Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies 2017; 5(6): 490-497
E-ISSN: 2320-7078
P-ISSN: 2349-6800
JEZS 2017; 5(6): 490-497
2017 JEZS
Received: 10-09-2017
Accepted: 15-10-2017
Naureen Rana
Department of Fisheries and
Zoology, University of
Agriculture, Faisalabad,
Pakistan
Tehmina Amin
Department of Fisheries and
Zoology, University of
Agriculture, Faisalabad,
Pakistan
Muhammad Zafar Iqbal
Department of Fisheries and
Zoology, University of
Agriculture, Faisalabad,
Pakistan
Shahla Nargis
Department of Fisheries and
Zoology, University of
Agriculture, Faisalabad,
Pakistan
Somia Afzal
Department of Fisheries and
Zoology, University of
Agriculture, Faisalabad,
Pakistan
Saira Fatima
Department of Fisheries and
Zoology, University of
Agriculture, Faisalabad,
Pakistan
Correspondence
Naureen Rana
Department of Fisheries and
Zoology, University of
Agriculture, Faisalabad,
Pakistan
Distribution pattern of foliage insects among the
summer vegetables viz. okra, brinjal and tomato
Naureen Rana, Tehmina Amin, Muhammad Zafar Iqbal, Shahla Nargis,
Somia Afzal and Saira Fatima
Abstract
The vegetables are excellent source as human food and nutrition since immemorial time. Okra, brinjal
and tomato are important and indigenous vegetable crops of Pakistan. Varieties of foliage insects invade
these vegetable fields and play role positively or negatively. Hence, the present research work was
conducted to record the distribution pattern of foliage insects among the summer vegetables viz. okra
(Abelmoschus esculentus L.), brinjal (Solanum melongena L.) and tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.)
under the ecological conditions of district Faisalabad (Punjab), Pakistan along the whole season. Among
tomato fields, total 108 species were recorded belonging to 09 orders, 56 families and 100 genera; while
among brinjal fields, total 107 species were recorded belonging to 11 orders, 52 families and 100 genera;
whereas among okra fields, total 96 species were recorded belonging to 10 orders, 48 families and 88
genera. Among these three vegetable fields, total 7773 specimens were collected during entire sampling
and maximum population was recorded from okra fields 44.77% (N = 3480); followed by brinjal fields
31.20% (N = 2425) and least population was recorded from tomato fields 24.03% (N = 1868). Wherein
in case of okra fields, maximum population was recorded during 2nd sampling (704292.74), followed by
609225.57 (5th sampling), 41689.10 (1st sampling), 36754.45 (10th sampling) and so on. Whereas,
species abundance was recorded utmost in 2nd sampling (38) species at temperature 41 C and 27%
relative humidity. In case of brinjal fields, maximum population was recorded during 11 th sampling
(871473.00), followed by 27048.02 (10th sampling), 2073.48 (8th sampling), 1889.96 (9th sampling)
and so on. Whereas, species abundance was recorded maximum in 10 th sampling (33) species at
temperature 28C and 92% humidity. In case of tomato fields, maximum population was recorded during
9th sampling (325120.03), followed by 18722.45 (6th sampling), 17816.09 (12th sampling), 1603.36
(7thsampling) and so on; wherein species abundance was recorded utmost in 9 th sampling (35) species at
temperature 34C and 62% humidity. ANOVA among three vegetables (brinjal, okra and tomato) showed
non-significant results (F = 0.17; P = 0.8460).
Keywords: foliage insects, summer vegetables, temperature and humidity
Introduction
Insects comprise 75 % of total arthropods and out of which, almost 1.5 million of species are
identified as arthropods with multi-type habitats [29], they show fluctuation in diversity and
abundance with minor change in abiotic factor e.g. temperature and humidity. Physical
characters e.g. size, life cycle, habitat and trophic status also depend upon these factors [1]. In
Asia, average vegetable production contributes almost 218 million tons, highest of which is
produced in China, India and Pakistan. These are categorized as leafy, stem and fruit
vegetables [6]. During present decade, in Pakistan, almost 3,460,000 ha area is under cultivation
for vegetables and almost 13.7 million tonnes edible vegetables are cultivated in Pakistan per
annum4 which are classified as Rabi (winter) and Kharif (summer) according to growing
season; and almost sixty three species are produced and utilized as winter and summer
vegetables [9] e.g. Brinjal, Tomato, Ladyfinger, Pumpkin, Luffa, Bitter gourd, Cucumber,
Cauliflower and Pea, etc. All these are good source of both nutrition and economy [28], but 90%
of their production is affected due to vulnerably of nuisance and related diseases [2, 7].
Okra, Abelmoschus esculentus (Malvaeceae) is an edible vegetable in Pakistan having
perennial nature with hairy leaves, with variability in shape, height and color of pod etc. For
proper development and pod growth, it demands high temperature [30]. Its cultivation covers an
area of about 14780 ha in Pakistan, with annual yield of about 1, 11, 565 tonnes [7], and in
Punjab, cultivated over 4.3 ha with 43.4 tonnes production; and is indigenous to Asia, Africa
and Australia [26], and rich source of lipids, protein, vitamin B complex, vitamin C, retinol and
~ 490 ~
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
minerals like magnesium, potassium, zinc, iron, calcium,
phosphorus, manganese and copper [21]. However, its
production is largely affected by the insect pests [38], which are
causing severe damage by sucking sap, pod destruction and
injecting their poison into plant parts [23]; which destroy its
foliage at every stage of development [14]. Damage due to
insect pests is recorded up to 25-55% from pre-harvest to
post-harvest stage which can result in severe income losses to
small scale farmers [41].
Brinjal Egg Plant, Solanum melongena L. (Solanaceae) is
grown both at small home gardens and at large commercial
level. In Asia, it is cultivated over an area of 6, 78,000 ha,
with a annual production of about 10.50 million tonnes which
is about 37% of the world eggplant area [16]. It contains 92.7%
water, 1.1% protein and 0.02% carbohydrate and contains
energy contents in calories about 13016, and it is rich source
of vitamin A and B. It also contains nutrients such as folate,
dietary fiber, ascorbic acid, vitamin K, niacin, vitamin B6,
pantothenic acid, potassium, magnesium, iron, manganese,
phosphorus and copper [46]. It acts as preventive agent against
many diseases as malfunction of liver, diabetes curing,
reliever against swelling and also a excellent appetizer35. But,
this vegetable is damaged by numerous insect pests from
sowing stage till harvesting [5].
