Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T04:17:28.487Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Assessment of Napier millet (Pennisetum purpureum×P. glaucum) and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) trap crops for the management of Chilo partellus on maize

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

N.S. Hari*
Affiliation:
Maize Entomology Laboratory, Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India141 004
J. Jindal
Affiliation:
Maize Entomology Laboratory, Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India141 004
*
*Author for correspondence Fax: 91-0161-2409891 E-mail: nirmalhari1978@yahoo.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two Napier millet (Pennisetum purpureum×P. glaucum) hybrids, namely PBN 83 and PBN 233 and one sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) variety, SL 44, were assessed for their potential role as a trap crop in the management of the stem borer, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) on maize. Oviposition preference and larval survival and development were determined for different test plants under laboratory and screen house conditions. Further, field dispersal of C. partellus larvae was assessed between Napier millet and maize crops. Results from no-choice and dual-choice tests indicated that Napier millet hybrids were preferred for oviposition over maize by C. partellus moths. Sorghum was, however, not preferred over maize in this respect. Napier millet hybrids were poor larval hosts, and a rapid decline in larval numbers was noticed within the first five days after hatching and virtually no larvae survived to pupation. Leaf area eaten by the borer larvae was significantly less on these hybrids than on maize or sorghum. Plant damage was more severe in maize and sorghum than Napier millet hybrids. No appreciable larval shift was noticed from Napier millet hybrids to the adjoining maize crop. The evaluated Napier millet hybrids, therefore, had potential for use as trap crop in C. partellus management. Sorghum, however, did not hold promise in this respect.

Information

Type
Research Paper
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Table 1. Ovipositional response of Chilo partellus to different host plants under no-choice test.

Figure 1

Table 2. Ovipositional preference of Chilo partellus to maize cultivar (PMH 1) and other test host plants in dual-choice tests.

Figure 2

Table 3. Comparison of settling preference of Chilo partellus neonates on leaf cuts of maize and other host plants in dual-choice tests.

Figure 3

Table 4. Leaf area consumed by Chilo partellus larvae on different host plants.

Figure 4

Fig. 1. Larval survival (%) of Chilo partellus on Napier millet and maize at different times following egg hatching under laboratory conditions (bars indicate ±SE) (–■–, Maize; –•–, PBN 83;, PBN 233).

Figure 5

Fig. 2. Average larval weight (mg)±SE of Chilo partellus larvae on Napier millet and maize ten days after egg hatching. Bars marked with different letters are significantly different (LSD test; p=0.05).

Figure 6

Fig. 3. Average (±SE) larval recovery of Chilo partellus on different host plants after 20 days of infestation. Bars marked with different letters are significantly different (LSD test; p=0.05).

Figure 7

Table 5. Recovery of Chilo partellus larvae from Napier millet hybrids and maize one day after infestation.