52

C Sample Computation of ANOVA and Scheffé’s Test 54

D Tables 58

E Figures 60

F Letter to the Senior Museum Researcher of the National Museum

65

G Certification of Plant Material 66

H Letter to the Chief, Baguio PAL Satellite‐BNCRDC

67

I Certificate of Appearance (issued by the Chief, Baguio PAL Satellite‐BNCRDC)

68

x

THE TERMITICIDAL POTENTIAL OF Chromolaena odorata (L.)

R.M. KING & H. ROBINSON (HAGONOY)

Researchers: Ralph Stephen E. Cacapit

Izavelo Raphael J. Lloren

Caleb Mark D. Quiambao

Dennis Bryan A. Valdez

Adviser: Tessie Q. Peralta, Ph. D.

A B S T R A C T

This study aimed to analyze and determine the termiticidal potential of

Chromolaena odorata (L.) RM King & H Robinson (Hagonoy).

This study utilized the experimental method of research which focused on the use

standard laboratory diagnostic procedures implicated in termiticidal potential of hagonoy in

terms of the length of time for the termites to die upon application of the various

treatments.

The methods used were collection and preparation of plant material, the

preparations on decoction from hagonoy leaves, expressed juice, methanol extract,

Solignum, and the application of the various substances to the termites.

Specifically, this study tested if there were significant differences in the length of

time the termites were killed between pair of treatments and after the application of the

various treatments which were T1 – positive control, commercial pesticide (Solignum), T2 ‐

leaf decoction from C. odorata, T3 ‐ expressed leaf juice from C. odorata, T4 ‐ 30% C.

odorata leaf extract solution, and T5 ‐ 60% C. odorata leaf extract solution.

The data gathered were tabulated and computed using One‐Way Analysis of

Variance (ANOVA) to determine whether significant differences exist in the length of time

the termites were killed after the exposure to the five treatments. Scheffé's Test was used

to find out where the difference lies among the five treatments and which among the

treatments had the greatest termiticidal potential.

The study revealed that there were significant differences in the length of time the

termites were killed among the various treatments and between the pair of treatments. The

data gathered showed that sample termites in 60% C. odorata leaf extract solution has the

least length of time with a mean of 1.29 minutes. This was followed by T1 (positive control,

Solignum) with a mean 1.45 minutes, 30% C. odorata leaf extract solution with a mean of

1.47, and leaf decoction from C. odorata with a mean of 1.77. The treatment with the

longest time for the sample to die was the expressed leaf juice from C. odorata with a mean

of 2.15 minutes.

The F‐test showed that there were significant differences among the means of the

five treatments at 0.05 significance level. The Scheffé's Test implies that the positive control

and 30% C. odorata methanol leaf extract solution were equally efficient. Furthermore,

since all comparisons with 60% C. odorata leaf extract solution which has the shortest mean

time are significantly different, then it could be concluded that 60% hagonoy methanol leaf

extract solution is the best among the five treatments.

xii



Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Plants are considered as one of the most significant endeavors to study. All life on

Earth depends directly or indirectly on the plants for food and for other purposes. Some of

these contain thousands of medicinal compounds (Quisumbing, 1978) while the others have

potential as insecticide (http://encarta.msn.com).

Chromolaena odorata, locally known as Hagonoy or Hagonoi, is a shrub that is

widely distributed to many parts of the tropics. However, many farmers do not seem to

mind its benefits because these are problems in agricultural land and commercial

plantations. Chromolaena odorata (hagonoy) is a pest abundant in our country (Padilla, et.

Al., 2006)

It is proven that hagonoy causes diarrhea when ingested or even fetal deaths among

animals. It also reduces the carrying capacity of the field to grow more beneficial weeds.

(CPD Technoguide No. 8, 2003).

People even regard this as unusable. Because of this perception, the researchers

decided to make something out of Chromolaena odorata (Hagonoy). The plant could be

used as a termiticide.

Termites are some of the loathed and hated pests in the Philippines because they

feed on woods and weaken its structure and they are considered pest by local people. For

this reason, the researchers developed termiticide out of Chromolaena odorata (hagonoy)

plant.

2

According to Padilla, et al., the use of pesticide is really prevalent to industrial

countries like the Philippines. They are used in comforts of their business establishments

and even at home to eliminate the huge number of pests. And one of the pests, considered

as problem of Filipinos today are the destructive termites.

With these concerns, the researchers were motivated to investigate the termiticidal

potential of Chromolaena odorata (hagonoy).

Objectives of the Study

The main purpose of this study is to formulate a potential solution to the focal

problems presented in Figures 1 and 2, which are the destructive termites and the

dependence on insecticides by developing a termiticide out of C. odorata.

The study purported to evaluate the termiticidal potential of Chromolaena odorata

(L.) R.M. King & H. Robinson (Hagonoy).

In the study reported herein, it sought to:

1. Test termiticidal potential of Chromolaena odorata in terms of the length of time

the termites are killed after the application of the five treatments.

2. Determine the significant differences in the length of time the termites are killed

when exposed to the five treatments.

3. Analyze the significant differences in the length of time the termites are killed

between pairs of treatments.

3

In this regard, the researchers were encouraged to investigate the termiticidal

potential of Chromolaena odorata (hagonoy) and to develop ways of putting C. odorata to

beneficial uses as an effective alternative termiticide.

Null Hypotheses

The following null hypotheses were tested in the study:

1. There are no significant differences in the length of time the termites are killed

after application of the five treatments.

2. There are no significant differences in the length of time the termites are killed

between pairs of treatments.

4

PROBLEM TREE

Structural Damage and Additional Expenses to

Repair Damaged Properties Use of Expensive

Chemical Termiticide

TERMITES

Lack of Knowledge of Plant Alternative as

Termiticide

Destructive

Figure 1. Problem Tree

5

PROBLEM TREE

Toxicity to Natural Enemies and Other Non-target

Organisms

Expensive

Pesticide Resistance

Risk to Human and Animal Health

DEPENDENCE ON

INSECTICIDES

Highly Effective

Easy to Use

Readily Available

Lack of Knowledge on its Impacts to Health

and Environment Figure 2. Problem Tree

6

Significance of the Study Results of this study may be beneficial to the following:

a. People and industry. This study may serve as a benchmark on termite

eradication. This study may also serve as a springboard towards the discovery of potentially

new natural foundations of pesticides from plants. After several years of research efforts,

the problems on C. odorata remained unsolved. In this unfolding scenario, it is necessary to

develop ways of putting C. odorata to beneficial uses (Bamikole, 2004). It can be used as a

source alternative foundations as termiticide which is health and environment friendly.

People living in far‐flung areas and places that cannot be reached by modern products may

also benefited by this study.

b. Future researchers. The results of this study would provide baseline information

that may serve as a frame of reference to the future researchers who become ardently

absorbed in this study; and

c. The Researchers. It is hoped that this study will contribute to the pool of

knowledge about the termiticidal properties of plants like Chromolaena odorata.

Ultimately, the results of this study will serve as the potential solution to the focal

problems on the destructive termites and the people’s dependence on insecticides.

Scope and Limitation

The concern and focus of this study was limited to the termiticidal potential of C.

odorata making use of 5 (five) treatments which can be found in Figure 3. Effects of the

7

positive control, hagonoy leaf decoction, expressed juice, and methanol extracts were

determined based on the length of time the termites are killed upon the application.

The extracting solvent used was a technical grade methanol. Thus, the component

that can only be extracted using methanol was considered. Distilled water was used as the

solvent for the treatments that used expressed juice and decoction (Biagtan, De Guzman,

Mangay‐ayam, 2007).

Time and Location

This study was conducted at Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University‐South

La Union Campus, Laboratory High School, Agoo, La Union from December 2008 to February

2009. Crude extraction of the termiticidal components was done at the Bureau of Plant

Industry (BPI) – Baguio Pesticide Analytical Laboratory (BPAL), Baguio City. Verification of

the plant material was done at the Botany Division of the National Museum, Manila.

Definition of Terms

For better understanding of the study, the following terms were operationally

defined and used .

Commercial Pesticide. e.g. Solignum; This refers to the positive control used in the

study, which is a synthetic chemical mostly used as termite killer and wood preservative.

Decoction. This refers to the preparation made by boiling the leaves in water.

Eradication. This refers to the elimination or destruction of a population of

termites as part of pest control.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pest_control

8

Expressed Juice. The preparation made by pounding C. odorata leaves using mortar

and pestle afterwich, fresh leaf juice was obtained.

Hagonoy. A local term of Chromolaena odorata; plant used in the study.

Insecticide. A type of pesticide used to eliminate insects.

Leaf Extract. A concentrated preparation of C. odorata (Hagonoy) leaf obtained by

separating the active constituent of the plant through extraction using methanol.

Methanol. A colorless organic substance used as a solvent also known as methyl

alcohol, carbinol, wood alcohol, wood naphtha or wood spirits. It is a chemical compound

with chemical formula CH3OH (often abbreviated MeOH) and boils at 64.7 °C (337.8 K).

Methanol Extract . It is a concentrated preparation of C. odorata obtained by using

methanol as the extracting solvent.

Termites. Social insects that are destructive to properties, and used as test organism

in this study.

Termiticide. It is a specific type of insecticide used to kill termites.

Pesticide. The agent known to eliminate different types pests like termites, fungi,

mollusks.

Conceptual Framework

This research study focused on the termiticidal potential of C. odorata.

Proper and careful laboratory method and techniques such as collection and

shredding of leaves, extraction, preparation of solutions and test for the efficacy of the

termiticide were done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_compound

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_formula

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxide

9

There were five treatments namely: T1 ‐ positive control, commercial pesticide

(Solignum), T2 ‐ leaf decoction from C. odorata, T3 ‐ expressed leaf juice from C. odorata, T4

‐ 30% C. odorata leaf extract solution, and T5 ‐ 60% C. odorata leaf extract solution.

The paradigm, which explains the conceptual framework of this study, is presented

in Figure 3.

INDEPENDENT VARIBLE DEPENDENT VARIABLE

Treatment: a. T1 ‐ positive control, (Solignum) b. T2‐ leaf decoction from

C. odorata c. T3‐ expressed leaf juice from

C. odorata d. T4‐ 30% C. odorata leaf extract

solution e. T5‐ 60% C. odorata leaf extract

solution

Length of time the termites are killed after the exposure to:

a. leaf decoction from hagonoy

b. expressed leaf juice from hagonoy

c. methanol leaf extract

solutions

Figure 3. Conceptual Paradigm showing the Independent and Dependent Variables of the study.

Chapter II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Plants are used as insecticides since before the time of Ancient Romans. People

applied the crude mixture from natural products in insecticidal activities nowadays

(Franzios, 1997).

Many plants such as vetiver grass oil (Zhu, 2001); seeds (Vanucci, 1992); wood

leaves, such as leaves of tarbush (Flourensia cernua) (Tellez, 2001); mature leaves of 7

species of Eucalyptus (Lin, 1998); leaves of Azadirachta excelsa (Jack) Jacobs (Sajap, 2000);

and heartwood from trees have been investigated for termiticidal preservatives. Many

species of wood have been extracted, and the efficacy for termite resistance has been

tested. These woods include Taxodium distichum (L.), (Scheffrahn, 1988); Sawara wood

(Chamaecyparis pisifera D. Don) (Saeki, 1973); Port‐Orford‐cedar [Chamaecyparis

lawsoniana (A. Murr.) Parl.] (McDniel, 1989), bogwood of yakusugi (Yatagai, 1991);

Diospyros virginiana L. (common persimmon) (Carter, 1978), Mansonia altissima and

Piptadeniastrum africanum (Bultman, 1979); Juniperus procera (African pencil cedar)

(Kinyanjui, 2000); Taiwania (T. cryptomerioides) (Chang, 2001); Melaleuca (Melaleuca

quinquenervia) heartwood blocks (Carter, 1982); Lophopetalum wightianum,

Microcerotermes beesoni Snyder, Neotermes bosei (Snyder) and Heterotermes indicola

(Wasm.) (Sen‐Sarma, 1979); Brazil wood (Prosopis juliflora), Anadenanthera macrocarpa;

Astronium urundeuva; Schinopsis brasiliensis, Senna siamea, Tabebuia aurea, Amburana

cearensis, Tabebuia impetiginosa and Aspidosperma pyrifolium (Paes, 2001). Wang (1989)

compared the effects of eight species which included (a) Chamaecyparis obtusa,

11

(b) Cunninghamia lanceolata, (c) Taiwania cryptomerioides, (d) Cryptomeria japonica, (e)

Acacia confusa, (f) Castanopsis carlesii, (g) red oak (Quercus sp.) and (h) Gonystylus

bancanus.

These materials were extracted with organic solvents or hot water to get crude

mixture to test against termites. Most of them were tested in a mixture, and effective

compositions were isolated and identified by some of the researchers. The extracted

chemicals may act as feeding deterrent, ovipositor deterrents, repellent and toxicant, and

trail‐following compounds. Many kinds of chemicals are found to be termiticidal due to

different resources used. These chemicals include ferruginol and manool (Scheffrahn,

1988), nootkatone (Zhu, 2001; Maistrello, 2001), chamaecynone and isochamaecynone

(Saeki, 1973), 2‐phenoxyethanol (Laine, 1998), eugenol (Cornerlius, 1997), Terpene

(Sharma, 1994), α‐terpineol and three sesquiterpene alcohols T‐cadinol, torreyol (δ‐

cadinol), and α‐cadinol (McDaniel, 1989), 7‐methyljuglone, isodiospyrin (Carter, 1978),

cedrol and alpha‐cadinol (Chang, 2001), alpha–pinene, p‐cymene and 1,8‐ cineole (Lin,

1998), and aphthalene (Henderson, 1998).

These compositions may have different effects on different species of termites.

Most of the experiments were carried out with the FST (Chen, 1996; Valles, 2002). Other

species such as Reticulitermes flavipes (Green, 2000), viz. Microcerotermes beesoni,

Neotermes [Kalotermes] bosei and Heterotermes indicola (Sen‐Sarma, 1979; Gupta, 1978;

Jain, 1990), and white termite (O. obesus) (Singh, 2001) collected from sugarcane fields in

India were also employed. (http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd‐01172004‐

25708/unrestricted/Liu_thesis.pdf)

12

Termites

Termites are light‐colored social insects that form large colonies. Many species live

in warm or tropical regions, feed on wood, and are highly destructive to trees and wooden

structures (www.thefreedictionary.com).

The termites are a group of social insects usually classified at the taxonomic rank of

order Isoptera. As truly social animals, they are termed eusocial along with the ants and

some bees and wasps which are all placed in the separate order Hymenoptera. Termites

mostly feed on dead plant material, generally in the form of wood, leaf litter, soil, or

animal dung, and about 10% of the estimated 4,000 species (about 2,600 taxonomically

known) are economically significant as pests that can cause serious structural damage to

buildings, crops or plantation forests. Termites are major detrivores, particularly in the

subtropical and tropical regions, and their recycling of wood and other plant matter is of

considerable ecological importance.

As eusocial insects, termites live in colonies that, at maturity, number from several

hundred to several million individuals. They are a prime example of decentralized, self‐

organized systems using swarm intelligence and use this cooperation to exploit food

sources and environments that could not be available to any single insect acting alone. A

typical colony contains nymphs (semi‐mature young), workers, soldiers, and reproductive

individuals of both genders, sometimes containing several egg‐laying queens

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Termite).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insect

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_%28biology%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusocial

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_%28biology%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detritus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detrivore

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subtropics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusocial_insect

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralised

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organised

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organised

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swarm_intelligence

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Termite

13

A colony may number from 100 to more than 1 million termites. Excluding the

immature forms, called nymphs, a colony consists of several structurally differentiated

forms living together as castes with different functions in community life. In socially

advanced species, three principal castes exist: the reproductives, the soldiers, and the

workers. Both the reproductives and the soldiers occur in two or three distinguishable

forms, each specialized for a role in the division of labor in the colony. All forms comprise

individuals of both sexes, but only in the reproductives do the sexual organs undergo

complete development.

