Loading...

Seasonal abundance of predatory bugs, Eocanthecona furcellata (Wolff.) and Rhynocoris fuscipes (F.) and its olfactory responses towards plant and pest mediated semiochemical cues in Pigeonpea ecosystem

DOI: 10.18805/lr.v0iOF.11312    | Article Id: LR-3600 | Page : 351-357
Citation :- Seasonal abundance of predatory bugs, Eocanthecona furcellata (Wolff.) and Rhynocoris fuscipes (F.) and its olfactory responses towards plant andpest mediated semiochemical cues in Pigeonpea ecosystem .Legume Research.2017.(40):351-357

Snehel Chakravarty*, Meena Agnihotri and Jaba Jagdish

snehel.chak@gmail.com
Address :

Department of Entomology, G. B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar-263 145, India.

Submitted Date : 31-08-2015
Accepted Date : 19-03-2016

Abstract

Studies on seasonal abundance of the predatory bugs, Eocanthecona furcellata (Wolff.) and Rhynocoris fuscipes (F.) on short duration pigeonpea variety Manak during 2012-14 revealed that the incidence of both the heteropteran bugs commenced from the 36th meteorological standard week and persisted up to 47th meteorological standard week of both the years. These bugs were found predating on larvae of spotted pod borer, Maruca vitrata (Geyer), one of the major insect pests of pigeonpea. Correlation studies with different weather variables indicated that the populations build up of these bugs exhibited a significant positive correlation with maximum temperature, minimum relative humidity and rainfall. In order to identify the semiochemical cues mediating the host seeking behavior of these predatory bugs towards M. vitrata, a laboratory experiment was conducted using four-arm olfactometer. The predatory bugs displayed a much higher preference for volatiles produced by M. vitrata infested pigeonpea flowers and early instar larvae of M. vitrata.

Keywords

Eocanthecona furcellata (Wolff.) Maruca vitrata (Geyer) Rhynocoris fuscipes (F.) Semiochemicals Pigeonpea.

References

  1. Agnihotri, M., Pillai, A.K. and Ruhela, A. (2012). Seasonal abundance of predatory sting bug in pigeon pea. Ann. Pl. Protec. Sci., 20: 465-467.
  2. Ahirwar, R., Devi, P. and Gupta, R. (2015). Seasonal incidence of major insect pests and their biocontrol agents of soybean crop (Glycine max L. Merrill). Scient. Res. E., 10: 402-406.
  3. Ahmad, M., Singh, S.P., Sharma, S., Mishra, R.K. and Ahmad, M.J. (1996). Potential estimation of predatory bug, Canthecona furcellata Wolff. against poplar defoliater, Clostera cupreata. Ann. Forestry., 4: 133-138.
  4. Ambrose, D.P. (1999). Asian Bugs. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, India, pp: 337.
  5. Ambrose, D.P. and Claver, M.A. (2001). Prey preference of the predator Rhynocoris kumarii Ambrose and Lirngstone (Heteroptera: Reduviidae) to seven cotton insect pests. J. Appl. Zool. Res., 12: 129-132.
  6. Anonymous. (2014). Report of expert group on pulses. Department of Agriculture and Co-operation, Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture., pp: 1-148.
  7. Armes, N.J., Jadhav, D.R. and DeSouza, K.R. (1996). A survey of insecticides resistance in Helicoverpa armigera in the Indian sub-continent. Bull. Entomol. Res., 86: 499-514.
  8. Basandrai, A.K., Basandrai, D., Duraimurugan, P. and Srinivasan, T. (2011). Breeding for biotic stresses. In Biology and Breeding of Food Legumes (Pratap, A. and Kumar, J., eds.). CAB International, Oxfordshire, UK, Pages 220-240. 
  9. Bhat, D.M., Bhagat, R.C. and Azim, M.N. (2009). Record of natural enemies of Helicoverpa armigera from Kashmir valley. Ann. Pl. Protec. Sci., 17: 229-230.
  10. Bhoyar, A.S., Siddhabhatti, P.M., Wadaskar, R.M. and Khan, M.I. (2004). Seasonal incidence and control of pod borer complex in pigeonpea. Pestology., 28: 99-104.
  11. Dannon, E.A., Tamo, M., Huis, A.V. and Dicke, M. (2010). Effect of volatiles from Maruca vitrata larvae caterpillar infested flowers of their host plant Vigna unguiculata on the on the foraging behaviour of the parasitoid Apanteles taragamae. J. Chem. Ecol., 36: 1083-1091.
  12. De Clercq, P. (2000). Predaceous sting bugs (Pentatomidae: Asopinae): Heteroptera of economic importance. CRC press, Boca Raton. pp: 737-789.
  13. Dodia, D.A., Prajapati, B.G. and Acharya, S. (2009). Efficacy of insecticides against gram pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera Hardwick, infesting pigeonpea. J. Food Legumes., 22: 144-145.
  14. Hislop, R.G. and Prokopy, R.J. (1981). Mite predator responses to prey and predator- emitted stimuli. J. Chem. Ecol., 22: 895-904.
  15. Kumar, A.G. and Ambrose, D.P. (2014). Olfactory response of an assasin bug, Rhynocoris longifrons (Insecta: Hemiptera: Reduviidae) to the hexane extracts of different agricultural insect pests. Insect Rev., 1: 12-19.
  16. Lal, S.S. and Singh, N.B. (1998). The pigeonpea and future strategies. Pages 65-80 in Proceedings of National Symposium on Management of Biotic and Abiotic Stresses in Pulse Crops. Indian Institute of Pulses Research, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India.
  17. Mohapatra, S.D. and Srivastava, C.P. 2002. Bioefficacy of chemical and biorational insecticides against incidence of Legume Pod Borer, Maruca vitrata (Geyer) in short duration pigeonpea. Indian J. Plant Prot., 30: 22-25. 
  18. Nagarajan, K. and Ambrose, D.P. (2013). Chemically mediated prey – approaching behavior of the reduviid predator Rhynocoris fuscipes (Fabricus) (Insecta: Heteroptera: Reduviidae) by Y-arm olfactometer. Pak. J. Biol. Sci., 16: 1363-1367.
  19. Nebapure, S.M. and Agnihotri, M. (2011). Canthecona furcellata: A predator of Maruca vitrata. Ann. Pl. Protec. Sci., 19: 451-508.
  20. Nene, Y. L. (2006). Indian pulses through the millennia. Asian Agri. Hist., 10: 179-202.
  21. Ninkovic, V., Albassi, A.A. and Pettersson, J. (2001). The influence of aphid-induced plant volatiles on ladybird beetle searching behavior. Biol. Control., 21: 191–195.
  22. Pillai, K.A. and Agnihotri, M. (2011). Population dynamics of the predatory bug Eocanthecona furcellata (Wolff.). Indian J. Appl. Entomol., 25: 162-163.
  23. Pillai, K.A. and Agnihotri, M. (2013). Biology and predatory potential of Eocanthecona furcellata (Wolff.) on Maruca vitrata Geyer. Madras Agric. J., 100: 193-195.
  24. Rao, G.V.R. and Shanower, T.G. (1999). Identification and management of pigeonpea and chickpea insect pests in Asia. Information Bulletin No. 57. pp: 48-49.
  25. Sharma, H.C. (1998). Bionomics, host plant resistance and management of the legume pod borer, Maruca vitrata – a review. Crop Prot., 17: 373-386.
  26. Singh, R.S., Nath, P. and Kumar, A. (2013). Effect of sustainable pest management approaches on the population dynamics of spider fauna inhabiting pigeonpea agro-ecosystem. Agri. Sci. Digest., 33: 63-67.
  27. Sonune, V.R., Bharodia, R.K., Jethva, D.M., Rathod, R.T. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2010). Field efficacy of chemical insecticides against spotted pod borer, Maruca vitrata (Fabricius) infesting blackgram. Legume Res., 33: 287 – 290.
  28. Srinivasan. G. (2008). Bioefficacy of chemical and biorational insecticides against spotted pod borer, Maruca vitrata (Geyer) in Short duration pigeonpea. Pesticide Res. J., 20: 221-223.
  29. Tabo, R., Ezueh, M. I., Ajayi, O., Asiegbu, J.E. and Singh, L. (1995). Pigeonpea production and utilization in Nigeria. ICPN., 2: 47-49.
  30. Turlings, C.T.J., Tumlinson, J.H., Eller, F.J. and Lewis, W.J. (1991). Larval-damaged plants: Source of volatile synomones that guide the parasitoid Cotesia marginiventris to the microhabitat of its hosts. Entomol. Exp. Appl., 58: 75–82.
  31. Vishakantaiah, M. and Jagadeesh Babu, C.S. (1980). Bionomics of the tur webworm, Maruca testulalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Mysore J. Agr. Sci., 14: 529-532.
     

Global Footprints