Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:19:37.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Phytotoxicity of clove oil and its primary constituent eugenol and the role of leaf epicuticular wax in the susceptibility to these essential oils

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Luke D. Bainard
Affiliation:
Faculty of Land and Food Systems, University of British Columbia, 2357 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
Murray B. Isman
Affiliation:
Faculty of Land and Food Systems, University of British Columbia, 2357 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada

Abstract

Herbicidal activities of clove oil and its primary constituent eugenol on broccoli, common lambsquarters, and redroot pigweed and the role of crystalline leaf epicuticular wax (LEW) in susceptibility and retention of these essential oils were studied. Clove oil (2.5%) and eugenol (1.5%) were applied to leaves of greenhouse-grown broccoli, common lambsquarters, and redroot pigweed seedlings and effects on seedling growth and leaf cell membrane integrity were studied. Compared with eugenol, clove oil caused greater inhibition of seedling growth in all species. Both eugenol and clove oil caused greater loss of membrane integrity and inhibition of seedling growth in redroot pigweed, which has no crystalline LEW, compared with common lambsquarters, which has a thick layer of crystalline LEW. In broccoli seedlings with LEW, clove oil caused greater inhibition of growth than eugenol. Both clove oil and eugenol caused greater electrolyte leakage from broccoli leaves without LEW than in the leaves with LEW. Removal of LEW increased electrolyte leakage, an indicator of cell membrane damage, by 97% in eugenol-treated and 26% in clove oil–treated broccoli leaves. Susceptibility of broccoli seedlings and possibly some weed species may, therefore, be affected by factors (e.g., genetic, environmental) that influence the amount of LEW. Although the presence of LEW greatly reduced the retention of the essential oil solutions, there was no significant difference between the retention of clove oil and eugenol solutions, indicating that differences in their phytotoxicity to broccoli leaves was not due to differential foliar retention.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Bauer, K., Garbe, D., and Surburg, H. 1997. Common Fragrance and Flavor Materials: Preparation, Properties and Uses, 3rd ed. New York: J. Wiley–VCH. 278 p.Google Scholar
Bitterlich, I. and Upadhyaya, M. K. 1990. Leaf surface ultrastructure and susceptibility to ammonium nitrate injury. Can. J. Bot. 68:19111915.Google Scholar
Bitterlich, I., Upadhyaya, M. K., and Shibairo, S. I. 1996. Weed control in cole crops and onion (Allium cepa) using ammonium nitrate. Weed Sci. 44:952958.Google Scholar
Burdock, G. A. 2002. Fenaroli's Handbook of Flavor Ingredients, 4th ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC. 1834 p.Google Scholar
Duke, S. O. 2002. Chemicals from nature for weed management. Weed Sci. 50:138151.Google Scholar
Duke, S. O., Baerson, S. R., and Dayan, F. E. et al. 2003. United States Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Research Service research on natural products for pest management. Pest Manag. Sci. 59:708717.Google Scholar
Harbour, J. D., Messersmith, C. G., and Ramsdale, B. K. 2003. Surfactants affect herbicides on kochia (Kochia scoparia) and Russian thistle (Salsola iberica). Weed Sci. 51:430434.Google Scholar
Hess, F. D. 1985. Herbicide absorption and translocation and their relationship to plant tolerances and susceptibility. Pages 191214 in Duke, S. O. ed. Weed Physiology, Volume 2: Herbicide Physiology. Boca Raton, FL: CRC.Google Scholar
Holloway, P. J. 1993. Structure and chemistry of plant cuticles. Pestic. Sci. 37:203232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isman, M. B. 2000. Plant essential oils for pest and disease management. Crop Prot. 19:603608.Google Scholar
Kong, C., Hu, F., Xu, T., and Lu, Y. 1999. Allelopathic potential and chemical constituents of volatile oil from Ageratum conyzoides . J. Chem. Ecol. 25:23472356.Google Scholar
Raina, V. K., Srivastava, S. K., Aggarwal, K. K., Syamasundar, K. V., and Kumar, S. 2001. Essential oil composition Syzygium aromaticum leaf from Little Andaman, India. Flavour Fragr. J. 16:334336.Google Scholar
Ramsdale, B. K. and Messersmith, C. G. 2001. Drift-reducing nozzle effects on herbicide performance. Weed Technol. 15:453460.Google Scholar
Silcox, D. and Holloway, P. J. 1986. A simple method for the removal and assessment of foliar deposits of agrochemicals using cellulose acetate film stripping. Asp. Appl. Biol. 11:1317.Google Scholar
Srivastava, A. K., Srivastava, S. K., and Syamsundar, K. V. 2005. Bud and leaf essential oil composition of Syzygium aromaticum from India and Madagascar. Flavour Fragr. J. 20:5053.Google Scholar
Tworkoski, T. 2002. Herbicide effects of essential oils. Weed Sci. 50:425431.Google Scholar
Zawierucha, J. E. 2000. Absorption, translocation, metabolism, and spray retention of quinclorac in Digitaria sanguinalis and Eleusine indica . Weed Sci. 48:296301.Google Scholar