Research Article

Spatiotemporal Distribution of Sucking and Bollworm Insect Pests on Transgenic and Conventional Cotton Cultivars at Sahati Region of Central Sindh

Wali Muhammad Mangrio1*, Hakim Ali Sahito1, Abdul Hafeez Mastoi2, Sanaullah Sattar3, Fahmeeda Imdad Sahito4 and Shahid Ali Jakhrani1

1Department of Zoology, SALU, Khairpur, Pakistan; 2Department of Entomology, LUAWMS, Balochistan, Pakistan; 3Department of Wildlife and Ecology, UVAS, Lahore, Pakistan; 4Department of Teacher Education, SALU, Khairpur, Pakistan.

Received | May 29,2024; Accepted | August 26, 2024; Published | September 06, 2024

*Correspondence | Wali Muhammad Mangrio, Department of Zoology, SALU, Khairpur, Pakistan; Email: wali.mangrio@salu.edu.pk

Citation | Mangrio, W.M., H.A. Sahito, A.H. Mastoi, S. Sattar, F. I. Sahito and S. A. Jakhrani. 2024. Spatiotemporal distribution of sucking and bollworm insect pests on transgenic and conventional cotton cultivars at sahati region of central Sindh. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Research, 37(3): 282-289.

DOI | https://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjar/2024/37.3.282.289

Keywords | KMG-1, KMG-2, KMG-3, NIAB-78, Spotted bollworm, Sucking pests

Copyright: 2024 by the authors. Licensee ResearchersLinks Ltd, England, UK.

This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Introduction

Cotton, the prime natural fiber, most commercial and main crop of Pakistan (Shah et al., 2017; Sahito et al., 2017), is cultivated more than 100 countries in the semiarid, tropical, and subtropical agro-climatic conditions of the world (Tarazi et al., 2020). Pakistan, India, United States, Brazil, and China are the five top most cotton producer hubs in the world (Parmar et al., 2023). This preeminent fiber crop extends the world’s biggest textile industry with a $600 annual economic impact throughout the world (Ashraf et al., 2018). Cotton is regarded as a cash crop of Pakistan with significant economic value and the country ranked 4th position worldwide (Marral et al., 2023). The cotton crop is cultivated widely throughout Pakistan but Sindh and Punjab provinces are growing belts, the seeds and fibers of the cotton are used by the textile industry and for edible oil purposes (Shuli et al., 2018). Cotton crop is not only used as raw material in the textile industry but also a source of livelihood to local farmer’s and country earns foreign exchange (Saleem et al., 2019). The production of cotton in the last decades has been gradually decreasing due to variation in climatic conditions, reduced seed quality, genetic diversity, viral disease, crop and weed competition, insect pest infestation, output and input instability (Razzaq et al., 2021). Cotton breeding and farming have a long history in Pakistan but the abruptly emergence of new widespread diseases instigated extensive yield losses (Saleem et al., 2019). Bt and NIAB-78 cotton varieties could help in reducing the application of pesticides and are considered to be eco-friendly (Tokel et al., 2022). There is a developing stage to create resistance power even after the introduction of several varieties of cotton cultivars (Karar et al., 2020).

Certain biotic and a biotic stresses such as; insect pest infestations, fungal infections, viral diseases, salinity, drought, heat etc., caused prolonged morphological, physiological, and biochemical changes in cotton cultivars (Qamer et al., 2021). The insect pest larvae have voracious feeder effects at different growing stages of the host plant communities and relay negative effects on productivity (Mangrio et al., 2020). Several insect pest species including, jassid, thrips, whitefly, spotted bollworm, armyworm, American bollworm, and pink bollworm caused huge problems in Pakistan, massively affecting its quality and quantity (Faheem et al., 2022). No doubt, the application of toxic insecticides are rapid control strategy against pest population and cultivars gives more than double income compared to natural enemy field reservoirs (Sahito et al., 2015), but they are causative agents for environmental pollution and human health issues, hence should be used wisely (Mangrio and Sahito, 2023). However, the botanical insecticides exhibited potential alternatives (Mangrio et al., 2023; Mal et al., 2024). The thrips, spotted bollworm, jassid, and whitefly infest cotton genotypes throughout the vegetative and reproductive stages (Mal et al., 2022). It is strongly needed to boost up the activity of natural enemies to minimize insect pest infestation (Mangrio et al., 2023). In this context, early insect pest management precautions are highly needed for cotton crop security.

Materials and Methods

Study area

This study was performed to examine the comparative susceptibility among (n=03) Bt and (n=01) non-Bt cotton genotypes against, thrips, jassid, whitefly, and bollworm populations at natural field conditions, from agriculture form of Rais Nabi Bux Khan Mangrio, Naushahro Feroze. The study area shown in (Figure 1), mostly contains fertile lands, geographically, this area is located at 26.8463°N, latitude and 68.1253°E longitude.

 

Study design

The KMG-1 cotton genotype was created by a cross of NIAB-78 and MS-1, KMG-2 variety is the result of a cross of NIAB-78 and MS-2, KMG-3 genotype is the cross product of CIM-109 and MS-1, and NIAB-78 non-Bt genotype was developed from the Delta pine 16xAC-134 and F1 was irradiated with 30Kr gamma rays in 1981. This plant contains 20-26 sympodia and 18-25 monopodia. The (n=02) acres of land were prepared and the seed of three cross cotton genotypes and NIAB-78 were sown on May 8, 2023. The plant-to-plant spacing was kept at 68.5 X 60cm in a plot of 50 X 22 square meters. The fertilizers were applied at the rate of three bags of urea and 1 ½ bags of DAP per acre. The recommended doses of diammonium phosphate, DAP, and nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, NPK were given at the time of sowing, irrigation, and flowering stage. The details of genotypes tested in the present study were given in (Abro et al., 2004b). All cotton experimental varieties were managed by using the recommended agronomic “package of practices of Kharif crops” and insecticides were strictly prohibited in experimental plots.

Insect pest observation and data collection

The observations on cotton sucking and bollworm insect pests were made after 45 days of sowing and continued till crop harvest. For data recording five plants were selected in RCBD with four replications. From each plant, data were recorded from the bottom, middle, and top portions of the plant leaves. Intensive carefully the population of A. biguttula biguttula (Ishida), T. tabaci (Lind), B. tabaci (Gennadius), and Earias spp were observed and recorded. The data of pest insects were collected at weekly interval basis. The infestation of the pest was calculated by using of following formula:

Statistical analysis

The analysis of variance (ANOVA) of the entire pest collected data (RCBD) was analyzed through student package (SXW) statistics software version 8.1. The mean results interpretations were separated by using (LSD) method at (P< 0.05) probability level.

Results and Discussions

Prevalence of Thrips tabaci (Lind) on selected cotton cultivars

The population of T. tabaci (Lind), on above discussed cotton cultivars varied significantly (P<0.05) on different calendar dates. Comparatively higher pest population was recorded during the last week of June and the first fortnight of July. The fluctuation of pest population remained throughout the season but gradually declined in the 2nd week of October. Comparatively, the highest mean seasonal pest population was recorded on KMG-3, followed by KMG-2, KMG-1, and NIAB-78 an average per leaf population 1.66, 1.35, 1.12, and 1.01, with an overall mean 1.29, respectively. Mostly pest suspected cotton genotypes were recorded KMG-3 followed by KMG-2, KMG-1 but the NIAB-78 cotton cultivar found with more resistant to pest infestation. When the ANOVA of T. tabaci (Lind) was statistically analyzed was found (DF= 3; F= 2.11; P= 0.10) non-significant difference in given cotton genotypes, but significant difference was found (DF= 16; F= 2.61; P= 0.02) among pest data replications, as detail given in (Table 1).

Prevalence of Amrasca biguttula biguttula (Ishida) on selected cotton cultivars

In this study highest population of A. biguttula biguttula was recorded in KMG-3 compared with KMG-2, KMG-1, and NIAB-78 variety. However, the difference was non-significant (P< 0.05) among different calendar dates on cotton genotypes. The maximum pest prevalence was recorded during the last week of June and July. However, the population of A. biguttula biguttula gradually decreased during the month of October. The average per leaf population was recorded at 1.24, 1.02, 0.96, and 0.93 with an overall mean 1.04, respectively. The NIAB-78 cotton variety found with more resistance against A. biguttula biguttula as compared to KMG-1, KMG-2, and KMG-3. When per leaf jassid population was statistically analyzed, the ANOVA was found (DF= 3; F= 2.03; P= 0.11) with non-significant difference but significant difference (DF= 16; F= 4.28; P= 0.02) in pest population on cotton genotypes in all replication, detailed description is given in (Table 2).

Prevalence of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) on selected cotton cultivars

The overall highest seasonal mean pest population was recorded on KMG-3 followed by KMG-2, KMG-1, and NIAB-78 genotypes. The prevalence of pest population was found throughout the year but population gradually increased during the last week of June and July months. During, October the population of B. tabaci gradually decreased on cotton cultivars. The maximum per leaf mean population of the B. tabaci was recorded at 1.18, 0.95, 0.83, and 0.79 with overall 0.94, respectively. ANOVA showed difference in population on different days found statistically non-significant at (P< 0.0.5). The KMG-3 cotton genotype was found with less resistance power against B. tabaci followed by KMG-2, KMG-1, and NIAB-78. When data of whitefly per leaf was subjected to analyzed found non-significant difference (DF= 3; F= 3.46; P= 0.12) but significant (DF= 16; F= 15. 7; P= 0.03) among pest data replication, further justification is shown in (Table 3).

Prevalence of Earias spp., on selected cotton cultivars

These bollworm species cause the shedding of fruiting bodies of cotton and reduce the potential yield of cotton crops. In the present research work

 

Table 1: Thrips tabaci (Lind) mean population on different cotton cultivars.

Date	NIAB-78	KMG-1	KMG-2	KMG-3	Mean±SD
24/6/2023	1.78abc	1.82abc	1.81abc	4.32def	2.43±0.63bcd
1/7/2023	1.31abc	1.11abc	1.13abc	5.35efg	2.23±1.04bcd
8/7/2023	1.71abc	1.17abc	1.65abc	3.12cde	1.91±0.42abc
15/7/2023	1.04abc	1.33abc	3.08cde	2.09bcd	1.89±0.46abc
22/7/2023	1.27abc	1.42abc	1.26abc	1.37abc	1.33±0.04abc
29/7/2023	0.88ab	1.95abc	1.38abc	1.28abc	1.37±0.22abc
5/8/2023	1.67ab	1.78abc	2.56bcd	1.35abc	1.84±0.26abc
12/8/2023	0.86ab	1.18abc	2.07bcd	1.38abc	1.37±0.26abc
19/8/2023	0.78ab	1.21abc	1.11abc	1.91abc	1.25±0.24abc
26/8/2023	0.76ab	0.81ab	0.82ab	0.78ab	0.79±0.01ab
2/9/2023	0.73ab	0.69ab	1.71ab	0.76ab	0.97±0.25ab
9/9/2023	0.78ab	0.73ab	0.75ab	0.77ab	0.76±0.01ab
16/9/2023	0.75ab	0.75ab	0.77ab	0.76ab	0.76±0.00ab
23/9/2023	0.79ab	0.79ab	0.68ab	0.75ab	0.75±0.03ab
30/9/2023	0.81ab	0.94ab	0.65ab	0.79ab	0.80±0.06ab
7/10/2023	0.65ab	0.72ab	0.78ab	0.77ab	0.73±0.03ab
14/10/2023	0.63ab	0.69ab	0.75ab	0.78ab	0.71±0.03ab

 

The same letters in the horizontal columns are non-significant (P< 0.05) from each other by LSD. Datatransformed.

 

Table 2: Amrasca biguttula biguttula (Ishida) mean population on different cotton cultivars.

Date	NIAB-78	KMG-1	KMG-2	KMG-3	Mean±SD
24/6/2023	1.09abc	1.22abc	1.13abc	2.15bcd	1.40±0.25abc
1/7/2023	1.12abc	1.37abc	1.17abc	1.68abc	1.34±0.13abc
8/7/2023	1.24abc	1.31abc	0.98ab	1.12abc	1.16±0.07abc
15/7/2023	0.98ab	1.12abc	1.77abc	2.68bcd	1.64±0.39abc
22/7/2023	1.23abc	1.08abc	1.13abc	1.21abc	1.16±0.03abc
29/7/2023	1.37abc	1.11abc	1.21abc	1.36abc	1.26±0.06abc
5/8/2023	0.87ab	1.24abc	1.36abc	2.45bcd	1.48±0.34abc
12/8/2023	0.89ab	1.13abc	1.13abc	1.23abc	1.10±0.07abc
19/8/2023	0.97ab	0.88ab	1.68abc	1.57abc	1.28±0.20abc
26/8/2023	0.84ab	0.79ab	0.76ab	0.71ab	0.78±0.03ab
2/9/2023	0.78ab	0.83ab	0.71ab	0.72ab	0.76±0.03ab
9/9/2023	0.76ab	0.77ab	0.72ab	0.69ab	0.74±0.02ab
16/9/2023	0.77ab	0.85ab	0.69ab	0.78ab	0.77±0.03ab
23/9/2023	0.76ab	0.76ab	0.76ab	0.65ab	0.73±0.03ab
30/9/2023	0.73ab	0.73ab	0.79ab	0.77ab	0.76±0.02ab
7/10/2023	0.77ab	0.64ab	0.78ab	0.68ab	0.72±0.03ab
14/10/2023	0.69ab	0.57a	0.65ab	0.69ab	0.65±0.03a

 

The same letters in horizontal columns are non-significant (P< 0.05) from each other by LSD.Data transformed.

 

Table 3: Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) mean population on different cotton cultivars.

Date	NIAB-78	KMG-1	KMG-2	KMG-3	Mean±SD
24/6/2023	1.58abc	1.61abc	1.88abc	1.98abc	1.76±0.10abc
1/7/2023	1.53abc	1.62abc	1.76abc	1.87abc	1.70±0.08abc
8/7/2023	1.09abc	1.13abc	1.37abc	1.68abc	1.32±.014abc
15/7/2023	1.02abc	1.07abc	1.22abc	1.57abc	1.22±0.12abc
22/7/2023	0.94ab	0.98ab	1.14abc	1.53abc	1.15±0.13abc
29/7/2023	0.91ab	0.93ab	1.09abc	1.45abc	1.10±0.13abc
5/8/2023	0.78ab	0.83ab	1.05abc	1.56abc	1.06±0.18abc
12/8/2023	0.76ab	0.78ab	0.87ab	0.93ab	0.84±0.04ab
19/8/2023	0.68ab	0.69ab	0.78ab	0.87ab	0.76±0.04ab
26/8/2023	0.63ab	0.67ab	0.74ab	0.84ab	0.72±0.05ab
2/9/2023	0.63ab	0.65ab	0.72ab	0.98ab	0.75±0.08ab
9/9/2023	0.61ab	0.66ab	0.69ab	0.87ab	0.71±0.06ab
16/9/2023	0.56a	0.59a	0.65ab	0.83ab	0.66±0.06a
23/9/2023	0.53a	0.57a	0.62ab	0.88ab	0.65±0.08a
30/9/2023	0.49a	0.52a	0.57a	0.78ab	0.59±0.07a
7/10/2023	0.43a	0.47a	0.52a	0.73ab	0.54±0.07a
14/10/2023	0.38a	0.43a	0.51a	0.83ab	0.54±0.10a

 

The same letters in horizontal columns are non-significant (P< 0.05) from each other by LSD. Data transformed.

 

Table 4: Earias spp., mean population on different cotton cultivars.

Date	NIAB-78	KMG-1	KMG-2	KMG-3	Mean±SD
24/6/2023	1.84abc	1.87abc	1.98abc	3.56cde	2.31±0.42bcd
1/7/2023	1.77abc	1.79abc	1.81abc	3.23cde	2.15±0.36bcd
8/7/2023	1.67abc	1.69abc	1.74abc	3.12cde	2.06±0.36bcd
15/7/2023	1.29abc	1.37abc	1.43abc	1.87abc	1.49±0.13abc
22/7/2023	1.19abc	1.28abc	1.31abc	1.76abc	1.39±0.13abc
29/7/2023	0.83ab	0.87ab	1.09abc	1.67abc	1.12±0.19abc
5/8/2023	0.69ab	0.83ab	0.88ab	1.55abc	0.99±0.19ab
12/8/2023	0.77ab	0.79ab	0.84ab	1.47abc	0.97±0.17ab
19/8/2023	0.69ab	0.72ab	0.78ab	1.41abc	0.90±0.17ab
26/8/2023	0.65ab	0.68ab	0.76ab	1.37abc	0.87±0.17ab
2/9/2023	0.62ab	0.65ab	0.73ab	1.22abc	0.81±0.14ab
9/9/2023	0.53a	0.58a	0.69ab	1.08abc	0.72±0.12ab
16/9/2023	0.49a	0.51a	0.57a	1.02abc	0.65±0.13a
23/9/2023	0.44a	0.48a	0.52a	0.98ab	0.61±0.13a
30/9/2023	0.39a	0.43a	0.49a	0.87ab	0.55±0.11a
7/10/2023	0.29a	0.38a	0.47a	0.81ab	0.49±0.11a
14/10/2023	0.27a	0.35a	0.39a	0.79ab	0.45±0.12a

 

The same letters in horizontal columns are non-significant (P< 0.05) from each other by LSD. Data transformed.

 

significantly high infestation of Earias spp., was recorded on KMG-3, followed by KMG-2, KMG-1, and Naib-78. The pest insect maximum mean population was recorded at 1.63, 0.96, 0.89, 0.84, with an overall 1.08 mean population, respectively. During the last week of June peak population of the pest species was calculated but gradually decreased in October on cotton genotypes. The population of Earias spp. recorded on different cotton genotypes significantly varied (P< 0.05). The cotton genotype NIAB-78 was recorded with more resistance against spotted bollworm infestation followed by KMG-1, KMG-2, and KMG-3 cotton cultivars. The ANOVA of the spotted bollworm calculated non-significant difference (DF= 3; F= 6.06; P= 0.09), but among pest data replications found with significant difference (DF= 16; F= 8.20; P= 0.03), as shown in (Table 4).

Overall mean insect pest population on selected Bt and non-Bt cotton cultivars

Many species of insect pest species massively hit Bt and non-Bt cotton cultivars throughout the vegetative and reproductive stages and reduce yield in terms of quantity and quality. The overall higher pest infestation was calculated on KMG-3, compared to KMG-2, KMG-1, and NIAB-78. The overall maximum effect of T. tabaci was recorded at (1.29) followed by Spotted bollworm (1.08), Jassid (1.04), and Whitefly (0.94), respectively. The analysis of variance among the pairwise homogenous group in the comparison test found non-significant difference (DF= 3; F= 1.27; P= 0.33) on cotton cultivars and significant difference (DF= 3; F= 7.39; P= 0.02) in pest data replication as shown in (Figure 2).

 

The sucking insect pests of cotton like jassid, whitefly, thrips, and spotted bollworms are important pests during seedling and vegetative stages, making plants weak, ultimately causing wilting and shedding of leaves. This study was performed to assess the population fluctuation of selected insect pests. The maximum mean population (1.66) of thrips tabaci was recorded on the KMG-3 cotton cultivar and the minimum (1.01) on NIAB-78. (Sahito et al., 2020) cultivated (n=09) non-transgenic cotton cultivars, of which maximum pest resistant power was recorded in Marvi (CRIS-5A) and CRIS-467 against sucking complex but CRIS-342 (7.01) and Sindh-1 (7.04) found to be less insect pest resistance. The maximum mean population of spotted bollworm was recorded (1.63) and minimum (0.84) on KMG-3 and NIAB-78 cotton genotypes. Earias spp., prefers square formation to the host plants, and both transgenic and conventional are suspected by spotted bollworm (Abro et al., 2004b). (Asif et al., 2023), sown Sadori, NIA-88, NIA-30, and NIA-98 cotton genotypes during 15th April, May, June, the maximum infestation of jassid, spotted bollworm was recorded in April, thrips in May and all the cotton genotypes found with cotton spotted bollworm fluctuation but maximum insect pest fluctuation was observed at the upper canopy compared to lower parts of the plant leaves.

The maximum jassid population fluctuation was calculated in June and the minimum in October with the great conformity of (Siraj et al., 2019) to find out the prevalence of jassid on different Bt. cotton cultivar in relation to different temperatures, air, rainfall and relative humidity, in September the maximum and November minimum mean population was observed per leaf. (Avinash et al., 2022) evaluated jassid population on twenty-six cotton cultivars during Kharif season 2020-21, among them four genotypes were recorded with susceptible, three highly, and nineteen with moderate resistance power. The highest whitefly population was gathered during June and the lowest in October, which may be the environmental fluctuation. (Khan et al., 2018), documented prevalence of cotton crop insect pests viz., Pectinophora gossypiella, Amrasca devastans, and Bemisia tabaci depends on temperature, relative humidity, and rainfall. In the present study, three transgenic cotton genotypes were produced locally to compare their resistance against sucking and bollworm insect pests with one conventional Niab-78 variety. Scientific information is lacking on the comparative resistance of these genotypes against sucking and bollworm insect pests in our agro-ecological condition.

Conclusion and Recommendations

The cotton is the trademark industry of Pakistan. The results concluded that higher population of whitefly, T. tabaci, (Lind) jassid, A. biguttula biguttula (Ishida), spotted bollworm, Earias spp. and whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) were recorded in KMG-3 followed by KMG-2, KMG-1 and NIAB-78. The findings of this scientific study show that NIAB-78 cotton cultivars have more resistance power compared to other cotton genotypes, hence recommended. Moreover, develop to assist against pest control outbreaks through advanced IPM strategies.

Acknowledgements

The authors are highly thankful for the agricultural form of Rais Nabi Bux Khan Mangrio, where seeds of the cotton cultivars were sown and population of the insect pest species were observed and gathered. Last but not least, authors extend thanks to farmers of the agriculture form, their jolly support and help made it easiest for us throughout the study period.

Novelty Statement

Gossypium hirsutum L. is the “white gold” commercial cash crop of Pakistan. Sindh province is regarded as the cotton growing belt of the country. The cotton farming community of Sindh is less aware of identifying and to avoiding prior pest infestation. In this context, this scientific contribution will be supportive tool to early management and cotton crop security.

Author’s Contribution

W.M. Mangrio: Main author of this research manuscript, who gathered pest data, arranged, performed, and conceived experiments.

H.A. Sahito: Supervised the research work, and statistically analyzed pest data.

A.H. Mastoi: Helped in article review.

S. Sattar: Arranged tools for pest data collection.

F.I. Sahito and S.A. Jakhrani: Played support at any stage regarding this research work.

Availability of data and materials

At the request of the corresponding author, the findings of this scientific contribution are available.

Publication consent

All the responsibilities are accepted by the corresponding author for the release of this scientific contribution.

Conflict of interest

There is no financial or personal relationship regarding any part of this scientific documentary.

References

Abro, G.H., A.J. Memon., T.S. Syed and A.A. Shaikh. 2004b. Infestation of Earias spp. on cotton and okra grown as mono and mix crops. Pak. J. Biol. Sci., 7: 937-942. https://doi.org/10.3923/pjbs.2004.937.942

Ashraf, J., D. Zuo., Q. Wang., W. Malik., Y. Zhang., M.A. Abid and G. Song. 2018. Recent insights into cotton functional genomics: progress and future perspectives. Plant Biotech., 16(3): 699-713.

Asif, M.U., R. Muhammad., M.I. Awais., J.A. Tariq. 2023. Sowing time optimization for insect pest management and enhanced crop yield in cotton. Agric. Sci. J., 5(2): 47-56. https://doi.org/10.56520/asj.v5i2.286

Avinash, R.S.W., N.K. Bhuthe., A. Ingle and S.R. Swami. 2022. Field evaluation of cotton genotypes against Jassid resistance. Pharma Inno. J., 11(8): 1487-1490.

Faheem, U., A. Qurban., H. Mussurat., A. Abrar., N. Tamsila., A. Ghayour., A. Idrees and M. Madiha. 2022. Field evaluation of host-parasitoid scenario in different varieties of cotton. Sarhad J. Agric., 38(3): 1007-1016. 10.17582/journal.sja/2022/38.3.1007.1016 https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2022/38.3.1007.1016

Karar, H., M.A. Bashir., M. Haider., N. Haider., K.A. Khan., H.A. Ghramh., M.J. Ansari., C. Mutlu and M.A. Suilman. 2020. Pest susceptibility, yield and fiber traits of transgenic cotton cultivars in Multan, Pakistan. PLoS ONE., 15(7): e0236340. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236340

Khan, R.R., M. Naveed., K.P. Akhtar., U. Najeeb and M. Hussain. 2018. Prevalence of the major pests in transgenic and non-transgenic cotton genotype in response to climatic factors and their impact on yield, Arch. Phytopatho. Plant Prot., 51:17-18, 927-938. https://doi.org/10.1080/03235408.2018.1526249

Mal, B., H.A. Sahito., A.H. Mastoi., S. Rahim., A.K. Pathan., W.M. Mangrio and T. Kousar. 2022. Food preference and comparative feeding efficacy of Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens) in population management of invasive Cotton mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis (Tinsley). Pure Appl. Biol., 11(2): 651-660. https://doi.org/10.19045/bspab.2022.110066

Mal, B., W.M. Mangrio., H.A. Sahito., A.A. Siddiqui., F.I. Sahito., S.N. Khuhro and F.I. Sahito. 2024. Comparative efficacy of neem oil derivatives with imidacloprid against okra Jassid, Amrasca biguttula biguttula (Ishida). Pak. J. Biotechnol., 21(2): 250-257. https://doi.org/10.34016/pjbt.2024.21.02.915

Mangrio, W.M and H.A. Sahito. 2023. Comparative toxicant efficacy of some novel insecticides against metamorphosis of Papilio demoleus (L.) Larvae. J. Appl. Res. Plant Sci., 4(1): 425-433. https://doi.org/10.38211/joarps.2023.04.01.51

Mangrio, W.M., H.A. Sahito., F.I. Sahito., F.A. Jatoi and N.H. Jakhrani. 2023. Biological control and antagonistic activity of natural enemies against, Papilio demoleus at Sahati region of Sindh-Pakistan. Pak. J. Agric. Engl. Vet. Sci., 39(1): 16-25. https://doi.org/10.47432/2023.39.1.4

Mangrio, W.M., H.A. Sahito., B. Mal., T. Kousar., Z.H. Shah and F.A. Jatoi. 2020. Incidence and distribution of Lemon butterfly (Papilio demoleus L.) on five alternate Citrus hosts at Sahati region, Sindh-Pakistan. Pure Appl. Biol., 9(4): 2637-2647.

Mangrio, W.M., F.A. Jatoi., H.A. Sahito., F.I. Sahito., B. Mal and N. Qureshi. 2024. Efficacy of botanical insecticides against, Batrachedra Amydraula on Phoenix dactylifera at field conditions. Pak. J. Agric. Res., 37(1): 79-87. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjar/2024/37.1.79.87

Marral, M.W.R., F. Ahmad., S. Ul-Allah., A. Rehman., S. Farooq and M. Hussain. 2023. Influence of transgenic Bt cotton on the productivity of various cotton-based cropping systems in Pakistan. Agric., 13: 276 https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13020276

Parmar P.R., G.R. Bhanderi., H.R. Desai and R.D. Patel. 2023. Efficacy of seed treatment chemicals against sucking pests of Bt cotton. Int. J. Agric. Sci., 15(1): 12153-12156.

Qamer, Z., M.T. Chaudhary., X. Du., L. Hinze and M.T. Azhar. 2021. Review of oxidative stress and antioxidative defense mechanisms in Gossypium hirsutum L. in response to extreme abiotic conditions. J. Cotton Res., 4(9: 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42397-021-00086-4

Razzaq, A., M.M. Zafar., A. Ali., A. Hafeez., W. Batool., Y. Shi., W. Gong and Y. Yuan. 2021. Cotton germplasm improvement and progress in Pakistan. J. Cotton Res., 4(1): 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42397-020-00077-x

Sahito, H.A., Z.H. Shah., M. Ruk., M.Z. Shah and W.M. Mangrio. 2015. Toxicant efficacy of some insecticides against whitefly, Bemisia tabaci under cotton field conditions at Khairpur-Sindh. Aca J. Entomol., 8(4): 193-200.

Sahito, H.A., Z.H. Shah., T. Kousar., W.M. Mangrio and F.A. Jatoi. 2020. Resistance of non-Bt., cotton varieties against sucking pests under vitro conditions at Sindh, Pakistan. Int. J. Biosci., 15(3): 514-523.

Sahito, H.A., Z.H. Shah., T. Kousar., W.M. Mangrio., N.A. Mallah., F.A. Jatoi and W.A. Kubar. 2017. Comparative efficacy of novel pesticides against Jassid, Amrasca biguttula (Ishida) on Cotton crop under field conditions at Khairpur, Sindh, Pakistan. Singapore J. Sci. Res., 7(1): 1-8. https://doi.org/10.3923/sjsres.2017.1.8

Saleem, M., D. Hussain., G. Ghouse., M. Abbas and S.W. Fisher. 2019. Monitoring of insecticide resistance in Spodoptera litura (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) from four districts of Punjab, Pakistan to conventional and new chemistry insecticides. Crop Prot., 79: 177-184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2015.08.024

Shah, Z.H., H.A. Sahito., T. Kousar., M.M. Rind., F.A. Jatoi and W.M. Mangrio. 2017. Integrated pest management of Cotton thrips, Thrips tabaci (Lindeman, 1889) through selected pesticides under vitro conditions. Int. J. Res. Estud. Zool., 3(4): 76-83. https://doi.org/10.20431/2454-941X.0304011

Shuli, F., A.H. Jarwar., X. Wang., L. Wang and Q. Ma. 2018. Overview of the cotton in Pakistan and its future prospects. Pak. J. Agric. Res., 31(4): 396-407. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjar/2018/31.4.396.407

Siraj, Z., A. Farooq and Z. Mehmood. 2019. Seasonal occurrence of jassid (An insect pest) on Bt. cotton in sourthern Punjab, Pakistan. Sarhad J. Agri., 35(3): 856-863. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2019/35.3.856.863

Tarazi, R., J.L.S. Jimenez., M.F.S. Vaslin. 2020. Biotechnological solutions for major cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) pathogens and pests. Biotechnol. Res. Innov., 3: 19-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biori.2020.01.001

Tokel, D., B.N. Genc and I.I. Ozyigit. 2022. Economic impacts of Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) cotton. J. Int. Fibro., 19: 4622-4639. https://doi.org/10.1080/15440478.2020.1870613