Response of Cotton Bollworm Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) (Lepidoptera:noctuidae) to Different Insecticides in Maharashtra, India

Transcription

1 World Journal of Agricultural Sciences 5 (2): , 2009 ISSN IDOSI Publications, 2009 Response of Cotton Bollworm Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) (Lepidoptera:noctuidae) to Different Insecticides in Maharashtra, India R.K. Nimbalkar, S.S. Shinde, D.S. Tawar and S.P. Muley 1 Department of Zoology, Deogiri College, Aurangabad (M.S.) 2 Department of Zoology, Vivekanand College, Aurangabad (M.S.) Abstract: This study deals with Insecticide Resistance Management of cotton bollworm Helicoverpa armigera to five commonly used insecticides on cotton were carried out during In, LD 50 value for chlorpyriphos varies from 0.046µg/larva in Parbhani district to mg/larva during in Aurangabad district. Resistance to chlorpyriphos was highest in Aurangabad district ( fold) followed by Parbhani district ( fold). In Jalna district, a maximum LD 50 value of 0.070µg/larva was observed for quinalphos in with a minimum of mg/larva in. Resistance to quinalphos was greatest in Jalna ( fold) followed by Aurangabad ( fold) and Parbhani ( fold). The LD 50 value for cypermethrin was highest, during (1.459 mg/larvae in Aurangabad) and lowest during in Parbhani (0.157 µg/larva). Resistance to cypermethrin increased from the same throughout the three districts over the time. Resistance to endosulfan showed an increasing trend as the season progressed and was greatest in Jalna ( fold) followed by Aurangabad ( fold) and Parbhani ( fold). Key words: Cotton Helicoverpa armigera Insecticides Resistance management INTRODUCTION Excessive use of insecticides has also resulted in an increase in severity of minor pests and in environmental Cotton is an important cash crop of Maharashtra pollutions. In order to avoid indiscriminate use of state. In India, the cotton crop provides ecological insecticides, it is essential to monitor the insecticides niche to 164 insects and mites, of this, only 12 having resistance. The present studies were undertaken to economic importance [1]. In India, Jassid, Amrasca estimate extent of resistance in Helicoverpa armigera to biguttula (Ishida) and whitefly, Bemisi tabaci commonly used insecticides in main cotton belt of (Gennadius) are serious sucking pests. Among the Maharashtra. bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner), spotted bollworm; Earias vitella (Fabricius), Earia insulana MATERIAL AND METHODS (Boisduval) and pink bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella (Saunders) are key pests. The damage caused by insect Study Area: Larvae of Helicoverpa armigera were pests, particularly by Helicoverpa armigera is the collected from the different districts of Maharashtra major constraint in increasing the cotton productivity. especially from Marathwada region i.e. Aurangabad, Jalna Among the various options for their management, the and Parbhani during to 2008 i.e. the use of insecticides is the dominant tool used by reproductive period of cotton crop. farmers. However, the indiscriminate use of insecticides has resulted in resistance development of Helicoverpa Rearing of Helicoverpa Armigera: Larvae of armigera to almost all groups of insecticides. In India, Helicoverpa armigera were reared singly on artificial diet resistance was first reported in cotton growing belt of in 12 cell trays / sample containers. Larvae were provided Andhra Pradesh in 1987 [2]. Low to moderate levels of fresh food until pupation. Freshly formed pupae were resistance have been reported in Maharashtra, moderate transfer to glass jars (15cm X 10cm) having moist sponge to high in Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat and Punjab and blotting paper at the bottom, covered with muslin, and high in Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh [3]. which was fastened with rubber bands. Two pairs were Corresponding Author: Dr. R.K. Nimbalkar Department of Zoology, Deogiri College, Aurangabad (M.S.) India PIN

2 released in each earthen pot. The earthen pots were RESULT AND DISCUSSION placed in plastic trays containing water to maintain desired level of humidity (>70%) inside the pot. Chlorpyriphos: The population of Helicoverpa armigera Temperature of laboratory was maintained up to 27±2 C. collected from Aurangabad district showed 3.6, 4.1 and Eggs laid on the muslin were removed daily and kept in 8.2 folds resistance in, and to glass jars for hatching. The neonate larvae were reared chlorpyriphos (Table 1). During, resistance ratio and used for the experimental purpose. The equipments to chlorpyriphos increased by 73.18% in the population used in experiments such as Rearing trays, moth collected from Aurangabad as compare to Parbhani chambers, forceps and brushes were to be regularly district, but only 23.22% increase was observed in Jalna decontaminated in 5% sodium hypochlorite and district than Parbhani district. In, 5.0% increase rectified spirit. in resistance ratio to Chlorpyriphos were observed in For artificial diet of Helicoverpa armigera [4] the populations collected from Aurangabad and Jalna ingredients were divided into two parts. Entire diet district as compare to Parbhani district. Resistance for ingredients of Part A were mixed thoroughly in a Chlorpyriphos increased by 94 and 77% in population mixing bowl to avoid clot formation. Methyl-4-hydroxyl- collected from Aurangabad and Parbhani districts as benzoate, being insoluble in water was dissolved in ethyl compare to Jalna district during. alcohol. This was boiled on a hot plate by adding 150 ml The insecticide resistance to Chlorpyriphos has been distilled water. For part B agar-agar was sprinkled in reported as low to moderate in the majority of strains boiling water with continuous stirring and then yeast [8-10]. The level of resistance to Chlorpyriphos ranged was sprinkled. After removing the ingredients from the from 1 to 3 fold as compared to susceptible strain [11]. hot plate, Part A and Part B were mixed quickly to avoid Recently, moderate level of resistance was observed solidification. The prepared diet was poured in squeeze throughout India [3]. In present study, resistance ratio bottles and then dispensed into rearing trays. When not was reported to be 4.0 fold and was in accordance with required immediately, trays with diet were covered with the finding of these workers. plastic bags after cooling and kept in refrigerator. A liquid mixture of ABDEC (Multivitamin) drops, Quinalphos: The population of Helicoverpa armigera honey and water in the ratio of 0:5:1:10 was prepared. collected from Jalna district showed 2.5, 3.4 and 7.4 fold Cotton swabs dipped in above mixture were hung in the resistance to quinalphos during, and pot with pins to provide food for the moths. This food, respectively (Table 2). The resistance level in was daily changed. Aurangabad and Parbhani districts also increased with the progression of the season but no lower extent. During Bioassay: Serial dilutions of cypermethrin, quinalphos, resistance to quinalphos increased by 30 to 60% in chlorpyriphos endosulfan and spinosad were Aurangabad and Parbhani districts as compare to Jalna prepared in acetone from stock solutions. Technical district. The resistance ratios were 3.0, 2.5 and 3.7 folds in grade insecticides of known Purity were used. Aurangabad, Jalna and Parbhani respectively. As the Third instars larval weighing 30-40mg each was used season progressed i.e. in increased in for testing different doses larvae used for each resistance ratio was 47 and 11% in population collected concentration according to availability. A tropical method from Aurangabad and Jalna district showed 2 and 32% was used for the bioassay [5]. Hamilton syringe dispenser increase in resistance ratio than population collected from was used to apply 1µl of insecticide solution to the Parbhani district. The resistance ratios were 5.0, 3.4 and thoracic dorsum of third instar larvae. In control treatment, 3.8 fold during in Aurangabad, Jalna and 1µl of acetone was used. It was ensured acetone did not Parbhani districts, respectively. In the population drip to the lateral sides of larvae. Once all the larvae in the collected from Jalna district showed maximum resistance tray were treated, the lid was closed and labeled. with LD50value of 0.070µg/larva. The resistance ratio was Mortality assessments were made on the basis of the 7.00 fold. number of moribund and dead larvae [6]. Mortality of Low level of resistance was observed in north and Helicoverpa armigera in different treatments was central India but moderate in South India [3]. Resistance recorded up to 72 hours after the application. to quinalphos was low to moderate in Helicoverpa Statistical analysis was done by log probit using the armigera, but resistance to quinalphos in Meingeli strain, computer program PC-POLO software [7]. collected from Chattisgarh, India was high as observed 251

3 Table 1: IRM of cotton bollworm Helicoverpa armigera against Chlorpyriphos in three districts of Maharashtra LD 50 (µg/larva) RR Fiducial range (95%) (Lower/Upper) X Heterogeneity Slope±SE Aurangabad (6) ±0.121 Jalna (6) ±0.103 Parbhani (6) ±0.096 Aurangabad (6) ±0.099 Jalna (6) ±0.110 Parbhani (6) ±0.108 Aurangabad (6) ±0.100 Jalna (6) ±0.110 Parbhani (6) ±0.116 Value of susceptible strain =0.020µg/larva Table 2: IRM of cotton bollworm Helicoverpa armigera against quinalphos in three districts of Maharashtra LD 50(µg/larva) RR Fiducial range (95%) (Lower/Upper) X Heterogeneity Slope±SE Aurangabad (4) ±0.172 Jalna (4) ±0.174 Parbhani (4) ±0.182 Aurangabad (4) ±0.168 Jalna (4) ±0.165 Parbhani (4) ±0.168 Aurangabad (4) ±1.165 Jalna (4) ±0.166 Parbhani (4) ±0.156 Value of susceptible strain =0.010µg/larva Table 3: IRM of cotton bollworm Helicoverpa armigera against cypermethrin in three districts of Maharashtra LD 50(µg/larva) RR Fiducial range (95%) (Lower/Upper) X Heterogeneity Slope±SE Aurangabad (8) ±0.102 Jalna (8) ±0.098 Parbhani (8) ±0.082 Aurangabad (8) ±0.096 Jalna (8) ±0.101 Parbhani (8) ±0.087 Aurangabad (8) ±0.216 Jalna (8) ±0.117 Parbhani (8) ±0.087 Value of susceptible strain =0.007µg/larva Table 4: IRM of cotton bollworm Helicoverpa armigera against spinosad in three districts of Maharashtra LD 50(µg/larva) RR Fiducial range (95%) (Lower/Upper) X Heterogeneity Slope ±SE Aurangabad (6) ±0.172 Jalna (6) ±0.121 Parbhani (6) ±0.225 Aurangabad (6) ±0.384 Jalna (6) ±0.193 Parbhani (6) ±0.262 Aurangabad (6) ±0.225 Jalna (6) ±0.273 Parbhani (6) ±0.262 Value of susceptible strain =0.062µg/larva 252

4 Table 5: IRM of cotton bollworm Helicoverpa armigera against endosulfan in three districts of Maharashtra LD 50 (µg/larva) RR Fiducial range (95%) (Lower/Upper) X Heterogeneity Slope±SE Aurangabad (12) ±0.347 Jalna (12) ±0.225 Parbhani (12) ±0.200 Aurangabad (12) ±0.276 Jalna (12) ±0.227 Parbhani (12) ±0.208 Aurangabad (12) ±0.196 Jalna (12) ±0.160 Parbhani (12) ±0.244 Value of susceptible strain =0.031µg/larva by Chaturvedi [8]. In Punjab, India the LD50 value for pyrethroids in those regions where pyrethroids use was quinalphos was mg/larva was minimum and most frequent i.e. 4-8 applications per season [18]. High 0.065µg/larva was maximum [12]. Quinalphos resistance level of resistance was observed to cypermethrin and frequency ranged between 27.8 and 45.4% [10,13]. fenvalerate [19]. According to Ahmad et al., [20] high Resistance to Quinalphos was reported as 45% during level of resistance was reported to cypermethrin by Shekar et al., [14]. No resistance to Quinalphos and monocrotophos but a moderate level to endosulfan during 1989 from cotton growing areas of Guntur and in the field strains of Helicoverpa armigera collected Coimbatore [15]. In present studies, resistance to from Pakistan. LD 50 for cypermethrin was 4 to 9 times Quinalphos was low as the insecticide was used mostly in greater in Marathwada region of Maharashtra state early season. Nimbalkar et al. [21]. High level of resistance was recorded to Cypermethrin: Maximum LD50 value for cypermethrin, cypermethrin in strains collected from cotton growing during august was being and minimum areas of Guntur and Coimbatore during 1989 [15]. High 0.143µg/larva. The resistance ratio varied between resistance frequencies were observed to cypermethrin and 21.2 and 39.0 fold in (Table 3). During, fenvalerate in population collected from central India the LD50values were minimum and maximum in population during cropping seasons of [22]. Majority of collected from Jalna and Parbhani districts, respectively. strains collected from Chattisgarh exhibited high There was not much variations in resistance level in resistance level of 40 to 348 fold to cypermethrin [8]. Parbhani (81.7 fold) and Aurangabad (73.9 fold). The LD50 In Coimbatore, resistance to cypermethrin increased with value increased to 0.539, and with resistance the progression of season for the population