Validation of Integrated Pest Management Modules against Piercing and Sucking Insect Pest of Rice

Rice (Oryza sativa L., Family: Poaceae) is the most significant grain and staple crop in the world including Asia. According to FAO (2018), rice is the third most produced agricultural crop in the world, after sugarcane and maize. Rice is a good source of protein, fats, crude fibre and carbohydrates along with vitamins and salts including riboflavin, niacin, tocopherol, calcium and other salts (Verma, 2011) The United Nations declared 2004 as the “Worldwide Year of Rice” to recognize significance of rice that have an impact on millions of people’s economy, nutrition and cultural practices. In India, rice is grown across an area of 47 million hectares, producing 134 million tonnes (Anonymous, 2023). Rice is grown in Bihar throughout both the Kharif and Rabi seasons under various natural and climatic circumstances, covering an area of 2.914 million hectares and yielding 6.8 million tonnes (Anonymous, 2018). Around 52% of the world’s rice output get loss due to damage caused by biotic factors, of which 21- 25% is due to damage from pest fauna (Yarasi et al., 2008; Dhaliwal et al., 2015). Rice gall midge (Orseolia oryzae Wood Mason), rice leaf folder (Cnaphalocrocis medinalis Guenee), brown planthoppers (Nilaparvata lugens Stal), yellow stemborer (Scirpophaga incertulas Walker), Green leafhopper (Nephotettix virescens Distant) and white-backed planthopper (Sogatella furcifera Horvath) are the most serious rice pests causing significant reduction in yield. (Anonymous, 1996; Singh and Kumari, 2020). Farmers use broad-spectrum pesticides indiscriminately to manage these pests, which leads to a number of risks including insecticide resistance, secondary pest outbreaks, phytotoxicity, toxicity to beneficial organisms and environmental pollution like groundwater contamination (Halder et al., 2014) in addition to with the pesticide residue. Integrated pest management (IPM), is a combination of cultural, physical, mechanical, botanical, chemical (when required) and other management methods which plays a significant role in countering the population of pest in a sound manner. Many researchers had already proven the usefulness of IPM integrating of each and all available components in managing the pest population of rice  below those causing economic injury (Alam et al., 2016; Tanwar et al., 2016; Anurag et al, 2020; Jahnavi et al., 2022). Therefore, the present study was designed to assess the effectiveness of a knowledge based IPM module in insect pest management of rice as well as its economics, which is crucial from the perspective of the farmer.

The research trial was conducted during Kharif season of 2018 and 2019 at Pusa Rice Research Farm, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Bihar. The field was first leveled properly to have uniform geology and two blocks of 440 m² was prepared. Each block was sub-divided into five equal parts, which was taken as replication. The packages followed are given in (Table 1).
 

 
Observations recorded
 
Observation on pest incidence was initiated from 15 DAT by randomly selecting 5 hills in each replication at fortnightly interval. Total 25 hills in IPM block and 25 hills in Farmers practice block at each observation no. of nymphs, adults and leaf damages were recorded. The data so obtained was analysed with ANOVA using SPSS software.

Nilaparvata lugens
 
The pooled incidence of Nilaparvata lugens (Table 2) recorded at 15 DAT upto 113 DAT varied widely ranging from 4.88 to 7.61 per cent incidence in IPM module whereas in farmer’s practices the incidence varied from 8.64 to 10. The peak incidence in farmer’s practices 9.65, 10 and 9.60% leaf damage was recorded at 43 DAT, 57 DAT and 57 DAT. As the crop reaches its maturity the incidence gradually declined from 6.06 per cent to 4.88 per cent incidence in IPM modules which was recorded from the period at 85 DAT to 113 DAT which was contradictory incase of farmer’s practices whereby Nilaparvata lugens incidence remained consistently higher during this period with a per cent incidence of 8.74 to 8.91 recorded at 85 DAT to 113 DAT.
 

 
Nephotettix virescens
 
The pooled data data on effect of IPM technologies as against farmers practices depicted in Table 3 shows that mean incidence of leaf damage from 15 DAT to 113 DAT ranged from 4.59 to 6.25 per cent incidence of leaf damage as compared to 8.09 to 8.61% leaf damage in farmers practices. The mean incidence of leaf damage was also significantly higher during the period from 57 DAT to 113 DAT in farmers plot whereas the mean leaf damage of 4.59% to 5.70% was recorded in the IPM plot during the period. Similar, finding was also recorded by (Gautam et al., 2017) where the impact of IPM practices had a significant effect on technology efficiency level. Higher technology efficiency is due to the improvement in extension services, such as training and demonstrations; as these factors are necessary and had a significant impact on adoption (Rahman and Norton, 2019). Developing of the IPM modules and its adoption by the farmers can only ensures the successful management of insect-pests. In a study carried out by Bagenia and Meena, (2017) revealed that majority of farmers incorporated the cultural practices such as summer deep ploughing, sanitation of fields, manual weeding, inter cropping and inter row earthing up and practices neem based botanicals which resulted in low incidence of the pest (Bagenia and Meena, 2017). Divya and Mariappan (2020) revealed that IPM practices was effective in reducing the population of insect pest with minimal effect on natural enemies viz., spiders 10.95/ 10 hill and coccinellid 9.95/ 10 hill and significantly superior over farmers practice. The present finding is in conformity with the result of (Shanmugam et al., 2022) and (Swathi et al., 2018) who reported the component of chemicals with less residues and minimum negative effect of beneficial insects such as thiamethoxam to be effective in lowering the pest population. Gautam et al., (2013) also observed the efficacy of botanicals as IPM component when Neem 5% was found effective in managing the incidence of pest and were found  relatively  safe against predators and parasitoids such as Chrysoperla carnea and Trichogramma chilonis compared with pesticides. Similar findings are also in agreement with the present result where incorporation of Entomopathogens and insecticides from animal origin contributed significant result in reducing the pest population (Laichattiwar and Meena, 2014; Dhaker et al., 2017; Javed et al., (2019).
 

 
Economics and yield (2018 and 2019)
 
Harvested yield data presented in Table 4 indicates that the validated modules gave 4.22 t/ha during 2018 with an increase of 3.05 t/ha over farmer’s practices. The results showed IPM module not only increases the grain yield but also gave high net return of Rs. 49905 with 1:7.64 cost: benefit ratio. Similarly, during the second trial, the validated modules gave 4.34 t/ha with an increase of 2.77 t/ha over farmer’s practices. The results showed IPM module not only increased grain yield but also provided high net return of 44725 with 1: 6.85 cost: benefit ratio. Earlier, Singh et al., 2018 and Surendra et al., (2016) studied the effect of IPM modules against rice pest and compared with farmer practice and reported increased in grain yield in IPM Modules respectively over farmers practices. It was shown that high benefit cost ratio of tested Module 1 and Module 2 over farmer’s practice was obtained. Borkakati and Saika (2020) observed maximum yield and cost: benefit ratio (1: 8.46) in the IPM plot and the proposed IPM module was found superior with highest yield and cost-benefit ratio. Mohankumar et al., (2016) and Singh et al., (2017) also observed that IPM approach was effective against piercing sucking insect pests giving maximum cost: benefit ratio.
 

The present study’s findings lead to the conclusion that the IPM module is more effective than other practices in managing the sucking pest in rice. IPM refers to the logical blending of several techniques, particularly the blending of chemical pesticides with other ecologically friendly components to control the pest below ETL. It can be concluded that the IPM module is a comprehensive strategy for sustainability in crop protection that focuses on managing the pest and has been enshrined as the best module that is both economically viable and environmentally feasible.

The authors are grateful to Dr. R. C. Srivastava, Honorable Vice Chancellor for providing all the necessary resources for the smooth conduct of the field experiment.