DOCSLIB.ORG

PENGGEREK POLONG KEDELAI, Etiella Zinckenella Treitschke (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), DAN STRATEGI PENGENDALIANNYA DI INDONESIA

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
PENGGEREK POLONG KEDELAI, Etiella Zinckenella Treitschke (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), DAN STRATEGI PENGENDALIANNYA DI INDONESIA PENGGEREK POLONG KEDELAI, Etiella zinckenella Treitschke (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), DAN STRATEGI PENGENDALIANNYA DI INDONESIA Yuliantoro Baliadi, W. Tengkano, dan Marwoto Balai Penelitian Tanaman Kacang-kacangan dan Umbi-umbian, Jalan Raya Kendalpayak, Kotak Pos 66 Malang 65101 ABSTRAK Penggerek polong kedelai (Etiella zinckenella Treitschke) merupakan hama penting dan dilaporkan terdapat pada semua sentra pertanaman kedelai di Indonesia. Selain E. zinckenella, ada empat spesies penggerek polong lain yang diidentifikasi di Indonesia, yaitu E. hobsoni Butler, E. chrysoporella Meyrick, E. grisea drososcia Meyrick Stat.n., dan E. behrii Zeller. E. zinckenella merupakan spesies yang paling dominan dan mengakibatkan kehilangan hasil panen kedelai hingga 80%. Kehilangan hasil tersebut merupakan dampak dari gerekan larva pada polong dan biji. Bintik coklat pada polong yang tertutupi oleh benang pintal merupakan jalan masuknya larva dan lubang besar pada polong sebagai jalan keluar larva dewasa untuk melanjutkan stadium pupa di dalam tanah. Polong yang terserang juga ditandai oleh butiran-butiran kotoran yang terikat satu sama lain oleh benang pintal berwarna coklat kekuningan dan adanya gerekan pada biji. Makalah ini menelaah kemajuan penelitian penggerek polong kedelai di Indonesia, meliputi bioekologi E. zinckenella (biologi, fluktuasi populasi, pola pembentukan polong, iklim, musuh alami, tanaman inang, dan tanggap varietas), komponen pengendalian (sanitasi, tanam serempak, pergiliran tanaman, pola tanam, tanaman perangkap, pestisida nabati, varietas tahan, biologi, dan kimia), serta rekomendasi pengendalian penggerek polong secara terpadu (PHT). Kata kunci: Kedelai, Etiella zinckenella, pengendalian hama terpadu, Indonesia ABSTRACT Soybean pod borer, Etiella zinckenella Treitschke (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), and its control strategy in Indonesia Soybean pod borer (Etiella zinckenella Treitschke) is an important pest and reported from all of soybean planting areas in Indonesia. Besides E. zinckenella, there are four others pod borer species identified in Indonesia, namely E. hobsoni Butler, E. chrysoporella Meyrick, E. grisea drososcia Meyrick Stat.n., and E. behrii Zeller. E. zinckenella is widely causing severe damage to soybean seeds in many soybean areas. Up to 80% yield losses of soybean have been reported in Indonesia. Damage by E. zinckenella is resulted from the larvae boring into pods and seeds. A brown spot on the pod indicates the point of larva entry, and left large hole where the mature larva moves to pupate in the soil. Feeding marks are rough and the injured pod contains large and round fecal pellets. Pods often rot away as a result of the accumulation of these fecals. The present report discusses the research progress of soybean pod borer in Indonesia, i.e, pest bioecology (biology, population dynamic, soybean pod development, climates, natural enemies, host plants, response of varieties), pest control (sanitation, simultaneous planting, crop rotation, trap crop, botanical pesticide, resistant variety, biology, and chemical), and the recommendation of integrated management (IPM) of soybean pod borer. Keywords: Soybean, Etiella zinckenella, integrated pest management, Indonesia edelai merupakan salah satu tanam- sedangkan produksi dalam beberapa Indonesia adalah serangan hama (Teng- K an pangan penting bagi penduduk tahun terakhir cenderung menurun. kano dan Soehardjan 1985). Penggerek Indonesia sebagai sumber protein nabati, Produksi kedelai tahun 2006 dan 2007 polong (Etiella zinckenella Treitschke) bahan baku industri pakan ternak, dan masing-masing mencapai 795.340 dan merupakan salah satu hama utama pada bahan baku industri pangan. Hal tersebut 782.530 ton, dan tahun 2009 diprakirakan pertanaman kedelai di Indonesia, terutama menyebabkan permintaan kedelai terus turun menjadi 757.540 ton (Sudaryanto dan pada sentra-sentra produksi (Okada et al. meningkat jauh melampaui produksi dalam Swastika 2007). 1988a; Tengkano et al. 2006; Tengkano negeri. Kebutuhan kedelai pada tahun 2009 Salah satu kendala dalam pening- 2007). Selain E. zinckenella, spesies diprakirakan mencapai 2.037.530 ton, katan dan stabilisasi produksi kedelai di penggerek polong lainnya di Indonesia Jurnal Litbang Pertanian, 27(4), 2008 113 adalah E. hobsoni Butler (Kalshoven 1981; salah satu jenis ulat yang menyerang Penelitian E. zinckenella berkembang Naito et al. 1983; Naito dan Harnoto 1984), tanaman tersebut adalah E. zinckenella pesat pada tahun 1980-an, antara lain E. chrysoporella Meyrick, E. grisea (Van Helten 1913 dalam Mangundojo mengenai kelimpahan populasi (Doda drososcia Meyrick Stat.n., dan E. behrii 1958). Namun, penelitian mengenai E. 1980; Djafar dan Saleh 1983; Gabriel et al. Zeller (Whalley 1973). Spesies yang zinckenella kurang berkembang karena 1986; Okada et al. 1988a, 1988b), aspek dominan dan memiliki daerah penyebaran terbatasnya peneliti bidang entomologi di biologi (Jovillano 1983; Naito et al. 1983), yang luas adalah E. zinckenella. Informasi Balai Penyelidikan Hama Tumbuhan di ekologi (Naito dan Harnoto 1984), dan mengenai bioekologi dan daerah penye- Bogor saat itu. Penelitian mengenai cara mekanisme ketahanan (Akib dan Baco baran empat spesies penggerek polong hidup, pengaruh hayati dan iklim terhadap 1985; Honma et al. 1986). Pada tahun lainnya masih terbatas. perkembangan hama secara intensif dila- 1990−2007, penelitian dilakukan terhadap Peningkatan serangan E. zinckenella kukan pada tahun 1956−1958 (Mangun- karakteristik biologi (Naito et al. 1991; diduga berkaitan dengan makin luasnya dojo 1958). Hasil penelitian menunjukkan Djuwarso et al. 1992), ketahanan varietas pertanaman kedelai dan tersedianya inang bahwa E. zinckenella merupakan perusak kedelai (Tengkano et al. 1992a; Trijaka et sepanjang tahun. Perbandingan kumulatif polong utama tanaman orok-orok. Hal ini al. 1992; Djuwarso et al. 1994), pengenda- pertambahan luas serangan penggerek sesuai dengan laporan Kalshoven (1981) lian dengan tanaman perangkap Sesbania polong pada tahun 2002, 2003, dan rata- bahwa tanaman inang utama E. zincke- rostrata dan kacang hijau (Tengkano et rata tahun 1997−2001 masing-masing nella selain kedelai adalah orok-orok. al. 1994), identifikasi tanaman inang adalah 316 ha, 539 ha, dan 1.218 ha (Direk- Hasil survei pada bulan Juni− (Tengkano et al. 1995), pola sebaran dan torat Jenderal Bina Produksi Tanaman Agustus 1971 memperlihatkan bahwa metode pencontohan (Priyanto et al. Pangan 2004). Seiring dengan menurun- penggerek polong masih tercatat sebagai 1997), tingkat kerusakan (Djuwarso dan nya luas pertanaman kedelai, luas hama utama tanaman kedelai, khususnya Naito 1991; Bergh et al. 1998), parasitoid serangan penggerek polong pada tahun di Jawa Timur (Iman et al. 1972). Whalley Trichogrammatoidea bactrae-bactrae 2003 lebih rendah dibanding rata-rata tahun (1973) melaporkan terdapat lima spesies (Naito dan Djuwarso 1994; Djuwarso et 1997−2001, namun serangannya terdapat penggerek polong di Indonesia dan salah al. 1997; Marwoto et al. 2002), pengaruh di 22 provinsi. Provinsi dengan pertam- satunya adalah E. zinckenella. Pada