INTRODUCTION Brinjal (Solanum melongena Linnaeus) also known as eggplant belongs to the family “Solanaceae” and is designated as the “King of vegetables”, having the centre of origin in the Indian sub-continent, Omprakash and Raju (2014). Being local to India it is one of the foremost common vegetable crops developed all through the nation. China is the leading nation of brinjal within the area and production all over the world. India is second in area and production about 730.4thousandhectare areas and 12800.8 metric tons production and 17.5 metric tons productivity. In India, brinjal is grown mainly in Bihar, Orissa, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh and states with coordinating climatic conditions within the tropics and subtropics. The area, production and productivity of brinjal are India- 7.1 Lakh ha, 135.58 Lakh MT, 19.1MT/ha; Bihar – 57,500 ha, 12.40 Lakh MT, 21.6 MT/ha. In Madhya Pradesh, it is grown in an area of 51.35 thousand hectares, with a production of 1073.63 metric tons (Anonymous 2018). Owing to the accessibility of the brinjal produce all through the year, this crop suffers very significantly from insect-pests damage. Brinjal is attacked by 142 species of insect pests, four species of mites and three species of nematodes in different nations of the world (Prempong and Bauhim, 1977 Sohi, 1996, Butani and Verma, 1976 Nayar et al., 1976). Brinjal shoot and fruit borer,Leucinodes orbonalis Guenee (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) is the extremely severe, endemic pest of brinjal in India causing potential damage to the crop. Early instar larvae tunnel into petioles, midribs of big leaves, and delicate shoots; the usual symptom caused is a dead heart and plant falling. Later, they bore into developing unmarketable fruits. During its whole larval stage, one larva destroys four to six fruits. A fully developed larva makes an escape hole in the fruit before entering the pupal stage. According to Alam et al. (2003), the economic harm threshold in India corresponds to a shoot and fruit infestation of 6%. The caterpillar may be a profoundly damaging and cosmopolitan pest causing damage to 80-90% yield loss, Regupathy et al. (1997). To combat the brinjal shoot and fruit borer, farmers are presently utilising a wide range of harmful chemical pesticides and spraying them more often. The foremost successful and cheapest strategy to manage this pest is to develop resistant varieties. Among the different strategies of pest management, the use of pesticides shapes the primary line of defence against insect pests. Due to the frequent picking, the use of pesticides to manage this pest started to pose concerns for the environment, natural enemies, the development of resistance, and pest comeback in addition to being harmful to customers' health due to chemical residue in the produce (Mehrotra, 1990). However, it has been asserted that the next-generation biorational pesticide compounds are both potent and safer for non-target creatures and the environment (Sontakke et al., 2007; Misra, 2008). With a view on the climate change projections for India, an attempt has been made here to study the efficacy and economics of newer insecticides for the management of Brinjal shoot and fruit borer, Leucinodes orbonalis Guenee in the Gwalior region of M.P. MATERIAL AND METHODS A field experiment was conducted at the entomological field of the College of Agriculture, Gwalior during rabi 2018-19. An experiment was laid out in Randomized Block Design (RBD), with eight treatments including the untreated control and three replications. The plot size was taken as 4.2 m × 3.0 m. Thirty days old healthy seedlings of the Deshi variety of brinjal were transplanted in the main field with 60 cm spacing between the rows and 60 cm between plants. A standard agronomic package of practices was followed to raise and maintain a healthy crop. Insecticidal treatments mentioned in Table 1 were imposed when the pest population has reached its ETL. Further, the second and third sprays were done at 15 days intervals. For the observations on the shoot and fruit borer, the total number of secondary shoots per plant and number of infested shoots per plant were recorded from 5 randomly selected plants in each replicated plot and per cent shoot damage was calculated by using the following formula. To avoid repetition in observations, the infected shoots were clipped off at each observation. Percentage shoot infestation = (Number of infested shoots)/(Total number of secondary shoots) × 100 For observations on percent fruits infestation, the fruits were harvested at fruiting stages and weight of the total number of fruits and weight of infested fruits per plant were counted separately and per cent, of fruit infestation (by weight) was calculated by using the following formula- Percentage fruit infestation (by weight) = (Weight of infested fruits)/(Weight of the total number of fruits) × 100 The weight of brinjal fruits at each picking was recorded individually for each treatment and the total yield was calculated by adding the yield from all pickings in each treatment. The yield was then converted into a per hectare basis. Yield (Kg/ha) = (Yield / plot)/(Plot size) × 10000 The data on pest infestation based on calculated percentage were arc sine transformed by the method as suggested by Gomez and Gomez (1984). The data were then subjected to statistical analysis by adopting the appropriate method of "Analysis of variance" as suggested by Fisher and Yates, 1963. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1. Efficacy of newer insecticides against Brinjal shoot and fruit borer. Brinjal shoot and fruit borer, Leucinodes orbonalis Guenee was observed in the field at varying levels and the damage symptoms and specimens are depicted in Plate 1. A. Percent shoot damage by Leucinodes orbonalis Based on the data presented in Table 2 and depicted in Fig. 1, the mean per cent shoot damage in all the insecticidal treatments was recorded as significantly less damagein comparison to control (5.08%). Among the treatments, flubendiamide 20% WG @ 300g/ha was found to be most efficient as it was recorded with minimum per cent shoot damage (0.31%) followed by emamectin benzoate 5% SG @ 150g/ha (0.53%) and spinosad 45% EC @ 180ml/ha (0.79%). The following effective group of treatments included chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 55 gm/ha (1.23% shoot damage), Carbosulfan 25% EC @ 1000ml/ha (1.54% shoot damage), Indoxacarb 14.5% SC @ 500ml/ha (2.05% shoot damage), thiacloprid 21.7% W/W @ 300ml/ha (2.87% shoot damage) and found at par with each other but statistically significant superior to control.The results are in line with the findings of Reshma and Behera (2018) who reported that flubendiamide 480 SC @ 78.70 g a.i. /ha and spinosad 45%SC @ 10ml a.i. /ha were proved to be highly effective against shoot and fruit borer in brinjal. B. Percent fruit damage by Leucinodes orbonalis Based on the data presented in Table 2 and depicted in Fig. 1, the mean per cent fruit damage (by weight) in all the insecticidal treatments recorded significantly lessdamage in comparison to control (40.58%). Among the treatments, flubendiamide 20% WG @ 300g/ha was found to be most efficient as it was recorded with least fruit damage (11.77%) followed by emamectin benzoate 5% SG @ 150g/ha (16.03%) and spinosad 45% EC @ 180ml/ha (18.02%). The following effective group of treatments included chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 55 g/ha (20.29% fruit damage), Carbosulfan 25% EC @ 1000ml/ha (22.22% fruit damage). Treatment indoxacarb 14.5% SC @ 500ml/ha with 24.38% fruit damage was found at par with thiacloprid 21.7% W/W @ 300ml/ha with 25.95% fruit damage but statistically significant superior to control.These results were strongly supported by previous studies by Singh and Sachan (2015) who reported that spinosad @ 200ml/ha was the most effective treatment for shoot and fruit damage in brinjal. Niranjan et al. (2017) reported chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC was most effective. Besides these, Spinosad 2.5% SC and Flubendiamide 20 WG proved next to Chlorantraniliprole. C. Fruit yield Based on the data presented in Table 2 and depicted in Fig. 1, cumulative healthy marketable fruit yield in all the insecticidal treatments recorded significantly higher fruit yield as compared to control (198.50 q/ha). Among the treatments flubendiamide 20% WG @ 300g/ha was found to be most efficient as it recorded highest fruit yield (583.70 q/ha) after by emamectin benzoate 5% SG @ 150g/ha (448.30 q/ha), spinosad 45% EC @ 180ml/ha (418.17 q/ha). The following effective group of treatments included chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC @ 55 g/ha (328.50 q/ha), Carbosulfan 25% EC @ 1000ml/ha (322.27 q/ha), indoxacarb 14.5% SC @ 500ml/ha (322.17 q/ha), thiacloprid 21.7% W/W @ 300ml/ha (252.57 q/ha) fruit yield. The present findings are in line with the findings of Khare and Sneha (2021) who reported thatthe brinjal crop was best protected against the brinjal shoot and fruit borer using Spinosad 45 percent SC with a fruit yield of 250 q/ha. Singh et al. (2021) reported spinosad 45SC @ 0.5 ml/l was the best with the least shoot (2.03%) and fruit damage (12.66%) with maximum yield (25.39 and 26.99 t/ ha), chlorantraniliprole and emamectin benzoate were the next best treatment. Shirale et al. (2012) reported Chlorantraniliprole 18.50% SC gave a significantly higher yield as compared to the plots (528.52 quintals/ha). 2. Economics of the insecticidal treatments A. Increase in yield over control Data indicated in Table 3 showed that, highest increase in fruit yield of brinjal among the different treatment during rabi 2019 over control was recorded in flubendiamide 20 WG @ 300 g/ml/ha (385.2 q/ha) which was followed by emamectin benzoate 5% SG @ 150 g/ml/ha (249.8 q/ha), spinosad 45% SC @ 180 g/ml/ha (219.67 q/ha), Chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SC @ 55 g/ml/ha (130 q/ha), Carbosulfan 25 EC @ 1000 g/ml/ha (123.77 q/ha), Indoxacarb 14.5 SC @ 500 g/ml/ha @ 123.67g/ml/ha and thiacloprid 21.7 W/W @ 300 g/ml/ha (54.07 q/ha). B. Net profit Highest net profit per hectare among the different treatments, was recorded in flubendiamide 20 WG @ 300 g/ml/ha (Rs. 767656), followed by emamectin benzoate 5% SG @ 150 g/ml/ha (Rs. 496856), spinosad 45% SC @ 180 g/ml/ha (Rs. 436596), Chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SC @ 55 g/ml/ha (Rs. 257256), Carbosulfan 25 EC @ 1000 g/ml/ha (Rs. 244796), Indoxacarb 14.5 SC @ 500 g/ml/ha @ 123.67g/ml/ha (Rs. 244596) and thiacloprid 21.7 W/W @ 300 g/ml/ha (Rs. 105396). The present findings got supported by Khare and Sneha (2021) who reported spinosad treated plot was Rs. 410000/ha. Shridhara et al. (2019) reported emamectin benzoate 5 SG higher net profit of Rs. 141884 ha-1. This was followed by flubendiamide 39.5 SC, chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SC and spinosad 45 SC registered net profit of Rs. 125604, 108179.84 and 71937.58 ha-1. C. Cost-benefit ratio Highest cost benefit ratio per hectare among the different treatments, was recorded in flubendiamide 20 WG @ 300 g/ml/ha (1:279.7) which was followed by emamectin benzoate 5% SG @ 150 g/ml/ha (1:181.06), spinosad 45% SC @ 180 g/ml/ha (1:159.10), Chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SC @ 55 g/ml/ha (1:93.7), Carbosulfan 25 EC @ 1000 g/ml/ha (1:89.2) Indoxacarb 14.5 SC @ 500 g/ml/ha @ 123.67g/ml/ha (1:89.1) and thiacloprid 21.7 W/W @ 300 g/ml/ha (1:38.40). The present results were supported by Kushwaha and Painkra (2016) who reported Chlorantraniliprole (1:5.48) had the highest B:C ratio, followed by flubendiamide (1:4.91), spinosad (1:4.65), and indoxacarb (1:4.65). (1:4.44). Kameshwaran and Kumar (2015) reported highest CBR with chlorantraniliprole 20 EC @ 40 g a.i./ha and lowest with indoxacarb 14.5 SC @ 75 g a.i./ha.