The PDF file you selected should load here if your Web browser has a PDF reader plug-in installed (for example, a recent version of Adobe Acrobat Reader).

If you would like more information about how to print, save, and work with PDFs, Highwire Press provides a helpful Frequently Asked Questions about PDFs.

Alternatively, you can download the PDF file directly to your computer, from where it can be opened using a PDF reader. To download the PDF, click the Download link above.

Fullscreen Fullscreen Off


Bio-intensive pest management practices were compared with farmer’s practices and untreated control in basmati rice at village Sahauli (Punjab). BIPM practices involved green manuring; seed treatment; alternate wetting and drying of the field; installation of pheromone traps and bird perches; augmentative releases of Trichogramma spp.; spray of Neem oil 1%. The farmer’s practices comprised the applications of chemical insecticides. The mean leaffolder damage was 3.12, 1.90 and 5.41 per cent in BIPM, farmer’s practice and untreated control, respectively. The dead heart incidence was 2.49 per cent in BIPM, 1.16 per cent in farmer’s practice and 4.30 per cent in untreated control. Similarly, the mean incidence of white earheads was 3.31, 1.78 and 5.06 per cent in BIPM, farmer’s practice and untreated control, respectively. Highest grain yield was recorded in farmer’s practice fields (30.63 q/ha) followed by yield in BIPM fields (28.07 q/ha). These yields were significantly better than untreated control (25.18 q/ha).The population of natural enemies was higher in BIPM fields as compared to farmer’s practiced fields.

Keywords

Basmati, Bio-Intensive Pest Management, Leaf Folder, Natural Enemies, Stem Borer.
User
Notifications