Contact: +91-9711224068
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
  • Printed Journal
  • Indexed Journal
  • Refereed Journal
  • Peer Reviewed Journal

ISSN Print: 2349-6800 | ISSN Online: 2320-7078

Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

2015, Vol. 3, Issue 2
Assessment of resistance to the attack of pulse beetle, Callosobruchus chinensis (Fabricius) in chickpea genotypes on the basis of various physical parameters during storage

B.S. Chandel, D.S. Bhadauria

Experiments were conducted in the laboratory, Department of Zoology, D.B.S. College, Kanpur to find out the impact of physical characteristics of promising varieties of pigeonpea, Cajanus cajan Linn. on infestation of pulse beetle. The promising genotypes viz; PUSA–84, PRABHAT, MANAK, AMAR, PUSA-33, ICPL-151, UPAS-120, JAGARTI, TYPE-7, PUSA-9, BAHAR, and TYPE-21 of pigeonpea were obtained from IIPR, Kalyanpur, Kanpur. The results indicated that mean test weight was found to be 94.35 g and most of varieties were not deviating from the mean except PRABHAT and UPAS-120. The seeds of PUSA-33(11.9), PUSA-9 (13.9), TYPE-7 and BAHAR (13.1) Kg/ grain, had significantly more hardness. The average moisture content in pigeonpea varieties was found to be 12.39 per cent. The mean protein content was 22.99 per cent in pigeonpea varieties. AMAR possessed the lowest proteinrncontent (21.80 per cent) and had significantly poor protein content. It can be concluded that TYPE -7 variety of pigeonpea showing the least weight loss (15.82%) due contained 110.13g test weight, 13.1 kg hardness/grain, 12.5 per cent moisture and 21.80 per cent protein. It is followed by IPCL-151(17.03%) due to 98.423g test weight, 7.6 kg hardness/grain, 12.3per cent moisture and 22.40 per cent protein.
Pages : 160-165 | 1017 Views | 17 Downloads
How to cite this article:
B.S. Chandel, D.S. Bhadauria. Assessment of resistance to the attack of pulse beetle, Callosobruchus chinensis (Fabricius) in chickpea genotypes on the basis of various physical parameters during storage. J Entomol Zool Stud 2015;3(2):160-165.
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
Please use another browser.