Title code: \.I SA L' I ()()J()~ Use this code lor further enquiry and online searching Int. J. Sustain. Agril. Tech. 6(3): 08-11, March 2010 An online Journal of"G-Seienee Implementation and Publication", website: www.gscience.net
DEVELOPMENT
or www. gurpukur.corn
OF IPM BASED MANAGEMENT TACTICS AGAINST INSECT PESTS OF MUNGBEAN M. M. R. SHAH1- and A. K. M. M. MAULA2
'Scientific Officer, Entomology Division. Wheat Research Centre, Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute. Dinajpur-5200, Bangladesh, 2 Agricultural Extension Officer. Department of Agricultural Extension. Paba. Rajshah i, Bangladesh. *Corresponding author's Emai I: mostafiz.
[email protected]. ABSTRACT
A study was conducted for evaluation of some IPM packages against insect infestation of mungbean during Kharif-I season 2008 and 2009 at the experimental field of Regional Wheat Research Centre, Bangladeswh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI), Shyampur, Rajshahi district in Bangladesh. The management tactics tested in the study were T,= Seed treatment with Imidachlorpid 70 WS (5g1kg seeds) + Poultry manure (3t/ha) + Sequential release of bio-control agents (Trichogramma chilonis + Bracon hebetort + Spray with detergent @ 2gfL of water; Tz = Seed treatment with Imidaehlorpid 70 WS (5g1kg seeds) + Poultry manure (3 t/ha) + Sequential release of bio-control agents (Trichogramma chilonis + Bracon hebetort + Spray with crashed neem seed extract @ 50glL of water; T, = Seed treatment with Imidachlorpid 70 WS (5g1kg seeds) + Poultry manure (3 t/ha) + Spray with Quinalphos 25EC (Minalux25EC) @ Iml/L of water; and T4 = Untreated control. All the treatments significantly reduced insects' infestation (except thrips in 2009) and produced higher yield compared to control. It was found that the highest yield was obtained from the treatment T, (910.00 and 920.00 kglha in 2008 and 2009 respectively) followed by T2 and T). In case ofMBCR, the highest value was obtained from T, followed by Tl and T, in both the year. Keywords: Mungbean, Management tactics, Insect and IPM.
INTRODUCTION Mungbean
(Vigna radiate L. Wilczek)
is one of the important pulse crops in Bangladesh. Nowaday. is the promising cropping pattern considering socioeconomic, environment. and soil health factors. The acreage of mungbean increased day by day for its high price, easy digestibility, good flavour and high protein content. It contains 24.5% protein and 59.9% carbohydrate. It also contains 75 mg calcium, 8.5 mg iron and 49 mg ~-carotine per 100g of split dual (Bakr et al., 2004). But mungbean cultivation faced some constrains, insect pests problem is major one of them. Several insect pests have been reported to infest mungbean damaging the crops in seedlings, leaves. stems, flowers, buds and pods causing considerable losses (Litsinger et aI., 1988, Sehgal and Ujagir, 1988, Rahman and Miah, 1988, Karim and Rahman, 1991 and Husain, 1993). More than twelve species of insect pests were found to infest mungbean in Bangladesh (Anonymous, 1998) among them stem fly (Lal, 1985, Rahman, 1987), thrips and pod borers (Rahman et al., 1981, Hossain et aI., 2004) are important. In Bangladesh, insecticides are frequently being used in controlling insect pests of field and horticultural crops (Kabir et al., 1996). These conventional chemical control measures failed to control adequately this pest that resulting in severe yield losses. Under these circumstances it becomes necessary to find out some eco-friendly alternative methods for insect pests' management in formulating the Integrated Pest Management approach. The present study was conducted to develop economically feasible integrated management approach combining bio-control agent, bio-rationale, seed treatments, and foliar spray with synthetic insecticides.
Wheat-Mungbean-TAman
MATERIALS AND METHODS The experiment was conducted at the experimental field of Regional Wheat Research Center, BARI, Shyampur, Rajshahi district in Bangladesh during Kharif-l of 2008 and 2009. There were four treatments viz. TI=' Seed treatment with Imidachlorpid 70 WS (5g1kg seeds) + Poultry manure (3t/ha) +
8
Title code: USAT/ 100302 Use this code for further enquiry and online searching Sequential release of bio-control agents (Trichogramma chilonis + Bracon hebetor) + Spray with detergent @ 2g/L of water; T2 = Seed treatment with Imidachlorpid 70 WS (5g/kg seeds) + Poultry manure (3t1ha) + Sequential release of bio-control agents (Trichogramma chilonis + Bracon hebetorj + Spray with crashed neem seed extract @ 50g/L of water; TJ = Seed treatment with lrnidachlorpid 70 WS (5g1kg seeds) + Poultry manure (3Uha) + Spray with Quinalphos 25EC (Minalux-25EC) @ I mill of water and T4 = Untreated control. Seed treatment procedure: Seeds were treated according Jagadish and Gowda (1994). Sticky soil with high clay content was taken then it is dried and powdered, and finally sieved to get finer fractions. 200g of mung bean seeds with 20 g of that fine soil were taken in a plastic container, and then 10 rnl of water. 3-4 drops of gum (sticker) and Ig of Imidachlorpid 70 WS (Gaucho) were added to this and stirred thoroughly. If needed extra more water was added drop by drop and stirred well to get slurry. Lid of the container was covered tightly and shaken vigorously for about 30 seconds to get uniform coating of the slurry on the seeds. The treated seeds were then air dried overnight under shade and sown on next day. The experiment was laid out in ReB design with 3 replications and plot size was 10m x 10m where plot to plot and block to block distance was I m and 1.5m respectively. BARI Mung-6 was used and fertilizers were used as recommended dose (Hussain et aI., 2006). Poultry manure pulverized with soil during final land preparation. Seeds were sown in line, where line to line and plant to plant distance was 75 em and 20 em, respectively. Sprays were made 3 times at ten days interval starting from 30 days after sowing (DAS). Bio-control agents were released after 2 days of each spray. Data were recorded on stem fly, thrips, pod borer and yield of grain. For stem fly, data were taken three times at seedling stage viz. 20, 27, and 34 DAS, respectively from randomly selected 10 plants in each plot. Plants were uprooted followed by cleaning, divided it longitudinally with the help of scalpel, checked infested or not, and measured the stem tunneling. Finally data were converted into percentage. For thrips, randomly 20 flowers were collected in a polythene bag from each plot and opened on white paper and counted the number of thrips. In the case of pod borer infestation, randomly 10 plants were collected from each plot and counted the number of healthy and borer infested pods. For yield data, whole plot pods were harvested through hand picking two times, dried it properly and yield was recorded. Data were analyzed statistically and the treatment means were separated by DMRT according to Gomez and Gomez (198'+). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The stem tunneling percentage caused by stem fly showed significant difference among the treatments in both seasons. The highest stem tunneling was found in control plot (T4) which is statistically different from other treatments. The lowest stem tunneling was found in TI which is statistically similar with T2 and T3 considering both the year. The abundance of thrips did not show significant difference among the treatments in 2009 but significant in 2008. In 2008, the highest number of thrips per flower was recorded from T4 plot (5.56) which is statistically similar to T3 plot (5.09). The lowest number of thrips was found from T 2 plot (4.17) which is statistically same to T I plot (4.35). Pod borer infestation varied significantly among the treatments in both the year. In 2008, the highest infestation was found in T4 (27.98%) and the lowest was found in TI (11.80%) which is statistically similar with Tz (11.95%). In 2009, T2 (1.97%) had the lowest infestation which was statistically similar to all the treatments except T4 (5.23%). Grain yield in 2008 did not show significant difference among the treatments but numerically higher yield obtained from TI (910.00 kg/ha) where lowest was T4 (706.67 kg/ha). In 2009. the highest grain yield also obtained from TI (920.00 kg/ha) which was significantly different from remaining all the treatments. The lowest yield was found in T4 (721.33 kg/ha) which was also different from all the treatments (Table 1). Total variable cost ranged from Tk·. 0 (zero) to 3475/- where the minimum and maximum were in T4 and T3 respectively. The highest value of additional yield over control was found in TI treated plot
'us dolor
($) I = Taka (Tk) 69
9
Title code: 1JSATI 100302 Use this code for further enquiry and online searching followed by T2 and T3 in both 2008 and 2009 season. The maximum Marginal Benefit Cost Ratio (MBCR) was obtained from TI treated plot (3.29 in 2008 and 3.22 in 2009) followed by T2 and T1 treated plot in both the year. This finding indicates that all the treatments significantly reduced insect infestation (Except thrips in 2009) and offered higher yield compared to control plot. The efficacy of lmidachlorpid and poultry manure in minimizing insects infestation have been claimed by a good number of entomologists which clearly supports the findings of present investigation. The effectiveness of lmidachlorpid against thrips as seed treatment of Allium porrum has been reported by Ester e/ of. (2001). They observed that lmidachlorpid showed effective control of thrips on the seed bed for twelve weeks and three weeks after transplanting which was closely agreement with the present investigation. The results of this study have also been corroborated with the findings of Balasubramanian and Muralibaskaran (2000). They carried out research against the sucking insects using poultry manure on cotton and observed poultry manure significantly reduced the incidence of early sucking pest of cotton. Prodhan et 01. (2008) reported that seed treatment with Imidachlorpid, use of poultry manure and biocontrol agents, spray with neem seed extract and Quinalphos 25EC significantly reduced insects' infestation (except thrips) in mungbean and produced higher yield compared to control which support the present findings. Table I. Damage severity of major insect pests attacking mungbean season at Rajshahi. Treatments
2008 11.80 c (3.43) 11.95 c (3.45) 14.82 b (3.84) 27.9R a (5.272 0.296* 3.68
TI T2
TJ
T4 LSD value CV~ Means in a column value.
having same letter(s) did not differ significantly
Table 2. Economic evaluation and 2009. Treatments TI T2
TJ "1"4
of different management
Total variable cost (tk/ha) 2008 I 2009 3085 3085 3270 3270 3475 3475 00 00
and its yield during 2008 to 2009
2.IOb(1.43) 1.97 b (1.39) 3.77 ab (\.88) 5.23 a (2.2R) 0.65* 18.74
and figures in the parenthesis
are the square root transformed
tactics on grain yields of mungbean
Total yield Additional yield (kg/ha) over control (kg/ha 2008 I 2009 2008 I 2009 910.00 203.33 920.00 198.67 866.67 160.00 115.34 836.67 151.66 102.00 823.33 858.33 721.33 706.67
Cost of additional yield (tk) 2008 I 2009 10166.5 9933.5 8000.00 5767 5100 7583.0
during 2008 MBCR 2008 3.29 2.44 2.IR
I 2009 3.22 1.70 1.46
Mungbcan-Tk. SOlkg, Imidachlorpid -Tk. 10/g, Quinalphos (Minalux 2SI':C)-Tk. 78/1 OOml, Poultry manurc-Tk. ~OO/t. DetergentTk.40Ikg, Neem sced-Tk. 3Slkg, Trichograma sp.-Tk. I DO/viall!, and Bracon sp.-Tk. ISOlbunker Note: Additional yield: Treated plot yield-Control plot yield and Additional cost: Additional yield x rate (Mungbcan-tk. 501kg)
It may be concluded from the study that considered all lPM management tactics significantly reduced insects' infestation (except thrips in 2009) and gave higher yield compared to control in both the year of 2008 and 2009. The highest yield was obtained from the package of Seed treatment with lmidachlorpid 70 WS (5g1kg seeds) + Poultry manure (3tJha) + Sequential release of bio-control agents (Trichogramma chilonis + Bracon hebetory + Spray with detergent @ 2g/L of water (T I) and the highest value of MBCR also found from this package.
10
Title code: IJSATI 100302 Use this code for further enquiry and online searching
REFERENCES Anonymous. 1998. Effect of sowing date and insecticides against stcmlly and pod borer or bluckgrarn. Annual report 1997-1998. Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (8ARI). Joydcbpur. Gazipur, Bangladesh. pp.104-105. Bakr, M. A, M. A Afzal, A Hamid, M. M. Haque and M. S. Aktar. 2004. Blackgram in Bangladesh. Lentil Blackgram and Mungbean Development Pilot Project, Publication No. 25. Pulses Research Centre. BARI, Gazipur, Bangladesh. p. 60. Balasubramanian, A and R. K. Muralibaskaran. 2000. Inllucnce of organic amendments and inorganic on the incidence of sucking pests of cotton. Madras Agric. 1. 2000. 87(4-6):359-361.
fertilizers
Ester, A, H. F. Huiting and A 1. Biddle. 2001. Filmcoating the seed of leek with fipronil to control onion thrips. onion fly and leek moth. Proceedings of symposium of Seed treatment challenges and opportunities. Wishaw, North Warwickshire, UK. 26-27 February 200 I. pp. I 59- I66. Gomez,
K. A and A. A. Gomez. 1984. Statistical procedures tor Agricultural Research. Willy and Sons, New York, Chickcstcr, Brisbane. Toronto. Singapore. p. 643.
Hossain,
M. A., 1. Ferdous, M. A. Sarkar and M. A Rahman. 2004. Insecticidal borer in mungbean. Bangladesh J. Agril. Res. 29(3): 347-356.
Husain, M. 1993. Anistakari
Kit-patanga
Daman (in Bengali).
BangIa Academy.
Int. Rice Res. lnst. John
management
or thrips and pod
Dhaka. Bangladesh.
p. 220.
Hussain,
M. S., M. M. Rahman, M. Harun-Ur-Rashid, A. T. M. Farid, M. A Kaium, M. Ahmed. M. S. Alarn and K. M. Salauddin. 2006. Krishi Projukti Hatboi (Handbook on Agro-technology) (Part-l ), 4th cd. Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute, Gazipur 170 I, Bangladesh. p. 139.
Jagadish,
K. S. and G. Gowda. 1994. Efficacy of certain insecticides as seed treatment in the management of cowpea stem fly, Ophiomyia phaseoli (Tryon) (Diptcra: Agromyzidae). Seed Research. 22(2): 156-159.
Kabir,
K. H., M. E. Bakash, F. M. A Rouf, M. A Karim and A. Ahmed. 1996. Insecticide usage pattern of vegetables at farmer's level of Jessore region in Bangladesh: A survey findings. Bangladesh 1. Agri/. Res. 21 (2): 241-254.
Karim, M. A. and M. M. Rahman. 1991. Status of insect and vertebrate pest management 135-138. In: Proceedings of the second National Workshop of Advances Bangladesh, 6-8 June 1989, Joydebpur, Bangladesh. Lal, S. S. 1985. A review of insect pests of mungbean 105-114.
and their control
research on pulses. pp. in Pulses Research in
in India. Trap. Pest Management,
31 (2):
LitsingcrJ.
A, A. T. Barrion, 1. P. Bangdog, C. G. Dela-Cruz, B. L. Canapi and R. F. Apostol. 1988. Food web. yield loss and chemical control of insect pests of wetland rice-based mungbcan in the Philippines. Mungbean: Proceedings of the second International Symposium. Asian Vegetable Research and Development Centre, Taiwan.
Prodhan,
M. Z. H., M. AltafHossain, Hosna Kohinur. M. K. U. Mollah and M. H. Rahman. 2008. Development of integrated management approaches against insect pest complex ofmungbcan. 1. Soil. Nature. 2(3):37-39.
Rahman,
M. M. 1987. Evaluation of sumithion as a component or an integrated pest management program to control insect pests of mungbean. Abstract or the Bangladesh Science Conference 12. Bangladesh Association for Advancement of Science. Section 1:38-39.
Rahman,
M. M. and A A Miah. 1988. Mungbean in Bangladesh-Problem and Prospects. In: Shanmugasundaram. S(ed.) Mungbean: Proceedings of the second International Symposium on Mungbean. 16-20 November 1987. Bankok, Thailand. AVRDC, Shanhua, Tainan, Taiwan (ROC). p. 570.
Rahman,
M. M., M. A. Mannan and M. A Islam. 1981. Pest survey of major summer and winter pulses Bangladesh. In: Proceedings of the National Workshop on Pulses (eds.). AK. Kaul. pp. 265-273.
Sehgal, V. K. and R. Ujagir. 1988. Insect and pest management the Second International Symposium. Asian Vegetable
II
of mungbean in India. Mungbean: Proceedings Research and Development Centre. Taiwan.
in or
