Indian Journal of Agricultural Research

  • Chief EditorV. Geethalakshmi

  • Print ISSN 0367-8245

  • Online ISSN 0976-058X

  • NAAS Rating 5.60

  • SJR 0.293

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, volume 40 issue 1 (march 2006) : 31 - 36

SUSCEPTIBILITY OF SOME COWPEA, VIGNA UNGUICULATA (L.) WALP, CULTIVARS TO COWPEA SEED BEETLE, CALLOSOBRUCHUS MACULATUS (FAB.), DURING STORAGE

O.C. Umeozor*, P.O. Pessu1
1Department of Animal and Environmental Biology, University of Port Harcourt, Box 384, Uniport Post Office, Port Harcourt, Nigeria

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Umeozor* O.C., Pessu1 P.O. (2024). SUSCEPTIBILITY OF SOME COWPEA, VIGNA UNGUICULATA (L.) WALP, CULTIVARS TO COWPEA SEED BEETLE, CALLOSOBRUCHUS MACULATUS (FAB.), DURING STORAGE. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 40(1): 31 - 36. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Brown and yellow rust development in variety mixtures was represented more precisely by coefficient of disease level (CDL), which incorporated infection type, rust severity and rust incidence into one value. The development of rusts declined in variety mixtures in comparison to their pure susceptible components. Mixtures of HD 2329 + WH 542 + UP 2338; RR 21 + PBW 226 + HUW 234; PBW 154 + Sangam + UP 2338 resulted decrease in brown rust by 51.85, 47.89 and 40.00 per cent; and in yellow rust by 50.00, 15.00 and 37.50 per cent, respectively over mean of their components. Variety mixtures yielded more than the total average yields of their components and exhibited lower yield reduction in absence of fungicide protection.

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. AOAC (Association of Official Analytical Chemists) (1984). Official Methods of Analysis. 14th edn. AOAC, Washington D.C.
    2. Abate, T. et al. (2000). Ann. Rev. Entomol., 45: 631-659.
    3. Adjadi, O. et al. (1985). Crop Sci., 25: 740-742.
    4. Akingbohungbe, A.E. (1976). Trop. Grain Legume Bull., 5: 11-13.
    5. Caswell, G.H. (1981). Samaru J. Agric. Res., 1: 11-19
    6. Caswell, G.H. and Akibu, S. (1980). Trop. Grain Legume Bull., 17/18: 9-11.
    7. Duke, J.A. (1990). In: insect Pests of Tropical Food Legumes (Singh, S.R. ed.). John Wiley. Chichester, U.K. 1-42.
    8. FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization) (1988). Inventory of Obsolete. Unwanted, and/or Banned Pesticides. FAO, Rome.
    9. Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. (1984). Statistical Procedure for Agricultural Research. 2nd edn. John Wiley, Chichester, U.K.
    10. Howe, R.W. (1971). J. Stored Prod. Res., 1: 63-65.
    11. Jackai, L.E.N. and Singh, R.R. (1988). Trop. Grain Legume Bull., 35: 2-18.
    12. Markham, R. (1942). Biochem. J., 36: 790.
    13. NRI (Natural Resource Institute) (1996). Insect Pests of Nigerian Grops: Identification, Biology and Control. NRI, Chatham, U.K.
    14. Ofuya, T.I. and Adeduntan, S.A. (1999). Nigerian J. Entomol., 16: 14-22.
    15. Prevett, P.E. (1961). Bull. Entomol. Res., 52: 635-646.
    16. Redden, R.J. and McGuire, J. (1983). Aust. J. Agric. Res., 34: 707-715.
    17. Salifu, A.B. et al. (1988a). Trop. Pest. Mgt., 34: 180-184.
    18. Salifu, A.B. et al. (1988b). Trop. Pest. Mgt., 34:185-188.
    19. Satya, V.I.R. (1981). Indian J. Agric. Sci., 51: 813-815.
    20. Singh, S.R. (1977). Trop. Grain Legume Bull., 9: 1-7.
    21. Singh, S.R. et al. (1990). In: Insect Pests of Tropical Food Legumes (Singh, S.R. ed.). John Wiley, Chichester, U. K. 43 - 89.
    22. Sokal, R.R. and Rohlf, F.J. (1981). Biometry. 2 nd edn. W. H. Freeman, New York.
    Reviewed By

    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)