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 36 issue 3 (september 2002) : 212 - 215

ROLE OF DIFFERENT SUGARCANE GENOTYPES IN RELATIONTO STALKBORER, CHILD AURICILIUSDDGN U~CIDENCE UNDER FIELD CONDITION

Maan Singh, YP. Madan, J.e. Mahla, Dharam Singh

Affiliations

¹CCS HAU Regional Research Station Uchani, Karnal- 132001, India

Submitted|
First Online |
doi

Cite article:- Singh Maan, Madan YP., Mahla J.e., Singh Dharam (2024). ROLE OF DIFFERENT SUGARCANE GENOTYPES IN RELATIONTO STALKBORER, CHILD AURICILIUSDDGN U~CIDENCE UNDER FIELD CONDITION. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 36(3): 212 - 215. doi: .

ABSTRACT

The screening of genotypes against stalk borer, Chilo auricilius Ddgn. were carried out with a view to find out the resistant genotypes against stalk borer of sugarcane. A total of 131 genotypes were taken under study among them 39, 46 and 46 were screened during 1994,95, 1995–96 and 1996–97, respectively. The experimental results showed that 9.92 (13), 29.01 (38), 24.43 (32) and 36.64 (48) per cent genotypes were graded as tolerant, moderately tolerant, susceptible and highly susceptible having incidence of 0.0–10.0, 10.1–20.0, 20.1–40.0 and above 40.0 per cent, respectively. None of the genotypes was found resistant to stalk borer. The lowest incidence of stalk borer was recorded in genotypes CoH 77. Co-92-341 and CoJ 88–191 having infestation of 4.00,8.10 and 1l.67 per cent, respectively. The genotypes Co 89003, CoJ 64 and Co 88042 were tested for three consecutive years and their incidence ranged from 40.00 to 100.00, 30.00 to 86.70 and 10.50 to 100.00 per cent, respectively.

KEYWORDS

REFERENCES

Chaudhary, J.P. (1981). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Stalk Borer. pp 7-19.
Jana, S.C and Patnaik, N.C.P. (1996). Co-operative Sugar, 27: 749-750.
Shenhmar, M. et a/. (1998). Indian Sugar, 48: 39-41.
Singh, a.p. eta!. (1974). Sugar News, 6:12-16.
Siddiqi, ZA eta/. (1957). Indian Sugar, 6:625-628.
Umapathy, G. et a/. (1990). Co-operative Sugar. 30: 779-780
Madan, YP. (1972). Indian Sugar, 21: 683-684.

Disclaimer :

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Copyright :

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reviewed By

Share options

Editorial Board

View all (0)

ROLE OF DIFFERENT SUGARCANE GENOTYPES IN RELATIONTO STALKBORER, CHILD AURICILIUSDDGN U~CIDENCE UNDER FIELD CONDITION

ABSTRACT

KEYWORDS

REFERENCES

Reviewed By

In this Article

APC

Publish With US

Become a Reviewer/Member

Open Access

Products and Services

Support and Policies

Editorial Board