Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T08:00:21.317Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relative susceptibility of sunflower maintainer lines and resistance sources to natural infestations of the banded sunflower moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae)1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 August 2016

Jarrad R. Prasifka  and
Brent S. Hulke
Jarrad R. Prasifka*
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Research Service, Northern Crop Science Laboratory, 1605 Albrecht Boulevard North, Fargo, North Dakota, 58102, United States of America
Brent S. Hulke
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Research Service, Northern Crop Science Laboratory, 1605 Albrecht Boulevard North, Fargo, North Dakota, 58102, United States of America
*
2Corresponding author (e-mail: jarrad.prasifka@ars.usda.gov).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The banded sunflower moth, Cochylis hospes Walsingham (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), is a significant seed-feeding pest of sunflowers (Helianthus Linnaeus; Asteraceae) in North America. Though some wild Helianthus, interspecific crosses, and H. annuus Linnaeus cultivars (which precede hybrid sunflower breeding) have low susceptibility to banded sunflower moth, no apparent effort has been made to evaluate modern inbred lines as a source of resistance for hybrids. In field trials from 2013 to 2015, inbred maintainer (HA) lines, resistant accessions (PI), and unreleased, partially inbred (F6) lines were evaluated in field trials using natural infestations of banded sunflower moth. Results show greater seed damage to maintainer lines than the other groups, but also significant variability among lines within groups. The best maintainer, HA 207, had ≈75% fewer damaged seed than the most susceptible HA lines. Among the resistant PI and unreleased inbred lines, only one entry had significantly less damage than HA 207. While PI 494859 showed banded moth resistance superior to the best inbred lines, its other agronomic liabilities make breeding with the least susceptible maintainer lines appear more practical. A key unknown for any attempts to breed hybrids resistant to banded sunflower moth is how closely damage is correlated between inbred lines and their hybrids.

Type
Insect Management
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 148 , Issue 6 , December 2016 , pp. 736 - 741
Copyright
© Entomological Society of Canada 2016 

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.)

Footnotes

Subject editor: Chris Bergh

1

Mention of trade names or commercial products in this article is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the United States Department of Agriculture.

References

Anderson, M.D. and Brewer, G.J. 1991. Mechanisms of hybrid sunflower resistance to the sunflower midge (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae). Journal of Economic Entomology, 84: 1060–1067.Google Scholar
Beregovoy, V.H. 1985. Appearance of first generation larvae of the sunflower moth, Homoeosoma electellum (Hulst) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), in the central United States. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society, 58: 739–742.Google Scholar
Beregovoy, V.H., Hein, G.L., and Hammond, R.B. 1989. Variations in flight phenology and new data on the distribution of the banded sunflower moth (Lepidoptera: Cochylidae). Environmental Entomology, 18: 273–277.Google Scholar
Charlet, L.D. and Brewer, G.J. 1995. Resistance of native sunflowers (Asterales: Asteraceae) to the banded sunflower moth (Lepidoptera: Cochylidae). Environmental Entomology, 24: 1224–1228.Google Scholar
Charlet, L.D., Brewer, G.J., and Franzmann, B.A. 1997. Sunflower insects. In Sunflower production and technology. Agronomy Monograph 35. Edited by A.A. Schneiter. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America. Pp. 183–261.Google Scholar
Charlet, L.D. and Busacca, J.D. 1986. Insecticidal control of banded sunflower moth, Cochylis hospes (Lepidoptera: Cochylidae), larvae at different sunflower growth stages and dates of planting in North Dakota. Journal of Economic Entomology, 79: 648–650.Google Scholar
Charlet, L.D. and Gross, T.A. 1990. Bionomics and seasonal abundance of the banded sunflower moth (Lepidoptera: Cochylidae) on cultivated sunflower in the northern Great Plains. Journal of Economic Entomology, 83: 135–141.Google Scholar
Charlet, L.D. and Miller, J.F. 1993. Seed production after floret removal from sunflower heads. Agronomy Journal, 85: 56–58.Google Scholar
Charlet, L.D., Seiler, G.J., Miller, J.F., Hulke, B.S., and Knodel, J.J. 2009. Resistance among cultivated sunflower germplasm to the banded sunflower moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in the northern Great Plains. Helia, 32: 1–9.Google Scholar
Chirumamilla, A., Knodel, J.J., Charlet, L.D., Hulke, B.S., Foster, S.P., and Ode, P.J. 2014. Ovipositional preference and larval performance of the banded sunflower moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) and its larval parasitoids on resistant and susceptible lines of sunflower (Asterales: Asteraceae). Environmental Entomology, 43: 58–68.Google Scholar
Crompton, D.S. and Brewer, G.J. 2005. Heritability of sunflower midge resistance in selected inbred lines. In Proceedings of the 27th sunflower research workshop. National Sunflower Association, Mandan, North Dakota, United States of America. Available from http://www.sunflowernsa.com/uploads/research/205/Crompton_Heritability_05.PDF [accessed 12 April 2016].Google Scholar
DeGrandi-Hoffman, G. and Chambers, M. 2006. Effects of honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) foraging on seed set in self-fertile sunflowers (Helianthus annuus L.). Environmental Entomology, 35: 1103–1108.Google Scholar
Flint-Garcia, S.A., Dashiell, K.E., Prischmann, D.A., Bohn, M.O., and Hibbard, B.E. 2009. Conventional screening overlooks resistance sources: rootworm damage of diverse inbred lines and their B73 hybrids is unrelated. Journal of Economic Entomology, 102: 1317–1324.Google Scholar
Kreps, R.C., Gumber, R.K., Schulz, B., Klein, D., and Melchinger, A.E. 1998. Genetic variation in testcrosses of European maize inbreds for resistance to the European corn borer and relations to line per se performance. Plant Breeding, 117: 319–327.Google Scholar
Martinez, F.A.P. 1991. Seasonal infestation of sunflower by Homoeosoma electellum (Hulst) in Central Tamaulipas, Mexico. Southwestern Entomologist, 16: 31–35.Google Scholar
National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2015. Acreage [June 30]. United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, Washington, District of Columbia, United States of America.Google Scholar
National Sunflower Association of Canada. 2014. National sunflower research strategy [online]. Available from http://www.canadasunflower.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/FINAL-National-Sunflower-Research-Strategy_cp_March-27-2014.pdf [accessed 12 April 2016].Google Scholar
Peng, C. and Brewer, G.J. 1995. Description of achene damage by the red sunflower seed weevil, the banded sunflower moth, and the sunflower moth. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society, 68: 263–267.Google Scholar
Prasifka, J.R. 2015. Variation in the number of capitate glandular trichomes in wild and cultivated sunflower germplasm and its potential for use in host plant resistance. Plant Genetic Resources, 13: 68–74.Google Scholar
Prasifka, J.R. and Hulke, B.S. 2012. Current status and future perspectives on sunflower insect pests. In 18th International Sunflower Conference Program and Abstracts, Mar del Plata and Balcarce, Argentina, 27 February 27 to 3 March, 2012. International Sunflower Association, Paris, France. P. 41.Google Scholar
Prasifka, J.R., Hulke, B.S., and Seiler, G.J. 2014. Pericarp strength of sunflower and its value for plant defense against the sunflower moth, Homoeosoma electellum . Arthropod-Plant Interactions, 8: 101–107.Google Scholar
Prasifka, J.R., Spring, O., Cook, L.W., Palmquist, D.E., and Foley, M.E. 2015. Sesquiterpene lactone composition of wild and cultivated sunflower germplasm and biological activity against a seed-feeding insect pest. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 63: 4042–4049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, C.E., Gershenzon, J., Ohno, N., Mabry, T.J., Stipanovic, R.D., and Kreitner, G.L. 1987. Terpenes of wild sunflowers (Helianthus): an effective mechanism against seed predation by larvae of the sunflower moth, Homoeosoma electellum (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Environmental Entomology, 16: 586–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute Inc. 2007. SAS 9.1.3 help and documentation. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina, United States of America.Google Scholar
Schneiter, A.A. and Miller, J.F. 1981. Description of sunflower growth stages. Crop Science, 21: 901–903.Google Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 2016. Germplasm Resources Information Network – (GRIN) [online]. Available from https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/search.aspx [accessed 12 April 2016].Google Scholar
Wilson, R.L. and McClurg, S.G. 1997. Evaluation of cultivated sunflower germplasm for resistance to sunflower moth, Homoeosoma electellum (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Helia, 20: 1–8.Google Scholar