screening elite genotypes and ipm of defoliators in groundnut

SCREENING ELITE GENOTYPES AND IPM OF 

DEFOLIATORS IN GROUNDNUT 

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 

RASHMI S. YAMBHATNAL 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ENTOMOLOGY 

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, DHARWAD 

UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, 

DHARWAD – 580 005 

JULY, 2010

ADVISORY COMMITTEE 

DHARWAD 

JULY, 2010 (R. K. PATIL) 

CHAIRMAN 

Approved by : 

Chairman : 

Members : 1. 

2. 

3. 

(R. K. PATIL) 

(R. A. BALIKAI) 

(P. V. KENCHANAGOUDAR) 

(B. T. NINGANUR)

CONTENTS 

Sl. No. Chapter Particulars 

CERTIFICATE 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 

LIST OF TABLES 

LIST OF FIGURES 

LIST OF PLATES 

LIST OF APPENDIX 

1. INTRODUCTION 

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 

2.1 Screening of groundnut genotypes 

2.2 Different components of IPM for S.litura 

3. MATERIAL AND METHODS 

3.1 Field Screening 

3.2 IPM modules for Northern transitional zone of Karnataka 

4. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS 

4.1 Field screening of groundnut genotypes 

4.2 Evaluation of IPM modules in groundnut 

5. DISCUSSION 

5.1 Field screening 


6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

REFERENCES

Table 

No. 

LIST OF TABLES 

Title 

1. Performance of elite groundnut genotypes against Spodoptera litura 

damage under field condition during Kharif 2009 

2. In vitro larval duration (in days) of Spodoptera litura on elite 

groundnut genotypes 

3. Gain in larval weight and larval mortality of Spodoptera litura at 

different days after hatching on elite groundnut genotypes under 

laboratory conditions 

4. Biological parameters of Spodoptera litura on elite groundnut 

genotypes under laboratory conditions 

5. In vitro biology of Spodoptera litura on elite groundnut genotypes 

6. Thrips population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

7. Leaf hoppers population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

8. Thysanoplusia orichalcea population in different IPM modules of 

groundnut 

9. Spodoptera litura population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

10. Spilarctia obliqua population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

11. Aproraema modicella population in different IPM modules of 


12. 12: Per cent defoliation by defoliators at 35, 50 and 65 days after 

sowing in different IPM modules 

13. The management of Spodoptera litura in IPM modules of groundnut 

during Kharif 2009 

14. Incidence of sucking and defoliating insect pests on sunflower (Trap 

crop) 

15. Incidence of defoliators on main and trap crop 

16. Natural enemy population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

(Coccinellids) 


(Syrphids) 


(Campoletis chloridae) 

19. Economics of IPM modules during Kharif 2009

Figure 

No. 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Title 

1. Performance of elite groundnut genotypes for Spodoptera litura 

damage during kharif 2009 

2. In vitro biology of Spodoptera litura on elite groundnut genotypes 

3. Gain in larval weight and larval mortality of Spodoptera litura at 

different days after hatching on elite groundnut genotypes 

4. Incidence of defoliators on main and trap crop 

5. Pest and natural enemy population in different IPM modules of 


6. Economics of IPM modules during kharif, 2009 

Plate 

No. 

LIST OF PLATES 

Title 

1. Resistant and susceptible genotypes of groundnut 

2. IPM modules take up in groundnut 

Appendix 

No. 

LIST OF APPENDIX 

Title 

I. Pheromone trap catches of Spodoptera litura

1. INTRODUCTION 

The cultivated groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) is an important oilseed crop of 

tropical and subtropical areas of the world. In India, the crop occupies an area of 5.7 million 

hector with a production of 4.7 million metric tons with an average productivity of 0.8 metric 

tons per hectare during rainy season (Radhamani and Singh, 2008). Among major groundnut 

producing states of India, Karnataka ranks fourth in acreage (0.76 m ha) with total production 

of 0.38 million tons (Anon., 2009). More than 50 insects have been reported to occur on 

groundnut in India and few are quite destructive and reduce the yield considerably. 

Aproaerema modicella Deventer, Amasacta albistriga Walker, Spodoptera litura Fabricus, 

Helicoverpa armigera Hubner, Aphis craccivora Koch, Frankliniella schultzeri Trybom, Thrips 

palmi Karny and Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood are considered as important destructive pests on 

groundnut (Amin and Mohammad, 1980). 

The tobacco caterpillar, S. litura is widely distributed throughout the world. It is a 

polyphagous pest and reported on more than 120 host plants. It is next to H. armigera in 

terms of economic importance at national level. The population of this defoliator in groundnut 

ecosystem has been found to increase in number and intensity both in rainy and post rainy 

seasons, especially in fields where insecticides have been applied (Rao and Shanower, 1989; 

Stechmann and Semisi, 1984) due to destruction of natural control system. In recent years, 

these pests created a serious threat to agricultural industry due to development of resistance 

towards commonly used insecticides. Populations of many pests including S. litura have 

developed resistance to many commercially available pesticides (Ramakrishnan et al., 1984 

and Rame Gowda, 1999). 

Spanish bunch type cultivars are the most popular cultivars in the northern 

transitional zone of Karnataka as they mature early and facilitate double cropping. But, all 

presently cultivated varieties are susceptible to S. litura. Scientists have been successful in 

developing some cultivars utilizing resistant sources. Hence systematic evaluation of these 

genotypes developed at the AICRP on oilseeds, UAS, Dharwad center was taken to find out 

nature of resistance in the present investigations. 

Mechanisms of resistance are under genetic and environmental control. The resistant 

cultivar helps in suppressing the pest population and act as a principal control method. The 

genotypes with different mechanisms of resistance could be hybridized to pool the genes to 

enhance the level and effectiveness of resistance. Enhanced resistance is desirable in 

managing the pest especially when there is heavy pest load or an early outbreak, due to 

continuous cropping system. The knowledge on mechanisms of resistance or avoidance is 

also helpful in designing appropriate strategies in screening for resistance to the pest. 

Hence, entomologist and environmentalist felt to develop viable alternate strategies 

which could be integrated into a workable system called integrated pest management that 

could reduce negative influence of chemical pesticides on the environment by utilizing 

ecofriendly components such as bio-pesticides, cultural practices, semiochemicals and many 

other harmonious practices. Therefore, a unilateral approach of controlling crop pests by 

synthetic insecticides has dictated the necessity for need based, cost effective, eco-friendly 

and safe pest control strategies. 

In recent years the problem of resistance to chemical has worsened, resulting in 20- 

30 per cent crop loss due to pests in India (Bhargava et al., 2008) and causing widespread 

hardship especially amongst poor farmers. In addition to the development of resistance in 

pests, indiscriminate and injudicious use of pesticides has grossly poisoned almost each 

component of the biosphere, caused resurgence of pests and reduction of natural enemies in 

agroecosystems allowing rapid rebund of target and minor pests. The development of a 

broad-spectrum resistance to insecticides has complicated its chemical control. It is therefore 

imperative that an integrated pest management strategy should be devised for managing this 

pest.

In some parts of the northern Karnataka, farmers are experiencing difficulty in 

managing the pests on groundnut and other crops. Groundnut is largely a smallholder crop 

grown under rainfed with low inputs. The low yields in groundnut are primarily due to low 

inputs, rainfed cultivation, non availability of seeds of suitable high yielding variety and the 

occurrence of insect pests and diseases at different stages of the crop and also due to 

extreme climatic conditions. 

Millets are cultivated as rain-fed crops, which require less crop management 

practices, there is less preference shown by farmers for cultivating these crops. Whilst a 

number of traditional foods are made in the domestic household, the lack of large-scale 

industrial utilization discourages the farmers raising these crops. 

Integration of biological agents, mixed and intercropping, pheromone traps and 

resistant varieties appear to be ideal strategies against S. litura on groundnut crop. With this 

background in mind field and laboratory trials were undertaken during the year 2009 kharif 

season at the Main Agricultural Research Station, University of Agricultural Sciences, 

Dharwad. Following are objectives related to the above study. 

1. Screening of elite groundnut genotype under field condition and to study the biology 

of S. litura on elite genotypes of groundnut under laboratory condition. 

2. To evaluate IPM modules for northern transitional zone of Karnataka.

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 

The review of literature pertaining to biology and integrated pest management of 

Spodoptera litura on groundnut are presented in the following paragraphs. 

2.1 Screening of groundnut genotypes 

Moss (1980) reiterated that research done on the utilization of wild species of Arachis 

in U.K. has been of immense help in the ICRISAT programme. Fifty cultivated genotypes 

were screened for resistance to defoliators in the AICRP on groundnut at Dharwad during 

kharif 1985.Among them 40 entries recorded injury rating 3 while 7 entries were under rating 

2(Anon., 1985). 

Further, GBPRS-312 and ICG-5240 were found to be resistant to S.litura in the 

laboratory trails at ICRISAT, Hyderabad (Anon., 1995). The cultivated groundnut genotypes 

such as ICG-7948, 8081, 8232, 8781, 8977, 9012, 9039, 9449 and 9961 were grouped as 

promising by Kulkarni, (1989). Dark green leaves and rough texture were associated with 

resistance, while light green and smooth texture with susceptibility. 

During kharif 1995-97 at Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India, S. litura larval damage to 

foliage was recorded in 32 genotypes. The lowest leaf damage (5%) was recorded in ICGV 

86156, ICGV 86400, ICGV 86528, ICGV 87128, ICGV 87141, ICGV 87290, ICGV 87411 and 

ICGV 91214 (Dharne and Patel, 2000). Fifty groundnut genotypes were screened for 

resistance to S.litura in All India Co-ordinated Research Project on Oil Seeds at Dharwad 

(Anon., 1985). Due to low level of infestation during kharif 1985, majority of entries (40) fell 

under injury rating of 3. However, 7 entries were under injury rating of 2 and three entries 

sustained higher damage with a rating of 4. At Hissar, GC-79 and GC-333 were observed to 

be from S. litura damage (Anon., 1985). Of the 50 cultivated groundnut genotypes screened 

for resistance to defoliator, 22 entries fell below injury rating scale of 2, thirteen below rating 

3, three below rating 4,six below rating 5 and one below rating 6 (Anon., 1986). 

Fifteen A. hypogaea genotypes were screened in laboratory using choice test for 

resistance to H. armigera (3 rd instar) and S. litura (1 st , 3rd and 5 th instar). Of them, only BG2 a 

Virginia bunch variety was resistant to both the pests (Singh et al. 1993). Based on 

oviposition and feeding performance test conducted with the seven cultivars, NC Ac 343 was 

least preferred, while the UPL Pn 2 was the most preferred and EG Pn 13 occupied an 

intermediate position (Xie Jia Li, 1987). The cultivar C-501 was most resistant and M-145 was 

the most susceptible among the nine groundnut varieties tested in laboratory at Pantnagar on 

the basis of growth and development of S. litura (Tiwari et al. 1989). 

Preliminary screening to assess the resistance to S. litura was carried out in the field 

on six Virginia bunch and 18 Virginia runner accessions and higher resistance was recorded 

by Virginia runner varieties NC Ac 17840, NFG 79 and EC 21989 (Rajgopal et al. 1988). In 

screening study by Patil et al. (1991), entries ICGV 87264 and 86598 have recorded the least 

damage (< 17.5%) and entries ICGV 86598 and 86125 have also recorded less damage 

(

mutants were systematically screened for S. litura in 1996. Based on leaf area damage, three 

mutants (28-2, 45 and 110) were identified as resistant to S. litura (Prasad et al., 1998). 

Screening of groundnut germplasm and advanced breeding lines in the All India Co- 

ordinate Project has resulted in new sources of resistance to S. litura with better agronomic 

background –ICGV 86364, 91172, 86400, 86402, 91112, M 335 (Anon., 1998). ICGVs 86364, 

86590, 91167, ICGS 44 and ICG 22719 (Anon., 1999). Several years of screening germplasm 

collections at National Research Center for Groundnut, Junagadh resulted in genotypes viz., 

NRCG 5724, 2615, 9773, 8313 and 8673 possessing resistance/ tolerance to S. litura (Basu, 

2003). 

2.1.1 Biology of Spodoptera litura 

2.1.1.1 Biology of Spodoptera litura on different hosts 

Balasubramanian et al. (1984) reported the effect of castor (Ricinus communis L.), 

tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.), sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L.), okara 

(Abalmuschus esculentus L.), cotton (Gossypium sp.), sunflower (Helianthus annus L.), 

Lucerne (Medicago sativa L.) and egg plant (Solanum melongena L.) on the biological 

aspects of S. litura. The incubation period was shortest on castor (3.5 days) and longest on 

okra (5.0 day). The duration of larval, pre-pupal and pupal periods were less and the larval 

length, pupal weight and length, percentage of pupation and adult emergence were high on 

castor. Moths reared on castor had shorter developmental period, high growth index, low preoviposition 

period, extended oviposition period and high fecundity. Similar trend was reported 

by Garad et al. (1984). Parasuraman and Jayaraj (1985) found castor as ideal host with 

shorter life cycle, maximum growth index and high fecundity, groundnut was intermediate. 

Maize and horsegram affected biology, growth index and fecundity. 

Bhalani (1989) studied growth and development of S. litura on seven natural food 

plants in the laboratory. On the basis of larval survival, growth index, pupal weight, size, 

duration, emergence and fecundity, castor was the most suitable food plant, while maize was 

least preferred, resulting in a prolonged larval period and lowest growth index. The suitability 

of the remaining plants was as follows cotton> groundnut > cowpea> green gram >sorghum. 

Kulkarni (1989) reported the effect of castor, soybean, mulberry, two cultivated 

groundnut varieties and two wild groundnut varieties on the biological aspects of S. litura. 

Among the all hosts, castor proved to be most suitable as it favored optimum growth and 

development of the insect. The larval period was 16.5 days on castor as against 20.0 days on 

cultivated groundnut. The larvae passed through six instars on all the hosts except the wild 

peanut genotypes. S. litura reared on the castor had shorter life cycle (30.8 days) while 

groundnut had longer life cycle (37.8 days). The fecundity was maximum on castor (635), 

minimum on mulberry (450) and intermediate on groundnut (585). 

The influence of three host plants viz., castor, sunflower and groundnut on the 

organic constituents and the fecundity of S. litura was studied in the laboratory. The organic 

constituents of the leaves significantly influence the larvae. Females resulting from larvae on 

castor laid 1038 ± 116 eggs while those from sunflower and groundnut 684 ± 53 and 878 ± 73 

eggs, respectively. The protein and nitrogen contents of the leaves of castor were higher than 

those of the other two host plants and this was responsible for the higher fecundity on castor 

(Sankarperumal et al., 1989). 

Bae-SoonDo (1999) conducted study to determine the larval development of tobacco 

cutworm, S. litura on leaves of 11 different leguminous plants, varieties and cultivars, and to 

measure the amount of leaves fed by the larvae. Larval duration ranged from 11.5 to 15.7 

days depending on the different food sources with the shortest on soybean cv. 

Geomjeongkong-1 and the longest on groundnut cv. Daekwangddangkong. Among the 6 

larval development stages, the 1 st instar was the longest (3.2-5.0 days) while the 4th instar 

was the shortest (1.0-1.5 days). In general the amount of leaves consumed was increased 

with larval age. Consumption of the total food (55 to 74%) was only during the last instar

stage, with the female consuming more food than the male. Larval mortality and the sex ratio 

seem to have no relation with the amount of food consumed per species. 

According to Ghumare and Mukheijee (2003) the five host plants [castor (Ricinus 

communis L.), cotton (Gossypium hirsutm L.), tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum M.) mint 

(Mentha arvensis L.) and cabbage (Brassica oleracea L.)] belonging to different families were 

used to study the performance of the Asian armyworm, S. litura. Highest consumption of food 

and dry weight gain was observed in larvae fed on castor. Mint did not support optimum larval 

growth because of low digestibility and low efficiency of conversion of digested food to body 

matter. Dry weight gain ranged from 26.64 mg on mint to 86.80 mg in castor. 

The biological parameters of S. litura were studied on cotton and different weed 

plants viz., itsit (Trianthema portulacastrum), tandla (Digera arvensis) and thakra (Tribulus 

terrestris) under laboratory conditions at Entomology Research Farm and Laboratories of the 

Department of Entomology at Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana during 2006 Kharif 

season. The study suggests that S. litura showed faster larval development on all three 

weeds as compared to cotton, although the larval and pupal survival was lower on these 

weeds. These results suggest that the role of weeds in the development of S. litura cannot be 

overlooked (Inderjit et al., 2006). 

Dara and Prasad (2007) estimated the population parameters of S. litura on green 

gram (Vigna radiate L.), black gram (Vigna mungo L.), groundnut (A. hypogaea) and chilli 

(Capsicum annuum L.) along with castor bean as control in the laboratory. Field-collected egg 

masses of S. litura were used to start the initial colonies. S. litura population showed a 

positive trend on all host plants. The population parameters net reproductive rate, intrinsic 

and finite rates of increase, weekly multiplication rate, and potential fecundity were highest on 

castor bean, followed by greengram, blackgram, groundnut and chilli. Accordingly, the mean 

generation time and doubling time were shortest on castor bean, followed by greengram, 

blackgram, groundnut and chilli. Stable age-distribution showed that egg, larvae and pupae 

contributed to > 99 per cent of the population stable age. 

Maghodia and Koshiya (2008) studied that the life history of S. litura at 27.1 0 C in the 

laboratory on five different crops presumably observed as host plants of S. litura. The data 

were analyzed based on age-stages and variability of developmental rate among individuals 

of the pest. The highest intrinsic rate of increase (r), the finite rate of increase and the net 

reproduction rate (Ro) of S. litura were 0.174, 1.192 females/day, 1370.74 offspring/individual, 

respectively, observed on castor, while the highest mean generation time (T) 45.48 days was 

observed on cotton. The life expectancy of newly deposited eggs was 17.34, 17.44, 16.39, 

17.45 and 17.98 on castor, tobacco, groundnut, cotton and cabbage, respectively. The age 

specific fecundity of S. litura was 395.64, 179.32, 186.25, 292.64 and 25.14 progenies per 

day on the 42 nd , 44 th , 41 st , 46 th and 51 st days for castor, tobacco, groundnut, cotton and 

cabbage, respectively. Studies on age-specific distribution of the pest on different hosts 

revealed that the eggs and larvae contributed the highest to the population, whereas the 

contribution of the pupae and adults was negligible. 

2.1.1.2 Biology of Spodoptera litura on different varieties of groundnut 

Host plant resistance can be exploited as an effective and environment friendly 

component of pest management. At present, S. litura is a prominent defoliator associated with 

groundnut crop. So incorporation of resistance to this in suitable varieties has been high 

priority for groundnut breeders in association with entomologists. 

Tiwari et al. (1980) studied on the survival and weight gain in larvae of S. litura reared 

on 9 varieties of groundnut. Four days after feeding, larval survival was similar on all varieties 

except C-501, where high mortality rate was recorded. This trend was also observed 8 days 

after feeding, but after 12 days the mortality rate did not change. Larvae feeding on C-501 

weighed 1.26 mg after 4 days, while on Dwarf Mutant larval weight was 4.41 mg. Larval 

weight after 8 days' feeding was significantly greater on Dwarf Mutant than on the other 

varieties, and was lowest on C-501. After 12 days of feeding, the greatest weight gain was

observed on Dwarf Mutant, the lowest gains were observed in larvae on AH-1192, OG-71-3, 

JH-62, M-13 and C-501, and moderate gains were observed on J-11, Pol-2 and M-145. 

