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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The potential significance of these results may be estimated by extrapolating the reduction obtained in percentage infestation by flies to the loss estimates Pakistan by Stonehouse et al. (1998). This extrapolation is problematical, but if accepted with appropriate caveats can estimate the hypothetical potential benefit of a wider use of BAT and MAT in Pakistan. Table IV.C.14 gives the outcome of this exercise for the fruit assessed. Infestation reductions are taken as the reductions in reared-out larvae obtained in Tables IV.C.9 to IV.C.12. The table shows estimates of annual gross savings (not including control costs) for the four crops of Rs4915 million, or (at the rate of 1US$=Rs34) $144.6 million. Table IV.C.14. Potential gross savings at farm level in Pakistan from overall reductions in fruit fly losses of the sizes estimated above. Production, prices and losses of melon, guava and mango (rows marked *) are for 1994-6, from Table 4 of Stonehouse et al. (1998), and dollar conversion at the then-prevailing rate of Rs34:US$1. Jujube production and prices, with no official statistics, are estimates from Pakistan Ministry of Agriculture personnel, and jujube losses from Stonehouse et al. Table 3. Production is taken to be after pest loss, but loss estimates refer to potential production; so if recorded production is 100 units, and loss estimated at 25%, the loss is inferred to be not 25 units but 33.3, i.e. potential production is 133.3 units and 25% of this is lost to leave 100. Estimated percentage increases in yield and reductions in infestation are those derived above, in the Tables specified. Crop Melon Guava Jujube Mango Annual production (‘000 MT)* 536 402 18 839 Unit price (Rs.MT -1 )* 5440 7300 5500 9100 Production value (Rs million)* 2916 2935 99 7635 Crop protection BAT BAT BAT MAT Experimental yield increase (%) 17 20 0 0 (Source - Table) (IV.C.4) (IV.C.6) (IV.C.6) (IV.C.6) Inferred yield increase value (Rs million) 496 587 0 0 Percentage overall loss (%)* 35 35 15 15 Annual loss (Rs million)* 1570 1580 17 1347 Experimental infestation reduction (%) 84 73 76 100 (Source - Table) (IV.C.9) (IV.C.10) (IV.C.11) (IV.C.12) Inferred infestation reduction value (Rs million) 1319 1154 13 1347 Total inferred crop protection value (Rs million) 1815 1740 13 1347 Total inferred crop protection value (US$ million) 53.4 51.2 0.4 39.6 Acknowledgements The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the farmers who gave their fields and time for this study - Messrs Qadar Bakhsh, Siddiq-Ur-Rehman, Mian Mohammad Mohsin, Malik Riaz, K.B. Sumro, Mian Izhar-Ul-Haq, M. Hanif, Umar Hayat, Qutab Deen, Malik Bashir and Ch. Rehmatullah. Thanks are also in particular due to Dr Umar Baloch of the Pakistan Agricultural Research Council, Mr M. Anwar, Deputy Director (Agriculture), RY Khan, and Dr Rehmatullah Khan, Director of the Arid Zone Research Institute, DI Khan. The fieldwork at Faisalabad was carried out by Messrs Muhammad Latif and Muhammad Saeed. Mr Abdul Qayyum drove the research team to all field sites many times under arduous conditions. This document is an output from a project funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) for the benefit of developing countries (R6924 and R7447, Crop Protection Programme). The work of this project provided the winning entry for the DFID Renewable Natural Resources Research Strategy Annual Award Scheme, 2000. The views are not necessarily those of DFID, and all errors and omissions remain the responsibility of the authors. 70
Appendix V. References Afzal, M, Mahmood, R, Stonehouse, JM 2001. Soaked-wood killer blocks for MAT fruit fly control in Pakistan. Price, Seewooruthun (Eds): 97-100. Agarwal, ML 1984. Fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) and their host plants in Bihar. Biological Bulletin of India 6: 76-82. Agarwal, ML 1985. Zoogeography of Indian Dacinae (Diptera: Tephritidae). Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 83: 256-60. Agarwal, ML 1987. On a collection of fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae: Dacinae) from India. Biological Bulletin of India 9: 135-43. Agarwal, ML, Kapoor, VC 1985. On a collection of Trypetinae (Diptera: Tephriditidae) from Northern India. Annals of Entomology 3: 59-64. Agarwal, ML, Kapoor, VC 1986. Indian Dacini (Diptera: Tephritidae) and their host plants relationships. Cavalloro, R (Ed) Fruit Flies of Economic Importance 84: Proceedings of the CEC/IOBC ‘Ad Hoc Meeting’ Hamburg 1984 (Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Balkema): 51-60. Agarwal, ML, Kapoor, VC 1988. On a collection of fruit flies (Diptera: Tephriditidae: Tephrellini) from India. Bulletin of Entomology 29: 225-8. Agarwal, ML, Kumar Pramod 1999a. Effect of weather parameters on population dynamics of peach fruit fly, Bactrocera zonata (Saunders). Entomon 24: 81-84. Agarwal, ML, Kumar, Pramo d 1999b. Relative efficacy of bait and attractant combinations against Peach Fruit Fly, Bactroceral zonata (Saunders). Pestology 33: 21-6. Agarwal, ML, Rahman, S, Yazdani, SS 1995. Trapping of Dacus (Bactrocera) zonatus (Saunders) (Diptera: Tephritidae) in different trap systems in north Bihar. Shashpa 2: 80-1. Agarwal, ML, Yazdani, SS 1991. A note on growth potential of Melon Fruit Fly Dacus (Zeugodacus) cucurbitae Coquillett in relation to certain host plants in North Bihar. Journal of Research (BAU) 3: 61-2. Aliniazee, MT 1976. Thermal unit requirements for determining adult emergence of the Western cherry fruit fly (Diptera: Tephriditidae) in the Willamette Valley of Oregon. Environmental Entomology 5: 397-404. AME (Agriculture Man Environment) 1999. Markets for LEISA and Organic Products. LEISA India Supplement 1.1.16pp. Anonymous 1988. Annual Report of the Entomologists of Entomology Section, Ayub Agricultural Research Institute, Faisalabad, Pakistan. Anonymous 1999. Obituary: Shri M. Purushothama Rao. LEISA India Supplement 1.1: 16. Anonymous undated. Integrated Pest Management for Guava Fruit Fly. Extension sheet, Tamil Nadu. 1p. Arora, PK, Batra, RC, Mehrotra, NK, Thind, SK 1998. Screening of some promising guava varieties against fruit fly. Reddy, PP, Kumar, NKK, Verghese, A (Eds) Advances in IPM for horticultural crops. Proceedings of the First National Symposium on Pest Management in Horticultural Crops: Environmental Implications and Thrusts, Bangalore, India, 15-17 October 1997: 43-44. Arora, PK, Kaur, Nirmal, Batra, RC, Mehrotra, NK 1999. Physico chemical characteristics of some ber varieties in relation to fruit fly incidence. Journal of Applied Horticulture (Lucknow) 1: 101-102. Bagle, BG 1992. Incidence and control of fruit fly Carpomyia vesuviana Costa of ber Zizyphus mauritiana, Lank. Indian Journal of Plant Protection 20: 205-207. Bagle, BG 1995. Pest management in ber, pomegranate and sapota. Indian Institute of Horticultural Research Annual Report 1994-95: 113-4. Bagle, BG 1996. Pest management in ber, pomegranate and sapota. Indian Institute of Horticultural Research Annual Report 1995-96: 130-1. Bagle, BG 1997. Pest management in ber, pomegranate and sapota. Indian Institute of Horticultural Research Annual Report 1996-97: 166-7. Bagle, BG 1998. Pest management in ber, pomegranate and sapota. Indian Institute of Horticultural Research Annual Report 1997-98: 120-1. Barnes, BN 2001. Monitoring and control of fruit flies in South African fruit orchards. Price, Seewooruthun (Eds): 147-52. Bersten, D 1997. Phloxine B - A photoactive insecticide. Pesticide Outlook, October: 20-23. Borah, RK 1996. Influence of sowing seasons and varieties on the infestation of fruitfly Bactrocera cucurbitae (Dacus cucurbitae) in cucumber in the hill zone of Assam. Indian Journal of Entomology 58: 382-383. Borah, SR, Dutta, SK 1997. Infestation of fruit fly in some cucurbitaceous vegetables. Journal of the Agricultural Science Society of North East India 10: 128-131. 71
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 and 122: elative, and offer little real comm
Page 123 and 124: Appendix III. Work Plan ACTIVITIES
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: Infestation (%) ANOVA F Tree Mean 3
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?