p~bi(g?c,'1 Hof/4 /' A!evJ J"JN~ .p. A If tJ.

Year;
aO/O

44
Evaluation of Organic Pest Managernent Techniques Against Tea Mosquito Bug in Cashew
D.
SUlJdarrl.r~tl,

P. Shivarama Bhat and T.N. Ravipras;lJ

INTRODUCTION

Mirid bugs belonging to genus He/opeltis calied ka mosquito bugs (TMB) are the most s-:rious foliage and fruit pests of cashew in India. Under west coast condition, three spl:cies or He/ope/lis (H. antonii Sign. H. theivora Watl:rh and H. bradyi Waterh.) infest cashew, whcrc:lS in other regions, only one species (H. antonii) exists on cashew. However, in all regions, Il. anlonii is the dominant species causing severe damage. Its feeding injury leads to necrosis which is attributed as one of the causes of infection and manifestation of blossom blight and Jieback diseases due to various funga! pathogens resulting in maximum yield loss. On cashew. its build up commences during October-November synchronising with the emergencl' of new flushes, after cessation of the monsoon. The population reaches a peak during.J anuary, when the trees are in full bloom. The pest prevails predominantly in the plantation till May and subsequently exists in negligible number during monsoon period (June-September) especially in older plantations (Sundararaju' and Sundararbabu, 1999a). Under severe out-break situation, only insecticidal application rescues the cashew crop from ravage ofTMB. As the major cashew importing countries (USA and EU) have already imposeJ restrictions on cashew kernels having pesticidal residues, research on non-chemical pesticides techniques viz., host plant resistance. botanical pesticides and biological control were done at National Research Centre for Cashew (NRCC) since 1987. The information available at NRCC on above a~pects was compiled and presented in this paper. Host Plant Resistance A total of 76 cashew accessions consisting of released varieties, promising accessions

Evaluation of Organic Pest Management

Techniques Against Tea Mosquito Bug in Cashew

349

and tolerant accessions located in TMB hot spot area (endemic area), germplasm and progeny evaluation trial were screened during 1988-92 under laboratory through cage screening technique in order to confIrm genetic basis of resistance. The results revealed that all accessions were susceptible (Sundararaju and John, 1993 andSundararaju, 1999). Subsequently, 392 cashew accessions available in the National Cashew Field Gene Bank (NCFGB) were also screened for resistance to TMB and no resistance could be detected. Bhaskara variety, a promising selection was collected from severe TMB infested hot spot area of Goa state as a tolerant type to TMB. In order to confIrm its tolerance to TMB under field condition, thirty cashew grafts were planted in a plot with a spacing of 6 x 6m during 1989 and the whole plot was maintained without any insecticidal application. In each year, the overall TMB damage of each tree was also assessed qualitatively as; very low (<10%), low (10-25%), moderate (26-50%) and severe (>50%). Tree-wise-yield data was collected from J 992-93-200 1-02 cropping season (Le., from 2nd to 11th harvest). The damage ofTMB was in the range of very low to severe in the initial years (upto six years of age) and subsequently fluctuated between very low to moderate and moderate to severe). The varied level of TMB damage during different years was mainly due to clumpingl patchy distrihution of TMB. Since, Bhaskara variety has the mid-season flowering habit, clear cut delay of one to two months in buildup of population was seen over early flowering varieties especially in older plantations and thus, it has got potential to escape from TMB attack as a phenomenon of pseudo resistance when compared to early varieties (Sundararaju, 2005).
Table 44.1. Yield and TMB (tea mosquito damage) in various ages 01Bhaskara cashew variety under unprotected condition Year (Planted during 1989) Range of TMB damage Per tree Mean' 2'<1harvest, 199293 3'" harvest, 199394 4m harvest, 199495 5m harvest, 199596 6m harvest, 1996-97 7'" harvest, 199798 8111 harvest, 199899
9'" harvest, 1999-00

Yield in kg Per ha" Range 0.0-4.6(3) 0.0-4.1(4) 0.5-7.1 1.9-5.9 3.211.5 3.1-13.3 2.4-6.4 5.3-17.2 2.1-12.9 5.0-19.0 306 222 1223 1001 2002 1724 1195 2613 1835 2975
:,

Very low - Severe Very low - Severe Very low - Severe Very low - Moderate Very low - Moderate Very low - Moderate Moderate - Severe Very low - Moderate Moderate - Severe Very low - Moderate

1.1 0.8 4.4 3.6 7.2 6.2 4.3 9.4 6.6 10.7

10m harvest, 2000-01 11m harvest, 200102

Mean 0121 trees; "Planted in a spacing 016 x 6m. Figures in brackets indicate no. 01trees with complete loss in yield due to severe TMB attack.

350

Organic Horticulture - Principles, Practices and Technologies

From the yield data of sixth to eleventh harvest, it was found that whenever the TMB damage was low to moderate, the yield level was not affected drastically when compared to damage level of moderate to severe. Further, this variety has also yielded more than 1 tlha from fourth harvest onwards and the highest yield of 2.975 tlha (l0.7 kg/tree) was obtain~d during 11th harvest (Table 44.1) (Sundararaju et al., 2006). Evaluatio of Plant Products (botanicals) A number of plant products viz., Nee,n oil, Cotton seed oil, Butea jmndosa L. leaf . extract (LE), Adathoda vasic L., LE, Pongo'nia llil suspension (OS), POllgamia OS i" lime solution, Pongamia solvent extr:.tct (inn- hL'xanc), Calophyllum oil, Vitex IICgIllU.'f)L.. LE, Thc\Qria 11 'riljo/ia Juss. LE, SlIychllou;, l1'U. \' JlniCQ L., LE and fruit extract, to!'acco decoction, Annona seed extract (commercial formulation from Mis Godrej Ltd.), PaIn rosa oil (RAZE""), Neem Commercial formulations ( 'imbicidine, RD-9 Repllin, Godn.:jAcliook, Limanool,). Dillapiole extract, Garlic extract (CB+) and Phalada III C lexlracts of Seeds of Saphora japonica Qnd Annona relieulata L. + leaf extracts of AdatllOda I'Osica, Sap' 'ldus trifoli(lllls L. and Pongamia pinnata (L.)) were e\aluated at different concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 1).0% (Table 44.2) against TMB during 1992 -2006 and nonc were found to be effective (NRCC, 2002; Raviprasad et al., 2002; Sundararaju, 2004a; Bhat and RaviprJsad, 2007). Even' smoking of the canopy in the carly morning with dried leavc:-;of cashew or V.negundo neither caused any mortality ofTMB nor reduced its damage on cashew (NRCC, 2(00). Though neem contains repellent and insecticidal properties due to secondary metabolites (Iimonoids/tetratriterpenoids). T B causes severe damage on neem and overcomes those phytochemicals through its salivary mechanism. It is possible as it-; salivary gbnds secrete various detoxifying salivary enzymes (catechol oxidase. peroxidase and catalase) and free amino acids (Sundararaju and Sundarababu, 1996 and 1999b). Because of this phennmenon. all the plant products tc~ted :.tgainst TMB were found to be ineffective.
Table 44.2. Lis of plant products (botanicals) evaluated against tea mosquito bug at National Research Centre for Cashew, Pultur. 51.No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Name of plant products evaluated Neem oil Colton seed oil Butea frondosa L. leaf extract Adathoda vasica Nees. leaf extract Pongamia oil suspension Pongamla oil suspension in lime solution Pongamia oil suspension in lime solu1ion Pongamia solvent extract (in n hexane) 6. Calophyllum oil Concentration tested (%)/ dosai!!: 5.0 5.0

5.0
5.0 5.0 & 6.0 2.0 4.0
5.0

5.0 (Gontd.)

Evaluation of Organic Pest Management Techniques Against Tea Mosquito Bug in Cashew

351

51.No. 7. 8. 9. HJ. 11.

12. 1'3.

Name of plant products evaluated Vitex negundo L.leaf extract Thevatia neriifolia Juss. leaf extract Strychnous nux vomica L.leaf extract S. nux vomica Fruit extract
Tobacco decoction

Concentration tested (%)/ dosage

5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 100g/31itre water 5.0 0.5

Annona seed extract (commercial formulatio:l from M!s Godrej Ltd.)

Palmrosa oil (RAZEe) I\'eem Commercial formulations

t ,imbicidine
RD9 Repllin Godrej Achook Llmanool 1j. 15. 16. Dillapiole extract Garlic extract (GB+) Phalada III C [extracts of Seeds of Saphora japonica and Annona reticulata

1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4

0.1

L + leaf extracts of Adathoda vasica, Sapindus trifoliatus L. and Pongamia pinnata (L.)] .
17. Fumigation of V. negundo / cashew leaves under cashew canopy 30 minutes twice! week

Biological Control This pest was found to be regulated under natural condition mainly through its egg p~lrasitojds (Telenomus sp., VJens sp. and Chaetostricl1a sp.). Among them Telenomus sp. and '['(ens sp. are dorrunant in west coast of India and coastal Tamil Nadu with highest n~ltura] parasitism upto 70.8 and 47.4'tc, re:;pectively. These parasitoids are specialist type and not amenable for mass multiplication under conventional laboratory rearing methods (Sund;lraraju and Sundarababu, 1999.1 and 1999c). Therefore, they could not be exploited under inundative release methods. However, their activities are naturally enhanced under favourable weather condition (increased minimum temperature and relative humidity) during vulnerable period (November-February) (Sundararaju, 2003). During the outbreak ofTMB, among the cashew trees which had nests and intensive activities of Oecophylla smaragdinG Fabr., the infestation ofTMB was in the range of low to moderate; whereas remaint~g trees had severe TMB infestation. But under natural condition, O. smaragdinG did not establish on majority of cashew trees in spite of cashew plantation heing never sprayed with insecticides or in cashew plantation having prolonged withdrawal of insecticide application. "':hen the impact of various arthropod predators on incidence of TMB was studied under unsprayed situations, the results indicated that among total arthropod predatory population, spiders accounted maximum upto two third of total population and appeared to be the domin:mt predators in cashew ecosystem. Therefore. their role in reducing the TMB dan1agc was critically analysed. Actually. the mean spider population varied from 22-3 I spiders pe:r 10J (ashew panicles and in spite of this, out break of TMB had occurred. No significant Tclationship between TMB damage and spiders was observed (Sundararaju, 2004b).

352

Organic Horticuiture - Principles,

Practices and Techn%gies

Sex Pheromone Behaviour The informatiOI1col leeted in cashew plantation clearly indicated that the male population ofTMB can be detected within 15 minutes and highest population of 18 males 'were collected on single bait cage containing virgin females. In the entire trapping period of 90 minutes 132 males were collected (Sundararaju and Sund:trababu, 1999d). Thus it provide~ substantial scope in future for exploiting this sex pheromone behaviour for mass trapping in the plantations of organic cashew.
CONCLUSION

Even though re"earch on organic pest management techniques (non-chemical pesticides techniques) viz., hdst plant resistance, botanical pesticides and biological control were done at Nat ion~dRcsear'-.:hCentre for Cashew. Puttur, KlJrnat:,ka for the management of tea mosquito bug on ca~he\" since 1987, under host plant re~istance only, some lead could be obtained. 'Bhaskar.!' ca 'hcw variety appeared to be a pmmising escape (pseudo resistant) variety and high vicldin-!. and it can be popularised in fmme organic farming propositions.

_________________

References

Bhat, P.S. and Raviprasad. T.N 2007. Managemenlt of tea mosquito bug on cas'1ew Helopeltis antoniiSign. with newer insecticides/product . Exte Jded Abstract. pp.80-81. National Seminar on Research, Development and Marketing of Cashew. ICAR Research Complex, Goa, India. NRCC (National Research Cent;~ for Cashew.), 2000. Annual report for 1999-2000, Puttur, Karnataka, 70p. NRCC (National Research Centre for Cashew.), 2002. Annual report for 2001-Q2, Puttur, Kamataka, pp. 40-42.. - . Raviprasad, TN, Sundararaju. O. and Bhat. P.S. 2002. Efficacy of botanicals against He/opeltis antonii Sign., (Miridae: . Hemiptera) infesting casheJ. In: Plantation Crops Researcr and Developmen~ in the New Millennium (Eds. Rethinam,' P., Khan, H.H, Reddy, V.M, Mandai, P.K. and Suresh, K.) pp.485-488. Coconut Development Board, Kochi,lndia. Sundararaju, D. 1999. Screening of cashew accessions to tea mosquito bug Helopeltis antonii Sign. (Heteroptera: Miridae). The Cashew, 13(4):20'26. . ' Sundararaju, D. 2003. Behaviour of egg parasitoids of Helopeltis anto/;iiSign. (Heteroptera: Miridae) in relation to weather parameters. Journal of Pe,,1 Management in Horticultural Ecosystem 9:113-116. Sundararaju, D. 200~a. Evalualj~'n of certain insecticides against tea mosquito bug 011 cashew. The Cashew 18(2):22-26. Sundararaju, D. 2004b. In::uenct; of spiders and insect predators on incidence 0: ted mosquito bug in cashew. The Cashew .. 18 (1):9-13. . '. Sundararaju, D. 2005. Season,,1 abundance of tea mosq:.Jito bug and ex:ent of damage on cashew. J. Plantn Crops 33:53-58. . 'da ) Sundararaju, D. and John. N.J. 1993. Susceptibility of cashew accessions to He/opeltis antonii Sign. (Heteroptera: Min e in the pre-flowering phase. J. Plantn Crops, 21 :5053. . Sundararaju, D. and Sundara Babu, P.C. 1996. Neem pest not a mystery. Nature, 381:108. . . tatio~ Sundararaju, D. and Sundara Babu. P.C. 1999a. Helopeltis spp. (Heteroptera : Miridae) and their management In plan and horticultural crops of India. J. P/antn. Crops. 27:155-174. . -Si n.. '. Sundararaju, D. and Sundara Babu, P.C. 1999b. Morphology and contents of salivary glands of He/opeltls antontl 9 hi '. (Heteroptera : Miridae). J. En/. Res. 23:41-46. . 'an/OM' . ., Sundararaju, D. and Sundara Babu, P.C. 1999c. Survey and tritrophic interactions between host plants, He/opeltiS '. Sign. (Heteroptera: Mindae) and its egg parasitoids. J. BioI. Control, 13:1923. .... virgin Sundararaju, D. and Sundara Babu, P.C. 1999d. Trapping male tea mosquito bug Helopeltis antonll Sign. uSing. '. females. Pest Management in Horticultural Ecosystem. 5:102106. . . erformanCe: Sundararaju, D Yadukumar. N., 8hat. P.S., Raviprasad. T.N., Venkatakumar, R. and Sreenath Dixit. 2006. Yieldp . of 'Bllaskara' cashew variety in coastal Karnataka. J. Plantn Crops, 34:216-219. ;~ ~