Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies 2018; 6(6): 208-210
E-ISSN: 2320-7078
P-ISSN: 2349-6800
JEZS 2018; 6(6): 208-210
© 2018 JEZS
Received: 24-09-2018
Accepted: 26-10-2018
Vivek Kumar Sandilya
Section of Genetics and Plant
Breeding, RMD Collage of
Agriculture and Research
Station, IGKV, Ambikapur,
Chhattisgarh, India
Prity Anant
Section of Entomology, RMD
Collage of Agriculture and
Research Station, IGKV,
Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh, India
GP Painkra
Section of Entomology, RMD
Collage of Agriculture and
Research Station, IGKV,
Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh, India
KL Painkra
Section of Entomology, RMD
Collage of Agriculture and
Research Station, IGKV,
Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh, India
JK Tiwari
Section of Genetics and Plant
Breeding, RMD Collage of
Agriculture and Research
Station, IGKV, Ambikapur,
Chhattisgarh, India
Correspondence
JK Tiwari
Section of Genetics and Plant
Breeding, RMD Collage of
Agriculture and Research
Station, IGKV, Ambikapur,
Chhattisgarh, India
Screening of spine gourd genotypes against fruit
fly (Bactrocera cucurbitae) under field condition
for Chhattisgarh
Vivek Kumar Sandilya, Prity Anant, GP Painkra, KL Painkra and JK
Tiwari
Abstract
Spine gourd is nutritious cucurbits with medicinal properties and due to these specialties in this potential
vegetable crop it has high demand in local and national market. The objective of present investigation
was to screen different crosses of spine gourd against fruit fly (Bactrocera cucurbitae). The experimental
material comprised of different 21 crosses of the spine gourd. The result revealed that none of the cross
showed immune reaction against fruit fly. Whereas, crosses of AMBIKA13-5 x IK-1 and AMBIKA13-6
x IK-1 were found highly resistance, crosses RMDSG-4 x IK-1, AMBIKA13-6 x AJSG-2 and NDM-2 x
IK-1 showed resistance and crosses AJSG-1 x CK-2, RMDSG-3 x IK-1, RMDSG-3 x AJSG-2 and
NDM-5 x AJSG-2 were found resistance towards fruit fly. These crosses may be used for the
development of resistant cultivar as well as identification of resistance gene for fruit fly in spine gourd.
Keywords: Fruit fly, Genotype, Resistance and Spine gourd
1. Introduction
Spine gourd (Momordica dioica Roxb.) is one of the most important commercial cucurbit crop
belong to the family cucurbitaceous. It is widely distributed in India, Bangladesh, China,
Malaysia, Nepal, Myanmar, Pakistan and Srilanka [8]. It is widely distributed and adopted in
different soil and climatic condition of India viz., Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh,
Utter Pradesh, Orissa, Assam, West Bengal, Jharkhand, Bihar and Andhra Pradesh [2]. It
contains high amount of carotene 162 μg/100 g of edible portion, It is the cheapest source of
vitamins and minerals nutritive value of kakrol per 100 g of edible part moisture 84.1%,
energy 52 Kcal, protein 3.1 g, fat 1.0 g, minerals 1.1 g, fiber 3.0 g, carbohydrate 7.7 g, calcium
33 mg, phosphorus 42 mg and iron 4.6 mg. [5, 3]. It possesses several medicinal and curative
properties like decoction of leaves reduces fever, tuberous roots help in relieving headache,
sweating, stone formation, migraine, while fruit is quite helpful in controlling diabetes and
blood pressure. Fruits are also used for treating ulcers, piles, sores and obstruction of the liver
and spleen and are good for those suffering from cough and other digestible problems. The
unripe fruits act as an appetizer and astringent. The ripe fruits are sweet, oily and laxative. The
seeds are used for chest problems and stimulate urinary discharge. It has a prominent position
among the cucurbitaceous vegetables owing to its good neutraceutical value, high keeping
quality, ability to withstand long distance transportation, high market price and good export
potential [9]. For increasing the productivity of such important potential crop there in the need
to develop high yielding as well as resistant varieties. The present low level of production may
be attributed to lack of grower knowledge [6]. The major constraints to the sustainable
increased productivity of spine gourd are incidence of insect pest. Spine gourd is severally
affected by different insect pest, among them fruit fly is the most devastating pest causing
significant damage. Keeping in mind the above facts, present investigation was carried out to
screen different crosses against fruit fly (Bactrocera cucurbitae).
2. Materials and methods
Twenty one crosses of spine gourd were used for the carryout present investigation Table 1.
All the crosses were grown in Randomized Block design with three replication during the two
consequently wet seasons (July-October) 2016 and 2017 at Rajmohini Devi College of
Agriculture and Research Station. Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh. Normal cultivation practices were
~ 208 ~
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

fallowed i.e. pits of 30 x 30 x 30 cm3 were prepared in each Periodical observations of fruit fly incidence on spine gourd,
plot with a spacing of 2m x 2m. The seed was planted in revealed that the maggot of fruit fly recorded the first time in
earthen pots containing a 2:1:1 mixture of soil sand and mid-October and remain active up to last week of November,
decomposed cow dung. They began to sprouted 10-15 days whereas, peak activity of the fruit fly population was noticed
after potting. The male plants were planted in the field at 8:1 during the fourth week of October. The present finding is in
ratio (female: male). The plants were supported by telephone accordance with [1] who recorded the activity of melon fruit
wiring system. When the plants were about 2.5 m. high, they fly during first week of August, however, the highest
were allowed to climb on rope net hanged vertically up to incidence was noticed during the middle of October and then
2.5m from the soil surface. infestation started declining at Kalyani, West Bengal during
Kharif. Present findings are similar to the results of [4] were
Screening technique studied incidences of melon fruit fly on cucurbits and found
The observations were recorded based on infested and healthy the population of melon fly fluctuated throughout the year
fruits from the randomly selected plant of each crosses and with two peak population during June-September.
fruit infestation percentage (%) were calculated by formula
given below and it is further classified in to 0-5 scale [7]. Table 1: The experimental material used for screening of fruit fly
infestation in spine gourd
SN. Crosses SN. Crosses
1 AJSG-1 x IK-1 12 AMBIKA13-5 x AJSG-2
2 AJSG-1 x CK-2 13 AMBIKA13-6 x IK-1
3 AJSG-1 x AJSG-2 14 AMBIKA13-6 x CK-2
3. Results and Discussion 4 RMDSG-3 x IK-1 15 AMBIKA13-6 x AJSG-2
Fruit fly (Bactrocera cucurbitae) is considered as the most 5 RMDSG-3 x CK-2 16 NDM-2 x IK-1
6 RMDSG-3 xAJSG-2 17 NDM-2 x CK-2
serious insect of spine gourd and other cucurbitaceous crop. It
7 RMDSG-4 x IK-1 18 NDM-2 x AJSG-2
is especially divesting during the rainy season. Data on
8 RMDSG-4 x CK-2 19 NDM-5 x IK-1
screened crosses were presented in table 3. It indicates that 9 RMDSG-4 x AJSG-2 20 NDM-5 x CK-2
none of the crosses were found immune against spine gourd 10 AMBIKA13-5 x IK-1 21 NDM-5 x AJSG-2
fruit fly. Whereas, crosses of AMBIKA13-5 x IK-1 and 11 AMBIKA13-5 x CK-2
AMBIKA13-6 x IK-1 were found in highly resistance, crosses
RMDSG-4 x IK-1, AMBIKA13-6 x AJSG-2 and NDM-2 x Table 2: Standard rating system for fruit fly (Nath, 1966)
IK-1 showed resistance and crosses AJSG-1 x CK-2,
RMDSG-3 x IK-1, RMDSG-3 x AJSG-2 and NDM-5 x Source Fruit damage (%) Rating ( reaction )
AJSG-2 were found resistance towards fruit fly. Five crosses 0 No damage Immune
i.e. RMDSG-3xCK-2, AJSG-1 x IK-1, RMDSG-4 x AJSG-2, 1 1-10% fruit damage Highly resistance
AMBIKA13-6 x CK-2 and NDM-5 x IK-1were found 3 11-20% fruit damage Resistance
susceptible and crosses AJSG-1 x AJSG-2, RMSG-4 x IK-1, 5 21-50%fruit damage Moderately
AMBIKA13-5 x CK-2, NDM-2 x CK-2, AMBIKA13-5 x 7 51-75%fruit damage Susceptible
AJSG-2, NDM-2 x AJSG-2 and NDM-5 x CK-2 were found 9 76-100%fruit damage Highly susceptible
highly susceptible against fruit fly.

Table 3: Screening of spine gourd genotypes against fruit fly (Bactrocera cucurbitae) under field condition (Kharif 2016-17and 2017-18).
% fruit Number of
Scale Reaction Name of genotype
damage genotype
1 0 Immune 0 -
2 1-10 Highly resistance 2 AMBIKA13-5 x IK-1 and AMBIKA13-6 x IK-1
3 11-20 Resistance 3 RMDSG-4 x IK-1, AMBIKA13-6 x AJSG-2 and NDM-2 x IK-1
4 21-50 Moderately 4 AJSG-1 x CK-2, RMDSG-3 x IK-1, RMDSG-3 x AJSG-2 and NDM-5 x AJSG-2
RMDSG-3xCK-2, AJSG-1 x IK-1, RMDSG-4 x AJSG-2, AMBIKA13-6 x CK-2
5 51-75 Susceptible 5
and NDM-5 x IK-1
AJSG-1 x AJSG-2, RMSG-4 x IK-1, AMBIKA13-5 x CK-2, NDM-2 x CK-2,
6 76-100 Highly Susceptible 7
AMBIKA13-5 x AJSG-2, NDM-2 x AJSG-2 and NDM-5 x CK-2

4. Conclusion and ICAR- AICRN on potential crops for providing necessary

Fruit fly is an important insect of Spine gourd looking to their
infestation which varies with different fruit picking.
Morphological features of plant are one of the important
aspects to develop resistance cultivar against fruit fly.
Morphological characterization need to be done which leads
to find important traits and gene associated with resistance
traits. These crosses may be used for the development of
resistant cultivar as well as identification of resistance gene
for fruit fly in spine gourd.
5. Acknowledgements
The authors are thankful to authorities of the I.G.K.V. Raipur
~ 209 ~
faculties and support for conductivity research work.
6. References
1. Banerji R, Sahoo SK, Das SK, Jha S. Studies on
incidence of melon fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coq.) in
relation to weather parameters on bitter gourd in new
alluvial zone of West Bengal. Journal of Entomological
Research. 2005; 29:179-82.
2. Basumatary P, Bora GC, Kalita UC, Saikia L, Deka NC.
Variability and correlation studies in spine guard
(Momordica dioica Roxb.) Journal of Agriculture and
Food Science. 2014; (2):77-81.
Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

3. Bhuiya MRH, Habib AKMA, Rashid MM. Content and

loss of vitamin C in vegetables during storage and
cooking, Bangladesh Horticulture. 1977; (5):1-6.
4. Chaudhary FK, Patel GM. Effect of abiotic factors on
population fluctuation of melon fly, Bactrocera
cucurbitae Coquillett. Life Science Leaflets, 2012, 365-
369.
5. Gopalan C, Rama Sastri BV, Balalsubramanian SC.
Nutritive value of Indian foods, 2nd ed. Hyderabad.
National Institute of Nutrition, IGMR, 1989.
6. John R, Ahmad P, Gadgil K, Sharma S. Antioxidative
response of Lemna polyrhiza L. to cadmium stress.
Journal of Environmental Biology. 2007; (28):583-589.
7. Nath P. Varietal resistance of gourds to the fruit fly.
Indian Journal of Horticulture. 1966; (23):69-78.
8. Rakh MS, Chaudhari SR. Literature survey of plant
Momordica dioica Roxb. Wild. An update. International
Journal of Pharmaceutical Research Development, 2010,
1-8.
9. Rasul MG. Study on parthenocarpy and genetic
divergence in kakrol (Momordica dioica Roxb.). Ph.D.
Thesis. Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan, 2003.

~ 210 ~