Skip to main content

Bacillus thuringiensis as a pest management tool for control of the squash vine borer, Melittia cucurbitae (Lepidoptera: Sesiidae) in South Carolina

Bacillus thuringiensis als Mittel zur Bekämpfung des Kürbisstängelbohrers Melittia cucurbitae (Lepidoptera: Sesiidae) in South Carolina

Abstract

A commercial formulation of Bacillus thuringiensis (Mattch) was evaluated under field conditions at Clemson, South Carolina, USA for control of the squash vine borer, Melittia cucurb-itae (Lepidoptera: Sesiidae), on yellow crookneck squash, Cucurbita pepo in 1997, 1998 and 1999. Two application methods were used: injection of the B. thuringiensis formulation directly into the main stem and spray foliage application. These were compared to an insecticide standard, endosulfan (Phaser), and an untreated check. In most cases, B. thuring-iensis treated plots had significantly less damage than untreated plots and generally gave control equal to that of the insecticide standard, endosulfan. In a trial 1998, the two methods were directly compared, the foliage sprays gave control equal to or better than the injection treatments. Even during the heaviest pest pressure (second trial, 1998), the B. thuringien-sis treatments were as effective as endosulfan in reducing the squash vine borer damage.

Zusammenfassung

Eine kommerzielle Formulierung von Bacillus thuringiensis (Mattch) wurde in Kürbisfeldern in Clemson, South Carolina, USA auf ihre Eignung zur Bekämpfung des Kürbisstängelbohrers Melittia cucurbitae (Lepidoptera: Sesiidae) in den Jahren 1997, 1998 und 1999 untersucht. Zwei verschiedene Verfahren, eine direkte Injektion von B. thuringiensis in den Hauptstängel und eine Blattsprizung, wurden mit einem Endosulfanstandard (Phaser) und einer unbehandelten Kontrolle verglichen. In den meisten Fällen zeigten die mit B. thuringiensis behandelten Varianten geringere Schäden als die unbehandelte Kontrolle und waren in der Wirkung mit der Endosulfanvariante vergleichbar. Der direkte Vergleich von Injektion und Blattspritzung im Jahr 1998 zeigte eine überlegene oder zumindest vergleichbare Wirkung der Blattspritzung. Selbst während des stärksten Befallsdrucks im zweiten Versuch des Jahres 1998 zeigten sich keine Wirkungsunterschiede zwischen B. thuringiensis und Endosulfan gegenüber dem Kürbisstängelbohrer.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Literature

  • Balazs, K., G. Bujaki, K. Farkas, 1996: Incorporation of apple clearwing (Synanthedon myopaeformis Borkh.) control into the IPM system of apple. Acta Hort. 422, 134–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, K.V.W., E.C. Burkness, W.D. Hutchison, 2004: Squash vine borer. Vegetable Pest Fact Sheets of University of Minnesota. www.vegedge.umn.edu/VEGPEST/CUCS/vinebor.htm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, P., M.J. Baily, J. Cory, S. Higgs, 1993: Bacillius thuringiensis: an Environmental Biopesticide: Theory and Practice. Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flexner, J.L., B. Lighthard, B.A. Croft, 1986: The effects of microbial pesticides on non-target, beneficial arthropods. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 16, 203–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, M.P., A.C. Frodsham, 1993: Natural Enemies of Vegetable Insect Pests. Department of Entomology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jupackson, D.M., R. Canhilal, G.R. Carner, 2005: Trap monitoring squash vine borers in cucurbits. J. Agric. Urban Entomol. 22, 27–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasinski, J., C. Welty, 2005: Squash bugs and squash vine borer on the rise. Ohio State University Extension Vegetable Crops. VegNet Vol. 12, No. 14. www.ag.ohio-state.edu/~vegnet/news/vnew1405.htm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klun, J.A., M. Schwarz, B.A. Leonardt, W. W. C Antelo, 1990: Sex pheromone of the female squash vine borer. J. Entomol. Sci. 25, 64–72.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kuepper, G., R. Thomas, 2001: Organic control of squash vine borer. National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service. www.attra.org/attra-pub/squashbore.html.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shehata, W.A., F.A. Nasr, A.W. Tadros, 1999: Applications of some bacterial varieties of Bacillius thuringiensis and its bio-product Delfin on Synanthedon myopaeformis Borkh. (Lepi-doptera: Aegeriidae) in apple orchards. Anz. Schadlingskd. Pfl. 72, 129–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sas Institute, 1997: SAS/STAT software, release 6.12. SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, J.D., 1985: Comparative effectiveness of gallery-injected insecticides and fumigants to control carpenter-worms, Prionoxystus rabiniae (Lepidoptera: Cossidae) and oak clearwing borers, Parathrene simulans (Lepidoptera: Sesiidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 78, 485–488.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorenson, K.A., 1994: The squash vine borer. North Carolina State University Extension Factsheet. www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/ent/notes/vegetables/veg20.html, Insect Note # 20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamer, A., 1995: Investigation on natural enemies and biological possibilities of Bembecia scopigera (Scopoli) (Lepi-doptera: Sesiidae). In: Symposium of the British Crop Protection Council and Sustainable Farming Systems, Edinburg, UK, September 11-14, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, D.R., A.G. Shivakumar, B.E. Melin, M.F. Miller, T.A. Benson, C.W. Shopp, D. Casuta, G.J. Gundling, T.J. Bolling, B.B. Spear, J.L. Fox, 1986: Genetic engineering of bioinsec-ticides. In: M. Inouye, R. Sarma (eds.): Protein Engineering: Applications in Science, Medicine and Engineering, pp. 395–413. Academic, Orlando, FL, USA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Canhilal.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Canhilal, R., Carner, G.R. Bacillus thuringiensis as a pest management tool for control of the squash vine borer, Melittia cucurbitae (Lepidoptera: Sesiidae) in South Carolina. J Plant Dis Prot 114, 26–29 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03356200

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03356200

Key words

  • Bacillus thuringiensis
  • biological control
  • Melittia cucurbitae
  • squash vine borer

Stichwörter

  • Bacillus thuringiensis
  • biologische Bekämpfung
  • Kürbisstängelbohrer
  • Melittia cucurbitae