South Pacific Study Vol. 19, No. 1-2, 1999

Further Studies on Pest-host Interaction in IPM of(Walk.)
Muhammad ASHFAQ 1), Abrar AHMAD 1)
and Ghulam Mustafa CHEEMA 2)

Abstract

The leaves of 15 selected host plants viz., ’chulai’ (L.), ’dib’(L.), garlicL.), gram (L.), ’khabbal’ grass (Pers.), ’korbooti’ (L.), lady’s finger (L.), maize (L.), ’makoh’ (L.),
onion (L), potato (L.), rice (L.), sorghum (Pers.), sugarcane (L.) and water grass (L.) were offered as food to 4th
instar larvae of(Walk.) to find out consumption and coefficient of utilization and werecorrelated here with the chemical plant factors.
Keeping all the results presented here in this study in view, it is concluded that Khabbal grass (296.32 mg
consumption and 66.67％ coefficient of utilization) was found to be a suitable alternate host for rice crop (282.70
mgs consumption and 70.57％ coefficient of utilization) whereas ’dib’ was found to be a suitable (123.74 mgs
consumption and 57.49％ coefficient of utilization) alternate host for potato (120.79 mgs consumption and54.33％ coefficient of utilization) and Lady’s finger (109.79 mg consumption and 49.28％ coefficient of utilization) of all calcium, magnesium and fat contents showed negative and significant correlation both with consumption as well as coefficient of utilization values. The R2 values were 0.852 and 0.847 for consumption and coefficient of utilization, respectively.
(

Key words: Pakistan, food preference, armyworm, chemical factors

Introduction
Armyworm,(Walk.) is one of the most serious pest of cereals in
Asia. It has been attacking plants of 33 species in 8 families resulting in heavy crop losses(SHARMA and DAVIS, 1983). Complete reliance has been made on pesticides for the controlof this notorious cereal pest resulting in the disturbance of natural fauna. With the recent
advances in the plant physiology, biochemistry and insects behaviour, it has become possible to determine the physiological and biochemical nature and causes of the plant immunity
and resistance. A few attempts on the line by various scientists in scattered form, however,were carried out by RAMDEV and RAO (1979), BERNAYS (1982), ELAIDI and AKHTAR(1984), SURANI and ASHFAQ (1984), RAMAN and ANNADURAI (1985), BRAWER(1987), HARE (1987), QAMAR (1990), CENTER and WRIGHT (1991), ALI (1993) and
1) Entomology Department, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan.
2) Agriculture College, Bahauddin Zikaria University, Multan, Pakistan.

24South Pacific Study Vol. 19, No. 1-2, 1999

VIRK (1993).
The present study was conducted to determine the role of chemical factors responsible forthe acquisition of resistance against

Materials and Methods
From a screening trail, 15 plants viz., ’chulai’, ’dib’, garlic, gram, ’khabbal’ grass,’korbooti’, lady’s finger, maize, ’makoh’, onion, potato, rice, sorghum, sugarcane and water
grass showing the response of susceptibility/resistance and intermediate (out of 54) wereselected. Fresh tender leaves weighing 40 g of each host plant were washed with distilledwater to remove dust and dirt and were shade-dried for one hour. The leaves of each hostplant were divided into four lots and each lot contained 10 leaves. These leaves were cut
into small pieces. Ten grams leaves of each host plant were put into glass beaker and eachhost plant had four beakers (250 ml capacity). It was replicated four times in Completely
Randomized Design. These beakers were kept into rearing room under controlled conditions. Uniform sized larvae of 4th instar were obtained from mass rearing studies and one
Table 1. Leaf consumption, coefficient of utilization, faeces and various chemical plant factors ofHost Plants

Consumption(mg) per 10g
fresh leaves

Coefficientofutilization(％)

Dry faeces
Total(mg) par 10g minerals
fresh leaves(％)

Nitrogen(％)

Protein(％)P(％)

ChulaiDib
GarlicGram
Khabbal Grass
Korbooti
Laby’s finger
Maize
Makoh
Onion
PotatoRice
Sorghum
Sugarcane
Water Grass

192.13F
123.74H
175.82G
196.42F
296.32B
228.03D
109.57I
370.46A
195.93F
216.13E
120.79HI
282.70C
364.28A
358.28A
179.01G

42.55G
57.49D24.31K
31.38I
66.67B
29.70U49.28F69.29AB
46.79F39.25H54.33E
70.57A
62.52C
71.06A
27.79J

110.34DE
52.63B
133.04BC
134.74BC
98.71F160.24A
55.53H
113.26D
104.29DEF
131.26BC
49.69H
83.20G
141.00B
102.79EF
129.19C

1.05I
0.95I
0.93I
1.36G
1.28GH
1.40G
2.36C
1.66F
1.64F
2.85A
2.15D
2.49B
2.02E
1.96E
1.21H

6.57HIJ
5.97IJ
5.76J
8.52G
8.03GH
8.74FG
14.77BC
10.41E
10.23EF
17.78A
13.47CD
15.53B
12.61D13.78CD
7.55GHI

0.28DE
0.12I
0.28D
0.31C
0.22H
0.25EFG
0.45A
0.26DEFG
0.25FG
0.28DEF
0.37B
0.25FG
0.26DEFG
0.25EFG
0.23GH

6.01H
4.55I
6.55GH
7.83EFG
6.55GH
8.86DEF
7.56FGH
7.62FGH
9.22CDE
10.69ABC
11.87A
10.04BCD
10.86AB
6.75GH6.14H

r ＝0.579＊
R2 ＝0.336
R2 ＝0.173
r ＝0.416NS
Means sharing similar letters are not significantly different at P＝0.01
r ＝Correlation coefficient value.
R2 ＝Coefficient of determination.

(Walk.)ASHFAQ: Further Studies on Pest-host Interaction in IPM of25

larva was liberated into each beaker for feeding. The larvae were starved for 24 hours
before liberation and then were allowed to feed on the experimental foods for 24 hours. At
the same time an equal quantity of the leaves of the same food plant was dried in an ovenat 100℃ for 24 hours to calculate dry weight of the leaves fed to the insects. Similarly, theleft over leaves after 24 hours feeding in each beaker were also dried and weighed. The
insects were left for further 24 hours in the same beakers (without food) to have complete
collection of the faeces. The faeces thus collected were transferred to 50 ml glass beakers
and were dried by putting in the oven at 100℃ for 24 hours. The dried faeces were weighed
as described above. The consumption of each lot was measured by directly substracting thefinal dry weight of the left over leaves from the calculated mean dry weight of the initialamount of leaves provided to the insects. The percent coefficient of utilization was calculated after EVANS (1939).
A−B
Coefficient of Utilization (％) ＝ ―――― × 100
A
A ＝ Dry weight of food consumed
B ＝ Dry weight of faeces produced
different food plants.
K
(％)

Ca
(％)

Mg
(％)

Fe
(PPM)

Mu
(PPM)

Zinc
(PPM)

Crude fibre
(％)

CHO
(％)

Fats
(％)

1.91G
1.33I
2.67E
1.49HI
2.16FG
2.67E
4.32B
2.68E
3.16D
2.66E
4.76A
2.24F
3.63C
1.63H
4.34B

0.77G
0.54H
1.16CD
0.94EF
0.38I
1.12D
1.02E
0.34IJ
0.91F
1.76A
1.56B
0.28J
0.33IJ
0.38I
1.21C

0.64C
0.36G
0.44E
0.43E
0.23J
0.32H
0.86A
0.18K
0.52D
0.38FG
0.55D
0.39F
0.27I
0.31H
0.75B

59.27D13.93I
15.36I
40.02F35.35G
26.27H
73.11C
26.15H
16.58I
53.16E
89.94B
118.20A
43.55F25.04H
13.95I

16.48G
20.57GH
59.00DE
43.82F71.13D
26.00GH
191.37B
140.43C
68.62DE
57.58E
142.99C
278.48A
19.86GH
30.89G
30.87G

20.41CDE
29.59CD
23.99CDE
11.69E
36.39C
30.95CD
75.06A
33.25CD
18.25DE
13.87E
30.84CD
51.71B
30.44CD
32.93CD
55.54B

30.83BC
37.73A
20.00DEF
14.25F25.19CDE
29.17BC
19.40EF
29.57BC
30.55BC
26.05CD
18.38F25.71CDE
26.18CD
33.46AB
29.68BC

50.56AB
50.15AB
52.25AB
43.56C53.90AB50.96AB
53.59AB49.98AB50.44AB
53.42AB52.97AB
52.72AB
47.94BC
50.99AB
54.85A

2.63CD
2.13EF
2.89C
5.23A
0.76H
1.63FG
3.52B
1.74F
2.38DE
2.10EF
3..56B
1.21GH
1.81F
2.07EF
1.65FGThe total minerals, nitrogen, protein, fat, crude fibre, soluble carbohydrates, magnesium,
phosphorus, calcium, potassium, ferrous, manganese and zinc were determined. The data
were analyzed. Means were separated by Duncan’s New Multiple Range Test (DUNCAN,
1955). Simple and multiple correlations were also worked out among consumption, coefficient of utilization and chemical plant factors.

26South Pacific Study Vol. 19, No. 1-2, 1999

Table 2. Effect of chemical factors on the consumption (g) and utilization (％) of levels of
Total Minerals

NitrogenProteinPhoshorus

Potassium＊＊-0.284-0.244

Calcium-0.6372＊r
Consumption
R2

0.157

0.156

0.156

0.017

0.029

0.043

0.083

0.077

0.425

r
Utilization
R2

0.109

0.3590＊＊0.359＊＊-0.171-0.158-0.711＊＊

0.012

0.130

0.147

0.028

0.025

0.504

＊

Significant at P 0.05
Significant at P 0.01
r ＝ Correlation values
R2 ＝ Coefficient of Determination Values＊＊

Results and Discussion
The results (Table 1) revealed that the ranking order of host plants on the basis ofconsumption was maize ＞ sorghum ＞ sugarcane ＞ ’khabbal’ grass ＞ rice ＞ ’korbooti’＞
onion ＞ gram ＞ ’makoh’ ＞ ’chulai’ ＞ garlic ＞ ’dib’ ＞ potato ＞ lady’s finger. The
preference on the basis of coefficient of utilization was recorded as sugarcane ＞ rice ＞
maize ＞ ’khabbal’ grass ＞ sorghum ＞ ’dib’ ＞ potato ＞ lady’s finger ＞ ’makoh’ ＞’chulai’ ＞ onion ＞ gram ＞ ’korbooti’ ＞ water grass ＞ garlic. On over all basis significantly positive correlation was found to exist between food consumption and coefficient ofutilization. The R２ value was found to be 0.336.
These findings are quite in conformity with those of BAILEY (1976) who reported 51.8％
coefficient of utilization on potato over the entire larval period of Bertha armyworm,
Mamestra configurata Walk. Our results are also in line with those of NASIR (1979) who
found that sugarcane and wheat had a very high degree of consumption and coefficient ofutilization. The present findings cannot be compared with those of SURANI and ASHFAQ(1984) and MAJEED (1995) because of differences in their materials and methods.
Phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium and fat contents were found to play significantly negative role for consumption. Nitrogen, protein, ferrous, crude fiber and manganese
showed significantly positive correlation with coefficient of utilization, whereas, calcium
and magnesium had negative effects. All other factors viz., carbohydrates, total minerals
and zinc were found to be non-significant. Calcium, magnesium and fat contents were themost important chemicals which showed significant correlation with negative effects bothfor food consumption and coefficient of utilization. The contribution of these factors towards susceptibility resistance was recorded as 42.5％, 51.5％ and 25.6％ for food consumption and 50.4％, 20.5％ and 17.3％ for coefficient of utilization, respectively (Table
2).
The present findings are in agreement with those of ALI (1993) regarding carbohydrates
and with QAMAR (1990) regarding zinc content. However, the findings reported by
Ramdev and RAO (1979), Elaidi and AKHTAR (1984), Raman and Annadurai (1985),

(Walk.)ASHFAQ: Further Studies on Pest-host Interaction in IPM of27

different selected plants.
Magnesium

ferrusManganeze

Zinc

Crude fibre＊＊-0.038-0.004-0.0095

0.235-0.145-0.718Carbohydrates

fats-0.506＊＊

0.515

0.009

0.00

0.009

0.055

0.021

0.256

-0.452＊＊0.321＊＊

0.406＊＊

0.234

0.278＊＊

0.125-0.417＊＊

0.205

0.103

0.166

0.043

0.077

0.002

0.1773

Table 3. Multiple effects of chemical factors on consumption and coefficient of utilization (％) ofdifferent food plants plants.
S. O. V.

＊

D. F.

M. S.

F. RATIO

R2

19.37＊
19.55＊

0.846
0.847

Regressoion

Consumption
Utilization

13

26176.34795
1006.63484

Error

Consumption
Utillization

46

1351.67699
51.50124

Signiffcant at P 0.01.

REGRESSION EQUATION FOR CONSUMPTION
Y＝603.1079−9.8832 Ⅹ1−3417.6 Ⅹ2＋554.99 Ⅹ3＋496.43 Ⅹ4＋26.232 Ⅹ5−114.94 Ⅹ6−162.28 Ⅹ7−0.17631 Ⅹ8−0.14336 Ⅹ9−1.9940 Ⅹ10−1.4412 Ⅹ11−3.7465 Ⅹ12−46.227 Ⅹ13
REGRESSION EQUATION FOR UTILIZATION
Y＝−20.25535−1.3585 Ⅹ1＋166.45 Ⅹ2−24.548 Ⅹ3＋0.9117 Ⅹ4＋4.9710 Ⅹ5−27.549 Ⅹ6−28.333 Ⅹ7＋
0.07904 Ⅹ8＋0.021883 Ⅹ9−0.14523 Ⅹ10＋0.67758 X11＋1.0355 Ⅹ12＋3.7883 Ⅹ13
The adjusted R2 value for consumption＝0.803
The adjusted R2 value for utilization＝0.802
Where: Ⅹ1 ＝ Totarl Mineral
Ⅹ2 ＝ Nitrogen
Ⅹ3 ＝ Protein
Ⅹ4 ＝ Phosphorus
Ⅹ5 ＝ Potassium
Ⅹ6 ＝ Calcium
Ⅹ7 ＝ Magnesium
Ⅹ8 ＝ Ferrous
Ⅹ9 ＝ Manganese
Ⅹ10 ＝ Zinc
Ⅹ11 ＝ Crude Fibers
Ⅹ12 ＝ Carbohydrates
Ⅹ13 ＝ FATHARE (1987). CENTER and WRIGHT (1992), SURANI and ASHFAQ (1984) are contradictory to the present ones which might be due to differences in test materials. The present
findings also can not be compared with those of ALI (1993) who found non-significant
correlation between protein, potassium and phosphorus contents and coefficient of28South Pacific Study Vol. 19, No. 1-2, 1999

utilization of different food plants offered to
He further reported nonsignificant effects of manganese, zinc and ferrous on the coefficient of utilization. In thepresent studies zinc contents showed non-significant response but manganese and ferrous
showed a significantly positive correlation.
Linear Multiple Regression Analysis of Variance revealed significant effects of chemicalfactors on food consumption and coefficient of utilization. The 100 R２ values were 84.6％
and 84.7％ for consumption and coefficient of utilization, respectively. The regression
equations were found to be fitted good (Table 3). According to THORSTEINSON (1960)
nutritive substances were responsible for attraction of the polyphagous insects and similar
conclusion has also been drawn during the present dissertation.
Keeping all the results presented here in this study in view, it is concluded that Khabbal
grass (296.32 mg consumption and 66.67％ coefficient of utilization) was found to be asuitable alternate host for rice crop (282.70 mg consumption and 70.57％ coefficient ofutilization) whereas ’dib’ was found to be a suitable (123.74 mg consumption and 57.49％
coefficient of utilization) alternate host for potato (120.79 mg consumption and 54.33％
coefficient of utilization) and Lady’s finger (109.79 mg consumption and 49.28％ coefficient of utilization) of all calcium, magnesium and fat contents showed negative andsignificant correlation both with consumption as well as coefficient of utilization values.
The R２ values were 0.852 and 0.847 for consumption and coefficient of utilization, respectively.

References
ALI, S. 1993. Physico-chemical factors affecting the consumption and utilization of different food plants by
Walk. M.Sc. Thesis, Dept. Agri. Entomol., Univ.
Agri., Faisalabad.
BAILEY, C. G. 1976. A quantitative study of consumption and utilization of various diets inthe bertha armyworm (Walk. Dept: Noctuidae). Gen. Entomol.
108, 1319-1326.
BERNAYS, E.A. 1982. The insect on the planta closer look. Proc. 5th Intern. Symp. on insect
plant relationship, Wageningen, The Netherlands 1-4 March, 1982. 3-17 Centre foroverseas pest research, London, UK. (Rev. Appl. Entomol. (A), 71, 3969, 1983).
BRAWER, J. W., O’NEIL, K.M., and DESHON, R.E. Jr. 1987. Effects of artificially alteredfoliar nitrogen levels on development and survival of young instars of Western sprucebudworm,
Freeman. J. Appl. Entomol., 104, 121-130 (Rev.
Appl.Entomol., (A); 76, 8070, 1988).
CENTER, T.D. and WRIGHT, A.D. 1991. Age and phytochemical composition of water
hyacinth (Pontederiaceae) leaves, determine their acceptability to(Coleoptera; Curculionidae). Envirn. Entomol., 20 ,323-334.
DUNCAN, D.B. 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11: 1-42.
ELAIDI, G. M. I. and AKHTAR, M. 1984. Factors affecting consumption and utilization ofASHFAQ: Further Studies on Pest-host Interaction in IPM of(Walk.)

29

different plants by(Rott.). Pak. J. Entomol., 6, 105-110.
EVANS, A. C. 1939. The utilization of food by certain Lepidopterous larvae. Trans. Roy.
Entomol., Soc., 89, 13-22.
HARE, J.D. 1987. Growth oflarvae in response to simultaneous
variation in protein and glyco-alkaloid concentration. J. Chem. Ecol., 13, 39-46. (Rev.
Appl. Entomol. (A), 75, 5240, 1987).
MAJEED, M. A. 1995. Consumption and utilization of different plants by rice grasshopper,(F.) (Acrididae: Orthoptera). M.Sc. thesis, Dept. Agri. Entomol.,Univ. Agri., Faisalabad, Pakistan.
NASIR, M. S. 1979. Food preference and utilization of food plants by armyworm,(Haw.). M.Sc. thesis, Dept. Entomol., Univ. Agri., Faisalabad.
QAMAR, S. 1990. The impact of some factors on the utilization of food by certain
lepidopterous larvae. Trans. Roy. Entomol. Soc., 89, 13-22.
RAMAN, K. and ANNADURAI, R.S. 1985. Host selection and food utilization of pumpkin
beetle,(Lucas). (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Proc. Indian
Acad. Sci., 94,547-556. (Rev. Appl. Entomol., (A); 73, 5833, 1988).
RAMDEV, Y.P. and RAO J.P. 1979. Consumption and utilization of dietary constituents ofCastor,Linn. by castor semilooper,
Linn. Indian J.
Expt. Biol., 17, 1154-1156 (Rev. Appl. Entomol., (A); 69 , 1394. 1981.
SHARMA, H. and DAVIS, J.C. 1983. The oriental armyworm, Mythimna(Walk.).
Distribution, biology and control: a literature review. Miscellaneous Report, Centre
Overseas Pest Res., 59, 24pp (Rev. Appl. Entomol., 71, 3342, 1983).
SURANI, I. R. and ASHFAQ, M. 1984. Studies on some physio-chemical factors influencing
the host preference inBalanchard. Pak. J. Entomol., 6,
15-20.
THORSTEINSON, A.J. 1960. Host plant selection by polyphagous. Ann. Rev. Entomol., 5,193-218.
VIRK, E. A., 1993. Physico-chemical factors affecting the consumption and utilization ofdifferent food plants by
F. M.Sc. Thesis, Dept. Agri. Entomol., Univ.
Agri., Faisalabad.
(Accepted 21 December, 1998)