Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T07:19:07.678Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Oviposition and infestation of the sorghum shootfly, Atherigona soccata Rondani, on certain sorghum cultivars in relation to their relative resistance and susceptibility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2011

G. C. Unnithan  and
K. V. Seshu Reddy
G. C. Unnithan
Affiliation:
International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE), Mbita Point Field Station, P.O. Box 30, Mbita, South Nyanza, Kenya
K. V. Seshu Reddy
Affiliation:
International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE), Mbita Point Field Station, P.O. Box 30, Mbita, South Nyanza, Kenya
Get access

Abstract

Sorghum shootfly, Atherigona soccata, oviposition and infestation on eight resistant sorghum cultivars (IS nos: 2122,2123, 2205, 2291, 4660, 5092, 5480 and 18551) and two susceptible cultivars (Serena and CSH-1), were studied under field conditions (natural infestation). The eight resistant cultivars and CSH-1 were also tested for preference for oviposition in a two-choice situation in the screenhouse. The eight resistant cultivars received considerably less shootfly eggs and showed fewer “dead hearts” than the susceptible cultivars. The results indicate that non-preference for oviposition is an important mechanism for resistance to shootfly in eight test cultivars. There was also evidence for a certain degree of antibiosis in IS 2291.

Résumé

La mouche de sorgho, Atherigona soccata, oviposition et infestation sur huit cultivars de sorgho (IS nos: 2122, 2123, 2205, 2291, 4660, 5092, 5480 et 18551) ont montré une résistance a la mouche de sorgho et deux cultivars susceptibles (Serena et CSH 1) ont été étudiés dans les champs (infestation naturelle). Les huit cultivars résistants et CSH 1 ont été testés quant a la préférence de la mouche pour oviposition dans une situation à deux choix dans la maison de dépistage. Les huit cultivars résistant ont reçu considérablement moins d'oeufs et ont montré de coeurs morts (dead hearts) que des cultivars susceptibles. Les résultats ont montré que la non-préférence pour oviposition est un mécanisme important pour la résistance dans les huit cultivars expérimentaux. On a décelé aussi un certain degré d'antibiose dans IS 2291.

Keywords

AntibiosisAtherigona soccatanon-preferenceovipositionresistanceshootflysorghumsusceptibilityAntibioseAtherigona soccatanon préférenceovipositionrésistancemouche à sorghosusceptibilité
Type
Section V: screening techniques and methodologies for host plant resistance research
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 6 , Special Issue 3: Host Plant Resistance and its Significance in Pest Management , June 1985 , pp. 409 - 412
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 1985

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

Blum, A. (1967) Varietal resistance of sorghum shootfly (Atherigona varia soccata). Crop Sei. 7, 461–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blum, A. (1969) Oviposition preference by the sorghum shootfly (Atherigona varia soccata) in progenies of susceptible x resistant sorghum crosses. Crop Sci. 9, 695–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delobel, A. G. L. (1983) Influence of temperature and host plant condition on preimaginal development and survival in the sorghum shootfly Atherigona soccata. insect Sei. Applic. 4, 327–335.Google Scholar
Doggett, H. (1972) Breeding for resistance to sorghum shootfly in Uganda. In Control of Sorghum Shootfly (Edited by Jotwani, M. G. and Young, W. R.), pp. 192–201. Oxford and IBH, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Jain, K. K. and Bhatnagar, M. P. (1962) Studies on varietal resistance to Jowar shootfly. Indian J. Genet PI. Breed. 22, 224–229.Google Scholar
Jotwani, M. G. (1976) Host plant resistance with special reference to sorghum. Proc. Indian natn. Acad. Sei. 463, 42–48.Google Scholar
Jotwani, M. G., Sharma, G. C., Srivastava, B. G. and Marwaha, K. K. (1971) Ovipositional response of shootfly Atherigona varia soccata Rondani on some promising resistant sorghum. In Investigations on Insect Pests of Sorghum and Millets. Final Technical Report 1965–70, pp. 119–122. Division of Entomology, IARI, New Delhi, India.Google Scholar
Maiti, R. K., Bidinger, F. R., Seshu Reddy, K. V., Gibson, P. and Davies, J. C. (1980) Nature and occurrence of trichomes in sorghum lines with resistance to sorghum shootfly. In Joint Progress Report, Sorghum Physiology— 3/Sorghum Entomology—3, p. 40. ICRISAT, Andhra Pradesh, India.Google Scholar
Raina, A. K. (1981) Deterrence of repeated oviposition in sorghum shootfly Atherigona soccata. J. chem. Ecol. 7, 785–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raina, A. K., Thindwa, H. Z., Othieno, S. M. and Corkhill, R. T. (1981) Resistance in sorghum to the sorghum shootfly: larval development and adult longevity and fecundity on selected cultivars. Insect Sei. Applic. 2, 99–103.Google Scholar
Shiang-Lin, Shie, Zi-De, Fan and Shou-Hua, Su (1981) Studies on the sorghum shootfly in China. Insect Sei. Applic. 2, 39–47.Google Scholar
Singh, S. P. and Jotwani, M. G. (1980) Mechanisms of resistance in sorghum to shootfly 1. Ovipositionai non-preference. Indian J. Ent. 42, 353–360.Google Scholar
Singh, S. R., Vedamoorthy, G., Thobbi, V. V., Jotwani, M. G., Young, W. R., Balan, J. S., Srivastava, K. P., Sandhu, G. S. and Krishnanda, N. (1968) Resistance to stem-borer, Chilo zonellus (Swinhoe) and stem fly Atherigona varia soccata Rond, in the World sorghum collection in India. Mem. ent. Soc. India 7, 1–79.Google Scholar
Singh, S. P., Jotwani, M. G., Rana, B. S. and Rao, N. G. P. (1978) Stability of host-plant resistance to sorghum shootfly Atherigona soccata. Indian J. Ent. 40, 376–383.Google Scholar
Young, W. R. (1972) Sources of resistance to the sorghum shootfly Atherigona varia soccata Rond. In Control Sorghum Shootfly (Edited by Jotwani, M. G. and Young, W. R.), pp. 137–148. Oxford and IBH, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Young, W. R. and Teetes, G. L. (1977) Sorghum entomology. A. Rev. Ent. 22, 193–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar