Evaluation of new generation pesticides to control pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) infesting chickpea

DOI: 10.18805/lr.v0iOF.11040    | Article Id: LR-3652 | Page : 384-387
Citation :- Evaluation of new generation pesticides to control pod borer,Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) infesting chickpea .Legume Research-An International Journal.2017.(40):384-387

Lekha*, O.P. Ameta and Hemant Swami

lekha.rca@gmail.com
Address :

Department of Entomology, Rajasthan College of Agriculture, MPUAT, Udaipur-313 001, India.

Submitted Date : 18-11-2015
Accepted Date : 14-01-2016

Abstract

A field study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of five insecticides viz., Lambdacyhalothrin 5 EC, Novaluron 10 EC, Clothianidin 50 WDG, Indoxacarb 14.5 SC and Quinalphos 25 EC (standard check) against gram pod borer (Helicoverpa armigera H.) on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) variety Pratap Channa-1. Lambdacyhalothrin 5 EC gave the highest reduction in the larval population of pod borer and was found statically at par with Indoxacarb 14.5 SC. The next effective treatments were Clothianidin 50 WDG and Quinalphos 25 EC, However, Novaluron 10 EC @ 750ml/ha proved to be the least effective treatment as it resulted in lowest per cent reduction in the larval population. Highest cost benefit ratio of 1:2.10 was obtained from Lambdacyhalothrin 5 EC followed by Indoxacarb 14.5 SC (1: 1.65). The next cost effective treatment in terms of CBR was Quinalphos 25 EC (1:1.64), whereas, Novaluron 10 EC (1:1.15) and Clothianidin 50 WDG @ 500g/ha (1:0.66) could not show any conspicuous gain over cost. 

Keywords

Chickpea Gram pod borer Helicoverpa armigera Insecticides.

References

  1. Abbott, W. S. (1925). A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. Eco. Ent., 18: 265-267.
  2. Ahmed, K. and Awan, M. S. (2013). Integrated management of insect pests of chickpea Cicer arietinum (L.) Walp in South Asian Countries: Present status and future strategies - a review. Pak. J. Zool., 45: 1125-1145. 
  3. Babariya, P.M., Kabaria, B.B.; Patel, V.N. and Joshi, M.D. (2010). Chemical control of gram pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera Hubner infesting pigeon pea. Legume Research, 33: 224 - 226
  4. Das B.C., Patra, S., Dhote V.W., Alam, SK.F., Chatterjee, M.L. and Samanta, A. (2015) Mix formulations: An alternative option for management of gram pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera H. and pod fly, Melanagromyza obtusa M. in pigeon pea. Legume Research, 38: 396-401
  5. Dhaka, S.S., Singh, G., Ali, N., Arvind, Y. and Adbhut, Y. (2010). Field evaluation of insecticides and bio-pesticides against Helicoverpa armigera on tomato. Annal. Pl. Prot. Sci., 18: 13-16.
  6. Henderson, C. F. and Tilton, E. W. (1955). Test with acaricides against the brown wheat mites. Journal of Economic Entomology, 48: 157-161.
  7. Khan, S. M., Inayatullah, M.Y. and Khan, M.A. (2009). Varietal screening of chickpea and the efficacy of different insecticides against chickpea pod borer Helicoverpa armigera (Hub). Gomal Univ. J. Res., 25: 20-24.
  8. Sreekanth, M.; Lakshmi, M. S. M. and Rao, Y. K. (2013). Bio-efficacy and economics of certain new insecticides against gram pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) infesting pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan L.) International Journal of Plant, Animal and Environmental Sciences. 4:11-15
  9. Sarwar, M.; Ahmad, N and Toufiq, M. (2009). Host plant resistance relationships in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) against gram pod borer (Helicoverpa armigera Hubner). Pak. J. Bot., 41: 3047-3052.
  10. Sarwar, M. (2012). Competency of Natural and Synthetic Chemicals in Controlling Gram Pod Borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) on Chickpea Crop International Journal of Agricultural; 2: 132-135 
  11. Singh, H., Singh, R., Yadav, R.N., Yadav, K.G. and A. Yadav. (2009). Efficacy and economics of some biopesticide in management of Helicoverpa armigera (Hub) on chickpea. Pestology, 33:36-37
  12. Yogeeswarudu, B and V. K. Krishna. (2014). Field studies on efficacy of novel insecticides against Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) infesting on Chickpea. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies, 2: 286-289

Global Footprints