Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

First Edition: 2019 ISBN: 978-1-913482-94-7

Price: Rs. 1500 (£16)

Disclaimer: The authors are solely responsible for the contents of the book chapters compiled in this book. The editors or publisher do not take any, responsibility for same in any manner. Errors, if any are purely unintentional and readers are requested to communicate such errors to the editors or publisher to avoid discrepancies in future.

Printed & Published by:

Rubicon Publications 4/4A Bloomsbury Square Bloomsbury Square, London WC/A 2RP, England e-mail: [email protected] Website: www.rubiconpublications.com Editors

Dr. Rashmi Nigam Assistant Professor, Plant Pathology Janta Vedic College, Baraut, Baghpat, UP

Dr. Joginder Singh Assistant Professor, Horticulture Janta Vedic College, Baraut, Baghpat, UP

Dr. Rajendra Singh Associate Professor, Entomology S.V.P. University of Agriculture & Technology, Meerut, UP

Mr. Ashwani Kumar Assistant Professor, Agricultural Extension C. S. S. S. (P.G.) College, Machhra, Meerut, UP

Mr. Yogesh Kr. Agarwal Jr. Project Fellow, Agroforestry Forest Research Centre for Eco-rehabilitation, Prayagraj, UP

Rubicon Publications Bloomsbury Square, London, England PREFACE

Integrated pest and disease control is a broad-based approach that integrates practices for economic control of pests. IPM aims to suppress pest populations below the economic injury level. Modern approaches in pest and disease management book contains the chapters highlights the current status of crop productivity. The book is structured into various chapters and primarily for the post graduate students and for the researchers. This book serves as a foundation for further learning in lecture, Lab field and Library a foundation that is largely manageable by students.

Contributed papers by experts in the field detail how to put pest management to work. Presents the philosophy and practice, ecological and economic background as well as strategies and techniques including not only the use of chemical pesticides but also biological, genetic and cultural methods to manage the harm done by insect and pathogen pests. Covers such key crops as cereal, pulses, fruit and forage. This edition reports important advances of the last decade including an increased environmental and ecological awareness and a trend toward lower chemical pesticide use. In this book attempt has been made to bring together chapters from different authors and highlight the current status of crop protection in the light of development in crop production. Though this is a multi authored book an effort has been made to assimilate the most topical result about crop improvement with contemporary plant protection approaches.

I wish to express our deep sense of gratitude and indebtness to those who helped us directly or indirectly during the preparation of the manuscript of this text. I specially thankful our co editors who have helped with me in editing the voluminous treaties. I hope that the book is useful and interesting to readers, teachers and students and would create in them the urge to know more about recent researchers going related to modern approaches in pest and disease management for enhancing crop productivity.

Dr. Rashmi Nigam

Content S. N. TITLES AND AUTHORS NAME Pg. N. 1. APPROACHES IN CONSERVATION AND AUGMENTATION OF 1-7 NATURAL ENEMIES Abhinav Kumar, Sunil Verma, Ram Keval, Abarna V. Ramesh Babu and Rupesh Kumar Gajbhiye 2. PEST MANAGEMENT THROUGH INDIGENOUS TECHNICAL 8-15 KNOWLEDGE (ITK) FOR SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION Sunil Verma, Abhinav Kumar, Kalpana Bisht, S. Ramesh Babu, Ram Keval and Rupesh Kumar Gajbhiye 3. INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT APPROACHES IN 16-25 STORED GRAIN Kamal Ravi Sharma, S. Ramesh Babu, Rakesh Sil Sarma, Surendra Singh Jatav and Vivek Kumar 4. STUDIES ON NON-CHEMICAL METHODS FOR THE 26-40 MANAGEMENT OF PEDUNCLE BLIGHT OF TUBEROSE CAUSED BY Lasiodiplodia theobromae (PAT.) GRIFFON AND MAUBL. A. Muthukumar, R. Udhayakumar and T. Suthinraj 5. POST-HARVEST LOSSES IN PERISHABLE FOODS 41-46 Asha Kumari 6. INTEGRATED PESTS MANAGEMENT IN MANGO CROP 47-55 Bharat Lal, N.S. Bhaduaria, S.P.S Tomar and Devendra Vishvkarma 7. RICE WEED DYNAMICS AND ITS MANAGEMENT 56-65 Chandrabhan Bharti, Anita Mohapatra, Rajesh Kumar, Alokmaurya, Vikash Kumar Yadav, Mahendru Kumar Gautam, Prem Kumar Bharteey 8. INSECT PESTS OF PIGEON PEA AND THEIR 66-67 MANAGEMENT Kailash Chaukikar, Amit Kumar Sharma and A. K. Bhowmick 9. I ASSISMENT OF LOSSES DUE TO INSECT PESTS IN 68-69 CHICKPEA Amit Kumar Sharma, Kailash Chaukikar and Anjni Mastkar 10. INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT STRETEGIES IN PULSE 70-80 CROPS Shashank Tyagi and Pravesh Kumar 11. HOST PLANT RESISTANCE TO INSECTS POTENTIAL AND 81-87 THEIR LIMITATIONS Sumit Kumar, Prahlad Masurkar, Pragati Gupta, Lavlesh Prajapati, Akash Pandey and Piyush Jaiswal 12. BREEDING FOR DISEASES RESISTANCE IN FIELD CROPS 88-91 Suraj Kumar Hitaishi, Amit Kumar Chaudhary, Shiv Prakash Shrivastav and Abhinav Kumar 13. WEED MANAGEMENT 92-98 Trilok Nath Rai, Kedar Nath Rai, Sanjeev Kumar Rai and Sadhna Rai 14. IMPACT OF BIO PESTICIDES AND BIO FERTILIZERS TO 99-106 CONSERVE NUTRIENT AND DISEASE MANAGEMENT Vikas, Sukirtee, Paras Kamboj, Ruby Garg and Kiran Khokher 15. CROP ROTATION: A NEED OF PRESENT TIME FOR SOIL 107-114 HEALTH AND SUSTAINABILITY Vishal Kumar, Vijay Pal, Dharminder, R.K. Singh1, Manjeet Kumar, Sudhanshu Verma, Abhishek Shori and Avinash Patel 16. BIORATIONAL AND INNOVATIVE APPROACHES FOR PESTS 115-118 CONTROL Rudra Pratap Singh 17. BIOTECHNOLOGY IN INTEGRATED AND ECO-FRIENDLY 119-128 PEST MANAGEMENT Sundar Pal and Prabhat Tiwari

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

APPROACHES IN CONSERVATION AND AUGMENTATION OF NATURAL ENEMIES Abhinav Kumar1*, Sunil Verma1, Ram Keval1, Abarna V2 Ramesh Babu1and Rupesh Kumar Gajbhiye 1Department of Entomology and Agricultural Zoology, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi-221005, Uttar Pradesh, India 2Department of Entomology, AC & RI, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Madurai-625104, Tamil Nadu, India

INTRODUCTION At present situation, elevated alertness of the effects of pesticide use on the environment and consequences faced by human races has triggered the efforts to reduce dependence on chemical controls. Many countries have introduced more strict regulation of pesticide manufacture, registration and use, thereby raising the cost, and lessening the accessibility of these tools. In many cases, the pests itself have shown the necessity for change, with pesticide resistance now a shared reality in numerous weeds, insects and diseases. The need for alternatives to pesticides is quite clear for sustainability, but where will we get these solutions from? There are many reports by various research conducting environmental and ecological bodies stating the incorporation of biological control in all aspects of pest control and later raising the share to achieve better biodiversity and simultaneously to meet the current issue of sustainability which state that biologically created trapping such as biological control could be more effective and widely used to solve demanding needs in pest management and for future generations also. Definition of a typical biocontrol says utilization of living organism or natural enemies to suppress the population of pests, it's having a long history in reducing the impacts of pests. The ancient most history of utilization bioagents we found by Chinese peoples, witnessing that ants were active predators of various citrus pests, augmented their populations by taking their nests from neighboring habitats and placing them into their orchards affected with pests population. Present days insectaries and air-freight carriage of biological agents across the country or around the domain are just modern versions of these unique concepts. In this chapter, we will discuss means to biological control and solicitations of these approaches in modern pest management. Though the principles of biological control can be practical against various pest organisms (e.g. weeds, plant pathogens, vertebrates and insects), but they do have certain limitation and needs certain practices to be more effective, these practices are very easy and can be employed in order to conserve the nature saver.

APPROACHES TO BIOLOGICAL CONTROL There are three broad methodologies to biological control which are as follows Importation Augmentation and Conservation of natural enemies Each of these methods can be employed either alone or in blend in a biological control program.

Importation It is a well-known fact that the success of any classical biological control programme depends largely on the correct identification and its host, and a firm recognition of the biological relationship of the parasitoid. Therefore, biological studies along with their taxonomic studies are needed before a parasitoid can be recommended for use in any biocontrol program. Importation of natural enemies sometimes mentioned to as classical biological control, where a pest of exotic origin is the target of the biocontrol program and managed by the importation of natural enemy of exotic origin. Pests are frequently being imported into countries where they are not the native origin, either unintentionally, or in some cases, intentionally. Many of these introductions do

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management not result in the establishment or if they do, the organism may not get pest status. However, in some cases, introduced ones are been reported as getting pest status, which may be due to absence of their natural enemies to suppress the populations. In such cases, the importation and introduction of natural enemies to the affected area can be highly effective to check the population of introduced pest (Caltagirone 1981). As soon as the country of origin of the pest is identified, steps in exploration in the native region can be initiated in order to search for promising natural enemies. If any reports of such enemies are found, then the further steps may involve in evaluation for potential impact on the pest organism in the native country or they can be alternatively imported into the new country for added study. There is a necessity to place in quarantine for one or more generations to be sure that no undesirable species are accidentally imported (diseases, hyperparasitoids, etc.). Additional permits are mandatory for national shipment and field release. Though biological control has a long history some alone get registered as success as they expected

Parasitoid export from India Several insects have been introduced from India to other countries, some of which have not only permanently established but are providing recurring economic gains to that country. The earliest recorded instance of biological control of a pest by employing a natural enemy from South East Asia was in 1762 when the mynah bird (Acridotheres tristis Linnaeus) was introduced from India into Mauritius to control the red locust, (Nomadacris septemfasciata Serville) and it is reported to have successfully controlled this pest. More than 26 bioagents have been introduced from India into different countries of the world, with substantial economic gains and varying degrees of success. Some of the outstanding successes recorded in the history of biological control have been achieved with natural enemies of Indian origin, e.g. "complete" biological control of Rhodes grass scale, Antonina graminis Maskellby Neodusmetia sangwani Raoin the USA, Israel and other countries; mango mealybug, Rastrococcus invadens Williamsby Gyranusoidea tebygi Noyes and Anagyrus mangicola Noyes in Central and West Africa; cereal stemborers by Apanteles flavipes Cameronin Barbados and Africa; coconut scale, Aspidiotus destructor Signoret by Chilocorus nigrita Fabricius in Seychelles. The diversity of life on this planet is part of what makes it so great to live on, reduce the diversity and you reduce the pleasure of every life. Just imagine how boring it would be if there was only one kind of plant and one kind of insect, everywhere you went would look just the same. We must also realize that the perception of diversity and variety in the world around us is important for our mental and spiritual health. This fact is hard to prove scientifically, but it is true, quality of life is important. Rachel Carson in her fantastic book “Silent Spring” described the killing of several life forms due to the use of pesticides (Singh 1995).

Augmentation Augmentation refers to the direct manipulation of natural enemies to enhance their effectiveness. This can be achieved by general methods viz., mass production and periodic colonization; or genetic enhancement of natural enemies. The most commonly used of these approaches is mass production, in which natural enemies are reared and produced in insectaries, and then released either inoculatively or inundatively. For instance, in areas where a particular natural enemy cannot overwinter, an inoculative release at each spring may allow the population to establish and adequately control a pest. Inundative releases engage with the release of large numbers of a natural enemy such that their populations completely devastate the pest. Augmentation is made use of where populations of a natural enemy are not present or can’t respond rapidly enough to the pest population. Therefore, permanent suppression of pests is not expected from augmentation usually. An illustration of the inoculative release method is the use of the parasitoid wasp, Encarsia Formosa Gahan, to control populations of the greenhouse whitefly, Trialeurodes vaporariorum(Westwood), (Hussey & Scopes 1985, Parrella 1990).

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

The greenhouse whitefly is a ubiquitous pest of vegetable and floriculture crops and not easy to manage, even with pesticides. Relatively low-density release of E. Formosa (typically 0.25 to 2 per plant, depending on the crop) immediately after the first whiteflies are detected on a greenhouse crop can effectively prevent populations to reach damaging levels. Nevertheless, releases should be made within the context of an integrated crop management program that takes into account the low tolerance of the parasitoids to pesticides.

Parasitoids import into India In 1953, Leptomastix dactylopii Howard was introduced into India from West Indies for control of pest Planococcos citri Risso on coffee (Krishnamoorthy and Singh, 1987).In 1965, the Australian species Copidosoma desantisi Annecke and Myhardt and was introduced into India for control of Pthorimaea operculella. In 1964 and 1965 Copidosoma koehleri Blanchard was introduced to India (Karnataka) from California for management of same parasitoid and the parasitoid established.Exotic parasitoids such as Anagyrus loecki Noyes and Menazes, Acerophagous papayae Noyes and Schauff and Pseudleptomastrix mexicana Noyes and Schauff were introduced into India (imported from Puerto Rico) and resulted in 95 to 100 percent control of the papaya mealybug in some parts of the country.

Conservation In any biological control effort, conservation of natural enemies is a significant component. This involves finding the factor(s) which may limit the efficacy of a certain natural enemy and adjusting them to increase the efficiency of the beneficial species. In general, conservation of natural enemies includes either, reducing factors which interfere with natural enemies or providing such resources that natural enemies need in their environment and which boost their survival rate and ability to find hosts. Several factors can interfere with the efficiency and success rate of a natural enemy, pesticide applications may straight kill natural enemies or have indirect effects through the reduction in the numbers or accessibility of hosts. Various other cultural practices which have direct effects such as tillage or burning of crop debris can kill natural enemies or make the crop habitat unsuitable for multiplications. In orchards, frequent tillage may create dust deposits on leaves, killing small predators and parasites by rupturing of cuticles and causing increases in certain insect and mite pests. In one study, periodic washing of citrus tree foliage resulted in increased biological control of California red scale, Aonidiella aurantii (Maskell) due to increased parasitoid efficiency (Debach& Rosen 1991). To end with, host plant properties such as chemical defenses which are harmful to natural enemies but to which the pestis altered can reduce the efficacy of biological control. Some pests are able to seize toxic mechanisms of their host plant and use them as a defense against their own enemies. In other cases, physical characteristics of the host plant such as leaf hairiness may reduce the ability of the thenatural enemy to find and attack hosts. Safeguarding the ecological necessities of the natural enemy are met in the cropping environment is the other major means of sustaining natural enemies. To be effective, natural enemies may need access to; alternate hosts, adult food resources, overwintering habitats, constant food supply, and appropriate microclimates (Rabb et al. 1976). In a typical example, Doutt & Nakata (1973) determined that Anagrus epos Girault, a principal parasitoid of the grape leafhopper, Erythroneura elegantula Osborne in California grape vineyards needs an alternate host for hibernating. This harbors, another leafhopper, only hibernated on blackberry vegetation in riparian areas, often quite distant from the vineyards. Vineyards close to natural blackberry stands experienced earlier colonization by the parasitoid in the spring and better biological control. Wilson et al. (1989) found that Frenchprune trees which harbor another overwintering host could be planted upwind of vineyards and effectively conserve Anagrus epos.

Current Applications of Biological Control Though there are some basic principles involving in Biological control to prevent an exciting science because it constantly incorporates new knowledge and techniques but still

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management there is a need to incorporate new ideas and developing science tools like nanotechnologies and biotechnologies which can boost the efficacy of poor fliers and K strategies natural enemies there are several reports regarding genetic improvement of several predaceous mites and predators as well as parasitoids to overcome various health hazards which is either from lethal or sub lethal dose of insecticides and temperature “Endogram” is such successful example of endosulfan resistant Trichogramma strain by NBAIR and other forward step to develop temperature tolerant strain of Trichogramma apart from insects and mites there are array of reports of developed and being under trail for successful pathogenicity of various genera of Entomopathogenic microbes and nematodes. In this section, we will illustrate several ways in which time-honored approaches to biological control are being adapted to meet today's pest management challenges.

Modern Approaches in Augmentation of Natural Enemies Since maximum augmentation involves mass-production and intermittent colonization of natural enemies, this type of biological control has advanced itself to commercial development. There are hundreds of biological control products available commercially for dozens of pest invertebrates, vertebrates, weeds, and plant pathogens (Anonymous 1995). The practice of augmentation varies from importation and conservation in that making permanent changes in agroecosystem to progress biological control is not the primary objective. Rather, augmentation generally pursues to acclimatize natural enemies to fit into prevailing production systems. There are several examples of commercial production and mass multiplication natural enemies, for instance, cultures of the predatory mite, Metaseiulus occidentalis (Nesbitt) were laboratory-selected for resistance to pesticides commonly used in an integrated mite management program in California almond orchards (Hoy 1985). This program alone has saved growers $24 to $44 per acre per year in reduced pesticide use and yield loss (Headley & Hoy 1987). Genetic enhancement of various predators and parasitoids has been accomplished with traditional breeding methods (Hoy 1992), and seems possible with recombinant DNA tools. An admirable example of an augmentative practice than has been efficaciously adjusted to a wide variety of agricultural systems is the inundative release of Trichogramma wasps. These minute endoparasitoids of insect eggs are poor fliers and released in crops or forests in large numbers (up to several million/ha) scheduled to the occurrence of pest eggs. Trichogramma is the most extensively augmented species of the natural enemy their mass multiplication job is also being carried out in various laboratories across the globe, having been mass-produced and field released for almost 70 years in biological control efforts and shown tremendous effects. Worldwide, above 32 million ha of agricultural crops also forests are being treated yearly with Trichogrammaspp.in 19 nations, commonly in China and nations of the previous Soviet Union (Li 1994).In China, the agricultural production and pest control systems take advantage of on low labor costs and usually follow very innovative yet technically simple processes. Such innovation example is, Trichogramma spp. that is inundatively released to suppress sugarcane borer, Chilo spp., populations in sugarcane field are being protected from rain and predators inside emergence packets which is simple and low cost based technique. Insectary-reared parasitized eggs are enveloped in sections of leaves which are then slipped by hand over blades of sugarcane. In day to day life the shifting cultivation and dependency over a narrow range of cereals and fruits which are preferable and have less production cost leads to monoculture and clean cultivation which is also one of the major constraints in field survival and efficacy of biological agents apart from that one of the barriers to wider implementation of biological control in western agriculture has been socio- economics (van Lenteren 1990). There is a belief that biocontrol is one of the slowest and less effective against the serious attack of pests especially when they are crossing the threshold level and key pest interaction so to compete strongly with pesticides, they should have numerous of the same features. Preferably, they should be as effective as pesticides, have residual activity, be easy to use, and they should have the capacity to be applied quickly on a big scale with conventional application equipment.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

In Western Europe, about two decades of intensive research resulted in the commercial marketing of three products by utilizing the European native, Trichogramma brassicae Bezdenko, to control the European corn borer, Ostrina nubilalis Hübner, in corn fields (Bigler et al. 1989). These products are applied annually to approximately 7,000 ha in each of Switzerland and Germany, 150 ha in Austria and 15,000 ha in France. All three products are designed (based on manufactured plastic or paper packets) in a way to provide protection for the wasps against weather extremes and predation until emergence in the field. European Trichogramma products are applied to crop fields by hand. One omission with this product called, Trichocaps which can be broadcast either by hand or by aircraft using conventional application equipment. Trichocaps packets are actually hollow, walnut-shaped, cardboard capsules having 2 cm. diameters and each capsule contain around 500 parasitized Mediterranean flour moth, Ephestia kuehniella Zwolfer, eggs (Kabiri et al. 1990). Developing Trichogramma inside capsules are induced into an overwintering (diapause) state in the insectary, and then stored in refrigerated conditions for up to nine months without loss of quality. This system allows for production during winter months, then distribution to growers in summer when needed. Once removed from cold storage, Trichogramma inside the capsules will begin development and emerge out after approximately 100 Celsius degree days later. This 'reactivation' process can be manipulated for application in field, capsules containing Trichogramma at different developmental stages can be applied to fields at the same time and this can extended the emergence period of parasitoids and increased the 'residual' activity of a single application upto a week. Cooperative research over the last 5 years (between BIOTOP, Pioneer Hi-Bred Intl., BASF, Univ. of Illinois, Iowa State University, Michigan State University, Purdue University, and Pest Management Co. of Nebraska) has resulted in successful commercial-scale pilot testing of this method in North America on seed corn and field corn production systems (Orr 1993, Orr et al. unpublished data).

Landscape Ecology and the Conservation of Natural Enemies The study of disturbance and its effects on community dynamics and also the emergence of the field of landscape ecology are impacting the way we imagine about the conservation of natural enemies. Over the past 15 years, ecologists have come to recognize that the disturbance plays a central role in the construction of ecological communities (Pickett & White 1985, Reice 1994). Despite the fact that the most highly disturbed terrestrial ecosystems may have one disturbance event every several years (e.g. fire in grasslands), many agricultural ecosystems experience manifold events per growing season (ploughing, planting, nutrient and pesticide applications, cultivation and harvest). From an ecological point of view, the result is expected (Odum 1985). Decreased species diversity and short food chains, resulting in the few well-adapted species (i.e. pests) having few natural enemies to suppress their populations exhibit in highly disturbed systems. This entails that additional disturbance events (i.e. pesticide applications) are to be initiated which, while controlling the initial negative symptom, may precipitate its reoccurrence. Existing systems of crop production also shape the physical structure of agricultural landscapes (Forman & Godron 1986). Diversity in farmlands has rapidly disappeared and the impacts on natural enemies are only now beginning to be understood with increased reliance on mechanization and pesticides, (Ryszkowski et al. 1993). In general, increased habitat fragmentation, isolation and decreased landscape structural complexity tend to destabilize the biotic interactions which serve to regulate natural ecosystems (Kruess&Tscharntke 1994, Robinson et al. 1992). The target of an ecological approach to conservation biological control is to adjust the intensity and frequency of disturbance to the point, from where natural enemies can function efficiently. This will have to take place at the field, farm, and larger landscape-levels. At filed level, alteration of tillage intensity and frequency (reduced tillage or no-tillage) may result in more plant residue on the soil surface and possess a positive impact on predators (ground beetles and spiders). Intercropping can also alter the microclimate of crop fields and make them more favorable for parasitoids. However, the presence and distribution of non-crop habitats can frequently be critical to

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management natural enemy survival at the farm level. As an instance, European corn borer larvaeparasitize by Eriborus terebrans (Gravenhorst) is a wasp, female Eriborus require moderate temperatures (<90° F) and a source of sugar for their survival during non-crop habitats. In a conventionally managed corn field, neither of these conditions is met for survival therefore, wasps seek out to other sheltered locations in wooded fencerows and woodlots where they get reduced temperatures, higher relative humidity and abundant sources of adult food. European corn borer larvae in corn field edges near these types of habitats and get parasitized (up to 40%) at two to three times the rate of those in field (Landis & Haas 1992). Current research is focused on examining the potential of modified corn production systems by creation of favorable resource habitats to natural enemy to provide critical resources and increase natural control of European corn borers. Intercrops, strip crops, as well as modification of grass waterways, shelterbelts, buffer and riparian zones are some promising techniques at field level. Finally, at the landscape-level, pest and natural enemy diversity and abundance can also influenced by physical structure of agricultural production systems. Ryszkowski et al. (1993) conducted a study having contrasting simple versus mosaic landscapes and concluded that natural enemies are more dependent on refuge habitats than the pests and the greater abundance of these refuges in the mosaic landscapes resulted in their higher diversity, abundance and ability to respond to prey numbers. Parasitism of true armyworm, Pseudaletia unipuncta (Haworth), in structurally-complex versus simple agricultural landscapes was observed by Marino and Landis (in press). Overall parasitism in the complex sites was more than three times higher in comparison to the simple sites (13.1% v/s 3.4%). They hypothesized that abundance and proximity of preferred habitats for alternate hosts of M. communis may account for the observed differences. Differences were largely attributable to one wasp species, the braconid, Meterous communis (Cresson) which was far more abundant in complex sites. While this will continue to be an an enormously useful approach, it now seems possible that basic ecological theory could inform the design and management of landscapes to conserve and enhance the effectiveness of entire communities of natural enemies.

SUMMARY The three basic approaches to biological control of insects are importation, augmentation, and conservation of natural enemies. Specific techniques within these approaches are being developed constantly and adapted to meet up the changing needs of pest management. Improvements in rearing and release techniques or procedures and genetic improvement of natural enemies have resulted in more effective augmentation programs. Application of new ecological theory is renovated the way we look at conservation of natural enemies. Continuous improvement and adaptation of biological control method and applications are obligatory if the full potential of this biologically based pest management strategy is to be fulfilled.

REFERENCES Anonymous. 1995. 1996 Directory of least-toxic pest control products. IPM Practitioner 17 (11/12): 1-48. (This reference manual provides a complete listing of the biological control products available worldwide and can be ordered for $10 from: BIRC, P.O. Box 7414, Berkeley, CA 94707). Bigler, F., S. Bosshart and M. Walburger. 1989. Bisherige und neue Entwicklungen bei der biologischen Bekampfung des Maiszunslers, Ostrinia nubilalisHbn., mit Trichogramma maidis Pint. et Voeg. in der Schweiz. Landwirtscahft Schweiz Band 2: 37-43. Caltigirone, L. E. 1981. Landmark examples in classical biological control. Ann. Rev. Entomol 26:213-32. Debach, P., and D. Rosen. 1991. Biological Control by Natural Enemies. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK. 440 pp Doutt, R. J., and J. Nakata. 1973. The Rubus leafhopper and its egg parasitoid: an endemic biotic system useful in grape pest management. Environ. Entomol. 3:381-6.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Forman, R. T. T., & M. Godron. 1986. Landscape Ecology. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Headley, J. C. & M. A. Hoy. 1987. Benefit/cost analysis of an integrated mite management program for almonds. J. Econ. Entomol. 80:555-559. Headley, J. C. & M. A. Hoy. 1987. Benefit/cost analysis of an integrated mite management program for almonds. J. Econ. Entomol. 80:555-559. Hoy, M. A. 1985. Almonds: Integrated mite management for California almond orchards, pp. 299-310. In: W. Helle & M. Sabelis [eds.], Spider mites,world crop pests. Elsevier, Amsterdam. Hoy, M. A. 1992. Biological control of arthropods: genetic engineering and environmental risks. Biological Control 2:166-170. Hussey, N. W. & N. Scopes. 1985. Biological pest control: the glasshouse experience. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca. Kabiri, F., J. Frandon, J. Voegele, N. Hawlitzky, & M. Stengel. 1990.[Evolution of a strategy for inundative releases of Trichogramma brassicae Bezd. (Hym Trichogrammatidae) against the European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis Hbn. (Lep. Pyralidae)]. In proceedings, ANPP-Second International Conference on Agricultural Pests, Versailles, 4-6 Dec., 1990. Krishnamoorthy, A. & Singh, S.P. 1987. Biological control of the citrus mealybug, Planococcus citri with an introduced parasite, Leptomastix dactylopii, in India. Entomophaga, 32(2): 144. Kruess, A., & T. Tscharntke. 1994. Habitat fragmentation, species loss, and biological control. Science 264: 1581-1584. Landis, D. A., and M. Haas. 1992. Influence of landscape structure on abundance and within-field distribution of Ostrinia nubilalis Hübner (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) larval parasitoids in Michigan. Environ. Entomol. 21: 409-416. Odum, E. 1985. Trends expected in stressed ecosystems. BioScience 35(7): 419-421. Orr, D. B. 1993. Biological control tactics for European corn borer. Proc. Illinois Crop Prot. Wksp., Mar 3-5, 1993. Champaign, IL. Parrella, M. L. 1990. Biological pest control in ornamentals: status and perspectives. SROP/WPRS Bull. XIII/5:161-168. Pickett, S. T. A., & P. S. White, eds. 1985. The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. San Diego: Academic Press. Rabb, R. L., R. E. Stinner and R. van den Bosch. 1976. Conservation and augmentation of natural enemies. pp. 233-54 In. Theory and Practice of Biological Control. C. B. Huffaker and P. S. Messenger eds. Academic Press, New York. Reice, S. R. 1994. Nonequilibrium determinants of biological community structure. Am. Scientist 82: 424-435. Robinson, G. R., R. D. Holt, M. S. Gaines, S. P. Hamburg, M. L. Johnson, H. S. Fitch, & E. A. Martinko. 1992. Diverse and contrasting effects of habitat fragmentation. Science 257: 524-526. Ryszkowski, L., J. Karg, G. Margarit, M. G. Paoletti, & R. Zlotin. 1993. Above-ground insect biomass in agricultural landscapes of Europe. In Landscape ecology and agroecosystems, ed. R. G. H. Bunce, L. Ryszkowski, & M. G. Paoletti, pp. 71-82. Boca Raton: Lewis Publ. Singh, S.P. 1995. Experiences in classical biological control in India. Proc. Workshop on Biological Control, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Sept. 11-15, 1995,pp121-146. Van Lenteren, J. C. 1988. Implementation of Biological Control. Am. J. Alternative Agric. 3: 102-109. Wilson, L. T., C. H. Pickett, D. L. Flaherty and T. A. Bates. 1989. French prune trees: refuge for grape leafhopper parasite. Calif. Agric. 43(2):7-8.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

PEST MANAGEMENT THROUGH INDIGENOUS TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE (ITK) FOR SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION Sunil Verma*, Abhinav Kumar, Kalpana Bisht, S. Ramesh Babu, Ram Keval and Rupesh Kumar Gajbhiye Department of Entomology and Agricultural Zoology, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi-221005, Uttar Pradesh, India

INTRODUCTION ITK (Indigenous Technical Knowledge) refers to the common and local knowledge of the farmers or indigenous peoples of different regions over the globe with their own language, culture, tradition, belief, rituals and rites (Das and Samant, 2015). Such knowledge is collectively owned, developed over several generations and subject to adaptation and imbedded in a community’s way of life as means of survival (Borthakur and Singh, 2012). This knowledge is based upon human experiences and practices and had developed over a time in a given community and continues to develop. ITK deals with crop production, livestock rearing, natural resource management, food preparation, healthcare, insect pest management and many others. For quick and instant results farmers relies only on the chemical control for combat against the pest attack and the indiscriminate use of hazardous chemicals or pesticides in agriculture for protection leads to soil, water and environmental pollution, ecological imbalance, development of resistance as well as leaving residue on foods and make them unfit for consumption. The sustainable crop production and protection can be achieved by developing easily acceptable and cost effective technologies and methods and at these moments, ITK related to plant protection in agriculture would play vital role and gaining popularity over the chemical control. An economically viable option for sustainable crop production is an effort towards production of Indigenous Technical Knowledge (ITK) based products on cottage and large scale. Innovations based on traditional knowledge have also been emphasized by the National Innovation Foundation (NIF) and Department of Science & Technology, Govt. of India. The World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) held at Johanesburg in South Africa during 2002 has strongly advocated the use of local technical knowledge in crop husbandry package (Anonymous, 2002). Therefore, in this context, the need of ITK is imperative to appropriately blend these ITKs with the scientific knowledge related to pest management strategy in agriculture for controlling and minimizing pest attacks on the crops in a better way and thereby make agriculture more productive and profitable for the farmers. In general, the ITKs are based on three categories viz., (a) Cultural practices, (b) Physical and mechanical methods and (c) Use of botanicals. Some conventional and modern knowledge in context with the above categories having significance for acceptance in IPM strategies have been reviewed and presented in the following paragraphs. a) Cultural practices The cultural practices (field sanitation; proper seed and variety selection; proper seedbed preparation; planting date; row spacing; seeding rate; fertilization; water management; crop rotation; planting of trap crops and hedge rows; companion planting; and intercropping) are well known and experimented by the farmers, which make the habitat more diverse for sustenance of natural enemies by boosting the "belowground biodiversity" which in tandem contribute to "aboveground biodiversity" and contribute to prevent, suppress, or eradicate pest build-up by disrupting the normal relationship between the pest and the host plant and thus make the pest less likely to survive, grow, or reproduce.

(b) Physical or mechanical control Physical control refers to the reduction of pest population by using device which affect them physically or Manipulation of temperature, humidity, light to alter their physical environment. Whereas, mechanical control helps in minimizing the pest population by means of manual devices and manually. Among the above practices traps and baits can be

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management indigenously prepared using locally available resource for better monitoring and control of insect pests. A few examples are cited below.

Rhinoceros beetles trap A mud pot containing three quarters of water and 250 gm of castor cake powder buried in the soil in such a way that its mouth is leveled with soil. The rhinoceros beetles get attracted by odour emitted by castor cake and fall in to the water containing pot. 2-3 such pots are enough for one-hectare area of a coconut plantation. Pineapple slices are also used to attract the beetles, 2 slices of pineapple are taken in a cylindrical plastic container and an exit hole is made to drain the rain water. The trap is hung near the crown of the coconut tree. The beetles get attracted towards the pineapple and get trapped.

Red palm weevil trap Chopped and crushed mid rib of coconut leaf mixed either with 1 litre of water, 100 gm jaggery and 10 gm tobacco powder, or with 2.5 kg sugarcane molasses, 2.5 litres toddy, 5 ml acetic acid and 5 gm yeast is filled in mud pot and A pot with hole at bottom is placed over it. 3-4 pots at corners of the plantation orchard help to attract and trap the weevils. If the former bait is preferred, the mixture of jaggery, tobacco and water is to be added once in a month.

Fruit flies trap Fruit fly (Dacus dorsalis and D. cucurbitae) incidence is normally seen in mango and cucurbits. A low-cost fruit fly trap to combat this insect pest can be made as follows; (a) Extract along with crushed leaves (20 gm) of Ocimum sanctum (holy basil) placed inside coconut shell and shell filled with 100 ml water and poisoned the solution by adding 0.5 gm carbofuran 3G. 0.5 gm citric acid is added to increase the keeping quality of the extract. The fruit flies feed on the ocimum extract and are killed. These traps are hanging on mango tree @ 4 traps per tree. (b) Makes two holes in 2 litres disposable bottle at height of 5 cm from bottom and pass a string from centre of the bottle which is pushed through a hole drilled in the centre of the cap. For preparing the attractant bait mix 1 cup of vinegar, 2 cups of water and 1 tablespoon of honey and shake it well before use. Pour the bait mixture up to the level of holes made at 5 cm height and hang the bottles about 5 feet high on tree. Flies will enter the container and fall into the attractant.

Traping sucking insect pests Bright yellow sticky traps are used for monitoring/controlling aphids, thrips and whiteflies. While, bright blue traps can exclusively be used for monitoring thrips and bright white sticky traps for flea beetles (Bissdorf, 2008).Set up sticky traps for monitoring whitefly, thrips etc. @ 10 traps per ha. Locally available empty tins can be painted yellow / coated with white grease/vaseline/castor oil. Place traps near the plants, preferably 25 cm away from the plant to ensure that the leaves will not stick to the board, but not facing direct sunlight. Position the traps at 50-75 cm above the plants. Alternatively, yellow water pan traps also proved useful for simple population counts of alate aphids based upon which insecticidal control can be initiated.

Blister beetles trap Blister beetles get attracted by blue containers, filled with water and little detergent.

Moths Trapping Bissdorf, 2008, suggested that mixture of 500 ml extract of aloe, castor cake (1 kg) and latex as adhesive in a wide opened disposable container is effective to attract and trap the moths. Place this trap @ 12/ha.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Other Mechanical control practices Birds attractant Erection of bird perches @ 25/ha facilitate predation of larval stages of insects.

Ant bait Insects like aphids, mealy bugs and scales produce honey dew and ants have symbiotic relations with these insects ants help in protecting them from natural enemies by presence of ants and transfer of these insects from plant to plant and in return they get honeydew. So, in order to control the ants, bait can be made by mixing 1 teaspoon of powdered boric acid and 10 teaspoon of sugar in 2 cups of water, soak the cotton balls in this mixture and place the cotton balls near ant trails.

Gundhi bugs traps Pieces of jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllas) and fixing of dead crabs or frogs to bamboo sticks are placed in the rice fields before milking stage, it will attract gundhi bug in rice and keep them busy till the dough stage.

Rat trap Boil 10 kg of wheat seeds in water with two large pieces of the bark from the Gliricidia tree. Boiled wheat seeds can be use in the field or in stores where rat threat exist. Mexican farmers crush the bark or leaves, mix it with wet wheat seeds or coat it on banana slice, use it for rat killing purpose. A mixture of cereals and grind leaves of Gliricidia is allowed to ferment and then this is used as a rat killer in Panama. Gliricidia contains coumarin which gets converted to anticoagulant dicoumerol by bacterial fermentation this reduces the protein Prothrombin to cause death in rats due to internal bleeding and act as a rat killer. Fruits of Mucuna pruriencs Back (Fam: Papilionaceae) are kept in the active rat burrows. When the rodent enters into the hole, it collides against the hairy fruits with irritating hairs and leaf, cause the spot with irritation. A mixture containing 90% sesame or groundnut or niger flour with 5% thick sugar crystals and 5% powdered bulb or tube is placed in a bowl near rat holes and when rats feed this mixtures they die within a week. Inserting 10 - 12 inches long fresh pieces of Jatropha stem into active rat holes makes the field rat free (Kanojia, et al., 2005)

(c) Use of botanicals Revitalizing and modernizing longstanding farmer practice through the optimization of ethno botanicals has shown that farmers are more relaxed with the use of botanicals than synthetic chemicals. Botanicals are easily available than commercial products and offer same level of control as synthetic chemicals when used with proper guidelines (Belmain, 2002).

Aloe + vitex extract Soak 5 kg of vitex (Vitex negundo; Fam: Verbenaceae) leaves in 10 litres of water and boil it for 30 minutes then, cool the extract and strain it. Take 2 kg of aloe (Aloe barbadensis;Fam: Aloeaceae) leaves and peel the outer part and grind in water to get the extract. Mix both the extract and dilute it in 50-60 litres of water. Add 50-60 ml soap in the mixture and spray early in the morning or late in the afternoon to cover about 0.4 ha area. This extract mixture is reported to control armyworm, hairy caterpillar, rice leaf folder, rice stem borer, semi-looper, bacterial and fungal diseases (Bissdorf, 2008).

Coriander (Coriandrum sativum) Prepare extract by crushing 200 gm seeds of coriander and soaked in 1 litre of water for 10 minutes. Add 2 litres of water to dilute the extract for spray on infested plant parts to control spider mites (Bissdorf, 2008). Coriander is a good repellent.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Marigold and chilli extract Soak chopped marigold (500 gm) and 10 chilli pods in 15 litres of water overnight. Filter the solution and dilute with water at 1:2 ratios and add 1 tablespoon soap per litre of extract at the time of spray. This controls most of agricultural pests (Bissdorf, 2008).

Turmeric (Curcuma domestica) Turmeric extracts controls aphids, caterpillars and red spider mites. 20 gm of shredded rhizome soaked in 200 ml of cow urine and dilute with 2-3 litres of water and add 8- 12 ml soap for spray (Bissdorf, 2008).

Chinese chastetree (Vitex negundo; Verbenaceae) Vitex is far and wide used in folk medicines. 2 kg of vitex leaves soaked overnight in 5 litres of water and boil the mixture for 30 minutes. Dilute the mixture with 10 litres of water and add 10 ml soap and spray to controls DBM, hairy caterpillars, rice leaf folder, rice stem borer and semilooper (Bissdorf, 2008).

Neem leaf extract Well grinded 1 kg of neem leaves with 2 litres of water put in mud pot. Mouth of pot is covered with cloth and left undisturbed for 3 days. Dilute the extract with water at 1:9 ratio and add 100 ml of soap for spraying to control aphids, grasshoppers, leaf hoppers, plant hoppers scales thrips weevils and beetles (Bissdorf, 2008).

Calotropis gigantea To control the termites, Preserved the calotropis leaves for two weeks in earthen pot filled with water. Replace the leaves after two months. Spray the solution @ 0.5 litre/ tree.

Other pest control ITK methods Fermented curd water Fermented curd water (butter milk) is used for the management of white fly, jassids aphids etc in some parts of central India.

Cow urine and dung Cow urine found effectual against mealy bugs, thrips and mites (Peries, 1989) and against post flowering insect pests of cowpea (Oparaeke, 2003). Cow urine diluted with water in ratio of 1: 20 is not only effective in the managing of pathogens and insects, but also acts as a growth promoter of crops. For controlling sucking pests and mealy bugs, crush 5 kg neem leaves in water, add 5lit cow urine and 2 kg cow dung ferment for 24 hrs with intermittent stirring, filter the extract and dilute it in 100 lit of water for spraying over one acre. In brinjal, application of cow urine 10%, starch 1% either alone (Pradhan, 2011) or alternatively with chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SC (Sakhinetipalli, 2012) was found to be cost effective.

Botanicals fermented in cow urine/cow dung Poonam, (2003) and Gupta, (2005) reported that Cow urine decoctions of botanicals are effective against the various insect pests without noticeable detrimental effect on their natural enemies. NSKE 5%, cow urine 5% and cow dung 5% showed anti-feedent and anti-ovipositional effects against Helicoverpa armigera (Sadawarte and Sarode, 1997; Boomathi et al., 2006). Cow urine (20%) mixed with crude extract of Datura alba (20%) was found effective against stem borer and leaf folder in Basmati rice (Aswal et al., 2010). Effectiveness of cow urine along with several botanicals like NSKE, Pongamia, Vitex and Aloe vera against S. litura in groundnut and H. armigera in chickpea, Barapatre and Lingappa (2003).

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Annona leaf extract (10%) along with cow urine (10%) proved better against sucking pests of cotton (Patel et al., 2003). Garlic extracts in combination with other extracts like neem, chilli, ginger, tobacco and cow urine (with soap solution) against H. armigera and S. litura upto 13 days of spray (Vijayalaxmi, et al., 1999). NSKE and vitex combination effective against reducing the shoot fly infestation in sorghum (Vijayalaxmi, et al., 1999; Mudigourdra, et al., 2009).

Ash The sprinkling of ash over the vegetables are found effective against several major pests viz, beetles (pumpkin beetle, hadda beetle etc.), leaf defoliating insects, leaf miners, thrips and aphids. Chewing and sucking type of insects facing problems in feeding because ash acts a physical barrier, ash acts as a detergent. Chewing and sucking type of insects, find it difficult to chew plant parts due to deposition of ash. It is the cheapest practice for small farmers. Besides acts as physical barrier it interferes with the chemical signals emitting from host plants thus obstructing initial location of host by the pest. In eastern part of Nigeria, burnt palm ashes are dusted traditionally on okra to manage leaf eating beetle, Podagrica spp. (Oparaeke, et al., 2006). Sakhinetipalli, 2012, reported maximum C: B ratio of 4.8:1 in brinjal with application of ash @50kg/ha kerosene5% and spinosad 45SC.

Kerosene Kerosene is effortlessly accessible with famers and can be mixed with soap for suppressing the insect pests. The kerosene, soap and water mixture has been reported as a contact insecticide for insects having piercing and sucking mouth parts (Jex-Blake, 1950). Similarly the effectiveness of SABRUKA (a mixture of soap, water and kerosene) against insect pests of cowpea in the northern Guinea Savanna was reported by Oparaeke, et al. (2006) mites, aphids and leaf miners It is readily available with the farmers and can be used with soap instantly to suppress the insect pests at the beginning of outbreak situation and subsequently the desired/recommended strategies may be followed. The use of Kerosene-soap-water emulsion has earlier been reported as a contact insecticide for piercing and sucking insects (Jex-Blake, 1950). Similarly, the usefulness of this emulsion against scale insects, bugs, mites, aphids and leaf miners has been documented by Van der Werf (1985). Oparaeke, et al. (2006) reported the effectiveness of SABRUKA (a mixture of soap, water and kerosene) against insect pests of cowpea in the northern Guinea Savanna. Kerosene exhibits phytotoxicity at higher concentrations and therefore, its use as foliar spray should be restricted up to 1 or 2%. Prepare a 4 lit. stock solution of soap kerosene mixture in the below given proportion; 3.5 lit.Water 48 g soap (1.2%) 500 ml kerosene (12.5%). Before spraying dilute 250 ml of this mixture with 4 liters of water. Oils may also repel some pests, but the problem of phytotoxicity can’t be ignored. Visible leaf damage, or more subtly reduction in yield could be possible. Bi-weekly oil applications reduced whitefly counts on tomato leaves by two thirds, but yield on the oil- treated plants was also reduced compared to untreated plants (Stansly et al., 2002). Five oil sprays controlled powdery mildew in grapes but reduced sugar levels (Northover, 2002).

Other common indigenous techniques for insect pest management The mixture of aloe barbadensis (Gwarpatha) + Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco) + Azadirachta indica (neem) + Sapindus trifoliatus Linn. (Aritha) is effectively used against the insect pests of mustard crops. Leaf extract of Gwarpatha (1 kg) and tobacco powder extract (200 gm) is prepared in 5 liters of water and let it for evaporation for 3-4 hrs to make a 2 liters solution. After evaporation Neem leaf extract (200 ml) is added and decoction of 50 gm aritha powder is added to the above solution and mixed thoroughly. This solution is sprayed on the mustard crop at interval of 2-3 weeks. It is practiced throughout the hilly areas of Mandi district of Himachal Pradesh (Roy et al., 2015).

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Management of insect pests of wheat crop through cow urine + Vitex negundo (Nirgundi) + Ferula asafoetida (Hing) these mixtures are very effective, eco-friendly insecticidal treatment. It repels the insect pests. Leaf decoction of nirgundi (about 30-40 leaves in 10 liters of water) is prepared till it is left 1 liter. This mixture is filtered properly. About 10 gm hing is mixed in 1 litre water and then above ingredients are mixed in about 5 litres of cow urine and sprayed over affected crops. It is effective for all sowing seasons (early; normal or late sowing seasons) of wheat and paddy crops. It is practiced most in hilly mountain villages of Shimla, Himachal Pradesh (Roy et al., 2015). Management of pod borers in gram crop through whey (lassi) + Aloe barbadensis (Gwarpatha) + Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco) This method is very effective against the pod borers infesting the gram crop. Tobacco powder (200 gm), lassi (2 litres) and Gwarpatha (2 leaves) are dissolved in 15 liter of water. This solution is left undisturbed for 15 days. It is then filtered with a muslin cloth and the filtrate is sprayed over the infested crop at an interval of 2-3 weeks. Management of paddy insect pests through Vitex negundo (Nirgundi) Farmers sweep the paddy field with brooms made up of branches of Vitex negundo, which are known to act as an insecticide and enhance growth of paddy. It is practiced throughout the hilly areas of Himachal Pradesh (Roy et al., 2015). 4 kg tobacco leaves and twigs are boiled in 40 liters of water for 40 min. After cooling, 1 kg soap power is mixed and solution is diluted 7-8 times and sprayed to control aphids and white flies in citrus plants. Rice seedlings raised from seed treated with extract of neem kernel are resistant to leaf hopper. For prevention of infestation of shoot borer in mango tree, common salt is mixed with soil near the collar region of tree. In case of insect holes made by shoot borer and bark eaters in mango, jiggery is placed in the holes to attract other predators to feed on the insect present in the holes. Similarly, the practices of pouring kerosene or petrol in holes and blocking holes with mud or cowdung are also common in citrus plant. 1 liter extract of equal quantity of crushed green chilies and garlic mixed with 200 liters of water is effective to control aphids and jassids. Filtrate prepared from a solution of 1 kg Calotropis leaves and 5 liters of water is effective to control leaf sucking pests. An extract of tobacco waste with 250 g of soap solution in 200 liters of water as spray control stem borer. A solution prepared from neem leaf paste in water (10 kg : 2 liter) is effective to control leaf folder in rice. A solution prepared from 100 g tulsi (Ocimum sp.) leaves in 1 liter of water with 1 ml soap solution can be used for effective control of aphid, army worm, red cotton bug, mosquito, etc. is used to control cotton semilooper, mites, green leaf hopper, aphid etc. Control of stored grain pests in Rajasthan, garlic leaves are used for safe storage of food grains. Leaves of Vitex negundo (Nirgundi) are incorporated in any pulse seeds for long time preservation. There is a common practice of storing food grains like wheat and rice use of neem leaves to prevent storage pest damage. Milled chickpea, green gram and other pulses are stored after thoroughly treated with mustard oil. Green gram can be kept free from any pest infestation by treating with 1% neem leaf powder Seed mixed with Acorus calamus (baje) powder in the ratio of 10 kg: 1 kg, would help in preserving the seed free from stored pests for long time.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Traditional Storage Structures It has been found that 100% women of Rajasthan use traditional storage structures such as mud bins, stone bins and bamboo bins for storage. Before storage, they used to disinfect the grains with smoke of cowgung cake and neem leaves. In Arunachal Pradesh, the majority of farmers store foodgrains and meat near the kitchen where the smoke of burning firewood penetrates. They also use leaves of neem or tulsi on the storage structure to keep free from insect-pest infestation (Roy et al., 2015). Nishi tribe of Arunachal Pradesh use rat trap called ‘gurung’. The trap is made of tauk (thin bamboo) with long internodes. Garo tribes of Meghalaya use grain storage structures made up of thatch grass, bamboo and wooden poles. A traditional system of rat proof storage locally called nahu (granary) can be seen at the one corner of village of Adi tribes in Arunachal Pradesh (Roy et al., 2015).

CONCLUSION Indian farming is going through a transition phase, which slowly but definitely adopting the ways and means of pest management for sustainable agriculture (Dhandapani et al., 2003). Adoption of ITK based crop protection measures is not only alternative to pesticides but also helps in restoring the biodiversity of natural enemies. ITK provides valuable inputs to make efficient use of natural resources and extends relevant support for sustainable development. Indigenous techniques used in different component of farming system are mostly organic, eco-friendly, sustainable, viable and cost effective. But, there is a need to explore, verify, modify and scientifically validate these practices for their wider use and application.

REFERENCES Anonymous (2002). Report of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Johannesburg, South Africa, 26 August- 4 September 2002. Aswal, J.S., Kumar, J and Shah, B. (2010). Evaluation of biopesticides and plant products against rice stem borer and leaf folder. Journal of Eco-friendly Agriculture, 5(1): 59-61. Barapatre, A. and Lingappa, S. (2003). Larvicidal and antifeedant activity of indigenous plant protection practices for Helicoverpa armigera (Hub.). Proc. Nation. Symp. Fronterier Areas Ent. Res., November 5-7, 2003, I.A.R.I. , New Delhi. Belmain, Steven, R. (2002). Optimising the indigenous use of botanicals in Ghana. In: Final Technical Report, Natural Resources Institute, Chatham, Kent ME4 4TB, UK.pp58. (Website:http://www.fao.org/docs/eims /upload/agrotech/1952/R7373 _FTR_pt1.pdf). Bissdorf, J.K. (2008). In: How to Grow Crops without Endosulfan – Field Guide to Non- chemical Pest Management, (Ed: Carina Webber), Pesticide Action Network (PAN), Hamburg, Germany: pp 71. Boomathi, N., Sivasubramanian, P., and Raguraman, S. (2006). Biological activities of cow excreta with neem seed kernel extract against Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner). Annals of Plant Protection Sciences, 14:11-16. Borthakur, A. and Singh, P. (2012). Indigenous Technical Knowledge (ITK) and their Role in Sustainable Grassroots Innovations: An Illustration in Indian Context. Proceedings of International Conference on Innovation & Research in Technology for Sustainable Development (ICIRT 2012), 01-03 November 2012. Das, N. and T. Samnant, (2015). Weed management inrabigroundnut in Central zone of Odisha. Ann. Pl. Protec. Sci. 23:196-197. Dhandapani, N., Shelkar, U.R. and Murugan, M. (2003). Bio-intensive pest management (BIPM) in major vegetable crops: an Indian perspectiveFood, Agriculture and Environment Vol. 1(2) : 333-339. Gupta, M. P. (2005). Efficacy of Neem in combination with cow urine against mustard aphidand its effect on coccinellid predators.Natural Product Radiance, 4(2):102-106. Jex-Blake, A.J. (1950). Gardening in East Africa, Longmans Green and Co. Ltd., London.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Kanojia, A. K., Singh, R. V. Bambawale, O. M. and Trivedi, T. P. (Edr) (2005). In: Explored Indigenous Technical Knowledge in Pest Management: NCIPM, New Delhi. Mudigourdra, S., Shekharappa and Balikai, R.A. (2009). Evaluation of plant products in combination with cow urine and panchagavya against sorghum shoot fly, Atherigona soccata Rondani Karnataka J. Agric. Sci., 22(3-Spl. Issue ) : 618-620. Northover, J. (2002). Optimum timing of Stylet oil for control of powdery mildew and European red mite without affecting juice sugars in Canadian grapes. pp. 402-408 In Spray Oils Beyond 2000 (edited by G. Beattie et al.). Univ. of Western Sydney Press. Oparaeke, A. M., Di ke, M. C. and Amatobi , C. I. (2003). Fermented cow dung: a home produced insecticide against post flowering insect pests of cowpea, Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp. Samaru J. Agric.19: 121-125. Oparaeke, A.M., Dike, M.C. and Amatobi, C.I. (2006). Insecticidal Efficacy of SABRUKA Formulations as Protectants of Cowpea Against Field Pests. Journal of Entomology 3(2):130-135. Peries, L. (1989). Cattle urine as a substitute for Agrochemicals. National Rural Conference. In: Natural Crop Protection in the Tropics. AGRECOL, Publication, Okozentrum, Switzerland. pp 188. Poonam, C. (2003). Effectiveness of cow urine and its decoctions against insect pests of soybean. M. Sc. Thesis, G.B.P.U.A.T., Pantnagar, pp. 95. Pradhan, H. (2011). Validation of a few ITKs' for the control of major insect pests of brinjal. M.Sc (Ag) thesis submitted to OUAT, Bhubaneswar. Roy, S. Rathod, A. Sarkar, S. and Roy, K. (2015). Use of ITK in Plant Protection Pop. Kheti, 3(2): 75-78. Sadwarte, A. K. and Sarode, S. V. (1997). Effect of neem seed extract, cow dung, cow urine alone and in combination against pod borer complex of pigeonpea. International Cheickpea and Pigeonpea Newsletter, 4: 36-37. Sakhinetipalli, A. (2012). Field testing of ITK and insecticide based strategies for the control of brinjal fruit and shoot borer, Leucinodes arbonalisGuenee in brinjal.M.Sc(Ag) thesis submitted to OUAT, Bhubaneswar, during 2012. Stansly, P. A., T. X. Liu, and D. J. Schuster. (2002). Effects of horticultural mineral oils on a polyphagous whitefly, its plant hosts and its natural enemies. pp. 120-133 InSpray Oils Beyond 2000 (edited by G. Beattie et al.). Univ. of Western Sydney Press. Van der Werf, E. (1985). Pest Management in Ecological Agriculture. AME Foundation, Groenekan/Holland.Vijayalakshmi, K., Subhashini, B. and Shivani, V. K.,(1999). In: Plant in Pest Control - Garlic and Onion, Centre for Indian Knowledge System, Chennai, pp. 1-20. Vijayalakshmi, K., Subhashini, B. and Shivani, V. K. (1999). In: Plant in Pest Control - Garlic and Onion, Centre for Indian Knowledge System, Chennai, pp. 1-20.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT APPROACHES IN STORED GRAIN Kamal Ravi Sharma1*, S. Ramesh Babu1, Rakesh Sil Sarma2, Surendra Singh Jatav3 and Vivek Kumar4 1Department of Entomology & Agriculture Zoology, Inst., Ag. Sci., BHU, Varanasi- 221005 2Dept. of Plant Physiology, Inst., Ag. Sci., BHU, Varanasi- 221005 3Dept. of Soil Sciences & Agril. Chemistry, Inst., Ag. Sci., BHU, Varanasi- 221005 4Dept. of Soil Sciences & Agril. Chemistry, CSAUA&T, Kanpur – 208002

ABSTRACT Stored grain pests normally cause as much loss of grains in storage after harvest as crop pests cause damage during the growing phase. The larvae/nymph and adults of these insects are damage and contaminate grains or their products by burrowing into grain and eat out the starchy portion in the interior and exterior. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in stored grains including cereals, oilseeds and pulses, which is complex operation due to diversity of grains and pests requirements. The management of stored grains necessitates the utilization of different methods to guarantee that the attributes of the grains incoming to the storehouse environment do not degenerate during storage time period. These activities involve; regular sampling, sanitation measures, storing sound and dry grains, bringing of proper temperature and aeration, and exploitation of chemical protectants and fumigants. However, the prevention against pests is the only satisfactory means to hold up the good grain quality. A powerful linkage of researchers and food industry can expedite the acceptation of IPM exercises, and improvement and publicity of fresh and reinforced control operations for forthcoming pest situations. Keywords: Insect Pests, Stored Grain, Integrated Pest Management, IPM Strategy.

INTRODUCTION Food grains and their processed products are susceptible to deterioration by a variety of biotic and abiotic factors. Together, they account for the loss of about 25% of food grains worldwide. These include high temperature, moisture, microorganisms, mites, insects and rodents. The losses are highest in tropical and subtropical areas where conditions are relatively conducive for rapid growth and multiplication of the damage-causing organisms to the food materials, especially insects. Among all the pests, insect damage in stored grains alone may amount to l0–50 % (FAO 2012). Insects are competing with human races for food. The insects do not only damage the field crops but also accompany the grains even to the store houses and warehouses to cause severe damage. Stored-product insects are serious pests of dried, stored, durable agricultural commodities and of many value-added food products and nonfood derivatives of agricultural products worldwide. Stored-product insects can cause serious postharvest losses, estimated to be from 9% in developed countries to 20% or more in developing countries (Pimentel, 1991), but they also contribute to contamination of food products by the presence of live insects, insect products such as chemical excretions or silk, dead insects and insect body fragments, general infestation of buildings and other storage structures, and accumulation of chemical insecticide residues in food, as well as human exposure to dangerous chemicals as a result of pest-control efforts against them. Worldwide, an annual loss of 8–10% (13 million t of grains lost due to insects and 100 million t due to failure to store properly) is estimated in stored-food commodities. Integrated pest management (IPM) has always been an important consideration in the management of stored grain insect pests. However, with continued depressed commodity prices, loss of treatment products, recent and impending legislative actions, and changes in consumer attitudes IPM has taken on an even greater significance. Of major importance in an integrated pest management program are the components that seek to prevent the establishment and buildup of insect pest populations. Before examining these components, however, it is important to first have a good understanding of the identification, biology and behavior of the major insect pests associated with stored grain.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Stored Grain Insect Pests Insect pests associated with stored grain can be divided into three major groups based on their importance, biology, and feeding behavior. These groups are commonly referred to as the primary insect pests, secondary insect pests, and miscellaneous insect pests. While a precise identification of a specific insect may not be necessary, it is critical that the insect be identified as belonging to one of these three groups in order to determine effective treatment options.

Primary Insect Pests Primary insect pests include those insects considered to be the most damaging pests of stored grain. These pests cause the most damage because they develop within the whole grain kernel. Examples of primary insect pests include the rice weevil, granary weevil, and maize weevil. All of these weevils are similar in appearance and have similar life cycles Adult weevils are reddish-brown to black, elongated, hard-shelled beetles that have a characteristic long snout or beak. Adults may vary slightly in size but are typically 2.5 mm in length. Like all beetles, adult weevils have chewing mouthparts. However, adult weevil feeding is usually not considered to be of major importance in stored grain. The main damage from weevils results from the feeding activity of the larva. Adult female weevils chew a tiny hole in the whole kernel and then deposit a single egg in the opening. The female then seals the hole with a gelatinous covering. Upon hatching, the larva feeds internally within the kernel.

Secondary Insect Pests Secondary insect pests do not cause as much damage to stored grain as the primary pests. However, their presence and feeding damage can be a major concern. Unlike the primary pests, the secondary insect pests feed and develop outside of the whole grain kernel. In fact, most of these secondary pests depend on the presence of cracked and broken kernels for their development. Examples of secondary pests include the red flour beetle, confused flour beetle, flat grain beetle, sawtoothed grain beetle, and Indian meal moth.

Miscellaneous Insect Pests A number of other pests can, at times, be associated with stored grain. These miscellaneous pests include the foreign grain beetle, fungus beetles, psocids, and mites. These pests are fungus feeders that do not feed directly on clean, high quality grain. As a result, their presence indicates a serious moisture-related problem associated with the stored grain.

Components of integrated pest management in stored products IPM relies on managing insect populations through physical and biological control techniques and, if necessary, chemical insecticides. The IPM approach involves various components for efficient management of insect pests in stored grains. These are described in more detail below. Pest Chemic Monit Prevent al oring/ ative metho Sampli measur ds IPMng es Exclusio Biorati n and onal Hermet curative manag measure ementFig. 1: Components of integratedic pest management in stored products storage s 17

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Pest monitoring/sampling Pest monitoring is an important component in the IPM postharvest practice for stored grain. Inspections should be done frequently, especially after first storage, to enable pest- management decisions to be made (Subramanyam and Hagstrum, 1995). Population density estimates and estimation methods include the following techniques: i) Absolute estimates (e.g. number of insects per kilogram of grain or number of moths per square metre) ii) Indirect estimates (mark-release-recapture methods); iii) Relative estimates (number of insects caught in a sticky trap, perforated probe trap, food baited trap, etc.). Trapping relies on insect mobility, which varies by species, environment and trapping period. The capture rate must be adjusted for time and converted to density per kilogram of grain. IPM relies heavily on sampling, as the use of physical and biological controls are most effective on low populations. However, if insect populations exceed an economic threshold, fumigant application is recommended. Presently, little information is available concerning the economic thresholds at which fumigants should be administered in stored grain. Monitoring of insect populations and quality deterioration over a particular period of time will be a valuable tool to determine economic thresholds in storage.

Preventative Measures Prevention requires good hygiene and sanitation. Typical preventative measures include the following: The threshing floor/yard should be clean, free from insect infestation and away from the vicinity of villages/granaries. Harvesting and threshing machines should be cleaned before use. Trucks, trollies or bullock carts used for transportation of food grains should be free from insect infestation. Storage structures should be cleaned before storage of newly harvested crops. All dirt, rubbish, sweepings, webbings, etc. should be removed from stores and dumped/destroyed. All cracks, cervices and holes in the floors, walls and ceiling should be filled with mud or cement. All rat burrows should be closed with a mixture of broken glass pieces and mud and then plastered with mud/cement. Stores should be whitewashed before storage of food grains. Food grains should be kept in stores that are rat and moisture proof. Proper stacking of bags helps in grain protection. Before the use of receptacles/stores, they should be disinfested with approved residual insecticides, preferably by spraying malathion 50% effective concentration, at a dilution of 1:100 and applied at a rate of 3 l/100 m2.

Exclusion and curative measures Infestations of stored-grain insect pests can be controlled by the following nonchemical methods. Physical controlThe use of physical control measures includes temperature, mechanical methods, moisture and relative humidity control, structural methods (e.g. grain silos, packaging), irradiation and sanitation (Fields and Muir, 1995). The red fl our beetle (Triboliumcastaneum Herbst) has a well-developed chemosensory system (Barrer, 1983) and is able to differentiate changes in the physical environment such as temperature (Saxena et al., 1992; Dowdy, 1999), humidity (Evans, 1983), carbon dioxide levels (Soderstrom et al., 1992) and even different hues immediately around it (Ramos et al., 1983; Viswanathan et al., 1996; Khan et al., 1998). Sheribha et al. (2010) assessed possibilities for the management of T. castaneum on stored products using coloured lighting systems. They

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management found that red light is not preferred by T. castaneum adults. Thus, if storage areas were lit red, T. castaneum beetles could be managed without the use of chemical pesticides.

Legal methods Entry of insects that are not found in a particular area can be prevented by the imposition of laws, such as the Destructive Insects and Pests Act 1914 in India.

Exclusion Prevention is one critical factor in any effective pest-management programme as prevention of the introduction of pests means prevention of losses of both product and time. Entry of insects into storage facilities can be prevented efficiently if products such as grains, cereals, fl our and other packed items are inspected properly. Materials to be stored need to be checked for eggs and insect frass as well as living insects. Any contaminated material should immediately be disinfested or destroyed. Entry of insects can be prevented by using screens over windows and doors. Rodent holes or crevices where insects can enter should be filled. It is also possible to make the area less attractive to insects by using sodium rather than mercury lights.

Environmental modifications Heat and cold treatments can be used forthe management of storage pests, as heatkills some pests while cold blocks theirdevelopment. It has been reported that a temperature of 15℃ prevents storage pestsfrom feeding, while 4℃ kills them over aperiod of time.

Cold treatment A temperature below 4℃ results in death, particularly of the immature stages of almost all insect pests. Death occurs rapidly at freezing point. T.castaneum and Oryzaephilus mercatorare highly susceptible to cold, whereas Trogoderma spp., Ephestia spp. and Plodiainterpunctella are cold-tolerant species. In most fi eld applications of a cold temperature to control insect pests, the insects are exposed to a temperature of 10–20℃ for some days before being exposed to a lethal cold temperature.

Heat treatment Most stored-grain insect pests die at 50–60℃ within a period of 10–20 min. Exposure to a temperature only about 5℃ above the optimum for the species will stop development. Exposure to 50℃ for 2 h eliminates most insect pests. Grain heating is carried out using a hot-air fluidized bed, infrared radiation or high frequencydielectric and microwave heatingto achieve a uniform grain temperature throughout the storage structure.

Controlled Atmosphere/Hermetic Storage Use of a controlled atmosphere for storage of grain involves the use of high CO2 (9.0– 9.5%) and low O2 (2–4%) levels, conditions that are lethal to all insects. This technology for control of stored pests has been extensively used in the field.

Desiccants Some desiccants such as earth, silica gel and non-silica and diatomaceous earth can be combined with stored grains to provide protection against insect damage. The desiccants are removed from the grain or stored foods before processing by a cleaning operation that also removes debris. The rate for bulk grain is 100–300 g/t, depending on the insect species and the grain moisture content. The rate for surface treatment is 0.3 mg/g to the top 45.7 cm of the grain mass. Alternative dusting preparations include ash, laterite dust, clay dust or very fi ne sand. The quantities commonly applied vary considerably and can reach up to 50% by volume. Depending on the type of dust, however, it is also possible to achieve an acceptable protective effect with considerably smaller quantities.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Sorting Food grains displaying insect infestation, mould, mechanical damage or any other inferior quality must be removed and processed as soon as possible. This will prevent contamination of the healthy grains and maintain the overall quality of the produce.

Dividing the harvest It is always advisable that produce meant for storage be divided into two parts, one for short-term daily requirements and the other for long-term storage. Generally, no losses are caused by insects for up to 3–4 months. Therefore, food grains intended for consumption during this period need not be treated, whereas those intended for longterm storage require proper treatment.

Treatment with lime dust Quicklime is one of the most important inexpensive dusts used for food grains stored in their husks. Lime dust has a dehydrating effect on insects and blocks their respiratory orifices.

Biorational Management Pheromones Pheromones are commercially available for approximately 20 species of stored- product insects as slow-release formulations of lures to be used in monitoring traps (Phillips etal., 2000). The most commonly used pheromones are those for P. interpunctella, the cigarette beetle (Lasioderma serricorne F.; Coleoptera: Anobiidae), the red and confused fl our beetles (T. castaneum and Tribolium confusum Jacquelin du Val, respectively) and the warehouse beetle (Trogoderma variabile Ballion; Coleoptera: Dermestidae). The efficacy of pheromonebaited sticky traps varies according to their placement within a building, and other fl at landing sites enhances the response of P. interpunctella males to pheromone-baited traps (Nansen et al., 2004). For beetles that tend to land and crawl to an odour source, traps are designed to sit on a floor or flat surface and capture insects that walk into the trap as they eventually become stuck to the trapping surface or ensnared inside the trapping receptacle. Barak and Burkholder (1985) developed a trap with horizontal layers of corrugated cardboard in which responding beetles walked through the tunnels of corrugations to reach a cup of oil into which they fell and suffocated.

Natural enemies of insects A number of natural enemies are associated with stored-product insects, adapted to human-based habitats, as are their prey and hosts. Detailed information can be found in the reviews by Scholler and Flinn (2000) and Scholler et al. (2006). Several species of parasitoid wasps from the Pteromalidae are solitary ectoparasitoids of internal-feeding grain-infesting species of beetles, and similarly there are several common species of Ichneumonidae and Braconidae as ecto and endoparasitoids associated with stored-product Lepidoptera. Some species of free-living predatory beetles, true bugs (Heteroptera: Anthocoridae), and mites prey on any life stage of numerous species of stored-product insect pests that they can subdue and consume (Abrol et al., 1989, 1994). Populations of parasitoids and predators in storage systems display delayed density dependency in their dynamics that are typical of other predator– prey and parasitoid–host systems in other insect communities, and population declines in stored-product pest species are typically followed by increases in these natural enemy populations.

Microbial pesticides Spinosad is a commercial bacterial insecticide derived from metabolites of the actinomycete bacterium Saccharopolyspora spinosa (Mertz and Yao). It is highly effective in controlling insects associated with stored wheat (Flinn et al., 2004). In fi eld crops, spinosad loses its activity after a week due to breakdown caused by UV radiation from sunlight.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

However, in farm bins, where most of the wheat is not exposed to sunlight, spinosad degrades very little over 12 months of storage, with no appreciable loss of insecticidal activity against the lesser grain borer (Rhyzopertha dominica F.) and the red fl our beetle (T. castaneum Herbst) (Fang etal., 2002). Laboratory and fi eld tests using stored wheat have shown spinosad to be effective against several stored-product insects. Spinosad applied to wheat at 0.1 and 1.0 mg/kg was effective in killing all adults and preventing population growth of R. dominica. A rate of 1.0 mg/kg was necessary for complete control and progeny suppression of the rusty grain beetle (Cryptolestes ferrugineus Stephens), the flat grain beetle (Cryptolestes pusillus Schonherr) and the confused fl our beetle (T.confusum) (Toews and Subramanyam, 2003). Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) is a registered protectant for use in stored grains in the USA. The larvae of P. interpunctella and the dried currant moth (Ephestiacautella) show high susceptibility to Bt. Nuclear polyhedrosis virus, granulosis virus and cytoplasmic polyhedrosis virus are isolated mainly from lepidopteran insects and have potential for control of these pests.

Biological control A number of insect predators and parasitic wasps attack insect pests of stored grain and can be used effectively if applied in overwhelming numbers. However, biological are generally not used because the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and food processors do not accept live insects or insect parts in raw grain. Biological agents have limited commercial availability and are cost prohibitive, except perhaps when used in organic production (Weaver and Petroff, 2004). Controlling insect pests in stored grain and grain products can be very difficult because of the variety of species that can infest grain. Insect parasitoids have been shown to be effective in suppressing a limited number of pest species both in bulk grain storages and in food processing facilities and warehouses. One of the more effective parasitoids is Theocolax elegans (Westwood), a small pteromalid wasp (1–2 mm long) that attacks primary grain pests whose immature stages develop inside grain kernels, including the weevils (Sitophilus spp.), the lesser grain borer (R.dominica F.), the drugstore beetle (Stegobium paniceum L.), cowpea weevils (Callosobruchus spp.) and the Angoumois grain moth (C. cerealella) (Flinn et al., 2006). Trichogramma spp. have also been evaluated against a variety of stored-product moths in bulk groundnut storage, bulk wheat storage and bakeries, as well as in warehouses and retail stores in Europe (Grieshop et al., 2007). Stored- product moths commonly oviposit on packages and on shelves holding stored-product packages. Trichogramma spp. are especially promising as biological control agents on finished products because they attack the egg stage of the pests, thereby preventing invasion of products by fi rst instars. Dinarmus spp. is a larval/pupal parasitoid of Callosobruchus spp., Bruchus spp., Bruchidius atrolineatus and Acanthoscelides obtectus in legume seed. Biological control has a limited scope in stored-grain pest management but is becoming an increasingly important part of an IPM approach.

Chemical Methods Botanicals Botanicals are chemicals produced by plants that repel approaching insects, deter feeding and oviposition on the plant, or disrupt the behaviour and physiology of insects in various ways. Various products of plants have been tried recently with a good degree of success as protectants against a number of stored-grain insect pests (Dixit and Saxena, 1990; Verma and Dubey, 1999; Shukla et al., 2007, Srinivasan, 2008). Botanicals such as neem possess repellent, anti-feedant and feeding deterrent properties against storage insect pests. Neem seed kernel powder at 4.0% (w/w), neem seed oil at 1.0% (v/w) and mahua oil at 1% (v/w) proved repulsive and a potent oviposition inhibitor in checking damage by the pulse beetle, C. chinensis for up to 8 months in pigeon pea (Singal and Chouhan, 1997). Wheat grains mixed with neem and dharek (Melia azedarach) leaves at 4% (w/w) were found to be less damaged by insects. Essential oils have been widely used as antiparasitic, bactericidal, fungicidal, antivirus and insecticidal agents. Pérez etal. (2010) reviewed the activity of

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management essential oils as a biorational alternative to control coleopteran insects in stored grains. The rice grains treated with turmeric powder at 3.25% (w/w) were found to be least infested by rice weevil. Kirubal et al. (2008) reported that 0.2% (v/w) ginger grass oil on red gram prevented oviposition and F1 emergence of C. chinensis (L.) for a long period after initial release of the adults. Paranagama etal. (2003) reported that damage to grain was lower in Oryza sativa treated with the essential oils of Cymbopogon citrates (Stapf) and Cymbopogon nardus (Rendle) than in the control rice grains. C. citrates and C. nardus showed deleterious effects on oviposition and F1 adult emergence of the cowpea bruchid Callosobruchusmaculatus (F.) compared with the control during no-choice tests. Rajasekharreddy and Usha Rani (2010) evaluated the insecticidal activity against adults of three stored-product pests in a test using a fi lter paper diffusion method (contact application) and found that Curcubita maxima leaf extract showed 100% mortality to Sarocladium oryzae and R. dominica within 3 days of treatment at a rate of 8.5 mg/cm2, whereas, only 65% mortality was observed against T. castaneum at this dosage. The application of crude plant extracts of Citrus sinensis and Citrusaurantium in the same concentrations, caused 89 and 76% mortality to S. oryzae and R. dominica, respectively, by 72 h post treatment. Among the three insects tested, T. castaneum was the most tolerant, having the lowest mortality rate against all the phytochemicals. Antifeedant and ovipositional activities of the essential oils agnuside and viridifl orol, obtained from the leaves of Vitex negundo (Lamiaceae) were tested against C. chinensis and S. oryzae. The essential oils were effective against both species at concentrations of 0.062– 0.5%, and had anti-feedant activity against S. oryzae at 0.25%, and up to 0.58 and 1.69% seed damage was observed (Rana etal., 2005). The essential oil of Cymbopogonmartini was an effective repellent against the beetlesC. chinensis and T. castaneum. The oil also affected oviposition, adult development and mortality of C. chinensis in cowpeas. The C. martini oil used as a fumigant did not affect viability, germination or seedling growth of gram (garbanzo bean) (Rajesh et al., 2007).

Insect growth regulators Insect growth regulators (IGRs) are chemicals that affect an insect’s ability to develop correctly or pass through the various developmental stages. They have a low toxicity towards humans synthetic pyrethroid insecticides. Several IGRs, including hydroprene have been evaluated for efficacy toward stored-product beetle species (Oberlander et al., 1997). Because of the low toxicity of IGRs, they are usually safe to spray directly on to raw products. An IGR should be used where fumigation is not possible or desirable. An IGR is only effective if it directly contacts the target insect so thorough coverage is necessary. IGRs can be applied as a spray to grains, nuts or other foodstuffs during the filling of storage bins. It is necessary to use sufficient spray to protect the entire stored product. The spray should be applied when the insects are at the correct stage of development, as described on the IGR label. Occasionally, application of an IGR extends the larval period, so the larvae may continue feeding for a while before they are destroyed.

Fumigants Control of stored-product insects in bulk containers, warehouses and other large storage structures/areas requires fumigation. Fumigants help to kill the insects in hidden places that may later become a problem. The area to be fumigated must be properly sealed so that fumigants can reach a lethal concentration and, once the required level is reached, it should be maintained for a specified period for better results. However, small quantities of cereals and other products can be fumigated in small containers subject to the condition that the containers are tightly closed immediately after the treatment. Care must be taken that the containers do not explode as a result of the creation of a vacuum. Thus, the lid is tightened only when the container has warmed up to room temperature. Of the various available fumigants, methyl bromide has been found to be highly effective as it acts rapidly in less than 48 h killing not only insects but also other pathogens such as microbes and nematodes. However, as this chemical depletes the ozone in the atmosphere, it may become restricted in

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management the near future (Fields and White, 2002). There are many options other than methyl bromide, such as the use of physical control methods such as heat and cold as described above, proper sanitation, and fumigant replacements such as carbonyl sulfide, phosphine and sulfuryl fluoride. Carbon dioxide can be used as a fumigant but has the drawback that it is less toxic to insects than some of the other fumigants and requires a high degree of air tightness to be effective, so is unlikely to find widespread acceptance except in controlled atmospheric storage systems.

Use of residual insecticides Short-term residual insecticides such as pyrethrins can be used for the rapid knockdown of some types of stored-product insects. These materials can be applied to bulk containers before adding the storage products. They are also used in cupboards and on shelves and areas close to where products are stored, but, if infestation levels are high, frequent re- applications are usually necessary. Residual insecticides, including persistent pyrethroids, should be used selectively. Residuals are generally applied to the surfaces of empty containers to prevent infestation but are rarely applied directly to foodstuffs (Taylor, 1991).

CONCLUSION An integrated pest management practice is the key to food sustainability and safety. For holding the best stored grain quality, it necessitates an integrated approaching by the stored grain administrator which integrates a number of implements and pesticides to prohibit quality impairment. Therefore, conclusions could be drawn that selected control strategies must be integrated for effective management of stored grain insects. T Drying the harvested grains to safe storage moisture content, aeration, and cooling, followed by suitable packaging in sanitized insect proof container, can prevent grain loss to a large extent. The primary information on the control of stored-grain pests presented in the paper might be of greater help to those who are interested in stored-grain pests management. At the same time, the integrated control strategy has safety to human and animals, no pollution to the stored grain and long lasting control effectiveness.

REFERENCES Abrol, D.P., Kakroo, S.K. and Putatunda, B.N. (1994). Stored product mite Tyrophagus longior (Gervais) with hive bees in India. Current Science .66 : 105. Abrol, D.P., Kumud, Mathur, S. and Mathur, R.B. (1989). Metabolic expenditures of some stored product mites as determined by their rate of oxygen consumption. In: Channabasavanna, G.P. and Viraktamath, C.A. (eds) Progress in Acarology. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co., New Delhi, India, pp. 271–273. Barak, A.V. and Burkholder, W.E. (1985). A versatile and effective trap for detecting and monitoring stored product Coleoptera. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 12: 207–218. Dixit, O.P. and Saxena, R.C. (1990). Insecticidal action of Premina integrifolia against Callosobruchus chinensis. Pesticides, 24: 29–31. Dowdy, A.K. (1999). Mortality of red fl our beetle, Tribolium castaneum (Herbst) (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) exposed to high temperature and diatomaceous earth combinations. Journal of Stored ProductsResearch, 35: 175–182. Evans, D.E. (1983). The influence of relative humidity and thermal acclimation on the survival of adult grain beetles in cooled grain. Journal of Stored Products Research, 19: 173–180. Fang, L., Subramanyam, B. and Dolder, S. (2002) Persistence and efficacy of spinosad residues in farm stored wheat. Journal of Economic Entomology, 95: 1102–1109. FAO (2012). www.faostat.org. Accessed on 28th June 2012. Fields, P.G. and Muir, W.E. (1995). Physical control. In: Integrated Pest Management of Insects in Stored Products. Marcel Dekker, New York.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Fields, P.G. and White, N.D.G. (2002). Alternatives to methyl bromide treatments for stored-product and quarantine insects. Annual Review of Entomology ,47: 331–359. Flinn, P.W., Subramanyam, B. and Arthur, F.H. (2004). Comparison of aeration and spinosad for suppressing insects in stored wheat. Journal of Economic Entomology, 97: 1465–1473. Grieshop, M.J., Flinn, P.W., Nechols, J.R. and Schoeller, M. (2007). Foraging success of three species of Trichogramma (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) in a simulated retail environment. Journal ofEconomic Entomology, 100: 591–598. Khan, A.A., Rath, S. and Shankar, U. (1998). Effect of coloured light on larval growth of rust red fl our beetle, Tribolium castaneum (Herbst). Shashpa, 5: 181–184. Kirubal, S., Jeeva, S., Kanagappan, M., Stalin, S.I. and Das, S.S.M. (2008). Ethnic storage strategies adopted by farmers of Tirunelveli district of Tamil Nadu, Southern Peninsular India. Journal ofAgricultural Technology, 4: 1–10. Nansen, C., Phillips, T.W. and Sanders, S. (2004). The effect of height and adjacent surfaces on captures of the Indian meal moth, Plodia interpunctella (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), in pheromone-baited traps. Journalof Economic Entomology, 97: 1284–1290. Oberlander, H., Silhacek, D.L., Shaaya, E. and Ishaaya, I. (1997). Current status and future perspectives of the use of insect growth regulators for the control of stored product insects. Journal of Stored ProductsResearch, 33: 1–6. Paranagama, P., Abeysekera, T., Nugaliyadde, L. and Abeywickrama, K. (2003). Effect of the essential oils of Cymbopogon citratus, Cymbopogon nardus and Cinnomomum zeylanicum on pest incidence and grain quality of rough rice (paddy) stored in an enclosed seed box. Journal of Food, Agriculture andEnvironment, 1: 139. Pérez, S.G., Ramos-López, M.A., Zavala-Sánchez, M.A. and Cárdenas-Ortega, N.C. (2010) .Activity of essential oils as a biorational alternative to control coleopteran insects in stored grains. Journal ofMedicinal Plants Research ,4: 2827–2835. Phillips, T.W., Cogan, P.M. and Fadamiro, H.Y. (2000). Pheromones. In: Subramanyam, B. and Hagstrum, D.W. (eds) Alternatives to Pesticides in Stored-product IPM. Kluwer Academic, Boston, pp. 273–302. Pimentel, D. (1991). World resources and food losses to pests. In: Gorham, J.R. (ed.) Ecology and Management of Food Industry Pests. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, Virginia, pp.5–11. Products. Marcel Dekker, New York. Barrer, T.M. (1983). A field demonstration of odour-based, host-food finding behaviour in several species of stored grain insects. Journal of Stored Products Research 19, 105–111. Rajasekharreddy, P. and Usha Rani, P. (2010). Toxic properties of certain botanical extracts against three major stored product pests. Journal of Biopesticides, 3: 586–589. Rajesh, K., Manisha, S. and Dubey, N.K. (2007). Evaluation of Cymbopogon martinii oil extract for control of postharvest insect deterioration in cereals and legumes. Journal of Food Protection, 70: 172–178. Ramos, E., De Conconi, J., Conconi, J., Elorduy, C., Oxley, T. and Barry, S. (1983). Laser light as a new potential method for pest control in preserved foods. In: Oxley, T.A. and Barry, S. (eds) Proceedings ofthe 5th International Biodeterioration Symposium, Aberdeen, UK, September 1981, pp. 592–608. Rana, V.S., Rashmi, and Rameshwar, D. (2005) Antifeedant and ovipositional activities of Vitex negundo, leaves against Sitophilus oryzae and Callosobruchus chinensis. Shashpa, 12: 117–121. Saxena, B.P., Sharma, P.R., Thappa, P.K. and Tikku, K. (1992). Temperature induced sterilization for control of three stored grain beetles. Journal of Stored Products Research, 28: 67–70. Scholler, M. and Flinn, P.W. (2000). Parasitoids and predators. In: Subramanyam, B. and Hagstrum, D.W. (eds) Alternatives to Pesticides in Stored-product IPM. Kluwer Academic, Boston, pp. 229–271.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Scholler, M., Flinn, P.W., Grieshop, M.J. and Zdarkova, E. (2006). Biological control of stored-product pests. In: Heaps, J.W. (ed.) Insect Management for Food Storage and Processing, 2nd edn. AACC International, St Paul, Minnesota, pp. 67–87. Sheribha, P.R.B., Jinham, A.P., Das, S.S.M. and Jasmine, K.R. (2010). Management of Tribolium castaneum (Herbst) based on hue response. Turkish Journal of Zoology, 34: 367–375. Shukla, R., Srivastava, B., Kumar, R. and Dubey, N.K. (2007). Potential of some botanical powders in reducing infestation of chickpea by Callosobruchus chinensis L. (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). Journal ofAgricultural Technology, 3: 11–19. Singal, S.K. and Chouhan, R. (1997). Effect of some plant products and other materials on development of pulse beetle, Callosobruchus chinensis (L.) on stored pigeon pea, Cajanus cajan(L.) Millsp. Journal ofInsect Science, 10: 196–197. Soderstrom, E.L., Brondl, D.G. and Mackey, B. (1992). High temperature combined with carbon dioxide enriched or reduced oxygen atmospheres for control of T. castaneum (Herbst) (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Journal of Stored Products Research, 28: 235–238. Srinivasan, G. (2008). Efficacy of certain plant oils as seed protectant against pulse beetle, Callosobruchus chinensis L. on pigeonpea. Pesticide Research Journal, 20: 13– 15. Subramanyam, B. and Hagstrum, D.W. (1995). Sampling. In: Subramanyam, B. and Hagstrum, D.W. (eds) Integrated Pest Management of Insects in Stored Products. Marcel Dekker, New York. Toews, M.D. and Subramanyam, B. (2003). Contribution of contact toxicity and wheat condition to mortality of stored-product insects exposed to spinosad. Pest Management Science, 59: 538–544. Tyler, P.S. and Boxall, R.A. (1984). Post-harvest loss reduction programmes: a decade of activities: what consequences? Tropical Stored Products Information, 50: 4–13. Verma, J. and Dubey, N.K. (1999). Prospectives of botanical and microbial products as pesticides of tomorrow. Current Science, 76: 172–179. Viswanathan, G., Rao, S.J. and Chakravarthy, C. (1996). Response of Tribolium castaneum to different colours of light during night and change in their intensities. Insect Environment, 2:94. Weaver, D.K. and Petroff, A.R. (2004). Pest Management for Grain Storage and Fumigation. Montana Department of Agriculture, Montana.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

STUDIES ON NON-CHEMICAL METHODS FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF PEDUNCLE BLIGHT OF TUBEROSE CAUSED BY Lasiodiplodia theobromae (PAT.) GRIFFON AND MAUBL. A.Muthukumar, R.Udhayakumar and T.Suthinraj *Department of Plant Pathology, Faculty of Agriculture, Annamalai University, Annamalainagar-608 002, Chidambaram, Tamil Nadu, India.

ABSTRACT Tuberose (Polianthes tuberosa L.) is one of the most important tropical ornamental bulbous flowering plant cultivated for production of long lasting flower spikes. It is popularly known as Rajanigandha or Nishigandha which means night fragrant. It belongs to the family Amaryllidaceae and is native of Mexico. Tuberose is grown commercially in a number of countries including China, Egypt, France, Hawaii, India, Italy, Kenya, Mexico, Morocco, North Carolina, South Africa, Taiwan, USA and many other tropical and sub-tropical areas in the world. The flower is very popular for its strong fragrance and its essential oil is important component of high- grade perfumes. The major constraints in the production of tuberose are the diseases caused by fungi and virus. Among various diseases infecting tuberose peduncle blight caused by L. theobromae is a serious problem in tuberose growing areas of Tamil Nadu and causing considerable economic loss to the farmers. The symptoms included blighting of flowers followed by die-back of peduncle from tip to downwards. Several pycnidia were observed over the infected spike. Control of these diseases is currently achieved through the use of chemical fungicides but there is increasing interest in utilizing alternative approaches such as biological control agents. Alternatively, antifungal agents produced by microorganisms may be used as biocontrol agent, as the materials based on microorganisms have properties such as: high specificity against target plant pathogens, easy degradability and low cost of mass production. In this chapter discussed in detail about pathogen, host range, symptomatology, mode of entry, pathogenicity, physiological and nutritional factors and bioagents for the control of peduncle blight of tuberose.

The Pathogen The fungus is commonly known as Botryodiplodia theobromae Pat. However, Sutton (1980) has adopted the name Lasiodiplodia theobromae as suggested by Zambettakis (1954). L. theobromae had also been recognized by Hawksworth et al. (1995) and B. theobromae is now therefore, considered to be synonym of L. theobromae. The fungus L. theobromae is classified within the Ascomycota in the order Botryosphaeriales and the family Botryosphaeriaceae (Schoch et al., 2006; Slippers et al., 2013). It has a wide host range of monocotyledonous, dicotyledonous and gymnosperm and estimated to be more than 280 plant species (Khanzada et al., 2006; Domsch et al., 2007). Anamorph of Botryosphaeria species have been placed in Botryodiplodia (Sacc) Sacc.,Lasidiplodia Elliies and Everth., Diplodia Fr., Dothiorella Sacc., Fusicoccum corda., Sphaeropsis Sacc., Macrophoma (Sacc.) Berl & Volg. AndMacrophomopsis Petrak (Crous et al., 2006). The teleomorphic stage of the fungus is Botryosphaeria rhodina (Berk and Curtis) Arx.

Occurrence and distribution Dieback of mango caused by L. theobromae is one of the major diseases of mango. The fungus causes complete defoliation of leaves (Khanzada et al., 2004). Wood and Wood (2005) reported that cane die-back of seedless table grapevine in Western Australia was identified as being caused by Botryosphaeria rhodina where the symptoms were progressive death of shoots, canes and trunks. Coconut rot and fall caused by L. theobromae was the first report in Roraima, Brazil by Halfeld and Nechet (2005). Among the post-harvest disease that affect banana, crown rot caused by a complex pathogens (L. theobromae and Colletotrichum musae) is a major problem in all banana growing regions (Sangeetha, 2006). This disease decreases the quality of bananas with aesthetic damage and drop of fingers. Stem end rot caused by B. theobromae was one of the most important post-harvest diseases of Rambutan

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

(Kunz et al., 2006). Jatropha gummosis incited by B. theobromae was noticed for the first time in China (Fu et al., 2007). Swapna Priya and Nagaveni (2009) reported that L. theobromae is a major problem in Western Ghats as it causes rotting and die-back in most of the fruit crops. L. theobromae was found to be associated with blossom blight, peduncle blight and blighting of leaf tip of tuberose (Durgadevi and Sankaralingam, 2012). Adeniyi et al. (2013) reported that inflorescence blight caused by L. theobromae is a major limiting factor affecting cashew nut production in Nigeria. Kedar et al. (2014) reported that banana fruit rot caused byL. theobromae is an important disease in South Gujarat region. L. theobromae causes root rot and collar rot disease of Jatropha (Jatropha curcasL.) in Gujarath (Prajapati et al., 2014). EI-Banna et al. (2015) reported that die-back of grapevine considered as one of the most destructive diseases in California caused by the fungus L. theobromae.

Yield loss Haque et al. (2003) reported that about 2.04 to 4.90 per cent banana fruits were rotten due to anthracnose and 2.96 to 4.74 per cent of the fruits were infected by Botryodiplodia rot. Arinze (2005) recorded that in yams about 50 per cent reductions of the total stored tubers due to B. theobromae within the first 6 months of storage. Onyenka et al. (2005) reported that the fungus is present in more than 70 per cent of farms surveyed in Nigeria and it is linked to massive yield losses around 80 per cent of crop harvest. Guava decline has becoming the National problem in Pakistan and caused in yield reduction from 8920 kg/ha in 2003-2004 to 8223 kg/ha in 2008-2009 (Anonymous, 2010). B. theobromae is a virulent plant pathogen commonly found in the tropics and sub-tropics. The fungus has wide range of plant hosts and known to cause yield losses up to 80 per cent especially on cash and food crop farms (Twumasi et al., 2013).

Symptomatology Sangeetha (2006) reported that the symptoms of banana crown rot include a firm dark brown or black rot which spread through the crown and penetrates into the pedicels of individual fingers. A layer of fluffy white, grey fungal mycelium covered the cut surface of the crown.The symptoms of stem end rot of mango include rot starts as a dark-brown firm decay at the epicarp around the base of the pedicel of the mango fruits in the initial stages of infection (Arjunan et al., 1999; Faber et al., 2007). The initial symptoms of charcoal rot of cocoa starts as a brown spot on the infected pod that latter turns black. The spot further enlarges until the whole pod blackens, a situation referred to as “charcoal rot” because of the thick black sooty spores resemblance to charcoal powder (Opoku et al., 2007). Mbenoun et al. (2008) reported that the initial symptoms of cocoa die-back include yellowing of outer twigs and the damage may extend along the whole branch, reaching the main trunk, eventually resulting in tree death. The disease incidence involves stem rot and silvering of yam leaves. The fungus also causes soft rots of yam tubers after harvest (Rossel et al., 2008). The symptoms of peduncle blight of tuberose include blighting of flower buds followed by die-back of peduncle from tip downward (Durgadevi, 2011). Muthukumar and Sangeetha (2011) reported that the symptoms of die-back of hippeastrum include drying of leaf tip. Then drying extended towards entire leaf. Finally the infected leaves hung over at the point of infection. Safdar et al. (2015) noted that the initial symptoms of the guava tree decline include wilting and yellowing of leaves. The tree can decline rapidly the leaves tend to remain on the tree, but shrivel and become necrotic shows scorched appearance. When tree decline is slow, the leaves droop naturally and eventually resulting in the complete defoliation of the tree.

Mode of entry The main means of entry for L. theobromae into the hosts is through the wounds produced by work tools, insects or natural causes (Ploetz, 2003). It has been reported that during periods of rain there is a greater production of spores, which may be disseminated by

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management rain drops and wind (Vasquez et al., 2009).The fungus colonizes the vascular system and advances ahead of the visible symptoms (Shahbaz et al., 2009). The fungus survives on dead tissues on the tree or the ground (Pegg et al., 2003).

Pathogenicity Pathogenicity test was made on mango fruits and make a hole perforated with 3mm cork borer, followed by drop-inoculated with 100 µl of conidial suspensions (5 x 105 conidia/ml).The fruits were kept in a plastic box with 100 per cent relative humidity at 2℃ for three days. Lesions were produced on the wound-inoculated fruits. However, no symptoms developed on the control fruits inoculated with sterilized distilled water. The pathogen was re- isolated from inoculated fruits (Hong et al., 2012). Kedar et al. (2014) reported that banana fruits were inoculated with L. theobromae by pin-prick method on each freshly exposed finger tip tissue and mature fruits near the crown portion and kept in a polythene bag containing wet cotton piece at room temperature for 8-10 days and produced similar symptoms of fruit rot those found in naturally infected fruits. Reisolation from infected inoculated fruits yielded cultures which were identical with the cultures which are used for inoculation of the fruits. EI-Banna et al. (2015) reported that two years old ten healthy grapevine plants were sprayed with a conidial suspension of L. theobromae (105conidia/ml). Control was treated with sterile distilled water. Following inoculation, the plants were covered with plastic bags for 48 h and kept in a glasshouse for 3 weeks. 70 per cent of the seedlings exhibits die-back symptom. Safdar et al. (2015) stated that pathogenicity test was confirmed by using detached twig inoculation technique on guava variety Gola. Guava twigs of 8-10 cm long were taken from healthy branches and surface sterilized with 2% sodium hypochlorite and injury was produced on the surface with the help of cork borer. Inoculation was done by placing 15 days old culture discs of L. theobromae and incubated in a growth chamber. The symptom development was observed on healthy twigs after 3-7 days of inoculation. Nogueria et al.(2017) reported that the pathogenicity tests were done by inoculating six detached persimmon fruit (cv. Rama Forte). Mycelial discs of Lasiodiplodia of 8 mm were deposited in the middle portion of wounded fruit. Six fruits were inoculated with disc of sterile PDA as a control. Fruits were incubated in a moist chamber at 25°C. After 8 days, the isolate caused lesions in all fruit. The fruits were covered by dark grey mycelia fulfilling Koch’s postulate.

Physiological studies Effect of culture media on the growth of pathogen Among the various synthetic and non-synthetic media tested in vitro for the growth of L. theobromae, Richard´s medium supported the best mycelial growth and pycnidial production followed by Czapek´s Dox agar and potato dextrose agar (Sangeetha, 2006). Saha et al. (2008) identified tea root extract supplemented potato dextrose agar medium to be suitable for both mycelial growth and sporulation of L. theobromae. Shesham decline incited by B. theobromae and Fusarium solani grew rapidly on PDA (Kausar et al., 2009). Durgadevi (2011) reported that PDA and PD broth favoured the growth of L. theobromae followed by carrot dextrose agar. Latha et al. (2013) reported that potato dextrose agar supported the highest growth (89.6 mm) of L. theobromae followed by potato sucrose agar and corn meal agar (89.4 mm). Potato dextrose agar medium was identified to be the best medium for the growth and sporulation of Botryodiplodia sp. causing die-back of Jabon seedlings (Achmad and Arshinta, 2014). Djeugap and Fovo et al.(2017) reported that among the media tested, PDA and MEA (Malt extract agar) were found to be most suitable for mycelial growth and sporulation of L. theobromae.

Effect of temperature on the growth of pathogen Among the external factors which influence the growth of fungi, temperature plays an important role for the development of pathogen. Each pathogen has got its own cardinal temperature and understanding the temperature requirement of the pathogen will help to

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management standardize the management strategies. Latha et al. (2013) recorded that the maximum mycelial growth of L. theobromae was observed at 30°C followed by 35°C. The mycelial growth was drastically reduced at below 20°C. Hegde andKeshgond (2015) reported that the fungus B. theobromae grew well at temperature ranging from 20-35°C with optimum growth occur between 25-30°C and at 40°C the growth of fungus was completely inhibited. Sankar et al.(2016) reported that the highest mycelial dry weight of B. theobromae was obtained at 25 to 30°C which was considered an optimum for the vegetative growth. The optimum temperature for sporulation of L. theobromae was at 23°C (Djeugap Fovo et al., 2017).

Effect of PH levels on the growth of pathogen Hydrogen ion concentration is one of the most important factors influencing the growth of the fungi. The pH of the medium determines the rate and amount of growth and many other life processes (Lilly and Barnett, 1951). Saha et al. (2008) found pH range of 3.0 to 8.0 and optimum pH of 6.0 to be suitable for the growth of B. theobromae. He further recommended tea root extract supplemented potato dextrose agar medium with pH 6.0 to be most suitable for conidial production by B. theobromae. The excellent sporulation was recorded at pH 6.0 and 6.5. Shah and Verma (2009) observed high biomass of B. theobromae at pH 7.0 and sporulation was high at pH 5.0 and no sporulation was observed at pH 4.0. Latha et al. (2013) recorded that maximum mycelial growth (76.20 mm) with highest mycelial dry weight (766.80 mg) was obtained at pH 7.0. Achmad and Arshinta (2014) reported that maximum colony diameter of B. theobromae was observed at pH of 4.0 to 8.0, whereas, nill growth was observed at pH of 4.0. Hegde andKeshgond (2015) reported that the fungus B. theobromae grew well in a wide range pH (4.0- 9.0) and most suitable pH level for the growth was 6.

Effect of photoperiods on the growth of pathogen Light has a profound effect on the growth of fungi. Alam et al. (2001) who showed that light was necessary for the growth and sporulation of L.theobromae. Saha et al. (2008) reported that the light had no significant influence on mycelia growth, which was found to be equally good under complete light, complete dark and alternate 12 hr light and dark conditions. Sporulation was excellent and noticed after 10 days when the fungus was grown under complete light condition. However, under complete dark conditions, sporulation was poor and delayed until 20 days. Parveen and Sobia Rashida (2009) reported that the continuous light was found to be the most suitable for maximum growth of the fungi viz., L. theobromae and Fusarium solani, respectively. Latha et al. (2013) reported that maximum mycelial growth and pycnidial production was recorded in continuous light sources. The fungus also performed well with 24 hrs light and 24 hrs dark.

Nutritional studies Effect of different carbon sources on the growth of pathogen Fungi exhibit wide variation in the utilization of carbon source. Fungi meet their carbon requirement mainly from various organic sources (Bilgrami and Verma, 1978). Durgadevi (2011) reported that among the carbon sources tested, sucrose was found to promote fast growth of L. theobromae in solid culture and yield more mycelium in liquid culture. Among the carbon source tested, sucrose, CMC and glucose were found to induce highest mycelial growth and pycnidial production of L. theobromae (Latha et al., 2013). Chaudhuri et al. (2017)reported thatamong the carbon containing media, the most effective medium for rapid growth was peptone salt agar medium followed by oat meal agar and Czaepek’s Dox agar media

Effect of different nitrogen sources on the growth of pathogen Nitrate compounds are excellent nitrogen sources for imperfect fungi and also ascomycetes (Bilgrami and Verma, 1978). Nitrogen is an important element for protein synthesis but all the sources of nitrogen are not equally good for the growth of the fungi. Holb

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management and Chauhan (2005) observed that peptone was the best nitrogen source that produced quickest growth of Monilia polystroma. Among the five nitrogen sources studied, ammonium dihydrogen phosphate recorded highest mycelial growth and pycnidial production followed by ammonium oxalate (Patil et al., 2006). Among the seven nitrogen sources tested, maximum growth was found in beef extract (310.0 mg) followed by peptone (305.0 mg) and potassium nitrate (268.1 mg) after 20 days of incubation (Saha et al., 2008). Durgadevi (2011) reported that potassium nitrate and peptone were equally efficient in promoting fast growth of L. theobromae in both solid and liquid medium. Latha et al. (2013) reported that the maximum mycelial growth of L. theobromae was recorded in ammonium dihydrogen phosphate and ammonium oxalate amended medium (90.00 mm). Chaudhuri et al.(2017) reported that, the radial growth of L. theobromae was higher in case of medium containing aspartic acid and a combination of sodium nitrate and ammonium sulphate

Biocontrol agents Management of crop diseases through biocontrol agents has been realized as an alternate to chemical fungicides. It is an important component of integrated disease management to reduce the risk of pesticide hazard as well as to prevent resistance development in pathogens to fungicides. Though biocontrol agents are successfully employed in controlling soil borne pathogens, in recent years commercial formulations of biofungicides are being applied to manage many foliar diseases especially in flower crops under greenhouse and field conditions. Out of the diverse microbial species of bioagents few genera like Pseudomonas and Bacillus have been successfully exploited in different crops.

In vitro antagonism of Pseudomonas species When various isolates of P. fluorescens from the rhizosphere of mulberry were screened against wilt incited by F. solani, F. oxysporum and stem rot caused by B. theobromae the isolates Psf-1 and Psf-2 were found to be effective in inhibiting the mycelial growth of all the test pathogens (Govindaiah et al., 2003). When various strains of B. subtillis where compared, B1 strongly inhibited the mycelial growth of B. theobromae and F. oxysporum. The inhibition of mycelial growth was up to 60 per cent with B. theobromae (Okigbo, 2005). Sharma et al. (2009) reported that P. fluorescens (Pf-1) was found most effective bacterial bioagent which inhibited 84.8 per cent growth of B. theobromae (stem end rot of citrus) followed by B. subtilis (64.05%). Kedar et al. (2014) reported that five known bioagents tested by dual culture technique showed that P. fluorescens and B. subtilis were strong antagonism to L. theobromae (banana fruit rot) by inhibiting the mycelial growth up to 75.83 and 70.50%, respectively. EI-Banna et al. (2015) reported that cell free culture filtrate of P. putida is most effective in reducing the growth of L. theobromae causing die back of grapevine.

In vivo activity of Pseudomonas B. theobromae and Fusarium oxysporum are the pathogens associated with the post harvest spoilage of yam (Ray et al., 2000). The fungitoxic activity of B. subtilis and T. viride in controlling B. theobromae and Fusarium oxysporum of yam has been reported by Okigbo and Ikediugwu (2000). B. subtilis strains were the predominant bacterial flora isolated from fresh cow dung that had biocontrol activity against B. theobromae and Fusarium oxysporum (Swain and Ray, 2007; Swain et al., 2008). B. subtilis and P. fluorescens were observed to be effective biocontrol agents of post harvest fungal decay of citrus fruits caused by B. theobromae and B. subtilis exerts its effects by producing the antibiotic-iturin (Johnson et al., 2008). Sharma et al. (2009) found that bacterial biocontrol agents such as B. subtilis and P. fluorescens were effective in controlling the stem end rot of Citrus deliciosa caused by B. theobromae. Alvindia and Natsuaki (2009) reported that post harvest application of B. amyloliquifaciens DGA14 in the packing house reduced the incidence of crown rot of banana to a lower level than in fungicidal treatment. Okigbo and Emeka (2010) state that P. syringae and P. chlororaphis effectively control B. theobromae and Fusarium solani which infect yam tubers. Liquid

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management formulation of plant growth promoting viz., P. putida, P. fluorescens, B. brevis, B. polymyxa and S. griseus were screened for their ability to control die-back of grapevine transplant inoculated with L. theobromae. Foliar application of P. putida, B. brevis and B. polymyxa showed higher effects as biofungicde efficacy on controlling of grapevine die-back disease than other tested (EI-Banna et al., 2015).

Compatibility studies Compatibility among biocontrol agents Compatible multiple strains are advantageous when dealing with several diseases (or) a disease that has multiple infection sites. A single strain may not grow equally well in a variety of environmental conditions. A major pre-requisite for the desired effectiveness of strains seems to be compatibility of the co-inoculated microorganisms (Baker, 1990; Raaijimakers et al., 1995; Li and Alexander, 1998). The compatibility study revealed that there was no inhibition zone between P. fluorescens (Pf51) and B. subtilis (Bs 45) indicating the compatible nature of both the antagonists (Sivakumer et al., 2012). Earlier studies also reported that the both bacteria are compatible and the combination was highly successful in controlling crop diseases (Thilakavathi et al., 2007; Salaheddin et al., 2010; Sundaramoorthy and Balabaskar, 2013).

Commercial formulation of biocontrol agents Jayarajan et al. (1994) developed commercial formulations of T. viride and B. subtilis using talc powder (magnesium silicate ore) and peat soil, respectively. They added carboxy methyl cellulose as the sticky material @10g/kg of talc powder. Vidhyasekaran et al. (1996) developed commercial formulation of P. fluorescens using peat and talc as the basic material which gave very good control of rice sheath blight, chickpea wilt and pigeonpea wilt in the field. Amer and Utkhede (2000) observed that B. subtilis BACT-O could be formulated in vermiculite, peat mass and wheat bran. The population of B. subtilis was stable in peat-based formulation (Georgakopoulos et al., 2002). Nakkeeran et al. (2006) revealed that B. subtilis strain BSCBE4 and P. fluorescens strain PA23 could be developed as peat and talc-based formulations.Various carrier formulations of Psueudomonas and Bacillus have been developed for controlling soil and seed-borne diseases. Satisfactory survival of P. fluorescens isolates in peat soil and its efficacy against chickpea wilt, banded leaf and sheath blight have been reported earlier by Vidyasekaran and Muthamilan (1995); Sivakumar et al. (2007). Jayaraj and Radhakrishnan (2008) reported that application of T. viride and P. fluorescens multiplied on talc based formulations resulted in reduced incidence of tomato damping-off. Among the carrier materials tested, talc powder was found to be superior in supporting the survival of T. viride and P. fluorescens (Muthukumar, 2009). Sandikar and Aswathi (2010) prepared bioformulations of four Pseudomonas and three Bacillus isolates with talc and dried fecal pellets of sheep and goats as carrier materials, along with CMC. The bioformulations of Bacillus species were relatively more durable than Pseudomonas species. Sivakumar et al. (2012) reported that shelf life of P. fluorescensPf51 and B. subtilisB45 was tested in four different carriers (peat, talc, vermiculite and lignite). Among these, peat supported the survival of both strains Pf51 and B45 for 270 days. Sallam et al. (2013) reported that the population of B. subtilis and B. cereus was stableon talc and wood flour formulations.

Effect of storage on the viability of antagonists The success of biological control of plant diseases depends on the availability of effective formulations of bio-control agents, their survival during storage and rapid multiplication and colonization after inoculation (Becker and Schwin, 1993). Talc has been found to be a good carrier material for bio pesticides (Jayarajan et al., 1994; Vidhya, 1995). Talc based P. fluorescens preparation could be stored for eight months without much loss in viability (Vidhyasekaran and Muthamilan, 1995). Formulation of Bacillus brevis with vermiculite as a carrier had a shelf life of at least six months (Bapat and Shah, 2000). P.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management fluorescens formulated product (BioshieldTM) can be safely stored for 180 days (Jagtap, 2002). Viability of propagules in lignite, lignite plus fly ash, bentonite paste, wettable powder and water dispersible tablet formulations of B. subtilis was 100 per cent for up to one year. However, the viability of propagules was significantly reduced in talc, wettable powder, PEG paste and tablet formulations beyond one year of storage (Jayaraj et al., 2005). Sivakumar et al. (2012) reported that peat based formulation of P. fluorescensPf51 and B. subtilisB45 had a shelf life of 270 days with a viable population of 4.3×107 cfu/g and 6.2×107 cfu/g, respectively. Sallam et al. (2013) recorded that the population of B. Subtilis and B. cereus on talc and wood flour formulations produced viable colonies up to 150 days after storage thereafter population declined. Dohroo and Gupta (2014) reported that highest microbial count was recorded in T. harzianum (8.3×108 cfu/g)and B. subtilis (5.6×108 cfu/g) at zero days which was reduced to 2.2×108 cfu/g and 2.0×108 cfu/g, respectively after 80 days of storage at ambient temperature.

Mechanisms involved in bio-control of plant pathogenic fungi Mechanisms involved in Pseudomonas Pseudomonas is a genus of non-spore-forming, gram-negative, rod-shaped bacteria. Along with Bacillus, the two groups of bacteria are usually found in isolates from different environments, including bulk and rhizosphere soil (Compant et al., 2005; Haas and Defago, 2005). Pseudomonas is a genus of natural bacterial agents living in disease-suppressive soils (Weller, 2007). Due to their various genetic and phenotypic characteristics, members of this genus have a good potential to be used as biocontrol agents. Pseudomonas is capable of rapid growth and therefore shows good colonization in the rhizosphere. One reason for this is that it can use various substrates as nutrients and survive in different conditions that would be stressful for other bacteria. Its ability to produce various compounds such as antibiotics, polysaccharides and siderophores is also crucial. The impact that Pseudomonas has had in recent years is enormous, being one of the best-known genera of bacteria, with a great potential to inhibit pathogens and the diseases they cause (Raaijmakers and Weller, 2001; Chapon et al., 2002; Steddom et al., 2002).

Colonization and competition for niches in the rhizosphere The rhizosphere is a highly competitive ecosystem for its space, food and protection from various biotic and abiotic stresses (Raaijmakers et al., 2002). Pseudomonas are particularly good colonizers of space in the rhizosphere, especially where there is low nutrient availability. The synthesis of lipopolysaccharides by rhizobacteria is important for spatial colonization in the rhizosphere, and in the case of Pseudomonas, it is also a crucial factor, although this may dependent on specific species or strains (Lugtenberg and Dekkers, 1999; Lugtenberg et al., 2001). The use of different carbon sources, motility, chemostactic responses, among other factors, is also important for occupying space and limiting the growth of pathogens in the rhizosphere (Compant et al., 2005). Another important factor for the colonization of plant roots, especially under iron- limiting conditions, is the synthesis of siderophores from Pseudomonas, which are iron- chelating compounds (Cornelis, 2010). Pseudomonas siderophores have a high affinity for iron, and when they chelate this micro-nutrient, they made it less available for other microorganisms, including plant pathogens (Kloepper et al., 1980; Weller, 2007). This mechanism is considered indirect plant growth promotion by Pseudomonas. In particular, Pseudomonas can synthesise siderophores in iron limiting conditions, being a factor that induces gene expression in operons involved in siderophore synthesis. Other environmental factors such as pH, presence of trace elements, nitrogen, phosphorus and carbon, are also important (Duffy and Defago, 1999).

Iron-chelating compounds Synthesis of iron-chelating compounds, such as siderophores, by Pseudomonas is a characteristic feature visible in some isolates from bulk or rhizosphere soils. In culture media

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management with trace amounts of iron, a yellow-green halo can be observed, which may be fluorescent under ultraviolet light (Loper and Buyer, 1991). Pseudomonas isolates were selected from the rhizosphere of potato plants, which presented a good production of pseudobactin-type siderophores (Valencia-Cantero et al., 2005). Siderophores from some pathogens do not play a role in pathogenesis. For instance, the phytopathogenic bacteria Pseudomonas syringaepv. tomato DC3000 is capable of producing three types of siderophores (yersiniabactin, pyoverdin and citrate), which are required for growth in iron-limiting conditions (Buell et al., 2003).

Synthesis of antibiotics Many bacteria, particularly members of the Pseudomonas genus, have the ability to synthesise antibiotics. Various strains of Pseudomonas capable of synthesising a wide spectrum of antibiotics have been isolated and characterised by their suppressive activity against plant pathogens, which results in better agricultural production (Weller, 1988). Pseudomonas synthesise several compounds with antimicrobial activity, such as pyoluteorin (Plt), phenazine-1-carboxylic acid (PCA), 2,4-diacetylphloroglucinol (DAPG), pyrrolnitrin (Prn), hydrogen cyanide (HCN) and pyoluteorin (Plt) and bacteriocins (Voisard et al., 1989; Weller et al,. 2002; Haas and Keel, 2003; Validov et al., 2005). Some fluorescent pseudomonas strains are able to synthesise a wide range of compounds. For example, the strain CHAO produces more than 10 compounds with pathogen biocontrol activity and plant- growth promotion, such as DAPG, Plt, Prn, HCN, indole acetic acid, salicylic acid, pyochelin and siderophores (Haas and Defago, 2005).

Biocontrol mechanisms in Bacillus Species Bacillus is a genus of spore-forming, gram-positive, rod-shaped bacteria. Plant- growth promotion of Bacillus can be divided into direct and indirect mechanisms. The latter consists of methods through which bacteria synthesise antibiotics or other compounds, having an inhibitory effect on pathogenic organisms in the rhizosphere (Glick, 1995; Ahmad et al., 2008), whereas the former consists of methods through which the bacteria can positively influence plant growth through synthesis and excretion of auxin or cytokinin (Ahmad et al., 2008). Other direct methods include access to nutrients trough P solubilisation or Fe reduction in rhizosphere by PGP bacteria (Orozco-Mosqueda et al., 2013).

Phytostimulation The genus Bacillus has shown the ability to produce and excrete cytokinins in the rhizosphere, thus positively influencing plant growth. Arkhipova et al. (2005) analyzed the ability of different strains of B. subtilis to synthesise zeatin riboside-type cytokinins (ZR), dihydrozeatin riboside (DHZR) and isopentenyl adenosine (IPA). In experiments where strains of Bacillus were inoculated into lettuce plants, it was observed that after two weeks, the tissues of roots and shoots contained a greater amount of cytokinin than plants without inoculation. The accumulation of cytokinins was associated with a 30% increase in plant weight. Notably, high levels of other plant hormones, such as indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) and abscisic acid (ABA), were also observed. This suggests that strains of Bacillus have a dual effect on plant-growth, promoting it by accumulation of cytokinins and by increasing other routes of synthesis of hormones such as IAA and ABA, as well as interfering in other hormonal balance synthesis such as gibberellins (GA) (Arkhipova et al., 2005). Bacillus synthesise a variety of hormones that influence plant growth and development. Such is the case of auxin (from the Greek word auxein, ‘to grow’), which is a hormone that plays a role in development. Idris et al. (2007) detected high levels of auxin (indole-3-acetic acid, IAA) in cell free culture filtrates of strains of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (FZB24, FZB42 and FZB45) and B. subtilis (FZB37). The Bacillus culture supernatants had a positive effect on maize germination and coleoptile curvature. Valencia-Cantero et al. (2007) isolated and characterised four bacterial strains (UMCV1, UMCV2, UMCV3 and UMCV4) from the rhizosphere of bean plants and maize, whose important feature was the ability to reduce Fe (III) to Fe (II). In in vitro experiments, B. megaterium UMCV1 was inoculated onto

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management bean plants, which showed a higher concentration of iron in the tissue and increased biomass, compared to uninoculated plants. This plant growth promotion was attributed to the ability of B. megaterium to reduce iron and make it available to the plant (Valencia-Cantero et al., 2007).

Lipopeptides Various strains of Bacillus have the ability to synthesise lipopeptide-type compounds, which have been studied for their antagonistic activity against plant pathogens (Chen et al., 2009; Leon et al., 2009). In particular, lipopeptides from the fengycin, surfactin and iturin families have been shown to effectively suppress the growth of pathogens (Ongena et al., 2005; Chen et al., 2009). Romero et al. (2007) reported the isolation and purification of several lipopeptides from four Bacillus strains, which showed to have a strong inhibitory effect on Podosphaera fusca conidial germination. Lipopeptides such as bacillomycin, fengycin and iturin A were responsible for the antagonistic activity. The above studies show that different Bacillus strains have a great potential for producing inhibitory compounds against different species of fungal organisms.

REFERENCES Achmad and Arshinta, P. (2014). Pathogenicity of Botryodiplodia sp. on the seedling and growth characterization of Jabon (Anthocephalus cadamba) (Roxb.) Miq.). Asian J. Pl. Pathol., 8:55-62. Adeniyi, D.O., Adedeji, A.R., Oduwaye, O.F. and Kolawole, O.O. (2013).Evaluation of bio-control agents against Lasiodiplodia theobromae causing inflorescence blight of Cashew in Nigeria. J. Agri. Veterinary Sci., 5:46-48. Ahmad, F., Ahmad, I. and Khan, M.S. (2008). Screening of free-living rhizospheric bacteria for their multiple plant growth promoting activities. Microbiological Res.,163:173-181. Alam, M.S., Begum, M.F., Sarkar, M.A., Islam, M.R. and Alam, M.S. (2001). Effect of temperature, light and media on growth, sporulation, formation of pigments andpycnidia of Botryodiplodia theobromae. Pat. Pak. J. Biol. Sci., 4:1224-1227. Alvindia, D.G. and Natsuaki, K. (2009). Bio-control activities of Bacillus amyloliquefaciensDGA14 isolated from banana fruit surface against banana crown rot- causing pathogens. CropProtection, 28:236-242. Amer, G.A. and Utkhede, R.S. (2000). Development of formulations of biological agents for the management of root rot of lettuce and cucumber. Can. J. Microbiol., 46:809-816. Anonymous, (2010). Pakistan Statistical Year book 2010. Federal Bureau of Statistics, Ministry of Economic Affaris and Statistics, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad. Arinze, A.E. (2005). Plant Pathology and Post-harvest food loss. An Inaugural Lecture Series, 43:29-72. Arjunan, G., Karthikeyan, G., Dinakaran, D. and Raguchander, T. (1999). Diseases of horticultural crops, A.E Publications, Coimbatore. pp. 56-92. Arkhipova, T.N., Veselov, S.U., Melentiev, A.I., Martynenko, E.V. and Kudoyarova, G.R. (2005). Ability of bacterium Bacillus subtilis to produce cytokinins and to influence the growth and endogenous hormone content of lettuce plants. Plant and Soil, 272:201- 209. Baker, R. (1990). An over view of current and future strategies and models for biological control. In: Biological control of soil-borne plant pathogens. Hornby, D. (Ed.). CAB, International, Wallingford, UK. pp. 250. Bapat, S. and Shah, A.K. (2000). Biological control of fusarial wilt of pigeon pea by Bacillus brevis. Can. J. Microbiol., 46:125-132. Becker, O.J. and Schwin, F.J. (1993). Control of soil-borne pathogens with living bacteria and fungi. Status and Outlook Pesticide Science, 37: 355-363.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Bilgrami, K.S. and Dube, H.C. (1970). A text book on Modern Plant Pathology, 1985 Edn. Vani Educational Books. Sahidabad. pp. 315. Buell, C.R., Joardar, V., Lindeberg, M., Selengut, J., Paulsen, I.T., Gwinn, M.L., Dodson, R.J., Deboy, R.T., Durkin, A.S., Kolonay, J.F., Madupu, R., Daugherty, S., Brinkac, L., Beanan, M.J., Haft, D.H., Nelson, W.C., Davidsen, T., Zafar, N., Zhou, L., Liu, J., Yuan, Q., Khouri, H., Fedorova, N., Tran, B., Russell, D., Berry, K., Utterback, T., Van Aken, S.E., Feldblyum, T.V., D’Ascenzo, M., Deng, W.L., Ramos, A.R., Alfano, J.R., Cartinhour, S., Chatterjee, A.K., Delaney, T.P., Lazarowitz, S.G., Martin, G.B., Schneider, D.J., Tang, X., Bender, C.L., White, O., Fraser, C.M. and Collmer, A. (2003). The Complete genome sequence of the Arabidopsis and tomato pathogen Pseudomonassyringaepv. tomato DC3000. Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences, USA, 100:10181-10186. Chapon, A., Guillerm, A.Y., Delalane, L., Lebreton, L. and Sarniguet, A. (2002). Dominant colonisation of wheat roots by Pseudomonasfluorescens Pf29a and selection of the indigenous microflora in the presence of the take-all fungus. Euro. J. Pl. Pathol., 108:449-459. Chaudhuri, T., Birendranath, and Saha, P.J. (2017). Cultural and morphological characteristics of Lasiodiplodia theobromae of Dianellain various carbon and nitrogen containing media. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 6(6):160-164. Chen, X.H., Koumoutsi, A., Scholz, R., Schneider, K., Vater, J., Susmuth, R., Piel, J. and Borriss, R.J. (2009). Genome analysis of Bacillusamyloliquefaciens FZB42 reveals its potential for bio-control of plant pathogens. Biotechnology, 140:27-37. Compant, S., Duffy, B., Nowak, J., Clement, C. and Barka, E.A. (2005). Use of plant growth-promoting bacteria for bio-control of plant diseases: Principles, mechanisms of action, and future prospects. Appl. Environ.Microbiol., 71: 4951-4959. Cornelis, P. (2010). Iron uptake and metabolism in pseudomonads. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 86:1637-1645. Crous, P.W., Slippers, B., Wingfield, M.J., Rheeder, J., Marasas, W.F.O., Phillips, A.J.L., Alves, A., Burgess, T., Barber, P. and Groenewald, J.Z. (2006). Phylogenetic lineages in the Botryosphaeriaceae. Studies In Mycology 55:235-253. Daayf, F., Bel-Rhlid, R. and Belanger, R. (1997). Methyl ester of P-coumaric acid: a phytoalexin-like compound from long English cucumber leaves. Journal of Chemical Ecology.23:1517-1526. Djeugap Fovo, J., Dostaler, D. and Bernier, L. (2017). Influence of culture media and temperature on growth and sporulation of Lasiodiplodia theobromae, Pestalotiopsis microspora and Fusarium oxysporum isolated from Ricinodendron heudelotiiin Cameroon. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci., 6(6): 3098-3112. Dohroo, N.P. and Gupta, M. (2014). Effect of bio-agents on management of rhizome disease, plant growth parameters and nematode population in ginger. Agric. Sci. Digest, 34:41-44. Domsch, K.H., Gimas, W. and Anderson, T.H. (2007). Compendium of soil fungi, 2nd Ed. Cornell Univeristy, England. Duffy, B.K. and Defago, G. (1999). Environmental factors modulating antibiotic and siderophore biosynthesis by Pseudomonasfluorescens bio-control strains. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 65:2429-2438. Durgadevi, D. 2011. Investigation on peduncle blight of tuberose (Polianthes tuberosa Linn.) caused by Lasiodiplodia theobromae (Pat.) Griffon and Maubi. M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis, Agricultural College and Research Institute, Madurai, TNAU. Durgadevi, D. and Sankaralingam. A. (2012). First report of peduncle blight of tuberose caused by Lasiodiplodia theobromae in India. New Dis. Reports, 26:5-5. EI-Banna, O.H., Haggag, W.M. and Ai-Ansay, N.A. (2015). Biological products to control grapevine die-back pathogen. J. Chem. Pharm. Res., 7:545-555.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Faber, G.A., Bender, G.S. and Ohr, H.D. (2007). Diseases, UC IPM Pest Management Gudielines. UC, ANR publications, pp:3436. Fu, G., Huang, S.I., Wei, J.G., Yuan, G.Q., Ren, J.G., Yan, W.H. and Cen, Z.L. (2007). First record of Jatrophapodagrica gummosis caused by Botryodiplodiatheobromae in china. Aust. Pl. Dis. Notes, 2:75-76. Georgakopoulos, D.G., Fiddaman, P., Leifert, C. and Malathrakis, N.E. (2002). Biological control of cucumber and sugar beet damping-off caused by Pythium ultimum with bacterial and fungal antagonists. J. Appl. Microbiol., 92: 1078-1086. Glick, B.R. (1995). The enhancement of plant growth by free-living bacteria. Can. J. Microbiol., 41:109-117. Haas, D. and Defago, G. (2005). Biological control of soil-borne pathogens by fluorescent pseudomonads. Nature Rev. Microbiol., 3:307-319. Haas, D. and Keel, C. (2003). Regulation of antibiotic production in root-colonizing Pseudomonas spp. and relevance for biological control of plant disease. Ann. Rev. Phytopathol., 41:117-153. Halfeld, B.A. and Nechet, K. (2005). Lasiodiplodiatheobromae causing coconut fall in Roraima. Fitopatologia Brasileria, 30:203. Haque, A., Khalequzzaman, K., M., Islam, S. and Hossain, M.M. (2003). Survey on the prevalence of market disease of banana. Pak. J. Pl. Pathol., 2:169-173. Hawksworth, D.L., Kirk, P.M., Sutton, B.C, and Pegler, D.N. (1995). Ainsworth and Bisby’s Dictionary of the Fungi. 8th edition, CAB Int., Wallinford, Oxan, UK. Hegde, Y.R. Keshgond, R.S. (2015). Physiological studies in Botryodiplodia theobromae infecting Jatrophacurcas. J. Environ. Biol., 33:1355-1357. Holb, I.J. and Chauhan, S.V.S. (2005). Effect of carbohydrate and nitrogen sources on the growth rates of Monilia fructigena and Monilia polystroma isolates. J. Mycol. Pl. Pathol., 35:128-131. Idris, E.E., Iglesias, D.J., Talon, M. and Borris, R. (2007). Tryptophan-dependent production of Indole-3- acetic Acid (IAA) affects level of plant growth promotion by Bacillusamyloliquefaciens FZB42. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact., 20: 619-626. Jagtap, G.P. (2002). BioshieldTM (Pseudomonasfluorescens): more than biopesticide. Pestol., 2:38-41. Jayaraj, J. and Radhakrishnan, N.V. (2008). Enhanced activity of introduced bio-control agents in solarised soils and its implications on the integrated control of tomato damping-off caused by Pythium spp. Plant and Soil, 304:189-197. Jayaraj, J., Radhakrishnan, N.V., Kannan, R., Sakthivel, K., Suganya, D., Venkatesan, S. andVelazhahan, R. (2005). Development of new formulation of Bacillussubtilisfor management of tomato damping-off caused by Pythiumaphanidermatum. Bio-control Sci. Technol., 15:1-11. Jayarajan, R., Ramakrishnan, G., Dinakaran, D. and Sridhar, R. (1994). Development of productof Trichoderma viride and Bacillus subtillsfor bio-control of root rot disease, pp. 26-36. In: Dwivedi, B.K. (eds.) Biotechnology in India. Bioved Research society Allahabad, India. Johnson, M., Narayan Reddy, P. and Rajaram Reddy, D. (2008). Comparative efficacy of rhizosphere mycoflora, fungicides, insecticides and herbicides against groundnut stem rot caused by Sclerotium rolfsii. Ann. Pl. Prot. Sci., 16:414-418. Kausar, P., Chohan, S. and Parveen, R. (2009). Physiological studies on Lasiodiplodiatheobromae and Fusariumsolani, the cause of sesame decline. Mycopathol., 7:35-38. Kedar, N., Solanky, K.U. and Kumawat G.L. (2014). Effective approaches of potential bio-agent, phytoextract, fungicide and cultural practice for management of banana fruit rot disease. Plant Pathol. Microbiol.,5: 6-10.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Khanzada, M. A. Rajput A. Q. and Shahzad, S. (2006). Effect of medium, temperature, light and inorganic fertilizers on in vitro growth and sporulation of Lasiodiplodiatheobromae isolated from mango. Pak. J. Bot., 38:885-889. Khanzada, M.A., Lodhi, A.M. and Shahzad, S. (2004). Pathogenicity of Lasiodiplodia theobromae and Fusarium solani on mango. Pak. J. Bot., 36:181-189. Klessig, D.K. and Malamy, J. 1994. The salicylic acid signal in plants. Plant Molecular Biology, 26: 1439-1458. Kloepper, J.W., Leong, J., Teintze, M. and Schroth, M.N. (1980). Pseudomonas siderophores: A mechanism explaining disease-suppressive soils. Curr. Microbiol., 4:317-320. Kunz, R., Wijerataam, S.W., Jacnikle, H. and Heller, J. (2006). Control of post-harvest disease (Botryodiplodiasp.) of rambutan (Nepheliumlappaceum) and annona (Annonasp.) by using a bio-control agent (Trichoderma spp.) in Sri Lanka In: Prosperity and Poverty in Globalized World-challanges for Agricultural Research. Tropentag, pp.11-13. Latha, P., Prakasam, V., Jonathan, E.I., Samiyappan, R. and Natarajan, C. (2013). Effect of culture media and environmental factors on mycelia growth and pycinidial production Lasiodiplodiatheobromae in Physic nut (Jatrophacurcas). J. Environ. Biol., 34:683-687. Leon, M., Yaryura, P.M., Montecchia, M.S., Hernandez, A.I., Correa, O.S., Pucheu, N.L., Kerber, N.L. and Garcia, A.F. (2009). Antifungal activity of selected indigenous Pseudomonas and Bacillus from the soybean rhizosphere. Int. J. Microbiol., Article ID 572049. doi: 10.1155/2009/572049.. Li, D.M. and Alexander, M. (1998). Co-inoculation with antibiotic-producing bacteria to increase colonization and nodulation by rhizobia. Plant and Soil, 108:211-219. Lilly, V.G. and Barnett, H.L. (1951). Physiology of the Fungi. Mc Graw Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, pp.464. Loper, J.E. and Buyer, J.S. (1991). Siderophores in microbial interactions on plant surfaces. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact., 4:5-13. Lugtenberg, B.J. and Dekkers, L.C. (1999). What makes Pseudomonas bacteria rhizosphere competent.Environ.Microbiol., 1:9-13. Lugtenberg, B.J., Dekkers, L. and Bloemberg, G.V. (2001). Molecular determinants of rhizosphere colonization by Pseudomonas. Ann.Rev.Phytopathol., 39:461-490. Mbenoun, M., Momo Zeuts, E.H., Samuels, G., Amougou, N. and Nyasse, S. (2008).Die- back due to Lasiodiplodia theobromae, a new constraint to cocoa production in Cameroon. Plant Pathol.,57:381. Muthukumar, A. (2009). Trichoderma viride and Pseudomonas fluorescens formulation against Pythium aphanidermatumin vitro. Indian J. Plant Protect., 37:204-206. Muthukumar, A. and Sangeetha, G. (2011). A new record of die-back on hippestrum from Tamil Nadu. J. Mycol. Pl. Pathol., 41:120-122. Nakkeeran, S., Kavitha, K., Chandrasekar, G., Renukadevi, P. and Fernando, W.G.D. (2006). Induction of plant defence compounds by Pseudomonas chlororaphis PA 23 and Bacillus subtilis BSCBE4 in controlling damping-off of hot pepper caused by Pythium aphanidermatum. Bio-control Sci. Technol., 16:403-416. Nakkeeran, S., Kavitha, K., Chandrasekar, G., Renukadevi, P. and Fernando, W.G.D. (2006). Induction of plant defence compounds by Pseudomonas chlororaphis PA 23 and Bacillus subtilis BSCBE4 in controlling damping-off of hot pepper caused by Pythium aphanidermatum. Bio-control Sci. Technol., 16: 403-416. Nogueira Júnior A.F., Santos R.F., Pagenotto A.C.V. and Spósito, M.B. (2017). First report of Lasiodiplodia theobromae causing fruit rot of persimmon in Brazil. New Disease Reports, 1:36. Okigbo, R.N. (2005). Biological control of post harvest fungal rot of yam (Dioscorea sp.) with Bacillus subtilis. Mycopathologia, 159:307-314.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Okigbo, R.N. and Emeka, A.N. (2010). Biological control of rot-inducing fungi of water yam (Dioscoreaalata) with Trichodermaharzianum, Pseudomonassyringae and Pseudomonaschlororaphis. J. Stored Products and Post Harvest Research, 12:18-23. Okigo, R.N. and Ikediugwu F.E. (2000). Studies on biological control of post-harvest rot in yams(Dioscorea spp.)using Trichoderma viride. J. Phytopathol., 148:351-355. Ongena, M., Jacques, P., Toure, Y., Destain, J., Jabrane, A. and Thonart, P. (2005).Involvement of fengycin-type lipopeptides in the multifaceted bio-control potential of Bacillussubtilis. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 69:29-38. Onyenka, T.J., Dixon, A.G.O. and Ekpo, E.J.A. (2005). Identification of levels of resistance to cassava root rot disease (Botryodiplodia theobromae) in Africa landrace and improved germplasm using in vitro inoculation methods. Eu. hytica, 14:281-288. Opoku, I.Y., Assuah, M.K. and Domfeh, O. (2007). Manual for the identification and control of disease of cocoa. Cocoa Research Institute of Ghana-Ghana, Cocoa Board, Ghana. TechnicalBulletin, 16:18-19 Orozco-Mosqueda Madel, C., Velazquez-Becerra, C., Macias-Rodrıguez, L.I., Santoyo, G., Flores-Cortez, I., Alfaro-Cuevas, A. and Valencia-Cantero, E. (2013).Arthrobacter UMCV2 induces iron acquisition I Medicagotruncatula (Strategy I Plant) in vitro via dimethyl hexa decylamine emission. Plant and Soil,362:51-66. Parveen, K. and Sobia Rashida, V.B. (2009). Studies on Lasiodiplodiatheobromae and Fusariumsolani, the cause of Shesham decline. Mycopathol., 7:35-38. Patil, L.V., V.B., Shinde, R.S.D., Ghawadeand, S.H. and Ware. (2006). Physiological and nutritional studies of (Botryodiploidia theobromae) Pathogen causing die-back disease of mango. J. Plant Disease. Sci., 1:216-218. Pegg, K.G., Coates, L.M., Korsten, L. and Harding, R.M. (2003). Foliar, fruits and soil- borne diseases. pp. 299-337. A.W. Whiley, A.W., Schaffer, B. and Wolstenholme, B.N. (des.). The Avocado: Botany, Production, and Uses. CABI Publishing, UK. pp. 560. Ploetz, R.C. 2003. Diseases of Tropical fruit crops. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK. pp.76-77. Prajapati, H.N., Patel, J.K. and Patil, R.R. (2014). Lasiodiplodiatheobromae the causal agent of root rot and collar rot of biofuel plant (Jatrophacurcas) and its variability. J. Plant Dis., 29:174-177. Raaijmakers, J.M. and Weller, D.M. (2001). Exploiting genotypic diversity of 2, 4- diacetyl phloroglucinol-producing Pseudomonas spp: Characterization of superior root- colonizing Pseudomonas fluorescens strain Q8r1-96. Appl. Environ.Microbiol., 67:2545- 2554. Raaijmakers, J.M., Vandersulis, I., Koster, M., Bakker, P., Weisbeek, P.J. and Schippers, B. (1995). Utilization of heterologus siderophores and rhizosphere competence of fluorescent Pseudomonas spp. Can. J. Microbiol., 41:126-135. Raaijmakers, J.M., Vlami, M. and De Souza, J.T. (2002). Antibiotic production by bacterial biocontrol agents. AntonieVanLeeuwenhoek, 81:537-547. Ray, R.C., Nedunzhiyan, M. and Balagopalan, C. (2000). Microorganism associated with post harvest spoilage of yam. Ann. Trop. Res., 22:31-40. Romero, D., De Vicente, A., Rakotoaly, R.H., Dufour, S.E., Veening, J.W., Arrebola, E., Cazorla, F.M., Kuipers, O.P., Paquot, M. and Perez-Garcıa, A. (2007). The Iturin and fengycin families of lipopeptides are key factors in antagonism of Bacillussubtilis towards Podosphaerafusca. Mol. Plant-MicrobeInteract., 20:430-440. Rossel, G., Espinoza C., Javier, M. and Tay, D. (2008). Regeneration guidelines: Sweet potato and Yam. In: Dulloo M.E., Thormann I., Jorge M.A. and Hanson, J. Crop Specific Regeneration Guidelines. CGIAR System-wide Genetic Resource Programme, Italy. pp.9. Safdar, A., Khan, S.A. and Safdar, M.A. (2015). Pathogenic assiociation and management of Botryodiplodia theobromae in guava orchards at sheikhupura District, Pakistan. Int. J. Agri. Bio., 17:297-304.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Saha, A.P., Mandal, S., Dasgupta and D. Saha. (2008). Influence of culture media and environmental factors on mycelial growth and sporulation of Lasiodiplodia theobromae (Pat).Griffon and Maubl. J. Environ.Biol., 29:407-410. Salaheddin, K., Valluvaparidasan, V., Ladhalakshmi, D. and Velazhahan, R. (2010). Management of bacterial blight of cotton using a mixture of Pseudomonas fluorescens and Bacillus subtilis. Plant Prot. Sci., 46: 41-50. Sallam, N.A., Riad, S.N., Mohamed, M.A. and EI-Eslam, A.S. (2013). Formulations of Bacillus spp. and Pseudomonas fluorescens for biological control of Cantaloupe root rot caused by Fusarium solani. J. Plant Prot. Res., 53:295-300. Sandikar, B.M. and Awasthi, R.S. (2010). Preparation and shelf life study of Pseudomonas and Bacillus bioformulations against phytopathogenic Pythium and Fusarium species. J. Plant Prot., 2:251-254. Sangeetha, G. (2006). Identification, molecular characterization and biological control of crown rot disease complex in banana. Ph.D., Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture Annamalai University, pp.199. Sankar, G.T., Gopi, Y. Hema Bharathi, K. Gopal and L. Mukunda Lakshmi. (2016). Growth of Botryodiplodia theobromae an incitant of longitudinal splitting of bark and wood disease in Acidlime (Citrus aurantifolia Swingle) as influenced by pH levels, temperature and growth media. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci.,5(12): 756-764. Schoch, C.L., Shoemaker, R.A., Seifert, K.A., Hambleton, S.S., Patafora, J.W. and Crous, P.W. (2006). A multigene phyologeny of the Dothideomycetes using four nuclear loci. Mycologia, 98:1041-1052. Shah, M.D. and K.S.Verma, (2009). Effect of temperature and pH on growth and sporulation of Botryodiplodia theobromae isolates and their cultural variability. J. Mycol. PlantPathol.,39:227-230. Shahbaz, M., Iqbal, Z., Sallem, A. and Anjum, M.A. (2009). Association of Lasiodiplodia theobromae with different decline disorders in mango (Mangiferaindica L.) Pak. J. Bot., 41: 359-368. Sharma, R.N., Maharshi, R.P. and Gaur, R.B. (2009). Management of stem end rot of Citrus deliciosa through bio-agents. Ann. Plant Prot., Sci., 17:114-118. Sivakumar, G., Josephrajkumar, A. and Dhanya, M.K. (2012). Evaluation of bacterial antagonists for the management of rhizome rot of cardamom (Elettaria cardamomum Maton).Journal of Spices and Aromatic Crops, 21:9-15. Slippers, B., Oissin, E., Phillips, A.J.L., Groenewald, J.Z., Lombard, L., Wingfield, M.J., Postma, A., Burgess, T. and Crous, P.W. (2013). Phylogenetic lineages in the Botryosphaeriales: A systematic and evolutionary frame work. Studies in Mycology, 76:31-499. Steddom, K., Menge, J.A., Crowley, D., and Borneman, J. (2002). Effect of repetitive applications of the bio-control bacterium Pseudomonasputida 06909-rif/nal on citrus soil microbial communities. Phytopathology, 92:857-862. Sundaramoorthy, S. and Balabaskar, P. (2013). Evaluation of combined efficacy of Pseudomonas fluorescens and Bacillus subtilis in managing tomato wilt caused by Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici (Fol). Pl. Pathol. J., 12:154-161. Sutton, B.C. (1980). The Coelomycetes. Common wealth MycologicalInst., Kew, Surrey. Swain, M.R. and Ray, R.C. (2007). Bio-control and other beneficial activities of Bacillus subtilis isolated from cowdung microflora. Microbiol. Res., 46:1-17. Swain, M.R., Ray, R.C. and Nautiyal, C.S. (2008). Biocontrol efficacy of Bacillus subtilis strains isolated from cow dung against from post-harvest yam (Dioscorea rotundata L.) pathogens. Curr. Microbiol., 57:407-411. Swapna Priya, K. and Nagaveni, H.C. (2009). In vitro screening of Trichoderma sp. aganist Lasiodiplodiatheobromae causing fruit rot of Elaeocarpusmunronii. Indian J. Pl. Prot., 37:166-169.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Thilakavathi, R., Saravanakumar, D., Ragupathi, N. and Samiyappan, R. (2007). A combination of bio-control agents improves the management of dry root rot (Macrophomina phaseolina) in green gram. Phytopathol. Medit., 46:157-167. Twumasi, P., Moses, E. and Ohene Mensah, G. (2013). Molecular characterization of cocoa, mango, banana and yam isolates of Botryodiplodia theobromae in Ghana. J. Ghana Sci., Ass., 15:42-52. Valencia-Cantero, E., Villegas-Moreno, J., Sanchez-Yanez, J.M., Pena-Cabriales, J.J. and Farıas-Rodrıguez, Y.R. (2005). Inhibition del crecimiento de Fusariumoxysporum porcepas mutantes de Pseudomonasfluorescens Zum80 incapaces de producing siderophores. Terra Latino Americana, 23:65-72. Validov, S., Mavrodi, O., De La Fuente, L., Boronin, A., Weller, D., Thomashow, L. and Mavrodi, D. (2005). Antagonistic activity among 2, 4-diacety lphloroglucinol producing fluorescent pseudomonas spp. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 242:249-256. Vasquez, Lopez-Lopez, A., Mora-Aguilera, J.A., Cardenas-Sornao, A.Y. and Teliz-Oritz, D. (2009). Etiologiae histopathologia delamuerte descendente de arboles de mamey (Pouteriasapota (Jacq.) H.E. Moorey stearn) en el estado de Guerrero, Mexico. Agrociencia, 43:717-728. Vidhya, R. (1995). Studies on biological control of root rot (Macrophominaphaseolina (Tassi.) Goid.) byTrichodermaviride Pers. M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, India. Vidhyasekaran, P. and Muthamilan, M. (1995). Development of formulations on Pseudomonas fluroescens for control of chick pea wilt. Plant Dis., 79: 782-786. Vidhyasekaran, P., Muthamilan, M.M., Rabindran, R., Sethuraman, K. and Anantha Kumar, C.M. (1996). Development of a powder formulation of Pseudomonas fluorescens for seed, soil and foliar applications to control root and foliar pathogens, pp.93-96. In: ManibhushanRao, K. and Mahadevan, A. (EDS.) CurrentTrents in Life Sciences,(21). Recent trends in biocontrol of plant Pathogens, New Delhi. Voisard, C., Keel, C., Haas, D. and Defago, G. (1989). Cyanide production by Pseudomonasfluorescens helps suppress black root rot of tobacco under genobiotic conditions. The EMBO Journal, 8:351-358. Weller, D.M. (1988). Biological control of soil-borne plant pathogens in the rhizosphere with Bacteria. Ann. Review of Phytopathol., 26:379-407. Weller, D.M. (2007). Pseudomonas bio-control agents of soil-borne pathogens: Looking back over 30 Years. Phytopathology, 97:250-256. Weller, D.M., Raaijmakers, J.M., Spadden, M.C., Gardener, B.B. and Thomashow, L.S. (2002). Microbial populations responsible for specific soil suppressiveness to Plant Pathogens. Ann. Review of Phytopathol., 40: 309-348. Wood, P.M. and Wood, C.E. (2005). Cane die-back of dawn seedless table grapevines (Vitis vinifera) in Western Australia caused by Botryosphaeria rhodina. Australas. Plant Pathol., 34:393-395. Zambettakis, E.C. (1954). Recherches surla systematiquedes Sphaeropsidales- Phaeodidymae. Bull. Trimest. Soc. Mycol. Fr., 70:219-349.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

POST-HARVEST LOSSES IN PERISHABLE FOODS Asha Kumari Department of Agricultural Processing and Food Engineering, SVCAET&RS, IGKV, Raipur

INTRODUCTION India is second largest producer of food next to China with estimated food processing industry size at US$ 70 billion. In 2012, the production was 257 million tonnes of food grain (rice, wheat, coarse grains and pulses), 75 million tonnes of fruits and 149 million tonnes of vegetables. Out of these amounts, only 2.2 % of these are processed. In contrast, countries like USA (65%) and China (23%) are far ahead of India in reducing the wastage and enhancing the value addition and shelf life of the farm products. The losses in postharvest sector are estimated to be from 10 to 25 per cent in durables, semi-perishables and products like milk, meat, fish and eggs. Post-harvest Food Loss (PHL) is defined as measurable qualitative and quantitative food loss along the supply chain, starting at the time of harvest till its consumption or other end uses. PHLs can occur either due to food wastage or due to inadvertent losses along the way. The most important goals of post-harvest handling are to keep the product cool, thereby avoiding moisture loss and slowing down undesirable chemical changes and to avoid physical damage such as bruising in order to delay spoilage. This in turn will help ensure increased food security, as food security goes beyond food production to include distribution and marketing, adequate and stable supply, and accessibility to food. Perishable foods are those that will spoil the most quickly and require refrigeration. Non- perishable foods, on the other hand, are those that will take a very, very long time to spoil and don't require refrigeration. Maximum post-harvest losses of different commodity including cereals, pulses, oilseeds, fruits and vegetables are compared as shown in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1 Maximum post-harvest losses of different commodities

Major Elements of the Post-Harvest System Harvesting The time of harvesting is determined by the degree of maturity. With cereals and pulses, a distinction should be made between maturity of stalks (straw), ears or seedpods and seeds, for all that affects successive operations, particularly storage and preservation.

Pre-harvest drying Generally, in case of cereals and pulses, extended pre-harvest field drying ensures good preservation but also heightens the risk of loss due to attack (birds, rodents, insects) and moulds encouraged by weather conditions, not to mention theft. On the other hand, harvesting before maturity entails the risk of loss through moulds and the decay of some of the seeds.

Transport Much care is needed in transporting a really mature harvest, in order to prevent detached grain from falling on the road before reaching the storage or threshing place.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Collection and initial transport of the harvest thus depend on the place and conditions where it is to be stored, especially with a view to threshing.

Post-harvest drying The length of time needed for full drying of ears and grains depends considerably on weather and atmospheric conditions. In structures for lengthy drying such as cribs, or even unroofed threshing floors or terraces, the harvest is exposed to wandering livestock and the depredations of birds, rodents or small ruminants. Apart from the actual wastage, the droppings left by these marauders often result in higher losses than what they actually eat. On the other hand, if grain is not dry enough, it is vulnerable to mould and can rot during storage. Moreover, if grain is too dry, it becomes brittle and can crack after threshing, during hulling or milling. This applies especially to rice if milling takes place a long time (two to three months) after the grain has matured, when it can cause heavy losses. During winnowing, broken grain can be removed with the husks and is also more susceptible to certain insects (e.g. flour beetles and weevils). Lastly, if grain is too dry, this means a loss of weight and hence a loss of money at the time of sale.

Threshing If a harvest is threshed before it is dry enough, this operation will most probably be incomplete and considered to be incorrect. Furthermore, if grain is threshed when it is too damp and then immediately heaped up or stored (in a granary or bags), it will be much more susceptible to attack from micro-organisms, thus limiting its preservation.

Storage Facilities, hygiene and monitoring must all be adequate for effective, long-term storage. In closed structures (granaries, warehouses, hermetic bins), control of cleanliness, temperature and humidity is particularly important. Damage caused by pests (insects, rodents) and moulds can lead to deterioration of facilities (e.g. mites in wooden posts) and result in losses in quality and food value as well as quantity.

Processing Excessive hulling or threshing can also result in grain losses, particularly in the case of rice hulling which can suffer cracks and lesions. The grain is then not only worth less, but also becomes vulnerable to insects such as the rice moth (Corcyra Cephalonia).

Marketing Marketing is the final and decisive element in the post-harvest system, although it can occur at various points in the agro-food chain, particularly at some stage in processing. Moreover, it cannot be separated from transport, which is an essential link in the system. Comparison between properties of non-perishable food crops (cereals) and perishable food crops (roots and tubers) regarding their storage capacity as mentioned in the FAO (1984) and referred by Knoth, (1993) is given in Table 1. The major chains of post-harvest activities through which losses occur are shown in Fig. 2.

Causes of Food Losses in Perishable Crops There are so many causes for losses in the post-harvest food chain that it helps to classify them into 2 groups and a number of sub-groups. Estimates of post–harvest losses in perishable staples (percent) are given in Table 2.

Primary Causes of Loss These are the causes that directly affect the food. They may be classified into the following groups:

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Table 1 Comparison between properties of Non-perishable and Perishable food crops regarding their storage capacity Non-perishable food crops Perishable food crops Harvest mainly seasonal, need for storage of Possibility of permanent or semi-permanent long duration production, needs for short-term storage Preliminary treatment (except threshing) of Processing in dried products as an the crop before storage exceptional alternative of the shortage of fresh products Products with low level of moisture content Products with high level of moisture in (10-15 percent or even less) general between 50-80 percent Small "fruits" of less than1g Voluminous and heavy fruits from 5g to 5kg or even more Respiratory activity very low of the stored High or even very high respiratory activity product, heat limited of stored products inducing a heat emission in particular in tropical climates Hard tissues, good protection against injuries Soft tissues, highly vulnerable Good natural disposition for storage even for Products easily perishable, natural several years disposition for storage between some weeks up to several months (strong influence of the varieties) Losses during storage mainly due to Losses due partly to endogenous factors exogenous factors (moisture, insects or (respiration, transpiration, germination) and rodents) partly to exogenous factors (rot, insects)

Fig. 2 The major chains of post-harvest activities through which losses occur

Table 2 Estimates of post–harvest losses in perishable staples (percent) Commodity Early TPI estimates1 NAS2 estimates Potatoes 8 to 30 5 to 40 Sweet Potatoes 35 to 65 55 to 95 Yam 5 to 15 10 to 60 Cassava - 10 Taro 12 to15 - Plantains 33 35 to 100 Biological Consumption of food by rodents, birds, monkeys and other large animals causes direct disappearance of food. Sometimes the level of contamination of food by the excreta, hair and feathers of animals and birds is so high that the food is condemned for human

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management consumption. Insects cause both weight losses through consumption of the food and quality losses because of their brass, webbing, excreta, heating, and unpleasant odours that they can impart to food.

Microbiological Microorganisms cause damage to stored foods (e.g., fungi and bacteria). Micro- organisms usually directly consume small amount of the food but they damage the food to the point that it becomes unacceptable because of rotting or other defects. Toxic substances elaborated by molds (known as mycotoxins), cause some food to be condemned and hence lost. The best-known mycotoxins are aflatoxin (a liver carcinogen), which is produced by the mold Aspergillus flavus. Another mycotoxin which is found in some processed apple and pear products is patulin, which is formed in the apple by rotting organisms such as Penicillium expansum which infect fresh apples before they are processed.

Physiological Natural respiratory losses which occur in all living organisms account for a significant level of weight loss and moreover, the process generates heat. Changes which occur during ripening, senescence, including wilting and termination of dormancy (e.g., sprouting) may increase the susceptibility of the commodity to mechanical damage or infection by pathogens. A reduction in nutritional level and consumer acceptance may also arise with these changes. Production of ethylene results in premature ripening of certain crops.

Psychological Human aversion, such as "I don't fancy eating that today". In some cases food will not be eaten because of religious taboos. Microbiological, mechanical and physiological factors cause most of the losses in perishable crops.

Secondary Causes of Loss Secondary causes of loss are those that load to conditions that encourage a primary cause of loss. They are usually the result of inadequate or non-assistant capital expenditures, technology and quality control. Following are some examples: 1. Inadequate harvesting, packaging and handling skills. 2. Lack of adequate containers for the transport and handling of perishables. 3. Storage facilities inadequate to protect the food. 4. Transportation inadequate to move the food to market before it spoils. 5. Inadequate refrigerated storage. 6. Inadequate drying equipment or poor drying season. 7. Traditional processing and marketing systems can be responsible for high losses. 8. Legal standards can affect the retention or rejection of food for human use by being too lax or unduly strict. 9. Conscientious, knowledgeable management is essential for maintaining tool in good condition during marketing and storage. 10. Bumper crops can overload the post-harvest handling system or exceed the consumption need and cause excessive wastage.

Technologies The major technologies for reducing losses in horticultural products are listed below followed by a statement of probable environmental effects from the named procedure. 1. Gentle handling Because of their soft texture, all horticultural products should be handled gently to minimize bruising and breaking of the skin. Bruising renders the product un-saleable to most people although it usually has minor effect upon the nutritional value. The skin of horticultural products is an effective barrier to most of the opportunistic bacteria and fungi that cause rotting of the tissues. Breaking of the skin also stimulates physiological deterioration and

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management dehydration. Careful digging and movement of roots and tubers significantly reduces postharvest losses. Careful handling of fruits and vegetables to minimize bruising and breaking of the skin likewise is a well-known method of reducing postharvest losses as is the provision of adequate shipping containers to protect the produce from bruising' and puncturing of the skin. Reducing the number of times the commodity is handled reduces the extent of mechanical damage. There are no adverse environmental effects to this technology. Thus careful digging, harvesting and handling, and appropriate packaging end transportation are environmentally count methods for reducing losses. Also, since damaged skin is the major entry point for fungal infections, some of which produce mycotoxins, gentle handling can improve the safety of the produce.

2. High humidity High humidity retards wilting and maintains the product in better condition. Most horticultural products store best in an atmosphere that has a relative humidity of 90% (Lutz and Hardenburg (1968). Providing humidity has little environmental cost.

3. Waxing of the surface Waxing the surface of horticultural products is a treatment used on a number of commodities including citrus fruits, apples, rutabagas and cucumbers. It retards the rate of moisture loss, and maintains turgor and plumpness and may modify the internal atmosphere of the commodity, and is performed primarily for its cosmetic effect; the wax imparts a gloss to the skin and gives the produce a shinier appearance than the un-waxed commodity. Sometimes anti-waxing is a technique that could probably be used more widely in developing countries with advantage. In some countries indigenous waxes may be suitable for this purpose. For example, experiments in Colombia have shown that waxing of cassava can extend the storage life from 2 to 3 days up to about 30 days by preventing discolouration in the vascular tissue. India has also demonstrated the efficacy of indigenously produced wax emulsion formulations in extending the storage life of different fruits and vegetables. (Dalal et al., 1970)

4. Field factors Maturity at time of harvest is an important factor in the keeping quality of horticultural products. Commodities that are harvested in an immature state not only have poor eating quality but may tend to shrivel in storage and be more susceptible to storage disorders. When picked too mature the commodity is soft or fibrous, the flesh breaks down more quickly and it has a shorter storage life. There is an optimum time of harvest to give maximum storage life for fruits, vegetables and tubers. The rootstocks used for establishing fruit orchards may affect loses. For example, McDonald and Wutscher (1974) reported decay in grapefruit ranging from 3.3% to 27.7% depending on the rootstock. It is reported that the storage life of fresh cassava can be greatly extended by leaving part of the stalk attached to the tubers at harvest time. There are a number of other field factors that affect losses and these should be utilized as much as possible. Generally, there are no adverse environmental effects in these operations.

5. Controlled atmosphere storage Controlled atmosphere storage consists of placing a commodity is a gas-tight refrigerated chamber and allowing the natural respiration of the fruit to decrease the oxygen and increase the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere in the chamber. Typically, for storage of apples the oxygen content is lowered to about 3% and carbon dioxide is allowed to increase to 1 to 5%. This atmosphere can extend the storage life of apples by several months and allows fresh apples to be marketed every month of the year. This technology requires expensive storage chambers and close supervision of the composition of the atmosphere and is unsuited for widespread use in less developed countries.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Some roots and tubers are stored in pits in the ground, known as "clamp storage". Well-designed clamps tend to change the atmosphere to some extent by reducing oxygen and increasing the carbon dioxide content. Modified atmosphere storage would probably be effective for a limited number of commodities in developing countries especially if coupled with low temperature storage. Wills and Wimalasiri (1979) have recently shown that short pre-storage exposure to high carbon dioxide and low oxygen atmosphere of vegetables can extend the storage life of commodities even at ambient temperature. Since this technology only manipulates the proportions of gases that are naturally present in the air, there should be no adverse environmental effect. The new technology of hypobaric storage is emerging which maintains reduced pressure in the refrigerated storage chamber by means of vacuum pumps. In this system the commodity is placed in a flowing stream of highly humidified air which is maintained at a reduced pressure and controlled temperature. Under these conditions, gases released by the commodity that limits its storage life, are flushed away. Reports indicate that the storage life of certain fruits and vegetables is extended substantially by this procedure. The economic feasibility of this type of controlled atmosphere storage is presently being tested. This is an energy-intensive and capital-intensive technology and is perhaps unsuited for less developed countries. The major environmental effect is the high energy cost.

6. Shortening the time between harvest and consumption In developing countries, a considerable amount of produce is wasted because of poor transportation systems and poor marketing procedures. Much produce is spoiled because it is stored beyond its inherent shelf life before marketing is completed. Improving transportation and marketing facilities, spreading the harvest season by growing varieties that mature at different times, and staggering the planting dates of annuals and reducing the number of steps between producer and consumer are methods that can be used to shorten the time between harvest and consumption.

7. Heat treatment Some of the organisms that cause rotting are inhibited or killed at elevated temperatures that are below the injury threshold of the product. For example, hot water dipping of mangoes at about 50°C for a few minutes kills many pathogens without adversely affecting the quality of mango. Heat treatment is however not a desirable procedure for most fruits and vegetables. When applicable, very rigid temperature controls are needed. There is little adverse environmental effect from heat treatment. Small amounts of heat are dumped into the environment.

REFERENCES Adams J. M. (1977). A review of the literature concerning losses in stored cereals and pulses, published since 1964. Trop. Sci, 19, 1-28. Ashby B. H., Hinsch R.T., Risse I.A., Kindya W.G., Craig W.L., Turczyn M.T. (1987). Dalal V.B., Subrahmanyan H. (1970). Refrigerated Storage of fresh fruits and vegetables. Climate Control, 3: 37. Food and Agriculture Organization (2004). The State of the Food Insecurity in the World 2005. Rome. Italy. McDonald R.E., Wutscher H.K. (1974). Root stocks affect post-harvest decay of grapefruit. Hort. Science, 9: 455-456. Post-Harvest Losses Information System. (2013). Available at: http://www.aphlis.net/ Accessed January 10, 2013. Wills A., Wimalasiri W. (1979). Food loss prevention in perishable crops FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin No. 43.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

INTEGRATED PESTS MANAGEMENT IN MANGO CROP Bharat Lal, N. S. Bhaduaria, S. P. S. Tomar and Devendra Vishvkarma Ph. D. Scholar, Dept. of Agric. Entomology, RVSKVV, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India Professor, Dept. of Agric. Entomology, RVSKVV, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India Assistant Professor, Dept. of Agric. Entomology, RVSKVV, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India Ph. D. Scholar, Dept. of Horticulture, RVSKVV, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India

INTRODUCTION Mango (Mangifera indica L.), belongs to the family Anacardiaceae, it is one of the most important tropical and subtropical climates fruits in the world. It is considered to be the ‘king of fruits’ in South Asia. It is believed to be originated in the Indo-Burma region (De Candolle, 1904 and Mukherjee, 1951). Its origin is traced back to 4000 years (De Candolle, 1884). India is the largest producer and exporter of mangoes in the world. India produces some 18.00 million tones of mangoes annually. It is grown in more than 100 nations, however nowhere it is enormously esteemed as in India where 40 per cent of the total fruits grown are mango (Swamy, 2012). In India, mango is grown in 21.63 lakh hectares with a production of 185.27 lakh MT (Dashyal et al., 2019). The seedling varieties are very tall, whereas the grafted ones are short and commercially more acceptable. In addition to being sweet and juicy, the fruit is a rich source of vitamin A and C. There are a number of insect pests of this fruit and over 175 species of insects have been reported damaging mango tree but the most abundant and destructive at the flowering stage are the mango hoppers (Atwal and Dhaliwal, 2015). The most common ones are fruit flies (Ceratitis spp., Bactrocera spp., Dacus spp. etc.) and Sternochetusmangiferae (F.). It is almost essential to control there pests spp. otherwise there is a heavy fruit drop and the trees may remain without any fruit.

List of Insect Pests of Mango SN Insect pest Scientific name Order Family 1. Mango Hoppers Idioscopusclypealis (Lethiery) Hemiptera Cicadellidae Amritodus atkinsoni (L.) Idioscopu niveosparsus (L.) 2. Mango Mealybug Drosicha mangiferae (Green) Hemiptera Margarodidae 3. Mango Stem Borer Bactocera rufomaculata Coleoptera Ceramycidae (DeGeer) B. rubus (Linnaeus) 4. Mango Fruit fly Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) Diptera Tephritidae B. correctus, B. zonatus 5. Mango Stone/Nut Sternochetus mangiferae Coleoptera Curculionidae 6. MangoWeevil Shoot Chlumetiatransversa(Fab.) (Wal.) Lepidoptera Noctuidae 7. WebberMango Leaf Webber Orthaga exvinacea (Wal.) Lepidoptera Pyralidae Orthaga euadrusalis (W.) 8. Bark Eating Inderbela quadrinotata (Wal.) Lepidoptera Inderbelidae/ Caterpillars Inderbela tetranois (Wal.) Metarbelidae 9. Mango Shoot Gall Apsylla cistella (Buckton) Hemiptera Psyllidae Psyllid / Maker 10. Mango Bud Mite Aceria mangifera (Sayed) Acari Eriophydae 11. Red Tree Ant Oecophylla smaragdina (Fab.) Hymenoptera Formicidae 12. Termites Microtermesobesi Isoptera Termitidae 13. Thrips Rhipiphorothrips cruentatus Thysanoptera Thripidae 14. Scale Chloropulvinaria polygonata, Hemiptera Diaspididae Aspidiotus destructor 15. Deanolis albizonalis Lepidoptera Crambidae 16. LeafFruit MinerBorer Acrocercops syngramma Lepidoptera Gracillariidae 17. Eucrostus sp., Lepidoptera Geometridae Inflorescence Argyroploce Eucosmidae caterpillars aprobola/meyrick, Lymantriidae Euprotis fraternal Moore 47

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

List the ETL of major pest of Mango crop

S. No. Insect pest ETL stage 1. Mango hoppers 5 % adults/ panicle 2. Mango stem borer Appearance of pest 3. Leaf webber 10 % incidence

1. Mango Hoppers Scientific name: Idioscopusclypealis (Lethiery), Amritodus atkinsoni (L.) Order: Hemiptera Family: Cicadellidae

Nature of Damage It is a major pest of mango. The damage is inflicted by both nymphs and adult. The wedge shaped nymphs and adult insects puncture and suck the sap from leaves, inflorescence and tender parts, reducing vigour of plants and particularly destroying the inflorescence and causing fruit drop. The infected flowers shrivel, turn brown. Heavy puncturing and continuous draining of sap causes curling and drying of infected tissue. They also damage the crop by excreting a sweet sticky substance facilitates the development of black fungus sooty mould. The growth of young tree is much retarded and older trees do not bear much fruit. The damage to the mango crop may be as high as 60 per cent.

Management Avoid dense planting, maintained open canopy. In cause of old dense orchards, prune overcrowded overlapping branches after rainy season. Orchards should be kept clean by regular ploughing and removal of weeds. Avoid waterlogged or damp conditions. Do not encourage plants to put intermittent flushes by regular irrigations and split doses of nitrogenous fertilizers. Plant resistance varieties – Pulhora, Kala hapus, Kesher basti, Annanas etc. To manage hoppers 1-2 sprays to be done with insecticides viz., carbaryl 50% SP @ 2- 3g/l or acephate 75% SP @ 1g/ l, once in end of February and again in end of March. Spraying of 0.2% Nimbicidin or Azadirachtin 3000 ppm@ 2ml/l at initial stage of hopper population. Spray lambda cyhalothrin 5% EC @ 0.5ml or Imidacloprid 200 SL @ 0.25ml/l or Thiamethoxam 25 WG @ 0.05% or propanophos 0.05%. First spray should be done at early stage of panicle formation if hopper population is more than 5-10 panicles, second spray at full length of panicle and the third spray after fruit setting at pea size. Spraying with Malation LVC@ 1.4 lit. Per ha. With aerial or ground equipment is also effective. Chemical spray is to be minimized and should be need based. A rational rotation of insecticide is desirable to counteract the tendency of pest to develop field resistance. Bioagents like predator- Malladaboninensis, Chriysopalacciperda, egg parasite- Aprotocetus sp., Polynema spp., Gonatocerus sp., Tetrastichus sp. and fungus, Verticillium lacanii.

2. Mango Mealybug Scientific name: Drosicha mangiferae (Green) Order: Hemiptera Family: Margarodidae

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Nature of Damage Among insect pests ofmango, the mealy bug occupies an important place, second only to the mango hoppers, with respect to the amount of damage caused.Damage is caused by nymphs and wingless females are destructive and they suck plant juice, causing tender shoots and flowers to dry up. The young fruits also become juiceless and drop off. The pest is responsible for causing considerable loss to the mango growers and there is a serious attack, the trees retain no fruit at all. They also excrete honey dew, a sticky substance, which facilitates development of sooty mould.

Management Remove of weeds of Clerodendron sp. and Parthenium avoids build up of population of mealy bugs. Flooding of orchard with water in the month of October kill the eggs. Ploughing of orchard during summer exposes eggs to NE and extreme sun heat or in November. Raking of soil around tree trunk to expose the eggs to natural enemies and sun heat, mixing with chlorpyriphos dust 1.5% @250 g/ tree during January After mud plastering, banding of tree trunk with alkathene (400 gauge), 25 cm wide sheets should be fastened to the free trunk with the help of sutli, 30 cm above ground level and application of Beauveriabassiana product @ 2g/l 1x 107 spores/ml or 5% NSKE in last week of January around tree trunk. Bioagents of like- Predators- Menochilussexmaculatus and grubs of RodoliafumidaSumiusrenardi, the nymphs are parasitized by Phygadeuon sp., Getonidesperspicax, and larvae of Brinkochrysascelestas, Fungus- Beauveriabassiana.

3. Mango Stem Borer Scientific name: Bactocera rufomaculata (DeGeer), B. rubus (Linnaeus) Order: Coleoptera Family: Ceramycidae

Nature of Damage Damage is caused by grubs, killing a branch or the entire to roots or stems of tree, depending upon the place which they bore. The grubs after hatching from eggs first feed on bark and make irregular cavities. It makes tunnels which may either be in boring upward, resulting in drying of branches.

Management Keep orchard clean and healthy. Cut and destroy the infested branches with grubs and pupae. Remove frass near the holes on main stem and inset cotton wool soaked in emulsion of dichlorvos 76 EC @ 0.05% or methyl parathion 50 EC@ 4 ml/l of water or kerosene or petrol on each hole and plug them with mud. In case these holes open, these may be treated again. Bioagents of like- green mascardine fungi, Metarhiziumanisopliae or Beauveriabassiana.

4. Mango Fruit fly Scientific name: Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel), B. correctus and B. zonatus Order: Diptera Family: Tephritidae

Nature of and Damage Damage is caused by grubs only and they maggots feed on fruit pulp and the infested fruits start rotting due to further secondary infection and fall to the ground emit foul

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management smell, making the fruit unfit for human consumption. Maggots are very destructive and cause heavy losses to all kinds of fruits. The infested fruits become unmarketable and at times almost all of them contain maggots.

Management Prior to harvest, collect and destroy off infested and fallen fruits to prevent, multiplication and carryover of population. Ploughing of orchard during winter to expose and kill the pupae. Monitor the fruit fly population in orchards by using methyl eugenol traps. The bait commonly used as attractant for fruit flies is methyl eugenol. Setting of sex lure wooden block trap with methyl eugenol soaked in ethanol, methyl eugenol and malathion (6:4:1) during fruiting period from April- August @10 traps/ ha tie them tightly at 2-5 feet above ground level. Insecticides + bait used to control fruit flies are dichlorvos + methyl eugenol. To control adult flies during severe infestation placing poison bait viz., Protein hydrolysate + Malathion 50 ml+200 ml molasses in 2 liters of water be sprayed adding an additional 18 liters of water to bait poison. Commencing at pre-oviposition period and repeat at 15 days interval. Addition of 10 ml methyl eugenol in place of molasses is also recommended. Three weeks before harvesting, spray Deltamethrin 2.8 EC @ 0.5 ml/l + Azadiractin (3000 ppm) or 2 ml/l. Hot water treatment of fruit at 48 ± 1 oC for 60 min. Irradiation of fruits 400 G-rays using cobalt 60 to control fruit fly. If infestation is heavy, bait splash on the trunk only, once or twice at weekly interval is recommended. To prepare bait splash, mix 100 gm of gur/jiggery in 1 liter of water and add 1 ml of Deltamethrin 2.8 EC EC by using an old broom. or Spraying of malathion 50EC @ 1.25 l + 12.5 kg gur or sugar in 1200 liters of water per ha and repeat spray at 7-10 days interval if infestation continues. After harvest, dip the fruits in 5% sodium chloride solution for 60 min. to kill eggs of fruit flies. Managing fruit flies also reduces anthracnose disease and prevents late fruit fall. Bioagents of like- parasitoids Opius compensatus, O. persulcatus, O. incises Biosleres arisanus etc.

5. Mango Stone/Nut Weevil Scientific name: Sternochetus mangiferae (Fab.) Order: Coleoptera Family: Curculionidae

Nature of Damage Damaging stage grub. It is not very serious in any part of country. The insect attacks mango varieties with a relatively soft flesh. The injury caused by the grub feeding in pulp sometimes heals over but a certain number of fruits always get spoiled when the weevil make an exit through ripe or near ripe mangoes. The grubs make tunnels in zig-zag manner through the pulp, endocarp and seed coat and finally reach the cotyledons. The grubs feed on cotyledons and destroy them. The pulp adjacent to the affected stone is seen discoloured when the fruit is cut open. T- Shaped marking on marble size mango fruits.

Management Collection and destruction of all infested and fallen fruits at weekly interval till harvest fruits. Plough of orchard after harvest to expose hibernating adults, reduce, infestation levels. Destroyed all left over seeds in the orchard and also in the processing industries.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Ranking of soil below the tree in October- November and March can contribute partially to weevil management. Vapour heat treatment @ 46 oC for 280 min. kills the grub of nut weevil inside the stone. Irradiation of fruits with 0.25-0.75 KGY to control stone weevil. The weevil, being an internal feeder throughout its development, is not amenable to control with any of the insecticides. Spray main trunk, primary branches and junction of braches prior to flowing with Carbaryl 75 SP @ 0.2% or Fenthion @ 0.1% or Chlopyriphos 20EC @ 2.5 ml/l to control beetles hiding in the bark. Spray Dimethoate 30 EC @0.15 twice at 15 days interval when fruits are of marble size. Spray Acephate 75 SP @ 1.5 g/l when fruits are of lime size followed by Deltamethrin 28 EC @ 1 ml/l after two or three weeks. Biological- parasitoids are unknown on stone weevil. The NE recorded on S. gravis include a mite- Rhizoglyphus sp, ants- Camponatus sp., Monomorium sp. and Oecophyllasmaragdina and fungus- Aspergillus sp., Beauveria bassiana has been found to be pathogenic on mango weevil.

6. Mango Shoot Webber Scientific name: Chlumetiatransversa (Walker) Order: Lepidoptera Family: Noctuidae

Nature of Damage Damage is done by the larval by boring into the growing shoots; young tender leaves of affected shoots wither and droop down. Young grafted seedlings are severely affected and may even be killed.

Management Remove and burn the dried shoots. Attacked shoots should be clipped off and destroyed. Spray Cabaryl 75 SP or Quinalphos 25 EC@ (0.05%) at fortnightly interval from the commencement of new flush. Spray the new growth with 2 liters of Malathion 50 EC in 1250 liters of water/ha.

7. Mango Leaf Webber Scientific name: Orthaga exvinacea (Walker), Orthaga euadrusalis (Walker) Order: Lepidoptera Family: Pyralidae

Nature of Damage Damaging stage of caterpillar.Initially caterpillars feed on leaf surface gregariously by scrapping/Later they make web of tender shoots and leaves together and feed within. Several caterpillars may be found in a single webbed up cluster of leaves.

Management Ploughing of orchard done earlier for mealy bug control checks its population. Pruning of overcrowded and overlapping branches. Mechanical removal of infested webs by leaf web removing device and burning them. The use of same chemical for every spray should be avoided. Two to three sprays commencing from last week of July with Carbaryl 75 SP @ 0.2% or quinalphos 25 EC@ 0.05%. This spay will also take care of mango psylla (Apsylla cistellata).

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

8. Bark Eating Caterpillars Scientific name: Inderbela quadrinotata (Walker), Inderbela tetranois (Walker) Order: Lepidoptera Family: Inderbelidae/ Metarbelidae

Nature of Damage Damage is seen by feeding of larvae on bark and also the presence of small chips of wood and excreta with sticky gum adhered to the branches and tunneled into the stem. Larvae also make shelter tunnels inside where they rest.

Management Keep orchard clean and healthy. Hoeing Clean hole and put emulsion of Quinalphos @ 0.05% in each hole and plug them with mud. Drench stem thoroughly with Quinalphos 25 EC @ 0.05% when incidence is high. Spray with SP @ 75 @0.15% or chloropyriphos 20 EC @ 0.05%.

9. Mango Shoot Gall Psyllid/ Maker Scientific name: Apsylla cistella (Buckton) Order: Hemiptera Family: Psyllidae

Nature of Damage The damage is caused by nymphs emerge during August-September and suck cell sap from adjacent bunds. As a result of feeding, buds develop into hard conical green galls. The galls are usually seen during September-October. Consequently there is on flowering and fruit setting. Nymphs pass winter inside the galls.

Management Collected and destroyed the galls. Plant resistance against gall insect like Annanas, Anain, Delicious, Gulabkhah, Banglora, Vellekachi. Spray with Dimethoate 30 EC @ 0.06% or Quinalphos 25 EC @ 0.05% at fortnightly interval starting from August. Spray with 2, 4-D@ 150 ppm, (i.e. 150 mg/l of water) during October which opens the galls and nymphs come out and are killed with cold. New mango orchard in humid region need to be discouraged.

10. Mango Bud Mite Scientific name: Aceria mangifera (Sayed) Order: Acari Family: Eriophydae

Nature of Damage The bud mite sucks the sap from inside the buds and causes necrosis of tender tissues. When the population is high, the entire bud may be killed. This mite infested all varieties of mango and none has shown resistance to it.

Management Removed and destroyed all the panicles bearing infested inflorescences. Spray with Dimethoate 30 EC @ 1.0 liter in 1250 liters of water/ha, preferably during summer.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

11. Red Tree Ant Scientific name: Oecophylla smaragdina (Fab.) Order: Hymenoptera Family: Formicidae

Nature of Damage The ants web and stitch together a few leaves, usually at the top of the branches and build their nests. Webbing mango leaves with petiole intact. The ants are carnivorous and prey upon small insects. However, indirect damage is caused by protecting insects like aphids and scales, which excrete honey dew.

Management Nests should be removed and destroyed mechanically by web cutting device. Spraying any contact insecticides, Dimethoate 30 EC @ 1.5 ml/l after disturbing the nest.

12. Termites Scientific name: Microtermesobesi Order: Isoptera Family: Termitidae

Nature of Damage They feed on root or move upward making the shoots or tunnels. They construct mud galleries on tree trunk and under the protection of these galleries; they feed on the bark of the trunks.

Management Remove the mud galleries on truck and swab or spray the trunk with Malathion 50 EC @ 1.5 ml/l. After two month, drench he soil at the base of the tree with chlorpyriphos 20 EC @ 1.5 ml/l.

13. Thrips Scientific name: Rhipiphorothrips cruentatus, Scirtothrips dorsalis, Coliothrips indicus Order: Thysanoptera Family: Thripidae

Nature of Damage Damage stage of nymphs and adults lacerate the leaf tissues and suck the oozing cell sap. Coliothrips indicus and Rhipiphorothrips cruentatus feed on leaves and Scirtothrips dorsalis on in florescence, and young fruits. Leaf feeding species feed on mesophyll near leaf tips. Affected leaves show silvery sheen and bear small spots of faecal matter.

Management If the infestation is severe, can be controlled by either Dimethoate 30 EC @ 0.15% or Monocrotophos 36 SL @ 0.1%.

14. Scale Scientific name: Chloropulvinaria polygonata, Aspidiotus destructor Order: Hemiptera Family: Diaspididae

Nature of Damage Damage stage of the nymphs and adult scale suck the sap of leaves and other tender parts reducing vigor of plants. They also excrete honeydew which helps in the development of sooty mould on leaves and other tender parts.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Management Prune heavy infested plant parts to open the tree canopy and destroy them immediately. Spray Dimethoate 30 EC @ 0.06% at 21 days interval. Removal of attendant ants may permit NE to control the insect.

15. Fruit Borer Scientific name: Deanolis albizonalis Order: Lepidoptera Family: Crambidae

Nature of Damage Pest is activefrom Jan- Mayadults female lay eggs on fruits. After hatching larvae bore into fruits and full develop larval feed inside reaching kernels. Entrance hole is plugged with excreta. Affected fruits rot and fall prematurely.

Management Collection of fruits and dead wood after fruit harvest. Destroyed all fallen fruits. Spray with fenthion @ 0.1% at marble size onward and repeat with Deltamethrin 2.8 EC @ 1 ml/l after two weeks in case of heavy infestation. No spray should be given in fortnight before harvest.

16. Leaf Miner Scientific name: Acrocercops syngramma Order: Lepidoptera Family: Gracillariidae

Nature of Damage Damage stage of caterpillar.Tiny caterpillar mine under the dorsal epidemics of tender leaves and feed within as a result grayish white blister appear on leaves.

Management Clipped off destroy the infested shoots. Spray Quinalphos 25 EC @ 0.05% or fenthion @ 0.1% from the emergence of new flush.

17. Inflorescence caterpillars Scientific name: Eucrostus sp. (Geometridae), Argyroploce aprobola/ meyrick (Eucosmidae), Euprotis fraternal Moore (Lymantriidae) Order: Lepidoptera

Nature of Damage Damage is caused by the caterpillars attack inflorescence and if not controlled cause heavy loss through reduced fruit bearing.

Management For efficient management spray Monocrotophos or Dimethoate @ 1 ml/l at early panicle emergence.

18. Tea- Mosquito Bug Scientific name: Helopeltis antonii

Nature of Damage Damage stage of adult and nymphs. Adult and nymphs feed on petioles, tender shoots and leaf veins causing necrotic lesions.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Management Spray with Dimethoate 30 EC @ 0.05% or Quinalphos 25 EC @ 2 ml/l of water.

19. Inflorescence/leaf/twig midge Scientific name: Erosomyia indica, Dasineura, amraramanjarae, Procystiphovra mangiferae, Procontarinia, matteriana

Nature of Damage Damage is caused by caterpillar.The larvae tunnel the axis of inflorescence and destroy it completely. Damage by E. indica causes bending and drying of the inflorescences. Second attacks starts at fruit setting as young maggots bore into these tender fruits which slowly turn yellow and finally drop. Third attack is on tender ‘new leaves encircling inflorescence. The most damaging one is first attack in which the entire inflorescence is destroyed. The inflorescence shows stunted growth and its axis bends, at the entrance point of larva.

Management Collection and disposal of infested panicles leaves and twigs. Deep ploughing of orchard in October- November to expose pupae and diapausing larvae to sun heat which kills them. Monitoring of larval population on white paper in April/May and apply Chlopyriphos 20 EC @ 1.5 % dust based on population. Spray Dimethoate 30 EC @ 0.05 % at bud burst stage.

REFERENCES Atwal, A.S. and Dhaliwal, G.S., 2015. Agricultural pests of South Asia and there management: Pests of Trop. and Subtrop. Fruits. 8: 395- 436 De Candolle, A., 1884. Origin of cultivated plants. Kegan Paul, Trench, London. De Candolle, A., 1904. Origin of cultivated plants. Kegan Paul, Trench, London. Mahesh S. Dashyal, C.G. Sangeetha, Vikram Appanna, G.K. Halesh and Devappa, V. 2019. Isolation and Morphological Characterization of Endophytic Fungi Isolated from Ten Different Varieties of Mango. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci., 8(03): 717-726. Mukherjee, S.K., 1951. The origin of mango. Indian J. Genet. Plant Breed., 11: 49- 56. Swamy, J.S. 2012. Flowering manipulation in mango: A science comes of age. J. of Today’s Bio. Sci.: Res. & Rev., 1(1): 122-137.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

RICE WEED DYNAMICS AND ITS MANAGEMENT Chandrabhan Bharti1, Anita Mohapatra2, Rajesh Kumar3, Alokmaurya 4Vikash Kumar Yadav5, Mahendru KumarGautam6, Prem Kumar Bharteey7 1,3,4Ph. D. Research Scholar, SNRM, CPGS, CAU, Umiam, Meghalaya- 793 103 5 Ph.D. Research Scholar Dept. of Plant Pathology NDUAT, Kumarganj, Ayodhya-UP 6 M.Sc. (Ag) Research Scholar Dept. of SSAC, IAS, BHU-UP 7 Ph.D. Research Scholar Dept. of SSAC, AAU, Jorhat, Assam 2Assistant Professor, Department of Agronomy, OUAT, Bhubaneswar, Orissa- 751 003

ABSTRACT Weed dynamics is the changes that occur in the abundance, distribution and genetic structure of population of weed species. Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is one of most important food crop and nearly one-half of the world’s population dependent on it. It provides staple diet of 2.7 billion people of the World. In Asia 90% of global rice is produced and consumed and it is the staple food of 65% people of India. There are mainly four major rice ecosystems in India: (1) irrigated lowland (2) rain fed lowland (3) rain fed upland and (4) deep-water. Of the total rice area, 55% is irrigated, 12% is upland, 3% is deep-water and the remaining 30% is rain fed lowland. Due to weeds, yield loss is about 33% followed by insect pest (26%) followed by disease (20%) and others (6-8%). Direct seeded rice (DSR) have 24 % more weed infestation as compared to transplanted rice (TPR). Direct seeded rice saves labour and water but can only be successful if accompanied with effective weed control. In rice ecosystem the weed flora found (both upland and low land situation) are annual grasses, sedges and broad leaved weeds, most common weed species in rice field are Echinochloa colona, Cyperus rotundus and Commelina benghalensisetc. Weeds can be managed through mechanical, chemical and biological methods. Chemical application of butachlor + almix proved economically beneficial for higher yield of rice in DSR and TPR establishment as well as best weed management practices. SRI system along with pyrazosulfuron-ethyl at 20 g a.i /ha at 6 DAT and using twice cono-weeder at 15 and 30 DAT/DAS is most effective weed management practice. Keywords: Rice, Weeds, Direct seeded rice, transplanting rice, yield losses

INTRODUCTION Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is one of most important food crop and nearly one-half of the world’s population dependent on it. It provides staple diet of 2.7 billion people of the World. In Asia 90% 0f global rice is produced and consumed. It Provides 32-59% of dietary energy and 25-39% of dietary protein in 39 countries. It Accounts for more than 40% of total food grain production in India. Staple food of 65% people of India.

Scenario of different production system of rice in India Rice ecosystems in India There are mainly four major rice ecosystems in India: (1) irrigated lowland, (2) rain fed lowland, (3) rain fed upland and (4) deep-water. Of the total rice area, 55% is irrigated, 12% is upland, 3% is deep-water and the remaining 30% is rain fed lowland. The irrigated rice area is further divided in to the continuously flooded, single aeration and multiple aeration. The rain fed area is also sub-divided into flood prone and drought prone. In lowland ecosystems rice seedlings are transplanted in puddled condition and the fields are kept either in continuous submergence or intermittently flooded depending on soil texture, rainfall and availability of irrigation water. Lowland rice fields in north India are generally intermittently flooded whereas those from east and south India flooded continuously. In the case of upland rice the seeds are directly sown on pulverized seedbed and fields are never flooded. Deepwater rice is grown in low-lying high rainfall areas, where fields are inundated with water. In these areas rice is either direct seeded or transplanted depending upon the onset of monsoon.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Challenges in rice establishment systems Transplanting direct seeding Unavailability of labour on time Higher weed pressure Late rice planting Good crop establishment may be difficult Drudgery to farm workers Precise water management and level fields are necessary Less plant population Crop lodging may be greater High production cost higher pest and disease incidence is likely in dense canopies because of less ventilation around plants High water use for puddling More variability and risk Restricted root growth Adverse effect on soil physical conditions Methane production (24.57 mg/plant/day)

Total annual losses in crop In India, the losses caused by weeds exceed the losses from any other category of agricultural pests like insects, nematodes, diseases, etc. Due to weeds 33% yield losses followed by insect pest 26% followed by 20% disease than other 6-8%.

What is weed dynamics “The changes that occur in the abundance, distribution and genetic structure of population of weed species” (Das, 2008)

Estimated yield losses caused by weeds in different methods of rice establishment in India Weeds were reported to reduce rice yields by 12 to 98%, depending on type method of rice establishment. Rice yield losses due to uncontrolled weed growth and weed competition were least (12%) in transplanted rice (Singh et al., 2011) and highest in aerobic direct-seeded rice on a furrow-irrigated raised-bed systems (Singh et al., 2008) and in dry- seeded rice sown without tillage (Singh et al., 2011).

Weed management in nursery of TPR Apply any one of the pre-emergence herbicides viz., Pretilachlor + safener 0.3kg/ha on3rd or 4th day after sowing to control weeds in the lowland nursery. Keep a thin film of water and allow it to disappear. Avoid drainage of water. This will control germinating weeds. Butachlor 2.0 l/ha (or) Pendimethalin 2.5 l/ha (or) Anilophos 1.25 l/ha. Herbicides should be applied on 8 DAS with thin layer of water in the field.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Method of rice Weeds % reduction in Reference establishment yield due to weeds TPR Season long 12 to 69.5% Rammohan et. al., Competition 1999, Kathirvelan, and Vaiyapuri, 2003; Singh et al., 2011 Wet-seeded rice Season long 85 Singh et al., Competition 2011 Upland direct- Season long 93.6% Ladu, and Singh seeded rice Competition 2006 Dry-seeded rice- Season long 98 Singh et al.,2011 zero tillage Competition Dry-seeded rice pre-post- 17.4 to 25.8, 10.03 Moorthy and flooding to Saha, 2001 periods and 48.3 and complete crop 34.4 to 72.6% growth period Upland rice Uncontrolled 97.2% Singh et al.,1988 weeds

Weed Management in main field of TPR • Use of rotary weeder from 15 DAT at 10 days interval. • Cultural practices like dual cropping of rice-azolla, and rice-green manuring reduces the weed infestation to a greater extent. • Pre- emergence application of pretilachor @ 1.0 kg a.i. ha-1 on 3 DAT + weeding with Twin row rotary weeder at 40 DAT. • If pre-emergence herbicide application is not done, hand weeding has to be done on 15th DAT. • 2,4-D sodium salt (Fernoxone 80% WP) @1.25 kg/ha, three weeks after transplanting or when the weeds are in 3 - 4 leaf stage. • Early post emergence application of Bispyripac sodium 50 g a.i. ha-1 (2-3 leaf stage of weeds) + Hand weeding on 45 DAT

Weed Management in Dry Seeded -Puddled Lowland Rice Application of mulch or residue Brown manuring Stale seed bed preparation Irrigation management Apply pendimethalin @ 1.0kg/ha at 5 DAS or Pretilachlor + safener (Sofit) @ 0.45kg/ha followed by one hand weeding at 30 to 35 DAS. Application of penoxsulam 24 SC @ 0.0225 kg a.i./ ha at 8-12 DAT

Weed management in Dry Seeded upland rice Deep summer tillage Hand weeding /cono weeding Incorporation of mulch Brown manuring Apply pendimethalin 1.0kg/ha on 5 days after sowing. Seed drill sowing with pre-emergence application of pretilachlor + safener @ 0.3 kg/ha followed by two weedings with star / rotary weeder is recommended. Post emergence application of bispyribac- sodium 30 g /ha reduced weed growth with higher weed control efficiency

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Weed management in SRI • Using rotary weeder / Cono weeder, power operated two row weeder. • Manual weeding is also essential to remove the weeds closer to rice root zone

Strategy for weed management in SRI • Weed growth is more in SRI due to wider spacing and alternate wetting & drying. Effective and timely weed control is crucial for success of SRI • Adopt invariably mechanical weeding as to provide aeration of soil • Start weeding from 10 DAT using suitable weeder and perform at least 4 weeding at an interval of 10 days. • Take up manual weeding to remove weeds near to the plants which are not incorporated by weeder. • Irrigate the field a day before cono weeding for smooth and easy running of weeder.

Number of grasses, sedges, and broadleaf weeds at 50 DAT as affected by different weed control methods The un-weeded check showed the highest grasses population among the treatments. The treatment of 2 HW gave the lowest number of grasses and the highest number of sedges, respectively. The treatment of 2 RW produced the lowest weed population of broadleaf among the treatments. HA fb HW and HA fb RW treatments were obtained very negligible number of sedges among the treatments at harvest.

Effect of crop establishment and weed management practices on total weed dry weight, Weed control efficiency (%) & grain yield. Among the crop establishment methods, SRI had the lowest dry weight of total weed and drum seeding plots had the highest dry weight of weeds both at 40 and 60 DAS/DAT. The treatment PSE + cono weeder significantly reduced the total weed dry weight followed by PSE and Almix alone. Absolute WCE was only in weed free check, above 95% in PSE + cono weeder, PSE and Almix and below 75% in Cono weeder. Besides that Almix had the certain level of phytotoxicity in DS and SRI treated plots at the early stage of crop growth.SRI recorded significantly the highest grain yield (3.23 kg/ha) which was 19.7 and 25.8% higher over CTR and DS, respectively.

Effect of establishment methods and weed management practices on total dry weight, weed control efficiency (WCE) and grain yield of rice Lesser weed density and dry weight was observed in pretilachlor applied treatments at the early period of crop growth and was seen up to maturity by giving one cono weeding at 45 DAS. It was comparable with pretilachlor followed by one motorized weeding at 45 DAS. Pretilachlor gave excellent control of many grasses, sedges and broad leaved weeds in wet

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management seeded. Pretilachlor applied treatment recorded weed control efficiency of 86.7 per cent at 60 DAS.The direct planting system registered significantly higher grain yield (5102 kg ha-1) and straw yield (6384 kg ha) than drum seeding.

Treatment Total weed dry Weed control Grain weight efficiency % Yield(Q/ha) 40 DAS 60 40 60 DAS DAS DAS Crop establishment methods (main plot treatments) DS (Drum seeding) 29.7 36.4 - - 2.57 SRI (system of rice 6.0 17.3 - - 3.23 intensification) CTP(conventional 8.4 28.8 - - 2.70 transplanting) CD(P=0.05) 0.10 0.37 - - 4.43 Weed management practices (Sub plot treatments) Pyrazosulfuron ethyl @20g/ha 0.6 6.0 99.5 93.9 2.90 2 Conoweeding at 15 & 30 DAS 31.8 51.8 70.46 47.8 2.76 Pyrazosulfuron ethyl@20g/ha 0.5 4.0 99.53 95.9 2.98 + conoweeding Metsulfuron methyl + 0.7 4.1 99.36 95.8 2.84 chloromuron ethyl@ 4g/ha Weed free check 0.0 0.0 100 100 3.05 Unweeded check 107.7 99.1 0 0 2.47 CD(P=0.05) 0.23 0.28 - - 0.13

Treatment Weed dry WCE Grain weight (kg ha-1) yield (kg/ha) Method of establishment 40 60 40 60 DAS DAS DAS DAS D1 - Drum seeding 1032 1123 43.42 55.82 4529 D2 - Direct planting system 963 1062 47.20 58.22 5102 SEd 0.36 0.36 114 CD at 5% 0.75 0.76 340 Weed management practices T1 - Motorized weeder at 25 and 45 DAS 717 644 60.69 74.67 4616 T2 - Cono weeder at 25 and 45 DAS 659 584 63.87 77.03 4941 T3- Pretilachlor (@) 0.45 kg a.i. ha-1 at 441 376 75.82 85.21 5860 3DAS + Motorized weeder at 45 DAS T4- Pretilachlor (@) 0.45 kg a.i. ha-1 at 3 434 350 76.21 86.23 6216 DAS + Cono weeder at 45 DAS T5- Unweeded check 1824 2542 2445 SEd 0.56 0.58 180 CD at 5% 1.18 1.21 380

Effect of different weed control measures on weed biomass (60 DAS), WCE and grain yield in direct-seeded rice (DSR) The average data of both the years revealed that hand weeding recorded the lowest biomass of weeds 3.65 g/m 2 followed by fenoxaprop + (chororimuron + metsulfuron), cyhalofop-butyl + (chlorimuron + metsulfuron) and bispyribac sodium in increasing order.The indicated that maximum WCE was obtained from hand weeding (87.83) closely followed by fenoxaprop + (chororimuron + metsulfuron) (82. 66) and cyhalofop-butyl + (chlorimuron +

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management metsulfuron) (75.66). Amongst herbicide, lowest WCE was by pyrazosulfuron and pretilachlor.The grain yield data indicated that hand weeding produced significantly maximum grain yield of 3.49/3.43 t/ha due to lowest weed dry weight and highest WCE.

Treatment Weed biomass (g/m2) WCE Grain yield (t/ha) 2010 2011 Mean Pyrazosulfuron25 g/ha at 5-7 DAS 23.5 22.5 23 23.3 2.70 Pretilachlor 750 g/ha at 3-5 DAS 24.7 23.7 24.2 24.0 2.43 Cyhalofop-butyl90 g/ha at 25 DAS 23.4 22.4 22.9 31.0 2.61 Fenoxaprop60 g/ha at 30 DAS 18.5 17.5 18 66.7 2.89 Cyhalofop-butyl + (chlorimuron+ 7.8 6.8 7.3 75.7 3.20 metsulfuron) 90 + 20 g/ha at 25-30 DAS Fenoxaprop + (chlorimuron + 5.7 4.7 5.2 82.7 3.24 metsulfuron) 60 + 20 g/ha at 25-30 DAS Azimsulfuron 35 g/ha at 20 DAS 16.5 15.5 16 46.7 2.97 Bispyribac-sodium 25 g at 20 DAS 9.8 9.8 9.8 67.3 3.05 Fenoxaprop + ethoxysulfuron 60 + 15 at 25- 12.7 11.7 12.2 59.3 3.04 30 DAS Oxyfluorfen + 2,4-D 300 + 500 g/ha at 30 21.3 20.3 20.8 30.7 2.85 DAS Hand weeding 4.5 2.8 3.65 87.8 3.46 Weedy 33.5 26.5 30 1.52 LSD (P=0.05) 2.73 2.73

Effect of times of sowing and weed management practices on total weed dry weight, WCE, weed index and yield of direct seeded aromatic rice Among times of sowing, crop sown on and at harvest in 10th July sown crop was significantly higher than 15th June sown crop. Among weed management practices, significantly lowest total weed density at 60 DAS and at harvest were recorded with application of bispyribac as post-emergence at 30 g/ha also recorded significantly lowest weed dry matter followed by cyhalofop-butyl + 2, 4-D post-emergence at 90 g/ha + 500 g/ha and anilophos + ethoxysulfuron post-emergence at 375 g/ha + 15 g/ha. However, 15th June sowing recorded slightly highest grain and straw yields as compared to 10th July sowing.Amongst the herbicidal treatments, application of bispyribac as postemergence at 30 g/ha recorded significantly highest grain yields which was statistically at par with cyhalofop-butyl + 2, 4-D post-emergence at 90 g/ha + 500 g/ha and anilophos + ethoxysulfuron post-emergence at 375 g/ha + 15g/ha.

Treatment Total weed dry WCE WI Grain yield weightat 60 (t/ha) DAS (g/m2) Time of sowing 2012 2013 2012 2013 2012 2013 2012 2013 15th June 129 128 59.2 60.5 - - 2.07 2.18 10th July 154 154 51.3 52.4 - - 1.96 2.05 LSD (P=0.05) 1.58 1.67 - - - - NS NS Weed management Azimsulfuron 60 166 165 57.3 58.3 35.9 35.6 1.77 1.91 g/ha Cyhalofop-butyl + 131 129 70.1 71.3 21.9 23.6 2.16 2.29 2,4-D 90 g/ha + 500 g/ha

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Bispyribac 30 g/ha 129 128 71.8 72.8 15.8 19.6 2.33 2.39 Anilophos + 131 131 68.5 70.1 25.2 26.1 2.07 2.20 ethoxysulfuron 375 g/ha +15 g/ha Oxadiargyl 100 169 165 56.5 58.1 39.7 41.1 1.67 1.75 g/ha Weedy check 268 269 00 0.0 52.7 56.4 1.31 1.30 Weed free 0 0 - - 0 0 2.77 2.97 LSD (P=0.05) 0.65 0.98 - - - - 0.28 0.28

Weed dry weight at 30 and 60 DAT, and grain and straw yield in rice as influenced by the different treatments Hand weeding at 20 and 40 DAT recorded the lowest weed dry weight at 30 and 60 DAT and it differed significantly from all the cono-weeder treatments.Use of self- propelled conoweeder at 15 and 30 DAT recorded the second lowest weed dry weight at 30 DAT, while at 60 DAT it was by manual cono weeding four times. Grain yield was the maximum in the hand weeded plot, while straw yield was higher with the use of sell-propelled cono-weeder at 15 and 30 DAT as well as manual cono-weeding four times.

Treatment Weed dry weight (g/m2) Yield (t/ha) 30 DAT 60 DAT Grain Straw Manual cono-weeding at 15 and 30 DAT 30.9 114.9 2.16 2.19 Self-propelled cono-weeding at 15 18.1 136.1 2.26 2.45 and 30 DAT Manual cono-weeding at 10, 20, 30 21.8 75.5 2.19 2.43 and 40 DAT Hand weeding at 20 and 40 DAT 0.7 9.1 2.28 2.10 LSD (P=0.05) 0.27 0.65 0.11 0.13

Narrow- and broad-leaved weeds as affected by tillage practices on total dry weight, weed control efficiency (WCE), grain yield and B:C ratio of rice The lowest weed dry weight (11.37 and 3.67) and highest weed control efficiency (86.3 and 81.8%) for narrow-leaved and broad-leaved, respectively was recorded in two passes with country plough which was at par with 2 passes by power tiller.The highest grain yield in 2 passes by country plough was due to 37.3% higher productive tiller, grains compared to tillage-fallow.However, 2 passes with power tiller recorded higher B: C ratio (2.25) than that of country plough (2.10) indicating reduced cost in tillage operation of power tiller. The tillage fallow recorded the lowest B: C ratio.

Treatment Weed dry Weight WCE Yield B:C (g/m2) ratio Narrow- Broad- Narrow- Broad- leaved leaved leaved leaved 7 WAS 7 WAS 7 WAS 7 WAS Tillage fallow (no 83.1 20.2 0 0 2.8 1.72 ‘beusaning’) Two passes with 11.4 3.7 86.3 81.8 4.1 2.10 country plough Two passes with power 20.5 4 75.4 80.4 3.9 2.25 tiller Two passes with tractor 26.3 5.4 68.4 73.3 3.6 2.07 One pass with country 30.5 5.4 52.6 73.3 3.5 1.90

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management plough

One pass with power 35.5 7.3 57.3 64 3.3 1.91 tiller one pass with tractor 43 9.7 48.3 52.2 3.1 1.79 LSD (P=0.05) 7.4 3.4 - - 0.2

Effect of weed management practices on weed dry weight, WCE, yield, weed index and B:C ratio in aerobic rice Weed free treatment recorded lowest dry weight 8 g/m2, Un-weeded control produced significantly higher dry weight (430.3 g/m2).Pre-emergence application of butachlor and anilophos along with a hand weeding in non-flooded soil resulted in weed control efficiencies of 42.9.However, maintaining weed free condition throughout the crop period in aerobic rice recorded highest weed control efficiency of 98.2%.Significantly higher rice grain yield was recorded with weed free condition (2.93 t/ha). It was followed by the hand weeding twice at 15 and 30 DAS and pendimethalin1.0 kg/ha + 1 hand weeding at 30 DAS (2.52 and 2.51 t/ha, respectively).Pre-emergence pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha application with a hand weeding at 30 DAS resulted in higher B: C ratio (1.94) followed by two hand weeding at 15 and 30 DAS (1.92) compared to other treatments.

Treatment Total weed dry WCE Yield Weed B:C weight (g/m2) (t/ha) Index ratio Butachlor 1.25 kg/ha+1 HW 245 42.9 1.33 54.4 1.14 Pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha+1 HW 149 65.3 2.51 14.3 1.94 Pretilachlor with safener 0.45 kg/ ha 172 60 1.92 34.3 1.49 + 1 HW Anilophos 0.4 kg/ha + 1 HW 227 47.3 1.38 52.7 1.18 Hand weeding twice (15&30 DAS) 149 65.3 2.52 14.1 1.92 Weed free 8 98.2 2.93 - 1.84 Unweeded control 430 0 0.40 86.3 0.40 LSD (P=0.05) 2.75 - 0.32 - -

Effect of different weed management practices on total weed density, weed control efficiency yield and B:C ratio in transplanted rice Higher doses of penoxsulam 25.0 g/ha and 22.5 g/ha recorded significantly lower total dry matter production compared to its lower doses.The weed control efficiency of penoxsualam 25 g/ha was 96.2% at 40 DAT, which was comparable with its lower doses and bispyribac-sodium.Among the different treatments, penoxsulam 22.5 g/ha recorded the highest yield (5.40 t/ha) and it was statistically at par with all the herbicide treatments and hand weeding. Penoxsulam applied at 22.5 g/ha registered the highest net returns and B:C ratio compared to other treatments.

Treatment Total weed dry WCE (%) Yield B:C weight (g/m2) (t/ha) ratio 20 40 20 40 DAS DAS DAS DAS Penoxsualam 17.5 g/ha 2.04 2.62 86.4 95.5 5.14 1.61 Penoxsualam 20 g/ha 1.23 2.62 91.6 94.2 5.14 1.60 Penoxsualam 22.5 g/ha 0.55 2.43 93.6 94.5 5.40 1.67 Penoxsualam 25 g/ha 0.44 2.28 96.9 96.2 5.27 1.63 Bispyribac-sodium 30 g/ha 12.9 2.43 15.5 92.1 5.26 1.62 2,4-D sodium salt 1000 g/ha 12.5 2.40 17.9 76.1 5.14 1.62

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Hand weeding twice 13.8 5.48 10.7 75.1 4.91 1.46 Weedy check 15.4 46.1 - - 4.21 1.31 SE m (±) 0.06 0.04 0.52 0.12 LSD (P=0.05) 0.19 0.12 1.52 0.35

Effect of crop establishment and weed management practices on growth & yield parameters of rice Among the crop establishment management practices transplanted rice recorded higher leaf area index, grain yield and yield attributes. Among the weed management practices butachlor (1.5 kg a.i. ha−1) + almix (4 g a.i. ha) proved superior over other weed management practices with respect to grain yield and yield attributes. Maximum grain yield weed control efficiency was recorded in transplanted rice with the application of butachlor @ 1.5 kg a.i.

Leaf area Plant dry Grains/ Grain Treatment index matter at Panicle yield(t/ha) (60 DAS) harvest (t/ha) Crop establishment Direct seeded rice (DSR) 3.86 13.09 97.33 6.06 Transplanted rice(TPR) 3.92 14.26 105.00 6.43 CD (P= 0.05) NS 3.89 4.86 3.10 Weed management practices Weedy 3.04 10.870 71.50 5.05 Two Hand weeding 3.19 13.34 102.16 6.33 Butachlor @ 1.5 kg a.i. /ha 4.29 14.22 104.33 6.38 Pendimethalin @1.0 kg a.i. 3.08 12.90 90.33 5.43 /ha Butachlor @1.5 kg a.i./ha + 4.31 14.53 108.16 6.48 2,4-D @ 1 kg a.i./ha [email protected] kg a.i./ha 4.49 14.72 115.00 7.05 +Almix @4 g a.i. /ha Weed free 4.82 14.85 116.66 7.26 CD(p=0.05) 0.37 7.29 9.09 5.81

Effect of crop establishment methods and weed management practices on Cost of cultivation, net return & B:C ratio of rice Among the crop established methods and weed management practices in transplanted rice butachlor + almix recorded higher net return and B:C ratio, Followed by weed free. Similarly in direct seeded rice butachlor + almix recoreded maximum net return and B:C ratio followed by butachlor + 2,4-D recorded highest net return and B:C ratio.

Treatments Cost of cultivation Net return B:C Ratio (Rs. /ha) (Rs./ha) Direct seeded rice Weedy check 28634 34316 1.20 2 HW 34684 50696 1.46 Butachlor 29234 57086 1.95 Pendimethalin 29134 39096 1.34 Butachlor+2,4-D 29634 57876 1.96 Butachlor+Almix 29734 62486 2.10 Weed Free 40684 54316 1.33 Transplanted Rice Weedy check 29500 40320 1.36 2 HW 35500 53290 1.50

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Butachlor 30100 59370 1.97 Pendimethalin 29950 50550 1.68 Butachlor+2,4-D 30450 60510 1.98 Butachlor+Almix 30550 66640 2.16 Weed Free 38500 61160 1.58

CONCLUSION • TPR having less weed (Grassy, BLW & Sedges) infestation as compared to DSR during whole crop cycle. (DSR have 24 % more weed infestation as compared to TPR). • Direct seeded rice save labour and water but transition to direct seeded rice only be successful if accompanied with effective weed control. • Combined application of butachlor + almix proved economically beneficial for higher yields of rice in DSR & TPR establishment as well as best weed management practices. • SRI system along with pyrazosulfuron-ethyl at 20 g a.i /ha at 6 DAT and using twice cono- weeder at 15 and 30 DAT/DAS is most effective weed management practice.

REFERENCES Veena, C. (2011). Nitrate toxicity and possible contaminant sources in groundwater of western UP, India Journal of Plant Research 61 (2) 2229–4473. Kunnathadi, M. Jayan, R. P. and Abraham, T. C. (2016). Development and testing of self- propelled cono-weeder for mechanized rice cultivation Indian Journal of Weed Science 48(1): 25–28 Mandal, K. M., Duary, B. and De, C. G. (2013). Effect of crop establishment and weed management practices on weed growth and productivity of Basmati rice. Indian Journal of Weed Science 45(3): 166–170 Mishra, M.M., Dash, R. and Mishra M. (2016). Weed persistence, crop resistance and phytotonic effects of herbicides in direct-seeded rice Indian Journal of Weed Science 48 (1): 13–16 Mohapatra, S. and Tripathy K. S.(2016). Tillage effects on weed biomass and yield of direct-seeded riceIndian Journal of Weed Science 48 (2): 144–147 Pathak,H.Tewari, N.A.,Sankhyan,S. Dubey, S.D.,Mina,U.Singh,K. V.,Jain,N.AndBhatia,A. (2011) Direct-seeded rice: Potential, performance and problems. Current Advances in Agricultural Sciences 3(2): 77-88 Rao, N. A. and Chauhan, S.B. (2015).Estimated yield losses caused by weeds in different methods of rice establishment in India. International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) Reddy, S. G., Sekhar, P. M., Chandrasekhar, N., C. and Muthukrishnan P. (2013). Effect of crop establishment methods and weed management Practices on productivity and economics of wet seeded rice. Indian J. Agric. Res.., 47 (5) : 425 – 430 Sansa, S. Syriac, E. K. and Raj, K. S (2016). Penoxsulam as post-emergence herbicide for weed control in transplanted rice Indian Journal of Weed Science 48(2): 215–216 Saravanane, P. Mala, S. and Chellamuthu, V. (2016) Integrated weed management in aerobic rice Indian Journal of Weed Science 48 (2):152-154 Shan F.A., Bhat M. A., Ganai, M. A., Hussain A.,and Bhat T. A.(2012). Effect of crop Establishment and Weed Control Practices on the Performance of Rice (Oryza sativa L.)Applied Biological Research14 (1): 79-86 Sharma, N. Kumar, A. Kumar, J. Mahajan, A. and Stanzen, L. (2016). Sowing time and weed management to enhance productivity of direct-seeded aromatic riceIndian Journal of Weed Science 48 (1): 21-24 Thura, S. (2010). Evaluation of weed management practices in the system of rice intensification (SRI) thesis Department of Agronomy Yezin Agricultural University Myanmar. Weed management in rice TNAU agritech portal. Yield losses due to weeds Directorate of Rice Research, Hyderabad.2011

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

INSECT PESTS OF PIGEON PEA AND THEIR MANAGEMENT Kailash Chaukikar*, Amit Kumar Sharma and A. K. Bhowmick Department of Entomology, JNKVV, Jabalpur (MP) 482004

INTRODUCTION Pulses constitute an integral part of human diet as it caters the protein requirement of majority of Indian population. Besides providing energy, they also supply certain essential amino acids, minerals and vitamins which are crucial for normal growth and health. Nature has endowed the pulses with a unique mechanism of nitrogen fixation which helps in sustaining soil fertility.India is a rare country in the world where variety of pulse crops is grown. Among the pulses, Pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan (L) Mill sp.) is an important pulse crop cultivated under semi-arid conditions of Central and Peninsular India and North Indian Plains. It is the second most important pulse crop after chickpea with 92 percent of world‘s production (Reed et al., 1980).The major pigeonpea growing states are Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and Tamilnadu respectively. Pigeonpea, Cajanus cajan (L.), popularly known as “Tur” or “Arhar” or “Rahar” is one of the important pulse crops grown in about 3.53 million ha in the country out of which it is grown in an area of about 0.32 million ha in Madhya Pradesh (Anonymous 2004). Madhya Pradesh ranks second in pigeonpea production and third in area in the country. Green revolution have made India self reliant in cereals, but failed to make similar break through in pulses. Indian Institute of Public Opinion (IIPO) has reported India as the largest importer of pulses, buying 20 lakh tones annually to offset low productivity and rising demand in the face of stagnant production. Pulses import has more than tripled in the last 5-6 years, despite India being the largest pulses producer. The stagnant production and low average yield has drawn the attention of scientists and policy makers countrywide to boost up the current production level and thus attaining self sufficiency. Among the several constraints identified in securing high yield, insect pests are recognized as the major ones (Rache and Roberts, 1974). Amongst insect pests, pod borer (Helicoverpa armigera Hubner), spotted bollworm (Maruca vitrata Fabricius) and pod fly (Melanagromyza obtusa Malloch.) infestation has assumed a special significance due to their widespread occurrence and economic loss to the crop (Shanower et al. 1999). Pigeonpea is damaged by over 200 species of insect worldwide (Reed and Lateef 1989), out of which the insects damaging the reproductive part, cause maximum reduction in grain yield (Rangaiah and Sehgal 1984). The insect pests are mainly pod infesting species i.e. Pod bug, Clavigralla gibbosa (Spinola) (Hemiptera: Coridae); Pod fly, Melanagromyza obtusa (Malloch) (Diptera: Agromyzidae); Pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hub.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae); Pigeonpea plume moth, Exelastis atomosa Walsingham (Lepidoptera: Pterophoridae) (Thakur et al.,1989).The losses caused by major insect pests are about 30-40percent (Lal and Yadava 1988) and cause adequate economic damage leading to very low yield of 500-800 kg/ha as against the potential yield of 1800-2000 kg/ha (Lal et al .,1997).Component research has led to identification of mitigation measures against e.g., low levels of host plant resistance, which can be compensated through judicious use of pesticides through community approach (Bhede et al. 2015). partial success of implementing IPM for managing pod borer has also been demonstrated (Chaudhary et al. 2008; Samiayyan and Gajendran (2009); Srinivasan and Sridhar (2008); Hanumanthaswamy et al. 2009; Nagamani et al. 2013), however conventional farmers’ practices could not succeeds due to constraint of resistance in Helicoverpa against major insecticides (Kranthi et al. 2002). Review indicates that, pest research has been largely dominated by insect bias, Due to the changing climatic conditions and in the cropping pattern, information on pest scenario of the pest complex, seasonal abundance of major insect pests and efficiency of new insecticides is a pre-requisite for developing successful

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Integrated Pest Management practices. Further, the use of resistant or tolerant variety as a component of Integrated Pest Management is perhaps the most promising means of insect pest management, since it does not require any monetary investment and as an added benefit, protects the environment from toxic chemical residuals. Use of insecticides as a last resort is also one of the important components of Integrated Pest Management. Severities of the pests have made the use of insecticides indispensable. Regular and indiscriminate uses of insecticides have induced resistance against several pests besides polluting our much precious environment. To ward off these hazards, identification of some newer insecticide and biopesticide and their combinations seems to be promising and logical strategy. REFERENCES Reed, W.; S.S. Lateef and S. Sithananthan (1980). Constraints to effective pest management in pigeonpea. Presented at the “Conference on Future Integrated Pest Control” held at 10 BC Bellegia from30th May to 4th June 1980 pp:46 Anonymous (2004). Agricultural Statistics. Directorate of Agriculture Govt. of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal pp:1-58. Rache P. and R. Roberts (1974). Grain legumes of the low and tropics. Agron 26:1-132. Shanower T G, Romeis J and Minja E M. 1999. Insect pests of pigeonpea and their management. Annual Review of Entomology 44: 77- 96. Reed, W. and S.S. Lateef (1989). Pigeonpea and chickpea Insect identification handbook Information bull. 26 ICRISAT Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh, India, pp :89 Rangaiah, P. and V.K. Sehgal (1984). Insects of T-21 pigeonpea and losses caused by them at Pantnagar, Northern India. International Pigeonpea Newsletter 3:40 – 43. Thakur, R.C; K.K. Nema and O.P. Singh. (1989). Losses caused by pod fly, Melanagromyza obtusa (Mall.) and pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hub) to pigeonpea in Madhya Pradesh. Bhartiya Krishi Anusandhan Patrika 4 (2) :107- 111 Lal, S.S. and C.P. Yadava (1988). Efficacy of certain insecticides against pod borers infesting pigeonpea. Pesticide 22(12): 30-35. Lal, S.S.; C.P. Yadava and R. Ahmad (1997).Insect pest of short duration pigeonpea. A review, Plant Protection bulletin no.49 pp:25-32 Bhede B V, Sharma O P, Badgujar A G, Bhagat S, Bhosle B B and Khullar M. 2015. Impactof Areawide Integrated Pest Management strategies on pests of pigeonpea and yield inMarathwada region of Maharashtra, India. Legume Res. 38: 101- 108. Chaudhary R G, Saxena H, Dhar V and Prajapati R K. 2008. Evaluation and validation ofIPM modules against wilt, Phytophthora blight, pod borer and pod fly in pigeonpea. Journal of Food Legumes 21(1): 58–60. Samiayyan K and Gajendran G. 2009. Evaluation and demonstration of pigeonpea IPMmodule for pod borer management. Madras Agriculture Journal 96(7-12): 401-403. Srinivasan G and Sridhar R P. 2008. Evaluation of integrated pest management moduleagainst major pests of rainfed pigeon pea. Legume Research 31(1): 60-2 Hanumanthaswamy B C, Yadahalli K B. Nagaraja M V. 2009. Evaluation of bio intensiveIPM module in redgram. Mysore Journal of Agricultural Sciences 43(2): 386-8. Nagamani P, Viswanath K, Sharma O P, Bhagat S, Reddy P L. 2013. Demonstration of IPMmodule for management of Helicoverpa armigera at village level. Annals of PlantProtection Sciences 21(2): 432-434. Kranthi K R, Jadhav D R, Kranthi S, Wanjari R, Ali S S and Russell D A. 2002. Insecticideresistance in five major insect pests of cotton in India. Crop Production 21(6): 449-460.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

ASSISMENT OF LOSSES DUE TO INSECT PESTS IN CHICKPEA Amit Kumar Sharma1 Kailash Chaukikar2*, and Anjni Mastkar3 1,2 Department of Entomology, JNKVV, Jabalpur (MP) 482004 3 Department of Agronomy, MGCGVV, Satna (MP)

INTRODUCTION Pulses are the best source of vitamins and medicinal value and acts as a blood purifier. Among pulses chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is the most important pulse crop of the world which is also known as gram or Bengal gram. It is cultivated and consumed in large quantities from South East Asia to India and in the Middle East and Mediterranean countries. Chickpea is a highly nutritious legume crop which is well accounts for rich and cheapest source of energy, protein and soluble and insoluble fiber. Mature chickpea grains contain 60-65% carbohydrates, 6% fat, and between 12- 31% protein higher than any other pulse crop (Kumar et al., 2015). India occupies first position in the world in accounts of area (66%) and production (70%). In India the crop was occupies 8.25 million ha area with production of 7.33 million tonnes and 889 kg ha-1 productivity. In Madhya Pradesh chickpea is cultivated in 2.85 million ha with an annual production of 2.96 million tonnes and productivity of 1039 kg ha-1 (Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, 2016).In the last four decades it has experienced that the area, production and productivity of chickpea fluctuated widely. One of the most practical resorts of increasing chickpea production is to minimize losses caused by the biotic constraints, which include insect-pests, diseases and weeds under field conditions. About 36 species of insect pests are attack on chickpea during different growth stage of the crop in India (Nayer et al., 1982). Among the insect pests the gram pod borer (Helicoverpa armigera Hubner) alone causes 29% yield losses in chickpea at national level. Gram pod borer is one of the most devastating and polyphagous pest in worldwide and feeds on more than 300 plant species and solely responsible for considerable damage to many field and horticultural crops (Arora et al., 2005). The attack of this alarming pest begins from early vegetative to maturity stage. At early stage the young larvae start feeding to leaflets, buds, flowers and pods of chickpea (Mandal and Roy, 2012). A reduction in yield ranging from 40-50% has been reported and may cause even total loss of the crop (Rai et al., 2003). A single larva of the gram pod borer alone can destroy 30-40 pods before its maturity. Annual losses due to insect pests are estimated to be 15 % in chickpea (Chandrashekar et al., 2014). The low yield of chickpea is attributed to the regular outbreaks of pod borer which is considered to be one of the major pests of chickpea crop. Crop damage by insect pests could be minimized and kept under economic threshold level effectively by adopting one of the important component of integrated pest management i.e., chemical control by selecting some newer insecticides which should have selective and less harmful to natural enemies. Scientific data based on toxicity, effectiveness and economics of chemical insecticide is very essential before the application in pest management. Thus, keeping the above facts in mind the present study was carried out to evaluate the efficacy of some most popular chemical insecticides against the gram pod borer in chickpea ecosystem.

REFERENCES Kumar, G.V.S., Sarada O., 2015. Field efficacy and economics of some new insecticide molecules against lepidopteran caterpillars in chickpea. Current Biotica 9, 153–158. Agricultural Statistics at a Glance 2016.Government of India Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare Directorate of Economics and Statistics.111. Nayer, K.K., Ananthkrishan, T.N., David, B.V., 1982. General and applied Entomology Tata Mc Graw Hill publishing company Ltd., New Delhi, 589. Arora, R., Sharma, H.C., Dreissche, E.V., 2005. Biological activity of lectins from grains legumes and garlic against the legume pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera. Journal of ICRISAT Organization 1(1), 1–3.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Mandal S. K., Roy, S. P. 2012. Impact of environmental factor (s) on certain pulse crops of north-eastern Bihar (India) with reference to resource management. The Ecoscan.1(Special Issue), 35–40. Rai, D., Ujagir, R., Singh, R.K., 2003. The larvae parasitization by Campoletis chloridae Wchida (Hymenoptora: Ichneumonidae) of Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) in pure chickpea crop at Pantnagar. Journal of Biocontrol 17, 81–83. Chandrashekar, K., Gupta, O., Yelshetty, S., Sharma, O. P., Bhagat, S., Chattopadhyay, C., Sehgal, M., Kumari, A., Amaresan, N., Sushil, S. N., Sinha, A. K., Asre, R., Kapoor, K. S., Satyagopal, K., Jeyakumar, P., 2014. Integrated Pest Management for Chickpea. Director NCIPM, LBS Building, IARI Campus New Delhi, 43

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT STRETEGIES IN PULSE CROPS Shashank Tyagi and Pravesh Kumar Department of Agronomy, Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour, Bhagalpur- 813210, India Email: [email protected]

ABSTRACT Weed management is very much effective when it integrates a combined application of the strategies to the best for attaining a particular goal when maintains economical and eco- stability. Common techniques span very large ranges included prevention, chemical, cultural, biological and mechanical methods. Pulse growers have to face challenges in units of manipulating weed populations in the crop. Not the pulses only are relatively lesser competitive, there are very limited choice for the pre-seed or in the crop herbicide application. Plans ahead are much available to manage the weed populations. There are many more choices for the grasses weed control for pulses, but very few options available for broadleaf weed control. Pulses are also broad leaf plant and this is much difficult rather to control broad leaved weeds in broad leaf plant without loss, and there is little investment in developed chemistry. Over the several years search, the information will help in determination of changes in various weed species. As comparing, this information is with past and present weed management means includes time and dose of herbicide application and cultivation will help in evaluation of success of the techniques and deciding future actions. Keywords: Biological, Chemical, Mechanical means, Pulse, Weed management INTRODUCTION The United Nations, declared 2016 as “International Year of Pulses” (IYP). India is the largest producer (25% of global production), consumer (27% of world consumption) and importer (14%) of pulses in the world. Pulses account for around 20 per cent of the area under food grains and contribute around 7-10 per cent of the total food grains production in the country (Mohanty and Satyasa, 2015). It is well understood that weeds interfere with crop growth and reduce yield and quality either through competition for light, food, water, nutrients, space, allelopathic effect or harbor insects and diseases (Dittmar and Boyd, 2015). Along with competition, weeds in seed production field also give risk of seed purity contamination. Integrated weed management is defined as the combination of two or more weed- control methods at low input levels to reduce weed competition in a given cropping system below an economical threshold level. Integrated weed management system is basically an integration of effective, dependable and workable weed management practices that can be used economically by the producers as a part of sound farm management system (Riemens et al., 2007). Integrated weed management relies on weed management principles that have proved to be suitable for long term weed management by combining the use of cultural, mechanical, thermal, biological and chemical means based on ecological approaches (Singh, 2014 and Kewat, 2014), that will prevent weed reproduction, emergence, promote weed seed bank depletion and minimize weed competition (Malviya and Singh, 2007), which is the key component of sustainable agriculture.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Under such circumstances, to get effective control of composite weed flora, a logical combination of several weed control methods is likely to prove the most effective approach (Kumar et al., 2012). These alternative approaches to suppressing weed growth and reproduction below the economic threshold level are called “ecological approaches of weed management”. Green Gram Of the different factors known for reduction in crop production, weeds are major biotic constraint to crop production all over the world and India is no exception. Potential yield losses in green gram due to weeds have been estimated to range between 10-45% (Rao and Chauhan, 2014). Weed competition was observed maximum during active growth stage of crop like vegetative and flowering. Weed control in green gram during early period of crop growth is most important. If weed growth is minimized during critical period of crop-weed competition, the yield can be obtained equivalent to that of maintaining weed free condition. The critical period of crop-weed competition in summer green gram is 15-30 days after sowing (Mandal et al., 2006). Gelot et al. (2018) reported from Sardar krushinagar, Gujarat that the effect of integrated weed management on weed control and yield of summer green gram (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) was found significant. Maximum seed yield and effective weed control in green gram could be achieved by maintaining weed free condition throughout crop growth period where labours are easily available. Under constraint of labour availability, application of pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg ha-1 as PE + imazethapyr @ 75 g ha-1 as post-emergence at 15-20 DAS + inter culturing followed by hand weeding at 30 DAS recorded higher plant height, seed yield, stover yield, net return and B:C ratio. These findings are in close proximity with findings of Pedde et al. (2013) and Prachand et al. (2015). Removal of weeds by means of inter culturing and hand weeding at 20 and 40 DAS along with application of pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg/ha as PE + imazethapyr @ 75 g ha-1 as post- emergence at 15-20 DAS reduced weed population and dry weight of weeds in green gram might improve weed control efficiency. These findings are akin to report of Singh and Kumar (2008), Jha and Soni (2013), Singh et al. (2014) and Kavad et al. (2016).

Chick Pea Gore et al. (2018) reported that the predominant weed flora were Brachiria eruciformis, Chenopodium album, and Cynodon dactylon L. among monocot; Cyperus rotundus L. among sedges; and Amaranthus viridis L., Digera arvensis, Portulaca oleracea, Physalis minima, Euphorbia hirta, Parthenium hysterrophorus and Alternenthara sessili among dicots. The significantly lowest dry weight of weeds and highest weed control efficiency (WCE), grain, bhoosa and biological yield was observed in Pendimethalin @ 0.75 kg ha-1 PE and it was significantly superior over rest of the treatments. Weedy check recorded lowest grain and bhoosa yield. Among the chemical weed control treatments, application of Pendimethalin 0.75 kg ha-1 PE recorded beneficial highest net monetary returns and B:C ratio and it was found most economical and effective in controlling weeds in chickpea. These findings of yield and yield attributes of chickpea are in accordance with those of Ratnam et al. (2011). Rupareliya et al. (2018) reported that next to weed free, significantly higher growth parameters viz., plant height, number of branches/plant and leaf SPAD value, yield attributes and yield viz. number of pods/plant along with seed yield and stover yield were recorded with Oxyfluorfen 0.18 kg ha-1 as pre-emergence fb Pre-mix (Imazamox + Imazethapyr) 0.03 kg ha-1 PoE at 40 DAS and Two hand weeding (HW) at 20 and 40 DAS. Besides, weed free condition, Oxyfluorfen 0.18 kg ha-1 as pre-emergence fb Pre-mix (Imazamox + Imazethapyr) 0.03 kg ha-1 PoE at 40 DAS and Two HW at 20 and 40 DAS were found more effective in reducing the weed population up to harvest and resulted in less dry weight of weeds, lower weed index and higher weed control efficiency and herbicidal efficiency index. The highest net return of Rs. 72040 ha-1 was realized with Oxyfluorfen 0.18 kg ha-1 as PE fb Pre-mix

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

(Imazamox + Imazethapyr) 0.03 kg ha-1 PoE at 40 DAS followed by weed free and two HW at 20 and 40 DAS. However, the highest B:C ratio of 3.54 was obtained with Oxyfluorfen 0.18 kg ha-1 as PE fb Pre-mix (Imazamox + Imazethapyr) 0.03 kg ha-1 PoE at 40 DAS.

Table1. Effect of different treatments on weed control efficiency, seed yield and economics of chickpea Source: Singh and Jain, 2017 Treatment Weed Seed Net B:C control yield monetar Ratio efficiency (t/ha) y (%) return (x103/ha) Pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha as pre-emergence 73.51 1.57 47.34 64.51 Pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha + hand weeding at 30 92.90 2.07 62.31 45.77 DAS Pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha + hand hoeing at 30 DAS 90.42 1.94 58.75 53.07 Alachlor 1.0 kg/ha as pre-emergence 60.41 1.51 31.71 23.10 Alachlor 1.0 kg/ha + hand weeding at 30 DAS 86.06 1.91 14.33 75.74 Alachlor 1.0 kg/ha + hand hoeing at 30 DAS 82.42 1.74 2.98 3.41 Straw mulch 53.83 1.19 3.36 3.00 Weed mulch 38.49 1.05 3.22 3.08 weedy check (control) 0.00 0.71 1.95 1.20 Two hand weeding at 20 and 40 DAS 97.19 2.38 1.00 3.73 LSD (P=0.05) 73.51 0.06 47.34 64.51 The higher growth parameters viz., plant height and number of branches per plant were registered under weed free, 2 HW at 20 and 40 DAS and Oxyfluorfen 0.18 kg ha-1 as PE fb Pre-mix (Imazamox +Imazethapyr) 0.03 kg ha-1 PoE at 40 DAS and maximum SPAD meter reading mainly ascribed to better control of weeds through application of pre and post emergence herbicide and hand weeding thus, increase water and nutrient uptake, which might have accelerated photosynthetic rate, thereby increasing the supply of carbohydrates, resulted in increased cell division, multiplication and elongation leading to increased plant height and number of branches. These findings are in agreement with those of Mishra et al. (2013) and Poonia et al. (2013). Infestation of weeds is one of the major causes of poor productivity of chickpea. It is a poor competitor of weeds because of slow growth rate and limited leaf area development at early stages. Kumar et al. (2014) reported that presence of weeds throughout crop season reduced the seed yield of chickpea up to 68%. The predominant methods of weed control by mechanical hoeing and manual weeding over extensive scale have been declined because of shifting the agricultural labourers to industries for better and assured wages. The current trend and future development of intensive agriculture are likely to seek the help of chemicals as an effective weed control measures and replace the conventional method of weed control. Unfortunately till now, majority of the farmers are quite ignorant about the use of herbicides in chickpea. Mulching is also a good option to conserve moisture and reduce weeds. Mulch is used to cover soil surface around the plants to create congenial condition for growth, reduce salinity and weeds (Bhardwaj, 2013). Kumar et al. (2010) revealed that application of pendimethalin with one hand weeding significantly reduced the total weed density in chickpea. Gore et al. (2015) also reported that application of pendimethalin 0.75 kg ha-1 + one hand weeding produced higher yield and gave highest net monetary returns and B:C ratio and was found most effective and economical in controlling weeds and increasing the yield of chickpea.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Singh and Jain (2017) reported that hand weeding superseded over all the treatments and attained minimum weed biomass with highest weed control efficiency (97.2%) followed by pendimethalin 1.0 kg ha-1 + hand weeding at 30 DAS (92.9%), pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha + hand hoeing at 30 DAS (90.4%) and alachlor + hand weeding (86.1%). Reduction in weed biomass and increased weed control efficiency under pre emergence application of alachlor followed by mechanical methods was due to complete removal of weeds at critical period of crop-weed competition. Yield attributing characters, viz., number of pods per plant, number of seeds per pod and test weight attained significantly higher values under two hand weeding followed by pendimethalin 1.0 kg ha-1 PE + hand weeding at 30 DAS. Two hand weeding gave significantly higher yield attributes than rest of the treatments. Among the herbicidal treatments, pendimethalin + hand weeding at 30 DAS recorded significantly higher yield attributes than other herbicidal treatments. These results were in close conformity with Pedde et al. (2013). Singh and Jain (2017) reported that hand weeding twice was most effective and recorded minimum weed density and weed dry weight followed by pendimethalin at 1.0 kg ha- 1 + hand weeding and pendimethalin at 1.0 kg ha-1 + hand hoeing. Two hand weeding at 20 and 40 DAS recorded the highest yield (2.38 t ha-1) followed by pendimethalin 1.0 kg ha-1 + hand weeding at 30 DAS (2.07 t ha-1). Pendimethalin 1.0 kg ha-1 PE and alachlor 1.0 kg ha-1 produced significantly higher seed yield over straw mulch and weed mulch. The highest net monetary return (Rs.75739 ha-1) was obtained with two hand weedings followed by pendimethalin + hand weeding and pendimethalin + hand hoeing. Chavada et al. (2017) reported that maximum yield attributes and yield of chickpea were recorded under hand weeding + Inter culturing at 30 & 45 DAS followed by Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg ha-1 PE + Two IC at 30 & 45 DAS. Besides HW + IC at 30 & 45 DAS, Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg ha-1 as PE + Two IC at 30 & 45 DAS was found more effective in reducing the weed population viz., grassy, broad leaves and sedges resulted into less dry weight of weeds (230 kg ha-1), higher weed control efficiency (68.71%) as well as lower weed index (7.39). Hand weeding & IC at 30 & 45 DAS also recorded significantly the higher uptake of N (72.79 kg ha-1), P (13.99 kg ha-1) and K (20.23 kg ha-1) by seeds and stover and significantly lower uptake of N, P and K by weeds. Lentil Yadav et al. (2013) reported that weeds prevalent in field were Phalaris minor, Chenopodium album, Convolvulus arvensis and Anagallis arvensis. Minimum weed counts (4 m-2) and dry weight (2.64 g m-2) was registered with Pendimethalin 0.75 kg ha-1 PE + 1 hand weeding (HW), being at par with Pendimethalin 1.0 kg ha-1 PE while highest grain yield (16.62 q ha-1) was obtained from Pendimethalin 0.75 kg ha-1 PE + 1 HW being at par with weed free and Pendimethalin 1 kg ha-1 PE. Increased 25% seed rate significantly reduced weed dry weight by 32% and increased yield by 22.8% while 19.2 and 40.8% increase in yield was obtained by 1 HW under 25% higher seed and normal seed rate, respectively. Weed free provided 60% hike in grain yield over weedy. Similar findings were noted by Jain (2007) also. About 37.7% yield reduction was recorded due to weed infestation. Highest net return (Rs. 15918) and B:C were noted under pendimethalin 0.75 kg ha-1 PE + 1 HW while it was almost similar to weed free whereas minimum net return was noted in weedy plot. Similar results were reported by Jain (2007) and Turk and Tawaha (2001). Pendimethalin 0.75 kg ha-1 PE + 1 HW is found the best for grassy and broad leaved weed control. Highest weed control efficiency (94.1%) was found under Pendimethalin 0.75 kg ha-1 + 1 HW followed by Pendimethalin 1.0 kg ha-1 that might be attributed due to inhibition of germination of weed seeds. Similar results were also noted by Jain (2007) and Singh et al. (1994). Soil solarization is a technique in which moist soil is covered by polyethylene film (usually black or clear plastic sheet) to trap solar radiation and cause an increase in soil temperature for several weeks to levels that kill weeds, weed seeds, plant pathogens, and insects for economic crop production (Ascard et al., 2007 and Singh, 2014). For effective weed control, there should be warm, moist soil and intense radiation needed throughout the

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management day in order to raise the soil temperature, may cause damaging changes in enzymatic activity, membrane structure and protein metabolism and ultimately kill weed seeds and seedlings of heat sensitive species (Arora and Tomar, 2012) because the effect of solarization varies with weed species (Singh, 2014). Research has shown the negative impact of solarization on weeds, including parasitic weed Orobanche in tobacco and vegetable crops and better control of noxious Cyperus rotundus has been achieved (Das and Yaduraju, 2008 and Kumar et al., 2012). In view of growing concern for environmental safety and sustainability of agricultural production, integration of solarization practices would provide an eco-friendly and sustainable system (Arora and Tomar, 2012).

Table 2. Effect of weed management practices on growth and yield attributes of lentil Treatment Plant Weed Weed Weed Grain Net B:C height Density No. dry control yield return ratio (cm) m-2 weight efficiency (q/ha) (Rs./ha) (g m-2) (%) Farmer’s Practice 30.5 155.3 124.2 - 5.5 6100 1.35 (Control) Pendimethalin 38.2 73.6 58.7 52.7 8.5 17200 1.92 @1.0 kg a.i. ha-1 Quizalofop-ethyl 35.7 64.8 48.9 60.6 9.5 20400 2.04 5% @ 40g a.i. ha-1 CD (5%) 1.29 5.42 3.20 1.23 Source: Singh et al. (2018) Integrated weed management relies on weed management principles that have proved to be suitable for long term weed management by combining the use of cultural, mechanical, thermal, biological and chemical means based on ecological approaches (Singh, 2014 and Kewat, 2014) that will prevent weed reproduction, emergence, promote weed seed bank depletion and minimize weed competition (Malviya and Singh, 2007) which is the key component of sustainable agriculture. Under such circumstances, to get effective control of composite weed flora, a logical combination of several weed control methods is likely to prove the most effective approach (Kumar et al., 2012). These alternative approaches to suppress weed growth and reproduction below economic threshold level are called “ecological approaches of weed management”. In general, weeds are managed either manually or by using herbicides but former is costly, time consuming and regenerates soon and thus not feasible and creates soil and water pollution, forces heavy financial burden and needs technical know-how for its application. To overcome the problems, biological control appears pollution free and economic option for weed control. Insects, mites, nematodes, plant pathogens, animals, fish, birds and their toxic products are major weed control biotic agents and insects are one of the important groups (Tiwari et al., 2013 and Kumar, 2014). Pioneering works on biological control of weeds was carried in India for control of Parthenium hysterophorus (Kumar and Ray, 2011). Primary focus of biological weed management in South-East Asia has been on aquatic weeds, water hyacinth (Ray et al., 2009) and water fern. ‘BIOMAL’ dry formulation of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides F. sp. malvae, was used in Canada for control of Malva pusilla in flax and lentils and Colletotrichum gloeosporioides F. sp. Cuscutae, for control of Cuscuta sp. in soybean (Das, 2008). Peas Pea is very sensitive to the competition of weeds because of its short life cycle, sparse canopy and shallow roots. Wider spacing provides the luxurious growth of weed during the crop growth period. Hence, early season weed control is extremely important and major emphasis on control should be made during this period. Weeds present at harvest

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management reduce harvest efficiency and increase mechanical damage to the pods (Dittmar and Boyd, 2015). Variable climatic conditions and soil types influence the severity and diversity of weeds. So there is need to develop total weed control program that integrates chemical, mechanical and cultural methods which can overcome weed problems and best suitable for production practices. Chaubey et al. (2016) reported that application of pendimethalin @ 0.75 kg a.i. ha-1 PE followed by one hand weeding at 30 to 40 DAS is recommended for weed management to obtain higher seed yield and quality of pea with high B:C ratio (2.67) and less chemical use. Das (2016) reported that highest seed yield (961.0 kg ha-1) was recorded under hand weeding twice treatment and lowest with weedy check (421.0 kg ha-1). Application of chemical herbicides significantly improved the seed yield over weedy check. Application of Imazethapyr @ 25 ml ha-1 as PoE (916.0 kg ha-1) was found at par with hand weeding twice at 15 and 30 DAS treatment. The lowest weed density and weed dry weight (8.3 g m-2) was recorded in hand weeding twice followed by application of Imazethapyr @ 50 ml ha-1 as PoE (15-20 DAS) (12.1 g m-2). Among the chemical herbicides, applied at recommended doses, Imazethapyr @ 25 ml ha-1 as PoE at 15-20 DAS recorded highest (71%) weed control efficiency with significantly higher seed yield. These results corroborated with the findings of Das et al. (2014), Asaduzzaman et al. (2010) and Mundra and Maliwal (2012). Overdose of chemical herbicides though recorded higher weed control efficiency but reduced pea yield due to negative effect on plant growth and yield attributing characters. Chemical weed control measures increased the total microbial population by 23 to 76.7 per cent over weedy check and 10.6 to 58.9 per cent over twice hand weeding The result was in conformity with the findings reported by Ali et al. (2014). It was also revealed that nodulation in pea was not affected significantly due to the application of chemical herbicides.

Fig.1: Effect of integrated weed management on number of pod plant-1, number of seed pod-1, 100 seed weight and grain yield at harvest in field pea (Bahadur et al., 2017) Peas are poor competitors, particularly at the seedling stage, avoiding early season weed interference is critical. The critical period for crop weed competition in pea is up to 60 days after sowing (Kumar et al., 2009). Weeds can hamper pea production in many ways. First, weeds can reduce yield through competition for light, moisture, nutrients, and space. Second, weeds may harbour insect pests and pathogens that can affect crop production. Finally, late season weeds can be a nuisance that reduces harvest efficiency. Since hand weeding and other weed control methods are laborious, time consuming, costly and difficult, chemicals are the obvious and cost effective methods of weed control. For this many pre-

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management emergence herbicides were released and used by the farmers but very few post-emergence herbicides are available. The chemical weed control method is becoming popular among the farmers as they continue to realize the usefulness of herbicides. Field pea (Pisum sativum) cultivated around the world primarily for seed, but also as a vegetable (for leafy greens, green pods, fresh shelled green peas, and shelled dried peas), as cover crop and for fodder Andargie et al. (2011). Field pea is one of the important rabi pulse crop grown in the India for grain, and vegetable purpose. Despite the use of herbicidal weed control in conventional production, similar weed control problems are being faced due to increased presence of herbicide resistant weeds. As a result, novel and sustainable weed management strategies must be developed (Mortensen et al., 2012). Field pea crop suffers severely due to weed infestation resulting into reduction in crop yield. The critical period of crop-weed competition in field pea has been identified at 20- 35 DAS and presence of weeds beyond this period causes severe reduction in yield (Gupta et al., 2016). Hence, weed control needs to be undertaken during initial period of crop growth. Though the hand weeding is well proven effective method of weed control, but non- availability of labour and cost incurred is very high. Bahadur et al. (2017) reported that weed control is limited factor for realising higher grain yield in field pea. Apart from weed free treatment, weeds can also be effectively controlled with integration of 20:17:16:20 kg NPKS ha-1 + pendimethalin @ 1 kg a.i. ha-1 + one hand weeding at 30 DAS + 3 g kg-1 seed treated with thiram 75% + carbendazim 50% (2:1) and monocrotophos 36% SL 1 lt ha-1 and followed by pendimethalin @ 1 kg a.i. ha-1 + one hand weeding at 30 DAS + 3 g kg-1 seed treated with thiram 75% + carbendazim 50% (2:1) and monochrotophos 36% SL 1 lt ha-1) which ultimately results in higher grain yield of pigeon pea. Integrated weed management is better approach for reduction in yield losses in field pea due to weeds. These findings are in concurrence with those of Dhonde et al. (2009), Idupuganti et al. (2005), Meena et al. (2010), Singh and Sekhon (2013), Sharma et al. (2014) and Murali et al. (2013) and Rao et al.(2015). Similar results of high weed control efficiency in urd bean and pigeon pea was reported by Gupta et al. (2014) and Sharma et al. (2014) and Kumar and Singh (2017).

Fig.2: Effect of integrated weed management on weeds control efficacy, weed dry weight, plant height and final plant stand population at harvest in field pea (Bahadur et al., 2017)

Chaudhryet al. (2013) reported that field pea (Pisum sativum) is cultivated in different crop rotation and soil conditions. Besides constraints, weeds also posed several problems and reduced the grain yield of pea to the extent of 34.2% (Mishra and Bhan, 1997). Hence, suitable weed management practice in pea is must for increment in yield. The results

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management also collaborated with scientific findings of Singh et al. (1991). Weedy plot caused about 7.15 q ha-1 (32.4%) reduction in grain yield. Similar findings were also reported by Mishra and Bhan (1997). Tall genotypes and weed free plot also recorded Rs. 6540 ha-1 or 39.4% and Rs. 9710 ha-1 or 64.6% more net profit, respectively over weedy plot. Pigeon Pea Channabasavannaet al. (2017) reported that Imazethayr @ 0.075 kg ha-1 and hand weeding recorded the highest grain yield (1683 kg ha-1 and 1521 kg ha-1), respectively. The next best treatment was propaquizafop @ 0.062 kg ha-1 (1372 kg ha-1) and further increase in dose did not have any beneficial effect. These treatments controlled both monocot weed species Dinebra retroflexa and Echinochloa colonum very effectively and had no residual effect on the following pigeon pea. Dhaker et al. (2009) reported that imazethapyr @ 0.1 kg ha-1 with one hand weeding recorded efficient weed control, higher yield and economics of pigeon pea. The next best treatment was propaquizafop @ 0.062 kg ha-1 (1372 kg ha-1) that recorded 51.9 per cent higher yields over unweeded check. Further increase in dose of propaquizafop on an above 0.062 kgha-1 had no beneficial effect on weeds. The increase in these treatments may be attributed to growth characters like branches per plant. This inturn helped in accommodating higher pods per plant. Weed less plots increased the uptake of nutrients thus increased the test weight.

Table 3. Some integrated weed management options for controlling weeds in pigeon pea Treatment Seed yield References (t ha-1) Pendimethalin 1.0 kg ha-1 PE + HW (45 DAS) 2.23 Dhonde et al. (2009) Pendimethalin 0.75 kg ha-1 PE + Paraquat 0.48 1.82 Padmaja et al. (2013) kg ha-1 POE 42 DAS Paraquat 0.48 kg ha-1 25 DAS + HW (50 DAS) 1.79 Singh and Sekhon (2013) Pendimethalin 0.45 kg ha-1 PE + HW (30 DAS) 1.84 Singh and Sekhon (2013) Imazethapyr 246 g ha-1 POE 2.56 Bidlacket al. (2009)

Bhengra et al. (2010) reported that lowest weed density and weed dry weight was registered with 2 hand weeding at 30 and 60 DAS that was statically at par with either oxyflourfen 200 g a.i. ha-1 or imazethapyr 100 g a.i. ha-1 in pigeon pea intercropping with 2 lines groundnut and blackgram, respectively and was found superior over remaining treatments with weedy treatment. Thus, IWM options recognized by researchers in said references must be adopted on the farmers’ fields to assess the effectiveness as well as economical feasibility. The future challenges of weed scientists are to set up efficient, economical viable and eco-friendly safe IWM approaches which may be combined into each other in these present and future agro- based systems for making our cropping systems more bio-diverse and complex form in context of weed management scenario. REFERENCES Ali, M, Zaid, MM and Yahya, SF 2014. The effects of post-emergence herbicides on soil microflora and nitrogen fixing bacteria in pea field. International Journal of Chemical, Environmental and Biological Science 2, Issue 1. Andargie, M, Remy, P, Gowda, B, Muluvi, G and Timko, M 2011. Construction of a SSR- based genetic map and identification of QTL for domestication traits using recombinant inbred lines from a cross between wild and cultivated cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp.). Molecular Breeding 28: 413-420. Arora, A and Tomar, SS 2012. Effect of soil solarization on weed seed bank in soil Indian Journal of Weed Science 44 (2): 122-123.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Asaduzzaman, M, Sultana, S, Roy, TS and Masum, SM 2010. Weeding and plant spacing effects on the growth and yield of black gram. Bangladesh Research Publication Journal 4: 62-68. Ascard, J, Hatcher, PE, Melander, B and Upadhyay, MK 2007. Thermal weed control. In Upadhaya MK, Blackshaw RE, 2007. Nonchemical weed management. Principles, concepts and technology. CABI, London, UK. Bahadur, R., Singh, V, Rajpoot, P, Dwivedi, S, Singh, SK, Yadav, DK, Verma, OP, Singh, PK and Singh, J 2017. Effect of integrated weed management on growth and yield of field pea (Pisum sativum) under irrigated conditions. Bulletin of Environment, Pharmacology and Life Sciences 6 (Special issue 3): 96-100. Bhardwaj, RL 2013. Effect of mulching on crop production under rainfed condition. Agriculture Reviews 34 (3): 188-197. Bidlack, JE, Andy, M, Delmar, S, Charles, TM, Robert, DW and Srinivas, CR 2006. Weed control in a pigeon pea–wheat cropping system. Field Crops Research 96: 63-70. Channabasavanna, AS, Talawar, AM, Kitturmath, MS and Rajkumar, H 2017. Evaluation of post emergence herbicides on grass weeds in pigeon pea and its bioassay on following crop. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research 51 (2): 188-190. Chaubey,T, Manimurugan, C, Gupta, N,Kumar,R, Singh, PM and Singh, B 2016. Effect of different weed management practices on seed yield and quality of vegetable pea.Vegetable Science 43 (1): 142-144. Das, R, Patra, BC, Mandal, MK and Pathak, A 2014. Integrated weed management in blackgram (Vigna mungo.) and its effect on soil microflora under sandy loam soil of west Bengal. The Bio Scan 9: 1593-96. Das, SK 2016. Chemical weed management in pea (Pisum sativum L.). Journal of Crop and Weed 12 (2):110-115. Das, TK 2008. Weed science: basics and application. Jain Brothers Publication, New Delhi, First edition p. 901. Das, TK and Yaduraju, NT 2008. Effect of soil solarization and crop husbandry practices on weed species competition and dynamics in soybean- wheat cropping system. Indian Journal of Weed Science 40 (1&2): 1-5. Dhaker, H, Mundra, SL and Jain, NK 2009. Weed management in cluster bean. Indian Journal of Weed Science 41 (3-4): 224-227. Dhonde, MB, Kate, SR, Pandure, BS and Tambe, AD 2009. Integrated weed management in pigeon pea. Indian Journal of Weed Science 41 (1&2): 102-105. Dittmar, PJ and Boyd, NS 2015. Weed Management in Bean and Pea (Bush, Pole, Lima Bean, English Pea, and Southern Pea). http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu. Gelot, DG, Patel, DM, Patel, KM, Patel, IM, Patel, FN and Parmar, AT 2018. Effect of integrated weed management on weed control and yield of summer green gram (Vigna radiata L. wilczek). International Journal of Chemical Studies 6 (1): 324-327. Gore, AK, Chavan, AS, Gokhale, DN and Thombre, KM 2018. Evaluation of new herbicides on weed flora and productivity of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences7 (5): 2319-7706. Gore, AK, Gobade, SM and Patil, PV 2015. Effect of pre and post emergence herbicides on yield and economics of chickpea. International Journal of Tropical Agriculture 33: 2. Gupta, KC., Gupta, AK, and Saxena, R 2016. Weed management in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Wasp.) under rainfed conditions. International Journal of Agricultural Sciences 12 (2): 238-240.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Gupta, V, Singh, M, Kumar, A, Sharma, BC and Kher, D 2014. Effect of different weed management practices in urd bean (Vigna mungo L. Hepper) under sub-tropical rainfed conditions of Jammu, India. Legume Research: An International Journal 37 (4): 424-426. Idapuganti, RG, Rana, DS and Sharma, R 2005. Influence of integrated weed management on weed control and productivity of soybean (Glycine max L. Merrill). Indian Journal of Weed Science 37 (1/2): 126-128. Jha, AK and Soni, M. 2013. Weed management by sowing methods and herbicides in soybean (Glycine max L.). Indian Journal of Weed Science 45 (4): 250-252. Kavad, NB, Patel, CK, Patel, AR and Thumber, BR 2016. Integrated weed management in black gram. Indian Journal of Weed Science 48 (2): 222-224. Kewat, ML 2014. Improved weed management in Rabi crops. National Training on Advances in Weed Management pp. 22-25. Kumar, A, Sharma, BC, Nandan, B and Sharma, PK 2009. Crop weed competition in field pea under rain fed subtropical conditions of Kandi belt of Jammu. Indian Journal of Weed Science 41: 23-26. Kumar, M, Ghorai, AK, Singh, SR, Majumdar, B, Kundu, DK and Mahapatra, BS 2012. Effect of stale seedbed and subsequent herbicides application on weeds and rhizospheric microorganism in Jute. In: Proceeding of 3rd International Agronomy Congress, Held at IARI, New Delhi, pp. 304-305. Kumar, N, Nandal, DP and Punia, SS 2014. Weed management in chickpea under irrigated condition. Indian Journal of Weed Science 46 (3): 300-301. Kumar, P and Singh, R 2017. Integrated weed management in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Wasp.) under rainfed conditions. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Science 6 (3): 97-101. Kumar, S, Singh, R, Kumar, A and Kumar, N 2010. Performance of different herbicide in weed growth of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). International Journal of Agricultural Science 6: 401-404. Kumar, S 2014. Biological control of terrestrial weeds. In training manual advance training in weed management, held at DWSR, Jabalpur, on 14-23 January, pp. 91-95. Kumar, S and Ray, P 2011. Evaluation of augmentative release of Zygogramma bicolorata for biological control of Parthenium. Crop Protection 30: 587-591. Malviya, A and Singh, B 2007. Weed dynamics, productivity and economics of maize as affected by integrated weed management under rainfed condition. Indian Journal of Agronomy 52 (4): 321-24. Mandal, D, Khuntia, A, Ghosh, S, Pal, D and Ghosh, RK 2006. Determination of critical period of crop-weed competition in green gram (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) in the gangetic alluvial soil of India. Journal of Crop and Weed 2 (1): 13-14. Meena, B, Sagarka, BK and Pisal, RR 2010. Efficacy of new herbicides in kharif pigeon pea under south Saurashtra condition. Indian Journal of Weed Science 42 (1&2): 98-100. Mishra P, Singh, H and Shukla, VK 2013. Efficacy of herbicide odyssey on growth, growth parameters and yield of soybean (Glycine max L.). Bioinfolet – A Quarterly Journal of Life Science 10 (2b): 703-705. Mohanty, S and Satyasai, KJ 2015. Feeling the Pulse Indian Pulses Sector. NABARD Rural Pulse. Mortensen, DA, Egan, JF, Maxwell, BD, Ryan MR and Smith, RG 2012. Navigating a critical juncture for sustainable weed management. Biological Science 62 (1): 75-84. Mundra, SL and Maliwal, PL 2012. Influence of quizalofop-ethyl on narrow-leaved weeds in black gram and its residual effect on succeeding crops. Indian Journal of Weed Science 44: 231–34.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Murali, K, Mallesha, Fakeerappa Arabhanvi 2013. Effect of integrated weed management practices on growth, yield and weed dry weight of pigeon pea. Ecology, Environment and Conservation 19 (4): 1279-1283. Padmaja, B, Reddy, MM and Reddy, DV 2013. Weed control efficiency of pre- and post- emergence herbicides in pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan L.). Journal of Food Legumes 26(1&2): 44-45. Pedde, KC, Gore, AK and Chavan, AS 2013. Integrated weed management in chickpea. Indian Journal of Weed Science 45 (4): 299. Poonia, TC and Pithia, MS 2013. Pre and post –emergence herbicides for weed management in chickpea. Indian Journal of Weed Science 45 (3): 223-225. Prachand, S, Kalhapure, A and Kubde, KJ 2015. Weed management in soybean with pre and post-emergence herbicides. Indian Journal of Weed Science 47 (2): 163-165. Rao, AN and Chauhan, BS 2014. Weeds and weeds management in India. Weed Science in India. A review. Asian-Pacific region. Pattancheru (Hydarabad) Chapter-4, 90 & 107. Rao, PV, Reddy, SA and Rao, KY 2015. Effect of integrated weed management practices on growth and yield of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan L. Millsp.). IJPAJX, CAS-USA, 5 (3): 86-91. Ratnam, M, Rao, AS and Reddy, TY 2011. Integrated weed management in chickpea. Indian Journal of Weed Science 43 (1&2): 70-72. Ray, P, Kumar, S and Pandey, AK 2009. Influence of photoperiod on growth and myco- herbicidal potential of Alternaria alternate, a biological agent of water hyacinth. Journal of Mycology and Plant Pathology 39: 458-461. Riemens, MM, Widge, RVD, Bleeker, PO and Lotz, L 2007. Effect of stale seedbed preparation and subsequent weed control in lettuce on weeds. Weed Research 47: 149-156. Rupareliya, VV, Chovatia, PK, Vekariya, SJ and Javiya, PP 2018. Evaluation of pre and post emergence herbicides in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). International Journal of Chemical Studies 6 (1): 1662-1665. Sharma, JC, Chandra, P, Shivran, RK and Narolia, RS 2014. Integrated weed management in pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan L. Millsp.). IJAAS, 2 (1-2): 69-74. Singh, A and Jain, N 2017. Integrated weed management in chickpea. Indian Journal of Weed Science 49 (1): 93–94. Singh, G and Sekhon, HS 2013. Integrated weed management in pigeon pea (Cajanus cajanL. Millsp.). World Journal of Agricultural Sciences 9 (1): 86-91. Singh, KM, Kumar, M and Choudhary, SK 2018. Effect of weed management practices on growth and yield of lentil (Lens esculenta Moench). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences Special Issue 7: 3290-3295. Singh, P and Kumar, R 2008. Agro-economics feasibility of weed management in soybean (Glycine max L.) grown in vertisols of south-eastern Rajasthan. Indian Journal of Weed Science 40 (1-2): 62-64. Singh, R 2014. Weed management in major kharif and rabi crops. National Training on Advances in Weed Management. pp. 31-40. Singh, VP, Singh, SP, Kumar, A, Banga, A, Tripathi, N, Bisht, N and Singh, RP 2014. Comparative efficacy of quizalofop-ethyl against weeds in groundnut. Indian Journal of Weed Science 46 (4): 389-391. Tiwari, A, Meena, M, Zehra, A and Upadhyay, RS 2013. Efficacy of Alternaria alternata as bio-herbicide against weed species. International Conference on Global Scene of Traditional System of Medicine, Ayurveda, Agriculture and Education, RGSC, Barkachha BHU, 21-22 January, pp. 498-01.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

HOST PLANT RESISTANCE TO INSECTS POTENTIAL AND THEIR LIMITATIONS Sumit Kumar1*, Prahlad Masurkar1, Pragati Gupta2, Lavlesh Prajapati2, Akash Pandey3 and Piyush Jaiswal1 1Department of Mycology and Plant Pathology, Institute Agricultural Science, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi- 221005 (U.P.) 2Department of Entomology, C. S. Azad University of Agriculture and Technology, Kanpur - 208002 (U.P.) 3Department of Plant Pathology, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel University of Agriculture and Technology, Meerut- 250110 (U.P.)

ABSTRACT Host plant resistance (HPR) to insects is an effective, economical and environment friendly method of pest control. The most attractive feature of HPR is that farmers virtually do not any need and skill in application techniques, and there is no cash investment by the poor farmers. Considerable progress has been made by researchers in identification and development of crop cultivars with resistance to the major pests in different crops. There is a need to transfer resistance genes into high yielding cultivars with adaption to different agro-ecosystems. Resistance to insects should form one of the criteria to release varieties for cultivation by the farmers. Genes from the wild relatives of crops, and novel genes, such as those from Bacillus thuringiensis can also be deployed in different crops to make HPR an effective weapon to minimize the losses due to insect pests. HPR will not only cause a major reduction in pesticides use and slowdown the rate of development of resistance to insecticides in insect populations, but also lead to increased activity of beneficial organisms and reduction in pesticides residues in food and food products.

INTRODUCTION Host plant resistance (HPR) along with natural enemies and cultural practices, is a central component of any pest management strategy. With the domestication of plants for agricultural purposes, farmers selected the plants that were able to withstand the adverse environmental factors, including insect pests and disease. The plants that were susceptible to the herbivores were generally eliminated, and only resistant plants survived until the crop harvest. This process led to natural selection of plants having resistance to insect pests. Because of this unintentional, but continuous selection of plants over several hundred years, many landraces selected by farmers evolved as having or accumulating genes conferring resistance to insects (Sharma, 1993). Host Plant Resistance: The relative amount of heritable qualities possessed by the plant which influence the ultimate degree of damage done by the insect in the field (Painter, 1951). Host Plant resistance also can be defined as the heritable qualities of a cultivar to counteract the activities of insects so as to compared to other cultivars of the same species under similar conditions (Dhaliwal et al., 1993).

Characterization of Resistance Resistance is heritable and controlled by one or more major genes. Resistance is relative and can be measured only by comparing with a susceptible cultivar of the same species. Resistance is measurable and its magnitude can be determined quantitatively (by insect establishment) and qualitatively (by analysis of the standard scoring systems). Resistance is variable and can be modified by abiotic and biotic components of the environment.

Types of Resistance A. Genetic Resistance Monogenic resistance When resistance is controlled by a single gene it is called monogenic resistance.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Oligogenic resistance When resistance is governed by a few genes, it is called oligogenic resistance.

Polygenic resistance When resistance is governed by many genes, it is referred to as polygenic resistance. The term horizontal resistance has also been used to denote the resistance governed by polygenes.

B. Major or Minor Genes Major gene resistance The resistance controlled by one (monogenic) or a few (oligogenic) major genes is called major gene resistance. This is also called vertical resistance. Major genes have a strong effect and these can be identified easily.

Minor gene resistance When resistance is controlled by a number of minor genes, each contributing a small effect, it is called minor gene resistance. This is also referred to as horizontal resistance.

C. Evolutionary concept Sympatric resistance Evolved as a result of gene for gene nature of coevolution of plant and insect. It is governed by major genes.

Allopatric resistance Evolved not as a result of coevolution of plant and insect. It is governed by many genes.

D. Trophic levels Intrinsic resistance Here the plant alone produces defense through physical means (trichomes or toughness) or through production of chemicals (toxin or digestibility reducers) or both (Glandular trichomes and resins).

Extrinsic resistance Here the natural enemies of insect pests benefit the host plants by reducing the pest abundance.

E. Biotype Reaction Vertical resistance This type of resistance is effective against certain specific biotypes of the insect but not against others. It is also called specific resistance. Vertical resistance is qualitative as the frequency distribution of resistant and susceptible plants is discontinuous.

Horizontal resistance This type of resistance is effective against all the known biotypes of the insect. It is also called nonspecific resistance. Horizontal resistance is quantitative as the degree of resistance depends on the number of minor genes each contributing a small effect. It does not exert a high selection pressure on the insect.

F. Intensity of resistance Immunity An immune variety is one to which a specific insect will never consume or injure under any known conditions.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

High resistance A variety with high resistance is one which possesses qualities resulting in small damage by a specific insect under a given set of conditions.

Low resistance It indicates the possession of qualities which cause a variety to show lesser damage or infestation by an insect than the average for the crop under consideration.

Susceptibility A susceptible variety is one which shows average or more than average damage caused by an insect.

High susceptibility A variety shows high susceptibility when much more than average damage is done by the insect under consideration.

Mechanisms of Resistance The three important mechanisms of resistance are - Antixenosis (Non preference) - Antibiosis - Tolerance

1. Antixenosis Host plant characters responsible for non-preference of the insects for shelter, oviposition, feeding, etc. The word was coined by Kogan and Ortman, 1978. Another term used for non-preference is "antixenosis", (Xenosis is a Greek word for guest; therefore, antixenosis means against or expelling guests). It describes the inability of a plant to serve as a host to an insect herbivore. It denotes presence of morphological or chemical factor which alter insect behaviour resulting in poor establishment of the insect. e.g. Trichomes in cotton - resistant to whitefly, wax bloom on crucifer leaves - deter feeding by DBM, Plant shape and colour also play a role in non-preference, Open panicle of sorghum - Supports less Helicoverpa armigera.

2. Antibiosis Adverse effect of the host plant on the biology (survival, development and reproduction) of the insects and their progeny due to the biochemical and biophysical factors present in it manifested by larval death, abnormal larval growth, etc. Antibiosis may be due to -Presence of toxic substances, -Absence of sufficient amount of essential nutrients, -Nutrient imbalance/improper utilization of nutrients

Chemical factors in Antibiosis

Chemicals present in plants Imparts resistance against DIMBOA (Dihydroxy methoxybenzoxazin) European corn borer Gossypol (Polyphenol) American bollworm Sinigrin Aphids Cucurbitacin Cucurbit fruit flies Salicylic acid Rice stem borer

Physical factors in antibiosis Thick cuticle, glandular hairs, silica deposits, tight leaf sheath, etc.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

3. Tolerance It enables the host plant to withstand or recover from damage causedby insect pest abundance equal to that damaging a plant without resistancecharacters (susceptible). Tolerance is a plant response to an insect pest.

Tolerance is useful in pest management due to certain distinct advantages Tolerant varieties have a higher economic threshold level than the susceptible varieties and hence require less insecticide application and promote bio-control. Tolerant varieties do not depress insect populations nor do they provide any selection pressure on the insect and thus are useful in preventing the development of insect biotypes. In varieties with a combination of three mechanisms of resistance, toleranceincreases yield stability by providing at least a moderate level of resistance, whenvertical genes providing a high level of resistance through antixenosis and antibiosis succumb to the new biotype.

Factors affecting expression of resistance to insects Resistance is primarily governed by genetics but physical and biotic factors of the environment also often influence its expression.

Physical Factors Weather, soil, plant architecture, and cultural practices are some of the most important influences on the plant's physical environment. These factors can affect plant resistance by influencing such elements like temperature, light intensity, and soil fertility. Changes in these elements cause fundamental changes in plant physiological processes and can alter levels of allelochemicals or cause imbalances in basic nutrients.

I. Temperature Abnormally high or low temperatures for a period of time may cause loss of resistance e.g. loss of resistance to the Hessian fly has been found in some wheat varieties at temperatures below 180 c.

II. Light intensity Shade induced loss of resistance has been found in several instances e.g. wheat resistant to wheat stem fly, sugar beets resistant to greenpeach aphids, potato resistant to Colarado potato beetle etc. With potatoes, shading was found associated with reduced levels of steroidal glycosides in leaves. These substances are known to retard feeding and development of the beetle.

III. Soil fertility Changes in soil nutrient levels may also mediate the expressions of resistance in some plants, but little is known about the mechanisms involved e.g., alfalfa resistant to spotted alfalfa aphid were found to have reduced resistance ifdeficient levels of calcium or potassium or excess levels of magnesium ornitrogen were present.

Biological factors The most important biological factors are the selection of biotypes and changes in resistance with plant age.

I. Biotypes When resistant cultivars are grown widely, selection pressure is imposed by these hosts on the insect population. When capable, the insect population responds with genotypes with virulence to overcome the resistance.With time, these genotypes with superior fitness increase in number and displace the earlier ones. This results in a situation of growing in effectiveness of the resistant cultivar e.g., biotypes of brown plant hopper in rice, whiteflies in cottonetc.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

II. Plant age Physiological responses in plants vary with age, and these can lead tochanges in the expression of cultivar resistance e.g., resistance in corn to theEuropean corn borer results from the presence of DIMBOA (2,4-dihydroxy-7-methoxy-l,4- benzoxazin-3-one). DIMBOA levels are highest during the earlygrowing season, thus offering maximum resistance to the first- generation cornborers. DIMBOA levels decrease as the season progresses, and most cultivarshave very little resistance to second-generation corn borers.

Advantage of HPR Utilization of plant resistance as a control strategy has enormous practical relevance and additional emotional appeal (Davies,1981). It is in this context that host plant resistance assumes a central role in our efforts to increase the production and productivity of crops. Plant resistance to insects is the backbone of any pest management system because of: Specificity- It is specific to the target pest or a group of pests and generally has no adverse effects on the non-target pest. Cumulative effect -It is due to target pest have reduced survival, delayed development and reduced fecundity. Eco-friendly – HPR does not cause pollution in any component of the environment nor does it have any deleterious effect on man or wild life. Easily of adoptable-It does not involve any costs to the farmers also the farmers do not have knowledge of the application techniques. Effectiveness – Resistant varieties increase the susceptibility of insect pest to insecticides and many natural enemies of insect pest are more effective on resistant varieties. Compatibility- It can easily be combined with other methods of pest control, and also improves the efficiency of other methods of pest management. Decreased pesticide application – Resistant varieties usually need less frequent treatment with a pesticide or may require low rates of application or pesticide application may not be necessary at all. Persistence- Most of the insect – resistant varieties express moderate to high levels of resistance to the target insect pests throughout the crop growing season.

HPR in Integrated Pest Management High levels of plant resistance are available against a few insect species only. However, very high levels or resistance are not a pre-requisite for use HPR in integrated pest management. Varieties with low to moderate levels of resistance or those which can avoid the pest damage can be deployed for pest management in combination with other components of pest management. Deployment of pest-resistant cultivars should be aimed at conservation of the natural enemies and minimizing the number pf pesticides applications. Use of insect – resistant cultivars also improve the efficiency of other pest management practices, including the synthetic insecticides (Adkisson and Dyck, 1980; Heinrichs, 1988; Sharma, 1993; Panda and Khush, 1995). Host plant resistance can be used as: a principal component of pest control, an adjunct to cultural, biological and chemical control. as a check against the release of susceptible cultivars.

HPR as a principal method of insect control HPR as a method of insect control in the context of IPM has a greater potential than any other method of pest suppression. In general, the use of pest resistant varieties is not subjected to the vagaries of nature unlike chemical and biological control methods. Use of insect resistant varieties has contributed immensely to sustainable rice production in Asia (Khush and Brar, 1991). Insect resistant varieties have now been deployed for the control a number of insect pests world-wide (Painter, 1951; Maxwell and Jennings, 1980; Smith, 1989; Sharma et al., 1999). Plant resistance to insects was a principal method of insect control before the advent of insecticides. Several insect pests have been kept under check through the use of

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management insect’s resistant cultivars. The major example includes Grapevine phylloxera, Phylloxera vitifoliae (Fitch.) resistant rootstocks from the U.S.A. (Painter, 1951), Cotton jassid, A. biguttula biguttula - Krsihna, Mahalaxmi, Khandwa 2, and MCU (Sundramurthy and Chitra,1992).

HPR and Biological control Plant resistance to insects, in general, is compatible with the natural enemies for pest management.The natural enemies not only help to control the target pests, but also reduce the population densities of other insects within their host range (Maxwell,1972). Insect resistant varieties also increase the effectiveness of the natural enemies because of a favorable ratio between the densities of the target pest and its natural enemies. And such a combination is more effective in crops with tolerance mechanism of resistance (Kogan, 1982). Restless behavior of the insects on the resistance varieties also increases their vulnerability to the natural enemies (Pathak, 1970). The use of HPR and biological control brings together unrelated mortality factors, and thus reduce the pest population’s genetic response to selection pressure from either plant resistance or from the natural enemies. Acting in concert, they provide a density-independent mortality at times of low pest density, and density-dependent mortality at times of pest abundance (Bergman and Tingey, 1979).

Limitations of HPR Time consuming - Takes a long time to identify and develop insect resistant cultivars. It takes 5 to 15 years to identify sources of resistance and transfer for quality traits. Development of plant varieties resistant to insect pests takes a long time. For example, it took 15 years to develop the sorghum midge – resistance variety, ICSV 745 (Sharma, 1993). Biotype development – The use of varieties with vertical resistance may lead to development of insect biotypes. Complexity of pests – Most of the crops is attacked by a complex of pests and there is a potential problem of resistance to one pest being linked to susceptibility to another. For example, pubescence in plants may be attractive to some pests and provide resistance to others. Similarly cotton varieties high in gossypol content are resistant to Helianthus species and Blister beetles, but gossypol at concentrations found in most cotton plants attracts Boll weevils. Effects on non-targeted species – Plants that are resistance to arthropod pests, may have adverse impact non-targeted species in two ways. Firstly, elevated toxin levels may be unpalatable, allergenic or even dangerous for consumers. Genetic limitations- The use of HPR may be limited by the absence of preadaptive resistance genes among available germplasm. Moreover, resistance cultivars may lack the potential to produces high yields. Conflicting resistance traits-certain plant characteristics may confer resistance to one pest, but render such plants more susceptible to other pests.eg. Hair ness in cotton confers resistance to jassids but they preferred for oviposition by spotted bollworm.

REFERENCES Adkisson, P.L. and V. A. Dyck: Resistant varieties in pest management systems. In: Breeding Plants Resistant to Insect (Eds: F.G. Maxwell, and P.R. Jennings). John Wiley and Sons, New York, USA. Pp.233-251 (1980). Bergman, J.M. and W.M. Tingey: Aspects of interaction between plant genotypes and biological control. Bull. Entomol. Soc. Am., 25 275-279 (1979). Davies, J.C.: Pest losses and control of damage on sorghum in developing countries – The realities and myths. In: Sorghum in the Eighties (Eds: L.R. House, L.K. Mughogo and J.M. Peacock). International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Andhra Pradesh, India. pp. 215-224 (1981). Dhaliwal G.S. (2006) An outline of Entomology., Kalyani publications., pp: 102

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Dhaliwal G.S., Arora R. Integrated Pest management. pp: 116-144. Heinrichs, E.A.: Role of insect-resistant varieties in rice IPM systems. In: Pesticides Management and Integrated Pest Management in Southeast Asia (Eds; P.S. Teng and K.L. Heong), Consortium for International Crop Protection, Maryland, USA (1988). Khush, G.S. and D.S. Brar: Genetics of resistance to insects in crop plants. Adv. Agron., 45, 223-274 (1991). Kogan, M.: Plant resistance in pest management. In: Introduction to Insect Pest Management, 2nd Edition (Eds: R.L. Melcalf and W.H. Luckmann). John Willey and Sons, New York, USA, pp. 93-134 (1982). Maxwell, F.G. and P.R. Jennings (Eds.): Breeding Plants Resistant to Insects. John Wiley and Sons, New York, USA, 683 pp: (1980). Maxwell, F.G., J.N. Jenkins and W.L. Parrot: Resistance of plants to insects. Adv. Agron., 24, 187-265 (1972). Painter, R.H.: Insect Resistance in Crop Plants. MacMillan New York, USA. 520pp. (1951). Panda, N. and G.S. Khush: Host Plant Resistance to Insects. CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK, 431 pp. (1995). Pathak, M.D.: Genetics of plants in pest management. In: Concepts of pest management (Eds: R.L. Rabb and F.E. Guthrie). North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA. Pp. 138-157 (1970). Saxena R. C. and Srivastava R. C. Entomology at a glance. Agrotech publishing academy. pp: 187(2002). Sharma, H.C., B.U. Singh, K.V. Hariprasad and P.J. Bramel Cox: Host plant resistance to insects in integrated pest management for safer environment. Proc. Acad.Environ. Biol., 8, 113-136 (1999). Sharma, H.C., P. Vidyasagar and K.F. Nwanze: Effect of host-plant resistance on economic injury levels for the sorghum midge, Contarinia sorghicola. Int. J. Pest Management, 39, 435-444 (1993). Smith, C.M.: Plant Resistance to insects. John Wiley and Sons, New York, USA, 286 pp: (1989). Sundramurthy, V.T. and K.L. Chitra: Integrated pest management in cotton. Indian j.Pl. Prot., 20, 1-17 (1992).

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

BREEDING FOR DISEASES RESISTANCE IN FIELD CROPS Suraj Kumar Hitaishi1, Amit Kumar Chaudhary1, Shiv Prakash Shrivastav1 and Abhinav Kumar2 Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding1, Department of Horticulture2, Narendra Deva University of Agriculture and Technology, Narendra Nagar (Kumarganj), Faizabad -224 229 (U.P.), India.

INTRODUCTION In nature organisms are classified as producers, green plants, consumers organisms exploiting other organisms), and decomposers (organisms using dead organisms). Green plants, including our crops, are used by a multitude of consumers of almost every kind, from various types of herbivores (mammals, snails, insects) to typical parasites (insects, mites, fungi, bacteria). In order to survive green plants developed a broad range of defence mechanisms to ward off most of these consumers. These defence mechanisms are principally based on avoidance, resistance or tolerance.

Measuring Resistance Selection for resistance implies measurements of plant resistance. Ideally one should measure the amount of pathogen present at a given moment compared with the amount present on or in a extremely susceptible cultivar. The quantitative or partial resistance of a host cultivar cannot be assessed in absolute terms; it is always a relative measure compared with that of a well-known standard cultivar. This standard cultivar is often the most susceptible cultivar available (Parlevliet, 1989). The amount of tissue affected is, in general, a good estimator of the amount of pathogen present. The amount of pathogen present, however, is not just dependent on the level of resistance of the host cultivar. Other factors may and do interfere with it such as:

Interplot interference Van der Plank (1963) stated: “Plots in the experiment are meant to represent farmers’ fields receiving the same treatment as these fields receive”. But plots represent fields only when the plots within an experimental area do not interfere with one another. The representational error - the error of taking plots to represent fields when they do not can be large.

Relation between disease symptoms and amount of the pathogen True disease symptoms are observed with several pathogens such as wilting caused by vascular pathogens, and leaf rolling, mottling, stunting, etc., caused by viruses. These symptoms tend to be rather unreliable for assessing resistance, since the relationship between the amount of pathogen present and the severity of symptoms is often poor. In other cases the pathogen itself is observed, making assessment much easier and far more reliable. The ecoparasitic powdery mildews are good examples; their mycelia remain on the surface of the host epidermis and are visible as white to grey spots

Inoculum Density This factor may obscure real differences in quantitative resistance. In order to prevent escape of genotypes from infection, there is a tendency to apply high inoculum densities. Complete resistance in such cases is easily detectable, but small differences in susceptibility tend to disappear. The optimal inoculum density is the density whereby escapes are largely prevented while only the most susceptible cultivars are strongly affected (Parlevliet, 1989).

Earliness If the entries differ considerably in earliness the period of exposure to the pathogen varies greatly as the assessment is usually done at the same moment for all entries. Resistance

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management to head blight caused by Fusarium in wheat is considerably overestimated in late cultivars due to this aspect (Parlevliet, 1993).

Plant Habitat In dense crops and short plants the amount of tissue affected tends to increase. In loose crops and tall plants it tends to decrease. This is probably due to micro-climatic effects. Short wheat cultivars are more affected than tall cultivars by Septoria leaf and glume blotch (Parlevliet, 1993).

Genetics of Resistance If published research is representative of the resistance present it is most often controlled by major genes. These major genes are often inherited dominantly, less frequently recessively. Polygenic inheritance of resistance has been reported as well, but its much lower frequency is most likely due to the more difficult nature of the research than to a truly lower frequency. Major resistance genes often occur in a surprisingly high numbers. In coffee (Coffea arabica L.) – Hemileia vastatrix Berk. & Br.

The gene-for-gene concept Many major resistance genes operate in a gene-for gene way. For each resistance gene in the host there is a corresponding avirulence gene in the pathogen (Flor, 1971), and only the corresponding avirulence gene can initiate the hypersensitive reaction (HR) leading to incompatibility. Resistance and avirulence inherit in most cases in a dominant manner, susceptibility and virulence in a recessive way. The HR is now known to result from the specific interaction at the cellular level of the product of the resistance gene and the product of the avirulence gene. If one of the two products is absent, there is no incompatibility; the normal pathogenicity of the pathogen results in a compatible reaction (the host appears susceptible). What is normally meant with virulence is actually the normal pathogenicity shown in the absence of avirulence. Virulence is absence of avirulence, it is genetically seen as an empty concept; there are no virulence genes.

Quantitative Resistance Resistance, like other traits, occurs in a qualitative or in a quantitative way. With the former the different genotypes in a population occur as discernible phenotypes; it is usually controlled by a major gene. Quantitative resistance (QR) is defined as a resistance that varies in a continuous way between the various phenotypes of the host population, from almost imperceptible (only a slight reduction in the growth of the pathogen) to quite strong (little growth of the pathogen). This resistance is often indicated with other terms such as partial, residual and field resistance or even (wrongly) with tolerance

Components of partial resistance QR is expressed as a reduced amount of tissue in the invaded or affected host compared with that of a highly susceptible standard. When the total amount of disease is the collective result of a large number of discrete lesions, it is possible to identify a number of components contributing to the amount of tissue affected, as in the case of the cereal rusts (Parlevliet,1992). QR may reduce the chance of infection, resulting in fewer lesions. It may reduce the growth of the pathogen once the infection is successfull, causing smaller lesions that may sporulate less. It is possible to discern at least three components of QR against pathogens that are not systemic; infection frequency, lesion size and sporulation rate per lesion.

Non-Durable Resistance In nature there is a constant race of arms between the attacking parasite and the defending host, and in the evolutionary sense, all resistance is transitory. But large differences exist in the ease by which parasites can overcome a resistance. In agriculture, too the

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management durability of a resistance varies greatly. Resistance may already be neutralized in the last stages of the breeding program (at zero years) and may, still be effective after more than 130 years and wide exposure, as the case of the Phylloxera aphid resistance of grape (Vitis vinifera L.) rootstocks (Niks et al. 1993).

Durable Resistance Resistance is considered durable when it remains effective for a considerable time, despite wide exposure. In this sense, it is a quantitative concept. The Rpg1 gene discussed above was durable, but did not last forever. And in the evolutionary sense, no resistance will last forever. It is possible to discern three groups of resistances that are predominantly durable.

1 - Resistance to pathogens with a wide host range, generalists Are usually of a quantitative nature (Bruehl, 1983) and nearly always durable (Parlevliet, 1993). But there are exceptions, such as the major resistance genes Mi in tomato and Rk in cow pea against the root knot nematode, M. incognita (Roberts, 1995).

2 - QR against specialists and based on some to several genes with additive effects seems durable. In the few cases where reported QR broke down, the resistance appeared to be monogenic, like the field resistance against rice blast, M. grisea, in the rice cultivar St-1. The resistance became ineffective within a few years and appeared to be based on a single dominant gene Pi-f (Toriyama, 1975).

3 - Monogenic resistance against specialists of a non hypersensitive nature. Such resistance is often quite durable. The non hypersensitive resistance genes Rpg2 (sr-2) and Rpr34 (Lr- 34) of wheat to stem rust and leaf rust respectively and the mlo-gene of barley to powdery mildew have already lasted for a considerable time. Usually, the presence of race-specific resistance effects is considered as evidence of non-durable resistance

Breeding for Resistance In order to reduce costs and to increase the efficiency of identifying resistant plants or lines in segregating populations, breeders developed screening methods in which plants as young as possible were exposed to high concentrations of, preferably, a specified inoculum. This efficiently identifies complete resistance based on major genes but is inadequate for recognizing small differences in resistance. These screening approaches, together with the belief that polygenic resistance is difficult to select for and might not give a good level of resistance, led to the present situation where major gene resistance has been exploited very well, while QR has been used only sparingly. This is unfortunate as there is so much QR available. Quantitative Resistance occurs to most of our important pathogens at various levels in nearly all our crops as discussed in the chapter “quantitative resistance”. Since this QR does occur in the cultivars grown, it is genetic material that is related to what the breeders’ desire. For this type of resistance breeders do not need to look for primitive genotypes from centres of diversity nor to related wild species. The resistance is near at hand in adapted cultivars, a fortunate situation as it makes breeding easier. McIntosh (1997) concluded that the ideal sources of resistance are those present in closely related, commercial genotypes, and any effort to transfer resistance from related species and genera should be considered long term. To select for QR means accumulating QR in much the same way as selecting for higher yields. The breeder selects the plants or lines with the lower levels of disease severity and by doing that continuously over the seasons, the level of QR will increase fairly rapidly as Parlevliet and Van Ommeren (1988) showed. There is, however, one complication. If there is also non-durable major gene resistance around, it has to be taken into account. The QR is not visible when such an effective major gene is present. By using, preferably, local material, the frequency of such non-durable still effective major genes is often low, as the local pathogen population has adapted to these genes. Introducing plant material from elsewhere, especially

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management from the centres of diversity, increases the frequency of such non-durable effective major genes considerably, as the local pathogen population has not yet adapted to the newly introduced resistance. Therefore, to select QR stick as much as possible to local material as they will almost certainly carry QR. One can also avoid ending up with non-durable major resistance in the selected material by selecting against susceptibility, i.e. removing the most susceptible plants and lines all the time (Parlevliet and Van Ommeren, 1988). Plants or lines with complete resistance should also be removed in case of resistance breeding against specialized fungal pathogens, as such resistances can be assumed to be non-durable. In case of non-specialized pathogen and viruses one may use any resistance.

Concluding Remarks In the coming 50 to 60 years the world population will about double and hopefully also become more prosperous. This demands large yield increases in our food crops, which have to be grown in more sustainable agricultural systems. The need for durable disease resistance, therefore, can be expected to grow enormously. This need can be met technically by exploiting two sources that are largely untapped at present. These sources are the QR already present in our crops and the possibilities of transforming genes or gene constructs encoded for resistance into our crops. Quantitative Resistance at present is poorly exploited. If the same large effort that went into breeding for the hypersensitive, major gene type had gone into QR, most cultivars of our major crops would now carry high levels of it. With respect to sustainable agriculture and integrated forms of crop protection quantitative, durable resistance is a more desirable form of resistance than the non-durable type. Much of the resistance obtained after transformation is of a quantitative nature. This view should be consequential in modern genetic engineering activities. A considerable part of successful molecular manipulation leads to the type of resistance in which there is no shortage in most crops to most pathogens, and which is poorly used by the breeders

REFERENCES Bruehl, G.W. Nonspecific genetic resistance to soil borne fungi. Phytopathology 73:948- 951. 1983 Mcintosh, R.A. Breeding wheat for resistance to biotic stress. In: Braun, H.J., Altay, F., Kronstad, W.E., Beniwal, S.P.S. & McNab, A. (Eds.). Wheat: prospects for global improvement. Proc. 5th Int. Wheat Conf. 1996, Ankara, Turkey. Kluwer Acad. Publ. Dordrecht. The Netherlands. 1997. pp 71-86. Niks, R.E., Ellis, P.R. & Parlevliet, J.E. Resistance to parasites. In: Hayward, M.D., Bosemark, N.O. & Romagosa, I. (Eds.). Plant Breeding, Principles and Prospects. Chapman & Hall, London. 1993. pp. 422- 447. Parlevliet, J.E. & VAN Ommeren, A. Accumulation of partial resistance in barley to barley leaf rust and powdery mildew through recurrent selection against susceptibility. Euphytica 37:261-274. 1988. Roberts, P.A. Conceptual and practical aspects of variability in root-knot nematodes related to host plant resistance. Annual Review Phytopathology 33:199-221. 1995. Toryama, K. Recent progress of studies on horizontal resistance in rice breeding for blast resistance in Japan. In: Proceedings of Seminar on Horizontal Resistance to Blast Disease of Rice. CIAT Series CE9, Colombia. 1975. pp. 65-100. Van der plank, J.E. Plant disease: epidemic and control. Academic Press, New York, London. 1963.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

WEED MANAGEMENT *Trilok Nath Rai, Kedar Nath Rai, Sanjeev Kumar Rai & Smt Sadhna Rai *Subject Matter Specialist, Soil Science /Agronomy, Krishi Vigyan Kendra (ICAR-IIVR, Varanasi) Sargatia, Seorahi, Kushinagar-274406 (U.P.)

INTRODUCTION About Seed Weeds are unwanted and undesirable plants which interfere with the utilization of land and water resources and thus adversely affect human welfare. They can also be referred as plants out of place.Weeds compete with the beneficial and desired vegetation in crop lands, forests, aquatic systems etc. and poses great problem in non-cropped areas like industrial sites, road/rail lines, air fields, landscape plantings, water tanks and water ways etc.,Weeds are an important factor in the management of all land and water resources, but its effect is greatest on agriculture. The losses caused by weeds exceed the losses caused by any other category of agricultural pests. Of the total annual loss in agriculture produce, weeds account for 45%, insect 30%, disease 20% and other pests 5%.

Critical Period of Weed Competition 1.The critical period of weed competition is the shortest time span during the crop growth when weeding results in highest economic returns. 2.The crop yield level obtained by weeding during this period is almost similar to that obtained by the full seasons weed free conditions. 3.The critical period of weed competition is also defined as the period between early growth during which weeds can grow without affecting crop yield and the point after which weed growth does not affect the yield. 4.The critical period of weed competition is approximately 1/3rd of the duration of the crop.

Critical period Crops (days after sowing) From To Rice (Transplanted) 15 45 Upland Rice Entire period Wheat 30 45 Maize 15 45 Sorghum 15 45 Finger Millet 25 45 Soybean 15 45

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Blackgram 30 45 Cotton 15 60 Sugarcane 30 120 Groundnut 30 50 Sunflower 30 45 Castor 30 60 Sesame 15 45

Integrated weed management Rice Critical period of weed 20-30 DAT control Cultural method 1) Hand weeding 2) Hand pulling 3) Pudding 4) Flooding Mechanical method 1) Weeder (Float) 2.Conoweeder/Rotary weeder Chemical method Apply pendimethalin 1.0kg/ha on 5 days after sowing or Pretilachlor + safener (Sofit) 0.45kg/ha on the day of receipt of soaking rain followed by one hand weeding on 30 to 35 days after sowing. Biological method 1. Hirsch – Manniella spinicaudata is a rice root nematode which controls most upland rice weeds 2. Azolla Remarks I. Substitution and preventive method: a) Stale seed bed technology b) Land preparation c) Water management

Wheat Critical period of weed 15 – 30 DAS control Cultural method a) Hand Hoeing b) Inter cultivation c) Criss-cross sowing Chemical method 1. 2, 4D (1 – 1.5 kg ai/ha) 2. Mixture of Isoproturan (0.75 kg ai/ha) and 2, 4D (0.4 kg ai/ha) during 30- 35 DAS Remarks II. Complimentary weed control methods a) Cultivars b) Seedling age /planting method c) Fertilizer management d) Cropping system

Sorghum Critical period of weed 21 – 42 DAS control Cultural method 1. Hoe and hand weed on the 10th day of transplanting if herbicides are not used. 2. Hoe and weed between 30 - 35 days after transplanting

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

and between 35 - 40 days for a direct sown crop Chemical method 1. Apply the pre-emergence herbicide Atrazine 50 WP - 500 g/ha on 3 days after sowing as spray on the soil surface 2. If pulse crop is to be raised as an inter-crop in sorghum do not use Atrazine. Remarks 1. Inclusion of cotton crop in the rotation

Maize Critical period of weed Maize 2 to 6 Weeks control Cultural method One hand weeding on 40-45 days after sowing Chemical method 1. Pre-emergence application of Atrazine (1-2 kg ai/ha) 2. Combined application of Alachlor (2 kg/ha) and atrazine (1kg/ha) is more effective and have wider spectrum of control

Groundnut Critical period of weed Upto 45 days control Cultural method After 35 - 40 days one hand weeding may be given. Chemical method 1. Alachlor (1-5 kg/ha) – pre emergence application

Sunflower Critical period of weed 4-6 weeks control Cultural method Hoe and hand weed on the 15th and 30th day of sowing and remove the weeds. Allow the weeds to dry for 2 - 3 days in the case of irrigated and then give irrigation. Chemical method 1. Apply Fluchloralin at 2.0 l/ha before sowing and incorporate or apply as pre-emergence spray on 5 day after sowing followed by irrigation or apply Pendimethalin as pre-emergence spray 3 days after sowing.

Cotton Critical period of weed First 45 days control Cultural method 1. One hand weeding on 45 DAS will keep weed free environment upto 60 DAS 2. Hoe and hand weed between 18th to 20th day of sowing, if herbicide is not applied at the time of sowing Chemical method 1. Diuron (0.5 – 1.5 kg/ha), Monuron (1-1.5 kg/ha), Fluchloralin (1-1.5 kg/ha) applied as preemergence/ preplanting

Pulses Critical period of weed First 30-35 days control Cultural method 1. One hand weeding on 30 days after sowing gives weed free environment throughout the crop period

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

2. If herbicides are not applied give two hand weedings on 15 and 30 days after sowing. Chemical method 1. Fluchloralin (1-1.5 kg/ha ), Pendimethalin (0.5-1.0 kg/ha) as Pre emergence (preplanting incorporation)

Tobacco Critical period of weed First 9 weeks control Chemical method 1. Fluchloralin (2-3 kg/ha), Pendemethalin (1-1.5 kg/ha) as pre-emergence application

Sugarcane Critical period of weed 4 to 5 months control Cultural method Remove the weeds along the furrows with hand hoe. Mechanical method If herbicide is not applied work the junior-hoe along the ridges on 25, 55 and 85 days after planting for removal of weeds and proper stirring Chemical method 1. Pre-emergence herbicides like atrazine (2 to 3 kg/ha) Simazine (2 to 3 kg/ha), Alachlor (1.3 to 2.5 kg/ha) etc., will generally last for 8 to 12 weeks 2. To obtain best results sequential application of Preemergence and post emergence herbicides or post emergence herbicides like Glyphosate (0.8 to 1.6 kg/ha) Paraquat (0.4 to 0.8 kg/ha).

Management of Problem, Perennial And Parasitic Weeds Cynodon dactylon (Arugu) & Cyperus rotundus (Koarai)

Management of perennial weeds like Cynodon dactylon & Cyperus rotundus by the application of Glyphosate 10 ml + AGF activator 2 ml / lit of water (or) Glyphosate 15 ml + 20 g Ammonium sulphate / lit of water. Approach : Post emergence, total, translocative herbicide Stage of weed : Active growing, pre flowering stage Sprayer : Hand operated Knapsack / Backpack

Nozzle : WFN 24 & ULV 50 with 30 Psi Cynodon dactylon Spray volume : 250-300 litre / ha

Application technology

Non-Crop situation - Blanket application Cropped situation - Pre-sowing / planting - Stale seed bed (Blanket application) Established Crops - Directed application using hoods. Note: Rain free period / waiting period: 48 hours

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Parthenium hysterophorus (Parthenium natchu chedi) Manual removal and destruction of Parthenium plants before flowering using hand glouse / machineries (or) Pre-emergence application of atrazine 4 g / litre in 500 litres of water / hectare (or) Uniform spraying of sodium chloride 200g + 2 ml soap oil / litre of water (or) Spraying of 2,4-D sodium salt 8 g or glyphosate 10 ml + 20g ammonium sulphate + 2 ml soap solution / litre of water before flowering (or) Post-emergence application of metribuzin 3 g / litre of water under non crop situation. Raising competitive plants like Cassia serecea and Abutilon indicum on fallow lands to replace Parthenium (or) Biological control by Mexican beetle, fungal pathogen and nematodes Note : Parthenium can be decomposed well before flowering and used as organic manure. Parthenium hysterophorus

Solanum Ipomoea carnea elaegnifolium (Neyveli (Kattu Kandan kattamanakku) kathiri)

Foliar Post-emergence application of 2,4- application of D sodium salt 8 g Glyphosate 20 ml + urea 20g + soap alone or 10 ml in oil 2 ml / litre of combination with 2, water and then 4-D sodium salt 6 g removal and / litre. burning of dried weeds (or) Note: The Manual / application should mechanical be during the active removal of growth / vegetative grownup plants phase of weed. in channels during summer (or)

Note: Composted I pomoea carnea plants can be used as organic manure preferably in rice fields.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Eichhornia Portulaca quadrifida (Shiru crassipes (Agaya pasari) thamarai)

Post-emergence Manual / tank mix directed Mechanical removal application of and drying glyphosate 10 ml/l Application + 2, 4-D sodium of 2,4-D salt 5g / lit to sodium salt control Portulaca at 8g + urea quadrifida in at 20g or cropped fields. Paraquat at 6 ml / litre Note: Not to use above of water herbicides in broadleaved crops particularly cotton and Note : Vermi- bhendi. composting and composting of dried water hyacinth and can be used as organic manure in irrigated upland ecosystems. Striga asiatica Orabanche (Pukaielai kalan) (Sudu malli)

Plant hole application of Pre-emergence neem cake 25 g / plant or application of drenching of copper sulphate atrazine 1.0 kg/ha on 5% provides partial control 3rd DAP + hand of Orabanche in tobacco. weeding on 45 DAP with an earthing up on 60 DAP combined with post- emergence spraying of 2,4-D at 6 g (0.6%) + urea 20 g (2%) / litre of water on 90 DAP + trash mulching 5 t/ha on 120 DAP.

Harmful Effects of Weed

Weeds extend the harmful effects slowly, steadily and inconspicuously and the effect is almost unchangeable. If no restriction is imposed they compete with crop plants and the yield reduction of individual crops varies and that of cropping system 5 to 50%. Presence of weeds increases the cost of agriculture and hinders the progress of work.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

It increases the irrigation requirement. They reduce the value of produce or otherwise adds the cost of cleaning. Some weeds when eaten (Cleome viscosa) by milch animals will produce an undesirable odour in the milk. At times death/disorder/disformity may occur. eg: Datura stramarium The fruits and seeds of Xanthium strumarium and Achyranthes aspera entangle with wool which fetch lower prices. They harbour insect pests, pathogen and parasites They reduce the value of the land Presence of weeds will impair the purity of varieties by chance of cross pollination Weeds cause health hazards to man and animals Weeds cause allelopathic effect

Susceptibility of Crops to Certain Herbicides Herbicides Susceptible Crops Barban Oat, rye Chlorbromuron Sugarbeet, cole crops, cucurbits, tomato, okra, rice Chloroxuron Sugarbeet, cole crops 2, 4 – D (amine) Dicot plants 2, 4 – DEP Cotton, Tobacco, tomato, onion, grapes (falone) Soybean, beans, small-seeded legumes, ornamentals, vegetables Dicamba Cruciferous crops Dinoseb Sugarbeet, cole crops, cucurbits, brinjal Flumeturon Sugarbeet, cucurbits tomato, alfalfa Fluorodifen Sugarbeet, cole crops, cruciferous crops, onion, pea, sunflower, sweet- Metribuzin potato, cotton and tobacco Sugar beet, tomato, spinach Neptalam Broadleaved plants except cruciferous crops Picloram Sugarbeet, vegetables Propazine Sugarbeet, vegetables, tobacco Simazine Cereals and millets TCA

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

IMPACT OF BIO PESTICIDES AND BIO FERTILIZERS TO CONSERVE NUTRIENT AND DISEASE MANAGEMENT *Vikas, Sukirtee1, Paras Kamboj2, Ruby Garg3 and Kiran Khokher4 *,1,4Department of Soil Science, Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University 2Department of Agronomy, Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University 3Department of Entomology, Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University

ABSTRACT In India agriculture play a important role in workforce and contributes to 17.5% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). India is among top producer of several crops such as wheat, rice, pulses, sugarcane and cotton. But its agricultural yield (quantity of crop produced per unit of land) is found to be less in case of most crops, as compared to other top producing countries such as China, Brazil and United States of America. It has been projected that by 2025 country will be requiring 300 million tonnes of food grains to feed population, the current food grain production is 252 million tonnes. The issue of food security can be addressed either by agricultural expansion or increasing agricultural productivity. The increasing productivity by applying excessive fertilizers and pesticides has led to various environmental problems such as contamination of water resources, loss of soil fertility, and hazard to human health disorders etc. There is a need for more sustainable way of producing crops relies organic farming and minimizes use of harmful chemicals. One best alternative is to supplement synthetic chemicals with useful microorganisms such as Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR), Mycorrhiza, Blue green algae, etc. Bio fertilizers and bio pesticides affect plant’s growth and development, change nutrient dynamics and alter a plant’s susceptibility to disease and abiotic stress. Biofertilizers may be bacteria or fungus and their interactions in soil rhizosphere are responsible for key environmental processes, such as the biogeochemical cycling of nutrients, the maintenance of plant health and soil quality. The microbial interaction taking place in rhizosphere may be synergestic, antagonistic or neutral. Bio pesticidal activity of microbes may be due to activity of microorganism and competition for root niches colonization and competition for nutrients etc. Some antagonistic fungi may inhibit the growth of pathogenic at the same time it may be Symbiotic and beneficial in case of Rhizobium, mycorrhiza etc. Hence various kinds of interactions occur in nature and proper understanding of these interactions is required for their utilization in sustainable agriculture. Management of such interactions is a promising approach for low-input agricultural technologies. Biofertilizers and Bio pesticides are eco-friendly, cheap, easy to handle and doesn’t leave any residues in the environment. Proper formulation of bio control agents and quality control measures can be very effective in enhancing the efficacy of bio inoculants for sustainable agriculture Keywords: Rhizosphere, plant growth promoting bacteria, biofertilizers, bio pesticides bio formulations, microbial interactions, bio inoculants.

INTRODUCTION According to growing of human population it is a challenge for environment, current farming methods are proving incapable of meeting requirements for sustainable agricultural production, food security, and economic growth. The land is degraded and production id declining due to using chemicals including soil erosion and soil exhaustion, hence poor plant nutrition. Pests, weeds and diseases too, have devastating effects on crop yields. The availability of sufficient soluble C, N and P nutrients is indispensable for plant growth but soluble N and P nutrients are often limiting in agricultural and they are usually provided as chemical fertilizers. However, these soluble chemical fertilizers are quickly immobilized in the soil and thus not available for plant or quickly washed away by the raining waters, polluting rivers and ground waters. Biofertilizers have been identified as an alternative to chemical fertilizer to increase soil fertility and crop production in sustainable farming PGPR may colonize the rhizosphere, the surface of the root, or even superficial intercellular spaces of plants. Phosphate (P) and potassium (K) solubilizing bacteria may enhance mineral uptake by plants through solubilizing insoluble P and releasing K from silicate in soil.

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Pseudomonas putida and Pseudomonas fluorescens could increase root and shoot elongation in canola, lettuce and tomato. It has also been reported that crop yield increased up to 30% with Azotobacter inoculation and up to 43% with Bacillus inoculation. Soil microorganisms are important components in the natural soil ecosystem because not only can they contribute to nutrient availability in the soil, but also bind soil particles into stable aggregates, which improve soil structure and reduce erosion potential.

Bio Fetilizers Biofertilizers are defined as preparations containing living cells or latent cells of efficient strains of microorganisms that help crop plants’ uptake of nutrients by their interactions in the rhizosphere when applied through seed or soil. They accelerate certain microbial processes in the soil which augment the extent of availability of nutrients in a form easily assimilated by plants. In recent years, biofertilizers have emerged as an important component of the integrated nutrient supply system and hold a great promise to improve crop yields through environmentally better nutrient supplies. Use of biofertilizers is one of the important components of integrated nutrient management, as they are cost effective and renewable source of plant nutrients to supplement the chemical fertilizers for sustainable agriculture. Several microorganisms and their association with crop plants are being exploited in the production of biofertilizers. They can be grouped in different ways based on their nature and function. Biofertilizers fix atmospheric nitrogen to ammonia by complex metabolic process. Two types of biofertilizers are known. The symbiotic, which require association with plants, are represented by Rhizobium, and the free-living, which fix nitrogen independently, include the Azotobacter, Azospirillium, blue green algae and Azolla. These biofertilizers are particularly important in tropical countries where soils are deficient in organic matter and essential plant nutrients. However, the application of microbial fertilizers in practice, somehow, has not achieved constant efforts. The mechanisms and interactions among these microbes still are not well understood.

PGPR (Plant Growth Promoting Rhizo Bacteria) The group of bacteria that colonize roots or rhizosphere soil and beneficial to crops are referred to as plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR). Plant growth promoting rhizosphere organisms (PGPRs), are a heterogenous group of microorganisms that stimulate plant growth by beneficial effect on plant growth by suppressing soil-borne pathogens, improving mineral nutrition and phytohormone synthesis. The PGPR inoculants currently commercialized that seem to promote growth through at least one mechanism; suppression of plant disease (termed Bioprotectants), improved nutrient acquisition (termed Biofertilizers), or phytohormone production (termed Biostimulants). Species of Pseudomonas and Bacillus can produce as yet not well characterized phytohormones or growth regulators that cause crops to have greater amounts of fine roots which have the effect of increasing the absorptive surface of plant roots for uptake of water and nutrients. These PGPR are referred to as Biostimulants and the phytohormones they produce include indole-acetic acid, cytokinins, gibberellins and inhibitors of ethylene production. In rhizospheric relationships, PGPR may colonize the rhizosphere, the surface of the root, or even superficial intercellular spaces or attach to the surface of the plant. Depending on the host plant and the endophyte, bio fertilizing PGPR may be found in all parts of plants (seed, roots, stems, leaves, fruit, etc.). Plant growth promoting activity activity has been reported in strains belonging to several genera, such as Azotobacter, Azospirillum, Pseudomonas,Acetobacter, Burkholderia and Bacillus.

100

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Role of Bio Inoculants in Improving Plant Growth and Soil Properties Bioinoculants is a major cause for success of both the plant establishment and the sustainability of bioinoculants and confirms the beneficial effects of microbial consortium over conventional single inoculant application method. Fertilizer application enhanced the efficiencies of N, P and K uptake, whereas reduced their usage efficiencies. Though soil type did not affect microbial inoculation response, fertilizer application significantly affected plant response to microbial inoculation (Muthukumar and Udaiyan, 2006). The microbial inoculants were used in single form or in combinations (Prabakaran and Ravi, 1996; Gupta et al., 1999; Amutha and Kannaiyan, 2004; Aseri and Rao, 2005; Zaidi and Khan, 2006; Anil et al., 2007; Gaikwad et al., 2008). The effects of the inoculation of Rhizobium and phosphate solubilizing bacterium (PSB; Bacillus megaterium var. phosphaticum), singly or in combination gave better result than the uninoculated control (Sengupta et al., 2002; Marimuthu et al., 2002; Jat et al., 2003; Mathew and Hameed, 2003; Kashyap et al., 2004; Purbey and Sen, 2005). Singh and Tilak (2001) said that the synergistic effect of combined phosphorus fertilizers and inert sources of natural P (varisite, strengite, fluorapatite, hydroxyapatite, and tricalcium phosphate) along with bioinoculants (namely: phosphate solubilizing rhizobacteria and arbuscular mycorrhizas) is discussed. Bio inoculants in improving the plant growth by increase the activity of beneficial microorganism and improve soil quality. They can contribute to plant nutrition by converting important macromolecules into forms usable by plants. Many microbial interactions are responsible for key environmental processes, such as the biogeochemical cycling of nutrients and matter and the maintenance of plant health and soil quality. Co-inoculations of beneficial rhizosphere microorganisms into soils, reduces the inputs of environmentally deleterious agro-chemicals required for optimal plant growth, are gaining increased attention in sustainable farming. Carbon fluxes are critical for rhizosphere functioning. Many microbial interactions are responsible for key environmental processes, such as the biogeochemical cycling of nutrients and matter and the maintenance of plant health and soil quality PGPR participate in many key ecosystem processes, such as those involved in the biological control of plant pathogens, solubilisation of nutrients and phytohormone synthesis. The combined inoculation of selected rhizosphere microorganisms has been recommended for maximising plant growth and nutrition. Combined inoculation of Rhizobium, a phosphate solubilizing Bacillus megaterium sub sp. Phospaticum strain-PB and a biocontrol fungus Trichoderma spp. have been shown to increase germination, nutrient uptake, plant height, number of branches, nodulation, pea yield, and total biomass of chickpea Azospirillum spp. are commonly isolated bacteria from the rhizosphere of various grasses and cereals and Gluconacetobacter diazotrophicus, a species found in high numbers in roots and stems of sugarcane is known for production of growth hormones, phosphate solubilization, and antagonistic potential against plant pathogens. Species of Acidithiobacillus when react with elemental sulphur produce sulphuric acid and may increase available P in soil by

101

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management promoting higher solubility of phosphate rocks, furnishing phosphorus to the symbiotic process and to plant growth.

Role of Bio Inoculants in Disease Suppression and Pest Control Integrated pest management have been defined as a sustainable approach to managing pests by combining biological, cultural, physical and chemical tools in a way that minimizes economic, health and environmental risks. Biological control of soil borne plant pathogens by antagonistic microorganisms is a potential nonchemical means of plant-disease control. Biological control involving microbial agents or biochemical to control plant pathogens can be an eco-friendly and cost-effective component of integrated disease management program. While diverse microbes may contribute to the biological control of plant pathogens, most research and development efforts have focused on isolates of three genera, Bacillus, Trichoderma, and Pseudomonas. Biological control is a nonchemical measure that has been reported in several cases to be as effective as chemical control. However, the efficacy of biological control is occasionally inadequate and variability in control efficacy may be high. Understanding the mechanisms involved in biological control may enable enhancing control efficacy and reducing the inconsistency and variability. The mechanisms involved in biological control are several and include, among others, induced resistance, competition for nutrients, and secretion of inhibitory compounds.

Plant Disease Suppression by Trichoderma Trichoderma spp., which is an active mycoparasite, has been considered a biocontrol agent of foliar disease, soilborne disease and plant-parasitic soilborne nematodes.Trichoderma spp. have biocontrol activity against a number of different pathogenic fungi on various hosts. On cotton, biocontrol activity has been reported against Rhizoctonia solani, Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. vasinfectum, and Verticillium dahlia. The fungal antagonist Trichoderma harzianum Rifai, alone or in combination with chemical fungicides, is capable of reducing disease caused by Botrytis. cinereaand other phytopathogens in a number of crops. The most frequently suggested mechanisms of biocontrol by Trichoderma include mycoparasitism, antibiosis, competition for nutrients. Trichoderma can inhibit the pathogen by means of antibiotics. One proposed mechanism for biocontrol activity in Trichoderma sp. is stimulation of host defense responses. Induced resistance has been reported with T. harzianum on bean and T. virens (Gliocladium virens) on cotton. Cotton seedlings treated with effective biocontrol strains of T. virens have higher levels of defense-related compounds such as terpenoids and higher peroxidase activity in the roots than seedlings treated with ineffective isolates.The biocontrol fungus Trichoderma atroviride (previously T.harzianum) produces many chitinolytic enzymes, including endochitinase, which randomly cleaves chitin.

Plant Disease Suppression by Pseudomonas Pseudomonas putida is an effective biocontrol agent of Phytophthora parasitica and Phytophthora citrophthora. Pseudomonas putida can effectively reduce populations of Phytophthora citrophthora and Phytophthora parasitica. It actively adheres to the hyphae of Phytophthora sp. and restricts growth of the pathogen in vitro. It produces an iron chelating siderophore, pyoverdine, but shows no evidence of antibiosis. Certain strains of fluorescent Pseudomonas spp. can enhance the biological control of Fusarium wilt achieved by nonpathogenic F. oxysporum Enhanced disease suppression by the microbial combination was related to the production by P. putida of the siderophore pseudobactin (pyoverdine). P. fluorescens has been reported to produce a diverse array of antibiotics, which are largely responsible for the biocontrol effectiveness of this bacterium. The important antimicrobial metabolites are phenazines, pyrrolnitrin, pyoluteorin, and 2, 4-diacetylphloroglucinol.

AM (Arbuscular Mycorrhizal) Fungi The great majority of terrestrial plants live in close collaboration with a diversity of soil organisms among which mycorrhizal fungi play an essential role. Mycorrhizal symbioses

102

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management profit to plant growth and plant protection especially against environmental stresses as well the propagation and the survival of mycorrhizal fungi. The examination of late Devonian fossils revealed that arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi existed on earth for more than 460 million years before plants first appeared. As such, AM fungi contributed directly to the evolution of life, to the development of the earth's biodiversity, to the survival of plant species and consequently to the equilibrium of ecosystems.AM fungi establish symbiotic associations with almost 80% of plants, mainly herbaceous ones, among which are found the cultivated crops that feed the world (cereal and pulse crops, market garden products, fruits and vegetables).

Fig: Field culture of mycorrhizal leek plants

Plant Growth Promotion Mycorrhiza improves mineral nutrition protection against pathogens and enhanced resistance or tolerance to stress. Mycorrhizal symbiotic status changes the chemical composition of root exudates while the development of the fungal soil mycelium serves as a carbon source to rhizosphere microbial communities and introduces physical modifications into the environment surrounding the roots. These changes affect both quantitatively and qualitatively the microbial populations in the rhizosphere of the mycorrhizal plant also termed the mycorrhizosphere. After absorbing P from the soil solution, the fungi first incorporate it into the cytosolic pool, and the excess P is transferred to the vacuoles. The main forms of inorganic P in fungal vacuoles are orthophosphate and polyphosphate, but organic P molecules may also be present long distance transport is mediated either by protoplasmic streaming or the motile tubular vacuole-like system. Number of studies has demonstrated the beneficial role of AM fungi in plant growth and health and it appears that they are essential for the survival of plant species in many ecosystems.

10 Amelioratiion of Saline Stress and Uptake of Heavy Metals

103

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) have been shown to decrease plant yield losses in saline and alkaline soil conditions. Shoot and root dry matter yields and leaf area were higher in mycorrhizal than in non-mycorrhizal plants. Total accumulation of P, Zn, Cu, and Fe was maximum along with chlorophyll content and relative water content in mycorrhizal than in non mycorrhizal plants under both control and medium salt stress conditions. AM fungi could also influence plant hormones. Improved salt tolerance of mycorrhizal plants can be mainly related the changes in physiological processes such as increased carbon dioxide exchangeable rate, transpiration, stomatal conductance and water efficiency. This may be due to increased uptake of nutrients with low mobility, such as P, Zn and Cu, and to improved water relations. Enhanced salt tolerance in AM symbiosis was mainly related with the elevated superoxide-dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), ascorbate peroxidase (APX), peroxidase (POD) activity by AMF which degrade more reactive oxygen species and so alleviated the cell membrane damages under salt stress. As the biogeochemical cycling of nutrients and matter and the maintenance of plant health and soil quality PGPR participate in many key ecosystem processes, such as those involved in the biological control of plant pathogens, solubilisation of nutrients and phytohormone synthesis. The combined inoculation of selected rhizosphere microorganisms has been recommended for maximising plant growth and nutrition. Combined inoculation of Rhizobium, a phosphate solubilizing Bacillus megaterium sub sp. Phospaticum strain-PB and a biocontrol fungus Trichoderma spp. have been shown to increase germination, nutrient uptake, plant height, number of branches, nodulation, pea yield, and total biomass of chickpea Azospirillum spp. are commonly isolated bacteria from the rhizosphere of various grasses and cereals and Gluconacetobacter diazotrophicus, a species found in high numbers in roots and stems of sugarcane is known for production of growth hormones, phosphate solubilization, and antagonistic potential against plant pathogens. Species of Acidithiobacillus when react with elemental sulphur produce sulphuric acid and may increase available P in soil by promoting higher solubility of phosphate rocks, furnishing phosphorus to the symbiotic process and to plant growth.

Formulation of Bio Inoculants and Future Prospects PGPR have a very good potential in the management of pests and diseases, it could not be used as cell suspension under field conditions. Hence the cell suspensions of PGPR should be immobilized in certain carriers and should be prepared as formulations for easy application, storage, commercialization and field use. The organic carriers used for formulation development include peat, turf, talc, lignite, kaolinite, pyrophyllite, zeolite, montmorillonite, alginate, pressmud, sawdust, and vermiculite, etc. Carriers increase the survival rate of bacteria by protecting it from desiccation and death of cells. Talc, Peat, Kaolinite, Lignite, Vermiculite based formulations of fluorescent Pseudomonas were developed through liquid fermentation technology. The fermenter biomass was mixed with different carrier materials (Talc, Peat, Kaolinite, Lignite and Vermiculite) and stickers. Increase in public concern about the environment has increased the need to develop and implement effective bio control agents for crop protection. An effective PGPR could be developed for disease control only after understanding its performance in the environment in which it is expected to perform. In nature agriculture crops are exposed to diverse environmental conditions and gambling of monsoons, which alter the microclimatic conditions existing around the infection court. A thorough knowledge on the mechanisms and performance related to disease control will help in the selection of promising candidates that suits industries to produce reliable commercial products.

CONCLUSIONS Biofertilizers and biopesticides play very a vital role in enhancing soil fertility, crop productivity and can act as a supplement to chemical fertilizers. Usage of biofertilizers is one of the important components of integrated nutrient management, as they are renewable source of plant nutrients, ecologically safe compared to chemical fertilizers and cost effective.

104

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Application of Biofertilizers improve mineral and water uptake, root development, vegetative growth and Nitogen fixation. Some bio inoculants induce production of growth promoters and other mobilizes important nutrients. They improve soil physical and chemical properties. The most common species of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria include Agrobacterium, Ensifer, Microbacterium, Bacillus, Rhizobium, Pseudomonas, Chryseobacterion and Rhodococcus. Biopesticides are derivatives of plants, microorganisms and insects. Substances from plants and animals have been used to manage diseases in crops, animals and humans. Rhizosphere is supporting area for important and intensive interactions between the plant, soil, microorganisms and soil microfauna, because it is rich source of utilizable carbon source. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria protect plants from biotic and abiotic stresses and they also enhance plant growth and enhance formation of root hairs. Plants nutrients are essential for the production of crops and healthy food for the world’s ever increasing population. Soil management strategies today are mainly dependent on inorganic chemical-based fertilizers, which cause a serious threat to human health and the environment. Our dependence on chemical fertilizers and pesticides has encouraged the thriving of industries that are producing life-threatening chemicals which are not only hazardous for human consumption but can also disturb the ecological balance. Use of synthetic chemicals has raised numerous concerns due to their negative effects on the environmental, human health, natural enemies and ecosystem balance. Bio-fertilizers and Bio pesticides provides an effective alternative for increasing soil fertility and crop production in sustainable farming. Bio fertilizers and bio pesticides have short shelf life, which needs to be improved through formulations in suitable medium and effective delivery mechanisms.

REFERENCES Barea JM. Rhizosphere and mycorrhiza of field crops. In: Toutant JP, Balazs E, Galante E, Lynch JM, Schepers JS, Werner D, Werry PA. (Eds) Biological Resource Management: Connecting Science and Policy (OECD) Springer, 2000, 110-125. Barea JM, Azcon R, Azcon-Aguilar C. Vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in nitrogen-fixing systems. In: Norris JR, Read D, Varma A (eds) Methods in microbiology: technology for the study of mycorrhizae. Academic Press, London. 1992; 24:391-416. Barea JM, Azco´n-Aguilar C,Interactions between mycorrhizal fungi and rhizosphere microorganisms within the context of sustainable soil-plant systems. In:Gange AC, Brown VK. (Eds.), Multitrophic Interactions in Terrestrial Systems. Blackwell Science, Cambridge,1997,65-77. Bowen GD, Rovira AD. The rhizosphere: the hidden half of the hidden half.In: Roots: The hidden half Y, Waisel Eshel A, Kafkafi U (eds.) Marcel Dekker Inc. New York, 1992, 641-669. Hjeljord L, Tronsmo A. Trichoderma and Gliocladium in biological control: An overview. In: Trichoderma and Gliocladium. Harman GE, Kubicek CK, eds. Taylor and Francis Ltd. London. 1998; 2:131-151. Kapulnik Y. Plant growth promotion by rhizosphere bacteria. In: Waisel Y, Eshel A, Kafkafi U (eds) Plant roots. The hidden half. Dekker, New York, 1996, 769-781. Marschner P, Rengel Z. Contributions of Rhizosphere Interactions to Soil Biological Fertility LK. Abbott & Murphy DV (eds) Soil Biological Fertility-A Key to Sustainable Land Use in Agriculture, 2007, 81-98. Muthukumar T, Udaiyan K (2006). Growth of nursery-grown bamboo inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria in two tropical soil types with and without fertilizer application. New. For., 31(3): 469-485. Prabakaran J, Ravi KB (1996). Influence of bioinoculants on Cenchrus ciliaris nursery. Mad. Agric. J., 83(8): 531-533. Weller DG, Thomashow LS. Current challenges in introducing beneficial microorganisms into rhizosphere. In: O’Gara F, Dowling DN, Boesten B. (Eds.), Molecular Ecology of

105

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Rhizosphere Microorganisms: Biotechnology and the Release of GMOs. VCH Verlagsgesellschaft, Weinheim, 1994, 1-13. Vessey JK. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria as biofertilizers. Plant Soil. 2003; 255:571–586 Rodríguez H, Fraga R. Phosphate solubilizing bacteria and their role in plant growth promotion. Biotechnology Advances. 1999; 17:319-339

106

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

CROP ROTATION: A NEED OF PRESENT TIME FOR SOIL HEALTH AND SUSTAINABILITY Vishal Kumar*1, Vijay Pal2, Dharminder1, R.K. Singh1**, Manjeet Kumar3, Sudhanshu Verma1, Abhishek Shori1 and Avinash Patel1 1Ph.D. Scholar &1**Professor, Department of Agronomy, Institute of Agricultural Sciences BHU, Varanasi, UP-221005 2Assistant Professor, Department of Agronomy, Janta Vaidic College, Baraut, Baghpat, UP- 250613 3Narendra Dev University of Agriculture and Technology, Kumarganj, Faizabad-224229 *Corresponding Author E. Mail: [email protected]

INTRODUCTION The Green Revolution Technology increased the production substantially in terms of quantity but failed to achieve the quality of traditional agriculture in terms of food and fodder. The technology includes high yielding seeds, irrigation and chemical inputs (fertilizers & pesticides, insecticides, herbicides, etc.) without adding organic matter in field. Thus it became most cost-ineffective technology as well as gradually decreasing soil productivity.Crop rotation were portrayed as a solution to farmers problems, especially the problem of less yield and degrading soil quality forgetting their negative impacts on the environment in which air, water, soil & food pollution are the major components that created severe & widespread health hazards. This “western profit driven” chemical input mono crop technology was found to be more dangerous on long-term, over the short-term gains. FAO and UN body report states that around 30% of the produce is going as waste – this is more than 40% in India. Therefore, at present time more needs to adopt organic and crop diversity (crop rotation) based farming practices. During the last decades, agriculture went through an intensification process associated with an increased use of fossil fuel energy, which despite temporarily increasing yields often resulted in decreased overall sustainability. Crop rotation is also known as cornerstone of sustainable farming systems. The design of crop rotations is a complex process where several objectives should be combined. Models can support the design of crop sequences and help to reveal synergies and trade-offs among objectives. Despite their importance, pathogen dynamics are rarely taken into account in cropping system models, not in the least because quantitative information from classical crop rotation experiments to calibrate and evaluate the models is resource demanding, and therefore scarce (Carolina Leoni Velazco, 2013). In agriculture, crop rotation refers to growing of crops that are different from each other in successions on farm field in a specific period of time. In other words, it is growing of dissimilar crop or no crop during sequential seasons on the same piece of land (Rahman, M. A., 2018). This is a system of cultivation which denoted moving from simple monoculture to a higher level of diversity begins with viable crop rotations, which break weed and pest life cycles and provide complementary fertilization to crops in sequence with each other. This process helps maintain nutrients in the soil and reduce soil erosion. According to United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC- 2016), Planting the same field or areas of fields with different crops from year to year to reduce depletion of soil nutrients. A plant such as rice, wheat, sugarcane, corn, tobacco and cotton, which removes large amounts of nitrogen from the soil, is planted one year. The next year a legume such as chickpea, soybeans and pulses which add nitrogen to the soil, is planted.

Principles of Crop Rotation 1. The crops with tap roots (deep rooted) should be followed by those, which have fibrous (shallow) root system. This helps in proper and uniform use of nutrients from the soil. 2. The leguminous crops should be grown before non-leguminous crops because legumes fix atmospheric nitrogen into soil and add more organic matter to the soil.

107

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

3. More exhaustive crops should be followed by less exhaustive crops because crops like potato, sugarcane, maize etc., need more inputs such as better tillage, more fertilizers, greater number of irrigations etc. 4. Selection of the crop should be demand based. 5. The crop of the same family should not be grown in succession because they act as alternate hosts for insect pests and diseases. 6. An ideal crop rotation is one, which provides maximum employment to the farm family and labour and permits efficient use of machines and equipments and ensures timely agricultural operations simultaneously maintaining soil productivity. 7. The selection of the crops should be problem based i.e. a) One sloppy land, which are prone to erosion, an alternate cropping of erosion promoting and erosion resisting crops like legumes should be adopted. b) In low-lying and flood prone area, the crops, which can tolerate water stagnation, should be selected. c) Under dry farming the crops, which can tolerate the drought, should be selected. d) The selection of crops should suit farmer’s financial conditions. e) The crop selected should also suit the soil and climatic conditions. (Chandrasekharan et al., 2010). Why Rotate? 1. Creates diversity 2. Builds soil organic matter and provide nutrients 3. Decreases weed, pest and disease problems 4. Provides economic value to the farm 5. Sustainability and soil health Creating Diversity Include crops from a variety of plant families as well as use cover crops during non- crop seasons in crop rotation practices. Different type crops (legume, grasses and green manures) include in crop rotation to create crop diversity. Increasing the biodiversity of crops has beneficial effects on the surrounding ecosystem and can host a greater diversity of fauna, insects and beneficial microorganisms in the soil. Some studies point to increased nutrient availability from crop rotation under organic systems compared to conventional practices as organic practices are less likely to inhibit of beneficial microbes in soil organic matter, such as arbuscular mycorrhizae, which increase nutrient uptake in plants. Increasing biodiversity also increases the resilience of agro-ecological systems (Anonymous, 2008).

Major Crop rotation of India and UP Most of the Indian farmers resort to cultivation of a number of crops and rotate a particular crop combination over a period of 3-4 years. It results in a multiplicity of cropping systems, which remains dynamic in time and space, making it difficult to precisely determine the speed of different cropping systems. Scientists have identified more than 250 cropping systems being followed throughout the country. But it is estimated that only 30 major cropping systems are prevalent, barring the areas under mono-cropping due to moisture or thermal limitations (ICAR 2009). These 30 major systems are given below:

No. Cropping Systems No. Cropping Systems No. Cropping Systems 1. Rice- wheat 11. Cotton- wheat 21. Sorghum- sorghum 2. Rice- rice 12. Cotton- gram 22. Groundnut- wheat 3. Rice- gram 13. Cotton- sorghum 23. Sorghum- groundnut 4. Rice- mustard 14. Cotton- safflower 24. Groundnut- rice 5. Rice- groundnut 15. Cotton- groundnut 25. Sorghum- wheat 6. Rice- sorghum 16. Maize- wheat 26. Sorghum- gram

108

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

7. Pearlmillet- wheat 17. Maize- gram 27. Pigeonpea- sorghum 8. Pearlmillet- gram 18. Sugarcane- wheat 28. Groundnut- groundnut 9. Pearlmillet- 19. Soybean- wheat 29. Sorghum- rice mustard 10. Pearlmillet- 20. Soybean- gram 30. Groundnut-sorghum sorghum In south India, especially Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, three crops are also grown in a year under well irrigation. Some such examples are indicated below:

No. Cropping Systems No. Cropping Systems 1. Rice- rice- rice 11. Rice – rice- pulse 2. Rice- rice- fingermillet 12. Rice – groundnut- sorghum 3. Rice- rice- vegetables 13. Rice- groundnut- fingermillet 4. Rice- rice- sorghum 14. Rice – groundnut- sesame Source: Reddy, SR. 1999.

Builds soil organic matter and provide nutrients: Rotate soil-building crops with neutral and soil (nutrient)-depleting crops. Include legumes in rotation. Alternate crops with deep, intermediate and shallow roots to optimize access to nutrients and water and to cycle nutrients as well as cycle water. Rotate low residue with high-residue crops (high-residue – leaves biomass on the ground – corn, sunflowers etc.) Include crops with enhanced abilities to access nutrients. Use cover crops, green manures and inter and under-seeding whenever possible. Avoid bare soil (erosion and lose nutrients) by planting cover crops and leaving residue on the field. Take land out of vegetable production on a regular basis-use it for pasture, cereal crops or legume cover crops. Include cover crops and crops that stimulate soil biological activity (microorganisms have feed source – keeping organic matter in the soil – don’t kill them).

Decrease Weed, Pest and Disease Problems Alternating between warm and cold season crops. Follow crop rotation for 2-3 years to eliminate root rot disease. Use cover crops to smother or discourage weeds, encourage beneficial insects and break disease and pest patterns. Grow non-competitive (squash, radish, beans) crops after crops that compete crops after crops that compete well. Observe recommended planting intervals before planting crops from the same family.

Provides economic value to the farm Does this rotation include crops that can be marketed? Are these crops likely to be profitable? (such as maize, vegetables and cash crops) What are the marketing opportunities for these crops over the next few years? Does this rotation have the potential to provide ecological and income sustainability? What are the input costs?

Sustainability and Soil Health Sustainable farming systems have often been associated with relatively long crop rotations, in which the frequency of individual crop species is low and species diversity over time is high. An adequate crop rotation not only provides a regular supply of nutrients,

109

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management maintains a good soil structure that enhances the water-holding capacity and allows for extensive root formation, reduces soil erosion and regulates disease, pest and weed outbreaks, but also spreads the workload more evenly over the seasons and provides food and income security to farmers. However, the design or selection of a particular crop rotation may be a trade-off between farmers’ long-term objectives and ambitions at the whole farm level, local resource availability, climate, and shorter-term socio-economic conditions. Crop rotations have been a valuable tool in designing sustainable farming systems, as they provide diversity in space and over time. However, selection of a particular crop rotation may be a trade-off between an ideal crop sequence for ecological benefits and a practical sequence providing short-term market opportunities for economic gains. Crop rotation is the main “driver” in selecting soil functional groups, and the differences in quality and quantity of root exudates and dead plant materials from successive plants lead to the maintenance of different biological communities in soil. The microorganisms in such communities can provide various ecological services. For example, the beneficial effects of Azospirillum spp. on sugar cane, rice or corn consist not only of biological nitrogen fixation (BNF) in the rhizosphere, but also bacterial auxin production resulting in increased soil exploration by roots and more efficient water and nutrient absorption (Dalla Santa et al., 2004). Crop rotation, especially with plant species high in lignin or phenolic compounds, contributes to the creation of various micro-habitats that allow complex communities with different ecological functions to co-exist and foster a healthy, disease suppressive soil. Crop rotation combined with no- or reduced tillage and the use of cover crops in between cash crops, can lead to a quantitative and qualitative improvement of soil organic matter (SOM). This strategy induces a higher saprophytic and mycorrhizal fungal biomass by increasing hyphae mat and associated extracellular exudates of polysaccharides and glycoproteins like glomalin from arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF). Both exudates and hyphae are responsible for soil macro-aggregate formation, for protecting plant-derived SOM and microbial organic matter (MOM) and for enhancing soil water infiltration and retention (Douds et al, 1999; Scholberg et al., 2010). When the aim is to reduce the risk of potential nutrient leaching losses between two cash crops, “nutrient catch crops” are planted. Deep-rooted and fast growing crops such as rye (Secale cereale), forage radish (Raphanus sativus var. niger) or other brassicas and sun-hemp (Crotalaria juncea) can effectively acquire nutrients (specially N, but also P and micronutrients) from deep soil layers and make them more readily available for subsequent crops when killed and incorporated or left as a mulch (Douds et al, 1999). If legume crops are used in the rotation, nutrient cycling is improved through BNF by symbiotic rhizobacteria (Rhizobium spp., Sinorhizobium spp., Bradyrhizobium spp.). Similarly, free-living nitrogen- fixing bacteria (Beijerinckia fluminensis, Azotobacter paspali, Azospirillum spp.) associated with non-legume plants like sugar cane, maize, or rice contribute to BNF, explaining the productivity of these crops under low input management (Scholberg et al., 2010). Minimize soil erosion and deterioration of soil physical structure If soil physical properties are the main constraint, species with fibrous and deep roots and with more recalcitrant residues (higher C: N ratio) are preferred as rotational crops, while N inputs can be provided by other sources. For example, in temperate vegetable production on clay soils, the inclusion of grasses as green manures in the crop rotation, either as winter cover crops like black oats (Avena strigosa), wheat (Triticum aestivum), barley (Hordeum vulgare) and triticale (Secale cereale x Triticum durum) or summer cover crops such as sorghum (Sorghum spp.), millet (Setaria italica) and Italian ryegrass (Pennisetum glaucum, P. americanum) has proven to be effective in controlling soil erosion and improving porosity and apparent soil density (Dogliotti, 2003). Water use efficiency can be enhanced by increasing SOM and soil aggregate stability, by improving soil physical properties, and by minimizing water losses due to evaporation. One example is the inclusion of a cover crop of forage radish and rye prior to a soybean crop. The cover crop supplies a mulch layer that limits evaporation from the soil surface early in the season and increases infiltration, while provides pathways for roots to obtain water from the subsoil (Williams and Weil 2004). This can again contribute to a

110

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management reduction in root diseases caused by soil borne pathogens like Phytophthora and Pythium species (Van Bruggen and Termorshuizen 2003). To summarize, crop rotations are implemented for a large number of reasons, primarily agronomic and economic reasons, but also for their contributions to soil health and agro-ecosystem sustainability. Plants are the main drivers for shifting and diversifying soil communities; so, the choice of crops will affect soil functional groups and basic ecological services. These services, such as water and nutrient cycling (supporting services) and disease suppression (regulating services), have a profound influence on the agronomic performance of the crops produced in a rotation.

Advantages of Crop Rotation Crop rotation helps in maintaining of soil fertility, organic matter content and recycling of plant nutrients. All crops do not require the plant nutrients in the same proportion. If different crops are grown in rotation, the fertility of land is utilized more evenly and effectively. Restorative crops like heavy foliage crops and green manure crops included in rotation increase the nitrogen and organic matter content of the soil. Helps in control of specific weeds like bermuda grass, cyprus (sedges) and Trianthema portulacastrum. Avoids accumulation of toxins and maintains physical properties of soil. Controls certain soil borne pests and disease. Reduces the pressure of work due to different farm operations in a stipulated period of time.

Crop rotation and disease development Continuously cropping the same crop builds up the population levels of any soil borne pathogen of that crop that may be present. The populations can potentially build up so large that it becomes difficult to grow that crop without yield losses. But by growing a crop that is not a host plant for that pathogen will lead to the pathogen dying out and its soil population levels lowering. Most pest populations will decline in two to three years without a suitable host. Rotating to non-host crops prevents the buildup of large populations of pathogens. However there a few factors however that limit the effectiveness of crop rotations. These factors really need to be considered before rotating into another crop. First, plants that belong to the same family often share the same pest problems. Therefore using crops that are closely related to rotate with will likely not achieve the goal of reducing pathogen levels in the soil. The botanical classification should be looked at when considering which crop to rotate with. As an example, even though broccoli, cabbage, turnips, and mustard greens appear very different from another, they all belong to the mustard family (Brassicaceae). Therefore they all share some common pest problems (https://www.westernfarmpress.com/management/crop- rotation-method-disease-control). Crop rotation affects each component of the disease triangle, and can be planned in such a way that each component is minimized or in the case of the host even eliminated. Indeed, some growers opt not to grow a particular crop, because they cannot sufficiently control one or more diseases affecting that crop, for example potatoes, which are often severely affected by late blight on organic farms. Although the simplest strategy is to eliminate the host, a decline in pathogen populations can also be achieved by crop rotation. Crop rotation contributes in pathogen reduction by antibiosis, parasitism, predation, or release of toxic compounds from crop residues or root exudates. Also promotes an unfavourable environment for pathogen development by changing the nutritional status or resistance response of the host plant, or by improving soil physical properties (Carolina Leoni Velazco, 2013). Rotating between these plants will not reduce any disease problems that may be occurring. In fact it will increase the chance of problems with soil-borne diseases such as black leg, black rot, Fusarium yellows, and clubroot which these crops all have in common. Rotating to crops from other than those in the mustard family would help to reduce the pest

111

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management populations in the soil (https://www.westernfarmpress.com/management/crop-rotation- method-disease-control). Crop rotation is most effective against arthropod pests that do not disperse over great distances and/or that overwinter in or near host crop fields, such as the Colorado potato beetle (Leptinotarsa decemlineata) and onion maggot (Delia antiqua). For example Colorado potato beetles can walk up to 100 m to find new potato crops. Crop rotation can also improve overall plant resistance to insect pests through its effects on soil quality and health (Zehnder et al., 2007). Crop rotation combined with reduced tillage and straw mulch can suppress some insects. For example in potato crops with straw mulch, Colorado potato beetle is suppressed and aphid infestation and virus Potato Virus Y (PVY) incidence are reduced, probably through a combination of reduced host-finding ability, increased predation from natural enemies and less soluble N in potato foliage (Zehnder et al., 2007).

Crop rotation decreases green house gas emissions Scientists at the University of Illinois have provided further evidence that long -term study shows rotating crops increases yield and lowers green house gas emissions compared to continuous corn or soybeans. Comparing the corn phase of corn/soybean rotation to continuous corn showed an average yield benefit of more than 20% and a cumulative reduction in nitrous oxide emissions of approximately 35% (Gevan et al., 2018). Nitrous oxide is an extremely potent greenhouse gas with a global warming potential (how much heat a greenhouse gas traps in the atmosphere) almost 300 times higher than carbon dioxide. It is a byproduct of the process of denitrification whereby bacteria in the soil break nitrate down into inert nitrogen gas. Not surprisingly, nitrous oxide emissions are tied to the rate and timing of nitrogen fertilizer application (Gevan et al., 2018).

Crop rotation increases soil fertility Rotations that include nitrogen-producing legumes such as peas, beans, and alfalfa provide subsequent crops with substantial amounts of this critical nutrient. And recent research shows that nitrogen from legumes remains in the soil longer than the nitrogen in synthetic fertilizers, leaving less to leach into groundwater or run off fields and pollute streams (https://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/solutions/advance-sustainable agriculture/crop-diversity-and-rotation.html#.W6cf6mhKjIX).

Maximum yield explains crop rotation When a single crop is grown in one field for many years in a row, the crop will cause the depletion of particular nutrients from the soil. This depletion of nutrients leads to poor plant health and lower crop yield. With crop rotation, particular nutrients are replenished depending on the crops that are planted. For example, a simple rotation between a heavy nitrogen using plant (e.g., corn) and a nitrogen depositing plant (e.g., soybeans) can help maintain a healthy balance of nutrients in the soil (https://www.maximumyield.com/definition/317/crop-rotation).

Crop rotation on microbial population Crop rotation with organic compound fertilizer application reduced the percentage of fungi in the soil by 24% compared to continuous maize and soybean with the same fertilizer application. The combination of crop rotation with organic fertilizer can reduce the percentage of fungi/bacteria to the greatest degree. In addition, the content of soil aggregate and organic matter had great influence on Gram-positive bacteria and actinomyces. In conclusion, soybean and maize crop rotation improve the soil nutrient content primarily by influencing the composition of bacterial community, especially the Gram-positive bacteria (Zhang et al., 2019). Declines in plant diversity will likely reduce soil microbial biomass, alter microbial functions, and threaten the provisioning of soil ecosystem services. We examined whether increasing temporal plant biodiversity in agro-ecosystems (by rotating crops) can partially

112

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

reverse these trends and enhance soil microbial biomass and function. We quantified seasonal patterns in soil microbial biomass, respiration rates, extracellular enzyme activity, and catabolic potential three times over one growing season in a 12-year crop rotation study at the W. K. Kellogg Biological Station LTER. Rotation treatments varied from one to five crops in a 3-year rotation cycle, but all soils were sampled under a corn year. We hypothesized that crop diversity would increase microbial biomass, activity, and catabolic evenness (a measure of functional diversity). Inorganic N, the stoichiometry of microbial biomass and dissolved organic C and N varied seasonally, likely reflecting fluctuations in soil resources during the growing season. Soils from biodiverse cropping systems increased microbial biomass C by 28–112% and N by 18–58% compared to low-diversity systems. Rotations increased potential C mineralization by as much as 53 %, and potential N mineralization by 72 %, and both were related to substantially higher hydrolase and lower oxidase enzyme activities. The catabolic potential of the soil microbial community showed not or slightly lower, catabolic evenness in more diverse rotations. However, the catabolic potential indicated that soil microbial communities were functionally distinct, and microbes from monoculture corn preferentially used simple substrates like carboxylic acids, relative to more diverse cropping systems. By isolating plant biodiversity from differences in fertilization and tillage, our study illustrates that crop biodiversity has overarching effects on soil microbial biomass and function that last throughout the growing season. In simplified agricultural systems, relatively small increases in crop diversity can have large impacts on microbial community size and function, with cover crops appearing to facilitate the largest increases (McDaniel et al., 2016). As the growing population is increasingly reliant on soils for food, fiber, and fuel, we will either need to consume less, put more land into production, or better use the land we already have in production. Putting more land in production will likely result in declines in local and global biodiversity. Thus, it is critical to incorporate biodiversity through any means possible into the existing managed ecosystems –even including biodiversity through time as with crop rotations. Here we show that both microbial biomass and function are strongly influenced by cropping diversity. In fact, the influence of crop rotations on soil microbes and functioning lasts over an entire growing season and even when all soils are under the same crop. Overall, our study highlights the importance of incorporating biodiversity into agroecosystems by including more crops in rotation, especially cover crops, to enhance beneficial soil processes controlled by soil microbes (McDaniel et al., 2016).

CONCLUSION Crop rotations clearly enhance soil microbial biomass and activity, which are now considered a pillar of soil health, and it appears from some researcher’s study that rotations also facilitate microbes in supplying more soil nitrogen to crops. Crop rotation delivers numerous ecological services as affected by several microbial processes, which confer “insurance” to agro-ecosystem disturbances, among others plant diseases. Not all the benefits of a crop rotation will be realized during the first few years after its initiation. To address the positive effects of crop rotation on the whole system more attention should be paid to and efforts invested in long-term experiments and on-farm research, where local conditions as well as farmers’ knowledge related to crop management can be combined.

REFERENCES Anonymous (2008). Atlantic Canadian Organic Regional Network (ACORN), Market Garden Crop Rotations Facilitated by Ann Slater, Ecological Farmers Association of Ontario, Maritimes. Baldani, J.I. and Baldani, V.L. (2005). History on the biological nitrogen fixation research in graminaceous plants: special emphasis on the Brazilian experience. Annais da Academia Brasileira da Ciência 77:549-579. Carolina Leoni Velazco, (2013). Crop rotation design in view of soilborne pathogen dynamics. A methodological approach illustrated with Sclerotium rolfsii and Fusarium

113

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management oxysporum f.sp. cepae, PhD thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, NL with references, with summaries in Dutch, English and Spanish, ISBN 978-94-6173-802-8. Chandrasekharan, B., K. Annadurai and E. Somasundaram 2010.A Text Book of Agronomy, New Age International (P) Ltd., Publishers, Published by New Age International (P) Ltd., Publishers. Dalla Santa, O.R., Fernández Hernández, R., Michelena Alvarez, G.L., Ronzelli Jr., P., Soccol, C.R. (2004). Azospirillum sp. inoculation in wheat, barley and oats seeds greenhouse experiments. Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology 47:843-850. Dogliotti, S. (2003). Exploring options for sustainable development of vegetable farms in South Uruguay. Ph.D diss. Wageningen University, Wageningen. Douds, D.D., and Millner, P.D. (1999). Biodiversity of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in agroecosystems. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 74:77-93. Gevan, D. Behnke, Stacy M. Zuber, Cameron M. Pittelkow, Emerson D. Nafziger, María B. Villamil (2018). Long-term crop rotation and tillage effects on soil greenhouse gas emissions and crop production in Illinois USA. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 261: 62. https://www.maximumyield.com/definition/317/crop-rotation. Access time & date: 12:25 PM; 26, Sep-2018. https://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/solutions/advance-sustainable agriculture/crop-diversity-and-rotation.html#.W6cf6mhKjIX. Access on: 22-Sep-2018; 10:10 PM. https://www.westernfarmpress.com/management/crop-rotation-method-disease-control. Access on: 22-Sep-2018; 9:54 PM. McDaniel, Marshall. D. and Grandy.A. S. 2016. Soil microbial biomass and function are altered by 12 years of crop rotation. SOIL, 2, 583–599. www.soil-journal.net/2/583/2016/ doi:10.5194/soil-2-583-2016. Rahman, M. A. (2018). Crop rotation in agriculture. Retrived from http://aridagriculture.com/2018/03/01/crop-rotation-agriculture/. Reddy, SR., 1999. Principles of agronomy. A. Text book. Kalyani Publishers New delhi- 110 002. 4rth Revised, 2011, reprinted, 2015; ICAR 2009. Scholberg, J.M.S., Dogliotti, S., Leoni, C., Cherr, C.M., Zotarelli, L., Rossing, W.A.H. 2010. Cover crops for sustainable agrosystems in the Americas. Pages 23-58. In: Genetic Engeneering, Biofertilization, Soil Quality and Organic Farming. Lichtfouse, E. (Ed.) Sustainable Agriculture Reviews, Vol. 4. Springer. Van Bruggen, A.H.C. and Termorshuizen, A.J. (2003). Integrated approaches to root disease management in organic farming systems. Australasian Plant Pathology 32: 141 – 156. Williams, S. M. and Weil, R.R. (2004). Crop cover root channels may alleviate soil compaction effects on soybean crop. Soil Science Society of America Journal 68:1403– 1409. Zehnder, G., Gurr, G M., Kühne, S., Wade, M. R., Wratten, S. D., Wyss, E. (2007). Arthropod pest management in organic crops. Annual Review of Entomology 52:57–80. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ento.52.110405.091337. Zhang Peng, Jiying Sun, Lijun Li, Xinxin Wang, Xiaoting Li and Jiahui Qu. 2019. Effect of Soybean and Maize Rotation on Soil Microbial Community Structure. Agronomy, 9,42; doi:10.3390/agronomy9020042. www.mdpi.com/journal/agronomy.

114

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

BIORATIONAL AND INNOVATIVE APPROACHES FOR PESTS CONTROL Rudra Pratap Singh Faculty of Agriculture Sciences, Bagwant University, Ajmer (Raj.)

Abstract The present generation insecticides are neurotoxic,and are sufficiently selective. Selective insecticides are more likely to be based on the insect cuticle, endocrine and chemical communication systems. The innovative approaches are based on behavioural or physiological disturbances which may ultimately prove lethal to insects. The new group of l insecticides includes neonicotinoids, spinosyns, avermectins, oxadiazines, IGR’s, fiproles, pyrroles, pyridine azomethine, ketoenols and benzenedicarboxamides. These novel groups of pesticides are likely to play an important role in IPM programme in future.

INTRODUCTION Mankind has a history of using cropprotection products from non-selective,naturally occurring compounds to highlyspecific synthetic and biological materialsfor assured food production and protection ofenvironment since long time. Researchersare going on to develop safer moleculeswhich could undergo photo-degradation,microbial degradation as well as chemicaldegradation leaving very less amount ofresidues in the environment. Accordingly,many conventional pesticides have beenreplaced by newer insecticides which aremore selective than conventionalinsecticides. The prime motto for thesedevelopments is to give protection to thecrops along with safety to the naturalenemies of different pests as a whole safetyto environment. Pesticides are used as plants protection products. Among those, insecticides serve as agents to control insects. When incorrectly applied, however these substances may negatively affect people's health and natural environment (Gavkare,2013). In biorational control, chemicals are utilized to affect insect behaviour, growth or reproduction, for suppression of insect populations (Dhaliwal & Arora, 2006). The latest developments of the biorational approaches for pest management and the proposed advantages of the biopesticides including their specificity, safety to non-target organisms, particularly mammals, and utilization in low, sometimes minute, amounts have led to an intensive research program by public and private institutions resulting in an avalanche of reports in attempts to discover and develop newer and safer pesticides, particularly in the past three decades. The innovative approaches to develop new insecticides are of three main categories, including microbial insecticides, utilization of semiochemicalsand botanical insecticides, paying particular attention to those practical approaches that are respectful to the environment (Rosell, et al. 2008).

Insect Growth Regulators The insect cuticle serves as a first line of defence against abiotic and biotic factors of the environment. It also provides a skeletal support and serves as a site for muscle attachment. The cuticle consists of chitin and proteins. Benzoyl Urea The insecticides of this group are Novaluron and Lufenuron. Novaluron is new insect growth regulator. It is powerful toxicant for controlling lepidopteran larvae. It is available commercially with the name of Rimon and Signa.

Thiadiazines This is chitin synthesis inhibitor. It prevents proper formation of exoskeleton after molting. It is effective against homoperean insects such as hoppers, jassids and white fly. In the market it is available with the active ingredient Buprofezin, commercial name Applaud.

Carbazate Acaricide It is selective acaricide that controls spider mite. In the market it is available with active ingredient Bifenazate, commercial name Floramite.

115

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Pyridazinones Acaricide This class of acaricide is very effective against red spider mites and two spotted mites. It inhibits mitochondrial electron transport. In the market it is available with active in gradient Fenpyroximate, trade name Mitigate.

Neo-Nicotinoids These are synthetic analogues of nicotine. The neonicotinoid family includes acetamiprid, clothianidin, imidacloprid, nitenpyram, nithiazine, thiacloprid and thiamethoxam. Imidacloprid is the most widely used insecticide in the world. Compared to organophosphate and carbamate insecticides, neonicotinoids cause less toxicity in birds and mammals than insects. These neo-nicotinoids are further classified into three groups namely:

1. Chloronicotinyl Compounds Imidacloprid It is the first commercialinsecticide of this group which inhibitsnicotinic acetylcholine by binding withnicotinic acetylcholine receptor(nAChR). Imidacloprid has good xylemmobility and formulated for use as seedtreatment, soil and foliar application and is found effective against sucking pests(aphids, leaf hoppers, plant hoppers,white flies and thrips). In India manyformulations of Imidacloprid areregistered viz., Imidacloprid 17.8% SL(Confidor), and 70% WS (Gaucho) asseed treatment. Acetamiprid The mode of action issame as imidacloprid and it is a broadspectruminsecticide used for control ofpests of vegetables, fruit trees, tea etc. Itis found effective against sucking insectpests of cotton and formulated asAcetamiprid 20% SP and available inIndian market as Pride®. Thiacloprid It affects transmission ofnerve impulse. Thiacloprid is available with trade name Calypso.

2. Thionicotinyl Group Compounds Thiamethoxam is a broad spectruminsecticide acting against stem borers,hoppers, jassids, whiteflies, aphids,mosquito bug, psyllids and used in cropsviz., rice, cotton, wheat, mustard, okra,mango, potato, tea and citrus etc. It canbe used both for seed and foliartreatment. The formulations developedare 25% WG (foliar spray), 70% WS(Seed treatment). It is commerciallyavailable in market as Actara®,Cruiser® etc.

3. Furanicotinyl Group Compounds Dinotefuran is third generation nicotinylgroup of insecticides acting againstsucking pests like hoppers, jassids andaphids of different crops. It is highlysystemic compound. Commerciallyavailable formulation is Dinotefuran 20%SG in the name of Osheen and Token.

4. Pyridincarboxamides Flonicamid has systemic as well astrans-laminar activity which gives longterm control. Flonicamid rapidly inhibitsthe feeding behaviour of major species of aphids.It offers good persistence for long timeprotection from the pest. It is available with the brand nameUlala with flonicamid 50% WG in themarket.

5. Phenyl Pyrazoles The insecticide of this group is Fipronil. It isa systemic compound with contact andstomach activity. Fipronil blocks the gamma-amino-butyricacid (GABA) regulatedchloride channel in neurons,thusantagonizing the “calming” effect of GABA.It is found effective against stem borer, gallmidge, DBM, thrips, shoe borers, root borerand can be used in crops viz., sugarcane,cruciferous crops, cotton and rice. In Indiathe formulations registered are 5% SC and0.3% GR. It is popular with the farmersunder the brand name as Regent®

116

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

6. Pyridine Azomethines The insecticide of this group is"Pymetrozine"and it has no direct toxicityagainst insects but it blocks stylet penetrationof sucking insects which may causeimmediate cessation of feeding afterexposure to this insecticide. It is found effective against sucking pests and can be applied bothas foliar and soil application. Thecommercial products of pymetrozineare available Chess® and Fulfill®.

7. Oxadiazine Group The insecticide of this group is"Indoxacarb"which inhibits the flow ofsodium ions into nerve cell in insects, thatcause paralysis and death. It enters into theinsect body by two ways, throughingestion of treated foliage and alsopenetrates through insect cuticle. It is used tocontrol for variety of lepidoptera pests,specially Helicoverpa armigera andPlutellla xylostella. The formulationavailable are 14.5% SC, and recentlyindoxacarb 15.8% EC. It is sold under tradename as Avaunt® and Avanut EC.

8. Halogenated Pyrroles The insecticide of this group isChlorfenapyr. It is first and only member ofthis unique chemical group, which acts bydisrupting the proton gradient acrossmitochondrial membrane and preventmitochondria from producing ATPs. It isfound effective against DBM in cabbage andcauliflower and also against mites in chilliand commercially available as Intrepid®(Chlorfenapyr 10% SC).

9. Thiazolidine Group The insecticide of this group is Hexythiazox, an acaricide.Itaffects growth and development of mites andused for control of red spider and yellowmites in tea and chilli, and available ashexythiazox 5.45% EC withtrade name Maiden.

10. Thiourea Derivatives The insecticide of this group isDiafenthiuron. The mode of action of thisinsecticide is inhibition of oxidativephosphorylation i.eby specificallyinhibitingthe ATP synthase. They are found to be effectiveagainst sucking insects, mites and capsule borer. It isavailable as Diafenthiuron50% WP as Pegasus or Polo.

11. Sulfite Ester Group Propargite an acaricide belongs to this group.It kills mites through inhibition of oxidativephosphorylation by disruption of ATP formation. It is highlyeffective against phytophagous mites. It is available in liquid formulation as57% EC,trade name Omite.

12. Diamide Group Flubendiamide and Chlorantraniliprole aretwo insecticides of this group.Flubendiamide is a novel class of insecticidehaving a unique chemical structure, usedagainst broad spectrum of lepidopterousinsects. The other new class of thisgroup is Chlorantraniliprole, which specifically belongs to anthranilidin diamides and controls almost all economically importantLepidoptera and other species. It has highlarvicial potency and long lasting activitywith new mode of action and safe to nontarget insects.

13. Quinazoline Group Acaricide, Fenazaquin belongs tothis group. It inhibits mitochondrialelectron transport chain by binding withcomplex I at co-enzymes site Q. Itis registered as Fenazaquin 10% EC and soldas Magister, which is effectiveagainst mites in tea and chilli.

14. Tetronic Acid Derivatives Spiromesifen, this acarcide cum insecticidebelongs to tetronic acid derivatives. It blocksthe fat synthesis which ultimately causes thetarget pest to dry out and die. Its

117

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management activeingredient is a lipid biosynthesis inhibitorthat prevents insects from maintaining anecessary water balance.

New Insecticides From Microorganisms Microbial control of pest insects is increasing in importance because of increasing resistance of arthropods to chemical insecticides, improved performance and cost- competitiveness, reduced environmental costs and a decline in development of new chemical insecticides(Reddy, 2010). These are:

Avermectins Natural product isolated from soilmicroorganism, mycelia of Streptomycesavermitilis. These compound are closelyrelated to milbemycins. Abamectinwith the trade names Vertimec®, Avid® and Agrimec®isused against sucking pests,dipterans, psyllidae, leaf miners andphytophagous mites. Ivermectin is a semisynthetic derivative of abamectin used tocontrol parasites of cattles.Emamectin benzoate is also a semisynthetic derivative of avermectin which ishighly effective against lepidopteran pestswith the trade name of Proclaim. Spinosyns Spinosad is the first active ingredientproposed for a new class of insect controlproducts. Spinosad isderived from the metabolites of the naturallyoccurring bacteria, Saccharopolysporaspinosa.. This formulation contained amixture of two of the most activemetabolites, Spinosyns A and Spinosyn D.It is marketed as Tracer.

Future Challenges To develop more and more new moleculeshaving- 1. Low dose compounds 5. Less residual effect. 2. High efficacy and quick knock 6. High persistence in the plant. downagainst target pest 7. Minimization of residue effect in 3. Less or no leaching potential ecosystem. 4. Less harmful to beneficial insects such 8. More safety for environment and ashoney bees and natural enemies reducing health hazards. More biotechnological innovations are directed towards transgenic plants having natural resistance to pests. More innovative technologiesare to bedeveloped in application of pesticides. Aspecial care shall be given on the nozzles,sprayer or applicator with an intention tominimize the loss of applied pesticide.

Conclusion Scientific community has been involved inapproaches towards the developments ofnewer molecules which could be easilybiodegradable and target-specific with very lowmammalian toxicity. New types of insecticides to be developed with safermolecules which could undergophotodegradation, microbial degradation aswell as chemical degradation, leaving veryless residues in the environment.The main object of this development is togive protection to the crops along with safetyto the natural enemies of various pests as overall safety to environment.

Reference Dhaliwal, G.S. and Arora, R. (2006). Integrated Pest Management.Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi.pp.277-302. Gavkare, O.,Patil, M.U., Kulkarni, A.V. and Gupta, S. (2013). New Group of Insecticides.Popular Kheti. 1(3): 34-39. Reddy, D. S. (2010). Applied entomology. New Vishal Publication. New Delhi, India. Rosell, G., Quero, C., Coll, J. and Cuerrero, A. (2008). Biorational insecticides in pest management, Journal of Pesticide Science, 33 (2):103-121.

118

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

BIOTECHNOLOGY IN INTEGRATED AND ECO-FRIENDLY PEST MANAGEMENT Sundar Pal and Prabhat Tiwari Rani Lakshmi Bai Central Agricultural University, Jhansi, UP, India. [email protected]

Abstract Biotechnology has providing new avenues for management of insect pest. It has potential to move farming closer to ecologically sustainable practices both in developed and developing countries and thus could make a considerable impact on agricultural systems in the future. Crop cultivars derived through conventional plant breeding or biotechnological approaches will continue to play a pivotal role in IPM in different crops and cropping systems. Transgenic with different insecticidal genes can be exploited for sustainable crop production in the future. Food safety risks associated with transgenic plants include the spread of antibiotics resistance, changes in nutrients composition of the plant, and the production of toxic proteins and allergens. Key words: Biotechnology, Integrated pest management and transgenic plants.

1.1 Introduction The term “Integrated Pest Management” was used for the ﬁrst time by Smith and van dan Bosch (1967) and in 1969 this term was formally recognized by the US National Academy of Sciences. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a system approach that combines a wide array of crop production and protection practices to minimize the economic losses caused by the pests (insect pests, diseases, nematodes, weeds, rodents, birds etc.). The world population is still increasing and is projected to reach 9 to 10 billion over the next four decades. Thus immediate priority fir agriculture is to achieve maximum production of food and other products. As a result of using high-yielding varieties, irrigation, fertilizers, and pesticides, crop productivity has increased five times over the past five decades. Productivity increases in agriculture led by research and development formed the basis for rapid economic growth and poverty reduction. The basic tactics of IPM were proposed and applied to reduce crop losses against the ravages of pests long before the expression was coined (Jones, 1973). Throughout the early twentieth century, plant protection specialists relied on knowledge of pest biology and cultural practices to produce multitactical control strategies (Gaines, 1957). It was not until the incorporation of all classes of pests in the early 1970s that the modern concept of IPM was born (Prokopy and Kogan, 2003). It emphasizes on careful monitoring of pests and conservation of their natural enemies. Insect pathogens have demonstrated to be environmentally safe and economical alternative for the control of wide range of arthropod pests. One of the practical means of increasing crop production is to minimize the pest associated losses (Sharma and Veerbhadra Rao, 1995), currently estimated at 14% of the total agricultural production (Oerke, 2006). A massive application of pesticides to minimize losses due to insect pests, diseases, and weeds have resulted in high levels of pesticide residue in food and food products and has had an adverse effect on the beneficial organisms in the environment. A large number of insect species have now developed high levels of resistance to currently available insecticides, which has necessitated either the application of even higher doses or an increased frequency of insecticide application. Advances in crop improvement have led to the “Green Revolution” becoming one of the scientifically most significant events in the history of mankind. Productivity increases in rice, wheat, and maize helped to surpass in a decade the production accomplishments of the past century (Swaminathan, 2000). A substantial increase in food production can be realized through the application of the modern tools of biotechnology for pest management. Biotechnology is a technique that uses living organisms to make or modify products to improve plants or animals or to develop mocro organisms for specific uses. In which involve the production, isolation, modification and uses of substances derived by means of biosynthesis. Genetic engineering is use for

119

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management changes in the genetic constitution of cells by introduction or elimination of specific genes using molecular biology techniques and helpful against herbicide tolerant crop, virus resistant crop, insect resistant crop and transgenic micro-organism. Biotechnological approaches in agriculture and medicine can provide a powerful tool to alleviate poverty and improve the livelihoods of the rural poor (Sharma et al., 2002). Toxin genes from the bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis have been incorporated into several crops and insect-resistant genetically- engineered cotton, corn, and potato are now being cultivated over large areas of Asia, Africa, Australia, the Americas, and in some parts of Europe. Large-scale deployment of insect-resistant transgenic crops has raised many concerns about their possible interaction with non-target organisms in the ecosystem, bio-safety of the food derived from genetically-engineered crops, and their likely impact on the environment. Natural enemies, biopesticides, natural plant products, and pest-resistant varieties offer a potentially safe method of managing insect pests. Unlike synthetic pesticides, some of these technologies (insect-resistant varieties, natural enemies, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) Berliner, nucleo polyhedrosis viruses [NPVs], entomopathogenic fungi, and nematodes) have the advantage of replicating themselves or their effect in the field, and thus having a cumulative effect on pest populations. Despite being environmentally friendly, the alternative technologies have some serious limitations, such as: (1) mass production, (2) slow rate of action, (3) cost effectiveness, (4) timely availability, and (5) limited activity spectrum. In this chapter, role of Genetic engineering in Integrated and eco-friendly Pest Management, is a comprehensive work that deals with a gamut of issues ranging from host plant resistance to insect pests, phenotyping transgenic plants and mapping populations for insect resistance, physico-chemical and molecular markers associated with insect resistance, potential of insect- resistant transgenic crops for pest management, and the use of biotechnological tools for diagnosis of insects and monitoring insect resistance to insecticides. It also covers the use of genetic engineering to produce robust natural enemies and more virulent strains of entomopathogenic microbes, bio-safety of food derived from genetically engineered plants, detection of transgene(s) in food and food products, and the potential application of the modern tools of biotechnology for pest management and sustainable crop production. This valuable chapter comes at a time when alternative strategies are urgently needed to deal with biotic stresses to ensure a food secure future. It will serve as a useful source of information to students, scientists, NGOs, administrators, and research planners in the 21st century.

1.2 Agriculture and Biotechnology Biotechnology has been a remarkable increase in grain production over the past five decades, but only a marginal increase was realized after the 1990s. Productivity gains are essential for long-term economic growth, but in the short term, these are even more important for maintaining adequate food supplies for the growing population. It is in this context that biotechnology will play an important role in increasing food production in the near future. There is a need to take a critical, but practical look at the prospects of biotechnological applications for increasing crop production and improving nutritional quality. Genetic engineering offers plant breeders access to an infinitely wide array of novel genes and traits, which can be inserted into high-yielding and locally adapted cultivars. Employed of biotechnology tools in crop improvement as tissue culture technology in which include protoplast fusion, clonal propagation, somaclonal variation and mutant selection and recombination technology like Agrobacterium based plant transformation, particle acceleration, electroporation, microinjection and RNA interference. Biotechnological tool can be used to develop new hybrid crops based on genetic male-sterility, exploit apomixis to fix hybrid vigor in crops, increase resistance to insect pests, diseases, herbicides, and abiotic stress factors, improve effectiveness of natural enemies and entomopathogenic bacteria, viruses, and fungi, enhance nutritional value of crops through enrichment with vitamin A and essential amino acids, improve shelf life and postharvest quality of produce, increase efficiency of phosphorus uptake and nitrogen fixation, improve adaptation to soil salinity and aluminum toxicity, understand the nature of gene action and metabolic pathways, increase

120

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management photosynthetic activity, sugar, starch production, and crop yield and produce antibodies, pharmaceuticals, and vaccines etc. As new crop cultivars with resistance to insect pests and diseases combined with biocontrol agents should lead to a reduced reliance on pesticides, and thereby reduce farmers’ crop protection costs, while benefiting both the environment and public health.

1.3 Transgenic resistance against Pests The first transgenic plants with Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) (Berliner) genes were produced in 1987. While most of the insect- resistant transgenic plants have been developed by using Bt d-endotoxin genes, many studies are underway to use non-Bt genes, which interfere with the nutritional requirements of the insects. Such genes include protease inhibitors, chitinases, secondary plant metabolites, and lectins (Hilder and Boulter, 1999). Genes conferring resistance to insects have been inserted into crop plants such as maize, cotton, potato, tobacco, rice, broccoli, lettuce, walnuts, apple, alfalfa, and soybean. A number of transgenic crops have now been released for on-farm production or field testing (James, 2007). The first transgenic crop with resistance to insects was grown in 1994, and large-scale cultivation was undertaken in 1996 in the United States. Since then, there has been a rapid increase in the area sown with transgenic crops in the United States, Canada, Australia, Argentina, India, and China. Transgenic crops are now grown in over 25 countries in the world. Successful control of cotton bollworms has been achieved through transgenic cotton ( Zhao et al., 1998). Cry type toxins from Bt are effective against cotton bollworms, Heliothis virescens F. and Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner), corn earworm, Helicoverpa zea (Boddie), the European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis (Hubner), and rice stem borer, Scirpophaga incertulas (Walker) (Alam et al., 1999). Successful expression of Bt genes against the lepidopterous insects has also been achieved in tomato, potato, brinjal, groundnut, and chickpea by various researchers. There will be tremendous benefits to the environment through the deployment of transgenic plants for pest management (Sharma and Ortiz, 2000). Papaya with transgenic resistance to ring spot virus has been grown in Hawaii since 1996. Rice yellow mottle virus (RYMV), which is difficult to control with conventional approaches, can now be controlled through transgenic rice, which will provide insurance from total crop failure. Globally, herbicide- resistant soybean and insect-resistant maize and cotton account for 85% of the total area under transgenic crops. The area planted to genetically improved crops has increased dramatically from less than 1 million ha in 1995 to 100 million ha in 2006 (James, 2007). Transgenic plants with insecticidal genes are set to feature prominently in pest management in both the developed and developing worlds in the future. Such an effort will play a major role in minimizing insect-associated losses, increase crop production, and improve the quality of life for the rural poor.

1.4 Role of biotechnology in insect pest control Each year billions of dollars are spent worldwide on insect control in agriculture. Despite this expenditure, up to 40% of a crop can be lost to insect damage, particularly in developing countries (Oerke, 2006). Some of the most damaging insect species belong to the Lepidoptera, the second largest insect order comprised of moths and butterflies. The larval stage of moths cause major damage to an array of economically valuable crops including cotton, tobacco, tomato, corn, sorghum, lucerne, sunflower, pulses, and wheat (Srinivasan et al., 2006). Until recently, broad spectrum chemical insecticides have been the primary control agent for agricultural pests, with about 40% targeted to the control of lepidopteran insects. Over the years the widespread use of pesticides has led to pesticide resistant insects, a reduction in beneficial insect populations and harmful effects to humans and the environment (Haq et al., 2004). In India alone, Bt-cotton has increased cotton yields by up to 60%, and has reduced insecticide sprays by around half. This in turn has lead to an income increase of up to US $11.9 billion per annum (James, 2011). The reliance of a worldwide industry on one insect

121

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management resistance trait has led to real concerns about the development of Bt-resistant insects, especially since at least four cases of field based resistance have already been documented (Storer et al., 2010). This in turn has led to a search for new insecticidal proteins and their encoding genes that have commercial potential for plant protection. They include amylase inhibitors, vegetative insecticidal protein (Bhalla et al., 2005), chitinases (Kabir et al., 2006) and protease inhibitors (Maheswaran et al., 2007), as well as several other proteins directed to targets in the insect gut like Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) endotoxin.

1.4.1 Bt endotoxin Bacillus thuringiensis, a Gram-positive soil bacterium, produces a proteinaceous parasporal crystalline inclusion during sporulation. There are two main categories of Bt toxins: Cry and Cyt. The largest Cry family is the three domain family, and genes from this family are present in the majority of commercialised Bt crops (Tabashnik, 2009). Upon ingestion by insects the crystalline inclusion is solubilised in the midgut. Most target insects have a high gut pH that is crucial for the efficacy of Bt toxins since most Btprotoxins are only soluble above pH 9.5. The 130 kDa protoxins are activated by insect gut proteases, which typically cleave from both the C- and N-termini resulting in a 43-65 kDa protease-resistant active core (Rukmini et al., 2000).

1.4.1.1 Lepidopteran insects and Bt More recently there have been reports of field resistance to Bt crops in pink bollworm (Pectinophore gosspiella), cotton bollworm (Helicoverpa spp), armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) and western corn rootworm (Diabrotica virgifera virgifera). Some insects collected from the field have Bt resistance that has been characterized in the Laboratory. Mutations in cadherin genes are responsible for Bt resistance in Heliothis virescens, Helicoverpa armigera and Pectinophora gossypiella (Morin et al., 2003). Another resistance mechanism associated with an ABC transporter locus has been reported in three lepidopteran spp (H. virescens, P. xylostella and T. ni (Baxter et al., 2011). Resistance to Bt in Ostrinia nubialis is due to reduced midgut protease activity resulting in less activation of the protoxins.

1.4.2 Vegetative insecticidal protein (Vip) Entomopathogenic bacteria like Bacillus cereus and Bacillus thuringiensis, produced insecticidal protein that accumulate in inclusion bodies or oarasporal crystal protein as well as insecticidal proteins that secreted into the culture medium. The Vio1 and Vip2 protein act as binary toxins and are toxic to some members of the Coleoptera and Hemiptera where Vip1 bind to receptures in the membrane of the insect midgut and Vip2 enters the cell where it displays its ADP-ribosyltransferase activily against action, preventing microfilament formation (Chakroun et al., 2016). Examples, VIP was highly toxic to Agrotis and Spodoptera species. VIP induced gut paralysis, complete lysis of the gut epithelial cells and resulted in larval mortality. Agrotis ipsilon and Spodoptera frugiperda larvae suffered gut paralysis, disruption of midgut epithelial cells and mortality on Vip3A. Vip3A was toxic to A. ipsilon and S. frugiperda. Larvae of Ostrinia nubilalis and Danaus plexippus were insensitive. Vip3Aa14 was toxic to Spodoptera litura and Plutella xylostella. Larvae of Helicoverpa armigera and Pieris brassicae were insensitive. VIP3Ac1 had insecticidal activity against larvae of S. frugiperda, Helicoverpa zea and Trichoplusia ni, but low activity against Bombyx mori and O. nubilalis. The chimeric protein Vip3AcAa was insecticidal to O. nubilalis. Vip3LB resulted in growth inhibition of Spodoptera littoralis when incorporated into a semi solid artificial diet (Sellami et. al., 2011).

1.4.3 Biotin binding proteins (BBPs) BBPs expressed in transgenic plants are insecticidal to a very wide range of insects. It’s effective across a broader range of insect’s orders and other invertebrates than Bt Cry proteins. Avidin and streptavidin are reported as causing death of sevear growth reduction in at last 40 species of insects across five insect orders ( Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, Orthoptera,

122

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Diptera, and Some leaf feeders of hymenoptera) and mites (Christeller et al., 2010). Biotin is an essential vitamin and act as a covalently-bound cofactor in various carboxylases, which have major roles in gluconeogenesis, lipogenesis, amino acid and fatty acid catabolism, and the citric acid cycle. Example: Avidin and streptavidin increased mortality in four Lepidoptera; Epiphyas postvittana, Planotortrix octo, Ctenopseustis obliquana and Phthorimaea operculella when incorporated into artificial diets (Markwick et. al., 2001). Avidin is a water-soluble tetrameric glycoprotein from chicken egg, which binds strongly to biotin. Streptavidin is a homologous protein found in the culture supernatant of Streptomyces avidinii. Examples, Transgenic plants with leaves expressing avidin in the vacuole halted growth and caused mortality in H. armigera and S. litura larvae. Transgenic tobacco plants expressing either avidin or streptavidin increased mortality of the potato tuber moth (P. operculella). Similarly, transgenic apple expressing either avidin or streptavidin increased mortality and decreased growth of the lightbrown apple moth (E. postvittana). Transgenic tobacco expressing avidin reduced S. litura larval mass. Transgenic tobacco expressing three variants of biotin binding proteins in the vacuole increased mortality of P. operculella larvae (Murray et al., 2010).

1.4.4 Chitinase (enzyme) Chitin is important component in insect integument which is insoluble structurally polysaccharide that occurs in the exoskeletal and gut lining of insects where is a metabolic target of selective pest control agents. One potential biopesticide is the insect molting enzyme, chitinase which degrades chitin to low molecular weight, soluble and insoluble oligosaccharides. Chitinases have been isolated from the tobacco hornworm, Manduca sexta and several other insect species (Kramer and Muthukrishnan, 1997). Chitinase catalyses the hydrolysis of chitin, which is one of the vital components of the lining of the digestive tract in insects and is not present in plant and higher animals. Examples, Transgenic tobacco plants expressing M. sexta chitinase caused a reduction in survival and growth of H. virescens, but not M. sexta larvae. Lacanobia oleracea larvae exposed to diet containing recombinant L. oleracea chitinase had a reduction in weight gain and consumption compared to control fed larvae. Transgenic rapeseed (Brassica napus) expressing M. sexta chitinase and scorpion insect toxin increased mortality and reduced growth of Plutella maculipenis (Jackie et al., 2012). Oral injection of B. mori chitinase (BmCHI) caused high mortality in Japanese pine beetle, Monochamus alternates (Coleoptera). The peritrophic membrane chitin was degraded by Bm-CHI, but the midgut epithelium was not affected (Kabir et al., 2006).

1.4.5 Cholesterol oxidase (enzyme) Cholesterol oxidase (CHOx), a FAD-dependent enzyme of the oxido-reductase family catalyzes the oxidation of cholesterol to cholestenone. Cholesterol oxidase (3β- hydroxysterol oxidase, EC 1.1.3.6) is produced by microorganisms of both pathogenic and nonpathogenic nature such as Mycobacterium, Brevibacterium, Streptomyces, Corynrbacterium, Arthrobacter, Pseudomonas, Rhodococcus, Chromobacterium and Bacillus species (Devi and Kanwar, 2017). It is a bacterial enzyme that catalyzes the oxidation of cholesterol and other 3-hydroxysterols, resulting in production of the corresponding 3hydroxysterols and hydrogen peroxide. The major functions are damaging the midgut membranes. Examples, Cholesterol oxidase from Streptomyces caused stunting of H. virescens, H. zea and Pectinophora gossypiella when incorporated into an artificial diet. Cholesterol oxidase expressing tobacco leaves that were incorporated in artificial diets caused mortality and severe stunting of neonate Anthonomus grandis larvae (Corbin et al., 2001).

1.4.6 Lipoxygenases (enzyme) This enzyme is produced from plants and its potential role of the host resistance against insect pests. Dioxygenase enzymes are widely distributed in plants and catalyse the hydroperoxidation of cis-cis-pentadiene moieties in unsaturated fatty acids. The important function is damaging midgut membranes. Example, Lipoxygenase from soybean retards the

123

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management growth of Manduca sexta when incorporated into artificial diet (Shukle and Murdock 1983). The larvae growth of Helicoverpa zea was reduced from 24 to 63% depending upon treatments (Felton et al., 1994).

1.4.7 Plant alpha-amylase inhibitors This enzyme inhibitor impact digestion through their action on insect gut digestive alpha-amylases and proteinases, which play a key role in the digestion of plant starch and proteins. Six different alpha-amylase inhibitor classes, lectin- like, knottin- like, cereal-type, Kunitz-like, gamma-purothionin-like and thaumatin-like could be used in pest control (Franco et al., 2002). Alpha-amylase inhibitors block starch digestion. Widespread in microorganisms, plants and animals. Example, development of pea weevil larvae (Bruchus pisorum; Coleoptera) was blocked at an early stage after ingestion of transgenic peas expressing an alphaamylase inhibitor from the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). Alpha-amylase inhibitor protects against predation by certain species of bruchids (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) and the tomato moth, L. oleracea (Lepidoptera). Alpha-amylase inhibitor 1, from the common bean (P. vulgaris), provided complete protection against pea weevil (B. pisorum; Coleoptera) in transgenic peas. Whereas alpha-amylase inhibitor 2 delayed maturation of larvae. The alpha- amylase activity in Tecia solanivora larvae was inhibited by alpha amylase inhibitor from amaranth seeds (Valencia et al., 2008).

1.4.8 Protease inhibitors (PIs) Protease inhibitors are one class of plant defense proteins against insect pest infestation. It is inhibiting endogenous enzymes is a compelling evidence for the current view that they are involved in the protection of plants against insect pests and possibly pathogens (Sharma, 2015). The plants protect themselves directly by constitutively expressing protease inhibitors and by inducing protease inhibitors in response to mechanical wounding or insect attack. They may also release volatile compounds after insect damage that function as potent attractants for predators of insect herbivores. The release of volatile compounds after wounding, such as methyl jasmonate, it also triggers the production of proteinase inhibitors in neighbouring unwounded plants essentially prearming the local population against insect attack. Protease inhibitors when incorporated into artificial diets or expressed in transgenic plants increase mortality and reduce the growth and development of larvae from many insect pest species including Coleoptera, Orthoptera and Lepidoptera (Tamhane et al., 2007).

1.4.9 Trypsin modulating oostatic factor (TMOF) The TMOFs will inhibit the growth and development of mosquito larvae feeding on it resulting in death by starvation in larvae (Lau et al., 2011). A peptide that blocks trypsin biosynthesis in mosquitoes (Aedes aegypti; Diptera [AeaTMOF]) and fleshflies (Sarcophaga; Diptera). Examples, Injection or oral ingestion of Aea-TMOF caused inhibition of trypsin biosynthesis and larval growth in H. virescens. Mortality of H. virescens increased when fed transgenic tobacco plants expressing Aea-TMOF (Tortiglione et al., 2002).

1.4.10 Iso-pentenyl transferase gene (IPT) The bacterial isopentenyl transferase (ipt) gene involvedin cytokinin biosynthesis was fused with a promoter from the proteinase inhibitor II gene and introduced ito Nicotiana plumbaginifolia. Transcripts of the IPT gene were wound-inducible in leaves of transgenic PI- II- IPT plants (Smigocki et al., 1993). Micro organism-derived gene from Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Codes for a key enzyme in the cytokinin-biosynthetic pathway. Examples, Ipt expressed in tobacco and tomato decreased leaf consumption by M. sexta and reduced survival of the peach potato aphid, Myzus persicae (Hemiptera).

124

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

1.4.11 RNAi constructs 1.4.11.1 Vacuolar ATPase Nutrient uptake by midgut cells is energized by the electrical difference created by the K+ pump. The K+ pump also regulates midgut lumen pH and determines the potassium concentration in blood, epithelial cells and midgut lumen. The primary motor for transport is a vacuolar-type proton ATPase. Examples, Transgenic corne plants expressing dsRNA of a V- ATPase from Diabrotica virgifera (western corn rootworm [WCR], Coleoptera) showed significant reduction in WCR feeding and plant damage.

1.4.11.2 Cytochrome P450 monooxygenas Cytochrome P450 monooxygenase permits insects to tolerate otherwise inhibitory concentrations of the cotton metabolite, gossypol. Examples, H. armigera fed on plants expressing cytochrome P450 dsRNA had retarded growth. Growth inhibition was more dramatic in the presence of gossypol (Mao et al., 2007).

1.4.11.3 Hemolin Recognition of microbial infection is an essential first step in immunity in insects. Induction of this protective effect is associated with upregulation of microbial pattern recognition protein genes such as hemolin. Examples, Pupae of the giant silkmoth (Hyalophora cecropia) were injected with hemolin dsRNA and developed normally into moths. After mating, no larvae emerged from the eggs which had malformed embryos (Eleftherianos et al., 2006). Prior infection of M. sexta larvae with non-pathogenic E. coli, elicited effective immunity against subsequent infection by the lethal pathogen Photorhabdus luminescens. Injection of hemolin dsRNA left the insect more susceptible to P. luminescens infection than insects that had not experienced prior infection with E. coli. physiology differs between insect species. Proteinase inhibitors bind to insect digestive proteases, preventing proteolysis which blocks digestion of protein. This effectively starves the larvae of protein and essential amino acids required for insect growth, development and reproduction. Examples, Arabidopsis thaliana serpin 1 [AtSerpin1] effect on 38% biomass reduction after feeding for 4 days in Spodoptera littoralis, Barley trypsin inhibitor [BTI] effect on 29% reduction in survival on Spodoptera exigua, Bovine spleen trypsin inhibitor [SI] reduced survival and growth of Helicoverpa armigera (Christeller et al., 2002), Cowpea trypsin inhibitor [CpTI] increased mortality in Helicoverpa zea and Heliothis virescens.

1.4.12 Lectins Multivalent carbohydratebinding proteins. Some bind to midgut epithelial cells, disrupting their function, causing breakdown of nutrient transport, and absorption of potentially harmful substances. Examples, Lectin from soybean seed inhibited larval growth of M. sexta. Wheat germ agglutinin was toxic when fed to O. nubilalis. Formation of the peritrophic membrane was disrupted in the anterior midgut microvilli. O. nubilalis growth was strongly inhibited by wheat germ agglutinin (WGA), whereas M. sexta was not affected. In O. nubilalis larvae, WGA caused hypersecretion of unorganized peritrophic membrane in the anterior midgut lumen, disintegration of microvilli and cessation of feeding. The snowdrop lectin (Galanthus nivalis, agglutinin, GNA) reduced L. oleracea larval biomass and slowed larval development when in an artificial diet or expressed in potato plants. Transgenic potato expressing snowdrop lectin (G. nivalis agglutinin; GNA) reduced development of L. oleracea larvae. Transgenic plants were significantly less damaged. Transgenic tobacco plants expressing leaf (ASAL) and bulb (ASAII) agglutinins from Allium sativum retarded S. littoralis larval development and growth. The Moringa oleiferalectin (cMoL) reduced Anagasta kuehniella larval growth and increased development time and pupal mortality when incorporated into an artificial diet.

125

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Conclusion Biotechnology provided new generation to pest management and its great potential to be included in IPM system. It is help in production of resistant varieties for different crops which are reduced the chemicals application in crop protection. The treated plants have pesticidal properties throughout her oven from growing point to root tips. It is help for reducing to continuity monitoring of pests and reduced the cost of equipment and labor. The transgenic plants possessing resistance property in one locality may affect the insect population dynamics in other areas. It has been claimed that there are a number of risks to humans associated with eating transgenic food crops. These risks include novel protein acting as allergens or toxins, altered host metabolism producing new or unknown allergens oe toxics and reduced nutritional quality leading to dietary deficiencies or health problem. There is a potential danger that just as farmers become trapped in ‘pesticides treadmills’ during the 1950s and 1960s, so farmers in the 21st century may be trapped in ‘Gene treadmills’.

References Baxter SW, Badenes-Pérez FR, Morrison A, Vogel H, Crickmore N, Kain W, Wang P, Heckel and DG, Jiggins CD (2011). Parallel evolution of Bacillus thuringiensis toxin resistance in Lepidoptera. Genetics 189: 675-679. Bhalla R, Dalal M, Panguluri SK, Jagadish B, Mandaokar AD, Singh AK, and Kumar PA (2005). Isolation, characterization and expression of a novel vegetative insecticidal protein gene of Bacillus thuringiensis. FEMS Microbiol Lett; 243: 467-472. Chakroun M., Banyuls N., Bel Y., Escriche B. and Ferre J. (2016). Bacterial Vegetative Insecticidal Protein (Vip) from Entomopathogenic Bacteria. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews; 80(3): Christeller JT, Burgess EPJ, Mett V, Gatehouse HS, Markwick NP, Murray C, Malone LA, Wright MA, Philip BA, Watt D, Gatehouse LN, Lovei GL, Shannon AL, Phung MM, Watson LM, and Laing WA (2002). The expression of a mammalian proteinase inhibitor, bovine spleen trypsin inhibitor in tobacco and its effects on Helicoverpa armigera larvae. Transgenic Res: 11: 161-173. Christeller, J.T., Markwick, N.P., Burgess, E.P. and Malone, L.A. (2010). The use of Biotin- binding proteins for insect control. Journal Economic Entomology;103(2): 497-508. Corbin DR, Grebenok RJ, Ohnmeiss TE, Greenplate JT, and Purcell JP (2001). Expression and chloroplast targeting of cholesterol oxidase in transgenic tobacco plants. Plant Physiol 126: 1116-1128. Devi, S. and Kanwar, S.S (2017). Cholesterol Oxidase: Source, properties and Applications. Insights Enzyme Research; 1(1): 1-12. Eleftherianos I, Marokhazi J, Millichap PJ, Hodgkinson AJ, Sriboonlert A, ffrenchConstant RH, and Reynolds S E (2006). Prior infection of Manduca sexta with non-pathogenic Escherichia coli elicits immunity to pathogenic Photorhabdus luminescens: roles of immune-related proteins shown by RNA interference. Insect Biochem Mol Biol; 36: 517525. Fang J, Xu X L, Wang P, Zhao J Z, Shelton A M, Cheng J, Feng MG, and Shen Z C (2007). Characterization of chimeric Bacillus thuringiensis Vip3 toxins. Appl Environ Microbiol; 73: 956-961. Felton, G.W., Bi, J.L., Summers, C.B., Mueller, A.J. and Duffey, S.S. (1994). Potential role of lipoxygenases in defense against insect herbivory. Journal of chemical Ecology; 20(3): Pp 651-666. Ferry N, Jouanin L, Ceci LR, Mulligan EA, Emami K, Gatehouse JA, Gatehouse AMR (2005). Impact of oilseed rape expressing the insecticidal serine protease inhibitor, mustard trypsin inhibitor-2 on the beneficial predator Pterostichus madidus. Mol Ecol 14: 337-349. Franco OL, Rigden DJ, Melo FR, and Grossi-de-Sa MF (2002). Plant alpha-amylase inhibitors and their interaction with insect alpha-amylases. Structure, function and potential for crop protection. Eur J Biochem; 269: 397-412.

126

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Gaines, J.C. (1957). Cotton insects and their control in the United Sates. Annual Review of Entomology; 2: 319–338. Haq SK, Atif SM, and Khan RH (2004). Protein proteinase inhibitor genes in combat against insects, pests, and pathogens: natural and engineered phytoprotection. Arch Biochem Biophys; 431: 145-159. Hilder, V.A. and Boulter, D. (1999). Genetic engineering of crop plants for insect resistance: A critical review. Crop Protection; 18: 177–191. Jackie Stevens, Kerry Dunse, Jennifer Fox, Shelley Evans and Marilyn Anderson (2012). Biotechnological Approaches for the Control of Insect Pests in Crop Plants. Pesticides – Advances in Chemical and Botanical Pesticides. https://www.researchgate.net. Pp: 269- 308. James C (2011). Global status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops. ISAAA Brief No 43 Ithaca, NY, USA. James, C. (2007). Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2006. ISAAA Briefs no. 35. Ithaca, New York, USA: International Service for Acquisition on Agri- Biotech Applications (ISAAA). http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/35. Accessed June 15, 2007. Jones, D.P. (1973). Agricultural entomology. In: Smith, R.F., Mittler, T.E. and Smith, C.N. (eds) History of Entomology. Annual Review Inc. Palo Alto, CA; pp. 307–332. Kabir KE, Sugimoto H, Tado H, Endo K, Yamanaka A, Tanaka S, and Koga D (2006). Effect of Bombyx mori chitinase against Japanese pine sawyer (Monochamus alternatus) adults as a biopesticide. Biosci Biotech Biochem; 70: 219-229. Kramer, J.K. and Muthukrishnan, S. (1997). Insect chitinases: Molecular biology and protential use as biopesticides. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol.; 27(11): 887-900. Lau, Y.S., Sulaiman, S. and Othman, H. (2011). The effectiveness of trypsin modulating oostatic factor (TMOF) and combination of TMOF with Bacillus thuringiensis against Aedes aegypti larvae in the laboratory. Iraian Journal of Arthropod borne Diseases; 5(1):13- 19. Lynch RE, Guo B, Timper P, and Wilson JP (2003). United States Department of Agriculture– Agricultural Research Service: Research on improving host-plant resistance to pests. Pest Manage Sci; 59: 718-727. Maheswaran G, Pridmore L, Franz P, and Anderson MA (2007). A proteinase inhibitor from Nicotiana alata inhibits the normal development of light-brown apple moth, Epiphyas postvittana in transgenic apple plants. Plant Cell Rep; 26: 773-782. Mao YB, Cai WJ, Wang JW, Hong GJ, Tao XY, Wang LJ, Huang YP, and Chen XY (2007). Silencing a cotton bollworm P450 monooxygenase gene by plant-mediated RNAi impairs larval tolerance of gossypol. Nat Biotechnol; 25: 1307-1313. Markwick N, Christeller J, Dochterty L, and Lilley C (2001). Insecticidal activity of avidin and streptavidin against four species of pest Lepidoptera. Entomol Exp Appl; 98: 59-66. Morin S, Biggs RW, Sisterson MS, Shriver L, Ellers-Kirk C, Higginson D, Holley D, Gahan LJ, Heckel DG, Carriere Y, Dennehy TJ, Brown JK, and Tabashnik BE (2003). Three cadherin alleles associated with resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis in pink bollworm. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 100: 5004-5009. Murray C, Markwick NP, Kaji R, Poulton J, Martin H, and Christeller JT (2010). Expression of various biotin-binding proteins in transgenic tobacco confers resistance to potato tuber moth, Phthorimaea operculella (Zeller) (fam. Gelechiidae). Transgenic Res; 19: 1041-1051. Oerke, E.C. (2006). Crop losses to pests. Journal of Agricultural Science; 144: 31–43. Prokopy, R. and Kogan, M. (2003). Integrated pest management. In: Resh, V.H. and Carde, R.T. (eds). Encyclopedia of Insects, Academic Press, San Diego; 589–595. Rukmini V, Reddy CY, and Venkateswerlu G (2000). Bacillus thuringiensis crystal δendotoxin: role of proteases in the conversion of protoxin to toxin. Biochimie; 82: 109116.

127

Modern Approaches in Pest and Disease Management

Schnepf E, Crickmore N, van Rie J, Lereclus D, Baum J, Feitelson J, Zeigler DR, Dean DH (1998). Bacillus thuringiensis and its pesticidal crystal proteins. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev; 62: 775-806. Sellami S, Jamoussi K, Dabbeche E, Jaoua S (2011). Increase of the Bacillus thuringiensis Secreted Toxicity Against Lepidopteron Larvae by Homologous Expression of the vip3LB Gene During Sporulation Stage. Curr Microbiol; 63: 289-294. Sharma, H.C. and Ortiz, R. (2002). Host plant resistance to insects: An eco-friendly approach for pest management and environment conservation. Journal of Environmental Biology; 23: 111–135. Sharma, H.C. and Veerbhadra Rao, M. (Eds.). (1995). Pests and Pest Management in India: The Changing Scenario. Rajendranagar, Andhra Pradesh, India: Plant Protection Association of India. Sharma, H.C., Crouch, J.H., Sharma, K.K., Seetharama, N. and Hash, C. T. (2002). Applications of biotechnology for crop improvement: prospects and constraints. Plant Science; 163: 381–395. Sharma, K. (2015). Protease inhibitors in crop protection from insects. International Journal of Current Research and Academic Review; 3(2):Pp 55-70. Shukle RH, Murdock LL (1983). Lipoxygenase, trypsin inhibitor and lectin from soybeans: effects on larval growth of Manduca sexta (Lepidoptera: Sphingidae). Environ Entomol 12: 787-791. Smigocki, A., Neal, J.W., McCanna, I. and Douglass, L. (1993). Cytokinin-mediated insect resistance in Nicotiana plant transformed with the ipt gene. Plant Molecular Biology; 23(2): 325-335. Srinivasan A, Giri A, Gupta V (2006). Structural and functional diversities in lepidopteran serine proteases. Cell Mol Biol Lett; 11: 132-154. Storer NP, Babcock JM, Schlenz M, Meade T, Thompson GD, Bing JW, and Huckaba RM (2010). Discovery and characterization of field resistance to Bt maize: Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Puerto Rico. J Econ Entomol; 103: 1031-1038. Swaminathan, M.S. (2000). Genetic engineering and food security: Ecological and livelihood issues. In Persley, G.J. and Lantin, M.M. (Eds.), Agricultural Biotechnology and the Rural Poor. Washington, D.C., USA: Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, 37–44. Tabashnik BE, Gassmann AJ, Crowder DW, and Carrière Y (2008). Insect resistance to Bt crops: evidence versus theory. Nat Biotechnol; 26: 199-202. Tabashnik BE, Van Rensburg JBJ, and Carrière Y (2009). Field-evolved insect resistance to Bt crops: definition, theory, and data. J Econ Entomol; 102: 2011-2025. Tamhane VA, Giri AP, Sainani MN, and Gupta VS (2007). Diverse forms of Pin-II family proteinase inhibitors from Capsicum annuum adversely affect the growth and development of Helicoverpa armigera. Gene 403: 29-38. Tortiglione C, Fanti P, Pennacchio F, Malva C, Breuer M, De Loof A, Monti LM, Tremblay E, and Rao R (2002). The expression in tobacco plants of Aedes aegypti Trypsin Modulating Oostatic Factor (Aea-TMOF) alters growth and development of the tobacco budworm, Heliothis virescens. Mol Breed; 9: 159-169. Valencia-Jimenez A, Arboleda JW, Avila AL, and Grossi-de-Sa MF (2008). Digestive alphaamylases from Tecia solanivora larvae (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae): response to pH, temperature and plant amylase inhibitors. Bull Entomol Res; 98: 575-579. Van Rensburg J (2007). First report of field resistance by stem borer, Busseola fusca (Fuller) to Bt-transgenic maize. S Afr J Plant Soil; 24: 147-150. Zhao, W.X., He, J.F., Zhang, G.Y., Li, J.S. and Liu, Q. (1999). A study on techniques to trap and kill cotton bollworm adults with high-voltage mercury lamps. Acta Agriculturae Universitatis Henanensis; 33: 151–155.

128