Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-559fc8cf4f-8sgpw Total loading time: 0.985 Render date: 2021-03-02T08:38:53.970Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Tritrophic interactions between cabbage cultivars with different resistance and fertilizer levels, cruciferous aphids and parasitoids under field conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

T. Kalule
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 7PY, UK
D.J. Wright
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 7PY, UK
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

Tritrophic interactions involving cabbage Brassica oleracea var. capitatacultivars ± fertilizer, Brevicoryne brassicae (Linnaeus) and Myzus persicae (Sulzer), and the parasitoids Diaeretiella rapae (M’cIntosh) and Aphidius sp. were conducted in 1998 and 1999. Brevicorne brassicaewas the dominant aphid species on all cultivars ± fertilizer, except for some treatments in late season 1998. Ruby Ball (red-leaved with antixenosis factors for B. brassicae alates) ± fertilizer was consistently less colonized by aphids in early stages of plant growth, although only significantly so compared with Derby Day (green-leaved, susceptible to aphids) without fertilizer for B. brassicae and Minicole (green-leaved with antibiosis factors for B. brassicae) with fertilizer for M. persicae. In early 1999, only B. brassicae was present and no significant differences between cultivars were seen. In the mid to late season 1998, the highest aphid infestations were usually found on Derby Day, although only significantly so for B. brassicae, in some treatments. In 1999, higher aphid infestations were observed on Derby Day in mid to late season and some significant differences were found for M. persicae as well as for B. brassicae. In both years, Ruby Ball had the greatest mummy:aphid ratios early season, with no consistent difference between the other cultivars. Later in the season, mummy:aphid ratios were generally highest on Minicole. Parasitism differed in seasonal occurrence and relative abundance. Diaeretiella rapae mummies were found earlier than Aphidius sp. There was evidence of a beneficial interaction between the degree of plant resistance and biological control in early to mid season.

