ArticlePloS one2023
Botanical biopesticides have an influence on tomato quality through pest control and are cost-effective for farmers in developing countries.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comprehensive review ofBiochemistry and biophysics reports · 2026Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Synthetic insecticides heavily applied to manage agricultural pests are highly hazardous to the environment and non-target organisms. Their overuse through repeated treatments in smallholder farming communities is frequent. Botanical biopesticides are ideal for sustainable pest management in agricultural environments by keeping synthetic insecticide use at a minimum. Here we evaluated a locally prepared neem seed extract (NSE) alongside emamectin benzoate against both lepidopteran pests Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) and Spodoptera exigua (Hübner) on tomato Lycopersicon esculentum Mill under natural field conditions in Pakistan. We compared pest severity, fruit injury, quality, marketability, and cost:benefit ratio (CBR) between treatments. The concentration of azadirachtin A in the NSE was 26.5 ppm. NSE at 2% (20 mL/L) and the emamectin benzoate at the recommended field rate in Pakistan were sprayed weekly throughout the fruiting stage. The pest larvae were significantly more abundant on fruits than on flowers and leaves. Fruit injury and losses were significantly more important in untreated control compared to NSE and emamectin benzoate treatments. NSE efficacy varied with respect to the cultivars used and the seasons. Cultivar Eden harboured more pests than Adventa, and emamectin benzoate suppressed more pest individuals than NSE. Both the insecticidal treatments were comparable in terms of marketable yield productions as well as unmarketable, uninjured, and recovered fruit yields. NSE generated a higher CBR (1: 9.26) than emamectin benzoate (1: 3.23). NSE suppressed pests by acting as an antifeedant, similar to its synthetic counterpart. Smallholder growers can thus use NSE as a cost-effective solution in tomato pest management in Pakistan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.