International Journal of Applied Environmental Sciences ISSN 0973-6077 Volume 12, Number 4 (2017), pp. 661-672 © Research India Publications http://www.ripublication.com

Description, Bionomics and Bio-Rational Control of Mango Mealy Bug, mangiferae Glover (Coccidae: ) at Malda, West Bengal

Ajoy Sarkar1*, Partha Sarathi Nandi2 & Kaushik Chakraborty1

1Department of Zoology, Gour Banga University, Mokdumpur, Malda, West Bengal, India. 2Department of Zoology, Raiganj University, Raiganj, Uttar Dinajpur, West Bengal India. *Corresponding author

Abstract The studies to find out the dynamics of Drosicha mangiferae population and its management by funnel type slippery trap in mango orchards was done during four consecutive fruit seasons (2012-2015) at Malda,West Bengal. D.mangiferae population was under the supervision from 06 standard meteorological weeks (SMW) to 22 SMW. Initially it builds up slowly up to 09 standard SMW and then steadily up to 13 SMW. The numerical abundance of D.mangiferae then declines abruptly and by 21 SMW the population was considerably out of sight. The abiotic conditions such as maximum relative humidity and average relative humidity had significant positive impact on D.mangiferae population. Minimum temperature, temperature gradient, minimum relative humidity and sunshine hour had imparted negative impact on the population. Relative humidity gradient, average relative humidity and rainfall imparted insignificant positive effect on D.mangiferae population structure. Following this observation, an IPM package can thus be generated and accordingly a time fitted prophylactic measure to control mealy bug can be advocated. Funnel type slippery trap as a bio-rational method can fruitfully not only be materialized but also be utilized safely for D.mangiferae population counting and to inspect effectively the vertical movement of gavid bug population to the ground. Key words: D.mangiferae incidence, climatic factors, FTST trap 662 Ajoy Sarkar, Partha Sarathi Nandi and Kaushik Chakraborty

INTRODUCTION Mango (Mangifera indica L.), the king of fruits, is a member of family Anacardiaceae and is known for its strong aroma, delicious taste and high nutritive value (Sahoo et al.2009). India is the second largest producer of fruits in the world next to China (Zaman, et al.1994). The total annual production is over 3.95 million tonnes with a share of 11 per cent in the world production (Sahoo et al.2009). West Bengal produces about 585 metric tons mango per year (Anonymous.2002). In consideration of production, Malda district in West Bengal ranks first in the list (Anonymous.2002). pests are the major threat to underscore the mango production (Ishaq et al, 2004). Grossly 400 and non-insect mango pests are recorded from Indian subcontinent (Sengupta et al.1957). Out of that, thirty are obnoxious and serious pests to mango orchards (Kapadia, 2003). Insect pest population dynamics deals with factors affecting changes in population densities (Rahman et al. 1944, Haq et al. 1960). The agro-climatic conditions directly lead to modifications and alternation of life cycle and bionomics of insect species which subsequently enhances upon size, density and genetic composition of populations, as well as on the extent of host plant exploitation (Jha, et al. 1991). Drosicha mangiferae (G.), is the serious, dilapidating, polyphagus, dimorphic and notorious pest of mango orchards in Indian sub continent (Rao et al. 2006). Butani (1993) had noted that D. mangiferae has the tendency to attack a variety of other fruit trees apart from mango and thus magnifies the extent of loss. Damage to plants is principally manifested due to the unremitting sucking of ‘cell sap’ from tender leaves, stem, and inflorescence and even from the growing fruits (Bhagat, 2004). Sap reduction from the tender plant results in loss of plant vigour, subsumed yield, reduced growth, dieback of twigs and branches, leaf drop, and sometimes death of the total plant (McKenzie, 1967; Williams, 1986; Miller et al., 2002). Indirect damage results in fouling foliage with their sugary honeydew excretions that ultimately supports growth of sooty mould fungi (McKenzie, 1967; Tenakanai et al.2006). Karar (2006) from Pakistan had reported that mango cultivar Chaunsa was the most susceptible to mango mealy bug whereas ‘Dusehri’ was comparatively resistant. Gavid females generally follow the tree trunk to migrate downwards to soil for hibernation. Apart from insecticidal control a number of methods are in practice to check such ‘downward migration’ of mealy bug which conceives no definite plant protection schedule (Ashfaq,2005).However, obstruction by funnel type slippery trap (FLST) in the path of gavid female is found economically prudent to halt the ‘downward movement’ under modern IPM practices and to check the menace of mealy bug for the subsequent year (Zaman, et al. 1994; Bhattacharya et al.2014). Severity of mango pests is influenced both by crop growth and prevailing weather. So study of impact of agro-ecological factors on mango crop-pest interactions and careful Description, Bionomics and Bio-Rational Control of Mango Mealy Bug… 663 collection of data on long term basis is indispensable (Bhattacharya et al.2014). Generated data thus helps for formulation and implementation of a robust research strategy combining the present scenario of cropping patterns, cultivars and plant protection practices in consideration of the area. Further, effective installation of FLST can effectively check mealy bug population. Observation at heterogeneous locations over time results in improved and holistic understanding to evolve a preventive ‘region specific mango-IPM’ strategies towards agro-climatic variability (Golez 1991; Sahoo et al. 2004). Observation on population dynamics of D. mangiferae in consideration of pest management decision making is thus found crucial for bio-rational management of this pest. Grossly, there are three specific objectives of this study: (i) to define the basic population system of D. mangiferae at Malda, West Bengal. (ii) to consider the role of weather parameters on the incidence of the D. mangiferae population. and (iii) to assess the relative efficacy of FLST trap to check the subsequent mealy bug population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS Geographical location and agro-climatic conditions: Place of observation: Incidence of D. mangiferae is recorded from three sites that are aerially separated from nearby site by about 6 Km and have mostly same mango cultivar. Villages are located at the upper Gangetic plain and within the administrative boundary of Malda district of West Bengal. The villages are (i) Sattari (latitude 25.28, longitude-88.24) with fertile soil.(ii) Kajigram (Latitude 24.96, longitude 88.09) with clay soil (iii) Gokul nagar kamat (Latitude 25.01, Longitude 88.14) with sandy fertile soil. All of the three villages are considered as seasonal replication. Agro-climatic conditions: The average annual rain fall varies from 2100 to 3000 mm, the maximum rainfall occurs during the rainy months of June to September amounting to more than 80% of the total rain fall. The annual average day night temperature ranges between 19.7and 29.9oC with the mercury soaring even as high as 33oC in April and cascading to a low of 4°C in January. The relative humidity at 8:30 hours is 58% and 88% in March and July respectively. The relative humidity in the afternoon at 17:30 hours is 48% and 84% in March and November respectively. Incidence of mealy bug population at three sites was recorded separately and averaged. However climatic conditions are recorded only at Sattari as very nominal variation was noted in consideration of the three selected villages.

664 Ajoy Sarkar, Partha Sarathi Nandi and Kaushik Chakraborty

Assessment on mango mealy bug population: Experimental protocol for mealy bug population study: Two orchards from each of the three experimental villages are considered to survey D. mangiferae population. Orchards are continuously inspected year round on standard meteorological week (SMW) basis for the pests using standard data sheet format. In each orchard, ten trees, two from each corner of the field and the remaining two from the centre of the orchard are randomly selected. However two rows of trees alongside of boundary of orchard in all directions of orchard are discarded for observation to avoid ‘border effect’. Number of mealy bug infested panicles or shoots are visually counted during season and off season. Record on climatic parameters: Climatic parameters like maximum temperature (Tmax), minimum temperature (Tmin), maximum humidity (RHmax), minimum relative humidity (RHmin), rain fall (Rfall), solar duration in a day (Shr) was recorded by conventional agro-ecological techniques. Temperature gradient (Tgr.) and humidity gradient (RHgr) was calculated from the difference of Tmax to Tmin and RHmax to RHmin respectively.

Bio-rational control of D. mangiferae by funnel type slippery trap (Khan 2004, Ashfaq et al. 2005): Structure and experimental setup of funnel type slippery trap (FTST): Grossly, smooth and transparent plastic ribbon of about 10 inches wide were used to prepare the ‘funnel type slippery traps’ (FTST). The free upper margin of FTST wraps around the tree stem and has an insulated fine iron wire at the margin while the lower margin is fixed with the tree trunk. In each plant FTST is setup at about 4-5 feet above the ground level. In order to reduce the chances of runaway of D. mangiferae nymph through the cracks on tree trunk, the lower part of the trap is wrapped and encapsulated with muddy cover. To ensure killing of adult females that comes downward vertically from the tree and subsequently entrapped within FTST, fine lime is placed within the lower part of the funnels (Khan 1989, Khan 2004). Operational principle of FTST and data recording: Ten mango trees are randomly selected. Out of ten, two are considered as control. Remaining eight is from four direction of the orchard taking two from each of the direction. Trunk of each of the trees is marked with two grids, each of one feet that is located respectively above and below of the ‘stem barrier’ with FTST trap. D. mangiferae that are trapped within these grids from 10.00 to 16.00 hours are considered. Nymphs and adult females are counted and accordingly tabulated. Orchards are inspected at 7-day interval especially in the month of January and May. The neighbouring trees adjacent to selection spot are continuously pruned to avoid tress passing of the insects between trees. Description, Bionomics and Bio-Rational Control of Mango Mealy Bug… 665

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Incidence of D. mangiferae population in mango orchards are assessed during four consecutive fruit seasons (2012-2015) at Malda West Bengal. The results are delineated below: Observation on the life cycle of D. mangiferae : D. mangiferae covers one generation life cycle in the agro-climatic region of Malda. The eggs are laid in the muddy soil around tree trunk within the radius of 3 meter. The eggs generally hatch about 51 SMW to 2 SMW depending on the condition of the soil. First instar nymphs appears at about 3SMW and remains active up to 7 SMW. Third instar matures at about 10 SMW and roams actively up to 14 SMW. Fertilized females start migrating from 15 SMW to 17 SMW. At complete maturation nymphs are found to adhere to the peduncle, soft branches, inflorescence and tender shoots. Generally, the females are observed to migrate vertically through main trunk of the three but some of them fall on the ground directly from the infested panicles and lay eggs in the soil around tree trunk. The eggs remain inactive in soil from 19 SMW to 49 SMW. Just after hatching, the minute newly hatched nymphs crawl up the tree. Present observation is in consonance with the study of Bindra et al.(1974). They also had noted the downstream movement of gavid mealy bug during off season. However they did not pointed out the extension of land area from the trunk of the tree up to which they can hibernate. Like the present observation, Atwal (1976) had observed the up steam movement of newly emerged nymphs of mealy bug to plant canopy during favourable seasonal condition. Observation on the population dynamics of D. mangiferae in relation to climatic parameters (Table1 and 2): Dynamics of mealy bug population in relation to SMW was noted by visual counting and twig tagging. Incidence of the pest starts from December; gains steady impetus and reaches the peak incidence during the middle of April when it is numerically more abundant. During winter season, initially, at 06 SMW the population is very low. It then increases slowly from about 10 SMW. At that time the mango crop is nearly remained free from D. mangiferae infestation. High number of adult population is noted till 11 SMW which is maintained nearly up to 18 SMW. 6 SMW to 10 SMW, extent of infestation is negligible. The appearance of first peak of adult D. mangiferae population is noted at about 07 SMW. Incidence of shooty mold due to D. mangiferae infestation is noted only after 10 SMW. The extent of infestation is moderate at about 14 SMW (3.21±0.47). In all the years except in 2014, D. mangiferae population shows an insignificant negative relation with the Tmax. While Tmin had exhibits a significant positive effect on the incidence of D. mangiferae in all the years except in 2014. Except in 2014, the incidence of D. mangiferae population expresses significantly negative relation with 666 Ajoy Sarkar, Partha Sarathi Nandi and Kaushik Chakraborty

Tgr. An insignificantly positive relation is noted with Tavg in 2013, 2014 and 2015, but in 2012 the relations were significantly positive. Persistent RHmax (71-84%) exerts a significantly positive impact on the abundance of D. mangiferae population in all the years. Significant positive relation existed between the RHgr and D. mangiferae population in all the years except in 2012 where the relation is insignificantly positive. Incidence is positively influenced by RHavg almost in all the years. But the values of relation differs among the years, particularly in 2013 and 2015. Bright sunshine hour for an average of 7.20 hrs/day has a significant negative effect on the D. mangiferae population with the exception of 2012 where the relation though negative, is non-significant. Drizzling Rainfall has an insignificant positive effect on the pest structure. But heavy shour within a short time has significant negative effect on pest appearance in all the years. Observation on the trapping of D. mangiferae population by funnel type slippery trap (FTST) (Table 3): Numerically, 67-102 nymph per square foot is counted on the trunk of control (C) trees for all of the experimental years. In 2012, 11±04 and 67±05 nymphs congregates above and below FTST respectively. Population of egg carrying females descending down via tree stem after crossing the FTST barrier gradually decreases. In case of control (C), the average number of females crawling down looks small, ranging from 5-8 per square foot of the stem since many of them directly fall down due to wind action or their loose grip on stem. Below FTST stem barrier, the presence of D. mangiferae female tends to be zero. This is thus evicted that very little adult female can cross FTST barrier. In almost all the years the number of gavid female above FTST barrier (A) is comparatively high than the lower counterpart (B). However both the number gradually decreases during the years of observation. In 2012, though females are trapped by FTST trap, a good number also drops directly by wind action to the ground. High temperature with low aeration ensures killing of the entrapped insects. In 2013, the number of adult females above and below the FTST barrier is 37±04 and 04±01 respectively and only 10 female are entrapped in funnel of FTST. In 2014 and 2015 the abundance of adult mango mealy bugs below the trap tends to zero on tree stem and in the vicinity. The abundance of gavid female above the trap is respectively 23±02 and 08±02 in 2014 and 2015. Tree with FTST supports less number of D. mangiferae in all the years. The number of nymph and adult individuals is 102±04 and 5±01 respectively on control (C) tree. The number of nymph is comparatively low than that was recorded below the trap in all the years of observation. Adults are found to be crawling down via tree stem or drop directly on ground.

Description, Bionomics and Bio-Rational Control of Mango Mealy Bug… 667

Table1: Average climatic parameters (2012-2015) and the incidence of D. mangiferae population during the period of study

SMW Temperature Relative humidity Average Rainfall Number Individuals Tmax Tmin Tgr Tavg RHmax RHmin RHgr RHavg sunshine (mm) of rainy /leaf hour days (hr/day) 06 32.21 19.24 12.97 25.73 96.00 67.70 28.30 81.85 5.42 0 0 0.17±0.02 07 32.11 19.01 13.10 25.56 98.12 47.25 50.87 72.69 5.78 0 0 0.40±0.04 08 32.65 19.81 12.84 26.23 95.47 46.38 49.09 70.93 5.84 0.87 1 0.26±0.07 09 32.61 21.11 11.50 26.86 94.83 47.14 47.69 70.99 5.17 0 0 0.49±0.05 10 33.89 22.56 11.33 28.23 96.53 78.00 18.53 87.27 7.47 0 0 0.97±0.04 11 35.42 23.21 12.21 29.32 96.22 65.01 31.21 80.62 2.29 0 0 1.38±0.11 12 35.82 23.65 12.17 29.74 95.53 56.27 39.26 75.90 2.04 0 0 1.68±0.13 13 35.72 23.13 12.59 29.43 95.00 44.53 50.47 69.77 3.48 2.87 0 2.73±0.51 14 36.72 24.35 12.37 30.54 95.84 46.12 49.72 70.98 6.47 0 0 3.21±0.47 15 40.31 24.25 16.06 32.28 94.25 40.12 54.13 67.19 6.94 0 0 4.09±1.03 16 36.35 24.79 11.56 30.57 94.76 41.79 52.97 68.28 8.69 3.02 1 5.37±1.08 17 39.23 24.05 15.18 31.64 94.28 48.41 45.87 71.35 7.35 2.51 1 5.45±1.61 18 40.81 25.34 15.47 33.08 96.01 41.59 54.42 68.80 8.51 1.62 1 7.18±1.75 19 42.15 27.72 14.43 34.94 84.12 39.25 44.87 61.69 5.61 6.13 2 6.14±0.97 20 41.69 30.92 10.77 36.31 85.01 47.41 37.60 66.21 8.53 1.97 1 5.93±0.21 21 41.97 30.39 11.58 36.18 87.89 53.53 34.36 70.71 8.73 2.67 1 2.17±0.19

Table 2: Correlation coefficient of incidence of the D. mangiferae with the climatic factors indicating the level of significance

Climatic parameters Years of observation 2012 2013 2014 2015 Maximum temperature (Tmax) -0.612* -0.635* -0.421 -0.641* Minimum temperature (Tmin) -0.557* -0.521* 0.455 -0.676* Temperature gradient (Tgr) -0.518* -0.588* -0.492 -0.751* Average temperature (Tavg) 0.485 -0.574* -0.672* -0.585* Maximum humidity(RHmax) 0.515* 0.535* 0.501* 0.564* Minimum humidity (RHmin) -0.795* -0.828* -0.768* -0.655* Humidity gradient (RHgr) 0.378 0.578* 0.653* 0.818* Average humidity (RHavg) 0.211 0.479 0.487 0.219 Sunshine hours / day(Shr) -0.413 -0.782* -0.798* -0.821* Rainfall (Rfall) 0.346 0.365 0.286 0.445 Rainy days (Rdays) 0.423 0.477 0.364 0.319 Significant at 5% level 668 Ajoy Sarkar, Partha Sarathi Nandi and Kaushik Chakraborty

Table 3: Impact of FTST on the incidence of both D. mangiferae nymph and adult population

Years of Incidence of D. mangiferae population observation (average data from two mango trees from each of the three orchards) on control tree on experimental tree (without FTST setup) (with FTST setup) nymph gavid adult nymph Adult Above Below Above Below female the trap (A) the trap (B) the trap (A) the trap (B) 2012 67 ±09 8 ±02 11 ±04 67 ±05 56 ±07 07 ±02 2013 79 ±05 8 ±02 07 ±03 34 ±04 37 ±04 04 ±01 2014 98 ±05 7 ±01 04 ±02 26 ±04 23 ±02 02 ±01 2015 102 ±04 5 ±01 02 ±01 12 ±02 08 ±02 01 ±00

Plant protection schedule should be taken in such a way that maximum fruit maturation stage and the maximum incidence of mealy bug population can be checked effectively. Highest level of mealy bug population was noted at about 18 SMW. Incidence of D. mangiferae varies considerably from orchard to orchard as evident from the present study. Results of the present study are in agreement with those of Kumar et al. (2009). They had recorded that the number of nymphs of D. mangiferae present on the tree trunk, terminal twigs or on inflorescences gradually increases with the advent of high temperature during ‘long day duration’. Karar et al (2006, 2007) had observed that the peak population of mango mealy bug may extend up to 26.63 per 30 cm. long branch. Whereas Boavida et al.(1992) though had recorded significant differences among different ‘quadrants’, but no variation was accounted between old and young leaves and also between top and bottom of the trees. This finding contradicts to present observation as variation in the numerical abundance of mealy bud was noted in consideration of the age and location of mango leaf within canopy. Yousuf et al. (1993) had noted that Tmax and RHmax have considerably influenced the incidence of D. stebbingi. Somewhat similar opinion was expressed by Yadav, et al.(2004). In addition to that Yadav, et al.(2004) had observed that mango plant physiology and phenology also influenced insect pest structure. Present observation is in accordance to the findings of Dwivedi et al.(2003) who had also noted the variability of mealy bug population in relation to season that is in parity to the present observation, In reliance to the present observation, Dwivedi et al.(2003) had mentioned that mealy bug population subsumes during rainy season and peaks during dry season. Yadav et al.(2004) from Uttar Pradesh, India had noted lowest and highest Description, Bionomics and Bio-Rational Control of Mango Mealy Bug… 669 abundance of mealy bug population at about 11 SMW and 13 SMW respectively in Amprali orchards. They further had observed that by about 15 SMW mealy bug population is conspicuously absent from the tree canopy. However, this results are in a little contrast with our findings as traces of mealy bug population was noted up to 21 SMW. Present observation is in consonance with the findings of Ashfaq et al. (2005). They had observed that the emergence of mealy bug nymph gradually ascends with the rise in temperature from about 4 SMW. Present observations are in agreement with those of Khan et al.(1985,1989). They also had noted the sudden surge to mealy bug population at the middle of mango growth season following the availability of favourable agro-climatic conditions. Yousaf (1993) had explained that out of different bio-rational gazettes to check mealy bug population, use of ‘polyethylene band’ is most effective one. Though insecticides like parathion, BHC and DDT are effective against 1st, 2nd instar of mealy bug but it conceives to definite pest control strategy. Further, pesticides negatively impact the natural ecosystem with the termination of ‘many beneficial insects’ (Pimentel, 2005). Use of ‘sticky bands’ along with burning and burying treatments to reduce the incidence of mealy bug results in restricted success (Chandra et al.1991). Present finding agrees with the findings of Sindhu et al. (1983), Khan (1989) and Miller et al. (2002) who found a significant reduction in the infection and recommended this method as simple and effective to control all kinds of sucking insect pests of mango. To prevent the nymphs climbing the trees before winter season especially during 01 SMW-4SMW the tree trunks may tied with 30cm wide alkathene sheet (Chandra et al.1991; Bhagat 2004). However FTST gives better result. Banding the tree trunk with coal tar and crude oil emersion was done as conventional practice with restricted success.

REFERENCES [1] Anonymous.2002. Database of National Horticulture Board, Ministry of Agriculture , Govt. of India, State-wise Area, Production & Productivity of Mangoes during 2001-02 [2] Ashfaq, M., Khan, R.A., Khan, M.A., Fahad Rasheed, and Shahid, H.,2005. Complete control of mango mealy bug using funnel type slippery trap. Pakistan Entomologist, 27(1): 45- 48 [3] Atwal, A.S. 1976. Agriculture Pests of India and South East Asia. Kalyani Publishers,Ludhiana, India, : 224-227 [4] Bhagat, K.C. 2004. Mango mealy bug, Drosicha mangiferae (Green) (: Hemiptera) on Ashwagandha - a medicinal plant. Insect Environment 10(1): 14 670 Ajoy Sarkar, Partha Sarathi Nandi and Kaushik Chakraborty

[5] Bhattacharya M. 2014. A Review On The Biology And Symptoms Of Attack Of Mango Red Banded Catterpillar ( Autocharis Albizonalis Hampson). Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science (IOSR-JAVS): 7: 01-05. [6] Bindra, O.S. and B.S. Sohi. 1974. A note on control of mango mealy bug in Punjab. Indian Journal of Hortriculture., 31(1):102-103. [7] Boavida, C.P. Neuenschwander, and Schulthess. F.1992. Spatial distribution of Rastrococcus invadens Williams (Hom., Pseudococcidae) in mango trees. Journal of Applied Entomology 114: 381-391 [8] Butani, D.K.1993. Mango pest problem. pub: Periodical Expert Book Agency, New Delhi.415 [9] Chandra A., D.P.S. Bhat and K.M.Singh. 1991.Mechanical control of mango mealy bug, Drosicha mangiferae (Green) by tree trunk banding. Indian Journal of Entomology., 53(1):76-79. [10] Dwivedi, S.C., Kuldeep, S.M. Singh and. Katiyar, R.R.2003. Seasonal incidence of insect pests associated with mango crop. Department of Entomology, C.S.A. Univ. Agri. & Tech., Kanpur 208 002, India. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences, 11(1):159-160 [11] Golez, H.G. 1991. Bionomics and control of mango seed borer, Noorda albizonalis Hampson(Pyralidae :Lepidoptera). Acta Horticulture. 291:418-424. [12] Haq K.A. and M.Akmal. 1960. Mango mealy bug and its control. Publication Fruit Journal., 23(82-83): 199-202. [13] Ishaq, M., Usman, M., Asif, M. and Khan, I.A. 2004. Integrated pest management of mango against mealy bug and fruit fly. International Journal of Agricultural Biology. 6:452-454. [14] *Jha, S. and Sarkar, A. 1991. Mango in Malda, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Mohanpur, Nadia, W.B.13. [15] Kapadia M.N. 2003. Insect pests of mango and their management. In: National Seminar on Mango, G.A.U, Junagadh, June14-15. [16] *Karar, H., Arif, J., Saeed, S. and Sayyed, H.A. 2006. A threat to Mango. DAWN Sci-technology World , December 23. [17] *Karar, H., M.J. Arif, S. Saeed and Abbas, G.2007. Losses in different cultivars of mango due to mango Drochica mangiferae Green Monophlebbedae: Homoptera. XI International Symposium on Studies ISSIS in Oeiras, Portugal, 24-27: 46 [18] Khan M.A. 1989. Control of insect pests of mango. Proc. Inter. Mango workshop 27th Feb.-1st Mar. Direct. Agric-Multan Region, Punjab, P 224. Description, Bionomics and Bio-Rational Control of Mango Mealy Bug… 671

[19] Khan R.A. and M. Ashfaq. 2004. Funnel Type Slippery Trap: A mechanical device to control mango mealy bug. SAIC Newsletter, Bangladesh, 14(3): 2-9. [20] Khan, S.M. 1985. Chemical control of insect pests of mango and its malformation by injection method. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Agriculture, Fasialabad, Pakistan. [21] Kumar, A., S. K. Pandey and Kumar, R.2009. Population dynamics of mango mealy bug, Drosicha mangiferae Green from Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh Biological Forum An International Journal, 1(2): 77-79 [22] McKenzie, H.L. 1967. of California with , biology, and control of North American species (Homoptera: Cooccoidea: Pseudococcidae). University of California Press, Berkeley, California, USA, pp. 526. [23] Miller, D.R., Miller, G.L. and Watson, G.W. 2002. Invasive species of mealybugs (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) and their threat to US agriculture. Protocol of Entomological Society of Wash. 104(4), 825-836. [24] Pimentel, D. 2005. “Environmental and economic costs of the application of pesticides primarily in the United States.” Environment, Development and Sustainability 7: 229 – 252 [25] Rahman K.A. and A. Latif. 1944. Description, bionomics and control of mango mealy bug, Drosicha stebbingi (Gr.) (Homoptera:Coccidae). Bullein of Entomological. Research, 35(2):197-209. [26] Rao, C.N., Shivankarand, V.J., and Shyam, S. 2006. Citrus mealy bug (Planococcus citri Risso) management- a review. Agricultural Review .27(2), 142-146. [27] Sahoo, A.K. and Das, B.K. 2004. Incidence and biological observations of mango fruit borer, Deanolis albizonalis Hampson (Pyralidae: Lepidoptera) in West Bengal. Environmental and Ecology; 22(Spl.2):180-183. [28] Sahoo, S.K. and Jha, S. 2009 . Bio-ecology of Mango Fruit borer, Autocharis (=Noorda) albizonalis Hampson (Pyralidae Lepidoptera)-A Recent Threat to Mango Growers in West Bengal, India. (ed,: S.A.Oosthuyse, Proc.VIII Int. Mango Symposium Acta Hort.820,ISHS 2009) Acta Horticulture, (820):1345- 1425. [29] Sengupta, G.C. and Behura, B.K.1957. Annotated list of crop pests in the state of Orissa. Memoirs of the Entomological Society of India. (5). 1–44. [30] Sindhu, G.S., A.H. Sohi, R.C. Batra and J.S. Bhalla, 1983. Stem injection for the control of mango pests with particular reference to mango mealy bug Drosicha mangifera (Gr.) (Margarodidae: Hemiptera). Gujrat Agriculture University Research Journal.,( 9): 14–8. 672 Ajoy Sarkar, Partha Sarathi Nandi and Kaushik Chakraborty

[31] *Tenakanai, D., Dori, F. and Kurika, K. 2006.Red-banded mango caterpillar, Deanolis sublimbalis Snellen (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae: Odontinae), in Papua New Guinea. In 'Pest and disease incursions: risks, threats and management in Papua New Guinea'. ACIAR Technical Reports No. 62 (Ed TV Price). 161–165. Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research: Canberra. [32] Williams, D.J. 1986. Rastrococcus invadens sp. n. (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) introduced from the Oriental Region to West Africa and causing damage to mango, citrus and other trees. Bullein of Entomological Research. 76, 695-699. [33] Yadav, J.L., S.P. Singh and Kumar, R. 2004.The population density of the mango mealy bug (Drosicha mangiferae G.) in mango. Progressive Agriculture 4(1): 35-37. [34] Yousaf M. 1993. Mango mealy bug control with polyethylene. Pakistan Entomologist, 15(2):129. [35] Zaman, Z. and Maiti, B. 1994. Insects and mite infesting seedlings of mango in West Bengal. Environment and Ecology. 12:734–736. (*): original not seen