, 24:97 | Cite as

Ovipositional response ofHelicoverpa armigera to different cotton genotypes

  • N. S. Butter
  • Surjit Singh
Research Paper


The ovipositional response ofHelicoverpa armigera (Hübner) to different cotton varieties and species was studied under caged conditions. Maximum oviposition (51.6 eggs/female) was recorded on LH 900, a variety ofGossypium hirsutum, and minimum oviposition (3.0 eggs/female) on G 27, a variety ofG. arboreum. Oviposition, in general, was low (3 to 6.5 eggs/female) onarboreum cottons as compared withhirsutum. Of the number of factors found to affect the oviposition ofH. armigera, the trichome length on the upper surface of the leaf, rather than the density, was positively correlated (r = 0.687*). Among different months in the cropping season, oviposition was maximum (552.7) during April. Oviposition was higher on leaves than on other plant parts.

Key Words

Helicoverpa armigera ovipositional response Gossypium spp. cotton genotypes 


  1. 1.
    Duhoon, S.S. and Singh, M. (1980) Resistance to spotted bollwormEarias spp. in cotton,Gossypium arboreum Linn.Indian J. Entomol. 42: 116–121.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goyal, S.P. and Rathore, V.S. (1988) Patterns of insect-plant relationship determining susceptibility of different hosts toHeliothis armigera (Hüb.).Indian J. Entomol. 50:193–201.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jayaswal, A.P. (1988) Recent outbreak of American bollworms,Heliothis armigera Hüb. on cotton in Andhra Pradesh and its management. Paper presented at Workshop onHeliothis Management (Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, India).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Karmawati, E. (1988) Within plant distribution ofHelicoverpa armigera Hüb. eggs on cotton at Asembagus, East Java.Ind. Crop Res. J. 1(1):26–31.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lukefahr, M.J., Houghtaling, J.E. and Graham, H.M. (1971) Suppression ofHeliothis populations with glabrous cotton strains.J. Econ. Entomol. 64:486–488.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lukefahr, M.J., Houghtaling, J.E. and Graham, H.M. (1975) Suppression ofHeliothis spp. with cottons containing combinations of resistant characters.J. Econ. Entomol. 68:743–746.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Norris, D.M. and Kogan, M. (1980) Biochemical and morphological bases of Maxwell, F.C. and Jennings, P.R. [Eds.] Breeding Plants Resistant to Insects. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, NY. pp. 323–361.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Parsons, F.S. (1940) Distribution of eggs ofHeliothis armigera Hüb. on cotton.Bull. Entomol. Res. 31:147–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ramnath, S., Chitra, K. and Uthamasamy, S. (1992) Behavioral response ofHelicoverpa armigera (Hüb.) to certain host plants.J. Insect Sci. 5:147–149.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Singh, J. and Sidhu, A.S. (1990) Present status ofHeliothis on cotton and strategies for its management in Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan.Proc. First National Workshop on Heliothis Management: Current Status and Future Strategies. Directorate of Pulses, Kanpur, India.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Steel, R.G.D. and Torrie, J.H. (1980) Principles and Procedures of Statistics: A Biometrical Approach. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, NY.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sundramurthy, V.T. (1993) Integrated insect management strategies for cotton insects to increase the production in 2000 A.D. Paper presented at the Seminar on Important Commercial Cotton Varieties (Ahmedabad, New Delhi, India).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wilson, R.L. and Wilson, F.D. (1977) Effects of cottons differing in pubescence and other characters on pink bollworm in Arizona.J. Econ. Entomol. 70:196–198.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. S. Butter
    • 1
  • Surjit Singh
    • 2
  1. 1.Directorate of Extension EducationPunjab Agricultural UniversityLudhianaIndia
  2. 2.Lambi (Malout)PunjabIndia

Personalised recommendations