Evaluation of Different Bio Pesticides Against the Aphid in Okra at Bhubaneswar

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Evaluation of Different Bio Pesticides Against the Aphid in Okra at Bhubaneswar"

Shawn Bridges
5 years ago
Views:

1 World Engineering & Applied Sciences Journal 6 (1): 59-63, 2015 ISSN IDOSI Publications, 2015 DOI: /idosi.weasj Evaluation of Different Bio Peicides Again the Aphid in Okra at Bhubaneswar Mohanisha Janghel, Ipsita Mishra a B.K. Mishra Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture, Orrisa University of Agriculture a Technology, Bhubaneswar (Odisha), Iia Abract: Aphid population ranged from in the beginning of Kharif 2013 a 3.7 to 4.21 in summer after the application of biopeicides a bioagents at 40 DAG aphid infeation during 2013 was fou to be 0.36/plant in acetamiprid treatment (T 7) but bioagent C. zarowi sillemi also reduced the population subantially recording 1.0 a 1.09 aphid/ plant at 40 DAG. The reduction was 96.54% in insecticide were as it was 90.41% in C. zarowi 1 lakh / ha a 9.54% in C. zarowi 75,000 / ha iicating the effectiveness of C.zarowi sillemi in the control of sucking pe similarly correspoing incidence in summer was 0.96, 1.2 a 1.31 aphids/ plant a a 6.32 a 5.74% reduction respectively. The biopeicides were also effective for control of aphid the mo effective being V. lecanii which recorded 1.6 a 2.06 aphids/plant a 2.16 a 2.92% reduction of aphid population during Kharif a summer respectively. The other biopeicides in order of effectiveness were M. anisopliae, Neemazol a B. bassiana recording (3.02 a 3.10,4.01 a 3.92,3.96 a 4.0 aphid/plant) during Kharif a summer respectively. It was observed that over the two seasons, the aphid population ranged between 0.77 in acetamiprid treatment to 3.69 in B. bassiana treatment among the bioagent a biopeicides where as in controlled plot it was.34 aphid/plant correspoingly the population reduction was also highe in T 7 (0.21%) followed by T 3(79.46%), T 5 (77.57%), T 2 (67.6%), T 4(60.67%) a T 1(55.75%) iicating that C.zarowi sillemi a V.lecanii were mo effective bioagents again aphids. Key word: Evaluation Aphid Okra INTRODUCTION peicides like Beauveria bassiana, Verticillum lecanii a Metarhizium anisopliae again okra aphid Aphis Okra is ravaged by as many as 45 species of gossypii has been reported by Harischara Naik a insect-pes throughout its growth period (Rawat a Shekharappa (200) whereas that of the neem peicides Sahu, 1973) [1]. Among these, the aphid, Aphis gossypii has been elaborated by Dhanalakashmi a Mallapur is a polyphagous sucking pe a also fou damaging (2011) [6]. The chrysopid predator, C. carnea has also okra all over Iia. It also acts as vector of virus a successfully controlled okra aphid (Puri, 1992). transmits mosaic, leaf curl etc. (Butani a Verma, 1976) Keeping all these in view, a field experiments were [2]. The iiscriminate use of peicides has caused taken up at the Orissa University of Agriculture a toxicity to non-target beneficial organisms resulting in Technology, Bhubaneswar to evaluate bio peicides development of pe resiance to the chemical peicides again the okra aphid. a resurgence of pe due to pyrethorids (Basha et al. 192) [3]. Adoptions of IPM rategies ensure safety of MATERIALS AND METHODS environment. In this regard encouragement of natural enemies occupies a central position in integrated pe The field experiments were taken up in the Central management because biological control of pes a Research Station of Orissa University of Agriculture a weeds through natural enemies is eco-friely Technology (OUAT), Bhubaneswar during Kharif 2013 (Shivalingaswamy et al., 2002 [4]; Telang et al., 2004; a Summer The okra variety Utkal Gaurav was Sardana et al., 2005 [5]). The effectiveness of bio sown in well prepared la a the crop was grown Correspoing Author: Mohanisha Janghel, Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture, Orrisa University of Agriculture a Technology, Bhubaneswar (Odisha). 59

2 following all aard package of practices. The The treatments with Beauveria bassiana, experiments were laid in Raomized Block Design Metarhizium anisopliae a Neemazol recorded (RBD) with three replications a eight treatments. 2.12, 2.09 a 2.03 aphids/plant which were at par with The plot size was 5m x 5m. Treatment schedule was as each other. The bioagent Chrysoperla zarowi sillemii follows: when 1,00,000/ha was as effective as the application of acetamiprid, but when released at the rate T- 1 Application of Beauveria 1x 10 cfu/g at of 50,000/ha the predator as effective as the but the 15 a 30 DAG (Days after Germination) biopeicide Verticillum lecanii. T- 2 Application of Metarrhizium anisopliae@ 1x 10 The treatment reduced the pe population in the cfu/g as in T1 range of 7.71% in T 7 to in T 1 during Kharif T- 3 Application of Verticillium 1x 10 cfu/g as 2013 (Table 1). This observation corroborate with the in T 1. fiing of Nirmala et al. (2006) have recorded similar T- 4 Application of Neemazal 4% as in T 1. effectiveness of V. lecanii. After 30 DAG similar tre T- 5 Release of Chrysoperla zarowi was observed in the aphid population. Days before inar larvae/ha at 15 a 30 DAG application (DBA) aphids ranged from 1.02 in T 7 to 5.1 in T- 6 Release of Chrysoperla zarowi 100,000 T when the observations was taken. The difference 1 inar larvae /ha at 15 a 30 DAG between treatments in respect of aphid population was T- 7 Application of acetamiprid 0.025% at 15 a 30 DAG significant. After 33 DAG 2 application was done in the T- Untreated control same dose. After 3 days of applying treatment i.e. at the 33 DAG the population a aphid ranged between in Fifteen days after germination (DAG) the fir T70.61 to 7.29 in T. The aphid population was lowe application of biopeicides were done. Before that, as the (0.61/plant) in T7 i.e. application of acetamiprid which was th 14 DAG, the population of pes were recorded at par with application of C. zarowi sillemii in T 6 having before application of the treatments (DBA). Thus for each 1.12 aphids/plant. Control plots recorded the highe treatment pe population were recorded 1 day before population of aphid at 3.0 aphids/plant [9]. application (DBT) a then 3 day after treatment V. lecanii a C. zarowi sillemii in T (DAT) a 10 DAT. The population of pes was 75,000/ha recorded 1.9 a 1.43 aphids/plant which recorded from 10 raomly selected plants in each subplot were atiically at par with each other. B. bassiana, after the fir application of biopeicides a bioagents. M. anisopliae a Neemazol were recorded 4.67, 3.33 a Observations were taken from 3 leaves i.e., from top, 4.07 which were atiically similar will each other [10]. middle a lower portion of the plant for sucking pes. During summer (Table 2), the population Data so obtained during Kharif 2013 a summer of aphid in okra ranged from at 15 days after were atiically analysed after suitable germination when the 1 observation was taken. transformation a the inferences were drawn basing on The differences between treatments in respect of aphid the results. population was non-significant. After 3 days of applying treatments i.e. 1 DAG the population of aphid ranged RESULTS AND DISCUSSION between 2.00 in T 3to 5.32 in T. The aphid population was lowe (2.00/plant) in T i.e. application of acetamiprid During Kharif 2013, the population of aphids in okra which was at par with the application of V. lecanii ranged from 2.01 in T 1 to 2.22 in T 7. Fifteen days after (T 3) having 2.02 aphids/plant. The biopeicides. germination (DAG) when the 1 observation was taken the B. bassiana, V. lecanii a Neemazol recorded 4.19, difference between treatments in respect of aphid 3.21 a 3.12 aphids per plant which were atiically at population was non-significant. After 3 days of applying par will each other. The bioagent C.zarowi sillemii when treatments i.e. 1 DAG, the population of aphid ranged released at the rate of 1,00,000/ha was as effective as the between 0.63 in T 7to 3.0 in T. The aphid population was application of acetamiprid, but when released at the rate lowe in (0.63/plant) in T 7 i.e. application of acetamiprid of 50,000/ha the predator was as effective as the be which was at par will the application of Verticillum biopeicide V. lecanii. Control plots recorded the highe lecanii (T 3) having 1.36 aphids/plant []. population of aphid at 5.32 aphids per plant [11]. 60

3 Table 1: Effect of different bioagents on the aphid population in okra during Kharif application 2 Application Reduction over Reduction over Treatment DBA 1 DAG 25 DAG control (%) DBA 33 DAG 40 DAG control (%) T1 2.01(1.41) 2.12(1.45) 2.73(1.65) (2.19) 4.67(2.16) 3.96(1.9) T2 2.13(1.45) 2.09(1.44) 1.65(1.2) (2.0) 3.33(1.2) 3.02(1.73) T3 2.11(1.45) 1.36(1.16) 1.06(1.02) (1.70) 1.9(1.40) 1.6(1.36) 2.16 T4 2.21(1.4) 2.03(1.42) 2.00(1.41) (2.10) 4.07(2.01) 4.01(2.00) T5 2.09(1.44) 1.0(1.34) 1.73(1.3) (1.14) 1.43(1.19) 1.09(1.04) 9.54 T6 2.13(1.45) 1.65(1.2) 1.53(1.23) (1.13) ) 1.00(1.00) T7 2.22(1.4) 0.63(0.79) 0.5(0.76) (1.00) 0.61(0.7) 0.36(0.60) T 2.20(1.4) 3.0(1.94) 4.72(2.17) - 5.1(2.41) 7.29(2.7) 10.42(3.22) - SE(m)+ NS NS CD(0.05) NS NS Table 2: Effect of different bioagents on the aphid population in okra during Summer Application 2 Application Reduction over Reduction over Treatment DBA 1 DAG 25 DAG control(%) DBA 33 DAG 40 DAG control (%) T1 4.20(2.04) 4.19(2.04) 4.03(2.00) (2.26) 4.36(2.0) 4.0(2.01) T2 3.7(1.99) 3.21(1.79) 2.97(1.72) (1.4) 3.16(1.77) 3.10(1.76) T3 3.75(1.93) 2.02(1.42) 1.6(1.36) (1.72) 2.12(1.45) 2.06(1.43) 2.92 T4 4.21(2.05) 3.71(1.92) 3.22(1.79) (2.20) 4.43(2.10) 3.92(1.97) T5 4.0(2.01) 3.12(1.76) 2.96(1.72) (1.46) 1.(1.37) 1.72(1.31) 5.74 T6 4.11(2.02) 3.01(1.73) 2.43(1.55) (1.44) 1.70(1.37) 1.65(1.2) 6.32 T7 3.7(1.96) 2.00(1.41) 1.23(1.10) (1.55) 1.10(1.04) 0.93(0.96) T 4.01(2.00) 5.32(2.30) 6.1(2.4) - 6.2(2.61).91(2.9) 12.06(3.47) - SE (m) + NS CD(0.05) NS Table 3: Effect of different biopeicides on the aphid population in okra (pooled over Kharif 2013 a summer ) Treatment DBA 1 DAG 25 DAG (% )Reductionover control T 4.03(2.00) 3.3(1.95) 3.69(1.92) T 3.33(1.2) 2.94(1.71) 2.6(1.63) T 2.93(1.71) 1.7(1.37) 1.71(1.30) T 3.92(1.96) 3.56(1.) 3.2(1.1) T 4.1(2.19) 2.05(1.43) 1.7(1.36) T 2.39(1.54) 1.91(1.3) 1.65(1.2) T 2.3(1.54) 1.0(1.03) 0.77(0.) T 4.70(2.16) 6.32(2.51).34(2.) - SE (m) + NS CD(0.05) NS During summer (Table 2), the population between 2.00 in T 3to 5.32 in T. The aphid population was of aphid in okra ranged from at 15 days lowe (2.00/plant) in T i.e. application of acetamiprid after germination when the 1 observation was taken. which was at par with the application of V. lecanii (T 3) The differences between treatments in respect of aphid having 2.02 aphids/plant. The biopeicides. B. bassiana, population was non-significant. After 3 days of applying V. lecanii a Neemazol recorded 4.19, 3.21 a treatments i.e. 1 DAG the population of aphid ranged 3.12 aphids per plant which were atiically at par will 61

4 each other. The bioagent C.zarowi sillemii when respect of M. anisopliae Neemazol a B. bassiana were released at the rate of 1,00,000/ha was as effective as the 2.94 a 2.6, 3.56 a 3.2, 3.3 a 3.69 aphids / plant application of acetamiprid, but when released at the rate respectively. Acetamiprid recorded the highe reduction of 50,000/ha the predator was as effective as the be in population of aphid ( 90.76%) followed by C. zarowi biopeicide V. lecanii. Control plots recorded the highe 1 lakh / ha ( 0.21%), V. lecanii ( 79.49%) in population of aphid at 5.32 aphids per plant. C. zarowi (77.57%), M. anisopliae The treatments reduced the pe population in (67.6%), Neemazol (60.67%) a B. bassiana (55.75%). the range of 34.79% (T 1) to 0.09% (T 7) during summer The effectiveness of Chrysoperla in reducing the This observation is in agreement with the sucking as well as borer pe of different crops has fiings of Yokomi a Gottwald (199) who have been demonrated by Balakrishnan et. al. (2004) [11], recorded similar effectiveness of V. lecanii again Inayatullah (2007) in tomato, Pathan et.al, in okra (2010) A. gossypii. [12]. The present fiings are in agreement with the above After 30 DAG, similar tre was observed in the authors. aphid population. DBA, it ranged from 2.42 in T 7 to 6.2 in CONCLUSION T when the observation were taken. The difference between treatments in respect of aphid population It was observed that over the two seasons, the aphid was significant. After 3 days i.e. 33 DAG again the population ranged between 0.77 in acetamiprid treatment 2 spraying was done. The aphid population varied from to 3.69 in B. bassiana treatment among the bioagent 1.10 in T 7to.91 in Taphid/plant showing acetamiprid as a biopeicides where as in controlled plot it was mo effective treatment with 92.29% population reduction.34 aphid/plant correspoingly the population followed by C. zarowi 1 lakh/ha a reduction was also highe in T 7 (0.21%) followed by 75,000/ha resulting in 6.32% a 5.74 % reduction in T 3 (79.46%), T 5 (77.57%), T 2 (67.6%), T 4(60.67%) a aphid population respectively. Next be treatment was T 1 (55.75%) iicating that C.zarowi sillemi a V. V. lecanii showing 2.92 % reduction, M. anisopliae lecanii were mo effective bioagents again aphids. showing % reduction, Neemazol showing % reduction a Bt showing % reduction in aphid REFERENCES population. The effectiveness of V. lecanii a C.zarowi sillemi in controlling aphids has been reported 1. Rawat, R.R. a H.R. Sahu, Eimation of losses by Khalil et al. (193) [7], Yokomi [] a Gottwald (199), in growth a yield of okra due to recommeed Ramarethinam et al. (2005) [9] a Nirmala et al., (2006) insecticides again jassid on okra. Himachal [10] earlier a the present udy also confirmed their J. Agric. Res., 24(1/2): fiings. 2. Butani, D.K. a S. Verma, Insect-pes of The pooled data (Table 3) of both the seasons vegetables a their control-3: Lady s finger. revealed that the DBA, the aphid population ranged Peicides, 10(7): from 2.93 / plant in T3 i.e. V. lecanii to 4.70 in untreated 3. Basha, A.A., S. Chelliah a M. Gopalan, 192. control. The lowe population in T3 is due to application Effect of synthetic pyrethroids in the control of of V. lecanii. The plots treated with insecticide brinjal fruit borer (Leucinodes orbanalis Guen). acetamiprid regiered, recorded lowe population of Peicide, 16(9): aphids/ plant where as the biopeicide recorded 4. Shivalingaswamy, T.M., S. Sathpathy, B. Singh a 3.33,3.92 a 4.03 aphids / plant in respect of A. Kumar, Predator-prey interaction between M. anisopliae, Neemazol a B. bassaina application jassid (Amrasca biguttula biguttula, Ishida) a a [12]. aphylinid in okra. Veget. Sci., 29: DAG a 25 DAG the population of aphid 5. Sardana, H.R., O.M. Bambawale, L.M. Kadu a ranged from 1.0/ plant in T 7 to 6.32/plant a 0.77 to D.K. Singh, Development a Validation of.34/ plant respectively, acetamiprid being the mo Adaptable IPM in Okra through Farmers Participatory effective treatment recording both the lowe population. Approach. Ann. Pl. Protec. Sci., 13(1): The biopeicides were also fou effective in controlling 6. Dhanalakashmi, D.N. a C.P. Mallapur, the aphid population. The mo effective one was Efficacy of Stored Botanical Extracts again V.lecanii recording 1.7 a 1.71 aphids/ plants Sucking Pes of Okra uer Laboratory Coitions, respectively the correspoing aphid population in Journal of Entomological Research, 35: 3. 62

5 7. Khalil, S.K., J. Bartos a Z. Laa, Nirmala, R., B. Ramanujam, R.J. Rabira a Effectiveness of Verticillium lecanii to reduce N.S. Rao, Effect entomofungal pathogen on populations of aphid uer glasshouse a field mortality of three aphid species, Journal of Biological coitions. Agric. Ecosy. Environ., 12: Control, 20(1): Yokomi, R.K. a T.R. Gottwald, 199. Virulence of 11. Balakrishnan, N., R.K.M. Baskaran a Verticillium lecanii isolates in aphids determined N.R. Mahadevan, Evaluation of management by bioassay, Journal of Invertebrate Pathology, modules of bollworms on cotton uer rainfed 51: coition. Ann. Pl. Protect. Sci., 13: Ramarethinam, S., 199. Neem formulations for 12. Pathan, N.M., P.K. Nalwaikar a S.T. Shie, integrated pe management, Peology, Evaluation of components of integrated 22(6): pe management (IPM) again aphids a jassids infeing okra, J. ent. Res., 34(4):

Evaluation of Different Bio Pesticides Against the Aphid in Okra at Bhubaneswar

American-Eurasian J. Agric. & Environ. Sci., 15 (4): 694-69, 2015 ISSN 11-6769 IDOSI Publications, 2015 DOI: 10.529/idosi.aejaes.2015.15.4.22261 Evaluation of Different Bio Peicides Again the Aphid in