Abstract

A field and semi-field investigation was undertaken at the Central Horticultural Research
Station and the Department of Entomology, OUAT, Bhubaneswar, during October 2024 to June
2025 to study the seasonal incidence of insect pests and their natural enemies on sarpagandha
(Rauvolfia serpentina) and to evaluate the efficacy of selected botanicals. The experiment was
laid out in a Completely Randomized Design with nine treatments replicated thrice, consisting
of seven plant extracts, one neem-based standard check, and an untreated control. The
treatments were: T₁ – Azadirachta indica (Neem), T₂ – Pongamia pinnata (Karanja), T₃ –
Annona squamosa (Custard apple), T₄ – Ageratum conyzoides (Billygoat weed), T₅ – Datura
stramonium (Jimsonweed), T₆ – Calotropis gigantea (Indian milkweed), T₇ – Aegle marmelos
(Indian bael), T₈ – Neemazol 1500 ppm (standard check), and T₉ – untreated control. Seasonal
incidence studies revealed six major arthropod pests red spider mite (Tetranychus urticae),
mealybug (Planococcus citri), sphingid moths (Deilephila nerii and Psilogramma menephron),
pod bug (Riptortus pedestris), gundhi bug (Leptocorisa oratorius), and green stink bug (Nezara
viridula). Populations peaked during February–April for sucking pests and November–
December for bugs. Natural enemies such as Coccinella transversalis and lynx spiders
(Oxyopes salticus) coincided with pest [Link] analysis showed that red spider
mite and mealybug populations were significantly positively correlated with maximum
temperature and negatively with rainfall and wind velocity. Sphingid moths had a significant
negative association with maximum temperature and positive with minimum temperature. Pod
bug and stink bug were significantly negatively correlated with morning humidity, while gundhi
bug was significantly negatively associated with rainfall. Other factors showed non-significant
effects. Among treatments, T₈ (Neemazol) was most effective, recording the lowest mean red
spider mite population (7.01 mites/cm², 42.82% ROC) and mealybug density (4.03/cm², 49.31%
ROC). This was followed by T₅ (D. stramonium, 38.21% ROC) and T₁ (A. indica, 36.65%
ROC). Other botanicals such as T₂ (P. pinnata) and T₆ (C. gigantea) offered moderate
suppression. For mealybug suppression, T₈ (Neemazol) again proved superior, recording the
lowest mean density (3.84/cm²) with 51.76% ROC. The next best treatments were T₆ (Indian
milkweed, 47.86% ROC) and T₁ (Neem, 43.72% ROC). Moderate suppression was noted in T₅
(Jimsonweed, 33.67% ROC) and T₂ (Karanja, 33.29% ROC), whereas lower levels of control
were achieved by T₄ (Billygoat weed, 30.77% ROC), T₇ (Indian bael, 27.26% ROC), and T₃
(Custard apple, 22.49% ROC).

30
 INTRODUCTION
Sarpagandha (Rauvolfia serpentina Benth.) is one of India's most important
native medicinal plant, belonging to the Apocynaceae family. The Rauvolfia genus has
around 85 species found in tropical areas, with R. serpentina and R. tetraphylla being the
two most commonly grown for commercial uses. Sarpagandha is an upright, evergreen,
perennial undershrub, typically reaching heights of 15 to 75 cm, though it can grow up to
90 cm in ideal conditions. The plant features large leaves that grow in whorls of three,
dark green on top and pale green underneath. It produces white to pink or violet flowers
from March to May and again from July to November. The fruits are small, about 7.5
mm, and can be either didymous or single, turning purple-black when ripe, with 1 to 2
hard seeds. The root system is robust, with tuberous roots measuring 20 to 50 cm in
length and 1.5 to 2.5 cm in thickness. The root bark makes up 40 to 60 % of the root and
holds around 90 % of the plant's alkaloids. The roots release a strong, acrid smell and
have a bitter taste. Sarpagandha prefers areas with 200 to 250 cm of annual rainfall and
altitudes up to 1000 m. It thrives in rich, deep soils that are high in organic matter (De
and Dey, 2010).

Rauvolfia serpentina grows naturally in the moist deciduous forests of South

and Southeast Asia, including India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Malaysia,
Indonesia, and the Andaman Islands. Much of the raw drug continues to be sourced from
the wild. In India, this species occurs naturally in regions like Sirmor and Gorakhpur
(Uttar Pradesh), North Bengal, Assam, Bihar, and the Khasi, Jaintia, and Garo Hills. It is
also plentiful in parts of the Western Ghats, including Goa, Coorg, and districts of
Karnataka (North Kanara, Shivamogga) and Kerala (Palghat, Calicut, Trichur). Odisha,
Andhra Pradesh, and Himachal Pradesh, especially in the Godavari catchment area, also
feature abundant R. serpentina populations. The plant typically grows under the canopy
of Shorea robusta forests and bamboo thickets (Kumari et al, 2021).

Traditional Indian medicine systems, such as Ayurveda, Siddha, and Unani have
used various parts of plants to treat many ailments for a long time. These systems are still
the primary healthcare choice for nearly 70% of India's rural population. Similar
traditional practices exist in countries like China, Korea, Singapore, and across West

31
Asia. India remains a leader in the global trade of many plant-based drugs, including
those derived from opium poppy, isabgol, senna, cinchona, rauvolfia, periwinkle,
gloriosa, papaya (for papain) and [Link] roots of R. serpentina are the main
medicinal part, used in India for over 400 years. They are traditionally employed to treat
snake bites, insect stings, neurological and psychiatric disorders like mania and epilepsy,
chronic skin issues such as psoriasis, excessive sweating and itching, as well as
gynaecological problems and heart conditions like angina. The roots are also used to
induce contractions during childbirth. In modern medicine, its alkaloids, especially
reserpine, are recognized for their effectiveness in treating high blood pressure and as
tranquilizers (Mittal et al., 2012). More than 80 alkaloids have been identified in
Rauvolfia species, including reserpine, serpentine, ajmalicine, and yohimbine. The
alkaloid content in dried roots varies from 1.7% to 3%, depending on the plant variety
and growing conditions. Significant research has been done on their chemical makeup,
effects, and therapeutic applications in treating high blood pressure and neuropsychiatric
issues (Deshmukh et al., 2012).

Medicinal plants like sarpagandha are vital for traditional medicine systems and
play an important role in the herbal industry. They provide livelihoods and healthcare
options for many rural communities. India has about 1,178 medicinal plant species that
are commercially traded, with 242 species consuming over 100 metric tonnes each year.
Exports of Ayurvedic and herbal products from India have shown significant growth. For
the fiscal year 2024-2025, the export value reached approximately $689 million (about
₹5,830 crores), reflecting a 5.86% increase over the previous year. Export quantities also
rose sharply, going up by 21.46% to about 128,738 metric tonnes The total herbal raw
drugs consumption in India involves hundreds of thousands of metric tonnes, with the
domestic herbal medicine market revenue reported to be around $4.6 billion in 2023,
expected to grow rapidly to $26.8 billion by 2030 with a CAGR of about 28.5. (Statista
2025)

Odisha, with its various agroclimatic zones, has great potential for growing
medicinal plants. Districts like Rayagada, Koraput, Malkangiri, and Sambalpur are
particularly rich in R. serpentina diversity, with around 136 known species. The
increasing demand for herbal drugs has led to large-scale cultivation, supported by
government initiatives and market demand. The State Government, with help from the
National Medicinal Plant Board (NMPB) and the Ministry of AYUSH, actively promotes

32
the establishment of herbal gardens in Odisha, aiding in the conservation and growth of
medicinal plants.

Despite its importance, the pest problems affecting R. serpentina have not been
widely studied, especially in Odisha. The crop is vulnerable to a variety of insect pests
that can hinder its growth and yield. Common insect pests affecting sarpagandha are
Oleander hawk moth (Deilephila nerii), Gundhi bug (Leptocorisa oratorius), Weevil
(Indomia cretaceous), Grasshopper (Trilophida annulata), Dark brown hawk moth
(Psilogramma menephron), Leaf roller (Glyophodes suralis), green stink bug (Nezara
viridula), scales (Chrysomphalus aonidum), mealy bug (Planococcus citri) and mite
(Tetranychus urticae). Natural predators like spiders and ladybird beetles are often
present and help control pest populations (Khan et al., 2020). However, there is a lack of
detailed studies on pest occurrence and management in R. serpentina, particularly in
Odisha. This research gap provides significant opportunities for further exploration of
pest incidence, seasonal patterns, and eco-friendly management strategies for this crucial
medicinal crop.

Considering the aforementioned factors, the current study was carried out to
evaluate the prevalence and abundance of the insect pest complex on Sarpagandha, with
respect to various botanical extracts applied. The present work was carried out with
the following objectives:

1. Occurrence and seasonal incidence of insect and mite pests on sarpagandha

2. Management of major arthropod pests on sarpagandha

33
 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Sarpagandha (Rauvolfia serpentina Benth) is a medicinal indigenous plant of all

India commercial and economic importance and has a range of insect pests that will
reduce the quality and yield of this crop. The important insect pests of sarpagandha are:
foliage feeders including a sphingid moth (Deilephila nerii) sap suckers like green stink
bug (Nezara viridula), gundhi bug (Leptocorisa oratorius), red spider mite (Tetranychus
urticae) mealy bug (Planococcus citri). Along with insect pests, the natural enemies
formed by predators like spiders and ladybird beetles, which are frequently observed, are
major consequences of pest build-up. Pests build-up leads to infestations, especially the
red spider mite will produce abnormal morphology in inverted boat-shaped leaves and
reduced the photosynthetic properties and viability of the crop. The presence of these
kind of pests impose an economic cost which directs the need for definitive pest
management solutions based on botanical plant extracts. The overall pest management
strategies used in pot culture planting methods are various permissible plant protection
products such as botanicals etc. The next section is a complete review of studies
published on insect pest occurrence and management of R. serpentina.

2.1 Occurrence and seasonal incidence of insect and mite pests on sarpagandha

Sphingid (Deilephila nerii)

Srinivasan and Prasad (1978) noticed that the large scale occurrence of sphingid,
Deilephila nerii on Catharanthus roses in Bangalore causing extensive damage to the foliage. They
also observed that D. nerii damaging in a large scale on Costus roseus.

Reddy et al. (1981) found that during a survey in South India, seven pests viz. Acrida
exaltata Orthacris simulans, Amrasca biguttula biguttula, Nezara viridula, Anomis flava and
[Link] were found infesting Catharanthus rosens. They also observed that D. nerii was found
damaging in a large scale on Costus roseus.

34
 Hanumanthaswamy (1992) reported that D. neri was found defoliating the leaves of
ashwagandha with population of 0.58 larvae per plant.

Kumar (2007) reported that the larvae of Deilephila nerii were defoliating the
leaves of ashwagandha during November to December, 2006. The highest population of
3 larvae per 10 plants was recorded during November, 2006.

Kulkarni et al. (2008) reported a major pest (the larvae of sphinx moth D. nerii)
on sarpagandha which was observed on leaves.

Ramanna (2009) documented 11 pest species on ashwagandha: five defoliators

(Coleoptera, Lepidoptera), five sucking pests (Hemiptera, Acarina), and one lepidopteran
flower/fruit feeder.
Defoliators like Henosepilachna vigintioctopunctata, Deilephila
nerii, Myllocerus viridanus, M. discolor, and leaf miners caused foliage loss early, while
sucking pests (Aphis gossypii, Ferrisia virgata, Nezara viridula) and mites (Tetranychus
urticae) led to yellowing, drying, and yield reduction.

Nirmal et al. (2015) reported that the larvae of D. nerii caused defoliation of
ashwagandha leaves and three species of coleopterans were reported to be feeding on the
leaves of ashwagandha.

Rehaman et al. (2018) found that D. nerii was defoliating the leaves of
sarpagandha with population of 0.60 larvae per plant.

Khan (2019) noticed that, the occurrence of sphingid moth observed from month
of July 2018 to December 2018.

Green stink bug (Nezara viridula)

Kumar (2007) observed that the green plant bug, Nezara virudula is a
polyphagous pest where nymphs and adults were noticed to suck the sap from leaves,
buds of ashwagandha from September, 2008 to January, 2009. However he also reported
the occurrence of N. viridula on Coleus in September 2006 from Raichur. He also
reported that the nymphs and adults of N. viridula were observed to suck the sap from
leaves, buds and young shoots of Solanum viarum with the population of 1.17 nymphs
per plant.

35
 Kumar (2007) recorded 11 species of phytophagous insects on Costus specious.
They belong to the order Orthoptera that includes short-horned grasshoppers,
Anacridium flavescens and Atractomorpha crenulata, and these were found making
broad holes on the leaves. Hemiptera order includes Oxyrachis tarandus, Chrysocoris
stolli and a plant bug, Nezara viridula. The nymphs and adults of these pests de-sap
tender shoots.

Ramanna (2009) recorded the incidence of N. viridula on sarpagandha.

Jayakumar et al. (2010) observed the occurrence of Southern green stink bug
(Nezara gramineae) (Pentatomidae,Hemiptera) in Noni, (Morinda citrifolia), distributed
in tropics and subtropics and known for its polyphagous nature.

Nirmal et al. (2015) reported that, the nymphs and adults of green plant
bug,Nezara viridula sucked the sap from leaves and buds of ashwagandha.

Khan (2019) noticed green stink bug population was found in sarpagandha during
August, 2018 to December, 2018.

Mealy bug (Planococcus citri)

Karthikeyan (1993) reported the presence of mealybugs as a pest, in southern

Tamil Nadu.

Muralibaskaran et al. (2009) documented two species of sucking insect pests,

specifically thrips (Scirtothrips dorsalis) and mealybugs (Orthezia insignis), infesting
costum leaves. Another species of mealybug, Coccidohystrix insolitus, was observed
infesting ashwagandha leaves.

Ramanna (2009) recorded 11 pest species on ashwagandha, which included five

defoliators (from Coleoptera and Lepidoptera), five sucking pests (from Hemiptera and
Acarina), and one flower and fruit feeder (Lepidoptera). Among these, the mealybug
(Ferrisia virgata) was observed at various growth stages of the crop.

Jayakumar et al. (2010) reported mealybug (Maconellicoccus hirsutus)

infestations on Noni (Morinda citrifolia), typically attacked young shoots, causing
stunted growth and swollen nodes. Severe infestations lead to crumpled leaves,
defoliation, and even plant death.

36
 Suganthy et al. (2011) noted the occurrence of mealybugs (Paracoccus
marginatus and Phenacoccus solenopsis) on Makoi (Solanum nigrum). Severe
infestations resulted in clusters of mealybugs on the underside of leaves, forming a thick
waxy coat. These cottony white masses spread across all plant parts, attracting ants due to
honeydew secretions, which led to sooty mold growth. Damage by the nymphs and adults
caused yellowing and wilting of leaves, premature fruit drop, and, in extreme cases, plant
death.

Vijay and Suresh (2013) highlighted that mealybugs have become significant
pests on a variety of host plants, including 60 species of flowering and medicinal crops.
Their economic impact is particularly notable on plants belonging to families such as
Malvaceae, Solanaceae, Asteraceae, Euphorbiaceae, and Amaranthaceae.

Sahu et al. (2017) identified Phenacoccus solenopsis as a primary pest of ashwagandha.

Khan (2019) observed from Mealybugs were July, 2018 to February, 2019.

Gundhi bug (Leptocorisa oratorius)

According to van der Goot (1949) and Rothschild (1970) adult females of gundhi
bug (Leptocorisa oratorius) oviposit from the booting stage to the milky stage. Up to 30
eggs are laid in single or double rows, predominantly on the flag-leaf and occasionally on
the panicle.

Goot (1949) observed in the field that individual panicles attacked by adults or
clusters of nymphs produced normal seed, and suggested that damage occurred only at
high densities of adults. In the laboratory, L. oratorius adults were found to attack
flowering or milky spikelets.

Khan (2019) noticed Gundhi bug was prevelant in sarpagandha plant from May to
September, 2018.

Red spider mite (Tetranychus urticae)

Lahiri et al. (2005) recorded 48 mite species on 35 medicinal plants in Kolkata,

with 17 phytophagous species from Tetranychidae,Tenuipalpidae,Tarsonemidae, and
Eriophyidae. Key pest species like Tetranychus urticae, Schizotetranychus cajani, Panon
ychus citri, and Polyphagotarsonemus latus caused significant damage, while Datura ho
sted the most mite species and Adhatoda vasica supported six species.

37
 Kumar (2007) reported that a mite belonging to the family Tetranychidae caused
shrinking, curling and drying of leaves of ashwagandha.

Rachna et al. (2007) reported seasonal incidence of Tetranychus urticae in okra

during summer and kharif seasons of 2005-06. Two peaks of [Link] populations were
recorded during first fortnight of June and second fortnight of August.

Sharma and Pati (2010) found Tetranychus urticae mites on ashwagandha leaves
in Amritsar, Punjab, from April–June, causing whitening, drying, and defoliation.

Salma (2017) observed that, infestation on Sarpagandha was sever, more than 100
mites were observed on abaxial side of leaf. The infested leaves became yellowish and
later brownish.

Khan (2019) noticed that the maximum mean population of scales and red spider
mite was during February and March, 2019 respectively.

2. Management of major arthropod pests on sarpagandha

Red spider mite (Tetranychus urticae)

Deka [Link] (2000) observed the efficacy of karanja seeds to control insect pests,
such as tea mosquito bug , Red spider mite and other minor insects of tea. The aqueous
seed extract at 10% of karanja reduce the infestation of red spider mite in tea by 43.33%.

Srinivasa and Chandrashekar (2002) found neem oil (2–3%) caused 92–100%
larval mortality of T. urticae on French bean, while NSKE (4–5%) caused 73–90% total
mortality, including [Link] commercial formulations, Nimbecidine (6 ml/l)
caused 80% nymphal and 90% total mortality, and Neemazal (5 ml/l) induced maximum
walk-off (40% nymph, 67% adults).

According to James (2003), neem oil activity against spider mite on

outdoor roses treated weekly was distinguishable since no build up of spider mite
population took place even during the summer heat and high level of spider mite
egg mortality occurred when they were directly treated with the oil.

Balaji and Hariprasad (2003) tested plant extracts and neem formulations against
red spider mite, finding Phytopalm (3–5%) most effective early in nut development,
while neem formulations (Neemazal 1%, Fortuneaza 3000 ppm) performed equally well.
Nochi leaf extract (3%) was least effective.

38
 Kumar (2007) reported that neem oil (2%) was effective in managing the mite
population on rose, cultivated under polyhouse condition. Leaves treated with neem
oil(2%) recorded a lesser mean population of 3.81 mites/ leafletas compared to the
control treatment with 23.77 mites/leaf. NSKE (5%) was moderately effective in
managing the mite population on rose.

Babu et al. (2008) reported 5% neem kernel aqueous extract (NKAE) caused
83.43% mortality of Oligonychus coffeae on tea in lab tests, while field trials showed
significantly lower mite counts (272/75 leaves) compared to controls (973/75 leaves)
after three sprays.

Patil and Nandhihalli (2009) studied the effect of promising botanicals against the
red spider mite on brinjal under field conditions and reported that neem 2%) exhibited
maximum acaricidal action causing adecrease in number of eggs (3.91/4 cm2), immature
active stages (3.81/4 cm2) and adults of red spidermite (2.11/4 cm2) at two days after
first spray

Mamun and Ahmed (2011) highlighted that locally grown botanicals like neem,
karanja, and datura can be extracted simply and offer effective, affordable control of key
tea pests. These natural alternatives help reduce reliance on chemical pesticides and
support sustainable tea cultivation.

Vasanthakumar et al. (2012) tested leaf extracts of Vitex negundo, Gliricidia

maculata, Wedelia chinensis, Morinda tinctoria, and Pongamia glabra against Oligonyc
hus coffeae in lab trials, finding that M. tinctoria and P. glabra extracts showed the
strongest acaricidal effects-causing 100% adult mortality, oviposition deterrence, and
maximum ovicidal action.

Radhakrishnan et al. (2014) reported Oligonychus coffeae as a serious tea pest in

south India. Aqueous extracts of Allamanda cathartica and Conyza bonariensis weeds
caused 100% and 80% adult mite mortality, respectively, while other tested weeds
showed only moderate or low effects.

Krishna and Bhaskar (2016) found that in field trials on okra, 2% neem oil
reduced T. urticae populations by 81.15%, while 5% NSKE achieved 52.78% reduction,
demonstrating neem oil’s superior efficacy over NSKE against this pest.

39
 Sarmah (2016) found NKAE’s LC₅₀ for red spider mite nymphs and adults was
47.73 mg/ml and 66.02 mg/ml, respectively, [Link]-laying on NKAE-treated
leaves dropped to 1.16–1.50 eggs/female/day versus 3.83 in controls, while higher
NKAE concentrations (4–10%) reduced adult emergence by 20–56.7% and lengthened
development by 1–4.3 days.

Roy [Link] (2016) observed that, the application of the aqueous extract of D.
repens reduced the mite population and its bioefficacy was comparable to that of the
synthetic pesticide Propargite 57 EC, in field condition.

Gahukar (2017) observed that 2% Neem oil, 5% Pongamia pinnata seed extract,
5% Datura stramonium leaf extracts are effective against Red spider mite, T. urticae in
Withania somnifera.

Hazarika et al. (2020) found that methanol extracts from Aegle marmelos leaves
were highly effective against Oligonychus coffeae in lab tests, significantly reducing mite
populations at various life stages. The potency of methanol extract was comparable to
synthetic pesticides and neem-based products, highlighting its potential as a botanical
miticide for tea pest management.

Mealy bug (Planococcus citri)

Mamun and Ahmed (2011) reported botanical extracts like neem, ghora-neem,
mahogoni, karanja, adathoda, sweet flag, tobacco, derris, annona, smart weed, bar weed,
datura, calotropis, bidens, lantana, chrysanthemum, artemisia, marigold, clerodendrum,
wild sunflower and many others can control major pests of tea such as Heliopeltis, red
spider mite, aphids, thrips, jassid, mealybug, termites and nematodes.

Thinnaluri et al. (2014) reported that neem seed kernel extract (4%) was most
effective against mealy bug on mulberry, showing 96% repellency within 48 h, followed
by Pongamia seed extract.

Sumathi and Rajasugunasekar (2017) demonstrated that flower extracts of Calotropis

gigantea were highly effective against papaya mealy bug on Ailanthus excelsa, showing
strong insecticidal activity (90–95%) at 2000 ppm within 24 hours of application.

Bharathi and Muthukrishnan (2017) assessed botanicals and fish oil rosin soap
(FORS) against Phenacoccus solenopsis under laboratory and field conditions. Among

40
treatments, FORS (2.5%), neem oil (3%), and NSKE (5%) were most effective, reducing
mealy bug populations by 74–85% and maintaining low mean populations per shoot in
both preliminary and confirmatory trials.

Devi et al. (2018) found that 10% Calotropis gigantea leaf extract caused 86-93%
mortality of Maconellicoccus hirsutus adults within 24-72 hours, while fruit pericarp and
flower extracts were also effective, with fruit extract (LC₅₀ 2.895%) slightly
outperforming leaf (LC₅₀ 3.055%) and flower (LC₅₀ 3.560%) extracts.

Ghosh and Kumar (2020) reported that azadirachtin (Nimarin 1500 ppm, 2.5
ml/L) reduced mealy bug populations by 57%.

Ajayan [Link] (2023) reported that Tween 20-based neem oil microemulsions are
more effective than DMSO-based formulations in controlling eggplant mealybugs, due to
better stability, physical properties, and higher pesticidal efficiency under greenhouse
conditions.

Rizwan et al. (2022) tested leaf extracts of neem, eucalyptus, datura, batho, and
Indian lemongrass on mealybug nymphs, finding highest mortality (76.67%) with neem
extract, followed by eucalyptus (66.67%) at 72 hours.

Mariyam and Paul (2024) found neem extract caused the highest mortality
(86.6%) of P. solenopsis, followed by clove (68.3%) and black pepper (58.3%), while
bay leaf extract was least effective (36.6%).

Green stink bug (Nezara viridula)

Abudulai et al. (2003) reported that Neemix 4.5 EC (azadirachtin) acted as a

strong antifeedant and slow-acting toxin against Nezara viridula in lab tests, reducing
adult feeding in a dose-dependent manner and causing delayed toxicity, deformities,
and reduced longevity in nymphs.

Singha et al. (2007) found that topical application of neem seed kernel aqueous
suspension (NSKAS) and hexane extract (NSKHE) caused proboscis loosening and
mouthpart deformities, especially in the stylets, in fifth instar and adult Nezara viridula,
as well as during inter-stadial moults.

Pinheiro and Quintela (2010) found that Dalneem and Nim-I-Go neem oil
formulations at 1–2% (v/v) showed dose-dependent antifeedant effects on Oebalus

41
poecilus in rice, with Dalneem also causing ingestion toxicity at 0.5–4% (v/v). These
results demonstrate neem oil’s potential to deter feeding and act as an insecticide against
rice stink bugs.

Zanuncio et al. (2016) reported that neem oil had low direct toxicity to Podisus
nigrispinus nymphs and adults, with mortality rising only at very high concentrations.

Gundhi bug (Leptocorisa oratorius)

Das and Elayidam (1994) found that 0.05% malathion caused the highest pest
reduction (86.2%), followed by 0.5% Neemark (82.8%), 2% neem oil (69%), and 5%
Vitex negundo extract (50.7%); Achook (0.5–1%) was also effective against Leptocorisa
[Link] showed neem extract caused the highest mortality (76.67%), with
eucalyptus extract next (66.67%), after 72 hours.

De-Ling et al. (2005) tested neem seed extracts and mixtures against Leptocorisa
chinensis nymphs in field cages, finding that a neem oil–abamectin mix was most
effective in reducing survival in choice tests, followed by azadirachtin (60 and 30 ppm)
and 3% neem oil. In no-choice tests, all treatments except neem oil alone caused 100%
mortality within three weeks.

Mishra [Link] (2015) reported significant decrease in Leptocoryza varicornis popul

ation was observed after foliar spray of vermiwash with neem oil followed by aqueous
garlic and annona leaf extract.

Soren and Prasad (2018) found that neem cake (2.5 t/ha) was most effective,
reducing ear bug incidence to 2.02/10 hills and yielding 41.50 q/ha, while karanj cake
(2.5 t/ha) also performed well (2.63/10 hills, 38.60 q/ha yield), indicating both as
valuable options for pest management in rice.

Sphingid (Deilephila nerii)

Bajpai and Sehgal (2003) showed that the methanol and chloroform extracts of
neem seed kernel and nicotine sulphate are very effective against the oviposition of H.
armigera female moth whereas water extract of neems seed Kernel and neem oil is
effective at higher concentration only.

Rajashekar [Link] (2010) Combined action of neem (Azadiracta indica) and

eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.) oil volatiles causes a sharp reduction in percent egg

42
hatchability in rice moth, Corcyra cephalonica (Stainton) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) when
freshly laid eggs were exposed to these volatiles for 24 hours. A marked decline in egg
output and egg hatchability in reproductive pairs, was observed.

Senthilkumar et al. (2014) reported that methanolic extracts of Annona squamosa

and Prosopis juliflora, when combined with Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki (Btk),
showed lower LC₅₀ values and faster toxicity against Helicoverpa armigera larvae
compared to individual treatments. These combinations also significantly disrupted larval
feeding behavior and reduced dietary efficiency, demonstrating synergistic pest control
effects.

Sisay et al. (2019) found that 5% Agave americana leaf extract caused 100%
larval mortality in fall armyworm, though slowly, while 5% Annona squamosa seed
extract and 1% azadirachtin caused 74% mortality with rapid action and strong
antifeedant effects. Extracts of A. squamosa and Zingiber officinale also reduced larval
and pupal weights, pupation, and adult emergence, showing potential for integrated pest
management.

Veeranna et al. (2024) found that 5% NSKE was most effective against
Helicoverpa armigera, with the lowest larval numbers (1.90/m) and pod damage
(13.45% and 12.76% in 2010–11 and 2011–12, respectively), outperforming Bt, neem
oil, Nimbecidine, NPV, and neem leaf extract.

43
 MATERIALS AND METHODS

A field and semi field experiment was conducted under the All India Coordinated
Research Project on Medicinal and Aromatic Plants & Betelvine (AICRP on MAP &
Betelvine) at the Central Horticultural Research Station, Odisha University of
Agriculture and Technology (OUAT), Bhubaneswar, from October, 2024 to June, 2025.
The study evaluated the influence of selected plant extracts on the incidence of arthropod
pests in sarpagandha (Rauvolfia serpentina Benth) and examined the effects of abiotic
factors on arthropod pest population dynamics. The materials employed and the
methodology adopted during the investigation are detailed in this chapter.

3.1 Location of the study

The field trial for this experiment was conducted on the experimental field of
AICRP on Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (MAP), Baramunda, Bhubaneswar on existing
standing crop sown during October, 2023. The field had a latitude of 20º 16’ 44” N and a
longitude of 85º 47’ 22” E, located at an elevation of 41m (133 ft.) above the sea level.
The pot culture experiment was conducted in net house (semi-field conditions) in
Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture OUAT, Bhubaneswar.

3.2 Climate and weather conditions

The climate of Bhubaneswar is sub-tropical with temperatures ranging from

13.7 ºC to 38.9 ºC and an average annual rainfall of 1105 mm. The month of May was
observed as the hottest month, with temperatures ranging from 33.9 °C to 38.9 °C. In
contrast, the coldest month was January, with temperatures ranging from 13.7 °C to
18.7 °C.

3.3 Soil characteristics

The soil characteristics of the experimental field are mentioned below.

44
Texture: Sandy loam
Colour: Brown
pH: 5.10

3.4 Experimental details

3.4.1 For field condition
Sarpagandga RS-1
variety :
Period of October2024-June2025
study :
Date of
sowing :
Plot 200m2
size :

Spacing :
No. of 16
irrigation :

3.4.2 For semi field condition (Pot Culture)

Sarpagandga variety : RS-1
[Link] pot used : 27
No. of Treatments : 9
No. of replications : 3
Design : CRD (Completely Randomized Design)
No. of watering : 22

[Link] Agronomic practices adopted (Raising of seedling)

Seeds were sown in raised nursery beds filled with soil, sand, and well-
decomposed farmyard manure (FYM) in 1:1:1 ratio. Seeds were sown at a depth of 1–1.5
cm and covered lightly with the medium. Beds were maintained under partial shade, and
watering was done using a fine rose can. Germination occurred within 20–25 days,
depending on environmental conditions.

[Link] Pot preparation

After 6–8 weeks, when the seedlings attained a height of 8–10 cm with 3–4 true leaves,
they were carefully lifted and transplanted into plastic pots of 12–14inch diameter which
are filled with well-drained potting mixture consisting of coarse stone chips, loamy soil,

45
and well-decomposed farmyard manure. One seedling was transplanted per pot, and
immediate light watering was done.

3.5.3 Transplanting
Sarpagandha (Rauvolfia serpentina) seedlings, measuring 15–20 cm in height and raised
in the nursery for one month, were transplanted into pots during the first week of
October, 2024. Light watering was provided immediately after planting.

3.5.4 Inter-cultural operations

Three hand weeding operations was undertaken to manage the weeds during the
crop growth stage.

3.6 Design and layout of the experimental plot:

The experiment was laid out in a Completely Randomized Design (CRD) comprising
nine treatments and three replications, resulting in a total of 27 pots. Each pot served as
an individual experimental unit. Adequate drainage and irrigation facilities were
maintained to ensure uniform growth conditions throughout the trial.

46
3.7 Spraying of plant extracts (Treatment details)

The collected natural materials were first thoroughly washed with running tap water to
remove soil particles and other impurities. The selected plant parts were then air-dried
and cut into small pieces under aseptic conditions. Subsequently, the dried leaves were
finely ground using an electric blender, and the resulting powder was sieved through a
200µm mesh. For plant extract preparation, the powder was mixed with water at a
concentration of 50g/L and left to stand overnight. The mixture was then filtered through
Whatman’s filter paper and the next day, the filtered extract can be used for spraying
(Fitiwy et al., 2019). The field experiment comprised nine treatments, consisting of
seven plant extract treatments, one standard check, and one untreated control. The details
of the treatments are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Treatment details

Treatments Phyto products Scientific name Family Dose to be tested

T1 Neem Azadirachta Meliaceae 50g/lit
indica
T2 Karanja Pongamia Fabaceae 50g/lit
pinnata
T3 Custard apple Annona Annonaceae 50g/lit
squamosa
T4 Billygoat weed Ageratum Asteraceae 50g/lit
conyzoides
T5 Jimsonweed Datura Solanaceae 50g/lit
stramonium
T6 Indian milk Calotropis Apocynaceae 50g/lit
weed gigantea
T7 Indian bael Aegle marmelos Rutaceae 50g/lit
T8 Nemazal Azadirachta Meliaceae Commercial
1500ppm indica product
(Standard @2.5ml/lit
Check)
T9 Control - - Water Spray

47
Drying of plant leaves

48
Sieving of dried grinded plant leaves

Grinding of dried plant leaves

49
Collection and packaging of seven un-sieved dried grinded plant leaves

Weighing of sieved plant leaves for making plant extract solution

50
Filtering of plant extract solution Plant extract solution ready for hand spraying

3.8 Spray schedule

Plant extracts were applied in the designated treatments across all replications using a
hand sprayer. In the untreated control, no plant extracts were applied, and only water was
sprayed. Plant extract sprays were first initiated on 11 th April, 2025 and subsequently
applied at 10-day intervals on 21st April and 1st May, 2025, respectively. Thus, a total of
three sprays were administered during the experimental period using a hand sprayer,
ensuring uniform and thorough coverage of the crop foliage and observation recorded a
day before spraying (DBS) and 3, 7 and 10 days after spraying (DAS).

3.9 Taxonomic position of the arthropod pests

The taxonomic position of the arthropod pests observed in sarpagandha during the
experimental period has been presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Taxonomic position of pests

Sl.
Common Name Scientific Name Family Order
no.

51
1 Red spider mite Tetranychus urticae Tetranychidae Trombidiformes

2 Sphingid moth Psilogramma menephron Sphingidae Lepidoptera

Deilephila nerii
3 Pod bug Riptortus pedestris Alydidae Hemiptera

4 Gundhibug Leptocorisa oratorius Alydidae Hemiptera

5 Stinkbug Nezara viridula Pentatomidae Hemiptera

6 Mealy bug Planococcus citri Pseudococcidae Hemiptera

The taxonomic position of the spiders and coccinellid beetles observed in sarpagandha
during the experimental period has been presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Taxonomic position of natural enemies observed in sarpagandha

Sl. Common Name Scientific Name Family Order
no.

1 Transvers ladybird Coccinella transversalis Coccinellidae Coleoptera

beetle

2 Striped lynx spider Oxyopes salticus Oxyopidae Araneae

3.9 Method of observation of arthropod pests

During the course of the investigation, observations on the population of sap-sucking
arthropod pests viz., green stink bug, scale insects, gundhibug, red spider mite, and
mealybug as well as foliage feeders such as sphingid larvae, were recorded at weekly
intervals. Data were collected from five randomly selected plants per subplot in each
replication (khan et al., 2019).

52
For mealybug and red spider mite, observations were made on two leaves each from the
top, middle, and bottom canopy of the plant. In addition, mealybug infestation was
assessed from a 1cm² portion of the terminal twig of each selected plant, while mite
populations were recorded from a 1cm² leaf area (Reddy et al., 2025).
The populations of the other insect pests mentioned above were assessed from the five
randomly selected plants, and the average number per plant were calculated weekly. Pest
counts were recorded weekly by visual observation with the aid of a 30X magnification
hand lens.
Table 4: Mode of observation of insect-pests

Insect Observations
Red spider mite Nymphs+adults/ cm²
Sphingid moth No. of larvae/plant
Pod bug Nymphs+adults/plant
Gundhibug Nymphs+adults/plant
Stinkbug Nymphs+adults/plant
Mealy bug Nymphs+adults/ cm²

3.10 Statistical analysis

The data so obtained on population for various insects, mite, spider and beetle counts were
suitably transformed following Gomez and Gomez (1984), analyzed statistically to arrive at
meaningful conclusion. After compiling the data on the incidence of insect pests, those were
subjected to simple correlation analysis with weather parameters viz., maximum and minimum
temperature, relative humidity, rainfall, and wind velocity factors.

53
 Oleander hawk moth (Deilephila nerii)

Dark brown hawk moth (Psilogramma menephron)

54
Microscopic view Eggs and nymph of red spider mite (Tetranychus urticae).

Microscopic view Adult Red spider mite (Tetranychus urticae).

55
 Mealybug (Planococcus citri)

Microscopic view of mealybug (Planococcus citri)

56
Gundhi bug (Leptocorisa oratorius)

Green stink bug (Nezara viridula)

57
 Pod bug (Riptortus pedestris)

Plate 3.2: Pest complex observed in experimental field

58
 Striped lynx spider(Oxyopes salticus)

Transverse ladybird beetle (Coccinellatransversalis)

Plate 3.7: preparation of plant extracts Diversity of various natural enemies in the
experimental field

59
60
61
 RESULTS
The seasonal incidence of major insect pests on sarpagandha was monitored from
October, 2024 to June, 2025. The data collected was analyzed in relation to various
weather parameters viz., temperature, rainfall, relative humidity, and wind velocity.
Additionally, different plant product treatments were evaluated for their effectiveness
against the arthropod pests of sarpagandha. The impact of these treatments on the
important arthropod pests of sarpagandha are presented below.

4.1 Occurrence and seasonal incidence of insect and mite pests on sarpagandha

A total of six arthropod pests namely Oleander hawk moth (Deilephila nerii),
Gundhi bug (Leptocorisa oratorius), Dark brown hawk moth (Psilogramma menephron),
Green stink bug (Nezara viridula), Pod bug (Riptortus pedestris), Mealybug
(Planococcus citri) and Red spidermite (Tetranychus urticae) were observed at different
stages of the crop growth.

The incidence data of insect and mite pests on sarpagandha, recorded from
October, 2024 to June, 2025 are presented in Table 5.

4.1.1 Red Spider Mite

The data in Table 5 reveal that he initial incidence of red spider mite on
sarpagandha (2.17 mites/cm2) was observed during 41 Standard Metrological Week
(SMW) (1st week of October, 2024). The pest population showed minor fluctuations
through the early weeks, then increased steadily to reach its highest peak of 11.13
mites/cm2 at 14 SMW (1st week of April, 2025). This surge corresponded with weather
parameters like rising temperature and lower afternoon relative humidity. After the peak,
the population gradually declined, reaching its lowest value of 0.17 mites/cm 2 by the 25
SMW (4th week of June, 2025). The main aggregation and high infestation period
extended from 9 to 15 SMW (March-April, 2025) after which increasing rainfall and
humidity led to a marked reduction in pest density.

4.1.2 Sphingid moth

Table 5 illustrates that the sphingid larval population started low, with 0.6
larvae/plant recorded at 41 SMW (1 st week of October, 2024). For most of the season,
numbers of the pest remained modest (below 2 larvae/plant), with intermittent increases.

62
The highest population was 4.8 larvae/plant at 26 SMW (last week of June, 2025). The
lowest values, including several weeks with zero number of larvae (notably at 12–16 and
18–25 SMW i.e late March to June, 2025) were frequent.

4.1.3 Mealybug

It is evident from Table 5 that the mealybug infestation began with 2.6
mealybugs/cm2 in the 41 SMW (1st week of October, 2024). Mealybug population on
sarpagandha showed a progressive increase, attaining a maximum density of 8.6
mealybugs/cm² in the 7 SMW (2nd week of February, 2025). Another surge in population
was recorded during the 10 and 11 SMW (early March, 2025). After this, the mealybug
count rapidly decreased, dropping its lowest value of 0 mealybug/cm 2 by 23-26 SMW
(June, 2025), and remained negligible thereafter. The period of highest infestation was 6–
11 SMW (February-March, 2025), aligning with increased temperature and low rainfall.

4.1.4 Pod Bug

Table 5 demonstrates that no infestations were observed till 42 SMW (2 nd week of
October, 2024) and the population peaked at 3.8 bugs/plant in the 49 SMW (1 st week of
December, 2024). For the rest of the season, the population fluctuated generally between
0.2–1.8 bugs/plant, with lowest values of 0 bug/plant in multiple weeks (notably early
and late season of the experiment).

4.1.5 Gundhi bug

The data in Table 5 reveal that The highest gundhi bug population recorded was 3
bugs/plant, was observed during the 41 and 42 SMW (2nd October, 2024). Moderate
peaks (1.8–2.6 bugs/plant) recurred during March-April, 2025 followed by a steady
decline to 0.2 bugs/plant repeatedly from late May, 2025 onwards.

4.1.6 Stink bug

Table 4 indicates that Stinkbugs were initially observed at 2.2 bugs/plant during 41 SMW
(1st week of October, 2024) and showed a peak of 3.8 bugs/plant at 44 SMW (4 th week of
October, 2024). Populations generally ranged between 0.8–3.8 bugs/plant, with repeated
zero counts in 3–5 SMWs (3rd week of October, 2024) and several weeks of March–June,
2025. However, the lower counts coincided with periods of higher rainfall and humidity.

63
Table 5: Seasonal incidence of arthropod pests on sarpagandha under field
conditions from October, 2024 to February, 2025
SM Period of Red Mealy Mean number of insect pests
W observatio spider bug/cm2 (adults/nymphs/grubs/larvae/plant)
n mite/cm Sphingi Pod Gundhi Stink
2
d moth bug bug bug
41 1ˢᵗ week of
2.17 0.6 2.6 0 3 2.2
Oct. 24
42 2ⁿᵈ week of
1.33 0.6 1.2 0.2 3 2.2
Oct. 24
43 3ʳᵈ week of
0.83 0.8 0.6 0.6 3.2 2.8
Oct. 24
44 4ᵗʰ week of
2.5 1.6 2.8 1.2 3.8 2.6
Oct. 24
45 1ˢᵗ week of
3.33 2.6 3 1.3 3.2 2.8
Nov. 24
46 2ⁿᵈweek of
3.83 3 2.2 2.6 2.6 2.8
Nov. 24
47 3ʳᵈweek of
4.17 3.2 2.6 3.5 2.6 2.6
Nov. 24
48 4ᵗʰweek of
3.33 3.2 2.6 2.4 1.8 2.6
Nov. 24
49 1ˢᵗ week of
2.5 4 4.8 3.8 1.8 2
Dec. 24
50 2ⁿᵈweek of
1.5 4.4 5.2 1.2 1.2 1.2
Dec. 24
51 3ʳᵈweek of
1.33 4.4 0.8 0.8 1.2 1.2
Dec. 24
52 4ᵗʰweek of
1.13 4.2 1.2 2.5 0.8 0.8
Dec. 24
1 1ˢᵗ week of
1.67 3.6 2.6 1.7 0.4 0.8
Jan. 25
2 2ⁿᵈweek of
1.33 3.6 4.4 1.2 0.4 0.2
Jan. 25
3 3ʳᵈweek of
0.83 3.2 4.6 0.6 0.2 0
Jan. 25
4 4ᵗʰweek of
0.67 3.4 6.2 0.2 0.8 0
Jan. 25
5 5ᵗʰ week of
2.13 2.8 6.8 0.6 0.8 0.2
Jan. 25
6 1ˢᵗ week of
2.17 1.8 7.2 0.6 1.4 0.2
Feb. 25
7 2ⁿᵈweek of
3.33 1.6 8.6 0.8 1.4 0
Feb. 25
8 3ʳᵈweek of
3.22 1.2 7.4 0.6 1.8 0
Feb. 25
9 4ᵗʰweek of
6.55 0.6 7.4 0.6 2 0
Feb. 25

64
SM Period of Red Mealy Mean number of insect pests
W observatio spider bug/cm (adults/nymphs/grubs/larvae/plant)
n mite/cm2 2
Sphingi Pod Gundhibu Stinkbu
d moth bug g g
10 1ˢᵗ week of
7.22 0.6 8.6 0.8 2 0
March. 25
11 2ⁿᵈweek of
8.93 0.2 8.6 0.4 2.6 0.6
March. 25
12 3ʳᵈweek of
7.63 0 7.8 0.4 2.6 0.6
March. 25
14 1ˢᵗ week of
9.16 0 8.2 0.4 2.4 0.8
April. 25
15 2ⁿᵈweek of
11.13 0 8.2 0.8 1.8 1.8
April. 25
16 3ʳᵈweek of
10.63 0 8 1.4 1.8 1.6
April. 25
17 4ᵗʰweek of
8.22 0 3.2 2.2 1.2 1.6
April. 25
18 1ˢᵗ week of
7.96 0 1.8 3 1.4 1.8
May. 25
19 2ⁿᵈweek of
7.22 0 1.8 3 1 1.4
May. 25
20 3ʳᵈweek of
8.91 0 1.2 1.8 0.4 1.6
May. 25
21 4ᵗʰweek of
9.92 0 1 1.6 0.6 1.8
May. 25
22 1ˢᵗ week of
6.78 0 0.6 1.2 0.2 0.8
June. 25
23 2ⁿᵈweek of
5.11 0 0.6 1.4 0.2 1
June. 25
24 3ʳᵈweek of
1.17 0 0 0.8 0.2 1.2
June. 25
25 4ᵗʰweek of
0.67 0 0 0.6 0.2 0.8
June. 25
26 5ᵗʰ week of
0.17 4.4 0 0.6 0.2 0.8
June. 25

65
 0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0

1ˢᵗ week of Oct. 24

2ⁿᵈ week of Oct. 24
3ʳᵈ week of Oct. 24
4ᵗʰ week of Oct. 24
1ˢᵗ week of Nov. 24
2ⁿᵈweek of Nov. 24
3ʳᵈweek of Nov. 24
4ᵗʰweek of Nov. 24
1ˢᵗ week of Dec. 24
2ⁿᵈweek of Dec. 24
3ʳᵈweek of Dec. 24

TMax
4ᵗʰweek of Dec. 24

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1

Rain(mm)
1ˢᵗ week of Jan. 25

2
2ⁿᵈweek of Jan. 25

3
3ʳᵈweek of Jan. 25

4
4ᵗʰweek of Jan. 25

TMin
5
5ᵗʰ week of Jan. 25
6

wind(Km/h)
1ˢᵗ week of Feb. 25
7

2ⁿᵈweek of Feb. 25

66
Figure 4.1:Effect of weather parameter on Red spider mite population
8

3ʳᵈweek of Feb. 25
4ᵗʰweek of Feb. 25
RH7 hr

1ˢᵗ week of March. 25

2ⁿᵈweek of March. 25
3ʳᵈweek of March. 25
Red spider mite/leaf

4ᵗʰweek of March. 25
1ˢᵗ week of April. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of April. 25
3ʳᵈweek of April. 25
4ᵗʰweek of April. 25
RH14 hr

1ˢᵗ week of May. 25

2ⁿᵈweek of May. 25
3ʳᵈweek of May. 25
4ᵗʰweek of May. 25
1ˢᵗ week of June. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of June. 25
3ʳᵈweek of June. 25
4ᵗʰweek of June. 25
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

5ᵗʰ week of June. 25

0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Figure 4.2:Effect of weather parameter on sphingid population

67
 0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0

1ˢᵗ week of Oct. 24

2ⁿᵈ week of Oct. 24
3ʳᵈ week of Oct. 24
4ᵗʰ week of Oct. 24
1ˢᵗ week of Nov. 24

TMax
2ⁿᵈweek of Nov. 24
3ʳᵈweek of Nov. 24
4ᵗʰweek of Nov. 24
1ˢᵗ week of Dec. 24

TMin
2ⁿᵈweek of Dec. 24
3ʳᵈweek of Dec. 24
4ᵗʰweek of Dec. 24

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1
1ˢᵗ week of Jan. 25

2
2ⁿᵈweek of Jan. 25

RH7 hr
3
3ʳᵈweek of Jan. 25

4
4ᵗʰweek of Jan. 25

5
5ᵗʰ week of Jan. 25

Figure 4.3:Effect of weather parameter on Pod bug population

6
1ˢᵗ week of Feb. 25
7

2ⁿᵈweek of Feb. 25

68
RH14 hr
8

3ʳᵈweek of Feb. 25
4ᵗʰweek of Feb. 25
1ˢᵗ week of March. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of March. 25
3ʳᵈweek of March. 25
4ᵗʰweek of March. 25
Rain(mm)

1ˢᵗ week of April. 25

2ⁿᵈweek of April. 25
3ʳᵈweek of April. 25
4ᵗʰweek of April. 25
1ˢᵗ week of May. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of May. 25
wind(Km/h)

3ʳᵈweek of May. 25
4ᵗʰweek of May. 25
1ˢᵗ week of June. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of June. 25
3ʳᵈweek of June. 25
Pod bug

4ᵗʰweek of June. 25
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

5ᵗʰ week of June. 25

0
1
2
3
4

0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
 100.0
120.0
140.0

20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0

0.0
1ˢᵗ week of Oct. 24
2ⁿᵈ week of Oct. 24
3ʳᵈ week of Oct. 24
4ᵗʰ week of Oct. 24

TMax
1ˢᵗ week of Nov. 24
2ⁿᵈweek of Nov. 24
3ʳᵈweek of Nov. 24
4ᵗʰweek of Nov. 24
1ˢᵗ week of Dec. 24

TMin
2ⁿᵈweek of Dec. 24
3ʳᵈweek of Dec. 24
4ᵗʰweek of Dec. 24

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1
1ˢᵗ week of Jan. 25

2
2ⁿᵈweek of Jan. 25

RH7 hr
3
3ʳᵈweek of Jan. 25

4
4ᵗʰweek of Jan. 25

5
5ᵗʰ week of Jan. 25

Figure 4.4:Effect of weather parameter on Mealybug population

6
1ˢᵗ week of Feb. 25

69
2ⁿᵈweek of Feb. 25

RH14 hr
8 3ʳᵈweek of Feb. 25
4ᵗʰweek of Feb. 25
1ˢᵗ week of March. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of March. 25
3ʳᵈweek of March. 25
4ᵗʰweek of March. 25
Rain(mm)

1ˢᵗ week of April. 25

2ⁿᵈweek of April. 25
3ʳᵈweek of April. 25
4ᵗʰweek of April. 25
1ˢᵗ week of May. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of May. 25
wind(Km/h)

3ʳᵈweek of May. 25
4ᵗʰweek of May. 25
1ˢᵗ week of June. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of June. 25
3ʳᵈweek of June. 25
4ᵗʰweek of June. 25
Mealy bug
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

5ᵗʰ week of June. 25

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
 0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
1ˢᵗ week of Oct. 24
2ⁿᵈ week of Oct. 24
3ʳᵈ week of Oct. 24
4ᵗʰ week of Oct. 24

TMax
1ˢᵗ week of Nov. 24
2ⁿᵈweek of Nov. 24
3ʳᵈweek of Nov. 24
4ᵗʰweek of Nov. 24
1ˢᵗ week of Dec. 24

TMin
2ⁿᵈweek of Dec. 24
3ʳᵈweek of Dec. 24
4ᵗʰweek of Dec. 24

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1
1ˢᵗ week of Jan. 25

2
2ⁿᵈweek of Jan. 25

RH7 hr
3
3ʳᵈweek of Jan. 25

4
4ᵗʰweek of Jan. 25

5
5ᵗʰ week of Jan. 25

Figure 4.5:Effect of weather parameter on Stinkbug population

6
1ˢᵗ week of Feb. 25
7
2ⁿᵈweek of Feb. 25

70
RH14 hr
8

3ʳᵈweek of Feb. 25
4ᵗʰweek of Feb. 25
1ˢᵗ week of March. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of March. 25
3ʳᵈweek of March. 25
4ᵗʰweek of March. 25
Rain(mm)

1ˢᵗ week of April. 25

2ⁿᵈweek of April. 25
3ʳᵈweek of April. 25
4ᵗʰweek of April. 25
1ˢᵗ week of May. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of May. 25
wind(Km/h)

3ʳᵈweek of May. 25
4ᵗʰweek of May. 25
1ˢᵗ week of June. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of June. 25
3ʳᵈweek of June. 25
Stinkbug

4ᵗʰweek of June. 25
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

5ᵗʰ week of June. 25

0
1
2
3

0.5
1.5
2.5
 0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
110.0
120.0

1ˢᵗ week of Oct. 24

2ⁿᵈ week of Oct. 24
3ʳᵈ week of Oct. 24
4ᵗʰ week of Oct. 24
1ˢᵗ week of Nov. 24
2ⁿᵈweek of Nov. 24
3ʳᵈweek of Nov. 24
4ᵗʰweek of Nov. 24
1ˢᵗ week of Dec. 24

Max
2ⁿᵈweek of Dec. 24
3ʳᵈweek of Dec. 24
4ᵗʰweek of Dec. 24

Min
41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1
1ˢᵗ week of Jan. 25

2
2ⁿᵈweek of Jan. 25

7 hr
3ʳᵈweek of Jan. 25
4
5 4ᵗʰweek of Jan. 25
5ᵗʰ week of Jan. 25

Figure 4.6:Effect of weather parameter on Gundhi bug population

6

14 hr
1ˢᵗ week of Feb. 25

71
7

2ⁿᵈweek of Feb. 25
8

3ʳᵈweek of Feb. 25
(mm) 4ᵗʰweek of Feb. 25
1ˢᵗ week of March. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of March. 25
3ʳᵈweek of March. 25
(Km/h)

4ᵗʰweek of March. 25
1ˢᵗ week of April. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of April. 25
3ʳᵈweek of April. 25
Gundhibug

4ᵗʰweek of April. 25
1ˢᵗ week of May. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of May. 25
3ʳᵈweek of May. 25
4ᵗʰweek of May. 25
1ˢᵗ week of June. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of June. 25
3ʳᵈweek of June. 25
4ᵗʰweek of June. 25
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

5ᵗʰ week of June. 25

0
1
2
3
4

0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
140.0 6

120.0 5
100.0
4
80.0
3
60.0
2
40.0

20.0 1

0.0 0
2ⁿᵈ week of Oct. 24
3ʳᵈ week of Oct. 24
4ᵗʰ week of Oct. 24
1ˢᵗ week of Nov. 24
2ⁿᵈweek of Nov. 24
3ʳᵈweek of Nov. 24
4ᵗʰweek of Nov. 24
1ˢᵗ week of Dec. 24
2ⁿᵈweek of Dec. 24
3ʳᵈweek of Dec. 24

1ˢᵗ week of Feb. 25

2ⁿᵈweek of Feb. 25

1ˢᵗ week of March. 25

2ⁿᵈweek of March. 25
3ʳᵈweek of March. 25
4ᵗʰweek of March. 25

3ʳᵈweek of April. 25

1ˢᵗ week of May. 25

2ⁿᵈweek of May. 25

4ᵗʰweek of May. 25
1ˢᵗ week of June. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of June. 25

4ᵗʰweek of June. 25
1ˢᵗ week of Oct. 24

4ᵗʰweek of Dec. 24
1ˢᵗ week of Jan. 25
2ⁿᵈweek of Jan. 25
3ʳᵈweek of Jan. 25
4ᵗʰweek of Jan. 25
5ᵗʰ week of Jan. 25

3ʳᵈweek of Feb. 25
4ᵗʰweek of Feb. 25

1ˢᵗ week of April. 25

2ⁿᵈweek of April. 25

4ᵗʰweek of April. 25

3ʳᵈweek of May. 25

3ʳᵈweek of June. 25

5ᵗʰ week of June. 25

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

TMax TMin RH7 hr RH14 hr Rain(mm) wind(Km/h) Sphingid

Correlation of different weather parameters with several insect pests of sarpagandha

The correlation coefficients of weather parameters viz., temperature, relative humidity

(RH), rainfall, and wind velocity with the mean population of red spider mite (no./cm² leaf
area), sphingid moth (no. of larvae/plant), pod bug (no. of nymphs+adults/plant), gundhi bug
(no. of nymphs+adults/plant), stink bug (no. of nymphs+adults/plant), and mealybug (no./cm²
plant ) were computed and are presented in Table 6.

Sphingid moth

Table 6 indicated a strong and significant negative relationship between sphingid

moth population and maximum temperature (r = –0.878), while showing a strong and
significant positive association with minimum temperature (r = 0.671). Morning relative
humidity (r = 0.077) and evening relative humidity (r = 0.123) exhibited weak positive but
non-significant relationships with the pest population. Similarly, rainfall (r = 0.098) also
showed a slight positive and non-significant association. On the other hand, wind velocity
exhibited a strong and significant negative correlation (r = –0.630) with the sphingid moth
population.

Red spider mite

72
 Table 6 revealed that the red spider mite population had a positive and significant
correlation with maximum temperature (r = 0.751) and minimum temperature (r = 0.461).
Morning relative humidity (r = –0.238) showed a negative but non-significant association,
whereas evening relative humidity (r = –0.336) was negatively and significantly correlated.
Rainfall (r = –0.514) also exhibited a significant negative relationship. Likewise, wind
velocity (r = –0.636) showed a strong, negative, and significant correlation with the red
spider mite population.

Mealybug

Table 6 highlited that the mealybug population showed a positive and significant
correlation with both maximum temperature (r = 0.678) and minimum temperature (r =
0.643). Morning relative humidity was negatively correlated (r = –0.274), though the
relationship was not significant, while evening relative humidity had a positive but non-
significant correlation (r = 0.144) with the pest. Rainfall (r = 0.063) and wind velocity (r =
0.305) also exhibited positive but non-significant correlations with the mealybug population.

Stink bug

Table 6 depicted that the stink bug population showed a positive but non-significant
correlation with maximum temperature (r = 0.056) and minimum temperature (r = 0.243).
Morning relative humidity exhibited a negative and significant correlation (r = –0.457),
whereas evening relative humidity had a positive but non-significant correlation (r = 0.209).
Rainfall (r = –0.043) and wind velocity (r = –0.162) also displayed negative, non-significant
correlations with the stink bug population.

Gundhi bug

Table 6 portrayed that the gundhi bug population showed a positive but non-
significant correlation with maximum temperature (r = 0.094) and minimum temperature (r =
0.060). Morning relative humidity (r = –0.118) and evening relative humidity (r = –0.153)
both exhibited negative, non-significant correlations. Rainfall (r = –0.354) had a negative and
significant correlation, while wind velocity (r = –0.224) also showed a negative but non-
significant correlation with the gundhi bug population.

Pod bug

73
 Table 6 depicted that the pod bug population showed a negative and non-significant
correlation with maximum temperature (r = –0.101) and minimum temperature (r = –0.152).
Morning relative humidity exhibited a negative and significant correlation (r = –0.522), while
evening relative humidity (r = –0.174) was negative but non-significant. Rainfall (r = –0.266)
and wind velocity (r = –0.019) also displayed negative, non-significant correlations with the
pod bug population.

