View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE

provided by Scientific Journals of Bogor Agricultural University

J. Entomol. Indon., September 2011, Vol. 8, No. 2 , 55-62 Perhimpunan Entomologi Indonesia

Predation of Five Generalist Predators on Brown ( lugens Stål )

SRI KARINDAH

Department of Plant Pest and Diseases, Faculty of Agriculture, Brawijaya University Jalan Veteran Malang 65145

(received March 2011, accepted August 2011)

ABSTRAK Predasi Lima Predator Generalis pada Wereng Coklat (Nilaparvata lugens St ål). Metioche vittaticollis dan Anaxipha longipennis (: ) adalah predator generalis di habitat sawah yang belum banyak diteliti di Indonesia. Pada penelitian ini diamati dan dibandingkan daya mangsa kedua predator tersebut dengan Paederus fuscipes (Staphylinidae), Ophionea sp. (Carabidae) dan Micraspis sp. (Coccinellidae) pada nimfa wereng batang coklat Nilaparvata lugens (instar ke- 4 dan ke- 5) di laboratorium. Sebanyak 20 nimfa N. lugens diberikan pada masing-masing predator selama 2 jam dan pemberian mangsa dilakukan selama 5 hari berturut-turut. M. vittaticollis memangsa nimfa wereng batang coklat paling banyak dan selanjutnya diikuti berturut-turut oleh A. longipennis, Micraspis sp., P. fuscipes , dan Ophionea sp. Daya mangsa M. vittaticollis dan A. longipennis lebih tinggi daripada ketiga predator yang lain. Micraspis sp. lebih aktif memangsa pada pagi hari, sedangkan M. vittaticolis, A. longipennis, P. fuscipes dan Ophionea sp. lebih aktif memangsa pada pagi dan malam hari. Kelima predator tersebut tidak aktif memangsa pada siang hari. Dengan melihat kemampuan mem- predasinya yang tinggi, suatu usaha yang sungguh-sungguh perlu dilakukan untuk melestarikan predator-predator tersebut, khususnya M. vittaticollis dan A. longipennis . KATA KUNCI: Konsumsi mangsa , Metioche vittaticollis, Anaxipha longipennis

ABSTRACT of Five Generalist Predators on (Nilaparvata lugens Stål ). Two generalist predators of brown planthopper, Metioche vittaticollis and Anaxipha longipennis (Gryllidae) have not been much studied in Indonesia. This research was conducted to study and compare the predatory ability of M. vittaticollis, A. longipennis (Gryllidae) and three coleopterans, Paederus fuscipes (Staphylinidae), Ophionea sp. (Carabidae), and Micraspis sp. (Coccinellidae) against brown planthopper (fourth and fifth instars) under laboratory condition. In total, 20 nymphs of N. lugens were exposed for 2 hour to each predator for 5 consecutive days. Prey consumptions by the predatory crickets, M. vittaticollis and A . longipennis were greater than the other predators and followed by A. longipennis, Micraspis sp., P. fuscipes , and Ophionea sp. respectively. ______*Korespondensi: Telp.: +62-341-575843, Faks: +62-341-569237, E-mail: [email protected]

55 Sri Karindah: Predation of the Five Generalist Predators

Consumption rates of M. vittaticolis and A. longipenis were also higher than other predators. Micraspis sp was more active on predation in the morning, while M. vittaticollis , A. longipennis , P. fuscipes , and Ophionea sp. were more active both in the morning and the night but not in the afternoon. However, all five species of predators were not so active in preying during the afternoon. In conclusion, a major effort should be extended to conserve these predatory crickets especially M. vittaticollis and A. longipennis . KEY WORDS: Prey consumption , Metioche vittaticollis, Anaxipha longipennis

logical control should also be con- INTRODUCTION sidered. Predators, parasites and pathogens Brown planthopper Nilaparvata play a major role in the regulation of lugens St ål is distributed throughout pests (van Vreden and Ahmad- India, South East Asia and China. The zabidi 1986). Brown planthopper has a was previously considered to be natural enemies complex which may a minor pest throughout its range, and keep this pest below economic damage still is in a number of countries. How- level most of the time. The brown ever, since 1970’s the significance of planthopper’s natural enemies complex this species as a pest increased consi- consists of parasitoids, specialist and derably in Indonesia (Kalshoven 1981; generalist predators, and pathogens. Soenarjo 2000). In 1961-1970, 52,000 One species of nematode, 15 species of ha of rice field was attacked by brown and , and 8 pathogens planthopper, and in the decade of have been recorded as natural enemies 1971-1980, over 2,500,000 ha of rice and diseases of this pest (Mochida et fields was attacked. In 2005 planting al. 1979; Kalshoven 1981). Cyrtorhi- season, brown planthopper’s attack nus longipennis, Harmonia spp. Pae- was over 46,000 ha in Java (BBPADI derus fuscipes Curtis (Staphylinidae), 2011). N. lugens causes ‘hopper burn’ Ophionea nigrofasciata (Schmidt- of rice plants by direct feeding and Goebel) (Carabidae), Micraspis sp. transmitting the Grassy Stunt and (Mulsant) (Coccinellidae) and the Ragged Stunt rice diseases (Kalshoven orthopterans Metioche vittaticollis 1981). The rice brown planthopper is (Stål) , Anaxipha longipennis (Serville ) an -induced resurgence pest (Gryllidae) and Conocephalus long- whose degree of damage is positively ipennis (Tettigoniidae) are known as correlated to insecticide use (Chiu the predator of rice hoppers (Shepard 1979). Cultural practices and resis- et al. 1987). pseudoannulata tance varieties of rice are suggested in Boesenberg, Tetragnatha maxillosa controlling this pest. However, bio- Thorell, Cyrtorhinus lividipennis Reu- ter, and Conocephalous longipennis de

56 J. Entomol. Indon., September 2011, Vol. 8, No. 2, 55-62

Haan had high ability to suppress the MATERIALS AND METHODS population of N. lugens on rice, the The laboratory experiment was predation capacity were 4.05, 3.10, and conducted between April and June 1.79 brown per day res- 2005, at the Laboratory of Entomo- pectively (Marheni 2004). logy, Brawijaya University in Malang. There is a renewed interest in In the laboratory, temperature was biological control exercised by assem- ranged from 24 o to 27 o C. blages of mainly generalist predators Five predator species were selected (Symondson et al. 2002). Settle et al. for cage tests on brown planthopper (1996) have studied the relative acceptance and consumption: the co- abundance of generalist predators in leopterans Paederus fuscipes (Stap- the rice field in Java. The high po- hylinidae), Ophionea sp. (Carabidae), pulation of generalist predators in the and Micraspis sp. (Coccinellidae) and early season, which were supported by the orthopterans Metioche vittaticollis, detritus feeding and plankton feeding and Anaxipha longipennis. The preda- insects before the pest populations tors were collected from Tasikmadu developed, should suppress pest po- District, Malang, East Java and were pulations and lend stability to rice starved individually in Mylar cage test ecosystems. The potential preying of for 24 hours prior to the experiment. some and coleopterans predator Unsexed individuals were used in the such as P. fuscipes , O. nigrofasciata , test, except for M. vittaticollis and A. Micraspis sp. ( Verania sp.) P. pseudo- longipennis , for which were used only annulata , and T. maxillosa have been female adults. much studied in Indonesia (Laba 1999; The consumption rates were deter- Laba et al . 2001; Marheni 2004), mined separately for five predator excepted M. vittaticollis and A. species. One predator was introduced longipennis . Since the importance of to a cylindrical Mylar cage (10 cm generalist predators of brown plant- diameter and 28 cm height) with IR64 hopper, especially M. vittaticollis, and rice seedlings variety, and provided 20 A. longipennis, has not been known in fourth-fifth nymphs of brown plant- Indonesia, a study was conducted to hopper. The prey consumed was re- compare the predatory ability of these corded four times for one day-period. orthopterans and three coleopterans The numbers of brown planthoppers against brown planthopper in the labo- were replaced to the original density ratory. after 24 hours. The consumption rate experiments for each predator species was replicated 10 times and deter- mined daily within 5 days.

57 Sri Karindah: Predation of the Five Generalist Predators

As a measure of prey acceptabili- dator consumption between five pre- ty, an acceptance ratio was calculated dators. The average number of brown being the proportion of predators that planthopper nymphs which were con- consumed at least one prey of the sumed by P. fuscipes and Ophionea sp. provided prey (de Kraker et al. 2000) was not significantly different. Micras- over the entire 5-day period. Test for pis sp. consumed significantly greater significance of the treatments was numbers of brown planthopper nymphs carried out using Two-ways ANOVA than P. fuscipes or Ophionea sp. and means were compared by Tukey’s Whereas M. vittaticollis and A. long- test. ipennis consumed higher numbers of prey than P. fuscipes, Ophionea sp. or RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Micraspis sp. Consumptiom behavior The laboratory study showed that of the crikets varies; i.e. from preying all five species of predators consumed on the whole body of brown plant- brown planthopper nymphs when hopper nymph to only biting on some. offered in a no-choice situation. The Each was able to kill more than prey acceptance and the number of that they might consume per day. nymphs consumed or killed per day are The daily pattern in preying of the presented in Table 1. The five pre- five species predatory insects is shown dators accepted brown planthopper in figure 1. It has been observed that nymphs as prey in each replication. the predators never stop preying during Based on brown planthopper nymphs a day; there was a period of time that consumption rates, a ranking was made they decreased the predation and and it was found that M. vittaticollis increased after some time. A. long- consumed more than A. longipennis ipennis, M. vittaticolis, P. fuscipes and and followed by Micraspis sp., P. Ophionea sp. might have the same fuscipes , and Ophionea sp. There was pattern in preying. They were more a significant overall difference in pre- active in preying after dusk until early

Table 1. Prey consumption rates and acceptance ratio of rice field predators of brown planthopper in the laboratory Predator species Nymphs consumed/killed per day ± Prey acceptance ratio S.E. *) Ophionea sp. 4.36 ± 0.22 a 1 P. fuscipes 4.06 ± 0.30 a 1 Micraspis sp. 8.44 ± 2.08 b 1 A. longipennis 11.78 ± 0.48 c 1 M. vittaticollis 14.38 ± 0.36 d 1 *) In a column, means followed by a common letter are not significantly different at the p=0,05 by Tukey’ Test

58 J. Entomol. Indon., September 2011, Vol. 8, No. 2, 55-62

Figure 1. Numbers of Nilaparvata lugens nymphs consumed by five predator in 24-hour period morning and decreasing in the after- brown planthopper nymphs, and this noon. Micraspis sp. was more active in cricket preferred prey egg type rather preying during daytime, unlike A. than nymph or larvae. According to longipennis, M. vittaticolis, P. fusci- deKraker (1996), P. fuscipes , and pes and Ophionea sp. All the five Ophionea sp. consumed few leaffolder species of predators were not too eggs in the petridish test compared active in preying in the afternoon. with M. vittaticollis, A. longipennis, or The present findings depicted the Micraspis sp. Laba (1999) found that predation potential of common genera- P. fuscipes , and Ophionea sp. consum- list predators in rice habitat. The data ed 4.9 and 2.7 brown planthopper per indicated that the predatory crickets M. day respectively. This was showed that vittaticollis and A. longipennis con- they had lower predation ability rather sumed greater than the other predators. than M. vittaticollis, A. longipennis, or The amount of feeding by M. vittati- Micraspis sp. However, according to collis in present finding was found Laba et al. (2001) Micraspis sp. con- two-three times more than consump- sumed 2.8 brown planthopper per day tion capacity of P. fuscipes , and which was lower than P. fuscipes , and Ophionea sp. However, this consump- Ophionea sp. This was the opposite tion rate was different than the result result with this experiment when Mic- found by Rubia and Shepard (1987), raspis sp. consumed brown planthop- that the cricket predator consumed per more than P. fuscipes , and Ophio- lower number of brown planthopper nea sp. The coccinellid predators, e.g. nymphs of two to fourth instar nymph. Micraspis sp., are usually very abun- DeKraker (1996) also found the low dant during the flowering stage of the consumption of M. vittaticollis on crop and the availability of pollen will

59 Sri Karindah: Predation of the Five Generalist Predators

probably reduce their impact on brown situations and it is evident that these planthopper (deKraker 1996), M. vita- results require confirmation in large ticollis never used plant as the source scale field studies. However this study of their food. M. vittaticollis was the demonstrated the high potential of two most voracious predator, followed by predatory crickets M. vittaticollis and A. longipennis, O. nigrofasciata, Mic- A. longipennis as generalist predator in raspis nr. crocea and P. fuscipes (den rice habitat. Therefore a major effort Berg et al. 1992), therefore keep them should be extended to conserve the as appropriate effective biological con- predatory crickets M. vittaticollis and trol agents, particularly on brown A. longipennis through judicious use of planthopper. chemicals and perhaps habitat manipu- There was a period of time that the lation. five predators decreased and increased the predation after some time. The five CONCLUSION species predators have different pattern There was evidence to conclude in preying during a day, they would be that the consumption rates of five preying all day when the preys were species predators on brown plant- available. A. longipennis, M. vittati- hopper nymphs ranked from the high- colis, are active at night (deKraker est to the lowest: M. vittaticollis, A. 1996) as well as P. fuscipes (Laba longipennis, Micraspis sp., P. fuscipes, 1999) that they might have the same and Ophionea sp. respectively. pattern in preying. They were more Micraspis sp. was more active in active in preying after dusk until early preying during daytime, unlike A. morning and decreasing in the after- longipennis, M. vittaticolis, P. fuscipes noon. However, A. longipennis, and M. and Ophionea sp. However, all the five vittaticolis increased more prey con- species of predators were not too ac- sumed at two period of time in the tive in preying in the afternoon evening and in the early morning, then M. vittaticolis and A. longipennis after sometime they decreased in were also active preying longer than preying. Micraspis sp. was more ac- Micraspis sp., P. fuscipes and Ophio- tive in preying during daytime, unlike nea sp. A. longipennis, M. vittaticolis, P. fusci- pes and Ophionea sp. However, all the ACKNOWLEDGEMENT five species of predators were not too I would like to thank Dwi, for active in preying in the afternoon. helping in rearing of brown plant- A degree of caution is needed in hopper and predators used in the expe- relating the findings of this laboratory riments. study using artificial arenas to field

60 J. Entomol. Indon., September 2011, Vol. 8, No. 2, 55-62

REFERENCES lanjutan. Di dalam: Prosiding Konferensi Nasional XV , Him- BBPADI. 2011. Wereng coklat. http: punan Ilmu Gulma Indonesia , //bbpadi.litbang.deptan.go.id/ind Himpunan Ilmu Gulma Indo- ex.php?option=comcontent&vie nesia ; Surakarta, 17-19 Juli w=article&id=228%3A-werengc 2001. Surakarta: HIGI. p 20. oklat&catid=60%3Ahamapadi&I temid =98&lang=in. [accessed Marheni. 2004. Kemampuan beberapa in 28 Juni 2011] predator pada pengendalian we- reng batang coklat ( Nilaparvata Chiu SC. 1979. Biological control of lugens Stål ). Jurnal Natur Indo- the brown planthopper. In nesia . 6(2):84-86 Brown Planthopper: Threat to Rice Production in Asia. Los- Mochida O, Denan K. and Astuti ED. Banos, The Philippines: Interna- 1979. Some observation on the tional Rice Research Institute. p bionomics of the Brown Plant- Nilaparvata lugens 335-355. hopper Stål (Homoptera: ). Di de Kraker J. 1996. The Potential of dalam: Kongres Entomologi I , Natural Enemies to Suppress Jakarta 9-11 January 1979. Rice Leaffolder Populations Jakarta: PEI. p 13 [thesis]. Nederland: Landbouw Rubia EG, and Shepard BM. 1987. Universiteit Wageningen. p 257. Biology of Metioche vittaticollis de Kraker JA, van Huis JC, van Stål (Orthoptera: Gryllidae), a Lenteren KL, Heong, and predator of rice pests. Bull. Ent. Rabbinge R. 2000. Identity and Res. 77:669-676. relative importance of egg pre- dators of rice leaffolders (Lepi- Settle WH, Ariawan H, Astuti ET, doptera: Pyralidae). Biological Cahyana W, Hakim AL, Hinday- Control 19:215-222. ana D, Lestari AS, Pajarningsih and Sartanto. 1996. Management Kalshoven LGE. 1981. Pest of Crops tropical rice pests through con- in Indonesia. Revised by P.A. servation of generalist natural Van der Laan. Jakarta: PT. enemies and alternative prey. Ichtiar baru, Van Hoeve. Ecology 77(7):1975-1988. translation of: Deplagen van de Shepard BM, Barrion AT, and Cultuurgewasen in Indonesie . Litsinger JA. 1987. Helpful Laba IW. 1999. Aspek biologi dan Insects, Spiders and Pathogens. potensi beberapa predator hama Friend’s of The Rice Farmer. wereng pada tanaman padi. Jur- Los-Banos, The Philippines: In- nal Penelitian dan Pengebangan ternational Rice Research Ins- Pertanian 18(2):56-62 titute. p 127. Laba IW, Alwi A, dan Baringbing B. Soenarjo E. 2000. Analisis Ledakan 2001. Peranan gulma dalam pe- dan Pengendalian Hama Wereng lestarian parasitoid dan predator Coklat di Wilayah Endemik. menuju sistem pertanian berke- Pusat Penelitian dan Pengem-

61 Sri Karindah: Predation of the Five Generalist Predators

bangan Tanaman Pangan . Jakar- atimeta, Naranga aenescens ta: Badan Penelitian dan Pe- (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and ngembangan Pertanian. Hydrellia philippina (Diptera: Symondson WOC, Sunderland KD, Ephydridae) by insect predators Biocontrol and Greenstone MH. 2002. Can on rice. 37(1):21-28. ge-neralist predators be effective Van Vreden G. and Ahmadzabidi AL. biocontrol agents? Ann. Rev. 1986. Pest of Rice and Their Entomol . 47:561-594. Natural Enemies in Peninsular Malaysia. Van DenBerg H, Litsinger JA, Shepard The Nederland: Pudoc BM, and Pantua PC. 1992. Wageningen. p 18. Acceptance of eggs of Rivula ______

62