Among the reproductives are dark‐colored males and females with fully developed

wings and compound eyes. At maturity, they leave the parental nest in swarms. After the

flight, they shed their wings and mate. A new colony is then established by a male and

female who become primary reproductives, that is, the king and queen, whose sole

occupation is the production of eggs. Termite kings and queens are longer‐lived than other

termites, and the queens are larger than other members of their colony. In certain tropical

species, the king and queen live for ten years, and the queen grows to an enormous size,

sometimes as much as 20,000 times the size of the worker. The abdomen becomes so

distended with eggs that the queen is unable to move about. The eggs are laid at a

prodigious rate that totals about 30,000 a day in some species. Most termite colonies have

only one royal pair.

Apart from the reproductives, all castes are sterile and wingless and have whitish

bodies. Typically, the workers constitute the most numerous castes and are the smallest of

14

the adult forms. Workers build and provision the nest, tend the eggs, and feed and groom

all the other inmates of the community. In some species, no true worker caste exists;

undifferentiated nymphs do the work in the colonies of such species. All species have

soldiers with greatly enlarged heads. The soldiers of certain species are equipped with

huge jaws for defense of the colony; in some species, the soldiers have long snouts, from

which they can eject a sticky, poisonous substance to envelop an enemy and render it

helpless.

Termites feed mainly on wood or other materials containing cellulose. The

cellulose is partially digested by a protozoan ciliate living symbiotically in the intestines of

the worker. Enzymes produced by the protozoan break down the cellulose into

components that can be assimilated by the termites. Digested cellulose is distributed by

the workers to members lacking the protozoan. Some species feed on vegetable molds

that they cultivate. Other species obtain a special fluid secreted by beetles, known as

termitophiles, which live as guests within the termite community.

Termite nests, called termitaries, vary widely. The nests of certain tropical species

are huge mound‐like structures, often 6 m (20 ft) in height. These mounds have extremely

hard walls, constructed from bits of soil cemented with saliva and baked by the sun. Inside

the walls are numerous chambers and galleries, interconnected by a complex network of

passageways. Ventilation and drainage are provided, and heat required for hatching the

eggs is obtained from the fermentation of organic matter, which is stored in the chambers

serving as nurseries (www.encarta.msn.com).

15

Of the more than 55 species common in the United States, majority build their

nests underground. The subterranean termites are extremely destructive, because they

tunnel their way to wooden structures, into which they burrow to obtain food. Given

enough time, they will feed on the wood until nothing is left but a shell.

Termites are classified under Phylum: Arthropoda, Class: Insecta, Subclass:

Pterygota, Infraclass: Neoptera, Superorder: Dictyoptera, Order: Isoptera. Subterranean

termites came from family Termitidae. In the Philippines: Nasutitermes luzonicus Oshima,

Macrotermes gilvus Hagen, and Microcerotermes losbanosensis Oshima. Are the most

common (http://insectscience.org/7.26).

"Higher termites" (Family Termitidae) comprise three quarters of all described

termite species. They differ from "lower termites" (all families except Termitidae) by

having bacteria rather than protozoa in their guts. Many in the deserts of the American

Southwest are important foragers of plant litter, grass and dung. Most are harmless, not

known to cause serious structural damage, even though species of Amitermes feed mostly

on wood ( http://www.utoronto.ca).

Termitidae rely on symbiotic bacteria rather than protozoa (as in all other termite

families, the ‘lower’ termites) for the digestion of cellulose. Most Termitidae inhabit soil

nests. The complex architecture of the large mounds of the Macrotermitinae ensures

ventilation and regulation of the microclimate of the nest. There are five families, with

about 1500 species, occurring world‐wide but mainly in the tropics.(A Dictionary of

Zoology, 1999).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthropod

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insect

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pterygota

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoptera

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictyoptera

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isoptera

http://insectscience.org/7.26

http://www.utoronto.ca/forest/termite/term_hig.htm

16

Chromolaena odorata

Chromolaena odorata (L.) R.M. King & H. Robinson, is a weed belonging to the

Asteraceae family which has now become so common in the Philippines since its

introduction from South America through the country's southern backdoor in the 1960's.

(CPD Technoguide No. 8, 2003)

C. odorata is a native of South and Central America but thoroughly naturalized in

parts of Africa, India, Ceylon, Indochina, Malaysia and Indonesia. It migrated into the

Philippines some 20 years ago. It might have found its way into the country either through

some air packing materials during the World War 11 or through traders from South

Borneo where it is growing abundantly in borders of abaca plantations

(http://www.ehs.cdu.edu.au).

Hagonoy is classified under Kingdom: Plantae; Division: Magnoliophyta;

Class : Magnoliopsida; Order: Asterales; Family: Asteraceae; Tribe: Eupatorieae; Genus:

Chromolaena.

Locally in the Philippines, the plant is known as Agonoi (Tagalog, Iloko, Bisaya);

Hagonoi (Tagalog, Monobo); Haluhagonoi (Tagalog); Haluka (Tagalog); Salonai (Iloko);

Malasili (Iloko); Larogon (Bagobo); Anoioi (Ivatan); Palunag (Pampangan); Palunai

(Pampangan); Lahunai (Sulu); and Hagonoy or Hagonio in many parts of the country. The

common names in English are devil weed, bitter bush, Chromolaena, jack in the bush, siam

weed, and triffid weed. The other names are verba de Maluco (Spanish); herbe de Laos

http://www.ehs.cdu.edu.au/chromolaena/procee

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flowering_plant

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dicotyledon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asterales

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteraceae

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eupatorieae

17

(French); kasengisil, masigsig (Guam); ngengesil (Palau); Utuot (Chuuk); rumput pirtih

(Indonesian); and siam kraut (German).

It is an economically significant weed because it grows rapidly under any

agricultural situations, in cattle ranches, and under plantations; it is avoided by all

livestock; it causes diarrhea when ingested or even fetal deaths among cows; and it

reduces the carrying capacity of the field to grow more beneficial weeds. (CPD

Technoguide No. 8, 2003).

C. odorata was first noted in Zamboanga and then shortly thereafter in Palawan

and Mindoro. From there, it spread very rapidly northward to Luzon, covering thousands

of acres of range and crop lands per year. Recent survey of the weed showed that it has

spread extensively in Mindanao island (except the northeastern region), in most islands in

the Visayas, Palawan and in areas surrounding Manila. In Mindanao, the spread of the

weed appears to be originating from important port areas of Davao and Zamboanga, and

progressing toward the northeastern region (http://www.ehs.cdu.edu.au).

C. odorata is an herbaceous perennial that forms dense tangled bushes 1.5‐2.0m in

height. It occasionally reaches its maximum height of 6m (as a climber on other plants). Its

stems branch freely, with lateral branches developing in pairs from the axillary buds. The

older stems are brown and woody near the base; tips and young shoots are green and

succulent. The root system is fibrous and does not penetrate beyond 20‐30 cm in most

soils. The flowerheads are borne in terminal corymbs of 20 to 60 heads on all stems and

branches. The flowers are white or pale bluish‐lilac, and form masses covering the whole

18

surface of the bush (Cruttwell and McFadyen, 1989). C. odorata is a big bushy herb with

long rambling (but not twining) branches; stems terete, pubescent; leaves opposite,

flaccid‐membranous, velvety‐pubescent, deltoid‐ovate, acute, 3‐nerved, very coarsely

toothed, each margin with 1‐5 teeth, or entire in youngest leaves; base obtuse or

subtruncate but shortly decurrent; petiole slender, 1‐1.5cm long; blade mostly 5‐12cm

long, 3‐6cm wide, capitula in sub‐corymbose axillary and terminal clusters; peduncles 1‐

3cm long, bracteate; bracts slender, 10‐12mm long; involucre of about 4‐5 series of bracts,

pale with green nerves, acute, the lowest ones about 2mm long, upper ones 8‐9mm long,

all acute, distally ciliate, flat, appressed except the extreme divergent tip; florets all alike

(disc‐florets), pale purple to dull off‐white, the styles extending about 4mm beyond the

apex of the involucre, spreading radiately; receptacle very narrow; florets about 20‐30 or a

few more, 10‐12mm long; ovarian portion 4mm long; corolla slender trumpet form;

pappus of dull white hairs 5mm long; achenes glabrous or nearly so (Stone 1970). The

seeds of Siam weed are small (3‐5mm long, ~1mm wide, and weigh about 2.5mg seed‐1

(Vanderwoude et al., 2005).

Moreover, the proximate, amino acid and phytochemical composition of

Chromolaena odorata was investigated. A high total carbohydrate (20.58% WW and

50.82% DW), crude fibre (10.76% WW and 26.57% DW) and protein (6.56% WW and

16.20% DW) content was observed. The protein is rich in the essential amino acids (with

histidine and phenylalanine being very high) and has a protein score of 88.24% with

methionine as the limiting amino acid. The phytochemical screening revealed the

presence of alkaloids, cyanogenic glycosides, flavonoids (aurone, chalcone, flavone and

19

flavonol), phytates saponins and tannins. The anti‐nutrients composition includes

cyanogenic glycosides (0.05% WW and 0.13% DW), phytates (0.22% WW and 0.54% DW),

saponins (0.80% WW and 1.98% DW) and tannins (0.15% WW and 0.37% DW). Our result

suggests that C. odorata is a source of high quality protein which could serve as a potential

source of protein supplement (Ngozi, et Al., 2009).

The PCA‐Davao Research Center, after having been granted a permit, imported the

stem‐galling fly, Procecidochares connexa Macquart (Diptera : Tephritidae) from Indonesia

ACIAR project CS2 96/91 "Biological Control of Chromolaena odorata in Indonesia, Papua

New Guinea and the Philippines". A series of host specificity tests on ‘hagonoy’ and several

other weed and tree species were conducted under the supervision of the National

Biosafety Committee of the Philippines (NCBP) of the Department of Science and

Technology (DOST). A year of testing showed that the gall fly was highly host specific to

‘hagonoy’. In a parallel project in Indonesia which imported the flies in 1994 and released

in 1995 the flies are now widely spread among Chromolaena in several islands.

The gall fly lays its eggs on practically all of the growing tips of ‘hagonoy’. As much

as 50 eggs are laid by a single female throughout its short lifetime of 1 to 2 weeks. In

about 12 to 15 days the tips begin to swell as manifestation of the activity of the maggots

inside. The gall attains a maximum of 9 by 13 mm in size and each contains from 2 to 10

pupae. Two months after egg laying the flies start to emerge. Egg –laying starts almost

immediately after mating. Death to ‘hagonoy’ is often as a result of extreme pressure

exerted by the fly where almost all shoots develop galls. The final dried‐up ‘hagonoy’ show

galls in every axil and in chains at tips (CPD Technoguide No. 8 Series of 2003).

20

The shrub is reported to be highly allelopathic to nearby vegetation (Muniappan

1994), a fact that has been demonstrated in controlled studies (Sahid and Sugau 1993). It

reduces the diameter growth of teak in infested plantations (Daryono and Hamzah 1979).

It was thought to be useful in the control of Imperata grass and for this reason was

deliberately introduced into the Ivory Coast, but the results were disappointing (Binggeli

1999). Because of the abundance of dead leaves and dry shoots, C. odorata stands are a

fire hazard (Muniappan 1994). Cattle do not eat C. odorata; however, it is browsed by

white‐tailed deer (Meyer and others 1984). In herbal medicine, leaf extracts with salt are

used as a gargle for sore throats and colds. It is also used to scent aromatic baths (Liogier

1990). Extracts of C. odorata have been shown to inhibit or kill Neisseria gonorrhea (the

organism that causes gonorrhoea) in vitro (Caceres and others 1995) and to accelerate

blood clotting (Triratana and others 1991). A satisfactory medium‐density particleboard

was prepared from Christmas bush stems (Kaleta and others 1999). During fallows

between cultivation, Christmas bush adds copious amounts of organic matter to the soil

and may reduce the populations of nematodes (M’Boob, 1991). It is also useful as mulch

for row crops (Swennen and Wilson 1984).

In addition, the allelopathic effects of Chromolaena odorata L. aqueous leaf extract

and residues incorporated in the soil on the growth and water status of Lycopersicon

esculentum Mill were studied. Significant growth reductions in L. esculentum were

observed from additions of C. odorata aqueous leaf extract at concentrations as low as 1g

fresh weight in 40ml of water. Reduction in growth was accompanied by decreases in leaf

water potential. Incorporation of C. odorata leaf material into the soil in which

21

Lesculentum Mill seedlings were germinated and grown caused significant depression in

growth over the 2‐week test period with addition of 2g residue to 80g soil. Allelochemicals

released from C. odorata plants and residues are suggested as a possible explanation for

yield reductions in crops in fields where C. odorata plants are present. One mechanism of

toxic action on seedlings involved interference with water balance.

(http://bioline.utsc.utoronto.ca/archive/00001932/)

Furthermore, essential oil extracts of Chromolaena odorata, and Lantana camara

from their leaves were tested for efficacy on the morality of the maize grain weevil,

Sitophilus zeamais (Coleoptera, Curculionidae). Concentrations of the essential oils relative

to the maize grains of 0.013, 0.025, 0.05 and 0.1% (v/w) were used for A. conyzoides and

0.063, 0.125, 0.25 and 0.50% (v/w) for C. odorata and L. camara. Twenty 7‐day old adult

weevils were fed on maize grains treated with the above concentrations of the essential

oils in Petri dishes. Control dishes contained insects and maize grains without essential

oils. The experiment was repeated three times. Dishes were incubated in the laboratory

for 7 days at 26°C and 75‐‐85% relative humidity. Insect mortality was recorded every 24

h. Graphs of percentage mortality versus the duration of exposure were constructed and

the LD50 was computed for each oil. Significant insect mortality was obtained with all the

essential oils used. The mortality of S. zeamais increased with the concentration of the

essential oils of the three plants and the duration of exposure of the weevils on the

treated substrates. The essential oil extract of Ageratum conyzoides was the most

effective insecticide (LD50 = 0.09% in 24 h), followed by that of L. camara (LD50 = 0.16%)

and C. odorata (LD50 = 6.78%). These results show that the essential oils of the leaves of

http://biblioteca.universia.net/irARecurso.do?page=http%3A%2F%2Fbioline.utsc.utoronto.ca%2Farchive%2F00001932%2F&id=3920514

22

some of these weed species may be exploited for insect control in stored products

(http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=855900).

Furthermore, studies on Chromolaena odorata oils from the flowers and leaves

showed toxicity to mosquitoes, although the extent of toxicity varied from each oil. Lt50

determined for the C. odorata flower and leaf oils used on the larvae gave 10.6 minutes

and 12.0 minutes respectively. Adult treatments also gave the LD50 of 2.5 and 4.0 minutes

for the flower and leaf oils respectively. The C. odorata oils were effective against both the

larvae and adults of the mosquitoes and their effects found to be persistent. The oil

extracts therefore have good prospects of being developed as insecticides for mosquito

control (http://esa.confex.com/esa/2004/techprogram /paper_14489.htm).

Solignum

Solignum, the No. 1 wood preservative that provides sure protection against

termites (anay), woodborers (bukbok) and fungi (amag). Solignum has been tried, tested

and trusted in the Philippines for over 50 years now and is registered under Fertilizer and

Pesticide Authority (FPA). Solignum is available in two variants: Solignum Colorless and

Solignum Brown (http://www.jardinedistribution.com/construction.php ?cid=10).

According to Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA), the major termiticidal

component of Solignum is permethrin. (http://fpa.da.gov.ph/List%20of%20Registered%2

0Agricultural%20Pesticide%20Products.pdf) Permethrin is a common synthetic chemical,

widely used as an insecticide and acaricide and as an insect repellent. It belongs to the

family of synthetic chemicals called pyrethroids and functions as a neurotoxin, affecting

neuron membranes by prolonging sodium channel activation. It is not known to harm

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=855900

http://esa.confex.com/esa/2004/techprogram%20/paper_14489.htm

http://www.jardinedistribution.com/construction.php%20?cid=10

http://fpa.da.gov.ph/List%20of%20Registered%252

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_synthesis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insecticide

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acaricide

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insect_repellent

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrethroid

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurotoxin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuron

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_membrane

23

most mammals or birds. It generally has a low mammalian toxicity and is poorly absorbed

by skin. In agriculture, permethrin is mainly used on cotton, wheat, maize, and alfalfa

crops, and is also used to kill parasites on chickens and other poultry. It is also extensively

used in Europe as a timber treatment against wood boring beetle (woodworm). Its use is

controversial since, as a broad‐spectrum chemical, it kills indiscriminately; as well as the

intended pests, it can harm beneficial insects including honey bees, aquatic life, and small

mammals such as mice. Permethrin is toxic to cats and many cats die each year after being

given flea treatments intended for dogs, or by contact with dogs that have recently been

treated with permethrin.

Permethrin is also used in healthcare, to eradicate parasites such as head lice and

mites responsible for scabies, and in industrial and domestic settings to control pests such

as ants and termites.

Permethrin kills ticks on contact with treated clothing. According to the

Connecticut Department of Public Health, it "has low mammalian toxicity, is poorly

absorbed through the skin and is rapidly inactivated by the body. Skin reactions have been

uncommon.”

Permethrin is used in tropical areas to prevent mosquito‐borne disease such as

dengue fever and malaria. Mosquito nets used to cover beds may be treated with a

solution of permethrin. This increases the effectiveness of the bed net by killing parasitic

insects before they are able to find gaps or holes in the net. Malaria kills 1‐3 million people

per year, and permethrin is believed to have very low if any toxicity in humans. Military

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheat

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maize

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfalfa

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasite

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poultry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodworm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broad-spectrum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honey_bee

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouse

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_lice

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scabies

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ant


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Connecticut_Department_of_Public_Health&action=edit&redlink=1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosquito

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dengue_fever

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria

24

personnel training in malaria‐endemic areas may be instructed to treat their uniforms with

permethrin as well. An application should last several washes.

Recently, in South Africa, residues of permethrin were found in breast milk,

together with DDT, in an area that experienced DDT treatment for malaria control, as well

as the use of pyrethroids in small‐scale agriculture.

Permethrin is extremely toxic to fish. Extreme care must be taken when using

products containing permethrin near water sources. Permethrin is also highly toxic to cats.

Flea and tick repellent formulas intended (and labeled) for dogs may contain permethrin

(like k‐9 Advantix and Advantage Multi for Dogs) and cause feline permethrin toxicosis in

cats: specific flea and tick control formulas intended for feline use, such as those

containing fipronil, should therefore be used for cats instead.

Permethrin is classified by the US EPA a likely human carcinogen, based on

reproducible studies in which mice fed permethrin developed liver and lung tumors.

Carcinogenic action in nasal mucosal cells for inhalation exposure is suspected due to

observed genotoxicity in human tissue samples, and in rat livers the evidence of increased

preneoplastic lesions lends concern over oral exposure (http://en.wikipedia.org/

wiki/Permethrin).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Africa

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fipronil

http://en.wikipedia.org/

Chapter III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter deals with the materials, methods, and procedures used in the

preparation of the different test substances and its application to termites. It also includes

the data gathered and the statistical analysis of the data. Research flowchart is also

presented in Figure 3.

Materials

Plant material – Chromolaena odorata leaves collected from Aringay, La Union

Test organism – termites

Laboratory apparatus – triple beam balance, spatula, stirring rod, beaker,

Erlenmeyer flask, graduated cylindeccr, petri dish, scissor, timer, blender, rotary evaporator,

desiccators, sprayer, clean containers

Chemicals ‐ chemical termiticide (Solignum), technical grade methanol

Others – distilled water

Research Design

The study did not use any design for the reason that studies such as this one,

concerned treatment of the experimental animals done by batches or done one after the

other and not at the same time.

In line with this, this study utilized the experimental method of research using

standard laboratory diagnostic procedures involved in termiticidal potential of hagonoy.

26

The study used five treatments, which are as follows:

a. T1 – positive control, commercial pesticide (Solignum)

b. T2 – leaf decoction from C. odorata

c. T3 – expressed leaf juice from C. odorata

d. T4 – 30% C. odorata leaf extract solution

e. T5 – 60% C. odorata leaf extract solution

Collection and Preparation of Plant Material

Fresh leaves of C. odorata were removed from the plant. Only leaves without

adhering dirt particles or associated with insect or insect bites were used. The leaves were

washed by running water.

Preparation of Decoction from C. odorata Leaves

About 100 grams of dried C. odorata leaves were boiled in 250 mL water. Boiling was

done for about 15 minutes. Afterwards, the mixture is allowed to cool then placed in a clean

container. Eventually, the mixture was filtered using filter paper. The filtrate collected was

the decoction used in the treatment.

Preparation of Expressed Juice

About 100 grams of fresh C. odorata leaves were pounded using mortar and pestle

and squeezed using a clean cheese cloth. The obtained juice was filtered using filter paper.

Finally, the expressed leaf juice was placed in a clean container.

27

Preparation of the Methanol Leaf Extract

Fresh C. odorata leaves were dried, cut into small pieces, and homogenized using a

blender. The ground leaves were soaked in technical grade methanol for two days with

occasional stirring. The volume of solvent was just enough to immerse the material. The

methanol extract was filtered through a filter paper. After filtration, the methanol was

removed by concentrating at 400C in vacuo using a rotary evaporator, and kept in a

dessicator at room temperature to remove the moisture of the specimen.

Test Organism

A total of 225 subterranean termites in more or less uniform in sizes were collected

from Agoo, La Union. The researchers dug up termitaries and collected the termites

including the soil where they thrived on and placed in a box. After the collection, the test

organisms were separated from the soil and placed them in a petri dish. Each petri dish

contained 15 termites.

Application of the Test Substances

Five (5) treatments namely T1 – positive control, commercial pesticide (Solignum); T2

‐ leaf decoction from C. odorata, T3 ‐ expressed leaf juice from C. odorata, T4 ‐ 30% C.

odorata leaf extract solution, and T5 ‐ 60% C. odorata leaf extract solution were utilized in

the study. The test substances were sprayed once to the sample termites by using sprayer.

28

These doses were administered once for each treatment. The termiticidal effects

were observed as to the length of time the termites are killed. The treatment was

replicated three (3) times.

Data Gathered

The following data was collected during the course of the study:

The length of time the termites were killed. The data on the length of time the

termites were killed after the application of the test substances was determined using timer

in minutes. This was done for every replication.

Data Analysis

The data gathered were tabulated and computed using the following statistical

tools:

1. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to determine whether significant differences exist

in the length of time the termites are killed among the five treatments; and

2. Scheffé's Test to find out where the difference lies and determine which among

the five treatments has the greatest termiticidal potential.


29

Preparation and collection of resources used in the study:

a. plant material b. test organisms c. laboratory apparatuses

and equipment d. chemicals, etc.

Preparation of various test substances: a. Positive control b. leaf decoction from

hagonoy c. expressed leaf juice from

hagonoy d. methanol extracts

Application of the various test substances to the test organisms (termites)

Gathering of data: a. length of time for the test

organisms to die as affected by various test substances

Analyzing the data gathered using the following statistical tools:

a. Analysis of Variance b. Scheffé's Test

Figure 4. The Research Flowchart depicting chronologically the methods and procedures used in the study.

Chapter IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the analysis, discussion, and interpretation of the data

gathered from the test organisms that were treated with the Chromolaena odorata leaf

decoction, expressed juice, and various concentration levels. It also discusses the findings in

relation to the problems in Chapter I.

Table 1. Length of time in minutes for the termites to die due to various treatments

Replication

Treatment 1 2 3

Treatment

Mean

T1 (positive control, Solignum)

1.43 1.48 1.45 1.45

T2 (leaf decoction from C. odorata)

1.73 1.83 1.75 1.77

T3 (expressed leaf juice from C. odorata)

2.05 2.25 2.15 2.15

T4 (30% C. odorata leaf extract solution)

1.33 1.58 1.50 1.47


1.18 1.42 1.28 1.29

GRAND MEAN 1.626

Table 1 presents the data on the length of time in minutes for the sample termites

to die upon application of the various treatments. The results reveal that the sample

termites in T5 (60% Chromolaena odorata leaf extract solution) has the shortest length of

time with a mean of 1.29 minutes. This is followed by T1 (positive control, Solignum) with a

31

mean 1.45 minutes, T4 (30% Chromolaena odorata leaf extract solution) with a mean of

1.47, and T2 (leaf decoction from Chromolaena odorata) with a mean of 1.77. The treatment

with the longest time for the termites to die is T3 (expressed leaf juice from Chromolaena

odorata) with a mean of 2.15 minutes. The shorter the number of mean time, the higher its

termiticidal potential, so this implies that the T5 (60% Chromolaena odorata leaf extract

solution) which has the lowest mean is the most effective and it has the greatest

termiticidal potential among the various treatments.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Length of time in minutes

1 2 3 4 5

Treatment

R1R2R3

Figure 5. Length of time in minutes for the termites to die due to various treatments

32

Table 2. One‐Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Summary Table

Source of Variation

Degrees of Freedom

Sum of Squares Mean Square F‐ratio

Within

Treatments

4

1.39

0.35

38.89*

Between

Treatments

10

0.09

0.009

TOTAL

14

1.48

Legend: *significant at ∞ = .05 CV = 5.83 %

The One‐Way Analysis of Variance is used to compare the means of the five

treatments is presented in Table 2. The F‐test shows that there are significant differences

among the means of the five treatments at 0.05 significance level. This implies that there

are treatments that are more efficient than the others in terms of the length of time for the

sample termites to die upon application of such treatment. Since the Coefficient of

Variation (CV) is 5.83 %, the study is highly reliable. Hence, to determine where the

difference lies, was further tested using Scheffé's Test.

Furthermore, Table 3, on the next page, depicts that all pairwise comparisons exhibit

significant differences with the exception of T1, the positive control and T4, 30% C. odorata

leaf extract solution. This implies that T1 and T4 have comparable effect in terms of the

length of time it takes the sample termites to die. Thus, the application of the positive

control, Solignum (T1) and the application of 30% C. odorata leaf extract solution (T4) are

equally efficient in killing termites. Furthermore, since all comparisons with T5 which has the


33

lowest mean time, are significantly different, then it can be derived that T5 (60% C. odorata

leaf extract solution) is the best among the five treatments.

Table 3. Pairwise Comparison of the Mean Time using Scheffé's Test

Between Treatments F’ F(.05)(k‐1) ∞ = .05

T1 vs. T2 1 896.30 13.44 significant


T1 vs. T4 7.41 13.44 not significant

T1 vs. T5 474 13.44 significant

T2 vs. T3 2 674 13.44 significant






Conclusively, the null hypotheses, indicating that there are no significant differences

on the length of time the termites are killed upon the application of the five treatments,

and between the pairs of treatments, are rejected. This is because each treatment is

significantly different from one another. This strongly indicates that 60% C. odorata

methanol leaf extract solution is the best among the five treatments however; the positive

control and 30% C. odorata methanol leaf extract solution are equally efficient.


Chapter V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMENDATIONS

This chapter presents a summary of the experimental study, the drawn conclusions,

and the offered recommendations.

Summary

This study aimed to analyze and determine the termiticidal potential of

Chromolaena odorata (L.) King & Robinson (Hagonoy).

It study utilized the experimental method of research which focused on the use

standard laboratory diagnostic procedures implicated in termiticidal potential of Hagonoy in

terms of the length of time for the termites to die upon application of the various

treatments.

The study was conducted at DMMMSU ‐ South La Union Campus, Agoo, La Union

from December 2008 to February 2009. Crude extraction of the termiticidal components

was done at the Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) – Baguio Pesticide Analytical Laboratory

(BPAL), Baguio City. Verification of the plant material was done at the Botany Division of the

National Museum, Manila.

The methods used were collection and preparation of plant material, the

preparations on decoction from Chromolaena odorata leaves, expressed juice, methanol

extract, and the application of the various substances to the termites.

Specifically, this study tested if there were significant differences in the length of

time the termites were killed among and between the five treatments which were T1 –

positive control, commercial pesticide (Solignum), T2 ‐ leaf decoction from C. odorata, T3 ‐

35

expressed leaf juice from C. odorata, T4 ‐ 30% C. odorata leaf extract solution, and T5 ‐ 60%

C. odorata leaf extract solution. The extracting solvent used was technical grade methanol.

Thus, the components that could only be extracted with methanol were considered. For the

treatments that used expressed juice and decoction, distilled water was used as the solvent.

The data gathered were tabulated and compute using One‐Way Analysis of Variance

to determine whether significant differences exist in the length of time the termites are

killed after the exposure to the five treatments. Scheffé's Test was used to find out where

the difference lies among the five treatments had the greatest termiticidal potential.

The study revealed that there were significant differences in the length of time the

termites were killed after exposure to the various treatments and between the pair of

treatments. The data gathered showed that sample termites in T5 (60% Chromolaena

odorata leaf extract solution) had the least length of time with a mean of 1.29 minutes.

This was followed by T1 (positive control, Solignum) with a mean 1.45 minutes, T4 (30%

Chromolaena odorata leaf extract solution) with a mean of 1.47, and T2 (leaf decoction from

Chromolaena odorata) with a mean of 1.77. The treatment with the longest time for the

sample to die was T3 (expressed leaf juice from Chromolaena odorata) with a mean of 2.15

minutes.

The result of the One‐Way Analysis of Variance was used to compare the means of

the five treatments. The F‐test showed that there are significant differences among the

means of the five treatments at 0.05 significance level. This implied that there were

treatments that are more efficient than the others in terms of the length of time for the

sample termites to die upon application of such treatment. The Scheffé's Test implies that



36

T1 and T4 had comparable effects in terms of the length of time it took the sample termites

to die. Furthermore, since all comparisons with T5 (60% Chromolaena odorata leaf extract

solution) which had the lowest mean time are significantly different, it was concluded that

T5 was the best among and the most effective the five treatments. Besides, T5 (60% C.

odorata leaf extract solution was the best substitute for Solignum, the positive control, for

the reason that C. odorata is environment and health friendly in contrast with Solignum.

Conclusions

Within the limits of the study, the following conclusions were drawn:

1. Based on the results of the study in terms of the length of time for the termites to

die, 60% Chromolaena odorata leaf extract solution is effective in killing the sample

termites with the shortest length of time. The shorter the number of mean time, the

higher its termiticidal potential. However, the positive control (Solignum) and 30%

Chromolaena odorata leaf extract solution have comparable effect in terms of the

length of time it takes for the sample termites to die. This indicates that the T1 and

T4 are not significantly different from each other which implies that Solignum and

30% C. odorata leaf extract solution have the same effect (same length of time) for

the termites to die.

2. In terms to the length of time for the termites to die, there are significant

differences between the pairwise comparisons of T1 (positive control, Solignum) vs.

T2 (leaf decoction from C. odorata) , T1 (positive control, Solignum) vs. T3 (expressed

leaf juice from C. odorata), T1 (positive control, Solignum) vs. T5 (60% C. odorata leaf

extract solution), T2 (leaf decoction from C. odorata) vs. T3 (expressed leaf juice from

37

C. odorata), T2 (leaf decoction from C. odorata) vs. T4 (30% C. odorata leaf extract

solution) , T2 (leaf decoction from C. odorata) vs. T5 (60% C. odorata leaf extract

solution), T3 (expressed leaf juice from C. odorata) vs. T4 (30% C. odorata leaf extract

solution), T3 (expressed leaf juice from C. odorata) vs. T5 (60% C. odorata leaf extract

solution), and T4 (30% C. odorata leaf extract solution) vs. T5 (60% C. odorata leaf

extract solution). However, the positive control (Solignum) and 30% C. odorata leaf

extract solution are comparable with each other. Based from the results, leaf

decoction, expressed leaf juice, and the different extract solutions from C. odorata

are efficient in terms of their termiticidal potential.

3. The positive control and the 30% C. odorata methanol leaf extract solution have

comparable effect in terms of the length of time it takes for the sample termites to

die. Thus, the application of the positive control, Solignum and the application of

30% C. odorata leaf extract solution are equally efficient in killing termites.

Furthermore, since all comparisons with T5 which has the lowest mean time are

significantly different, then it can be derived that T5 is the best and the most

effective in eradicating termites among the five treatments.

Recommendations

According to results of the study, the following recommendations were offered:

1. In view of the fact that there was a great termiticidal potential of Chromolaena

odorata, which has a comparable effects to the commercial chemical termiticides, it

is recommended that this plant be used as the best alternative termiticide for it is

health and environment friendly.

38

2. While leaf decoction, expressed leaf juice, and the different concentration levels of

Chromolaena odorata have almost the same efficacy, decoction is better to use for

practical reasons. And it is more economical to use and is easy to be obtained by the

people especially those living in far‐flung areas and places that cannot be reached by

modern products.

3. Additional studies should utilize the same preparations of Chromolaena odorata to

investigate its effects on other type of pest as well as plants.

4. Further studies should be conducted by oil extraction and fractionation of the

various chemical constituents of Chromolaena odorata to analyze which of these

substances have the potential to cause such termiticidal effect.

5. Other researchers may employ the similar arrangement and set‐up of treatments of

the study using variety of plants in analyzing and determining their potential not

only as termiticide but also another type of pesticide.

6. Ultimately, a great termiticidal potential of Chromolaena odorata was found out. For

this reason, the researchers recommend the patenting of termiticidal product out of

Chromolaena odorata which is efficient, cheap, economical, organic, and

environment and health friendly.

39

REFERENCES

A Dictionary of Zoology 1999, Oxford University Press 1999. ISBN: 0192800760

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O8‐Termitidae.html

Acda, M. 2007 Toxicity of Thiamethoxam Against Philippine Subterranean Termites. 6pp.

Journal of Insect Science 7:26, available online: insectscience.org/7.26

Ahiati, JT. 2004. A Study of the Insecticidal Effects of Chromolaena odorata Oil Extracts

on the Larvae and Adults of Mosquitoes (Family Culicidae)

http://esa.confex.com/esa/2004/techprogram /paper_14489.htm

Aterrado E.D.,Sanico R.L, Status of Chromolaena Odorata Research in the Philippines.

Davao Research Center, Davao City, Philippines & Visayas State College of

Agriculture, Baybay, Leyte 6521‐A, Philippines. http://www.ehs.cdu.edu.au/

chromolaena/proceedings/first/Status%20of%20Chromolaena%

20odorata%20research%20in%20the%20Philippines.htm

Bamikole, M.A et. Al. 2004. Converting Bush to Meat: A Case of Chromolaena odorata

Feeding to Rabbits. Department of Animal Science, University of Benin, Nigeria

Bouda, H. (et al). Effect of Essential Oils from Leaves of Ageratum conyzoides, Lantana

camara and Chromolaena odorata on the Mortality of Sitophilus zeamais

(Coleoptera, curculionidae).


Broto, Antonio S. 2006. Statistics Made Simple. Second Edition. National Bookstore,

Quezon City, Philippines.

http://www.google.com/product_url?q=http://www.dualj.org/bookstore/item_details.aspx%3FItemID%3D0192800760&fr=AKMd-7z_bcd2SBqHI9t_WCy0Guv9U404_Uzrv6fL7OFdIHYYGRMoauEpKkwk5-FWTuKeAC6Z7_k_B-LeyWAlPZcPA0rpFakXWMf20riuK8p2I9ZAuWBPllrT8F38Inm7nM1s7l6W_YjM4EceX8Fp-8QAAAAAAAAAAA&gl=us&hl=en&sa=title

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O8-Termitidae.html

http://esa.confex.com/esa/2004/techprogram%20/paper_14489.htm

http://www.ehs.cdu.edu.au/%20chromolaena/proceedings/first/Status%20of%20Chro

http://www.ehs.cdu.edu.au/%20chromolaena/proceedings/first/Status%20of%20Chro


40

Chromolaena odorata. http://www.ehs.cdu.edu.au/ chromolaena/proceedings/first/

Status%20of%20Chromolena%20odorata%20research%20in%20the%20Philippin

es.htm

Chromolaena odorata.www.fs.fed.us/global/iitf/pdf/shrubs/

Chromolaena%20odoratum.pdf

Chromolaena odorata. http://www.issg.org/database/species/ecology.asp?fr=1&si =47

Eleyinmi, Afolabi. 2007. Chemical composition and antibacterial activity of Gongronema

latifolium .Department of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Sciences, University

of Alberta, Edmonton T6G 2P5, Canada

Enyi, J., 2001. Allelopathic Effects of Chromolaena Odorata L. (R. M. King and Robinson –

(Awolowo Plant’ Toxin on Tomatoes (Lycopersicum esculentum Mill)

http://biblioteca.universia.net/html_bura/ficha/params/id/3920514.html

Guidebook to Grassland Plants (A Resource Material for Biology Teachers). 2003

Foundation for the Advancement of Science Education,Inc., Science

Education Center, University of the Philippines Press, Diliman, Quezon City.

List of Registered Agricultural Pesticide Products as of 31 Dec 2007. 2008 PRSD.

Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority, FPA Bldg. B.A.I. Compound Visayas Ave. Diliman,

QuezonCity.http://fpa.da.gov.ph/List%20of%20Registered%20Agricultural%

20Pesticide%20Products.pdf

Ngozi, Igboh, Jude, Ikewuchi and Catherine, Ikewuchi. 2009. Chemical Profile of

Chromolaena odorata L. (King and Robinson) Leaves. Pakistan Journal of

Nutrition, University of Port Harcourt, Department of Biochemistry, Port

Harcourt, Nigeria

http://www.ehs.cdu.edu.au/%20chromolaena/proceedings/first/%20Status%20of%20Chromolena%20odorata%20research%20in%20the%20Philippines.htm



http://www.fs.fed.us/global/iitf/pdf/shrubs/%20Chromolaena%20odoratum.pdf

http://www.fs.fed.us/global/iitf/pdf/shrubs/%20Chromolaena%20odoratum.pdf

http://www.issg.org/database/species/ecology.asp?fr=1&si

http://biblioteca.universia.net/html_bura/ficha/params/id/3920514.html

http://fpa.da.gov.ph/List%20of%20Registered%20Agricultural%25

41

Plants. http://encarta.msn.com

Padilla, et. Al., Chromolaena odorata as Termite Eradicator. 2006, Agoo Kiddie Special

School, Agoo, La Union

Primer on Biological Control of Hagonoy (Chromolaena odorata).CPD Technoguide No.8,

2003. Crop Protection Division, Davao Research Center,Agricultural Research &

Development Branch, Philippine Coconut Authority,Bago‐Oshiro, Davao City.

Quisumbing, E. 1978. Medicinal Plants of the Philippines, Katha Publishing Co., Inc.

Quezon City, Philippines.

Termite. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Termite

Termites. www.encarta.msn.com

Termites. www.thefreedictionary.com

Permethrin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permethrin.

Protect Your Wood, Preserve Your Home. http: /www. jardinedistribution.com/

construction.php ?cid=10.

Yaojian, L. 2004. Study on the Termiticidal Components of Juniperus virginiana,

Chamaecyparis nootkatensis and Chamaecyparis lawsoniana.

http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd‐01172004‐

225708/unrestricted/Liu_thesis.pdf

http://encarta.msn.com/


http://www.encarta.msn.com/

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permethrin



http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-01172004-

42

EXPERIMENTAL PLATES

Plate 1. Chromolaena odorata in its natural environment

(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Chromolaena_odorata.jpg)

Plate 2. Fresh leaves of Chromolaena odorata

43

Plate 3. The experimental set‐up

Plate 4. The separation of test organism from the soil

44

Plate 5. The test organisms placed on the dish

Plate 6. Decoction of Chromolaena odorata leaves

45

Plate 7. Pounding of fresh Chromolaena odorata leaves

Plate 8. Air dried Chromolaena odorata leaves

46

Plate 9. Preparation of Extract

Plate 10. Laboratory personnel of the Bureau of Plant Industry – National Pesticide

Analytical Laboratory performing the Rotavation

47

Plate 11. The test organisms administered by positive control (Solignum)

Plate 12. The test organisms administered by leaf decoction from hagonoy

48

Plate 13. The test organism administered by expressed juice from hagonoy

Plate 14. The test organism administered by 30% leaf extract solution

49

Plate 15. The test organisms administered by 60% leaf extract solution

Plate 16. The test organisms as affected by the various treatments

50

Plate 17. The researchers introducing the various test substances to the termites

Plate 18. Researcher of the National Museum, Botany Division determining the plant

material used in the study

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Sample Computation for Methanol Leaf Extract Solutions

I. 30% Methanol Leaf Extract Solution

100 mL hagonoy methanol leaf extract solution

= 100 mL 30% ×

= 100 mL .30 ×

= 30 mL pure hagonoy methanol leaf extract

= 100 mL – 30 mL

= 70 mL distilled water

= 70 mL distilled water + 30 mL pure hagonoy methanol leaf extract

II. 60% Methanol Leaf Extract Solution

100 mL hagonoy methanol leaf extract solution

= 100 mL 60% ×

= 100 mL .60 ×

= 60 mL pure hagonoy methanol leaf extract

= 100 mL – 60 mL

= 40 mL distilled water

= 40mL distilled water + 60mL pure hagonoy methanol leaf extract

52

Appendix B. Statistical Formula

I. Analysis of Variance

1. Degrees of freedom (df)

dfwithin = total number of treatments -1

dfbetween = total df – dfwithin – replication df

Total df = total number of observations – 1

2. Sum of Squares (SS)

Correlation Factor (CF)

nsobservatioofnumbertotal

totalgrandCF2)(

=

Total Sum of Squares = CFX∑ −2

Block Sum of Squares = CFnreplicatiototaltreatment

−∑ 2)(

Sum of Squares between = Total SS – Block SS – SSwithin

3. Mean Square (MS)

MSwithin = 1−Treatment

SSwithin

MSbetween = )1( −rt

SSbetween

53

4. Observed F – Value

Observed F (within) = between

within

MSMS

5. Coefficient of Variation (CV)

100×=meangrand

MSCV between

II. Scheffé's Test

21

212 )(

221 )('

nnnnSW

TTF+

−=

where:

T1 = Mean of 1st sample

T2 = Mean of 2nd sample

SW= MSbetween

n1= Total of 1st sample

n2= Total of 2nd sample


54

Appendix C. Sample Computation of ANOVA and Scheffé’s Test I. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) A. Degrees of Freedom (df) df between = 5-1 = 4 df within = 10 Total df= 15 – 1 = 14 B. Sum of Squares (SS)

nsobservatioofnumbertotal

totalgrandCF2)(

= = 15

)41.24( 2

= 15

85.595

CF = 39.72333333

Total SS = CFx −∑ 2

Total SS = 1.48

SSbetween= CFtotaltreatment −∑ 2)(

SSbetween= 0.09

SSwithin= total SS – SSbetween

SSwithin= 41.11 – 37.72 = 1.39

55

C. Mean Square (MS)

MSwithin= )15(

39.11 −

=−t

SS within

MSwithin= 0.35

MSbetween= )13(5

09.)1( −=

−rtSSbetween

MSbetween= 0.009

F – value = 009.035.0

=between

within

MSMS

F – value = 38.89

CV= 100×MeanGrand

MSbetween

CV= 100626.1009.0

×

CV= 5.83%

56

II. Scheffé's Test

21

212 )(

221 )('

nnnnSW

TTF+

−=

1. T1 vs. T2

9)6()009(.)77.145.1(' 2

2−=F = 30.896,1

000054.01024.0

=

2. T1 vs. T3

9)6()009(.)15.245.1(' 2

2−=F = 10.074,9

000054.049.0

=

3. T1 vs. T4

9)6()009(.)47.145.1(' 2

2−=F = 41.7

000054.00004.0

=

4. T1 vs. T5

9)6()009(.)29.145.1(' 2

2−=F = 00.474

000054.00256.0

=

5. T2 vs. T3

9)6()009(.)15.277.1(' 2

2−=F = 674,2

000054.01444.0

=


57

6. T2 vs. T4

9)6()009(.)47.177.1(' 2

2−=F = 70.666,1

000054.009.0

=

7. T2 vs. T5

9)6()009(.)29.177.1(' 2

2−=F = 70.266,4

000054.02304.0

=

8. T3 vs. T4

9)6()009(.)47.115.2(' 2

2−=F = 00.563,8

000054.04624.0

=

9. T3 vs. T5

9)6()009(.)29.115.2(' 2

2−=F = 30.696,13

000054.07396.0

=

10. T4 vs. T5

9)6()009(.)29.147.1(' 2

2−=F = 00.600

000054.00324.0

=

58

Appendix D. Tables

Table 1. Length of time in minutes for the termites to die due to various treatments

Replication

Treatment 1 2 3

Treatment

Mean

T1 (positive control, Solignum)

1.43 1.48 1.45 1.45

T2 (leaf decoction from C. odorata)

1.73 1.83 1.75 1.77

T3 (expressed leaf juice from C. odorata)

2.05 2.25 2.15 2.15


1.33 1.58 1.50 1.47


1.18 1.42 1.28 1.29

GRAND MEAN 1.626

Table 2. One‐Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Summary Table

Source of Variation

Degrees of Freedom

Sum of Squares Mean Square F‐ratio

Within

Treatments

4

1.39

0.35

38.89*

Between

Treatments

10

0.09

0.009

TOTAL

14

1.48

Legend: *significant at ∞ = .05 CV= 5.83%

59

Table 3. Pairwise Comparison of the Mean Time using Scheffé's Test

Between Treatments F’ F(.05)(k‐1) ∞ = .05



T1 vs. T4 7.41 13.44 not significant









60

Appendix E. Figures

PROBLEM TREE

Structural Damage and Additional Expenses to

Repair Damaged Properties Use of Expensive

Chemical Termiticide

TERMITES Figure 1. Problem Tree

Lack of Knowledge of Plant Alternative as

Termiticide

Destructive

61

PROBLEM TREE

Toxicity to Natural Enemies and Other Non-target

Organisms

Expensive

Pesticide Resistance

Risk to Human and Animal Health

DEPENDENCE ON

INSECTICIDES

Highly Effective

Easy to Use

Readily Available

Lack of Knowledge on its Impacts to Health

and Environment Figure 2. Problem Tree

62

INDEPENDENT VARIBLE DEPENDENT VARIABLE

Length of time the termites are killed after the exposure to:

a. leaf decoction from hagonoy

b. expressed leaf juice

from hagonoy

c. methanol leaf extract solutions

Treatment: a. T1 ‐ positive control,

(Solignum) b. T2‐ leaf decoction from

C. odorata c. T3‐ expressed leaf juice

from C. odorata d. T4‐ 30% C. odorata leaf

extract solution e. T5‐ 60% C. odorata leaf

extract solution

Figure 3. Conceptual Paradigm

63

Preparation and collection of resources used in the study:

a. plant material b. test organisms c. laboratory apparatuses

and equipment d. chemicals, etc.

Preparation of various test substances: a. Positive control b. leaf decoction from

hagonoy c. expressed leaf juice from

hagonoy d. methanol extract

Application of the various test substances to the test organisms (termites)

Gathering of data: a. length of time for the test

organisms to die as affected by various test substances

Analyzing the data gathered using the following statistical tools:

a. Analysis of Variance b. Scheffé's Test

Figure 4. The Research Flowchart

64

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Length of time in minutes

1 2 3 4 5

Treatment

R1R2R3

Figure 5. Length of time in minutes for the termites to die due to various treatments

65

Appendix F. Letter to the Senior Museum Researcher of the National Museum

66

Appendix G. Certification of Plant Material

67

Appendix F. Letter to the Chief, Baguio PAL Satellite‐BNCRDC

68 68

Appendix I. Certificate of Appearance (issued by the Chief, Baguio PAL Satellite‐BNCRDC) Appendix I. Certificate of Appearance (issued by the Chief, Baguio PAL Satellite‐BNCRDC)

Date post:	12-Nov-2014
Category:	Documents
Upload:	dennisbryan
View:	5,358 times
Download:	32 times

The Termiticidal Potential of Chromolaena odorata (L.) RM King & H Robinson

Documents