Paper · 2022 · Indian Journal of Agricultural Research

Efficacy of New Generation Insecticides in Comparison with Biopesticides and their Economics against Chickpea Pod Borer (Helicoverpa armigera Hub.)

Vivek Tripathi; Akhilesh Kumar; Smita Singh; et al.

6
claims
14
verbatim quotes
2
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Background: Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is one of the most important pulses. Helicoverpa armigera [Hubner] is the most devastating chickpea pest responsible for substantial yield loss. Chickpea crop is damaged by a large number of insect species, both under field conditions and in storage. Productivity losses by gram pod borer range from 20 to 90 per cent depending upon the severity of insect attack. Among the biotic factors responsible for low yield the, damage due to insect pests is the major limiting factor. Keeping the above facts in view, the present investigation was planned and carried out to establish a new generation molecules are comparatively safer to natural enemies, honeybees and other pollinators than old generation molecules play an important role in reducing the pest populations. Methods: Field experiment was during Rabi season 2018-19 on chickpea in district Rewa. The field was prepared following the recommended package of practices. The incidence of H. armigera was observed from five randomly selected plants from four middle rows of each plot at weekly interval. The spray of insecticides was applied as soon as the pest incidence is noted. The first spray was done at 50% flowering stage of the crop and repeated after 15 days. Pre-treatment observation on pest population was undertaken one day before the application of the first spray by direct counting of H. armigera larvae per five randomly pre-selected plants in each plot. Similar procedure was followed for post-treatment observation which was recorded at 1, 3, 7, 10, 15 days after both the spray operations. Result: The experiment was laid out in randomized block design with 09 treatments (Chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SC @ 37 g a.i./ha, Fipronil 5% SC @ 50 g a.i./ha, Indoxacarb 15.8 EC @ 79 g a.i./ha, Spinosad 45 SC @ 90 g a.i./ha, Novaluron 10 EC @ 100 g a.i./ha, Emamectine benzoate 5 SG @ 10 g a.i./ha, Neem oil 0.15% , Bt.K. 3.5% and untreated check. First spray of insecticides over all mean analysis indicated that all the insecticidal treatments were significantly effective in reducing the larval population of Helicoverpa armigera Hub. as compared to untreated plots (1.56 larvae/plant) in the first and second spray (0.92 larva/plant) of insecticides over all mean larval population Indoxacarb 15.8 EC @ 79 g a.i./ha was effective in controlling the incidence of gram pod borer due to the first spray (0.59 larva/plant) and also the second spray (0.27 larva/plant) among all treatments. Resulting in the seed yield 1989.00 kg/ha with the highest cost: benefit ratio of 1:12.3, which was followed by the treatment of Emamectin benzoate 5 SG @ 10 g a.i./ha with cost benefit ratio of 1:10.83.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

All insecticide treatments significantly reduced Helicoverpa larvae relative to untreated plots.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
all the insecticidal treatmentse0
Interactor
Helicoverpa armigera Hub.Helicoverpa armigerae0pest
Outcome
larval population of Helicoverpa armigera Hub.e0
Direction
reducinge0
Qualifier
1.56 larvae/plante0
Comparator
untreated plotse0

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

“all the insecticidal treatments were significantly effective in reducing the larval population of Helicoverpa armigera Hub. as compared to untreated plots (1.56 larvae/plant) in the first and second spray (0.92 larva/plant)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2019–2242 · show in text ↑
t0

“against Chickpea Pod Borer”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 93–119 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Indoxacarb controlled pod borer after the first spray at 0.59 larva/plant.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Indoxacarb 15.8 EC @ 79 g a.i./hae0
Interactor
gram pod borere0pest
Outcome
incidence of gram pod borere0
Direction
controllinge0
Value
0.59 larva/plante0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Indoxacarb 15.8 EC @ 79 g a.i./ha was effective in controlling the incidence of gram pod borer due to the first spray (0.59 larva/plant)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2291–2427 · show in text ↑
t0

“against Chickpea Pod Borer”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 93–119 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Indoxacarb controlled pod borer after the second spray at 0.27 larva/plant.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Indoxacarb 15.8 EC @ 79 g a.i./hae0
Interactor
gram pod borere0pest
Outcome
incidence of gram pod borere0
Direction
controllinge0
Value
0.27 larva/plante0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Indoxacarb 15.8 EC @ 79 g a.i./ha was effective in controlling the incidence of gram pod borer due to the first spray (0.59 larva/plant) and also the second spray (0.27 larva/plant)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2291–2472 · show in text ↑
t0

“against Chickpea Pod Borer”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 93–119 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Indoxacarb treatment produced seed yield of 1989.00 kg/ha.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Indoxacarb 15.8 EC @ 79 g a.i./hat1
Outcome
seed yielde0
Value
1989.00 kg/hae0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

“Resulting in the seed yield 1989.00 kg/ha with the highest cost: benefit ratio of 1:12.3”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2495–2583 · show in text ↑
t0

“against Chickpea Pod Borer”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 93–119 · show in text ↑
t1

“Indoxacarb 15.8 EC @ 79 g a.i./ha was effective in controlling”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2291–2353 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Indoxacarb had the highest cost benefit ratio, 1:12.3.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Indoxacarb 15.8 EC @ 79 g a.i./hat1
Outcome
cost: benefit ratioe0
Direction
higheste0
Value
1:12.3e0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Resulting in the seed yield 1989.00 kg/ha with the highest cost: benefit ratio of 1:12.3”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2495–2583 · show in text ↑
t0

“against Chickpea Pod Borer”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 93–119 · show in text ↑
t1

“Indoxacarb 15.8 EC @ 79 g a.i./ha was effective in controlling”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2291–2353 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Emamectin benzoate followed with a cost benefit ratio of 1:10.83.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Emamectin benzoate 5 SG @ 10 g a.i./hae0
Outcome
cost benefit ratioe0
Direction
followede0
Value
1:10.83e0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“followed by the treatment of Emamectin benzoate 5 SG @ 10 g a.i./ha with cost benefit ratio of 1:10.83.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2595–2698 · show in text ↑
t0

“against Chickpea Pod Borer”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 93–119 · show in text ↑

indoxacarb · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

17 papers: 16 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

13 papers more in this group

See all 17 papers →

emamectin benzoate · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

8 papers: 8 positive, 0 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

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

18 papers: 17 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 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.