Insect Pest and Disease Management in Organic

359 Towards Organic Agriculture (2017) : 359-390 Editor : B. Gangwar and N. K. Jat Today & Tomorrow’s Printers and Publishers, New Delhi - 110 002, India

Insect Pest and Disease Management in Organic Farming S. M. Haldhar1, G. C. Jat2, H. L. Deshwal3, J. S. Gora4 and Dhurendra Singh5 ICAR-Central Institute for Arid Horticulture, Beechwal, Bikaner, Rajasthan-334 006

A major challenge today is entry into the policy making arena, entry into anonymous global market and the transformation of organic products into commodities. During the last two decades, there has been a significant sensitization of the global community towards environmental preservation and assuring of food quality. The promoters of organic farming consider that it can meet both these demands and become the mean for complete development of rural areas. After almost a century of development, organic agriculture is now being embraced by the mainstream and shows great promise commercially, socially and environmentally. While there is continuum of thought from earlier days to the present, the modern organic movement is radically different from its original form. It now has environmental sustainability at its core in addition to the founders concerns for healthy soil, healthy food and healthy people. The pest and disease management options in organic farming are heavily dependent on preventive measures rather than curative practices which are based on the ecologically safer management methods. The priority has been given to maintain the health of the ecosystem thus enabling plant to become resistance to attack by insect-pests and diseases. Broad management of ecosystem through little modification in the cultural practices such as crop rotation, soil quality management through the addition of organic amendments constitute the preliminary defence against 1

Scientist (Entomology); 2Senior Research Fellow; 4Scientist (Horticulture); 5Head, Division of Crop Improvement, CIAH, Bikaner 3

Associate Professor (Entomology), College of Agriculture (SKRAU), Bikaner

360 the attack of insect-pests and diseases followed by use of the curative methods like use of predators, parasitiods, plant products and ecologically safer chemicals forms the next line of defence against the insect pests and diseases. Apart from conventional fungicides and microbial biocontrol agents, plant products or extracts have been found effective against a wide range of pathogens (Amadioha, 2003). The induction of resistance in plants against plant pathogens by chemicals is the result of number of mechanisms. Salicylic acid, 2, 6-dichloroisonicotinic acid and benzothiadiazole are among such chemicals which induce systemic acquired resistance in plants (Guleria et al., 2005). Execution of systemic acquired resistance is brought about by the expression of genes coding for pathogenesis related (PR) proteins increase in activity of enzymes such as fenil amonya-liyaz and peroxidase and level of fungitoxic phenols (Kagale et al., 2004). Several studies on direct effect of neem leaf and fruit extracts on target pests and pathogens have been reported (Amadioha, 2000). Aqueous leaf extract of Azadirachta indica induced resistance in barley against Drechslera graminea through biochemical changes in the host plant (Paul and Sharma, 2002). The concentrated culture filtrates (50% dilution) produce highly susceptible reaction on aloe-vera destroying the gel after 72-96 hours of treatment (Shukla et al., 2008). Chemical used in the control of disease pollute the atmosphere and affect the properties of medicinal plants. To avoid the hazardous effects of chemicals, natural products of some plants have been used to control the disease (Bhatia and Awasthi, 2007). A number of reports are available showing the efficacy of plant extracts especially neem (A. indica and Ocimum sanctum) showing the antifungal properties (Mesta et al., 2009). Insect-pest and disease management strategies for organic farming For ease of understanding and their effective application for management of insect pests and diseases under organic farming, pest and disease management strategies are classified into following categories1. Modification of cultural practices including crop rotation, soil health management, use of insect resistant plants, etc. 2. The conservation practices to restore the natural enemies through provision of hedge rows, shelter belts, etc. 3. Use of biological control agents such as insect predators, parasitoids, insect pathogens by applying or releasing the agents

361 through inoculate and inundated methods. 4. Use of botanicals and their mixtures such as Panchagavya, Dasagavya and mineral oils as curative control measures. 5. Use of pheromones and other attractant. 6. Use of organic pesticides and other permissible pesticides. 1. Modification of cultural practices Cultural practices are among the oldest techniques used for pest suppression and many of the preventive practices used in conventional and organic farming today have their roots in traditional agriculture. Slight modification in the cultural practices will have an impact on the whole ecosystem. These practices can enhance the agricultural biodiversity and thus have a greater role to play in the management of insect pests as well as the pathogens. However, these methods have certain limitations as they have to be planned well in advance and these are preventive in nature thus not helpful in case of a severe outbreak of insect pests. Use of resistant cultivars: Plant breeders traditionally have placed more focus on creating pests-resistant varieties. Where they are available, however, insect resistant varieties can be an effective defense. It is important to find out about the mechanism of insect resistance in a crop variety because genetically modified crops (GMOs, transgenic crops) are not allowed in organic production systems. Even when insect resistant cultivars are not available, some varieties may be less attractive to pest species or tolerate more damage than others. Plant size, shape, coloration, leaf hairs, and natural chemicals (both attractants and repellents) are affecting the outcome of insect crop colonization. For example, onion crop with wider leaf angle and round leaves support less number of thrips incidence (Patil et al., 1988). Moreover, plants with glossy foliage are more resistant against onion thrips (Molenaar, 1984). Note that changing cultivars to reduce pests can also reduce beneficial insects either directly (characteristics that affect pest abundance may also influence beneficial insects) or indirectly (through providing less prey). Although resistant varieties and natural controls generally work together to suppress pests, some exceptions have also been documented. The biochemical characters such as total sugar and crude protein were positively correlated with fruit borer infestation, whereas total phenols had negative correlation (Haldhar et al., 2015b). It has been demonstrated that phenols, tannins, and flavonoids enhanced plant defenses against insects (Haldhar et al., 2015a). The results were documented by Haldhar et al. (2015b) that length of ovary pubescence, rind hardness,

362 fibre content and rind thickness had significant negative correlations whereas; fruit length and fruit diameter had significant positive correlations with the percentage fruit infestation and the larval density per fruit in different genotypes of ridge gourd. These variations in measurements of biophysical fruit-traits might be attributed to differences in the tested genotypes and/or stage of the fruits selected for measuring these traits, as reported in earlier studies (Haldhar et al., 2015a). Crop rotation: Crop rotation or sequence is designed to present a no host crop to pest insects. Realistically, rotations are likely to have little effect on highly mobile foliar insects. However, less mobile foliar pests such as the colorado potato beetle, subterranean pests or pests with one generation a year may be substantially suppressed with proper rotation. The distances required, however, may exceed the space available on small-scale operations. For example, to reduce insecticide applications for colorado potato beetle by 50%, potatoes have to be moved 1/4 to 1/2 mile away from previous potato crops (Weisz et al., 1994). To be most effective, rotations between susceptible crops should be three to seven years. Planting date and method: The stage of crop development can have a profound effect on a crop’s attractiveness to pest insects. For some pests and crops, stage of development dictates whether or not a pest is a problem. If very few crops are available when insects emerge in the spring, pest insects may concentrate on a few early planted fields. Conversely, if many crop and non-crop host plants are available in early spring, then pests may disperse widely and not concentrate in any one crop. Thrips, for example, often infest early planted crops in high numbers as compared to later planted crops. For some insects, early planting of crop is recommended so that it reaches a less susceptible physiological stage can be a practical solution to a pest problem. For example, corn earworm causes fewer problems in early planted sweet corn. In endemic areas, off-season cultivation of cauliflower and cabbage particularly late crop should be avoided (Shivalingaswamy and Satpathy, 2007). Additionally, aphid transmitted plant viruses may be minimized in early planted crops. Seeds should be sown when temperatures will allow them to emerge and grow quickly. Using seedlings or transplants instead of seeds can also speed crop development. Plants struggling to survive or plants under stress will be more attractive to pest insects and more affected by damage. Most of the time, planting date and method are dictated by markets, weather, labor availability, and other factors. But if a pest insect presents an especially difficult problem, manipulating the planting date and method may be one option to explore.

363 d. Plant density: Decisions about plant densities are dictated more by the growing characteristics of the crop, weed management, and harvest requirements than by pest insect management. In general, if increasing the population density of a crop increases beneficial insects, it can lead to a decrease in pest insects. In some crops, close row spacing proliferate control by beneficial insects. Fertility management: Organic production does not allow synthetic fertilizers or sewage sludge. Although crop plants must grow vigorously to withstand pest and disease damage because overly lush plants often attract more pest and disease and experience more damage than other plants. Over fertilized plants may give visual clues to insects and disease and become targets of attack. The organic manures create a partial nitrogen stress up to certain period without any negative effects on crop growth and thus induce resistance through intrinsic production of defense compounds, which deter the pest attack. The low nitrogen content in plants due to organic manures leads to increased phenols, tannins and lignins that make the leaf toughness and production of more cell wall related structural compounds which are not desirable for herbivores. (Surekha and Rao, 2000). Surekha and Rao (2000) also noted that organic sources, vermicompost and FYM were significantly superior and recorded lowest fruit borer infestation in okra than inorganic sources of NPK as straight fertilizer which recorded the highest incidence of fruit borer. Balasubramanian and Muralibaskaran (2000) concluded that application of organic amendments (neem cake, castor cake, sewage sluge, poultry manure and sheep manure) along with 75% dose of nitrogen was found to be better in reducing the population of sucking pests of cotton in comparison with full dose of nitrogen. Godase and Patel (2002) recorded significantly lowest population of whitefly on brinjal when it is treated with various organic manures. Mahto and Yadav (2003) reported that stem fly infestation in vegetable pea was reduced in plants grown on vermicompost of different organic sources, when applied together in combination with DAP at their test doses. Godse and Patel (2003) reported that neem cake when applied @ 1.7 t/ha exhibited the lowest (14.3%) infestation of brinjal shoot and fruit borer, while there was increased incidence with increasing levels of nitrogenous fertilizer. Singh and Singh (2003) reported that application of neem cake (2 kg/tree) in mango orchard was found best and provided effective control of termite up to four months followed by FYM which remain effective up to three months. Rao (2003) observed that the application of neem cake @ 0.770 t/ ha was effective for reducing the Helicovorpa armigera population on groundnut. Rao (2003) recorded that FYM when applied to soil @ 8 t/ha

364 exhibited the lowest population of Spodoptera litura (Fab.) on groundnut. Rajaram and Siddeswaran (2006) recorded that the basal application of neem cake 250 kg/ha reduced the population of cotton leafhopper (0.62 and 1.27/leaf at 45 and 60 DAS, respectively). Balakrishnan et al. (2005) observed that basal application of FYM @ 12.5 t/ha + basal application of neem cake 250 kg/ha + earthing up at 25 DAS significantly reduced the damage caused by cotton stem weevil. Antifungal activity among various organic composts has been reported by various workers against soil borne and foliar pathogens. Aqueous extracts of vermicompost and organic compost inhibited the mycelial growth of Botrytis cinerea, Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, Sclerotium rolfsii, R. solani and Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici in vitro (Nakasone et al., 1999). Sinha et al. (2010) studied the antifungal properties of vermicompost and vermiwash against soil borne pathogens (Pythium ultimum, R. solani and Fusarium spp.) and recorded 51-72% inhibition in mycelial growth of pathogens. Consequently, the careful planning and execution of soil fertility programs is an important component of pest insect and disease management. Water management: Irrigation has both direct and indirect effects on pest insects and pathogen. Insect populations can decrease if overhead sprinklers knock insects off plants or raise microenvironment humidity enough to encourage insect disease caused by bacteria or fungi. Because irrigation methods vary considerably (whether drip, overhead sprinkler, or flood irrigation), the impact of irrigation on insects also varies. Insect-pest populations can increase if irrigated plants are lusher and more attractive than surrounding plants. Likewise, plants stressed by drought can be more attractive to insect pests and pathogen or less tolerant to their feeding. The need for irrigation is dictated by crop growth and weather rather than the need for insect and pathogen control. But when there is some flexibility in irrigation scheduling, a farmer should think about irrigation as a tool for suppressing pest insects. Several naturally occurring insect pathogens, especially insect-pathogenic fungi, provide effective pest suppression when high humidity microenvironments are created. Irrigation of crops should be done to allow roots to get established so that the crops without any noticeable damage tolerate a certain level of white grub population (Mathur et al., 2011). Tillage: Infrequent disturbance of soils in natural systems preserves food webs and diversity of organisms and habitats. The regular disturbance of agricultural soils disrupts ecological linkages and allows adapted pest species to increase without the dampening effects of natural controls. Nevertheless, tillage can also destroy insects overwintering in the soil as

365 eggs, pupae, or adults, and reduce pest problems. Organic producers usually rely on tillage to control weeds and to prepare the soil for planting. Research is being conducted on methods and equipment that may allow for the reduction of tillage in organic systems. Some practices to reduce tillage in organic systems include zero tillage, ridge tillage, and including a perennial or sod-producing crop in the rotation. Reduction of tillage alters pest insect dynamics considerably. Thrips cause fewer problems in reduced till systems. Ground dwelling predators, such as ground beetles that prey on pest can increase. However, cutworm and slug problems can also increase where tillage is reduced. The degree of pest population shifts between a tilled and reduced-tillage system cannot be reliably predicted. Species shifts will occur and should be carefully monitored. Mulches: Mulching systems fall into various categories, including plastic (woven or nonwoven) and natural materials. Although, the use of plastic mulch is frequently discouraged by organic certification agencies because it relies on a non-renewable resource. Biodegradeable plastic mulches are being developed and may affect pests in a similar way to that of conventional, non-biodegradeable mulches. Organic farmers often use straw mulch because it is readily available and provides good weed suppression. New systems, such as hydro-mulch (which consists of wood fibers sprayed on with an adhesive to keep them together) may one day supplement plastic and straw if they are developed with organically allowable components. For now, plastic and straw mulches remain high in popularity. All mulches suppress insects in comparison to bare soil. Different colors of plastic have been tested and clear, white, yellow, or aluminum (reflective) colors may provide some additional suppression of aphids and whiteflies. Blue and yellow may bring in more pests. Before painting mulch, farmers should check with their certifiers to see if the practice is allowable. Straw mulches can affect insect pests. Crops that are traditionally mulched with plastic may benefit from straw mulches. For example suppression of the colorado potato beetle has been demonstrated with straw mulch in potatoes. Sanitation: Good farm sanitation can help to prevent introductions of pest insects from outside sources, slow their movement within the farm and eliminate them when they are discarded with crop materials that may harbor them. If transplants are purchased off-farm, buy from a reputable dealer and check very carefully before bringing transplants to the farm. Quarantine any purchased transplants for at least a week and examine them carefully for pests daily. Some pests (such as spider mites and whiteflies) are not very mobile but can spread when people and equipment move from an infested area to un-infested areas. After working in an infested area, clean

366 equipment and clothes before going to another area of the farm. Discarded plants and produce are often piled near the field or processing area for later disposal. This can provide a suitable feeding and breeding site for insect pests. These piles should be composted, buried, or otherwise destroyed as soon as possible. The most important factor in Lipaphis erysimi management is sanitation (Singh et al., 2006). Companion planting: The companion planting approach is based on the theory that various plants grown in close proximity to the crop plant will repel or kill pest insects. Studies to date have not shown this approach to be effective. Note that companion planting is not the same as intercropping, which may be a valuable tool in attracting beneficial insects. Trap crops: Trap crops attract pest species away from the cash crop to be protected and into a specific area where they can be destroyed. Depending on the target pest and the cash crop, trap crops can be planted with or around the perimeter of the cash crop field. The size and configuration of the trap-crop area usually is not based on the size of the cash crop area but on the number of pests expected. A small trap crop area that is quickly destroyed will not give satisfactory results. If enough land is available, it is better to have a trap crop area that is too large rather than one that is too small. Some trap crops are planted within the field of the cash crop. Another approach, called ‘perimeter trap cropping’ which involves planting at least two rows of the trap crop around the entire perimeter of the cash crop. An approach to trap cropping that improves efficacy is to combine it with other tactics. For example, with a push pull approach, a trap crop is used to pull the pest species away while the protected cash crop is intercropped with a plant that repels pests. This approach has been used successfully to protect maize in Kenya. Trap cropping was originally designed to be used in conjunction with a highly effective insecticide to kill pest species in the trap crop. In organic systems, however, there are few allowable insecticides, so it is important to know if there are allowable insecticides that are effective and economical to use against the expected target pest, or that the trap crop is destroyed before the target insect moves onto the cash crop. Growing paired rows of mustard with every 25 rows of cabbage has been used as a successful trap crop against diamondback moth (Srinivasan, 1993). Out of the two mustard rows, one is sown 15 days before and the other 25 days after cabbage planting. Planting of one row of cabbage intercropped with one row of tomato (30 days after cabbage) has been suggested for the control of DBM and leaf webber (Srinivasan and Veeresh, 1986). Growing of Indian mustard as trap crop for DBM also attracts the leaf webber moths (Srinivasan and Krishna Moorhy, 1992).

367 2. Conservation practices to restore the natural enemies Conservation of natural enemies involves manipulation of the environment to enhance the survival, fecundity, longevity, and behavior of natural enemies to increase their effectiveness. Such conservation efforts may be directed at mitigating harmful conditions or enhancing favorable ones. Conservation practices can be further categorized as those that focus on reducing mortality, providing supplementary resources, controlling secondary enemies, or manipulating host plant attributes to the benefit of natural enemies. Nectar from flowers or extra-floral nectaries: Adult parasitoids feed on and depend upon nectar to help them mature. Studies have shown that longevity and fecundity (the number of eggs lay per female) increase when suitable nectar sources are available. This can have a profound effect on parasitism rates and control of pest species. Flowering plants have a limited time during which nectar is available, which can make it difficult or impossible for a beneficial insect to use the nectar. So careful planning is needed to provide this resource. Pest species, especially moths and butterflies will also make use of nectar sources, which will extend their life, improve their fecundity and perhaps make pest problems worse. Pollen: Adult beneficial insects often use pollen as a food source. For example, adult hoverflies use pollen and may need it to mature eggs and produce their young, which are aphid predators. Some predatory insects are able to complete their life cycle entirely on supplementary food. Alternate prey: Providing a constant source of food will slow emigration of beneficial insects and keep them at high population levels. Refugia is a non-crop area where beneficial insects are provided with microhabitats that contribute to their survival and persistence. They need a place to hide when they are not searching for prey. This area should also provide overwintering habitat. In general the more plant-rich an area is the more likely natural control will work. But some insect natural enemies are more effective in grass or legume monocultures than in a grass and legume mixture, so plant diversity does not universally encourage natural control. Many different ways of conserving beneficial insects have been tested like managing soil, water, and crop residue; varying cropping patterns and noncrop areas and growing plants that attract beneficial species. Intercropping: Keeping beneficial insects in and around annual crops may be achieved by intercropping, which involves placing a crop plant and another plant within close proximity to promote insect interaction.

368 It is one part of a comprehensive conservation plan to manipulate habitats in ways that enhance natural control. The resources provided to natural enemies include pollen, nectar, alternate prey or hosts. Many organic farms are already intercropped to maximize land use and to suppress weeds in the crop area. Cover crops: Cover crops are usually planted to sequester soil nutrients, add organic matter to the soil, prevent erosion, and add nutrients. Cover crops can also provide food and habitat for beneficial insects. Natural enemies need food and shelter during the winter, and keeping them close to current or planned crops may help protect newly planted crops. Cover crops can increase the overall number of beneficial insects, and beneficial insects can move from dying winter cover crops to spring planted crops to provide some pest suppression. Cover crops that can be allowed to die naturally so that beneficial have time to find other habitat is preferable to a cover crop that must be managed all at once. Mowing a cover crop will have less effect on pest and beneficial populations than disking or plowing. Whether the cover is destroyed all at once or in stages is another factor that influences the preservation of beneficial. Field borders and hedge rows: Field borders and hedgerows represent an important component of the whole combination of habitats occupied by beneficial insects. It is unlikely that all the survival needs of beneficial insects will be met within field borders. Many beneficial insects will spend part of their time in field borders or hedge rows. These areas also serve as corridors that beneficial insects use to move from one field to another. Some consideration of all these areas is needed to develop a complete plan for encouraging natural control. Plants in hedge rows usually consist of natural vegetation that as much as practical, should be preserved. Field borders, depending on how they are managed, usually consist of annual plants. The natural complex of annual plants may provide the habitat and resources needed by beneficial insects. Certain practices can help to maintain a desired mix of plants. For example mowing at a particular time interval or height will stop the natural process of succession to woody perennial vegetation. Some plans for maintaining plant mixtures should be made. Too often, borders are left unattended until there is time to mow them. Some pest problems, such as mites, can be spread by waiting until mid summer to mow. Gather all the information that is available about maintaining field borders before deciding on a maintenance schedule. Use taller non-host border crops like maize, sorghum and pearlmillet as a barrier for whitefly (Krishina Moorthy et al., 2006).

369 Environmental conditions in the release area: The conditions present in the area where the natural enemies will be released should be considered before making a release. For example, some species of predatory mites will perform better under hot, dry conditions, whereas others will perform better under cool, humid conditions. Light can also have a dramatic impact on natural enemies. The mealy-bug destroyer beetle will slow or stop its reproduction, feeding, and growth if supplemental lighting is not sufficient in winter months. If releasing a mobile stage of a natural enemy it may sometimes be advisable to cage the natural enemies on infested plants for a day or two to allow them to become accustomed to their new surroundings. The presence of pest insects will also encourage reproduction and reduce the likelihood that the beneficial insects will leave the area. In some cases, the presence of nectar-bearing plants or other food sources (such as aphid honeydew) may also encourage natural enemy populations. Use of bio-pesticides for natural enemies: Neem products are considered safe to spiders, adults of numerous beneficial insect species and eggs of many predators, such as coccinellids; however, nymphal or larval instars are more or less sensitive, especially under laboratory conditions. Under semi field conditions, side effects on nymphal or larval instars are usually non-significant. Hence, the use of neem can be a substantial contribution towards preservation of biodiversity in agro-ecosystems. All the indigenous components (fermented plant products with cow urine) showed no significant differences in occurrence of natural enemies indicating safety to spiders, Chrysoperla and coccinellids after seven days of spray as reported by Jayakumar (2002). Smitha (2002) observed that plant extracts and bioagent formulations were quite safe to coccinellids as evidenced by the natural activity of predators comparable to untreated control. Similarly, Varghese (2003) found that various organics and botanicals were quite safe to coccinellids and predatory mites, which were found comparable to untreated control. Kumar (2004) studied the effect of indigenous plant products along with cow urine against natural enemies in chilli ecosystem. Studies revealed that all the indigenous sprays included in the study were safe to coccinellids and Chrysoperla spp. except garlic chilli kerosene at three percent. Soumya (2007) reported that organic soil amendments viz., vermicompost, neem cake and botanical sprays like NSKE and neemazal were found to be quite safe to the natural enemy fauna in chilli ecosystem. 3. Use of biological control agents Inundative and inoculative release or applying biological control agents such as insect predators, parasitiods and insect pathogens will have

370 a greater role to play in controlling the insect pests in an insecticide free environment. These agents can be used as curative control methods in case of sudden outbreak in the insect population. Some of the commonly used and potential biological control agents for pest management in organic crop production are listed in Table 1 and 2. Table: 1. Potential biological control agents for pest management in organic crop production Biocontrol agents

Effective against

Crops

Bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis

Lepidopteran pests

Cotton, sunflower and vegetables

Entomopathogenic fungi Metarhizium anisopliae Beauveria bassiana Verticilium lecanii

Coleopteran grubs Lepidopteran and coleopteran Aphids and whiteflies

Coconut, cotton, and green house vegetables

Insect predators Lady bird beetles Chrysoperla spp.

Aphids, whiteflies and mealy bugs

Fruits and vegetables

Insect parasitoids Trichogramma spp. Chelonis blackburni

Lepidopterans

Sugarcane and tomato

Entomopathogenic nematodes Coleopteran and Heterorhabditis bacteriophora Lepidopterans Steinernema carpocapsae

Sugarcane and plantation crops

Entomopathogenic Viruses Nuclear polyhedrosis virus (NPV)Granulosis virus

Pulses and vegetables

Helicoverpa and other Lepidopterans

Source: Kumaranag, et al., 2013

These biological control agents will be useful when there is a sudden outbreak in the pest population unlike the earlier control measures which are to be planned well in advance. However, slow mode of action, susceptibility of these bio-agents to environmental conditions and inability to control the pest below the economic threshold level will hinder the large scale use of bio-control agents in organic farming. Cotesia plutellae is the most common larval parasitoid of diamond back moth in India and causes 40-60 per cent parasitism under unsprayed conditions (Krishna Moorty et al., 2006). A predatory bug, Rhinocoris fuscipes feeds on all stages of Epilachna beetles (Chandel et al., 2007). Gupta and Haldhar (2012) reported that the mean per cent parasitization of Pioneer butterfly in ker by Brachymeria albicrus at CIAH farm and at Desnok, Bikaner was 49.5 and 47.5, respectively and the mean per cent emergence of the mature adult parasitoids from the parasitized pupae was 15.5 and 14.0, respectively.

371 Table 2. Biological agents to control pests of different crops. S. No. Biological Agents

Pest

Crop

1.

Trichogramma brassiliensis -1.0 cc/acre once in 10 days,(Egg parasitoid)

Lepidopteran, Heliothis spp.

Cotton

2.

Trichogramma chilonis -2 cc/acre once in 15 days

Borers

Sugarcane, paddy, pulses, Vegetables

3.

Nuclear Polyhedrosis Virus (NPV) 100-200 LE/acre

Spodoptera spp. & Heliothis spp.

Vegetables

4.

Chrysoperla spp. @ 5000-10000 eggs /ha, 3 – 4 times in 15 days (Green lace wing)

Prudenia, Caterpillars, White flies, thrips, aphids

Vegetables

5.

Beauveria bassiana - 1.0% Affects the young stage

Helicoperva, Vegetables, Spodoptera, cereals, borers, hairy caterpillars,mites, scales, etc.

6.

Metarhizium anisopliae- 0.5 - 1.0 % affects all stages

White grubs, Beetle grubs, caterpillars, Semi-loopers, mealy bugs, BPH

7.

Verticillium lecanii - 0.5 - 1.0%, affects all stages

All sucking Sugarcane, softbodies insects groundnut, rice, potato, cotton, cereals

8.

Phascilomycetes

Nematodes

All crops

9.

Bacillus thuringiensis var. Kustaki 0.3 - 0.4 %

Helicoperva, Spodoptera, borers, hairy caterpillars, mites, scales, etc.

Vegetables, cereals, fruits

10.

NPV - Nuclear Polyhedrosis Virus of Spodotera litura 250–500 ml/ ha 2 - 3 time at 10 daysinterval

Spodotera litura

Cotton, groundnut, pulses, cabbage, chillies

11.

NPV - Nuclear Polyhedrosis Virus of Helicoverpa armigera 250500 ml/ ha, 2 – 3 time at 10 days interval

Helicoverpa armigera

Cotton, groundnut, pulses, cabbage, chillies, Cotton

Source: Mohan, et al., 2013

Sugarcane, groundnut, rice, potato, cotton, cereals

372 Most microbes produce and secrete one or more compounds with antibiotic activity. In some instances, antibiotics produced by microorganisms have been shown to be particularly effective at suppressing plant pathogens and the diseases they cause. Some examples of antibiotics reported to be involved in plant pathogen suppression are listed in Table 3. Table: 3. Some of antibiotics produced by biological control agents Antibiotic

Source

Target pathogen Disease

Reference

Bacillomycin-D

Bacillus subtilis AU195

Aspergillus flavus

Bacillomycin, fengycin

Bacillus Fusarium amyloliquefaciens oxysporum FZB42

Wilt

Koumoutsi et al. (2004)

Xanthobaccin-A

Lysobacter spp. strain SB-K88

Aphanomyces cochlioides

Damping off

Islam et al. (2005)

Gliotoxin

Trichoderma virens

Rhizoctonia solani

Root rots

Wilhite et al. (2001)

Herbicolin

Pantoea Erwinia agglomerans C9-1 amylovora

Fire blight

Sandra et al. (2001)

Iturin-A

B. subtilis QST713

Botrytis cinerea and R. solani

Damping off

Paulitz and Belanger (2001), Kloepper et al. (2004)

Mycosubtilin

B. subtilis BBG100

Pythiumaphanidermatum

Damping off

Leclere et al. (2005)

Aflatoxin Moyne et al. contamination (2001)

Source: Jan et al., 2013

Although much biological eradication of plant pathogens takes place in nature, efforts to control plant diseases by introducing antagonistic organisms into the milieu of plant pathogenic organisms have not been successful, since most introduced organisms cannot maintain themselves indefinitely in their new environment. A number of bio-control agents like Trichoderma spp., Gliocladium spp., Bacillus subtilis, Aspergillus niger, Azotobacter chroococcum, Azospirillum lipoforum, Psuedomonas fluorescens etc. have been exploited in the management of major plant diseases. T. harzianum and T. viride were found to decrease the root rot caused by R. solani in bell pepper plants upto 70.9 per cent (Gaikward and Nimbalkar, 2003). Dikshit et al. (2004) revealed antagonistic properties of paclobutrazol commercial biological control agent against Phytophthora spp. causing buckeye rot. Nine isolates of Trichoderma spp. were screened for their ability to inhibit soil borne fungal pathogens of chickpea viz., R.

373 solani, S. rolfsii and F. oxysporum f.sp. ciceri. Among these, T. harzianum showed 72.1 and 59.9% mycelial inhibition of R. solani and S. rolfsii whereas T. virens exhibited 86.6% inhibition of F. oxysporum f.sp. ciceri (Rudresh et al., 2005). Srivastava et al. (2006) conducted studies on the effect of seed treatment with T. viride @ 4 g/ha +soil application of FYM against soil borne pathogens (Rhizoctonia, Pythium and Fusarium ) of cauliflower and observed 31 per cent increase in germination and 65% decrease in disease. Shashidhara et al. (2008) reported the effectiveness of antagonistic microbes viz., Bacillus spp., Pseudomonas spp., Trichoderma viride and T. harzianum against Phytophthora capsici, T. viride provided maximum inhibition (72.5%) of the pathogen. T. harzianum showed 82.8% of F. oxysporum f.sp. cumini followed by T. viride with 74% inhibition in mycelial growth under in vitro conditions (Deepak et al., 2009). Alwathnani et al. (2012) studied biological control of Fusarium wilt of tomato by antagonist fungi and cyanobacteria and showed that Aspergillus niger, Penicillium citrinum, Penicillium spp. and T. harzianum inhibited the radial colony growth of the test pathogen. Chowdappa et al. (2013) reported the efficacy of Bacillus subtilis OTPB1 and T. harzianum OTPB3 in inducing systemic resistance in tomato seedling against early and late blight. Adhikari et al. (2013) studied the antagonistic properties of rhizobacterial isolates isolated from different vegetables including tomato against R. solani. Among them, P. fluorescens isolate PF8 and PF7 inhibited the mycelial growth of R. solani (72.05 and 68.25%) in dual culture method. 4. Use of botanicals and their mixtures The use of botanicals and other insecticides of mineral origin for the control insect pests were used as last options in the organic agriculture, if all the earlier methods have been failed. Strict regulation of the chemicals that are allowed for pest management in organic cultivation is monitored by NPOP (National Programme for Organic Production) for India and similar organizations existed in different countries to look after registration of chemicals for use in organic cultivation of the crops. The crude extracts as well as commercial formulations from plants like neem, pongamia, and tobacco that showed efficacy in conventional agriculture for the management of insect pests were allowed in organic farming because of their less residual action and ecological safety. The microbial based insecticides such as spinosad 45 SC was also approved for use in organic agriculture in USA and UK. A broad array of pest-repellent products, including homemade herbal teas, plant extracts, and fermentation products, and industrial clay and rock powder products (e.g., kaolin) are authorized for use in organic agriculture. Nevertheless, the use of homemade products

374 has declined in recent years because of the commercialization of standardized industrial products. Some of the commonly used animal product based concoctions in organic pest management in India are Panchagavya and Dasagavya. Use of botanicals and crude extracts: The highest per cent mortality of white grub, Leucopholis burmeisteri was noticed in the treatment of Karanj cake (44.8%) (Padmanabam, 1997). Chau and Heong (2005) reported that density of spiders was 31.1/ square feet in the treatment of chicken hog manure compost at 7.5 tons/ ha and 31.9/ square feet in the treatment of organic fertilizer. Parthenium and neem leaves are taken in equal quantity, crushed and soaked in water for 24 hours. The extract is sprayed @ 20 ml/ 10 litres of water cause considerable reduction in H. armigera damage in chilli (Kumar, 2007). Haldhar et al. (2014) studies on organic IPM system that proved the most effective and economical approach (B: C ratio 8.8:1) against melon aphid (Aphis gossypii), leaf eating caterpillar (Diaphania indica), hadda beetle (Epilachna vigintiopunctata) and cucurbit fruit fly (Bactrocera cucurbitae) in which the lowest incidence was recorded as compared to other modules. The organic IPM module-III comprised of growing resistant genotype (RM-50), spray of neem oil at 20 DAS, installation of pheromone trap (10/ hectare) at 42 DAS, spray of tumba fruit extract (TFE 5%) at 50 DAS and spray of spinosad 46 SC at 60 DAS was the most effective. The presences of antifungal components in higher plants have long been recognized as an important factor for disease resistance. Leaf extracts of Datura stramonium, O. sanctum and A. indica caused more than 94.0% inhibition as well as reduced production of sclerotia of S. sclerotiorum causing stem rot of mustard (Shivpuri and Gupta, 2001). Sharma et al. (2003) recorded that seed treatment with datura and neem extracts showed good seed germination, seedling vigour and least mortality due to F. oxysporum f.sp. pisi, R. solani, Macrophomina phaseolina and Alternaria alternata. Meena and Paul (2005) studied aqueous extracts of 10 plants (Melia azedarach, Eupatorium odoratum, E. adenophorum, Cannabis sativa, Ranunculus muricatus, O. sanctum, L. camara, Vitex negundo, Camellia sinensis and D. stramonium. Meena and Paul (2005) studied aqueous extracts f.sp. pisi, R. solani, S. sclerotiorum and Phoma medicaginis var. pinodella. R. muricatus completely inhibited the growth of R. solani, S. sclerotiorum and P. medicaginis while E. adenophorum caused 72.2% inhibition of F. solani and F. oxysporum. Zhang et al. (2006) evaluated the extracts of tea leaves against Colletotrichum camelliae and recorded 75% inhibition in mycelial growth of pathogen when PDA medium

375 was amended @ 25 mg/ml. Aqueous and ethanol extracts of A. indica and M. azedarach were evaluated against two pathogenic fungi of tomato; A. solani and F. oxysporum (Hassanein et al., 2008). At 10% concentration, aqueous extracts of A. indica and M. azedarach provided 70.5 and 15.7% inhibition of A. solani and 100 and 16.5% inhibition of F. oxysporum, respectively. Bhattarai and Shrestha (2009) revealed that the aqueous and ethanolic extracts of E. adenophorum (50 and 10% concentration) were found highly effective against F. oxysporum, F. moniliforme and Aspergillus niger. The aqueous extracts of 46 plants were screened for antifungal activity against species of Fusarium (Satish et al. 2009). Goel et al. (2011) studied the antifungal activity of hexane, ethyl acetate and methanol extracts of Parmelia reticulata against S. rolfsii, R. solani, F. udum and P. aphanidermatum. Maximum inhibition was exhibited by hexane and ethyl acetate extracts against all pathogens. Ashlesha et al. (2013) studied antifungal activity of cow urine distillates of local botanicals M. azedarach, Eupatorium spp. and others against major pathogens of bell pepper including P. nicotianae at 0.5, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 8.0 and 10.0% concentrations in vitro. They reported more than 98% inhibition in mycelial growth of P. nicotianae at 10- 22% concentration. Cow urine distillates of botanicals were found inhibitorier to pathogens than cow urine distillate alone. Use of other botanical insecticides: These botanicals act to poison insects through their digestive systems or to repel insects with strong odours and tastes. Some interrupt life cycle stages with hormone-like substances. Crude formulation of Melia azedarach (drupes), Lantana camara (leaves), Rumex nepalensis (roots) and Artimisia brevifolia (leaves) are also highly effective in reducing lepidopterous larval complex in cabbage (Mehta et al., 2005). Neem (non-synthetic extracts and derivatives) is a restricted material that can be used as a pest lure, repellent, or as part of a trap, or as a disease control. It may be used for other pesticide purposes only if nonchemical practices documented in the organic system plan are insufficient to prevent or control insect pests. Neem products are derived from the seeds of the neem tree, Azadiracta indica, grown from India to Africa. Neem products have been used extensively for insect control in tropical countries in field crops and in stored products. Chemically, neem mimics certain insect hormones used to control metamorphosis. Neem interrupts this process and the insect dies. It is also effective as a repellent and stomach poison. Neem products are generally formulated as emulsifiable concentrates. Boomathi et al. (2006) conducted lab experiment to study the combined action of cow excreta with nem seed kernel extract (NSKE) on the biological activities of H. armigera. NSKE 5% + cow

376 dung extract 5% treatment was the best in exhibiting toxic effect on eggs and larvae of H. armigera. The high antioviposition and antifeedant index and low total development growth index, food intake and post ingestive utilization of treated pods by H. armigera were recorded in NSKE followed by NSKE + cow urine + cow dung. The bio-rational approach that included application of eco-friendly biopesticides i.e. neem seed kernel extract (NSKE 5%), nimbecidine (1%) and Btk (halt 1.5 kg/ha) significantly reduced the pod and grain damages (on number and weight bases) infested by pod borer. The two sprays of eco-friendly biopesticides were found superior one spray in reducing the pigeon pea pod and grain damages as well as grain weight loss (Paras Nath and Singh, 2006). The results showed that neem oil 3% and NSKE 5% were found effective in reducing the larval population of spotted pod borer, M. vitrata in short duration pigeonpea APK-1 and obtaining higher yields (Srinivasan and Sridhar, 2008). Sharma et al. (2012) reported the minimum aphid infestation in fenugreek grown under organic management was recorded with three foliage application of neem oil (1%) at 95 DAS and 15 days interval which was significantly superior over karanj oil (1%), garlic bulb extract (5%) and neem leaf extract (5%). Fresh and fermented cow products: Earlier workers have also reported the efficacy of various cow products against several diseases. Jayashree et al. (1999) tested butter milk, plant extracts and derivatives for their efficacy in controlling pumpkin yellow vein mosaic virus in pumpkin. The only animal product tested i.e. buttermilk reduced virus transmission effectively. Arun et al. (2004) reported effectiveness of raw milk in reducing the severity of sorghum downy mildew effectively. The antifungal activity of buttermilk is due to the lactic acid bacteria that produced antifungal metabolites such as proteinaceous compounds and fatty acids (Schniirer and Magnusson, 2005). Diniz et al. (2006) explored the efficacy of crude cow milk diluted in water (20%, v/v) as an alternative product to manage tomato late blight caused by P. infestans and found that it did not reduce the disease. It was postulated that diluted cow milk (20%) could also control P. infestans, however, at this concentration it did not reduce the severity of tomato late blight (Diniz et al., 2006). Harender and Sharma (2013) investigated bio efficacy of aqueous (BF-1) and cow urine based bio formulations (BF-II) against grey mold of strawberry and found BF-II as more effective in mycelial growth inhibition (95.4%) compared to BF-I (82.0%). The BF-II resulted in 85.9% reduction in the incidence of grey mould and 81.4% increase in yield compared to untreated control. Kumar et al. (2013) found all the animal products to be effective for management of Rhizoctonia web

377 blight of urdbean through botanicals and animal products. However, among animal products, cow urine revealed highest reduction in disease severity (69.6%), maximum increase grain yield (33.1%) as well as maximum 1000grain weight (49.7%) as compared to control. Use of oils and modified Panchgavya: Ramezani et al. (2002) studied the effect of volatile oils from Eucalyptus citriodora and its major constituent citronellol against rice pathogens and concluded that eucalyptus volatile oils have potential for the suppression of phytopathogenic fungi. Sharma et al. (2003) evaluated oils of Brassica juncea and Mentha piperita against seed borne pathogens of pea and found that these two oils showed considerable antifungal activity. Gwinn et al. (2010) studied the role of essential oils from 13 monarda herbages for controlling of Rhizoctonia damping-off in tomato. Antifungal activities of essential oils obtained from aerial parts of aromatic plants such as Origanum syriacum, Lavandula stoechas and Rosmarinus officinallis were investigated against Botrytis cinerea. It was found that oils cause considerable morphological degeneration of fungal hyphae (Soylu et al. 2010). Sukanya et al. (2011) tested essential oils and found that pepper oil is most effective against P. oryzae followed by coriander oil. Panchgavya use can be traced back to times of great Indian epic ‘Mahabharat’ as purification act of persons who committed misdeeds as per Hindu religion (Shastri, 1982). The application of Panchgavya amended with carbendazim (MPG-modified Panchgavya) was found effective in suppressing seedling disease and wilt incidence of tomato both in pot culture and field studies (Bhaskar, 1994). Research on the management of panama disease of banana caused by 23 Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. cubense, using modified Panchagavya mixture (mixture of cow milk, curd, ghee, dung and urine supplemented with yeast and common salt) was reviewed by Jahagirdar et al. (2003). Dhama et al. (2013) highlighted that the use of cow derived products has been mentioned in the “Vedas” and various researchers and scientists have found these to be rich source of essential elements as well as minerals and hormones. For this reason, the use of Panchgavya (term used to describe five major substances obtained from cow that include: cow’s urine, dung, milk, curd and ghee) and its products is gaining popularity. Panchgavya Therapy/ Chikitsa (Cowpathy) has been proposed as an alternate prophylactic and therapeutic approach. 5. Pheromones and other attractants Insects are very small creatures in a very large world. They have evolved many different ways of finding each other to mate. Some insects

378 can make a sound as loud as a chainsaw; others have striking colors. Many insects find each other over long distances by emitting chemical signals or ‘pheromones’ to attract individuals of the same species into an area so they can find each other to mate. Chemical signals to the location of food can draw insects into a particular area where, once they get close enough, visual and tactile cues lead them to food sources. Pheromones and other chemical attractants can be used in several different ways to monitor pests, disrupt mating, capture a large number of adults (called mass trapping), distribute an insect pathogen or lure pests to consume poisoned bait. Any trap baited with an attractant must be used carefully. Chemicals that trick pest insects to expect food or mates can be very effective at attracting insects from long distances. The primary use of these chemicals has been to monitor pest activity. New traps and baits, however, are showing the potential to reduce pest abundance directly. Use of pheromones to monitor insect populations: Monitoring insect pests is one of the most effective’s uses for pheromones. They can be used to detect the first arrival of a pest insect species or an increase or decrease in populations. Attractants are used in several different types of traps (including sticky, wire, mesh, pan, and water traps) that all work on the same basic principle: Attract insects to the trap where they can be captured and counted. Most pheromone traps attract males, which are indirect indicators of potential pest problems. Also, when females are in the area, they can be more successful than traps at attracting the males. Pheromone traps can also be effectively used to monitor levels of insecticide resistance in the population (Riedl et al., 1985).This method incorporates varying dosages of insecticides into the trapping mechanism (sticky liner or water bath) and hence requires little or no handling of insects and no need for topical dosage of insecticides. Results are rapid, and due to the ease of use, this technique should be valuable to growers and consultants making decisions regarding pesticide application. In a New Zealand fruit growing district, pheromones were used to lure male insects from different habitats to capture in insect nets, and the regions of insecticide resistance were then identified by topically testing the collected male insects for levels of insecticide resistance (Suckling et al., 1985). Release of sterile boll weevils and also diapause control procedures (insecticide applications to kill adult weevils before cotton begins fruiting) were triggered if pheromone trap captures exceeded two to five weevils per trap (Baker, 2008). Over the years of this program across six southeastern states, boll weevil capture levels declined to near zero and it was economically advantageous to grow cotton again in this region (Baker, 2008).

379 Use of pheromones to disrupt mating: Mating disruption works by permeating the crop environment with a chemical message that prevents pest insect adults from locating each other to mate. If enough males can be confused so they cannot find mates, then almost all females are unmated and fewer immature insects will result. Because there are fewer immature insects, crop damage is minimized or eliminated. In some cases this approach has worked well. For example, pheromones emit a plume of chemical carried on the prevailing wind. During the course of the mating season, wind shifts and eddies will distribute the pheromone over a wide area. Males detect this plume and follow it into the area where the pheromone is located. This plume can be carried a long distance and may actually attract males that otherwise would not be in the immediate area. If the number of males in the vicinity is increased, then the net effect may be to increase the number of mating males. For high value crops, the offspring of a few mated females can cause a large amount of crop damage. So it is wise to consider the area surrounding the crop of interest to determine if it is hospitable to the pest species. Very high populations of pest insects may not respond to mating disruption with pheromones if they are able to respond to visual cues from their close proximity to each other. Use of pheromones for mass trapping: Pheromones can be so powerful that many or most of the adult insects in an area can be trapped and killed. It is easy to conclude that so many are caught that the number remaining cannot cause substantial crop loss. Insects, however, can mate repeatedly. So the remaining males will usually be sufficient to keep pest populations at economically damaging levels. Studies have demonstrated that more than 95% of the males must be destroyed before populations decline. For instance, research and development of mass trapping systems using maleproduced sex pheromones for a variety of highly damaging tropical weevil species has resulted in successful commercial mass trapping systems for suppressing populations of these species (Baker, 2008). Successive years of mass trapping using pheromone dispensed in inexpensive bucket traps at a density of only one trap per 7 ha reduced the damage to trees from the American palm weevil to near zero, as illustrated on thousands of hectares of oil palms on two plantations. Trapping males will be less likely to reduce populations because male insects are usually capable of mating once per day and females only once or twice per lifetime. Thus, a single male can mate with multiple females over his lifetime (for crustaceans) (Gosselin et al., 2005), and this feature allows any remaining males to “replace” the missing inseminations that would have been achieved by the other males had they not been trapped out.

380 6. Use of organic pesticides and other pesticides When nonchemical practices documented in the organic system plan are not sufficient to prevent or control populations of insect pests from rising above a level that is economically damaging, a biological or botanical material or a substance included on the national list of synthetic substances allowed for use in organic crop production may be applied to prevent, suppress, or control pests. The decision to employ an insecticide in organic systems, even if it is an allowed material, is difficult for several reasons: insecticides may disrupt a balance between beneficial and pest species, making the original problem worse or causing secondary pest outbreaks; most organic insecticides are expensive to use and insecticides represent a temporary solution. Insecticides approved for use in organic systems can be less efficacious than insecticides available for use in nonorganic systems, so trying to determine if the control delivered is worth the cost can be a difficult decision. In many cases, the degree of success will be site specific. Historically, conventional insecticides have not been approved for use in certified organic systems. Recently, however, some companies that manufacture and sell agricultural chemicals have been using active ingredients from natural sources. For example, insecticide spinosad is a fermentation product of the soil dwelling actinomycete, Saccharopolyspora spinosa. There are commercially available formulations of spinosad insecticides allowable for use in organic systems. Allowable formulations of spinosad will provide excellent control of many caterpillar species, but they are less efficacious on piercing-sucking insects (such as stink bugs and plant bugs). Formulations of spinosad are labeled for a wide array of vegetables for example, potatoes, eggplant, tomatoes, cucurbits (melons, cucumbers, pumpkins, squash), cole crops, and sweet corn, as well as some field crops (such as peanuts). Among biopesticides, Spinosad @ 75g a.i./ ha and Vertimec 1.8 EC @ 1.5g a.i./ ha are effective against diamondback moth, Bacillus thuringiensis application @ 1.0 kg/ha has been suggested at weekly interval (Srinivasan and Krishna Moorthy, 1992). Saini et al. (2010) reported that the highest per cent reduction of cotton leafhopper was noticed in the treatment of imidacloprid + profenofos (80%) followed by neem oil + fermented cow urine (68.04%). Saini et al. (2010) revealed that significantly lower bollworm damage (16.22%) was found in the treatment of spinosad followed by uplenchwar mixture (20.96%). Kaolin is naturally occurring clay resulting from the weathering of aluminous minerals with kaolinite as their principal ingredient, such as

381 feldspar. Kaolin is ground to a uniform particle size for application as a plant protecting applied as a water suspension to plant parts. This material has demonstrated efficacy for both insect and disease control. Kaolin controls insects by making the protected plant unattractive because it leaves a white film on leaves. The white film may interfere with the insect’s host finding. It also acts as a physical barrier preventing insects from reaching vulnerable parts, and acts as a repellent by creating an unsuitable surface for feeding or egg-laying. The particles also cling to insects and make their normal activities more difficult. It has proven highly effective for some pest species and less for others. In regions with high light and temperature levels, kaolin also acts as an anti-transpirant, reducing plant stress and sunburn. Care should be taken to protect workers from the dust generated during mixing and application. Local recommendations should be followed. Insecticidal soaps are restricted use materials that may be used for pesticidal purposes only if nonchemical practices documented in the organic system plan are insufficient to prevent or control insect pests. Soaps or fatty acid salts are manmade fatty acids that are used to control soft-bodied pests like aphids and mites. Insecticidal soaps work by smothering soft bodied insects and disrupting their cuticle layer. Soaps do not have residual activity and do not provide lasting control. They are effective only on contact, so thorough coverage of the infested area is critical to success. Soap products are most effective when they dry slowly. Once dry on the plant surface, they are not effective against insects and mites. Soaps are not effective against insect eggs. Phytotoxicity can be a concern with soap products, and crops vary in their sensitivity. Test effectiveness and phytotoxicity before spraying a large area. Learning targets for farmer 1. Distinguish between beneficial organisms (predator, parasitoid and biopesticides) and harmful organisms (pests, diseases and weeds). 2. Develop awareness of the most important organisms limiting production and storage of agricultural products. 3. Understand why management of pests, diseases and weeds should not be limited to spraying pesticides, but should consist of providing good growing conditions for the plants to enhance their resilience and resistance and encourage natural control mechanisms through promotion of natural enemies. 4. Recognize the tools of organic pest, disease and weed management

382 and be able to combine them appropriately to limit pesticide applications. Constraints/limitation for adoption of organic approach of plant protection 1. The major constraints of plant protection in organic farming like high cost of organic pesticides inputs, no market for organic pesticides product, unavailability of organic pesticides inputs, less yield and no price advantage for organic product are found to be the major constraints according to their ranking as first, second, third, fourth and fifth. 2. The next important constraints are found to be no consumers demand for organic product. 3. Natural insecticides are generally less stable than synthetic materials and degrade quickly in the environment, meaning that they are also less potent and have shorter residual periods than their synthetic counterparts. Therefore, satisfactory arthropod pest management can only be achieved when insecticide use is integrated with other strategies. 4. If the quality and efficacy of natural products like teas, extracts and fermentation products could be enhanced by commercial research and development programs, better solutions for some typical problems of plant protection in organic farming could be found. 5. The other constraints in order to importance are lack of awareness, low employment potentiality and lack of experience of organic pesticides. 6. In regards to the relative importance of different constraints it is found that socio-economic constraints is the main hurdle followed by infrastructural, technological and situational in the process of adoption of organic plant protection. Future research thrusts of organic approach of plant protection 1. Development of weather based forecasting modules for key insectpests and diseases of crops. 2. Survey and surveillance of insect-pests, diseases and non-insect pests of important crops.

383 3. Identification of sources of resistance against major insect-pests and diseases of major crops. 4. Exploration/ evaluation of plants, microbials and bioagents for their insecticidal activity against insect- pests of crops. 5. Development of pest management modules for important crops under organic farming situations. 6. Determination of environmentally based economic thresholds values for the key pests under agro climatic conditions. 7. Monitoring and management of resistance against insecticides, fungicides and pesticdes in plant insect-pests and pathogens. Conclusions For any given combination of crop, location, labour and capital availability conditions there are potentially several optimum crop protection strategies. Different crop production or protection strategies include schedule-based prevention, integrated pest management, organic, traditional, biodynamic, biological or ecological practices. Alternative strategies may rely on fundamentally different conceptual approaches, yet also function as viable suites of best management practices for crop production. The idea of such ‘syndromes of production’ using shizen and conventional rice farming management schemes, and show that qualitatively different sets of integrated practices can produce favourable outcomes in terms of yields and profit. Emphasia on most conventional crop production systems in most locales, viable alternatives, including organic agricultural schemes, either already are in practice or are possible. To support and develop alternative crop protection schemes that are economically, socially and environmentally sustainable, alternative lines of research, price supports, agricultural policies, and land-use practices may need to be embraced. To optimize crop protection in organic agriculture, research should be geared to defining and accessing suites of crop production materials and practices that work in concert as a favourable production syndrome. References Adhikari A, Dutta S, Nandi S, Bhattacharya I, Roy M, De Sarkar G and Mandal T. 2013. Antagonistic potentiality of native rhizobacterial isolates against root rot disease of okra, incited by Rhizoctonia solani. African Journal of Agricultural Research 8 (4): 405-412.

384 Alwathnani H A, Perveen K, Tahmaz R and Alhaqbani S. 2012. Evaluation of biological control potential of locally isolated antagonist fungi against Fusarium oxysporum under in vitro and pot conditions. African Journal of Microbiological Research 6: 312-319. Amadioha A C. 2000. Controlling rice blast in vitro and in vivo with extracts of Azadirachta indica. Crop Protection 19: 287-290. Amadioha A C. 2003. Evaluation of some plant leaf extracts against Colletotrichum lindemuthianum in cowpea. Acta -Phytopathologica- et - Entomologica Hungarica 38: 259-265. Arun Kumar, Bhansali R R and Mali P C. 2004. Raw cow’s milk and Gliocladium virens induced protection against downy mildew of pearl millet. International Sorghum and Millets Newsletter 45: 64-65. Ashlesha, Thakur, Sapna, Paul Y S, Rameshwar and Payal. 2013. Antifungal activity of cow urine distillates of local botanicals against major pathogens of bell pepper. African Journal of Agricultural Research 8(48): 6171-6177. Baker T C. 2008. Use of pheromones in IPM. In: Integrated Pest Management,Radcliffe T, Hutchinson B (Eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 273–285. Balakrishnan N, Muralibaskaran R K and Mahadevan N R. 2005. Influence of cotton stem weevil in cotton treated with organic amendments and cultural practice. Journal Entomological Research 29(2): 115-118. Balasubramanian A and Muralibaskaran R K. 2000. Influence of organic amendments and inorganic fertilizers on sucking pests and yield of cotton. Madras Agricultural Journal 87(4/6): 359-361. Bhaskar P. 1994. Biological control of seedling disease and wilt in tomato caused by Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. lycopersici. Ph D Thesis, pp. 169. UAS Banglore, India. Bhatia B S and Awasthi R P. 2007. Ecofriendly management of Alternaria blight and white rust of Rapeseed Mustard. Journal of Mycology and Plant Pathology 37(1): 112–115. Bhattarai N and Shrestha G. 2009. Antibacterial and antifungal effect of Eupatorium adenophorum Spreng against bacterial and fungal isolates. Nepal Journal of Science and Technology 10: 91–95. Boomathi N, Sivasubramanian P and Raguraman S. 2006. Biological activities of cow excreta with neem seed kernel extract against Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner). Annals of Plant Protection Sciences 14: 11-16. Chandel R S, Dhiman K R, Chandla V K and Kumar Vinod. 2007. Intergrated pest management in potato. In: Entomology: Novel Approaches, Eds Jain, P. C and Bhargava, M. C. New India Publishing Agency, New Delhi, pp. 377-398. Chau M L and Heong K L. 2005. Effects of organic fertilizers on insect pest and diseases of rice. Omonrice 13: 26-33. Chowdappa P, Mohan Kumar S P, Jyothi Lakshmi M and Upreti K K. 2013. Growth stimulation and induction of systemic resistance in tomato against early and late

385 blight by Bacillus subtilis OTPB1 or Trichoderma harzianum OTPB3. Biolological Control 65: 109-117. Deepak, Saran P L and Lal G. 2009. In-vitro and in-vivo control of Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. cumini and Alternaria bumsil through various bio agents. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 79(1): 84-87. Dhama K, Chakraborty S and Tiwari R. 2013. Panchgavya therapy (Cowpathy) in safeguarding health of animals and humans: a review. Research Opinions in Animal and Veterinary Sciences 3(6): 170-178. Dikshit H K, Jhang T, Singh N K, Koundal K R, Bansal K C, Chandra N, Tickoo J L and Sharma T R. 2004. Genetic differentiation of Vigna species by RAPD, URP and SSR markers. Biologia Plantarum 51(3): 451-457. Diniz L P, Maffia L A, Dhingra O D, Casali V W D, Santos R H S and Mizubuti E S G. 2006. Avaliação de produtos alternativos para controle da requeima do tomateiro. Fitopatologia Brasileira 31: 171-179. Gaikwad A P and Nimbalkar C A. 2003. Mangement of collar and root rot (Rhizoctonia solani) of bell pepper with bioagent (Trichoderma spp.) and fungicides. Journal of Maharastra Agricultural University 28: 270-273. Godase S K and Patel C B. 2002. Studies on the influence of organic manures and fertilizer doses on the intensity of sucking pests infesting brinjal. Plant Protection Bulletion 54(2): 3-6. Godase S K and Patel C B. 2003. Effect of different treatments of organic manures and fertilizers on infestation of brinjal shoot and fruit borer. Pestology 27(5): 9-12. Goel M, Sharma P K, Dureja P, Rani A and Uniyal P l. 2011. Antifungal activity of extracts of the Lichensparmelia reticulata, Ramalina roesleri, Usnea longissima and Stereocaulon Himalayense. Arch phytopathology plant protection 44(13): 1300131. Gosselin T, Sainte-Marie B and Bernatchez L. 2005. Geographic variation of multiple paternity in the American lobster, Homarus americanus. Molicular Ecology 14: 1517–1525. Guleria S, Sohal B S and Mann A P. S. 2005. Salicylic acid treatment and Erysiphe polygoni inoculation on phenylalanine ammonia-lyase and peroxidase content and accumulation of phenolics in pea leaves. Journal of Vegatival Science 11: 71-79. Gupta A and Haldhar S M. 2012. Pupal parasitization of Anaphaeis aurota Fabricius (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) infesting Capparis decidua (Forsk.) by Brachymeria albicrus (Klug) (Hymenoptera: Chalcididae). Journal of Biological Control 26: 155-156. Gwinn K D, Ownley B H, Greene S E, Clark M M, Taylor C L, Springfield T N, Trently D J, Green J F and Hamilton S L. 2010. Role of essential oils in control of Rhizoctonia damping off in tomato with bioactive Monarda herbage. Phytopathology 100(5): 493. Haldhar S M, Choudhary B R, Bhargava R and Gurjar K. 2015b. Host plant resistance (HPR) traits of ridge gourd (Luffa acutangula (Roxb.) L. against melon fruit fly,

386 (Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett)) in hot arid region of India. Scientia Horticulture 194: 168-174. Haldhar S M, Choudhary B R, Bhargava R and Meena S R. 2015a. Antixenotic and allelochemical resistance traits of watermelon against Bactrocera cucurbitae in a hot arid region of India. Florida Entomologist 98: 827-834. Haldhar S M, Choudhary B R, Bhargava R and Sharma S K. 2014. Development of an organic integrated pest management (IPM) module against insect-pests of muskmelon in arid region of Rajasthan, India. Journal of Experimental Biology and Agricultural Sciences 2: 19-24. Harender Raj and Sharma R L. 2013. Bioefficacy of aqueous and cow urine based bioformulations against grey mold of strawberry. Journal of Mycology and Plant Pathology 43(3): 319-322. Hassanein N M, Abou Zeid M A, Youssef I F and Mahmoud D A. 2008. Efficacy of leaf extracts of neem (Azadirachta indica) and chinaberry (Melia azedarach) against early blight and wilt diseases of tomato. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences 2: 763-772. Islam T M, Hashidoko Y, Deora A, Ito T and Tahara S. 2005. Suppression of damping-off disease in host plants by the rhizoplane bacterium Lysobacter spp. strain SB-K88 is linked to plant colonization and antibiosis against soil borne peronosporomycetes. Applied Environmental Microbiology 71: 3786-3796. Jahagirdar Shamrao, Ravikumar M R and Siddaramaiah A L. 2003. Traditional methods in the management of plant diseases - a review. Agricultural Reviews 24(2): 142146. Jan Mohd Junaid, Nisar Ahmad Dar, Tariq Ahmad Bhat, Arif Hussain Bhat and Mudasir Ahmad Bhat. 2013. Commercial Biocontrol Agents and Their Mechanism of Action in the Management of Plant Pathogens. International Journal of Modern Plant and Animal Sciences 1(2): 39-57. Jayakumar R. 2002. Survey of indigenous practices for the management of pests in Raichur district and evaluation for new practices against okra pests. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, India. Jayashree K, Pun K B and Doraiswamy Sabitha. 1999. Effect of plant extracts and derivatives, butter milk and virus inhibitory chemicals on pumpkin yellow vein mosaic virus transmission. Indian Phytopathology 52(4): 357-361. Kagale S, Marimuthu T, Thayumanavan B, Nandakumar R and Samiyappan R. 2004. Antimicrobial activity and induction of systemic acquired resistance in rice by leaf extract of Datura metel against Rhizoctonia solani and Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae. Physiology and Molicular Plant Pathology 65: 91-100. Kloepper J W, Ryu C M and Zhang S. 2004. Induce systemic resistance and promotion of plant growth by Bacillus spp. Phytopathology 94: 1259-1266. Koumoutsi A, Chen X H, Henne A, Liesegang H, Gabriele H, Franke P, Vater J and Borris R. 2004. Structural and functional characterization of gene clusters directing nonribosomal synthesis of bioactive lipopeptides in Bacillus amyloliquefaciens

387 strain FZB42. Journal of Bacteriology 186: 1084-1096. Krishna Moorthy P N, Pandey K K, Pandey K K and Krishna Kumar N K. 2006. Status and prospects of integrated pest management strategies in selected crops: Vegetables. In: Integrated Pest Management. Principles and Applications Volume 2: Princiles, Eds. Singh, Amerika., Sharma, O. P. and Garg, D. K. CBS Publishers and Distributors, New Delhi, pp. 340-92. Kumar Ravi. 2004. Evaluation of organics and indigenous products for the management of Helicoverpa armigera in chilli. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, India. Kumar S and Yadav B P. 2007. Efficacy of fungicides and phyto extracts on Colletotrichum spp. Physiology and Molicular Plant Pathology 37(2): 363-364. Kumar S, Garkoti A, Tripathi H S, Mehi Lai, Ali M and Singh V. 2013. Management of Rhizoctonia web blight of urdbean through botanicals and animal products. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences 21(2): 342-344. Kumaranag K M, Kedar S C and Patil M D. 2013. Insect Pest Management in Organic Farming Systems. Popular Kheti 1(4): 3. Leclere V, Bechet M, Adam A, Guez J S, Wathelet B, Ongena M, Thonart P, Gancel F, Chollet-Imbert M and Jacques P. 2005. Mycosubtilin overproduction by Bacillus subtilis BBG100 enhances the organism’s antagonistic and biocontrol activities. Applied Environmental Microbiology 71: 4577-4584. Mahto T P and Yadav R P. 2003. Effect of vermicompost prepared from different organic sources alone or in combination with chemical fertilizer on stem fly incidence and yield parameters in vegetable pea Rajasthan University of Agriculture. Journal of Research 13 (1&2): 26-29. Mathur Y S, Bhatnagar Ashok and Singh Swaroop. 2011. Phytophagous whitegrubs of Indian Bioecology and Management. AINP on whitegrubs and other soil Arthropods Department of Entomology, ARS, Durgapura, Swami Keshvanand Rajasthan Agricultural University Pp.28. Meena Devi and Paul Y S. 2005. Biological control of wilt/root rot complex of pea. Paper presented in the Second Global conference on Plant Health-Global wealth held at Udaipur w.e.f. 25-29th November, 2005. Mehta P K, Sharma P C and Sood A K. 2005. Evaluation of some botanicals against lepidopterous larval complex of cabbage in Himachal Pradesh. In: First Congress on Insect Science, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, December 15-17, pp. 110-11. Mesta R K, Benagi V I, Srikant K and Shankergoud I. 2009. In vitro evaluation of fungicides and plant extracts against A. helianthi causing blight of sunflower. Karnataka Journal of Agriculture Science 22(1): 111–114. Mohan S, Devasenapathy P, Vennila C and Gill M S. 2013. IPM Booklet for Pest and Disease Management: Organic Ecosystem. P. 21-22. Molenaar N D. 1984. Genetics, thrips (Thrips tabaci L.) resistance and epicuticular wax characteristics of non-glossy and glossy onion, Allium cepa L. Dissertation

388 Abstracts International B-Sciences and Engineering 45: 1075. Moyne A L, Shelby R, Cleveland T E and Tuzun S. 2001. Bacillomycin D: an iturin with antifungal activity against Aspergillus flavus. Journal of Applied Microbiology 90: 622-629. Nakasone A K, Bettiole W and Souze R M D. 1999. The effect of water extracts of organic matter on plant pathogens. Summa Phytopathologica 25: 330-35. Padmanabam. 1997. Evolution of oil cake against white grub. Annals of Agricultural Research 24 (3): 461-465. Paras Nath and Singh R S. 2006. Effect of biorational approaches on pigeonpea pod and grain damage by Helicoverpa armigera (Hub.). Annals of Plant Protection Sciences 14: 56-61. Patil A P, Nawale R N, Azri D S and Moholkar P K. 1988. Field screening of onion cultivars for their reaction to thrips. Indian Cocoa Arecanut and Spices Journal 12:10-11. Paul P K and Sharma P D. 2002. Azadirachta indica leaf extract induces resistance in barley against leaf stripe disease. Physiology and Molicular Plant Pathology 61: 3-13. Paulitz T C and Belanger R R. 2001. Biological control in greenhouse systems. Annual Review of Phytopathology 39:103-133. Rajaram V and Siddeswaran K. 2006. Effect of Organic amendments and inorganic fertilizers on the incidence of leafhopper and yield of cotton. International Journal of Agricultural Science 2(2): 515-516. Ramezani H, Singh H P, Batish D R, Kohli R K and Dargan J S. 2002. Fungicidal effect of volatile oil from Eucalyptus citriodora and its major constituent citronellal. New Zealand Plant Protection 55: 327-330. Rao K R. 2003. Influence of host plant nutrition in the incidence of Spodoptera litura and Helicoverpa armigera on groundnut. Indian Journal of Entomology 65 (3): 386392. Riedl H, Seaman A and Henrie F. 1985. Monitoring susceptibility to azinphos-methylin field populations of the codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) with pheromone traps. Journal of Economic Entomology 78: 692-699. Rudresh D L, Shivaprakash M K and Prasad R D. 2005. Tricalcium phosphate solubilizing abilities of Trichoderma spp. in relation to P uptake and growth and yield parameters of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Canadian Journal of Microbiology 51: 217-22. Saini T M, Patel G M and Jat M K. 2010. Efficacy of farmers innovative plant protection practices against some pests of cotton. Pestology 34(4): 35-39. Sandra A I, Wright C H, Zumoff L S and Steven V B. 2001. Pantoea agglomerans strain EH318 produces two antibiotics that inhibit Erwinia amylovora in vitro. Applied Environment of Microbiology 67: 282-292. Schniirer J and Magnusson J. 2005. Antifungal lactic acid bacteria as biopreservatives.

389 Trends in Food Science and Technology 16: 70–78. Sharma P, Singh S D and Rawal P. 2003. Antifungal activity of some plant extracts and oil against seed borne pathogens of pea. Plant Disease Research 18: 16-20. Sharma Pankaj, Singh S D, Rawal P and Lodha P C. 2003. Antifungal activities of plant extracts and oils against seed-borne pathogen of pea. Plant Disease of Research 8: 16-20. Sharma S K, Trivedi A, Ameta O P, Sharma S K, Choudhary R and Hussain T. 2012. Evaluation of botanical extracts against aphid management in fenugreek under organic farming. Indian Journal of Applied Entomology 26: 88-92. Shashidhara S, Lokesh M S, Lingaraju S and Palakshappa M G. 2008. In vitro evaluation of microbial antagonists, botanicals and fungicides against Phytophthora capsici Leon. the causal agent of foot rot of black pepper. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences 21(4): 527-531. Shastri P K. 1982. Anusasinika Parva. In: Mahabharathama. Sri Rama Printing Press, Secundarabad. P. 614. Shivalingaswamy T M and Satpathy S. 2007. Integrated pest management in vegetable crops. In: Entomology: Novel Approaches, Eds Jain P C and Bhargava M C, New India Publishing Agency, New Delhi, pp. 353-75. Shivpuri A and Gupta R B L. 2001. Evaluation of different fungicides and plant extracts against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum causing stem rot of mustard. Indian Phytopathology 54: 272-274. Shukla R S, Abdul K, Singh H N and Alam M. 2008. Phytotoxin production by Alternaria alternata and its role in black leaf spot disease of Aloe Vera. Fourth National Interactive Meet Souvenir, NIM (47). Singh S K and Singh G. 2003. Effectiveness of organic amendments against Odontotermes obesus Rambur in mango orchard. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research 37(2): 148-150. Singh Saroj, Basappa and Singh Surender Kumar. 2006. Status and prospects of integrated pest management strategies in selected crops: Vegetables. In: Integrated Pest Management. Principles and Applications Volume 2: Princiles, Eds. Singh Amerika, Sharma O P and Garg D K. CBS Publishers and Distributors, New Delhi, pp. 23479. Sinha R K, Valani D, Chauhan K and Agarwal S. 2010. Embarking on a second green revolution for sustainable agriculture by vermiculture biotechnology using earthworms: Reviving the dreams of Sir Charles Darwin. Journal of Agricultural Biotechnology and Sustainable Development 2: 113-128. Smitha M S. 2002. Management of yellow mite, polyphagotarsonemus latus (Banks) [Acari; Tarsonemidae] on chilli. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, India. Soumya George. 2007. Role of vermicompost, vermiwash and other organics in the management of thrips and mites of chilli. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, India.

390 Soylu E M, Kurt S and Soylu S. 2010. In vitro and in vivo antifungal activities of the essential oils of various plants against tomato greu mould disease agent Botrytis cinerea. International Journal of Food Microbiology 143(3): 183-189. Srinivasan G and Sridhar R P. 2008. Field efficacy of plant products against spotted pod borer, Maruca vitrata (Geyer) in pigeonpea. Legume Research 31: 48-50. Srinivasan K and Krishna Moorthy P N. 1992. Development and adoption of IPM for major pests of cabbage using Indian mustard as a trap crop. In: Diamondback moth and other Crucifer Pests (Ed. Talekar) NS. Asian Vegetable Research and Development Centre, Taipei, Taiwan: 511-21. Srinivasan K and Veeresh G K. 1986. The development and comparison of visual damage threshold for chemical control of Plutella xylostella and Crocidolomia binotalis in cabbage in India. Insect Science Application 7: 547-57. Srivastava V K, Mishra B, Sinha A K and Samujh R. 2006. Integrated management of soil borne diseases of cauliflower (Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.) in nursery. Plant Protection Bulletin 58(1&2): 20-2. Suckling D M, Penman D R, Chap-man R B and Wearing C H. 1985. Pheromoneuse in insecticide resistance surveys of light-brown apple moths (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 78: 204-207. Sukanya S L, Yamini D and Fathima S K. 2011. Ecofriendly management of Pyricularia oryzae the causal agent of blast of paddy. Current Botany 2: 46-49. Surekha J and Rao P A. 2000. Effect of the organic and inorganic sources of NPK on the fruit borer Earias vittella Fabricius and fruit yield of bhindi. Pestology 24(8): 3539. Varghese T S. 2003. Management of thrips, Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood and mite, Polyphagotarsonemus latus Banks on chilli using biorationals. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, India. Weisz R, Smilowitz Z and Christ B. 1994. Distance, rotation, and border crops affect Colorado potato beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) colonization and population density and early blight (Alternaria solani) severity in rotated potato fields. Journal of Economic Entomology 87(3): 723-729. Wilhite S E, Lumsden R D and Strancy D C. 2001. Peptide synthetase gene in Trichoderma virens. Applied Environment of Microbiology 67: 5055-5062. Zhang Z Z, Li Y B, Qi L and Wan X C. 2006. Antifungal activities of major tea leaf volatile constituents toward Colletorichum camelliae Massea. Journal of Agriculture Food Chemical 54: 3936-3940.