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
Submit

Agricultural Science Digest, volume 25 issue 4 (december 2005) : 307 - 308

EFACACY AND ECONOMICS OF SOME INSECTICIDES AGAINST POD BORER, HELICOVERPA ARM/GERA (HUBNER) INFESTING CHICKPEA UNDER DRY TEMPERATE CONDITIONS OF WESTERN HIMALAYAS

P. Sood, K.K. Mondal
1CSK HP Krlshl Vlshvavidyalaya. Research Sub Station. Sangla - 172 106. Kinnaur. India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Sood P., Mondal K.K. (2024). EFACACY AND ECONOMICS OF SOME INSECTICIDES AGAINST POD BORER, HELICOVERPA ARM/GERA (HUBNER) INFESTING CHICKPEA UNDER DRY TEMPERATE CONDITIONS OF WESTERN HIMALAYAS. Agricultural Science Digest. 25(4): 307 - 308. doi: .

ABSTRACT

In a field experiment five insecticides were evaluated against gram pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) during the summer season of 2001. The results of the study revealed that lamda cyhalothion 0.004%, deltamethrin 0.0028% and cypermethrin 0.0075% were the effective insecticides with 9.26, 10.61 and 11.26 per cent pod infestation, respectively as compared to 30.79 per cent in case of untreated control. Chlorpyriphos 0.05% was the least effective amongst the insecticides, however, better than the control. Further the yield was higher in all the treatments as compared to unsprayed control. The benefit cost ratio tended to be maximwn due to lamda cyhalothion (Rs. 8.64) followed by deltamethrin (Rs. 6.41) and cypermethrin (Rs. 3.12).

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. Atwal. A.S. and Dhaliwal, G.S. (2002). Agricultural Pests of India and South East Asia and Their Management
    2. Kalyani Publishers. New Delhi.
    3. Baruah. A. and Chauhan. R. (2000). J. Entom. Res., 24: 185-189.
    4. Finney. D.J. (1952). Probit Analysis. Cambridge University Press. pp. 318.
    5. Mehta. P.K. and Chandel. YS. (1993). Him; J. Agric. Res., 19(1-2): 13-16.
    6. Prasad. YG. and Singh. Y (1994). Indian J. Ent., 56: 356·358.
    7. Prasana. G.J. and Bhalani. PA (1994). GAU Res. J.. 19(2): 33-38.
    8. Saxena. H.P. and Phokela. A. (1983). In: Agricultural Entomology. Vol. II. (Srivastava. P.O. et al., eds.). Scientific Writers Association. New Delhi. 128-146 pp.
    9. Sharma. P.L. and Bhalla. a.p. (1964). Indian J. Ent., 26: 318-331.
    10. Sharma, S.D. (1999). Pest Man Econ. Zool.• 7(2): 137-141.
    11. Tripathy. M.K. and Singh. H.N. (1999). J. Entom. Res.. 23: 281-291. ,
    12. Yadav. L.S. and Chaudhary, J.P. (1993). Indian J. Ent.. 55: 375-379.
    Reviewed By

    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)