Abstract
A systematic roving survey was undertaken during the rabi season of 2023–24 across 24 maize-growing villages in six districts of Telangana, spanning the Southern, Central, and Northern agro-climatic zones, to assess the incidence, severity, and spatial distribution of FAW, and PSB. Pest incidence was quantified using a standardized W-shaped transect method, with 50 plants examined per field at two critical growth stages: vegetative (20–25 DAS) and reproductive (50–65 DAS). FAW incidence during the vegetative stage ranged from 22.0% (Ramreddipalli) to 70.0% (Palem), with a mean of 48.46% and a coefficient of variation (CV) of 9.74%. Corresponding proportional losses, based on a severity factor of 0.83, were estimated at 18.26–58.10%. By the reproductive stage, FAW incidence declined substantially (11.0–36.0%; mean: 20.13%; CV: 13.76%), with associated damage of 8.8–21.2% (severity factor: 0.80). Severe FAW pressure (>60%) was recorded in 12.5% of surveyed villages at the vegetative stage, whereas only 8.3% reported infestation above 30% during the reproductive phase. In contrast, PSB incidence during the vegetative stage was more spatially variable, ranging from 10.0% (Chilpur) to 44.0% (Khanapur), with a mean of 22.77% and CV of 15.76%. Damage estimates, derived from severity factors of 0.78–0.86, varied between 8.10% and 36.72%. Spatial stratification revealed that 8.3% of villages experienced high infestation (>40%), 33.3% moderate (25–40%), 41.7% low-moderate (15–25%), and 16.7% low (<15%). The contrasting spatiotemporal dynamics of FAW and PSB indicate that FAW exerts maximum pressure during early crop growth, while PSB maintains heterogeneous but persistent incidence during the vegetative stage. These findings emphasize the need for stage-specific, zone-oriented integrated pest management (IPM) strategies, aligned with pest biology and regional agro-ecological contexts, to minimize yield losses in rabi maize ecosystems of Telangana.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 20
Claim · model-written summary
Vegetative FAW incidence ranged from 22.0% to 70.0%.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“FAW incidence during the vegetative stage ranged from 22.0% (Ramreddipalli) to 70.0% (Palem), with a mean of 48.46% and a coefficient of variation (CV) of 9.74%.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Vegetative FAW incidence reached 70.0% in Palem.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“FAW incidence during the vegetative stage ranged from 22.0% (Ramreddipalli) to 70.0% (Palem), with a mean of 48.46% and a coefficient of variation (CV) of 9.74%.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Mean vegetative FAW incidence was 48.46%.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“FAW incidence during the vegetative stage ranged from 22.0% (Ramreddipalli) to 70.0% (Palem), with a mean of 48.46% and a coefficient of variation (CV) of 9.74%.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Vegetative FAW proportional losses were estimated at 18.26–58.10%.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corresponding proportional losses, based on a severity factor of 0.83, were estimated at 18.26–58.10%.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Reproductive FAW incidence declined to 11.0–36.0%.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“By the reproductive stage, FAW incidence declined substantially (11.0–36.0%; mean: 20.13%; CV: 13.76%), with associated damage of 8.8–21.2% (severity factor: 0.80).”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Mean reproductive FAW incidence was 20.13%.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“FAW incidence declined substantially (11.0–36.0%; mean: 20.13%; CV: 13.76%)”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Reproductive FAW damage was 8.8–21.2%.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“with associated damage of 8.8–21.2% (severity factor: 0.80)”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Severe vegetative FAW pressure occurred in 12.5% of villages.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Severe FAW pressure (>60%) was recorded in 12.5% of surveyed villages at the vegetative stage”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Reproductive FAW infestation above 30% occurred in 8.3% of villages.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“only 8.3% reported infestation above 30% during the reproductive phase”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Vegetative PSB incidence ranged from 10.0% to 44.0%.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PSB incidence during the vegetative stage was more spatially variable, ranging from 10.0% (Chilpur) to 44.0% (Khanapur), with a mean of 22.77% and CV of 15.76%.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
PSB incidence reached 44.0% in Khanapur.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PSB incidence during the vegetative stage was more spatially variable, ranging from 10.0% (Chilpur) to 44.0% (Khanapur), with a mean of 22.77% and CV of 15.76%.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Mean vegetative PSB incidence was 22.77%.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PSB incidence during the vegetative stage was more spatially variable, ranging from 10.0% (Chilpur) to 44.0% (Khanapur), with a mean of 22.77% and CV of 15.76%.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
PSB damage estimates ranged from 8.10% to 36.72%.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Damage estimates, derived from severity factors of 0.78–0.86, varied between 8.10% and 36.72%.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
PSB infestation was high in 8.3% of villages.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“8.3% of villages experienced high infestation (>40%)”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
PSB infestation was moderate in 33.3% of villages.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“33.3% moderate (25–40%)”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
PSB infestation was low-moderate in 41.7% of villages.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“41.7% low-moderate (15–25%)”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
PSB infestation was low in 16.7% of villages.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“16.7% low (<15%)”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
FAW pressure peaked early in crop growth.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“FAW exerts maximum pressure during early crop growth”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
PSB incidence persisted heterogeneously in the vegetative stage.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PSB maintains heterogeneous but persistent incidence during the vegetative stage”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend stage-specific, zone-oriented pest management.
- Outcome
- stage-specific, zone-oriented integrated pest management (IPM) strategiese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“stage-specific, zone-oriented integrated pest management (IPM) strategies, aligned with pest biology and regional agro-ecological contexts, to minimize yield losses in rabi maize ecosystems of Telangana”
t0“maize”