Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T02:50:41.989Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparaison de quelques parametres caracteristiques de la dynamique des populations entre Megalurothrips sjostedti (Trybom) et Maruca testulalis (Geyer) sur une meme plante-hote, le niebe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2011

P. Atachi  and
B. C. Ahohuendo
P. Atachi*
Affiliation:
Faculté des Sciences Agronomiques de l'Université Nationale du Bénin, B.P. 526, Cotonou, République Populaire du Bénin
B. C. Ahohuendo
Affiliation:
Faculté des Sciences Agronomiques de l'Université Nationale du Bénin, B.P. 526, Cotonou, République Populaire du Bénin
*
* Addresse actuelle: B.P. 06-947, Cotonou PK3, Bénin.
Get access

Abstract

The temporal evolution of the populations of Megalurothrips (=Taeniothrips) sjostedti (Trybom) (Thysanoptera, Thripidae) (larvae and adults) and of Maruca testulalis (Geyer) (Lepidoptera, Pyralidae) (larvae) as well as the rate of flower infestation by these insects was carried out under Held conditions using 10 cowpea varieties (IT 82D-889, IT 82D-287, IT 82D-716, IT 82D-789, IT 82D-703, IT 82D-713, IT 82D-890, IT 82D-709, TVu 57 and “Kpodjiguegue”).

The investigation was carried out during the 1984 early cropping season (from April to July) at Abomey-Calavi. In the research station the abundance of M. sjostedti populations was observed 47 days after planting (DAP) for one variety and 68 DAP for the nine other varieties (384–634 thrips/20 flowers according to the varieties). In addition, the decline of the insect population was recorded 40 DAP for four varieties and 75 DAP for the six other varieties (88–375 thrips per 20 flowers according to the varieties). But 90–100% of the sampled flowers were infested by M. sjostedti towards 40 DAP whereas 95–100% of flowers were injured 68 DAP.

Larval populations of M. testulalis reached their maximum value 40 DAP for four varieties and 47 DAP for the six other varieties (4–17 larvae/20 flowers according to the varieties). The population declined 61 DAP for two varieties, 68 DAP for seven varieties and 75 DAP for one variety (0–3 larvae/20 flowers according to the varieties). Regarding the rate of flower infestation by M. testulalis, the highest percentages (20–70% according to the varieties) were obtained among all varieties from the same sampling dates where the larval population peak was noted for the same varieties. In the same way, lowest percentages (0–15% according to the varieties) were recorded among all varieties on the same dates where the minimum value of larval populations of the pest was obtained.

M. sjostedti and M. testulalis fluctuate in opposed phase. The peak value of M. sjostedti generally coincides with the minimum value of M. testulalis and inversely. But the peak activity period of both insects occurs between 40 and 70 DAP. The average number of insects recorded all along the sampling period has shown significant differences (P=0.05) between the various cowpea varieties for M. sjostedti and M. testulalis. The biological and nutritional factors that contribute to such population fluctuations are discussed in the light of results obtained.

Résumé

L'étude sur l'évolution temporelle des populations de Megalurothrips (=Taeniothrips) sjostedti (Trybom) (Thysanoptère, Thripidae) (larves et adultes) et de Maruca testulalis (Geyer) (Lépidoptère, Pyralidae) (larves) dans les fleurs de niébé ainsi que sur la vitesse d'infestation des fleurs par ces insectes a été effectuée en conditions d'infestation naturelle chez 10 variétés de niébé (IT 82D-889, IT 82D-287, IT 82D-716, IT 82D-789, IT 82D-703, IT 82D-713, IT 82D-890, IT 82D-709, TVu 57 et “Kpodjiguegue”).

L'étude a été faite au cours de la grande saison pluvieuse de l'année 1984 (Avril à Juillet) à la ferme expérimentale d'Abomey-Calavi. Le pic d'abondance des populations de M. sjostedti a été atteint 47 jours après la levée (JAL) pour une variété et 68 JAL pour les neuf autres variétés (384 à 634 thrips/20 fleurs suivant les variétés). Alors que, le déclin d'abondance des populations chez cet insecte a été enregistré 40 JAL pour quatre variétés et 75 JAL pour les six autres variétés. Mais dès le 40e JAL, 90 à 100% des fleurs examinées contenaient des thrips alors qu'à que, 95 à 100% des fleurs ont été infestées 68JAL par ces insectes.

Quant à M. testulalis, le pic d'abondance des larves a été obtenu 40 JAL pour quatre variétés puis 47JAL pour les six autres variétés (4 à 17 larves/20 fleurs suivant les variétés). Aussi, le déclin des populations de M. testulalis a été noté 61 JAL 68 JAL et 75 pour deux, sept et une variétés (0 à 3 larves/20 fleurs suivant les variétés). En ce qui concerne la vitesse d'infestation des fleurs par M. testulalis, les pourcentages les plus élevés (20 à 70% suivant les variétés) ont été obtenus pour toutes les variétés aux mêmes dates que celles où le pic d'abondance des larves de la pyrale a été enregistré pour ces mêmes variétés. D'autre part les pourcentages les plus bas (0 à 15% suivant les variétés) ont été notés aux mêmes dates que celles où le déclin d'abondance des populations du ravageur a été obtenu.

Dans l'ensemble, les fluctuations des populations notées pour M. sjostedti et pour M. testulalis sont en opposition de phase. Le pic d'abondance de M. sjostedti coincide généralement avec le déclin chez M. testuhlis et inversement. Toutefois, la période d'activité maximale chez ces duex especes d'insectes se situe entre 40 et 70 JAL. Les moyennes relatives au nombre d'insectes recensés au cours de toute la période d'échantillonnage ont montré qu'il existe des différences significatives (P=0,05) entre les diverses variétés de niébé aussi bien vis-à-vis de M. sjostedti que de M. testulalis. Les facteurs qui peuvent unir ou opposer ces deux ravageurs dans les fleurs de niébé ont été discuites et il a été un du qui l es résultats obtenus dans ce travail ont une bonne perspective en protection phytosanitaire désormais plus adéquate contre les attaques de ces deux importants déprédateurs de niébé.

Keywords

Megalurothrips sjostedtiMaruca testulalisvariétés de niébédynamique des populationsinfestation des fleursMegalurothrips sjostedtiMaruca testulaliscowpea varietiespopulation dynamicsflower infestation
Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , April 1989 , pp. 187 - 197
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 1989

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

Agyen-Sampong, M. (1977) Progress report on insect pests of cowpea in Ghana. Trop. Grain Legume Bull. 8, 20–23.Google Scholar
Anonymous (1974) Cowpea has a great potential as a plant protein source. World Crops 26, 281.Google Scholar
Anonymous (1980) Annual Report of the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture for 1979. Ibadan, Nigéria, pp. 79–90.Google Scholar
Anonymous (1981a) Annual Report of the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture for 1980. Ibadan, Nigeria, pp. 117–137.Google Scholar
Anonymous (1981b) Le point de la recherche 1981 pour l'Institut International d'Agriculture Tropicale. Ibadan, Nigeria, pp. 1–71.Google Scholar
Anonymous (1982) Annual Report of the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture for 1981. Ibadan, Nigeria, pp. 51–68.Google Scholar
Booker, R.H. (1965) Pests of cowpea and their control in Northern Nigeria. Bull. Ent. Res. 55, 663–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, E.C. (1964) Effects of flower thrips on onion seed plant and a study of their control. J. econ. Ent. 57, 735–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ezueh, M.I. (1981) The biological bases of resistance in cowpea to the cowpea moth, Cydia ptychora (Lepidoptera:Olethreutidae). Ann. Appl. Biol. 99, 313–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faure, J.C. (1960) Thysanoptera of Africa. J. Ent. Soc. Sth Africa 23, 16–64.Google Scholar
Harter, H.L. (1960) Critical Values for Duncan's New Multiple Range Test. Biometrics 16, 671–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackai, L.E.N. (1981) Use of an oil-soluble dye to determine the oviposition sites of the legumepod-borer Maruca lestulalis (Geyer) (Lepidoptera:Pyralidae). Insect Sci. Applic. 2, 205–207.Google Scholar
Jackai, L.E.N. (1982) Maruca distribution on the cowpea plant. In IITA (1982) Annual Report for 1981, Ibadan, Nigeria, pp. 51–68.Google Scholar
Jackai, L.E.N. and Singh, S.R. (1981) Studies on some behavioural aspects of Maruca testulalis on selected species of Crotalaria spp. and Vigna unguiculata. Trop. Grain Legume Bull. 22, 3–6.Google Scholar
Jotwani, M.G. (1983) Chemical control of cereal stem-borers. Insect Sci. Applic. 4, 185–189.Google Scholar
Kogan, M. (1974) Plant resistance in pest management. In Introduction to Insect Pest Management (Edited by Metcalf, R.L. and Luckmann, W.H.), pp. 103–146. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Macfoy, C.A., Dabrowski, Z.T. and Okech, S. (1983) Studies on the legume pod-borer, Maruca testulalis (Geyer) — VI. Cowpea resistance to oviposition and larval feeding. Insect Sci. Applic. 4, 147–152.Google Scholar
Muruli, B.I., Pathak, R.S., Mukunya, D.M., Karel, A.K., Keya, S.O. and Ssali, H. (1980) Cowpea Research in Kenya. Trop. Grain Legume Bull. 19, 13–16.Google Scholar
Nyiira, Z.M. (1973) Pest status of thrips and lepidopterous species on vegetable in Uganda. East African Agric. For. J. 39, 131–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okeyo-Owour, J.B., Agwaro, P.O. and Simbi, C.O.J. (1983) Studies on the legume pod-borer, Maruca testulalis (Geyer) — V. Larval population. Insect Sci. Applic. 4, 75–81.Google Scholar
Okeyo-Owour, J.B. and Ochieng, R.S. (1981) Studies on the legume podborer, Maruca testulalis (Geyer) — I. Life Cycle and behaviour. Insect Sci. Applic. 1, 263–268.Google Scholar
Okwakpam, B.A. (1965) A preliminary check list of West African Thysanoptera. Memo Fed. Agric. Dept. Nigeria 65, 1–10.Google Scholar
Okwakpam, B.A. and Youdeowei, A. (1980) The annotated key to four species of thrips (Thysanoptera) attacking edible legume in Nigeria. Bull, de l'INFAN 42, 157–165.Google Scholar
Perrin, R.M. (1978) Varietal differences in the susceptibility of cowpea to larvae of the seed moth, Cydia ptychora (Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Bull. ent. Res. 68, 47–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, M., Chambuya, R.L. and Machange, F.Z. (1983) Insecticide evaluation and timing of spray application for insect control in cowpea in Tanzania. Trop. Grain Legume Bull. 28, 4–8.Google Scholar
Salifu, A.B. (1982) Biology of cowpea flower thrips and host plant resistance. M. Sci. thesis submitted to the University of Ghana, 1–115.Google Scholar
Singh, S.R. (1980) Biology of cowpea pests and potential for host plant resistance. In Biology and breeding for resistance to Arthropods and pathogens in agricultural plants. (Edited by M.K.). Texas A. and M. University Bulletin, pp. 399–421.Google Scholar
Singh, S.R. and Allen, D.J. (1980) Cowpea pests and diseases. IITA Manual Series No. 2, 1–113.Google Scholar
Singh, S.R. and Salifu, A.B. (1984) Flower thrips. IITA Annual Report for 1983. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria, pp. 1–218.Google Scholar
Singh, S.R., Singh, B.B., Jackai, L.E.N. and Ntare, B.R. (1983) Cowpea research at IITA. Grain Legume Improv. Program 14, 1–20.Google Scholar
Singh, S.R. and Taylor, T.A. (1978) Pests of grain legumes and their control in Nigeria. In Pests of Grain Legumes: Ecology and Control (Edited by Singh, S.R., van Emden, H.F. and Taylor, T.A.), pp. 99–111. Academic Press, London, New-York.Google Scholar
Suh, J.B. and Simbi, C.O. (1983) Studies on the legume pod-borer Maruca testulalis (Geyer)–VIII. Cowpea phenology and yield loss assessment: effect of loss of leaves, shoots, flowers and pods on cowpea yield in western Kenya. Insect Sci. Applic. 4, 89–96.Google Scholar
Taylor, T.A. (1967) The bionomics of Maruca testulalis (Geyer) (Lepidoptera), a major pest of cowpea in Nigeria. J.W. Afric. Sci. Assoc. 12, 111–129.Google Scholar
Taylor, T.A. (1968) Effect of insecticide application on insect damage and performance of cowpea in Southern Nigeria. Nigerian Agric. J. 5, 29–37.Google Scholar
Taylor, T.A. (1969) On the population dynamics and flight activity of Taeniothrips sjostedti (Trybom) (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) on cowpea. Bull. Ent. Soc. Nigeria 2, 60–71.Google Scholar
Taylor, T.A. (1974) On the population dynamics of Taeniothrips sjostedti (Trybom) (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) on cowpea and an alternate host, Centrosema pubescens (Benth.) in Nigeria. Rev. Zool. Africa 88, 689–702.Google Scholar
Taylor, T.A. (1978) Maruca testulalis: An important pest of tropical grain legumes. In Pests of Grain Legumes: Ecology and Control (Edited by Singh, S.R., Taylor, T.A. and van Emden, H.F.), pp. 193–200. Academic Press, London, New-York.Google Scholar