Field screening of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) genotypes against gram pod borer (Heliothis armigera Hub.) under late sown conditions
Brijesh Singh, Renu Yadav
Abstract
Brijesh Singh, Renu Yadav
Abstract
Seventy desi chickpea genotypes were subjected to field screening against Heliothis armigera Hub. under late sown conditions i.e., sown on or after 16th December. None of these genotypes showed complete resistance to the pest or could evade its infestation. On the basis of all the three parameters for evaluation i.e., relative pest pressure index, relative intensity of damage index and relative productivity index; chickpea genotypes, viz, DHG 84–11, ICC 29, DHG 86–38, DHG 88–20, SG 90–55, KBG1, IH 83–83, NP 37, DHG 87–54, GNG 669 and SG 89–11 were identified as either more pest tolerant or as good as common cultivars, viz., P 240, P 256, C 235 and BR 77, belonging to phenologically four different groups. The remaining genotypes proved inferior to their checks.
OpenAlex reports 5 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Seventy desi chickpea genotypes were subjected to field screening against Heliothis armigera Hub. under late sown conditions i.e., sown on or after 16th December. None of these genotypes showed complete resistance to the pest or could evade its infestation. On the basis of all the three parameters for evaluation i.e., relative pest pressure index, relative intensity of damage index and relative productivity index; chickpea genotypes, viz, DHG 84–11, ICC 29, DHG 86–38, DHG 88–20, SG 90–55, KBG1, IH 83–83, NP 37, DHG 87–54, GNG 669 and SG 89–11 were identified as either more pest tolerant or as good as common cultivars, viz., P 240, P 256, C 235 and BR 77, belonging to phenologically four different groups. The remaining genotypes proved inferior to their checks.
Key concepts: Infestation, PEST analysis, Gram, Veterinary medicine, Forensic science, Point of delivery, Cultivar, Biology