Type
Review Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Campbell, R.K., Salto, C.E., Sumner, L.C. & Eikenbary, R.D. (1990) Tritrophic interactions between grains, aphids and a parasitoid. pp. 393401 in Szentesi, A. & Jermy, T. (Eds) Insect plants: 89, (Symp. Biol. Hungary, 39) Budapest, Academizi Kiado.Google Scholar
Cole, R.A. (1997) The relative importance of glucosinolates and amino acids to the development of two aphid pests Brevicoryne brassicae and Myzus persicae on wild and cultivated brassica species. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 85, 121133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, P.R., Singh, R., Pink, D.A.C., Lynn, J.R. & Saw, P.L. (1996) Resistance to Brevicoryne brassicae in horticultural brassicas. Euphytica 88, 8596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farid, A., Quisenberry, S.S., Johnson, J.B. & Shaffi, B. (1998) Impact of wheat resistance on Russian wheat aphid and a parasitoid. Journal of Economic Entomology 91, 334339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feeny, P. (1976) Plant apparency and chemical defence. pp. 140 in Wallace, J.W. & Mansell, R.L. (Eds) Biochemical interaction between plants and insects. New York, Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Fernandes, A.O., Wright, J.R. & Mayo, B.Z. (1998) Parasitism of greenbugs (Homoptera: Aphididae) by Lysiphlebus testaceipes (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) in grain sorghum: implications for augmentative biological control. Journal of Economic Entomology 91, 13151319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster, S.P., Denholm, I., Harling, Z.K., Moores, G.D. & Devonshire, A.L. (1998) Intensification of insecticide resistance in UK field population of the peach–potato aphid, Myzus persicae, Sulzer (Hemiptera: Aphididae) in 1996. Bulletin of Entomological Research 88, 127130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gamal, E.S., El-Ghar, A., El-Ghany, A. & El-Sayed, M. (1992) Long term effects of insecticides on Diaeretiella rapae (M'Intosh), a parasite of the cabbage aphid. Pesticide Science 36, 109114.Google Scholar
Gomez, K.A. & Gomez, A.A. (1984) Statistical procedures for agricultural research. 680 pp. New York, John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Gowling, G.R. & van Emden, H.F. (1994) Falling aphids enhance impact of biological control by parasitoids on partially aphid-resistant plant varieties. Annals of Applied Biology 125, 233242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hafez, M. (1961) Seasonal fluctuations of population density of the cabbage aphid, Brevicoryne brassicae (L.), in The Netherlands, and the role of its parasite, Aphidius (Diaeretiella rapae) (Curtis). Tijdschrift Plantenziekten 67, 445548.Google Scholar
Hare, D.J. (1992) Effects of plant variation on herbivore-enemy interactions. pp. 278298 in Fritz, R.S. & Simms, E.L. (Eds) Plant resistance to herbivores and pathogens – ecology, evolution and genetics. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jansson, R.K. & Smilowitz, Z. (1986) Influence of nitrogen on population parameters of potato insects: abundance, population growth and within-plant distribution of the green peach aphid, Myzus persicae (Homoptera: Aphididae). Environmental Entomology 15, 4955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalule, T. (2000) Tritrophic interactions between crucifers, aphids and hymenopteran parasitoids. PhD thesis. University of London.Google Scholar
Kausalya, K.G., Nwanze, K.F., Reddy, Y.V.R. & Reddy, D.D.R. (1995) Genotype-pest interactions in sorghum: sorghum midge. pp. 47 in Nwanze, K.F. & Youm, O. (Eds) Panicle insect pests of sorghum and pearl millet. Proceedings of International Consultative Workshop, ICRISAT, Niamey, Niger.Google Scholar
Loader, C. & Damman, H. (1991) Nitrogen content of food plants and vulnerability of Pieris rapae to natural enemies. Ecology 72, 15861590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackauer, M. & Chow, F.J. (1986) Parasites and parasite impact on aphid populations. pp. 95118 in McLean, D.G., Garrett, G.R. & Ruesink, G.W. (Eds) Plant virus epidemics: monitoring, modelling and predicting outbreaks. Sydney, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Mohamad, B.M. & van Emden, H.F. (1989) Host plant modification to insecticide susceptibility in Myzus persicae (Sulz). Insect Science and its Application 10, 699703.Google Scholar
MSTAT-C (1990) Microcomputer statistics program. Experimental design, data management, data analysis. Institute of International Agriculture, Michigan State University, USA.Google Scholar
Nwanze, K.F., Reddy, Y.V.R., Nwilene, F.E., Kausalya, K.G. & Reddy, D.D.R. (1998) Tritrophic interactions in sorghum, midge (Stenodiplosis sorghicola) and its parasitoid (Aprostocetus spp.). Crop Protection 17, 165169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Obrycki, J.J. & Tauber, M.J. (1984) Natural enemy activity on glandular pubescent potato plants in the greenhouse: an unreliable predictor of effects in the field. Environmental Entomology 13, 679683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ofuya, I.T. (1995) Colonisation and control of Aphis craccivora Koch (Homoptera: Aphididae) by coccinellid predators in some resistant and susceptible cowpea varieties in Nigeria. Crop Protection 14, 4750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, P.W., Bouton, C.E., Gross, P., McPheron, B.A., Thompson, J.N. & Weis, A.E. (1980) Interactions among three trophic levels: influence of plant on interactions between insect herbivores and natural enemies. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 11, 4165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radcliffe, E.B. & Chapman, R.K. (1965) Seasonal shifts in the relative resistance to insect attack of eight commercial cabbage varieties. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 58, 892897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salto, C.E., Eikenbary, R.D. & Starks, K.J. (1983) Compatibility of Lysiphlebus testaceipes (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) with greenbug (Homoptera: Aphididae) biotypes C and E reared on susceptible and resistant oat varieties. Environmental Entomology 12, 603604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schepers, A. (1989) Chemical control. pp. 89122 in Minks, A.K. & Harrewijn, P. (Eds) Aphids: their biology, natural enemies and control. World Crop Pests, 2C, Amsterdam, Elsevier.Google Scholar
Singh, R. & Ellis, P.R. (1993) Sources, mechanisms and bases of resistance in cruciferae to the cabbage aphid, Brevicoryne brassicae. IOBC/WPRS Bulletin 16, 2135.Google Scholar
Singh, R., Ellis, P.R., Pink, D.A.C. & Phelps, K. (1994) An investigation of the resistance of cabbage aphid in brassica species. Annals of Applied Biology 125, 457465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starks, K.J., Muniappan, R. & Eikenbary, R.D. (1972) Interaction between plant resistance and parasitism against the greenbug on barley and sorghum. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 65, 650655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, L.R. (1970) Aggregation and the transformation of counts of Aphis fabae Scop. on beans. Annals of Applied Biology 65, 181189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Emden, H.F. (1963) A field technique for comparing the intensity of mortality factors on the cabbage aphid in different areas of a crop. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 6, 5362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Emden, H.F. (1991) The role of host plant resistance in insect pest mis-management. Bulletin of Entomological Research 81, 123126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Emden, H.F. & Bashford, M.A. (1969) A comparison of the reproduction of Brevicoryne brassicae and Myzus persicae in relation to soluble nitrogen concentrations and leaf age (leaf position) in the Brussels sprout plant. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 12, 351364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Emden, H.F. & Wearing, C.H. (1965) The role of the aphid host plant in delaying economic damage levels in crops. Annals of Applied Biology 56, 323324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Lenteren, J.C. (1991) Biological control in a tritrophic system approach. pp. 327 in Peters, D.C., Webster, J.A. & Chlouber, C.S. (Eds) Aphid–plant interactions: population to molecules. Oklahoma, USA.Google Scholar
Verkerk, R.H.J., Leather, S.R. & Wright, D.J. (1998) The potential for manipulating crop–pest–natural enemy interactions for improved insect pest management. Bulletin of Entomological Research 88, 493501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyatt, I.J. (1970) The distribution of Myzus persicae (Sulz) on year round chrysanthemums. II. winter season: the effect of parasitism by Aphidius matricariae Hal. Annals of Applied Biology 65, 3142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 40 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 2nd March 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Tritrophic interactions between cabbage cultivars with different resistance and fertilizer levels, cruciferous aphids and parasitoids under field conditions
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Tritrophic interactions between cabbage cultivars with different resistance and fertilizer levels, cruciferous aphids and parasitoids under field conditions
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Tritrophic interactions between cabbage cultivars with different resistance and fertilizer levels, cruciferous aphids and parasitoids under field conditions
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *