Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T07:14:03.021Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Field screening of pearl millet cultivars in relation to insects and diseases

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2011

R. T. Gahukar
R. T. Gahukar
Affiliation:
FAO/CILSS/USAID Integrated Pest Management Project, ISRA, Boite Postale 199, Kaolack, Senegal
Get access

Abstract

Thirty-five pearl millet cultivars of short, medium and long maturity cycle were screened in Senegal during 1985–1986 crop seasons to study field reaction to the attack of stalk borer, Coniesta (Acigona) ignefusalis Hmps.; spike worm, Heliocheilus (Raghuva) albipunctella De Joannis; millet midge, Geromyia penniseti Felt; head smut, Tolysporium penicillariae Bref; and ergot, Claviceps fusiformis Lov. Insect and disease incidence varied considerably depending upon cultivar maturity cycle. Least susceptible cultivars were IBV-8001 and P8 against spike worm; Zalla, NKK, P8 and M2D2 against head smut, and Ex-Darou against ergot. Cultivation of IBV-8001 has been suggested in northern and central Senegal. However, studies on identification and utilization of resistance sources of wide genetic diversity and multilocational tests may be necessary.

Résumé

Trente cinq cultivars du petit mil de court, moyen et long cycle de maturité ont été criblés au Sénégal pendant les saisons 1985–86 afin d'étudier la reaction au champ à l'attaque du foreur des tiges, Coniesta (Acigona) ignefusalis Hmps; de la chenille mineuse de l'épi, Heliocheilus (Raghuva) albipunctella De Joannis; de la cécidomyie du mil, Geromyia penniseti Felt; et du charbon de l'épi, Tolysporium penicillariae Bref; et de l'ergot, Claviceps fusiformis Lov. L'incidence des insectes et des maladies a varié considérablement en fonction du cycle de maturité des cultivars. Les cultivars les plus moins attaqués étaient IBV–8001 et P8 contre la mineuse de l'épi; Zalla, NKK, P8 et M2D2 contre le charbon et Ex-Darou contre l'ergot. Cultivation d'IBV-8001 a été suggérée dans les régions du nord et du centre du Sénégal. Pourtant, les études sur l'identification et l'utilisation des sources de résistance d'une diversité génétique et les essais multilocaux seront nécessaires.

Keywords

Sahelpearlmilletvarietal screeningstalk borerspike wormmillet midgehead smutergotSahelpetit milcriblage variétaleforeur des tigeschenille mineuse de l'épicécidomyie du milcharbon de l'épiergot
Type
Research Articles
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , February 1990 , pp. 13 - 19
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 1990

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

REFERENCES

Clement, J.C. (1985) Les mils penicillaires de l'Afrique de l'Ouest: Prospections et Collectes. International Board for Plant Genetic Resources, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Coutin, R. and Harris, K. M. (1968) The taxonomy, distribution, biology and economic importance of the millet grain midge, Geromyia penniseti (Felt) gen. n. comb. n. (Dipt., Cecidomyiidae). Bull. Entomol. Res. 59, 259–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, D. B. (1955) Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11, 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gahukar, R. T. (1984) Insect pests of pearl millet in West Africa: A review. Trop. Pest Manage. 30, 142–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gahukar, R. T. (1987) Relationship between spike worm (Raghuva albipunctella) infestation and flowering of pearl millet, and some sources of resistance. Agronomie 7, 595–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gakuhar, R. T. (1988) Problems and perspectives of pest management in the Sahel: A case study of pearl millet. Trop. Pest Manage. 34, 35–38.Google Scholar
Gahukar, R. T. (1989) Population ecology of Acigona ignefusalis (Lepidoptera, Pyralidae) in Senegal. Environ. Entomol. (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gahukar, R. T., Guevremont, H., Bhatnagar, V. S., Doumbia, Y. O., Ndoye, M. and Pierrard, G. (1986) A review of the pest status of the millet spike worm, Raghuva albipunctella De Joannis (Noctuidae Lepidoptera) and its management in the Sahel. Insect Sci. Applic. 7, 457–463.Google Scholar
Gupta, S. C. and Guegan, R. (1983) Caracteristiques de Trois Variétés du mil (Pennisetum americanum (L.) Leeke) Recommandées au Sénégal. Centre National de la Recherche Agronomique, Bambey, Senegal, Document No. 4.Google Scholar
Gupta, S. C., Ndoye, A. T. and Andrews, D. J. (1983) Essais variétaux sur le mil au Sénégal. Agron. Trop. 38, 229–232.Google Scholar
Harris, K. M. (1962) Lepidopterous stem borers of cereals in Nigeria. Bull. Entomol. Res. 53, 139– 171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ndoye, M., Gahukar, R. T., Carson, A. G., Selvaraj, C., Mbaye, D. F. and Diallo, S. (1986) Les problèmes phytosanitaires du mil dans le Sahel. pp. 79–94. In Compte Rendu du Séminaire International sur la Lutte Intégrée. Niamey, Niger, 6–13 Dec. 1984, Projet CILSS de lutte intégrée. Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.Google Scholar
Nwanze, K. F. (1985) Some aspects of pest management and host plant resistance in pearl millet in the Sahel. Insect Sci. Applic. 6, 461–465.Google Scholar
Thakur, R. P. and Chahal, S. S. (1987) Problems and strategies in the control of ergot and smut in pearl millet. In Proceedings of International Pearl Millet Workshop, 7–11 April 1986, Patancheru, India. International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Patanchera, India, pp. 173–182.Google Scholar
Thakur, R. P., Rao, V. P., Williams, R. J., Chahal, S. S., Mathur, S. B., Pawar, N. B., Nafade, S. D., Shetty, H. S., Singh, G. and Bangar, S. G. (1985) Identification of stable resistance to ergot in pearl millet. Plant Disease 69, 982–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thakur, R. P., Rao, K. V. S., Williams, R. J., Gupta, S. C., Thakur, D. P., Nafade, S. D., Sundaram, N. V., Frowd, J. A. and Guthrie, J. E. (1986) Identification of stable resistance to smut in pearl millet. Plant Disease 70, 38–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar