Yellow Mosaic of Legume: Biology, Epidemiology & IDM

Master Seminar on
“Yellow Mosaic Diseases of Legume : Biology,
Epidemiology and IDM’’
Presented by
Mr. Sarode Saurabh Gulabrao
Reg. No.:- 2016A/96ML
Research Guide
Dr. S. J. Magar
Asst. Prof. Dept. Plant Pathology,
COA, Latur.
Seminar in charge
Dr. A. P. Suryawanshi
Professor, Dept. of Plant Pathology, COA,
Latur.
SUBMITTED TO
HEAD
DEPARTMENT OF PLANT PATHOLOGY
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, LATUR
V.N.M.K.V., PARBHANI
2017-2018

 MYMV-Mungbean
 Introduction
 Biology
 Transmission
 Epidemiology
 Symptomatology
 Yield Loss
 Host Range
 Integrated Disease Management
MYMV- Blackgram
 Symptoms
MYMV- Mothbean
 Symptoms

 MYMV- Soybean
 Symptoms
Conclusion
4

Sr.
No.
Crop
Area
(lakh ha)
Production
(lakh tones)
Productivity
(kg/ha)
India MH India MH India MH
1. Chickpea 88.80 14.29 85.09 11.02 958 771
2. Pigeon pea 38.35 11.19 29.92 8.88 780 793
3. Mungbean 30.41 3.95 14.24 1.70 468 430
4. Black gram 31.28 3.16 18.29 1.70 585 538
5. Lentil 13.90 0.04 10.93 0.01 786 400
Source: Pulses in India Retrospect & Prospects by Dr. A.K. Tiwari,2016

 YMD has been recorded in Bangladesh, India,
Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Thailand.
 In all the countries, disease incidence in mung bean
is very high and yield loss is considerable.
 In India, YMD was first reported in Lima bean
(Phaseolus lunatus) in western India in 1940s. Later
in 1950, YMD was seen in dolichos (Lablab
purpureus) in Pune (Malathi, 2007).

• The Mungbean yellow mosaic virus disease on green
gram was first ever reported from the field of IARI,
New Delhi in 1955 (Nariani, 1960).
• Mungbean, Vigna radiata (L) wilczek, is an important
short duration summer food legume and is the third
most important pulse crop of India after Chickpea and
Pigeon pea. A major constraint for improved production
is the yield loss caused by mungbean yellow mosaic
disease (MYMD). This diseasse is caused by several
begomovirus which are transmitted by the whitefly
Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae)
(Nair et al., 2017).

9
 The MYMV belongs to the genus Begomovirus of the family
Geminiviridae (Hajong et al., 2016).
 Both male and female flies can transmit the virus but the
female adults were four times more efficient than the males
neither sex remains infective throughout its life (Costa et al.,
1976).
 Virus has geminated particle morphology (20 × 30nm) and
the coat protein encapsulates spherical single stranded DNA
genome of approx. 2.8 kb (Hull, 2004).
 The size of the purified geminate particle was about 18 × 30
nm under electron microscope and the yield of the geminate
particles associated with MYMD was below 1 mg/kg tissue.()
 The virus has single-stranded closed circular DNA with
bipartite genome.

Fig: Genome organization of bipartite begomovirus_DNA-A and DNA-B:
Begomovirus are single-stranded DNA plant viruses with one or two
circular genome components of 2.6 to 3.0 kb size, encapsidated in
twinned particles.
(Silodia, 2016)

Electron micrograph of MYMV showing Geminate particles
(Salam et al., 2009)

12
 The MYMV is transmitted easily by the white fly Bemicia
tabaci (Manjunath et al., 2012).
 The MYMV is graft transmissible and disease transmission
was 100% in this method (Akhtar and Haq, 2003).
 The MYMV is not transmitted by seeds collected from
infected plants (Kanimozhi et al., 2009).
 The MYMV is not sap transmissible (Hajong et al., 2016).
 The MYMV virus cannot transmit by mechanical
inoculation or by seed (Shad et al., 2006).
 The whitefly-borne mungbean yellow mosaic virus
(MYMV) in Thailand was transmitted by mechanical
inoculation (Honda et al., 1983).

Whitefly Nymphs
Whitefly Adult
(Jyothi, 2014)

14
 Maximum temperature and relative humidity had
significant effect on disease development.(Ali et al.,
2015)
 Optimum temperature of 28-350C is most conducive
for virus population.(Khan et al., 2012)
 Higher temperature and dry climate favors the more
MYMV disease incidence which may had directly
influenced the vector population and migration
behavior (Salam et al., 2011).
 Temperature and humidity is the most determinant
factor of population build up of whitefly in mungbean
field.

 A range of 38.400C to 40.830C maximum and
23.930C to 30.400C minimum temperature and
81.660C% to 93.330C% maximum humidity was
found most suitable for multiplication of whitefly
and disease development in the field (Biswas et al.,
2012).
 Maximum temperature, mean relative humidity and
rainfall play an important role in white fly
population built-up and significantly related to its
peak population (Srivastava and Prajapati, 2012).
15

 Mungbean plant infected with YMD generally show
yellowing or chlorosis of leaves followed by necrosis,
shortening of internodes, and severe stunting of plants
with no yield or few flowers and deformed pods
produced with small, immature and shriveled seeds
(Akhtar et al., 2009; Habib et al., 2007).
 In soybean the characteristics symptoms of YMD
observed on naturally infected plants were appeared
as golden yellow color on leaves which may be
partially or completely yellow. Infected plants bear
few flowers and pods with some immature and
deformed seeds (Hajong et al., 2016).
16

17
Typical symptoms of MYMV; (a) on first trifoliate; (b) first and subsequent
trifoliate; (c) green vein banding on mature leaf

18
(d) Complete yellowing
(e) Healthy and symptomatic pods
(f) Symptomatic and healthy mungbean seed
(Mahatma et al., 2016)

Mungbean yellow mosaic virus disease is one of the
most important virus disease on greengram transmitted
by the whitefly vector (Bemisia tabaci Genn.). It was
first reported by Nariani (1960) at IARI, New Delhi
with 20-30 percent incidence at institute area.
Usharani et al., (2004) reported that MYMV is more
predominant in southern regions of India where it
causes 85-100% loss in yield if the plants are infected at
the seedling stage.
Pathak and Jhamaria (2004) reported that MYMV
caused 2.22 to 100 percent yield losses.
Yadav and Brar (2010) estimated that on an average
43.6% reduction in seed yield.

 The agriculturally significant hosts of MYMV
include mungbean, urdbean (Vigna mungo), soybean
(Glycine max), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) and
common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) (Malathi & John,
2008).
 Honda et al., (1983) reported that only seven species
of Leguminosae were infected with MYMV viz.,
Azuki bean (Phaseolus angularis) , black gram,
mungbean and soybean, french bean, jack bean
(Canavalia ensiformis) and lima bean (P. lunatus).
20

 Ageratum conyzoids is the common weed host in kanpur and
the virus was successfully transmitted by whiteflies from weed
to cultivated hosts (mungbean and urdbean) and induced
typical yellow mosaic symptoms (Naimuddin et al., 2014).
21
Yellow vein symptoms in A. conyzoids collected from different location, (a) Main research farm
of IIPR, (b) New research of IIPR, (c) Vegetable research farmof CS, AUSAT Kanpur and (d)
Farmer’s fields, Fatehpur.

 Alternanthera eassilus, Corchorus soliturus,
Sidarhom bifoloia, and Paracalyxs cubisus this weed
plant acts as resevoirs of MYMV inoculum in all the
three seasons (Gupta, 2016).
22

23
• Antiviral substances of plant origin may be used as a
component for disease management.
e.g. Clerodendrum spp. (Awasthi and Singh, 2015)
Boerhaavia diffusa (Singh et al., 2004)
• Use of Insecticide for vector control.
• The destructive yellow mosaic disease of mungbean (Vigna
Radiata (L.) Wilczek) was prevented under natural field
condition by clarified aqueous root extract of Boerhaavia diffusa
(Singh et al., 2004).
• Screening of genotypes under field condition.
Some screened varieties having rating scale 1 i.e. tolerant or
resistant to MYMV.
Viz., Agastiyalingapuam, BINA MUNG-2, CO 6,
Glanger, HUM 1, Ilangi-1, MH 521, Pusa 0672, RRMI-10
(AVT), VBN(Gg) 1, VRM(Gg) 1 (Kingsly et al., 2015).

Table: 1. Effects of treatments on yellow mosaic disease and grain yields of mungbean cv.
T44 grown during 2013 and 2014 kharif season
Sr.
No.
Treatments
2013 2014 Average
% DI
Grain yield
(kg/ha)
% DI
Grain yield
(kg/ha)
% DI
Grain yield
(kg/ha)
T1
Seed treatment with Trichoderma
harzanium @ 6 g/kg
24.9 341.7 11.9 615.1 18.4 478.4
T2
Seed treatment with imidacloprid 17.8 SL
@ 5g/kg seed
23.5 483.3 12.0 634.9 17.7 559.1
T3
Foliar sprays (2) with Nurelle D505 @
0.1%(Chlopyrifos 50 EC+Cypermethrin 5
EC) at 15 & 45 DAS
29.3 641.7 14.5 714.3 21.9 678.0
T4
harzanium @ 6 g/kg+ two spray of with
Nurelle D505 at 15 & 45 DAS
31.6 590.3 12.5 734.1 22.1 662.2
T5
@ 5g/kg seed+ two spray of with Nurelle
D505 at 15 & 45 DAS
27.9 666.7 13.1 754.0 20.5 710.3
T6
harzanium @ 6 g/kg+one spray of with
Nurelle D505 at 45 DAS
22.8 450.0 12.2 654.8 17.5 552.4
T7
@ 5g/kg seed+one spray of with Nurelle
D505 at 45 DAS
26.4 583.3 12.2 742.1 19.3 662.7
T8 Control 27.7 300.0 12.3 575.4 20.0 473.7
(Mohd Akram and Naimuddin, 2016)

Table: 2. Effect of insecticides on whitefly and YMVD incidence in summer mungbean.
Sr.
No.
Treatment
Details
Form
ulatio
n
Dose
Mean number of
whitefly/5plants
MYMV incidence (%)
Yield
(q/ha)
Cost
Benefit
ratio
25 DAS 35 DAS Mean 40 DAS
50
DAS
Mean
T1 S.T. with
Imidacloprid +
Foliar app. of
Azadiractin
70 WS
1500
ppm
3g/kg
seed
5 ml/L
3.2 2.4 2.8 6.1 8.7 7.4 9.2 1:6.3
T2 S.T. with
Thiomethoxam +
Foliar app. of
Imidacloprid
70 WS
17.8S
L
3g/kg
seed
0.4
ml/L
2.9 1.3 2.1 5.4 6.6 6.0 10.9 1:6.7
T3 S.T. with
Imidacloprid +
Foliar app. Of
Difentheuron
70 WS
50 WP
3g/kg
seed
1 g/L
3.0 1.7 2.4 6.3 7.1 6.7 10.1 1:5.9
T4 Foliar app. Of
Acetamiprid
20 SP 1 g/L
3.8 2.6 3.2 5.8 9.4 7.6 9.0 1:8.2
T5
Foliar app. Of
Calothionidin
50
WDG
0.4
ml/L
4.2 2.8 3.5 5.4 10.2 7.8 8.6 1:7.0
T6
Foliar app. Of
Dimethoate
(Farmers practice)
30 EC 2 ml/L 4.6 3.2 3.9 6.7 10.5 8.6 7.5 1:7.7
T7 Controls _ _ 5.8 5.4 5.6 9.2 13.8 11.5 4.8 _
(Mandal, 2015)

Table: 3. Efficacy of insecticides on incidence of Bemisia tabaci.
Sr.
No.
Treatment details
Concentration
(%)
Mean number of whitefly / 5 plants
Pre count 2 DAS 5 DAS 7 DAS Mean
T1
Seed treatment with
Thiomethoxam
0.0035 3.00 3.66 6.00 8.33 6.00
T2
Seed treatment with
Imidacloprid
0.0035
4.66 5.33 7.33 9.33 7.33
T3 Thiomethoxam 0.005
7.00 1.33 2.00 4.66 2.66
T4 Imidaclopride 0.008
5.66 3.66 4.33 7.00 5.00
T5 Clothionidin 20-25 a.i./ha
6.66 4.66 5.33
8.33
6.10
T6 Dimethoate 0.06
7.66 5.33 6.33 9.33 7.00
T7 Acetamiprid 0.002
6.66 2.66 4.66 7.33 4.88
T8 Spinosad 0.009
6.00 4.00 5.33 7.66 5.66
T9 Spirotetramat 90 g a.i./ha
6.33
2.33
2.66 5.33 3.44
T10 Control _
7.33 7.66 9.00 12.00 9.55
Spraying was done at 25 DAS (Panduranga et al., 2011)

Table: 4. Integrated disease management of MYMV
Sr.
No.
Treatment details
% Disease incidence at
Before
spray*
15 days
after first
spray
15 days
after second
spray
Mean
%
reduction
over
control
T1 Maize as border row (1 row) 10.69 57.25 65.65 44.51 9.5
T2 Imidacloprid 70 WS @ 5g/kg seed 10.96 51.26 63.25 41.82 14.9
T3 Imidacloprid 17.8 SL @ 0.24 ml/L 9.76 39.20 42.14 30.36 38.2
T4 Azadiractin 0.03 EC @ 5 ml/L 10.50 49.15 55.98 38.54 21.6
T5
Clerodendrum aculeatum Leaf
extract(1:5)
11.10 50.48 58.23 39.94 18.8
T6 Dimethoate 30 EC @ 1.5 ml/L 12.30 43.99 49.63 35.31 28.2
T7
Marigold as trap crop + yellow sticky
traps @8/ha
10.69 48.40 50.78 36.62 25.5
T8 T2 + T3 10.86 38.32 41.70 30.29 38.4
T9 T2 + T4 10.50 47.61 55.20 37.77 23.2
T10 T2 + T5 9.50 49.45 59.57 39.60 31.7
T11 Package of practices 10.10 41.76 46.13 32.66 33.6
T12 Control 11..5 59.91 76.16 49.19 --
2 sprays were given at 45 and 60 days after planting. (Salam et al., 2009)

Table: 5. Integrated disease management of MYMV
Tr.
No.
Treatment details
Average number of white flies on 3 top leaves/plant
First spray at 45 DAP Second spray at 60 DAP
1 DBS
5
DAS
% reduction
over control
1
DBS
5 DAS
% reduction
over control
T1 Maize as border row (1 row) 5.20 5.80 9.3 5.73 6.20 11.4
T2 Imidacloprid 70 WS @ 5g/kg seed 4.89 5.00 21.8 5.40 5.60 20.0
T3 Imidacloprid 17.8 SL @ 0.24 ml/L 5.34 1.73 72.9 2.47 1.73 75.2
T4 Azadiractin 0.03 EC @ 5 ml/L 5.22 3.20 50.0 4.80 4.00 42.8
T5
Clerodendrum aculeatum
Leaf extract(1:5)
5.12 4.80 25.0 5.87 5.00 28.5
T6 Dimethoate 30 EC @ 1.5 ml/L 5.25 2.40 62.5 3.47 2.80 60.0
T7
Marigold as trap crop + yellow sticky
traps @8/ha
5.32 2.00 68.7 3.40 4.00 42.8
T8 T2 + T3 5.30 1.53 76.0 2.27 1.87 73.3
T9 T2 + T4 4.89 3.40 46.8 4.87 3.80 45.7
T10 T2 + T5 4.90 4.20 34.3 5.87 5.20 25.7
T11 T2 + T6 5.03 2.40 62.5 3.27 2.67 61.9
T12 Package of practices 4.81 2.20 65.6 3.00 2.40 65.7
T13 Control 5.43 6.40 - 6.93 7.00
2 sprays were given at 45 and 60 days after planting. (Salam et al., 2009)

Table: 6. Bioefficacy of insecticides and biorationals against whitefly in mungbean kharif,
2010-2011
Sr.
No
.
Treatments
Population of whitefly/ cage/ plant
Yellow
Mosaic
Virus (%)
Yield
(q/ha)
Avoidable
yield loss
(%)
30 Days
after
sowing
3 Days
after
sowing
7 Days
after
sowing
10 Days
after
sowing
T1 ST Imidacloprid 3 ml/kg 4.2 4.2 5.9 2.8 3.4 13.43 20.34
T2 ST Dimethoate 5 ml/kg 2.4 2.4 4.2 3.0 2.5 13.85 24.10
T3 T1 + Triazophos 0.04% 4.3 2.3 2.8 4.3 2.2 18.03 61.55
T4 T1 + Trizophos 0.02% 5.3 3.3 3.6 4.0 3.2 15.11 35.39
T5 T2 + Triazophos 0.04% 3.4 2.7 2.8 4.0 1.4 18.75 68.01
T6 T2 + Triazophos 0.02% 3.5 2.9 3.1 2.3 3.4 16.78 50.35
T7 T1 + NSKE 5% 4.3 2.0 2.08 3.1 2.3 16.14 44.62
T8 T2 + NSKE 5% 3.3 1.6 3.1 3.1 3.4 17.56 57.34
T9 Untreated control 4.2 3.6 4.2 3.2 5.5 11.16 -
(Lal and Jat, 2015)

Table: 7. Bioefficacy of insecticides and biorationals against whitefly in mungbean kharif,
2011-2012
Sr.
No.
Treatments
Population of whitefly/ cage/ plant
YMV
(%)
Yield
(q/ha)
Avoidable
yield loss
(%)
30
Days
after
sowing
1 Days
after
spray
3 Days
after
spray
7 Days
after
spray
10
Days
after
spray
14
Days
after
spray
T1 ST Imidacloprid 3 ml/kg 7.1 7.8 8.8 8.1 8.7 2.5 29.1 6.65 9.91
T2 ST Dimethoate 5 ml/kg 7.7 8.4 8.0 8.4 8.4 5.5 28.5 6.55 7.93
T3 T1 + Triazophos 0.04% 7.6 6.0 7.6 11.8 10.5 3.8 29.1 7.75 28.09
T4 T1 + Trizophos 0.02% 6.3 10.8 15.9 12.3 13.2 3.6 35.4 6.65 9.91
T5 T2 + Triazophos 0.04% 7.2 5.5 8.1 10.7 9.5 3.2 29.2 7.57 25.12
T6 T2 + Triazophos 0.02% 6.0 10.1 14.2 11.9 16.14 5.2 34.0 6.84 13.05
T7 T1 + NSKE 5% 6.9 5.7 6.4 6.1 8.9 2.9 25.4 7.23 19.50
T8 T2 + NSKE 5% 6.7 5.9 6.6 6.6 9.3 5.2 28.3 7.19 18.84
T9 Untreated control 12.6 9.4 13.0 8.5 10.6 6.0 39.0 6.05 -
(Lal and Jat, 2015)

Table: 8. Effect of different date of sowing on MYMV incidence (%) of six-mungbeaan
lines/variety during Kharif season at RPRS, Madaripur
Name of
lines/var.
January
15, 2011
February
01, 2011
February
15, 2011
March 01,
2011
March
15, 2011
April 01,
2011
BMXK2-030011-
1
12.30 14.20 15.59 21.25 28.66 28.00
BMXK2-030011-
4
11.86 11.03 15.09 18.03 26.57 29.09
BMXK2-03000 6.83 16.15 19.43 18.95 27.92 32.98
BMXK2-030005-
4
6.54 11.29 12.8 11.94 16.67 21.96
BARI Mung-5 13.28 10.09 15.41 26.13 38.51 40.74
BARI Mung-6 7.26 12.90 14.86 13.57 23.86 26.63
(Rashid et al., 2013)
% yellow mosaic incidence = Number of infected plants/plot
Total number of plant/plot

32
Symptomatic black gram (cv. Co5) plants showing yellowing of pods.
a. Healthy plant.
b. Seeds from healthy plant.
c. Yellow mosaic disease-affected plants.
d. Seeds from infected plants showing yellow discoloration.(Kothandaraman et al., 2016)

Table: 9. Efficacy of Pfl, plant extract and bioactive compounds against disease incidence of
MYMV in black gram and grain yield under field conditions.
Tr.
No.
Treatments Grain yield (kg/ha) Disease incidence (%)
Trial I Trial II Trial I Trial II
T1
Neem oil 583.3 663.5 56.8 56.74
T2
Pseudomonas fluorescens 733.3 703.5 38.61 39.67
T3
Alum 626.5 570.3 59.91 62.99
T4
Actigard 620.3 600.8 56.66 61.55
T5
Na2HPO4 633.5 590.5 52.72 57.31
T6
Datura metel 610.8 600.8 56.22 62.53
T7
Mirabilis jalapa 703.3 730.3 42.4 40.56
T8
Control 493.3 496.3 77.75 84.6
(Venkatesan et al., 2010)

Table: 10. Effect of Neem products and insecticides on the incidence of whitefly and YMV in
blackgram (2003-05)
Tr.
No.
Treatments
Mean no. of whitefly per 25
leaves
% yellow mosaic infested
plants
2003 2004 2005 Mean 2003 2004 2005 Mean
T1 Neem oil @ 1% 7.4 10.1 17.6 11.7 0.1 3.5 4.0 2.5
T2 Dimethoate @ 0.045% 5.3 9.1 17.5 10.6 0.3 4.0 4.4 2.9
T3 Methyl demeton @ 0.04% 5.6 7.8 16.1 9.8 0.3 4.1 3.3 2.6
T4 NSKE (in cow urine) @ 3% 6.2 9.3 16.1 10.5 0.0 5.4 3.9 3.1
T5
NSKE (in cow urine) @ 3% +
Dimethoate @ 0.03%
4.4 7.3 14.2 8.6 0.0 3.0 3.8 2.3
T6
NSKE (in cow urine) @ 3% +
Methyl demeton @ 0.03%
4.8 7.8 15.7 9.4 0.2 4.4 2.7 2.4
T7
Neem oil @ 0.5% + Dimethoate
@ 0.03%
5.4 8.0 15.5 9.6 0.2 4.0 2.3 2.2
T8 Cow butter milk @ 4% 7.1 7.7 18.7 11.2 0.1 4.6 3.6 2.8
T9 Untreated 19.2 15.1 27.1 20.5 2.8 6.6 5.5 5.0
(Gupta and Pathak, 2009)

Table: 11. Efficacy of different chemistris on the incidence of yellow mosaic disease in
urdbean during kharif 2013
Tr.
No.
Treatments
Dosage
(g a.i./ha)
Percent Disease Incidence %
reductio
n over
control
Before
spray
10 Days
after first
spray
10 Days
after second
spray
Final
incidence
T1 Acetamaprid 20SP 20 5.11 5.04 8.97 12.19 78.35
T2 Triazophos 40EC 500 4.98 4.94 8.56 10.20 81.88
T3 Thiamethoxam 70WS 20 5.51 4.61 9.36 10.02 82.20
T4 Buprofezin 25SC 200 4.88 12.67 22.16 34.21 67.66
T5 Fipronil 5SC 50 5.42 12.60 23.42 35.32 26.61
T6 Glamour 80WG 25 5.74 5.94 10.86 15.21 72.98
T7 Monocrotophos 36SL 200 4.99 9.57 16 25.43 54.83
T8 Imidacloprid 17.8SL 20 5.38 6.06 9.56 14.21 74.76
T9 Imidacloprid 60 FS + T8 35 1.1 4.14 8.52 9.29 83.40
T10 Untreated - 5.34 15.74 34.10 56.30 0.00
( Srinivasaraghavan, 2014)

Table: 12. Efficacy of different leaf extracts on the incidence of yellow mosaic disease in
urdbean during kharif 2013
Tr.
No.
Treatments
Dosage
(g a.i./ha)
Percent Disease Incidence
%
reduction
over
control
Before
spray
10 Days
after first
spray
10 Days
after second
spray
Final
incidence
T1 Azadiractin 0.03EC 5 ml/l 5.82 10.10 21.60 31.44 44.16
T2 Datura leaf 10 ml/l 5.41 12.65 26.24 41.74 25.86
T3 Tulsi leaf 10 ml/l 5.62 14.60 28.10 46.83 16.82
T4 Kaner leaves 10 ml/l 5.84 16.83 29.50 48.62 13.64
T5 Pongamia leaves 10 ml/l 5.36 12.60 23.42 41.32 26.61
T6 Neem leaf extract 10 ml/l 5.63 11.80 21.36 36.52 35.13
T7 Parthanium leaf extract 10 ml/l 5.10 14.50 29.65 49.20 12.61
T8 Untreated - 5.34 15.74 34.10 56.30 0.00
( Srinivasaraghavan, 2014)

Initial symptoms of MYMV disease of mothbean in the field.
(Sunil kumar, 2007)

Table: 13. Effect of botanicals on MYMV disease progression and grain yield of mothbean
var. RMO-225
Tr.
No.
Treatments
Dose
(%)
Disease incidence (%) DAS
Decrease
in DI
over
check
(%)
Yield
(q/ha)
Increase
in grain
yield
over
check
(%)
25 35 45 55
At
harvest
T1 NSKE 5 (SP) 15.9 20.1 25.2 31.2 36.8 49.10 5.12 58.02
T2
Neem leaf
extract
10 (SP) 10.9 15.1 20.3 24.2 28.3 60.85 5.46 68.51
T3 Neem oil 5 (SP) 8.1 12.1 17.5 21.7 26.4 63.48 5.60 72.83
T4
Azadiracti
n
5 (SP) 6.8 11.0 14.2 18.1 22.1 69.48 5.98 84.56
T5
Endosulfa
n
0.07
(SP)
6.1 10.2 13.1 17.2 20.5 71.64 6.04 86.41
T6 Control - 30.1 42.8 53.3 62.0 72.3 - 3.24 -
(Sunil kumar, 2007)
38

Symptomology of MYMV on soybean (cv. JS335)
A: Leaf puckering; B: Complete yellowing of infected leaf; C: Reduction in pod size of
symptomatic soybean plants (Hajong et al., 2016)

Table: 14. Effect of border crop and insecticides on management of whitefly, Bemisia tabaci transmitted Yellow
Mosaic Virus in soybean
Treatments
Whitefly population/plant
% YMV disease
incidence
Soybean grain yield (q/ha)
2015-
16
2016-
17
Mean
2015-
16
2016-
17
Mean
2015-
16
2016-
17
Mean
T1: Seed treatment with thiamethoxam 30 FS @
10 ml/kg + two row of maize as border crop
2.70 2.48 2.59 32.28 27.76 30.02 15.67 15.03 15.35
10 ml/kg + two row of sorghum as border crop
2.93 2.70 2.81 34.47 31.01 32.74 14.83 14.33 14.58
T3: Seed treatment with thiamethoxam 30% FS
@ 10 ml/kg + two row of pearl millet as border
crop
3.20 2.86 3.03 36.66 34.30 35.48 14.33 14.07 14.20
T4: T1+ foliar spray of imidacloprid 17.8 SL @
500 ml/ha at 30-35 DAS + spray of trizophos 40
EC @ 800 ml/ha at 45-50 DAS
1.08 0.95 1.02 15.54 13.73 14.63 19.83 19.00 19.42
T5: T2 + foliar spray of imidacloprid 17.8 SL @
1.22 1.05 1.14 18.86 16.80 17.83 19.10 18.13 18.62
T6: T3 + foliar spray of imidacloprid 17.8 SL @
1.36 1.17 1.27 21.71 18.97 20.34 18.80 17.47 18.13
10 ml/kg + foliar spray of imidacloprid 17.8 SL
@ 500 ml/ha at 30-35 DAS + spray of trizophos
40 EC @ 800 ml/ha at 45-50 DAS
1.51 1.32 1.42 22.83 20.24 21.54 18.37 17.13 17.75
T8: Control 6.77 6.02 6.39 66.78 63.38 65.08 13.13 12.73 12.93
(Swathi and Gaur, 2017)

41
 The development of resistant cultivar is the most
effective and economical strategy against MYMV.
 The MYMV disease can be easily manage by
adjusting the date of sowing and cultural practices.
 Urgent need to develop high-yielding varieties with
resistance to diseases with greater yield stability.

Yellow Mosaic of Legume: Biology, Epidemiology & IDM

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Yellow Mosaic of Legume: Biology, Epidemiology & IDM

Similar to Yellow Mosaic of Legume: Biology, Epidemiology & IDM (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Yellow Mosaic of Legume: Biology, Epidemiology & IDM