Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T20:59:05.881Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Monitoring of Helicoverpa (= Heliothis) Armigera (Hubner) moths with light and pheromone traps in India*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2011

C. P. Srivastava ,
M. P. Pimbert  and
W. Reed
C. P. Srivastava
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India
M. P. Pimbert
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India
W. Reed
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India
Get access

Abstract

Light and pheromone trap networks were used to monitor and compare moth catches ofHelicoverpa (= Heliothis) armigera (Hubner) in both types of traps at many locations across India. There were obvious changes with latitude in flight patterns and in the correlation between light and pheromone trap catches. At northern locations, the correlation between light and pheromone trap catches were higher as compared to southern locations. The traps located in the central part of India showed correlations, intermediate between those of northern and southern locations. Pheromone traps were thus found suitable for monitoring at northern and central locations. At southern locations, where light and pheromone trap catches differ considerably at different times of the year, both types of traps should be operated simultaneously for better monitoring of this insect. Good correlations were found between larval population and light and pheromone trap catches of H. armigera at Patancheru, one of the southern locations in India.

Résumé

Des réseaux de pièges à phéromones et de piéges lumineux ont été utilisée pour comparer l'activité de vol de Helicoverpa (= Heliothis) armigera (Hubner) dans différentes localités en Inde. L'activité de vol de ce papillon ravageur ainsi que le degré de correlation entre les résultats des pièges lumineux et des pièges à pheromone varient en fonction de la latitude. Les correlations entre les rcsultats des pièges lumineux et des pièges à pheromone sont plus fortes dans le Nord que dans le Sud de l'inde. Les correlations observces entre les résultats obtenus par les deux types de pièges pour le Centre de l'inde ont des valeurs intermédiaires entre celles observées pour le Nord et le Sud du pays. Les pièges à pheromone se sont avérés adéquats pour la surveillance des populations de ce ravageur au Nord et au Centre de l'inde. Par c.ontre, dans le Sud du pays oil les pièges lumineux et les pièges à pheromone donnent des informations très différentes au cours de l'annee les deux types de pièges doivent étre employes simultanément pour la surveillance efficace de ce papillon ravageur. De bonnes correlations ont été observées entre les populations larvaires et les prises de H. armigera dans les pièges à pheromone et les pièges lumineux à Patancheru, une des localités du Sud de l'inde.

Keywords

Light trappheromone trapHelicoverpa armigeraIndiaPiège lumineuxpiège à phéromoneHelicoverpa armigeraInde
Type
Research Articles
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , April 1992 , pp. 205 - 210
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 1992

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

Bhatnagar, V. S. and Davies, J. C. (1979) Insect light trap studies at ICRISAT Centre. Prog. Rep. Crop. Entomol. 2. ICRISAT, Patancheru, A.P. India.Google Scholar
ICRISAT (International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics) (1988) Annu. Rep. 1987. Patancheru, A. P. 502 324, India.Google Scholar
Nesbitt, B. F., Beevor, P.S., Hall, D.R. and Lester, R. (1980) (Z)-9-Hexadecenal; a minor component of the female sex pheromone of Heliothis armigera (Hubner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Entomol. Exp. Appl. 27, 306–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pawar, C. S., Sithanantham, S., Sharma, H. C., Taneja, S. L., Amin, P. W., Leuschner, K. and Reed, W. (1984) Use and the development of insect traps at ICRISAT. Paper presented at the Nat. Sent, on use of Traps in Vector Res. and Control, 10–11 March 1984 at Bidhan Chandra Krishi Vishwa Vidhyalaya, Kalyani, West Bengal, India.Google Scholar
Pawar, C. S., Sithanantham, S., Bhatnagar, V. S., Srivastava, C. P. and Reed, W. (1988) The development of sex pheromone trapping of Heliothis armigera at ICRISAT, India. Trop. Pest Manage. 34, 39–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pawar, C. S., Srivastava, C. P. and Reed, W. (1986) Some aspects of population dynamics of Heliothis armigera at ICRISAT Center. In Proc. of III Oriental Entomol. Symp., 21–24 February, 1984, Trivendrum, Kerala, India. pp. 79–85.Google Scholar
Sachan, J. N. (1987) Status of the gram pod borer, Heliothis armigera (Hubner) in India and its management. In Recent Advances in Entomology (Edited by Mathur, Y. K., Bhattacharya, A. K., Pandey, N. D., Upadhyaya, K. D. and Srivastava, J. P.), pp. 91–110. New Gopal Printing Press, Kanpur, India.Google Scholar
Srivastava, C. P. and Srivastava, R. P. (1989) Comparison of Heliothis armigera (Hubner) male moth catches in light and pheromone traps at Udaipur, Rajas than, India. Insect Sci. Applic. 10, 565–568.Google Scholar