Journal

Journal of Applied Horticulture, 15(2): 150-155, 2013 Appl

Population dynamics and development of suitable pest

management module against major insect pests of tomato
(Solanum lycopersicum)

S.M. Chavan*, Sushil Kumar and S.S. Arve

Department of Entomology, N.M. College of Agriculture, Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari-396 450, Gujarat,
India. *E-mail: sachinento@gmail.com

Abstract
Investigation on the population dynamics and evaluation of pest management modules against major insect pests of tomato were carried
out at Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari, south Gujarat in rabi, 2007-08. Results revealed that aphid and whitefly population
commenced from transplanting with 1.35 aphids leaf-1 and 0.37 whiteflies leaf-1, reached to peak level (7.31 aphids leaf-1and 6.01
whiteflies leaf-1) at 11 WAT. Peak level of percent infested leaves by leaf miner was 31.75 % at 10th WAT. The higher population of
Helicoverpa on foliage (2.80-3.40 plant-1) was noticed during third week of January to end of February (10-16 WAT). The population
of mirid bug, which acts as a potential predator of sucking pests reached peak (1.90-2.05 plant-1) when population of aphid and
whitefly reached maximum. Correlation studies between insect pest population/damage and weather parameters showed that there
was significant negative correlation of aphid (r=-0.491) and whitefly (r=-0.449) with maximum temperature and negative significant
correlation with minimum temperature (r=-0.645, r=-0.599). Further, the wind velocity showed significantly positive correlation with
aphid (r=0.574) and whitefly (r=0.534) population. The wind velocity gave positive and significant correlation with the population of
mirid bug as natural enemies. The IPM module was found most promising in reducing the population of aphids (2.1 leaf-1), whitefly
(2.4 leaf-1), Helicoverpa larva (1.0 plant-1) on foliage. Besides, it reduced leaf infestation by leaf miner (17.8 %) and fruit infestation
by Helicoverpa (15.4 %) and increased yield (36445 kg ha-1). The sole insecticidal module was equally effective as IPM module in
recording low population of aphids (2.2 leaf-1), whitefly (2.5 leaf-1), Helicoverpa (1.1 plant-1), leaf infestation (18.3 %), fruits infestation
(16.3 %) and also increased fruit yield (34684 kg ha-1). The biological module and botanical module ranked third and fourth in efficacy
with respect to pest control. Besides pest management, population of mirid bugs (0.8 plant-1) as natural enemy was also conserved in
IPM module. The net ICBR obtained in IPM module was 1:9.45 which was comparable to the insecticidal module (1:15.92).
Key words: Aphid, Chrysoperla, Helicoverpa, IPM, leaf miner, mirid bug, population dynamics, tomato, Trichogramma,whitefly

Introduction Establishment of the relationships between the populations of a

given insect pest, time of its appearance and duration for which
Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) is grown in India over an area
it is likely to cause damage to the crop at a vital growth stage and
of 6.34 lakh ha with a total production of 12433.2 thousand
the consequent loss in yield by the pest are of vital importance
MT and total productivity of 19.6 MT ha-1 (Kumar, 2010). In
India, about 16 pests reportedly feed on tomato, commencing for working out the economic threshold. Before developing
from germination to harvesting stage which reduce its yield and insect pest management programme for specific agro ecosystem,
also spoil quality (Butani, 1977). The farmers therefore follow it is necessary to have basic information on abundance and
plant protection schedule based on plant growth and time of distribution of pest in relation to weather parameters, as it helps
pest appearance. The important insect pests identified on tomato in determining appropriate time of action and suitable effective
in Gujarat and also other parts of the country are aphid (Aphis method of control.
gossypii Glover and Myzus persicae Sulzer), jassid (Amrasca
Against major insect pests of tomato, Trichogrammatids, NPV,
biguttula biguttula Ishida), whitefly (Bemisia tabaci Genn.),
leaf miner (Liriomyza trifoli Burgess), fruit borer (Helicoverpa one row of marigold after 16 rows of tomato, azadirachtin,
armigera Hubner), tobacco leaf eating caterpillar (Spodoptara NSKE, endosulfan, cypermethrin+ profenophos, profenofos and
litura Fab.), mealy bug (Ferrisia virgata Cockerell) (Reddy and indoxacarb have been found effective (Parminder Kumar et al.,
Kumar 2004; Jamadar, 2006). Amongst these, A. gossypii and M. 2004; Yadav et al., 2006; Singh et al., 2004; Senguttuvan et al.;
persicae caused significant reduction in yield ranging from 25 to 2005; Shivalingaswamy et al., 2008). But reports on integration of
80 % (Kishore and Parihar, 2002). all such components and their efficacy against target insect pests
It is recognized that the estimation of population is a basic of tomato are lacking. Keeping this in consideration, the present
necessity for measuring the intensity of a pest population, investigation was, therefore, undertaken to study population
determining the influence of natural enemies on the populations, dynamics in relation to weather parameters and to evaluate
assessing the crop losses, monitoring the appearance of the pest efficacy and economics of various pest management modules for
and making decisions on the methods of control to be used. management of major insect pests of tomato in south Gujarat.
 Population dynamics and management of insect pests of tomato 151

Materials and methods recorded same as in case of population dynamic study throughout
the crop season on 5 randomly selected plants in each replication.
To study the population dynamics of major insect pests of tomato, Total ten pickings were carried out commencing from 90 days
a field experiment was conducted at College Farm, N.M. College after transplanting and at every picking, damaged and healthy
of Agriculture, Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari during marketable fruits obtained from all the plants of each treatment
rabi season of 2007-08. A variety, Gujarat Tomato-2 (GT-2) plot were separated and percent damaged fruits was worked
was grown in 400 m2. The experimental area was kept free from out.
insecticidal spray throughout the crop season in order to record
the incidence of insect pests. To study incidence of major insect Results and discussion
pests on tomato, 30 plants were selected randomly and weekly
observations were recorded throughout the crop season. In case Population dynamics of major insect pests of tomato and
of aphid, number of nymphs and adults, while in case of whitefly, natural enemy: In the present investigation, A. gossypii
number of adults were recorded during early morning on selected population commenced from 1st week after transplanting (WAT)
plant. For recording leaf miner infestation, pernectage of damaged i.e. second week of November with 1.35 aphids leaf-1. Further, the
leaves was worked out. In case of vegetative stage of the tomato mean population indicated that the activity of this pest increased
crop, population of fruit borer was counted from selected plants, steadily and reached peak level of 7.31 aphids leaf-1 at 11th WAT
whereas during fruiting stage, perncetage of damaged fruits were coinciding with third week of January, then aphid population
worked out. Besides insect pests population, the population of gradually decreased. Low aphid population was noticed from
mirid bug plant-1 as natural enemy were also recorded. In order last week of February to last week of March (5.43-2.83 leaf-1)
to study the influence of weather parameters viz., maximum coinciding with 16-20 WAT (Table 1). Hath and Das (2004)
temperature, minimum temperature, average temperature, found low population of aphid from third week of February
maximum relative humidity, minimum relative humidity, average to the last week of March, whereas Reddy and Kumar (2004)
relative humidity, rainy days, sunshine hours, wind velocity and reported peak population of two aphid species (A. gossypii
rainfall on population of insect pest of tomato and there natural and M. persicae) during November and February on tomato
enemy, the simple correlation coefficient was worked out. Weekly at Bangalore, Karnataka. Reddy and Kumar (2004) recorded
meteorological data recorded at the meteorological observatory, highest white fly population during November and December. In
N.M. College of Agriculture, Navsari Agricultural University, the present investigation higher white fly population (5.28-6.01
Navsari were used for this purpose (Fig.1). leaf-1) was noticed during last week of December to third week
To assess feasibility of pest management module against of January (8-11 WAT) (Table 1). Thereafter, population steadily
major insect pests of tomato, the Integrated Pest Management declined, which indicates almost the same trend as reported by
(IPM) module (M5) was compared with four modules viz; Non- earlier workers.
Pesticidal Pest Management (NPM) module (M1), botanical pest The similar trend was noticed in case of leaf miner, Liriomyza
management module (M2), biological pest management module trifolii, Burgess infestation which commenced from transplanting
(M3), insecticide based pest management module (M4) and and continued up to end of the crop season. Peak level of percent
untreated control (C) (Table 3). The experiment was conducted infested leaves were 31.75 % at 10th WAT coinciding with second
in a randomized block design (RBD) with a plot size of 3.6 x 2.7 week of January, then it gradually decreased at the time of last
m with each treatment replicated four times. Tomato variety GT-2 harvesting (Table 1). Reports of Hath and Das (2004) and Reddy
was transplanted on 5 Nov, 2007. Five days after transplanting and Kumar (2004) indicated peak infestation of leaf miner (L.
of tomato seedlings, 40 days old seedlings of marigold were trifoli) during March to April and thereafter population declined.
also transplanted (marigold 2 rows per 5 rows of tomato) in non The slight different trend in the present investigation could be due
pesticidal and IPM based pest management modules. Weekly to different sowing periods as well as different agro-ecological
observations on insect pest population and their damage were conditions where the crop was raised.
The larval population of H. armigera, Hubner on foliage started
from 2nd WAT i.e. third week of November (0.25 larvae plant-1)
and gradually increased and reached the peak population level
(3.40 larvae plant-1) during 16 WAT i.e., second week of February
(Table 1). The data on percent infested fruits by Helicoverpa
revealed that at all pickings, the infestation was observed.
However, the highest percent infested fruits were observed during
eighth picking (28.96 %). The mirid bugs are important predators
of sucking pests of tomato. Their population in the form of adult
bugs appeared along with population of sucking pests. The peak
population of mirid bug (1.90-2.05 plant-1) was observed when
population of aphid and whitefly reached at maximum level.
Correlation of insect pest population/damage and mirid bug
with weather parameters: The data on different insect-pest
population/damage during 2007-08 were correlated with weather
Fig. 1. Weekly meteorological data during the investigation period. parameter and presented in Table 2. It was revealed from the
152 Population dynamics and management of insect pests of tomato

Table 1. Mean population of aphids, whitefly per leaf, Helicoverpa larvae Table 2. Correlation of insect pest population/damage of tomato in
per plant and per plant percent infested leaves by L. trifoli relation to weather parameters
WAT Date Mean population Infested Weather Parameters Aphid Whitefly Leaf Helicoverpa Mirid
Aphids Whitefly Helicoverpa Mirid leaves by miner bug
leaf-1 leaf-1 plant-1 bug leaf miner
Maximum Temp -0.491* -0.449* -0.013 -0.175 -0.152
(nymph+ plant-1 (mean %)
adults) Minimum Temp -0.645** -0.599** 0.136 -0.328 -0.333
1 12.11.07 1.35 0.37 0.00 0.05 14.67 Morning RH (%) 0.095 0.095 0.403 0.287 0.202
2 19.11.07 1.35 1.40 0.25 0.10 15.03 Evening RH (%) 0.140 0.144 0.279 0.281 0.238
3 26.11.07 1.66 1.96 0.25 0.05 13.56 Average RH (%) 0.128 0.130 0.382 0.315 0.243
4 03.12.07 3.19 3.53 0.35 0.25 24.96 Wind velocity (km/h) 0.574** 0.533* 0.274 0.429 0.451*
5 10.12.07 3.99 3.45 0.80 0.50 23.67 Sunshine hours 0.211 0.137 -0.421 0.378 0.372
Rainfall (mm) 0.199 0.277 -0.200 0.370 0.358
6 17.12.07 4.14 4.18 1.75 0.45 26.17
* Significant at P=0.05 (r = ± 0.443), ** Highly Significant at P=0.05 (r
7 24.12.07 5.18 4.96 1.90 0.60 27.22 = ± 0.561), RH=Relative humidity, Temp.= temperature
8 31.12.07 6.21 5.28 2.05 1.05 28.91 reduced population of mirid bug (0.6 plant-1) which played its
9 07.01.08 6.70 6.00 2.20 0.95 28.55
role as an effective natural enemy of aphid and whitefly. Next to
insecticidal module, botanical insecticide module in vegetative
10 14.01.08 7.20 5.75 2.80 1.35 31.75 phase also gave effective control of aphid (2.3 leaf-1) and whitefly
11 21.01.08 7.31 6.01 2.80 1.30 29.35 (1.6 leaf-1). The biological module was found moderately effective
in combating sucking pest population, whereas non-pesticidal
12 28.01.08 5.13 5.94 3.05 1.70 14.67
module did not exert any effective control of sucking pests.
13 04.02.08 6.51 5.05 3.15 1.95 15.03
The biological control through release of trichocards having
14 11.02.08 7.11 5.60 2.95 2.05 13.56 300 parasitized eggs in combination with Chrysoperla larvae
15 18.02.08 6.43 5.04 3.15 1.90 24.96 and neem extract played an important role in management of
Helicoverpa (Usman et al., 2012). Senguttuvan et al. (2005)
16 25.02.08 5.43 5.00 3.40 1.90 23.67
reported that NSKE were found effective against white fly.
17 03.03.08 3.94 4.55 2.90 1.75 26.17 Thus, in all the above reports, efficacy of bio-agents, neem and
18 10.03.08 3.58 3.69 3.15 1.45 27.22 their products have been successfully demonstrated. In present
investigation, the use of neem as a component of IPM module as
19 17.03.08 3.31 2.96 2.45 1.20 28.91 well as its sole use in botanical module has proved its significance
20 25.03.08 2.83 2.68 2.45 1.10 28.55 over remaining modules besides control. Sharma and Lal (2002)
indicated highest reduction of white fly, B. tabaci population
data that, there was significant negative correlation of aphid (94.8 %) when thiamethoxam was used. Similarly, Leeuwen
(r=-0.491) and whitefly (r=-0.449) with maximum temperature et al. (2005) found spinosad at 5 mg as most effective against
and negative significant correlation with minimum temperature the tomato whitefly. In the present experiment, thiamethoxam
(r=-0.645, r=-0.599, respectively). Further, the wind velocity and spinosad were incorporated as a component of chemical
showed significantly positive correlation with aphid (r=0.574) insecticidal module (M4), wherein the sucking pest population
and whitefly (r=0.534) population. The morning relative was significantly lower than any other module or treatment except
humidity, evening and average relative humidity showed positive M5, i.e. IPM module which in turn did not differ significantly with
correlation with the entire insect pest population/damage but chemical insecticidal module (M4).
found to be non-significant. Sunshine hours and rainfall also gave
positive correlation with insect pest population except percent
damaged leaves by leaf miner which was negatively correlated.
There was no any impact of abiotic factors on percent damaged
leaves by leaf miner and larval population of Helicoverpa. The
wind velocity gave positive and significant correlation with the
population of mirid bug as natural enemies. Sarangdevot et al.
(2010) reported that aphid population was significantly negatively
correlated with mean temperature and positively correlated with
relative humidity which supports the present investigation.
Efficacy of pest management modules against sucking insect-
pests of tomato: The IPM module played significant role in
controlling population of aphid (2.1 leaf-1), and whitefly (2.4 leaf-1).
Besides pest management, population of mirid bug (0.8 plant-1) as
natural enemy also flourished in IPM module (Fig. 2). Though, sole Fig. 2. Mean population of insect pest of tomato in diffrenet treatments/
application of insecticides was equally effective (2.20 aphids leaf-1 modules. LSD (P=0.05) valued for aphid, whitefly, Helicoverpa and Leaf
and 2.48 whitefly leaf-1) as compared to IPM module. It drastically miner, mirid bug are 0.06, 0.15, 0.05, 0.04, respectively.
 Population dynamics and management of insect pests of tomato 153

Table 3. Details of pest management modules used for the management of major insect pests of tomato
Module Components and practices of Concentration Time of application Source
respective modules used
M1 1. Trap crop (marigold 2 rows/5 rows of 25 days old seedlings of marigold and Hath and Das (2005);
tomato) 40 days old seedling of tomato were Sushil et al. (2006)
2. Collection and disposal of immature stages transplanted together
of Helicoverpa armigera Hubner At weekly intervals commencing from
and infested tomato fruits transplanting

M2 1. Neemazal (two applications). 5% One pre-flowering + one post-flowering

2. Ginger rhizome extract (two applications) 5% One pre-flowering + one post-flowering Singh et al. (2006)
3. Garlic bulb extract (one application) 5% One pre-flowering
M3 1. Release of Chrysoperla carnea larvae 10000 ha-1 Two pre-flowering Liu and Chen (2001)
(2 applications) Sharma et al. (1997)
2. Spraying of HaNPV @ (two applications) 250 LE ha-1 One pre-flowering + one post-flowering Parminder kumar et al.
3. Release of Trichogramma chilonis Ishii 160000 ha-1 One post-flowering (2004); Yadav et al. (2006)
adults
M4 1. Thiomethoxam 25 % WG (two applications) 0.005 % One pre-flowering + one post-flowering Sharma and Lal (2002)
2. Spinosad 45 % SC (one applications) 0.002 % One pre-flowering Leeuwen et al. (2005)
3. Indoxacarb 15 % SC (two applications) 0.01 % Two post-flowering Kuttalam et al. (2008); Singh
et al.(2005)
M5 1. Collection and disposal of immature At weekly intervals commencing from Praveen and Dhandapani
stages of H. armigera and infested fruits transplanting same as in treat. T1 (2003)
2. Marigold as trap crop
3. Release Chrysoperla larvae 10000 ha-1 One pre-flowering Liu and Chen (2001)
4. Spray NSKE 5% One pre-flowering + one post-flowering
5. Spray endosulfan 35 EC 0.07 % One pre-flowering Senguttuvan et al. (2005)
6. Release of Trichogramma chilonis adults 160000 ha-1 One post-flowering Yadav et al. (2006)
7. Spray profenofos 40 % + cypermethrin 4 % 0.044 % One post-flowering Thakor and Patel (2008)
44 EC
C Control Water spray -
M1 - Non-pesticidal pest management module; M2 - Botanical pest management module; M3 - Biological pest management module;
M4 - Insecticidal pest management module; M5 - Integrated pest management module; C- Untreated control
(Note: M-Module, LE- Larval Equivalent, HaNPV- Helicoverpa armigera Nuclear Polyhydrosis Virus, NSKE-Neem Seed Kernel Extract)
The component and package of practices selected in various Efficacy of pest management modules against tomato fruit
integrated pest management modules developed in India and borer, H. armigera: The overall order of effectiveness of various
abroad vary from area to area and region depending upon the treatment modules in reducing Helicoverpa larval population
requirement, however perusal of the available literature on white and fruit infestation was: M5 > M4 > M3 > M1 > M2 > Control
fly with respect to components of the current IPM package with (Fig. 3). IPM module consistently suppressed the Helicoverpa
that of earlier workers revealed a non-significant impact of population both during vegetative and reproductive stages of the
marigold as trap crop on white fly reduction (Bandyopadhyay crop and recorded minimum percent fruit infestation. Hussain and
et al., 2005). In the present investigation, when marigold was Bilal (2007) proved that growing of tomato with marigold (3:1)
exclusively used as trap crop in non-pesticidal module (M1), it had effectively manages population of H. armigera. From the results,
no impact on white fly population reduction resulting in highest it was also evident that application of 5 % NSKE, an essential
white fly population (3.14 leaf-1) which was found significantly component of botanical module as well as one of the components
higher than most effective IPM module (M5) (2.35) (Fig. 2). of IPM assisted in lowering larval population and fruit damage
by Helicoverpa. Devraj and Nandihalli (2002) showed that
Efficacy of pest management modules against tomato leaf 60 % NSKE recorded higher pupal mortality and lowest adult
miner, L. trifolii: Out of the five treatment modules, IPM module emergence of H. armigera. In the present investigation, though
was effective in reducing leaf infestation (17.8 %) followed by the botanical module was not very effective, but use of NSKE in
insecticidal module (18.3 %) and botanical module (18.4 %) IPM module assisted in the management of pest effectively. This
(Fig. 3). The practices in non-pesticidal module proved less is more or less in line with the earlier reports.
effective against leaf miner indicating as high as 19.12 per cent
leaf damage followed by 23.34 per cent leaf damage in biological Insecticidal module was effective for the control of H. armigera
pest management module (Fig. 3). Earlier workers have proved and was comparable with IPM module. These findings are in
Chlopyriphos + cypermethrin (0.05 %) was effective in agreement with Thakor and Patel (2008) who demonstrated
controlling L. trifoli (Galande, 2001). In the present study, instead effectiveness of spinosad 0.009 %, indoxacarb 0.014 % and
of chlopyriphos + cypermethrin, profenofos + cypermethrin was profenophos + cypermethrin (Polytrin-C) 0.066 % in killing eggs
of H. armigera.
used which supports the IPM module in recording comparatively
lower leaf miner infestation. The insecticides viz, spinosad and Economics of pest management modules against insect-pests
indoxacarb included in insecticide module reduced leaf infestation of tomato: As far as yield and economics is concerned, the IPM
by L. trifoli which was comparable with the IPM module. module recorded higher fruit yield (36445 kg ha-1) and net gain
154 Population dynamics and management of insect pests of tomato

Table 4. Yield and economics of different treatments / modules

Treatments Yield Increased Cost of** Gross* Net gain I.C.B.R. Net Rank
(modules) (kg ha-1) yield over Treatment realization over I.C.B.R.
control (Rs ha-1) over control control
(kg ha-1) (Rs ha-1) (Rs ha-1)
Non-pesticidal pest management module (M1) 23598c 2019 4500 14133 9633 1: 2.14 1: 1.14 5
Botanical pest management module (M2) 30350b 8771 5955 61397 55442 1: 9.31 1: 8.31 3
Biological pest management module (M3) 30813b 9234 7450 64638 57188 1: 7.68 1: 6.68 4
Insecticidal pest management module (M4) 34684a 13105 5120 91735 86615 1: 16.92 1: 15.92 1
Integrated pest management module (M5) 36445a 14866 9085 104062 94977 1: 10.45 1: 9.45 2
Untreated control 21579c - - - - - - 6
LSD (P=0.05) 3371.61
Treatment means followed by same alphabets are not significantly different.
Total cost of insecticides used including two labours per hectare for each spray @ Rs. 50 per day.
*Prevailing market price of tomato= Rs.7 /kg
**Thiamethoxam @ Rs. 4450/l, Spinosad @ Rs. 2000/l, Indoxacarb @ Rs. 3700/l, Endosulfan @ Rs. 350/l, Polytrin-C @ Rs 400/l, NSKE 5% @
Rs. 15/Kg, HaNPV@ Rs. 250/100LE, Neemazal @ Rs. 450/l, C. carnea@ Rs. 30/100 eggs card, Trichocards @ Rs. 25/card, Marigold @ Rs. 0.50/
seedling, Ginger @ Rs. 63/kg,Garlic @ Rs. 60/kg
Note: M- Module, I.C.B.R.-Incremental Cost Benefit Ratio,
(94977 Rs ha-1), followed by insecticidal module in terms of fruit > untreated control. The study revealed that, IPM was the most
yield (34684 kg ha-1) and net gain (86615 Rs. ha-1) (Table 4). The promising module (economical) for management of major insect-
IPM module recorded lower net ICBR (1:9.45) than insecticidal pests of tomato.
module (1:15.92). This was attributed to higher cost of treatments
involved in IPM. However, on the basis of overall ranking (based Acknowledgement
on various parameters), IPM module was best and most effective
The authors are thankful to Director of Research, Navsari
as it involved eco-friendly approach to control tomato insect-pest Agricultural University, Navsari, Gujarat, India for providing
which was evident from higher population of mirid bug as natural necessary facilities in conducting the present research work.
enemy, than insecticidal module. These findings are more or less
similar to results obtained by Praveen and Dhandapani (2003) References
wherein combined use of T. chilonis, C. carnea, B.t. and HaNPV
Bandyopadhyay, U.K., A.K. Debnath, M.V. Santhakumar and Urs S. Raje,
effectively controlled H. armigera coupled with increase in fruit 2005. Efficacy of marigold plants as trap crop on whitefly management