Tomato, Solanum lycopersicum L. (Solanaceae) is an
important vegetable grown all over the world and is main
source of vitamin C, vitamin E, beta- carotene and natural
potassium. Medically, it has the ability to reduce the
inflammation and minimize the risk of stroke [44]. Its vitamins
contents have great potential to control diabetes, colon cancer
and inflammatory diseases [22]; along this, they also act as
antioxidant to fight against many infections. It also contains
Niacin, vitamin K and B6 and they together control
cholesterol level. It provides favorite host site to various
insects and they damage all parts of this vegetable, as it
provides protection, shelter, food and reproduction site to
them [3].
Information about ecology and distribution of invading
insects is milestone to formulate any strategy regarding their
management [31, 42, 48] because co-existing of balanced
population of foliage insects can safeguard production of
these vegetables. So, the present study was designed to record
the distribution pattern of foliage insects among the summer
vegetables viz. okra, brinjal and tomato.
Materials and Methods
Field area
Experiments were conducted during summer from June to
August during 2015 at Horticultural Vegetable Research
Fields, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad (Punjab),
Pakistan. The environmental and climatic conditions are the
soil suitable for cultivation of both Rabi and Kharif crops [8].
Okra crop was sown in the 4th week of May in 100m2
(60m40m) and row to row and plant to plant distance was 2
to 2.5 inches respectively. Brinjal crop was sown in 3rd week
of May in 100m2 (60m40m) and row to row and plant to
plant distance was 2.5 to 3 inches respectively. Tomato crop
was sown 2nd week of May in 100m2 (60m40m) and row to
row and plant to plant distance was 1.5 to 2 inches,
respectively. The experimental crops were not treated with
pesticide during the survey period.
The vegetables fields of okra, tomato and brinjal were
sampled after seven days intervals right from the pre-harvest
stage to post-harvest stage. The specimens were collected by
selecting an area of 100 m2 of field by following methods:
~ 491 ~
Direct hand picking method
By using Sweep Net
By using Forceps
Collection was made from 06:00 am to 08:00 am; temperature
and humidity of area were also recorded as per objectives.
Collected specimens were stored in jars containing 70:30%
alcohol and glycerin solution and shifted to Biodiversity
Laboratory, Department of Zoology, Wildlife and Fisheries,
University of Agriculture, Faisalabad for further systematic
studies. Here, the specimens were separated and preserved in
separate glass vials containing 70:30% alcohol and glycerin
solution.
Identification
The collected specimens were sorted and identified with the
aid of:
Microscope
Naked eye
Magnifying glass
These specimens were identified up to species level with the
aid of identification keys and description available in
literature and on the internet search engines [11]. Glass vials
were labeled accordingly containing the date of collection,
locality name, common name, scientific name specimens,
temperature, humidity and trophic status (food web status and
related issues) [41, 43].
Results and Discussion
A stable ecosystem is maintained by interactions of many
inter dependent species45 and resulting food web is a key
indication of stability status which demonstrate feeding
relationships between these communities [10]. This association
is recorded very complex in vegetable crop fields. Wherein in
connection to vegetable life histories, insects are key motor of
an ecosystem function and they can live in various ecological
circumstances e.g. peak, plus or negative temperature,
humidity, and desiccation [18]. Ecological co-relation toward
their diversity and density for primary production and ideal
ecosystem functioning have been acknowledged by many
researchers [2, 13, 27, 34, 40]. Keeping in view all these facts, the
present research work was conducted to record the
distribution pattern of foliage insects among the summer
vegetables viz. okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L.), brinjal
(Solanum melongena L.) and tomato (Solanum lycopersicum
L.) under the ecological conditions of district Faisalabad
(Punjab), Pakistan along the entire season in session 2015-16.
After completing the whole research trials, taxa composition
was recorded as follow: among tomato fields, total 108
species were recorded belonging to 9 orders, 56 families and
100 genera, while among brinjal fields, total 107 species were
recorded belonging to 11 orders, 52 families and 100 genera;
whereas among okra fields, total 96 species were recorded
belonging to 10 orders, 48 families and 88 genera. Among
these three vegetables, total 7773 specimens were collected
during entire sampling (12 sampling from each category) and
maximum population was recorded from okra fields 44.77%
(N = 3480); followed by brinjal fields 31.20% (N = 2425) and
least population was recorded from tomato fields 24.03% (N
= 1868). Wherein in case of okra fields (Table - 1), maximum
population was recorded during 2nd sampling (704292.74),
followed by 609225.57 (5th sampling), 41689.10 (1st
sampling), 36754.45 (10th sampling) and so on. While, least
values were recorded during 4th sampling (59163.34).
Whereas, species abundance was recorded utmost in 2 nd
sampling (38) species at temperature 41C and 27% humidity.
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
However, least species abundance was recorded during 6 th
sampling i.e. 14 species at 36C temperature and 57%
(humidity). In case of brinjal fields, maximum population was
recorded during 11th sampling (871473.00), followed by
27048.02 (10th sampling), 2073.48 (8th sampling), 1889.96
(9th sampling) and so on. While, least values were recorded
during 5th sampling (7589.86). Species abundance was
recorded maximum in 10th sampling (33) species at
temperature 28C and 92% humidity. However, least species
abundance was recorded during 1st sampling i.e. 17 species at
25C temperature and 58% (humidity). In case of tomato
fields, maximum population was recorded during 9 th sampling
(325120.03), followed by 18722.45 (6 th sampling),
17816.09 (12th sampling), 1603.36 (7th sampling) and so
on. Whilst, least values were recorded during 10 th sampling as
8450.38; wherein species abundance was recorded utmost in
9th sampling (35) species at temperature 34C and 62%
humidity. However, least species abundance was recorded
during 10th sampling i.e. 19 species at 25C temperature and
82% (humidity). From the overall findings, significant results
were recorded in case of order Hemiptera (84.83%) and least
for order Neuroptera (0.04%). Wherein, Dipterans population
densities were recorded in conflicting contribution.
Nonetheless, impacts of climatic changes (temperature and
humidity) were not significant; whereas, comparative relative
abundance of each species from each vegetable was recorded
heterogeneously, some species were recorded more
abundantly in one field while other fields were devoid off by
them or exist with very lest abundance. Because, a lot of
species representing only one vegetable instead of overall
representation. After entire documentation (Table 2), in
brinjal fields, Amrasca biguttula biguttula was recorded as an
extraordinary contributing species with relative abundance of
57.03% (N = 1383). Thereafter, Nysius graminicola 4.49% (N
= 109) was recorded most abundant species, followed by
Homoeocerus spp. 4.08% (N = 99), Dasiopes latifron,
Herpetogramma licarsisalis 2.52% (N = 61), Plagiodera
versicolora 2.39% (N = 58), Bactrocera cucurbitae 1.73% (N
= 42), Coccinella septempunctata 1.32% (N = 32), Calliopum
aeneum 1.07% (N = 26), Calliphora vicina, Chilocorus
circumdatus 0.95% (N = 23), Thaumatomyia notate 0.91% (N
= 22), Bracon spp., Brumiodes suturalis 0.87% (N = 21),
Liriomyza langei 0.70% (N = 17), Mycodrosophila spp.,
Napomyza cichori 0.58% (N = 14), Oxyopes tiengianensis,
Callibracon spp., Lasius alienus 0.54% (N = 13), Chrysolina
coerulans, Oxycarenus hyalinipennis, O. tarandus, Apis
dorsata, Bracon melitor 0.49% (N = 12), Menochilus
semaculata 0.45% (N = 11), Pleuroptya ruralis, Metioche
vittaticollis, Oxyopes salticus 0.41% (N = 10), A. florae,
Hippodamia convergens 0.37% (N = 09), Raphidopalpa
foveicollis, Lucilia cuprina, Lasius spp. 0.33% (N = 08),
Podisus maculiventris, Dysedercus cingulatus, Polistes wattii,
Megachile versicolora, Bothriembryon dux 0.29% (N = 07)
and Spilostethus pandurus 0.25% (N = 6). In past studied39,
the lepidopterous pests in potato, tomato, cabbage, okra,
cauliflower and brinjal, and reported pests population of sap
feeder (hoppers, aphids and mites) at peak while borers and
feeders (foliage) were also eminent. However, along this,
carmine spider mite, red cotton bug, leaf worm moth, cotton
bollworm, cotton aphids, pink bollworm, spotted bollworm,
cotton leaf-roller, Indian cotton jassid and blister beetles were
recorded with severe damage to floral part of these vegetables
[25]
. Brinjal shoot and fruit are damaged by Leucinodes
orbonalis (brinjal shoot and fruit borer) were significant and
found lowest population of Coccidohystrix insolitus (mealy
~ 492 ~
bug) and Aphis gossypi (cotton aphid) in brinjal comparative
to cluster bean [15]. Results of present study were quite
analogous with them.
From okra fields, Amrasca biguttula biguttula was again
recorded abundantly with relative abundance of 37.07% (N =
1290). Thereafter, Oxycarenus hyalinipennis 24.43% (N =
850) was most abundant species, followed by Nysius
graminicola 14.80% (N = 515), Dysedercus cingulatus 4.71%
(N = 164), Homoeocerus spp. 2.36% (N = 82), Coccinella
septempunctata 1.87% (N = 65), Plagiodera versicolora
1.38% (N = 48), Calliopum aeneum 1.03% (N = 36),
Hippodamia convergens 0.86% (N = 30), Herpetogramma
licarsisalis, Oxyopes tiengianensis 0.66% (N = 23),
Elachiptera tuberculifera 0.57% (N = 20), Apis dorsata
0.49% (N = 18), Thomisus lobsus 0.46% (N = 16), Brumiodes
suturalis, Podisus maculiventris 0.43% (N = 15), Calliphora
vicina 0.37% (N = 13), A. florae, Megachile versicolora
0.34% (N = 12), Polistes wattii, Pleuroptya ruralis 0.32% (N
= 11), Scymnus nubilus, Oxyopes salticus, Bothriembryon dux
0.26% (N = 09), Lucilia sericata, Volucella pellucens,
Geocoris erythrocephalus, Dolycoris baccarum 0.23% (N =
08), Solenopsis invicta 0.20% (N = 07), Chrysogaster
solstitialis and Bracon spp. 0.17% (N = 06). Results of
present study were quite analogous to previous studies25, 39.
Whereas among tomato fields, again Amrasca biguttula
biguttula was recorded with utmost relative abundance
20.02% (N = 374); thereafter, Nysius graminicola 13.3% (N =
250) was most abundant species, followed by Plagiodera
versicolora 6.00% (N = 112), Homoeocerus spp., Oxycarenus
hyalinipennis 5.46% (N = 102), Oxyopes tiengianensis 2.68%
(N = 50), Brumiodes suturalis 2.52% (N = 47),
Herpetogramma licarsisalis 2.41% (N = 45), Apis florea
1.82% (N = 34), Calliopum simillimum, Elachiptera
tuberculifera 1.66% (N = 31), A. dorsata (Apidae) 1.50% (N
= 28), Metioche vittaticollis 1.45% (N = 27), Hippodamia
convergens 1.39% (N = 36), Pleuroptya ruralis 1.34% (N =
25), Coccinella septempunctata 1.18% (N = 22), Dolycoris
baccarum, Halyomorpha halys, Mycodrosophila spp.,
Dasiopes latifron 1.02% (N = 19), Podisus maculiventris,
Drosophila melanogaster 0.96% (N = 18), Acureperia
ceropegia 0.91% (N = 17), Bothriembryon dux 0.86% (N =
16), Spilostethus pandurus 0.75% (N = 14), Geocoris
erythrocephalus, Bracon spp., Circulifera tenellus 0.70% (N
= 13), Thomisus lobsus, Acanthomopes interjects, Drosophila
suzkii, Melinda gentilis, Bactrocera cucurbitae 0.11% (N =
12), Zizula hylex, Polistes wattii, Fannia scalaris, Liromyza
langei 0.59% (N = 11), Dysedercus cingulatus 0.54% (N =
10), Nomia strigata, Helophilus pendulus 0.48% (N = 09),
Pyrilla perpusilla, Drosophila transversa, Chrysogaster
solstitialis, Bellardia vulgaris, Musca domestica 0.43% (N =
08), Oxyopes salticus 0.37% (N = 07) and Crocothemis
nigrifrons Pasammodius asper 0.32% (N = 06). These
findings were again an acknowledgement with previous
studies [36].
In case of genera level documentation, from brinjal fields
relative abundance was recorded maximum (N 10) in
descending order for genus Amrasca, Nysius, Homoeocerus,
Dasiopes, Herpetogramma, Plagiodera, Bactrocera, Bracon,
Coccinella, Calliopum, Lasius, Chilocorus, Calliphora,
Oxyopes, Thaumatomyia, Brumiodes, Apis, Liromyza,
Chrysolina, Napomyza, Incertella, Eristalinus,
Mycodrosophila, Callibracon, Oxycarenus, Oxyrachis and
Menochilus. From tomato fields, following genera were
recorded with extraordinary abundance (N 10) Amrasca,
Nysius, Homoeocerus, Plagiodera, Oxycarenus, Apis,
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

Oxyopes, Brumiodes, Herpetogramma, Drosophila,
Elachiptera, Calliopum, Metioche, Hippodamia, Pleuroptya,
Coccinella, Dasiopes, Mycodrosophila, Dolycoris,
Halyomorpha, Podisus, Acureperia, Bothriembryon,
Spilostethus, Liromyza, Circulifera, Geocoris, Polistes,
Bracon, Bactrocera, Melinda, Acanthomopes, Thomisus,
Helophilus, Nomia, Fannia and Zizula. From okra fields,
following genera were recorded with extraordinary abundance
(N 10) Amrasca, Oxycarenus, Nysius, Dysedercus,
Homoeocerus, Coccinella, Plagiodera, Calliopum, Oxyopes,
Hippodamia, Apis, Herpetogramma, Elachiptera, Thomisus,
Brumiodes, Podisus, Calliphora, Megachile, Polistes and
Pleuroptya. In past following researchers have reported
analogous findings [33, 47].
Fundamental issue, relative abundance was again accessed at
family level to overcome these aspects. From total of 70
recorded families, 52 were recorded from brinjal fields and
among them, extra ordinary relative abundance (N 10) was
recorded for family Cicadellidae, Lygaeidae, Coreidae,
Coccinellidae, Chrysomelidae, Crambidae, Lonchaeidae,
Tephritidae, Calliphoridae, Chloropidae, Agromyzidae,
Formicidae, Lauxaniidae, Syrphidae, Apidae, Oxyopidae,
Pentatomidae, Drosophillidae and Vespidae, Membricidae.
However, from total of 70 recorded families, 48 were
recorded from okra fields and among them, relatively higher
abundance (N 10) was recorded for family Lygaeidae,
Cicadellidae, Pyrrhocoridae, Coccinellidae, Coreidae,
Chrysomelidae, Lauxaniidae, Oxyopidae, Chloropidae,
Pentatomida, Calliphoridae, Syrphidae, Thomsidae,
Megachilidae, Vespidae, Braconidae and Formicidae. Whilst,
from total of 70 recorded families, 56 were recorded from
tomato fields and among them, relatively higher abundance
(N 10) was recorded for family Cicadellidae, Lygaeidae,
Coreidae, Chrysomelidae, Coccinellidae, Crambidae, Apidae,
Pentatomidae, Oxyopidae, Drosophillidae, Chloropidae,
Lauxaniidae, Formicidae, Gryllidae, Calliphoridae,
Syrphidae, Braconidae, Lonchaeidae, Araneidae, Vespidae,
Bothriembryontidae, Muscidae, Agromyzidae, Acrididae,
Thomsidae, Tephritidae, Lacenidae and Fanniidae. However,
incidence was recorded in descending order.
Wherein in case of order level presentations, total 11 orders
were recorded and all the orders were recorded from brinjal
fields among them, higher relative abundance (68.49%; N =
1661) was recorded for order Hemiptera followed by Diptera
(11.96%; N = 290), Coleoptera (7.96%; N = 193),
Hymenoptera (5.73%; N = 139), Pulmonata (0.29%; N = 97),
Lepidoptera (3.42%; N = 83), Araneae (1.44%; N = 35), and
Orthoptera (0.49%; N = 12). However, least relative
abundance (N 10) was recorded for order Odonata,
Phasmatadata and Neuroptera. While, from total of 11 of
recorded orders, 10 orders were recorded from okra fields and
among them higher relative abundance (84.83%; N = 2952)
was recorded for order Hemiptera, followed by Coleoptera
(5.20%; N = 181), Diptera (3.82%; N = 133), Hymenoptera
(2.53%; N = 88), Araneae (1.67%; N = 58), Lepidoptera
(1.09%; N = 38) and Orthoptera (0.34%; N = 12). However,
least relative abundance (N 10) was recorded for order
Pulmonata, Odonata and Phasmatodea. Whereas, order
Neuroptera was not recorded from okra fields. Out of 11 of
recorded orders, 9 orders were recorded from tomato fields
and among them higher relative abundance (53.16%; N =
993) was recorded for order Hemiptera, followed by Diptera
(12.79%; N = 239), Coleoptera (12.58%; N = 235),
Hymenoptera (7.87%; N = 147), Araneae (5.30%; N = 99),
Lepidoptera (4.82%; N = 90), Orthoptera (2.09%; N = 39),
and Pulmonata (0.86%; N = 16). However, least relative
abundance (N 10) was recorded for order Odonata; whereas,
order Neuroptera and Phasmatadata were not recorded from
tomato fields. Our present findings are in agreement with
previous studies24, who studied the lepidopterans population
in wheat, brassic, fodder and vegetables to assess the diversity
and abundance of insects in these fields. They recorded 2811
specimens belonging to 14 species and 6 families. Among
these, Pieris brassicae was the dominant species, followed by
Trichoplusia spp., Spodoptera litura, Agrotis ipsilon, Plutella
xylostella, Helicoverpa zea, Helicoverpa armigera,
Spodoptera exigua, Lymantria dispar, Pieris rapae, Galleria
mellonella, Menduca sexta and Evergestris rimosalis.This
insects group was phytophagous as well as pollinators, but
majority of these species were associated with vegetables
comparative to the other fields.
Diversity was recorded maximum among okra fields (0.8700),
followed by brinjal fields (0.6063) and least was recorded
among tomato fields (0.4670). Evenness ratio was also
recorded in same context (0.2457, 0.1791 and 0.1428,
respectively). Dominance was recorded maximum from okra
fields (1.2457), followed by brinjal fields (1.1791) and least
from tomato fields (1.1428). However, richness was a little bit
recorded high among brinjal fields (26.8270) followed by
tomato fields (26.5815) and least among okra fields
(24.5402). Overall results of present study were similar to
previous findings [12], who reported that vegetables are
affected by numerous insect pests e.g. mites, aphids, mealy
bugs and scales insects and induce great damage by sucking
the plant sap or act as vector for many harmful agents [17, 32].
Okra is attacked by large number of insect pests, which
greatly reduce their quality and yield such as thrips, whitefly,
mites and spotted boll worm from sowing till harvesting stage
and brinjal crop is attacked by shoot borer, fruit borer,
whitefly, Bemisia tabaci and leafhopper [20, 37]. Whereas,
tomato crop is attacked by thrips, aphids, mealy bugs and
mites and their predators are ladybeetle and bugs [19].

Table 1: Population Means SD, Temperature and Humidity recorded from Okra, Brinjal and Tomato fields
Okra Brinjal Tomato
Sampling No.
Mean SD Species Temperature Humidity Mean SD Species Temperature Humidity Mean SD Species Temperature Humidity
1 41689.10 30 25 58 9774.31 17 25 58 13613.61 29 30 41
2 704292.74 38 39 33 13944.61 31 39 33 11528.46 20 38 42
3 3049.90 21 32 48 10072.18 25 32 48 10039.07 28 39 33
4 59163.34 18 31 56 6894.81 18 31 56 1457.25 32 27 84
5 609225.57 29 28 70 7589.86 25 28 70 1646.19 33 30 68
6 31517.68 14 28 77 18412.79 26 28 77 18722.45 34 36 70
7 18872.12 25 31 75 10965.82 24 31 75 1603.36 33 38 55
8 16389.80 25 28 85 2073.48 19 28 85 1494.42 33 33 73
9 17680.61 23 33 61 1889.96 20 33 61 325120.03 35 34 62
10 36754.45 21 28 92 27048.02 33 28 92 8450.38 19 33 82
11 86144.25 27 35 65 871473.00 32 35 65 12024.93 32 33 76
12 93139.30 19 27 74 11760.16 23 27 74 17816.09 34 27 67
~ 493 ~
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
Table 2: Overall Relative Abundance of recorded Taxa from Okra, Brinjal and Tomato fields
Relative Abundance (%)
Order Family
Species Brinjal Okra Tomato
Coleoptera Coccinella septempunctata 1.32(32) 1.87(65) 1.18(22)
Hippodamia convergens 0.37(9) 0.86(30) 1.39(26)
Scymnus nubilus 0.00(0) 0.26(9) 0.00(0)
Menochilus semaculata 0.45(11) 0.14(5) 0.00(0)
Coccinellidae Anisolemia dilata 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.27(5)
Brumiodes suturalis 0.87(21) 0.43(15) 2.52(47)
Cheilomenses sexmaculata 0.08(2) 0.06(2) 0.00(0)
Chilocorus circumdatus 0.95(23) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Olla v-nigrium 004(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Dermestidae Cryptorpalum trista 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.00(0)
Staphyliidae Paederus littoralis 0.08(2) 0.06(2) 0.00(0)
Plagiodera versicolora 2.39(58) 1.38(48) 6.00(112)
Chrysolina coerulans 0.49(12) 0.00(0) 0.11(2)
Raphidopalpa foveicollis 0.33(8) 0.03(1) 0.21(4)
Chrysomelidae
Chrysolina graminis 0.12(3) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Cassida circumdata 0.21(5) 0.00(0) 0.32(6)
Monolepta signata 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.00(0)
Phalacridae Phalacrus spp. 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.05(1)
Meloidae Lytta magister 0.00(0) 0.06(2) 0.00(0)
Carambycidae Samanotus undatus 0.08(2) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Diaprepes abbreviatus 0.12(3) 0.00(0) 0.05(1)
Curculinidae
Stiophilus oryzae 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.16(3)
Cerylonidae Corylon castaneum 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Scarabaeidae Psammodius asper 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.32(6)
Liromyza langei 0.70(17) 0.11(4) 0.59(11)
Liromyza strigata 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.11(2)
Agromyzidae Ophimyia spp. 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Ophimyia phaseoli 0.04(1) 0.14(5) 0.00(0)
Napomyza cichori 0.58(14) 0.03(1) 0.00(0)
Tephritidae Bactrocera cucurbitae 1.73(42) 0.09(3) 0.64(12)
Musca domestica 0.16(4) 0.06(2) 0.43(8)
Diptera Muscidae Antherigona spp. 0.12(3) 0.00(0) 0.21(4)
Hydrotaea irritans 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.05(1)
Lucilia sericata 0.00(0) 0.23(8) 0.00(0)
Lucilia cuprina 0.33(8) 0.03(1) 0.11(2)
Calliphora vicina 0.95(23) 0.37(13) 0.00(0)
Calliphoridae
Melinda gentilis 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.64(12)
Chrysomya megacephala 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Bellardia vulgaris 0.21(5) 0.00(0) 0.43(8)
Elachiptera tuberculifera 0.00(0) 0.57(20) 1.66(31)
Chorops spp. 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.05(1)
Chloropidae
Thaumatomyia notata 0.91(22) 0.06(2) 0.00(0)
Incertella spp. 0.58(14) 0.09(3) 0.00(0)
Melanostoma scalare 0.00(0) 0.06(2) 0.00(0)
Volucella pellucens 0.37(9) 0.23(8) 0.11(2)
Eristalinus aeneus 0.58(14) 0.03(1) 0.05(1)
Syrphidae
Chrysogaster solstitialis 0.00(0) 0.17(6) 0.43(8)
Helophilus pendulus 0.12(3) 0.09(3) 0.48(9)
Ischiodon scutellaris 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.00(0)
Fanniidae Fannia scalaris 0.00(0) 0.11(4) 0.59(11)
Tanytarsus spp. 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.11(2)
Chironomidae
Chironmus tuberculatus 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.00(0)
Lonchaeidae Dasiopes latifron 2.68(65) 0.11(4) 1.02(19)
Calliopum aeneum 1.07(26) 1.03(36) 0.00(0)
Lauxaniidae
Calliopum simillimum 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 1.66(31)
Mycodrosophila spp. 0.58(14) 0.09(3) 1.02(19)
Drosophila melanogaster 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.96(18)
Drosophillidae
Drosophila transversa 0.08(2) 0.00(0) 0.43(8)
Drosophila suzkii 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.64(12)
Culex erraticus 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Culicidae
Culex pipens 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.11(2)
Dysmachus trigonus 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.05(1)
Asilidae
Efferia aestuans 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Piophillidae Mycetataulus nigrietellus 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.21(4)
Amrasca biguttula biguttula 57.03(1383) 37.07(1290) 20.02(374)
Hemiptera Cicadellidae
Cicadulina mbila 0.00(0) 0.11(4) 0.00(0)
~ 494 ~
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

Ceratgallia uhleri 0.16(4) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)

Circulifera tenellus 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.70(13)
Haplaxius xyron 0.00(0) 0.14(5) 0.00(0)
Empoasca fabae 0.16(4) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Homoeocerus spp. 4.08(99) 2.36(82) 7.01(131)
Coridae
Piezogaster spp. 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.27(5)
Aphididae Rhopalosiphum padi 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.16(3)
Nysius graminicola 4.49(109) 14.80(515) 13.3(250)
Oxycarenus hyalinipennis 0.49(12) 24.43(850) 5.46(102)
Geocoris erythrocephalus 0.16(4) 0.23(8) 0.70(13)
Lygaeidae
Spilostethus pandurus 0.25(6) 0.09(3) 0.75(14)
Heterogaster uritica 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Lygaeinae kalmii 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.05(1)
Zelus luridus 0.00(0) 0.06(2) 0.00(0)
Triatoma rubida 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Reduviidae Apiomerus spp. 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Reduvis personatus 0.00(0) 0.06(2) 0.00(0)
Triatoma sanguisuga 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.11(2)
Dolycoris baccarum 0.16(4) 0.23(8) 1.02(19)
Podisus maculiventris 0.29(7) 0.43(15) 0.96(18)
Bagrada hilaris 0.08(2) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Chinavia hilaris 0.08(2) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Pentatomidae Halyomorpha halys 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 1.02(19)
Acrosternum hilare 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.00(0)
Crytomens ciliatus 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.05(1)
Eurydema oleracea 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.05(1)
Acanthosoma haemorrhoidale 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.11(2)
Pyrrhocoridae Dysdercus cingulatus 0.29(7) 4.71(164) 0.54(10)
Lophoidae Pyrilla perpirilla 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.43(8)
Acanthosomatidae Elasmothus interstinctus 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Membracidae Oxyrachis tarandus 0.49(12) 0.06(2) 0.11(2)
Miridae Oncerometophus spp. 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.27(5)
Hymenoptera Apis florea 0.37(9) 0.34(12) 1.82(34)
Apidae
Apis dorsata 0.49(12) 0.52(18) 1.50(28)
Xylocopa violacea 0.12(3) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Polistes wattii 0.29(7) 0.32(11) 0.59(11)
Polistes dominulus 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.11(2)
Vespidae
Ancistocerus alpholeratus 0.12(3) 0.06(2) 0.00(0)
Vespa orientalis 0.08(2) 0.00(0) 0.16(3)
Solenopsis invicta 0.08(2) 0.20(7) 0.16(3)
Lasius spp. 0.33(8) 0.03(1) 0.00(0)
Lasius interjectus 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.05(1)
Lasius alienus 0.54(13) 0.03(1) 0.00(0)
Formicidae
Lasius niger 0.21(5) 0.00(0) 0.21(4)
Formica obscuriventris 0.16(4) 0.00(0) 0.11(2)
Formica cunicularia 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.27(5)
Acanthomopes interjectus 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.64(12)
Bracon melitor 0.49(1) 0.11(4) 0.00(0)
Bracon spp. 0.87(21) 0.17(6) 0.70(13)
Braconidae Doryctobracon areolatus 0.00(0) 0.06(2) 0.16(3)
Campyloneurus spp. 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.16(3)
Cllibracon spp. 0.54(13) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Lasioglossum caliginosum 0.21(5) 0.06(2) 0.05(1)
Halictidae Lasioglossum calceatum 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Nomia strigata 0.12(3) 0.03(1) 0.48(9)
Sceliphora caementarium 0.04(1) 0.03(1) 0.11(2)
Sphecidae Chalybion californicus 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.00(0)
Cerceris compare 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Megachilidae Megachile versicolora 0.29(7) 0.34(12) 0.00(0)
Mymaridae Gonatocerus morilli 0.08(2) 0.03(1) 0.00(0)
Scolia dubia 0.00(0) 0.06(2) 0.11(2)
Scolidae
Scolia soror 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Cerceris compare 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Crabronidae Philanthus cornatus 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Pison atrum 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.16(3)
Tiphiidae Meria tripunctata 0.12(3) 0.06(2) 0.00(0)
Tiphia spp. 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.27(5)
Icheumonidae Pterocryptus castaneus 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.05(1)
Odonata Coenagrionidae Ischnura aurora 0.04(1) 0.11(4) 0.21(4)

~ 495 ~
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

Crocothemis nigrifrons 0.04(1) 0.09(3) 0.32(6)

Pleuroptya ruralis 0.41(10) 0.32(11) 1.34(25)
Crambidae
Herpetogramma licarsisalis 2.52(61) 0.66(23) 2.41(45)
Ocrase glaucinalis 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.11(2)
Pyralidae Ematheudes punctatella 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.11(2)
Eurema albula 0.08(2) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Belenoisa aurota 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Peridae
Artogeia manni 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Lepidoptera
Pieris rapae 0.08(2) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Arctiidae Utetheisa pulchella 0.08(2) 0.00(0) 0.05(1)
Lycaenidae Zizula hylex 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.59(11)
Danaus plexippus 0.08(2) 0.09(3) 0.00(0)
Nymphalidae
Junonia coenic 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Lycanenidae Nacaduba biocellata 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.11(2)
Noctuiidae Redingtonis alba 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.11(2)
Schistocerca nitens 0.04(1) 0.03(1) 0.11(2)
Cedarinia costata 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.00(0)
Chortocetes terminifera 0.00(0) 0.06(2) 0.11(2)
Achurum carinatum 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.00(1)
Acrididae
Orthoptera Acrida conica 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.05(1)
Phaulacridium vittatum 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Melanoplus differentialis 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.27(5)
Stethophyma grossum 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.05(1)
Gryllidae Metioche vittaticollis 0.41(10) 0.14(5) 1.45(27)
Oxyopes tiengianensis 0.54(13) 0.66(23) 2.68(50)
Oxyopidae
Oxyopes salticus 0.41(10) 0.26(9) 0.37(7)
Thomsidae Thomisus lobsus 0.00(0) 0.46(16) 0.64(12)
Corinnidae Castineira zetes 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.11(2)
Sparassidae Olios argelasius 0.04(1) 0.03(1) 0.00(0)
Thyene imperialis 0.08(2) 0.09(3) 0.16(3)
Araneae Dendryphanets rudis 0.21(5) 0.00(0) 0.21(4)
Salticidae
Hypobelmum albovittatum 0.00(0) 0.00(0) 0.11(2)
Thiodina sylvana 0.00(0) 0.06(2) 0.00(0)
Clubionidae Clubiona obesa 0.00(0) 0.03(1) 0.00(0)
Teragnathidae Metellina merianae 0.00(0) 0.06(2) 0.05(1)
Araneidae Acureperia ceropegia 0.08(2) 0.00(0) 0.91(17)
Lycosidae Lycosa mackenzie 0.08(2) 0.00(0) 0.05(1)
Pulmonata Bothriembryontidae Bothriembryon dux 0.29(7) 0.26(9) 0.86(16)
Phasmatadata Diapheromeridae Carausius morosus 0.08(2) 0.06(2) 0.00(0)
Neuroptera Crysopidae Crysopa spp. 0.04(1) 0.00(0) 0.00(0)
Total 2425 3480 1868

Conclusions Wahundeniya I, Cork A, Ammaranan C, Talekar NS.

It has been concluded from the present study that insects
inhabit these three vegetable fields variably. So, keeping in
view their ecological role in agro-ecosystem and other areas
of this biosphere, the IPM (integrated pest management)
strategies may be formulated according to their distribution
patterns.
References
1. Adjal MK, Oduro W, Mochiah MB. Spatial distribution of
insect assemblage in cocoa farms in relation to natural
forest. J Appl. Biosci. 2012; 54:3870-3879.
2. Afzal S. Determination of ecological diversity of order
Diptera, Coleoptera and Siphonoptera among okra
Abelmoschus esculentus L. potato Solanum tuberosum L.
and cauliflower Brassica oleracea L. fields. M. Phil
Thesis, Department of Zoology, Wildlife and Fisheries,
University of Agriculture, Faisalabad. 2015, 89-98.
3. Ahmad M, Imran RL, Sarwar S. Pollination and foraging
potential of European bumblebee, Bombus terrestris
(Hymenoptera: Apidae) on tomato crop under greenhouse
system. Pak. J Zool. 2015; 47:1279-1285.
4. Akhtar A, Ahmad M, Ali T, Zafar MI. Vegetable growers
awareness abouthealth safety measure and pesticide use in
Punjab Pakistan Pak. J Agri. Sci. 2007; 44:480-489.
5. Alam SN, Rashid MA, Shivalingaswamy TM, Rai S,
~ 496 ~
Development of an integrated pest management strategy
for eggplant fruit and shoot borer in south Asia. AVRDC
Veges. Taiwan. 2003; 2:225-335.
6. Ali M. Dynamics of vegetables in Asia. Int. J Anim. Biol.
2015; 1:243-248.
7. Anonymous. Govt. of Pakistan: Agricultural Statistics of
Pakistan. Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock.
Food, Agriculture and Livestock Division, Islamabad,
Pakistan, 2014.
8. Ashfaq M, Ullah F, Rafi MA, Nazi F. Taxonomic study of
subfamily Scymninae (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) with
one new record from Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan. Turk. J
Zool. 2015; 39:1401-17.
9. Athara TK. Bokharib MK. Attractiveness of single species
flower patches to beneficialinsects in agroecosystem. Ann.
Appl. Sci. 2006; 148:39-47.
10. Bersier, L. F., C. B. Richter and M. F. Cattin. Quantitative
description of food web matrices. Ecol. 2002; 83:2394-
2407.
11. Borror DJ, Delong DM. An introduction to the study of
insects. Columbus, Ohio. 2005, 812.
12. Buker VRS, Manner HI. Citrus species. Resources
Agriculture Permanent Agroforestry, 2006. In:
http://www.traditionaltree.org.
13. Decaens T, Jimenez JJ, Barros E, Chauvel A, Blanchart E,
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
Fragoso C, Lavelle P. Soil macrofaunal communities in
permanent pastures derived from tropical forest or
savanna. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2004; 103:301-312.
14. Echezona BL, Offordile JI. Responses of flea beetles
(Podagrica spp.) and okra plants (Abelmoschus esculentus
L. Moench) to differently coloured polyethylene shades.
Int. J Pest Manage. 2010; 2:161-168.
15. Elanchezhyan K, Baskaran RK, Murali DS. Rajavel.
Influence of intercrops on incidence of major pests of
brinjal and their natural enemies. Ann. Plant Protect. Sci.,
2013; 16:87-91.
16. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). FAOSTAT.
2007. http:// faostat.fao.org.
17. Fisheries and Foresty. Australian insect common names
Australian vernment. Department of Agriculture, 2008.
http:/www.entomo.csiro.au/aicn /index.htm.
18. Gullan, P. J. and P. S. Cranston. The Insects: An outline of
Entomology. Wiley-Blackwell, Publisher. 2010; 8:7-9.
19. Hafeez, A. and A. Sahito. Varietal resistance of
Abelmoschus esculentus against Bemisia tabaci and
Earias spp. under field conditions. Pak. J Entomol.
Karachi, 2012; 27:149-156.
20. Khadijah AR, Azidah AA. Meor SR. Diversity and
abundance of insect species at Kota Damansara
Community Forest Reserve, Selangor. Academic Journal.
2013; 8(9):359-374.
21. Khushk AM, Shar MU, Memon MA. The cultivation of
okra in Sindh and its economic view. PARC Technol.
Trans. INST. 2003; 136:17-18.
22. Lefebvre D, Pierre J. Spatial distribution of bumblebees
foraging on two cultivars of tomato in a commercial
greenhouse. J Econ. Entomol. 2006; 99:1571-1578.
23. Lohar MK. Insects resistance against pests. Appl.
Entomol., 2001; 2:16-23.
24. Maalik S, Rana SA, Khan HA, Ashfaq M. Diversity and
abundance of Lepidopteran population from selected crops
of district Faisalabad, Pakistan. Pak. J Agri. Sci. 2013;
50:95-101.
25. Malik MI, Khuhro RD, Dhilloo KH, Zaman B. Kuhuhro
SN. Response of sucking insects complex to various
colors of sticky traps in okra crop. Pak. J Entomol.
Karachi. 2012; 27:181-186.
26. Memon AJG, Abro H, Syed TS. Varietal resistance of
okra against, Earias spp. on cotton and okra grown as
mono and mix crops. Pak. J Biol. Sci. Entomol. 2004; 7:
937-942.
27. Meyer JR. Social Impacts of insects. Entomol., 2007; 6:
78-89.
28. Nagnathan B, Gebauer G, Fiedler K. Disentangling a
rainforest food web using stable isotopes: Dietary
diversity in a species-rich ant community. J Entomol.
2003; 3:426-435.
29. Nazir S, Sharif F, Arshad M, A. H. Khan. Diversity
analysis of insects of the Thorn Forest Community at
Harappa Archaeological Site, Pakistan. Pak. J. Zool., 46:
2014, 1091-1099.
30. Paul, C. G. and V. Charles. Commercial vegetable
production Georgia pest control. Hand Book Control
Measurers, 2: 2000, 10-11.
31. Pereira, N., M. D. N. Ferreira, M. E. Sousa and J. C.
Franco. Mites, lemon trees and ground cover interactions
in Mafra region. IOBC WPRS Bulletin, 29 (3): 2006, 143-
150.
32. Radwan SA. Toxocological studies on some scale insects
infested mango and guava trees. Agri. Cairo Univ. 2003;
~ 497 ~
6:89-99.
33. Razmjou J, Westbrook NJ, Hall DG, Duan Y. Life history
traits of Tetranychus urticae Koch on three legumes
(Acari: Tetranychidae). Entomol. 2009; 4:204-211.
34. Rana, N., S. A. Rana, A. Sohail, M. J. I. Siddiqui and M.
Z. Iqbal. Diversity of Soil Macrofauna in Sugarcane of
high input and low input nature: Past Finding and future
priorities. Pak. Entomol., 2006; 28:19-26.
35. Regupathy, A., S. Palanisamy, N. Chandramohan and K.
Gunathilagaraj. A guide on crop pests. Academic Press,
San Diego, Calif, USA. 1997; 2:264-268.
36. Sanjeev R, Uma S, Bhagat RM, Gupta SP. Population
dynamics and succession of fruit fly on sub-tropical fruits
under rain fed condition in Jammu Region. Indian J
Entomol. 2008; 70:12-15.
37. Sardan HP, Arora S, Singh DK, Kadu LN. Development
and validation of adaptable IPM in eggplant, Solanum
melongena L. in a farmers participatory approach. Indian J
Pl. Prot. 2004; 32:123-128.
38. Senjobi BA, Ande OT, Senjobi CT, Adepiti AO. Adigun
MO. Performance of Abelmoschus esculentus (L. Moench)
under various applications of pesticides and fertilizers in
an Oxic Paleustalf. Int. J. Plant and Soil Sci., 1: 2013, 24-
40.
39. Singh NK, Singh J Thakur A. Biodiversity of
lepidopterous insects in the field crops under various
climatic condition. J Appl. Zool. Res. 2008; 19:127-131.
40. Sharma D, Rao DV. A field study of pest of cauliflower
cabbage and okra in some areas of Jaipur. Int. J. Biotech.
Pharma. Res. Life Sci. 2012; 1:2250-3137.
41. Soomro SH, Sultana R, Soomro AH, Solangi IK, Solangi
MN. Studies on the distribution pattern of whitefly
(Bemisia tabaci) on okra crop in Sindh, Pakistan. Pak. J
Entomol. Karachi. 2012; 27:111-116.
42. Stahl L. Controlling garden pests with natural remedies.
Pharma. Res. Inst. 2013; 3:118-120.
43. Sulatana R, Wagan YS, Wagan MS. Orthopteran
biodiversity of Thar desert, sindh, Pakistan. Pak. J Zool.
2013; 45:299-304.
44. Talekar NS. Insect pests of tomato. Entomol. AVRDCO.
1998, 1-18.
45. Tilman D. Causes, consequences and ethics of
biodiversity. Nature. 2000; 405:208-211.
46. USDA. Vegetables and Melons outlook/VGS-318. J Eco.
Res., 2007; 23:21-29.
47. Vacante V. Citrus mites: identification, bionomy and
control. Oxfordshire: CABI. 2010, 378.
48. Walter DE. Living on leaves: mites, tomenta and leaf
domatia. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2007; 41:101-114.