Evaluation of integrated pest management (IPM) module against sucking pests of black gram under semi arid conditions

Transcription

1 126 Insect Environment, Vol. 20(4), JanuaryMarch 2015 Evaluation of integrated pest management (IPM) module against sucking pests of black gram under semi arid conditions Shakti Khajuria, A.K.Rai, Kanak Lata Raj Kumar and J.K.Jadav Krishi Vigyan KendraPanchmahal (CIAHICAR) Vejalpur, Godhra (Gujarat) India. Pulses are rich in proteins and are the second most important constituent of Indian diet after cereals. Among the different pulses, black gram is a rich source of protein which is one of the essential nutrients of the human diet. Black gram contributes to 10% of the national pulse production. The area under black gram in India is about lakh ha with production of lakh tonnes and productivity of 549 kg/ ha. In Gujarat, black gram is cultivated in an area of 0.96 lakh ha with 0.68 lakh tonnes production and an average productivity of 708 kg/ha ( Black gram is attacked by different species of insect pests. Sucking pests viz., aphids (Aphis craccivora Koch.), leaf hoppers (Empoasca kerri Pruthi), whiteflies (Bemisia tabaci Genn) and disease incidence (yellow mosaic virus) are of major importance. These insect pests not only reduce the vigor of the plant by sucking the sap but transmit diseases and affect photosynthesis as well. In India, quantitative avoidable losses (735%) caused by insect pest complex, both in black gram and green gram vary with different agroclimatic conditions (Hamad and Dubey 1983). On an average, 2.5 to 3.0 million tonnes of pulses are lost annually due to pest problems (Rabindra et al., 2004). The annual yield loss due to the insect pests has been estimated at about 30 per cent in urd bean and mung bean. Though many options are available for the management of these insect pests, farmers mostly used synthetic chemicals because of their quick knockdown effect with or without knowing the ill effects of these chemicals. To minimize use of hazardous chemicals, IPM strategies are suggested to avoid toxicity to human health, environment and beneficial insects. The objective of present study was to evaluate and demonstrate performance of integrated pest management modules against sucking pests of black gram as well as yellow mosaic disease under field condition.

2 127 Insect Environment, Vol. 20(4), JanuaryMarch 2015 Field experiments were carried out during the Kharif season of at Krishi Vigyan KendraPanchmahal (Gujarat) to evaluate the integrated pest management module against black gram sucking pests and YMV under on farm testing activity of the KVK at farmer s field. The trials were laid out in RBD with three treatments and ten replications. All the recommended cultural and agronomical were followed to raise a healthy crop. Following three treatments were conducted and compared: Treatment 1 : Spray with azadirachtin (0.03%) in the form of neem oil after 30 and 45 days after sowing followed by dimethoate (0.03%) as last spray (IPM module 1). Treatment 2 : Based on indigenous traditional knowledge (ITK) method : Foliar spray of decoction of different leaves; prepared using 5 kg leaves of neem, custard apple, mint, eucalyptus and lantana, 1 kg each are boiled in 10 liters water until the solution reduced to 5 liters. The contents were stirred intermittently. The extract was cooled and filter with a thin cloth and 100 g soap powder was added. All contents were mixed and made up to liters with water. This was sprayed on one acre of the crop during evening hours (IPM ModuleII). Treatment 3: Conventional farmers. Sprays were conducted starting with the initiation of insect pests by using knapsack sprayer at 500 l of spray fluid/ ha. For sucking pests, observation was recorded on ten randomly selected plants at three leaves/ plant (top, middle and bottom). Observations for YMV disease was recorded by counting the total number of plants per field and number of infected plants, and percentage disease infected plants were calculated. At the time of harvest, yield was recorded both in the IPM modules and farmer s practice fields and the cost: benefit ratios were worked out. The avoidable loss and increase in yield over farmer s was calculated for each treatment by the following formula. Avoidable loss % = Highest yield in treated plot Yield in the treatment 100 Highest yield in treated plot Increase in Yield % = Yield in treatment Yield in farmer s Yield in farmer s 100 The formulae does not give the exact losses/ increase in yield considering damages occurring during treatment. However, this is considered to be the most feasible method for working out the percentage loss due to the insect pests in any treatment (Pradhan, 1964)

3 128 Insect Environment, Vol. 20(4), JanuaryMarch 2015 The data collected were transformed into angular or square root values as per the standard requisites (Gomez and Gomez,1984). The experiments were subjected to statistical scrutiny following the method of Panse and Sukhatme (1989) and the means were compared with Least Significant Difference (L.S.D.). On farm evaluation of black gram IPM modules were carried out at the farmer s field. The results are presented in (table 1 & figure 1). IPM modules revealed lower mean sucking pests population (per leaf/plant) and disease incidence of YMV (%). Minimum infestation by aphids (0.94), leafhopper (1.04) and whitefly (0.93) were noted in module I followed by module II aphids (2.07), leafhopper (2.00) and whitefly (1.72). Similarly, the minimum disease incidence was observed in module I (3.54) followed by module II (9.17). Farmer showed higher infestation of aphids (5.03), leafhopper (2.54), whitefly (2.76) and more disease incidence (17.15) (fig 1). Table 1 Incidence of aphids, leafhoppers whitefly and disease incidence (%) in different management modules of black gram Treatments IPM ModuleI Disease incidence Aphids Leafhoppers Whitefly (%) PM a PRFP PM a PRFP PM a PRFP PM b PRFP 0.94 (1.39) (1.43) (1.39) (10.85) IPM ModuleII 2.07 (1.75) (1.73) (1.66) (17.64) Farmers 5.03 (2.46) 2.54 (1.88) 2.76 (1.94) (24.54) S.E± (0.01) (0.07) (0.08) 0.28 CV (2.16) (13.59) (15.92) (5.83) LSD(5%) (0.04) * (0.21) * (0.24) * (0.85) * PM: pooled mean, PRFP :per cent reduction over farmers a Figures in parenthesis are transformed values of x+1 b Figures in parenthesis are transformed angular values; * Significant at 5%

4 129 Insect Environment, Vol. 20(4), JanuaryMarch 2015 Results indicated that wherever the IPM modules were demonstrated, higher yields were realized as compared to farmers. Higher mean yield of q/h in module I and 9.80 q/ha in module II were recorded in the IPM fields against 7.25 q/h in farmers practise fields resulting in higher C:B ratio of 1:2.25 in module I and 1:2.11 in module II for the IPM demonstrated fields as compared to 1:1.63 for the farmers. Table 2 Economics and assessment of losses caused by insectpests and disease in black gram Treatments IPM ModuleI IPM ModuleII Farmer Yield (q/h) Total avoidable losses (q/h) Per cent avoidable losses Yield increase over farmers (q/h) Per cent yield increase over farmers Return of increased yield (`) B:C Ratio , ,

5 130 Insect Environment, Vol. 20(4), JanuaryMarch IPM ModuleI IPM ModuleII Farmers Yield Aphids Leafhoppers Whiteflies Disease incidence (%) Figure 1 Association of pests and yield in management modules of black gram Regarding the management of sucking pests and YMV disease of black gram, various authors have reported efficacy of neem oil and dimethoate (Bhatnagar and Kaudasamy,1993 ; Jatwani and Srivastava, 1981; Nimbalkar et al. 1994). However, a recent report states that neem oil significantly reduced the incidence of viral and leaf spot disease complexes and increased the yield attributes and yield of black gram (Trivedi et al. 2014). As discussed earlier viruses are transmitted through seed at the rate of 2.7 to 46% and sap sucking insect pest like leaf feeding beetles (Henosepilachna dodecastigma (Wied), whiteflies (Bemisia tabaci Glov.) and two aphid species (Aphis craccivora and A. gossypii) have been reported to be putative vectors. The basic concept to manage the viral infection is to control the population of these vectors. Neem oil used in the present study significantly reduced the viral infection by managing the vectors. A number of biological methods have been reported to reduce these sap sucking pest infestation in black gram. Aphid resistant black gram varieties are not available to growers. Earlier workers have also reported that plant extract viz., nirgundi oil and neem oil (2%) effectively reduced the egg laying of dipteran fly in cereal (Bai and Kundaswamy, 1985), while Shrinivas and Shekharappa (2009) reported that neem seed kernel extract (5%) also reduced the white fly in sorghum. Khajuria and Malik (2003) reported leaves of neem, eucalyptus, tulsi, melia, mint and chrysanthemum to be effective against S. oryzae. Srivastava et al. (2005) have reported the effectivity of neem oil to control aphids. The efficacy of

6 131 Insect Environment, Vol. 20(4), JanuaryMarch 2015 dimethoate has been reported earlier (Gailce Leo Justin et al., 2015). The results obtained in the study are in consonance with those previous workers. It can be suggested that IPM ModuleI: i.e., spray of neem oil 0.03% after days 30 and 45 of sowing, followed by 0.03% as the last spray can manage the sucking pests and YMV disease of black gram effectively in semi arid region of central Gujarat. References: Bai and Kundaswamy Laboratory induced mortality of Spodoptera litura Fab. and Stachytarphata wrticifolia (Salish) Sims. with the extracts of Viter negundo Linn. fed on the leaf discs of castor treated. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 55: Bhatnagar, Praduman and Kadasamy, C Evaluation of neem based formulation against insect pests of cotton. Pestology 17: Gailce Leo Justin, C., Anandhi, P and Jawahar, D Management of major insect pests of black gram under dryland conditions. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies. 3 (1): Gomez, K.A and A.A. Gomez Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. 2nd Edn., John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York, USA., ISBN: , Pages: 680 Hamad, S.E and Dubey, S.L Losses due to insect pests in North Bihar. Indian J. Entomology 1: Jatwani, M.G and Srivastava, K.P Neem insecticide of the future, II Protection against field pests. Pesticides 15: Khajuria, Shakti and Malik, Kamlesh Preliminary screening of botanicals against Sitophilus oryzae (L). Insect Environment. 9 (1): 34. Nimbalkar, N., Yadav, D.B and Prabhune, R.N Evaluation of the bioefficacy, phytotoxicity and compatibility of Neemax on okra (Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench.) cultivar PARBHANI KRANTHI. Pestology 18: Panse, V.G and P.V. Sukhatme Statistical Methods for Agricultural Workers. Indian Council for Agricultural Research, New Delhi, Pages: 359. Pradhan S Assessment of losses caused by insect pests of crop and estimation of insect population. Entomology in India, New Delhi, pp Rabindra, R.J., Ballali, C.R and Ramanujan B Biological options for insect pests and nematode management in pulses. Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi, India, 487.

7 132 Insect Environment, Vol. 20(4), JanuaryMarch 2015 Shrinivas, M and Shekharappa Evaluation of plant products against sorghum shoot fly. The J. Plant Prot. Sci. 1: Srivastava, A., Bhateria, S., Guleria, S. and Dongra, I Evaluation of some plant extracts against Lipaphis erysimi (Kalt). J. Insect Sci. 18: Trivedi, Amit, Sharma, S.K., Ameta, O.P and Sharma S.K Management of viral and leaf spot disease complexes in organic farming of black gram. Indian Phytopath. 67 (1) :