Tải bản đầy đủ - 0 (trang)
6 Resistance Management and Prevention Strategy

6 Resistance Management and Prevention Strategy

Tải bản đầy đủ - 0trang

T. Venkatesan et al.


reduce mealybug numbers and improve insecticide coverage. Details are provided below:

• Mark ‘spot’ infestations of mealybugs during

harvest. Confine sprays to the infested crop

area: do not spray shelter or other areas around

the orchard unless there is a clearly identified

source of pest infestation.

• Be aware of mealybug natural enemies and

take actions to protect them.

• Insecticide use must be designed to keep the

mealybug population small enough to prevent

significant infestation of fruit. Spray only

when essential for control.

• Follow industry codes of conduct where

appropriate. Comply with label rates.

• Use correct application procedures, observing

correct tractor speeds and spraying conditions

to obtain good insecticide coverage. Calibrate

sprayers at least once per season. Follow spray

programme recommendations.

• Mealybugs are difficult to kill with insecticides. They also often live deep inside cracks

and crevices in trees, or inside fruit or fruit

bunches where they are protected from contact with insecticides. High-volume applications of insecticides are essential for mealybug

control and should be sprayed to ‘run-off’.

Mealybug control should not be attempted

with a low-volume application technology.

• Identify mealybugs present and learn their life

cycle. Apply insecticides when the most vulnerable stage (crawlers) is prevalent. To minimise this risk, use strictly in accordance with

label instructions. Avoid using this pesticide

exclusively all season. The potential for resistance to Applaud has been long recognised

and it is generally recommended around the

world that it is not used more than twice a


• Use a range of insecticides, especially if making more than one application per season.

Efforts should be made to determine insecticide resistance across the geographical populations and different species of mealybugs. Further,

adequate in-depth research should be done on

biochemical aspects especially quantification of

detoxifying enzymes and molecular mechanism

of resistance by detecting different insecticide

resistance alleles, namely sodium-gated channel,

KDR (Knock down resistance) and Ache.


Anand P, Ayub K (2000) The effect of five insecticides on

Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green) (Homoptera:

Pseudococcidae) and its natural enemies Anagyrus

kamali moursi (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae), and

Cryptolaemus montrouzieri Mulsant and Scymus coccivora Aiyar (Coccinellidae). Int Pest Control


Bushra S, Sarfraz Ali S, Hafiz AA (2014) Resistance in





(Homoptera: Psedococcidae) in Pakistan to selected

organophosphates and pyrethroids insecticides. Crop

Prot 66:29–33

Castle SJ, Henneberry TJ, Prabhaker N, Toscano NC

(1996) Trends in relative susceptibilities of white flies

to insecticides through the cotton season in the

Imperial Valley, CA. Proc Beltwide Cotton Conf


Charles JG (1996) Mealybug resistance management

strategy. In: Bourdot GW, Suckling DM (eds) Pesticide

resistance: prevention & management. New Zealand

Plant Protection Society, Lincoln, pp 172–176

Charles JG (2004) Mealybug insecticide resistance management strategy. http://resistance.nzpps.org/index.


Charles JG, Walker JTS, White V (1993) Resistance to

chlorpyrifos in the mealybugs Pseudococcus affinis

and P. longispinus in Hawkes Bay and Waikato pipfruit orchards. In: Proceedings of the forty sixth New

Zealand Plant Protection Conference, Christchurch,

New Zealand, 10–12 Aug 1993, pp 120–125

Congdon NB, Morison L (1959) Mealybug resurgence in

Hawke’s Bay orchards. N Z J Agric 99:481–487

Cox JM, Pearce MJ (1983) Wax produced by dermal

pores in three species of mealybug (Homoptera,

Pseudococcidae). Int J Inst Morph Embryol


Denholm I, Cahill M, Byrne FJ, Devonshire AL (1996)

Progress with documenting and combating insecticide

resistance in Bemisia. In Gerling D, Mayer RT (eds)

Bemisia: 1995. Taxonomy, biology, damage, control

and management. Intercept Ltd., Andover, Hants,

Great Britain, pp 577Ð603

Flaherty DL, Peacock WL, Bettiga L, Leavitt GM (1982)

Chemicals losing effect against grape mealybug. Calif

Agric 36:15–16

Foldi I (1983) Structure and functions of the integumentary glands of mealybugs Pseudococcidae and of their

secretions. Ann Soc Entomol Fr 19:155–166

French-Constant RH, Roush RT (1990) Resistance detection and documentation: the relative roles of pesticidal

17 Insecticide Resistance and Its Management in Mealybugs

and biochemical assays. In: Roush RT, Tabashnik BE

(eds) Pesticide resistance in arthropods. Chapman &

Hall, New York, pp 4–38

Frick KE (1952) The value of some organic phosphate

insecticides in control of grape mealybug. J Econ

Entomol 45:340–341

Georghiou GP, Taylor CE (1986) Factors influencing the

evolution of resistance. In: National Research Council

(ed) Pesticide resistance: strategies and tactics for

management. National Academy Press, Washington,

DC, pp 157Ð169

Grimes EW, Cone WW (1985) Control of the grape





Pseudococcidae), on Concord grape in Washington.

J Entomol Soc Br Columb 82:3–6

Gullan PJ, Kosztarab M (1997) Adaptations in scale

insects. Annu Rev Entomol 42:23–50

Horowitz R, Kontsedalov S, Denholm I, Ishaaya I (2002)

Dynamics of insecticide resistance in Bemisia tabaci:

a case study with the insect growth regulator pyriproxyfen. Pest Manag Sci 58:1096–1100

Khan AAH, Shad SA, Akram W (2013) Resistance to

conventional insecticidesin Pakistani populations of

Musca domestica L. (Diptera: Muscidae): a potentialectoparasite of dairy animals. Ecotoxicology


Mallet J (1989) The evolution of insecticide resistance:

have the insects won. Trends Ecol Evol 4(7):1


Mansour R, Youssfi FE, Labdi KG, Rezgui S (2010)

Imidacloprid applied through drip irrigation as a new

promising alternative to control mealybugs in Tunisian

vineyards. J Plant Prot Res 50:314–319

Mendel Z, Gross S, Steinberg S, Cohen M, Blumberg D

(1999) Trials for the control of the citrus mealybug in

citrus orchards by augmentative release of two encyrtid parasitoids. Entomologica 33:251–265

Misumi T, Kawakami F, Mizobuchi M, Tao M, Machida

M, Inoue T (1994) Methyl bromide fumigation for

quarantine control of Japanese mealybug and citrus

mealybug of satsuma mandarin [Japanese]. Res Bull

Plant Prot Serv Jpn 30:57–68

Morishita M (2006) Susceptibility of the mealybug,

Planococcus kraunhiae (Kuwana) (Thysanoptera:

Thripidae), to insecticides evaluated by the petri dishspraying tower method [Japanese]. Jpn J Appl Entomol

Zool 50(3):211–216

Myburgh AC, Siebert MW (1964) Experiments on

parathion-resistant mealybugs. Deciduous Fruit

Grower 14:190–193


Nilima P, Carmen G, Steven JC (2012) Baseline susceptibility





Pseudococcidae) from California to select insecticides. J Econ Entomol 105(4):1392Ð1400. doi:http://


Prabhaker NS, Castle J, Byrne FJ, Henneberry TJ,

Toscano NC (2006a) Establishment of baseline

susceptibility data to various insecticides for glassywinged sharpshooter, Homalodisca coagulata Say

(Homoptera: Cicadellidae), by comparative bioassay

techniques. J Econ Entomol 99:141–154

Prabhaker N, Castle SJ, Toscano NC (2006b) Susceptibility

of immature stages of Homalodisca coagulata

(Homoptera: Cicadellidae) to selected insecticides.

J Econ Entomol 99:1805–1812

Sanderson JP, Roush RT (1992) Monitoring resistance in

greenhouse whitefly (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) with

yellow sticky cards. J Econ Entomol 85:634–641

Serghiou CS (1983) The citrus mealybug, Planococcus

citri Risso – carob moth, Ectomyelois ceratoniae

Zeller, pest complex on grapefruit and its chemical

control. Tech Bull Agric Res Inst Nicos Cyprus 56:17

Sayyed AH, Attique MNR, Khaliq A (2005) Stability of

field selected resistance to insecticides in Plutella

xylostella (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) from Pakistan.

