Paper · 2022 · Environment Conservation Journal

Bioefficacy and economics of certain new molecule of insecticides against Gram pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) in chickpea

Nitish Kumar Alok; Sameer Kumar Singh; Umesh Chandra

11
claims
25
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc

Abstract

Gram pod borer (Helicoverpa armigera) is a major insect pest of chickpea. The gram pod borer begins to infest at vegetative stage and later feeds on flowers and developing pods. A field investigation was conducted to evaluate the bioefficacy of certain new molecule insecticides against Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) on chickpea during Rabi 2020-21 in randomized block design with three replications. The outcomes revealed that the application of Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 25g a.i./ha and Cyantraniliprole 10.26% OD @ 60g a.i./ha were established to be most effective treatments and application of Fipronil 5% SC @ 50g a.i./ha was least effective in respect of reduction of H. armigera larval population. The maximum yield was recorded in Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 25g a.i./ha (14.00 q/ha) followed by Cyantraniliprole 10.26% OD @ 60g a.i./ha (13.73 q/ha) and lowest yield was recorded from Novaluron 75g a.i./ha (10.15 q/ha) treated plot. The economics of different new molecule insecticides indicated that higher benefit cost ratio (BCR) was observed from Lambda Cyhalothrin 30g a.i./ha (7.86:1) followed by Emamectin benzoate 12g a.i/ha (6.75:1) and the lower BCR was recorded from Cyantraniliprole 60g a.i./ha (1.64:1) and Novaluron 75g a.i./ha (1.58:1). Chlorantraniliprole and Cyantraniliprole are newer group of insecticides, which are relatively safer and more effective against gram pod borer as comparison to conventional insecticides and can be used in successful management of this key pest of chickpea.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. 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 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chlorantraniliprole was among the most effective treatments for reducing larval population.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 25g a.i./hae0
Interactor
H. armigeraHelicoverpa armigerae1pest
Outcome
H. armigera larval populatione1
Direction
reductione1

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

“application of Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 25g a.i./ha and Cyantraniliprole 10.26% OD @ 60g a.i./ha were established to be most effective treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 432–583 · show in text ↑
e1

“reduction of H. armigera larval population”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 666–708 · show in text ↑
t0

“in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 120–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cyantraniliprole was among the most effective treatments for reducing larval population.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Cyantraniliprole 10.26% OD @ 60g a.i./hae0
Interactor
H. armigeraHelicoverpa armigerae1pest
Outcome
H. armigera larval populatione1
Direction
reductione1

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

“Cyantraniliprole 10.26% OD @ 60g a.i./ha were established to be most effective treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 494–583 · show in text ↑
e1

“reduction of H. armigera larval population”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 666–708 · show in text ↑
t0

“in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 120–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fipronil was least effective for reducing larval population.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Fipronil 5% SC @ 50g a.i./hae0
Interactor
H. armigeraHelicoverpa armigerae0pest
Outcome
H. armigera larval populatione0
Direction
least 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

“application of Fipronil 5% SC @ 50g a.i./ha was least effective in respect of reduction of H. armigera larval population”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 588–708 · show in text ↑
t0

“in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 120–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chlorantraniliprole had the maximum yield of 14.00 q/ha.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 25g a.i./hae0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
maximume0
Value
14.00 q/hae0

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

“maximum yield was recorded in Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 25g a.i./ha (14.00 q/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 714–799 · show in text ↑
t0

“in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 120–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cyantraniliprole yielded 13.73 q/ha, second to chlorantraniliprole.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Cyantraniliprole 10.26% OD @ 60g a.i./hae0
Outcome
yielde1
Value
13.73 q/hae0
Comparator
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 25g a.i./hae1

Not reportedDirection

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 Cyantraniliprole 10.26% OD @ 60g a.i./ha (13.73 q/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 800–865 · show in text ↑
e1

“maximum yield was recorded in Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 25g a.i./ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 714–786 · show in text ↑
t0

“in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 120–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Novaluron plots had the lowest yield, 10.15 q/ha.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Novaluron 75g a.i./hae0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
loweste0
Value
10.15 q/hae0

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

“lowest yield was recorded from Novaluron 75g a.i./ha (10.15 q/ha) treated plot”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 870–948 · show in text ↑
t0

“in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 120–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lambda Cyhalothrin had the highest reported benefit cost ratio, 7.86:1.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Lambda Cyhalothrin 30g a.i./hae0
Outcome
benefit cost ratio (BCR)e0
Direction
highere0
Value
7.86:1e0

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

“higher benefit cost ratio (BCR) was observed from Lambda Cyhalothrin 30g a.i./ha (7.86:1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1018–1107 · show in text ↑
t0

“in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 120–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Emamectin benzoate had a benefit cost ratio of 6.75:1.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Emamectin benzoate 12g a.i/hae0
Outcome
benefit cost ratio (BCR)e1
Value
6.75:1e0

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

“followed by Emamectin benzoate 12g a.i/ha (6.75:1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1108–1158 · show in text ↑
e1

“benefit cost ratio (BCR)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1025–1049 · show in text ↑
t0

“in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 120–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cyantraniliprole had a lower benefit cost ratio of 1.64:1.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Cyantraniliprole 60g a.i./hae0
Outcome
BCRe0
Direction
lowere0
Value
1.64:1e0

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

“lower BCR was recorded from Cyantraniliprole 60g a.i./ha (1.64:1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1167–1232 · show in text ↑
t0

“in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 120–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Novaluron had a lower benefit cost ratio of 1.58:1.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Novaluron 75g a.i./hae0
Outcome
BCRe0
Direction
lowere0
Value
1.58:1e0

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

“lower BCR was recorded from Cyantraniliprole 60g a.i./ha (1.64:1) and Novaluron 75g a.i./ha (1.58:1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1167–1267 · show in text ↑
t0

“in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 120–131 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend chlorantraniliprole and cyantraniliprole for chickpea pod borer management.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume0
Treatment
Chlorantraniliprole and Cyantraniliprolee0
Outcome
successful management of this key pest of chickpeae0
Comparator
conventional insecticidese0

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

“Chlorantraniliprole and Cyantraniliprole are newer group of insecticides, which are relatively safer and more effective against gram pod borer as comparison to conventional insecticides and can be used in successful management of this key pest of chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1269–1524 · show in text ↑

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

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

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

3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. negative
See all 3 papers →

lambda-cyhalothrin · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 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 →

chlorantraniliprole · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

14 papers: 14 positive, 0 negative or no effect

13 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

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

15 papers: 15 positive, 0 negative or no effect

14 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

11 papers more in this group

See all 15 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.