You are on page 1of 7

International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences (IJSRES), 1 (11), pp. 317-323, 2013 Available online at http://www.ijsrpub.

com/ijsres ISSN: 2322-4983; 2013 IJSRPUB http://dx.doi.org/10.12983/ijsres-2013-p317-323

Full Length Research Paper Identification of Resistance to Insect Pests Infestations in Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Varieties Evaluated in the Field Experiment
Muhammad Sarwar*, Muhammad Hamed, Muhammad Yousaf, Mureed Hussain
Nuclear Institute for Agriculture and Biology (NIAB), Faisalabad-38950, Pakistan; *Corresponding author: E-mail: drmsarwar64@yahoo.com
Received 02 September 2013; Accepted 5 October 2013

Abstract. Resistance against insect pests is a crucial trait for the stability and sustainability of cotton production. A field trial was conducted to quantify relative tolerance and sensitivity varying in 10 released (new and existing) cotton varieties of Nuclear Institute for Agriculture and Biology (NIAB), Faisalabad, Pakistan, against sucking and bollworm insect pest complexes. In general, it was observed that none of the cultivars were found completely resistant to pests although these originated as least susceptible, moderately susceptible and highly susceptible. Of them, N-777 was rated as more tolerant to white fly attack in comparison to N-Karishma that appeared susceptible. Variety N-9811 and Sitara-10 M carried maximum, and N-Karishma carried minimum jassid load for considering the best source for pest resistance. On the basis of mean bollworms damage values, the varieties N-Karishma, N-846 and N-852 carried less pest pressure than IR-824, Sitara-10 M and N-26 which were the most susceptible. Percent of seedling emergence was variable in most of the test genotypes. The variety N-9811 gave 99% emergence, while N-846 and N-777 conferred 95% emergence. Variety N-852 gave the poorest percent of emergence (72.99%) and the other six varieties conferred an emergence range of 94.05-83.76%. Differences in seed cotton yield were also observed, indicating that minimal and maximal pest injury on cotton influenced the crop yield. The varieties NKarishma, N-852 and N-846 performed well in respect of higher seed cotton yield. The results suggest that tolerant cotton genotypes might be commercially cultivated extensively in this agro-climatic area and Scientists involving in development of host plant resistant cultivars are encouraged to utilize resistance sources as donar against key pest species. Key words: Cotton, Pest population, Genotypes, Cultivars, Pest tolerance.

1. INTRODUCTION All parts of the cotton plant, Gossypium hirsutum (L.) are very useful in our daily life. The most important parts of the cotton are the cottonseed and fiber or lint. The cottonseed is compressed in order to detach its three products particularly, oil (primarily used for cooking purpose), and meal and hulls (used as livestock, poultry and fish feeds). The fiber or lint is used in making cotton cloth and numerous other products. The leaves and stalks of the cotton plant are usually turned under soil to enrich its fertility. Today, the cotton is a leading cash crop in Pakistan and the country uses more cotton than any other fiber crop. The production and handling of cotton at the farm level alone now has become even more technically handling action (Ahmad et al., 2011 a; 2011 b). Several insect pests are responsible for causing yield reduction in cotton either directly through sucking cell sap or else by means of eating different parts of plant. Insect pests are major limiting factors in producing cotton and hundreds of species of insect pests may be found in a cotton field, but only about 10-15 of those species are capable of producing economical damage (Greene, 2012). Multiple chemical applications are often required

for crop management and insect pests control throughout the growing season in cotton (Miller et al., 2012). During the flowering period, cotton plants are much larger than during the pre-flowering stages and adequate coverage with insecticide sprays is difficult to obtain (Smith and Luttrell, 1997). Also boll-feeding insects often feed enclosed within the bracts of squares and bolls, escaping some direct exposure to insecticide. The nymphs or larvae appear to be more difficult to control with insecticides, partially because these are less mobile than adults, remain within the bracts or fruiting forms and not readily exposed to insecticides (Hollingsworth et al., 1997). Finally, pest tolerances to insecticide increase during the season, making those applications less effective during the final weeks of flowering and boll maturity (Snodgrass and Scott, 2000). Due to the development of insect resistance to insecticides, undesirable influences of insecticides on natural enemies and community understandings of atmosphere preservation, there has been a conversion of interest to develop crop cultivars resistant to certain insect pests (Sarwar, 2013 a). The host plant resistance to insect pests for restraining pest damage or their populations has been tremendously victorious practice. The host plant resistance of the crops presumes a vital part in pest

317

Sarwar et al. Identification of Resistance to Insect Pests Infestations in Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) varieties Evaluated in the Field Experiment

management in order to boost productivity of plant (Sarwar et al., 2009; 2011). In general, a number of insect resistant cotton advanced breeding lines or varieties have been developed and released within the past few years. Besides, variations in susceptibility to insects have long been noted and persisted to be originated in existing cotton genome. Thus, genetic resistance is the most outstanding and the cheapest technique in crop plants to control insects. The genetic resistance offers a capability of various cotton genotypes to provide an elevated production of superior prominence than susceptible varieties under same environmental conditions at the similar initial intensity of insects incidence. The resistant cotton genome can offer to the producers an ability to integrate crop and pest management strategies for crop security and to reduce the cost of production (Sarwar, 2013 b; Ahmad and Sarwar, 2013). The selection of the best cotton varieties to be grown at farms level requires a detail comparison of germplasms in local tests that can match with growing conditions of a region. Thus, host plant resistance may be useful as a selection criterion in breeding programs with the objective of improving pests tolerance and yield in cotton which can help to escape the heavy attack occurring throughout the season. The protocol of this field trial is to give information to researchers and growers with quantitative measure of host plant resistance of new and existing cotton germplasms. 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS 2.1. Plant Material and Crop Production Field trials were conducted during 2012 crop season at the Nuclear Institute for Agriculture and Biology (NIAB), Faisalabad, an establishment of Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission. The varieties tested in field trials were N-777, N-Karishma, N-9811, N-846, N-852, IR-824, N-86, SP-16, Sitara-10 M & N-26 used as plant material. Seeds of all these varieties were taken from Plant Protection Division, and Plant Breeding & Genetics Division of the Institute. The available acid delinted seed was planted during optimum sowing time on 5 June, 2012. The tillage operation was carried out prior to cotton planting to produce a clean seedbed with no plant residue on the surface. The operation performed made a well-drained and firm seedbed to provide a good environment for uniform germination of seed and vigorous growth of seedling. The recommended doses of N, P and K fertilizers in the form of urea, DAP and sulphate of potash were applied @ 100, 50 and 30 kg ha-1, respectively. At the time of sowing, the whole P and K were applied, and total amount of nitrogen was split into three equal doses; at sowing,

first irrigation and flowering stage. While sowing, the seed was placed into moist soil at 50-75 mm depth for good seed soil contact. Every cotton variety was generally planted at 30 cm and 75 cm plant to plant and row to row spacing, respectively. Each entry was sown in a row of 7.5 m length; there were 6 rows in each replicate and net plot size comprised 30 m2 (7.5 4 m). The trials were arranged in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications per variety and irrigated with canal water. After seedling emergence, only one healthy and uniform size seedling was kept in each spot during thinning. Throughout the growing season, weeds free field environment was retained by hand hoeing. Supplemental insect pests management operations to protect crop against insect infestations were conducted uniform for all replicates of cotton genome. 2.2. Detection of Host Plants Resistance to Insect Pests The rankings of host plant resistance in cotton to insect pests were based on the survival of plants under the presence of significant pests pressure and to give lint yield. Screening procedures adopted for evaluating tolerance involved estimating population of whitefly and jassid (adults and nymphs) per leaf, and of bolls injury for all kind of bollworms recorded at weekly intervals. For counts of sucking insects population, nine leaves were observed form three replications selected from three different randomly selected plants in such a way that first leaf starting from upper one third of the first plant, second appearing from middle one third of the second plant, and third from the lower one third of the third plant, thus, continuing in the same manner. Investigations on the sampling of bolls for combined infestation of bollworms involved counting total immature fruiting (squares) and mature fruiting parts (bolls), and finding damaged fruiting parts of all test material to calculate the percent damage recorded weekly. Yield estimates were made by manually picking the bolls from plots of all replicates conducted at crop maturity close to harvest stage. Data collected included picking of opened bolls per replicate and mean yield was calculated from three replicates which provided final cotton yield to estimate production or make comparisons for each variety. 2.3. Data analysis Prior to statistical analysis, all data on insect pests counts and percentages of damage were transformed to mean values, analyzed statistically and means subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA). The least significant differences test (L. S. D.) at a 0.05 level of

318

International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences (IJSRES), 1 (11), pp. 317-323, 2013

probability was used for the comparison between means. 3. RESULTS 3.1. Pest Identification and Population On the whole, it was observed that a diverse group of arthropods, for instance sucking and chewing complexes were identified to injure or associated with damage in cotton at the experimental field. The most important sucking insect pests of cotton such as jassids and whiteflies were abundant in cotton from early to mid season. Among the main chewing insect

pests, pink bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella (Saund.) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae), spiny bollworm, Earias insulana (Boisd.) (Lepidoptera: Arctiidue) and American bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera (Hub.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) were the most predominant in occurrence. Analysis of variance of data revealed the significant differences observed in the seasonal mean populations of sucking and chewing insect pests among various cotton cultivars. This occurrence of pest populations depend upon the genetic make up of cultivars tested as well as seasons climatic factors that may favor certain species but not other type of pests.

Table 1: Field reaction of cotton germplasms for source of resistance against insect pests.
Variety Germination (%) 95.00 ab 95.00 ab 72.99 f 99.00 a 94.05 ab 90.85 bc 83.76 de 88.10 cd 87.30 cd 80.51 e 2.725 5.726 Population per leaf White fly 0.67 ab 0.45 b 0.73 ab 0.61 ab 0.79 a 0.69 ab 0.66 ab 0.61 ab 0.60 ab 0.60 ab 0.137 0.288 Jassid 1.90 ab 2.20 a 2.05 ab 2.25 a 1.70 b 1.85 ab 2.17 a 2.14 ab 1.86 ab 2.05 ab 0.211 0.443 Percent Bollworms damage Squares 2.44 ab 3.40 ab 2.42 ab 4.17 a 2.06 b 2.93 ab 3.98 ab 3.53 ab 2.80 ab 4.37 a 0.991 2.083 Bolls 2.00 a 1.63 a 2.13 a 1.73 a 1.66 a 2.06 a 2.40 a 2.80 a 2.36 a 2.56 a 0.638 1.342 Mean Bollworms damage (%) 2.22 bc 2.52 abc 2.28 abc 2.94 abc 1.87 c 2.50 abc 3.18 ab 3.16 ab 2.57 abc 3.48 a 0.594 1.247 Yield Kg per 30 m2 7.80 abc 6.50 de 8.20 ab 5.76 e 8.53 a 6.83 cde 7.16 bcd 7.83 abc 7.46 abcd 6.50 de 0.511 1.074

N-846 N-777 N-852 N-9811 N-Karishma SP-16 Sitara-10 M N-26 N-86 IR-824 S. Error LSD Value

Mean values in a column sharing similar letters do not differ significantly as determined by LSD test at P= 0.05.

The test material appearing maximum susceptible to white fly attack was N-Karishma (0.79 per leaf) at farm level. The reduction in white fly attack was especially more pronounced in N-777, showing 0.45 per leaf incidence compared to other respective germplasms. The N-Karishma carried minimum jassid load considering the best for pest resistance (1.70 per leaf) in comparison to other varieties. The pest increase was more pronounced in the sensitive genotypes N-777, Sitara-10 M and N-9811, and incidence was observed at a level of 2.17, 2.20 and 2.25 per leaf, respectively. There was statistical difference between all test materials for the squares damage (2.06- 4.37%) which confirmed that the damage seen was commercially significant. There was no statistical difference in bolls damage counts at maturity, confirming that the damage had uniform effect on fruit retention (1.632.80%). Results of the trials indicated that NKarishma was more tolerant to mean cotton bollworms injury (1.87%) relative to the other 9 entries. Variety IR-824 produced significantly more mean damage (3.48%) compared to the rest of cotton germplasms which was maximum than tolerant variety (Table 1).

3.2. Germination and Seed Cotton Production With respect to germination percentage, the variety N9811 gave 99% emergence, while N-846 and N-777 conferred 95% emergence. Variety N-852 gave the poorest percent of emergence (72.99%) and other six varieties gave an emergence range of 94.05-80.51%. Differences in seed cotton yield were also observed, indicating that minimal and maximal pest injury on cotton influenced crop yield. The cotton production was much higher in tolerant varieties like NKarishma, N-852, N-26 and N-846 (8.53, 8.20, 7.83 and 7.80 gm per 30 m2, respectively). The production was the minimum in sensitive varieties N-9811, N777 and IR-824, and magnitude of reduction was 5.76, 6.50 and 6.50 gm per 30 m2, respectively, which was significant to yield of tolerant varieties (Table 1). 4. DISCUSSIONS A set of cotton germplasms comprising 10 varieties under similar field regime was evaluated for measurements of their variability in pest tolerance and productivity. The studied germplasms differed considerably for relative yield losses due to insect

319

Sarwar et al. Identification of Resistance to Insect Pests Infestations in Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) varieties Evaluated in the Field Experiment

pests. Cotton tolerance was directly related to insect pests incidence and of course due to genetic variations that occurred from planting, emergence and through out crop season. Relative tolerance and sensitivity of cotton varieties to pests was possibly not attributable to adoption under field conditions. Reduced pest injury was detected in varieties N-Karishma, N-852 and N-846, and they also performed well in respect of higher seed cotton yield compared to other test material. A number of researchers have assessed cotton germplasms for resistance against insect pests and their yield losses with the hope of developing superior yielding resistant cotton varieties. The results suggested variations that occurred through out crop season and confirmed that genotypes ranged in resistance from susceptible to resistant in pest tolerance. For example, the screening studies were conducted to compare the crop with one another, and these tests confirmed the occurrence of host plant resistance. As a result, the comparison of different genotypes noted several top, middle and bottom performers and the top and bottom performers are presently used as standards in ongoing screening tests (Reed et al., 1999; Nasreen et al., 2004; Salman et al., 2011). As a result, the varieties N-Karishma, N-852 and N-846 displaying excellent resistance to cotton pests, did not show a great deal of damage and thus could enter into the cotton improvement program. Some initial damage was seen in all plants, however, this was slight and transient with no effect on final yield potential compared to sensitive plants. Such tolerant and high yielding varieties could be used as donor for incorporation of pests resistance. Damage to early season squares can reduce yield, delay crop maturity and increase the risk of crop loss because of untimely seasonal insect pests and adverse weather. Past research has evaluated the relative tolerance and sensitivity varying in new and existing cotton varieties. This may be due to the early blooming of cotton, a phenomenon in this respect indicating that late bloomer variety was the most susceptible variety, while early bloomer variety was the most resistant one to P. gossypiella (Al-Ameer et al., 2010). The information on genetics and inheritance of resistance to insect pests is important for crop improvement, which indicates the degree of difficulty or ease involved in incorporating resistance genes into the improved cultivars. Many genes have been identified for resistance to insect pests. Both dominant and recessive genes control the inheritance of resistance to insect pests, while polygenic resistance also exists in many genotypes (Khush and Brar, 1991; Katiyar et al., 2001). Previous research has also shown that differential absorption, translocation and metabolism at various growth stages, as well as the development of a bark layer, are

the basis for differential tolerances of cotton (Price et al., 2004). In other trials, cotton pests density was significantly correlated with the density of trichomes (unicellular outgrowths from the epidermis of leaves, shoots and roots, their cover of a plant surface is collectively called pubescence) on leaves, bracts and stems. However, there was no relationship between cotton pests density and percent square damage in the trials, suggesting that in some genotypes the response to feeding injury is mediated by host plant resistance factor expressed as tolerance (Knutson et al., 2013). Within the last few decades an exemplar shift in identification of several cotton varieties as sources of resistance to insect pests has been observed. For example, smooth-leaf okra and normal-leaf upland cotton (G. hirsutum) strains and cultivars were compared for susceptibility to Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius). Okra-leaf strains and cultivars, as a group, had lower numbers of adults, eggs and nymphs compared with normal-leaf strains and cultivars indicating the potential of okra-leaf genetic traits for reducing colonization by B. tabaci. Results also suggest that okra-leaf shape may provide less favorable micro-environmental conditions for the habitat of B. tabaci because of more open canopy as evidenced by higher leaf perimeter to leaf area ratio (Chu et al., 2002). Adults and larvae of B. tabaci feed by sucking from the phloem bundles of the leaves, and are attracted by the yellow colour and believed not to react to odours. In relation to its host plant, B. tabaci is affected mainly by the external physical characteristics of the leaf surface, e.g., hairiness vs. glabrousness, sticky glandular trichomes, leaf shape (okra/ super okra) and probably the microclimate as a result of foliage density; and the internal chemical characteristics of the leaf, e.g., pH of leaf sap as sources of mechanisms of resistance in cotton (Berlinger, 1986). Hairiness/ trichomes act as an important insect non-preference trait against the sucking insect pests of cotton. It is clear that trichomes play a role in plant defense, especially with regard to phytophagous insects. The degree of hair or trichome density on the leaves of Gossypium species and cultivars is related to varying degrees of resistance/ susceptibility to sucking pests (Meagher et al., 1997). The oviposition behaviour of plant bug Creontiades signatus, was investigated with respect to the trichome density on okra and normal leaves (Armstrong et al., 2009). The different cotton genotypes have varying densities of trichomes on the leaves. Absence of trichomes increased the attractiveness of the cotton plant to some major insect pests, thus increasing the reliance on pesticides (Nawab et al., 2011). The cotton cultivars that appeared to have tolerant genetic traits should be

320

International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences (IJSRES), 1 (11), pp. 317-323, 2013

examined further as a source of pests resistance on the basis of above factors. 5. CONCLUSION The host plant resistance ranking is a management tool to help cotton researchers and growers in choosing the best cotton variety to plant in their environment by considering the risk for pests. These entire results are advantageous to give an insect resistant cotton plants that might be of use in insect resistance management programs. From all these outcomes the average performance of cotton varieties for the entire considered characters are incredibly imperative to choose the most excellent and superior stock varieties for using in general agriculture or essential for breeding plan. Some tolerant species of cotton crop might be significant resources of genes for resistance to biotic and abiotic constraints. Such varieties showing high levels of resistance to insects can be deployed to use in extensive hybridization to increase the levels and diversify the basis of resistance to the target insect pests. REFERENCES Ahmad N, Sarwar M (2013). The Cotton Bollworms: Their Survey, Detection and Management through Pheromones: A Review. Research and Reviews: Journal of Agriculture and Allied Sciences, 2 (3): 5-8. Ahmad N, Sarwar M, Khan GZ, Tofique M, Salam A (2011 a). Efficacy of Some Plant Products and Synthetic Chemicals to Manage the Outbreak of Mealy Bug (Maconellicoccus hirsutus) in Cotton. Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences, 3 (1): 16-21. Ahmad N, Sarwar M, Wagan MS, Muhammad R, Tofique M (2011 b). Conservation of biocontrol agents in cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. Field by food supplements for insect pests management. The Nucleus, 48 (3): 255-260. Al-Ameer MA, Abd El-Salam ME, Yehia WMB, Saad IAI (2010). Evaluation of Some Cotton Genotypes for Ability to Infestation Tolerance to Bollworms for Improving of Some Important Economical Characters. J. Agric. Res., 36 (2): 147-169. Armstrong S, Coleman RJ, Setamou M (2009). Oviposition patterns of Creontiades signatus (Hemiptera: Miridae) on okra-Leaf and normalLeaf cotton. Annals of the Entomol. Soc. of America, 102: 196-200. Berlinger MJ (1986). Host plant resistance to Bemisia tabaci. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 17: 69-82.

