Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T11:32:07.842Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Residual toxicity of various insecticidal formulations to the coffee berry borer, Hypothenemus hampei Ferrari (Scolytidae: Coleoptera)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2017

Ajai Mansingh  and
Llewellyn F. Rhodes
Ajai Mansingh
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of the West Indies, Kingston 7, Jamaica
Llewellyn F. Rhodes
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of the West Indies, Kingston 7, Jamaica
Get access

Abstract

The persistence of 34 formulations in the green (G) and red (R) berries of C. arabica var. typica, infested with female adult H. hampei were assayed by a dip-technique. The 3-day LC50 values in G and R (figures in parentheses) berries for thiodan EC 35 were 0.00284 (0.00327), and the relative ratio of values for other formulations were: perfekthion 1.2 (2.1) > carbicron 1.6 (2.3) > basudin 3.5 (3.2) > actellic 4.0 (3.6) > decis 4.1 (3.7) > thiodan EC 3 4.2 (4.2) > bidrin 5.8 (5.0) > malathion 5.8 (5.1) > lindane 5.8 (5.6) > ciodrin 5.9 (5.6) > folimat 6.0 (6.0) > belmark 6.2 (6.3) > aldicarb 8.0 (9.7) > nexion 11.0 (12.0)>kelthane 13.5 (15.4) > tiovel 14.6 (16.3) > dursban 15.6 (22.0) > chlordane 17.8 (23.8) > methomyl 21.5 (24.3) > aldrin 25.1 (24.9) > supona 27.2 (26.5) > dimilin 29.0 (27.5) > methoxychlor 31.7 (92.2) > chlorfenvinphos 35.8 (92.5) > dieldrin 41.2 (93.8) > phosdrin 65.0 (94.7)>sevin 104.2 (118.0)> nexagan 106.4 (121.9) > bimarit 196.4 (301.7) > azodrin 271.2 (410.4) > fenitrothion 448.3 (417.0) > chlorpyrifos 448.8 (614.3) > gardona 514.6 (703.1), -fold more than the thiodan EC 35 values.

The 7-day LC50 values for 29 formulations were ca 10–82% less than those of the 3-day values; the decrease in the values for leading formulations being thiodan EC 35 13.4 (8.3), perfekthion 6.5 (39.9), carbicron 12.4 (10.6), thiodan EC 324.3 (16.4), malathion 35.2 (25.7), lindane 82.1 (76.9) and tiovel 59.6 (67). The values for the 17 least toxic formulations (except dimilin and bimarit) showed ca 27–88% decrease during the last 4 days of observations.

Keywords

Coffee berry borerHypothenemus hampeiinsecticidesformulations
Type
Research Articles
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , April 1985 , pp. 209 - 212
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 1985

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

Almeida, P. R. and Cavalcante, R. D. (1964) Ensaio de campo com novas insecticidas organicos no combate a broca de cafe, Hypothenemus hampei (Ferr. 1867). Archos Inst. biol., S Paulo 31, 85–90.Google Scholar
Almeida, P. R., Pigatti, A. and Arruda, H. V. (1980) Alguns no va productos aplicados em ensaio de campo controle a broca, Hypothenemus hampei (Ferr, 1867), do cafe. Resume, I.B.C. Congress, Brazil, Vol. 8, pp. 67–69.Google Scholar
Amaral, S. F., Arruda, H. V. and Orlando, A. (1973) Some insecticides and coffee liquor. Archos Inst. biol., S Paulo 40, 173–180.Google ScholarPubMed
Amaral, S. F. and Oliviera, D. A. (1974) The behaviour of some chlorinated insecticides for the control of coffee berry borer H. hampei (Ferr. 1867). Secao de Pragas des Plantas Alimenticias Basices e Olericolas, instituto Biologio, Sao Paulo, Brazil Vol. 40, pp. 106–110.Google Scholar
Bardner, R. (1978) Pest control in coffee. Pestic. Sci. 9, 458–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busvine, J. R. (1971) Techniques for Testing Insecticides. Commonwealth Institute of Entomology, London.Google Scholar
Evans, D. E. (1965) The coffee berry borer control in Kenya. Kenya Coff. 134, 15–21.Google Scholar
Hernandez-Paz, P. and Penagos, D. H. (1974) Evaluation of a system of low volume application, in the control of the borer of coffee fruit. An. Cafe 134, 15–21.Google Scholar
Ingram, W. R. (1968) Observations on the control of the coffee berry borer Hypothenemus hampei (Ferr) with endosulfan in Uganda. Bull. ent. Res. 57, 539–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lepage, H. S. and Giannotti, O. (1950) The action of some modern insecticides on the coffee berry borer. Archos Inst. biol., S Paulo 19, 299–308.Google Scholar
Le Pelley, R. H. (1969) Pests of Coffee, pp. 116–138. Longman, London.Google Scholar
Liceras, Z. L. and Farge, G. G. (1975) Chemical control of the coffee berry borer with early and late applications in Tingo Maria. Revta peru. Ent. 17, 78–80.Google Scholar
Maier-Bode, H. (1968) Properties, effect residues and analytics of the insecticide endosulfan. Resid. Rev. 22, 1–37.Google ScholarPubMed
Mansingh, A. and Rhodes, L. F. (1983) Bioassay of various formulations of insecticides on the egg and larval stages of the coffee berry borer Hypothenemus hampei Ferrari (Scolytidae: Coleoptera). Insect Sci. Applic. 4, 223–226.Google Scholar
Penados-Robles, R. and Ochoa, M. H. (1978) Evaluation of insecticides in the control of the borer of coffee fruit in the republic of Guatamala. In Symposium on Coffee Cultivation, pp. 25–37. Curoa Reuniones, IICA 184, Guatamala City.Google Scholar
Rhodes, L. F. and Mansingh, A. (1981) Susceptibility of the coffee berry borer Hypothenemus hampei to various insecticidal formulations. Insect Sci. Applic. 2, 227–231.Google Scholar
Thomson, W. T. (1980) Agricultural Chemicals, Book I, Insecticides. Thomson Fresno, California.Google Scholar