management of entomofauna of cocoa ssnaik tnau

Welcome RESEARCH VIVA-VOCE

“Studies on management of the entomofauna of cocoa Theobroma cacao L.”

Advisory committee board

Dr. M. Suganthy Assistant Professor (Agrl.Entomology)Dept. of Medicinal and Aromatic Crops

ProfessorCentre for Plant Molecular Biology & Biotechnology

Assistant ProfessorDept. of Spices and Plantation Crops

Dr. S. Mohan Kumar

Dr. V. Jegadeeswari

Student Sabhavat Srinivasnaik

II M.Sc. ID.NO: 13-503-010

CHAIRMAN

MEMBERS

INTRODUCTION

Source of chocolate Mallow family economic plant Third imp. beverage crop (Coffee and tea) Third highest traded commodity in the world 25 million people in the world

Economic importance: Native sp. of tropical humid forests-South

America Food of gods- Theobroma Mayas and Aztecs-divine origin

(Peter, 2002)(Prasannakumari et al., 2012)

GENERAL INTRODUCTION:

-(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cocoa_bean)

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

….....

COCOA STATISTICS: Global: 43.5 lakh haIvory Coast, Ghana and Indonesia - (ICO,2014)India:71,000 ha/15,000/ 0.2 metric tonnes Kerala (41.72), Andhra Pradesh (37.08), Karnataka(13.90) and Tamil Nadu (7.28%) (IHD, 2014)

1

23

4

Crop loss 30-90 % pest and diseases Importance IPM (Uwagboe et al., 2012).

1.To document the entomofauna associated with cocoa

2.To study the seasonal abundance of economically important insects 2.1. Monitoring of seasonal abundance of insect pests by direct counting 2.2. Monitoring of seasonal abundance of insect pests by sticky light traps 2.3. Morphological identification of entomofauna of cocoa 2.4. Molecular identification of insect pests of cocoa 2.5. Biology of sucking pests of cocoa 2.6. Predatory potential of natural enemies on cocoa mealybugs

3.To develop integrated pest management strategies against sucking pest complex of cocoa 3.1. Efficacy-sucking pest complex of cocoa 3.2. Effect-natural enemies 3.3. Effect-pod and bean yield parameters

Objectives

Documentation of entomofauna associated with cocoa

Methodology :

Survey, monitoring - documentation of entomofauna

Survey was carried out in well-established and high yielding cocoa plantations Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh

Monitoring-three farmer’s holdings at Sethumadai and in coconut nursery, TNAU, Coimbatore

Duration October, 2014 to April, 2015 (7 months)

Obj.1

S. No Location Name of the farmer/farm Address of the farmer/farm Age of the

plantationI Tamil Nadu1

SethumadaiVJ. Jayaraj Sethumadai,

Pollachi taluk, Coimbatore district

10 years2 VJ. Prasad 15 years3 Rajaram 10 years

4 Coimbatore Coconut nursery TNAU, Coimbatore 4 yearsII Kerala

5 Chamanampathy T.S. Asokan Chamanampathy, Palakkad district 15 years

III Andhra Pradesh 6

West Godavari

A. S. Pratap Naguldenipadu, Eluru 17 years

7 Gopinathreddy Singarayapalem, T. Narasapuram 21 years

8 Thirumurthirao Singarayapalem, T. Narasapuram 13 years

9 Rajanbabu Vijaya gardens, Eluru 20 years10 Gopalakrishanan Pedavegi, Eluru 17 years11 GP Rao Eluru 18 years12 Sathish Vundrajavaram, Eluru 18 years13 Shivananda Savaram, Eluru 18 years14 Ravi Prasad Savaram, Tanuku 6 years15 Ramakrishanaraju Velayaduru, Tanuku 13 years16 Muraliraju Velayaduru, Tanuku 19 years17 Narayanaraju Velayaduru, Tanuku 17 years18 Sremannarayanrao Velayaduru, Tanuku 19 years19 Shankararao Bapiraju gudam, Eluru 20 years20 Hari Mohan Kunchum padi, Eluru 22 years21 Krishnabhaskar Badarada, Eluru 20 years22 Subbaraju Lakshmipuram, Eluru 15 years23 East Godavari Madhusudanrao Vearavaram, Rajhamandry 14 years

Table 1. Details of farm holdings surveyed and monitored for the documentation of entomofauna of

cocoa during 2014-2015

Documentation of entomofauna associated with cocoa

Results:

Entomofauna: A. Insect pests B. Natural enemies.

A total number of 23 species of insect pests and 13 species of natural enemies

Among the insect pests: 14-Sucking pests 2-Borers 7-Defliators

Among the natural enemies: 7-Predators 6-Parasitoids

Obj.1

Table 2. Documentation of entomofauna associated with cocoa

Obj. 1. Documentation of entomofauna associated with cocoa……………………………………….. A. INSECT PESTS: i) sucking pests

Obj. 1. Documentation of entomofauna associated with cocoa……………………………………….. A. INSECT PESTS: ii) Borers iii) Hairy caterpillars and other defoliators

B. NATURAL ENEMIES

Obj.1.Documentation of entomofauna associated with cocoa…

Documentation of entomofauna of cocoa during 2014-2015

Documentation of entomofauna of cocoa in Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh during 2014-2015

Obj.1.Documentation of entomofauna associated with cocoa…

Obj. 2. To study the seasonal abundance of economically important

insects

2.1. Monitoring of seasonal abundance of insect pests by direct counting

Methodology:

10 randomly selected trees in 2,500 m2 Top three leaves - aphids Three randomly selected pods for mealybugs and tea mosquito bugs Correlation and regression analysis with the weather parameters Maximum temperature (Tmax) Minimum temperature (Tmin) Relative humidity (RH) Rainfall (mm) Solar radiation (Cal/Cm2)

Date / Month Std.week Aphids / top 3 leaves / tree*

Mealybugs/ 3 pods / tree*

Tea mosquito bugs/ 3 pods / tree*

2014

01 to 07 October 40 122.00 175.80 8.0008 to 14 October 41 115.40 178.00 8.2015 to 21 October 42 118.00 177.60 7.2022 to 28 October 43 120.00 176.20 9.0029 to 04 November 44 113.00 135.40 12.0005 to 11 November 45 99.20 146.80 11.0012 to 18 November 46 102.40 148.80 10.6019 to 25 November 47 113.80 172.80 9.5026 to 02 December 48 107.22 180.40 10.0003 to 09 December 49 110.00 168.00 8.4010 to 16 December 50 116.42 142.50 7.4017 to 23 December 51 127.50 138.00 6.6024 to 31 December 52 135.00 171.60 6.00

Table 2. Monitoring of insect pests of cocoa during 2014-2015 Results:

Contd.,


2015 01 to 07 January 01 110.00 262.60 8.6008 to 14 January 02 138.00 259.20 3.0015 to 21 January 03 140.00 282.00 4.2022 to 28 January 04 139.45 250.60 4.4029 to 04 February 05 142.20 283.20 0.8005 to 11 February 06 146.00 294.20 2.2012 to 18 February 07 152.20 337.20 1.6019 to 25 February 08 169.80 356.80 1.0026 to 04 March 09 168.00 361.00 3.0005 to 11 March 10 178.00 256.60 3.4012 to 18 March 11 165.00 262.40 4.0019 to 25 March 12 160.00 258.80 5.2526 to 01 April 13 158.62 250.00 4.8002 to 08 April 14 141.90 252.20 4.4009 to 15 April 15 138.75 237.60 5.2016 to 22 April 16 132.10 250.40 4.6023 to 29 April 17 128.42 237.80 3.80

2.1. Monitoring of seasonal abundance of insect pests by direct counting…Table 2. Monitoring of insect pests of cocoa during 2014-2015 ( Contd.,)

2.1. Monitoring of seasonal abundance of insect pests by direct counting…

Seasonal abundance of tea mosquito bugs infesting cocoa during 2014-2015

Aphids mealybugs

Tea mosquito bugs

VariablesCorrelation coefficient

Aphids Mealybugs Tea mosquito bugs

Maximum temperature (Tmax) (oC) 0.480** 0.420** -0.037

Minimum temperature (Tmin) (oC) -0.485** -0.455** 0.219

Relative humidity (%) -0.234 -0.282 0.539**

Rainfall (mm) -0.198 -0.239 0.288

Solar radiation (Cal / cm2) 0.277 0.201 -0.331

Table 3. Influence of weather parameters on seasonal abundance of aphids, mealybugs and tea mosquito bugs during 2014-2015

**Correlation coefficient is significant at 5% level

2.1. Monitoring of seasonal abundance of insect pests by direct counting...

VariablesRegression coefficient

Aphids(Y1)

Mealybugs(Y2)

Tea mosquito bugs(Y3)

Intercept (a) 132.896 363.570 -11.871Maximum temperature (Tmax) (oC) (X1) 5.774** 6.689** -0.175

Minimum temperature (Tmin) (oC) (X2) -5.786** -5.884** 0.102

Relative humidity (RH) (%) (X3) -0.599 -2.036 0.757**

Rainfall (mm) (X4) -1.150 -3.484 0.208

Solar radiation (Cal / cm2) (X5) 0.061 0.093 0.002

R2 0.610 0.640 0.426

Table 4. Multiple linear regression analysis for the prediction of seasonal abundance of aphids, mealybugs and tea mosquito bugs

Regression equations

1) Y1 = 132.896 + 5.774X1**-5.786X2 - 0.599X3 - 1.150X4 + 0.061X5

2) Y2 = 363.570 + 6.689X1**-5.884X2 - 2.036X3 - 3.484X4 + 0.093X5

3) Y3 = -11.871 - 0.175X1 + 0.102X2 + 0.757X3** + 0.208X4 - 0.002X5

**Regression coefficient is significant at 5% level


2.1. Monitoring of seasonal abundance of insect pests by sticky light traps

Methodology:

Farmer’s holding at Sethumadai, Pollachi Period of 7 months Coloured sticky light traps Light source-15 W bulbs smeared -white grease and castor oil in 50:50 ratio 1 hour daily between 6.30 pm to 7.30 pm. Treatments T1 - Yellow sticky light trap T2 - Blue sticky light trap T3 - Green sticky light trap T4 - White sticky light trap T5 - Red sticky light trap Weekly counts


Date/Month Std. weekNumber of insects trapped per week*

T1-YSLT T2 - BSLT T3 - GSLT T4 -WSLT T5 - RSLT S. Ed CD01 to 07 October 40

22.25a

(4.77)

16.50b

(4.12)

12.75c

(3.64)

8.75d

(3.04)

5.75d

(2.50)1.57 3.41

08 to 14 October 41

19.50a

(4.47)

14.50b

(3.87)

9.50c

(3.16)

6.25d

(2.60)

4.00e

(2.12)0.92 2.00

15 to 21 October 42

20.25a

(4.55)

16.50b

(4.12)

12.50c

(3.60)

11.50c

(3.46)

4.25d

(2.18)1.31 2.87

22 to 28 October 43

17.50a

(4.24)

15.75b

(4.03)

12.25c

(3.57)

7.25d

(2.78)

4.00e

(2.12)0.70 1.50

29 to 04 October 44

15.75a

(4.03)

14.25a

(3.84)

12.50ab

(3.60)

7.75c

(2.87)

7.75c

(2.87)1.13 2.47

05 to 11 November 45

11.00a

(3.39)

10.25a

(3.28)

7.75b

(2.87)

7.50b

(2.83)

3.50c

(2.00)0.77 1.68


11.25a

(3.43)

9.25ab

(3.12)

8.25b

(2.96)

6.75c

(2.69)

4.25d

(2.18)1.06 2.31


11.25ab

(3.43)

12.00a

(3.53)

9.25b

(3.12)

6.25c

(2.60)

4.50d

(2.24)1.12 2.45

26 to 02 December 48

12.25a

(3.57)

9.50b

(3.16)

8.25bc

(2.96)

7.50bc

(2.83)

6.50c

(2.65)1.25 2.71


16.75a

(4.15)

14.75a

(3.90)

11.00b

(3.39)

7.75c

(2.87)

6.50c

(2.65)1.16 2.53


12.75a

(3.60)

11.00b

(3.39)

7.75c

(2.87)

7.00cd

(2.74)

5.50d

(2.45)0.75 1.65


21.00a

(4.64)

14.00b

(3.81)

12.75b

(3.64)

8.25c

(2.96

7.50c

(2.83)1.63 3.54


16.75a

(4.15)

13.25ab

(3.71)

13.00ab

(3.67)

10.75bc

(3.35)

5.75c

(2.50)1.84 4.00

01 to 07 January 01

12.50a

(3.60)

8.25b

(2.96)

6.75b

(2.69)

6.50b

(2.64)

0.75c

(1.11)0.16 0.34

08 to 14 January 02

15.50a

(4.00)

12.00b

(3.53)

11.50c

(3.46)

9.75cd

(3.20)

7.50d

(2.83)1.01 2.21

15 to 21 January 03

16.25a

(4.09)

12.50b

(3.60)

8.00c

(2.91)

5.75d

(2.5)

5.25d

(2.40)0.97 2.11

22 to 28 January 04

13.25a

(3.70)

13.00a

(3.67)

8.00b

(2.91)

4.00c

(2.12)

5.50bc

(2.45)1.27 2.77

Table 5. Monitoring of Toxoptera aurantii infesting cocoa using sticky light traps during 2014-2015

Contd.,

Results :

Date/Month Std. weekNumber of insects trapped per week*

T1-YSLT T2 - BSLT T3 - GSLT T4-WSLT T5- RSLT S. Ed CD

29 to 04 February 0515.00a

(3.94)

13.50a

(3.74)

7.50b

(2.83)

4.25c

(2.18)

0.75d

(1.12)0.13 0.29


(3.5)

9.75b

(3.20)

10.00b

(3.24)

7.25bc

(2.78)

7.50c

(2.83)1.70 3.71


(3.90)

13.50ab

(3.74)

10.00bc

(3.24)

7.25cd

(2.78)

5.75d

(2.5)1.68 3.66


(3.90)

12.50a

(3.60)

9.50b

(3.16)

8.00bc

(2.91)

6.75c

(2.69)1.78 2.57

26 to 04 March 0912.00a

(3.53)

10.50ab

(3.32)

8.75b

(3.04)

10.50ab

(3.32)

5.50c

(2.45)1.10 2.32

05 to 11 March 1017.00a

(4.18)

12.25b

(3.57)

8.50c

(3.00)

5.75d

(2.5)

7.50cd

(2.83)1.05 2.30

12 to 18 March 1115.75a

(4.03)

13.75a

(3.77)

9.50b

(3.12)

6.25c

(2.60)

3.50d

(2.00)1.17 2.55

19 to 25 March 1215.25a

(3.97)

14.00a

(3.80)

10.25b

(3.29)

7.75c

(2.87)

7.50c

(2.83)1.1 2.34

26 to 01

April13

14.00a

(3.80)

11.25b

(3.45)

10.75bc

(3.35)

9.00c

(3.08)

6.50d

(2.64)0.92 2.00

02 to 08 April 1414.00a

(3.80)

12.00b

(3.53)

8.50c

(3.00)

8.00c

(2.91)

6.75c

(2.69)0.86 1.86

09 to 15 April 1518.50a

(4.36)

16.75a

(4.15)

12.25b

(3.57)

9.50bc

(3.16)

7.50c

(2.83)1.45 3.15

16 to 22 April 1614.00a

(3.80)

11.75ab

(3.50)

11.00ab

(3.91)

8.00bc

(2.91)

5.25c

(2.34)1.39 3.02

23 to 29 April 1713.75a

(3.77)

12.50ab

(3.60)

11.50b

(3.46)

8.75c

(3.04)

6.00d

(2.55)0.99 2.11

Mean - 15.21 12.71 9.93 7.78 5.52 - -

2.1. Monitoring of seasonal abundance of insect pests by sticky light traps Table 5. Monitoring of Toxoptera aurantii infesting cocoa using sticky light traps during 2014-2015


Monitoring of seasonal abundance of insect pests using sticky light traps during 2014-2015

Obj. 2.3. Morphological identification

Entomofauna observed during survey were collected

Soft bodied insects were preserved in 70 per cent ethanol other entomofauna were card mounted/ pinned

Specimens were identified morphologically by the taxonomists and by comparing the specimens in the Biosystematics Laboratory, Department of Agricultural Entomology, TNAU, Coimbatore.

Methodology:

Obj. 2.3. Morphological identification……………………………….

Results:

Tea mosquito bugs Mealybugs Aphids Plant hoppers Scales Cowbugs Borers Hairy caterpillars Other defoliators Predators and parasitoids

Morphological differentiation of tea mosquito bugs

Helopeltis bradyi

Obj. 2.4. Molecular identification of insect pests of cocoaMethodology:

Preservation -20 OC DNA Isolation-CTAB method DNA quality checking 0.8 per cent agarose gels DNA quantity- Nanodrop spectrophotometer

S. No Insect pests Family Order1 Helopeltis bradyi Miridae

Hemiptera

2 H.antonii 3 Paracoccus marginatus Pseudococcidae4 Icerya aegyptiaca Monophlebidae5 Telingana sp. Membracidae

Molecular Ecology Laboratory, CPMB&B,TNAU, Coimbatore Field collection

Obj. 2.4. Molecular identification of insect pests of cocoa……………………………. Amplification of cytochrome oxidase I gene from the sucking pests of cocoa Primers:

Primer name Sequences (5' - 3')KBRHB-F GATAACATTAAGATGAATCATCCGACKBRHB-R GTACTGGTAGGGATAATAATAGGAGGKBRHA-F ATTACTACCTCCTTCACTAATATKBRHA-R ATACTGGTAGAGATAGTAGCAGTAAALCO-1490-F GGTCAACAAATCATAAAGATATTGGHCO-2198-R TAAACTTCAGGGTGACCAAAAAAT CA

Activity Temperature TimeNumber of

cyclesInitial denaturing 95 °C 10 min. OneDenaturing 95 °C 1 min.

35 cycles

Annealing 55 °C 1 min.

Extension 72 °C 1 min.

Final Extension 72 °C 10 min. OneStorage 4 °C Forever -

PCR programme for universal and specific mitochondrial COI primer

Activity Temperature Time Number of cycles

Initial denaturing 94 °C 5 min. OneDenaturing 94 °C 30 sec.

35 cycles

Annealing 63 °C 45 sec.

Extension 72 °C 45 sec.

Final Extension 72 °C 10 min. OneStorage 4 °C Forever -

Sequencing Sci. Genome Pvt. Ltd, Kerala

Obj. 2.4. Molecular identification of insect pests of cocoa…Results:

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…

Obj. 2.4. Molecular identification of insect pests of cocoa…1) Helopeltis bradyi

Obj. 2.4. Molecular identification of insect pests of cocoa...

2) Helopeltis antonii

3) Paracoccus marginatus

Obj. 2.4. Molecular identification of insect pests of cocoa…


4) Icerya aegyptiaca


5) Telingana sp.

Obj. 2.4. Molecular identification of insect pests of cocoa...

Molecular differentiation of tea mosquito bugs

2.5. Biology of sucking pests of cocoaMethodology: 1. Aphid, Toxoptera aurantii

Field collection –adults Release 30 day old seedling Observed layed nymphs Removed adult aphids Observed fecundity and longevity

2. Mealybugs (Planococcus citri and Paracoccus marginatus) Field collection Infestation 30 day old seedlings Transferred crawlers to the petriplates Each growth stage , fecundity and longevity

3.Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis bradyi

Field collected-adults Released- 30 day old seedlings Nymphs-transferred to another cages Observed the each instar, fecundity and

longevity

Life StageDevelopmental period (Days)*

Range Mean ± SDNymphs

I instar 1.0 - 2.0 1.45 ± 0.43

II instar 1.5 - 30 2.15 ± 0.47

III instar 2.0 - 3.0 2.35 ± 0.51

IV instar 2.0 - 4.0 2.05 ± 0.37

Adults

Pre reproductive period 0.5 - 2.0 1.05 ± 0.44

Reproductive period 4.0 - 5.0 4.40 ± 0.40

Adult longevity 10.0 - 14.0 12.10 ± 1.29

Fecundity 45.0 - 61.0 52.17 ± 4.19

Table 6. Biology of Toxoptera aurantii infesting cocoa under laboratory conditions

*Mean of 10 observations

2.5. Biology of sucking pests of cocoa

Life stageDevelopmental period (Days) *

(Mean ± SD)

Planococcus citri Paracoccus marginatusEgg (Incubation period) 3.50 ± 0.50 6.50 ± 0.87I instar 5.17 ± 0.29 3.67 ± 0.58II instar 6.17 ± 0.58 3.92 ± 0.39III instar 7.33 ± 0.29 4.58 ± 0.40Pupa or cocoon (Male) 4.83 ± 0.76 3.25 ± 0.43Adult longevity

Male 2.50 ± 0.50 1.52 ± 0.58 Female 18.83 ± 1.61 19.67 ± 0.59

Total life cycle Male 29.50 ± 1.50 23.58 ± 1.87

Female 41.50 ± 1.80 39.17 ± 1.04Oviposition period 10.17 ± 1.26 7.67 ± 0.58Fecundity (No.) 358.67 ± 3.06 336.67 ± 3.21

Table 7. Biology of mealybugs infesting cocoa under laboratory conditions

*Mean of 3 replications


Life stageDevelopmental period (Days)

(Mean ± SD)Egg (Incubation period) 7.54 ± 0.46I instar 1.60 ± 0.42II instar 1.10 ± 0.22III instar 1.24 ± 0.18IV instar 1.88 ± 0.40V instar 2.52 ± 0.36Adult longevity

Male 22.20 ± 1.30 Female 26.00 ± 0.71

Total life cycle Male 38.08 ± 1.59

Female 41.88 ± 1.11Oviposition period 21.80 ± 0.84

Fecundity (No.) 137.60 ± 1.82

Table 8. Biology of tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis bradyi infesting cocoa under laboratory conditions

*Mean of 3 replications


2.6 Predatory potential of natural enemies on cocoa mealybugs Methodology:

First, second, third, fourth and adult stages of Cryptolaemus montrouzieri

First, second and third instars of Chrysoperla zastrowi sillemi Planococcus citri and Paracoccus marginatus Cocoa leaf cut- circular bits Agar containing petriplates 100 numbers of mealybugs

Nymphal stageFeeding potential (Mean ± SD)

Planococcus citri Paracoccus marginatus1st instar 2nd instar 3rd instar Ovisacs Nymphs Adults

Grub (Instar)1st instar 129.60 ± 2.88e 31.80 ± 2.77e 18.20 ± 1.20e 1.40 ± 0.55d 14.40 ±1.52e 2.40 ± 1.14e

2nd instar 170.40 ± 3.65d 52.60 ± 1.52d 34.80 ± 1.30d 1.80 ± 0.45d 23.40 ± 0.89d 8.40 ± 1.80d

3rd instar 278.60 ± 5.81c 88.00 ± 2.74c 48.80 ± 2.59c 2.60 ± 0.55c 38.20 ± 2.86c 20.80 ± 0.84c

4th instar 389.20 ± 4.97b 124.20 ± 2.59b 56.40 ± 4.83b 3.40 ± 0.44b 62.60 ± 5.77b 25.80 ± 1.30b

Adult 441.80 ± 6.76a 146.60 ± 3.05a 74.60 ± 2.70a 5.80 ± 0.84a 92.60 ± 6.31a 34.20 ± 2.39a

Total 1408.80 ± 134.83 443.20 ± 47.83 232.80 ±

21.39 15 ± 0.89 231.20 ± 31.69 91.60 ± 12.90

S. Ed 2.68 1.63 1.80 0.37 2.59 0.93CD (P=0.05) 5.59 3.41 3.76 0.79 5.42 1.93

Table 9. Predatory potential of Cryptolaemus montrouzieri on Planococcus citri and Paracoccus marginatus 2.6 Predatory potential of natural enemies on cocoa mealybugs

*Mean of 5 replications In a column, means followed by common letter(s) are not significantly different by LSD

Nymphal stage

Feeding potential* (Mean ± SD)

Planococcus citri Paracoccus marginatus1st instar 2nd instar 3rd instar Ovisacs Nymphs Adults

Grub (Instar) 1st instar 158.80 ± 5.24c 35.00 ± 2.73c 23.60 ±2.87c 1.40 ± 0.55c 68.20 ± 3.11c 11.80 ± 1.79c

2nd instar 224.40 ± 4.14b 69.20 ± 3.27b 41.00 ± 3.16b 2.20 ± 0.45b 128.80 ± 2.77b 19.40 ± 2.88b

3rd instar 326.60 ± 2.96a 116.20 ± 6.45a 97.40 ± 2.05a 3.60 ± 0.55a 213.80 ± 8.84a 27.40 ± 3.13a

Total 709.80 ± 84.56 220.40 ± 40.76 162 ± 38.57 7.20 ± 1.11 410 ± 73.14 58.60 ± 7.80 S. Ed 2.67 2.82 1.93 0.32 3.57 1.68

CD (P=0.05) 5.81 6.15 4.21 0.71 7.77 3.67

Table 10. Predatory potential of Chrysoperla zastrowi sillemi on Planococcus citri and Paracoccus

marginatus

*Mean of 5 replicationsIn a column, means followed by common letter(s) are not significantly different by LSD

2.6 Predatory potential of natural enemies on cocoa mealybugs

Obj. 3.0. Development of IPM module against sucking pest complex of cocoa

Obj. 3.0. Development of IPM module against sucking pest complex of cocoa

Methodology:

Erection of yellow sticky light traps @10 per ha Filed release of C. montrouzieri @ 10 beetles per tree Acerophagus papayae @ 100 per hamlet Foliar application of Beauveria bassiana (2x108 cfu / ml) @

5 kg per ha Foliar application of azadirachtin 10,000 ppm @ 500 ml

per ha Foliar application of thiacloprid 21.7 % SC @ 750 ml per

ha 1,3,5,7,21 DAT- population counts % damage and natural enemies population count 21 DAT Recorded pod and bean yield parameters

T1 - IPM moduleT2 - Farmer’s practice T3- Untreated control

Treatments:

S. No Treatments

Number of aphids / top 3 leaves / tree * Per cent reduction over control

PTC 1DAT

3DAT

5DAT

7DAT

14DAT

21DAT Mean 1

DAT3

DAT5

DAT7

DAT14

DAT21

DAT Mean

1 IPM module 110.000.57a

(1.04)

0.29a

(0.88)

0.00a

(0.71)

8.57a

(3.01)

28.00a

(5.33)

33.14a

(5.80)11.76 99.59 99.80 100.00 93.22 79.54 74.19 91.10

2 Farmer’s practice

105.500.71a

(1.10)

0.43a

(0.96)

0.14a

(0.80)

11.86b

(3.52)

35.28b

(5.98)

59.14b

(7.72)17.93 99.48 99.70 99.88 90.62 74.22 53.95 86.30

3Untreated control 145.50

138.20b

(11.78)

146.00b

(12.10)

125.71b

(11.24)

126.43c

(11.27)

136.85c

(11.72)

128.42c

(11.35) 133.62 - - - - - - -

S. Ed - 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.97 0.89 1.19 - - - - - - - -

CD (P=0.05) NS 0.17 0.13 0.08 2.12 1.94 2.61 - - - - - - - -

Table 11. Efficacy of different pest management practices against Toxoptera aurantii infesting cocoa during 2014-2015

3.1. Efficacy of different pest management practices against sucking pest complex of cocoa

PTC - Pre treatment count; DAT - Days after treatment*Mean of 7 replications; NS-Non significant In a column, means followed by common letter(s) are not significantly different by LSD Figures in parenthesis are square root transformed values

Figure. Efficacy of different pest management practices against Toxoptera aurantii infesting cocoa


S. No

Treatments

Number of Planococcus citri / 3 pods / tree *

Per cent reduction over control

PTC 1DAT

3DAT

5DAT

7DAT

14DAT

21DAT Mean 1

DAT3

DAT5

DAT7

DAT14

DAT21

DAT Mean

1IPM module

262.6010.29a

(3.28)

3.86a

(2.09)

0.00a

(0.71)

10.57a

(3.33)

28.50a

(5.38)

35.14a

(5.97)14.72 96.36 98.53 100.00 96.03 89.86 87.23 94.66

2 Farmer’s practice

249.5011.00a

(3.39)

4.43a

(2.22)

0.00a

(0.71)

15.86b

(4.04)

39.35b

(6.31)

50.85b

(7.16)20.25 96.10 98.31 100.00 94.05 86.00 81.52 92.66

3Untreated control 297.00

282.29b

(16.82)

261.71b

(16.19)

272.14b

(16.51)

266.29c

(16.33)

281.14c

(16.78)

275.28c

(16.60)273.13 - - - - - - -

S. Ed - 2.70 1.98 0.03 1.11 1.77 1.25 - - - - - - - -

CD

(P=0.05)NS 5.90 4.33 0.08 2.42 3.85 2.74 - - - - - - - -

PTC - Pre treatment count; DAT- Days after treatment*Mean of 7 replicationsIn a column, means followed by common letter(s) are not significantly different by LSDFigures in parenthesis are square root transformed values

Table 12. Efficacy of different pest management practices against Planococcus citri infesting cocoa during 2014-2015


Efficacy of different pest management practices against Planococcus citri infesting cocoa


S. No Treatments

Number of Paracoccus marginatus / 3 pods / tree* Per cent reduction over control

PTC 1DAT

3DAT

5DAT

7DAT

14DAT

21DAT Mean 1

DAT3

DAT5

DAT7

DAT14

DAT21

DAT Mean


(3.49)

4.14a

(2.15)

0.00a

(0.70)

11.85a

(3.51)

25.57a

(5.10)

35.26a

(5.98)14.76 94.8

0 98.05 100.00 94.35 88.39 84.29 93.31

2 Farmer’s practice 215.71

13.00a

(3.67)

4.28a

(2.18)

0.28a

(0.88)

27.71b

(5.31)

36.14b

(6.05)

58.28b

(7.66)23.28 94.2

2 97.98 99.87 86.81 83.59 74.06 89.42

3 Untreated control 236.28

225.28b

(15.02)

213.00b

(14.61)

221.14b

(14.88)

210.14c

(14.51)

220.28c

(14.85)

224.71c

(15.00)219.10 - - - - - - -

S. Ed - 1.12 1.13 0.05 0.82 1.16 0.67 - - - - - - - -

CD(P=0.05) NS 2.44 2.46 0.11 1.80 2.53 1.47 - - - - - - - -

PTC - Pre treatment count; DAT- Days after treatment*Mean of 7 replicationsIn a column, means followed by common letter(s) are not significantly different by LSDFigures in parenthesis are square root transformed values


Table 13. Efficacy of different pest management practices against Paracoccus marginatus infesting cocoa during 2014-2015

Figure. Efficacy of different pest management practices against Paracoccus marginatus infesting cocoa


S. No Treatments

Number of tea mosquito bugs / 3 pods / tree * Per cent reduction over control

PTC 1DAT

3DAT

5DAT

7DAT

14DAT

21DAT Mean

Damage

(%)

1DAT

3DAT

5DAT

7DAT

14DAT

21DAT Mean Damage

(%)


(1.34)

