Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T23:42:33.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Demographic parameters of cowpea aphid Aphis craccivora (Homoptera: Aphididae) on different Botswana cowpea landraces

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 November 2012

M. Machacha ,
M. Obopile ,
A.B.N. Tshegofatso ,
B. Tiroesele ,
C. Gwafila  and
M. Ramokapane
M. Machacha
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science and Production, Botswana College of Agriculture, Private Bag 0027, Gaborone, Botswana
M. Obopile*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science and Production, Botswana College of Agriculture, Private Bag 0027, Gaborone, Botswana
A.B.N. Tshegofatso
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science and Production, Botswana College of Agriculture, Private Bag 0027, Gaborone, Botswana
B. Tiroesele
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science and Production, Botswana College of Agriculture, Private Bag 0027, Gaborone, Botswana
C. Gwafila
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Research, Private Bag 0033, Gaborone, Botswana
M. Ramokapane
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Research, Private Bag 0033, Gaborone, Botswana
*
*E-mails: [email protected], [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The variation in demographic parameters (namely survival and fecundity, intrinsic rate of natural increase pre-reproductive period and relative growth rate) was used to assess the resistance of cowpea landraces (namely B261-B, B383, B013-F, B339 and Blackeye, as a check) against cowpea aphid (Aphis craccivora Koch). The experiment was carried out from 18 March 2011 to 5 April 2011. The demographic parameters of A. craccivora differed significantly among varieties, supporting our prediction that cowpea landraces resistant to cowpea aphid would have a significant effect on the demographic parameters of the aphid. We recorded significantly lower survival, fecundity, intrinsic natural rate of increase and relative growth rate on the landraces B261-B and B383 compared with the other landraces. A significant delay in the pre-reproductive period was also found on B261-B and B383. The results showed that landraces B261-B and B383 have an increased level of resistance as shown by the extended pre-reproductive period and the reduction in population growth rate, survival and fecundity. This information will be used in the characterization of the landraces before being incorporated in the breeding programme in Botswana.

Keywords

pre-reproductive periodsurvivalfecundityresistanceVigna unguiculata
Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , December 2012 , pp. 189 - 193
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 2012

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

Caswell, G. H. (1984) The value of the pod in protecting cowpea seed from attack by bruchid beetles. Samaru Journal of Agricultural Research 2, 49–55.Google Scholar
Diaz, B. M. and Fereres, A. (2005) Life table and population parameters of Nasonovia ribisnigri (Homoptera: Aphididae) at different constant temperatures. Environmental Entomology 34, 527–534.Google Scholar
Diouf, D. (2011) Recent advances in cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.] 'omics' research for genetic improvement. African Journal of Biotechnology 10 2803–2810.Google Scholar
Dixon, A. F. G. (1985) Structure of aphid populations. Annual Review of Entomology 30, 155–174.Google Scholar
Hill, D. S. (1983) Agricultural Insect Pests of the Tropics and their Control. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 760 pp.Google Scholar
Holopainen, J. K. and Kainulainen, P. (2004) Reproductive capacity of the grey pine aphid and allocation response of Scots pine seedlings across temperature gradients: a test of hypotheses predicting outcomes of global warming. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 34, 94–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holopainen, J. K. and Kossi, S. (1998) Variable growth and reproduction response of the spruce shoot aphid, Cinara pilicornis, to increasing ozone concentrations. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 87, 109–113.Google Scholar
Jackai, L. E. N. and Daoust, R. A. (1986) Insect pests of cowpeas. Annual Review of Entomology 31, 95–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackai, L. E. N., Goudou, C., Asiwe, J. A. N. and Tayo, B. O. (2001) Integrated control of the cowpea aphid using seed dressing and varietal resistance. Samaru Journal of Agricultural Research 17, 13–23.Google Scholar
Kennedy, G. G. and Abou-Ghadir, M. F. (1979) Bionomics of the turnip aphid on two turnip cultivars. Journal of Economic Entomology 72, 754–757.Google Scholar
Laamari, M., Khelfa, L. and Cœur d'Acier, A. (2008) Resistance source to cowpea aphid (Aphis craccivora Koch) in broad bean (Vicia faba L.) Algerian landrace collection. African Journal of Biotechnology 7, 2486–2490.Google Scholar
Maelzer, D. A. (1977) The biology and main causes of changes in numbers of the rose aphid, Macrosiphum rosae (L.), on cultivated roses in South Australia. Australian Journal of Zoology 25, 269–284.Google Scholar
Obopile, M. (2006) Economic threshold and injury levels for control of cowpea aphid, Aphis craccivora Linnaeus (Homoptera: Aphididae) on cowpea. African Plant Protection 12, 111–115.Google Scholar
Obopile, M. and Ositile, B. (2010) Life table and population parameters of cowpea aphid, Aphis craccivora Koch (Homoptera: Aphididae) on five cowpea Vigna unguiculata (L. Walp.) varieties. Journal of Pest Science 83, 9–14.Google Scholar
Ofuya, T. I. (1997) Control of the cowpea aphid, Aphis craccivora Koch (Homoptera: Aphididae) in cowpea, Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp. Integrated Pest Management Reviews 2, 199–207.Google Scholar
Pule-Meulenberg, F. and Dakora, F. D. (2009) Assessing the symbiotic dependency of grain and tree legumes on N2 fixation for their N nutrition in five agro-ecological zones of Botswana. Symbiosis 48, 68–77.Google Scholar
SAS Institute (2003) SAS Users Guide: Statistics. SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina.Google Scholar
Singh, S. R. (1987) Host plant resistance of cowpea insect pest management. Insect Science and Its Application 8, 765–769.Google Scholar
Singh, S. R. and Jackai, L. E. N. (1985) Insect pests of cowpeas in Africa: their life cycle, economic importance, and potential for control, pp. 217–231. In Cowpea Research, Production and Utilization (edited by ). John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
Wyatt, I. J. and White, P. F. (1977) Simple estimation of intrinsic increase rates for aphids and tetranychid mites. Journal of Applied Ecology 14, 757–766.Google Scholar
Youdeowei, A. (1989) Major arthropod pests of food and industrial crops in Africa and their economic importance, pp. 31–50. In Biological Control: A Sustainable Solution to Crop Pest Problems in Africa (edited by ). IITA, Ibadan.Google Scholar