No abstract

Plants have been used for thousands of years as medicine for treating variety of diseases and medical complaints by most of the civilizations. Juniperus communis L. is an evergreen aromatic shrub with high therapeutic potential for the treatment of diseases in human and animals. The plant is rich in aromatic oils, invert sugars, resins, catechin, organic acid, terpenic acids, leucoanthocyanidin, alkaloids, flavonoids, tannins, gums, lignins, wax, etc. Juniper berries or extract of the plant has traditionally been used as diuretic, anti-arthritis, anti-diabetes, antiseptic as well as for the treatment of gastrointestinal and autoimmune disorders. The essential oil and extracts of juniper have been experimentally documented to have antioxidant, antibacterial, antiviral and antifungal activities. Recent studies have also found anti-inflammatory, cytotoxic, hypoglycemic and hypolipidemic effects of berries in experimental models. Further, the essential oil incorporation retarded lipid peroxidation in preserved meat due to its high antioxidant effect which not only improved meat product quality but also improved shelf life of the product. Thus natural antioxidant such as juniper can be used in place synthetic antioxidant for the preservation and improving self-life of meat products. New well designed clinical trials in human and animals using well-characterized J. communis extract or oil need to be conducted so that additional information is generated which can support the use of this natural product as a nutraceutical.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

International audienceThe huge research efforts to develop integrated pest management (IPM) have failed to reduce pesticide use and to foster IPM adoption by farmers. Indeed, despite five decades since the concept of integrated control and threshold theory was developed, and four decades since IPM programs have been implemented in USA, Asia, Latin America, Australia, and India, the widespread use of complex IPM practices has not been adopted. This failure can be explained by IPM complexity, policy restrictions, and counteracting forces of the pesticide industry. This article is a study of drivers that rule the adoption or rejection of IPM by 150 farmers from the Indian state of Punjab. Cotton was cultivated under an insecticide resistance management-based IPM program. This program was implemented in Punjab from 2002 to 2007. A rating scale was developed to measure farmers’ perceived attitudes. An adoptability index was developed. Results show that farmers exhibited very different adoption attitudes. Specifically, farmers adopted widely practices that have no complexity, higher economic advantage, and observability. IPM practices with adoptability indices higher than 0.60 have been widely adopted. The predicted adoptability and effective actual adoption of IPM practices were well correlated with a correlation coefficient of 0.88. Technological attributes complexity and relative economic advantage induced a variation of 99 % in the adoptability. Overall the findings show that relative economic advantage, benefit visibility, compatibility with past experiences, and complexity are the most effective drivers in predicting adoption or rejection. Whereas, unexpectedly, socio-personal and economic factors used by most scientists are relatively insignificant. The new methodological frame can be applied to predict the adoption of agricultural innovations

No abstract

In India, many IPM programmes have been implemented, but they have not achieved the desired level of success in reducing insecticide use and increasing adoption of IPM practices. This inter-disciplinary study evaluated an Insecticide Resistance Management-based Integrated Pest Management (IRM-IPM) programme in cotton and compared it with non-IRM production for a range of IPM and economic measures. The IRM-IPM programme has been implemented in 28 districts of 10 states of India since 2002 to help rationalize and reduce the use of insecticides and to overcome the development of resistance in cotton pests, especially Helicoverpa armigera. The IRM-IPM strategy includes applying insecticides only when pests exceed economic threshold levels, using selective insecticides that are compatible with biological control, and rotating between different insecticide classes. The IRM-IPM programme we evaluated resulted in a reduction in insecticide consumption (technical grade material) by 30%, and it reduced the number of sprays by 15%; however, it did not result in a significant change in productivity. The majority of IRM farmers avoided using highly toxic insecticides such as monocrotophos, avoided use of synthetic pyrethroids beyond 140 days after sowing to avoid resurgence of Bemisia tabaci, and rotated the insecticide compounds/groups to delay the development of resistance and ensured effective management of H. armigera. On average, the IRM-IPM programme resulted in a return of US $24.05 ha 71 (at 2005 rates: US $1 ¼ 45 Indian rupees), by saving on insecticide costs. While the farmers gained significantly in knowledge of IPM practices, the level of adoption of IPM techniques was low. Further studies based on impact evaluation methodology, employing a with/without and before/ after quasi-experimental design, would provide feedback to help in the formulation of future IPM strategies.