2021 Volume 8 Issue 3

Biological Efficiency of the Application of Herbicides on Spring Barley in the Chernozem Region


Roman Victorovich Shchuchka, Vladimir Alexandrovich Kravchenko, Vyacheslav Leonidovich Zakharov
Abstract

In the conditions of the Central Chernozem Region of Russia, a study of the effect of herbicides on the weed component and productivity of barley plants was carried out. We used seeds of spring barley of the Vakula variety and Ballerina Super, Prima, Lancelot, and Ballerina Forte herbicides. Weed counts were carried out following the All-Russian Institute for Plant Protection methodological instructions: before treatment (initial weediness), 15, 30, 45 days after treatment, and before harvesting. Sheaf samples for laboratory analysis were taken at the onset of economic ripeness in all test plots in four replicates. The actual yield of barley was determined using sheaf samples. The obtained results were processed by the method of variance analysis. The research variants were determined as follows: control (no effect of herbicides), Ballerina Super (application of a herbicide), Prima (application of a herbicide), Ballerina Forte (application of a herbicide), Lancelot (application of a herbicide). Studies have shown that perennial and annual dicotyledonous weeds have significant distribution in the crops of spring barley in the Central Chernozem zone. Out of these, in terms of abundance, white goosefoot, drug fumitory, white campion, black-bindweed, field pennycress, field milk thistle, and dog nettle prevail. A comparative analysis of herbicides, both in terms of the biological effectiveness of preparations against weeds and the effect on plant productivity, revealed that the Lancelot, Ballerina Super, and Ballerina Forte herbicides had the biggest effect against a wide range of weeds.


How to cite this article
Vancouver
Shchuchka RV, Kravchenko VA, Zakharov VL. Biological Efficiency of the Application of Herbicides on Spring Barley in the Chernozem Region. Entomol Appl Sci Lett. 2021;8(3):8-14. https://doi.org/10.51847/h7kM3hIIuB
APA
Shchuchka, R. V., Kravchenko, V. A., & Zakharov, V. L. (2021). Biological Efficiency of the Application of Herbicides on Spring Barley in the Chernozem Region. Entomology and Applied Science Letters, 8(3), 8-14. https://doi.org/10.51847/h7kM3hIIuB

Biological Efficiency of the Application of Herbicides on Spring Barley in the Chernozem Region

Roman Victorovich Shchuchka1*, Vladimir Alexandrovich Kravchenko1, Vyacheslav Leonidovich Zakharov2

 

1Department of Agrochemistry and Soil Science, Agroindustrial Institute, Bunin Yelets State University, Yelets, Russia.

2Department of Technology of Storage and Conversion of Agricultural Products, Bunin Yelets State University, Yelets, Russia.


ABSTRACT

In the conditions of the Central Chernozem Region of Russia, a study of the effect of herbicides on the weed component and productivity of barley plants was carried out. We used seeds of spring barley of the Vakula variety and Ballerina Super, Prima, Lancelot, and Ballerina Forte herbicides. Weed counts were carried out following the All-Russian Institute for Plant Protection methodological instructions: before treatment (initial weediness), 15, 30, 45 days after treatment, and before harvesting. Sheaf samples for laboratory analysis were taken at the onset of economic ripeness in all test plots in four replicates. The actual yield of barley was determined using sheaf samples. The obtained results were processed by the method of variance analysis. The research variants were determined as follows: control (no effect of herbicides), Ballerina Super (application of a herbicide), Prima (application of a herbicide), Ballerina Forte (application of a herbicide), Lancelot (application of a herbicide). Studies have shown that perennial and annual dicotyledonous weeds have significant distribution in the crops of spring barley in the Central Chernozem zone. Out of these, in terms of abundance, white goosefoot, drug fumitory, white campion, black-bindweed, field pennycress, field milk thistle, and dog nettle prevail. A comparative analysis of herbicides, both in terms of the biological effectiveness of preparations against weeds and the effect on plant productivity, revealed that the Lancelot, Ballerina Super, and Ballerina Forte herbicides had the biggest effect against a wide range of weeds.

Keywords: Spring barley, Weed component, Herbicides, Ballerina super, Prima, Lancelot.


INTRODUCTION

 

The main factors in initiating work to determine the effect of herbicides on the weed component and productivity of barley plants in the Lipetsk area of the Chernozem region were the natural and climatic conditions of the region and the social significance of barley derivatives to ensure the country's food security [1-3].

The purpose of the research

Was to study the effect of herbicides on the weed component and productivity of barley plants in the Lipetsk area of the Chernozem region.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The objects of research are the following herbicides:

Ballerina Super, Suspo-Emulsion (SE) (2.4-D acid in the form of 2-ethylhexyl ether, 410 g/l, and florasulam, 7.4 g/l) is a post-emergence herbicide of systemic action against annual dicotyledons, including those resistant to 2.4-D and 2-Methyl-4-Chlorophenoxyacetic Acid (MCPA), and some perennial root-sprouting weeds in grain crops, corn, millet, and sorghum.

Prima, SE (300 g/l 2.4-D to-you + 6.25 g/l of florasulam) is a post-emergence herbicide of systemic action, designed to control annual and some perennial dicotyledonous weeds in crops of grain and corn. It affects weeds that have already sprouted by the time of treatment [4].

Lancelot, Water-Dispersible Granules (WDG) (aminopyralid, 300 g/kg + florasulam, 150 g/kg) is a herbicide for cereal crops used against a wide range of dicotyledonous weeds, including the most dangerous species (yellow thistle, field milk thistle, creeping thistle, chamomile, fallen sunflower seeds, sticky-weed, and others) [5].

Ballerina Forte, SE (complex 2-ethylhexyl ester of 2.4-D acid, 300 g/l, picloram, 37.5 g/l, and florasulam, 10 g/l.) is a herbicide with enhanced action used against perennial dicotyledonous and annual dicotyledonous weeds on grain crops and corn [6-8].

The studies were carried out in 2019 from June to July on the territory of the educational and experimental field of the Yelets State University (YSU) named after I.A. Bunin, Yeletskiy district, Lipetsk area, on the culture of Vakula P4 spring multi-row barley variety. Before barley, winter wheat had been cultivated on the fields. The tillage of the experimental plot consisted of two autumn disking treatments after harvesting the predecessor crop and pre-sowing cultivation. In spring, N34 was introduced for cultivation, 100 kg/ha Seeding rate of barley: 170 kg/ha. The sowing was done in rows. The space between the rows was 15 cm. The sowing period was April 30. The treatment of crops with herbicides was carried out on June 4 in the tillering phase. Harvesting was carried out at the stage of full ripeness.

Identified Research Variants:

  1. Control variant (no herbicide exposure)
  2. Ballerina Super, SE (herbicide application: 0.5 l/ha)
  3. Prima, SE (herbicide application: 0.6 l/ha)
  4. Ballerina Forte, SE (herbicide application: 0.75 l/ha)
  5. Lancelot, WDG (herbicide application: 0.033 kg/ha)

Weed counts were carried out following the methodological instructions of the All-Russian Institute for Plant Protection (VIZR) for the determination of weediness (the VIZR method): before treatment (initial weediness), 15, 30, 45 days after treatment, and before harvesting. The number of weeds was verified during the first and subsequent counts. 30 days after treatment, in addition to the number of weeds, the weight was taken into account. After harvesting, the yield of barley was determined. Repetition: fourfold, the number of experimental plants in replication: 25 pcs. Sheaf samples for determination of yield and laboratory analysis were taken at the onset of economic ripeness in all test plots in four replicates. The weight of 1,000 seeds was determined by the arithmetic mean of two samples in fourfold repetition. The obtained results were processed by the method of variance analysis.

To determine the biological effectiveness of herbicides, we used the quantitative weight-related and quantitative methods of weed counting. The biological effectiveness of herbicides shows a decrease in the number of weeds as a result of the use of herbicides as compared with the control variant [9, 10].

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

As a result of the studies carried out in the crops of barley, we identified 28 species of weeds belonging to 13 families.

The largest number of species included such families as Asteraceae (4 species), Cruciferae (5 species), Polygonaceae (3 species), and Labiatae (3 species), which accounted for 54% of the total number of recorded species. The Leguminosae, Ranunculaceae, Caryophyllaceae families had two representatives each, while Chenopodioideae, Rubiaceae, Violaceae, Geraniaceae, Scrophulariaceae, Amaranthaceae, Convolvulaceae, and Equisetidae had one species each. The biological subtype of annual weeds included 20 species, while the perennial subtype included 9 species.

Analysis of indicators of the abundance of weeds per unit area by the time of herbicide treatments revealed that on average, up to 100 specimens of annual weeds and up to 13-14 specimens of perennial species of different ages and habits were counted per 1 m2. This made it possible to carry out tests of herbicides at this site (according to the VIZR method).

The most abundant species were the early spring dicotyledonous ones, such as white goosefoot, white campion, dog nettle, and field pennycress. Wintering species were also noted, namely sticky-weed and scentless chamomile. Among the perennial weeds, representatives of the creeping-rooted group such as field milk thistle and field bindweed dominated in the count. Rhizomatous species (marsh woundwort and field horsetail) had a high occurrence at the survey sites.

Determination of the effectiveness of herbicides concerning certain groups of weeds revealed the following patterns. On the variant with the use of the Ballerina Super, SE, high biological effectiveness was revealed concerning such annual species growing in grain fields as black-bindweed, white goosefoot, sticky-weed, and such perennial species as yellow thistle and field horsetail. No biological effect was observed in the case of white goosefoot and field horsetail treated with Lancelot. The oppressive effect affected only the seedlings of the white goosefoot, while the adult vegetative plants practically did not suffer. Only visual observations of horsetail were carried out. Calculation of effectiveness against horsetail was not included in the experiment.

The study noted a biological effect on field milk thistle and creeping thistle, where the population of the plants did not recover.

Determination of the comparative effectiveness of herbicides in reducing the number of weeds revealed that the death of most of the weeds that fell under herbicidal treatment was noted on the 30 to 40th day. When compared with the control variant, by the 30th day of observation, the total number of weeds in the variant with the use of Ballerina Forte had decreased by 75%. In the variant with the use of Prima the number had decreased by 68%, with Ballerina Super by 56%, and with Lancelot by 8%. By the 45th day of observation, the regularity remained. By harvesting the decrease amounted to 70, 45, 86, and 15%, respectively.

Analysis of the data revealed that the use of Ballerina Super and Ballerina Forte contributed to a decrease in the biological mass of weeds by 88% by the 30th day of observation, the use of Prima by 91%, and the used of Lancelot by 59% (Table 4).

The highest yield of barley grain was obtained in the variant with the use of the Lancelot preparation, amounting to 34.4 c/ha, which is 32% higher than in the control variant (Table 5). The control of weeds with such herbicides as Ballerina Super and Ballerina Forte provided an increase in yield compared to the control variant by 6.4 and 7.8 c/ha, respectively. The use of the Prima herbicide made it possible to obtain 29.6 c/ha of barley grain, which is 14% higher than the control variant. The seeds obtained from the plots treated with Prima were the heaviest, weighing 56.5 g, which is 4 g higher than the control variant. The seed mass in the variants treated with Ballerina Super and Ballerina Forte herbicides was approximately the same (53.2 and 53.8 g, respectively) (Table 6).

 

 

Table 1. Biological Effectiveness of Herbicides Used Against Dicotyledonous Weeds 15 Days after Treatment (by the Number of Weeds)

Weed species

Control variant

Ballerina Super

Prima

Ballerina Forte

Lancelot

pcs/m2

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

Dicotyledonous annual plants

Lady's thumb

1.0

1.0

0.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

Field violet

3.0

1.0

66.7

3.0

0.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

White campion

1.0

13.0

-1200.0

6.0

-500.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

White goosefoot

9.0

5.0

44.4

3.0

66.7

0.0

100.0

6.0

33.3

Dog nettle

12.0

1.0

91.7

2.0

83.3

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

Field pennycress

1.0

0.0

100.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

0.0

100.0

annual plants

27.0

21.0

22.2

15.0

44.4

2.0

92.6

7.0

74.1

Dicotyledonous perennial plants

Field bindweed

3.0

2.0

33.3

1.0

66.7

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

total

30.0

23.0

23.3

16.0

46.7

2.0

93.3

7.0

99.8

Table 2. Biological Effectiveness of Herbicides Against Dicotyledonous Weeds 30 Days after Treatment (by the Number of Weeds)

Weed species

Control variant

Ballerina Super

Prima

Ballerina Forte

Lancelot

pcs/m2

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

Dicotyledonous annual plants

Black-bindweed

1.0

0.0

100

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

1.0

0.0

Lady's thumb

2.0

0.0

100

1.0

50.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

Field violet

4.0

1.0

75

2.0

50.0

2.0

50.0

2.0

50.0

White campion

4.0

3.0

25

12.0

-200.0

22.0

-450.0

34.0

-750.0

Drug fumitory

1.0

2.0

-100

2.0

-100.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

-100.0

White goosefoot

10.0

1.0

90

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

7.0

30.0

Dog nettle

13.0

2.0

84.6

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

1.0

92.3

Red-root amaranth

1.0

1.0

0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

Field pennycress

2.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

annual plants

38.0

10.0

73.7

17.0

55.3

25.0

34.2

47.0

-23.7

Dicotyledonous perennial plants

Field milk thistle

1.0

1.0

0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

Field bindweed

3.0

3.0

0

1.0

66.7

0.0

100.0

3.0

0.0

perennial

4.0

4.0

0

1.0

75.0

0.0

100.0

3.0

25.0

Total

42.0

14.0

66.7

18.0

57.1

25.0

40.5

50.0

-19.0

 

Table 3. Biological Effectiveness of Herbicides Used Against Dicotyledonous Weeds 45 Days after Treatment (by the Number of Weeds)

Weed species

Control variant

Ballerina Super

Prima

Ballerina Forte

Lancelot

pcs/m2

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

Dicotyledonous annual plants

Black-bindweed

1.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

Lady's thumb

1.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

Field violet

12.0

2.0

83.3

1.0

91.7

1.0

91.7

2.0

83.3

Tufted vetch

2.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

White campion

5.0

7.0

-40.0

15.0

-200.0

1.0

80.0

17.0

-240.0

Drug fumitory

2.0

0.0

100.0

1.0

50.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

50.0

White goosefoot

7.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

13.0

-85.7

Dog nettle

2.0

1.0

50.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

Annual yellow woundwort

2.0

6.0

-200.0

4.0

-100.0

3.0

-50.0

2.0

0.0

annual plants

34.0

16.0

52.9

21.0

38.2

7.0

79.4

35.0

-2.9

Dicotyledonous perennial plants

Field bindweed

8.0

1.0

87.5

2.0

75.0

0.0

100.0

2.0

75.0

Creeping thistle

1.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

Field milk thistle

2.0

1.0

50.0

2.0

0.0

0.0

100.0

2.0

0.0

Marsh woundwort

1.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

perennial

12.0

2.0

83.3

4.0

66.7

0.0

100.0

4.0

66.7

total

46.0

18.0

60.9

25.0

45.7

7.0

84.8

39.0

15.2

 

 

Calculation of the biological effectiveness of herbicides 15 days after treatment showed that the maximum percentage of death of dicotyledonous weeds (both annual and perennial) was caused by the use of the Ballerina Forte (93.3%) and Lancelot (99.8%) preparations (Table 1).

On the 30th day after treatment (Table 2), Ballerina Forte showed 100% biological effectiveness against perennial dicotyledonous weeds. For annual weeds, for this period the best effect was shown by Ballerina Super (73.7%) and Prima (55.3%). These herbicides have shown 100% effectiveness in the control of field pennycress and black-bindweed. The number of drug fumitory plants in these variants was higher than in the control variant, however, the calculation of the effectiveness of the preparations by the weight of weeds showed a result of 84 and 88%, respectively. This indicates the suppressive effect of these preparations on these weeds.

According to the results of calculating the effectiveness of herbicides on the 45th day after treatment (Table 3), it was found that:

  • Creeping thistle and marsh woundwort in barley crops had been destroyed by all preparations;
  • Field milk thistle was more resistant to the effect of Prima and Lancelot herbicides;
  • In general, in the group of dicotyledonous perennial weeds, Ballerina Forte (100%) and Ballerina Super (83.3%) showed a greater effect;
  • From annual dicotyledonous plants, lady’s thumb, black-bindweed, tufted vetch, dog nettle responded to the effects of all preparations. The Lancelot, WDG herbicide is less effective against white goosefoot. Presumably, other herbicides are more effective because of the 2.4 D ether that is included in their composition and better overcomes wax deposits.

On the 45th day after treatment, there was an increase in the number of certain weeds in all variants due to the emergence of new shoots.

 

 

Table 4. The Effect of Herbicides on the Weight of Weeds by Species in Barley Crops on Day 30 after Treatment, g/m2

Weed species

Control variant

Ballerina Super

Prima

Ballerina Forte

Lancelot

 

pcs/m2

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

pcs/m2

effectiveness, %

Dicotyledonous annual plants

Black-bindweed

0.55

0.0

92.7

0.0

100.0

2.0

-263.6

0.5

12.7

Lady's thumb

1.7

0.0

100.0

0.7

60.0

0.0

100.0

0.1

92.9

Field violet

1.2

0.1

91.7

0.8

36.7

0.6

46.7

0.1

90.0

Tufted vetch

3.1

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

1.1

65.2

White campion

15.54

0.8

94.6

3.5

77.6

5.2

66.3

9.8

37.2

Drug fumitory

2

0.3

84.0

0.2

88.0

0.2

90.0

0.7

64.0

White goosefoot

3

0.2

93.3

0.4

86.7

0.0

100.0

4.6

-52.0

Dog nettle

3.15

1.4

54.3

0.1

98.1

0.1

97.5

0.8

74.6

Red-root amaranth

0.3

0.4

-20.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

Field pennycress

0.11

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

Annual yellow woundwort

0.1

0.0

60.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

minor

30.75

3.3

89.1

5.6

81.7

8.2

73.5

17.6

42.6

Dicotyledonous perennial plants

Field bindweed

25.9

4.2

83.6

0.2

99.1

1.0

96.3

3.8

85.3

Creeping thistle

15.34

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

5.3

65.6

Field milk thistle

5

0.8

84.0

0.8

84.0

0.1

97.6

5.0

-0.8

Marsh woundwort

0.95

0.7

24.2

0.2

78.9

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

perennial

47.19

5.8

87.8

1.2

97.4

1.1

97.7

14.1

70.1

total

77.94

9.1

88.3

6.86

91.2

9.24

88.1

31.76

59.3

 

Table 5. Barley Yield Depending on the Use of Herbicides, c/ha

Variant

Yield

+/- to the control variant

abs.

%

Control variant

25.9

 

 

Ballerina Super

32.3

6.4

24.7

Prima

29.6

3.7

14.3

Ballerina Forte

33.7

7.8

30.1

Lancelot

34.4

8.5

32.8

Least Significant Difference (LSD)05 of particular differences

3.5

According to the 2019 crop accounting data, all herbicides made it possible to obtain a significant increase in yield compared to the control variant, except for the Prima herbicide. There was no significant difference between the herbicide applications (Table 5)

 

 

Table 6. Weight of 1,000 Barley Seeds Depending on the Use of Herbicides, g

Variant

Weight of 1,000 pieces, g

+/- to the control variant

abs.

%

Control variant

52.5

-

-

Ballerina Super

53.2

0.7

1.3

Prima

56.5

4.0

7.6

Ballerina Forte

53.8

1.3

2.3

Lancelot

51.2

-1.3

-2.3

 

Figure 1. The dependency of 1000 grain weight on yeild

 

 

It is noted that in herbicidal variants, the higher the yield, the lower the weight in the variants of herbicide use, see Graph 1. For the control variant, both a lower mass of 1,000 grains and a lower yield are noted compared to the treated variants.

 

CONCLUSION

Studies have shown that perennial and annual dicotyledonous weeds have significant distribution in the crops of spring barley in the Central Chernozem zone. Out of these, in terms of abundance, white goosefoot, drug fumitory, white campion, black-bindweed, field pennycress, field milk thistle, and dog nettle prevail.

All herbicides were effective against such weeds as creeping thistle, field milk thistle, black-bindweed, lady’s thumb, violet, dog nettle and allowed controlling the field bindweed. By the end of the growing season, there was an increase of seedlings of annual dicotyledonous weeds, especially white campion, in all variants, which somewhat reduced the numeric effectiveness values. At the same time, weeds were located in the lower tier and did not have a significant effect on the development of the crops.

The yield when counted by the combine harvester method and the experimental variants exceeded the control variant by 3.7-8.5 c/ha. The difference between herbicide applications was significant.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: None

CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None

FINANCIAL SUPPORT: None

ETHICS STATEMENT: None


References

1.       Avdeenko AP. Influence of herbicides on weediness of crops and productivity of spring barley. Adv Mod Nat Sci. 2018;(10):34-9.

2.       State register of breeding achievements approved for use. Volume 1: Plant varieties (official edition). Ministry of agriculture of the Russian Federation: Moscow; 2017. 483 p.

3.       Zakharenko VA, Zakharenko AV. Weed control in cereal crops. Plant Prot Quar. 2007;(2):48.

4.       Epishina TM. Assessment of biological influence of chloroquinoline derivative. Hyg Sanit. 2018;97(6):505-8.

5.       Costanzo A, Bàrberi P. Field scale functional agrobiodiversity in organic wheat: Effects on weed reduction, disease susceptibility and yield. Eur J Agron. 2016;76:1-16.

6.       Serban M, Maturaru G, Lazar C, Gradila M, Ciontu C. Research on the selectivity and the efficacy of herbicides in controlling weeds for the maize crop. Rom Agric Res. 2021;38:377-85.

7.       Linn AI, Mink R, Peteinatos GG, Gerhards R. In‐field classification of herbicide‐resistant Papaver rhoeas and Stellaria media using an imaging sensor of the maximum quantum efficiency of photosystem II. Weed Res. 2019;59(5):357-66.

8.       Marinov-Serafimov P, Golubinova I, Vasileva V. Dynamics and distribution of weed species in weed associations. Indian J Agric Sci. 2019;89(1):105-10.

9.       Parakhin NV, Karakotov SD. Bioenergetically and environmentally efficient crop cultivation technologies. Orel: Izd. Orel GAU; 2011. 31 p.

10.   Sadokhina TP. Chemical protection of spring barley. Plant Prot Quar. 2011;(4):30-3.


Entomology and Applied Science Letters is an international peer reviewed publication which publishes scientific research & review articles related to insects that contain information of interest to a wider audience, e.g. papers bearing on the theoretical, genetic, agricultural, medical and biodiversity issues. Emphasis is also placed on the selection of comprehensive, revisionary or integrated systematics studies of broader biological or zoogeographical relevance. Papers on non-insect groups are no longer accepted. In addition to full-length research articles and reviews, the journal publishes interpretive articles in a Forum section, Short Communications, and Letters to the Editor. The journal publishes reports on all phases of medical entomology and medical acarology, including the systematics and biology of insects, acarines, and other arthropods of public health and veterinary significance.
Issue 3 Volume 9 - 2022
Call for Papers
Entomology and Applied Science Letters supports the submission of entomological papers that contain information of interest to a wider reader groups e. g. papers bearing on taxonomy, phylogeny, biodiversity, ecology, systematic, agriculture, morphology. The selection of comprehensive, revisionary or integrated systematics studies of broader biological or zoogeographical relevance is also important. Distinguished entomologists drawn from different parts of the world serve as honorary members of the Editorial Board. The journal encompasses all the varied aspects of entomological research. This has become the need felt in scientific research due to the emphasis on intra-, inter-, and multi-disciplinary approach.