Abstract
A field trial was conducted at Central Research Farm (CRF), SHUATS, Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh during the Kharif season of 2021. The field was laid in a Randomized Block Design (RBD) replicated thrice with seven treatments. The larval population per plant was taken as the first spray and second spray on one day before spraying and 3rd,7th and 14th day after each spray all the treatments tested and found to significantly reduced the larval population compared to control. The results of the efficacy showed that the mean larval population recorded in the treatment Chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SC (3.45%), was most effective. The next effective treatments was Spinosad 45 SC (3.70%) followed by Emamectin benzoate (3.80%), Metarihizium anisopliae (4.00%), Neem oil (4.15%), Karanj oil (4.30%) as compared to Control (7.10%). The best and most economical treatment in terms of yield and B: C ratio was Chlorantraniliprole 18.5SC (20.98q/ha and 1:3.99). It was followed by Spinosad 45SC (20.62 q/ha and 1:3.92). Emamectin benzoate 5% SG (17.45 q/ha and 1:3.84), Metarhizium anisopliae (17.01 q/ha and 1:3.83), Neem oil 5% (16.6 q/ha and 1:3.61), Karanj oil 5% (15.13 q/ha and 1:3.46), as compared to control (9.5q/ha and1:2.28).
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 19
Claim · model-written summary
All insecticide and biopesticide treatments significantly reduced the Maruca vitrata larval population on green gram compared with the control.
- Taxon
- Green Gram
.jpg?width=60)
Vigna radiata var. radiatat0 - Treatment
- all the treatments testede0
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrata
Maruca vitratat1pest - Outcome
- larval populatione0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“all the treatments tested and found to significantly reduced the larval population compared to control”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram plots treated with Chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SC had a mean Maruca vitrata larval population of 3.45%, lower than the control (7.10%).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SCe1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- larval population per plante0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede1
- Value
- 3.45%e1
- Qualifier
- 7.10%e2
- Comparator
- Controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“larval population per plant”
e1“Chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SC (3.45%)”
e2“as compared to Control (7.10%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram plots treated with Spinosad 45 SC had a mean Maruca vitrata larval population of 3.70%, lower than the control (7.10%).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Spinosad 45 SCe1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- larval population per plante0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede1
- Value
- 3.70%e1
- Qualifier
- 7.10%e2
- Comparator
- Controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“larval population per plant”
e1“Spinosad 45 SC (3.70%)”
e2“as compared to Control (7.10%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram plots treated with Emamectin benzoate had a mean Maruca vitrata larval population of 3.80%, lower than the control (7.10%).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Emamectin benzoatee1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- larval population per plante0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede1
- Value
- 3.80%e1
- Qualifier
- 7.10%e2
- Comparator
- Controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“larval population per plant”
e1“Emamectin benzoate (3.80%)”
e2“as compared to Control (7.10%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram plots treated with Metarihizium anisopliae had a mean Maruca vitrata larval population of 4.00%, lower than the control (7.10%).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Metarihizium anisopliaee1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Second interactor
- Metarihizium anisopliaee1biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- larval population per plante0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede1
- Value
- 4.00%e1
- Qualifier
- 7.10%e2
- Comparator
- Controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“larval population per plant”
e1“Metarihizium anisopliae (4.00%)”
e2“as compared to Control (7.10%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram plots treated with Neem oil had a mean Maruca vitrata larval population of 4.15%, lower than the control (7.10%).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Neem oile1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- larval population per plante0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede1
- Value
- 4.15%e1
- Qualifier
- 7.10%e2
- Comparator
- Controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“larval population per plant”
e1“Neem oil (4.15%)”
e2“as compared to Control (7.10%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram plots treated with Karanj oil had a mean Maruca vitrata larval population of 4.30%, lower than the control (7.10%).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Karanj oile1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- larval population per plante0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede1
- Value
- 4.30%e1
- Qualifier
- 7.10%e2
- Comparator
- Controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“larval population per plant”
e1“Karanj oil (4.30%)”
e2“as compared to Control (7.10%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram treated with Chlorantraniliprole 18.5SC yielded 20.98q/ha, higher than the control (9.5 q/ha).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Chlorantraniliprole 18.5SCe1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 20.98q/hae1
- Qualifier
- 9.5q/hae2
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“in terms of yield and B: C ratio”
e1“Chlorantraniliprole 18.5SC (20.98q/ha and 1:3.99)”
e2“control (9.5q/ha and1:2.28)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram treated with Spinosad 45SC yielded 20.62 q/ha, higher than the control (9.5 q/ha).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Spinosad 45SCe1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 20.62 q/hae1
- Qualifier
- 9.5q/hae2
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“in terms of yield and B: C ratio”
e1“Spinosad 45SC (20.62 q/ha and 1:3.92)”
e2“control (9.5q/ha and1:2.28)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram treated with Emamectin benzoate 5% SG yielded 17.45 q/ha, higher than the control (9.5 q/ha).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Emamectin benzoate 5% SGe1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 17.45 q/hae1
- Qualifier
- 9.5q/hae2
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“in terms of yield and B: C ratio”
e1“Emamectin benzoate 5% SG (17.45 q/ha and 1:3.84)”
e2“control (9.5q/ha and1:2.28)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram treated with Metarhizium anisopliae yielded 17.01 q/ha, higher than the control (9.5 q/ha).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Metarhizium anisopliaee1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Second interactor
- Metarhizium anisopliae
Metarhizium anisopliaee1biocontrol_agent - Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 17.01 q/hae1
- Qualifier
- 9.5q/hae2
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“in terms of yield and B: C ratio”
e1“Metarhizium anisopliae (17.01 q/ha and 1:3.83)”
e2“control (9.5q/ha and1:2.28)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram treated with Neem oil 5% yielded 16.6 q/ha, higher than the control (9.5 q/ha).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Neem oil 5%e1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 16.6 q/hae1
- Qualifier
- 9.5q/hae2
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“in terms of yield and B: C ratio”
e1“Neem oil 5% (16.6 q/ha and 1:3.61)”
e2“control (9.5q/ha and1:2.28)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram treated with Karanj oil 5% yielded 15.13 q/ha, higher than the control (9.5 q/ha).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Karanj oil 5%e1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 15.13 q/hae1
- Qualifier
- 9.5q/hae2
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“in terms of yield and B: C ratio”
e1“Karanj oil 5% (15.13 q/ha and 1:3.46)”
e2“control (9.5q/ha and1:2.28)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram treated with Chlorantraniliprole 18.5SC had a benefit-cost ratio of 1:3.99, higher than the control (1:2.28).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Chlorantraniliprole 18.5SCe1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- B: C ratioe0
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 1:3.99e1
- Qualifier
- 1:2.28e2
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“in terms of yield and B: C ratio”
e1“Chlorantraniliprole 18.5SC (20.98q/ha and 1:3.99)”
e2“control (9.5q/ha and1:2.28)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram treated with Spinosad 45SC had a benefit-cost ratio of 1:3.92, higher than the control (1:2.28).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Spinosad 45SCe1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- B: C ratioe0
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 1:3.92e1
- Qualifier
- 1:2.28e2
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“in terms of yield and B: C ratio”
e1“Spinosad 45SC (20.62 q/ha and 1:3.92)”
e2“control (9.5q/ha and1:2.28)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram treated with Emamectin benzoate 5% SG had a benefit-cost ratio of 1:3.84, higher than the control (1:2.28).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Emamectin benzoate 5% SGe1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- B: C ratioe0
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 1:3.84e1
- Qualifier
- 1:2.28e2
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“in terms of yield and B: C ratio”
e1“Emamectin benzoate 5% SG (17.45 q/ha and 1:3.84)”
e2“control (9.5q/ha and1:2.28)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram treated with Metarhizium anisopliae had a benefit-cost ratio of 1:3.83, higher than the control (1:2.28).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Metarhizium anisopliaee1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Second interactor
- Metarhizium anisopliaeMetarhizium anisopliaee1biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- B: C ratioe0
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 1:3.83e1
- Qualifier
- 1:2.28e2
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“in terms of yield and B: C ratio”
e1“Metarhizium anisopliae (17.01 q/ha and 1:3.83)”
e2“control (9.5q/ha and1:2.28)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram treated with Neem oil 5% had a benefit-cost ratio of 1:3.61, higher than the control (1:2.28).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Neem oil 5%e1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- B: C ratioe0
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 1:3.61e1
- Qualifier
- 1:2.28e2
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“in terms of yield and B: C ratio”
e1“Neem oil 5% (16.6 q/ha and 1:3.61)”
e2“control (9.5q/ha and1:2.28)”
Claim · model-written summary
Green gram treated with Karanj oil 5% had a benefit-cost ratio of 1:3.46, higher than the control (1:2.28).
- Taxon
- Green GramVigna radiata var. radiatat0
- Treatment
- Karanj oil 5%e1
- Interactor
- Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratat1pest
- Outcome
- B: C ratioe0
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 1:3.46e1
- Qualifier
- 1:2.28e2
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Green Gram”
t1“Maruca vitrata”
e0“in terms of yield and B: C ratio”
e1“Karanj oil 5% (15.13 q/ha and 1:3.46)”
e2“control (9.5q/ha and1:2.28)”
The same questions in other papers
emamectin benzoate · Maruca vitrata · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
chlorantraniliprole · Maruca vitrata · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →spinosad · Maruca vitrata · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →botanical · Maruca vitrata · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.