Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:34:00.849Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feeding Deterrence Induced by Some Plants in Spodoptera littoralis and Their Potentiating Effect on Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2011

H. S. Salama  and
A. Sharaby
H. S. Salama
Affiliation:
Laboratories of Pests and Plant Protection, National Research Centre, Dokki, Cairo, Egypt
A. Sharaby
Affiliation:
Laboratories of Pests and Plant Protection, National Research Centre, Dokki, Cairo, Egypt
Get access

Abstract

Investigations have been made to evaluate the development of Spodoptera littoralis as affected by feeding on a standard artificial diet containing powder of some plant species known to be resistant to the infestation of this insect. Trials were also made to find out whether the effect of these plants facilitate the potency of Bacillus thuringiensis var entomocidus HD-635 vs. the target insect. The results revealed that powders of pomegranate peel, guava leaves and lemon grass, greatly affected the insect development in terms of larval duration, larval and pupal weights, deformities in pupae and moths, percentage of emergence, egg production and hatching. This may be correlated to the chemical constituents of these plants. A marked increase was observed in the potency of B. thuringiensis endotoxin preparation vs. S. littoralis when combined with some of the tested powdered plants or its extracts but in varying degrees.

Résumé

Les investigations ont fait pour evoluer le development de Spodoptera littoralis qui est a effecté par la nouriture sur un olimentation artificiel standard contient poudre de quelques spèces de plantes qui sont convues comme resistente contre l'invasion de l'insecte.

Les jugements sont faites encore pour trouver si l'effet de ses plantes facilitent la puissance de Bacillus thuringiensis var. entomocidus HD-635 contre l'insect.

Les resultats réveloient que les poudres de granade epluché, les feuilles de guava et l'herbe de citran effectoient grandement le development de l'insecte dans le period de larve, le poids de larve et de numph, le diformité du numphs de mites, le pourcentage de l'emergence, la production des oeufs et ses éclosions. Ces resultats peut être correspondrent avec les constituents chimiques des ces plantes. Une gronde augmentation etait observé dans la priussance de l'endotoxin preparer par B. thuringiensis contre S. littoralis quand il est réuni avec quelque plantes éxaminer ou leurs extraits mois dans divers degré.

Keywords

Spodoptera littoralisBacillus thuringiensisstandard artificial dietendoxin preparation
Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 9 , Issue 5 , October 1988 , pp. 573 - 577
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 1988

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

REFERENCES

Abbott, W. S. (1925) A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. J. Econ. Ent. 18, 265–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asari, P. A. R. and Thomas, M. J. (1976) On the use of lemon-grass leaf infusion for control of brinyal aphid. Agric. Res. J. Kerala. 12, 77.Google Scholar
Braverman, J. B. S. (1949) Citrus products: Chemical composition and chemical technology. Interscience Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
Chan, B. G., Waiss, A. C. Jr, Stanley, W. L. and Goodban, A. E. (1978) A rapid diet preparation method for antibiotic phytochemical bioassay. J. Econ. Ent. 71, 366–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimetri, N. Z. (1972) Further studies on the host plant preference of Spodoptera littoralis Boisd. Z. angew. Ent. 71, 350–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulmage, H. T., Boening, O., Rehenberg, C. and Hansen, G. (1971) A proposed standardized bioassay for formulations of B. thuringiensis based on the international unit. J. Inverlebr. Pathol. 18, 240–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, D. B. (1951) A significance test for differences between ranked treatments in an analysis of variance. Va. J. Sci. 2, 171–189.Google Scholar
Dutta, P. K. and Chakravarti, R. N. (1971) Constituents of Euphorbia lathyris. Phytochem. 10, 2550.Google Scholar
Feeny, P. O. (1968) Effects of oak leaf tannin on larval growth of the winter moth Operophtera brumata. J. Insect Physiol. 14, 805–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraenkel, G. (1969) Evaluation of our thoughts on secondary plant substances. Ent. exp. appl. 12, 473–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guenther, E. (1948) The Essential Oils. New York, D. Van Nostrand Co. Inc.Google Scholar
Klocke, J. A. and Chan, B. (1982) Effects of cotton condensed tannin on feeding and digestion in the cotton pest, Heliothis Zea. J. Insect Physiol. 28, 911–915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lichtenstein, E. P. and Casida, J. E. (1963) Myristicyn, an insecticide and synergist occurring naturally in the edible parts of parsnips. J. Agric. Food Chem. 11, 410–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lichtenstein, E. P., Liang, T. L., Schultz, K. R., Schnoes, H. K. and Carter, G. T. (1974) Insecticidal and synergistic components isolated from dill plants. Ibid. 22, 658–664.Google ScholarPubMed
Meisner, J. and Ascher, K. R. S. (1972) Feeding stimulants for the larva of the Egyptian cotton leafworm, Spodoptera littoralis Boisd. II. Assaying the larval feeding response to extracts of fruits and their peels with the styropor method. Z. Angew. Ent. 71, 337–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munakata, K. (1970) Insect antifeedants in plants. In Control of Insect Behaviour by Natural Products (Edited by Wood, D. L., Silverstein, R. M. and Nakajina, M.), pp. 179–187. Academic Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nayar, J. K. and Fraenkel, G. (1962) The chemical basis of hostplant selection in the silkworm, Bombyx mori 1. J. Insect Physiol. 8, 505–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osman, A. M., Younes, M. E. and Sheta, A. E. (1975) Chemical examination of local plants. VII. Psidium guajava L. leaf extracts. Egypt. J. Chem. 18, 347–352.Google Scholar
Salama, H. S. (1970) Rearing the corn borer Ostrinia nubrlalis Hubn. on a semiartificial diet. Z. Angew. Ent. 65, 216–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salama, H. S., Dimitry, N. Z. and Salem, S. A. (1971) On the host preference and biology of the cotton leafworm, Spodoptera littoralis Boisd. Z. Angew. Ent. 67, 261–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salama, H. S., Foda, M. S. and Shataby, A. F. (1983) Novel fermentation media for production of endotoxins from Bacillus thuringiensis. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 41, 8–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salama, H. S., Wassel, G. and Saleh, R. (1970) Resistance of some varieties of Mangifera indica L. to scale insects infestation due to flavonoids. Curr. Sci. 39, 497.Google Scholar
Schmidt, O. Th. and Werner, F. (1958) Flavogallol, an intermediate of the dye of pomegranate skin. Z. Natur-forsch. 13b, (136).Google Scholar
Sneh, B. and Gross, S. (1981) Toxicity of avocado leaves Persea americana to young larvae of Spodoptera littoralis Boisd. Z. Angew. Ent. 92, 420–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wada, K. and Munakata, K. (1968) Naturally occurring insect control chemicals. Isoboldine, a feeding inhibitor, and cocculolidine, an insecticide in the leaves of Cocculus trilobus DC. J. Agric. Fd. Chem. 16, 417–474.Google Scholar
Wada, K., Enomoto, Y., Matsui, K. and Munakata, K. (1968) Insect antifeedants from Parabenzoin trilobum (1). Two new sesquiterpenes, shirimodiol-diacetate and monoacetate. Tetrahedron Lett. 45, 4673–4676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wada, K., Matsui, K., Enomoto, Y., Ogiso, O. and Munakata, K. (1970) Insect feeding inhibitors in plants. Part I. Isolation of three new sesquiterpenoids In Parabenzoin trilobum Nakai. Agric. Biol. Chem. 34, 941–945.Google Scholar
Wada, K. and Munakata, K. (1971) Insect feeding inhibitors in plants. III. Feeding inhibitory activity of terpenoids in plants. Agric. Biol. Chem. 35, 115–118.Google Scholar
Yakushevich, M. V. (1954) Properties of some Uzbekistan pomegranates as determined from the chemical and mechanical composition of their fruits. Inst. Akad. Nauk. Uzbek. S.S.R. 20, 117–120.Google Scholar