Insect Resistance with Special Reference to Mustard Aphid

Sekhon, Bhallan Singh; Åhman, Inger

doi:10.1007/978-3-662-06166-4_13

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Insect pests pose a great challenge to Brassica crop production worldwide. A huge number of insect pests attack brassicas, and several insect specialists have Brassica species as preferred host plants (Lamb, 1989;Sekhon and Åhman, 1993;Sibanda et al, 2000). These insect pests are the major un-equalisers of growth and crop yield of brassicas and their importance varies by geographical location (Hokkanen and Wearing, 1996;Kanrar et al, 2002).…”

Section: The Origin and Excellence Of "Brassicas"mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A 2-year study on the preference and performance of L. erysimi on different Brassica species in the field and under greenhouse conditions revealed that rapeseed (B. campestris varieties BSH-1 and YSPB-9) and mustard (B. juncea RH-30) were better hosts for this aphid than other Brassica species (B. napus, B. nigra, B. carinata) (Rana, 2005). Moreover, L. erysimi is a harmful insect on Brassica oilseeds, especially on B. juncea in India and in other tropical regions of the world, causing up to 83% yield loss (Sekhon and Åhman, 1993;Mandal et al, 1994 as cited by Chattopadhyay et al, 2005;Agarwala and Datta, 1999;Aslam and Ahmad, 2001;Dutta et al, 2005;Hossain et al, 2006 and references therein). Aphids reproduce at a higher rate during the early vegetative stage of mustard plants when the developmental period is shortest and the production of winged morphs is lowest (Agarwala and Datta, 1999).…”

Section: The Aphids (Brevicoryne Brassicae Myzus Persicae and Lipaphmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Defence mechanisms of Brassicaceae: implications for plant-insect interactions and potential for integrated pest management. A review

Ahuja

Rohloff

Bones

2010

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

212

165

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Brassica crops are grown worldwide for oil, food and feed purposes, and constitute a significant economic value due to their nutritional, medicinal, bioindustrial, biocontrol and crop rotation properties. Insect pests cause enormous yield and economic losses in Brassica crop production every year, and are a threat to global agriculture. In order to overcome these insect pests, Brassica species themselves use multiple defence mechanisms, which can be constitutive, inducible, induced, direct or indirect depending upon the insect or the degree of insect attack. Firstly, we give an overview of different Brassica species with the main focus on cultivated brassicas. Secondly, we describe insect pests that attack brassicas. Thirdly, we address multiple defence mechanisms, with the main focus on phytoalexins, sulphur, glucosinolates, the glucosinolate-myrosinase system and their breakdown products. In order to develop pest control strategies, it is important to study the chemical ecology, and insect behaviour. We review studies on oviposition regulation, multitrophic interactions involving feeding and host selection behaviour of parasitoids and predators of herbivores on brassicas. Regarding oviposition and trophic interactions, we outline insect oviposition behaviour, the importance of chemical stimulation, oviposition-deterring pheromones, glucosinolates, isothiocyanates, nitriles, and phytoalexins and their importance towards pest management. Finally, we review brassicas as cover and trap crops, and as biocontrol, biofumigant and biocidal agents against insects and pathogens. Again, we emphasise glucosinolates, their breakdown products, and plant volatile compounds as key components in these processes, which have been considered beneficial in the past and hold great prospects for the future with respect to an integrated pest management.Brassicas / insect pests / chemical ecology / trophic levels / glucosinolates / isothiocyanates / defence mechanisms / biocontrol / trap crops / integrated pest management

show abstract

Section: The Origin and Excellence Of "Brassicas"mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Aphids (Brevicoryne Brassicae Myzus Persicae and Lipaphmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defence mechanisms of Brassicaceae: implications for plant-insect interactions and potential for integrated pest management. A review

Ahuja

Rohloff

Bones

2010

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

212

165

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first step in the development of an insect resistant cultivar is the precise knowledge of sources of resistance (Stoner and Shelton 1988). A very large number of attempts have been made in the past to identify sources of resistance in primary gene pool of crop brassica species (Brar and Sandhu 1978;Amjad and Peters 1992;Sekhon and Ahman 1993;Bhadoria et al 1995;Saxena et al 1995). Despite these investigations and resultant publications claiming resistance, no germplasm that carries genetically characterized resistance factor(s) seem to be available.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Screening of wild crucifers for resistance to mustard aphid, Lipaphis erysimi (Kaltenbach) and attempt at introgression of resistance gene(s) from Brassica fruticulosa to Brassica juncea

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A diverse array of wild and weedy crucifers was screened under laboratory conditions for their resistance to Lipaphis erysimi (Kaltenbach) (Homoptera: Aphididae). Among these, Brassica fruticulosa and Brassica montana were found to be the most promising. The availability of a synthetic amphiploid, AD-4(B. fruticulosa 9 Brassica rapa var. brown sarson) as well as a set of Brassica juncea lines carrying genomic introgressions from B. fruticulosa allowed us to investigate B. fruticulosa resistance in greater detail. This assessment was carried out along with susceptible check B. rapa ssp. brown sarson cv. BSH-1 in a series of choice and no choice experiments. The mustard aphid showed maximum preference for feeding on BSH-1 while least preference was recorded for B. fruticulosa followed by AD-4 as evidenced by the number of aphids that settled on circular leaf bits of these genotypes 24 and 48 h after release in a choice experiment. Brassica fruticulosa exhibited strong antibiosis against mustard aphid in no choice experiment and all the released aphids died within 5-8 days of their release, while the maximum survival (76.7%) was recorded on BSH-1. The survival on AD-4 (40%) was significantly lower than that on BSH-1. Almost similar trend was observed with respect to other demographic parameters of L. erysimi viz. development time, fecundity and longevity. In the screen house studies, there was no seedling mortality in B. fruticulosa and AD-4 after 30 days of aphid release while 80% mortality was observed on BSH-1. Excellent variation for aphid resistance was recorded in B. juncea introgression lines, emphasizing heritable nature of fruticulosa resistance. The biochemical analysis suggested the possibility of high concentration of lectins to be associated with low aphid infestation in B. fruticulosa.

show abstract

“…canola crops in Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand and Sweden (Lamb 1989;Sekhon and Ahman 1992;Waern and Ekbom 1995). Another generalist lepidopteran pest, bertha armyworm, Mamestra configurata Walker, is a sporadic but serious economic pest of canola in western Canada (Morris et al 1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Response of canola to simulated diamondback moth (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) defoliation at different growth stages

Ramachandran¹,

Buntin²,

All³

2000

Can. J. Plant Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In field trials conducted during 1995–1998, canola cultivar "Falcon" was subjected to different levels of simulated insect defoliation at four stages of crop growth. Plants were 0, 33, 67 and 100% defoliated at rosette and flowering stages during the 1995–1996 season as well as 2–4 leaf stage during the 1996–1997 and 1997–1998 seasons. Plants were 0, 50 and 100% defoliated at pod filling stage during all seasons. Over all seasons, defoliation did not consistently affect the number of plants per unit area, plant height, 1000 seed weight, and oil content of seeds for most of the defoliation treatments. However, defoliation at the 2–4 leaf and rosette stages made plants more susceptible to cold injury. Generally, canola could withstand a higher level of defoliation as crop development progressed. Maximum yield reductions occurred for defoliations at the 2–4 leaf stage followed by the rosette and flowering stages of the crop. No significant yield losses were recorded for defoliations at the pod filling stage. Results suggest that canola is most sensitive to defoliation in its early stages of growth. Greater amounts of defoliation can be tolerated as crop development progresses. The relationships between defoliation and yield loss were used to establish diamondback moth economic injury levels for canola at different crop growth stages. Key words: Canola, Brassica napus, oilseed rape, simulated defoliation, economic injury level

show abstract

Insect Resistance with Special Reference to Mustard Aphid

Cited by 10 publications

References 24 publications

Defence mechanisms of Brassicaceae: implications for plant-insect interactions and potential for integrated pest management. A review

Defence mechanisms of Brassicaceae: implications for plant-insect interactions and potential for integrated pest management. A review

Screening of wild crucifers for resistance to mustard aphid, Lipaphis erysimi (Kaltenbach) and attempt at introgression of resistance gene(s) from Brassica fruticulosa to Brassica juncea

Response of canola to simulated diamondback moth (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) defoliation at different growth stages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About