Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T03:28:04.248Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Resistance in sweetpotato to sweetpotato weevil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2011

N. S. Talekar
N. S. Talekar
Affiliation:
Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center (AVRDC), P.O. Box 42, Shanhua, Tainan 74199, Taiwan, ROC
Get access

Abstract

Sweetpotato weevil, Cylas formicarius formicarius F is the most destructive pest of sweetpotato, Ipomoea batatas in tropical and subtropical regions. The larvae and adults feed on sweetpotato roots and crowns. For the past 12 years we have been screening sweetpotato germplasm for resistance to this pest in order to breed an agronomic cultivar with weevil resistance. Resistance screening is conducted at AVRDC and Penghu island in autumn and summer, respectively. Germplasm is planted between heavily infested source rows maintained in a weevil nursery. Roots are harvested, sliced into thin pieces, and the number of insects (larvae + pupae + adults) per unit weight, as well as the weight of damaged and healthy root slices, are recorded. The resistance rating is based mainly on the number of insects found in the root. Considerable differences in resistance rating are observed from location to location and season to season. Even at one location, tremendous differences are observed in weevil infestation of a particular entry among the replicates. Although over 1000 sweetpotato accessions have been screened, we have not found any that is consistently less damaged over several seasons at either location. Our recent screening of a population of I. trifida × I. batatas crosses show certain hybrids with high yield and low weevil infestation. These hybrids need to be evaluated further to confirm their resistance.

Résumé

Le charançon Cylas formicarius formicarius F. est le ravageur le plus destructif de la patate douce dans les régions tropicales et subtropicales. Les larves et les adultes attaquent les racines et les couronnes. Nous nous sommes attelés, durant les 12 dernières années, à trier le germplasme de patate douce pour la résistance au ravageur dans le but de développer des variétés résistantes et intéressantes agrono-miquement. Le triage pour la résistance était conduit à l'AVRDC en automne et dans l'île de Penghu en été. Le germplasme est planté entre des rangées de patate douce très infestées maintenues dans une pépiniérs à charançon. Les racines sont déterrées, découpées en tranches fines, et le nombre d'insectes (larves + pupes + adultes) par unité de poids est déterminé, ainsi que le poids des tranches attaquées et saines. La réaction de résistance est déterminée principalement en fonction du nombre d'insectes trouvés à l'intérieur des racines. Des différences considérables de résistance sont observées d'un endroit à l'autre et d'une saison à l'autre. Même dans un même endroit, il existe souvent d-énormes différences dans le niveau d'infestation entre différentes répétitions de la même entrée. Quoique nous ayons jusqu'à présent testé plus de 1000 entrées de patate douce, nous n'en avons trouvé aucune qui soit systématiquement moins attaquée dans l'un ou l'autre des deux sites expérimentaux. Notre travail récent d'évaluation d'une population issue de croisements I. trifida × I. batatas revele certains hybrides à haut rendement et à bas niveau d'infestation par le charançon. Ces hybrides méritent d'être évalués plus en profondeur pour confirmer leur résistance.

Keywords

Sweetpotato weevilCylas formicarius formicariushost plant resistanceresistance evaluationIpomoea trifidainterspecific crossresistance breeding
Type
Symposium X: Sweetpotato Weevil
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 8 , Issue 4-5-6: Recent Advances in Research on Tropical Entomology , December 1987 , pp. 819 - 823
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 1987

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

Austin, M. E., Aung, L. H. and Graves, B. (1970) The use of carbohydrate contents as an index of sweetpotato maturity. In Tropical Root and Tuber Crops Tomorrow (Edited by Plucknett, D. L.) pp. 42–44, vol. 1. College of Tropical Agriculture, University of Hawaii, Honolulu.Google Scholar
AVRDC (1975) Annual Report for 1974. Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center, Shanhua, Taiwan, ROC.Google Scholar
Cockerham, K. L. (1943) The host preference of the sweet-potato weevil. J. econ. Ent. 36, 471–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockerham, K. L. and Deen, O. T. (1947) Resistance of new sweetpotato seedlings and varieties to attack by the sweetpotato weevil. J. econ. Ent. 40, 439–441.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cockerham, K. L. and Harrison, P. K. (1952). New sweetpotato seedlings that appear resistant to sweetpotato weevil attack. J. econ. Ent. 45, 132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, D. B. (1955). Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11, 1—41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edmond, J. B. (1971) Sweetpotatoes: Production, Processing, Marketing. The Avi Publishing Company, Inc., Westport Connecticut, USA.Google Scholar
Ezell, B. D. and Wilcox, M. S. (1958). Variation in carotene content of sweetpotatoes. J. Agric. Food Chem. 6, 61–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahn, S. K. and Leuschner, K. (1981) Resistance of sweetpotato cultivars to African sweetpotato weevil. Crop Sci. 21, 499–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IITA (1976) 1975 Annual Report. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria.Google Scholar
IITA (1977) 1976 Annual Report. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria.Google Scholar
IITA (1978) 1977 Annual Report. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria.Google Scholar
IITA (1979) 1978 Annual Report. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria.Google Scholar
IITA (1980) 1979 Annual Report. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria.Google Scholar
IITA (1983) IITA Annual Report 1982. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria.Google Scholar
IITA (1985) IITA Annual Report 1984. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria.Google Scholar
Jayaramaiah, M. (1975) Reaction of sweetpotato varieties to damage of the weevil, Cylas formicarius (Fab) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) and on the possibility of picking up of infestation by weevil. Mysore J. Agric. Sci. 9, 418–421.Google Scholar
Jong, S. K. and Park, K. Y. (1975) Variety × environmental interaction in sweetpotato (Ipomoea batatas Lam) tests in Korea. The Research Reports of the Office of Rural Development 17(C), 125–130.Google Scholar
LSU (1970) Thirty Years of Cooperative Sweetpotato Research 1939–1969. Southern Coop. Series Bull. No. 159. Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station, Louibiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA.Google Scholar
Mullen, M. A., Jones, A., Arbogast, R. T., Schalk, J. M., Paterson, D. R., Boswell, T. E. and Earhart, D. R. (1980) Field selection of sweetpotato lines and cultivars for resistance to the sweetpotato weevil. J. econ. Ent. 73, 288–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullen, M. A., Jones, A., Paterson, D. R. and Boswell, T. E. (1982) Resistance of sweetpotato lines to the sweetpotato weevil, HortScience 17, 931–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rolston, L. H., Barlow, T., Hernandez, T., Nilakhe, S. and Jones, A. (1979) Field evaluation of breeding lines and cultivars of sweetpotato for resistance to the sweetpotato weevil. HortScience 14, 634–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Talekar, N. S. (1982a) Effects of a sweetpotato weevil infestation on sweetpotato root yields. J. econ Ent. 75, 1042–1045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Talekar, N. S. (1982b) A search for sources of resistance to sweetpotato weevil. In Sweetpotato: Proc. of the First International Symposium. (Edited by Villareal, R. L. and Griggs, T. D.), pp. 147–156. Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center, Shanhua, Taiwan, ROC.Google Scholar
Vietmeyer, N. D. (1986) Lesser-known plants of potential use in agriculture and forestry. Science 232, 1379–1384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waddill, V. H. and Conover, R. A. (1978) Resistance of white-fleshed sweetpotato cultivars to the sweetpotato weevil. HortScience 13, 476–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar