EFFECT OF POTASSIUM FERTILIZER ON THE POPULATION OF CERTAIN SUCKING INSECTS AND THEIR ASSOCIATED PREDATORS IN COTTON FIELDS | ||||
| Journal of Plant Protection and Pathology | ||||
| Article 2, Volume 30, Issue 9, September 2005, Page 5607-5615 PDF (101.08 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/jppp.2005.239025 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| Roud A. A. EI-Doksh,; Jehan B. EI-Nagar; Wafa H. Hegazy | ||||
| Plant Protect. Res. Inst. A. R. C., Giza, Egypt. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Cotton plant is liable to be attacked all over irs growing season by certain sucking insects, such as cotton aphids (Aphis gossypii Colo ••• ,), cotton [assid (Empoasca Iyp < /em>ica de Berg), cotton whitefly (Bemisia tabaci Genn.) and cotton thrips (Thrips tebec! L,). The effect of soil and loliar applications with different rates of potassium sultate fertilizer (48 % K20) was studied on the infestation of the previous insects and their associated predators, Lady-bird beelles (Coccinella S~? And Scymnus spp.), Aphid lion (Chrysoperla camea), Anlhocoride bua (Orius spp.) Rove beetles (Paederus alfiem'l) and true spiders whiCh attacked Giza 89 cotton variety cultivated during 2002 and 2003 seasons at Sakha Agricullural Research Station, Kafr EI-Sheikh, Governorate Egypt. The results showed that insignificant differences were observed between treated and untreated plants, by potassium fertilizer in case of soil application with 50 and 25 kg/fed. of fertilizer, and slight effect was observed in reducing the population of sucking insects. On the other hand. significant differences were observed between two foliar applications with 8.165 kg/fed, and 16.33 kg/fed. of potassium fertilizer and untreated plants. Generally, potassium fertiliz.er reduced the population of B. tabaci than other insects. The effect of potassium fertilizer on the population of studied predators in the two seasons, showed that the three soil treatments had a slight effect on these predators, while the two ·foliar treatments affected the abundant of predators significantly than the untreated one where they reduced the mean numbers of predators than untrerated. | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 78 PDF Download: 209 |
||||
