Agricultural Science Digest

  • Chief EditorArvind kumar

  • Print ISSN 0253-150X

  • Online ISSN 0976-0547

  • NAAS Rating 5.52

  • SJR 0.156

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Agricultural Science Digest, volume 30 issue 2 (june 2010) : 98- 100

FIELD EFFICACY OF DIFFERENT INSECTICIDES AGAINST THE PINK POD BORER, CYDIA PTYCHORA (MEYRICK) ON GREENGRAM

P.S. Umbarkar, G.J. Parsana, D.M. Jethva,
1Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture, Junagadh Agricultural University, Junagadh – 362 001, India
  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Umbarkar P.S., Parsana G.J., Jethva D.M. (2024). FIELD EFFICACY OF DIFFERENT INSECTICIDES AGAINST THE PINK POD BORER, CYDIA PTYCHORA (MEYRICK) ON GREENGRAM. Agricultural Science Digest. 30(2): 98- 100. doi: .
A field experiment was conducted to determine the efficacy of nine insecticides against
pink pod borer, Cydia ptychora (Meyrick) infesting greengram at the Junagadh Agricultural
University campus, Junagadh during kharif season of 2008. The results revealed that spinosad
0.009 %, indoxacarb 0.0075 %, cypermethrin 0.009 % or profenophos 0.05 % were found the
most effective in reducing pink pod borer population. Maximum yield and net realization was
obtained in indoxacarb 0.0075 %, spinosad 0.009 %, cypermethrin 0.009 % and profenophos
0.05 %. The highest cost benefit ratio (1: 15.29) was obtained in the treatment of cypermethrin
0.009 %, followed by profenophos 0.05 % (1: 12.54), indoxacarb 0.0075 % (1:7.54),
monocrotophos 0.04 % (7.19), quinalphos 0.05 % (1:6.23) and spinosad 0.009 % (1:5.55).
Thus, indoxacarb, cypermethrin, spinosad and profenophos can be recommended for effective
and economic management of pink pod borer infesting greengram.
  1. Anonymous (2007). “Agricultural Statistics at a Glance 2008”, Web site (www.agri.gujarat.gov.in) of Directorate of
  2. Agriculture, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar, pp.3.
  3. Giraddi, R. S.; Dasareddy, S. V. and Lingappa, S. L. (2002). Indian J. Agric. Sci., 72(5): 311-312.
  4. Henderson, C. F. and Tilton, E. W., (1955). J. Econ. Ento., 48(2): 157-161.
  5. Mittal, V. and Ujagir, R. (2005). Indian J. Plant Prot., 33(2): 211-215.
  6. Rekha, S. and Mallapur, C. P. (2007). Karnataka J. Agric. Sci.,20(2): 414-416.
  7. Virani, V. R. (2000). Ph. D. (Agri.) Thesis submitted to Gujarat Agricultural University, S. K. Nagar, India, pp. 78

Editorial Board

View all (0)