Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-tdptf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-09T15:02:13.837Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Efficacy of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and Baculovirus heliothis foliar applications for suppression of helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Noctuidae) and other lepidopterous larvae on tomato in south-western Nigeria

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

I. J. Lutwama
Affiliation:
Plant Science Department, University of Ife, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
B. A. Matanmi
Affiliation:
Plant Science Department, University of Ife, Ile-Ife, Nigeria

Abstract

Tomato plants in Nigeria were subjected to foliar sprays of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki (formulated as Dipel and Thuricide) and Baculovirus heliothis (Elcar), to which carbaryl, plus the adjuvants Tenac and Gustol were on occasion added, to test their effectiveness against Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) and other lepidopterous larvae. H. armigera larvae were found susceptible to both pathogens. The 0·5 kg/ha and the 1·0 kg/ha applications of Bacillus thuringiensis gave good field control of the larvae, similar to that of carbaryl at 1·5 kg/ha. Bacillus and virus were compatible but not significantly more effective when combined than when applied separately. Combinations of bacillus and virus with carbaryl were also not significantly more effective than the pathogens applied separately. B. thuringiensis at 0·5 kg/ha applied with carbaryl at 0·5 kg/ha was as good as carbaryl at 1·5 kg/ha. Gustol and Tenac did not significantly increase the effectiveness of the pathogens.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

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

Anon. (1974). For better biological control: Bactospeine technical leaflet.—20 pp. Belgium, Biochemproducts Ltd.Google Scholar
Bell, M. R. & Romine, C. L. (1980). Tobacco budworm field evaluation of microbial control in cotton using Bacillus thuringiensis and a nuclear polyhedrosis virus with a feeding adjuvant.—J. econ. Ent. 73, 427430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ignoffo, C. M. (1968). Specificity of insect viruses.—Bull. ent. Soc. Am. 14, 265276.Google Scholar
Ignoffo, C. M. & Couch, T. L. (1981). The nucleopolyhedrosis virus of Heliothis species as a microbial insecticide.—pp. 329–362 in Burges, H. D. (Ed.). Microbial control of pests and plant diseases 1970–1980.—949 pp. London, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, D. R. (1982). Suppression of Heliothis spp. on cotton by using Bacillus thuringiensis, Baculovirus heliothis, and two feeding adjuvants.—J. econ. Ent. 75, 207210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luttrell, R. G., Yearian, W. C. & Young, S. Y. (1983). Effects of spray adjuvants on Heliothiszea (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) nuclear polyhedrosis virus efficacy.—J. econ. Ent. 76, 162167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, O. N. (1969). Susceptibility of several forest insects of British Columbia to commercially produced Bacillus thuringiensis. I. Studies on the physiological properties of some commercial products.—J. Invertebr. Pathol. 13, 134146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, T. A. (1977). An agricultural notebook, with special reference to Nigeria.—312 pp. London, Longman.Google Scholar
Smith, D. B., Hostetter, D. L., Pinnell, R. E. & Ignoffo, C. M. (1982). Laboratory studies of viral adjuvants: formulation development.—J. econ. Ent. 75, 1620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teakle, R. E. (1977). Disease organisms for pest control. What is their potential?Qd agric. J. 103, 6163.Google Scholar
Tinsley, T. W. (1979). The potential of insect pathogenic viruses as pesticidal agents.—A. Rev. Ent. 24, 6387.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed