1,720,960 research outputs found

    Evaluation of Insecticides on Management of some Sucking Insect Pests in Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) in West Shoa Zone, Toke kutaye District, Ethiopia

    No full text
    Tomato plants (Lycopersicon esculentum L.), which belongs to family Solanaceae, is one of the most popular and cost-effective vegetables for fresh consumption and processing. Certain sucking insects viz., thrips, whiteflies and aphids cause severe damage to crop by transmitting virus disease rather than direct feeding, particularly to the tomato plants. The present study was carried out in RCBD with four replications in open farmer’s fields by irrigation water for the period from October to March 2018/2019 for two consecutive years. Two new insecticides Sivanto Energy EC 85 and Delta 2.5 E.C with the doses of the former and later, 800, 1000 & 1200ml-1ha and 350, 400 & 450ml-1ha respectively; and Diazinon 60 E.C at 1000ml-1ha were tested for their efficacy against sucking insect pests on tomatoes. Percent efficacy recorded after 48 hours of each spray in the fields was significantly affected by the dose applied. The percent efficacy obtained by Sivanto Energy EC 85 and Delta 2.5% E.C at the highest doses proved to be the most effective and gave better efficacy against whiteflies, thrips and aphids. Therefore, both insecticides can be used for the management of sucking pests (whitefly, thrips, and aphid) on tomato crops in the field

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore