NON-CHEMICAL APPROACHES FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF ...

NON-CHEMICAL APPROACHES FOR THE 

MANAGEMENT OF SHOOT FLY Atherigona soccata 

RONDANI IN KHARIF SORGHUM 

Thesis submitted to the 

University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad 

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the 

Degree of 

Master of Science (Agriculture) 

In 

AGRICULTURAL ENTOMOLOGY 

By 

ANITA V. SABLE 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ENTOMOLOGY 

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, DHARWAD 

UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, 

DHARWAD-580 005 

JUNE,2009

ADVISORY COMMITTEE 

______________________ 

Place: Dharwad ( SHEKHARAPPA) 

Date : June, 2009 CHAIRMAN 

Approved by: 

Chairman: ______________________ 

(SHEKHARAPPA) 

Members : 1. _____________________ 

(R. K. PATIL) 

2.______________________ 

(G. M. PATIL) 

3._______________________ 

(Y. N. HAVALDAR)

CONTENTS 

Sl. No. Chapter particulars 

CERTIFICATE 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 

LIST OF TABLES 

LIST OF FIGURES 

LIST OF PLATES 

1 INTRODUCTION 

2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 

2.1 Management of shoot fly through seed treatment with organics 

2.2 Determination of critical stage of management of shoot fly through 

botanicals 

2.3 Management of shoot fly through traps 

3 MATERIAL AND METHODS 



botanicals 


4 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS 

4.1 Management of shoot fly through seed treatments with organics 


botanicals 


5 DISCUSSION 

5.1 Management of shoot fly through seed treatments with organics 


botanicals 


Future line of work 

6 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

REFERENCES

Table 

No. 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

LIST OF TABLES 

Title 

Effect of seed treatment with organics on oviposition of shoot fly in 

timely sown sorghum 

Effect of seed treatment with organics on oviposition of shoot fly in 

late sown sorghum 

Evaluation of seed treatment with organics against shoot fly and yield 

of timely sown sorghum 

Evaluation of seed treatment with organics against shoot fly and yield 

of late sown sorghum 

Evaluation of seed treatment with organics on coccinellids population 

in timely sown sorghum 

Effect of seed treatments with organics on coccinellids population in 


Effect of seed treatments with organics on chrysoperla population in 


Effect of seed treatments with organics on chrysoperla population in 


Cost economics for the management of sorghum shoot fly through 

seed treatments 

Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on oviposition of 

shoot fly on 14 DAE in timely sown sorghum 

11 Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on oviposition of 

shoot fly at 21 DAE in timely sown crop 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 


shoot fly at 14 DAE in late sown sorghum 


shoot fly on 21 DAE in late sown sorghum 

Evaluation of spraying botanicals at different intervals on the 

deadheart formation by shoot fly on 14 DAE in timely sown sorghum 

of spraying botanicals at different intervals on the deadheart 

formation by shoot fly on 21 DAE in timely sown sorghum 




deadheart formation by shoot fly on 14 DAE in late sown sorghum 





Yield of timely sown sorghum as influenced by spraying botanicals at 

different intervals 

Yield of late sown sorghum as influenced by spraying botanicals at 


Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on coccinellid 

population in timely sown sorghum

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

Figure 

No. 

Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on coccinellid 

population in late sown sorghum 

Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on chrysoperla 

population in timely sown sorghum 

Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on chrysoperla 

population in late sown sorghum 

Cost economics for the management of sorghum shoot fly through 

spraying botanicals at different intervals 

Effect of different types and frequencies of traps on the population of 

predators 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Title 

1 Effect of seed treatment with organics on oviposition of shoot fly in 


2 Effect of seed treatment with organics on oviposition of shoot fly in 


3 Evaluation of seed treatment with organics against shoot fly and yield 

of timely sown sorghum 

4 Evaluation of seed treatment with organics against shoot fly and yield 

of late sown sorghum 


shoot fly on 14 DAE in timely sown sorghum 


shoot fly at 14 DAE in late sown sorghum 

7 Evaluation of spraying botanicals at different intervals on the 


8 Evaluation of spraying botanicals at different intervals on the 


9 Yield of timely sown sorghum as influenced by spraying botanicals at 


10 Yield of late sown sorghum as influenced by spraying botanicals at 


11 Evaluation and optimization of traps for the management of shoot fly 

in sorghum

LIST OF PLATES 

Plate No. Title 

1. Life stages of shoot fly 

2. Deadheart caused by shoot fly 

3. Fish meal trap

1. INTRODUCTION 

Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) is an important food and fodder crop of the 

world which ranks fourth among major cereals after wheat, rice and maize. It is a major food 

crop for millions of people in the semi–arid tropics primarily grown under subsistence farming 

over 42.75 million hectares producing 54.15 million tonnes with an average grain yield of 

1394 kg per hectare (Anonymous, 2001a). It is presently cultivated in India, China, Japan, 

United States, Australia, Argentina and in African countries. Apart from grain and fodder, it 

can also be used as fuel and building material in rural areas. Sweet sorghum is used in the 

preparation of jaggery, syrup, biscuits and the ethanol production. In many parts of Africa, 

beer is prepared from sweet sorghum. 

India is the largest sorghum growing country in the world with an area of 9.69 million 

ha with production of 7.24 million tonnes and productivity of 783 kg/ha (www.fao.org). It is 

grown in all seasons irrigated as well as rainfed conditions. The main states growing sorghum 

are Maharashtra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and 

Gujrat. 

Karnataka is second leading state after Maharashtra with an area of about 18.91 lakh 

ha and production of 13.45 tonnes of grain (www.fao.org). It is grown in both rainy and postrainy 

seasons. Important sorghum growing districts of Karnataka are Bijapur, Bagalkot, 

Belgaum, Bellary, Bidar, Dharwad, Gadag, Gulbarga, Haveri, Koppal and Raichur. 

Sorghum is cultivated under diverse agro ecosystems and various biotic and abiotic 

factors influence yield. It is attacked by about 150 species of insects from sowing to harvest. 

(Jotwani et al., 1980 and Sharma, 1985). Shoot fly (Atherigona soccata Rondani) is one of the 

most important and destructive pest at the seedling stage. Fletcher (1914) reported for the 

first time its incidence in south India. Ballard and Ramchandra Rao (1924) described some 

aspects of its behaviors and biology. Shoot fly assumed the status of major pest in 1970s, 

with the introduction of high yielding hybrids. 

About 32 per cent of the crop is lost due to insect pests in India (Borad and Mittal, 

1983) of which 5 per cent of the loss have been attributed to sorghum shoot fly (Jotwani, 

1983). Taking this low level of only five per cent loss by shoot fly the estimate of the annual 

loss comes to 5,25,2000 tonnes. Valued about five crore rupees. Annual losses have been 

estimated to exceed 100 million US$. 

Because of introduction of new improved varities and hybrids, continuous cropping, 

ratooning and narrow genetic variability, the shoot fly has become principle pest of sorghum 

in India (Singh and Rana, 1986). Also its high fecundity and shorter generation period has 

resulted in rapid population built up. 

Currently used methods to manage this pest are early sowing, increased seed rate, 

thinning and destroying of seedlings with deadhearts and soil application of carbofuran. 

Chemical control with granular insecticides has provided the most reliable strategy to manage 

the pest but sorghum is mainly grown by majority of small farmers and chemical control 

method is not economically feasible and it also requires sufficient soil moisture. Pesticides like 

endosulfan, malathion, methyl demeton and cypermethrin have been recommended for 

spraying at 7 and 14 days after germination. To stick to this spray schedule may not be 

feasible for many small farmers. Sorghum is low remunerative crop and farmers can not 

invest in costly chemicals. Further, insecticides are harmful to non-target species and natural 

enemies; they have resulted in environmental pollution, hazards, biomagnification and 

resistance to insecticides by insect pests, resurgence of number of insect pests and 

disturbance of ecological balance. Hence, it is the need of time to develop safer and cost 

effective strategy to manage this culprit. Management using organic input plays vital role in 

the pest management. 

Keeping these points in view, the present investigation was undertaken with the 

following objectives: 

1. Management of shoot fly through seed treatments with organics. 

2. Determination of critical stage of management of shoot fly through botanicals. 

3. Management of shoot fly through traps.

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 


The systemic action of neem against insects is well known (Gill and Lewis, 1971 and 

Hyde et al., 1984). So, seed treatment can be useful in pest management. 

Mote et al. (1982) reported that incidence of shoot fly A. soccata in sorghum was reduced 

in the seed treatment with Azotobactor inoculum but was not as effective as carbofuran treatment. 

The grain yield was higher from seed treated with carbofuran and Azotobactor individually and in 

combination. Mohan et al. (1987) reported that Azospirillum seed treatment has greater impact in 

imparting resistance towards shoot fly in sorghum. 

Kareem et al. (1989) carried out experiment on neem as seed treatment for rice before 

sowing to study its effect on BPH and GLH. As compared with treated seed, fewer first instar 

Nephotettix virescens (Distant) nymphs reached the adult stage on rice raised from seeds treated 

before sowing with >2.5 per cent neem kernel extract or with 2 per cent neem cake. Likewise, 

fewer Nilparvata lugens (Stal) nymphs became adults in treatment with neem extracts. 

Treatments affected neither germination nor root length, shoot length or chlorophyll content. 

Application of bioinoculants like Azospillum and Azotobactor as seed treatment are newly 

emerging trends which can be utilized in integrated control for suppressing insect pests of 

sorghum and pearl millet (Kishore, 2000) 

Okra seed treatment with neem oil at 8 ml per kg seeds recorded least per cent fruit 

damage (68.82) followed by neem cake application at 2 q/acre (73.06), Gauch 600 FS 12 ml/kg 

(74.34) and thiamethoxam 70 WS @ 10 g/kg (76.00) as reported by Praveen, (2005). 

2.2 Determination of critical stage of management of shoot fly 

through botanicals 

Botanicals are safer and cost effective alternatives to manage insect pests. Studies 

carried out by scientists on effectivity of botanicals against shoot fly and other pests of sorghum 

and related crops are reviewed. However, there is absolutely no work on determination of critical 

stage of application of botanicals for insect pest management. 

2.2.1 Bioefficacy of plant products against shoot fly 

Kareem et al. (1974) reported that the antifeedants fentine acetate and fentine hydroxide 

and extracts of kernel of neem seed (Azadirachta indica A. Juss) sprays of which were less 

effective than the insecticides against sorghum shoot fly. 

Larvae of Chilo partellus swinhoe when fed on leaves treated with aqueous extracts of 

neem seed kernel produced larval pupal intermediates and deformed adults. (Anonymous, 1979). 

Narasimhan and Mariappan (1988) studied the effects of leaf extracts of Vitex negundo 

L., Croton sparsiflorus Narong, bilwa Aegle marmalos Coor, sweet tulsi Ocimum sanctum L. and 

ikshugandha Tribules terestris L. in water and seed oils of neem. A. indica, Laural Callophyllium 

inophyllum L. Mahua Madhuca longifolia Koen. Custard apple Annona squamosa Linn. Crude 

seed extracts of neem on green leaf hoppers in paddy. Results revealed that seed oils gave 

higher GLH mortality than leaf extracts and highest mortality was given by neem oil. 

There was reduction in feeding by GLH in rice plants treated with foliar or systemic 

application of neem seed bitters (NSB) (Saxena and Boncodin, 1988). 

The laboratory studies on potential of neem oil (A. indica), Karanj oil (Pongamia. pinnata), 

castor oil Ricinus communis L. and Mahua oil (Madhuca longifolia) @ 5, 10 and 20 per cent 

concentrations revealed that neem and karanj oils were highly effective in reducing feeding 

activity and the survival of C. partellus larvae. Neem oil at 20 per cent acted as oviposition 

deterrent and reduced the egg laying to a greater extent on the treated surface (Sharma and 

Bhatnagar, 1990). 

Leaf extracts of Parthenium hysterophores L., Vinca rosea L., Solanum xantho cappum 

L., Cyperus rotundus L. and Cynodon dactylon (L.) pers. showed antifeedant property against 

larvae of Amsacta albistriga walker as reported by Dhandapani et al. (1985).

Kumar and Sangappa (1984) compared the efficacy of plant products for the control of 

grain caterpillars in Bengal gram. Results indicated that honge oil @ 5 per cent concentration 

recorded least pod damage (1.05%) which was on par with NSKE (5%), Neem oil (5%), honge oil 

(3%) and endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%). 

Bai and Kundaswamy (1985) reported that acetone extracts of Vitex. negundo L. resulted 

in cent per cent mortality of Spodoptera litura F. at 500 ppm concentration in laboratory. 

The lowest bollworm incidence was observed with NSKE (10.3%), datura and neem oil 

emulsion and maximum yield was observed with endosulfan (16.64% qt/ha), which was on par 

with NSKE, datura and garlic at 10 per cent concentration (Anon., 1987). 

Anonymous (1989) reported that the NSKE and garlic alone and in combinations were 

significantly superior to endosulfan spray in reducing the bollworm infestation in cotton. 

Monocrotophos 36 WSC applied to the whorls of the plant using seeds of Argmone 

mexicana as substrate was found to be the most effective treatment for controlling infestations of 

C. partellus on sorghum variety CSH-9, followed by endosulfan 4G and BHC 10 per cent. 

Untreated seeds of A. mexicana exhibited some insecticidal properties by reducing the amount of 

stem boring. (Katole and Mundiwale, 1992). 

Torto et al. (1992) evaluated six amide alkokids of Piper guiniens for antifeedants activity 

against fifth instar larvae of C. partellus piperene and its dihydrosaturated derivative exhibited the 

most potent antifeedants activity whereas delta alpha, beta-hydrocoisanine and trichostachine 

were intermediate in effectiveness. 

The methanolic extracts of A. squamosa (seed) Acanthospermum hispidum DC (whole 

plant). V. negundo (leaf), P. pinnata Vent (seed). Ricinus communis L. (leaf) and Stychnos 

nuxvomica L. (leaf) 5000 ppm concentration showed strong larvicidal activity (>90%) for Diamond 

back moth (Hiremath, 1994). 

Maximum egg, nymph and adult mortality of Aleurolobus barodensis Mark in a field 

experiment which was recorded by 1.25 per cent mixture of oils of A. indica,, P. glabra vent and 

Brassica latifolia L. and soap oil formulation (Murthi et al. 1994). 

Sahayaraj and sekar (1996) reported highest mortality of Spodoptera litura F. after 96 hrs 

of treatment with 10 per cent extract of Citrus sinensis L. (90%) formed by V. negundo (83%), 

Acorus indica Soland (80%) and Zingiber officinales Rase.(70%). 

Ravikumar (1997) evaluated nine promising botanical and two recommended insecticides 

under field condition against safflower aphid. Among different botanicals tested, V. rosea aqueous 

extract was very effective by recording minimum aphid population of 6.68 with per cent reduction 

of 89.35 at two days after application and it was significantly superior over malathion (9.22) 

followed by neem oil (15.63) with per cent reduction of 73.39 both being significantly superior 

over other botanicals. 

Patil et al. (1997) reported that under laboratory condition crude extracts of V. rosea V. 

negundo, stachytarpheta indica Vahl, Calotropis gigantia, W. T. Aiton, L. camera L., Thuja 

occidentalis L. at two per cent concentration each gave cent percent mortality of safflower aphid 

at 48 hrs after application. 

Neem products were comparable or better than endosulfan in controlling shoot borer 

damage in brinjal (Srinivasan and Sundarababu, 1998). 

Feeding deterrent effect of A. indica C. sinensis, V. negundo and Z. officinalis was 

reported against last instar larvae of S. litura. Highest antifeedant property was found with V. 

negundo, which was reflected from very low rate of food consumption, less quantity of facial 

pellets and reduced body weight (Sahayaraj, 1998). 

Laboratory and field tests showed that extracts from neem and custard apple kernels 

were effective against Chilo partellus, Mythimna separata wlk. Calocoris angustatus leth. and 

Melanaphis sacchari Zehntner in sorghum (Sharma et al. 1999). 

Murugan et al. (1999) studied the feeding deterrent and toxic effects of plant extracts of 

C. gigatia, Datura, Nerium oleander L., V. rosea, Catharanthus roseus (L.) G Don (all leaf 

extracts), Aloe vera (L.) Burm (stem extract), P. pinnata and A. squamosa (seed extract) were 

highly toxic to S. litura.

Senguttuvan and Dhanakodi (1999) carried out field trials to evaluate bio-efficacy of 

different plant extracts in combination with monocrotophos against groundnut leaf miner. The 

check monocrotophos was superior with 43.4 and 27.2 per cent reduction in larval load and leaflet 

damage, respectively. While among nine plant extracts tested, V. negundo (5%) and croton (5%) 

were found effective with 24.70 per cent less damage to leaflets respectively, over control. 

Aqueous extracts of V. rosea, C. roseus (2%) was the most effective in decreasing the 

population of Condia expensis Guene by 60 per cent and Helicoverpa armigera(Hubner) by 32 

per cent (Kumar et al. 1999). 

Sharma et al. (1999) evaluated 21 plant extracts. Out of them six were found toxic to 

three insect pests viz. Aedes aegypti L., Musca domestica L. and termites. The order of 

effectiveness recorded was L. camera > A. calamus > P. pinnata > P. hysterophorus. 

Pongamia oil 1 per cent and 2 per cent, aqueous leaf extracts of V. negundo 4 per cent 

and 5 per cent recorded lowest overall fruit damage (11.40% and 12.70% and 13.60%) which 

were on par with each other as well as with dimethoate spray (Eswarareddy, 2000). 

Katole et al. (2000) studied the performance of some IPM modules against H. armigera 

on chick pea. The efficacy of 5 per cent neem seed extract (NSE) + 5 per cent cow dung, 5 per 

cent NSE + 5 per cent cow dung + 5 per cent cow urine, 5 per cent NSE + 0.035 per cent 

endosulfan, 5 per cent NSE, 5 per cent cow dung, 5 per cent urine and 0.035 per cent endosulfan 

were evaluated. Data revealed that all the treatments except 5 per cent cow dung and 5 per cent 

cow urine were effective over control. Treatment with 5 per cent NSE + 0.035 per cent endosulfan 

and 5 per cent NSE alone gave the lowest pod damage (13.37 and 16.11%) and the highest 

average grain yields (8.40 and 7.77 q/ha respectively). 

Patil (2000) reported that among the botanicals evaluated against S. litura NSKE (5%) 

caused highest mortality (72.94%) followed by V. negundo leaf extract (42.57%) and A. 

squamosa (40.73%) whereas others registered in between 21.11 to 26.64 per cent mortality as 

compared to control (13%). 

Nagaraju (2000) studied effect of selected botanicals and synthetic insecticides against 

gall midge A. Capparis Rubsaamen (Diptera : Cecidomyidae) on bell pepper. Results indicated 

that significantly lower incidence of galls was observed in neem oil treated plots (8.00%) and it 

was as par with profenofos (9.01%), NSKE (9.51%) abamectin (9.79%) and neem leaf extract 

(11.18%). 

Mariam and Chandramohan (2000) reported the ovicidal action of neem oil (A), neem oil 

(B), neem seed kernel extract and neem oil and pongam oil (C) registering a mortality percentage 

of 53.36, 59.37, 52.08 and 50.99, respectively on spiralling whitefly of mulberry. 

Patil (2000) studied field efficacy of plant products against Plutella xylostella L. on 

cabbage. Results indicated that 24 hrs after treatment A. Indian, honge oil and Acorus calamus 

were equal in their effectiveness with larval reduction of 56.29 to 63.38 per cent and were on par 

with malathion and colt which recorded 57.70 and 71.98 per cent reduction respectively. 

Singh and Batra (2001) studied the bio-efficacy of different neem formulations along with 

recommended insecticide endosulfan in forage sorghum against shoot fly. The data revealed that 

the eggs per plant and deadhearts due to shoot fly were significantly lesser in all the treatments 

than that in control. Minimum oviposition (0.6 eggs/plant) was recorded in neem treated treatment 

followed by endosulfan (1.3 egg / plant) and was maximum (7.1 eggs/plant) in water spray 

(control). Minimum deadhearts were recorded in endosulfan (10.5%) followed by neem graded 

(18.5%), maximum dead hearts recorded in control (56%) followed by neem leaf extract (46%). 

Rosaiah (2001) tested different plant extracts in okra. Neemazal at 0.5 per cent showed 

lowest fruit infestation (14.87%) followed by pongamia seed extracts (18.34%) and NSKE 10% 

(38.27%). Higher seed yield recorded in neemazal 0.5% treated plot (5.51 q/ha) followed by 

pongamia seed extract (5.09 q/ha) and NSKE (4.81 q/ha) on okra. 

Anonymous (2001b) reported spraying of neem leaf extract at 7 DAE recorded 39.7 per 

cent deadhearts and was on par with carbofuran 3G whorl application (35.0%) in sorghum. 

A study by Ramamurthi and Rajaram (2001) indicated that the plant products NSKE (3%), 

neem oil (2% and 1%) and NSKE (2%) were as effective as malathion (0.1%) in controlling the 

sorghum earhead bug.

Anon. (2002) reported that neem leaf (5%) spray at 7 DAG with normal seed rate 

recorded 19.60 per cent dead hearts and grain yield of 3.5 q/ha was found superior to carbofuran 

soil application at 30 DAG in combination with different seed rates in recording least per cent 

dead hearts in sorghum. 

Anon. (2001c) evaluated efficacy of different botanicals against shoot fly. Among them V, 

negundo spray recorded significantly least per cent deadhearts (25.3%) caused shoot fly and 

Madhuca indica I. F. Gmelin spray was on par with V. negundo and was found next best (28.0%) 

followed by TNAU neem oil + pongam 3% (31.7%), P. Pinnata (5%) spray (32.10%), NSKE 5% 

spray and Sunny neem 5% spray (37.7% each) soil application of carbofuran 3G @ 30 kg/ha, 

endosulfan 35EC spray @ 0.07 per cent at 7 DAS recorded least per cent dead hearts (25.0) 

among all the treatments. 

Baviskar et al. (2002) studied the efficacy of botanicals against pod borers in pigeon pea. 

They reported higher yield and low infestation when sprayed with NSKE at 5 per cent and neem 

oil (Neemark) at one per cent. 

Manu (2002) tested various plant extracts to control spiralling white fly in guava. Results 

indicated that five days after imposing treatment acetone extracts of A. sativum recorded least 

number of egg masses (1.67/10 plants) which was on par with triazophos (2.00) aqueous extracts 

of A. sativum (2.00), acetone extracts of A. indica (3.00) Aqueous extracts of A indica (3.33) and 

acetone and aqueous extracts of C. inerme (5.00 and 2.67, respectively). 

Srivastava and Das (2003) reported that dimethoate along with NSKE at 5 per cent 

effectively managed pigeon pea pod fly. Lowest pod damage (2.27%) in pigeon pea was recorded 

by thiochloprid 240 SC (2.94%) followed by imidacloprid 17.8 SL (3.06) while chilli + garlic extract 

(0.25% + 0.50%), 5 per cent NSKE and 0.2 per cent Neem oil recorded more damage viz. 4.99 

per cent, 6.36 and 7.30 per cent, respectively (Gogi, 2003). 

Shekharappa (2001) reported that the neem formulations, NSKE, Neem rich II and 

Nimbecidine recorded 12.72, 14.39 and 15.89 per cent feeding marks which were significantly 

less as compared to other neem based insecticides, exhibiting higher degree of feeding 

deterrence in sorghum. 

Neem leaf spray (5%) in combination with early sowing and normal seed rate (7.5 kg/ha) 

was recorded 96.8 per cent dead heart was not found effective (Anon., 2004) in sorghum. 

Juneja et al. (2004) reported that at 14 DAG the extracts from mint and tulsi leaves and 

the neem seed kernel suspension were the most effective in the reduction of shoot fly (A. 

approximata) infestation (2.62, 3.95 and 3.47% infestation respectively). At 28 DAG, and at the 

earhead stage, the mint extract resulted in the lowest levels of shoot fly infestation. (4.83 and 3.08 

per cent). 

Anon. (2004a) reported neem seed kernel extract (50%) spray at 40 DAE with seed 

treatment with cruizer (3 g/kg seed) and timely sowing recorded least per cent dead heart 

(42.98%) and was comparable with farmer practice i.e. timely sowing (80.23%) of sorghum. 

Hegde (2004) reported that among different indigenous sprays evaluated for the 

management of okra fruit borer, treatment receiving NSKE was found superior in recording less 

number of eggs of H. armigera followed by garlic extract 10 per cent GLKE and sweet flag 

treatment which were superior to untreated check. 

Ravikumar (2004) studied the effect of indigenous products on eggs of H. armigera in 

chilli. Three days after spray, egg population was lowest in NSKE 5 per cent + cow urine 10 per 

cent (1.65 / plant), which was on par with NSKE 5 per cent (1.70/ plant) GCK extract 3 per cent 

(192) and garlic extract 3 per cent + cow urine 10 per cent (2.79). 

One spray of neem leaf extract in combination with normal sowing (10kg/ha), seed 

sucking in endosulfan (0.07%) + CaCl2 (2%) and whorl application of carbofuran 3G (7.5 kg/ha) 

was found superior in recording least per cent dead hearts (13.02%) as against whorl application 

of carbofuran 3G (7.5 kg/ha) and normal sowing (10 kg/ha) (29.34%) (Anon., 2004b) 

Palta and Chauhan (2004) studied efficacy of neem derivative (Repelin) and insecticides 

for the control of sorghum midge. All the treatments were significantly superior over untreated 

check.

Ogabalu et al. (2005) carried out studies on neem plant parts namely neem leaves (ML), 

neem bark (NB), neem roots (NR) and neem leaf + bark + root (NLBR) and neem seed kernel 

powder (NSKP) extracts against Atherigona orientalis (Schiner)on pepper and tomato. 2 per cent 

solution of each of the neem plant parts when applied individually was effective against pests of 

both crops. 

Oparaeke et al. (2005) reported that the synergistic advantage of mixing two different 

plant species in botanical formulations play a key role in the renewed efforts to control pests of 

agricultural crops using biopesticides. The evaluated the efficacy and synergistic activity of 

extracts mixtures from herbal landraces in reducing pest members in cowpea and ensuring high 

yield of grains. The extracts mixed in the ratio 10:10 per cent W/W included cashew nutshell + 

garlic bulb, cashew nut shell + African pepper and garlic bulb + chilli peppers. All the herbal 

extract mixtures reduced the number of the tested insect pests and increased grain yields by 4-5 

times compared to the untreated control. 

Bhanukiran and Panwar (2005) reported that high azadirechtin neem formulations 

Neemazal F 5EC and Neemazal-T/S 1 EC were potential enough to reduce infestation including 

dead hearts due to infestation maize stalk borer but were in no way superior to endosulfan 35 EC. 

Shekharappa and Kulkarni (2006) evaluated bioefficacy of neem formulations on the 

management of stem borer Chilo partellus in sorghum. They reported that Nimbecidine 0.03 per 

cent @ 5 ml/l and NSKE (5%) caused highest percentage reduction in stem borer incidence. 

Oparaeke et al. (2006) reported that the thrips pressure on cowpea flowers was 

significantly less on plants sprayed with leaf extract mixtures of neem, Eucalyptus citridora 

followed by neem + lemon grass (Cymbopogan citratus), neem + bitter leaf (Vernonia 

amygdalina), neem + tomato and E. citirdora + African curry (Hyptis suaveolens) than unsprayed 

plants. They suggested that the synergistic attributes of some plants extracts in mixtures with 

those of other plant species could form basis of biopesticide formulations for resource limited 

farmers in low input agriculture in the developing countries. 

Tekie et al. (2006) reported that application of 3 g/plant neem seed powder and 500 l/ha 

of 10 per cent aqueous neem seed extract applied 4 weeks after crop emergence provided 

protection against C. partellus in maize comparable to conventional insecticides. 

Shrinivas (2006) reported that NSKE 5 per cent spray recorded 0.40 eggs of sorghum 

shoot fly per plant and found significantly superior over other botanicals but carbofuran 3G (30 

kg/ha) was an par with NSKE 5 per cent by recording 0.53 eggs/plant. 

Sajjan (2006) evaluated three promising plant products viz. NSKE, V. negundo and A. 

vasica alone and in combination with panchagavya at different concentration with spinosad for the 

efficacy against P. xylostella in cabbage. At 6 days after spray, all the treatments were statistically 

on par with each other by recording larval population of 2.33 to 2.67 except spinosad over other 

treatments by recording least larval population of 1.40/plant. 

Subbarayadu and Indira (2007) investigated various IPM modules for shoot fly 

management in Hyderabad during 2000-2001. In all modules, spraying of NSKE (0.375-0.50%) 

effectively repelled oviposition by shoot fly. 

Various combinations of botanicals (soil / seed treatment + spray) were evaluated for the 

management of insect pests in an intensive forage production sequence: treatments consisted of 

4 seed / soil treatment (NSKE powder or NSKE, Trineem carbofuran 3G + carbandazim and 

control) and 4 sprays (3% NSKE, 3% Karanje seed kernel extract, 0.07% endosulfan 35 EC + 

0.09% Dithane M-45 and recommended control) in the management of shoot fly in sorghum and 

exceptionally high levels of pest control were obtained with NSK powder + NSKE (Shah et al. 

2007). 

NSKE (5%) and Nimbecidine (5%) were on par with Bacillus thuringiensis and 

Metarrhizium anisopliae in reducing deadhearts caused by C. partellus and tunneling by the pest 

was least in NSKE (5%) which was on par with carbofuran (Deepthi, 2007). 

The formulations based on crude extracts of Eucalytpus and neem formulations were 

significantly effective in reducing the larval population of H. armigera and increased yield of chick 

pea. The most economically effective treatments were eucalyptus fraction (0.15%) eucalyptus

fraction (0.25%) and NSKE (1500 ppm with cost benefit ratios of 1:21.5, 1:17.1, 1:14.2 

respectively as reported by Raghuraman et al. (2008). 

Dejen (2008) conducted on farm trials on different locations on farmers field in the 

Ethiopia to evaluate A. indica and Melia azedarach seed powders for the management of Bussela 

fusca (Fuller) and C. partellus on sorghum. Neem seed powder was more effective than Persian 

lilac seed powder in reducing per cent damage on sorghum. Per cent damage on sorghum 

reduced from 43.90 per cent in control to 2.12 and 15.30 per cent in neem and Persian lilac seed 

powders respectively. Sorghum yield advantages of 118-119 per cent and 6.62 per cent over 

untreated control were recorded in neem and Persian lilac respectively. 

Nandihalli (2009) evaluated performance of Azagro 5 per cent (Azadirachtin) in the 

management of okra pests. He concluded that Azagro 5 per cent at 0.75 ml /l was the best 

treatment to give higher yield which was on par with 1.25 and 1 ml /l. 

Synergistic efficacy of phytoexctracts on S. litura Fab. were studied by Vendan et 

al.(2009) who reported that in laboratory bioassay, hexane extract of Citrullus colocynthis 

(54.85%) Chloroform extracts of Chlerodendron phlomeides (68.34%) and Arthenasia alpina 

(71.43%) and Mundulela sericea (64.52%) showed maximum antifeedant activity at five per cent 

concentration, while these extracts were mixed in equal proportion, mixture recorded 88.94 per 

cent antifeedants activity at 5 per cent concentration, which was significantly higher than 

individual treatment. This suggested that crude extracts of different plant species may have 

synergistic effect and can be used for insect pest management. 

Aqueous extract of seed kernel of soapnut Sapindus emarginatus was found to exhibit 

ovicidal, larvicidal and pupicidal activity in bioassays performed with the three vector mosquito 

species viz., Aedes aegypti, Anopheles stephensi and Culex quinquefasciatus (Koodalingam et 

al., 2009). 

War(2009) reported that at 5 ppm concentration of PONEEM (neem oil + pongam oil in 

equal proportion) higher antifeedant activity (53.45%) was recorded in bioassay with S. litura. It 

also increased larval development period significantly. However the larvicidal activity was less 

pronounced when compared to Neemgold and Vijayneem (neem based commercial pesticides). 

2.2.2 Safety at plant products to natural enemies 

Naseeh (1982) studied the effects of crude extracts of garlic at concentration of 1.25, 2.5 

and 5.0 per cent on larvae and pupae of Chrysoperla carnea stephens and Coccinella 

septempunctata (L.). The extracts killed 16 to 56 and 4 to 20 per cent of C. carnea and C. 

septempunctata respectively. 

Kareem et al. (1988) reported that seedlings of rice treated with neem seed bitters 

followed by weekly foliar spray spared the predatory mite population while; monocrotophos (0.75 

kg a.i./ha) reduced the population significantly. 

Neem based products were safe to natural enemies due to their weak contact on insects 

and wolf spider Lycosa pseudoannulata (Boesenberg and stand) (Schumutter 1990). 

Yadav and Patel (1990) evaluated the effect of different botanical insecticides viz. 

Neemark, Repelin, Wellgro, neem seed kernel suspension, nicotine sulphate and Neemrich on 

oviposition of Chrysopa scelestes stephens. All the botanicals were repellent in action but nicotine 

sulphate was found to be toxic to the adults. 

Kaethner (1991) stated that neem extracts with or without neem oil were harmless to 

eggs, larvae and adults of C. carnea and C. Septempunctata mortality increased and 

morphogenetic defects developed only when larvae were sprayed directly in the laboratory. 

Lowrey et al. (1993) stated that under field condition sprays of neem seed oil and neem 

seed kernel extract to safflower plants had no significant impact on number of aphids parasitized 

by Diaeretiella rapae (Mc Intosh). 

Matter et al. (1993) tested the oils from A. indica, Melaia azadirachta Mthusensua, Melia 

wolkinsis Gurla, Citrus aurantium L. and Geranium maniculatum on C. septumpanctata in the 

laboratory. None of them affected the survival and behavior of C. septumpunctata and also 

consumption of aphid.

Guddewar et al. (1994) stated that the ether extracts of neem was safer than synthetic 

insecticides to C. septumpanctata. 

Generally synthetic insecticides are toxic to egg parasitoids than plant products and 

biopesticides as reported by Jhansi Lakshmi et al.(1997). 

Nine promising botanical treatments and two recommended insecticides as standard 

checks were evaluated under field condition on safflower crop. Cooked extracts of Vinca rosea 

and V. negundo were completely safe to grubs of C. septempunctata without causing any 

mortality followed by aqueous extracts of V. rosea (3.33%), V. negundo (3.33%) and Bowenia 

spectabilis (3.33%). Also V. negundo aqueous extract emerged as safest botanical against adults 

of C. carnea at 48 hrs after application. (Ravikumar, 1997). 

Laboratory evaluation of some plant products viz P. hysterophorus, V. negundo, V. rosea, 

C. gigantia, S. indica, L. camara, A. maxicana and T. occidentalis at two per cent concentration 

each on different stages of C. carnea along with polytrin and profenofos recorded significantly 

higher egg mortality, less larval and adult mortality of C. carnea when compared to chemical 

insecticides (Patil et al. 1997). 

In feeding toxicity test against Trichogramma chilonis Ishida in laboratory neem seed oil 

at 5 per cent concentration caused less than 50 per cent mortality to both males and females but 

in contact toxicity tests, females were affected sparing males. (Raghuraman and Singh, 1999). 

Neem extracts were not toxic to parasites and predator of sorghum midge but reduced 

the parasitism of Mythimna separata by Cotesia rufricus (Sharma et al. 1999) 

Balikai (2001) studied the effect of plant products on coccinellids and chrysoperla in 

sorghum. The treatments in descending order of toxicity included neem soap (35.47%), Datura 

metal (3.60%), endosulfan (30.63%), P. pinnata kernels (25.50%) and Adathoda vasica (25.33%) 

parthenium caused least toxicity (16.87%) to coccinellids and it was on par with V. negundo 

(18.80%) and A. mexicana (19.90%) while malathion was highly toxic to coccinellids causing 

62.67 per cent mortality. 

Natural enemies like syrphids and spiders in all botanical treatments were almost equal to 

untreated control (2.27 syrphids and 1.87 spiders/5 plants) as compared to monocrotophos (1.66 

and 0.41 / 5 plants), respectively. These results revealed the safety of botanicals to natural 

enemies as compared to synthetic insecticides after 10 days of spray in brinjal (Rosaiah, 2001). 

Smitha (2002) reported that one day after spraying plant extracts viz. C. inerme leaf 

extract, V. negundo leaf extract, NSKE and neem gold recorded normal activity of the predatory 

beetles as that of control plants in chilli. 

Aqueous and acetone extracts of A. sativum, A. squamosa, A. indica, C. inerme, M. 

oleander and untreated check showed statistically on par population of predatory grub Mallada 

astur in guava. (Manu, 2002). 

The population of C. carnea was highest in cow urine 20 per cent treatment (1.72/plant) 

being statistically on par with green chilli extract 3 per cent (1.57) NSKE 5 per cent (1.46), garlic 

extract 3 per cent + cow urine 10 per cent (1.43), garlic extract 3 per cent (1.32) and NSKE 5 per 

cent + garlic extract 5 per cent (1.21) and all these treatments were statistically on par with 

untreated check (2.12) in chilli crop (Ravikumar, 2004). 

Commercial neem product, Bacillus thuringiensis and imidaclorpid reduce 17.14, 18.19 

and 34.83 per cent of C. sexmaculata population in okra crop. (Sunitha et al., 2004). 

Spurthi (2004) reported that NSKE spray was found safe as compared to 0.07 per cent 

endosulfan spray which recorded least parasititzation by Cotesia flavipes (Riley). Irrespective of 

different intercropping, NSKE was found safe and conserved more population of coccinellids (1.6 / 

plant) compared to chemical control (1.11/plant). 

Bharathi (2005) reported organically treated soybean crop recorded significantly higher 

number of coccinellids, syrphids and N. rileyi incidence (3.15/plant, 1.35/m row and 1.53 mycosed 

larvae/m row respectively) and was followed by INM 1.13/plant, 0.88/m row and 0.84 mycosed 

larvae/m row respectively) and RPP (0.53/plant, 0.37/m row and 0.60 my caused larvae/m row 

respectively).

NSKE 5 per cent conserved significantly highest number of coccinellid population 

(1.00/plant), V. negundo (5%), V. rosea (5%) recorded significantly least coccinellid population 

(0.33/plant) at 14 DAE in sorghum. Also, V. negundo (5%), NSKE (5%), B. monosperma (5%), V. 

rosea (5%) conserved significantly higher number of chrysoperla (1.00/plant) but were found next 

best to untreated control. (1.67/plant) V (5%) and leaf extracts of P. glabra (5%) recorded least 

chrysoperla population (0.33/plant) (Shrinivas 2006). 

Significantly higher number of pupae of Cotesia plutellae Kurdj were observed in 

untreated control. However it was statistically on par with cow urine (10%) + V. negundo (5%), 

panchagavya (3%) + A. vesica (5%), panchagavya alone (3%), cow urine 10% + V. negundo 

(10%), cow urine (10%) + A. vesica (5%) panchagavya (5%) + V. negundo (5%), panchagavya 

(5%) + A. Vasica (5%) and cow urine (20%) alone in cabbage. (Sajjan, 2006). 

Pareet (2006) reported that the population of coccinellids and chrysopids in brinjal seven 

days after NSKE 5 per cent spray in different treatments except RPP was uniform (1.36 to 1.78 

coccinellids and 0.80 to 1.33 chrysopids) and indicated the safety of NSKE spray to these natural 

enemies. 

Basappa (2007) carried out an experiment in laboratory which revealed that all the 

botanicals used viz. NSKE (5%) custard apple seed extract (5%) pongamia seed extract (5%), 

neem oil (2%) and pongamia oil (2%) were found safer to C. sexmaculata and T. chilonis. 

Duso et al. (2008) evaluated comparative toxicity of botanical insecticides to 

Mediterranian population of mites Tetranychus urticeae and its predator Phytoseulus persmilis. 

Pyrethrins and rotenone were more toxic to P. persmilis tha T. urticeae while azadirechtin showed 

apposite tendency. Rotenone significantly affected P persmilis egg hatching. 


Starks (1970) stated that fish meal has been reported to attract shoot flies. It has been 

used in traps for monitoring at ICRISAT. 

Seshu Reddy et al. (1981) reported that the fish meal yeast ammonium sulphide was the 

most potent mixture for shoot fly catch, but readily available fish meal was adequate. They also 

observed that 85 per cent of the files attracted to trap were females containing 30 per cent gravid. 

Bonzi and Gahukar (1983) reported fishmeal as effective bait for A. soccata and related 

species on sorghum in Upper Volta. Adults were active during August-September and number of 

males caught in traps represented 4-43 per cent of the total adult population. 24 species of 

Atherigona were identified. Among them, Atherigona marginiflora Emden. was the most abundant 

species forming 36 pet cent whereas A. soccata constituted 14 per cent. 

Natarajan and chellaiah (1983) developed a hanging trap for attracting shoot flies which 

consisted of a plastic jar (11 cm diameter and 14 cm length) with entry holes (2 cm diameter) for 

the flies, a dispenser with a fish meal and a small tube holding an insecticide (Dichlorvos) to kill 

the trapped flies . These traps caught upto 342 adults daily and were more effective than pan type 

of water traps. 

Taneja and Leuschner (1986) compared plastic fishmeal trap over conventional metal 

trap. No significant difference was observed in shoot fly catches in these traps. 

Gahukar (1987) recorded 23 species of Atherigona from fishmeal trap. Among them, A. 

soccata was the most abundant accounting 80 to 97 per cent female population. 

Singh and Verma (1988) reported peak activity of sorghum shoot fly during August. The 

activity of fly was adversely affected by atmospheric temperature (>40 o C). There was a positive 

correlation of fly population in traps with egg laying and dead hearts formulation in field. 

Zongo et al. (1991) recorded 34 species of the subgenus Acritochaeta during trap catch 

studies at Burkina Faso. Among them A. soccata, A. occidentalis chandler and A. tomerntigena 

were predominant. 

Lyra Netto et al. (1989) conducted studies in Brazil to evaluate six insecticides with or 

without molasses at 10 lit/ha a bait against Diatraea spp on sorghum chlorpyrifos + molasses was 

the most effective bait.

Mohan (1991) observed only females in fishmeal traps catch studies, accounting 49.78 

per cent gravid females. 

Mohan and Prasad (1991) reported that addition of prepared (1% w/w) fishmeal bait 

attracted significantly more adult flies than fishmeal alone. 

D`Almeida (1991) collected 9611 flies representing 47 species of muscidae and 2 species 

of Anthomyiidae using decomposing fish, bovine leaver, fresh human faces and mashed banana 

with sugar as a bait. A. orientalis, Musca domestica, Synthesiomyia nudiseta and Ophyra 

aenescens were the most abundant species. 

Kadiregowda et al. (1995) reported that trap catches of Atherigona pulla Wiedmann 

infesting the little millet showed significant positive correlation between total catches and bright 

sunshine hours. Female flies constituted 95.14 per cent of total catch. 

Mendes and Linhares (1993a) studied attractivity to baits in various synanthropic species 

of calliphoridae (Diptera) using traps baited with ripe pineapple, human faces, chicken viscera and 

rodent carcasses. All species of except Chrysomyia albiceps preferred rodent carcasses as 

oviposition substrates which were more attracted by chicken viscera bait. Mendes and Linhares 

(1993b) also stated that several species of muscidae viz., A. orientalis, M. domestica, Ophyra 

chalcogaster, synthesiomya nudiseta were attracted to the baits of mature pineapple fruits, 

human faces, chicken viscera and rodent carcasses. 

Brazil. 

Paraluppi and Linhares (1995) used fishmeal and cow dung to attract calliphorids flies in 

Murali (1996) stated that during the period of seven months from may 95 to November 95 

total of 10,893 shoot flies were trapped by the fish meal trap. 

Kumar and Mohan (2003) used pitfall traps to trap earwigs (Dermaptera) Present in 

sorghum field in India. Among various materials evaluated, fish meal was the most attractive to 

insect followed by pineapple, apple and wheat bread. 

Shrinivas (2006) reported that fishmeal + Monocrotophos, fish meal + dichlorvos were 

statistically similar and recorded least number of eggs compared to fishmeal alone and there was 

no statistical difference with respect to dead heart in different treatments used for the 

management of shoot fly through fishmeal traps.

3. MATERIAL AND METHODS 


Experiment was conducted at All India Coordinates Sorghum Improvement Project, 

University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. 

Experiment was laid out in the Randomized Block Design in three replications with a 

plot size of 4x2.8 m 2 leaving a gangway of one metre all around the plots. The sorghum 

cultivar CSH-16 with a spacing of 45x15 cm 2 was sown during second fortnight of June 2008 

(Normal sowing) and also during second fortnight of July 2008 (late sowing). All the 

recommended package of practices was followed except plant protection. To compare the 

efficacy of treatments treated check of insecticides as well as untreated check was 

maintained. 

3.1.1 Preparation of plant extracts 

3.1.1.1 Leaf extracts / bulb extract 

Fresh leaves (and bulb in case of garlic) were collected and brought to the laboratory 

and washed thoroughly 3-4 times with tap water and finally with distilled water. Later they 

were chopped into small pieces with a sharp knife. Fifty grams of chopped material was 

macerated in mortar and pestle and extracted with a small quantity of distilled water. The 

extract was squeezed through muslin cloth and made upto 1 litre, with distilled water. The 

filtrate was stored in a clean reagent bottles for further use. The concentration of suspension 

so prepared works out to be 5 per cent. 

3.1.1.2 Seed extracts 

Fifty grams of seeds (Neem Azadirechta indica A.Juss and B. monosperma L.) were 

smashed and soaked overnight in distilled water, squeezed through muslin cloth and diluted 

with distilled water to get five per cent concentration of the suspension. 

3.1.1.3 Oils 

Oils of Pongamia pinnata, neem and Jatropha caracass L. were brought and diluted 

with distilled water to get 2 per cent concentration just before seed treatment. 

3.1.1.4 Plant mixture 

Fresh leaves of Vitex negundo, Ricinus communis L., Clerodendron inerme, 

Calotropis gigantia and Parthenium hysterophorus were collected washed with tap water 3-4 

times and then with distilled water. Leaves were chopped by knife and 10 g of each of these 

were taken mixed, and macerated in mortar and pestle, and then extracted with small quantity 

of distilled water. The extracts were squeezed through muslin cloth and made upto one litre 

with distilled water. 

3.1.1.5 Organics of animal origin 

Cow urine and vermiswash was brought and before seed treatment, diluted with 

distilled water to get 5 per cent concentration. 

3.1.2 Seed treatments 

Seeds were kept in Petri plates containing the respective treatment solution for two to 

three minutes and taken out and dried under shade to about three-four hours. In case of 

endosulfan 35 EC treatment, seeds were soaked in 0.07 per cent endosulfan 35 EC for 8 

hours and dried under shade. All seeds were sown after proper drying. 

The treatments were as follows: 

T1 – Cow urine 5% 

T 2 – Vermiwash 5% 

T3 – Butea monosperma seed extract 5% 

T 4 – Butea monosperma leaf extract 5%

T5 – Vitex negundo leaf extract 5% 

T6 – Castor (Ricinus communis L.) leaf extract 5% 

T7 – Garlic (Alium sativum) bulb extract 5% 

T8 – NSKE 5% 

T9 – Azagro 5% (Neem based insecticide) 

T10 – Pongamia pinnata leaf extract 5% 

T 11 – Pongamia oil 2% 

T12 – Neem oil 2% 

T 13 – Jatropha leaf extract 5% 

T14 – Jatropha oil 2% 

T 15 – Prosopis julifera leaf extract 5% 

T16 – Annona squamosa leaf extract 5% 

T 17 – Plant mixture (V. negundo + Ricinus communis + Clerodendron inerme + C. gigantia + 

P. hysterophorus leaves) 

T 18 – Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) 

T19 – Imidacloprid (2 g/kg) 

T 20 – Untreated check 

3.1.3 Observations 

3.1.3.1 Number of eggs 

In each plot 10 plants were randomly selected. Number of shoot fly eggs were 

counted from each plant and total number of eggs on ten plants (sum of eggs in 10 randomly 

selected plants) were taken and averaged to represent the eggs present per plant. Egg count 

was taken at 7, 14 and 21 days after emergence (DAE) of plants. 

3.1.3.2 Deadhearts (%) 

Total number of plants in each plot and the number of plants showing deadhearts 

were recorded and per cent dead heart were counted by a formula: 

Number of plants showing dead heart 

Per cent heart = ------------------------------------------------- x 100 

Total number of plants in the plot 

Dead heart count were taken at 14, 21 and 28 DAE of crop. 

3.1.3.3 Natural enemies 

Coccinellids and chrysopids are important predators in sorghum ecosystem. 

Chrysopids feeds on shoot fly eggs. Coccinellids are not directly related to shoot fly but they 

predate on aphids in sorghum. To check the safety of applied treatment to these predators, 

observations on the number of coccinellids and chrysopids were taken. 

Ten plants were randomly selected from each plot and coccinellids and chrysopids 

present on them were counted. Total number of the coccinellid and chrysopids present on 10 

plants were then averaged to number of coccinellids / plant and number of chrysopids/plant. 

Observations were taken to 14, 21 and 28 DAE. 

3.1.3.4 Grain yield 

Total grains were collected from each plot by threshing the earheads from each plot. 

Then the grain weight of each plot was recorded by using electronic balance. Then the yield 

was converted to yield q/ha.

Shoot fly egg Shoot fly maggot 

Shoot fky pupa Shoot fly adult 

Plate.1. Life stages of shoot fly

3.1.4 Cost economics 

Cost economics for the treatments found superior over untreated check was 

calculated. 

3.2 Determination of critical stage for management of shoot fly 


Experiment was laid out in the split plot design. Main plot constituted four treatments 

and each main plot was further divided into 14 subplots which constituted different intervals of 

applying the treatment. Experiment constituted three replications with each individual plot size 

of 4 x 2.8 m 2 leaving a gangway of 1m all around the plots. The sorghum cultivar CSH-16 was 

sown with a spacing of 45 x 15 cm 2 during second fortnight of June 2008 (timely sowing) and 

second fortnight of July 2008 (late sowing). All the recommended package of practices was 

followed except pest control. To compare the efficacy of treatments treated check of 

recommended insecticide as well as untreated check was maintained. 

3.2.1 Preparation of plant extracts 

3.2.1.1 Neem seed kernel extract 

Neem seeds of 50 g were crushed and soaked overnight in distilled water, squeezed 

through muslin cloth and diluted with distilled water to get five per cent concentration of 

suspension. 

3.2.1.2 Plant mixture 

Fresh leaves of V. negundo, R. communis, C. inerme, C. gigantia and P. 

hysterophorus were collected washed with tap water 3-4 times and then with distilled water. 

Leaves were chapped with knife and 10 g of each of these were taken, mixed and macerated 

in mortar and pestle and then extracted with small quantity of distilled water to get 5 per cent 

concentration. 

Treatment details are as here under: 

Main plots treatments: 

1) Azagro 5% 

2) NSKE 5% 

3) Plant mixture (V. negundo + R. communis + C. inerme + C. gigantia + 

P. hysterophorus) 

4) Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) 

Subplots included following spraying intervals: 

1. 3 DAE 

2. 6 DAE 

3. 9 DAE 

4. 12 DAE 

5. 3, 6 DAE 

6. 3, 6, 9 DAE 

7. 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE 

8. 3, 9 DAE 

9. 3, 12 Dae 

10. 6, 9 DAE 

11. 6, 9, 12 DAE 

12. 6, 12 DAE

13. 9, 12 DAE 

14. Untreated check 

Spraying in field was done with high volume sprayer. Quantity of spray volume was 

200 l/acre. 


3.2.2.1 Egg 

Egg count was done in each plot on 14 and 21 DAE. 10 plants were randomly 

selected from each plot and total number of eggs on all the 10 plants was counted which was 

then averaged to number of eggs per plant. 

3.2.2.2 Dead hearts 

Dead heart count was taken on 14, 21, 28 DAE per cent dead heart were calculated 

as follows. 

Number of plants showing dead heart in the plot 

Per cent deadheart= ------------------------------------------------------------- x 100 

3.2.2.3 Natural enemy 

Total number of plants in the plot 

Number of coccinellids and chrysopids were counted in each plant randomly selecting 

10 plants per plot the total number of natural enemy on 10 plants was then averaged to the 

number of coccinellids/plant and number of chrysopids/plant. The count were taken at 14, 21, 

28 DAE. The data of 3 observations was pooled and analyzed statistically. 

3.2.2.4 Grain yield 

Grain yield from each plot was recorded by weighing them using electronic balance. 

Yield was then converted to per ha. 


Cost economics for the treatments which were found superior was calculated. 


The experiment was conducted on farmer’s fields. The experiment was conducted to 

know the effective baits and number of traps for management of sorghum shoot fly. Each 

treatment constituted one acre area with different number of traps. 

3.3.1 Preparation of traps 

Plastic bottles of about 8 cm diameter were collected and small holes of about 2 cm 

diameter were prepared. 

The baiting substance was kept in a small plastic cup inside the plastic bottle. 

Baiting substance included 

1) Fish meal trap: Fish meal + little quantity of water + 1 ml DDVP 

2) Dead frog trap: A piece of carcass of dead frog + little quantity of water + 1 ml DDVP 

3) Chicken trap: a piece of chicken + little quantity of water + 1 ml DDVP. 

Bottles constituting traps were established in the field at the height of that of seedlings 

Treatment details: 

Baits used: 

1) Fish meal trap 

2) Dead frog trap 

3) Chicken trap

Plate.2. Deadheart caused by shoot fly 

Each trap was consisting of different baits installed under field at the rate of 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 

traps per acre. 


3.3.2.1 Adult shoot fly count 

weeks. 

Number of shoot fly adults collected in all traps counted at weekly interval over 4 

3.3.2.2 Egg count 

Egg count was taken at 14 and 21 DAE on 50 randomly selected plants. Total 

number of eggs on 50 plants was then averaged to number of eggs per plant. 

3.3.2.3 Dead heart 

Dead heart count was taken at 21 and 28 DAE on 50 randomly selected plants. 

For dead heart counting a random area of about 4 x 3 m 2 was selected in which total 

number of seedlings and number of seedlings showing deadhearts were counted. Such 5 

plots were selected randomly. Per cent dead heart was calculated as 

Number of plants showing dead heart 

Per cent dead heart = ----------------------------------------------- x 100 

3.3.2.4 Yield of grains 

Total number of plants 

Yield from each treatment was recorded and converted to per hectare.

Plate.3. Fish meal trap

4. RESULTS 

The experimental results of non-chemical approaches for the management of shoot 

fly Atherigona soccata Rondani in kharif sorghum conducted during 2008 at the Main 

Agricultural Research Station, Dharwad are presented hereunder. 

4.1 Management of shoot fly through seed treatments with 

organics 

4.1.1 Number of eggs per plant 

4.1.1.1 Timely sown crop 

0n 7 DAE, all organics except cow urine (5%) and vermiwash (5%) were significantly 

superior over untreated control (Table 1). Among all organics, NSKE (5%) and Azagro 5 per 

cent (1 ml/l) recorded significantly less number of eggs (0.40 eggs/plant each) and neem oil 

(2%) was on par with them (0.43 egg/plant). Next best treatments were Butea monosperma 

seed extract (5%), B. monosperma leaf extract (5%), Pongamia leaf extract (5%), Pongamia 

oil (2%), Prosopis julifera leaf extract (5%) and plant mixture (5%) all recording 0.46 eggs per 

plant and garlic bulb extract (5%) was on par with them (0.50 egg/plant). Jatropha oil was 

next best recording 0.83 egg per plant and it was on par with Vitex negundo (5%), castor leaf 

(5%) and Annona sqamosa (5%) each recording 0.86 egg per plant. Jatropha leaf extract 

(5%) was least effective (0.93 egg/plant). Cow urine (5%) and vermin wash (5%) were not at 

all effective and were on par with untreated control (all recording 1.03 egg/plant). However, 

Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) and Imidacloprid (2 g/kg) were significantly superior over all 

organics each recording 0.33 eggs per plant. 

On 14 DAE, among all organics neem oil (2%) proved to be the best (0.50 egg/plant) 

followed by NSKE (5%), Azagro (5%) 1 ml/l and plant mixture (5%) each recording 0.63 

egg/plant.(Table 1). Garlic bulb extract (5%) and P. julifera leaf extract (5%) were on par with 

them recording 0.73 egg/plant. Also, B. monosperna seed extract (5%) and B. monosperma 

leaf extract (5%) recorded 0.86 egg/plant which were on par with garlic bulb extract and P. 

julifera extract. Next best treatments were pongamia leaf extract (5%), pongamia oil (2%), 

jatropha leaf extract (5%), jatropha oil (2%) and A. squamosa leaf extract (5%) and castor leaf 

extract (5%) all recorded one egg per plant. V negundo (5%) and castor leaf extract (5%) 

were least effective recording 1.33 egg per plant cow urine (5%) and vermiwash were inferior 

and were on par with untreated control (1.66 egg/plant). Chemicals however remained 

superior to all organics. Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) and Imidacloprid (2 g/kg) were the best 

treatments recording least eggs (0.46 egg/plant each). 

Among all organics NSKE (5%), Azagro 5 per cent (1 ml/l), neem oil (2%) and plant 

mixture (5%) were the best treatments all recording one egg per plant at 21 DAE (Table 1). 

The next best treatment was A. squamosa (1.33 egg/plant) and B. monosperna leaf extract 

(5%) and seed extract (5%) were on par with it (1.46 egg/plant). Garlic extract was on par 

with these (1.53 egg/plant). V. negundo (5%) castor leaf extract (5%) jatropha leaf extract 

(5%) P. julifora leaf extract (5%) proved next best (1.66 egg/plant) and jatropha oil (2%) was 

on par with them (1.76 e egg/plant). Cow urine (3%) and vermiwash (5%) were not effective 

at all and were on par with untreated control (2 egg/plant). However, all these treatments 

were inferior to chemical seed treatment. Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) and Imidacloprid 2 g/kg 

were the best treatments recording 0.66 egg/plant. 

4.1.1.2 Late sown crop 

NSKE (5%) and neem oil (2%) were the best treatments (0.50 egg/plant) and Azagro 

5 per cent (1 ml/l) and plant mixture were on par with them (0.53 egg/plant) on 7 DAE (Table 

2). This was followed by P. julifera leaf extract (5%) which recorded 0.66 egg per plant and A. 

squamosa was on par with it. B. monosporma leaf extract (5%), jatropha leaf extract (5%), 

jatropha oil (2%) were next best all recording 0.86 egg/plant. B. monosperma seed extract 

(5%), V. negundo leaf extract (5%), castor leaf extract (5%), garlic bulb extract (5%), 

pongamia leaf extract (5%) and pongamia oil (2%) were least effective treatments all 

recording 1 egg/plant and cow urine (5%) and vermiwash (5%) were ineffective (1.30

Table 1. Effect of seed treatment with organics on oviposition of shoot fly in timely sown 

sorghum 

Sl. 

No. 

Treatments 

7 DAE 

Number of eggs/plant 

14 DAE 21 DAE Mean 

1 Cow urine 5% 1.03a 

(1.43)* 

1.66a 

(1.63) 

2.00a 

(1.73) 

1.56a 

2 Vermiwash 5% 1.03a 

(1.43) 

1.66a 

(1.63) 

2.00a 

(1.73) 

1.56a 

3 Butea monosperma seed extract 5% 0.46d 

(1.21) 

0.86d 

(1.36) 

1.46cd 

(1.57) 

0.93de 

4 Butea monosperma leaf extract 5% 0.46d 

(1.21) 

0.86d 

(1.36) 

1.46cd 

(1.57) 

0.94de 

5 Vitex negundo leaf extract 5% 0.86bc 

(1.37) 

1.33b 

(1.53) 

1.66bc 

(1.63) 

1.28abc 

6 Castor leaf extract 5% 0.86bc 

(1.37) 

1.33b 

(1.53) 

1.66bc 

(1.63) 

1.28abc 

7 Garlic bulb extract 5% 0.50d 

(1.22) 

0.73de 

(1.32) 

1.53c 

(1.59) 

0.92de 

8 NSKE 5% 0.40e 

(1.18) 

0.63de 

(1.28) 

1.00e 

(1.41) 

0.68ef 

9 Azagro 5% (1 ml/lit) 0.40e 

(1.18) 

0.63de 

(1.28) 

1.00e 

(1.41) 

0.68ef 

10 Pongamia leaf extract 5% 0.46d 

(1.21) 

1.00c 

(1.41) 

1.66bc 

(1.63) 

1.04cd 

11 Pongamia oil 2% 0.46d 

(1.21) 

1.00c 

(1.41) 

1.66bc 

(1.63) 

1.04cd 

12 Neem oil 2% 0.43de 

(1.20) 

0.50f 

(1.22) 

1.00e 

(1.41) 

0.65ef 

13 Jatropha leaf extract 5% 0.93b 

(1.39) 

1.00c 

(1.41) 

1.66bc 

(1.63) 

1.20bcd 

14 Jatropha oil 2% 0.83c 

(1.35) 

1.00c 

(1.41) 

1.76b 

(1.66) 

1.20bcd 

15 Prosopis julifera leaf extract 5% 0.46d 

(1.21) 

0.73de 

(1.32) 

1.66bc 

(1.63) 

0.95de 

16 Annona squamosa leaf extract 5% 0.86bc 

(1.37) 

1.00c 

(1.41) 

1.33d 

(1.53) 

0.92de 

17 Plant mixture 5% 0.46d 

(1.21) 

0.63de 

(1.28) 

1.00e 

(1.41) 

0.70ef 

18 Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) 0.33f 

(1.15) 

0.46f 

(1.21) 

0.66f 

(1.29) 

0.48f 

19 Imidacloprid 70 WS (2 g/kg) 0.33f 

(1.15) 

0.46f 

(1.21) 

0.66f 

(1.29) 

0.48f 

20 Untreated control 1.03a 

(1.43) 

1.66a 

(1.63) 

2.00a 

(1.73) 

1.56a 

SEm± 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.09 

CD at 5% 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.26 

* Figures in parentheses are √ x + 1 transformed values 

Means followed by same alphabet in column do not differ significantly (0.05) by DMRT 

DAE = Days After Emergence

egg/plant) being on par with untreated control. But Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) and 

Imidacloprid (2 g/kg) were superior treatments (0.40 egg/plant) over all organics. 

On 14 DAE, among all tratments, neem oil proved to be the best recording 0.86 eggs 

per plant and was on par with endosulfan (0.86 egg per plant) and Imidacloprid (0.83 egg per 

plant) (Table 2). NSKE (5%) and Azagro (5%) (1 ml/l) were the best treatment all recording 1 

egg per plant and plant mixture (5%) was on par with these (1.03 egg/plant). Next best was 

A. squamosa (1.26 egg/plant) and B. monosperma seed extract (5%), B. monosperma leaf 

extract (5%), (1.30 egg/plant each), jatropha leaf extract (5%) and jatropha oil (2%) (1.33 

egg/plant each) were on par with A. squamosa (5%). Next best were pongamia oil (2%) garlic 

bulb extract (5%) pongamia leaf extract (5%) which recorded 1.43, 1.46 and 1.47 egg/plant 

respectively and were on par with each other. V. negundo leaf extract (5%) and castor leaf 

extract (5%) were least effective (1.63 and 1.60 egg/plant, respectively). Cow urine (5%) and 

vermin wash were ineffective (1.70 egg/plant each) and were on par with untreated control 

which recorded 1.76 egg per plant. 

On 21 DAE, best results were recorded by neem oil (1.30 egg/plant), NSKE 5% (1.34 

egg/plant) and Azagro 5 per cent (1 ml/l) (1.36 egg/plant) which were on par with each other 

(Table 2). Next best was plant mixture (5%) which recorded 1.73 eggs per plant. Jatropha 

leaf extract (5%), P. julifera leaf extract (5%) and A.squamosa leaf extract (5%) were next 

best each recording 1.86 eggs per plant and Jatropha oil (5%) was on par with them (1.90 

egg/plant). B. monosperma seed extract (5%), V. negundo (5%), pongamia leaf (5%) and 

pongamia oil (2%) recorded 2.00 eggs per plant and were on par with each other. B. 

monosperma leaf extract (5%) and castor leaf (5%) were next best (2.12 and 2.23 egg/plant 

respectively) followed by garlic bulb extract (5%) which recorded 2.28 egg/plant. Cow urine 

(5%) and vermiwash (5%) recorded 2.53 and 2.43 eggs per plant and were on par with 

untreated control (2.53 egg/plant) thus being ineffective. However, Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) 

and Imidacloprid (2 g/kg) were superior to all organics and on par with each other recording 

1.00 and 1.03 eggs per plant respectively. 

4.1.2 Per cent deadhearts 

4.1.2.1 Timely sown sorghum 

On 14 DAE, NSKE (5%) was superior among organics which recorded the least 

damage due to shoot fly (8% deadhearts) at 14 DAE and was on par with Imidacloprid 

(6.66% deadhearts) (Table 3). Next best treatments were Azagro 5 per cent (1 ml/l) (9.00% 

deadhearts), neem oil (9.33% deadhearts) and plant mixture (5%) (10% deadhearts) all being 

on par with NSKE (5%). This was followed by pongamia leaf extract (5%) which recorded 

13.33 per cent deadhearts while garlic bulb (5%) (14% deadhearts), pongamia oil (14.33% 

deadhearts), B. monosperma seed extract (5%) (14.66% deadhearts) and castor leaf extract 

(5%) (15.66% deadhearts) were on par with it. Jatropha leaf extract (5%) and jatropha oil 

(2%) were next best treatments (16.66% and 17.66% deadhearts, respectively) and on par 

with V. negundo leaf extract (5%) and P. julifera leaf extract (5%) (18.33% deadhearts each). 

However, these were on par with untreated control (21.66% deadhearts) cow urine and 

vermiwash were also on par with untreated control (23.33 and 21.66% deadhearts, 

respectively). 

On 21 DAE neem oil (2%) (15.66% deadhearts), NSKE (5%) (16.33% deadhearts), 

plant mixture (5%) (17% deadhearts) and Azagro 5 per cent (1 ml/l) (18.33% deadhearts) 

were the best and on par with each other. (Table 3). B. monosperma leaf extract (5%), B. 

monosperma seed extract (5%) and pongamia leaf extract (5%) were next effective 

treatments which recorded 27, 27.66 and 31.00 per cent deadhearts respectively and were on 

par with each other. Prosopis julifera leaf (5%) (36.66% deadhearts), pongamia oil (2%) 

(37.33% deadhearts) and garlic extract (5%) (38.00% deadhearts) were next suepior and on 

par with V. negundo leaf (5%) (38.66% deadhearts), jatropha oil (2%) (39.66% deadhearts). 

A. squamosa (5%) (44.33% deadhearts) was least effective. Cow urine (5%), vermiwash 

(5%), castor leaf (5%) were ineffective which recorded 53.33, 50.53 and 50 per cent 

deadhearts, respectively and were on par with untreated control (53.00% deadhearts). All 

organics were inferior to chemicals. Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) and Imidacloprid (2 g/kg) 

recorded least per cent deadhearts (9.33 and 9.66%, respectively).

Table 2. Effect of seed treatment with organics on oviposition of shoot fly in late sown 

sorghum 

Sl. 

No. 

Treatments 

7 DAE 




(1.52)* 

1.70a 

(1.63) 

2.53a 

(1.88) 

1.75ab 

2 Vermiwash 5% 1.3a 

(1.52) 

1.70a 

(1.61) 

2.43a 

(1.85) 

1.77ab 

3 Butea monosperma seed extract 5% 1.00b 

(1.41) 

1.30d 

(1.52) 

2.00d 

(1.73) 

1.43cde 

4 Butea monosperma leaf extract 5% 0.86c 

(1.37) 

1.30d 

(1.52) 

2.12c 

(1.77) 

1.44cde 

5 Vitex negundo leaf extract 5% 1.00b 

(1.41) 

1.63b 

(1.62) 

2.00d 

(1.73) 

1.63abc 

6 Castor leaf extract 5% 1.00b 

(1.41) 

1.60b 

(1.61) 

2.23bc 

(1.80) 

1.72ab 

7 Garlic bulb extract 5% 1.00b 

(1.41) 

1.46c 

(1.57) 

2.28b 

(1.81) 

1.58bcd 

8 NSKE 5% 0.50e 

(1.22) 

1.00e 

(1.41) 

1.34g 

(1.53) 

0.94hi 

9 Azagro 5% (1 ml/lit) 0.53e 

(1.24) 

1.00e 

(1.41) 

1.36g 

(1.54) 

0.96hi 

10 Pongamia leaf extract 5% 1.00b 

(1.41) 

1.47c 

(1.57) 

2.00d 

(1.73) 

1.49cde 

11 Pongamia oil 2% 1.00b 

(1.41) 

1.43c 

(1.56) 

2.00d 

(1.73) 

1.48cde 

12 Neem oil 2% 0.50e 

(1.22) 

0.86f 

(1.36) 

1.30g 

(1.52) 

0.90hi 

13 Jatropha leaf extract 5% 0.86c 

(1.37) 

1.33d 

(1.53) 

1.86e 

(1.69) 

1.36def 

14 Jatropha oil 2% 0.86c 

(1.37) 

1.33d 

(1.53) 

1.90de 

(1.70) 

1.36def 

15 Prosopis julifera leaf extract 5% 0.66d 

(1.29) 

1.33d 

(1.53) 

1.86e 

(1.69) 

1.18fg 

16 Annona squamosa leaf extract 5% 0.73d 

(1.32) 

1.26d 

(1.50) 

1.86e 

(1.69) 

1.29efg 

17 Plant mixture 5% 0.53e 

(1.24) 

1.03e 

(1.42) 

1.73f 

(1.65) 

1.10gh 

18 Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) 0.40f 

(1.18) 

0.86f 

(1.37) 

1.00h 

(1.41) 

0.76i 

19 Imidacloprid 70 WS (2 g/kg) 0.40f 

(1.18) 

0.83f 

(1.35) 

1.03h 

(1.42) 

0.75i 

20 Untreated control 1.33a 

(1.53) 

1.76a 

(1.66) 

2.53a 

(1.88) 

1.87a 

SEm± 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.07 

CD at 5% 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.21 




Table 3. Evaluation of seed treatment with organics against shoot fly and yield of timely sown 

sorghum 

Sl. 

No. 

Treatments 

Percent deadhearts 

14 DAE 21 DAE 28 DAE 

Yield (q/ha) 


(27.66)* 

53.33a 

(41.82) 

83.00a 

(52.17) 

9.43f 

2 Vermiwash 5% 21.66ab 

(26.65) 

50.33ab 

(40.63) 

80.33ab 

(51.33) 

9.91f 

3 Butea monosperma seed extract 5% 14.66def 

(21.93) 

27.66e 

(30.12) 

55.33d 

(42.66) 

13.01c 

4 Butea monosperma leaf extract 5% 19.00bc 

(24.96) 

27.00e 

(29.75) 

60.00d 

(44.36) 

12.98c 

5 Vitex negundo leaf extract 5% 18.33bc 

(24.52) 

38.66cd 

(35.61) 

70.66c 

(48.14) 

12.99c 

6 Castor leaf extract 5% 15.66c-f 

(22.66) 

50.00ab 

(40.49) 

79.00ab 

(50.90) 

9.94ef 

7 Garlic bulb extract 5% 14.00ef 

(21.42) 

38.00d 

(35.30) 

73.33bc 

(49.04) 

12.07cd 

8 NSKE 5% 8.00gh 

(16.19) 

16.33f 

(23.14) 

31.00f 

(31.88) 

14.72b 

9 Azagro 5% (1 ml/lit) 9.00g 

(17.18) 

18.33f 

(24.42) 

33.00ef 

(32.90) 

14.14b 

10 Pongamia leaf extract 5% 13.33f 

(20.91) 

31.00e 

(31.88) 

59.33d 

(44.11) 

11.81cd 

11 Pongamia oil 2% 14.33ef 

(21.68) 

37.33d 

(34.99) 

61.66d 

(44.97) 

11.92cd 

12 Neem oil 2% 9.33g 

(17.49) 

15.66f 

(22.66) 

32.33ef 

(32.56) 

15.21b 

13 Jatropha leaf extract 5% 16.66cde 

(23.38) 

41.00cd 

(36.67) 

79.66ab 

(51.11) 

9.73f 

14 Jatropha oil 2% 17.66cd 

(24.07) 

39.66cd 

(30.07) 

80.00ab 

(51.22) 

9.71f 

15 Prosopis julifera leaf extract 5% 18.33bc 

(24.52) 

36.66d 

(34.68) 

55.33d 

(42.66) 

11.89cd 

16 Annona squamosa leaf extract 5% 21.33ab 

(26.45) 

44.33bc 

(38.13) 

73.33bc 

(51.96) 

10.96de 

17 Plant mixture 5% 10.00g 

(18.11) 

17.00f 

(23.61) 

36.00ef 

(34.36) 

14.57b 

18 Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) 5.33i 

(13.22) 

9.33g 

(17.49) 

17.66g 

(24.07) 

17.12a 

19 Imidacloprid 70 WS (2 g/kg) 6.66hi 

(14.78) 

9.66g 

(17.80) 

18.33g 

(24.52) 

17.32a 

20 Untreated control 21.66ab 

(26.65) 

53.00a 

(41.69) 

81.33ab 

(51.65) 

9.48f 

SEm± 0.71 0.86 0.84 0.39 

CD at 5% 2.05 2.46 2.39 1.12 

* Figures in parentheses are arc sine transformed values 



NSKE (5%) was the best (31% deadhearts) and Azagro 5 per cent (1 ml/l), neem oil (2%), 

plant mixture were on par with NSKE (5%) (33, 32.33 and 36% deadhearts respectively) at 28 

DAE. (Table 3). P. julifera leaf (5%) was the next best (37.66% deadhearts). Pongamia leaf 

(5%) was next best (59.33% deadhearts) and it was on par with B. monosperma. Seed 

extract (5%), B. monosperma leaf (5%) and pongamia oil (2%) which recorded 55.33, 60.00 

and 61.66% deadhearts respectively. This was followed by V. negundo leaf (5%) extract 

which recorded 70.66% deadhearts and jatropha leaf (5%), jatropha oil (2%), castor leaf (5%), 

cow urine (5%) and vermiswash (5%) were ineffective (79.66, 80.00, 79.00, 83.00 and 

80.33% deadhearts, respectively) which were on par with untreated control (81.33% 

deadhearts). Endosulfon 35 EC (0.07%) and Imidacloprid (2 g/kg) were superior to all and 

were on par with each other (17.66 and 18.33% deadhearts respectively). 

4.1.2.2 Late sown sorghum 

On 14 DAE, the best treatment was NSKE (5%) which was on par with Azagro 5 per 

cent (1 ml/l) (9.66% deadhearts) and neem oil (2%) (10.66% deadhearts). (Table 4). Plant 

mixture (5%) recorded 11.33% dead hearts and was the next best. This was followed by 

garlic bulb (5%) and pongamia leaf (5%) extracts (15% deadhearts each) and pongamia oil 

(2%), castor leaf (2%), jatropha leaf (5%) were on par with garlic bulb extract recording 15.33, 

16.33 and 17.66% deadhearts, respectively. B. monosperma seed extract (5%), B. 

monosperma leaf (5%), V. negundo leaf extract (5%), P. julifera leaf extract (5%) and A. 

squamosa leaf extract (5%) were on par with each other (20.00, 20.00, 20.53. 19.33 and 

22.33% deadhearts respectively). Cow urine (5%), vermiwash (5%) were on par with 

untreated control (24.33 and 22.66% deadhearts, respectively). the least damage due to 

shoot fly was recorded by Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) and Imidacloprid (2 g/kg) and were on 

par with each other (6.66 and 7.00% deadhearts respectively). 

On 21 DAE, the best treatment was neem oil (2%) which recorded 15.66% 

deadhearts and it was also on par with NSKE (16.33% deadhearts), Azagro (18.33% 

deadhearts) and plant mixture (17% deadhearts). (Table 4) Next best was B. monosperma 

leaf (5%) (27.66% deadhearts) and it was on par with B. monosperma seed extract (27.66% 

deadhearts) and pongamia leaf (5%) (31% deadhearts). V. negundo leaf extract (5%), garlic 

bulb extract (5%), pongamia oil (2%), jatropha leaf (5%) extract, jatropha oil (2%) and P. 

julifera leaf (5%) extract were on par (38.66, 38.00, 37.33, 41.00, 39.66 and 36.66% 

deadhearts, respectively). A. squamosa was less effective (22.33% deadhearts), cow urine 

(5%) and vermiwash (5%) were not effective (53.33 and 50.33% deadhearts) and were on par 

with untreated control (53.00%, deadhearts). The trend of chemical insecticides being 

superior remained same. Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) and Imidacloprid 2.0 g/kg recorded least 

damage and were on par with each other (9.33 and 9.66% deadhearts, respectively). 

On 28 DAE, NSKE (5%) was the best (38.33% deadhearts) and was on par with 

Azagro 5 per cent (1 ml/l) (40.66% deadhearts), 2 per cent neem oil (39.33% deadhearts). 5 

per cent plant mixture (43.66% deadhearts) gave the next best results. (Table 4). B. 

monosperma seed (5%) extract leaf extract of P. julifera (5%) were next best (61% 

deadhearts each) and it was also on par with B. monosperma leaf extract (5%) which 

recorded 63.66 per cent deadhearts. Pongamia leaf extract (5%) was considered next best 

(67.33% deadhearts) and was on par with pongamia oil (2%) (73.33% deadhearts). Next best 

treatments were garlic bulb extract (5%) and 5 per cent leaf extract of jatropha (83% 

deadhearts each) and were on par with each other. 2 per cent jatropha oil (85.66% 

deadhearts), 5 per cent A. squamosa (87.33% deadhearts), 5 per cent cow urine (89.66% 

deadhearts), 5 per cent vermiwash (92.61% deadhearts were on par with untreated control 

(89.33% deadhearts). Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) and Imidacloprid (2 g/kg) remained superior 

over all treatments by recording least deadhearts percentage (19.66% and 20.66% 

respectively). 

4.1.3 Yield 


Among organics 2 per cent, neem oil recorded higher yield (15.21 q/ha) and it was on 

par with 5 per cent NSKE (14.72 q/ha), 5 per cent plant mixture (14.57 q/ha) and Azagro 

(14.14 q/ha). (Table 3). Next highest yield was recorded by 5 per cent B. monosperma seed 

extract (13.01 q/ha), 5 per cent V. negundo leaf (12.99 q/ha), 5 per cent B. monosperma leaf

Table 4. Evaluation of seed treatment with organics against shoot fly and yield of late sown 

sorghum 

Sl. 

No. 

Treatments 

Pre cent deadhearts 

14 DAE 21 DAE 28 DAE 

Yield (q/ha) 


(28.25)* 

53.33a 

(41.82) 

89.66ab 

(54.23) 

8.62h 

2 Vermiwash 5% 22.26abc 

(27.66) 

50.33ab 

(40.63) 

92.61a 

(54.93) 

8.67h 

3 Butea monosperma seed extract 5% 20.00c 

(25.61) 

27.66e 

(30.12) 

61.00f 

(44.73) 

12.89d 

4 Butea monosperma leaf extract 5% 20.00cde 

(25.61) 

27.00e 

(29.75) 

63.66ef 

(45.69) 

11.93ef 

5 Vitex negundo leaf extract 5% 20.53b-e 

(25.82) 

38.66cd 

(35.61) 

83.00bc 

(52.17) 

12.72de 

6 Castor leaf extract 5% 16.33fg 

(23.14) 

50.00ab 

(40.49) 

83.00bc 

(52.17) 

9.20h 

7 Garlic bulb extract 5% 15.00g 

(22.18) 

38.00d 

(35.30) 

80.00c 

(51.22) 

11.22fg 

8 NSKE 5% 9.00i 

(17.18) 

16.33f 

(23.14) 

38.33h 

(35.45) 

13.65b-d 

9 Azagro 5% (1 ml/lit) 9.66hi 

(17.80) 

18.35f 

(24.52) 

40.66gh 

(36.52) 

13.56cd 

10 Pongamia leaf extract 5% 15.00g 

(22.18) 

31.00e 

(31.88) 

67.33de 

(46.99) 

10.46g 

11 Pongamia oil 2% 15.33g 

(22.42) 

37.33d 

(34.99) 

73.33d 

(49.04) 

10.78g 

12 Neem oil 2% 10.66hi 

(18.70) 

15.66f 

(22.66) 

39.33gh 

(35.91) 

14.56b 

13 Jatropha leaf extract 5% 17.66efg 

(24.07) 

41.00cd 

(36.67) 

80.66c 

(51.43) 

9.25h 

14 Jatropha oil 2% 19.00ef 

(24.96) 

39.66cd 

(30.07) 

85.66a-c 

(53.00) 

8.94h 

15 Prosopis julifera leaf extract 5% 19.33de 

(25.18) 

36.66d 

(34.68) 

61.00f 

(44.73) 

10.34g 

16 Annona squamosa leaf extract 5% 22.33a-d 

(27.06) 

44.33bc 

(38.13) 

87.33a-c 

(55.52) 

10.96g 

17 Plant mixture 5% 11.33h 

(19.28) 

17.00f 

(23.61) 

43.66g 

(37.84) 

13.89bc 

18 Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) 6.66j 

(14.78) 

9.33g 

(17.49) 

19.66i 

(25.39) 

16.81a 

19 Imidacloprid 70 WS (2 g/kg) 7.00j 

(15.15) 

9.66g 

(17.80) 

20.66i 

(26.00) 

16.95a 

20 Untreated control 23.33ab 

(27.66) 

53.00a 

(41.69) 

89.33ab 

(54.13) 

8.69h 

SEm± 0.64 0.86 0.71 0.3 

CD at 5% 1.83 2.46 2.05 0.9 




extract (12.98 q/ha) and they were also on par with 5 per cent garlic bulb extract (12.07 q/ha), 

Pongamia oil (2%) (11.92 q/ha) and 5 per cent pongamia leaf extract (11.81 q/ha), 5 per cent 

A. squamosa recorded 10.96 q/ha yield followed by above treatment. Castor leaf extract (5%), 

jatropha leaf extract (5%), jatropha oil (2%), cow urine (5%) and vermiwash (5%) were 

ineffective (9.94, 9.73, 9.71, 9.43, 9.91 q/ha, respectively) and were on par with untreated 

control (9.48 q/ha). Despite of 89.33 per cent deadhearts, untreated control recorded 8.69 

q/ha yield. This might be due to increased number of tillers due to shoot fly attack. However, 

significantly higher yield was recorded by chemical seed treatments as compared to organics. 

Highest yield was recorded by Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) and it was on par with Imidacloprid 

(2 g/kg) (17.12 and 17.32 q/ha, respectively). 


The highest yield was recorded in neem oil (2%) treatment (14.56 q/ha) which was 

on par with plant mixture (13.89 q/ha) and NSKE (5%) (13.65 q/ha). (Table 4). Next best 

treatment was Azagro (5%) which recorded 10.46 q per ha and B. monosperma seed extract 

(5%) (12.89 q/ha), V. negundo (5%) were on par with it (12.72 q/ha). Next highest yield was 

recorded in garlic bulb extract (5%) treatment and it was also on par with pongamia leaf 

extract (5%), pongamia oil (2%), P. julifera leaf extract (5%) and A. squamosa leaf extract 

(5%) which recorded 10.40, 10.78, 10.34 and 10.96 q/ha yield respectively. Castor leaf 

extract (5%), jatropha leaf extract (5%), jatropha oil (2%), cow urine (5%), vermiwash (5%) all 

were ineffective which recorded 9.3, 9.25, 8.94, 8.62 and 8.67 q/ha yield and it was on par 

with untreated control (8.69 q/ha). However amonf all treatments, chemicals proved 

significantly superior. Highest yield was given by Imidacloprid (16.95 q/ha) which was on par 

with Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) (16.81 q/ha). 

4.1.4 Natural enemies 

4.1.4.1 Coccinellids 

4.1.4.1.1 Timely sown crop 

On 14 DAE, among organics, maximum number of coccinellids per plant was 

recorded in pongamia leaf extract (5%) treatment (0.53/plant) and the least was recorded in 

B. monosperma seed extract (5%) treatment (0.33/plant) (Table 5). This high number of 

coccinellids might be due to migration from infester row and neighbouring fields. However, all 

the treatments recorded statistically similar number of coccinellids per plant and they were 

also on par with untreated control (0.40 coccinellids/plant). 

Similarly on 21 DAE, coccinellid population in various plots ranged from 0.50 to 0.77 

coccinellids per plant and they were statistically on par with each other. (Table 5) 

The same trend was noticed on 28 DAE (Table 5). The population of coccinellids per 

plant ranged from 0.57 to 0.93 per plant which were statistically on par with untreated control 

(0.90 coccinellids per plant). 

4.1.4.1.2 Late sown crop 

On 14 DAE maximum population was noticed in cow urine (5%) treatment 

(0.57/plant). However, all the treatments were statistically on par with each other and also 

with untreated check (Table 6). 

On 21 DAE, untreated control plot conserved highest coccinellid population (0.80/ 

plant). However all the organic treatments recorded statistically same number of coccinellids 

per plant and were on par with untreated check (Table 6). 

On 28 DAE also all the treatments conserved statistically same number of 

coccinellids per plant ranging from 0.80 to 1.00 coccinellids per plant (Table 6). 

4.1.4.2 Chrysoperla carnea 

4.1.4.2.1 Timely sown crop 

All the treatments conserved statistically same number of chrysoperla on 14 DAE and 

they were on par with untreated control. Number of chrysoperla per plant ranged from 0.33 to 

0.50 per plant. Untreated control recorded 0.50 chrysoperla per plant (Table 7).

Table 5. Evaluation of seed treatment with organics on coccinellids population in timely sown 

sorghum 

Sl. 

No. 

Treatments 

14 DAE 

Number of coccinellids/plant 


1 Cow urine 5% 0.40 

(1.18)* 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.93 

(1.39) 

0.68a 

2 Vermiwash 5% 0.37 

(1.17) 

0.77 

(1.33) 

0.73 

(1.32) 

0.62ab 

3 Butea monosperma seed extract 5% 0.33 

(1.15) 

0.53 

(1.24) 

0.73 

(1.32) 

0.53abc 

4 Butea monosperma leaf extract 5% 0.43 

(1.20) 

0.57 

(1.25) 

0.83 

(1.35) 

0.61abc 

5 Vitex negundo leaf extract 5% 0.37 

(1.17) 

0.57 

(1.25) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.53abc 

6 Castor leaf extract 5% 0.47 

(1.21) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.77 

(1.33) 

0.61abc 

7 Garlic bulb extract 5% 0.50 

(1.22) 

0.53 

(1.24) 

0.90 

(1.38) 

0.64ab 

8 NSKE 5% 0.37 

(1.17) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.63 

(1.28) 

0.53abc 

9 Azagro 5% (1 ml/lit) 0.40 

(1.18) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.57 

(1.25) 

0.56abc 

10 Pongamia leaf extract 5% 0.53 

(1.24) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.64ab 

11 Pongamia oil 2% 0.43 

(1.20) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.60abc 

12 Neem oil 2% 0.40 

(1.18) 

0.50 

(1.22) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.52ab 

13 Jatropha leaf extract 5% 0.43 

(1.20) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.97 

(1.40) 

0.67a 

14 Jatropha oil 2% 0.43 

(1.20) 

0.73 

(1.32) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.61abc 

15 Prosopis julifera leaf extract 5% 0.40 

(1.18) 

0.57 

(1.25) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.54abc 

16 Annona squamosa leaf extract 5% 0.50 

(1.22) 

0.57 

(1.25) 

0.83 

(1.35) 

0.63ab 

17 Plant mixture 5% 0.37 

(1.17) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

0.61abc 

18 Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) 0.33 

(1.15) 

0.53 

(1.24) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.49bc 

19 Imidacloprid 70 WS (2 g/kg) 0.30 

(1.14) 

0.50 

(1.22) 

0.57 

(1.25) 

0.46c 

20 Untreated control 0.40 

(1.18) 

0.77 

(1.23) 

0.90 

(1.38) 

0.69a 

SEm± 0.08 0.07 0.09 0.05 

CD at 5% NS NS NS 0.13 



DAE = Days After Emergence NS = Non Significant

Table 6. Effect of seed treatments with organics on coccinellids population in late sown 

sorghum 

Sl. 

No. 

Treatments 

Number of coccinellids/plant 

14 DAE 21 DAE 28 DAE Mean 


(1.25)* 

0.77 

(1.33) 

1.00 

(1.41) 

0.78a 


(1.22) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.93 

(1.39) 

0.70a-d 


(1.18) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.93 

(1.39) 

0.67cde 


(1.21) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.90 

(1.38) 

0.68bcd 


(1.21) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

1.00 

(1.41) 

0.69bcd 


(1.22) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

1.00 

(1.41) 

0.73abc 


(1.18) 

0.50 

(1.22) 

0.88 

(1.37) 

0.59e-h 

8 NSKE 5% 0.43 

(1.20) 

0.53 

(1.24) 

1.00 

(1.41) 

0.65c-g 

9 Azagro 5% (1 ml/lit) 0.50 

(1.22) 

0.77 

(1.33) 

1.00 

(1.41) 

0.76ab 


(1.20) 

0.77 

(1.33) 

1.00 

(1.41) 

0.73abc 


(1.21) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.93 

(1.39) 

0.67cde 

12 Neem oil 2% 0.40 

(1.18) 

0.53 

(1.24) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

0.58fgh 


(1.20) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.90 

(1.38) 

0.64d-g 


(1.22) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.90 

(1.38) 

0.70a-d 


(1.18) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.98 

(1.41) 

0.66c-f 


(1.22) 

0.63 

(1.28) 

0.98 

(1.41) 

0.70a-d 


(1.22) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

1.00 

(1.41) 

0.72a-d 

18 Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) 0.37 

(1.17) 

0.50 

(1.22) 

0.83 

(1.35) 

0.57gh 


(1.15) 

0.50 

(1.22) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

0.54h 


(1.24) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

1.00 

(1.41) 

0.78a 

SEm± 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.03 





Table 7. Effect of seed treatments with organics on chrysoperla population in timely sown 

sorghum 

Sl. 

No. 

Treatments 

14 DAE 

Number of chrysoperla /plant 



(1.17)* 

0.77 

(1.33) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.61a-f 


(1.20) 

0.77 

(1.33) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

0.67abc 


(1.18) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.60a-f 


(1.21) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

0.83 

(1.35) 

0.70a 


(1.17) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.77 

(1.33) 

0.58a-f 


(1.18) 

0.53 

(1.24) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.54def 


(1.22) 

0.57 

(1.25) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

0.62a-e 

8 NSKE 5% 0.40 

(1.18) 

0.50 

(1.22) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.50ef 

9 Azagro 5% (1 ml/lit) 0.37 

(1.17) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.55c-f 


(1.20) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.61a-f 


(1.24) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.77 

(1.33) 

0.67abc 

12 Neem oil 2% 0.37 

(1.14) 

0.73 

(1.32) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.57b-f 


(1.20) 

0.57 

(1.25) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.53ef 


(1.20) 

0.77 

(1.33) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.62a-e 


(1.22) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.67abc 


(1.21) 

0.83 

(1.35) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.66a-d 


(1.22) 

0.77 

(1.33) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

0.69ab 

18 Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) 0.37 

(1.17) 

0.57 

(1.25) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.51ef 


(1.15) 

0.53 

(1.24) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.49f 


(1.22) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.77 

(1.33) 

0.66a-d 

SEm± 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.04 





Table 8. Effect of seed treatments with organics on chrysoperla population in late sown 

sorghum 

Sl. 

No. 

Treatments 

14 DAE 

Number of chrysoperla /plant 



(1.18)* 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

0.63b-e 


(1.20) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

0.90 

(1.38) 

0.71abc 


(1.22) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

0.67a-e 


(1.18) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.72 

(1.33) 

0.61b-e 


(1.21) 

0.77 

(1.33) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.65a-e 


(1.22) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.61b-e 


(1.26) 

0.56 

(1.25) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.62b-e 

8 NSKE 5% 0.43 

(1.20) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.54e 

9 Azagro 5% (1 ml/lit) 0.43 

(1.20) 

0.57 

(1.25) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.53e 


(1.22) 

0.70 

(1.30) 

0.57 

(1.25) 

0.59cde 


(1.24) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

0.77 

(1.33) 

0.70a-d 

12 Neem oil 2% 0.40 

(1.18) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

0.60cde 


(1.24) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.90 

(1.38) 

0.70a-d 


(1.22) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.93 

(1.39) 

0.70a-d 


(1.25) 

0.77 

(1.33) 

0.90 

(1.38) 

0.75ab 


(1.25) 

0.77 

(1.33) 

1.00 

(1.41) 

0.78a 


(1.24) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

1.00 

(1.41) 

0.78a 

18 Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) 0.40 

(1.18) 

0.60 

(1.26) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.56de 


(1.18) 

0.57 

(1.25) 

0.67 

(1.29) 

0.55e 


(1.24) 

0.80 

(1.34) 

0.93 

(1.39) 

0.75ab 

SEm± 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.04 





Table 9. Cost economics for the management of sorghum shoot fly through seed treatments 

Sl. 

No. 

Treatments 

Yield 

(q/ha) 

Increase in 

yield over 

control (q/ha) 

Per cent 

increase in 

yield over 

control 

Cost of 

pest control 

(Rs/ha) 

Gross 

return 

(Rs./ha) 

Net return 

(Rs./ha) 

IBC ratio 

1 Butea monosperma seed extract 5% 13.01 3.53 37.24 100.00 19515.00 18512.50 185.1:1 

2 Butea monosperma leaf extract 5% 12.98 3.50 36.92 100.00 19470.00 18470.00 184.8:1 

3 Vitex negundo leaf extract 5% 12.99 3.51 37.03 100.00 19485.00 18485.00 184.9:1 

4 Garlic bulb extract 5% 12.67 2.59 27.32 100.00 18105.00 17105.00 171.1:1 

5 NSKE 5% 14.72 5.24 55.27 100.00 22080.00 21080.00 210.8:1 

6 Azagro 5% (1 ml/l) 14.14 4.66 49.16 111.20 21210.00 21098.00 189.7:1 

7 Pongamia leaf extract 5% 11.81 2.33 24.58 100.00 17715.00 16715.00 167.2:1 

8 Pongamia oil 2% 11.92 2.44 25.74 109.00 17885.00 16795.00 154.1:1 

9 Neem oil 2% 15.21 5.73 60.44 107.20 22815.00 21743.00 202.8:1 

10 Prosopis julifera leaf extract 5% 11.89 2.41 25.42 100.20 17835.00 16835.00 168.0:1 

11 Annona squamosa leaf extract 5% 10.96 1.48 15.61 100.00 16440.00 15440.00 154.4:1 

12 Plant mixture 5% 14.57 5.09 33.69 100.00 21855.00 20855.00 208.6:1 

13 Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) 17.12 7.64 86.59 101.05 25680.00 24469.00 242.2:1 

14 Imidacloprid 70 WS (2 g/kg) 17.32 7.84 82.70 113.20 25980.00 24848.00 219.5:1 

15 Untreated control 9.48 - - - - - -

On 21 DAE chrysoperla population in various organic seed treatments ranged from 0.53 to 

0.77 chrysopids per plant and they were on par with untreated control (0.70 chrysoperla/ 

plant) (Table 7). 

On 28 DAE untreated control recorded 0.77 chrysoperla per plant and all the seed 

treatments were on par with it recording 0.60 to 0.83 chrysoperla per plant (Table 7). 

4.1.4.2.2 Late sown crop 

On 14 DAE number of chrysoperla in various seed treatments ranged from 0.40 to 

0.57 chrysoperla per plant and they were on par with untreated control (0.53/plant) (Table 8). 

Various treatments conserved 0.56 to 0.80 chrysoperla per plant on 21 DAE and all 

were on par with untreated control (0.80 chrysoperla / plant) (Table 8). 

On 28 DAE, chrysoperla population conserved by various treatments was from 0.67 

to 0.93 chrysoperla per plant and all were statistically on par with untreated control (0.93 

chrysoperla/plant) (Table 8). 


Cost economics for the management of sorghum shoot fly through seed treatments 

(Table 9) indicated that highest net returns among organics was given by neem oil 2% 

(21743.00 Rs./ha) followed by Azagro (21098.00 Rs./ha), NSKE (21080.00 Rs./ha). But 

Imidacloprid and Endosulfan were superior in giving highest net returns (24848.00 and 

24469.50 Rs./ha, respectively). Highest incremental benefit cost ratio (21.08:1) was obtained 

NSKE 5 per cent followed by plant mixture 5 per cent (208.6:1), neem oil 2 per cent (202.8:1) 

and other botanicals. However, Endosulfan and Imidacloprid remained superior over 

organics seed treatments by giving IBC ratio of 24.22:1 and 21.95:1, respectively. 





Effect of spraying different botanicals irrespective of spraying intervals recorded at 14 

DAE revealed that Azagro (5%) and NSKE (5%) were most effective and on par with each 

other by recording 0.46 eggs per plant (Table 10). Plant mixture (5%) recorded 0.51 eggs per 

plant. However, Endosulfan seed treatment was superior over organic seed treatments which 

recorded 0.42 eggs per plant. 

Various spraying intervals irrespective of treatments revealed that all spraying 

intervals were significantly superior over untreated control (1.16 eggs/plant) (Table 10). The 

best effect was shown by spraying at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE which did not record any egg. Next best 

reduction was offered by 3, 6, 9 DAE (0.08 eggs/plant) followed by 6, 12 and 9, 12 DAE (0.42 

eggs/plant). Spraying at 3, 6 DAE, 3, 9 DAE and 6, 9 DAE were next best (0.48 eggs/plant) 

and were on par with each other. 6 DAE and 9 DAE recorded 0.66 eggs per plant and were 

on par with each other. Spraying at 3 DAE recorded 0.74 eggs per plant 

Interaction effect of botanicals spraying at various intervals revealed that all the 

botanicals proved best when sprayed at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE.(Table 10). Also Azagro (5%) and 

NSKE (5%) were on par with this at 3, 6, 9 DAE and 6, 9, 12 DAE and they were also on par 

with Endosulfan spraying at these intervals and recorded no eggs. Untreated control plots 

recorded 1.00 egg per plant. 

Study on effect of spraying botanicals at various interval on oviposition of shoot fly 

recorded at 21 DAE (Table 11) revealed that Azagro (5%) and NSKE (5%) were superior over 

plant mixture (5%) irrespective of spraying intervals. Azagro and NSKE recorded 0.93 and 0.9 

eggs per plant respectively. Plant mixture recorded 1.25 eggs per plant. Endosulfan recorded 

0.69 eggs per plant and was superior over botanicals. 

Spraying intervals irrespective of botanicals revealed that spraying at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE 

was most effective (0.49 eggs/plant) as against untreated control (2.00 eggs/plant) (Table 11). 

Spraying at 3, 6, 9 DAE and 6, 9, 12 DAE were next best recording 0.58 eggs per plant. Next

Table 10. Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on oviposition of shoot fly on 14 DAE in timely sown sorghum 

Treatments 3 6 9 12 3, 6 3, 6, 

9 

Azagro 5% 0.66 b 

(1.29)* 

NSKE 5% 0.66 b 

Plant mixture 

5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.07%) 

(1.29) 

1.00 a 

(1.41) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

Mean 0.74 b 

(1.32) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 c 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 c 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

1.00 a 

(1.41) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.74 b 

(1.32) 

0.33 c 

(1.15) 

0.33 c 

(1.15) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.33 c 

(1.15) 

0.48 d 

(1.22) 

SEm± CD at 5% Source 

0.01 

0.01 

0.04 

0.01 

0.02 

0.11 

0.00 d 

(1.00) 

0.00 d 

(1.00) 

0.33 c 

(1.15) 

0.00 d 

(1.00) 

0.08 f 

(1.04) 

Spraying interval (DAE) 

3,6,9,12 3, 9 3, 12 6, 9 6, 9, 

12 

Number of shoot fly eggs per plant 

0.00 d 

(1.00) 

0.00 d 

(1.00) 

0.00 d 

(1.00) 

0.00 d 

(1.00) 

0.00 g 

(1.00) 

0.33 c 

(1.15) 

0.33 c 

(1.15) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.33 c 

(1.15) 

0.48 d 

(1.22) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.33 c 

(1.15) 

0.42 e 

(1.19) 

0.33 c 

(1.15) 

0.33 c 

(1.15) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.33 c 

(1.15) 

0.48 d 

(1.22) 

0.00 d 

(1.00) 

0.00 d 

(1.00) 

0.33 c 

(1.15) 

0.00 d 

(1.00) 

0.08 f 

(1.04) 

* Figures in parenthesis are √ x + 1 transformed values. 

Means followed by same alphabet do not differ significantly (0.05) by DMRT. 

DAE – Days After Emergence 

Between two treatments 

Between two spraying intervals 

Interaction between treatments and spraying intervals 

6, 12 9, 12 Untreated 

control 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.33 c 

(1.15) 

0.42 e 

(1.19) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.66 b 

(1.29) 

0.33 c 

(1.15) 

0.42 e 

(1.19) 

1.00 a 

(1.41) 

1.00 a 

(1.41) 

1.00 a 

(1.41) 

1.00 a 

(1.41) 

1.00 a 

(1.41) 

Mean 

0.46 b 

(1.21) 

0.46 b 

(1.21) 

0.51 a 

(1.23) 

0.42 c 

(1.19) 

0.46 

(1.21)

Table 11. Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on oviposition of shoot fly at 21 DAE in timely sown crop 

Treatments 3 6 9 12 3, 6 3, 6, 

9 


(1.63)* 

NSKE 5% 1.66 b 

Plant mixture 

5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.07%) 

(1.63) 

1.66 b 

(1.63) 

1.00 d 

(1.41) 

Mean 1.49 b 

(1.59) 

1.66 b 

(1.63) 

1.33 c 

(1.53) 

1.66 b 

(1.63) 

1.00 d 

(1.41) 

1.41 c 

(1.55) 

1.66 b 

(1.63) 

1.33 c 

(1.53) 

1.66 b 

(1.63) 

1.00 d 

(1.41) 

1.41 c 

(1.55) 

1.66 b 

(1.63) 

1.66 b 

(1.63) 

1.66 b 

(1.63) 

1.00 d 

(1.41) 

1.49 b 

(1.59) 

1.00 d 

(1.41) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

1.33 c 

(1.53) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

0.91 d 

(1.38) 


0.01 

0.01 

0.03 

0.02 

0.03 

0.08 


0.66 e 

(1.29) 

0.33 f 

(1.15) 

1.00 d 

(1.41) 

0.33 f 

(1.15) 

0.58 f 

(1.25) 

3,6,9,12 3, 9 3, 12 6, 9 6, 9, 

12 


0.33 f 

(1.15) 

0.33 f 

(1.15) 

1.00 d 

(1.41) 

0..33 f 

(1.15) 

0.49 g 

(1.21) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

1.33 c 

(1.53) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

0.82 d 

(1.36) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

1.00 d 

(1.41) 

0.33 f 

(1.15) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

1.33 c 

(1.53) 

0..66 e 

(1.29) 

0.82 d 

(1.36) 

0.33 f 

(1.15) 

0.33 f 

(1.15) 

1.00 d 

(1.41) 

0.33 f 

(1.15) 

0.58 f 

(1.25) 

* Figures in parentheses are √ x + 1 transformed values. 







control 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

1.00 d 

(1.41) 

0.33 f 

(1.15) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

1.00 d 

(1.41) 

0.33 f 

(1.15) 

0.66 e 

(1.29) 

2.00 a 

(1.73) 

2.00 a 

(1.73) 

2.00 a 

(1.73) 

2.00 a 

(1.73) 

2.00 a 

(1.73) 

Mean 

0.93 b 

(1.39) 

0.90 b 

(1.38) 

1.25 a 

(1.50) 

0.69 c 

(1.30) 

0.93 

(1.39)

superior was 3, 6 DAE, 3,9 DAE and 6, 9 DAE (0.91, 0.82 and 0.82 eggs/plant) being on par 

with each other. All spraying intervals were proved better than untreated control. 

Interaction effect revealed that the best results were given by Azagro (5%) and NSKE 

(5%) sprayed at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE and also at 6, 9, 12 DAE and NSKE (5%) at 3, 6, 9 DAE all 

being on par (0.33 eggs/plant) and also with endosulfan (0.33 eggs/plant). However, all the 

treatments at all intervals were significantly superior over untreated check which recorded 

highest eggs (2 eggs/plant) (Table 11). 


Study on effect of spraying botanicals at various intervals on oviposition of shoot fly in 

late sown sorghum as recorded at 14 DAE (Table 12) revealed that irrespective of spraying 

intervals, Azagro (5%) and NSKE (5%) were superior (0.72 and 0.69 eggs/plant) over plant 

mixture (0.93 eggs/plant) and were on par with each other. Endosulfan proved its superiority 

over botanicals recording 0.58 eggs per plant. 

Among all spraying intervals irrespective of botanicals revealed that 3, 6, 9 DAE, 3, 6, 

9, 12 DAE and 6, 9, 12 DAE were on par with each other recording 0.17 eggs per plant (Table 

12). All spraying intervals were superior than untreated control (1.66 eggs/plant). 

Interaction effect revealed that NSKE (5%) sprayed at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE, 3, 6, 9, 12 

DAE and at 6, 9, 12 DAE was on par with Endosulfan 35 EC at all these intervals recording 

no eggs per plant. Next best treatments were Azagro and plant mixture sprayed at 3, 6, 9 

DAE, 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE and 6, 9, 12 DAE and were on par with each other (0.33 eggs/plant). 

Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on oviposition of shoot fly on 21 

DAE in late sown sorghum (Table 13) revealed that irrespective of spraying intervals NSKE 

(5%) proved best (1.13 eggs/plant) after endosulfan (1.02 eggs/plant). Next best was Azagro 

(5%) recording 1.31 eggs per plant. Least effective was plant mixture (1.62 eggs/plant). 

All spraying intervals irrespective of botanicals were significantly superior over 

untreated check (2.49 eggs/plant) (Table 13). Spraying at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE was proved best 

(0.59 eggs/plant) and next best were 3, 6, 9 DAE and 6, 9, 12 DAE (0.74 and 0.66 eggs/plant 

respectively) and were on par with each other. This was followed by 3, 9 DAE, 3, 12 DAE 

and 6, 9 DAE (1.16 eggs/plant), 6, 12 DAE and 9, 12 DAE (1.00 eggs/plant each) all being on 

par with each other. 

Interaction effect of botanicals and different spraying intervals recorded 0.33 to 2 

eggs per plant while untreated check recorded 2.33 to 2.66 eggs per plant (Table 13). Best 

results were recorded by NSKE (5%) sprayed at 3, 6, 9 DAE, 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE and 6, 9, 12 

DAE recorded (0.33 eggs/plant) which was on par with Endosulfan 35 EC (0.05%) (0.33 

eggs/plant) at all these intervals. Next best was Azagro (5%) at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE and 6, 9, 12 

DAE (0.66 eggs/plant) which was on par with Endosulfan 35 EC at these intervals (0.66 

eggs/plant). 



On 14 DAE, irrespective of spraying intervals, NSKE (5%) showed least damage of 

9.02 per cent deadhearts (Table 14). Azagro (5%) and plant mixture (5%) were on par with 

each other (9.43 and 9.93% deadhearts respectively). However, Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) 

was superior over botanicals (5.45% deadhearts). 

Irrespective of botanicals, all spraying intervals were significantly superior over 

untreated check (24.08% deadhearts) (Table 14). Spraying at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE offered highest 

protection (3.08% deadhearts) followed by 3, 6, 9 DAE and 6, 9, 12 DAE (4.08 and 4.17% 

deadhearts respectively). Next superior were 3, 12 DAE, 6.12 DAE and 9, 12 DAE (all 5.75% 

deadhearts). 

Interaction effect recorded 2.33 to 15 per cent deadhearts (Table 14). Azagro (5%) 

and NSKE (5%) at 3, 6,9,12 DAE recorded 3% deadhearts each and were on par with 

endosulfan at this interval (2.33% deadhearts). 

On 21 DAE (Table 15), among botanicals irrespective of spraying intervals NSKE 

(5%) recorded least damage (13.69% deadhearts) and was on par with Endosulfan (11.78%

Table 12. Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on oviposition of shoot fly at 14 DAE in late sown sorghum 


Treatments 3 6 9 12 3, 6 3, 6, 

9 

Azagro 5% 0.66 d 

(1.29)* 

NSKE 5% 1.00 c 

Plant mixture 

5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.07%) 

(1.41) 

1.33 b 

(1.53) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

Mean 0.99 b 

(1.41) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

1.33 b 

(1.53) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

0.99 b 

(1.41) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

0.33 e 

(1.15) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

0.33 e 

(1.15) 

0.58 d 

(1.26) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

0.92 c 

(1.38) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

0.92 c 

(1.38) 

0.33 e 

(1.15) 

0.00 f 

(1.00) 

0.33 e 

(1.15) 

0.00 f 

(1.00) 

0.17 f 

(1.08) 

3,6,9,12 3, 9 3, 12 6, 9 6, 9, 

12 


0.33 e 

(1.15) 

0.00 f 

(1.00) 

0.33 e 

(1.15) 

0.00 

(1.00) 

0.17 f 

(1.08) 

* Figures in parentheses indicates √ x + 1 transformed values. 




0.01 

0.01 

0.03 

0.02 

0.03 

0.08 




0.66 d 

(1.29) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

0.33 e 

(1.15) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

0.92 c 

(1.38) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

0.75 e 

(1.32) 

0.33 e 

(1.15) 

0.00 

(1.00) 

0.33 e 

(1.15) 

0.00 f 

(1.00) 

0.17 f 

(1.08) 


control 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

0.75 e 

(1.32) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

1.00 c 

(1.41) 

0.66 d 

(1.29) 

0.75 e 

(1.32) 

1.66 a 

(1.63) 

1.66 a 

(1.63) 

1.66 a 

(1.63) 

1.66 a 

(1.63) 

1.66 a 

(1.63) 

Mean 

0.72 b 

(1.31) 

0.69 b 

(1.30) 

0.93 a 

(1.39) 

0.58 c 

(1.26) 

0.75 

(1.32)

Table 13. Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on oviposition of shoot fly on 21 DAE in late sown sorghum 


Treatments 3 6 9 12 3, 6 3, 6, 

9 


(1.73)* 

NSKE 5% 2.00 b 

Plant mixture 

5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.07%) 

(1.73) 

2.00 b 

(1.73) 

1.66 c 

(1.63) 

Mean 1.92 b 

(1.71) 

2.00 b 

(1.73) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

1.66 c 

(1.63) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

1.59 c 

(1.61) 

1.66 c 

(1.63) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

2.00 b 

(1.73) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

1.59 c 

(1.61) 

1.66 c 

(1.63) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

1.66 c 

(1.63) 

1.00 e 

(1.41) 

1.34 d 

(1.53) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

1.66 c 

(1.63) 

1.00 e 

(1.41) 

1.34 d 

(1.53) 

1.00 e 

(1.41) 

0.33 g 

(1.15) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

0.33 g 

(1.15) 

0.74 f 

(1.32) 

3,6,9,12 3, 9 3, 12 6, 9 6, 9, 

12 


0.66 f 

(1.15) 

0.33 g 

(1.15) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

0.33 g 

(1.15) 

0.59 g 

(1.26) 

* Figures in parentheses indicates √ x + 1 transformed values. 




0.01 

0.02 

0.03 

0.03 

0.06 

0.09 




1.00 e 

(1.41) 

1.00 e 

(1.41) 

1.66 c 

(1.63) 

1.00 e 

(1.41) 

1.16 e 

(1.47) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

0.66 f 

(1.29) 

1.16 e 

(1.47) 

1.00 e 

(1.41) 

1.00 e 

(1.41) 

1.66 c 

(1.63) 

1.00 e 

(1.41) 

1.16 e 

(1.47) 

0.66 f 

(1.29) 

0.33 g 

(1.15) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

0.33 g 

(1.15) 

0.66 f 

(1.29) 


control 

1.00 e 

(1.41) 

1.00 e 

(1.41) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

0.66 f 

(1.29) 

1.00 e 

(1.41) 

1.00 e 

(1.41) 

1.00 e 

(1.41) 

1.33 d 

(1.53) 

0.66 f 

(1.29) 

1.00 e 

(1.41) 

2.66 a 

(1.91) 

2.33 a 

(1.83) 

2.66 a 

(1.83) 

2.33 a 

(1.91) 

2.49 a 

(1.87) 

Mean 

1.31 b 

(1.52) 

1.13c 

(1.46) 

1.62a 

(1.62) 

1.02d 

(1.42) 

1.27 

(1.51)

deadhearts). This was followed by Azagro (5%) which recorded 14.29 per cent deadhearts. 

Plant mixture was inferior recording 15.02 per cent deadhearts. 

All spraying intervals irrespective of botanicals were significantly superior over 

untreated check (49.25% deadhearts) (Table 15). Highest protection was offered by spraying 

3, 6, 9, 12 DAE (4.91% deadhearts) followed by 3, 6, 9 DAE (6.08% deadhearts) and 6, 9, 12 

DAE (6.00% deadhearts) being on par with each other. 

Interaction effect revealed that spraying NSKE (5%) at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE offered 

highest protection (4.00% deadhearts) which was on par with Endosulfan 35 EC at this 

interval (4% deadheart).this was followed by Azagro at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE (6% deadheart) and 

NSKE (5%) sprayed at 6,9,12 DAE (5.66% deadhearts) all being on par with each other and 

with endosulfan at these intervals.( 5% deadhert) (Table 15). 

Study on evaluation of spraying botanicals at different intervals against shoot fly on 

28 DAE in timely sown sorghum (Table 16) revealed that irrespective of spraying intervals 

Azagro (5%) and NSKE (5%) offered good protection (22.78% deadhearts each). But 

endosulfan was superior (18.40% deadhearts). Plant mixture offered least protection 

(23.61% deadhearts). 

Irrespective of botanicals, all spraying intervals offered good protection as against 

control (82.08% deadhearts) (Table 16). Highest protection was offered by spraying at 3, 6, 

9, 12 DAE (10.83% deadhearts) followed by 3, 6, 9 DAE and 6, 9, 12 DAE (13.08% 

deadhearts each). Spraying at 3, 6 DAE, 3, 9 DAE and 6, 9 DAE were on par with each other 

(18.08, 17.91 and 18.00% deadhearts, respectively) and were next best. 

Interaction effect revealed that the best was NSKE (5%) sprayed at the 3, 6, 9, 12 

DAE (10.33% deadhearts) which was on par with Azagro (5%) and plant mixture (5%) 

sprayed at the same interval (11.66 and 12% deadhearts, respectively). But highest 

protection was offered by endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) sprayed at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE (9.33% 

deadhearts) (Table 16). 


On 14 DAE (Table 17) the best treatment was NSKE (5%) (14.19% deadhearts) 

irrespective of spraying intervals. Azagro (5%) and plant mixture were on par (14.85 and 

15.90% deadhearts respectively). However, endosulfan recorded least damage (8.42% 

deadhearts) and was the most superior. 

Among spraying intervals, spraying at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE proved best (4.66% 

deadhearts) followed by 3, 6, 9 DAE (5.66% deadhearts), 6, 9, 12 DAE (5.66% deadhearts) 

and were on par with each other. 

Interaction effect recorded 3.33 to 22.00 per cent deadhearts as against control 

(31.66 to 32% deadhearts) thus proved significantly superior to no protection. Among 

botanicals, highest protection was offered by NSKE (5%) sprayed at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE (4.00% 

deadhearts) and endosulfan was on par with it at the same interval (3.33% deadhearts). Next 

best were Azagro (5%) at 3,6,9,12 DAE (5.66% deadheart) and plant mixture (5%) sprayed at 

3,6,9 DAE (5.33% deadheart), NSKE (5%) at 6,9,12 DAE (5.66% deadheart) all being on par 

with each other. 

At 21 DAE (Table 18), the best was Azagro (5%) which recorded 23.66 per cent 

deadhearts. NSKE (5%) and plant mixture (5%) recorded 24.14 and 24.26% deadhearts and 

were on par with each other but the superiority was shown by endosulfan 35 EC (0.05%) 

which recorded least damage (16.92% deadhearts) irrespective of spraying intervals. 

Irrespective of botanicals, spraying @ 3, 6, 9, 12 offered highest protection against 

shoot fly (9.08% deadhearts) followed by 3, 6, 9 DAE and 6, 9, 12 DAE (15.33 and 15.66% 

respectively). Next superior were 3, 12 DAE, 6, 12 DAE and 9, 12 DAE (17.33, 17.66 and 

17.33% deadhearts, respectively). Spraying at 3, 6 DAE, 3, 9 DAE and 6, 9 DAE were next 

best and on par with each other (20.58, 20.66 and 20.41% deadhearts, respectively). Next 

superior were 6 DAE and 9 DAE (23.08 and 22.83% deadhearts, respectively) followed by 3 

DAE and 12 DAE (24.16 and 24.75% deadhearts, respectively). All intervals proved better 

than untreated check (63.08% deadhearts).

Table 14: Evaluation of spraying botanicals at different intervals on the deadheart formation by shoot fly on 14 DAE in timely sown sorghum 

Treatments 3 6 9 12 3, 6 3, 6, 9 

Azagro 5% 13.67 bc 

(21.16)* 

NSKE 5% 13.00 bcd 

Plant 

mixture 5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.07%) 

(20.63) 

14.33 b 

(21.68) 

6.00 h-k 

(14.02) 

Mean 11.75 b 

(19.37) 

11.33 d 

(19.27) 

11.33 d 

(19.26) 

11.67 cd 

(19.55) 

5.00 j-n 

(12.8) 

9.83 c 

(17.72) 

11.00 d 

(18.99) 

11.33 d 

(19.27) 

12.00 cd 

(19.82) 

5.33 i-l 

(13.21) 

9.92 c 

(17.82) 

14.67 b 

(21.91) 

13.67 bc 

(21.16) 

15.00 b 

(22.18) 

6.33 ij 

(14.40) 

12.42 b 

(19.91) 

8.33 efg 

(16.52) 

9.00 e 

(16.98) 

9.00 e 

(17.16) 

4.33 l-o 

(11.90) 

7.62 d 

(15.64) 


0.11 

0.26 

0.33 

0.38 

0.73 

1.45 

4.67 k-n 

(12.35) 

4.00 nop 

(11.39) 

5.00 j-n 

(12.8) 

2.67 q 

(9.31) 

4.08 f 

(11.46) 


3, 6, 9, 

12 

3.00 pq 

(9.91) 

3.00 pq 

(9.82) 

4.00 

nop 

(11.39) 

2.33 q 

(8.7) 

3.08 g 

(9.96) 

3, 9 3, 12 6, 9 

Deadhearts (%) 

8.00 efg 

(16.17) 

7.00 fgh 

(15.15) 

8.67 ef 

(16.85) 

4.00 m-p 

(11.45) 

6.92 d 

(14.9) 

7.33 e-h 

(15.5) 

6.00 h-k 

(14.02) 

6.67 ghi 

(14.77) 

3.00 q 

(9.91) 

5.75 e 

(13.55) 

8.33 efg 

(16.48) 

8.00 efg 

(16.17) 

8.67 ef 

(16.85) 

4.00 p-q 

(11.45) 

6.92 d 

(15.24) 

6, 9, 

12 

5 j-n 

(12.76) 

4.33 l-o 

(11.9) 

4.67 k-n 

(12.35) 

2.67 q 

(9.31) 

4.17 f 

(11.58) 

*Figures in parentheses are arc sine transformed values 

Means followed by same alphabet do not differ significantly (0.05) by DMRT 


B/W two treatment 

B/W two spraying intervals 



control 

7 fgh 

(15.15) 

5.33 i-m 

(13.17) 

7.33 e-h 

(15.5) 

3.33 opq 

(10.43) 

5.75 e 

(13.56) 

6.67 ghi 

(14.77) 

6.00 h-k 

(13.99) 

7.33 e-h 

(15.5) 

3.00 pq 

(9.91) 

5.75 e 

(13.54) 

23.00 a 

(27.46) 

24.33 a 

(28.25) 

24.67 a 

(28.44) 

24.33 a 

(28.24) 

24.08 a 

(28.10) 

Mean 

9.43 a 

(17.03) 

9.02 b 

(16.51) 

9.93 a 

(17.49) 

5.45 c 

(12.5) 

8.46 

(15.88)

Table 15. Evaluation of spraying botanicals at different intervals on the deadheart formation by shoot fly on 21 DAE in timely sown sorghum 

Treatments 3 6 9 12 3, 6 3, 6, 9 

Azagro 5% 20.33 b 

(25.82)* 

NSKE 5% 19.00 b 

Plant 

mixture 5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.07%) 

(24.96) 

19.66 b 

(25.46) 

13.00 b 

(24.96) 

Mean 18.00 b 

(25.29) 

15.00 de 

(22.17) 

14.66 e 

(21.93) 

16.33 cd 

(23.14) 

12.00 e 

(21.93) 

14.45 c 

(22.29) 

15.00 de 

(22.18) 

15.00 de 

(22.18) 

16.66 c 

(23.36) 

12.66 de 

(22.18) 

14.83 c 

(22.48) 

19.00 b 

(24.96) 

19.66 b 

(25.40) 

20.00 b 

(25.6) 

13.66 b 

(25.40) 

18.08 b 

(25.34) 

12.00 fgh 

(19.83) 

10.00 i-l 

(18.10) 

12.00 fgh 

(19.83) 

9.33 i-l 

(18.10) 

18.83 d 

(18.96) 


0.04 

0.19 

0.22 

0.14 

0.52 

1.01 

7.00 mn 

(15.13) 

5.33 p 

(13.21) 

7.00 mn 

(5.13) 

5.00 p 

(13.21) 

6.08 f 

(14.17) 


3, 6, 

9,12 3, 9 3, 12 6, 9 

5.33 p 

(13.21) 

4.0 q 

(11.45) 

6.33 mno 

(14.4) 

4.00 q 

(11.45) 

4.91 g 

(12.63) 


12.33 fg 

(20.09) 

10.33 i-l 

(18.41) 

12.66 f 

(20.38) 

10.00 i-l 

(18.41) 

11.33 d 

(19.32) 

10.00 i-l 

(18.11) 

9.00 l 

(17.16) 

9.66 jkl 

(17.80) 

6.33 l 

(17.16) 

8.75 e 

(17.56) 

11.33 f-i 

(19.25) 

11.00 g-j 

(19.00) 

12.00 fgh 

(19.83) 

9.66 g-j 

(19.00) 

11.00 d 

(19.27) 

6, 9, 

12 

6.0 nop 

(14.03) 

5.66 op 

(13.62) 

7.33 m 

(15.48) 

5.00 op 

(13.62) 

6.00 f 

(14.19) 




B/W two treatment 

B/W two spraying intervals 

Interaction of treatments and spraying intervals 


control 

9.33 kl 

(17.49) 

9.33 kl 

(17.49) 

10.33 i-l 

(18.41) 

7.66 k-l 

(17.49) 

9.16 e 

(17.72) 

9.00 l 

(17.18) 

9.66 jkl 

(17.80) 

10.66 hk 

(18.70) 

6.66 jkl 

(17.80) 

9.0 e 

(17.87) 

48.33 a 

(39.81) 

49.00 a 

(40.09) 

49.66 a 

(40.36) 

50.00 a 

(40.09) 

49.25 a 

(40.09) 

Mean 

14.29 b 

(20.66) 

13.69 c 

(20.06) 

15.02 a 

(21.27) 

11.78 c 

(20.06) 

13.69

Table 16. Evaluation of spraying botanicals at different intervals on the deadheart formation by shoot fly on 28 DAE in timely sown sorghum 


Treatments 3 6 9 12 3, 6 3, 6, 9 3,6,9,12 3, 9 3, 12 6, 9 6, 9, 12 6, 12 9, 12 Untreated 

control 

Azagro 5% 24 c-f 

(28.05)* 

NSKE 5% 24.33 a 

Plant 

mixture 5% 

Endosulfan 

35EC 

(0.07%) 

(28.24) 

26.00 bc 

(29.19) 

19.33 hi 

(25.15) 

Mean 23.41 b 

(27.66) 

22.66 fg 

(27.25) 

21 b-f 

(26.24) 

23.33 ef 

(27.64) 

16.00 jkl 

(22.90) 

20.75 c 

(26.01) 

23.66 def 

(27.85) 

22.23 gh 

(27.06) 

23.00 ef 

(27.46) 

16.33 jk 

(23.13) 

21.33 c 

(26.38) 

25.00 be 

(28.63) 

25.66 fg 

(29.01) 

26.33 b 

(29.38) 

18.66 i 

(24.74) 

23.91 b 

(27.94) 

18.66 i 

(24.73) 

19.33 bcd 

(25.15) 

21.00 gh 

(26.24) 

13.33 nop 

(20.91) 

18.08 d 

(24.26) 


0.09 

0.19 

0.24 

0.32 

0.52 

1.04 

14.33 lo 

(21.68) 

13.00 hi 

(20.64) 

14.66 kn 

(21.93) 

10.33 st 

(18.40) 

13.08 f 

(20.66) 

11.66 opq 

(19.55) 

10.33 qrs 

(18.40) 

12.00 pqr 

(19.83) 

9.33 t 

(17.47) 

10.83 g 

(18.81) 


18.66 i 

(24.73) 

19.00 st 

(24.96) 

20.00 hi 

(25.61) 

14.00 mno 

(21.42) 

17.91 d 

(24.18) 

15.66 jkl 

(22.66) 

15.66 i 

(22.65) 

16.66 j 

(23.37) 

11.33 rs 

(19.27) 

14.83 e 

(21.99) 

18.33 i 

(24.5) 

19.66 jkl 

(25.39) 

20.00 hi 

(25.60) 

14.00 mno 

(21.42) 

18.00 d 

(24.23) 

14.00 mno 

(21.42) 

13.66 hi 

(21.16) 

14.00 mno 

(21.42) 

10.66 rs 

(18.70) 

13.08 f 

(20.68) 

*Figures in parentheses are arc sine transformed values 



Between two treatment 



15.33 jm 

(22.42) 

16.00 jkl 

(22.9) 

16.00 jkl 

(22.9) 

11.00 rs 

(18.9) 

15.58 e 

(21.8) 

16.00 j-l 

(22.9) 

15.33 jm 

(22.42) 

16.00 jkl 

(22.9) 

11.33 rs 

(19.27) 

14.66 e 

(21.87) 

81.00 a 

(51.54) 

83.66 a 

(52.38) 

81.66 a 

(51.75) 

82.00 a 

(51.86) 

82.08 a 

(51.88) 

Mean 

22.78 b 

(26.28) 

22.78 b 

(26.19) 

23.61 a 

(26.80) 

18.40 c 

(23.11) 

21.89 

(25.6)

Table 17. Evaluation of spraying botanicals at different intervals on the deadheart formation by shoot fly on 14 DAE in late sown sorghum 


Treatments 3 6 9 12 3, 6 3, 6, 9 3,6,9,12 3, 9 3, 12 6, 9 6, 9, 

12 

Azagro 5% 21.00 b 

(21.44)* 

NSKE 5% 20.66 b 

Plant 

mixture 5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.07%) 

(26.03) 

22.00 b 

(26.86) 

11.33 c 

(19.25) 

Mean 17.75 b 

(24.59) 

18.00 c 

(24.29) 

18.00 c 

(24.29) 

18.33 c 

(24.52) 

9.66 gh 

(17.80) 

16.00 c 

(22.72) 

18.00 c 

(24.29) 

17.66 c 

(24.07) 

18.00 c 

(24.29) 

9.00 h 

(17.18) 

15.66 c 

(22.45) 

22.00 b 

(26.86) 

21.00 b 

(26.24) 

22.33 b 

(27.06) 

11.00 ef 

(18.99) 

19.08 b 

(24.79) 

15.33 d 

(22.42) 

14.66 d 

(21.92) 

15.66 d 

(22.66) 

6.66 i 

(14.77) 

13.08 d 

(20.44) 


0.07 

0.17 

0.22 

0.25 

0.48 

0.94 

6.66 i 

(14.75) 

5.33 kl 

(13.21) 

7.00 i 

(15.15) 

3.66 op 

(10.94) 

5.66 f 

(13.51) 

5.66 jk 

(13.62) 

4.00 nop 

(11.39) 

5.66 jk 

(13.62) 

3.33 p 

(10.43) 

4.66 g 

(12.26) 


15.66 d 

(22.67) 

15.00 d 

(22.18) 

15.66 d 

(22.67) 

7.00 i 

(15.15) 

13.33 d 

(20.66) 

10.33 efg 

(18.40) 

9.66 gh 

(17.80) 

10.33 efg 

(18.40) 

4.66 lmn 

(12.35) 

8.75 e 

(16.74) 

15.66 d 

(22.66) 

15.00 d 

(22.18) 

15.00 d 

(22.18) 

7.00 i 

(15.12) 

13.66 d 

(20.53) 

12.33 ij 

(14.40) 

5.66 jk 

(13.62) 

7.00 i 

(15.15) 

3.66 op 

(10.94) 

5.66 f 

(13.53) 

* Figures in parentheses are arc sine transformed values. 


DAE - Days After Emergence 





control 

10.00 fgh 

(18.11) 

10.00 fgh 

(18.11) 

10.33 efg 

(18.40) 

4.33 mno 

(11.9) 

8.66 e 

(16.63) 

10.66 efg 

(18.70) 

10.00 fgh 

(18.11) 

11.00 ef 

(18.99) 

5.00 klm 

(12.80) 

9.16 e 

(17.15) 

32.66 a 

(32.73) 

32.00 a 

(32.39) 

33.00 a 

(32.9) 

31.66 a 

(32.22) 

32.33 a 

(32.56) 

Mean 

14.85 a 

(21.44) 

14.19 b 

(20.82) 

15.9 a 

(21.63) 

8.42 c 

(15.70) 

13.14 

19.90



Treatments 3 6 9 12 3, 6 3, 6, 9 3,6,9,12 3, 9 3, 12 6, 9 

Azagro 5% 27.00 cde 

(29.75)* 

NSKE 5% 27.00 cd 

Plant 

mixture 5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.07%) 

(29.75) 

28.00 bc 

(30.30) 

14.66 mn 

(21.93) 

Mean 24.16 b 

(27.93) 

25.66 fg 

(29.01) 

25.33 fg 

(28.82) 

27.00 cde 

(29.75) 

14.33 mno 

(21.68) 

23.08 c 

(27.31) 

25.00 g 

(28.63) 

26.00 efg 

(29.29) 

26.33 def 

(29.38) 

14.00 no 

(21.42) 

22.83 c 

(27.16) 

27.66 c 

(30.12) 

27.33 cd 

(29.94) 

29.00 b 

(30.83) 

15.00 m 

(22.18) 

24.75 b 

(28.27) 

22.66 hi 

(27.26) 

22.00 i 

(26.86) 

23.66 h 

(27.85) 

14.00 no 

(21.42) 

20.58 d 

(25.85) 


0.04 

0.12 

0.14 

0.12 

0.32 

0.63 

16.00 l 

(22.90) 

16.33 kl 

(23.14) 

17.00 k 

(23.61) 

12.00 rs 

(19.84) 

15.33 f 

(22.37) 

15.66 lm 

(22.36) 

13.66 op 

(21.16) 

15.66 lm 

(22.36) 

11.33 s 

(19.27) 

9.08 g 

(16.92) 


23.00 hi 

(27.46) 

22.33 i 

(27.06) 

23.00 hi 

(27.46) 

14.33 mno 

(21.68) 

20.66 d 

(25.91) 

19.33 i 

(25.18) 

18.66 j 

(24.74) 

18.66 j 

(24.74) 

12.66 qr 

(20.32) 

17.33 e 

(23.76) 

22.00 i 

(26.86) 

22.66 hi 

(27.26) 

23.00 hi 

(27.46) 

14.00 no 

(21.42) 

20.41 d 

(25.75) 

6, 9, 

12 

16.00 l 

(22.90) 

16.00 l 

(22.90) 

16.66 kl 

(23.37) 

12.00 rs 

(19.83) 

15.66 f 

(22.25) 

*Figures in parentheses are arc sine transformed values. 







control 

19.66 j 

(25.39) 

19.00 j 

(24.96) 

19.00 j 

(24.96) 

13.00 pq 

(20.63) 

17.66 e 

(23.99) 

19.00 j 

(24.96) 

18.66 j 

(24.74) 

19.00 j 

(24.96) 

12.66 qr 

(20.37) 

17.33 e 

(23.76) 

62.66 a 

(45.33) 

63.00 a 

(45.45) 

63.66 a 

(45.69) 

63.00 a 

(45.45) 

63.08 a 

(45.48) 

Mean 

23.66 b 

(27.10) 

24.14 a 

(27.57) 

24.26 a 

(23.43) 

16.92 c 

(22.68) 

22.25 

26.19



Treatments 3 6 9 12 3, 6 3, 6, 9 3,6,9,12 3, 9 3, 12 6, 9 6, 9, 12 6, 12 9, 12 Untreated 

control 

Azagro 5% 

NSKE 5% 

Plant 

mixture 5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.07%) 

Mean 

30.66 b 

(33.23)* 

33.00 bc 

(32.89) 

34.00 b 

(33.39) 

22.00 gh 

(26.86) 

33.66 b 

(31.59) 

30.66 e 

(31.71) 

30.00 e 

(31.36) 

31.00 de 

(31.88) 

20.33 ijk 

(25.82) 

28.00 c 

(30.19) 

30.00 e 

(31.36) 

30.00 e 

(31.36) 

31.66 cde 

(32.22) 

20.00 jkl 

(25.61) 

27.91 c 

(30.14) 

32.66 bcd 

(32.73) 

32.66 bcd 

(32.73) 

33.00 bc 

(32.89) 

21.66 ghi 

(26.65) 

30.00 b 

(31.25) 

27.66 f 

(30.12) 

27.00 f 

(29.75) 

26.33 f 

(29.33) 

18.66 lmn 

(24.74) 

24.91 d 

(28.49) 


0.1 

0.15 

0.21 

0.36 

0.42 

0.87 

18.33 mno 

(24.52) 

18.66 lmn 

(24.74) 

19.00 klm 

(24.95) 

14.66 p 

(21.93) 

17.66 f 

(24.03) 

17.33 no 

(23.84) 

17.00 o 

(23.61) 

17.33 no 

(23.84) 

14.00 p 

(21.42) 

16.41 g 

(23.18) 


27.33 f 

(29.94) 

26.33 f 

(29.38) 

28.00 f 

(30.30) 

19.00 klm 

(24.96) 

25.16 d 

(28.64) 

21.66 ghi 

(26.65) 

21.00 hij 

(26.24) 

22.33 gh 

(27.06) 

17.33 no 

(23.84) 

20.58 e 

(25.95) 

26.33 f 

(29.35) 

26.33 f 

(29.38) 

27.00 f 

(29.75) 

19.00 klm 

(24.95) 

24.66 d 

(28.36) 

19.00 klm 

(24.96) 

18.66 lmn 

(24.74) 

19.00 klm 

(24.96) 

15.00 p 

(22.18) 

17.91 f 

(24.21) 







21.00 hij 

(26.24) 

21.66 ghi 

(26.65) 

22.62 g 

(27.25) 

17.00 o 

(23.61) 

20.58 e 

(25.94) 

22.00 gh 

(26.86) 

21.00 hij 

(26.23) 

22.33 gh 

(27.06) 

17.33 no 

(23.84) 

20.66 e 

(26.00) 

82.33 a 

(51.96) 

81.66 a 

(51.75) 

83.66 a 

(52.38) 

81.00 a 

(51.54) 

82.16 a 

(51.91) 

Mean 

29.28 a 

(30.25) 

28.92 a 

(30.06) 

29.80 a 

(30.52) 

22.66 b 

(26.28) 

27.66 

29.28

Interaction between different treatments and their different spraying interval reveled 

that superior among botanicals was NSKE (5%) sprayed @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE (13.66% 

deadhearts) followed by Azagro (5%) and plant mixture (5%) sprayed @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE 

(15.66% deadhearts each). However, highest protection was offered by endosulfan 35 EC 

(0.05%) which recorded 11.33 per cent deadhearts. 

On 28 DAE (Table 19), all botanicals were on par with each other. Azagro (5%), 

NSKE (5%) and plant mixture (5%) recorded 29.28, 28.92 and 29.80 per cent deadhearts 

respectively but all the botanicals were inferior to endosulfan 35 EC (0.05%) which remained 

best chemical in controlling shoot fly. It recorded least (22.66% deadhearts). 

Irrespective of treatments, all spraying intervals provided better protection over 

control (82.16% deadhearts). Spraying @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE offered highest protection (16.41% 

deadhearts) followed by 3, 6, 9 DAE and 6, 9, 12 DAE (17.66 and 17.91% deadhearts, 

respectively) and were on par with each other. 

Interaction effect of treatments and spraying intervals revealed that all treatments at 

all intervals were superior to untreated control (Table 19). Among botanicals, highest 

protection offered by NSKE (5%) recording 17.00 per cent deadheart when sprayed at 3, 6, 9, 

12 DAC and it was a par with Azagro (5%) and plant mixture (5%) both recording 17.33% 

deadhearts when sprayed @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE. Here also botanicals were inferior to chemical. 

Endosulfan was the best treatment compared to all botanicals at the respective interval. 

4.2.3 Yield 


Irrespective of spraying intervals Azagro (5%) and NSKE (5%) treatments (16.23 and 

16.26 q/ha respectively) gave highest yield and were on par with each other. Least yield 

recorded by plant mixture (5%) treatment (15.80 q/ha). Among all treatments, highest grain 

yield was recorded in endosulfan 35 EC (0.05%) treatment (17.33 q/ha) (Table 20). 

All spraying intervals gave significantly superior yield over untreated control (9.46 

q/ha) irrespective of treatments (Table 20). Highest yield was obtained in spraying @ 3, 6, 9, 

12 DAE (18.78 q/ha) followed by 3, 6, 9 DAE (17.74) and 6, 9, 12 DAE (17.76) which were on 

par with each other. Next highest yield recorded by 3,12 DAE, 6, 12 DAE and 9, 12 DAE 

(17.30, 17.29 and 17.33 q/ha, respectively) being on par with each other. 

Interaction effect revealed that Azagro (5%) recorded highest grain yield (18.80 q/ha) 

and was on par with NSKE (5%) (18.89 q/ha) when sprayed at 3,6,9,12 DAE. Next best was 

NSKE (5%) sprayed at 3, 6, 9 DAE (17.58 q/ha) and at 6,9,12 DAE (17.60 q/ha). At 

respective intervals, all botanicals were inferior to endosulfan (Table 20). 


Study on yield of late sorghum as influenced by spraying botanicals at different 

intervals (Table 21) revealed that irrespective of spraying intervals highest yield was obtained 

in Azagro (5%) and NSKE (5%) and were on par with each other (15.58 and 15.59 q/ha). But 

they were next to endosulfan (16.67 q/ha). Plant mixture was inferior to all other treatments. 

(15.14 q/ha). 

All spraying intervals irrespective of treatments recorded significantly higher yield 

than untreated control (8.8 q/ha). Best results were obtained by spraying at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE 

(18.11 q/ha) followed by 3, 6, 9 DAE, 6, 9, 12 DAE and 6, 12 DAE all being on par with each 

other (17.07, 17.09, 16.62 q/ha) (Table 21). 

Interaction revealed that spraying NSKE (5%) at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE was the best 

treatment which gave 18.22 q/ha and was on par with Azagro (5%) (18.13 q/ha) followed by 

plant mixture (17.60 q/ha) at the same interval. However endosulfan 35 EC (0.05%) remained 

the best of all botanicals at respective spraying intervals.

Treatments 

Table 20. Yield of timely sown sorghum as influenced by spraying botanicals at different intervals 


3 6 9 12 3,6 3,6,9 3,6,9,12 3,9 3,12 6,9 6,9,12 6,12 9,12 

Yield (q/ha) 

Untreated 

control 

Azagro 5% 15.34vw 15.78t 15.82st 15.29wx 16.40q 17.30gh 18.80c 16.44q 16.96lm 16.47q 17.35g 17.00 l 17.04kl 9.51z 16.23b 

NSKE 5% 15.27wx 15.94r 15.93r 15.25wxy 16.72p 17.58f 18.89bc 16.71p 17.19ij 16.81nop 17.60ef 17.14jk 17.11jk 9.44z 16.26b 

Plant 

mixture 5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.07%) 

15.16y 15.46u 15.43uv 15.21xy 15.86rst 17.10jk 18.27d 15.94r 16.76op 15.89rs 17.12jk 16.73p 16.84no 9.48z 15.80c 

16.95lm 17.25hi 17.20ij 16.90mn 17.62ef 18.96b 19.15a 17.69e 18.27d 17.68e 18.97b 18.27d 18.34d 9.42z 17.33a 

Mean 15.68g 16.11f 16.10f 15.66g 16.65e 17.74b 18.78a 16.70de 17.30c 16.71d 17.76b 17.29c 17.33c 9.46h 16.38 




0.01 0.04 Between two treatments 

0.02 0.04 Between two spraying interval 

0.03 0.09 Interaction between treatments and spraying interval 

Mean

Treatments 

Table 21. Yield of late sown sorghum as influenced by spraying botanicals at different intervals 


3 6 9 12 3,6 3,6,9 3,6,9,12 3,9 3,12 6,9 6,9,12 6,12 9,12 

Yield (q/ha) 

Untreated 

control 

Azagro 5% 14.68uv 15.11s 15.15rs 14.62v 15.73p 16.64u 18.13c 15.78p 16.30lm 15.81p 16.68f 16.34klm 16.38jkl 8.84w 15.58b 

NSKE 5% 14.60uv 15.27qr 15.27qr 14.58uv 16.06o 16.91e 18.22bc 16.05o 16.52ghi 16.64fg 16.94e 16.47hij 16.44ijk 8.77x 15.59b 

Plant 

mixture 5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.07%) 

14.49v 14.80t 14.76t 14.55uv 15.19qrs 16.43ijk 17.60d 15.28a 16.10o 15.23qrs 16.45ijk 16.06o 16.17no 8.81w 15.14c 

16.29lmn 16.58fgh 16.54gi 16.23mn 16.95e 18.29b 18.49a 17.02e 17.60d 17.01e 18.30b 17.61d 17.67d 8.75w 16.67a 

Mean 15.02d 15.44d 15.43d 15.00d 15.98c 17.07b 18.11a 16.03c 16.63b 16.05c 17.09b 16.62b 16.67b 8.80e 15.72 




0.01 0.02 Between two treatments 

0.02 0.06 Between two spraying interval 

0.04 0.11 Interaction between treatments and spraying interval 

Mean



4.2.4.1.1 Timely sown sorghum 

Highest coccinellids population (1.57/plant) was recorded in Azagro 5 per cent 

treatment (Table 22) and least in Endosulfan (0.07%) treatment (1.52/plant). However, all the 

treatments were on par in recording coccinellid population. 

Irrespective of treatments all spraying intervals were on par and also all interactions 

recorded statistically same coccinellid population as that of control. Thus they were found to 

be safe for coccinellid. 

4.2.4.1.2 Late sown sorghum 

Irrespective of spraying intervals all the treatments were statistically on par in 

recording coccinellid population (1.54-1.57/plant) (Table 23). All spraying intervals irrespective 

of treatments and also all interactions were on par with untreated check. And thus all 

treatments found to be safe for coccinellids. 

4.2.4.2 Chrysoperla 

4.2.4.2.1 Timely sown sorghum 

Study on effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on chrysoperla population 

in sorghum ecosystem (Table 24) revealed that irrespective of spraying intervals, all 

treatments recorded statistically same chrysoperla population (1.54-1.58/plant). Also all 

spraying intervals irrespective of treatments and all interactions were on par with untreated 

check thus proving to be safe for chrysoperla. 

4.2.4.2.2 Late sown sorghum 


in sorghum ecosystem (Table 25) revealed that irrespective of spraying intervals, all 

treatments recorded statistically same chrysoperla population (1.60-1.62/plant). Also all 

spraying intervals irrespective of treatments and all interactions were on par with untreated 

check thus proving to be safe for chrysoperla. 


Cost economics for the management of sorghum shoot fly through spraying 

botanicals at different intervals (Table 26) indicated that highest net returns among that 

highest net returns were obtained by spraying NSKE 5% at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE (27615 Rs./ha) 

followed by spraying endosulfan at 6, 9, 12 DAE (27075 Rs./ha). Highest IBC ratio was 

obtained by spraying NSKE at 6, 9, 12 DAE (46.14:1) followed by spraying the same at 3, 6, 9 

DAE (46.08:1). Spraying endosulfan at 3, 6, 9 DAE, 6, 9, 12 DAE and 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE 

recorded comparatively low IBC ratios of 19.60:1, 19.62:1 and 14.61:1, respectively. 


4.3.1 Number of shoot flies attracted to different traps 

Evaluation of different traps against shoot fly (Table 27) indicated that highest total 

number of shoot flies were attracted towards fish meal trap 10 per acre (10482 shoot flies) 

followed by chicken trap 10 per acre (8297.5) and it was on par with fish meal trap 8 traps per 

acre (8293.5). Next best treatment was chicken trap 8 per acre which attracted 6316.5 flies 

and it was on par with dead frog trap 10 per acre (6268 shoot flies) and fish meal trap 6 per 

acre (6246.5 shoot flies). Next best treatments were fish meal trap 4 per acre (4249.5), 

chicken trap 6 per acre (4303) and dead fog trap 8 per acre (4243 shoot flies) and were on 

par with each other. Next best treatments were chicken traps 4 per acre (3377 shoot flies), 

dead frog trap 6 per acre (3306 shoot flies) being on par with each other. Least number of 

shoot flies were attracted by fish meal trap 2 per acre (2085.5 shoot flies), chicken trap 2 per 

acre (2078 shoot flies), dead frog trap 2 per acre (2060.5) and dead frog trap 4 per acre (2059 

shoot flies).

Table 22. Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on coccinellid population in timely sown sorghum 

Treatments 3 6 9 12 3, 6 3, 6, 

9 

Azagro 5% 

NSKE 5% 

Plant mixture 

5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.05%) 

Mean 

1.53 

(1.59) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.56 

(1.60) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.52 

(1.59) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.58 

(1.61) 

1.55 

(1.60) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.55 

(1.60) 

1.58 

(1.61) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.48 

(1.57) 

1.58 

(1.61) 

1.56 

(1.60) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.47 

(1.57) 

1.46 

(1.57) 

1.51 

(1.58) 

1.50 

(1.58) 

*Figures in parentheses are √ x + 1 transformed values. 



0.01 

0.02 

0.04 

NS 

NS 

NS 


1.42 

(1.56) 

1.57 

(1.60) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.43 

(1.56) 

1.57 

(1.60) 

3,6,9,12 3, 9 3, 12 6, 9 6, 9, 

12 

Number of coccinellid per plant 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.43 

(1.56) 

1.62 

(1.62) 




1.66 

(1.63) 

1.44 

(1.56) 

1.64 

(1.62) 

1.56 

(1.60) 

1.58 

(1.61) 

1.67 

(1.63) 

1.64 

(1.62) 

1.62 

(1.62) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.61 

(1.62) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.47 

(1.57) 

1.46 

(1.57) 

1.50 

(1.60) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.55 

(1.60) 

1.43 

(1.56) 

1.56 

(1.60) 


control 

1.47 

(1.57) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.66 

(1.61) 

1.55 

(1.60) 

1.57 

(1.60) 

1.66 

(1.63) 

1.48 

(1.57) 

1.58 

(1.61) 

1.56 

(1.60) 

1.57 

(1.60) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.62 

(1.62) 

1.66 

(1.63) 

1.56 

(1.60) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

Mean 

1.57 

(1.60) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.55 

(1.60) 

1.52 

(1.59) 

1.55 

(1.60)

Table 23. Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on coccinellid population in late sown sorghum 

Treatments 3 6 9 12 3, 6 3, 6, 

9 

Azagro 5% 

NSKE 5% 

Plant mixture 

5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.05%) 

Mean 

1.52 

(1.59) 

1.51 

(1.58) 

1.67 

(1.63) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.57 

(1.66) 

1.52 

(1.59) 

1.51 

(1.58) 

1.67 

(1.63) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.57 

(1.60) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.66 

(1.63) 

1.67 

(1.63) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.57 

(1.60) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.58 

(1.61) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.57 

(1.60) 

1.55 

(1.59) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.42 

(1.56) 

1.50 

(1.58) 




0.01 

0.03 

0.04 

NS 

NS 

NS 


1.48 

(1.57) 

1.51 

(1.58) 

1.53 

(1.59) 

1.40 

(1.55) 

1.48 

(1.57) 

3,6,9,12 3, 9 3, 12 6, 9 6, 9, 

12 

Number of coccinellid per plant 

1.50 

(1.58) 

1.50 

(1.58) 

1.51 

(1.58) 

1.40 

(1.55) 

1.48 

(1.57) 




1.53 

(1.59) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.48 

(1.57) 

1.50 

(1.58) 

1.50 

(1.58) 

1.68 

(1.64) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.50 

(1.58) 

1.50 

(1.58) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.45 

(1.57) 

1.44 

(1.56) 

1.53 

(1.59) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.55 

(1.59) 

1.42 

(1.56) 

1.41 

(1.55) 

1.48 

(1.57) 


control 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.68 

(1.64) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.50 

(1.68) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.67 

(1.63) 

1.57 

(1.66) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.62 

(1.62) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.62 

(1.62) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.62 

(1.62) 

Mean 

1.57 

(1.60) 

1.56 

(1.60) 

1.55 

(1.59) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.56 

(1.60)

Table 24. Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on chrysoperla population in timely sown sorghum 

Treatments 3 6 9 12 3, 6 3, 6, 

9 

Azagro 5% 

NSKE 5% 

Plant mixture 

5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.05%) 

Mean 

1.47 

(1.57) 

1.43 

(1.56) 

1.40 

(1.55) 

1.40 

(1.55) 

1.43 

(1.56) 

1.43 

(1.56) 

1.57 

(1.60) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.51 

(1.58) 

1.52 

(1.59) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.66 

(1.63) 

1.52 

(1.59) 

1.40 

(1.55) 

1.55 

(1.60) 

1.51 

(1.58) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.47 

(1.57) 

1.46 

(1.57) 

1.50 

(1.58) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.56 

(1.60) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.52 

(1.59) 




0.04 

0.03 

0.04 

NS 

NS 

NS 


1.56 

(1.60) 

1.52 

(1.59) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.40 

(1.55) 

1.57 

(1.60) 

3,6,9,12 3, 9 3, 12 6, 9 6, 9, 

12 

Number of chrysoperla per plant 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.42 

(1.56) 

1.56 

(1.60) 




1.53 

(1.59) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.64 

(1.62) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.55 

(1.60) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.64 

(1.62) 

1.42 

(1.56) 

1.57 

(1.60) 

1.57 

(1.60) 

1.51 

(1.58) 

1.57 

(1.60) 

1.51 

(1.58) 

1.42 

(1.56) 

1.55 

(1.60) 


control 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.48 

(1.57) 

1.58 

(1.61) 

1.58 

(1.61) 

1.56 

(1.60) 

1.44 

(1.56) 

1.66 

(1.63) 

1.64 

(1.62) 

1.56 

(1.60) 

1.62 

(1.62) 

1.57 

(1.60) 

1.64 

(1.62) 

1.67 

(1.63) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.62 

(1.62) 

Mean 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.58 

(1.61) 

1.55 

(1.60) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.55 

(1.60)

Table 25. Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on chrysoperla population in late sown sorghum 

Treatments 3 6 9 12 3, 6 3, 6, 

9 

Azagro 5% 

NSKE 5% 

Plant mixture 

5% 

Endosulfan 

35 EC 

(0.05%) 

Mean 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.67 

(1.63) 

1.57 

(1.60) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.62 

(1.62) 

1.66 

(1.63) 

1.67 

(1.63) 

1.61 

(1.62) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.64 

(1.62) 

1.44 

(1.56) 

1.45 

(1.57) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.53 

(1.59) 

1.50 

(1.58) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.68 

(1.64) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.51 

(1.58) 

1.52 

(1.59) 

1.67 

(1.63) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.57 

(1.60) 


1.58 

(1.60) 

1.58 

(1.60) 

1.52 

(1.59) 

1.41 

(1.55) 

1.52 

(1.59) 

3,6,9,12 3, 9 3, 12 6, 9 6, 9, 

12 

Number of chrysoperla per plant 

1.57 

(1.58) 

1.50 

(1.58) 

1.51 

(1.58) 

1.40 

(1.55) 

1.47 

(1.57) 





0.01 

0.01 

0.04 

NS 

NS 

NS 




1.53 

(1.59) 

1.67 

(1.63) 

1.68 

(1.64) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.61 

(1.62) 

1.68 

(1.64) 

1.67 

(1.63) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.58 

(1.61) 

1.53 

(1.59) 

1.48 

(1.57) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.50 

(1.58) 

1.50 

(1.58) 

1.49 

(1.58) 

1.54 

(1.59) 

1.55 

(1.59) 

1.42 

(1.56) 

1.50 

(1.58) 


control 

1.69 

(1.64) 

1.61 

(1.62) 

1.59 

(1.61) 

1.51 

(1.58) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.51 

(1.58) 

1.55 

(1.59) 

1.55 

(1.59) 

1.48 

(1.57) 

1.52 

(1.59) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.63 

(1.62) 

1.62 

(1.62) 

1.62 

(1.62) 

Mean 

1.61 

(1.62) 

1.60 

(1.61) 

1.50 

(1.60) 

1.61 

(1.62) 

1.64 

(1.62)

Table 26. Cost economics for the management of sorghum shoot fly through spraying botanicals at different intervals 

Sl. 

No. 

Treatments (spraying) 

Yield 

(q/ha) 

Increase in 

yield over 

control 

(q/ha) 

Per cent 

increase in 

yield over 

control 

Cost of 

pest control 

(Rs/ha) 

Gross 

return 

(Rs./ha) 

Net return 

(Rs./ha) 

1 Azagro 5% @ 3, 6, 9 DAE 17.30 7.79 81.91 1680 25950 24270 14.45:1 

2 Azagro 5% @ 6, 9, 12 DAE 17.35 7.84 82.44 1680 26025 24345 14.49:1 

3 Azagro 5% @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE 18.80 9.29 97.69 2240 28200 25960 11.59:1 

4 NSKE 5% @ 3, 6, 9 DAE 17.58 8.07 84.86 560 26370 25810 46.08:1 

5 NSKE 5% @ 6, 9, 12 DAE 17.60 8.09 85.07 560 26400 25840 46.14:1 

6 NSKE 5% @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE 18.89 9.38 98.63 720 28335 27615 38.35:1 

7 Plant mixture 5% @ 3, 6, 9 DAE 17.10 7.59 79.81 560 25650 25090 44.80:1 

8 Plant mixture 5% @ 6, 9, 12 DAE 17.12 7.61 80.02 560 25680 25120 44.86:1 

9 Plant mixture 5% @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE 18.27 8.76 92.11 720 27405 26685 37.06:1 

10 Endosulfan 35 EC 0.07% @ 3, 6, 9 DAE 18.96 9.45 99.37 1380 28440 27060 19.60:1 

11 Endosulfan 35 EC 0.07% @ 6, 9, 12 DAE 18.97 9.46 99.47 1380 28455 27075 19.62:1 

12 Endosulfan 35 EC 0.07% @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE 19.15 9.64 101.36 1840 28725 26885 14.61:1 

13 Untreated control 9.51 - - - - - - 

IBC 

ratio

4.3.2 Oviposition 

Effect of different traps on oviposition of shoot fly (Table 27) indicated that, on 14 

DAE fishmeal trap 10 per acre recorded least egg load (0.5 egg/plant). All remaining trap 

treatments recorded 1.5 to 2.00 eggs per plant and were on par with each other. 

On 21 DAE (Table 27) also best treatment was fishmeal trap 10 per acre which 

recorded least egg load (1.00 per plant) and remaining treatments recorded 2.00 to 3.00 eggs 

per plant and were on par with each other. 


On 21 DAE (Table 27) there was no significant difference in the deadhearts caused 

by different trap treatments only except fish meal trap 10 per acre which offered highest 

protection recording 44 per cent deadhearts. All other treatments recorded 58 to 62 per cent 

deadhearts and were on par with each other. 

On 28 DAE (Table 27) highest protection was offered by fishmeal trap 10 per acre 

which recorded 64 per cent deadhearts and all remaining treatments showed no significant 

difference in deadheart percentage which recorded 77 to 80.5 percent deadhearts and were 

on par with each other. 

4.3.4 Yield 

Highest yield was recorded in the treatment of fishmeal trap at 10 per acre (12.12 

q/ha). Remaining all treatments recorded no significant difference in yield and it ranged from 

9.54 to 10.12 q/ha (Table 27).

Table 27. Evaluation and optimization of traps for the management of shoot fly in sorghum 

Treatments 

Total number of 

shoot flies trapped 

over 4 weeks 

Eggs/plant 

14 DAE 21 DAE 

Per cent dead hearts 

21 DAE 28 DAE 

Yield 

(q/ha) 

Fish meal trap 

2/acre 2085.5f 

2.00a 

(1.73)* 

2.50a 

(1.87)* 

61.50a 

(44.91)** 

79.00a 

(50.9)** 

9.54b 


4/acre 4249.5d 

2.00a 

(1.73) 

2.50a 

(1.87) 

59.00a 

(43.99) 

77.50a 

(50.41) 

9.84b 


6/acre 6246.5c 

1.50a 

(1.58) 

2.00a 

(1.73) 

61.00a 

(44.73) 

79.50a 

(51.06) 

9.98b 


8/acre 8293.5b 

1.50a 

(1.58) 

2.00a 

(1.73) 

58.00a 

(43.61) 

78.50a 

(50.74 

10.09b 


10/acre 10482a 

0.50b 

(1.22) 

1.00b 

(1.41) 

44.00b 

(37.99) 

64.00b 

(45.81) 

12.22a 

Chicken trap 

2/acre 2078f 

2.00a 

(1.73) 

3.00a 

(2) 

59.00a 

(43.99) 

77.50a 

(50.41) 

9.81b 

Chicken trap 

4/acre 3377e 

1.50a 

(1.58) 

3.00a 

(2) 

62.00a 

(45.09) 

80.50a 

(51.38) 

9.43b 

Chicken trap 

6/acre 4303d 

1.50a 

(1.58) 

3.00a 

(2) 

62.00a 

(45.09) 

80.50a 

(51.38) 

9.62b 

Chicken trap 

8/acre 6316.5c 

2.00a 

(1.73) 

2.50a 

(1.87) 

59.00a 

(43.99) 

77.00a 

(50.25) 

10.12b 

Chicken trap 

10/acre 8297.5b 

2.00a 

(1.73) 

2.00a 

(1.73) 

58.00a 

(43.61) 

78.50a 

(50.74) 

10.05b 

Dead frog trap 

2/acre 2060.5f 

1.50a 

(1.58) 

3.00a 

(2) 

60.00a 

(44.36) 

78.00a 

(50.58) 

9.89b 


4/acre 2059f 

1.59a 

(58) 

3.00a 

(2) 

59.50 

(44.17) 

77.50a 

(50.41) 

9.88b 


6/acre 3306e 

2.00a 

(1.73) 

2.50a 

(1.87) 

61.50a 

(44.91) 

79.50a 

(51.06) 

9.69b 


8/acre 4243d 

1.50a 

(1.73) 

2.50a 

(1.87) 

61.00a 

(44.73) 

79.00a 

(50.9) 

9.78b 


10/acre 6268c 

2.00a 

(1.73) 

2.50a 

(1.87) 

61.50a 

(44.91) 

79.00a 

(50.9) 

9.98b 

SEm± 251.41 0.14 0.16 1.66 1.3 0.57 

CD at 5% 762.58 0.41 0.51 5.05 3.95 1.73 

* Figures in parentheses indicate √ x + 1 transformed values. 

** Figures in parentheses indicate arc sine transformed values. 

DAE: Days After Emergence 

Means followed by same alphabet in a column do not significantly by DMRT

5. DISCUSSION 

Investigations on the non-chemical approaches for the management of shoot fly 

Atherigona soccata Rondani with reference to management through botanical seed treatment, 

botanical sprays and traps carried out during kharif 2008 are discussed hereunder: 

5.1 Management of shoot fly through seed treatments with 

organics 


On 7 DAE, among botanicals, NSKE (5%), Azagro 5 per cent (1 ml/l) and neem oil 

(2%) proved best recording 0.40, 0.40 and 0.43 eggs per plant. Next best results were given 

by B. monosperla seed extract (5%), B. monosperma leaf extract (5%), garlic bulb extract 

(5%), pongamia leaf extract (5%), pongamia oil (2%) and P. julifera leaf extract (5%) which 

recorded 0.46, 0.46, 0.50, 0.46, 0.46, 0.46 eggs per plant, respectively. least eggs were 

recorded in Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) and Imidacloprid (2 g/kg) treatments (0.33 egg/plant 

each). Botanicals proved inferior to Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) and Imidacloprid (2 g/kg) 

(Fig.1). 

On 14 DAE most effective seed treatment among organics was found neem oil (2%) 

treatment (0.50 egg/plant) and it was also on par with insecticides Endosulfan and 

Imidacloprid (0.46 egg/plant each) and next best were NSKE (5%) treatment (0.73 egg/plant), 

Azagro 5 per cent (1 ml/l) treatment (0.63 egg/plant), P. julifera (5%) treatment (0.73 

egg/plant) and plant mixture (5%) treatment (0.63 egg/plant) all being on par with each other. 

On 21 DAE also chemical seed treatment was superior (0.66 egg/plant) and next superior 

were NSKE (5%), Azagro (5%), neem oil (2%) and plant mixture (5%) all recorded one egg 

per plant. The supremacy of neem products and plant mixture in reducing oviposition by 

shoot fly was also noticed in late sown sorghum (Fig.2). 

There was no such document to support these findings. However, it can be 

compared with the studies of Kareem et al. (1989) who found that fewer first instar 

Nephotettix virescens (Distant) nymphs reached the adult stage on rice raised from seeds 

treated before sowing with > 2.5 per cent neem kernel extract or with 2 per cent neem cake. 


14 DAE in timely sown sorghum chemicals recorded least per cent deadhearts (5.33 

and 6.66% in Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) and Imidacloprid (2 g/kg) respectively), NSKE (5%) 

was on par with Imidacloprid recording 8 per cent deadhearts and it was also on par with 

Azagro (5%), neem oil (2%) and plant mixture (5%) which recorded 9.00, 9.33 and 10.33 per 

cent deadhearts respectively. On 21 DAE also, chemical seed treatment remained best and 

neem products and plant mixture remained next best to it NSKE (5%), Azagro (5%), neem oil 

(2%) and plant mixture (5%) were on par and superior of all other organic treatments by 

recording 16.33, 18.33, 15.66 and 17.00 per cent deadhearts, respectively. All the botanicals 

except castor leaf extract (5%) were superior over untreated control but cow urine (5%) and 

vermiwash (5%) were ineffective (53.33 and 50.33% deadhearts, respectively) being on par 

with untreated control (53.00% deadhearts). On 28 DAE the next best to chemicals was 

NSKE (5%) treatment (31.00% deadhearts) and it was also on par with Azagro 5 per cent 

neem oil treatment (33.00% deadhearts), 2 per cent neem oil (32.33% deadhearts) and 5 per 

cent mixture (36.00% deadhearts) (Fig.3). In late sown sorghum this trend remained almost 

similar (Fig.4). 

These results were not in agreement with the findings of Praveen (2005) who 

reported that okra seed treatment with neem oil at 80 ml/kg seeds recovered least per cent 

fruit damage (68.82%) followed Gaucho 600 FS @ 12 ml/kg (74.34) and thiamethoxam 70 

WS @ 10 g/kg (76.00%). 

5.1.3 Yield 

Higher grain yield obtained in among botanicals was NSKE (14.72 q/ha), Azagro 

(14.14 q/ha), neem oil (15.21 q/ha) and plant mixture (14.57 q/ha) all being on par with each 

other. Next best were B. monosperma seed (5%), B. monosperma leaf (5%), V. negundo leaf

Mean number of eggs/plant 

1.6 

1.4 

1.2 

1 

0.8 

0.6 

0.4 

0.2 

0 


T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T12 T13 T14 T15 T16 T17 T18 T19 T20 

Treatment 

Fig.1: Effect of seed treatment with organics on oviposition of shoot fly in timely sown sorghum 

Fig.1. Effect of seed treatment with organics on oviposition of shoot fly in timely sown sorghum 

Treatments 

T1 - Cow urine 5% 

T2 - Vermiwash 5% 

T3 - Butea monosperma seed extract 5% 

T4 - Butea monosperma leaf extract 5% 

T5 - Vitex negundo leaf extract 5% 

T6 - Castor leaf extract 5% 

T7 - Garlic bulb extract 5% 

T8 - NSKE 5% 

T9 - Azagro 5% (1 ml/lit) 

T10 - Pongamia leaf extract 5% 

T11 - Pongamia oil 2% 

T12 - Neem oil 2% 

T13 - Jatropha leaf extract 5% 

T14 - Jatropha oil 2% 

T15 - Prospis julifera leaf extract 5% 

T16 - Annona squamosa leaf extract 5% 

T17 - Plant mixture 5% 

T18 - Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) 

T19 - Imidachloprid 2 gm/kg 

T20 - Untreated control


2 

1.8 

1.6 

1.4 

1.2 

1 

0.8 

0.6 

0.4 

0.2 

0 

Mean number of eggs/plant Treatments 


Treatment 








T8 - NSKE 5% 












T20 - Untreated control 

Fig.2: Effect of seed treatment with organics on oviposition of shoot fly in late sown sorghum 

Fig.2. Effect of seed treatment with organics on oviposition of shoot fly in late sown sorghum

extract (5%) pongamia leaf (5%), pongamia oil (2%) and garlic bulb extract (5%) which were 

on par recording 13.01, 12.98, 12.99, 11.98, 11.92 and 12.07 q/ha, respectively. however, 

endosulfan and Imidacloprid proved superiority over rest of the treatments (Fig.3). Trend 

remained similar for late sown sorghum (Fig.4). 

There were no such documents to support these findings. Hence, these results 

neither can be discussed nor compared. 



There was no significant difference in number of coccinellids per plant recorded in all 

seed treatments and they were on par with untreated control on 14 DAE coccinellid 

population ranged from 0.30 to 0.53 per plant in various treatments. On 21 DAE and 28 DAE 

also the trend of coccinellids population being on par in all treatments including untreated 

check remained same and so also in late sown sorghum. 

The perusal of literature reveal that there is no reports on this aspect as such studies 

are wanting. 


On 14 DAE untreated check recorded 0.40 chrysoperla per plant and all organic seed 

treatments remained on par with it. On 21 DAE also, though least number found in 

Imidacloprid (0.50 chrysoperla/plant) and the highest in untreated check (0.77/plant) but no 

significant difference between the treatments was found. The same trend remained on 28 

DAE and so also in late sown sorghum. 

As this work of seed treatments with organics for the control of insect is first of its 

kind, there are no documents to support these findings. 


Highest net returns among organics was given by neem oil 2% (2174 Rs./ha) 

followed by Azagro (2109 Rs./ha), NSKE (2108 Rs./ha). But Imidacloprid and Endosulfan 

were superior in giving highest net returns (2484 and 2446 Rs./ha, respectively). Highest 

incremental benefit cost ratio (21.08:1) was obtained NSKE 5 per cent followed by plant 

mixture 5 per cent (20.86:1), neem oil 2 per cent (21.08:1) and other botanicals. However, 

Endosulfana and Imidacloprid remained superior over organics seed treatments by giving IBC 

ratio of 24.22:1 and 21.95:1, respectively. 




Azagro (5%) and NSKE (5%) were the best and on par with each other (0.46 

eggs/plant each) among botanicals but inferior to endosulfan 35 EC on 14 DAE. This was not 

in agreement with the findings of Singh and Batra (2001) who reported the supremacy of 

neem sprays (0.6 eggs/plant) over Endosulfan sprays (1.33 eggs/plant). However in this 

study, Endosulfan proved superior over neem based sprays on 14 and 21 DAE in timely as 

well as late sown sorghum. The variation may be due to change in variety, environment and 

the experimentation. 

Irrespective of treatments, spraying @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE was the most effective 

treatment in 14 and 21 DAE in timely sown crop (0 and 0.49 eggs/plant, respectively). In late 

sown crop also spraying at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE remained best on 14 DAE and 21 DAE (0.17 and 

0.59 eggs/plant, respectively) and it was also on par with 3, 6, 9 DAE (0.17 and 0.74 

eggs/plant, respectively) and 6, 9, 12 DAE (0.17 and 0.66 eggs/plant). However the trend of 

all spraying intervals being significantly superior over untreated control remained same 

throught the experiment.

Percent deadheart 

90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

Per cent deadheart at 28 DAE 

Yield (q/ha) 


Treatments 

Fig.3: Evaluation of seed treatment with organics against shoot fly and yield of timely sown sorghum 

Fig.3. Evaluation of seed treatment with organics against shoot fly and yield of timely sown sorghum 

20 

18 

16 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

Yield (q/ha) 

Treatments 








T8 - NSKE 5% 












T20 - Untreated control


100 

90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

Per cent deadheart at 28 DAE 

Yield (q/ha) 


Treatments 

Fig.4: Evaluation of seed treatment with organics against shoot fly and yield of late sown sorghum 

Fig.4. Evaluation of seed treatment with organics against shoot fly and yield of late sown sorghum 

18 

16 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

Yield (q/ha) 

Treatments 



T3 - Butea monosperma seed extract 

5% 





T8 - NSKE 5% 











T19 - Imidachloprid 2 gm/kg

Interaction effect of treatments and spraying intervals revealed that spraying of 

Endosulfan, Azagro (5%), NSKE (5%) and plant mixture (5%) @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE Endosulfan, 

Azagro and NSKE @ 3, 6, 9 DAE and 6, 9, 12 DAE were the most effective treatments 

recording no eggs and were on par with each other on 14 DAE in timely sown sorghum 

(Fig.5). However, plant mixture showed reduced efficacy over other treatments on 21 DAE 

recording 1.33 eggs per plant as against 0.33 in other treatments. In late sown sorghum, also 

this trend remained almost similar (Fig.6). 

These results are in agreement with findings of Shrinivas (2006) who reported that 

NSKE (5%) was on par with Carbofuran 3 G (30 kg/ha) by recording 0.53 eggs of shoot fly 

per plant in sorghum. In various IPM modules studied, spraying of NSKE (0.375 to 0.50%) 

effectively repelled oviposition by sorghum shoot fly as reported by Subbarayadu and Indira 

(2007). Sharma and Bhatnagar (1990) found that neem oil at 20 per cent acted as oviposition 

deterent and reduced egg laying to a greater extent by Chilo partellus (swinhoe) on the 

treated surface. Effectivity of neem sprays in reducing oviposition by shoot fly was also 

reported by Kulkarni and Bhuti (1981). 


Irrespective of spraying intervals, NSKE (5%) which recorded 9.02 per cent dead 

hearts and proved best botanical treatment on 14 DAE in timely sown crop. Azagro (1 ml/l) 

and plant mixture (5%) remained least effective (9.43 and 9.93% deadhearts respectively). 

Endosulfan 35 EC (2 ml/l) recorded least deadheart due to shoot fly (5.45%) This trend of 

botanicals being inferior to chemical remained same throught experiment except on 21 DAE 

in timely sown sorghum. 

This trend of neem insecticides remaining less effective than chemicals was also 

found by Kareem et al. (1974) who reported that NSKE sprays were less effective than 

insecticides against sorghum shoot fly. Singh and Batra (2001) reported minimum 

deadhearts due to shootfly in sorghum was reported in Endosulfan spray (10.5%) followed by 

neem (18.5%). Endosulfan 35 EC spray @ 0.07 per cent at 7 DAS recorded least per cent 

deadhearts due to shoot fly in sorghum (25.00%) and NSKE (5%) spray recorded significantly 

higher damage than Endosulfan spray as reported by Anonymous (2001c). Also, present 

findings are in agreement with those of Bhanukiran and Panwar (2005) who reported that high 

azadirechtin neem formulations neemazal F 5 EC and Neemazal-T/S 1 EC were potential 

enough to reduce infestation due to maize stalk borer but were in no way superior to 

Endosulfan 35 EC. 

However, opposite results were obtained by Anonymous (2002) who reported that 

neem leaf (5%) spray at 7 DAG of sorghum with normal seed rate recorded 19.60 per cent 

deadhearts and it was found superior to carbofuran soil application at 30 DAG in combination 

with different seed rates. 

On 21 DAE in timely sown sorghum NSKE (5%) spray was the best (13.69% 

deadhearts) and it was on par with endosulfan spray (11.78% deadherts). 

This finding is in confirmation with Anonymous (2001) who reported that spraying of 

neem leaf extract at 7 DAE recorded 39.7 per cent deadhearts and was on par with 

Carbofuran 3 G whorl application (35.0% deadhearts) in sorghum. Tekie et al. (2006) 

reported that application of 3 g per plant neem seed powder and 500 l/ha of 10 per cent of 

aqueous neem seed extract applied 4 weeks after crop emergence provided protection 

against damage by C. partellus in maize comparable to conventional insecticides. Deepthi 

(2007) reported that tunneling by C. partellus was least in NSKE (5%) which was on par with 

Carbofuran 3 G. Studies on effect of selected botanicals and synthetic insecticides against 

gall midge Capparis rubsaamen (diptera: cecidomydae) on bell pepper by Nagaraju (2000) 

indicated that significantly lower incidence of galls was observed in neem oil treated plots 

(8.00%) and it was on par with Profenofos (9.01%), NSKE (9.51%) and Abamectin (9.79%) 

and neem leaf extract (11.18%). 

Irrespective of treatments, all spraying intervals were significantly superior over 

untreated control on 14 DAE in timely sown sorghum least per cent deadhearts were 

recorded by spraying @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE (3.08 per cent deadhearts) followed by 3, 6, 9 DAE 

(4.08%) and 6, 9, 12 DAE (4.17% deadhearts) both being on par with each other. This trend

Number of eggs per plant 

1 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

0.6 

0.5 

0.4 

0.3 

0.2 

0.1 

0 

Azagro 5% NSKE 5% Plant mixture 5% Endosulfan 35 EC (0.05%) 

Treatments 

Fig.5: Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on oviposition of shoot fly on 14 DAE in timely 

sown sorghum 

Fig.5. Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on oviposition of shootfly on 14 DAE in timely sown sorghum 

Spraying interval 

(DAE) 

3 

6 

9 

12 

3,6 

3,6,9 

3,6,9,12 

3,9 

3,12 

6,9 

6,9,12 

6,12 

9,12 

Untreated control


1.8 

1.6 

1.4 

1.2 

1 

0.8 

0.6 

0.4 

0.2 

0 


Treatments 

Fig.6: Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on oviposition of shoot fly at 14 DAE in late 

sown sorghum 

Fig.6. Effect of spraying botanicals at different intervals on oviposition of shootfly at 14 DAE in late sown sorghum 


(DAE) 

3 

6 

9 

12 

3,6 

3,6,9 

3,6,9,12 

3,9 

3,12 

6,9 

6,9,12 

6,12 

9,12 

Untreated control


90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 


Treatments 


(DAE) 

Fig.7: Evaluation of spraying botanicals at different intervals on the deadheart formation by shoot fly on 

28 DAE in timely sown sorghum 

3 

6 

9 

12 

3,6 

3,6,9 

3,6,9,12 

3,9 

3,12 

6,9 

6,9,12 

6,12 

9,12 

Untreated control 

Fig.7. Evaluation of spraying botanicals at different intervals on the deadheart formation by shoot fly on 28 DAE in timely sorghum


90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 


Treatments 

Fig.8: Evaluation of spraying botanicals at different intervals on the deadheart formation by shoot fly on 

28 DAE in late sown sorghum 


(DAE) 

3 

6 

9 

12 

3,6 

3,6,9 

3,6,9,12 

3,9 

3,12 

6,9 

6,9,12 

6,12 

9,12 

Fig.8. Evaluation of spraying botanicals at different intervals on the deadheart formation by shoot fly on 28 DAE in late sown sorghum 

Untreated control

was same throughout experiment. There were no documents to support these findings as the 

work was first of its kind. 

Interaction effect of botanicals at different spraying intervals revealed that @ 14 DAE 

in timely such sorghum, best results given by spraying and Azagro and NSKE (5%) was on 

par with it at this interval (3.00% deadhearts each) and also with endosulfan @ 3, 6, 9, 12 

DAE (2.33% deadhearts). Throughout the experiment interaction effect revealed that neem 

products were next best to endosulfan. On 28 DAE in timely sown sorghum, plant mixture 

(5%) was also on par (12.00% deadhearts) with Azagro (11.66% deadhearts) and NSKE (5%) 

treatment (10.33% deadhearts) @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE (Fig.7). This trend was also observed in 

observations recorded on 28 DAE in late sown sorghum (Fig.8). 

Vendan et al. (2009) reported that crude extracts of different plant species may have 

synergistic effect and can be used for insect pest management. However, the present findings 

revealed that plant mixture (5%) was in no way superior to chemicals which is not in 

confirmation with findings of Anonymous (1989) who reported that combination of NSKE and 

garlic were significantly superior to endosulfan in reducing bollworm infestation in cotton. 

5.2.3 Yield 

In timely sown sorghum, irrespective of spraying intervals, NSKE (5%) was the best 

(16.26 q/ha) and it was also on par with Azagro (5%) (16.23 q/ha). Highest grain yield was 

obtained by Endosulfan 35 EC (2 ml/l) (17.33 q/ha) and remained superior to botanicals 

Similar trend was noticed in late sown sorghum. 

Carbofuran 3 G (30 kg/ha) recorded significantly highest sorghum grain yield (17.00 

q/ha) and NSKE was found next best (13.22 q/ha) in the study by Shrinivas (2006). 

Irrespective of treatments highest grain yield was recorded by spraying @ 3, 6, 9, 12 

DAE (18.78 q/ha) and next best was 3, 6, 9 DAE (17.74 q/ha) and 6, 9, 12 DAE (17.76 q/ha) 

both being on par with each other. Similar trend was noticed in late sown sorghum. There 

were no documents to support these findings. 

Interaction effect of treatments and different intervals revealed that highest grain yield 

was recorded in NSKE (5%) spray @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE (18.89 q/ha) in normal sowing and it 

was next to endosulfan 35 EC spray at 3,6,9,12 DAE (19.15 q/ha) (Fig.9). Same trend was 

observed in late sowing as well (Fig.10). 

These findings were not in confirmation with Spurthi (2004) who reported NSKE (5%) 

spray was on par (12.50 q/ha) with Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) spray (13.50 q/ha) in sole 

sorghum. But in this study NSKE spraying at 3, 6,9,12 DAE was on par with endosulfan @ 3, 

6, 9 DAE (18.96 q/ha) and @ 6, 9, 12 DAE (18.97 q/ha). 



Highest coccinellids population (1.57/plant) was recorded in Azagro 5 per cent 

treatment and least in Endosulfan (0.07%) treatment (1.52/plant). However, all the treatments 

were on par in recording coccinellid population. 

Irrespective of treatments all spraying intervals were on par and also all interactions 

recorded statistically coccinellid population as that of control. Same trend noticed in late sown 

sorghum. Thus they were found to be safe for coccinellid. 

These findings are in confirmation with Sunitha (2002) who reported that one day 

after spraying NSKE, neem gold and other plant extracts recorded normal activity of the 

predatory coccinellids beetles as that of control plants in chilli. Also Pareet (2006) reported 

that the population of coccinellids in brinjal seven days after NSKE 5% spray in different 

treatments except RPP was uniform (1.36 to 1.78 coccinellids) and indicated the safety of 

NSKE spray to these natural enemies. 

Aqueous extracts of Allium sativum, A. squamosa, A. indica, C. inerme, M. oleander 

and untreated check showed statistically on par population of predatory grub Mallada astur in 

guava (Manu, 2002).

Yield (q/ha) 

20 

18 

16 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 


Treatments 

Fig.9: Yield of timely sown sorghum as influenced by spraying botanicals at different intervals 

Fig.9. Yield of timely sown sorghum as influenced by spraying botanicals at different intervals 


(DAE) 

3 

6 

9 

12 

3,6 

3,6,9 

3,6,9,12 

3,9 

3,12 

6,9 

6,9,12 

6,12 

9,12 

Untreated control

Yield (q/ha) 

20 

18 

16 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 


Treatments 

Fig.10:Yield of late sown sorghum as influenced by spraying botanicals at different intervals 

Fig.10. Yield of late sown sorghum as influenced by spraying botanicals at different intervals 


(DAE) 

3 

6 

9 

12 

3,6 

3,6,9 

3,6,9,12 

3,9 

3,12 

6,9 

6,9,12 

6,12 

9,12 

Untreated control



in sorghum ecosystem revealed that irrespective of spraying intervals, all treatments recorded 

statistically same chrysoperla population (1.54-1.58/plant). Also all spraying intervals 

irrespective of treatments and all interactions were on par with untreated check thus proving 

to be safe for chrysoperla. Similar trend noticed in late sown sorghum. 

Results of this study were in agreement with Ravikumar (2004) who reported the 

population of chrysopids in chilli after NSKE (5%) spray recorded 1.46 chrysoperla per plant 

which was on par with untreated control (2.12 chrysoperla/plant) and indicated the safety of 

NSKE spray to chrysoperla. However, the study by Shrinivas (2006) indicated opposite 

results. He found NSKE (5%) spray conserved 1.00 chrysoperla per plant which was next 

best to untreated control (1.67 chrysoperla/plant). 


Cost economics for the management of sorghum shoot fly through spraying 

botanicals at different intervals (Table 26) indicated that highest net returns among that 

highest net returns were obtained by spraying NSKE 5% at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE (27615 Rs./ha) 

followed by spraying endosulfan at 6, 9, 12 DAE (27075 Rs./ha). Highest IBC ratio was 

obtained by spraying NSKE at 6, 9, 12 DAE (46.14:1) followed by spraying the same at 3, 6, 9 

DAE (46.08:1). Spraying endosulfan at 3, 6, 9 DAE, 6, 9, 12 DAE and 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE 

recorded comparatively low IBC ratios of 19.60:1, 19.62:1 and 14.61:1, respectively. 

This is in agreement with Deepthi (2007) who reported that NSKE (5%) spray gave 

net returns of 5454 Rs./ha for control of sorghum stem borer but Endosulfan proved its 

supremacy by giving net returns of 6704 Rs./ha. 


5.3.1 Number of shoot flies attracted to different traps 

Highest number of shoot flies were trapped in fishmeal trap 10 per acre (10482 shoot 

flies) followed by fishmeal trap 8 per acre (8293.5 shoot flies) and chicken trap 10 per acre 

(8297.5) both being on par with each other (Fig. 11). Dead frog traps showed least 

attractiveness to shoot fly by recording 2059 to 6268 flies in different treatments. 

Attractiveness of callphorid and muscid flies to chicken viscera bait and rodent 

carcasses was reported by Mendes and Linhares (1993b). 


Least number of eggs per plant was recorded by fishmeal trap 10 per acre on 14 DAE 

and 21 DAE (0.5 and 1 egg/plant respectively). All other treatments did not differ significantly. 

No documents were reported to support these findings. 


On 21 and 28 DAE, fishmeal trap 10 per acre recorded last per cent deadhearts (44 

and 64% respectively) (Fig. 11). Remaining treatments showed no significant difference. As 

the work is first of its kind there were no documents to support these findings. 

5.3.4 Yield 

Highest yield was recorded in fishmeal traps 10 per acre treatment (10.09 q/ha) which 

was significantly superior over other treatments. Remaining treatments showed no significant 

difference in yield (Fig. 11). No documents were reported to support these findings. 

Future line of work 

• Other various commonly available botanicals should be evaluated for seed treatment 

and spraying against shoot fly 

• Botanicals should be evaluated on large area. 

• More than 10 fish meal traps/acre should be evaluated for management of shoot fly.

Percent deadheart at 28 DAE 

90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

fish meal trap 2/acre 





Per cent dead hearts at 28 DAE Yield (q/ha) 

chicken trap 2/acre 





dead frog trap 2/acre 





Treatments 

Fig.11: Evaluation and optimization of traps for the management of shoot fly in sorghum 

Fig.11. Evaluation and optimization of traps for the management of shoot fly in sorghum 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

Yield (q/ha)

6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 

Investigations on non-chemical approaches for the management of shoot fly in kharif 

sorghum were undertaken in order to tailor a suitable management strategy against shoot fly. 

The present investigations were carried out at Main Agricultural Research Station, University 

of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad during 2008. The results obtained from the present studies 

are summarized here under: 

Effect of seed treatment with organics on oviposition shoot fly revealed that NSKE 

(5%), Azagro (5%), neem oil (2%) and plant mixture (5%) offered least egg load per plant in 

sorghum and were on par with chemicals. Cow urine (5%), vermiwash (5%), Vitex negundo 

leaf extract (5%) and castor leaf extract were inferior treatments similar to untreated check. 

However, all the other botanical seed treatments were superior over untreated check. 

Evaluation of seed treatments with organics against shoot fly in sorghum revealed 

that NSKE (5%), Azagro (5%), neem oil (5%) and plant mixture (5%) were best of all organics 

offering least dead heart percentage due to shoot fly. But these were inferior to chemical 

seed treatment V. negundo leaf extract (5%), garlic bulb extract (5%) and Annona squamosa 

leaf extract (5%) were least effective treatments and cow urine (5%) vermiwash (5%), castor 

leaf extract (5%), jatropha leaf extract (5%) and jatropha oil (2%) were ineffective as that of 

untreated check. In late sown sorghum, highest protection against shoot fly was offered by 

NSKE (5%), Azagro (5%) and neem oil (2%). But those were inferior to chemicals. Garlic 

bulb extract (5%) and jatropha leaf extract (5%) were inferior to other botanicals and cow 

urine (5%) ad vermiwash (5%) was ineffective as that of untreated check. 

Highest grain yield of sorghum was obtained in NSKE (5%), Azagro (5%), neem oil 

(2%) and plant mixture (5%). However these treatments were inferior to chemical seed 

treatments. Lowest yield was recorded in cow urine (5%), vermiwash (5%), castor leaf extract 

(5%), jatropha leaf extract (5%), jatropha oil (2%) and untreated control. Similar trend was 

noticed in late sown sorghum where highest yield recorded in NSKE (5%), neem oil (5%) and 

plant mixture (5%). But these treatments were inferior to endosulfan and imidacloprid. Lowest 

yield was recorded in cow urine (5%), vermiwash (5%), castor leaf extract (5%), jatropha leaf 

extract (5%), jatropha oil (2%) and untreated control. Remaining all seed treatments were 

superior to untreated control. 

Study on effect of organic seed treatments on coccinellid population in timely sown 

sorghum revealed no statistical differences in coccinellid population per plant on 14, 21 and 

28 DAE. All organic treatments were on par with untreated control in conserving coccinellid 

predators. Also, in late sown sorghum, same trend was observed. 

Study on evaluation of organic seed treatments on chrysoperla population in timely 

and late sown sorghum revealed that on 14, 21 and 28 DAE all organic seed treatments 

conserved same chrysoperla population per plant as that of untreated check. 

Cost economics for the management of sorghum shoot fly through seed treatments 

indicated that highest net returns were obtained in neem oil 2 per cent treatment but 

Endosulfan and Imidacloprid remained superior recording highest net returns than organics. 

Also among organics, highest IBC ratio was obtained in NSKE 5 per cent seed treatment. 

However, chemicals (Endosulfan and Imidacloprid) remained superior recording higher IBC 

ratio than all other organics used. 

Effect of spraying botanicals at various intervals on shoot fly oviposition on 14 DAE in 

normal sown sorghum revealed that the Azagro (5%) and NSKE (5%) were superior over 

plant mixture (5%) recording less egg load per plant. But these were inferior to endosulfan 

spray. All spraying intervals irrespective of treatments were superior over untreated check 

and best results were obtained with spraying at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE and least with spraying at 3 

DAE and 12 DAE. 

Interaction effect revealed that spraying Azagro (5%) at 3, 6, 9 DAE, 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE 

and 6, 9, 12 DAE, spraying NSKE (5%) at these intervals and spraying plant mixture (5%) at 

3, 6, 9, 12 DAE were best treatments as that of spraying endosulfan at these intervals. On 21 

DAE also NSKE (5%) and Azagro (5%) were superior to plant mixture inspective of spraying 

internvals but were inferior to endosulfan. All spraying intervals irrespective of treatments 

were superior to untreated check but best results given by spraying at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE which

ecorded least egg load per plant. Least effective were spraying at 3 DAE and 12 DAE. 

Interaction effect revealed that the least egg load per plant was recorded by spraying Azagro 

(5%) at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE and at 6, 9, 12 DAE, spraying NSKE (5%) at 3, 6, 9 DAE, 3, 6, 9, 12 

DAE and 6, 9, 12 DAE. These treatments gave similar results as that of endosulfan at these 

intervals. Same trends were noticed in late sown sorghum as well. 

Evaluation of spraying botanicals at different intervals on dead heart formation by 

shoot fly in timely sown sorghum revealed that on 14 DAE highest protection was offered by 

NSKE (5%) irrespective of spraying intervals. But it was inferior to endosulfan. Azagro (5%) 

and plant mixture (5%) were inferior to NSKE (5%). Irrespective of treatments, all spraying 

intervals provided better protection as against untreated check. The least damage was 

recorded by spraying at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE and highest at 3 DAE and 12 DAE. On 21 DAE, 

irrespective of spraying intervals NSKE (5%) offered highest protection as that of endosulfan 

and Azagro (5%) was next best while plant mixture was inferior. Among all spraying intervals, 

irrespective of treatments, spraying at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE was most effective which recorded 

least damage while spraying at 3 DAE and at 12 DAE were least effective recording highest 

damage. However, all spraying intervals were superior over untreated control. Interaction 

effect on 21 DAE revealed that spraying (5%) at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE and at 6, 9, 12 DAE, 

spraying NSKE at 3, 6, 9 DAE, 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE and at 6, 9, 12 DAE proved best recording 

least damage but they were inferior to endosulfan. On 28 DAE Azagro (5%) and NSKE (5%) 

were superior over plant mixture but inferior to endosulfan spray. Spraying at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE 

offered highest protection against shoot fly while lowest protection offered by spraying at 3 

DAE and 12 DAE. All spraying intervals were superior to no spraying. In interaction, spraying 

all botanicals @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE proved better but was inferior to endosulfan at this interval. 

These trends were almost similar in late sown sorghum as well. 

Azagro (5%) and NSKE (5%) recorded superior yield over plant mixture (5%) 

irrespective of spraying intervals, but these were inferior to endosulfan. Spraying at 3, 6, 9, 

12 DAE irrespective of treatments recorded highest yield. All spraying intervals recorded 

superior yield over untreated check. Interaction effect revealed that spraying. NSKE (5%) 

and Azagro (5%) at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE were superior to all other interactions but were inferior to 

endosulfan at this intervals. Same trend was noticed in case of late sowing. 

In timely sown crop, all botanicals recorded statistically similar coccinellid population 

per plant. Also, all spraying intervals conserved same coccinellid population as that of 

untreated check. All interactions of botanicals and spraying intervals also conserved same 

population as that of untreated check. Same trend was noticed in late sown crop. Testing the 

safety of botanicals to chrysoperal also revealed same results in timely as well as late sown 

sorghum. Thus botanicals proved safe to coccinellids and chrysoperla predators. 

Highest net returns among botanical sprays was obtained by spraying NSKE (5%) at 

3, 6, 9, 12 DAE and highest IBC ratio recorded by spraying NSKE (5%) at 3, 6, 9 DAE and at 

6, 9, 12 DAE. But spraying Endosulfan at 3, 12 DAE remained best recording higher net 

returns and higher IBC ratio than other treatments. 

Study on evaluation and optimization of traps for shoot fly management revealed that 

higher number of shoot flies were attracted towards fish meal traps 10 per acre. Least shoot 

flies were cached in fishmeal trap 2 per acre, chicken trap 2 per acre dead frog trap 2 per 

acre and 4 per acre. Least egg load per plant by shoot fly was recorded in fishmeal trap 10 

per acre. All remaining trap treatments were inferior to it and statistically same. Similarly 

fishmeal traps 10 per acre recorded least damage due to shoot fly. Remaining treatments 

were inferior to it. Highest yield was recorded by fishmeal trap 10 per acre and remaining trap 

treatments were statistically similar and recorded inferior yield over fishmeal trap 10 per acre. 

Conclusions 

• Seed treatment with NSKE (5%), Azagro (5%), neem oil (2%) and plant mixture (5%) 

were the best treatments for the management of shoot fly while cow urine (5%), 

vermiwash (5%) castor leaf extract (5%), jatropha leaf extract (5%) and jatropha oil 

(2%) were ineffective. 

• All the organic seed treatments were safe for coccinellids and chrysoperla in sorghum 

• Highest IBC ratio was obtained in NSKE (5%) seed treatment

• Spraying Azagro (5%) and NSKE (5%) at 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE was the best for managing 

shoot fly followed by spraying at 3, 6, 9 and 6, 9, 12 DAE. 

• All the botanicals sprays at all intervals were safe to coccinellids and chrysoperla in 

sorghum. 

• Highest IBC ratio among botanical sprays was obtained in the treatments of spraying 

NSKE at 6, 9, 12 and at 3, 6, 9 DAE. 

• Fishmeal traps attracted highest number of adult shoot flies than chicken traps and 

dead frog traps. 

• Fishmeal traps @ 10 per acre proved best for management of shoot fly.

REFERENCES 

Anonymous, 1979, Annu. Rep. 1978-79, Nimbalkar Agril. Res. Inst., Phaltan-415523, India, 

p.23. 

Anonymous, 1987, Annu. Rep. for 1987-88. Central Institute for Cotton Research, Nagpur, 

p.27. 

Anonymous, 1989, Annu. Rep. for 1988-89. Central Institute for Cotton Research, Nagpur, 

p.29. 

Anonymous, 2000c, Annu. Rep. (2004-05), All India Co-ordinated Sorghum Improvement 

Project, NRC on Sorghum, Hyderabad. P.32. 

Anonymous, 2001a, FAO Bullet. Stat., pp. 37-38. 

Anonymous, 2001b, Annu. Rep. (2001-02), All India Co-ordinated Sorghum Improvement 

Project, NRC on Sorghum, Hyderabad, p.24. 

Anonymous, 2001c, Annu. Rep. (2001-02), All India Co-ordinated Sorghum Improvement 


Anonymous, 2002, Annu. Rep. (2002-03), All India Co-ordinated Sorghum Improvement 


Anonymous, 2004a, Annu. Rep. (2004-05), All India Co-ordinated Sorghum Improvement 


Anonymous, 2004b, Annu. Rep. (2004-05), All India Co-ordinated Sorghum Improvement 


Bai and Kundaswamy, 1985, Laboratory induced mortality of Spodoptera litura Fab. fed the 

leaf discs of castor treated with the extracts of Vitex negundo Linn. and 

Stachytarphata urticifolia (Salish) sims. Indian J. Agril. Sci., 55: 760-761. 

Balikai, R.A., 2001, Bioecology and management of aphid Melanaphis sacchari (Zehntner) on 

rabi sorghum. Ph.D. Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., Dharwad (India). 

Ballard,E. and Ramachandra Rao, Y., 1924, A preliminary note on the life history of certain 

anthomyiid flies, Atherigona spp and Acridochaeta excise Thompson in the 

Proceedings of the 5 th Entomological Meeting, Pusa, pp.275-277 

Basappa, H., 2007, Toxicity of pesticides and synthetic insecticides to egg parasitoid 

Trichogramma chilonis Ischii and coccinellid predator Chelomenus sexmaculata 

(Fabricius). J. Biol. Cont., 21 (1): 31-36. 

Baviskar, M.B., namboodiri, R., Gourkhede, Y.N., Patil, S.D. and Chaudhari, P.M. 2002, 

Efficacy of botanical extracts against pod borer complex in pigeon pea 

(Cajanus cajan Millsp.). J. Soils and Crops, 12 (2): 206-209. 

Bhanukiran, Y. and Panwar, V.P.S., 2005, Bioefficacy of neem products and insecticides 

against maize stalk borer Chllo partellus (SW). Indian J. Ent., 7 (1): 24-28. 

Bharathi, S.M., 2005, Role of organics and indigenous components against Spdoptera litura 

(Fab.) in groundnut and soybean. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., 

Dharwad (India). 

Bonzi, S.M. and Gahukar, R.T., 1983, Distribution of the population of Atherigona soccata 

Rondani (Diptera : Muscidae) and allied species during rainy season in Upper 

Volta. Agron. Trop., 34: 331-334. 

Borad, P.K. and Mittal, V.P., 1983, Assessment of losses caused by pest complex of sorghum 

hybrid CSH-5. In: Crop Losses due to Insect Pests. Eds. Krishnamurthi, Rao, 

B.H. and Murhi, K.S.R. K., Entomologica Society of India, Rajendranagar, 

Hyderabad, pp.271-278. 

D’Almeida, J.M., 1991, Diptera calyptrateae (Muscidae and Anthomyiidae) from metropolitan 

area of Rio de Janeiro, RJ II. Attractivity and seasoncy frequency. Revista 

Brasileira Zoologica, 8 (1): 1-4.

Deepthi Jose, 2007, Studies on the management of pests of sweet sorghum with special 

reference to stem borer Chilo partellus (Swinhoe). M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Uni. 

Agric. Sci. Dharwad (India). 

Dejen, A., 2008, On-farm bio-efficacy of Azadirachta indica and Melia azedarach seed 

powders on lepidopteran stem borers on sorghum in Northeast Ethiopia 

(Dedicated to the memory of Dr. Eduareto Aranda Escobar). Biopest. Int., 4 (1): 

57-62. 

Dhandapani, N., Rajmohan, N.S. and Kareen, A.A., 1985, Plant product as antifeedants 

control insects. Pesticides, 19: 53-60. 

Duso, C., Malagnini, V., Pozzebon, A., Castognoli, M., Lignori, M. and Simoni, S., 2008, 

Comparative toxicity of botanical and reduced risk pesticides to Mediterranean 

populations of Tetranichus urticeae and Phytoseulus persimilis. Biol. Cont., 47 

(1): 16-21. 

Eswarareddy, S.G., 2000, Evaluation of brinjal varieties, selected botanicals and synthetic 

insecticides against pest complex of brinjal (Solanum melongena Linn). M.Sc. 

(Agri.) Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., Dharwad (India). 

Fletcher,T.B., 1914,Some south Indian insects and other animals of importance considered 

especially from an economic point of view. Government Press Madras, p.565 

Gahukar, R.T., 1987, Population dynamics of sorghum shoot fly Atherigona soccata (Diptera : 

Muscidae) in Senegal. Environ. Ent., 16: 910-916. 

Gill, J.S. and Lewis, C.T., 1971, Systemic action of an insects feeding deterrent. Nature, 232: 

402-403. 

Gogi, R., 2003, Bioecology, Crop loss estimation and management of pigeon pea fly 

Melanagromyza obtusa Malloch (Diptera : Agromyzidae). M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, 

Uni. Agric. Sci., Dharwad (India). 

Guddewar, M.B., Shukla, A., Chandra, R., Pandey, S. and Saini, M.C., 1994, 

Tabenaenontana coronoeia B. Br. Apolynaceae, a potential source of botanical 

insecticides. Pl. Protect. Bullet., 46 (1): 1-5. 

Hedge, K.K., 2004, Ecofriendly approaches in the management of Okra fruit borers. M. Sc. 

(Agri.) Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., Dharwd (India). 

Hiremath, I.G., 1994, Isolation and identification of pesticides from selected Indian and African 

plants. Post doctoral Research Document, Seoul Nat. Uni., Suman, South 

Korea, pp. 87-88. 

Hyde, J.V.D., Saxena, R.C. and Schumutterer, 1984, Neem oil and neem extracts as potential 

insecticides for control of hemipterous rice pests, pp. 377-390 in K.R.S. Aschier 

(Eds.) Natural Pesticides from neem tree and other tropical plants. Gesellschuff 

fiir Technische Zusammenur Beit, Eschborn. 

Jhansi Lakshmi, V., Katti, G. and Krishnaiah, N.V., 1997, Laboratory evaluation of commercial 

neem formulations vis-à-vis insecticides against parasitoid Trichogramma 

japonicum Ashmed (Hymenoptora : Trichopamectidae). J. Biol. Cont., 11: 29- 

32. 

Jotwani,M.G., 1983, Losses due to shoot fly in high yielding sorghum cultivars. In: Crop 

Losses due to Insect Pests (Eds. Krishnamurthi Rao,,B.H. and Murthi, K.S.) 

Entomological Society of India, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad.pp.213-220 

Jotwani,M.G., Young, W.R. and Teete, G. L.,1980, Elements of integrated control of sorghum 

pests. FAO Plant Protection and Production Paper No.39, Food and 

Agricultural Organization Rome. Italy, p.159 

Juneja, R.P., Raghvan, K.L., Godhani, B.G. and Dagaria, C.J., 2004, Effectiveness of plant 

origin extracts against pearl millet shoot fly. Ins. Envt., 10 (2): 90-92.

Kadiregowda, A., Jagadish, P.S. and Muniswamy Gowda, K.N., 1995, Monitoring of shoot fly, 

Atherigona pulla Widemann population by trap in little millet. Pestology, 19: 

7-10. 

Kaethner, M., 1991, No side effect of neem extracts on the aphidaphagous predators, 

Chrysoperla carnea steph and Coccinella septumpunctata. Anzeigerfus 

schaling Skunds Flanzeneschutz Unweltschutz, 64: 97-99. 

Kareem, A.A., Sadakthulla, S., Venugopal, M.S. and Subramanian, T.R., 1974, Efficiency of 

two organotin compounds and neem extracts against sorghum shoot fly. 

Phytoparasitica, 2 (2): 127-129. 

Kareem, A.A., Saxena, R.C. and Boncodin, M.E.M., 1988, Neem seed kernel extract and 

neem seed bitter agent against oviposition and hatchability of eggs of 

Nephotettix virescens (Distant). Neem News lett., 5: 9-10. 

Kareem, A.A., Saxena, R.C., Boncodin, M.E.M., Krishnasami, V. and Seshu, D.V., 1989, 

Neem as seed treatment for rice before sowing : Effects on two homopteran 

insects and seedling vigor. J. Econ. Ent., 82 (4): 1219-1223. 

Katole, S.R. and Mundiwale, S.K., 1992, Relative efficacy of some insecticides and Argemone 

seed against Chilo partellus Swin. on hybrid sorghum in different sowings. 

Indian J. Ent., 54:15-19 

Katole, S.R., Nimbalkar, S.A., Kolhe, A.V., Ghuguskar, H.T. and Yadgirwar, P.V., 2000, 

Performance of some IPM modules against Helicoverpa armigera Hub. on 

chickpea. Punjabrao Krishi Vidyapeet Res. J., 24 (1): 51-53. 

Kishore, P., 2000, Eco-friendly viable options for formulating management for insect pests of 

sorghum and pearlmillet. J. Ent. Res., 24 (1): 63-72. 

Koodalingam, A., Mullaindhan, P. and Arumugam, M., 2009, Anti – mosquito activity of 

soapnut Sapindus emarginatus. Impact on biochemical constituents and 

cellular immune responses of the mosquito Aedes aegypti. Paper presented In: 

Nat. Conf. Biotech. Appr. Ecofriendly Insect Pest Mgmnt, p.40. 

Kulkarni, K.A. and Bhuti, S. G., 1981, Evaluation of plant origin repellants for sorghum shoot 

fly Atherigona soccata Rond. Sorghum Newlett., 24: 72. 

Kumar, A.R.V. and Sangappa, M.K., 1984, A note on the performance of plant products in 

control of gram caterpillar in Bengal gram. Curr. Res., 13: 38-40. 

Kumar, P.P. and Mohan, S., 2003, Efficacy of pitfall traps in trapping insects found in 

sorghum ecosystem. Pest Mgmnt. Econ. Zool., 11 (1): 27-30. 

Kumar, S.S.R., Kulkarni, G.G., Basavana, G.K. and Mallapur, C.P., 1999, Insecticidal 

property of some indigenous plant extracts against lepidopterous pests of 

safflower. Annals Agribiol. Res., 4 (1): 49-52. 

Lowery, D.T., Isman, M.B. and Brard, N.L., 1993, Laboratory and field evaluation of neem for 

the control of aphids (Homoptera : aphididae). J. Econ. Ent., 86 (3): 864-870. 

Lyra Netto, A.M.C., Lira, M.A., Friedas, E.V. de., Maciel, G.A., 1989, Prospects of control of 

Diatraea spp. (Lepidoptera : Pyralidae) on sorghum with baits of insecticides 

and molasses. Anais da Sociedae Ent. Do Brasil, 18 (1): 51-55. 

Manu, C.R., 2002, Evaluation of botanicals for the management of species of white fly 

Aleurodicus dispursus Russel (Homoptera : Aleurodidae) on guava. M.Sc. 

(Agri) Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., Dharwad (India). 

Marium, M.A. and Chandramohan, N., 2000, Evaluation of chemical insecticides and 

botanicals against various stages of spiraling whitefly (Alleurodicus dispersus 

Russell) on Mulberry. Maharashtra Agric. J., 87: 379-381. 

Matter, M.M., Marei, S.S., Moawad, S.M. and Elgengaithi, S., 1993, The relation of Aphis 

gossypii and its predator Coccinella septumpunctata to some plant extracts. 

Bullet. Forestry Agric., 44: 417-432.

Mendes, J. and Linhares, A.X., 1993a, Attractivity to baits and stages of ovarian development 

in various synanthropic species of calliphoridae (Diptera). Revista Brasileira de 

Ent., 37 (1): 157-166. 

Mendes, J. and Linhares, A.X., 1993b, Attractivity to baits and stages of ovarian development 

in 5 various species of muscidae (Diptera). Revista brasileira de Ent., 37 (2): 

289-297. 

Mohan, S., 1991, Only female sorghum shoot flies in fish meal traps. Indian J. Pl. Protec., 19: 

77-78. 

Mohan, S. and Prasad, G., 1991, Development of a new fish meal attractant and insecticide 

formulation for management of sorghum shoot fly, Atherigona varia Soccata 

Rond. Trop. Pest Mgmnt., 37: 397-398. 

Mohan, S.J., Purushottaman, D. and Rangarajan, A.V., 1987, Can the use of Azospirillum 

biofertilizer control sorghum shoot fly?. Curr. Sci., 56 (4): 723-725. 

Mote, U.N., Bapat, D.R., Shirole, S.M. and Murti, T.K., 1982, Effect of carbofuron and 

Azotobactor culture on the incidence of shoot fly and sorghum yield. Indian J. 

Pl. Prot., 9 (1): 50-55. 

Murali, P.R., 1996, Integrated management of shoot fly Atherigona pulla wiede (Diptera: 

Mussidae) on small millets with special reference to Paniam milliare L. M.Sc. 

(Agri.) Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., Dharwad (India). 

Murthy, V., Mala, S.R., Vadivelu, M. and Solayappan, A.R., 1994, Evaluation of new plant 

products PLEXIN for the control of sugarcane white fly Aleurolobus barodensis 

(Hemiptera : Aleurodidae). Co-operative Sugar, 25: 209-210. 

Murugan, K., Babu, R. and Sivaramakrishnan, S., 1999, Toxic effect of plants on Spodoptera 

litura Fab. Insect Environ., 4 (4): 135. 

Nagaraju, D.K., 2000, Biology, ecology and management of the capsicum gall midge 

Asphondylia capparis Rubsaamen (Dipt : cecidomyiidae) and other insects 

associated with galls on bell pepper. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., 

Bangalore (India). 

Nandihalli, B.S., 2009, Performance of Azagro 5% (Azadirachtin) in the management of the 

pest of okra. Paper presented In: Nat. Conf. Ecofriendly Appr. Ecofriendly 

Insect Pest Mgmnt, p.38. 

Narsimhan, V. and Mariappan, V., 1988, Effect of plant derivatives on green leaf hopper 

(GLH) and rice tungro virus (TRV) transmission, IRRN, 13 (1): 28-29. 

Naseeh, M.O., 1982, The effect of garlic extract on Syrphus corollae F., C. carnea (Steph.) 

and Coccinella septempunctata L. Leitschruft for Angewandte Ent., 94 (2): 

123-126. 

Natarajan, K. and Chellaiah, S., 1983, A new method to sorghum shoot fly. Pesticides, 17: 37. 

Ogabalu, O.K., Umeozor, O.C. and Ebere, N., 2005, Oviposition deterrent effect of extracts of 

neem against Atherigona orientalis (Schiner) on pepper (Capsicum annuum) 

and tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) fruits in Nigeria. Indian J. Agric. Sci., 39 

(1): 18-24. 

Oparaeke, A.M., Dike, M.C. and Amatobi, C.I., 2005, Evaluation of botanical mixtures for 

insect pest management on cowpea plants. J. Agric. Rur. Dev. Trop. Subtrop., 

106 (1): 41-48. 

Oparaeke, A.M., Dike, M.C., Amatobi, C.I., 2006, Botanical pesticides mixtures for insect pest 

management on cowpea Vigna unquiculata (L.) Walp plants – the legume 

flower bud thrips Megalurothrips sjostedti Trybom. J. Sustain. Agric., 29 (1): 

5-13. 

Palta, R.K. and Chauhan, R.S., 2004, Efficacy of insecticides and a neem derivative for the 

control of sorghum midge Contarinia sorghicola Coquilett. Indian J. Ent., 66 (1): 

88-98.

Paraluppi, N.D. and Linhares, A.X., 1995, Calliphoridae in Manaus III. Selective attractivity of 

baits in relation to ovarian development in three species of chrysomya 

Robinaeu – Desvoidy. Revista Brasilelra de Ent., 89 (1): 121-124. 

Pareet, J.D., 2006, Biorational approaches for the management of brinjal shoot and fruit 

borer. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., Dharwad (India). 

Patil, R.K., 2000, Eco-friendly approaches for the management of Spodoptera litura (F.) in 

groundnut. Ph.D. Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., Dharwad (India). 

Patil, R.K., Rayar, S.G., Hiremath, I.G., Basappa, H. and Patil, B.R., 1997, Effect of different 

plant products on safflower aphid Dactylopus carthami and its natural predator 

Chrysoperla carnea. J. Oilseed Res., 14: 71-74. 

Patil, R.S., 2000, Evaluation of plant products for the management of diamond back moth. 

Plutella xylostella Linnaeus on Cabbage. 

Praveen, K.S., 2005, Effect of seed treatments and foliar spray with insecticides and products 

on crop growth, seed yield and quality in Okra (Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) 

Moench. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., Dharwad (India). 

Raghuraman, M., Ajanta Birah and Gupta, G. P., 2008, Management of Helicoverpa armigera 

in chickpea with botanical formulations. Indian J. Ent., 70 (2): 188-122. 

Raghuraman, S. and Singh, R.P., 1999, Biological effects of neem (Azadirechta indica) seed 

oil on egg parasitoid Trichogrumma chilonis. J. Econ. Ent., 92 (6): 1274-1280. 

Ramamurthi, R. and Rajaram, V., 2001, Effect of plant products on sorghum earhead bug. 

Annu. Pl. Protec. Sci., 9 (2): 304-366. 

Ravikumar, 2004, Evaluation of organics and indigenous products for the management of 

Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) in chilli. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., 


Ravikumar, S.S., 1997, Evaluation of botanicals to safflower aphid, Uroleucon compositae 

(Theobald) and its natural enemies. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., 


Rosaiah, R., 2001, Evaluation of different botanicals against pests complex of brinjal. 

Pestology, 25 (4): 14-16. 

Sahayaraj, K., 1998, Antifeedant effect of some plant extract on the Asian armyworm, 

Spodoptera litura (Fab.). Curr. Sci., 74: 523-525. 

Sahayaraj, K. and Sekar, R., 1996, Efficacy of plant extracts against tobacco caterpillar larvae 

in groundnut. Int. Arachis News lett., 16: 38. 

Sajjan, N.I., 2006, Role of biorationals in the management of diamond balk moth Plutella 

xylostella L. in cabbage ecosystem. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., 


Saxena, R.C. and Boncodin, M.B.M., 1988, Effect of neem seed bitters (NSB) on green leaf 

hopper (GLH) survival and rice tungro virus (RTV) transmission IRRN, 13 (1): 

25-26. 

Schumutter, H., 1990, Properties and potential of natural pesticides from the neem free, 

Azadirechta indica. Ann. Rev. Ent., 35: 271-278. 

Senguttuvan, T. and Dhanakodi, C.V., 1999, Effect of Indigenous plant extract in controlling 

the groundnut leaf miner Aproraema modicella. Indian J. Agric. Sci., 69: 

654-656. 

Seshu Reddy, K.V. Skinner, J.D. and Davies, J.C., 1981, Attractants for Atherigona spp. 

including sorghum shoot fly. Atherigona soccata Rond. (Muscidae : Diptera). 

Insect Sci. Appl., 2: 83-86. 

Shah, N.K., Saxena, P. Azmi, M.I., Roy, S. and Tyagi, P.K., 2007, Synthesis of botanical pest 

management technology for intensive forage production. Range Mgmnt Agroforestry, 

28 (2A): 157-158.

Sharma, H.C., 1985, Strategies for the pest control in sorghum in India. Trop. Pest Mgmnt 31: 

167-185. 

Sharma, H.C., Sankaran, A.V.B. and Nwanze, M.F., 1999, Utilization of natural pesticides 

desired from neem and custard apple in integrated pest management. 

Azadirechta indica. A. Juss., 199-213. 

Sharma, R.M., Vrushali, Tare and Pushpa Pawar, 1999, Toxic action of some plant extracts 

against selected insect pest and vectors. Pestology, 23: 30-32. 

Sharma, V.K. and Bhatnagar, A., 1990, Studies on the effects of non-edible oils on Chilo 

partellus. Proc. Symp. Bot. Pest. IPM, pp. 351-359. 

Shekharappa, 2001, Evaluation of biorationals in the IPM of sorghum stem borer Chilo 

partellus (Swinhoe). Ph.D.Thesis, Uni. Agric.Sci., Dharwad. 

Shekharappa and Kulkarni, K.A., 2006, Bio-efficacy of neem formulations for the 

management of stem borer Chilo partellus (Swinhoe). Pestology, 30(12): 162- 

175. 

Shrinivas, M., 2006, Evaluation of Ecofriendly techniques for the management of sorghum 

shoot fly, Atherigona soccata Rondani. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., 


Singh, B.U. and Rana, B.S., 1986, Resistance in sorghum to the shoot fly Atherigona soccata 

Rondani. Insect. Sci. Appl.7: 577-587 

Singh, S.P. and Batra, G.R., 2001, Effect of neem formulations on shoot fly Atherigona 

soccata (Rond.) oviposition and infestation in forage sorghum. Haryana Agric. 

Uni. J. Res., 31: 9-11. 

Singh, S.P. and Verma, A.N., 1988, Monitoring of shoot fly, Atherigona soccata (Rondani) in 

traps and their periodic incidence in sorghum. Crop Res., 1: 76-83. 

Smitha, M.S., 2002, Management of yellow mite Polyphagotarsonemus latus (Banks) 

(Acarina : Tarsonemidae) on chilli. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., 


Spurthi, G.S., 2004, Effect of biorationals on the incidence of major pests and their natural 

enemies in sorghum intercropping system. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Uni. Agric. Sci., 


Srinivasan, G. and Sundarababu, P.C., 1998, Management of brinjal shoot and fruit borer 

Leucinodes orbonalis (Guene) using neem products and insecticides. Proc.I 

Nat. Symp. Pest. Mgmnt. Hort. Crops., pp. 87-93. 

Srivastava, C.P. and Das, Mohapatra, S., 2005, Efficacy and economics of insecticides along 

with NSKE against pigeonpea pod fly and pod bug. Annals of Plt. Prot. Sci., 11 

(1): 143-183. 

Starks, K.J., 1970, Increasing infestation of the sorghum shoot fly in experimental plots. J. 

Econ. Ent., 63: 17-15. 

Subbarayadu B. and Indira, S., 2007, Integrated pest management for the shoot fly 

(Atherigona soccata) in sorghum (Sorghum vulgar) in Andhra Pradesh. Indian 

J. Agric. Sci., 77 (1): 51-54. 

Sunitha, P., Ramachandra Rao, G., Arjun Rao, P. and Rajsekhar, P., 2004, Toxicity of 

ecofriendly chemicals to coccinellid predators on Okra. J. Biol. Cont., 18: 

207-209. 

Taneja, S.L. and Leuschner, K., 1986, A single trap for monitoring sorghum shoot fly. Indian 

J. Pl. Protec., 14: 83-86. 

Tekie, H., Seyaum, E. and Saxena, R.C., 2006, Potential of neem Atherigona indica, 

Atherigona juss in the management of Chilo partellus (Swin 40e) on maize in 

Kenya. African Ent., 14 (2): 373-374.

Torto.B., Addae, M. and Moreka, K.,1992, Antifeedant activity of Piper guinense Scham and 

Thann. against larvae of the sorghum stem borer, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe). 

Insect. Sci. Appl. 13:705-708 

Vendan, S.E., Paulraj, M.G. and Ignacimuthu, S., 2009, Synergistic efficacy of 

phytoextractonts on Spodoptera litura Fab. (Lepidoptera : Noctuidae). Paper 

presented In: Nat. Conf. Biotech. Appr. Ecofriendly Insect Pest Mgmnt, p.39. 

War, A.R., Ignacimuthu, S. and Paulraj, MG.., 2009, Comparative efficacy of poneem, a new 

botanical oil formulation with neem based commercial pesticides against 

Spodoptera litura (Fab.) (Lepidoptera : Noctuidae). Paper presented In: Nat. 

Conf. Biotech. Appr. Ecofriendly Insect Pest Mgmnt, p.42. 

www.fao.org 

Yadav, D.N. and Patel, A.R., 1990, Effect of some botanical insecticides on oviposition of 

Chrysoperla scelertes and their oricidal action. In : Bot. Pest. IPM, 1963 (Eds.), 

Chali, M.S. and Ramaprasad, G., Indian Soc. Tobacco Sci., Rajmandri, 

pp.166-169. 

Zongo, J.O., Vincent, C. and Stewart, R.K., 1991, Monitoring of adult sorghum shoot fly, 

Altherigona soccata Rondani (Diptera : Muscidae) and related species in 

Burkina – Faso. Trop. Pest Mgmnt., 37: 231-235.

NON-CHEMICAL APPROACHES FOR THE 

MANAGEMENT OF SHOOT FLY Atherigona soccata 

RONDANI IN KHARIF SORGHUM 

ANITA V. SABLE 2009 Dr. SHEKHARAPPA 

MAJOR ADVISOR 

ABSTRACT 

Investigations on non-chemical approaches for the management of shoot fly 

Atherigona soccata Rondani in sorghum was carried out under field conditions during kharif 

2008 at MARS, Dharwad. 

Sorghum seed treatment with NSKE (5%), Azagro (5%), neem oil (2%) and plant 

mixture (5%) recorded least mean number of shoot fly eggs (0.68, 0.68, 0.65 and 0.70 

egg/plant, respectively) in normal sown condition. The same four botanicals recorded least 

damage due to shoot fly (31.00%, 33.00%, 32.33% and 36.00% deadhearts respectively) at 

28 DAE. Higher sorghum grain yield was also recorded by these botanicals (14.72, 14.14, 

15.21 and 14.57 q/ha). Neem oil recorded the highest net returns of Rs.21743/ha. However, 

endosulfan and imidacloprid seed treatment remained superior over organics by recording 

0.48 eggs/plant each, least deadhearts (17.66 and 18.33% respectively) and highest yield 

(17.12 and 17.32 respectively). The same trend was observed in late sown sorghum. 

As foliar spray application, Azagro (5%) and NSKE (5%) @ 3, 6, 9 DAE, 6, 9, 12 DAE 

and 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE and plant mixture (5%) @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE recorded least oviposition due 

to shoot fly at 21 DAE (0.33-1.00 eggs/plant) and least damage due to shoot fly at 28 DAE 

(10.33-14.33% deadhearts) under timely sown condition. These treatments recorded higher 

grain yields (17.30-18.89 q/ha). Performance of botanicals was found almost same in late 

sown condition also. But organics proved lesser effective than Endosulfan 35 EC (0.07%) at 

all spraying intervals. However, spraying NSKE @ 3, 6, 9, 12 DAE resulted in highest net 

returns of Rs.27615/ha. 

All the organics used in the investigations were found safe for lady bird beetles and 

chrysoperla in sorghum ecosystem both as seed treatment and spray application. 

Fish meal trap was more effective than chicken and dead frog trap in attracting shoot 

flies. As a management strategy, 10 fishmeal traps per acre was the effective treatment 

recording significantly less eggs (1 egg/plant), least deadhearts (44.00%) and highest yield 

(10.09 q/ha).

NON-CHEMICAL APPROACHES FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?