20098-- Kuldeep Sharma Indian Journal of Entomology Online published (Preview) DoI No.: A NOVEL FROND INJECTION METHOD AGAINST COCONUT BLACK HEADED CATERPILLAR OPISINA ARENOSELLA WALKER KULDEEP SHARMA*, T SHIVASHANKAR1 AND SANDEEP KUMAR1 Department of Entomology, Rajasthan College of Agriculture, Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and Technology, Udaipur 313001 1Department of Agricultural Entomology, College of Agriculture, V C Farm Mandya, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bengaluru 571405 *Email: [email protected] (*corresponding author) ABSTRACT A field study was conducted in coconut at farmer’s field in Halebudanuru village in Mandya district, Karnatakaduring 2017-2018.The frond injection, a novel method of insecticide application was evaluatedagainst the black headed caterpillar Opisinaarenosella Walker. The insecticides evaluated include: imidacloprid 17.8% SL, acetamiprid 20% SP, clothianidin 50% WG, thiacloprid 21.7% SC, emamectin benzoate 5% SG, spinosad 45% SC, cartap hydrochloride 50% SP and standard check monocrotophos 36% SL. Among these, it was observed that cartap hydrochloride 50%SP and monocrotophos 36% SL gave 100% mortality; and all other treatments alsogave significant mortality over control. The present frond injection method is an easy, quicker and accurate method, without any secondary infection/ damage to the frond tissues. Key words: Frond injection, insecticide administration, coconut, Opisinaarenosella, cartap hydrochloride, monocrotophos, larval mortality Coconut (Cocos nucifera L.) palm is cultivated but also evaluates anovel method of administration, i.e., across the globe, and being a perennial, it harbours frond injection against O. arenosella. many insects/ other arthropods. Among the foliage pests, the seriouspestis the black headed caterpillar MATERIALS AND METHODS Opisinaarenosella Walker (Lepidoptera: Oecophoridae) The study was conducted in a farmer’s field at (Thippeswamyet al., 2008). Mohan et al. (2010) Halebudanuru village in Mandya district (12º 32’ observed that the nut yield of infested palms could be N, 76º 53’E, 690 masl) during 2017-18. The study reduced by as much as 45.4% in the year following site consisted of 8-10 years old 200 coconut palms, severe pest incidence and also that the number of of which 50 palms infested with O. arenosella were flower bunches and leaves could be reduced by 21 and selected, with the field laid out in randomized block 13.8%, respectively. The management options against design (RBD). There were ten treatments with five this include topical sprays and systemic application replications, each consisting of five coconut palms, with (root administration and trunk injection method) of one frond/ tree considered as a replication. Insecticides insecticides.Several studies have been undertaken for evaluated include: imidacloprid 17.8% SL, acetamiprid its management deploying methods viz., spraying of 20% SP, clothianidin 50% WG, thiacloprid 21.7% SC, insecticides, using biopesticides, and root feeding with emamectin benzoate 5% SG, spinosad 45% SC, cartap monocrotophos (Pushpalatha, 1986); and stem injection hydrochloride 50% SP and monocrotophos 36% SL. using soluneem (Shivashankar, 1999). Monocrotophos These were administered by frond injection method; has been effectively exploited against this pest in the details of dilutions are given in Table 1. For frond the coconut growing areasof the world. However, injection, a middle frond was selected and the upper monocrotophos beingPreview an organophosphate has been surface of its base being the site of injection. Injection banned in many countriesand restricted for use in India. was by inserting syringe loadedwith insecticide Hence, there is a need to identify equally effective solution. Hand drill machine with 0.3 cm of diameter alternatives, and those which are least toxic to the non- drill bit was used to make a hole at 45o to a depth of target fauna. The present study not only focuses on this 1.5 cm. The syringe loaded with insecticide solution 2 IndianJournalofEntomologyOnlinepublished(Preview) Table 1. Insecticides absorptionand their effect on O. arenosella S. Treatments Dilution Absorption out of injected Larvae/ infested leaflet Pupation, pupal weight, adults and parasitoids No. (%) each volume (Mean ± S.D.) emergence 10 ml/ (Mean ± S.D.) frond after 24 hr after 48 hr 0 DBT 3 DAT 7 DAT 15 DAT Pupae/ 30 Pupal weight Adult Parasitoid infested (mg) emerged emerged leaflets (Mean ± S.D.) 1. Imidacloprid 0.02 7.60 ± 2.51 8.60 ± 1.34 3.40 ± 0.42 2.76 ± 0.26 2.28 ± 0.67 0.64 ± 0.30 5 27.46 ± 5.12 2 1 17.8% SL 2. Acetamiprid 20% 1 9.20 ± 1.10 9.20 ± 1.10 3.20 ± 1.10 2.96 ± 0.43 2.48 ± 0.33 0.76 ± 0.17 6 28.28 ± 4.55 3 1 SP 3. Clothianidin 50% 0.5 7.20 ± 1.92 8.40 ± 1.52 3.20 ± 1.26 1.72 ± 0.48 1.60 ± 0.32 0.52 ± 0.23 4 25.93 ± 4.23 2 0 WG 4. Thiacloprid 0.01 5.40 ± 0.55 7.00 ± 1.22 3.24 ± 1.16 1.88 ± 0.30 1.68 ± 0.36 0.68 ± 0.23 4 24.78 ± 5.61 1 0 21.7% SC 5. Emamectin 1 5.60 ± 0.89 7.20 ± 0.84 3.56 ± 0.33 2.72 ± 0.64 2.08 ± 0.54 0.80 ± 0.32 4 26.18 ± 3.15 2 0 Benzoate 5% SG 6. Spinosad 45% SC 0.2 5.80 ± 0.84 10.00 ± 3.52 ± 0.56 2.02 ± 0.15 1.44 ± 0.26 0.64 ± 0.26 4 28.28 ± 2.79 2 1 0.00 7. Monocrotophos 10 10.00 ± 0.00 10.00 ± 3.16 ± 0.43 0.08 ± 0.11 0.00 ± 0.00 0.00 ± 0.00 0 0.00 ± 0.00 0 0 36 % SL 0.00 8. Cartap 10 10.00 ± 0.00 10.00 ± 3.60 ± 0.32 0.12 ± 0.18 0.00 ± 0.00 0.00 ± 0.00 0 0.00 ± 0.00 0 0 hydrochloride 50 0.00 % SP 9. Check-1 (Water) - 10.00 ± 0.00 10.00 ± 3.48 ± 0.41 3.80 ± 0.32 3.60 ± 0.32 1.08 ± 0.36 23 40.00 ± 6.60 18 5 Preview0.00 10. Check-2 - - - 3.44 ± 0.38 3.96 ± 0.78 3.72 ± 0.46 1.16 ± 0.48 26 40.68 ± 10.07 20 6 (Control) F NS * * * S.Em ± - 0.07 0.07 0.05 CD@ 5% - 0.19 0.19 0.14 NS- non-significant; *Significant (p=0.05); S.D.- Standard deviation; DBT: Day before treatment; DAT: Day after treatment A novel frond injection method against coconut black headed caterpillar Opisina arenosella 3 Kuldeep Sharma et al. was placed into injection hole just after making hole in of injection site on the coconut frond; age of the coconut between 9 am to 11 am during September, 2017 when palm; and weather factors. In case of coconut palms the the majority of larvae of O. arenosella were in early rate of absorption through xylem vessels isrelated to instars and were actively feeding on green tissue. The the age. The relative abundance of vascular bundles in syringe (12 ml) loaded with 10 ml of insecticide solution coconut palms increases with increasing age (Meylan, was placed into each hole and the hole was sealed with 1978). Palm stem xylem, phloem, and even parenchyma wax to avoid leakage.The syringe was covered with cells remain alive for the life of the palm, which can polythene cover to avoid the entry of inert material, be hundreds of years in some species (Tomlinson and with the time of inserting hole and imposing injection Huggett, 2012). When the syringe loaded with the noted down in each replication. appropriately diluted insecticide formulation is plugged into the incision, a very unique micro environment is The observations on absorption of insecticide created in which the diluted insecticide formulation is solution was recorded after 24 and 48 hr of imposing directly fed into the vascular bundles. In coconut palm, syringe into the coconut frond.The observations on though the vascular bundles are unified with different the number of live larvae of O. arenosella were made types of tissues, it is believed that a major portion of from randomly selected five infested leaflets from the insecticide solution is taken by the xylem vessels. each replication including check-1 and check-2, a day The complete absorption of insecticides by fronds can before injection (pre-treatment counts), 3, 7 and 15 be comparable to petiolar wells method used by Parera days after injection (post-treatment counts). After 25 et al. (1989). days of imposing treatments when larvaegets pupated, 30 infested leaflets were clipped from each treatment The results on the efficacy of insecticides given and the observations on number of pupae, pupal in Table 1 reveal that the pretreatment count of live weight, adult emergence and parasitoid emergencewere larvae ranged from 3.16 to 3.60 larvae/ infested analysed fromcollected pupae in the infested leaflets. leaflet, reduced after 3 days of treatments. It was the Each collected pupa was weighed and kept for adult and least in monocrotophos 36% SL (0.08 larvae) treated parasitoid emergence. In each treatment, the number fronds followed by cartap hydrochloride 50% SP (0.12 of emerged adult and parasitoids from reared pupae larvae), compared to highest larval counts in check-1 were recorded. The fate of injected holes on fronds (3.80 larvae) and check-2 (3.96 larvae).The complete was observed at different intervals from drilling for reduction was observed with monocrotophos 36% any secondary infections by pathogen or mechanical SL and cartap hydrochloride 50% SP after 7 days of damage. A total of 45 fronds (45 injected holes on injection, and these results continued after 15 days fronds) were observed up to six months from drilling.