NON-CHEMICAL APPROACHES FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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 4.2.3.1 Timely sown sorghum 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). 4.2.3.2 Late sown sorghum 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 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 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 Means followed by same alphabet do not differ significantly (0.05) by DMRT DAE – Days After Emergence SEm± CD at 5% Source 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
Page 1 and 2: NON-CHEMICAL APPROACHES FOR THE MAN
Page 3 and 4: CONTENTS Sl. No. Chapter particular
Page 5 and 6: 23 24 25 26 27 Figure No. Effect of
Page 7 and 8: 1. INTRODUCTION Sorghum (Sorghum bi
Page 9 and 10: Kumar and Sangappa (1984) compared
Page 11 and 12: Anon. (2002) reported that neem lea
Page 13 and 14: fraction (0.25%) and NSKE (1500 ppm
Page 15 and 16: NSKE 5 per cent conserved significa
Page 17 and 18: 3. MATERIAL AND METHODS 3.1 Managem
Page 19 and 20: Shoot fly egg Shoot fly maggot Shoo
Page 21 and 22: 13. 9, 12 DAE 14. Untreated check S
Page 23 and 24: Plate.3. Fish meal trap
Page 25 and 26: Table 1. Effect of seed treatment w
Page 27 and 28: Table 2. Effect of seed treatment w
Page 29 and 30: NSKE (5%) was the best (31% deadhea
Page 31 and 32: extract (12.98 q/ha) and they were
Page 33 and 34: Table 6. Effect of seed treatments
Page 35 and 36: Table 8. Effect of seed treatments
Page 37 and 38: On 21 DAE chrysoperla population in
Page 39 and 40: Table 11. Effect of spraying botani
Page 43 and 44: deadhearts). This was followed by A
Page 45 and 46: Table 15. Evaluation of spraying bo
Page 47 and 48: Table 17. Evaluation of spraying bo
Page 49: Table 19. Evaluation of spraying bo
Page 53 and 54: 4.2.4 Natural enemies 4.2.4.1 Cocci
Page 59 and 60: 4.3.2 Oviposition Effect of differe
Page 61 and 62: 5. DISCUSSION Investigations on the
Page 63 and 64: Mean number of eggs/plant 2 1.8 1.6
Page 65 and 66: Percent deadheart 90 80 70 60 50 40
Page 67 and 68: Interaction effect of treatments an
Page 69 and 70: Number of eggs/plant 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.
Page 71 and 72: Percent deadheart 90 80 70 60 50 40
Page 73 and 74: Yield (q/ha) 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6
Page 75 and 76: 5.2.4.2 Chrysoperla Study on effect
Page 77 and 78: 6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION Investiga
Page 79 and 80: • Spraying Azagro (5%) and NSKE (
Page 81 and 82: Deepthi Jose, 2007, Studies on the
Page 83 and 84: Mendes, J. and Linhares, A.X., 1993
Page 85 and 86: Sharma, H.C., 1985, Strategies for
Page 87: NON-CHEMICAL APPROACHES FOR THE MAN

NON-CHEMICAL APPROACHES FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?