Menu
Archive of Past Issues
Ask an Expert about Resistance Issues
Information for Libraries
Submission Information
Pest Management Laboratory
Mission Statement
Contact Us
Site
designed by:
Erin A. Gould
Development and Validation of Insecticide Resistance Management (IRM) based Integrated Pest Management (IPM) module for cotton pests
G.M.V.
Prasada Rao and N. Sivaramakrihna
Regional Agricultural Research Station
Nandyal, Kurnool Dist.,
Andhra Pradesh-518 502
N. Hariprasada Rao
Regional Agricultural Research Station, Lam, Guntur
K. R. Kranthi
Central Institute for Cotton Research, Nagapur
Cotton is one of the important commercial crops of India in general and Andhra Pradesh in particular. Damage caused by different insect pests, apart from seasonal factors, has been identified as the main reason for the fluctuating kapas yields and farmers fortunes. Farmers of Kurnool dist. are not exception to it. The farmers are mostly depending on insecticides for management of these insect pests. Use of several insecticide sprays at short interval, insecticide mixtures, and higher doses are not uncommon. Due to excess and indiscriminate use of synthetic chemicals resulted in the development of many fold resistance in Helicoverpa armigera to these chemicals. Dingra et al., 1988 were the first to report the insecticide resistance development capabilities of H. armigera in India. Studies conducted by Armes et al., 1992, 1996; Kranthi et al., 2001 revealed that resistance to pyrethroids and conventional insecticides in India were increasing. As a result the research was intensified to develop resistance monitoring and management strategies for cotton pests. Eventually Resistance monitoring centers were established throughout India in 26 districts of 10 cotton-growing states and for Kurnool district at RARS, Nandyal under Technology Mission on Cotton-Mini Mission II (TMC-MM II). The farmers participatory IRM based IPM trials were conducted in intensive cotton growing block of Kurnool dist, from 2002-2003 to 2005-06 with an aim to enhance the production and productivity of the cotton ecosystem while reducing the use of insecticides and increasing the farmers confidence in cotton pests management.
Insecticide Resistance studies conducted on Kurnool population of cotton bollworm H. armigera at Resistance Monitoring Centre (RMC), RARS, Nandyal, from 2003 season onwards indicated high resistance against synthetic pyrethroids (resistance frequencies >80% resistance factors >1000) and low to moderate levels against organophosphates and carbamate compounds. Based on our studies, available literature on new chemistries and taking clues from supporting additional information the location specific IRM based IPM module was formulated and tested; 1. No Spray up to first sixty days; Seed tretamnet with imidacloprid 70 WS or thiamethoxam 70 WS 5 g/kg seed, Inter cropping with cowpea, Stem application at 40 DAS, Avoidance of broad spectrum OP chemicals, in case of emergency spray diafenthiuron (Pegasus) 1 g /l 2. Window II. 60-75 days; release Trichogramma during peak egg load period, spray soft biopesticides such as Bt, NPV or neem based formulations, Incase of non availability of these, spray endosunfan 35% EC 2ml/l 3. Window III. 75-90 days. Spray bioselective and least resisted insect growth regulators like novaluron or lufenuron 1ml/l 4. Window IV. Bollworm infestation 90-110 days; Spray new chemistries like spinosad or emamectin benzoate or indoxacarb 5. Peak bollworm-110-140 days; Spary quinalphos or chlorpyriphos or thiodicarb, rotate them and two to three days after spray left over population should be hand picked and destroyed 6. Window V. Pink bollworm; ETL based spray of synthetic pyrethroids.
The location specific IRM based IPM strategies were validated through farmers participatory filed trials from 2002-03 to 2005-06 in 3307 ha in 79 intensive cotton growing villages of Kurnool dist. of Andhra Pradesh. Cluster of villages were selected mainly based on their socio economic status, crop history and pesticide use pattern and convenience for supervision and implementation of the strategies. These strategies were disseminated using indigenous techniques like street plays, dramas, and folk songs because this form of massage dissemination was recognised as more appealing with dramatic impact, and has been found close to the hearts of rural folk. Besides folk arts, keeping the importance of electronic media in dissemination of technologies an innovative Hello-IRM an interactive live phone in programme was devised and broadcasted through All India Radio, Kurnool for the benefit of farmers. Team of resource persons from RARS, Nandyal was involved to respond the queries posed by the farmers immediately. Further, one field worker per village was employed for effective dissemination of strategies. This project staff, staying in the project villages, has educated the farmers through out the season about latest crop production and pest management technologies.
Data on pest incidence, natural enemy activity, No. of insecticides sprayed, quantity of insecticides used in project fields and non-project fields were collected. Yield parameters and economics of project farmers and non-project farmers were recorded and impact of IRM strategies on yield and economics has been worked out (Table 1). Marginal differences were recorded in the incidence of sucking pests and bollworms. Natural enemy activity was comparatively more in project operated fields, on an average around 35% more natural enemy activity was recorded in IRM fields. The farmers of project operating villages saved on an average 5.8 sprays over non-project farmers. No major differences were recorded in terms yield and gross returns. However, with reference to total expenditure and net returns, project farmers spent 36% less expenditure and realized 30% more net profit than non-project farmer/acre. The overall monetary benefit accrued to the farmers by adoption of IRM based IPM module was estimated at 209 lakhs.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thanks are due to Dr. T. Yellamanda Reddy, Associate Director of Research, Regional Agricultural Research Station, Nandyal, for providing necessary facilities and Dr. K. R. Kranthi, Principal Investigator, TMC-MM II, Central Institute for Cotton Research, Nagapur, for extending necessary technical support. Financial support from TMC-MM II is gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES
Armes, N. J., Bond, G. S., and Cooter, R. J. 1992. The laboratory culture and development Helicoverpa armigera. Natural Resources Institute Bulletin, 57, NRI, Chathan, U.K. pp32
Armes, N. J., Jadhav, D.R., and De Souza, K.R. 1996. A survey of insecticide resistance in Helicoverpa armigera in the Indian sub-continent. Bulletin of Entomological Research, 86: 499-514.
Dingra, S., Phokela, A. and Meharothra, K. N. 1988. Cypermethrin resistance in population of Heliothis armigera (Hubner). National Academy Sciences letters 11:123-125.
Kranthi, K. R., Jadhav, D. R., Wanjari, R. R., Shakir Ali and Russell, D. 2001. Carbamate and organophosphate resistance in cotton pests in India, 1995 to 1999. Bulletin of Entomological research, 91:37-46
Supported By:
Editors:
Mark
E. Whalon
Robert M. Hollingworth
Area Editors:
Plant Pathology
Margaret Tuttle McGrath
Herbicide
Jonathan Gressel
Maintained
by:
Theresa A. Baker