Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:16:19.299Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Impact of the groundnut leafminer, Aproaerema modicella (Deventer) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) on growth and yield of two groundnut cultivars

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2017

T.G. Shanower ,
A.P. Gutierrez  and
J.A. Wightman
T.G. Shanower
Affiliation:
Crop Protection Division, International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh 502 324, India
A.P. Gutierrez
Affiliation:
Division of Biological Control, University of California, Berkeley, 1050 San Pablo Ave., Albany, CA 94706, USA
J.A. Wightman
Affiliation:
Crop Protection Division, International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh 502 324, India
Get access

Abstract

The impact of larval defoliation by Aproaerema modicella (Deventer) on the growth, development and yield of two groundnut cultivars (Kadiri 3 and NC Ac 17090) was studied under a naturally occurring, high density infestation. Defoliation by leaf-mining larvae did not increase plant mortality in either cultivar. In both cultivars, leaf and stem production were significantly lower in untreated plots than in the treated plots. Unsprayed plants of both cultivars produced fewer flowers, pegs, and pods per plant compared to plants of the same cultivar protected with monocrotophos. Fruit growth rates, however, were marginally higher in control plots than in treated plots. Pod yields were 35 and 44% lower, and haulm yields 25 and 20% lower, in Kadiri 3 and NC Ac 17090, respectively in untreated control plots compared to plots treated with insecticide. A linear relationship between leafminer density and pod and haulm yields was observed, and differences between cultivars were not significant.

Résumé

Cette étude a porté sur l'impact de la défoliation par les larves de Aproaerema modicella (Deventer) sur la croissance, le développement et le rendement de deux cultivars d'arachide (Kadiri 3 et NC Ac 17090) dans des conditions d'infestation naturelle à densité élevée. La défoliation n'a augmenté la mortalité de plantes ni chez l'un ou l'autre de ces cultivars. Pour les deux cultivars, la production de feuilles et de tiges était sensiblement réduite dans des parcelles non-traitées par rapport aux parcelles traitées. Des plantes non-pulvérisées des deux cultivars ont produit moins de fleurs, de gynophores et de gousses par plante, par rapport aux plantes du même cultivar traitées au monocrotophos. Cependant, les taux de croissance des fruits étaient légèrement plus élevés dans des parcelles témoins que dans des parcelles traitées. Les rendements en gousses étaient de 35 et 44% moins élevés, les rendements en fanes, de 25 et 20% moins élevés, chez Kadiri 3 et NC Ac 17090 respectivement dans des parcelles témoins non-traitées par rapport au traitement insecticide. Un rapport linéaire a été constaté entre la densité d'infestation de la mineuse des feuilles et les rendements en gousses et en fanes, les différences entre cultivars n'étant pas significatives.

Keywords

Aproaerema modicellagroundnutyieldplant growthcultivarssouth IndiaAproaerema modicellaarachiderendementcroissance des plantescultivarsInde du Sud
Type
Research Articles
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , March 1995 , pp. 87 - 91
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 1995

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

Enyi, B. A. C. (1975) Effects of defoliation on growth and yield in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata), soybean (Glycine max) and green gram (Vigna aurens). Ann. Appl. Biol. 79, 55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAO (1992) Production Yearbook 1991. Vol. 39. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. Rome, Italy. 330 pp.Google Scholar
Gutierrez, A. P. and Curry, G. L. (1989) Conceptual framework for studying crop-pest systems. In Integrated Pest Management Systems andCotton Production (Edited by Frisbie, R. E., El-Zik, K.M. and Wilson, L.T.), pp. 37–64. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Panchabhavi, K.S., Nethradhaniraj, C. R., Yelishetty, Y. and Kulkami, G. K. (1986) Effect of artificial defoliation on pod yield in groundnut. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 56, 855–857.Google Scholar
Rajput, S. G., Dalaya, V. P. and Awate, B. G. (1984) Efficacy of different insecticides for the control of groundnut leafminer. J. Maharashtra Agric. Univ. 9, 336–337.Google Scholar
Rajput, S. G., Dalaya, V. P. and Awate, B. G. (1985) Field evaluation of synthetic pyrethroids and other insecticides against groundnut leafminer (Aproaerema modicella D.). Pesticides 19, 34–35.Google Scholar
Santos, R. B. and Sutton, B. G. (1983) Effect of defoliation on reproductive development of the peanut. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 34, 527–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shanower, T. G. (1989) The biology, population dynamics, natural enemies, and impact of the groundnut leafminer, Aproaerema modicella (Deventer) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae), on groundnut in India. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of California, Berkeley, USA.Google Scholar
Shanower, T. G., Wightman, J. A. and Gutierrez, A. P. (1993) The biology and control of the groundnut leaf miner Aproaerema modicella (Deventer) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). Crop Protection 12, 3–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sivasubramanian, P. and Palaniswamy, G. A. (1983) Studies on the chemical control of groundnut leafminer Aproaerema modicella Dev. Madras Agric. J. 70, 485–486.Google Scholar
Wightman, J. A., Dick, K. M., Ranga Rao, G. V., Shanower, T. G. and Gold, C. G. (1990) Pests of groundnut in the semi-arid tropics. In Insect Pests of Food Legumes (Edited by Singh, S.R.), pp. 243–322. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Wilkerson, G. G., Jones, J. W. and Poe, S. L. (1984) Effect of defoliation on peanut plant growth. Crop Sci. 24, 526–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J. H. (1979) The physiology of groundnuts (Arachis hypogaea L. cv. Egret). 3. The effect of thinning at different stages of development on reproductive growth and development. Rhod. J. Agric. Res. 17, 57–66.Google Scholar
Zar, J. H. (1974) Biostatistical Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar