Honeydew Excretion Measurement Techniques for Determining Differential Feeding Activity of Biotypes of Nilaparvata lugens on Rice Varieties1

Abstract

Techniques to quantify the feeding activity of Nilaparvata lugens (Still) on rice varieties as based on honeydew excretion are described and their potential as a b.ioassa¥for.bioty~e identification are discussed. Honeydew, excreted on filter paper, was stamed Withnmhydnn and quantified by measuring the area (mm 2) or by weighing. Results were sati~fact<~ry b~t the methods were extremely tedious. Volumetric measurement of honeydew with rrncroplpettes was less sensitive.. The color intensity of one ILliter honeydew streaked on filter paper and treated With 0.001% ninhydrin was determined with a Fujiox™ Densitometer. The method was relatively simple and rapid and was sufficiently precise for biotype identification as based on differential feeding activity.

Performance of adult psyllids in no‐choice experiments on juvenile and adult leaves of Eucalyptus globulus

“…Honeydew production and longevity are indirect measures of feeding and host plant resistance to homopteran insects (Paguia et al, 1980;Eenink et al, 1984;Lewis, 1986;Shanks & Garth, 1992;Kaloshian et al, 1997). Our data suggest that the differential survival of C. eucalypti and C. spatulata on juvenile and adult leaves were due to differences in feeding behavior.…”

Maize and Oat Antixenosis and Antibiosis Against <I>Delphacodes kuscheli</I> (Homoptera: Delphacidae), Vector of “Mal de Rio Cuarto” of Maize in Argentina

“…Several studies have shown that planthoppers excrete less honeydew when feeding on resistant than on susceptible plant varieties, indicating nonpreference resistance in no-choice situations (Paguia et al 1980, Khan and Saxena 1984, Padgham and Woodhead 1988, Bahagiawati et al 1989, Mishra and Misra 1991, Smith et al 1994. Virus inoculation occurs during D. kuscheli feeding (Remes Lenicov et al 1985), and the amount of feeding can be estimated indirectly by measuring honeydew excretion (Smith et al 1994).…”

Feeding behavior of the vectorDelphacodes kuscheli(Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha: Delphacidae) on maize and oat

“…Th e excretion was collected on a 9 cm diameter Whatman fi lter paper disk placed around the base of seedlings which were enclosed in a cylindrical PET cage (20 cm high -9 cm in diameter). Papers were treated with 0.1 % nynhydrin in acetone and bromocresol green (Paguia et al 1980;Heinrichs et al 1985;Karim & Saxena 1991). For chemical analysis, honeydew droplets from the fi rst and second instars nymphs were collected from the plant surface with micropipettes.…”

“…Studies about feeding sites by means of salivary sheaths termination within plant tissues were recorded on important pests such as Saccharosydne saccharivora (Westwood) (Metcalfe 1969), Nilaparvata lugens Stål (Sogawa 1973(Sogawa , 1982Kimms 1989), Laodelphax striatellus Fallen (Sonku & Sakurai 1973) and Peregrinus maidis (Ashmead) (Fisk et al 1981). In addition the analysis of honeydew excretion was used as a complementary study of the feeding activity of planthoppers (Paguia et al 1980;Heinrichs et al 1985;Padgam & Woodhead 1988;Karim & Saxena 1991;Kumar et al 2001). Among other discussed issues, Mattson (1980) studied the eff ect of plant physiology on the insect feeding process and Hattori (2001) recorded the eff ect of nonhost antifeedant on the N. lugens behavior.…”