Skip to main content
Log in

Psyllid resistance in Leucaena. Part 2. Quantification of production lossesfrom psyllid damage

  • Published:
Agroforestry Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The psyllid insect (Heteropsylla cubana) is known to reduce biomass production in Leucaena species, but little information is available on the level of reduction, or whether a commonly used plant damage rating scale can be related to production losses. Biomass production losses due to predation by the psyllid were determined for 12accessions of Leucaena in a randomised split-plot field experiment conducted at Brisbane, Australia. Regrowthfrom well-established Leucaena trees, cut back to bare stems 50 cm high, was measured over a 9–week period from plants subjected to psyllid damage and from plants with psyllids controlled by spraying with chlorpyrifos (1 mg ai/l water). Psyllid damage was scored using a ratings scale developed by the University of Hawaii. Lossof potential DM production due to psyllids ranged from 10% for L. trichandra OFI53/88 to 76% for L. collinsii ssp. zacapana OFI56/88. Production losses were significantly correlated with psyllid damage ratings for 10 of the 12 accessions, and also for a combined data set comprising these 10 accessions. From correlations for the combined data set, a 50% loss of potential DM production occurred at a psyllid damage rating of approximately3.2. Results indicated that a “0” rating should be added to the scale to indicate the absence of psyllids.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Austin M.T., Early R.J., Brewbaker J.L. and Sun W.1997. Yield,psyllid resistance, and phenolic concentration of Leucaena intwo environments in Hawaii.Agronomy Journal89: 507–515.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Austin M.P., Sorensson C.T., Brewbaker J.L., Sun W. and Shelton H.M.1995. Forage dry matter yields and psyllid resistance ofthirty-one leucaena selections in Hawaii.Agroforestry Systems31: 211–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin M.P., Williams M.J., Hammond A.C., Frank J.H. andChambliss C.G.1996. Psyllid population dynamics and plant resistance of Leucaena selections in Florida.Tropical Grasslands30: 223–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bray R.A.1994. The Leucaena psyllid. In: Gutteridge R.C. andShelton H.M. (Eds.), Forage tree legumes in tropical agriculture.CAB International, Wallingford, UK, pp. 283–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bray R.A. and Woodroffe T.D.1988. Resistance of some Leucaenaspecies to the leucaena psyllid.Tropical Grasslands22: 11–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bray R.A. and Woodroffe T.D.1991. Effect of the leucaena psyllidon yield of Leucaena leucocephala cv Cunningham in south-eastQueensland.Tropical Grasslands25: 356–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castillo A.C., Cuyagan O.C., Fogarty S. and Shelton H.M.1997.Growth, psyllid resistance and forage quality of Leucaena leucocephala, L. pallida, L. diversifolia and the F1 hybrid of L.leucocephala x L. pallida. Tropical Grasslands31: 188–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Ponti O.M.B., Romanow L.R. and Berlinger M.J.1990. Whitefly-plant relationships: plant resistance. In: Gerling D. (Ed.),Whiteflies: their bionomics, pest status and management.Intercept Ltd. UK, pp. 91–105.

  • Hughes C.E.1998. Leucaena-A genetic resources handbook.Oxford Forestry Institute, Tropical Forestry Paper No. 37. Oxford,UK, 274pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landsberg J.J.1977. Some useful equations for biological studies.Experimental Agriculture13: 273–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeill D.M., Osborne N., Komolong M. and Nankervis D.1998.Condensed tannins in the genus Leucaena and their nutritionalsignificance for ruminants. In: Shelton H.M., Gutteridge R.C.,Mullen B.F. and Bray R.A. (Eds.), Leucaena-adaptation, quality and farming systems. Proceedings of a workshop held in Hanoi, Vietnam 9–14 February 1998.ACIAR, Canberra, Australia.pp. 168–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullen B.F.2001. Agronomic adaptation to environmentalchallenges in the genus Leucaena.PhD Thesis. The Universityof Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullen B.F. and Dalzell S.A.1998. Phytotoxicity of insecticidesand wetting agents to the Leucaena genus. In: Shelton H.M.,Gutteridge R.C., Mullen B.F. and Bray R.A. (Eds.), Leucaena-adaptation, quality and farming systems. Proceedings of a workshop held in Hanoi, Vietnam 9–14 February 1998.ACIAR, Canberra, Australia. pp. 141–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullen B.F., Gabunada F., Shelton H.M. and Stür W.W.2003.Psyllid resistance in Leucaena. Part 1. Genetic resistance of thegenus in subtropical Australia and humid-tropical Philippines.Agroforestry Systems.

  • Palmer B., Bray R.A., Ibrahim T.M. and Fulloon M.G.1989. Theeffect of the Leucaena psyllid on the yield of Leucaena leucocephala cv. Cunningham at four sites in the tropics.TropicalGrasslands23: 105–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Queensland Agricultural College (QAC). 1992. Peskem.Department of Plant Protection, Queensland Agricultural College, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler R.A.1988. Leucaena psyllid trial at Waimanalo, Hawaii.Leucaena Research Reports8: 25–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler R.A. and Brewbaker J.L.1990. An evaluation of resultsfrom the Leucaena psyllid trial network.Leucaena Research Reports11: 23–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler R.A., Chaney W.R., Butler L.G. and Brewbaker J.L.1994.Condensed tannins in Leucaena and their relation to psyllid resistance.Agroforestry Systems26: 139–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B.F. Mullen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mullen, B., Shelton, H. Psyllid resistance in Leucaena. Part 2. Quantification of production lossesfrom psyllid damage. Agroforestry Systems 58, 163–171 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026081307893

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026081307893

Navigation