ECO-FRIENDLY MANAGEMENT OF MANGO PEST AND DISEASES ENHANCE THE MANGO PULP QUALITY

V. SENDHILVE1, P. VEERAMANI2*
1Department of Plant Pathology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641003, Tamil Nadu, India
2Tapioca and Castor Research Station, Yethapur, 636119, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641003, Tamil Nadu, India
* Corresponding Author : veeramani.p@tnau.ac.in

Received : 07-10-2022     Accepted : 27-10-2022     Published : 30-10-2022
Volume : 14     Issue : 10       Pages : 11761 - 11763
Int J Agr Sci 14.10 (2022):11761-11763

Keywords : Mango, Eco-friendly, TSS, Organoleptic test
Academic Editor : Dr Bhawana Asnani, R. K. Rathod, Dr R. S. Umakanth
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Department of Plant Pathology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641003, Tamil Nadu, India and Tapioca and Castor Research Station, Yethapur, 636119, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641003, Tamil Nadu, India
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed

Cite - MLA : SENDHILVE, V. and VEERAMANI, P. "ECO-FRIENDLY MANAGEMENT OF MANGO PEST AND DISEASES ENHANCE THE MANGO PULP QUALITY." International Journal of Agriculture Sciences 14.10 (2022):11761-11763.

Cite - APA : SENDHILVE, V., VEERAMANI, P. (2022). ECO-FRIENDLY MANAGEMENT OF MANGO PEST AND DISEASES ENHANCE THE MANGO PULP QUALITY. International Journal of Agriculture Sciences, 14 (10), 11761-11763.

Cite - Chicago : SENDHILVE, V. and P., VEERAMANI. "ECO-FRIENDLY MANAGEMENT OF MANGO PEST AND DISEASES ENHANCE THE MANGO PULP QUALITY." International Journal of Agriculture Sciences 14, no. 10 (2022):11761-11763.

Copyright : © 2022, V. SENDHILVE and P. VEERAMANI, Published by Bioinfo Publications. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Abstract

Mango fruit fly and anthracnose are major destructive threat in mango cultivation and caused 67 per cent pre and post-harvest loss. The indiscriminate pesticide spray has reduced the pulp quality, texture, flavor and accumulate the residual effect. A field trial with eco-friendly management options were carried out to control the mango anthracnose and fruit fly. The promising biocontrol agent Pseudomonas fluorescens (Pf1) was sprayed immediately after flowering @ 5ml/ lit for five times at 21 days interval and Fixing of fruit fly trap 12/ha for one ha in each demonstration. The quality analysis test viz., the TSS was measured with the help of a hand refractometer. The fruits harvested from ecofriendly measures adopted field recorded the TSS of 19 to 22°brix against the insecticide sprayed plot 15 to 17 °brix. In addition to that organoleptic test analysis of the pulp was conducted and it shows the evident by rate of scoring for taste 4.42 and aroma with flavor 3.96. Whereas in case of Novaluran@3ml/lit was sprayed by farmers has recorded the organoleptic test was 3.22 and aroma with flavor was 1.96. The surprising finding noted in this study that the eco-friendly adopted plots were invited more honey bee population when compared to farmers i.e., insecticide sprayed plot. The results concluded that the eco-friendly adopted plant protection for mango enhances the fruit quality, aroma and taste

References

1. Pramanik M.A.J. (1995) M.S. Thesis. Dept. Hort., Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh.
2. Siddique A.B. and Scanlan F.M. (1995) Horticulture Research and Development Project (FAO/UNDP/ASDB Project. BDG/87/0 25, 1-288.
3. Nelson S.C. (2008) Department of Plant Protection Sciences University of Hawaii, 2, 13-17.
4. Arauz L.F. (2000) Plant Disease, 84, 600-611
5. AOAC (1975) Official methods of analysis (12th Ed.) Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington.
6. Benzie I.F.F. and Strain J.J. (1996) Anal Biochem., 239, 70-76.
7. Bharathi R., Vivekananthan R., Harish S., Ramanathan A. and Samiyappan R. (2004) Crop Prot., 23, 835-843
8. Samiyappan R. and Vivekananthan R. (2003) PhD Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641003, Tamil Nadu, India
9. Litchenthaler H.K. (1987) Methods Enzymol, 148, 350-383.
10. Panse V.G. and Sukhatme P.V. (1978) Statistical Research, New Delhi, 695.
11. Akdemir S., Akcaoz H., Kailey H. (2012) Tuerkey Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment, 10(2), 473-479.
12. Vivekananthan R., Ravi M., Ramanathan A., Kumar N. and Samiyappan R. (2006) Phytopathol. Mediterr, 45, 126-138.
13. Viswanathan R. and Samiyappan R. (2001) Microbiology Research 155, 309-314
14. Senthilraja G., Anand T., Durairaj C., Raguchander T. and Samiyappan R. (2010) Crop prot., 29, 1003-1010.
15. Vidhyasekaran P. and Muthamilan M. (1995) Plant Dis., 79, 782-786.
16. Vidhyasekaran P., Rabindran R., Muthamilan M., Nayar K., Rajappan K., Subramanian N. and Vasumathi K. (1997) Plant Pathol., 46, 291-297.
17. Nandakumar R., Babu S., Viswanathan R., Raguchander T. and Samiyappan R. (2001) Soil Biol. Biochem., 33, 603-612.
18. Ramamoorthy V., Raguchander T. and Samiyappan R. (2002) Plant and Soil, 239, 55-68.
19. Prabakar K.T., Raguchander D., Saravanakumar P., Muthulakshmi V., Parthiban K. and Prakasam V. (2008) Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection, 41(5), 333-339.