Intrinsic rates of increase of S. litura on 9 different varieties of groundnut were 

assessed in Andhra Pradesh, India. Life-tables were prepared from the results of 

observations on the development of larvae and on the number and viability of eggs produced 

by the ensuing adults, the intrinsic daily, weekly and monthly rates of increase being 

calculated. The duration of a generation was shorter and the intrinsic rate of increase was 

higher on the varieties, Dwarf Mutant and Pol 2 than on any of the others. Since this indicates 

a very rapid buildup of populations of S. litura on these 2 varieties, it is recommended that 

they should not be cultivated in areas where this pest is a common problem on other field 

crops. Larval mortality was highest on ICGV 86031 (82.8%) followed by ICGV 86350 

(53.32%) and Dh-3-30 (43.02%). Development was shortest on Dh-3-30 (32.25 days), and 

longest on ICGV 86031 (37.5 days) with adults surviving a maximum of 9.5 days. Of the nine 

groundnut varieties tested in the laboratory for resistance to S. litura, C-501 was most 

resistant and M -145 was the most susceptible (Tiwari et al., 1989). 

The biology of S. litura was studied on different groundnut genotypes along with 

wild tetraploid, Arachis manticola (L.) (Kulkarni, 1989 and Patil et al., 1995). Survival was 

least on the wild species, while it was maximum on Dh-3-30. The Survivability on ICGV- 

86031, 87264 was comparatively low followed by ICGV-86165, 86350, 86699 and GBFDS- 

272. The larval duration was short while gain in larval weight and survival percentage were 

high on susceptible genotypes indicating higher rate of multiplication. On the other hand, 

these parameters were reversed in resistant genotypes. In laboratory feeding bioassay by 

Todd et al. (1991), it was found that larval weight (75.7) mg was more in susceptible variety 

(Southern runner) as compared to resistant genotypes (26.5 mg). Larvae fed on florunner 

required an average of 3.7 more days to develop, compared to larvae fed on curly leaf. 

Similarly, Singh and Sachan (1992) identified ICGV-86030, 86031 and NCAC 343 as resistant 

to S. litura based on survival, weight gain and larval duration. 

Patil et al. (1991) reported that the performance of 27 and 15 entries in initial and 

advanced groundnut varietal trials, respectively, for defoliator damage at75 and 90 days after 

sowing, and productivity during the 1989 rainy season at Dharwad. Entries ICGV-87264, 

ICGV-86598 (Advanced varietal trial), ICGV-86350 and ICGV-86276 (Initial varietal trial), 

which combined low leaf damage (

Sreenivasa et al. (1997) studied on the development of S. litura as influenced by 

groundnut genotypes. In laboratory studies, larval mortality of S. litura was highest on the 

groundnut variety ICGV 86031 (82.8%) followed by ICGV 86350 (53.32%) and Dh-3-30 

(43.02%). Development was shortest (32.25 days) on Dh-3-30 with adults surviving for a 

maximum of 10.5 days and longest (37.5 days) development on ICGV 86031 with adults 

surviving a maximum of 9.50 days. ICGV 86350 was intermediate. 

S. litura reared on EMS treated Valencia mutants at Dharwad, Karnataka, showed 

that mutant 28-2 and 45 consistently showed less leaf damage, high mortality, low weight and 

low gain in weight of larvae compared to susceptible check (JL-24) and parents (DER and VL 

1) at all stages. The mortality and gain weight was very much pronounced on neonate larvae. 

The resistance effect of these mutants also extended the larval period by three days and had 

pronounced effect on the fecundity of moths indicating resistance in the mutants (Prasad et 

al., 2000). Leuk and Skinner (1971) reported that the mean length of the life cycle of 

Spodoptera frugiperda (S.) was shorter (29 days) for the susceptible Starr than South Eastern 

runner (33.3 days). The mean percentage of moth emergence was significantly less for larvae 

fed on foliage of the resistant cultivar, south eastern runner and the mortality of the total 

insects fed with the foliages was higher at all the stages of larval development and pupation 

on south eastern runner than starr. 

According to Patil et al. (2005) the investigations have been carried out for four years 

from 1996 to 1999 involving elite genotypes of groundnut to assess the yielding potentiality 

over different agroclimatological conditions and also understand the mechanism of resistance 

to major defoliator S. litura. Among the genotypes Dh-53 surpassed all other entries for pod 

yield under unprotected conditions and hence considered to be a resistant variety of 

groundnut against S. litura. 

In the laboratory condition, rearing of insect on resistant genotypes like NC Ac 343, 

Mutant 28-2 and R 9227 affected larval growth and survival, pupal development, adult 

emergence and fecundity indicating antibiosis as the principal mechanism of resistance 

(Prasad and Gowda, 2006). 

Patil et al. (2009) investigated the presence of resistance mechanism in elite 

genotypes of groundnut against S. litura. Eleven genotypes of groundnut such as TR-1-16-2, 

R-D-1-51, MN-1-35, DCG-17, M-1-28,R-9227, Dh-4-3, Dh-53, R-2001-2, ICGV-86590 and 

Dh-3-30 were evaluated. The variation in larval development and pupal weight after feeding 

on these groundnut varieties were taken as criteria and subjected to analysis. The larvae fed 

on leaves of MN-1-35, R-9227, DCG-17, M-1-28, Dh-53 & TR-1-16-2 recorded low to 

moderate larval weight and lower pupal weight. Higher larval and pupal weight was recorded 

in larvae fed on leaves of ICGV-86590, R-2001-2 and Dh-3-30. The results clearly indicated 

the presence of resistance mechanism in some groundnut genotypes against the S. litura. 

2.2 Different components of IPM for S.litura 

2.2.1 Seasonal incidence of S. litura measured by the use of pheromone 

traps 

Sreedhar (1983) monitored the activity of S. litura moths in cabbage fields at two 

locations in Karnataka using sex pheromone traps and found peak moth catches during last 

week of February at Raichur and during second week of March at Dharwad. However, 

Kulkarni (1989) noticed this pest to be active throughout the year at Dharwad. But more moth 

catch was seen from June to October with peak moth activity during September. 

Pawar and Shrivastava (1988) tried pheromone traps baited with lure of S. litura and 

H. armigera separately and together in a groundnut field in Andhra Pradesh. There was no 

difference in catches of S. litura in traps with any one of the lures or a combination of both the 

lures.

Singh and Sachan (1991) recorded seven peaks of S. litura in the sex pheromone 

traps at Nainital, Uttar Pradesh, during the cropping seasons of 1988-1989 and 1989-1990 of 

which five peaks were observed during the rainy season and the rest during spring. 

Rao et al. (1991) reported that the efficacy of four pheromone trap designs was 

compared for catching male tobacco caterpillar, S. litura moths in fields. There was no 

significant difference in the performance of the single and double funnel traps, and the single 

funnel (20 cm dia) trap captured more moths than any other trap. 

According to Lalita and Reddy (1992) the relative efficiency of ICRISAT standard trap 

and sleeve trap for trapping males of S. litura and H. armigera using synthetic sex pheromone 

and their rhythm of male attraction has been assessed. ICRISAT standard trap have been 

found to be more efficient by 1.2 times over sleeve traps in mass trapping of both S. litura and 

H. armigera particularly on the days with distinct peak for both the pests with a highest moth 

catch at 2.00 am to 4.00 am followed by 10.00 pm to 12.00 midnight for S. litura and 2.00 pm 

to 4.00 pm followed by 12.00 midnight to 2.00 am for H. armigera. 

Singh and Sachan (1993) recorded four peaks of S. litura of which the first and 

second were small and caused no threat to groundnut at Nainital. The third was observed at 

the pegging and pod initiation stage. During the first week of September and coincided with 

the greatest rate of oviposition on leaves. The fourth peak was greatest and occurred 

between 40 th and 43 rd standard weeks. 

Sreenivasulu et al. (2003) monitoring studies of S. litura on groundnut carried out 

during rabi 2000 in Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India, using synthetic sex pheromone traps 

indicated that the peak male moth catch was observed during the 2nd week of February while 

the highest number of egg masses were observed during the 2nd week of February and the 

highest number of larvae/20 m 2 during the 4th week of February. The moth catches in 

pheromone traps were found to be positively correlated with number of egg masses and larval 

counts of S. litura on groundnut in the field. 

Pheromone as a mass trapping tool have also been utilized in a few insects such as 

Pthorimoaea opercullela (Z.), S. litura, Chilo sacchariphagus indicus (K.), H. armigera, A. 

modicella, Lymantria obfuscata (W.), Cydia pomonella (L.) and Pectinophora gossypiella (S.) 

The communication disruption as a tool has been tried in S. litura, A. modicella, Peripleneta 

americana (L.) and Chilo auricilius (D.) in India with limited success. Attempts were made to 

design the trap for efficient trapping of the target insect, some of them were successful in the 

case of cotton, sugarcane and groundnut ecosystem. In oilseeds, seven insects are being 

included for monitoring, and for mass trapping the groundnut leaf miner (GLM), the tobacco 

caterpillar (S. litura) were tried. Mating disruption with saturation of sex pheromone was tried 

in GLM (Nandagopal, 2006). 

According to Tojo et al. (2008) traps with sex pheromone (litlure) of S. litura were set 

at nine locations in five countries in South Eastern Asia to compare the daily patterns of male 

moths caught in traps during the overlapping two years between 1997 and 1999. When the 

records for observation periods were averaged, the daily number of males from June to 

November was low in the locations of the year-round occurrence of males, as 0.4 on Sulawesi 

Island in Indonesia (5°S), 2 on Luzon Island in the Philippines (15°N), 2 in Chiayi, Taiwan 

(24°N), 4 in Kwangsi, China (25°N), 11 in Fukien, China (27°N), and 20 in Okinawa, Japan 

(26°N), whereas in locations where essentially no males were caught during winter, 

significantly more males were caught daily as follows: 108 in Chekiang, China (30°N), 192 in 

Kagoshima, Japan (31.5°N) and 47 in Saga, Japan (33.5°N). This increasing tendency of 

males toward northern latitudes suggested the northward migration of this species, and 

further to Kyushu from China, distributed at the same and/or lower latitude, if they could 

migrate overseas. 

2.2.2 Intercrops/ trap crops in groundnut to mange insect pests 

Intercropping has been an important component of small farm agriculture (Lamb, 

1978) and one of the reasons for the evolution of these cropping patterns may be the reduced

incidence of insect pests (Altieri et al., 1978). Kennedy and Raveendran (1989) reported that 

groundnut intercropped with pearl millet reduced the incidence of sucking pests substantially. 

Gavarra and Raros (1975) found more predatory spiders and predatory coccinellids in 

groundnut-maize cropping system than in sole crop of groundnut. The incidence of leaf 

hoppers, thrips and aphids were significantly reduced and population of predatory coccinellids 

was increased, when pearl millet intercropped with groundnut (Kennedy et al., 1990). 

Singh et al. (1991) conducted the field experiments in Delhi, in kharif season of 1987- 

88, groundnut intercropped with red gram, green gram, sorghum and soybean. Among these 

intercrops, groundnut- sorghum intercropping reduced the incidence of leaf hoppers, thrips, 

bihar hairy caterpillar and tobacco caterpillar. 

Agasimani et al. (1993) studies conducted on the incidence of S. litura in the 

intercropping system indicated the maximum incidence noticed in groundnut + sunflower (4:1) 

intercropping whereas, the least incidence was noticed in groundnut + jower (4:1) 

intercropping. Patil (1993) reported among various intercrops, groundnut + sorghum recorded 

less S. litura damage. Whereas, groundnut + sunflower, groundnut + cotton and groundnut + 

chilli recorded more damage. 

Anonymous (2003) reported that among the two most important defoliators of 

groundnut, S. litura and H. armigera both prefer sunflower over groundnut for oviposition and 

feeding. Also, the newly hatched larvae of these pests disperse immediately from the egg site 

on the groundnut crop, while on the sunflower they stay for a week to ten days on the same 

leaf. These larvae make skeletons of sunflower leaves. At this stage, the damage on the trap 

crop (sunflower) is clearly visible, making it easier for the farmers to collect the leaves under 

attack for subsequent destruction of the larvae, and without chemical pesticides. Since 

groundnut is more vulnerable to defoliators before the flowering stage, it is necessary to 

protect this crop from defoliators during this phase. While the larvae feed and develops on the 

trap crop, the main crop (groundnut) escapes from the critical pest damage. 

The influence of straight fertilizers and organic manures on the groundnut sucking 

insect pests viz., jassid, Empoasca kerri Pruthi and aphid, Aphis craccivora Koch was studied 

in the field from 1994 to 1996 in sandy loam soils. These studies combined with other cultural 

practices like planting sunflower as a trap crop for S. litura and spraying of nuclear 

polyhedrosis virus (NPV) to reduce the incidence of S. litura (Rajasekhara, 2002). 

Theodore et al. (2008) reported that groundnut intercropped with maize reduced the 

incidence of aphids, thrips and pod borers and increased the population of predators and also 

yield. The higher numbers of predators in groundnut/maize could be due to the crop canopy 

providing more food and, shade to allow development of their different stages (eggs, larvae). 

2.2.3 Natural enemies of Spodoptera litura 

According to Battu (1977), field collected larvae of S .litura were parasitized by the 

tachanid, Parasacrophaga misera (Wlk.) during October –November and by the ichneumonid, 

Campoletis sp. Both of these were first recorded from India. 

Joshi et al. (1979) reported that the natural enemies of S. litura on tobacoo in Andhra 

Pradesh. They collected eggs and larvae of S. litura from the field and reared in the laboratory 

for the emergence of parasites like Trichogramma australicum (Girault), Chelonus 

formosanus (Sonan), Apanteles sp, Strobliomyia aegyptia (Vill.), Blepherella setigera (Corti), 

Sarcophaga dux (Thoms.) and also predator like Ropalidia sp. 

Rao (1983) noticed that eggs of Corcyra cephalonica (Stainton) served as food for 

the larvae of Chrysopa scelestes (E.). These Chrysopa larvae were highly effective and fed 

voraciously on Corcyra eggs, Myzus persicae (Sulzer), Bemisia tabacci (Gennadius), eggs 

and just hatched larvae of S. litura.

Thontadarya and Nangia (1983) reported natural enemies of S. litura infesting 

soybean at Hebbal, Bangalore. Trichogramma chilonis Ishii, Brachmaria sp. and Bracon 

brevicornis (Wesmael) parasitized 32.5 per cent of the eggs, 3.4 per cent of the pupae and 

16.3 per cent of the larvae, respectively. In addition, a nuclear polyhedrosis virus infected 

21.4 per cent of the larvae. The list included Chrysopa sp, Coccinella sp and Scymnus sp 

preying on eggs or larvae of S. litura .According to the detailed studies conducted at IARI, 

New Delhi, Telenomus remus Nixon accepted 10 to 72 h old eggs of S. litura. 

Kulkarni (1989) recorded larval parasitoids emerged from S. litura in groundnut viz., a 

braconid, Bracon brevicornis Wesmael, an icneumonid, Campoletis chlorideae Uchidas and 

two tachinids, Campsilure concinnata Meigen, Peribaea orbatta Wiedemann. The occurrence 

and abundance of insect pests of groundnut and parasitoids, predators were studied in the 

field in Bangladesh in1984. 18 species of insect pests were recorded of which, Spilosoma 

obliqua, S. litura, Thysanoplusia orichalcea (F.) were dominant and one parasitoid, Gryon 

antestiae (Dodd) (Scelionidae), two predatory species Coccinella septempunctata (L.) and 

syrphids, Paragus sp. (Islam et al., 1983). 

Sridhar and Prasad (1996b) reported that larval parasitoids of S. litura, viz., Peribaea 

orbatta Wied. and Apanteles ruficrus Haliday caused 13.7 per cent and 8.2 per cent mortality, 

respectively in groundnut. Srivastava and Kushwaha (1995) reported that the parasitoid 

complex of S. litura consisted of an egg parasitoid, T. chilonis (31.8%) and nine larval 

parasitoids of which P. orbatta (14.3%) was the most abundant in cauliflower. 

Rao et al. (1990) observed that 5-10 per cent parasitisation of Charops obtusa (M.) 

and 80 per cent parasitisation of Apanteles africanus Cameron on S. litura in laboratory 

condition and these parasitoids were highly effective in tobacco nurseries. They also reported 

A. ruficrus was gregarious polyembryonic parasitoids parasite on S. litura in tobacco field. 

Similar trend was reported by Braune (1989). 

2.2.4 Potentiality of Nomuraea rileyi (Farlow) Samson to Spodoptera litura 

(F.) 

Gopalkrishnan and Mohan (1990) reported that the field trials on N. rileyi against third 

instar larvae of S. litura on cabbage revealed that the fungus @ 1.2 × 10 8 conidia/ml caused 

95 per cent mortality in 6 days after treatment. In the field, larval mortality of 52-60 per cent 

was observed at 12 days after spraying. The highest cumulative mortality of 88-97 per cent 

was observed after 19 days (Vimaladevi, 1994). 

In the laboratory, spraying the fungus at 10 8 , 10 9 , 10 10 and 10 11 conidia per litre of 

water against first instar larvae of S. litura resulted in cent per cent mortality within 5 days. 

The LC50 for third instar larvae was 2.89 × 10 10 at eight days. In the net house studies, initial 

mortality was observed at 7-8, days with an LC50 of 2.2×10 10 spores per litre. Larval mortality 

was initially observed in the field at nine days after spraying with the conidia. Even the lowest 

dose of 2 × 10 11 spores per litre resulted in significant cumulative larval mortality. There was 

no increase in mortality with increased dose (Vimaladevi, 1994).The conidial suspension 

sprayed on egg mass was found to cause 95.2 per cent mortality of neonate larvae 

(Gopalkrishnan and Mohan, 1991). 

Sridhar and Prasad (1996 a) reported about 86.9 per cent mortality of S. litura due to 

the entomopathogenic fungus on groundnut during 1991-1992 from Bapatla, a coastal region 

of Andhra Pradesh. 

According to Kulkarni (1999) seasonal incidence of N. rileyi to S. litura in groundnut, 

soybean and potato was noticed between 32 nd (Aug 1 st week) to 40 th (October 1st week) 

standard weeks. Among the three crops, maximum incidence was noticed in groundnut 

followed by soybean and least in potato. 

Patil (2000) studied on the entomopathogenic fungus, N. rileyi occurred in epizootic 

form on S. litura in groundnut during the rainy season. N. rileyi was found to be more effective

against S. litura on groundnut and also found more persistent on groundnut foliage during 

kharif which was up to ten days. 

According to Hegde (2001) the mycopathogen @ 2×10 8 conidia per litre sprayed 

thrice against S. litura in potato at 15 days interval from 50 days after sowing proved as 

effective as SlNPV and Bt and reduced the defoliators up to 32 per cent. 

Influence of host plants on the response of S. litura to N. rileyi indicated that larvae 

fed on groundnut were more susceptible by recording the lowest LC50 value of 5.79 × 10 6 

conidia per litre followed by soybean 5.98 × 10 6 conidia per litre, potato 6.96 × 10 6 conidia per 

litre and highest when feed on cotton 7.84 × 10 6 (Kulkarni and Lingappa, 2001). 

According to Navi (2002) spraying of N. rileyi @ 1×10 11 conidia per hectare was most 

effective in soybean and groundnut in large scale demonstration in reducing larval population 

to the extent of 28 and 62 per cent in soybean, 33 and 77 per cent in groundnut after first and 

second spray respectively. 

Manjula et al. (2004) record the occurrence of N. rileyi on S. litura and H. armigera in 

groundnut fields in Anantapur (Andhra Pradesh, India) and adjacent areas. The numbers of 

cadavers and live larvae were recorded at fortnightly intervals from September 2001 until the 

end of the cropping season. N. rileyi was initially observed during the first fortnight of 

September, and the level of infection gradually increased to 5-10, 25-50 and 50-100% during 

the second fortnight of September, first fortnight of October and second fortnight of October, 

respectively. These periods were characterized by a mean maximum temperature of 31-32 ° C, 

minimum temperature of 22-23 ° C, morning relative humidity (RH) of 79-84%, and evening RH 

of 29-42%. 

Nagaraja, (2005) reported that in groundnut crop ecosystem, different formulations of 

N. rileyi and spray equipments were evaluated, the results indicated that oil based formulation 

of N. rileyi with knapsack sprayer recorded significantly higher mycosis (47.43%), followed by 

wettable powder and crude formulation. 

A field experiment was conducted during the 2001 kharif in medium black soils in 

India to study the effect of resistant (Dh-53, GPBD-4, Dh-74, Dh-86, Dh-22 (red), ICGV 

86590, Dh-995, and Dh-22 (tan)) and susceptible genotypes (ICGV-92242 and Jl-24) of 

groundnut on the incidence of S. litura. The reduction of the larval population due to the spray 

of N. rileyi was compared with Neem Seed Kernel Extract (NSKE), insecticide (quinalphos 

0.05%) spray. Insecticidal spray recorded significantly lower larval population (3.18, 2.53 and 

0.82 larvae/m row at 40, 55 and 70 DAS, respectively) and leaflet damage in all the 

genotypes of groundnut. Significantly higher yield (16.89 q/ha) and lowest leaflet damage was 

recorded in quinalphos spray, whereas, N. rileyi and NSKE were next best in terms of yield 

(14.04 and 13.83 q/ha) with lesser leaflet damage (Navi et al., 2006). 

Rachappa and Lingappa (2007) conducted experiments during 2000-01 and 2001-02 

at Bailhongal and during 2000-01 and 2002-03 at Dharwad, Karnataka, India, to determine 

the seasonal occurrence of N. rileyi in relation to time and crop ecosystem. Fungal incidence 

was more abundant on pests inhabiting soyabean and groundnut ecosystems at both 

locations, e.g. Spodoptera litura, T. orichalcea and H. armigera. These crops, aside from 

being suitable for host insect build-up and providing congenial microclimate with their host, 

predisposed the insect larvae to higher and quicker infection. 

2.2.5 Integrated pest management for Spodoptera litura (F.) 

Mahesh (1996) reported that integration of raising tolerant varieties, raising trap crops 

like castor and sunflower around the fields and within the field respectively. These trap crops 

will act as perches for predatory birds and laying of eggs on the broader leaves as per the 

performance of the pest. Installation of pheromone traps to predict oviposition, application of 

neem seed kernel extract during early stages of the crop and spraying of NPV @ 250 LE per 

hectare will be a good management strategy for S. litura in groundnut.

Monitoring with pheromone traps to predict oviposition, growing sunflower and castor 

as trap crop around the field and 3-5 m apart within the fields, collection of egg masses and 

larvae from trap crop and destroying them on alternate days, spraying of NPV @ 250 LE/ ha 

at 36 days after sowing, release of egg parasitoid Telonomus remus Nixon @ 40,000/ ha at 

39 days after sowing, spraying of NSKE @ 3% at 42 days after sowing and spraying of 

quinalphos @ 0.05% or chlorpyriphos @ 0.05% or endosulfan @ 0.07% from 52 days 

onwards when the pest reaches economic threshold level. Utility of these components will be 

effective in the S. litura management in groundnut (Prasad, 1996). 

Ghewande and Nandagopal (1997) reported that the integration of resistant lines, 

intercropping with pearlmillet, soybean, castor and pigeonpea, use of pheromone traps and 

use of novel insecticides will be a good IPM strategy for major pests in groundnut. 

Spraying of chlorpyriphos @ 3 ml/l or quinalphos @ 2 ml/l or acephate @ 1 g/l or 

monocrotophos @ 1.6 ml/l and keep pheromone traps (2/acre) in the field to attract the male 

moths has been recommended. Poison baiting with bran, jaggery and chlorpyriphos (10:1:1 

w/w) is promising against grown up caterpillars which withstand contact insecticides as 

sprays. And planting castor or sunflower as trap crop for egg laying and destroying eggs or 

first stage larvae (on skeletonised leaf) help in reducing the incidence (Anon., 2000). 

Field experiments were conducted to determine the effect of an integrated pest 

management module, exclusive use of insecticides and insecticide sprays on S. litura on 

groundnut in Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India, during 2000. Integrated pest management 

module consisting of seed treatment with imidacloprid and mancozeb (3 g/kg), use of trap 

crop (castor), manual picking of larvae and egg masses, use of pheromone trap, spraying of 

SlNPV at 250LE/ha and use of larval bait with chlorpyriphos (0.05%) proved significantly 

effective by managing the populations of S. litura and sucking pests on groundnut and gave 

higher yield and cost-benefit ratio compared with the chemical control schedule, consisting of 

sprays of monocrotophos (0.05%), chlorpyriphos (0.05%), quinalphos (0.05%) and 

endosulfan (0.07%), and farmers practice, i.e. spray with cypermethrin (0.02%) at 60 days 

after sowing (Sreenivasulu et al., 2002). 

Singh et al. (2005a) reported that the IPM module, consisting seed treatment with 

Trichoderma viride Lieckfeldt @ 4 g/kg, foliar spray of NSKE (5%) applied at 30 DAS, foliar 

spray of sorghum leaf extract (10%) at 20 and 30 DAS, installation of pheromone traps @ 

10/ha each for monitoring of S. litura, erecting of “T” shaped bamboo bird perches @ 60/ha 

and need based application of SINPV spray @ 250 LE/ha was effective pest management 

option for groundnut + sunflower (5:1) based production system. 

Pest and disease incidence in groundnut plots maintained under integrated pest 

management (IPM; seed treatment with (Trichoderma) 4 g/kg of seeds, sowing through hand 

dibbling, intercropping with soybean cv. JS 335 and groundnut cv. Phule Unap at 4:1, soil 

amendment with 500 kg castor cake/ha, planting of castor bean as a trap crop, establishment 

of 10 pheromone traps/ha, and application of neem seed kernel extract (5%) at 30 and 50 

days after sowing (DAS) and SlNPV (1.5x10 13 POB’S/ha) or farmers' practice (FP; seed 

drilling, sole crop of groundnut, and spraying of 0.03% dimethoate at 35 DAS and spraying of 

0.07% endosulfan at 60 DAS) were studied in Jalgaon and Dhule districts of Maharashtra, 

India, during the rainy seasons (July-November) of 2003, 2004 and 2005. Infestation by thrips 

and leaf hopper was severe at 30-45 DAS. The average percentage of damage by thrips was 

lower in IPM plots (15-25%) than in FP plots (20-50%). S. litura and groundnut leaf miner 

were observed at 60 and 80 DAS, respectively. Damage was reduced by 5-25% when neem 

seed kernel extract and SlNPV were applied. The population of lady bird beetle was low in 

plots sprayed with insecticides. The incidence of soil borne diseases was reduced by 20-50% 

in IPM plots compared to FP plots. The intensity of foliar diseases, particularly late leaf spot 

(Cercosporidium personatum (Berk. & M.A. Curtis) Deighton [Mycosphaerella berkeleyi]), was 

lower under IPM (30%) than under FP (up to 80%). IPM resulted in higher net return (8345 

rupees/ha, higher by 42.3 per cent and benefit-cost ratio (1.43 vs. 1.31) than FP 

(Shambharkar et al., 2006).

3. MATERIAL AND METHODS 

The investigations on the objectives envisaged in previous chapter were carried out 

during kharif 2009 at Main Agricultural Research Station (MARS), University of Agricultural 

Sciences, Dharwad. Dharwad is located in Northern Transition Zone (Zone 8) of Karnataka 

and is situated at 15° 26' North latitude, 75° 07' East longitude and at an altitude of 678 m 

above mean sea level (MSL) and rainy climate. During experimental year the annual rainfall 

received was 1140.4 mm (69 rainy days), which was 31.9 per cent higher compared to the 

average of past 59 years. The air temperature, both minimum and maximum temperature did 

not vary much from the normal. However, relative humidity showed higher value compared to 

mean monthly average values. 

The biology of Spodoptera litura on seven elite genotypes of groundnut was carried 

out under laboratory condition, the field screening and evaluation of IPM modules against 

major defoliators of groundnut were under taken at Main Agricultural Research Station UAS, 

Dharwad during 2009 kharif season. The details of the materials used and methodology 

adopted during the course of investigation are described below. 

3.1 Field Screening 

1. Plant material 

Seven genotypes were screened against S. litura under artificial infestation in the field 

condition during 2009, rainy season. Each of the genotype was sown in three rows of 10 

meters length with spacing of 30×10 cm. The genotypes were assessed for foliage damage 

due to S. litura. 

2. Artificial infestation in the field 

Egg masses of S. litura were collected from the unsprayed groundnut field. Those 

collected egg masses were pinned on the surface of young leaves (egg mass facing the leaf 

surface) in each genotype of three rows of 10 meters length when crop was 50 days old. 

3. Scoring method 

The leaf area damage by S. litura was scored when the crop was 70 days old (Prasad 

et al., 1998). Five leaflets on the main stem from top to bottom were used for the estimation of 

leaf area damaged, as the damage was confined to young leaflets showing difference among 

entries. The leaf area damaged (in per cent) was visually assessed by adopting 1-9 scale 

(Wightman and Ranga Rao, 1994). On the bases of 1-9 scale the genotypes were grouped 

into four categories 1-2, 2-4, 4-6 and > 6 visual damage grade. Observations on larvae per 

meter row and per cent defoliation of each variety were also taken. 

3.1.1 Biology of Spodoptera litura on elite genotypes under laboratory 

conditions 

The experimental material was raised in the field during 2009 rainy season. All the 

cultural practices as recommended on package of practice were adopted, except spraying of 

insecticides. Care was also taken to protect the plants from drifting of insecticide spray from 

neighbouring fields. 

Egg masses of S. litura were collected from unsprayed groundnut fields. Uniform 

sized egg masses were surface sterilized with 10 per cent formaldehyde, washed 3-4 times 

with distilled water and kept in sterilized petriplates (5 cm diameter) for hatching on moist filter 

paper. Third leaf from top was selected for rearing. Freshly hatched hundred neonate larvae 

were released into seven trays containing seven genotypes viz.,

1. JL-24 (Susceptible check) 

2. ICGV-86699 Red 

3. GPBD- 5 

4. ICGV-86699 Tan 

5. GPBD- 6 

6. Mutant III 

7. GPBD-4, which were replicated trice. 

The cut end of the fresh groundnut leaves were covered with wet cotton wad for 

maintaining freshness of the leaves. The open top of the tray was covered by muslin cloth 

secured with rubber band. Fresh leaves were provided daily morning after cleaning the tray. 

Once the larvae attain third instar, only 25 larvae were maintained on each genotype. 

Before pupation, larvae were transferred to another tray containing sterilized sawdust. Two 

pairs of male and female pupae were kept for moth emergence in cages (35 × 25 × 45 cm) to 

study the oviposition period and fecundity. Diluted honey (10%) was provided as adult food in 

small vials with cotton wad. Groundnut plants placed in conical flask with water were kept 

inside the cage for egg laying. The following parameters were recorded. 

Number of days required for completion for each larval instar, prepupa and pupa and 

also larval weight, larval mortality at 5, 10 and 15 days after hatching. Per cent pupal survival 

on each variety and pupal weight were recorded. Pre-oviposition, oviposition and post- 

oviposition period, adult longevity, per cent adult emergence and total life cycle were 

recorded. 

3.2 IPM modules for Northern transitional zone of Karnataka 

3.2.1 Mass multiplication of Nomuraea rileyi 

The number of spores per ml was calculated using the following formula. For field 

studies the entomopathogenic fungus N. rileyi was cultured on Sabouraud’s Maltose Agar 

Yeast (SMAY) medium. For this, 200ml of the medium was put into conical flasks (500 ml), 

autoclaved at 15 PSI for 20 minutes, cooled and inoculated with pure culture of the fungus 

maintained in culture slants. Inoculated flasks were incubated at room temperature of 26 ± 1 ° 

C for 15 days. All the steps were carried out in aseptic conditions to avoid contamination. 

Spores were harvested with the help of a small sterile metal spatula and stored in small 

airtight screw type tubes at 10 ° C and 60 per cent relative humidity. 

The suspension of week old spores was made using distilled water and filtered 

through muslin cloth. Few drops of Tween-80, a wetting agent was added to the filtrate. From 

the stock solution, serial dilutions were made to obtain the required concentration. 

Spore count was made using Neaubuar’s haemocytometer 

Number of spores per unit = N × 400 × 1000 × 10 × D 

Where, 

N : Mean number of spores per small square of the haemocytometer. 

D : Dilution factor

3.2.2 Preparation of Neem Seed Kernel Extract (NSKE) 

5 kg of dehusked neem seeds have been taken 

Ground the neem seed kernals into fine powder 

Overnight soak fine powder in 10 liters of water 

Filtered it through muslin cloth and added 90 liters of water and 100 ml of soap 

solution to get 5 per cent NSKE (50 grams in 1 liter of water gives 5 per cent NSKE). 

3.2.3 Evaluation of IPM modules 

The experiment was carried out under field condition during kharif 2009 at the Main 

Agricultural Research Station, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. The trial was 

conducted to evaluate effects of three IPM modules on groundnut pests. The sowing was 

done during first fortnight of July, 2009 in all the modules. Each module was implemented on 

1000 sq m (10 guntas) area with GPBD-4 variety which is having resistance to late leaf spot 

and spacing followed was 30×10 cm. The details of modules tested in the field are given 

below. 

Module I: 

Seed treatment with Trichoderma @ 4 g/kg 

200 grams of sunflower seeds were mixed with groundnut seeds 

Pheromone traps @ 2/acre installed after sowing for the monitoring of S. litura 

Mechanical removal of egg masses from both sunflower and groundnut periodically 

and 

Sprayed with Nomuraea rileyi @ 1×10 8 conidia /ml and NSKE @ 5% two times at 45 

and 60 days after sowing. 

Module II: 

Seed treatment with Trichoderma @ 4 g/kg 

Intercropping of groundnut with foxtail millet at the row proportion of 7:1 (7 rows of 

groundnut and 1 row of foxtail millet) and all along the experimental plot 

Pheromone traps @ 2/acre installed after sowing for the monitoring of S. litura 

Mechanical egg collection on main crop and 

Sprayed with Emamectin benzoate @ 0.2 g/l at 45 and 60 days after sowing 

Module III: Farmer’s practice 

Insecticidal spray with quinalphos @ 2 ml/ l was taken up at 50 and 60 days after 

sowing 

In all the three modules, the sprays were imposed 2 times at an interval of 15 days, at 

45 and 60 days after sowing. 

The observations were recorded, when there was a initial notice of both sucking and 

defoliating pests on groundnut.

Observations were recorded daily on trap catches of S. litura 

The population count of sucking pests and defoliating pests were taken at weekly 

intervals 

For sucking pests- 

Five spots (per meter row) have been selected randomly in each module, from each 

spot the pest population on top three leaves of selected five plants was recorded 

For defoliating pests- 

Five spots have been selected randomly in each module, from each spot population 

(larvae) per meter row was recorded 

Natural enemy population in each module was recorded 

The leaf area damaged (in per cent) was visually assessed once in a week by 

adopting 1-9 scale on groundnut at randomly selected five spots. 

The leaf damage prior to spray and after spray at 7 and 15 days and also larvae per 

meter row were recorded. 

After the harvest, pod yield of groundnut and grain yield of both intercrop and trap 

crop were recorded. 

Whereas, all other data were compared by using Paired‘t’ test. 

3.2.4 Cost economics 

Based on the yield data the gross returns and net returns were calculated for each 

module. The Cost-Benefit ratio (C:B) was determined by Gross returns divided by cost of 

cultivation for each module.

4. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS 

The results of the present study on biology of Spodoptera litura on seven elite 

genotypes and integrated pest management modules for groundnut pests was undertaken at 

Main Agricultural Research Station (MARS), University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, 

during Kharif, 2009 and results presented here under. 

4.1 Field screening of groundnut genotypes 

Seven groundnut genotypes were screened against S. litura under artificial infestation 

in the field condition during 2009, rainy season. All the elite groundnut genotypes differed 

significantly in per cent defoliation and larval count (per m row). 

The damage ranged from 11.5 to 44.0 per cent in different genotypes. Maximum 

defoliation and number of larvae / m row were observed in the JL-24 (44.0% and 4.0) followed 

by GPBD-4 (33.5% and 3.5). The genotypes viz., Mutant-III (11.5% and 1.0) and ICGV- 

86699 Tan (12.0% and 1.0) recorded minimum damage and less number of larvae / m row. 

The damage and number of larvae were moderate in GPBD-5 (23.5% and 2.0), ICGV86699 

RED (23.5% and 2.0) and GPBD-6 (28.5% and 2.0) (Table 1). 

4.1.1 Biology of Spodoptera litura on elite genotypes under laboratory 

conditions 

Spodoptera litura was reared on seven groundnut genotypes viz., JL-24, ICGV-86699 

Red, GPBD- 5, ICGV-86699 Tan, GPBD- 6, Mutant III and GPBD- 4. Various parameters of 

growth and development of S. litura viz., number of days required for completion of each 

larval instar, prepupa, pupa, pre oviposition, oviposition, post oviposition and also larval 

weight, larval mortality at 5, 10 and 15 days after hatching, pupal weight, per cent survival on 

each variety, per cent adult emergence, adult longevity and total life cycle were studied. 

4.1.1.1 Larval period 

During the entire larval period, the caterpillar moulted five times. Thus completed six 

larval instars. A brief description of each larval instar is presented below (Table 2). 

4.1.1.1.1 First Instar 

Neonate larvae tiny, cylindrical and pale green with brown head. First abdominal 

segment has a pair of black spots. Three dorsal stripes were seen all along the body. Larvae 

congregated below the leaf at the site of egg laying. Scraped the epidermis which resulted in 

the papery leaf devoid of chlorophyll. 

The duration of first instar varied from 1.75 to 2.00 days in different genotypes. But 

there was no significant difference between the genotypes tested. 

4.1.1.1.2 Second instar 

Except for increase in size, no marked change in body color was noticed. The larvae 

remained in congregation but moved little away from the previous site and scraped the 

chlorophyll resulting into thin papery leaf. 

The duration of second instar was significantly longer (3.83 days) on the genotypes, 

ICGV- 86699 Tan followed by Mutant III (3.50 days) than on other except GPBD-4 on which 

the second instar duration was least 2.42 days. 

4.1.1.1.3 Third instar 

The larvae increased in size, turned pale green with brown head. A pair of black dots 

on first abdominal segment and three dorsal stripes all along the body were prominent. 

Larvae of this instar moved individually and punctured the leaflet.

Table 1: Performance of elite groundnut genotypes against Spodoptera litura damage under 

field condition during Kharif 2009 

Sl. No. Genotypes 

Per cent 

defoliation 

1 JL-24 (Susceptible check ) 44.0 a 

2 ICGV86699 RED 23.5 d 

3 GPBD-5 23.5 d 

4 ICGV86699 TAN 12.0 e 

5 GPBD-6 28.5 cd 

6 MUTANT -III 11.5 e 

7 GPBD-4 33.5 bc 

No. of larvae / m row 

4.0 a 

2.0 c 

2.0 c 

1.0 d 

2.0 c 

1.0 d 

3.5 b 

S. Em ± 1.09 0.063 

C.D. at 5% 3.31 0.019 

C.V. (%) 13.0 8.53 

In a column, means followed by the same alphabet do not differ significantly (P = 0.05) by 

DMRT

ICGV-86699 TAN (Resistant) 

JL-24 (Susceptible) 

Mutant- III (Resistant) 

Plate.1. Resistant and susceptible genotypes of groundnut

Third instar duration was significantly longer on the genotypes ICGV-86699 Tan (3.83 

days) and Mutant III (3.75 days) followed by GPBD-6 (3.25 days) and GPBD-5 (3.25 days) 

and were on par with JL-24 (3.08 days), GPBD-4 (3.00 days) and ICGV- 86699 Red (3.00 

days). 

4.1.1.1.4 Fourth instar 

The color of the fourth instar larvae was grayish to black with a dark head and three 

white spots were observed on cervix. On meso and metathoracic segments white spots were 

seen on the lateral sides along the black stripes. The larvae got scattered from the egg laying 

site and fed on the leaves irregularly from the margin inwards. 

The duration of fourth instar was significantly longer on the resistant genotypes, 

ICGV- 86699 Tan (4.33 days) and Mutant III (4.17 days) followed by GPBD-5 (3.83 days), 

GPBD-6 (3.67 days) and ICGV- 86699 Red (3.67 days). The shortest larval duration was 

recorded in susceptible genotypes GPBD-4 (3.25 days) and JL-24 (3.17 days). 

4.1.1.1.5 Fifth instar 

Considerable variation in the color ranging from light green to dark brown with a dark 

brown head was apparent. A prominent ‘Y’ shaped epicranial suture was present on the head. 

The lateral stripes were more clearly visible from a distance. Larvae were more gregarious 

and fed irregularly on the leaves from margin inwards. 

The duration of fifth larval instar was significantly longer in the genotypes, ICGV- 

86699 Tan (4.75 days) and Mutant III (4.58 days) followed by GPBD-5 (3.92 days), and 

GPBD-6 (3.90 days) and were on par with ICGV- 86699 Red (3.42 days). The least larval 

duration was recorded in susceptible genotypes GPBD-4 (3.33 days) and JL-24 (3.25 days). 

4.1.1.1.6 Sixth instar 

The full grown sixth instar larva was stout and smooth. It was dull grayish to blackish 

green in color with a bright yellow stripes bordered by semicircular stripe. Along the lower 

edge of lateral side of the body, dull yellow stripe was distinct. On the dark brown head 

inverted ‘Y’ shaped suture was prominent. 

The duration of last instar was significantly longer in the resistant genotypes, ICGV- 

86699 Tan (4.92 days) and Mutant III (4.83 days) followed by GPBD-5 (4.08 days), and 

GPBD-6 (4.09 days) and shortest larval duration was noticed in ICGV- 86699 Red (3.42 

days).However, it was on par with JL-24 (3. 52 days) and GPBD-4 (3.50 days). 

4.1.1.1.7 Total larval period 

The total larval period on all the genotypes ranged from 17.33 to 23.67 days. The 

resistant genotypes, ICGV- 86699 Tan and Mutant III permitted the larvae to complete their 

development in longer period (23.67 days and 22.83 days respectively) followed by GPBD-5 

(19.75 days) and GPBD-6 (19.49 days) and ICGV- 86699 Red (18.17 days). The susceptible 

varieties JL-24 and GPBD-4 allowed the larvae to complete their larval period within shortest 

period (17.93 days and 17.33 days) (Table 2). 

4.1.1.2 Larval weight 

Mean of 20 larval weight was recorded on each genotype at 5, 10 and 15 days after 

hatching. The weight gain by the larvae after 5 days after hatching (DAH) was maximum on 

susceptible genotypes, JL-24 (0.08 g) and GPBD-4 (0.08 g) followed by GPBD-5 (0.06 g) and 

minimum weight was recorded in resistant genotypes, ICGV- 86699 Tan (0.02 g) and Mutant 

III (0.02 g) and remaining genotypes were on par with each other (Table 3). 

After 10 DAH, the larval weight was significantly highest on JL-24 (1.98 g) and 

GPBD-4 (1.91 g) followed by GPBD-6 (1.44 g), GPBD-5 (1.41 g) ICGV-86699 Red (1.28 g).

Table 2: In vitro larval duration (in days) of Spodoptera litura on elite groundnut genotypes 


1 GPBD-5 2.00 a 

2 ICGV-86699 Red 1.83 a 

3 ICGV-86699 Tan 2.00 a 

4 GPBD-6 1.75 a 

5 Mutant-III 2.00 a 

6 GPBD-4 1.83 a 

7 JL-24 (Susceptible check) 2.00 a 

Larval instar duration (in days) 

1 st instar 2 nd instar 3 rd instar 4 th instar 5 th instar 6 th instar Total 

2.67 c 

2.83 c 

3.83 a 

2.92 bc 

3.50 ab 

2.42 c 

2.92 bc 

3.25 ab 

3.00 b 

3.83 a 

3.25 ab 

3.75 a 

3.00 b 

3.08 b 

3.83 ab 

3.67 ab 

4.33 a 

3.67 ab 

4.17 a 

3.25 b 

3.92 b 

3.42 bc 

4.75 a 

3.90 b 

4.58 a 

3.33 bc 

3.17 b 3.25 c 

S. Em ± 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.18 0.14 0.12 0.32 

C.D.at 1% NS 0.56 0.59 0.71 0.59 0.49 1.26 

In a column, means followed by the same alphabet do not differ significantly (P = 0.01) by DMRT 

4.08 b 

3.42 c 

4.92 a 

4.09 b 

4.83 a 

3.50 c 

3.52 c 

19.75 b 

18.17 cd 

23.67 a 

19.49 bc 

22.83 a 

17.33 d 

17.93 d

Table 3: Gain in larval weight and larval mortality of Spodoptera litura at different days after hatching on elite groundnut genotypes under laboratory 

conditions 


1 GPBD-5 0.06 a 

2 ICGV-86699 Red 0.05 ab 

3 ICGV-86699 Tan 0.02 b 

4 GPBD-6 0.05 ab 

5 Mutant-III 0.02 b 

6 GPBD-4 0.08 a 


Mean of 20 larval weight (g) Larval mortality (%) 

Total 

mortality 

5 DAH 10 DAH 15 DAH 5 DAH 10 DAH 15 DAH (%) 

1.41 ab 

1.28 ab 

0.79 b 

1.44 ab 

0.82 b 

1.91 a 

1.98 a 

10.30 ab 

9.92 b 

7.12 c 

10.31 ab 

6.13 c 

11.99 a 

11.70 a 

31.67 ab 

29.33 b 

41.00 a 

30.67 ab 

41.33 a 

27.00 b 

28.00 b 

6.67 b 

5.53 b 

9.67 a 

7.00 ab 

S. Em. ± 0.007 0.20 0.38 2.45 0.65 2.46 

C.D. at 1% 0.029 0.80 1.51 9.82 2.65 9.84 


DAH: Days after hatching 

9.67 a 

5.67 b 

5.67 b 

16.80 ab 

12.55 b 

25.27 a 

15.11 ab 

25.47 a 

13.00 b 

12.93 b 

55.14 

47.41 

75.95 

52.78 

76.47 

45.67 

46.60

The least larval weight recorded in ICGV- 86699 Tan (0.79 g) and Mutant III (0.82 g). 

However, after 15 DAH larvae reared on GPBD-4 and JL-24 registered significantly higher 

weight gain (11.99 g and 11.70 g) and the least larval weight was recorded in ICGV- 86699 

Tan (7.12 g) and Mutant-III (6.13 g). The genotypes GPBD-6 (10.31 g), GPBD-5 (10.30 g) 

and ICGV-86699 Red (9.92 g) were intermediate in gaining the weight. 

4.1.1.3 Larval mortality (%) 

Per cent larval mortality at 5, 10 and 15 DAH varied significantly between the 

genotypes evaluated. Significantly high larval mortality was recorded on resistant genotypes 

at all the stages compared to susceptible genotypes. 

The per cent larval mortality after 5 DAH Significantly high on resistant genotypes 

Mutant III (41.33%) and ICGV- 86699 Tan (41.00%) compared to susceptible genotypes 

ICGV-86699 Red (29.33%), JL-24 (28%) and GPBD-4 (27%) followed by GPBD-5 (31.67%) 

and GPBD- 6 (30.67%) (Table 3). 

After 10 DAH, the per cent larval mortality was significantly more on ICGV- 86699 

Tan (9.67%) and Mutant III (9.67%) followed by GPBD-6 (7.00%) and less larval mortality was 

noticed on the genotype ICGV-86699 Red (5.53%) and it was on par with JL-24 (5.67%) and 

GPBD-4 (5.67%). However, after 15 DAH larvae reared on ICGV- 86699 Tan and Mutant III 

registered significantly high larval mortality (25.27% and 25.47%) followed by GPBD-5 (16.80 

%), GPBD-6 (15.11%). The genotypes ICGV-86699 Red (12.55%), JL-24 (12.93%) and 

GPBD-4 (13.00%) were intermediate in larval mortality. 

4.1.1.4 Total per cent mortality 

Total per cent mortality was significantly highest on the genotypes Mutant III (76.47%) 

and ICGV- 86699 Tan (75.95%) and it was lowest on GPBD-4 (45.67%) and it was on par 

with JL-24 (46.60%) and ICGV-86699 Red (47.41%). Whereas GPBD-5 (55.14%), GPBD-6 

(52.14%) were intermediate in total per cent mortality (Table 3). 

4.1.1.5 Pupal weight 

Mean of 15 pupal weight was recorded on each genotype at a day after pupation. 

Pupal weight varied significantly between the genotypes evaluated. The highest pupal weight 

was recorded on the susceptible genotypes, JL-24 (4.66 g) and GPBD-4 (4.63 g) followed by 

GPBD-5 (4.27 g), GPBD-6 (4.21 g) and ICGV-86699 Red (3.93 g). The lowest pupal weight 

was recorded on ICGV- 86699 Tan (3.07 g) and Mutant III (2.98 g) (Table 4). 

4.1.1.6 Per cent pupal survival 

Per cent pupal survival on each variety varied significantly. The per cent pupal 

survival was highest on the genotypes, GPBD-4 (49.67%), JL-24 (48.00%).Which were on par 

with ICGV-86699 Red (46.67%) and per cent pupal survival was lowest on ICGV- 86699 Tan 

(20.67 %) and Mutant III (19.00%).Whereas GPBD-6 (43.00%) and GPBD-5 (40.00%) were 

intermediate in per cent pupal survival (Table 4). 

4.1.1.7 Percentage of adult emergence 

Percentage of adult emergence was significantly least on ICGV- 86699 Tan (16.72%) 

and Mutant III (14.94%) and it was highest in the genotypes GPBD-4 (46.38%) and JL-24 

(46.08%). Which were on par with ICGV-86699 Red (38.70 %) and GPBD-6 (38.48%) (Table 

4). 

4.1.1.8 Adult longevity 

Adult longevity was maximum on susceptible genotypes JL-24 (11.83 days) and 

GPBD-4 (11.67 days) followed by GPBD-6 (10.25 days), GPBD-5 (10.17 days) and minimum

Table 4: Biological parameters of Spodoptera litura on elite groundnut genotypes under laboratory conditions 


Mean of 15 pupal 

weight (g) 

Pupal survival (%) 

Adult emergence 

(%) 

Adult longevity 

(days) 

1 GPBD-5 4.27 ab 40.00 b 30.79 b 10.17 b 

2 ICGV-86699 Red 3.93 ab 

3 ICGV-86699 Tan 3.07 b 

46.67 ab 38.70 ab 9.58 b 

20.67 c 

16.72 c 9.33 b 

4 GPBD-6 4.21 ab 43.00 ab 38.48 ab 10.25 b 

5 Mutant-III 2.98 b 19.00 c 14.94 c 9.67 b 

6 GPBD-4 4.63 a 49.67 a 46.38 a 11.67 a 


48.00 a 46.08 a 11.83 a 

Fecundity (eggs/ 

female) 

520.67 ab 

492.67 ab 

386.00 b 

517.00 ab 

379.67 b 

588.67 a 

592.00 a 

S. Em. ± 0.31 1.57 2.38 0.23 30.75 

C.D. at 1% 1.24 6.28 9.00 0.92 123.23 

In a column, means followed by the same alphabet do not differ significantly (P = 0.01) by DMRT

on ICGV- 86699 Tan (9.33 days) and it was on par with Mutant III (9.67 days) and ICGV- 

86699 Red (9.58 days) (Table 4). 

4.1.1.9 Fecundity 

There was greater variation in the fecundity. JL-24 and GPBD-4 established their 

superiority in recording significantly higher number of eggs / female (592.0 and 588.67) 

followed by GPBD-5 (520.67), GPBD-6 (517.0), ICGV-86699 Red (492.67) and the least 

number of eggs were recorded in ICGV- 86699 Tan (386.0) and Mutant III (379.0) (Table 4). 

4.1.1.10 Pre-pupal period 

The fully developed larvae gradually shrunk and entered prepupal stage. There was 

no significant difference in the pre-pupal period in genotypes, thus pre pupal period did not 

vary between the genotypes (Table 5). 

4.1.1.11 Pupal period 

There was further reduction in the length of the prepupa and it transformed into a 

pupa. The pupa was brown, obtect with prominent compound eyes. 

The total pupal period was significantly minimum on susceptible genotypes, JL-24 

(9.83days) and GPBD-4 (9.75 days).Whereas Mutant III (11.67 days) and ICGV- 86699 Tan 

(11.33 days) recorded maximum pupal period and GPBD-5 (10.33 days), GPBD-6 (10.25 

days) and ICGV- 86699 Red (10.17days) were intermediate in pupal duration (Table 5). 

4.1.1.12 Pre-oviposition period 

Pre-oviposition period was significantly extended on resistant genotypes, Mutant III 

(4.25 days) and ICGV- 86699 Tan (4.17 days) and the Pre-oviposition period was least on JL- 

24 (3.08 days) and it was on par with GPBD-6 (3.50 days), GPBD-5 (3.42 days), GPBD-4 

(3.33 days) and ICGV- 86699 Red (3.25 days) (Table 5). 

4.1.1.13 Oviposition period 

Oviposition period was significantly higher on GPBD-4 (4.92 days) followed by JL-24 

(4.83 days) and least on Mutant III (4.25 days) and ICGV- 86699 Tan (4.17 days). Whereas 

GPBD-5 (4.42 days), GPBD-6 (4.42 days) and ICGV- 86699 Red (4.33 days) were 

intermediate in oviposition period (Table 5). 

4.1.1.14 Post-oviposition period 

GPBD-4 (4.00 days) showed significantly higher post-oviposition period. Whereas 

Mutant III (3.25 days) and ICGV-86699 Tan (3.17 days) recorded least post-oviposition period 

followed by GPBD-6 (3.58 days) and GPBD-5 (3.50 days) and were on par with ICGV- 86699 

Red (3.33 days) (Table 5). 

4.1.1.7 Total developmental period (egg-adult) 

The total developmental period was significantly least on JL-24 (41.02 days), GPBD-4 

(41.00 days) and ICGV-86699 Red (41.17 days) when compared to ICGV-86699 Tan (49.00 

days) and Mutant III (48.92 days). Whereas GPBD-5 (43.33 days) and GPBD-6 (43.15 days) 

were intermediate in total developmental period and were on par with each other (Table 5). 


Three different IPM modules viz., (1) the effective IPM modules developed against S. 

litura (M-I) involving seed treatment with Trichoderma, sunflower as trap crop, pheromone 

traps, spraying of N. rileyi and NSKE was imposed (2) in this module (M-II) instead of

Table 5: In vitro biology of Spodoptera litura on elite groundnut genotypes 


Larval period 

Pre pupal 

period 

Pupal period 

Duration (in days) 

Pre 

oviposition 

period 

Oviposition 

period 

Post 

oviposition 

period 

Total 

development 

al period 

(egg-adult) 

1 GPBD-5 19.75 b 1.75 a 10.33 abc 3.42 b 4.42 abc 3.50 abc 43.33 b 

2 ICGV-86699 Red 18.17 cd 

1.58 a 

10.17 abc 3.25 b 4.33 bc 3.33 bc 41.17 c 

3 ICGV-86699 Tan 23.67 a 2.17 a 11.33 ab 4.17 a 4.17 c 3.17 c 49.00 a 

4 GPBD-6 19.49 bc 1.67 a 10.25 abc 3.50 b 4.42 abc 3.58 abc 43.15 b 

5 Mutant-III 22.83 a 2.08 a 11.67 a 4.25 a 4.25 c 3.25 c 48.92 a 

6 GPBD-4 17.33 d 1.75 a 9.75 c 3.33 b 4.92 a 4.00 a 41.00 c 

7 JL-24 (Susceptible check) 17.93 d 

1.67 a 

9.83 bc 

3.08 b 4.83 ab 3.92 ab 

S. Em. ± 0.32 0.16 0.32 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.34 

C.D. at 1% 1.26 NS 1.28 0.56 0.49 0.48 1.36 


41.02 c

Module II (Groundnut + Foxtail millet) 

Module III (Farmers practice) 

Plate.2. IPM modules take up in groundnut 

Module I (Groundnut + Sunflower)

sunflower and N. rileyi, foxtail millet used as intercrop and Emamectin benzoate used for 

spraying where as other treatments remained same as that of M-I. These two modules were 

compared with M-III which comprised of farmer’s practice. The results obtained are presented 

in tables. 

4.2.1 Monitoring the activity of S. litura 

The daily trap catches of male adults of S. litura in pheromone traps during Kharif 

2009 indicated definite pattern of occurrence during August and September (Apendix-I). 

In first module 

During the cropping season, the maximum number of moths were caught on fourth 

day of second week of August (451.0) and minimum number of moths were caught on fourth 

day of third week of August (13.0). The maximum number of adults were caught during first 

and second week of August. The least number of moths were caught on fifth day of first week 

of September (18.0) and maximum (75.0) on seventh day of second week. In September 

month, the maximum number of adults were caught during second week compare to other 

weeks. 

In second module 

During August month, the maximum number of moths were caught on fifth day of 

third week (159.0) and the minimum (18.0) number of moths on first day of fourth week. 

During September month, the highest number of moths caught on seventh day of second 

week (112.0) and lowest (13.0) on fourth day of first week. In second module, the highest 

number of moths were caught during first week of August compare to September. 

Between Module-I and II, the highest number of moths were caught in Module-I 

compare to Module –II. 

4.2.2 Sucking pest population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

4.2.2.1 Thrips (Scirtothrips dorsalis and Thrips palmi) 

Nymphs and adults were found sucking the sap from leaves, starting from 21 DAS to 

63 DAS. Population of thrips ranged from 2.60 to 3.28 /top three leaves in M-I. In M-II it was 

ranged from 1.40 to 2.48. In case of third module the thrips population was varied from 3.16 

to 3.84 (Table 6). 

As per Paired ‘t’ value, there was significant variation in sucking pest population in 

different IPM modules. Module-II was significantly superior over module-I and module-III 

during 21 DAS to 63 DAS. Whereas module-I was significantly superior over module-III during 

same period. 

4.2.2.2 Leafhoppers (Empoasca kerri) 

Leafhoppers population found to attack the crop from 21 DAS to 63 DAS with the 

population of 1.44 to 2.24 / top three leaves in M-I. In M-II, the population of leafhoppers 

ranged from 1.24 to 2.38. In module-III (farmer’s practice) the population varied from 2.40 to 

3.45/ top three leaves (Table 7). 

As per Paired ‘t’ value, all the three modules varied significantly from each other. 

Module-II was significantly superior over module-I and module-III during 21 DAS to 63 DAS. 

However module-I was significantly superior over module-III during 21 DAS to 63 DAS. 

4.2.3 Defoliator population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

4.2.3.1 Semilooper (Thysanoplusia orichalcea) 

This pest was observed on the crop from 37 DAS to 79 DAS. The young caterpillars 

scraped the chlorophyll content of the tender leaves from undersurface. Later instars caused

Table 6: Thrips population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

Module I 

Treatment 

(Groundnut + sunflower) 

Module II 

(Groundnut + foxtail millet) 

Module III 

(Farmers’ practice) 

Paired “ t” test value for comparison of means 

Thrips population / top 3 leaves 

21 DAS 28 DAS 35 DAS 42 DAS 49 DAS 56 DAS 63 DAS 

2.60 2.68 3.28 3.24 3.12 3.00 2.80 

2.00 2.12 2.40 2.48 2.24 1.80 1.40 

3.16 3.28 3.84 3.72 3.56 3.40 3.36 

Module I & Module II 3.35* 2.88* 3.22* 3.28* 2.99* 5.26* .37* 

Module II & Module III 5.98* 7.89* 2.88* 6.07* 3.65* 7.62* 7.89* 

Module III & Module I 2.88* 3.58* 3.58* 4.70* 5.87* 3.65* 3.50* 

* Significant at 5% level DAS- Days after sowing 

Module-I : Seed treatment with Trichoderma, sunflower (trap crop), pheromone trap and spraying of N. rileyi and NSKE 

Module-II : Seed treatment with Trichoderma, foxtail millet (intercrop), pheromone trap and spraying of Emamectin benzoate 

Module-III: Spraying of quinalphos

Table 7: Leaf hoppers population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

Module I 

Treatment 


Module II 


Leafhoppers population / top 3 leaves 


2.48 2.24 2.87 2.51 2.47 1.88 1.44 

2.00 2.38 2.16 2.06 2.00 1.48 1.24 

Module III (Farmers’ practice) 3.16 3.00 3.44 3.36 3.45 2.60 2.40 


Module I & Module II 2.95* 1.25 7.88* 2.78* 2.93* 6.53* 0.95 

Module II & Module III 5.98* 2.90* 9.58* 5.12* 5.74* 3.31* 83* 






severe defoliation. Their population varied from 1.24 to 1.72 larvae / m row in first module. 

Whereas in second module, the population varied from 0.44 to 0.68 and in case of third 

module the population ranged between 2.00 to 2.48 (Table 8). 

As per Paired ‘t’ value, all the three modules differed significantly from each other. 


Whereas module-I was significantly superior over module-III during same period. 

4.2.3.2 Tobacco caterpillar (Spodoptera litura) 

This pest was noticed on the crop from 37 DAS to 79 DAS. They were gregarious in 

early instars and scraped the chlorophyll content from under surface of leaves, resulted in 

skeletonisation. Later instars spread and fed on leaves voraciously. The population varied 

from 1.48 to 3.96 larvae/ m row in first module. Whereas in second module, the S.litura 

population ranged from 0.76 to 3.08 and it was varied from 2.56 to 4.40 in third module 

(Table 9). 


Module-II was significantly superior over module-I and module-II during 37 DAS to 79 DAS. 

However module-I was significantly superior over module-III during same period. 

4.2.3.3 Bihar hairy caterpillar (Spilactia obliqua) 

Larvae scraped the green matter from under surface of leaves and skeletonised them 

in the early instars. The grown up caterpillars defoliated the crop. This pest was found to 

attacked the crop 37 DAS to 79 DAS. In M-I the larval number varied from 0.78 to 1.11 / m 

row. Whereas in M-II it was varied from 0.28 to 0.70 larvae /m row. However in M-III, the 

larval population ranged from 1.04 to 1.69 (Table 10). 



The same trend was followed with module-I and module-III. 

4.2.3.4 Groundnut leaf miner (Aproraema modicella) 

Infestation was noticed on the crop for a short period from 51 DAS to 72 DAS. The 

larvae were mining into midrib of the leaves and feeding on the mesophyll between the two 

epidermal layers for a week and comes out from mine and webbing the leaves and feeding on 

them. At later stage to give burnt appearance of leaves from a distance. The population of 

GLM varied from 0.92 to 1.20 larvae/ plant in M-I. Whereas in M-II, the leaf miner population 

ranged from 0.36 to 0.50 and in M-III, it was varied from 1.82 to 2.04 (Table 11). Though the 

pest population was below ETL in all the IPM modules. 

Paired ‘t’ value, all the three modules differed significantly from each other. Module-II 

was significantly superior over module-I and module-III during 51 DAS to 72 DAS. However 

module-I was significantly superior over module-III during same period. 

4.2.4 Per cent defoliation by defoliators in different IPM modules of 


4.2.4.1 35 days after sowing 

The per cent defoliation was highest in module-III (36.6) followed by module-I (26.4) 

and lowest in module-II (22.8) at 35 days after sowing. As per Paired ‘t’ value, all the three 

modules differ significantly from each other (Table 12).

Table 8: Thysanoplusia orichalcea population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

Module I 

Treatment 


Module II 


Module III 



Thysanoplusia orichalcea population / m row 


1.24 1.64 1.72 1.68 1.71 1.56 1.44 

0.68 0.48 0.52 0.53 0.58 0.50 0.44 

2.48 2.00 2.16 2.12 2.14 2.06 2.20 

Module I & Module II 2.88* 5.20* 5.47* 4.46* 5.23* 4.16* 4.56* 


Module III & Module I 6.76* 2.59 3.77* 3.31* 3.26* 2.30 2.96* 





Table 9: Spodoptera litura population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

Module I 

Treatment 


Module II 


Module III 


Spodoptera litura population/ m row 


1.48 2.20 2.16 2.80 3.60 3.80 3.96 

0.76 1.60 1.48 2.36 2.84 3.00 3.08 

2.56 3.20 3.28 3.60 4.04 4.20 4.40 









Table 10: Spilarctia obliqua population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

Module I 

Treatment 


Module II 


Module III 


Spilarctia obliqua population / m row 


0.78 0.82 0.90 0.95 0.99 1.09 1.11 

0.28 0.32 0.36 0.38 0.43 0.64 0.70 

1.04 1.10 1.12 1.20 1.29 1.60 1.69 




Module III & Module I 4.33* 3.81* 1.62 2.98* 3.35* 6.50* 3.71* 





Table 11: Aproraema modicella population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

Module I 

Treatment 


Module II 


Module III 



Aproraema modicella population / plant 

51 DAS 58 DAS 65 DAS 72 DAS 79 DAS 86 DAS 

0.92 1.00 1.20 1.08 - - 

0.36 0.44 0.48 0.50 - - 

1.82 1.94 2.00 2.04 - - 

Module I & Module II 4.63* 3.25* 3.02* 2.88* - - 

Module II & Module III 6.69* 4.48* 4.41* 6.01* - - 

Module III & Module I 6.28* 3.98* 4.20* 6.00* - - 






The defoliation percentage was more (39.8) in module-III followed by module-I (35.8) 

and less (29.0) in module –II and at 50 days after sowing. All the three modules varied 

significantly from each other as per Paired ‘t’ value (Table 12). 


The per cent defoliation was highest in module-III (25.2) followed by module-I (22.2) 

and least in module-II (16.4) at 65 days after sowing. As per Paired ‘t’ value, all the three 

modules differ significantly from each other (Table 12). 

4.2.5 The management of Spodoptera litura in IPM modules of groundnut 

The management of Spodoptera litura in IPM modules of groundnut is given in table 

13. Two sprays 45 and 60 days after sowing was done and observations have taken. All the 

three treatments differed significantly in percent defoliation before spraying in both the cases. 

Module III has shown significantly higher defoliation percentage (43.6, 24.4) followed by 

module I (37.8, 17.4) and lowest observed in module II (31.8, 15.4) in first and second spray 

respectively. 

In first spray, 7DAS defoliation percentage and larvae per mt row were counted. All 

three treatments differed significantly in both the observations. Module III reported 

significantly highest defoliation and larvae (39.8 and 4.2) followed by module I (35.8 and 3.2) 

and the module II showed less defoliation and larvae (29.0 and 2.2). Observations taken 15 

DAS also showed the same trend showing significantly higher defoliation and larvae in 

module III (25.2 and 3.8) followed by module I (22.2 and 3.0) and lowest in module II (16.4 

and 1.6). 

In second spray, 7DAS per cent defoliation and larvae per mt row were recorded. All 

three treatments varied significantly in both the observations. M- III showed significantly 

highest defoliation and larvae (24.4 and 3.6) followed by M-I (21.2 and 2.6) and the M -II 

showed less defoliation and larvae (15.4 and 1.8). Observations taken 15 DAS also followed 

the same trend showing significantly higher defoliation and larvae in M-III (19.4 and 3.4) 

followed by M-I (17.4 and 2.0) and lowest in M- II (12.4 and 1.2). 

4.2.6 Incidence of sucking and defoliating insect pest on sunflower crop 

4.2.6.1 Sucking pests 

Leafhoppers, both nymphs and adults were found to suck the plant sap, starting from 

21 DAS to 63 DAS. The leafhopper population varied from 1.02 to 2.04 / top three leaves with 

an average of 1.49 ± 0.32 (Table 14). 

Thrips, Thrips palmi were noticed on the crop from 21 DAS to 63 DAS. The 

population of thrips ranged from 1.42 to 2.64 / top three leaves with an average of 1.24 ± 

0.29. The nymphs and adults were found to attack and suck the sap from the tender leaves 

(Table 14). 

Aphids, Aphis sp were observed on the crop from 21 DAS to 63 DAS. Both nymphs 

and adults were found feeding around succulent parts and under surface of tender leaves. 

The aphid population differed from 0.86 to 1.84 per top three leaves with the mean value of 

1.28 ± 0.34. 

4.2.6.2 Defoliators 

DAS. 

Semilooper, Thysanoplusia orichalcea was noticed on the crop from 37 DAS to 79

Table 12: Per cent defoliation by defoliators at 35, 50 and 65 days after sowing in different IPM modules 

Module I 

Treatment 


Module II 


Module III 



Defoliation (%) by defoliators 

35 DAS 50 DAS 65 DAS 

26.4 35.8 22.2 

22.8 29.0 16.4 

36.6 39.8 25.2 

Module I & Module II 3.09* 2.81* 2.81* 

Module II & Module III 4.81* 4.22* 4.00* 

Module III & Module I 3.45* 3.81* 4.73* 

* Significant at 5% level DAS- days after sowing 




Table 13: The management of Spodoptera litura in IPM modules of groundnut during Kharif 2009 

Module I 

Treatments 


Module II 


Module III 


Before 

Spray 

( per cent 

defoliation) 

First spray (45 days after sowing) Second spray (60 days after sowing) 

Defoliation 

(%) 

After spray After spray 

7 DAS 15 DAS 

Before 

spray 

7 DAS 15 DAS 

larvae/ mt 

row 

Defoliation 

(%) 

larvae/ mt 

row 

( per cent 

defoliation) Defoliation 

(%) 

larvae/ mt 

row 

Defoliation 

(%) 

larvae/ mt 

row 

37.8 35.8 3.20 22.2 3.00 22.2 21.2 2.6 17.4 2.00 

31.8 29.0 2.20 16.4 1.60 16.4 15.4 1.8 12.4 1.20 

43.6 39.8 4.20 25.2 3.80 25.2 24.4 3.6 19.4 3.40 


Module I & Module II 2.89* 2.81* 3.16* 2.81* 3.50* 2.81* 5.43* 3.62* 4.38* 4.00* 

Module II & Module III 4.35* 4.22* 6.32* 4.00* 11.0* 4.00* 5.81* 4.83* 5.53* 4.47* 

Module III & Module I 5.98* 3.81* 3.16* 4.73* 3.16* 4.73* 6.53* 7.40* 6.32* 3.50* 

* Significant at 5% level DAS- days after spray 




Table 14: Incidence of sucking and defoliating insect pests on sunflower (Trap crop) 

Weekly interval 

Sucking pests / top 3 leaves Defoliator population/ plant 

Leaf hoppers Thrips Aphids 


T. orichalcea S. litura S. obliqua 

21 DAS 1.42 2.64 1.42 37 DAS 2.68 1.86 1.48 

28 DAS 1.64 2.26 1.64 44 DAS 4.42 3.64 2.86 

35 DAS 1.02 1.42 1.02 51 DAS 2.28 5.18 4.08 

42 DAS 1.24 1.68 0.86 58 DAS 2.46 6.28 5.48 

49 DAS 1.86 2.16 1.84 65 DAS 1.86 9.86 7.68 

56 DAS 2.04 1.82 1.48 72 DAS 2.06 11.06 10.06 

63 DAS 1.42 2.24 1.06 79 DAS 1.64 13.84 11.56 

Mean± SD 1.49 ± 0.32 ± 0.29 1.28± 0.34 Mean± SD 2.43±0.86 7.38±3.99 6.17±3.47 

DAS - days after sowing

The early instar larvae scraped the chlorophyll content of the leaves from 

undersurface. Later instars caused severe defoliation. Their population varied from 1.64 to 

4.42 with an average of 2.43 ± 0.86 larvae / plant. 

Tobacco caterpillar, Spodoptera litura was observed during vegetative stage of the 

crop from 37 DAS to 79 DAS. Early instars larvae were gregarious and scraped the 

chlorophyll content from under surface of leaves, resulted in skeletonisation. Later instars 

spread and fed on leaves voraciously. The population ranged between 1.86 to 13.84 larvae/ 

plant. Initially the population was less (1.86 larvae/ plant) whereas gradually the population 

was increased (13.84 larvae/ plant) with the mean value of 7.38 ± 3.99. 

Bihar hairy caterpillar, Spilosoma obliqua scraped the green mater from under 

surface of leaves and skeletonised them in the early instars. The grown up caterpillar 

defoliated the crop. This pest was noticed on the crop from 37 DAS to 79 DAS with mean 

larval population of 6.17 ± 3.47. Initially the larval population was less (1.48 larvae/ plant) and 

it was increased to 11.56 larvae/ plant at end of the crop stage (Table 14). 

4.2.7 Incidence of defoliators on main and trap crop 

The defoliator pest population was more on sunflower compared to groundnut at all 

the stages of the crop. The semiloopers population varied from 1.24 to 1.72 larvae / m row in 

groundnut whereas in sunflower varied from 1.64 to 4.42/ plant. 

The population of S. litura and S. obliqua varied from 1.48 to 3.96 and 0.78 to 1.11 

larve/ m row respectively in groundnut whereas in sunflower, the population ranged from 1.86 

to 13.84 and 1.48 to 11.56 larvae/ plant (Table 15). 

4.2.8 Natural enemy population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

Natural enemy population was recorded in all the three IPM modules of groundnut. 

4.2.8.1 Coccinellids 

Coccinellid population was noticed on the crop 21 DAS to 63 DAS. Both adult and 

grubs were predators on sucking pests. The population both adult and grubs were ranged 

from 1.20 to 2.40 and 1.20 to 2.60 per m row respectively in M-I. Whereas in M-II the adult 

and grub population was ranged from 2.00 to 3.80 and 2.40 to 3.80 grubs per m row 

respectively. In M-III, the population of adult and grubs were ranged between 1.00 to 2.00 and 

1.00 to 1.80 respectively (Table 16). 

Paired ‘t’ value, module-II and module-I differed significantly and module-II and 

module-III also varied significantly from each other. Module-II was significantly superior over 

module-I and module III during 21 DAS to 63 DAS. 

4.2.8.2 Syrphids 

Syrphid population was observed on the crop from 21 DAS to 63 DAS. The 

population ranged between 1.40 to 2.70 syrphids / m row in first module. In second module 

Syrphid population was varied from 2.60 to 3.90. Whereas in third module it was differed from 

1.00 to 1.80 (Table 17). 



Where the module-I was significantly superior over module-III. 

4.2.8.3 Campoletis chlorideae 

It was observed in large proportion during August and September. The incidence was 

noticed on the third instar larvae of S. litura during 37 to 79 DAS. The population ranged

Table 15: Incidence of defoliators on main and trap crop 


Groundnut Sunflower 

T. orichalcea S. litura S. obliqua T. orichalcea S. litura S. obliqua 

37 DAS 1.24 1.48 0.78 2.68 1.86 1.48 

44 DAS 1.64 3.48 0.82 4.42 3.64 2.86 

51 DAS 1.72 2.16 0.90 2.28 5.18 4.08 

58 DAS 1.68 2.80 0.95 2.46 6.28 5.48 

65 DAS 1.71 2.20 0.99 1.86 9.86 7.68 

72 DAS 1.56 2.00 1.09 2.06 11.06 10.06 

79 DAS 1.44 1.80 1.11 1.64 13.84 11.56 

DAS - days after sowing

Module I 

Table 16: Natural enemy population in different IPM modules of groundnut (Coccinellids) 

Treatment 


Module II 


Module III 



Module I & Module II 3.16* 3.21 * 

Coccinellid population / m row 


Adult Grub Adult Grub Adult Grub Adult Grub Adult Grub Adult Grub Adult Grub 

1.20 1.21 1.80 1.60 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.40 2.20 2.60 1.88 2.00 1.20 1.20 

2.20 2.40 2.80 2.80 3.20 3.40 3.80 3.80 3.20 3.20 2.80 3.00 2.00 2.40 

1.00 1.10 1.40 1.20 1.16 1.12 1.60 1.60 2.00 1.80 1.04 1.40 1.20 1.00 

3.17* 3.20* 3.21* 3.21* 6.11* 5.71* 3.16* 5.72* 3.57* 3.16* 4.00* 6.00* 

Module II & Module III 6.00* 3.17* 3.50* 6.53* 8.22* 7.50* 6.53* 11.0* 3.17* 5.71* 2.86* 8.43* 4.00* 5.72* 

Module III & Module I 1.00 3.50* 1.00 1.63 2.87* 5.51* 0.41 4.00* 1.00 4.02* 2.88* 3.17* 1.00 1.00 





Table 17: Natural enemy population in different IPM modules of groundnut (Syrphids) 

Module I 

Treatment 


Module II 


Module III 



Syrphid population / m row 


1.80 2.00 2.40 2.70 2.60 1.80 1.40 

2.60 2.80 3.60 3.90 3.20 3.00 2.60 

1.10 1.40 1.60 1.80 1.80 1.20 1.00 



Module III & Module I 3.50* 2.44 4.00* 9.00* 4.00* 1.50 1.63 





Table 18: Natural enemy population in different IPM modules of groundnut (Campoletis chloridae) 

Module I 

Treatment 


Module II 


Module III 



Campoletis chloridae population / m row 


1.60 1.80 2.20 2.40 2.60 1.60 1.40 

2.40 2.80 3.40 3.60 3.80 2.80 2.60 

1.10 1.40 1.40 1.80 1.80 1.20 1.00 



Module III & Module I 3.50* 1.63 4.00* 2.45* 4.00* 0.78 1.63 





etween 1.40 to 2.60/ m row in module-I. Whereas module-II the population was varied from 

2.40 to 3.80 and in M-III it was differed from 1.00 to 1.80 (Table 18). 

Paired ‘t’ value, module-II and module-I differed significantly and module-II and 

module-III also varied significantly from each other. Module-II was significantly superior over 

module-I and module III during 37 to 79 DAS. 

4.2.9 Yield and cost economics 

Among the different modules, the highest yield (39.95 q/ha) was obtained in M-II 

which resulted in higher gross returns (Rs. 1,07,525/ ha), net profit (Rs. 89,850/ ha) and 

highest C: B ratio (1:5.1) compared with net profit (Rs. 70,190/ ha), C: B ratio (1:4.3), gross 

returns (Rs. 86,300/ ha) and yield (30.02 q/ha) in M-I. Net profit (Rs. 33,490/ ha), C: B ratio 

(1:2.0), gross returns (Rs. 50,000/ha) and yield (20.00 q/ha) were least in M-III (farmer’s 

practice) compared to M-II and M-I (Table 18).

Table 19: Economics of IPM modules during Kharif 2009 

Module I 

Treatment 


Module II 


Module III 


Yield (q/ha) 

Groundnut Intercrop 

Gross returns 

(Rs/ ha) 

Cost of cultivation 

(Rs/ ha) 

Net profit 

(Rs/ ha) 

30.02 5.0 86,300.00 16110.00 70,190.00 1: 4.3 

39.95 4.5 1,07,525.00 17,675.00 89,850.00 1: 5.1 

20.00 - 50000.00 16,510.00 33,490.00 1: 2.0 



Module-III: Spraying of quinalphos 

C: B 

ratio

5. DISCUSSION 

Of more than a hundred species of insect pests associated with groundnut crop, 

about ten are economically important in India. Defoliators mainly tobacco caterpillar, leaf 

miner, Helicoverpa armigera and bihar hairy caterpillar (BHC) are gaining importance in 

Karnataka. At present, pest management strategies rely on chemical control. Overuse of 

pesticides, especially in irrigated conditions has led to the outbreak of pests such as S. litura, 

destruction of natural enemies, development of resistance, environmental pollution and 

operational hazards followed by substantial erosion in net income. Further, farmers failed to 

get difference in sprayed and un-sprayed plots (Ranga Rao and Wightman, 1993).This 

indicates the failure of insecticides sprays, which add to the total cost of production and affect 

the environment adversely. 

As S. litura is one of the key pests of groundnut in the transitional tract of Karnataka 

in kharif and other irrigated places during rabi /summer, a study was envisaged to combat this 

noxious pest with an intention to evolve cost effective and environmentally safe approaches 

such as resistant cultivars, cultural practices and bio-pesticides. 

Worldwide there is an increased awareness that agricultural practices must be 

sustainable and environmentally friendly, greater emphasis is laid on integrated management 

of pests of which resistant cultivars form principle component. In groundnut, the Spanish 

bunch cultivars are most popular in India but they are highly susceptible to pests and 

diseases compared to spreading type. The research efforts have been successful in 

identifying resistant genotypes against S. litura (Wightman et al.; 1990, Patil et al.; 1991, 

Dwivedi et al.; 1993, Singh et al.; 1993, Nadaf et al.; 1995, Tiwari et al.; 1989, Prasad et al.; 

1998, Rame Gowda and Basavana Goud, 2002). 

The present investigations were undertaken on IPM modules for groundnut pests and 

efforts were also made to know the nature of resistance of some selected elite genotypes of 

groundnut, which ultimately helps to develop strong IPM strategies. The results obtained in 

the light of available literature are discussed under here. 

5.1 Field screening 

Different groundnut genotypes were screened against S. litura under artificial 

infestation in the field condition during 2009, rainy season. All the elite groundnut genotypes 

differed significantly in per cent defoliation and larval count per mt row. 

The damage ranged from 11.5 to 44.0 per cent in different genotypes. Maximum 

defoliation and number of larvae were observed in the JL-24 followed by GPBD-4. The 

genotypes viz., Mutant-III and ICGV- 86699 Tan recorded minimum damage and less number 

of larvae indicating their resistant nature (Fig. 1). The damage and number of larvae were 

moderate in GPBD-5, ICGV86699 Red and GPBD-6 (Table 1). 

Present findings corroborates with the findings of Prasad and Gowda, (2006) where 

the damage ranged from 34.33 to 83.67 per cent in different genotypes. Maximum defoliation 

was observed in the Dh-40, KRG-1, JL-24 and GPBD-4 and minimum damage was recorded 

in Mutant-45, ICGV-91180, NC Ac- 343 and Mutant-28-2. 

In screening study made by Patil et al. (1991), entries ICGV 87264 and 86598 have 

recorded the least damage (< 17.5%) and entries ICGV 86598 and 86125, ICGV 86350, 

86276 and 87287 showed promise for resistance with less damage (< 27.5%) at two stages 

of screening (75 and 90 DAS). 

5.1.1 Biological parameters of Spodoptera litura (F.) on selected elite 

groundnut genotypes 

Knowledge of an insect biology on the host plant is imperative in host plant resistance 

investigations. Investigating developmental and biological parameters of an insect has

Per cent defoliation 

50 

45 

40 

35 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

JL-24 (Susceptible 

check) 

Per cent defoliation No of larvae /mt row 

ICGV-86699 Red GPBD-5 ICGV-86699 TAN GPBD-6 MUTANT -III GPBD-4 

Genotypes 

Fig. 1: Performance of elite groundnut genotypes for Spodoptera litura damage during Kharif 2009 

4.5 

4 

3.5 

3 

2.5 

2 

1.5 

1 

0.5 

0 

No. of larvae/mt row

ecome an integral part of the process of identifying and studying pest resistance in 

groundnut (Prasad et al., 2000). 

Groundnut genotypes such as ICGV- 86699 Tan, Mutant III, GPBD-6, GPBD-5, 

ICGV- 86699 Red, GPBD-4 and susceptible check (JL-24), were utilized for rearing S. litura. 

The effect of these genotypes on larval, pre pupal, pupal, pre oviposition, oviposition and post 

oviposition period, larval weight, larval mortality, per cent pupal survival ,pupal weight ,adult 

longevity, per cent adult emergence and fecundity of S. litura was ascertained on each of the 

elite genotypes. The present study demonstrated existence of substantial amount of variability 

in host, affecting these biological parameters. 

5.1.1.1 Larval period 

The length of larval duration was affected in larvae fed on foliage of test genotypes 

(Table 2) and there by reduces biotic potential of the pest. The genotypes Mutant III and 

ICGV- 86699 Tan recorded longer larval duration in each instars compare to other genotypes. 

While in susceptible genotypes viz., GPBD-4 and JL-24 recorded shorter larval duration (Fig. 

3). The present study corroborate with the findings of Patil et al. (1995) where in S. litura had 

stretched larval duration on ICGV-87165, ICGV- 86350 and ICGV- 87264. Bioassay carried 

out with the larvae to understand the mechanism of resistance by Wightman and Ranga Rao 

(1994) revealed no antibiosis effect on II and IV instar larvae when fed to matured leaves of 

ICGV- 86031. Spodoptera frugiperda (S.) fed with resistant florunner took more days to 

develop compared to larvae fed with curly leaf (Todd et al., 1991). It has also been showed 

that longer larval duration on resistant genotypes, NC Ac -2243 (Xi Jia LI , 1987) was longer. 

5.1.1.2 Larval weight and larval mortality 

The genotypes Mutant III and ICGV- 86699 Tan recorded significantly low larval 

weight and high percentage of mortality at all the stages compared to susceptible genotypes 

GPBD-4 and JL-24 (Table 3 and Fig. 2). The larval per cent mortality was high on resistant 

genotypes in early stages compare to susceptible genotypes indicating the vulnerability of 

neonate larvae to the existing resistant factor. According to Stevenson et al. (1993) in pest 

control strategies, neonate larvae should be a primary target in host plant resistance because 

plant damage can be minimized if pest is eliminated as early in the life cycle as possible. The 

higher larval mortality of S.litura on resistant groundnut genotypes like ICGV-86031, wild 

tetraploid Arachis manticola was also reported by many workers (Kulkarni, 1989; Dwivedi et 

al., 1993; Wightman and Ranga Rao, 1994; Patil et al., 1995; Prasad and Gowda, 2006). 

Mortality at early stages has also been observed in Heliothis zea when reared on maize plant. 

The development of first stadium larvae of H. zea was retarded by the presence of 

chlorogenic acid and rutin in artificial diet (Isman and Duffey, 1982). 

Present findings corroborates with the findings of Prasad and Gowda (2006) where in 

the larval weight was significantly low from larvae fed on the foliage of resistant genotypes NC 

Ac 343, Mutant 28-2 and R 9227. Singh and Sachan (1992) identified ICGV-86030, ICGV- 

86031 and NC Ac 343 as resistant to S. litura based on survival, weight gain and larval 

duration. The differential response of the genotypes on larval parameters indicates the 

possibility of antibiosis mechanisms of resistance operating in them. 

The effect of resistant genotypes on larval mortality in early stage, gain in larval 

weight and growth of the larvae could obviously be due to chemical factors, i.e. antibiosis as 

elucidated by Painter (1951). The chemicals viz., querecitin glycosiden, chlorogenic acid and 

rutin have been reported to be the cause for resistance in wild Arachis species (Stevenson, 

1993) and could be the cause for antibiosis. However, physical resistance (leaf thickness) 

may be also important as panitrometric studies showed that leaves of resistant wild Arachis 

species required a greater biting effort than did the leaves of susceptible TMV-2 and more 

susceptible of Arachis. 

5.1.1.3 Pupal development and moth emergence 

The resistant effect of Mutant III and ICGV- 86699 Tan were also observed on pupal 

duration, pupal weight, per cent pupal survival and moth emergence (Table 5 and 4). Similar

Larval period and Total developmental period (egg-adult) 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

Larval period Total developmental period (egg-adult) Fecundity (eggs/female) 

GPBD-5 ICGV-86699 Red ICGV-86699 Tan GPBD-6 Mutant-III GPBD-4 JL-24 (Susceptible 

check) 

Genotypes 

Fig. 2: In vitro biology of Spodoptera litura on elite groundnut genotypes 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

Fecundity (eggs / female)

observations were also made by Leuk and Skimmer (1971) and Garner and Lynch (1981), 

where pupal weight, mean percentage of pupae and moth emergence were significantly less 

and the pupal duration was long from larvae fed on foliages of the resistant than susceptible 

groundnut cultivars. Prasad and Gowda (2006) reported that the larvae fed on the resistant 

genotypes, NC Ac 343, Mutant 28-2, ICGV-86031 and R 9227 showed less per cent pupal 

survival and moth emergence compare to susceptible checks. The effect of resistance on 

pupal development confirms the antibiosis mechanism of resistance existing in the resistant 

genotypes (Painter, 1951). 

5.1.1.4 Pre-oviposition, oviposition and post oviposition period 

The duration of pre-oviposition, oviposition and post-oviposition were also affected in 

larvae fed on foliage of resistant genotypes. The genotypes Mutant III and ICGV-86699 Tan 

recorded longer pre-oviposition and shorter oviposition, post-oviposition period compare to 

susceptible genotypes GPBD-4 and JL-24 (Table 5). 

5.1.1.5 Adult longevity 

Adult longevity was significantly longest on susceptible genotypes JL-24 and GPBD-4 

and shorter on resistant genotypes Mutant III and ICGV-86699 Tan (Table 4). The similar 

observations also made by Sreenivasa et al. (1997), where the development of S. litura was 

shortest (32.25 days)on Dh-3-30 with adult surviving maximum of 10.5 days and longest 

developmental period on ICGV-86031 (37.3 days) with adult surviving for maximum of 9.5 

days. The effect of these genotypes on adult longevity of S. litura could obviously due to 

chemical factor (i.e. antibiosis). 

5.1.1.6 Fecundity 

The resistant effect of Mutant III and ICGV- 86699 Tan were also affected the 

fecundity as disclosed by total number of eggs laid by the female moths developed from 

larvae fed on these genotypes (Table 4 and Fig. 3). This could be an important criterion for 

selecting resistant genotypes. Therefore, the antibiosis effect from these genotypes could 

result theoretically in cumulative seasonal reduction of eggs. Painter (1951) stated that 

resistance at this level could be of high value as control measure. 

Higher mortality of neonate larvae on Mutant III and ICGV- 86699 Tan compared to 

JL-24 and GPBD-4 were perhaps because of the most common and easily observable 

characteristics of antibiosis. Low larval and pupal weight, extension of larval, pupal, preoviposition, 

oviposition and post-oviposition period, lower fecundity, per cent pupal survival 

and adult emergence confirm the possible role of antibiosis as mechanism of resistance in 

these promising genotypes with varying degrees, as elucidated by Painter (1951). 

Insect resistance in these genotypes may be due to high laminar thickness, low water 

content, fecundity and growth index (Tiwari et al., 1989; Dwivedi et al., 1993; Patil et al., 

1995) and also due to the presence of anti- insect properties like isomers of caffeol quinic 

acid (Stevenson, 1993). 

If these two resistant elite genotypes are agronomically superior in all characters 

including yielding ability. These can be recommended for cultivation in farmer’s field after 

evaluating on large scale farmers field or otherwise these can be utilized as resistant source 

in improving agronomically superior susceptible varieties of groundnut. 


In recent years groundnut has suffered heavy losses due to severe outbreak of the 

tobacco caterpillar, Spodoptera litura (F.). The farmers fail to adopt management practices 

because of high populations during monsoon rains and overlapping generations. Besides, 

many other sucking pests of this crop, including leafhoppers, Empoasca kerri Pruthi and 

thrips, Thrips palmi Karny, damage the foliage extensively. In view of environmental impact of 

pesticides and development of resistance to pesticides by S. litura (Rame Gowda, 1999) the

Larval Larval weight weight (g) (g) 

16 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

Larval weight (g) Larval mortality (%) 

GPBD-5 ICGV-86699 Red ICGV-86699 Tan GPBD-6 Mutant-III GPBD-4 JL-24 (Susceptible 

check) 

Genotypes 

Fig. 3: Gain in larval weight and larval mortality of Spodoptera litura at different days after hatching on elite groundnut genotypes 

90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

Larval Larval mortality mortality (%) 

(%)

concept of IPM has emerged that emphasizes the need for minimizing the use of pesticides 

and conserve the naturally occurring beneficial fauna for effective suppression of pest 

species. IPM modules were developed and evaluated in field at MARS Dharwad during kharif, 

2009. 

The two IPM modules viz., (1) IPM module, M-I comprising of GPBD-4 variety, seed 

treatment with Trichoderma , groundnut + sunflower as trap crop, pheromone trap (received 

N.rileyi spray @ 1×10 8 conidia/ml and NSKE spray @ 5% two times at 45 and 60 days after 

sowing), (2) IPM module, M-II groundnut + foxtail millet, pheromone trap (received 

Emamectin benzoate spray @ 0.2 g/l at 45 and 60 days after sowing) compared with (3) IPM 

module, M-III (Farmer’s practice). 

5.2.1 Monitoring the activity of S. litura 

The pattern of adults trapped in pheromone traps indicates that the activity of S.litura 

was observed during kharif, 2009 (Appendix I). In M-I, the maximum number of adults were 

caught during first and second week of August and second week of September. Whereas in 

M-I, the maximum number of moths were caught during first week of August and second 

week of September. 

In M-I, the maximum number of moths were caught during first two weeks of August 

compared to M-II. This may be due to intercropping of sunflower in M-I as it act as trap crop 

and attracted more moths for egg laying. 

Kulkarni (1989) noticed this pest to be active throughout the year at Dharwad. But 

more moth catch was seen from June to October with peak moth activity during August and 

September. The similar observations were also made by Krishnaprasad et al. (1985) and 

Patel et al. (1985) are in conformity with present findings. Therefore the pheromone trap 

catches aid in definite predictions about adult moth activity. Which helps in initiation of 

management practices such as collection of egg masses in groundnut leaves and gregarious 

stage of early instar larvae on trap crops like sunflower and castor as well as groundnut. In 

case of groundnut S. litura lays eggs on upper surface of the leaves which helps in easy 

location of egg mass compared to other crops where it lays in lower surface including 

sunflower and castor. 

5.2.2 Sucking pest population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

The population of leafhoppers and thrips were found least under M-II followed by M-I 

and the highest population was recorded in M-III (Fig. 5). Low pest population in M-II may be 

due to the intercropping of foxtail millet where the natural enemies fauna attracted to foxtail 

millet for nectar and it also act as barrier for movement of thrips which is passive mover in 

comparison to M-III (Farmer’s practice) where no intercrops but insecticidal applications was 

taken up (Table 6 and 7). 

Present study corroborates with other IPM modules in groundnut carried by 

Shambharkar et al. (2006) recorded the infestation by thrips and leaf hopper was severe at 

30-45 DAS. The average percentage of damage by thrips was lower in IPM plots (15-25%) 

than in FP plots (20-50%). IPM modules comprising of seed treatment with Trichoderma 4 

g/kg of seeds, sowing through hand dibbling, intercropping with soyabean cv. JS 335 and 

groundnut cv. Phule Unap at 4:1, soil amendment with 500 kg castor cake/ha, planting of 

castor bean as a trap crop, establishment of 10 pheromone traps/ha, and application of NSKE 

(5%) at 30 and 50 days after sowing (DAS) and SlNPV (1.5x10 13 /ha). 

The incidence of leafhoppers and thrips were lowest in IPM module compared to 

chemical control and farmer’s practice. The IPM module comprising of seed treatment with 

imidacloprid and mancozeb, interplanting of cowpea as trap crop, installation of light trap , 

spray with Bacillus thuringiensis and a poison bait spray with dichlorovos (Sreenivasulu et 

al.,2002). The similar observations were also made by Singh et al. (2005a) where the 

population of leafhoppers and thrips were least in IPM module compared to non- IPM module.

5.2.3 Defoliator population in three different IPM modules of groundnut 

Groundnut leaf miner, tobacco caterpillar, semiloopers and Bihar hairy caterpillar 

population was least in M-II followed by M-I (Fig. 5). However the highest population was 

recorded in M-III. This is due to intercropping of foxtail millet in M-II and sunflower as trap 

crop in M-I (Table 8,9,10 and 11). 

Singh et al. (2005b) revealed that the population of tobacco caterpillar (S. litura) and 

Bihar hairy caterpillar population in castor were lowest in IPM module followed by modified 

IPM module and the population was highest in farmer’s practice. The leaf miner (A. modicella) 

and tobacco caterpillar (S. litura) population was less in IPM module in comparison with non 

IPM module in groundnut crop (Singh et al., 2005a). Similar trend was reported by 

Sreenivasulu et al. (2002) and Shambharkar et al. (2006). 

5.2.4 Management of Spodoptera litura in different IPM modules of 


The per cent defoliation was least in M-II Followed by M-I and it was highest in M-III 

at 35, 50 and 65 days after sowing (Table 12). 

Module III has shown significantly higher defoliation percentage followed by Module I 

and lowest in Module II at 45 and 65 days before spray respectively. 

In first spray, 7days after spraying (DAS), Module III recoded significantly highest 

defoliation and larvae per mt row followed by Module I and the Module II showed less 

defoliation and larval population. After 15 DAS also showed the same trend i.e. significantly 

higher defoliation and larvae in Module III followed by Module I and lowest in Module II. In 

second spray, the same trend was followed at 7 DAS and 15 DAS (Table 13). 

In M-II, the defoliation and larvae were least after two sprays of Emamectin benzoate. 

This is due to its high effectiveness. Emamectin benzoate is more effective insecticide than 

that of monocrotophos for S. litura. Which is a safer molecule obtained from actinomycetes. 

5.2.5 Incidence of sucking and defoliating insect pests on sunflower (Trap 

crop). 

Sucking pests such as leafhoppers, thrips, aphids and defoliators such as 

semiloopers, tobacco caterpillar and Bihar hairy caterpillar were noticed on the sunflower crop 

(Table 14). The pest population was more on sunflower compared to groundnut crop (Table 

15 and Fig. 4). This is due to sunflower act as trap crop which attracted the pests more than 

groundnut. 

Present findings are in corroborate with findings of Mahesh, (1996) reported that 

sunflower and castor were proved to be good trap crops and facilitated for easy collection of 

egg masses and larvae. Which prefer feeding on trap crop. Similar findings were made by 

many workers (Prasad, 1996; Anon; 2000). 

5.2.6 Natural enemy population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

The natural enemies such as coccinellids, syrphids and Campoletis chlorideae, the 

population of these natural enemies were highest in M-II followed by M-I and the population 

was lowest in M-III ( Farmer’s practice) (Table 16,17 and 18). This is due to intercropping of 

foxtail millet in M-II and sunflower in M-I, the natural enemy was high in M-II and M-I because 

pest population on intercrop serve as a food reservoir for adults of natural enemies and also 

they provided favourable microclimate for natural enemies. It is believed the natural enemy 

fauna also move and reduce the pest damage on main crop (Fig. 5).

Defoliators 

16 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

F. orichalka S. litura S. obligua F. orichalka S. litura S. obligua 

37 DAS 44 Das 51 DAS 58 Das 65 DAS 72 DAS 79 DAS 


Fig. 4: Incidence of defoliators on main and trap crop

Pest population 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

Pest population Natural enemy population 

Module-I Moduel-II Module-III 

Treatment 

Fig. 5: Pest and natural enemy population in different IPM modules of groundnut 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

Natural enemy population

According to Battu (1977), recorded the occurrence of Campoletis. sp on S. litura in 

groundnut crop. Kulkarni (1989) reporded natural enemies of S. litura. The insect predator like 

Menochilus sexmaculatus and Coccinella septempunctata and ichneumonid parasitoid, 

Campoletis chlorideae and N. rileyi on S. litura in groundnut crop (Kulkarni and Lingappa, 

2002). 

5.2.7 Yield and cost economics 

Among the different IPM modules, the highest yield was obtained in module-II, which 

resulted maximum net returns (Rs.89,850/ ha) and C: B ratio (1:5.1) followed by M-I where in 

net returns (Rs.70,190/ ha) and C: B ratio was (1:4.3) (Fig. 6). Net returns (Rs. 33,490/ ha) 

and C: B ratio (1:2.0) were low in module-III (farmer’s practice) compared to M-II and M-I due 

to low yield (Table 19).These results are in conformity with Singh et al. (2005a) who reported 

that IPM modules gave higher profit in comparison to farmer’s practices of pest control in 

groundnut. 

M-II was an effective IPM module and best for everywhere, it comprising of foxtail 

millet as intercrop and insecticide Emamectin benzoate. M-I was totally bio-intensive module 

and it was suitable for northern transitional belt. 

Future line of work 

The promising resistant genotypes viz., Mutant-III and ICGV-86699 Tan need to be 

evaluated for their yield potential, if they are more potential than existing verities they 

can be directly recommended. 

These elite genotypes can be utilized in the further resistance breeding programme. 

Module-II (groundnut + foxtail millet) should be evaluated on large scale in farmers 

field for management of S. litura.

Gross returns and Net returns (Rs./ha) 

120000 

100000 

80000 

60000 

40000 

20000 

0 

Gross returns (Rs./ha) Net profit (Rs./ha) B:C ratio 

Module-I Moduel-II Module-III 

Treatment 

Fig. 6 : Economics of IPM modules during kharif, 2009 

6 

5 

4 

B:C ratio 

3 

2 

1 

0

6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

Investigations were carried out on the integrated pest management for defoliators on 

groundnut crop under both field and laboratory condition at Main Agricultural Research 

Station, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. The objectives of the study were 1) 

Screening of elite genotypes in field and to study the biology of Spodoptera litura on elite 

genotypes of groundnut under laboratory condition 2) Evaluation of different IPM modules of 

groundnut. The findings of the investigation are summarized below: 

The seven groundnut genotypes were screened against S. litura resistance in the 

field. The genotypes viz., Mutant-III and ICGV- 86699 Tan showed 11.5 and 12.0 per cent leaf 

damage compared to 44.0 per cent foliar damage in susceptible check JL-24. It clearly 

indicates that they are highly resistant to S. litura damage. 

Growth and development of an insect on elite genotypes become an important 

criterion in investigating mechanism of resistance. The detail investigation on biology of S. 

litura on all the seven genotypes further confirmed with the field screening studied by 

recording longest larval period (22.83 and 23.67 days), pupal period (11.67 and 11.33 days) , 

lowest adult longevity ( 9.67 and 9.33 days) and fecundity (379.67 and 386.00 eggs/ female) 

in resistant genotypes Mutant-III and ICGV- 86699 Tan respectively. Whereas susceptible 

check JL-24 has recorded shortest larval period (17.93 days), pupal period (9.83 days), 

higher adult longevity (11.83 days) and fecundity (592.00 eggs/ female). 

The resistant genotypes Mutant-III and ICGV-86699 Tan recorded higher per cent 

larval mortality and lower larval weight at different stages of growth and development. Adult 

emergence, adult longevity and fecundity were affected more in these two resistant 

genotypes than others. 

The resistant genotypes, Mutant-III and ICGV-86699 Tan were permitted the S. litura 

to complete its life cycle in longest period (48.92 and 49.00 days) compared to susceptible 

genotypes, JL-24 and GPBD-4 (41.02 and 41.00 days). The other genotypes GPBD-5, 

GPBD-6 and ICGV-86699 Red were intermediate. The effects of these resistant genotypes on 

the growth and development of S. litura could obviously be due to chemical factors i.e. 

antibiosis. The differential response of resistant genotypes on various components of insect 

growth and development could be due to different resistance factors present in these 

genotypes. 

Evaluation of IPM modules against S. litura in groundnut crop. The population of 

sucking pests and defoliating pests were least in M-II (groundnut + foxtail millet) followed by 

M-I (groundnut + sunflower) and highest in M-III (farmer’s practice). Low pest population in M- 

II may be due to the intercropping of foxtail millet, where the natural enemies’ fauna attracted 

to foxtail millet for nectar. 

The natural enemy population was high in M-II followed by M-I and it was least in M- 

III (farmer’s practice). The natural enemy population was high in M-II and M-I because 

intercrop serve as a food reservoir for adults of natural enemies and also they provided 

favourable microclimate for other natural enemies. 

Among the different IPM modules, the highest yield was obtained in module-II, which 

resulted in maximum net returns (Rs.89, 850/ ha) and C: B ratio (1: 5.1) followed by M-I 

where in net returns (Rs.70, 190/ ha) and C: B ratio was (1: 4.3) and net returns, C: B ratio 

were least in M-III. It indicated that the M-II (groundnut+ foxtail millet) appeared to be effective 

IPM module with highest yield, net profit and C: B ratio followed by M-I (groundnut+ 

sunflower).

REFERENCES 

Agasimani, C. A., Ravishankar, G., Mannikeri, I. M., Patil, R. K and Giriraj, K., 1993, 

Groundnut based intercropping systems. National Seminar on Oilseeds Res. and 

Dev. in India : Status and Strategies, pp. 161. 

Altieri, M. A., Francis, C. A., Schoon, H. A. V. and Doli, J. D., 1978, A review of insect 

prevalence in Maize (Zea mays L.) and bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in 

polycultural system. Field Crops Res., 1: 33-49. 

Amin, P. W. and Mohammad, 1980, Groundnut pest research at ICRISAT. Proceedings of the 

International Workshop on Groundnut, ICRISAT Center, Patancheru, A. P., India, 

13-17 October, 1980, pp. 158-166. 

Anonymous, 1985, Annu. Prog. Rep., XXVII Annual Kharif Oilseed Workshop. Directorate of 

Oilseeds Research, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad. 

Anonymous, 1986, Annu. Rep., XXVIII Annual Kharif Oilseed Workshop. Directorate of 

Oilseeds Research, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad. 

Anonymous, 1995, Annu. Rep., ICRISAT, Patancheru, A. P., India, p. 68. 

Anonymous, 1998, Rabi/Summer groundnut Workshop, Progress Report, 1997-98 Project 

Coordinating Unit, Groundnut, National Research Centre for Groundnut, 

Junagad, pp. 20-34. 

Anonymous, 1999, Rabi/Summer groundnut Workshop, Progress Report, 1998-99 Project 

Coordinating Unit, Groundnut, National Research Centre for Groundnut, 

Junagad, pp. 21-27. 

Anonymous, 2000, Ikisan: Introduction to insect management in groundnut, http : //www. 

ikisan. com/. . . /ap_groundnutInsect%20Management. shtm. 

Anonymous, 2003, New Agriculturist : Focus on . . . Crops of the Semi-arid Tropics, http : 

//www.wrenmedia.co.in. 

Anonymous, 2009, Agriculture Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy, pp. 156. 

Bae-SoonDo., 1999, Leaf characteristics of leguminous plants and the biology of tobacco 

cutworm, Spodoptera litura (F.): I. The larval development and leaf feeding 

amount. Korean J. Appl. Ent., 38(3) : 217-224. 

Balsubramanian, G., Chelliah, S. and Balsubramanian, M., 1984, Effect of host plants on the 

biology of Spodoptera litura (F.). Indian J. Agric. Sci., 54 : 1075-1080. 

Basu, M. S., 2003, Stress management in groundnut. Proc. Nation. Sem. on Stress 

Management in Oilseeds for Attaining Self Reliance in Vegetable Oils, 28-30 

January, 2003, Hyderabad, India, pp. 1-6. 

Battu, G. S., 1977, Occurrence of Parasarcophaga misera (Walker) and Campoletis sp. As 

parasite of Spodoptera litura (F.) from India. Curr. Sci., 46 : 568-569. 

Bhalani, P. A., 1989, Suitability of host plants for growth and development of leaf eating 

caterpillar, Spodoptera litura (F.). Indian J. Ent., 51(3) : 427-430. 

Bhargava, M. C., Choudhary, R. K. and Jain, P. C, 2008, Genetic engineering of plants for 

insect resistance. In : Entomology : Novel Approaches (Eds . Jain, P. C. and 

Bhargava, M. C.). New India Publishing, New Delhi, India., pp. 133-144.

Braune, H. J., 1989, The development of an integrated pest management system in Samao. 

Rev. Appl. Ent., 77(4) : 2575. 

Dara, S. K. and Prasad, V. D., 2007, Population dynamics of Spodoptera litura on some host 

plants in laboratory studies. Bionotes, 9(2) : 51. 

Dharne, P. K. and Patel, S. K., 2000, Screening of promising groundnut genotypes for their 

reaction to Spodoptera litura. Intl. Arachis Newslett., 20 : 67-69. 

Dwivedi, S. L., Reddy, D. V. R., Nigam, S. N., Rao, G. V. R., Wightman, J. A., Amin, P. W., 

Nagabhushanam, G. V. S., Reddy, A. S., Scholberg , E. and Ramraj, V. M., 

1993, Registration of ICGV 86031 peanut germplasm. Crop Sci., 33 : 220. 

Garad, G. P., Shivapuje, P. R. and Bilpate, G. G., 1984, Life fecundity tables of Spodoptera 

litura (F.) on different hosts. Proc. Indian Acd. Sci. Anim. Sci., 93 : 29-33. 

Garner, J. W. and Lynch, R. E., 1981, Fall armyworm leaf consumption and development on 

florunner peanuts. J. Econ. Ent., 74(2) : 191-193. 

Gavarra, M. R. and Raros, R. S., 1975, Studies on the biology of the predatory wolfspider, 

Lycosa pseudoannulata Boes ( Aran : Lycosidae). Phillipines Entomol., 2 : 427- 

444. 

Ghewande, M. P. and Nandagopal, V., 1997, Integrated pest management in groundnut 

(Arachis hypogaea L.) in India. Integrated Pest Manage. Rev., 2 : 1-15. 

Ghumare, S. S. and Mukheijee, S. N., 2003, Performance of Spodoptera litura (F.) on 

different host plants : Influence of nitrogen and total phenolics of plants and midgut 

esterase activity of the insect. Indian J. Exp. Biol., 41(8) : 895-899. 

Gopalkrishnan, C. and Mohan, K. S., 1990, Studies on indigenous entomogenous fungi 

affecting insect pest of horticultural crops. Annu. Rep., 1989-90, Indian Institute 

of Horticultural Research, Hesaraghatta, Bangalore, pp. 64-65. 

Gopalkrishnan, C. and Mohan, K. S., 1991, Studies on indigenous entomogenous fungi 

affecting insect pest of horticultural crops. Annu. Rep., 1990-91, Indian Institute 

of Horticultural Research , Hesaraghatta, Bangalore, pp. 45. 

Hegde, R., 2001, Exploitation of Nomuraea rileyi (Farlow) Samson against important 

lepidopterous pests of potato, cotton and chickpea. Ph. D. Thesis. Univ. Agric. 

Sci, Dharwad, Karnataka (India). 

Inderjit, S., Navreet, K., Sohi, A. S. and Baljinder, S., 2006, Development and survival of 

Spodoptera litura (Fab.) on common weeds occurring in cotton agroecosystem. 

Indian J. Crop Sci., 2(2) : 431-432. 

Islam, M. B. and Duffey, S. S., 1982, Toxicity of tomato phenolic compounds to the fruit worm, 

(Heliothis zea). Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 31 : 370. 

Islam, W., Ahmed, K. N., Nargis, A. and Islam, U., 1983, Occurrence, abundance and extent 

of damage caused by insect pests of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). 

Malaysian Agric. J., 54(1) : 18-24. 

Joshi, B. G., Sitaramaiah, S., Satyanarayana, S. V. V. and Ramaprasad, G., 1979, Note on 

natural enemies of Spodoptera litura F. Myzous persicae (S.) on flue- cured 

tobacco in Andhra Pradesh. Sci. & Cult., 44 : 251-252. 

Kennedy, F. J. S. and Raveendran, T. S., 1989, Intercropping minimize pests incidence. 

Oilseeds Newslett., 3 : 2-3.

Kennedy, F. J. S., Rajamanickam. K. and Raveendran. T. S., 1990, Effect of intercropping on 

insect pests of groundnut and their natural enemies. J. Biol. Control, 4(1) : 63-64. 

Krishnaprasad, N. K., Mallikarjunaiah, H. and Nandihalli, B. S., 1985, Efficacy of different 

types of trap in monitoring Spodoptera litura (F.) populations with synthetic sex 

pheromones. In : Proceedings Natn. Seminar on Behav. Physical Appr. Mgmt. 

Crop Pests, TNAU, Coimbatore, pp. 53-55. 

Kulkarni, K. A., 1989, Bio ecology and management of Spodoptera litura (F.) (Lepidoptera : 

Noctuidae) on groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Ph. D. Thesis. Univ. Agric. Sci, 

Dharwad, Karnataka (India). 

Kulkarni, N. S., 1999, Utilization of fungal pathogen Nomuraea rileyi (Farlow) Samson on the 

management of lepidopterous pests. Ph. D. Thesis. Univ. Agric. Sci, Dharwad, 

Karnataka (India). 

Kulkarni, K. A. and Lingappa, S., 1993, Life fecundity tables of Spodoptera litura (F.) on 

groundnut. Karnataka J. Agric. Sci., 6(3) : 255-258. 

Kulkarni, N. S. and Lingappa, S., 2001, Influence of host plants on the susceptibility of 

Spodoptera litura to entomopathogenic fungus Nomuraea rileyi (Farlow) 

Samson. Karnataka J. Agric. Sci., 14(3) : 816-818. 

Kulkarni, N. S. and Lingappa, S., 2002, Seasonal incidence of entomopathogenic fungus, 

Nomuraea rileyi (F.) in groundnut, soybean and potato – A comparative study. 

Karnataka J. Agric. Sci., 15(1) : 63-70. 

Lalita, K. V. L. and Reddy, D. D. R, 1992, Evaluation of pheromone trap designs for trapping 

Spodoptera litura and Helicoverpa armigera and their reproductive behaviour. 

Indian J. Pl. Protec. 20 : 18-23. 

Lamb, K. P., 1978, Economic entomology in the Third World. Pest Articles and News 

Summaries, 24 : 27-28. 

Leuk, D. B. and Skinner, J. L., 1971, Resistance in peanut foliage influencing fall armyworm 

control. J. Econ. Ent., 64 : 148-150. 

Maghodia, A. B. and Koshiya, D. J., 2008, Life fecundity studies (for female) of Spodoptera 

litura Fabricius on different hosts. Crop Res., 35(3) : 132-136. 

Mahesh, B. V., 1996, Integrated pest management in groundnut for control of Spodoptera 

species during rabi season 1995-96. Spodoptera litura in India : Proceedings of 

the National Scientists Forum on Spodoptera litura (F.), 2-4 April 1996, ICRISAT 

Asia Centre, India, pp. 93-95. 

Manjula, K., Rao, P. A. and Nagalingam, B., 2004, Record of Nomuraea rileyi (Farlow) 

Samson on Helicoverpa armigera Hubner in kharif groundnut. Indian J. Pl. 

Protec., 32(2) : 125. 

Moss, J. P., 1980, Wild species in the improvement of groundnuts. In : Advances in Legume 

Science, Proceedings of the International Legume Conference, Kew, England, 

1978, 1 : 525-535. 

Nadaf, H. L., Patil, R. K., Giriraj, K. and Hanamaratti, N. G., 1995, Field performance of 

groundnut genotypes with inherent resistance to biotic stresses. Crop Improv., 22 

: 261-263. 

Nagaraja, S. D., 2005, Effect of different formulations of Nomuraea rileyi and spray 

equipments in the management of tobacco caterpillar in groundnut and pod borer 

in chickpea. M. Sc. (Agri) Thesis, Univ. Agric. Sci., Dharwad, Karnataka (India).

Nandgopal, V, 2006, Commercialization of pheromone research and their application in Indian 

agriculture. Sci. Tech. Entrepreneur, pp. 1-20. 

Navi, S. S., 2002, Ecosystem manipulation in soybean and groundnut to enhance the efficacy 

of Nomuraea rileyi (Farlow) Samson against Spodoptera litura (F.) M. Sc. (Agri) 

Thesis, Univ. Agric. Sci., Dharwad, Karnataka (India). 

Navi, S. S., Patil, R. K., Somanagouda, G., Prashanth, J. M. and Aski, G. S., 2006, Evaluation 

of Nomuraea rileyi (Farlow) Samson with botanical and insecticide in groundnut 

genotypes for the management of Spodoptera litura (Fab.). Mysore J. Agric. Sci. 

40(1) : 8-13. 

Painter, R. H., 1951, Insect Resistance in Crop Plants, MacMillan Company, New York, pp. 

23-53. 

Parasuraman, S. and Jayaraj, S., 1985, Effect of host plants on the biology of Spodoptera 

litura (F.). Cotton Dev., 14 : 37-40. 

Patel, R. C., Yadav, D. N., Joshi, A. D. and Patel, A. K., 1985, Impact of mass trapping of 

Heliothis armigera and Spodoptera litura from cotton with sex pheromones. In : 

Proceedings Natn. Seminar on Behav. Physical appr. Mgmt. Crop Pests, TNAU, 

Coimbatore, pp. 120-125. 

Patil, R. K., 1993, Progress of research in groundnut pest management at Dharwad. Seminar 

on “Prospective in Entomological Research for Sustainable Agriculture in 

Northern Karnataka, UAS Dharwad, pp. 132. 

Patil, R. K., 2000, Ecofriendly approaches for the management of Spodoptera litura (F) in 

groundnut. M. Sc. (Agri) Thesis, Univ. Agric. Sci., Dharwad, Karnataka (India). 

Patil, R. K., Gowda, M. V. C. and Nadaf, H. L., 1991, Screening of Spanish bunch breeding 

lines of groundnut against Spodoptera litura (F.) damage. Intl. Arachis Newslett., 

10 : 26-27. 

Patil, R. K., Nadaf, H. L., Sattagi, H. N., Hanamaratti, N. G. and Lingappa, S. and Gopali. J. 

B., 1995, Effect of groundnut genotypes on biology and development of 

Spodoptera litura (F.). Crop Improv., 22 :184-189. 

Patil, R. K., Parameshwarappa, K. G. and Kenchanagoudar, P. V., 2005, Studies on the 

mechanism of host plant resistance to Spodoptera litura (F.) in elite breeding 

lines of groundnut, Arachis hypogaea L. J. Oilseeds Res., 23 : 256-259. 

Patil, R. K., Hegde, M. G., Parameshwarappa, K. G. and Kenchanagoudar, P. V., 2009, 

Influence of some elite breeding lines/varieties of groundnut crop on Spodoptera 

litura (F.) larval development. J. Oilseeds Res., 26 : 729-731. 

Pawar, C. S. and Shrivastava, C. P., 1988, Interaction between sex pheromones of 

Spodoptera litura (F.) ans Heliothis armigera (Hub.). Intl Arachis Newsletter, 14 : 

22. 

Prasad, R. G., 1996, Integrated management of Spodoptera litura (F.) in India : Proc. Nation. 

Scientists Forum on Spodoptera litura (F.), 2-4 April 1996, ICRISAT Asia Centre, 

India, pp. 96-103. 

Prasad, M. N. R., Gowda, M. V. C. and Patil, R. K., 1998, Screening groundnut mutants for 

resistance to Spodoptera litura and thrips. Intl. Arachis Newsletter, 18 : 29-30. 

Prasad, M. N. R., Gowda, M. V. C. and Naidu, G. K., 2000, Groundnut mutants for resistance 

to tobacco cutworm (Spodoptera litura F.). Curr. Sci., 79 : 158-160.

Prasad, M. N. R. and Gowda, M. V. C., 2006, Mechanisms of resistance to tobacco cutworm 

(Spodoptera litura F.) and their implications to screening for resistance in 

groundnut. Euphytica, 149 : 387-399. 

Rachappa, V. and Lingappa, S., 2007, Seasonality of Nomuraea rileyi (Farlow) Samson in 

northern transitional belt of Karnataka. Ann. Pl. Protec. Sci., 15(1) : 68-72. 

Radhamani, J. and Singh, A. K., 2008, Conservation and utilization of genetic resources of 

groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) in India. Proc. Indian Natn . Sci. Acad., 74(3) : 

131-147. 

Rajasekhara, R. K., 2002, Induced host plant resistance in the management of sucking insect 

pests of groundnut. Ann. Pl. Protec. Sci., 10(1) : 45-50. 

Rajgopal, K., Nandgopal, N. and Bhagat, N. R., 1988, Preliminary screening of Virginia 

groundnut genotypes against tobacco caterpillar, Spodoptera litura (F.). J. 

Oilseeds Res., 5 : 162-165. 

Ramakrishnan , N., Saxena, V. S. and Dhingra, S., 1984, Insecticide resistance in the 

population of Spodoptera litura (F.) in Andhra Pradesh. Pesticides, 18 : 23-24. 

Rame Gowda, G. K., 1999, Studies on resistance to insecticides in Spodoptera litura (F.) on 

groundnut. M. Sc. (Agri) Thesis, Univ. Agric. Sci., Dharwad, Karnataka (India). 

Rame Gowda, G. K. and Basavana Goud. K., 2002, Priliminary studies on development of 

resistance to insecticides in Spodoptera litura (F.) in northern Karnataka. J. 

Oilseeds Res., 19 : 95-97. 

Rao, G. V. R. and Shanower, T. G., 1989, A survey of groundnut insect pests in Andhra 

Pradesh, India during post rainy season 1987-88. Intl. Arachis Newslett., 4 : 8- 

10. 

Ranga Rao, G. V. and Wightman, J. A., 1993, Groundnut insect problems and their 

management in India. In : Proceedings of the National Seminar on Changing 

Scenario in Pest Management in India, The Plant Protection Association of India, 

January. 31 to February 1, 1992 at CPPTI, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, India, pp. 

70-77. 

Rao, R. S. N., 1983, A note on new record of Chrysopa (Apterochrysa) crassinervis Esben 

Peterson from India. Curr. Sci., 52 : 438-439. 

Rao, R. S. N., Joshi, B. G. and Satyanarayana, S. V. V. and Soundararajan, V., 1990, Note 

on new addition to the natural enemies of Spodoptera litura (F.) and Myzous 

persicae (S.) on FCV tobacco in Andhra Pradesh. Sci. & Cult., 47 : 98-99. 

Sankarperumal, G., Baskaran, S. and Mohandoss, A., 1989, Influence of host plants on the 

organic constituents and fecundity of Spodoptera litura (F.) (Lepidoptera : 

Noctuidae). Proc. Indian Nat. Sci. Acad., part B (Bio. Sci.), 55 : 393-396. 

Shambharkar, D. A., Dharne, P. K., Bahale, T. M., Deshmukh, A., Surywanshi, R. T. and 

Jadhav, R. B., 2006, Assessment of integrated pest management modules in 

groundnut on farmers' fields. Intl. Arachis Newslett., 26 : 31-33. 

Shreedhar, P., 1983, Studies on trapping of the tobacco cutworm, Spodoptera litura (Fab.), 

(Lepidoptera : Noctuidae) with pheromones in groundnut fields. M. Sc. (Agri) 

Thesis, Univ. Agric. Sci., Bangalore, Karnataka (India). 

Singh, K. N. and Sachan, G. C., 1991, Monitoring of Spodoptera litura F. populations with 

pheromone baited traps at Pantnagar, India. J. Pl. Protec. Tropics., 8(2) : 97-101.

Singh, K. N. and Sachan, G. C., 1992, Phenols and phenolic acids in groundnut (Arachis 

hypogaea) resistant to tobacco caterpillar. Indian J. Agric. Sci, 60 : 717-719. 

Singh, K. N. and Sachan, G. C., 1993, Assessment of the use of sex pheromone traps in the 

management of Spodoptera litura F. Indian J. Pl. Protec., 21(1) : 7-13. 

Singh, S., Kumar, S. and Basappa, H., 2005a, Validation of IPM Technologies for the castor 

crop in rainfed agro-ecosystem. Ann.Pl. Protec. Sci., 1(13): 133-136. 

Singh, S. K., Singh. S., and Katti, P., 2005b, Evaluation of IPM Technology for groundnut and 

sunflower based production system. Entomon, 30(3): 201-205. 

Singh, T. V. K., Singh, K. M., and Singh, R. N., 1991, Influence of intercropping on incidence 

of major pests in groundnut (Arachis hypogeae). Indian J. Ent., 53(1) : 18-44. 

Singh, V. J., Nandagopal, V., Gor, H. K., Chikani, B. M. and Jaroli, R. K., 1993, BG2 a 

possible donar parent for resistance to Helicoverpa and Spodoptera. Groundnut 

News, 5 : 2-3. 

Sreenivasa, A. G., Patil, R. K., Rahman, S. M. and Lingappa, S., 1997, Development of 

Spodoptera litura as influenced by groundnut genotypes. Karnataka J. Agric. 

Sci., 10(3) : 872-876. 

Sreenivasulu, B. , Naidu, V. G. and Prasad, P. R. , 2002, Integrated pest management in 

groundnut against Spodoptera litura (Fabr.) and other sucking pests. Pest 

Manag. and Econ. Zool., 10(2) : 193-196. 

Sreenivasulu, B., Naidu, V. G. , Prasad, P. R. , 2003, Monitoring of Spodoptera litura Fabr. 

through sex pheromones in groundnut. J. Appl. Zool. Res., 14(2) : 148-150. 

Sridhar, V. and Prasad, V. D., 1996a, Mycoses of Nomuraea rileyi in field populations of 

Spodoptera litura in relation to four host plants. Indian J. Ent., 58 : 191-193. 

Sridhar, V. and Prasad, V. D., 1996b, Life-table studies on natural population of Spodoptera 

litura (F.) on groundnut, Arachis hypogaea Linn. Ann. Pl. Protec. Sci., 4 : 142- 

147. 

Srivastava, B. and Kushwaha, K. S., 1995, Sequential appearance and frequency of the 

parasites of Spodoptera litura (Fabr.) on cauliflower and cabbage at Udaipur, 

Rajasthan. Adv. Agric. Res. India., 3 : 130-140. 

Stechmann, D. H. and Semisi, S. T., 1984, Insect control in Western Samoa with particular 

reference to the present state of biological and integrated control, Anzeiger fur 

Schadl Pflan Unwelt, 57 : 65-70. 

Stevenson, P. C., Blaney, W. M., Simmonds, M. J. S. and Wightman, J. A., 1993, The 

identification and characterization of resistance in wild species of Arachis to 

Spodoptera litura (Lepidoptera : Noctuidae). Bull. Ent. Res., 83 : 421-429. 

Theodore, M. B. M., Samuel, K. and Gregory, C. L., 2008, Effects of groundnut genotypes, 

cropping systems and insecticides on the abundance of native arthropod 

predators from Uganda and Democratic Republic of Congo. Bull. Insectology., 

61(1) : 11-19. 

Thontadarya, T. S. and Nangia, N., 1983, Natural enemies of tobacco caterpillar infesting 

soybean. Curr. Res., 12 : 105-106.

Tiwari, S. N., Rathore, Y. S. and Bhattacharya, A. K., 1980, Notes on the survival and change 

in weight of larvae of Spodoptera litura (F.) feeding on some promising 

groundnut varieties. Indian J. Ent., 42(2) : 283-285. 

Tiwari, S. N., Rathore, Y. S. and Bhattacharya, A. K., 1981, Intrinsic rate of increase of 

Spodoptera litura (F.) on different varieties of groundnut. Sci and Cult., 47(7) : 

261-262. 

Tiwari, S. N., Rathore, Y. S., Bhattacharya, A. K. and Sachan, G. C., 1989, Classification of 

groundnut varieties based on growth reaction of Spodoptera litura (F.) and 

mahalanabis D 2 statistics. Indian J. Ent., 50 : 202-208. 

Todd, J. W., Beach, B. M. and Branch, W. D., 1991, Resistance in eight peanut genotypes to 

foliar feeding of fall armyworm, velvet bean caterpillar and corn earworm. Peanut 

Sci., 18 : 38-40. 

Tojo, S., Mishima, H., Kamiwada, H., Ngakan, P. O. and Kwang-Shing, C., 2008, Variations 

in the occurrence patterns of male moths of the common cutworm, Spodoptera 

litura (Lepidoptera : Noctuidae) among Southeastern Asian countries, as 

detected by sex pheromone trapping. Appl. Ent. and Zool., 43(4) : 569-576. 

Vimaladevi, P. S., 1994, Conidia production of the entomopathogenic fungus, Nomuraea rileyi 

and its evaluation for control of Spodoptera litura (F.) on Ricinus communis. J. 

Invert. Path., 63 : 145-150. 

Wightman, J. A. and Ranga Rao, G. V., 1994, Groundnut pests. In : The Groundnut Crop; A 

Scientific Basis of Improvement (Ed. Smart, J.), Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 

395-479. 

Wightman, J. A., Dick, K. M., Ranga Rao, G. V., Shanower, T. C. and Gold, C. G., 1990, In : 

Pests of Groundnut in Semi Arid Tropics, (Ed. Singh, S. R. and Chichester, J.), 

Wiley and Sons, pp. 243-322. 

Xie Jia Li, 1987, Influence of Peanut Cultivars on the Development and Feeding Activity of the 

Common Cut Worm Spodoptera litura (F.) College of Laguna, Philippines, 

Philippines University Las Banos College, Laguna, pp. 66.

APPENDIX 

Appendix I: Pheromone trap catches of Spodoptera litura 

Pheromone trap catches of 

Number of male moths per trap 

Spodoptera litura Module I Module II 

05/08/2009 

121 

022 

06/08/2009 

198 

024 

07/08/2009 

199 

040 

08/08/2009 

358 

036 

09/08/2009 

373 

110 

10/08/2009 

432 

032 

11/08/2009 

451 

130 

12/08/2009 

135 

147 

13/08/2009 

114 

095 

14/08/2009 

202 

096 

15/08/2009 

112 

075 

16/08/2009 

029 

021 

17/08/2009 

032 

029 

18/08/2009 

013 

069 

19/08/2009 

040 

159 

20/08/2009 

062 

029 

21/08/2009 

060 

027 

22/08/2009 

027 

018 

23/08/2009 

031 

050 

24/08/2009 

019 

024 

25/08/2009 

035 

031 

26/08/2009 

047 

030 

27/08/2009 

031 

028 

28/08/2009 

027 

031 

29/08/2009 

050 

058 

30/08/2009 

039 

024 

31/08/2009 

021 

032 

01/09/2009 

019 

024 

02/09/2009 

031 

029 

03/09/2009 

028 

034 

04/09/2009 

021 

013 

05/09/2009 

018 

031 

06/09/2009 

023 

020 

07/09/2009 

031 

019 

08/09/2009 

028 

031 

09/09/2009 

061 

048 

10/09/2009 

053 

044 

11/09/2009 

029 

063 

12/09/2009 

040 

057 

13/09/2009 

034 

061 

14/09/2009 

075 

112 

15/09/2009 

035 

027 

16/09/2009 

039 

024 

17/09/2009 

015 

026 

18/09/2009 

028 

069 

19/09/2009 

031 

050 

20/09/2009 

027 

018 

21/09/2009 

062 

036 

22/09/2009 

052 

058 

23/09/2009 

034 

037 

24/09/2009 

028 

031 

25/09/2009 

019 

024 

26/09/2009 

021 

049 

27/09/2009 

037 

040 

28/09/2009 

021 

032 

29/09/2009 

027 

046 

30/09/2009 

018 

034

SCREENING ELITE GENOTYPES AND IPM OF 

DEFOLIATORS IN GROUNDNUT 

RASHMI S. YAMBHATANL 2010 Dr.R.K. PATIL 

Major Advisor 

ABSTRACT 

Screening elite genotypes and IPM of defoliators in groundnut were studied during 

Kharif 2009, at Main Agricultural Research Station, UAS, Dharwad. The seven groundnut 

genotypes were screened for Spodoptera litura (F.) resistance in the field. The genotypes viz., 

Mutant-III and ICGV-86699 Tan showed 11.5 and 12.0 per cent leaf damage compared to 

44.0 per cent foliar damage in susceptible check, JL-24. 

The detailed investigation on biology of S. litura on these seven genotypes further 

confirmed with the field screening studied by recording longest larval period (22.83 and 23.67 

days), pupal period (11.67 and 11.33 days), lowest adult longevity (9.67 and 9.33 days) and 

fecundity (379.67 and 386.0 eggs/ female) in Mutant-III and ICGV-86699 Tan respectively. 

Whereas susceptible check, JL-24 has recorded shortest larval period (17.93 days), pupal 

period (9.83 days), higher adult longevity (11.83 days) and fecundity (592.0 eggs/ female). 

The resistant genotypes, Mutant-III and ICGV-86699 Tan permitted S. litura to complete its 

life cycle in longest period (48.92 and 49.00 days respectively) compared to susceptible 

varieties, JL-24 and GPBD-4 (41.02 and 41.00 days respectively). The other genotypes 

GPBD-5, GPBD-6 and ICGV-86699 Red were intermediate. The effects of these resistant 

genotypes on the growth and development of S. litura could obviously be due to chemical 

factor i.e. antibiosis. 

Among different IPM modules, Module-II proved as effective IPM module in reducing 

defoliator population, enhancing natural enemy population and recording higher yield (39.95 

q/ha) with maximum net returns (Rs.89,850/ha) and highest C:B ratio (1:5.1) followed by 

Module-I. Module-II comprising of foxtail millet as intercrop (7:1) and insecticide Emamectin 

benzoate (0.2 ml/lit) and M-I was totally bio-intensive module and it comprising of sunflower 

as trap crop and Nomuraea rileyi spray and it was suitable for northern transitional belt.

screening elite genotypes and ipm of defoliators in groundnut

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?