Advertisement

Feeding Stimulation in Chilo Partellus (Swinhoe) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) Larvae by Some Commonly Available Sugars and its Effect on Larval Mortality Caused by Bacillus Thuringiensis (Berliner)

  • Michael Brownbridge
Research Article

Abstract

Investigations were carried out to establish the phagostimulatory effects of cheaply available materials (bag sugar, sucrose, molasses) on Chilo partellus larvae. Sugar and analytical grade sucrose (1% w/v solutions) were the best phagostimulants tested. Molasses was the least effective but a 10% w/v solution induced a significant feeding response. These stimulants, in combination with a Bacillus thuringiensis treatment, were tested to determine their effects on increasing the efficacy of the pathogen against this pest species. Larval mortality levels were significantly higher in the presence of a feeding stimulant than when B. thuringiensis alone was administered; inclusion of such adjuvants in a B. thuringiensis preparation could significantly enhance the field efficacy of the pathogen against C. partellus.

Key Words

Chilo partellus sugars feeding stimulation phagostimulants Bacillus thuringiensis pathogenesis 

Résumé

Des investigations ont été conduites pour établir les effets de stimulation alimentaire de matériaux pas chers disponibles (sucre de sac, sucrose, molasses) sur la larve de Chilo partellus. Les meilleurs stimulants d’alimentation testés furent le sucre de sac et sucrose (SigmaR analytical grade) (1% w/v solutions). Les molasses furent les moins effectives mais à 10% w/v solution, induit une response significante. On testa ces stimulants, en combinaison avec le traitement de Bacillus thuringiensis pour déterminer leur effets en incrementant l’efficacité du patogen contre cette espéce nuisible. En présence d’un stimulant alimentaire, les niveaux de mortalité larvale furent significamment supérieurs que quand seulement B. thuringiensis était pourvu, suggérant que l’inclusion de tels adjuvants dans une préparation de B. thuringiensis pourrait relever, sur le terrain, l’efficacité du patogen contre C. partellus.

Mots Clés

Chilo partellus sucres stimulation alimentaire Bacillus thuringiensis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ascher K. R. S. and Meisner J. (1973) Evaluation of a method for assay of phagostimulants with Spodoptera littoralis larvae under various conditions. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 16, 101–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell M.R. and Romine C. L. (1980) Tobacco budworm field evaluation of microbial control in cotton using Bacillus thuringiensis and nuclear polyhedrosis virus, with a feeding adjuvant. J. Econ. Entomol. 73, 427–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bristow P. R., Doss R. P. and Campbell H. (1979) A membrane filter bioassay for studying phagostimulatory materials in leaf extracts. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 72, 16–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brownbridge M. (1990) The role of bacteria in the management of Chilo spp. Insect Sci. Applic. 11, 779–783.Google Scholar
  5. Brownbridge M. and Onyango T. (1992) Screening of exotic and locally isolated Bacillus thuringiensis (Berliner) strains in Kenya for toxicity to the spotted stem borer, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe). Trop. Pest Manage. 38, 77–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Doss R. P. and Shanks C. H. Jr. (1986) Use of membrane filters as a substrate in insect feeding bioassays. Bull. Entomol. Soc. Amer. Winter, 248–249.Google Scholar
  7. Duncan D. B. (1955) Multiple range and multiple f tests. Biometrics 11, 248–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. El-Nockrashy A. S., Salama H. S. and Taha F. (1986) Influence of baitformulations on the effectiveness of Bacillus thuringiensis against Spodoptera littoralis (Bois.) (Lep., Noctuidae). J. Appl. Entomol. 101, 381–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hafez M., Salama H. S., Aboul Elal R. G. and Ragaeil M. (1987) Evaluation of adjuvants for use with Bacillus thuringiensis against Heliothis armigera (Hubn ). J. Appl. Entomol. 103, 313–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hsiao T. H. (1969) Adenine and related substances as potent feeding stimulants for the alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica. J. Insect Physiol. 15, 1785–1790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ignoffo C. M., Hostetter D. L. and Smith D. B. (1976) Gustatory stimulant, sunlight protectant, evaporation retardant: Three characteristics of an insecticide adjuvant. J. Eton. Entomol. 69, 207–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Johnson D. R. (1982) Suppression of Heliothis spp. on cotton using Bacillus thuringiensis, Baculovirus heliothis and two feeding adjuvants. J. Econ. Entomol. 75, 207–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Khalifa A., Salama H. S., Azmy N. and El-Sharaby A. (1974) Taste sensitivity of the cotton leafworm, Spodoptera littoralis, to chemicals. J. Insect Physiol. 20, 67–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Meisner J., Ascher K. R. S. and Eizick C. (1984) Effects of the commercial stimulant Coax and Gustol on the toxicity of Cypermethrin and deltamethrin against (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 77, 1123–1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Meisner J., Ascher K. R. S. and Kamh J. (1970) Feeding stimulants for the larva of the Egyptian cotton leafworm, Spodoptera littoralis Boisd. I. Assaying the larval response to extracts of several host plants and to some pure substances with the Styropor method. World Rev. Pest Contr. 9, 104–118.Google Scholar
  16. Navon A., Meisner J. and Ascher K. R. S. (1987) Feeding stimulant mixtures for Spodoptera littoralis (Lepidoptera:Noctuidae). J. Econ. Entomol 80, 990–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ochieng R. S., Onyango F. O. and Bungu M. D. O. (1985) Improvement of techniques for mass culture of Chilo partellus (Swinhoe). Insect Sci. Applic. 6, 425–428.Google Scholar
  18. Patti J. H. and Carner G. R. (1974) Bacillus thuringiensis investigations for the control of Heliothis spp. on cotton. J. Econ. Entomol. 67, 415–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Richter A. R. and Fuxa J. R. (1984) Preference of five species of Noctuidae for feeding stimulant adjuvants. J. Ga. Entomol. Soc. 19, 383–387.Google Scholar
  20. Sithole S. Z. (1990) Status and control of the stem borer, Chilo partellus Swinhoe (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in southern Africa. Insect Sci. Applic. 11, 481–488.Google Scholar
  21. Salama H. S., Rizk A. A. and Sharaby A. (1971) Evidence of phagostimulants in cotton leaves eliciting feeding of Spodoptera littoralis. Experimentia 27, 329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shanks C. H. Jr. and Doss R. P. (1987) Feeding responses by adults of five species of weevils (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) to sucrose and sterols. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 80, 41–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Torto B., Hassanali A. and Saxena K. N. (1990) Chemical aspects of Chilo partellus feeding on certain sorghum cultivars. Insect Sci. Applic. 11, 649–655.Google Scholar
  24. Warui C. M. and Kuria J. N. (1983) Population incidence and the control of maize stalk borers Chilo partellus (Swinhoe), C. orichalcociliellus Strand and Sesamia calamistis Hmps. in Coast Province, Kenya. Insect Sci. Applic. 4, 11–18.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ICIPE 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Brownbridge
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.The International Centre of Insect Physiology and EcologyNairobiKenya
  2. 2.Entomology Research LaboratoryThe University of VermontSouth BurlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations