Legume Research

  • Chief EditorJ. S. Sandhu

  • Print ISSN 0250-5371

  • Online ISSN 0976-0571

  • NAAS Rating 6.80

  • SJR 0.391

  • Impact Factor 0.8 (2024)

Frequency :
Monthly (January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November 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

Legume Research, volume 31 issue 1 (march 2008) : 60 - 62

EVALUATION OF INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT MODULE AGAINST MAJOR PESTS OF RAINFED PIGEON PEA

G. Srinivasan, R. Philip Sridhar
1National Pulses Research Centre, Vamban Colony – 622 303, Pudukkottai, India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Srinivasan G., Sridhar Philip R. (2024). EVALUATION OF INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT MODULE AGAINST MAJOR PESTS OF RAINFED PIGEON PEA. Legume Research. 31(1): 60 - 62. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Experiments on evaluation of redgram (pigeonpea) Integrated Pest Management (IPM) module in comparison with the farmers’ practice were conducted at National Pulses Research Centre (NPRC), Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Vamban as well as in farmer’s field with variety Vamban 2 during kharif 2004 and 2005. Adoption of IPM module consisting of the components viz., intercropping with groundnut, setting up of pheromone traps against Helicoverpa armigera, erection of bird perches, application of Neem Seed Kernel Extract (NSKE), spraying of HaNPV and need based spraying of insecticides registered reduced pod borer damage (31.5 – 35.67%), pod wasp damage (3.33 – 4.67%), pod fly seed damage (5.00% - 6.00%) and pod bug damage (5.67% - 8.67%) as against the farmer’s practice of dusting with lindane 1.3D @ 25kg/ha at peak flowering, which recorded higher pod borer damage (48.67 – 54.67%), pod wasp damage (6.33 – 8.33%), pod fly seed damage (6.66 – 8.67%) and pod bug damage (5.66 – 13.33%). The grain yield (714 – 801 kg/ha) and Benefit: Cost (2.41 – 2.79) were also higher in IPM plots compared to farmer’s practice.

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. Bhagwat, V.R. (1997). SAT News., 20: 6-8.
    2. Borkar, S.L. et al.(1996). J. Soils and Crops, 6 : 146-150.
    3. Dar, M.H. et al. (2005). Ann. Pl. Protec. Sci., 13: 298-301.
    4. Gajendran, G. et al.(2006). Legume Res., 29 : 53-56.
    5. Rao, P.K and Virupakshaiah, G. (1990). J.Appl.Zool.Res., 1: 59-61.
    6. Reddy, C.N. et al.(1998). Indian J. Ent., 60: 334-338.
    7. Sahoo, B.K. (1998). Ph.D. Thesis O.U.A.T., Bhubaneswar, India pp.106.
    8. Sarode, S.V. and Sonalkar, V.V. (2001). SHASHPA, 8 : 85-87.
    9. Sarode, S.V. et al. (1997). PKV Res. J., 21 : 227-229.
    10. Singh, H.M. et al. (2003). Ann. Pl. Protec. Sci., 11 : 145-146.
    11. Srinivasa Rao, M. and Dharma Reddy, K. (2003). Ann. Pl. Protec. Sci., 11:26-30
    Reviewed By

    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)