Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tpknm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T04:54:54.364Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparison of rearing methods for the banana weevil, Cosmopolites sordidus (Germar) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) on its natural host

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2011

A. M. Koppenhöfer  and
K. V. Seshu Reddy
A. M. Koppenhöfer
Affiliation:
Institut für Pflanzenkrankheiten, Nussallee 9, D-53115 Bonn, Germany
K. V. Seshu Reddy
Affiliation:
The International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE), P.O. Box 30772, Nairobi, Kenya
Get access

Abstract

Simple methods for production of all life stages of the banana weevil on its natural diet, banana rhizome and pseudostem are presented. Their effectiveness, labour demands and applicability for different purposes are discussed. The most effective method for the production of eggs, pupae and adults is the utilization of the rhizome part of suckers, whereas larvae are easier to recover from pseudostem. The hatchability of the eggs produced is high.

Résumé

Des méthodes simple sont présentées pour la production de tous les stades du charançon du bananier dans son régime naturel, le rhizome et le pseudotronc du bananier. Leur effectivité, dépense en temps et applicabilité pour des objectifs differents sont discutées. La méthode la plus effective pour la production d'oeufs, de pupes et d'adultes est celle utilisant le rhizome des rejets, tandis que les larves sont plus facilement récupérées du pseudotronc. Le pourcentage d'oeufs éclorants est élevé.

Keywords

Banana weevilCosmopolites sordidusrearing natural dietegg hatchabilityCharançon du bananierCosmopolites sordidusproductionrégime natureléclosion d'oeufs
Type
Research Articles
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , April 1994 , pp. 191 - 195
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 1994

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Beccari, F. (1967) Contributo alia conoscenza del Cosmopolites sordidus (Germar) (Coleoptera, Curculionidae). Riv. Agric. Subtrop. trop. 61, 131–150.Google Scholar
Cuillé, J. (1950) Recherches sur le charançon du bananier Cosmopolites sordidus Germar. Institut Françaisde Agriculture coloniale, Serie technique 4, pp. 225.Google Scholar
Froggatt, J. L. (1924) Banana weevil borer. Queensland Agric. J. 22, 154–156.Google Scholar
Longoria, A. (1968) Diferencias sexuales en la morfologia externa de Cosmopolites sordidus Germar (Coleoptera, Curculionidae). Ciencias Biologicas 1, 1–11.Google Scholar
Parnitzki, P. (1992) Biologische Bekämpfung des Rüsselkäfers Cosmopolites sordidus (Germar) mit entomopathogenen Nematoden der Gattungen Heteror habditis und Steinernema sowie Untersuchungen zur Biologie des Schädlings. Doctoral Thesis, University of Bonn.Google Scholar
Roth, L. M. and Willis, E. R. (1963) The humidity behaviour of Cosmopolites sordidus (Coleoptera, Curculionidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 96, 41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute (1985) SAS/STAT Guide for Personal Computer, Version 6. Cary, North Carolina: SAS Institute. Pp. 378.Google Scholar
Treverrow, N. L. and Maddox, C. (1992) The distribution of Cosmopolites sordidus (Germar) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) between various types of banana plant material in relation to crop hygiene. Gen. Appl. Entomol. 23, 16–20.Google Scholar
Vilardebo, A. (1984) Problemes scientifiques poses par Radopholus similis et Cosmopolites sordidus en cultures bananieres de zones francophones de production. Fruits 39, 227–233.Google Scholar