Screening of certain gram  genotypes against Callosobruchus chinensis L. (Coleoptera:Bruchidae) 

DOI: 10.18805/lr.v0iOF.11038    | Article Id: LR-3382 | Page : 651-653
Citation :- Screening of certain gram genotypes against Callosobruchuschinensis L. (Coleoptera:Bruchidae) .Legume Research-An International Journal.2016.(39):651-653

Pawan Kumar Raghuwanshi*, Sandeep Sharma, Mahendra bele and Dipesh Kumar 

pawanraghuwanshi10@gmail.com
Address :

R. A. K .College of Agriculture, R .V. S. K .V.V . Sehore - 466 001, India.

Submitted Date : 27-11-2014
Accepted Date : 25-05-2016

Abstract

Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.), is an important pulse food. During storage this commodity is severely attacked by pulse beetle Callosobruchus chinensis L. (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) and losses in quantity and nutritional quality. Research studies on relative resistance of 8 chickpea genotypes to the attack of C. Chinensis during storage were carried out. The maximum number of eggs laid on genotypes ICCV-07301 (34.35) whole minimum numbers of eggs (17.3) were laid on genotypes ICCV-990126. Significantly higher weight loss (24.98%) was noticed SG-98310 which was followed by SG-950226 (16.64 per cent). Least weight loss (5.78 per cent) was observed in SG-97311 closely followed by SG-98004 (6.36%).. The highest per cent infestation was observed in ICCV-08303 (91.66) and the lowest per cent infestation was observed in ICC-920412 (71.66%) closely followed by ICCV-990126(73.33%). The developmental period was recorded longer on deshi genotypes than kabuli genotypes. After 60 days of infestation the protein content increased by 30.03   per cent in kabuli genotypes and by 48.37 per cent in deshi genotypes.

Keywords

C.chinensis Deshi genotypes Gram Kabuli Pulse beetle.

References

  1. Ali, Y.;Haq, M.A.;Ahmad,N. and Alam, S.S. (1998). Differences in drought tolerance in ten chickpea genotypes 1:some studies on yield and yield components. Pakistan Journal of Biological Science. 1:199-201. 
  2. Dobie, P. (1977). The contribution of the tropical stored products centre to the study of insect resistance in stored maize.Trop. Stored Products of Information 43:7-22.
  3. Ghafoor, A.;Ahmad,Z.; Javaid, A. and Ashraf, M. (2003). Multivariate analysis of chickpea [Cicer arietinum L.]. Pak. J. Bot. 35(3): 369-376. Gurjar, G.T. and Yadav, T.D. (1978). Feeding of Callosobruchus maculatus (Fab.) in greengram. Indian Journal of Entomology. 40 :108-112.
  4. Mahendran, K. and Mohan, S. (2002). Technology adoption, estimation of loss and farmers behaviour in pulse storage: A study in western Tamil Nadu. Pestology 26: 35-38.
  5. Ofuya, T.I. and Agele, S.O. (1990). Ability of ovipositing callosobruchus maculates (Fabricious ) (Coleoptera : Bruchidae) females to discriminate between seeds with differing numbers of emergence holes. Journals of Stored products Research, 26: 117-120. 
  6. Rajasri, M. and Rao, P. Sambasiva (2012). Neem formulation and sugar seed protectant against pulse beetle, Callosobruchus chinensis for long term storage of Bengalgram. IJABPT 3:323-328.
  7. Sarwar, Muhammad (2012) Assessment of resistance to the attack of bean beetle Callosobruchus maculatus (Fabricius) in chickpea genotypes on the basis of various parameters during storage Songklanakarin J. Sci. Tech. 34: 287-291.
  8. Saxena, Beenam and Saxena, Ranjana (2011) Nutritional changes in stored chickpea, Cicer arietinum in relation to bruchid damage. J. Stored Products and Post Harvest Res. 2: 110-112. 
  9. Tripathi, K. et al; (2015). Screening of cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp. ] accessions againstpulse beetle, Callosobruchus chinensis (L.), Legume Research, 38 : 675-680 
  10. Umrao, R.S. and Verma, R.A. (2003). Studies on protein composition of different pea varieties for preference of Callosobruchus chinensis. Indian J. Ento. 65:311-314.
     

Global Footprints