DOCSLIB.ORG

Integrated Management of Groundnut Rosette Disease

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Integrated Management of Groundnut Rosette Disease INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT OF GROUNDNUT ROSETTE DISEASE Catherine Njambi Karanja BSc. Agriculture, University of Nairobi A thesis submitted to the Department of Plant Science and Crop Protection in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of a Master of Science degree in Crop Protection of the University of Nairobi University ot NAIROBI Library 0406111 5 Faculty of Agriculture College of Agriculture and Veterinary Sciences University of Nairobi 2009 DECLARATION I declare that this is my original work and has not been presented for a degree in any other university. Signed.... (OItAA.................. Date. A?. .1.9.?. Catherine N. Karanja This thesis has been submitted for examination with our approval as university supervisors from the Department of Plant Science and Crop Protection. Signed.. R. 9. Date. Dr. Rama D. Narla Date..... '<?./.£/*??. ...... Dr. Florence M. Olubayo Dat Dr. Mary W. Mburu n DEDICATION To my parents, Samuel Karanja and Irene Wairimu for their moral support and care all my life. in ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I thank Almighty God for life and strength. I am thankful to my supervisors: Drs. R. D. Narla, KM. Olubayo and M.W. K. Mburu for their guidance, support and encouragement throughout the study. I am grateful to Mr. Elias Obudho for assistance in biometry. I am grateful to the University of Nairobi for the scholarship award and International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-arid Tropics (ICRISAT) for financing the research through the Lucrative Legumes Project. I am also thankful to the University staff (Joseph Wagura and Isaac Gathuma) and ICRISAT staff (Andrew Wandera, Joseph Kibuka, Agumba Singh, Collins Otieno and Ken Omondi) for their technical support during lab and field work respectively. I am also thankful to Siaya Agricultural Training Centre staff (David Okere and Paul Mbore) and the officer in­ charge of Kenya Agricultural Research Institute substation in Alupe (Lazarus Kisuya). I appreciate support and encouragement from all my friends. iv 2.4.2 Disease symptoms.......................................................................................18 2.4.3 Effects of rosette disease on groundnut yields...........................................19 2.4.4 Diagnosis of rosette disease....................................................................... 20 2.5 The aphid vector..............................................................................................20 2.5.1 Taxonomic characters of Aphis craccivora Koch...................................... 22 2.6 Disease-vector relationship.............................................................................22 2.7 Epidemiology of Groundnut rosette disease................................................. 23 2.8 Management of groundnut rosette disease.....................................................24 2.8.1 Chemical control of the vector...................................................................25 2.8.2 Cultural practices.........................................................................................25 2.8.3 Host plant resistance.................................................................................. 27 CHAPTER THREE.......................................................................................................30 MATERIALS AND METHODS.................................................................................30 3.1 Study area......................................................................................................... 30 3.2 Description of test groundnut varieties..........................................................30 3.3 Field preparation and fertilizer application....................................................31 3.4 Planting and weeding...................................................................................... 32 CHAPTER FOUR..........................................................................................................33 EFFECT OF PLANTING TIME AND VARIETAL RESISTANCE ON APHID POPULATION, GROUNDNUT ROSETTE DISEASE INCIDENCE AND YIELD.............................................................................................................................. 33 4.1 Introduction...................................................................................................... 33 4.2 Materials and methods.................................................................................... 35 4.3 Results...............................................................................................................38 4.3.1 Aphid population.........................................................................................38 4.3.2 Groundnut rosette disease incidence..........................................................43 4.3.3 Kernel yield.................................................................................................49 4.4 Discussion.........................................................................................................53 vi CHAPTER FIVE ,57 EFFECTS OF INTEGRATED DISEASE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON APHID POPULATION, GROUNDNUT ROSETTE DISEASE INCIDENCE AND YIELD.................................................................................................................... 57 5.1 Introduction......................................................................................................57 5.2 Materials and methods.................................................................................... 58 5.3 Results...............................................................................................................62 5.3.1 Aphid population.........................................................................................62 5.3.2 Groundnut rosette disease incidence...........................................................66 5.3.3 Kernel yield..................................................................................................69 5.4 Discussion........................................................................................................ 71 CHAPTER SIX............................................................................................................... 74 GENERAL DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS..... 74 6.1 General discussion............................................................................................ 74 6.2 Conclusion....................................................................................................... 75 6.3 Recommendations............................................................................................76 REFERENCES................................................................................................................77 APPENDICES.................................................................................................................96 Vll LIST OF TABLES Aphid population in early and late planted groundnut varieties at Siaya in 2007 40 Aphid population in early and late planted groundnut varieties at Alupe, 2007 42 Aphid population in early planted groundnut varieties at Alupe during the short rain season, 2007 43 Percentage increase in disease incidence among groundnut varieties due to late planting 46 Groundnut rosette incidence in early and late planted groundnut 47 varieties at Siaya, 2007 Groundnut rosette incidence in early and late planted (4 weeks later) 48 groundnut varieties at Alupe in 2007 Kernel yield (Kg ha 1) among groundnut varieties planted during the 50 short and long rain season Costs used in calculating marginal returns 61 Aphid population in various disease management practices at Siaya and Alupe during the long rain season, 2007 63 Aphid counts/leaf in various disease management practices per 64 variety Percentage reduction in groundnut rosette disease incidence in 67 groundnut varieties due to different management practices Groundnut rosette incidence across varieties over time in various 68 disease management practices at siaya and Alupe during the long rain season, 2007 Mean kernel yield, % yield gain and marginal returns 70 Groundnut kernel yield (Kg ha ') response to disease 70 management practices at Siaya and Alupe, during the long rain season, 2007 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Aphid population over time in early- and late planted groundnut varieties at Siaya and Alupe during the long rain season, 2007 39 Figure 2 Groundnut rosette incidence in early and late (4 weeks later) planted groundnut varieties at Siaya and Alupe during the long rain season, 2007 45 Figure 3 Rainfall (mm) at Siaya and Alupe during the long 51 rain season, 2007 Figure 4 Temperature (°C) at Siaya and Alupe during the long rain season, 2007 51 Figure 5 Temperature (°C) at Alupe during the short rain season, 2007 52 Figure 6 Mean aphid population over time at Siaya and Alupe during the long rain season, 2007 62 Figure 7 Groundnut rosette incidence over time during the 66 long rain season, 2007 ix LIST OF PLATES Plate 1 Groundnut rosette disease symptoms in the field 44 Plate 2 Cowpea and sesame trap crops 65 x LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ANOVA Analysis of variance CP Coat Protein DMP Disease management practice GRAV Groundnut Rosette Assistor Virus GRD Groundnut rosette disease GRV Groundnut Rosette Virus Ep Early planting FAO Food and Agriculture Organization ICRISAT International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics ICTV dB International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses database KARJ Kenya Agricultural Research Institute Lp Late planting MOA Ministry of Agriculture sat RNA Satellite
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pathogen-Induced Addjski of the Wild Peanut, Arachis Diogoi, Potentiates
    http://www.diva-portal.org Postprint This is the accepted version of a paper published in . This paper has been peer-reviewed but does not include the final publisher proof-corrections or journal pagination. Citation for the original published paper (version of record): Bag, P. (2018) Pathogen-induced AdDjSKI of the wild peanut, Arachisdiogoi, potentiates tolerance of multiple stresses in E. coli andtobacco Plant Science https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2018.03.033 Access to the published version may require subscription. N.B. When citing this work, cite the original published paper. Permanent link to this version: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-156687 Pathogen-induced AdDjSKI of the wild peanut, Arachis diogoi, potentiates tolerance of multiple stresses in E. coli and tobacco Sakshi Rampuria1*, Pushan Bag1, Conner J Rogan2, Akanksha Sharma1, Walter Gassmann3, P.B Kirti1, 1Department of Plant Sciences, School of Life Sciences, University of Hyderabad, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. 2Division of Biological Sciences, Christopher S. Bond Life Sciences Center and Interdisciplinary Plant Group, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA. 3Division of Plant Sciences, Christopher S. Bond Life Sciences Center and Interdisciplinary Plant Group, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA. *Correspondence: Sakshi Rampuria, Department of Plant Sciences, School of Life Sciences, University of Hyderabad, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. Tel.: +914023134545; Fax: +914023010120. P.B Kirti [email protected] Highlights Chloroplastic AdDjSKI enhances tolerance of E.coli against salinity, osmotic, acidic and alkaline stress conditions. AdDjSKI over expression lines in tobacco exhibits enhanced heat, salinity, drought and osmotic stress tolerance along with enhanced disease resistance against phytopathogenic fungi P.
    [Show full text]
  • 09-Plantas Alimentícias.Indd
    Iheringia Série Botânica Museu de Ciências Naturais ISSN ON-LINE 2446-8231 Fundação Zoobotânica do Rio Grande do Sul Lista preliminar das plantas alimentícias nativas de Mato Grosso do Sul, Brasil Ieda Maria Bortolotto, Geraldo Alves Damasceno-Junior & Arnildo Pott Fundação Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul, Instituto de Biociências, Laboratório de Botânica. Bairro Universitário, CEP 79070-900, Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul. [email protected] Recebido em 27.IX.2014 Aceito em 17.V.2016 DOI 10.21826/2446-8231201873s101 RESUMO – Apresentamos o inventário preliminar das plantas alimentícias silvestres do Mato Grosso do Sul usadas na dieta humana ou com potencial para uso. Incluímos espécies que constam em publicações e em trabalhos inéditos dos autores, cujas coletas, realizadas no estado, estão incorporadas nos herbários CGMS, COR e CPAP. Adicionalmente, foram incluídas espécies de Arecaceae, coletadas no estado depositadas em outros Herbários e espécies dos gêneros Arachis, Dioscorea e Passifl ora que constam na Lista de Espécies da Flora do Brasil para o Mato Grosso do Sul. Foram encontradas 294 espécies, distribuídas em 160 gêneros e 67 famílias botânicas. As famílias mais ricas foram Fabaceae (49) e Myrtaceae (38), seguidas por Arecaceae (32) e Passifl oraceae (12). Esta é a primeira listagem de espécies alimentícias do estado. Palavras chaves: frutos comestíveis, Cerrado, Pantanal ABSTRACT – Preliminary list of native food plants of Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil - We present a preliminary inventory of wild food plants found in Mato Grosso do Sul that are used in human diet or potentially useful. Species were compiled from publications and from data collected by the authors; specimens deposited in CGMS, COR and CPAP herbaria were also included.
    [Show full text]
  • Peanut Science
    PEANUT SCIENCE VOLUME 31 JULy-DECEMBER 2004 NUMBER 2 Phenotypic and Molecular Evaluation of Interspecific Peanut (Arachis) Lines W.P.Anderson'>, G. Kocherr', C.C. Holbrook', and H.T. Stalker' ABSTRACT molecular markers to tag resistance genes for use in Peanut breeders are constantly in search of new conventional breeding programs and stack these genes sources of genes that confer tolerance or resistance to in highly productive peanut cultivars. biotic and abiotic stresses to improve the production and quality. The objective of this study was to evaluate peanut lines generated from interspecific crosses for Key Words: Root-knot nematode, RFLP, AFLP, amounts of wild species introgression, including genes for resistance to peanut root-knot nematodes, tomato disease resistance. spotted wilt virus and leaf spot diseases. Nine diploid Arachis species were crossed with peanut breeding lines and 130 different interspecific hybrid lines were Improvement of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) culti­ developed. These lines were evaluated for the amount vars has historically been achieved by crossing elite by of introgression using RFLP analyses, plant elite genotypes. This procedure often results in genotypes morphology, and disease resistant phenotypes. Based withhigher yields, but may cause vulnerability to biotic on RFLPs, 41 lines showed measurable introgression and/or abiotic stresses. During the last few decades peanut and 12 hexaploid-derived lines were polymorphic for breeding programs have attempted to incorporate genes at least four probes. Greenhouse and field evaluations for increased tolerance or resistance to known diseases indicated that resistance was not present in the lines tested for tomato spotted wilt virus, early leaf spot, or of peanut.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonomy of the Genus Arachis (Leguminosae)
    BONPLANDIA16 (Supi): 1-205.2007 BONPLANDIA 16 (SUPL.): 1-205. 2007 TAXONOMY OF THE GENUS ARACHIS (LEGUMINOSAE) by AntonioKrapovickas1 and Walton C. Gregory2 Translatedby David E. Williams3and Charles E. Simpson4 director,Instituto de Botánicadel Nordeste, Casilla de Correo209, 3400 Corrientes, Argentina, deceased.Formerly WNR Professor ofCrop Science, Emeritus, North Carolina State University, USA. 'InternationalAffairs Specialist, USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, Washington, DC 20250,USA. 4ProfessorEmeritus, Texas Agrie. Exp. Stn., Texas A&M Univ.,Stephenville, TX 76401,USA. 7 This content downloaded from 195.221.60.18 on Tue, 24 Jun 2014 00:12:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BONPLANDIA16 (Supi), 2007 Table of Contents Abstract 9 Resumen 10 Introduction 12 History of the Collections 15 Summary of Germplasm Explorations 18 The Fruit of Arachis and its Capabilities 20 "Sócias" or Twin Species 24 IntraspecificVariability 24 Reproductive Strategies and Speciation 25 Dispersion 27 The Sections of Arachis ; 27 Arachis L 28 Key for Identifyingthe Sections 33 I. Sect. Trierectoides Krapov. & W.C. Gregorynov. sect. 34 Key for distinguishingthe species 34 II. Sect. Erectoides Krapov. & W.C. Gregory nov. sect. 40 Key for distinguishingthe species 41 III. Sect. Extranervosae Krapov. & W.C. Gregory nov. sect. 67 Key for distinguishingthe species 67 IV. Sect. Triseminatae Krapov. & W.C. Gregory nov. sect. 83 V. Sect. Heteranthae Krapov. & W.C. Gregory nov. sect. 85 Key for distinguishingthe species 85 VI. Sect. Caulorrhizae Krapov. & W.C. Gregory nov. sect. 94 Key for distinguishingthe species 95 VII. Sect. Procumbentes Krapov. & W.C. Gregory nov. sect. 99 Key for distinguishingthe species 99 VIII. Sect.
    [Show full text]
  • Keystone Ancient Forest Preserve Resource Management Plan 2011
    Keystone Ancient Forest Preserve Resource Management Plan 2011 Osage County & Tulsa County, Oklahoma Lowell Caneday, Ph.D. With Kaowen (Grace) Chang, Ph.D., Debra Jordan, Re.D., Michael J. Bradley, and Diane S. Hassell This page intentionally left blank. 2 Acknowledgements The authors acknowledge the assistance of numerous individuals in the preparation of this Resource Management Plan. On behalf of the Oklahoma Tourism and Recreation Department’s Division of State Parks, staff members were extremely helpful in providing access to information and in sharing of their time. In particular, this assistance was provided by Deby Snodgrass, Kris Marek, and Doug Hawthorne – all from the Oklahoma City office of the Oklahoma Tourism and Recreation Department. However, it was particularly the assistance provided by Grant Gerondale, Director of Parks and Recreation for the City of Sand Springs, Oklahoma, that initiated the work associated with this RMP. Grant provided a number of documents, hosted an on-site tour of the Ancient Forest, and shared his passion for this property. It is the purpose of the Resource Management Plan to be a living document to assist with decisions related to the resources within the park and the management of those resources. The authors’ desire is to assist decision-makers in providing high quality outdoor recreation experiences and resources for current visitors, while protecting the experiences and the resources for future generations. Lowell Caneday, Ph.D., Professor Leisure Studies Oklahoma State University Stillwater,
    [Show full text]
  • 100 Characters
    40 Review and Update of Non-mollusk Invertebrate Species in Greatest Need of Conservation: Final Report Leon C. Hinz Jr. and James N. Zahniser Illinois Natural History Survey Prairie Research Institute University of Illinois 30 April 2015 INHS Technical Report 2015 (31) Prepared for: Illinois Department of Natural Resources State Wildlife Grant Program (Project Number T-88-R-001) Unrestricted: for immediate online release. Prairie Research Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign Brian D. Anderson, Interim Executive Director Illinois Natural History Survey Geoffrey A. Levin, Acting Director 1816 South Oak Street Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-6830 Final Report Project Title: Review and Update of Non-mollusk Invertebrate Species in Greatest Need of Conservation. Project Number: T-88-R-001 Contractor information: University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign Institute of Natural Resource Sustainability Illinois Natural History Survey 1816 South Oak Street Champaign, IL 61820 Project Period: 1 October 2013—31 September 2014 Principle Investigator: Leon C. Hinz Jr., Ph.D. Stream Ecologist Illinois Natural History Survey One Natural Resources Way, Springfield, IL 62702-1271 217-785-8297 [email protected] Prepared by: Leon C. Hinz Jr. & James N. Zahniser Goals/ Objectives: (1) Review all SGNC listing criteria for currently listed non-mollusk invertebrate species using criteria in Illinois Wildlife Action Plan, (2) Assess current status of species populations, (3) Review criteria for additional species for potential listing as SGNC, (4) Assess stressors to species previously reviewed, (5) Complete draft updates and revisions of IWAP Appendix I and Appendix II for non-mollusk invertebrates. T-88 Final Report Project Title: Review and Update of Non-mollusk Invertebrate Species in Greatest Need of Conservation.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the United States National Museum
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM issued |i;|\X^H by the SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM Vol.86 Washington: 1939 No. 3064 RESTRICTION OF THE GENUS GELECHIA (LEPIDOP- TERA: GELECHIIDAE), WITH DESCRIPTIONS OF NEW GENERA By August Busck The genus Gelechm Hiibiier/ type G. rhomhella (Schiffermiiller), has become, in the course of years since its erection, a "wastebasket" ^ for hundreds of heterogeneous species of gelechiids that could not readily be assigned to other genera on wing or palpal characters. The result is an aggregation of more than 400 such species under the generic name Gelechia. Quite aside from the inconvenience of such an unwieldy number of species in one genus, it is apparent that this lumping does not represent a natural grouping, but that many of the included species are less related to their associates in the check lists under that genus than they are to the species placed in other genera. Gnorimoschema Busck {Phthorimaea Meyrick), for example, which has been correctly separated for many years on obvious pterogostic and oral characters, is clearly more closely related to Gelechia proper than most of the genera here eliminated from the concept. For this reason it is included in the synoptic tables in this paper, and figures of the genitalia are given for comparison (pi. 68, fig. 2; pi. 65, fig. 36). Several sound attempts have been made by workers in continental Europe, notably Heinemann,^ to make a more natural classification by the erection of separate genera for species with certain slight modi- fications of wing structure and palpal characters in common, but the 1 Verzeichniss bekannter Schmetterlinge, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Major Pests of African Indigenous Vegetables in Tanzania and the Effects Of
    i Major pests of African indigenous vegetables in Tanzania and the effects of plant nutrition on spider mite management Von der Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultat der Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Universität Hannover zur Erlangung des Grades Doktorin der Gartenbauwissenschaften (Dr. rer. hort) genehmigte Dissertation von Jackline Kendi Mworia, M.Sc. 2021 Referent: PD. Dr. sc. nat. Rainer Meyhöfer Koreferent: Prof. Dr. rer. nat. Dr. rer. hort. habil. Hans-Micheal Poehling Tag der promotion: 05.02.2020 ii Abstract Pest status of insect pests is dynamic. In East Africa, there is scanty information on pests and natural enemy species of common African Indigenous Vegetables (AIVs). To determine the identity and distribution of pests and natural enemies in amaranth, African nightshade and Ethiopian kale as well as pest damage levels, a survey was carried out in eight regions of Tanzania. Lepidopteran species were the main pests of amaranth causing 12.8% damage in the dry season and 10.8% in the wet season. The most damaging lepidopteran species were S. recurvalis, U. ferrugalis, and S. litorralis. Hemipterans, A. fabae, A. crassivora, and M. persicae caused 9.5% and 8.5% in the dry and wet seasons respectively. Tetranychus evansi and Tetranychus urticae (Acari) were the main pests of African nightshades causing 11%, twice the damage caused by hemipteran mainly aphids (5%) and three times that of coleopteran mainly beetles (3%). In Ethiopian kale, aphids Brevicoryne brassicae and Myzus persicae (Hemipterans) were the most damaging pests causing 30% and 16% leaf damage during the dry and wet season respectively. Hymenopteran species were the most abundant natural enemy species with aphid parasitoid Aphidius colemani in all three crops and Diaeretiella rapae in Ethiopian kale.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae
    New Attractant Food for Catching Adult Rednecked Peanutworm (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) in Peanut Authors: Yoandry Rodríguez Rivero, Daniel Junior de Andrade, Fabiano Aparecido dos Santos, Cirano Cruz Melville, and Gustavo Walace Pacheco Leite Source: Florida Entomologist, 100(3) : 660-662 Published By: Florida Entomological Society URL: https://doi.org/10.1653/024.100.0326 BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Complete website, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/terms-of-use. Usage of BioOne Complete content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Florida-Entomologist on 17 May 2019 Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-use New attractant food for catching adult rednecked peanutworm (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) in peanut Yoandry Rodríguez Rivero1,*, Daniel Junior de Andrade1, Fabiano Aparecido dos Santos1, Cirano Cruz Melville1, and Gustavo Walace Pacheco Leite1 Production of peanuts, Arachis hypogaea L. (Fabaceae), is a tradi- Evaluations were carried out in an experiment established to tional agricultural activity in several regions of Brazil, especially in the compare 2 peanut cultivation systems: intercropped with sorghum, state of São Paulo, which accounts for 80% of the national production Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench (Poaceae), and sunflower, Helianthus (Santos & Todeschini 2012).
    [Show full text]
  • Parasitism Capacity of Telenomus Remus and Trichogramma Pretiosum on Eggs of Moth Pests of Peanut
    Bulletin of Insectology 73 (1): 71-78, 2020 ISSN 1721-8861 eISSN 2283-0332 Parasitism capacity of Telenomus remus and Trichogramma pretiosum on eggs of moth pests of peanut José Ricardo Lima PINTO, Odair Aparecido FERNANDES School of Agricultural and Veterinarian Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Jaboticabal, SP, Brazil Abstract Telenomus remus Nixon (Hymenoptera Scelionidae) and Trichogramma pretiosum Riley (Hymenoptera Trichogrammatidae) are widely used for the control of lepidopteran pests in several countries, but applied programs using these parasitoids in peanuts are still rare. Therefore, the comparative parasitism capacity of T. remus and T. pretiosum in Stegasta bosqueella (Chambers) (Lepi- doptera Gelechiidae), Spodoptera cosmioides (Walker) and Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) (Lepidoptera Noctuidae) eggs were studied under controlled conditions (12L:12D photoperiod, 25 ± 1 °C, and 70 ± 10% RH). Eggs of S. bosqueella, S. cosmi- oides and S. frugiperda were offered daily throughout the adult lifespan of the parasitoids. Both parasitoids did not parasitize eggs of S. bosqueella. Eggs of Spodoptera spp. were significantly more parasitized by T. remus than by T. pretiosum. These two parasi- toids presented the highest parasitism rate in the first 24 hours in Spodoptera eggs. However, to obtain 80% of parasitism in Spodoptera spp. took up to seven days for T. remus and up to three days for T. pretiosum. Telenomus remus demonstrated a long- er lifespan, greater number of emerged parasitoids, and a female-biased sexual ratio, which might result in a greater potential con- trol of Spodoptera spp. in the field. For S. bosqueella, other biological control agents should be considered. Key words: biological control, egg parasitoids, biological parameters.
    [Show full text]
  • The Distribution of Insects, Spiders, and Mites in the Air
    TECHNICAL BULLETIN NO. 673 MAY 1939 THE DISTRIBUTION OF INSECTS, SPIDERS, AND MITES IN THE AIR BY P. A. CLICK Assistant Entomolo^ist Division of Cotton Insect In^^estigations Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREJWAVSHINGTON, D. C. somi )r sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. Price 25 ccntt Technical Bulletin No. 673 May 1939 UNJIED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AQRIQULTURE WASHINGTON, D. C n THE DISTRIBUTION OF INSECTS, SPIDERS, AND MITES IN THE AIR ' By P. A. GLICK Assistant entomologist, Division of CMçtn Insect Investigations, Bureau of Ento- mology hndWlant Quarantine 2 CONTENTS Page Pasrt Introduction 1 Meteorological data—Continued Scope of the work '_l_^ Absolute humidity 101 The collecting ground ""' '" g Vapor pressure 102 Airplane insect traps ...... 6 Barometric pressure. _. .1 104 Operation and efläciency of the traps ' 8 Air currents---._._ "" log Seasonal distribution of insects 9 Light intensity "" 122 Altitudinal distribution of insects 12 Cloud conditions _ 126 Day collecting 12 Precipitation . _" 128 Night collecting 16 Electrical state of the atmosphere 129 Notes on the insects collected * 16 Effects of the Mississippi River flood of 1927 \Yinged forms _ 59 on the insect population of the air ISO Size, weight, and buoyancy _ 84 Seeds collected in the upper air __.. 132 Wingless insects 87 Collection of insects in Mexico 133 Immature stages _ 90 Sources of insects and routes of migration 140 Insects taken alive 91 Aircraft as insect carriers.-.-.. 141 Meteorological data _ 93 Collecting insects in the upper air 142 Temperature _.. 93 Summary 143 Dew point _ 98 Literature cited...
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of Peanut and Its Wild Relatives
    q NIAB 2011 Plant Genetic Resources: Characterization and Utilization (2011) 9(1); 134–149 ISSN 1479-2621 doi:10.1017/S1479262110000444 An overview of peanut and its wild relatives David J. Bertioli1,2*, Guillermo Seijo3, Fabio O. Freitas4, Jose´ F. M. Valls4, Soraya C. M. Leal-Bertioli4 and Marcio C. Moretzsohn4 1University of Brası´lia, Institute of Biological Sciences, Campus Darcy Ribeiro, Brası´lia-DF, Brazil, 2Catholic University of Brası´lia, Biotechnology and Genomic Sciences, Brası´lia-DF, Brazil, 3Laboratorio de Citogene´tica y Evolucio´n, Instituto de Bota´nica del Nordeste, Corrientes, Argentina and 4Embrapa Genetic Resources and Biotechnology, PqEB Final W3 Norte, Brası´lia-DF, Brazil Abstract The legume Arachis hypogaea, commonly known as peanut or groundnut, is a very important food crop throughout the tropics and sub-tropics. The genus is endemic to South America being mostly associated with the savannah-like Cerrado. All species in the genus are unusual among legumes in that they produce their fruit below the ground. This profoundly influences their biology and natural distributions. The species occur in diverse habitats including grass- lands, open patches of forest and even in temporarily flooded areas. Based on a number of criteria, including morphology and sexual compatibilities, the 80 described species are arranged in nine infrageneric taxonomic sections. While most wild species are diploid, cultivated peanut is a tetraploid. It is of recent origin and has an AABB-type genome. The most probable ancestral species are Arachis duranensis and Arachis ipae¨nsis, which contributed the A and B genome components, respectively. Although cultivated peanut is tetraploid, genetically it behaves as a diploid, the A and B chromosomes only rarely pairing during meiosis.
    [Show full text]