Skip to main content
. 2017 Sep 7;7:10864. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-11419-2

Table 2.

Insecticide release of spinosad (SP) and emamectin benzoate (EM)-micropheres (SP-EM-microspheres) affected by preparation conditions.

Conditions Entrapment rate of SP + EM (%)(a) Loading of SP + EM (%)(a) Mean diameter of microspheres (μm) Span Kinetic equation of release curve of SP + EM(b) T 50 (d)(b)
A: external aqueous phase
Not saturated with SP + EM 84.5 ± 0.67a 40.6 ± 0.32a 7.19 ± 0.27a 1.13 ± 0.023a Mt/Mz = 30.5t0.29 5.45
Saturated with SP + EM 87.9 ± 0.78a 42.2 ± 0.38a 7.11 ± 0.21a 1.11 ± 0.016a Mt/Mz = 23.6t0.35 8.86
B: distilled water addition (ml)
0 84.5 ± 0.67b 40.6 ± 0.32b 7.19 ± 0.27b 1.13 ± 0.023a Mt/Mz = 30.5t0.29 5.45
400 88.3 ± 0.92a 41.8 ± 0.44a 7.58 ± 0.18ab 1.24 ± 0.082a Mt/Mz = 30.4t0.38 3.70
800 89.6 ± 0.73a 42.4 ± 0.35a 7.71 ± 0.22a 1.24 ± 0.037a Mt/Mz = 50.5t0.23 0.961
C: PLA / PCL ratio
5:1 82.6 ± 0.95ab 39.7 ± 0.45ab 7.16 ± 0.26a 1.14 ± 0.012a Mt/Mz = 33.7t0.32 3.45
4:2 83.4 ± 0.74b 40.1 ± 0.36b 7.19 ± 0.27a 1.20 ± 0.061ab Mt/Mz = 46.1t0.20 1.47
3:3 81.4 ± 0.81a 39.1 ± 0.39a 7.35 ± 0.23a 1.16 ± 0.013ab Mt/Mz = 55.9t0.17 0.51
2:4 82.2 ± 0.79ab 39.5 ± 0.38ab 7.05 ± 0.19a 1.18 ± 0.027b Mt/Mz = 65.8t0.13 0.14
1:5 81.1 ± 0.70a 39.0 ± 0.34a 6.97 ± 0.31a 1.17 ± 0.042ab Mt/Mz = 72.3t0.13 0.060
D: gelatin concentration (%)
0 84.5 ± 0.67c 40.6 ± 0.32c 7.19 ± 0.27a 1.13 ± 0.023a Mt/Mz = 30.5t0.29 5.45
0.5 80.7 ± 1.29b 38.8 ± 0.62b 7.26 ± 0.31a 1.14 ± 0.049ab Mt/Mz = 10.3t0.40 53.7
2.5 75.8 ± 0.95a 36.4 ± 0.42a 7.45 ± 0.27a 1.21 ± 0.025b Mt/Mz = 7.60t0.39 129
4.5 74.2 ± 0.81a 35.7 ± 0.39a 7.65 ± 0.26a 1.18 ± 0.015b Mt/Mz = 4.51t0.45 212

Note: (a): Contents of SP + EM determined by HPLC. (b): Contents of SP + EM determined by spectrophotometer. “Mt/Mz” and “t” represent cumulative quantity of insecticides release (%) and release time (d), respectively. T 50 represents the time (d) when cumulative insecticides release reached 50%. Kinetic equations of insecticides release for condition A to D and T 50 were calculated based on data in Fig. 1A to D, respectively. Correlation coefficients for two fitted equations were higher than 0.99. Different letters (such as a, b, and c) in a same column represents significant difference (t-test, P ≤ 0.05).