Evaluation of Soybean Resistance to Pod-Sucking Bug, Riptortus linearis F. and Performance of its Agronomic Characters

Abstract

Pod sucking bug, Riptortus linearis, is the most damaging soybean pest in Indonesia. A total of 24 soybean genotypes was identified for their resistance to pod sucking bug. The objective of the study was to classifying the resistance of some soybean genotypes against pod sucking pests. The research was conducted during the second dry season (July - October) 2016 in Ngale Research Station, East Java, Indonesia. The experimental design was arranged in randomized block design with five times repetition and two types of environment (full crop protection and controlled until 50 days of planting/dap). The resistance to pod sucking bug was evaluated based on seed damage, pod damage, and seed weight. The grouping of resistance was by using Chiang & Talekar’s method (1980). A very high natural population of pod sucking bug was recorded in the research area as seen from the average number of damaged pod in full protection environment (L1) and insecticide control until 50 dap (L2), i.e. 41.45% and 60.16%, respectively. Genotype of G511H/Anj//Anj-2-8 was consistently resistant to pod sucking bug in L1 as well as L2. This genotype also had early days to maturity (78 days) and large seed size (15.57 g/100 seed), thus potentially to be developed in tropical area of Indonesia. The availability of genotype with such characteristics is in accordance with farmers’ preference and also important to minimize yield losses.

Assessment of Soybean Resistance Level to Pod Sucking Bug Riptortus linearis F. (Hemiptera: Coreidae) based on No-choice and Free-choice Tests

“…The average intensity of the pod damage was higher than the seed damage. Previous studies found the similar result to those found in this study (Krisnawati et al 2016;Maulidah, 2006;Krisnawati and Adie, 2018). highly susceptible.…”

“…Nevertheless, pod and seed damaged intensity was influenced by genotypes. A previous study in the non-controlled environment showed the range of the intensity of pod and seed damage was 34.46-76.82% (an average of 60.16%) and 11.72-42.31% (an average of 23.08%), respectively (Krisnawati and Adie, 2018).…”

“…As a result, the two genotypes reported in this study with a consistent moderately resistant level suggested that these genotypes were not preferred as a food source for R. linearis, or indicating the occurrence of Assessment of Soybean Resistance Level to Pod Sucking Bug Riptortus linearis F. (Hemiptera: Coreidae) based on No-choice... non-preference mechanism on those genotypes. A previous study found a soybean genotype (G511H/Anj//Anj-2-8) which showed a consistent resistance to pod sucking bug R. linearis based on the field evaluation in the controlled as well as the non-controlled environment (Krisnawati and Adie, 2018). A study by Kim and Lim (2010) found that pod sucking bug R. pedestris preferred Cheongjakong soybean variety to Daewonkong or Agakong variety in the choice-test.…”

“…Asadi et al (2012) obtained two resistant soybean Assessment of Soybean Resistance Level to Pod Sucking Bug Riptortus linearis F. (Hemiptera: Coreidae) based on No-choice... genotypes which its resistance was controlled by two recessive genes located at different loci with epistatic dominant interaction. Another study found a genotype with resistant reaction to pod sucking bug R. linearis (Krisnawati and Adie, 2018). The availability of several soybean genotypes resistant to pod sucking bugs, then the efforts to increase soybean resistance to these pests were considered to have a high chance of success.…”

Repelence of Bintaro Plant Extract (Cerbera Manghas) Against Pod-sucking Insects (Riptortus Linearis) (Hemiptera)

“…Pod-sucking pests (Riptortus linearis) attack postflowering soybean plants, are important pests that can cause a decrease in yield both in quality and [1], [2]. The nymphs and adults damage the soybean pods by sucking the liquid of the seeds on the young pods, causing deformation of the seeds, the young pods drying out and falling out, which in turn causes a decrease in production both in quality and quantity [3].…”