efficiency of different insecticides against sucking insect-pest ...

Pak. Entomol. Vol. 29, No.2, 2007EFFICIENCY OF DIFFERENT INSECTICIDES AGAINST SUCKING INSECT-PEST COMPLEXAND EFFECT ON THE GROWTH AND YIELD OF MUNGBEAN (VIGNA RADIATA L.)M. Jahangir Shah, Amir Ahmad, Mumtaz Hussain, Malik M. Yousaf and Bashir AhmadArid Zone Research Institute (PARC), BahawalpurABSTRACTA field study was undertaken at Arid Zone Research Institute (AZRI), Bahawalpur, during Kharif, 2005 toinvestigate the efficiency of different insecticides, namely imidacloprid (Confidor 200SL), acetameprid(Mospilan 20SP), buprofezin (Polo), thiomethoxam (Actara 25WG) along with control on the growth and yieldof mungbean. The results revealed that pods/plant and seed yield kg ha -1 varied significantly among differentinsecticides. Out of all the insecticides used in this study, imidacloprid treated plots had significantly the highestyield of (1563 kg ha -1 ) while the lowest seed yield of (1056 kg/ha) was obtained from the control plots where noinsecticide was applied.Key words: Mungbean, growth, seed yield, insecticides, sucking insect pestINTRODUCTIONMungbean (green gram) is an important pulse cropin many Asian countries including Pakistan wherethe diet is mostly cereal based. Mungbean is high inprotein, digestible and does not cause the flatulencethat many other legumes do. Its seed contains 24.2%protein, 1.3% fat and 60.4% carbohydrates(Considine, 1982).It is a short duration, drought tolerant, grown twice ayear, and fits well in our crop rotation programme.In Pakistan, it is grown annually on an area of 245.4thousands hectares and a total seed yield of 130thousand tones with an average seed yield of 529.7kg ha -1 (Anonymous, 2005), which is very low ascompared to other countries of the region. Thereasons of this low yield are numerous but yieldlosses due to insect pest complex is distinct one.Mungbean is attacked by different species of insectpests but sucking insect pests (whitefly, jassids andthrips) are of the major importance. These insectpests not only reduce the vigor of the plants bysucking the sap but transmit diseases and affect theprocess of photosynthesis. Farmers in Pakistanmostly used synthetic chemicals because of theirquick knock down effect. Previously many researchworkers have also evaluated different syntheticchemicals against sucking insect pests of mungbean.A drastic reduction in the infection of yellow mosaicvirus was found where whitefly attack wasreasonably controlled, that reduced the yield up to70% (Marimuthu et al., 1981; Sachan et al., 1994).The present study was conducted to evaluatedifferent insecticides against sucking insect pests forbetter growth and yield of mungbean under the agroecologicalconditions of Bahawalpur.MATERIALS AND METHODSThe insecticides i.e., imidacloprid, acetameprid,buprofezin and thiomethoxam used in theexperiment, were obtained from the local market.The experiment was laid out according toRandomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) withthree replications. The plot size was kept as 3 x 5mland row to row distance was 30 cm. The insecticideswere sprayed at recommended doses whenever thepopulation of pest (Jassid, whitefly and thrips)reached at economic threshold level on mungbeanvariety NM-92 during Kharif 2005. Sprayapplications were made with hand operatedknapsack sprayer with hollow cone nozzle. Data onplant height, pods plant -1 and seeds pod -1 wererecorded at physiological maturity of the plant. Dataon 1000 seed weight (gm) and yield (kg ha -1 ) werealso recorded after threshing. Data collected werestatistically analyzed by Analysis of VarianceTechnique at 5% level of probability (Steel andTorri, 1980)RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONThe analysis of variance indicated that plant heightwas not significantly influenced by the use ofdifferent insecticides in mungbean however, theplants of maximum height (64.5 cm) were observedin the plots where acetameprid was applied tocontrol the sucking pests of mungbean. On contrary,83