Chu CC, Natwick ET, Henneberry TJ (2002). Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) biotype B colonization on okra- and normal-leaf upland cotton strains and cultivars. J. of Economic Entomol., 95: 733-738. Greene JK (2012). South Carolina Pest Management Handbook for Field Crops. Pp. 91-105. Hollingsworth RG, Steinkraus DC, Tugwell NP (1997). Response of Arkansas populations of tarnished plant bugs (Heteroptera: Miridae) to insecticides, and tolerance differences between nymphs and adults. J. Econ. Entomol., 90: 2126. Katiyar SK, Tan Y, Huang B, Chandel G, Xu Y, Zhang Y, Xie Z, Bennett J (2001). Molecular mapping of gene Gm-6(t) which confers resistance against four biotypes of Asian rice gall midge in China. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 103 (6-7): 953-961. Khush GS, Brar DS (1991). Genetics of resistance to insects in crop plants. Advances in Agron., 45: 223-274. Knutson AE, Mekala KD, Smith CW, Campos C (2013). Tolerance to feeding damage by cotton fleahopper (Hemiptera: Miridae) among genotypes representing adapted germplasm pools of United States upland cotton. J. of Economic Entomol., 106 (2): 1045-1052. Meagher RL, Smith CW, Smith WJ (1997). Preference of Gossypium genotypes to Bemisia argentifolii (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). J. Econ. Entomol., 90: 1046-1052. Miller DK, Stephenson DO, Blouin DC (2012). Glufosinate-Resistant Cotton Tolerance to Combinations of Glufosinate with Insecticides and Mepiquat Chloride. The J. of Cotton Sci., 16: 125-128. Nasreen A, Cheema GM, Fareed S, Saleem MA (2004). Resistance of different cotton cultivars to chewing insect pests. Pak. Entomol., 26 (1): 81-85. Nawab NN, Khan IA, Khan AA, Amjad M (2011). Characterization and Inheritance of Cotton Leaf Pubescence. Pak. J. Bot., 43 (1): 649-658. Price JA, Pline WA, Wilcut JW, Cranmer JR, Danehower D (2004). Physiological basis for cotton tolerance to flumioxazin applied postemergence directed. Weed Sci., 52 (1): 17. Reed B, Gannaway J, Rummel DR, Thorvilson HG (1999). Screening for resistance in cotton genotypes to Aphis gossypii Glover, the cotton aphid. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf., Orlando, Florida, USA, 3-7 January, 1999. 2: 10021007. Salman M, Masood A, Arif MJ, Saeed S, Hamed M

321

Sarwar et al. Identification of Resistance to Insect Pests Infestations in Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) varieties Evaluated in the Field Experiment

(2011). The resistance levels of different cotton varieties against sucking insect pests complex in Pakistan. Pak. J. Agri., Agril. Engg., Vet. Sci., 27: 168-175. Sarwar M (2013 a). Management of Spider Mite Tetranychus cinnabarinus (Boisduval) (Tetranychidae) Infestation in Cotton by Releasing the Predatory Mite Neoseiulus pseudolongispinosus (Xin, Liang and Ke) (Phytoseiidae). Biological Control, 65 (1): 3742. Sarwar M (2013 b). Comparing abundance of predacious and phytophagous mites (Acarina) in conjunction with resistance identification between Bt and non-Bt cotton cultivars. African Entomology, 21 (1): 108-118. Sarwar M, Ahmad N, Tofique M (2009). Host plant resistance relationships in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) against gram pod borer

Helicoverpa armigera) (Hubner). Pakistan Journal of Botany, 41 (6): 3047-3052. Sarwar M, Ahmad N, Tofique M (2011). Identification of susceptible and tolerant gram (Cicer arietinum L.) genotypes against gram pod borer (Helicoverpa armigera) (Hubner). Pakistan Journal of Botany, 43 (2): 1265-1270. Smith DB, Luttrell RG (1997). Application Technology. Pp. 379-404. In: The Cotton Foundation Reference Book Series Vol. III, Cotton Insects and Mites: Characterization and Management, Eds. E. G. King, J. R. Phillips, and R. J. Coleman. Memphis, Tenn.: The Cotton Foundation. Snodgrass GL, Scott WP (2000). Seasonal Changes in Pyrethroid Resistance in Tarnished Plant Bug (Heteroptera: Miridae) Populations during a Three-Year Period in the Delta Area of Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. J. Econ. Entomol., 93 (2): 441-446.

322

International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences (IJSRES), 1(11), pp. 317-323, 2013

Dr. Muhammad Sarwar imitated his service career as Agricultural Officer (Plant Protection) from 16. 05. 1991 to 31. 05. 2001, Directorate of Pest Warning & Quality Control of Pesticides, Department of Agriculture, Punjab, which was exclusively deployed on research work for better crop protection. Specialized in the field of Entomology (Insects) and Acarology (Mites) and significantly contributed in the field of crop protection. Worked on vertebrate pests management especially controls of rodents in field crops and storage. Explored, hitherto the unexplored 36 species of stored grain & stored products mites, which were new additions to Acarology, by conducting extensive survey of different localities in Pakistan & Azad Kashmir. These species were belonging to 8 genera viz., Forcellinia, Lackerbaueria, Acotyledon, Caloglyphus and Troupeauia of family Acaridae; Capronomoia, Histiostoma and Glyphanoetus in family Histiostomatidae. Identification keys, taxonomical observations, differentiation remarks, comparison of characters, similarity matrices, Phenograms and Geographical maps of new species along with 48 alien species had been prepared. Conducted research work on Integrated Management of Cotton Leaf Curl Disease, Pest scouting, Pest monitoring and forecasting; planning, designing and layout of different research trials and data recording for integrated pest management on different crops, vegetables and orchards. Imparted training to the farmers and Field Staff, and provision of advisory services to the farmers regarding plant protection practices. Instructed training to the pesticides dealers for proper handling, distribution and storing of pesticides, their legal aspects and samp ling of pesticides for the purpose of quality control. Joined Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission, as Senior Scientist, on 1st June 2001 and involved in the research Projects, viz., Studies on the ecology, behavior and control of rice stem borers, Insect pests management of Brassica crops, Ecology and control of gram pod borers, and Management of post harvest food losses. Currently, conducting research work on IPM of Mosquitoes, Cotton insect pests and Fruit flies.

Dr. Muhammad Hamed is working as Deputy Chief Scientist and Head, Plant Protection Division, at NIAB, Faisalabad. He has 30 years research experience in IPM, Mass rearing of beneficial insects, Biological Control and Radiation Entomology. He got specialized Training/ Visit/ Presentation on area-wide pest control-2005 (IAEA, Vienna, Austria); Visit/ Training on rearing of beneficial insects-2003 (Uzbekistan); Visit/ Training on rearing of PBW-1996 (Phoenix, Arizona, USA); Visit/ Training on rearing of codling moth-1996 (Osoyoos B.C., Canada); Training on SIT and use of radiation/ isotopes in Entomology-1984 (Florida, USA). He has enormous experience in biological control and conducted Post Doctoral research on Predator of fig wasp at University of Leeds, United Kingdom, in 2007.

Mr. Muhammad Yousaf, is working as Principal Scientific Assistant in Plant Protection Division. He is the member of scientific team of Division who is doing research on IPM. He has thirty one years experience in the field of IPM and assisted in evolving 3 insect pests resistant cotton varieties (NIAB-Karishma, NIAB-86 & NIAB-26-N). He has the capability to data recording, compilation and analysis.

Mr. Mureed Hussain, has twenty nine years of research experience as Scientific Assistant in Plant Protection Division. He involved in evolving 3 insect pests resistant cotton varieties of this Institute. He is expert to make use of Word Processing (MS Word), Internet Operations (including browsing, email messages etc), Presentations (MS Power point), and Spread sheet skills (MS Excel).

323