Control of pulse beetle, Callosubruchus maculatus (F.) (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) in different cereals using spinosad dust in storage conditions
 
More details
Hide details
1
Young Researchers Club, Islamic Azad University, Branch of Qaemshahr, P.O. Box 163 Mazandaran, Iran
2
Department of Zoology, Young Researchers Club of Islamic Azad University, Branch of Urmia P.O. Box 969, Tehran, Iran
3
Department of Plant Protection, Agricultural Faculty, Urmia University, P.O. Box 57135-165 Urmia, Iran
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Adel Khashaveh
Young Researchers Club, Islamic Azad University, Branch of Qaemshahr, P.O. Box 163 Mazandaran, Iran
 
Journal of Plant Protection Research 2011;51(1):77–81
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Effectiveness of spinosad dust formulation, that contains 0.125% spinosad, was evaluated against adults Callosubruchus maculatus (F.) on four commodities: chickpea, split pea, cowpea and lentil. Spinosad was applied at three dose rates: 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3 g/kg, corresponding to 0.125, 0.25 and 0.375 mg/kg of the active ingredient, respectively. The experiment was carried out at 27°C and 55±5% relative humidity. Adults mortality was measured after 1, 2, 5 and 10-days of exposure. After the 10-day mortality count, all surviving insects were removed and samples retained under the same conditions for a further 35 days to assess progeny reduction. Mortality of exposed individuals in all treated commodities was low at 1-day exposure even at 0.3 g/kg and did not exceed 20%. As expected, mortality increased with the increase of exposure interval and dose rates. A significant difference was observed among the four commodities. After 10 days of exposure, mortality reached 100% in all commodities except for split pea. The application of spinosad significantly reduced progeny production in four commodities tested in comparison with the untreated ones. High reduction in progeny production was recorded when spinosad was applied at the rate of 0.3 g/kg on split pea and cowpea (94.33 and 94.21%, respectively). The results of our study clearly revealed that spinosad dust could be successfully used as a grain protectant against C . maculatus . Further experimentations still need to be done to examine higher dose rates and long-term use in different commodities.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have declared that no conflict of interests exist.
 
REFERENCES (25)
1.
Abbott W. 1925. A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. J. Econ. Entomol.18 (1): 265–267.
 
2.
Aldryhim Y. 1990. Efficacy of the amorphous silica dust, Dryacide, againstTribolium confusum Duv. and Sitophilus granarius (L.) (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae and Curculionidae). J. Stored Prod. Res.26 (4): 207–210.
 
3.
Arthur F. 1996. Grain protectants: current status and prospects for the future. J. Stored Prod. Res.32 (4): 293–302.
 
4.
Athanassiou C., Kavallieratos N., Chintzoglou G., Peteinatos G., Boukouvala M., Petrou S., Panoussakis E. 2008. Effect of temperature and commodity on insecticidal efficacy of spinosad dust against Sitophilus oryzae(Coleoptera: Curculionidae) and Rhyzopertha dominica. J. Econ. Entomol.101 (3): 976–981.
 
5.
Chintzoglou G., Athanassiou C., Markoglou A., Kavallieratos N. 2008. Influence of commodity on the effect of spinosad dust against Rhyzopertha dominica (F.)(Coleoptera: Bostrychidae) and Sitophilus oryzae(L.) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Int. J. Pest Manage.54 (4): 277–285.
 
6.
Fang L., Subramanyam B., Arthur F. 2002. Effectiveness of spinosad on four classes of wheat against five stored-product insects. J. Econ. Entomol.95 (3): 640–650.
 
7.
Greenspan L. 1977. Humidity fixed points of binary saturated aqueous solutions. J. Res. Nat. Bur. Stand-Phys. Chem.81 (1): 89–96.
 
8.
Hall C. 1980. Drying and Storage of Agricultural Crops. AVI Publishing: Westport, CT, 8 pp.
 
9.
Huang F., Subramanyam B. 2007. Effectiveness of spinosad against seven major stored-grain insects on corn. Insect Sci.14 (3): 225–230.
 
10.
Huang F., Subramanyam B., Hou X. 2007. Efficacy of spinosad against eight stored-product insect species on hard white winter wheat. Biopestic. Int.3 (2): 117–125.
 
11.
Khashaveh A., Ziaee M., Safaralizadeh M., Lorestani F.A. 2009. Control of Tribolium castaneum (Herbst) (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) with spinosad dust formulation in different oilseeds. Turk. J. Agric. For.33 (3): 203–209.
 
12.
Mutambuki K., Ngatia C., Mbugua J., Likhayo P. 2003. Evaluation on the efficacy of spinosad dust against major storage insect pests. p. 888–891. In: Proc. 8th Int. Work. Conf. Stored-Prod. Prot. York, UK. 22–26 July 2002. CAB Internaional, Wallingford, 1075 pp.
 
13.
Nayak M., Daglish G., Byrne V. 2005. Effectiveness of spinosadas a grain protectant against resistant beetle and psocid pests of stored grain in Australia. J. Stored Prod. Res.41 (5): 455–467.
 
14.
Odeyemi O., Gbaye O., Akeju O. 2006. Resistance of Callosobruchus maculatus(Fab.) to pirimiphos methyl in three zones in Nigeria. p. 324–329. In: Proc. 9th Int. Work. Conf. Stored-Prod. Protect. Campinas, Sauo Paulo, Brazil. 15–18 October, 2006, 1355 pp.
 
15.
Raja M., John S. 2008. Impact of volatile oils of plants against the cowpea beetle Callosobruchus maculatus(FAB.) (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). Int. J. Integrative Biol.2 (1): 62–64.
 
16.
Rohitha Prasantha B., Reichmuth C., Buttner C. 2003. Effect of temperature and relative humidity on diatomaceous earth treated Callosobruchus maculatus(F.) and Acanthoselides obtectus(Say) (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). p. 314–318. In: Proc. 8th Int. Work. Conf. Stored-Prod. Protect. York, England. Wallingford, Oxon, 22–26 July, 2002. CAB International, 1075 pp.
 
17.
Sadat K., Asghar P. 2006. The influence of post-exposure temperature on the toxicity of Spinosad against adults of Callosobruchus maculatus Fabricius (Coleóptera: Bruchidae).p. 258–262. In: Proc. 9th Int. Work. Conf. Stored-Prod. Protect. Campinas, Sauo Paulo, Brazil, 15–18 October 2006, 1355 pp.
 
18.
Sadeghi A., van Damme E., Peumans W., Smagghe G. 2006. Deterrent activity of plant lectins on cowpea weevil Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) oviposition. Phytochemistry 67 (18): 2078–2084.
 
19.
Salgado V.L. 1998. Studies on the mode of action of spinosad: insect symptoms and physiological correlates. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol.60 (1): 91–102.
 
20.
SAS Institute. 2000. The SAS System version 8 for Windows.
 
21.
Saunders D., Bret B. 1997. Fate of spinosad in the environment. Down Earth52 (1): 14–20.
 
22.
Snedecor G., Cochran W. 1989. Statistical Methods. 8th ed. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA, USA, 503 pp.
 
23.
Thompson G., Dutton R., Sparks T. 2000. Spinosad-a case study: an example from a natural products discovery programme. Pestic. Sci.56 (8): 696–702.
 
24.
Vayias B., Athanassiou C., Milonas D., Mavrotas C. 2009. Activity of spinosad against three stored-product beetle species on four grain commodities. Crop Protect.28 (7): 561–566.
 
25.
Ziaee M., Nikpay A., Khashaveh A. 2007. Effect of oilseed type on the efficacy of five diatomaceous earth formulations against Tribolium castaneum Herbst (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). J. Pest Sci.80 (4): 199–204.
 
eISSN:1899-007X
ISSN:1427-4345