Paper · 2017 · Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

Efficacy of Certain Chemicals and Neem Products against Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)

Chandra Shekhara Gv; Ashwani Kumar; Lavanya; et al.

9
claims
20
verbatim quotes
5
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted during Rabi season of 2014-2015 at the central research farm of Sam Higginbottom Institute of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences, Deemed-to-be-University, Allahabad to evaluate the efficacy of certain chemicals and neem products against pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) The occurrence of pod borer commenced from 6th standard week (February second week) with an average population of 0.25 larvae/plant. The pod borer population increased and gradually reached its peak level of 6.25 larvae/plant at 13th standard week (March last week) there after declined trend was observed as temperature increased. It was observed that the temperature between 27-35 0C favored the multiplication of gram pod borer. The per cent population reduction of gram pod borer H. armigera on third, seventh and fourteenth days after spraying revealed that all treatments are superior over control. Among the treatments spinosad 45 SC found superior over all the treatments followed by cypermethrin and indoxacarb after first and second sprays, respectively. Highest reduction in larval population (72.12%) was observed with spinosad 45 SC @ 0.5 ml/l. Minimum pod damage of 11.98% and highest yield of 1745 Kg/ha was registered in spinosad. Highest cost benefit ratio (C:B) was recorded in spinosad (1:2.36) followed by cypermethrin (1:1.94), indoxacarb (1:1.84), chlorpyriphos (1:1.60), profenophos (1:1.34), NSKE (1:1.20) and neem oil (1:0.90).

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 9

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pod borer occurrence began in the sixth standard week at 0.25 larvae per plant.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Interactor
Helicoverpa armigeraHelicoverpa armigerae1pest
Outcome
populatione0
Value
0.25 larvae/plante0
Qualifier
6th standard week (February second week)e0

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

“The occurrence of pod borer commenced from 6th standard week (February second week) with an average population of 0.25 larvae/plant.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 346–478 · show in text ↑
e1

“Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 283–345 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pod borer population peaked in the thirteenth standard week at 6.25 larvae per plant, then declined as temperature increased.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Interactor
Helicoverpa armigeraHelicoverpa armigerae1pest
Outcome
pod borer populatione0
Value
6.25 larvae/plante0
Qualifier
13th standard week (March last week)e0

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

“The pod borer population increased and gradually reached its peak level of 6.25 larvae/plant at 13th standard week (March last week) there after declined trend was observed as temperature increased.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 479–677 · show in text ↑
e1

“Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 283–345 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Temperatures of 27-35 0C favored gram pod borer multiplication.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Interactor
Helicoverpa armigeraHelicoverpa armigerae1pest
Outcome
multiplication of gram pod borere0
Direction
favorede0
Qualifier
27-35 0Ce0

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

“temperature between 27-35 0C favored the multiplication of gram pod borer”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 703–776 · show in text ↑
e1

“Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 283–345 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All sprayed treatments reduced gram pod borer populations compared with control on days three, seven and fourteen.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
all treatmentse0
Interactor
H. armigeraHelicoverpa armigerae0pest
Outcome
population reduction of gram pod borer H. armigerae0
Direction
superiore0
Comparator
controle0

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

“The per cent population reduction of gram pod borer H. armigera on third, seventh and fourteenth days after spraying revealed that all treatments are superior over control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 778–950 · show in text ↑
e1

“on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 313–345 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Spinosad 45 SC was superior to other treatments after the first and second sprays.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
spinosad 45 SCe0
Outcome
superiore0
Direction
superiore0
Comparator
all the treatmentse0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Among the treatments spinosad 45 SC found superior over all the treatments followed by cypermethrin and indoxacarb after first and second sprays, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 951–1110 · show in text ↑
e1

“on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 313–345 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Spinosad 45 SC at 0.5 ml/l achieved the greatest larval population reduction, 72.12%.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
spinosad 45 SC @ 0.5 ml/le0
Interactor
Helicoverpa armigeraHelicoverpa armigerae1pest
Outcome
larval populatione0
Direction
Highest reductione0
Value
72.12%e0
Comparator
all the treatmentse2

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

“Highest reduction in larval population (72.12%) was observed with spinosad 45 SC @ 0.5 ml/l.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1111–1203 · show in text ↑
e1

“Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 283–345 · show in text ↑
e2

“superior over all the treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 993–1025 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Spinosad had minimum pod damage of 11.98%.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
spinosade0
Interactor
Helicoverpa armigeraHelicoverpa armigerae2pest
Outcome
pod damagee0
Direction
Minimume0
Value
11.98%e0

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

“Minimum pod damage of 11.98% and highest yield of 1745 Kg/ha was registered in spinosad.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1204–1292 · show in text ↑
e1

“on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 313–345 · show in text ↑
e2

“Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 283–312 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Spinosad gave the highest chickpea yield, 1745 Kg/ha.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
spinosade0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
higheste0
Value
1745 Kg/hae0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Minimum pod damage of 11.98% and highest yield of 1745 Kg/ha was registered in spinosad.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1204–1292 · show in text ↑
e1

“on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 313–345 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Spinosad had the highest cost benefit ratio, 1:2.36.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
spinosade0
Outcome
cost benefit ratioe0
Direction
Higheste0
Value
1:2.36e0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Highest cost benefit ratio (C:B) was recorded in spinosad (1:2.36)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1293–1359 · show in text ↑
e1

“on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 313–345 · show in text ↑

spinosad · Helicoverpa armigera · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

23 papers: 23 positive, 0 negative or no effect

22 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

19 papers more in this group

See all 23 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.