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 (2023)

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 44 issue 5 (may 2021) : 602-607

Resistance Level of Mung Bean Genotypes to Pod Borer Maruca testulalis Geyer

Sri W. Indiati, Ratri T. Hapsari, Yusmani Prayogo, Sholihin, Titik Sundari, Made J. Mejaya
1Indonesian Legumes and Tuber Crops Research Institute (ILETRI), Jl. Raya Kendalpayak km.8. PO Box 66 Malang 65101, East Java, Indonesia.
  • Submitted24-09-2020|

  • Accepted18-12-2020|

  • First Online 25-02-2021|

  • doi 10.18805/LR-590

Cite article:- Indiati W. Sri, Hapsari T. Ratri, Prayogo Yusmani, Sholihin, Sundari Titik, Mejaya J. Made (2021). Resistance Level of Mung Bean Genotypes to Pod Borer Maruca testulalis Geyer. Legume Research. 44(5): 602-607. doi: 10.18805/LR-590.
Background: Pod borer, Maruca testulalis is one of the harmful mung bean pests and cause substantial damage to the crop or failure to harvest. This study was carried out to identify the level of resistance to pod borer of mungbean accessions. 
Methods: Field research was conducted at Muneng Experimental Farm, Probolinggo, East Java, Indonesia in the 2018 dry season using the randomized block design and repeated two times. A total of 50 accessions of mungbeans were planted in two growing environments, namely: L1 = controlled environment (Maruca pest was controlled with NPV biopesticide 2 g/liter of water) and L2 = uncontrolled environment (Maruca pest was not controlled with any kind of pesticide). Observations were made on the intensity of borer attack and dry seed weight. 
Result: Eleven accessions gave a low resistant (LR) to moderately resistant (MR) categories responses against M. testulalis attacks. The pod damage from the eleven selected accessions was less than 15% under environmental conditions without control (L2). Control application (L1) reduced pod damage by 48.5% and increased mung bean seed yield by 25%, compared to without control (L2). The eleven accessions that were consistent or stable with low attack intensity under conditions with and without control gave dry seed weights above average, except for accessions (MLGV 0054, MLGV 0115 and MLGV 0320) which had dry seed weights lower than the average both in the growing environment with control (L1) or without control (L2).
  1. Atachi, P., Dannon, E.A. and Rurema, D.G. (2007). Trap cropping and intercropping of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan Millsp.) in pest management of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) in southern Benin: competing risk and pest status in pod attack. Annales des Sciences Agronomiques. 9: 1-20.
  2. Chiang, H.S. and Talekar, N.A. (1980). Identification of source of resistance to beanfly and two other agromyzid flies in soybean and mungbean. J. Econ. Entomol. 73(2): 1-5.
  3. Erayya, Jagdish, J., Sajeesh, P.K. and Upadhyay, V. (2013). Nuclear Polyhedrosis Virus (NPV). A Potential Biopesticide: A Review. Research Journal of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences. 1(8): 30-33. 
  4. Halder, J. and Srinivasan, S. (2007). Biochemical basis of resistance against Maruca vitrata in urbean. Ann. Pl. Protec. Sci. 15: 287-290.
  5. Halder, J. and Srinivasan, S. (2011). Varietal screening and role of morphological factors on distribution and abundance of spotted pod borer, Maruca vitrata (Geyer) on cowpea. Ann. Pl. Protec. Sci. 19 (1): 71-74.
  6. Hammig, M.D., Shepard, B.M., Carner, G.R., Dilts, R. and Rauf, A. (2008). Area-wide pest management for non-rice food crops in Southeast Asia. In: Area-wide Pest Management: Theory and Implementation, [O Koul, G Cuperus, Norman Elliott (Editors)], CABI, UK. pp. 480.
  7. Indiati, S.W. (2007). Pengendalian hama penggerek polong pada pertanaman kacang hijau [Pod Borer Management in Mungbean Field]. Jurnal penelitian dan informasi pertanian Agrin. 11(2): 138-142. 
  8. Indiati, S.W. (2010). Efektivitas pengendalian biologi dan kimiawi hama penggerek polong kacang hijau [The Efectiveness of Biological and Chemical Control on Mungbean Pod Borer, Maruca testulalis]. Jurnal Penelitian Pertanian Tanaman Pangan. 29(1): 50-55.
  9. Indiati, S.W., dan Ermawan, S.B. (2015). Pengelolaan tanaman dan tumbuhan inang untuk pengendalian thrips pada tanaman kacang hijau [Management of plants and host plants for thrips control on mung bean]. Buletin Palawija. 29: 33-45.
  10. Indiati, S.W., Bejo, Rahayu, M. (2017). Diversity of mung bean insect pests and their natural enemies in farmers‘ fields in East Java, Indonesia. Biodiversitas. 18(4): 1300-1307. 
  11. Lekha, O.P. Ameta and Hemant Swami (2017). Evaluation of new generation pesticides to control pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) infesting chickpea. Legume Research. 40(2): 384-387.
  12. Mahalakshmi, M.S., Sreekanth, M., Adinarayana, M. Reni, Y.P., Rao, K. and Narayana, E. (2016). Incidence, bionomics and management of spotted pod borer [Maruca vitrata (Geyer)] in major pulse crops in India-A review. Agricultural Reviews. 37(1): 19-26.
  13. Phompanjai, P. and Jamjanya, T. (2000). Study on pod borer (Maruca vitrata Fabricius) widespread and insecticide spraying time in cowpea. Proceedings of the National Mungbean, Marucavitrata Research Conference VIII, Kasetsart University. Kamphaeng Saen Campus, Nakhon Pathom (Thailand). Bangkok (Thailand): Department of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture Extension and the Thai Research Fund. pp. 184-192. 
  14. Soundararajan, 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.
  15. Soundararajan, R.P. and Chitra, N. (2017). Field evaluation of mungbean (Vigna radiata L.) germplasm for resistance against pod borer complex. Legume Research. 40(4): 768-772. 
  16. Sunitha, V., Rao, G.V.R., Lakshmi, K.V., Saxena, K.B., Rao, V.R. and Reddy, Y.V.R. (2008). Morphological and biochemical factors associated with resistance to Maruca vitrata (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in short-duration pigeonpea. International Journal of Tropical Insect Science. 28(1): 45-52.
  17. Traore, F., Dabire-Binso, C.L., Ba, N.M., Sanon, A. and Pittendrigh, B.R. (2013). Feeding preferences of the legume pod borer Maruca vitrata (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) larvae and suitability of different flower parts for larval development. Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci. 33: 107-113. 
  18. Ulrichs, C. and Mewis, I. (2004). Evaluation of the efficacy of Trichogramma evanescens Westwood (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) inundative releases for the control of Maruca vitrata F. (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Journal of Applied Entomology. 128: 426-431. 
  19. Umbarkar, P.S., Parsana, G.J. and Jethva, D.M. (2011). Estimation of yield losses by pod borer complex in greengram. Legume Research. 34(4): 308-310.
  20. Yule, S. and Srinivasan, R. (2013). Evaluation of bio-pesticides against legume pod borer, Maruca vitrata Fabricius (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), in laboratory and field conditions in Thailand. Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology. 16: 357-360. 

Editorial Board

View all (0)