“Key Informant Survey” of Production, Value, Losses and ... - DfID

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Uttar Pradesh (CISH, 1998) (mango) - need-based bait sprays of protein OR molasses every 21 days - methyl eugenol and malathion traps at 10 per ha - fruit collection and disposal - ploughing - early harvest Area-Wide Control In many parts of the world fruit flies are controlled in a coordinated way over large areas (e.g. Mauritius, Israel, USA, South Africa), and there is a role for a study of the extent to which economies of scale accrue when control is area-wide as opposed to on individual plots, and of how the benefits of area-wide controls may be most efficiently realised. This may need to take the form of comparison of the effectiveness of control in areas of different sizes, but also of specific studies of migratory capacity, such as using marked flies to estimate migratory capacity. The study of fly migration across barriers is difficult and has been limited so far. Stonehouse, Manrakhan and Mumford (in prep.) found that only 2% of freshly emerged B. zonata were intercepted by an intense grid of lure and bait attractant traps, though uncaught flies may have penetrated the barrier or been killed. Noticeably, larval and pupal controls (parasitoids, fruit destruction, ploughing etc) all implicitly make assumptions about the mobility of emerged adults, as it is only ovipositing females whose reduction leads to savings of fruit (the destruction of eggs and small larvae, allowing their fruit to be saved, is assumed not to be practical, and assuming that emerging parasitoids damage fruit as much as flies) in assuming that reductions of populations of larvae and pupae lead to reductions in ovipositing adults which are not replaced by immigration from outside the treated area. Yet these authors know of no study, in India or anywhere else, which has specifically tested how much immigration may replace losses to the population by such controls. Social and Economic Factors In addition to the central role of official extension and support agencies, India is particularly rich in associations such as NGOs, cooperatives and farmers' associations, which offer different opportunities to provide farmers with key resources such as information, material inputs, group organisation and access to markets, transport and other essentials for agricultural development. In general, much fruit fly research on a global scale is on quarantine and risk assessment, and less on cost-effective on-farm suppression, particularly imperfect but cheap controls suitable for small farmers (Stonehouse, 2001). The world literature is particularly scanty in addressing farmers’ opinions and perceptions of the practical usefulness of the methods recommended to them. There are also only very few studies of the quantified cost-benefit values of practices when carried out on farms. This pattern also holds true for India, where the published information on the social and economic usefulness of control alternatives is less abundant than that on technical findings of controls in operation. The realistic assessment of farmers’ perceptions of the usefulness and practicality of control operations remains a priority area. Conclusions There is a large volume of excellent research studies on fruit fly biology and control. Farmers, however, continue without ecological and integrated controls. There is a role for adaptive research to optimise the reliability and economy of controls from the farmers point of view, and a study of the ways in which these may be made attractive to farmers in operation. 32
Appendix III. Work Plan ACTIVITIES SUMMARY 1.1: Knowledge Review 1.1.1: Incidence mapping of flies and distribution 1.1.2: Tabulation and synthesis of damage and loss records 1.1.3: Review of biological research results 1.1.4: Tabulation and analysis of records of controls 1.2: Survey 1.2.1: Trapping of adults 1.2.2: Rearing out from collected fruit 1.2.3: Key informant interview survey 1.2.4: Semi-structured interview survey 1.3: Opening workshop 2: Farm-Level Control Experiments 2.1: Laboratory single-killing-point study 2.2: Field single-killing-point study 2.3: On-farm control trials with farmer evaluation 3: Village-Level Studies 3.1: Institutional study of village-level organisation 3.2: Village-level control trials 3.3: Village participatory rural appraisal of trial outcome 4: Closing workshop The work is proposed to take place over two and one-quarter years. Experimental and survey work (Activities 1.2, 2 and 3) will take place at eight points, by five administrative centres (three in Gujarat by GAU, two in Kerala by KAU, one each by CISH Lucknow, IIVR Varanasi and IIHR Bhubaneshwar). The knowledge review (Activity 1.1) will be centred on one institution (IARI, New Delhi, with journeys). The research will begin and end with workshops to assemble all researchers together to exchange experience, ideas and expertise. All research participants will require the following: - personnel, their subsistence and travel costs - a computer with standard software (word-processing and spreadsheets) - reliable e-mail and telephone connections Activity 1: Problem Analysis Activity 1.1: Knowledge Review Much high quality information already exists, and so a major component is to be a comprehensive review of existing knowledge, an extension of the sketchy beginning outlined in Appendix II. Literature searched will include (a) refereed papers, (b) other scientific publications such as conference proceedings, (c) annual reports by national institutes and state bodies such as Agricultural Universities, (d) “grey cover” literature such as reports by research institutes and specific projects and programmes, (e) student research theses, (f) documentation of other bodies such as NGOs, cooperatives and companies, and (g) other material such as media reports (newspapers, magazines) which throw light on agricultural problems. It will be accompanied by interviews with researchers active in the particular areas. 33
Page 1 and 2:
Dear Colleague, Integrated Manageme
Page 3 and 4:
each zone will be divided by the to
Page 5 and 6:
Sheet 2. Production and fruit fly l
Page 7 and 8:
Product: Muskmelon Himalayan Highla
Page 9 and 10:
Product: Snake Gourd Himalayan High
Page 11 and 12:
Integrated Management of Fruit Flie
Page 13 and 14:
Palanpur Pumpkin 2 Anand Bitter Gou
Page 15 and 16:
Integrated Management of Fruit Flie
Page 17 and 18:
Navsari Thiruvananthapuram
Page 19 and 20:
The power of parapheromones. This I
Page 21 and 22:
Cluster “Western” “Southern
Page 23 and 24:
Indian fruit fly control and the So
Page 25 and 26:
INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT OF FRUIT FLIE
Page 27 and 28:
They used to be nearer Ahmedabad, a
Page 29 and 30:
FRUIT FLY CONTROL: SPRAYS (i) Spray
Page 31 and 32:
fruit borer, little leaf (a mycopla
Page 33 and 34:
ores the vine from tender portion,
Page 35 and 36:
(DDVP). He is applying both ME and
Page 37 and 38:
CROPS He said that he is growing bi
Page 39 and 40:
that spraying insecticides is only
Page 41 and 42:
vegetables not by having greater wa
Page 43 and 44:
advantage of bitter gourd? He start
Page 45 and 46:
isk of complete failure of crop. Am
Page 47 and 48:
FF MANAGEMENT He said that he using
Page 49 and 50:
eady-to-harvest fruits. Farmers los
Page 51 and 52:
Gandevi. #G008 DATE: 03/01/04 TEAM:
Page 53 and 54:
#R004 DATE:08/03 TEAM: JT/CVV. He i
Page 55 and 56:
he has found this as very reasonabl
Page 57 and 58:
improving the fertility condition o
Page 59 and 60:
50 cents, banana intercropped in co
Page 61 and 62:
with grass. When the field is left
Page 63 and 64:
sells his own produce. CROPS He gro
Page 65 and 66:
it. When JS mimes a jumping FF magg
Page 67 and 68:
other pests). RICE AND ITS PESTS In
Page 69 and 70:
(mother) feed voraciously on leaf l
Page 71 and 72: yellow and drop. On opening of the
Page 73 and 74: including semilooper because fruit
Page 75 and 76: off prematurely from plants. Thus p
Page 77 and 78: PEST: FRUIT FLIES Losses: Bitter go
Page 79 and 80: PEST: SEMILOOPER Creates problems i
Page 81 and 82: semi looper pest bitter gourd at an
Page 83 and 84: FRUIT FLIES July sown crop suffers
Page 85 and 86: LEAF CURL He said that this serious
Page 87 and 88: only own farm total area five ha. N
Page 89 and 90: PEST 1 - MANGO HOPPER is number one
Page 91 and 92: PROJECT MEMORANDUM on behalf of the
Page 93 and 94: 4. Starting and finishing dates 1 J
Page 95 and 96: Fruit flies, although a serious pes
Page 97 and 98: Department of Agricultural Extensio
Page 99 and 100: SECTION C: SCIENTIFIC BACKGROUND 17
Page 101 and 102: Pakistan-UK Fruit Fly Project 1998-
Page 103 and 104: This will connect the field researc
Page 105 and 106: Narrative Summary Goal Objectively
Page 107 and 108: YEAR 2 2002-2003 MONTH Activity A M
Page 109 and 110: Table I.2. Subjectively-derived syn
Page 111 and 112: Jujube 3 - S Bawal Dashad et al. (1
Page 113 and 114: Appendix II. Scientific Research on
Page 115 and 116: Museum has B. dorsalis specimens re
Page 117 and 118: and if neem can be used in attracta
Page 119 and 120: coast. In the Faisalabad area attac
Page 121: elative, and offer little real comm
Page 125 and 126: 1.1.4: Tabulation of Controls Findi
Page 127 and 128: other methods. In fields where loss
Page 129 and 130: In addition to the Key Informant Su
Page 131 and 132: killing points”, and these techni
Page 133 and 134: tiers. It is proposed to replace th
Page 135 and 136: general benefit. Socially-cooperati
Page 137 and 138: greater than the sum of their parts
Page 139 and 140: Appendix IV. Prior Scientific Paper
Page 141 and 142: vi - Value of cucurbit extract comp
Page 143 and 144: Methods The assessment of BAT and M
Page 145 and 146: surfaces - cotton cloth, plastic sh
Page 147 and 148: Table IV.B.4. Mean total catches (N
Page 149 and 150: Table IV.B.9. Catches over four to
Page 151 and 152: Many improvements may be made to th
Page 153 and 154: economic damage per fly will be gre
Page 155 and 156: Table IV.C.1. Fruit infestation ass
Page 157 and 158: factors (ecoregion, year, season, w
Page 159 and 160: Infestation (%) ANOVA F Tree Mean 3
Page 161 and 162: Appendix V. References Afzal, M, Ma
Page 163 and 164: Jalaluddin, SM, Natarajan, K, Sadak
Page 165 and 166: cucurbitae Coquillett) in cucumber.
Page 167 and 168: Sharma, VP, Lal, OP, Rohidas, SB, P
Page 169 and 170: Project Integrated Management of Fr
Page 171 and 172: Section 1: Indian Fruit and Vegetab
Page 173 and 174:
Section 2: Indian Production of Fru
Page 175 and 176:
Section 4: Fruit Fly Species Report
Page 177 and 178:
56 Gastrozona balioptera 57 G. fasc
Page 179 and 180:
114 P. tetrica 115 Indacilira basiv
Page 181 and 182:
Section 5: Hosts of Tephritid Fruit
Page 183 and 184:
56 Cucumis melo var. utilissimus Cu
Page 185 and 186:
118 Physalis peruviana Solanaceae C
Page 187 and 188:
Bactrocera sp. T. dioica Mondouri,
Page 189 and 190:
B. cucurbitae Mogekai Karnataka Kum
Page 191 and 192:
B. carambolae Andaman Islands Ranga
Page 193 and 194:
Jujube 20 20 60 40 N Gujarat xi,xii
Page 195 and 196:
Mango 9.8 9.8 10 10 10 N Kanpur vi
Page 197 and 198:
Cucumber 6.2 6.2 6 6 6 S South Anda
Page 199 and 200:
Section 8: Population Dynamics and
Page 201 and 202:
B. dorsalis Mango Kanpur, Uttar Pra
Page 203 and 204:
C. vesuviana Jujube Haryana Lakra a
Page 205 and 206:
Meridarchis scyrodes, Carpomyia ves
Page 207 and 208:
B. cucurbitae Bitter gourd Thakur e
Page 209 and 210:
B. cucurbitae C melo, C callosus B.
Page 211 and 212:
B. correcta Guava Jalaluddin and 19
Page 213 and 214:
B. cucurbitae 82 cucurbits Nath et
Page 215 and 216:
B. cucurbitae Singh et al. 2000 The
Page 217 and 218:
B. cucurbitae Gowda et al. 1979 An
Page 219 and 220:
B. cucurbitae Kaur and Srivastava B
Page 221 and 222:
B. dorsalis Srivastava et al. 1989
Page 223 and 224:
B. dorsalis Prasad and Sethi 1981 T
Page 225 and 226:
Section 12: Natural Enemies Host En
Page 227 and 228:
Section 13: Cultural Controls Fly H
Page 229 and 230:
B. cucurbitae Bhagat and Koul B. cu
Page 231 and 232:
B. cucurbitae Bitter gourd Gupta an
Page 233 and 234:
B. zonata Peach Himachal Pradesh B.
Page 235 and 236:
B. cucurbitae Bitter gourd Mote 197
Page 237 and 238:
B. cucurbitae Ccumber, ridge gourd
Page 239 and 240:
Zaprionus paravittiger [Z. indianus
Page 241 and 242:
B. zonata Apple, peach Solan, Himac
Page 243 and 244:
B. cucurbitae B. cucurbitae B. cucu
Page 245 and 246:
Section 16: Pheromone and Colour Lu
Page 247 and 248:
B. dorsalis Mango Pantnagar Uttar P
Page 249 and 250:
B. cucurbitae Snake gourd Banglades
Page 251 and 252:
Bagle, B.G. Prasad, V.G. 1983 Effec
Page 253 and 254:
Borah, S.R. Dutta, S.K. 1997 Infest
Page 255 and 256:
Drew, R.A.I. Raghu, S. 2002 The fru
Page 257 and 258:
Gupta, K. Anand, M. 2002 Effect of
Page 259 and 260:
Kapoor, V.C. Grewal, J.S. Agarwal,
Page 261 and 262:
KrishnaMoorthy, P.N. Srinivasan, K.
Page 263 and 264:
Nair, S. Thomas, J. 2001 Ovipositio
Page 265 and 266:
Patel, R.K. Patel, C.B. 1998 Biolog
Page 267 and 268:
Rahman, S Singh, S.P.N. Agarwal, M.
Page 269 and 270:
Shivarkar, D.T. Dumbre, R.B. 1985 B
Page 271 and 272:
Srivastava, B.G. Pant, N.C. Chaudhr
Page 273 and 274:
Wadhwani, K. Khan, N.H. 1983 Effect
Page 275 and 276:
Anon. 1994 Distribution Maps of Pes
Page 277 and 278:
Anon. 1998 Population dynamics of B
show all

“Key Informant Survey” of Production, Value, Losses and ... - DfID

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?