Bedoukian   RussellIPM   RussellIPM   Piezoelectric Micro-Sprayer


Home
Animal Taxa
Plant Taxa
Semiochemicals
Floral Compounds
Semiochemical Detail
Semiochemicals & Taxa
Synthesis
Control
Invasive spp.
References

Abstract

Guide

Alphascents
Pherobio
InsectScience
E-Econex
Counterpart-Semiochemicals
Print
Email to a Friend
Kindly Donate for The Pherobase

« Previous Abstract"Deciphering the Microbiota and Volatile Profiles of Algerian Smen, a Traditional Fermented Butter"    Next AbstractAir pollution and atopy »

J Econ Entomol


Title:Impact of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria and natural enemies on Myzus persicae (Hemiptera: Aphididae) infestations in pepper
Author(s):Boutard-Hunt C; Smart CD; Thaler J; Nault BA;
Address:"Department of Entomology, Cornell University, New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, Geneva, NY 14456, USA. cb239@cornell.edu"
Journal Title:J Econ Entomol
Year:2009
Volume:102
Issue:6
Page Number:2183 - 2191
DOI: 10.1603/029.102.0622
ISSN/ISBN:0022-0493 (Print) 0022-0493 (Linking)
Abstract:"Management of green peach aphid, Myzus persicae (Sulzer) (Hemiptera: Aphididae), in bell pepper, Capsicum annuum L., was explored through a combination of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) and endemic biological control in New York in 2006 and 2007. We hypothesized that by using PGPR-treated peppers 1) M. persicae infestations would be reduced via induced resistance, 2) natural enemies would be lured to plants through the elicitation of volatile organic compounds, and 3) yield amount and quality would be improved. Pepper seed was planted in soil containing the PGPR formulation BioYield or untreated soil. Plants were transplanted to field plots and then treated with an insecticide regimen designed to remove or conserve populations of natural enemies. Apterous aphids and natural enemies were counted weekly on plants and pepper fruit were harvested, graded and weighed three times. PGPR did not directly or indirectly reduce aphid densities in either year. In 2006, there were more natural enemies in PGPR-treated plots than untreated ones, but this was probably a density-dependent response to aphid densities rather than a response of natural enemies to volatiles from PGPR-treated plants. For the first harvest date in 2006, yield of all fruit grades, especially the premium Fancy Grade, was 1.7-2.3 times greater in PGPR-treated plots than in untreated plots. However, no differences in yield were observed for the other two harvest dates or overall yield in 2006; no differences in yield among treatments were detected in 2007. Our results suggest that PGPR will not significantly impact M. persicae infestations or natural enemy populations but could enhance yield and quality of pepper fruit in some years"
Keywords:"Animals Aphids/*physiology Biomass Capsicum/microbiology/*parasitology/physiology *Food Chain Host-Parasite Interactions Immunity, Innate *Pest Control, Biological Plant Roots/*microbiology Population Density Volatile Organic Compounds/metabolism Weather;"
Notes:"MedlineBoutard-Hunt, Caroline Smart, Christine D Thaler, Jennifer Nault, Brian A eng Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S. England 2010/01/15 J Econ Entomol. 2009 Dec; 102(6):2183-91. doi: 10.1603/029.102.0622"

 
Back to top
 
Citation: El-Sayed AM 2024. The Pherobase: Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. <http://www.pherobase.com>.
© 2003-2024 The Pherobase - Extensive Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. Ashraf M. El-Sayed.
Page created on 22-11-2024