Methods for caterpillars’ control in the culture of tomato - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2007 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://www.periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAgron/article/view/278 |
Resumo: | Five methods for the control of caterpillars, which attack the culture of tomato, were analyzed: the conventional method of application of phytosanitary products; the integrated pest management (IPM); the IPM with the use of Azadirachta indica. extract at 5% (Neem); the sacking of the tomato fruit immediately after flowering, and the control plants (without any treatment against pest). The methods that used phytosanitary products (conventional and IPM) efficiently controlled the caterpillars on the tomato plants and, as a consequence, promoted an increase in the productivity of the culture of 156 and 165% respectively, if compared with the control plants. The number of pulverizations had a reduction of 66.7% when the IPM was used compared to the conventional. The performance of the IPMNeem treatment was significantly the same as the control, denoting poor efficiency in controlling the borer caterpillars. The method of sacking the tomato fruit consisted of a promising alternative in the production without the presence of insecticides. |
id |
UEM-5_dc330c57c66838bd39ce98f035663d39 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:periodicos.uem.br/ojs:article/278 |
network_acronym_str |
UEM-5 |
network_name_str |
Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Methods for caterpillars’ control in the culture of tomato - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278Métodos de controle de lepidópteros na cultura do tomateiro (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278controle fitossanitáriotomatemanejo integrado de pragasFive methods for the control of caterpillars, which attack the culture of tomato, were analyzed: the conventional method of application of phytosanitary products; the integrated pest management (IPM); the IPM with the use of Azadirachta indica. extract at 5% (Neem); the sacking of the tomato fruit immediately after flowering, and the control plants (without any treatment against pest). The methods that used phytosanitary products (conventional and IPM) efficiently controlled the caterpillars on the tomato plants and, as a consequence, promoted an increase in the productivity of the culture of 156 and 165% respectively, if compared with the control plants. The number of pulverizations had a reduction of 66.7% when the IPM was used compared to the conventional. The performance of the IPMNeem treatment was significantly the same as the control, denoting poor efficiency in controlling the borer caterpillars. The method of sacking the tomato fruit consisted of a promising alternative in the production without the presence of insecticides.Foram avaliados 5 métodos de controle das lagartas que atacam a cultura do tomateiro: método convencional de aplicação de produtos fitossanitários; manejo integrado de pragas (MIP) com produtos sintéticos; MIP com o emprego de extrato de Azadirachta indica (Nim) à 5%; ensacamento das pencas de tomate e testemunha. Os métodos que utilizaram produtos fitossanitários (convencional e MIP) foram eficientes no controle das lagartas do tomateiro e, em conseqüência, promoveram um aumento na produtividade da cultura em 156 e 165% respectivamente, em comparação à testemunha. O número de pulverizações foi reduzido em até 66,7%, quando se adotou o MIP comparado ao convencional. O tratamento MIP-Nim foi significativamente igual à testemunha, denotando não ser eficiente no controle das lagartas broqueadoras. O ensacamento das pencas de frutos de tomate consistiu em uma alternativa promissora na produção de frutos sem a presença de inseticidas.Universidade Estadual de Maringá2007-11-14info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://www.periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAgron/article/view/27810.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy; Vol 29 No 3 (2007); 339-344Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy; v. 29 n. 3 (2007); 339-3441807-86211679-9275reponame:Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)instacron:UEMporhttp://www.periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAgron/article/view/278/201Lebedenco, AnatoliAuad, Alexander MachadoKronka, Sérgio do Nascimentoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-11-23T18:37:03Zoai:periodicos.uem.br/ojs:article/278Revistahttp://www.periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAgronPUBhttp://www.periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAgron/oaiactaagron@uem.br||actaagron@uem.br|| edamasio@uem.br1807-86211679-9275opendoar:2022-11-23T18:37:03Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Methods for caterpillars’ control in the culture of tomato - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278 Métodos de controle de lepidópteros na cultura do tomateiro (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278 |
title |
Methods for caterpillars’ control in the culture of tomato - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278 |
spellingShingle |
Methods for caterpillars’ control in the culture of tomato - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278 Lebedenco, Anatoli controle fitossanitário tomate manejo integrado de pragas |
title_short |
Methods for caterpillars’ control in the culture of tomato - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278 |
title_full |
Methods for caterpillars’ control in the culture of tomato - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278 |
title_fullStr |
Methods for caterpillars’ control in the culture of tomato - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278 |
title_full_unstemmed |
Methods for caterpillars’ control in the culture of tomato - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278 |
title_sort |
Methods for caterpillars’ control in the culture of tomato - DOI: 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278 |
author |
Lebedenco, Anatoli |
author_facet |
Lebedenco, Anatoli Auad, Alexander Machado Kronka, Sérgio do Nascimento |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Auad, Alexander Machado Kronka, Sérgio do Nascimento |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Lebedenco, Anatoli Auad, Alexander Machado Kronka, Sérgio do Nascimento |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
controle fitossanitário tomate manejo integrado de pragas |
topic |
controle fitossanitário tomate manejo integrado de pragas |
description |
Five methods for the control of caterpillars, which attack the culture of tomato, were analyzed: the conventional method of application of phytosanitary products; the integrated pest management (IPM); the IPM with the use of Azadirachta indica. extract at 5% (Neem); the sacking of the tomato fruit immediately after flowering, and the control plants (without any treatment against pest). The methods that used phytosanitary products (conventional and IPM) efficiently controlled the caterpillars on the tomato plants and, as a consequence, promoted an increase in the productivity of the culture of 156 and 165% respectively, if compared with the control plants. The number of pulverizations had a reduction of 66.7% when the IPM was used compared to the conventional. The performance of the IPMNeem treatment was significantly the same as the control, denoting poor efficiency in controlling the borer caterpillars. The method of sacking the tomato fruit consisted of a promising alternative in the production without the presence of insecticides. |
publishDate |
2007 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2007-11-14 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://www.periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAgron/article/view/278 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278 |
url |
http://www.periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAgron/article/view/278 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.278 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
http://www.periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAgron/article/view/278/201 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual de Maringá |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual de Maringá |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy; Vol 29 No 3 (2007); 339-344 Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy; v. 29 n. 3 (2007); 339-344 1807-8621 1679-9275 reponame:Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy (Online) instname:Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM) instacron:UEM |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM) |
instacron_str |
UEM |
institution |
UEM |
reponame_str |
Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy (Online) |
collection |
Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
actaagron@uem.br||actaagron@uem.br|| edamasio@uem.br |
_version_ |
1799305902085373952 |