Main Article Content


A study was conducted to know the influence of physical and biochemical parameters on development of the pulse bruchid in green gram at RARS, Lam during 2017-18. The physical parameters of seed viz., colour, shape, surface texture, seed length and width, seed coat hardness and 100 seed weight and biochemical parameters such as protein content, phenol content and total sugars were evaluated for twelve genotypes of greengram. The greengram genotypes with smooth texture, oblong or globose shape and light coloured seed might be less preferred by the pulse bruchid for egg laying. The data showed that genotypes having low sugar and protein contents and high phenol content were resistant to pulse bruchid. The correlation studies showed that biological parameters i.e., number of eggs, adult emergence and growth index had significant positive association with protein content, sugar content, moisture content and electrical conductivity and negative correlation phenol content, 100 seed weight and seed coat hardness. In contrast, mean development period had negative association with protein content, sugar content, electrical conductivity and moisture content and positive correlation with phenol content, 100 seed weight and seed coat hardness. Multiple linear regression studies revealed that all the physical and biochemical properties of seed together were contributing to a large and significant variation (65 to 87 %) in growth parameters of pulse bruchid.


Bruchid Greengram Phenols Proteins Seed coat thickness

Article Details

Author Biography

Kavitha G, Department of Seed Science and Technology Advanced Post Graduate Centre, Lam, Guntur- Andhra Pradesh

Seed technology

How to Cite
G, K., MS, M., Reddy , K. B. ., Reni, Y. P. . ., & Radhika, K. . . (2021). Physicochemical basis of resistance in certain green gram genotypes to pulse bruchid, Calloso bruchus chinensis (L.). Environment Conservation Journal, 22(3), 231–242.


  1. Amrit, L., Katiyar P. K.,Natarajan, S. &Sripathy K. V. (2016). Relationship among some seed characters, laboratory germination and field emergence in chickpea (Cicerarietinum L.) genotypes differing in testacolour.Journal of Food Legumes. 29(1): 29-32.
  2. Bhadauria, N.S &Jakhmola, S.S. (2006).Effect of intensity of infestation caused by pulse beetle on extent of losses and germination of seeds in different pulses.Indian Journal of Entomology. 68 (1): 92-94.
  3. Bhise, H. T., Desai, B. B &Chavan, U. D. (1996).Assessment of some biochemical parameters responsible for shoot fly resistance in sorghum. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities. 21 (1): 127-129.
  4. Chakraborthy, J. N., Chaudhuri, N.&Senapathi, S. K.(2004). Correlation between seed parameters and relative susceptibility of mungbean genotypes to Callosobruchuschinensis(L) during storage. Annals of plant Protection Sciences.12: 48-50.
  5. Chakraborthy, S.&Mondal, P.(2016). Physico chemical parameters of pulses affecting the bruchid (Callosobruchuschinensis(L).) infestation.Asian Journal of Science and Technology. 7 (3): 2554-2560.
  6. Chandel,B. S.&Bhadauria, D. S. (2015). Impact of bio chemical parameters on pigeon pea varieties against egg laying, fecundity and viability of pulse beetle, Callosobruchuschinensis(L).Journal of Entomological and Zoological studies. 3: 160-165.
  7. Choudhary, S., Bhargava, M.C., Yadav, M.K., Jat, G.C and Choudhary, M.D. (2017).Qualitative losses in different varieties of lentil caused by the infestation of Callosobruchuschinensis.International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences.6 (6): 2044-2048. DOI:
  8. Dubois, M., Gilles, K.A., Hamilton, J.K., Robers, P.A &Smith, F. (1956).Estimation of total soluble sugars.Journal of Analytical Chemistry.26: 350. DOI:
  9. Dabi, R.K., Gupta, H.C & Sharma, S.K. (1979).Relative susceptibility of some cowpea varieties to pulse beetle, Callosobruchusmaculatus F. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 49 (1): 48-50.
  10. Fletcher, T.B &Ghosh, C.C. (2002).Stored grain pests. Rep. Proc. 3rd Ent. Meeting, Pusa, New Delhi, pp. 712-716.
  11. Ghosal, T.K., Dutta, S., Senapati, S.K & Deb, D.C. (2004). Role of phenol contents in legume seed and its effect on the biology of Calloso bruchus chinensis. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences. 12 (2): 425-475.
  12. Jat N. R, Rana B. S.&Jat S. K. (2013). Estimation of losses due to pulse beetle in chickpea.The biosacn.8: 861-863.
  13. Lattanzio, V., Terzano, R., Cicco, N., Cardinali, A., Di Venere, D &Linsalata, V. (2005). Seed coat tannins and bruchid resistance in stored cowpea seeds.Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. 85: 839-846. DOI:
  14. Lowry, A.H., Rosebrough, N.J., Farr, A.L & Randall, R.J. (1951).Protein measurement with folin-phenol reagent.Journal of Biological Chemistry. 193: 265-275. DOI:
  15. Neog P & Singh H. K. (2011). Correlation of seed characters of pulses with host suitability and preference of Callosobruchuschinensis(L). Indian Journal of Entomology. 73: 365-370.
  16. Pankaj, N & Singh, H.K. (2011).Correlation of seed characters of pulses with host suitability and preference of C. chinensis (L.).Indian Journal of Entomology. 73: 365-370.
  17. Panse, V.G &Sukhatme, P.V. (1985).Statistical Methods for Agricultural Workers.Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi.205-210.
  18. Parameshwarappa, S.G., Deshpande, V.K &Salimath, P.M. (2007).Studies on comparative response and seed quality attributes of certain chickpea varieties to pulse beetle, (Callosobruchuschinensis L.) in storage.Karnataka Journal ofAgricultural Sciences. 20 (3): 492-495.
  19. Patil, S.K., Tanpure, S.V & Mate, S.N. (2003).Effect of different levels of pulse beetle infestation on chickpea during storage.Seed Research. 31 (1): 119-120.
  20. Rai, P.C & Singh, J. (1989). Relative susceptibility of chickpea (Cicer arietinum) varieties to pulse beetle (Callosobruchus chinensis). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 59 (2): 135-136.
  21. Reddy, M.U and Pushpamma, P. (1986). Effect of storage on aminoacid and biological quality of proteins in different varieties of pigeon pea, greengram and chickpea. Nutrition Reports International. 33 (6): 1021-1028.
  22. Satyavir, V.(1980). Ovipositional response and development of Callosobruchus maculatus F. on different varieties of cowpea. Bulletin Grain Technology. 18 (3): 200-203.
  23. Shaheen, F.A. (2006). Integrated management of pulse beetle, Callosobruchuschinensis L. (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) attacking stored chickpea. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis.University of Arid Agriculture, Rawalpindi, Pakistan. 226.
  24. Sharma,S.&Thakur, D. R.(2014).Bio chemical basis for bruchid resistance in cowpea, chickpea and soybean genotypes. American journal of Food Technology 9 (6): 318-324. DOI:
  25. Singh, B.D. (2002). Plant Breeding: Principles and Methods; Kalyani Publishers: New Delhi, India. 587-591.
  26. Singhal, S.K & Singh, R. (1985). Relative susceptibilty of promising varieties of chickpea and greengram to pulse beetle, Callosobruchus chinensis Linn. Bulletin Grain Technology. 23 (1): 28-32.
  27. Somta, P., Ammaranan, C., Ooi, P.A.C &Srinivas, P. (2008).Inheritance of seed resistance to bruchids in cultivated mungbean (Vigna radiate L. Wilczek).Euphytica. 155: 47-55. DOI:
  28. Somta, C., Somta, P., Tomooka, N., Ooi, P. A. C., Vaughan, D. A., & Srinives, P. (2007). Characterization of new sources of mungbean (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek) resistance to bruchids, Callosobruchus spp. (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). Journal of Stored Products Research. 44: 316–321. DOI:
  29. Soumia, P.S., Srivastava, G.C., Guru, P.P & Subramanian, P. (2015). Physical and biochemical basis of resistance in mungbean accessions against Callosobruchusmaculatus (F.). International Conference on Innovative Insect Management Approaches for Sustainable Agro Ecosystem. 272: 31-34.
  30. Srinivas, G. (1980). Studies on the effect of physico-chemical characters of few pigeonpea varieties on oviposition and development of pulse beetle, Callosobruchusmaculatus(F.) M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis. Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad.
  31. Steel, R.G.D &Torrie, J.G. (1980).Principles and procedures of statistics.McGraw Hill Book Inc. New York.
  32. Swain, T.&Hillis, W.E. (1959). The phenolic constituents of Prunusdomestica. L. The quantitative analysis of phenolic constituents. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture.10: 63-68. DOI:
  33. Usha R, Singh, P.S., Singh, S. K. &Saxena R.P.N. (2020). Biochemical basis of resistance in greengram genotypes against pulse beetle, Calloso bruchus maculatus(F.)under storage conditions. Journal of Entomological Research, 44 (4):541-546. DOI:
  34. Vijay, D. (2000). Relationship between physico-chemical parameters and the deterioration mechanism in maize and soybean seeds. M.Sc. Thesis. Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi.
  35. Yadav, D.S., Panwar, K.S. and Sing, V.K. (1994). Management of pulse crops in sequential cropping. Indian Abst.Proc.Intercropping.Symposium on pulse Research. 2-6 April, New Delhi, India. 27p.