pak. j. entomol. karachi - pakistan journal of entomology … 26 1.pdf · · 2017-10-14pak. j....

Pak. j. entomol. Karachi. Volume 26 (1) 2011 (January-June) CODEN: PJENEL, ISSN: 1018-1180

Web site: www.pjek.org.pk E-mail: [email protected] THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF KARACHI, PAKISTAN (1971)

Office Bearers and Council for the year 2010-2011 Patron-In-Chief: Vice-Chancellor, University of Karachi, Karachi-75270, Pakistan Patron: Chairman, Pakistan Agricultural Research Council (PARC), G-5/1, Islamabad President: Prof. Dr. M. Arshad Azmi, Department of Zoology, University of Karachi Vice-Presidents: Prof. Dr. M. Saeed Wagan, Dept. of Zoology, University of Sindh, Jamshoro

Prof. Dr. S. Anser Rizvi, Department of Zoology, University of Karachi Dr. Abdul Sattar Burrero: Director General, A.R.I. Tandojam, Sindh

General Secretary: Prof. Dr. M. Farhanullah Khan, Department of Zoology, University of Karachi Joint Secretaries: Dr. Farzana Perveen, Department of Zoology, Hazara Univ. Mansehra, K.P.

Dr. Abdul Ghani Lanjar, Department of Entomology, S.A.U. Tandojam Treasurer: Prof. Dr. Masarrat J. Yousuf, Department of Zoology, Univ. of Karachi Councilors including above Editors & Officers:

Dr. S. Aminullah Khan, Dr. M. Ahmed Azmi, Dr. Rahila Tabassum, Dr. Nasreen Memon, Dr. S. Salahuddin Qadri, Dr. Tanveer Fatima, Dr. Noureen Raza, Dr. Rahila Nazly, Dr. Riffat Sultana, Mr. M. Hanif Qureshi, Mr. H.A. Sahito, Mr. Allah-Wasayo Kaleri, Mr. M. Usman Shar

FOREIGN & NATIONAL EDITORIAL BOARD R. Schuh, Ph.D.

George Willett, Curator Entomology, American Museum of Natural History,

101 W 80th Str., 75 D, Columbus Avenue, New York – 10024, U.S.A.

[email protected]

J.E. McPherson, Ph.D. Department of Zoology,

25 Lincoln Drive, Life Science II, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale,

Carbondale, Illinois-62901, U.S.A. [email protected]

Nikhat Yasmin, Ph.D. Ex-Dean, Faculty of Science, University of

Karachi, Pakistan

Seema Tahir, Ph.D. Department of Zoology, University of Karachi.

[email protected]

A.R. Shakoori, Ph.D. University of the Punjab, New Campus, Lahore

(Pakistan) [email protected]

M.A. Matin, Ph.D. National Agricultural Research Centre (NARC),

Park Road, PO NIH, Islamabad (Pakistan). Wahedul Islam, Ph.D.

Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Rajshahi, Rajshahi 6205 (Bangladesh)

[email protected]

M. Ather Rafi, Ph.D. National Agricultural Research Centre (NARC),

Park Road, PO NIH, Islamabad (Pakistan). [email protected]

Michael Breuer, Ph.D. State Institute for Viticulture and Enology

Dept. of Biol. – Sec. Ecology, Merzhauser Str. 119, 79100 Freiburg, [email protected]

Jumakhan Kakarsulemankhel, Ph.D.Department of Zoology, University of Balochistan,

Saryab Road, Quetta, Pakistan. [email protected]

FOREIGN ADVISORY BOARD

Carl Schaefer, Ph.D. University of Connecticut,

Storrs, Conn. (USA) [email protected]

Tadashi Miyata Ph.D.G.S.B.S., Nagoya Univ., Chikusa,

Nagoya, 464-801, Japan [email protected]

Chatterjee Monilal, Ph.D.Dept. of Agric. Ento.,

Mohanpur, Dist: Nadia 741252, WB, India

[email protected] Stephen Bondy, Ph.D.

O.& E.H., Dept. of Medic., Univ. of California, Irvine CA92697-1825, U.S.A. [email protected]

Errol Hasan, Ph.D.University of Queensland,

Gattons College, Lawes, QLD. Australia. [email protected]

V.K. Ganesalingam, Ph.D.37/2, Chetty Street Lane,

Nallur, Jaffna, Sri Lanka (Asia)

J. Koolman, Ph.D. Philips Universitat

Marburg (Germany) [email protected]

Chiu, Shin-Foon, Ph.D.South China Agriculture

Guangzhou (Peoples Rep. of China) Asia

R.W. Mwangi, Ph.D.University of Nairobi

P.O. Box 72913, Nairobi (Kenya) Africa

R.C. Saxena, Ph.D. Chairman, Neem Foundation,

Mumbai, India

K. Sombatsiri, Ph.D.Karetsart University

Bangkok (Thailand) Asia

Absar Mustafa Khan, Ph.D.Department of Zoology

M.U. Aligarh (India) Asia


Web site: www.pjek.org.pk E-mail: [email protected]

INSTRUCTIONS TO CONTRIBUTORS/AUTHORS For Original Research paper(s) and Review article(s)

1. Scope of this journal is various disciplines of Entomology which covers Toxicology, Taxonomy, Physiology, Pathology, Paleontology, Agricultural pests, Beneficial insects, Pesticide residues and related problems, Environmental pollution, Environmental safety (Bio-security), Health hazards, Food protection, Cell biology, Molecular biology and Genetics.

2. Manuscripts should be in English, typed and double spaced, on one side of the paper. There should be an abstract, not exceeding 200 words, which will be printed in small type before the introduction. Nothing in the text, except the scientific name will be italicized. Tables should be typed on separate sheets. Footnotes should be avoided as much as possible.

3. Illustrations should be in black Indian ink, preferably on white or butter paper paper. All letterings and numerical should be in light pencil for insertion in uniform style. The author’s name and the number of the figures should be written on the back of each drawing. The size of the illustration after reduction will not exceed 4x6 inch. The legends should be typed on a separate piece of paper.

4. The author should submit a hard copy in original and a photocopy of the original and soft copy in re-writable C.D. or simply send your paper on this E-mail address: [email protected].

5. Photographs should be glossy black and white prints. They should be numbered separately from the Text-figures. The cost of the coloured plates will be met by the author.

6. Reference should be cited in the text by giving the author’s name followed by the year. Papers and books should be listed in the alphabetical order. Journals should be abbreviated according to the latest edition of the World List of Scientific Periodicals e.g. DREYER, M. (1984). Effects of aqueous neem extracts and neem oil on the main pests of Cucurbita pepo in Togo. Proc. 2nd Int. Neem Conf. (Rauischholzhausen, 1983), pp. 435-443. EDWARDS, C.A. AND HEATH, G.W. (1964). The Principles of Agricultural Entomology. Chapman and Hall, London, 418 pp. NAQVI, S.N.H., ASHRAFI, S.H. AND QADRI, M.A.H. (1968). Acid phosphatase activity in the digestive system of the desert locust, Schistocerca gregaria (Forskål). Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 21: 1047-52. RAUPP, M.J. AND DENNO, R.F. (1983). Leaf age as a predictor of herbivore distribution and abundance. In: Denno, R.F. and McClure, M.S. (eds.): Variable Plants and Herbivores in Natural and Managed Systems. Academic Press, New York, USA, pp. 91-124.

7. Page-proofs will be sent to the authors for correction which should be returned within 7 days. Authors may be required to pay for alternations in proofs other than those needed to correct printer’s errors. The responsibility of the results will be on authors(s).

8. Key words/Index of maximum 10 words and short title of 8 words be mentioned at the proper place. 9. Authors may order for extra reprints purchase when proofs are returned to the Editor. After

acceptance of paper the amount of publication charges should be paid before publication of the paper. 10. All correspondence should be addressed to the Executive Editor, C/o Office of the Entomological

Society of Karachi, Department of Zoology, or Assistant Editor, M.A.H. Qadri Biological Research Centre, University of Karachi, Gulshan-e-Iqbal Town, Karachi-75270, Sindh-Pakistan.

11. Paper(s) for publication may be e-mailed at [email protected]. The author submitting paper for publication are requested to refer 1-3 references from earlier issues of Pak. j. entomol Karachi in the respective discipline.

The Entomological Society of Karachi was established in 1971, with the object of promoting Entomological Science and a closer cooperation between entomologists of Pakistan and abroad. Pak. j. entomol. Karachi (Biannual) is available in exchange or by subscribing the cost, from the Society’s office at the Department of Zoology-Entomology, University of Karachi, Karachi-75270, Pakistan.

The journal was recognized by HEC in the list of “Scientific Journals” up to June 2005 at serial number 108. At present the journal is under recognition at serial number 24 in the list of Science/Multidisciplinary journals by HEC, Quality Assurance Division.

Due to high cost of publication, the charges are Rs.3000 for 1-4 pages and Rs.500 per page for extra pages or US $ 10 per page from members and Rs.700 per page or US $ 15 per page from non-members. The publication charges may be paid by cash or pay order/bank draft in favour of “The Entomological Society of Karachi, Pakistan”.

Subscription Price Pakistan: Rs.500.00 per copy/number Other Countries: US $ 50.00 per copy/number Composed and Designed at: Muhammed Afzal Husain Qadri Biological Research Centre, University

of Karachi, Gulshan-e-Iqbal Town, Karachi-75270, Sindh-Pakistan.


Web site: www.pjek.org.pk E-mail: [email protected] CONTENTS

01. BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF DENGUE VECTOR MOSQUITOES AT LABORATORY AND FIELD LEVEL IN KARACHI………………………………………………………………………..…… TARIQ, R.M., QADRI, S.S. AND AHMAD, I.

01-04

02. DISTRIBUTION OF FLEAS (SIPHONAPTERA) ON LIVESTOCK AND STOCKMEN IN MANSEHRA, PAKISTAN……………………………………………………………………………….. PERVEEN, F., JABEEN, T., ALI, N., YASMIN, N. AND NAQVI, S.N.H.

05-10

03. STUDIES ON POPULATION DYNAMIC OF APIS FLOREA F. (HYMENOPTERA: APIDAE) ON LINSEED AND SAFFLOWER FROM SINDH……………………………………………………………... SOLANGI, B.K., SULTANA, R. AND WAGAN, M.S.

11-16

04. SEASONAL OCCURRENCE OF PHENACOCCUS SOLENOPSIS TINSLEY (HEMIPTERA: PSEUDOCOCCIDAE) AND ITS NATURAL ENEMIES ON DIFFERENT VARIETIES OF COTTON CROP…………………………………………………………………………………………. SAHITO, H.A., LANJAR, A.G., NAHIYOON, A.A., KHAJJAK, A.S., MEMON, S.A. AND MAL, B.

17-24

05. SEASONAL POPULATION ABUNDANCE OF COTTON MEALYBUG, PHENACOCCUS SOLENOPSIS TINSLEY (HEMIPTERA: PSEUDOCOCCIDAE) AND ITS NATURAL ENEMIES ON VARIOUS HOSTS PLANTS…………..…………………………………………………………… SAHITO, H.A., ABRO, G.H., SAYED, T.S., LANJAR, A.G., MAL, B. AND KHAJJAK, A.S.

25-40

06. REPELLENT ACTION OF BOTANICAL PESTICIDES AGAINST FRUITFLY, BACTROCERA ZONATA SAUNDERS IN LABORATORY…………………………………………………………… SOLANGI, B.K., SULTANA, R., WAGAN, M.S. AND AHMED, N.

41-45

07. EFFECT OF MICRONUTRIENTS AND PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS AGAINST SUCKING INSECT PESTS ON COTTON…………………………………………………………… MAHESAR, T.G., RUSTAMMANI, M.A., SAHITO, H.A., MEMON, S.A., MASTOI, A.H. AND KHAJJAK, A.S.

47-55

08. OIDES NEOBENGALENSIS: A NEW SPECIES OF THE GENUS OIDES WEBER (COLEOPTERA: CHRYSOMELIDAE: GALERUCINAE) FROM PAKISTAN…………………… RIZVI, S.G. AND KAMALUDDIN, S.

57-60

09. IMPACT OF TRAP CROPS ON NATURAL BUILDUP OF JASSID POPULATION ON OKRA CROP……………………………………………………………………………………………………... KALERI, A.W., LOHAR, M.K., RUSTAMANI, M.A. AND NAHIYOON, A.A.

61-66

10. EFFICACY OF DIFFERENT BIOPESTICEDS AGAINST SUCKING INSECT PESTS ON OKRA CROP…………………………………………………………………………………………… KALERI, A.W., LOHAR, M.K., RUSTAMANI, M.A. AND NAHIYOON, A.A.

67-72

11. EFFECT OF LEAD ACETATE ON MUSCA DOMESTICA………………………………………… HAQ, R., KHAN, M.F., FAHEEM, M., RANA, H. AND NAQVI, S.N.H.

73-76

12. POPULATION AND PREVALENCE OF DENGUE VECTOR MOSQUITOES DURING WINTER TO SUMMER SEASON WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO TEMPERATURE IN KARACHI, SINDH-PAKISTAN…………………………………………………………………………. TARIQ, R.M., QADRI, S.S., HUSSAIN, S.Z., AHMAD, I. AND AZMI, M.A.

77-80

Pak. j. entomol. Karachi 26 (1): 1-4, 2011 CODEN: PJENEL, ISSN: 1018-1180


BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF DENGUE VECTOR MOSQUITOES AT LABORATORY AND FIELD LEVEL IN KARACHI

RAJPUT M. TARIQ, SYED S. QADRI AND IMTIAZ AHMAD MAHQ Biological Research Centre, University of Karachi

Govt. Degree College, Jamia Millia, Malir, Karachi Department of Agriculture, University of Karachi

(Received for publication: 28.02.2011)

ABSTRACT

The Karachi division comprising 5 districts previously and now 18 Towns have been reported Dengue positive in 2010 after survey reports. The efforts to control DV-Vector Mosquitoes by present authors started in 2009. Now in the present paper the biological control by fishes in underground water tanks, overhead water tanks and open water tanks on ground has been reported. The result shows that the biological control by fishes in pure and fresh drinking water decreases the vector population. In biological control various type of locally found fishes were used, including Poecelia reticulata, Cyprinus carpio, Tilapia mosambicus and Opheocephalus sp. was used in this field experiment. All these four species gave satisfactory control of DV-Vector mosquitoes and Malaria plasmodium vector mosquito, the Anopheles sp. in water tanks. Total 200 breeding sites for mosquito including overhead water tanks (OHWT), underground water tanks (UGWT) and open ground water tanks (OGWT) were studied. Among the studied water tanks, 31% water tanks were found with Dragon fly nymphs, the mosquito larvae especially dengue and malaria and Culex were not found in these water tanks, these water tanks were generally of open type. This type of control by nature may be termed as Natural Biological Control (NBC) of mosquitoes, whereas 9% tanks were found with above mosquito larvae including 5% Aedes, 3% Anopheles and 1% Culex larvae, where there were no fishes and no dragonfly nymphs. Tilapia sp. proved to be 2nd successful fish giving 26% control, Cyprinus was found on 3rd ranking giving 19% control, Poecellia on 4th # giving 11% control, whereas, Opheocephalus was recorded on 5th # giving 4% control. Overall combining 31% biological control by dragonfly nymphs and 59% biological control of mosquitoes by fishes, totally biological control recorded was as 90%, only 10% (collectively all 3 species of mosquitoes) breeding points were found positive due to absence of fishes or dragonfly nymphs.

Key words: Biological control, Dengue, Fishes, Dragonfly nymph, Laboratory level, Field level.

INTRODUCTION

The population of mosquitoes is increasing day after day (Tariq & Zafar, 2000) in spite of modern control ways all over the world (Monath, 1994; Akram et al., 2009) In some modern countries the male mosquitoes are done genetically sterile, which mate with female and the female lay sterile eggs, these eggs are unable to hatch. In some countries fumigation and spray are done regularly but the population in spite of decreasing it is increasing due to either the controlling methods are for short term, or very much sophisticated, in effective or effective for some stage or very much costly.

Such as doing spray is costly, short term, ineffective, time taking, laborious, effective only for adult stage and time taking. Spray is always done when the population of vector mosquitoes increases and there is infection fear. Some time untargeted spray, make it ineffective. Spray can kill only those mosquitoes which flies in the air i.e. adult stage only

(Gunter et al., 2008) but the mosquitoes from where they are coming is known as breeding site, (Tariq, 2001) which remain untargeted during due to which, the coming of the adult mosquitoes from the breeding point remain continue, by this way the spray become ineffective (Tariq & Qadri, 2008). That is why emphases should be given to such control which may remain for long time, effective, targeted, less time consuming, low cost, less pollutative, less/non hazardous to untargeted animals and human beings (Qadri, et al., 2007).

In this paper the biological control which was started in 2009 following Tariq et al., 2009 which provided, the wanted targets, during 2011 leaving aside the hazardous effects of the chemical control in the form of resistance, chemical residues, environmental pollution, time wastage, money wastage and etc.

Tariq et al.

2

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Following Ahmed et al., (1986), four types of fishes were used in lab. to observe the efficacy at lab. levels then they were released in water tanks and in all other mosquito breeding points during the year 2009.Then survey of 18 Towns, selecting at least 10-11 breeding points randomly in each Town. Totally 200 breeding points were targeted, selected and visited.

RESULTS

During the present work 4 types of local fishes P. reticulata, C. carpio, T. mosambicus & Opheocephalus and dragonfly nymph, the Nayard were given 100 larvae of Ae. aegypti. The experiment was repeated in alternate days. The observation was done after 24 hours.

The fishes used in this experiment were of size 0.5+0.5-4.5+0.5cm in length, but Nayards were taken full grown in size. The experiments were done for 15 days and observations were taken, then mean value was calculated and it was rounded up to a nearer whole digit. The results of lab., experiments are shown in Table 1.

Keeping in mind the lab., results the same 4 types of fishes were released in over head water tanks (OHWT), underground water tanks (UGWT) in open grown water tanks (OGWT) and open dirty water reservoir (ODWR) usually big size Tilapia were released in OHW-Tanks, Opheocephalus in UGW-Tanks, Cyprinus in OGW-tanks and Poecilia were released in open dirty water reservoir (ODWR) during the year 2009 (Ahmad et al. 2009; Tariq & Azmi, 2010).

The survey for the presence of Aedes in all three types of water tanks and common house mosquito (Culex) in open dirty water reservoir was observed. For this purpose more than 10 breeding points but at least 10 breeding points were randomly visited and observed in each town of Karachi city. Totally 200 breeding points were visited and recorded for observation.

Beside fishes, the presence of Nayards was also taken into consideration. The results of this biological control at field level are shown in Table 2. The tanks and the water reservoir where there were no fishes or dragonfly nymphs, they were recorded as control.

The biological control by Nayards was found 31% on no. 1 in ranking of biological control truly called as Natural Biological Control (NBC) of Aedes and Anopheles in fresh and clean water in all kinds of tanks. The biological control by P. reticulata was

recorded as 11% both in fresh and clean water as well as in dirty water. Therefore, P. reticulata may be used both in clean and dirty water.

In all overhead, ground and open water tanks, the mouth of supply pipe was covered with nylon net of mosquito net type so that the fishes could not entire into the pipeline of supplying water. The fishes were used of 2.5+0.5 in width especially for overhead and underground water tanks. No bad effect of the presence of the fishes in tanks was noted until unless they die in water due to some reason.

DISCUSSIONS

Ata-ur-Rahim (1981) reported Aphanius dispar, a mosquito larvivorous fish in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia to control the mosquitoes but in the present work four fishes C. carpio, T. mosambicus, P. reticulata & Opheocephalus sp. were used to control mosquitoes as biological control.

Bay (1965) also reported the fish as an effective tool for mosquito control in 1965 & 1985, which is also effective today in this modern age of science.

Dubitskij et al., (1975) reported laboratory and field trials of a larviphage to control the mosquitoes, responsible for malaria, at larval stage by means of fishes.

Therefore the population of mosquitoes responsible for dengue bread the whole year and they are present in houses, offices and the place where the water is stored in the shape of tank. These mosquitoes also breed and present the whole year in tyre shops, houses, offices and masjid, where these mosquitoes get chance to breed as reported by Tariq & Zafar (2000), Tariq (2001) and Tariq et al., (2010).

CONCLUSION

This experiment and the prevalence survey indicates, that the presence and breeding of Aedes and Anopheles in water tanks, remains the whole year, which provides the potential base to shoot the population in the raining season. Therefore use of above fishes can provide biological control of Dengue and malaria vector mosquitoes in fresh drinking water and rainbow fish which can also breed in dirty, stagnant, polluted water providing biological control not only of fresh water (Aedes & Anopheles) but also of dirty water mosquitoes the Culex sp. in Karachi, Sindh- Pakistan.

Biological control of Dengue vector mosquitoes at laboratory and field level in Karachi

3

Table 1. Showing biological control of mosquitoes by fishes

and Dragon flies nymphs at laboratory level

S # Means of biological control Larvae of

mosquitoes given to fishes

Larvae of mosquitoes

used by fishes

% of used larvae

Ranking of control

1. Tilapia mosambicus (Dayya/mouth breeder

100 99 99% 1

2. Cyprinus carpio (Gulphom/Popery)

100 91 91% 3

3. Poecellia reticulata (Rainbow fish)

100 22 22% 4

4. Opheocephalus (Sole/Shakur)

100 95 95% 2

5. Dragon fly nymphs (Nayards) 100 14 14% 5

6. No fish/no Nayard (Control) 100 0 0 0

Table 2. Showing biological control of mosquitoes by fishes and Dragon flies nymphs (Nayards) at field level.

S # Means of biological control

Species of mosquitoes

Breeding sites positive for

Control % Ranking of control

1. Tilapia mosambicus (Dayya/mouth breeder

Nil 52/200 26% 2

2. Cyprinus carpio (Gulphom/Popery)

Nil 38/200 19% 3

3. Poecellia reticulata (Rainbow fish)

Nil 22/200 11% 4

4. Opheocephalus (Sole/Shakur)

Nil 08/200 4% 5

5. Dragon fly nymphs (Nayards)

Nil 62/200 31% 1

6. No fish/no Nayard Aedes 5%

Anopheles 3%, Culex 1%

18/200 09% Positive breeding

sites

7. Total: 3 species of mosquitoes

200 100%

Tariq et al.

4

RECOMMENDATION

If awareness is created through media as in 2006 by the present authors on Geo channel, in people to use this kind of biological control, the population of the vector mosquitoes may be decrease further more and the potential increase of the mosquitoes, which provides the base of initiative shooting of the mosquitoes in the raining season i.e. August-December.

As the people are using the Mechanical control of dengue vector mosquitoes at larval stage condition to control these mosquitoes as reported by Tariq et al., (2010).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors are thankful to Pakistan Academy of Sciences for providing the funds for this project entitled: “The Survey, Distribution, Population Dynamics and Biological Control of Mosquitoes Causing Dengue Fever in Karachi” (Ref. No. 5-9/PAS/3392, dated 13-5-2009) to control the Dengue vector mosquitoes in Karachi, after identifying the main localities and areas, positive for dengue vector mosquitoes.

We are also thankful to City District Govt. Karachi (CDGK) for providing help in survey and control, during 2009-2010.

REFERENCES

AHMED, I., TARIQ, R.M. AND QADRI, S.S. (2009). Scouting & survey of Towns of Karachi city for the presence of Dengue vector mosquitoes, Ae. aegypti L. Pak. j. entomol. Karachi. 24 (1&2): 61-62.

AHMED, S.S., A.L. LINDEN AND J.J. CECH (1986). A rating system for the selection of indigenous fish species for mosquito control. Mimeograph Doc., WHO/VBC/86.934, 7 pp.

AKRAM, W., HAFEEZ, F., NAEEM ULLAH, U., KIM, Y.K., HUSSAIN, A. AND LEE, J.J. (2009). Seasonal distribution and species composition of daytime biting mosquitoes. Entomol. Res. 39 (2): 107-113.

ATA-UR-RAHIM, M. (1981). Observations of Aphanius dispar (Ruppel, 1828), a mosquito larvivorous fish in Riyadh. Saudi Arabia. Am. Trop. Med. Parasit., 75(3): 359-36.

BAY, E.C. (1965). Instant fish! - a new tool for mosquito control? Pest Contr. Mag., 33: 14-16 and 58.

BAY, E.C. (1985). Other larvivorous fishes In: Biological Control of Mosquitoes. (Eds): H.C. Chapman, A.R. Barr, M. Laird and D.E. Weidhaas. Am. Mosq. Contr. Assoc. Bull. No. 6.

DUBITSKIJ, A.M. AND M.A. ABIL DAEV (1975). Laboratory and field trials of a new larviphage, in control of malaria mosquito larvae. Med .Parazit. i. Parazit. Bolenzni 44(6): 675-677.

GUNTER, C., MULLER, VASILIY, D., KRAVCHENKO AND SCHLEIN, Y. (2008). Decline of Anopheles sergentii and Aedes caspius populations following presentation of attractive toxic (Spinosad) sugar bait stations in an Oasis. J. Amer. Mosq. Cont. Assoc. 24(1): 147-149.

MONATH, T.P. (1994). Dengue: the risk to developed and developing countries. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 91: 2395-2400.

QADRI, S.S., TARIQ, R.M. AND AHMED, I. (2007). Dengue kee wapsi (Article in Urdu). Global Science (Nov. 2007): 21-26.

TARIQ, R.M. (2001). Where the mosquitoes Aedes, Anopheles & Culex are breeding in Karachi, Sindh-Pakistan? Pakistan j. entomol, Karachi, 16 (1&2): 15-18.

TARIQ, R.M. AND AZMI, M.A. (2010). Dengue fever virus vector mosquito (Aedes) prevalence survey report of Sindh province by seven different methods and outbreak of Dengue in Karachi, 2010. Pak. j. entomol. Karachi, 25(2): 113-118.

TARIQ, R.M. AND QADRI, S.S. (2008). Levels of dengue fever virus control: the effectiveness and vastness of controlling power boundaries of these levels. Pakistan j. entomol. Karachi 23 (1&2): 61-62.

TARIQ, R.M. AND ZAFAR, S.M.N. (2000). Why the population of Dengue vector mosquitoes is increasing day-by-day in Karachi and other areas of Sindh, Pakistan? Pakistan j. entomol. Karachi. 15 (1&2): 7-10.

TARIQ, R.M., AHMAD, I. AND QADRI, S.S. (2010). Population dynamics and mechanical control of Dengue vector mosquitoes Aedes aegypti and Aedes unilineatus in seven towns of Karachi. Pak. j. entomol. Karachi 25(1): 21-26.

TARIQ, R.M., NAQVI, S.N.H. AND ZAFAR, S.M.N. (2009). Two indigenous aquatic weeds Lemna minor and Spirodella spp., gave promising biological control of mosquito larvae with rainbow fish on field level in Karachi, Sindh-Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 41 (1): 269-276.



DISTRIBUTION OF FLEAS (SIPHONAPTERA) ON LIVESTOCK AND STOCKMEN IN MANSEHRA, PAKISTAN

FARZANA PERVEEN1*, TAHIRA JABEEN1, NAHEED ALI2, NIKHAT YASMIN3 AND S.N.H. NAQVI4

1Department of Zoology, Hazara University, Garden Campus, Mansehra-21300, Northern Pakistan

2Department of Zoology, University of Peshawar, PKP, Pakistan 3Department of Zoology, University of Karachi, Karachi-75270, Pakistan

4Baqai Medical University, Super Highway, Toll Plaza, Karachi, Pakistan *E-mail: [email protected] (Received for publication: 18.01.2011)

ABSTRACT

Fleas (Siphonaptera) are small, wingless, laterally compressed ectoparasite that feed on the blood of mammals and birds. Present research was under taken to study infestation of fleas species in two small villages i.e., Parhana and Khowari of Mansehra, Pakistan. The hosts were including domestic bovid animals, chicken at poultry farm and human beings working in these vicinities during April to October 2008. Relevant information was recorded, specimens mounted on slides and studied under light microscope. During this study, 64 goats 62 sheep, 71 chickens and 51 humans were examined. The flea infestation rates were calculated in goats (43.75%), sheep (27.41%), human (23.52%) and chicken (30.98%). The flea species were identified as Pulex irritans, Ctenocephalides felis felis and Ctenocephalides canis. The order of relative abundance among three species was: Pulex irritans (156)>Ctenocephalides felis felis (53)> Ctenocephalides canis (9). Through the pooled compilation of data maximum prevalence was recorded in the months of May, June and July.

Key words: Ctenocephalides canis, Ctenocephalides felis felis, Pulex irritans, fleas, ectoparasites, farms/houses, infestation, livestock, stockmen.

INTRODUCTION

Fleas are readily distinguished from other apterous parasitic insects having laterally compressed body instead of being dorso-ventrally flattened. The body of fleas like ticks is greatly modified for their parasitic mode of life (Perveen et al., 2010c). Their mouthparts are piercing and sucking type. Both male and female are pierce the skin for sucking blood of a variety of hosts i.e., mammals and birds as well as men. Antennae are with 3 joints, small and are found in groove on the side of the head. There are ten segments in their abdomen, the last three being greatly modified. Bristles on the body are short, stout. Comb like spines and ctenida, which are often present on head and pronotum are of value in taxonomy of the group. The legs are long and are modified for jumping which aid further in escaping their enemies and finding their hosts (Little, 1957; Wang and Xiad, 1987; Duchemin et al., 2006; Perveen et al., 2010b).

Adult fleas may live up to 6-12 months, or possibly 2 years and during this time a female may lay 300-1000 eggs; mostly in small batches of about 3-25 a day. Eggs hatch within 2-14 days depending on the species of the flea, temperature and also on humidity. Minute legless larva emerges from egg. Being very active, they avoid light and seek shelter in rocks and in debris. Larval period may last 10-21

days, but this varies greatly according to the species. At the end of the larval period the larva spins a whitish cocoon from silk produced by the larval salivary gland. After 2-3 days the larva pupates within the cocoon. Adult emerges from the pupa after 7-14 days but this period depends on ambient temperature (Dryden, 1989; Service, 1996).

There are 2500 species and subspecies of fleas belonging to 239 genera, but only relatively few infest humans. About 94% of known species bite mammals and the remainders are parasitic on birds. Fleas are found throughout most of the world, but many genera and species have more restricted distribution. The genus Xenopsylla that comprise important vectors of plague is confined to the tropics and warmer parts of some temperate countries (Service, 1996; Perveen et al., 2010a).

Karlov (1986) during investigations in the Moscow (USSR) found a total of 3143 fleas belonging to 22 species collected from 4704 small mammals and 29 nests of the common mole. Lang (1993) collected fleas from domestic mammals at 46 different localities throughout San Diego, California, USA, from April 1991 through December 1992. Thirteen of the 26 flea species occurring in San Diego been reported as disease vectors.

Perveen et al. 6

Arijo et al. (2007) examined hundred dogs and cats in Tandojam town in Pakistan, with an object to record the flea infestation in these hosts. During this study only one species of flea, i.e. Ctenocephalides felis was found infesting both the host. However, categorical complication of results showed that in case of dogs, the higher rate of infestation (50%) was recorded in females than males (10%). Similar trend was also found on cats, where 25% females were found infested against 11.11 % in males.

Hass and Walton (1973) examined many specimens of small animals, collected primarily in the Karachi district of Pakistan to obtain basic taxonomic and ecological data needed for the establishment of effective pest control program. Collection was made from Siphonaptera, Insectivora, Chiroptera, Rodentia and Carnivora. Siphonapteran specimens were obtained from the sites closely associated with human population. The present study was planned to determine distribution and Identification of fleas (Siphonaptera) infestation in livestock and stockmen during April to October 2008 in two villages i.e., Parhana and Khowari, districts Mansehra of Northern Pakistan. The collected data will help in taking appropriate measures to reduce fleas infestation and to improve management practices. Hence, it will help to increase farm productivity and farmers income.


Study Area The study area includes two villages i.e.,

Parhana and Khowari of district Mansehra, of Northern Pakistan located at a distance of 30 km. Collection of fleas The study period includes summer and spring seasons as the collection of fleas was started in April and completed in October 2008. Different types of hosts like Sheep, Goat, Chicken and Human were selected from houses and poultry farms. Animals were handled simply with hands and checked by searching the body regions like chest, legs and throat. The furs of animals were carefully brushed, but before brushing furs were made wet to stop the jumping action of fleas and facilitate their collection. The fleas recovered were preserved in 70% alcohol and placed in numbered vials. Relevant information was recorded. The collection was taken to the laboratory for further analysis. Permanent mount

Fleas were taken from alcoholic solution and transferred to 10% KOH solution for 24 hours. On next day, fleas were removed from caustic solution and placed in cold water for an hour and then

transferred to a watch-glass containing distilled water. Fleas were taken to a distilled water container, dehydrated by passing them through increasing concentration of alcohol 30, 50, 70, 90 and 100%. Specimens were left for 5 min in each grade of alcohol. After dehydration the fleas were cleared in clove oil, mounted on glass slide with the help of Canada balsam.

Identification of fleas

A detailed examination of permanent slides was made with binocular dissection microscope. For identification, the help was sought from keys described by Lewis (1967) and Soulsby (1982). The Diagnostic characters of fleas species were photographed with the help of digital camera (model DCM300, 3 Mega pixels).

Interviews

Interviews were held with the farmer/ livestock holders about the ethno-veterinary practices of fleas’ control. They quoted their comments and their talks were also recorded.

Statistical analysis

All data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) (Abacus Concepts Ltd., 1989) and Scheffé’s F-tests (Scheffé, 1953) and percentage was calculated by number of infested animals/total number examined animals × 100.

RESULTS

A study was carried out to determine infestation of the various prevalent species of fleas was carried out on different type of hosts including domestic bovid animals, chicken at poultry farm and human beings working in these vicinities during April to October 2008. During this study, 64 goats, 62 sheep, 71 chickens and 51 humans were examined. The numbers of host infested were 28, 17, 22 and 12, respectively, while the number of fleas recovered was 77, 59, 44 and 38 from the infested hosts. Prevalence of three species of fleas

Prevalence of three species of fleas (Siphonaptera) Pulex irritans, Ctenocephalides felis felis and Ctenocephalides canis collected from different hosts of livestock and stockmen during different months from April to October 2008 in two villages i.e., Parhana and Khowari of Mansehra, There were number 69 of Pulex irritans, 3 of Ctenocephalides felis felis and 3 of Ctenocephalides canis were recovered from goat, however, 25, 21 and 6, Pulex irritans, Ctenocephalides felis felis and Ctenocephalides canis were found from sheep, moreover, 30, 15 Pulex irritans and Ctenocephalides felis felis recovered from chicken, furthermore 33

Distribution of Siphonaptera on livestock and stockmen in Mansehra, Pakistan 7

Pulex irritans and 13 Ctenocephalides felis felis collected from human. Relative abundance of different Species of fleas on different hosts

The highest numbers of fleas collected belong to species Pulex irritans (156), Ctenocephalides felis felis (53) and Ctenocephalides canis (9). The total number of specimens was 218.

Systematic Account

For the purpose of the best seen the specimen, the microscopic slides were prepared. Taxonomic keys were used for identification and separation of the fleas families through morphological characters. In present study two genera Pulex and Ctenocephalides belong to family Pulicidae were identified:

1. Genus Pulex

The diagnostic characters of this genus are absence of genal, pronotal combs and mesopleural rod, however, genal comb represented only by a single small and inconspicuous spine let. Pulex irritans Linnaeus, 1753

Commonly, it is known as human flea and is cosmopolitan in distribution. In the present study, it was collected from goat, sheep, chicken and human. Neither genal nor pronotal combs were present which served to distinguish Pulex from all species likely to be found on dogs except Xenopsylla. A vertical rod-shaped thickening reinforced the mesopleuron of Xenopsylla but this is absent in Pulex. Ocular bristle inserted below eye and two spines were present in mesothorax (Fig. 2a and b).

2. Genus Ctenocephalides

The diagnostic characters of this genus are genal comb consisting of at least six sharp spines which extend along almost the whole of anterior portion of ventral margin of head. Pronotum with comb composed of many spines. Mesopleural rod was present.

a. Ctenoephalides felis felis (Bouche, 1835)

Commonly, it is known as cat flea and is cosmopolitan. Presently it was collected from goat, sheep, chicken and human. Cat flea possessed pronotal comb with 8 bristles pre-side and a genal comb with 8 bristle. Therefore, the genus was recognized from these combs. The sloping forehead was the hall mark of Ctenocephalides felis felis. Anterior margin of head was not strongly convexed. Anterior spine of genal comb was much more than one half length of second spine. Dorsal margin of hind tibia with only 5 or 6 notches contained stout bristles excluding apical ones; space between post-

median and apical bristles occupied by only one shallow notch contained a stout bristle. In male terminalia, apical portion of manubrium was feebly dilated. Female was without minute bristles immediately behind antennal fossa. Spermatheca was relatively larger than in C. canis and bent over apical part of hilla, shorter than remainder. The distribution of setae on the hind tibia supplied another diagnostic criterion. Between the post-median and apical long setae on the railing edge of the hind tibia of the C. f. felis, there was one notch that beard a short stout spine (Figure 2c). b. Ctenocephalides canis (Curtis, 1826)

Commonly, it is known as dog flea. In the present work, infested hosts were goat and sheep. This flea was similar to the cat flea and is widely distributed. Head of Ctenocephalides species was rounded on its upper and anterior surface. Ctenocephalides canis had a sharp curve while C. f. felis had shallow curve on its anterior end. Ctenocephalides canis usually had 3 or 4 setae on the metepisternum, the other species usually had only 1 or 2 such setae. Anterior margin of the head was strongly convex in both sexes; a large part of lower portion of margin was almost vertical in male and female. Anterior spine of genal comb was only one-half of second spines. Row of minute bristles was immediately above and behind antennal fossa as in all male members of this genus.

Terminalia apex of manubrium strongly dilated, spatulate. Female was normally without minute bristles immediately above and behind antennal fossa, but one to four such bristles were very occasionally present (Figure 2d). Male fleas were identified by the upturned appearance of the abdomen. In the female the top of the abdomen was more rounded than in the male and lying internally in about the position of the 6–8 abdominal segment was a distinct brownish spermatheca. It was relatively small and apical part of hilla was (bent over apical part of “tail” of spermatheca) longer than the rest of hilla. Between the post median and apical long setae on the trailing edge of the hind tibia of C. canis there were two notches bearing short, stout setae. All of the other species had only notch that bears stout setae. Some fleas having genal and pronotal combs, which were in rows of heavy bristles on the lower anterior margin of the head and the posterior margin of the pronotum.

The sensilium was a plate located at the apex of the abdomen on the dorsal side of the body, just behind the last unmodified abdominal tergum, it had a group of rounded pits on each side, spiniform bristles on the coxa were short stout bristles, usually located near the apex of the coxa. Internal ridges on the coxae were thickened, usually apparent in a cleared specimen as a dark line extending the length of the coxa (Figure 2e).

Perveen et al. 8

DISCUSSION

The present work is a preliminary study carried out at two villages, Khowari and Parhana of District Mansehra. The collection was made from April to October 2008 on different hosts. Three species belonging to two different genera were identified.

Among the three species (Pulex irritans), (human flea) was found to be the most prevalent species. The reported hosts are humans, dogs, rabbits, squirrels, foxes and many others but in the present study it was collected from humans and other examined hosts.

The name of human flea “Pulex”, however, is said to be derived from the Latin word “Puella” meaning a girl, as a reflection of a preference it is alleged to show for young females (Askew, 1971). Its common name indicates its frequent host but in present study it was not only recovered from humans, but also from goat, sheep and chicken. Kaal et al., (2006), reported this species from sheep during the epidemiological study of flea’s infestation on ruminants in Libya. This genus is known to include at least seven species of which one is cosmopolitan but occur principally in the palaearctic region, while all the rest are Nearctic and Neotropical.

The next most abundant species in the present study was Ctenocephalides felis felis, commonly called cat flea. It is a small genus with indigenous species in the Palaearctic, Oriental and Ethiopian regions. It is principally a cat infesting ectoparasite but other hosts are dogs and domestic animals, while the hosts examined in the present work were sheep, goat, human and chicken.

Present findings are in agreement with those of Arijo et al. (2007) which also reported that C. f. felis is not strictly host specific species. It is polyphagus specie found in other parts of the world and is not confined to cat only. Haas and Walton (1973) confirmed the observations that the C. f. felis is reported on Mangoos in Pakistan. It is also found on the same host in Hawaii.

In the present study the third species was Ctenocephalides canis (dog flea). Reported hosts were dogs, cats and other mammals. It was collected only from sheep and goat and not from other two types of studied hosts, however, the number of specimens collected were very low as compared to the other two fleas species.

In the present study area infestation on dog was not observed due to religious binding, it is not very common in Pakistani community to keep dogs inside

the houses as pets and wild dogs are very difficult to handle. If dogs were included in the study, Ctenocephalides canis infestation would have been found in large number as most probably this species is relatively more host specific as compared to the other two flea species.

Among the above three species Pulex irritans is probably of Palaearctic origin and other two species Ctenocephalides felis felis, and Ctenocephalides canis are widely distributed in the oriental region, in which they probably originated as described by Hopkins (1961). His results described that all the three species are cosmopolitan in distribution as our study also recovered these three species though it was found in a very limited area.

During present study the higher rate of infestation of Pulex irritans was recorded in goat and chicken but the prevalence of high infestation is probably due to high number of studied individuals from these hosts. The rate of infestation widely varies from country to country and area to area principally depending upon climatic conditions including temperature and humidity and awareness towards control of fleas.

Figure 1. Relative abundance of three species of fleas (Siphonaptera) Pulex irritans, Ctenocephalides felis felis and Ctenocephalides canis found on livestock and stockmen.

Figure 1.

Distribution of Siphonaptera on livestock and stockmen in Mansehra, Pakistan 9

Table 1. Prevalence of three species of fleas (Siphonaptera) collected from different hosts during April to

October 2008 in two villages i.e., Parhana and Khowari of Mansehra, Pakistan. Month (2008)

Fleas on goat (n) Fleas on sheep (n) Fleas on chicken (n) Fleas on human (n) sp1 sp2 sp3 sp1 sp2 sp3 sp1 sp2 sp3 sp1 sp2 sp3

April 12 0 0 8 0 0 0 8 0 6 0 0 May 13 0 0 1 4 1 5 0 0 4 0 0 June 5 0 0 2 12 1 7 0 0 8 2 0 July 4 2 3 8 5 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 Aug 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 4 0 Sep 14 1 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 5 7 0 Oct 6 0 0 0 0 4 0 7 0 0 0 0

Total 69 3 3 25 21 6 30 15 0 33 13 0 sp1: Pulex irritans; sp2: Ctenocephalides felis felis; sp3: Ctenocephalides canis were recovered from goat, sheep, chicken and human; n: number of fleas.

REFERENCES

ABACUS CONCEPTS LTD. (1989). Super ANOVA. Berkeley Publisher, Berkeley, CA, USA.

ARIJO, A.G., OMANI, K.T. AND RAJPUT, Z.I. (2007). Ctenocephalidies felis in dogs and cat in Tandojam region, Pakistan. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 10 (151): 2579–2582.

ASKEW, R.R. (1971). Parasitic insects. Published by Heinemann Educational books Ltd, London. 1: 30-45.

DRYDEN, M.W. (1989). Biology of the cat flea, Ctenocephalides felis. Comp. Anim. Prac. 19: 23–27.

DUCHEMIN, J.B., FOURNIER, P.E. AND PARALA, P. (2006). Fleas and disease transmissible to man. Medic. Trop. 66 (1): 21–29.

HASS, G.E AND WALTON, D.W. (1973). Fleas (Siphonaptera) infesting small mammals from the Western Oriental region. Kor. J. Parasitol. 11 (2): 102–107.

HOPKINS, G.H.E. (1961). Ins. Micron. Siphonapt. 14 (4): 91–107.

KAAL, J.F., BAKER, K. AND TOGERSON, P.R. (2006). Epidemiology of flea infestation of Ruminants in Libya. Vet. Parasitol. 413, 313–318.

KARLOV, D.G. (1986). Contribution to the fauna and ecology of fleas of small mammals of Moscow region USSR. Vete. Parasitol. 20 (5): 356–63.

LANG, J. D. (1993). Fleas found on mammals in San Diego country, California, USA. Bull. Soc. Vect. Ecol. 18 (2): 113–524.

LEWIS, R.E. (1967). The fleas (Siphonaptera) of Egypt. An illustrated and annotated key. J. Parasitol. 53: 863–885.

LITTLE, V.A. (1957). General and Applied Entomology. Entomol. Gener. (2): 433-434.

PERVEEN, F., BILQEES, F.M., AHMED, H., BIBI, N. AND ABBASI, F.M. (2010a). Frequency of Ixodid ticks infestation in livestock in two districts of NWFP, Pakistan. Proc. Parasitol. 49: 127–141.

PERVEEN, F., JABEEN, T., ALI, N, BILQEES, F.M. (2010b). Fleas infestation on livestock and stockmen in Mansehra, Northern Pakistan. Proc. Parasitol. 50: 153–165.

PERVEEN, F., NAQVI, S.N.H., YASMIN, N. AND BIBI, N. (2010c). Ixodid ticks infestation in livestock and their traditional control in N-WFP, Pakistan. Pak. j. entomol. Karachi. 25(1): 43–54.

SCHEFFÉ, H. (1953). A method for judging all contrasts in the analysis of variance. Biometrica 40: 87–104.

SERVICE, M.W. (1996). Medical Entomology for Students. Chapman and Hall 2-6 Boundary Row, London SE18H: UK 1, 179–180.

SOULSBY, E.J.L. (1982). Helminths, Arthropods, Protoza of domestic Animals. Lea and Feb. Philadel. USA. 7: 378–384.

WANG, S.Q. AND XIAD, X.A. (1987). The scanning electron microscopy of flea sensory plates. Shanei. Med. Coll. Shanx. (30) 1: 41–46.

Perveen et al. 10

Figure 2. Three species of fleas (Siphonaptera) found on livestock and stockmen diagnostic characters were photographed with digital camera (model DCM300, 3 Mega pixels): Head of Pulex irritans (a); Mesothorax and metathorax of Pulex irritans (b); Hind tibia of Ctenocephalides felis felis (c); Hind tibia of Ctenocephalides canis (d); Ctenocephalides felis felis spermatheca (e).

Figure 2a.

Figure 2b.

Figure 2c.

Figure 2d.

Figure 2e.



STUDIES ON POPULATION DYNAMIC OF APIS FLOREA F.

(HYMENOPTERA: APIDAE) ON LINSEED AND SAFFLOWER FROM SINDH

BHAI KHAN SOLANGI*, RIFFAT SULTANA** MUHAMMAD SAEED WAGAN

*Department of Entomology, Sindh Agriculture University, Tandojam **Department of Zoology, University of Sindh, Jamshoro [email protected]


ABSTRACT The study on the Relative population dynamics of Apis florea F. on linseed and safflower crop was carried during the year 2010. The result showed that Safflower flowers attracted relatively the honey bee pollinators more than the linseed flowers. Honey bee population on safflower on 12th March was 1.27 ± 0.20 / plant which increased to 2.33 ± 0.65 / plant on the following day. On 14th March, reduction in population was noticed (0.93 ± 0.65) and again a sharp rise (1.96 ± 0.39) on the following day. The honey bees visiting safflower were 1.67 ± 0.31 on 16th March and remained stable for following five days i.e. 1.60 ± 0.25, 1.64 ± 0.22, 1.71 ± 0.21, 1.71 ± 0.21 and 1.66 ± 0.30 per plant on 17th to 21st March. Relative reduction in pollinator population was recorded on 27th March, (1.62 ± 0.25/plant), and in first week of April it was 1.68 ± 0.68, 1.29 ± 0.34, 1.45 ± 0.41 and 1.16±0.19/plant on 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th April, respectively. Linseed flowers attracted honey bees relatively less than safflower and on 12th March 2010, honey bees visiting linseed were 1.24 ± 0.89/plant, increased to 1.87 ± 0.75 on 13th March and reduction from 14th March i.e. 1.50 ± 0.57, 1.25 ± 0.50 and 1.29±0.20/plant on 14th, 15th and 16th March, 2010 respectively. Increasing trend in honey bee population was recorded i.e. 1.37 ± 0.10, 1.33 ± 0.18, 1.78 ± 0.39, 1.35 ± 0.12 and 1.34 ± 0.12 bees per plant on 26th, 27th, 28th, 29th and 30th March, 2010, respectively. In the later stage (first week of April, 2010) the population was relatively lower, i.e. 1.20 ± 0.24, 1.20 ± 0.24, 1.30 ± 0.22, 1.12 ± 0.25, 1.29±0.34 and 1.12±0.25 per plant, respectively. The honey bee population on safflower remained stabled throughout the observation period (12th March to 5th April, 2010) relatively with some uneven population fluctuation. On linseed, there was also a stable trend of honey bee visiting population throughout the observation period (from 12th March to 5th April). Population did not achieve a certain peak level during the experimental period and once the population reached at highest, next day it showed a decline. A non-significant but negative correlation between temperature and honey bee population was noted, while a non-significant but positive correlation between relative humidity and population was also recorded on both the crops.

Key words: Dynamic population, honey bee, linseed, safflower, Sindh, Pakistan.

INTRODUCTION Linseed is grown both for its seed and for its fibers.

Various parts of the plant have been used to make fabric, dye, paper, medicines, fishing nets and soap etc. It is also grown as an ornamental plant in gardens, as linseed is one of the few plant species capable of producing truly blue flowers. The seeds produce a vegetable oil known as linseed oil. It is one of the oldest commercial oils and solvent-processed linseed oil has been used for centuries as a drying oil in painting and varnishing. Although brown linseed can be consumed and has been for thousands of years, it is better known as an ingredient in paints, fiber and cattle feed. Brown and yellow linseed have similar nutritional values and equal amounts of short-chain omega-3 fatty acids (AIBS, 2006).

Safflower, Carthamus tinctorius L. is a highly branched, herbaceous, thistle-like annual, usually with many long sharp spines on the leaves. Safflower is one of humanity's oldest crops. Chemical analysis of ancient Egyptian textiles dated to the Twelfth dynasty identified dyes made from safflower, and garlands made from safflowers were found in the tomb of the pharaoh Tutankhamun. There are two parts of the plant which can be used; the pale seeds and the red

florets. It is a minor crop today, with about 600,000 tons being produced commercially in more than sixty countries worldwide. India, United States, and Mexico are the leading producers, with Ethiopia, Kazakhstan, China, Argentina and Australia accounting for most of the remainder (Wikipedia, 2007). Pollination is an important step in the reproduction of seed plants: the transfer of pollen grains (male gametes) to the plant carpel, the structure that contains the ovule (female gamete). The receptive part of the carpel is called a stigma in the flowers of angiosperms and a micropyle in gymnosperms. Pollination is important in horticulture because most plant fruits will not develop if the ovules are not fertilized. The various flower traits that attract different pollinators are known as pollination syndromes. Pollination management is a branch of agriculture that seeks to protect and enhance present pollinators and often involves the culture and addition of pollinators in monoculture situations (Chen et al. 2006).

Honey bees travel from flower to flower, collecting nectar (later converted to honey), and pollen grains. The bee collects the pollen by rubbing against the anthers. The pollen collects on the hind legs, in dense hairs referred to as a pollen basket. Thus the management techniques of a beekeeper providing pollination services

Solangi et al. 12

are different from, and somewhat incompatible with those of a beekeeper who is trying to produce honey. Other species of bees will differ in various details of their behaviour and pollen-gathering habits, and it should be remembered that honey bees are not native to the Western Hemisphere; all pollination of native plants in the Americas has been historically performed by various native bees (Dafni et al., 2005).

Honey bees, which themselves are non-native pollinators on most continents, and which may harm native bees and other pollinators, are nonetheless critically important for crop pollination. Recent declines in honeybee numbers bring home the importance of healthy pollination systems and the need to further develop native bees and other animals as crop pollinators. Considering the importance of pollinators in the agricultural ecosystems, the present research was carried out to examine the relative dynamic population of Apis florea F. on linseed and safflower.


Present study on safflower and linseed crops was carried out at the experimental fields of Oilseeds Section, Agriculture Research Institute Tandojam during

the year 2010 and the relative population of visiting Apis florae was recorded for both crops separately. The crop was as usual fertilized and irrigated as per the preplanned schedules. The crop was also kept free of weeds to allow the plants to utilize moisture and light and grow optimally. For recording observations on Apis florae, ten plants of each of safflower and linseed crops in each replication were randomly selected and properly labeled. On each of the ten plants visiting honey bee pollinators were counted daily in both the crops. The observations have been recorded in the morning from 8.00 A.M. to 10:00 A.M. from 12th March to 05th April condition where the temperature fluctuated between16.3±2.82oC to 34.8±2.70oC with relative humidity 58.0±0.10% (Table.1).

Statistical analysis

Data obtained from experimental groups were subjected to one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) (SPSS 10.0 Soft-Ware) with repeated measures and correlating factors were determined using correlation coefficient and probability test.

Table-1. Temperature and relative humidity during the experimental period.

Date of observation Minimum temperature

Maximum temperature

Relative humidity

12-03-2010 17.5 32.0 68% 13-03-2010 19.5 31.5 90% 14-03-2010 15.5 30.5 72% 15-03-2010 12.0 31.5 64% 16-03-2010 13.5 32.0 62% 17-03-2010 15.5 32.5 52% 18-03-2010 16.0 34.0 47% 19-03-2010 15.5 34.0 56% 20-03-2010 17.0 33.0 60% 21-03-2010 15.0 34.5 65% 22-03-2010 18.0 34.5 64% 23-03-2010 20.0 36.0 62% 24-03-2010 17.0 32.5 68% 25-03-2010 17.5 32.5 60% 26-03-2010 16.0 34.0 60% 27-03-2010 12.5 36.5 48% 28-03-2010 13.5 34.5 49% 29-03-2010 15.0 35.5 44% 30-03-2010 13.5 38.0 48% 31-03-2010 10 37.5 52% 01-04-2010 21.5 38.5 50% 02-04-2010 18.0 37.5 46% 03-04-2010 18.5 39.0 46% 04-04-2010 19.0 38.0 61% 05-04-2010 20.5 40.0 62%

Average 16.3±2.82 34.8±2.70 58.0±0.10%

Studies on population dynamic of Apis florea on linseed and safflower from Sindh 13

RESULTS

A. Observation on Safflower The results on populations dynamic of honey bee

Apis florea F. visiting safflower crop as pollinator were significant (P<0.05) between observation intervals as well as between crops (P<0.01), while non-significant (P>0.05) for interaction between intervals and crops (Table-2) On first day of observation 1.27 ± 0.20 honey bees per plant were found visiting safflower crop and the population increased to 2.33 ± 0.62 on the following day. On 14th March, a reduced honey bee population was noticed (0.93 ± 0.65) and again a sharp rise (1.96 ± 0.39) on the following day. The population of honey bee visiting safflower as pollinator was 1.67 ± 0.31 on 16th March and remained stabled for following five days i.e. 1.60 ± 0.25, 1.64 ± 0.22, 1.71 ± 0.21, 1.71 ± 0.21 and 1.66 ± 0.30 per plant on 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th and 21st March, respectively.

The honey bee population found visiting safflower crop and recorded active on its pollen was relatively reduced to 1.48 ± 0.22 and 1.41 ± 0.42 per plant on 22nd and 23rd March, 2010, respectively. However, later on 24th March, the honey bee population started flaring up and on average there were 1.69 ± 0.13, 1.68 ± 0.46, 1.73 ± 0.40 honey bees per plant found visiting flowers of safflower crop on 24th, 25th and 26th March, 2010, respectively. The honey bee population visiting safflower crop on 27th March, 2010 was relatively reduced to 1.62 ± 0.25 per plant, and again a rise to 2.03 ± 0.66 per plant on the following day. Later on, the population of honey bees, pollinating safflower crop were slightly decreased to 1.87 ± 0.55 per plant on 29th March and further reaching 1.66 ± 0.49 and 1.18 per plant on 30th March and 1st April, 2010, respectively.

Table-2 . Population of honey bee’s plant as pollinators on safflower.

Date of Obs. RI RII RIII RIV Mean ± SED 12.03.10 2.00 1.33 1.00 1.5 1.27 ± 0.20 13.03.10 1.50 2.50 2.33 3.00 2.33 ± 0.62 14.03.10 1.50 1.00 1.25 0.00 0.93 ± 0.65 15.03.10 2.00 2.50 1.60 1..75 1.96 ± 0.39 16.03.10 1.80 1.66 1.25 2.00 1.67 ± 0.31 17.03.10 1.83 1.75 1.60 1.25 1.60 ± 0.25 18.03.10 1.85 1.66 1.33 1.75 1.64 ± 0.22 19.03.10 1.85 1.75 1.85 1.40 1.71 ± 0.21 20.03.10 1.85 1.75 1.85 1.40 1.71 ± 0.21 21.03.10 1.33 2.00 1.50 1.83 1.66 ± 0.30 22.03.10 1.60 1.16 1.66 1.50 1.48 ± 0.22 23.03.10 1.25 2.00 1.00 1.40 1.41 ± 0.42 24.03.10 1.75 1.80 1.50 1.76 1.69 ± 0.13 25.03.10 2.00 1.25 2.16 1.33 1.68 ± 0.46 26.03.10 1.50 1.60 2.33 1.50 1.73 ± 0.40 27.03.10 1.57 1.50 1.42 2.00 1.62 ± 0.25 28.03.10 1.83 1.50 3.00 1.80 2.03 ± 0.66 29.03.10 2.00 1.20 1.56 2.60 1.87 ± 0.55 30.03.10 1.40 1.33 1.71 2.33 1.66 ± 0.49 31.03.10 1.25 2.00 1.16 1.00 1.18 ± 0.14 01.04.10 1.33 2.5 1.00 1.50 1.45 ± 0.41 02.04.10 1.25 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.68 ± 0.68 03.04.10 1.00 2.00 1.50 1.66 1.29 ± 0.34 04.04.10 1.33 1.33 1.00 1.50 1.45 ± 0.41 05.04.10 1.33 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.16 ± 0.19 Average 1.59 ±0.29 1.65±0.43 1.54±0.50 1.63±0.56 1.67 ± 0.31

Solangi et al. 14

The results showed no linear trend of honey bee population throughout the season and natural fluctuation was seen even during the peak flowering days of safflower. The honey bee visiting safflower crop was 1.68 ± 0.68, 1.29 ± 0.34, 1.45 ± 0.41 and 1.16 ± 0.19 bees average per plant on 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th April observation, respectively. The results indicated that pollinators (honey bees) population remained stabilized throughout the observation period (12th March to 5th April, 2010) relatively with high natural population fluctuation. B- Observation on Linseed

The population of pollinators (honey bees) found visiting linseed crop on 19th, 20th, 21st, 22nd and 23rd March, 2010 was 1.35 ± 0.47, 1.47 ± 0.41, 1.47 ± 0.41, 1.66 ± 0.90 and 1.54 ± 0.31 per plant, respectively. However, later on the visiting pollinators found in reduced population of 1.13 ± 0.16 and 1.16 ± 0.33 per plant on 24th and 25th March, 2010. Initially on 12th March 2010, the population of honey bee visiting linseed crop was 1.24 ± 0.89 per plant, which was increased to 1.87 ± 0.75 on 13th March. From 14th March, a reducing population trend in honey bee population was observed i.e. 1.50 ± 0.57, 1.25 ± 0.50 and 1.29 ± 0.20 bees per plant on 14th, 15th and 16th March, 2010 respectively. A rise in population (1.83±0.88 per plant) was observed on 17th March, but again sharp decline in honey bee

population (1.22 ± 0.15 per plant) on 18th March, 2010. The population of honey bee Apis florea visiting linseed crop as pollinator (Table-3) was significant (P<0.05) for observation dates and when compared with safflower (P<0.01), while non-significant (P>0.05) for interaction between intervals and crops (Table-3). A growing trend in honey bee population of linseed pollens was recorded i.e. 1.37 ± 0.10, 1.33 ± 0.18, 1.78 ± 0.39, 1.35 ± 0.12 and 1.34 ± 0.12 bees per plant, when observations were recorded on 26th, 27th, 28th, 29th and 30th March, 2010, respectively. In the later stage (first week of April, 2010) the dynamics of honey bees visiting linseed pollens got a moderate trend of stability, but remained relatively lower, where 1.20 ± 0.24, 1.20 ± 0.24, 1.30 ± 0.22, 1.12 ± 0.25, 1.29 ± 0.34 and 1.12 ± 0.25 bees per plant were found visiting linseed crop as pollinators, respectively.

There was a stable trend of honey bee visiting population on linseed throughout the observation period (from 12th March to 5th April, 2010) and population did not achieve a certain peak level during the experimental period. Once the population reached at highest, next day it showed a declined number visiting the linseed plants. However, on average relatively population dynamics of honey bee was higher during first 15 days as compared to later part of the observation period. In addition to this, the analysis of difference variance has been shown in Table.5).

Table-3. Population of honey bees / plant as pollinators on linseed.

Date of Obs RI RII RIII RIV Mean ± SED12.03.10 2.00 0.0 1.33 1.66 1.24 ± 0.89 13.03.10 1.50 2.50 2.50 1.00 1.87 ± 0.75 14.03.10 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 ± 0.57 15.03.10 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.25 ± 0.50 16.03.10 1.50 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.29 ± 0.20 17.03.10 1.33 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.83 ± 0.8818.03.10 1.33 1.25 1.00 2.00 1.22 ± 0.15 19.03.10 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.40 1.35 ± 0.47 20.03.10 1.50 1.00 1.40 2.00 1.47 ± 0.41 21.03.10 1.50 1.00 1.40 2.00 1.47 ± 0.41 22.03.10 1.33 3.00 1.00 1.33 1.66 ± 0.90 23.03.10 1.50 1.33 1.33 2.00 1.54 ± 0.3124.03.10 1.20 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.13 ± 0.16 25.03.10 1.00 1.66 1.00 1.00 1.16 ± 0.33 26.03.10 1.25 1.33 1.50 1.40 1.37 ± 0.10 27.03.10 1.20 1.20 1.60 1.33 1.33 ± 0.18 28.03.10 1.40 1.75 2.33 1.66 1.78 ± 0.39 29.03.10 1.50 1.33 1.40 1.20 1.35 ± 0.1230.03.10 1.33 1.33 1.20 1.50 1.34 ± 0.12 31.03.10 1.33 1.00 1.20 1.50 1.20 ± 0.24 01.04.10 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.20 ± 0.24 02.04.10 1.33 1.55 1.33 1.33 1.30 ± 0.22 03.04.10 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.12 ±0.25 04.04.10 1.50 1.00 1.66 1.00 1.29 ± 0.34 05.04.10 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.12 ± 0.25

Average 1.36±0.26 1.42±0.65 1.37±0.43 1. 35±0.35 1.37 ± 0.21

Studies on population dynamic of Apis florea on linseed and safflower from Sindh 15

Temperature vs. honeybee population

It was noted that on safflower crop, there was a negative and non-significant (P>0.05) correlation (-0.381) between temperature and honeybee population, which indicated that with increasing temperature, there would be a slight reduction in the population of bees on safflower. Similar trend of correlation coefficient was recorded for linseed crop, where also negative and non-significant correlation (-0.325) between temperature and population buildup was noted. This obviously suggested that in case of both the crops under study, the rise in temperature caused a slight reduction in the honey been population buildup.

Relative humidity vs. honeybee population

Positive but non-significant (P>0.05) correlation (0.313) between relative humidity and honey been population was noted on safflower. This suggested that with increasing relative humidity, the honey been on safflower was slightly increased. In case of linseed crop, similar trend of correlation was recorded and honey bee population was non-significantly but positively correlated (0.118) with relative humidity. The results suggested that on linseed crop also, the increasing relative humidity caused to increase honey bee population slightly.

Table-4. Correlation coefficient of environmental factors with honey bee population.

Correlating factors Correlation coefficient

Probability

Temperature vs. Population (Safflower) -0.381 0.060 Relative Humidity vs. Population (Safflower) 0.313 0.127 Temperature vs. Population (Linseed) -0.325 0.112 Relative Humidity vs. Population (Linseed) 0.118 0.575

Table-5. Showing the analysis of variance.

Source of variation

D.F S.S M.S F. Value Remarks

Replications 3 0.18751 0.062 0.3234 - Obs. Intervals (I) 24 8.754 0.365 1.8911 * Error (I) 72 13.887 0.193 - - Crops (C) 1 2.604 2.604 116.1184 ** Error (C) 3 0.067 0.022 - - I X C 24 3.907 0.163 0.8651 NS Error (I X C) 72 13.548 0.188 - - Total 199 42.953 - - -

*Significant at 0.05 probability level, **Significant at 0.01 probability level, NS Non-Significant.

DISCUSSION

The study of pollination dynamic brings together many disciplines, such as botany, horticulture, entomology, and ecology (Chen et al., 2006). Honey bees are one of the most important and effective pollinator of various field crops. Honey bees travel from flower to flower, collecting nectar (later converted to honey), and pollen grains. The bee collects the pollen by rubbing against the anthers. Thus the management techniques of a beekeeper providing pollination services are different from, and somewhat incompatible with, those of a beekeeper who is trying to produce honey (Dafni et al. 2005). No linear trend of honey bee population was observed throughout the season and fluctuation was seen even during the peak flowering days of safflower.

However, on average relatively population dynamics of honey bee was higher during first 15 days as compared to later part of the observation period. These results have been supported by Mattu et al., (2001), who

carried out pollen analyses on honey bee collected from 10 areas of Kashmir at different altitudes and with different climates; 5 of the honeys were shown to be unifloral and 5 multifloral. Of the 37 pollen types identified, the following were dominant in the honeys of one or more areas: Plectranthus, Salix, Rumex, Brassica, safflower, linseed, Salvia and Artemisia. From the results, and also a survey of nectar sources, a list of 68 major bee forage species or genera is given, with flowering period, importance as a source of nectar and/or pollen, and economic uses. Moreover, the correlation studies suggested a non-significant but negative correlation between temperature and honey bee population was noted, while a non-significant but positive correlation between relative humidity and population was recorded on both the crops.

Stanghellini (2001) concluded that the effectiveness of Apis mellifera in the pollination of safflower at the individual bee level (as opposed to the colony level) under typical field conditions and concluded that bumble bees might serve as a back-up or alternative pollinator to

Solangi et al. 16

honey bees for safflower. Faeg and Mouwetch (2004) reported that safflower Carthamus tinctorius was pollinated by honey bees showed that bee activity was higher in the morning (when stigmas are more receptive) if hives were placed at the northern end of the tunnels, seed yields were also higher than when hives were located at the southern end. Similarly, Sim et al. (2003) conducted experiments in net houses, pollinating safflower cultivars, grown with or without honeybees Apis mellifera. The number of pods/plant and the podding ratio were higher with than without bees, especially for Paldalkong and Dankyeongkong, while the number of seeds/pod was not affected. Yield increased by up to 12% with bees, with the highest increases in Paldalkong and Dankyeongkong. Considerable research on this aspect has also been reported by a number of workers round the world. Chand et al. (2000) from India found that honey bees were the popular pollinators of different oilseed crops including safflower, while Wilde and Krukowski (2000) from Poland concluded that honey production was similar during three years. However, pollination of Carthamus tinctorius and Linum usitatissimum was poor. Kumar et al., (2003) counted bee visits on plots of flowering toria, Apis mellifera made 59% of all visits and it was most efficient pollinator, followed by Andrena ilerda. In a similar study in Germany, Burgett (2001) reported that honey bees were the most efficient pollinating agents in oilseeds including safflower and brassica species, while, Mamood et al. (2001) reported that honey bee Apis mellifera pollination had significant effects on seed quantity and quality in oilseeds including safflower and linseed and bees were observed foraging on the flowers most actively between 10.00 and 13.00 hours, with a peak at 11.00 hours.

Greatti et al., (2003) reported that the pollen spectrum of 7 safflower honeys was dominated (43-90% of pollen contents). Kumar et al. (2003) found that the foraging periods of pollen collectors and nectar collectors of each species was from morning to afternoon, later the population was decreased considerably. Kunin (2003) argued that the number of individuals in a population had no effect on pollinator visitation or subsequent seed set. Population density, however, had strong effects on both visitation and reproductive success. The position of a plant within a population had an impact on pollinator constancy in the second experiment, but had no effect on visitation rates or reproductive success. The above discussion clearly showed that honey bee population for safflower pollination is generally higher in the morning time and up to afternoon, later in the evening the population is reduced considerably.

REFERENCES AIBS (2006). Native insect pollination saves the United

States agricultural pollination management. The American Institute of Biological Sciences, Bioscience. 56 (4): 315-317.

BURGETT, M. 2001. Pacific Northwest honey bee pollination survey. Amer. Bee. J. 6 (4): 432-434.

CHAND, H., SINGH, R. AND HAMEED, S.F. (2000). Population dynamics of honeybees and insect pollinators on Indian mustard, Brassica juncea L.J. Ent. Res. (3): 233-239.

CHEN, J.M., WANG, L. AND THOMPSON, L.U. (2006). Flaxseed and its components reduce metastasis after surgical excision of solid human breast tumor in nude mice. Cancer Letters, 234, pp. 168-175.

DAFNI, A., PETER, K.G. AND BRIAN, C. (2005). Practical Pollination Biology. Enviroquest, Ltd., pp. 1-6.

FAEG, A. AND MOUWETCH, D. (2004). The influence of hive location on honeybee foraging activity and seed production in Safflower Carthamus tinctorius grown in plastic greenhouses. Apidologie, 6 (5): 11-19.

GREATTI, M., IOB, M. AND ZORATTI, M.L. (2003). Beekeeping interest of Amorpha fruticosa L. and pollen spectrum of its honey produced in Friuli. Ape-Nostra-Amica, 18 (1): 6-11.

KUMAR, R., CHAUDHARY, O.P. AND LENIN, J.K. (2003). Studies on the foraging behavior of Honeybees and their role as pollinators of sunflower Helianthus annuus L.. Ind. Bee J. 6 (4): 103-108.

KUNIN, W.E. (2003). Population size and density effects in pollination: pollinator foraging and plant reproductive success in experimental arrays of Brassica kaber. J. Eco. Oxford, 85 (2): 225-234.

MAMOOD, A.N., RAY, D.T., ERICKSON, E.H. AND PRINCEN, L.H. (2001). Pollination by insects and seed quantity and quality in oilseeds. Association for the Advancement of Industrial Crops; USA, pp. 377-379.

MATTU, V.K., DEVI, M. AND MATTU, N. (2001). Pollen spectrum of some honeys of Kashmir (India) as determinant of honey bee forage. Ind.-Bee-J. 56 (3-4): 132-141.

SIM, Y., CHOI, Y., SIM, Y.G. AND CHOI, Y.E. (2003). Influence of honeybee pollination on Carthamus tinctorius yield and yield components. Kor. J. Appl. Ent. 32 (3): 271-278.

STANGHELLINI, M.S. (2001). The effect of bee type and bee visit number in the pollination of safflower. North Carolina State University, Raleigh; USA, Bdo, pp. 147.

WIKIPEDIA (2007). Safflower, Linseed. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation. Inc. 1-5.

WILDE, J. AND KRUKOWSKI, R. (2000). Field crops as a source of nectar flow for honey bee colonies. Acta Academies Agriculture Technicae Olstenensis, Zootechnica, 43: 105-114.



SEASONAL OCCURRENCE OF PHENACOCCUS SOLENOPSIS TINSLEY

(HEMIPTERA: PSEUDOCOCCIDAE) AND ITS NATURAL ENEMIES ON DIFFERENT VARIETIES OF COTTON CROP

HAKIM ALI SAHITO*i, ABDUL GHANI LANJAR*, ASHFAQUE AHMED NAHIYOON**, ABDUL SAMAD KHAJJAK**, SHAFIQUE AHMED MEMON*** AND BHUGRO MAL*

*Department of Entomology, Sindh Agriculture University, Tando Jam, Sindh.

**Center of Agriculture and Bio-science, International (CABI) South Asia. ***Faculty of Crop and Plant Sciences, Lasbela University of Agriculture, Water & Marine Sciences,

Uthal Balochistan, *1 (Part of Ph.D. thesis of first author) (Received for publication: 27.01.2011)

ABSTRACT

The studies on “Seasonal Occurrence of Phenacoccus Solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) and its Natural Enemies on Different Varieties of Cotton Crop” was conducted at Experimental Field, Entomology Section, A.R.I, Tandojam from May to November 2008. Fifteen varieties of cotton crop viz. Cris-134, Chandi, FH-901, CIM-473, CIM-499, Shahbaz, TH-57/96, NIAB-111, CIM-496, Hari dost, Okra leaf, Sindh-1, NIAB-78, Bt. and Okra desi were cultivated in a Complete Randomized Block Design with 4 replications.

The results of studies showed that mealybug appeared on all varieties of cotton crop. The occurrence of Phenacoccus solenopsis was recorded one month after sowing (8 June 2008) till harvesting (14 October) of the varieties. The analysis of variance showed highly significant (P<0.001) difference in the population of mealybug on the varieties. The peak populations were recorded on 8 June 2008, (8.80±2.73 on TH-57/96), 23 June (43.20±14.41 on NIAB-111), 7 July (57.00±20.49 on Cris-134), 21 July (20.40±5.13 on Bt.), 5 August (36.00±6.63 on Sindh-1) and 18 August (72.60±24.37 also on Sindh-1), 3 September (148.30±33.98 on F-H. 901), 17 September (141.10±30.50 on Chandi), 30 September (189.10±78.14 on NIAB-78) and 14 October (42.40±14.88 on Okra desi). However, the highest overall mean population (62.34±24.72) was recorded on variety NIAB-78 whereas, the lowest mean population (7.47±3.19) on Okra leaf, respectively. Whereas, the predators peak populations were recorded on 8 June 2008, (1.60±0.67 on CIM-496), 23-June (3.20±0.88 on NIAB-111), 7 July (5.20±2.08 on Sindh-1), 21 July (5.10±1.47 on Shahbaz), on 5 August (5.50±2.32 on Bt.), 18 August (6.80±1.63 on F-H.901), 3 September (12.20±4.16 on Okra desi), 17 September (16.60±5.31 on NIAB-78), 30 September (21.30±11.73 on NIAB-78) and 14 October (25.70±3.88 on NIAB-78). However, the highest overall mean population (8.44±2.30) was recorded on variety F-H. 901 whereas, the lowest mean population (3.02±1.18) on TH-57/96 were recorded, respectively. Whereas; the highest mummies population percentage was recorded on CIM-473 (67.55)% followed by Okra leaf (62.55)%, Hari-Dost (59.09)%, Shahbaz (57.96)%, Cris-134 (56.52)%, CIM-499 (56.36)%, F-H. 901 (48.02)%, NIAB-111 (47.38)%, Bt. (45.70)%, Chandi (45.07)%, Okra-Desi (44.89)%, NIAB-78 (44.18)%, Sindh-1 (43.59)%, TH-57/96 (37.59)% and CIM-496 (30.97)% during , 2008 respectively. In the field the predators were found active feeding on mealybug population on all varieties. The mummified (3rd) instar mealybugs were collected that were never observed before August-2008, indicating that parasitoids were present under unsprayed field condition. This hymenopteran encyrtid parasitoid was identified as Aenasius sp. nov. nr. longiscapus Compere through the help of MINFA project from the Natural History Museum in London, UK. Therefore, parasitism percentage was observed. Further; this study is described that it is important to take immediate actions to control this vigorous pest through the help of biological control.

Key words: Cotton varieties, Phenacoccus solenopsis, Mummies, Aenasius, Predators.

INTRODUCTION

Agriculture plays a pivotal role in the economy of Pakistan. It contributes about 24% to national GDP and employs 44% of the total labor force. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) is the main cash crop and is known as “White Gold”. It plays a significant role in the economy of Pakistan which contributes 8.5% of GDP in agriculture sector and about 60% of foreign exchange earnings and fulfills 64% of our edible oil

requirements (Anonymous, 2007). Pakistan is the fourth largest producer of cotton after China, the USA and India (Abro et al., 2004). It is used in textile as well as oil industries and earns foreign exchange through export in shape of raw cotton, cotton yarn, cloth, garments and other cotton made products. It makes about 80% of national edible oil production (Agha, 1994). It is one of the major crops cultivated for its fiber since ancient times, which is as old as

Sahito et al. 18

3000 BC and accounts as world’s most important fiber crop (Agarwal et al., 1984). Now, it is grown in over 70 countries in the world (Parmar and Ramchandran, 1992).

Its low yield is attributed to the damage caused by insect pests and their improper management. (Wu, 1986). The eruption of mealy bug as sucking insect pest on cotton and other plants in Pakistan was first recorded at Vehari Agriculture Farm, Pakistan. It has now spread throughout the cotton growing areas that has adversely affected cotton yield for last 3 years. In 2006, it was seen in epidemic form at Multan, Bahawalpur, Vehari and Khanewal. Cotton yield suffered a severe setback due to the attack of this insect reported in (The daily DAWN June 2, 2006). The situation in Sindh, due the attack of mealybug on cotton was even worse than in Punjab. Severe damage of mealybug was recorded first time on an area of about 3000 acres in Kot Ghulam Mohammad, Tando Allahyar, Tandojam, Mirpurkhas and Sanghar district in 2005 and 2006. Mealybugs are soft bodied insects belonging to family Pseudococcidae of order Hemiptera. About 5000 species of mealybug have been recorded from 246 families of plants throughout the world. Among these, 56 species have been reported from 15 genera of family Malvaceae, including cotton and many other plants of economic importance (Ben- Dov, 1994). A similar outbreak of mealy bug on cotton was also recorded in the areas of India (Muralidharan and Badaya, 2000), which is adjacent to Sindh. It is suspected that the dry season and suitable level of amino acids and proteins in the leaves may favour its infestation. Williams (1985) and Hanchinal, et al., (2010) described that P. solenopsis attacks on Bt. cotton in India. Bayer Crop Science was the first to identify this pest, as Phenococcus solenopsis Tinsley, in the country. Rehman (2006, 2007) and Sahito et al. (2010) described the biological and morphological study Phenacoccus solenopsis and development under laboratory environment.

The natural enemies associated with mealybug are recorded by various scientists in different situations Brumus saturalus, Menochilos sexmaculantus, Schymnus coccivora, S. saturalus, Chyroperla soperala carnae, Ceccodomid, Cryptolamus montozieri, Aenasius bambawalei etc. Chandrababu et al. (1999) reported Brumus saturalis as the most voracious predator on mealybugs. The larvae of C. carnae have a ferocious appetite for sucking insect pest. Saminathan and Bas Karan (1999). Sattar et al. (2007) the results revealed that C. carnae larvae were voracious feeder of mealy bugs. Many of the predators always showed their co-existence to their hosts in various agro-ecosystems (Shah and Baloch, 1999; Genesoylu and Yalc 2004). (Hayat, 2009) described that recently, an encyrtid parasitoid species on P. solenopsis has been

described as Aenasius bambawalei from India. (CABI, 2008) the agents are an insect with parasitic larvae (Anenasius sp.) and an Australian beetle, known as mealybug destroyer (Crypolaemus montrouzieri).

The tendency of damage caused by the mealybug to different crop varieties and association of natural enemies with it prompted to conducted the studies on “Seasonal Occurrence of Phenacoccus Solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) and its Natural Enemies on Different Varieties of Cotton Crop”. The output of the present studies will be utilized to formulate better IPM strategies against mealybug invasion to cotton crop.


A preliminary study was carried out in cotton season 2008. The 15 cotton varieties viz. (1) Cris-134, (2) Chandi, (3) FH-901, (4) CIM-473, (5) CIM-499, (6) Shahbaz, (7) TH-57/96, (8) NIAB-111, (9) CIM-496, (10) Hari-Dost, (11) Okra-Leaf, (12) Sindh-1, (13) NIAB-78, (14) Bt. and (15) Okra-Desi were cultivated on 29-April-2008 in a (RCBD) Randomized Complete Block Design with 4 replications.

The population count of the mealybug was made at fortnight intervals after appearance of pest till the end of the crop. As the pest develops its colony on the stems, branches, buds, new emerged flashes, mature and immature bolls and leaves. Therefore, a 5 cm. portion of stem and branches were selected randomly from 5 plants per varieties as sampling unit to count mealybug population. The mealybug population within 5 cm. area on stem and branches were counted. These units were marked and tagged with red cotton cloth ribbons to continue further observations till the end of the crop. This was done for each variety separately.

Similarly, predator population was counted on all varieties by examination 5 plants thoroughly and through 30 stocks of sweep net. The populations of different predators were combined and presented for each variety against mealybug. The populations of parasitoids were recorded through the mummies found on 5 cm. area of plant twigs. In this way, the parasitoids activities were recorded on each variety. Metrological record was also maintained during study period. The recommended cultural practices such as; irrigation, fertilizer, weeding, hoeing (except use of pesticides) were uniformly applied to all varieties. Finally the data encoding and statistical analysis were proficient using Statistics-8.1 the statistical software.

RESULTS

The results of studies showed that mealybug appeared on all varieties of cotton crop. The

Occurrence of P. solenopsis and its natural enemies on different varieties of cotton crops 19

occurrence of Phenacoccus solenopsis was recorded one month after sowing (8 June 2008) till harvesting (14-October) of the varieties. The analysis of variance showed highly significant (P<0.001) difference in the population of mealybug on the varieties.

The results of studies showed that mealybug appeared on all varieties of cotton crop. The occurrence of Phenacoccus solenopsis was recorded one month after sowing (8 June 2008) till harvesting (14 October) of the varieties. The analysis of variance showed highly significant (P<0.001) difference in the population of mealybug on the varieties. The peak populations were recorded on 8 June 2008, (8.80±2.73 on TH-57/96), 23 June (43.20±14.41 on NIAB-111), 7 July (57.00±20.49 on Cris-134), 21 July (20.40±5.13 on Bt.), 5 August (36.00±6.63 on Sindh-1) and 18 August (72.60±24.37 also on Sindh-1), 3 September (148.30±33.98 on F-H. 901), 17 September (141.10±30.50 on Chandi), 30 September (189.10±78.14 on NIAB-78) and 14 October (42.40±14.88 on Okra desi) (Table-1). However, the highest overall mean population (62.34±24.72) was recorded on variety NIAB-78 whereas, the lowest mean population (7.47±3.19) on Okra leaf, respectively.

The predators, namely; Brumus saturalus, Menochilus sexmaculatus, Scymnus sp., Geocorus sp., Chrysoperla carnae, spiders, and Ceccidomyiid were found active throughout the season. However, Brumus saturalus was the most active form June 8 to October 8, 2008 and found on all varieties. Whereas, the peak populations of the predators were recorded on 8 June 2008, (1.60±0.67 on CIM-496), 23-June (3.20±0.88 on NIAB-111), 7 July (5.20±2.08 on Sindh-1), 21 July (5.10±1.47 on Shahbaz), on 5 August (5.50±2.32 on Bt.), 18 August (6.80±1.63 on F-H.901), 3 September (12.20±4.16 on Okra desi), 17 September (16.60±5.31 on NIAB-78), 30 September (21.30±11.73 on NIAB-78) and 14 October (25.70±3.88 on NIAB-78) (Table-2). However, the highest overall mean population of predator (8.44±2.30) was recorded on variety F-H. 901 whereas, the lowest mean population was recorded as (3.02±1.18) on TH-57/96, respectively. Due to the attack of parasitoids, the mummies of adult mealybug were found on the plants.

The highest mummies population percentage of predator was recorded on CIM-473 (67.55)% followed by Okra leaf (62.55)%, Hari-Dost (59.09)%, Shahbaz (57.96)%, Cris-134 (56.52)%, CIM-499 (56.36)%, F-H. 901 (48.02)%, NIAB-111 (47.38)%, Bt. (45.70)%, Chandi (45.07)%, Okra-Desi (44.89)%, NIAB-78 (44.18)%, Sindh-1 (43.59)%, TH-57/96 (37.59)% and CIM-496 (30.97)% respectively. Analysis of variance showed highly significant difference in mealybug population development on

different phenological stages of crop growth (F=3.62; DF=367534; P>0.001). However, LSD shows non-significant difference in mealybug populations on different varieties of cotton crop and made 4 different groups therefore, the varieties i.e., the varieties Chandi and FH-901 in group (ABC). Similarly, the varieties Cris-134, Shahbaz TH 57/96, Sindh-1 and okra desi were grouped as (BCDE). Whereas, the varieties CIM-499 and NIAB-111 were placed in group (CDE). The mealybug was also non-significantly appeared on varieties CIM -437 and Hari dost as group (DE) (Table-3).

During the study, it was observed that the predators populations were positively significant with mealybug population appeared on the verities (Fig-1). Parasite populations were negatively correlated with mealybug (Fig-2). Similarly, negative correlation was also found between mealybug population and temperature (Fig-3) and positively correlated with humidity (Fig-4).

DISCUSSION

The results of the present studies showed that the mealybug appeared on all varieties of cotton crop with fluctuating population in summer season which ultimately lost the crop yield. The results are agreed with those of Fuchs et al., (1991) who reported this species commonly occurring cotton crop. Arif et al. (2009) reported mealybug as a polyphagous pest spread rapidly to all other cotton growing areas of the country and many other economically important plants similarly, Hodgson et al., (2008) and Sahito et al., (2009) they reported that duet to the attack of mealybug leaves become crinkled and twisted and condense the flower, buds, bolls growth and finally plant exploited along with shaggy look that may be affect the yield. The pest appeared one month after germination till its harvesting with its fluctuating population.

The result further show that, parasitoids and predators appeared synchronizing with pest populations, however, 3rd instar and adult were the most preferred stages. Maximum activities were recorded at later stage of crop. Gautam and Tesfaye (2002) found that the predatory potential of the predator was high in the older instars than the younger ones. The estimated handling time was somewhat lower for the third instar because of the higher prey consumption. The results further indicate that mealybug populations were negative correlated with temperature and positively correlated with humidity. As for as, predators and parasitoid populations are concerned, they were positively correlated with mealybug populations. Nordlund and Correa (1995) reported positive correlation between the predator and mealybug population.



Table- 1. Mealybug population on different cotton varieties cultivated at A.R.I, Tando jam during 2008. Varieties 8-June 23-June 7-July 21-July 5-August 18-August 3-Sept. 17-Sept. 30-Sept. 14-Oct.

Cris- 134 7.30± 2.07

32.7± 9.89

57.00± 20.49

5.30±1.87

15.60±6.03

14.50±6.03

6.40±2.54

8.60± 3.40

8.70± 4.17

16.80±8.85

Chandi 3.70± 1.03

15.00± 8.89

33.90± 14.48

12.10± 3.39

28.30± 5.57

24.30± 6.05

127.00± 46.34

141.10± 30.50

37.10± 12.52

19.30± 6.72

F-H. 901 4.50± 1.63

8.60± 3.21

30.70± 13.50

5.70± 1.65

22.80± 6.29

16.20± 4.38

148.30± 33.98

120.50± 45.87

43.10± 14.05

47.30± 11.18

CIM-473 4.10± 1.06

21.90± 10.31

17.30± 8.67

3.00±1.36

10.40±2.66

10.70±4.96

12.60±5.66

9.40± 4.64

10.10±4.86

13.10±4.21

CIM-499 6.40± 1.82

32.40± 11.13

44.90± 24.92

5.00±2.44

8.80±2.40

6.80±2.45

4.20±2.51

6.00± 3.34

18.20±8.62

3.40±1.37

Shahbaz 8.40± 2.02

9.20± 4.70

25.40± 13.76

10.50± 5.53

24.80± 8.45

16.70± 5.06

39.50± 28.24

36.70± 13.97

11.80± 4.60

10.70± 5.25

TH-57/96 8.80± 2.73

26.30± 9.71

47.00± 29.17

1.90± 0.78

6.70± 2.07

5.60± 1.83

46.30± 15.92

87.70± 34.57

30.70± 10.68

29.10± 8.77

NIAB-111 10.70± 3.32

43.20± 14.41

30.80± 15.96

6.90±2.21

9.20±2.62

6.60±2.32

6.00±3.53

7.00± 4.06

17.20±6.56

12.10±5.97

CIM-496 10.10± 3.71

19.70± 6.18

30.80± 9.57

15.90± 6.44

9.70± 3.42

64.10± 31.56

57.80± 42.56

93.80± 28.96

60.20± 23.56

33.00± 10.99

Hari- Dost

7.70± 2.13

19.20± 9.88

28.50± 11.70

13.60± 4.78

16.30± 6.80

14.30± 5.76

1.90± 1.04

2.70± 1.41

2.30± 1.27

3.20± 2.18

Okra leaf 10.80± 3.25

19.40± 6.58

23.10± 11.76

5.00± 1.59

3.40± 1.18

2.70± 1.15

2.60± 1.35

3.30± 2.60

0.90± 0.58

3.50± 1.82

Sindh-1 14.70± 2.75

21.90± 7.89

45.40± 15.52

13.20±4.03

36.00±6.63

72.60±24.37

31.40±17.43

15.00± 6.98

4.50± 2.02

0.70±0.42

NIAB-78 2.50± 0.85

24.30± 7.38

42.70± 15.07

11.30± 3.17

35.60± 17.14

60.40± 17.69

82.20± 50.88

150.30± 49.19

189.10± 78.14

25.00± 7.66

Bt. 4.80± 1.49

28.00± 6.87

39.30± 12.28

20.40± 5.13

13.30± 6.88

24.45± 18.70

40.30± 13.31

106.90± 41.15

155.50± 55.55

37.70± 12.01

Okra-Desi

5.40± 1.31

10.00± 3.43

19.20± 6.75

9.10± 2.99

1.40± 0.58

22.40± 12.12

76.00± 42.83

64.10± 14.21

49.00± 16.12

42.40± 14.88

Mean+ S.E

7.33± 2.08

22.12± 8.03

34.40± 14.91

9.26±3.16

16.15±5.25

24.16±9.63

45.50±20.54

56.87± 18.99

42.56±16.22

19.82±6.82

Table- 2. Predator’s population on different varieties of cotton crop during 2008.

Varieties 8-June 23-June 7-July 21-July 5-August 18-August 3-Sept. 17-Sept. 30-Sept. 14-Oct.

Cris 134 0.30± 0.24

3.10± 0.97

4.30± 0.96

2.80± 0.98

4.50± 0.90

6.10± 1.68

5.20± 3.04

9.60± 2.87

7.10± 4.03

12.40± 5.07

Chandi 0.20± 0.16

1.10± 0.46

2.30± 0.90

4.90±1.50

1.60±0.81

4.20±0.78

11.10±2.99

13.80± 4.19

15.90±5.55

8.30±4.74

F-H. 901 0.50± 0.22

0.50± 0.41

3.60± 1.35

2.90±0.94

2.90±0.82

6.80±1.63

9.30±2.55

15.50± 3.77

17.70±6.89

24.70±4.71

CIM-473 0.30± 0.17

1.30± 0.81

2.50± 1.39

3.20± 1.39

3.20± 0.83

5.20± 1.96

4.10± 1.21

11.80± 3.10

4.40± 1.28

12.80± 6.57

CIM-499 0.40± 0.22

0.80± 0.65

3.80± 2.46

4.40± 1.32

2.80± 1.21

6.70± 1.39

3.70± 1.27

4.30± 0.95

6.40± 4.01

9.10± 3.93

Shahbaz 0.50 ±0.41

0.30± 0.24

4.70± 0.90

5.10±1.47

3.50±1.12

2.20±0.74

3.40±1.39

14.50± 5.73

7.50± 5.67

3.60±1.31

TH-57/96 0.80± 0.45

1.20± 0.54

3.10± 1.29

2.30± 1.00

3.40± 1.34

2.50± 0.87

4.20± 1.20

7.20± 2.37

1.40± 0.61

4.10± 2.17

NIAB-111 1.40± 0.50

3.20± 0.88

2.80± 1.00

2.10± 0.86

2.10± 0.67

3.90± 1.07

5.30± 1.55

4.60± 1.74

9.80± 4.32

3.50± 2.42

CIM-496 1.60± 0.67

1.10± 0.45

3.70± 2.42

3.50± 1.45

4.40± 1.71

5.20± 1.11

3.60± 1.29

6.20± 1.99

9.80± 7.29

6.90± 4.84

Hari Dost 1.40± 0.53

2.10± 0.58

3.10± 1.11

4.40±1.85

5.30±1.30

4.20±1.22

5.10±1.93

13.50± 5.38

5.80± 4.03

9.40±7.32

Okra leaf 0.80± 0.50

1.50± 0.84

1.60± 0.90

2.20± 1.23

2.80± 1.20

2.20± 0.76

2.10± 0.74

2.10± 0.80

6.60± 4.86

8.90± 6.47

Sindh-1 2.10± 0.76

2.30± 1.07

5.20± 2.08

3.10± 1.71

5.40± 1.40

4.30± 1.28

2.30± 0.83

3.10± 2.53

4.30± 2.37

6.10± 2.39

NIAB-78 0.50± 0.22

1.50± 0.52

2.50± 1.21

4.80±1.17

4.70±1.63

1.10±0.41

3.30±2.43

16.60± 5.31

21.30±11.73

25.70±3.88

Bt. 0.80± 0.44

2.90± 0.90

5.20± 1.97

3.20±0.88

5.50±2.32

2.30±0.60

7.40±2.82

12.60± 3.96

19.10±7.02

24.50±4.28

Okra-Desi 1.20± 2.50± 2.70± 4.80± 3.80± 5.40± 12.20± 4.40± 6.40± 11.70±


0.70 1.12 0.88 1.60 1.16 1.34 4.16 1.60 3.10 3.59

Mean+ S.E

0.85± 0.41

1.69± 0.70

3.41± 1.39

3.58± 1.29

3.73± 1.23

4.15± 1.12

5.49± 1.92

9.32± 3.09

9.57± 4.85

11.45± 4.25

Sahito et al. 22

Table- 3. Overall mean population of mealybug pest, predators and mummies % during 2008. Varieties Mealybug Predators Mummies% Cris 134 17.29±6.53 bcde 5.54±2.08 56.52 Chandi 44.18±13.55 abc 6.34±2.21 45.07 F-H. 901 44.77±13.57 abc 8.44±2.30 48.02 CIM-473 11.26±4.84 de 4.88±1.87 67.55 CIM-499 13.61±6.10 cde 4.24±1.74 56.36 Shahbaz 19.37±9.16 bcde 4.53±1.90 57.96 TH-57/96 29.01±11.62 bcde 3.02±1.18 37.59 NIAB-111 14.97±6.10 cde 3.87±1.50 47.38 CIM-496 39.51±16.70 abcd 4.60±2.32 30.97 Hari Dost 10.97±4.70 de 5.43±2.52 59.09 Okra leaf 7.47±3.19 e 3.08±1.83 62.55 Sindh-1 25.54±8.80 bcde 3.82±1.64 43.59 NIAB-78 62.34±24.72 a 8.20±2.85 44.18 Bt. 47.07±17.34 ab 8.35±2.52 45.70 Okra-Desi 29.90±11.52 bcde 5.51±1.93 44.89 Mean + S.E 27.82±10.56 5.32±2.02 49.83%

LSD shows the non significant difference among all varieties (P>0.001).

Y=3.05075+0.08170 x (r2=0.555**)

Figure 1.


Y=61.0168+0.40222 x (r2=0.448**)

Figure 2.

Y=37.7686+0.08000 x (r2=0.0354 ns

Figure 3.

Sahito et al. 24

Some predators like Brumus spp., Menochilus spp., Orius spp., Geocoris spp., Chrysoperla spp., Ants and Aenasius sp. adult and huge numbers of mummies were recorded on all different varieties. Beside of this, mealybug mummies were also observed in the last months of the crop. Buckley and Gullan (1991) described ants provide better protection to mealybug for its mutualism. Kamath et al., (2001) described about C. carnae larvae feeds on both stages of (nymph and adult) of mealybug. During the study the samples of mummies were sent to CABI, South Asia for proper identification (Bodlah et al. 2010). This Hymenopteran encyrtid parasitoid was identified as Aenasius sp. nov. nr. longiscapus Compared by CABI through the Natural History Museum in London, UK. Further the results are agreed with (CCRI, 2007) that this encyrtid parasitoid has been multiplied and released in cotton belt of the Punjab and Sind provinces through different bio control laboratories established in collaboration with the Ministry of Food Agriculture & Livestock (MINFAL) project by CABI. Further, reported that (Anenasius sp.) is outstanding potential to reduce the P. solenopsis population in cotton crop. Bodlah et al. (2010) who also recorded the Aenasius bambawalei first time mummified on Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley, the collection was done not only from cotton crop but also from other

weeds in Punjab, Pakistan. (Saini et al. 2009; Anon., 2009) reported as It has many alternative hosts viz., sunflower, vegetables, weeds, ornamentals etc.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Cordially gratitude is owing to the scientific staff

and trained acquaintances particularly, Project Manager; Riaz Mahmood from CABI, South Asia, (Bio-control specialist) who engaged the technical staff in the project and scrupulous help is due to their valuable suggestions and good management during this research.

REFERENCES ABRO, G.H., SYED, T.S., TNUIO, G.M. AND KHURO, M.A.

(2004). Performance of transgenic Bt cotton against insect pest infestation. Biotechnol., 3: 75–81.

AGARWAL, R.A., GUPTA, G.P. AND GARG, D.O. (1984). Cotton pest management in India. Research Publications, Delhi.

AGHA, H.K. (1994) Crop Production. Published by Pakistan Book foundation, Islamabad. Pp. 6.

ANONYMOUS (2007). 2006/07 Annual Report Agricultural Statistics of Pakistan, Statistic division, Federal Bureau of Statistics, Ministry of Economic affair and Statistics Govt. of Pak. Islamabad, Pakistan.

ANONYMOUS (2009), Host range of mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley. Cotton + Pigeon pea

Figure 4.

Y=132.706+1.40101 x (r2=0.0435*)


cropping system of central India. In Proc. of Nation. Symp. on Bt-cotton: Opportunities and Prospectus, Central Institute of Cotton Research, Nagpur, November 17-19, pp.150.

ARIF, M.I., RAFIQ, M. AND GHAFFAR, A. (2009). Host plants of cotton mealybug (Phenacoccus solenopsis): a new menace to cotton agro ecosystem of Punjab, Pakistan. Int. J. Agric. Biol., 11: 163-167.

BEN-DOV, Y. (1994). A Systematic Catalogue of the Mealybugs of the World, p: 686. Intercept Limited, UK.

BODLAH, I., AHMAD, M., NASIR, M.F. AND NAEEM, M. (2010) Record of Aenasius bambawalei Hayat, 2009 (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae), a Parasitoid of Phenacoccus solenopsis (Sternorrhyncha: Pseudococcidae) from Punjab, Pakistan. Deptt: of Entomology, Arid Agriculture University Rawalpindi, Pakistan. Pakistan J. Zool. 42 (5): 533-536.

BUCKLEY, R. AND GULLAN, P. (1991). More aggressive ant species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) provide better protection for soft scales and mealybugs (Homoptera: Coccidae, Pseudococcidae). Biotropica, 23: 282-286.

CABI, 2008. http://www.cabi.org/datapage.asp?iDocID=1237.

CENTRAL COTTON RESEARCH INSTITUTE (2007). Annual Research Report, Pakistan Central Cotton Committee, 67-69 pp.

CHANDRABABU, A., GAUTAM, R.D AND GARG, A.K. (1999). Biology of ladybird beetle, Brumoides suturalis (Fabricius) on aphid and mealybugs. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences. 7(1): 13-18.

FUCHS, T.W., STEWART, J.W., MINZENMAYER, R. AND ROSE, M. (1991). First record of Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley in cultivated cotton in the United States. Southwestern Entomologist. 16(3): 215-221.

GAUTAM, R.D. AND TESFAYE, A. (2002). Potential of green lacewing, Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens) in crop pest management. New Agriculturist, 13 (1/2): 147-158.

GENCSOYLU, I. AND YALC (2004). The effect of different tillage systems on cotton pests and predators in cotton fields: Asian J. Plant Sci. 3 (1): 39-44.

HANCHINAL S.G., PATIL, B.V., BHEEMANNA, M. AND HOSAMANI, A.C. (2010). Population dynamics of mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley and it's natural enemies on Bt. Cotton. Karnataka J. Agric. Sci., 23(1): (137-139).

HAYAT, M. (2009). Description of a new species of Aenasius Walker (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae), parasitoid of the mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae) in India. Biosystematica, 3: 21-26.

HODGSON, C., ABBAS, G., ARIF, M.J., SAEED, S. AND KARAR, H. (2008). Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Sternorrhyncha: Coccoidea: Pseudococcidae), an invasive mealybug damaging cotton in Pakistan and India, with a discussion on seasonal morphological variation. Zootaxa, 1913: 1–35.

KAMATH, S.P., HUGAR, P.S. AND GOUD, K.B. (2001). Predatory efficiency of green lacewing, Chrysoperla carnea Stephens (Neuroptera:Chrysopidae). Karnataka J. Agric. Sci., 14 (2):483-484.

MURALIDHARAN, C.M. AND BADAYA, S.N. (2000). Mealy bug (Maconellicoccus hirsutus) (Pseudococcidae: Hemiptera) out break on herbaceum cotton (Gossypium herbaceum) in Wagad cotton belt of Kachchh. Indian J. Agri Sci, 70 (10): 705-706.

NORDLUND, D.A. AND CORREA, J.A. (1995). Improvements in the production system for green lacewings: An adult feeding and ovipositional unit and hot wire egg harvesting system. Biol. Contr., 5: 179-185.

PARMAR, K.S. AND RAMACHANDRAN, K. (1992). Cotton growing and marketing in India. TECOYA TREND in assoc. with All India Federation of Co -operative Spg. Mills.

REHMAN, S. (2006). Cotton mealy bug, identification, biology and control strategies; Training Bayer Sales Team, June 15, 2006, Multan.

REHMAN, S. (2007). A seminar on cotton mealy bug control, under the chairmanship of Minister of Agriculture (Punjab), at Bahawalpur, April 2007.

SAHITO, H.A., ABRO, G.H., KHUHRO, R.D. AND BURIRO, A.S. (2009) Varietal Resistance of Cotton Crop against Mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley. Pak. Jr., Agri., Agri. Engg., Vet. Sci., 25(1):34-38.

SAHITO, H.A., ABRO, G.H., KHURO, R.D., LANJAR, A.G. AND MAHMOOD, R. (2010). Biological and morphological studies of cotton mealybug Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) development under laboratory environment. Pak. J. entomol. Karachi. 25 (2):131-141.

SAINI, R.K., PALARAM SHARMA, S.S. AND ROHILLA, H.R. (2009). Mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley and its survival in cotton ecosystem in Haryana In : Proc. Nation. Symp. On Bt-cotton:Opportunities and Prospectus, Central Institute of Cotton Research, Nagpur, November 17-19, pp150.

SAMINATHAN, V.R. AND BASKARAN, R.K.M. (1999). Biology and predatory potential of green lacewing, Chrysoperla carnea (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) on different insect hosts. Indian J. Agri Sci., 69 (7): 502-505.

SATTAR, M., HAMED, M. AND NADEEM, S. (2007) predatory potential of Chrysoperla carnea (stephens) (Neuropter:chrysopidae agaist cotton mealybug. NIA and Biology (NIAB). Pak. Entomol. 29 (2): 103.

SHAH, S.G.S. AND BALOCH, A.A. (1999). Cotton agro-ecosystem studies in relation to population dynamics of insect pests and their natural enemies on cotton crop of central Sindh. Sindh Balochistan. J. Plant Sci. 1 (2): 26-40.

WILLIAMS, D.J. (1985). Australian Mealy bugs. British Museum (Natural History), London. p. 431.

WU, Q.L. (1986). Investigations of fluctuation of dominant natural enemy populations in different cotton habitats and integrated application with biological agents to control cotton pests. Natural Enemies of Insects, 8 (1): 29-34.



SEASONAL POPULATION ABUNDANCE OF COTTON MEALYBUG, PHENACOCCUS SOLENOPSIS TINSLEY (HEMIPTERA:

PSEUDOCOCCIDAE) AND ITS NATURAL ENEMIES ON VARIOUS HOSTS PLANTS

HAKIM ALI SAHITO*1, GHUMLAM HUSSAIN ABRO*, TAHWER SULTANA SAYED*, ABDUL GHANI LANJAR*, BHUGRO MAL* AND ABDUL SAMMAD KHAJJAK**

*Department of Entomology, Sindh Agriculture University, Tando Jam, Sindh. **Center of Agriculture and Bio-science (CABI) South Asia.*1. (Part of Ph.D. work of first author)


ABSTRACT

The experiment on “Seasonal population abundance of cotton mealybug, Phenacoccuss solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) and its natural enemies on various hosts” was conducted at experimental field, Entomological Section, A.R.I, Tando jam in summer and winter seasons of 2007-08,. The summer hosts were: NIAB-78, okra, brinjal, China rose, abutilon and itsit, while winter hosts were: tomato, potato, chilies, sunflower, thorn apple and rough cocklebur. The data was compiled for two years that is 2007-8.

Results indicated that P. Solenopsis appeared on all hosts of summer and winter as well. The analysis of variance showed significant (P<0.05) difference in the population of mealybug on the varieties. However, the overall means showed that the maximum population of mealybug (130.13±25.68) 10 cm. per twig/plant was recorded on China rose followed by abutilon (123.75±22.56), cotton (119.95±27.99), brinjal (57.01±14.03), okra (38.26±10.88), and itsit (35.09±9.58) in summer season. However, during winter / off season rough cocklebur (70.83±6.13) followed by thorn apple (69.24±5.92), sunflower (60.65±6.99), chilies (48.19±6.66), potato (34.30±4.47) and tomato (32.83±6.45). Whereas; predator population per plant observed on China rose (21.75±4.49), followed by abutilon (20.09±3.39), cotton (15.69±3.40), itsit (10.36±3.18), okra, (6.44±2.11) and brinjal (6.26±1.75) in summer. However, in winter rough cocklebur (28.59±3.44) followed by thorn apple (27.36±3.10), sunflower (24.59±2.91), chilies (18.41±2.99), tomato (14.94±2.79) and potato (14.71±2.07) respectively. However, the 1st time mummies of P. solenopsis were found after 1st attack 2005 in the month of August-2008. Therefore, the parasitism percentage was continued on cotton with various host plants. Thus, the samples of mummies and adult parasitoid were sent to CABI, South Asia and identified as (hymenopteran encyrtid) parasitoid Aenasius sp. nov. nr. longiscapus Compere through the help of MINFA project from the Natural History Museum in London, UK. Therefore, the Anasius bambawalei parasitoid population observed on cotton (12.85) % followed by China rose (8.57)%, abutilon (6.79)%, Brinjal (4.28)%, okra, (1.36)%, and itsit (1.08)% with (30.17) temperature and (72.10) relative humidity. Whereas on thorn apple (5.20) % followed sunflower (4.46) %, rough cocklebur (2.24)%, tomato (1.21)%, chilies (0.91)% and potato (0.81)% with (18.81) temperature and (65.13) relative humidity during 2008-09, respectively. The predators population observed in both years on all hosts however parasitoid population observed from August, 2008-09. The predators such as Coccinellids spp., Chrysoperla sp. spiders, Geocoris sp., Orius sp. and ants were found active when the mealybug populations were predominant on cotton and alternate hosts. More than 60 host plants are identified with ornamental, vegetables and weeds from different locations of Sindh.

Key words: Cotton, various hosts, P. solenopsis, Aenasius bombawalei and Predators.

INTRODUCTION

The country of Pakistan is the 4th largest producer of cotton after China, the USA and India. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) is the main cash crop and is known as white gold by Abro et al. (2004). Cotton crop pestilence was recorded from 11 out of the 18 cotton growing areas covering 45,000 sq. km (Anonymous, 2005). Bt. and non Bt. varieties suffered by cotton mealybug approximately; (US 121.4 million dollars) used on pesticides to reduce

this epidemic pest in Punjab only within 2 months during 2007 Dutt (2007). Since 2005, the cotton mealybug has been recorded a serious pest of cotton Gosspium hirsutum (Muhammad, 2007; Abbas et al. 2007 and Hodgson et al. 2008). Destruction caused to the cotton crop, different various ornamental plants and vegetables, encouraging the study of predators and parasitoids. Thus the present study was conducted on “Seasonal Population Abundance of Cotton Mealybug, Phenacoccus Solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera:

Sahito et al. 26

Pseudococcidae) and its Natural Enemies on Various Hosts”. The productivity of the present study will be utilized to originate healthier IPM strategies against this forceful pest of cotton crop and various host plants. ICAC Recorder (2008) included 22 plant species as its host plants. Chris, et al. (2008), also Arif, et al. (2009) observed 22 host plants during 2006-07 in a rounding area of Faisalabad. Maximum damage was on (Hibiscus chinensis) and (Abelmoschus esculentus). Aheer et al. (2009) and Ben-Dov et al. (2009) reported 35 localities of various ecological zones of the globe.

An apparently un-described species of Phenacoccus (Sternorrhyncha: Coccioidea: Pseudococcidae) was found a severe pest of cotton in Punjab and Sindh Provinces. The outbreaks have been recorded in most of the cotton growing regions of Pakistan, namely; Bahawalpur, Dera Ghazi Khan, Faisalabad, Layyah, Lodhran, Multan, Muzaffar Garh, Rajanpur, Toba Tek Sing, Khanewal, Rahimyar Khan, Bahawalnagar, Vehari, Jhang, Okara, Kasur, Lahore, Rawalpindi and Tando Allahyar, Mirpur Khas, Nawab Shah, Sanghar, Thatta, Badin in Sindh to Karachi. Abbas et al., (2005, 2010).


The cotton crop variety NIAB-78 was cultivated on 5-5-2007 with surrounding alternate hosts viz. okra, brinjal, china rose, abutilon and itsit in summer season. The cotton crop was kept continue till winter season. The other winter crops viz. tomato, potato, chilies, sunflower, dhaturo/thorn apple and rough cocklebur from different location of Tandojam, Sindh were also kept under observation as winter alternate hosts.

The population count of cotton mealy bug was made on weekly basis. For this purpose the leaves, stems, buds, flowers, and new flashes were examined from 25 randomly selected plants. These plants were tagged with red cotton ribbon for further observations. The adult female with visible 3rd instar / crawler of the mealybug was counted 10 cm. per twig / plant with association of mummies on all host plants. Similarly, the predator populations were counted / plant on the same selected plants. Besides hand net strokes were also played for counting predator population. The population trend and abundance of mealybug and its natural enemies in both seasons were recorded. Some predators were encapsulated to endorse their feeding on mealybug in the Laboratory at Entomological Section, ARI. Tandojam Sindh. Predator species were sent to CABI, South Asia for proper identification. The metrological data were maintained throughout the year. The means also were compared and grouped.

Finally, the data was analyzed through statistically package, Statistics – 8.1.

RESULTS

The result of experiment shows that mealybug occurred on cotton and other alternate hosts. The mealybug appeared on cotton in month of May (in both the year 2007 and 2008) i.e. after two months of cultivation and remained till harvest of the crop. On other seasonal alternate hosts it appeared from germination till harvesting. Whereas, on perennial hosts it appeared throughout the years. The analysis of variance showed significant (P<0.05) difference in the population of mealybug on the varieties.

Initially, the mealybug appeared in small numbers on all hosts then the population was continuously increasing from first week of July and its 1st peak observed in third week of September, 2nd peak in third week of October afterward it started decreasing till the absolute harvest of cotton crop. The predator population increased with similar fashion, the 1st peak was recorded in 4th week of September and 2nd peak in second week of October whereas on okra the peaks in the mealybug population were recorded in the last week of September and in third week of October, respectively. Predator population was much synchronized with mealybug population. Thus, the same trend of predator population was recorded on okra (Fig.1).

The mealybug appeared in very small numbers on brinjal which later on increased continuously. However, the 1st peak was observed in last week of September and 2nd peak in third week of October. The predator activities went very positively with mealybug population on brinjal. The maximum activities were recorded twice i.e. during first week of September and 2nd peak in last week of October, respectively. On China rose the population of mealybug was observed fluctuating around the year with condition of survival of plants. However, the 1st peak was observed in third week of September, the 2nd peak in first week of October and 3rd peak in third week of October, respectively the population of predator was much synchronized with mealybug population on China rose plants. The maximum populations of predators were recorded twice in the third week of July and 2nd peak in last week of September, respectively (Fig. 2).

Mealybug population remained higher on perennial abutilon plant among all cultivated alternate hosts appeared from starting of July reached at 1st peak observed in first week of September, 2nd peak in first October and 3rd peak in third week of October afterward it started

Seasonal population abundance of cotton mealybug and its natural enemies on various hosts 27

decreasing. Minor predator population observed from preliminary and 1st peak observed in last week of October. Whereas, Itsit / winter cherry is the weed of cotton crop and grown naturally and kept for checking the population trend of mealybug and predators in the field. Low attack of mealybug observed from July to August and increased from first week of September and reached its 1st peak in first week of October and 2nd peak in last week of October respectively. Abundant predator activity observed from starting therefore, the 1st peak in second week of September and 2nd peak occurred in third week of October, 2007. (Fig. 3)

After the cultivation of cotton crop the mealybug attack observed in July and continuously increased and reached at 1st peak in third week of September, 2nd peak in third week of October afterwards it started decreasing only 2 peak populations were observed throughout year in 2008. Predator activity observed from beginning to escalating population with the 1st peak in last week of September and 2nd peak in last week of October. Whereas, the minor attack with mealybug on okra crop observed in starting of second week of July thus the 1st peak observed in last week of September and 2nd peak in third week of October then went beyond decrease till harvest of crop. Where the predator population observed in lower numbers and slowly reached at 1st peak in third week of September respectively (Fig. 4).

In the second week of August, the first attack of mealybug appeared on brinjal, the 1st peak observed in the last week of September and 2nd peak in third week of October. Whereas, the predator population observed in rare case but the 1st peak observed in the 2nd week of September and 2nd peak in third week of October so far. The previous year (perennial) cultivated China rose plants had low attack that flared up in the third week of August and the 1st peak observed in third week of September while, the 2nd peak in first week of October and 3rd peak in third week of October, respectively (Fig. 5).

The perennial abutilon previous year attacked plants had low density population of mealybug in starting turned into sever infestation and reached at 1st peak in first week of September, 2nd peak in first week of October and 3rd peak in third week of October. While, the predators activity remained high comparatively to pest that showed 1st peak in last week of August and 2nd peak in third week of October. In the scenario of itsit weed, the population remained negligible some time increased and some time decreased. Its 1st peak observed in the fourth week of September and 2nd peak in second week of October. Same wise, predator remained fluctuated in population and 1st peak observed in first week of

October and 2nd peak in third week of October (Fig. 6).

Over all mean population abundance in summer 2007 and 2008

However, the overall means showed that the maximum mean population of mealybug was recorded on China rose (130.13±25.68) on 10 cm. / twig followed by abutilon (123.75±22.56), cotton (119.95±27.99), brinjal (57.01±14.03), okra (38.26±10.88), and itsit (35.09±9.58) (Table-1). The overall maximum mean population of predators observed on China rose (21.75±4.49) followed by abutilon (20.09±3.39), cotton (15.69±3.40), itsit (10.36±3.18), okra (6.44±2.11) and brinjal (6.26±1.75) respectively (Table- 2). Whereas, the mummies of P. solenopsis were found 1st time in 2008, the collected samples from various hosts were sent to the CABI, South Asia, which was identified as Aenasius bombawalei (Encyrtidae: Hymenoptera) through the Natural History Museum in London, UK. This was the most dominant parasitoid of P. solenopsiss on cotton and alternate hosts where mealybug found. This parasitoid was parasitizing on 3rd instar of the mealybug. The mummies were found in the month of August, 2008 till the harvest of all crops. The maximum parasitism percentage observed (12.85) on cotton followed by okra, (1.36), brinjal (4.28), China rose (8.57), abutilon (6.79) and itsit (1.08) (30.17) temperature and (72.10) relative humidity respectively (Table- 3).

Distribution, Hosts and Population trend of Phenacoccus solenopsis (Tinsley) and predators in winter / off season

The result of experiment shows that mealybug occurred on cotton off season in winter on various host plants. When the mealybug infestation appeared the data was taken in the month of December (in both the year 2007 and 2008) from surrounding of SAU and ARI. Tandojam, Sindh from various hosts, vegetables, weeds and ornamental plants from germination till harvest in their respective seasons.

Primitively, mealybug established their colonies on tomato in December, 2007 gradually increased population and reached at the 1st peak in the third week of February afterwards decreased. Whereas, the predator increased by population reached at 1st peak in the first week of March and continuously increased till the harvest of the crop. Whereas, in the condition of mealybug on potato crop simultaneously increased and 1st peak observed in first week of January, 2nd peak in last week of February and 3rd peak in last week of March. Hence, predator population synchronized continuously and 1st peak observed in first week of January, 2nd peak in third

Sahito et al. 28

week of February and suddenly it decreased and then increased respectively (Fig.7).

The mealybug appeared on chilies from starting of December in minor attack but the 1st peak observed in last week of February towards to first week of March. Thus, the predator 1st peak observed in second week of March afterwards increased. Whereas, mealybug on sunflower observed in low numbers throughout winter season, the 1st peak observed in last week of December 2nd peak in last week of February. The synchronization of predator continuously increased from beginning to end therefore, the 1st peak observed in second week of February afterwards it increased so far (Fig. 8).

Consequently, the mealybug remained on Dhatura from first week of December with low density attack but 1st peak observed in second week of February. The predators observed in increasing temperament therefore, the 1st peak observed in first week of March then started in increasing state, whereas, in circumstances of rough cocklebur / xanthium the mealybug observed in minor compactness from starting of December. The 1st peak observed in second week of February afterwards in decreasing. The predator population appeared continuously increased from beginning thus, the 1st peak observed in last week of February and 2nd peak in third week of March respectively (Fig. 9).

In the beginning, the mealybug observed in low infestation on tomato crop after it increased in last week of December and reached at 1st peak occurred in last week of January after remained same but the 2nd peak observed in second week of March. Whereas, predator population remained in fluctuation some time it increased and some time decreased but in last week of January it highly increased after turned up into decrease the fore, the 1st peak observed in last week of March. Same wise, on potato the mealybug observed with minor attack in December. Then, it went in increasing state and reached at 2 peaks observed in the second and last week of February afterwards decreased slowly. From beginning the predator activity increased therefore, the 1st peak observed in second week of February and 2nd peak in third week of March respectively (Fig. 10).

The mealybug population on chilies observed in December with low attack till the January, the 1st peak observed in the third week of January and 2nd peak in second week of February. Whereas, predators observed in enlarging population from starting therefore, the 1st peak observed in third week of January and 2nd peak in third week of February afterwards went into decrease. Hence, the mealybug population on sunflower in December with

low density occurred but in month of January the pest increased and reached at 1st peak in first week of February respectively. In predator situation, there was same condition as pest appearance when the mealybug population reached at peak the predator population got same condition. Therefore, the 1st peak observed in first week of February and 2nd peak in third week of March (Fig. 11).

Population of the mealybug on Dhatura observed with 1st peak in first week of January and 2nd peak in last week of February afterwards decreased. Thus, predator activity observed in low population in starting but the 1st peak observed in first week of January and 2nd peak in first week of March afterwards suddenly decreased. Whereas, mealybug on rough cocklebur / xanthium observed in starting of December therefore, the 1st peak observed in last week of December and 2nd peak in third week of February. From first week of December predators observed in increasing and pest pressure remained under control. Further, the 1st peak observed in first week of March afterwards it observed decreasing till last week of March (Fig. 12).

Population abundance during winter/off season, 2007-08

However, during winter season 2007-08, the overall means showed that maximum mean population of mealybug (10 cm. per twig / plant) was recorded on rough cocklebur (Xanthium) (70.83±6.13) followed by dhatura (69.24±5.92), sunflower (60.65±6.99), chilies (48.19±6.66), potato (34.30±4.47) and tomato (32.83±6.45) (Table-4). Whereas; predator population observed on rough cocklebur (Xanthium) (28.59±3.44) followed by dhatura (27.36±3.10), sunflower (24.59±2.91), chilies (18.41±2.99), tomato (14.94±2.79) and potato (14.71±2.07) respectively (Table-5). Whereas, mummies population was observed on dhatura (5.20)% followed by sunflower (4.46)%, rough cocklebur (2.24)%, tomato (1.21)%, chilies (0.91)% and potato (0.81)% with (18.81) temperature and (65.13) relative humidity, respectively (Table-6).

In present experiment, it was observed that none of the cotton plant and alternate hosts had demonstrated any resistance against mealybug mostly the plants were completely destroyed by the attack of mealybug in this 5 acres experimental field in summer and winter / off seasons. However, fluctuation in the mealybug adult, crawlers and predator population were recorded throughout cotton season with time as well as alternate host wise. It showed difference in mealybug, predators and parasitoids population on cotton, alternate hosts with temperature and humidity. In the field 6 hosts i.e. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Malvaceae, Okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L.) Malvaceae, Brinjal


(Solanum melongena) Solancea, China rose (Hibiscus rosa-sinensis L.) Malvaceae, Velvet leaf / abutilon (abutilon theophrasti Medik) Malvaceae and Itsit / Winter cherry (Withana somnifera L.) Solanaceae were cultivated in cotton / summer season to check the population fluctuation trend. After harvest of cotton, adjoining areas of Tandojam were visited during November to March for presence of mealybug on different hosts. The mealybug continued to survive on different host plants during winter / off season. All stages of mealybug were also observed on different host plants in the field. The mating behavior and crawlers dispersing in abundant population were seen in a curly and folded leaves, buds and fruits of different hosts i.e. Tomato (Lycopercium asculents) Solanaceae, Potato (Solanum Tuberosum) Solanaceae, Chilies (Capsivum annum) Cucurbitaceae, Sunflower (Helianthus annus) Compositeae, Dhatoro / thorn apple (Dhatura alba / Dhatura stramonium L.) Solanaceae and Rough cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium L.) Asteraceae. Analysis of variance showed significant difference in population of mealybug during the years 2007-08, (DF= 1, F=4.40; P<0.05). Whereas, the population of the mealybug highly significant varied on summer hosts (DF=5, F=24.84, P<0.01) and between the winter hosts a well (DF=5, F=23.72, P<0.01). Whereas, the LSD shows the significant difference (P<0.05) in mealybug populations occurred on different alternate hosts during 2007-08.

DISCUSSIONS

The results of the present studies showed that cotton mealybug Phenacoccus solenopsis, appeared on cotton and adjoining alternate host plants. Sometimes infestation was so severe which ultimately caused death of some plants. The results are in agreement with those of Ghouri (1960) who described mealybugs, Ferrisia virgata Ckll. as major pest on cotton in Pakistan in sixty’s. However, Fuchs, et al. (1991) recorded P. solenopsis on cotton crop 1st time in United States.

Ben-Dov (1994) recorded the same species of mealybug on other Malvaceous plants i.e. Abutilon, Gossypium, Hibiscus and Malvastrum. Akintola and Ande (2008) specified P. solenopsis on Hibiscus rosa-sinensis 1st time in Nigeria.

Saini et al. (2009 and Anon. (2009) reported P. solenopsis on many host plants such as sunflower, vegetables, weeds and ornamental plants. Arif et al. (2009) reported that P. solenopsis is a serious threat to 154 field crops belonging to the Malvaceae, Solanaceae, Asteraceae, Euphorbiaceae, Amaranthaceae and Cucurbitaceae families.

They observed economical damage on cotton, brinjal, okra, tomato, sesame, sunflower and China rose, whereas in present work predators (natural enemies of mealybugs are reported.

Sahito et al. (2010) carried out morphological and biological studies of P. solenopsis on cotton crop. The present result indicates that the mealybug found in summer and winter season as well on all host plants along with off season cotton. Wang et al. (2009) reported mealybug as a serious and potential threat in to many crops around the year in China. Hodgson et al. (2008) reported the same situation in Pakistan. Similarly, Sahito et al. (2009) described that cotton mealybug P. solenopsis damage all kind of the cotton varieties and also affect the cotton yield.

During present study, the predators namely; Brumus saturalus, Menochilus sexmaculatus, Scymnus sp., Geocorus sp., Chrysoperla carnia, Ceccidomyiid and some species of spiders were observed active against the mealybug on cotton crop and other alternate hosts in summer and winter seasons of 2007 and 2008, respectively. Whereas, the mummies of adult mealybug by parasitoid, A. bambawalei were recorded in both the seasons of 2008 only. The population of predators and numbers of mummified mealybug were recorded positively in correlation with mealybug population.

Results of the present study are agreed with Kamath et al. (2001) who observed on Chrysoperla carnea larvae feeds on both stages of mealybug. CCRI (2007) reported that the NEFR release the parasitoid A. bambawalei in cotton fields in Sindh and Punjab provinces of Pakistan gave a satisfactory result. Hayat (2009) described as Aenasius bambawalei on P. solenopsis from India. Bodlah et al. (2010) recorded A. bambawalei naturally occurring on P. solenopsis first time on cotton and some weeds in Punjab, Pakistan.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The financial assistance from Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Federal Government of Pakistan for conducting the present studies is sincerely acknowledged. I thank Dr. A.S. Burriro (Director General & Entomologist ARI, T.J.) and Mr. R. Mahmood (CABI, South Asia), for providing space at ARI, Tandojam and assist in conducting this study. Also specially thank Prof. Dr. G.A. Abro (Chairman Department of Entomology) and Prof. Dr. S. Din Tunio (Dean Department of Agronomy) for identifying alternate hosts, ornamental plants, weeds and their consistent encouragement and support during the study.

Sahito et al. 30

Fig. 1-6. Mealybug population on cotton and surrounded alternate hosts cultivated at ARI, Tandojam during summer seasons, 2007-08.

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

1-Jul -2 -3 -4

1-Aug -2 -3 -4

1-Sep -2 -3 -4

1-Oct -2 -3 -4

1. Weeks and months during, 2007

Mea

lybu

g / t

wig

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

Pred

ator

s / p

lant

CottonOkraCotton Okra

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

1-Jul -2 -3 -4

1-Aug -2 -3 -4

1-Sep -2 -3 -4

1-Oct -2 -3 -4

2. Weeks and months

Mea

lybu

g / t

wig

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Pre

dato

rs /

plan

t

BrinjalCh. RoseBrinjalCh. Rose

Figure 1.

Figure 2.


0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

180.0

1-Jul -2 -3 -4

1-Aug -2 -3 -4

1-Sep -2 -3 -4

1-Oct -2 -3 -4

3. Weeks and months

Mea

lybu

g / t

wig

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Pre

dato

rs /

plan

t

AbutilonItsitAbutilonItsit

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

1-Jul -2 -3 -4

1-Aug -2 -3 -4

1-Sep -2 -3 -4

1-Oct -2 -3 -4


Mea

lybu

g / t

wig

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

Pre

dato

rs /

plan

t

CottonOkraCotton Okra

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Sahito et al. 32

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

1-Jul -2 -3 -4

1-Aug -2 -3 -4

1-Sep -2 -3 -4

1-Oct -2 -3 -4

5. Weeks and months

Mea

lybu

g / t

wig

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

Pred

ator

s / p

lant

BrinjalCh. RoseBrinjalCh. Rose

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

1-Jul -2 -3 -4

1-Aug -2 -3 -4

1-Sep -2 -3 -4

1-Oct -2 -3 -4

6. Weeks and months

Mea

lybu

g / t

wig

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

Pre

dato

rs /

plan

t

AbutilanItsitAbutilonItsit

Figure 5.

Figure 6.


Table-1. Mealybug population in summer seasons during 2007-08.

Date Cotton Okra Brinjal Ch. Rose Abutilon Itsit Average

July- 1 20.10±6.80 8.20±2.62 3.50±1.16 12.70±9.14 11.60±2.99 6.70±1.79 10.47±4.08

- 2 40.00±16.76 22.20±8.90 7.20±3.37 18.50±12.60 28.70±10.92 14.10±5.79 21.78±9.72

- 3 22.10±9.08 21.20±4.74 3.90±1.43 19.20±13.63 20.90±7.02 5.20±1.69 15.42±6.27

- 4 31.90±10.60 1.80±0.66 4.90±1.44 24.50±19.01 30.70±7.14 11.70±5.12 17.58±7.33

Aug - 1 30.30±16.00 9.60±3.53 23.50±16.57 47.20±14.91 40.60±12.30 12.60±3.59 27.30±11.15

- 2 38.50±11.47 21.30±4.51 12.80±5.35 83.40±55.45 65.00±17.39 11.00±2.16 38.67±15.75

- 3 64.30±20.77 19.60±5.91 13.90±3.52 95.80±20.33 86.40±22.18 16.70±3.86 49.45±13.06

- 4 99.90±24.86 26.70±6.25 28.70±5.35 120.70±16.24 136.50±23.64 22.10±4.28 72.43±13.44

Sep - 1 120.10±29.49 34.90±9.02 49.70±10.05 174.50±51.44 143.70±27.95 28.90±6.30 91.97±22.38

- 2 214.60±58.26 41.80±11.81 72.20±27.85 200.20±32.26 116.50±26.85 47.70±11.06 115.50±28.02

- 3 175.20±36.13 42.40±13.42 79.20±27.64 158.70±21.06 150.50±26.84 56.30±12.42 110.38±22.92

- 4 217.50±40.24 80.50±35.88 83.70±21.27 192.60±34.86 209.00±37.03 54.10±16.02 139.57±30.88

Oct- 1 148.10±27.95 47.50±11.01 70.60±11.18 241.50±34.82 258.50±40.24 80.20±15.93 141.07±23.52

- 2 171.50±29.98 72.90±17.10 132.70±27.63 207.50±28.68 236.00±37.03 81.20±17.26 150.30±26.28

- 3 270.50±53.12 88.80±18.18 185.00±30.13 249.20±19.47 269.50±32.18 91.70±20.44 192.45±28.92

- 4 254.60±56.25 72.70±20.61 140.70±30.49 235.80±26.92 175.90±29.18 21.30±25.52 150.17±31.50

Average 119.95±27.99a 38.26±10.88b 57.01±14.03b 130.13±25.68a 123.75±22.56a 35.09±9.58b 84.03±18.45

Table-2. Predator population in summer seasons during 2007-08.


July- 1 2.30±0.84 1.70±0.73 0.80±0.40 2.70±0.73 3.20±0.75 1.90±0.92 2.10±0.73

- 2 3.50±1.27 2.90±0.79 1.30±0.67 4.60±1.21 5.70±1.68 3.40±1.39 3.57±1.17

- 3 2.00±0.39 2.80±0.64 0.90±0.23 4.10±1.44 4.30±0.84 5.40±2.11 3.25±0.94

- 4 2.70±0.64 1.20±0.41 0.90±0.35 6.30±1.37 7.40±1.13 6.80±2.71 4.22±1.10

Aug - 1 4.00±0.98 1.40±0.56 1.90±0.57 8.80±2.26 6.40±1.50 5.60±1.84 4.68±1.29

- 2 7.00±2.08 3.20±0.58 1.90±0.67 13.00±3.97 15.40±3.90 6.70±1.82 7.87±2.17

- 3 9.10±2.07 2.70±0.84 2.70±0.83 17.20±5.08 18.10±3.51 6.10±1.82 9.32±2.36

- 4 11.40±2.99 5.10±2.04 3.20±1.12 20.30±5.08 20.60±2.94 11.20±2.59 11.97±2.79

Sep - 1 13.20±2.68 6.20±1.65 8.40±1.86 31.20±6.81 22.00±4.77 9.00±1.97 15.00±3.29

- 2 21.70±4.38 11.50±2.02 7.10±2.14 33.60±7.06 24.50±3.98 9.50±3.13 17.98±3.79

- 3 18.90±5.28 7.00±2.14 5.30±1.99 22.60±6.86 25.20±5.12 8.20±2.24 14.53±3.94

- 4 37.40±8.20 8.80±6.95 6.70±2.23 25.30±7.34 27.80±4.99 13.10±3.98 19.85±5.62

Oct- 1 23.30±4.77 6.80±2.38 9.80±2.72 40.00±6.63 31.60±5.22 16.80±6.17 21.38±4.65

- 2 18.70±5.66 10.00±2.93 11.20±4.78 26.30±6.15 29.10±4.46 13.10±2.62 18.07±4.43

- 3 36.60±6.00 16.50±4.58 19.10±3.54 42.90±4.33 40.80±4.40 27.70±6.74 30.60±4.93

- 4 39.30±6.16 15.30±4.49 19.00±3.90 49.10±5.54 39.40±5.06 21.20±8.78 30.55±5.66

Average 15.69±3.40 6.44±2.11 6.26±1.75 21.75±4.49 20.09±3.39 10.36±3.18 13.43±3.05

Sahito et al. 34

Table-3. Mummies % population on alternate hosts in summer season during 2008.


July- 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

- 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

- 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

- 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Aug - 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

- 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

- 3 3.14 0.00 0.00 1.15 0.00 0.11 0.73

- 4 6.73 0.00 0.39 1.53 0.00 0.24 1.48

Sep - 1 9.18 0.00 0.89 8.02 2.99 0.37 3.58

- 2 20.63 0.24 3.19 12.01 2.95 0.84 6.64

- 3 21.84 0.80 4.59 11.42 7.20 1.40 7.88

- 4 25.89 1.95 5.91 14.77 14.36 1.20 10.68

Oct- 1 22.03 2.29 7.33 19.95 20.37 2.36 12.39

- 2 14.31 4.12 13.07 19.67 19.77 3.33 12.38

- 3 33.17 6.93 18.22 23.32 23.21 3.97 18.14

- 4 48.60 5.38 14.89 25.32 17.75 3.52 19.24

Average 12.85 1.36 4.28 8.57 6.79 1.08 5.82

Fig. 7-12. Mealybug population alternate hosts found at Tandojam during winter / off seasons, 2007-08.

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

Dec- 1 02 03 04

Jan-

1 0 2 03 04

Feb- 1 02 03 04

Mar- 1 02 03 04

1. Weeks during winter, 2007

Mea

lybu

g / t

wig

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

Pre

dato

rs /

plan

t

TomatoPotatoTomatoPotato

Figure 7.


0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

Dec- 1 02 03 04

Jan-

1 0 2 03 04

Feb- 1 02 03 04

Mar- 1 02 03 04

2. Weeks and months

Mea

lybu

g / t

wig

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Pred

ator

s / p

lant

ChilliesSunflowerChilliesSunflower

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

Dec- 1 02 03 04

Jan-

1 0 2 03 04

Feb-

1 02 03 04

Mar- 1 02 03 04

3. Weeks and months

Mea

lybu

g / t

wig

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Pre

dato

rs /

plan

t

DhaturaXanthiumDhaturaXanthium

Figure 8.

Figure 9.

Sahito et al. 36

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

Dec- 1 02 03 04

Jan-

1 0 2 03 04

Feb- 1 02 03 04

Mar- 1 02 03 04


Mea

lybu

g / t

wig

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

Pred

ator

s / p

lant

TomatoPotatoTomatoPotato

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.0

100.0

Dec- 1 02 03 04

Jan-

1 0 2 03 04

Feb- 1 02 03 04

Mar- 1 02 03 04

5. Weeks and months

Mea

lybu

g / t

wig

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

Pred

ator

s / p

lant

ChilliesSunflowerChilliesSunflower

Figure 10.

Figure 11.


0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Dec- 1 02 03 04

Jan-

1 0 2 03 04

Feb- 1 02 03 04

Mar- 1 02 03 04

6. Weeks and months

Mea

lybu

g / t

wig

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

Pred

ator

s / p

lant

DhaturaXanthiumDhaturaXanthium

Table-4. Mealybug population in winter seasons during 2007-08.

Date Tomato Potato Chilies Sunflower Dhatura Xanthium Average

Dec- 1 9.20±1.65 9.00±2.33 16.90±2.60 11.30±1.77 19.60±2.22 23.20±2.81 14.87±2.23

- 2 15.20±2.78 8.00±1.77 21.90±3.39 17.80±2.64 23.30±1.90 34.80±3.84 20.17±2.72

- 3 14.30±3.11 16.30±3.90 25.90±3.46 22.60±3.93 28.00±2.32 34.00±3.70 23.52±3.40

- 4 19.60±4.58 22.10±3.54 28.10±3.33 37.60±7.62 37.40±5.33 51.10±5.24 32.65±4.94

Jan- 1 28.70±7.86 33.70±4.48 32.10±3.81 59.00±8.75 87.60±8.08 47.60±5.50 48.12±6.41

- 2 32.60±7.14 31.30±3.02 43.70±6.91 75.70±7.12 72.70±7.05 58.80±7.36 52.47±6.43

- 3 42.50±8.52 35.70±3.00 57.90±7.22 89.80±6.09 85.80±7.78 71.40±7.69 63.85±6.72

- 4 47.20±7.21 40.90±4.54 47.70±8.14 102.20±5.66 102.30±9.49 88.50±7.49 71.47±7.09

Feb- 1 39.10±7.32 46.80±5.86 69.00±7.81 106.70±6.72 99.40±7.19 99.50±6.63 76.75±6.92

- 2 44.00±7.36 51.40±5.87 73.10±11.18 85.40±9.54 129.20±7.14 118.80±9.35 83.65±8.41

- 3 49.40±7.34 55.80±5.37 73.80±9.49 80.30±9.86 123.70±7.44 120.80±6.16 83.97±7.61

- 4 43.50±6.86 57.30±5.88 73.60±8.49 82.00±11.67 120.60±8.77 119.30±4.71 82.72±7.73

Mar- 1 40.50±6.85 41.50±7.48 66.00±7.89 70.40±9.93 70.90±7.87 91.10±9.02 63.40±8.18

- 2 38.10±6.52 31.70±5.69 55.20±7.07 62.80±10.31 53.90±4.19 67.10±7.16 51.47±6.82

- 3 32.70±7.04 32.10±4.85 43.50±8.43 38.20±6.21 33.20±5.41 57.80±6.52 39.58±6.41

- 4 28.70±11.08 35.20±3.99 42.70±7.30 28.60±4.08 20.20±2.62 49.50±4.91 34.15±5.66

Average 32.83±6.45d 34.30±4.47d 48.19±6.66c 60.65±6.99b 69.24±5.92ab 70.83±6.13a 52.67±6.11

Figure 12.

Sahito et al. 38

Table-5. Predators population in both winter seasons during 2007-08.

Date Tomato Potato Chilies Sunflower Dhatura Xanthium Average Dec- 1 3.00±0.87 1.80±0.82 6.10±1.39 3.50±1.07 4.20±1.44 5.40±1.03 4.00±1.10

- 2 4.60±1.11 3.90±0.90 8.30±1.82 6.30±1.49 5.20±1.19 9.80±1.11 6.35±1.27

- 3 7.30±2.19 6.00±1.38 8.10±1.71 7.50±1.55 8.30±1.37 12.10±2.22 8.22±1.74

- 4 7.90±2.96 10.00±1.84 7.20±1.20 12.10±2.14 13.30±2.07 11.20±1.49 10.28±1.95

Jan- 1 11.90±4.40 14.40±2.81 8.70±1.43 21.60±2.91 28.20±3.40 15.30±2.66 16.68±2.94

- 2 13.80±4.40 13.30±1.91 12.90±2.33 25.90±2.90 30.30±3.25 16.80±2.18 18.83±2.83

- 3 15.80±4.44 13.70±2.05 18.90±2.29 36.60±4.89 20.60±2.36 21.70±2.29 21.22±3.05

- 4 18.30±4.29 16.30±2.35 18.50±2.72 41.70±4.47 29.20±4.30 29.40±3.81 25.57±3.66

Feb- 1 15.10±2.18 19.70±2.08 23.20±3.66 43.30±4.44 35.50±4.20 33.60±4.04 28.40±3.43

- 2 16.20±2.34 20.70±2.03 26.10±5.06 31.00±2.25 41.00±3.97 38.90±4.69 28.98±3.39

- 3 19.00±3.22 20.90±2.66 29.30±4.09 29.90±3.09 48.90±4.42 46.30±5.21 32.38±3.78

- 4 20.90±2.92 19.20±2.85 24.40±4.68 29.20±3.22 32.90±3.09 50.70±4.94 29.55±3.62

Mar- 1 22.70±2.70 15.50±2.21 25.90±3.62 25.50±2.49 54.30±4.34 46.00±3.80 31.65±3.19

- 2 19.10±2.62 20.50±2.27 26.60±3.87 25.20±2.98 24.10±3.11 44.20±4.47 26.62±3.22

- 3 20.20±2.50 20.10±2.29 24.00±3.96 30.40±3.83 32.80±3.83 47.40±4.80 29.15±3.53

- 4 23.20±1.45 19.40±2.63 26.40±3.99 23.70±2.87 29.00±3.25 28.70±6.29 25.07±3.42

Average 14.94±2.79 14.71±2.07 18.41±2.99 24.59±2.91 27.36±3.10 28.59±3.44 21.43±2.88

Table-6. Mummies % population on alternate hosts in winter season during 2008-9.

Date Tomato Potato Chilies Sunflower Dhatura Xanthium Average Dec- 1 0.20 0.05 0.34 2.88 4.92 1.71 1.68

- 2 0.41 0.18 0.78 4.05 5.65 2.74 2.30

- 3 1.11 0.45 0.33 2.43 7.05 3.01 2.40

- 4 0.37 0.42 0.26 3.07 6.40 4.00 2.42

Jan- 1 0.29 0.16 0.21 4.35 10.70 2.53 3.04

- 2 0.31 0.28 0.27 2.53 6.32 1.30 1.84

- 3 0.86 0.60 0.70 1.13 5.65 0.77 1.62

- 4 0.31 0.63 1.06 1.00 3.99 1.35 1.39

Feb- 1 0.43 0.43 1.05 2.67 2.56 1.74 1.48

- 2 0.68 1.09 2.23 3.55 4.34 2.18 2.35

- 3 0.86 0.89 1.79 3.62 5.34 2.50 2.50

- 4 1.30 2.04 2.33 6.99 4.17 2.20 3.17

Mar- 1 2.15 0.75 1.80 7.79 4.16 2.55 3.20

- 2 1.96 0.64 0.77 9.34 4.19 2.50 3.23

- 3 2.96 2.10 0.23 8.03 3.51 2.80 3.27

- 4 5.10 2.17 0.38 7.95 4.17 1.99 3.63

Average 1.21 0.81 0.91 4.46 5.20 2.24 2.47


REFERENCES ABBAS, G., ARIF, M.J. AND SAEED, S. (2005).

Systematic status of a new species of the genus Phenacoccus Cockerell (Pseudococcidae), a serious pest of cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L., in Pakistan. Pakistan Entomol., 27: 83–84.

ABBAS, G., ARIF, M.J., ASHFAQ, M., ASLAM, M. AND SAEED, S. (2010). Host plants, distribution and overwintering of cotton mealybug (Phenacoccus Solenopsis; hemiptera: pseudococcidae). Int. J. Agric. Biol., 12: 421–425.

ABBAS, G., ARIF, M.J., SAEED, S. AND KARAR, H. (2007). Increasing Menace of a New Mealybug Phenacoccus Gossypiphilous to the Economic Crops of Southern Asia, p: 30. In Abstr. XI Int. Symp. on Scale Insect Studies (ISSIS), 24-27 Sept. 2007, Oeiras, Portugal.

ABRO, G.H., SYED, T.S., TNUIO, G.M. AND KHURO, M.A. (2004). Performance of transgenic Bt cotton against insect pest infestation. Biotechnol., 3: 75–81.

AHEER G.M., SHAH, Z. AND SAEED, M. (2009). Seasonal History and Biology of Cotton Mealy Bug, Phenacoccus Solenopsis Tinsley. J. Agric. Res., 2009, 47(4): 423-431.

AKINTOLA, A.J. AND ANDE, A.T. (2008). First Record of Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) on Hibiscus rosa-sinensis in Nigeria. Agri. Jr. Medwell Jr., Pak. 3(1): 1-3.

ANONYMOUS (2005). Weekly Pest Scouting Reports. Directorate General, Pest Warning and Quality Control of Pesticides, Punjab. Official Reports for the months August to September, 2005.

ANONYMOUS (2009). Host range of mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley. Cotton + Pigeon pea cropping system of central India. In Proc. of Nation. Symp. on Bt-cotton:Opportunities and Prospectus,Central Institute of Cotton Research, Nagpur, November 17-19, pp.150

ARIF, M.I., RAFIQ, M. AND GHAFFAR, A. (2009). Host plants of cotton mealybug (Phenacoccus solenopsis): a new menace to cotton agro ecosystem of Punjab. Int. J. Agric. Biol., 11: 163–167.

BEN-DOV, Y. (1994). A Systematic Catalogue of the Mealybugs of the World, p: 686. Intercept Limited, UK.

BEN-DOV, Y., MILLER, D.R. AND GIBSON, G.A.P. (2009). Scale Net: A Searchable Information System on Scale Insects. Available on-line at http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/scalenet/scalenet.htm. Accessed 8 August 2009.

BODLAH, I., AHMAD, M., NASIR, M.F. AND NAEEM, M. (2010) Record of Aenasius bambawalei Hayat, 2009 (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae), a Parasitoid of Phenacoccus solenopsis (Sternorrhyncha: Pseudococcidae) from Punjab, Pakistan. Deptt: of Entomology, Arid Agriculture University Rawalpindi, Pakistan. Pakistan J. Zool. 42 (5): 533-536.

CENTRAL COTTON RESEARCH INSTITUTE (2007). Annual Research Report, Pakistan Central Cotton Committee, 67-69 pp.

CHRIS, H., ABBAS, G., ARIF, M.J., SAEED, SH. AND KARAR, H. (2008), Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Sternorrhyncha: Coccoidea: Pseudococcidae), an invasive mealybug damaging cotton in Pakistan and India, with a discussion on seasonal morphological variation. Zootaxa, 1913: 1-35.

DUTT, U. (2007). Mealy bug infestation in Punjab: Bt. cotton falls flat. Online article at http:/www.countercurrents. org/dutt210807. htm. 7th July, 2007.

FUCHS, T.W., STEWART, J.W., MINZENMAYER, R. AND ROSE, M. (1991). First record of Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley in cultivated cotton in the United States. Southwestern Entomol., 16: 215–221.

GHOURI, A.S.K. (1960). Insect Pests of Pakistan, FAO Technical Bulletin No. 8, FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Far East, Bangkok, Thailand, p: 30.

HAYAT, M. (2009). Description of a new species of Aenasius Walker (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae), parasitoid of the mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae) in India. Biosystematica, 3: 21-26.

HODGSON, C.J., ABBAS, G., ARIF, M.J., SAEED, S. AND KARAR, H. (2008). Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Sternorrhyncha: Coccoidea: Pseudococcidae), a new invasive species attacking cotton in Pakistan and India, with a discussion on seasonal morphological variation. Zootaxa, 1913: 1–33.

ICAC RECORDER (2008). Mealy Bug: A New Threat to Cotton Production in Pakistan and India, Vol. 25, pp: 15–19. A review article shared by International Cotton Advisory Committee

Sahito et al. 40

(ICAC), Technical Information Section, June, 2008.

KAMATH, S.P., HUGAR, P.S. AND GOUD, K.B. (2001). Predatory efficiency of green lacewing, Chrysoperla carnea Stephens (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). Karnataka J. Agric. Sci., 14 (2): 483-484.

MUHAMMAD, A. (2007). Mealybug: Cotton Crop’s Worst Catastrophe. Centre for Agro-Informatics Research (CAIR), Pakistan. Available on-line at http://agroict.org/pdf_news/Mealybug.pdf accessed Jul. 2008 (verified 27 May 2009).

NAGRARE, V.S., KRANTHI, S., BIRADAR, V.K., ZADE, N.N., SANGODE, V., KAKDE, G., SHUKLA, R.M., SHIVARE, D., KHADI, B.M. AND KRANTHI, K.R. (2009). Widespread Infestation of the Exotic Mealybug Species, Phenacoccus Solenopsis (Tinsley) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae), on Cotton in India, pp: 1–15. Bulletin Entomology Research, published on-line by Cambridge University Press 19 Feb 2009. doi:10.1017/S0007485308006573 (Verified 27 May 2009).

SAHITO, H.A., ABRO, G.H., KHUHRO, R.D. AND BURIRO, A.S. (2009) Varietal Resistance of Cotton Crop against Mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley. Pak. Jr., Agri., Agri. Engg., Vet. Sci., 25(1):34-38.

SAHITO, H.A., ABRO, G.H., KHURO, R.D., LANJAR, A.G. AND MAHMOOD, R. (2010). Biological and morphological studies of cotton mealybug Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) development under laboratory environment. Pak. j. entomol. Karachi. 25 (2): 131-141.

SAINI, R.K., PALARAM SHARMA, S.S. AND ROHILLA, H.R. (2009), Mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley and its survival in cotton ecosystem in Haryana In : Proc. Nation. Symp. On Bt-cotton:Opportunities and Prospectus, Central Institute of Cotton Research, Nagpur, November 17-19, pp150.

WANG, Y.P., WU, S.A. AND ZHANG, R.Z. (2009). Pest risk analysis of a new invasive pest, Phenacoccus solenopsis to China. Chinese Bull. Entomol., 46: 101–106.



REPELLENT ACTION OF BOTANICAL PESTICIDES AGAINST FRUITFLY, BACTROCERA ZONATA SAUNDERS IN LABORATORY

BHAI KHAN SOLANGI*, RIFFAT SULTANA**, MUHAMMED SAEED WAGAN**

AND NAZEER AHMED***

*Department of Entomology, Sindh Agriculture University, Tandojam **Department of Zoology, University of Sindh, Jamshoro

***Nuclear Institute of Agriculture, Tandojam (Received for publication: 05.02.2010)

ABSTRACT

Bactrocera zonata commonly called as fruitfly, reported as severe pest of many valuable fruits i-e guavas, mangoes, peach, apricots, figs and citrus etc. In order to examine the repellent action of botanical pesticide against fruit fly, B. zonata present study has been carried out during the year 2010 under laboratory conditions. Five botanical pesticide such as: Neem oil(T1), Tobacco leaf solution(T2), Neem seed powder solution(T3) and solution made from Eucalyuptus leaves (T4) were used as repellents and were compared with untreated control(T5). On average, fruit flies attempts on fruit culture treated with Neem oil (T1) were 1.35, tobacco leaf solution (T2), 2.85 Neem seed solution (T3) treatment, 2.11 and Eucalyptus leaf solution (T4) treatment, 1.82 times against 5.43 attempts under control. The results indicated that Neem oil (T1) and Eucalyptus leaf solution (T4) showed higher repellent action against fruit flies as compared to Neem seed powder solution (T3) and tobacco leaf solution (T2). It was concluded that categorically, Neem oil(T1), eucalyptus leaf solution(T4), Neem seed powder solution (T3) and Tobacco leaf solution (T2) ranked 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th for repellent action against guava fruit flies.

Key words: Repellent action, Botanical pesticides, Bactrocera zonata, Ranked.

INTRODUCTION

Bactrocera zonata Saunders commonly called fruit fly originates in South and South-East Asia, where it severely attacks many fruit species (more than 50 host plants), including guavas, mangoes, peach, apricots, figs and citrus. It has spread to other parts of the world, in particular to several countries in the Near East and to Egypt. In recent years, B. zonata has become a widespread pest (Cayol 2008, Syed 1970 & Hashimi 2001). The different species of fruit fly cause enormous losses to fruit and vegetables in tropical, sub tropical and temperate regions of the world (Bateman, 1972). They cause direct loss to fruit and vegetables and indirect loss by enhancing expenditure on chemicals which alternately reduce the market value of the product. The infestation may reach up to 50% in summer crop of guava in Pakistan. The peaches, apricot, guava and other fruit attacked by this pest are malformed, mis-shaped, under-sized and rotted inside. The damage caused is very serious and the fruits become unmarketable (James, 2003).

Mostly, these insect pests are controlled by synthetic insecticides for their quick knock down effect, however, careless and indiscriminate use of these chemicals leads to a number of well known problems like contamination of food, soil, ground

water, lakes, rivers, oceans, air with toxic residues which carry side effects on non target insects and other organisms, development of resistance in insects against these pesticides and pest resurgence etc (Ali et al., 2010). In addition, many non lethal and lethal accidents occur due to mishandling of highly toxic synthetic products. Because of these hazards of the chemicals, there is growing awareness in developed and even in developing countries of toxicological and environmental problems involved in the use of synthetic pesticides (Mahmoud 2010).This awareness has lead to a steadily increasing movement toward more environmental oriented, sustainable agriculture with low or no input of toxic synthetic material and other agriculture chemicals in an attempt to preserve and protect the environment and as well as human health (Clark et al., 1998).

Increasingly, application of pesticides by air and occasionally by ground for fruit fly control is meeting resistance from environmentalists as well as the general public (Clark et al., 1998). The situation is further complicated since cultural and biological control methods will not yield an immediate result that is necessary for successful eradication programs (Van Driesche & Bellows 1996 & El-Husseini et al., 2008.) so, in order to introduce the environmental friendly strategies the present research was carried out to investigate the repellent

Solangi et al. 42

action of some botanical pesticides against guava fruit fly. Definitely; this research would be guideline for future pest management.


The research was carried out during the year 2010 to examine the repellent action of botanical pesticides against Bactrocera zonata under laboratory condition. Fruits obtained from Dehli Farm near Tandojam were kept in the cages as culture and treated with solutions of different botanical pesticides to examine their repellent action against adult fruit flies. Five botanical pesticides were experimented with three replicate. Treatments included:

1) T1=Neem oil, 2) T2=Tobacco leaf solution, 3) T3=Solution of Neem seed powder, 4) T4= Eucalyuptus leaves, 5) T5=Control (untreated).

B. zonata used in these experiments were obtained from the culture maintained under laboratory conditions at temperature 27±1.0oC, relative humidity 60±5% and 14:10 light and dark. The repellent effect of test plants extracts on the fruit flies, all the plant extracts were applied at the recommended dose to the fruits separately by dipping method. The cages (18 x 16 x 16) having muslin cloth on the two opposite sides. The other two sides top and bottom were made of transparent glass sheet work used in the experiment. Newly emerged female fruit flies 20 with a ratio of 1: 1 were released in the cage. Cotton soaked with glucose solution was placed in each cage to feed the adults. The mango variety Begal pali was used in the experiment. The mango fruits were drip in each solution and kept in the cages along with untreated fruit to provide a free choice to the female to settle. The number of fruit flies adults settled on treated and untreated fruits were counted after every one hours for ten days. In this way the repellency/deterrence was counted. Statistical analysis

The data collected was subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) and means were compared by DNMR (Duncan’s New Multiply Range) test at P<0.05 and P<0.01, using MSTAT-C software (Michigan State University, 1982).

RESULTS

The data in Table 1 and Figure 1 shows that on first day of the experiment, all the botanical pesticides were effective to repel fruit flies, and fruits

treated with T1, T4 ,T3and T2 were attempted 1.43, 1.91, 2.34 and 3.00 times by the fruit flies as compared to 5.19 times under control. This indicates that T1 was most effective to repel guava fruit flies, followed by T4 and T3 solution made from neem seed powder. Statistically, the effect of botanical pesticides was highly significant (P<0.01). On second day, the same culture was used and it was noted that there was no significantly difference in the behavior of first and second day. However, all the botanical pesticides showed remarkable repellent effect on the fruit flies. The fruits treated with T1, T4, T3, and T2 were attacked 1.28, 1.86, 2.05 and 3.24 times by the fruit flies, while T5 untreated guava fruits were attacked 5.19 times by the flies. The data suggested that T2 used as repellent was relatively less effective, while T1 and T4 were highly effective to repel the fruit flies to attack the guava fruits.

On third day, the culture was changed and fresh fruits were placed in the cages. The results indicated that all the botanical pesticides significantly repel the fruit flies to affect the guava fruits. The T1, T4, T3 and T2 treated fruits were attempted 1.19, 1.86, 2.15 and 2.38 times by the fruit flies, while the flies attacked control fruits for 5.43 times. It was observed that repellent effect of botanical pesticides was highly significant (P<0.01) when compared with control, but between treatments, the effect was statistically non-significant (P>0.05). On fourth day, the observations showed that neem oil proved to be most effect repellent for fruit flies, and fruits treated with T1, T3, T4 and T2 were attempted 1.34, 1.67, 1.77 and 2.72 times by the fruit flies, while the flies attacked control fruits for 5.24 times. The data exhibited that all the botanical pesticides showed remarkable (P<0.01) repellent effect on fruit flies when compared to control. However, non-significant (P>0.05) repellent action was noted between treated fruits.

On fifth day of the experiment, no considerable change in the trend of repellent effect of botanical pesticides against the fruit flies was observed. The guava fruits treated with T1, T3, T4 and T2 were attacked by fruit flies for 1.24, 1.72, 1.81 and 2.33 times, while on the control culture T5 averagely 5.48 flies were recorded. All the botanical pesticides were effectively to repel fruit flies and between treatments the repellent effect was non-significant (P>0.05), while highly significant (P<0.01) when It was observed that repellent effect of botanical pesticides was highly significant (P<0.01) when compared with control, but between treatments, the effect was statistically non-significant (P>0.05). The sixth day indicated that the repellents such as T1, T3, T4 and T2 effectively repelled the infestation of guava fruit flies and attacked 1.24, 1.67, 1.72 and 2.15 times, respectively; while the culture kept untreated T5 was infested for 4.86 times by the fruit flies. There was no marked difference in the fruit flies infestation between botanical pesticide treatments, while effect

Repellent action of botanical pesticides against fruit fly in laboratory 43

of highly significant (P<0.01) when results of treatments were compared with control.

The experiment results of seventh day showed that the T1 proved to be more effective to repel the guava fruitfly than the rest of the repellents. The fruits treated with T1, T4, T3 and T2 were infested by fruit flies for 1.39, 1.81, 2.24 and 2.80 times, respectively; while the untreated fruits were infested for 6.34 times by the fruit flies. This indicated that all the botanical pesticides showed remarkable repellent action against the fruit flies and the differences in infestation of fruit were highly significant when compared with control. Observation on the eighth day showed that the trend of results varied considerably and T1 and T4 showed almost equal repellent action. The T1, T4, T3 and T2 treated culture was infested by 1.76, 1.81, 2.86 and 3.43 flies, while the flies attacked control fruits for 4.77 times. It was observed that repellent effect of botanical pesticides was highly significant (P<0.01) when compared with control, but between T3 and T2 and between T1 and T4 non-significant (P>0.05) difference was observed.

The results for ninth day showed that all the botanical pesticides with the exception of T2 showed remarkable repellency against guava fruit flies and fruits treated with T1, T3, T4 and T2 were attacked averagely for 1.53, 1.67, 1.96 and 4.43 times by the fruit flies, while untreated T5 guava fruits were highly infested i.e. 6.01 times by the flies. The data indicate that T1 botanical pesticides showed higher repellent action against fruit flies when compared with T4 and T2 based repellents. On day tenth, it was observed that T1 and T4 showed high repellent action against fruit flies where flies attempted averagely 1.09 and 1.67 times to the offered culture; while the fruits treated with T3 and T2 attacked by flies for 2.14 and 2.57 times on this day against 4.55 attempts on fruits without treatment of any repellent (control). The results further suggested that categorically, (neem oil) T1, (eucalyptus leaf solution) T4, (neem seed powder solution) T3 and (tobacco leaf solution) T2 ranked 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th for repellent action against guava fruit flies while control ranked 5th during entire period of study.

DISCUSSION

Repellents are gaining recognition to discourage pests from landing or climbing on the surface or on the particular product. It is frequent to say that synthetic repellents tend to have more effectiveness than natural repellents; but some plant-based repellents are comparable or somewhat better than synthetics repellents (Jantan & Zaki, 1998 Jaenson et al., 2006) used various insect repellents and found that repellents containing picaridin were more effective than repellents with natural active

ingredients and almost 100% repellency for the first 2 hours was observed. He further said that a product containing 40% oil of lemon and eucalyptus was just as effective as products containing high synthetic concentrations.

During the present study results of effectiveness of various botanical pesticides are in concurrence with Walter (1999) who evaluated repellency effects of a number of botanical pesticides against fruit flies on guava and found effective to repel fruit flies; while Jimenez et al., (2000) reported that the repellent effects of some botanical pesticides against fruit flies and found that Bio-Rapid can be used for effective control of B. zonata @ 2-3 ml/liter water by spraying from early stages of fruit development in guava and McFarland & Hoy (2001) found Ecogold 999 Plus as an effective repellent against insects of various horticulture crops.

At present, high infestation of fruit culture was recorded under control condition and remarkable repellent effect was found in case of all the botanical pesticides. These similar results was also observed by Lababidi in 2002 and stated that the repellent action of Biopesticide (Newtech) against fruit flies of guava and some other horticulture insect pests; and found that Newtech is highly effective to repel guava fruit flies.

Similarly, Akhtar et al., (2004) investigated the repellent effects of three plants viz neem seed, sweet flag and turmeric rhizomes against B. zonata and indicated that turmeric extracts had suppressed egg laying and development of pupae and adults. Minimum number of pupae and adults were obtained from the fruits treated with 2% concentration of plant extracts. At this concentration only 1.44 pupae were obtained which was significantly lower than 7.78, and 9.39 pupae obtained at 1 and 0.5 percent concentrations. From Pakistan, Khattak et al., (2006) reported repellent and growth inhibiting effect of the plants viz. harmal, Kuth and balcher each extracted in petroleum ether, acetone and ethanol at 2%, 1% and 0.5% concentrations against B. zonata and reported effective repellency of these products against the insect infestation.

Singh et al., (2007) conducted studies on the use of neem products as biopesticide to repel Bactrocera spp. and revealed that B. dorsalis and B. zonata are associated with mango neem products have proved effective repellency against fruit flies. The results of the present research regarding the repellent action of various botanical pesticides are coincide with the findings of the past researches, which argued that instead of using synthetic repellents, better to adopt botanical pesticides which far less toxic and low cost, as compared to synthetic products.

Solangi et al. 44

Figure-1 Repellent action of botanical pesticides against fruitfly

Bactrocera zonata in laboratory

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Day-1 Day-2 Day-3 Day-4 Day=5 Day-6 Day-7 Day-8 Day-9 Day-10

Experimental days

Gua

va F

ruit

Flie

s In

fest

atio

n

Neem oil Tobacco leaf Neem seed Eucalyptus leaf Control

Table-1 Analysis of variance for different botanical pesticides were tested against the fruitfly Bactrocera zonata in laboratory

Source of variation

Degrees of freedom

Sum of Squares

Mean Squares F. Ratio Remarks

Replications

2 0.016 0.008 0.0088 NS

Treatments(T)

4 313.058 78.264 85.3065 **

Days (D)

9 7.769 0.863 0.9408 NS

T x D

36 18.626 0.517 0.5640 NS

Errors

98 89.910 0.917 - -

Total

149 429.379 - - -

Note: ** Highly Significant (P<0.01); NS Non-Significant (P>0.05).

Repellent action of botanical pesticides against fruit fly in laboratory 45

REFERENCES AKHTAR, N., JILANI, G., MAHMOOD, R.,

ASHFAQUE, M. AND IQBAL, J. (2004). Effects of plant derivatives on settling response and fecundity of peach fruitfly Bactrocera zonata (Saunders). Sarhad J. Agriculture (Pakistan), 20 (2): 269-274.

ALI, H., AHMAD, S., JAN, S. AND SAFIULLAH (2010). Efficacy of different control methods against oriental fruit fly Bactrocera zonata (Saunders). ARPN J. Agric. Bio. Sci, 5 (2): 1-3.

BATEMAN, M.A. (1972). The ecology of fruit flies, Annual Review Entomology. 17: 493-518.

CAYOL, D. (2008). Introduction of Bactrocera zonata into the EPPO region: Situation in the EPPO region and the Near East. FAO/IAEA Division, Pp. 1-5.

CLARK, A.J., SIMMONDS, M.S.J., LEY, S.V., BLANEY, W.M., MORDUE, W., NASIRUDDIN, M. AND NISBET, A.J. (1998). Strategies to control fruit flies on guava. Pesticide Sci. 54: 277-284.

EL-HUSSEINI, M.M., AGAMY, E.A., SAAFAN, M.H. AND ABD EL-KHALEK, W.M. (2008). On the biology of Dirhinus giffardii (Silvestri) (Hymenoptera: Chalcididae) parasitizing pupae of the peach fruit fly, Bactrocera zonata (Saunders) (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Egypt. Egypt. J. Bio. Pest Cont. 18 (2): 391-396.

HASHIMI, R.A. (2001). Insect Pest Management, cereal and cash crops. Pak. Agric. Res. Council Islamabad, 317 pp.

JAENSON, T.G.T., SAMIRA, G. AND KATINKA, P. (2006). Repellency of Oils of Lemon Eucalyptus, Geranium, and Lavender and the Mosquito Repellent MyggA Natural to Ixodes ricinus (Acari: Ixodidae) in the Laboratory and Field. J. Medical Entomology. 43 (4): 731-736.

JAMES, R.R. (2003). Combining Azadirachtin and Paecilomyces fumosoroseus (Deuteromycotina: Hypomycetes) to control Bemisia argentifolii (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). J. Econo. Entomol., 96 : 25-30.

JANTAN, I. AND ZAKI, Z.M. (1998). Development of environment-friendly insect repellents from the leaf oils of selected Malaysian plants, ASEAN Review of Biodiversity and Environmental Conservation (ARBEC), 5 (1): 200-203.

JIMENEZ, V.J.A., HOY, M.A. AND DAVIES, F.S. (2000). Integrated pest management-compatible pesticides for the guava fruit flies Bactrocera zonata. J. Econ. Entomol., 93: 357–367.

KHATTAK, M.K., SHAHZAD, M.F. AND JILANI, G. (2006). Effect of Different Extracts of Harmal Peganum harmala L. Rhizomes of Kuth, Saussurea lappa C. B. Clarke and Balchar Valariana officianalis L. on the settling and growth of peach fruitfly, Bactrocera Zonata Saunders. Pak. Entomol, 28 (1): 129-132.

LABABIDI, M.S. (2002). Efficacy of Biopesticides against fruit flies and other horticulture insect pests. J. Pest Science, 75 (1/2): 84–88.

MAHMOUD, M.F. (2010). Effect of gamma radiation on the sterility and quality of male peach fruit fly, Bactrocera zonata (Saunders) (Diptera: Tephritidae). Egypt. J. Biol. Pest Cont. 20 (1): 71-77.

MCFARLAND C.D. AND HOY, M.A. (2001). All season agriculture and horticulture spray (ECOGOLD 999 PLUS). Florida Entomol. 84:227–233.

NISBET (1998). Strategies to control fruit flies on guava. Pesticide Sci., 54:277–284.

SINGH, M., GUPTA, D., GUPTA, R. AND KASHYAP, S.D. (2007). Population dynamics of fruit flies, Bactrocera spp. (Diptera: Tephritidae). Himachal J. Agricul. Research, 33 (2): 292-294.

SYED, R.A. (1970). Studies on the trypetids and their natural enemies in West Pakistan. Dacus spp. of lesser importance, Pak. J. Zool., 2: 17-24.

VAN DRIESCHE, K. AND BELLOWS, M.B. (1996). Guava fruit flies and control programmes. Am. J. Entomol. 136 (3/4): 518–520.

WALTER, J.F. (1999). Commercial experience with plant products in relation to control fruit flies. In F. R. Hall and J.J. Menn [eds.], Biopesticides: Use and Delivery. Humana, Totowa, NJ. pp. 155-170.



EFFECT OF MICRONUTRIENTS AND PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS AGAINST SUCKING INSECT PESTS ON COTTON

TOHEED GHANI MAHESAR*, MAQSOOD ANWAR RUSTAMMANI*, HAKIM ALI

SAHITO**, SHAFIQUE AHMED MEMON***, ABDUL HAFEEZ MASTOI*** AND ABDUL SAMMAD KHAJJAK**

*Department of Entomology, Sindh Agriculture University (SAU) Tando Jam, Sindh. **Center of Agriculture and Bio sciences (CABI) South Asia Rawalpindi, Pakistan. ***Faculty of Crop and Plant Sciences, Lasbela University of Agriculture, Water &

Marine Sciences, Uthal (LUAWMS) Balochistan. (Received for publication: 18.02.2011)

ABSTRACT

Field experiment was carried out to see the effect of Micronutrients and Plant Growth Regulators against sucking insect pests on cotton in the experimental field of faculty of crop protection Sindh Agriculture University, Tandojam during kharif season of 2010.

Cotton plants were applied three Plant Growth Regulators (Pix, Plano fix and Salicylic acid) and three Micronutrients (Bigsaver, Dawn and Agrofeed) through foliar spray to artificially removed leaves and fruiting bodies of cotton at 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60% thrice. The experiment was laid out in a three replicated randomized complete block design. Observation of sucking insect pests Jassid, Whitefly, Thrip and Aphid were recorded at 15 days intervals. It was found that Plant Growth Regulators, Micronutrients, treatments and observations dates had significant effect of pests population however, there inter actions were non-significant. Among the Plant Growth Regulators Pix was more effective in reducing the population of sucking pests as compared to Planofix and Salicylic acid. It was observed that application of Agrofeed reduce the infestation of sucking insect pests effectively than Bigsaver and Dawn. Plant remained as such and treated with Plant Growth Regulators and Micronutrients showed lower infestation of pests than untreated control. There was no difference in the population of pests when leaves and fruiting parts were removed at 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60%. The mean population of Jassid was 0.25-0.90/leaf, whitely 1.35-3.25/leaf, Thrip 1.9-3.97/leaf and Aphid mean population was 0.15-0.89/leaf.

Application of Plant Growth Regulators and Micronutrients increased boll volume, boll maturity and seed cotton yield as compare to control. Among Plant Growth Regulator Pix was superior, in case of Micronutrients Agrofeed relatively effective than other products. No removed of plant parts and treated with Pix and Agrofeed yielded significantly, while leaves and fruiting bodies removed upto 36% and treated with Plant Growth Regulators and Micronutrient also gave more seed cotton yield.

Key words: Micronutrients, PGRs, S. dorsalis, A. devastans, B. tabaci, A. gossypii and G. irsutum.

INTRODUCTION Cotton, (Gossypium hirsutum Linn,) is the

world’s important fiber crop contributing about 56 percent of the total world demand for fiber, whereas, the rest 44 percent of demand for fiber is satisfied with the man synthetic fiber like rayon and nylon. The important role that the cotton plays in developing the economy of Pakistan is evident from the very fact that it moves the wheels of local textile industry and earns huge foreign exchange. The cotton seed is utilized for foreign exchange and also for preparing Banaspati ghee and cosmetic needed by ever increasing population of the country.

The cotton crop damaged by number of insect pests during seedling and vegetative phase the crop is damaged by sucking pests such as cotton Thrips, Scirtothrips dorsalis (Hood), Jassid, Amrasca

devastans, that causes heavy losses to the crop (Atwal, 1994). Some hosts also affects to the life cycle of Bemesia tabaci. (Lanjar and Sahito, 2009). All the cotton varieties are affected by cotton mealybug (Sahito, et al. 2010a) and this vigorous cotton pest according the morphological was studied by (Sahito, et al. 2010b). Beside of this, these sucking insect pests Bemesia tabaci and Amrasca devastans also damage to sunflower crop (Lanjar and Sahito, 2005, 2010). Application of Micronutrients play an important role in boosting crop yield due to their important role in the physiological activity of cotton plants and provide resistant to the cotton plant against certain insect pests damage as compared to those which receive low Micronutrients. Similarly Plant Growth Regulators are substances which improve the physiological process of the plant resulting in vigour, growth and posses resistance against incidence of

Mahesar et al. 48

insect pests. (Herbert, et al. 1999). Cotton producers and researchers, use Plant Growth Regulators (PGRs) and other cultural practices as a means to manage the balance between vegetative and reproductive growth for efficient cotton production (Duli and Oosterhuis, 2000). There is dire need for the enhancement of production and yield per hectare order to satisfy the requirements of increasing population in Pakistan. Among measures or steps to be taken, the application of micro-nutrients is of in great importance in order to enhance cotton production and yield. Micro-nutrients play essential role in physiology of the plants, cell elongation, cell division and regulation of nutrients from one part to other part of the plant. Plant contains small amount of 90 or more elements, only 16 of which are currently known to be essential for the growth and reproduction of plants (Bastia, 2001, Nazir et al., (2003).

Keeping the above facts in view an experiment was laid out to assess the “Effect of micronutrients and plant growth regulators against sucking insect pests on cotton”. Such studies will be helpful in managing the insect pests on cotton crop.


Field trial was conducted to see the effect of Micronutrients and Plant Growth Regulators against Thrip and Jassid pests on cotton in the experimental area of Faculty of Crop Protection, Sindh Agriculture University, TandoJam during the Kharif season of 2010.

Homogenous seeds of a cotton variety CRIS-134 were drilled in rows 75 cm apart. Just before 1st irrigation, seedlings were thinned and a plant to plant distance of 30 cm was maintained. The experiment was laid out in a three replicated Randomized Complete Block Design, keeping a net plot area of 5 x 3 meter.

Recommended dose of NPK fertilizer was applied in the form of urea and DAP. The full dose of P with 1/3 of N was applied at the time of sowing, while rest of N was split and top dressed at the time of various crop developmental stages.

Before application of Micronutrients and Plant Growth Regulators cotton leaves and fruiting bodies (flower buds, flowers and bolls) were removed artificially to simulate pest damage. Two control treatments were maintained one is Natural control (T1) in which no leaves and fruiting bodies were removed and no application of Micronutrients and Plant Growth Regulators were applied and other one is Treated control (T7) in which leaves and fruiting bodies were not removed but Micronutrients and Plant Growth Regulators were applied.

The details of the treatments are as under:

T1 = Natural control

T2 = 12 percent leaves + fruiting bodies removed.

T3 = 24 percent

T4 = 36 percent

T5 = 48 percent

T6 = 60 percent

T7 = Treated control in which Micronutrients and Plant Growth Regulators were applied.

When the pest population reaches at economic threshold level, insecticides were sprayed in the plots, the spray of Confidor and Mospilan at recommended dose was sprayed against the sucking pests of cotton crop.

For recording the data was taken at 15 days interval from randomly selected five plants from each treatment (Five leaves / plant, one from top, and two each from middle and bottom portion). The data thus collected were subjected to analysis of variance while to test the superiority of treatment mean I&D test was applied after Gomez and Gomez (1984). For this purpose a Microsoft Computer package “MSTATC” was used.

RESULTS

The results on population of thrip, jassid, whitefly and aphid pests on cotton treated with Plant Growth Regulators, Micronutrients and treatments obtained are summarized in the tables and their statistical analysis are shown. The results on each character are presented below:

Thrip Scritothrips dorsalies (Hood)

The results presented on the Table-1, indicated that population of thrips varied significantly (P≤ 0.01) between the Plant Growth Regulators Micronutrients, treatments and dates while there was no significant interaction. It was observed that the population of thrips was low in plots treated with Pix as compared to Planofix and Salicylic acid treated plots, similar application of Micronutrients also reduces the thrips population, Agrofeed found relatively more effective than Bigsaver and Dawn respectively. However, removal of cotton leaves and fruiting bodies did not reduce the population of thrips significantly however, untreated control displayed relatively more population of thrips. However, the greater variation in

Effect of micronutrients and plant growth regulators against sucking insect pests on cotton 49

the population of thrips was observed between the dates. The population of thrips ranged between 1.90 to 3.97 / leaf in the all treatments.

Jassid Amrasca devastance (Dist.)

The results on population of jassid on cotton plants treated with Plant Growth Regulators, Micronutrients and treatments recorded on various observation dates are presented in the Table-2. It may be seen from the results that jassid population was significantly different between Plant Growth Regulators, Micronutrients, treatments and observation dates. The population of jassid was less when Plant Growth Regulators and Micronutrients were applied as compared to untreated control similarly the jassid population was also different between the observation dates and leaves and fruiting bodies removal treatment, although no significant interaction was observed between the treatments. Pix was relatively more effective among the plant growth regulars, among Micronutrients Agrofeed showed lower population of jassid, leaves and fruiting bodies removed up to 60% showed lower population of jassid. The population of jassid among all the treatments ranged from 0.25-0.90 / leaf.

Whitefly, Bemesia tabaci (Genn.)

The results on mean population of whitefly recorded during different time intervals on cotton treated with PGRs, Micronutrients and removed of leaves and fruiting bodies treatments obtained are displayed in the Table-3. It can be observed from the results that the population of whitefly was significantly different between Plant Growth Regulators, Micronutrients, observation dates and treatments, while their interaction was non significant. It was growth regulators, and Micronutrients result relatively low population as compared to control. The results further showed that removing leaves and fruiting bodies at various percentages showed that 60% removal of leaves and fruiting bodies showed less population of whitefly than 12, 24, 36 and 48% respectively. On the whole the population of whitefly ranged between 1.35-3.25 / leaf.

Aphid, Aphis gossypii (Glov.)

The results on mean population of aphid / leaf on cotton treated with PGRs, Micronutrients, removed of leaves and fruiting bodies treatments recorded during various observation dates are given in Table-4. It may be seen from the results that the population of aphid differed significantly among the PGRs, Micronutrients, treatments and observation dates while their interaction was non significant. Application of Pix, Agrofeed both provide resistant to

plant resulted in low population of aphid, beside removal of leaves and fruiting bodies up to 60% showed less population of aphid as compared plants remained as such (control). The population of aphid in all treatments ranged between 0.15-0.89/leaf.

Plant height (cm)

The results in plant height recorded at 1st picking of cotton under various Micronutrients, Plant Growth Regulators application and treatments of percentage removal of leaves and fruiting parts obtained are presented in the Table-5. It was observed that plant height affected significantly the plant growth regulator, Micronutrients application and treatments, while their interaction was non significant (P ≤ 0.01).

Among the three, PGRs Planofix proved more effective in lesser improvement in plant height. Among the Micronutrients Dawn improved plant height as compared to Bigsaver and Agrofeed respectively leaves and fruiting parts removed up to 60% resulted in lower plant height than 12, 24, 36 and 48% respectively. All treatment showed independent effect on plant height. Plant height ranged among all treatments from 68.40 to 110.73 cm / plant.

Volume of boll

The results on volume of boll of cotton treated with various products of Plant Growth Regulators, Micronutrients and treatment of removal of leaves and fruiting parts recorded are presented in the Table-6. It may be seen from the results that volume of boll affected significantly by the Plant Growth Regulators, Micronutrients and their interaction, while their interaction was non significant (P ≤ 0.01).

Cotton plants treated with Plant Growth Regulators improved volume of boll, among the products Pix was more effective than Planofix and Salicylic acid respectively, similarly application of Micronutrients also increased the volume of bolls, Agrofeed found relatively more effective than Dawn and Bigsaver respectively. Cotton leaves and fruiting bodies remained as such and treated with products produced greater volume of boll than removed at 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60%. The volume of boll ranged from 2.71 to 3.50 cm.

Boll opening percentage (%)

The results on average values for percent boll opening of cotton treated with different Plant Growth Regulators, Micronutrients and treatments of leaves and fruiting bodies removal are shown in the Table-7. It revealed that the difference in the boll opening percentage between Plant Growth Regulators, Micronutrients and treatments were highly

Mahesar et al. 50

significant, while their interaction was non significant (P ≤ 0.01).

It was observed that application of PGRs enhanced boll opening, percentage, among the products Pix was more effective than Planofix and Salicylic acid respectively. Similarly, all products of Micronutrients also increased percentage of boll opening. Agrofeed was relatively more effective as compared to the Bigsaver and Dawn respectively. No removal of leave and fruiting bodies and treated with Plant Growth Regulators and Micronutrients recorded greater percentage of boll opening than 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60% removal of leaves and fruiting parts as well as control. The boll opening percentage ranged between 50-78%.

Seed cotton yield / plant (gm)

The results regarding yield of cotton treated with PGRs, Micronutrients and treatments obtained are presented in the Table-8. It was observed that Plant Growth Regulators micro nutrients and treatments had significant (P ≤ 0.01) effect on seed and cotton yield.

The results further indicated that all three products of PGRs increased seed cotton yield, Pix was relatively more effective than Planofix and Salicylic acid respectively. Like wise Micronutrients also enhanced seed cotton yield, but this increment was comparatively more in Agrofeed treated plots than those recorded under Bigsaver and Dawn respectively. No removal of leaves and fruiting bodies and application of both Plant Growth Regulators and micro nutrients showed heights to seed cotton yield as compared to no removal or removal of plant parts at 12, 24, 36, 48a and 60% respectively. The seed cotton yield obtained in all treatments ranged from 45.41-92.44 gm / plant.

DISCUSSION

Cotton crop undergo serious victims due to the invasion of sucking insect pests from begging till harvest of the crop. The results of present study carried out to determine the effect of PGRs and Micronutrients against sucking insect pest of cotton indicated that population of thrips, jassids, whiteflies and aphids reduced when PGRs and Micronutrients were applied to 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60% removal of cotton leaves and fruiting bodies as well as those remained as such and received above products as compared to control. The populations of insect pests were relatively more where no treatment was applied. Results are agreed with those of (Ahmad et al. 2003) who described that efficacy of PGRs manages the sucking insect pests of cotton crop. (Oosterhuis and Duli, 2000) (Oosterhuis and Robertson 2000).

It was observed that among the products Pix was more effective plant growth regulator than Planofix and Salicylic acid. While; among the Micronutrients Agrofeed showed resistance in plants against these pests than Bigsaver and Dawn. The population of thrips ranged from 1.90-3.98 / leaf, jassid ranged from 0.25-0.90 / leaf, whitefly 1.35-3.25 / leaf and aphids 0.15-0.89 / leaf respectively. Further results are agreed with (Nofal et al. 2002) described about micronutrients and (Steven et al. 2004) who reported the effects of two insect growth regulators (IGRs) and conventional insecticides in cotton within the context of alternative management strategies for Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius). (Lanjar, et al., 2008) described the sampling techniques of Bemisia tabaci.

The results further revealed that plant height, volume of boll, boll opening percentage and seed cotton yield varied significantly between the PGRs, Micronutrients and treatments (removal of leaves and fruiting bodies). The plant height was observed maximum in the control plots, while lowest in Pix treated plots and application of Agrofeed. While boll volume was greater in Pix treated plots along with Agrofeed to cotton plants without removal of leaves and fruiting bodies removed up to 48 and 60% and plant remained as such and treated with Pix and Agrofeed increased percentage of boll opening and gave higher seed cotton yield. Research conducted earlier by (Eittipibool et al. 2001) tested different PGRs against jassid infestation on cotton and found that growth regulator mainly reduced the number of jassid egg laid per leaf. However, (Nazir et al. 2003) tried different PGRs in controlling the insect pests (jassids, thrips and whiteflies) on cotton and found that Pix and Cytokin were the most effective in controlling jassids, thrips and whiteflies, the PGRs provide resistance against these pest. However, (Abdel-Al. 1998) reported that application of Pix reduced plant height and increased seed cotton yield. (El-shahawy 2000) reported that application of growth regulators reduced plant height and increased seed cotton yield. (El-Dayem and El-Deeb 2000) found that application of growth regulators reduced plant height, increased open bolls and seed cotton yield.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The financial assistance from Dean Faculty of CPT and Department of Entomology, Prof. Dr. M.A. Rustammani and Prof. Dr. G.H. Abro, SAU. Tandojam, Sindh for conducting studies on effect of micronutrients and plant growth regulators against sucking insect pests on cotton are gratefully acknowledged. We thank to the Entomologist (Sindh) and Balochistan from CABI, South Asia for their consistent encouragement and support during the research work.


Table-1. Mean population of Thrip / leaf on cotton after application of Micronutrients and Plant Growth Regulators during Kharif season, 2010.

Pix

Products Treatments

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

Bigsaver 3.67 2.60 2.50 2.43 2.40 2.40 2.20

Dawn 3.90 3.00 2.85 2.72 2.68 2.60 2.50

Agrofeed 3.20 2.45 2.40 2.35 2.25 2.10 1.90

Planofix

Bigsaver 3.80 3.00 2.75 2.70 2.70 2.60 2.50

Dawn 3.98 3.15 3.00 2.95 2.80 2.70 2.60

Agrofeed 3.50 3.10 3.00 2.80 2.60 2.50 2.35

Salicylic acid

Bigsaver 3.85 3.10 3.00 2.80 2.75 2.70 2.65

Dawn 3.97 3.50 3.30 3.28 2.90 2.80 2.70

Agrofeed 3.58 3.56 3.35 3.30 2.95 2.70 2.00

Table-2. Mean population of Jassid / leaf on cotton after application of Micronutrients and Plant Growth Regulators during Kharif season, 2010.

Pix

Products Treatments

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

Bigsaver 0.78 0.60 0.56 0.53 0.50 0.48 0.40

Dawn 0.85 0.70 0.62 0.60 0.58 0.53 0.50

Agrofeed 0.60 0.53 0.50 0.48 0.35 0.30 0.25

Planofix

Bigsaver 0.82 0.75 0.71 0.70 0.68 0.62 0.60

Dawn 0.90 0.80 0.78 0.74 0.72 0.72 0.68

Agrofeed 0.65 0.60 0.58 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40

Salicylic acid

Bigsaver 0.80 0.70 0.68 0.66 0.64 0.60 0.56

Dawn 0.82 0.75 0.68 0.65 0.60 0.59 0.58

Agrofeed 0.62 0.57 0.55 0.51 0.48 0.40 0.35

Mahesar et al. 52

Table-3. Mean population of Whitefly / leaf on cotton after application of Micronutrients and Plant Growth Regulators during Kharif season, 2010.

Pix

Products Treatments

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

Bigsaver 2.75 2.00 1.90 1.85 1.80 1.72 1.65

Dawn 3.00 2.50 2.40 2.41 2.38 2.00 1.70

Agrofeed 2.00 1.72 1.73 1.60 1.57 1.48 1.35

Planofix

Bigsaver 2.90 2.50 2.45 2.40 2.33 2.35 2.00

Dawn 3.25 3.00 2.70 2.60 2.52 2.40 2.20

Agrofeed 2.35 2.00 1.88 1.90 1.75 1.69 1.45

Salicylic acid

Bigsaver 2.70 2.18 1.95 1.90 1.85 1.77 1.70

Dawn 3.15 3.00 2.56 2.53 2.45 2.40 2.00

Agrofeed 2.40 2.00 1.76 1.70 1.60 1.52 1.45

Table-4. Mean population of Aphid / leaf on cotton after application of Micronutrients and Plant Growth Regulators during Kharif season, 2010.

Pix

Products Treatments

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

Bigsaver 0.70 0.57 0.58 0.53 0.50 0.47 0.40

Dawn 0.78 0.60 0.60 0.57 0.53 0.50 .48

Agrofeed 0.50 0.30 0.25 0.21 0.22 0.18 0.15

Planofix

Bigsaver 0.80 0.70 0.65 0.62 0.60 0.61 0.57

Dawn 0.89 0.77 0.72 0.73 0.70 0.68 0.62

Agrofeed 0.77 0.65 0.50 0.48 0.42 0.33 0.24

Salicylic acid

Bigsaver 0.75 0.60 0.59 0.57 0.53 0.50 0.45

Dawn 0.82 0.73 0.70 0.69 0.63 0.60 0.60

Agrofeed 0.70 0.60 0.45 0.41 0.35 0.30 0.20


Table-5. Mean plant height (cm) of cotton after application of Micronutrients and Plant Growth Regulators during Kharif season, 2010.

Pix

Products Treatments

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

Bigsaver 95.30 85.33 80.75 75.30 70.15 68.00 80.35

Dawn 98.50 88.50 85.40 80.33 75.30 70.00 85.40

Agrofeed 85.33 80.00 75.30 70.00 72.30 68.40 82.00

Planofix

Bigsaver 102.50 88.35 86.41 80.33 80.00 75.30 82.00

Dawn 110.73 92.78 88.40 83.40 82.15 80.00 89.00

Agrofeed 92.75 82.15 80.00 80.00 78.20 71.00 84.00

Salicylic acid

Bigsaver 99.35 87.15 83.20 78.12 72.20 70.00 81.20

Dawn 105.41 90.30 86.00 82.00 79.20 71.00 87.00

Agrofeed 90.30 81.30 78.20 76.15 74.20 70.00 83.00

Table-6. Mean boll volume of cotton after application of Micronutrients and Plant Growth Regulators during Kharif season, 2010.

Pix

Products Treatments

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

Bigsaver 2.85 3.40 3.30 3.28 3.10 2.92 3.44

Dawn 2.75 3.25 3.12 3.10 2.95 2.80 3.10

Agrofeed 2.97 3.00 3.38 3.31 3.20 3.00 3.50

Planofix

Bigsaver 2.80 3.30 3.25 3.15 2.97 2.88 3.38

Dawn 2.71 3.15 3.00 2.92 2.80 2.75 3.25

Agrofeed 2.91 3.38 3.25 3.20 3.00 2.97 3.40

Salicylic acid

Bigsaver 2.82 3.35 3.30 3.20 2.99 2.90 3.40

Dawn 2.72 3.28 3.15 2.97 2.85 2.78 3.30

Agrofeed 2.93 3.42 3.30 3.25 3.10 3.00 3.45

Mahesar et al. 54

Table-7. Mean boll opening (%) of cotton after application of Micronutrients and Plant Growth Regulators during Kharif season, 2010.

Pix

Products Treatments

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

Bigsaver 60.00 66.00 68.20 69.00 70.00 70.00 72.00

Dawn 52.20 63.00 63.50 64.00 65.30 68.20 69.00

Agrofeed 65.34 69.00 71.20 71.00 74.00 75.15 78.00

Planofix

Bigsaver 57.20 64.00 65.20 67.00 68.20 69.00 70.00

Dawn 50.00 53.00 55.00 59.00 60.00 63.00 66.00

Agrofeed 61.30 60.00 61.00 62.00 63.00 68.00 70.00

Salicylic acid

Bigsaver 59.15 65.15 66.00 66.00 67.00 67.00 71.20

Dawn 51.30 58.00 59.00 60.00 62.00 68.00 70.00

Agrofeed 62.00 62.00 64.00 70.00 71.00 73.00 75.00

Table-8. Mean Seed cotton yield / plant (g) of cotton after application of Micronutrients and Plant Growth Regulators during Kharif season, 2010.

Pix

Products Treatments

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

Bigsaver 56.30 80.78 78.41 75.30 74.56 68.50 86.35

Dawn 50.41 73.50 71.50 70.00 68.50 61.33 78.71

Agrofeed 59.60 88.71 82.40 80.00 75.30 70.20 92.44

Planofix

Bigsaver 51.33 70.33 70.00 65.35 60.34 58.35 68.20

Dawn 45.41 67.50 69.00 61.20 57.40 51.35 60.00

Agrofeed 56.30 75.30 73.41 70.00 65.43 60.20 85.30

Salicylic acid

Bigsaver 53.41 75.71 72.00 69.33 65.33 60.12 72.41

Dawn 49.39 69.35 65.44 63.41 64.00 54.42 65.33

Agrofeed 57.42 72.33 78.50 71.35 67.20 65.00 88.41


REFERENCES ABDEL-AL, M.H., ISMAIL, M.S. AND AHMED, F.M.

(1998). Response of cotton plants to some poly phenols application. Egp. Jr. of Agri. Res. 76 (2): 735-744.

AHMAD, N., S.M. RASHDI, M.S., RAJPUT, A.A. (2003). Efficacy of Plant Growth Regulators to manage the insect pests of cotton. Asian Jr. of Plant Sci. 2 (7): 544-547.

ATWAL, S.T. (1994). Agricultural Pests of India and South East Asia. Kalyani Publications, New Delhi. Pp. 529.

BASTIA, D.K. (2001). Integrated nutrient management in cotton. Madras Agri. Jr. 87 (7/9): 442-443.

DULI, Z. AND OOSTERHUIS, D.M. (2000). Pix Plus and mepiquat chloride effects on physiology, growth, and yield of field grown cotton. Jr. of Plant Growth Regulation. 19 (4): 415-422.

EITTIPIBOOL, W., RENOU, A., CHONGRATTANAMETEEKUL, W. AND HORMCHAN, P. (2001). Effects of cotton growth regulator on jassid infestation and injury. Kasetsart Jr. Natural Sci. 35 (4): 378-385.

EL-DAYEM, H.M., M.A. AND EL-DEEB, A.E.A. (2000). Effect of some Plant Growth Regulators on growth, yield components and some chemical constituents of cotton plant. Annals of Agri. Sci. Moshtohor. 38 (2): 907-925.

EL-SHAHAWY, M.I.M. (2000). Attempts to control excessive vegetative growth of cotton. Egyptian Jr. of Agri. Res. 78: (3) pp 1181-1193.

HERBERT, D., ABAYE, A.A.O., DUGGER, P. AND RICHARD, D. (1999). Compensation from systematic square removal by Virginia Cotton. 1999 Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. Oriando Florida, USA. 2: 968-971

LANJAR, A.G. AND SAHITO, H.A. (2005). Effect of some spring hosts on the life cycle of whitefly, Bemisia Tabaci (Genn.). Pak. j. entomol. Karachi 20 (1&2):13-18.

LANJAR, A.G. AND SAHITO, H.A. (2010). Studies on varietal resistance of sunflower crop against Bemesia tabaci (Genn.) and Amrasca devastans (Dist.). Pak. Jr. entomol. Kar. 25 (2): 147-151.

LANJAR, A.G., LOHAR, M.K., SAHITO, H.A., NAHIYOON, A.A. AND BALOCH, N. (2008). Studies on sampling techniques to monitor adult population of whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (GENN.) in cucurbit field. Pak. j. entomol. Karachi 23 (1&2): 51-54.

NAZIR A., RASHDI, S.M.M.S. AND RAJPUT, A.A. (2003). Efficacy of Plant Growth Regulators to manage the insect pests of cotton. Asian Jr. of Plant Sci. 2 (7): 544-547.

NOFAL, O.A., KHALIFA, R.K.M., NAWAR, M.T. AND EL-SHAZLY, W.M.O. (2002). Effect of foliar feeding with some Micronutrients on cotton leaf nutrient content, growth, earliness, yield, yield components and fiber quality based on soil Micronutrients status. Egp. Jr. of Bot. 42 (1/2): 1-19.

OOSTERHUIS, D. AND ROBERTSON, W.C. (2000). The use of Plant Growth Regulators and other additives in cotton production. Special Report - Arkansas Agri. Exp. Station. 198: 22-32.

OOSTERHUIS, D.M. AND DULI, Z. (2000). Field evaluation of Plant Growth Regulators. Special Report - Arkansas Agri. Exp. Station. 198: 89-93.

SAHITO, H.A., ABRO, G.H., KHUHRO, R.D. AND BURIRO, A.S. (2010a). Varietal Resistance of Cotton Crop against Mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley. Pak. Jr., Agri., Agri. Engg., Vet. Sci., 25(1):34-38.

SAHITO, H.A., ABRO, G.H., KHURO, R.D., LANJAR, A.G. AND MAHMOOD, R. (2010b). Biological and morphological studies of cotton mealybug Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) development under laboratory environment. Pak. j. entomol. Karachi 25 (2):131-141.

STEVEN, E.N., PETER, E.C. AND HAGLER, J.R. (2004). Conservation of natural enemies in cotton: role of insect growth regulators in management of Bemisia tabaci. Jr. of Bio. Cont. 30. (1): 52-72.



OIDES NEOBENGALENSIS: A NEW SPECIES OF THE GENUS OIDES WEBER (COLEOPTERA: CHRYSOMELIDAE:

GALERUCINAE) FROM PAKISTAN

SYEDA GHAZALA RIZVI AND SYED KAMALUDDIN Federal Urdu University of Arts, Science and Technology, Gulshan-e-Iqbal Campus, Karachi


ABSTRACT A new species of the genus Oides Weber of the family Chrysomelidae is described with special reference to its genital complex. This new species is also compared with its closest ally O. bengalensis Maulik and its apomorphies is also briefly discussed. Key words: Oides neobengalensis, new species, Coleoptera, Galerucinae, apomorphies.

INTRODUCTION Lefroy and Howlatt (1909) reported only one

species O-bipunctata F., as plentiful in forest localities and occasionally in the plains of tropical India with reference to its very brief color patterns of adults and larvae and feeding habitat of its larvae. Bowditch (1914) described four new species of the genus Oides from Austro-Malayan region based on superficial characters.

Maulik (1936) described eleven species of the genus Oides Weber with reference to their brief external morphological characters and also keyed out all these species from Oriental region.

Hashmi and Tashfeen (1992) listed five species of the genus Oides Weber viz. bipunctata F., affinis jacoby, centilleta hope., flava Oliver and innacua Cabor, in their checklist, Coleoptera of Pakistan, recorded from National Museum Karachi (NMK) and University of Agriculture, Faisalabad (UAF). Medevdev (2000) studied Chrysomalidae of Nepal, Himalayas in which listed the distribution of only one species of Oides scutellata (Hope).

Kalaichelvan and Verma (2005) gave a checklist of leaf beetles of Bhilai-Durg and included only one species Oides bipunctata Fabricius collected from Vitis trifolia plant giving the remarks that active in rainy season, diapause in winter which continues up to summer.

Aston (2009) described and keyed out two species Oides bowrinigi Baly and Oides decempunctata Billberg under the tribe Luperini of the sub-family Galerucinae with reference to their external morphological characters, habitat and their distributional ranges.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The specimen of Oides neobengalensis is collected on the wild bush from Rawlakot Azad

Kashmir by searching technique. For the study of genitalia the abdomen was removed from base and boiled in 10% KOH solution for about 3-5 minutes on a bench lamp then washed with tap water and dissected in the same medium.

The examination of various structures and their diagrams were made placing these on cotton threads under glycerin with the help of eyepiece graticule. The abdomen and genitalia were preserved in microvials with a drop of glycerin and pinned with the specimen (Kamaluddin 1993).

RESULTS

Oides neobengalensis (sp. n) (Figs. 1-5)

Body Shape and Coloration

Body moderately oblongate, generally reddish-orange except black head, antennae, scuetellum, pronutum, legs, one oval small outer basal patch and one large oblongate medium vertical patch on elytra, entire abdomen.

Head

Head slightly broader than long, anteocular distance very short, about 1/6th the length of posterior of head including eyes, length anteocular distance 0.40 mm, posterior of head including eyes 2.50 mm, width of head 3.10 mm, interocular distance 1.5 mm, antennae 11-segmented, 1st to 4th segment cylindrical, 5th to 10th segment serrated, last segment club-shaped, 4th segment shortest, basal and 3rd segment equal, 2nd and 5th segment equal and longest. Length of segments ; 1st 0.15 mm, 2nd 0.30 mm, 3rd 1.50 mm, 4th 1 mm, 5th 0.30 mm, 6th to 10th are equal i.e., of 0.25 mm, 11th 0.30 mm.

Rizvi & Kamaluddin 58

Figs. 1-5. Oides neobengalensis sp. n. 1. Entire, dorsal view; 2. Aedeagus, Ventral view; 3. Same lateral view; 4. Tegumen, ventral view; 5. Genital plates, ventral view.

Oides neobengalensis: A new species of the genus Oides Weber Coleoptera from Pakistan 59

Fig. 6. Cladogram showing relationship of oriental species of the genus type Oides Weber.

Rizvi & Kamaluddin 60

Thorax

Pronotum almost rectangular shaped, anterior margin sinuated, posterio-medially produced, posterio-laterally sinuated, lateral margin convex, anterior angles acutely produced, humeral angles rounded width of pronotum about 1.5X of its length, length of pronotum 3.0 mm, width 4.50 mm, scutullum small triangular shaped, as broad as long legth of scuetullum 0.60 mm, width 0.60 mm, elytra large, broad at base, medialy constricted, apex narrowed somewhat truncated, length of elytra 8.0 mm, width.

Abdomen

Abdomen convex beneath, basal segment, medialy produced into acute process, epical segment posteriorly convex. Total length 10.90 mm.

Male genitalia (Figs 2-5)

Aedeagus (Figs 2and3) with medium lobe broad almost spirical with posterior margin sinuated, basal lobe medialy constricted and anteriorily obtusely produced, apical lobe anteriorily broad, posteriorily narrowed with sub-acute apex, genital orifices oblongated with a pair of lateral appendages and a median appendage, tegumen (Fig 4) Y-shaped medialy dilated, anteriorily rod-like, genital plates (Fig. 5) somewhat triangular, laterally convex, posterio-laterally acutely produced.

Material examined

Holotype ♂, Azad Kashmir, Rawlakot, 18.6.10, on Wild bush, det. S. Ghazala Rizvi. Lodged at Museum of Urdu University.

Comparative note

This species is most closely related to O. bengalensis Maulik in having general color patterns, vertex of head smooth and impunctate but it can easily be separated from the same in having each elytra with a small rounded spot at base and a large oval vertical spot at sub-apical margin, second antennal segment about 2X the 3rd segment, distal lobe with of aedeagus with plate-like appendage and by the other characters as noted in description, specially with reference to differencing genitalia.

DISCUSSION (Fig. 6)

The representatives of the genus Oides Weber

are distributed mostly in Oriental region east and northwardly direction including Pakistan .Among these only six species recorded including present new species.

The cladogram (Fig. 6) includes 11-species which falls into two groups. The first groups includes six species viz bipunctata, affinis, bengalensis,

neobengalensis, cocinelloides, maculosa whereas the second group includes five species viz pectoralis, semipunctata, flava, scuetelleta and innocua. Among first group the species bipunctata and affinis plays sistergroup relationship to each other and out group relationship with cocinelloides and maculosa.

Among second groups the pectoralis and semipunctata plays sister group relationship to each other with out-group relationships with rest of species, in which scutellata and innocua plays sister group relationships to each other and out-group relationship with Flava.

The present species neobengalensis is most closely related to bengalensis by their synapomorphies like by their general colour patterns and vertex of head smooth and impunctate but can easily be separated by its autoapomorphies like each elytra with a basal and one sub-epical black spots and specially the aedeagus in genital orifices.

List of abbreviations

Apl(apicallobe),bsl(basallobe),gn.or.(genitalorifices),gpl.(genitalplate)md.l.(medianlobe),tg.(tegumen)

REFERENCES ASTON, P. (2009). Chrysomelidae of Hong Kong part 3

subfamily Galuricinae. Hongkong entomological bulletin 1(2): 6-25.

BOWDITCH, F.C. (1914). Notes on Aulacophora Oliver and Oides Weber. Psyche 21: 133-135.

HASHMI, A.A. AND TASHFEEN, A. (1992). Coleoptera of Pakistan. Proc. Pakistan Congr. Zool. 12: 133-170.

KALAICHELVAN, T. AND VERMA, K.K. (2005). Checklist of leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomalidae) of Bhilai-Drug. Zoos’ Print Journal 20(4): 1838-1842.

KAMALUDDIN, S. (1993). Rediscription of Radinosa reticuluta Baly Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae Hispinae with a key to the Indo-Pakistani species and their cladistic analysis. Proc. Pakistan Congr. Zool. 13: 379-386.

LEFROY, H.M. AND HAWLETT, F.M. (1909). Indian Insect Life, a manual of the insects of the Plains (Tropical India). Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa: 1-396.

MAULIK, S. (1936). The fauna of British India including Ceylon and Burma. Taylor and Francis: 1-645.

MEDVEDEV, L.N. (2000). Chrysomelidae from the Nepal Himalyas, with revision of the genus Haplosomoides (Insecta: Coleoptra). Stuttgarte Beitr Naturk: A(616): 1-32.



IMPACT OF TRAP CROPS ON NATURAL BUILDUP OF JASSID POPULATION ON OKRA CROP

ALLAH WASAYO KALERI*, MUHAMMED KHAN LOHAR**, MAQSOOD ANWAR RUSTAMANI** AND ASHFAQUE AHMED NAHIYOON**

*Assistant Entomologist, Cotton Agriculture Research Institute, Tandojam

**Department of Entomology, Sindh Agriculture University Tando Jam, Pakistan (Received for publication: 20.04.2011)

ABSTRACT

Impact of Trap crops on natural build up of jassid population. The studies were carried out in the experimental field of Entomology section A R I Tando jam. The variety subzpari was sown during 3rd week of February 2008 with three trap crops and okra alone. The trap crops sown with okra were Maize, sunflower and marigold. The experiment was laid down in a complete randomized block design with four replications. The observations on pest infestation were started 2nd week of March 2008and continue till harvest of crop. Observation were recorded at weekly interval from 5 plant selected random per treatment. The results revealed that the population of jassid varied significantly (p>0.05) on different dates on okra alone and okra planted with trap crops.

The result indicated that the maximum jassid population was recorded on okra alone which was 3.91/leaf it was followed by okra planted with sunflower 2.92/leaf, marigold 3.33/leaf and maize 2.5/leaf. However the result okra alone and trap crops showed that the maximum jassid population was recorded on okra alone 3.91 which was followed by sunflower 2.70 / leaf, Marigold 0.50 and Maize 0.48 / leaf during 2008.

Key words: Okra, Trap crop, Jassid.

INTRODUCTION

Okra, Abelmoschus esculentus L. (Malvceae) is an important Vegetable crop in many part of the world. It is native crop of Africa, south East Asia and north Australia to the pacific. Okra is the herbaceous annual plant of the world tropic and widely cultivated or naturalized in the tropical and sub tropical countries (Memon, et. al, 2004). Okra contain water , iron, protein , starch, vitamins (A &B), minerals , phosphorus, iodine and salts which play a significant role in human diet (Khushk et. al., 2003). The area under okra cultivation in Pakistan 14780 hectares with annual Production 111565 tones, where as in sindh area under okra cultivation 4910 hectares with annual production 22112 tones. (Anonymous, 2007). The okra vegetable is attacked by number of insect pest such as jassid, whitefly, thrips and spotted bollworms from sowing to harvest (Basu 1995). The jassid nymph and adult cause damage by sucking plant sape. They inject toxic saliva into plant tissues (Lohar 2001).

The most destructive insect pests are whitefly, Thrip, Jassid (Khambete & Desai 1996), Aphid, Spotted bollworm (Pawar et al., 1996), American bollworm etc., among these insect pests the jassid is the injurious one which destroys the okra plant by

sucking the sap from the leaves and transmitting certain viral diseases. (Atwal 1994). The seasonal incidence of jassid, Amrasca biguttula biguttula and whitefly Bemisia tabaci populations investigated on okra and their correlation with a biotic factors viz., minimum and maximum temperature, relative humidity and rainfall (Kumawat et al.2000).

Due to indiscriminate use of pesticides , the pest has developed resistance Besides, that pesticides are hazardous to human health, reduce the density of beneficial insect and soil micro organisms , therefore ,it is need of the time to develop alternate method of pest management other than pesticides (Srinivasa & Sugeetha 2001).

Keeping in view the economic importance of okra and loss by Jassid, Amrasca biguttula biguttula the experiment on impact of trap crops on natural buildup of jassid population on okra crop was carried out in field of entomology section, ARI Tandojam during 2008.


The study was conducted at experimental field, Entomology Section Agriculture Research Institute

Kaleri et al. 62

Tandojam during 2008. The trap crops like Sunflower, Marigold and Maize were sown with okra crop. The okra variety subzpari and trap crops were sown on ridges with 4 replications. The size of sub plot was 50” X 30”. The control plot was sown with okra alone with same size. All Agronomical Practices were carried out throughout growing season.

The observation of jassid (Amrasca biguttula biguttula) was observed from five plants selected randomly from each sub plot. Each plant’s 5 leaves (upper, middle and bottom) were observed at weekly interval. No any pesticides were sprayed in the field. The data was statistically analyzed.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

a) Population of jassid on okra alone crop

The results presented in Figure-1 indicate that the population buildup of jassid on subzpari variety was recorded after 21 days of sowing and continued its appearance throughout growing period of okra. The data revealed that first peak of jassid population was 5.70 in 1st week of May however , the period of jassid activity with peak population was between April and May. In Fig.2 the mean per leaf population on okra alone was 3.91.

b) Population of jassid on okra planted with Maize as trap crop

The results presented in Figures 1 further indicate that when okra was sown in with trap crop maize, the infestation of jassid appeared on okra was less than on okra alone crop. The jassid appeared on second week of February with population of 1.40 jassid per leaf. Its appearance was recorded throughout growing period and continued up to second week of June 2008. The maximum jassid population 4.40/ leaf were recorded in the 2nd week of April and 1st week of May but minimum 0.80 / leaf was in the second week of June. In Fig.2 the mean of jassid on okra+maiz was 2.50 per leaf.

c) Population of jassid on okra planted with sunflower as trap crop

The results presented in figures 1 also indicated that the jassid population appeared on okra crop 0.20 /leaf during second week of March and continued till second week of June 2008. The maximum population of jassid was noted in the second week of May 5.20 per leaf. After it was declined and reached to minimum 2.20 per leaf in the second week of June 2008. In Fig.2 the mean of jassid on okra+ sunflower was 2.92 per leaf in Fig.2 during the growing season.

d) Population of jassid on okra planted with marigold as trap crop

When okra crop was 21 days old, the jassid population 1.20/ leaf was recorded .and continued its activity till second week of June 2008. The data in Fig.1 revealed that maximum jassid population was 5.40 per leaf in 1st week of May and minimum 1.20 per leaf in second week of March. The population of jassid on okra crop in presence of Marigold trap crop fluctuated throughout the growing period and mean was 3.33 per leaf in Fig.2.

JASSID POPULATION ON TRAP CROPS

a) Maize trap crop

The result presented in Fig.3 indicated that jassid population appeared on maize after 21 days of sowing and the maximum population 0.18 per leaf was recorded in 2nd week of May 2008 and minimum 0.25 / leaf in the second week of June, 2008 the jassid population fluctuated throughout growing season and overall mean per leaf was recorded 0.480 showed in Fig.4.

b) Sunflower Trap crop

The result indicated in Fig.3 that maximum population of jassid on sunflower 5.80 per leaf was recorded in 1st week of May 2008 and minimum 1 per leaf in the 2nd week of June 2008 the jassid population fluctuated throughout growing season. The data showed in Fig.4 that overall mean population was 2.70 per leaf.

c) Marigold Trap crop

The result presented in Fig.3 showed that jassid population appeared on marigold after 21 days of sowing. The maximum population 0.81 per leaf was recorded in 3rd week of April 2008 and minimum 0.07 / leaf in the second week of March 2008 .the jassid population fluctuated throughout growing season. In Fig.4 overall mean population was 0.50 per leaf.

CONCLUSION

In the present studies some newly introduced trap crops were sown to avoid jassid population. It was observed that the maize trap crop was more effective followed by sunflower and marigold to control jassid population.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that Maiz trap crop is more effective to control jassid population and it is also a good source of shelter for predator and parasitoids so it should be cultivated as a trap crop.

Impact of trap crops on natural buildup of jassid population on okra crop 63

0123456

12/3

/200

819

/3/2

008

6/3/

2008

2/4/

2008

9/4/

2008

16/4

/200

823

/4/2

008

30/4

/200

87/

5/20

0814

/5/2

008

21/5

/200

828

/5/2

008

4/6/

2008

11/6

/200

8

W e e k s

Mea

n/le

af

O k r a a lo n eO k r a + M a izO k r a + S . FO k r a + M . G

Fig. 1. Weekly mean population of Jassid/leaf on okra alone and planted with, Maize, Sunflower and Marigold trap crops during 2008.

Fig. 2. Overall mean population of Jassid per leaf on okra alone and planted

with, Maize, Sunflower and Marigold trap crops during 2008.

012345

O k r a a l o n e O k r a +M a i z e

O k r a + S . F O k r a + M . G

M e a n

Kaleri et al. 64

OKRA ALONE

OKRA + MAIZE

OKRA + MARIGOLD

OKRA + SUNFLOWER

Impact of trap crops on natural buildup of jassid population on okra crop 65

01234567

1 2 / 3 / 2 0 0 8

1 9 / 3 / 2 0 0 8

6 / 3 / 2 0 0 8

2 / 4 / 2 0 0 8

9 / 4 / 2 0 0 8

1 6 / 4 / 2 0 0 8

2 3 / 4 / 2 0 0 8

3 0 / 4 / 2 0 0 8

7 / 5 / 2 0 0 8

1 4 / 5 / 2 0 0 8

2 1 / 5 / 2 0 0 8

2 8 / 5 / 2 0 0 8

4 / 6 / 2 0 0 8

1 1 / 6 / 2 0 0 8

W E E K S

M/L

M a i z eS u n f l o w e rM a r i g o l d

Fig. 3. Weekly mean population of Jassid/leaf on Maize, Sunflower and Marigold as trap crops during 2008.

0

0 . 5

1

1 . 5

2

2 . 5

3

M a i z e S u n fl o w e r M a r i g o l d

T r a p C r o p s

Ove

rall

mea

n/le

af

S e r i e s 1

Fig. 4. Overall mean population of Jassid per leaf on Maize, Sunflower

and Marigold as trap crops during 2008.

Kaleri et al. 66

REFERENCES

ANONYMOUS (2007). Pakistan statistical year book Published by Federal Bureau of statistics, Statistics Division, Government of Pakistan Pp. 29-31.

ATWAL, A.S. (1994). Agricultural pests of India and South East Asia. Kalyani Publishers New Delhi, India. Pp. 529.

BASU, A.N. (1995). Bemesia tabaci (Genn.) crop pest and principal whitefly vector o plan Viruses. West View Press, Bouleters San Francesco, Oxford, 183 pp.

KHAMBETE, M.S. AND DESAI, B.D. (1996). Studies on the varietal resistance of okra to jassid and shoot and fruit borer. TVIS Newsletter 1(2): 18-19.

KHUSHK, A.M., USMAN SHAR, M. AND MEMON, M.A. (2003).The cultivation of okra in sindh and its economic view, PARC Technology

transfer institute, Tandojam, published in Sindh Zarat.136:17-18.

KUMAWAT R.L., PAREEK, B.L. AND MEENA, B.L. (2000). Seasonal incidence of jassid and whitefly on okra and their correlation with a biotic factor. Annuals of Biology. 16 (2): 167-169.

LOHAR, M.K. (2001). Applied Entomology [second edition]. Published by Kashif Publication Hyderabad, Sindh.

MEMON, S.A., ABRO, G.H. AND SYED, T.S. (2004). Varietal resistance of okra against Earias spp. Journal of Entomology. 1(1): 1-5.

PAWAR, D.B., LAWANDE, D.E. AND WARADE, S.D. (1996). Effects of different sowing dates on the incidence of leafhopper, mite and fruit borer of okra. J. Maharashtra Agril. Univ. 21(3): 375-377.

SRINIVASA, N. AND SUGEETHA, G. (2001). Field screening of certain okra varieties for resistance against major. Insect Environment. 7 (2): 74-76.



EFFICACY OF DIFFERENT BIOPESTICEDS AGAINST SUCKING INSECT PESTS ON OKRA CROP

ALLAH WASAYO KALERI*, MUHAMMED KHAN LOHAR**, MAQSOOD AHMED

RUSTAMANI** AND ASHFAQUE AHMED NAHIYOON**

*Assistant Entomologist, Cotton Agriculture Research Institute, Tandojam **Department of Entomology, Sindh Agriculture University Tando Jam,


ABSTRACT The studies on efficacy of different biopesticeds against sucking insect pests of okra plant were conducted at Experimental Field, Entomology Section, A. R. I. Tando jam from during 2008-2009. The okra variety subzpari was sown during 3rd week of February 2008-2009 in complete randomized block design with four replications. Results indicated that due to application of biopesticides on okra maximum reduction percentage of white fly was (54.48%- 42.8%) on Hing followed by (39.18% - 33.17%) on Neem extract and (37.39%-30.38%) on Neem oil during 2008-2009 respectively. The maximum reduction percentage of thrip was (46.72%-50.03%) Neem Extract followed by (42.70%-39.49%) Neem oil and (39.89%-41.09%) Hing during 2008-2009 respectively. The maximum reduction percentage of Jassid was (57.33%-52.07%) on Neem extract followed by (48.56% - 46.36%) Neem oil and (42.69% -39.26%) Hing during 2008-2009 respectively. Key words: Okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L.), Biopesticeds, jassid, white fly, thrip.

INTRODUCTION

Okra, Abelmoschus esculentus L. (Malvaceae) is an important vegetable-crop in many parts of the world. It is a native crop of Africa, South East Asia and North Australia to the pacific.

The area under okra cultivation in Pakistan 14780 hectares with annual Production 111565 tones, where as in Sindh area under okra cultivation 4910 hectares with annual production 22112 tones (Anonymous, 2007).

The okra vegetable is attacked by number of insect’s pests such as aphid, jassid, white fly, thrips, spotted bollworm, & mites from sowing till harvest. White fly, Bemisia tabaci (Genn) is the most serious sucking type insect pest attacking a number of crops including okra plant throughout world (Nizamani et al .2002).

The Okra crop is infested by a number of insect pest like Jassid (Amrasca biguttula), Spotted boll worm (Earias vittela), White fly (Bemisia tabaci), American bollworm (Helicoverpa armigera), Thrips (Thrip tabaci ) Aphid (Aphid gossypii) Based on there occurrence and infestation, A. biguttula biguttula, E. vittela, H. armigera and B. tabaci, were the major insect pests (Dubey et al, 1999)

The whitefly Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera) is a world wide pest, causing yield loss and economic injury in many crop species. (Oliveira et al. 2001).

The seasonal incidence of jassid, Amrasca biguttula and whitefly Bemisia tabaci populations investigated on okra and their correlation with a biotic factors viz., minimum and maximum temperature, relative humidity and rainfall (Kumawat et al. 2000).

Jassid has been found damaging many crops in the world . the okra crops is damaging by both adult and nymphs of the jassid by sucking plants sap. The also inject toxic saliva into the plant tissues . due to the attack of jassid, the colour of the leaves changes from green to brown with grayish margin and the edges of the leaves turn down (crinkling) which is the characteristics feature of jassid attack (Lohar, 2001).

Due to indiscriminate use of pesticides , the pest has developed resistance besides, that pesticides are hazardous to human health, reduce the density of beneficial insect and soil micro organizes , therefore ,it is need of the time to develop alternate methods of pest managemeant other than pesticides (Greathead, 1986).

The efficacy of six plant extracts and two pestcides were evaluated the control of Aphis gossypii and Amrasca devastans on okras. Aqueous leaf extracts of tobacco (2%), Ipomoea carnea (5%) and a seed extract of Azadirachta indica and Pongamia glabra, P.pinnata (both at 5%) gave a similar level of control compared to endosulfan (0.06%) and monocrotophos (0.05%) (Kulat et al. 1997).

Kaleri et al. 68

The effects of Datura stramonium, Ricinus communis, and neem (Azadirachta indica) extracts were evaluated. The neem-based preparation Rakshak Gold (10 and 100%) on M. incognita larval emergence in vitro. All treatments significantly inhibited larval emergence (by 60-90%) (Narpinderjeet et al. 2002).

Keeping in view the economic importance of okra and loss by insect pests, present investigation was under taken to develop alternate management tactics such as application of Biopesticides to control the sucking insect pests of okra in Sindh Pakistan.


The experimeant on efficacy of different biopesticeds against sucking insect pests on okra crop were conducted at Experimeantal Field, Entomology Section, Agriculture Research Institute, Tandojam during 2008-09. Healthy and homogenous seeds of okra were sown on well prepared ridges keeping 2.5 feet distance between row to row and 4-6 inches distance between plant to plant during third week of febuary 2008- 2009 respectively. The experiment was laid out in a four replicated with complete Randomized Block design. The treatments were T1= Neem oil, T2= Hing, T3= Neem Extract and T4=Control. The size of sub plot was maintained as 30 x 40 feets. The rate of biopesticeds such as Neem Extract 3 kg, Neem oil 700 ml and Hing 3 kg per acre were applied respectively. The observations on sucking insect pests were taken randomely from 5 leaves (1 Upper, 2 Middle and 2 Bottom) of each okra plant for Jassid, White fly, Thrips. Data was taken after 48 hours, 96 hours, one and two weeks of spray respectively.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1) White fly:

The Data in Fig-1 (a) revealed that during 2008 in okra maximum reduction (65.71%) of whitefly population was recorded in Hing followed by (54.28%) neem extract and (45.71%) Neem oil after 96 hrs. The effectiveness of biopesticides continued up to one week after application of biopesticides with range of (55.26%) in Hing, (38.15%) in Neem Extract and (36.84%) in Neem Oil respectively. During 2009 Fig-1 (b) showed that the mean reduction percentage of whitefly in okra by different biopesticides were almost similar with a range of maximum (56.71%) to (45.71%) after 96 hrs. of spray in all biopesticides. There after, the neem reduction percentages decreased after one week of spray. Over all, maximum reduction percent (42.8%) of white fly population was recorded in Hing followed by neem extract (33.17%) and neem oil (30. 38%).

In the Fig: 1 (c) showed that over all maximum mean reduction percent of white fly was recorded

(54.48%) in Hing followed by neem extract (39.18%) and neem oil (37.39%) respectively.

2) Jassid

The Data in Fig-2 (a) revealed that during 2008 in okra maximum reduction (69.56%) of jassid population was recorded in Neem extract followed by (60.86%) neem oil and (43.18%) Hing after 96 hrs. The effectiveness of biopesticides continued up to one week after application of biopesticides with range of (63.38%) in Neem extract, (54.92%) in Neem oil and (50.70%) in Hing respectively. During 2009 Fig-2 (b) showed that the mean reduction percentage of jassid in okra by different biopesticides were almost similar with a range of maximum (52.56%) in Neem extract, (44.87%) Neem oil and (37.17%) after 1 week. Fig. 2 (c) revealed that Over all maximum reduction percent (54.70%) of jassid population was recorded in Neem extract followed by neem oil (48.56%) and Hing (42.69%) respectively.

3) Thrips:

The Data in Fig-3 (a) revealed that during 2008 in okra maximum reduction (55.38%) of thrips population was recorded in Neem extract after one week followed by (48.27%) in Hing after 96 hrs. and (44.82%) in Neem oil after 48 hrs respectively. The effectiveness of biopesticides continued up to one week after application of biopesticides. During 2009 Fig-3 (b) showed that the mean reduction percentage of Thrips in okra by different biopesticides were almost similar with a range of maximum (56.47%) in Neem extract after one week, (40.90%) in Hing after 48 hrs. and (44.82%) after 48 hrs. Fig. 3 (c) revealed that Over all maximum reduction percent (48.51%) of Thrips population was recorded in Neem extract followed by Neem oil (41.09 %) and Hing (36.88%) respectively.

CONCLUSION It is concluded that sucking population of okra

was significantly reduced after application of Biopesticides like neem extract, Neem oil and Hing, they are also safe against the, Agroecosystem, Predators and parasitoids populations. After two year data recording, It is observed that Hing biopesticides is effective to control White fly population while Neem extract and Neem oil was also effectively to control jassid and thrips population during.

RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that Biopesticdes like Neem

Extract, Neem Oil and Hing should be applicate after 15 days interval to control sucking insect pests of okra crop.

It is also suggested that there is need to work on other different Biopesticides.

Efficacy of different biopesticides against sucking insect pests on okra crop 69

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

4 8 H R S 9 6 H R S 1 - W E E K 2 - W E E K

o b s e r v a t i o n s

Percen

tage N e e m o il

H in g

N . E x t r a c t l

Fig. 1 (a): Efficacy of different biopesticeds against whitefly during 2008.

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

4 8 H R S 9 6 H R S 1 - W E E K 2 - W E E K

O b s e r v a t io n s

Valu

es

N e e m o i lH i n gN .E x t r a c t l

Fig. 1 (b) Efficacy of different biopesticeds against whitefly during 2009.

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

%

N e e m o i l H i n g N .E x t r a c t lB io p e s t ic id e s

2 0 0 82 0 0 9

Fig. 1 (c) Overall Efficacy of different biopesticeds against whitefly during 2008-09.

Kaleri et al. 70

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

4 8 H R S 9 6 H R S 1 - W E E K 2 - W E E K

o b s e r v a t io n s

%N e e m o i lH i n gN . E x t r a c t l

Fig. 2 (a): Efficacy of different biopesticeds against jassid during 2008.

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

4 8 H R S 9 6 h r s 1 - W E E K 2 - W E E K

O b s e r v a t io n s

%

N e e m o i lH i n gN .E x t r a c t l

Fig. 2 (b): Efficacy of different biopesticeds against jassid during 2009.

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

N e e m o i l H i n g N .E x t r a c t l

B io p e s t ic id e s

%

2 0 0 82 0 0 9

Fig. 2 (c) Overall Efficacy of different biopesticeds against jassid during 2008-09.

Efficacy of different biopesticides against sucking insect pests on okra crop 71

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

4 8 H R S 9 6 H R S 1 - W E E K 2 - W E E K

o b s e r v a t i o n s

valu

esN e e m o i lH i n gN . E x t r a c t l

Fig. 3 (a): Efficacy of different biopesticeds against Thrips during 2008.

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

4 8 H R S 9 6 H R S 1 - W E E K 2 - W E E K

o b s e r v a t io n s

%

N e e m o i lH in gN . E x t r a c t l

Fig. 3 (b): Efficacy of different biopesticeds against Thrips during 2009.

3 6

3 8

4 0

4 2

4 4

4 6

4 8

N e e m o i l H in g N . E x t r a c t l

B i o p e s t i c i d e s

%

2 0 0 82 0 0 9

Fig. 3 (c) Overall Efficacy of different biopesticeds against thrips during 2008-09.

Kaleri et al. 72

REFERENCES ANONYMOUS (2007). Pakistan statistical year

books Published by Federal Bureau of statistics, Statistics Division, Government of Pakistan.

DUBEY, V.K., BHAGAT, K.P. AND YADU, Y.K. (1999). Insect pest succession studies on okra. Journal of Applied Zoological researches. 10 (2): 103-111.

GREATHEAD, A.H. (1986). Host plants. In Bemisia tabaci a literature survey (M.J.W. Cock, ed). C.A.B. International practices for managing Bemisia tabaci. Manjo Integrado de Plagas. 56: 22-30.

KULAT, S.S., NIMBALKAR, S.A. HIWASE, B.J. (1997). Relative efficacy of some plant extracts against Aphis gossypii Glover and Amrasca devastans (Distant) on okra. PKV Research Journal. 21 (2): 146-148.

KUMAWAT, R.L., PAREEK, B.L. AND MEENA, B.L. (2000). Seasonal incidence of jassid and whitefly

on okra and their correlation with abiotic factors. Annals of Biology, 16 (2): 167-169.

LOHAR, M.K. (2001). Applied Entomology. 2nd Edition. Department of Entomology, Sindh Agriculture University Tandojam. pp. 31-34.

RANDHAWA, N., SAKHUJA, P.K. AND INDERJIT, S. (2002). Management of root-knot nematode Meloidogyne incognita in Abelmoschus esculentus through botanical extracts and organic amendments. Indian Journal of Nematology 32(2): 129-131.

NIZAMANI, I.A. TALPUR, M.A. KHUHRO, R.D. AND NIZAMANI, S.M. (2002). Relative resistance of cotton cultivars to sucking complex. Pakistan Journal of Applied Sciences, 2(6): 686-689.

OLIVEIRA, M.R.V., HENNEBERRY, T.J. AND ANDERSON, P. (2001). History, current status, and collaborative research projects for Bemisia tabaci. Crop Protection 20: 709-723.



EFFECT OF LEAD ACETATE ON MUSCA DOMESTICA

RIZWANUL HAQ1, MUHAMMED FARHANULLAH KHAN2, MUHAMMAD FAHEEM2,

HABIBULLAH RANA2 AND S.N.H. NAQVI3

1Department of Botany, Federal Urdu University of Arts, Science & Technology, Karachi, Pakistan 2Department of Zoology University of Karachi, 3Baqi Medical University, Super Highway, Karachi


ABSTRACT

Under the effects of 0.125 mg., and 2.0 mg lead acetate Musca domestica, were studied at 48 hours post treatment. It was observed that abnormalities and malformation were developed in the flies as elongated / de-shaped wings, elongated and folded legs with change in melanization of larvae, pupae and adults. Some other structural abnormalities of larvae and pupal shape were also observed. Therefore, in this respect, Musca domestica, could be used as a test system for heavy metals effects.

Key words: Heavy metal, Lead acetate, M. domestica.

INTRODUCTION

Lead could cause definite cytogenetic effect (Ramel, 2003; Talbot, 2004 and Margim. 2005). it has been established that contamination with heavy metals (Zinc, Lead etc.) can induce the effects on behavior, structure and function of some diptera, (Michailova, 1987 and Timmermans 1988). The Musca domestica are found associated with human activities and animal feaces, these are abundant where sanitary managements is poor (Graczyk et al., 2001, 2005). However, sufficient data on the action of heavy metals and lead is limited available on the group of insects such as Musca domestica, which is widely distributed species. Therefore, presently effect of lead was studied on houseflies.


The larvae of Musca domestica were treated as batches of bottles with 3 grams bananas mixed with lead acetate were used as diet, doses of lead acetate were used as, 0.125 mg and 2.0 mg after Haq et al., (2011). A batch of three bottles was kept as control. 10 larvae were released in each bottle for 48 hours. Surviving larvae were kept in separate bottles on lead free bananas up to formation.

At the post 48 hours exposure mortality count was made then the surviving larvae were transferred in separate bottles on pure diet and kept till pupation and adult emergence. At each stage the effect of lead acetate of different concentration was recorded. and presented in Table 1.

RESULTS

Musca domestica larvae in normal conditions were up to 3 to 9 mm long, typical creamy whitish in color, cylindrical but tapering toward the head (Fig. I). Whereas effected larvae with lead acetate 0.125 mg. were found abnormally thickened at one end and tapper from other end. The middle portion of larvae was dull white dark brown and melanized at proximal end, (Fig. II). Larvae treated with 2.0 mg. were turned into rough cylindrical body, anterior and posterior ends become blackish brown, middle portion of the body was dark brown melanized, slightly curved body, smaller than normal one (Fig. III). Normal pupae were found 8 mm. in length dark to yellow, red brown up to black in color. (Fig. IV), effected pupae with 0.125 mg exposure were blackish dark brown, with narrow at anterior end. Some time immature dead fly was found inside the pupal cover, usually reduced 5 to 6 mm in length. (Fig. V). Effected pupae with 2.0 mg., appeared as slightly pointed at one end, segmented brownish encapsulated bumble shaped, with some time un-hatched fly inside 5 to 8 mm in length (Fig. VI). Normal adult flies were with veinlated wings, 7 mm. in length. Adult emerged from the 0.125 mg treated larvae were found abnormal in shape and structure. Wing was with a cut at proximal end and abnormal legs were found, they were, 7 mm. in length. (Fig. VII).Adult formed from 2.0 mg effected larvae were physical abnormal with one wing twisted projected. reduced oval abdomen with folded and curved thickened legs, 7 mm. (Fig. VIII).

Rizwan et al. 74

Fig.I Musca domestica (larvalstage) normal in condition, narrow at the mouth end, larvae are 3 to 9 mm. in length.

Fig. II. M. domestica (larval stage) effected with lead acetate 0.125mg. at 48 hours. Showing abnormalities.

Fig. III. M. domestica (larval stage), effected with lead acetate, 2.0 mg at 48 hours showing structural and morphological changes on different larvae.

Fig. IV. Musca domestica (Pupal stage) in normal condition.

Fig. V. M. domestica (Pupal stage), effected with lead acetate 0.125mg at 48 hours showing abnormalities.

Fig. VI. M. domestica (Pupal stage), effected with lead acetate 2.0 mg at 48 hours showing the abnormal structure and different melanization on pupae.

Effect of lead acetate on Musca domestica L. 75

Fig. VII. M. domestica (Adult stage), effected with lead acetate 0.125mg at 48 hours showing the abnormal toxic effect on their structure and wings.

Fig. VIII. M. domestica effected with lead acetate 2.0 mg at 48 hours exposure showing slightly morphological change on their one side wing and legs

Table 1. Mortality effect of lead acetate on Musca domestica (3rd instar larvae) at post 48 hours exposure period

Treatment Control 0.125mg 2.0mg Serial # 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Mortality 2 3 3 6 6 7 10 11 11 Ave. % Mortality

17.77 42.22 71.11

• Number of larvae exposed in each replicate = 15

DISCUSSIONS

The results of Musca domestica, treated with lead acetate 0.125 mg, 0.25 mg, 0.5 mg, 01 mg and 02 mg of different concentrations, revealed an increase in mortality rates directly proportional to all different concentrations.

Parke et al., (1991) have shown that after the exposure of lead acetate the mortality rate increased with the increase in the concentration of the chemical compound to induce in vivo experiments, these results are in line with the present findings.

Ahmed and Naqvi (1985) reported that heavy metal resistance is evidently a widespread phenomenon in invertebrates. Heavy metal resistance in Diptera and specially Drosophila are the model organisms in exposure to cadmium stated by Magnusson and Ramel (1986).

Insects living in polluted areas have been shown to accumulate heavy metals, in particular Ni and Cu, along with the obvious effects of pollution on growth rate and mortality, reported by Warrington, (1987). Positive relationship was found in Chironomus between the copper concentration and the incidence of deformation of the pectin epipharyngis, observed

by Kosalwat and Knight, (1987). Chironomous reparius and sediment spiked with cadium, zinc and copper,high mortality rates were observed, but no mentum deformities were induced, observed by Grootelaar et al. (1988).

The concentration of lead, cooper, cadmium and zinc in Chironomus larvae from several location in the polluted Dyle Basin and Dommel River in Belgium, and compared levels in normal larvae, stated by Janssens de Bisthoven (1995).

The present studies showed that lead acetate caused influence mostly on the morphology and development of the under test insects. However, the differences due to increase in concentration of lead acetate effected the level of these changes as compared to control.

Rizwan et al. 76

REFERENCES AHMED, S.O. AND NAQVI, S.N.H. (1985). Toxicity

and effects of Dimilin on protein pattern of Aedes aegypti. Proc. Entomol. Soc. 14&15: 119-132.

GRACZYK, T.K., KNIGHT, R., GILMAN, R.H. AND CRANFIELD, M.R. (2001). The role of non-biting flies in the epidemiology of human infectious diseases. Microbes and Infection 3: 231-235.

GRACZYK, T.K., KNIGHT, R., TAMANG, L. (2005). Mechanical transmission of human protozoan parasites by insects. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. pp. 128-132.

GROOTELAAR, E.M.M., VAN DE GUCHTE, C., KERKUM, F.C.M. & VAN URK, G. (1988). Effekten op chironomide larven bij blootelling aan waterbodems.

HAQ, R., KHAN, M.F. AND HAQ, M.E. (2011). Adverse effects of lead acetate on Drosophila melanogaster. J. Basic & Appl. Sci. (Accepted).

JANSSENS DE BISTHOVEN, L. (1995). Morphological deformities in Chironomus gr. Thummi (Diptera, Chironomidae) as bioindicators for micropollunts in sediments of Belgian lowland rivers.- Ph.D.- thesis, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium. 259 pp.

KOSALWAT, P. AND KNIGHT, A.W. (1987). Chronic toxicity of copper to a partial life cycle of the midge Chronomus secorus.- Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 16: 283- 290.

MAGNUSSON, J. AND RAMEL, C. (1986). Genetic variation in the susceptibility to mercury and other metal compounds in Drosophila melanogaster. Teratog. Carcinog. Mutagen. 6: 289-305.

MARGIM, A. (2005). Chromosome affected in experimental lead poisoning. Tox. 41: 6-14.

MICHAILOVA, P. (1987). The effect of metal compounds on chromosome segregation. Ist. Nat. Conf. Plovidiv, PP. 168-173.

PARKE, V.D., IONNIDES, C. AND LEWIS, D.F.V. (1991). Pharmac. Manufact. Assoc. Can. Key. Lect. 69(19): 537-548.

RAMEL, S. (2003). Chromosomal aberrations in insects. Environ. Sci. 16:119-127.

TALBOT, P.S. (2004). Sister-chromated exchange frequency correlated with age, sex and lead poisoning. Environ. Tox. 25:27-33.

TIMMERMANS, K.P. (1988). Heavy metal body burden in insects larvae as related to their feeding behaviour. Symp. Abst. 76.

WARRINGTON, S. (1987). Relationship between SO2 dose and growth of the pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum, on peas. Environmental Pollution 43, 155e162.



POPULATION AND PREVALENCE OF DENGUE VECTOR MOSQUITOES DURING WINTER TO SUMMER SEASON WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO

TEMPERATURE IN KARACHI, SINDH-PAKISTAN

RAJPUT MUHAMMED TARIQ1, SYED SALAHUDDIN QADRI2, SYED ZAFAR HUSSAIN3, IMTIAZ AHMED4 AND MUHAMMAD ARSHAD AZMI5

1. MAHQ, Biological Research Centre, University of Karachi, [email protected]

2. Jamia Millia Govt. Degree College, Malir, Karachi, [email protected] 3. Govt. Degree Science College for Women, Lines Area, Karachi

4. Department of Agriculture, University of Karachi, [email protected] 5. Department of Zoology, University of Karachi

ABSTRACT

Visits were done during January 2011 to June 2011 in which, breeding spots of Dengue vector mosquitoes were visited and observed for the presence of larvae or pupae of these mosquitoes. Totally 4 types of containers including 1. Plastic or Rubber containers; 2. Cemented tanks; 3. Earthen pots and 4. Iron containers (tubs) were visited. During this work totally 12, 14, 16, 22, 35 and 50 containers were visited in January 2011 to June 2011, respectively. Whereas 01, 02, 02, 06, 20 and 31 containers were found positive among these above visited containers in January 2011 to June 2011, respectively. The average temperature of day and night was also noted during January-June 2011 from 25+2 / 10+2 to 36+1 / 28+1. The percentage of positive container during January-June 2011 was increased with the increase of temperature, which was recorded as 8.33, 14.28, 12.5, 27.27, 57.142 and 62%, respectively. The percentage of pupae + larvae/total container visited was recorded as 0.5, 02, 03, 54.818, 110.142 and 113.56, whereas pupae + larvae/positive container was recorded as 06, 14, 24, 201, 192.75 and 183.161. The increase in larvae and pupae was found positively correlated with the increase of temperature.

Key words: Dengue population, Prevalence, Temperature, Season, Karachi.

INTRODUCTION

Dengue is a worldwide problem and is a risk to all developed and developing countries because of its fast spreading (Monath 1994). The same risk is being realized for Pakistan as its all 4 provinces are reported dengue positive. The dengue vector mosquitoes remain present, the whole year, due to which they increase their population in raining season because they find more chances to breed, due to the availability of freshwater everywhere, in houses, offices, schools, masjid, tyre shops etc. (Tariq & Zafar 2000, Tariq, 2001). Generally people and government takes precautions and start mosquito control strategies in July or August from where the infection of dengue virus starts but the best way to control any pest or infectious insect is the period of its life, when its population is small or a particular stage, such as larval stage of mosquitoes as reported by Tariq & Qadri (2008). Survey of all towns of Karachi has been reported dengue positive by Ahmed et al. (2009), Tariq et al. (2010) and the survey of Sindh has been reported by Tariq & Azmi (2010). Seasonal distribution of daytime biting

mosquitoes was reported by Akram et al. (2009). Therefore the increasing population of these vector mosquitoes has been monitored by visiting breeding point containers of 4 types with special reference to temperature effect. This survey has been done in three neighbouring towns of Karachi, i.e. SITE, Liaquatabad and Saddar town.


Visits were arranged on Sunday data in each month. Total number of visited containers including plastic or rubber, cemented tanks, earthen pots and iron container was recorded. Among the total visited containers of 4 types the number of positive containers was also recorded. Total number of pupae and larvae was counted. The type of place from where the larvae or pupae were collected was also noticed such as house, masjid, tyre shop, or any other place. Results of the visits and observation shows that due to low temperature (25+2/10+2) in January. The pupae and larvae were not found in visited point containers.

Tariq et al. 78

Table showing the parameters for increasing Dengue mosquitoes population during January-2011 to June-2011,

with reference to temperature

S. # Parameters Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun.

01. Total container visited 12 14 16 22 35 50

02. No. of positive container 01 02 02 06 20 31

03. Percent of positive container 8.33% 14.28% 12.5% 27.27% 57.142% 62.00%

04. Pupae collected 00 03 21 38 168 792

05. Larvae collected 06 25 27 1168 3687 4886

06. Total Pupae+larvae 06 28 48 1206 3855 5678

07. Larvae or

pupae/total container visited

0.5 02 03 54.818 110.142 113.56

08. Larvae or

pupae/positive container

6 14 24 201 192.75 183.16

09. Type of container positive

Earthen pots

Earthen pots,

plastic or rubber

container

Cement tank,

earthen pot

Earthen pot,

cemented tank & iron

tubs, plastic or

rubber container

Earthen pot,

cemented tank & iron

tubs, plastic or rubber

container

Earthen pot,

cemented tank, iron

tubs & plastic or rubber

container

10. Type of place positive House House,

Masjid Tyre shop,

House

Tyre shops, House, Masjid



11. Date of the month 30.01.11 27.02.11 27.03.11 24.04.11 29.05.11 26.06.11

12. Temperature Day/Night 25+2/10+2 27+2/15+2 30+2/20+2 34+1/23+1 35+1/27+1 36+1/28+1

Population and prevalence of Dengue vector mosquitoes during winter to summer season 79

Plastic drum in house containing mosquito larvae

Plastic tub in tyre shop containing mosquito larvae

Earthen pot in house containing mosquito larvae

Earthen pot in masjid containing mosquito larvae

Earthen pot in tyre shop containing mosquito larvae

Cemented tank in tyre shop containing mosquito larvae

Cemented tank in tyre shop showing mosquito larvae

Cemented tank in tyre shop showing mosquito larvae

Tariq et al. 80

RESULTS Visits and observation during January 2011 to

June 2011 during present work shows that Dengue vector mosquitoes (Aedes aegypti L.) remain present the whole year in houses, masjid, offices, tyre shops, nurseries etc. The larval stage become prolong due to low temperature and winter season, where they can survive. The Aedes larvae may die due to low temperature and could not survive. This is the reason that in January only 6 larvae were found in visited containers. The population of the mosquitoes increases with the increase of temperature. The total number of visited container, number and % of positive containers, number of pupae and larvae with total count, number of pupae and larvae/total container visited and per positive container, type of container and place positive for Aedes and average temperature of day and night has been shown in Table with date of visit.

DISCUSSION Qadri et al., (2007) reported biological control of

these mosquitoes by a fish P. reticulata which can breed in both waters dirty and fresh. These fishes may be used in permanent freshwater storage, where these mosquitoes can breed, in any season. By the use of these fishes, the population of these mosquitoes may decrease at a level, which could not shoot the population of these (Aedes) mosquitoes in raining season.

Tariq & Qadri (2008) reported control of Aedes mosquitoes at three levels: 1. Control of dengue mosquitoes at larval stage level; 2. Adult stage level (flying stage) and 3. The clinical stage level. Among these three levels the 3rd clinical stage level is the weakest and the most limited type of control in which only a few persons may be given treatment or safety. The 2nd one adult stage level control is difficult to control due to large areas and in ability of penetration of pesticide in all sprayed area. Side effects and hazards of these pesticides, but provide safety to all those who are present in that sprayed area. The 1st one is easy to control the mosquitoes in their larval stage level as they remain limited in their particular area. This particular area (breeding point) may be detected and destroyed by someone easily. Therefore if in the initial stage of the mosquitoes they are controlled, then all the people may be saved.

CONCLUSION

The biological control and mechanical control is reported by Tariq et al., (2009) and Tariq et al. (2010). The biological and mechanical control may also be effective if the people are given awareness by electronic and print media, to decrease the population of these mosquitoes furthermore. By this way we may avoid dengue break in Pakistan.

RECOMMENDATION Each and everyone try to use biological control,

mechanical control of these mosquitoes and also try to reduce the number of breeding points, or avoid of producing the breeding points for these mosquitoes.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors are thankful to Pakistan Academy of Sciences for providing the funds for this project entitled: “The Survey, Distribution, Population Dynamics and Biological Control of Mosquitoes Causing Dengue Fever in Karachi” (Ref. No. 5-9/PAS/3392, dated 13-5-2009) to control the Dengue vector mosquitoes in Karachi, after identifying the main localities and areas, positive for dengue vector mosquitoes. We are also thankful to City District Govt. Karachi (CDGK) for providing help in survey and control, during 2009-2010.

REFERENCES

AHMED, I., TARIQ, R.M. AND QADRI, S.S. (2009). Scouting & survey of Towns of Karachi city for the presence of Dengue vector mosquitoes, Ae. aegypti L. Pak. j. entomol. Karachi. 24 (1&2): 61-62.

AKRAM, W., HAFEEZ, F., NAEEM ULLAH, U., KIM, Y.K., HUSSAIN, A. AND LEE, J.J. (2009). Seasonal distribution and species composition of daytime biting mosquitoes. Entomol. Res. 39 (2): 107-113.

MONATH, T.P. (1994). Dengue: the risk to developed and developing countries. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 91: 2395-2400.

QADRI, S.S., TARIQ, R.M. AND AHMED, I. (2007). Dengue kee wapsi (Article in Urdu). Global Science (Nov. 2007): 21-26.

TARIQ, R.M. (2001). Where the mosquitoes Aedes, Anopheles & Culex are breeding in Karachi, Sindh-Pakistan? Pakistan j. entomol, Karachi, 16 (1&2): 15-18.

TARIQ, R.M. AND AZMI, M.A. (2010). Dengue fever virus vector mosquito (Aedes) prevalence survey report of Sindh province by seven different methods and outbreak of Dengue in Karachi, 2010. Pak. j. entomol. Karachi, 25(2): 113-118.

TARIQ, R.M. AND QADRI, S.S. (2008). Levels of dengue fever virus control: the effectiveness and vastness of controlling power boundaries of these levels. Pakistan j. entomol. Karachi 23 (1&2): 61-62.

TARIQ, R.M. AND ZAFAR, S.M.N. (2000). Why the population of Dengue vector mosquitoes is increasing day-by-day in Karachi and other areas of Sindh, Pakistan? Pakistan j. entomol. Karachi. 15 (1&2): 7-10.

TARIQ, R.M., AHMAD, I. AND QADRI, S.S. (2010). Population dynamics and mechanical control of Dengue vector mosquitoes Aedes aegypti and Aedes unilineatus in seven towns of Karachi. Pak. j. entomol. Karachi 25(1): 21-26.

TARIQ, R.M., NAQVI, S.N.H. AND ZAFAR, S.M.N. (2009). Two indigenous aquatic weeds Lemna minor and Spirodella spp., gave promising biological control of mosquito larvae with rainbow fish on field level in Karachi, Sindh-Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 41 (1): 269-276.

pak. j. entomol. karachi - pakistan journal of entomology … 26 1.pdf · · 2017-10-14pak. j....

Documents