Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vsgnj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T23:29:44.734Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Laboratory and Field Evaluation of Bacillus Thuringiensis Berliner Products Against the Teak Defoliator, Hyblaea Puera Cramer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2011

J. Loganathan  and
P. M. M. David
J. Loganathan
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Entomology, Agricultural College & Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Killikulam 628 252, Tamil Nadu, India
P. M. M. David
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Entomology, Agricultural College & Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Killikulam 628 252, Tamil Nadu, India
Get access

Abstract

Commercial Bacillus thuringiensis (B.t.) Berliner products, namely Delfin®, Agree®, Halt® and Spicturin® were evaluated in the laboratory and on an intensively managed teak plantation for the control of the teak defoliator, Hyblaea puera Cramer (Lepidoptera: Hyblaeidae). A 2 g/litre concentration showed highly significant lethality against defoliator larvae, the early instars being more susceptible (99.8% mortality) than late ones (63.6–81.2% mortality). The order of effectiveness was Delfin = Agree > Halt > Spicturin. At 2 g/litre the B. t. preparations were as effective as at 0.07% (2 ml/litre) monocrotophos 36% when sprayed on one-year-old saplings in a plantation. However, at 1 g /litre concentration, monocrotophos 0.07% was superior to the B. t. products.

Résumé

Les formulations commerciales de Bacillus thuringiensis (B. t.) dont Delfin®, Agree®, Halt® et Spicturin® ont été évaluées au laboratoire et sur une plantation du teck en exploitation intensive en vue de lutter contre Hyblaea puera Cramer (Lepidoptera: Hyblaeidae), un défoliateur du teck. Une concentration de 2 gr./litre a révélé une létalité hautement significative contre les larves du défoliateur et les stades les plus jeunes étaient les plus sensibles avec 99,8% de mortalité contre 63,6%–81,2% de mortalité pour les derniers. stades. Selon leur ordre d'efficacité, les produits se rangeaient comme suit: Delfin = Agree > Halt > Spicturin. A la dose de 2 gr./litre, les formulations de Bt avaient la même efficacité que 0.007% de monocrotophos 36 % (2 ml/litre), une fois le traitement effectué sur des plants de la plantation âgés d'une année. Cependant, à la concentration de 1 gr/litre, l'activité du monocrotophos 0,007% était plus supérieure aux produits à base de B. thuringiensis.

Keywords

Bacillus thuringiensiscommercial preparationsteak defoliatorHyblaea pueralaboratory and field evaluationsBacillus thuringiensisformulations commercialesdéfoliateur du teckHyblaea pueraévaluations au laboratoire et en champs
Type
Research Articles
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , March 2000 , pp. 61 - 65
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 2000

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

Abbott, W. S. (1925) A method for computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. J. Econ. Ent. 18, 265–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amonkar, S. V., Kulkarni, V. and Anand, A. (1985) Comparative toxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis sub species to Spodoptera litura. Current Sci. 54, 475–478.Google Scholar
Babu, P. C. S. and Subramaniam, T. R. (1973) Studies with Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner in Spodoptera litura Fab. Madras Agric. J. 60, 487–491.Google Scholar
Beegle, C. C., Dulmage, H. T., Wolfenbarger, D. A. and Martinez, E. (1981) Persistence of Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner insecticidal activity on cotton foliage. Environ. Entomol. 10, 400–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohammed Ali, M. I., Varma, R. V. and Sudheendrakumar, V. V. (1991) Evaluation of microbial pathogen for biocontrol against important insect pests of ailanthus and teak. KFRI Res. Report No. 72, Peechi, India, 44 pp.Google Scholar
Morris, O. N. (1983) Protection of Bacillus thuringiensis from inactivation by sunlight. Can. Entomol. 115, 1215–1227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nair, K. S. S., Sudheendrakumar, V. V., Varma, R. V. and Chacko, K. C. (1985) Studies on the seasonal incidence of teak defoliators and the effect of defoliation on volume increment of teak. KFRI Res. Report No. 30, Peechi, India, 78 pp.Google Scholar
Pratapsingh, S. and Mishra, R. M. (1978) Bioassay of thuricide. A microbial insecticide against important forest pest. Indian For. 104, 838–842.Google Scholar
Sareen, V., Rathore, Y. S. and Bhattacharya, A. K. (1983) Influence of Bacillus thuringiensis var. thuringiensis on the food utilisation of Spodoptera litura. Z. Angew. Entomol. 95, 253–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sudheendrakumar, V. V., Mohamed Ali, M. I. and Mohandas, V. (1990) Studies on bacterial pathogens associated with the teak defoliator Hyblaea puera Cramer, pp. 262–265. In IUFRO Workshop on Pests and Diseases of Forests Plantations, Bangkok.Google Scholar
Zaz, G. M. and Kushwaha, K. S. (1993) Effectiveness of Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner against different instars of Spodoptera litura (Fab.). Indian J. Entomol. 55, 62–66.Google Scholar