Banner

Agricultural Science Digest

  • Chief EditorArvind kumar

  • Print ISSN 0253-150X

  • Online ISSN 0976-0547

  • NAAS Rating 5.52

  • SJR 0.176, CiteScore: 0.357

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 22 issue 3 (september 2002) : 145 - 148

ROOT BORER (POLYOCHA 'DEPRESSELLA SWIN.) INFESTATION IN DIFFERENT GENOTYPES OF SUGARCANE UNDER FIELD CONDITIONS

Maan Singh, YP. Madan, Dharam Singh, J.e. Mahla
1ccs HAU Regional Research Station Uchani, Karnal- 132001, India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Singh Maan, Madan YP., Singh Dharam, Mahla J.e. (2025). ROOT BORER (POLYOCHA 'DEPRESSELLA SWIN.) INFESTATION IN DIFFERENT GENOTYPES OF SUGARCANE UNDER FIELD CONDITIONS. Agricultural Science Digest. 22(3): 145 - 148. doi: .

ABSTRACT

The experiments were carried out with total number of 92 genotypes screened during 1995–96 and 1996–97 where as the incidence of root borer ranged from 15.7 to 86.2 and 10.2 to 91.6 per cent, respectively. The lowest and highest incidence of root borer was recorded in genotypes Co 86036 and CoH 98 (1995–96) rated as moderately tolerant and CoS 89 and 5-91-76 (1996–97) as highly susceptible. Several genotypes like Co 98003, CoJ 64, CoH 108, CoS 93230, CoP 84211 and CoH 76 were repeated for the second year and their incidence ranged from 79.3 and 90.9, 42.4 and 27.7, 33.3 and 34.3,39.7 and 57.1,78.3 and 58.3 and 41.9 and 36.6 per cent, respectively. However, none was found tolerant, 8 genotypes were graded as moderately tolerant while 17 as susceptible and 67 as highly susceptible, which were 7.71, 18.15 and 74.14 per cent of the total 92 genotypes tested, respectively.

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. Cheema, P.S. (1953). Indian J. Ent. 15: 139-145.
    2. Gupta, K.M. eta/. (1996)./ndianSugar, 16: 273-279.
    3. Pandya, H.V. et al (1996). Bharatiya Sugar, 22(3): 19-20.
    4. Pati!, A.S. and Manjul, U.S. (1999). Sugarcane Research Report (1998-99l, V.S.1. Pune.
    5. -stngn, M. (1993). Ph. D. Thesis, Haryar'la Agricultural University,Hisar. pp.I-93.
    6. Umapathy, G. et al (1999). Co-operative Sugar. 30: 779-780.
    Reviewed By

    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)