Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T06:55:17.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Field Observations on the Cacao Mirids, Sahlbergella singularis Hagl. and Distantiella theobroma (Dist.), in the Gold Coast

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

G. Williams
Affiliation:
West African Cacao Research Institute, Tafo.*

Extract

The two species of Mirids, Sahlbergella singularisHagl. and Distantiella theobroma (Dist.), are important pests of cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) in the Gold Coast. The damage sustained by the cacao is due, in part, to the direct effects of feeding by these insects, but more to the subsequent invasion of the resulting lesions by the weakly pathogenic fungus, Calonectria rigidiuscula (Berk. & Br.) Sacc.

In the field, Mirid damage may be classified into three categories. “Blast” is the result of light diffuse attack and is so named because of its similarity to fire damage. “Stagheaded cacao” is more severe, the trees showing numeroussmall crown branches but forming a poor canopy. “Mirid pocket” describes severe damage, normally limited to a small area, the trees losing the crown completely and the polelike trunks bearing numerous lateral chupons. In general, stagheaded symptoms are more prevalent where cacao is grown without shade, and pockets where cultivation of cacao utilises shade trees.

Consideration of the factors associated with Mirid damage shows that it is correlated with breaks in the cacao canopy. Evidence is brought forward to suggest that such breaks normally precede, rather than result from, Mirid attack. The canopy itself is unsuitable for the development of either species, the major part of the population being confined to the sub-canopy levels. The initial causes of the breaks are, most frequently, the die-backs associated with swollen shoot or with adverse water relations. The falling of shade trees causes a number of breaks, and, where cacao is grown without shade, the Mirids themselves may be a cause.

The most important single factor influencing the form of the cacao canopy, and thus the course of Mirid attack, is the amount of overhead shade, particularly that provided by trees little taller than the cacao itself. Shade which is too dense causes etiolation of the cacao and thus renders it susceptible to attack, the resulting damage generally taking the form of a pocket. Shade which is too sparse does not shield the cacao from the adverse effects of exposure. The Mirid damage in such areas generally assumes the stagheaded form.

It is suggested, from field experiments, that the invasion by Mirids of areas suitable for colonisation is not by random movements, but is determined by the change in some physical factor resulting from the broken canopy. Changes in light intensity are the most obvious results of such breaks, but further experiments are needed to determine which is the operating factor.

Degraded cacao is prevented from recovery, not by Mirid attack alone, but by the interaction of it with the presence of C. rigidiuscula, and by increased exposure.

The sampling methods employed are described, and the bearing of the results upon control measures is discussed.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1953

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

Anon. (1947). West African Cacao Research Institute, Annual Report. April 1945–March 1946.Google Scholar
Anon. (1948). West African Cacao Research Institute, Annual Report., April 1946–March 1947.Google Scholar
Box, H. E. (1944). The Sahlbergella menace to Gold Coast cacao.—Memor. cent. Cacao Res. Sta., Tafo, no. 9, 8 pp.Google Scholar
Cheesman, E. E. (1934). Vegetative Propagation of Cacao.—Emp. J. exp. Agric., 2, pp. 4050.Google Scholar
Crowdy, S. H. (1947). Observations on the pathogenicity of Calonectria rigidiuscula (Berk. & Br.) Sacc. on Theobroma cacao L.Ann. appl. Biol.,34, pp. 4559.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicol, J. (1945). The present position of research on Caspid pests of cacao in West Africa.—Rep. Cocoa Res. Conf. 1945, pp. 111113.Google Scholar
Posnette, A. F. (1943). Botany.—Rep. cent. Cocoa Res. Sta., Tafo, 1938–42, pp. 1930.Google Scholar
Posnette, A. F. (1947). Virus diseases of cacao in West Africa. I. Cacao viruses 1A, IB, 1C and 1D.—Ann. appl. Biol., 34, pp. 388402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, K. M. (1920). Investigation of the nature and cause of the damage to plant tissue resulting from the feeding of Capsid bugs.—Ann. appl. Biol., 7, pp. 4055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Squire, F. A. (1947). On the economic importance of the Capsidae in the Guinean Region.—Rev. Ent., Rio. de J., 18, pp. 219247.Google Scholar
Strickland, A. H. (1951). The entomology of swollen shoot of cacao. II.—Bull. ent. Res., 42, pp. 65103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Upholt, W. M. (1942). The use of the square-root transformation and analysis of variance with contagious distributions.—J. econ. Ent., 35, pp. 536543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voelcker, O. J. (1948). The West African Cacao Research Institute.—Nature, Lond.,161, p. 117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voelcker, O. J. & West, J. (1940). Cacao die-back.—Trop. Agriculture Trin., 17, pp. 2731.Google Scholar
Yates, F. (1934). The analysis of multiple classifications with unequal numbers in the different classes.—J. Amer. statist. Ass., 1934, pp. 6066.Google Scholar