Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T02:58:46.451Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

COMPARISON OF GREENHOUSE AND FIELD RESISTANCE OF BEAN VARIETIES TO EMPOASCA KRAEMERI (HOMOPTERA: CICADELLIDAE)1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Fred M. Eskafi  and
Aart V. Schoonhoven
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Resistance of 360 varieties of Phaseolus vulgaris L. to Empoasca kraemeri (Ross and Moore) was tested in the greenhouse. Thirty promising varieties were subsequently evaluated for resistance in the field when 30 days old. Seedlings in the greenhouse were infested with field collected adults for 3 days, and the resistance was tested against first generation nymphs. A highly significant positive correlation existed under greenhouse conditions between the numbers of nymphs present on the plant and the plant damage (expressed as quality) under low, but not high infestation pressure. No such relation was found in the field. There was no correlation between numbers of nymphs found on the 30 varieties in the greenhouse and the field, but there was a highly significant correlation in the damage (quality). No correlation was found in the field between the numbers of nymphs and the plant height or volume. A rank correlation test showed that quality (resistance) of the plants was highly significantly related in the greenhouse and field tests.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 110 , Issue 8 , 01 August 1978 , pp. 853 - 858
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1978

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

Anonymous. 1974–1976. Bean production systems, entomology. CIAT Annual Rept. Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical. Aptdo. Aereo 67–13. Cali, Colombia, S.A.Google Scholar
Chalfant, R. B. 1965. Resistance of bunch bean varieties to potato leafhopper and relationship between resistance and chemical control. J. econ. Ent. 58: 681–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinstrup-Andersen, P., Londono, N., and Infante, M.. 1976. A suggested procedure for estimating yield and production losses in crops, with empirical application to beans in Cauca Valley, Colombia. PANS 22: 359–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, H. H. and Moore, T. E.. 1957. New species in the Empoasca fabae complex (Hemiptera, Cicadellidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 50: 118–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruppel, R. F. and Delong, D. E.. 1956. Empoasca (Homoptera: Cicadellidae) from highland crops of Colombia. Bull. Brook. ent. Soc. 51: 85–92.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. 1956. Statistical methods. Iowa State College Press, Ames. 534 pp.Google Scholar
Wilde, G. and Schoonhoven, A. V.. 1976. Mechanism of resistance to Empoasca kraemeri on Phaseolus vulgaris. Environ. Ent. 5: 251–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilde, G., Schoonhoven, A. V., and Gomez-Laverde, L.. 1976. The biology of Empoasca kraemeri on Phaseolus vulgaris. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 69: 442–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfenbarger, D. and Sleesman, J. P.. 1961. Resistance in common bean lines to potato leafhopper. J. econ. Ent. 54: 846–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar