Effect of Different Varieties of Gram on Growth, Development and Reproduction of <i>Heliothis armigera</i> (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Tripathi, S. R.; Singh, Rajendra

doi:10.1002/mmnz.19890650113

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a study comparing the ovipositional response to certain host plants excluding cereals, pigeonpea was more attractive than cotton, tomato, okra, and chickpea (65). Relative to other host plants, pigeonpea is a very suitable plant for H. armigera development (107,109).…”

Section: Flower-and Pod-feeding Lepidopteramentioning

confidence: 99%

Insect Pests of Pigeonpea and Their Management

Shanower

Romeis²,

Minja³

1999

Annu. Rev. Entomol.

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) is an important crop in semi-arid tropical and subtropical farming systems, providing high quality vegetable protein, animal feed, and firewood. Insect pests feeding on flowers, pods, and seeds are the most important biotic constraint affecting pigeonpea yields. This review summarizes the biology and ecology of the three most important groups of pests: flower- and pod-feeding Lepidoptera, pod-sucking Hemiptera, and seed-feeding Diptera and Hymenoptera. Recent research investigating the complex interactions among pigeonpea, its key pests, and their natural enemies is also reviewed. These relationships have implications on the pest status of individual species and on possible control strategies. Pigeonpea pest management research has focused until recently on the identification and development of resistant cultivars and on chemical control. Future research must focus on environmentally sound pest management strategies that are compatible with the needs and limitations of pigeonpea farmers. Several priority areas for research are suggested.

show abstract

Section: Flower-and Pod-feeding Lepidopteramentioning

confidence: 99%

Insect Pests of Pigeonpea and Their Management

Shanower

Romeis²,

Minja³

1999

Annu. Rev. Entomol.

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although H . Tripathi & Singh, 1989;Grundy et al, 2004). Tripathi & Singh, 1989;Grundy et al, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…armigera is known to feed on more than 200 host plant species (including both cultivated crops and wild plants) belonging to 47 families (reviewed in Zalucki et al, 1986), very few studies have ever associated it with broad bean, Vicia faba L. (e.g. Tripathi & Singh, 1989;Grundy et al, 2004). Johnson and Zalucki (2005) reported that larvae of generalist feeders do not behave in an equivalent manner on intact plants as compared with plant parts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fungal endophyte negative effects on herbivory are enhanced on intact plants and maintained in a subsequent generation

Jaber¹,

Vidal²

2010

Ecological Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Fungal endophytes are ubiquitous associates of virtually all plant species. Although many studies have focused on the role of these microorganisms as mediators of plant-herbivore interactions, these studies have usually been conducted using short-term experiments.2. Truly effective defences against herbivores may require normal functioning of the plant, as excised leaves may be less resistant as compared with those still attached to the plant. Yet, most studies investigating possible effects of endophytes in conferring host resistance to herbivores have been conducted with plant parts rather than intact plants.3. Using the root endophytic fungus (Acremonium strictum)-broad bean (Vicia faba)-generalist herbivore (Helicoverpa armigera) model, we conducted experiments to examine whether endophyte effects on herbivory would depend on the experimental setting used in the investigation and whether they would translate into a subsequent generation of the herbivore.4. Acremonium strictum negative effects on the fitness of H . armigera first generation were more evident when the larvae foraged freely on inoculated intact whole plants than when offered leaf discs of inoculated plants. Furthermore, these effects were carried over into H . armigera second generation reared on an artificial diet.5. Acremonium strictum could not be re-isolated from V . faba leaves; hence direct contact between the endophyte and the insect could be excluded. Alternatively, loss of volatiles or inhibitory effects of compounds that were stronger in situ might have caused changes in larval feeding and performance on leaf discs as compared with intact plants, regardless of infection status.6. We suggest that the reduction in fitness parameters of H . armigera across two generations is caused indirectly via an endophyte-triggered reduction in plant quality.

show abstract

“…Several studies have been conducted on the effects of constant and alternating temperature on development of H. armigera on host plant materials or artiÞcial diets (Allsopp et al 1991, Jallow and Matsumura 2001, Mironidis et al 2008). The biological effects of different host plants on this pest have been examined previously (Tripathi and Singh 1989;Singh and Rembold 1992;Sison and Shanower 1994;Shanower et al 1996bShanower et al , 1997Singh and Mullick 1997;Borah and Dutta 2002;Jallow and Zalucki 2003;Kulkarni et al 2004;Liu et al 2004). However, there are few publications on nutritional indices for H. armigera on different diets (Ashfaq et al 2003).…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

Evaluation of Potential Resistance in Seeds of Different Soybean Cultivars to <I>Helicoverpa armigera</I> (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) Using Demographic Parameters and Nutritional Indices

Soleimannejad¹,

Fathipour²,

Moharramipour³

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of resistant cultivars is a key component of any integrated pest management (IPM) program. Here, we assess the resistance status of 10 different soybean cultivar seeds according to their effects on demographic and nutritional indices of Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) when incorporated into artificial diets. All experiments were conducted at 25 +/- 1 degrees C, 60 +/- 5% RH, and a photoperiod of 16:8 (L:D) h. Life table, reproduction, development, adult longevity, and nutritional indices of H. armigera were significantly affected by the cultivars examined. Mean developmental time of across all immature stages varied from 57 d on 'L17' to 32 d on 'Clark'. Efficiency of conversion of digested food (ECD) for old larvae ranged from 36.4% on 'Sari' to 14.8% on 'Sahar'. The adults that emerged from these larvae had very different rates of reproduction; the highest and lowest values for net reproductive rate (Ro) were 270 and 17 on Clark and L17, respectively. The most important demographic parameter, intrinsic rate of increase (rm), ranged from 0.114 on Sari to 0.09 on L17. H. armigera did not perform well on Sahar, L17, 'Gorgan3', and 'M4'. These cultivars show antibiosis resistance compared with other tested cultivars and are key candidates for field tests to determine usefulness in an IPM system.

show abstract

Effect of Different Varieties of Gram on Growth, Development and Reproduction of Heliothis armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Cited by 6 publications

References 2 publications

Insect Pests of Pigeonpea and Their Management

Insect Pests of Pigeonpea and Their Management

Fungal endophyte negative effects on herbivory are enhanced on intact plants and maintained in a subsequent generation

Evaluation of Potential Resistance in Seeds of Different Soybean Cultivars to <I>Helicoverpa armigera</I> (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) Using Demographic Parameters and Nutritional Indices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About