Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T08:20:52.630Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Oviposition of Tomaspis saccharina, Dist. (Rhynch., Cercop.), an Insect Pest of Sugar-cane in Trinidad

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Alan Pickles
Alan Pickles
Affiliation:
Entomologist, Trinidad Froghopper Investigation.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Tomaspis saccharina, Dist., is a Cercopid bug which infests the cane-fields of Trinidad in vast numbers during the wet months of the year. Corresponding with the successive generations, there are three, and sometimes four nights or broods of adults, each of which causes severe damage to the cane. This damage, or “ froghopper blight,” as it is locally called, is a result of the feeding activities of the adult on the foliage, and is characterised by a progressive discoloration of the leaves, leading to death of the affected leaf and, in severe cases, to the death of the cane. In either event, growth of the plant is more or less severely checked and the adverse effect on yield is usually of a very significant nature.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , December 1931 , pp. 461 - 468
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1931

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

Literature Cited

1.Hardy, F.The liming problem in Trinidad sugar-cane soils.—Min. & Proc. Froghopper Inv. Committee, i, pp. 202–210.Google Scholar
2.Hardy, F.Progress Report of 16th October, 1929.—Min. & Proc. Froghopper Inv. Comm., ii, pp. 386–387.Google Scholar
3.Hardy, F.Progress Reports.—Min. & Proc. Froghopper Inv. Committee, ii, pp. 130, 142, 179.Google Scholar
4.Hardy, F. & Steven, R. M.Suggested scheme for the recording of froghopper incidence.—Min. & Proc. Froghopper Inv. Comm., ii, p. 25.Google Scholar
5.Hardy, F. & Potter, J. A.Progress Reports for August to December 1930.—Min. & Proc. Froghopper Inv. Comm., iii.Google Scholar
6.Morris, H. M.On a Method of separating Insects and other Arthropods from Soil.—Bull. Ent. Res., xiii, 1922, pp. 197–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Mumford, E. P.Notes on the Froghopper blight of sugar-cane in Trinidad.—Bull. Ent. Res., xvii, 1926, pp. 139–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Pickles, A.Notes on biological studies on the Froghopper during the dry season, 1930.—Min. & Proc. Froghopper Inv. Comm., iii, pp. 150–157.Google Scholar
9.Rodriguez, G.Progress Report of 15th August, 1927.—Min. & Proc. Froghopper Inv. Comm., i, p. 275.Google Scholar
10.Turner, P. E.Lime status of soil in relation to an insect pest of sugar-cane.—J. Agric. Science, xix, 1929, pp. 26–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Urich, F. W.Notes on the life history of the Froghopper.—Bull. Dept. Agric. Trinidad & Tobago, xi, pp. 372–373.Google Scholar
12.Urich, F. W.The Sugar-cane Froghopper, and biological notes on some Cercopids of Trinidad.—Board Agric. Trinidad & Tobago, Circ. no. 9, 1913.Google Scholar
13.Williams, C. B.Report on the Froghopper blight of sugar-cane in Trinidad.—Mem. Dept. Agric. Trinidad & Tobago, no. 1.Google Scholar