Content uploaded by Sandip Patra
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Sandip Patra on Oct 03, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Res. on Crops
14
(3) : 757-761 (2013)
Printed in India
Evaluation of maize hybrids against stem borer
(Chilopartellus
Swinhoe) and cob borer
(Stenachroia elongella
Hampson) in
Meghalaya
of North-East
India
SANDIP PATRN, KANCHAN SAIKIA
AND
N. S. AZAD THAKUR
Division of Crop Improvement
ICARResearch Complex for North-Eastern HillRegion, Umiam-793 103 (Meghalaya), India
(Received : October 2012)
ABSTRACT
Studies were conducted at ICAR Research Complex for North-Eastern Hill
Region, Umiam, Meghalaya during
kharif
seasons of 2009 and 2010 to evaluate some
maize hybrids against stem borer
(Chilo partellus
Swinhoe) and cob borer
(Stenachroia
elongella
Hampson) under field conditions. Twelve varieties viz., HIM-129, Vivek Maize
Hybrid-5, Vivek Maize Hybrid-9, Vivek Maize Hybrid-IS, Vivek Maize Hybrid-21, Vivek
Maize Hybrid-23, Vivek Maize Hybrid-25, Vivek Maize Hybrid-33, FH-3356, Vivek QPM-9,
Vivek Sankul Makka-31 and RCM-l-1 were evaluated. Results revealed that Vivek Maize
Hybrid-IS recorded the lowest mean dead hearts (3.25%) followed by Vivek Maize Hybrid-
5(3.95%), HIM-129 (4.37%) and RCM 1-1 (5.72%), while highest mean dead hearts were
found in FH-3356 (9.94%). On the other hand, RCM-l-l was found least susceptible
variety to cob borer (4.11 %)followed by HIM-129 and Vivek Hybrid Maize-5 with 4.55 and
4.73% mean cob damage, respectively, whereas it was highest in Vivek Maize Hybrid-25
with 10.86% cob damage. Average grain yield recorded ranged from 2.87 to 5.09 t/ha in
different varieties. Among the varieties evaluated, Vivek Maize Hybrid-25, FH-3356, RCM-
1-1, Vivek Maize Hybrid-23, Vivek Maize Hybrid-21 and Vivek QPM-9were found promising
varieties with an average yield of 5.09,4.71,4.57,4.38,4.29 and 4.22 t/ha, respectively.
Key words:
Chilo partellus,
cob borer, hybrid maize, stem borer,
Stenachroia elongella,
varietal evaluation
INTRODUCTION
Maize is the second most important
cereal crop in Meghalaya next to rice covering
16,898
ha with
24,424
tonnes production and
only
1.445
t/ ha productivity (Anonymous,
2009).
It has been observed that maize
production in India has remained almost
stagnant with constant yield level despite rise
in acreage due to many factors. Among these,
biotic stress on maize is a major constraint to
achieve the attainable yield. Maize is infested
by about
139
species of insect-pests with
varying degree ofdamage; however, only about
a dozen are quite serious (Sarup
et al., 1987;
Siddiqui and Marwaha,
1993).
Ofthese, maize
stem borer
(Chilo partellus
Swinhoe) is a key
pest causing losses to grain yield, which vary
between
24.3
and
36.3%
in different agro-
climatic regions of India. Khan
et al. (1997)
reported that the yield losses caused by stem
borers to maize vary widely in different regions
and ranged from
25-40%
according to the pest
population density and phenological stage of
the crop at infestation. In Meghalaya, besides
stem borer
(Chilo partellus
Swinhoe), maize is
severely damaged by another dreaded pest
i. e. cob borer
(Stenachroia elongellaHampson)
causing cob damage to the tune of
68.75%
(Anonymous,
1997).
Cob borer damage can be
easily recognized by the presence of small
circular entry holes on the cob. Larvae feed on
grains inside the cob and make them unfit for
human consumption. As cob borer infestation
starts during silking stage and extends up to
maturity, therefore, it is difficult to manage
by frequent applications of persistent
insecticides for residue problem in grain.
Therefore, the main objective of this study was
to screen some maize hybrids for tolerance
against these pests with potential yield for this
region.
'Department of Agricultural Entomology, BCKV, Mohanpur-741 252 (W. B.), India.
758
Patra,
Saikia and Thakur
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The experiments were conducted at
Entomology Farm, ICARResearch Complex for
North-Eastern Hill Region, Umiam, Meghalaya,
India during 2009 and 2010 with 12 varieties
including 11 hybrids of maize and one
traditional variety (RCM 1-1) as check to
evaluate the relative resistance against stem
borer and cob borer. Varieties viz., HIM-129,
Vivek Maize Hybrid-5, Vivek Maize Hybrid-9,
Vivek Maize Hybrid-15, Vivek Maize Hybrid-
21, VivekMaizeHybrid-23, VivekMaizeHybrid-
25, Vivek Maize Hybrid-33, FH-3356, Vivek
QPM-9, Vivek Sankul Makka-31 and RCM-l-l
were sown in second week of April in
randomized block design (RBD) with three
replications in plot size of 3 x 2.5 m with row to
row and plant to plant spacing of55 and 25 cm,
respectively. Recommended management
practices except plant protection measures
were followed for raising the crop. Stem borer
data were recorded at 10 days intervals after
infestation was noticed in the field.
Observations were taken on the basis of
number ofinfested plants and number of dead
hearts from each plot and converted into per
cent infestation and per cent dead hearts. Cob
borer damage was recorded at harvest time by
counting number of damaged cob and total
number of cobs from each replication and
converted into per cent cob infestation. Grain
damage and number of cob borer larvae were
recorded from five infested cobs wherever
applicable from each replication. Yield was
recorded separately for each plot. Percentage
data were taken as angular transformed values
for analysis only and mean data of all
observations were presented in the tables.
Data were analysed using Duncan's Multiple
Range Test (DMRT)at 5% level of probability.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Stem Borer Infestation
Stem borer infestation (plant infested
and dead heart formed) data are presented in
Table 1. During first and second year, plant
infestation was found ranging from 13.33 to
Table 1.
Stem borer infestation on different maize hybrids during 2009 and 2010
Varieties Stem borer infestation (%) Yield (t/ha)
Plant infestation Dead heart 2009 2010 Mean
2009 2010 Mean 2009 2010 Mean
HlM-129 17.33,b 5.33' 11.33,be 8.06,be 0.67' 4.37,b 2.84·be 3.70' 3.27,b
(24.60) (13.35) (19.67) (16.49) (4.69) (12.07)
Vivek Hybrid Maize-5 13.33' 5.33' 9.33' 7.22ab 0.67' 3.95,b 1.94' 3.81a2.87'
(21.41) (13.35) (17.78) (15.59) (4.69) (11.46)
Vivek Hybrid Maize-9 18.67,b 3.33'
i
i.oo=
10.56bed 1.33' 5.95,be 2.76,be 5.04,b 3.90,bed
(25.60) (10.51) (19.37) (18.96) (6.62) (14.12)
Vivek Hybrid Maize-IS 18.67ab 0.67' 9.67' 5.83' 0.67' 3.25' 2.00' 5.13,b 3.56,be
(25.60) (4.69) (18.12) (13.97) (4.69) (13.97)
Vivek Maize Hybrid-21 27.33cd 5.33' 16.33cd 16.94e1.33' 9.14be 2.62abe 5.95,b 4.29bed
(31.52) (13.35) (23.83) (24.30) (6.62) (17.60)
Vivek Maize Hybrid-23 33.33d5.33' 19.33d16.3ge1.33' 8.86be 2.40' 6.35b4.38bed
(35.26) (13.35) (26.08) (23.88) (6.62) (17.32)
Vivek Maize Hybrid-25 23.33be 2.00' 12.67,be 11.39cd 0.67' 6.03,be 3.81
c
6.36b5.09d
(28.88) (8.13) (20.85) (19.72) (4.69) (14.21)
Vivek Maize Hybrid-33 19.33abe 2.00· lO.67,b 14.17de 1.33' 7.75,be 2.51 ab 5.32,b 3.92abed
'(26.08) (8.13) (19.06) (22.11) (6.62) (16.16)
FH-3356 32.67d2.67' 17.67cd 18.88e1.00' 9.94c
s.io=
6.3Jb 4.71 cd
(34.86) (9.40) (24.86) (25.75) (5.74) (18.38)
Vivek QPM-9 24.00be 2.00'
is.oo=
16.67e1.33a9.00be 3.18,be 5.25,b 4.22bed
(29.33) (8.13) (21.13) (24.10) (6.62) (17.46)
Vivek Sankul Makka-31 22.67be 2.00a 12.34,be 14.72de 2.00' 8.36bc
a.oz=
4.36ab 3.69,be
(28.43) (8.13) (20.56) (22.56) (8.13) (16.81)
ReM 1-1 20.67abe 2.67' l1.67abe 9.44be 2.00a 5.72,be 3.73be 5.40,b 4.S7bed
(27.04) (9.40) (19.97) (17.89) (8.13) (13.84)
Difference in mean values was determined by DMR test. Means sharing same superscript in a column are not
significantly different at S% level of significance.
Evaluation of maize hybrids against stem and cob borers
33.;33%and 0.67 to 5.33%, respectively. In first
year, plant infestation was found varying
significantly among the varieties, whereas in
second year there was no significant
difference. In first year, variety, Vivek Maize
Hybrid-5 showed minimum plant infestation
(13.33%) which was at par with all other
varieties except Vivek Sankul Makka-31
(22.67%),Vivek Maize Hybrid-25 (23.33%),
VivekQPM-9 (24.00%), Vivek Maize Hybrid-21
(27.33%), FH-3356 (32.67%) and Vivek Maize
Hybrid-23 (33.33%). Lowest mean plant
infestation was also found in Vivek Maize
Hybrid-5 (9.33%)which was closely at par with
Vivek Hybrid Maize-IS (9.67%) followed by
VivekMaize Hybrid-33 (10.67%), Vivek Hybrid
Maize-9 (11.00%), HIM-129 (11.33%), RCM 1-1
(11.67%), Vivek Sankul Makka-31 (12.34%),
Vivek Maize Hybrid-25 (12.67%) and Vivek
QPM-9(13.00%). Higher plant infestation was
found in Vivek Maize Hybrid-21(16.33%), FH-
3356 (17.67%) and Vivek Maize Hybrid-23
(19.33%).
Regarding dead hearts (OH),there was
significant variation among the varieties
during first year, whereas in second year,
there was no statistical difference in dead
heart formation. During first year, highest dead
hearts were observed in FH-3356 (18.88%)
which were at par with Vivek Maize Hybrid-21
(16.94%), Vivek QPM-9 (16.67%) and Vivek
MaizeHybrid-23 (16.39%)and also did not differ
significantly from Vivek Sankul Makka-31
(14.72%) and Vivek Maize Hybrid-33 (14.17%).
Vivek Hybrid Maize-IS showed lowest dead
hearts (5.83%) and these were significantly
different from all other varieties except Vivek
MaizeHybrid-5 (7.22%) and HIM-129 (8.06%).
Further, VivekHybrid Maize-IS maintained its
superiority with least mean dead hearts
(3.25%) and significantly different from FH-
3356 which recorded highest dead hearts
(9.94%). Other varieties were at par with little
difference in dead heart formation. Present
findings are in close conformity with those of
Khan and Amjad (2000) who reported 7.71 to
10.34% dead hearts on different maize
varieties. These results are also partially in
agreement with the results ofAhad
et. al. (2008)
who reported that mean infestation (dead
heart+leafinfestation) ranged from 0 to 23.16%
during
kharif
season.
759
Cob Borer Infestation
Cob borer infestation is presented in
Table 2 for both the years. Results revealed
that cob borer infestation was present on all
the varieties with significant variation in both
the years. Cob damage ranged from 4.13 to
9.71 % and 4.09 to 14.40% for first and second
year, respectively. During first year, lowest cob
damage was observed in RCM 1-1,HIM-129and
Vivek Hybrid Maize-5 with 4.13, 4.37 and
4.63% damage, respectively, and these
varieties did not differ statistically from Vivek
Sankul Makka-31 (5.30%), Vivek Hybrid
Maize-9 (6.00%),Vivek Maize Hybrid-33
(6.34%), Vivek QPM-9 (6.81%) and Vivek Maize
Hybrid-21 (6.92%). Next highest cob damage
was found in Vivek Maize Hybrid-23 (8.19%)
followed by Vivek Maize Hybrid-IS (9.38%),
Vivek Maize Hybrid-25 (9.54%) and FH-3356
(9.71 %). In second year, some varieties
maintained similar trend with minimum cob
damage in RCM 1-1 (4.09%), HIM-129 (4.46%),
Vivek Sankul Makka-31 (5.03%), Vivek Hybrid
Maize-5(5.09%),FH-3356 (5.14%),VivekHybrid
Maize-IS (5.32%), Vivek Hybrid Maize-21
(5.84%) and Vivek Maize Hybrid-9 (6.71%)
which were at par with each other. Highest
cob infestation was noticed in Vivek QPM-9
(14.40%) followed by Vivek Maize Hybrid-25
(12.18%), Vivek Maize Hybrid-23 (10.78%) and
Vivek Maize Hybrid-33(10.71%). Least mean
cob borer damage was observed in RCM 1-1
with 4.11 % followedby HIM-129, Vivek Hybrid
Maize-5 and Vivek Sankul Makka-31 with
4.55,4.73, and 5.17% cob damage, respectively,
whereas highest was in Vivek Maize Hybrid-
25 (10.86%) which did not differ significantly
from Vivek QPM-9 (10.61%), Vivek Maize
Hybrid-23 (9.49%) andVivek Maize Hybrid-33
(8.53%). Azad Thakur (1993) reported 80.0,
66.67,54.76 and 15.07% cob borer infestation
in 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991, respectively,
which indicated the severity of this pest in this
region. These results were supported by
Shylesha (1996) who reported 5-39% cob borer
damage on seven maize varieties in this
region.
Grain Damage
The data pertaining to grain damage
760
Patra, Saikia and Thakur
Table
2. Cob borer infestation on different maize hybrids during 2009 and 2010
Varieties Cob borer infestation (%) No. of larvae/cob
Cob damage Grain damage 2009 2010 Mean
2009 2010 Mean 2009 2010 Mean
HIM-129 4.63' 4.46" 4.55"b 11.930b 8.92
de
10.43,b 1.53' 1.27" 1.40"
(12.42) (12.19) (12.32) (20.21) (17.38) (18.84)
Vivek Hybrid Maize-5 4.37- 5.09' 4.73"b 10.56·,b
e.so=
8.53"b 1.33- 0.87" 1.10-
(12.07) (13.04) (12.56) (18.96) (14.77) (16.98)
Vivek Hybrid Maize-9 6.00-bc 6.71,b
e.se=
10.31"b 4.61"bc 7.46-b1.27-
LOO'
1.13-
(14.18) (15.01) (14.61) (18.73) (12.40) (15.85)
Vivek Hybrid Maize-15 9.38
od
5.32"
v.as=
20.47b3.40"b 11.94,b 1.33- 0.80" 1.07"
(17.83) (13.33) (15.73) (26.90) (10.62) (20.21)
Vivek Maize Hybrid-21 6.92·bc 5.84'
e.ss=
16.83,b 4.75'bc 1O.79"b 1.07- 0.67" 0.87
a
(15.25) (13.98) (14.63) (24.22) (12.59) (19.18)
Vivek Maize Hybrid-23 8.
is=
10.78bc 9.4g
er
5.48" 7.99
cde
6.74
a
0.87" 0.93" 0.90-
(16.63) (19.17) (17.92) (13.54) (16.42) (15.05)
Vivek Maize Hybrid-25 9.54
d
12.18
c
10.86
r
20.15b2.85- 11.500b 1.80- 0.47- 1.13"
(17.99) (20.43) (19.24) (26.67) (9.72) (19.82)
Vivek Maize Hybrid-33 6.34"bc 10.71bc
s.sa-«
11.66ob 5.03°bc 8.35ob 1.13" 0.87"
LOO"
(14.58) (19.10) (16.98) (19.97) (12.96) (16.79)
FH-3356 9.71
d
5.14- 7.43
cde
16.748b 4.11"b 10.43"b 1.13" 0.80" 0.97-
(18.16) (13.10) (15.82) (24.15) (11.70) (18.84)
Vivek QPM-9 6.81"bc 14.40
c
10.6Jf 16.92-b11.48
e
14.20b 1.47- 1.33- 1.40-
(15.13) (22.30) (19.01) (24.29) (19.80) (22.14)
Vivek Sankul Makka-31 5.30·b5.03- 5. 17-bc 17.12ob 3.97·b10.55·b1.20- 0.53" 0.87-
(13.31) (12.96) (13.14) (24.44) (11.49) (18.95)
RCM 1-1 4.13" 4.09" 4.11· 10.94·b
e.as=
8.64·b1.47- 0.80· 1.13·
(11.72) (11.67) (11.70) (19.31) (14.57) (17.09)
Difference in mean values was determined by DMR test. Means'sharing same superscript in a column are not
significantly different at 5% level of significance.
are shown in Table 2, which reveal that grain
damage of infested cob ranged from 5.48 to
20.47% and 2.85 to 11.48% during first and
second years, respectively. During first year,
lowest grain damage was found in Vivek Maize
Hybrid-23 (5.48%) which was at par with other
varieties except Vivek Maize Hybrid-15
(20.47%) and Vivek Maize Hybrid-25 (20.15%),
whereas all other varieties were at par with
each other with minimum variation in
damage. In second year, least percentage of
grain damage was observed in Vivek Maize
Hybrid-25 (2.85%)which was at par with Vivek
Hybrid Maize-15 (3.40%), Vivek Sankul
Makka-31 (3.97%), FH-3356 (4.11%), Vivek
Maize Hybrid-9 (4.61%), Vivek Maize Hybrid-
21 (4.75%) and Vivek Maize hybrid-33 (5.03%)
which was significantly different from HIM-129
(8.92%) and Vivek QPM-9 (11.48%). Mean
lowest grain damage was found in Vivek Maize
Hybrid-23 (6.74%) which was at par with other
varieties with least variation in infestation
except Vivek QPM-9 which showed highest
percentage of grain damage (14.40%).
Literature is scanty regarding grain damage
within infested cob but number of larvae per
cob as reported by Azad Thakur (1990) ranged
from 3 to 5 larvae/ cob which partially supported
the present investigation. Further, Shylesha
(1996) observed that the number of cob borer
larvae ranged from 2 to 15/cob.
Yield
From Table 1, it is clear that yield
varied significantly among the different
varieties in both the years. During first and
second year, yield recorded varied from 1.94 to
3.81 and 3.70 to 6.36 t/ha, respectively.
Highest yield was recorded in Vivek Maize
Hybrid-25with 3.81 and 6.36 t/ha, respectively,
in both the years. During first year, Vivek
Maize Hybrid-5 recorded lowest yield (1.94
t]
ha) which was at par with Vivek Maize Hybrid-
15 (2.00 t/ha) and Vivek MaizeHybrid-23 (2.40
t/ ha). It was also not found significantly
different from other varieties except ReM 1-1
(3.73 t/ha) and Vivek MaizeHybrid-25 (3.81 t/
ha). In second year, lowest yield was recorded
in HIM-129 (3.70 t/ha) and Vivek Maize
--
Evaluation of maize hybrids against stem and cob borers
Hybrid-S (3.81 t/ha) which was at par with
other varieties but statistically different from
Vivek Maize Hybrid-23 (6.39 t/ha), FH-3356
(6.61 t/ha) and Vivek MaizeHybrid-25 (6.36 t/
ha). Highest average yield was also recorded
in VivekMaizeHybrid-25 with 5.09 t/ha which
significantly differred from other varieties
except FH-3356 (4.71 t/ha), RCM 1-1 (4.57 t/
ha), Vivek Maize Hybrid-23 (4.38 t/ha), Vivek
Maize Hybrid-21 (4.29 t/ha) and Vivek QPM-9
(4.22 t/ha), while lowest average yield was
found in Vivek Maize Hybrid-S (2.87 t/ha)
followed by HIM-129 (3.27 t/ha). Most of the
results were similar with the results of Kaul
et al.
(2010)who reported average yield of maize
hybrids ranging from 40-60 q/ha but yield of
some varieties was not in agreement with
their results like HIM-129 and Vivek Maize
Hybrid-5 which yielded lower than their
findings, it may be due to variable geographical
adaptation of varieties.
CONCLUSION
However, some results of present
investigation are not much similar with the
results reported by several authors earlier;
these may be due to different adaptable
capacity of maize hybrids in new area as well
as variable biotic stresses in particular agro-
climatic condition. Performance ofall varieties
was good during second year as compared to
first year results, it may be due to very less
biotic stress during second year. Trend of some
results such as dead heart formation and yield
fortwoyears gave clear indication of superiority
of some potent varieties for this region. Among
tested hybrids, HIM-129, Vivek Hybrid Maize-
5 and Vivek Hybrid Maize-15 were least
susceptible to stem borer, whereas HIM-129,
Vivek Hybrid Maize-5 and RCM 1-1 were
minimum susceptible to cob borer with
moderate yield. Vivek Maize Hybrid-25, FH-
3356, Vivek Maize Hybrid-23, Vivek Maize
Hybrid-21 and Vivek QPM-9 were high yielder
with relatively more damage by pests.
Considering all findings from this study, it may
be concluded that the high yielder varieties
may be recommended to the farmers along with
traditional variety RCM 1-1 for this region.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are highly indebted to the
761
Director, ICAR Research Complex for North
Eastern Hill Region, Umiam for providing
necessary facilities to conduct the experiment.
The authors are also thankful to the Director
and Head, Division of Crop Improvement,
Vivekananda Parvatiya Krishi Anusandhan
Sansthan (VPKAS),Almora for providing maize
hybrids to conduct this experiment at our
institute.
REFERENCES
Ahad, Ishtiyaq, Bhagat, R. M., Ahmad, H. and
Monobrullah, M. (2008). Population
dynamic of maize stem borer,
Chilopartellus
Swinhoe in upper Himalayas of Jammu
Region.
J.
Bio. Sci.
16 :
137-38.
Anonymous (1997).
Annual Report
1996-97. ICAR
Research Complex for North Eastern Hill
Region, Umiam, Meghalaya. p. 37.
Anonymous (2009).
Statistical Hand Book of
Meghalaya
2008-09. pp. 41-45.
Azad Thakur, N. S. (1990). Seasonal incidence of
cob borer. In :
Annual Report
1989-90. ICAR
Research Complex for North-Eastern Hill
Region, Umiam, Meghalaya. p. 37.
Azad Thakur, N. S. (1993). Bio-efficacy of
insecticides against
Stenachroia elongella
Walk. infesting cobs in Khasi Hills of
Meghalaya.
Pestology
17 :
27-30.
Kaul, J., Dass, Sain, Manivannan, A., Singode,
Avinash, Sekhar, J. C., Chikkappa, G. K.
and Om Parkash (2010).
Maize Hybrid and
Composite Varieties Released in India (1961-
2010) 3rd edn.
Directorate of Maize
Research, Pusa Campus, New Delhi
(India).
Tech. Bull. No. 2010/3.
pp. 7-27.
Khan, S. M. and Amjad, M. (2000).Varietal
performance of maize against stem borer
(Chilo partellus
Swin.).
Pak.
J.
Bioi. Sci.
3 :
521-22.
Khan, Z. R., Overholt, W. A.and Hassana, A. (1997).
Utilization of agricultural biodiversity for
managemen t of cereal stem borers and
striga weed in maize-based cropping
systems in Africa-A case study.
http://
www.cbd.int/doc/casestudies/agr/cs-agr-
cereal-stemborers.pdf.
Sarup, P., Siddiqui, K. H. and Marwaha, K. K.
(1987). Trends in maize pest management
research in India together with
bibliography. J.
Entomol. Res.
11 :
19-68.
Shylesha, A. N. (1996). Insect-pest management
in maize. In :
Annual Report1995-96.
ICAR
Research Complex for North-Eastern Hill
Region, Umiam, Meghalaya. pp. 18-20.
Siddiqui, K. H. and Marwaha, K. K. (1993).
The
Vistas of Maize Entomology in India.
Kalyani
Publishers, Ludhiana
z
New Delhi. p. 184.