J Appl Entomol 129:541–547

Thirumurugan A, Gautam RD (2001) Relative toxicity of

some insecticides to mealy bug, Planococcus pacificus

(Pseudococcidae, Hemiptera). Ann Plant Prot Sci


Tranfaglia A, Viggiani G (1981) Problems of integrated

control in vine-growing in Italy. Boll Zool Agrar

Bachic 16:85–89

Valles SM, Koehler PG, Brenner RJ (1997) Antagonism

of fipronil toxicityby piperonyl butoxide and S, S,

S-tributyl phosphorotrithioate in the German cockroach (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae). J Econ Entomol


Walker JTS, White V, Charles JG (1993) Field control of

chlorpyrifos-resistant mealybugs (Pseudococcus affinis) in a Hawkes Bay orchard. In: Proceedings of the

forty sixth New Zealand Plant Protection Conference,

Christchurch, New Zealand, pp 126–128

Zettler JL, Follett PA, Gill RF (2002) Susceptibility





Pseudococcidae) to Methyl Bromide. J Econ Entomol


Mealybug Alikes


M. Mani and Shaheen Gul

The insects belonging to the family Pseudococcidae

and Putoidae are called true mealybugs (Williams

2004). There are several insects (Coccoidea) similar in appearance, and they are to be called as

mealybug alikes only. By mistake, many of the

scales belonging to genera Drosicha, Icerya,

Perissopneumon (Margarodidae) and Pulvinaria,

Chloropulvinaria, Megapulvinaria, Ceroplastodes







(Stictococcidae), etc. were quoted as mealybugs in

literature. In India, Drosicha mangiferae (Green)

belongs to the Margarodidae and is popularly

called as mango mealybug, but truly speaking, it

should not be called as mealybug. Many species

belonging to the genus Icerya (Margarodidae) are

also called mealybugs, like the cottony Icerya

aegyptiaca (Douglas), and is wrongly called as

breadfruit mealybug in Pacific Atolls. Another

group belonging to genera Pulvinaria,

Chloropulvinaria, Megapulvinaria, etc. are also

similar to mealybugs when they produce ovisacs,

and are often mistaken as mealybugs. They are

M. Mani (*)

Indian Institute of Horticultural Research,

Bangalore 560089, India

e-mail: mmani1949@yahoo.co.in

also called mealy scales. Yet another group belonging to the genus Ceroplastodes is also being

wrongly quoted as mealybug (Bhatnagar et al.

1984). The scale insect Stictococcus vayssierei is

also commonly called as mealybug-infested cassava. The following scales are also mistaken as

mealybugs and come under the category of mealybugs look-alike. Icerya genistae (Hempel),

Pulvinaria acericola (Walsh and Riley), Pulvinaria

ericicola (McConnell), Pulvinaria psidii

(Maskell), Pulvinaria urbicola (Cockerell),




Philephedra tuberculosa (Nakahara & Gill),




Milviscutulus mangiferae (Green), Ceroplastes

ceriferus (Fabricius), Ceroplastes rusci (Linnaeus),




Ceroplastes dugesii (Lichtenstein), Ceroplastodes

cajani (Maskell), Ceroplastes floridensis

(Comstock), Ceroplastes rubens (Maskell),

Eriococcus azalea (Comstock), Eriococcus quercus (Comstock) and Dactylopius confuses





(Eriococcidae) is wrongly named as a mealybug

from material found on a grass of the cereal type in

a reserve in the Western Caucasus (Dantsig 1979).

S. Gul

Sher-E-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences

and Technology of Kashmir, Srinagar, India

e-mail: Shaheen.gul@rediffmail.com

© Springer India 2016

M. Mani, C. Shivaraju (eds.), Mealybugs and their Management in Agricultural

and Horticultural crops, DOI 10.1007/978-81-322-2677-2_18


M. Mani and S. Gul



Breadfruit Mealybug: Icerya


Icerya aegyptiaca is quoted as breadfruit

(Artocarpus spp.) mealybug in Pacific nations.

Heavy infestations of the pest, which kills young

leaves and stems, can reduce fruit yields by 50 %

and may even kill mature trees. Insecticides

could not be used for fear of polluting water supplies. Rodolia cardinalis was used to control the

breadfruit mealybug, Icerya aegyptiaca. A predatory ladybird beetle Rodolia limbata (Blackburn)

from Australia was introduced in the Federated

States of Micronesia (FSM), where control of the

mealybug was spectacular. This success was

repeated in Kiribati, the Marshall Islands and

Palau, where similar problems have been caused

by the mealybug (Waterhouse 1991). This is also

quoted as Egyptian mealybug Icerya aegyptiaca

(Douglas) and reported several fruits and ornamental plants in India (Rao 1950). Sundararaj

et al. (2006) reported Icerya aegyptiaca as mealybug infestation on Santalum album.


Icerya seychellarum

In Egypt, Icerya seychellarum (Westwood)

(Margarodidae, Homoptera) was reported as

common white mealybug/ornamental palm

mealybug on Cycas revoluta Thunb (Cycadaceae).

Adult female is orange red or brick red, obscured

by a granular covering of waxy secretion, which

may be either bright canary yellow or white,

tinged with yellow. It is reported to breed on

many species of Acalypha, Acacia, Artocarpus,

Casuarina, Citrus, Cocculus, Cynodon, Croton,

Cassia, Dodonaea, Grevillea, Morus, Mangifera,

Magnolia, Olea, Psidium, Pyrus, Pterospermum,

Rosa and sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum)

(Rao 1950). Sundararaj et al. (2006) reported its

infestation on S. album. The important tree spe-

18 Mealybug Alikes

cies affected by this insect include Acacia

nilotica, A. tortilis, Casuarina equisetifolia,

Dodonaea viscosa, Grevillea robusta, Morus

alba and Mangifera indica (Sundararaj and

Muthukrishnan 2008).


Perissopneumon ferox

Perissopneumon ferox Newstead is also similar to

mealybug in appearance. Rodolia fumida and

Leptus sp. were recorded from Malihabad (Singh

1993). Perissopneumon ferox was reported as a





(Margarodidae, Homoptera), on mangoes from

Uttar Pradesh, India. Heavy infestation of the

pseudococcid P. ferox on mango was seen in

Uttar Pradesh, India. Two predators, the coccinellid Rodolia fumida and the Erythraeid Leptus

sp., were seen preying on P. ferox (Srivastava and

Verghese 1985). Perissopneumon tamarindus

Green was also reported as a mealybug on ber

and other crops in India (Butani 1973).


Drosicha spp.

Drosicha stebbingi Green and Drosicha mangiferae are popularly called mango mealybugs

besides Perissopneumon ferox. Mealybug alikes,

Drosicha mangiferae (Green) and Drosicha dalbergiae Green was recorded as mealybugs on

pomegranate and papaya in India. Mealybug

alikes, Drosicha stebbingi Green, D. mangiferae

(Green) (Pruthi and Batra 1960), Drosichiella

tamarindus Green and Perissopneumon tamarindus Green (Butani 1973) were reported as

mealybugs on ber in India. Drosicha stebbingii

Green on forest plants is reported as a mealy

bug occurring throughout the sal (Shorea

robusta) forests of north India. It was also

quoted as mealybug on Tectona grandis and

Albizia spp. in India (Joshi 1992). Drosicha

mangifera was also recorded as a mealybug pest

on black nightshade (Solanum nigrum L) and

Indian gooseberry (Phyllanthus emblica) from

Uttar Pradesh, India.


Incidence of Drosicha mangiferae on ashwagandha was reported as mealybug infestation in Jammu and Kashmir, India. The pinkish

nymphs and female adults suck the sap from

the twigs, leaf stock and also along the midrib,

and the infestation was mainly concentrated

on the terminal part of the shoot. Sumnius vestita and Cryptochaetum were known to attack

D. mangiferae. In western Uttar Pradesh,

Drosicha mangiferae has one generation a

year and diapauses in the egg stage in soil for

about 7 months.

The so-called mango mealybug D. stebbingi

was predated by several coccinellids, but none of

these natural enemies were found to give adequate control of D. stebbingi (Rahman and Latiff

1944, Wadi and Batra 1964, Singh 1993).

Beauveria bassiana was found infecting nymphs

of Drosicha mangiferae in the field, and the

pathogen was found infecting the margarodid in

orchards in five localities in India. In field trials

on infested mango panicles, spray application of

a suspension having 4.8 × 106 conidia/ml reduced

populations of D. mangiferae by 33.3–100 % in

10 days (Srivastava and Fasih 1988).

An integrated approach involving cultural,

mechanical and chemical methods is ideal for the

management of mango mealybugs. Raking of

soil four times (May, June, August and October)

in Uttar Pradesh afforded the best control of egg

hatching of the margarodid Drosicha mangiferae;

30 % of the eggs hatched, as compared with 68 %

for no treatment (Chandra et al. 1989). Complete

control could be obtained by the use of grease

bands round the trunks from the second week of

December. An alternative method proved to be

banding with coal tar, which remains effective for

only a relatively short period (Prasad and Singh

1976). Sticky bands were found to remain effective for only a short time (up to 15 days after

application). The commonly used bands of mixture of rosin and castor oil (4:5) and coal tar and

grease (2:1) prevented the nymphs from ascending for only up to 5–6 days after application.

Field tests were carried out in Hissar, India, and

revealed that the slippery band of alkathene sheet

was most effective of all in blocking the ascend-

Tài liệu bạn tìm kiếm đã sẵn sàng tải về

6 Resistance Management and Prevention Strategy

Tải bản đầy đủ ngay(0 tr)