Advances in Bioresearch Advances in Bioresearch Adv. Biores., Vol 11 (1) January 2020: 77-80 ©2020 Society of Education, India Print ISSN 0976-4585; Online ISSN 2277-1573 Journal’s URL:http://www.soeagra.com/abr.html CODEN: ABRDC3 DOI: 10.15515/abr.0976-4585.11.1.7780 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Ecofriendly Management of Brown Plant Hopper (BPH), Nilaparvata lugens Stal in Paddy (On Farm Trails) N.K singh1, *Wajid Hasan2 andSanjeev Kumar3 Kendra, Nalanda, B.A.U, Sabour, Bhagalpur, Bihar 2 KrishiVigyan Kendra, Jahanabad, B.A.U, Sabour, Bhagalpur, Bihar *Email: entowajid@gmail.com 1&3KrishiVigyan ABSTRACT The study was carried out to manage the Brown plant hopper (BPH) Nilaparvata lugens with the treatment of Profenophos@1ml/lit with the treatments of Azadiractin 1500 ppm @3-4 ml/lit, cartap hydrochloride 50%wp@2gm/lit and azadiractin 1500 ppm@1ml+cow urine 50ml/lit+vermiwash 20ml/lit of water was done on the appearance of insect at the field of 8 farmers of Nalanda district of Bihar. Results revealed that the hopper incidence was lower in the field which was treated with azadiractin 1500ppm + cow urine + vermi wash (2.74) followed by cartap hydrochloride 50 % wp (7.55/hill) and higher in farmer practice (14/hill) as well as yield also higher from the field was treated with azadiractin 1500ppm+cow urine+vermi wash (42.37 q/ha) followed by cartap hydrochloride 50% wp (35.51q/ha) and lowest in farmer practices (22.33q/ha). The cost benefit ratio (BC ratio) was higher in the field treated with azadiractin 1500 ppm+cowurine+vermiwash (1:2.60) followed by cartap hydrochloride 50% wp (1:2.30) and lowest in farmer practices (1:1.3). Key words: Nilaparvata lugens, paddy and biopesticides. Received 02.01.2020 Revised 10.01.2020 Accepted 27.01.2020 How to cite this article: N.K Singh, W Hasan and S Kumar. Ecofriendly Management of Brown Plant Hopper (BPH), Nilaparvata lugens Stal in Paddy (On Farm Trails). Adv. Biores., Vol 11 [1] January 2020.77-80. INTRODUCTION The brown plant hopper (BPH), Nilaparvata lugens stal (Hemiptera: Delphacidae) is a major pest of rice (Oryza sativa L.) in India. It is a monophagous herbivore and affects the rice crop through direct feeding causing nutrient depletion in the plant. The causes more circle effects that leads to “Hopper burn” which is characterized by visible circle patch, wilting and browing of the affected crops. BPH is also an efficient vector for various rice viruses. Including ragged rice stunt and grassy stunt virus. These combines causes significant losses to rice crops, upto 60% yield losses in susceptible cultivars [3]. Insecticide indeed resurgence is thought to be a , important factor, causing Nilaparvata lugens to become a major pest of rice in the last decade. It is rather widely distributed in India. It damages the rice plant by directly feeding on it and by transmitting the grassy stunt disease [1]. There is an urgent need to enhance the productivity of irrigated paddy fields to increase the rice production that meets population growth. The focus of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of biopesticides in enhancing the paddy growth for yield improvement after controlling the pest and rice diseases. It is very difficult to control this pest due to its high fecundity and its long distance migratory behavior as well as adapting to resistant varieties rapidly [9,16]. In the presence of effective natural enemies and their production methods, control of BPH has became easier with the combination of biopesticides. It acts as a anti-feedent and repellent the insect and environmentally safe. Chemical pesticides developed the resurgence and resistant in the Brown plant hopper. Rice pests already developing resistance to even newly introduced agrochemicals leading to synthetic chemicals being registered at a slower rate than in the past. In the era of environment awareness, more emphasis is given to the natural insecticides, as they are biodegradable and less harmful to environment. Considering the economic importance of the pest and to reduce the poisonous effect of chemical insecticides to natural ABR Vol 11 [1] January 20202 77 | P a g e ©2020 Society of Education, India Singh et al enemies, Azadiractin, vermiwash and cow urine were tried for its efficacy against the brown plant hopper (BPH). This situation has helped to reopen the market for a new generation of biopesticides. With fast paced changes in development of effective delivery systems and possibility of identifying newer potential biomolecules. Resistance has affected many of the major classes of insecticides including organophosphate, carbamates, synthetic pyrethroid, neonicotionoids and phenylpyrazoles [4,7 and 8]. In this context, the present on farm trials was undertaken to manage the brown plant hopper (BPH), Nilaparvata lugens using Biopesticides at Nalanda district of Bihar. MATERIAL AND METHODS The present study was done among 8 different farmers field of Nalanda district of Bihar, during 2013-14 and 2014-15. The treatments of Azadiractin 1500 ppm@3-4ml/lit, cartap hydrochloride 50% wp@2gm/lit, Azadiractin 1500ppm@1ml + cow urine@50-60ml+vermiwash 20-30 ml/lit and profenophos 50EC@1ml/lit on the appearance of N. Lugens. The local varieties were transplanted. The randomized block design (RBD) was applied with 8 replication and 4 treatments. The nymph/adult population of brown plant hopper was observed one day before and 5 days after application of each technological option. To find out the economic impact of technological options on brown plant hoppers incidence and paddy yield, the cost benefit ratio were calculated. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Results revealed that the incidence of the brown plant hopper (BPH), Nilaparvata lugens was lower in the field sprayed by azadiractin 1500 ppm +cow urine+ vermi wash (2.74/hill) followed by cartap hydrochloride (7.55/hill) and higher at farmer practices (14.00/hill) as well as yield also higher in the field sprayed by azadiractin 1500ppm+cow Urine+vermi wash (41.40q/ha) which was followed by cartap hydrochloride 5% wp (35.80q/ha) and lowest in the farmer practices (21.00q/ha). The cost benefit ratio (BC ratio) was higher in the field sprayed by azadiractin 1500ppm+cow urine+ vermi wash (1:2.6) followed by cartap hydrochloride (1:2.3) and lowest in farmer practices (1:1.3). Whereas during cropping season 2014-15 the hopper incidence was lowest in the field sprayed by azadiractin 1500 ppm+cow urine +vermiwash (2.18/hill) followed by cartap hydrochloride 50% wp(8.01/hill) and higher at farmer practices (12.06/hill) as well as yield also higher from the field sprayed by azadiractin 1500ppm+cow urine+vermiwash (42.37q/ha) followed by cartap hydrochloride 50% wp (35.51q/ha) and lowest in farmer practices (22.33q/ha). The cost benefit ratio was higher in the field sprayed by azadiractin 1500ppm+cow urine+vermi wash (1:2.5) followed by cartap hydrochloride 5o% wp(1:2.1) and lowest in the farmer practices (1:1.2). Therefore, it was concluded that the azadiractin 1500ppm+cow urine+vermiwash and cartap hydrochloride can be recommended to manage the hopper incidence in paddy field. The alternative application of azadiractin 1500ppm+cow urine+ vermi wash and cartap hydrochloride maintained efficacy for longer duration, rapid effective and efficient controls on brown plant hopper in paddy and also delayed drug resistance of insects (17).Hasanet el., [5] revealed that the hopper incidence was lower in the field sprayed by fipronil (3.0 /hill) followed by Imidacloprid (3.06 /hill) and higher at farmer practices (28.71 /hill) as well as yield also higher from the field sprayed by fipronil (46.92 q/ha) followed by Imidacloprid (44.90 q/ha) and lowest in farmer practices (36.14 q/ha). The cost benefit ratio (BC Ratio) was higher in field sprayed by fipronil (1:2.49) followed by Imidacloprid (1:2.39) and lowest in farmer practices (1:2.00). Neem formulations as spray also adversely affected the survival of BPH through toxic effects. The oil based neem formulations were more effective in oviposition deterrency than solvent based neem formulations as sprays. The studies have revealed that constituents other than Azadirachtin also play a role in exercising toxic effect against BPH. Some neem formulations with high azadirachtin content like Neem Azal T/S have exhibited some systemic activity when given as a seedling root dip adversely affecting the growth and development of BPH and GLH nymphs when confined to treated plants [6]. Saikia and Parameswaran [12] also reported more than fifty per cent mortality of leaf folder larvae after direct exposure to neem azal –F 5% treatment. In deep water rice also, integrated treatments with neem components plus one or two synthetic chemical applications were found very effective in controlling the pest population build up as compared to chemical control [2].Increase in the effectiveness of neem products when combined with insecticides has also been reported (15). ABR Vol 11 [1] January 20202 78 | P a g e ©2020 Society of Education, India Singh et al Table 1. Effect of Biopesticides on population of the brown plant hopper (BPH), Nilaparvata lugens Treatments Hopper incidence (population/hill) 2013-14 DBS % 5DAS% Profenophos 50 EC@1ml/lit 54.4% Aza 1500ppm @3-4 ml/lit 53.0% Cartaphydrochaloride 50 SP @ 2gm/lit 53.7% Aza1500ppm @ 1ml+Cow Urine @50ml 49.0% +Vermiwash 25 ml/lit DBS= Day Before Spray, DAS= Days After Spray Treatments DBS% 45.08 53.12 53.47 46.21 2014-15 5DAS% 12.06 10.90 8.01 2.18 Table 2. Economic Impact during cropping season 2013-14 Profenophos 50 EC@1ml/lit Aza 1500ppm @3-4 ml/lit Cartaphydrochaloride 50 SP @ 2gm/lit Aza1500ppm @ 1ml+Cow Urine @50ml +Vermiwash 25 ml/lit Treatments 14.00% 10.22% 7.55% 2.74% Hopper incidence (Population/hill) AV yield 21.00 31.00 35.80 41.40 % increase 48% 70% 97% Cost of Cultivation 19000 16000 18000 18500 Gross Return 25200 37200 42960 49680 Table-3 Economic Impact during cropping season 2014-15 Profenophos 50 EC@1ml/lit Aza 1500ppm @3-4 ml/lit Cartaphydrochaloride 50 SP @ 2gm/lit Aza1500ppm @ 1ml+Cow Urine @50ml +Vermiwash 25 ml/lit AV yield 22.33 31.89 35.51 42.37 % increase 43% 59% 90% Cost of Cultivation 19500 16800 18500 18600 Gross Return 24563 35079 39061 466.7 Yield (q/ha) 201314 21.0 31.0 35.8 41.4 201415 22.33 31.89 35.51 42.37 Net Return Cost Benefit ratio 1.3 2.3 2.3 2.6 6200 21,200 24960 31180 Net Return 5063 18279 20561 28007 Cost Benefit ratio 1.2 2.0 2.1 2.5 CONCLUSION Insect pests are continuing to challenging rice production. The reduction in chemical pesticide use associated with ecofriendly control measures is increasing the abundance of some beneficial insects as well improving the natural control. It is concluded that the azadiractin 1500ppm+cow urine+vermiwash and cartap hydrochloride can be recommended to manage the hopper incidence in paddy field. REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Bottrell, D.G. and Schoenly, K.G. (2012) Resurrecting the ghost ofgreen revolutions past: The brown plant hopper as a recur-ringthreat to high-yielding rice production in Tropical Asia. Journalof Asia-pacific Entomology, 15 : 122–140. Chakraborti, S. (2003) Management of insect pests in deep water rice using ecofriendly approach. Journal of Applied Zoological Researches 14: 65-67. Cheng, J. (2009) Rice plant hopper problems and relevant causes inChina, in: K.L. Heong, B. Hardy (Eds.), Plant hoppers: NewThreats to the Sustainability of Intensive Rice ProductionSystems in Asia, Int. Rice Res. Inst, Los Baños, Philippines, pp.157–177. Hemingway, J., S. Karunaratne, M.F. Claridge (1999) Insecticideresistance spectrum and underlying resistance mechanisms intropical populations of the brown plant hopper (Nilaparvata lugens) collected from rice and the wild grass Leersia hexandra,Int. J. Pest Manage. 45: 215–223. Hasan, W., Singh, N.K., Rani,S. and Sohane, R.K. (2015)On Farm Trials for the Management of Brown Plant Hopper (BPH), Nilaparvata lugens Stal in Paddy. Advances in Life Sciences4(2): 63-65. Krishnaiah, N.V., Pasalu, I.C., Katti, G., KondalaRao, Y., Mahesh Kumar, K. and Lingaiah, T. (2000) Effect of neem formulations on resurgence of brown plant hopper, Nilaparvata lugens (Stal) under field conditions. Indian Journal of Plant Protection28: 143-147. Matsumura, M. and S. Sanada Morimura 2010. Recent status of insecticide resistance in Asian rice plant hoppers, Jpn Agric ResQ 44: 225–230. ABR Vol 11 [1] January 20202 79 | P a g e ©2020 Society of Education, India Singh et al 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Nagata, T., T. Kamimuro, Y.C. Wang, S.G. Han, N.M. Noor (2002)Recent status of insecticide resistance of longdistance migratingrice plant hoppers monitored in Japan, China and Malaysia, Journal of Asia Pacific Entomology. 5: 113–116. Pathak, P.K. and Heinrichs, E.A. (1982) Selection of biotype population 2 and 3 of Nilaparvata lugens by exposure to resistantrice varieties. Environmental Entomology, 11 : 85–90. Ramraju K, Sundrababu PC (1989) Effect of plant derivatives on brown planthopper (BPH) and white backed planthopper (WBPH) nymphs emergence in rice. Int rice Res. Newsl.14:30. Sahid AA, Nasir IA, Zafar AC, Sumrin A. Chaudhary B, Riazuddin S. (2003) The use of CAMB Biopesticides to control pests of rice (Oryza sativa). Asian JPI. Sci. 2: 1079-1082. Saikia, P. and Parameswaran, S. (2001) Contact toxicity of chemical and bio-pesticides against Cnaphalocrocisme dinalis Guenée and Trichogramma chilonis Ishii. Journal of Applied Zoological Researches12: 86-87. Saxena R.C, Justo ND, Rueda BP. (1987) Need seed bitters for management of plant hopper and leaf hopper pests of rice, In: Mid-Term Appraisal works on Botanical pest control in Rice Based cropping system PP 19. SenthilNatham S , Choi MY, RaikCh, seoHy, Kim JD, Kang SM. (2007). The toxic effects of Neem extract and azadiractin on the brown plant hopper, Nialparvatalugens (stal). Chemosphere67: 80-88. Sharma, P.K. and Kaul, B.K. (2003). Management of Dicladispa armigera (Linn.) on rice with combination of insecticide and ecofriendly neem formulations. Crop Research (Hisar) 25: 248-250. Su, J.Y., Wang, Z.W., Zhang, K., Tian, X.R., Yin, Y.Q., Zhao, X.Q.,Shen, A.D. and Gao, C.F. (2013) Status of insecticide resistanceof the white backed plant hopper, Sogatella furcifera (Hemiptera:Delphacidae). Florida Entomologist, 96 : 948–956. Zhong,P.S., Ou Wen Min; Zhong,Z.F. (2010) Control efficiency offive pesticides for brown plant hopper in rice field. GuangxiAgricultural Sciences 41(9): 925-927. Copyright: © 2020 Society of Education. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. ABR Vol 11 [1] January 20202 80 | P a g e ©2020 Society of Education, India