Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies 2015; 3(3): 403-407

E-ISSN: 2320-7078
P-ISSN: 2349-6800
JEZS 2015; 3(3): 403-407
Response of pea varieties to insect pests in Peshawar
© 2015 JEZS
Received: 12-04-2015
Ashraf Khan, Imtiaz Ali Khan, Komal Habib
Accepted: 14-05-2015
Abstract
Ashraf Khan
Department of Entomology,
An experiment to determine response of pea varieties to insect pests in Peshawar was conducted at the
The University of Agriculture, New Developmental Farm, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar during 2013-14. Seven pea varieties
Peshawar-Pakistan. including Climax (New Zealand NTL), Classic, Leader, Azad P-1, PF-400, Meteor and Peshawar Local
(Check) were tested treatments. The experiment was laid out in Randomized Complete Block Design
Imtiaz Ali Khan (RCBD) with three replications. The results revealed that density of pea leaf miner, Chromatomyia
Department of Entomology, horticola Goureau was significantly higher on Azad P-1 (7.21 leaflet-1) and lower on Climax (5.85
The University of Agriculture, leaflet-1). Peshawar Local was significantly highly infested by pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum Harris
Peshawar-Pakistan. (5.34 leaf-1) while Climax was less infested (3.66 leaf-1). Thrips, Caliothrips sp. infestation was higher on
the leaves of Meteor (1.80 leaf-1) and lower on Climax (1.64 leaf-1) as well as Peshawar Local (1.64 leaf-
Komal Habib 1). The data showed that Climax gave significantly higher (4235.81 t/ha) pea yield. It was concluded that
Department of Entomology, Climax yielded more and also found comparatively more resistant to the attack of insect pests as
The University of Agriculture, compared to all other varieties. Climax variety should be brought under cultivation for its comparatively
Peshawar-Pakistan.
high resistance and more production and further research on its other physico-morphic plant characters
should be carried out.

Keywords: Pea leaf miner, aphids, thrips, pea varieties

1. Introduction
Pea (Pisum sativum L.) is cultivated as winter crop all over the world and is utilized as
nutritious vegetable. It contributes to about 40% of total trading in pulses [14]. Cooked green
peas are a rich source of proteins. One pound of green peas containing 13.7 g protein, 8 g fat,
36.2 g carbohydrates, 45.1 mg calcium, 29 mg phosphorus and 54 mg ascorbic acid [12]. World
widely peas are grown on an area of 528.71 thousands hectares and ranks fourth in the
production (441.53 thousand tons) among grains legume after soybean, ground and beans [5]. It
is grown in many tropical and subtropical countries including Burma, India, Ethiopia,
Morocco, Columbia, Ecuador, Peru and Pakistan [14]. Over the last decade, Canada has been
the leading producing country of peas in the world [27]. In Pakistan, more than 100,000 hectares
is under cultivation, yielding less than1000 kilograms ha-1 [16].
Regardless of large number of cultivars in the field, pea yield per unit in Pakistan is still lower
than international standard. There are several factors responsible for it, among which poor
cultural practices, low weed control and high pest and disease attack are important ones [14].
Among insect pests of peas, pea leaf miner (Phytomyza horticola Goureau (Diptera:
Agromyzidae) is a serious hold back in cultivation of pea causing 90% damage to the pea crop
by mining young leaves which leads to stunting and low flower production [18]. Pea aphid
infestation causes severe economic losses in pea crop- by reducing crop yield and
contamination of crop for processing or fresh market. Plants representing Fabaceae serve as
main host for aphid pea that includes field pea, alfalfa and clovers [31]. Pea thrips, Caliothrips
indicus (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) also come under the category of serious pests of peas. Due
to their infestation, tissue surface becomes silvery and may result to the failure of flowers
production and also change structure of plant and pods. At the range of 250 eggs per 10
flowers causes reduction in the harvest by up to 60% [9].
It is understood that almost all plants emit volatile organic compounds (VOCs) into the
atmosphere. These VOCs play a fundamental ecological role, which initiate interactions of
plants to other living things [7]. Leaves having high phenolic contents are not preferred for
feeding [11]. Leaves consisting of high nitrogen content are mostly preferred by pea leaf miners
Correspondence:
Ashraf Khan
therefore high dose application of nitrogen are dangerous [17]. Keeping in view the importance
Department of Entomology, of pea, assessing its higher production and its resistance or susceptibility to different insect
The University of Agriculture, pests, different varieties were tested to evaluate the more appropriate variety for the farmers of
Peshawar-Pakistan. the region.
~ 403 ~ 
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
 

2. Materials and Methods Leaf miners data collection

The present experiment was carried out at the New For leaf miners data was commenced by counting the number
Developmental Farm (NDF) of The University of Agriculture, of leaf miners larvae per plant on five plants per row [4]. Four
Peshawar during 2013-14. The experiment was laid out in rows were randomly selected from each treatment. Data was
Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three taken at weekly intervals.
replications. Each replication consisted of seven treatments
(i.e. Climax (New Zealand NTL), Classic, Leader, Azad P-1, Thrips data collection
PF-400, Meteor and Peshawar Local (Check)), 4 m x 4m each. Twenty leaves were collected from each variety in 75%
Plant to plant and row to row distance was kept at 10 cm and alcohol in plastic bottle at weekly intervals and brought to the
65 cm, respectively. Standard agronomic practices were Entomology Research Laboratory the University of
applied in the field throughout the pea growing season. The Agriculture, Peshawar. Thrips were washed out with camel
field was left open for natural infestation of insect pests and hair brush from the leaves. They were counted and permanent
their natural enemies. During the course of study, data was slides were prepared.
recorded on pea leaf miners, pea aphids and thrips on pea
leaves and pods from germination till maturity of crops at 3. Results
weekly intervals. The data recorded for each parameter was Pea leaf miner infestation
analyzed statically by using Statistix 8.1 software and means The results in table 1 reveal the infestation of pea leaf miner
were separated by using Fisher Protected Least Significance leaf-1. Pea leaf miner’s infestation was significantly affected by
Difference Test at 5% level of significance [28]. different varieties as well time intervals. Interaction of time
and varieties also showed significant difference. The results
Aphid’s data collection showed that significantly higher infestation of leaf miner was
Data of aphids was recorded on randomly selected 20 plants in recorded during week 7 (16.30 leaf-1) and lower during week 1
four rows per treatment for recording its population density. (0.74 leaf-1). It was also found that mean leaf miner infestation
Progress of the aphids was determined by the aphids/leaf count was significantly higher (7.21 leaf-1) on Leader, followed by
method [20]. Aphids were inspected on three fully expanded PF-400 (7.18 leaf-1) and Azad P-1(7.14 leaf-1) while lower on
leaves on top, middle and bottom, and its number counted. Climax (5.85 leaf-1). Interaction of time and varieties implied
Mean number of aphids was derived for all the treatments that statistically significant higher infestation of pea leaf
from each replication miners (17.50 leaf-1) was recorded during week 7 on Leader
and lower (0.62 leaf-1) during week 1 on Meteor.
Table 1: Mean weekly no. of pea leaf miners leaf-1 on pea crop during 2013-14.
Mean no. of pea leaf miner/leaf in week
Variety Over all Mean
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Climax 0.65t 1.07st 1.88qrs 3.60op 4.96mn 10.78hi 13.90d 10.23i 5.55lm 5.85b
Classic 0.85t 1.13st 2.35qr 4.57mno 6.38jkl 12.92def 15.68c 12.90ef 6.90jk 7.08a
Leader 0.75t 1.17st 2.50q 4.57mno 6.20kl 12.57ef 17.50a 13.07de 6.54jkl 7.21a
Azad P-1 0.67t 1.28st 2.57q 4.75mn 6.30jkl 12.00fg 17.20ab 12.80ef 6.69jk 7.14a
PF-400 0.74t 1.20st 2.80pq 4.53no 6.82 11.37gh 17.45ab 13.12de 6.59jk 7.18a
Meteor 0.62t 1.40rst 2.70pq 4.70mn 7.07jk 10.97hi 15.85c 12.60ef 6.57jk 6.94a
Pesh Local 0.93st 1.30st 2.85pq 4.67mn 7.22j 11.12ghi 16.48bc 12.93def 6.63jk 7.12a
Mean 0.74h 1.22g 2.52f 4.48e 6.42d 11.67c 16.30a 12.52b 6.50d
Means in columns and rows followed by different letter(s) are significantly different at 5% level of significance (LSD test).
LSD value for Varieties = 0.3323,
LSD value for time intervals = 0.3768
LSD value for interaction = 0.9970

Pea Aphids infestation significantly higher aphids density (5.34 leaf-1) in pea crop was
The aphid’s infestation leaf-1 on pea crop was significantly recorded on Peshawar Local, which was followed by Azad P-1
affected by time intervals and different pea varieties (Table 2). (5.11 leaf-1) and Meteor (4.91 leaf-1) while lower aphids
Interaction of weeks and varieties for Aphids infestation leaf-1 density (3.66 leaf-1) was recorded in Climax. Interaction of
was also found significant. Mean values for weeks showed that weeks and varieties for aphids infestation leaf-1) revealed that
significantly higher Aphids infestation (11.01 leaf-1) was lower aphids density (0.89 leaf-1) was recorded during week 7
recorded during week 3 while lower aphid’s infestation (1.83 on Climax whereas higher (13.93 leaf-1) at week 3 on Azad P-
leaf-1) during week 7. Mean values for varieties showed that 1.
Table 2: Mean weekly no. of pea Aphids leaf-1 on pea crop during year 2013-14.
Mean no. of pea leaf miner/leaf in week
Variety Over all Mean
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Climax 2.22t-m 3.10q-u 8.20de 2.82s-w 4.24n-r 2.59s-w 0.89x 4.52m-p 4.31n-q 3.66d
Classic 2.58s-w 4.32n-q 9.99c 3.19q-u 5.44i-n 3.05q-w 1.94u-x 6.94e-h 5.16j-n 4.74bc
Leader 2.63s-w 4.54m-p 10.33c 3.04q-w 6.06g-l 2.63s-w 1.81wx 6.50f-i 5.10k-o 4.74bc
AzadP-1 2.99r-w 3.86o-s 13.93a 2.91s-w 5.68h-m 2.84s-w 2.11t-x 6.43f-j 5.27i-n 5.11ab
PF-400 2.88s-w 3.32p-t 9.36cd 2.93s-w 5.31i-n 2.40t-w 1.85vwx 6.31f-k 5.04k-o 4.38c
Meteor 2.97r-w 3.84o-s 12.36b 3.06q-w 5.03k-o 3.04q-w 1.96u-x 6.99efg 4.97l-o 4.91ab
Pesh. Local 3.15q-u 4.58m-p 12.91ab 3.34p-t 5.76g-m 3.20q-u 2.24t-m 7.59ef 5.28i-n 5.34a
Mean 2.78e 3.94d 11.01a 3.04e 5.36c 2.82e 1.83f 6.47b 5.02c
Means in columns and rows followed by different letters are significantly different at 5% level of significance (LSD test).
LSD value for Varieties = 0.4308
LSD value for time intervals = 0.4885
LSD value for interaction = 1.2923
~ 404 ~ 
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
 

Thrips infestation week 6 which was 1.36 thrips leaf-1. Interaction of time and
The results for the infestation of pea crop leaves by thrips are varieties for thrips infestation indicated that significantly
given in Table 3. Higher mean density of thrips (1.79 leaf-1) higher density of thrips was recorded during week 1 on Meteor
was recorded on Meteor followed by Azad P-1 and lower on which was 2.58 thrips leaf-1 and lower during week 6 on
Climax (1.63 leaf-1) and Peshawar Local (1.63 leaf-1). Climax which was 1.18 thrips leaf-1.The results revealed that
Significantly higher mean infestation was noted during week 3 thrips densities did not vary significantly among the pea
(2.14 leaf-1) followed by week 1 (2.09 leaf-1) and lower during varieties.

Table 3: Mean weekly density of thrips leaf-1 on seven pea varieties during 2014.
Mean density of thrips leaf-1 in week
Variety Overall Mean
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Climax 1.80d-l 1.85d-k 1.95b-i 1.63e-o 1.47h-o 1.18o 1.55g-o 1.63
Classic 2.15abcd 1.68d-n 2.35abc 1.53g-o 1.43j-o 1.20no 1.60g-o 1.74
Leader 2.38ab 1.85d-k 2.12a-e 1.60g-o 1.53g-o 1.22mno 1.45j-o 1.72
Azad P-1 1.85d-k 1.97b-h 2.52a 1.35l-o 1.91b-j 1.43j-o 1.38k-o 1.75
PF-400 1.80d-l 1.85d-k 2.15abcd 1.38k-o 1.60g-o 1.45j-o 1.43j-o 1.67
Meteor 2.58a 1.58g-o 2.00b-g 1.58g-o 1.60g-o 1.57g-o 1.70d-m 1.79
Pesh Local 2.10a-f 1.55g-o 1.88c-j 1.65e-o 1.30l-o 1.48h-o 1.47i-o 1.63
Mean 2.09a 1.76b 2.14a 1.53cd 1.54c 1.36d 1.51cd Ns
Means in columns and rows followed by different letters are significantly different at 5% level of significance (LSD test).
LSD value for varieties = 0.1942
LSD value for time intervals = 0.1856
LSD value for interaction = 0.4911

Yield (kg ha-1) density of Pea leaf miner was observed on Climax and highest
In the present investigation highest yield was recorded for on Peshawar Local. Our results are comparable with those of
Climax (4235.80 kg ha-1), which was followed by PF-400 [3]
. They had found minimum leaf miner infestation (4.3
(3882.72 kg ha-1) and Classic (3764.23 kg ha-1). Minimum infested leaflets/branch) on Climax variety while highest
yield was recorded for Peshawar Local (2962.71 kg ha-1) (Fig. infestation on Grean Feast variety with 9.6 infested
1). leaflets/branch [22]. Found significant effect of varieties on leaf
miner infestation. Their study showed that leaf miner
infestation begun in February and Climax variety was declared
resistant to leaf miner infestation due to thick leaf and spongy
tissues. Different infestation level on different varieties of Pea
crop and in different localities was also recognized by [21].
Pea aphid Acyrthosiphon pisum infestation on pea varieties
was observed in the last week of January. It fluctuated and
reached to its peak in the middle of February (week 3). The
fluctuation in pest density might be due to rain fall. Pest
density also decreased with maturity of the crop as aphids
infest young shoots and unfolded leaves of the crop [19].
Reported that both biological and physical factors could be
responsible for the variation in aphid population densities. He
also stated that environmental factors (particularly temperature
Fig 1. Total yield (Kg ha-1) of different Pea varieties. and humidity) and food availability greatly influenced the
LSD value = 323.56 buildup of aphid population. The results also revealed that
mean density of aphids was higher on Peshawar Local 1) and
4. Discussion lower on Climax. These results are in agreement with those of
The pea leaf miner infestation started from last week of (6). They had tested five varieties of pea for resistance against
January and continued till the start of April. Pest density was aphids and found none of these promising varieties were
lower during the first weeks and gradually increased in a completely immune to aphids. The reason for these pea
sequence on all the varieties and reached to peak during week varieties could be their genetic makeup as less infested variety
7. In the last week of March infestation decreased because of was Climax [1]. Stated that there is need for exploring resistant
maturity of the crop [26]. Stated that pea leaf miner density with cultivars because completely resistant varieties are lacking in
an average population of 7.3 leaf miners per plant was started Pakistan
to increase from 2nd week of February and was highest during [23]
. stated that thrips were present throughout the year except
the 4th week of February with a 9.25 leaf miner per plant. Our July and August due to high rainfall. Highest density of thrips
results are in accordance with the work done by [15]. According was observed from April to May in which maximum density
to them no larval infestation was observed till January and recorded was 26.82 per three leave in the second fortnight of
highest infestation was recorded during the month of March April. Our results are not in conformity with the findings of [29]
with an average of 15.25 + 1.292 leaf miner per leaf. Our in case of thrips densities, who found occurrence of maximum
results are also in conformity with the results of [30]. They had sucking pest densities in the months of July, August and
found that in Egypt, leaf miner larval population of Phytomyza September whereas [10] recorded maximum population of
orobanchiae peaked in the third week of March and infested thrips during the last week of July to mid-August. The month
the leaves up to 100% during the 2nd and 4th weeks of April on of August was favorable for thrips population in 2009. The
ovules of Orbanchiae crenata. The results (Table-1) regarding low density level of thrips recorded may be due the rain fall.
infestation on different varieties showed that lowest pest
~ 405 ~ 
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
 

Negative and significant correlation between rainfall and thrips in Madhya Pardesh. Journal of Insect Science 1997;
density was recorded by [2]. [25] Also reported negative 10:153-156.
correlation while [13] recoded non-significant positive 11. Ipe M, Sadaruddin M. Infestation and host specificity of
correlation between thrips density and rainfall. Liriomyza species and the role of phenolic compounds in
Climax performed well among the seven pea varieties in terms host plant resistance. Entomology 1984; 9:265-270.
of yield production. The variations in yield of pea may be due 12. Khan IA, Shakoor MA. Variation in quantitative
to pest infestation and its susceptibility to pest attack. It may characters of peas after seed irradiation, Botony Bulletin
be due to genetic variations and environmental conditions. of Academia Sinica 1991; 23(2):105-118
Biomass, pea N production and grain yield are variable and 13. Khan MA, Khaliq A, Subhani MN, Saleem MW.
depend on genotype and growing conditions [8]. The variation Incidence and development of Thrips tabaci and
can be caused by other yield components as [32] stated that Tetranychus urticae on field grown cotton. International
plants m-2, number of pods plant-1, seeds pod-1 and also the Journal of Agriculture Biology 2008; 10:232-234.
mean seed weight are the main yield components. [14] recorded 14. Khan T, Ramzan NA, Jillani G, Mehood T.
higher yield of 4673.0 kg/h while lower of 2399.0 kg/h for Morphological performance of peas (Pisum sativum)
peas in Peshawar. genotypes under rainfed conditions of Potohar region.
Journal of Agriculture Research 2013; 51(1):51-60.
5. Conclusion 15. Mehmood T, Khokar KM, Farooq M, Arshaf M. Larval
The results of the present research strengthen that Climax fluctuation of pea leaf miner on pea crop and effect of
variety was more resistant to the attack of all the three major abiotic factors on its dynamics. Pakistan Journal of
insect pests. Due to higher resistance to pest infestation it Agriculture Research 1991; 12(3):202-205.
resulted in higher yield. 16. MINFAL. Fruit, vegetables and condiments statistics of
Pakistan. MINFAL Economic wing. Islamabad, 2011-12,
6. Recommendations 22.
Based on the above mentioned results of lower incidence of 17. Minkenberg O, Fredrix M. Preference and performance of
pests and higher yield, cultivation of Climax variety is an herbivorous fly, Liriomyza huidobrensis (Diptera:
recommended to the growers in Peshawar. Further research on Agromyzidae), on tomato plants differing in leaf nitrogen.
its other physico-morphic plant characters and testing in other Annual of Entomological Society America 1989; 82:350-
areas of the province should be carried out. 354.
18. Molites LP, Gabriel BP. Biology of the sweet pea leaf
7. References miner, Phytomyza horitcola Goreau (Diptera:
1. Aheer GM, Ehsan-ul-haq, Ahmad Kl, Ali A. Varietals Agromyzidae) in the Philippines. Philippine Entomologist
resistance and sowing dates affect on the aphids density (Review of Applied Entomology, (A) 66(12): 6132, 1978)
and wheat yields. Journal of Agriculture Research 1993; 1975; 3(2):89-108.
31:313-317. 19. Naeem M. Responses of aphids and their natural enemies
2. Ali A, Bhatti MA, Ahmad KJ. Role of weather in to a silvoarable agroforestry environment. Ph.D. Thesis,
fluctuating the population of Amrasca devastans (Dist.) Leeds University Leeds, England, 1996, 272.
and Thrips tabaci (Lind.). Proceeding Pakistan Cong. 20. Raman KV. Transmission of potato viruses by aphids.
Zoology 1993; 13:133-139. Technical Information Bulletin 2. International Potato
3. Ali H, Rehman M. Combine effect of relative resistance Center (CIP), Lima, Peru, 1985, 1-12.
and chemical control against pea leaf miner (Phytomyza 21. Saeed M, Naz F, Ahmed S, Aaqeel M. Studies on level of
horticola goureau (Diptera: Agromyzidae)) in pea (Pisum infestation of pea leaf miner Chromatomyia horticola
sativum L) varieties. International Journal of Research in Goureau (Agromyzidae: Diptera) on pea crop in selected
Engineering, IT and Social Sciences 2012; 2(9):35-42. areas of NWFP, Pakistan. Pakistan Entomology 2003;
4. Amin N. Insect pests, pollinators and their relative 25(2):227-230.
abundance on different varieties of Pea (Pisum sativum). 22. Sheikh El, Herakly MAK, Ismail FA. Effect of varieties
Thesis, 2008, 12. and sowing dates of flax on the rate of infestation with the
5. Ashraf I, Pervez MA, Amjad M, Ahmad R. Effect of leaf-miner, Phytomyza atricornis Mg. Bulletin of Faculty
varying irrigation frequencies on growth, yield and quality of Agriculture University Cairo 1990; 41(3):665-674.
of peas seed. Journal of Agriculture Research 2011; 23. Shivanna BK, Gangadhara NB, Basavaraja MK, Nagaraja
49(3):339-351. R, Kalleswara SCM, Karegowda C. Impact of abiotic
6. Boyer DM, Priluki. Aphid spread and the structure of factors on population dynamics of sucking pests in
dominance in pea agrocoenosises. Journal of Plant transgenic cotton ecosystem. International Journal of
Protection 2002; 4:84-86. Science and Nature 2011; 2(1):72-74.
7. Dudareva N, Negre F, Nagegowda DA, Orlova I. Plant 24. Shivanna BK, Nagaraja DN, Manjunatha M, Naik MI.
volatiles: recent advances and future perspectives. Critical Seasonal incidence of sucking pests on transgenic Bt
Reviews in Plant Science 2006; 25:417-440. cotton and correlation with weather factors. Karnataka
8. Evans J, O'Connor GE, Turner GL, Coventry DR, Fettell Journal of Agriculture Sciences 2009; 22:666-667.
N, Mahoney J et al. N2 fixation and its value to soil N 25. Shivanna BK, Nagaraja DN, Manjunatha M, Naik MI.
increase in lupin, field pea and other legumes in south- Seasonal incidence of sucking pests on transgenic Bt
eastern Australia. Australian Journal of Agriculture cotton and correlation with weather factors. Karnataka
Research 1989; 40:791-805. Journal of Agriculture Science 2009; 22:666-667.
9. GPP. Pea thrips, Caliothrips indicus (Thysanoptera: 26. Singh H, Saravanan L. Seasonal incidence and
Thripidae). Green Plant protection, 2009. management of pea leaf miner Phytomyza horticola,
http://www.greenplantprotection Goureau infesting pea. International. Journal of Plant
10. Gupta MP, Sandeep S, Shrivastava SK, Sharma S. Protection 2008; 1(2):33-37.
Population build up of some sap sucking insects on cotton 27. Smykal P, Aubert G, Burstin J, Coyne CJ, Ellis NTH,
~ 406 ~ 
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
 

Flavell AJ et al. Pea (Pisum sativum L.) in the Genomic

Era. Journal of Agronomy 2012; 2:74-115.
28. Steel RGD, Torrie JH. Principals and procedures of
statistics: A biological approach. 2 nd Ed. McGraw Hill
Book Co. New York, 1980, 481
29. Swefy GH, E1-Arnaouty SA, Belal MH. The effect of
cotton late planting on population densities of sucking
insects and their associated predators in Giza region,
Egypt. Bulletin of Faculty of Agriculture University Cario
1996; 47:665-675.
30. Taufik MS, Awadallah KT, Shalaby FF. Biology of
Phytomyza orobanchiae Kalt. (Diptera: Agromyzidae).
Bulletin of Entomological Society of Egypt 1980; 60:63-
64.
31. van Emden HF. Host-plant resistance. In: van Emden, H.
& Harrington, R. (Eds.) Aphids as crop pests. CAB
International, 2007, 447-468.
32. Wilson DR. New approaches to understanding the growth
and yield of pea crops. Special Publication, Agronomy
Society New Zealand, 1987, 23-28.

~ 407 ~