0.00a

(0.71)

0.00a

(0.71)

1.28a

(1.33)

3.00a

(1.87)

4.14a

(2.15)1.62 10.52 88.46 100.0

0100.00 86.15 70.00 61.84 84.40 84.59

2 Farmer’s practice 8.00

3.00b

(1.87)

1.43b

(1.38)

0.86b

(1.16)

2.57b

(1.75)

5.85b

(2.51)

8.85b

(3.05)3.69 26.58 76.92 86.84 92.40 72.30 41.42 18.42 64.71 61.08

3 Untreated control 12.00

11.14c

(3.41)

10.85c

(3.39)

11.28c

(3.43)

9.28c

(3.12)

10.00c

(3.24)

10.85c

(3.36)10.57 68.31 - - - - - - - -

S. Ed - 0.44 0.07 0.07 0.432 0.56 0.52 - - - - - - - - - -

CD(P=0.05) NS 0.95 0.14 0.17 0.94 1.22 1.13 - - - - - - - - - -

PTC - Pre treatment count; DAT - Days after treatment *Mean of 7 replications; NS-Non significantIn a column, means followed by common letter(s) are not significantly different by LSDFigures in parenthesis are square root transformed values


Table 14. Efficacy of different pest management practices against tea mosquito bugs infesting cocoa during 2014-2015

Figure Efficacy of different pest management practices against tea mosquito bugs infesting cocoa


TreatmentsNumber of natural enemies recorded / tree at 21 DAT*

C. montrouzieri(Grubs)

Spalgis epeus(Larvae)

Syrphids(Maggots) Spiders

IPM Module5.70b

(2.49)

4.10b

(2.14)

2.10b

(1.61)

1.70b

(1.48)

Farmer’s practice1.20c

(1.30)

0.50c

(1.00)

0.00c

(0.71)

0.80c

(1.14)

Untreated control11.30a

(3.44)

9.60a

(3.18)

6.30a

(2.61)

5.00a

(2.35)

S. Ed 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.11

CD (P=0.05) 0.21 0.19 0.21 0.22

DAT - Days after treatment*Mean of 10 observations In a column, means followed by common letter(s) are not significantly different by LSD Figures in parenthesis are square root transformed values

Table 15. Effect of different pest management practices on natural enemies in cocoa ecosystem during 2014-2015

3.2. Effect of different pest management practices on natural enemies

C. montrouzieri Spalgis epeus Syrphids Spiders

Figure .Effect of different pest management practices on natural enemies in cocoa ecosystem

3.2. Effect of different pest management practices on natural enemies

Treatments Number of harvestablepods / tree / season

Pod yield parameters (Mean of 8 harvests)*

Pod length (cm) Pod girth (cm) Pod weight (g)

IPM module28.60a

(5.39)

18.48a

(4.35)

26.64a

(5.20)

588.78a

(24.27)

Farmer’s practice 23.90b

(4.94)

17.15b

(4.20)

23.60b

(4.90)

482.89b

(21.98)

Untreated control14.92c

(3.92)

15.14c

(3.95)

20.57c

(4.59)

371.50c

(19.29)

S. Ed 0.76 0.36 0.57 1.25

CD (P=0.05) 1.66 0.79 1.23 2.73

Mean of 7 replicationsIn a column, means followed by common letter(s) are not significantly different by LSD Figures in the parenthesis are square root transformed values

Table 16.Effect of different pest management practices on pod yield parameters of cocoa during 2014-2015

3.3. Effect of different pest management practices on pod yield parameters

Figure. Effect of different pest management practices on pod yield parameters of cocoa


Treatments

Bean yield parameters (Mean of 8 harvests)* Dry bean yield / tree / season

(g)Number of beans /

podWet bean weight / pod

(g) Dry bean weight / pod (g)

IPM module37.85a

(6.19)

126.00a

(11.24)

39.42a

(6.31)984

Farmer’s practice 34.00b

(5.87)

109.71b

(10.49)

35.14b

(5.97)782

Untreated control28.42c

(5.37)

92.32c

(9.63)

27.28c

(5.27)433

S. Ed 0.61 1.46 0.73 -

CD (P=0.05) 1.32 3.19 1.59 -

*Mean of 7 replicationsIn a column, means followed by common letter(s) are not significantly different by LSD Figures in parenthesis are square root transformed values


Table 17. Effect of different pest management practices on bean yield parameters of cocoa during 2014-2015

Figure. Effect of different pest management practices on bean yield parameters of cocoa

3.3. Effect of different pest management practices on bean yield parameters

Thank you

management of entomofauna of cocoa ssnaik tnau

Education