of of 74.25, and in Aurangabad, Jalna and Helicoverpa armigera from Akola district [23]. The level Parbhani districts, respectively (Table 3). The resistance of resistance increased from 76.5 to 84.2% to cypermethrin ratio in Aurangabad, Jalna and Parbhani districts was during Resistance to cypermethrin varied from , and fold in as compared to 46.8 to 95.7% during [14]. During 1992 in 39.00, and fold in respectively. Turkey, 17 folds of resistance were reported by Ernst and The present study show high level of resistance to Dittrich [23]. In Punjab resistance to cypermethrin was cypermethrin. The population of Helicoverpa armigera increased from to folds [12] Kranthi et al. [3] collected from cotton growing areas of south sulawesi, reported high resistance to cypermethrin throughout Indonesia in 1987 and 1988 were resistant to cypermethrin India. In Maharashtra, one of the reasons for high [13]. High level of resistance was reported to synthetic resistance was indiscriminate use of synthetic pyrethroids pyrethroids [16]. According to Mc Caffery et al. [13], particularly, cypermethrin for the management of cotton population of Helicoverpa armigera collected in bollworms. In most of the sprays, farmers used synthetic 1987 from coastal cotton growing districts in Andhra pyrethroids alone or in combinations. Pradesh was highly resistant to cypermethrin. Resistance of Helicoverpa armigera to insecticide especially Spinosad: Susceptibility profile to spinosad remained pyrethroids was disastrous to Israeli growers [17]. Higher same through out three districts in all the periods level of resistance was observed against synthetic (Table 4). Although resistance level increased but it 253

5 showed low variations. It has been observed that spinosad is a new molecule effective for the management of Helicoverpa armigera. During, resistance ratio increased by 3 and 9% in population collected from Aurangabad and Parbhani districts than Jalna district (Table 4). In, 6 and 5% increase in resistance ratios were observed in population collected from Aurangabad and Parbhani districts as compared to Jalna district. As the season progressed to 26 and 15% increase were observed in resistance ratio in Jalna and Parbhani district as compared to that in Aurangabad district. In present study, low level of resistance was observed to spinosad as also reported by Kranthi et al. [3]. Endosulfan: The population of Helicoverpa armigera collected from Jalna district showed 3.10, 4.6 and 9.1 fold of resistance to endosulfan in, and. In Aurangabad district, resistance ratio increased as the season progressed from august to i.e. from 3.9 to 8.2 fold. During, resistance level was low as 1.9 fold in Parbhani district and then resistance ratio increased from 4.5 to 6.9 fold in and (Table 5). In present study, resistance level was 4.75 fold to endosulfan. Kranthi et al., [3] reported low level of resistance in North India but moderate level of resistance in South India. The endosulfan resistance frequency ranged between 30.7 and 57.3% [9]. Moderate level of resistance was observed to endosulfan [10,20]. Low level of resistance was reported to endosulfan and moderate to high resistance was also observed to endosulfan across India [24]. Resistance to endosulfan was low to moderate in Helicoverpa armigera, but resistance to endosulfan was high i.e. 36 to 91 fold in meingeli strain, collected from Chattisgarh, India observed by Chaturvedi [8]. Sekhar et al., [14] reported 46% resistance to endosulfan during Mc Caffery et al. [13] reported that population of Helicoverpa armigera collected in 1987 from coastal cotton growing districts in Andhra Pradesh were moderately resistance to endosulfan. Resistance to endosulfan was increased in as the season progressed in Punjab [12] During 1992 in Australia 28 fold of resistance was observed to endosulfan by Gunning et al., [25]. Low levels of resistance i.e. 7 folds were reported in India by Armes et al., [6,15]. In present studies, low level of resistance to endosulfan was observed [1]. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Authors are thankful to University Grants Commission for the funding a Major Research Project F.No /2007. REFERENCES 1. Dhawan, A.K., Annual reports of IRM project. Department of entomology, Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana (Punjab), India. 2. Reddy, A.S., Helioths armigera (Hubner)- a serious threat to cotton cultivation in India, pp: National Workshop on Heliothis Management. Tamil Nadu Agriculture University, Coimbatore, India. pp: Kranthi, K.R., Insecticide Resistance Monitoring, Mechanism and Management Manual. Central Institute for Cotton Research, Nagpur, India, pp: Gupta, G.P., Birah Ajanta and Rani Seema, Development of artificial diet for mass rearing of American bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera Indian J. Agri. Sci., 65: Anonymous, Pakage of Practices for Kharif Crops of Punjab. Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana, India, pp: Armes, N.J., D.R. Jadhav and K.R. De Souza, A survey of insecticide resistance in Helicoverpa armigera in the Indian subcontinent. Bull. Ent. Res., 86: Robertson, J.L., R.M. Russell and N.E. Savin, POLO: A user s Guide to Probit or Logit Analysis. Pasific SouthWest forest and Range Experiment Station, Bekley, U.S.A. 8. Chaturvedi, I., Insecticide resistance in Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) in India, 1993 to 2003 Res. Pest. Mgmt. Newsl., 14: Regupathy, A. and R. Ayyasamy, 2003 Status of insecticide resistance in heliothis species An update. Res. Pest Mgmt Newsl., 13: Ahmad, M., M.I. Arif and Z. Ahmad, Monitorng insecticides resistance of Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Pakistan. J. Econ. Ent., 88: Kapoor, S.K., A.S. Sohi, J. Singh, D. Russell and R.L. Kalral, Insecticide resistance in Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) in Punjab, India. Pestic. Res. J., 12:

6 12. Gill, H.K. and A.K. Dhawan, Insecticide 19. Ahmad, M., M.I. Arif and M.R. Attique, resistance profile of Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) Pyrethroid resistance of Helicoverpa armigera to different insecticide on cotton in Punjab J. Insect. (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Pakistan. Bull. Ent. Res., Sci., 19: : Mc Caffery, A.R., A.B.S. King, A.J. Walker and 20. Ahmad, M. and A.R.. Mc Caffery, Resistance to H. EI-Nayir, Resistance to synthetic pyrethroids incticides in a Thiland strain of Heliothis armigera in bollworm, Heliothis armigera from Andhra (Hubner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J. econ. Ent., Pradesh, India. Pestic. Sci., 27: : Sekhar, P.R., M. Venkataiah, N.V. Rao, B.R. Rao 21. Nimbalkar, R.K., S.K. Chandekar, D.S. Tawar and and V.S. Rao, Monot oring of insecticide S.P. Muley, LD 50 Mortality response of cotton resistance in Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) from bollworm (Lepidoptera:Noctuidae) in Marathwada areas reciving heavy insecticidal applications in Region. Intl. J. Biot. Res., 2: Andhra Pradesh (India). J. Ent. Res., 20: Kranthi, K.R., N.J. Armes, N.G.V. Rao, S. Raj and 15. Armes, N.J., D.R. Jadhav, G.S. Bond and A.B.S. King, V.T. Sundraramurthy, Seasonal dynamics of Insecticide resistance in Helicoverpa armigera metabolic mechanisms mediating pyrethroids in south India. Pestic. Sci., 34: resistance in Helicoverpa armigera in central India 16. Kapoor, S.K., J. Singh, D. Russell, B. Singh and pestic. Sci., 50: R.L. Kalral, Susceptibility change of 23. Ernst, G. and V. Dittrich, Comparative Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) to different measurement of resistance to insecticides in three Insecticides in Punjab. Pestic. Resi. J., 14: closely related old and new world bollworm species. 17. Horowltz, A.R., I.M. Seligman, G. Forer, D. Bar and I. Pestic. Sci., 34: Ishaaya, Preventative insecticides resistance 24. Kranthi, K.R., D.A. Russell, R.R. Wanjari, M. Kharde, management strategy in Helicoverpa armigera S. Munje, N. Lavhe and N. Armes, In (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Israeli cotton. J. Econ. season changes in resistanc to insecticides in Ent., 86: Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) 18. Kranthi, K.R., D.R. Jadhav, S. Kranthi, R.R. Wanjari, in India. J. Econ. Ent., 95: S.S. Ali and D.A. Russell, Pyrethroids 25. Gunning, R.V. and C.S. Easton, Resistance to resistance and mechanism of resistance in field organophosphate insecticides in Helicoverpa strains of Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: armigera (Hubner) (Lepidoptera:Noctuidae) in Noctuidae). J. Econ. Ent., 94: Australia. Gen. appl. Ent., 25: