Bioefficacy of newer neonicotenoids against sucking insect pests of Bt cotton

Similar documents
Bioefficacy of New Insecticide Molecules Against Okra Jassids (Amrasca biguttula biguttula Ishida)

National Academy of Agricultural Science (NAAS) Rating : Bioefficacy of New Insecticide Molecules Against Okra Aphids (Aphis gossypii Glover)

Bioefficacy and Phytotoxicity of Alanto 240 SC (Thiacloprid 240 SC) against Thrips and Natural Enemies in Pomegranate

Influence of different nitrogen levels on the management of Bt cotton sucking pests

Efficacy of Newer Insecticides Against Sucking Insect Pests of Greengram [Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek]

Seasonal incidence of major insect pests of okra in the north eastern hill region of India

Influence of Meteorological Factors on Population Build-Up of Aphids and Natural Enemies on Summer Okra

Seasonal incidence and control of black fly (Aleurocanthus rugosa Singh) infesting betelvine (Piper betle L)

Growth and development of Earias vittella (Fabricius) on cotton cultivars

Biophysical Basis of Resistance against Shoot Bug (Peregrinus maidis) in Different Genotypes of Rabi Sorghum

POPULATION DYNAMICS OF CHILLI THRIPS, Scirtothrips dorsalis HOOD IN RELATION TO WEATHER PARAMETERS BAROT, B.V., PATEL, J.J.* AND SHAIKH, A. A.

Screening of different okra genotypes against major sucking pests

International Journal of Science, Environment and Technology, Vol. 5, No 2, 2016,

Relative Performance of Different Colour Laden Sticky Traps on the Attraction of Sucking Pests in Pomegranate

Determination of Economic Threshold level (ETL) of brown planthopper, Nilaparvata lugens Stal. population in different stages of rice crop at Raipur

In seed crop of onion (Allium cepa L.), the

Effect of Weather Parameters on Population Dynamics of Paddy Pests

Effect of Leaf Characteristics on Different Brinjal Genotypes and their Correlation on Insects Pests Infestation

Research Article. Purti 1 *, Rinku 1 and Anuradha 2

Preying Propensity of Larvae/ Grubs of Syrphid and Coccinellid Predators on Mustard APHID, Lipaphis Erysimi (KALT.)

G.J.B.B., VOL.7 (2) 2018: ISSN

Genetic variability, Heritability and Genetic Advance for Yield, Yield Related Components of Brinjal [Solanum melongena (L.

Weather based forecasting models for prediction of leafhopper population Idioscopus nitidulus Walker; (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae) in mango orchard

SCREENING OF CARNATION VARIETIES AGAINST THRIPS, Thrips tabaci (LINDERMAN) IN PROTECTED CULTIVATION

Study on Genetic Variability, Heritability and Genetic Advance in Rice (Oryza sativa L.) Genotypes

Sanjeev Kumar Kataria, Paramjit Singh, Bhawana and Jaswinder Kaur

Population distribution of thrips, Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) in rose plant within different plant parameters

Vegetable Diagnostics 101: Insects and Diseases

Residual effect of two insecticides and neem oil against epilachna beetle, Epilachna vigintioctopunctata (Fab.) on bitter gourd

PEST AND DISEASE MANAGEMENT

Effect of inoculation with VAM fungi at different P levels on flowering parameters of Tagetes erecta L.

Biology of sweet potato weevil, Cylas formicarius F. on sweet potato

Penetrates. and Protects your Banana Plants. The Changing of the Guard

Strategies to Optimize Thrips Control in the Klamath Basin

Study of Genetic Variability and Heritability in Sugarcane (Saccharum spp. Complex)

2018 // Potato // HARS // CPB Systemic Trial Pg. 1

Combining Ability Estimation for Fibre Quality Parameters in Desi Cotton (Gossypium arboreum)

HIND AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND TRAINING INSTITUTE

Population dynamics of chiku moth, Nephopteryx eugraphella (Ragonot) in relation to weather parameters

COMBINING ABILITY ANALYSIS FOR CURED LEAF YIELD AND ITS COMPONENT TRAITS IN BIDI TOBACCO (NicotianatabacumL.)

Probability models for weekly rainfall at Thrissur

EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT DOSES OF GLYCINE BETAINE AND TIME OF SPRAY APPLICATION ON YIELD OF COTTON (GOSSYPIUM HIRSUTUM L.)

Correlation, path and cluster analysis in hyacinth bean (Lablab purpureus L. Sweet)

White flies and their natural enemies. Moshe cohen Bio-bee Sde Eliyahu Ltd. October 2015

IR-4 Ornamental Horticulture Program Research Report Cover Sheet

Correlation and Path Coefficient Analysis in Upland Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)

Dynamics of Mango Hopper Population under Ultra High Density Planting

ANNUAL REPORT SUGARCANE ENTOMOLOGY

Reproductive Success and Damage Potential of Tobacco Thrips and Western Flower Thrips on Cotton Seedlings in a Greenhouse Environment 1

On probability models for describing population dynamics of major insect pests under rice-potato-okra cropping system

Debashis Roy and Pijush K Sarkar

Sharpshooter & Whiteflies: What s New in Ornamental Research

Student Name: Teacher: Date: Test: 9_12 Agriculture AP41 - Horticulture I Test 2 Description: Pest Management District: Wake County Form: 501

Variability Studies in Foxtail Millet [Setaria italica (L.) P. Beauv]

Brinjal (Solanum melongena L.) is an important

Seasonal Activity of Sogatella furcifera H.,Cnaphalocropcis medinalis G. and Mythimna separata W. in Relation to Weather Parameters in Central India

Screening and Evaluation of Potato (Solanum tuberosum) Genotypes to Identify the Sources of Resistance to Potato Apical Leaf-Curl Disease

Effect of downy mildew in host resistant pearl millet

Study of Genetic Diversity in Some Newly Developed Rice Genotypes

3. Potato / HARS / CPB Systemic Trial

2016 Soybean Vein Necrosis Disease Survey

Scale Insects. Order: Hemiptera. Families: Diaspididae (armored scales), Coccidae (soft scales), Eriococcidae (Felt scales), others

Seasonal occurrence and diversity of arthropods in Bt cotton ecosystem under Akola conditions of Maharashtra

Population Dynamics of Sugarcane Plassey Borer Chilo tumidicostalis Hmpson (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae)

Development of Agrometeorological Models for Estimation of Cotton Yield

Gossypium hirsutum L.

Genetic Variability, Coefficient of Variance, Heritability and Genetic Advance of Some Gossypium hirsutum L. Accessions

EVALUATION OF SOME MANGO CULTIVARS UNDER NORTH INDIAN CONDITIONS

Improved General Class of Ratio Type Estimators

Evaluation of Light Trap against Different Coloured Electric Bulbs for Trapping Phototrophic Insects

Pulse Knowledge. Pea Aphid. Identification and Life Cycle. Host Crops and Crop Injury. Scouting and Economic Thresholds. Jennifer Bogdan, P.Ag.

Rice is one of the most important food

EFFECT OF POLLINATION TIME AND CROSSING RATIO ON SEED YIELD AND QUALITY OF BRINJAL HYBRID UNDER DHARWAD REGION OF KARNATAKA

Correlation and path coefficient analysis for seed cotton yield and its components in American cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)

Leaf and Stem Feeding Aphids

Development of Superior Hybrids for Fibre Quality based on Heterosis and Combining Ability in Upland Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.

Genetic divergence studies for fibre yield traits in roselle (Hibiscus sabdariffa l.) In terai zone of West Bengal

EXTENT OF HETEROTIC EFFECTS FOR SEED YIELD AND COMPONENT CHARACTERS IN CASTOR (RICINUS COMMUNIS L.) UNDER SEMI RABI CONDITION

Studies on Fertility Restoration Using Newly Derived Restorers in Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.)

Control by Seed Dressing of Leaf Weevils of the Genus Sitona (Col.: Curculionidae) Feeding on Sprouting Alfalfa

6 2 Insects and plants

Genetic Variability Studies of Ridge Gourd Advanced Inbred Lines (Luffa acutangula (L.) Roxb.)

Development of regression models in ber genotypes under the agroclimatic conditions of south-western region of Punjab, India

IR-4 ORNAMENTAL DATA REPORTING FORM

INSECTS AND PESTS OF AFRICAN VIOLETS By Mary Lou Harden

Available online at

Biochemical Basis of Resistance in Rice against Brown and White Backed Planthopper

The incidence and abundance of sucking insect pests on groundnut

Intermountain Thrips Story:

Pest Management for Vegetable Bedding Plants Grown in Greenhouses

Exposure of pollinating insects to neonicotinoids by guttation on straw cereals after seed-treated sugar beet (November 2017)

~a5ttr of ~[irnrr In ~grl(ulturt

Effect of different modes of pollination on seed set of mustard (Brassica juncea L.) sown on different sowing dates

Kelly Hamby. Department of Entomology University of Maryland

Ficus Whitefly and Other Pests of Ficus

Date of. Issued by (AICRPAM), & Earth System

2008 Lygus Small Plot Efficacy Trial University of Arizona Maricopa Agricultural Center Peter C. Ellsworth, Ph.D. 24 November 2008

Study on Purple Nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) Tuber Dormancy and its Control Through Combined Application of Growth Regulator and Herbicides

Evaluation of Contact and Residual Activity of Selected Insecticides for Control of Rice Stink Bug. Beaumont, TX

Impact of Tobacco Thrips on Cowpea

Transcription:

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PLANT PROTECTION VOLUME 7 ISSUE 2 OCTOBER, 2014 415-419 e ISSN-0976-6855 Visit us : www.researchjournal.co.in IJPP RESEARCH PAPER DOI : 10.15740/HAS/IJPP/7.2/415-419 Bioefficacy of newer neonicotenoids against sucking insect pests of Bt cotton D.B. KADAM* 1, D.R. KADAM 1, S.M. UMATE 1 AND R.S. LEKURWALE 2 1 Department of Agricultural Entomology, College of Agriculture, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, PARBHANI (M.S.) INDIA 2 Department of Agricultural Botany, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, PARBHANI (M.S.) INDIA ARITCLE INFO Received : 09.08.2014 Revised : 21.08.2014 Accepted : 03.09.2014 KEY WORDS : Bt cotton, Sucking pests, Neoneconetoids *Corresponding author: ABSTRACT A field experiment was conducted at the experimental farm of Department of Entomology, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani during Kharif 2013 to evaluate the bio-efficacy of neonicotenoids against sucking pests of Bt cotton. The results revealed that significantly lowest population of sucking pests per three leaves was recorded in nitenpyram 10 per cent WSG @ 100 g a.i./ha, dinotefuran 20 per cent SG @ 50 g a.i./ha and clothianidin 50 per cent WDG @ 20 g a.i./ha were the most effective treatments in reducing incidence of sucking pests on Bt cotton as compared to acetamiprid 20 per cent SP @ 20 g a.i./ha, imidacloprid 17.8 SL, thiamethoxam 25 per cent WS @ 25 g a.i./ha and thiacloprid 21.7 per cent SC @ 30 g a.i./ha. How to view point the article : Kadam, D.B., Kadam, D.R., Umate, S.M. and Lekurwale, R.S. (2014). Bioefficacy of newer neonicotenoids against sucking insect pests of Bt cotton. J. Plant Protec., 7(2) : 415-419. INTRODUCTION Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.), is the King of fibre popularly known as White gold, an important cash crop in India. Cotton belongs to the family Malvaceae and genus Gossypium. It is popularly known as Friendly fibre because, in India, cotton crop contributes about 80 per cent of the raw material to textile industry in the country providing livelihood for more than 100 million people, through production, processing, trading and marketing (Rakesh and Kathane, 1989). India occupies first place in area and second in production on global basis after China. Among the various causes of low productivity of cotton in India the insect pests is one of the major cause. About 200 insect pests are reported to attack cotton crop in India (Anonymous, 1992). The pests of major significance in Bt cotton are sucking pests like aphids (Aphis gossypii, Glover), jassids ( Amrasca biguttula, Ishida), whiteflies ( Bemisia tabaci, Gennadius) and thrips (Thrips tabaci Linnman) these affect the yield considerably causing losses of 11.20 per cent to 20.90 per cent in Marathwada region. Sucking pests, also referred to as sap feeders, limit the realization of potential productivity of cotton, they are deleterious to the cotton plant growth and development by being assimilate sappers, stand reducers and light stealers. The heavy infestation of nymph and adults of sucking pests resulted in leaf yellowing, wrinkled leaves, leaf distortion and oily spots on leaves. Secondly, they found to secrete honey dew which leads to growth and development of sooty mould fungus (Capnodium sp.) on leaves. The fungus inhibits the photosynthetic activity

D.B. KADAM, D.R. KADAM, S.M. UMATE AND R.S. LEKURWALE of the plants resulting into chlorosis that affect the seed cotton yield. Moreover, whitefly also act as a vector to transmit leaf curl disease in cotton. Neonecotenoids evolved the new era in pest management in Indian agriculture, keeping in mind the potential of neonecotenoids in management of cotton sucking pests, it was tried to evaluate their comparative bioefficacy and safety to cotton ecosystem, so that these products can be included in a compatible manner to develop an effective IPM module in coming future. MATERIAL AND METHODS Studies on efficacy of newer neonicotenoids against sucking pests of Bt cotton was carried out during Kharif 2013 in research farm, Department of Entomology, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani. The cotton variety Bunny Bt was grown in the observation plots with recommended agronomic package of practices without any crop protection measures. The experiments were carried out plots of 5.5 4.7m in Randomized Block Design (RBD) with eight treatments replicated thrice. In the present investigation, seven newer necotenoids viz., clothianidin, nitenpyram, dinotefuran, acetamiprid, imidacloprid, thiamethoxam, thiacloprid were evaluated and compared with untreated check against sucking insect pest complex of Bt cotton. Observations on the number of nymph and adults of aphids, jassids, thrips and whiteflies was recorded from randomly selected five plants one day before spraying and 1, 3, 7 and 14 days after insecticidal spray. The data obtained was subjected to vx+0.5 transformations before analysis. The data was statistically analyzed by standard analysis of variance method. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Studies on efficacy of newer neonicotenoids against sucking pests of Bt cotton concluded that all the neonecotenoids were superior over untreated control in controlling sucking insect pests on Bt cotton. Aphids : The pretreatment count indicated that there was no statistical difference in all treatments. The live count of nymphs and adults of aphids ranged from 36.00 to 42.20 aphids/3 leaves justifying the need undertake plant protection interventions. The post treatment findings indicated that all the insecticidal treatments significantly reduced the aphid population up to seven days. Moreover, at 14 DAS lowest aphid count was recorded from the plots treated with nitenpyram 50 WDG @ 100 g a.i./ha (20.84 aphids/3 leaves). It was at par with dinotefuran 20 SG @ 50 g a.i./ha (20.84 aphids/3 leaves) and clothianidin 50 WDG @ 20 g a.i./ha (21.35 aphids/3 leaves). Rest of the insecticides recorded higher counts 22.51 aphids/3 leaves (acetamiprid 20 SP @) 20 g a.i.) to 29.97 aphids/3 leaves (thiacloprid 21.7 SL @ 30 g a.i.). Similar trends of results regarding sucking insect pest incidence were reported by Wang Qiang et al. (1995). They reported 95 per cent field control of aphids after 5, 7 and 10 days of treatment with imidacloprid 37.5 g per ha on cotton crop. More than 90 per cent control of aphids, Aphis gossypii was recorded by Layton et al. (1996) in imidacloprid treated plots. Weekly imidacloprid treatment reduced aphid population on cotton (Wells et al., 1998). Acetamiprid gave 91 per cent control of aphids on cotton at 2, 5, 7, 10 and 15 days after application, Bellottini et al. (1999). Dhandapani et al. (2002) reported that seed treatment of cotton with the new insecticides, clothianidin (Poncho 600 FS) at 9 ml per kg seed and imidacloprid (Gaucho 600 FS) at 12 ml per kg seed, effectively controlled the sucking pests of cotton viz., aphids, thrips and leaf hoppers. Two sprays of clothianidin @ 20 and 25 g a.i./ha rendered very good protection to crop Table 1 : Bioefficacy of different insecticides against aphids (Aphis gossypii) in Bt cotton 2013 Sr. No. Treatments Dose (g a.i./ha) 1. Dinotefuran 20 (%) SG 50 36.10 (6.04) 1.32 (1.22) 4.00 (1.82) 5.88 (2.42) 20.84 (4.32) 2. Acetamiprid 20 (%) SP 20 36.00 (6.04) 2.21 (1.47) 5.06 (2. 02) 9.05 (2.87) 22.51 (4.56) 3. Imidacloprid 17.8 SL 25 41.15 (6.45) 2.8 (1.83) 6.16 (2.36) 12.84 (3.41) 24.00 (4.80) 4. Clothianidin 50 (%) WDG 20 38.00 (6.20) 1.85 (1.37) 4.19 (1.85) 8.14 (2.73) 21.35 (4.55) 5. Thiamethoxam 25 (%) WS 25 42.20 (6.53) 3.62 (1.56) 7.84 (2.29) 16.86 (3.96) 27.4 (5.24) 6. Thiacloprid 21.7 (%) SC 30 37.04 (6.12) 6.80 (2.62) 10.32 (3.09) 18.13 (4.10) 29.97 (5.48) 7. Nitenpyram 10 (%) WSG 100 36.40 (6.07) 0.80 (1.03) 3.30 (1.61) 4.93 (2.22) 20.64 (4.30) 8. Untreated control -- 38.10 (6.21) 38.79 (6.3) 37.6 (6.15) 40.76 (6.41) 35.93 (6.02) S.E. ± 0.06 0.61 0.53 0.50 0.22 C.D. (P=0.05) NS 2.00 1.73 1.65 0.74 Figures in parenthesis x+0.5, NS= Non significant 416

