Submit or Track your Manuscript LOG-IN

Management of Callosobruchus chinensis L. (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) in Stored Chickpea Grains by using Entomopathogenic Fungi

Management of Callosobruchus chinensis L. (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) in Stored Chickpea Grains by using Entomopathogenic Fungi

Mohsin Iqbal1, Farid Asif Shaheen1*, Farah Naz2, Muhammad Usman Raja2, Muhammad Fiaz3 and Muhammad Nadeem1 

1Department of Entomology, PMAS-Arid Agriculture University Rawalpindi, Pakistan, 46300; 2Department of Plant Pathology, PMAS-Arid Agriculture University Rawalpindi, Pakistan, 46300; 3Faculty of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, PMAS, Arid Agriculture University Rawalpindi, Pakistan, 46300.

[email protected]  

Eq 1
Eq2
Figure 1

Modeling trend for mean number of eggs laid by pulse beetle in response to different concentrations of B. bassiana. 

Figure 2

Modeling trend for mean number of eggs laid by pulse beetle in response to different concentrations of M. anisopliae. 

Figure 3

Modeling trend for mean number of holes made by C. chinensis in response to different concentrations of B. bassiana. 

Figure 4

Modeling trend for mean number of holes made by C. chinensis in response to different concentrations of M. anisopliae. 

Figure 5

Modeling trend for emergence of F1 adults of pulse beetle in response to different concentrations of B. bassiana. 

Figure 6

Modeling trend for emergence of F1 adults of pulse beetle in response to different concentrations of M. anisopliae. 

Figure 7

Percent inhibition rate (Mean ± SE) of pulse beetle in stored chickpea treated with different concentrations of B. bassiana and M. anisopliae. 

Figure 8

Modeling trend of percent inhibition rate (Mean ± SE) of pulse beetle in stored chickpea treated with different concentrations of B. bassiana. 

Figure 9

Modeling trend of percent inhibition rate (Mean ± SE) of pulse beetle in stored chickpea treated with different concentrations of M. anisopliae. 

Figure 10

Modeling trend of days to 100% mortality of F1 adults (Mean ± SE) of pulse beetle in stored chickpeas treated with different concentrations of B. bassiana and M. anisopliae. 

Figure 11

Modeling trend of days to 100% mortality of F1 adults (Mean ± SE) of pulse beetle in stored chickpeas treated with different concentrations of B. bassiana. 

Figure 12

Modeling trend of days to 100% mortality of F1 adults (Mean ± SE) of pulse beetle in stored chickpeas treated with different concentrations of M. anisopliae. 

Figure 13

Percent weight loss (Mean ± SE) caused by pulse beetle in stored chickpeas treated with different concentrations of B. bassiana and M. anisopliae. 

Figure 14

Modeling trend of percent weight loss (Mean ± SE) caused by pulse beetle in stored chickpeas treated with different concentrations of B. bassiana. 

Figure 15

Modeling trend of percent weight loss (Mean ± SE) caused by pulse beetle in stored chickpeas treated with different concentrations of M. anisopliae. 

Figure 16

Percent damage (Mean ± SE) caused by pulse beetle in stored chickpeas treated with different concentrations of B. bassiana and M. anisopliae. 

Figure 17

Modeling trend of percent damage (Mean ± SE) caused by pulse beetle in stored chickpeas treated with different concentrations of B. bassiana. 

Figure 18

Modeling trend of percent damage (Mean ± SE) caused by pulse beetle in stored chickpeas treated with different concentrations of M. anisopliae. 

Featuring

Click here for more

Subscribe Today

Receive free updates on new articles, opportunities and benefits


Subscribe Unsubscribe