DOCSLIB.ORG

Fall Armyworm: Impacts and Implications for Africa Evidence Note (2), September 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fall Armyworm: Impacts and Implications for Africa Evidence Note (2), September 2017 Fall Armyworm: Impacts and Implications for Africa Evidence Note (2), September 2017 Authors: Phil Abrahams; Melanie Bateman; Tim Beale; Victor Clottey; Matthew Cock; Yelitza Colmenarez; Natalia Corniani; Roger Day*; Regan Early^; Julien Godwin; Jose Gomez; Pablo Gonzalez Moreno; Sean T. Murphy; Birgitta Oppong-Mensah; Noah Phiri; Corin Pratt; Gareth Richards; Silvia Silvestri; Arne Witt *Corresponding author ^Dept of Biosciences, University of Exeter (UK) All other authors: CABI Acknowledgement The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Department for International Development (DFID). The views expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of DFID. Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 4 Behaviour, biology and ecology of the fall armyworm................................................................. 5 Current spread in Africa .............................................................................................................. 5 The impact of FAW on maize yield and economics: national, continental, household and trade perspectives ................................................................................................................................ 5 National level ........................................................................................................................... 5 Household level ....................................................................................................................... 6 Impacts on trade ..................................................................................................................... 6 Control ......................................................................................................................................... 6 Monitoring ................................................................................................................................ 7 Control ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Section 1: Behaviour, biology and ecology of the fall armyworm ............................... 9 Host range ................................................................................................................................... 9 Life cycle and biology .................................................................................................................. 9 Mobility and dispersal ................................................................................................................ 12 Taxonomic and genetic issues .................................................................................................. 13 Pathways of entry and spread................................................................................................... 15 Section 2: Current spread into Africa .......................................................................... 19 Spread into Africa ...................................................................................................................... 19 Previously reported distribution ................................................................................................. 19 Methods for current distribution review ..................................................................................... 20 Current distribution .................................................................................................................... 21 Map of known impacts in Africa ................................................................................................ 23 Forecasted distribution based on climatic suitability ................................................................. 31 Ecological niche occupation in the Americas and Africa .......................................................... 32 Correlation between known impacts and current predictions ................................................... 33 Section 3: The impact of FAW on maize yield and economics: national, continental, household and trade perspectives ............................................................................... 37 Studies in Ghana and Zambia: last completed maize growing season .................................... 37 Maize production in relation to sectors in Ghana and Zambia .................................................. 37 Results and discussion ............................................................................................................. 38 Estimates of national yield and revenue losses due to FAW .................................................... 38 Area affected by FAW per household ....................................................................................... 43 Estimates of continental yield loss due to FAW ........................................................................ 44 Context .................................................................................................................................. 44 Results and discussion ............................................................................................................. 45 The impact of controlling the FAW at a household level in Ghana and Zambia ....................... 48 Context .................................................................................................................................. 48 Scenarios: ................................................................................................................................. 51 Control measure success .......................................................................................................... 53 Impacts on trade ....................................................................................................................... 54 Section 4 Control ........................................................................................................... 59 4.1 Damage, monitoring and action thresholds ............................................................ 60 4.1.1 Damage ............................................................................................................................ 60 2 4.1.2 Monitoring ........................................................................................................................ 60 4.1.3 Action thresholds .............................................................................................................. 62 4.2 Control methods in Latin America and lessons for Africa....................................... 64 4.2.1 Biological considerations .................................................................................................. 64 4.2.2 Chemical control .............................................................................................................. 65 4.2.3 Microbial biopesticides ..................................................................................................... 67 4.2.4 Macrobials: Inundative release ........................................................................................ 68 4.2.5 Macrobials: Classical biological control ........................................................................... 70 4.2.6 Plant extracts/botanicals .................................................................................................. 70 4.2.7 Pest-resistant crops ......................................................................................................... 71 4.2.8 Mass trapping ................................................................................................................... 73 4.2.9 Agronomic practices ......................................................................................................... 73 4.2.10 Sterile insect technique (SIT) ......................................................................................... 76 4.2.11 Integrated Pest Management ......................................................................................... 76 4.3 Biopesticides for FAW ......................................................................................................... 77 Hazard profiles of identified biopesticides AI ............................................................................ 82 Discussion ................................................................................................................................. 82 4.4 Uptake of pest control solutions ............................................................................. 84 4.1.1 IPM in Africa ..................................................................................................................... 84 4.4.2 Promoting uptake of pest management methods ............................................................ 87 Financial incentives, subsidies .................................................................................................. 87 Agricultural advisory services .................................................................................................... 88 Policy and regulatory environment ............................................................................................ 89 4.5 Control recommendations ...................................................................................... 92 4.5.1 Country recommendations in Africa ................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Egyptian Cottonworm Spodoptera Littoralis
    Michigan State University’s invasive species factsheets Egyptian cottonworm Spodoptera littoralis The Egyptian cottonworm is a highly polyphagous defoliator of many cultivated plants. Its accidental introduction to Michigan may be a particular concern to vegetable, fruit and ornamental industries. Michigan risk maps for exotic plant pests. Other common names African cotton leafworm, Egyptian cotton leafworm, Mediterranean Brocade moth Systematic position Insecta > Lepidoptera > Noctuidae > Spodoptera littoralis (Boisduval) Global distribution Adult. (Photo: O. Heikinheimo, Bugwood.org) Most parts of Africa. Southern or Mediterranean Europe: Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal, Spain. Middle East: Israel, Syria, Turkey. Quarantine status The Egyptian cottonworm has been intercepted at least 65 times at U.S. ports of entry since 2004 (Ellis 2004). This insect has been detected in greenhouses in Ohio but was subsequently eradicated (Passoa 2008). It is listed as an exotic organism of high invasive risk to the United States (USDA-APHIS 2008). Plant hosts Larva. (Photo: Biologische Bundesanstalt für Land- und Forstwirtschaft Archive, A wide host range of at least 87 plant species over Biologische Bundesanstalt für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Bugwood.org) 40 plant families including many vegetable, fruit and ornamental crops. Some examples include alfalfa, white oblique bands; hind wings pale with brown margins. apples, avocados, beets, bell peppers, cabbage, carrots, Larva: Body up to 45 mm long and hairless; newly cauliflower, cereal, clover, corn, cotton, cucurbits, hatched larvae are blackish-grey to dark green; mature eggplants, figs, geraniums, grapes, lettuce, oaks, okra, larvae are reddish-brown or whitish-yellow; larvae have onions, peas, peanuts, pears, pines, poplars, potatoes, dark and light longitudinal bands and two dark, semi- radish, roses, soybeans, spinach, sunflowers, taro, tea, circular spots on their back.
    [Show full text]
  • Cluster Caterpillar (Spodoptera Litura [Fabricius]) Ilse Schreiner, Ph.D., Associateprofessor of Entomology, University of Guam
    Agricultural Pests of the Pacific ADAP 2000-3, Reissued February 2000 ISBN 1-931435-06-5 Cluster Caterpillar (Spodoptera litura [Fabricius]) Ilse Schreiner, Ph.D., AssociateProfessor of Entomology, University of Guam he moth of this Tspecies is widespread throughout Asia and is present in the Marianas, most of the Carolines, and the South Pacific region including American Sa- moa. Many vegetables and other crops are damaged by cluster caterpillars. Crops likely to be seriously damaged in this region in- clude the various taros, cabbage and its relatives, Large caterpillar on cabbage leaf Cluster of small caterpillars on taro leaf and tomatoes. The eggs of the cluster caterpillar (Spodoptera litura [Fabricius]) (Lepi- occurred. Several insecticides may also be used if doptera: Noctuidae) are laid in clusters of 200 to 300 necessary. When the use of chemicals is required, underneath leaves and covered with brown scales consult an Extension Agent at your local land grant from the body of the mother. They hatch in three to institution. In Guam, you may also consult the Fruit four days. The larvae feed in a group when they are and Vegetable Pesticide Guide for current recommen- young but spread out as they get older. When they dations and permissible uses. are mature they leave the plants and pupate in a small cell in the soil. The life cycle takes about 25 days. The adult moths are nocturnal and are not often seen. For Further Information: The larvae are primarily leaf feeders but may occa- American Samoa Community College (684) 699-1575 - fax (684) 699-5011 College of Micronesia (691) 320-2462 - fax (691) 320-2726 sionally cut young plants at the soil line.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Wild Host Plants in the Abundance of Lepidopteran Stem Borers Along Altitudinal Gradients in Kenya
    Ann. soc. enromol. Fr. (n.s.), 2006, 42 (3-4) : 363-370 ARTICLE The role ofwild host plants in the abundance oflepidopteran stem borers along altitudinal gradient in Kenya GEORGE O. ONG'AMO(I), BRUNO P. LE RD(I), STI~,PHANE DUPAS(l), PASCAL MOYAL(l), ERIC MUCHUGU(3), PAUL-ANDRE CALATAYUD(I) & JEAN-FRAN<;:OIS SILVAIN(2) (I) Nocruid Stem Borer Biodiversity Project (NSBB), Insrirur de Recherche pour le Developpernenr I International Cenrre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (IRD/ICIPE), P.O. Box 30772, Nairobi, Kenya (2) IRD, UR R072 clo CNRS, UPR 9034, Laboraroire Evolution, Genomes et Speciarion, avenue de la Terrasse, 91198 Gif/Yvene, France (31 Stem borer Biological Control Project (ICIPE), P.O. Box 30772, Nairobi, Kenya Abstract. Presence of wild host plants of stem borers in cereal-growing areas has been considered as reservoirs of lepidopteran stem borers, responsible for attack of crops during the growing season. Surveys to catalogue hosts and borers as well as to assess the abundance of the hosts were carried out during the cropping and non-cropping seasons in different agro-ecological zones along varying altitude gradient in Kenya. A total of 61 stem borer species belonging to families Noctuidae (25), Crambidae (14), Pyralidae (9), Tortricidae (11) and Cossidae (2) were recovered from 42 wild plant species. Two noctuids, Busseola fusca (Fuller), Sesamia calamistis Hampson, and two crambids, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) and Chilo orichalcociliellus (Strand) were the four main borer species found associated with maize plants. In the wild, B. fusca was recovered from a limited number of host plant species and among them were Sorghum arundinaceum (Desvaux) Stapf, Setaria megaphylla (Steudel) 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Spodoptera Litura (Fabricius)
    Keys About Fact Sheets Glossary Larval Morphology References << Previous fact sheet Next fact sheet >> NOCTUIDAE - Spodoptera litura (Fabricius) Taxonomy Click here to download this Fact Sheet as a printable PDF Noctuoidea: Noctuidae: Noctuinae: Spodoptera litura (Fabricius) Common names: rice cutworm, cluster caterpillar, cotton leafworm, tobacco cutworm, tropical armyworm, Egyptian cottonworm Synonyms: Prodenia litura, Noctua histrionica, Noctua elata, Prodenia ciligera, Prodenia tasmanica, Prodenia subterminalis, Prodenia glaucistriga, Prodenia declinata, Mamestra albisparsa, Prodenia evanescens, Orthosia conjuncta Fig. 1: Late instar, lateral view Larval diagnosis (Summary) Mandible with scissorial teeth resulting in a serrate cutting edge Ground color green to yellow brown to dark blue gray Subdorsal area often not contrasting with paler dorsum Middorsal line often present and conspicuous Fig. 2: Late instar, lateral view Spiracular stripe, if interrupted on A1, then equal in intensity on both the thorax and abdomen Dorsal triangles, if present, usually with an apical white dot Abdominal spiracles usually with a large black dot dorsally and a white spot posteriorly From Middle East to Asia on a wide range of hosts Fig. 3: Early to mid-instar, lateral view Host/origin information More than 85% of all interception records at U.S. ports of entry for S. litura are from Thailand on orchids. Origin Host(s) Thailand Dendrobium, Oncidium Malaysia various Fig. 4: Early instar, lateral view Singapore various Recorded distribution Spodoptera litura is widely distributed throughout Asia and Australasia, from Afghanistan, northwestern India, and Pakistan to Korea, China, and Japan, south to Australia and New Zealand. It is also present on many Pacific Islands as well as in Hawaii (Pogue 2002).
    [Show full text]
  • Universidade Estadual De Campinas Instituto De Biologia
    UNIVERSIDADE ESTADUAL DE CAMPINAS INSTITUTO DE BIOLOGIA Fabricio José Biasotto Francischini Morphological and molecular characterization of species of Diatraea ssp. (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) and elucidation of dispersal pattern in America continent Caracterização morfológica e molecular de espécies de Diatraea ssp. (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) e elucidação dos padrões de dispersão no continente americano CAMPINAS 2017 Fabricio José Biasotto Francischini Morphological and molecular characterization of species of Diatraea ssp. (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) and elucidation of dispersal pattern in America continent Caracterização morfológica e molecular de espécies de Diatraea ssp. (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) e elucidação dos padrões de dispersão no continente americano Thesis presented to the Institute of Biology of the University of Campinas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor in Genetics and Molecular Biology in the area of Plant Genetics and Genetic Breeding Tese apresentada ao Instituto de Biologia da Universidade Estadual de Campinas como parte dos requisitos exigidos para obtenção do título de Doutor em Genética e Biologia Molecular, na Área de Genética Vegetal e Melhoramento Orientadora: Profa. Dra. Maria Imaculada Zucchi Coorientador: Dr. Tederson Galvan ESTE ARQUIVO DIGITAL CORRESPONDE À VERSÃO FINAL DA TESE DEFENDIDA PELO ALUNO FABRICIO JOSÉ BIASOTTO FRANCISCHINI E ORIENTADO PELA PROFa. DRa. MARIA IMACULADA ZUCCHI CAMPINAS 2017 Campinas, 30 de agosto de 2017 COMISSÃO EXAMINADORA Profa. Dra.Maria Imaculada Zucchi (presidente) Prof. Dr. Thiago de Araújo Mastrangelo Prof. Dr. Pedro Takao Yamamoto Dr. Alessandro Alves Pereira Prof. Dr. Alberto Soares Corrêa Os membros da Comissão Examinadora acima assinaram a Ata de defesa, que se encontra no processo de vida acadêmica do aluno. Para Josy Minha eterna esposa Juntos recebemos o dom Da Graça! Constantemente você me ensina a construir nossa família alicerçados em Jesus.
    [Show full text]
  • The African Scare of Fall Armyworm: Are South African Farmers Immune?
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITY STUDIES Vol 12, No 1, 2020 ISSN: 1309-8063 (Online) THE AFRICAN SCARE OF FALL ARMYWORM: ARE SOUTH AFRICAN FARMERS IMMUNE? Witness Maluleke University of Limpopo Email: [email protected] Orcid ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6228-1640 –Abstract– The manifestations of Fall Armyworm [FAW] (Spodoptera frugiperda) in South Africa were all clearly reminders of the seriousness of this epidemic in 2019. The scare caused by FAW as an African Moth continues to multiple largely. This is becoming a factor for African farmers, seeking urgent acknowledgement of the associated detrimental effects mapped with economic, social, environmental opportunities and fully exploitation of sustainable agriculture in the country and elsewhere. This study adopted qualitative research approach, with an aid of non- empirical research design: Systematic review, closely looking at recent reputable reports across globe, while using South Africa as a case study, from 1995-2019 (i.e. 24 years’ projection). This study found that South African readiness against FAW is [currently] highly questionable, with the consequences of failing to act clearly felt by many South African farmers, therefore, the strategies geared towards this pandemic [might] not be able to totally stop the clock on its effects on farming practices, however, revisiting and adding to the available strategies can be beneficial to this sector to holistically affirm and sustain agriculture in South Africa as one of the two sectors at the core of economic development. It is concluded that there is no single solution to respond to this elusive spread, thus, multi-agency approach is highly sought.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Pest Management in Soybeans 12 by G
    Chapter Insect Pest Management in Soybeans 12 by G. Lorenz, D. Johnson, G. Studebaker, C. Allen and S. Young, III he importance of insect pests in Arkansas Finally, it is important to determine what soybeans is extremely variable from year to management tactics are available and whether or year due in large part to environmental not they are economically feasible. T conditions. For example, hot, dry years favor many lepidopterous pests such as the soybean Insect Identification podworm and the beet armyworm; and when drought conditions occur, these pests usually are The three types of insect pests found in soybeans abundant. Many other lepidopterous pests, such as in Arkansas are: the velvetbean caterpillar and the soybean looper, 1. Foliage feeders, which comprise the biggest may cause problems following migrations from group of insect pests, southern areas, particularly in concurrence with winds out of the Gulf region where they are a 2. Pod feeders, which are probably the most common problem. Generally, insect pressure is detrimental to yield, and greater in the southern part of the state compared to 3. Stem, root and seedling feeders, which are northern Arkansas due to warmer temperatures and often the hardest to sample and are not detected closeness to the aforementioned migration sources. until after they have caused damage. Production practices also have an impact on the Some insects, such as the bean leaf beetle, may feed GEMENT occurrence of pest insects in soybeans. For example, on both foliage and pods but are primarily insects such as the Dectes stem borer and grape considered foliage feeders.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Potential of Using Spodoptera Litura Eggs for Mass-Rearing Telenomus Remus, a Promising Egg Parasitoid of Spodoptera Frugiperda
    insects Article Evaluating the Potential of Using Spodoptera litura Eggs for Mass-Rearing Telenomus remus, a Promising Egg Parasitoid of Spodoptera frugiperda Wanbin Chen , Yuyan Li , Mengqing Wang, Jianjun Mao and Lisheng Zhang * State Key Laboratory for Biology of Plant Diseases and Insect Pests, Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China; [email protected] (W.C.); [email protected] (Y.L.); [email protected] (M.W.); [email protected] (J.M.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-10-6281-5909 Simple Summary: Telenomus remus (Nixon) is an effective egg parasitoid for controlling Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith), which is a major destructive agricultural pest. Currently, this parasitoid is reared on Corcyra cephalonica (Stainton) eggs in several countries. However, previous studies carried out in China have reported that it cannot parasitize in C. cephalonica eggs. Meanwhile, those works have indicated that Spodoptera litura (Fabricius) can potentially be used as an alternative host. In order to evaluate this potential, our study compared the development and parasitism ability of T. remus on the eggs of S. frugiperda and S. litura at different temperatures in a laboratory. We found that S. litura eggs are more advantageous as an alternative host for the mass-rearing of parasitoid when compared with S. frugiperda eggs. Our results provide a more specific basis and reference for the large-scale Citation: Chen, W.; Li, Y.; Wang, M.; production and low temperature storage of T. remus. Mao, J.; Zhang, L. Evaluating the Potential of Using Spodoptera litura Abstract: Although Telenomus remus, a promising parasitoid of Spodoptera frugiperda, had been Eggs for Mass-Rearing Telenomus successfully reared on the eggs of Corcyra cephalonica in some countries, reports from China have remus, a Promising Egg Parasitoid of argued that it is infeasible.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 5.3 MON 810 Literature Review – List of All Hits (June 2016
    Appendix 5.3 MON 810 literature review – List of all hits (June 2016-May 2017) -Web of ScienceTM Core Collection database 12/8/2016 Web of Science [v.5.23] ­ Export Transfer Service Web of Science™ Page 1 (Records 1 ­­ 50) [ 1 ] Record 1 of 50 Title: Ground beetle acquisition of Cry1Ab from plant­ and residue­based food webs Author(s): Andow, DA (Andow, D. A.); Zwahlen, C (Zwahlen, C.) Source: BIOLOGICAL CONTROL Volume: 103 Pages: 204­209 DOI: 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2016.09.009 Published: DEC 2016 Abstract: Ground beetles are significant predators in agricultural habitats. While many studies have characterized effects of Bt maize on various carabid species, few have examined the potential acquisition of Cry toxins from live plants versus plant residue. In this study, we examined how live Bt maize and Bt maize residue affect acquisition of Cry1Ab in six species. Adult beetles were collected live from fields with either current­year Bt maize, one­year­old Bt maize residue, two­year­old Bt maize residue, or fields without any Bt crops or residue for the past two years, and specimens were analyzed using ELISA. Observed Cry1Ab concentrations in the beetles were similar to that reported in previously published studies. Only one specimen of Cyclotrachelus iowensis acquired Cry1Ab from two­year­old maize residue. Three species acquired Cry1Ab from fields with either live plants or plant residue (Cyclotrachelus iowensis, Poecilus lucublandus, Poecilus chalcites), implying participation in both live­plant and residue­based food webs. Two species acquired toxin from fields with live plants, but not from fields with residue (Bembidion quadrimaculatum, Elaphropus incurvus), suggesting participation only in live plant­based food webs.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. EPA, Pesticide Product Label, LAMBDA 13% INSECTICIDE, 04/24
    EPA Reg. Number: Date of Issuance: US. ENVIRONMENTAI.PR<lTECTION AGENCY 71532-20 Office of Pesticide Programs APR 2 4 20D7 Registration Division (H7505C) 1200 Pl:nnsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.c' 20460 NOTICE OF PESTICIDE: L Registration _ Reregistration (Under FrFRA as amended) Name LG Life Sciences, Ltd. c/o Biologic Inc. 115 Obtuse Hill Road and Rodenticide Act. Registration is in no way to bc construed as an endorsement or recommendation of this product by the Agency. In order to prot~t health and the : environment, the Administrator, on his motion, may at any time suspend or cancel the registratIOn of a pesticide in accordance with the Act. The acceptance , of any name in conneCtion with the registration of a product under this Act is not to be construed as giving the registrant a right to exclusive use of the name or to its use if it has been covered by others. This product is conditionally registercd in accordance with PIFRA sec. 3(c)(7)(A), subject to the following provisions: 1. You will submit andlor cite all data required for registration/reregistration of your pmduct under FIFRA sec. 3( c)(5) when the Agency requires all registrants of similar products to submit su;h data; and submit acceptable responses required for reregistration of your product under FIFRA sectior 4. 2. You will make the following label changes before you release the product for shipmmt: a) Revise the EPA Registration Number to read "EPA Reg. No.71532-20." b) Add "Contains petroleum distillates" immediately below the ingredient statement as a footnote below the term "Inert ingredients." c) Under First Aid list the statcments in the following order: "If on skin or clothing, Ifin eyes, If swallowed, If inhaled." d) Revise the 2"d bullet of the "If Swallowed" first aid statements to read "Do not give any liquid to the person." e) Add H(PPE)" after the Personal Protective Equipment headi!lg on page 3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fall Armyworm – a Pest of Pasture and Hay
    The Fall Armyworm – A Pest of Pasture and Hay. Allen Knutson Extension Entomologist, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Texas A&M AgriLife Research and Extension Center, Dallas, 2019 revision The fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda, is a common pest of bermudagrass, sorghum, corn, wheat and rye grass and many other crops in north and central Texas. Larvae of fall armyworms are green, brown or black with white to yellowish lines running from head to tail. A distinct white line between the eyes forms an inverted “Y” pattern on the face. Four black spots aligned in a square on the top of the segment near the back end of the caterpillar are also characteristic. Armyworms are very small (less than 1/8 inch) at first, cause little plant damage and as a result often go unnoticed. Larvae feed for 2-3 weeks and full grown larvae are about 1 to 1 1/2 inches long. Given their immense appetite, great numbers, and marching ability, fall armyworms can damage entire fields or pastures in a few days. Once the armyworm larva completes feeding, it tunnels into the soil to a depth of about an inch and enters the pupal stage. The armyworm moth emerges from the pupa in about ten days and repeats the life cycle. The fall armyworm moth has a wingspan of about 1 1/2 inches. The front pair of wings is dark gray with an irregular pattern of light and dark areas. Moths are active at night when they feed on nectar and deposit egg masses. A single female can deposit up to 2000 eggs and there are four to five generations per year.
    [Show full text]
  • Fall Armyworm
    How to identify... Fall armyworm Fall armyworm or ‘American armyworm’ is a new pest in Africa that is currently attacking maize. This pest originates from the Americas, but it has recently been found in several countries in West and Southern Africa. This guide will help you to recognize fall armyworm and tell it apart from similar caterpillars such as other armyworms, stalk borers and cut worms. IDENTIFICATION Half-grown or fully grown caterpillars are the easiest to identify. Fall armyworm caterpillars have a characteristic pattern of dark pimples (spots) on their backs, each spot has a short bristle (hair). Although the skin looks rough it is smooth to the touch. Look out for four dark spots forming a square on the second to last segment (red circle). Each of the other body segments also has four spots, but they do not from a square pattern (yellow circle). The head is dark and shows a characteristic upside down Y-shaped pale marking on the front (blue circle). ©Russ Ottens, Bugwood.org ✔ ©Russ Ottens, Bugwood.org ✔ ©Russ Ottens, Bugwood.org ✔ Other armyworms, maize stem borer and cotton bollworm ©Donald Hobern, Denmark Hobern, ©Donald ✘ Denmark Hobern, ©Donald ✘ The cotton bollworm (Helicoverpa armigera) often shows a similar pattern of dots on its back, but its head is usually paler, and although they can also show an inverted Y this is usually a similar colour to the rest of the head. Unlike the fall armyworm they feel rough to the touch due to tiny spines. us Kloppers/PANNAR us ©Rik ✘ Bugwood.org Cranshaw, ©Whitney ✘ Flickr Reyes, Marquina ©David ✘ African armyworm Beet armyworm African cotton leafworm Spodoptera exempta Spodoptera exigua Spodoptera littoralis ©NBAIR ✘ CABI ©R.Reeder, ✘ Spotted stem borer African maize stalk borer Chilo partellus Busseola fusca Damage caused by Fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) ©J.
    [Show full text]