Cogon Grass Pesticide

Republic of the Philippines Department of Education Region IV-A CALABARZON Division of Batangas BATANGAS PROVINCE SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL Dacanlao, Calaca, Batangas Cogon Grass Pesticide A Science Investigatory Project Proponents: Angelica M.

Ditan Rosana Joy T. De Roxas Bryan Frero John B. Hernandez IV-Einstein S. Y. 2010-2011 ANGELINE C. PAGKALIWANGAN Adviser Table of Contents Abstract3 Research Plan3 A.

Materials and Methods3 B. Treatment/General Procedure4 Introduction5 A. Background of the Study5 B. Statement of the Problem6 C. Significance of the Study6 D.Scopes and Limitations7 E.

Review of related Literature7 Results and Discussion8 Conclusion13 Recommendation13 Bibliography13 Acknowledgement14 ? Abstract The study was done with the aim of producing a pesticide from cogon grass. Cogon grass was treated to come up with a product which can be used as a pesticide. The said product can be used against pests, namely, cockroaches and wood ants. In the study, the methods in the production of pesticide were given emphasis. Tests conducted by the researchers were also incorporated in this paper, to test the effectiveness of the product.The product was compared to other setups, from cogon grass to the commercially available pesticide.

Statistical tools were used in analyzing the data for more accurate results. In the end of the paper, a wider range of researches on how to improve the quality of the product was recommended. Research Plan A. Materials and Methods The cogon grass was cut into very small pieces. Then, the cut cogon grass was placed in the blender. 50 mL of water was poured in the blender.

The blender was tightly covered. The mixture was pureed for about 10 minutes.The remaining cut cogon was added in the mixture and the mixture was pureed again for another Then, the mixture was put in a clean container preferably a spray bottle. The cap of the bottle was secured. The mixture was shook thoroughly.

B. Treatment/General Procedure To test on which kind of pest the product will be most effective, the product was applied on two pests: pest A (cockroach) and pest B (wood ant) at varying amounts. There were eight set-ups. In pest A, there were four set-ups where 3 mL, 5 mL and 7 mL amount of the product in each set-up.

The fourth set-up was a controlled setup which received no treatment.The same set-ups were used for pest B. The amount of the product assigned to each set-up was sprayed and the number of pest killed was recorded. To test the effectiveness of the product as compared to its commercially available counterparts, the product and the commercial pesticide has undergone two tests. First, to test the difference between the time it takes for the product and the commercial pesticide to exterminate pest, six set-ups were used.

Three set-ups were allotted for pest A and three were also used for pest B. Each set-up contained five pests of the variety assigned to it.Set-ups A were for pest A and set-ups B were for pest B. Set-up A1 was sprayed with the product, Set-up A2 received the commercial pesticide and Set-up A3 received no treatment. 5 mL of the product and the commercial pesticide were used.

Then, for set-ups B, the same procedures as the aforementioned were done. The time for each set-up were recorded. Three trials were done. Second, to test which between the product and the commercial pesticide will exterminate the most number of pest, six set-ups will be used. The set-ups that were used were the same as the aforementioned.After the set-ups A1, A2, B1 and B2 received their treatment, the researchers waited for twenty minutes.

After 20 minutes, the numbers of pests exterminated were recorded. Three trials were done. To test for the shelf-life of the product, the product will be stored in a place with room temperature. The researchers chose 10 respondents that observed and recorded the differences in the product’s properties, namely, color, odor & formation of precipitates every day for 10 days. They were given checklists wherein they could record their observations. A color scheme was also provided.

The observations of the respondents and the researchers were recorded. Introduction a. Background of the Study The problem of humanity concerning pests will never end but people find ways on how to get rid of them. Different methods have been discovered and applied to different kinds of pests such as rats, mosquitoes and cockroaches.

Nowadays, people are avoiding the use of pesticides which contain too much chemicals. They tend to use products which are organic and because of this, will not harbor harmful effects. Numerous plants can be used as an ingredient to produce a pesticide due to their ability to disperse pests.As commercial products become more costly, organic substitutes have been used to replace the commercial ones. The conduct of the study has come to the researcher’s mind, in search for a pesticide that would yield the same effect as the commercial one and would come from a natural source.

Cogon grass was the subject of the study because of its potential as a source of pesticide. b. Statement of the Problem General Problem: What is the potential of Cogon Grass to be an effective pesticide? Specific Problem 1: On what kind of pest will the product be effective? Specific Problem 2:How long is the shelf-life of the product? Specific Problem 3: What are the significant differences between the cogon grass pesticide and the commercial one? c. Significance of the Study The study aims to help common people by providing a pesticide which is cheap and effective.

They will benefit from a pesticide that is readily available and easy to make. Hopefully, the results of the study would be of great help to farmers as it may lead to an alternative pesticide . Also, the study will produce a pesticide which has no side effect to man’s health due to its organic nature.Also, it would, hopefully give way to more researches on the potential of other plants to be a source of pesticide. d. Scopes and Limitations The study was focused mainly on producing an organic pesticide from Cogon Grass that could be an alternative.

The study includes the effectiveness of the pesticide on ants and cockroaches. The study also seeks to know the shelf-life of the product. It focuses on the significant differences between the Cogon Grass pesticide and the commercial one. It was also expected that the product would be less expensive than the other commercially-available ones.

The study is limited to the effect of the pesticide on the pests mentioned. Further, the study does not require the enhancement of any attribute of the pesticide. Also, the study does not seek any other use for cogon grass. It also does not include the effect of the product to humans. E. Review of Related Literature Pesticides are used in cultivation of plants and storage and distribution of plants and animal products.

There are two types of pesticide: chlorinated hydrocarbons and organic phosphorus compounds. Cogon Grass, Imperata Cylindrical, belongs to family Graminae which is the most variable and useful plant group.Water extracts of Imperata Cylindrica acute and sub chronic toxicities in some pests like rats, cockroaches and wood ants . Bioactivity –guided fractionation of the methanolic extract of the leaves of Imperata Cylindrica afforded compounds which showed significant pesticidal activity against some common pests.

Cogon Grass pesticide, as an example of organic pesticide used in exterminating destructive pests has its advantages and disadvantages. Organic pesticides are made from naturally-occurring ingredients which do not harm plants while eliminating pests.Although not completely safe, these are a lot safer than ordinary chemical pesticides. One of its disadvantages is that it can’t be controlled after applied.

Others are its low productivity due to high labor inputs. Results and Discussion A. Pest Effectivity Table 1 Number of Pests Killed Using Varying Amounts of Cogon Pesticide 5 mL7 mL10 mLControlled Wood Ant5680 Cockroach1120 The table shows the effect of the cogon pesticide on the two pests in varying amounts of the product. There are a greater number of wood ants killed compared to the number of cockroaches killed.Based on the results shown, the degree of freedom of 4 at 0.

05 level of probability requires t-value of ±2. 32 to be significant. Using the mean 1. 333 and variance 0.

33335 obtained from the cogon grass pesticide and a mean of 6. 333 and variance of 2. 3337 obtained from the commercial pesticide, t computed is -6. 5 which is significant at 0. 05 level of probability.

Therefore, the product is more effective against wood ants. B. Number of Pests Killed Table 2 Comparison of the Number of Wood Ants Killed Between the Product and the Commercial Pesticide ProductCommercial PesticideControlled 1780 24100 8110 The table shows the comparison of the number of wood ants killed by the cogon pesticide and the commercial pesticide. The product killed 7, 4 and 8 wood ants in the first to third trials, respectively. The commercial pesticide killed 8, 10 and 11 wood ants in the first to third trials, respectively.

Based on the results shown, the degree of freedom of 4 at 0. 05 level of probability requires t value of ±2. 32 to be significant. Using the mean 1. 333 and variance 0.

33335 obtained from the cogon grass pesticide and a mean of 3 and variance of 1 obtained from the commercial pesticide, t computed is -2. which is significant at 0. 05 level of probability. It appears therefore that the no.

of pests killed between the cogon grass pesticide and the commercial pesticide really differ from each other. Thus, the null hypothesis is rejected. Table 3 Comparison of the Number of Cockroaches Killed Between the Product and the Commercial Pesticide ProductCommercial PesticideControlled 1120 2030 3340 The table shows the comparison of the number of cockroaches killed by the cogon pesticide and the commercial pesticide. The product killed 1, 0 and 3 cockroaches in the first to third trials, respectively.The commercial pesticide killed 2, 3 and 4 cockroaches in the first to third trials, respectively.

Based on the result, the degree of freedom of 4 at 0. 05 level of probability requires t-value of ± 2. 32 to be significant. Using the mean 6. 333 with a variance 2. 333 obtained from the cogon grass pesticide and a mean of 9.

667 with a variance of 2. 3335 from the commercial pesticide, t-computed is -2. 67 which is significant at 0. 05 level of probability. It appears therefore that the no.

of cockroaches killed between the cogon grass pesticide and the commercial pesticide really differ from each other.Thus, the null hypothesis is rejected. C. Time It Takes To Kill Table 4 Comparison of the Time It Takes to Kill Wood Ants Between the Product and the Commercial Pesticide Product (seconds)Commercial Pesticide (seconds)Controlled (seconds) 12170 230100 327120 The table shows the comparison of the time it takes to kill wood ants by the cogon pesticide and the commercial pesticide. The product took 21, 30 and 27 seconds to kill wood ants in the first to third trials, respectively. The commercial pesticide killed 7, 10 and 12 seconds to kill wood ants in the first to third trials, respectively.

Based on the results, the degree of freedom of 4 at 0. 05 level of probability requires t value of ± 2. 32 to be significant. Using the mean 26 with a variance of 21 obtained from the cogon grass pesticide and a mean of 9. 667 with a variance of 6.

337 from the commercial pesticide, t-computed is 5. 411 which are significant at 0. 05 level of probability. It appears therefore that the time it takes to kill ants between the cogon grass pesticide and the commercial pesticide really differ from each other. Thus, the null hypothesis is rejected. Table 5 Comparison of the Time It Takes to Kill CockroachesBetween the Product and the Commercial Pesticide Product (seconds)Commercial Pesticide (seconds)Controlled (seconds) 175120 2112140 396190 The table shows the comparison of the time it takes to kill cockroaches by the cogon pesticide and the commercial pesticide.

The product took 75, 112 and 96 seconds to kill cockroaches in the first to third trials, respectively. The commercial pesticide killed 12, 14 and 19 seconds to kill cockroaches in the first to third trials, respectively. Based on the results, the degree of freedom of 4 at 0. 05 level of probability requires t-value of ± 2. 32 to be significant. Using the mean 94.

33 and variance of 344. 333 obtained from the cogon grass pesticide and a mean of 15 with a variance of 13 from the commercial pesticide, t-computed is 7. 269 which are significant at 0. 05 level of probability. It appears therefore that the time it takes to kill cockroaches between the cogon grass pesticide and the commercial pesticide really differ from each other. Thus, the null hypothesis is rejected.

D. Shelf-life The test for the shelf-life was not executed because the product spoiled after 24 hours. Conclusion The product is more effective against wood ants compared to its effect against cockroaches.The shelf-life of the product lasted only for one day. There is a significant difference between the effect of the cogon pesticide and the commercial pesticide.

Recommendations The study calls for a wide range of researches to improve the pesticide. Different pests can also be used to test the effectiveness of the product. Also, methods of increasing the shelf-life of the product can be done. Bibliographies http://hrdc. pcarrd. dost.

gov. ph/phil-organic/R&D%20nutrient%20management/kudzu%20for%20cogon. htm http://wiki. bugwood.

org/Imperata_cylindrica "Beware of Cogon Grass".Florida Division of Forestry. Retrieved 21 February 2010. "Imperata".

Sen - traditional Chinese medicine (tcm). Retrieved 13 July 2011. Wunderlin, R. P.

, and B. F. Hansen. 2008.

Imperata cylindrica. Atlas of Florida Vascular Plants (http://www. plantatlas. usf.

edu/). [S. M. Landry and K.

N. Campbell (application development), Florida Center for Community Design and Research. ] Institute for Systematic Botany, University of South Florida, Tampa. Acknowledgement The researchers wish to extend their sincerest appreciation to the following people who helped make this research.They are the people who helped and contributed much for the success of this endeavor.

To God, for his gift of wisdom and understanding to the researchers and for answering their prayers in their times of need. To their Chemistry teacher, Mr. Jonathan Digma for teaching them the fundamental of research and investigatory writing and for showing a great deal of patience. To their parents and family members, for the unending love and support that they gave to the researchers.

And lastly, to all those who were a part of this work, the researchers would like to extend their deepest thanks.