Prec. Indian Aead. Sei., Vol. 83 B, No. 2, 1976, pp. 55-65

Observations on peltigera (Sehiff.)(Lep., Noetuidae) and its natural enemies in Anand (Gujarat State, India)

T. M. MANJUNATH*, R. C. PATEL AND D. N. YAOAV Gujarat Agricultural University, Anand Campus, B, A. College of Agriculture, Anand 388110, Gujarat MS received 13 August 1975

ABSTRACT Iteliothis peltigera (Sehiff.) () was found infesting the weed Acanthospermum hispidum at AItand (Gujarat State), and our obser- vations itldicated a close synchrony between the seasollal history of A, hispidum and /-/. peltigera. Both appear with the onsdt of mollsoolt (July) and disappear as winter approaches (October/November). If. pe#i- gera larvae were observed to feed primarilylon the growing tips and termi- nal leaves, the young larvae forming characteristic leaf-webs. The extent of" damage, population of the alld its natural parasitism were re~orded. Peak period of larval activity was in September when up to 53.39o shoots were damaged and 35 larvae]100 shoots were encoun- tered. The parasites recorded included the egg-parasite Trichogramma chilo- traeae Nag. and Nagar. (Trichogrammatidae), the egg-larval parasite Chelonus heliopae Gupta (Braconidae) and the larval parasites Campoletis maculipes (Tschek), Eriborus sp., Pristomerus sp. (all Ichneumonidae), Eucarcelia illota Curran, Palexorista laxa Curran and Exorista xanthaspis Wied. (all Tachinidae). Except C. heliopae and Pristomerus sp., all other parasites are new records on g. peltigera. T. chilotraeaewas the most predominant parasite, giving consistently high degree of para- sitism which-reached tip to 100~ in October 1973. C. maculipes was next in importance which gave up to 26.7~/o parasitism in September 1973. A predatory ant, Camponotus sericeus (F.) (Formicidae) and larvae ot~ Chrysopa carnea Steph. (Chrysopidae) were observed, preying on young H. peltigera larvae for the first time. The survey revealed that H. peltigera feeds primarily olt A. hispldum and is not a serious pest of any economic plants in this region. The distribution, host-plants and ~.atural enemies of 1t. peltigera in different countries is reviewed from literature records.

* Present address: CommonwealthInstitute of Biological Control, Indian Station;. P.O. Box 603, Bangalore ~560006 (Karnataka). 55

B2~Fob. % 56 T.M. MANJUNATH et at.

1. INTRODUCTION THE Heliothis (Lep., Noctuidae) is very complex, comprising many species, of which H. armigera (Hiibn.), H. assulta (Guen.) and H. pelt~gera (Sehiff.) occur in India. H. armigera is the most widely distributed and highly polyphagous pest, attacking over 40 species of plants of which pulses, tomato and tobacco are the most seriously damaged. H. assulta has a some- what limited distribution and host-range including tobacco (Nicotiana rustica and N. tabacum) and Physalis minima. Relatively little is known about H. peltigera. A survey of the literature indicates that H. peltigera occurs in Bulgaria, Burma, Canada., Cape Verde Islands, France, Germany, India, Israel, Italy, New Zealand, Persia, South Afi'ica, Tenerife Island (Canary Island) and the U.S.S.R. According to Hampson t its distribution in India is restricted to the northwestern region as far south as Poona. The host plants of H. peltigera recorded in various countries are given in table 1. Several parasites have been recorded on H. peltigera in Britain 25, France z2, India 2 and U.S.S.R. 6 (see also Thompson "2) and these are given in table 2. Polistes gallicus L. (Hym., Vespidae) was recorded as preying on larvae of H. peltigera in France 22. In Israel, Harpaz and Zlotkin 13 found numerous larvae of H. peltigera infected with nuclear polyhedrosis virus of the Borrelina virus type. With the exception of records of a few host plants and parasites of 1t. peltigera in India, no information is available on its seasonal history, extent of damage, degree of natural parasitism, etc. The present investi- gations were undertaken to study these aspects.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS H. peltigera was found infesting Starburr (Acanthospermum hispidum) in the Anand Campus of the Gujarat Agricultural University, where studies were carried out for two seasons in 1972 and 1973. Whilst the extent of natural parasitism was recorded in both years, that of damage to the host plant was studied only in the second year. H. peltigera larvae were observed to feed primarily on the growing tips and terminal leaves, the young larvae forming characteristic leaf-webs. To estimate the extent of damage, over 100 randomly selected terminal shoots were examined at weekly intervals and the number damaged was recorded. Young Acanthospermum plants possess only the central shoot but a frill-grown plant attains a height of about two feet and produces over l-Ieliothis peltigera (Schiff.) 57

Table 1. Host plants of H. peltigera recorded in various countrios

i Acanthospermum hispidum (Starburr) India Pate/ et aL (1971) 2 Arachis hypogaea (Groundnut) U.S.S.R. Shehegolev (1930) 8 Atropa bellodonna (Deadly nightshade) U.S.S.R. Parfentjev (1921) 4 Printz (1925) s Shchegolev (1929) 8 offlcinalis (Pot-marigold) U.S.S.R. Shchegolev (1929) 6 tinctorius (Safflower) India Fletcher (1919) 7 Pruthi (1941) a Patel et aL (1971) 2 Burma Ghosh (1926) 9 U.S.S.R. Shchegolev (1929) 6 Yakhontov (1941) TM France Feron and Vidaud (1960) 11 Israel Avidov (1966) ~2 Harpaz and Zlotkin (1965) 18 Edipta alba (' Bhangra ') India Patel et al. (1971) 2 Glycine max () Italy Reali (1959) 14 Gossypium hirsutum (Cotton) U.S.S.R. Vasilev (1924) 15 sp. Germany Zacher (1921) TM H. albus U.S.S.R. Shchegolev (1929) 6 H. (Henbane) U.S.S.R. Printz (1925) 5 Lycopersicon esculemum (Tomato) Cape Verde Coutinho Saraiva (1963) ~ Island Mentha piperita (Peppermint) U.S.S.R. Shchegolev (1929) s Bulgaria Popov (1960) is Dirimonov (1964) 11 Phaseolus sp. (Beans) Israel Coutinho Saraiva 0963) I7 Ricinus communis minor (Castor) U.S.S.R Olchovsky (1917) 2o Salvia sp. Germany Zacher (1921) le S. o O~binhlis (sage) Bulgaria Buresch (1941) 2~ S. sclarea (Clary) France Fagniez (1934) 22 Seneeio sp. Germany Zacher (1921) is Triumfetta pilosa ("Zepti ") India Patel et aL (1971) 2 Ulex Germany Zacher (1921) le Zea mav.~ (Maize} Canada Noel (1917) 28 France Anglade (l 963)~ Israel Coutinho Saraiva (1963) 17

200 branches. However, not more than five shoots were examined from a single plant. The plants were selected from all over the College Farm. To estimate the population of H. peltigera the number of larvae present ort the shoots was reeordod, Similarly, eggs fourtd oi1 the stem and ot~ 58 T.M. MANJUNATH et at.

Table 2. Parasites recorded on H. peltigera

Apanteles sp. Braconidae K~a

Aspilota imidtatrix Marsh do. Britain Carnpolpex mutablli~ Hlgr. Ictmeumonidae Russia C. ,olitarius Brisehke do. do. Carcelia sp. Tachinidae India Chelonua heliopae Gupta Braconidae do. Eulimneria rufifemur Thorns. Ichneumonidae Russia Hemiteles sp. do, France Meteorus pulchricornis Wesm. Bra¢onidae do. Microbracon piger Wcsm. do. Russia Orthostigma pumila Nees do. Britain Pristomerus sp. Ichneumonidae I~dia Rogas sp. Braconidae Russia R. aestuosus Reinh. do, do, Tachinafera L. Tachinidae France T. praeceps Mg. do. Russia VVinthernia quadri- pustulata F. do. France

i

six terminal leaves of each shoot (the were found to prefer these regions for oviposition) were also recorded.

The eggs arid larvae collected from sampled shoots as also those obtained additionally by examining more plants were brought to the laboratory and reared individually to record parasitism.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Acanthospermum is very common in waste lands and also in ctiltivated fields where periodical w~ding is not carried out. A :large number of seedlings of this weed appear all over the area after the first monsoon showers in July. Moths of H. pelt(gera also become active at about the same time, (Schiff.) 59 Table 3. Extent of shoot-damage and egg and larval populatioas of H. peitigera on A. hispidum

i i i i i i i m iiii iiii i i No. of H. peltigera Population/ Samplir.g period Number of shoots collected 100 shoots 1973 Month Week Examined % damaged Eggs Larvae Eggs Larvae

August I 123 6.5 5 7 4 •0 5.5 II 256 9'5 29 12 11.5 4.5 III 156 14-7 17 15 11.0 9.5 IV 126 17.5 32 9 25.5 7.0 SePtember I 153 19.0 44 22 28' 5 14" 5

II 171 50.3 61 60 35'5 35.0 IlI 187 22-4 32 33 17-0 17 '5 IV 278 8.3 27 17 10.0 6.0 October I 183 9- 8 17 8 9' 5 4"5

II 158 3 '2 9 4 5 "5 2"5 III 202 3.0 0 2 0 1"0

i i The data collected on the extent of shoot-damage as also the popula- tions of eggs and larvae are presented in table 3 (also see figures 1 artd 2). The data in table 3 indicate that larval activity and consequent damage to A. hispidum commenced from early August. Peak period of activity was in September when up to 53.3~ shoots were damaged and 35 larvae/!00 shoots were encountered. The population declined in October and thereafter until the next monsoon, the insect was not found in the field. There appears to be a long diapause in the pupal stage inside the soil. The following parasites have been recorded during the present investi- gations : Egg-parasite : Trichogramma chilotraeae Nagaraja and Nagarkatti (Hym., Trichogrammatidae) Egg-larval parasite • Chelonus heliopae Gupta (Hym., Braconidae) Larval parasite • Campoletis maculil.'es (Tschek) (Hym., Ichneumonidae) Eriborus sp. (Hym., lchneumonidae) ~ucarcelia illota Curran (Dipt, Tachmidae) 60 T.M. MANJUNATH et al.

Exorista xanthaspis Wied. (Dipt., Tachinidae) Palexorista laxa Curran (Dipt., Tachinidae) Pristomerus sp. (Hym., Ichneumonidae). Except C. heliopae and Pristomerus sp., all other parasites are new records on H. peltigera. A predatory ant, Camponotus sericeus (F.) (Hym., Formicidae) and larvae of Chrysopa carnea Steph. (Neu., Chrysopidae) were observed preying on young larvae of 11. peltigera during August-September 1972. Both these predators are new records for H. peltigera. The data obtained on natural parasitism are presented in table 4 and figures 1 and 2.

Egg-parasitism (figUre 2) It is evident from table 2 that oviposition by H. peltigera lasted from late July to early October and throughout this period the eggs were para- sitised by T. chilotraeae. The-egg-population and its parasitism were both much higher in 1972 than in 1973. The minimum parasitism in 1972 was 63.3j°o and it rem,Oned

Table 4. Natural parasitism of H. peltigera on A. hispidum

No. of eggs % parasitism by No. of % parasitism Total Period collected T. chilotraeae larvae by % Month Week 1972 1973 1972 1973 collected C.h. C.m. E.i. parasi- 1973 tism

JuLy ILl 0 0 .... 7 0 0 0 0

IV 30 0 63'3 .. 0 ...... ,.,

August l 80 4 75"0 50.0 7 0 0 0 0

1I 100 27 80~0 55"5 10 0 0 0 0

III 109 17 95"4 47'0 15 0 13.3 0 13.3

IV 62 20 96.8 25 "0 10 10 0 0 10:0

September I 102 42 90.2 7" l 25 0 4-0 0 4-0

lI 52 55 92.3 41 8 60 1.7 26-7 1.7 30.1

III 58 32 93" 1 62.5 36 0 25 "0 0 2 -~ "0

IV 200 23 88.0 73.9 19 0 15-8 5"5 2l .6

October I 0 23 .. 100.0 7 0 14" 2 0 14" 2

II 0 9 .. 100-0 4 0 0 0 0

C.h. = Chelonus hdiopae; C.m, = Campoletis maeulipes; E.i. = Eufarcelia illota, Holiothis peltigera (Schiff.) 61

• bove-90% from the third week of August till September. Parasitism slightly decreased towards the end of September and thereafter host eggs were not available. In 1973, parasitism gradually declined from August third week to September first week. Heavy rains during this period (in the first and second fortnights of August and September 1973 the rainfall was 109.73 ram, 282'19 mm, 231.14 mm and 194.06 mm as against 25.40 ram, 160.53 ram, 15.75 mm and 0.0 mm during the same periods in 1972) seem to have had a retarding effect on the activity of T. chilotraeae. How- ever, as the weather cleared from the second week of September, parasi- tism began to increase and reached 1007/o in October.

Larval parasitism (figure 1) Eriborus sp., E. xanthaspis, P. laxa and Pristomerus sp. were reared in small numbers ordy in 1972 while other parasites were obtained during both years. However, the extent of parsitism was recorded only in 1973.

55.

S0,

45- :' :

40- - :

g /iA 30. - /1\~ i - - Larval population/lO0 shoots / I I % "t ...... % shoots damaged : / / \',: - ~ larval parasltlsm

f ,. "-. 20' Ira''// ~' ' ...... • -'"~ I \:°. % \ is. 4 / / \: \ ," # ~- / # ~. l

10- ~," ~ , %. , •" ~/~.'fl i ~: ...... , ..... " /y ~zX ~ ...... \

s "'-~...~../I q ~, (.. / ...... / Weeks--* I II III IV I 1I III IV I II III August September

Figure 1. Seasonal larval population of l-[elivthls peltigera, extent of damage to Acantho. spermum hispidum and larval parasitism. 62 T.M. MANJUNATH et al.

As seen in table 4, C. maculipes was the only parasite active through- out the period while C. heliopae and E. illota were scarce. C. maculipes commenced its activity from August third week. The peak period of activity was in September when up to 26.7%, parasitism was recorded. H. peltigera larvae were not available from mid-October onwards. The observations carried out during two seasons indicate that there is a close synchrony between the seasonal history of A. hispidum and H. peltigera. Both appear with the onset of monsoon and disappear as winter approaches. A. hispidum completes its life-cycle and begins to dry up by October/November. Similarly, the activity of H. peltigera also comes to an end about the same time. Many plants (see host list) have been mentioned as hosts of H. peltigera in different countries of which reports of serious damage include the follow- ing. According to Shchegolev ~ it is an important pest of safflower, sage, mint and a number of cultivated oil-producing and medicinal plants in North Caucasian region. Dirimonov TM reported heavy infestation of mint in Bulgaria. Avidov r' considered it the most important defoliating cater

100 .a ...... o,° ! ,° °,%° . .t-, • • Q~,o,,, I 90, °°" J I / 80. / / ,it°,°'"" / o 70. °° / / t / J 60. / / / / 50 / / / Egg-populatlon/I00 terminal \ g shoots in 1973 40 \ 0~ parasitism in 1973 \ t ...... % parasitism in 1972

30-

~/\\\ 20- / \ I \ ~. 10

h'eeks-~ IV July' August :~ pt ember October Figure 2. Seasonal egg-population of Hellothis peltigera and its parasitism by Trichogramma chitotraeae (egg-population not recorded in 1972). I-Ieliothis peltigera (Schiff.) 63 pillar pest of safflower which damaged up to 35~ of the seeds in certain parts of Israel. Vasilev 15 listed H. peltigera as one of the less important pests of cotton in Transcaucasia (U.S.S.R.), but Printz 5 never found it on that plant. Although the first report of H. peltigera in India dates back to 18941, the only report of its being an economic pest was made by Pruthi 8 who mentioned it as a serious pest of safflower. However, there have been no subsequent reports to date and it is hardly considered a serious pest of safflower. The new host plants namely, E. alba and T. pilosa, recorded recently by Patel et al. are also weeds like A. hispidum. To study its possible host-range, cotton (Gossypium hirsutum), gram (Cicer arietinum), groundnut (Arachis hypogaea), lucerne ( sativa), maize (Zea mays), safflower, sunflower (Helianthus annuus), tobacco (Nico- tiana tabacum) and tomato (Lycopersicon esculentwn) plants grown in the vicinity where H. peltigera was active on A. hispidum, were repeatedly sur- veyed by the authors. But for the occasional presence of one or two larvae in groundnut and safflower, causing minor damage to leaves and flowers, other crops were free from its depredations. The moths also exhibit a remarkable host-searching ability, for eggs were laid on even isolated ' Star- burr' plants. From these it appears that H. peltigera has a marked pre- ference for A. hispidum. The fact that in India H. peltigera is almost specific to A. hispidum, which is a serious weed, but is a serious pest of certain economic plants in other countries, is very interesting. This leads one to suspect that the Indian species is a sibling. In preliminary feeding tests with Indian bean (Doliehos lablab), castor (Ricinus communis), cotton, gram, groundnut, lucerne, maize, pea (Pisum sativum), potato (Solanum tuberosum), safflower, sunflower, tobacco, tomato and tur (Cajanus cajan), the larvae fed on leaves of cotton, gram, groundnut, lucerne, maize, safflower and tur under labo- ratory conditions. However, the fact that it has not become a serious pest of any of these or other economic plants suggests that H. peltigera is of some value in the control of A. hispidum. In cases of severe infesta- tion, the larvae destroyed considerable number of flowers and shoots of A. hispidum, but this potential is greatly reduced as the larval population generally remained low because of the high degree of egg-parasitism.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors are grateful to the Director of the Anand Campus, and Principal, B.A. College of Agriculture, Gujarat Agriculture University, Anand, for providing facilities. They are indebted to the Director, B 3--Feb. 76 64 T.M. MANJUNATH et al.

Commonwealth Institute of Entomology, British Museum, London, and, to Dr. (Mrs.) Sudha Nagarakatti, Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, Bangalore, for identifying the specimens.

REFERENCES

1. Hampson, G. F., The Fauna of British India including Ceylon and Burma. Moths Vol. II Thacker, Spink ann Co., Calcutta, 175 pp. (1894). 2. Patel, R. C., Patel, J. C. and Patel, J. K., New records of parasites of Heliothis armigera (Hbn.) and Heliothis peltigera Schiff. from Gujarat. Indian J. Ent. 33 (2) 223-224 (1971). 3. Shchegolev, V. N., Pests of Arachis hypogaea in North Caucasus. J. Agric. Res. iV. Caucasus 3 (20) 141-150 (1930). 4. Parfentjev, I., Les Insectes nuisibles aux plantes Medicinales en Crimee. Bull. Soc. Path. Exot. 14 (3) 164-167 (1921). 5. Printz, YA. I., The biology of Heliothis obsoleta F. and its control. Notes App. Sci. Dept. Tiflis Bot. Gdns. Part 2, separate 54 pp. (1925). 6. Shchegolev, V. N., The of the genus Heliothis as insect pests of oil plants and. medicinal cultures and fodder plants in the North Caucasian region. Byull. Sev.-- Kavkazek. Kraev. sel. khoz. opuitn. Sta. 2112 48 pp. (1929). 7. Fletcher, T., B Report of the Imperial Entomologist. Sci. Rep. Agric. Re~. Inst., 1918-19, 86-103 (1919). 8. Pruthi, H. S., Report of the Imperial Entomologist. Sci. Rep. Agric. Ben. lint., New Delhi 1939-40, 102-114 (1941). 9. Ghosh, C. C., Report of the Entomologist, Mandalay, and Sericultural work for the year ended 30th June 1925, 18 pp. (1926). 10. Yakhontov, V., Supplementa entomologica. Izv. Uzbek. Fil. Akad. Nauk SSSR 2 76-77 (1941). 11. Feron, M. and Vidaud, J., La mouche du carthame Acanthiophilus helianthi Rossi (Dipt., Trypetidae) en France. Bev. Path. reg., 39 (1) 1-12 (1960). 12. Avidov, Z., (Ed.), Studies in agricultural entomology and plant pathology. Scripta hierosolymitana, 18 208 pp. (1966). 13. Harpaz, I. and Zlotkin, E., A nuclear-polyhedrosis virus of the safflower leaf worm Helio- this peltigera Schiff. (Lep., Ncctuidae). Annla. Soc. ent. Ft. (N.S.) 1 (4) 963--972 (1965). 14. Reali, G., On two Lepidoptera [ Vanesaa cardui (L.) and Heliothi~] ()peltigera (Schiff.) injurious to soybean in Lombardy. Boll. Zool. agric. Bachic. (2) 2 236-238 (1959). 15. Vasilev, I. V., Cotton pests. Cotton lndust. 3 (7-8) 88-116 (1924). 16. Zacher, F., pests of curative and poisonous plants and their importance in the cultivation of medicinal plants. Ber. Deutschen pharmazeut. Gea., 31 (2) 53-65 (1921). 17. Coutinho Saraiva, A., As lagartas polifagas, Heliothis armigera (Hiibner) e It. peltigera (Schiff.), no arquipelago de Capo Verde. (Polyphagous larvae, 11. armigera and 11. peltigera, in the Cape Verde Islands). Garcia de Orta 11 (3) 593-599 (1963). 18. Popov, P., New and rare insect species, their foodplants and distribution in Bulgaria. Bast. Zasht. $ (3) 51-55 (1960). Heliothis peltigera (Schiff.) 65

19. Dirimonov, M., Some features of the morphology and bionomics of Chloridea (Heliothis) peltigera Schiff. and the prospects for its control. Raat. Zasht. 12 (1) 17-23 (1964). 20. Olchovsky, V. V Observations made in 1916 on the castor oil plant in the Baku District. Baku Dageston Provincial Btireau for combating pests of agriculture, 8 pp. (1917). 21. Buresch, I., The Nocturnal Lepidoptera of Bulgaria with special reference to the harmful species. Mere. Bulgarian Soc. 7 9-100 (1914). 22. Fagniez, C., Line invasion de Chloridea peltigera Schiff. Lepidoptera nuisible a la sauge sclaree, arretee par 1' intervention de Polistes gallicus L. (Hymen.). l~ev. franc. Est. 1 (1) 27-28 (1934). 23. Noel, P., Les ennemis du Mais (Zea L.). (The pests of maize). Bldl. Lab. Reg. d' Entom. Agric. pp. 6-10 (1917). 24. Anglade, P., Degats de Chloridea (Heliothis) peltigera Schiff. sur mais darts le sud-ouest. Damage by 1t. peltigera to maize in south-western France). Rev. Zool. agric. 62 (4-6) 57 (1963). 25. Morley and Rait Smith, Trans. Roy. Est. Soc., London, 81 133-183 (1933). 26. Thompson, W. R., A catalogue of the parasites and predators of insect pests, Sec. I, Parasite-Host catalogue: part 7, Parasite of the Lepidoptera (G-M). Imperial Agr. Bureau, Inst. of Ent., Parasite Service, p. 290 (1946).