Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T19:43:18.089Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of the stem borer Eldana saccharina (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) on the yield of maize

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

N. A. Bosque-Pérez  and
J. H. Mareck
N. A. Bosque-Pérez*
Affiliation:
Maize Research Program, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria.
J. H. Mareck
Affiliation:
Maize Research Program, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria.
*
IITA, c/o L.W. Lambourn & Co., Carolyn House, 26 Dingwall Road, Croydon CR9 3EE, UK.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in the dry season of 1985–86 and the first and second rainy seasons of 1986 at Ibadan, Nigeria, to assess the level of damage and yield reductions caused by Eldana saccharina Walker to maize. Grain weight per plant in artificially infested plots was up to 36% lower than grain weight per plant in insecticide-protected plots. Artificially infested plots had significantly lower 100-grain weight than insecticide-protected ones. The regression coefficient obtained from covariance analysis revealed that 100-grain weight decreased by 0.125 g for each unit increase in the percentage of the stem tunnelled. Infestations of E. saccharina were found to increase significantly the incidence and severity of stalk rots.

Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 81 , Issue 3 , September 1991 , pp. 243 - 247
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adenuga, A.O. (1983) Comparative methods and the economics of control of stem borers on local maize. Nigerian Journal of Plant Protection 3, 52–58.Google Scholar
Adeyemi, S.A.O., Donelly, J. & Odetoyinbo, J.A. (1966) Studies on chemical control of stem borers of maize. Nigerian Agricultural Journal 3, 61–66.Google Scholar
Appert, J. (1970) Insects harmful to maize in Africa and Madagascar. 71 pp. Madagascar, Madagascar Institute of Agronomic Research.Google Scholar
Atkinson, P.R. (1980) On the biology and natural host plants of Eldana saccharina Walker (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa 43, 171–194.Google Scholar
Bosque-Pérez, N.A. & Mareck, J.H. (1990). Distribution and species composition of lepidopterous maize borers in southern Nigeria. Bulletin of Entomological Research 80, 363–368.Google Scholar
Bosque-Pérez, N.A., Mareck, J.H., Dabrowski, Z.T., Everett, L., Kim, S.K. & Efron, Y. (1989) Screening and breeding maize for resistance to Sesamia calamistis and Eldana saccharina. pp. 163–169 in Toward insect resistance maize for the third world: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Methodologies for Developing Host Plant Resistance to Maize Insects.México, D.F.,Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maíz y Trigo.Google Scholar
Carter, A.O. (1985) An evaluation of the importance of stem borers and their control on maize grown in south eastern Nigeria. 57 pp. M Agr Sc Thesis, Reading University, UK.Google Scholar
Cochereau, P. (1985) Ecologie des populations, en Côte d'lvoire, du foreur africain de la canne à sucre et du mais Eldana saccharina Walker. 99 pp. Côte d'lvoire, Institut des Savanes-ORSTOM.Google Scholar
Dick, J. (1945) Some data on the biology of the sugar cane borer (Eldana saccharina Walker). Proceedings of The South African Sugar Technologists' Association 19, 75–79.Google Scholar
Girling, D.J. (1978) The distribution and biology of Eldana saccharina Walker (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) and its relationship to other stem borers in Uganda. Bulletin of Entomological Research 68, 471–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Girling, D.J. (1980) Eldana saccharina as a crop pest in Ghana. Tropical Pest Management 26, 152–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guthrie, W.D., Russell, W.A., Neumann, F.L., Reed, G.L. & Grindeland, R.L. (1975) Yield losses in maize caused by different levels of infestation of second-brood European corn borers. Iowa State Journal of Research 50, 239–253.Google Scholar
Harris, K.M. (1962) Lepidopterous stem borers of cereals in Nigeria. Bulletin of Entomological Research 53, 139–171.Google Scholar
IITA (International Institute of Tropical Agriculture) (1980) IITA Annual Report for 1979. 152 pp. Ibadan, Nigeria.Google Scholar
IITA (International Institute of Tropical Agriculture) (1986) Maize Program Annual Report for 1985. 167 pp. Ibadan, Nigeria.Google Scholar
Jarvis, J.L., Clark, R.L., Guthrie, W.D., Berry, E.C. & Russell, W.A. (1984) The relationship between second-generation European corn borers and stalk rot fungi in maize hybrids. Maydica 29, 247–263.Google Scholar
Jarvis, J.L., Guthrie, W.D. & Berry, E.C. (1983) Time and level of infestation by second-generation European corn borers in a resistant and a susceptible maize hybrid in relation to yield losses. Maydica 28, 391–400.Google Scholar
Leyenaar, P. & Hunter, R.B. (1977) Effect of stem borer damage on maize yield in the coastal savanna zone of Ghana. Ghana Journal of Agricultural Science 10, 67–70.Google Scholar
Sampson, M.A. & Kumar, R. (1985) Borer damage and estimation of yield loss caused by sugar-cane stem-borers in southern Ghana. Insect Science and its Application 6, 705–710.Google Scholar
Umeozor, O.C., Van Duyn, J.W., Kennedy, G.G. & Bradley, J.R. (1985) European corn borer (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) damage to maize in eastern North Carolina. Journal of Economic Entomology 78, 1488–1494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Usua, E.J. (1968) Effect of varying populations of Busseola fusca larvae on the growth and yield of maize. Journal of Economic Entomology 61, 375–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, P.T. (1981) The relation between infestation by lepidopterous stem borers and yield of maize: methods and results. EPPO Bulletin 11, 101–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar