Field Evaluation of the Insecticidal Activity of Some Plant Extracts again t Major Insect Pests of Mung bean (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) in Nigeria

Greener Trends in Plant Pathology and Entomology

Vol. 2(2), pp. 19-28, 2019

ISSN: 2672-4510

DOI Link: https://doi.org/10.15580/GTPPE.2019.2.070519127

https://gjournals.org/GTPPE

$Description: Description: C:\Users\user\Pictures\Journal Logos\GTPPE Logo - cropped.jpg$

Field Evaluation of the Insecticidal Activity of Some Plant Extracts against Major Insect Pests of Mung bean (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) in Nigeria

^*Emeasor, KC; Ngwobia, MU

Department of Plant Health Management, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture Umudike, P.M.B. 7267 Umuahia, Abia State Nigeria.

ARTICLE INFO

ABSTRACT

Article No.: 070519127

Type: Research

DOI: 10.15580/GTPPE.2019.2.070519127

A field trial was conducted at the Teaching and Research Farm of the Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike during the 2018 cropping season to evaluate efficacy of selected plant extracts from five plant species against insect pests of Mung bean (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek). The extracts tested were obtained from leaves of Vernonia amygdalina, Tephrosia vogelii, Alchornea cordifolia, Azadirachta indica, Moringa oleifera and untreated plot was introduced as the check (control) in the trial. The experimental design was a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with four replicates. Data were collected weekly on the insect population densities, yield and yield components. The results indicated that there was a significant P<0.05) reduction in the population of insects on the plots treated with plant extracts compared with the control plot. The results indicated that all the treatments were effective against major field insect pests of Mung bean (Aphis craccivora (Aphid), Ootheca mutabilis, (brown leaf beetle), Megalurothrips sjostedti (flower bud thrips), Maruca vitrata (legume pod borer), and pod sucking bugs (Nezara viridula “green vegetable bug”), (Riptortus seripes “large brown bean bug”), Anoplocnemis curvipes, Melanacanthus scutellaris (small brown bean bug). Plots treated with Tephrosia vogelii recorded high insecticidal properties when compared with other plant extracts. The plots treated with Tephrosia vogelii and Moringa oleifera recorded the highest grain yield of 406.0kg/ha and 289.5kg/ha in 2018 cropping season. All the plant extracts used exhibited insecticidal activity against insect pests of Mung bean in the field.

Submitted: 05/07/2019

Accepted: 30/07/2019

Published: 25/09/2019

*Corresponding Author

Emeasor, KC

E-mail: kingsleychidiemeasor@ yahoo.com

Keywords: Plant extracts; Insecticides; Insect pests; Mung bean

Peer Review Link: https://gjournals.org/GTPPE/peer-review/2019/070519127.pdf

INTRODUCTION

Mung bean (Vigna radiata ) (L) Wilczek belongs to the family Fabaceae. The genus Vigna has been broadened to include about 150 species but only twenty-two species are native to India (Pochill and Vander, 1995) where they are grown in large numbers and are often grouped under distinct varieties and sub-species. The annual world production area of Mung bean is about 5.5 million ha of which about 90% is confined to Asia (Lambrides and Godwin, 2007). Mung bean is grown on more than 6million ha worldwide (about 8.5% of global pulse area). India is the leading producer of Mung bean with 65% of the world average and 54% of the global Mung bean production (Lambrides and Godwin, 2007; http://avrdc.org/intl.mungbean-network, 2019). A minimum intake of pulse by a human should be 80.0g per day (FAO, 1999). It is an important source of protein and several essential micronutrients. It contains 24.5% protein and 59.9% carbohydrate, 75mg calcium, 8.5mg iron and 49mg β-carotine per 100g of grains (Bakrr et al., 2004). Among pulses, mung bean is favoured for children and the elderly people because of its easy digestibility and low production of flatulence. It is drought tolerant, grown twice a year and fits well in our crop rotation program. Production of Mung bean is however hampered by insect pest attack as it tends to increase yield loss. Insect pests that attack Mung bean can be distinguished based on their appearance in the field as it is related to the phenology of Mung bean plant. They are stem feeders, foliage feeders, pod feeders and storage pests. Mung bean is attacked by different species of insect pests especially sucking insect pests (aphid, jassids, white leaf hopper and white fly) are of the major importance (Islam et al., 2008). Aphids, jassids, whiteflies, pod borer, thrips, stemflies are pests of Mung bean which are vectors of yellow mosaic virus (MYMV) disease, which is the major cause of unsuccessful cultivation of Mung bean. These insect pests not only reduce the vigor of the plant by sucking the sap but transmit diseases and affect photosynthesis as well (Sachan et al., 1994). Although many options are available for the management of these insect pests, farmers mostly use synthetic chemicals because of their quick effect with or without knowing the ill effects of these chemicals; the recurrent use of chemical insecticides destabilizes the ecosystem and enhances the development of resistance to pest population (Asawalam and Ekemezie, 2018). Previously many research workers have also used and evaluated different synthetic chemicals against different insect pests of Mung bean. These conventional chemical control measures adequately control these pests but the indiscriminate use of these chemicals for the control of insect pests leads to phyto-toxicity, environmental pollution and insect resistance resulting in severe yield losses.

The objectives of this research were to identify the major insect pests associated with Mung bean, to evaluate the insecticidal potentials of selected plant extracts for the control of insect pests of Mung bean in the field and to evaluate the effect of these treatments on the yield and yield components of Mung bean.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Experimental Site

The experiment was carried out at the Teaching and Research Farm of the Department of Plant Health Management, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike (longitude 07⁰33E, latitude 05⁰29N, altitude 122m) with annual rainfall of 2177mm, 27% relative humidity, monthly and ambient temperature of 17⁰C to 36⁰C. The climate is a rainforest environment characterized by a long rainy season (7-8 months) and a short dry weather of (3 months) with light sandy soil.

Field Operation

The experimental site was cleared with machete and beds were made using hoe. Planting was done in the month of April 2018. The experimental bed size was 2.4m x 3m, with inter-bed space of 1.5m. Three Mung bean seeds per hole were sown at the spacing of 60cm x 30cm. Seeds that failed to germinate were supplied 4 days after planting, and thinning to one plant per stand took place 10 days after plant emergence. Each experimental plot consisted of the rows of 10 plants to give 40 plants per plot.

Planting Materials and Experimental Design

The variety of Mung bean used in this study is the bold seeded variety, VC6372 (48-8-1) of Mung bean obtained from Department of Agronomy, College of Crop and Soil Sciences. The treatments in (Table 1) were five plant materials. The experiment was laid out in a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with four replicates.

During the spray operations, a polythene sheet (1m high) was held and lowered to stop the drift of insecticide from each nursery bag. A control was set up in which there was no treatment.

Preparation of Plants Extracts and Application of Treatments

The leaves of Azadirachta indica, Moringa oleifera, Vernonia amygdalina, Alchornea cordifolia and Tephrosia vogelii were collected from Umudike environment.

Fresh and mature leaves of the botanicals were plucked and air-dried to a very low moisture level so as to make sure that the process of drying did not affect the potency of the active ingredients. Thereafter, the plant materials were milled with a milling machine so that the active ingredient in the leaves can be freely released in water. Afterward, 300g of the blended leaves from each botanical were soaked in 4 litres of distilled water and the mixtures were allowed to stand for 24 hours after which the mixtures were filtered using a muslin cloth to obtain a homogenous filtrate that was used for spraying. The five (5) botanicals were sprayed at weekly intervals with the aid of a hand sprayer.

Experimental evaluations of A. craccivora damage assessment

A. craccivora infestation was assessed by visual rating on a 10 point scale (Table 2) (Litsinger et al., 1977). Ten randomly selected Mung bean plants tagged in the two middle rows of each plot was used. Each stand was carefully inspected and the size of A. craccivora colony on each plant was rated, recorded and the mean of the 10 plants were calculated. Observations commenced from 26 days after planting (DAP), between 8.00 – 10.00am. Six weekly observations were made.

Table 2: Scale for rating Aphids infestation on Mung bean

Rating	Number of Aphids	Appearances
0	0	No infestation
1	1-4	A few individual Aphids
2	5-10	A few isolated colonies
3	11-30	Several small colonies
7	31-50	Large isolated colonies
9	> 50	Large continuous colonies

Source: Iitsinger et al., 1997

Experimental evaluations of Megalurothrips sjostedti damage assessment

Megalurothrips sjostedti damage to Mung bean was assessed between 8.00 – 10.00am beginning from 30 DAP. Ten Mung bean stands were randomly tagged from the two middle rows of each plot and each stand were inspected for damage and rated on a scale of 1-9 points (Table 3), based on M. sjostedti symptoms such as browning/drying of stipulus and leaves and bud abscissions. Mean for the 10 stands were calculated. Four observations were made at 6 days intervals.

Table 3: Scale for rating flower bud thrips infestation on Mung bean

Rating	Appearance
1	No browning/drying (that’s scaling) of stipules, leaf or flower buds, no bud abscission
3	initiation of browning of stipules and leaf or flower buds, no bud abscission
7	serious bud abscission accompanied by browning drying of stipules and buds, non-elongation of peduncles
9	very severe bud abscission, heavy browning drying of stipules and buds, distinct non-elongation of (most or all) peduncles

Source: Jackai and Singh, 1988

A second assessment of thrips was carried out at 45 DAP. At least 10 flowers were randomly picked from the two rows set aside for data collection. Also, the population of M. sjostedti in each flower was determined by counting when the flowers are opened.

Experimental evaluations of Maruca vitrata assessment

Damage to Mung bean pod by Maruca vitrata was determined in the field between 3-5pm beginning from 45 DAP at 5 days intervals. The presence of holes and larva on flowers was the Maruca damage index. Ten flowers were randomly selected from the two outer rows of each plot. Each flower was carefully open and inspected the spot for Maruca larva or flower damage. The mean for the 10 flowers were calculated. Four observations were made.

Table 4: Scale for rating Maruca vitrata damage to Mung bean

Pod Load (PL)		Pod Damage (PD)
Rating	Degree of podding	Rating	%
1	Mot most ( < 60% peduncles bare (that’s no pods)	1 2	6 – 10 11 – 20
2	31 – 50% peduncles bare	3	21 – 30
5	16 – 30% peduncles bare	4 5 6	31 – 40 41 – 50 51 – 60
7	up to 15% peduncles bare	7 8	61 – 70 71 – 80
9	occasional bare peduncles	9	81 – 90

Source: Jackai and Singh 1988

Assessment of pod sucking bugs (PSB) infestation

Population of pod sucking bug on Mung bean stands in the two middle rows was determined by counting weekly between 8.00 – 10.00am at 45 days after planting. Since all PSBs do similar damage, all will be counted together. Four observations were made (Egho and Emosairue 2010).

Yield assessment

Pod load and pod damage: At 60 DAP

When the pods are filled, mature but still green, the pod load and pod damage were assessed in the field by rating on a scale of 1-9 points (Jackai and Singh, 1988) from the two rows of each plot. Maruca damage index used where holes and presence of frass on pods and sticking of pods.

Number of pods per plant

At 60 DAP numbers of pods per plant were assessed from the 2 middle rows of each plot by visual counting. The numbers of pods were divided by the number of Mung bean plants and the value recorded.

Grain yield

At 65 to 70 DAP the pods were harvested for hands into black medium sized polythene bags. They were sun dried for 2 weeks and then shelled with hands. Then grains were weighed with Triple Beam Balance (Haus Model) and the weight recorded. The yield per plot was extrapolated to Kg ha^-1. One hundred (100) seeds were handpicked from the grains in bags (plot) weighed and the weight recorded (Egho and Emosairue, 2010).

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

All the collected data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) and significant means were separated by Fisher’s Least Significance Difference Test (LSD) at 5% level of probability.

Field layout of the experiment

Replicate I	Replicate II	Repijcate III	Replicate IV
Tephrosia vogeli	Moriger oleifera	Tephrosia vogeli	Moriger oleifera	Trt. I

Moriger oleifera	Alchornea cordifolia	Azadirachta indica	Azadirachta indica	Trt. II

Azadirachta indica	Vernonia amygdalina	Vernonia amygdalina	Vernonia amygdalina	Trt. III

Vernonia amygdalina	Azadirachta indica	Moringer oleifera	Control	Trt. IV

Control	Tephrosia vogelii	Control	Alchornea cordifolia	Trt. V

Alchornea cordifolia	Control	Alchornea cordifolia	Tephrosia vogelii	Trt. VI

Table 5: Effect of treatments on incidence of aphid on Mung bean

Treatment	Aphids infestation
Treatment	4 WAP	5 WAP	6 WAP	7 WAP	8 WAP	9 WAP
Tephrosia vogelii	4.38	4.38	2.52	1.05	1.02	0.75
Moringa oleifera	9.35	9.0	5.15	4.75	3.47	1.3
Azadirachta indica	10.28	9.55	8.4	5.8	2.07	2.4
Vernonia amygdalina	12.78	6.75	8.35	5.6	3.72	3.28
Alchornea cordifolia	6.83	12.18	10	8.77	5.42	3.93
Control	16.12	16.43	17.23	17.62	26.98	38.45
Mean	9.95	9.71	8.61	7.27	7.12	8.35
LSD _(0.05)	4.874	4.85	4.451	4.404	3.889	3.272
CV (%)	2.7	5.2	10.1	10.5	20.6	12

Table 6: Effect of plant extract on the population of Ootheca mutabilis in the field

Treatment	*Ootheca* *mutabilis* count
Treatment	1WAP	2WAP	3WAP	4WAP	5WAP	6WAP	7WAP
Tephrosia vogelii	4.0	3.3	3.8	2.8	2.7	1.9	1.4
Moringa oleifera	5.7	5.4	5.1	4.4	4.4	3.5	3.2
Azadirachta indica	5.6	4.5	4.7	3.9	3.9	3.1	2.7
Vernonia amygdalina	9.2	8.4	5.0	3.6	3.6	2.8	1.6
Alchornea cordifolia	5.3	4.9	6.2	5.6	5.6	4.9	3.2
Control	10.4	12.5	13.6	16.8	16.8	19.0	18.0
Mean	6.7	6.5	6.4	6.2	6.2	5.9	5.0
LSD _(0.05)	2.2	1.5	1.3	2.0	2.0	2.9	5.5
CV (%)	3.5	7.2	5.1	10.6	11.1	16.8	18.0

Table 7: Effect of plant-extracts on the population of flower bud Thrips on Vigna radiata in the Field

	Population of Flower bud Thrips at
Treatment		4 WAP	5 WAP	6 WAP	7 WAP
Tephrosia vogelii		7.8	6.3	4.1	1.6
Moringa oleifera		10.1	8.2	6.2	3.1
Azadirachta indica		11.1	7.6	5.1	3.0
Vernonia amygdalina		10.8	10.3	7.1	3.9
Alchornea cordifolia		12.6	11.0	8.2	4.9
Control		16.2	16.9	17.6	22.8
Mean		11.4	10.0	8.1	6.5
LSD _(0.05)		3.7	3.1	2.4	4.4
CV (%)		15.1	14.8	11.3	8.6

Table 8: Effect of plant extracts on the population of legume pod borer on Vigna radiata in the field

	Population of Legume pod borer at
Treatment			6 WAP		7 WAP		8 WAP		9 WAP
Tephrosia vogelii		3.8		2.8		1.1		1.3
Moringa oleifera		10.0		5.2		2.3		0.5
Azadirachta indica		3.7		2.1		1.0		1.6
Vernonia amygdalina		7.6		4.1		2.3		2.2
Alchornea cordifolia		12.8		7.4		4.5		0.5
Control		14.1		17.8		19.5		21.6
Mean		8.7		6.6		5.1		4.6
LSD _(0.05)		4.0		2.2		2.1		1.3
CV (%)		21.9		17.4		8.1		5.8

Effects of plant extract on the population of pod sucking bug attacking Mung bean (Vigna radiata) in the field

Result in Table 9 revealed that the plant extracts significantly (P<0.05) reduced pod sucking bug infestation in the field. From general point of observation, all the tested plant-derived insecticide were effective against pod sucking bugs on Mung bean compared to the control plot (16.98) which is the untreated plot. At 4 WAP and 5 WAP, the infestation level of pod sucking bug was very high on the plots treated with V. amygdalina, A. cordifolia and A. indica (12.78, 12.18 and 10.28) respectively. Reduction in the population of pod sucking bug was observed at 7WAP to 9WAP. However, T. vogelii leaf aqueous extract was most effective against pod sucking bug at 9WAP (0.75) which was not significantly different (P>0.05) from the plots treated with M. oleifera (1.3), A. indica (2.4), V. amygladina (3.28) and A. cordifolia (3.93). However, the results also show that the control plot had the highest level of infestation and reduction of pod sucking bug was lowest, hence the plots treated with plant derived insecticide were significantly different (P<0.05) from the control plot.

Table 9: Effect of plant extract on the population of pod sucking bug attacking Mung bean (Vigna radiata) in the field

Pod sucking bug
Treatment	6 WAP	7 WAP	8 WAP	9 WAP
Tephrosia vogelii	8.65	6.22	3.8	2.13
Moringa oleifera	11.25	10.75	5.32	5.5
Azadirachta indica	8.3	7.35	4.72	4.43
Vernonia amygdalina	11.38	11.25	6.22	6.3
Alchornea cordifolia	11.77	11.2	6.42	7.68
Control	13.02	17.47	13.73	16.98
Mean	10.73	10.71	6.7	7.17
LSD _(0.05)	2.318	2.559	2.058	1.987
CV (%)	6.5	6.5	13	13

Table 10: Effects of plant extract on the yield and yield related traits of mungbean (Vigna radiata)

Treatment	Number of pod per plant	Pod yield per plant (g)	Grain yield per plant (g)	Grain yield per hectare (kg/ha)
Tephrosia vogelii	27.2	345.3	243.6	406.0
Moringa oleifera	17.4	234.4	173.7	289.5
Azadirachta indica	15.0	207.2	133.1	221.8
Vernonia amygdalina	7.5	132.5	78.4	130.6
Alchornea cordifolia	9.3	115.7	83.4	138.9
Control	7.2	176.7	60.3	100.4
Mean	13.9	202.0	128.7	214.5
LSD _(0.05)	10.3	111.6	74.5	124.2
CV (%)	24.5	23.3	11.3	11.3

DISCUSSION

This research findings support the earlier reports of Russel and Lane (1993) and Emimal (2010) that plant extracts consist of complex mixtures of bioactive constituents and plant metabolites which produce toxic effects if ingested by the insect pests and leading to rejection of host plants. Also these bioactive constituents and metabolites act as anti-feedants which inhibit oviposition, disturb insect growth and development.

Findings from the present study revealed that all the plant derived insecticides significantly reduced the population of Megalurothrips sjostedti, thereby reducing their infestation and enhanced plant growth and yield. These findings agree with the report of Asawalam (2006) and Isman (2008) who reported the insecticidal activities of plant extracts in suppressing the populations of Megalurothrips sjostedti on Mung bean.

The result of the present study also agree with the findings of Hossain et al., (2010), who reported that the application of neem leaf reduced the population of sucking insects of Mung bean.

The effectiveness of T. vogelii and M. oleifera in controlling insect pests of Mung bean in this study agree with the finding of Alao and Timothy (2015) that evaluated the efficacy of T. vogelii and M. oleifera extracts at three concentrations (5, 10 and 20% v/v) against insect pests of water melon. It was reported that M. oleifera extracts had 62% reduction of Phyllotreta cruciferae compared with T. vogelii that had 45% control. However, T. vogelii extract had 64% control of Diabrotica undecimpunctata and Bactrocera curcubitea but M. oleifera extract had 50% control.

The results are in agreement with that of Asawalam and Osondu (2013) and Ibekwe and Emosairue (2011) who reported reduced pod damage on cowpea treated with plant extract. The reduced pod damage with the plant extract could be because of the ability of the plant extracts to penetrate tissues of the insects, thereby disrupting the cell cycle (Isman, 2008).

Rouf and Sardar (2011) reported a significant reduction in pod damage with significantly higher yield of Country bean treated with crude seed extract of neem. This result also agree with that of Asawalam and Constance, (2018) who reported that plant extracts from different parts of A. indica, Allium sativum, C. longa, M. paradisiacal, O. gratissimum, V. amygdalina and X. aethiopica have insecticidal activity against insect pests of Mung bean. This result also agrees with Emeasor et al., (2017). Who reported that the plant derived insecticides used for the control of P. uniforma, and P. sjostedti in okra field were effective and significantly reduced the population of the insect pests.

This result also agree with the findings of Ogunjobi and Ofuya (2007), Adesina and Idoko (2013) and Adesina and Afolabi (2014), who reported in their various works that okra plants treated with plant extracts recorded higher yield compared to the untreated okra plants.

CONCLUSION

Insect pest infestation is one of the factors militating against effective and meaningful cultivation of Mung bean. The results from this study showed that the major insect pests identified in Mung bean cultivation in Umudike, Nigeria were Aphis craccivora, Ootheca mutabilis, Megalurothrips sjostedti, Maruca vitrata and the pod sucking bugs. It also showed that the treatments significantly (P<0.05) lowered insect populations as recorded in the plots treated with the plant extracts (Vernonia amygdalina, Tephrosia vogelii, Alchornea cordifolia, Azadirachta indica, Moringa oleifera) when compared with the control. The study showed that yield and yield parameters were significantly higher in treated plots than in the control plots. The findings demonstrated that the application of plant-derived insecticides significantly reduced the population of the major field insect pests of Mung bean, thereby minimizing leaf surface area damage, pod damage and consequently increased yield compared to the untreated Mung bean plants. The plant materials reduced population of insects mainly due to contact toxicity and action upon the nervous system of the insects. Based on the results of this study, it is recommended that concerted efforts should be made towards the enhancement of extraction and formulation of the active ingredients of these botanicals at the best dosages. It is also recommended that T. vogelii, A. indica, A. cordifolia, M. oleifera and V. amygdalina be widely adopted low-input and organic farmers for the control of insect pests of Mung bean; since these plant-derived insecticides are readily available have low phyto- and mammalian toxicities.

REFERENCES

Adesina, J.M. and Afolabi, L.A. (2014). Comparative bio-efficacy of aqueous extracts of Loncocarpus cyanenscens and Trema orientalis against flea beetle (Podagrica spp.) (Coleoptera: Chysomelidae) infestation and yield of okra. Int. J. Horticulture. 4(2):4-9.

Adesina, J.M. and Idoko, J.E. (2013). Field evaluation of insecticidal activity of Demopodium abrodiodes and Spondias mombin crude extract for the control of okra flea beetle Podagrica uniforma (Coleoptera:Chrysonelidae) RSJ. Agric. Sci. 4(1):37-39.

Alao, F.O. and Timothy A.A. (2015). “Comparative efficacy of Tephrosia vogelii and Moringa oleifera against insect pests of WAP rmelon (Citullus lanatus thumb)’ International Letters of Natural Sciences 35, 71-78.

Asawalam, E.F. (2006). ‘Effect of four plant extracts on the infestation of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L). walp by MegaluroThrips sjostedti (frybom) and Mylabris postulate Thunberg; Global Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences,12(1), 19-21.

Asawalam, E.F. and Constance, E.E. (2018). “Control of field insect pests of mungbean (Vigna radiata. Wilczek) using some plant extracts in Umudike Nigeria, Journal of Medicinal Plants for Economic Development 2(1) a27.

Asawalam, E.F. and Ekemezie, C. (2018). Control of field insect pests of mungbean Vigna radiata L. Wilczek using some plant extracts in Umudike Nigeria. Journal of medicinal plants for Economic development 2(1) 1-5.

Asawalam, E.F. and Osondu, H. (2013). Control of field insect pests of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp) in Umudike Nigeria using medicinal plant extracts, Journal of Sustainable Agriculture and the Environment 14, 31-37.

Bakr, M. A, Afzal, M. A, Hamid, A., Haque, M. M.; and Aktar, M. S. (2004). Black gram in Bangladesh lentil Blackgram and mung bean development pilot project, publication no. 25, pulses research centre, BARI Gazipur, bop.

Emeasor, K.C.; Uwalaka, O.A. and Nnaji, M.C. (2017). Use of Plant derived insecticides for the control of Podagrica spp. of Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) in South Eastern Nigerian. International Journal of Advance Agricultural Research 5: 95-100

Emimal, V.E. (2010). Pest infestation on the biochemical modulation of Adhatoda vasica. Journal of Biopesticides, 3(2):413-419.

FAO. (1999), food and agriculture organization. Production year book. Rome, Italy.pp.45-48.

Hossain, M. A. I.; K. M. S and Mondal, A. T. M. A. I. (2000). Effect of sowing date on lentil Aphid,Aphis craccivora Koch infestation and yield contributing characters of lenti (Lens culinatis Medik). Journal of Biological Science. 8:115-117.

Ibekwe, H.N., and Emosaime, S.O. (2011). Evaluation of neem seed kernel extracts for the control of insect pests of mungbean (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) in Okigwe South Eastern Nigeria; Nigerian Journal of Horticultural Science 16, 56-60

Isman, M.B. (2008). Botanical insecticides: for richer for poor; pest management science 64 (1), 8-11.

Lambrides, C.J. and I. Godwin, (2007). Mung bean in Genome mapping and molecular breeding in plants 3: pulses, sugar and tuber crops kole. C. (pd). Spinger, Berlini pp:60-69.

Ogunjobi, S.O. and Ofuya, T.I. (2007). Field comparism of aqueous neem seed extract and a synthetic insecticides for reducing post flowering insect attack in cowpea Vigna unguculata (L) walp in a South Guinea Savannah of Nigeria. In proceeding of the Akure-Humbioldt Kellog/3^rd. SAAT annual conference: medicinal plants in Agriculture. The Nigerian experience edited: Onibi G.E. Agele S.O. Adekunle VAJ. Olufayo M.O pp. 60-63.

Pochill, R. M. and L. J. G. Vander Maessan (1995). Taxonomy of grain legume pp3-36. In R.J. summer field and E.H Roberts (eds) grain legume crops, Collins London.

Rouf, R.M.A and Sardar, M.A. (2011). “Effect of crude seed extract of some indigenous plants for the control of legume pod borer (Maruca vitrata F.) on country benn”, Bangladesh. Journal of Agricultural Research 36(1), 41-50.

Russel, G.B. and Lane, G.A (1993). Insect antifeedants a new Zealand Plant Protection Conference. Pp. 079-186.

Sachen, J. N.; Yadava, C. P.; Ahmad, R.; and katti, G. (1994), insect pest management in pulse crop. In: Dhalivaal, G.S. and Arora R. (eds) Agricultural insect pest management. Common wealth publishers, New Delbi, India. Pp. 45-48.

Singh D. P. (2005). Green gram (Vigna radiata and black gram (V. mungo) improvement India-past, present and future prospects. Indian J Agric sci. 75: 243- 250.

Scientific Name	Common name	Family	Part used
Alchornea cordifolia	Christmas bush tree	Euphorbiaceae	Leaves
Azadirachta indica	Neem	Meliaccae	Leaves
Tephrosia vogelii	Fish poison-bean	Fabaceae	Leaves
Moringa oleifera	Moringa (Drumstick tree)	Moringaceae	Leaves
Vernonia amygdalina	Bitter leaf (Onugbu)	Asteraceae	Leaves