scholarly journals Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in cotton: vertical distribution of egg masses, effects of adult density and plant age on oviposition behavior

2013 ◽  
Vol 80 (4) ◽  
pp. 424-429
Author(s):  
Arlindo Leal Boica Junior ◽  
Zeneide Ribeiro Campos ◽  
Alcebiades Ribeiro Campos ◽  
Walter Veriano Valerio Filho ◽  
Ostenildo Ribeiro Campos

The objective of this work was to determine the most suitable density of adults per plant, ideal plant age, and vertical distribution of eggs in different parts of the plant in a greenhouse investigation for future resistance studies and improvement of S. frugiperda management practices in cotton. The experiments of Spodotera frugiperda oviposition in relation to adult density, relationship between cotton plant age and Spodoptera frugiperda oviposition, Spodoptera frugiperda non-preference for oviposition on cotton varieties were conducted with plants of cotton variety BRS Ita 90. The experiments were conducted with plants of cotton variety BRS Ita 90. Non-preference (antixenosis) for oviposition was studied in FiberMax 966, FiberMax 977, DeltaOpal, DeltaPenta, Acala 90, Coodetec 408, Coodetec 409, Coodetec 410, BRS Cedro, BRS Ipê, BRS Aroeira, IPR 96, IPR 20, BRS Araçá, IAC 24, and BRS Ita 90 varieties. We concluded that the fall armyworm S. frugiperda prefers to oviposit on plants with approximately 60 days of age, on the lower surface of leaves located in the upper third of the plant tests under greenhouse conditions. A density of at least three pairs of S. frugiperda adults per plant was sufficient to conduct non-preference-for-oviposition tests under greenhouse conditions. Coodetec 408, BRS Aroeira, BRS Araçá, BRS Ita 90 and DeltaPenta varieties showed non-preference-for-oviposition resistance to S. frugiperda. In regions with high infestations of S. frugiperda, it would be prudent for the cultivation the use of BRS Ita 90 cotton variety.

2018 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teshome Kumela ◽  
Josephine Simiyu ◽  
Birhanu Sisay ◽  
Paddy Likhayo ◽  
Esayas Mendesil ◽  
...  

Agriculture ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 430
Author(s):  
Sidol Houngbo ◽  
Afio Zannou ◽  
Augustin Aoudji ◽  
Hervé C. Sossou ◽  
Antonio Sinzogan ◽  
...  

Spodoptera frugiperda has caused significant losses of farmer income in sub-Saharan countries since 2016. This study assessed farmers’ knowledge of S. frugiperda, their perceptions and management practices in Benin. Data were collected through a national survey of 1237 maize farmers. Ninety-one point eight percent of farmers recognized S. frugiperda damage, 78.9% of them were able to identify its larvae, and 93.9% of the maize fields were infested. According to farmers, the perceived yield losses amounted to 797.2 kg/ha of maize, representing 49% of the average maize yield commonly obtained by farmers. Chi-square tests revealed that the severity of the pest attacks was significantly associated with cropping practices and types of grown maize varieties. About 16% of farmers identified francolin (Francolinus bicalcaratus), village weaver (Ploceus cucullatus), and common wasp (Vespula vulgaris) as natural enemies and 5% of them identified yellow nutsedge, chan, shea tree, neem, tamarind, and soybean as repellent plants of S. frugiperda. Most farmers (91.4%) used synthetic pesticides and 1.9% of them used botanical pesticides, which they found more effective than synthetic pesticides. Significant relationships exist between farmers’ management practices, their knowledge, organization membership, and contact with research and extension services. More research is required to further understand the effectiveness of botanical pesticides made by farmers against S. frugiperda and to refine them for scaling-up.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Djima Koffi ◽  
Rosina Kyerematen ◽  
Vincent Y Eziah ◽  
Yaa Oguabi Osei-Mensah ◽  
Kwame Afreh-Nuamah ◽  
...  

Abstract Spodoptera frugiperda was considered an insect pest only in the Americas until its first report in African countries in 2016. In this study, farmers and agricultural officials in Ghana were interviewed on their perceptions and knowledge of the pest, on infestation and maize yield variations across years, and on management practices. Farms were inspected to determine the infestation level of 100 plants per hectare. Interviews revealed that farmers were familiar with the larval stages of this pest and noticed that the pest occurred throughout the year, but populations of S. frugiperda increased only during cropping seasons. Infestation levels reported by farmers in surveys were much lower in 2018 (30.38%) than in 2017 (80.92%). Farm inspections confirmed that infestation levels were much lower in 2018 (20.90%) than 2017 (73.70%). The belt formed by Guinea Savannah, Transitional Zone, and Semi-Deciduous Forest Agro-Ecological Zones (AEZs) recorded the highest infestations while the lowest were observed from the Sudan Savannah and Tropical Rain Forest AEZs. Insecticides were the most commonly used tactic to manage populations of this new pest. Maize yields increased across Ghana between 2013 and 2015 from 1.52 to 1.73 t/ha, decreased between 2015 and 2017 to 1.55 t/ha, and increased to 1.69 t/ha in 2018. The impact of fall armyworm injury to maize production is discussed.


NeoBiota ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 68 ◽  
pp. 127-143
Author(s):  
Albasini Caniço ◽  
António Mexia ◽  
Luisa Santos

This study aimed to gather information about farmers’ knowledge, perception and management practices of the newly introduced insect pest, the fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda Smith (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Manica province, Mozambique. A total of 200 smallholder farmers with experience in maize cultivation were surveyed using a semi-structured questionnaire. The survey was conducted between May and August 2019 in four districts: Macate, Manica, Sussundenga and Vanduzi. Most farmers were unable to morphologically identify fall armyworm (FAW) (from 93.9% in Vanduzi to 98.0% in Manica). Most farmers have experienced FAW damage in their farms (from 92% in Macate to 98.0% in Manica). Maize is mostly planted in October and November (from 44.0% in Sussundenga to 60.0% of farmers in Manica), but the highest infestation period is believed to be between November and February. With the exception of Vanduzi where 65.3% of farmers apply insecticides, most farmers in other districts do not use any method to control FAW (from 60.8% in Macate to 88.0% in Manica and Sussundenga respectively). Among those applying insecticides, from 65.0% in Manica to 75.0% in Vanduzi have confidence in the efficiency of the insecticides being used against FAW. Most farmers reported an increase in the spread of FAW. The lack of financial resources is reported as the main constraint in the fight against FAW. This study is the first of its nature in the province of Manica and provides valuable information that may support extension services and researchers when designing FAW management options for local smallholder farmers.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 305-309
Author(s):  
Santosh Kandel ◽  
Rakshya Poudel

Fall armyworm ((Spodoptera frugiperda) commonly known as FAW is polyphagous pest of maize with more than 85 host species. It is native to tropical and subtropical region of America. It has already been detected in India and reports from Nepal also suggests presence of FAW.  Due to Open broader between Nepal and India chance of spreading in Nepal is very high. Delay maturing hybrids and late planted maize crops are likely to be affected by this pest. It can cause serious leaf damage along with direct injury to the ear. Major damage is done by younger larvae. Larvae causes damage by consuming foliage. Terai and inner terai region are considered to be affected more as climatic condition of this region highly favors FAW. So, timely preventive and management practices should be done before it leads to havoc condition. Management of the pest can be done through many biological, chemical and cultural means. Quality seed, Avoidance of late planting, Push-pull technology can be adopted for management practices. Different biological agents have been identified for controlling FAW such as Bacillus thuringenesis (Bt), Baculovirus and Beauveria bassiana etc.  Chemicals like Methomyl, Methyl parathion, chlorpyrifos, malathion, permethrin are used to control the pest. However, use of chemical should be discouraged as it may affect soil fertility and natural enemy of FAW. Int. J. Appl. Sci. Biotechnol. Vol 8(3): 305-309


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 783-791 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan-dan ZHANG ◽  
Yu-tao XIAO ◽  
Peng-jun XU ◽  
Xian-ming YANG ◽  
Qiu-lin WU ◽  
...  

Insects ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 298
Author(s):  
Ouorou Ganni Mariel Guera ◽  
Federico Castrejón-Ayala ◽  
Norma Robledo ◽  
Alfredo Jiménez-Pérez ◽  
Georgina Sánchez-Rivera ◽  
...  

Chemical control is the main method used to combat fall armyworm in maize crops. However, its indiscriminate use usually leads to a more complex scenario characterized by loss of its effectiveness due to the development of resistance of the insect pest, emergence of secondary pests, and reduction of the populations of natural enemies. For this reason, efforts to develop strategies for agroecological pest management such as Push–Pull are increasingly growing. In this context, the present study was carried out to evaluate field effectiveness of Push–Pull systems for S. frugiperda management in maize crops in Morelos, Mexico. In a randomized block experiment, the incidence and severity of S. frugiperda, the development and yield of maize were evaluated in nine Push–Pull systems and a maize monoculture. The Push–Pull systems presented incidence/severity values lower than those of the monoculture. Morphological development and maize yield in the latter were lower than those of most Push–Pull systems. Mombasa—D. ambrosioides, Mulato II—T. erecta, Mulato II—C. juncea, Tanzania—T. erecta and Tanzania—D. ambrosioides systems presented higher yields than those of monocultures.


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 764-771
Author(s):  
Dan-dan ZHANG ◽  
Sheng-yuan ZHAO ◽  
Qiu-lin WU ◽  
Yu-yan LI ◽  
Kong-ming WU

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document