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 31 issue 1 (march 2011) : 25 - 29

BIOEFFICACY OF CHEMICAL INSECTICIDES AGAINST EARIAS VITTELLA (FABRICIUS) ON OKRA

A.M. Pardeshi, R.K. Bharodia, D.M. Jethva, R.T. Rathod, P.V. Patel
1Department of Entomology, Junagadh Agricultural University, Junagadh – 362 001, India.

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Pardeshi A.M., Bharodia R.K., Jethva D.M., Rathod R.T., Patel P.V. (2024). BIOEFFICACY OF CHEMICAL INSECTICIDES AGAINST EARIAS VITTELLA (FABRICIUS) ON OKRA. Agricultural Science Digest. 31(1): 25 - 29. doi: .

ABSTRACT

A field experiment was conducted to determine the efficacy of eleven chemical treatments against Earias vittella (Fabricius) infesting okra at Junagadh Agricultural University campus, Junagadh during kharif season of 2006. Among tested insecticides, profenophos + cypermethrin (0.044%), chlorpyriphos + cypermethrin (0.055%), cypermethrin 0.006% and profenophos 0.05%, were found to be the most effective in reducing the fruit infestation to 6.47 to 10.52 % against 43.5% in the control. The highest yield of healthy fruits was recorded in the treatment of profenophos + cypermethrin 0.044% (2366.3 kg/ha) followed by chlorpyriphos + cypermethrin 0.055% (2155.4 Kg/ha), cypermethrin 0.006% (2127.1 Kg/ha) and profenophos 0.05% (2103.9 Kg/ha). The highest cost benefit ratio (1: 20.3) was obtained in the treatment of cypermethrin 0.006%, followed by profenophos + cypermethrin (1:11.9), chlorpyriphos (1:10.4), chlorpyriphos + cypermethrin (1:10.2), profenophos (1:8.7), acephate (1:5.1) and methomyl (1:4.1).

REFERENCES

  1. Bagade, A. S., Ambekar, J. S., Bhagavati, V. Y. and Bade, B. A. (2005). J. Maharashtra Agric. Univ., 30 (2): 210-212.
  2. Chaudhary, H.R. and Dadheech, L.N.(1989). Ann. Arid Zone, 28 (3-4):305-307.
  3. Das, S. N., Subhrajyoti, Ray. and Chatterjee, M. L. (2001). J. Interacademicia, 5 (3): 346-351.
  4. Dubey, V. K. and Ganguli, R. N. (1998). Insect Environment, 4 (1): 25.
  5. Misra, H. P., Dash, D. D. and Mahapatra, D. (2002). Ann. Pl. Prot. Sci., 10 (1): 51-54.
  6. Panse, V. G. and Sukhatme, P. V. (1985). Statistical Methods for Agricultural Workers, I. C. A. R., New Delhi, pp. 361.
  7. Rai, S and Satpathy, S. (1999). Vegetable Sci., 26 (1): 74-77.
  8. Singh, S. P. S. and Jayswal, A. K. (2001). J. Insect Sci., Ludhiana, 14 (1/2): 93-94.
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)