Paper · 2015 · The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences

Evaluation of Beauveria bassiana against chickpea pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera and its safety to natural enemies

D R BAJYA; M RANJITH; S K RAZA

3
claims
6
verbatim quotes
11
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-sa

Abstract

The chickpea pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner), a serious insect pest of pulses, has developed resistance to many groups of insecticides all over the world. The entomopathogenic fungi, Beauveria bassiana (Buls.- Criv.) safe to predators and parasites, recommended for using in rotation with insecticides to mitigate the resistance to chemical insecticides, was evaluated for its efficacy against H. armigera in chickpea and its safety to natural enemies at research farm, Institute of Pesticide Formulation Technology in Gurgaon, Haryana during two seasons 2012-13 and 2013-14. The three spray were made on 15 days intervals starting from appearance of pest, i.e. (07.02.2013, 22.02.2013 and 09.03.2013 during 2012-13) and (16.02.2014, 03.03.2014 and 18.03.2014 during 2013-14) cropping season of different doses of Beauveria bassiana 1.15% WP (1 × 108 cfu/g) were carried out with knapsack sprayer @500 litres of water per hectare. The results revealed that B. bassiana 1.15% WP @ 3 000 g/ha and 2 500 g/ha were highly effectual in controlling pod borer populations after two sprays of both the seasons, quinalphos 25%EC @ 1 000g/ha being a chemical pesticide was sprayed at pod formation stage and also effective against pod borer populations on both the seasons.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-sa. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 3

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Beauveria bassiana at 3 000 g/ha controlled chickpea pod borer populations effectively after two sprays in both seasons.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
B. bassiana 1.15% WP @ 3 000 g/hae0
Interactor
Helicoverpa armigeraHelicoverpa armigerat0pest
Second interactor
B. bassianaBeauveria bassianae0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
pod borer populationse0
Direction
controllinge0
Qualifier
after two sprays of both the seasonse0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Helicoverpa armigera
Helicoverpa armigera · InteractorRaimundo Pastor · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Beauveria bassiana
Beauveria bassiana · Second interactorBealeiderman · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“B. bassiana 1.15% WP @ 3 000 g/ha and 2 500 g/ha were highly effectual in controlling pod borer populations after two sprays of both the seasons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 966–1110 · show in text ↑
t0

“chickpea pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 41–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Beauveria bassiana at 2 500 g/ha controlled chickpea pod borer populations effectively after two sprays in both seasons.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
2 500 g/hae0
Interactor
Helicoverpa armigeraHelicoverpa armigerat0pest
Second interactor
B. bassianaBeauveria bassianae0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
pod borer populationse0
Direction
controllinge0
Qualifier
after two sprays of both the seasonse0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Helicoverpa armigera
Helicoverpa armigera · InteractorRaimundo Pastor · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Beauveria bassiana
Beauveria bassiana · Second interactorBealeiderman · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“B. bassiana 1.15% WP @ 3 000 g/ha and 2 500 g/ha were highly effectual in controlling pod borer populations after two sprays of both the seasons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 966–1110 · show in text ↑
t0

“chickpea pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 41–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Quinalphos at 1 000g/ha was effective against chickpea pod borer populations in both seasons.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Organ / stage
pod formation stagee0
Treatment
quinalphos 25%EC @ 1 000g/hae0
Interactor
Helicoverpa armigeraHelicoverpa armigerat0pest
Outcome
pod borer populationse0
Direction
effectivee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Helicoverpa armigera
Helicoverpa armigera · InteractorRaimundo Pastor · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“quinalphos 25%EC @ 1 000g/ha being a chemical pesticide was sprayed at pod formation stage and also effective against pod borer populations on both the seasons.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1112–1272 · show in text ↑
t0

“chickpea pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 41–81 · show in text ↑

quinalphos · Helicoverpa armigera · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 7 positive, 1 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

Beauveria bassiana · Helicoverpa armigera · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

9 papers: 8 positive, 1 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.