O slideshow foi denunciado.
Utilizamos seu perfil e dados de atividades no LinkedIn para personalizar e exibir anúncios mais relevantes. Altere suas preferências de anúncios quando desejar.

Integrated pest management under Indian conditions

5.083 visualizações

Publicada em

IPM

Publicada em: Educação
  • Did u try to use external powers for studying? Like ⇒ www.WritePaper.info ⇐ ? They helped me a lot once.
       Responder 
    Tem certeza que deseja  Sim  Não
    Insira sua mensagem aqui
  • What gout treatment options are available to me?  https://url.cn/5sAm1gG
       Responder 
    Tem certeza que deseja  Sim  Não
    Insira sua mensagem aqui
  • Gout! Is it a life sentence? I used to think so. I managed symptoms. But the pain never ended. But now us and European researches really cause gout. This program tackles the disease at its cause. I get rid of 3 years of gout in just days. Click here to do the same.. ♥♥♥ https://url.cn/5MYrgAB
       Responder 
    Tem certeza que deseja  Sim  Não
    Insira sua mensagem aqui
  • Stop Gout Swelling Today, It can be reversed quickly and safely. Click here to see our home remedies ♣♣♣ http://t.cn/A67DowPY
       Responder 
    Tem certeza que deseja  Sim  Não
    Insira sua mensagem aqui
  • good job
       Responder 
    Tem certeza que deseja  Sim  Não
    Insira sua mensagem aqui

Integrated pest management under Indian conditions

  1. 1. 19/17/2016
  2. 2. EXT-411(0+4) R.A.W.E PROGRAMME BANARAS HINDU UNIVERSITY INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT UNDER INDIAN CONDITION SUBMITTED TO-: SUBMITTED BY-: Dr. SHREERAM SINGH NEHA ANAND B.Sc.(Ag.) 4th year R-13026 29/17/2016
  3. 3. Introduction INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT “It is ecosystem based strategy that focuses on long term prevention of pests or their damage through a combination of techniques such as biological control,habitat manipulation,modification of cultural practices, and use of resistant varieties”. •In 1967 the term IPM was introduced by R.F. Smith and R. van den Bosch. •The term IPM was formalized by the US National Academy of Sciences in 1969. •IPM was adopted as policy by various world governments during the 70's and 80's, including the USA (1972) •1970’s-1980’s IPM adapted for managing pests of landscape trees and shrubs in Urban Areas. •In 1985 India declared IPM as official Ministerial Policy. 39/17/2016
  4. 4. AIM of Selected IPM strategies • Promote natural controls. • Protect human health. • Minimize negative impacts to non-target organism. • Enhance the general environment. • Be most likely to produce long-term, beneficial results. • Be cost-effective in the short and long-term • Be easily and efficiently implemented. 49/17/2016
  5. 5. Tools of Pest Management 1. Cultural methods or agronomic practices 2. Mechanical methods 3. Physical methods 4. Biological control 5. Regulatory methods 6. Chemical methods 59/17/2016
  6. 6. 69/17/2016
  7. 7. Available Technologies • Research has generated new technologies using naturally occurring enemies of insect pests (parasitoids, predators and pathogens) for use in IPM. Some important commercially available products include Trichogramma, Bracons, Bacillus thuringiensis, Nuclear polyhedrosis viruses (NPV) and Trichoderma. In addition, a number of plant products such as azadirachtin (neem), pyrethrum, nicotine, etc. are also valuable as biopesticides. The Directorate of Plant Protection and Quarantine, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, has evolved location-specific IPM packages for both the Kharif and Rabi crops. 79/17/2016
  8. 8. 9/17/2016 8 Bracon spp. Trichogramma Trichoderma Coccinella septempunctata
  9. 9. 2)Technical Efficiency For IPM to be a success, it must be sound on technical and economic parameters. Technical feasibility of IPM is judged on two criteria: change in the pesticide use, and yield change over the conventional chemical control. 3)Economic Feasibility Technical feasibility is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for commercialization and adoption of a technology. The necessary condition is the net benefits it entails to the producers over the conventional technology. Net benefits can be measured in terms of the difference in per hectare net revenue due to application of new technology and/or changes in unit cost of production. 99/17/2016
  10. 10. 4)Socio-economic and Policy Issues • Adoption of IPM remains restricted to hardly 2 percent of the area treated with plant protection inputs. This estimate is based on the informed opinions of the researchers, extension personnel and policy makers. • The structure of agrochemical market also suggests a similar level of adoption; biopesticides share only 2 percent of the agrochemical market in India (Saxena, 2001). There could be a number of technological, social, economic, institutional and policy factors restricting large scale adoption of IPM. 109/17/2016
  11. 11. 5)Technology characteristics are important determinants of adoption • The characteristics of technology have an important role in farmers’ adoption decisions (Adesina and Zinnah, 1993; Lapar and Pandey, 1999). IPM a complex technology. Generally, the farmers adopt those components that show immediate effect, and are easily available. Biopesticides comprise a major component of IPM. Most of the biopesticidesare host-specific, slow in action and have short shelf-life. • The major issues that the researchers would be confronting in the decades to come include basic research for development of broad- spectrum biological pesticides and improvements in their efficacy and shelf-life. 119/17/2016
  12. 12. 6)Role of extension system goes beyond technology dissemination. • IPM is akin to a new technology and knowledge intensive. Its effective implementation requires extension workers to have a sound understanding of the characteristics of the technology, its target host and relationship with natural enemies, and its method of application before the technology is delivered to the farmers. During 1995 and 2000, on an average an extension worker has been trained thrice in IPM methodologies. To transfer the skills to the farmers, more than 6200 farmers’ field schools were established. These efforts however have not trickled down much, as only 0.2 percent of the farmers were trained during this period. 129/17/2016
  13. 13. 7)Community participation is key to success of IPM • Successful pest control demands collective efforts. There are a number of management practices such as observance of synchronicity in sowing dates, use of resistant varieties, crop rotations, etc. that require close cooperation among farmers to achieve maximum pest control efficiency. • Local bodies, such as Panchayats, Non-Governmental Organisations, Self Help Groups, etc. should be encouraged to shoulder this responsibility. Incentives and awards should be given to those farmers/groups who are following IPM approach. 139/17/2016
  14. 14. IPM AT GLANCE • Keeping in view ill effects of chemical pesticides govt. of India, Deptt. Of Agriculture & Cooperation has adopted Integrated Pest Management(IPM) as cardinal principle and main plank of plant protection technology in the country since 1985. • Scheme- Strengthening of Modernisation of pest management approach in India • Sub-Scheme/Component- Promotion of IPM • Commencement- In 1992, when Central Integrated Pest Management Centres (CIPMCs) were established by merging all Central Plant Protection Stations (CPPS), Central Surveillance Stations (CSS) and Central Biological Control Stations (CBCS). • Mandate- Promotion of IPM in Plant Protection under the overall crop production programme. 149/17/2016
  15. 15. Major Activities •Monitoring of pests and diseases for forewarning •Conservation of natural enemies in farmer’s fields. •Production and field releases of biocontrol agents •Promotion of ecofriendly IPM inputs like biopesticides/neem based pesticides. •Human Resource Development by imparting IPM training to extension officers and farmers through FFSs/SLTPs/Short during IPM Prorgramme. •Popularise IPM technology among farming community Present Status of Central IPM Centres 31 CIPMCs in 28 States and 1 UT 159/17/2016
  16. 16. IPM Package & Practices: These have been developed for the following 77 crops which includes Rice, Wheat, Maize, Sorghum, Pearl Millet, Pigeon pea, Black gram/Green gram, Gram, Rajmah, Pea, Groundnut, Soybean, Rapeseed/Mustard, Sesame, Safflower, Castor, Sunflower, Potato, Onion, Tomato, Cruciferous Vegetables, Leguminous Vegetables, Cucurbitaceious vegetables, Brinjal, Okra, Chillies, Cotton, Sugarcane, Tobacco, Citrus, Pineapple, Sapota, Pomegranate, Grapes, Apple, Mango, Guava, Banana, Litchi, Papaya, Apricot, Peach, Pear, Cherry, Walnut, Ber, Amla, Small Cardamom, Large Cardamom, Black Pepper, Coriander, Cumin, Fennel (Saunf), Ginger, Coconut, Cashew, Arecanut, Oil Palm, Tea, Jack fruit, Spinach, Broccoli, Loquat, Strawberry, Olive, Watermelon, Lablab bean , Garlic, Betelvine. Fig, Phalsa, Saffron, Custard apple, Persimmon, Kiwi, Passion fruit and Raspberry. 169/17/2016
  17. 17. Registered Biopesticides LIST OF REGISTERED BIOPESTICIDES Microbial biopesticides 1) Bacillus thuringiensis var.israelensis 2) Bacillus thuringiensis var.kurstaki 3) Bacillus thuringiensis var. galleriae 4) Bacillus sphaericus 5) Beauveria bassiana 6) Trichoderma viride 7) Verticillum lecanii 8) NPV of Helicoverpa armigera 9) NPV of Spodoptera litura 10)Trichoderma harzianum 179/17/2016
  18. 18. CONTD. 11) Metarrhizium anisopliae 12) Pseudomonas fluorescence 13) Verticillum chlamydosporium 14) Paecilomyces lilacinus 15) Ampelomyces quisqalis 16) Bacillus subtilis Botanical biopesticides 17) Azadirachtin 18) Pyrethrum/Pyrethrin 189/17/2016
  19. 19. Impact of IPM •Crop yield increased from 6.72 to 40.14% in rice and 22.7 to 26.63% in cotton in IPM fields compared to non-IPM fields •Chemical pesticide sprays were reduced to the extent of 50-100% in rice and 29.96 to 50.5% in cotton. • Use of biopesticides/neem based pesticides increased from 123 MT during 1994-95 to 1262 MT during2009-10. •Over all consumption of chemical pesticide in the country reduced from 75033 MT (Tech. grade) during 1990-91 to 41822 MT (T.G.) during 2009-10. 199/17/2016
  20. 20. SUCCESSFUL BIOCONTROL PROGRAMMES Sugarcane pyrilla • There was a severe outbreak of sugarcane pyrilla during 1972-73 in the states of Punjab, Hyrana, U.P. and Bihar which was successfully controlled by utilization of potential biocontrol agents like egg parasitoid Tetrastichus pyrillae and nymphal predator Epipyrops melanoleuca on the advise of Cental Govt. team headed by Dr. S.N. Banergee then PPA to the Govt. of India. This saved the Government Exchequer to the tune of Rs.11.00 crores. • Similarly during 1987, there was again outbreak of this pest in some sugarcane growing states of the country, when again utilization of its potential bioagents saved Govt. exchequer to the tune of Rs.16.00 crores. In 1994, severe incidence of this pest in Karnataka was successfully controlled by its potential biocontrol agents. 209/17/2016
  21. 21. CONTD. Water hyacinth: • This weed is fully under control in Southern states of India through its two exotic phytophagous weevils i.e. Neochetina eichhorniae and N. Bruchi. Apple woolly aphid and Sanjase scale: • Dreaded pests of apple plants are under check by their bioagents like Aphelinus mali, Syrphus confrater etc. in case of apple woolly aphid and Encarsia perniciosi, Aphytis spp.etc. in case of sanjose scale in apple growing states of the country. Helicoverpa armigera: • Use of Nuclear Polyhedrosis virus (NPV) has given considerable success in control of this dreaded pest of cotton, pulses, vegetables, oilseeds etc. 219/17/2016
  22. 22. Aphelinus mali Neochetina eichhorniae N. bruchi. Syrphus confrater Encarsia perniciosi Aphytis spp. Nuclear Polyhedrosis virus 229/17/2016
  23. 23. References • http://ppqs.gov.in/IPM.htm • www.ncap.res.in • https://biocontrol.entomology.cornell.edu/weedf eed/Neochetina.php 239/17/2016
  24. 24. 249/17/2016

×