Does varying cowpea spacing provide better protection against cowpea pests?

Asiwe, J. A. N.; Nokoe, S.; Jackai, L. E. N.; Ewete, F. K.

doi:10.1016/j.cropro.2004.09.014

Cited by 21 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result the cowpea fodder variety yielded no grain at all in our trials. The high sowing density (0.4 m within row) is known to favour pests as it eases host colonization and provides a better shelter against natural enemies and adverse weather conditions (Asiwe et al, 2005;Karungi et al, 2000). Less dense planting (>1 m within row) would reduce pest density (Asiwe et al, 2005) but at the same time would decrease fodder production.…”

Section: A Disappointingly Small Response To the Tested Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unravelling the causes of variability in crop yields and treatment responses for better tailoring of options for sustainable intensification in southern Mali

Falconnier

Descheemaeker

Mourik

2016

Field Crops Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Options that contribute to sustainable intensification offer an avenue to improve crop yields and farmers' livelihoods. However, insufficient knowledge on the performance of various options in the context of smallholder farm systems impedes local adaptation and adoption. Therefore, together with farmers in southern Mali we tested a range of options for sustainable intensification including intensification of cereal (maize and sorghum) and legume (groundnut, soyabean and cowpea) sole crops and cereallegume intercropping during three years on on-farm trials. There was huge variability among fields in crop yields of unamended control plots: maize yielded from 0.20 to 5.24 t ha −1 , sorghum from 0 to 3.53 t ha −1 , groundnut from 0.10 to 1.16 t ha −1 , soyabean from 0 to 2.48 t ha −1 and cowpea from 0 to 1.02 t ha −1. This variability was partly explained by (i) soil type and water holding capacity, (ii) previous crop, its management and the nutrient carry-over and (iii) inter-annual weather variability. Farmers recognized three soil types: gravelly soils, sandy soils and black soils. Yields were very poor on gravelly soils and two to three times greater (depending on the crop) on black soils. Yields were also poor at the end of the typical crop rotation, i.e., after sorghum and millet, and 1.3-1.7 times greater (depending on the crop) after the fertilized crops maize and cotton. We diagnosed a number of cases of technology failure where no improvement in yield was observed with hybrid varieties of maize and sorghum and rhizobial inoculation of soyabean. Regardless of soil type and previous crop, mineral fertilizer improved yields by 34-126% depending on the crop. Targeting options to a given soil type and/or place in the rotation enhanced their agronomic performance: (i) the biomass production of the cowpea fodder variety was doubled on black soils compared with gravelly soils, (ii) the additive maize/cowpea intercropping option after cotton or maize resulted in an average overall LER of 1.47, no maize grain penalty, and 1.38 t ha −1 more cowpea fodder production compared with sole maize. Soil type and position in the rotation, two indicators easy to assess by farmers and extension workers, allowed the identification of specific niches for enhanced agronomic performance of legume sole cropping and/or intercropping.

show abstract

Section: A Disappointingly Small Response To the Tested Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unravelling the causes of variability in crop yields and treatment responses for better tailoring of options for sustainable intensification in southern Mali

Falconnier

Descheemaeker

Mourik

2016

Field Crops Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A variety of approaches have been developed for the control of M. vitrata including host plant resistance, cultural management, biological control and biopesticides (Adati et al 2008) with limited success and applicability (Bottenberg and Singh 1996;Fatokun 2002;Asiwe et al 2005;Asiwe 2009). Consequently, the West Africa region is seeking other strategies for managing M. vitrata.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Annual cycle of the legume pod borer Maruca vitrata Fabricius (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) in southwestern Burkina Faso

Traore

Dabire-Binso

et al. 2014

Arthropod-Plant Interactions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maruca vitrata is an economically significant insect pest of cowpea in sub-Saharan Africa. Understanding the seasonal population patterns of M. vitrata is essential for the establishment of effective pest management strategies. M. vitrata larval populations on cultivated cowpea and adult flying activities were monitored in addition to scouting for host plants and parasitoids during 2 consecutive years in 2010 and 2011 in southwestern Burkina Faso. Our data suggest that M. vitrata populations overlapped on cultivated cowpea and alternate host plants during the rainy season. During the cowpea off-season, M. vitrata maintained a permanent population on the wild host plants Mucuna poggei and Daniella oliveri. The parasitoid fauna include three species, Phanerotoma leucobasis Kri., Braunsia kriegeri End. and Bracon sp. Implications of these finding for pest management strategies are discussed.

show abstract

“…However, it is advisable to use less susceptible proteases, such as the ones in C. tomentosicollis, when screening plant extracts for good PIs. Cowpea is severely attacked by insect pests at every stage of its growth (Asiwe et al, 2005) and its production cannot be successful without insecticide application (Nabirye et al, 2003;Dugje et al, 2009;Kamara et al, 2010). Genetic modification of cowpea cultivars using genes that mediate protease inhibition in Kìshí and NG/SA/07/0098 may serve as a basis for producing transgenic cowpea lines.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Protease inhibition in cowpea pod-sucking bug species (Hemiptera: Heteroptera) using cereal and legume grain extracts

Taiwo¹,

Soyelu²,

Okonji³

2016

Afr. J. Biochem. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Selected grain extracts were assayed against digestive proteases of Anoplocnemis curvipes, Clavigralla tomentosicollis and Mirperus jaculus with a view to identifying suitable sources of protease inhibitors against the cowpea pests. Laboratory bioassays showed that grains of a local soybean variety Kìshí and a cowpea landrace NG/SA/07/0098 contain potent inhibitors although the former produced a consistently higher level of inhibition in each of the three pests. Protease activity was highest in C. tomentosicollis (1.06 μmol/mg) followed by M. jaculus (0.94 μmol/mg) and A. curvipes (0.69 μmol/mg) but inhibition was highest in M. jaculus. The optimum temperature range for the inhibitors was 40-90°C while optimum inhibitory activity occurred in weak acidic to neutral media, pH 4-7. There was total protease inhibition in the pests when soybean and cowpea extracts were combined against gut extracts in soybean-biased volumetric ratios of 0.7:0.3 and 0.8:0.2. This synergistic efficacy was superior to those of two commercial products. The inhibitors were stable for 10-50 min at 80°C but got denatured within few minutes of exposure to higher temperatures. Obtained results showed that the soybean and cowpea are suitable sources of protease inhibitors in breeding exercises for development of transgenic cowpea varieties.

show abstract

Does varying cowpea spacing provide better protection against cowpea pests?

Cited by 21 publications

References 17 publications

Unravelling the causes of variability in crop yields and treatment responses for better tailoring of options for sustainable intensification in southern Mali

Unravelling the causes of variability in crop yields and treatment responses for better tailoring of options for sustainable intensification in southern Mali

Annual cycle of the legume pod borer Maruca vitrata Fabricius (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) in southwestern Burkina Faso

Protease inhibition in cowpea pod-sucking bug species (Hemiptera: Heteroptera) using cereal and legume grain extracts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About