insect pest management in vegetable crops
Post on 06-Dec-2014
2.133 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Latest trends and techniques of insect-pest management in commercial vegetable
production
Kamaldeep Singh Matharu Department of Entomology
HPAU, Palampur
Vegetable provide nutritional security in addition to food
security.
They supply carbohydrate, proteins, vitamins and minerals.
They constitute the major part of the diet of the Indians.
In 2010, vegetables grown on 79.8 million hectare, with
production of 133.7 million tonnes.
INTRODUCTION
Anonymous (2011)
Yield loss in some vegetables caused by major insect-pestsCrop Pest common name Pest Scientific name Per cent
damageReference
Cabbage Diamondback moth Plutella xylostella (L.) 52 Raja et al. (1999)
Onion Onion thrips Thrips tabaci Linderman ˃50 More (1977)
Brinjal Brinjal fruit and shoot borer
Leucinodes orbonalis Guenee 20.7-60 Gangwar and Sachan (1981)
Okra Shoot and fruit borer Earias vittella (Fabricius) 63.53 Chaudhary and Dadheech (1989)
Jassid Amrasca biguttula biguttula (Ishida)
32.06-40.84 Singh and Brar (1994)
Tomato Tomato fruit borer Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) 30-57.79 Dhandapani et al. (2003)
Bitter gourd
Fruit fly Bactrocera cucurbitae Coquillet 100 Srivastava and Butani (1998)
Why pest problems in vegetable cultivation ?
Monoculture
Overlapping of crops
Dense cropping
Availability of preferred host
Excessive use of fertilizers
Indiscriminate use of pesticide
Technique of Pest Management
Cultural methods
1. Plant diversity
2. Mulching
i. Polythene mulching
ii. Straw mulching
Plant diversity
Intra-field diversity
Trap crop attracts insect
Intercrop
Insecticides are seldom required
It enhances natural control
Suitable for IPM programme
Successful examples of trap crop in vegetable crops
Main crop Trap crop Method of planting Pest (s) controlled
Cabbage Collards Border crop Diamondback Moth
Tomato lovage Row intercrop Tomato hornworm
Carrot Onion and garlic Border crop Thrips and Carrot root fly
Garlic marigold Border crop Thrips
Cabbage Indian mustard Strip intercrop in between cabbage plots
Cabbage head caterpillar
Potato Tansy Intercrop Colorado potato beetle
Effect of intercropping on population of fruit borer in tomato crop
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
Tomato+
Coriander
Tomato +
Dill
Tomato +
Mustard
Tomato +
Carrot
Tomato +
Barley
Tomato +Fenugreek
0.94
1.511.39 1.09 1.38
Crop combination
Lar
val
po
pu
lati
on
/pla
nt
Ram and Singh, 2010
1.26
Dehradun
Effect of intercropping brinjal on the incidence of L. orbonalis
Treatments Shoot damage per cent
Fruit damage per cent
Marketable yield (t/ha)
Brinjal+ Roselle 16.4 29.0 23.4
Brinjal+Sowa 17.2 31.9 22.1
Brinjal+ Marigold 23.6 36.9 18.5
Brinjal+Maize 30.4 38.5 17.2
Brinjal (Sole protected) 8.7 22.3 27.3
Brinjal (Sole Control) 46.9 64.2 14.6
CD (P=0.05) 5.2 3.8 3.2
Prasad et al. 2007Port Blair
Effect of split burying of two rows of crucifer cultivars in soil on fruit damage by H. armigera
Days after burying
Mean fruit damage (%) in tomato grown adjacent to crucifer cultivars
Control MeanBrassica juncea var. PBR-91
Eruca sativa var. TMLC-2
B. Napa var. GSL-1
B. Napa var. PGSH-51
62 14.28 (22.01) 14.01 (21.89) 8.83 (16.44) 11.90 (19.38) 25.02 (29.96) 14.81 (21.94)
69 4.58 (11.62) 3.77 (10.63) 3.38 (10.33) 4.95 (10.52) 16.34 (24.11) 6.69 (13.42)
76 3.31 (10.46) 2.36 (7.22) 4.12 (11.58) 5.70 (13.09) 12.98 (21.05) 5.69 (12.68)
83 10.85 (19.22) 8.29 (16.34) 2.5 (7.34) 6.83 (15.03) 17.13 (24.43) 9.12 (16.47)
Mean 8.26 (18.83) 7.11 (14.02) 4.71 (11.40) 7.34 (14.51) 17.87 (24.89)
CD (P=0.05) Days after burying = 3.32 Cultivars = 3.71
Pandher et al. 2008
Ludhiana
Mulching
Increase the soil temperature
Reduce inter movement of insect
Suppress the alternate host.
Mean population of Tetranychus urticae/2 cm2 leaf area of brinjal hybrid BH-2 in different cultural treatments under nethouse conditions
Cultural control Mean mite population/ 2cm2 leaf area of brinjal under different growing systems
Training Without training Mean
White polythene mulching 5.27 (29.03) 6.86 (46.96) 6.17 (38.00)
Black polythene mulching 5.25 (26.86) 6.14 (37.00) 5.70 (31.93)
Low tunnel white polythene mulching
5.59 (30.43) 7.18 (51.86) 6.38 (41.15)
Control 6.43 (42.13) 7.68 (58.53) 7.06 (50.33)
Mean 5.69 (32,11) 6.97 (48.59) -
C.D (P=0.05) 0.27
Bhullar and Dhatt 2011Ludhiana
Straw mulch
Straw treated plots have lower T. tabaci (Adult and larval) population as compared to control.
Emergence of T. tabaci reduced 54 per cent as compared to bare soil.
Larentzaki et al. 2008New York
Mechanical methods
1. Trellis system
2. Protected cultivation
3. Traps
4. Lure and kill
Trellis system
More light penetration
Pest monitoring becomes too easy
Less pest and disease problems
Comparatively less health hazards.
Effect of trellis system on fruit yield and borer infestation in bitter gourd
Treatment specification
Population of Diaphania indica/fruit
Percent loss in fruit weight
(g/fruit)
Percent loss in fruit number
Fruit yield (q/ha)
Single line 0.86 13.70 14.70 225.78
Double line 1.14 17.60 19.40 206.50
Bower system 1.37 25.50 31.10 197.12
CD (P=0.05)
0.10 2.10 2.10 12.40
Singh et al. 2007Bhubaneswar
Insect-pests cause direct and indirect damage
Polyhouse and nethouse act as physical barrier
Incidence of insect-pest less in protected cultivation
Superior quality of produce.
Protected cultivation technology
Effect of insect pest incidence on high value vegetable under open field and polyhouse conditions
Crop Open field condition Polyhouse condition
Name of insect-pest
No. of insect-
pest/ plant
Total No. of
insecticide sprayed
Marketable yield
(kg/plant)
Net income
(Rs/ plant)
No. of insect-
pest/ plant
Total No. of
insecticidesprayed
Marketable yield
(kg/plant)
Net income
(Rs/ plant)
Tomato Whitefly 20.25 8 1.55 4.75 0.66 3 3.75 15.75
Aphid 25.60 0.83
Beetle 17.40 0.33
Mealybug 15.50 0.00
Fruit borer 5.60 0.00
Awani (2005)
Trapping
Monitoring: Insect trap catches indicate adult pest activity. Economic thresholds are based on trap catch numbers
• Light trap• Pheromones trap • Sticky trap
Yellow sticky trap
Yellow traps, trapped higher number of adults leafminer
(1879.1) and whiteflies (544.5).
Black color trap, trapped lesser number of adults leafminer
(14.0) and whiteflies (2.6).
One trap per 20m2 for mass trapping of whitefly.
Durairaj et al. 2007
Flower Model trap (FMT)
• Flower model trap (FMT) made from artificial yellow chrysanthemum flower coated
with sticky material.
• It attracts higher number (1.8 times more) of greenhouse whitefly, Trialeurodes
vaporariorum Westwood as compared to the conventional yellow sticky trap.
• The color exhibited by the petals and/or geometrical pattern of the flower models
might have tempted the whitefly to land on them.
• Installation of 80 FMTs in a 500 m2 commercial tomato greenhouse significantly
reduced the adult population of T. vaporariorum.
• Shooty mold infestation was also reduced by 85 per cent on the greenhouse fruits.
South Korea Mainali and Lim (2008)
Lure and kill (Bait technique)
Cucurbits are vines and creepers
They provide hiding place to Insect-pest
Fruit fly lays eggs in fruit tissue
Control directed toward adult flies
(Palam fruit fly trap)
Eg: Cue-lure, methyl eugenol, molasses etc
Efficacy of eco-friendly insecticides and bait spray on the bottle gourd fruit damage by B. cucurbitae
Treatment First spray Second spray Third spray Fruit damage average
T1NSKE 5% Malathion 50gm +500g
molasses +50 liter of waterCypermethrin
(0.006%)7.50 (8.24)
T2Nimbecidine (2ml/l water)
Malathion 50gm +500g molasses +50 liter of water
Malathion 13.37 (13.04)
T3Neem gold
(2ml/ l water)Malathion 50gm +500g
molasses +50 liter of waterDiazinon 16.53 (17.19)
T4Achook (2ml/l
water)Malathion 50gm +500g
molasses +50 liter of waterMalathion 15.00 (15.72)
T5Cypermethrin
(0.006 %)Cypermethrin (0.006%) Cypermethrin
(0.006%)9.22 (10.09)
T6Control Control Control 24.49 (28.57)
CD (P=0.05)
7.26
Nath et al. 2007Varanasi
Host plant resistance
The most cheapest and safest techniques, if available
naturally
Bases of resistance
Biophysical (thickening of cell wall, trichomes,
surface waxes etc)
Biochemical (Nutrient, Allelochemicals )
Resistance of okra varieties against A. biguttula biguttula in kangra valley
Variety Mean nymphs/3 leaves (Palampur)
Mean nymphs/3 leaves(Kachhiari)
Arka Anamica 9.75 (3.27) 13.19 (3.72)
Harbhajan 14.22 (3.88) 16.75 (4.19)
P-8 14.48 (3.91) 16.87 (4.21)
Panchaali 11.09 (3.56) 13.45 (3.76)
Parbhani Kranti 10.91 (3.44) 13.73 (3.80)
Pusa Makhmali 15.25 (4.02) 20.08 (4.57)
Shagun 18.25 (4.37) 20.32 (4.59)
Tulsi 6.40 (2.70) 8.64 (3.05)
Varsha Uphar 6.64 (2.75) 10.72 (3.39)
Pusa Sawani 21.03 (4.69) 23.77 (4.95)
CD (P=0.05) 0.23 0.18
Badiyala et al. 2010
Resistance genotypes
Crop Place Resistant genotype Target insect
Reference
Brinjal Palampur Moderately Resistant: ASRB 2, BB 60C, H8, Ornamental brinjal, Solanum integrifolium, S.uporo
L. orbonalis Patial et al. 2008
Resistant: Local brinjal, Ornamental brinjal, Solanum integrifolium, S.uporo and BB 46-13.
L. orbonalis Patial et al. 2008
Okra Palampur Tulsi (6.40), Varsha Uphar (6.64) A. biguttula biguttula
Badiyala et al. 2010
Tomato Faisalabad Resistance: Sahil, Pakit and Nova Mecb H. armigera Sajjad et al. 2011
Biorational control
1. Biological
2. Botanical
3. Insect growth regulator (IGR)
4. Plant incorporated protectant (PIPs)
Why biorational ?
Control insect at lower doses
High level of selectivity
Lower the residual toxicity
Non-harmful to beneficial insect
Reduce the health hazards
Environmentally safe
Biological control
Utilization of predator, parasitoid and pathogens
Biological control approaches.
– Conservation
– Release
Pathogens (Bacteria, fungi, virus, nematode, protozoa)
Conservation
Preserving the natural enemies already existing
Use of pest control tactics which are compatible to natural enemies
e.g., planting refuge crops (ideal for maintenance of natural enemies
etc.)
Avoiding pest control tactics which are harmful to natural enemies e.g.,
Broad spectrum pesticides
Use of selective insecticides
Insect pathogens
Insect growth regulators
Natural enemies
Lady bird beetle Green lace wing
Aphidius sp Syrphid larvae
Natural enemies of L. orbonalis
Trathala flavoorbitalis Goryphus nursei
Orius spp.
Geocoris spp. Chrysoperla larvae
Predators attacking Whiteflies
Entomopathogenic Bacteria
The most widely known microbial is bacterial species, Bacillus thuringiensis.
A naturally occurring soil bacterium.
1911, discovered as a pathogen of flour moth.
Bt is somewhat slow acting because it has to be ingested so that the toxic proteins can break down the wall of the insect’s midgut and cause septicemia.
Efficacy of DOR-Bt 5 against L. orbonalis on brinjal
Treatmants Fruit damage (%) Yield loss (%) Yield (t/ha)
DOR-Bt 5 (2.0 kg/ha) 28.45 (31.86) 22.58 (27.79) 24.09
DOR-Bt 5 (1.5kg/ha) 32.28 (34.62) 24.54 (29.16) 22.91
DOR-Bt 5 (1.0 kg/ha) 37.42 (37.42) 29.70 (32.35) 16.70
Hostathion (1250 ml/ha) 27.08 (30.93) 20.45 (26.37) 25.49
Control 41.91 (40.10) 44.22 (41.22) 15.74
CD (P=0.05) 3.27 2.42 1.08
Joshi et al. 2010Ludhiana
Entomopathogenic Fungus
Beauveria bassiana: Small insect (such as
aphids, whiteflies and thrips)
Nomuraea rileyi: Scale insects (Fruit borer and
leaf eating caterpillar)
Metarhizium anisopliae: Beetles and
Grasshoppers
Efficacy of Paecilomyces fumosoroseus against Spider mite, T. urticae on okra
Treatment Conc. Mean mortality (%) of T. uticae after days of treatment
1 3 5 7 9
P. fumosoroseus (WP)
0.475 31 .67 ( 34.20)
65.00 (53.73) 81.67 (64.60) 91.67 (73.15) 100.00 (90.00)
0.375 30.00 (33.21) 51.67 (45.92) 70.00 (56.79) 81.67 (64.60) 96.67 (79.37)
0.275 20.00 41.67(40.22) 61.67 (51.71) 71.67 (57.80) 90.00 (71.56)
P.fumosoroseus (EC)
0.10 21.67 (27.69) 55.00(47.87) 70.00 (56.79) 80.00 (63.44) 90.00 (71.56)
0.80 15.00 (22.79) 43.33 (41.15) 56.67 (48.79) 68.33 (55.73) 86.67 (68.53)
0.60 6.67 (14.89) 33.33 (35.24) 48.33 (44.03) 55.00 (47.87) 73.33 (58.89)
SE± 8.215 9.151 6.919 6.661 7.454
CD (P=0.05) 17.901 19.937 15.075 14.514 16.241
Kumar et al. 2010Varanasi
Entomopathogenic viruses
Inclusion viruses (IVs): Granulosis viruses (GVs) and Polyhedrosis viruses (PVs)
Nuclear polyhedrosis viruses (NPVs)-SlNPV
Cytoplasmic polyhedrosis viruses (CPVs)
Efficacy of HaNPV against H. armigera in tomato
Different doses of HaNPV (100, 150, 200 & 250 LE/ha) and endosulfan
(0.07 & 0.035%) were applied as spray.
The spraying was done three times at an interval of 15 days starting
from pest occurrence.
After 4 days of third spray, HaNPV 250 LE/ha caused maximum
mortality (98%) followed by endosulfan 0.07% and HaNPV 200 LE
having 96 and 95% mortality, respectively.
However, after 7 days of spray, three dosages of HaNPV (i.e. 150, 200
& 250 LE/ha) and endosulfan 0.07% gave 98, 99, 99 and 98% mortality.
Meerut Mehraj et al. 2010
Entomopathogenic Nematodes
Nematodes enter host through natural opening.
It reduces fitness, delays development and also causes
sterility.
Kill insects in 1-4 days.
Common species commercially available are
Steinernema carpocapsae, S.feltiae and Heterorhabditis
bacteriophora.
Botanical control
Plants defend themselves through chemical or
phytochemicals.
It includes alkaloids, terpenoids, phenolics etc.
Repel approaching insects, deter feeding and
oviposition on the plants, disrupt behaviour and
physiology of insect.
Effect of different treatments on larval population of H. armigera on tomato
Treatment Pre treatment
Larval population/10 plants (mean of three replication) Overall mean
First spray Second spray
3DAT 7DAT 10DAT 3DAT 7DAT 10DAT
Neem oil 3% 9.66 (3.18) 5.33 (2.41)
6.35 (2.61)
7.66 (2.85)
5.66 (2.48)
6.66 (2.67)
5.66 (2.48)
6.22 (2.59)
Neem oil 5% 12.00 (3.53)
4.00 (2.11)
5.33 (2.41)
6.00 (2.54)
3.33 (2.04)
6.35 (2.61)
5.33 (2.40)
5.05 (2.36)
Neem kernal powder WP 2.5%
13.00 (3.67)
6.00 (2.54)
8.33 (2.97)
11.00 (3.38)
6.66 (2.67)
8.35 (2.97)
6.66 (2.67)
7.83 (2.88)
Neem kernal powder WP 5%
13.35 (3.71)
4.33 (2.19)
5.33 (2.41)
6.66 (2.67)
3.66 (2.11)
5.00 (2.33)
5.66 (2.48)
5.11 (2.37)
Endosulfan 35 EC 0.07 %
9.33 (3.13) 3.35 (1.95)
5.00 (2.33)
6.66 (2.67)
4.00 (1.95)
6.66 (2.67)
5.33 (2.41)
5.16 (2.35)
CD (P=0.05) NS 0.39 0.24 0.27 0.26 0.59 0.30 0.12
Barde et al. 2009Khandwa
Effect of different plant products against B. cucurbitae on cucumber
Field efficacy of plant products viz., neem seed kernal (NSKE),
rhizome of Acorus calamus, seed of Annona squamosa and
Endosulfan as control were evaluated on cucumber.
Reduction in fruit damage in the range of 68.63%, 64.82%,
63.72% and 77.14% in treatment with NSKE, A. squamosa, A.
calamus and Endosulfan respectively.
(Mondal and Ghatak, 2009)
Effect of organic products on onion thrips population in onion bulb crop
Treatment Average thrips population
Bulb yield (q/ha)
(T1 ) Farm yard manure 20t/ha 3.82 (2.01) 181.94
(T2 ) FYM 20t/ha+ neem cake@ 250kg/ha 3.61 (1.94) 194.44
(T3 ) FYM 20t/ha+ neem cake @ 500kg/ha 3.36 (1.87) 191.66
(T4 ) Recommended dose of NPK+ azadiractin (2ml/l) at 10 days interval when pest appear
3.39 (1.88) 201.33
(T5) Recommended dose of fertilizers+ fipronil (1ml/l) at 10 days interval when pest appear
2.45 (1.62) 208.33
Untreated control 6.09 (2.46) 159.72
Mean 3.68 (1.96)
CD (P=0.05) 0.13
Verma, 2010 Nauni
Insect growth regulator (IGR)
Chemical based on insect cuticle (Novaluron, Buprofezin)
Chemical based on endocrine system (Pyriproxyfen, Fenoxycarb)
Microorganism derived (Sipnosad, Emabectin benzoate)
New registered eco-friendly insecticide in India
Common Name Formulation Dosage/ ha Target insect
a.i. (gm) Formulation (gm/ml)
Dilution in water (liter)
Buprofezin 25% SC 75-150 300-600 500-750 Yellow Mite (Chilli)
Chlorantranilprole 18.5 % SC 10 50 500 DBM (Cabbage)
Difenthiuron 50% WP 300 600 500-750 DBM (Cabbage)
Mite (Chilli)
Whitefly (Brinjal)
Emamectin benzoate
5% EC 15-30 300-600 300-500 Fruit and Shoot borer (Okra)
DBM (Cabbage)
Fruit borer, Thrips and Mite (Chilli)
Brinjal fruit and shoot borer (Brinjal)
Fenazaquin 10% EC 125 1250 400-600 Yellow Mite (Chilli)
Fenopyroximate 5% EC 15-30 300-600 300-500 Yellow Mite (Chilli)
Fipronil 5% EC 40-50 800-1000 500 DBM
Thrips, Aphid, Fruit borer
Flufenoxuron 10% DC 40 400 500-1000 DBM
Contd..
Common Name
Formulation Dosage/ ha Target insect
a.i. (gm) Formulation (gm/ml)
Dilution in water (liter)
Flumite 20% SC 80-100 400-500 500-1000 Mite (Brinjal)
Hexythiazox 5.45% EC 15-25 300-500 625 Yellow Mite (Chilli)
Imidacloprid 70% WG 21-24.5 30-35 375-500 Jassid, Aphid (Okra)
Thrips, Jassid, Aphid (Chilli)
Imidacloprid 48% FS 300-540 (per 100 Kg of seed)
500-900 - Jassid, Aphid (Okra)
Indoxacarb 14.5% SC 30-75 200-500 400-750 DBM
Fruit borer (Tomato)
Fruit borer (Chilli)
Lufenuron 5.4% DC 30 600 500 DBM (Cauliflower)
Metaflumizone 22% SC 165-220 150-1000 500 DBM (Cabbage)
Contd..Common Name Formulation Dosage/ ha Target insect
a.i. (gm) Formulation (gm/ml)
Dilution in water (liter)
Milibectin 1% EC 3.25 325 500 Yellow/White Mite (Chilli)
Novaluron 10% EC 33.5- 75 750-375 500-1000 DBM Fruit borer (Chilli and
Tomato) Tobacco caterpillar
(Chilli)
Pyridalyl 10% EC 50-75 500-750 500-750 Fruit and shoot borer (Okra)
DBM (Cabbage)
Spinosad 45% EC 73 160 500 Fruit borer and Thrip (Chilli)
Spiromesifen 22.9% SC 96 400 500 DBM (cabbage and Cauliflower)
Thiacloprid 21.7% SC 54-72 225-300 500 Red mite (Brinjal)
Yellow Mite (Chilli)
Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 500-1000 Thrips (Chilli)
Thiamethoxam 70% WS 200 286 - Whitefly (Brinjal, Okra & Tomato)
Aphid (Potato & Okra)
Effect of different treatments on mean larval population ofP. xylostella
Treatment dose/ha
Pretreatment 3 DAS 7 DAS 10 DAS Percent reduction over control
Spinosad @ 600 ml
3.47 2.20 (1.79) 0.53 (1.24) 0.60 (1.26) 87.15
Proclaim @ 170 g
3.53 2.00 (1.73) 0.67 (1.29) 1.07 (1.43) 77.08
KN 128@ 333ml (indoxacarb)
3.73 2.60 (1.90) 0.73 (1.32) 0.93 (1.39) 80.08
Thiodan @ 1000 ml
4.33 3.47 (2.11) 3.20 (2.05) 3.40 (2.10) 27.19
Padan @ 500g
3.73 3.33 (2.08) 2.00 (1.73) 2.27 (1.80) 51.39
Control 4.07 4.27 (2.29) 4.47 (2.33) 4.67 (2.38) -
CD (P=0.05) NS 0.16 0.16 0.18
Gill et al. 2008Ludhiana
Efficacy of biorational against L. orbonalis
• The studies revealed that indoxacarb 14.5% SC to be
the most effective treatment against the pest and it was
at par with spinosad, emamectin benzoate, diafenthiuron
and Halt during both the years.
• Higher fruit yield recoded from indoxacarb treated plots
i.e. 232.51 q/ha and per cent increase over control
(57.94%).
Singh (2010)
Efficacy of different insecticides
Insecticide Dose and formulation
Crop Target insect
Refernce
Acetamiprid 40 g a.i./ha Okra B. tabaci Reddy et al. (2007)
Emamectin benzoate
15 g a.i./ha Bitter gourd B. cucurbitae Sharma and Sinha (2009)
Spinosad 56 g a.i./ha Okra H. armigera Ghosh et al. (2011)
Plant incorporated protectants (PIPs)
• Modification in living organism for specific purpose
• Bacterial derived genes: Cry1Ac, Bacillus
thuringiensis
• Plant derived genes: serine protease inhibitors,
lectins, alpha amylase inhibitors etc.
• Gene express in time and space
Integrated pest management for L. orbonalis
Selection of oblong/ small cluster bearing varieties/ hybrids.
Nursery bed should be protected with muslin cloth to avoid the initial attack of
insect.
Spray the seedling with any systemic insecticide at the day of transplanting in the
nursery bed.
Install plastic funnel trap baited with sex pheromone of brinjal shoot and fruit
borer@100/ha at the spacing of 10mx10m at 15-20 days after transplanting. The
pheromone septa should be changed at 30 days interval.
Clipping and destruction of infested shoots along with larval at weekly interval.
Sanitation through removal of damaged fruit
Need based foliar spray of NSKE (4%).
www.iivr.org.in
Integrated pest management for B. cucurbitae
• Deep summer ploughing should be done to expose the dormant pupae
in the field.
• Follow crop rotation incorporating non-cucurbiticious crops.
• Install mineral water trap, baited with cue-lure saturated (ethanol:
cuelure:cararyl=8:1:2) wood blocks@25 traps/ha prior to flower initiation.
• Initiate molassess (10%) based bait spray along with carbaryl (2%) in
selected plants in 250 spots/ha. This operation should be repeated at 4
days interval during the fruiting period.
• Sanitation should be maintained in the field through removal and
destruction of infested fruits immediately after initial infestation.
www.iivr.org.in
Conclusion
Cultural practices are basic but eco-friendly way to minimize the insect-pest population.
Traps can be used for monitoring and suppression of pest
population.
Use the biological control agents with the emergence of pest.
Insect resistance varieties should be used along with refuge crop.
Various biorational pesticides which are selective and eco-friendly are available to control pests.
IPM is the best technique for management of Insect-pest.
Future Prospective
More precise research should be focus on plant incorporated protectants foods.
Evaluation of local natural resources for pest management.
Conservation and augmentation of natural enemy.
Need more scientific research work to exploit the biorational insecticides.
Innovations in farmers participation and training to utilize the developed techniques.
top related