ISSN: 2349-8889 International Journal for Research in Applied Sciences and Biotechnology Volume-8, Issue-3 (May 2021) www.ijrasb.com https://doi.org/10.31033/ijrasb.8.3.5

Screening of Pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.] Against Tur Pod Bug, Clavigralla gibbosa (Spinola) in Long Duration Pigeonpea Genotypes

Rohit Sharma1 and Dr. Ram Keval2 1Department of Entomology and Agricultural Zoology, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, INDIA 2Department of Entomology and Agricultural Zoology, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, INDIA

1Corresponding Author: [email protected]

ABSTRACT India, it covers a surface of 3.88 million acres (E-Pulses The pigeonpea was infested with the number of IIPR, 2015-16) for production of 3.17 million tonnes. It pests at various stage of crop growth. Out of which is usually cultivated on marginal land and intercropped the incidence pattern of C. gibbosa was studied. The result with other pulses. However, as sole crops are gaining of the investigation pertaining to the “Screening of cash crop status, farmers grow pigeonpea. pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.] against Tur Pod Pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millspaugh] is a bug, Clavigralla gibbosa (Spinola) in long duration Pigeonpea genotypes” was carried out in 2018-19 at the short-lived permanent shrub, grown through custom as a Agricultural Research Farm, Institute of Agricultural grain legume crop in tropical and subtropical areas. Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi. This insect Pigeonpea is the annual grain legume production of was studied during reproductive phase of the crop during pigeons. It's named red gram (Red) and Congo (English), 2018-19. The very first presence of pod bug, [C. gibbosa tur and Arhar (Hindi), and is mainly cultivated as (spinola)] was reported in all genotypes with a maximum foodstuff. Dry whole seed, split seed (dhal) and dehulled population of (1.13 bug/plant) in the MAL-13 (AVT1) seed are used to cook various dishes. In addition to its genotype in the 4th standard week pursued in the first use as a food crop, the plants also cultivate lake , week by AVT1-706 (1.06 bug/plant), AVT1-705 (1.03 such as forages, fuel, stomach, basket-making, etc., bug/plant) in first week. Pod Bug population continued between the 4th standard Week of 2018-19. Throughout all Pigeonpea has a deep root system that enables them to genotypes, that 12th standard week Pod bug populations withstand the drought and are cultivated on mountain had been reported to also be especially high mostly during slopes to tie the soil and to reduce the erosion of the soil. 12th standard week for nearly every genotypes. MAL-13 Pigeonpea is lowly grown because of its deep-root (AVT1) genotypes, accompanied by AVT1-704, would have system, therefore extensively used with cereals, like the highest percentage of 10.55 bugs/plant, as well as 9.62 millets, sorghum and in inter-cropping systems bugs/plant populations. In genotypes AVT1-707 (4.96 and is also a good way of improving fertility in fallows. bug/plant), the lowest population of pod bugs was found. During the early vegetative stage, pigeonpea grows AVT2 - 903 (5.02 bug/plant), and AVT1-703 (5.17 slowly and does not interfere with accompanying crops. bugs/plant) during the 10th standard week. The mean pod bug population was substantially different in different The following crops are harvested. Pigeonpea continue genotypes and ranged from AVT1-708 (1.72 bugs/plant) to to grow after harvesting the accompanying crop, and MAL 13(AVT1) (3.77 bugs/plant). . Its degree of damage in they can fill the land with the appearance of a single crop cultivar AVT2-904 ranged from 27.33% to 51.00% in (AICRP). cultivar AVT1-703. The grain loss in genotype AVT2-904 The damage caused by pod sucking bugs has ranged from 12.68% to 30.52% in genotype AVT2-907. been detected in 50,000 tons of u.p annually, total grain loss due to the sucking of pod bugs. Clavigralla Keywords- Pigeonpea, field screening, standard week, C. gibbossa (Spinola) attacks pigeons and other legumes in gibbosa, genotypes, pod bug population Asia with several kinds and genera of pod sucking bugs. These insects penetrate the pod wall with the adult and nymphs to suck fluid from which seeds can be made. I. INTRODUCTION Damaged seeds are reduced and there are dark patches. In the past, the injury has been close to that of drought Pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millspaugh] is a stress and the impact of the insect. Seeds spoiled with major tropical and subtropical climate grain legume crop pods sucking bugs do not sprout or become acceptable as cultivated on nearly 4.8 million hectares covering 22 food. Almost 90 percentage of crops with medium-to Asian, African and Caribbean countries worldwide. In long duration cultivars are cultivated in rainfed production, India has a virtual monopoly conditions. For irrigated settings, short term varieties are accounting for 90 percent of total world production. In suitable. Since the colonial pigeons are growing under

27 This work is under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

ISSN: 2349-8889 International Journal for Research in Applied Sciences and Biotechnology Volume-8, Issue-3 (May 2021) www.ijrasb.com https://doi.org/10.31033/ijrasb.8.3.5 many agroclimate conditions and different crops, pigeon AVT1-709 MAL-13 (Check) pests Sachan et al. (1994) are vulnerable to many pests, although they cause relatively few serious losses of Details of Experiment yield, and Almost 250 insect species worldwide, although relatively low in yield, belong to eight orders 1 Design : Randomized block design and 61 families. Other main pests such as are potential 2 Number of replication : 3 pesticides, and occasional significant lowers in the production of grain during long-term pork. The annual 3 Treatments : 18 pigeonpea crop was projected to loss 25 to 30 percent in U.P because of pod fly alone (Lal and Yadav, 1987). In 4 Total no. of plots : 54 addition to the podfly and other insects, damage caused 5 Plot size : 4m x 3.75m=15 m2 by pod sucking bugs has been detected in 50.000 tons of u.p annually, total grain loss due to the sucking of pod 6 Row to Row and plant to : 75 cm x 25cm bugs. Clavigralla gibbossa (Spinola) attacks pigeons and plant spacing other legumes in Asia with several kinds and genera of pod sucking bugs. These insects penetrate the pod wall Screening of pigeonpea genotypes against with the adult and nymphs to suck fluid from which Tur Pod bug, Clavigralla gibbosa (Spinola) in long seeds can be made. Damaged seeds are reduced and duration Pigeonpea genotypes under field conditions there are dark patches. In the past, the injury has been during 2018-19. close to that of drought stress and the impact of the For the assessment of pod bug C.gibbosa the insect. Seeds spoiled with pods sucking bugs do not seeds which become shrivelled with dark patch can be sprout or become acceptable as food. The survey carried set as criteria for this, sucking pest. out by ICRISAT reported damage in 22.5% pigeon peas in the north of India, 21% in the central part of India and Pod bug C. gibbosa (Spinola): Pod bug is the most 13.2% in the south of India (lateef and reed, 1981), while critical amongst the infestation of pod sucking bugs. The in the north-west area there were 29.7%, 13.2% in the grown female lays eggs on the surface of the leaf and north zone 24.3% and 36.4% for the south (lateef a pod in clumps. The time of incubation lasts from 3-20 south) zone. days. Nymphal period lasts for 1-3 weeks, during which 5 nymphal instars take place. The adult and nymph suck II. MATERIALS AND METHODS the sap through the pod wall to produce seeds. With dark patches the seeds get shrivelling. These seeds don't The field experiment was conducted on the germinate and are therefore not recognized as a human topic “Screening of pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) diet. Millsp.] against Tur Pod bug, Clavigralla gibbosa 푵풖풎풃풆풓 풐풇 풅풂풎풂품풆풅 풑풐풅풔 (Spinola) in long duration Pigeonpea genotypes”. The % 퐏퐨퐝 퐝퐚퐦퐚퐠퐞 = × ퟏퟎퟎ 푻풐풕풂풍 풏풖풎풃풆풓 풐풇 풑풐풅풔 present investigation on the cooperative output of certain 푵풖풎풃풆풓 풐풇 풅풂풎풂품풆풅 품풓풂풊풏풔 % 퐆퐫퐚퐢퐧 퐝퐚퐦퐚퐠퐞 = × ퟏퟎퟎ genotypes was conducted during 2018-19 at Agriculture 푻풐풕풂풍 풏풖풎풃풆풓 풐풇 품풓풂풊풏풔 Research Farm, Institute of Agricultural Science, 푵풖풎풃풆풓 풐풇 풅풂풎풂품풆풅 품풓풂풊풏풔 % 퐆퐫퐚퐢퐧 퐝퐚퐦퐚퐠퐞 = × ퟏퟎퟎ Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi. 푻풐풕풂풍 풏풖풎풃풆풓 풐풇 품풓풂풊풏풔 Seed sowing was done manually with spacing from row to row (75 cm), and spacing from plant to Grain yield: When the crop matured, separately threshed plant (25 cm).In the first 10 accessions, the field and grain yield per plot was recorded and transformed to experiment was performed with 18 pigeon pea accession grain yields in kg / ha, each genotype was individually into a separate trial and in the second trial 8 accession harvested. was used respectively as an initial varietal trial and Statistical analysis: All data recorded have been advanced varietal trial. statistically calculated according to the Randomized The following 18 genotypes/varieties have been Block design method and population data from the screened against infestation of pigeon pea pod pest insects have been transformed using a transformable complex. square root method, and harm evaluation data have been AVT-1 AVT-2 transformed using the transformed method sin (q= sin- AVT1-701 AVT2-901 1x). AVT1-702 AVT2-902 AVT1-703 AVT2-903 III. EXPERIMENTAL FINDINGS AVT1-704 AVT2-904 AVT1-705 AVT2-905 The present investigation entitled “Screening AVT1-706 AVT2-906 of pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.] against Tur AVT1-707 AVT2-907 Pod bug, Clavigralla gibbosa (Spinola) in long AVT1-708 MAL-13 (Check) duration Pigeonpea genotypes” were performed during

28 This work is under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

ISSN: 2349-8889 International Journal for Research in Applied Sciences and Biotechnology Volume-8, Issue-3 (May 2021) www.ijrasb.com https://doi.org/10.31033/ijrasb.8.3.5

2018-19 at Agriculture Research Farm, Institute of different. Damages caused by Pod Bug in cultivar Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, AVT2-903 ranged from 12.00% on AVT1-706 genotype Varanasi. Observations were recorded at weekly to 23.00% AVT2-903 cultivar. All genotypes showed a intervals on the occurrence of insect pest species on relatively lower percentage of pod damage than AVT2- eighteen pigeonpea genotypes against Pod bug, 903 (23.00 percent).Among the numerous genotypes [Clavigralla gibbosa (spinola)]. The result obtained screened, the highest percentage of pod damage was from the investigation have been summarized under the found in AVT2-903 cultivar (23%) followed by AVT2- following heads. 902 (22.00), AVT2-901 (21.70), AVT1-704 (21.00), Pod bug, C. gibbosa (spinola): AVT2-906 (19.30), AVT2-905 (18.70), AVT1-708 Incidence of pod bug during 2018-19. In the 4th (18.30), AVT1-705(18.00), MAL-13 (AVT1) (18.00), standard week with all of the genotypes, the populations AVT1-702 (17.7), AVT1-709(17.00), MAL-13 (AVT2) were observed to be very different for all research (16.70), AVT2-904 (16.00), AVT-701 (15.30), AVT2- genotypes with a maximum population of MAL13 907 (15.30), AVT1-707 (15.00), AVT1-703 (14.30). The (AVT1) 1.13 bug/plant and AVT1-705 (1.03 bug/plant) AVT1-706 genotype showed the lowest (12%) pod AVT1-707(0.19 bug/plant) genotypes with the genotype damage table No. 4.5.1, 4.5.2. AVT1-708 (0.13 bug/plant). The genotypes of C. Grain damage: gibbosa were identified in all of those genotypes The percentage of grain damage on different throughout the 4th standard week. Pod bug populations genotypes of pigeonpea due to pod bug differentiated have persisted from the 4th standard week to the 12th significantly in different genotypes. The damage ranged standard week of 2018-19 in all genotypes. In the 12th from 4.71 percent in the AVT1-703 genotype to 8.93 week the pod bug population was found to be largest, percent in cultivar AVT2-907. All genotypes showed with a population of (10.55 bugs/plant), (9.62 comparatively less damage to grain than AVT2-907 bugs/plant), a population of (9.34 bugs/plant) and (8.24 (8.93 percent) of the various genotypes screened, the bugs/plant), MAL 13 (AVT1) followed by AVT1-704 highest percentage of grain damage was observed in and AVT1-706 and MAL13 (AVT2) in the 12th regular AVT2-903 (8.71), AVT1-704 (8.27), AVT2-901 (7.73), week table No. 4.2.1, 4.2.2. MAL-13 (AVT1) (7.65), AVT2-905 (7.29), AVT1-702 The pooled mean population of pod bug also (7.17), AVT2-902 (7.06), MAL-13 (AVT2) (6.83), different significantly among the test genotypes and with AVT1-705 (6.44), AVT2-904 (6.39), AVT2-906 (6.37), the check cultivar MAL 13 (AVT1) and MAL13 (AVT AVT1-709 (6.11), AVT1-701(5.99), AVT1-706 (5.32), 1) (check) records the largest aggregate average AVT1-707 (5.27) percent respectively. The lowest population of (3.77 bugs/plant) followed by AVT1-704 percentage of grain damage observed respectively in (3.56 bugs/plant) AVT1-705 (3.23 bugs/plant), AVT1- AVT1-703 (4.17%) table No. 4.5.1, 4.5.2. 706 (3.16 bugs/plant) MAL 13(AVT2) (2.98 bugs/plant) Grain yield: AVT1-709 (2.89 bugs/plant), AVT1-701(2.77 The data presented in Table No. 4.5.1, 4.5.2 and bug/plant), AVT1-702 (2.61 bug/plant) AVT2-906 (2.36 displays the grain yield of the various genotypes of bugs/plant) AVT2-901 (2.15 bugs/plant) AVT2-904 pigeon pea in grain yields. The genotype AVT1-708 is (2.12 bugs/plant) AVT2-902 & AVT1-707 (2.10 1434 kg/ha to 617kg/ha to throughout the AVT1-704 bugs/plant) AVT2-907 (1.99 bugs/plant) AVT2-905 genotype. The genotypes AVT1-707 and AVT1-706 and (1.90 bugs/plant), AVT1-703 (1.84 bug/plant). The AVT1-709 & AVT2-901, AVT2-907, MAL- 13 lowest pooled mean population was found in AVT1-708 (AVT2), AVT1-702 & AVT1-705, AVT1-703, AVT2- (1.72 bugs/plant) followed by AVT2-903 (1.80 902, AVT2-906, AVT2-903, AVT2-905, AVT2-904 and bugs/plant) table No. 4.2.1, 4.2.2. MAL 13 (AVT1) show comparatively higher yields, i.e., Extent of damage done by pod bug C. gibbosa in 1233 kg/ha, 1025 kg/ha, 1017 kg/ha, 1000 kg/ha, 900 certain long-duration pigeonpea genotypes: kg/ha, 850 kg/ha, 840 kg/ha, 767 kg/ha, 748 kg/ha, 717 The amount of pod damage done by a pod kg/ha and 667 kg/ha respectively as compared to AVT1- bug on specific pigeonpea genotype was substantially 708 giving yield. 1434 kg/ha.

Table 4.2.1: Pod bug [C. gibbosa (Spinola)] population on different genotypes of pigeonpea of long duration during Kharif 2018-19

Pod bug per plant Genotypes 4th SW 5th SW 6th SW 7th SW 8th SW 9th SW 10th SW 11th SW 12th SW Average

AVT1-701 .73(1.315) .6(1.265) .95(1.396) 1.08(1.442) 1.79(1.670) 2.89(1.972) 4.09(2.256) 5.76(2.600) 7.07(2.841) 2.77

AVT1-702 .54(1.241) .43(1.196) .79(1.338) .95(1.396) 1.43(1.559) 2.24(1.800) 5.92(2.631) 5.16(2.482) 6.02(2.698) 2.61

AVT1-703 .3(1.140) .25(1.118) .35(1.162) .62(1.273) 1.13(1.459) 2.09(1.758) 2.98(1.995) 3.7(2.168) 5.17(2.484) 1.84

AVT1-704 .69(1.300) .99(1.411) 1.16(1.470) 1.69(1.640) 2.3(1.816) 4.08(2.254) 5.52(2.553) 5.97(2.640) 9.62(3.529) 3.56

29 This work is under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

ISSN: 2349-8889 International Journal for Research in Applied Sciences and Biotechnology Volume-8, Issue-3 (May 2021)

www.ijrasb.com https://doi.org/10.31033/ijrasb.8.3.5

AVT1-705 1.03(1.425) .62(1.273) .94(1.393) 1.2(1.483) 1.75(1.658) 2.68(1.918) 5.92(2.631) 7.68(2.946) 7.28(2.877) 3.23

AVT1-706 1.06(1.435) .9(1.378) .57(1.253) 1.48(1.575) 2.03(1.741) 3.46(2.112) 4.43(2.330) 5.15(2.48) 9.34(3.216) 3.16

AVT1-707 .19(1.091) .3(1.140) .28(1.131) .57(1.253) .93(1.389) 1.52(1.587) 2.99(1.997) 7.15(2.855) 4.96(2.441) 2.1

AVT1-708 .13(1.063) .06(1.030) .16(1.077) .5(1.225) .9(1.378) 1.45(1.565) 2.79(1.947) 3.88(2.209) 5.06(2.462) 1.72

AVT1-709 .97(1.404) .89(1.375) .53(1.237) 1.4(1.549) 2.09(1.758) 3.16(2.040) 4.12(2.263) 5.14(2.478) 7.7(2.950) 2.89

MAL13 1.13(1.459) .68(1.296) 1.33(1.526) 1.9(1.703) 2.37(1.836) 4.06(2.249) 5.97(2.640) 5.92(2.631) 10.55(3.399) 3.77

SE(m)± 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.006 0.005 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.003

CD at 5% 0.01 0.007 0.007 0.019 0.016 0.005 0.002 0.002 0.009

Figures in parenthesis are Arc Sine Percentage transformed values.

Table 4.2.2: Pod bug [C. gibbosa (Spinola)] population on different genotypes of pigeonpea of long duration during Kharif 2018-19

Pod bug per plant Genotypes 4th SW 5th SW 6th SW 7th SW 8th SW 9th SW 10th SW 11th SW 12th SW Average

AVT2-901 .5(1.224) .3(1.140) .48(1.217) .86(1.364) 1.47(1.572) 2.09(1.758) 3.22(2.054) 4.4(2.324) 6(2.641) 2.15

AVT2-902 .46(1.208) .4(1.183) .69(1.300) .82(1.349) 1.05(1.432) 2.12(1.766) 3.5(2.121) 4.2(2.280) 5.67(2.583) 2.1

AVT2-903 .24(1.114) .17(1.082) .29(1.136) .72(1.311) 1(1.414) 1.89(1.700) 2.88(1.970) 4.02(2.241) 5.02(2.454) 1.8

AVT2-904 .36(1.166) .32(1.149) .4(1.183) .86(1.364) 1.08(1.442) 2.13(1.769) 3.59(2.142) 4.46(2.337) 5.9(2.627) 2.12

AVT2-905 .3(1.140) .25(1.118) .36(1.166) .7(1.303) 0.98(1.407) 1.9(1.703) 3(2.000) 3.97(2.229) 5.68(2.585) 1.9

AVT2-906 .7(1.303) .54(1.241) 1(1.414) .93(1.389) 1.64(1.625) 2.39(1.841) 3.83(2.198) 3.94(2.223) 6.24(2.691) 2.36

AVT2-907 .35(1.162) .22(1.105) .45(1.204) .8(1.342) 1.04(1.428) 1.99(1.729) 3.19(2.047) 4.24(2.289) 5.62(2.573) 1.99

MAL 13 .82(1.349) .8(1.342) .86(1.364) 1.09(1.446) 1.89(1.700) 3.19(2.047) 4.14(2.267) 5.78(2.604) 8.24(3.040) 2.98

SE(m)± 0.009 0.011 0.006 0.008 0.002 0.006 0.005 0.007 0.039

CD at 5% 0.029 0.035 0.02 0.025 0.006 0.018 0.016 0.021 0.118

Figures in parenthesis are Arc Sine Percentage transformed values.

Table No: 4.5.1: Extent of damage caused by Pod yield of different long duration pigeonpea genotypes during Kharif 2018-19

% Damage bypod bug Name of the Entry Grain Yield (Kg/ha) Pod Grain 15.30 5.99 AVT 1 -701 777 (22.99) (14.12) 17.7 7.17 AVT 1 -702 1000 (24.78) (15.51) 14.30 4.17 AVT 1 -703 900 (22.10) (11.72) 21.00 8.27 AVT 1 -704 617 (27.24) (16.70) 18.00 6.44 AVT 1 -705 1000 (25.07) (14.67) 12.00 5.32 AVT 1 -706 1233 (20.18) (13.13) 15.00 5.27 AVT 1 -707 1233 (22.72) (13.15)

30 This work is under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

ISSN: 2349-8889 International Journal for Research in Applied Sciences and Biotechnology Volume-8, Issue-3 (May 2021) www.ijrasb.com https://doi.org/10.31033/ijrasb.8.3.5

18.30 7.23 AVT 1 -708 1433 (25.33) (15.58) 17.00 6.11 AVT 1 -709 1233 (24.31) (14.27) 16.70 7.65 MAL- 13 (check) 667 (24.04) (15.94) SE(m)± 1.250 0.964 1.210 CD at p = 0.05% 3.744 2.885 3.622

Table: 4.5.2: Extent of damage caused by Pod yield of different long duration pigeonpea genotypes during Kharif 2018-19

% Damage bypod bug Name of the Entry Grain Yield (Kg/ha) Pod Grain 21.70 7.73 AVT 2 – 901 1233 (27.71) (16.13) 22.00 7.06 AVT 2 – 902 850 (27.94) (15.39) 23.00 8.71 AVT 2 – 903 767 (28.62) (17.15) 16.00 6.39 AVT 2 – 904 717 (23.52) (14.63) 18.70 7.29 AVT 2- 905 748 (25.54) (15.64) 19.30 6.37 AVT 2- 906 840 (26.05) (14.60) 15.30 8.93 AVT 2 – 907 1025 (23.02) (17.37) 18.00 6.83 MAL-13 (Check) 1017 (25.07) (15.14) SE(m)± 1.030 0.345 1.729 CD at p = 0.05% 3.153 1.057 5.296

IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION REFERENCES

In order to determine the population of major [1] AICRP Report (2014). All India Co-ordinated insect pests on different genotypes of pigeon pea and Research Project on Pigeonpea, Project Coordinator’s risk analysis of percent pod and grain damage by pod Report Annual group meet 2013. 10-11. pest complex, eighteen genotypes have been risen under [2] Anonymous (2014). Agricultural statistics at a unsupervised situations. Performance in yield (kg/ha) glance, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, was also reported at crop harvest. Clavigralla gibbosa Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, p. 97 (Spinola) is a pigeon pest cardinal insect in this zone and [3] Gopali, J. B., Teggeli, R., Mannur, D. M. and is increasing as the crop age increases. Current damage Yelshetty, S. (2010), Web- forming lepidopteran, to the economic product also occurs in cases of pulses (Geyer): an emerging and destructive following flowering. The AVT 1-708 was shown to be pest in pigeonpea Karnataka Journal of Agriculture the most resistant to pod bug damage among the 18 generotypes screened. For successful pod bug control, Sciences: 23 (1) 35-38. this genotype can therefore be recommended for [4] Jaisal, J.K., Srivastava, C.P. and Sharma, R.P. 2010. Varanasi farmers. Resistance in long duration pigeonpea against major insect pests. Ann. Pl. Protec. Sci, 18 (2): 501-502. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT [5] Keval, R. Kumar, R, Chkaravarthy, s and Mishra, V.K. (2017). Extent of damage caused by major insect Dr. Ram Keval, Associate Professor, pest on long duration pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Department of Entomology, BHU, Varanasi, thanked the millsp.] under natural condition Plant Archives 17 (1): author for providing the best possible support and 643-346. opportunities for their entomological research fields.

31 This work is under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

ISSN: 2349-8889 International Journal for Research in Applied Sciences and Biotechnology Volume-8, Issue-3 (May 2021) www.ijrasb.com https://doi.org/10.31033/ijrasb.8.3.5

[6] Kumar A. and Nath P. 2003. Pest complex and their population dynamics on medium-late variety of, Bahar. Indian J. Pulses Res, 11 (2): 150-154. [7] Kumar, A and Nath, P. (2004). Effect of weather parameters on population buildup of pod borers. Indian Journal of Entomology, 66 (4): 293-296. [8] Lateef, S. S. and Reed, W. (1990). Insect pests of pigeonpea: In Insect Pests of Tropical Food Legumes, ed. S. R. Singh, p. 193-242. Chichester, Uk: Wiley.p.451 [9] Snapp, S. S., Rohrbach D. D., Simtowe, F. Freeman, H. A. (2002). Sustainable soil management options for Malawi: Agriculture, Ecosystems and Enviroment, 91: 159-174. [10] Shanower, T. G., Romeis, J and Minja, E. M. 1999.Insect pests of pigeonpea and their management. Annual Review of Entomology. 44: 77-96. [11] Srinivasa R, M., Dharma, R. K., Singh, T. V. K. and Subba Reddy, G.(2003). Impact of crop duration and intercropping on the incidence of clavigralla gibbosa and spp. on pigeonpea. Legume Research, 58(3): 172-177. [12] Lal, S. S. and Yadav, C. P. (1987). Estimation of crop losses in pigeonpea caused by the pod borer complex. FAO Plant protection Bulletin 35 (3):93-98. [13] Sachan, J.N., and Lal, S.S.(1994) Integrated pest management of pod borer complex of and pigeonpea in India.In: Recent advances in pulse research (Asthana, A.N.and Masood Ali, eds.). Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India: Indian Institute of Pulses Research. pp. 349–376

32 This work is under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.