For verification of this paper, please visit on http://www.socialresearchfoundation.com/innovation.php#8

Storage of grains in an integral component of the post-harvest system, serving as a crucial stage in the journey of food materials from field to consumer[24]. Post-harvest losses are fast becoming a major problem due to several causes which includes sanitary, physical, and nutritional deprivation, from their maturation to the utilization[9].Post- harvest losses of around 9% in developed nations and up to 50% in developing countries have been documented resulting in significant economic losses[7].In India, the post-harvest losses of food grains are estimated to reach 12-16 million metric tons annually, with pests accounting for approximately 6.5% of the total grains stored [23,24,28].Every year, approximately 25-30% of crop yields are destroyed by various insect pests, both in the fields and during storage [19,23].

Among the stored grain pests, the rice weevil, Sitophilus oryzae (Linn. 1763) (Coleoptera, Curculionidae) is one of the most widespread and destructive major insect pests of stored cereals such as, rice, wheat, maize, barley, sorghum, buckwheat, pulses, dried beans, cashew nuts and products derived from them throughout the world causing both quantitative and qualitative damage to grain imparting severe economic loss [7,9,21].Qualitative damage to stored products encompasses alternations in various aspects, including nutritional and aesthetic value, as well as increased likelihood of rejecting the grain mass and loss of industrial usability. Quantitative damage can manifest as grain weight loss resulting from insect feeding activities [10,24].Both quantitative and qualitative losses of stored grain can arise from various factors of age including the feeding and waste production by insect mites, rodents, and birds as well as the growth of microorganisms, all of which are influenced by environmental conditions. Insects, mites, and fungi have the potential to induce hydrolysis and oxidation, leading to a decline in the levels of specific nutrients within stored products, and in some cases such as the production of toxic substances such as mycotoxins [24].

The rice weevil, S.oryzae is a cosmopolitan and highly destructive insect pest, responsible for causing approximately 10-65% damage under moderate storage conditions, with the damage increasing to 80% under prolonged storage conditions[22,26].

S. oryzae exhibits host preferences for various stored products concerning its feeding habits, development, oviposition, and degree of damage. Furthermore, the behavior and performance of these insects vary based on the physico-chemical characteristics of the host, including presence of toxins, inhibitors, volatile, macronutrients, micronutrients, as well as kernel hardness and texture profile [7,12,29]. Prior research has indicated that rice serves as the primary host for S. oryzae, exhibiting preference in terms of oviposition, grain damage, & F1 progeny under free-choice conditions, followed by wheat, barley, and maize are also identified as susceptible hosts [15]. Both the adult and larval stages of the insect feed on the carbohydrates present in rice grains leading to weight loss and contamination. Additionally, the activity of S. oryzae can elevate the temperature, humidity, within the grains promoting accelerated growth of secondary pests and creating ideal conditions for pathogens and further infestations. Without proper control measures, the infestation can lead to complete destruction of the stored grain [13,20,23].

There remains an ongoing need to safeguard stored products against deterioration particularly the loss of quality and weight during storage[24].Controlling this pest proves challenging as its immature stages develop within grain kernel, which hinders accurate detection of infestations and the efficacy of control measures, ultimately leading to extensive damage to stored cereals [7,29]. In regions with insufficient storage facilities, relying on stored grains resistance or susceptibility alone, or in combination with other protective methods, can be essential for effectively managing insect pests [5,22].

This is the review based paper and the reviews has been discussed through out the paper.

2. Taxonomy and morphology of Sitophilus oryzae

Taxonomy

Kingdom: Animalia

Phylum: Arthropoda

Class:Insecta

Order: Coleoptera

Family: Curculionidae

Genus: Sitophilus

Species: oryzae (Linnaeus, 1763).

Morphology

1. Appearance and Identification:

The rice weevil is a small insect, measuring 2 to 3 mm in length, or about 1/10 inch. It is closely resembling the granary weevil but can be distinguished by its reddish-brown to black coloration with fourreddish orpale-yellow spots on the corners of its hard protective forewings, known as elytra[9]. Rice weevils possess chewing mouthparts,and their most distinctive feature is its elongated snoutmeasuring approximately 1 mm, which is nearly one-thirdof its total length [30]. The head, including the snout,is as long as theelytra. The prothorax,located behind the headis strongly pittedwith round or irregularly shaped pits, while the elytra have rows of pits with longitudinal grooves. The larvaof the rice weevil is legless and resides inside hollowed grain kernels. It appears plump with a cream - colored body and dark head capsules [9,18].

2. Habits:

The rice weevil stands as one of the most significant threats to stored grains globally. Originating in India, this pest has spread worldwide through commercial activities, now has a cosmopolitan distribution particularly prevalent in the Southern United States. Both the adult and larval stages of the rice weevil feed on a variety of whole grains, including wheat, corn, oats, rye, barley, sorghum, buckwheat, dried beans, cashew nuts, wild bird seeds, and cereal products, with a preference for macaroni [18].

The adult rice weevil is attracted to sources of light and have the capability to flight. When disturbed, adult rice weevils exhibit defensive behavior by retracting their legs dropping to the ground, and feigning death. The larval stage of the rice weevil must complete its development within a grain kernel a similar man-made structure, such as macaroni products. Larval rice weevils have been observed to mature even in hardened flour [18].

Iranipouret al. (2008)studied the host preference of the rice weevil, S. oryzae, across the five native and commercial Iranian rice cultivars, Gerdeh, Beenam, Taarom, Neda and Fajr at two constant temperatures 25 and 30°C, 75 ± 5% RH, and darkness.Adult attraction to kernels, female fecundity during a 10-day reproductive interval, and developmental time were compared across cultivars and temperatures. The results revealed that Gerdeh and Beenam cultivars were the most attractive with an average of 12.07 and 11.72 insects/dish/day. In contrast, Fajr attracted only 6.56 insects/dish/day. The highest fecundity was observed in females reared on Gerdeh, followed by Taarom and Neda, while Fajr and Beenamexhibited lower fecundity. Both parental age and temperaturesignificantly influenced the number of male offspring, with females being affected only by parental age. The percentage of female offspring was higher at 25°C compared to 30°C across all cultivars. Developmental time was shorter at 30°C (ranging from 35.53 to 40.22days) compared to 25°C (ranging from 40.39 to 43.3 days) across different cultivars.Fajr and Neda showed relative resistance to rice weevils, while Gerdeh and Taarom were relatively susceptible cultivars, Beenam exhibited a temperature dependent response to this pest.

Mehtaet al. (2021)studied the biological parameters and orientation of S. oryzae towards wheat cultivar HPW-236 and mixed grains of differentcultivars (HPW-155, HPW-236, HPW-249, HPW-349, HPW-360, HS-490 and VL-892). It was observed that the incubation period, larval period, pupal period, and total life cycle period of S. oryzae, were prolonged when fed on mixed grains compared to HPW-236. Additionally, the weevils exhibited a stronger orientation towards HPW-236, and lower germination rates were observed in HPW-236 compared to mixed cultivars when exposed to S. oryzae.Quantitative assessment of damage caused by S. oryzae in different wheat cultivars recommended in the northwestern Himalayas under free-choice conditions revealed that HPW-236suffered greater damage and weight loss compared to HPW-360 and HPW-249. As HPW-236 is widely cultivated in this region, it proved highly susceptible to the weevil and provided a favorable environment for weevil development. Consequently, avoiding prolonged storage of ΗΡW-236 and preferring cultivars such as HPW-360 and HPW-249, which showed minimal susceptibility to the weevil, is recommended for farmers in the northwestern Himalayas.

3. Biology of Sitophilus oryzae

A. Development of rice weevil:

The adult female rice weevilcreates a small cavity within the grain kernel to lay their eggssealing it withsecretions from her ovipositor. Once hatched the egg give rise to a young larva, which then move towards the kernel center to feed, grow and mature into a pupa. Enclosed within the grain, the pupa undergoes significant internal and external transformations, culminating in the development of an adult. The emerged adults exit through the emergence hole, primed for mating and initiating the next generation [18,30].

B. Life cycle:

Like other holometabolous insects, the life cycle of S. oryzae can be categorized into four stages:egg, larva, pupa, and adult. [25]

Egg: The rice weevil deposits its egg in the crevices of kernels or dust. A female rice weevil laysapproximately 4 eggs daily. Over its lifespan of 5 months, it can lay a total of roughly 250 to 400 eggs. These eggs typically hatch within 3 days [30].

Larva: Within the grain kernel, they feed for approximately 18 days. The larval stage isthe primary period of growth for the insect. Inside the seed, its cuticles undergo hardening and maturation.It consumes several times its own weight andundergoes periodic moulting to facilitate growth and increase in size [30].

Pupa: The pupal stage spans 6 days, during which the pupa remains non-feeding. In certain species, the pupa is enveloped within a cocoon constructed by the larva. This stage witnesses significant internal and external transformations. Ultimately, the fully developed adult emerges from the pupa [30].

Adult: Adults typically range between 0.1 and 1.7cm in length, featuring three pairs of legs and a segmented body comprising the head, thorax,and abdomen. Adults move and penetrating deeply into the bulk of grains facilitating widespread distribution. Thehead encompasses the mouthpartsand sensory organs, while the thorax supports the legs and wings.The abdomen contains the reproductive organs [30].

The complete life cycle may span only 26 to 30 days during hot summer months but requires a significantly longer period in cooler weather conditions[18].

Okram and Hath (2019)reported about the laboratory experiments conducted on S. oryzae revealed significant variations in its biology across different seasons, specifically, during February, the species exhibited the longest durations for various developmental stages and adult longevity. These included an incubation period of 5.85±0.31 days, larval period of 21.33±0.99 days, pupal period of 10.20±0.5 days, and adult longevity of male with food was 58.72±3.44 days and without food was 12.98±0.98 days, and adult longevity of female with food was 77.23±3.11 days and without food was 14.47±0.69 days. Additionally, the total life cycle of both male and female specimens was longestduring February. This pattern coincided with temperatureranges from 12.39°C to 27.89°C and relative humidity of 58.33 to 88.81% respectively. Notably, regardless ofseason and food availability, the adult female consistently exhibited higher longevity compared to the male.

Choudhury and Chakraborty (2014)studied the life cycle and biology of the rice weevil S. oryzae under laboratory conditions. The laboratory-maintained temperature ranging from 30.7°C to 23.7°C and relative humidity ranging from 86% to 69% respectively. Adult male and female weevils exhibited anaverage length of 2.9±0.6mm and2.8±0.6mm respectively. Thelongevity of adult females, when provided with food, ranged from 85 to 109 days. Mating commenced 4 to 6 days after emergence under laboratory conditions with subsequent copulation occurring thereafter. Adult males exhibited a longevity of 59 to 64 days when provided with food. The larval period extended from 22 to 29 days with larvae pupating inside rice grain after full development The pupal period lasted for 7 to8 days with a mean duration of 7.5±0.84 days.The entire life cycle, from egg to adult ranged from 35 to 49 days with a mean durationof 41.2±5.79 days.

Akhter et al. (2017)investigated the oviposition preference and developmental stages of the rice weevil, S. oryzae across three stored grain varieties: parboiled rice Oryza sativa), wheat (Triticumaestivum) and pulse (Cicer arietinum). In no-choice tests, the mean number of eggslaid was 360.3±2.60 in rice,382±2.49 inwheat, and 394±2.06 in pulses. In choice tests, the mean number of eggs laid was 13.6±0.4 inrice, 14.2±0.37 in wheat, and 15.6±0.4 in pulses. The incubation period, larval period, and pupal period of weevils reared on rice, wheat and pulses were as follows: incubation (5.7±0.27, 5±0.47, 5.4±0.27days), larval (21±0.47, 20.3±0.27, 19±0.47days) and pupal (10.3±0.27, 10.7±0.27, 11.3 ± 0.27 days) respectively. The total development time from egg to adult was 37±0.47 days in rice, 36±0.47 days in wheat and 35.6±0.72 days in pulses. Overall the development period was shorter in pulses compared to rice andwheat.

4. Chemical control of Sitophilus oryzae

Regardless of the advancement of modern technologies for pest control and storage of grain, conventional methods of grain storage are practiced by some farmers, so the grains stored under such conditions are highly vulnerable to significant deterioration [9].Agricultural chemicals have long been hailed as “Miracle Weapons” in the frontline management of stored grain pests. However, in the present scenario,numerous drawbacks have become evident.The control of stored product insect populations has traditionally relied heavily on the repeated application of liquid and gaseous insecticides and over-reliance on specific chemicals or a limited range has resulted in complications such as residual hazards, the emergence of resistance, environmental pollution, negative impact on non-target organisms, instances of control failures and disruptions to the biological control system by natural enemies, leading to outbreaks of insect pests [17,22].

The utilization of pesticides represents a method for mitigating losses during storage. Nevertheless, the selection of pesticides for controlling storage pestsis limited due to stringent safety regulations governing the use of synthetic insecticides in proximity to the food [24]. Regulatory issues surround several current commercial fumigants, includingmethyl bromide, dichlorvos, chloropicrin, and phosphine. Fumigants such as methyl bromide and phosphine have historically been the most effective means of protecting stored food, feedstuff, and agricultural commodities from insect infestation. The US Environmental Protection Agency, 2001 [EPA] has restricted the use of methyl bromide due to its ozone depleting properties, while dichlorvos is considered a suspected carcinogen. Consequently, the use of methyl bromide, phosphine and dichloropropene is limited to licensed commercial applications due to their toxicity. Furthermore, some stored product insects have developed resistance to both methyl bromide and phosphine[16,17,26].S. oryzae is of growing concern due to its capability to quickly develop resistance to insecticides like phosphine [25]. These challenges underscore the urgent need for the development of new types of selective insect-control alternatives with fumigant action [8,17].

Caoet al. (2024) investigated the impact of stored cereal volatiles on S. oryzaebehavior, they conduced electroantennography (EAG] and behavioral bioassays of different rice cultivars [Red brown rice (RBR), Daohuaxiangmi (DHXM), Baishuigongmi (BSGM), Yashuixinmi(YSXM), and white gelatinous rice (WGR)] in different types of olfactometers. Their findings revealed significant variations in S.oryzae preferences among these rice cultivars, in the order RBR>DHXM = YSXM BSGM>WGR. Analysis of volatile compounds in RBR identified26 components, with nonanal (29.37%), hexanal (16.08%), and 1-octen-3-ol (8.83%) being the most abundant. EAG showed dose-dependent perception of these compounds by S. oryzae antennae at 100 ^-1. Comparing the olfactory preferences of S. oryzae based on these compounds at their optimal concentrations were nonanal>1-octen-3-ol=hexanal revealed insights into host preferences. These results highlightthe perceptionof preferredrice cultivar (RBR) volatiles by S. oryzae peripheral olfactory system, inducing positive chemotaxis. The findings provide valuable insights into the mechanisms driving the host preferences of stored grain pests, with nonanal presenting promising potential as a novel monitoring and control tool against this storage beetle pest.

Parket al. (2004)evaluated the insecticidal fumigation toxicity of both natural and synthetic cyanohydrins on fourstored product pests: the lesser grain borer Rhyzoperthadominica (F), the red-flour beetle Triboliumcastaneum Herbst, the saw-toothed grainbeetles the Oryzae philussurinamensis L., the Sitophilus zeamais (Motsch) and the house fly Musca domestica L.For houseflies, all but one of the cyanohydrins showed higherpotencycompared to 1,3-dichloropropene.For the lesser grain borer,all cyanohydrins showed higher insecticidal potency compared todichloropropene and chloropicrin, with some being effective as dichlorvos. Additionally, the acetate of1cyano-1hydroxy-2-propene (CHP-ace) demonstrated antifungal and antibacterial activity in soil, along with the inhibition of weed seed germination, indicating its potential as a broad-spectrum soil fumigant.

5. Biological control of Sitophilus oryzae

Over the last twenty years,addressing the loss of stored food products due to insect damage has predominantly involved the utilizationof synthetic insecticides.Therefore, the heavy dependence on specific chemicals has resulted in issues like toxic residues, resistance, environmental pollution, and control failures. These hurdles, coupled with heightened environmental issues, have prompted researchers to investigate alternatives approaches to chemical pesticides. Among these alternatives plant-based products have gather attention due to their biodegradability, eco-friendliness, and human safety as they constitute a rich source of bioactive compounds.These compounds, while effective against specific target pests, are often biodegradable into non-toxic byproducts and hold potential for suitable use integrated pest management systems.Specifically, certain plant extracts utilized as grain protectants have demonstrated promising efficacy against S. oryzae[7,17].

Anincreasingly promising approach with considerable potential to mitigate the adverse effects of insecticides is the utilization of entomopathogenic fungi and other microbial control agents.While the concept of using fungal pathogens to control insects has been under study for numerous years,comparativelylessemphasis has been paid to the use of fungi as control agents against storage pests.Currently, essential oils standout as one of the most extensively researched options [1,6,24].

Parisot et al. (2021)utilized a combination of short and long reads to sequence the S.oryzae genome, resulting in the most comprehensive assembly for a curculionidae species to date. Their analysis revealed that S. oryzae has experienced successive bursts of transposable element (TE) amplification, constituting 72% of the genome. Moreover, they demonstrated that numerous TE families exhibittranscriptional activity, with changes in their expression correlating with the insect’s endosymbiotic state. Compared to other beetles, S. oryzae has undergone a notable expansion in gene content. S. pierantoniusdepends on the host for various amino acids and nucleotides crucial for survival as well as for the synthesis of vitamins and essential amino acids essential for insect development and cuticle biosynthesis.

Padinet al. (2002)investigated the efficacy of the fungal entomopathogen Beauveriabassiana (Balsamo) Vuillemin (Hyphomycete) in reducing losses caused by storage insects in durum wheat and beans. Grains were infested with Triboliumcastaneum (Herbst), S. oryzae (L.), and Acanthoscelidesobtectus (Say). B. bassiana, produced in inoculated autoclaved rice, showed significant insecticidal effects. Specifically, the grains treated with B. bassiana exhibited lowerdamage from S.oryzae compared to untreated grains. However, no significant differences were observed in fresh weight or weight loss of grains infested with T. castaneum or A. obtectus with or without B. bassiana.

Asawalamet al. (2012)reported about the powders which are derived from four indigenous botanical plants in Nigeria, including Dennettiatripetala Baker F. fruits,Curcuma longa L. rhizomes, Piper quineense,Schum and Thonn, seeds andZingiberofficinaleRosc. rhizomes were assessed for their insecticidal activityagainst rice weevil, S. oryzae (L.) in laboratory conditions. Results indicated that use of these botanical powders increased adult mortality and suppressed adult emergence of the rice weevils. P.guineense and D. tripetala exhibited thehighest mortality rates, reaching 18.8% and 16.5% respectively, 35 days post-treatment when compared with other treatments. Application of P.guineense seed powder resulted in significantly lower adult emergence (3.25%) in treated rice seeds and demonstrated best in terms of percentage weight losscomparedto the control. These findings suggest the potential of these botanicals for safeguarding stored rice against damage by storage insects.

Kimet al. (2003) studied the methanol extracts from 30 aromatic medicinal plant species and 5 essential oils were evaluated for their insecticidal activities against adults of S. oryzae andCallosobruchuschinensis (L.) using direct contact application and fumigation methods.Responses varied depending on the plant material, insect species, and exposure time. In a fumigation test withS. oryzae adults, the oils exhibited greaterefficacy in closed containers comparedtoopen ones,suggesting their insecticidal activity was primarily due to fumigant action.

Benziet al. (2009) reported about the Brazilian pepper tree. (Schinusmolle L. var. areira (L.) DC.) exhibits various biological properties, including insecticidal activity. In this study they assessed the repellent, fumigant activity, nutritional indices, and feeding deterrent action of Brazilian pepper tree essential oils on adult of S. oryzae. Results revealed that leaf essential oils exhibited a repellenteffect at both concentrations (0.04 and 0.4% w/w), whereas fruit essential oil lacked repellent activity.Fruit essential oils displayed strong feeding deterrent actions (62%) whereas leaves had a milder effect (40.6%). However, neither essential oil demonstrated toxicity in terms of fumigant activity.

Mehta and Kumar (2020) studied environmentally friendly alternatives to chemical fumigants and synthetic insecticides for controlling weevils in stored grains. Among the treatments evaluated, Ageratum conyzoides leaf powder demonstrated superior efficacy against the weevils, resulting in a maximum mean cumulative mortality of 96.67%, lowest monthly population increase of 18.33% and minimal grain damage (12.61%) and weight loss (17.5%) over a 6-month storage period. Following A. conyzoides, the next most effective treatment was the drupe powder of Melia azedarach, followed by Vitexnegundo and Ocimum sanctum. Notably, A. conyzoides, M. azedarach and O. sanctum were found effective even 3 months after preparation. In contrast the leaf powder of Murrayakoenigii exhibited the lowest mean cumulative adult mortality (14.23%), the highest monthly population increase (132.78%) and the greatest grain damage (47.50%) and weight loss (11.07%), indicating its limited effectiveness.

1. Adane,K.,Moore,D. and Archer,S.A.,(1996).Preliminary studies on the use of Beauveriabassiana to control Sitophilus zeamais (coleoptera: curculionidae) in the laboratory. Journal of Stored Products Research,32: 105-113. 

2. Akhter, M., Sultana, S., Akter, T. and Begum, S., (2017). Oviposition preference and development of rice weevil, Sitophilus oryzae (Lin.) (coleoptera: curculionidae) in different stored grains. Bangladesh J. Zool., 45(2): 131-138.

3. Asawalam, E.F., Ebere, U.E. and Emeasor, K.C., (2012). Effect of some plant products on the control of rice weevil Sitophilus oryzae (L.) coleoptera: curculionidae. J. Med. Plants Res., 6(33): 4811-4814.

4. Aslan, I., Özbek, H., Kordali, Ş., Çalmşaur, Ö. and Cakir, A.,(2004). Toxicity of essential oil vapours obtained from Pistacia spp. to the granary weevil, Sitophilus granarius(L.) (coleoptera: curculionidae). Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection,111: 400-407.

5. Badii, K. B., Asante,S. K. and Adarkwa, C., (2013). Varietal differences in the susceptibility of new rice for Africa (NERICA) to Sitophilus oryzae L. (coleoptera: curculionidae). African J. Agric. Res.,8: 1375-1380.

6. Benzi, V.S., Stefanazzi, N. and Ferrero, A.A., (2009). Biological activity of essential oils from leaves and fruits of pepper tree (Schinusmolle L.) to control rice weevil (Sitophilus oryzae L.). Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research, 69(2): 154-159.

7. Cao, Y., Hu, Q., Huang, L., Athanassiou, C.G., Maggi, F., D’Isita, I., Liu, Y., Pistillo, O.M., Miao, M., Germinara, G.S. and Li, C., (2024). Attraction of Sitophilus oryzae (L.) (coleoptera: curculionidae) to the semiochemical volatiles of stored rice materials. Journal of Pest Science, 97: 73-85.

8. Champ, B.R. andDyte C.E., (1977). FAO global survey of pesticide susceptibility of stored grain pests. FAO Plant Protec Bull,25(2):49-67.

9. Choudhury, S.D. and Chakraborty, K., (2014). Study on both the life cycle and morphometrics of Sitophilus oryzae on rice cultivar Sampamashuri in laboratory conditions. J. of Appl. Sci. And Research, 2(6): 22- 28.

10. Golebiowska,Z., (1969). The feeding and fecundity ofSitophilus granariesL., SitophilusoryzaeL. and Rhyzoperthadominica F. in wheat grain. Journal of Stored Products Research,5: 143-155.

11. Gupta, S., Gupta, J. and Singh, H.,(2022). Biopesticides are the need of present time for safe environment and healthy humans. Asian Journal of Advances in Medical Science, 4(1): 270-275.

12. Gvozdenac, S., Tanasković, S., Vukajlović,F., Prvulović, D., Ovuka, J., Viacki, V. andSedlar, A.,(2020). Host and ovipositional preference of rice weevil(Sitophilus oryzae) depending on feeding experience. ApplEcolEnv Res,18(5):6663-6673.

13. Hardman, J. M., (1977). Environmental changes associated with the growth of populations of Sitophilus oryzae (L.) confined in small cells of wheat.Journal of Stored Products Research,13: 45-52.

14. Hidalgo, E., Moore, D., Le Patourel, G., 1998. The effect of different formulations of Beauveriabassiana on Sitophilus zeamais in stored maize. Journal of Stored Products Research 34, 171–179.

15. Iranipour, S., Belbasi, M. and Zenouz, E.B., (2008). Host preference of rice weevil Sitophilus oryzae (L.) to five cultivars of Northern Iran. Agricultural Science, 17: 155-168.

16. Kamrin, M.A., (1997).Pesticide profiles: toxicity, environmental impact and fates. CRC Press,566:  pp160.

17. Kim, S.I., Roh, J.Y., Kim, D.H., Lee, H.S. and Ahn, Y.J., (2003). Insecticidal activities of aromatic plant extracts and essential oils against Sitophilus oryzae and Callosobruchuschinensis. Journal of Stored Products Research, 39: 293-303.

18. Koehler, P.G., (2022). Rice weevil, Sitophilus oryzae (coleoptera: Curculionidae). ENY261: 1-2.

19. Lal, S. and Shrivastava, B. P., (1985). Insect pest of stored wheat in Madhya Pradesh (India). Journal of Entomological Research,9(2): 141-148.

20. Longstaff, B. C., (1981). Biology of the grain pest species of the genus Sitophilus (coleoptera: curculionidae): a critical review. Protect. Ecol., 2: 83-130.

21. Mehta, V. and Kumar, S., (2020). Influence of different plant powders as grain protectants on Sitophilus oryzae (L.) (coleoptera: Curculionidae) in stored wheat. Journal of Food Protection, 83(12): 2167-2172.

22. Mehta, V., Kumar, S. and C.S.J., (2021). Damage potential, effect on germination and development of Sitophilus oryzae (coleoptera: curculionidae) on wheat grains in Northwestern Himalayas. Journal of Insect Science, 21(3): 1-7.

23. Okram, S. and Hath, T.K., (2019). Biology of Sitophilus oryzae (L.) (coleoptera: curculionidae) on stored rice grains during different seasons in Terai agro- ecology of West Bengal. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci, 8(4): 1955-1963.

24. Padin, S., Bello, G.D. and Fabrizio, M., (2002). Grain loss caused by Triboliumcastaneum, Sitophilus oryzae and Acanthoscelidesobtectus in stored durum wheat and bean treated with Beauveriabassiana. Journal of Stored Products Research, 38(1): 69-74.

25. Parisot, N., Vargas- Chávez, C., Goubert, C., Baa- Puyoulet, P., Balmand, S., Beranger, L., Blanc, C., Bonnamour, A., Boulesteix, M., Burlet, N., Calevro, F., Callaerts, P., Chancy, T., Charles, H., Colella, S., Barbosa, A.D.S., Dell’Aglio, E., Genova, A.D., Febvay, G., Gabaldón, T., Ferrarini, M.G., Gerber, A., Gillet, B., Hubley, R., Hughes, S., JacquinJoly, E., Maire, J., Marcet-Houben, M., Masson, F., Meslin, C., Montagné, N., Moya, A., Vasconcelos, A.T.R., Richard, G., Rosen, J., Sagot, M.F., Smit, A.F.A., Storer, J.M., Vincent- Monegat, C., Vallier, A., Vigneron, A., Zaidman-Rémy, A., Zamoum, W., Vieira, C., Rebollo, R., Latorre, A. and Heddi, A., (2021). The transposable element- rich genome of the cereal pest Sitophilus oryzae. BMC Biol., 19(241): 1-28.

26. Park, D.S., Peterson, C., Zhao, S. and Coats, J.R., (2004). Fumigation toxicity of volatile natural and synthetic cyanohydrins to stored- product pests and activity as soil fumigants. Pest Manag. Sci., 60: 833-838.

27. Shaaya, E. Ravid, U., Paster, N.,Juven, B., Zisman, U. and Pissarev, V., (1991). Fumigant toxicity of essential oils against four major stored-product insects. Journal of Chemical Ecology,17: 499-504.

28. Singh, P. K.,(2010). A decentralized and holistic approach for grain management in India. Curr. Sci.,99: 1179-1180.

29. Trematerra, P., Fontana, F., Mancini, M. andSciarretta, A., (1999). Influence of intact and damaged cereal kernels on the behaviour of rice weevil, Sitophilus oryzae (L.) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). J. Stored Prod. Res.,35:265-276.

30. Pest of rice (Sitophilus oryzae): Distribution, Life cycle, Nature of damage and Control measures.