www.IndianJournals.com Members Copy, Not for Commercial Sale

Downloaded From IP - 220.225.236.59 on dated 5-Dec-2012 Keywords: † Department ofEntomology,ChaudharyCharanSinghHaryanaAgriculturalUniversity,Hisar-125004,India. Dhillon K Mukesh , to Genotypes ( Gourd Bitter Different of Reaction paper Full * Seventeen genotypes,comprisingoftwohighly-resistant, methods and Materials cultivated bittergourdgenotypesanditswildrelatives. to highlevelofresistancethemelonfruitflyfrom conducted toidentifybittergourdgenotypeswithmoderate et al., to moderate(Thakur were identifiedearlier,buttheirlevelofresistancewaslow controlling thispest.Someresistantsourcesofresistance fly-resistant varietiesisthemostdesirablemethodof 28.6% onwatermeloninIndia.Thedevelopmentoffruit et al., inSolomonIslands(Hollignsworth Guinea), and90%ofsnakegourd60to87% reported toinfest95%ofbittergourdfruitsinPapua(New 1978; RabindranathandPillai,1986).Thispesthasbeen been reportedtovaryfrom4189%(GuptaandVerma, preferred hostsofmelonfruitflyandinfestationhas Bitter gourd,( and isamajorthreattocucurbitaceousvegetablesinIndia. (Fletcher, 1987).Itdamagesawiderangeofhostplants, temperate, tropicalandsub-tropicalregionsoftheworld (Diptera: )iswidelydistributedthroughoutthe The melonfruitfly, Introduction Abstract DepartmentofVegetableCrops,ChaudharyCharanSinghHaryanaAgriculturalUniversity,Hisar-125004,India. Present Address:InternationalCropsResearchInstitutefortheSemi-AridTropics(ICRISAT),Patancheru-502324,AndhraPrad cucurbitae Seventeen bittergourdgenotypeswereevaluatedunderfieldconditionsforresistancetoMelonfruitfly, used intheresistancebreedingprogramstoincreaselevels,anddiversifybasisof fruit infestationandnumberoflarvae/fruit.Wildrelativeresistantbittergourd( infestation hadlowlarvalnumbersinthefruits,andtherewasapositivecorrelation(r=0.96)betweenpercentage also showedresistancetothemelonfruitflyinbothrainyandsummerseasons.Genotypeswithlowfurit Do Mausmi.GenotypesIC213311,248282,256110,248254,248281,248292and68314-B lower (9.4%)inIC256185and248256(10.2%)comparedto82.1%infestationthesusceptiblecheck,Pusa (2000)reported31.3%damageonbittergourdand 1996;Tewatia Bittergourd,melonfruitfly, hostplantresistance (Coquillett), et al., cucurbitae et al., 1992;Thakur * , J S Naresh, Ram Singh and N K Sharma K N and Singh Ram Naresh, S J ,

1997).Therefore,studywas during2001rainyand2002summerseasons.Melonfruitflyinfestationwassignificantly Linn.)isoneofthemost et al., et al. , 1997).Singh 1994;Thakur (Coquillett) Bactrocera cucurbitae Bactrocera Indian JournalofPlantProtectionVol.33.No.1,2005(55-59) The dataonnumberoflarvaeweretransformedintosquare analysis Statistical infestation andnumberoflarvaeperfruit(Nath,1966). different categories(Table1)onthebasisofpercentfruit were sevenpickings.The48genotypesgroupedinto open tocountthenumberoflarvaeperfruit.Inall,there to estimatefruitinfestation.Theinfestedfruitswerecut per fruit.Theinfestedanduninfestedfruitswerecounted for observationsonfruitflyinfestation,andnumberoflarvae the crop.Marketablefruitswerepickedatsix-dayintervals practices (exceptchemicalcontrol)werefollowedforraising there werefiveplantsperplot.Recommendedagronomic (2.5 x1.5m)withaplanttospacingof45cmand three replications.Theentrieswereplantedonraisedbeds randomized completeblockdesign(RCBD),andtherewere at theVegetableResearchFarm,CCSHAU,Hisarina was plantedinrainyseason2001andsummer2002 Agricultural University(CCSHAU),Hisar.Thetestmaterial Vegetable Crops,ChaudharyCharanSinghHaryana Resources (NBPGR),NewDelhi;andDepartmentof procured fromtheNationalBureauofPlantGenetic from thewildrelative, accessions, eightcommercialcultivars,andaccessions screening of48bittergourdgenotypes(32 two highly-susceptiblewereselectedfromthepreliminary five resistant,sixmoderately-twosusceptible,and Momordica charantia charantia Momordica M. charantia Momordicacharantia † var. (Coquillett) muricata B. cucurbitae. Bactrocera var. esh, India. L.) ) canbe muricata ) 55 www.IndianJournals.com Members Copy, Not for Commercial Sale

Downloaded From IP - 220.225.236.59 on dated 5-Dec-2012 56 17 ucpil 7361IC 6.1 57.3 Susceptible 51-75 21-50 ()Rato % ri Genotypes IC 4.9 fruit 14.2 (%) Nooflarvaeper Resistant infested fruit Mean Reaction 11-20 1-10 (%) infestation Fruit and numberoflarvaeperfruit Table 1.Groupingofbittergourdgenotypesintodifferentcategoriesonthebasispercentagefruitinfestation 2.6 (IC44413)to9.6(CoimbatoreWhiteLong)in group, 3.0(IC213311)to6.2248292)inresistant from 3.3(IC256185)to6.8248256)inhighlyresistant group. Therangefornumbersoflarvaeperfruitvaried Harit )to83.3%(PusaDoMausmi)inthehighlysusceptible to 61.5%(IC68255)insusceptiblegroup,and75.0%(Arka Baramasi) inmoderatelyresistantgroup,53.9%(IC33227) resistant group,21.8%(MidhiPagal)to47.6%(Jhalri group, 11.1%(IC213311)to17.2%248292)inthe 8.2% (IC256185)to10.9%248256)inhighlyresistant infestation indifferentpickings48genotypesrangedfrom Mausmi) werehighlysusceptible.Percentagefruit reaction, whiletwogenotypes(ArkaHaritandPusaDo (IC 33227,IC68255andPusaVishesh)showedasusceptible four genotypesweremoderatelysusceptible,three IC 68314-Bshowedaresistantreaction(Table1).Thirty- 256110, IC248254,248281,248292(wildtypes)and while sevengenotypes muricata genotypes (IC256185,IC248256)from per fruit(Table2).Outof48bittergourdgenotypes,two tested forpercentagefruitinfestationandnumberoflarvae There weresignificantdifferencesamongthegenotypes discussion and Results 76-100 difference atp<0.05. and thetreatmentmeanswerecomparedbyleastsignificant of differencesbetweenthegenotypeswasjudgedbyF-test, and thensubjectedtoanalysisofvariance.Thesignificance values,andpercentfruitinfestationintoangularvalues ecino itrGudGntpst eo ri l MukeshKDhillon Reaction ofBitterGourdGenotypestoMelonFruitFly (wildtypes)werecategorizedashighlyresistant, Moderately resistant Highly susceptible ihyrssat9843IC256185,248256 4.3 9.8 resistant Highly viz., IC213311,248282, M. charantia 535.0 35.3 998.1 79.9 var high temperatures(35to40 season maybebecauseoflowerfruitflypopulationdueto The decreaseinmelonflyinfestationduring2002summer the seasonstherewasnochangeintheirrelativeranking. resistant tofruitfly.Butbasedonthemeanvaluesofboth and IC248282werealsorecognized ashighly IC 213311, wild bittergourdtypesIC256185,248256,248281, at moderateinsectpressure(duringsummerseason2002) bitter gourdtypeswererecognizedashighlyresistantwhile, rainy season2001)onlyIC256185and248256,wild 2). Itmaybeconcludedthatathighinsectpressure(during and 3.4to7.8larvaeperfruitacrossthegenotypes(Table during summerseason2002itrangedfrom7.3to57.0% and 3.8to8.3larvaeperfruitduringrainyseason2001,while fruit in17bittergourdgenotypesrangedfrom9.4to82.1% The percentagefruitinfestationandnumberoflarvaeper the highlysusceptiblegroup. in susceptiblegroup,and5.1to9.2(PusaDoMausmi) moderately resistantgroup,4.6(IC68255)to7.033227) moderately resistantduringsummerseason2002),ArkaHarit (which wassusceptibleduringthe2001rainyseasonand in theirrelativeranking,exceptPusaVisheshandIC68255 of cultivatedbittergourdgenotypesbut,therewasnochange during thesummerseason2002alsoinfluncedgrouping compared tothe2001rainyseason.Lowlevelofinfestation of infestationwaslowerduringthesummerseasonas northeastern Taiwan(Lee influence thepopulationdensityof humidity, andplantationactivityhavebeenreportedto 40%). Hightemperatures,longsunshinehours,low IC 68272-1 Hirkani, IC68251,68250,32817,85622, IC 44423,68238-1,JhalriBaramasi,45338, Coimbatore WhiteLong,IC85619-A,BG14, IC 45352,44428,68309,68292, B, IC44410,Jaunpuri,85637,44420, IC 85604,85605-B,68272,BL237,44415- IC 68306,4413,45350,44425-A, Midhi Pagal,GreenLong,KonkanTara,IC85606, IC 248281,248292,68314-B Arka Harit,PusaDoMausmi 33227, PusaVishesh,IC68255 213311, IC248282,256110,248254, et al., et al., o C), andlowhumidity(30to 1992).

However, thelevel B. cucurbitae in www.IndianJournals.com Members Copy, Not for Commercial Sale

Downloaded From IP - 220.225.236.59 on dated 5-Dec-2012 V% .(.)1.(.)-1.(.)6030 - - - - 6.0(3.0) 19.6(9.6) 0.33(0.07) 1.13(0.23) - MR - 11.1(6.4) MR 6.2(2.5) MR 2.59(1.78) 4.6(2.9) 6.1(2.5) 6.6(2.6) HR =Highlyresistant,RResistantMRModeratelySSusceptible 1.62(1.03) 4.1(2.1) *** Basedon7fruitpickings ** Figuresintheparenthesesaresquareroottrasformedvalues 6.3(2.5) 6.0(2.4) * Figuresintheparenthesesareangulartransformedvalues 4.2(2.1) CV(%) 34.5(35.8) LSD (p<0.05) 7.2(2.7) 4.0(2.0) SE 24.6(29.7) Pusa DoMausmi 28.6(32.1) 44.5(41.8) 27.6(31.6) Arka Harit HR 21.1(32.1) IC 68255 22.0(28.0) Pusa Vishesh 36.1(36.9) 33.3(35.2) 4.2(2.1) Hirkani Jhalri Baramasi Remarks 3.6(2.0) Jaunpuri BL 237 HR Mean 4.7(2.2) Konkan Tara Green Long Summer2002 (17.7) 9.3 3.8 (2.0) IC 68314-B Rainy2001 3.8***(1.9)** IC 248281 (16.8) 8.4 3.8***(2.0)** IC 256110 Mean 8.3 (16.7) (18.6) 10.2 IC 248282 7.3***(15.5)8 Summer2002 9.4***(17.8)* IC 213311 Rainy2001 IC 248256 IC 256185 Genotypes Table 2.Fruitflyinfestationondifferentgenotypesofbittergourdduringrainyseason2001andsummer2002 3, andGhoti(Srinivasan,1991),Acc.23,33 1974) IHR89,and213(Pal feet ofsoil(r=0.92).ShortGreenKarlei(LallandSinha, trapped/trap/day (r=0.86),andnumberofpupariapersquare between fruitflyinfestationandnumberofmales Inayatuallah decrease innumberoflarvaeperfruitacrosstheseasons. per fruit(Figure1).Butnotrendwasobservedinincrease/ between percentagefuritinfestationandnumberoflarvae Pusa DoMausmi.Therewasapositivecorrelation(r=0.96) except inPusaVishesh,BL237,IC68255,ArkaHarit,and larvae perfruitdidnotdiffersignificantlyacrossseason, for boththeseasons.Fruitinfestationandnumberof during summerseason2002andbasedonthemeanvalues the 2001rainyseason,werecategorizedassusceptible and PusaDoMausmi,whichwerehighlysusceptibleduring et al . (1991)reportedapositivecorrelation .316)43(.5 .303)05(.2 - - S S 0.54(0.12) S 7.8(2.8) 1.83(0.37) MR 8.0(2.9) 5.8(2.4) 7.8(2.8) MR - 6.3(2.5) 7.8(2.8) 6.2(2.5) 7.8(2.8) 6.6(2.6) 6.7(2.6) 8.3(2.9) 4.31(2.95) MR 69.5(57.0) 5.5(2.3) MR 65.5(54.4) 2.63(1.68) 6.4(2.5) 5.9(2.4) R 57.0(49.0) 52.1(46.2) R 5.1(2.3) 53.4(46.9) 82.1(64.9) 43.3(41.0) 5.6(2.4) 6.8(2.6) R 45.1(42.1) 77.7(61.9) R 4.9(2.2) 5.0(2.2) 29.9(33.1) 4.6(2.2) 59.2(50.3) 32.5(34.6) R 5.5(2.3) 56.6(48.8) 4.6(2.1) 4.8(2.2) 5.1(2.3) 23.7(29.1) 4.8(2.2) 4.7(2.2) 5.7(2.4) 5.1(2.3) 41.4(40.0) 24.8(29.8) 3.4(1.8) 4.9(2.2) 4.9(2.2) 4.5(2.1) 23.4(28.9) 23.6(29.0) 4.2(2.1) 18.9(25.8) 5.7(2.4) 21.2(27.3) 12.6(20.1) 4.7(2.2) 25.8(30.5) 21.3(27.5) 5.9(2.4) 25.7(30.4) 12.1(20.3) 8.9(17.3) 11.1(19.4) 16.5(24.0) 10.7(19.1) 10.4(18.8) 15.2(22.9) 9.1(17.5) 13.5(21.5) 9.0(17.4) 13.1(21.3) 11.7(20.1) et al., ri netto % NumberofLarvae/fruit Fruit infestation(%) 1984),HisarII,Acc. Indian JournalofPlantProtectionVol.33.No.1,2005(55-59) (Thakur Gold. Percentagefruitinfestationincreaseswithanincrease compared to87.33%infruitsofthesusceptiblevariety,Delta 17 (Tewatia and 17.8% infruitshavingtoughrind (1971) observedthateggyingbythemelonfruitflywas (Boller andProkopy,1976).ChelliahSambandam orientation offruitfliestoapotentialovipositionalsite by theinsects.Shapeoffruitalsoinfluences Morphological factorsinterferewithfeedingandoviposition physiological conditionsofthetestinsects(De-Ponti,1977). biochemical planttraits,environmentalconditions,and interactions areinfluencedbyseveralmorphologicaland level ofresistanceinthepresentstudies.Theplant-herbivore resistant tomelonfruitfly,buttheyshowedlowmoderate

1996), andKeralacollection1Faizabad et al., et al., 1992),C96andNBTI1(Thakur 1997)haveearlierbeenreportedtobe Cucumis callosus et al., 1994 as 57 www.IndianJournals.com Members Copy, Not for Commercial Sale

Downloaded From IP - 220.225.236.59 on dated 5-Dec-2012 58 B References Dr. H.C.Sharmaforhiscriticalcommentsonthemanuscript. providing necessaryfacilitiestoconducttheexperiment,and Crops, CCSHAU,Hisarforprovidingthegermplasmand India, andProfessor&Head,DepartmentofVegetable The authorsarethankfultoDirector,NBPGR,NewDelhi, Acknowledgements resistance to programs toincreasethelevels,anddiversifybasisof muricata Wild relativeresistantbittergourd( program tobroadenthebasesofresistancemelonfly. different mechanismscanbeusedinaresistance-breeding se genotypes ofbittergourdcanbegrownbythefarmers support ourpresentfindings.Themelonfly-resistant al., in fruitlengthanddiameter(Jaiswal De Ponti,O.M.B.1977. Chelliah, S.andSambandam,C.N.1971. susceptibility/resistance tomelonfruitfly Figure 1.Fruitinfestation(%)andnumberoflarvaeperfruitinbittergourdgenotypeswithdifferentlevels oller, E.F.andProkopy,R.J.1976. or usedinresistancebreedingprograms.Genotypeswith management of 511-512. Tetranychus urticae imparting resistanceto mechanical factorsin 1998).Thesearesomeoftheearlierstudies,which Reaction of Bitter Gourd Genotypes to Melon Fruit Fly Mukesh K Dhillon K Mukesh Reaction ofBitterGourdGenotypestoMelonFruitFly ) canalsobeusedintheresistancebreeding B. cucurbitae. Rhagoletis Koch.I.Theroleofplantbreedingin Dacus cucurbitae Cucumis callosus Resistancein . Annual ReviewofEntomology et al., Cucumis sativus . AUARA M. charantia Bionomicsand (Rottl.)Cogn.In 1990;Tewatia Roleofcertain 3 : 48-53. L.to var.

21 per et : Lall, B.S.andSinha,R.P.1974. Inayatullah, L.,Khan,L.andHaq,M.U.1991. Hollingsworth, R.,Vagalo,M.andTsatsia,F.1997. Jaiswal, R.C.,Kumar,S.,Raghav,M.andSingh,D.K.1990. Fletcher, B.S.1987. Gupta, J.N.andVerma,A.N.1978. Lee, L.W.Y.,Hwang,Y.B.,Cheng,C.andChang,J. varieties toinvasionbymelonfruitfly, and puparia. between fruitinfestationandthedensityofmelonflyadults : 140-144. Industrial AgriculturalResearch. inthePacific.Proceedings,AustralianCluncilfor Allwood, A.J.andDrew,R.A.I.(eds.), of melonfly,withspecialreferencetoSolomonIslands.In: Proceedings, BiharAcademyofAgriculturalSciences L.) cultivars. Variation inqualitytraitsofbittergourd( integrated control. Horticulture Science cucurbitae cucurbit cropsfortheattackofmelonfruitfly, Review ofEntomology Entomology cucurbitae 1992. 100-103. Populationfluctuationofthemelonfly, Coq. (Diptera:Tephritidae). , innortheasternTaiwan.

12 Vegetable Science Indian JournalofEntomology : 285-292. ThebiologyofDacinefruitflies. Euphytica

et al., 7

32 : 78-82. : 115-144.

26 susceptible Reactionofdifferentcucurbit

17 MiscellaneousPublishers : 633. : 186-190. Screeningofdifferent Dacus cucurbitae Momordica charantia Harynana Journalof Management offruit Chinese Journalof 53 Relationship : 239-243. Biology

Annual 22/23 Dacus Dacus Co1. 76 : www.IndianJournals.com Members Copy, Not for Commercial Sale

Downloaded From IP - 220.225.236.59 on dated 5-Dec-2012 Rabindranath, K.andPillaiS.1986. Pal, A.B.,Srinivasan,K.andDoijode,S.D.1984. Nath, P.1966. Singh, S.V.,Mishra,A.,Bisan,R.S.,Malik,Y.P.and Srinivasan, K.1991. 16 Breeding ResearchinAsiaandOceania(SABRAO)Journal mechanisms ofresistance. resistance tomelonfruitflyinbittergourdandpossible bitter gourdusingsyntheticpyrethroids. Journal ofHorticulture A. 2000. 272. pp 44-52. Horticulture forNorthernPlains,Lucknow,UttarPradesh,India. Horticultural Crops, Entomologists WorkingintheCoordinatedProjectsof Improvement Project(AICVIP). of workdoneunderAllIndiaCoordinatedVegetable Journal ofEntomology foveicollis : 57-69. Hostpreferenceofredpumpkinbeetle, andmelonfruitfly, Varietal resistanceofgourdstothefruitfly. Pestmanagementincucurbits–Anoverview 28-29January1991.CentralInstituteof

62 23 : 242-246. : 69-78. Society fortheAdvancementof Dacus cucurbitae. Group Discussionof Controloffruitfly Entomon Aulacophora Sourcesof

11

Indian Indian : 296- Indian JournalofPlantProtectionVol.33.No.1,2005(55-59) Thakur, J.C.,Khattra,A.S.andBrar,K.1992. Thakur, J.C.,Khattra,A.S.andBrar,K.1994. Thakur, J.C.,Khattra,A.S.andBrar,K.1996. Tewatia A.S.,Dhankhar,B.S.andSingh,R.1998. Tewatia, A.S.,Dhankhar,B.S.andK.1997. eevd:2-420 Accepted:10-02-2005 Received :28-04-2004 ( analysis foreconomictraitsandinfestationofmelonfruitfly Horticulture Science resistance tofruitflyinbittergourd. Journal ofHorticultureScience Indian JournalofAgriculturalSciences to melonfruitfly, in bittergourd. studies betweeneconomictraits,fruitflyinfestationandyield of bittergourd( Journal ofHorticultureScience highly susceptiblegenotypesofbittergourd–Anote. Growth andyieldcharacteristicsofmelonfruitflyresistant Dacus cucurbitae Momordica charantia Punjab VegetableGrower Bactrocera cucurbitae ) inbittergourd( 21 : 285-288.

25 27 : 266-271. : 253-255. L.) cultivarsforresistant Momordica charantia

(Coquillett). 64 Haryana Journalof

31 : 378-381. : 37-40. Comparative Correlation Evaluation Haryana Haryana Stability ). 59