Pak. Entomol. Vol. 29, No.2, 2007the plants of minimum plant height of 60.5 cm werefound in control plots where no insecticideapplication was done (Table 1).Number of pods plant -1 showed significantdifferences among various insecticides. Maximumpods/plant of 30.3 was recorded in the plots ofimidacloprid and minimum (23.1) pods plant -1 wasproduced in the control plots (Table 1). Suckinginsects not only reduce the vigor of the plant bysucking the sap but also transmit disease and affectthe photosynthetic activity that is the main source ofproducing more number of pods plant -1 . Similarresults are reported by Chumder and Singh (1991)and Sethuraman et al. (2001).Number of seeds pod -1 is important parameter thatdirectly affects the yield potential of legumes. Effectof different pesticides for controlling sucking insectpest was non-significant for number of seeds pods -1 .However, the higher number of seeds (11.3) wasrecorded for imidacloprid (Table 1)1000-Seed weight has the direct effect on the finalyield. The analysis of data revealed that 1000-seedweight did not vary significantly among variouspesticides applied for control of sucking insect pests.However, the seeds of maximum weight of 43.1 gmwere produced in the plots where imidacloprid wasapplied (Table 1). These results are in line with thefindings of at Sethuraman et al., 2001. Theminimum 1000 seed weight (41.7 gm) was observedin case of plots where no pesticide was applied tocontrol sucking insect pest complex.Final grain yield is a function of commutative effectof various yield parameters. Data reflect thatapplication of different insecticides has a significanteffect on grain yield/ha. The highest seed yield of1563 kg ha -1 was recorded from the plots whereimidacloprid was applied to control sucking insectpests of mungbean (Figure 1). On contrary, thelowest seed yield (1056 kg ha -1 ) was noted from thecontrol plots. These results are in conformity withthose of Ujagir and Chaudhry (1997), Ahmad et al.(1998) and Deka et al. (1998).It may be inferred from the present investigation thatyield advantages from the mungbean crop under theexisting conditions could be achieved by using theimidacloprid pesticide against the sucking insect pestcomplex.Table 1. Efficiency of different pesticides for sucking insect-pest complex, on the growth and yield of mungbeanPesticides Plant height (cm) Pods/Plant Seeds/pod 1000-seed weight (gm) Seed yield kg/haControl 60.5 23.1 bc 10.7 41.7 1056 cImidacloprid 61.3 303 a 11.3 43.1 1563 aAcetameprid 64.5 25.1 b 11.0 42.5 1362 abBuprofezin 61.1 24.1 bc 10.5 37.6 1287 bThiomethoxam 60.7 22.5 c 10.5 38.5 1319 bLSD (0.5) NS NS NS 206.7Figure 1. Efficiency of different pesticides for sucking insect-pest complex, on the growth and yield of mungbean(Vigna radiata)Yield Kg/ha180016001400120010008006004002000ControlImidaclopridAcetamepridBuprofezinThiomethoxamPesticides84

Pak. Entomol. Vol. 29, No.2, 2007REFERENCESAhmad, R., C.P. Yadava and S. Lal, 1998.Evaluation of spray schedule for the controlof insect pests of mungbean. Indian J.,Pulses Res. 11 (2): 146-148.Anonymous, 2005. Economic Survey of Pakistan2005-2006. Govt. of Pakistan, EconomicAdvisor’s Wing, Fin. Div., Islamabad.Considine, M., 1982. Food and Food productionEncyclopedia Van Nostard Book Co. 173pp.Chumder, S. and Y. Singh, 1991. Effects ofinsecticides on whitefly Bemisia tabaciyellow mosaic virus in green gram Vignaradiata (L) wilczek. Indian J. Virol., 53 (2):248-251.Deka, N., D.C. Borah and P.K. Das, 1998.Insecticidal control against major insectpests of mungbean (vigna radiate). Ann.Bio. Ludhiana, 14 (2): 195-198Marimuthu, T., C.L. Subramanian and Mohan, 1981.Assessment of yield losses due to yellowmosaic virus in mungbean. Pulse CropNewsl., 1: 104.Sachan.J.N., C.P. Yadava, R. Ahmad and G. Katti,1994. Insect Pest management in pulse crop.In Agricultural Insect Pest Management,Dhaliwal, G.S. and R. Arora (Eds.)Common Wealth Publishers, New Delhi,India.Sethuraman, K.N., Manivannan and S. Natarajan,2001. Management of yellow mosaicdiseases of urdbean using neem products.Legume Res., 24 (3): 197-199.Steel, R.G.D. and J.H. Torri, 1980. Principles andProcedures of Statistics, McGraw Hill BookCo., New York.Ujagir, R. and P.S. Chaudhry, 1997. Field efficacyof certain insecticides against major insectpests of mungbean. Ann. Pl. Prot. Sci., 5 (1):34-39.85

86Pak. Entomol. Vol. 29, No.2, 2007