Studies on Morphophysiological and Biochemical Parameters for Sucking Pest Tolerance in Organic Cotton

Shradha S. Aherkar, Surendra B. Deshmukh, Nitin. M. Konde, Aadinath N. Paslawar, Tanay Joshi (), Monika M. Messmer and Amritbir Riar
Additional contact information
Shradha S. Aherkar: Department of Agricultural Botany, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola 444104, India
Surendra B. Deshmukh: Cotton Research Unit, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola 444104, India
Nitin. M. Konde: Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola 444104, India
Aadinath N. Paslawar: Department of Agronomy, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola 444104, India
Tanay Joshi: Group Resilient Cropping System, Department of International Cooperation, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), 5070 Frick, Switzerland
Monika M. Messmer: Group Plant Breeding, Department of Crop Science, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), 5070 Frick, Switzerland
Amritbir Riar: Group Resilient Cropping System, Department of International Cooperation, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), 5070 Frick, Switzerland

Agriculture, 2023, vol. 13, issue 7, 1-18

Abstract: The demand for organic cotton is primarily driven by manufacturers and brands with a corporate focus on environmental and social responsibility. These entities strive to be responsible stewards by seeking organic cotton, which not only offers environmental benefits but also provides softer, more durable, and longer-lasting clothing. Unlike conventional cotton, organic cotton is processed without the use of harsh chemicals, making it more comfortable for individuals with sensitive skin. A study was conducted at the Center of Organic Agriculture Research and Training Center, Department of Agronomy, Dr. PDKV, Akola, Maharashtra, India to evaluate 22 cotton genotypes, including control samples, using a randomized block design with three replications during the kharif (June–October) season in the years 2019–2020 and 2020–2021, under complete organic conditions. During the initial year of the study (2019–2020), visual observations were made to assess the incidence of sucking pests on the cotton genotypes’ leaves, including the top, middle, and bottom portions. The observations indicated promising results, leading to a more detailed study in the subsequent year (2020–2021). This extended study identified several tolerant genotypes to sucking pests, such as AV-G11, PA-255, GA-8004, AV-C14, and AV-G13 from the arboreum species, as well as AKH-09-5, a hirsutum cultivar. Among the recorded data, it was found that the lowest mean aphid population occurred at 90 days after sowing (DAS), with only 1.53 aphids per leaf. Similarly, the lowest mean populations of Cicadellidae, thrips, and whitefly were recorded at 0.75, 0.97, and 0.63 per leaf, respectively, all at 30 DAS. Microscopic analysis of trichome density and gossypol glands revealed a negative and significant correlation with Aphis gossypi (aphids), Cicadellidae sp. ( Cicadellidae ), and Thrips tabaci (thrips). However, a positive and significant correlation was found with Bemesia tabaci (whitefly). Furthermore, the estimation of total soluble sugar using the Anthrone method, total nitrogen, and crude protein showed positive and significant correlations with aphids, Cicadellidae , and thrips, but negative, significant correlations with whitefly. The findings indicate that higher trichome density provides greater resistance to sucking pest infestation. It was concluded that G. arboreum genotypes exhibit greater tolerance to sucking pests compared to G. hirsutum varieties. This implies that G. arboreum varieties may require less intensive pest management, aligning with organic farming principles. The discovery of these genotypes opens up possibilities for utilizing them as sustainable and pest-resistant options in cotton cultivation, promoting environmentally friendly and organic farming practices in cotton fiber production.

Keywords: organic; cotton; sucking pests; trichome density; gossypol glands; total sugar; total nitrogen; crude protein (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q1 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/7/1402/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/7/1402/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:7:p:1402-:d:1194196

Access Statistics for this article

Agriculture is currently edited by Ms. Leda Xuan

More articles in Agriculture from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().