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

Research Article

Legume Research, volume 44 issue 12 (december 2021) : 1482-1487

Host Preference and Damage Assessment of Pulse Beetle, Callosobruchus maculatus (Fabricius) (Chrysomelidae: Coleoptera) on Different Hosts

S. Ramesh Babu, S.V.S. Raju, P.S. Singh, Kamal Ravi Sharma
1Department of Entomology, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi-221 005, Uttar Pradesh, India.

  • Submitted03-12-2019|

  • Accepted14-02-2020|

  • First Online 22-08-2020|

  • doi 10.18805/LR-4292

Cite article:- Babu Ramesh S., Raju S.V.S., Singh P.S., Sharma Ravi Kamal (2021). Host Preference and Damage Assessment of Pulse Beetle, Callosobruchus maculatus (Fabricius) (Chrysomelidae: Coleoptera) on Different Hosts. Legume Research. 44(12): 1482-1487. doi: 10.18805/LR-4292.

ABSTRACT

The host preference of pulse beetle, C. maculatus to selected host grains were evaluated under laboratory conditions in the Department of Entomology and Agricultural Zoology, Banaras Hindu University during the year 2018. Cowpea and green gram were most preferred hosts for C. maculatus in terms of oviposition, per cent survival and mean developmental periods. Red gram and soybean were comparatively less preferred host for oviposition (66.38 eggs/50 seeds and 69.00 eggs/50 seeds respectively) than other host grains. In terms of per cent grain damage (92.25%; 90.19%) and per cent weight loss of grains (76.27%; 75.92%) cowpea and green gram were most preferable hosts respectively after 120 days after insect inoculation. 

REFERENCES

  1. Adam, J.I. and Baidoo, P. K. (2008). Susceptibility of five cowpea varieties to attack by Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) [Coleopteran: Bruchidae]. Journal of Ghana Science Association. 10(2).
  2. Adams, J.M. and Schulten. (1978). Post Grain Loss Assessment Methods. Analytical Association of Cereal Chemists. 195.
  3. Applebaum, S.W., Marco, S and Birk, Y. (1969). Saponins as possible factors of resistance of legume seeds to the attack of insects. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 17: 618-622.
  4. Bhaduria, N.S. and Jakhmola, S.S. (2006). Indian Journal of Entomology. 68: 92-94.
  5. Caswell, G.H. (1981). Damage to stored cowpea in the northern part of Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Research. 1: 11-19.
  6. Chandrakantha, J. and Mathavans, S. (1986). Change in developmental rates and biomass energy in Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) reared on different foods and temperatures. Journal of Stored Products Research. 39: 355-365.
  7. Chaturvedi, S.K. and Ali, M. (2002). Indian Institute of Pulses Research, Kanpur. The Hindu Survey of Indian Agriculture. 63-69.
  8. Creadland, P.F. (1987). Effect of host change in the fecundity and development of an unusual strain of Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). Journal of Stored Products Research. 25 (2): 91-98.
  9. Dobie, P. (1974). The laboratory assessment of the inherent susceptibility of maize varieties to post-harvest infestation by Sitophilus zeamais. Journal of stored product research. 10: 183-197
  10. Doharey, R.B., Katiyar, R.N and Singh, K.M. (1987) Studies on the seed damage, weight and germination loss caused by pulse beetle in green gram Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek. Bulletin of Grain Technology. 20(1): 12-16.
  11. El-Halfawy, M.A., Nakhla, J.M., Isa, N.H. and Halfaway, M.A. El. (1972). Effect of food on the fecundity, longevity and development of the southern cowpea weevil, Callosobruchus maculatus F. Agricultural Research and Review. 50: 67-70.
  12. Ghosal, T.K. and Senapati, S.K. (2007). Effect of physical characters, moisture contents and phenol contents of stored pulses on the oviposition, development and survival of Callosobruchus analis. Indian Journal of Entomology. 69(3): 238-240.
  13. Girish, G.K., Singh, K and Murthy, K. (1974). Bulletin of Grain Technology. 12: 113-16.
  14. Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. (1984). Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research (2ed.). John Wiley and Sons, NewYork, 680p.
  15. Howe, R.W. (1971). A Parameter for expressing the suitability of an environment for insect development. Journal of Stored Products Research. 7: 63-65.
  16. Malaikozhundan and Raj, S.T. (2012). A Study on the developmental biology of Callosobruchus maculatus (Fabricius) in different pulses. Legume Research. 35:159-163
  17. Meyer, J.S., Mcdonald., Boyce, M.S. (1986). Estimating uncertainly in population growth rate: Jackknif vs bootstrap techniques. Ecology. 67: 1156-1166.
  18. Mphuru, A.N. (1981). Comparative biological and ecological studies of Callosobruchus chinensis (L.). Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
  19. Parsai, S.K., Rawat, R.R and Choudhary, R.K. (1989). Ovipositional behaviour and preference of Callosobruchus phaseoli (Gyllehal.): its extent of damage in storage seeds of different varieties of fieldbean. Bulletin of Grain Technology. 27 (2): 103-106
  20. Quitco, R.T. and Quindoza, N.M. (1986). Assessment of Paddy Loss in Storage. Unpublished Terminal Report, NAPHIRE. 46 p.
  21. Ramzan, M., Chahal, B.S and Judge, B.K. (1986). Studies on the preference of pulse beetle, Callosobruchus maculatus F. to some commonly used pulses. Bulletin of Grain Technology. 24(3): 211-214.
  22. Rawat, S. and Srivastava, M. (2011). Evaluation of qualitative and quantitative losses caused by Callosobruchus chinensis to some pulses. Journal of Entomological Research. 35: 117-120
  23. Sachdeva, J.S., Seth, R.K and Sehgal, S.S. (1986). Relative susceptibility of twelve promising varieties of cowpea to Callosobruchus maculatus Fab. infestation. Bulletin of Grain Technology. 24: 201-205.
  24. Sandhu, G.S., Bassi, G.S and Sohoo, M.S. (1987). Evaluation of susceptibility in seeds of rice bean and different genotypes of cowpea to pulse beetle, Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) Growth and development. Journal of Research, Punjab Agricultural University. 24: 423-432.
  25. Sharma, R., Devi, R., Soni, A., Sharma, U., Yadav, S., Sharma, R and Kumar, A. (2016). Growth and developmental responses of Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) on various pulses. Legume Research. 39: 840-843.
  26. Shivanna, B. K., Ramamurthy, B.N., Gangadhara, N. B., Gayathri D. S., Mallikarjunaiah, H and Krishna, N. R., (2011). Host preference of pulse beetles, Callosobruchus Maculatus (Fab.) and C. Analis (Fab.) on Selected Pulses. International Journal of Science and Nature. 2(2):238-240.
  27. Van Hius, A. and De Rooy, M. (1998). The effect of leguminous plant species on Callosobruchus maculatus (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) and its parasitoid Uscana lariophaga (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research. 88: 93-99.
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)