The document discusses the latest trends and techniques in insect-pest management for commercial vegetable production, highlighting the impact of various insect pests on crop yields and the nutritional importance of vegetables in the Indian diet. It details several pest management strategies, including cultural methods, mechanical controls, and biological approaches, emphasizing the importance of integrated pest management (IPM) practices. The effectiveness of various pest control techniques, such as intercropping, mulching, and the use of biological control agents, is also analyzed based on experimental data.

1. Latest trends and techniques of insect-pest
management in commercial vegetable
production
Kamaldeep Singh Matharu
Department of Entomology
HPAU, Palampur

2. INTRODUCTION
 Vegetable provide nutritional security in addition to food
security.
 They supply carbohydrate, proteins, vitamins and minerals.
 They constitute the major part of the diet of the Indians.
 In 2010, vegetables grown on 79.8 million hectare, with
production of 133.7 million tonnes.
Anonymous (2011)

3. Yield loss in some vegetables caused by major insect-pests
Crop Pest common name Pest Scientific name Per cent Reference
damage
Cabbage Diamondback moth Plutella xylostella (L.) 52 Raja et al. (1999)
Onion Onion thrips Thrips tabaci Linderman ˃50 More (1977)
Brinjal Brinjal fruit and shoot Leucinodes orbonalis Guenee 20.7-60 Gangwar and
borer Sachan (1981)
Okra Shoot and fruit borer Earias vittella (Fabricius) 63.53 Chaudhary and
Dadheech (1989)
Jassid Amrasca biguttula biguttula 32.06-40.84 Singh and Brar
(Ishida) (1994)
Tomato Tomato fruit borer Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) 30-57.79 Dhandapani et al.
(2003)
Bitter Fruit fly Bactrocera cucurbitae Coquillet 100 Srivastava and
gourd Butani (1998)

4. Why pest problems in vegetable cultivation ?
Monoculture
Overlapping of crops
Dense cropping
Availability of preferred host
Excessive use of fertilizers
Indiscriminate use of pesticide

5. Technique of Pest Management
Cultural methods
1. Plant diversity
2. Mulching
i. Polythene mulching
ii. Straw mulching

6. Plant diversity
 Intra-field diversity
 Trap crop attracts insect
 Intercrop
 Insecticides are seldom required
 It enhances natural control
 Suitable for IPM programme

7. Successful examples of trap crop in vegetable crops
Main crop Trap crop Method of planting Pest (s) controlled
Cabbage Collards Border crop Diamondback Moth
Tomato lovage Row intercrop Tomato hornworm
Carrot Onion and garlic Border crop Thrips and Carrot root
fly
Garlic marigold Border crop Thrips
Cabbage Indian mustard Strip intercrop in Cabbage head
between cabbage plots caterpillar
Potato Tansy Intercrop Colorado potato beetle

8. Effect of intercropping on population of fruit borer in
tomato crop
1.6
Larval population/plant
1.4 1.26 1.51 1.09
1.2 1.39 1.38
0.94
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato Tomato
+ + + + + +
Coriander Fenugreek Barley Carrot Mustard Dill
Crop combination
Dehradun Ram and Singh, 2010

9. Effect of intercropping brinjal on the incidence of L. orbonalis
Treatments Shoot damage Fruit damage per Marketable
per cent cent yield (t/ha)
Brinjal+ Roselle 16.4 29.0 23.4
Brinjal+Sowa 17.2 31.9 22.1
Brinjal+ Marigold 23.6 36.9 18.5
Brinjal+Maize 30.4 38.5 17.2
Brinjal (Sole protected) 8.7 22.3 27.3
Brinjal (Sole Control) 46.9 64.2 14.6
CD (P=0.05) 5.2 3.8 3.2
Port Blair Prasad et al. 2007

10. Effect of split burying of two rows of crucifer cultivars in soil
on fruit damage by H. armigera
Mean fruit damage (%) in tomato grown adjacent
to crucifer cultivars
Days after
Control Mean
burying Brassica Eruca B. Napa B. Napa
juncea var. sativa var. var. GSL-1 var. PGSH-
PBR-91 TMLC-2 51
62 14.28 (22.01) 14.01 (21.89) 8.83 (16.44) 11.90 (19.38) 25.02 (29.96) 14.81 (21.94)
69 4.58 (11.62) 3.77 (10.63) 3.38 (10.33) 4.95 (10.52) 16.34 (24.11) 6.69 (13.42)
76 3.31 (10.46) 2.36 (7.22) 4.12 (11.58) 5.70 (13.09) 12.98 (21.05) 5.69 (12.68)
83 10.85 (19.22) 8.29 (16.34) 2.5 (7.34) 6.83 (15.03) 17.13 (24.43) 9.12 (16.47)
Mean 8.26 (18.83) 7.11 (14.02) 4.71 (11.40) 7.34 (14.51) 17.87 (24.89)
Pandher et al. 2008
CD (P=0.05) Days after burying = 3.32
Cultivars = 3.71 Ludhiana

11. Mulching
 Increase the soil temperature
 Reduce inter movement of insect
 Suppress the alternate host.

12. Mean population of Tetranychus urticae/2 cm2 leaf area of brinjal hybrid BH-2 in
different cultural treatments under nethouse conditions
Cultural control Mean mite population/ 2cm2 leaf area of brinjal under different growing
systems
Training Without training Mean
White polythene mulching 5.27 (29.03) 6.86 (46.96) 6.17 (38.00)
Black polythene mulching 5.25 (26.86) 6.14 (37.00) 5.70 (31.93)
Low tunnel white polythene 5.59 (30.43) 7.18 (51.86) 6.38 (41.15)
mulching
Control 6.43 (42.13) 7.68 (58.53) 7.06 (50.33)
Mean 5.69 (32,11) 6.97 (48.59) -
C.D (P=0.05) 0.27
Ludhiana Bhullar and Dhatt 2011

13. Straw mulch
 Straw treated plots have
lower T. tabaci (Adult and
larval) population as
compared to control.
 Emergence of T. tabaci
reduced 54 per cent as
compared to bare soil.
New York Larentzaki et al. 2008

14. Mechanical methods
1. Trellis system
2. Protected cultivation
3. Traps
4. Lure and kill

15. Trellis system
 More light penetration
 Pest monitoring becomes too easy
 Less pest and disease problems
 Comparatively less health hazards.

16. Effect of trellis system on fruit yield and borer infestation in
bitter gourd
Treatment Population of Percent loss Percent loss Fruit yield
specification Diaphania in fruit weight in fruit (q/ha)
indica/fruit (g/fruit) number
Single line 0.86 13.70 14.70 225.78
Double line 1.14 17.60 19.40 206.50
Bower system 1.37 25.50 31.10 197.12
CD (P=0.05) 0.10 2.10 2.10 12.40
Bhubaneswar Singh et al. 2007

17. Protected cultivation technology
 Insect-pests cause direct and indirect damage
 Polyhouse and nethouse act as physical barrier
 Incidence of insect-pest less in protected cultivation
 Superior quality of produce.

18. Effect of insect pest incidence on high value vegetable
under open field and polyhouse conditions
Crop Open field condition Polyhouse condition
Name of No. of Total No. Marketabl Net No. of Total No. Marketabl Net
insect- insect- of e yield income insect- of e yield income
pest pest/ plant insecticide (kg/plant) (Rs/ plant) pest/ plant insecticide (kg/plant) (Rs/
sprayed sprayed plant)
Tomato Whitefly 20.25 8 1.55 4.75 0.66 3 3.75 15.75
Aphid 25.60 0.83
Beetle 17.40 0.33
Mealybug 15.50 0.00
Fruit borer 5.60 0.00
Awani (2005)

19. Trapping
 Monitoring: Insect trap catches indicate adult pest activity.
 Economic thresholds are based on trap catch numbers
• Light trap
• Pheromones trap
• Sticky trap

20. Yellow sticky trap
 Yellow traps, trapped higher number of adults leafminer
(1879.1) and whiteflies (544.5).
 Black color trap, trapped lesser number of adults leafminer
(14.0) and whiteflies (2.6).
 One trap per 20m2 for mass trapping of whitefly.
Durairaj et al. 2007

21. Flower Model trap (FMT)
• Flower model trap (FMT) made from artificial yellow chrysanthemum flower
coated with sticky material.
• It attracts higher number (1.8 times more) of greenhouse whitefly, Trialeurodes
vaporariorum Westwood as compared to the conventional yellow sticky trap.
• The color exhibited by the petals and/or geometrical pattern of the flower
models might have tempted the whitefly to land on them.
• Installation of 80 FMTs in a 500 m2 commercial tomato greenhouse significantly
reduced the adult population of T. vaporariorum.
• Shooty mold infestation was also reduced by 85 per cent on the greenhouse
fruits.
South Korea Mainali and Lim (2008)

22. Lure and kill (Bait technique)
 Cucurbits are vines and creepers
 They provide hiding place to Insect-pest
 Fruit fly lays eggs in fruit tissue
 Control directed toward adult flies
(Palam fruit fly trap)
 Eg: Cue-lure, methyl eugenol, molasses etc

23. Efficacy of eco-friendly insecticides and bait spray on the
bottle gourd fruit damage by B. cucurbitae
Treatment First spray Second spray Third spray Fruit damage
average
T1 NSKE 5% Malathion 50gm +500g Cypermethrin 7.50 (8.24)
molasses +50 liter of water (0.006%)
T2 Nimbecidine Malathion 50gm +500g Malathion 13.37 (13.04)
(2ml/l water) molasses +50 liter of water
T3 Neem gold Malathion 50gm +500g Diazinon 16.53 (17.19)
(2ml/ l water) molasses +50 liter of water
T4 Achook (2ml/l Malathion 50gm +500g Malathion 15.00 (15.72)
water) molasses +50 liter of water
T5 Cypermethrin Cypermethrin (0.006%) Cypermethrin 9.22 (10.09)
(0.006 %) (0.006%)
T6 Control Control Control 24.49 (28.57)
CD 7.26
(P=0.05)
Varanasi Nath et al. 2007

24. Host plant resistance
 The most cheapest and safest techniques, if available
naturally
 Bases of resistance
 Biophysical (thickening of cell wall, trichomes,
surface waxes etc)
 Biochemical (Nutrient, Allelochemicals )

25. Resistance of okra varieties against A. biguttula biguttula in
kangra valley
Variety Mean nymphs/3 leaves Mean nymphs/3 leaves
(Palampur) (Kachhiari)
Arka Anamica 9.75 (3.27) 13.19 (3.72)
Harbhajan 14.22 (3.88) 16.75 (4.19)
P-8 14.48 (3.91) 16.87 (4.21)
Panchaali 11.09 (3.56) 13.45 (3.76)
Parbhani Kranti 10.91 (3.44) 13.73 (3.80)
Pusa Makhmali 15.25 (4.02) 20.08 (4.57)
Shagun 18.25 (4.37) 20.32 (4.59)
Tulsi 6.40 (2.70) 8.64 (3.05)
Varsha Uphar 6.64 (2.75) 10.72 (3.39)
Pusa Sawani 21.03 (4.69) 23.77 (4.95)
CD (P=0.05) 0.23 0.18
Badiyala et al. 2010

26. Resistance genotypes
Crop Place Resistant genotype Target Reference
insect
Brinjal Palampur Moderately Resistant: ASRB 2, BB 60C, L. orbonalis Patial et al.
H8, Ornamental brinjal, Solanum 2008
integrifolium, S.uporo
Resistant: Local brinjal, Ornamental L. orbonalis Patial et al.
brinjal, Solanum integrifolium, S.uporo 2008
and BB 46-13.
Okra Palampur Tulsi (6.40), Varsha Uphar (6.64) A. biguttula Badiyala et al.
biguttula 2010
Tomato Faisalabad Resistance: Sahil, Pakit and Nova Mecb H. armigera Sajjad et al.
2011

27. Biorational control
1. Biological
2. Botanical
3. Insect growth regulator (IGR)
4. Plant incorporated protectant (PIPs)

28. Why biorational ?
Control insect at lower doses
High level of selectivity
Lower the residual toxicity
 Non-harmful to beneficial insect
Reduce the health hazards
 Environmentally safe

29. Biological control
 Utilization of predator, parasitoid and pathogens
 Biological control approaches.
– Conservation
– Release
Pathogens (Bacteria, fungi, virus, nematode, protozoa)

30. Conservation
 Preserving the natural enemies already existing
 Use of pest control tactics which are compatible to natural enemies e.g.,
planting refuge crops (ideal for maintenance of natural enemies etc.)
 Avoiding pest control tactics which are harmful to natural enemies e.g.,
Broad spectrum pesticides
 Use of selective insecticides
Insect pathogens
Insect growth regulators

31. Natural enemies
Lady bird beetle Green lace wing
Aphidius sp Syrphid larvae

32. Natural enemies of L. orbonalis
Trathala flavoorbitalis Goryphus nursei

33. Predators attacking Whiteflies
Geocoris spp. Chrysoperla larvae
Orius spp.

34. Entomopathogenic Bacteria
 The most widely known microbial is bacterial
species, Bacillus thuringiensis.
 A naturally occurring soil bacterium.
 1911, discovered as a pathogen of flour moth.
 Bt is somewhat slow acting because it has to be
ingested so that the toxic proteins can break down
the wall of the insect’s midgut and cause septicemia.

35. Efficacy of DOR-Bt 5 against L. orbonalis on brinjal
Treatmants Fruit damage (%) Yield loss (%) Yield (t/ha)
DOR-Bt 5 (2.0 kg/ha) 28.45 (31.86) 22.58 (27.79) 24.09
DOR-Bt 5 (1.5kg/ha) 32.28 (34.62) 24.54 (29.16) 22.91
DOR-Bt 5 (1.0 kg/ha) 37.42 (37.42) 29.70 (32.35) 16.70
Hostathion (1250 ml/ha) 27.08 (30.93) 20.45 (26.37) 25.49
Control 41.91 (40.10) 44.22 (41.22) 15.74
CD (P=0.05) 3.27 2.42 1.08
Ludhiana Joshi et al. 2010

36. Entomopathogenic Fungus
 Beauveria bassiana: Small insect (such as
aphids, whiteflies and thrips)
 Nomuraea rileyi: Scale insects (Fruit borer and
leaf eating caterpillar)
 Metarhizium anisopliae: Beetles and
Grasshoppers

37. Efficacy of Paecilomyces fumosoroseus against Spider mite,
T. urticae on okra
Treatment Conc. Mean mortality (%) of T. uticae after days of treatment
1 3 5 7 9
P. 0.475 31 .67 ( 65.00 (53.73) 81.67 (64.60) 91.67 (73.15) 100.00
34.20) (90.00)
fumosoroseus
(WP)
0.375 30.00 (33.21) 51.67 (45.92) 70.00 (56.79) 81.67 (64.60) 96.67 (79.37)
0.275 20.00 41.67(40.22) 61.67 (51.71) 71.67 (57.80) 90.00 (71.56)
P. 0.10 21.67 (27.69) 55.00(47.87) 70.00 (56.79) 80.00 (63.44) 90.00 (71.56)
fumosoroseus
(EC)
0.80 15.00 (22.79) 43.33 (41.15) 56.67 (48.79) 68.33 (55.73) 86.67 (68.53)
0.60 6.67 (14.89) 33.33 (35.24) 48.33 (44.03) 55.00 (47.87) 73.33 (58.89)
SE 8.215 9.151 6.919 6.661 7.454
CD (P=0.05) 17.901 19.937 15.075 14.514 16.241
Varanasi Kumar et al. 2010

