Central Rice Research Institute Annual report...2011-12

Developing IPM Technologies for Different Rice Ecologies
pheromone traps 20 ha -1 for mass trapping of YSB and
release of Trichogramma japonicum @ 100,000 ha -1 . The
results of the trial revealed that least incidence of dead
heart (DH) 4.05 %, WEH 4.5%, gundhi bug damage
8.75% and termite damage 5.3% were recorded under
IPM practice in variety Anjali with highest grain yield
of 2.85 t ha -1 . This treatment was found to be better than
that of farmer practice/non-IPM in reducing the insect
damage and increasing the grain yield in both the varieties
(Table 43). The increased benefit cost ratio was
found to be highest (2.65) for Anjali (IPM) vs. Brown
gora (non-IPM), whereas, it was 1.66 in Anjali under
IPM vs. Non-IPM and 1.55 in Brown gora IPM vs. Non-
IPM.
IPM in upland rice at Hazaribag and Chatra
Integrated pest management was conducted in village-
Sigrawan, District Hazaribag in an area of 20 acres
involving 32 farmers with IPM interventions, five acres
Non IPM (farmers’ practice) and six acres in village
Pandani, District Chatra. IPM interventions were, application
of pre-emergence herbicides, seed dressing
with fungicides and need based spray of fungicides
and insecticides. Variety Anjali was taken for the IPM
interventions in both the villages with the local variety
Dhusari for Non IPM (farmers practice). Average yield
under IPM interventions was 3.58 t ha -1 , whereas, under
farmers’ practices yield was 1.86 t ha -1 in village
Pandani with benefit cost ratio of 1.89 (IPM) and 1.73
(Non IPM). In Sigrawan the yield was 2.21 t ha -1 in IPM
and 1.32 t ha -1 in Non IPM with benefit cost ratio of 1.24
(IPM) and 1.19 (Non IPM). In IPM fields, gundhi bug
infected panicles were 4 m -2 while it was 10 m -2 in Non-
IPM fields. Weed infestation was 46 g m -
2
in IPM and 132 g m -2 in Non IPM, respectively
at Pandani. In general, the yield
was higher in Pandani due to normal
rainfall and better soil fertility with good
water holding capacity in comparison to
Sigrawan.
Bio-intensive IPM for irrigated
rice
Under irrigated ecosystem, variety
Naveen was transplanted during dry seasons
of 2011 and 2012. Experiments were
designed for IPM and insecticide treatments
along with untreated control. Yellow
stem borer (YSB) was the major pest
during both the years. Pheromone trapping
of male moths indicated two broods during 2011
with peak emergence at 7 th standard meteorological
week (SMW) and 14 th SMW. During 2012, brood emergence
with three peaks was observed at 3 rd , 6 th and 13 th
SMW (Fig. 30). The early brood (3 rd SMW) caused severe
infestation to the initial crop stage whereas, continuous
YSB population up to last week of April (17 th
SMW) damaged later stage of the crop.
Need-based application of 0.5% neem oil as foliar
spray along with standing water application of biomixtures
(Neem, Karanj and Kochila seed powder in
the proportion of 3:2:1) @25 kg a.i. ha -1 at 20 DAT coinciding
with brood emergence could reduce the dead
heart (DH) formation up to 35.7% and 29.3% during
2011 and 2012, respectively. Second application of biomixture
at PI stage reduced white ear head formation to
about 50% as compared to 100% in untreated control.
Yield advantage of 25% was achieved through bio-intensive
IPM over untreated control. The efficacy was
on par with the treatment of seedling root dip (SRD) in
0.02% Chlorpyrifos solution followed by a foliar spray
of Chlorpyrifos @ 0.5 kg a.i. ha -1 at 20 DAT + Cabofuran
at PI stage (2012) but was inferior to SRD + granular
application of Carbofuran @1 kg a.i. ha -1 both at 20 DAT
and at PI stage of the crop (2011). Observations on spider
population at reproductive stage indicated 4 spiders
sweep -1 in IPM plot, 3.0 spiders sweep -1 in control
plot and 1.0 spider sweep -1 in insecticide treated plots.
IPM package in rainfed shallow favourable
lowland rice with emphasis on botanicals
Variety Pooja was grown with 3 treatments such as
IPM (two foliar sprays of 1% neem oil, one at 20 DAT
Fig. 30. Population of male yellow stem borer moths in pheromone
trap during dry season
CRRI ANNUAL REPORT 2011-12
91