Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-18T10:22:06.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Development of mass trapping technique for control of brinjal shoot and fruit borer, Leucinodes orbonalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

A. Cork*
Affiliation:
Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, Central Avenue, Chatham Maritime, Kent, ME4 4TB, UK
S.N. Alam
Affiliation:
Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute, Gazipur-1701, Bangladesh
F.M.A. Rouf
Affiliation:
Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute, Gazipur-1701, Bangladesh
N.S. Talekar
Affiliation:
Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center, PO Box 42, Shanhua 741, Taiwan
*
*Fax: 00 44 1634 880066 E-mail: a.cork@gre.ac.uk

Abstract

Locally-produced clear plastic water traps (12 cm × 14 cm base and 21 cm height) were optimized for use in large-scale mass trapping trials for control of brinjal fruit and shoot borer, Leucinodes orbonalis Guenée. Changing the shape (square and triangular) and number (two and four) of entry holes in the water trap had no significant effect on trap catch. Significantly more male moths were caught in traps treated with water containing powdered detergent than liquid detergent, light gear oil or insecticide. All water traps tested caught significantly higher numbers of moths than sticky delta traps with open sides under farmers' field conditions. Trap catches per 100 m2 were found to increase with increasing number of traps from 3 to 6 but the difference in catch between 4 and 6 traps per 100 m2 was not significant. Two small-scale replicated integrated pest management (IPM) trials were conducted consisting of the optimized water trap placed out with 10 m spacing (4 per 100 m2) and infested shoots pruned and destroyed. The first season trial had two treatments, IPM and farmers' practice in which farmers applied insecticide every two days in the peak harvest period. Overall, the percentage of healthy fruit and yields in both treatments were comparable at 53.8 and 49.6% and 20 and 19.4 tonnes per ha in the IPM and farmers' practice plots respectively. However, the initial infestations in the IPM plots (68%) were significantly higher than in farmers' practice plots (16%) due to the proximity of the nurseries used for the IPM plots to stacks of brinjal crop residues from the previous season that acted as a source of infestation. The second season's trials contained a third treatment in which IPM and farmers' practice were combined. The percent total healthy fruits harvested were 46.1, 58.6 and 69.1% respectively for the farmers' practice, farmers' practice plus IPM and IPM alone. Averaged total fruit yields were approximately 12 tonnes per ha for the farmers' practice plots and 30 tonnes per ha for each of the IPM-treated plots. The IPM plot had significantly fewer infested fruit than the IPM plus farmers practice plots and this was attributed to the activity of the larval parasitoid Trathala flavo-orbitalis (Cameron) that was suppressed in trial plots treated with insecticides.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alam, S.N., Khorsheduzzaman, A.K.M., Rouf, F.M.A., Jasmine, H.S., Rezaul, Karim A.N.M., Rajotte, E.G., Luther, G.C. & Talekar, N.S. (2005) Characteristics of parasitism of eggplant fruit and shoot borer, Leucinodes orbonalis Guenee (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) by Trathala flavoorbitalis (Cameron) (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) in Bangladesh Applied Entomology and Zoology (in press).Google Scholar
Bariola, L.A. (1984) Pink bollworm: factors affecting survival of diapause larvae and emergence of overwintering moths in the spring in central Arizona. US Department of Agriculture Research Service, ARS-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beevor, P.S., Mumford, J.D., Shah, S., Day, R.K. & Hall, D.R. (1993) Observations on pheromone-baited mass trapping for control of cocoa pod borer, Conopomorpha cramerella, in Sabah, East Malaysia. Crop Protection 12, 134140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campion, D.G., Bettany, B.W., Nesbitt, B.F., Beevor, P.S., Lester, R. & Poppi, R.G. (1974) Field studies of the sex pheromone of the cotton leafworm Spodoptera littoralis (Boisd.) in Cyprus. Bulletin of Entomological Research 64, 8996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catling, H.D. & Islam, Z. (1995) Studies on the ecology of yellow stem borer, Scirpophaga incertulas (Walker) (Pyralidae) in deepwater rice in Bangladesh. Crop Protection 14, 5767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cork, A., Alam, S.N., Das, A., Das, C.S., Ghosh, G.C., Phythian, S., Farman, D.I., Hall, D.R., Maslen, N.R., Vedham, K., Rouf, F.M.A. & Srinivasan, K. (2001) Female sex pheromone of brinjal fruit and shoot borer, Leucinodes orbonalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): blend optimization. Journal of Chemical Ecology 27, 18671877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cork, A., Alam, S.N., Rouf, F.M.A. & Talekar, N.S. (2003) Female sex pheromone of brinjal fruit and shoot borer, Leucinodes orbonalis: trap optimization and application in IPM trials. Bulletin of Entomological Research 93, 107113CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Downham, M.C.A., Tamo, M., Hall, D.R., Datinon, B., Adetonah, S. & Farman, D.I. (2004) Developing pheromone traps and lures for Maruca vitrata in Benin, West Africa. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 110, 151158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faccioli, G., Pasqualini, E. & Baronio, P. (1993) Optimal trap density in Cossus cossus (Lepidoptera: Cossidae) mass trapping. Journal of Economic Entomology 86, 850853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitt, G.P., Zalucki, M.P. & Twine, P. (1989) Temporal and spatial pattern of pheromone-trap catches of Helicoverpa spp. (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in cotton growing areas of Australia. Bulletin of Entomological Research 79, 145161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isart, J., Valle, N., Llerena, J.J., Mateu, F., Olmo, M.A., Rodriguez-Paiño, E., Viñolas, A. (1997) Use of pheromones in biological control against Zeuzera pyrina L. on hazel-nuts in Spain: mass trapping efficiency for different pheromone dispensers. IOBC-WPRS Bulletin 20, 107110Google Scholar
Katti, G., Pasalu, I.C., Varma, N.R.G. & Krishnaiah, K. (2001) Integration of pheromone mass trapping and biological control for management of yellow stem borer and leaf folder in rice. Indian Journal of Entomology 63, 325328Google Scholar
Kondo, A. & Tanaka, F. (1991) Pheromone trap catches of rice stem borer moth, Chilo suppressalis (Lepidoptera, Pyralidae) and related trap variables in the field. Applied Entomology and Zoology 26, 167172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mafra-Neto, A. & Habid, M. (1996) Evidence that mass-trapping suppresses pink bollworm populations in cotton fields. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 81, 315323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marks, R.J. (1976) Field studies with the synthetic sex pheromone and inhibitor of the red bollworm Diparopsis castanea Hmps. (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Malawi. Bulletin of Entomological Research 66, 267278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rashid, M.A., Alam, S.N., Rouf, F.M.A., Talekar, N.S.Insecticide and economics of eggplant cultivation at the farmers level of Jessore region in Bangladesh. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, in press.Google Scholar
Smit, N.E.J.M., Downham, M.C.A., Odongo, B., Hall, D.R. & Laboke, P.O. (1997) Development of pheromone traps for control and monitoring of sweetpotato weevils, Cylas puncticollis and C. brunneus, in Uganda. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 85, 95104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanzubil, P.B., Mensah, G.W.K. & McCaffery, A.R. (2000) Diapause initiation and incidence in the millet stem borer, Coniesta ignefusalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): the role of the host plant. Bulletin of Entomological Research 90, 365371CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zwankhuizen, M.J., Govers, F. & Zadoks, J.C. (1998) Development of potato late blight epidemics: disease foci, disease gradients and infection sources. Phytopathology 88, 754763CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed