Evaluation of Rice Genotypes of Sikkim and Tripura for Resistance to Brown Planthopper, Nilaparvata lugens (Stal)

Abstract

Studies were undertaken to evaluate the rice genotypes of Sikkim and Tripura for their resistance against brown planthopper (BPH) under glasshouse conditions. Among 74 rice genotypes phenotyped, a genotype (AC-39843) was considered as resistant and two other genotype (AC-39842 and AC-39877) of Tripura were categorized as moderately resistant to BPH. To understand their mechanism of resistance, resistant genotypes were evaluated for different parameter of antixenosis and antibiosis. The antixenosis and antibiosis studies in terms of nymphal setting preference, per cent unhatchability of eggs, nymphal survival and development, honeydew excretion, probing mark test, plant dry weight loss and defence enzymes (Peroxidase, polyphenol oxidaseand catalase) indicated that these genotypes showed confirmation of resistance to BPH compared to susceptible check TN 1. Among resistant genotypes, AC-39843 recorded lowest sugar content followed by AC-39842 and AC-39877 compared to TN1. Total phenol content in AC-39843 was highest followed by AC-39877 and AC-39842. Resistant genotypes found in the study could be used as new resistant donors and utilized in resistance breeding programme against brown planthopper in rice.

Development and Validation of Diagnostic KASP Markers for Brown Planthopper Resistance in Rice

“…(2019) . Similar studies were also taken up by Gangaram et al . (2019) who evaluated 74 rice genotypes of Sikkim and Tripura against the BPH in glasshouse conditions along with resistant (PTB33) and susceptible (TN1) checks.…”

“…Several researchers reported PTB33 as resistant to BPH (Harini et al, 2013;Ramulamma et al, 2015;Reddy et al, 2016;Thamarai and Soundararajan, 2017;Udayasree et al, 2018), along with RathuHeenati and RP 2068-18-3-5 that were reported to exhibit durable resistance by Sarao and Bentur (2016); Sunil et al (2018) and Akanksha et al (2019). Similar studies were also taken up by Gangaram et al (2019) who evaluated 74 rice genotypes of Sikkim and Tripura against the BPH in glasshouse conditions along with resistant (PTB33) and susceptible (TN1) checks. The polarity in the resistance response of the rice accessions might be due to the variation in the toxin or antibiotic produced by the rice plant (Qiu et al, 2011;Singh et al, 2019), notably alkaloids or other organic compounds that have repellent effects against the BPH (Sodiq, 2009;Qiu et al, 2011), thus exhibiting varying levels of reaction to the BPH infestation.…”

Antixenosis and antibiosis mechanism of resistance in selected rice entries against brown planthopper, Nilaparvata lugens (Stal)

“…Our findings are supported by the findings of Alagar et al, (2007) and Gangaram et al, (2019) as they observed that the settling response of nymphs was more apparent at 24 hours after infestation on all the tested rice entries and also supported by Madurangi et al (2013) as they reported that over the time insects preferred susceptible plants compared to resistant plants. So on Ptb 33 and N22-CC-DTM-893 there is decrease in nymphal population at 48 and 72 hrs of observation as compared to 24 hr (Figure 1).…”