Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T04:08:29.913Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Host plant resistance to stalk-borer, Chilo partellus Swin., in sorghum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2011

B. U. Singh
Affiliation:
All India Coordinated Sorghum Improvement Project, IARI-Regional Station, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500 030 (AP), India
B. S. Rana
Affiliation:
All India Coordinated Sorghum Improvement Project, IARI-Regional Station, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500 030 (AP), India
B. B. Reddy
Affiliation:
All India Coordinated Sorghum Improvement Project, IARI-Regional Station, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500 030 (AP), India
N. G. P. Rao
Affiliation:
All India Coordinated Sorghum Improvement Project, IARI-Regional Station, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500 030 (AP), India
Get access

Abstract

Seventy cultivare of sorghum representing recently released varieties, hybrids, experimental varieties, lines bred for stalk-borer resistance and local resistant stocks were tested for stalk-borer resistance under artificial infestation during monsoon (July–October) season. There were significant differences among varieties for leaf-feeding injury, per cent ‘dead hearts’, number of holes and tunnels and per cent tunnelling. Released hybrids and local varieties were susceptible for different parameters. Thirteen varieties viz., SPV Nos. 35, 103, 107, 110, 135, 140, 192, 229, E 302, E 304, P 37, R 133 and CSV-8R were at par with resistant varieties for per cent tunnelling per plant. Long peduncle varieties were relatively susceptible.

Leaf-feeding injury, per cent ‘dead hearts’ and tunnelling parameters were not significantly correlated and independent of each and none of them could be related to grain yield. Number of holes, number of tunnels and per cent tunnelling were positively correlated. Thus, number of holes per plant or internode may be a good indicator of per cent tunnelling and can conveniently be used as a criterion for evaluating germplasm to stalk-borer (Chilo partellus Swin.) resistance. The varieties CSV-8R, SPV-35, SPV-103, SPV-140 and SPV-192 were identified as promising sources of resistance to stalk-borer.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Jotwani, M. G., Chaudhury, S., Singh, S. P. and Young, W. R. (1971) Studies on resistance in sorghum against stem borer, Chilo partellus. In Investigations on Insect Pests of Sorghum and Millets (1965–1970) (Ed. Pradhan, S.). Final Technical Report, Division of Entomology, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Dehli, pp. 113118.Google Scholar
Rana, B. S. and Murty, B. R. (1971) A genetic analysis of resistance to stem borer (Chilo zonellus) in sorghum. Indian J. Genet. 31, 521529.Google Scholar
Rao, N. G. P. and Rana, B. S. (1981) Selection in temperate x tropical crosses in sorghum. In Sorghum in the 80's, pp. 403419. International Symposium held at ICRISAT, Hyderabad on 2–9 November, 1981.Google Scholar
Singh, S. P., Jotwani, M. G. and Rana, B. S. (1980) Development and stability of sorghum varieties resistant to stem borer, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe). Indian J. Ent. 42, 473–81.Google Scholar
Singh, S. R., Veda Moorthy, G., Thobbi, V. V., Jotwani, M. G., Young, W. R., Balan, J. S., Srivastava, K. P., Sandhu, G. S. and Krishnananda, N. (1968) Resistance to stem borer, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) and stem fly, Atherigona varia soccata Rond. in World Sorghum Collection in India. Memoir of Ent. Soc. India (Spl. Issue) 7, 179.Google Scholar
Starks, K. J. and Doggett, H. (1970) Resistance to a spotted stem borer in sorghum and maize. J. econ. Ent. 63, 17901795.Google Scholar
Trehan, K. N. and Butani, D. K. (1949) Notes on the life-history, bionomics and control of Chilo zonellus (Swinhoe) in Bombay Province. Indian J. Ent. 11, 4759.Google Scholar