tahun letak telur terhadap kelangsungan hidup bahan luas serangan tertinggi adalah Jawa 1973 dan 1974, dilaporkan bahwa perta- larva (Tengkano 1999), monitoring dan Tengah 197 ha, Sulawesi Tenggara 58 ha, naman kedelai di Tanggul, Jawa Timur, pengendalian (Bergh et al. 2000), evaluasi NTB 37 ha, Jawa Timur 31 ha, Sulawesi tanpa tindakan pengendalian hama ketahanan kedelai generasi F1 hasil Tengah 30 ha, dan Kalimantan Selatan 30 terserang Etiella spp. hingga 39%. Pada transformasi dengan gen proteinase ha (Direktorat Jenderal Bina Produksi tahun 1987, rata-rata serangan penggerek inhibitor II (pinII) (Herman et al. 2001), Tanaman Pangan 2004). polong antarkabupaten di Jawa Timur perbandingan perkembangan dan siklus Kehilangan hasil akibat serangan berkisar antara 0,20−21% dan pada lokasi hidup dua spesies Etiella spp. (Edmonds penggerek polong mencapai 80%, bahkan pengamatan sekitar 0−48%, meskipun telah et al. 2003), bioasai kedelai transgenik puso apabila tidak ada tindakan pengenda- dilakukan pengendalian dengan insekti- (Sutrisno et al. 2003), daya predasi lian (Djuwarso et al. 1990). Hingga kini, sida (Tengkano et al. 1991). Oxyopes javanus (Tengkano et al. 2004), upaya pengendalian masih mengandalkan Di Jatibarang, Jawa Tengah, serang- preferensi peneluran (Kamandalu et al. insektisida kimia, namun kehilangan hasil an Etiella spp. pada tahun 1973 dan 1974 1995; Ardiwinata et al. 1997; Tengkano et akibat serangan penggerek polong masih mencapai 66% (Tengkano et al. 1977; al. 2000; Suharsono 2004), dan pestisida belum teratasi. Untuk meningkatkan Soekarna dan Tengkano 1979); tahun 1978 nabati Aglaia odorata (Marwoto 2007). efisiensi dan efektivitas pengendalian, serangannya pada tanaman kedelai umur telah dilakukan pengkajian bioekologi 44−45 hari setelah tanam (HST) sebesar sebagai dasar dalam penyusunan strategi 3% dan pada umur 72−84 HST naik Biologi Etiella spp. pengendalian penggerek polong secara menjadi 13% (Iqbal 1979). Pada tahun 1983, terpadu (PHT). Makalah ini membahas serangan penggerek polong kedelai di Dua spesies penggerek polong yang hasil-hasil penelitian mengenai bioekologi Brebes pada musim kemarau mencapai dominan di Indonesia, yaitu E. zinckenella serta pengendalian penggerek polong 96% (Surjana 1992). dan E. hobsoni, mudah dibedakan berda- kedelai di Indonesia. Serangan penggerek polong juga sarkan ada tidaknya garis putih pada terjadi di luar Jawa, yaitu di Sumatera sayap
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Terrestrial Arthropod Surveys on Pagan Island, Northern Marianas
    Terrestrial Arthropod Surveys on Pagan Island, Northern Marianas Neal L. Evenhuis, Lucius G. Eldredge, Keith T. Arakaki, Darcy Oishi, Janis N. Garcia & William P. Haines Pacific Biological Survey, Bishop Museum, Honolulu, Hawaii 96817 Final Report November 2010 Prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Fish & Wildlife Office Honolulu, Hawaii Evenhuis et al. — Pagan Island Arthropod Survey 2 BISHOP MUSEUM The State Museum of Natural and Cultural History 1525 Bernice Street Honolulu, Hawai’i 96817–2704, USA Copyright© 2010 Bishop Museum All Rights Reserved Printed in the United States of America Contribution No. 2010-015 to the Pacific Biological Survey Evenhuis et al. — Pagan Island Arthropod Survey 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... 5 Background ..................................................................................................................... 7 General History .............................................................................................................. 10 Previous Expeditions to Pagan Surveying Terrestrial Arthropods ................................ 12 Current Survey and List of Collecting Sites .................................................................. 18 Sampling Methods ......................................................................................................... 25 Survey Results ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Relative Susceptibility of Crotalaria Spp. to Attack by Etiella Zinckenella in Puerto Rico1
    Relative susceptibility of Crotalaria spp. to attack by Etiella zinckenella in Puerto Rico1 Alejandro E. Seganu-Cannona and Pedro Barbosa2 ABSTRACT Four Crotalaria species were found attacked by the lima bean pod borer Etiella zinckenella (Treit.) in Puerto Rico: C. pallida, C. anagyroides, C. zanzibariea and C. incana. Non-susceptible species were C. retasa, C. stipularia and C. lanceolata. Early literature observations on the effect of soil characteristics (pH, soil penetrability, and organic matter) on attack rates of this borer to C pallida could not be confirmed on the basis of field observations. Only plant patch size seemed to be positively correlated with attack rates. Female oviposition patterns are discussed. Oviposition on C pallida field collected pods was restricted to green pods larger than 3.2 cm. No eggs were found on senescent pods. INTRODUCTION The lima bean pod borer, Etiella zinckenella (Treit.), was reported in Puerto Rico in 1890 (20). Since then, it has been studied by many visiting and resident entomologists. Leonard and Mills (6) first reported this pyralid boring on pods of lima beans, cowpeas, pigeon peas and Crotalaria (no species given). Wolcott (17,18) recorded that among all species of Crotalaria, only C. incana L. was attacked, and C. retusa L. appeared immune to this borer. This author also reported that Crotalaria plants growing on sandy soils were more susceptible to pod loss by E. zinckenella than those growing on clay soils. Further studies by Scott (12) corroborated Wolcott's observations on C. retusa resistance and added C stipularia Desv. to the list of resistant species.
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf (539.04 K)
    J. of Plant Protection and Pathology, Mansoura Univ., Vol 11 (1):29 - 36, 2002 Journal of Plant Protection and Pathology Journal homepage: www.jppp.mans.edu.eg Available online at: www. jppp.journals.ekb.eg Efficiency of Certain Bio-Insecticides for Reducing the Yield Losses due to the Bean Pod Borer, Etiella zinckenella (Treitschke) in Soybean Fields 1* 2 Soheir F. Abd El-Rahman and Eman I Abdel-wahab Cross Mark 1Plant Prot. Res. Inst., Agric. Res. Center, Dokki, Giza, Egypt 2Field Crops Res. Inst., Agric. Res. Center, Giza, Egypt ABSTRACT The pod borer Etiella zinckenella (Treitschke) is most destructive insect which infest crops of leguminosae in Egypt. Field experiments were carried out in farm of Agricultural Research Center, Giza governorate during 2017 and 2018 seasons. First experiment was conducted to study seasonal incidence of this insect on soybean and its relation with weather factors under natural conditions. In first season, the larval population increased to make two peaks, that recorded in the 1st and 3rd weeks of September. In second season found one peak on September, 4th. The relationship between population fluctuation and three climatic factors (minimum and maximum temperatures& R.H. %) were studied. Simple correlation of Max. and Min. temperatures were negative but R.H.% gave positive effects. The second experiment was conducted to evaluate efficacy of Biover, MgChl and Dipel 2xfor control of this insect under field conditions in addition the yield. Results showed that, mean reduction of larvae for highest concentrations of tested treatments were arranged descendingly as Biover (63.04%) followed by MgChl (55.52%) and finally Dipel 2x (51.28%) with significant differences between treatments compared with control.
    [Show full text]
  • Rapid Biodiversity Assessment of REPUBLIC of NAURU
    RAPID BIODIVERSITY ASSESSMENT OF REPUBLIC OF NAURU JUNE 2013 NAOERO GO T D'S W I LL FIRS SPREP Library/IRC Cataloguing-in-Publication Data McKenna, Sheila A, Butler, David J and Wheatley, Amanda. Rapid biodiversity assessment of Republic of Nauru / Sheila A. McKeena … [et al.] – Apia, Samoa : SPREP, 2015. 240 p. cm. ISBN: 978-982-04-0516-5 (print) 978-982-04-0515-8 (ecopy) 1. Biodiversity conservation – Nauru. 2. Biodiversity – Assessment – Nauru. 3. Natural resources conservation areas - Nauru. I. McKeena, Sheila A. II. Butler, David J. III. Wheatley, Amanda. IV. Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) V. Title. 333.959685 © SPREP 2015 All rights for commercial / for profit reproduction or translation, in any form, reserved. SPREP authorises the partial reproduction or translation of this material for scientific, educational or research purposes, provided that SPREP and the source document are properly acknowledged. Permission to reproduce the document and / or translate in whole, in any form, whether for commercial / for profit or non-profit purposes, must be requested in writing. Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme P.O. Box 240, Apia, Samoa. Telephone: + 685 21929, Fax: + 685 20231 www.sprep.org The Pacific environment, sustaining our livelihoods and natural heritage in harmony with our cultures. RAPID BIODIVERSITY ASSESSMENT OF REPUBLIC OF NAURU SHEILA A. MCKENNA, DAVID J. BUTLER, AND AmANDA WHEATLEY (EDITORS) NAOERO GO T D'S W I LL FIRS CONTENTS Organisational Profiles 4 Authors and Participants 6 Acknowledgements
    [Show full text]
  • The Investigation on Harmful Insects Occurring in Soybean During
    Source: Journal of Agricultural Research of China (Taiwan) [Zhonghua nong ye yan jiu, ISSN: 0376-477X ] (1980) v.29(4) p.283-286 Translation by Professor Dunxiao Hu, China Agricultural University; Edited by Donna Schenck-Hamlin, Kansas State University, 2002 Soybean insect pests occurring at podding stage in Taichung Wang Qingling (Taiwan Agricultural Research Institute) Abstract: A survey of insect pests infesting soybean at the podding stage was carried out at Wufeng in Taichung in 1979. 7 orders, 16 families and 33 species of insect pests were found attacking this crop. Among them, 10 species, viz, Halticus tibialis, Cletus trigonus, Riptortus clavatus, Cletus punctiger, Nezara viridula, Piezodorus hybneri, Eysarcoris guttiger, Aphis glycines, Etiella zinckenella, Spodoptera litura, attacked the pods. Nezara viridula and Etiella zinckenella are recognized as the most serious pests. The damage and the economic importance of other soybean insect pests are also discussed in this paper. Research on soybean insect pests in Taiwan has always been focused on leaf-mining insects, such as Ophiomyia phaseoli, Melanagromyza sojae(3,5,7,8,9), or pests ’ chemical control(1,2,4,10,11,12)，but surveys on insect pests species are rare, and related information or data is serious lacking. In fact, soybeans can be attacked by many species of insect pests from the young seedling to mature stages, and the species of insect pests involved are quite complex. At the same time, the long soybean podding stage, which takes about a half of the whole growing period of soybeans, make it possible for insects to harm pods directly or influence pod development by attacking other parts of soybean plants.
    [Show full text]
  • 02 October 2015 Radebeul-Germany
    ©Societas Europaea Lepidopterologica; download unter http://www.soceurlep.eu/ und www.zobodat.at XIXth European Congress Welcome .............................................................................................................................................................. 3 of Lepidopterology Programme ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 27 September – 02 October 2015 Monday, 28 September 2015 ........................................................................................................ 5 Radebeul · Germany Tuesday, 29 September 2015 ....................................................................................................... 7 Wednesday, 30 September 2015 ................................................................................................ 9 Thursday, 1 October 2015 ............................................................................................................ 10 Friday, 2 October 2015 ................................................................................................................... 14 Honouring Niels Peder Kristensen ............................................................................................... 15 Abstracts .......................................................................................................................................................... 16 Oral presentations ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bio2 Ch01-Wilson
