Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T00:32:35.105Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Résistance aux thrips et correlations caractères — populations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2011

David Cishahayo
David Cishahayo
Affiliation:
ISAR — Karama, B. P. 121 Kigali, Rwanda
Get access

Abstract

The groundnut variety ICG 2271 is the most resistant to thrips In our conditions. Despite the existence of some differences between types, the number of thrips per flower In the cowpea is negatively correlated with the total number of flowers present per plant, the rate of pod formation, the internode and pod length, the pod number per plant and grain yield. It Is positively correlated with the percentage of flowers shed per plant.

In the pigeonpea, the characters linked to the number of thrips per flower vary with varieties. However, days to maturity and height at the same stage are more consistent.

The days to 50% flowering are positively correlated with the number of thrips per flower In the cowpea and pigeonpea.

Résumé

La variété d'aracbide ICG 2271 est la plus résistante aux thrips dans noe conditions. Malgré l'existence de certaines différences entre types, te nombre de thrips par fleur chez le niébé est corrélé négativement au nom be total de fleurs présentes par plant, au taux de formation des gousses, à la longueur de l'internode et de la gousse, au nombre de gousses par plant et au rendement. II est corrélé positivement au pourcentage de fleurs tombées par plant.

Chez le pois d'Angole, les caractères liés au nombre de thrips par fleur varient selon les variétés. Néanmoins le nombre de jours à la maturité et le hauteur à cette même phase sont les plus consistants.

Le nombre de jours à 50% de floraison est corrélé positivement au nombre de thrips par fleur chez le niébé et le pois d'Angole.

Keywords

Thripsarachideniébépois d'AngoleinsecticidecoupeThripsgroundnutcowpeapigeonpeainsecticidecutting
Type
Research Articles
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , February 1993 , pp. 1 - 6
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 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

REFERENCES

Amin, P. W. and Mohamad, A. D. (1980) Groundnut pest research at ICRIS AT. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Groundnut, 13–17 Oct. 1980, pp. 158–166. ICRISAT, Patancheru.Google Scholar
Amin, P. W. and Palmer, J. M. (1985) Identification of groundnut Thysanoptera. Trop. Pest Manage. 31, 286–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Autrique, A. (1981) Principaux ennemis des cultures de la région des Grands Lacs d'Afrique Centrale (Edité par I'Administration Générale de la Coopération au Développement), pp. 124–127. ISABU, Bruxelles.Google Scholar
Dwivedi, S. L. and Nigam, S. N. (1991) Groundnut Breeding Unit Progress Report. ICRISAT, Patancheru.Google Scholar
Goldsworthy, P. R. (1984) Crop Growth and Development (Edited by Goldsworthy, P. R. and Fisher, A. M.), pp. 163–205. John Wiley & Sons Ltd.Google Scholar
Lozano, J. C., Belloti, A., Reyes, J. A., Howeler, R., Lehner, D. and Doll, J. (1981) Field Problems in Cassava. CIAT, Cali.Google Scholar
Nayar, K. K., Ananthakrishnan, T. N. and David, B. V. (1986) General and applied entomology, pp. 214–219. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Porter, D. M., Smith, D. H. and Rodriguez-Kabana, R. (1984) Compendium of peanut diseases, pp. 61–62. American Phytopathological Society, Minnesota.Google Scholar
Price, M., Asenga, J. A. and Machange, F. (1982) Improved cultivation of cowpea (Vigna, unguiculata) in Tanzania, pp. 22–24. Tanzanian Ministry of Agriculture with a grant from U.S. Agency for International Development.Google Scholar
Ramanaiah, M. J., Freire, M. J., Chilengue, B. S. and Mungwambe, A. V. (1988) Research on groundnut in Mozambique. In Proceedings of the Third Regional Groundnut Workshop for Southern Africa, 13–18 March 1988, Lilongwe, Malawi, pp. 157–161. ICRISAT, Patancheru.Google Scholar
Reed, W., Lateef, S. S., Sithanantham, S. and Pawar, C. S. (1989) Pigeonpea and Chickpea Insect Identification Handbook, pp. 50–51. ICRISAT, Patancheru.Google Scholar
Robbe, P. et Maurin, G. (1988) Index Phytosanitaire Afrique. Association de Coordination Technique, Paris.Google Scholar
Senapi, B. and Patnaik, N. C. (1973) Occurrence of Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood on groundnut and preliminary evaluation of loss in pod yield. 7. Res. Orissa Univ. Agric. Techn. 3, 110–113.Google Scholar
Singh, S. R. and Allen, D. J. (1979) Cowpea Pests and Diseases. IITA, Ibadan.Google Scholar
Sinha, S. K. (1980) Water availability and grain yield in pigeonpea. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Pigeonpeas, pp. 283–291. ICRISAT, Patancheru.Google Scholar
Sinthanantham, S., Irving, N. S. and Sohati, P. (1988) Recent and ongoing research on insect pests in Zambia. In Proceedings of the Third Regional Groundnut Workshop for Southern Africa, 13–18 March 1988, Lilongwe, Malawi, pp. 141–145. ICRISAT, Patancheru.Google Scholar
Smith, J. W. and Barfield, C. S. (1982) Management of preharvest insects. In Peanut Science and Technology (Edited by Pattee, H. E. and Young, C. T.). American Peanut Research and Education Society, Texas.Google Scholar
Wien, C. and Summerfield, R. J. (1984) Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp). In The Physiology of Tropical Field Crops (Edited by Goldsworthy, P. R. and Fisher, A. M.), pp. 353–376. John Wiley and Sons Ltd.Google Scholar
Wightman, J. A. and Amin, P. W. (1988) Groundnut pests and their control in the semi-arid tropics. Trop. Pest Manage. 34, 218–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaman, M. (1989) Effect of foliar insecticides against thrips on onion in Peshawar, Pakistan. Trop. Pest Manage. 35, 332–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar