Resistance Aux Thrips Et Correlations Caracteres—Populations

  • David Cishahayo
Research Article


La variété d’aracbide ICG 2271 est la plus résistante aux thrips dans nos conditions. Malgré l’existence de certaines différences entre types, le 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 an rendement. Il 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.

Mots Clés

Thrips arachide niébé pois d’Angole insecticide coupe 


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.

Key Words

Thrips groundnut cowpea pigeonpea insecticide cutting 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 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
  2. Amin P.W. and Palmer J. M. (1985) Identification of groundnut Thysanoptera. Trop. Pest Manage. 31, 286–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Autrique A. (1981) Principaux ennemis des cultures de la région des Grands Lacs d’Afrique Centrale (Edité par l’Administration Générale de la Coopération au Développement), pp. 124–127. ISABU, Bruxelles.Google Scholar
  4. Dwivedi S. L. and Nigam S. N. (1991) Groundnut Breeding Unit Progress Report. ICRISAT, Patancheru.Google Scholar
  5. 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
  6. Lozano J. C., Belloti A., Reyes J. A., Howeler R., Lehner D. and Doll J. (1981) Field Problems in Cassava. CIAT, Cali.Google Scholar
  7. 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
  8. Porter D. M., Smith D. H. and Rodriguez-Kabana R. (1984) Compendium of peanut diseases, pp. 61–62. American Phytopathological Society, Minnesota.Google Scholar
  9. 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
  10. Ramanaiah M. J., Freire M. J., Chilenguc 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
  11. 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
  12. Robbe P. et Maurin G. (1988) Index Phytosanitaire Afrique. Association de Coordination Technique, Paris.Google Scholar
  13. Senapi B. and Patnaik N. C. (1973) Occurrence of Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood on groundnut and preliminary evaluation of loss in pod yield. J. Res. Orissa Univ. Agric. Techn. 3, 110–113.Google Scholar
  14. Singh S. R. and Allen D. J. (1979) Cowpea Pests and Diseases. UTA, Ibadan.Google Scholar
  15. 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
  16. 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
  17. 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
  18. 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
  19. 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
  20. Zaman M. (1989) Effect of foliar insecticides against thrips on onion in Peshawar, Pakistan. Trop. Pest Manage. 35, 332–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ICIPE 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Cishahayo
    • 1
  1. 1.ISAR — KaramaKigaliRwanda

Personalised recommendations