74
Table 6: Correlation coefficient (r) of different weather parameters with several arthropod pests of sarpagandha

Arthropod pest Sphingid Pod bug Gundhibug Stinkbug Red spider Mealybug

Weather
parameter

Tmax (°C) -0.878** -0.101 0.094 0.056 0.751** 0.678**

Tmin (°C) 0.671** -0.152 0.06 0.243 0.461** 0.643**
RH%(7hr) 0.077 -0.522** -0.118 -0.457** -0.238 -0.274

RH% (14hr) 0.123 -0.174 -0.153 0.209 -0.336* 0.144

Rainfall 0.098 -0.266 -0.354* -0.043 -0.514** 0.063

Wind velocity -0.63** -0.019 -0.224 -0.162 -0.636** 0.305

**Significant at 1% level, *Significant at 5% level

75
4.2 Management of major arthropod pests on sarpagandha

4.2.1 Efficacy of plant extracts against red spider mite

Pre-application population

The data on red spider mite population (number/cm 2) as influenced by different plant extract
treatments has been presented in Table 6. It can be observed that at 1 Day before spryaing (DBS), the
mite population in different treatments did not vary and as high as 9.97 mite/cm 2 was visualized in
control treatment.

First spray

At 3 days after spraying (DAS), it was witnessed that the control treatment T9 registered
10.72 mites/cm² which was significantly different from the rest of the treatments. The lowest mite
population (9.43 mites/cm²) was recorded in T₈ (Neemazol) which was at par with T₅ (Jimsonweed)
(9.84 mites/cm²). Whereas, the T₅ did not differ significantly from rest of the treatments (9.86 to 9.89
mites/cm²).

At 7 DAS of first spray T₈ reported 8.92 mites/cm² which was significantly different from rest
of the treatments. Similarly, the control treatment T9 that supported 11.65 mites/cm² was statistically
different from rest of the treatments. T₅ (9.57 mites/cm²) is at par with only T 1 (9.59 mites/cm²) but
differ significantly from rest of the treatments.

At 10 DAS of the first spray, the control treatment witnessed 11.99 mites/cm² which was high
and remained significantly different from the rest of the treatments. The lowest mite population at this
stage was encountered with T₈ (8.51 mites/cm²) which also remained different statistically from other
treatments. The next better treatment was T₅ (9.01 mites/cm²) which was only at par with T₁ (9.21
mites/cm²). Treatment T₁ (Neem) was significantly homogenous to T₆ (9.56 mites/cm²) whereas, T₆
was at par with rest of the treatments.

The mean value of the 3 observations after first spray revealed that T ₈ (Neemazol) was the
best treatment which supported a mean of 8.96 mites/cm² whereas, in other treatments the average
mite number varied from 9.47 mites/cm² in T₅(Jimsonweed) to 11.45 mites/cm² in T9 (control).

Second spray

At 3 DAS of the second spray, the control treatment (T9) registered 12.54 mites/cm² which was
significantly higher than the rest of the treatments. The lowest population was observed in T₈ (8.34
mites/cm²) which was at par with T₂ (Karanja) (8.79 mites/cm²) and T₅ (8.81 mites/cm²), respectively.
Rest of the treatments were visualized to be at par among themselves.

At 7 DAS of the second spray, it was noted that the control treatment retained 13.76 mites/cm²
which was significantly higher than the rest of the treatments. The treatment T₈ supported only 7.69

76
mites/cm² which was superior to the rest of the treatments. The next best treatment was T₅ (8.15
mites/cm²) which was at par with T₂ (8.36 mites/cm²) and T₁ (8.48 mites/cm²).

At 10 DAS, it was observed that the mite population recorded a high of 14.01 mites/cm² in T9
which was significantly different from the rest of the treatments. On the contrary, T₈ supported the
lowest population (7.36 mites/cm²) which was different from other treatments. The treatment T₅ (7.96
mites/cm²) was the next better treatment which remained on par with T₂ (8.16 mites/cm²) and T₁ (8.26
mites/cm²), respectively.

The mean of three observations revealed that T₈ (Neemazol) supported the lowest mite
population (7.77 mites/cm²) followed by T₅(Jimsonweed) (8.30 mites/cm²).

Third spray

Mite population was observed to be high in T9 (14.72 mites/cm²) at 3 DAS of third spray which
was significantly different from rest of the treatments. The treatment T₈ registering 7.11 mites/cm² was
regarded as the best treatment and remained different for the rest of the treatments. The next better
treatment was T₅ (7.72 mites/cm²). However, the treatments T₁ and T₂, each supporting 8.11 mites/cm²
were adjudged as the next better performance.

At 7 DAS of third spray, the control treatment T9 supported 15.12 mites/cm² which was highest.
Similarly, T₈ supported only 6.19 mites/cm² which was statistically different from rest of the treatments.
The next better performing treatment was T₅ which retained 6.91 mites/cm² and remained on a par with
T₁ (7.21 mites/cm²).

At 10 DAS of third spray, it was noticed that T₈ and T9 supported lowest and highest mite
population (5.02 and 15.38 mites/cm²), respectively and differed significantly. The treatment T₁ which
supported 6.01 mites/cm² was at par with T₅ (6.05 mites/cm²). In other treatments, the mite population
ranged from 7.74 mites/cm² in T₂ to 9.66 mites/cm² in T₇.

Percent reduction over control

With regards to overall mean performance, it was ascertained that the T₈ (Neemazol)
supported only 7.01 mites/cm² and reduced the mite population by 42.82% followed by T₅
(Jimsonweed) (6.89 mites/cm²),T₁ (Neem) (7.11 mites/cm²) and caused 38.21% and 36.65% reduction
in mite population in comparison against the control treatment.

The descending order of efficacy based on ROC values was:

T₈ (42.82%) > T₅ (38.21%) > T₁ (36.65%) > T₂ (34.32%) > T₆ (31.31%) > T₄ (28.17%) > T₃ (27.53%)
> T₇ (26.91%)

77
78
 Mean population of red spider mite (Number of mite/cm2)
Treatments 1st application 2ndapplication 3rdapplication Mean of 3
1DBS 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS Mean 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS Mean 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS Mean Applications
T1 (Neem) 9.92 9.89 9.59 9.21 9.56 9.11 8.48 8.26 8.61 8.11 7.21 6.01 7.11 8.43
T2 (Karanja) 9.94 9.88 9.77 9.86 9.83 8.79 8.36 8.16 8.43 8.11 8.01 7.74 7.95 8.74
T3 (Custard 9.91 9.93 9.90 9.84 9.89 9.74 9.68 9.63 9.68 9.51 9.39 9.19 9.36 9.64
apple)
T4 (Billygoat 9.93 9.91 9.85 9.80 9.85 9.75 9.63 9.46 9.61 9.33 9.19 9.12 9.21 9.55
weed)
T5 (Jimsonweed) 9.95 9.84 9.57 9.01 9.47 8.81 8.15 7.96 8.30 7.72 6.91 6.05 6.89 8.22
T6 (Indian milk 9.93 9.86 9.77 9.56 9.73 9.39 9.14 8.92 9.15 8.71 8.53 8.41 8.55 9.14
weed)
T7 (Indian bael) 9.94 9.87 9.81 9.78 9.82 9.74 9.69 9.61 9.68 9.73 9.67 9.66 9.68 9.72
T8 (Nemazol 9.96 9.43 8.92 8.54 8.96 8.34 7.61 7.36 7.77 7.11 6.19 5.02 6.10 7.61
1500ppm)
(Standard Check)
T9(Untreated 9.97 10.72 11.65 11.99 11.45 12.54 13.76 14.01 13.43 14.72 15.12 15.38 15.07 13.31
control)
SE(m)± 0.014 0.140 0.122 0.115 0.176 0.115 0.167 0.097 0.148 0.089
CD (P=0.05) NS 0.41 0.37 0.34 0.53 0.34 0.50 0.29 0.44 0.27
Table:6 Efficacy of plant extracts against red spider mite

DBS: Days Before Spraying DAS: Days After Spraying

79
 ROC (%)
45
42.82
percent reduction of red spidermite population over

40 38.21
36.65

35 34.32

31.31
30 28.17
27.53 26.91
untreated control

25

20

15

10

0
T₁ T₂ T₃ T₄ T₅ T₆ T₇ T₈

Figure 4.7:Per cent reduction in red spider mite population over untreated control

80
Mealybug

The data on mealybug population (number/cm 2) as influenced by different treatments

has been presented in table _. It can be observed that at 1 Day before spraying (DBS), the
mealybug population in different treatments did not vary and as high as 6.49mealybug /cm 2 was
visualized in T₄.

First spray

At 3 days after spraying (DAS), the control treatment T 9 registered 7.26 mealybug/cm²,
which was significantly different from the rest of the treatments. The lowest mealybug
population (5.99 mealybug/cm²) was recorded in T₈, which was at par with T₅ (6.22
mealybug/cm²) and T₆ (6.13 mealybug/cm²). Whereas, T₅ and T₆ did not differ significantly
from the rest of the treatments (6.27 to 6.39 mealybug/cm²).

At 7 DAS of the first spray, T₈ reported 5.36 mealybug/cm², which was significantly
different from the rest of the treatments. Similarly, the control treatment T9 that supported 7.26
mealybug/cm² was statistically different from the rest of the treatments. The next best
treatment, T₆, was observed to be significantly at par with T₁. Rest of the treatments showed
mealybug populations that varied from 5.73 to 6.36 mealybug/cm².

At 10 DAS of the first spray, the control treatment T9 witnessed 7.40 mealybug/cm²,
which was high and remained significantly different from the rest of the treatments. The lowest
mealybug population at this stage was encountered with T₈ (5.03 mealybug/cm²), which
statistically at par with T₆ (5.14 mealybug/cm²) and T₁ (5.18 mealybug/cm²). Rest of the
treatments showed mealybug populations that varied from 5.73 to 6.36 mealybug/cm².

Second spray

At 3 days after spraying (DAS), the control treatment T9 registered 7.80 mealybug/cm²,
which was significantly different from the rest of the treatments. The lowest mealybug
population (4.73 mealybug/cm²) was recorded in T₈, which was at par with T₆ (4.78
mealybug/cm²). The next best treatment, T₆ (4.78 mealybug/cm²), was observed to be
significantly at par with T₁ (5.01 mealybug/cm²). Rest of the treatments showed mealybug
populations that varied from (5.25 to 6.26 mealybug/cm²).

At 7 DAS of the first spray, T₈ reported 4.07 mealybug/cm², which was at par with T₆
(4.13 mealybug/cm²). Similarly, the control treatment T9 that supported 7.96 mealybug/cm² was
statistically different from the rest of the treatments. Rest of the treatments showed mealybug
populations that varied from 4.13 to 6.24 mealybug/cm².

At 10 DAS of the first spray, the control treatment witnessed 8.11 mealybug/cm²,
which was high and remained significantly different from the rest of the treatments. The lowest
mealybug population at this stage was encountered with T₈ (3.28 mealybug/cm²), which also

81
remained statistically different from the other treatments. Rest of the treatments showed
mealybug populations that varied from 3.71 to 6.13 mealybug/cm².

The mean value of the three observations after the first spray revealed that T ₈ was the
best treatment, which supported a mean of 4.03 mealybug/cm², whereas in the other treatments
the average mealybug number varied from 4.21 mealybug/cm² in T₆ to 7.95 mealybug/cm² in
T9.

Third spray

At 3 days after spraying (DAS), the control treatment T9 registered 8.27 mealybug/cm²,
which was significantly different from the rest of the treatments. The lowest mealybug
population (2.84 mealybug/cm²) was recorded in T₈, which also remained statistically different
from the other treatments. Rest of the treatments showed mealybug populations that varied
from 3.41 to 6.21 mealybug/cm².

At 7 DAS of the first spray, T₈ reported 2.17 mealybug/cm², which was significantly
different from the rest of the treatments. Similarly, the control treatment T9 that supported 8.41
mealybug/cm² was statistically different from the rest of the treatments. Rest of the treatments
showed mealybug populations that varied from 2.51 to 6.01 mealybug/cm².

At 10 DAS of the first spray, the control treatment T9 witnessed 8.58 mealybug/cm²,
which was high and remained significantly different from the rest of the treatments. The lowest
mealybug population at this stage was encountered with T₈ (1.08 mealybug/cm²), which also
remained statistically different from the other treatments. Rest of the treatments showed
mealybug populations that varied from 1.83 to 5.96 mealybug/cm².

The mean value of the three observations after the first spray revealed that T ₈ was the
best treatment, which supported a mean of 2.03 mealybug/cm², whereas in the other treatments
the average mealybug number varied from 3.17 mealybug/cm² in T₁ to 8.42 mealybug/cm² in
T9.

Percent reduction over control (mealybug)

With regards to overall mean performance, it was ascertained that T₈ (Nemazol)

supported only 3.84 mealybug/cm² and reduced the mealybug population by 51.76%, followed
by T₆ (Indian milkweed) with 4.15 mealybug/cm² (47.86%), T₁ (Neem) with 4.48
mealybug/cm² (43.72%), and T₅ (Jimsonweed) with 5.28 mealybug/cm² (33.67%) in
comparison against the control treatment.

The descending order of efficacy based on ROC values was:

T₈ (51.76%) > T₆ (47.86%) > T₁ (43.72%) > T₅ (33.67%) > T₂ (33.29%) > T₄ (30.77%) > T₇
(27.26%) > T₃ (22.49%)

82
Table:7 Efficacy of plant extracts against mealybug

Mean population of mealy bug (Number of adults/cm2)

Treatments 1st application 2ndapplication 3rdapplication Mean of 3
1DBS 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS Mea 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS Mean 3DAS 7DAS 10DAS Mean Applications
n
T1 (Neem) 6.46 6.27 5.85 5.18 5.77 5.01 4.42 4.07 4.50 3.68 3.03 2.79 3.17 4.48
T2 (Karanja) 6.44 6.32 6.08 5.97 6.12 5.48 5.25 5.03 5.25 4.89 4.64 4.17 4.57 5.31
T3 (Custard apple) 6.41 6.39 6.27 6.23 6.30 6.26 6.24 6.13 6.21 6.08 6.01 5.96 6.02 6.17
T4 (Billygoat weed) 6.49 6.32 6.27 6.11 6.23 5.98 5.45 5.24 5.56 5.06 4.83 4.37 4.75 5.51
T5 (Jimsonweed) 6.45 6.22 6.02 5.98 6.07 5.62 5.15 5.03 5.27 4.93 4.45 4.19 4.52 5.28
T6 (Indian milk 6.46 6.13 5.73 5.14 5.67 4.78 4.13 3.71 4.21 3.41 2.51 1.83 2.58 4.15
weed)
T7 (Indian bael) 6.40 6.38 6.36 6.35 6.36 6.01 5.84 5.63 5.83 5.39 5.19 5.02 5.20 5.79
T8 (Nemazol 6.41 5.99 5.36 5.03 5.46 4.73 4.07 3.28 4.03 2.84 2.17 1.08 2.03 3.84
1500ppm)
(Standard Check)
T9(CONTROL) 6.43 7.26 7.26 7.40 7.19 7.8 7.96 8.11 7.95 8.27 8.41 8.58 8.42 7.96
SE(m)±) 0.088 0.087 0.094 0.067 - 0.080 0.073 0.091 - 0.058 0.057 0.086 - -
CD (P=0.05 NS 0.26 0.28 0.20 - 0.24 0.22 0.27 - 0.17 0.17 02.6 - -
DBS: Days Before Spraying DAS: Days After Spraying

83
84
 ROC (%)
60.00%
Per cent reduction of mealybug population over

51.76%
50.00% 47.86%
43.72%
40.00%
untreated control

33.29% 33.67%
30.77%
30.00% 27.26%
22.49%
20.00%

10.00%

0.00%
T₁ T₂ T₃ T₄ T₅ T₆ T₇ T₈

Figure 4.8: Per cent reduction in mealybug population over untreated control

DISCUSSION
85
 Sarpagandha (Rauvolfia serpentina Benth) is one of India's most important native
medicinal plant, belonging to the Apocynaceae family. The roots of R. serpentina are the
main medicinal part, used in India for over 400 years. They are traditionally employed to
treat snake bites, insect stings, neurological and psychiatric disorders. Despite its
importance, the pest problems affecting R. serpentina have not been widely studied,
especially in Odisha. The crop is vulnerable to a variety of insect pests that can hinder its
growth and yield. Common insect pests affecting sarpagandha are Oleander hawk moth
(Deilephila nerii), Gundhi bug (Leptocorisa oratorius), Weevil (Indomia cretaceous),
Grasshopper (Trilophida annulata), Dark brown hawk moth (Psilogramma menephron),
Leaf roller (Glyophodes suralis), Green stink bug (Nezara viridula), Scales
(Chrysomphalus aonidum), Mealybug (Planococcus citri) and Red spider mite
(Tetranychus urticae). The widespread occurrence of these pests has been identified as a
critical factor hindering crop yields under the agro-climatic conditions of Odisha.

This chapter presents the findings from the various investigations conducted during
the experiment and provides a detailed discussion on how these results fulfil the study’s
objectives, supported by comparisons with relevant previous literature.

5.1 Occurrence and seasonal incidence of insect and mite pests on sarpagandha
The present study was undertaken to examine the quantitative aspects of population
fluctuations of insect pests infesting sarpagandha under the agro-climatic conditions of
Bhubaneswar, Odisha, during October, 2024 to June, 2025. Regular observations were
recorded at weekly intervals to monitor the seasonal incidence and population dynamics
of major pests. Findings revealed patterns in pest population dynamics in relation to
different meteorological parameters.

5.1.1 Red spider mite

In our present study it was revealed that the red spider mite infestation on
sarpagandha began at 2.17 mites/cm² in the 41 SMW (October, 2024), peaked at 11.13
mites/cm² by the 14 SMW (April, 2025) due to warmer temperatures and low humidity,
then declined to 0.17 mites/cm² by the 25 SMW (June, 2025) with increased rainfall.
High pest activity occurred between the 9 and 15 SMW (March-April, 2025) before
weather conditions suppressed the population. Moreover, the red spider mite population
had a significant positive correlation with max (0.751) and min (0.461) temperatures but
a negative correlation with evening relative humidity (RH) (-0.336), rainfall (-0.514),

86
and wind velocity (-0.636). Morning RH (-0.238) was negative and non-significant with
mite population.

The present findings are in line with Khan et al. (2019), who reported that red
spider mite infestation on sarpagandha commenced in January, 2019 and continued up to
March, 2019 showing a steadily increasing trend. The population during January,
February and March ranged from 1.83–3.40, 1.96–4.20, and 3.50–4.96 mites per leaf,
respectively. These results confirm that red spider mite activity is concentrated during
the cooler and drier months, with populations building up gradually towards March. The
reported trend is consistent with our results, as peak mite infestation occurred during the
same months. Ganai et al. (2017) conducted a study on the diversity of arthropod fauna
associated with marigold in the Jammu region, spanning from February to May during
2014–15. During the investigation, infestations of red spider mite (Tetranychus urticae)
on marigold were recorded. This result quietly matches with our results in which the
peak mite population observed in the similar months. Bhagat et al. (2018) conducted a
study on the insect pest attacking marigold on the northern hills of Chhattisgarh in which
mite population was noticed on the crop in the third week of November to first week of
February. Mite population observed peak in first week of January which mostly aligns
with our results. Similarly experimental results of Halder et al. (2018) and Bamel and
Gulati (2022) shows the higher incidence of red spider mite population the month of
January to march which clearly matches with the results. The difference in the monthly
incidence indicated may be due to the different agro-climatic location having different
environmental effects.

The correlation data of the present study are consistent with previous reports. Patel
et al. (2020) observed that red spider mite population in brinjal was positively and
significantly associated with both maximum and minimum temperatures. Similarly,
Reddy et al. (2025) reported a significant positive correlation between mite population
and temperature. Chinniah et al. (2009) also noted that maximum temperature favoured
two-spotted spider mite population, whereas relative humidity and rainfall had a negative
influence. Likewise, Shinde (2021) recorded a positive association of mite incidence
with maximum and minimum temperatures, along with a strong negative correlation with
morning and evening relative humidity and rainfall.

5.1.2 Mealybug

87
 Mealybug infestation began with 2.6 mealybug/cm2 in the 41 SMW (1st week of
October, 2024). The pest number gradually increased, with peak population of 8.6
Mealybug/cm2 during 7 SMW (2nd week of February, 2025) and again at 10-11 SMW
(early March, 2025). After this, the mealybug count rapidly decreased, dropping its
lowest value of 0 Mealybug/cm2 by 23-26 SMW (June, 2025), and remained negligible
thereafter. The period of highest infestation was 6–11 SMW (February–March, 2025),
aligning with increased temperature and low rainfall. The mealybug population showed a
positive and significant correlation with both maximum temperature (0.678) and
minimum temperature (0.643). Morning relative humidity was negatively correlated (-
0.274), though the relationship was not significant, while evening relative humidity had a
positive but non-significant correlation (0.144) with the pest. Rainfall (0.063) and wind
velocity (0.305) also exhibited positive but non-significant correlations with the
mealybug population.

The present findings are in close agreement with those of Reddy et al. (2025), who
studied the seasonal incidence of striped mealybug in tuberose during 2022–23 and
reported maximum infestation in similar months. Similarly, Khan et al. (2020) revealed
the occurrence of insect pests such as mealybugs on sarpagandha from July 2018 to
February 2019, which corresponds with the present trend of peak incidence during
similar months. In addition, Sahu et al. (2017) reported mealybug as a major insect pest
on medicinal plants. Minor variations in the months of peak incidence across different
studies could be attributed to differences in agro-climatic conditions and associated
environmental factors, which influence pest population dynamics.

The correlation data of the present study are in line with Reddy et al. (2025), who
reported that mealybug population was positively and significantly correlated with both
maximum and minimum temperatures. Similarly, Aditi et al. (2025) observed a
significant positive association between mealybug incidence and maximum temperature.

5.1.3 Sphingid moth

The sphingid larval population started low, with 0.6 larvae/plant recorded at 41
SMW (1st week of October, 2024). For most of the season, numbers remained modest
(below 2 larvae/plant), with intermittent increases. The highest population was 4.8
larvae/plant at 26 SMW (last week of June, 2025). The lowest values, including several

88
weeks with zero number of larvae (notably at 12–16 and 18–25 SMW i.e late March to
June, 2025) were frequent.

These findings are in partial agreement with the observations of Khan et al. (2020),
who reported sphingid infestation on sarpagandha during July to December 2018, with
populations varying from nil to 0.26 larvae per plant, and the highest mean density (0.15
larvae/plant) recorded in October 2018. Rehaman et al. (2018) also noted the presence of
Deilephila nerii on sarpagandha, describing larvae as greenish in colour and capable of
severe defoliation at densities of 0.60 larvae per plant. The differences in the seasonal
occurrence and intensity of sphingid larvae reported in different studies may be attributed
to variations in agro-climatic conditions and crop phenology.

The correlation data of the present study are in agreement with earlier reports,
indicating a positive association of sphingid moth population with temperature.
Choudhary et al. (2020) observed a positive relationship with mean minimum
temperature,

5.1.4 Gundhi bug

In the present study, the highest incidence of gundhi bug was recorded during the
41 and 42 SMW (October, 2024) with 3 bugs per plant. Subsequent moderate peaks
(1.8–2.6 bugs/plant) occurred during March–April, after which the population steadily
declined, reaching very low levels (0.2 bugs/plant) from late May onwards.

The present study is mostly consistent with the findings of Khan et al. (2019),
showing that gundhi bug infestation on sarpagandha occurs during the warmer months
but remains at low densities, not reaching outbreak levels. This indicates that the pest has
a limited period of activity and having minimal threat under the prevailing conditions.

The correlation data of the present study are in agreement with earlier reports,
indicating a negative association of gundhi bug population with rainfall. Das et al. (2021)
reported a significant negative correlation between rainfall and gundhi bug activity,
suggesting that higher rainfall suppresses pest incidence and population buildup.

5.1.4 Stink bug

Stink bugs were initially observed at 2.2 bugs/plant during 41 SMW (1 st week of
October, 2024) and showed a peak of 3.8 bugs/plant at 44 SMW (4 th week of October,

89
2024). Populations generally ranged between 0.8–3.8 bugs/plant, with repeated zero
counts in 3–5 SMWs and several March–June weeks. However, the lower counts
coincided with periods of higher rainfall and humidity.

These findings are mostly in line with the observations of Khan et al. (2019), who
reported that the green stink bug population on sarpagandha varied from 0.13 to 2.33
bugs/plant, with the maximum mean density (1.33 bugs/plant) recorded in August, 2018,
and the lowest (0.37 bugs/plant) observed in November and December, 2018. Similarly,
Kumar (2007) noted that the green plant bug Nezara viridula, a polyphagous pest, was
observed from September, 2008 to January, 2009 at a density of 1.17 nymphs per plant,
with both nymphs and adults sucking sap from leaves and buds of aswagandha. Further,
Ramanna (2009) and Nirmal et al. (2015) also reported that N. viridula nymphs and
adults on leaves and buds of aswagandha. The present findings, together with earlier
reports, indicate that the green stink bug persists on sarpagandha at varying levels
depending on climatic conditions.

5.1.5 Pod bug

No infestations were observed till 42 SMW (2 nd week of October, 2024) and the
population peaked at 3.8 bugs/plant in the 49 SMW (1 st week of December, 2024). For
the rest of the season, the population fluctuated generally between 0.2–1.8 bugs/plant,
with lowest values of 0 bugs/plant in multiple weeks (notably early and late season), and
decreased further with the onset of higher humidity and rainfall in late June.

These findings are in line with the observations of Singh (1964), who reported the
incidence of Riptortus pedestris on Rauvolfia serpentina, confirming the pod bug as a
pest of sarpagandha in India.

5.2 Management of major arthropod pests on sarpagandha

In India, the growing demand for natural products has surged due to the adverse side
effects associated with synthetic drugs. To ensure a consistent supply of raw materials
for the pharmaceutical sector, there is an increasing focus on large-scale, scientifically
guided cultivation of medicinal plants. However, these plants are vulnerable to biotic
stressors such as insect pests and diseases, which negatively impact both the yield and
quality of the produce. Severe pest infestations can even lead to total crop loss. Effective
implementation of integrated pest management (IPM) strategies requires accurate

90
monitoring of pest populations and assessment of the damage inflicted, which are
essential for determining their pest status and devising appropriate control measures.

5.2.1 Red spider mite

Among the nine treatments evaluated against red spider mite infestation in
Sarpagandha, T₈ (Neemazal 1500 ppm) exhibited the highest efficacy, achieving a
42.82% reduction in mite population. This was followed by T₅ (Jimsonweed; 38.21%),
T₁ (Neem; 36.65%), and T₂ (Karanja; 34.32%), whereas the lowest efficacy was
recorded in T₇ (Indian bael; 26.91%). These findings are in partial agreement with those
of Patel et al. (2024), who reported that neem oil (0.5%) and azadirachtin 10,000 ppm
(0.002%) significantly reduced mite populations, achieving up to 71.29% efficacy in
managing infestations. The observed variation in inhibition percentage between the two
studies may be attributed to differences in the concentrations of treatments applied.
Similarly, Kumar (2007) demonstrated that Neemazal (2%) effectively suppressed mite
populations on rose under polyhouse conditions, where treated leaves recorded a mean
population of 3.81 mites/leaf as compared to 23.77 mites/leaf in the control,
corresponding to 83.97% reduction. Ifrahim et al. (2022) showed Azadirachtin 0.03%EC
@ 5 ml/L reduced mite population in gerbera leaves with percent inhibition of 75.57%
which supports to our result of Neemazal being effective treatment against red spider
mite. These results further substantiate the present findings, whereas Neemazal
(1500ppm) reduced mite populations by 42.82%, though the differences in reduction
levels are likely due to variations in concentration used across the studies. The acaricidal
potential of neem oil observed in the present study is consonant with the findings of
Saleem et al. (2019) on cucumber. Saad et al. (2025) demonstrated the acaricidal
potential of Datura extracts, reporting mortality rates of 85.71% and 84.62% when
methanol and acetone solvents, respectively, were used at a concentration of 4%. These
findings are partially similar with the present results, where jimsonweed extract (50 g/L)
reduced the red spider mite population by 38.21%. The variation in efficacy between the
two studies may be attributed to differences in solvent type and concentrations
employed. In a related study, Mamun et al. (2015) also confirmed the acaricidal activity
of D. metel, which exhibited mortality rate 69.94% at 72 hours after treatment (HAT).
These earlier reports lend further support to the present findings, reinforcing the potential
of jimsonweed as an effective treatment for managing red spider mite infestations.

91
5.2.2 Mealybug

Among the nine treatments evaluated against mealybug infestation in sarpagandha,

T₈ (Neemazal 1500 ppm) exhibited the highest efficacy, achieving a 51.76% reduction in
mealybug population. This was followed by T₆ (Indian milk weed ;47.86%), T₁ (Neem;
43.72%) and T₅ (Jimsonweed;33.67%), whereas the lowest efficacy was recorded in T₃
(22.49%). The present results are consistent with the observations of Ghosh (2020), who
demonstrated that azadirachtin (Nimarin 1500 ppm at 2.5 ml/L) suppressed mealybug
populations with an efficacy of up to 57.00%. Similarly, according to Rajasekhar et al.
(2022), field application of azadirachtin 1500ppm at 5mL/L effectively suppressed
mealybugs, yielding a 58.2% decrease relative to the control. Thammayya et al. (2024)
reported that azadirachtin 1% EC (10,000ppm) was highly effective in laboratory
bioassays, delivering a substantial reduction in mealybug populations with 96.39%
mortality. The difference observed is due to the variation in concentration between
treatments. According to Zala et al. (2021), calotropis leaf extract caused 64.64%
mortality after 11 days in the field condition. The difference observed is due to the
variation in Devi et al. (2018) evaluated aqueous extracts from different parts of
Calotropis gigantea against adult female Maconellicoccus hirsutus and found the leaf
extract most potent, causing 86.67%, 91.67%, and 93.33% mortality at 24, 48, and 72
hours after exposure, respectively. Manjula et al. (2020) reported that acetone extracts of
Calotropis gigantea were effective against mealybugs.

92
A field and semi field experiment was conducted under the All India Coordinated
Research Project on Medicinal and Aromatic Plants & Betelvine (AICRP on MAP &
Betelvine) at the Central Horticultural Research Station, Odisha University of
Agriculture and Technology (OUAT), Bhubaneswar, from October, 2024 to June, 2025.
The experiment was laid out in a completely randomized design (CRD) with nine
treatments and three replications, to study the seasonal incidence and management of
major arthropod pests on sarpagandha (Rauvolfia serpentina Benth.). This chapter
consists of the summary of the results and conclusion derived from the experiment
performed.
6.1 Summary
Red spider mite infestation started in SMW 41 (1ˢᵗ week of October, 2.17 mites/cm²),
increased gradually, and peaked in SMW 14 (1ˢᵗ week of April, 11.13 mites/cm²).
Populations fell sharply after SMW 15 and were negligible by SMW 25–26 (June). Mite
activity was highest from SMW 9–15 (March–April). Mealybug appeared in SMW 41
(2.6/cm²), peaked in SMW 7 (2nd week of February, 8.6/cm²) and again in SMW 10–11
(early March), then declined rapidly, almost disappearing by SMW 23-26
(June). Sphingid moth larvae were present from SMW 41 (0.6 larvae/plant) but generally
remained low (less than 2 larvae/plant), except for a late surge in SMW 26
(4.8/plant). Pod bug emerged in SMW 42 (2nd week of October), peaked in SMW 49
(3.8/plant), then stayed low. Gundhi bug and stink bug numbers were highest early in the
season (SMW 41-44, October), then declined.
Analysis of weather parameters and pest population dynamics throughout the cropping
season revealed a consistent pattern of climate-driven pest responses. Red spider
mite and mealybug, the two major pests, displayed a strong positive correlation with both
maximum and minimum temperatures. As temperatures rose, particularly during
February to April, mite and mealybug populations increased significantly. The onset of
the monsoon, with increased rainfall and higher relative humidity, was associated with a
sharp decline in both mite and mealybug numbers. Wind velocity also had a notable
negative effect, particularly for the red spider mite, likely due to disruption of web
structures and dispersal of mites from their feeding sites.
Sphingid moth larvae showed a different set of relationships. Their numbers
were negatively correlated with maximum temperature and wind velocity, but positively
correlated with minimum temperature. This suggests that comparatively cooler nights
and calmer conditions were more favourable for sphingid moths, while hot, windy days
reduced their activity.
Pod bug populations were negatively associated with morning relative humidity,
indicating that moist early mornings were unfavourable for this pest, possibly affecting
survival or egg-laying activity. Gundhi bug abundance was negatively correlated with
rainfall, consistent with the observation that their numbers declined as monsoon showers
became frequent. These patterns underscore the importance of specific weather elements
in shaping pest outbreaks: warm, dry spells (as seen in SMW 7–15) promote outbreaks
especially of mites and mealybugs while increased humidity, rainfall, and
wind generally suppress pest activity.

93
The management trial conducted with eight plant extracts against the predominant pests
of sarpagandha, namely red spider mite (Tetranychus urticae) and mealybug
(Planococcus citri), revealed marked differences in their suppressive potential. For red
spider mite, the standard check Neemazal (T₈) exhibited the highest efficacy, achieving
42.82% reduction over control, and consistently maintaining the lowest population
(6.10–8.96 mites/cm²) across all sprays. This was closely followed by Jimsonweed
extract (T₅) which effected 38.21% reduction, and Neem extract (T₁) with 36.65%
reduction. Other treatments such as Karanja (T₂) and Indian milkweed (T₆) also
recorded appreciable suppression (34.32% and 31.31%, respectively), whereas Custard
apple (T₃), Billygoat weed (T₄), and Indian bael (T₇) were comparatively less effective
(<30%).
In case of mealybug, Neemazol (T₈) again proved most effective, reducing infestation by
51.76%, and supporting a mean population as low as 2.03 mealybugs/cm² after the third
spray. The next best treatment was Indian milkweed (T₆) with 47.86% reduction,
followed by Neem extract (T₁) with 43.72% reduction. Jimsonweed extract (T₅) also
showed notable suppression (33.67% reduction). Karanja (T₂), Billygoat weed (T₄), and
Indian bael (T₇) offered moderate control ranging from 27.26% to 33.29%, whereas
Custard apple extract (T₃) was least effective (22.49%).
Conclusion
The present investigation on the seasonal incidence and management of arthropod pests
of sarpagandha (Rauvolfia serpentina) conducted from October 2024 to June 2025 offers
valuable insights into pest dynamics and their association with prevailing weather
conditions, along with the evaluation of plant-based pest management strategies. During
this period, six major arthropod pests were recorded, each showing population
fluctuations strongly influenced by climatic factors. Higher temperatures coupled with
lower relative humidity favored the proliferation of red spider mites and mealybugs,
whereas rainfall and wind velocity contributed markedly to their decline. In terms of
management, Neemazol 1500 ppm (T₈) applied thrice at 10-day intervals proved
most effective in suppressing red spider mite and mealybug populations, followed by
jimsonweed, neem, and Indian milkweed extracts, all of which performed significantly
better than the untreated control. Furthermore, the botanical treatments were
comparatively safer to natural enemies, underscoring their potential as sustainable and
eco-friendly options within integrated pest management (IPM) systems for sarpagandha
cultivation.

94