Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T11:06:31.126Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can larvae of the pod-borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), select between wild and cultivated pigeonpea Cajanus sp. (Fabaceae)?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

P.W.C. Green ,
P.C. Stevenson ,
M.S.J. Simmonds  and
H.C. Sharma
P.W.C. Green
Affiliation:
Jodrell Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3DS, UK
P.C. Stevenson*
Affiliation:
Jodrell Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3DS, UK Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, Chatham Maritime, Kent, ME4 4TB, UK
M.S.J. Simmonds
Affiliation:
Jodrell Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3DS, UK
H.C. Sharma
Affiliation:
International Crop Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh 502 324, India
*
*Fax: 020 8332 5310 E-mail: p.stevenson@rbgkew.org.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments were conducted to observe the feeding and food selection-behaviour of different instars of the pod-borer Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) in response to choices between the cultivated and a wild species of Cajanus. First and second instars fed upon a cultivated variety of Cajanus cajan in preference to a wild species, C. scarabaeoides and on flowers of C. cajan, rather than pods or leaves of C. cajan. First and second instars preferred pods of C. scarabaeoides with trichomes removed to pods with trichomes present. All instars fed upon pods of C. cajan rather than those of C. scarabaeoides. Solvent extraction of the pod surfaces affected the feeding of larvae, in some instances. They preferred the unextracted pods of C. cajan; the extracted pod of C. scarabaeoides (first and second instars) or the unextracted pod of C. scarabaeoides (fourth and fifth instars). Glass-fibre disc bioassays showed that the methanol, hexane and water extracts from the pod-surface of C. cajan stimulated the feeding of fifth instars. The experiments have shown that characteristics of C. cajan, such as either the compounds present or the type and distribution of trichomes on the plant surfaces, can determine the susceptibility of C. cajan to pod-borer larvae.

Type
Review Article
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 92 , Issue 1 , February 2002 , pp. 45 - 51
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2002

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

Armes, N.J., Bond, G.S. & Cooter, R.J. (1992) The laboratory culture and development of Helicoverpa armigera. Natural Resources Institute, Bulletin No. 57. Natural Resources Institute, Chatham, UK.Google Scholar
Blaney, W.M. & Simmonds, M.S.J. (1983) Electrophysiological activity in insects in response to antifeedants. Centre for Overseas Pest Research Project no. 9, Final Report, Overseas Development Agency, UK.Google Scholar
Grayer, R.J., Kimmins, F.M., Padgham, D.E., Harborne, J.B. & Ranga, Rao D.V. (1992) Condensed tannin levels and resistance of groundnuts (Arachis hypogaea) against Aphis craccivora. Phytochemistry. 31, 3795–3800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ICRISAT (1992) The medium term plan, Volume 1. International Crop Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Andhra Pradesh, India.Google Scholar
Nene, Y.L., Hall, S.D. & Sheila, V.K. (1990) The pigeonpea. 490 pp. Wallingford, CAB International.Google Scholar
Peter, A.J. & Shanower, T.G. (1996) Physical and chemical basis of resistance to insects in wild pigeonpea. pp. 111–123 in Ananthakrishnan, H. (Ed.) Proceedings of national symposium on biochemical bases of host plant resistance to insects. National Academy of Agricultural Sciences, New Delhi, India.Google Scholar
Peter, A.J., Shanower, T.G. & Romeis, J. (1995) The role of plant trichomes in insect resistance: a selective review. Phytophaga 7, 41–63.Google Scholar
Ranga, Rao G.V. & Shanower, T.G. (1999) Identification and management of pigeonpea and chickpea insect pests in Asia. ICRISAT Information Bulletin No. 57. ICRISAT, Andhra Pradesh, India.Google Scholar
Raubenheimer, D. & Barton-Browne, L. (2000) Developmental changes in the patterns of feeding in fourth- and fifth instar Helicoverpa armigera caterpillars. Physiological Entomology 25, 390–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romeis, J., Shanower, T.G. & Peter, A.J. (1999) Trichomes of pigeonpea and two wild Cajanus species. Crop Science 39, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shanower, T.G., Yoshida, M. & Peter, A.J. (1997) Survival, growth, fecundity and behavior of Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on pigeonpea and two wild Cajanus species. Journal of Economic Entomology 90, 837–841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shanower, T.G., Romeis, J. & Minja, E.M. (1999) Insects pests of pigeonpea and their management. Annual Review of Entomology 44, 77–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, H.C., Green, P.W.C., Stevenson, P.C. & Simmonds, M.S.J. (2001) What makes it tasty for the pest? Identification of Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) feeding stimulants and location of their production on the pod surface of pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.). Competitive Research Facility Project R7029 C, Final Technical Report, Department for International Development, UK.Google Scholar
Siegel, S. & Castellan, N.J. (1988) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. 399 pp. USA, McGraw-Hill Book Co., USA.Google Scholar
Simmonds, M.S.J. & Stevenson, P.C. (2001) Effects of isoflavonoids from Cicer on larvae of Helicoverpa. Journal of Chemical Ecology 27, 965–977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmonds, M.S.J., Blaney, W.M. & Fellows, L.E. (1990) Behavioural and electrophysiological study of antifeedant mechanisms associated with polyhydroxyalkaloids. Journal of Chemical Ecology 16, 3167–3196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, S.J., Simmonds, M.S.J. & Blaney, W.M. (1988) A comparison of dietary selection behaviour in larval Locusta migratoria and Spodoptera littoralis. Physiological Entomology 13, 225–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sison, M.L.J. & Shanower, T.G. (1994) Development and survival of Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on short-duration pigeonpea. Journal of Economic Entomology 87, 1749–1753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sokal, R.R. & Rohlf, F.J. (1987) Biostatistics. 2nd edn. 363 pp. W.H. Freeman and Co.Google Scholar
Stevenson, P.C. (1993) Biochemical resistance in wild species of groundnut to Spodoptera litura (Fabr.). Bulletin OILB⊘SROP 16, 155–162.Google Scholar
Wang, S.F., Ghisalberti, E.L. & Ridsdill-Smith, J. (1998) Bioactive flavonols and other components from Trifolium subterraneum. Journal of Natural Products 61, 508–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar