Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T14:20:18.381Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Food and Feeding Habits of Antestia in Kenya

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Richard H. Le Pelley
Richard H. Le Pelley
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, Kenya.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

(1) Two host-plants of Antestia lineaticollis in addition to Coffea arabica are Psychotria nairobiensis and Pavetta elliottii.

(2) Laboratory experiments showed that red berries and large green berries are favoured foods, but feeding will also take place on small green berries, on shoots, and on leaves.

(3) Feeding trials showed that large green berry food is essential for normal length of life and normal egg production.

(4) Antestia was reared to adult stage when fed exclusively on large green berries, on small green berries, and on shoots, but not on red berries or leaves.

(5) In large green berries and small green berries the endosperm becomes infected with rots, usually caused by the fungi Nematospora coryli or Nematospora gossypii, which are introduced by Antestia, but in the case of ripe red berries the endocarp is seldom if ever pierced and rotting of the endosperm is not initiated at this stage.

(6) The amount of damage caused to the crop by rotting of the beans is related to the number of Antestia present, and a formula which is considered to represent this relationship is given. In practice as high a proportion as 97 per cent. of the beans have been found rotted when Antestia is numerous. The figures also show that even when Antestia population is low, an economically important amount of damage to the crop may occur.

(7) Antestia was proved to cause a dropping of young green berries. This seems not to be due to the insect feeding on the stalk, but to be a response by the plant to an interruption of normal growth of the bean due to insect feeding. A similar shedding has been noticed of berries damaged by other insects when it is known that no feeding on the stalk can have taken place.

(8) Feeding experiments in cages and sleeves showed that Antestia must rank as one of the important causes of the non-setting of flowers ; this form of damage has been neglected or minimised in the past.

(9) As a result of Antestia feeding on the growing point, leaves become scarred and distorted.

(10) A useful form of cage for experimental work of this kind is described.

(11) Definite confirmation was obtained that well-known abnormalities of the vegetative growth characterised by multiple branching are produced by the feeding of Antestia.

(12) It is shown that the growth is stopped or much reduced by the feeding of Antestia, and when this is associated, as it usually is, with multiple branching, a “ bunchy ” or “ matted ” growth results, which increases pruning costs and much reduces the cropping ability of the tree.

(13) A short discussion follows which indicates certain practical conclusions that can be drawn from the above results.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , June 1942 , pp. 71 - 89
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1942

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, T. J. (1919). The coffee bug, Antestia lineaticollis Stål.—Bull. Div. Ent. Dep. Agric. Brit. E. Afr. No. 1.Google Scholar
Buxton, P. A. & Mellanby, K. (1934). Bull. Ent. Res., 25, pp. 171–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gowdey, C. C. (1918). Rep. Dep. Agric. Uganda 1917–18, pp. 42–51.Google Scholar
Hancock, G. R. L. (1926). Rep. Dep. Agric. Uganda 1925, pp. 25–28.Google Scholar
Hargreaves, H. (1930). Variegated coffee bug.—Circ. Dep. Agric. Uganda no. 22.Google Scholar
Hargreaves, H. (1936). Variegated coffee bug in Uganda.—E. Afr. Agric. J., 1, pp. 448–452.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, T. W. (1937). The autecology of Antestia spp. with a particular account of a Strepsipterous parasite.—Trans. R. Ent. Soc. Lond., 86, pp. 247–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Pelley, R. H. (1932). Lygus (coffeae, China) a pest of coffee in Kenya Colony.—Bull. Ent. Res., 23, pp. 85–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Pelley, R. H. (1932 a). On the control of Antestia lineaticollis on coffee in Kenya Colony.—Bull. Ent. Res., 23, pp. 217–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Pelley, R. H. (1934). Pyrethrum extract spraying … with suggestions for routine testing on plantations.—Bull. Dep. Agric. Kenya no. 8.Google Scholar
McDonald, J. (1932). Rep. Dep. Agric. Kenya 1931, pp. 118–130.Google Scholar
McDonald, J. (1933). Rep. Dep. Agric. Kenya 1932, pp. 124–134.Google Scholar
Notley, F. B. (1940). Entomologist's report.—Rep. Coffee Res. & Exp. Sta. Lyamungu (Tanganyika), 5 (1938), pp. 29–38.Google Scholar
Notley, F. B. (1941). E. Afr. Agric. J., 6, pp. 194–198.Google Scholar
Ritchie, A. H. (1929). Rep. Dep. Agric. Tanganyika 1928–1929, pt. 2, pp. 29–34.Google Scholar
Small, W. (1923). The diseases of Arabica Coffee in Uganda.—Circ. Dep. Agric. Uganda no. 9.Google Scholar
Smee, C. (1931). Rep. Dep. Agric. Nyasaland 1930, pp. 27–31.Google Scholar
Thompson, W. R. (1924). La théorie mathématique de l'action des parasites entomophages et le facteur du hasard.—Ann. Fac. Sci. Marseille, (2) 2, pp. 69–89.Google Scholar
Venkatarayan, S. V. (1938 ). Curr. Sci., 7, pp. 113–114.Google Scholar
Wallace, G. B. (1930). Rep. Dep. Agric. Tanganyika 1929–1930 Pt. 2, pp. 45–49.Google Scholar
Wallace, G. B. (1931). Coffee bean disease.—Trop. Agriculture, 8, pp. 14–17.Google Scholar
Wallace, G. B. (1932). Rep. Dep. Agric. Tanganyika 1931, pp. 94–97.Google Scholar
Wallace, G. B. (1932 a). Coffee bean disease.—Trop. Agriculture, 9, p. 127.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, H. (1924). The coffee bug.—Circ. Dep. Agric. Uganda no. 13.Google Scholar