Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T19:57:25.366Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A Study of the natural Control of the Pea Moth, Cydia nigricana, Steph.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Ewen Cameron
Affiliation:
Farnham House Laboratory, Imperial Institute of Entomology.

Extract

1. The moth—Cydia nigricana—whose larvae bore into the pods of developing peas and render most of the contained seeds unfit for human consumption is considered by some authorities to be one of the principal insect pests of agriculture in Canada. It is particularly destructive in the Maritime Provinces and British Columbia, while in Ontario it increased to such proportions that the farmers of that province had to give up growing mid-season peas altogether.

2. This state of affairs is attributed to the fact that the pea moth was accidentally introduced from Europe in 1893 without the insect parasites which attack and check it in its native home. At any rate no parasites have emerged from the representative collections of pea moth material made by the Canadian entomologists in the affected areas, while three species with a combined parasitism of up to 60 per cent. have been reared by the writer from cocoons of the moth in England. Furthermore, in Canada, where parasites of this particular pest are absent, 10–50 per cent. of the pea crop and sometimes as much as 75 per cent. or more, is said to be destroyed annually by the moth larvae, whereas in England, where they are present, the attack is usually comparatively slight.

3. The paper opens with a general account of the biology of the pea moth including systematic descriptions of the adult and developmental stages, and notes on the host-plants and distribution of the insect.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1938

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

Brittain, W. H. (1919). Notes on the life-history, etc. of the pea moth.—Proc. Ent. Soc. N. Scotia, pp. 1120.Google Scholar
Fletcher, J. A. (1895 & 1901). Rep. Dom. Ent. & Bot. Exp. Farms, Ottawa.Google Scholar
Fluke, C. L. (1920). The Pea Moth, etc.Wisc. Agric. Exp. Sta. Madison, Bull. 310.Google Scholar
Glaser, R. W. (1932). Circ. New Jersey Dep. Agric. Bur. Plant Ind., no. 211.Google Scholar
Hanson, A. J. & Webster, D. L. (1936). The Pea Moth.—Bull. Agric. Exp. Sta. Wash., no. 327.Google Scholar
Keilin, D. (1924). On the appearance of gas in the tracheae of insects.—Proc. Cam. Phil. Soc., 1, no. 2.Google Scholar
Marshall, T. A. (1888). Spécies des Hymén. d'Eur. et d'Alg., 4, p. 366.Google Scholar
Meyrick, E. (1927). A Revised Handbook of British Lepidoptera, p. 596, London.Google Scholar
Miles, H. W. (1926). Life-history of the Pea Moth.—Bull. Chamb. Hort., 3, pt. 1, pp. 69.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture. (1927). Min. Agric. Rep. Path. Lab., 10.Google Scholar
Montgomery, B. E. (1935). J. Econ. Ent., 28, p. 371.Google Scholar
Morley, C. (1908). British Ichneumonids, 3, p. 152.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, H. T. (1934). The biology of Cydia pomonella.—Bull. Ent. Res., 25, pp. 201256.Google Scholar
Schmiedeknecht, O. (1930). Die Hymenopteren Nord und Mitteleuropas, p. 282, Fischer, Jena.Google Scholar
Schutze, K. T. & Roman, A. (1931). Schlupfwespen.—Isis Budissina, 12, Bautzen.Google Scholar
Thompson, W. R. & Parker, H. L. (1930). The morphology and biology of Eulimneria crassifemur, etc.J. Agric. Res., 40, pp. 321345.Google Scholar
Thorpe, W. H. (1932). Experiments on respiration, etc.Proc. Roy. Soc., B, 109, pp. 451471.Google Scholar
Watson, J. A. S. & More, J. A. (1924). Agriculture, p. 576, Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Wigglesworth, V. B. (1930). A theory of tracheal respiration in insects.—Proc. Roy. Soc., B, 106, p. 247.Google Scholar
Wilson, G. F. (1931). Insects associated with the seeds of garden plants.—J. Roy. Hort. Soc., 56, pp. 4344.Google Scholar
Meteorological Office. The Book of Normals of Meteorological Elements.Google Scholar
Royal Meteorological Society. Rainfall Atlas.Google Scholar