Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T14:10:13.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The identification and characterization of resistance in wild species of Arachis to Spodoptera litura (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Philip C. Stevenson ,
Wally M. Blaney ,
Monique J. S. Simmonds  and
John A. Wightman
Philip C. Stevenson*
Affiliation:
Behavioural Entomology Group, Department of Biology, Birkbeck College, University of London, UK
Wally M. Blaney
Affiliation:
Behavioural Entomology Group, Department of Biology, Birkbeck College, University of London, UK
Monique J. S. Simmonds
Affiliation:
Behavioural Entomology Group, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, UK
John A. Wightman
Affiliation:
Legume Entomology Unit, International Crops Research, Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Patancheru, India
*
P. C. Stevenson (present address) Chemical Ecology Group, Natural Resources Institute, Central Avenue, Chatham Maritime, Kent, ME4 4TB, UK.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Fourteen wild species of Arachis (Leguminosae) were investigated under field and laboratory conditions to evaluate their effect on the survival and development of the larvae of Spodoptera litura (Fabricius). All of the species studied were observed to be resistant compared to the susceptible control, Arachis hypogaea (genotype TMV2). Overall, the mortality and development of larvae recorded in the field were similar to those recorded for larvae on excised leaves of the same species in the laboratory. When neonate larvae were exposed to excised leaves of A. batizogaea, A. kemph-mercadoi, A. appresipila, A. paraguariensis, A. stenophyla and A. villosa mortality was greater than 94% compared to less than 20% on TMV2. Third stadium larvae lost weight when exposed to both field plants and excised leaves of eight of the wild species, whereas larvae feeding on TMV2 gained weight. When third stadium larvae were fed pulped leaves they gained more weight than when exposed to intact leaves, except in the case of A. chacoensis and Arachis spp. 30007. A penetrometer was used to determine the relative toughness of the leaves. The leaves of most of the wild species were shown to require a greater biting effort for feeding than the leaves of TMV2. There was a negative correlation between toughness of whole leaves and larval development. Observations of larval behaviour indicated that, overall, larvae were deterred from feeding on the leaves of the wild species. Diets containing the chemical extracts of dried leaves of A. kemph-mercadoi, A. paraguariensis, A. appresipila, A. chacoensis, A. glabrata and A. pseudovillosa resulted in low larval weight gain. The physical quality of the leaves and foliar chemicals are implicated as being responsible for the observed resistance. The implications and potential applications of these results are discussed.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 83 , Issue 3 , September 1993 , pp. 421 - 429
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

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

Amin, P.W. & Mohommad, A.B. (1980) Groundnut pest research at ICRISAT. pp. 158–166in Proceedings of an International Workshop on Groundnuts, 13–17 October 1980, ICRISAT Center, India. Patancheru, A.P. 502 324 India, International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics.Google Scholar
Amin, P.W., Singh, K.N., Dwivedi, S.L. & Rao, V.R. (1985) Sources of resistance to the jassid (Empoasca kerri), thripps (Frankliniella schultzei) and termites (Odontermes spp.) in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Peanut Science 12, 58–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bajaj, Y.P.S., Kumar, P., Singh, M.M. & Labana, K.S. (1982) Interspecific hybridization in the genus Arachis through embryo culture. Euphytica 31, 365–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldwin, I.T. (1988) The alkaloidal responses of wild tobacco to real and simulated herbivory. Oecologia 77, 378–381.Google Scholar
Bharathi, M., Murthy, U.R., Kirti, P.B. & Rao, N.G.P. (1982) Alien incorporation in groundnut Arachis hypogaea L. Oleagineux 37, 301–306.Google Scholar
Blaney, W.M. & Simmonds, M. S.J. (1988) Food selection in adults and larvae of three species of Lepidoptera: a behavioural and electrophysiological study. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 49, 111–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blom, F. (1978) Sensory activity and food intake: a study of input output relationships in two phytophagous insects. Netherlands Journal of Zoology 28, 277–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiang, H., Norris, D.M., Ciepela, A., Shapiro, P. & Oosterwyk, A. (1987) Inducible versus constitutive PI 227687 soybean resistance to the Mexican bean beetle, Epilachna varivestis. Journal of Chemical Ecology 13, 255–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, P.J., Wratten, S.D. & Cox, H. (1985) Wound-induced changes in the acceptability of tomato to larvae of Spodoptera littoralis: a laboratory bioassay. Ecological Entomology 10, 155–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feakin, S.D. (1973) Pest control in groundnut. PANS Manual No. 2, London, Centre for Overseas Pest Research, Overseas Development Administration.Google Scholar
Felton, G.W., Donato, K., Del Vecchio, R.J. & Duffey, S.S. (1989) Activation of plant foliar oxidases by insect feeding reduces the nutritive quality of foliage for noctuid herbivores. Journal of Chemical Ecology 15, 2667–2694.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Isman, M.B. & Duffey, S.S. (1982) Toxicity of tomato phenolic compounds to the fruitworm, Heliothis zea. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 31, 370–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karban, R. & Myers, J.H. (1989) Induced plant responses to herbivory. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 20, 331–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leuck, D.B. & Skinner, J.L. (1971) Resistance in peanut foliage influencing fall armyworm control. Journal of Economic Entomology 64, 148–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leuck, D.B., Hammons, R.O., Morgan, L.W. & Harvey, J.E. (1967) Insect preference for peanut varieties, Journal of Economic Entomology 60, 1546–1549.Google Scholar
Lynch, R.E., Branch, W.D. & Garner, J.W. (1981) Resistance of Arachis spp. to the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda. Peanut Science 8, 106–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moss, J.P., Singh, A.K., Sastri, D.C. & Dundas, I.S. (1988) Wide hybridization in legumes at ICRISAT, pp. 87–96in Biotechnology in Tropical Crop Improvement: proceedings of an International Biotechnology Workshop, 12–15. January 1987, ICRISAT Center, India. Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh 502 324, India, ICRISAT.Google Scholar
Noble, M.D. (1958) A simplified clip cage for aphid investigation. Canadian Entomologist 90, 760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panchabhavi, K.S. & Nethradani Raj, C.R. (1987) Yield of groundnut as affected by varying larval density of Spodoptera litura. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 57, 525–527.Google Scholar
Schultz, J.C. & Baldwin, I.T. (1982) Oak leaf quality declines in response to defoliation by gypsy moth larvae. Science 217, 149–151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stalker, H.T., Campbell, W.V. & Wynne, J.C. (1984) Evaluation of cultivated and wild peanut species for resistance to the lesser cornstalk borer, Elasmopalpus lignosellus (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 77, 53–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taneja, S.L. & Leuschner, K. (1985) Methods of rearing, infestation and evaluation for Chilo partellus resistance in sorghum. pp. 175–188in Proceedings of the International Sorghum Entomology Workshop, 15–21. July 1984, Texas A & M University, College Station, TX. USA. Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh 502 324, India, ICRISAT.Google Scholar
van Loon, J.J.A. & van Eeuwijk, F.A. (1989) Chemoreception of amino acids in larvae of two species of Pieris. Physiological Entomology 14, 459–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wightman, J.A. & Amin, P.W. (1988) Groundnut pests and their control in the semi-arid tropics. Tropical Pest Management 34, 218–226.Google Scholar
Wightman, J.A., Dick, K.M., Ranga Rao, G.V., Shanower, T.C. & Gold, C.G. (1990) Pests of groundnut in semi-arid tropics. pp. 243–322in Singh, S.R. (Ed.) Insect pests of tropical food legumes. Chichester, J. Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar