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

Reviewer Article

Legume Research, volume 43 issue 1 (february 2020) : 1-7

Bioefficacy of chemical insecticides against major sucking insectpests on grain  legumes in India- A review

P. Seetharamu1,*, K. Swathi1, S. Dhurua1, M. Suresh1, S. Govindarao1, N. Sreesandhya1
1Department of Entomology, Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, Agricultural College, Naira-532 185, Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, India.

  • Submitted25-08-2018|

  • Accepted07-01-2019|

  • First Online 30-04-2019|

  • doi 10.18805/LR-4074

Cite article:- Seetharamu P., Swathi K., Dhurua S., Suresh M., Govindarao S., Sreesandhya N. (2019). Bioefficacy of chemical insecticides against major sucking insectpests on grain legumes in India- A review . Legume Research. 43(1): 1-7. doi: 10.18805/LR-4074.

ABSTRACT

Grain legumes are the important source of dietary protein in tropical regions and insect pests  are the major biotic constraints in the production of the grain legumes throughout the country.  About 150 species of insects are known to attack pulse crops in India. Among the insect pests, the sucking pests like aphid, Aphis  craccivora Koch; jassid, Empoasca kerri Pruthi; whitefly, Bemisia  tabaci Gennadius, thrips,Thrips palmi Karny and flower thrips, Megalurothrips usitatus Bagnall are known to cause significant damage  to the pulse crops and also indirectly acting as a vectors in transmitting the deadly diseases resulting in severe loss in grain yields of the legume crops. The present review highlights the losses caused by the sucking pests and critically review the literature generated on the bio efficacy of conventional and novel groups of chemical insecticides for the management of sucking pests infesting grain legumes at different locations in India.   

INTRODUCTION

Grain legumes (beans, pulses and oilseeds) are protein rich and energyrich dry seeds which are often called as pulses. Protein sourced from grain legumes costs one- fifth of  protein from milk. In addition, the amino acid balance of grain legume protein complements that of cereals when eaten together, greatly improving the protein quality of the combined food and sometimes referred as “poor man’s meat”(Ali and Gupta,2012). Grain legumes are also vital sources of micronutrients such as iron, reducing wide spread anemia caused by the lack of diversity in the starch based diets of the poor.  Leaves, stems (hulms) and pod walls of these pulses are also valuable as livestock feed and also soil fertility restorers. India is an important pulse growing country contributing 28 per cent to the global pulse basket from an area of about 37per cent (MasoodAli and Shivkumar, 2000).
       
The commonly grown major pulse crops in India are pigeonpea, mungbean, urdbean, chickpea, horsegram, cowpea and some of the minor pulse crops are drybean, mothbean, lathyrus, lentil and peas. Cultivation of pulses in India takes place under diverse  agro ecological nitches such as kharif/rabi, rainfed/ irrigated, mixed/ monocrop, low /high input conditions, traditional/ progressive farming etc., posing a highly variable spectrum of pest problems. The insect pest spectra that infest these pulse crops include more than 40 species on blackgram or greengram and 300 species on pigeonpea (Mahalakshmi et al., 2016).  The sucking pests like aphid, Aphis  craccivora Koch; jassid, Empoasca kerri Pruthi; whitefly, Bemisia  tabaci Gennadius, thrips, Thrips palmi Karny and flower thrips, Megalurothrips usitatus Bagnall are known to cause significant damage to grain legume crops (Soundararajan et al., 2013). The repeated use of conventional insecticides to combat the sucking pests resulted in development of resistance to insecticides.  Now, several novel insecticides with their novel mode of action and are very effective at lower doses  against target pests and safe to natural enemies. The present review deals with the bioefficacy of certain new molecule insecticides having unique mode of action, against the sucking pests on grain legumes.
 
DAMAGE POTENTIAL OF SUCKING PESTS ON GRAIN LEGUMES
The annual yield loss due to the insect pests has been estimated to the tune of 30 per cent in greengram (Soundararajan and Chitra, 2011) and urdbean and greengram (Gailce, et al., 2015). Pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan L. Millsp.) is attacked by number of pests which are quite varying according to different agro-climatic conditions. Several insects have been reported to infest pigeonpea crop at different stages during its growth period in different parts of the country (Priyadarshini et al., 2013, Chakravarthy and Agnihotri, 2016, Khamoriya et al., 2017). Srilaxmi and Ravindra Paul (2010) observed that C. cajan is infested by insect pests belonging to 6 orders and 16 families of these orders  and the pests belonging to Lepidoptera cause maximum damage followed by members of Coleoptera,  Diptera and Hemiptera.
       
Chickpea is the second largest pulse crop produced in the world and play important role in human nutrition as source of protein. Area occupied by chickpea is about 7.29 million ha with production of 5.77 million tones which accounts for 30 % and 38 % of the national pulse acreage and production, respectively. Insect pests pose greater threat to chick pea production and results in poor yields (Suneelkumar and Sarada, 2015). Blackgram is attacked by 40 to 60 insect species at different stages of the crop growth (Mohanraj et al., 2012). The sucking pests like aphid, Aphis  craccivora Koch; jassid, Empoasca kerri Pruthi; whitefly, Bemisia  tabaci Gennadius, thrips,Thrips palmi Karny and flower thrips, Megalurothrips usitatus Bagnall are known to cause significant damage to urdbean (Ramu et al., 2018). Mungbean is attacked by different species of insect pests but sucking insect pests (aphid, jassid, leafhopper and whitefly) are of the major importance and whitefly, a potential vector of mung bean yellow mosaic virus (MYMV), can cause losses ranging from 30 to 100 per cent in green gram and black gram (Panduranga et al., 2011).
       
Thrips cause damage to tender shoots, leaves, buds and flowers resulting in curling of leaves, dropping of flower buds and flowers and reported that thrips caused at least 40 per cent yield loss in greengram,besides direct injury by feeding, thrips also act as vectors of different plant viruses that cause leaf curl and bud necrosis (Sreekanth et al.,2003). Cow pea is infested by 21 insect pests and cause about 65-100 per cent losses among the insect pests cowpea aphid, Aphis craccivora causes significant yield losses (20-40 %) in Asia and upto 35 per cent in Africa (Kotadia and Bhalani, 1992). The Indian bean, Lablab purpureus L. is one of the important pulse crops of Gujarat widely grown in dry, warm arid region of the state. The crop is attacked by various sucking  pests viz;  black aphid, Aphis craccivora Koch, leaf hopper, Empoasca kerri Pruthi, whitefly, Bemisia tabaci  Genn., thrips, Megaleurothrips distalis Karny (Chaudhari et al., 2015).
 
BIO EFFICACY OF CHEMICAL INSECTICIDES AGAINST MAJOR SUCKING PESTS ON GRAIN LEGUMES
Several reports are available on the insecticide based management of major sucking pests on pulses at different locations which are reviewed group wise hereunder.
 
Organophosphates and synthetic pyrethroids
 
Foliar spray of cypermethrin @ 0.01%, deltamethrin @ 0.028% and dimethoate 0.03% were effective against whitefly on greengram (Borah,1995). Monocrotophos @0.04% and dimethoate @ 0.03 % had been found effective against jassids and thrips in greengram and cow pea (Oyewale et al.,2014). Dimethoate @ 0.03% showed effectiveness in reducing aphid population (88.4%) in greengram (Vikram et al., 2015). Malathion and chlorpyriphos were least effective against sucking pets in pulses (Shiloskar et al., 2015). Acephate@ 0.037% and profenophos @0.05% are moderately effective against jassid and whitefly on greengram (Manju et al., 2016).
 
Carbamates
 
Patel and Srivastava (1990) reported  the  phytotonic effect and effectiveness of carbosulfan 25 E C as a seed dresser @ 5.00 a.i/100 g seed and carbofuran 3 G @ 0.5 and 1 Kg a.i/ha  against aphids in green gram. Carbosulfan 25 EC @1000ml/ha and 500 ml/ha failed to control the whitefly population, YMV and YVMV diseases in blackgram and mesta, respectivevely (Gopalaswamy et al., 2012 and Yadav et al., 2012). Indoxacarb @ 500 ml/ha was highly toxic to the natural enemies (ladybird beetles, Green lace wings and spiders) of  soybean pests at Parbhani, Maharastra ( Ilyas et al., 2015). Thiodicarb @0.10% recorded lower number of leafhopper population (1.04/leaf) in blackgram (Parmar et al., 2015).
 
Neonicotinoids
 
Neonicotinoids are the newest major class of insecticides, have outstanding potency and systemic action for crop protection against piercing-sucking pests. These were developed in the 1980s, and the first commercially available compound, imidacloprid, has been in use since the early 1990s (Kollmeyer et al., 1999). Their common names are acetamiprid, clothianidin, dinotefuran, imidacloprid, nitenpyram, thiacloprid and thiamethoxam. They possess lower mammalian toxicity, less resurgence problems, environmental protection, pest management selectivity and less toxicity to natural enemies (Kunkel et al., 1999). Neonicotinoids are broad-spectrum, systemic compounds exhibit activity against sucking insects (e.g. aphids, whiteflies, leafhoppers) and several species of flies and moths. Neonicotinoids  are used primarily as plant systemic, applied to seeds, soil, or foliage; they move to the growing tip and afford long-term protection from piercing-sucking pests (Kundoo et al., 2017).
 
Imidacloprid
 
Imidacloprid @ 0.75 l/ha was highly effective in controlling the thrips infesting field bean resulting in 85.97% reduction over control (Cermeli et al., 2002). Seed treatment with imidacloprid 600 FS @ 5 ml/ kg seed in blackgram was effective in reducing the whitefly population (2.53/leaf) (Men et al., 2005). Two sprays of imidacloprid 17.8SL @ 0.24 ml/l along with imidacloprid 70WS @ 5 g/kg  seed treatment and two sprays of imidacloprid 17.8SL @0.24 ml/l alone recorded least disease incidence of 30.2 and 30.3% with minimum vector population of 1.87 and 1.73 whiteflies per leaf, respectively (Salam et al., 2009). Imidacloprid treated plot gave a less severity of yellow mosaic virus disease (9.22%) when compared to untreated control (21.84%) at 40 DAS in greengram (Hossain et al., 2010). Higher efficacy of imidacloprid was also reported in cowpea (Khade et al., 2014). Seed treatment with imidacloprid @ 5g/kg seed + foliar spray with imidacloprid @0.05% was very effective in reducing whitefly population (88.11%) and thrips on moth bean (Naga et al., 2015). Seed treatment with imidacloprid 600 FS @ 10ml/kg seed significantly recorded lowest population of whitefly, leafhopper and thrips with highest gross and net returns (Anusha et al., 2016).
 
Thiamethoxam
 
Foliar application of thiamethoxam @100 g/ha was found significantly effective over control which recorded 1.25 whiteflies/leaf followed by seed treatment with thiamethoxam 500 FS @ 4.0 ml/kg seed in soybean (AICRP report on Soybean, 2005-06). Shah et al. (2007) reported that thiamethoxam 25 WS @ 0.005 % was highly effective by recording lowest population of 2.60 whiteflies per plant and also recorded lowest MYMV incidence (10.7%) in greengram. Verma and Kanwar (2009) reported that the lowest leafhopper population (0.84/ plant) was observed in seed treatment with thiamethoxam 70 WS @ 3 g /kg seed  (0.84/plant) at 20 DAS in green gram. Seed treatment with thiamethoxam 25WS @0.0035% and imidacloprid 70WS @0.0035% protected the mungbean crop from whiteflies upto 25DAS but later resulted in more vector population (6.00 &7.33/5 plants) and high MYMV incidence (19.8% & 24.3%) than in other treatments (Panduranga et al., 2011). Thiamethoxam 70 WS @ 3 g/ kg seed and imidacloprid 70 WS @ 3 g/kg  seed were moderately effective against thrips resulting in a population of 2.36 and  19.6 thrips/ 10 terminal buds  of blackgram and greengram (Kabir et al., 2014). Seed treatment with thiamethoxam 25 WG @ 3 g kg-1 of seed + spray with thiamethoxam 25 WG @ 0.4 g l-1 was found to be effective against sucking pests of blackgram by recording lowest population of leafhoppers (2.36 per plant) over untreated control (8.03) Gailce et al., (2015). Mahalakshmi et al., (2015) reported that Thiamethoxam 25 WG @ 0.2 g l-1 was effective in recording the lowest per cent population of whitefly (45.15) and 30.38 per cent YMV disease incidence in blackgram. Shlokeshwar and Dhremendra (2015) conducted a field experiment on competitive studies of insecticides for the control of sucking pests in urdbean in relation to yield during kharif season 2012 and 2013 and reported that thiamethoxam @ 125g ha-1 gave significantly good control of whiteflies(2.11 in 2011 and 2.6 in 2013 per  6 plants). Yadav et al., (2015) revealed that thiamethoxam (0.025%) proved to be effective in reducing the leafhopper, whitefly and aphid population by 81.32%, 87.78% and 92.61%, respectively over untreated control in cluster bean. Sujatha and Bharpoda (2017) conducted an experiment and reported that thiamethoxam 25WG (0.01%) was found to be more effective against the sucking pests by recording lowest population of 0.38 aphids and 0.08whiteflies per three leaves, respectively on greengram. 
       
Imidacloprid(0.05%) and thiamethoxam (0.025%) were found to be most effective against whitefly and thrips  resulting in highest reduction of population in soybean, greengram, urdbean, cow pea, clusterbean and groundnut (Iqbal et al., 2013, Nataraja et al., 2014, Kaushik et al., 2015, Ahirwar et al., 2016, Singh et al., 2016) at Varnasi, Junagadh and other locations.
 
Acetamiprid
 
Kumawath and Kumar (2007) reported that acetamiprid @ 80 g a.i/ha provided significantly superior control of leafhoppers in soybean. Acetamiprid 20 SP @ 40 g a.i./ha resulted in highest reduction in whitefly population over untreated control and least incidence of yellow vein mosaic virus (YVMV) disease (<6.4 %) in mesta (Seetharamu et al., 2011). Acetamiprid @ 180g a.i/ha were found to be effective against jassid and thrips population in mungbean (Singh et al., 2014). Acetamiprid (0.3g/l) effective against whitefly in green gram (Singh et al., 2015, Sasmal and Kumar, 2016). Acetamprid 20SL @ 0.125g/l proved to be highly effective against cowpea aphid A. craccivora with mortality percentage of 98.33 (Gowtham et al., 2016). Acetamiprid @ 0.004 per cent was effective in reducing the whitefly population by recording 87.67% reduction over untreated control in cowpea at Junagadh (Anandmurthy et al., 2017). 
 
Thiacloprid
 
Palumbo (2001) conducted an experiment on evaluation of neonicotinoid insecticides for the control of whiteflies and reported that thiacloprid recorded excellent control as a foliar spray with a residual effect upto 14-21 days after spraying in melons. Mahalakshmi et al., (2015) stated that thiacloprid 21.7 SC @ 1.25 ml l-1 was effective in reducing 50.22 per cent population of whitefly by recording 30.38 per cent YMV disease incidence in blackgram. Thiacloprid @ 60 g a.i./ha was found superior with a reduction of 88.07% in whitefly  population after 7DAS in urdbean (Indrajeetsingh et al., 2017). Thiacloprid 21.7 SC @ 0.0325% was found to be highly effective against thrips by recording 74.80 per cent reduction in thrips population followed by acetamiprid 4% + fipronil 4% @ 2ml l-1 with 70.81 per cent reduction in thrips population over untreated control in blackgram (Swathi, 2018).
 
Clothianidin
 
Parmar et al., (2015) reported that clothianidin 50WDG @ 0.03% was found to be very effective against jassids by recording lowest population of 0.45 jassids/leaf in blackgram and greengram. Clothianidin@0.2g/l was found to be effective against aphids in greengram (Sasmal and Kumar, 2016). The potency of neonicotinoids viz., imidacloprid, acetamiprid and clothianidin against B. tabaci and leafhoppers on cowpea, Indian bean and okra (Gurjar et al., 2007, Preetha et al., 2009 and Chaudhari et al., 2015).
 
Flonicamid
 
Flonicamid - a pyridine carboxamide compound and a novel systemic insecticide with selective activity against hemipterous pests, such as aphids, whiteflies and thysanopterous pests. It has better action through ingestion than contact. It is found effective in controlling aphids resistant to various conventional insecticides (Hancock, 2003). The effectiveness of flonicamid against aphids and other sucking pests has been well documented in other systems (Baugh and Kerns, 2010). Flonicamid was more selective against soybean aphid A. glycines (Pezzini and Koch, 2015). Chaudhari et al., (2015) observed that the plots of Indian bean treated with flonicanid 50WG @ 0.015% showed comparable reduction in the incidence of thrips, hoppers and whiteflies at Anand.  Anandmurthy et al., (2017) stated that flonicamid 50WG @ 0.02% was effective in reducing the whitefly population by recording 58.21 per cent reduction in   population over untreated control in cowpea.  Swathi (2018) reported that flonicamid 50 WG @ 0.0325% was  very effective against  the  population of whitefly by recording 72.19 per cent reduction and lowest per cent disease incidence (17.66%) in rice fallow balckgram. Kalyan et al., (2017) concluded that the maximum (69.72%) reduction in whitefly population over untreated control was recorded with flonicamid 50 WP@ 100g a.i. ha-1.
 
Spinosad
 
Spinosad is a macrocyclic lactone developed from an actinomycete (Saccharopolyspora spinosa) fermentation culture that was originic acetyl choline receptors and has been reported to be effective on a wide variety of insect pests, especially lepidopterans and dipterans (Sparks et al., 2001). Spinosad @ 0.005% was significantly superior by recording 120.12 per cent increase with a pod yield (14.66 q ha-1) over untreated control in blackgram (Lakshmi et al., 2002). Spinosad 45 SC  was least effective in reducing the whitefly population (29.98) and recorded highest YMV incidence (31.76%) in blackgram (Mahalakshmi et_al2015). Spinosad 45 SC at 60 g a.i. ha-1 and 70 g a.i. ha-1 was highly effective in controlling the incidence of sucking pests and pod borers on blackgram, and reported it to be very safe to the coccinelid beetles, Green lacewings and Syrphids (Lalbabu et al., 2017). Spinosad 0.009 per cent was found least effective against the jassid population in summer cowpea (Anandmurthy et al., 2017).
 
Novel groups of insecticides
 
The higher effectiveness of diafenthiuron on whiteflies was reported by Gopalaswamy et al., 2012 and Mandal (2015) in greengram and Parmar et al., (2015) in blackgram. Meena and Raju (2014) reported that fipronil @ 2ml/l  was found effective in reducing whitefly population. Mahalakshmi et al., (2015) concluded that spiromesifen 240 SC @ 0.4 ml/l was the most effective treatment with more than 75 per cent mean reduction in nymphal population of whiteflies on blackgram at Guntur, Andhra Pradesh. Acetamiprid 4% + fipronil 4% @ 2ml l-1 was effective against thrips by recording (70.81%) reduction over untreated control (Swathi, 2018). These findings of actemiprid + fipronil are in agreement with Roshan et al., (2018) against BPH and GLH in paddy. Swathi (2018) and Tatagar et al., (2014) as they documented the effectiveness of flubendiamide 19.9% + thiacloprid 19.9% @ 1ml l-1 against thrips infesting blackgram and chilli, respectively. Pre mixed formulations like flubendiamide 24%+ thiacloprid 24% @175ml/ha or chlorantraniliprole 10% + thiamet- hocxam 20% @180 ml/ha or emamectin benzoate 5% + fipronil 15% @ 750 g/ha were  effective  combinations for the  sustainable management of spotted podborer and  all stages of Aphis craccivora on cowpea (Roy et al., 2017).

CONCLUSION

Among the various insect pests attacking the grain legumes in various seasons at different parts of the country from sowing to harvesting, the sucking pests are responsible for reducing the grain yield directly by feeding and indirectly transmitting the notorious plant diseases. A critical review on various groups of chemical insecticides indicates that for the last five decades conventional insecticides, all neuroactive chemicals have played major role in management of insect pests in pulses, their indiscriminate uses led to several problems like resistance, residue, resurgence and safety to environment. The focus therefore shifted to search for and development of new green chemistries having novel biochemical targets in the context of pest control and resistance management. The novel groups of insecticides are very effective at lower doses and have low risk to non-target organisms and environment, and their versatility in application methods. These important classes of new insecticides will certainly play a greater role in the present context of environmental safety and their consequent uses in integrated pest management and insect resistance management programmes.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The senior author is highly thankful to Acharya N.G .Ranga Agricultural University, Lam, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh for providing the facilities.

REFERENCES


  1. AICRP report on Soybean. (2005-2006). All India Coordinated Research Project Reporton Soybean. Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India. pp: 126-135.

  2. Ali, M and Gupta, S. (2012). Carrying capacity of Indian agriculture pulse crops. Current Science. 102: 874- 888. 

  3. Ahirwar, B., Bhowmick, A.K., Gupta, P.K and Khan, M.A.(2016).Efficacy of insecticides against sucking pests and yield of mungbean. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences. 24(1): 34-37.

  4. Anandmurthy, T., Parmar, G.M. and Arvindarajan G. (2017). Bio-efficacy of new molecules against sucking pests in summer cowpea. International Journal of Plant Protection. 10(2): 236-240.

  5. Anusha, Ch., Balikai, R.A and Patil, R.H. (2016). Insect pest of cowpea and their management-A review. Journal of Experimental Zoology India.19(2): 635-642. 

  6. Baugh, B. A. and Kerns, D. L. (2010).Efficacy of insecticides targeting cotton aphids and impacton key aphid predators.Proceedings of the 2010 Beltwide Cotton Conference,New Orleans, LA. pp: 956–961. 

  7. Borah, R.K.(1995). Effect of synthetic pyrethroids and organophosphate insecticides on the incidence of whitefly and YMV in greengram. Indian Journal of Virology 11: 75-76.

  8. Cermeli, M., Montagne, A., Castro, R and Romero, R. (2002). Chemical control of Thripspalmi karny (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) on Field beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L)II. Revista de la facultad de Agronomia, Universidad del Zulia.19(1): 1-8.

  9. Chaudhari, A.J., Korat, D.M. and Dabhi, M.R. (2015). Efficacy of newer insecticides against major insect pests of Indian bean, Lablab purpureus L. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 28(4): 616-619.

  10. Chakravarty, S., Agnihotri, M. (2016). Evaluation of certain novel insecticides along with biopesticides for the management of major insect pests of pigeonpea. Journal of Experimental Zoology. India. 19(2):843-850.

  11. Gailce, L.J.C., Anandhi, P. and Jawahar, D. (2015).Management of major inse pests of blackgram under dryland conditions.Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies. 3(1): 115-121.

  12. Gopalaswamy, S. V. S., Ramana, M. V. and Radha Krishna, Y . (2012). Management of YMV of black gram by chemical control of Bemisia tabaci Gennadius. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences.20(2): 358–360.

  13. Gowtham, V., Dilipsundar, N., Balaji, K. and Karthikeyan, S. (2016).Study on the effectiveness of pesticides against cow pea aphid. International Journal of Plant Protection. 9(1): 146-149.

  14. Gurjar, P. A., Radadia, G. G. and Pandya, H. V. (2007). Bio-efficacy of newer insecticides against pest complex of cowpea. Insect Environment. 13(2): 74-75.

  15. Hancock, H.G. (2003). Field performance of flonicamid (F1785) in cotton. Proceedings Beltwide Cotton Conference National Cotton Council of America, Nashville, TamilNadu. pp 1629 - 1636.

  16. Hossain, A.S.M.A., Islam, S.M.A.S., Akhter, N. and Muqit, A. (2010).Effect of plantextracts, insecticides and cultural practices on growth characters and disease severity of mungbean yellow mosaic. International Journal of Sustainable CropProduction. 5(2): 16-20.

  17. Ilyas Md., Patil, R.R. and Dhere, D.A.(2015). Effect of some insecticides on population of natural enemies and yield of soybean. Journal of Entomological Research.39(2):149-151.

  18. Indrajeet, S.R., Alam, M.A., Kumar, A., Tiwari, R.K and Sachin, K.J. (2017). Efficacy of new molecules of insecticides against whitefly Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) and Aphis craccivora (Koch) in urdbean (Vigna mungo L.). Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 51(5): 502-505.

  19. Iqbal, J., Muhammad, N., Muhammad, S. A., Muhammad, M. F. and Muhammad W. U. Hassan. (2013). Comparative efficacy of some insecticides against sucking insect pests on mung bean, Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek. Gomal University Journal of Research. 29(1): 31 -37.

  20. Kabir, M. M., Hossain, M. A., Farhat, T., Yasmin, S., Niaz, Md. and Farhat, R. (2014). Effect of different botanicals and chemicals on the incidence of sucking insect pests and their impact on mosaic disease of mung bean. International Journal of Innovative Research and Developmen. 3(5): 62 -68.

  21. Kalyan, R.K., Saini, D.P., Meena, B.M., Abhishek, P., Pooja, N., Shilpa, V and Sonika, J. (2017). Evaluation of new molecules against jassids and whiteflies of Bt cotton. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies. 5(3): 236-240.

  22. Kaushik, A.K., Yadav, S. K. and Srivastava, P. (2015). Comparative efficacy of some insecticides for thrips control in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.). Annals of Plant Protection Sciences. 23(2): 294-297.

  23. Kelmeyer, W.D., Flattum, R.F., Foster, J.P., Powell, J.E., Schroeder, M.E., Soloway, S.B. (1999). Discovery of the nitromethylene heterocycle insecticides. Nicotinoid Insecticides and the Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor. Springer. 71: 89. 14.

  24. Khade, K. N., Undirwade, D.B., Tembhurne, R. D. and Lande, G. K. (2014). Biorational management of sucking pests of cowpea Vigna sinensis L. Trends in Biosciences. 7 (20): 3212-3217.

  25. Khamoriya, J., Ram. K., Chakravarty.S and Mishra, V.K. (2017). Evaluation of sequential application of insecticides against major insect pests on long duration pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.]. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies. 5(3):1891-1894.

  26. Kotadia, V.S. and Bhalani, P.A. (1992). Residual toxicity of some insecticides against Aphis craccivora Koch on cowpea crop. GAU Research Journal. 17(2): 161-164.

  27. Kumawath, M.M. and Kumar, A.(2007). Bioefficacy of some novel insecticides against jassids in soybean. Pestology.31(2):29-32.

  28. Kundoo, A.A., Showket, A. Dar, M., Mushtaq, ZaffarBashir, Mohammad Saleem Dar, Shaheen Gul, Mohammad Tawseef Aliand Shammema Gulzar.(2017). Role of neonicotinoids in insect pest management:A review. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies. 6(1): 333-339.

  29. Kunkel, B.A, Held, D.W, Potter, D.A. (1999). Impact of halofenozide, imidacloprid and bendiocarb on beneÞcial invertebrates and predatory activity in turfgrass. Journal of Economic. Entomology. 92: 922-930. 

  30. Lakshmi, P.S.R., Sekhar, P.R and Rao,V.R.S. (2002). Bio efficacy of certain insecticides against spotted pod borer on urdbean. Indian Journal of Pulses Research.15: 201-202.

  31. Lalbabu, K., Meena, A and Karnatak, A.K. (2017). Efficacy of spinosad 45 SC against thrips, Caliothrips indicus (Bangall) and tobacco caterpillar, Spodoptera litura (Hubner) on blackgram (Vigna mungo L.) and their natural enemies. Environment and Ecology. 34(3A): 1019-1022.

  32. Mahalakshmi, M.S., Sreekanth, M., Adinarayana, M. and Koteswararao, Y. (2015). Efficacy of some novel insecticide molecules against incidence of whiteflies (Bemisia tabaci Genn.) and occurrence of Yellow Mosaic Virus (YMV) disease in urdbean. International Journal of Pure and Applied Bioscience. 3(5): 101-106.

  33. Mahalakshmi, M.S., Sreekanth, M., Adinarayana, M and Koteswararao, Y. (2016). Evaluation of flubendiamide 20 % WG (Takumi 20 % WG) against legume pod borer, Maruca vitrata (fabricius) in blackgram under field conditions. International Research Journal of Natural and Applied Sciences. 3(6): 134-139.

  34. Mandal, S. K. (2015). Bio- efficacy of novel insecticides against whitefly, Bemisia tabaci in mungbean.Annals of Plant Protection Sciences.23 (1): 16-18.

  35. Manju., Singh, V. and Mehra, K. (2016). Efficacy of some insecticides and botanicals against major sucking pests of greengram. Journal of Experimental Zoology. 19(1): 565-569.

  36. Masood Ali, Shivkumar, P. (2000). Problems and prospects of pulses research in India. Indian Farming. 4 : pp 13.

  37. Meena, L.K. and Raju, S.V.S.(2014). Bioefficacy of insecticides against whitefly and leafhoppers of tomato under field conditions. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences. 22: 14-17.

  38. Men, U.B., Thakare, A.Y. and Deshmukh, S.D. (2005). Management of Bemisia tabaci Genn. and Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood on rabi summer sunflower with herbals and chemicals. Crop Protection and Production. 1(2): 148.

  39. Mohanraj, A., Bharathi, K. Rajavel, D.S. (2012). Evaluation of chlorantraniliprole 20% SC against pests of blackgram. Pestology .36(4): 39-43.

  40. Naga, K.L., Naqvi, B.L., Naga, B.L., singh,A.K., Meena, B.M. Meena, (2015).Bioefficacy of newer insecticides against major sap sucking pests of mothbean and their impact on yield parameters. Journal of Experimental Zoology India. 18(2): 1001-1015.

  41. Nataraja, M.V., Harish, G., Jastrotia, P., Holajjer, P., Savaliya, S.D and Gajera, M. (2014). Neo- necotinoids: A bio rational approach for managing sucking insect-pests of groundnut. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences. 22(1): 42-48.

  42. Oyewale, R. O., Bamaiyi, L. J., Oparaeke, A. M., and Adamu, R. S. (2014). Evaluation of four insecticide formulations for the management of insect pests of cowpea. African Journal of Food Science and Technology. 5(8): 180-188.

  43. Palumbo, J.C. (2001). Evaluation of neo-nicotinoid insecticides for whitefly management in melons. Vegetable Report, University of Arizona, College of Agriculture and Life sciences, http:// ag.arizona.edu/pubs/crops/az1292.

  44. Panduranga, G.S., Vijayalakshmi, K and Loka Reddy, K. (2011). Evaluation of insecticides for management of Bemesia tabaci and MYMV disease in mungbean (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek). Annals of Plant Protection Sciences. 19(2): 295-298.

  45. Parmar, S. G., Naik, M. M., Pandya, H.V., Rathod, N.K., Patel, S.D., Dave, P.P. and Saiyad, M. M. (2015). Bio-efficacy of some insecticides against pest complex of blackgram [Vigna mungo (L.) Hepper]. International Journal of Plant Protection. 8(1): 162-168. 

  46. Patel , M.B. and Srivastava ,K.P. (1990). Phytontonic effect of insecticides on cow pea and green gram. Indian Journal of Entomology. 52(4):583-588.

  47. Pezzini, D.T. and Koch, R. L. (2015).Compatibility of flonicamid and a formulated mixture of pyrethrins and azadirachtin with predators for soybean aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae) management. Biocontrol Science and Technology. 25(9):1024–1035. 

  48. Priyadarshini, G., Reddy, C.N. and Reddy,D.J.(2013). Bioefficacy of selective insecticides against lepidopteran pod borers in pigeonpea. Indian Journal of Plant Protection.41: 6-10.

  49. Preetha, G., Manoharan, T., Stanley, J. and Kuttalam, S. (2009). Evaluation of Imidacloprid against Okra Jassid, Amrasca biguttula biguttula (Ishida) and Whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius). Indian Journal of Entomology. 71(3): 209-214.

  50. Ramu, P.S., Swathi, K. and Rao, S.G. (2018). A review on seasonal incidence and insecticidal management of spotted pod borer [Maruca vitrata(Geyer)] with special reference to urdbean (Vigna mungo L.)In India. Journal of Entomology and Zollogy Studies. 6(4): 926-931.

  51. Roshan, D.R., Raju, S.V.S and Singh, K.N. (2018). Relative efficacy of acetamiprid + fipronil combination formulation against BPH (Nilaparvatha lugens Stal) and GLH (Nephpotettix virescens Distant ) in rice. Journal of Pure and Applied Microbiology. 10(4): pp: 2773.

  52. Roy, D., Chakraborty, G and Sarkar, P.K. (2017). Comparitive efficacy, non –target toxicity and economics of seven novel pre- mixed formulations against Maruca testulalis G. and Aphis craccivora K. infesting cowpea. Journal of Environmental Biology. 38: 603-609.

  53. Salam, S.A., Patil, M.S and Byadgi, A.S. (2009). IDM of mungbean yellow mosaic disease. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences. 17(1): 157-160.

  54. Sasmal, A. and Kumar, S. (2016). Effect of insecticides against major sucking pests of greengram in coastal odisha. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences. 24(2): 276-282.

  55. Seetha Ramu, P., Venugopala Rao, N., Hari Satya Narayana, N and ChengaReddy, V. (2011). Evaluation of insecticides to control whitefly, Bemisiatabaci vector of Yellow mosaic disease on mesta. Indian Journal of Plant Protection. 39(1): 1-3.

  56. Shah, M.J., Ahmad, A., Hussain,M., yousaf,M.M. and Ahmad, B.(2007). Effieciency of different insecticides against sucking pests on growth and yield of mungbean. Pak.Entomol.29(2): 83-85.

  57. Shlokeshwar, R.S and Dhremendra, P.S. (2015). Competitive Studies of insecticides for the control of sucking pests in urdbean (Vigna mungo) in relation to yield. International Journal of Plant Protection. 8(2): 393-396.

  58. Singh, D.K., Sundar, P., Ramsingh, U.R. and Pal, R.K. (2014). Efficacy of insecticides as seed treatment against sucking pests of okra. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences. 22: 88-91.

  59. Singh, A.K., Singh, S.S., Prakash, V., Kumar, S., Dwivedi, S.K. (2015). Pulses Production in India: Present Status, Bottleneck and Way Forward. Journal of Agrisearch. 2(2):75-83.

  60. Singh, P.S., Mishra, H and Singh, S.K. (2016). Evaluation of certain newer insecticides against the insect pests of mung bean (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek. Journal of Experimental Zoology. 19(1): 367-372.

  61. Sparks, T.C., Crouse, G.D and Durst, G. (2001). Natural products as insecticides the biology, biochemistry and quantitative structure activity relationship of spinosyns and spinosoids. Pest Management Sciences. 4(1): 11-15.

  62. Soundarajan, R.P. and Chitra, N. (2011). Effect of bioinoculants on sucking pests and podborer complex in urdbean. Journal of Biopesticide. 4(1): 7-11.

  63. Soundarajan, R.P., Chitra, N. And Geetha, S.(2013). Host plant resistance to insect pests of grain legumes- A review. Agri. Reviews. 34(3):176-187.

  64. Sreekanth, M., Sreeramulu, M., Prasad Rao, R. D. V. J., Sarath Babu, B. and Ramesh Babu, T. (2003). Relative efficacy and economics of different imidacloprid schedules against Thrips palmi (Karny), the vector of peanut bud necrosis virus incidence on mung bean Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek. Indian Journal of Plant Protection. 31(1): 43 -47.

  65. Srilakshmi, K. and Ravindra P. (2010). Diversity of insect pests of pigeonpea Cajanus cajan( L.) and their Succession in relation to crop phenology in Gulburga, Karnataka. The Ecoscan. 4: 273-276.

  66. Sujatha, B and Bharpoda, T.M. (2017). Evaluation of insecticides against sucking pests in greengram grown during kharif. Interenational Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 6(10): 1258-1268.

  67. Suneelkumar, G.V. and Sarada, O. (2015). Field efficacy and economics of some new insecticide molecules against lepidopteran caterpillars in chickpea. Current Biotica. 9(2): 153-158. 

  68. Swathi, K.(2018). Study on Seasonal Incidence and Insecticidal Management of Major Insect Pests of Rice Fallow Black gram (Vigna mungo L.) in North Coastal Andhra Pradesh .M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis submitted to Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Lam Guntur, Andhra Pradesh.

  69. Tatagar , M.H., Mohankumar, H,D., Mesta, R,K and Shivaprasad, M. (2014). Bioefficacy of new molecule, flubendiamide 24% + thiacloprid 24%-48% SC against chilli thrips , Scirtothrips dorsalis. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 27(1): 25-27.

  70. Verma, S.C. and Kanwar, H.S. (2009). Efficacy of different insecticides as seed treatment against the cotton jassid, Amrasca biguttula biguttula (Ishida), on okra.Pest Management and Economic Zoology. 17(1): 25-28.

  71. Vikram, A.K., Singh, D.C. and Pankaj kumar (2015). Efficacy of botanical insecticides against Aphis craccivora in lentil. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences, 23: 393-395.

  72. Yadav, S.R., Kumawat, K.C. and Khinchi, S.K.(2015). Efficacy of new insecticide molecules and bioagents against sucking insect pests of cluster bean Cyamopsis tetragonoloba(L.). Legume Research .38(3): 407-410.

  73. Yadav, S. K., Patel, S., Agnihotri, M and Bisht, R. S. (2015). Efficacy of insecticides and biopesticides against sucking pests in black gram. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences. 23(2):223-226.

  74. Yadav, U.S., Srivastava, R.K., Singh, R.K. and Adbhut, Y. (2012). Evaluation of insecticides for the control of whitefly vector for yellow vein mosaic disease in mesta. Indian Phytopath.65(4): 418.419. 
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)