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
Legume Research, volume 28 issue 2 (june 2005) : 155 - 156

NOTE ON THE PERFORMANCE OF DIFFERENT GROUNDNUT POD-PROTECTANTS AGAINST GROUNDNUT BRUCHID, CARYDON SERRATUS (OLIVIER)

D. Rama Devi, N. Venugopal Rao
1Department.of Entomology, S.v. Agricultural College, Tirupathi - 517502. India
  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Devi Rama D., Rao Venugopal N. (2024). NOTE ON THE PERFORMANCE OF DIFFERENT GROUNDNUT POD-PROTECTANTS AGAINST GROUNDNUT BRUCHID, CARYDON SERRATUS (OLIVIER). Legume Research. 28(2): 155 - 156. doi: .
The pod-protectants like chlorpyriphos (2.5 ml L−1) and imidacloprid (1 ml L−1) gave complete control of bruchid by preventing egg laying and minimizing adult development in the treated pods. Neem based insecticides and fly ash were also found promising as protectants for groundnut pods. None of the protectants affected germinability of groundnut.
    1. Alexander. Kitchner and Briscoe, HVA. (1944). Ann. Applied BioI., 31: 143-149.
    2. Dick, K.M. (1987). Pest Management in Stored Groundnuts. ICRISAT. Information Bulletin No. 22: 1·25.
    3. Wigglesworth. V-B. (1944). Nature, 153: 493-494.

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)