Abstract
Development of pea weevil and weight loss of infested seed of field peas were examined in relation to damage thresholds for spraying adults and timing of harvest. Dissection of medium-sized seed revealed the mean weight loss was 1.2, 9.0 and 26.2% of dry weight equivalent seed for 3rd and 4th instar larvae, and pupae respectively. Between 1986 and 1988, infestation levels and age structure of populations were studied in the field. At the earliest possible harvest date (EPHD), 3rd and 4th instar larvae were predominant. The % weight loss was usually below 4%, which is the loss equivalent to the ‘break-even’ cost for spraying adults with insecticide. However, this level was often exceeded when harvest was 1–3 weeks after EPHD. The % splits in harvested peas increased with infestation level and larval growth. Weight loss could have been minimised, and grain quality maximised, if the crops were harvested at the EPHD. The risk of not adopting a border spray strategy for adults is that unforeseen events may delay harvest and fumigation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Brindley, T. A. (1933) Some notes on the biology of Bruchus pisorum L. (Coleoptera, Bruchidae) at Moscow, Idaho, J. Econ. Entomol. 26,1058–1062.
Brindley, T. A. and Hinman, F. G. (1937) Effect of growth of pea weevil on weight and germination of seed peas, J. Econ. Entomol. 30, 664–670.
Gerding, M. P., Juan, T. U. and y Mario, P. C. (1987) Incidence of Bruchus pisorum L. (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) on pea, according to seeding date and density, Agricultura Tecnica (Chile) 47, 160–162.
Newman, L. J. and Elliot, H. G. (1938) The pea weevil, Bruchus pisorum (Linn), J. Dept. Agr. Western Austr. 15, 156–158.
Pajni, H. R. (1981) Trophic relations and ecological status of the adults of Bruchus pisorum L. and allied species of Bruchidae (Coleoptera), in V. Labeyrie (ed.), The Ecology of Bruchids Attacking Legumes (Pulses), Proceedings of the International Symposium held at Tours (France), April 16–19,1980, Dr W. Junk Publishers, The Hague.
Reichart, G. (1964) Comprehensive study on the pea weevil (B. pisorum) and its control, Kiserl. Közl. 57, 149–168.
Schopp, R., Brindley, T. A., and Hinman, F. G. (1955) Factors affecting pinhole injury to dry peas by the pea weevil, J. Econ. Entomol. 48, 693–695.
Skaife, S. H. (1918) Pea and bean weevils, Union of South Africa, Dept. Agr. Bull. 12, 1–32.
Smith, A. H., O’Keefe, L. E., and Muehlbauer, F. J. (1982) Methods of screening dry peas for resistance to the pea weevil (Coleoptera: Bruchidae), J. Econ. Entomol. 75, 530–534.
Smith, A. M., Comery, J., and Chaffey, B. (1986) Review of DARA Recommendations for the Control of Pea Weevil in Victorian Field Peas, Research Report Series, No. 4, Department of Agricul ture arid Rural Affairs, Melbourne.
Yao Kang, H., Sueh-sien, T., Liang-bing, and Dung, W.-S. (1966) Biology and control of the pea weevil in Lotien, Hupeh, Acta Entomol. Sinica 15, 288–293.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1990 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this paper
Cite this paper
Smith, A.M. (1990). Pea Weevil (Bruchus Pisorum L.) and Crop Loss - Implications for Management. In: Fujii, K., Gatehouse, A.M.R., Johnson, C.D., Mitchel, R., Yoshida, T. (eds) Bruchids and Legumes: Economics, Ecology and Coevolution. Series Entomologica, vol 46. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2005-7_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2005-7_12
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-7398-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-2005-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive