R & D UPDATES ON INTEGRATED PEST AND DISEASE MANAGEMENT IN – EXPERIENCE

A. Sivapragasam*

Abstract

The paper provided a summary list of the major pests (including mammalian pests) and diseases on coconut in Malaysia and the control measures used. The pest management practices in both plantations and smallholders were described and initiatives towards Integrated Pest Management were highlighted. Some updates on research and development activities were reported. These included: (i) Development of a trapping system with aggregated pheromones for monitoring palm weevil; (ii) Management of an invasive pest, Brontispa longissima and other hispids; (iii) Determination of monocrotophos residue levels; (iv) Comparison studies on trap types and pheromone blends for the rhinoceros beetle, and (v) Studies on phytoplasmas and Coconut cadang cadang viroids (CCCVd). The paper concluded with suggestions to mitigate key pests and disease problems, including exotic ones. The suggestions were: (i) Strategies towards improving the current practice of pest management for greater sustainability; (ii) Developing adequate diagnostic tools for detection of exotic invasive pests and pathogens, particularly lethal ones, and (iii) Enhancing efforts towards the efficient utilization of bio-based technologies based on their delivery system (e.g. ) and exploiting genetic variations (e.g. natural virulence of the Oryctes virus).

1. Introduction: the Socio-Economic Position of Coconut

Coconut is the fourth important industrial crop in Malaysia in terms of total planted area, after oil palm, rubber and paddy. It supports one of the oldest agro-based industries and plays an important role in the socio-economic position of the Malaysian rural population that involves 80,000 households. Majority of the coconut farms belong to smallholdings. About 63% of coconut production is for domestic consumption and 37% is for export and industrial processing by a number of small and medium industries (SMIs). Interestingly, despite the gradually decreasing trend in terms of acreage, the country has seen an increase in the export of end-products of coconut such as desiccated coconut, coconut milk powder and activated carbon. In 2008, exports of coconut and coconut-based products was valued at RM615.1 million (USD 186.4 million) whereas imports amounted to RM705.75 million (USD 213.9 million) (Hairuddin et al., 2010). There has been an increasing number of coconut-based industries especially for the oleo-chemical industries to produce methyl ester and diethanol amide, coconut cream, desiccated coconut, nata, coir fibre, coir bristles, cushion stuffing and activated carbon. However, for the Malaysian domestic coconut industry to realize the opportunities of the growing global market, the consistent and increased supply of the various raw materials is a critical requisite. Essentially, domestic market demands outweigh supply of nuts and the shortfall is met via importation. In 2008,

* Deputy Director, Rice and Industrial Crops Research Centre, Malaysia Agricultural Research and Development Institute (MARDI), Ministry of Agriculture and Agro-Based Industry, P. O. Box 12351, 50774, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Phone: (60-3) 89437427, Fax: (60-3) 89425786 and E-mail : [email protected] ; [email protected] 149 the total quantity of nuts imported was 38 million nuts (Abd. Razak et al., 2009). There is a coconut re-vitalization plan in place and one of the major challenges to this program has been that of managing pests and diseases. Losses due to pests can be significant sometime incurring complete loss of palms (Abd. Razak et al., 2009).

2. Pests, Diseases and Other Major Maladies

2.1. Insect and mammalian pests

Based on documented records, the coconut palm in Malaysia is attacked by about 184 insect pests species and a number of pathogens. The major pests which are perennial in nature are Oryctes rhinoceros (rhinoceros beetle) and Rhynchophorus vulneratus (red stripe weevil) and more recently, the hispid beetle, Brontispa longissima. Other insect pests are usually sporadic in nature. These include the two-colored coconut leaf beetle, Plesispa reichei, coconut leaf miner, Promocotheca cumingi, coconut leaf skeletoniser, Zuexippa (Artona) catoxantha, nettle caterpillar, Setora nitens, leaf binder, Hidari irava, bagworms (e.g. and Mahasena corbetti and Crematopsyche pendula), rufivena (coconut spike ), red spider mites, Tetranychus sp. and the coconut scale, Aspidiotus destructor. These pests are generally sporadic in occurrence. Mammalian pests such as rats (e.g. Rattus tiomanicus) and wild pigs (e.g Sus scrofa) and monkeys also pose problems by feeding on young nuts, spathes and inflorescence and uprooting and damaging transplants. Despite the wide range of pests, Abd Razak et al (2009) pointed out that special attention is given to the problem of wild pigs (especially during new planting establishment), red palm weevils and rhinoceoros beetles.

2.2. Major diseases and their pathogens

Tey and Chan (1978) reported on the diseases of coconut palms, especially MAWA hybrids in Peninsular Malaysia. These include: (i) Pre-emergent shoot rot (PSR) affecting germinating nuts of most varieties caused by Marasmius palmivorus. This pathogen also causes the frond base infection that results in the collapse of the fronds. Fungicides screening in the laboratory using such as Dithane M45, Thiram and Actidione effectively inhibited mycelia growth; (ii) Curvularia leaf spot which affects dwarf seedlings and caused by the fungus Curvularia maculans (= C. eragrosstidis). Fungicides, such as Dithane M45, Captan, Actidione and Difolatan used as prophylactic sprays at weekly or fortnightly intervals (depending on severity) are recommended; (iii) Helminthosporium leaf spot which is a common leaf disease on all coconut varieties and is caused by Helminthosporium incurvatum (Dreshslera incurvata). Control is achieved using fungicides such as Maneb and Captan; (iv) Spear rot caused by Fusarium sp. found mainly in the nursery; (v) Bud rot on seedlings caused by unknown agents (possibly Botryodiplodia, Fusarium and bacteria were isolated). Sharples (1928) and later Singh (1973) recorded many other pathogens associated with the coconut. Singh (1973) recorded the stem disease caused by Ganoderma lucidum (Fr.) Karst and the white root disease caused by Rigidoporus lignosus (Klotzsch) Imazeki which was also considered as a serious and economically important disease of coconut. Many other fungi were also recorded as capable of infecting coconut palms, the more important ones being Pestalotiopsis

150 palmarum, Helminthosporium incurvatum and Marasmius palmivorus which infected the leaves. Chan (1974) reported that Curvularia leaf spot disease to be widespread and serious in yellow dwarf nurseries. Recently, a petiole disease which causes frond break was found in some hybrids replants. According to Child (1964), the causal agent could be associated with Botryodiplodea or Diplodia spp as reported by Ragunathan (1927; Year Book of the Department of Agriculture, Ceylon, 1927) as the leaf-break disease of in Sri Lanka. The first symptoms are similar to lethal yellowing, i.e. discoloration and withering of the oldest fronds, but the next fronds to be affected the mid ribs break at a short distance above the implantation of the first leaflets, causing the top end of the leaf to hang down vertically. The inflorescence appear normal. Shaw and Booth (1967) described a petiole disease of coconut in Papua which they attribute to the fungus Anthostomella cyclindrospora sp. nov. Booth and Shaw. They found lesions which preceded frond break. A similar pathogen A. fusispora had been reported in Malaya (quoted by Child, 1964). and Chen (1988) also observed similar symptoms in MAWA grown on sandy soils in the East Coast. A large number of fronds suffered premature senescence and frond break, especially the lower fronds. They described the symptoms of the disease and fungal isolation from the fresh diseased tissues carried out in the field and in the laboratory suggested a suite of fungal pathogens, viz., Botryodiplodia sp., Helminthosporium sp. and Beltrania sp.

Malaysia has no official records of devastating diseases such as cadang cadang in the Philippines, lethal yellowing disease and the range of coconut wilts such as the kerala wilt and natuna wilt. Interestingly, the Malaysian Wilt disease, contrary to its name, had not been recorded although there has been suspicions of its presence. However, an important fact should be considered based on the etiology of many of these pathogens as the absence of symptoms, based on morphological descriptions, do not concur that these pathogens are actually not present in the country. Current reliable diagnostic tools prove otherwise, as recently suggested by studies by Nejat et al., (2009) on phytoplasmas associated with disease of coconut in Malaysia and Randles et al (2009) on CCCVd (vide supra; Section 4.5).

3. Towards Holistic Pest Management - Initiatives on Integrated Pest Management

There had been efforts towards using the Integrated Pest Management Program (IPM) against insect pests such as the rhinoceros beetle, the red stripe palm weevil, R. vulneratus and the coconut hispine beetle, B. longissima Gestro. Nevertheless, irrespective of whether it is the smallholders or plantations, generally the focus is around the management of the rhinoceros beetle which is a major problem and thus important in replant areas with young palms (< 3 years). The overall strategy includes reduction of breeding sites, trapping using pheromone traps and use of generally pyrethroid–based pesticide sprays. Periodically, various control components had been developed and introduced but were not sustained for various reasons. The basic components of a management program include the use of the following: (i) Mass trapping using pheromone-baited traps, (ii) Sporadic use of the fungus Metarhizium anisopliae, (iii) Cultural practices such as removal of breeding sites and pulverization of coconut trunks, (iv) Sprays of insecticides and (v) Physical removal or ‘winkling’. 151 Specifically, the plantation approach for managing the rhinoceros beetle entails a fortnightly spear drenching with which is complemented with pheromone trapping for a duration based on the level of the pests. Thus, the major cost of control is for O. rhinoceros in the new plantings as well as the adjacent earlier plantings. However, beetle trapping only reduces the population by 20% (Xaviar, United Plantations, pers. comm.). In mature plantings, Oryctes is also the main pest. Although damage may be tolerable, pheromone trapping is still practised although not as regular as in young transplants. Other pests of sporadic importance include bagworms (e.g Metisa plana), Artona catoxantha, Hidari irava, Setora nitens are usually treated on a need-basis with products such as (e.g Dipel ® or Thuricide®). Surveillance and monitoring is also carried out regularly and enumeration census used to determine when chemical intervention is necessary especially for the beetle and weevil, Rhynchophorus spp.. The use of non- chemical approaches also augurs well for the non-burning and environmental stewardship policies adhered to by the plantations in compliance with requirements for Roundtable for Sustainable Oil Palm (RSPO) Certification. Some earlier IPM programs had also included the use of the Oryctes baculovirus for control of the rhinoceros beetle. However, this was not sustained due to economic and other considerations.

In smallholdings, sustainable management is a major challenge. Generally, pesticides (e.g. carbofuran (Furadan 3G® and cypermethrin + (Nurelle®)) use is common. Recently, to address the sustainability issue, the Farmer Field School (FFS) approach was advocated to implement the integrated pest management approach specifically for the management of the rhinoceros beetle (Sivapragasam et al, 2007a). The evaluation of environment-friendly approaches using pheromone traps, green muscardine fungus, M. anisopliae, the virus, O. baculovirus, and log traps either singly or in combination gave some encouraging results but were not able to significantly reduce rhinoceros beetle populations on coconut palms and improve their coconut productivity (Sivapragasam et al, 2007b). Moreover, the cost of implementing the IPM approach was relatively high and may not be economically attractive in its current form. This was also concluded in other IPM-based trials using by and large similar components such as M. anisopliae and pheromone traps (Ho, 1996). Nevertheless, the empowerment of farmers as decision makers to manage their pest problems far outweighs the issues entailing the use of IPM-based multiple component management strategies.

4. R & D Updates on Pest Management

The following are some recent developments pertaining to pest and disease management.

4.1. Development of a trapping system with aggregated pheromones for monitoring palm weevil

Studies were conducted to evaluate a commercially available male produced aggregation pheromone (Ferrugi-on; 4-methyl-5-nonanol), as a monitoring tool for the red stripe palm weevil (RSPW), Rhynchophorus vulneratus Panzer (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in the coconut ecosystem (Sivapragasam et al., 2009). The study on pheromone placement, comparing locating the traps at ground level with aerial trapping showed that the mean

152 weekly weevil capture between the two techniques was not statistically significant (F: 0.4955; P = 0.4930). However, catches were numerically higher in the ground trap (mean ± S.D = 3.25 ± 3.77) compared to the aerial trap (mean ± S.D.= 2.25 ± 1.39). Upon sexing of the weevils, there were more females caught, irrespective of location. The male: female ratio over the trapping period was 8:10 and 7:19 respectively for the aerial and ground traps. Irrespective of sex, trap catches peaked in week 3 in the ground trap whereas the aerial trap peaked a week later. Studies on adding sugarcane as complementary bait showed the combination pheromone + kairomone significantly enhanced trap catches. However sugarcane or water alone, or their combination will not trap any weevil. The field trap data showed weevil catches were obtained almost every week suggesting the perennial presence of weevil. The pheromone traps caught a total 348 adults. The fluctuation in trap catches was significant, with catches of more than 30 weevils recorded for some traps. The findings suggest aggregation pheromone trapping can be a useful monitoring tool for RSPW in Malaysia. Recently, we have also recorded the red palm weevil, R. ferrugineus, the con- generic species of the red stripe weevil, infesting coconut in Kelantan, Malaysia.

4.2. Management of an invasive pest, Brontispa longissima and other hispids

The coconut hispine beetle, B. longissima Gestro is a major invasive pest in many coconut growing countries. Since 2005, it has been reported in Malaysia and hitherto found throughout the country causing significant losses to many palms, including coconut (Sivapragasam, 2007). Field incidence and severity on different palms showed that the MATAG variety had the highest damage score compared to Malayan Yellow Dwarf and the Manila palm, Veitchia merrili. So far, the beetle has not been found infesting oil palm. In laboratory tests, both chlorpyrifos + cypermethrin (Nurelle R ;0.05% a.i) and filtered jatropha oil (1.0 % a.i.) gave 100 percent mortality on adults at 24 h compared to neem oil (NeemazalR ;1.2% a.i.) and the untreated check (water only). However, adults from both treatments died at 48 h. Mortality at 24 h of B. longissima larva using Nurelle R and neem oil was numerically higher compared with jatropha oil but was not statistically significant different (p<0.05). However, treatment with neem oil showed higher mortality of larva followed by jatropha oil and Nurelle R at 48 h of treatment. The parasitoid, Asecodes hispinarum (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) was found also parasitizing on the larva of B. longissima (Wan Khairul Anuar et al., 2009).

Jinius (2009) reported the results of surveillance of the indigenous hispid, Plesispa reichei Chapuis infestating coconut (Cocos nucifera L.) growing areas in Sabah, Malaysia. We suspect that this could also be B. longissima based on the morphological features. In 2000, significant populations were recorded in the west coast coastal areas of Sipitang, Menumbok, Kuala Penyu, Membakut, Bongawan, Papar, Kota Kinabalu and Tuaran and by 2006, it had spread to the east coast regions of Kudat, Kota Marudu, Pitas, Sandakan, Lahad Datu, Semporna and Tawau. Recent surveys show the infestation has already spread to interior areas like Beaufort, Telupid, Ranau, Tambunan, Keningau and Tenom. It is important to note that the adults were found infesting oil palm ( guineensis) planted near infested coconut trees, but the damage caused is minimal. Other palms found infested are landscape palms such as manila palm (Veitchia merrillii) and royal palm (Roystonea regia).

153

4.3. Determination of monocrotophos residue levels

Monocrotophos is a systemic organophosphorus insecticide and it is allowed only to be used for trunk injection in coconut and oil palm especially for leaf-feeders in Malaysia. However, limited information is available for the pesticide residue in the coconut leaves, kernel and water after its application, which is important, in view of the current interest and increasing demand for fresh young tender coconuts. Supervised trials were thus done to determine the residue level of injected monocrotophos in coconut (var. MATAG; > 3 year old) leaves, kernel and water using a single application of monocrotophos (Azodrin® 60WSE 55% a.i) at 10ml/palm (recommended rate) and 20 ml/palm (Ma et al., 2009). Generally leaves recorded the highest residue levels amongst the samples tested. In the leaves, residue levels exceeded MRL (0.05 ppm) at all the sampling dates commencing from day 4 days after treatment (DAT) until 77 DAT. The residue level was higher with increased application rate. In the kernel, detectable levels of monocrotophos were seen beginning 7 DAT. At the recommended rate the MRL was exceeded at 7, 28, 43 and 49 DAT, after which it was not detectable. In the 20ml/palm treatment, the pesticide was detectable even until 77 DAT. In the coconut water, generally, residue levels in the water were higher than the kernel. As in the kernel, monocrotophos residues applied at recommended rate were detected at 7 DAT. MRL was exceeded at 7, 22, 28, 35, 43 and 49 DAT. After that, there were still residues of monocrotophos present in the water, but the levels were below the MRL. On the other hand, high levels of monocrotophos were detected in the water in the 20ml/palm treatment until 77 DAT.

The results indicated that even at the recommended rate (10ml/palm), residues of monocrotophos were above the MRL until 49 DAT in the kernel and water of young tender coconut and until 77 DAT if applied at higher rate (20ml/palm). Considering the relatively high residue in the edible components of the young nut, and the levels and distribution in the leaves can be help towards managing leaf feeding insect pests, it is recommended that the use of monocrotophos for trunk injection be limited to only palms in the immature stage (Ma et al., 2009).

4.4. Improving the trapping system for the rhinoceros beetle

The conventional trapping method using the bucket system (Chung, 1997; Norman et al., 2007) was compared to the PVC trap system advocated by APCC-IPM system using two pheromone blends, viz., the Sime RB pheromone® and the BCL pheromone blend from India. Results (Table 1) showed that: (i) Based on trap types, the PVC trap caught more beetle adults than the bucket trap; (ii) Based on pheromone blend, the Sime RB pheromone caught higher number of adults compared to the BCL pheromone; (iii) The use of the PVC trap with the Sime RB caught the highest number of adults and as expected were biased towards the females. Based on these results, it is suggested that, in future, the PVC-based trapping system be given consideration for the rhinoceros beetle.

154 Table1. Trap catches of Oryctes rhinoceros adults using two different trap designs and pheromone blends during two trapping periods

Treatments Trapping Period 22 Oct – 21 Nov 09 21 Nov – 20 Dec 09 (total; male/female) (total; male/female)

T!: PVC trap only 0 0 T2: Bucket trap only 0 0 T3: PVC trap + Sime 107 (31/76) 52 (16/36) RB® T4: PVC trap + BCL 10 (5/5) 9 (0/9) pheromone® T5: Bucket + Sime RB® 19 (9/10) 16 (4/12)

T6 : Bucket + BCL 3 (0/3) 14 (5/9) pheromone®

4.5. Studies on phytoplasmas and CCCVd Studies were conducted by Nejat et al., (2009) on phytoplasmas associated with disease of coconut in Malaysia. In coconut palms displaying coconut yellow decline symptoms, the studies revealed that palms with symptoms indicative of phytoplasma disease, phytoplasmas were detected in eight out of 20 Malayan Red Dwarf (MRD), nine out of 12 Malayan Yellow Dwarf (MYD) and 12 out of 12 Malayan Tall (MT). They also reported that at least two phylogenetically distinct phytoplasmas were associated with the coconut yellow decline syndrome in Malaysia. It was also confirmed by Randles et al (2009) that the coconut cadang cadang viroid (CCCVd; Cocadviroid, Pospiviroidae) occurred in Malaysian coconut and oil palm. Survey in Selangor, Malaysia of dwarf-type coconut palms selected based on various phenotypes such as severely tapered trunk, failure to produce nuts or production of abnormal nuts, revealed the CCCVd sequence (Hanold and Randles, 1998; quoted by Randles et al., 2009).

5. Conclusion

Based on the current state of art, there are several initiatives that could be considered towards improving the efficiency of the current pests and disease management system in coconut to mitigate unnecessary losses. These include:

5.1. Improving the sustainability of pest management via farmer empowerment: The major pests and diseases, if unmanaged, show significant potential for causing debilitating losses to the coconut palm especially during the immature phase. The case in point is the incessant application of pesticide sprays on a bi-weekly basis (based on plantation practice) against the rhinoceros beetle as part of conventional practice. Besides the long-term impact of such a strategy on non targets and the environment, there is an issue 155 of poor sustainability in advocating such measures. The basic problem here generally lies with the lack of understanding of the basic ecological attributes of the pest and factors that contribute to its proliferation especially under a smallholder system. Essentially, there is a need for an area-wide strategy for management. The FFS approach, which provides greater empowerment for farmers, complements that strategy based on its successful implementation in various countries, including Malaysia.

5.2. Developing adequate diagnostics tools for detection: Under the current set of quarantine detection protocols, there are numerous possibilities for new emergent and exotic pests and diseases, such as the eriophyid mite, Aceria guerreronis, red mite, Raodiella indica and phytoplasmas-based pathogens that could enter Malaysian borders. The case is especially serious for insidious pathogens (e.g. CCLVs) which could find their pathways through planting materials etc. Potential opportunities are there to employ reliable diagnostic tools of biotechnology for detection as evidenced by the recent detection of CCLVs by Randles et al (2009) which confirmed the presence of the lethal cadang cadang infection in coconut and oil palm in Malaysia. With the use of diagnostic tools e.g. hybridization assay, the detection and timely management of the CCCVd may be feasible. It is in this context that perhaps the earlier proposed Global Coconut Research for Development Program (PROCORD), which included Control of lethal diseases among the four priority research areas identified by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) in 1991, could be useful in this context.

5.3. Enhancing efforts towards bio-based technologies: It will be worthwhile to employ a combination of bio-based methods to manage key pests such as the rhinoceros beetle whereby the pheromone trap catches could be dosed with the virus or Metarhizium fungus to spread them naturally through the population. Trevor et al (2005) suggested that there is considerable genetic variation among endemic Oryctes virus isolates and there is evidence of rapid evolution of the virus. The taxonomic nomenclature has also been revised from been previously under Baculoviridae but now is under Nudiviruses. Recent studies by Ramle et al (2005) in Malaysia, from where the virus was initially reported by Huger in 1963, indicated that the Oryctes virus was common in Malaysia among adult beetles caught in pheromone traps. Viral DNA analysis after restriction with HindIII enzyme suggested three distinct viral genotypes. One strain (type B) was found to be the most virulent against both the larvae and adults compared to another (type A) which is found naturally. According to Ramle et al (2005), release of virus–infected adults resulted in reduction in palm frond damage for oil palm.

156 6. References

1. Abd Razak, H. H. Che Hasmah, and Ab. H. Mohamad Idrus (2009). Replanting and rehabilitation of coconut under smallholders. In: A. Sivapragasam et al (eds.) Proceedings National Coconut Conference, 28 – 30 July, 2009 Swiss-garden Golf Resort & Spa, Damai Laut, Perak. Published by MARDI; pp 40-7.

2. Chan, C.L. (1974). Chemical control of Curvularia leaf spot of coconut seedling. MARDI Res. Bull. 2: 19 -24.

3. Child, R. (1964). Coconuts. Longman Group Ltd. 1974. Second Edition. Pp. 226

4. Chung, G.F. ( 1997). The bioefficacy of the aggregation pheromone in mass trapping of Oryctes rhinoceros (L.) in Malaysia. The Planter 73 (852): 119-127.

5. Hairuddin, M.A., T.A. Tengku Mohd Ariff, A. Sivapragasam and A.S. Asrul din (2009). Situation and outlook of the coconut industry in Malaysia. In: A. Sivapragasam et al (eds.) Proceedings National Coconut Conference, 28 – 30 July, 2009 Swiss-garden Golf Resort & Spa, Damai Laut, Perak. Published by MARDI; pp 240-6.

6. Ho, C.T. (1996). The Integrated management of Oryctes rhinoceros (L.) populations in the zero burning environment. In: Ariffin Darus, Mohd Basri Wahid, Rajanaidu, N., Mohd Tayep Dolmat, Paranjothy, K., Cheah, S.C., Chang, K.C., and Ravigadevi, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1996 PORIM International Congress-Agriculture Conference: pp 336-368.

7. Jinius, J. (2009). Outbreak incidence of black hispid (Plesispa reichei Chapuis) on coconut in Sabah, Malaysia. In: A. Sivapragasam et al (eds.) Proceedings National Coconut Conference, 28 – 30 July, 2009 Swiss-garden Golf Resort & Spa, Damai Laut, Perak. Published by MARDI; pp 123-6.

8. Ma, C.K., A. Sivapragasam, M. M. Jusoh, D. Ayub, B. Razali and K.P. Lim (2009). Monocrotophos residue levels in coconut leaves, kernel and water. In: A. Sivapragasam et al (eds.) Proceedings National Coconut Conference, 28 – 30 July, 2009 Swiss-garden Golf Resort & Spa, Damai Laut, Perak. Published by MARDI; pp 140-3.

9. Musa, J. And Y.M. Chen (1988). Some important coconut diseases in Peninsular Malaysia –recent findings. In: Proc. Nat. Cocon. Conf. 1982. Publihed and printed by Dato’ Dr. Hj. Mohd. Yusof Hashim, Director General Malaysian Agricultural Research and Development Institute (MARDI). Pp 399 – 409.

10. Norman, K., Mohd Basri W., Ramle M., and Siti Ramlah, A.A. (2007). The effects of mortality and influence of pheromone trapping on the infestation of Oryctes rhinoceros in an oil palm plantation. J. Asia-Pacific Entomol. 10(3): 239-250.

157 11. Nejat, N. and S. Kamaruzaman, S.N. A. Abdullah, V. Ganesan and M. Dickinson (2009). Phytoplasmas associated with disease of coconut in Malaysia: Phylogenetic groups and host plant species. Plant Pathology, 58 (6). pp. 1152-1160.

12. Ramle, M., M.B. Wahid, K. Norman, T.R. Glare and T.A. Jackson (2005). The incidence and use of Oryctes virus for control of rhinoceros beetle in oil palm plantations in Malaysia. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology. 89: (1); pp 85-90.

13. Randles, J.W., J.M. B. Rodriguez, D. Hanold and G. Vadamalai (2009). Coconut cadang cadang viroid infection of African oil palm. The Planter, Vol. 85, No. 995: pp 93 – 101.

14. Shaw, D.E. and Booth, C. (1967). Petiole disease of coconut in Papua. Papua New Guinea Agric. J., 19 (2), 89-93; 94-98. (cited in R. Child; 1974).

15. Sharples, A. (1928). Palm disease in Malaya. Malay. Agric. J 16: 313-360.

16. Singh, K.G. (1973). A check-list of hosts and diseases in Peninsular Malaysia. Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Malaysia.

17. Sivapragasam, A. (2007). Brontispa longissima – its status and management in Malaysia. Paper presented at the Asian and Pacific Coconut Community/FAO- RAP/APPPC Consultative Meeting on the IPM of Brontispa longissima, 27-28 February 2007, Bangkok, Thailand.

18. Sivapragasam, A. and P. Mansor (2009).Recent developments in research on coconut at MARDI. In: A. Sivapragasam et al (eds.) Proceedings National Coconut Conference, 28 – 30 July, 2009 Swiss-garden Golf Resort & Spa, Damai Laut, Perak. Published by MARDI; pp 40-7.

19. Sivapragasam, A., A.H. Mohd. Idrus and A. Mohd. Anuar (2007a). Coconut IPM – Implementation of FFS in Malaysia. Paper presented at the Third Annual Meeting cum Terminal Review, 2-5 May 2007, Kochi, India. Organized by CFC/DIFD/APCC/FAO Project on Coconut Integrated Pest Management.

20. Sivapragasam, A., A. Mohd. Anuar and A.H. Mohd. Idrus (2007b). CFC/DIFD/APCC/FAO Coconut IPM Project: Integrated Pest Management (IPM) of the Rhinoceros beetle, Oryctes rhinoceros – An Overview. Paper presented at the Third Annual Meeting cum Terminal Review, 2-5 May 2007, Kochi, India. Organized by CFC/DIFD/APCC/FAO Project on Coconut Integrated Pest Management.

21. Sivapragasam, A. N. Ahmad, B. Razali and S. Mohd Sani (2009). Field trapping of the red stripe weevil, Rhynchoporous vulneratus (Panzer) with an aggregation pheromone in a coconut ecosystem. In: A. Sivapragasam et al (eds.) Proceedings National Coconut Conference, 28 – 30 July, 2009 Swiss-garden Golf Resort & Spa, Damai Laut, Perak. Published by MARDI; pp 127-34.

158

22. Tey and Chan (1978). Diseases of coconut palms in Peninsular Malaysia. Proc. Int. Conf. Cocoa and Coconuts, Kuala Lumpur 1978. Pp 692 – 707.

23. Trevor A. J., M.C. Allan and R.G. Travis (2005). Oryctes virus – Time for a new look at a useful biocontrol agent. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology. 89: (1); pp 91- 94.

24. Wan Khairul Anuar W. A., A. Sivapragasam and B. Razali (2009). Brontispa longissima: an invasive pest of coconut. Poster paper presented at the National Coconut Conference 2009, 28 – 30 July, 2009 Swiss-garden Golf Resort & Spa, Damai Laut, Perak.

7. Acknowledgements

The author conveys his gratitude and appreciation to the Executive Director of APCC, Mr. Romulo N. Arancon Jr. for the invitation given to present the paper at the 44th APCC COCOTECH Meeting. The endorsement of Mr Raj R. D’Nathan, the Undersecretary and Malaysia’s National Liaison Officer for APCC is gratefully acknowledged. I am also indebted to the Director-General of MARDI and the Director of the Rice and Industrial Crops Research Center, MARDI who had relentlessly supported the author’s various projects on coconut. Technical assistance provided by the project staffs is duly acknowledged. Funding support for the studies was provided under the Development Project Fund (P&P 021) mechanism under the Ministry of Agriculture and Agro-based Industry.

159