1
LENTIL
Directorate of Plant
Protection, Quarantine and
Storage
N. H. IV,- Faridabad, Haryana
National Institute of Plant
Health Management
Rajendranagar, Hyderabad,
Telangana
Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare
Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare
Government of India
AESA BASED IPM PACKAGE
http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=CNqoTe…
2
The AESA based IPM – Lentil was compiled by the NIPHM working group under the
Chairmanship of Smt. V. Usha Rani, IAS, Director General, NIPHM, and guidance of Shri.
Utpal Kumar Singh, IAS, JS (PP). The package was developed taking into account the
advice of experts listed below on various occasions before finalization.
NIPHM Working Group:
Chairman : Smt. V. Usha Rani, IAS, Director General
Vice-Chairmen : Dr. S. N. Sushil, Plant Protection Advisor
: Dr. K. Vijaya lakshmi, Director (PHM)
Core Members :
1. Er. G. Shankar, Joint Director (PHE), Pesticide Application Techniques Expertise.
2. Dr. O. P. Sharma, Joint Director (A & AM), Agronomy Expertise.
3. Dr. Satish Kumar Sain, Assistant Director (PHM), Pathology Expertise.
4. Dr. Dhana Raj Boina, Assistant Director (PHM), Entomology Expertise.
5. Dr. S. Jesu Rajan, Assistant Scientific Officer (PHM), Entomology Expertise.
Contributions by DPPQ&S Experts:
1. Dr. M. Saleem, Assistant Director, Plant Pathology
2. Dr. D.K. Nagaraju, Assistant Director, Entomology
3. Dr. Gnansambandhan, Assistant Director (Weed Science)
Contributions by External Experts:
1. Dr. M. P. Thakur, Director of Extension Services,Indira Gandhi Krishi Vidyapeeth,
Raipur. (C.G.)
2. Dr. R. Swaminathan, Professor & Head, Department of Entomology, Rajasthan
College of Agriculture, Maharan Pratap University of Agriculture and Technology,
Udaipur, Rajasthan
3. Dr. S. L. Godara, Professor (Plant Pathology) Zonal Director Research, Agricultural
Research Station, Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agricultural University, Beechwal,
Bikaner.
4. Dr. R.S. Gill, Professor and Head, Department of Entomology, Punjab Agricultural
university, Ludhiana, Punjab.
5. Dr. G.N. Hazarika, Director of Research, Assam Agricultural University, Assam.
6. Dr. A.P. Bhagat, Chairman, Department of Plant Pathology, Bihar Agriculture
University, Sabour, Bihar.
7. Dr. S.N. Ray,Chairman, Department of Entomology, Bihar Agriculture University,
Sabour, Bihar.
8. Dr.Shoumidra B. Das, Principal Scientist (Ent.) Department of Entomology College of
Agriculture Jawaharlal Nehru Agricultural University Adhartal, Krishinagar, Jabalpur -
482
For internal circulation only. Not for sale.
3
CONTENTS
Lentil - Plant description
I. Pests
A. Pests of National Significance
1. Insect pests
2. Diseases
3. Weeds
4. Nematode
II. Agro-ecosystem analysis (AESA) based integrated pest management (IPM)
A. AESA
B. Field scouting
C. Surveillance through pheromone trap catches for fruit boring caterpillar
D. Blue pan water/sticky traps
E. Light traps
F. Nematode extraction
III. Ecological engineering for pest management
IV. Crop stage-wise IPM
V. Insecticide resistance and its management
VI. Common weeds
VII. Description of insect pests
VIII. Description of diseases
IX. Safety measures
A) At the time of harvest
B) Post harvest storage
X. Do’s and Don’ts in IPM
XI. Basic precautions in pesticides usage
XII. Pesticide application techniques
XIII. Operational, calibration and maintenance guidelines in brief
XIV. References
4
AESA BASED IPM PACKAGE FOR LENTIL
Lentil plant description:
Lentil (Lens culinaris), is a legume crop that belongs to Leguminosae
family.Theseeds are lens-shaped, rich in protein and is one of the most ancient crops. The
seeds are used chiefly in soups and the herbage as fodder. Lentils are a good source of
vitamin B, iron, and phosphorus. The plant varies from 15 to 45 cm (6 to 18 inches) in height
and has many long, ascending branches.. The pods are about 15–20 mm long, broadly
oblong, slightly inflated and contain two seeds the shape of a doubly convex lens and about
4–6 mm in diameter. There are many cultivated varieties of the plant, differing in size,
hairiness, and colour of the leaves, flowers, and seeds. The seeds may be more or less
compressed in shape, and the colour may vary from grey to dark brown; they are also
sometimes mottled or speckled.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/335145/legume
5
I. PESTS
A. Pests of National Significance:
1. Insect pests
1.1. Cow pea aphid: Aphis craccivora Koch (Hemiptera: Aphididae)
1.2. Pea aphid: Acyrthosiphon pisum Haris (Hemiptera: Aphididae)
1.3. Leaf weevil: Sitona spp. (Coleoptera: Curculionidae)
1.4. Lygus bugs: Lygus spp. (Hemiptera: Miridae)
1.5. Cut worm: Agrotis ipsilon (Hufnagel) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)
1.6. Thrips: Thrips tabaci Lindeman (Thysanoptea: Thripidae)
1.7. Pod borers: Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)
1.8. Spiny pod borer: Etiella zinckenella (Treit.) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae)
1.9 Pulse beetles: Bruchus spp., Callosobruchus spp. (Coleoptera: Bruchidae)
2. Diseases
2.1. Root rot and seedling disease: Pythium ultimum Trow, Rhizoctonia solani Kühn
2.2. Fusarium wilt : Fusarium oxysporum (Schlecht)Snyder & Hansen (Hypocreales:
Nectriaceae)
2.3. Lentis rust: Uromyces fabae (Pers.) Schröt.
2.4. Ascochyta blight: Ascochyta lentis Jellis & Punith
2.5. Anthracnose: Colletotrichum truncatum (Schwein.) Andrus & Moore
2.6. Powdery mildew: Erysiphe pisi DC.,
2.7. Sclerotinia rot/collar rot: Sclerotinia rolfsii Sacc.
2.8. Pea enation mosaic virus
2.9. Bean yellow mosaic virus
2.10. Pea seed borne mosaic virus (PSBMV).
3. Weeds
Broadleaf weeds
3.1. Field bind weed: Convolvulus arvensis L. (Convolvulaceae)
3.2. Lambs quarter: Chenopodium album L. (Chenopodiaceae)
3.3. Sweet clover: Melilotus indica (L.) All. (Fabaceae)
3.4. Scarlet pimpernel: Anagalis arvensis (Primulaceae)
3.5. Onion weed: Asphodelus tenuifolius Cav. (Liliaceae)
3.6. Carrot grass: Parthenium hysterophorus L. (Asteraceae)
3.7. Benghal dayflower: Commelina benghalensis L. (Commelinaceae)
Grasses
3.8. Wild oat: Avena ludoviciana (L.) Nees. (Poaceae)
3.9. Canary grass: Phalaris minor Retz. (Poaceae)
Sedges
3.10. Purple nutsedge: Cyperus rotundus L. (Cyperaceae)
3.11. Yellow nutsedge: Cyperus esculentus L. (Cyperaceae)
Parasitic weed
3.12. Dodder: Cuscuta spp.(Convolvulaceae)
3.13. Broomrape: Orobanche spp. (Orobanchaceae)
4. Nematode
4.1 Cyst nematode: Heterodera ciceri (Tylenchida: Heteroderidae)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diederich_Franz_Leonhard_von_Schlechtendal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocreales
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nectriaceae
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commelinaceae
http://cropgenebank.sgrp.cgiar.org/index.php/management-mainmenu-434/st…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orobanchaceae
6
II. AGRO-ECOSYSTEM ANALYSIS (AESA) BASED INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT
(IPM)
A. AESA
The IPM has been evolving over the decades to address the deleterious impacts of synthetic
chemical pesticides on environment ultimately affecting the interests of the farmers. The
economic threshold level (ETL) was the basis for several decades but in modern IPM (FAO
2002) emphasis is given to AESA where farmers take decisions based on larger range of
field observations. The health of a plant is determined by its environment which includes
physical factors (i.e. soil, rain, sunshine hours, wind etc.) and biological factors (i.e. pests,
diseases and weeds). All these factors can play a role in the balance which exists between
herbivore insects and their natural enemies. Understanding the intricate interactions in an
ecosystem can play a critical role in pest management.
Decision making in pest management requires a thorough analysis of the agro-
ecosystem. Farmer has to learn how to observe the crop, how to analyze the field situation
and how to make proper decisions for their crop management. This process is called the
AESA. Participants of AESA will have to make a drawing on a large piece of white paper (60
x 80 cm), to include all their observations. The advantage of using a drawing is that it
requires the participants/farmers to observe closely and intensively. It is a focal point for the
analysis and for the discussions that follow, and the drawing can be kept as a record.
AESA is an approach, which can be gainfully employed by extension functionaries
and farmers to analyze the field situations with regards to pests, defenders, soil conditions,
plant health and the influence of climatic factors and their relationship for growing a healthy
crop. The basic components of AESA are:
Plant health at different stages
Built-in compensation abilities of plants
Pest and defender population dynamics
Soil conditions
Climatic factors
Farmers past experience
Principles of AESA based IPM:
Grow a healthy crop
Select a variety resistant/tolerant to major pests
Select healthy seeds/seedlings/planting material
Treat the seeds/seedlings/planting material with recommended pesticides especially
biopesticides
Follow proper spacing
Soil health improvement (mulching and green manuring wherever applicable)
Nutrient management especially organic manures and biofertilizers based on the soil
test results. If the dosage of nitrogenous fertilizers is too high the crop becomes too
succulent and therefore susceptible to insects and diseases. If the dosage is too low,
the crop growth is retarded. So, the farmers should apply an adequate amount for
best results. The phosphatic fertilizers should not be applied each and every season
7
as the residual phosphate of the previous season will be available for the current
season also.
Proper irrigation
Crop rotation
Observe the field regularly (climatic factors, soil and biotic factors)
Farmers should
Observe the soil physical condition, moisture level, etc.
Take representative soil sample and get the soil analysis report showing soil pH,
electrical conductivity (EC), organic matter and nutrient status.
Observe the number and species of weeds found in per square meter area each in
five randomly selected spots/ha
Monitor the field situation of the orchrad at least once a week (soil, water, plants,
pests, natural enemies, weather factors etc.)
Make decisions based on the field situation and P: D ratio
Take direct action when needed (e.g. collect egg masses, remove infested plants
etc.)
http://www.centrestateexports.com.au/services/lentils.aspx
Plant compensation ability
Compensation can be defined as the replacement of plant biomass lost to herbivores and
has been associated with increased photosynthetic rates and mobilization of stored
resources from source organs to sinks (e.g., from roots and remaining leaves to new leaves)
during active vegetative growth period. Plant tolerance to herbivory can arise from the
interaction of a variety of plant traits and external environmental factors. Several studies
have documented such compensation through increased growth and photosynthetic rate.
8
Understand and conserve defenders
Know defenders/natural enemies to understand their role through regular
observations of the agro-ecosystem
Avoid the use of chemical pesticides especially with broad-spectrum activity
Insect zoo
In field various types of insects are present. Some are beneficial and some may be harmful.
Generally farmers are not aware about it. Predators (friends of the farmers) which feed on
pests are not easy to observe in crop field. Insect zoo concept can be helpful to enhance
farmers‟ skill to identify beneficial and harmful insects. In this method, unfamiliar/unknown
predators are collected in plastic containers with brush from the field and brought to a place
for study. Each predator is placed inside a plastic bottle together with parts of the plant and
some known insect pests. Insects in the bottle are observed for certain time and determined
whether the test insect is a pest (feeds on plant) or a predator (feeds on other insects).
Pest: Defender ratio (P: D ratio):
Identifying the number of pests and beneficial insects helps the farmers to make appropriate
pest management decisions. Sweep net, visual counts etc. can be adopted to arrive at the
numbers of pests and defenders. The P: D ratio can vary depending on the feeding potential
of natural enemy as well as the type of pest. The natural enemies of Lentil pests can be
divided into 3 categories 1. parasitoids; 2. predators; and 3. pathogens.
Model Agro-Ecosystem Analysis Chart
Date:
Village:
Farmer:
9
Decision taken based on the analysis of field situation
Soil condition :
Weather condition :
Diseases types and severity :
Weeds types and intensity :
Rodent damage (if any) :
No. of insect pests :
No. of natural enemies :
P: D ratio :
The general rule to be adopted for management decisions relying on the P: D ratio is
2: 1. However, some of the parasitoids and predators will be able to control more than 2
pests. Wherever specific P: D ratios are not found, it is safer to adopt the 2: 1, as P: D ratio.
Whenever the P: D ratio is found to be favourable, there is no need for adoption of other
management strategies. In cases where the P: D ratio is found to be unfavourable, the
farmers can be advised to resort to inundative release of parasitoids/predators depending
upon the type of pest. In addition to inundative release of parasitoids and predators, the
usage of microbial biopesticides and biochemical biopesticides such as insect growth
regulators, botanicals etc. can be relied upon before resorting to synthetic chemical
pesticides.
Decision making
Farmers become experts in crop management
Farmers have to make timely decisions about the management of their crops. AESA farmers
have learned to make these decisions based on observations and analysis viz. abiotic and
biotic factors of the crop ecosystem. The past experience of the farmers should also be
considered for decision making. However, as field conditions continue to change and new
technologies become available, farmers need to continue improving their skills and
knowledge.
Farmers are capable of improving farming practices by experimentation
Farmers can share their knowledge with other farmers
AESA methodology
Visit field in groups (about 5 farmers per group). Walk across the field diagonally and
observe 20 plants randomly. Observe keenly each of these plants and record your
observations:
Plant: Observe the plant height, number of branches, crop stage, deficiency
symptoms etc.
Pests: Observe and count insect pests from different parts of the plant.
Defenders (natural enemies): Observe and count parasitoids and predators.
Diseases: Observe leaves and stems and identify any visible disease
symptoms and severity.
Rats:. Look for live burrows and observe damage caused.
Weeds: Observe the growth and intensity of weeds.
Weather: Observe the weather condition.
10
While walking in the field, manually collect insects in plastic bags. Use a sweep net to
collect additional insects. Collect plant parts with disease symptoms.
Find a shady place to sit as a group in a small circle for drawing and discussion.
If needed, kill the insects with some chloroform (if available) on a piece of cotton.
Each group will first identify the pests, defenders and diseases collected.
Each group will then analyze the field situation in detail and present their
observations
and analysis in a drawing (the AESA drawing).
Each drawing will show a plant representing the field situation. The weather
conditions, water level, disease symptoms, etc. will be shown in the drawing. Pest
insects will be drawn on one side. Defenders (beneficial insects) will be drawn on
another side. Write the number next to each insect. Indicate the plant part where the
pests and defenders were found. Try to show the interaction between pests and
defenders.
Each group will discuss the situation and make a crop management
recommendation.
The small groups then join each other and a member of each group will now present
their analysis in front of all participants.
The facilitator will facilitate the discussion by asking guiding questions and makes
sure that all participants (also shy or illiterate persons) are actively involved in this
process.
Formulate a common conclusion. The whole group should support the decision on
what field management is required in the AESA plot.
Make sure that the required activities (based on the decision) will be carried out.
Keep the drawing for comparison purpose in the following weeks.
Data recording
Farmers should record data in a notebook and drawing on a chart.
Maintain records to
analyse and draw conclusions.
Data to be recorded:
Plant growth (weekly): Height of plant, number of brances, etc.,
Crop situation (e.g. for AESA): Plant health; insect pests, diseases, weeds;
natural enemies; soil condition; irrigation; weather conditions.
Input costs: Seeds; fertilizer; pesticides; labour;
Harvest: yield (Kg/acre); price of produce (Rs./Kg)
Some questions that can be used during the discussion
Summarize the present situation of the field.
What crop management aspect is most important at this moment?
Is there a big change in crop situation compared to last visit? What kind of change?
Is there any serious pest or disease outbreak?
What is the situation of the beneficial insects?
Is there a balance in the field between pests and defenders?
Were you able to identify all pests and diseases?
Do you think the crop is healthy?
What management practices are needed at this moment?
When will it be done? Who will do it? Make sure that responsibilities for all activities
are being discussed.
11
Are you expecting any problems to emerge during the coming week such as
congenial weather conditions for pest buildup?
What are the problems? How can we avoid it? How can we be prepared?
Summarize the actions to be taken.
Advantages of AESA over ETL:
One of the problems of the ETL is that it is based on parameters that are changing all the
time, and that are often not known. The damage or losses caused by a certain density of
insects cannot be predicted at all. In ETL the due recognition of the role of natural enemies in
decreasing pest population is ignored. Farmers cannot base their decisions on just a simple
count of pests. They will have to consider many other aspects of the crop (crop ecology,
growth stage, natural enemies, weather condition, etc.) and their own economic and social
situation before they can make the right crop management decisions. In ETL based IPM,
natural enemies, plant compensation ability and abiotic factors are not considered. In AESA
based IPM emphasis is given to natural enemies, plant compensation ability, abiotic factors
and P: D ratio.
AESA and farmer field school (FFS):
AESA is a season-long trai