yield (23.29 t ha-1). in mulberry plantation. Insect Environment, 11(2): 76-77.
Looking to the relationship of abiotic factors on overall Butani, D.K. 1977. Insect pest of vegetables-tomato. Pesticides,11:
33-36.
population/damage of insect pest of tomato, it may be concluded
Devraj, K. and B.S. Nandihalli, 2002. Efficacy of neem seed kernel dusts
that aphid and whitefly population showed negative bearing on pupae of Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner). Insect Environment,
on its abundance. This implies that the increase in maximum 8(3): 107-108.
temperature decreases the aphid and whitefly population and Galande, S.M. 2001. Studies on bio-ecology and management of
vice-versa. The overall order of effectiveness of various treatment serpentine leaf miner Liriomyza trifoli (Burgess) on tomato and
modules in terms of efficacy and economics against management cucumber, Ph.D. (Agriculture) thesis, submitted to Rahuri Agril.
of insect-pest of tomato was IPM module > insecticidal module University, Maharashtra, India. 124 pp.
> biological module > botanical module > non-pesticidal module Hath, T.K. and B.R. Das, 2004. Incidence of insect pests in late planted
tomato under terai agro ecology of West Bengal. Env. Eco., 22(1):
136-140.
Hath, T.K. and B.R. Das, 2005. Introduction of trap crops for the
management of Helicoverpa armigera Hubner in late planted tomato
under terai agroecology of West Bengal. Res. Crops, 6(1): 145-147.
Hussain, B. and S. Bilal, 2007. Marigold as a trap crop against tomato fruit
borer (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Int. J. Agric. Res., 2(2): 185-188.
Jamadar, R.D. 2006. Population dynamics, varietal screening and
chemical control of pest complex of tomato and biology of fruit
borer, Helicoverpa armigera Hubner. M.Sc. (Agriculture) thesis,
submitted to Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari, Gujarat,
India, 2006. 47 pp.
Kishore, R. and S.B.S. Parihar, 2002. Aphids species infesting tomato
and brinjal crops. Insect Environment, 8(1): 8-9.
Kuttalam, S., B. Vinoth Kumar, N. Kumaran and N. Boomathi, 2008.
Evaluation of bio-efficacy of flubendiamide 480 SC against tomato
fruit borer, Helicoverpa armigera, Hubner. Pestology, 32(3): 13-
16.
Fig. 3. Per cent infested fruits and leaves by H. armigera and L.
trifoli in diffrenet treatments. LSD (P=0.05) value for infested fruits Leeuwen, T.V., M.V.D. Veire, W. Dermauw and L. Tirry, 2005. Systemic
by Helicoverpa and infested leaves by leaf miner are 1.23 and 7.59, toxicity of spinosad to greenhouse whitefly and Spodoptera littoralis.
respectively Phyptparasitica, 34(1): 102-108.
 Population dynamics and management of insect pests of tomato 155

Liu, X.T. and T.Y. Chen, 2001. Effect of three aphid species (Homoptera: Shivalingaswamy, T.M., Akhilesh Kumar, S. Satpathy and A.B. Rai,
Aphididae) on development, survival and predation of Chrysoperla 2008. Efficacy of indoxacarb against tomato fruit borer, Helicoverpa
carnea (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool., 30(3): armigera, Hubner. Pestology, 32(8): 39-41.
361-366. Singh, D., L. Roshan, R. Singh, and K.K. Dahiya, 2006. Effect of
Kumar, B. 2010. Indian Horticulture Database-2010. National methanol extract of ginger, Zingiber officinale (Rose) and fractions
Horticulture Board, Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India. Aristo on ovipositional behavior and hatchability of eggs of Helicoverpa
Printing Press, New Delhi. armigera Hubner. Pesticide Res. Journal, 18(1): 20-23.
Parminder Kumar, M. Shenhmar and K.S. Brar, 2004. Field evaluation of Singh, N., Ramkishore and S.B.S. Parihar, 2004. Preliminary efficacy
trichogrammatids for the control of Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) of botanicals against cotton aphid, Aphis gossypii Glover on cotton.
on tomato. J. Biol. Control, 18(1): 45-50. Insect Environment, 10(3): 136-137.
Praveen, P.M. and N. Dhandapani, 2003. Development of biocontrol Singh, S., D.P. Choudhary and Y.S. Mathur, 2005. Efficacy of some newer
based pest management module in tomato, Lycopersicon esculentum insecticides against fruit borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) on
(Mill.). In: Proc. of the Symposium of Biological Control of tomato. Indian J. of Ent., 67(4): 339-341.
Lepidopteran Pests, 17-18 July 2002, Bangalore, India. pp. 267- Sushil, S.N., M. Mohan, K.S. Hooda, J.C. Bhatt and H.S. Gupta, 2006.
270. Efficacy of safer management tools against major insect pest of
Reddy, N.A. and C.T. Kumar, 2004. Insect pests of tomato, Lycopersicon tomato and garden pea in northwest Himalayas. J. Biol. Control,
esculentum Mill. in Eastern dry zone of Karnataka. Insect 20(2): 113-118.
Environment, 10(1): 40-42. Thakor, S.B. and I.S. Patel, 2008. Ovicidal toxicity of chemical and
Sarangdevot, S.S., S. Kumar, P.S. Naruka and C.P. Pachauri, 2010. botanical insecticides on the eggs of Helicoverpa armigera (Hub.)
Population dynamics of Aphis gossypii Glover, Myzus persicae in laboratory. Insect Environment, 13(4): 183-184.
Sulzer and Amrasca biguttula bigutulla Ishida of tomato in relation Usman, M., M. Inayatullah and A. Usman, 2012. Effect of egg parasitoid,
to abiotic factors. Pestology, 34(3): 14-16. Trichogramma chilonis, in combination with Chrysoperla carnea and
Senguttuvan, K., S. Kuttalam, T. Manoharan and T. Srinivasan, 2005. Neem seed extract against tomato fruitworm, Helicoverpa armigera.
Bio-efficacy of Meliadubia Cav. and Neem products against major Sarhad J. Agric., 28(2): 253-257.
insect pests of tomato. Pestology, 29(1): 47-50. Yadav, D.N., R.C. Patel and D.S. Patel, 2006. Impact of innundative
Sharma, D.L. and O.P. Lal, 2002. Bio-efficacy of thiamethoxam in releases of Trichogramma chilonis Ishii against Heliothis armigera
comparison to recommended insecticides against leafhopper (Hbn.) in Gujarat (India). J. Ent. Res., 9(2): 153-159.
and whitefly of brinjal (Solanum melongena L.). Journal of
Entomological Research, 26(3): 257-262. Received: October, 2012; Revised: January, 2013; Accepted: March, 2013
Sharma, M.L., H.S. Rai and M.L. Verma, 1997. Biopesticides for
management of Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) on chickpea.
International Chickpea Newsletter, 4: 26-27.