Effect of induced meteorological changes due to staggered planting on pest incidence in chickpea
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59797/jfl.v32i3.659Keywords:
Chickpea, Climate change, Helicoverpa armigera, Pest incidence, Spodoptera exiguaAbstract
Pest incidence in chickpea was studied across sowing dates to understand the effect of climatic factors on pest incidence on five genotypes of chickpea. The egg laying by the pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera decreased across sowing dates from October to December, with a slight increase in oviposition was observed in the January sown crops. ICC 3137 was most preferred for egg laying (9.5 eggs/5 plants), followed by KAK 2 (6.8 eggs/5 plants). The incidence of H. armigera decreased with a delay in time of sowing (60.0 larvae/ 5plants in the October sown crop to 21.9 larvae/5plants in the December sown crop). However, a slight increase was observed in the January sown crop (34.8 larvae/5plants). The highest incidence of H. armigera larvae was recorded on ICC 3137 (55.1 larvae/5plants), and the lowest on ICCV 10 (29.9 larvae/5plants).The numbers of H. armigera larvae were negatively correlated with open pan evaporation, temperature (both maximum and minimum), wind velocity and solar radiation in all the chickpea genotypes, except in ICCV 10. However, oviposition by beet armyworm, Spodoptera exigua was positively correlated with open pan evaporation, temperature (both maximum and minimum), and solar radiation in ICC 3137 and ICCV 10. The abundance ofS. exigua larvae was significantly and positively correlated with rainfall, open pan evaporation, temperature (both maximum and minimum), wind velocity and solar radiation, except in ICCV 10, which showed a non-significant negative correlation. The pod borer damage was significantly and positively correlated with rainfall, open pan evaporation, temperature (both maximum and minimum), wind velocity and solar radiation, suggesting the global warming will lead to an increase in pest incidence in chickpea. The numbers of H. armigera larval parasitoid, Campoletis chlorideae cocoons were significantly and negatively correlated with rainfall, open pan evaporation, temperature (both maximum and minimum), wind velocity and solar radiation, indicating that increase in temperature will decrease the efficacy of natural enemies. Grain yield decreased with an increase in rainfall, open pan evapouration, temperature (both maximum and minimum), wind velocity and solar radiation, but was positively correlated with relative humidity. The present studies suggested that global warming will decrease the incidence of H. armigera, but with result in an increase in the incidence of S. exigua. Increase in temperature will also decrease the extent of parasitization of H. armigera, which will result in a significant decrease in crop yields. Therefore, there is a need to develop strategies to mitigate the effects of climate change on crop production and food security.
References
Ali A, Aheer GM, Saleem M, Ashfaq M and Khan MA.2009. Effect of sowing dates on population development of Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) in cotton genotypes. Pakisthan Entomology31(2): 128-132.
Anwar M, Shafique M, Ahmad M and Shaloori AP. 1994.Incidence of attack and population fluctuation of Heliothisarmigera in relation to chickpea phenology and environmental factors. Proceedings of Pakistan Congress of Zoologypp.12.
Begum N, Husain M and Chowdhury SI. 1992. Effect of sowing date and plant density on pod borer incidence and grain yield of chickpea in Bangladesh. International Chickpea Newsletter 27:19-21.
Bhatnagar VS. 1980. A report on research on Heliothis complex at ICRISAT (India), 1974–1979. International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-AridTropics. pp. 23.
Food and Agriculture Organization. 2013. The State of Food Insecurity in the World. http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/i1683e/i1683e.pdf Gunathilagaraj K. 1996. Management of Helicoverpaarmigera in chickpea with Acridotheres tristis. Madras Agricultural Journal 83: 72-73.
Hill MG and Dymock J. 1989. Impact of Climate Change: Agricultural/Horticultural Systems. DSIR Entomology Division Submission to the New Zealand Climate Change Program. Auckland, New Zealand: Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. 16 pp.
Hossain MA, Haqueb MA and Prodhan MZH. 2008. Incidence and damage severity of pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Bangladesh Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research 44(2): 221-224.
IPCC. 1990a. Climate change: The IPCC Scientific Assessment.Inter governmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva and Nairobi, Kenya: World Meteorological Organization and UN Environment Program. 365 pp.
IPCC. 1990b. The Potential Impacts of Climate Change on Agriculture and Forestry. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva and Nairobi, Kenya: World Meteorological Organization and UN Environment Program.
Mahapatra SD, Aswal JS and Mishra PN. 2007. Monitoring population dynamics of tomato fruit borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) moths through pheromone traps in Uttaranchal Hills. Indian Journal of Entomology. 69(2): 172-173
Mahapatra SD, Aswal JS and Mishra PN. 2007. Monitoring population dynamics of tomato fruit borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) moths through pheromone traps in Uttaranchal Hills. Indian Journal of Entomology 69(2): 172-173.
Narayanamma VL, Sharma HC, Gowda CLL and Sriramulu M.2007a. Expression of resistance to pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in relation to HPLC fingerprints of leaf exudates of chickpea. Ph.D thesis submitted to ANGRAU, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Narayanamma VL, Sriramulu M, Gorda CLL, Ghaffar MA and Sharma HC.2007b. Tolerance to Helicoverpa armigera damage in chickpea genotypes under natural infestation. Indian Journal of Plant Protection. 35(2): 227-231
Pandey BM, Tripathi MK and Vijay Lakshmi. 2012. Seasonal incidence of Helicoverpa armigera on Chickpea. Annals of plant protection sciences 22(1): 190-239.
Patil SK, Shinde GP and Jamadagni BM. 2007. Reaction of shortduration chickpea genotypes for resistance to gram pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera in Maharashtra, India. Journal of SAT Agricultural Research 5(1): 1-2.
Patil SK, Shinde GP and Jamadagni BM. 2007. Reaction of shortduration chickpea genotypes for resistance to gram pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera in Maharashtra, India. Journal of SAT Agricultural Research. 5(1): 1-2.
Patnaik HP and Senapati B. 1996. Trends in Helicoverpa egg, larval and adult population changes in the chickpea environment of Orissa. Indian Journal of Plant Protection 24: 18-23.
Pearson EO.1958. The Insect Pests of Cotton in Tropical Africa. London: Common Wealth Institute of Entomology pp.355. Prasad CS and Singh VP.1997. Impact of variety, sowing date and control measures on incidence of pod borer, Helicoverpa
armigera(Hub) and yield of chickpea. Annals of plant protection sciences 5: 26-28.
Prasad D, Chand P, Deka NK and Prasad R. 1989. Population dynamics of Heliothis armigera (Hüb.) on chickpea. Giornale Italiano di Entomology 4: 223-228.
Qayyum A and Zalucki MP. 1987. Effects of high temperature on survival of eggs of Heliothis armigera (Hubner) and H. punctigera Wallengren (lepidoptera: noctuidae). Journal of Australian Entomological Society 26: 295-296.
Shah ZA and Shahzad MK. 2005. Fluctuation patterns of different developmental stages of Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) and their relationship with the environment. Entomology Fennica 16: 201-206.
Shankar M, Munghate RS, Babu TR, Sridevi D and Sharma HC. 2014. Population density and damage by pod borers, Helicoverpa armigera and Spodoptera exigua in a diverse array of chickpea genotypes under natural infestation in the field. Indian Journal of Entomology 76(2): 117-127.
Sharma HC. 2010a. Global Warming and Climate Change: Impact on Arthropod Biodiversity, PestManagement, and Food Security. In: National Symposium on Perspectives and Challenges of Integrated Pest Management for Sustainable Agriculture, 19-21 Nov 2010, Solan.
Sharma HC. 2005. Heliothis/HelicoverpaManagement: Emerging Trends and Strategies for Future Research. New Delhi India: Oxford & IBH, and Science Publishers, USA. 469 pp
Sharma HC. 2012b. Effect of global warming on insect-host plantenvironment interactions. In: 24th International Congress of Entomology 19-24 Aug 2012, Daegu, South Korea.
Sharma HC, Pampapathy G, Lanka SK and Ridsdill-Smith TJ.2005b. Antibiosis mechanism of resistance to pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera in wild relatives of chickpea. Euphytica. 142: 107-117.
Singh SS and Yadav SK. 2006. Evaluation of chickpea varieties for their resistance against gram pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera. Indian Journal of Entomology. 68(4): 321-324.
Srinivas PR and Jayaraj S.1989. Record of natural enemies of Heliothis armigera from Coimbatore district, Tamil Nadu. Journal of Biological Control 3: 71-72.
Thakur JN, Singh JP, Verma OP and Diwakar MC. 1995. Bioecological studies on gram pod borers Heliothis species under Jammu conditions. Journal of Advanced Zoology. 16: 118-122.
Tripathi SR and Sharma SK. 1985. Population dynamics of Heliothis armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera Noctuidae) on gram in the Terai belt of NE Uttar Pradesh. Giornale Italiano di Entomology 2: 347-353.
Ugale TB, Toke NR and Shirsath MS. 2011. Population dynamics of gram pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner). International Journal of Plant Protection 4(1): 204-206
Upadhyay VR, Vyas HN and Sherasiya RA. 1989. Influence of weather parameters on larval population of Heliothis armigera (Hubner) on ground nut. Indian Journal of Plant Protection 17(1): 85-87.
Yadav SS, Kumar J, Yadav SK, Singh S, Yadav VS, Turner NC and Redden R. 2006. Evaluation of Helicoverpa and drought resistance in desi and kabuli chickpea. Plant Genetics Resources 4: 198-203.
Yadava CP and Lal SS.1988. Relationship between certain abiotic and biotic factors and the occurrence of gram pod borer, Heliothis armigera (Hbn.) on chickpea. Entomology 13: 3-4.
Yadava CP, Lal SS, Ahmad R and Sachan JN. 1991. Influence of abiotic factors on relative abundance of pod borers of chickpea (Cicer arietinum). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 61:512–515.