38. Entomopathogenic viruses
Inclusion viruses (IVs): Granulosis viruses (GVs)
and Polyhedrosis viruses (PVs)
Nuclear polyhedrosis viruses (NPVs)-SlNPV
Cytoplasmic polyhedrosis viruses (CPVs)

39. Efficacy of HaNPV against H. armigera in tomato
 Different doses of HaNPV (100, 150, 200 & 250 LE/ha) and endosulfan
(0.07 & 0.035%) were applied as spray.
 The spraying was done three times at an interval of 15 days starting
from pest occurrence.
 After 4 days of third spray, HaNPV 250 LE/ha caused maximum
mortality (98%) followed by endosulfan 0.07% and HaNPV 200 LE
having 96 and 95% mortality, respectively.
 However, after 7 days of spray, three dosages of HaNPV (i.e. 150, 200
& 250 LE/ha) and endosulfan 0.07% gave 98, 99, 99 and 98% mortality.
Meerut Mehraj et al. 2010

40. Entomopathogenic Nematodes
 Nematodes enter host through natural opening.
 It reduces fitness, delays development and also causes
sterility.
 Kill insects in 1-4 days.
 Common species commercially available are
Steinernema carpocapsae, S.feltiae and Heterorhabditis
bacteriophora.

41. Botanical control
 Plants defend themselves through chemical or
phytochemicals.
 It includes alkaloids, terpenoids, phenolics etc.
 Repel approaching insects, deter feeding and
oviposition on the plants, disrupt behaviour and
physiology of insect.

42. Effect of different treatments on larval population of
H. armigera on tomato
Treatment Pre Larval population/10 plants (mean of three replication) Overall
treatment mean
First spray Second spray
3DAT 7DAT 10DAT 3DAT 7DAT 10DAT
Neem oil 3% 9.66 (3.18) 5.33 6.35 7.66 5.66 6.66 5.66 6.22
(2.41) (2.61) (2.85) (2.48) (2.67) (2.48) (2.59)
Neem oil 5% 12.00 4.00 5.33 6.00 3.33 6.35 5.33 5.05
(3.53) (2.11) (2.41) (2.54) (2.04) (2.61) (2.40) (2.36)
Neem kernal 13.00 6.00 8.33 11.00 6.66 8.35 6.66 7.83
powder WP (3.67) (2.54) (2.97) (3.38) (2.67) (2.97) (2.67) (2.88)
2.5%
Neem kernal 13.35 4.33 5.33 6.66 3.66 5.00 5.66 5.11
powder WP (3.71) (2.19) (2.41) (2.67) (2.11) (2.33) (2.48) (2.37)
5%
Endosulfan 9.33 (3.13) 3.35 5.00 6.66 4.00 6.66 5.33 5.16
35 EC 0.07 % (1.95) (2.33) (2.67) (1.95) (2.67) (2.41) (2.35)
CD (P=0.05) NS 0.39 0.24 0.27 0.26 0.59 0.30 0.12
Khandwa Barde et al. 2009

43. Effect of different plant products against B. cucurbitae on
cucumber
 Field efficacy of plant products viz., neem seed kernal (NSKE),
rhizome of Acorus calamus, seed of Annona squamosa and
Endosulfan as control were evaluated on cucumber.
 Reduction in fruit damage in the range of 68.63%, 64.82%, 63.72%
and 77.14% in treatment with NSKE, A. squamosa, A. calamus and
Endosulfan respectively.
(Mondal and Ghatak, 2009)

44. Effect of organic products on onion thrips population in onion bulb crop
Treatment Average thrips Bulb yield (q/ha)
population
(T1 ) Farm yard manure 20t/ha 3.82 (2.01) 181.94
(T2 ) FYM 20t/ha+ neem cake@ 250kg/ha 3.61 (1.94) 194.44
(T3 ) FYM 20t/ha+ neem cake @ 500kg/ha 3.36 (1.87) 191.66
(T4 ) Recommended dose of NPK+ azadiractin (2ml/l) at 3.39 (1.88) 201.33
10 days interval when pest appear
(T5) Recommended dose of fertilizers+ fipronil (1ml/l) at 2.45 (1.62) 208.33
10 days interval when pest appear
Untreated control 6.09 (2.46) 159.72
Mean 3.68 (1.96)
CD (P=0.05) 0.13
Nauni Verma, 2010

45. Insect growth regulator (IGR)
 Chemical based on insect cuticle (Novaluron, Buprofezin)
 Chemical based on endocrine system (Pyriproxyfen, Fenoxycarb)
 Microorganism derived (Sipnosad, Emabectin benzoate)

46. New registered eco-friendly insecticide in India
Common Name Formulation Dosage/ ha Target insect
a.i. (gm) Formulation Dilution in water
(gm/ml) (liter)
Buprofezin 25% SC 75-150 300-600 500-750 Yellow Mite (Chilli)
Chlorantranilprole 18.5 % SC 10 50 500 DBM (Cabbage)
Difenthiuron 50% WP 300 600 500-750 DBM (Cabbage)
Mite (Chilli)
Whitefly (Brinjal)
Emamectin 5% EC 15-30 300-600 300-500 Fruit and Shoot borer (Okra)
benzoate
DBM (Cabbage)
Fruit borer, Thrips and Mite (Chilli)
Brinjal fruit and shoot borer (Brinjal)
Fenazaquin 10% EC 125 1250 400-600 Yellow Mite (Chilli)
Fenopyroximate 5% EC 15-30 300-600 300-500 Yellow Mite (Chilli)
Fipronil 5% EC 40-50 800-1000 500 DBM
Thrips, Aphid, Fruit borer
Flufenoxuron 10% DC 40 400 500-1000 DBM

47. Contd..
Common Formulation Dosage/ ha Target insect
Name
a.i. (gm) Formulation Dilution in
(gm/ml) water (liter)
Flumite 20% SC 80-100 400-500 500-1000 Mite (Brinjal)
Hexythiazox 5.45% EC 15-25 300-500 625 Yellow Mite (Chilli)
Imidacloprid 70% WG 21-24.5 30-35 375-500 Jassid, Aphid (Okra)
Thrips, Jassid, Aphid (Chilli)
Imidacloprid 48% FS 300-540 (per 500-900 - Jassid, Aphid (Okra)
100 Kg of seed)
Indoxacarb 14.5% SC 30-75 200-500 400-750 DBM
Fruit borer (Tomato)
Fruit borer (Chilli)
Lufenuron 5.4% DC 30 600 500 DBM (Cauliflower)
Metaflumizone 22% SC 165-220 150-1000 500 DBM (Cabbage)

48. Contd..
Common Name Formulation Dosage/ ha Target insect
a.i. (gm) Formulation Dilution in water
(gm/ml) (liter)
Milibectin 1% EC 3.25 325 500 Yellow/White Mite (Chilli)
Novaluron 10% EC 33.5- 75 750-375 500-1000 DBM Fruit borer (Chilli and
Tomato) Tobacco caterpillar
(Chilli)
Pyridalyl 10% EC 50-75 500-750 500-750 Fruit and shoot borer (Okra)
DBM (Cabbage)
Spinosad 45% EC 73 160 500 Fruit borer and Thrip (Chilli)
Spiromesifen 22.9% SC 96 400 500 DBM (cabbage and Cauliflower)
Thiacloprid 21.7% SC 54-72 225-300 500 Red mite (Brinjal)
Yellow Mite (Chilli)
Thiamethoxam 25% WG 25 100 500-1000 Thrips (Chilli)
Thiamethoxam 70% WS 200 286 - Whitefly (Brinjal, Okra & Tomato)
Aphid (Potato & Okra)

49. Effect of different treatments on mean larval population of
P. xylostella
Treatment Pretreatment 3 DAS 7 DAS 10 DAS Percent
dose/ha reduction
over control
Spinosad @ 3.47 2.20 (1.79) 0.53 (1.24) 0.60 (1.26) 87.15
600 ml
Proclaim @ 3.53 2.00 (1.73) 0.67 (1.29) 1.07 (1.43) 77.08
170 g
KN 128@ 3.73 2.60 (1.90) 0.73 (1.32) 0.93 (1.39) 80.08
333ml
(indoxacarb)
Thiodan @ 4.33 3.47 (2.11) 3.20 (2.05) 3.40 (2.10) 27.19
1000 ml
Padan @ 3.73 3.33 (2.08) 2.00 (1.73) 2.27 (1.80) 51.39
500g
Control 4.07 4.27 (2.29) 4.47 (2.33) 4.67 (2.38) -
CD (P=0.05) NS 0.16 0.16 0.18
Ludhiana Gill et al. 2008

50. Efficacy of biorational against L. orbonalis
• The studies revealed that indoxacarb 14.5% SC to be
the most effective treatment against the pest and it was
at par with spinosad, emamectin benzoate, diafenthiuron
and Halt during both the years.
• Higher fruit yield recoded from indoxacarb treated plots
i.e. 232.51 q/ha and per cent increase over control
(57.94%).
Singh (2010)

51. Efficacy of different insecticides
Insecticide Dose and Crop Target Refernce
formulation insect
Acetamiprid 40 g a.i./ha Okra B. tabaci Reddy et al.
(2007)
Emamectin 15 g a.i./ha Bitter gourd B. cucurbitae Sharma and
benzoate Sinha (2009)
Spinosad 56 g a.i./ha Okra H. armigera Ghosh et al.
(2011)

52. Plant incorporated protectants (PIPs)
• Modification in living organism for specific purpose
• Bacterial derived genes: Cry1Ac, Bacillus
thuringiensis
• Plant derived genes: serine protease inhibitors,
lectins, alpha amylase inhibitors etc.
• Gene express in time and space

53. Integrated pest management for L. orbonalis
 Selection of oblong/ small cluster bearing varieties/ hybrids.
 Nursery bed should be protected with muslin cloth to avoid the initial attack of
insect.
 Spray the seedling with any systemic insecticide at the day of transplanting in the
nursery bed.
 Install plastic funnel trap baited with sex pheromone of brinjal shoot and fruit
borer@100/ha at the spacing of 10mx10m at 15-20 days after transplanting. The
pheromone septa should be changed at 30 days interval.
 Clipping and destruction of infested shoots along with larval at weekly interval.
 Sanitation through removal of damaged fruit
 Need based foliar spray of NSKE (4%).
www.iivr.org.in

54. Integrated pest management for B. cucurbitae
• Deep summer ploughing should be done to expose the dormant pupae
in the field.
• Follow crop rotation incorporating non-cucurbiticious crops.
• Install mineral water trap, baited with cue-lure saturated (ethanol:
cuelure:cararyl=8:1:2) wood blocks@25 traps/ha prior to flower
initiation.
• Initiate molassess (10%) based bait spray along with carbaryl (2%) in
selected plants in 250 spots/ha. This operation should be repeated at 4
days interval during the fruiting period.
• Sanitation should be maintained in the field through removal and
destruction of infested fruits immediately after initial infestation.
www.iivr.org.in

55. Conclusion
 Cultural practices are basic but eco-friendly way to minimize the
insect-pest population.
 Traps can be used for monitoring and suppression of pest
population.
 Use the biological control agents with the emergence of pest.
 Insect resistance varieties should be used along with refuge
crop.
 Various biorational pesticides which are selective and eco-
friendly are available to control pests.
 IPM is the best technique for management of Insect-pest.

56. Future Prospective
 More precise research should be focus on plant incorporated
protectants foods.
 Evaluation of local natural resources for pest management.
 Conservation and augmentation of natural enemy.
 Need more scientific research work to exploit the biorational
insecticides.
 Innovations in farmers participation and training to utilize the
developed techniques.