2013•Trends in Biosciences/Trends in biosciencesRequires access

Screening of Chickpea Genotypes for Resistant against Pod Borer, Helicoverpa armigera Hubn.

Jeewesh Kumar, DC Singh, Akhil Pratap Singh, Shilpi Verma

Open publisher page 4 citations

Abstract

Fifty genotypes of chickpea were screened against gram pod borer under field condition. Each genotype was sown in two rows of 2 m length in Augmented Design, Susceptible (H82-2) and resistant (C235) genotypes as checks were sown after every 10 genotypes. The populations of larvae of grampod borer were recorded on each test genotype at 50% pod filling stage. On the basis of pod damage throughpod borer were grouped in three categories (Tolerant, Moderate resistant, Susceptible). Nine genotypes registered as rating scale 1 were graded as tolerant because their pod damage (5.50–8.50 per cent) were moderate between resistant and susceptibleand these were DGP 15, GIG 0312, ICCL87315, ICCV7, RIL115, ICC29, ICC12470, ICCV 10 and PG23. Seven genotypes (DGP 15, GIG0312, ICCL87315, ICCV7, RIL115, ICC 29, ICC 12470,ICCV10 and PG23) had showed pod damage varies from 20.00–23.00 percent and rating scale 3 were placed under susceptible grade because they were at par with check susceptible (H82-2), remaining 34 genotypes had showed pod damage varies from 10.50–1900 percentrating stage scored 2, were placed under moderately resistant grade.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Fifty genotypes of chickpea were screened against gram pod borer under field condition. Each genotype was sown in two rows of 2 m length in Augmented Design, Susceptible (H82-2) and resistant (C235) genotypes as checks were sown after every 10 genotypes. The populations of larvae of grampod borer were recorded on each test genotype at 50% pod filling stage. On the basis of pod damage throughpod borer were grouped in three categories (Tolerant, Moderate resistant, Susceptible). Nine genotypes registered as rating scale 1 were graded as tolerant because their pod damage (5.50–8.50 per cent) were moderate between resistant and susceptibleand these were DGP 15, GIG 0312, ICCL87315, ICCV7, RIL115, ICC29, ICC12470, ICCV 10 and PG23. Seven genotypes (DGP 15, GIG0312, ICCL87315, ICCV7, RIL115, ICC 29, ICC 12470,ICCV10 and PG23) had showed pod damage varies from 20.00–23.00 percent and rating scale 3 were placed under susceptible grade because they were at par with check susceptible (H82-2), remaining 34 genotypes had showed pod damage varies from 10.50–1900 percentrating stage scored 2, were placed under moderately resistant grade.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 4 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Fifty genotypes of chickpea were screened against gram pod borer under field condition. Each genotype was sown in two rows of 2 m length in Augmented Design, Susceptible (H82-2) and resistant (C235) genotypes as checks were sown after every 10 genotypes. The populations of larvae of grampod borer were recorded on each test genotype at 50% pod filling stage. On the basis of pod damage throughpod borer were grouped in three categories (Tolerant, Moderate resistant, Susceptible). Nine genotypes registered as rating scale 1 were graded as tolerant because their pod damage (5.50–8.50 per cent) were moderate between resistant and susceptibleand these were DGP 15, GIG 0312, ICCL87315, ICCV7, RIL115, ICC29, ICC12470, ICCV 10 and PG23. Seven genotypes (DGP 15, GIG0312, ICCL87315, ICCV7, RIL115, ICC 29, ICC 12470,ICCV10 and PG23) had showed pod damage varies from 20.00–23.00 percent and rating scale 3 were placed under susceptible grade because they were at par with check susceptible (H82-2), remaining 34 genotypes had showed pod damage varies from 10.50–1900 percentrating stage scored 2, were placed under moderately resistant grade.

Key concepts: Point of delivery, Helicoverpa armigera, Biology, Genotype, Veterinary medicine, Forensic science, Gram, Horticulture

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Screening of Chickpea Genotypes for Resistant against Pod Borer, Helicoverpa armigera Hubn. — Research Paper | ScholarLens