BIOEFFICACY OF NEWER NEONICOTENOIDSAGAINST SUCKING INSECT PESTS OF Bt COTTON against the attack of sucking pests of cotton Patil et al. (2007). Other researchers also reported effectiveness of newer neonicotenoides against cotton aphids Kendappa et al. (2002). Table 2 : Bioefficacy of different insecticides against jassids (Amrasca bigutulla bigutulla) in Bt cotton 2013 Dose (g Sr. No. Treatments a.i./ha) 1. Dinotefuran 20 (%) SG 50 5.08 (2.36) 0.47 (0.96) 1.00 (1.25) 1.65 (1.44) 2.81 (1.79) 2. Acetamiprid 20 (%) SP 20 5.90 (2.52) 1.14 (1.26) 1.60 (1.44) 2.19 (1.62) 3.47 (1.97) 3. Imidacloprid 17.8 SL 25 4.99 (2.34) 1.22 (1.30) 1.86 (1.50) 2.53 (1.70) 4.01 (2.11) 4. Clothianidin 50 (%) WDG 5. Thiamethoxam 25 (%) WS 20 4.12 (2.15) 0.61 (1.04) 1.38 (1.37) 2.01 (1.69) 2.99 (1.84) 25 4.59 (2.25) 1.3 (1.33) 1.9 (1.53) 2.66 (1.76) 3.83 (2.06) 6. Thiacloprid 21.7 (%) SC 30 4.92 (2.26) 1.53 (1.41) 2.39 (1.68) 2.89 (1.80) 4.45 (2.19) 7. Nitenpyram 10 (%) WSG 100 5.92 (2.53) 0.05 (0.73) 0.61 (1.02) 1.26 (1.28) 2.44 (1.69) 8. Untreated control -- 5.90 (2.52) 4.76 (2.28) 4.56 (2.22) 4.97 (2.31) 5.33 (2.40) S.E. + 0.05 0.16 0.12 0.11 0.08 C.D. (P=0.05) NS 0.53 0.41 0.36 0.27 Figures in parenthesis x+0.5, NS= Non-significant Table 3 : Bioefficacy of different insecticides against Thrips (Thrips tabaci) in Bt cotton 2013 Dose (g Sr. No. Treatments a.i./ha) 1. Dinotefuran 20 (%) SG 50 30.40 (5.55) 0.29 (0.86) 2.34 (1.64) 6.63 (2.43) 16.24 (4.07) 2. Acetamiprid 20 (%) SP 20 29.89 (5.51) 0.91 (1.14) 3.33 (1.93) 7.45 (2.69) 25.16 (5.05) 3. Imidacloprid 17.8 SL 25 29.72 (5.49) 1.11 (1.23) 5.11 (2.05) 8.32 (2.75) 26.16 (5.14) 4. Clothianidin 50 (%) WDG 5. Thiamethoxam 25 (%) WS 20 30.65 (5.58) 0.24 (0.84) 2.57 (1.67) 6.73 (2.57) 19.21 (4.33) 25 30.15 (5.53) 1.46 (1.34) 3.98 (2.10) 9.86 (3.07) 28.75 (5.40) 6. Thiacloprid 21.7 (%) SC 30 28.46 (5.35) 1.77 (1.47) 5.00 (2.32) 10.47 (3.17) 31.4 (5.63) 7. Nitenpyram 10 (%) WSG 100 30.15 (5.53) 0.11 (0.77) 1.94 (1.48) 6.04 (2.37) 15.78 (3.93) 8. Untreated control -- 29.28 (5.45) 30.44 (5.55) 30.75 (5.57) 30.73 (5.57) 31.40 (5.67) S.E. ± 0.02 0.56 0.46 0.37 0.24 C.D. (P=0.05) NS 1.83 1.53 1.23 0.82 Figures in parenthesis x+0.5, NS= Non-significant Table 4 : Bioefficacy of different insecticides against whiteflies (Bemisia tabaci) in Bt cotton 2013 Sr. No. Treatments Dose (g a.i./ha) 1. Dinotefuran 20 (%) SG 50 4.14 (2.07) 0.00 (0.70) 0.17 (0.80) 0.83 (1.14) 3.20 (1.90) 2. Acetamiprid 20 (%) SP 20 3.68 (2.04) 0.16 (0.80) 0.34 (0.90) 1.18 (1.29) 3.80 (2.06) 3. Imidacloprid 17.8 SL 25 4.22 (2.17) 0.00 (0.70) 0.38 (0.58) 1.72 (1.48) 4.21 (2.20) 4. Clothianidin 50 (%) WDG 20 4.99 (2.34) 0.00 (0.70) 0.26 (0.86) 1.12 (1.27) 3.36 (1.90) 5. Thiamethoxam 25 (%) WS 25 5.90 (2.52) 0.51 (0.99) 0.65 (1.03) 1.89 (1.54) 4.21 (2.16) 6. Thiacloprid 21.7 (%) SC 30 4.12 (2.15) 0.17 (0.80) 0.87 (1.12) 2.40 (1.69) 4.58 (2.24) 7. Nitenpyram 10 (%) WSG 100 4.59 (2.25) 0.00 (0.70) 0.10 (0.77) 0.37 (0.90) 2.97 (1.82) 8. Untreated control -- 4.57 (2.34) 4.83 (2.30) 4.69 (2.29) 4.83 (2.30) 6.28 (2.65) S.E. ± 0.05 0.19 0.19 0.15 0.06 C.D. (P=0.05) NS 0.63 0.63 0.49 0.21 Figures in parenthesis x+0.5, NS = Non significant 417

D.B. KADAM, D.R. KADAM, S.M. UMATE AND R.S. LEKURWALE Jassids : During Kharif 2013 the incidence of jassids was recorded in the range of 4.12 to 5.92 jassids/3 leaves before initiation insecticidal spray. The pooled data on jassid incidence of three sprays showed that all the newer neonecotenoids significantly recorded minimum jassid population over a span of 14 days. The order of efficacy was nitenpyram, dinotefuran, clothianidin, acetamiprid, thiamethoxam, imidacloprid and thiacloprid. It indicated that the most newer compounds had performed even better in minimizing jassid population over regularly established neonecotenoids. In the present investigation the most newly developed neonecotenoids clothianidin, dinotefuran, nitenpyram and thiacloprid were compared with well accepted acetamiprid, imidacloprid and thiamethoxam. The data on these newly evolved molecules is not available. The present findings are in accordance with the findings of earlier workers who reported that thiamethoxam 25 WG @ 25 g a.i./ha (Dhawan and Simwat, 2002), acetamiprid 20 SP @ 80 g a.i./ha (Rathod, 2003), clothianidin 50 WDG @ 25 g a.i./ha against all sucking pests (Patil et al., 2007), seed treatment with thiamethoxam 70 WS at 4.3 g/kg seed and imidacloprid 600 FS at 12 ml/kg seed (Vodadaria et al., 2001) was most effective. Saleem et al. (2001) reported the effectiveness of thiamethoxam and imidacloprid against jassids upto 7 days only. Thrips : Thrips with their rasping and sucking type of mouthparts are known to feed on Bt cotton and emerged as major pest in recent years. Before application of insecticides thrips population was very high and ranged between 28.46 to 30.65/3 leaves. All the insecticidal treatments were significantly superior over untreated control throughout the experiment. Initially at 1 and 3 DAS all the insecticides showed equal effectiveness statistically. However, at 7 DAS thrips count in all insecticidal treatments was increased minimum in nitenpyram treated plots (6.04 thrips/3 leaves) and maximum in thiacloprid treated plots (10.47 thrips/3 leaves). The data recorded at 14 DAS indicated that none of the spray treatments was effective in managing pest population. The earlier workers reported that thrips can be effectively managed by acetamiprid (Bhosle et al., 2009, Raghuraman et al., 2008 and Singh and Kumar, 2005). Imidacloprid and dinotefuran had successfully controlled thrips (Rathod et al., 2002). Seed treatment with clothianidin (Pancho 600 FS) at 9 ml/kg seed and imidacloprid (Gaucho 600 FS) at 12 ml/kg effectively controlled sucking pests of cotton viz., aphids, thrips and leaf hopper upto 8 weeks after sowing (Dhandapani et al., 2002). Whiteflies : During the experimental period the whitefly population was quite less naturally and the pretreatment count ranged from 3.68 to 4.99 whiteflies/3 leaves. After the interventions the pooled average data showed that all the insecticidal treatments were equally effective upto 3 days after spray. At 14 DAS nitenpyram (2.97 whiteflies/3 leaves) was the most superior treatment followed by dinotefuran (3.20 whiteflies/ 3 leaves) and clothianidin (3.36 whiteflies/3 leaves) which were statistically at par. It clearly indicated that these compounds have even better efficacy as compared to other neonecotenoids at 14 DAS. These findings are discussed here in light of the work done by the earlier researchers. Kumar et al. (2001) showed that spirotreatment @ 75 g a.i./ha and imidacloprid @ 25 g a.i./ha were equally effective in managing cotton whitefly. Raghuraman and Gupta (2005) reported that acetamiprid @ 40 g a.i./ha and imidacloprid @ 100 g a.i./ha were found to be the most effective treatments against whitefly on cotton. Acetamiprid and thiamethoxam were the most promising insecticides against whitefly (Muhammad et al., 2004). REFERENCES Anonymous (1992). Agricultural situation in India. May 1994. :110. Bellottini, S., Bellottini, N.M.T., Fontos, A.R. and Sanches, V. (1999). Efficiency of insecticides as sprays for the control of aphids Aphis gossypii Glover, on cotton. Anais 11 Congresso Brasileiro de Algodao: algodao no seculo XX, perspectivar para seculo XXI, Ribeirao Prete, SP, Brazil, 5-10 Setembro, pp.293-295. Bhosle, B.B., Agale, D.A. and Kadam, D.R. (2009). Bio-efficacy of different insecticides against thrips in Bt cotton. Pestol., 33(9): 26-28. Dhandapani, N., Dhivahar, P. and Palaniswamy, S. (2002). Evaluation of new molecules, clothianidin (Poncho 600 FS) and imidacloprid (Gaucho 600 FS) as seed treatment against sucking pests of cotton. In: Resource management in plant protection during Twenty first century, (B.S. Babu, K.S. Varaprasad, K. Anitha, eds.). Plant Prot., 2: 127-130. Dhawan, A.K. and Simwat, G.S. (2002). Field evaluation of thiamethoxam for control of jassid Ambrasca biguttula bigutula (Ishida) on upland cotton. Pestol., 26(1): 15-19. Kendappa, G.N., Mallikarjunappa, S., Shankar, G. and Mithyantha, M.S. (2002). Efficacy of newer insecticides against green peach aphid on tobacco. Rallis Research Center, 21 and 22, Phase II, Peenya industrial area Bangalore. Pestol., 26(9):13-14. Kumar, B.V., Kuttalam, S. and Chandrasekaran, S. (2009). Efficacy of a new insecticide Spirotetramat against cotton whitefly. Pestic. Res. J., 21(1): 45-48. Layton, M.B., Smith, H.R. and Andrews, G. (1996). Cotton aphid infestation inn Mississippi.Efficacy of selected insecticides and impact on yield. Proc. Beltwide conf., Nashiville 2(1): 892-893. 418

BIOEFFICACY OF NEWER NEONICOTENOIDSAGAINST SUCKING INSECT PESTS OF Bt COTTON Muhammad, A.K., Muhammad, N.S. and Muhammad, W.S. (2004). Incidence and development of thrips on field grown cotton. Internat. J. Agri. & Bio., 10(2): 232-234. Patil, S.B., Udideri, S.S., Naik, Krishna L., Rachappa, V., Nimbal, Farook and Guruprasad, G.S. (2007). DANTOP : A promising new molecule for the management of cotton sap feeding insects. Karnataka J. Agril. Sci., 20(1): 47-50. Raghuraman, M., Birth, Ajantha and Gupta, G.P. (2008). Bioefficacy of acetamiprid against sucking pests in cotton. Ind. J. Ento., 70(4): 319-325. Raghuraman, M. and Gupta, G.P. (2005). Field evaluation of neonicotinoids against whitefly Bemisia tabaci Gennadius in cotton. Ind. J. Ento., 67(1): 29-33. Rakesh, R.C. and Kathane, T.V. (1989). Cotton marketing federation and export of cotton in India (1980-81 to 1987-88). Cott. Dev., 18(3-4): 1-18. Rathod, S.H. (2003). Bioefficacy of acetamiprid 20 SP against sucking pest complex of cotton.m.sc (Ag.) Thesis Marathwada Agricultural University, Parbhani, M.S. (INDIA). 7 th Year of Excellence Rathod, K.S., Lavekar, R.C., Pande, A.K., Patange, N.R. and Sharma, O.P. (2002). Efficacy of imidacloprid against sucking pests of cotton. Ann. Plant Prot. Sci., 11(2): 369-370. Saleem, M.A. and Khan, A.H. (2001). Toxicity of some insecticides against whitefly (Bemisia tabaci Genn.) on CIM 443 cotton. Pak. Ento., 23: 83-85. Vododaria, M.P., Patel, V.G., Patel, C.J., Patel, R.B. and Maisuria, I.M. (2001). Thiamethoxam (Cruiser) 70 WS : A new seed dresser against sucking pests of cotton. Pestol., 25(9): 13-19. Wang Qiang, Han LiJuan, Huang-Xianglin, Gu-Zhongyan, Qiao-Xiongwu, Zhu-Jiusheng, wang-q, Han-LJ, Huang-XL, Gu-Z, Qiao-XW and Zhu-JS. (1995). Research on the effects of imidacloprid in cotton aphids control and its phytotoxicity. China Cott., 22(4): 17-18. Wells, L., McPherson, R.M., Ruberson, T.R., Herzog, G.A., Dugger, P. and Richter, D. (1998). Integrating biological control with selective insecticides for environmental sound management of cotton aphids. Proceedings Beltwide Cotton Conferences, San Diego, California (U.S.A.), 2: 1058-1061. 419