20062--Manisha 31 July-2020

Indian Journal of Entomology Online published (Preview) DoI No.:

BIOLOGY OF BLUE BOETICUS (L.) ON FIELD

Manisha*, Tarun Verma, Gulshan Kumar and Roshan Lal

Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture, Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agriculture University, Hisar 125004 *Email: [email protected] (corresponding author)

ABSTRACT

Biology of blue butterfly, (L.) (Lepidopera: ) was studied on field pea variety HFP 529 under laboratory conditions (26±1ºC; 60-70% RH). It was observed that 14 eggs/ female were laid singly on twigs, flowers and pods. Pre-oviposition, oviposition, postoviposition and incubation periods were from 1 to 2, 2 to 3, 2 to 3 and 2 to 3 days, respectively. Mean larval period was 2.5, 2.6, 3.3 and 3.6 days for 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th instars, respectively, with total larval duration of 12 days. Prepupal and pupal period was 2.22 and 8.00 days, respectively. The mean longevity of male and female was 8.0 and 9.5 days, respectively. Total life cycle varied from 29 to 35 days.

Key words: Blue butterfly, Lampides boeticus, field pea,Pisum sativum, biology, longevity, oviposition, larval period, instars, pupal period

Field pea, Pisum sativum is an important grain 70% RH). Sufficient numbers of larvae of L. boeticus legume crop in India cultivated in rabi season and in were collected from the field pea variety HFP 529 Haryana, it is grown in 15.56 thousand ha and production and reared in petri dishes lined with a blotting paper is 135.15 mt (Anonymous, 2018). The productivity is to absorb liquid excreta on immature pods. The petri much lower and it is attributed to pests, major one dishes were changed after 2 to 3 days maintaining are- stem flyOphiomyia phaseoli (Tryone), leaf miner hygienic conditions, with fresh pods provided daily to Chromatomyia horticola (Goureau), thrips Caliothrips the reared larva till pupation. After the adult emergence, indicus (Bagnall) and pod borer complex comprising of ten pairs of male and female were caged separately to blue butterfly, Lampides boeticus (L.), pea pod borer, accomplish mating and egg laying in glass jars (20 x Etiella zinckenella (Treitschke) and gram pod borer, 15 cm). Field pea twigs containing pods were placed in Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) (Mittal and Ujagir, magenta box- half poured with agar-agar and the box 2005). Insect pests cause around 10-15% reduction placed at the bottom of the glass jar to facilitate egg in yield (Kumar and Nath, 2003). Among these, the laying. A cotton swab dipped in 10% honey kept in blue butterfly, P. boeticus is one of the major borer hanging position in jars served as food to adults. After (Ganapathy and Durairaj, 2000). It is regular and serious egg laying, hatching larvae were reared separately in pest in Haryana causing 8% damage (Kaushik and petri plates. Observations on preoviposition, oviposition Singh, 1982); and Singh and Dhooria (1971) recorded and post oviposition period, fecundity, incubation 8.7% damage in South India. Lampides boeticus also period, % egg hatchability, larval period, prepupal and infests red gram, green gram, black gram, cowpea, and pupal period, adult longevity, total lifecycle and sex sannhemp, though it is considered as a minor borer ratio were observed. Morphometrics of lifestages were on pulses and other leguminous plants, in many parts also measured as indicated in the results. of Asia, , Australia and Europe (Shantibala and Singh, 2004). Recently L. boeticus caused 26.4% yield RESULTS AND DISCUSSION loss in green gram in Annnamalainagar, Tamil Nadu. The freshly laid eggs of L. boetius were disc shaped, Its biology is known on otherPreview crops, and since it is now finely sculptured and flat on top and bottom, greenish infesting field pea, this study explores it biology on field blue, which turns white after a day. The micropile was pea variety HFP 529. clearly visible and surface was covered with polygonal MATERIALS AND METHODS cells. At the time of hatching the colour changes to ashy grey and larvae came out through micropyle end The study was done during rabi 2015-16 in the which is found in depression of egg. Single female laid laboratory of Department of Entomology (26±1ºC; 60- 13 to 15 eggs. Incubation period and egg hatchability 2 Indian Journal of Entomology Online published (Preview) ranged 2-3 days and 84.62 to 86.67%, respectively. emergence of adult, colour darkens and antenna and the Sontakke (2018) reported that hatching occurred within wings become visible. The duration, morphometrics and 3.20± 0.20 days of incubation, and Palem et al. (2015) weight of the larval instars, pupae and adults are given reported 3 to 27 eggs on Vigna trilobata (L.) buds. Table 1, and life stages are given in Figs. 1-4. Jagginavar et al. (1991) reported 160.0 eggs/ female and 22.7 eggs/ female with and without food, respectively. Pandey et al. (1978) observed pupal period as 7-19 Vijayachander and Arivudainambi (2007) reported days, whereas prepupal length and breadth ranged 120.57+ 5.32 eggs/ female with incubation period of between 10.61-10.99 mm and 4.76-5.12 mm. Pupal 74.08± 0.89 hr and egg hatchability of 76.42± 1.76%. body length and breadth measured about 10.18-11.05 mm and 4.01-4.89 mm with pupal weight ranged The larvae were 11 segmented, with the newly from 0.076-0.099 mg. Palem et al. (2015) reported hatched larva tiny, yellowish and creamy with black the prepupal length and width as 10 mm and 5 mm, shinning head; second, third and fourth instars greenish respectively. However, pupal length and width ranged brown with a dark radish brown middle line on dorsal from 10.0 to 11.0 mm and 3.5 to 5.0 mm, respectively. side; fourth instar after some time turned into pale pink Similarly, Sontakke (2018) reported the pupal stage as or purple. The duration of first, second and third, fourth 5.20± 0.20 days long. instar were 2 to 3 days and 3 to 4 days, respectively. Fourth instar stopped feeding and live for some time The comparisons of male and female are given in in prepupal stage (whitish green and whitish pink). Table 1. Adult slender and short, dark brown metallic Pupation took place at the bottom of the glass jars, blue dorsally and white ventrally; and male violet blue inside the pods and on tissue paper. was yellowish dorsally, while female with brown. The antennae slender creamy and greyish pink initially, later turned brownish. ending in an abrupt club. The prothoracic coxa was an The whole surface was covered with black irregular elongated cylindrical segment, while coxae of meso and markings, with five pairs of black dots along the surface metathoracic legs are broad; trochanter small, irregular of abdomen. Anal end was fairly broad. Thorax was ring like and nearly similar in all legs; femora also slightly compressed. Pupa body was humped in the similar. Anteior margins of the prothoracic legs slightly middle, dorsal brown colour with a dark brown dorsal more convex than the meso and the metathoracic legs. line having dark brown spots and blotches on both sides. The tibial articulation apical, with femur clothed with Ventrally it was pale brown, soft and plain without many hairs; tibiae of females slightly smaller compared any markings. It attached itself to the substratum at to those of males; and tarsi five segmented except the the middle of its body by a loose body band. Prior to prothoracic legs of male being only one segmented

Fig. 1. Eggs 1st instar 2nd instar 3rd instar 4th instar PreviewFig. 2. Larval instars of L. boeticus

Prepupa Fig. 4. Adult Fig 3. Prepupa and pupa Figs. 1-4. Life stages of L. boeticus Biology of blue butterflyLampides boeticus on field pea 3 Manisha et al.

Table 1. Biologicy and morphomterics of L. boeticus Life cycle parameters Morphometrics of adult Body parts Male Female Length Width (mm) Length Width (mm) (mm) (mm) Pre oviposition 1.6+ 0.52 Antennae 7.02± 0.21 - 7.93± 0.17 - period (days) Oviposition period 2.4+ 0.52 Scape 0.39± 0.01 0.22+0.02 0.39± 0.02 0.23± 0.02 (days) Post-oviposition 2.6+ 0.52 Pedicel 0.36± 0.02 0.08± 0.01 0.39± 0.01 0.09± 0.01 period (days) Fecundity (No.) 14+ 0.63 Flagellum 6.26± 0.19 0.07±.01 7.16± 0.17 0.09± 0.01 Egg hatchability (%) 85.64+ 1.45 Wing span 29.90± 0.25 - 33.28± 0.26 - Incubation period 2.5+ 0.7 Fore leg 5.63± 0.27 - 5.78± 0.28 - (days) Total larval period 12+ 0.82 Middle leg 5.91± 0.29 - 6.04± 0.30 - (days) Hind leg 6.15± 0.22 - 6.28± 0.29 - Head Head Duration Length Life stages Width (mm) Weight (mg) capsule capsule (days) (mm) length width I 2.50± 0.53 1.17± 0.04 0.16± 0.04 0.004± 0.001 0.22± 0.01 0.15± 0.01 Larval II 2.6± 0.52 2.10± 0.21 0.69± 0.03 0.021± 0.002 0.70± 0.04 0.64± 0.03 Instars III 3.3± 0.48 7.59± 0.1 1.15± 0.06 0.064± 0.008 1.25± 0.05 1.10± 0.06 IV 3.6± 0.52 11.09± 0.07 1.39± 0.04 0.170± 0.008 1.46± 0.03 1.34± 0.04 Prepupa 2.22± 0.13 10.80± 0.10 4.94± 0.11 0.155± 0.015 Pupa 8.0± 0.22 10.62± 0.27 4.45± 0.29 0.088± 0.016 Male 8± 0.79 Adult Female 9.5± 0.42 and ending in a single claw. From the distal end of insect pests of field pea, Pisum sativum (L.). Annals of Plant pretarsus, two lateral sickle shaped claws raise, with Protection Sciences 13(1): 111-118. length and breadth slightly differing between sexes. Palem H, Kanike S, Purushottam V R S. 2015. Ecobiology and life cycle of the pea blue butterfly, Lampides boeticus (Linnaeus) These observations are more or less in agreement with (: Rhopalocera: Lycaenidae) from Southern Andhra those of Vijayachander and Arivudainambi (2007). Pradesh, India. South Asian Journal of Life Sciences 3(1): 14-20. Pandey N D, Mishra S D, Pandey U K. 1978. Some observations on REFERENCES biology of Polyommatus boeticus Linn. (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) a pest of Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp. Indian Journal of Entomology Anonymous 2018. Horticultural statistics at a glance 2018. National 40: 81-82. board of horticulture Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Government of India. Pp 198. (http://www.nhb.gov.in) Shantibala T, Singh T K. 2004. Yield loss infestation and economic injury level for the pea pod borer, Lampides boeticus (Linn.) in Manipur. Ganapathy N, Durairaj C. 2000. Bio-efficacy of some newer insecticides Annals of Plant Protection Sciences 12(1): 25-28. against pod borers of black gram. Pestology 26: 43-44. Singh H, Dhooria M S. 1971. Bionomics of the pea pod borer, Etiella Jagginavar S B, Kulkarni K A, Lingappa S. 1991. Biology of Lampides zinckenella (Treitschke). Indian Journal of Entomology 33(2): boeticus (L.) Lycaenidae: Lepidoptera on cowpea. Karnataka 123-130. Journal of Agricultural Sciences 4(3&4): 154-155. Sontakke P P. 2018. Life cycle of the pulse blue butterfly, Lampides Kaushik S K, Singh G. 1982. A short note on the incidence of blue boeticus (Linnaeus) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) on cowpea. butterfly Lampides boeticus L. (Lycaenidae: Lepidoptera). Indian International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences Journal of Plant ProtectionPreview 10: 94. 7(2): 2377-2381. Kumar A, Nath P. 2003. Pest complex and their population dynamics on Vijayachander A, Arivudainambi S. 2007. Biology of pluses blue early variety of pigeonpea UPAS-120 at Varanasi. Indian Journal butterfly,Lampides boeticus (Linnaeus). Annals of Plant Protection of Entomology 64(4): 293-296. Sciences 15(1): 53-56. Mittal V, Ujagir R. 2005. Effects of various treatments against major

(Manuscript Received: March, 2020; Revised: June, 2020; Accepted: July, 2020; Online Published: August, 2020) Online published (Preview) in www.entosocindia.org Ref. No. 20062