Upload
others
View
10
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
BIO-ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT OF MANGO MEALYBUG,
DROSICHA MANGIFERAE GREEN IN MANGO
ORCHARDS OF PUNJAB, PAKISTAN
By
HAIDER KARAR
Reg. No. 84-ag-853 M.Sc .(Hons.) Agriculture
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
IN
AGRICULTURAL ENTOMOLOGY
FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE
UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE, FAISALABAD (PAKISTAN)
2010
D E D I C A T E D
To
My Mother MY HEAVEN LIES BENEATH HER FEET
&
My Wife Raeesa Haider
FOR HER SERVICES TO MY MOTHER
& LOOKING AFTER THE CHILDREN
OH! MY ALMIGHTY ALLAH,
MAKE ME
AN INSTRUMENT OF YOUR PEACE
WHERE, THERE IS HATRED , LET ME SOW LOVE,
WHERE THERE IS INJURY, PARDON WHERE THERE IS DOUBT, FAITH WHERE THERE IS DESPAIR, HOPE
WHERE THERE IS DARKNESS, L IGHT AND WHERE THERE IS SADNESS, ENJOY.
CONTENTS
CHAPTER CONTENTS PAGE
LIST OF TABLES ------------------------------------ -------------------- i LIST OF FIGURES ------------------------------------------------------- v LIST OF APPENDICES ------------------------------------------------- vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ----------------------------- -------------- vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ----------------------------------- ------------ viii ABSTRACT ----------------------------------------------------------------- ix
I INTRODUCTION
1.1 Agriculture in Pakistan ___________________________________1 1.2 The importance of fruits to Pakistan _________________________1 1.3 Importance of mango ____________________________________2 1.4 Insect pest of mango _____________________________________2
II REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Survey ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4 2.2 Population Dynamics ------------------------------------------------------- 4 2.3 Cultivar Resistance --------------------------------------------------------- 5 2.4 Effect of host plant ---------------------------------------------------------- 6 2.5 Biology ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 2.6 Selectivity Studies ---------------------------------------------------------- 7
2.6.1 Cultural control ------------------------------------------------------- 7 2.6.2 Mechanical control --------------------------------------------------- 8 2.6.3 Chemical control ----------------------------------------------------- 9
2.7 Sustainable management approach for the control of mango mealybug --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10
III PROBLEM ORIENTATION
STUDIES Abstract ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 12 3.1 Introduction ----------------------------------------------------------------- 13 3.2 Materials and Methods --------------------------------------------------- 14
3.2.1 Study Sites and its Climate ----------------------------------------- 14 3.2.2 Preliminary Survey --------------------------------------------------- 14 3.2.3 Comprehensive Survey ---------------------------------------------- 14
Contents
3.3 Results and Discussion ---------------------------------------------------- 16 3.3.1 Preliminary Survey --------------------------------------------------- 16
3.3.1.1 Awareness among Farmers about Insect Pests ------- 16 3.3.1.2 Relationship between Pest and Yield Losses --------- 17 3.3.1.3 Dominance Factors of Mango Mealybug -------------- 18
3.3.2 Comprehensive Survey ---------------------------------------------- 19 3.3.2.1 Respondent’s Knowledge about Resistant and Susceptible
Cultivars of Mango -------------------------------------- 19 3.3.2.2 Awareness Regarding Methods of Spreading of
Mealybug --------------------------------------------------- 20 3.3.2.3 Awareness among Respondents Regarding Hibernation
Places of Mango Mealybug ----------------------------- 21 3.3.2.4 Practices Adopted by the Farmers for the
Control of Mango Mealybug ---------------------------- 22 3.3.2.4.1 Cultural Practices ------------------------------ 22 3.3.2.4.2 Mechanical Practices -------------------------- 23 3.3.2.4.3 Response of Chemical Insecticide ---------- 24
3.3.2.5 Practices Adopted by the Farmer to Control the Fertilized Female of Mango Mealybug Coming down the Tree --------------------------------------------- 25
3.3.2.6 Yield Losses by Mango Mealybug --------------------- 26 3.3.2.7 Major Problems Faced by the Farmers ---------------- 27
3.4 Discussion ------------------------------------------------------------------- 28 IV POPULATION DYNAMICS, CULTIVAR
RESISTANCE AND BIOLOGY Abstract ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 31
4.1 Introduction ----------------------------------------------------------------- 32 4.2 Materials and Methods --------------------------------------------------- 34
4.2.1 Population dynamics of Mealybug on Chaunsa Cultivar of Mango ------------------------------------------------- 34
4.2.2 Population of mango Mealybug on different Cultivars of Mango ------------------------------------------------------------ 34
4.2.3 Methodology to Study the Biology of Mango Mealybug under Field Conditions ------------------------------- 35 4.2.3.1 Collection of eggs ----------------------------------------- 36 4.2.3.2 Hatching of Eggs ------------------------------------------ 36
4.3 Results and Discussion ---------------------------------------------------- 38 4.3.1 Population of mango mealybug versus plant sides -------------- 38
4.3.1.1 Population of Mango Mealybug on Leaves on Various Plant Sides --------------------------------------- 38
4.3.1.2 Mango Mealybug on Inflorescence -------------------- 40 4.3.1.3 Mango Mealybug on Branches ------------------------- 41 4.3.1.4 Population of Mango Mealybug on Trunk
and Weeds-------------------------------------------------- 42
Contents
4.3.1.5 Predation, Parasitization and Fungal Attacked Population of Mango Mealybug ------------------------ 42
4.3.2 Graphical interaction between weather factors and population of mango mealybug during 2005- 2006 and 2006-2007 ----------------------------------------------------------- 43 4.3.2.1 Population of Mango Mealybug versus Weather
Factors during 2005-2006 ------------------------------- 43 4.3.2.2 Population of Mango Mealybug versus Weather
Factors during 2006-2007 ------------------------------- 44 4.3.2.3 Population of Mango Mealybug versus Weather
Factors on an Average Basis of Both Years Data --------------------------------------------------------- 45
4.3.3 Role of weather in population fluctuation of mango mealybug ------------------------------------------------------------ 47 4.3.3.1 Simple Correlation Between Weather Factors
and Population of Mango Mealybug ------------------- 47 4.3.3.2 Multiple Linear Regression Models ------------------- 47
4.3.4 Active period of nymphs moving up the trees at various day times --------------------------------------------------- 49
4.3.5 Population of mango mealybug on different cultivars of mango ------------------------------------------------------------ 50 4.3.5.1 Population of Mango Mealybug During 2005-
2006 --------------------------------------------------------- 50 4.3.5.1.1 Cultivars Resistance --------------------------- 51 4.3.5.1.2 Plant Direction --------------------------------- 52 4.3.5.1.3 Period of Abundance of Mango
Mealybug --------------------------------------- 52 4.3.5.2 Population of Mango Mealybug During 2006-
2007 --------------------------------------------------------- 53 4.3.5.2.1 Cultivars Resistance --------------------------- 54 4.3.5.2.2 Plant Direction --------------------------------- 54 4.3.5.2.3 Period of Abundance -------------------------- 54
4.3.5.3 Population of Mango Mealybug on Cumulative Basis of Both Years Studies ----------------------------- 57
4.3.6 Antibiosis Resistance Against Mango Mealybug in Different Cultivars of Mango ------------------------------------ 59 4.3.6.1 Number of Eggs Laid Per Female ---------------------- 59 4.3.6.2 Weight of Female ----------------------------------------- 60 4.3.6.3 Length of Female ----------------------------------------- 60 4.3.6.4 Width of Female ------------------------------------------ 62 4.3.6.5 Length of Ovisac ------------------------------------------ 62 4.3.6.6 Width of Ovisac ------------------------------------------- 62
4.3.7 Biology of mango mealybug on susceptible cultivar Chaunsa -------------------------------------------------------------- 63 4.3.7.1 First Stadium ---------------------------------------------- 63 4.3.7.2 Second Stadium ------------------------------------------- 63
Contents
4.3.7.3 Third Stadium --------------------------------------------- 64 4.3.7.4 Females ----------------------------------------------------- 64 4.3.7.5 Males ------------------------------------------------------- 65
4.3.8 Study on the behaviour of the pest ------------------------------ 65 4.3.8.1 Speed of Nymphs ---------------------------------------- 65 4.3.8.2 Removal of Whitish Cocoon ---------------------------- 65 4.3.8.3 Egg Laying Behaviour ----------------------------------- 66 4.3.8.4 Nymphs Live Without Food ----------------------------- 66 4.3.8.5 Copulation Time ------------------------------------------ 66
4.4 Discussion ------------------------------------------------------------------- 68 Biology and Behaviour of Mango Mealybug on Chaunsa Cultivar ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 70 Period of abundance -------------------------------------------------------- 70
V CULTIVAR RESISTANCE BASED ON BIOCHEMICAL ANALYSIS IN LEAVES AND INFLORESCENCE
Abstract ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 71
5.1 Introduction ----------------------------------------------------------------- 72 5.2 Materials and Methods --------------------------------------------------- 73
5.2.1 Moisture Content ----------------------------------------------------- 73 5.2.2 Total Minerals -------------------------------------------------------- 73 5.2.3 Nitrogen --------------------------------------------------------------- 74 5.2.4 Crude Protein --------------------------------------------------------- 74 5.2.5 Fat Contents ----------------------------------------------------------- 74 5.2.6 Crude Fibre ------------------------------------------------------------ 74 5.2.7 Soluble Carbohydrates ---------------------------------------------- 75 5.2.8 Sample Digestion for Macro Nutrients ---------------------------- 75
5.2.8.1 Phosphorus ------------------------------------------------- 75 5.2.8.2 Potassium and Sodium ----------------------------------- 75
5.2.9 Statistical Correlations ----------------------------------------------- 75 5.3 Results and Discussion ---------------------------------------------------- 77
5.3.1 Chemical Factors in Leaves of different Cultivars of Mango ---------------------------------------------------------------- 77 5.3.1.1 Nitrogen ------------------------------------------------------ 77 5.3.1.2 Potassium --------------------------------------------------- 78 5.3.1.3 Crude Fiber -------------------------------------------------- 78 5.3.1.4 Fat Contents ------------------------------------------------- 78 5.3.1.5 Sodium Contents -------------------------------------------- 80 5.3.1.6 Ash Contents ------------------------------------------------ 80 5.3.1.7 Carbohydrate ------------------------------------------------ 80 5.3.1.8 Phosphorus --------------------------------------------------- 81 5.3.1.9 Moisture ------------------------------------------------------ 81 5.3.1.10 Crude Protein ---------------------------------------------- 81
5.3.2 Chemical Factors in Inflorescence in Different Cultivars of Mango -------------------------------------------------------------- 82
Contents
5.3.2.1 Nitrogen ------------------------------------------------------ 82 5.3.2.2 Potassium ---------------------------------------------------- 82 5.3.2.3 Crude Fibre -------------------------------------------------- 83 5.3.2.4 Fat Contents ------------------------------------------------- 83 5.3.2.5 Sodium ------------------------------------------------------- 83 5.3.2.6 Ash Contents ------------------------------------------------ 84 5.3.2.7 Carbohydrate ------------------------------------------------ 84 5.3.2.8 Phosphorus --------------------------------------------------- 86 5.3.2.9 Crude Protein ------------------------------------------------ 86
5.3.3 Impact of Various Chemical Factors on the Population of Mango Mealybug ------------------------------------------------- 86 5.3.3.1 Simple Correlation ------------------------------------------ 86 5.3.3.2 Multiple Linear Regression Models --------------------- 87
5.3.3.2.1 Impact of Chemical Factors in Population Fluctuation of Mango Mealybug on Leaves ------------------------------------------ 87
5.3.3.2.2 Impact of Chemical Factors in Population Fluctuation of Mango Mealybug on Inflorescence --------------------------------------------------- 89
5.4 Discussion ------------------------------------------------------------------- 91 VI LOSSES IN MANGO YIELD CAUSED BY MANGO
MEALYBUG Abstract ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 93 6.1 Introduction ----------------------------------------------------------------- 94 6.2 Materials and Methods --------------------------------------------------- 95 6.3 Results and Discussion ---------------------------------------------------- 95
6.3.1 Initial Mango Fruits in Treated and Untreated Trees ----------- 96 6.3.2 Mango Fruits Obtained at Maturity in Treated and Untreated Trees
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 97 6.3.3 Population of Mango Mealybug recorded per
Inflorescence in Treated and Untreated Trees ----------------- 99 6.4 Discussion ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 101 VII SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF MANGO
MEALYBUG ON MANGO TREES ABSTRACT ----------------------------------------------------------------- 102 7.1 Introduction ----------------------------------------------------------------- 103 7.2 Materials and Methods --------------------------------------------------- 106
7.2.1 Selectivity Studies ---------------------------------------------------- 106 7.2.1.1 Cultural Control ------------------------------------------- 106
7.2.1.1.1 Hoeing/Ploughing ----------------------------- 106
Contents
7.2.1.1.2 Earthing/Mounding the tree trunk with fine soil ----------------------------------------- 106
7.2.1.1.3 Earthing/Mounding the tree trunk with clods, fallen leaves and debris --------------------- 107
7.2.1.1.4 Mounds of clods, fallen leaves and debris on plastic sheet ------------------------ 107
7.2.1.1.5 Removal of soil from the orchard ----------- 107 7.2.1.1.6 Intercropping ----------------------------------- 107 7.2.1.1.7 Unploughed orchard--------------------------- 108
7.2.1.2 Mechanical control --------------------------------------- 108 7.2.1.3 Chemical control ------------------------------------------ 115
7.2.1.3.1 Control of mango mealybug under laboratory -------------------------------------- 115
7.2.1.3.2 Control of mango mealybug under field conditions ------------------------------- 116
7.2.2 Sustainable management of mango mealybug ------------------- 117 7.2.2.1 Cultural practices ----------------------------------------- 117 7.2.2.2 Mechanical practices ------------------------------------- 118 7.2.2.3 Chemical practices --------------------------------------- 118 7.2.2.4 Mechanical x chemical practice ------------------------ 118 7.2.2.5 Cultural x mechanical practice -------------------------- 118 7.2.2.6 Cultural x chemical practice ----------------------------- 119 7.2.2.7 Cultural x mechanical x chemical practices ---------- 119 7.2.2.8 Control ------------------------------------------------------ 119
7.2.3 Management of Males of Mango Mealybug --------------------- 119 7.2.3.1 Management through Light traps ----------------------- 119 7.2.3.2 Management through cultural practices --------------- 119
7.3 Results and Discussion ---------------------------------------------------- 120 7.3.1 Cultural Methods for the Control of Mango Mealybug -------- 120 7.3.2 Mechanical methods of control ------------------------------------ 124
7.3.2.1 Effect of Bands on the Nymphs of Mango Mealybug During 2006 ---------------------------------- 124
7.3.2.2 Effect of Bands on the Nymphs of Mango Mealybug during 2007 ----------------------------------- 126
7.3.2.3 Average Effect of Bands on the Nymphs of Mango Mealybug During 2006 and 2007 ---------------------- 127
7.3.3 Chemical Control of Mango Mealybug -------------------------- 129 7.3.3.1 In Vivo Mortality of First Instar Mango Mealybug One
Day After Treatment ------------------------------------- 129 7.3.3.2 Mortality of Mango Mealybug Two Days After
Treatment -------------------------------------------------- 129 7.3.3.3 Mortality of Mango Mealybug Three Days After
Treatment -------------------------------------------------- 130 7.3.3.4 Mortality of Mango Mealybug 4 Days After
Treatments ------------------------------------------------- 130
Contents
7.3.3.5 Mortality of Mango Mealybug 5 Days After Treatment -------------------------------------------------- 132
7.3.3.6 Mortality of Mango Mealybug 6 Days After Treatment -------------------------------------------------- 132
7.3.3.7 Mortality of First Instar Mango Mealybug under Field Conditions ------------------------------------------- 132 7.3.3.7.1 Mortality of First Instar Mango Mealybug
24 Hours After Spray ------------------------ 132 7.3.3.7.2 Mortality of First Instar Mango Mealybug
72 Hours After Spray ------------------------ 133 7.3.3.7.3 Mortality of First Instar Mango
Mealybug 168 Hours After Spray ---------- 133 7.3.3.8 Mortality of Second and Third Instars Mango Mealybug
--------------------------------------------------------------- 134 7.3.3.8.1 Mortality of Second and Third Instars
Mango Mealybug 24 Hours After Spray -------------------------------------------- 134
7.3.3.8.2 Mortality of Second and Third Instars Mango Mealybug 72 Hours After Spray -------------------------------------------- 136
7.3.3.8.3 Mortality of Second and Third Instars Mango Mealybug 168 Hours After Spray -------------------------------------------- 136
7.3.3.9 Mortality of Adult Female of Mango Mealybug at Various Post Treatments Intervals -------------------------------- 136 7.3.3.9.1 Mortality of Adult Female of Mango Mealybug
24 Hours After Spray ------------------------- 137 7.3.3.9.2 Mortality of Adult Female of Mango Mealybug
72 Hours After Spray ------------------------- 137 7.3.3.9.3 Mortality of Adult Female of Mango Mealybug
168 Hours After Spray ------------------------ 137 7.3.3.10 Sustainable management approach for the
control mango mealybug --------------------------------- 138 7.3.3.11 Management of Mango Mealybug Males ------------ 140
7.4 Discussion ------------------------------------------------------------------- 144 7.4.1 Control of Mango Mealybug through Cultural
Practices -------------------------------------------------------------- 144 7.4.2 Control of Mango Mealybug Through Mechanical
Methods --------------------------------------------------------------- 145 7.4.3 Control of Mango Mealybug Through Insecticides ------------ 145 7.4.4 Sustainable Management Approach for the Control of
Mango Mealybug ---------------------------------------------------- 146 7.4.5 Management of Males of Mango Mealybug --------------------- 147
VIII SUMMARY
Contents
Population Dynamics _____________________________________________149 Cultivar Resistance _______________________________________________150 Biology and Behaviour of the pest ___________________________________151 Effect of Environment on the population of Mango mealybug __________________________________________________________151 Period of abundance ______________________________________________152 Biochemical analysis of leaves and inflorescence _______________________152 Losses caused by Mango mealybug __________________________________152 Sustainable Management of Mango mealybug __________________________153
8.1 Recommendations --------------------------------------------------------- 155 8.2 Condition of the Pest and Recommended Practices ---------------- 156 8.3 Precautionary Measures ------------------------------------------------- 157
LITERATURE CITED -------------------------------- ------------------- 158 APPENDICES -------------------------------------------------------------179
i
LIST OF TABLES
Chapter III
TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE NO. 1. AWARENESS OF THE RESPONDENTS ABOUT DIFFERENT
INSECT PESTS OF MANGO ---------------------------------------------------- 17 2. PESTWISE EXTENT OF DAMAGE TO MANGO FRUIT AS
TOLD BY THE RESPONDENTS ----------------------------------------------- 18 3. VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING MANGO
MEALYBUG AS A VERY SERIOUS PEST --------------------------------- 18 4. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS
REGARDING SUSCEPTIBILITY AND RESISTANT MANGO CULTIVARS AGAINST MANGO MEALYBUG --------------------------------------------- 20
5. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING METHOD OF SPREADING OF MANGO MEALYBUG -------------------------------- 21
6. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING PLACES OF HIBERNATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ---------------------------- 22
7. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING CULTURAL PRACTICES OF MANGO MEALYBUG ------------------- 23
8. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING MECHANICAL PRACTICES OF MANGO MEALYBUG -------------- 24
9. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING CHEMICAL CONTROL OF MANGO MEALYBUG --------------------- 25
10. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING FERTILIZED FEMALE OF MANGO MEALYBUG COMMING DOWN THE TREES ----------------------------------------------- 26
11. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING LOSSES AND YIELD OF MANGO MEALYBUG ------------------------ 26
12. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING MAJOR PROBLEMS FACED BY MANGO GROWERS ----------------- 27
Chapter IV
1. POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON CULTIVAR CHAUNSA ON VARIOUS PLANT PARTS DURING 2005-06 AND 2006-07--------------------------------------------------------------39 2. EFFECT OF WEATHER FACTORS ON THE POPULATION
FLUCTUATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG DURING THE STUDY YEARS 2005-2006 AND 2006-2007. ------------------------------- 47
List of Tables
ii
3. MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION MODELS BETWEEN POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG AND WEATHER FACTORS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 48
4. ACTIVATION TIME OF MANGO MEALYBUG NYMPHS DURING THE DAY------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 50
5a. MEANS COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO AT VARIOUS PLANT SIDES DURING 2005-06. ------------------------------------------------------------------ 51
5b. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON DIFFERENT DATES AT VARIOUS PLANT SIDES DURING 2005-2006. ---------------------- 53
6a. MEANS COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO AT VARIOUS PLANT SIDES DURING 2006-2007. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 55
6b. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON DIFFERENT DATES OF OBSERVATION AT VARIOUS PLANT SIDES DURING 2006-2007 --------------------------------------------------------------- 56
7a. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO AT VARIOUS PLANT SIDES (AVERAGE OF BOTH YEARS) ------------------------------------------------ 58
7b. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON DIFFERENT DATES OF OBSERVATION AT VARIOUS PLANT SIDES (AVERAGE OF BOTH YEARS) ----------------------------------------------- 59
8. MEANS COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING BIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS OF MANGO MEALYBUG FEEDING ON DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO UNDER FIELD CONDITION --------------------------------------------------- 61
9. LIFECYCLE OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON CHAUNSA MANGO ON AN AVERAGE ---------------------------------------------------- 64
Chapter V
1. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING
CHEMICAL CONSTITUENTS (%) OF LEAVES IN DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO ------------------------------------- 78
2. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING CHEMICAL CONSTITUENTS (%) OF INFLORESCENCE IN DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO ------------------------------------------------------- 85
3. SIMPLE CORRELATION BETWEEN POPULATION OF MEALYBUG ON MANGO LEAVES AND INFLORESCENCE
ALONG WITH BIOCHEMICAL FACTORS --------------------------------- 87 4. MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION MODELS BETWEEN POPULATION
OF MEALYBUG ON MANGO LEAVES AND BIOCHEMICAL FACTORS ALONG WITH COEFFICIENT OF DETERMINATION VALUES ---- 89
List of Tables
iii
5. MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION MODELS BETWEEN POPULATION OF MEALYBUG ON MANGO INFLORESCENCE AND BIOCHEMICAL FACTORS ALONG WITH COEFFICIENT OF DETERMINATION VALUES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 90
Chapter VI
1. MEANS COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING NUMBER OF
MANGO FRUITS PER INFLORESCENCE IN TREATED AND UNTREATED TREES AT INITIAL STAGE ON DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 97
2. MEANS COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING NUMBER OF MANGO FRUITS OBTAINED IN UNTREATED AND TREATED TREES AT MATURITY ON DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO --------- 98
3. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG RECORDED PER INFLORESCENCE IN DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO ------------------------------------- 99
Chapter VII
1. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING REDUCTION
PERCENTAGE OF NYMPHS OF MANGO MEALYBUG IN DIFFERENT TREATMENTS AND MONTHS OF THE YEAR DURING 2006 AND 2007 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 121
2. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING REDUCTION IN PERCENTAGE OF NYMPHS OF MANGO MEALYBUG IN DIFFERENT
TREATMENTS DURING 2006 AND 2007 ----------------------------------- 122 3 MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING PERCENT
REDUCTION OF FIRST INSTARS NYMPHS OF MANGO MEALYBUG IN DIFFERENT TREATMENTS DURING 2006 AND 2007 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 123 4. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING PERCENT
POPULATION CROSSED THE TESTING BAND DURING 2006 ----- 125 5. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING PERCENT
POPULATION CROSSED THE TESTING BAND DURING 2007 ----- 127 6. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING PERCENT
POPULATION CROSSED THE TESTING BAND DURING 2006 AND 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 128
7. MEAN COMPARISON OF FIRST INSTAR MANGO MEALYBUG PERCENT MORTALITY UNDER LABORATORY CONDITION DURING 2006 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131
8. MEAN COMPARISON OF CHEMICAL CONTROL OF MANGO MEALYBUG FIRST INSTAR, SECOND AND THIRD INSTAR AND ADULT FEMALE UNDER FIELD CONDITION DURING 2006-2007 (AVERAGE OF BOTH YEARS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 135
9. MEANS COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING PERCENT REDUCTION OF MANGO MEALYBUG IN DIFFERENT IPM METHODS DURING 2006 TO 2008------------------- 139
List of Tables
iv
10. COST BENEFIT RATIO IN DIFFEREENT TREATMENTS REGARDING CONTROL OF MANGO MEALYBUG -------------------- 140
11. COST BENEFIT RATIO ---------------------------------------------------------- 140 12. MEAN COMPARISON REGARDING PUPAE OF MANGO MEALYBUG
900 CM2 IN ORCHARD IN DIFFERENT PLACES DURING 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------- 140
13. MEAN COMPARISON OF POPULATION OF ADULT MALE MANGO MEALYBUG ATTRACTED TO DIFFERENT LIGHTS DURING
2007 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 140
v
LIST OF FIGURES
Chapter VI
FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE NO 1. POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON LEAVES PER
30-CM BRANCH LENGTH OF MANGO CULTIVAR CHAUNSA AT VARIOUS SIDES DURING 2005-06 AND 2006-07 ------------------ 38
2. POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON INFLORECENCE OF MANGO CULTIVAR CHAUNSA AT VARIOUS SIDES DURING 2005-06 AND 2006-07 ----------------------- 40
3. POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON BRANCH OF MANGO CULTIVAR CHAUNSA AT VARIOUS SIDES DURING 2005-06 AND 2006-07 ------------------------------------------------------------- 41
4. POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON TRUNK AND WEEDS 900 CM2 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 42
5. POPULATION OF PREDATORS, PARASITES AND FUNGUS ATTACKED NYMPHS PER 30 CM BRANCH AND 900 CM2 ON TRUNK OF MANGO CULTIVAR CHAUNSA DURING 2005-06 AND 2006-07 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 43
6. POPULATION DYNAMIC AND WEATHER FACTORS DURING THE YEAR 2005-2006 ON CHAUNSA CULTIVAR ---------------------- 44
7. POPULATION DYNAMIC AND WEATHER FACTORS DURING THE YEAR 2006-2007 ON CHAUNSA CULTIVAR --------------------- 45
8. POPULATION DYNAMIC AND WEATHER FACTORS ON CHAUNSA CULTIVAR COMMULATIVE FOR THE YEAR 2005 TO 2007 (Graphically shown) ---------------------------------------------------------------- 46
9. AVERAGE NUMBER OF EGGS LAID PER FEMALE AND AVERAGE MATING TIME WITH STANDARD DEVIATION -------- 67
Chapter VI
1. INITIAL AND FINAL FRUIT LOSS IN DIFFERENT CULTIVARS
OF MANGO AND POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG -------- 100
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE FOR MANGO
MEALYBUG DROSICHA MANGIFERAE GREEN IN MANGO ORCHARDS ------------------------------------------------------------ 155
vi
LIST OF APPENDICES
APP. NO. TITLE PAGE NO 1. DATA REGARDING FIRST STADIUM DURATION -------------------- 179 2. DATA REGARDING SECOND STADIUM DURATION ---------------- 180 3. DATA REGARDING THIRD STADIUM DURATION ------------------- 181 4. DATA REGARDING FEMALE DURATION ------------------------------- 182 5. DATA REGARDING MALES CAME DOWN THE TREE--------------- 183 6. DATA REGARDING DISTANCE COVERED IN CENTIMETER BY
FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD STADIUM IN ONE MINUTE ON TREE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 183
7. DATA REGARDING REMOVAL OF FUZZ FROM THE PUPA ONCE ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 184
8. DATA REGARDING REMOVAL OF FUZZ FROM THE PUPA TWICE A TIME -------------------------------------------------------------------- 184
9. DATA REGARDING REMOVAL OF FUZZ FROM THE PUPA THRICE TIME ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 185
10. DATA REGARDING NUMBER OF EGGS LAID BY FEMALES DAILY --------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------ 186
11. DATA REGARDING FIRST STADIUM LIVE WITHOUT FOOD ----------------------------------------------------------------- 187
12. DATA REGARDING SECOND AND THIRD INSTAR STADIUM LIVE WITHOUT FOOD ---------------------------------------------------------- 188
13. DATA REGARDING ADULT FEMALE LIVE WITHOUT FOOD-189 14. DATA REGARDING TIME TAKEN BY THE MALE S FOR MATING WITH
THE FEMALES --------------------------------------------------------------------- 190
vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
• Cv Coefficient of Variation
• CBR Cost Benefit Ratio
• Cf Crude fibre
• CHO Carbohydrates
• cm Centimeter
• cm2 Centimeter square
• Cp Crude protein
• FD Frequency of Distribution
• Fig. Figure
• g Gram
• ha-1 Per hectare
• K Potassium
• LSD Least Significant Difference
• M Moisture
• m Meter
• MMB Mango Mealybug
• N Nitrogen
• Na Sodium
• P Phosphorus
• LSD Least Significant Difference
• IPM Integrated Pest Management
• BZU Bahaudin Zakariya University
• °C degree Celsius (=degree centigrade)
• RH Relative Humidity
• Av. Average
8
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
All the prayers and praises are for ALMIGHTY ALLAH (Jalla- Jalalaho), The
Unique, The Merciful, The Compassionate, The Provider and the source of all knowledge and guidance who never spoils the efforts. I consider it as my foremost duty to acknowledge the Omni-present kindness and love of Almighty Allah, who made it possible for me to complete the writing of this thesis. I consider it is my utmost duty to express gratitude and respect to Holy Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (SAW) and Ahlebait who are forever a torch of guidance and knowledge for humanity as a whole.
I express my gratitude to my worthy supervisor Dr. Muhammad Jalal Arif, Associate Professor of Agri. Entomology, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad for his keen and potential interest, valuable suggestions, consistent encouragement, dynamic supervision and sympathetic attitude during the course of this research endeavor.
I feel great pleasure to express deep sense of gratitude to members of my supervisory committee Dr. Muhammad Ashfaq (T.I), Professor and Chairman, Department of Agri. Entomology, Dr. Muhammad Aslam Khan, Professor and Chairman, Department of Plant Pathology, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Dr. Hussnain Ali Sayyed, Department of Biotechnology, B.Z. University, Multan and Dr. Shafqat Saeed, Assistant Professor B. Z. University, Multan for their positive attitude and providing me laboratory facilities and man powers during the course of the research work.
I express my heartiest gratitude and sense of obligation to Dr. Amjad Ali, Entomologist, Entomological Research Institute, AARI Faisalabad, for his skilful and marvelous guidance and positive attitude during the whole period of research.
Thanks are also due to my father in law Professor (R), Malik Ghulam Asghar, their moral support and continuous encouragement, brothers and sisters in their prayers and friends, colleagues who provided technical support and facilitated in the field surveys, particularly Syed Zaffar Yab Haider (EDO), Qaisar Abbas, Zaka Sayyed and Tahir Mahmood bhatti A.O. etc.
I don’t have words at command to acknowledge the moral support of my wife, Raeesa Haider, who always prayed for my success and look after children in my absence. I also pay thanks to my children, Safeer Hussain, Muneeba Haider, Najeeba Haider, M. Ammar Haider, M. Ali Haider and Labiba Haider who had to suffer the care and affection they deserved in my absence from home.
Finally I apologize if I have caused anger or offence to anybody.
9
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted on bio-ecology and management of mango mealybug Drosicha mangiferae (Green) in mango orchards of Punjab Pakistan from 2004 to 2008 in District Multan, Muzzaffar Garh, Bahawalpur and Rahim yar Khan. It was concluded from the growers’ survey that among various insect pest of mango, mango mealybug was found to be the major pest followed by hoppers, fruit fly, scales, mango leaf galls Amaraemyia spp. and midges. The farmers also reported that mango mealybug caused 25-100% loss. Further the respondents indicated that ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar was the most susceptible to mango mealybug followed by ‘Fajri’, ‘Langra’ and ‘Black Chaunsa, whereas ‘Dusehri’ was resistant. Irrigation was the major source of flare up of the pest as viewed by the majority of the respondents. The practices like hoeing, ploughing, irrigation, removal of weeds, grease bands and insecticides were adapted by the respondents with variable results. The satisfaction level for the control of mango mealybug was unsatisfactory. South, East, West directions of trees showed maximum population of mango mealybug on leaves and inflorescence, whereas North direction of the plant showed minimum population. The maximum peak population of mango mealybug was observed to be 26.63 per 30-cm branch at maximum temperature of 24.64°C, minimum temperature of 10.36°C and RH 78.86%. Among twelve cultivars under study, the ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar of mango showed maximum population of mango mealybug in both the study years (104.90 and 69.83 during 2005-2006 and during 2006-2007, respectively as well as on an average of both study years (87.38), whereas ‘Tukhmi’ cultivar was found comparatively resistant with minimum population of mango mealybug i.e. 14.20, 15.86 and 18.27. On an average of both the study years, the following ranking positions towards susceptibility of mango cultivars were as under. ‘Chaunsa’ > ‘Black Chaunsa’ > ‘Malda’ > ‘Fajri’ > ‘Ratul-12’ > ‘Langra’ > ‘Sensation’ > ‘Sindhri’ > ‘Dusehri’ > ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ > ‘Anwar Ratul’ and >‘Tukhmi’. All the chemical plant factors on leaves and inflorescence differed significantly among various cultivars of mango. Maximum carbohydrates contents was observed in the cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ (susceptible to the pest), whereas minimum carbohydrates contents were observed in the cultivar ‘Tukhmi’ resistant to the pest. All the other factors did not show any specific sequence with the population of the pest in all the cultivars. The maximum decrease in number of fruits was recorded 11 percent on cultivar ‘Anwar Ratul’, whereas ‘Langra’ cultivar showed minimum decrease in number of fruits i.e., 3 percent over untreated trees (no control practices were applied with these trees to control mango mealybug at initial stage of the experiment). At final stage of the experiment the maximum decrease in fruits was 81 percent on cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ and minimum on cultivar ‘Tukhmi’ i.e., 22 percent. Maximum population recorded on ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar was 18/inflorescence and minimum on ‘Anwar Ratul’ was 10/inflorescence. A combination of mounds on the plastic sheet, Haider’s band and application of acetamiprid were found to be the most effective treatment resulted in 98% reduction of first instars of mango mealybug. It is further stated that the Haider’s band was the most effective and cheaper which was a new addition in the mechanical control management of mango mealybug on mango trees. The males of mango mealybug were attracted to mercury light and no males were attracted to yellow, green, red, blue lights. Male preferred to pupate in wet places near the ‘kacha’ (mud) water which can be exposed to sunlight by hoeing. This research project demonstrates the complete management programme for the control of mango mealybug under field condition for mango growers.
10
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Agriculture in Pakistan
Pakistan is located in South Asia, between the latitudes 23° 35’ to 37° 05’ North
and longitudes 60° 50’ to 77° 50’ East (GOVPK, 2008). It is one of the most important
agricultural countries in the world. Agriculture is the largest economic sector in the
economy of Pakistan, and a dominant driving force for growth, poverty reduction and the
main source of livelihood for 66 percent of the population (FBS, 2007). Agriculture
sector contributes 25 percent to GDP of Pakistan. Of this vegetables and fruits contribute
up to Rs. 5.4 billions /year (Himayatullah, 1999).
1.2 The importance of fruits to Pakistan
Fruit is an important sector in the agriculture of Pakistan. Among the major fruits,
mango occupies the second position after citrus in terms of acreage and production: date
palm (42 thousand hectares), guava (47 thousand hectares), mango (86 thousand
hectares) and citrus (173 thousand hectares) (Khushk and Smith, 1996). Mango is the
most popular fruit amongst millions of people in the Orient, particularly in Indo-Pakistan
Sub-continent. Pakistan is the 4th largest mango producer in the world (0.8 million tones)
after India (10.0 million tonnes), China (1.18 million tonnes) and Mexico (1.09 million
tonnes) http://www.panhwar.com/ Article79. htm. Among mango exporting countries,
Pakistan is also the 4th largest exporter of mango fruit in the world and exported about
82,059 tons, worth US$ 23.77 million during 2004 (Anonymous, 2004). Mango is one
of the main foreign currencies earning fruit crop of Pakistan, but exports to many
countries, especially Dubai, Saudi Arabia, United Kingdom, Germany, France,
Switzerland, Holland, Singapore, Itly and Malaysia.
Mango is cultivated mostly in the Punjab and Sindh provinces. But Southern
Punjab is considered good for its cultivation due its favourable climatic conditions. The
main mango growing districts in the Punjab province are Multan, Muzaffargargh,
Bahawalpur, and Rahim yar khan. (http://www.pakissan.com/english/ allabout/orchards/
Chapter 1 Introduction
11
mango/index.shtml). More than 70 percent of the mango orchards grown in this province
of Pakistan are being cultivated in Multan and Bahawalpur Divisions (Anonymous,
2002).
1.3 Importance of mango
Mango (Mangifera indica L.) is known as “king of fruits”. It belongs to family
Anacardiaceae (Singh, 1968; Litz, 1997). It is one of the most important trees on the earth
and is now consumed worldwide (http://mgonline.com/mango.html). Mango is an
important tropical fruit, which is being grown in more than 100 countries of the world
(Sauco, 1997). But its original home is South Asia where it has been grown for the last
four thousand years (Salunkhe and Desai, 1984). It is an ancient fruit of Indo-Pakistan
sub-continent and is of great importance for millions (Singh, 1968; de Laroussilhe, 1980;
Litz, 1997). It is nutritionally rich in carbohydrates and vitamins A and C.
(http://www.pakissan.com/english/advisory/mango.diseases.andtheir.management. shtml)
and also has iron, potassium, calcium, or small quantity of protein (http://recipesnmore.
blogspot.com /2007/05/ sevai.html).
Mango is a valuable ornamental plant. It is a shade tree which also protects soil
against erosion and different medicinal virtues of mango are also known (D’ Almeida,
1995). After cotton and rice, mango is the third most important cash crop of Pakistan,
which helps to improve livelihoods of resource poor farmers. Mango is cultivated over an
area of 95,000 ha with production of 100,000 tones / annum, however, the average
productivity is only 80 mounds/acre (Anonymous, 2006), which is lower than most of the
mango growing countries of the world. The low yield could be attributed to different
biotic constraints, as insect pests.
1.4 Insect pest of mango
A number of insect pests attacked the mango crop and deprive the trees of its
important nutrients. Among these pests, mango mealybug (Drosicha mangiferae G.) is
one of the destructive pests attacking the fruit trees in Pakistan (Yousuf, 1993; Prassad
and Singh, 1976). In case of fruit trees, the yield is reduced severely. Tandon and
Verghese 1985 reported that D. mangiferae is dangerous for mango crop. It is not only
pest of mango but it attacks more than 70 other host plants (Tandon and Lal, 1978;
Narula, 2003). Mango mealybug Drosicha mangiferae Green is a pest of mango and
Chapter 1 Introduction
12
other orchards, known as giant mealybug (Sternorrhyncha: Coccoidea: Monophlebidae).
The overall goal of this study was to develop a complete management practices against
this notorious pest of mango crop.
The present project consists of
• Problems orientation studies
• Population dynamics, cultivar resistance and biology of mango mealybug
• Cultivar resistance based on biochemical analysis in leaves and inflorescence
• Losses in mango yield caused by the mango mealybug
• Sustainable management of mango mealybug on mango trees
13
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 SURVEY
Conventional methods of pest management have been investigated for different
crops, and used as input for development of integrated pest management packages
(Norton et al.,; 1999; Bently and Baker, 2002). It is well established that evaluation of
farmers’ perception and knowledge about the pests and their existing natural enemies is
the important tool for the planning of campaign, research agendas and development of
messages for communication (Fujisaka, 1992; Escalada and Heong, 1993). The lack of
full knowledge of mango insect pests and their ecology however, is the main obstacle in
pest management strategies (Van Huis and Meerman, 1997). For example, the farmers
usually are unable to differentiate between the damaged caused by seed borer Deanolis
aibizonalis (Hamson) from fruitflies Bactrocera dorsalis Hendel (Van Mele et al., 2001).
It is also important for improving crops and plant protection to recognize those
constraints which are faced by the farmers’ and their existing technical skills (Kenmore,
1991; Bentley, 1992; Morse and Buhler, 1997).
2.2 POPULATION DYNAMICS
Variation in population density of phytophagous insects among conspecific trees
is known to be very high (Price et al., 1990). This variation in susceptibility may be
genetic, or phenotypic due to differences in environmental factors such as the nutritional
status of the soil (Dale, 1988) or air pollution (Riemer and Whittake, 1989), as well as
variation in plant age or seasonal phenology (Marino and Cornell, 1993). In tropical
forests, for instance, a strong correlation was observed between renewal of foliage
(flushing) and abundance of herbivores, especially Homoptera (Wolda, 1978).
Temperature and relative humidity have been reported to play an important role in
development of D. stebbingi (Singh, 1946; Yousuf and Gaur, 1993; Yadav et al., 2004).
However Matokot et al., (1992) have shown that fluctuations in populations of mango
mealybug (Rastrococcus. invadens Williams.) on mango are linked to the physiological
Chapter 2 Review of Literature
14
and phenological characteristics of the host plant than to climatic factors. Seasonal
changes play an important role on population fluctuations of mango mealybug
(Rastrococcus invadens Williams.) its population, which decreased during the rainy
season and peaked during dry season (Bovida and Neuenschwander, 1995; Dwivedi et
al., 2003).
2.3 CULTIVAR RESISTANCE
Host-plant characteristics may influence the herbivore’s developmental rate, and
indirectly benefit natural enemies (Godfray, 1994). According to “slow-growth-high-
mortality” theory of Benrey and Denno (1997), most herbivorous insects have a
vulnerable stage to parasitism, and development of herbivores on a plant with weak
nutritional status takes longer and thus parasitoids can take advantage of the presence of
prey over a prolonged period. The host plant species on which larval development is
delayed, the window of vulnerability (time spent in the first two larval instars) will be
prolonged and rates of parasitism will be increased (Benrey and Denno, 1997). For
example, Pereyra and Sanchez (1998) have shown that the variations in nutritional
quality of host plant causes different growth rate of herbivores like budborer, Epinotia
aporema feeding on these plants. Similarly Karar et al., (2007) reported that the mango
mealybug (D. mangiferae) preferred to feed on ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar. The female mango
mealybug fed on ‘Chaunsa’ (‘Sammar Bahist’) cultivar was broader and laid more
number of eggs with more weight and size.
The plants which show more damage are called susceptible plants and those
plants which show lesser damage are called resistant. The resistance in plants is the result
of interaction between two biological entities, the plant and the insect under influence of
various environmental factors (Dhaliwal et al., 1993). The resistance was studied early in
England on apple cultivar ‘Winter Majetin’ against wooly aphid and was found to be
resistant to the woolly aphid, Eriosoma lanigerum (Hausmann). The studies have led to
the development of resistant cultivars against 50 key insect pests on different crops and
released world-wide. Another example of resistance in mango, the cultivar ‘mango-3’was
developed which have resistance against leaf cutting weevil, Deporaus marginatus P.
(Uddin et al., 2003). So the resistant cultivars are grown by the farmers and save
insecticides costs which are billion dollars (Pathak and Dhaliwal, 1986; Angeles, 1991;
Chapter 2 Review of Literature
15
Dhaliwal et al., 1993; Dhaliwal and Dilawari, 1996; Carvalho et al., 1996; Salem et al.,
2006).
Mango cultivars grown in India and Hawaii are equally susceptible to mango seed
weevil (Bagle and Prasad, 1984; Hansen et al., 1989) while, the cultivar ‘Itamaraca’ has
shown some resistance to mango weevil (Block and Kozuma, 1964).
2.4 EFFECT OF HOST PLANT
Host plant has great effect on the fecundity and survival of R. invadens (Bovida
and Neuenschwander, 1995) for example it was observed that the population of mealybug
was higher on infested trees because it has good conditions for feeding and having low
escape. Further it is noted that the pre-reproductive period of mealybugs was shorter on
heavily infested trees and offspring production was also higher than uninfested tree.
2.5 BIOLOGY
The mango mealybug (D. mangiferae) nymphs started to hatch out at end of Dec.
or beginning of Jan. (Chandra et al., 1987; Mohyuddin, 1989). A single female lays up to
400-500 eggs (Haq and Akmal, 1960). The duration of 1st instar vary from 45-71 days;
second 18-38 days; third instar for female 15-26 days, whereas duration for males 5-10
days. The total duration 77-135 days for female and 67-119 days for male and 78-135 for
females and 77-134 days for males on mango (Rahman and Latif, 1944; Haq and Akmal,
1960) whereas on citrus the total duration was 169-304 days for female and 165-290 days
for male (Saxena and Rawat, 1968). A female took 7-16 days to lay its full quota of eggs
(Rahman and Latif, 1944; Chandra et al., 1987). First instars of mango mealybug D.
stebbingi crawled a distance of about 40 ft and 2nd instars 150 ft. as reported by Latif
(1940). Males have ability to reconstruct the cocoon if it is damaged in any way. The
copulation time of male with female was 4-10 minutes (Rahman and Latif, 1944) and the
ratio of males to females was 1:19 (Chandra et al., 1987).
Resistance in mango to pests has been previously reported (e.g. Hansen 1989)
however additional results are needed to assess further to confirm the tolerance reported
previously. Determining the tolerance to insect in mango cultivars should be performed
in natural conditions. Therefore, experiment for resistance in mango against insect pest
should include possible exposure of insects under different conditions. There are few
reports where nutrients levels were tested in natural field conditions. For example Avilan
Chapter 2 Review of Literature
16
(1971), Singh (1978) and Hussain (2004) reported that NPK levels were the highest
before flowering, fell at flowering and fruit formation but it increased again at fruit
maturity. In contrast C/N ratio was the highest in flower bud differentiation and declined
and remained lower in off-season in Pakistani cultivars ‘Dusehri’ and ‘Langra’ (Hussain,
2004). Similarly, Ca level was low before flowering but increased during fruit formation
and lowered subsequently. Similarly, high levels of nitrogen, phosphorus and Zn were
associated with off-season (Mishra and Dhillon, 1978; Chadha et al., 1984; Mishera and
Dhillon, 1982). Similarly Thakur et al., (1981) shown that N, P and Ca contents were
significantly higher in the leaves, which emerged from fruiting terminal but K, S and Zn
contents were very low. The leaf position on the shoot, leaf age, sampling height and
sampling direction could also affect the mineral contents (Chadha et al., 1981). In older
leaves the K and P content decreased, while Mg, Ca, Mn and S, contents increased
significantly. The P, Ca, K, Fe and Mn content changed with sampling direction, while
Fe, Zn, S, Ca, Cu and K contents were significantly more in the leaves of the lower part
of the tree than from the upper part.
The nymphs and female scales suck sap from shoots, tender leaves and fruit
peduncles but prefer to feed on inflorescence (Tandon and Lal, 1979). The affected
panicles shrivel and dry. Severe infestation affects the fruit set and causes fruit drop
(Khan, 1989) and this ultimately affects the yield.
Yields losses due to infestations and damage caused by mealybug on mango plant
can rise up to 80 percent (Entomological Society of Nigeria, 1991; Moore, 2004; Karar et
al., 2007). The damage due to mealybug could be as high as 80 percent of all losses
(Nwanze, 1982). Similarly Tobih (2002) observed that the infestation due to mango
mealybug caused significant loss in size and weight of fresh mango fruits.
2.6 SELECTIVITY STUDIES
2.6.1 Cultural control
Destruction of eggs of mango mealybug by digging them out with spades from
the soil is not an encouraging practice (Rahman and Latif, 1944), whereas this way of
destroying the eggs is an effective practice as reported by (Singh, 1947; Mohyuddin and
Mahmood, 1993). Similarly the use of burlap band, burning of gravid females and
removal of soil contaminated with eggs of mango mealybug gave complete control of
Chapter 2 Review of Literature
17
mango mealybug without the use of pesticides (Sial, 1999). Burning of rubbish, scraping
of soil at the bases of fruit trees and root opening are very useful practices for the
destruction of eggs (Haq and Akmal, 1960). Also pruning of trees (Sandhu et al., 1980)
and cutting down of damaged trees and their destruction (Agricola et al., 1989) were the
most effective practices for the control of mango mealybug. Further, it was suggested that
a 30 cm deep trench dug in a radius about 50 cm around tree trunk filled with decoys
vegetation ideal for egg laying of Drosicha corpulenta (Hemiptera: Margarodidae) and
should be destroyed in autumn (Xu et al., 1999).
2.6.2 Mechanical control
The grease band is effective for checking the migration of mango mealybug
(Stebbing, 1902; Lal, 1918) whereas cotton wool dusted with DDT are effective controls
(Haq and Akmal, 1960). The band prepared by using sann fibre soaked in mixture of
crude oil emulsion and coal tar at the ratio of 1:1 can be quite effective for the control of
Drosicha stebbingi (Dutt, 1925). Similarly Rosin + Toria oil and Rosin + Neem oil +
Vaseline band were absolutely effective (Chopra, 1928; Richards and Sharma, 1934). The
sticky materials used in the bands act as repellent (Latif, 1940). In the past, black oil cloth
was also used as barrier for controlling the upward movement of mango mealybug, e.g.
Rahman and Latif (1944) found that black oil cloth was effective against 2nd and 3rd instar
nymphs of D. mangiferae but less effective against the nymphs of 1st instar. Namhar
bands were found effective against nymphs of mango mealybug for 51-78 days in shade,
42-58 days when partially exposed to sun depending upon climatic conditions (Lakra et
al., 1980). Sand was also used as barrier for upward migrating nymphs of D. mangiferae
as reported by Birat (1964). Ostico was more effective tree banding material than either
Esso fruit tree grease + Coal Tar mixture for the control of D. stebbingi (Bindra et al.,
1970; Ali, 1980; Sen, 1955). Similarly, polyethylene sheeting is an effective barrier to
prevent the upward moving nymphs of mango mealybug and was much cheaper, easily
accessible and practical (Bindra and Sohi, 1974; Yousuf, 1993; Abrar-ul-Haq et al.,
2002) whereas alkathene sheeting was more effective than polyethylene against upward
crawling nymphs (Lakra et al., 1980; Tandon and Lal, 1981; Chandra et al., 1991;
Narula, 2003). Double girdle band of alkathane sheeting was the more effective than
single girdle alkathene bands (Srivastava, 1980 a). Plastic slippery bands were used on
Chapter 2 Review of Literature
18
the base of trees against the nymphs of D. mangiferae gave best control (Sandhu et al.,
1980, 1981; Singh et al., 1988, 1991; Hashmi, 1994). Similarly, Esso tree grease bands
were found to be more effective than Nimhar band against 1st instar nymphs of the
polyphagous margarodid, Perissopneum tectonae (Morr.) on guava trees (Singh, 1980)
ineffective (Chandra et al., 1991). D. corpulenta is controlled by using plastic strips of
16.5 cm wide covered with a mixture of DDVP [dichlorovos] machine oil and grease in
the proportion 0.5:2:5 at 1 meter above ground level and found >90 percent mortality of
the pest (Chen, 1984). Khan and Ashfaq (2004) reported that Funnel Type Trap was an
effective barrier for mango mealybug nymphs and also worked for collecting the egg
carrying female. Further they suggested that powdered un-slaked lime was placed in the
funnels to kill females which entrapped during coming down trees via stems. Machine oil
and wool grease were more effective than other blocking methods (Xie et al., 2004).
Karar et al., (2007) recently tested nine tree bands to check the upward movement of
mango mealybug (D. mangiferae) and found a new band named Haider’s band (plastic
sheeting having a layer of 3.8 cm of grease in middle) proved most effective for the
preventing insects reaching the tree canopies.
2.6.3 Chemical control
The results of experiments and its analysis implies that management of this pest is
more effective when the pest is in initial instars than later instars, so it would be useful to
adopt the management strategies when mango mealybug is in early instars. It has already
been reported by previous research workers who worked on management of this pest. The
spray of insecticides parathion, Benzene Hexa Chloride (BHC) and
Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) was found effective against 1st, 2nd instar,
whereas for 3rd instar nymphs and adult females Folidol, Nematox, Hanane, Diazinon and
Pestox proved effective (Latif and Ismail, 1957) whereas malathion was found effective
for controlling mango mealybug as told by Bindra 1967. Good control of 1st and 2nd instar
nymphs of mango mealybug i.e. 91 percent could be attained by using Formothion
(Anthio) and it is decreased up to 63 percent against 3rd instar nymphs (Atwal et al.,
1969). The insecticides malathion, diazinon or dimethyldichlorovinyl phosphate (DDVP)
gave best control of mango mealybug (Srivastava and Butani, 1972). Mealybugs
(Maconellicoccus hirsutus Green) on mesta (Hibiscus cannabinus) were controlled
Chapter 2 Review of Literature
19
through the application of Roger (dimethoate) or Metasystox (methyl demeton) is
effective (Pushpa, 1973). High volume application of insecticides was very important to
ensure coverage and reach the mealybugs in crevices and cracks on the bark, for example
diazinon, quinalphos and parathion-methyl have been shown to suppress the pest quite
effectively both at nymph and adult stages (Lakra et al., 1980). The chemicals like
diazinon, quinalphos and parathion-methyl (methyl-parathion) were highly effective
against 1st instar nymphs that were gathered below the bands (Lakra et al., 1980). The
fenitrothion was recorded as the most effective insecticides and malathion least effective
for the control of mealybug, Drosicha mangiferae Green. on guava (Dalaya, 1983).
Hostathion was found the effective insecticide for the control of the mealybugs Icerya
aegyptiaca (Douglas) (Rojanavongse and Charernson, 1984). The carbophenothion was
the most effective insecticides against gravid females and first instar nymphs of mango
mealybug (D. mangiferae) under laboratory and field conditions (Spectrum Chemical
Fact Sheet). The mango pest for example mango mealybug, mango hoppers, mango shoot
gall psyllid, mango fruit weevil and mango stem borer could be controlled through the
application of insecticides like lebaycid, dimecron or malathion (Azim, 1985).
2.7 Sustainable Managemnet Approach for the Control of Mango
Mealybug
Mango mealybug (Drosicha mangiferae Green.) is considered the most important
pest of mango, so for its control, the use of chemicals should be justified and restricted. It
should spare the destruction of non-target insects and useful fauna. Normally it attacks
the mango trees in flowering season. Flooding in the month of Oct. often destroys the
eggs buried in the soil and remaining eggs are exposed to sun heat by ploughing in the
Nov. Polyethelene bands of 400 mil gauge and 25 cm width fastened around the tree
trunk are another effective way of managing mealybug ascent to the trees. The sticky
bands with grease material or slippery bands with alkathene or plastic sheets around the
trunk at about one meter above ground level in 2nd week of Dec. could also prevent the
upward movement of nymphs (Atwal, 1963). Similarly Tandon and Verghese (1995)
suggested that exposure of eggs to sun, removal of alternative host plants and
conservation of natural enemies by using garlic oil or neem seed extract around the trunk
of trees and application of alkathane bands could also eliminate mango mealybug
Chapter 2 Review of Literature
20
population. Bajwa and Gul (2000) reported that Drosicha stebbingii could be managed
through destruction of eggs, banding of trees and spray of insecticides v.z., Bulldock
25EC, Endon 35EC and Mepra 50EC on trees of Paulownia tomentosa and Paulownia
fortunei. Whereas, Jia et al., (2001) achieved good control of Drosicha corpulenta, a
walnut pest through dusting parathion in micro capsules form or phoxim on the ground
before the soil freezes in winter, painting mixture of 1 kg omethoate + 5 kg mineral oil
and spraying 300 times, solution of Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) or a 2000- times solution of
20% fenpropathrin from mid Feb. to mid Mar. for the control of nymphs.
The application of insecticides like Mepra 50EC and Endon 35EC along with
banding tree trunks, ploughing soil to destroy eggs could also be an effective strategy for
mealybug control (Gul et al., 1997). Insecticides and parasitoids together could also be an
important strategy to manage mealybug. For example, prepupal parasites have been
shown to parsitoids female of D. mangiferae (Kalia, 1995). Ishaq et al., (2004) worked
on the management of mango mealybug (D. stebbingi) and concluded that the mortality
only with insecticide sprays were up to 55 percent, whereas sticky bands along with
burying and burning treatments significantly reduced the extent of infestation by mango
mealybug (0.00-15.79 percent) and burlap bands reduced population of mango mealybug
nymphs by 78.98 percent. So it was concluded that for the control of mealybug
integration of insecticides with bands along with burning and burying treatments gave
good control.
21
ABSTRACT
About 141 mango growers’ were interviewed during peak activity of mango
mealybug in southern Punjab, Pakistan during 2004-05, to know the farmers’ knowledge,
perceptions and practices in the management of mango mealybug. It was observed during
survey that most of the farmers (94.3 percent) reported that Chaunsa cultivar (king of all
mango cultivars) was susceptible to mango mealybug and irrigation water was the major
source of flare up of this pest. Diazinon and methidathion were the most commonly used
insecticides as 72.9 and 51.8 percent farmers gave positive response and grease bands
were applied for the control of mango mealybug by the majority of the respondents.
Hundred percent yield losses was told by 22.7 percent respondents whereas 75 percent,
50 percent and 25 percent losses were reported by 39.7, 31.9 and 14.2 percent
respondents, respectively. Burning of females, application of grease bands and
insecticidal spray did not show satisfaction to the respondents for the control of fertilized
females of mango mealybug coming down from the trees. Lack of knowledge about the
pest, lack of money, adulteration and shortage of pesticides, lack of unity amongst
farmers and small land holdings were the main constraints for the control of mango
mealybug. The observations made in the field corroborated the views of farmers
regarding spread of this pest through irrigation water.
Key words: Mango, Indigenous knowledge, Drosicha mangiferae, Pest management.
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
22
3.1 INTRODUCTION
The mango crop is attacked by 500 insect pests due to the vast range of agro-
ecosystems and climatic conditions in which it is grown (Tandon and Varghese, 1985).
However, the severity of the pest can be identified through the growers’ survey to
develop management practices. Knowledge of pests varies from farmer to farmer and to
identify farmers’ problems and their existing knowledge, surveys are considered
important. The biggest constraints in the establishment of an Integrated Pest Management
program is lack of proper information about growers’ knowledge and perceptions, mango
pests and their ecology and practices in pest management (Morse and Buhler, 1997;
Teng, 1987; Heong, 1985). There is a need to integrate the farmer’s techniques and their
indigenous knowledge about the insect pest in the development processes to improve
farmers’ pest management practices (Nyeko et al., 2007). The growers have two
advantages over scientists, a life-long experience of growing their crops, a the system of
passing their knowledge to the next generations through exchange of information, that
has been built up through regular observations through informal and formal actor
networks (Van Mele and Van Chien, 2004). However, some scientists disagree with these
findings and their point of view is that scientist are trained to test the validity of
conclusions without bias, whereas growers generally have a great deal of bias in the way
they interpret results (Toews, 2010, per. com.). The present survey was therefore
conducted with the objective to identify the insect pest problems at farmers’ fields.
The main aims of the survey were
(i) To identify the insect pests problem in mango orchards
(ii) To determine and identify the most serious pest of the mango orchards
(iii) To determine the infestation of the most serious pest and identify the
problems faced by growers to manage the pest
(iv) To identify the alternate host plants and the means of dispersal of the
most serious pest
(v) To compare the recommended and farmers’ adapted management
strategies for the most serious pest
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
23
3.2 MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.2.1 STUDY SITES AND ITS CLIMATE
Multan Muzzaffargarh Bahawalpur R.Y.Khan
Latitude 30-12N 30-12 N 29-25 N 29-12 N
Longitude 71-30 E 71-14 E 71-4 E 70-30 E
Altitude (ft) 0121 0124 0115 0120
Mean Annual Temp (°C) 26.50 26.50 26.50 26.00
Mean Annual
Rainfall (mm)
168 160 162 160
A survey was conducted in the main mango growing districts of the Punjab
province (Pakistan) and the results were used to set the research objectives.
3.2.2 Preliminary Survey
In the preliminary survey, 25 (n=25) mango growers were selected randomly,
during Dec., 2004 to know farmers’ knowledge, perceptions and practices regarding
insect pest problems of mango crops in district Multan. A short list of questions was
prepared to collect information and to identify the major insect pests of mango orchard in
mango growing areas of Punjab.
3.2.3 Comprehensive Survey.
After the preliminary survey, a questionnaire was revised for conducting a
comprehensive and detailed survey during Jan., 2005 in the major mango growing
districts of the Punjab viz., Multan, Muzzaffar Garh, Bahawalpur and Rahim Yar Khan.
The mentioned districts of southern Punjab are considered a favourable for its cultivation
and higher yield. In the preliminary survey mango mealybug was identified to be a
serious pest of mango orchard in southern Punjab therefore a detailed and comprehensive
survey was planned to identify the reasons for its spread and establishment as a serious
pest of mango. The questionnaire was prepared to achieve the following major objectives.
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
24
• To determine the mango mealybug infestation and the major problems in
management being faced by the mango growers of the Punjab.
• To know alternate host plants and the means of dispersal of mealybug to other
host plants.
• To compare the recommended and farmer’s adopted management strategies
for mango mealybug.
In this study, only those growers were interviewed whose mango trees were
infested with mango mealybug. A total of 141 (n=141) mango farmers were interviewed.
The information regarding the attack of this pest was collected from the Department of
Pest Warning and Quality Control, Agriculture Extension, Ayub Agricultural Research
Institute, Faisalabad and persons related to the purchase of mango in markets, pesticides
dealers, contractors, nursery growers and fellow farmers in different districts. To evaluate
farmer’s perception, they were first asked about the most important insect pest problems
of mango crop including major pests, pest incidence, pest severity, estimated yield losses
and management practices to control the insect pests. Interviews were conducted either in
the farmer’s house or in their orchards. Each farmer was interviewed for 25-30 minutes.
The survey data were encoded, entered into Excel sheets and verified prior to analysis.
SPSS program (release 10 for windows) (Bryman and Cramer, 2001) was applied for
used to calculate the frequency distributions of of the responses.
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
25
3.3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The study was comprised of the problems of insect pests in the mango orchards
and farmer’s views regarding various aspects relating to their mango cultivars in relation
to resistance susceptibility against insect pests, particularly mango mealybug, its mode of
spread, hibernation places, comparison of recommended and farmer’s management
practices and losses caused by the insect pests. The study was conducted in two phase
viz., preliminary survey and comprehensive survey. The results are described below:
3.3.1 PRELIMINARY SURVEY
The study was conducted in district Multan with the following objectives.
a) To know awareness among farmers about insect pests of mango.
b) To observe the most damaging insect pests in term of yield losses.
c) To identify the reasons of seriousness of the pest.
3.3.1.1 Awareness among Farmers about Insect Pests.
The results (Table 1) reveal that amongst the respondents, 88 percent knew about
the mango mealybug followed by 80 percent who had the knowledge each about hoppers
and fruit fly. The minimum awareness was 8 percent only. Amongst the respondents, 44
percent and 24 percent of the farmers indicated that they knew about scales and mango
midges, respectively. From these results, it was observed that the greatest proportion of
respondents knew about the mango mealybug and thus this species was considered to be
the most important insect pest of mango.
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
26
Table 1. AWARENESS OF THE RESPONDENTS ABOUT DIFFERENT INSECT PESTS OF MANGO
Name of Insect Yes
F.D. Percent English Name Scientific Name
Mango Hoppers Ideoscopus clypeaus 20 80
Mango Mealybug Drosicha mangiferae 22 88
Fruitfly Dacus dorsalis 20 80
Mango Scale Radionaspis indica 11 44
Mango leaf Galls Amaraemyia spp. 6 24
Mango Midges Erosomyia indica 2 8
n=25 F.D. Signifies Frequency Distribution
3.3.1.2 Relationship between Pest and Yield Losses
The results regarding the farmers’ views about the relationship of the pests and
yield losses are shown in Table 2. The 40 percent respondents indicated that 100 percent
losses occurred due to the attack of mango mealybug, while 32, 20 and 8 percent
respondents reported 75, 50, and 25 percent losses, respectively. The fruitfly was ranked
as the second major insect pest as 8, 40 and 52 percent respondents 75, 50 and 25 percent
losses, respectively occurred due to this pest. The mango hoppers were ranked as the
third major insect pest as viewed by 36 and 64 percent respondents reported 50 and 25
percent losses occurred due to this pest, respectively.
The losses caused by scales, galls and midges were up to 25 percent each as
reported by 100 percent respondents. From these results it was again observed that mango
mealybug was the most serious pest as reported by the majority of the respondents and
that this pest caused the greatest losses to mango fruits.
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
27
Table 2. PEST WISE EXTENT OF DAMAGE TO MANGO FRUIT AS TOLD BY THE RESPONDENTS
Name of Insect Extent of Damage as viewed by the Respondents
English Name
Scientific Name
25 Percent 50 Percent 75 Percent 100 Percent
FD percent FD percent FD percent FD percent
Mango Hoppers
Ideoscopus clypeaus
16 64 9 36 0 0 0 0
Mango Mealybug
Drosicha mangiferae
2 8 5 20 8 32 10 40
Fruitfly Dacus dorsalis
13 52 10 40 2 8 0 0
Mango Scale
Radionaspis indica
25 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mango leaf Galls
Amaraemyia spp
25 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mango Midges
Erosomyia indica
25 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
n=25 F.D. Signifies Frequency Distribution
3.3.1.3 Dominance Factors of Mango Mealybug
The results regarding dominance factors responsible for the spread of mango
mealybug are given in Table 3. It is evident from the results that 84 percent respondents
told that the pest spread quickly due to high fecundity rate as compared to other mango
pests. The majority of the respondents (92 percent) told that the pest was very difficult to
control. The other factors were observed that 64 percent farmers told that they had no
knowledge about the pest, whereas 76 percent and 80 percent respondents told about
ineffective insecticides and many places of hibernation, respectively.
Table 3. VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING MANGO MEALYBUG AS A VERY SERIOUS PEST
Reasons Yes
FD Percent Spread quickly due to high fecundity 21 84
Difficult to control 23 92
Lack of information 16 64
Non-effective spray 19 76
Hibernate in different places 20 80
n=25 F.D. Signifies Frequency Distribution
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
28
CONCLUSION
Mango mealybug was the most serious insect pest and the problem is becoming
serious more due to high fecundity, lack of knowledge about the pest among respondents,
ineffective insecticides and multiple hibernation places.
3.3.2 COMPREHENSIVE SURVEY
Keeping in view the problems faced by mango growing farmers’ in managing
mango mealybug infestation as observed during preliminary survey, a comprehensive and
detailed survey was conducted with the objective to confirm the previous results by
extending the study for four major mango growing districts of the Punjab viz., Multan,
Bahawalpur, Rahim yar Khan and Muzaffargarh during Jan. to Feb. 2005. The results are
presented under the following sub-sections.
3.3.2.1 Respondent's knowledge about resistant and susceptible cultivars of mango
The awareness of the respondents regarding susceptible/resistant mango cultivars
against mango mealybug is shown in Table 4. Among the respondents, 94 percent
reported ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar, as the most susceptible, 3 percent told the resistant and 3
percent had no reply. Furthermore, ‘Fajri’ and ‘Langra’ were ranked the next most
susceptible cultivars according to 69 percent and 63 percent respondents, respectively.
According to the survey, 63 percent of respondents had the view that ‘Black Chaunsa’
was also found susceptible, whereas 14 percent told this cultivar was resistant to mango
mealybug. Majority of the respondent did not know about the susceptibility and resistant
response of mealybug to other cultivars of mango to the mealybug. The 57 percent
respondents reported ‘Hydershahwala’ as mealybug resistant genotype followed by
‘Dusehri’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sanglakhi’ and ‘Langra’ by the view of 62, 48, 32 and 31
percent respondents, respectively. According to the opinion of the majority of
respondents (94 percent) ‘Chaunsa’ is a susceptible genotype to mango mealybug.
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
29
Table 4. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING SUSCEPTIBILITY AND RESISTANCE MANGO CULTIVARS AGAINST MANGO MEALYBUG.
Name of
Cultivars
Susceptible Resistant Not Known
FD Percent FD Percent FD Percent
Langra 89 63 44 31 8 6
Dusehri 48 34 88 62 5 4
Chaunsa 133 94 4 3 4 3
Fajri 97 69 12 9 32 23
Malda 32 23 65 46 44 31
Anwar Ratul 32 23 57 40 52 37
Muhammadwala 29 21 8 6 104 74
Khangarhribacha 0 0 24 17 117 83
Sindhri 33 23 32 23 76 54
Alphanso 0 0 17 12 124 88
Sanglakhi 20 14 45 32 76 54
Sobhawali ting 28 20 40 28 73 52
Hydershahwala 52 37 80 57 9 6
Zafrani 16 11 4 3 121 86
Sensation 28 20 16 11 97 69
Chanwal 4 3 20 14 117 83
Tukhmi 12 9 40 28 89 63
Black Chaunsa 89 63 20 14 32 23
Sufaid Chaunsa 53 38 68 48 20 14
Ratul-12 26 18 8 6 107 76
n=141 F.D. Signifies Frequency Distribution
3.3.2.2 Awareness Regarding Methods of Spreading of Mealybug
The results regarding awareness among the farmers about methods of spreading of
mango mealybug are presented in Table 5. The majority of the respondents i.e. 94 percent
told that irrigation water is the main source of dispersal of mango mealybug, while 49
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
30
percent respondents opined that mango mealybug spread through nursery plants and
transportation by machinery. The other methods of spreading cited by respondents
included spread from affected branches of inflorescence by malformation, by walking of
insects, farm yard manure, dissidence, migration from one plant to another. However, the
dispersal of mealybugs through weeds by human being cannot be ignored as 29, 52, 11,
33, 41 and 28 percent respondents had positive views about it. None of the respondent
reported birds as active spreaders of mango mealybug.
Table 5. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING METHOD OF SPREADING OF MANGO MEALYBUG
Methods of spreading Yes
FD Percent
Through irrigation water 133 94
Through nursery plant 69 49
Through Air 25 18
Transportation by machinery 69 49
Through Birds 0 0
Through destroyed malformed inflorescence 41 29
By walking 74 52
Through Farm Yard Manure 15 11
Through dissidence 47 33
Plants to plants 58 41
Through weeds taken by woman 39 28
n=141 F.D. Signifies Frequency Distribution * Dissidence- The enmity or evil intention of one person or family to other person or family to inflict loss to his enemy’s orchard.
3.3.2.3 Awareness Among Respondents Regarding Hibernation
Places of Mango Mealybug. According to survey results on hibernation of mango mealybug (Table 6) reveal
that 83 percent respondents had the view that the places under mango trees were the
most favorable sites for hibernation followed by cracks in trees (68 percent respondents)
and mud walls around orchards (57 percent respondents). Amongst the respondents 43,
22, 17 and 17 percent indicated that mango mealybug hibernates in soil under tree
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
31
canopy, roots of plants, kacha (mud) water channels and under the fallen leaves,
respectively.
Table 6. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING PLACES OF HIBERNATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG
Places Yes
FD Percent
Under tree near trunk 117 83
Mud wall around orchards 80 57
Cracks in tree 96 68
Soil under tree canopy 61 43
Kacha (mud) water channel/kacha road 24 17
Under leaves 24 17
In roots of plants 31 22
n=141 F.D. Signifies Frequency Distribution
3.3.2.4 Practices Adapted by the Farmers for the Control of Mango
Mealybug 3.3.2.4.1 Cultural Practices
The cultural management practices adapted by the farmers to control mango
mealybugs are given in Table 7. The practice of removal of weeds was adapted by the
majority of the respondents i.e. 60 percent. However, 50, 48, 34 and 13 percent of
farmers used hoeing, irrigation, removal of eggs and ploughing as the major mango
mealybug management practices, respectively. From these results it is concluded that
removal of weeds was adopted by the majority of the respondents for the control of
mango mealybug. The results regarding to the satisfaction of respondents relating to
control practices adapted so far reveal that 18 respondents had the view that hoeing
practices controlled the mango mealybug up to 50 percent while seven, six and twenty
farmers had the views that ploughing, irrigation and removal of eggs also resulted in 50
percent control. The practice adapted by the majority of the respondents regarding
removal of weeds showed that 85 respondents had the view that this practice resulted in
25 percent control of mango mealybug. Twenty one respondents satisfied 75 percent
control of mango mealybug by adapting removal of eggs. From these results it was
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
32
observed that the practices adapted by the farmers did not give satisfactory control of
mango mealybug.
Table 7. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING CULTURAL PRACTICES OF MANGO MEALYBUG
Practices Yes Satisfaction
FD Percent 25 percent 50 percent 75 percent
100 percent
Hoeing 71 50 53 18 0 0
Ploughing 19 13 12 7 0 0
Irrigation 67 48 61 6 0 0
Removal of weeds 85 60 85 0 0 0
Removal of eggs 48 34 7 20 21 0
n=141 F.D. Signifies Frequency Distribution
3.3.2.4.2 Mechanical Practices
The views of the respondents regarding mechanical practices adopted by them
and their satisfaction level for the control of mango mealybug are presented in Table 8.
The results reveal that grease bands were adopted by majority of the respondents i.e. 89
percent and 43 respondents told that this practice controlled the mango mealybug up to
25 percent while 82 respondents reported up to 50 percent control of this pest. The
second most common practice was the application of plastic sheet bands which was
adopted by 43 percent respondents and 29 farmers told that this practice controlled the
pest up to 25 percent while 32 farmers had the view that this practice depressed the pest
population up to 50 percent. The application of gunny bags and cotton bands were not
adopted by any respondent. Non recommended practices i.e. the application of mud
bands, daily spray, spreading of insecticides and use of calcium carbonate were also
adopted by the some of the farmers and showed unsatisfactory control of mango
mealybug.
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
33
Table 8. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING MECHANICAL PRACTICES OF MANGO MEALYBUG
Practices Yes Satisfaction
FD Percent 25 percent
50 percent
75 percent
100 Percent
Plastic sheet bands 61 43 29 32 0 0
Grease bands 125 89 43 82 0 0
Cotton bands 0 0 0 0 0 0
Black oil cloth bands 20 14 7 13 0 0
Gunny bangs 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mud bands 12 9 12 0 0 0
Daily spray 40 28 3 29 8 0
Spread insecticides 12 9 0 8 4 0
Use of calcium carbonate 8 6 6 2 0 0
n=141 F.D. Signifies Frequency Distribution
From these results, it was observed that none of the mechanical control adopted
by the respondents gave complete control of mango mealybug.
3.3.2.4.3 Response of Chemical Insecticides
The results regarding the awareness amongst the respondents regarding chemical
control of mango mealybug are given in Table 9. Diazinon (Basudin)was used
abundantly by 100 (73 percent) respondents for the control of mango mealybug followed
by methidathion (Supracide)73 (52 percent). About the satisfaction level it was observed
that 86 respondents reported 75 percent control whereas 14 respondents told 100 percent
control with the three sprays of diazinon. Regarding the application of methidathion, 52
percent respondents replied the answer whereas 48 percent did not know. Forty one
respondents replied that the application of methidathion gave 50 percent control whereas
12 and 20 respondents reported 75 percent and 100 percent control respectively. The
application of triazophos (Hostathion), methyl parathion, deltamethrin (Decis),
fenpropathrin, lambdacyhalothrin (Karate), methamidophos, malathion, bifenthrin
(Talstar), fenvalerate (Sumicidin), DDT, cypermethrin + profenophos (Polytrin-C),
monocrotophos (Nuvacron), fenpropathrin (Danitol), chlorpyrifos (Lorsban), carbofuran
(Furadon) and Kerosine oil are being used for the control of mango mealybug and
resulted in unsatisfactory control as reported by the respondents. The majority of the
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
34
respondents did not know about these insecticides. The number of respondents, who gave
a positive response, ranged from 3 to 29 percent. According to the results it was observed
that none of the insecticides fulfilled the desire satisfaction of the respondents.
Table 9. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING CHEMICAL CONTROL OF MANGO MEALYBUG
Chemical used Yes No of
spray
Satisfaction
FD Percent 25
percent 50
percent 75
percent 100
Percent Diazinon 100 73 3 0 0 86 14
Methidathion 73 52 4 0 41 12 20
Triazophos 41 29 4 13 24 4 0
Methyl parathion 28 20 2 0 10 18 0
Deltamethrin 8 6 3 0 2 6 0
Fenpropathrin 24 17 4 10 14 0 0
Lambdacyhalothrin 32 23 3 0 14 18 0
Methamidophos 25 18 4 2 18 5 0
Malathion 16 11 1 0 7 9 0
Bifenthrin 16 11 3 2 11 3 0
Fenvalerate 4 3 4 0 1 3 0
DDT 8 6 2 0 0 8 0
Cypermethrin+ Profenophos
8 6 3 0 2 8 0
Monocrotophos 24 17 4 0 7 17 0
Fenpropathrin 8 6 3 0 2 6 0
Chlorpyrifos 16 11 4 0 3 11 2
Carbofuran 4 3 1 0 1 3 0
Kerosine oil 4 3 1 0 0 4 0
n=141 F.D. signifies Frequency Distribution
3.3.2.5 Practices Adopted by the Farmers to Control the Fertilized
Female of Mango Mealybug Coming down the Tree The results, given in Table 10 shows the awareness amongst the respondents’
practices, regarding fertilized females of mango mealybugs coming down from the tree.
For the control of coming down females of mango mealybug, 38 percent respondents had
positive view for burning the female, 17 percent for grease bands and 17 percent for
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
35
insecticides spray, whereas 62, 83 and 83 percent, respondents’ replied negative views
for burning the female, grease bands and insecticides spray, respectively. The practice of
burning the females gave 50 percent satisfactory control as reported by 8 respondents.
The satisfaction level was found to be zero for various levels of control in all the control
methods.
Table 10. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS PRACTICES REGARDING FERTILIZED FEMALE OF MANGO MEALYBUG COMING DOWN THE TREE.
Practices
Yes Satisfaction
FD Percent 25
percent
50
percent
75
percent
100
percent
Burning the females 53 38 45 8 0 0
Grease bands 24 17 24 0 0 0
Spray insecticides 24 17 24 0 0 0
n=141 F.D. Signifies Frequency Distribution
3.3.2.6 Yield Losses by Mango Mealybug.
The views of the respondents regarding yield losses by mango mealybug are
given in Table 11. Among the respondents, 35 percent told that mango mealybug caused
up to 75 percent yield losses, whereas 14, 28 and 23 percent respondents had the view
that mealybug cause 25, 50 and 100 percent yield losses, respectively. From these results,
it is concluded that mango mealybug is a very serious pest of mango orchards and can
cause 100 percent yield losses.
Table 11. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING LOSSES IN YIELD OF MANGO MEALYBUG
Losses in yield by Mango
Mealybug FD Percent
25 percent 20 14
50 percent 39 28
75 percent 50 35
100 percent 32 23
n=141 F.D. Signifies Frequency Distribution
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
36
3.3.2.7 Major Problems Faced by the Farmers
The results regarding the problems faced by the farmers are presented in Table 12.
According to 68 (48 percent) respondents, lack of knowledge about the pest was the
major problem. The other problem faced by the farmers were lack of money 44 (31
percent), lack of sprayer 16 (11 percent), shortage of pesticides 22 (16 percent), lack of
unity interest 28 (20 percent), eggs spread in wide areas 39 (28 percent), costly control
measures 24 (17 percent), small land holding 23 (16 percent) and adulterated pesticides
29 (21 percent) and fellow farmers donot spray 24 (17 percent). It was further observed
that 77(55 percent) respondents had the view that no control measure was adopted for the
control of mango mealybug.
Table 12. AWARENESS AMONGST THE RESPONDENTS REGARDING MAJOR PROBLEMS FACED BY MANGO GROWERS.
Problems Yes
FD Percent
Lack of money 44 31
Lack of sprayer 16 11
Lack of knowledge 68 48
Shortage of pesticides 22 16
Lack of unity interest 28 20
Eggs widely spread 39 28
No attention after entering the soil 28 20
Costly control measures 24 17
Small land holding 23 16
Adulterated pesticides 29 21
Fellow farmers don't spray 24 17
No control measures 77 55
n= 141 F.D. Signifies Frequency Distribution
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
37
3.4 DISCUSSION
A survey was conducted regarding the views of respondents relating to the
awareness among farmers about insect pests of mango, to determine growers’ perceptions
of the most damaging insect pests and the seriousness of the pest, their knowledge of
resistance and susceptible cultivars of mango and their awareness regarding methods of
spreading of mango mealybug. The survey results also determined the growers’
knowledge of the hibernation places of the mealybug, mealybug control practices and
yield losses caused by mango mealybug. The results revealed that majority of the
respondents i.e. 88 percent were aware that mango mealybug was a pest followed by
mango hopper (80 percent), fruit fly (80 percent), scale insect (44 percent), galls (24
percent) and mango midges (8 percent). Furthermore 40 percent of the respondents had
the view that the mango mealybug damaged the fruit up to 100 percent. However, 32
percent indicated a 75 percent loss, 20 percent indicated a 50 percent loss and 8 percent
indicated a 25 percent loss, respectively. In case of other insect pests, the extent of
damage was viewed as less important and lower in value. The seriousness of mango
mealybug according to the respondents was due to spread, dispersal of the pests and
difficulty in control, lack of information, non effective insecticides and hibernation of the
pest in different places. ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar of mango was the most susceptible as
indicated by maximum respondents i.e. 94 percent as compared to all the other mango
cultivars. Irrigation water is the major source of spreading of mango mealybug as
indicated by the majority of the respondents i.e. 94 percent. The present observations
made in the field corroborated with the views of farmers regarding spread of this pest.
However, some scientists have viewed that every person may not have experience with
all of these cultivars. These responses are likely biased toward more common cultivars
(Toews, 2010, per. com.). However, 49, 17, 49, zero percent, respondents have the
viewed that mango mealybug spread through nursery plants, through air, through
transportation of machinery, through birds, through malformed flowers (removed from
the trees by growers), by walking, through farm yard manure, through dissidence
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
38
(enmity), through plant to plant and through weeds taken by peoples weeding in the field
has been reported by 30, 52, 11, 33, 41, and 28 percent respondents.
Majority of the respondents i.e. 83 percent has reported that the mango mealybug
hibernated under tree near trunk followed by cracks entries (68 percent), mud walls
around orchards (57 percent), soil under tree canopy (43 percent), roots of the plants (22
percent), sides of kacha water channel (17 percent) and under leaves (17 percent). None
of the cultural and mechanical practices gave 100 percent satisfaction regarding control
of mango mealybug to the respondents. Amongst various insecticides Basudin was found
to be the most effective as 86 and 14 respondents reported 75 and 100 percent control of
mango mealybug. Majority of the respondents i.e. 35 percent had the view that mango
mealybug caused losses up to 75 percent, whereas 14, 28 and 23 percent respondents had
the view that mango mealybug caused losses to mango fruits up to 25, 50 and 100
percent, respectively. No control measure adopted by the farmers for the control of
mango mealybug as viewed by 55 percent respondents was the major constraint. The
other major constraint was the lack of knowledge (48 percent respondents) about the pest
amongst the farmers. The other problems as pointed out by the respondents are the lack
of money (31 percent), eggs widely spread (28 percent), adulterated pesticide
(21percent), lack of unity interest, no attention after entering the soil (20 percent), costly
control measures fellow farmers don’t spray (12 percent), small land holding (16
percent), shortage of pesticides (16 percent) and lack of sprayers (11 percent).
The results indicated that the lack of knowledge about the pest amongst farmers,
poverty, small land holding, lack of unity amongst the farmers were the main constraints
for the formulation of effective IPM strategy. The present findings can be compared with
those of (Van Mele et al., 2001; Heong, 1985; Teng, 1987; Morse and Buhler, 1997). It
is necessary to improve the communication system, develop messages and plan
campaigns for the effective control of insect pests of mango especially mango mealybug
to improve the knowledge of the farmers for perception of pest and natural enemies
(Fujisake, 1992, Escalada and Heong, 1993). The work on the same aspects have so far
been conducted by (DOA and DOAE, 1995; PCARRD, 1994; Waite, 1998; Ochou et al,
1998; Pollard, 1991; Trutmann et al., 1993, 1996; Burleigh et al., 1998; Van Huis et al.,
Chapter 3 Problem Orientation Studies
39
1982; Atteh, 1984; Chitere and Omolo, 1993; Bottenberg, 1995; Raheja, 1995;
Kemmore, 1991; Bentley, 1992; Morse and Buhler, 1997; Van Mele et al., 2002).
Furthermore, according to the present survey the majority of the respondent
indicated that mango mealybug is the major pest of mango and caused 100 percent loss to
mango fruits. These findings can be compared with those of Bokonon-Ganta et al.,
(2001). The results of the current survey show that the majority of the respondents knew
something about mango mealybug, mango hoppers and fruit flies, whereas the minority
of the respondents has little information about other insects of mango like scale, galls and
mango midges. One hundred percent loss in mango fruits caused by mango mealybug
was reported by 40 percent respondents whereas, zero percent of respondents observed
losses caused by other insects. Non-effective insecticides, rapid spread, ability to
hibernates in different places, difficulty to control and lacks of information about mango
mealybug are the main reasons for the need to formulate of an effective IPM strategy.
The cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ was the most susceptible to mango mealybug as viewed by the
majority of the respondents. A little information on insect pests of mango especially
mango mealybug through survey was sorted out but it was concluded that mango
mealybug was the major constraint among the growers and the information obtained from
the growers were used in developing IPM package for sustainable management of mango
mealybug.
• 100 percent yield losses was told by 23 percent respondents whereas 75 percent,
50 percent and 25 percent losses were reported by 35, 28 and 14 percent
respondents, respectively
• Burning of females scales, application of grease bands and insecticidal sprays did
not give satisfactory results to the respondents for the control of fertilized
females of mango mealybug migrating or dispersing down from the trees
40
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted on population dynamics, cultivar resistance and biology
of mango mealybug. Regarding population of mango mealybug it was observed that the
South, East, West directions of trees showed maximum population of mango mealybug
on leaves and inflorescence, whereas North direction of the plant showed minimum
population. The maximum peak population of mango mealybug was observed to be 26.6
per 30-cm branch at maximum temperature of 24.6°C, minimum temperature of 10.4°C
and RH 78.9 percent. Among twelve cultivars under study, the ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar of
mango showed maximum population of mango mealybug in both the study years (104.9
and 69.8 during 2005-2006 and during 2006-2007, respectively as well as on an average
of both study years (87.4), whereas ‘Tukhmi’ cultivar was found comparatively resistant
with minimum population of mango mealybug i.e. 14.2, 15.9 and 18.3. On an average of
both the study years, the following ranking positions towards susceptibility of mango
cultivars were as under. ‘Chaunsa’ > ‘Black Chaunsa’ > ‘Malda’ > ‘Fajri’ > ‘Ratul-12’ >
‘Langra’ > ‘Sensation’ > ‘Sindhri’ > ‘Dusehri’ > ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ > ‘Anwar Ratul’ and
>‘Tukhmi’. First instar male and female duration on an average is 56.3 days whereas 2nd
instar has 26 days. In case of 3rd instar female has duration 19.5 days and male has 3
days. Male has pupal stage while it is absent in female.
Key words: Drosicha mangiferae, Population dynamics, Cultivar resistance, Biology
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
41
4.1 INTRODUCTION
There are ca 1,000 different cultivars of mangoes throughout the world but
Pakistan offers a wide choice of ca 3500 mango cultivars (Anonymous, 2008). The most
famous and commercial cultivars of mango which are grown on large scale, those
cultivars are ‘Sindhri’, ‘Dusehri’, ‘Chaunsa’ (‘Summer Bahist’), ‘Black Chaunsa’,
‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Fajri’, ‘Malda’, ‘Sensation’, ‘Anwar Ratul’, ‘Ratul-12’ and ‘Langra’.
All these cultivars differ in taste and flavour. These are also different in shape and size.
Mango is one of the most extensively exploited fruits used for food, juice, fragrance and
color.
Antibiosis, Antixenosis and tolerance are three modalities of host plant resistance
(Painter 1951, Kogan and Ortman 1978, Panda and Khush 1995).Antibiosis (causes
harmful effects on insect life cycle) is one form of host plant resistance the other forms
are antixenosis resistance (where the pest is unable to locate or colonize a host) and
tolerance (where the plant does not suffer from the presence of pest). Plant resistance to
insect pests is one of the best components among various tactics of IPM. It is the result of
interactions between the insects and plants that the environment conditions under which a
plant grown is not favourable for the development and growth of the insects that are
associated with the plants. As this approach is environment friendly, so it is regarded as
the key to integrated pest management. It also provides cumulative protection to insect
pests and is also compatible with other pest management practices. During the last two
decades, great progress has been made in the development of resistant cultivars to major
insect pests of crops (Dhaliwal and Singh, 2004). Resistance is a heritable characteristic
that enables a plant to inhibit the growth of insect population or to recover from the
damage caused by populations that were not inhibited to survive (Kogan, 1982). The
genetic properties of a cultivar to hinder the activities of insects so as to minimize
percent reduction in yield as compared with other cultivars of the same species under
similar condition (Dhaliwal et al., 1993).
Abiotic factors have an important influence on the survival, development and
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
42
reproductive capacity of insect pests and were considered the main cause of fluctuations
in animal population (Elton, 1927). Andrewartha and Birch (1954) further highlighted the
role of climatic factors on the basis of detailed research into population dynamics,
distribution of swarm-forming grasshopper and apple blossom thrips and concluded that
the populations were entirely governed by climatic factors. Abiotic factors such as
temperature, relative humidity and rainfall play an important role in the population
fluctuation. For example, Atwal and Singh (1990) reported that some insects go under
aestivation, hibernation and diapause to overcome the periods of unfavourable
temperature in their life cycle. Similarly moisture has adverse effects on insects for
example it encouraged disease outbreaks and also effect on reproductive capabilities of
most of the insects (Dhaliwal and Arora., 1998).
Studies were conducted on mango mealybug for population dynamics, varietal
resistance and biology with the following objectives:
• To find the mango mealybug has a preference side of the plant that it infests
• To determine the impact of various weather factors in the population fluctuation
of the mango mealybug
• To study the population dynamics of mango mealybug on "Chaunsa” cultivar of
mango
• To study the antibiosis resistance against mango mealybug on different cultivars
of mango
• To study the biology of mango mealybug on susceptible cultivar of mango with
the objective to find out the weakest link for control measures
• To find out the active time of first instar of mango mealybug during the day
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
43
4.2 MATERIALS AND METHODS
4.2.1 POPULATION DYNAMICS OF MEALYBUG ON ‘CHAUNSA’
CULTIVAR OF MANGO
Two mango orchards with heavy mango mealybug (Drosicha mangiferae Green.)
infestations, in district Multan were selected at two different locations during 2005-06
and 2006-07 for the study of population dynamics. Three mango plants of ‘Chaunsa’
cultivar were taken from each orchard. Selected trees were labelled with iron sheet fixed
with 2 nails written with black permanent markers as tree No-1, 2 and 3. From each tree
four fruit bearing branches of 30-cm in length were selected in four different directions
i.e. east, west, south and north, were tagged. The tag was written with black permanent
marker as number 1, 2, 3 and 4. The abundances of pest, predators and parasites were
enumerated weekly from the selected 30-cm branches including (leaves, inflorescence
and branches). Average counts of insects on six trees were calculated on leaves, branches
and inflorescence with respect to their directions in each year as well as cumulative
average of two years. The population was also taken from the trunk of selected trees by
counting the number of individuals from 900 cm2 of bark. Weeds were assessed under the
trees by identifying and counting population in a 900 cm2 from 3 different places of
ground on a weekly basis. The meteorological data were collected from Central Cotton
Research Institute, Multan. Average population and abiotic factors was calculated by
using Excel sheets and shown graphically.
4.2.2 POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO
Three orchards were selected at three different locations in district Multan having
the most common or popular cultivars of mango during 2005-06 and 2006-07. Among
these 11 most prominent, grafted, exportable and commercial cultivars viz., ‘Chaunsa’,
‘Fajri’, ‘Langra’, ‘Black Chaunsa’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Malda’, ‘Anwar Ratul’,
‘Dusehri’, ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Sensation’ and one seed born cultivar ‘Tukhmi’ were selected for
recording the data on population of mango mealybug. There were 12 treatments and each
treatment had three replications. So there were 36 plants from the 3 orchards. From each
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
44
plant two fruit bearing branches of 30-cm in length were selected from east and south
directions. These branches were tagged. The population of the mango mealybug were
counted from the selected branches on all parts i.e. leaves, inflorescence and branches
fortnightly throughout the active period of pest. The data of different cultivars were
compiled and analyzed through Randomized Complete Block Design on an IBM-PC
Computer using M. Stat (Steel and Torrie, 1980) Package. Means were separated by
Duncan’s New Multiple Range Test (DMRT) (Duncan, 1955). In the month of May, 10
egg carrying females were collected from these selected cultivars coming downward the
tree via trunk having dominant similar size. The females of each cultivar were kept
separately in a petri dish of 5 x 5 cm size. These were brought to the laboratory and were
weighed with electronic balance, their length and width were measured with the help of
steel scale. These females were returned to the orchards and were kept singly in a pit of 4
x 5 cm for egg laying which was made in semi wet soil with the help of steel spoon. The
pits were covered with plastic petri dish of 5 cm and were written with black permanent
marker having cultivar name and female number. At the end of June, the pits were
opened and the females were taken out with steel spoon and were kept in plastic petri
dishes of 5 x 5 cm size. Ovisac length and width were measured and counted the number
of eggs laid. The data regarding biological parameters which were conducted in
laboratory were compiled and analyzed through Completely Randomized Design.
4.2.3 METHODOLOGY TO STUDY THE BIOLOGY OF MANGO MEALYBUG UNDER FIELD CONDITIONS
Biology of mango mealybug was studied in an orchard on mango plants. The
orchard was selected in District Multan. Five plants of mango cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ having
age of 3-4 years and height 5-6 feet were selected. These plants were marked as 1, 2, 3, 4
and 5.
After selection, the plants were cleaned before the releasing of nymph. Dried
branches, leaves and small branches were removed, so that the settled nymphs can easily
be observed on the plants. A funnel of 15 cm polyethylene sheet in width and length
according to trunk was made on the trunk of trees by using needle, thread, solution tape
and rope. The needle and thread was used on one sides of the polyethylene sheet to
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
45
reduce the length and can easily be wrapped on the trunk with solution tap in the form of
cup. A thread of sun hemp was used below the funnel on the solution tap to make it tight.
The funnel was made for the releasing of 1st instar nymph, to stop the downward and
upward movement of nymph on the ground as well as for the pupation of males and
collection of egg carrying females. In this funnel small amount of mud and sand mixture
with ratio 1:1 were added. After every rainfall the wet mixture were replaced with dry
one.
4.2.3.1 Collection of eggs
Eggs of mango mealybugs were collected on 15th of Dec. 2006 from the infested
mango orchard. These were kept in the 5 polyethylene bags of 2 kg along with soil and
were placed them in the orchards for hatching. The eggs were oval in shape, yellowish in
colour like turnips seed.
4.2.3.2 Hatching of Eggs
Hatching of eggs were checked after every 48 hours at 10 A.M. and the newly
emerged nymphs were collected with hand made aspirator and destroyed, until maximum
number of nymphs were obtained. The 416 nymphs were collected on 1st Jan., 2007 with
hand made aspirator. These were kept in 8 plastic petri dishes of 5 x 5 cm size for a
period of 48 hours. On 03rd Jan., 2007, at 10 A.M., these nymphs were released in the
funnel of 2 experimental plants. There were 208 nymphs /plant. The nymphs started their
movement upward and were settled on the plants within 48 to 72 hours after releasing.
The nymphs were observed daily. Among these nymphs, when the maximum 188
nymphs were observed half in exiuvae and half out of 2nd instar were collected for two
days with camel hair brush in plastic petri dish. These were kept in plastic petri dish for
24 hours. After that the nymphs of 2nd instar were released on 3rd plant. The maximum 96
nymphs of 3rd instar were collected when observed half in exiuvae and half out with
camel hair brush in plastic petri dish and kept them for 24 hours. These were released on
4th plant. When the maximum number of females (n=41)which were half in the exiuvae
and half out were collected and kept them in petri dishes for 24 h and then released on 5th
plants. The speed of 1st, 2nd & 3rd and adult females were measured after releasing in the
plant funnel. The duration of survival without food of all instar was also noted. As soon
as the males came down the plants for pupation, they were counted and fifteen males
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
46
were picked from the plastic funnel and put them in a pit of 5 x 5 cm (width and depth).
When the fuzz was secreted, the fuzz (cottony material like scretions) was removed once,
twice and thrice time and adult males were observed for any effects caused by removing
the fuzz. The pupation period, adult life and male copulation time was also noted. The
number of eggs laid by the females were counted daily each of 5 females separately.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
47
4.3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.3.1 POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG VERSUS PLANT SIDES
The population of mango mealybug was recorded from the four cardinal points of
the tree mango cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ during 2005-06 and 2006-07. The results are presented
under the following sub-heading.
4.3.1.1 Population of Mango Mealybug on Leaves on Various Plant Sides
The results presented in Fig. 1 and column A of Table 1 show that the south side
of the plant had significantly the highest abundance of mango mealybugs on leaves
during both the study years as well as on an average basis followed by east and west
sides. The north side of the mango plant showed significantly the lowest population of
mango mealybug during both the study years.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
EAST WEST SOUTH NORTH
Plant Directions
Mea
lyb
ug
/leav
es
2005-06 2006-07 Average
Fig 1. POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON LEAVES PER 30-CM BRANCH LENGTH OF MANGO CULTIVAR ‘CHAUNSA’ AT VARIOUS SIDES DURING 2005-06 AND 2006-07.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
48
TABLE 1. POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON CULTIVAR CHAUNSA ON VARIOUS PLANT PARTS DURING 2005-06 AND 2006-07
Sides Leaves (**) LSD=2.62
Mean (**) LSD=1.85
Inflorescence (**) LSD=0.94
Mean (**)
LSD=0.66
Branch (**) LSD=0.49
Mean (**) LSD=0.34
2005-06 2006-07 2005-06 2006-07 2005-06 2006-07 East A B C
24.26 b 9.84 c 17.50 b 8.93 b 4.65 d 6.79 b 20.70 a 0.50 c 10.60 a
West 23.97 b 8.18 cd 16.07 b 10.24 a 7.15 c 8.69 a 1.84 b 0.73 c 1.29 b
South 30.89 a 10.41 c 20.64 a 10.65 a 5.44 d 8.05 a 1.84 b 0.50 c 1.70 b
North 5.88 d 2.97 e 4.43 c 3.19 e 2.26 e 2.73 c 1.76 b 0.35 c 1.05 b
F-value 37.35 132.68 17.75 148.87 1703.58 1694.77
Mean (ns) 21.25 7.85 8.25 4.87 6.54 0.52
D.F of sites=3 year =1 sites x year=3 Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
49
4.3.1.2 Mango Mealybug on Inflorescence
The results shown in Fig.2 and column B of Table 1 reveal that the south and west
sides of the mango plants were the most favourable during, 2005-2006. The highest
population of mango mealybug was observed to be 10.65 on south side followed by west
(10.24) and east (8.93) sides. The north side of the plant had significantly the lowest
population of mango mealybug during, 2006-2007 (2.26) while west side of the plant
showed maximum population of mango mealybug on inflorescence (7.15) followed by
south (5.44) and east (4.65) sides. The north side also showed the lowest population
(3.19) of mango mealybug during 2005-06. On an average of two year’s data it was
observed that west side of the plant had significantly maximum population of mango
mealybug followed by south (8.05) and east (6.79) sides. North side showed significantly
the lowest population of mango mealybug on inflorescence i.e. 2.73 per inflorescence.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
EAST WEST SOUTH NORTH
Plant Directions
Mea
lyb
ug
/inflo
rese
nce
2005-06 2006-07 Average
Fig 2. POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON INFLORECENCE OF MANGO CULTIVAR ‘CHAUNSA’ AT VARIOUS SIDES DURING 2005-06 AND 2006-07.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
50
4.3.1.3 Mango Mealybug on Branches
The results depicted in Fig. 3 and Column C of Table 1 reveal that during 2005-
2006, east side showed significantly maximum population of mango mealybug i.e. 20.7
per 30-cm branch followed by west and south sides each showing 1.8 individuals per 30
cm branch. The north side of the plant had significantly the lowest population i.e., 1.8
per 30-cm branch of mango mealybug. The results of the 2006-2007 season showed that
the west side of the plants had maximum population of mango mealybug, whereas
minimum on north side of the plant. East and south sides showed similar population of
mango mealybug and had intermediate trend. On an average of two years data, it was
observed that east side of the plant had maximum population of mango mealybug 10.6
per 30-cm on branches and differed significantly from other sides. The minimum
population of mango mealybug was observed on north side of the plant i.e., 1.1 per 30-
cm and did not show significant variation with those of observed on south (1.7 per 30-
cm) and west (1.3 per 30-cm) sides of plant.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
EAST WEST SOUTH NORTH
Plant Directions
Mea
lyb
ug
/bra
nch
2005-06 2006-07 Average
Fig 3. POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON BRANCH OF MANGO CULTIVAR ‘CHAUNSA’ AT VARIOUS SIDES DURING 2005-06 AND 2006-07.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
51
4.3.1.4 Population of Mango Mealybug on Trunk and Weeds
The results presented in Fig. 4 reveal that the population of mango mealybug was
maximum on trunk of the tree during both the study years. However, this population was
higher during 2005-2006 as compared to 2006-2007. The population of mango mealybug
was observed to be the minimum on weeds. During 2005-2006, this population was
higher as compared to during 2006-2007 on weeds.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Trunk Weeds
No
. of m
ealy
bu
g o
n tr
un
ks a
nd
w
eed
s
2005-06 2006-07
Fig 4. POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON TRUNK AND WEEDS PER 900 CM2.
4.3.1.5 Predation Parasitization and Fungal Attacked Population of
Mango Mealybug.
The mango mealybug predated by the predator, parasitized and fungal attacked
specimens were observed from various sides of the plant of ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar during
both the study years. The results are shown in Fig. 5. It is evident from the results that
more mango mealybugs were predated during 2005-2006 than during 2006-2007. A
similar trend was also observed in parasitization data i.e. higher individuals scales were
parasitized during 2005-2006 than during 2006-2007. As regard to fungal attacked
specimens it was observed that more fungal attacked specimens were observed during
2006-2007 than during 2005-2006.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
52
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
Predation Parasitized Fungal AttackedNo
. of
pre
dat
ors
, par
asit
es a
nd
fu
ng
al p
ath
og
ens
2005-06 2006-07
Fig 5. POPULATION OF PREDATORS, PARASITES AND FUNGUS ATTACKED NYMPHS PER 30 CM BRANCH AND 900 CM 2 ON TRUNK OF MANGO CULTIVAR ‘CHAUNSA’ DURING 2005-06 AND 2006-07.
4.3.2 GRAPHICAL INTERACTION BETWEEN WEATHER FACTORS AND POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG DURING 2005- 2006 and 2006-2007. The population of mango mealybug observed on leaves, inflorescence and
branches of mango cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ and weather factors was depicted graphically in
Fig. 6, 7 and 8. The objective of the study was to find the trend in population fluctuation
of mango mealybug at various dates of observation corresponding to the respective
weather factors of 2005-2006, 2006-2007 and on average basis.
4.3.2.1 Population of Mango Mealybug versus Weather Factors
during 2005-2006 The results presented in Fig. 6 regarding population of mango mealybug versus
weather factors during 2006-2007 showed that the population of mango mealybug
appeared on 18 Jan. 06 with 0.1 individual per 30 cm branch and this population
increased consequently on the subsequent dates of observation and reached to a peak of
34.4 individuals per 30 cm branch on 22 Feb. 06 with maximum temperature of 26.1 ºC,
minimum temperature of 16.1ºC and average relative humidity of 77.9 percent. The
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
53
decreasing trend in this population was observed thereafter on the subsequent dates of
observation and reached to a minimum of 0.1 on 31 May, 06.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
07.1
2.05
14.1
2.05
21.1
2.05
28.1
2.05
04.1
.06
11.1
.06
17.1
.06
25.1
.06
01.0
2.06
08.0
2.06
15.0
2.06
22.0
2.06
01.0
3.06
08.0
3.06
15.0
3.06
22.0
3.06
29.0
3.06
05.0
4.06
12.0
4.06
19.0
4.06
26.0
4.06
03.0
5.06
10.0
5.06
17.0
5.06
24.0
5.06
31.0
5.06
Dates of Observation
Wea
ther
dat
a
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Av.
Po
pu
lati
on
2005-06 Av.pop 2005-06 TEMP.MAX 2005-06 TEMP.MINI
2005-06 AVER.RH% 2005-06 RAINFALL mm
Fig 6. POPULATION DYNAMIC AND WEATHER FACTORS DURI NG THE
YEAR 2005-2006 ON ‘CHAUNSA’ CULTIVAR 4.3.2.2 Population of Mango Mealybug versus Weather Factors
during 2006-2007 The results presented in Fig.7 regarding population of mango mealybug per 30 cm
branch versus weather factors during 2006-2007 reveal that the population of mealybug
was appeared on 18 Jan. 2007 and increasing trend was observed thereafter. The
population reached to its highest peak on 8 Feb. 2007 i.e. 22.0 per 30 cm branch and
suddenly decreased down to 5.9 per 30 cm branch on 16 Feb. 2007. The increasing trend
was again observed consequently on the subsequent dates of observation and reached to
the second peak on 15 Mar. 2007 with 11.70 individuals per 30 cm branch. The
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
54
population again in decreasing trends thereafter up to the remaining dates of observation
and reached to a minimum level of 0.1 individual per 30 cm branch on 31 May, 2007.
From these results it was observed that maximum temperature of 23.5 ºC, minimum
temperature of 11.5 ºC, and 80 percent RH were the most favourable for the development
of mango mealybug during 2006-2007.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
07.1
2.06
14.1
2.06
21.1
2.06
28.1
2.06
04.1
.07
11.1
.07
18.1
.07
25.1
.07
01.0
2.07
08.0
2.07
16.0
2.07
22.0
2.07
01.0
3.07
08.0
3.07
15.0
3.07
22.0
3.07
29.0
3.07
05.0
4.07
12.0
4.07
19.0
4.07
26.0
4.07
03.0
5.07
10.0
5.07
17.0
5.07
24.0
5.07
31.0
5.07
Dates of Observation
Wea
ther
fac
tors
0
5
10
15
20
25
Av.
Po
pu
lati
on
Av.pop TEMP.MAX TEMP.MINI AVER.RH% RAINFALL mm
Fig 7. POPULATION DYNAMIC AND WEATHER FACTORS DURI NG THE
YEAR 2006-2007 ON ‘CHAUNSA’ CULTIVAR 4.3.2.3 Population of Mango Mealybug versus Weather Factors on
an Average Basis of Both Years Data. The results regarding average population size of mango mealybug recorded from
30-cm branch, from leaves and inflorescence during 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 versus
weather factors are shown in Fig. 8. It is clear from the graph that the population
appeared on Jan. 4 i.e. 0.01 individuals per 30-cm branch and increased up to the highest
peak i.e. 26.6 individuals on Feb. 8. This population was decreased up to 19.8 individuals
per 30 cm branch on Feb. 15. The second peak was observed i.e. 21.1 individuals per 30
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
55
cm branch on Feb. 22. A decreasing trend was again observed and the population reached
down up to 17.2 individuals per 30 cm branch on Mar. 01. A third peak was again
observed on Mar. 08 with 19.1 individual of mealybug. The decreasing trend was
observed thereafter on the subsequent dates of observation with 0.1 individual of
mealybug on May 31. The maximum temperature 24.1 ºC, minimum temperature 10.9
ºC, RH 79.4 percent and rainfall 0.3 mm was observed at the highest peak i.e. 26.6
individuals per 30 cm branch on Feb. 8 and these conditions were found suitable for the
development of the pest.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Dec
,07
Dec
, 14
Dec
,21
Dec
, 28
Jan,
04
Jan,
11
Jan,
17
Jan,
25
Feb
,01
Feb
,08
Feb
,15
Feb
,22
Mar
c,01
Mar
c,08
Mar
c,15
Mar
c,22
Mar
c,29
Apr
il,,0
5
Apr
il, 1
2
Apr
il, 1
9
Apr
il, 2
6
May
,03
May
,10
May
,17
May
,24
May
,31
Dates of Observation
Wea
ther
dat
a
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Av.
Po
pu
lati
on
Av.pop TEMP.MAX TEMP.MINI AVER.RH% RAINFALL mm
Fig 8. POPULATION DYNAMIC AND WEATHER FACTORS ON
‘CHAUNSA’ CULTIVAR COMMULATIVE FROM 2005 TO 2007
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
56
4.3.3 ROLE OF WEATHER IN POPULATION FLUCTUATION OF MANGO
MEALYBUG
A study was conducted to determine the role of weather in population fluctuation
of mango mealybug. The data were processed for simple correlation and Multiple Linear
Regression Models with the objective to find the impact of these factors on the
population fluctuation of the pest. The results are described under the following sub-
sections.
4.3.3.1 Simple Correlation Between Weather Factors and
Population of Mango Mealybug The results presented in Table 2 show that none of the weather factor resulted in
significant effect on the population of mango mealybug during both the study years
separately as well as on cumulative basis. However, the response of maximum
temperature was negative whereas minimum temperature, relative humidity and rainfall
exerted positive correlation values during both the study years individually as well as on
cumulative basis.
Table 2. EFFECT OF WEATHER FACTORS ON THE POPULATIO N FLUCTUATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG DURING THE STUDY YEARS 2005-2006 AND 2006-2007.
Years
r-values
Weather Factors
Temperature oC R.H. (%) R.F. (mm)
Maximum Minimum
2005-06 -0.009 0.182 0.144 0.157
2006-07 -0.165 0.097 0.266 0.101
Cumulative -0.095 0.151 0.170 0.051
4.3.3.2 Multiple Linear Regression Models
The results relating to Multiple Linear Regression Models along with coefficient
of determination values between weather factors and population of mango mealybug
during 2005-2006, 2006-2007 and on cumulative basis are given in Table 3. It is evident
from the results that during 2005-2006, maximum temperature did not show any impact
on the population fluctuation of mango mealybug. The effect of maximum and minimum
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
57
temperature showed significant impact when computed together and contributed 21.5
percent role in the population fluctuation of the pest. The role was increased up to 27.4
percent in population fluctuation of the pest when the effect of maximum temperature,
minimum temperature and RH was computed together. Rainfall did not show any impact
on the population fluctuation of the pest.
Table 3. MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION MODELS BETWEEN POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG AND WEATHER FACTORS.
Years Regression Equation D.F. F-
value P-
value R2 Individual
Role (%) 2005-06 Y = 2.8032 – 0.0233 X1 24 0.00 0.97 0.00 0.00 Y = 9.6369 – 2.6986 X1* + 1.9752 **
X2 23 3.59 0.62 0.22 21.50
Y = -3.9438 – 1.4058 X1 + 1.8798 X2* + 0.8781 X3
22 2.12 0.08 0.27 5.90
Y = -3.8621 – 1.4272 X1 + 1.8934 X2* + 0.8803 X3 – 0.0412 X4
21 2.98 0.09 0.27 0.00
2006-07 Y = 2.2962 – 0.0625 X1 24 2.01 0.93 0.03 2.7 Y = 1.8111 – 0.0667 X1 + 0.1357 X2 23 2.41 0.75 0.04 1.3 **Y =
-13.6903–0.0803X1 + 1.4100X2** + 1.338 X3**
22 4.60 0.01 0.48 44.3
**Y =
-15.7025–0.1194X1+ 1.5534 X2** + 1.6068 X3** - 0.3814 X4
21 4.95 0.01 0.55 6.4
2005-06 + 2006-07 Y = 2.7087 – 0.0724 X1 50 2.16 0.32 0.01 0.9 Y = 1.7959 – 0.1050 X1 + 0.2902 X2 49 3.97 0.26 0.04 3.2 **Y =
-12.5385–0.1014 X1 + 1.3794 X2** + 1.2707 X3**
48 7.39 0.00 0.29 24.7
**Y= -13.4251–0.1307 X1 + 1.4598 X2** + 1.4078 X3 ** - 0.3361 X4
47 5.79 0.00 0.31 1.9
Where X1= Max. Temperature X2= Mini. Temperature X3= R.H percent X4=Rainfall R2 = Coefficient of Determination * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** Significant at P < 0.01.
During 2006-2007, maximum temperature contributed 2.7 percent role in
population fluctuation of the pest with nonsignificant impact. The role of maximum and
minimum temperature reached up to 4 percent when the effect of both parameters was
computed together. The combination of maximum temperature, minimum temperature
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
58
and relative humidity showed significant impact on the population fluctuation of the pest
and contributed 48.3 percent role. Similarly, the effect of all the weather factors exerted
54.7 percent role in population fluctuation of mango mealybug when the effect of these
factors was computed together. In this equation minimum temperature and relative
humidity showed significant impact with positive response, whereas rainfall and
maximum temperature played nonsignificant impact with negative response. From these
results it was observed that relative humidity was the most important factor which
contributed maximum role in population fluctuation of the pest i.e. 44.3 percent.
On cumulative basis, maximum temperature again showed nonsignificant impact
with minimum contribution i.e. 0.9 percent in population fluctuation of the pest. The
impact was reached up to 4.1 percent when the effect of maximum temperature and
minimum temperature was computed together. Relative humidity again proved to be the
most important factor which alone contributed 24.7 percent role in population fluctuation
of the pest when the effect of maximum and minimum temperatures were computed with
relative humidity. Rain fall did not show significant role in population fluctuation of the
pest and contributed only 1.9 percent role.
4.3.4 ACTIVE PERIOD OF NYMPHS MOVING UP THE TREES AT VARIOUS DAY TIMES The study was conducted to observe the activity of mango mealybug at various
intervals of the day viz. 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 and 18 hours. It is evident from the results in
Table 4 that maximum activity of the pest was observed at 12 noon on all the dates of
observation. The population was decreased tremendously at 14 hours followed by 16 and
18 hours. From these results it was concluded that 12 noon is the most favourable time
for maximum activity of the pest.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
59
Table 4. ACTIVATION TIME OF MANGO MEALYBUG NYMPHS DURING THE DAY.
Dated 8.00AM 10.00AM 12.00 Noon
1400 hours
1600 hours
1800 hours
01.02.06 7 43 72 32 12 3
02.02.06 6 36 63 42 19 4
03.02.06 9 41 67 51 21 2
04.02.06 7 35 58 34 14 3
05.02.06 9 39 62 35 11 5
06.02.06 8 32 43 22 13 2
07.02.06 7 41 29 19 8 3
08.02.06 8 55 22 11 5 4
09.02.06 4 43 17 5 3 1
10.02.06 3 4 9 4 1 1
11.02.06 1 2 7 3 0 0
12.02.06 0 1 3 2 0 1
4.3.5 POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO The study was conducted to determine the response of various cultivars of mango
viz., ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Fajri’, ‘Langra’, ‘Black Chaunsa’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Malda’,
‘Dusehri’, ‘Anwar Ratul’, ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Tukhmi’ and ‘Sensation’ for relative
resistance/susceptibility against mango mealybug during 2005-2006 and 2006-2007. The
results are presented under the following sub-sections.
4.3.5.1 Population of Mango Mealybug During 2005-2006
The means comparison of data regarding population of mango mealybug per
branch (30-cm in length) on East and South sides in different cultivars of mango at
various dates are shown in Table 5a and 5b. Significant variations (P < 0.01) were found
to exist among dates of observation, different cultivars, between plant directions and in
their interactions.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
60
4.3.5.1.1 Cultivar Resistance
The means were compared by DMR Test at P = 0.05 and the results are given in
Table 5a. It is clear from the results that the maximum mealybug (104.9/branch) was
observed on cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ and differed significantly from those of recorded on all
other cultivars of mango. The minimum individuals of mango mealybug was observed on
‘Tukhmi’ (18.3/branch) and also differed significantly from those of recorded on all other
cultivars. The cultivars ‘Sensation’ and ‘Sindhri’ did not show significant difference with
each other having 51.7 and 51.8 mealybugs per branch, respectively. All the other
cultivars of mango showed significant difference with one another. The position of
cultivars in descending order was as under:
‘Chaunsa’ > ‘Black Chaunsa’ > ‘Malda’ > ‘Fajri’ > ‘Ratul-12’ > ‘Langra’ > ‘Sindhri’ >
‘Sensation’ > ‘Dusehri’ > ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ > ‘Anwar Ratul’ > ‘Tukhmi’.
Table 5a. MEANS COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO AT VARIOUS PLANT SIDES DURING 2005-06.
Name of Cultivar Direction x varieties (**) LSD = 1.11 Average(**)
LSD = 0.78 East South Anwar Ratul 14.47 s 26.60 p 20.53 j
Black Chaunsa 78.70 e 103.80 b 91.25 b
Chaunsa 89.70 d 120.10 a 104.90 a
Dusehri 26.23 p 49.80 k 38.02 h
Fajri 71.20 h 89.77 d 80.48 d
Langra 44.77 l 74.27 f 59.52 f
Malda 73.00 g 94.93 c 83.97 c
Ratul-12 61.40 j 78.13 e 69.77 e
Sensation 38.63 n 64.73 i 51.68 g
Sindhri 41.27 m 62.40 j 51.83 g
Sufaid Chaunsa 21.83 r 33.47 o 27.65 i
Tukhmi 12.37 k 24.17 q 18.27 k
Average 47.80 b 68.51 a
F-value 137.8 10235.46
Cultivar (n=12) cardinal direction (n=2) DF=11 Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
61
4.3.5.1.2 Plant Direction
The south side of the plant had significantly higher population of mango
mealybug i.e. 68.51 individuals per branch whereas 47.80 individuals per branch than the
east side (Table 5a). Based on interactional response between sides and cultivars, it was
observed that the maximum population of mango mealybug was observed at South side
on ‘Chaunsa’ (120.10/branch), whereas the similar trend was also recorded on the same
cultivar on East side (89.70/branch). Tukhmi showed minimum population on both the
sides i.e. 12.37 and 24.17 per branch, respectively. In general the populations of mango
mealybugs were lower on East side as compared to South in all the cultivars of mango.
4.3.5.1.3 Period of Abundance of Mango Mealybug.
The data regarding the mango mealybug observed on various dates of observation
are given in Table 5b. The maximum population of mango mealybug was recorded on
Mar. 14, 2006 and differed significantly from those of recorded at all the dates of
observation. The population started to appear at 4th week of Jan. and reached to a peak on
the subsequent date of observation i.e. Feb. 11, 2006 with 114. 33 per branch and this
population again fluctuate to lower side on Feb. 26, 2006 i.e. 93.7 per branch. This
population again increased and reached to the highest peak i.e. 130.9 on Mar. 14, 2006.
Decreasing trend was observed continuously thereafter on all the subsequent dates of
observation and reached to the minimum level of 1.4 per branch. Keeping in view the
results regarding interactional responses, it was observed that south side showed
significantly higher population of mango mealybug as compared to east side almost at all
the dates of observation. The fluctuation trend on both sides was similar corresponding to
the dates.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
62
Table 5b. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON DIFFERENT DATES AT VARIOUS PLANT SIDES DURING 2005-2006.
Dates of Observation Dates x direction(**) LSD = 1.01 Average (**)
LSD = 0.72 East South 11-1-2006 0.00 o 0.00 o 0.00 h
27-1-2006 0.81 no 2.08 m 1.44 g
11-2-2006 98.11 f 130.56 b 114.33 b
26-2-2006 79.36 g 108.11 e 93.74 d
14-3-2006 113.42 d 148.44 a 130.93 a
28-3-2006 74.14 h 120.14 c 97.14 c
12-4-2006 49.50 j 79.22 j 64.36 e
27-4-2006 50.72 i 78.86 j 64.79 e
10-5-2006 10.94 l 15.92 k 13.43 f
25-5-2006 0.97 no 1.81 mn 1.39 g
F-value 1097.0 38572.9
Dates (n=10) cardinal direction (n=2) df=9 Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
CONCLUSION:
• The cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar was found to be relatively susceptible, whereas
‘Tukhmi’ the resistant. The south side of the plant showed higher population than
the east.
• Second week of Mar. was found to be the most favourable for the development of
mango mealybug during 2006.
4.3.5.2 Population of Mango Mealybug During 2006-2007
The mean comparison of data regarding population of mango mealybug per
branch of 30-cm length on east and south directions in different mango cultivars during
2007. The means were compared by DMR Test and shown in Table 6a and 6b.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
63
4.3.5.2.1 Cultivar Resistance
The results (Table 6a) show significant variations among mango cultivars
regarding population of mango mealybug per branch of 30 cm length. The cultivar
‘Chaunsa’ again found to be comparatively susceptible showing maximum population of
mango mealybug i.e. 69.8 per branch, whereas ‘Tukhmi’ showed minimum population of
mango mealybug i.e. 13.5 per branch which showed similar response statistically with
those of ‘Anwar Ratul’ with 14.2 individuals per branch of the pest. The descending
order of the cultivars based on population of mango mealybug towards susceptibility was
as follows:
‘Chaunsa’ > ‘Black Chaunsa’ > ‘Malda’ > ‘Fajri’ > ‘Ratul-12’ > ‘Langra’ >
‘Sensation’ > ‘Sindhri’ > ‘Dusehri’ > ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ > ‘Anwar Ratul’ and ‘Tukhmi’.
4.3.5.2.2 Plant Direction
The data presented in Table 6a reveal significant difference between sides
regarding population of mango mealybug. The South side of the plant showed
significantly the highest populations of mango mealybug i.e. 51.5 per branch, whereas
east side showed the lowest populations i.e. 33.4 per branch. Furthermore, all the
cultivars of mango possessed significantly higher population of mango mealybug on
south side of the plant as compared to east. The trend of cultivars towards
susceptibility/resistance was the same as those of observed in their mean values.
4.3.5.2.3 Period of Abundance
The results presented in Table 6b showed significant difference among various
dates of observation and between interaction of dates of observation and plant sides. The
population of mango mealybug started to appear on Jan. 26, 2007 i.e. 2.9 per branch of
30-cm length. This population tremendously jumped to the highest peak i.e. 94.9
individuals per branch on the subsequent dates of observation i.e. Feb. 13, 2007. This
population decreased down to 79.5 per branch on Feb. 28, 2007 and then it increased to
86.7 individuals per branch on Mar. 14, 2007. The decreasing trend in population of
mango mealybug was observed thereafter on the subsequent dates of observation and
reached to 3.5 per branch on May 25, 2007. Similar trend was observed in the interaction
between dates of observation and plant sides. Furthermore, south side showed
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
64
significantly higher population of mango mealybug as compared to east side at all the
dates of observation.
Table 6a. MEANS COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO AT VARIOUS PLANT SIDES DURING 2006-2007.
Name of Cultivar Varieties x direction(**) LSD = 1.06 Average (**)
LSD = 0.75 East South
Anwar Ratul 12.20 t 16.20 s 14.20 k
Black Chaunsa 51.47 h 80.40 b 65.93 b
Chaunsa 54.37 g 85.30 a 69.83 a
Dusehri 21.00 r 30.90 o 25.95 i
Fajri 47.17 j 71.80 d 59.48 d
Langra 36.73 m 56.13 f 46.43 f
Malda 48.90 i 74.90 c 61.90 c
Ratul-12 39.83 l 63.60 e 51.72 e
Sensation 34.57 n 56.27 f 45.42 g
Sindhri 26.97 p 43.17 k 35.07 h
Sufaid Chaunsa 16.57 s 23.20 q 19.88 j
Tukhmi 10.50 u 16.40 s 13.45 k
Average 33.36 b 51.52 a
F-value 307.5 5695.6
Cultivar (n=12) cardinal direction (n=2) df=11 Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
65
Table 6b. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON DIFFERENT DATES OF OBSERVATION AT VARIOUS PLANT SIDES DURING 2006-2007.
Dates of
Observation Dates x direction (**) LSD = 0.97 Average(**)
LSD = 0.68 East South
11-1-2007 0.00 r 0.00 r 0.00 h
26-1-2007 2.28 q 3.53 p 2.90 g
13-2-2007 77.50 e 112.22 a 94.86 a
28-2-2007 64.11 g 94.81 c 79.46 c
14-3-2007 70.39 f 102.92 b 86.65 b
28-3-2007 49.19 h 87.00 d 68.10 d
12-4-2007 27.58 l 37.17 j 32.38 e
27-4-2007 24.22 m 41.89 i 33.06 e
10-5-2007 15.97 n 31.00 k 23.49 f
25-5-2007 2.31 q 4.69 o 3.50 g
F-value 903.9 22300.0
Dates (n=10) cardinal direction (n=2) df=9 F-value= Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Conclusion:
The cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ was found to be relatively susceptible followed by ‘Black
‘Chaunsa’ and ‘Malda’, whereas ‘Tukhmi’ and ‘Anwar Ratul’ were
comparatively resistant with minimum population of mango mealybug.
South direction of the plant showed comparatively higher population of mango
mealybug as compared to east direction in all the cultivars of mango as well as on
average basis.
Second week of Feb. and Mar. showed highest population of mango mealybug. In
general, the 2nd week of Feb. to 4th week of Mar. was the most favorable period
for the development of mango mealybug.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
66
4.3.5.3 Population of Mango Mealybug on Cumulative Basis of
Both Years Studies The data regarding mango mealybug on different cultivars of mango at various
dates of observation during both the study years are presented Table 7a. The results
reveal that all the parameters such as years, dates of observation, plant directions and
cultivars showed significant difference individually as well as on their all possible
interactions. The results are described as under.
The results presented in Table 7a reveal that the cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ was found
susceptible to mango mealybug showing maximum population of the pest i.e. 87.4 per
30-cm branch and differed significantly from those of observed in all other cultivars. The
cultivar ‘Tukhmi’ was found comparatively resistant to mango mealybug with minimum
population of the pest i.e. 15.9 per 30-cm branch. Furthermore, all the cultivars differed
significantly with one another. The descending position of these cultivars are as under.
‘Chaunsa’ > ‘Black Chaunsa’ > ‘Malda’ > ‘Fajri’ > ‘Ratul-12’ > ‘Langra’ >
‘Sensation’ > ‘Sindhri’ > ‘Dusehri’ > ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ > ‘Anwar Ratul’ >’Tukhmi’.
The south direction of the plant showed significantly higher population as
compared to east direction in all the cultivars of mango. Significantly higher population
of mango mealybug was recorded to be 102.7 per 30 cm branch on south side as
compared to east side with 72.0 per 30 cm branch. Similar trend was observed in all the
cultivars.
The data presented in Table 7b based on both study years revealed that population
of mango mealybug was appeared during the 4th week of Jan. and reached to a peak
during 2nd week of Feb. This population decreased down during 4th week of Feb. and then
reached to the highest peak during 2nd week of Mar. This population decreased down
thereafter subsequently and reached to a minimum level of 2.4 per branch of 30-cm
length during 4th week of May. On the basis interaction, south side showed higher
population of mango mealybug as compared to the east side at all the dates of
observation. Mar. 14th had higher population i.e. 125.7 per 30-cm branch length on south
side as compared to east side with 91.9 individuals per 30-cm branch length.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
67
Conclusion:
• The cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ proved to be a susceptible, whereas ‘Tukhmi’ was a
resistant to mango mealybug.
• Maximum population of mealybug was recorded on the South direction of the
plants.
• The months of Feb. and Mar. were the most favourable period for the
development of the pest.
Table 7a. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO AT VARIOUS PLANT SIDES (AVERAGE OF BOTH YEARS).
Name of Cultivars Varieties x direction (**) LSD = 0.77 Average (**)
LSD = 0.54 East South
Chaunsa 72.03 e 102.70 a 87.38 a
Fajri 59.18 i 80.78 d 69.98 d
Langra 40.75 l 65.20 g 52.97 f
Black Chaunsa 65.08 g 92.10 b 78.59 b
Sufaid Chaunsa 19.20 s 28.33 o 23.77 j
Sindhri 34.12 n 52.78 j 43.45 h
Malda 60.95 h 84.92 c 72.93 c
Dusehri 23.62 p 40.35 l 31.98 i
Anwar Ratul 13.33 t 21.40 q 17.37 k
Ratul-12 50.62 k 70.87 f 60.74 e
Tukhmi 11.43 u 20.28 r 15.86 l
Sensation 36.60 m 60.50 h 48.55 g
F-value 362.0 15546.2
Cultivar (n=12) cardinal direction (n=2) df= 11 Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
68
Table 7b. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON DIFFERENT DATES OF OBSERVATION AT VARIOUS PLANT SIDES (AVERAGE OF BOTH YEARS).
Dates of
Observation
Dates x direction (**) LSD = 0.70 Average(**)
LSD = 0.50 East South
January 11 0.00 q 0.00 q 0.00 i
January 26 1.54 p 2.81 o 2.17 h
February13 87.81 f 121.39 b 104.60 b
February 28 71.74 g 101.46 d 86.60 c
March 14 91.90 e 125.68 a 108.79 a
March 28 61.67 h 103.57 c 82.62 d
April 12 38.54 k 58.19 j 48.37 f
April 27 37.47 l 60.38 i 48.92 e
May 10 13.46 n 23.46 m 18.46 g
May 25 1.64 p 3.25 o 2.44 h
F-value 1865.0 58781.0
Dates (n=10) cardinal direction (n=2) df=9 Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
4.3.6 ANTIBIOSIS RESISTANCE AGAINST MANGO MEALYBUG IN
DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO Various biological parameters viz., number of eggs laid per female, weight of
female, length and width of female, length and width of ovisac on different cultivars of
mango were studied during 2007 under field conditions. The results are shown in Table 8,
Column A to F and described under the following sub-sections.
4.3.6.1 Number of Eggs Laid Per Female
The comparison of data regarding mean numbers of eggs laid per female are
given in Table 8. The results reveal highly significant difference among genotypes. The
means were compared by DMR Test at P = 0.05. It is evident from the results (Table 8,
Column A) that maximum number of eggs were laid on the cultivar ‘Chaunsa’
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
69
(335.9/female) and did not differ significantly from those of collected from ‘Black
‘Chaunsa’ (328.9/female) and followed by 305.6, 302.5, 301.9, 293.5 and 286.7 number
of eggs laid by a single female on ‘Malda’, ‘Fajri’, ‘Langra’, ‘Ratul-12’ and ‘Sensation’,
respectively. The later mentioned figures did not show significant difference with one
another.
The minimum number of eggs laid by a single female of mango mealybug was
156.0 on ‘Anwar Ratul’ and did not show significant difference with 159.8 eggs per
female on ‘Tukhmi’. The cultivars ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ and ‘Dusehri’ possessed 187.2 and
186.6 number of eggs per female, respectively and did not show significant differences.
The number of eggs laid by a single female was 217.0 on Sindhri and showed significant
variations with those of found on all other cultivars of mango.
4.3.6.2 Weight of Female
The results (Table 8, Column B) show significant difference among mango
cultivars regarding weight of female. The specimens of mealybug collected from
‘Chaunsa’ cultivar had maximum weight i.e. 0.24 g/female and did not show significant
difference with 0.23 g/female for those specimens which were collected from the cultivar
‘Black Chaunsa’ followed by 0.22 and 0.22 g/female on ‘Malda’ and ‘Fajri’, respectively
and did not show significant difference with one another. The cultivars ‘Sensation’,
‘Ratul-12’ and ‘Langra’ showed similar response statistically regarding weight of female
i.e. 0.19, 0.19 and 0.18 g/female, respectively.
The female collected from ‘Sindhri’ showed 0.17 g/weight per female and
differed significantly from those of observed on all other cultivars of mango. The
minimum weight of female was observed on those specimens that were collected from
‘Tukhmi’ cultivar i.e. 0.11 g/female and did not show significant difference with those of
recorded on ‘Anwar Ratul’ i.e. 0.12 g/female. Similar trend was observed in between
‘Dusehri’ and ‘Anwar Ratul’ which showed 0.12 and 0.12 g weight/female, respectively.
4.3.6.3 Length of Female
The results regarding length of female of mango mealybug on different cultivars
of mango are shown in Table 8, Column C. The results reveal significant variations
among cultivars. The maximum length of female was observed on ‘Chaunsa’ i.e. 1.6
cm/female and showed significant difference from those of observed on all other cultivars
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
70
followed by 1.5, 1.5, 1.5, 1.5, 1.5 and 1.5 cm/female on ‘Malda’, ‘Black ‘Chaunsa’,
‘Ratul-12’, ‘Sensation’, ‘Langra’ and ‘Fajri’, respectively and the later mentioned figures
were not significantly different from one another.The minimum length of female was
observed on cultivar ‘Tukhmi’ and ‘Sindhri’ each showing 1.2 cm/female and did not
show significant variation with 1.2 cm/female on ‘Anwar Ratul’. The average length of
female was found to be 1.3 cm per female on ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ and showed
nonsignificant difference with 1.28 cm per female on ‘Dusehri’.
Table 8. MEANS COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING BIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS OF MANGO MEALYBUG FEEDING ON DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO UNDER FIELD CONDITION.
Name of Cultivars
Eggs per
female (A)**
Female Weight
(g) (B)**
Female Length
(cm) (C)**
Female Width (cm)
(D)**
Ovisac length (mm) (E) **
Ovisac width (mm) (F)**
Anwar Ratul 156.00 e 0.116 fg 1.22 d 0.51 f 5.90 b 4.90 b
Black Chaunsa 328.90 a 0.231 a 1.53 b 0.74 ab 10.20 a 6.20 a
Chaunsa 335.90 a 0.239 a 1.63 a 0.80 a 10.10 a 6.10 a
Dusehri 186.60 d 0.121 ef 1.28 b 0.50 f 5.90 b 4.70 b
Fajri 302.50 b 0.219 b 1.50 b 0.68 bcd 9.90 a 5.80 a
Langra 301.90 b 0.183 c 1.51 b 0.69 bc 10.10 a 6.00 a
Malda 305.60 b 0.222 b 1.54 d 0.70 b 10.00 a 6.30 a
Ratul-12 293.50 b 0.186 c 1.52 b 0.61 e 9.80 a 6.10 a
Sensation 286.70 b 0.186 c 1.52 b 0.63 cde 9.60 a 5.80 a
Sindhri 217.00 c 0.167 d 1.21 cd 0.62 de 5.80 b 5.00 b
Sufaid Chaunsa 187.20 d 0.126 e 1.34 c 0.51 f 5.80 b 4.90 b
Tukhmi 159.80 e 0.113 g 1.21 d 0.45 f 6.00 b 4.70 b
LSD at 5% 18.26076 0.00772 0.07201 0.06429 0.7495 0.7168
F-value 109.5 292.0 35.3 22.4 62.0 6.3
Cultivars (n=12) biological parameters (n=6) df=11 Means sharing similar letters in column A to F are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
71
4.3.6.4 Width of Female
The data relating to the width of female in different cultivars of mango and their
means comparison are presented in Table 8, Column D, reveal significant difference
among cultivars. The maximum width (0.80 cm) of female was observed on cultivar
‘Chaunsa’ which showed a susceptible response and did not differ significantly from 0.74
cm width of female on ‘Black Chaunsa’. The later mention figure also showed
nonsignificant variation with those of observed on ‘Fajri’, ‘Langra’ and ‘Malda’ with
0.68, 0.69 and 0.70 cm width of female, respectively. The minimum width of female was
recorded to be 0.45 cm in ‘Tukhmi’ and did not show significant variation with those of
observed on ‘Anwar Ratul’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ and ‘Dusehri’ with 0.51, 0.51 and 0.50 cm
width of female, respectively. Nonsignificant difference was found to exist between
‘Ratul-12’, ‘Sindhri’ and ‘Sensation’ which showed 0.61, 0.62 and 0.63 cm width of
female, respectively. The later mentioned two figures also showed nonsignificant
difference with those of observed in Fajri.
4.3.6.5 Length of Ovisac
The results presented in Table 8, Column E, showed significant difference among
mango cultivars regarding ovisac length of mango mealybug. The maximum length of
ovisac i.e. 10.20 mm/female was found on cultivar ‘Black Chaunsa’ and did not show
significant difference with those of observed on ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Langra’, ‘Malda’, ‘Fajri’,
‘Ratul-12’ and ‘Sensation’ with 10.10, 10.10, 10.00, 9.90, 9.80 and 9.60 mm length of
ovisac, respectively. The minimum length of ovisac i.e. 5.80 mm each on ‘Sufaid
Chaunsa’ and ‘Sindhri’ was recorded and did not show significant difference with 5.90,
5.90 and 6.00 on ‘Dusehri’, ‘Anwar Ratul’ and ‘Tukhmi’, respectively.
4.3.6.6 Width of Ovisac
The results regarding width of ovisac of female mango mealybug are given in
Table 8, Column F. The maximum width of ovisac was observed to be 6.3 mm on
‘Malda’ and did not differ significantly with 6.2, 6.1, 6.1, 6.0, 5.8 and 5.8 on ‘Black
Chaunsa’, ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Langra’, ‘Fajri’ and ‘Sensation’, respectively. The
minimum width of ovisac was found on those specimens that were collected from the
cultivars ‘Tukhmi’ and ‘Dusehri’ each showing 4.7 mm/female and followed by 4.9, 4.9
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
72
and 5.0 mm width of ovisac on ‘Anwar Ratul’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ and ‘Sindhri’,
respectively.
4.3.7 BIOLOGY OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON SUSCEPTIBLE CULTIVAR ‘CHAUNSA’.
4.3.7.1 First Stadium
Maximum nymphs hatched on 30th and 31st of Dec. 2006 i.e. 416 were caught
from the polyethylene bags with hand made aspirator. These were kept in plastic petri
dishes at ambient temperature in the orchard for 48 hours. On 03-01-07, the nymphs were
released at 10 A.M. in the plastic funnel of two plants. They started their movement
upward the plants. All the nymphs settled themselves on the leaves of plants within 48-72
hours. They were checked daily. After 39 days 4 nymphs out of 405 (11 were found
absent) to stopped feeding, became sluggish and attached to the leaves with no excretion.
These were encircled with black permanent maker with date on the leaves. The nymphs
were covered with whitish powder. After 4-5 days, a streak appeared longitudinally on
the head side of the nymphs and the second instar nymph comes out but remained half in
the exiuvae. After 24 hours the nymphs shed the exiuvae and again started feeding. All
the nymphs shed their exiuvae within 56.5 days (Table 9, Appendix 1). The maximum
number of 188 nymphs were observed which were half in the exiuvae on two dates i.e. on
21 to 22 Feb. were separated from the leaves on 25th and 26th Feb. with camel hair brush
in petri dish. These were kept in room present in the orchard for a period of 24 hours.
4.3.7.2 Second Stadium
The collected 188 nymphs were released on 28th Feb. in the funnel of 3rd plant in
the morning at 10 A.M. These go upward and settled on the leaves and tip of branches
within 48 hours. After 13 days i.e. on 10th Mar. 2 nymphs out of 188 stop their feeding
with no excretion present on the leaves, covered with whitish powder and were encircled
with date. After 4 days on 13th Mar. a streak appeared on the head side longitudinally and
nymphs crawled out but remained half in exiuvae. After 24 hours on 14th Mar. the
nymphs shed exiuvae and again started their feeding. All the nymphs shed their exiuvae
within 26 days (Table 9, Appendix 2). The maximum number of 96 nymphs were
observed which were half in the exiuvae on 15 to 16 Mar. were separated from the leaves
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
73
with camel hair brush in petri dish. These were kept in room present in the orchard for a
period of 24 hours.
Table 9. LIFECYCLE OF MANGO MEALYBUG ON CHAUNSA MANGO ON AN AVERAGE
Stage Duration
Females Males
First Stadium 56.5 days 56.5 days
Second Stadium 26 days 26 days
Third Stadium 19.5 days 3 days
Pupa Absent 12 days
Adult life 29 days 6 days
Number of eggs laid 282 /female -
Number of days in which eggs completed
12.5 days -
Total life from hatching to death of adult
143 days 103 days
4.3.7.3 Third Stadium
The collected 96 nymphs were released in the funnel of 4th plant on 17th Mar.
Among these, 1 nymph out of 96 stopped feeding on 25th Mar. and was seen under the
main branch of the plant covered with whitish powder. After 5 days, on 30th, Mar. a
streak appeared on the head side longitudinally and nymphs crawled out from the exiuvae
but remained half in and half out. After 24 hours, the nymphs leaved the exiuvae and
again started their feeding. All the nymphs shed their exiuvae within 19.5 days (Table 9,
Appendix 3). As soon as the females shed the exiuvae mating started. A maximum
numbers of 41 nymphs were observed on 28th and 29th Mar. stopped feeding which were
collected on 3rd Apr. when they were half in the exiuvae and separated from the leaves
with camel hair brush in petri dish. These were kept at room temperature in the orchard
for 24 hours.
4.3.7.4 Females
Forty one females were released on 5th plant on 4th Apr. As soon as the females
were released on 5th plant, the males gathered there and started the mating. After mating
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
74
the females started feeding on the plants. All the females come down the tree within 29
days. The females took 12.5 days to lay its full quota of eggs, after which it died but its
ovisac remained attached to the body. Total lifecycle of female from hatching to die was
143 days (Table 9, Appendix 4).
4.3.7.5 Males
The 59 male’s nymphs were recorded from all the 5 plants started to come down
on 2nd Apr, (Appendix 5) stopped feeding, gathered in the funnel and hibernate in the
material present in the funnel. After 1 to 5 days the males started pupation. But some
pupate soon after emerging from the exiuvae. Ten males were picked from the funnel
before pupation and put in to a pit of 1.5 x 2 inch covered with petri dish for further
study. The males were checked daily, in the beginning they stopped their movement and
started covering with whitish cocoon on their bodies. Pupation was completed within 2
to 3 days after keeping in the pit and remained in this condition for 12 days. After this
period, winged males of crimson colour came out from the pupae. Adult male life was 6
days and male completed life cycle within 103 days (Table 9). The insect has only one
generation in a year.
4.3.8 STUDY ON THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE PEST
Besides the study of various aspects of the biology of mango mealybug, some
behavioural factors were also taken into consideration for getting more information about
the pest for the effective management and provide base line to the Entomologists. The
aspects are given as under:
4.3.8.1 Speed of Nymphs
The nymphs were negatively geotropic. These started their movements upward
the plant with an average speed of 12.4 cm/minute is given in Appendix 6. Whereas,
second instar move with a speed of an average speed of 17.3 cm / minute. The 3rd instar
nymph moves with an average speed of 37.1 cm / minute.
4.3.8.2 Removal of Whitish Cocoon
Whitish fuzz (naturally occurring on pupa of males in mealybug like cottony
secretions) was removed from the body of 5 males it were constructed again (after its
removal) is given in Appendix 7-9, fuzz of four insects were removed 2nd time again, it
also secreted again but very small in amount, from this pupa healthy males come out.
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
75
Again the fuzz of three insects was removed 3rd time, they did not secrete the fuzz and
dessicated, so no winged males emerged from the pupa. It was concluded that if the fuzz
removed two times, healthy male comes out and if it was removed 3rd time, the male pupa
will not secrete the fuzz again and died.
4.3.8.3 Egg Laying Behaviour
For counting the eggs daily laid by the females, a trench of size 3.81 x 5.08 cm
was dug under the shade of tree in moist soil. In this trench, 5 females were kept singly
for egg laying is given in Fig. 9 Appendix 10. These trenches were covered with plastic
petri dish of size 5.08 cm and labeled them as R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 with date. After
covering the trenches, mud and dried leaves were spread over the dishes for darkness.
Egg were counted daily. It was observed that the first females started egg laying after 5
days and the fifth female started egg laying 12 days after keeping in trench. In the
beginning, maximum eggs were laid daily i.e. 56/day and at the end minimum eggs were
laid i.e. 1/day. The duration of egg laying was ranged from 221 to 361/female in 9 to 16
days. (n=5 mean eggs= 282.4 minimum eggs=221 maximum eggs= 362 SD=36.7)
4.3.8.4 Nymphs Live Without Food
First instar nymph lived without food for 5 to 19 days, 2nd & 3rd instar lived 3 to
23 days whereas, adult females lived up to 8-17 days without feeding is given in
(Appendix 11-13).
4.3.8.5 Copulation Time
The males fly where the females are presents. Mating time of males vary and
were ranged from 6.00 to 20.50 minute. The average mating time per female was 11.57/
minute is given in (Fig 9 Appendix 14). (n=20 mean mating time= 12.2 minute/male
minimum= 6.0 maximum= 20.5 SD=5.1)
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
76
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Av. No of eggs laid Av. Mating time
Fig 9. AVERAGE NUMBER OF EGGS LAID PER FEMALE AND AVERAGE MATING TIME WITH STANDARD DEVIATION
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
77
4.4 DISCUSSION
Population fluctuations of mango mealybug on twelve cultivars viz., ‘Chaunsa’,
‘Fajri’, ‘Langra’, ‘Black Chaunsa’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Malda’, ‘Anwar Ratul’,
‘Dusehri’, ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Tukhmi’ and ‘Sensation’ were studied for two years (2005-2007)
in Multan District. The present studies revealed that ‘Chaunsa’ was the most susceptible
cultivar with maximum population of mango mealybug i.e. 87.4 individuals per 30 cm of
branch whereas minimum population was observed on Tukhmi i.e. 15.9 per 30 cm of
branch. These studies provide compelling evidence that ‘Chaunsa’ is very amenable to
the development and reproduction of the mango mealybug. Other cultivars were ranked
from most susceptible to least susceptible as ‘Black Chaunsa’ > ‘Malda’ > ‘Fajri’ >
‘Ratul-12’ > ‘Langra’ > ‘Sensation’ > ‘Sindhri’ > ‘Dusehri’ > ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ and
‘Anwar Ratul’ with 78.6, 72.9, 69.9, 60.7, 52.9, 48.5, 43.5, 31.9, 23.8 and 17.4
individuals per 30 cm of branch, respectively. Furthermore the southern side of the plant
had significantly higher population of mango mealybug was found than east facing side.
It was also observed that the peak activity period of the pest was 2nd week of Feb. to 2nd
week of Mar. and the population decreased thereafter. The results of present studies are in
contrast to already reported (Matokot et al., 1992). The most probable reason could be
the differences in the methods used to carry out previous studies.
The results of the presence of mealybug on various parts of mango tree suggest
that on southern side maximum population of mango mealybug was present on leaves
and inflorescence, while on the western side of the plant maximum numbers of mango
mealybug was observed on branches. Maximum numbers of mealybugs were observed on
mango tree than on non-target plants such as weeds. The likely speculate that the reason
that mealybugs were more numerous on the south side of the tree has something to do
with ambient temperature. Because of the angle of the sun, the insects on the south and
east sides will get more degree day accumulation than insects on the west or north
cardinal directions. It is recommended that during pest scouting, pest monitoring or
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
78
survey of the pests particularly mango mealybug, southern side of the plant should be
sampled for better results.
The present results are very much similar to the results of Dwivedi et al., (2003)
who observed the highest numbers of mango mealybug at the base of the tree trunk than
on weeds. The most probable reason could be that on weeds mealybug did not find the
same amount of sap as on mango tree and also weeds may not be their preferred host
plant.
Parasitization and predation of the scales was generally higher during 2005-2006
compared to 2006-2007. Since the population of mealybug was higher in 2005-2006 to
2006-2007 therefore natural enemies had enough hosts to parasitize. In contrast Godfray,
(1994), Benrey and Denno (1997) found higher parasitism percentage when the
population was lower.
To determine the impact of host plants on fitness of mango mealybug the
hibernating females decending from tree were collected, weighed and the length and
width were measured. The data on number of eggs laid per female, length and width of
ovisac were also recorded for each cultivar. The data suggested that the female collected
from ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar laid maximum number of eggs (336) while Anwar Ratul cultivar
had minimum (156). Similarly, maximum weight gain, length and width of female and
ovisac were observed on ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar than others. The most probable reason for
such discrimination is that the ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar is the most susceptible and preferred
host for mealybug therefore the insects had enough food to survive and gain weight. It is
well established that higher the weight of female, the more fecund it will be. The data of
trail on different cultivars corroborated with the farmers experience regarding
susceptibility of some mango cultivars like ‘Chaunsa’. We also have found in the present
studies that the ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar has higher percentage of carbohydrates than the other
cultivars (Section III). This finding suggests that carbohydrates might be playing a role to
trigger increased uptake of sap from the vegetative parts resulting more gained weight on
‘Chaunsa’ cultivar than others. The current findings add significantly to those of Balock
and Kozuma (1964); Nachiappan and Bhaskaran (1984); Bagle and Prasad (1984);
Pathak and Dhaliwal (1986); Khaire et al., (1987); Hasen et al., (1989); Angeles (1991);
Dhaliwal et al., (1993); Singh (1993); Carvalho et al., (1996); Dhaliwal and Dilawari
Chapter 4 Population Dynamics, Cultivar Resistance & Biology
79
(1996); Salem et al., (2006), who studied host plant resistance against different insect
pests on different hosts.
Biology and Behaviour of Mango Mealybug on Chaunsa cultivar
The development times for various instars were 57 days, 26 and 20 days for first,
2nd and 3rd instars, respectively. Nymphs were negatively geotropic and the first instar
moved upward with an average speed of 12 cm per minute, 2nd instar 17 cm per minute
and 3rd instar 37 cm per minute. The female laid eggs on an average of 282 in 29 days. In
contrast, mango mealybug female was found to lay 336-, 372- and 300-eggs in the field
(Rahman and Latif, 1944; Haq and Akmal, 1960; Chandra et al., 1987) and these
variations could be due to weather conditions.
Period of abundance
The results of period of abundance suggest that the population was highest in the
months of Feb. to Mar. in Multan. The most probable reason for the peak is favourable
environmental condition in the area. Since the average temperature range between 11 to
24oC with RH 79 percent conditions and these conditions were found to be suitable for
the development of the pest. The present results are similar to Yadav et al., (2004) who
observed higher number of mango mealybug population at average temperature of 27oC
with RH 50 percent but the population decreased with the increase in temperature. In
contrast Yousuf and Gaur (1993) reported highest number of mango mealybug
population in the months of June to July.
80
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to determine the role of various chemicals like nitrogen,
potassium, crude fiber, fat, sodium, ash, carbohydrates, phosphorus, moisture and crude
protein in tolerance to mango mealybug. The cultivars from which the population data of
mango mealybug were collected i.e. ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Fajri’, ‘Langra’, ‘Black Chaunsa’,
‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Malda’, ‘Anwar Ratul’, ‘Dusehri’, ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Sensation’
and one seed born cultivar ‘Tukhmi’ were selected for biochemical analysis from district
Multan during 2005-06 and 2006-07. The chemical contents varies from cultivar to
cultivar however, carbohydrates were significantly higher in leaves of ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar,
which was susceptible to mango mealybug, while Tukhmi, comparatively resistant to
mango mealybug had significantly lower contents of carbohydrates. Furthermore, it was
observed that crude fiber, fat, sodium, ash and crude protein showed negative significant
correlation with the pest population on leaves, while carbohydrate and potassium had
positive correlation with the pest population. All the chemical plant factors on leaves and
inflorescence differed significantly among various cultivars of mango. All the other
factors did not show any specific sequence with the population of the pest in all the
cultivars.
Key words: Cultivars, Chemical factors, leaves, Inflorescence, Mango mealybug
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
81
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Plant resistance to insect pests is one of the most important components of the
integrated pest management (IPM). A wide array of chemical substances including
inorganic chemicals, primary and intermediary metabolites and secondary substances are
known to impart resistance to a wide cultivar of insect pests. The host plant may also be
deficient in certain nutritional elements required by the insects and hence prove resistant.
A number of plant characteristics are known to render the cultivar less suitable or
unsuitable for feeding, oviposition and development of insect pests. The nutritionally
deficient plant may cause antibiotic and antixenotic effects on insect. Antibiosis may
result from the absence of certain nutritional substances in the host plants, deficiency of
some nutritional materials and /or imbalance of available nutrients.The objectives of
these studies were to determine if various chemical viz., nitrogen, potassium, crude fibre,
fat, sodium, ash, carbohydrates, phosphorus, crude protein in leaves and inflorescence
could play an important role in regulating mango mealybug populations.
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
82
5.2 MATERIALS AND METHODS
The leaves of ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Black Chaunsa’, ‘Fajri’, ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Malda’, ‘Langra’,
‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Dusehri’, ‘Anwar Ratul’, ‘Tukhmi’ and ‘Sensation’ cultivars were
plucked from a 30 cm branch of the trees. The leaves were plucked from east, west, south
and north sides of the selected cultivars from three different gardens at the time of insect
data collected. The distance between gardens was ca 3-10 km. The leaves of each cultivar
were kept separately in paper envelope in three repeats and thus the 36 samples of leaves
were obtained from different cultivars. The leaves were brought to Bahauddin Zakariya
University, Multan laboratory, clean them and weighed. These samples were kept in the
oven for the determination of moisture contents. After drying, the leaves were ground in
grinder and fine powder was obtained and used for the determination of chemical
analysis. When the inflorescence comes out, the samples of inflorescence were also
collected and processed as described for leaves.
5.2.1 MOISTURE CONTENT
Freshly picked leaves were cleaned with muslin’s cloth and weighed. The leaves
were then kept in an oven at 65oC for 72 hours. After drying, leaves were weighed again
and the percent moisture was calculated as given below.
Moisture (%) = 100 A
BA ×−
A = Weight of fresh leaves
B = Weight of dried leaves
5.2.2 TOTAL MINERALS
A 2g sample of dried leaf powder of each cultivar was placed in a boron-free
fused silica crucible. The samples were burnt to ashes in muffle furnace at 600oC for five
hours. The dried matter after combustion was weighed again and placed back to same
temperature until it was completely burnt to white ashes to a constant weight. The
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
83
experiment was repeated four times. Total minerals were calculated using formula of
Ranganna (1977).
Total Minerals (%) = 100 B
A ×
A = Weight of the ash
B = Weight of dried leaves
5.2.3 NITROGEN
0.5 g of dried leaves tissue powder from each sample was taken to determine the
nitrogen percentage by Kjeldahl Method. It was calculated by the formula (Winkleman
et. al., 1986).
Nitrogen (%) = ( ) 100 grams smaple ofweight
blank]for titrant of ml -samplefor Titrant of [ml x 14.007 x acid of N ×
The procedure was repeated three times.
5.2.4 CRUDE PROTEIN
The crude protein was calculated by the formula followed by Winklemqan et al.,
(1986) given as under:
Crude Protein (%) = Nitrogen percent x 6.25
5.2.5 FAT CONTENTS
Two grams of the bulk sample was taken in plugged thimble. Fat sample was
extracted with solvent ether on Soxhlet extraction apparatus, for ten hours. The ether
extract was dried and fats were calculated with the help of following formula (A.O.A.C.,
1975).
Fats (%) = 100 sample ofweight
extractether ofweight ×
5.2.6 CRUDE FIBRE
The small sample left behind after fat extraction was dried and digested with 1.25
percent H2SO4 on crude fibre extraction apparatus. The digested material was then
filtered, re-digested with N/10 NaOH and re-filtered. The materials left on the filter paper
were dried and then ignited in muffle furnace for 30 minutes. After cooling for one hour
in a desiccator’s, the ignited material was weighed. The loss in weight after ignition was
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
84
measured and the crude fibre was calculated by using the following formula (A.O.A.C.,
1975).
Crude fibre (%) = 100 sample theofweight
ignitionon in weight loss ×
5.2.7 SOLUBLE CARBOHYDRATES
Following formula was used to determine the soluble carbohydrates (A.O.A.C.,
1975).
Soluble Carbohydrates (%) = 100 - crude protein+ percent fats + crude fibre + percent
ashes.
There were three replications for the determination of each component.
5.2.8 SAMPLE DIGESTION FOR MACRO NUTRIENTS
One gram of the material from each sample was weighed to determine the
macronutrients and digested in 10 ml concentrated nitric acid (HNO3) and an equal
quantity of 72 percent perchloric acid (HCLO4) was added. The volume was then reduced
to 3 ml and the sample became colourless, it was placed on ice to lower the temperature
and then transferred to volumetric flask. The volume was increased to 100 ml by adding
distilled water. The samples were then filtrated and stored in falcon tubes for further
analysis.
5.2.8.1 Phosphorus
Phosphorus was determined by using the digested materials from previous section
of samples following method 56 and 61 (Richard, 1954), respectively on Spectro
Photometer AnA-720 w Tokyo, Photoelectric Co. Ltd. Japan using 470 mm wavelength
as the characteristic band.
5.2.8.2 Potassium and Sodium
These were determined by using the digested materials with the help of Methods
55a, 58a and 57 a (Richard, 1954), respectively on Flame Photometer, Jenway Ltd.
Felsted CM6 3LB, DUNMOW ESSEX England.
5.2.9 STATISTICAL CORRELATIONS
The effect of macro and micronutrients on mealybug population has been studied
previously however in the present study I was interested to find out if there is
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
85
correlationship between mealybug population and various nutrients in different parts of
mango trees.
Simple correlation was worked out between population and chemical factors
individually and cumulatively by using Multiple Linear Regression Equation of the Type
1 viz., = a + b1x1+ X b2x2 X b3x3 X b4x4………………………where population of
mealybug was taken as the Response Variables (Y) and the X represent the chemical
factors in the equation.
The data were analyzed on an IBM-PC Computer using M. Stat (Steel and Torrie,
1980) Package. Means were separated by Duncan’s New Multiple Range Test (DMRT)
(Duncan, 1955).
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
86
5.3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Various biochemical factors such as nitrogen, potassium, crude fiber, fats,
sodium, ashes, carbohydrate, phosphorus, moisture and crude protein in leaves and
inflorescence of different cultivars of mango viz., ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Fajri’, ‘Langra’, ‘Black
Chaunsa’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Malda’, ‘Dusehri’, ‘Anwar Ratul’, ‘Ratul-12’,
‘Tukhmi’ and ‘Sensation’ in their leaves and inflorescence were determined and
correlated with the population data with the objective to find the role of these factors
towards resistance/susceptibility. The results are described below.
5.3.1 CHEMICAL FACTORS IN LEAVES OF DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO
5.3.1.1 Nitrogen
The results regarding nitrogen contents in the leaves of various cultivars of mango
reveal significant differences between among various mango cultivars (Table 1, Column
A). The maximum nitrogen content (3.0 percent) was observed in ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’
leaves which were significantly higher than ‘Dusehri’, ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Langra’ and ‘Anwar
Ratul’, i.e. 2.1, 1.8, 1.6 and 1.6 percent nitrogen contents, respectively. The minimum
nitrogen content was recorded to be 1.2 percent in the leaves of both ‘Tukhmi’ and ‘Fajri’
cultivars. Nonsignificant differences were found in the leaves of ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Black
Chaunsa’ and ‘Sindhri’ with 1.6, 1.5 and 1.6 percent nitrogen, respectively. Similarly
nitrogen content i.e. 1.4 percent each in the leaves of ‘Malda’ and ‘Tukhmi’ did not show
significant difference with one another (Table 1).
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
87
Table 1. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING CHEM ICAL CONSTITUENTS (PERCENT) OF LEAVES IN DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO
Cultivar (n=12) Chemical constituents (n=10) df=11 Means sharing similar letters in columns A to J for means did not differ significantly by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Cultivars Nitrogen Potassium Crude
Fibre Fat Sodium Ash Carbohydrates Phosphorus Moisture Crude
protein A** B** C** D** E** F** G** H** I** J**
Anwar Ratul 1.64 d 1.078 fg 28 a 3.5 a 0.334 b 14 a 44.29 j 1.39 b 50.49 k 10.20 e Black Chaunsa
1.52 e 1.466 b 14 e 1.5 e 0.224 e 9 d 66.02 b 0.47 j 57.89 b 9.48 g
Chaunsa 1.58 de 1.201 d 11 f 2.0 d 0.185 f 11 bc 66.16 a 0.42 k 60.60 a 9.84 f Dusehri 2.10 b 1.008 h 20 cd 2.5 c 0.259 d 14 a 50.37 h 1.17 d 54.58 e 13.13 c Fajri 1.23 g 1.192 d 19 cd 2.5 c 0.297 c 9 d 61.84 d 2.08 a 49.94 l 7.66 i Langra 1.64 d 1.034 .c 15 e 3.0 b 0.259 d 12 b 59.79 f 1.24 c 56.06 c 10.21 e Malda 1.40 f 2.748 a 14 e 3.0 b 0.222 e 12 b 62.25 c 0.97 e 50.70 j 8.75 h Ratul-12 1.75 c 1.080 fg 16 e 1.5 e 0.408 a 11 bc 60.59 e 0.62 g 51.56 i 10.94 d Sensation 1.40 f 1.158 de 18 d 3.5 a 0.222 e 10 cd 59.75 f 0.52 i 53.95 f 8.75 h Sindhri 1.58 de 1.123 ef 20 cd 2.5 c 0.258 d 10 cd 57.66 g 0.74 f 53.77 g 9.84 f Sufaid Chaunsa
3.04 a 1.060 gh 21 c 2.5 c 0.259 d 10 cd 47.54 i 0.57 h 55.68 d 18.96 a
Tukhmi 1.23 g 1.096 fg 24 b 2.5 c 0.259 d 14 a 43.80 k 0.22 l 52.78 h 15.63 b LSD @ 5% 0.0927 0.0535 1.9718 0.1776 0.00535 1.725184 0.05354 0.016 0.1693 0.05354 F-value 256.7 566.1 49.6 118.2 3638.4 10.2 357907.2 220.6 3145.4 51535.0
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
88
5.3.1.2 Potassium
The results relating to potassium contents in the leaves of various cultivars of
mango show significant variations among cultivars (Table 1, Column B). The maximum
potassium content (2.75 percent) was found in the leaves of ‘Malda’ and differed
significantly from those of observed in the leaves of all other cultivars followed by 1.47,
1.03, 1.20, 1.19 and 1.15 percent potassium contents in the leaves of ‘Black Chaunsa’,
‘Langra’, ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Fajri’ and ‘Sensation’, respectively. The later mentioned figure in
cultivar ‘Sensation’ also did not show significant variation with those of observed in the
leaves of ‘Sindhri’ i.e. 1.12 percent potassium. Nonsignificant difference were found to
exist among ‘Tukhmi’, ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Anwar Ratul’ and ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ having 1.09,
1.08, 1.07 and 1.06 percent potassium contents in their leaves, respectively. The
minimum potassium content was determined in the leaves of ‘Dusehri’ i.e. 1.01 percent
and did not show significant difference with those of observed in the leaves of ‘Sufaid
Chaunsa’ (1.06 percent).
5.3.1.3 Crude Fiber
The results pertaining to crude fiber in the leaves of various cultivars of mango
reveal significant difference among cultivars (Table 1, Column C). The maximum crude
fiber contents (28.0 percent) was observed in the leaves of ‘Anwar Ratul’ and differed
significantly from those of observed in the leaves of all other cultivars followed by 24.0,
21.0, 20.0, 20.0, 19.0 and 18.0 percent crude fiber contents in the leaves of ‘Tukhmi’,
‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Dusehri’, ‘Fajri’ and ‘Sensation’, respectively. The
minimum crude fiber contents was found to be 11.00 percent in the leaves of ‘Chaunsa’
and differed significantly from those of observed in all other cultivars. Nonsignificant
differences were found to exist among leaves of ‘Black Chaunsa’ (14.0 percent), Langra
(15.0 percent), Malda (14.0 percent) and Ratul-12 (16.0 percent) in crude fiber contents.
5.3.1.4 Fat Contents
Significant variations were found to exist among cultivars regarding fat contents
in their leaves (Table 1, Column D). The maximum fat contents was found in the leaves
of Anwar Ratul and Sensation with 3.5 percent each and differed significantly from those
of observed in all other cultivars followed by 3.0 percent fat contents each in the leaves
of ‘Malda’ and ‘Langra’. No significant differences were found to exist among ‘Fajri’,
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
89
‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Dusehri’ and ‘Tukhmi’ each showing 2.5 percent fat
contents in their leaves. The minimum fat content was found in the leaves of ‘Ratul-12’
and ‘Black Chaunsa’ each showing 1.5 percent fat contents. The cultivar ‘Chaunsa’
showed 2.0 percent fat contents in the leaves and differed significantly from those of
observed in the leaves of all other cultivars.
5.3.1.5 Sodium Contents
Differences were found to be significant among cultivars regarding sodium
contents in their leaves (Table 1, Column E). The maximum sodium contents was
observed in the leaves of ‘Ratul-12’ at 0.41 percent followed by 0.33 and 0.30 percent in
the leaves of ‘Anwar Ratul’ and ‘Fajri’, respectively and showed significant difference
with each other as well as from those of observed in all other cultivars. Nonsignificant
differences was found to exist among ‘Langra’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Dusehri’
and ‘Malda’ showed 0.26, 0.26, 0.26, 0.26 and 0.26 percent sodium contents in their
leaves, respectively. The cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ possessed the lowest sodium percentage in
the leaves i.e. 0.19 and differed significantly from those of observed in leaves all other
cultivars as well as in the leaves of Sensation with 0.22 percent sodium contents.
5.3.1.6 Ash Contents
The results regarding ash contents in the leaves of different cultivars of mango
reveal significant variations among cultivars (Table 1, Column F). The leaves of
‘Tukhmi’, ‘Anwar Ratul’ and ‘Dusehri’ showed maximum ash contents i.e. 14.00 percent
each followed by 12.00 percent in the leaves of each ‘Langra’ and ‘Malda’. The cultivar
‘Ratul-12’ and ‘Chaunsa’ each contained 11.00 percent ash contents in the leaves and
showed nonsignificant difference with those of observed in the leaves of ‘Sensation’,
‘Sindhri’ and ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ each contained 10.00 percent ash contents as well as with
those of observed in the leaves of ‘Langra’ and ‘Malda’. Non significant difference was
also observed in the leaves of ‘Fajri’ and ‘Black Chaunsa’ each showed 9.00 percent ash
contents and was statistically at par with the contents in the leaves of ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’,
‘Sindhri’ and ‘Sensation’.
5.3.1.7 Carbohydrate
All the cultivars of mango differed significantly with one another regarding
carbohydrate contents in their leaves (Table 1, Column G). The cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ had
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
90
the highest carbohydrates in the leaves i.e. 66.2 percent followed by 66.0, 62.3 and 61.8
percent in the leaves of ‘Black Chaunsa’, ‘Malda’ and ‘Fajri’, respectively. The lowest
carbohydrate was observed in the leaves of ‘Tukhmi’ i.e. 43.8 percent and also differed
significantly from those of observed in the leaves of all other cultivars. Nonsignificant
variation was found to exist between ‘Langra’ and ‘Sensation’ showing 59.8 and 59.8
percent carbohydrates in their leaves, respectively. The cultivar ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Sindhri’,
‘Dusehri’ and ‘Anwar Ratul’ contained 60.6, 50.4, 47.5 and 44.3 percent carbohydrates in
their leaves, respectively and were differed significantly from each other.
5.3.1.8 Phosphorus
The results regarding phosphorus contents in the leaves of various mango
cultivars reveal significant variation among cultivars (Table 1, Column H). The
maximum phosphorus contents was observed to be 2.1 percent in the leaves of ‘Fajri’ and
differed significantly from those of observed in the leaves of all other cultivars of mango.
The minimum phosphorus content was found to be 0.2 percent in the leaves of ‘Tukhmi’
and also differed significantly from those of observed in the leaves of all other cultivars.
The phosphorus contents in descending order were 1.4, 1.2, 1.2, 1.0, 0.7, 0.6, 0.6, 0.5, 0.5
and 0.4 percent in the leaves of ‘Anwar Ratul’, ‘Langra’, ‘Dusehri’, ‘Malda’, ‘Sindhri’,
‘Ratul-12’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sensation’, ‘Black Chaunsa’ and ‘Chaunsa’, respectively.
5.3.1.9 Moisture
The results relating to moisture percentage in the leaves of various mango
cultivars showed significant variation among cultivars (Table 1, Column I). Maximum
moisture percentage was recorded to be 60.6 in the leaves of ‘Chaunsa’ followed by 57.9
56.1, 55.7, 54.6, 54.0, 54.0, 53.0, 51.6, 50.7 and 50.5 percent in the leaves of ‘Black
Chaunsa’, ‘Langra’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Dusehri’, ‘Sensation’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Tukhmi’,
‘Ratul-12’, ‘Malda’ and ‘Anwar Ratul’, respectively and all these showed significant
difference from each other. The minimum moisture percentage was observed to be 49.9
in the leaves of ‘Fajri’ and also showed significant variation from those of observed in
the leaves of all other cultivars of mango.
5.3.1.10 Crude Protein
. The results relating to crude protein in the leaves of various cultivars of mango
reveal significant difference among cultivars (Table 1, Column J). The maximum crude
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
91
protein was observed in the leaves of ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ i.e. 19.0 percent followed by
15.6, 13.1 and 14.9 percent in the leaves of ‘Tukhmi’, ‘Dusehri’ and ‘Ratul-12’,
respectively. No significant differences were found to exist between ‘Chaunsa’ and
‘Sindhri’ each showing 9.8 percent crude protein in their leaves. Similarly ‘Langra’ and
‘Anwar Ratul’ did not show significant difference regarding crude protein in their leaves
showing 10.2 and 10.2 percent, respectively. The protein contents were 8.8 percent in the
leaves of each ‘Malda’ and ‘Sensation’ and also showed nonsignificant difference from
one another. The minimum crude protein was found to be 7.7 percent in the leaves of
‘Fajri’ and showed significant difference with those of observed in the leaves of ‘Black
Chaunsa’ i.e. 9.5 percent and as well as from those of observed in all other cultivars.
5.3.2 CHEMICAL FACTORS IN INFLORESCENCE IN DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO
5.3.2.1 Nitrogen
The data regarding nitrogen percentage in the inflorescence of different cultivars
of mango are given in Table 2, Column A. The results reveal significant differences
among cultivars. The cultivar ‘Tukhmi’ showed maximum nitrogen percentage in
inflorescences i.e. 2.0 and showed significant difference with those of observed in all
other cultivars followed by 1.9 percent nitrogen contents in inflorescences of each
‘Dusehri’, ‘Malda’, ‘Langra’ and ‘Chaunsa’ which were statistically similar with one
another. The minimum nitrogen content was found to be 1.6 percent in the inflorescence
of each ‘Black Chaunsa’ and ‘Ratul-12’ which also showed nonsignificant difference
with each other. The cultivars ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Anwar Ratul’ and ‘Sensation’ did not
show significant difference with one another regarding nitrogen contents with 1.6, 1.6
and 1.6 percent, respectively. The later mentioned figure also showed nonsignificant
variation with those of observed in ‘Ratul-12’ and ‘Black Chaunsa’. The cultivars ‘Fajri’
and ‘Sindhri’ possessed 1.9 and 1.8 percent nitrogen percentage in their inflorescence and
differed significantly with each other.
5.3.2.2 Potassium
The results (Table 2, Column B) reveal significant variation among cultivars
regarding potassium contents in their inflorescence. The cultivar ‘Malda’ had
significantly the highest potassium contents followed by 1.9, 1.9, 1.9, 1.9 and 1.8 percent
in the inflorescence of ‘Fajri’, ‘Sensation’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ and ‘Black
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
92
Chaunsa’, respectively and did not differ significantly with one another. Minimum
content of potassium was observed to be 1.6 percent in the inflorescence of ‘Chaunsa’
and did not show significant difference with 1.6 percent in ‘Langra’. Similarly ‘Anwar
Ratul’ and ‘Ratul-12’ showed no significant difference from each other having 1.7 and
1.8 percent potassium, respectively. Also no significant difference was also observed in
the inflorescence of ‘Tukhmi’ and ‘Dusehri’ with 1.5 and 1.5 percent potassium content,
respectively.
5.3.2.3 Crude Fibre
The results presented in (Table 2, Column C) reveal significant differences among
mango cultivars regarding crude fiber contents. The maximum contents of crude fiber
was observed to be 12.0 percent in the inflorescence of each ‘Fajri’, ‘Malda’ and ‘Anwar
Ratul’ and showed nonsignificant difference with 11.0, 11.0, 11.0, 10.0 and 10.0 crude
fiber contents in the inflorescence of ‘Tukhmi’, ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Dusehri’, ‘Sindhri’ and
‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, respectively. The cultivars ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Black Chaunsa’ and ‘Langra’
each had 8.0 percent crude fiber in their inflorescence and did not differed significantly
from ‘Sensation’ 7.0 percent crude fiber in the inflorescence.
5.3.2.4 Fat Contents
The results pertaining to fat contents in the inflorescence of various cultivars
reveal significant difference among cultivars (Table 2, Column D). ‘Anwar Ratul’ and
‘Sensation’ had the highest fat contents with 3.5 percent each. These cultivars were
followed by ‘Malda’ and ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ with 3.0 and 2.5 percent fat contents
respectively. ‘Malda’ and ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ and differed significantly with one another as
well as with ‘Anwar Ratul’ and ‘Sensation’. Fat contents of 1.5 percent was found in the
inflorescence of each ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Fajri’, ‘Langra’, ‘Black Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Ratul-12’
and ‘Tukhmi’ had the same fat content (1.5 percent). The lowest fat content was found in
the inflorescence of ‘Dusehri’ at 1.0 percent and differed significantly from those of
observed in all other cultivars.
5.3.2.5 Sodium
Significant variations were found to exist among cultivars regarding sodium
contents in their inflorescence (Table 2, Column E). The lowest sodium content was
found to be 0.223 percent in the inflorescence of ‘Tukhmi’ and this differed significantly
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
93
from those of observed in all other cultivars. No significant difference was found to exist
between ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Langra’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’ and ‘Anwar Ratul’ each
possessed 0.19 percent sodium contents in their inflorescence. Similarly nonsignificant
variation was found to exist among ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Dusehri’, ‘Malda’, ‘Black Chaunsa’ and
‘Fajri’ all contained 0.15 percent sodium content in their inflorescence and categorized as
intermediate.
5.3.2.6 Ash Contents
The data regarding ash content in the inflorescence of various cultivars of mango
are given in (Table 2, Column F). The results reveal that highest ash contents were
observed in the inflorescence of ‘Tukhmi’ (7 percent) and ‘Chaunsa’ (6 percent). All the
other cultivars had significantly lower ash content. These other varieities did not differ
significantly regarding ash content present in their inflorescence and ranged from 2 to 4
percent.
5.3.2.7 Carbohydrate
Significant differences were found to exist among cultivars of mango regarding
carbohydrates present in their inflorescence (Table 2, Column G) The highest
carbohydrate level was observed in the inflorescence of ‘Sensation’ (79.3 percent) and
followed by the inflorescences of ‘Black Chaunsa’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ and ‘Ratul-12’ with
77.7, 75.8 and 75.7 percent carbohydrate, respectively. The later mentioned figures also
differed significantly from one another. The lowest carbohydrate was observed in the
inflorescence of ‘Tukhmi’ (58.8 percent) and this differed significantly from other
cultivars of mango tested viz., ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Fajri’, ‘Langra’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Malda’, ‘Dusehri’
and ‘Anwar Ratul’ with 72.5, 70.8, 71.5, 74.6, 70.5, 74.0 and 73.4 percent carbohydrates
in their inflorescence, respectively and ranked as intermediate.
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
94
Table 2. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING CHEMICAL CON STITUENTS (PERCENT) OF INFLORESCENCE IN DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO
Cultivars Nitrogen Potassium Crude fibre Fat Sodium Ash Carbohydrates Phosphorus
Crude protein
A** B** C** D** E** F** G** H** I** Anwar Ratul 1.64 e 1.73 e 12 a 3.50 a 0.185 b 3 b 73.43 g 4.12 e 10.57 e Black Chaunsa 1.58 f 1.84 cd 8 b 1.50 d 0.148 c 3 b 77.66 b 7.51 b 9.78 h Chaunsa 1.92 b 1.60 f 8 b 1.50 d 0.185 b 6 a 72.47 h 3.52 i 12.03 b Dusehri 1.92 b 1.49 g 11 a 1.00 e 0.148 c 2 b 73.97 f 4.02 g 12.03 b Fajri 1.86 c 1.93 b 12 a 1.50 d 0.148 c 4 b 70.83 j 3.35 j 11.67 c Langra 1.92 b 1.63 f 8 b 1.50 d 0.185 b 4 b 71.47 i 2.28 l 12.03 b Malda 1.92 b 2.13 a 12 a 3.00 b 0.148 c 4 b 70.47 k 7.42 c 12.03 b Ratul-12 1.58 f 1.78d e 11 a 1.50 d 0.148 c 2 b 75.66 d 5.46 d 9.84 g Sensation 1.60e f 1.90 bc 7 b 3.50 a 0.148 c 3 b 79.25 a 9.89 a 8.75 i Sindhri 1.75 d 1.89 bc 10 a 1.50 d 0.185 b 3 b 74.56 e 3.67 h 10.94 d Sufaid Chaunsa 1.64 e 1.87 bc 10 a 2.50 c 0.185 b 3 b 75.79 c 4.09 f 10.21 f Tukhmi 2.04 a 1.52 g 11 a 1.50 d 0.223 a 7 a 58.78 l 2.78 k 12.76 a Lsd @5% 0.05354 0.07572 1.7686 0.05354 0.01693 1.7686 0.01693 0.01693 0.05354 F-value 256.7 566.1 49.6 118.2 3638.4 10.2 357907.2 220.6 51535.0 Cultivar (n=12) Chemical constituents (n=9) df=11 Means sharing similar letters in columns A to I for means did not differ significantly by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
95
5.3.2.8 Phosphorus
Significant variations were found to exist among cultivars regarding phosphorus
content in their inflorescence (Table 2, Column H). The cultivar ‘Sensation’ showed the
highest phosphorus content and differed significantly from those of observed in all other
cultivars. The lowest phosphorus contents was found to be 2.3 percent in the
inflorescence of ‘Langra’ cultivar and also showed significant variations from those of
observed in all other cultivars. The descending position of other cultivars were ‘Black
Chaunsa’, ‘Malda’, ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Anwar Ratul’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Dusehri’, ‘Sindhri’,
‘Chaunsa’, ‘Fajri’ and ‘Tukhmi’ with 7.5, 7.4, 5.5, 4.1, 4.1, 4.0, 3.7, 3.5, 3.4 and 2.8
percent phosphorus contents, respectively and all these cultivars differed significantly
with one another.
5.3.2.9 Crude Protein
The highest crude protein observed was 12.8 percent in the inflorescence of
‘Tukhmi’ and this differed significantly from those of found in all other cultivars and
followed by 12.0 percent crude protein for ‘Dusehri’, ‘Malda’, ‘Langra’, and ‘Chaunsa’
(Table 2, Column I). The lowest crude protein was found to be 9.8 percent in the
inflorescence of ‘Black Chaunsa’ which was significantly greater than observed in the
inflorescence of all other cultivars of mango. The descending position of other cultivars
was ‘Fajri’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Anwar Ratul’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ and ‘Ratul-12’ with 11.7, 10.9,
10.6, 10.2 and 9.5 percent crude protein in their inflorescence, respectively, and all
differed significantly from one another statistically.
5.3.3 IMPACT OF VARIOUS CHEMICAL FACTORS ON THE POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG Various chemical factors determined from the leaves and inflorescence of
different mango cultivars were correlated with the respective populations on the leaves
and inflorescence. The same parameters were processed for multiple linear regression
models through steps to see the impact of chemical factors and also determined the role
of individual chemical factors in the fluctuation of the population of mango mealybug on
the leaves and inflorescence. The results are presented under the following sub-sections.
5.3.3.1 Simple Correlation
The results presented in Table 3 reveal that crude fiber, fat, sodium, ashes and
crude protein contents showed negative and significant correlation with the population of
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
96
mango mealybug on leaves, whereas carbohydrate and potassium had significant and
positive correlation with the population of the pest. Nitrogen, phosphorus and moisture
percentage did not show significant correlation with the population of mango mealybug.
All the chemical plant factors resulted nonsignificant correlation with the
population of mango mealybug on inflorescence except crude fiber and nitrogen. Crude
fiber showed negative, whereas nitrogen showed positive and significant correlation with
the pest population.
Table 3. SIMPLE CORRELATION BETWEEN POPULATION OF MEALYBUG ON MANGO LEAVES AND INFLORESCENCE ALONG WITH BIOCHEMICAL FACTORS.
Constituents Leaves Inflorescence
Ash -0.595** 0.225
Carbohydrate 0.257** 0.133
Crude fibre -0.884** -0.340*
Crude protein -0.664** -0.034
Fat 0.400** -0.134
Moisture 0.300 -
Nitrogen -0.293 0.369*
Phosphorus 0.101 0.136
Potassium 0.482** 0.305
Sodium -0.317* -0.152
Leaves (n=10) and Inflorescence constituents (n=9) *= Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
5.3.3.2 Multiple Linear Regression Models
5.3.3.2.1 Impact of Chemical Factors in Population Fluctuation of Mango
Mealybug on Leaves
The results regarding multiple linear regression models between population
fluctuation of mango mealybug on leaves and chemical factors along with coefficient of
determination value are presented in Table 4. The results reveal that nitrogen content
showed 8.6 percent role in the population fluctuation of mango mealybug and the impact
was found to be nonsignificant. With the addition of potassium contents this role
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
97
increased up to 25.9 percent in population fluctuation of the pest. The individual
contribution of potassium was calculated to be 17.3 percent. The impact of potassium
was however highly significant. Crude fiber exerted maximum contribution i.e. 55.8
percent in the population fluctuation for the pest and found to be the most important
chemical. All the other factors were not so important which contributed 0.0 to 8.3 percent
role in the population fluctuation of the pest. From these results it was observed that the
effect of all the factors when computed together resulted in 96.5 percent contribution in
population fluctuation of the pest. Therefore, it was concluded that all the factors when
computed together contributed a significant role towards the resistance/susceptibility
rather than a single factor.
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
98
Table 4. MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION MODELS BETWEEN POPULATION OF MEALYBUG ON MANGO LEAVES AND BIOCHEMICAL FACTORS ALONG WITH COEFFICIENT OF DETERMINATION VALUES.
Regression Equation D.F. F-
value P-
value R2 Individual
Role (%) Y = 16.03 – 4.54 X1 34 2.78 0.08 0.086 8.6 X1
**Y= 4.37 – 2.63 X1 + 6.66 X2** 33 2.70 0.004 0.259 17.3 X2 **Y= 27.07 - 2.56 X1* + 1.08 X2- 3.57 X3 32 3.17 0.001 0.187 55.8 X3 **Y= 27.37-2.64 X1* + 1.63 X2 -3.33 X3**-
1.13 X4 31 2.50 0.001 0.823 0.6 X4
**Y= 21.75 - 2.61 X1* + 1.65X2 -3.57 X3**-0.68 X4 + 6.63 X5
30 2.16 0.001 0.854 3.30 X5
**Y= 25.52 - 2.50 X1** + 2.16 X2*-3.11X3**-0.02 X4 + 8.09 X5 - 2.52 X6**
29 2.21 0.002 0.906 5.2 X6
**Y= 26.22-2.25 X1**+1.94 X2-3.16 X3**-0.01 X4 + 8.18 X5-2.58 X6**-0.05 X7
28 2.37 0.003 0.906 0.0 X7
**Y= 34.47-2.44 X1**+1.61 X2-2.03 X3**-1.50 X4-3.70 X5-2.25 X6**-0.07 X7+2.48 X8**
27 2.38 0.005 0.938 3.2 X8
**Y= 26.05-2.67 X1**+2.07 X2-2.77 X3**-1.39 X4-1.03 X5-2.31 X6-0.07 X7** +2.57 X8** +0.70X9
26 2.43 0.004 0.938 0.0 X9
**Y= 45.40+1.58 X1+1.02 X2-2.36 X3**-2.71 X4**-8.84 X5-1.48 X6**-0.11 X7+1.02 X8-0.70 X9-2.15 X10**
25 3.59 0.003 0.965 3.5 X10
Where X1 =Nitrogen X2 =Potassium X3 =Crude fibre X4=Fat
X5 =Sodium X6 =Ash X7 =Carbohydrates X8=Phosphorus X9 =Moisture X10=Crude Protein
* = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
5.3.3.2.2 Impact of Chemical Factors in Population Fluctuation of Mango
Mealybug on Inflorescence
Linear multiple regression models between population fluctuation of mango
mealybug on inflorescence and different chemical factors (Table 5) indicated that
nitrogen content had a significant impact on the population fluctuation of the pest and
explained 13.6 percent of the variation in the insect fluctuation. Ash content explained
26.4 percent of the variation in the population fluctuation of the pest and was found to be
the most important factor. The coefficient of determination value was calculated to be
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
99
0.54 when the effects of all the chemical factors were computed together. It was again
concluded here that a combination of factors may contributed a significant impact on the
population fluctuation of mango mealybug rather than a single factor.
Table 5. LINEAR MULTIPLE REGRESSION MODELS BETWEEN POPULATION OF MEALYBUG ON MANGO INFLORESCENCE AND BIOCHEMICAL FACTORS ALONG WITH COEFFICIENT OF DETERMINATION VALUES.
Regression Equation D.F. F-value
P- value
R2 Individual Role (%)
*Y = -4.96+3.59* X1 34 1.46 0.03 0.136 13.6 X1 Y = -5.80+3.23 X1+1.37 X2 33 0.31 0.73 0.137 0.1 X2 Y = -1.12+1.54 X1+3.73 X2-1.59 X3 32 2.47 0.07 0.179 4.2 X3 Y = -9.18+3.66 X1+2.96 X2-2.25 X3+1.36
X4 31 2.28 0.08 0.237 5.8 X4
Y = -9.49+3.68 X1+2.99 X2-2.25 X3+1.35 X4+0.02 X5
30 1.77 0.14 0.237 0.0 X5
**Y = -36.24+4.89 X1+0.61 X2-3.47 X3**+ 0.33 X4 +0.39 X5+18.12 X6**
29 1.15 0.01 0.483 26.4 X6
**Y = -36.00+5.05 X1-0.04 X2-3.48 X3**+ 0.46 X4+0.35 X5+18.15 X6**+0.17 X7
28 1.67 0.00 0.497 1.4 X7
**Y = -35.52 +5.07 X1-0.62 X2-3.51 X3** +0.46 X4+0.35 X5+18.26**X6+0.17 X7+0.12 X8
27 2.45 0.00 0.498 0.1 X8
**Y = -36.64+6.81 X1-1.63 X2-2.99 X3**+ 0.22 X4+0.32 5+19.75**X6+0.09X7-0.24 X8-1.45 X9
26 2.86 0.00 0.539 4.1 X9
Where X1 =Nitrogen X2 =Potassium X3 =Crude fibre X4=Fat
X5 =Sodium X6 =Ash X7 =Carbohydrates X8=Phosphorus X9 =Protein
* = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
100
5.4 DISCUSSION
A study was conducted to determine the role of various chemicals like nitrogen,
potassium, crude fiber, fat, sodium, ash, carbohydrates, phosphorus, moisture and crude
protein in tolerance to mango mealybug. The chemical contents varies from cultivar to
cultivar however, carbohydrates were significantly higher in leaves of ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar,
which was susceptible to mango mealybug, while Tukhmi, comparatively resistant to
mango mealybug had significantly lower contents of carbohydrates. The present findings
are similar to that of Haviland et. al. (2006) who reported that increased concentration of
carbohydrates affecting the population of gill’s mealybugs (Ferrisia gilli). The
mealybugs having strawlike mouth parts through which it feed on the carbohydrates
available in the juices of the plants. During the late summer and spring they like to feed
on the stem of plant bearing flowers and cluster, respectively, where they rob the
carbohydrates from the tree, which is necessary for fruit development. Further Busgen
1891 proposed the role of carbohydrates in a slightly different way. He reported that the
insects attempted to obtain needed supply of protein, which apparently was present in
small quantities in plant sap; in the process of obtaining the protein supply, excess
carbohydrates and water were imbibed, and these were eliminated as honeydew.
Furthermore, it was observed that crude fiber, fat, sodium, ash and crude protein
showed negative significant correlation with the pest population on leaves, while
carbohydrate and potassium had positive correlation with the pest population. Similarly
the pest population on inflorescence showed no significant correlation with most of the
chemicals analyzed. Linear Multiple Regression Models showed that crude fiber was the
most important content in leaves which played a maximum role i.e. 55.80 percent in
population fluctuation of mango mealybug on leaves followed by potassium, sodium,
nitrogen, crude protein, phosphorus and fat contents. In case of pest population recorded
on inflorescence, ash contents showed maximum contribution i.e. 26.04 percent in
population fluctuation of the pest followed by nitrogen, fat, crude fiber, protein,
phosphorus and potassium. In contrast to my findings, Tobih et al., (2002) have shown
Chapter 5 Biochemical Analysis of Mango Leaves & Inflorescence
101
that mealybug infestation caused significant reduction in the crude fiber, ash content and
reducing sugar level of both unripe and ripe fruits compared with controls. To the best of
my knowledge there is no documented case where it has been shown that carbohydrates
play an important role in infestation of mango mealybug. Though we do not have direct
evidence to prove that carbohydrates increased mango mealybug infestations on the tree
but we found the highest number of mango mealybug on ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar, which had
significantly high level of carbohydrates content. This suggests that carbohydrate content
might may play a role in mealybug abundance. However, further studies where
application of carbohydrates from ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar onto a resistant cultivar could prove
that susceptibility in ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar is due to carbohydrates.
102
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to determine the yield loss caused by mango mealybug
Drosicha mangiferae G. (Hemiptera:Monophlebidae) in different cultivars of mango
based on number of fruits in treated versus untreated inflorescence of selected plants for
each cultivar during 2006-2007 at Multan. No significant differences were found to exist
among cultivars regarding number of fruits per inflorescence at initial stage of the
experiment. The maximum loss in fruit yield was observed to be 11 percent in cultivar
‘Anwar Ratul’ at initial stage of the experiment followed by 11, 10, 10, 9, 9, 8 and 8
percent yield losses on ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Black Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Tukhmi’,
‘Dusehri’ and ‘Fajri’, respectively. The cultivars ‘Malda’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sensation’
and ‘Langra’ showed 6, 5, 5 and 3 percent yield losses, respectively at initial stage of the
experiment. At final stage of the experiment ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar suffered the maximum
yield loss showing 81 percent yield losses followed by 72, 69, 64, 52, 46, 35, 29, 24, 23,
22 and 18 percent yield losses on ‘Langra’, ‘Fajri’, ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’,
‘Malda’, ‘Sensation’, ‘Dusehri’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Black Chaunsa’, ‘Tukhmi’ and ‘Anwar
Ratul’, respectively. Maximum population recorded on ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar was
18/inflorescence and minimum on ‘Anwar Ratul’ was 10/inflorescence.
Key words: Mango cultivars, Loss in fruits, Drosicha mangiferae, Population.
Chapter 6 Losses Caused by Mango Mealybug
103
6.1 INTRODUCTION
Mealybugs are one of the most active groups of scale insects, however they
generally remain on host plant once a suitable feeding site is found. Feeding by
mealybugs can cause dieback, premature leaf drop and may even kill plants if left
unchecked. Immatures and females scales of this pest suck the sap from mango
inflorescence, tender leaves, shoots and fruit peduncles. Mealybug feeding causes
inflorescence to shrivel and dry. The mealybug acquired the position of being the worst
agricultural insect pest in the tropics (Herren, 1981). In addition to sucking sap from host
plants, mealybugs also secrete honeydew, which serves as a medium for the growth of
sooty mold fungus (Tandon and Lal, 1978) that reduces the plant's photosynthetic
abilities (Pruthi & Batra, 1960; Smith et al., 1997; Pitan et al., 2000) rendered the fruit
shape which become unsaleable (CAB International, 2005) and decreased the export
values of mangoes (Willink and Moore, 1988). But in mango orchards the mealybug,
Drosicha mangiferae is one of the most serious pests in sub-continent and is a growing
threat to the fruit crops especially mango (Karar et al., 2006). It is responsible for
devastating the crop during its serious incidence.
The present study was planned to investigate the yield losses caused in mango due
to D. mangiferae.
Chapter 6 Losses Caused by Mango Mealybug
104
6.2 MATERIALS AND METHODS
The experiment was performed to study the losses caused by mango mealybug in
different cultivars for the year 2006-07. Three full-grown orchards (age 15-18 years)
having all cultivars of mango under study were selected. The distance between one
orchard to another was about two km. Six plants of each cultivar from each orchard were
selected and three of these plants were treated to control mango mealybug while three
were left untreated.Twenty inflorescence/plant from the east, west and south side of each
tree, at a height of 4 to 6 feet above ground level, were tagged and the number of fruits
developed was counted. The population data of mealybug were also recorded from the
tagged inflorescence. The practices applied for the control of mealybug on mango trees
are as follows:
Name of treatment Date of application Impact Cultural control Mounds Developed on April 5,
2006 Spread on soil on June 28, 2006
Destruction of eggs
Mechanical control Band Plastic sheet 9 inch having 1.5 inch layer of grease in the middle of plastic sheet
December 10,2006 To stop crawling of first instar nymphs upwards on the tree
Chemical control Acetamiprid 20SP@100g (a.i.20g)/100 liter water
February 3,2007 Spray below the band to control aggregated nymphs
The data for the number of fruits in treated and untreated trees were counted at
maturity. The percent loss in yield for each cultivar was determined using following
formula: Loss in Fruit yield (percent) =
100 treesin treated fruits ofnumber
treesuntreatedin fruits of No. - treeTreatedin fruits of No. ×
The data on initial fruits and final fruits were analyzed through Randomized
Complete Block Design.
Chapter 6 Losses Caused by Mango Mealybug
105
6.3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The study was conducted to determine the yield loss caused by mango mealybug
in different cultivars of mango based on number of fruits in treated versus untreated
inflorescence of selected plants for each cultivar. The results are presented under the
following sub-section.
6.3.1 INITIAL MANGO FRUITS IN TREATED AND UNTREATED TREES
The data regarding number of fruits per inflorescence in different cultivars of
mango in treated and nontreated plants are given in Table 1. The results reveal significant
difference among cultivars and between treated and nontreated trees. The interaction
response was found to be nonsignificant. In general nontreated trees of all the cultivars
showed less mango fruits as compared to treated trees of the same cultivars. The
maximum decrease of 11 percent mango fruit was recorded on ‘Anwar Ratul’ followed
by 11, 10, 10, 9, 8 and 8 percent on ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Black Chaunsa’, ‘Tukhmi’,
‘Malda’ and ‘Fajri’ respectively. The minimum decrease in fruit formation was recorded
in cultivar ‘Langra’ and ‘Tukhmi’ with 3 and 3 percent, respectively. On overall basis it
was observed that nontreated trees showed 8 percent decrease in fruits over treated trees.
Chapter 6 Losses Caused by Mango Mealybug
106
Table 1. MEANS COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING NU MBER OF MANGO FRUITS PER INFLORESCENCE IN TREATED AND NONTREATED TREES AT INITIAL STAGE ON DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO.
Name of Cultivar
Fruits/inflorescence (**) LSD = 0.68
Percent reduction in Initial
Fruit over treated
Nontreated Treated
Anwar Ratul 3.05 hijk 3.42 ghi 10.82
Black Chaunsa 4.27 cdef 4.72 c 9.53
Chaunsa 2.72 ijk 3.03 hijk 10.23
Dusehri 3.48 fghi 3.80 efgh 8.42
Fajri 2.50 k 2.60 jk 7.75
Langra 3.62 cd 3.75 efgh 3.47
Malda 3.72 efgh 3.95 defg 5.82
Ratul-12 3.30 ghij 3.70 efgh 10.81
Sensation 5.53 ab 5.73 a 3.49
Sindhri 4.43 cde 4.89 bc 9.41
Sufaid Chaunsa 3.52 fgh 3.70 efgh 4.61
Tukhmi 3.55 fgh 3.91 defg 9.21
Means 3.72 3.93
Cultivar (n=12) F-value=24.32 DF=11 Means sharing similar letters in interactional column are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
6.3.2 MANGO FRUITS OBTAINED AT MATURITY IN TREATED AND UNTREATED TREES
The data regarding number of fruits obtained at maturity in nontreated and treated
trees of different cultivars are given in Table 2. The results reveal significant variation
among cultivars, between treated and nontreated trees and in their interactions. The fruits
obtained in nontreated trees of all the cultivars showed significantly lower number of
fruits as compared to treated trees of all the cultivars of mango. On overall basis the
Chapter 6 Losses Caused by Mango Mealybug
107
decrease in fruit in untreated trees over treated trees was observed to be 44 percent. On
individual basis the greatest fruit loss was found to be 81 percent on ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar
followed by ‘Langra’, ‘Fajri’, ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Malda’ and ‘Sensation’ with
72, 69, 64, 52, 46 and 35 percent, respectively. The decrease in fruit in nontreated trees
over treated trees was 18, 22, 23, 24 and 29 percent on ‘Anwar Ratul’, ‘Tukhmi’, ‘Black
Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’ and ‘Dusehri’, respectively.
Table 2. MEANS COMPARISON THE DATA REGARDING NUMBE R OF MANGO FRUITS OBTAINED IN NONTREATED AND TREATED TREES AT MATURITY ON DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO.
Name of Cultivar
Fruits obtained at harvest (**) LSD = 0.68
Nontreated Treated
Percent reduction in
Final Yield over treated
Anwar Ratul 2.08 gh 2.550 cde 18.43
Black Chaunsa 2.45 cdef 3.167 b 22.71
Chaunsa 0.40 l 2.057 gh 80.58
Dusehri 2.20 fgh 3.093 b 28.80
Fajri 0.45 l 1.46 i 69.18
Langra 0.73 jk 2.567 cde 71.59
Malda 1.367 i 2.533 cde 45.85
Ratul-12 0.967 j 2.70 c 64.07
Sensation 2.30 efg 3.483 a 34.71
Sindhri 1.98 h 2.617 cd 24.43
Sufaid Chaunsa 0.60 kl 1.250 i 52.0
Tukhmi 2.367 def 3.023 b 21.52
Means 1.49 2.54
Cultivar (n=12) F-value=135.1 DF= 11 Means sharing similar letters in interactional column are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 6 Losses Caused by Mango Mealybug
108
6.3.3 POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG RECORDED PER
INFLORESCENCE IN TREATED AND UNTREATED TREES The results regarding population of mango mealybug per inflorescence recorded
from untreated and treated trees of different cultivars reveal significant variation among
population on different cultivars of mango (Table 3). The maximum population of mango
mealybug was recorded to be 18, 18, 16, 16, 15, 15 and 15 per inflorescence on
‘Chaunsa’, ‘Black Chaunsa’, ‘Fajri’, ‘Malda’, ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Langra’, and ‘Sensation’,
respectively. The statistically similar population of mango mealybug was recorded on
‘Sindhri’ and ‘Tukhmi’ at 12 and 12 per inflorescence followed by ‘Dusehri’ (11) and
‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ (11) whereas, minimum population was recorded on ‘Anwar Ratul’
with population of 10/ inflorescence.
Table 3. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG RECORDED PER INFLORESCENCE IN DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO.
Cultivars Average population /Inflorescence (**)
Anwar Ratul 9.67 d
Black Chaunsa 17.52 a
Chaunsa 17.52 a
Dusehri 11.10 cd
Fajri 15.65 b
Langra 15.08 b
Malda 15.63 b
Ratul-12 15.18 b
Sensation 14.78 b
Sindhri 11.75 c
Sufaid Chaunsa 10.72 cd
Tukhmi 11.65 c
LSD @5% 1.6933
Cultivars (n=12) DF=11 F-value=22.25 Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 6 Losses Caused by Mango Mealybug
109
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Cha
unsa
Faj
ri
Lang
ra
Bla
ck C
haun
sa
Suf
aid
Cha
unsa
Sin
dhri
Mal
da
Dus
ehri
Anw
ar R
atul
Rat
ul-1
2
Tuk
hmi
Sen
satio
n
Varieties
Av.
Po
pu
lati
on
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
% F
ruit
Lo
ss
Population Initial loss final loss
Fig 1. INITIAL AND FINAL FRUIT LOSS IN DIFFERENT CULTIVARS OF MANGO AND POPULATION OF MANGO MEALYBUG
Chapter 6 Losses Caused by Mango Mealybug
110
6.4 DISCUSSION
The experiment was conducted to study the losses of mango fruits in different
cultivars of mango caused by mango mealybug during 2006-2007 at Multan. Three
gardens having all cultivars were selected. Three plants of each cultivar from each garden
were kept as check and kept the pest population at zero level on 3 plants of each cultivar
by development of mounds, pasting Haider’s band and application of insecticides below
the bands. The data regarding population of mealybug and number of fruits per tagged
inflorescence were recorded.
No significant differences were found to exist among cultivars regarding number
of fruits per inflorescence at initial stage of the experiment. The maximum loss in fruit
yield was observed to be 11 percent in cultivar ‘Anwar Ratul’ at initial stage of the
experiment followed by 11, 10, 10, 9, 9, 8 and 8 percent yield losses on ‘Ratul-12’,
‘Chaunsa’, ‘Black Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Tukhmi’, ‘Dusehri’ and ‘Fajri’, respectively. The
cultivars ‘Malda’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sensation’ and ‘Langra’ showed 6, 5, 5 and 3
percent yield losses, respectively at initial stage of the experiment. At final stage of the
experiment ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar suffered the maximum yield loss showing 81 percent
yield losses followed by 72, 69, 64, 52, 46, 35, 29, 24, 23, 22 and 18 percent yield losses
on ‘Langra’, ‘Fajri’, ‘Ratul-12’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Malda’, ‘Sensation’, ‘Dusehri’,
‘Sindhri’, ‘Black Chaunsa’, ‘Tukhmi’ and ‘Anwar Ratul’, respectively. It was observed
that at later season, control is more critical to reduce the yield loss. It is also important to
note that control measures provide a bigger benefit in cultivars that are highly susceptible
to the mango mealybug. These results indicate that host plant resistance is a most
important to develop and that none of the cultivars appear to exhibit tolerance to mango
mealybug. However, it is notable that Black Chaunsa has high population of mango
mealy bug, but still it produces high amount of mature fruits. These results indicate that
mango mealybug caused losses up to 81 percent and these findings are inconformity with
those of Hiepko (1983); Wodageneh (1985); Entomological Society of Nigeria (1991);
Karar et al., 2007. Similarly, Moore (2004) reported that mango mealybug reduced
mango yield to 50-90 percent.
The present findings cannot be compared with those of Tobih (2002), because of
differences in their materials and methods.
111
ABSTRACT
Various cultural practices were conducted in mango orchards attacked with
mango mealybug (Drosicha mangiferae Green). The used practices were
hoeing/ploughing, mounding the trunks of trees with fine mud, mounding the trunks of
trees with debris, mud clods, weeds, dried leaves and rubbish material present under the
tree with plastic sheet as well as without plastic sheet during the first week of April. The
developed mounds were broken and spread at the end of June, July and Aug. gave
significant reduction of mango mealybug population with plastic sheet i.e. 75.2 percent.
Ten tree bands were tested against anscent of 1st instar mango mealybug. Among these
bands Haider’s band was found to be the most effective and lowest cost method resulting
in the least percent of nymphs i.e. 1 percent crossing the band. The number of nymphs
crossing the other banding methods was from 7 to 43 percent. Eleven formulations of
insecticides were tested for the control of mango mealybug under laboratory as well as
under field conditions. Acetamiprid was found the most effective for 1st, 2nd and 3rd
instars nymphs of mango mealybug at 24, 72 and 168 hrs after treatment. Supracide was
the most effective for adult female at all the post treatment intervals under field
conditions. A combination of mounds on the plastic sheet, Haider’s band and application
of acetamiprid were found to be the most effective treatment resulted in 98 percent
reduction of first instars nymphs of mango mealybug.The males of mango mealybug
were attracted to mercury light and no males were attracted to yellow, green, red, blue
lights. Male preferred to pupate in wet places near the ‘kacha’ (mud) water which can be
exposed to sunlight by hoeing and can be controlled.
Key words: Mango mealybug, Drosicha mangiferae, Mounds, Plastic sheet, Months,
Acetamiprid, Haider’s band, Male, Light traps
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
112
7.1 INTRODUCTION
Cultural control of insect pests consists of the regular farm operations that destroy
the insects or to prevent them from causing injury to the plants. These practices are
adopted by the growers’ to minimize the damage caused by insect pests (Smith et al.,
1976) prior to the emergence of methods of plant sciences. Cultural practices are the
broad set of management techniques or options that are utilized by agricultural producers
to maximize production of crop or farm income or "the manipulation of these practices to
prevent or reduce the damage of the pest" (Dhaliwal and Arora, 1998). The aim of
cultural practices is to make the environment less favourable for the pest and more
favourable for its natural enemies. The cultural practices are effective for the insects,
which hibernate in the soil for egg laying and pupation. The most notorious pest of
mango crop, the mango mealybug hibernates in the roots of host plant for egg laying. The
important thing is to collect the females before egg laying, commences, by developing
techniques, that are effective for collecting the females with no danger side effects (Karar
and Arif, 2005).
Similar the mechanical devices are also used to contol insect pest population, the
use of barrier to stop the insects moving upward on the trees, collecting and destroying
egg masses, hand picking of the large insects, the use of hand nets to collected insect
pests, pruning and destruction of infested shoots. The mango mealybug nymphs go
upward after hatching, which causes loss to mango growers. Mango mealybug is one of
the most serious pests of mango and is difficult to control by insecticide. For the control
of this pest non-chemical methods are better than other methods for the control of this
pest (Ishaq, et al., 2004). Several workers have focused on preventing upward movement
of nymphs using various bands such as grease or fluffy cotton band (Lal, 1918; Lal,
1919). Similarly, alkathane sheeting was efficacious in preventing upward movement of
mealybug (Yousuf, 1993; Abrar-ul-Haq et al., 2002; Narula, 2003). Black oil cloth band
was effective in preventing the upward movement of nymphs (Rahman and Latif, 1944).
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
113
Intensive, high agricultural production systems used synthetic insecticides to
eliminate insect pests traditionally as the major tool and sustain the least amount of
economic damage to the crop. It may be argued critically that insecticides may be used
with great care. Like Stern et.al (1959) argued, pesticides are very disruptive to the total
farming, so their use should be limited to situations where the benefit (to the total crop
production) outweigh the costs. The approach of preventing the population buildup by
controlling egg helps to minimize the use of insecticides.
Chemicals are considered the quickest method of control for different insect pests.
These are important to overcome the yield reduction caused by insect pest. Although an
insecticide has a number of environmental problems but still it is the widely used practice
for the control of insect pest. Insecticides are the most important component of IPM
program and having a number of advantages over alternate methods for the control of
insect.As chemicals are easily accessible, having a wide range and are available in
prepared forms in the market. A farmer can choose depending on the problem, two or
more pesticides can be mixed to control the entire pest complex and insecticides can be
compatible with IPM components under intensive agriculture and modern farming
conditions. To save the crop from mango mealybug it may be necessary to control it
through use of insecticides (Karar and Ahmad, 1999).
The study was conducted to find the most effective method(s) of control and
develop a sustainable management strategy by integration control of mango mealybug.
The objective of the current section was collection and destruction of eggs to minimize
insecticides sprays. Farmers in the past used hoeing, ploughing and digging for
destroying the eggs of insects, however, it was later discouraged to avoid injuries to
fibrous roots. I looked for methods to destroy the mealybug eggs without disturbing the
roots systems of the plants. Further, to replace the existing practices with some new one
which are easy, effective, cheap and harmless methods. In this experiment only screened
practices were used which were identified through a series of experiments in mango
orchards under the following objective/goals:
• To promote the effective, easy, durable and inexpensive control measures for the
management of mango mealybug
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
114
• To overcome increasing problems associated with the strategy of exclusive and
indiscriminate use of pesticides
• To promote attractive, low-cost alternative strategies to use the local resources
minimize dependence on exogenous materials
• Establishment and development of a suitable IPM research application for the
control of mango mealybug by considering the results obtained from the research
carried out
• An important aim of an IPM strategy is to integrate the available pest
management options. IPM is an important component in overall crop production
programme of mango
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
115
7.2 MATERIALS AND METHODS
7.2.1 SELECTIVITY STUDIES
7.2.1.1 Cultural Control
Cultural practices were conducted in those orchards (having ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar)
with high infestations of mango mealybug. The egg-carrying females coming down the
mango tree for egg laying were caught before spreading in the whole orchard. The data
were recorded by counting the number of 1st instar nymph from 900 cm2 marked on trunk
of tree on west side with chalk 45 cm above ground level. In the first experiment cultural
practices were studied on 75 trees were selected in an orchard. There were 18 trees
/treatment under 3 replications sampled for six months. In the second experiment of
cultural practices were studied on 9 trees with 3 trees / treatment. The data were recorded
weekly before treatment during 2005 and then after treatment during 2006 and 2007 from
the same orchard by counting the number of 1st instar present in the area of 900 cm2 on
the same month and date. The data were compiled and analyzed through Complete
Randomized Design. The percent reduction of nymphs was calculated through the
formula
Percent reduction =
100 cm 900 controlin recorded population Av.
cm 900nt in treatme recorded pop. Av. cm 900 controlin recorded pop. Av.2
22
×−
The treatments for the cultural practices are listed below.
7.2.1.1.1 Hoeing/Ploughing
The orchard was ploughed with a cultivator once in the month of June. After
ploughing, 3 trees were hoed in each month around the trunk of trees within the radius of
one meter by using spade started from June, 2005 till Nov., 2005. So the 18 trees were
hoed in six months and the data was recorded in Dec., 2005 to Feb., 2006.
7.2.1.1.2 Earthing/Mounding the tree trunk with fine soil
The trunks of 18 trees were mounded with fine mud at the height of 45 cm in the
1st week of Apr. 2005 to collect the gravid females. For direct falling females as well as
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
116
those females that were wandering for hibernation four other mounds were made under
the tree with the same fine mud having 30 x 30 cm (height and width) in four different
directions such as east, west, north and south away from 182 cm of tree. One tree had 5
mounds. The mounds of three trees were spread (15 mounds) in each month starting from
June, 2005 to Nov., 2005.
7.2.1.1.3 Earthing/Mounding the tree trunk with clods, fallen leaves
and debris The trunks of 18 trees were mounded with the material found under the tree i.e.
dried and fallen leaves, weeds ,clods of mud, grass, debris and small dried branches up to
45 cm high in the 1st week of Apr., 2005 to collect the egg carrying females. For direct
falling females as well as those females which are wandering for hibernation four other
mounds of 30 x 30 cm (height and width) were made under the tree with the same
materials in four different directions east, west, north and south away from 182 cm of
tree. One tree had 5 mounds. The mounds of three trees were spread (15 mounds) in each
month starting from June, 2005 to Nov., 2005.
7.2.1.1.4 Mounds of clods, fallen leaves and debris on plastic sheet
A plastic sheet of 150 cm in width was spread on the ground around the trunk of
each tree. On the sheet, 18 mounds were prepared around the trunk of trees with the
material found under the tree i.e. with clods, fallen leaves, debris and small dried
branches up to 45 cm high in the 1st week of Apr. 2005 to collect the egg carrying
females. For direct falling females as well as those females which are wandering for
hibernation four other mounds of 30 x 30 cm (height and width) were made under the tree
with the same materials in four different directions east, west, north and south away from
182 cm of tree. One tree had 5 mounds. The mounds of three trees were spread (15
mounds) in each month starting from June, 2005 to Nov., 2005.
7.2.1.1.5 Removal of soil from the orchard
Heavily infested soils with the eggs of mango mealybug were removed around the
trunk of 3 trees in the month of Nov., 2005 before hatching of eggs up to 5 to 7 cm. The
data were taken three selected trees in the month of Dec., 2005 to Feb., 2006.
7.2.1.1.6 Intercropping
The field was irrigated and then 3-4 ploughings were done in the orchard before
sowing of fodder. On the 22nd Sept., 2005, oat (Avena sativa L.) was sown as a fodder
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
117
and then on 2nd of Oct., 2005, berseem clover (Trifolium alexandrinum L.) was spread
after irrigation. The data were taken from three selected trees in the month of Dec., 2005
to Feb., 2006
7.2.1.1.7 Unploughed orchard
Three trees were kept as control where no practice was applied throughout the
season.
7.2.1.2 Mechanical control
Ten different bands were installed once in the first week of Dec., 2005 around the
trunk of tree 60 cm above the ground level before the hatching of eggs. A common band
(grease band) was installed on each of these tested bands at the height of 25 cm. So that
the nymph crossed the tested bands were gathered below the upper band were counted
weekly. The grease bands were repaired every week after recording the data. Average
population was counted from the area of 6.5 cm2 between two bands as well as below
bands. The data were compiled and analyzed as Completely Randomized Design. The
percent of the population crossing the band was calculated through the formula;
Formula= 100 cm 6.45 band thebelowion Av.populat
cm 6.45 band thecrossed population Av.2-
2-
×
After counting the number of mealybugs between two bands, the space between
the bands were sprayed with Acetamiprid @1g/1 liters of water with the help of small
hand operated sprayer (automizer) weekly. The following bands were used for
comparison.
BANDS WIDTH
1-Namhar band 7.6 cm
2-Black oil cloth band 7.6 cm
3-Gunny bag band 25.4 cm
4-Greeze band 7.6 cm
5-Greeze mixes with black oil 7.6 cm
6-Funnel Type Trape 30.5 cm
7-Cotton band 7.6 cm
8- Polyethelene sheet band 22.9 cm
9-Plastic sheet band 22.9 cm
10-Haider’s Band 22.9 cm + 3.8 cm grease in middle
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
118
The details of different bands are given below.
DESCRIPTION OF BANDS
1- NAMHAR BAND.
Materials Required Quantity
Part A
Castor oil 454 g
Conc.H2SO4 227 g
Part B
Rosin 1362 g
Axle Grease 908 g
Glycerin 2 oz
Unslaked lime 5-10 g
Preparation
Part A
For the preparation of this band H2SO4 was mixed in castor oil in a plastic
container and kept them for 15 days.
Part B
After 15 days, rosin was heated in a steel container on fire until it becomes thin
like water. In this heated rosin, grease was added and continuously stirs until it mixes
completely. It was removed from the fire and glycerin was added. The whole mixture was
stirred well with a stick and allowed them to cool.
After cooling mixture B was poured in to mixture A and stir continuously with a
wooden stick until both the mixtures mixed completely. This mixture was named as
Namhar band.
Effectiveness
It was effective up to 4-5 weeks after application. With the passage of timely it
loosed its efficacy slowly and the nymph crosses this band easily.
Limitation
• With rain water it becomes hard, which affects its efficiency.
• Take long time for preparation
• Very technical
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
119
• Most laborious
• Costly
2-BLACK OIL CLOTH BAND
Material Required
• Crude cloth of cotton having 7.6 cm width and length according to tree trunk.
• Used oil of vehicle
• Nails 2-3 of 2.5 cm and
• Hammer
Preparation
The cloth was dipped in the black oil for 5-10 minutes until it absorbed the oil
completely. Take the cloth was taken out and wrapped on the tree trunk tightly with 2-3
nails of 2.5 cm.
Effectiveness
• Low number of nymphs crossed it.
• Rain affected its efficacy
Limitation
• Not observed
3-GUNNY BAGS
Material Required
• Gunny bag
• Scissor
• Nails 2-3 of 2.5 cm and
• Hammer
Preparation
Cut piece of bag having 25.4 cm in width with the help of scissor. It was wrapped
on the tree trunk with 3 nails.
Effectiveness
• The nymphs passed easily through the holes of the gunny bags as well as crossed
the bag and went up the tree.
• No effect of rainfall.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
120
Limitation
• Squirrels damaged the bag and took them for their nest preparation.
4-GREAZE BAND
Material Required
• Grease
• Spatula
Preparation
Axle grease and was smeared on the trunk of tree with spatula in the form of ring
of 7.6 cm in width.
Effectiveness
It was effective 1-2 weeks after application. After this period the nymphs crossed
this band. A large number of nymphs was gathered below this band and can easily be
killed with help of insecticides.
Limitation
Grease treated places on the trees trunks were either shrunk or busted. From the
busted bark the gum came out and the trunks become weak. The width of the trunk was
reduced about 1.3 to 2.5 cm on the treated portion. Rainfall hardens the grease and
nymphs easily crossed it. Sometimes a bridge of dead nymphs formed on this band for
crossing the remaining nymph.
5- GREASE MIXED WITH BLACK OIL
Material required
• Grease
• Black oil
• Spatula
Preparation
An equal amount of grease and black oil were mixed i.e. 1:1 in a plastic container.
It was pasted on the trunk of tree with spatula in the form of ring of 7.62 cm.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
121
Limitation
• The bark of trunk treated with this mixture was either shrunk or thickened and
then busted. Gum oozed from the busted bark gums and the tree was weaken. The
width of the trunk was reduced at about 1.3 to 2.5 cm on the treated portion.
• Rainfall hardens the band allowing nymphs to easily cross due to its hardness. A
bridge of dead nymphs formed on the band and facilitated the crossing of the
remaining nymph.
6-FUNNAL TYPE TRAP
Material Required
• Polyethylene plastic of 12 inch width
• Soft steel wire
• Nails
• Hammer
• Calcium carbonate
Preparation
• The polyethylene sheeting was used for the preparation of the band and bend 1.3
cm from the upper side. The wire is passed from this bent portion and was tight
together in the form of ring around the trunk of trees. It was fixed on the trunk of
tree with the help of nails from the lower sides and the upper sides remain open
like funnel.
Effectiveness
• Less number of nymphs crossed this trap.
• The egg carrying females were collected in the funnel when they came
downward.
Limitation
• Rainfall seriously affects. The rain water gathered in this funnal. There is no way
for the water to go out and ruins the funnel.
• Costly
• Highly technical
• Laborious
• Not suitable for all types of trunk.
• Very difficult to install.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
122
7-COTTON BAND (FLUFFY BAND)
Material Required
• Cotton lint
• Rope
• Nails
Preparation
• Lint was purchased from the market. A nail was fixed with hammer on the trunk
60 cm above ground level. One end of the rope was tied on the nail and put the
lint under the rope with a width of 7.6 cm and again tied it with nail. In this way
lint is wrapped around the trunk.
Limitation
• Nymph easily crossed the lint.
• Rainfall compact the lint which allow more nymph to cross.
• New lint was wrapped after every rainfall.
• Squirrels take this for their nest preparation
8- POLYETHYLENE SHEET BAND
Material Required
• Polyethylene sheet of 22.9 cm width
• Nails 2-3 and
• Hammer
Preparation
• A mixture of mud and manure was prepared with a ratio of 1:1 and were pasted
on the trunk of trees in the form of ring to fill the cracks. On this ring, a
polyethylene sheet of 22.9 cm was wrapped with 3 nails (above, below and
middle).
Effectiveness
• Some nymphs crossed this plastic sheet and climbed up the tree.
• No effect of rainfall.
Limitation
• Not observe
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
123
9- PLASTIC SHEET BAND:
Material Required
• Common plastic of width 22.9 cm
• Nails 2-3 of 2.5 cm and
• Hammer
Preparation
• A mixture of mud and manure was prepared with a ratio of 1:1 and were pasted
on the trunk of trees in the form of ring to fill the cracks. On this ring, a plastic
sheet was wrapped with 3 nails (above, below and middle).
Effectiveness
• Nymph crossed this type of plastic sheet.
• No effect of rainfall.
Limitation
Not observed
10- HAIDER’S BAND.
Material Required
• Common plastic sheet of 22.86 cm width
• Grease
• Black oil
• Spatula
• Nails 2-3 of 2.54 cm and
• Hammer
Preparation
It consisted on a plastic sheet and 3.81 cm grease. The trunk of the tree is firstly
plastered with mixture of mud and wet farm yard manure at the ratio of 1:1. It is pasted
all around the trunk 25.4 cm in width from 60 cm above the ground so that it provides an
even and smooth surface for wrapping the plastic sheet which does not allow the nymphs
to crawl from underneath the band. Then plastic sheeting is wrapped around the trunk on
the surface pasted with mud mixture. The plastic sheet is tightened from the joining ends
with 3 small 1.27 cm iron nails (upper, middle, lower ends of joint) with the help of
hammer. After fully wrapping the plastic sheet a 3.81 cm grease band is applied in the
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
124
middle portion of plastic sheet. It forms a band which has been named as Haider’s band.
This is new addition in mechanical control of mango mealybug. It was applied on the
trunk of trees in Dec., 2006 untill the 3rd week of Feb., 2007 to stop the upward
movement of nymphs.
Effectiveness
• Very effective barrier against crawling insects. It remains effective throughout the
season even up to one year and is very cheap. In sunshine the grease becomes thin
and remains effective for several months.
• Rainfall did not effect its functioning. No bad effects were seen on the trees trunk,
as the grease did not touch the trunk directly.
• The grease was not dried on plastic sheet.
Limitation
• Not observed
7.2.1.3 Chemical control
7.2.1.3.1 Control of mango mealybug under laboratory conditions
The experiment was conducted in the laboratory at Agriculture College
laboratory, Department of Agri. Entomology, Baha-ud-Zakariya University, Multan. The
1st instars nymphs of the mango mealybug, Drosicha mangiferae (Green) were collected
from an infested commercial mango orchard in Multan during Jan., 2006. Test solutions
were prepared by mixing the concentrations of different insecticides in 30 ml water in a
beaker. Leaf discs of 5 cm diameter were cut from nonsprayed mango leaves, which were
washed and dried before cutting. These leaf discs were dipped in test solutions for 10
seconds with gentle agitation and then were placed on tissue paper for drying, with the
adaxial surface facing up. After drying, they were placed in 5 cm plastic petri dishes that
contained moist filter paper at their bottoms, to avoid desiccations. Forty 1st instars
nymphs were released on each leaf disc present in Petri dish. Each treatment was
replicated thrice, including the controls. Mortality was assessed after 24, 48, 72, 96, 120,
144 and 168 hours of exposure to insecticide. Nymphs that failed to show movement
after a gentle touch with needle were considered to be dead. Each insecticides
formulations had 3 different doses i.e. one treatment below the recommended dose, 2nd
recommended dose and 3rd above recommended dose. Among the treatments:
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
125
profenophos (Curacron) 500EC @ 30-ml a.i. 15-g (500g/l profenophos, Ciba-Geigy
Pak.Ltd., Basel, Switzerland), bifenthrin (Talstar) 10EC @ 100-ml a.i. 10-g (10 percent
bifenthrin, FMC United, pvt., Ltd., USA), triazophos (Hostathion) 20EC @ 100-ml a.i.
20g (20 percent triazophos, Bayer Crop Science, France), chlorpyrifos (Lorsban) 40EC
@ 50-ml a.i. 20-g (40 percent chlorpyrifos, BASF Chemicals & Polymers Pakistan (Pvt.)
Ltd., Germany), lambdacyhalothrin (Karate) 2.5EC @ 50-ml a.i. 1.25-g (2.5 percent
lambdacyhalothrin, Ciba-Geigy Pak.Ltd., Basel, Switzerland), imidacloprid (Confidor)
200SL @ 100g a.i. 20-g ( 200SL & 94 percent Techanical imidacloprid, Bayer Crop
Science, France), buprofezin (Starter) @ 500-g a.i. 125-g (25 percent WP & 95 percent
Tech., Pak.China Ltd.), deltamethrin (Decis) 2.5EC @ 50-ml a.i. 1.25g (2.5 percent
deltamethrin, Bayer Crop Science, France), cypermethrin (Ripcord) 10EC @ 100-ml a.i.
10-g (10 percent cypermethrin, Swat Agro Chemicals, Germany), acetamiprid
(Mospilan) 20SP @ 100-g a.i. 20-g (20 percent acetamiprid, Nippon Soda Co. Ltd .,
Tokyo, Japan), methidathion (Supracide) 40EC@150-ml a.i. 60-g (40 percent
methidathion, Ciba-Geigy Pak.Ltd., Basel, Switzerland ) (Tomlin, 1997) at the indicated
dose gave 100 percent mortality after 168 hours post treatment.The percent mortality was
calculated and analyzed as a Completely Randomized Design.
7.2.1.3.2 Control of mango mealybug under field conditions
The formulations of following insecticides i.e. profenohpos, bifenthrin,
triazophos, chlorpyrifos, lambdacyhalothrin, imidacloprid, buprofezin, deltamethrin,
cypermethrin, acetamiprid and methidathion were sprayed in the field on mango trees
against 1st instar nymphs of mango mealybug in the month of Feb., 2006 and the same
dose of insecticides were sprayed against 2nd & 3rd instar in the month of Mar., 2006 and
against adult female in the month of Apr., 2006. The two branches of 30 cm in length on
mango trees were selected, tagged and the population of nymphs were counted from these
branches including leaves, twig and inflorescence. The data were recorded before spray
and then 24 h, 72 h and 168 h after spray. On the soil below each of the selected branches
a square meter soil was levelled and cleaned. The number of nymphs falling out of the
tree and onto the ground was also checked regularly for their mortality from this square
meter. The ‘Black Chaunsa’ cultivar of mango was selected for chemical control.
Calibration was done before the spray for measuring the quantity of water used for each
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
126
treatment. Each tree was labelled with iron sheet fixed with nails and hammer. The date
of spray, treatment and replication were written on iron sheet. The trees were sprayed
with hand knapsack sprayer. The data was compiled and percent mortality was calculated
through formula
% Mortality = 100 spray before recorded Population
sprayafter recorded Population spray before recorded Population ×−
The data were analyzed as a Completely Randomized Design on an IBM-PC
Computer using M. Stat (Steel and Torrie, 1980) Package. Means were separated by
Duncan’s New Multiple Range Test (DMRT) (Duncan, 1955).
7.2.2 Sustainable management of mango mealybug
The experiment was designed based on preliminary data, which was obtained in
2006. An orchard, having commercial mango cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ (‘Sammar Bahist’)
heavily infested with mango mealybug was selected. A Complete Randomized Design
with 8 treatments including 1 control was used and each treatment had three replications.
The effect of management strategies were observed by counting the population of the 1st
instars weekly from the trunk of trees in 900 cm2 area, marked on the trunk with chalk 45
cm above the ground. Marked portion was repaired weekly after data collection. The
percent reduction in population was calculated using the formula
Percent reduction = controlin cm 900 pop. Av.
ntsin treatme cm 900 pop. Av. - controlin cm 900 pop. Av. 2-
-2-2
7.2.2.1 Cultural practices
Cultural practices were done to collect the egg-carrying females in mounds before
the insect spreading to different places for hibernation and egg laying. To collect
mealybugs, a plastic sheet of 152 cm in width and length according to tree trunk was
spread around the tree trunk. Mounds were made on the plastic sheet around the trunk
with the materials present under the tree like dried leaves, weeds, clods of mud, grass,
debris and small dried branches up to 45 cm high in the 1st week of Apr., 2007. For direct
falling females as well as those females which were searching for hibernation sites four
other mounds of 30 x 30 cm were made under the tree with the same materials in four
different directions east, west, north and south away from 180 cm of tree trunk without
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
127
plastic sheet (5 mounds/tree). These mounds were spread at the end of June, 2007 after
hibernation and egg laying of females.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
128
7.2.2.2 Mechanical practices
In this practice, a band was designed and named as Haider’s band was used. The
band was made of a plastic sheet and 3.81 cm layer of grease. The trunk of the tree was
first plastered with mixture of mud and wet farmyard manure at the ratio of 1:1. It was
pasted around the trunk at 25 cm width from 45 cm above the ground. The plastic sheet
was then wrapped around the trunk on mud pasted. It was tightened at the corners with 3
small 1.27 cm iron nails (upper, middle, lower ends of joint). After wrapping the plastic
sheet, 3.81 cm grease band was applied in the middle portion of plastic sheet.
7.2.2.3 Chemical practices
Trees infested with first instars were sprayed once with Acetamiprid at 100g/100
liter of water using hand knapsack sprayer. The spray was carried out on three selected
trees.
7.2.2.4 Mechanical x chemical practice
Haiders bands were applied on the trunk of 3 trees in Dec., 2006 to 3rd week of
Feb., 2007 to stop the upward movements of 1st instar nymphs. The nymphs that gathered
below the band were sprayed once with insecticide Acetamiprid @ 1g / liter (formulated
insecticide) of water in the 2nd week of Feb.
7.2.2.5 Cultural x mechanical practice
A plastic sheet of 152 cm in width and length according to the size of trunk were
spread around the trunk of three trees to stop the entry of females in to roots of host plant.
Mounds were made on the plastic sheet around the trunk of three trees with the materials
present under the tree like dried and fallen leaves, weeds, clods of mud, grass, debris and
small dried branches up to 45 cm high in the 1st week of Apr., 2006. For direct falling
females as well as those females which were searching their hibernation places four other
mounds of 30 x 30 cm were made under the tree with the same materials in four different
directions such as east, west, north and south away from 180 cm of tree trunk without
plastic sheet (5 mounds/ tree). These mounds were spread at the end of June, 2006 after
hibernation and egg laying of females. Haider’s band was applied on the trunk of these
trees to stop the nymphs below the band in Dec., 2006 to 3rd week of Feb., 2007.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
129
7.2.2.6 Cultural x chemical practice
Mounds were made on the plastic sheet around the trunk of three trees in the 1st
week of Apr., 2006 and these mounds were spread at the end of June, 2006. These trees
were sprayed thoroughly once with Acetamiprid @ 100g/100 liter (formulation) of water
against 1st instar in the 2nd week of Feb., 2007.
7.2.2.7 Cultural x mechanical x chemical practices
Mounds were made on the plastic sheet around the trunk of three trees in the 1st
week of Apr., 2006 and these mounds were spread at the end of June, 2006. Haider’s
band was applied in the month of Dec., 2006. The nymphs gathered below the band were
sprayed once with chemical Acetamiprid @ 1 g/ liter (formulated insecticide) of water in
the 2nd week of Feb.
7.2.2.8 Control
Three trees were kept as control where no practice was applied throughout the
season.
7.2.3 MANAGEMENT OF MANGO MEALYBUG MALES
7.2.3.1 Management through Light traps
Lights of different colors like yellow, red, mercury, blue and green bulb of 100
watts were used in traps during peak activity of males. These traps were installed for 8
days in the mango orchard started on 13.4.07 till to 20.04.07. Count of males were made
daily and removed from the traps. The data were analyzed through Completely
Randomized Design.
7.2.3.2 Management through cultural practices
Pupae of mango mealybug males were exposed from different places by hoeing.
The number of pupae exposed, were counted from 900 cm2 (three times from one place)
at 6 different places were taken to know the preferred places of its hibernation. The
following places were hoed up to 5 cm depth i.e. under the tree near trunk (Semi-wet
soil), under the tree near trunk (Dry soil), near mud water channel (Semi-wet soil), under
leaves (Semi-wet soil), under leaves (Dry soil) and on tree trunk bark. These selected
places were hoed with ‘ramba’ (A steel instrument used for hoeing purposes) and
counted the exposed pupae. After 10 days again these places were visited and observed
exposed pupae for the emergence of males. The data were analyzed as a Completely
Randomized Design. LSD test were used to measure the variability.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
130
7.3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
7.3.1 CULTURAL METHODS FOR THE CONTROL OF MANGO MEALYBUG
Experiment 1
Various cultural practices such as hoeing/ploughing (T1), earthing/mounding the
tree trunk with fine mud (T2), earthing/mounding the trees trunk with the material
present under the tree like dried leave, branches, weeds, debris and mud clods (T3),
mounding the trunk with dried material present under the tree like leaves, branches,
weeds, debris and mud clods after spreading plastic sheet (T4) and nonploughed orchard
as control were applied in highly infested trees of mango during different months of the
year for the collection of egg carrying females coming down the trees for egg laying as
well as for the destruction of eggs. The practices were applied during, 2005 and 2006.
The data on first instar nymphs of mango mealybug were recorded from the trunk of the
trees and percent reduction over control was calculated.
The data regarding percent reduction in various treatments over control based on
the number of alive mango mealybug per 900 cm2 of mango mealybug on the trunk in
different treatments applied during various months from June, 2005 to Nov., 2005 are
given in (Table 1). The data reveal significant variation (P < 0 .01) between years,
among treatments, months of application and in their all interactions. The means were
compared by DMR Test at P=0.05. The results reveal that T4 was found to be the most
effective treatment resulted in maximum reduction i.e. 75 percent followed by T3 with
71 percent reduction of first instars nymph. T2 did not show good control of first instars
nymphs of mango mealybug showing minimum reduction i.e. 27 percent and differed
significantly from those of observed in all other treatments. The treatment T1 resulted in
42 percent reduction and was found as intermediate with significant difference from
other treatments.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
131
Table 1. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING REDUCTION IN PERCENTAGE OF NYMPHS OF MANGO MEALYBUG IN DIFFERENT TREATMENTS AND MONTHS OF THE YEAR DURING 2006 AND 2007.
Treatments
Treatments x year (**) LSD= 0.65
Percent reduction of insect during Means (**) LSD= 0.46 2006 2007
T-1 37.83 f 46.13 e 41.98 c
T-2 23.59 h 29.79 g 26.69 d
T-3 65.77 d 75.43 b 70.60 b
T-4 71.55 c 78.80 a 75.18 a
Control 0.00 i 0.00 i 0.00 e
Means 39.75 a 46.03 b
F-value 128.2 35878.5
D.F=4 Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01. Where as
T-1= Hoeing/ploughing T-2= Mounding/ earthing the trees with fine mud T-3= Mounding /earthing the trees with debris, dried leaves, small branches, clods of mud T-4= Mounding/ earthing the trees on the plastic sheet with debris, dried leaves, small branches, clods
of mud. Control = No practice applied
It is evident from the results that the treatments applied during the month of June
(Table 2) resulted in maximum reduction in the population of mango mealybug i.e. 48
percent followed by 46 and 45 percent where the treatments were applied during the
month of July and Aug. respectively and differed significantly with one another. The
treatments applied during the month of Nov. showed minimum reduction i.e. 32 percent
followed by 42 and 43 percent where treatments were applied during the months of Sept.
and Oct. respectively. From these results it is concluded that cultural practices should be
applied during the month of June for maximum control of mango mealybug.
The application of mounding around the trunk with fine mud applied during all
the months did not show significant difference showing 23 to 26 percent reduction of
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
132
mango mealybug except this treatment when applied during the month of Oct. showed
significantly maximum reduction i.e. 35 percent. All the treatments showed maximum
reduction of mango mealybug applied during the month of June except T2 where the
trunk was mounded with fine mud. The percent reduction of mango mealybug decreased
in almost all the treatments applied after June.
Table 2. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING
REDUCTION IN PERCENTAGE OF NYMPHS OF MANGO MEALYBUG IN DIFFERENT TREATMENTS AND MONTHS OF THE YEAR DURING 2006 AND 2007.
Month
Treatments x Month (**)
LSD=1.13 Months (**)
Means LSD=0.51 T1 T2 T3 T4 Control
June 54.42 i 26.15 o 78.31 c 81.83 a 0.00 r 48.14 a
July 50.13 j 23.07 o 77.02 d 81.62 a 0.00 r 46.37 b
Aug. 45.83 k 26.28 o 75.73 e 79.45 b 0.00 r 45.46 c
Sept. 37.51 m 23.27 o 72.69 f 75.39 e 0.00 r 41.77 e
Oct. 39.17 l 35.17 n 68.84 g 72.71 f 0.00 r 43.18 d
Nov. 24.81 p 26.22 o 51.03 j 60.07 h 0.00 r 32.43 f
LSD=0.46 41.98 c 26.69 d 70.60 b 75.18 a 0.00 e
D.F= 20 F.value=222.0 D.F= 5
F.value=960.2
Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01. Where as
T-1= Hoeing/ploughing T-2= Mounding/ earthing the trees with fine mud T-3= Mounding /earthing the trees with debris, dried leaves, small branches, clods of mud T-4= Mounding/ earthing the trees on the plastic sheet with debris, dried leaves, small branches, clods
of mud. Control= No practice applied Experiment 2
Two treatments viz., removal of soil around the trunk of selected trees in the
month of Nov. and intercropping of Oat and Berseem clover as fodder grown as intercrop
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
133
on Sept. 22, 2005 and Oct. 2, 2005, respectively along with a control (nonploughed
orchard) were tested for the control of mango mealybug. The results regarding emergence
of first nymphal instar climbing up of the tree trunk were recorded and percent reduction
over control was calculated.
The comparison of means are presented in Table 3 and reveal highly significant
differences between treatments, years as well as in the interactions of treatment and year.
The maximum reduction was recorded to be 77 percent in those trees where Oat and
Berseem clover were intercropped, while minimum was observed in those trees where the
soil was ploughed and removed showing 64 percent reduction of mango mealybug. The
results obtained from the interaction response of both the treatments reveal that the
application of these cultural practices showed minimum reduction of mango mealybug
during 2006 as compared to 2007 in both the treatments. Intercropping trees showed
maximum reduction, whereas removal of soil resulted in minimum reduction in both the
study years. From these results it is suggested that good results regarding the control of
mango mealybug can be achieved if these practices specially intercropping may be done
continuously and regularly.
Table 3. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING PER CENT REDUCTION OF FIRST INSTARS NYMPHS OF MANGO MEALYBUGIN DIFFERENT TREATMENTS DURING 2006 AND 2007.
Practices Treatments x Year (**)
LSD =0.424 Treatment Means(**) LSD=0.300 2006 2007
Intercropping 68.36 c 84.86 a 76.61 a
Removal of Soil 54.37 d 73.91 b 64.14 b
Control 0.00 e 0.00 e 0.00 c
Year 61.37 b 79.39 a
D.F= 2 F-value= 2901.6 D.F=2 F-value= 177428.6
Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
134
7.3.2 MECHANICAL METHODS OF CONTROL
Various mechanical methods in the form of bands viz., namhar band, black oil
cloth band, gunny bag, grease band, grease + black oil, funnel type trap, cotton band,
polyethylene sheet, plastic sheet and Haider’s band were applied for the control of mango
mealybug for two years viz., 2005-06 and 2006-07. On each tested band, a common band
of grease was applied to count the population of crossed nymphs. The bands were applied
during Dec., 2005. The observations regarding number of 1st instar mango mealybug
nymphs crossed the tested band on the tree trunk gathered below the upper band were
counted at one week interval started from Jan. 7, 2006 to Feb. 19, 2006 of each year with
little variation. Bands were again applied during Dec., 2006 and the data were recorded
from Jan. 7, 2007 to Feb. 19, 2007. The results are presented under the following sub-
sections.
7.3.2.1 Effect of Bands on the Nymphs of Mango Mealybug During 2006
The data regarding the effectiveness of various bands used to stop the upward
movement of the nymphs of mango mealybug at various dates of observation during
2006 are given in (Table 4). The means comparisons of the same reveal highly significant
difference among treatments and dates of observation. The means were compared by
DMR Test at 0.05.
Haider’s band was found to be the most effective and resulted in the lowest
population of mango mealybug nymphs crossing the band (1 percent) and differed
significantly from those of observed in all other mechanical bands. The application of
plastic sheet, polyethylene sheet and funnel type traps were found to be less effective
with 10, 10 and 8 percent nymphs of mango mealybug crossed the bands, respectively,
and did not differ significantly with each other. Black oil cloth band also showed
significant effect regarding stopping the upward movement of mango mealybug nymphs,
resulted in 14 percent individuals crossed the bands and showed significant variation
from those of found in all other treatments. Gunny bag and cotton band were not so
effective resulting in 45 and 43 percent nymphs of mango mealybug crossing the bands
on the tree trunk and did not show significant variation with one another. Similarly
namhar band, grease band and grease + black oil band showed 34, 38 and 30 percent
nymphs crossed the band installed on the tree trunk, respectively which did not prove so
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
135
effective and differed significantly from each other. From these results it was observed
that Haider’s band was found to be the most effective regarding stopping the upward
movement of mango mealybug nymphs followed by funnel type trap, polyethylene and
plastic sheet. Similarly, the results based on interaction between the effects of different
bands at various dates of observation also showed similar trend in controlling the mango
mealybug. Haider’s band resulted in significantly the lowest population of the pest
crossed the band at all the dates of observation compared with results of other bands.
Cotton wool band and gunny bag showed comparatively higher population of mango
mealybug at all the dates of observation and proved inferior.
Table 4. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING PERCENT POPULATION CROSS THE TESTING BAND DURING 2006. Treatments Dates x Treatment (**)
LSD=5.91 Treatment Means(**) LSD =2.23 07.01.06 14.01.06 21.01.06 28.01.06 04.02.06 13.02.06 19.02.06
A B C D E F G H Namhar Band 0.00 t 2.42 rst 21.37
mn 41.57
hij 49.91 fg 49.94 de 60.25 de 33.63 c
Black Oil Cloth
0.00 t 4.25 rst 9.21 qr 11.71 pq 14.83 nopq
26.12 m 33.04 l 14.16 e
Gunny Bag 0.63 t 16.62 nop
35.77 jkl
47.34 gh 58.75 de 78.09 ab 75.57 bc 44.68 a
Grease Band 0.00 t 3.71 rst 35.19 jkl
46.70 gh 49.56 fg 64.89 d 64.61 d 37.81 b
Grease+Black Oil
0.00 t 2.81 rst 25.05 m 36.80 ijkl
42.35 hi 47.55 gh 54.91 ef 29.92 d
Funnel Type Trap
0.00 t 1.19 t 3.13 rst 8.86 qrs 12.65 pq 13.99 opq
14.16 opq
7.71 f
Cotton Wool Band
1.15 t 14.33 opq
40.11 ijk
34.43 kl 59.09 de 83.88 a 71.34 c 43.48 a
Polyethylene Sheet Band
0.00 t 1.65 t 4.38 rst 8.91 qrs 14.87 nopq
15.35 nopq
20.60 mno
9.39 f
Plastic Sheet Band
0.00 t 1.93 st 4.13 rst 9.17 qr 16.91 nop
17.42 nop
17.58 nop
9.59 f
Haider’s Band
0.00 t 0.00 t 0.78 t 0.94 t 1.11 t 1.31 t 1.52 t 0.81 g
LSD =1.8689 0.18 f 4.89 e 17.91 d 24.64 c 32.00 b 40.85 a 41.36 a Df=54 F-value= 29.7 Df=9 F-
value=424.6 Bands (n=10) Means sharing similar letters in columns A to G for interaction and in column H for treatment means did not differ significantly by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
136
7.3.2.2 Effect of Bands on the Nymphs of Mango Mealybug During
2007 The data relating to the effectiveness of various bands on the nymphs of mango
mealybug at various dates of observations during 2007 are given in Table 5. The means
comparisons of the same reveal highly significant difference between treatments and
dates of observation. The means were compared by DMR Test at P=0.05 (Table 4). It is
evident from the results that Haider’s bands again proved to be the most effective
resulted in the lowest percentage of mango mealybug crossed the band applied on tree
trunk i.e. 0.41 and differed significantly from those of observed in all other treatments.
The application of polyethylene sheet and plastic sheet bands were found to be the next
effective resulted in 8 and 9 percent nymphs crossed the band and did not differ
significantly from each other. The application of cotton bands did not prove effective
against the mango mealybug resulted in maximum number of individual crossed the tree
trunk i.e. 43 percent and differed significantly from those of recorded in all other
treatments. The Funnal type trap also showed significant control of mango mealybug
nymphs with 7 percent individuals crossed the band and also showed significant
differences from those of observed in all other treatments. The application of cotton band,
grease band, namhar band, grease + black oil band and black oil cloth band resulted in
38, 29, 28, 23 and 14 percent individual crossed the tree trunk, respectively and differed
significantly from one another. These bands were ranked as intermediate. The results
regarding the effect of different bands on the population of mango mealybug at various
dates of observation reveal that Haider’s band showed significant control of the pest
resulted in the lowest population crossed the bands at all the dates of observation. The
dates of observation effects were non-significant for Haider’s band. On the other hand,
cotton wool band found less effective resulted in maximum population crossed the band
at almost all the dates of observation as compared to other treatments. Haider’s band
again proved an effective barrier for the ascent nymphs of mango mealybug.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
137
Table 5. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING PERCENT POPULATION CROSS THE TESTING BAND DURING 2007.
Treatments
Dates x Treatments (**) LSD=2.0929
Treatment Means(**)
LSD =0.7910 07.01.07 14.01.07 21.01.07 28.01.07 04.02.07 13.02.07 19.02.07
A B C D E F G H Namhar Band 0.00 ^ 2.20
z[/]^ 19.58 q 42.49 ij 48.26 f 43.69
hij 41.59 j 28.26 c
Black Oil Cloth
0.00 ^ 3.12 z[ 9.07 y 13.35 uvw
15.54 rst 20.49 q 26.37 o 12.42 e
Gunny Bag 0.81 [/]^ 16.01 rs 36.30 kl 47.81 fg 57.29 c 55.02 d 49.65 ef 37.56 b Grease Band 0.00 ^ 2.68 z[/] 30.57
mn 36.48 kl 42.90 ij 44.03 hi 45.80 gh 28.92 c
Grease+Black Oil
0.00 ^ 2.37 z[/]^
23.29 p 30.01 n 37.62 k 36.17 kl 32.37 m 23.12 d
Funnel Type Trap
0.00 ^ 0.90 [/]^ 2.91 z[/ 9.46 xy 13.37 tuvw
12.43 uvw
9.26 xy 6.90 g
Cotton Wool Band
0.89 [/]^ 12.91 uvw
34.91 l 50.48 e 58.47 c 71.76 a 69.61 b 42.72 a
Polyethylene Sheet Band
0.00 ^ 1.42 z[/]^
3.67 z 12.16 uvw
13.80 stuv
16.33 r 11.09 wxy
8.35 f
Plastic Sheet Band
0.00 ^ 1.55 z[/]^
3.79 z 11.50 vwx
16.19 r 16.37 r 14.28 rstu
9.09 f
Haider’s Band
0.00 ^ 0.00 ^ 0.31 ]^ 0.79 [/]^ 0.88 [/]^ 0.56 /]^ 0.29 ]^ 0.41 h
LSD =0.6618 0.17 f 4.32 e 16.44 d 25.35 c 30.43 b 31.68 a 30.03 b Df=54 F-value= 154.8 Df= 9 F-
value=2566.4 Bands (n=10) Means sharing similar letters in columns A to G for interaction and in column H for treatment means did not differ significantly by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
7.3.2.3 Average Effect of Bands on the Nymphs of Mango Mealybug
During 2006 and 2007 The results regarding the effectiveness of different bands applied on tree trunk
were analyzed cumulatively to determine the average effect of both the study years viz.,
2006 and 2007 for the control of mango mealybug (Table 6). Significant differences were
found to exist between years, among dates of observation and treatments. The means
comparison of the results showed that Haider’s bands was proved to be the most effective
resulted in the lowest number of nymphs (0.6 percent) crossed the band applied on the
tree trunk and differed significantly from those of observed in all other treatments. Funnel
type trap was found to be a next effective band with 7 percent nymphs crossed the band
and also showed significant difference from those of found in all other treatments. No
significant difference was found to exist between polyethylene sheet and plastic sheet
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
138
bands with 9 and 9 percent nymphs crossed the band, respectively. The application of
cotton bands was not an effective treatment and resulted in the highest percentage of
nymphs crossing the band (43 percent) followed by 41, 33, 31, 27 and 14 percent in those
treatments where gunny bag, grease band, namhar band, grease + black oil and black oil
cloth bands were applied, respectively. The interactional response between different
bands and dates of observation reveal that the effect of Haider’s band at all the dates of
observation showed non-significant difference and resulted in the lowest population of
the pest crossed the band. Cotton wool band found less effective resulted in maximum
population of mango mealybug crossed the band at all the dates of observation as
compared to other bands. The population increased gradually at all the observations in all
the treatments except Haider’s band.
Table 6. MEAN COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING PERCENT POPULATION CROSS THE TESTING BAND DURING 2006 AND 2007.
Treatments
Dates x Treatments (**) LSD=4.0015
Treatments Means (**)
LSD =1.1796 Jan. 7 Jan. 14 Jan. 21 Jan. 28 Feb. 4 Feb. 13 Feb. 19
A B C D E F G H Namhar Band 0.00 z 2.31 yz 20.48 s 42.03
lm 49.09 ij 51.81 hi 50.92 i 30.95 d
Black Oil Cloth
0.00 z 3.69 yz 9.14 x 12.03 vwx
15.19 tuv
23.31 rs 29.71 q 13.29 f
Gunny Bag 0.72 yz 16.32 tu
36.03 op
47.57 j 58.02 ef 66.56 c 62.61 d 41.12 b
Grease Band 0.00 z 3.19 yz 32.88 p 41.58 lm
46.23 jk 54.46 gh 55.21 fg 33.37 c
Grease+Black Oil
0.00 z 2.59 yz 24.17 r 33.41 p 39.98 mn
41.86 lm 43.64 kl 26.52 e
Funnel Type Trap
0.00 z 1.04 yz 3.02 yz 9.16 x 13.01 uvw
13.21 tuvw
11.71 vwx
7.31 h
Cotton Wool Band
1.02 yz 13.62 tuvw
37.51 no
42.45 lm
58.78 e 77.82 a 70.47 b 43.09 a
Polyethylene Sheet Band
0.00 z 1.53 yz 4.02 y 10.54 wx
14.34 tuv
15.84 tu 15.84 tu 8.87 g
Plastic Sheet Band
0.00 z 1.74 yz 3.96 y 10.33 wx
16.55 tu 16.89 t 15.93 tu 9.34 g
Haider’Band 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.55 yz 0.86 yz 0.99 yz 0.93 yz
0.91 yz 0.61 i
LSD =0.9869 0.17 f 4.60 e 17.18 d 24.99 c 31.22 b 36.27 a 35.69 a Df=54 F-value= 82.5 Df=9 F-
value=1311.2 Bands (n=10)
Means sharing similar letters in columns A to G for interaction and in column H for treatment means did not differ significantly by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
139
7.3.3 CHEMICAL CONTROL OF MANGO MEALYBUG
Eleven formulated insecticides viz., profenophos (Curacron 500 EC), bifenthrin
(Talstar 10 EC), triazophos (Hostathion 40EC), chlorpyrifos (Lorsban 40 EC),
lambdacyhalothrin (Karate 2.5EC), imidacloprid (Confidor 200SL), buprofezin (Starter
20SP), deltamethrin (Decis 2.5EC), cypermethrin (Ripcord 10EC), acetamiprid
(Mospilan 20SP), and methidathion (Supracide 40EC) at the rate of 9 µl, 30 µl , 30 µl, 15
µl, 15 µl, 30 µl, 150 µg, 15 µl, 30 µl, 30 µl and 45 µl, respectively, were tested in 30 ml
of water for the control of mango mealybug under laboratory as well as under field
conditions. The results are as follows.
7.3.3.1 In Vivo Mortality of Mango Mealybug One Day After Treatment
The results regarding chemical control of first instars of mango mealybug in
different treatments at one day post-treatment interval under laboratory conditions show
highly significant (P≤ 0.01) differences among treatments. The means were compared by
DMR Test at P=0.05 (Table 7, Column A). The results reveal that Acetamiprid at the rate
of 100 g / 100 liter water showed maximum mortality of first instar nymph of mango
mealybug i.e. 33 percent and differed significantly from those of observed in all other
treatments. Imidacloprid at the rate of 100 g/100 liter water was the next effective
insecticide resulted in 28 percent mortality of the pest and also differed significantly from
all other treatments. The effectiveness of other insecticides in descending order were
bifenthrin > triazophos = deltamethrin > lambdacyhalothrin > chlorpyrifos= profenophos
> buprofezin > cypermethrin > methidathion with 25, 20, 20, 18, 15, 15, 13, 10 and 5
percent mortality of first instars nymph after one day post treatment interval, respectively.
7.3.3.2 Mortality of Mango Mealybug Two Days After Treatment
The results pertaining to mortality of first instar nymphs of mango mealybug at
two days after treatments (Table 7 Column B). The results reveal highly significant (P≤
0.01) differences between treatments. Imidacloprid caused the highest mortality (65
percent) and differed significantly from those of obtained in all other treatments.
Detamethrin was the next effective insecticide with 53 percent mortality of the pest and
also differed significantly from all other treatments followed by acetamiprid (48 percent),
cypermethrin (45 percent), lambdacyhalothrin (45 percent), buprofezin (40 percent),
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
140
bifenthrin (35 percent), chlorpyrifos (33 percent), triazophos (30 percent), profenophos
(23 percent) and methidathion (18 percent).
7.3.3.3 Mortality of Mango Mealybug Three Days After Treatment
The data regarding morality of first instar nymph of mango mealybug three days
after spray in different treatments (Table 7, Column C). The results showed significant (P
≤ 0.01) difference among treatments. The means were compared by DMR Test at P=0.05.
Confidor at the rate of 100 g formulation/100 liter water resulted in maximum mortality
of the pest i.e. 78 percent and differed significantly from those of observed in all other
treatments. Acetamiprid, deltamethrin and buprofezin were the next effective insecticides
each showed 73 percent mortality of first instar nymph at two days after treatment
followed by profenophos, bifenthrin, chlorpyrifos, methidathion, cypermethrin,
lambdacyhalothrin and triazophos with in 70, 68, 68, 65, 58, 55 and 53 percent mortality
of first instar nymph of mango mealybug, respectively.
7.3.3.4 Mortality of Mango Mealybug 4 Days After Treatments
Significant differences were found to exist between treatments regarding morality
of first instars nymph of mango mealybug four days after treatment (Table 7, Column D).
The use of Lambdacyhalothrin resulted in 100 percent mortality of the pest and differed
significantly from those of observed in all other treatments. The application of
acetamiprid, profenophos, bifenthrin, chlorpyrifos, imidacloprid, deltamethrin,
buprofezin, cypermethrin and triazophos resulted in 93, 90, 88, 85, 83, 83, 80, 78 and 70
percent morality of first instars four days after treatment, respectively. All these
treatments differed significantly from one another except imidacloprid and deltamethrin
which showed similar response statistically with each other. The lowest mortality (66
percent) in the methidathion was applied and this treatment also differed significantly
from all other treatments.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
141
Table 7. MEAN COMPARISON OF FIRST INSTAR MANGO MEA LYBUG PERCENT MORTALITY UNDER LABORATORY CONDITION.
Treatments
Dose/ 100
lit water
Dose/30 ml
water
Total insects exposed
Percent mortality of first instar after
Common Name Trade name One day Two
day Three day
Four day
Five day Six day
A** B** C** D** E** F**
30ml 9 µl 40 15 f 22.50 i 70 c 90 c 100 a 100 a
Profenophos 500EC Curacron 100ml 30 µl 40 25 c 35.00 f 67.50 d 87.50 d 100 a 100 a
Bifenthrin 10EC Talstar 100ml 30 µl 40 20 d 30 h 52.50 h 70 i 87.50 e 100 a
Triazophos 20EC Hostathion 50ml 15 µl 40 15 f 32.50 g 67.50 d 85 e 100 a 100 a
Chlopyriphos 40EC Lorsban 50ml 15 µl 40 17.50 e 45 d 55.00 g 100a 100 a 100 a
Lambdacyhalothrin 2.5EC Karate 100g 30 µl 40 27.50 b 65 a 77.50 a 82.50f 97.50 b 100 a
Imidacloprid 200SL Confidor 500g 150 µg 40 12.75 g 40 e 72.50 b 79.50 g 90 d 100 a
Buprofezin 20SP Starter 50ml 15µl 40 20.00 d 52.50 b 72.50 b 82.50 f 97.50 b 100 a
Deltamethrin 2.5EC Decis 100ml 30 µl 40 10 h 45.00 d 57.63 f 77.50 h 87.50 e 97.50 b
Cypermethrin 10EC Ripcord 100g 30 µl 40 32.50 a 47.50 c 72.50 b 92.50 b 100 a 100 a
Acetamiprid 20 SP Mospilan 150ml 45 µl 40 5 i 17.50 j 65 e 65.50 j 92.50 c 100 a
Control Control - 40 0 j 0 k 0 i 0 k 0.00f 0.00 c
LSD @5% 1.191236 1.0241 1.1108s 1.4764 0.51706 0.1434079
F-value 497.0 2330.3 2831.5 2507.5 3152.1 239059.1
n=12 df= 11 Means sharing similar letters in columns are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
142
7.3.3.5 Mortality of Mango Mealybug 5 Days After Treatment
The treatment effect on the mortality of first instar nymphs of mango mealybug at
five days after application was significant (Table 7, Column E). Profenophos, bifenthrin,
chlorpyrifos, lambdacyhalothrin and acetamiprid showed 100 percent mortality of the
pest and these treatments differed significantly from all other treatments. Statistically
similar response was observed between triazophos and cypermethrin, imidacloprid and
deltamethrin with 88 and 98 percent mortality for each pair, respectively. The application
of buprofezin and methidathion showed 90 and 93 percent mortality of the nymphs of
mango mealybug, respectively and differed significantly from each other.
7.3.3.6 Mortality of Mango Mealybug 6 Days After Treatment
All the insecticides showed 100 percent mortality of the pest except cypermethrin
with 98 percent mortality and showed significant difference with all other insecticides.
(Table 7, Column F).
Conclusion
All the insecticides showed 100 percent mortality of the pest 6 days after
treatment except cypermethrin which showed 98 percent mortality.
7.3.3.7 Mortality of First Instar Mango Mealybug under Field Conditions Same insecticides tested under laboratory conditions were evaluated for their
efficacy against first nymphal instars of mango mealybug under field conditions for two
years viz., 2006 and 2007.
7.3.3.7.1 Mortality of First Instar Mango Mealybug 24 Hours After Spray
The data regarding percent mortality of first instar nymphs of mango mealybug 24
hours after spray are given in (Table 8, Column A). Highly significant differences were
found between treatments whereas the interaction between year and treatment was
nonsignificant. The maximum mortality of the pest was observed in those treatments
where acetamiprid and deltamethrin were applied with 80 and 78 percent mortality of the
pest, respectively and did not show significant difference with each other followed by 75,
75 and 74 percent mortality in those treatments where methidathion, lambdacyhalothrin
and profenophos were sprayed, respectively and did not show significant difference with
one another. The minimum morality of the pest i.e. 44 percent observed in those trees
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
143
where cypermethrin was sprayed and differed significantly from all other treatments. The
effect of other insecticides in descending order is: Imidacloprid > chlorpyrifos >
bifenthrin > buprofezin > and triazophos with 70, 67, 66, 64 and 53 percent mortality of
the pest, respectively 24 hours after spray.
7.3.3.7.2 Mortality of First Instar Mango Mealybug 72 Hours After Spray
Variations were found to be significant among treatments as well as between
interaction of years and treatments (Table 8, Column B). The highest mortality of the pest
was recorded to be 85 percent in those trees where acetamiprid was sprayed and there
was no significant difference with those of where lambdacyhalothin and profenophos (85
and 83 percent) mortality of first instar nymphs of mango mealybug, 72 hours after spray.
The lowest mortality of the pest was observed to be 60 and 61 percent in those trees
where cypermethrin and triazophos were sprayed, respectively and did not show
significant difference with each other. The application of deltamethrin, methidathion,
chlorpyrifos, imidacloprid, bifenthrin and buprofezin resulted in 81, 78, 76, 75, 73 and 66
percent mortality of first instar nymphs of the pest, respectively.
7.3.3.7.3 Mortality of First Instar Mango Mealybug 168 Hours After Spray
Significant differences were found between treatments means, interaction
between years and treatments and between years regarding mortality of first instar
nymphs of mango mealybug 168 hours after spray (Table 8, Column C). The results
reveal that acetamiprid was found to be the most effective insecticide resulted in
maximum mortality of the pest i.e. 91 percent and differed significantly from those of
observed in all other treatments. Methidathion, lambdacyhalothrin and deltamethrin
showed similar response statistically with 86, 86 and 85 percent mortality of first instars
nymphs of mango mealybug, respectively and ranked second in their effectiveness after
acetamiprid. The mortality of the pest observed in those treatments where deltamethrin
was applied also showed no significant difference with those of observed in profenophos
treatment. The mortality on the pest was recorded to be 78 and 78 percent in those
treatments where chlorpyrifos and imidacloprid were sprayed, respectively. Cypermethrin
was found to be the least effective resulted in 65 percent mortality of the pest and differed
significantly from those of observed in all other treatments. Nonsignificant variation was
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
144
also found to exist between those treatments where bifenthrin and buprofezin were
sprayed resulted in 74 and 72 percent mortality of the pest.
7.3.3.8 Mortality of Second and Third Instars Mango Mealybug
Similar insecticides were evaluated for their effectiveness against second and
third nymphal instars of mango mealybug under field conditions during 2006 and 2007.
The observation was recorded at various post treatment intervals. The results are as
follows.
7.3.3.8.1 Mortality of Second and Third Instars Mango Mealybug 24 Hours After Spray.
The data regarding percent mortality of second and third nymphal instars of
mango mealybug observed at 24 hours after spray during 2006 and 2007 are given in
Table 8, Column D. Highly significant differences were found among treatments. The
means were compared by DMR Test at P=0.05. The maximum mortality of second and
third nymphal instar was recorded to be 71 percent in those treatments where
deltamethrin was sprayed and did not show significant difference with those of observed
in profenophos treatment showing 70 percent mortality of second and third nymphal
instars of mango mealybug. Acetamiprid was found to be the next effective treatment
with 65 percent mortality of the pest and also did not show significant variation with
those of where lambdacyhalothrin and chlorpyrifos were sprayed showing 63 and 62
percent mortality of the pest. The later mentioned treatments also showed nonsignificant
difference with those of where imidacloprid and methidathion were sprayed showing 58
and 60 percent mortality of the pest, respectively. No significant difference was also
found to exist between bifenthrin and triazophos application with 51 and 47 percent
mortality of the pest, respectively. Buprofezin was the least effective insecticide with 27
percent mortality of second and third nymphal instars of mango mealybug and differed
significantly from the mortality observed in all other treatments. Similarly the application
of cypermethrin also showed discouraging results i.e. 38 percent mortality of the pest and
also differed with those of found in all other treatments.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
145
Table 8. MEAN COMPARISON OF CHEMICAL CONTROL OF MANGO MEALYB UG FIRST INSTAR, SECOND & THIRD INSTAR AND ADULT FEMALE UNDER FIELD CONDITI ON DURING 2006-2007 (AVERAGE OF BOTH YEARS).
Insecticide
Dose / 100 lit water
1st instar 2nd and 3rd instar Adult female
Common Name Trade name Percent mortality after spray Percent mortality after spray
Percent mortality after spray
24 h 72 h 168 h 24 h 72 h 168 h 24 h 72 h 168 h A** B** C** D** E** F** G** H** I**
Profenophos 500EC Curacron 30ml 74.42 b 83.35 a 83.68 c 70.02 a 72.52 c 78.84 b 50.11 c 62.24 c 64.44 c
Bifenthrin 10EC Talstar 100ml 65.80 de 73.48 e 74.11 e 51.12 e 55.50 h 58.71 g 26.15 i 29.83 h 33.37 h
Triazophos 20EC Hostathion 100ml 52.94 f 61.27 g 68.00 f 47.34 e 57.66 g 62.03 f 30.12 h 33.39 g 35.55 g
Chlorpyrifos 40EC Lorsban 50ml 66.70 d 76.25 cd 77.68 d 61.94 bcd 66.39 e 70.11 d 35.19 f 46.77 e 52.99 e
Lambdacyhalothrin 2.5EC Karate 50ml 74.85 b 84.98 a 86.32 b 63.43 bc 64.87 f 74.88 c 31.89 g 42.35f 52.54 e
Imidacloprid 200SL Confidor 100g 70.47 c 75.22 de 77.50 d 57.89 d 64.02 f 67.76 e 40.28 e 45.26 e 48.61 f
Buprofezin 20SP Starter 500g 63.57 e 66.19 f 72.26 e 26.95 g 28.59 j 33.86 i 6.36 k 11.50 j 16.36 i
Deltamethrin 2.5EC Decis 50ml 77.93 a 80.91 b 85.20 bc 70.72 a 74.55 b 77.22 b 45.44 d 54.02 d 61.58 d
Cypermethrin 10EC Ripcord 100ml 4.80 g 60.05 g 64.92 g 37.61 f 42.65 i 45.83 h 21.87 j 25.12 i 32.96 h
Acetamiprid 20 SP Mospilan 100g 79.72 a 85.17 a 90.57 a 65.25 b 77.99 a 81.42 a 58.13 b 69.39 b 70.57 b
Methidathion 40EC Supracide 150ml 75.48 b 77.76 c 86.18 b 60.23 cd 69.86 d 74.02 c 59.89 a 71.64 a 72.71 a
Control Control 0.00 h 0.00 h 0.00 h 0.00 h 0.00 k 0.00 j 0.00 l 0.00 k 0.00 j
LSD @ 5% 2.3723 2.066 2.3723 4.507 1.516 1.969 1.660 1.993 1.828
F-value 697.9 1008.0 1085.3 168.3 1763.5 1151.7 1004.3 982.5 1171.7
n=12 df= 11 Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
146
7.3.3.8.2 Mortality of Second and Third Instars Mango Mealybug 72 hours After Spray.
The data regarding percent mortality of second and third nymphal instars of
mango mealybug at 72 hours after spray during 2006 and 2007 in different treatments
(Table 8, Column E). The results reveal highly significant differences between treatments
and interactions between years and treatments. It is evident from the results that
methidathion was found to be the most effective treatment causing the greatest mortality
at 78 percent 72 hours after spray of all insecticides tested. Deltamethrin was found to be
the most effective treatment resulted in 74 percent mortality of the pest and also showed
significantly different from all other treatments. The effectiveness of all other treatments
in descending order was profenophos > methidathion > chlorpyrifos > lambdacyhalothrin
= imidacloprid > triazophos > bifenthrin > cypermethrin > and buprofezin with 73, 70,
66, 65, 64, 58, 56, 43, and 29 percent mortality of the pest, respectively.
7.3.3.8.3 Mortality of Second and Thir Instars Mango Mealybug 168 Hours After Spray.
The data relating to mortality percentage of second and third nymphal instars of
mango mealybug in different treatments at 168 hours after spray are given in (Table 8,
Column F). The results reveal highly significant differences between treatments and
between years and a significant interaction between year and treatment. Acetamiprid was
most effective with the highest mortality at 81 percent and differed significantly from
those of observed in all other treatments followed by 79, 77, 75, 74, 70, 68, 62 and 59
percent mortality of the pest in those trees where profenophos, deltamethrin,
lambdacyhalothrin, methidathion, chlorpyrifos, imidacloprid, triazophos and bifenthrin,
respectively were applied. Buprofezin was found to be the least effective resulted in
minimum morality of the pest i.e. 34 percent and differed significantly from those of
recorded in all other treatments.
7.3.3.9 Mortality of Adult Female of Mango Mealybug at Various Post Treatments Intervals.
Same insecticides were evaluated for their efficacy against adult female of mango
mealybug during 2006 and 2007. The observations were recorded 24 hours, 72 hours and
168 hours after spray. The results are given as follows.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
147
7.3.3.9.1 Mortality of Adult Female of Mango Mealybug 24 Hours After Spray.
The data regarding percent mortality of adult females of mango mealybug at 24
hours of post treatment intervals in different treatments during 2006 and 2007 are
presented in (Table 8, Column G). The result showed significant differences among
treatments as well as interactions of years and treatments. The results reveal that
methidathion was found to be the most effective causing 60 percent mortality followed
by 58, 50, 45, 40, 35, 32, 30, 26 and 22 percent mortality of the pest in those treatments
where acetamiprid, profenophos, deltamethrin, imidacloprid, chlorpyrifos,
lambdacyhalothrin, triazophos, bifenthrin and cypermethrin, respectively were sprayed.
Buprofezin showed the least toxic effect on the adult female of mango mealybug resulted
in minimum mortality i.e. 6 percent. All the insecticides mentioned above showed
significant differences with one another.
7.3.3.9.2 Mortality of Adult Female of Mango Mealybug 72 Hours After Spray.
The data pertaining to the mortality percentage of adult females of mango
mealybug at 72 hours of post treatment interval during 2006 and 2007 are shown in
(Table 8, Column H). The results reveal highly significant differences among treatments.
Methidathion was found to be the most effective and resulted in maximum mortality of
the pest i.e. 72 percent followed by 69, 62 and 54 percent mortality of the pest in those
treatments where acetamiprid, profenophos and deltamethrin, respectively were sprayed.
Chlorpyrifos and imidacloprid showed 47 and 45 percent mortality of the pest,
respectively and did not show significant variation with each other. Buprofezin was
found to be the least effective insecticide for the control of adult female of mango
mealybug resulted in 12 percent mortality and also differed significantly from those of
observed in all other treatments. The effectiveness of other insecticides in descending
order are lambdacyhalothrin, triazophos, bifenthrin and cypermethrin with 42, 33, 30 and
25 percent mortality of the pest, respectively.
7.3.3.9.3 Mortality of Adult Female of Mango Mealybug 168 Hours After Spray.
The data regarding mortality of adult females of mango mealybug in different
treatments 168 hours after spray during 2006-2007 are given in (Table 8, Column I). The
result of the same reveals highly significant difference among treatments. The means
were compared by DMR Test at P=0.05. Methidathion was found to be the most effective
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
148
resulted in maximum mortality of the pest i.e. 73 percent and showed significant
difference with the mortality observed in all other treatments. Acetamiprid was found to
be the second most effective insecticide with 71 percent mortality of the pest and also
differed significantly from all other treatments. Buprofezin did not show good control of
the pest and showed minimum mortality i.e. 16 percent and also showed significant
difference with those of observed in all other treatments. The mortality percentage was
ranked as 64, 62, 53, 53, 49, 36, 33 and 33 in those treatments where profenophos,
deltamethrin, chlorpyrifos, lambdacyhalothin, imidacloprid, triazophos, bifenthrin and
cypermethrin, respectively were sprayed.
7.3.3.10 SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT APPROACH FOR THE
CONTROL OF MANGO MEALYBUG
From the selectivity studies, the control methods which found the most effective
were integrated with the objective to develop a sustainable strategy to control the mango
mealybug. Mounding the trunk with the materials present under the plants like dried
leaves, branches, weeds, clods of mud, debris after spreading plastic sheet (cultural
control), Haider’s band (mechanical control) and acetamiprid @100g/100 liter water
(chemical control) were applied individually and as well as in their possible interactions
viz., mechanical + chemical, cultural + mechanical, cultural + chemical and cultural+
mechanical + chemical for the control of mango mealybug. The data regarding the
population of first instar nymph were recorded from the tree trunk 45 cm above the
ground level before the treatment during 2006-2007. After recording the data the above
mentioned practices were applied to the selected trees. The post treatment data were
recorded during the year 2008. The percent reduction over control of the pest was
calculated.
The data on percent reduction of mango mealybug in different treatments are
given in (Table 9). The results showed significant difference (P < 0.01) among different
treatments. The maximum reduction (98 percent) of mango mealybug was observed on
the trees where cultural + mechanical + chemical methods were used followed by cultural
+ chemical, cultural + mechanical and mechanical + chemical with 88, 81 and 78 percent
reduction of mango mealybug, respectively.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
149
Table 9. MEANS COMPARISON OF THE DATA REGARDING PE RCENT REDUCTION OF MANGO MEALYBUG IN DIFFERENT IPM METHODS DURING 2006 TO 2008.
Treatments /Practices
Before treatment population during
2007(05.01.07 to 16.02.07) (ns)
Percent population reduction over control
after treatment (**)
T1- Cultural 204.29 70.58 e T2- Mechanical 178.62 45.23 g T3- Chemical 168.90 48.68 f T4- Cultural X Mechanical 211.14 81.32 c T-5 Cultural X Chemical 208.33 87.70 b T6- Mechanical X Chemical
188.86 78.03 d
T7- Cultural X Mechanical X Chemical
211.90 98.46 a
T8-Control 205.24 0.00 h LSD @ 5% 68.8554 1.05286
D.F=7 F-value=7975.4 Means sharing similar letters for means did not differ significantly by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
A significant low reduction (45 percent) of mango mealybug was observed in
mechanical treatment compared with all of the other treatments used. Chemical methods
of control and cultural control resulted in 48 and 71 percent reduction in mango
mealybug, respectively and showed significant difference with each other. From the data
it could be suggested that the combination of cultural, mechanical and chemical methods
gave better control for MMB.
Cost Benefit Ratios (CBR) was calculated (Table 10 & 11) to find the economics
and feasibility of each control practice. The results reveal that a combination of
mechanical + chemical and cultural practices showed maximum benefit to the farmers
with the CBR 1:9 followed by the application of Acetamiprid at the rate of 1 gm per liter
water only (1:6), application of Haider’s band (1:5), mechanical + chemical practices
(1:3), cultural practice only (1:1), cultural + chemical (1:1) and cultural + mechanical
practice (1:1). To avoid the use of insecticide, Haider’s band was proved to be effective,
economical and easy to apply resulted in good benefit to the farmers.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
150
Table 10. COST BENEFIT RATIO IN DIFFERENT TREATMENTS REGARDING CONTROL OF MANGO MEALYBUG.
Treatment No. Name of Treatment CBR
T1 Mounding and spreading the soil (cultural) 1:14
T2 Application of Haider’s band (mechanical) 1:48
T3 Application of Acetamiprid at the rate of 1gm/liter water 1:60
T4 Cultural + chemical 1:11
T5 Mechanical + cultural 1:10
T6 Mechanical + chemical 1:24
T7 Mechanical + cultural + chemical 1:92
Table 11. COST BENEFIT RATIO
Practices Material required Approx.cost per tree • Cultural i)Plastic sheet Rs: 9
ii)Labor for Mounding the tree
Rs:15
iii) Labor for Spreading the mounds
Rs:10
Total cost Rs: 34 • Mechanical i)Plastic sheet Rs: 2.60
ii)Grease Rs: 4.00 iii)Nails Rs: 0.40 iv)Labor Rs: 3.00
Total cost Rs:10 • Chemical i)Insecticides required
below band on trunk Rs: 4.00
ii)Labor for spray Rs: 4.00 Total cost Rs: 8
Grand Total Cost Cultural + Mechanical + Chemical Rs:52 per tree Average yield expected per tree 6 mounds loss 80 percent Increase due to control of mango mealy bug 4.8 mounds Rate / mound is average Rs: 1000 Cost Benefit Ratio 1000 x 4.8 = 4320 / 52 1:92
7.3.3.11 MANAGEMENT OF MANGO MEALYBUG MALES.
i. Pupae of male mango mealybug were exposed to sunlight by hoeing five cm deep
under tree trunk in semi wet soil and in dry soil, near water channel (semi wet soil)
under leaves in semi wet soil and dry soil and on the tree trunk bark to record the
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
151
emergence of male mango mealybug. The experiment was conducted in a mango
garden of 10 acres near Multan. The data regarding number of exposed pupae of male
mango mealybug were recorded. The data reveals highly significant difference among
treatments. The means were compared by DMR Test at P=0.05 (Table 12). The
maximum number of pupae 56 per 900 cm2 was observed near katcha water channel
in semi wet soil and differed significantly from all treatments. The number of pupae
45 per 900 cm2 was observed under tree trunk and also differed significantly from all
other treatments. The number of pupae 5, 4 and 1 per 900 cm2 observed under tree
trunk (dry soil), under leaves (dry soil) and on the tree trunk bark, respectively did not
show significant difference with each other. The number of pupae 12 per 900 cm2
under leaves (semi-wet soil) differed significantly from those of observed in all other
treatments. From these results it was observed that semi-wet soil near katcha water
channel was found to be the most favourite pupation site for male mango mealybug
followed by semi-wet soil under tree trunk. The emergence of winged males was
recorded to be zero in all the experimental sites.
Table 12. MEAN COMPARISON OF DATA REGARDING PUPAE OF MANGO MEALYBUG PER 900 CM 2 IN ORCHARD IN DIFFERENT PLACES DURING 2007.
TREATMENTS TREATMENT MEANS (**)
Under tree trunk (Semi-wet soil) 46.75 b
Under tree trunk (Dry soil) 5.37 d
Near kacha water channel (Semi-wet soil) 55.63 a
Under leaves (Semi-wet soil) 12.25 c
Under leaves (Dry soil) 3.75 d
On tree bark 0.63 d
LSD@5% 5.451
D.F=5 F-value=158.7 Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
152
ii. Light traps of different colours viz., yellow, red, mercury, blue and green were
installed in the mango orchards with the objective to monitor the winged males of
mango mealybug during their peak activity in the month of Apr. for disrupting their
mating with virgin female. The data showed highly significant differences among
different colours of light trap and date of observation. The means were compared by
DMR Test at P=0.05 (Table 13). It is evident from the results that mercury light
attracted the maximum winged males i.e. 5.71 per day and differed significantly from
those of observed in all other lights. Yellow, red, blue and green colored lights
showed nonsignificant differences with one another resulted in a range of male
catches 0.13 to 0.21 per trap per day. As regard to the variation among dates of
observation, it was observed that Apr. 16, 2007 was the most favorite date resulted in
maximum moth catches i.e. 1.93 per day per trap and did not show significant
variation with those of Apr. 14, 15, 17 and 18 with 1.53, 1.67, 1.67 and 1.47 moths
per day per trap, respectively. The moth catches decreased thereafter on Apr. 19 with
0.60 moths per trap per day. The moth catches of 0.13 per day per trap were observed
on Apr. 20, 2007 which was the minimum. From these results it was observed that
mercury light was the most effective for moth monitoring and Apr. 16, 2007 was the
most favourable date of moth catches resulted in maximum individuals i.e. 1.94 per
day per trap. Furthermore, mercury light showed maximum catches throughout the
monitoring period as compared to all other lights. The maximum moths of males
mango mealybug was attracted on Apr. 17 i.e. 8.00 per day per trap, whereas
minimum on Apr. 20, 2007 i.e. 0.67 per trap per day. The effect of different lights on
the moth population at various dates of observation reveals that yellow, red, blue, and
green light did not show significant difference among dates of observation resulted in
very low moth population catches which ranged from 0 to 0.7 per trap per night.
Mercury light resulted in significant difference among dates of observation. The
maximum moth catches was recorded to be 8.0 per trap per night on 17- 04-07 and
did not show significant difference with those of recorded on 15-04-07 and 16-04-07
each resulted in 7.7 moths per trap per night. This population decreased thereafter on
subsequent dates of observations. From these result it is concluded that mercury light
is an effective for monitoring the pest as compared to all other lights under study.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
153
Table 13. MEAN COMPARISON OF POPULATION OF ADULT M ALE MANGO MEALYBUG ATTRACTED TO DIFFERENT LIGHTS DURING 2007.
Dates
Dates X Lights (**) LSD =1.04
Yellow Red Mercury Blue Green Average (**) LSD=0.46
13-04-07 0.00 e 0.00 e 6.33 c 0.00 e 0.00 e 1.27 b
14-04-07 0.67 e 0.33 e 6.67 bc 0.00 e 0.00 e 1.53 ab
15-04-07 0.33 e 0.00 e 7.67 ab 0.33 e 0.00 e 1.67 ab
16-04-07 0.67 e 0.33 e 7.67 ab 0.67 e 0.33 e 1.93 a
17-04-07 0.00 e 0.00 e 8.00 a 0.00 e 0.33 e 1.67 ab
18-04-07 0.00 e 0.33 e 6.00 c 0.33 e 0.67 e 1.47 ab
19-04-07 0.00 e 0.00 e 2.67 d 0.33 e 0.00 e 0.60 c
20-04-07 0.00 e 0.00 e 0.67 e 0.00 e 0.00 e 0.13 d
Average 0.21 b 0.13 b 5.71 a 0.21 b 0.17 e
D.F 28 7
F-value 9.9 13.7
Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different by DMR Test at P = 0.05 LSD = Least Significant Difference Value. * = Significant at P < 0.05. ** = Significant at P < 0.01.
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
154
7.4 DISCUSSION
Mango mealybug is a serious threat for mango orchards. These studies were
conducted for the control of the pest by applying different control methods viz., cultural,
mechanical and chemical. The most effective treatments were then integrated for
sustainable management approach to control the pest. Results are discussed under the
following sub-sections.
7.4.1 CONTROL OF MANGO MEALYBUG THROUGH CULTURAL PRACTICES
Various cultural practices viz., hoeing/ploughing (T1), mounding/earthing the
trees with fine mud (T2), mounding/ earthing the trees with debris, dried leaves, small
branches, clods of mud (T3), mounding/earthing the trees on the plastic sheet with debris,
dried leaves, small branches, clods of mud (T4) were applied for the control of mango
mealybug in 2006 and 2007. The results revealed that mounding/earthing the trees on the
plastic sheet with debris, dried leaves, small branches and clods of mud proved to be the
most effective resulted in maximum reduction of nymphal population of mango
mealybug. In contrast Sial (1999) reported complete control of the pest using hoeing or
ploughing, use of burlap band, burning of adult female and removal of soil contaminated
with eggs of mango mealybug gave complete control of the pest without pesticides.
While Singh (1947), Haq and Akmal (1960), Sandhu et al., (1980) and Agricola et al.,
(1989) have shown digging the soil, burning of rubbish, scrapping of soil at the basis of
fruit trees, root opening and pruning were the most effective methods. In the present
study hoeing and ploughing resulted in 42 percent nymphal reduction, which was not an
encouraging control. Similar results were also observed by Rahman and Latif (1944) who
reported that destruction of eggs by digging them out with spades from the soil is not an
encouraging practice. The present findings can partially be compared with those of
Mohyuddin and Mahmood (1993) who achieved the control of mango mealybug by
hoeing or ploughing the soil to a depth of 15 cm, 3 times between June and Dec.
However, Xu et al., (1999) have used trenches filled with trash to trap egg-carrying
females while moving downward from tree for egg laying. In a second experiment two
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
155
treatments viz., removal of soil around the trunk in the month of Nov. and intercropping
of oat and berseem as fodder on Sept. and Oct., respectively were tested for the control of
mango mealybug. Two years studies revealed that intercropping resulted in significantly
maximum reduction of nymphal population (77 percent) in those trees where Oat and
berseem were intercropped whereas minimum nymphal reduction (64 percent) was found
in those trees where soil was ploughed and removed.
7.4.2 CONTROL OF MANGO MEALYBUG THROUGH MECHANICAL
METHODS Various mechanical methods in the form of bands viz., namhar band, black oil
cloth band, gunny bag, grease band, grease + black oil, funnel type tape, cotton band,
polyethylene sheet, plastic sheet and Haider’s band were applied for the control of mango
mealybug for two years (2005-2007). The results of both years study revealed that
Haider’s band was found to be the most effective and lowest cost method resulting in the
least percent of nymphs i.e. 1 percent crossing the band. The number of nymphs crossing
the other banding methods was from 7 to 43 percent. In contrast, Sial (1999), Abrar-ul-
Haq et al., (2002), Satish (2003) used grease and plastic sheets to prevent upward
movement of mango mealybug.
From polyethylene sheet band and black oil cloth only 9 percent and 13 percent
nymphs crossed during upward movement. Similarly Bindra and Sohi (1974) and
Rahman and Latif (1944) also have shown effectiveness of the bands in preventing
upward movement of mealybug. The namhar band however, was not very effective band
as it resulted in 31 percent nymphal upward movement. The results are in line with those
of Husain (1920) who found that the cotton bands are not effective in preventing the
mealybug, Drosicha (Monophelebus) sp. from reaching the blossoms of mango trees.
7.4.3 CONTROL OF MANGO MEALYBUG THROUGH INSECTICIDES
Eleven formulated insecticides viz., profenophos (Curacron 500 EC), bifenthrin
(Talstar 10EC), triazophos (Hostathion 20EC), chlorpyrifos (Lorsban 40EC),
lambdacyhalothrin (Karate 2.5EC), imidacloprid (Confidor 200SL), buprofezin (Starter
20SP), deltamethrin (Decis 2.5EC), cypermethrin (Ripcord 10EC), acetamiprid
(Mospilan 20SP), and methidathion (Supracide 40EC) at the rate of 30-ml, 100-ml, 100-
ml, 50-ml, 50-ml, 100-g, 500-g, 50-ml, 100-ml, 100-g and 150-ml per 100 litre water,
respectively were tested for the control of mango mealybug under laboratory as well as
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
156
under field conditions. Acetamiprid was found to be the most effective insecticide in
laboratory and in field conditions since most of the post treatment intervals resulted in
significantly the highest mortality of different instars and adult females.
Furthermore, all the insecticides resulted in 100 percent control of 1st instars
nymphs of mango mealybug under laboratory conditions six days after application but
under field conditions acetamiprid is identified as the most effective insecticide for 1st,
2nd and 3rd instars nymphs of mango mealybug at 24, 72 and 168 hrs after treatment.
Methidathion was the most effective for adult female at all the post treatment intervals
under field conditions. Chlorpyrifos was not as effective. These findings are partially in
conformity with those of Sarivastava and Tandon (1981) who reported that chlorpyrifos
was toxic to mango mealybug compared with the insecticides other than those tested in
the present study.
The present findings can not be compared with those of Rojanavongse and
Charernson (1984), Azim (1985), Dalaya et al., (1983), Rao and Barwal (1985), Khan
(1985), Das and Singh (1986), Khurana and Verma (1988), Gaffar (1989), Singh et al.,
(1991), Sohi et al., (1992), Irulandi (2000) due to differences in their materials and
methods.
In the present study, buprofezin was the effective after 6 days resulting in 100
percent and lambdacyhalothin after 4 days with 100 percent mortality of nymphal instars
of mango mealybug after spray under laboratory conditions. Similar results were
observed by Srivastava (1997). Further it is pointed out that sole reliance on a single
insecticide will result in the development of insecticide resistance in the insect
populations. But if the farmers are going to make more than one application per year they
need to rotate insecticides classes.
7.4.4 SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT APPROACH FOR THE CONTROL OF MANGO MEALYBUG From the above studies, the most effective control methods were
mounding/earthing the trees on the plastic sheet with debris, dried leaves, small branches,
clods of mud (cultural method), Haider’s band (mechanical method) and acetamiprid at
the rate of 100-g per 100 litre water were applied individually as well as in their possible
interactions for the control of mango mealybug on mango trees. The results revealed that
a combination of cultural + mechanical + chemical methods resulted in maximum
Chapter 7 Sustainable Management of Mango Mealybug
157
reduction (98.5 percent) of mango mealybug. The present findings can partially be
compared with those of Tandon and Verghese (1995), Gul et al., (1997) and Bajwa and
Gul (2000) who recommended a combination of cultural, mechanical and chemical
control methods for the control of mango mealybug on mango trees but the methods they
reported were different from those of tested in the present dissertation.
The present findings can not be compared with those of Hartless (1914), Ali
(1980), Lakra et al., (1980), Anwar (1991), Jia et al., (2001) and Ishaq et al., (2004) due
differences in their materials and methods.
It is noted that the greater effect of control methods in cultivars with greater
susceptibility and can be adopted easily and could have immediate impact on production
of mango.
7.4.5 MANAGEMENT OF MALES OF MANGO MEALYBUG
Infestation to mango orchards caused by mango mealybug can be minimized by
controlling an effective measure for management of male. For this purpose, emergence of
males of mango mealybug was controlled with the help of light traps and cultural
practices. It was observed that amongst yellow, red, mercury, blue and green lights, the
males of mango mealybug were attracted to mercury light. It is therefore suggested that
mercury light may be installed in the garden to capture the males of mango mealybug.
The present findings cannot be compared with those of Rahman and Latif (1944) who
used hurricane lanterns and two males per night were captured. Further it is noted that
exposing male pupae to sunlight by hoeing 5 cm deep proved to be the most effective
practice and resulted in maximum reduction.
158
Chapter 8
SUMMARY
A comprehensive survey regarding views of the respondents relating to resistant
and susceptible mango cultivars against mango mealybug, methods of spreading, places
of hibernation, control practices, problems faced by the farmers and yield losses occurred
due to the attack of mango mealybug in four districts of the Punjab viz., Bahawalpur,
Rahim Yar Khan, Multan and Muzzaffar Garh after a preliminary survey during 2005 in
Multan District. The results are summarized below.
• MMB was reported to be the major insect pests of mango orchards followed by
hoppers, fruit fly, scales, galls and midges
• ‘Chaunsa cultivar’ was the most susceptible as viewed by the majority of the
respondents i.e. 94 percent followed by 69, 63 and 63 percent respondents for
‘Fajri’, ‘Langra’ and ‘Black Chaunsa’, whereas 62 percent respondents had the
view that ‘Dusehri’ was resistant cultivar for mealybugs. It is proved from the
experiments that ‘Chaunsa’ is the most susceptible cultivar. The growers
perception of the more resistant cultivars is agreement with the experimental
evidence of the surveys conducted in study. The results show that Dusehri was
more susceptible than other cultivars like Tukhmi or Anwar Ratul
• Irrigation water was the major source of flare up of the pest as viewed by the
majority of the respondents i.e. 94 percent followed by migrating pest from one
place to another (52 percent), transportation of agricultural machinery (49
percent), through nursery plants (49 percent), by dissidence (33 percent), by host
plants (41 percent), by weeds taken by the women from one place to another (28
percent), through air (18 percent) with farm yard manure (11 percent) and
affected inflorescence by malformation (29 percent)
• Majority of the respondents told that the pest hibernated under the trees followed
by cracks in trees, mud walls around orchards, soil under tree canopy, roots of
plants under fallen leaves and kacha (mud) water channels
Chapter 8 Summary
159
• The majority of the respondents (60 percent) adopted removal of weeds practice
for the control of mango mealybug, resulting in 25 percent control as viewed by
85 respondents while hoeing, ploughing, irrigation and removal of weeds were
also adapted by the respondents with variable results. Furthermore satisfaction
level for the control of mango mealybug was unsatisfactory
• Amongst 18 insecticides, diazinon and methidathion were the most common as 73
and 52 percent respondents gave positive response whereas, 29 and 48 percent
respondents showed negative response, respectively. Furthermore, 86 respondents
gave the view that diazinon controlled the mealybug up to 75 percent and 14
respondents reported 100 percent satisfaction. All the other insecticides did not
give satisfactory results for the respondents
• Grease bands were applied by the majority of the respondents for the control of
mango mealybug. Forty three of the respondents reported up to 25 percent,
whereas, 82 of the respondents reported 50 percent control of mango mealybug
with this practice. The satisfaction level was again 50 percent or below
• Lack of knowledge about the pest, lack of money, adulterated and shortage of
pesticides, lack of unity amongst farmers and small land holdings were the main
constraints for the control of mango mealybug
• 100 percent yield losses was told by 23 percent respondents whereas 75 percent,
50 percent and 25 percent losses were reported by 35, 28 and 14 percent
respondents, respectively
• Burning of females scales, application of grease bands and insecticidal sprays did
not give satisfactory results to the respondents for the control of fertilized
females of mango mealybug migrating or dispersing down from the trees
Population Dynamics
The population dynamic studies were carried out on ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar as it was
the most susceptible cultivar. The MMB population was observed on weeds around
mango tree, on mango tree trunk, leaves, inflorescence and branches of the plant weekly
from east, west, south and north sides. The data on the population of mango mealybug
were also observed from the trunk of the trees and from the weeds around the trees.
Chapter 8 Summary
160
Predation, parasitization and fungal attacked specimens were also observed on the plant.
The results are summarized as under:
• South side showed maximum population of mango mealybug on leaves and
inflorescence, whereas west side of the plant showed maximum population of
mango mealybug on branches
• Trunk of the plant showed maximum population of mango mealybug as compared
to weeds. However, higher population was observed during 2005-2006 as
compared to 2006-2007
• Parasitization and predation of the pest was higher during 2005-2006 as compared
to 2006-2007
• Fungal attack was higher during 2006-2007 as compared to 2005-2006
Cultivar Resistance
• Twelve cultivars of mango viz., ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Fajri’, ‘Langra’, ‘Black Chaunsa’,
‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Malda’, ‘Anwar Ratul’, ‘Dusehri’, ‘Ratul-12’,
‘Tukhmi’ and ‘Sensation’ were studied for their relative resistant/susceptibility
against MMB in two years (2005- 2007) in district Multan. The population of
mango mealybug was counted from leaves, inflorescence and branches at
fortnight interval in their active period from East and South directions of the
plant. The females of dominant similar size were collected from the trunk coming
down the tree, and the specimens were weighed, and measured the length and
width. The data on number of eggs laid per female, length and width of ovisac
were also recorded on each cultivar. The results are summarized as under.
• The ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar showed maximum population of mango mealybug in both
the study years (105 and 70 during 2005-2006 and during 2006-2007,
respectively) as well as on an average of both study years (87), whereas ‘Tukhmi’
cultivar was found comparatively resistant with minimum population of mango
mealybug i.e. 18, 14 and 16 during 2005-2006, 2006-2007 and average of both
years, respectively
• On an average of both the study years, the following rankings positions towards
susceptibility of mango cultivars were as follows
Chapter 8 Summary
161
• ‘Chaunsa’ > ‘Black Chaunsa’ > ‘Malda’ > ‘Fajri’ > ‘Ratul-12’ > ‘Langra’ >
‘Sensation’ > ‘Sindhri’ > ‘Dusehri’ > ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’ > ‘Anwar Ratul’ and >
‘Tukhmi’
• The maximum population range of mango mealybug was observed during 2nd
week of Feb. to 2nd week of Mar.
• The cultivar ‘Tukhmi’ appeared as comparatively resistant because of the
minimum number of eggs laid per female, weight, length and width of female
and length and width of ovisac
• Based on biological parameters studies, the pest collected from ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar
showed maximum weight, length and width of female, maximum length and
width of ovisac and laid maximum number of eggs while all the above parameters
were minimum on cultivar ‘Tukhmi’
Biology and Behaviour of the Pest
• All the 1st instar nymphs molted in 56 days, 2nd instar nymphs 26 days and 3rd
instar nymphs 20 days. Nymphs were negatively geotropic and 1st instar moved
upward with average speed of 12 cm per minute, 2nd instar 17 cm per minute and
3rd instar 37 cm per minute. The female laid eggs on an average of 282 in 13 days.
First instar live without food for 12 days, 2nd and 3rd instar live for 13 days
whereas adult female live 13 days without feeding. The average mating time for
one female was 12 minutes
Effect of environment on the population of Mango Mealybug
• The maximum peak population of mango mealybug was observed to be 27 per
30-cm branch at maximum temperature of 25 ºC, minimum temperature of 10 ºC
and RH 79 percent
• All the weather factors under study did not show significant correlation with the
population of mango mealybug
• Relative humidity, on an average basis, played maximum role in population
fluctuation of the pest i.e. explaining 25 percent of the variation in the insect
fluctuation
Chapter 8 Summary
162
Period of Abundance
The maximum population was observed from Feb. to Mar. But the population
decreased from Apr. and onward as ambient temperature increased.
Biochemical analysis of leaves and inflorescence
Various chemical characters of the leaves and inflorescence such as nitrogen,
potassium, crude fiber, fat, sodium, ash, carbohydrates, phosphorus, moisture and protein
contents in different cultivars of mango viz., ‘Chaunsa’, ‘Fajri’, ‘Langra’, ‘Black
Chaunsa’, ‘Sufaid Chaunsa’, ‘Sindhri’, ‘Malda’, ‘Dusehri’, ‘Anwar Ratul’, ‘Ratul-12’,
‘Tukhmi’ and ‘Sensation’ were processed for simple correlation and multiple linear
regression analysis to determine the impact of these factors on the population fluctuation
of the pest . The results are summarized below.
• All the chemical plant factors on leaves and inflorescence differed significantly
among various cultivars of mango
• Maximum carbohydrate contents was observed in the cultivar ‘Chaunsa’ (susceptible
to the pest), whereas minimum carbohydrates contents were observed in the cultivar
‘Tukhmi’ resistant to the pest. All the other factors did not show any specific
sequence with the population of the pest in all the cultivars
• Crude fiber, fat, sodium, ash and crude protein contents exerted significant and
negative correlation with the population of mango mealybug on leaves, whereas
potassium and carbohydrate resulted in a positive and significant correlation with the
pest. Crude fiber and nitrogen contents were important which exerted negative and
positive correlation with the pest population on inflorescence
• Crude fiber and total ash played maximum role in the population fluctuation of
mango mealybug and contributed 55.8 and 26.4 percent role, respectively.
Furthermore the effect of all the factors when computed together resulted in 96.5
percent and 53.9 percent role in population fluctuation of the pest on leaves and
inflorescence, respectively
Losses caused by mango mealybug
The study was conducted to observe the percent decrease in mango fruits on
different cultivars of mango over treated trees during one season. Different control
Chapter 8 Summary
163
methods were applied to trees with the objective to maintain the population of mealybug
at zero level. The results are summarized as under.
• The number of fruits were lower in the nontreated trees of all the cultivars was
lower as compared to treated trees both at initial and final stage of the experiment
• The maximum decrease in number of fruits was recorded 11 percent on cultivar
‘Anwar Ratul’, whereas ‘Langra’ cultivar showed minimum decrease in number
of fruits at 3 percent over nontreated trees at initial stage of the experiment
• At final stage of the experiment the maximum decrease in fruits was 81 percent
on cultivar ‘Chaunsa’, whereas minimum decrease in fruits on cultivar ‘Tukhmi’
at 22 percent
• On an overall basis, 44 percent decrease in fruits was recorded in nontreated trees
at final stage of the experiment
• A single mango mealybug can cause 3 percent loss in yield in inflorescence
• Maximum population recorded on ‘Chaunsa’ cultivar was 18/inflorescence where
as minimum population recorded on ‘Anwar Ratul’ was 10/inflorescence
Sustainable management of Mango mealybug
The selective studies were conducted with the objective to evaluate the most
effective methods amongst various cultural (hoeing, mound with fine mud, mound with
leaves, debris, grass and big clods, mound on the plastic sheet, intercropping and removal
of soil), mechanical (Namhar band, black oil cloth, gunny bag, grease, grease + black oil,
funnel type trap, cotton wool, polyethelene sheet, plastic sheet and plastic sheet with 1.5
inch grease (Haider’s bands) and chemical insecticides viz., profenophos, bifenthrin,
triazophos, chlorpyrifos, lambdacyhalothrin, imidacloprid, buprofezin, deltamethrin,
cypermethrin, acetamiprid and methidathion during the year 2005 to 2007 in various
orchards of mango at Multan. The results are summarized as under:
• Amongst cultural practices mound on plastic sheet was found to be the most
effective in reducing mango mealybug population
• The application of plastic sheet with 3.7 cm wide layer of grease (Haider’s band)
proved to be the most effective resulted in the lowest individuals of the pest
crossed the band on the tree trunk
Chapter 8 Summary
164
• Amongst various insecticides tested acetamiprid was found to be the most
effective showing the highest mortality of the pest in almost all the nymphal
instars followed by profenophos. Furthermore, methidathion resulted in maximum
mortality of adult female of mango mealybug at all the post treatment intervals
followed by acetamiprid
• A combination of mounds on the plastic sheet, Haider’s band and application of
acetamiprid were found to be the most effective treatment in reducing first instar
nymphs. It is further stated that the Haider’s band was the most effective and
cheaper which is a new addition in the mechanical control management mango
mealybug
• The males of mango mealybug were more attracted to mercury light as compared
to other lights tested
• Exposing male pupae to sunlight by hoeing 5-cm deep proved to be the effective
practice resulted in maximum reduction
Chapter 8 Summary
165
8.1 RECOMMENDATIONS
FIG. 1 INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE FOR MANGO MEALYBUG DROSICHA MANGIFERAE GREEN IN MANGO ORCHARDS
Chapter 8 Summary
166
8.2 CONDITION OF THE PEST AND
RECOMMENDED PRACTICES
MMB Management schedule for the mango growers given below: Month Condition of the pest Recommendations December Hatching of the eggs started, a few
nymphs started their movement in upward direction. Mostly feeds on weeds under the tree
Apply bands in first week
January Hatching continued and the nymphs started ascend the trees in huge numbers
Spray below the bands
February First instars nymphs settled on the leaves and mostly on the tips of branches from which inflorescence comes out
If no bands applied spray the whole trees with profenophos @ 30 ml /100liter water or any other suitable insecticides
March Nymphs changing the Instar and shifting to the inflorescence, but males coming down the trees after 20th of this month
Spray the whole trees with enter the 2nd & 3rd instar shifting Acetamiprid @ 100 ml/100 litrer water or any other suitable insecticides. Making of mounds for male collection and destruction.
April Mating started and few females started decending the tree for egg laying
Cultural practices including mounding around the trees trunk over plastic sheet before the 10th of this month for the collection of egg carrying females
May Almost all females completed their decent and males disappear
At this stage no effective management practices of the pest can be adopted
June Remaining females completed their downward movement and hibernate in mounds if present
Spread the mounds at the end of June for the destruction of eggs.
July Females laid egg in mounds or in their hibernated places
Spread the mounds at any time in this month for the destruction of eggs
August Eggs can be collected from the sides of kacha water channel, mud walls around the orchards and from the roots of host plants.
Spread the mounds at any time in this month for the destruction of eggs
September Eggs present in the orchards can be destroyed through intercropping of fodders
Intercropping of Oat and Berseem clover in orchards
October Eggs present in the orchards can be destroyed through intercropping of fodders
Intercropping of Oat and Berseem clover in orchards
November If eggs present in the roots of host plant
Removal of eggs from the trunks and destroyed
Chapter 8 Summary
167
8.3 PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES
The following precautionary measures can be adopted by the mango growers to
overcome this notorious pest
• Mango mealybug (Drosicha mangiferae Green) has more than 70 host plants, so
that cultural, mechanical and chemical controls should be applied with all the
host plants
• Application of grease is dangerous for the mango trunk so it should not be
applied directly on the trunk of mango trees
• Mango mealybug shifted from trees to trees through the branches so the the
branches touching the trees should be cut off
• Irrigation water is the main source of spreading the mango mealybug, the
branches over the water channel should be trimmed off to avoid spreading to non
infested orchards
• Avoid purchasing nursery plants from the infested nurseries
• Agricultural implements such as cultivator etc used in infested orchards should
not be used in uninfested orchards
• Avoid moving of weeds (taken by the women for animals as feed), trimmed
malformed inflorescence and branches (for fuel purposes) of infested orchards to
uninfested orchards
• Recommended cultural, mechanical and chemical control methods should be
adopted in time (which is the most important) to overcome this pest
• Ask the fellow farmers to act upon the advices of agricultural experts
168
LITERATURE CITED
A.O.A.C., 1975. Official methods of analysis. 12 Ed. Benjamin. Franklin Station,
Washington, USA.34-48 pp.
Abrar-ul-Haq, A. Ghaffar, A. Saleem and A. Ghaffar, 2002. Integrated pest management
studies of mango mealybug (Drosicha stebbingi GR.). J. Agric. Res., 40(3-4):
223-226.
Agricola, U.D., D. Agounke, H.U. Fischer and D. Moore, 1989. Biology of the mealybug
Rastrococcus invadens Williams (Hemiptera:Pseudococcidae) and its control with
Gyranusoidea tebygi Noyes (Hymenoptera:Encyrtidae) in Togo. Mitteilungen der
Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Allgemeine und Angewandte Entomologie, 7: 647-
652.
Ali, M., 1980. Control of mango mealybug, Drosicha stebbingi (Green.) (Homoptera:
Coccoidae). M.Sc (Hons.) Thesis, Deptt. Agric. Entomol., Univ. Agric.
Faisalabad.
Andrewartha, H.G. and L.C. Birch, 1954. The distribution and abundance of animals.
University of Chicago press, Chicago, USA.p 782
http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.en.28.010183.00220
3
Angeles, D.E., 1991. Mangifera at L,sima. In : Coronel, R.E. and Verheij, E.W.M.(eds).
Edible fruits and nuts, Plant Resources of South East Asia 2. Pudoc, Wageningen,
pp.206-207.
Anonymous, 2002. Pakistan Statistical, year book. Federal Bureau of Statistics, Statistical
Division, Govt of Pakistan.
Literature Cited
169
Anonymous, 2004. Federal Bureau of Statistics, Government of Pakistan, Karachi.
Anonymous, 2006. Pakistan diseases and their control. AGRI.NEWS update & Habib –e-
Zarat Vol-25 issue for Jan-Jun: 20-24.
Anonymous, 2007. Mango Lemon Sevai.
(http://recipesnmore.blogspot.com/2007/05/sevai.html)
Anonymous, 2008. International mango conference, Multan 27th July. Khabrain
newspaper in Urdu.
Anwar, A., 1991. Effect of spraying of insecticide on mealybug attack. Buletin-
Penelitian-Hutan (Indonesia). No. 541 p. 7-10.
Atteh, O.D., 1984. Nigerian farmer’s perception of pests and pesticides. Insect Sci. Appl.,
5: 213-220.
Atwal, A.S. and B. Singh, 1990. Pest population and assessment of crop losses. Indian
Council of Agricultural Research, New Dehli, India.
Atwal, A.S., 1963. Insect pests of mango and their control. Punjab Hort. J., India, 3:238-
245.
Atwal, A.S., D.S. Bhatti and G.S. Sandhu, 1969. Some observation on the ecology and
control of mango mealybug , Drosicha mangiferae Green. J. Res. PAU. 6(1):107-
114.
Avilan, L., 1971. Variations in the levels of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and calcium
in the leaves of mango (Mangiferae indica L.) through a cycle of production.
Agron. Trop., 21: 3-10.
Azim, I.I.,1985. Insect pests of mango and their control in Bangladesh. Symposium on
the Problems and Prospects of Mango Production in Bangladesh. Dhaka
(Bangladesh), 17-18 Feb. p. 5-6.
Literature Cited
170
Bagle, B. and V. Prasad, 1984. Varietal incidence and control of stone weevil
Sternochetus mangiferae Fabricius. Indian J. Entomol. 46: 389-392.
Bajwa, G.A. and H. Gul, 2000. Some observations on insect species of Paulownia
species at Pakistan Forest Institute Campus, Peshawar. Pak. J. Forestry, 50(1-2):
71-80.
Benrey, B. and R.F. Denno, 1997. The slow growth-high mortality hypothesis: A test
using the Cabbage Butterfly. Ecology, 78: 987-999.
Bentley, J.W., 1992. The epistemology of plant protection: Hondurancampesino
knowledge of pests and natural enemies. In: R. W. Gibson and A. Sweetmore
(eds) Proceedings of a Seminar on Crop Protection for Resource-Poor Farmers
(CTA/NRI), pp. 107-118.
Bently, J.W. and S.P. Baker, 2002. Manual for collaborative research with smallholder
offer farmers. Egham, UK: CABI Commodities: 130.
Bindra, O.S. and B.S. Sohi, 1974. A note on control of mango mealybug in Punjab. Ind.
J. Hort., 31(1):102-103.
Bindra, O.S., 1967. Fighting pests of commercial fruits. (Indian J. Entomol., 43(2):148-
152).
Bindra, O.S., G.C. Varma and G.S. Sandhu, 1970. Studies on the relative efficacy of
banding materials for the control of mango mealybug Drosicha stebbingi Green .
J. Res. Ludhiana, India, 7(4):491-494.
Birat, R.B.S., 1964. Mango mealybug menace. Ind. Fmg., 14(1): 14-15.
Block, J.W. and T. Kozuma, 1964. Notes on the biology and economic importance of the
mango weevil, Sternochetus mangiferae (Fabricius), in Hawaii (Coleoptera:
Curculionidae). Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society, 18: 353-364
Literature Cited
171
Bokonon-Ganta, A.H., H.D. Groote and P. Neuenschwander, 2001. Socio-economic
impact of biological control of mango mealybug in Benin. Agric., Ecosyst.
Environ. , 93:367-378.
Bottenberg, G.H., 1995. Farmers’ perceptions of crop pests and pest control practices in
rain fed cowpea cropping systems in Kano, Nigeria. Int. J. Pest Manag. , 41:195-
200.
Bovida, C. and P. Neuenschwander, 1995. Influence of host plant on the mango
mealybug Rastrococcus invadens. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata,
76(2): 179-188.
Bryman, A. and D. Cramer, 2001. Quantitative data analysis with SPSS release 10 for
windows. East Sussex, UK: Routledge.p 295.
Burleigh, J.R., V. Vingnanakulasingham, W.R.B. Lalith and A.S. Gonapinuwala, 1998.
Pattern of pesticide use and pesticide efficacy among chilli growers in the dry
zone of Sri Lanka (System B): perception vs. reality. Agric., Ecosyst. Environ. ,
70: 49- 60.
Büsgen, M. 1891. Der Honigtau. Biologische Studien an Pflanzen und Flanzenläusen.
Jenaische Zeitschrift für Naturwissenschaft N.F. 25: 339^28.
Website (http://www.jstor.org/pss/30152279) accessed on 02-03-2010
CAB International (2005). Crop Protection Compendium (2005 edition).Wallingford,
UK: CAB International.
site:http://.cabicompendium.org/cpc/aclogin.asp?/cpc/findadatasheet.asp
Carvalho, R. da S., A. Nascimento, J. Morgante and N. Fonseca, 1996. Susceptibility of
different mango cultivars to the attack of the fruitfly, Anastrepha oblique. In:
McPheron, B. and Steck, G.(eds) Fro it Fly Pests: A World Assessment of their
Biology and Management. St Lucie Press, Delray Beach, pp.325-331.
Literature Cited
172
Chadha, K.L, R.S. Thakur, M.S. Rajput and J.S. Samra, 1984. Leaf nutrient status of
three mango cultivars at flowering and post harvest stages. Indian J. Hort. 42: 43-
84. .
Chadha, K.L., J.S. Samra and R.S. Thakur, 1981. Standardization of leaf-sampling
technique for mineral composition of leaves of mango cultivar 'Chaunsa'. Scientia
Horticulturae (Netherlands), 13(4): 323-329.
Chandra, A.D., P.S. Bhati and K.M. Singh, 1987. Bionomics of mango Mealybug,
Drosicha mangiferae Green (Margarodidae: Hemiptera). Bull.Entomol.,
28(2):145-152.
Chandra, A.D., P.S. Bhati and K.M. Singh, 1991. Mechanical control of mango mealybug
(D. mangiferae Green) by tree trunk banding. Indian J.Entomol., 53(1): 76-79.
Chen, W.Y. 1984. [A report of trial on interception and killing of Drosicha corpulenta by
plastic rings impregnated with poisonous oil.] (In Chinese). Forest Sci. and
Technol., No. 11: 32.
Chitere, P.O. and B.A. Omolo, 1993. Farmers’ indigenous knowledge of crop pests and
their damage in western Kenya. Int. J. Pest Manag. , 39: 126-132.
Chopra, R.I., 1928. Annual report of the entomologist to the Government of Punjab,
1925-26.
D’Almeida, J.P., 1995. Situation actuelle de la production fruitiere en Republique du
Benin. Rapport de consultation pour la FAO,TCP/BEN/4553.
Dalaya, V.P., S.G. Rajput., A.R. Mali and P.B. Mohite, 1983. Comparative efficacy of
insecticides against guava mealybug, Drosicha mangiferae Green. Indian J. p
prot.,11(1/2):138-139.
Dale, D., 1988. Plant-mediated effects of soil mineral stress on insects. In : E. A.
Heinrichs (ed), Plant stress-insect interactions. John Wiley & Sons, New
York, U.S.A. pp. 35-110.
Literature Cited
173
Das, L.K. and B. Singh, 1986. Economic control of Maconellicoccus hirsutus Green
infesting mesta. Indian J. Agric. Sci., 56(5): 373-375.
Dhaliwal, G.S. and R. Arora, 1998. Principles of insect pest management. Kalyani
Publishers, New Dehli, India, p. 17-40.
Dhaliwal, G.S. and R. Singh, 2004. Host plant resistance to insects: Concepts and
applications. New Delhi, Panima Pub., 2004, xii, 578 p.
Dhaliwal, G.S. and V.K. Dilawari, 1996. Host plant resistance in integrated pest
management. In : R.K. Upadhyay, K.G. Mukherjee and R.L. Rajak (eds). IPM
system in Agriculture, Vol. 1.Aditya Books Pvt. Ltd., New Dehli, India, pp. 264-
315.
Dhaliwal, G.S., V.K. Dilawari and R.S. Saini, 1993. host plant resistance to insects: Basic
concepts .In: G.S. Dhaliwal and V.K. Dilawari (eds).advances in Host Plant
resistance to insects. Lalyani Publishers, New Dehli , India,pp1-30.
DOA and DOAE (Department of Agriculture and Department of Agricultural Extension),
1995. Handbook on mango farm care and management using integrated pest
management methods (Bangkok: DOA and DOAE): p. 68.
Duncan, D.B., 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics, 11:1-42.
Dutt, G.R., 1925. The Giant Mealybug and its control. Bull. Ent. Res.,16:155-58.
Dwivedi, S.C., Kuldeep, S.M. Singh and R.R. Katiyar, 2003. Seasonal incidence of insect
pests associated with mango crop. Department of Entomology, C.S.A. Univ. Agri.
& Tech., Kanpur 208 002, India. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences, 11(1):159-
160.
Elton, C., 1927. Animal Ecology. McMillaon Company, New York (3rd ed. 1947).
Entomological Society of Nigeria, 1991. Newsletter, 10:14.
Literature Cited
174
Escalada, M.M. and K.L. Heong, 1993. Communication and implementation of change in
crop protection. In : Crop Protection and Sustainable Agriculture (Chichester:
Wiley), pp.191- 202.
FBS, 2007. Federal Bureau of Statistics, 2007-08, a year book published by the Statistics
Division, Government of Pakistan. Chapter Agriculture. (Available on-line at
http://www.statpak.gov.pk/depts/aco/index.html). Accessed on Mar. 24, 2008.
Fujisaka, S., 1992. Will farmer participatory research survive in the International
Agricultural Research Centre? Gatekeeper Series No. SA44. (London: IIED): 3-
14.
Gaffar, S.A., 1989. Chemical control of mealybug, Drosicha dalbergiae (Stebbing) on
almond in Kashmir. Indian J. P. Prot., 17(1): 31-34.
Galan, S.V., 1996. Mango world production. Acta Hortic.455: 15-20.
Giani, M.A., 1968. A Treatise to Horticulture, Lahore. pp: 25-28
Godfray, H.C.J., 1994. Parasitoids: behavioural and evolutionary ecology. Princeton
University Press, Princeton, 473 pp.
GOVPK, 2008. Official website of Govt. of Pakistan, Ministry of Information and
broadcasting. (Available on-line at www.gov.pk). Accessed on 26 April, 2008.
Gul, H.G., A. Bajwa. and G.N. Panhwar, 1997. Integrated control of mango mealybug
Drosicha stebbingi Green (Hemiptera: Margarodidae) infesting forestry tree
species at the Pakistan Forest Institute, Peshawar. Pakistan Journal of Forestry,
47(1-4):65-72.
Hansen, J.D., J. Armstrong and S. Brown, 1989. The distribution of mango weevil,
Cryptorhynchus mangiferae (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Tropical Pest
Management, 36: 359-361.
Literature Cited
175
Haq, K.A. and M. Akmal, 1960. The mango mealybug and its control. The Punjab Fruit
Journal, 23(82-83):199-202.
Hartless, A.C., 1914. Mango crop and some factors influencing them. Agric. J. India
Pusa, 9(2):141-59.
Hashmi, A.A., 1994. Insect Pest Management. Horticultural and Fruit Crops. Vol. No. 2.
Pak. Agric. Res. Council, Islamabad, pp: 362-368
Haviland D., R. Beede., K. Godfray and K. Danne (2006). Ferrisia gilli (gill’s
Mealybugs): A new mealybug pest of Pistachios and other deciduous crops.
University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources.
Publication 8208 Website (http://ucanr.org/freepubs/docs/8207.pdf) accessed on
02-03-2010
Heong, K.L., 1985. Systems analysis in solving pest management problems. In B. S. Lee,
W. H. Loke and K. L. Heong (eds) Integrated Pest Management in Malaysia
(Kuala Lumpur: MAPPS), pp. 133-149.
Herren, H.R., 1981. Current biological control research at IITA, with special emphasis on
the cassava mealybug (Phenacoccus manihoti Mat-Fer). Dakar (Senegal),
USAID: 92-97.
Hiepko, G., 1983. The cassava mealybug: its economic significance and ways of
controlling it. BASF- Agricultural-News (Germany F.R.). no. 1: 25-27.
Himayatullah. 1999. Economic Survey of Pakistan, 1999-2000. Economic Affairs
Advisors Wing, Finance Division, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad.
Husain, M.A. (1921-25). Rep. Dep. Agric. Punjab, 33:88.
Hussain, M., 2004. Problems of alternate bearing in Mangoes. In S.Ahmad (ed.)
Mangoes in Pakistan. The Horticultural Foundation of Pakistan, Islamabad: 83-
89.
Literature Cited
176
Irulandi, S., P.K.V. Kumar, H.G. Seetharama and K. Sreedharan, 2000. Laboratory
evaluation of imidacloprid 17.8percent SL against the coffee mealybug,
Planococcus lilacinus (Cockerell). Journal of Coffee Research (India), 28(1-2):
92-94.
Ishaq, M., M. Usman., M. Asif and I.A. Khan, 2004. Integrated pest management of
mango against mealybug and fruit fly. Int. J. Agric. and Biol., 6(3): 452-454
Jia, X.Y., G.Y. Ma, L.G. Wang, W. Liang, and H. Wen, 2001. Integrated control of
walnut pests. (In Chinese). China Fruits No. 1: 39-40.
Jiskani, M.M. Mango diseases and their management.
http://www.pakissan.com/english/advisory/mango.diseases.and.their.management.shtml
Kalia, V., 1995. Note on natural parasitisation of Drosicha mangiferae at Iari farm, New
Delhi. Bulletin of Entomology, 36: 124-125.
Karar, H. and N. Ahmad, 1999. Mango Mealybug in Multan. Unpublished data
Karar, H., J. Arif, S. Saeed and H.A. Sayyed, 2006. A threat to mango. DAWN Sci-tech.
World, December, 23.
Karar, H., J. Arif., H.A. Sayyed and S. Saeed, 2007. Stitch in time saves nine. DAWN
Sci-tech. World, January 27, 2007.
Karar, H., M.J. Arif, S. Saeed and G. Abbas, 2007. Losses in different cultivars of mango
due to mango mealybug Drochica mangiferae Green Monophlebbedae:
Homoptera. XI International Symposium on Scale Insect Studies ISSIS 2007 in
Oeiras, Portugal, 24-27. p. 46
Karar, H., M.J. Arif, S. Saeed and G. Abbas, 2007. Mechanical control of mango
mealybug Drochica mangifera Green in mango orchards. XI International
Symposium on Scale Insect Studies ISSIS 2007 in Oeiras, Portugal. 24-27 Sep.
page 46.
Literature Cited
177
Karar, H., M.J. Arif, H.A. Sayyed, S. Saeed, G. Abbas and M. Arshed, 2009. Integrated
Pest Management of Mango Mealybug (Drosicha mangiferae) in Mango
Orchards. International Journal of Agriculture & Biology. P.81–84.
Kenmore, P.E., 1991. Indonesia’s Integrated Pest Management a model for Asia, FAO
Rice IPC Programme (Manila:
FAO).http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/AC834E/ac834e0b.htm
Khaire, V.A., D.S. Kohle and J.D. Patil, 1987. Relative susceptibility of mango cultivars
to mango hoppers and powery mildew. Haryana J.Hort.Sci.,16(3-4):214-217.
Khan, M.A, 1989. Control of insect pests of mango, Pro. Inter. Mango Workshop 27th
Feb, 1st Mar. Direct. Agric. Multan region. Punjab, p.224.
Khan, R.A. and M. Ashfaq, 2004. Funnel Type Slippery Trap: A mechanical device to
control mango mealybug. SAIC Newsletter, Bangladesh, 14(3):2-9.
Khan, S.M., 1985. Chemical control of insect pests of mango and its malformation by
injection method. M. Sc. Thesis, Univ. Agric., Faisalabad, Pakistan.
Khurana, A.D. and A.N. Verma, 1988. Laboratory and field evaluation of insecticides
against nymphs and gravid females of mango mealybug, Drosicha mangiferae
(Green). Indian.J.Entomol., 50(3): 319-326.
Khushk, A.M. and L.E.D. Smith, 1996. A Preliminary Analysis of the Marketing of
Mango in Sindh Province, Pakistan. The Pakistan Development Review, 35 : 3
(Autumn 1996) pp. 241—255.
(http://www.pide.org.pk/pdf/PDR/1996/Volume3/241-255.pdf). Accessed on 8-5-
09.
Kogan, M., 1982. Plant resistance in pest management. In: R. L., Metcalf and W.H.
Luckmann (eds).Introduction to insect pest management. John Wiley & sons,
New York, USA, pp.93-134.
Literature Cited
178
Kogan, M. and E.E. Ortman, 1978. Antixenosis –a new term proposed to replace
Painter’s ‘nonpreference’ modality of resistance.Bull. Entomol. Soc. Am. 24:175-
176.
Lakra, R.K., W.S. Kharub and Z. Singh, 1980. Comparative efficacy of some banding
materials against mango mealybug, Drosicha mangiferae Green in Haryana.
Indian J. Ent., 42(2): 170-176.
Lakra, R.K., W.S. Kharub and Z. Singh, 1980. Pest management system for the mango
mealybug, Drosicha mangiferae Green a polyphagous pest of fruit trees in
Haryana. Indian J. Ent. 42(2): 153-165.
Lakra, R.K., Z. Singh and W.S. Kharub, 1980. Efficacy of some insecticides as trunk and
foliar spray against mango mealybug, Drosicha mangiferae Green
(Margarodidae: Homoptera) in Haryana. Haryana Agricultural University J. Res.,
10(1):50-56.
Lal, M., 1918-20. Annual report of the Entomologist, Rept. Dep. Agric. Punjab. part
II.153-157.
Latif, A. and M. Ismail, 1957. Effectiveness of some synthetic and systemic insecticides
for the chemical control of mango mealybug. Pak. J. Sci. Res., (2): 63-71.
Latif, A., 1940. Short Notes and exhibits. Indian J. Ent., 2: 93.
Litz, R.E., 1997. The Mango: Botany, Production and Uses. CAB International,
University Press, Cambridge, p. 587.
Mango.AllAbout/Orchards/Mangoes.
http://www.pakissan.com/english/allabout/orchards/mango/index.shtml Accessed
on 8-5-09
Marino, P.C. and H.V. Cornell, 1993. Adult feeding and oviposition of Phytomyza
ilicicola Loew (Diptera: Agromyzidae) in response to leaf and tree phenology.
Environ. Entomol., 22: 1294-1301.
Literature Cited
179
Matokot, L., G. Reyd, P. Malonga and B.I. Ru, 1992. Population dynamics of
Rastrococcus invadens (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae) in the Congo; influence of
accidental introduction of the Asiatic parasitoid Gyranusoidea tebygi
(Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae). Entomophaga, pp.123–140.
Mishra, K.A. and B.S. Dhillon, 1978. Carbohydrates and mineral composition of leaves
in relation to fruit-bud differentiation in 'Langra' mango. Indian J. Agric.
Sci., 48(1): 46-50.
Mishra, K.A. and B.S. Dhillon, 1982. Effect of time of sample collection and the bearing
condition of the tree on the level of zinc in the leaves of mango. Science and
Culture, 48(8): 288.
Mohyuddin, A.I. and R. Mahmood, 1993. Integrated Control of Mango Pests in Pakistan.
Acta. Hort., 341: 4373-4377.
Mohyuddin, A.I., 1989. Integrated pest management of three mango pests. Proc. Inter.
Mango workshop 27th – 1st Mar. Direct. Agric. Multan region Punjab, pp : 140-
141.
Moore, D., 2004. Biological control of Rastrococcus invadens. Review article.
Biocontrol news and information, 25(1): 17N-27N.
www.sel.barc.usda.gov/Coccoidea/scale2004.htm
Morse, S. and W. Buhler, 1997. Integrated pest management: Ideals and realities in
developing countries (London: Lynne Riener Publishers):pp.171.
Nachiappan, R.M. and P. Bhaskaran, 1984. Quantum of feeding and survival of mango
leaf hopper adults on the inflorescences of certain cultivars of mango. Indian J.
agric. Sci.54(4):312-314.
Narula, S., 2003. Nip mango mealybug in the bud now Spectrum, Sunday 14, 2003. The
Tribune (GARDEN LIFE) India.
Narula, S., 2003. Time to tackle bugs that attack mango trees SPECTRUM SUNDAY,
January 12, 2003 Leading article .INDIA.
Literature Cited
180
Norton, G.W., E.G. Rajotte and V.Gapud, 1999. Participatory research in integrated pest
management: Lesson from the IPM CRSP. Agriculture and Humane Values, 16:
431-439.
Nwanze, K.F., 1982. Relationships between cassava root yields and crop infestations by
the mealybug, Phenococcus manihoti. Tropical Pest Management . 28(1): 27-32.
Nyeko, P., E. Mutitu and R.K. Day, 2007. Farmers’ knowledge, perceptions and
management of the gall-forming wasp, Leptocybe invasa (Hymenoptera:
Eulophidae), on Eucalyptus species in Uganda. Int. J. Pest Manag. 53(2): 111-
119.
Ochou, G.O., G.A. Matthews and J.D. Mumford, 1998. Farmer’s knowledge and
perception of cotton insect pest problems in Cote d’Ivoire Int. J. Pest Manag. ,
44:5-9.
Painter, W.H. 1951. Insect resistance in crop plants. Macmillan, New York.
Panda, N. and G.S. Khush, 1995. Host plant resistance to insects. CAB International,
Oxan, united Kingdom.
Panhwar, M.H. Advisory Farmnote on Mango.
(http://www.pakissan.com/english/advisory/mango.diseases.and.their.managemen
t.shtml). Accessed on 8-5-09.(http://www.panhwar.com/Article79.htm). Accessed
on 8-5-09.
Pathak, M.D. and G.S. Dhaliwal, 1986. Insect control In : M.S. Swaminathan and S.K.
Sinha (eds). Global aspects of food production. Tycooly International, Oxford,
UK. pp. 357-386.
PCARRD (Philippines Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research
and Development), 1994. The Philippines recommends for mango (Los Banos:
PCARRD):124 p.
Literature Cited
181
Pereyra, P.C. and N.E. Sánchez, 1998. Effects of different host-plant species on growth,
development and feeding of the budborer, Epinotia aporema (Lepidoptera:
Tortricidae). Revista Chilena de Historia Natural, 71(3): 269-277.
Pitan, O.R., T.A. Akinsolotu and J.A. Odebiyi, 2000. Impact of Gyranusoidea tebygi
Noyes (Hemiptera: Encyrtidae) on the mango mealybug, Rastrococcus invadens
Williams (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) in Nigeria. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 10
(2000), pp. 245–254.
Pollard, G.V., 1991. Constraints to IPM development and a strategy for management of
tomato and cabbage pests in Trinidad, West Indies. Tropical Pest Management,
37: 59- 62.
Prassad, V. and R.K. Singh, 1976. Prevalence and control of mango Mealybug, Drosicha
stebbingi Green in Bihar. Ind. J. Entomol.38:214-224.
Price, P.W., N. Cobb., T.E Craig, G.W. Fernandes, J.K. Itarni, S. Mopper and R.W.
Preszler, 1990. Insect herbivore population dynamics on trees and shrubs: new
approaches relevant to latent and eruptive species and life table development. In:
E. Bernays (ed), Insect Plant lnteractions, vol. II. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida,
U.S.A. pp. 1-38.
Pruthi, H.S. and H.N. Batra, 1960. Some important fruit pests of north west India. ICAR.
Bull.No.80, 113.
Pushpa, V., G.P.R. M. Rao and P. Appa and P. Rao, 1973. A note on the biology and
control of mealybugs (Maconellicoccus hirsutus Green) on mesta. Jute-Bulletin,
36(1-2): 25-28.
Raheja, A.K., 1995. Practice of IPM in South and Southeast Asia. In A. N. Mengech, K.
N. Saxena and H. N. B. Gopalan (eds) integrated pest management in the Tropics
(West Sussex: John Wiley and Sons), pp. 69-119.
Literature Cited
182
Rahman, K.A. and A. Latif, 1944. Description, bionomics and control of mango
mealybug, Drosicha stebbingi (Gr.) (Homoptera:Coccidae). Bull. Ent. Res.,
35(2): 197-209.
Ranganna, S., 1977. Manual of analysis of fruit and vegetables products. Cent. Food.
Tech. Res. Instt. Mysure. Tata McGraw Hill Publ .Co. Ltd., New Dehli:14-18.
Rao, N.S. and R.N. Barwal, 1985. Comparative efficacy of various contact insecticides
Rastrococcus invadens Williams (Hemiptera:Pseudococcidae) and its control with
Gyranusoidea tebygi Noyes (Hymenoptera:Encyrtidae) in Togo. Mitteilungen der
Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Allgemeine und Angewandte Entomologie, 7: 647-
652.
Riaz, M., 1998. Taxonomic studies of Tephritidae (Diptera of Pakistan). Ph.D Thesis,
Deptt. of Agri. Entomol., Univ. Agri., Faisalabad.
Richard, 1954. Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkaline soils. USDA.Hb.No.60.
Washington DC, USA.
Richards, P.B. and H.N. Sharma, 1934. Bull. Dep. Agric. U.P. (Fruit Ser.) no.33.
Riemer, J. and J.B. Whittaker, 1989. Air pollution and insect herbivores: Observed
interactions and possible mechanisms. In: E.A. Bermays, Editor, Insect-Plant
Interactions, CRC-Press, Boca Raton, Florida (1989), pp. 73–105.
Rojanavongse, V. and K. Charernsom, 1984. Mealybug and scale insects of ornamental
plants and control. Kasetsart Univ., Bangkok (Thailand). Faculty of Agriculture.
Dept. of Entomology. Kasetsart Univ., Bangkok (Thailand). Research Reports p.
107.
Salem, M.S., M.I. El- Said., A.M. Abd El- Ghany and M.M. Abd El- Rahman, 2006.
Susceptibility of five mango cultivars to Icerya seychellarum (Westwood)
(Homoptera: Margarodidae) in relation to leaf quality, nutrients and inhibitors.
Eygpt . J. Agric., 84(3):697.
Literature Cited
183
Salunkhe, D.K. and B.B. Desai, 1984. Postharvest Biotechnology of Fruits, Vol. I. CRC
press, Boca Raton, Florida. pp. 85.
Sandhu, G.S., R.C. Batra , A.S. Sohi and J.S. Bhalla, 1981. Comparison of different
bands for the control of mango mealybug, Drosicha mangiferae Green
(Margarodidae : Homoptera). J. Res. Punjab Agric. University, 17(3):286-290.
Sandhu, G.S., R.C. Batra, A.S. Sohi and J.S. Bhalla, 1980. Control mango mealybug,
Drosicha mangiferae (Gr.) by tree trunk banding. Ind. J. Entomol., 42(2): 225-
229.
Sauco, V., 1997. Mango World Production (Outside Israel, Egypt and India). Acta Hort.,
455:15-22.
Saxena, D.M. and R.R. Rawat, 1968. Bionomics of Drosicha mangiferae green on citrus
including new records of its three natural enemies. Madras Agric. J., 55(7): 309-
313.
Sen, A.C.1955. Control of mealybug in Bihar. Indian J. Ent., 17(1):129-132.
Sial, M.I., 1999. Integrated pest management of mango insect pests. M.Sc.(Hons) Thesis,
Deptt. Agric. Entomol., Univ. Agric., Faisalabad
Singh, K., V.K. Sharma and P.S. Shant, 1988. Efficacy of banding materials and
insecticidal foliar sprays against mango mealybug, Drosicha mangiferae Green
(Margarodidae: Homoptera). Pesticides , 22(10):26-27.
Singh, L.B., 1968. The Mango: Botany, Cultivation and Utilization. World Crop.Pp 438.
Singh, O.P., 1980. Note on the relative effectiveness of certain preventive bands against
Perissopneumon tectonae Morrison (Coccoidea:Margarodidae). Indian J. Agric.
Sci., 50(4):369-371.
Literature Cited
184
Singh, R., A. Singh., R.S. Verma and D.K. Singh, 1991. Relative toxicity of some
insecticides to the adults of mango mealybug, Drosicha mangiferae Green. Indian
J. Entomol., 53(3): 525-527.
Singh, R.N., 1946. Factors effecting the development and time of hatching of eggs of
Drosicha stebbingi Green. Indian J. Entomol.,9 (1):131-132.
Singh, R.N., 1978. Mango. Indian Council of Agricultural Research. New Dehli.p99.
Singh. R.N., 1947. Short notes and exhibits. Ind. J. Entomol., 8 (1):132.
Smith, D., G.A.C. Beattie and R. Broadley, 1997. Citrus Pests and Their Natural
Enemies: Integrated Pest Management in Australia. Information series Q197030.
Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane.
Smith, R.F., J.L. Apple and D.G. Bottrell, 1976. The origin of integrated pest
management concepts for agriculture crops. In: J.L Apple and R.F. Smith (eds).
Integrated Pest Management. Plenum Press, New York, USA, pp, 1-16.
Sohi, A.S., G.S. Sandhu and R.C. Batra, 1992 . Pressure injection of monocrotophos in
tree trunk for control of mealybug and mango hopper. Indian J. Hort., 49(4): 350-
353.
Spectrum Chemical Fact Sheet, 2008. Chemical Abstract Number 786196 (WEB)
http://www.spedab.com/compound/786196.htm accessed on 07-11-08
Srivastava, R.P. and D.K. Butani, 1972 .A method to prevent the mango mealybug ,
Drosicha mangiferae Green damage. Entomologist. Newsletter, 2(5):35
Srivastava, R.P. and P.L. Tandon, 1981. Relative toxicity of insecticides against second
instar of mango mealybug Drosicha mangiferae Green nymphs. Indian J.
Entomol., 43(2): 193-195.
Literature Cited
185
Srivastava, R.P., 1980a. Relative effectiveness of different mechanical bands in
preventing ascent of mango mealybug (Drosicha mangiferae Green). Indian J.
Entomol., 42(1): 110-115.
Srivastava, R.P., 1997. Laboratory screening of buprofezin and alcoholic extract of
Alpinia galangal against mealybug nymphs, Drosicha mangiferae. Indian Journal
of Entomology, 59(4): 366-368.
Stebbing, I., 1902. Department notes on the insects that effect Forestry. No.1: 1-50; No.
2: 151-334; 1903; Calcutta.
Steel, R.G.D. and J.H. Torrie, 1980. Principles and procedure of statistics with special
reference to biological sciences. McGraw Hill Book Co., New York, USA.
Stern, V.M., R.F. Smith, R. van den Bosch, K.S. Hagen, 1959. The integrated control
concept. Hilgardia 28, 81-101.
Tandon, P.L. and A. Verghese, 1985. World list of insect, mite and other pests of mango.
Technical Document No.5, IIHR, Banglore, 22 p.
Tandon, P.L. and B. Lal, 1981. Effectiveness of different banding materials for
preventing migration of Drosicha mangiferae Green. Indian J. Ent. 43(2):188-
191.
Tandon, P.L. and B. Lal, 1978. The mango coccid, Rastrococcus iceryoides Green
(Homoptera: Coccidae) and its natural enemies. Curr. Sci., (13): 46-48.
Tandon, P.L. and B. Lal, 1979. Effectiveness of different banding materials for
preventing migration of Drosicha mangiferae Green. Indian J. Hort. 36(3): 323-
327.
Teng, P.S., 1987. The systems approach to pest management. In P. S. Teng (ed.) Crop
Loss Assessment and Pest Management (Minnesota: APS Press), pp. 160-167.
Literature Cited
186
Thakur, R.S., S.G.P. Rao, K.L. Chadha and J.S. Samra, 1981. Variation in mineral
composition of mango leaves contributed by the leaf sampling factors.
Communication in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, Monticello, 12: 331-343.
Tobih, F.O., A.A. Omoloye, M.F. Ivbijaro and D.A. Enobakhare, 2002. Effects of field
infestation by Rastrococcus invadens Williams (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) on
the morphology and nutritional status of mango fruits, mangiferae indica L. Crop
Protection, 21(9):757-761.
Tomlin, C.D.S., 1997. A world compendium. The Pesticides Manual. Eleventh Edition.
British Crop Protction Council, 49 Downing Street, Farnham, Surrey GU97PH,
http://www.BCPC.org
Toews, M.D., 2010. Personal communication.
Trutmann, P., J. Voss and J. Fairhead, 1993. Management of common bean diseases by
farmers in the Central African Highlands. Int. J. Pest Manag., 39: 334-342.
Trutmann, P., J. Voss and J. Fairhead, 1996. Local knowledge and farmer perceptions of
bean diseases in the Central African Highlands. Agriculture and Human Values,
13: 64-70.
Uddin, M.A., M.S. Islam, M.A. Rahman, M.M. Begum and A.T.M. Hasanuzzaman,
2003. Susceptibility of different cultivars of mango to leaf cutting weevil,
Deporaus marginatus P. and its control. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. , 6(7): 712-714.
Van Huis, A. and F. Meerman, 1997. Can we make IPM work for resource poor farmers
in sub-Saharan Africa? Int. J. Pest Manag., 43: 313-320.
Van Huis, A., R.S. Nauta and M.E. Vulto, 1982. Traditional pest management in maize in
Nicaragua: a survey. Mededelingen Landbouwhoge School Wageningen, 82-6:
43.
Van Mele, P. Nguyen, T. Thu and A. Van Huis, 2001. Farmer’s knowledge, perception
and practices in mango pest management in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Int. J.
Pest Manag, 47(1):7-16.
Literature Cited
187
Van Mele, N.T. T. CUC and A. Van Huis, 2002. Direct and indirect influence of the
weaver ant Oecophylla smaragdina on citrus farmers’ pest perceptions and
management practices in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam Int. J. Pest Manag., 48(3):
225-232.
Van Mele, P. and H. Van Chien, 2004. Farmer’s, biodiversity and plant protection:
developing a learning environment for sustainable tree cropping systems. Int. J.
Agric. Sustainability, 2: 67–75.
Waite, G.K., 1998. Integrated pest management in tropical and subtropical fruits in
Queensland. In : Proceedings of the International Conference of IPM, Guangzhou,
China, p. 135.
Willink, E. and D. Moore, 1988. Aspects of the biology of Rastrococcus invadens
Williams (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) a pest of fruit crops in West Africa and
one of its primary parasitoids Gyranusoidea tebygi Noyes (Hemiptera:
Encyrtidae). Bull. Ent. Res. 78: 709–715.
Winkleman, G.F., R. Amin, W.A. Rice and M.B.Tahir, 1986. Methods. Manual soils
laboratory. Barani Agri. Res. Dev. Proj., Pak. Agri .Res. council, Islamabad,
(Pakistan).pp.30-33.
Wodageneh, A., 1985. Cassava and cassava pests in Africa FAO-Plant-Protection-
Bulletin (FAO).,33(3):101-108.
Wolda, H., 1978. Seasonal fluctuations in rainfall, food and abundance of tropical insects.
J. Anim. Ecol., 47: 369-381.
Xie, S.A., J.L. Zhang, X.J. Wang, and S.J. Liu, 2004. Experiment of controlling
Drosicha corpulenta by blocking methods.Journal of Northeast Forestry
University, 30(5): 65-66.
Xu, Q., X.H. Sun, D.H. Wu and Z.P. Zhang, 1999. Biological characteristics and control
methods of Drosicha corpulenta (Kanawa). Journal of Jiangsu Forestry Science
and Techonology, 26 (1): 52-54.
Literature Cited
188
Yadav, J.L., S.P. Singh and R. Kumar, 2004. The population density of the mango
mealybug (Drosicha mangiferae G.) in mango. Progressive Agriculture, 4(1): 35-
37.
Yousuf, M., 1993. Mango mealybug control with polyethylene bands. Pak. Entomol.15:
129.
Yousuf, M. and M. Gaur, 1993. Prospis species in the Arid and semi-Arid zones of India.
Proceeding of Conference held at the central Arid Zone Research Institute,
Jodhpur, Rajasthan (Nov.1-23):134.
189
APPENDICES
Appendix 1. DATA REGARDING FIRST STADIUM DURATION
1 Number of nymphs stop feeding
Busting of exiuvae on dated
Remained in on dated exiuvae
15th of Dec ,2006 Collected eggs from the field kept in polyethelene bags for hatching 30,31st Dec, 2006 416 nymphs of 1st instar collected 1, 2 Jan, 2007 Kept in petri dish for 48 h 3 Nymphs released on 1st and 2nd plant, start go upward 4, Jan to 6th Feb 2007
Feed leaves
7th Feb. 4 11th Feb 12th Feb(24h)
8 0 - -
9 1 14th 15th 10 3 14th 15th 11 5 15th 16th 12 6 16th 17th 13 8 18th 19th 14 7 18th 19th 15 11 19th 20th 16 13 20th 21st 17 19 22nd 23rd 18 21 23rd 24th 19 33 24th 25th 20 41 25th 26th 21 83 25th 26th 22 105 26th 27th 23 23 28th 1st March 24 12 28th 1st 25 0 - - 26 1 3rd March 4th 27 0 3rd 4th 28 2 4th 5th 1, March, 2007 0 - - 2 1 7th 8th 3 0 - - 4 3 9th 10th 5 0 - - 6 2 10th 11th 7 0 - - 8 1 12th 13th Total duration 4-5 days 1 day (45-68 days
Av:56.5)
Appendices
190
Appendix 2. DATA REGARDING SECOND STADIUM DURATION
Date of collection 2nd stadium
Number of nymphs stop feeding
Busting of exiuvae on dated
Remained in exiuvae on dated
25,26th Feb,2007 188 nymphs of 3rd instar collected 27th Kept in petri dish for 24 h 28th Nymphs were released on 3rd plant, go upward 1st , March to 9th March
Feed leaves and some on inflorescence
10 2 13th 14th 11 0 - - 12 4 16 th 17th 13 6 18th 19th 14 16 18 th 19th 15 35 19 th 20th 16 61 21st 22nd 17 35 21st 22nd 18 8 23 rd 24th 19 13 24 th 25th 20 0 - - 21 2 24 th 25th 22 3 26th 27th 23 1 28th 29th 24 0 - - 25 2 29th 30th 26 1 30th 30th Total duration 4-5 days 1 day (18-34 days
Av: 26)
Appendices
191
Appendix 3. DATA REGARDING THIRD STADIUM DURATION
Date of collection 3rd stadium
Number of nymphs stop feeding
Busting of exiuvae on dated
Remained in on dated exiuvae
15,16 March,2007 96 nymphs of 3rd instar collected 17 Kept in petri dish for 24 h 18 Released on 4th plant and go upward 19- 24, March Feed on inflorescence 25 1 30th March 30th 26 7 30h 31st 27 13 31st 1st April 28 25 2nd April 3rd 29 16 2nd 3rd 30 10 4th 5th 31 8 4th 5th 1st April 9 5th 6th 2nd 2 6th 7th 3rd 2 7th 8th 4th 3 8th 9th Total duration 4-6 days 1 day (15-24 days
Av:19.5)
Appendices
192
Appendix 4. DATA REGARDING FEMALE DURATION
Date of collection female Females condition Number of Females moved down ward
22,23rd March, 2007 41 female were collected 24, March Kept in petri dish for 24 h 25 Released on 5th plant , go
upward and mated
26 Feed on inflorescence 27 Covered with whitish
powder during feeding on inflorescence
28, March to 5,April Same 6, April Same 1 7 Same 0 8 Same 0 9 Same 1 10 Same 1 11 Same 0 12 Same 0 13 Same 1 14 Same 0 15 Same 2 16 Same 1 17 Same 0 18 Same 1 19 Same 1 20 Same 4 21 Same 1 22 Same 7 23 Same 7 24 Same 4 25 Same 3 26 Same 2 27 Same 1 28 Same 0 29 Same 0 30 Same 0 1st , May, 2007 Same 1 2 Same 2 Total duration 16-42 days (Av:29 days)
Appendices
193
Appendix 5. DATA REGARDING MALES CAME DOWN THE TREE
Appendix 6. DATA REGARDING DISTANCE COVERED IN INC HES BY FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD INSTAR NYMPHS IN ONE MINUTE ON TREE
Nymphs Distance covered in inches /mintues 1st Instar 2nd Instar 3rd Instar 1 5 5 16 2 5 7 18 3 4.5 8 10 4 6 10 14 5 5 7 18 6 4 9 16 7 5.5 8 11 8 5 7 14 9 6 6 11 10 5 7 18
Average speed 5.1 7.4 14.6
DATED NUMBERS OF MALES DOWN THE TREE
01.04.07 NO 02.04.07 3 03.04.07 11 04.04.07 16 05.04.07 24 06.04.07 5 Total numbers of nymphs 59
Appendices
194
Appendix 7. DATA REGARDING REMOVAL OF FUZZ (COTTONY SECRETIONS) FROM THE PUPA ONCE
Dated Males changes 02.04.07 Five pupa fuzz removed 03.04.07 Again repaired fuzz 04.04.07 In pupal form 05.04.07 In pupal form 06.04.07 In pupal form 07.04.07 In pupal form 08.04.07 In pupal form 09.04.07 In pupal form 10.04.07 In pupal form 11.04.07 Two healthy males comes out 12.04.07 Three healthy males comes out
Appendix 8. DATA REGARDING REMOVAL OF FUZZ FROM THE PUPA TWICE A TIME
Dated Males changes 02.04.07 Five pupa fuzz removed 03.04.07 Again repaired fuzz 04.04.07 Removed fuzz again 05.04.07 Again repaired fuzz 06.04.07 In pupal form 07.04.07 In pupal form 08.04.07 In pupal form 09.04.07 In pupal form 10.04.07 In pupal form 11.04.07 One healthy males comes out 12.04.07 Four healthy males comes out
Appendices
195
Appendix 9. DATA REGARDING REMOVAL OF FUZZ FROM TH E PUPA THRICE TIME
Dated Males changes 02.04.07 Five pupa fuzz removed 03.04.07 Again repaired fuzz 04.04.07 Removed fuzz again 2nd times 05.04.07 Again repaired fuzz 06.04.07 Removed fuzz again 3nd times 07.04.07 Not repaired and dried 08.04.07 Not repaired 09.04.07 Not repaired 10.04.07 Not repaired 11.04.07 No males comes out 12.04.07 No males comes out
Appendices
196
Appendix 10. DATA REGARDING NUMBER OF EGGS LAID BY FEMALES DAILY
Dated Eggs laid daily by female F-1 F-2 F-3 F-4 F-5
18.05.07 0 0 0 0 0 19.05.07 0 0 0 0 0 20.05.07 0 0 0 0 0 21.05.07 0 0 0 0 0 22.05.07 45 0 0 0 0 23.05.07 54 0 0 0 0 24.05.07 56 0 0 0 0 25.05.07 17 26 0 0 0 26.05.07 32 26 29 0 0 27.05.07 40 32 37 0 0 28.05.07 28 33 39 48 0 29.05.07 25 29 30 40 0 30.05.07 22 27 27 34 0 31.05.07 20 32 21 37 25 01.06.07 8 21 21 19 40 02.06.07 2 26 11 28 46 03.06.07 10 11 6 15 30 04.06.07 1 7 0 11 27 05.06.07 1 9 0 11 24 06.06.07 1 4 0 10 24 07.06.07 0 9 0 7 14 08.06.07 0 3 0 3 22 09.06.07 0 2 0 0 17 10.06.07 0 0 0 0 0 11.06.07 0 0 0 0 0 12.06.07 0 0 0 0 0 Total number of eggs laid /female 362 297 221 263 269 Average eggs laid/day 13.9 11.4 8.5 10.1 10.4
Appendices
197
Appendix 11. DATA REGARDING FIRST INSTAR NYMPHS LI VE WITHOUT FOOD
Dated 1st Instar nymphs (Number of nymphs/petridish) Petri dish-1
(7) Petri dish -
2 (15) Petri dish -
3 (18) Petri dish -
4 (19) Petri dish -
5 (5) 18.01.07 0 0 0 0 0 19.01.07 0 0 0 0 0 20.01.07 0 0 0 0 0 21.01.07 0 0 0 0 0 22.01.07 0 0 0 0 0 23.01.07 3 1 5 10 2 24.01.07 0 0 0 0 0 25.01.07 1 2 0 0 0 26.01.07 0 2 0 0 0 27.01.07 0 0 5 3 2 28.01.07 0 0 0 0 1 29.01.07 0 0 1 0 0 30.01.07 1 1 0 1 0 31.01.07 0 1 1 0 0 01.02.07 0 0 1 0 0 02.02.07 0 1 0 0 0 03.02.07 0 1 1 0 0 04.02.07 1 2 3 1 0 05.02.07 0 1 0 2 0 06.02.07 0 2 0 0 0 07.02.07 0 0 0 1 0 08.02.07 1 0 0 0 0 09.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 10.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 11.02.07 0 0 1 0 0 12.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 13.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 14.02.07 0 0 0 1 0 15.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 16.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 17.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 18.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 19.02.07 0 1 0 0 0 20.02.07 0 0 0 0 0
Total died 5-19 days
Appendices
198
Appendix 12. DATA REGARDING SECOND AND THIRD INSTAR NYMPHS LIVE WITHOUT FOOD
Dated 1st Instar nymphs (Number of nymphs/petridish) Petri dish-1
(7) Petri dish -
2 (15) Petri dish -
3 (18) Petri dish -
4 (19) Petri dish -
5 (5) 18.01.07 0 0 0 0 0 19.01.07 0 0 0 0 0 20.01.07 0 0 0 0 0 21.01.07 0 0 0 0 0 22.01.07 0 0 0 0 0 23.01.07 3 1 5 10 2 24.01.07 0 0 0 0 0 25.01.07 1 2 0 0 0 26.01.07 0 2 0 0 0 27.01.07 0 0 5 3 2 28.01.07 0 0 0 0 1 29.01.07 0 0 1 0 0 30.01.07 1 1 0 1 0 31.01.07 0 1 1 0 0 01.02.07 0 0 1 0 0 02.02.07 0 1 0 0 0 03.02.07 0 1 1 0 0 04.02.07 1 2 3 1 0 05.02.07 0 1 0 2 0 06.02.07 0 2 0 0 0 07.02.07 0 0 0 1 0 08.02.07 1 0 0 0 0 09.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 10.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 11.02.07 0 0 1 0 0 12.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 13.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 14.02.07 0 0 0 1 0 15.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 16.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 17.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 18.02.07 0 0 0 0 0 19.02.07 0 1 0 0 0 20.02.07 0 0 0 0 0
Total died 5-19 days
Appendices
199
Appendix 13. DATA REGARDING ADULT FEMALE LIVE WITHO UT FOOD
Dated Adult females (Number of nymphs/petridish) Petri dish-1
(9) Petri dish -
2 (16) Petri dish -
3 (13) Petri dish -
4 (17) Petri dish -
5 (20) 05.03.07 0 0 0 0 0
06.03.07 0 0 0 0 0 07.03.07 0 0 0 0 0 08.03.07 0 0 0 0 0 09.03.07 0 0 0 0 0 10.03.07 0 0 0 0 0 11.03.07 0 0 0 0 0 12.03.07 0 0 0 0 0 13.03.07 0 0 1 0 0 14.03.07 0 0 0 0 0 15.03.07 1 0 0 0 3 16.03.07 0 2 0 0 5 17.03.07 3 1 4 3 2 18.03.07 0 5 0 1 1 19.03.07 2 3 2 5 4 20.03.07 3 2 3 4 0 21.03.07 0 1 3 2 3 22.03.07 0 2 0 1 2 Total died 8-17 days
Appendices
200
Appendix 14. DATA REGARDING TIME TAKEN BY THE MALE S FOR MATING WITH THE FEMALES
Number of males Time taken (Minutes: Seconds) 1 7.00 2 8.30 3 20.50 4 6.00 5 9.25 6 14.30 7 18.20 8 16.10 9 11.30 10 19.10 11 15.30 12 15.30 13 11.00 14 6.30 15 10.00 16 12.30 17 9.00 18 6.45 19 11.15 20 17.50
Average time taken /male 12.2 minute/male