    CHAPTER 1 Introduction EDWARD O. WILSON Pellegrino University Professor, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts “Biodiversity,” the term and concept, has been a remarkable event in recent cultural evolution: 10 years ago the word did not exist, except perhaps through occasional idiosyncratic use. Today it is one of the most commonly used expres- sions in the biological sciences and subsequently has become a household word. It was born “BioDiversity” during the National Forum on BioDiversity, held in Washington, D.C., on September 21-24, 1986, under the auspices of the National Academy of Sciences and the Smithsonian Institution. The proceedings of the forum, published in 1988 under the title BioDiversity (later to be cited with less than bibliographical accuracy by most authors as Biodiversity), became a best- seller for the National Academy Press. By the summer of 1992, as a key topic of the Rio environmental summit meeting, biodiversity had moved to center stage as one of the central issues of scientific and political concern world-wide. So what is it? Biologists are inclined to agree that it is, in one sense, every- thing. Biodiversity is defined as all hereditarily based variation at all levels of organization, from the genes within a single local population or species, to the species composing all or part of a local community, and finally to the communi- ties themselves that compose the living parts of the multifarious ecosystems of the world. The key to the effective analysis of biodiversity is the precise defini- tion of each level of organization when it is being addressed.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae Prof
    2019-12-12 Curriculum Vitae Prof. Dr. Dr. h. c. Dr. h. c. Bill S. Hansson, HonFRES, FAAS Department of Evolutionary Neuroethology Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology ¡ Born January 12, 1959 in Jonstorp, Sweden ¡ Married February 2, 1993 to Susanne Erland ¡ Children Otto, born November 1, 1996 Agnes, born November 25, 1998 ¡ Military service 1978–79, 15 months training, Rank: fänrik (sublieutenant) ¡ Language skills Swedish (mother tounge), English (excellent), German (fluent), French (basic), Danish (speak, understand and read), Norwegian (speak, understand and read) 1. Academic education and degrees Professor, honorary Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, 2010 Professor, recruited SLU, March 2001, Chemical Ecology Professor, promoted Lund University, April 2000, Chemical Ecology Docent Lund University, August 1992, Ecology Ph. D. Lund University, October 1988, Ecology B. Sc. Lund University, May 1982, Biology 2. Positions held ¡Jun 2014 – Vice President, the Max Planck Society ¡ Jan 2011 – Jun 2014 Managing Director, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology ¡ Apr 2006 – Director, Department of Evolutionary Neuroethology, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology ¡ Apr 2006 – June 2016 Guest professor, scientific leader (-2010) and partner in the ICE3 Linnaeus research program at The Swedish University for Agricultural Sciences, Alnarp ¡ Jan 2003 – Jan 2006 Associate dean of the faculty for Landscape planning Horticulture and Agricultural Sciences with specific responsibility for research and graduate studies ¡ Mar 2001 – Jan 2006
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Pest Management for Tropical Crops: Soyabeans
    CAB Reviews 2018 13, No. 055 Integrated pest management for tropical crops: soyabeans E.A. Heinrichs1* and Rangaswamy Muniappan2 Address: 1 IPM Innovation Lab, 6517 S. 19th St., Lincoln, NE, USA. 2 IPM Innovation Lab, CIRED, Virginia Tech, 526 Prices Fork Road, Blacksburg, VA, USA. *Correspondence: E.A. Heinrichs. Email: [email protected] Received: 29 January 2018 Accepted: 16 October 2018 doi: 10.1079/PAVSNNR201813055 The electronic version of this article is the definitive one. It is located here: http://www.cabi.org/cabreviews © CAB International 2018 (Online ISSN 1749-8848) Abstract Soyabean, because of its importance in food security and wide diversity of uses in industrial applications, is one of the world’s most important crops. There are a number of abiotic and biotic constraints that that threaten soyabean production. Soyabean pests are major biotic constraints limiting soyabean production and quality. Crop losses to animal pests, diseases and weeds in soyabeans average 26–29% globally. This review discusses biology, global distribution and plant damage and yield losses in soyabean caused by insect pests, plant diseases, nematodes and weeds. The interactions among insects, weeds and diseases are detailed. A soyabean integrated pest management (IPM) package of practices, covering the crop from pre-sowing to harvest, is outlined. The effect of climate changes on arthropod pests, plant diseases and weeds are discussed. The history and evolution of the highly successful soyabean IPM programme in Brazil and the factors that led to its demise are explained. Keywords: Biological control, Biotic constraints, Chemical control, Climate change, Cultural control, Insect pests, Mechanical practices, Nematodes, Pesticides, Package of practices, Plant diseases, Plant pest interactions, Soybean IPM programme, Weeds Review Methodology: Search terms used were: scientific and common names of all of the insects, plant diseases, nematodes and weeds listed in the tables.
    [Show full text]
  • Resistance of Some Groundnut Cultivars to Soybean Pod Borer, Etiella Zinckenella Treit
    J. HPT Tropika. ISSN 1411-7525 1 Vol. 9, No. 1: 1 – 7, MaretApriyanto 2009 et al.: Resistance of some groundnut cultivars to soybean pod borer Etiella zinckenella RESISTANCE OF SOME GROUNDNUT CULTIVARS TO SOYBEAN POD BORER, ETIELLA ZINCKENELLA TREIT. (LEPIDOPTERA: PYRALIDAE) Dwinardi Apriyanto1, Edi Gunawan1, dan Tri Sunardi1 ABSTRACT Resistance of some groundnut cultivars to soybean pod borer, Etiella zinckenella Treit. (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Five groundnut cultivars: Badak, Panther, Sima, Gajah, and Simpai, were grown in field in June-August, 2006 to determine their resistance/susceptibility to Etiella zinckenella Treit. Two local cultivars (big and small seeds) were included as comparison (controls). All cultivars were grown in experimental plots arranged in a randomized complete block design (RCBD), replicated three times. The incidence of soybean pod borer and damaged pods were observed at 9, 11, 13 weeks after sowing (WAS) at 10 sample plants taken randomly from each plot. All cultivars were harvested at 13 WAS. Number of damaged pods was counted and percentages per plant were calculated. Larvae observed inside pod or in the soil were counted and collected. The seed yield per plant and weight of 100 seeds from 100 sample plants taken randomly at harvest were weighted to nearest gram at 10% water content. Pod toughness (hardness) was measured with penetrometer. Resistance level of each cultivar was determined based on cultivar’s means and overall mean and standard deviation of the percentages of damaged pods. Data were analyzed with analysis of variance (ANOVA) and means were separated with DMRT. The result revealed that mean percentages of damaged pod differed significantly between cultivars.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Etiella Zinckenella (Treitschke) (Lep.: Pyralidae) on Sophora Alopecuroides L
    NORTH-WESTERN JOURNAL OF ZOOLOGY 10 (2): 251-258 ©NwjZ, Oradea, Romania, 2014 Article No.: 141201 http://biozoojournals.ro/nwjz/index.html Chalcidoid parasitoids (Hymenoptera) of Etiella zinckenella (Treitschke) (Lep.: Pyralidae) on Sophora alopecuroides L. in Iran Hosseinali LOTFALIZADEH* and Farnaz HOSSEINI Department of Plant Protection, College of Agriculture, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran *Corresponding author, H. Lotfalizadeh, E-mail: [email protected] Received: 7. June 2013 / Accepted: 20. July 2013 / Available online: 31. January 2014 / Printed: December 2014 Abstract. The seeds of Sophora alopecuroides L. (Legominosae) are damaged by Etiella zinckenella (Treitschke) (Lep.: Pyralidae) in East-Azarbaijan, northwestern Iran. Laboratory rearing of seeds infested E. zinckenella produced six chalcidoid species. These species are from the family Eulophidae: Aprostocetus arrabonicus (Erdös), Elasmus biroi Erdös, Elasmus platyedrae Ferrière; Eurytomidae: Aximopsis augasmae (Zerova) Comb. n., Aximopsis near ghazvini (Zerova) Comb. n.; and Pteromalidae: Cyrtoptyx lichtensteini (Masi). All of these species are new records for Iran. Associations of A. arrabonicus, E. biroi, E. platyedrae, A. augasmae and A. near ghazvini with E. zinckenella are new, and furthermore, A. arrabonicus may be a hyperparasitoid of E. zinckenella. Key words: Sophora alopecuroides, Etiella zinckenella, chalcidoid parasitoids, new records, Iran. Introduction tribution, a study of its parasitoids in Iran is desir- able. Therefore, this study
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Pathways for Exotic Plant Pest Movement Into and Within the Greater Caribbean Region
    Evaluation of Pathways for Exotic Plant Pest Movement into and within the Greater Caribbean Region Caribbean Invasive Species Working Group (CISWG) and United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Center for Plant Health Science and Technology (CPHST) Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory (PERAL) EVALUATION OF PATHWAYS FOR EXOTIC PLANT PEST MOVEMENT INTO AND WITHIN THE GREATER CARIBBEAN REGION January 9, 2009 Revised August 27, 2009 Caribbean Invasive Species Working Group (CISWG) and Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory (PERAL) Center for Plant Health Science and Technology (CPHST) United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) ______________________________________________________________________________ Authors: Dr. Heike Meissner (project lead) Andrea Lemay Christie Bertone Kimberly Schwartzburg Dr. Lisa Ferguson Leslie Newton ______________________________________________________________________________ Contact address for all correspondence: Dr. Heike Meissner United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Plant Protection and Quarantine Center for Plant Health Science and Technology Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory 1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 300 Raleigh, NC 27607, USA Phone: (919) 855-7538 E-mail: [email protected] ii Table of Contents Index of Figures and Tables ........................................................................................................... iv Abbreviations and Definitions .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]