ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Imidacloprid applied through drip irrigation as a new promising alternative to control mealybugs in Tunisian vineyards
1
Department of Plant Protection and Post-harvest Diseases, Laboratory of Entomology, National Agronomic Institute of Tunisia
43 Charles Nicolle Avenue, 1082 Cité Mahrajène, Tunis, Tunisia
2
Current address: Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Fitosanitarie, Università degli Studi
Via Santa Sofia, 100, 95123 Catania, Italy
3
Department of Crop Production Sciences, National Agronomic Institute of Tunisia
43 Charles Nicolle Avenue, 1082 Cité Mahrajène, Tunis, Tunisia
Corresponding author
Mansour Ramzi
Department of Plant Protection and Post-harvest Diseases, Laboratory of Entomology, National Agronomic Institute of Tunisia 43 Charles Nicolle Avenue, 1082 Cité Mahrajène, Tunis, Tunisia
Department of Plant Protection and Post-harvest Diseases, Laboratory of Entomology, National Agronomic Institute of Tunisia 43 Charles Nicolle Avenue, 1082 Cité Mahrajène, Tunis, Tunisia
Journal of Plant Protection Research 2010;50(3):314-319
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Mealybugs are serious insect pests in Tunisian vineyards where they can cause major production losses. Thus, a management program of these insects is a priority for grape growers. A summer pesticide trial was conducted in a vineyard, located in the Cap-Bon Region of Tunisia. The trial was carried out to assess the use of imidacloprid, a systemic insecticide, against mealybugs on vine. Imidacloprid was applied through the drip irrigation system for each vine and was then compared to methidathion, a contact insecticide. Imidacloprid was found to be more effective than methidathion on all mealybug developmental stages. In addition to its
outstanding, up to 100% efficiency, imidacloprid provided an interesting long-term control of mealybugs. No significant difference was found between the two imidacloprid rates (1 and 2 ml/vine). Methidathion generated an overall low to intermediate efficacy on mealybugs and was more effective on both first instar nymphs and adult females than on the other mealybug developmental stages. Thus, imidacloprid applied through a drip irrigation system is a new promising option to control mealybugs in vineyards. For this
reason it can be employed in an integrated management program against these pests in the Tunisian grape-growing area.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have declared that no conflict of interests exist.
REFERENCES (27)
1.
Ben-Dov Y. 1994. A Systematic Catalogue of the Mealybugs of the World (Insecta: Homoptera: Coccoidea: Pseudococcidae and Putoidae) with Data on Geographical Distribution, Host Plants, Biology and Economic Importance. Intercept Ltd, Andover, UK, 686 pp.
2.
Buonocore E., Tropea Garzia G., Cavalieri V., Mazzeo G. 2008. Riconoscere le cocciniglie farinose. Informat. Agrar. 64 (16): 62–63.
3.
Cabaleiro C., Segura A. 1997. Field transmission of grapevine leafroll associated virus 3 (GLRaV-3) by the mealybug Planococcus citri. Plant Dis. 81 (3): 283–287.
4.
Charles J.G. 1993. A survey of mealybugs and their natural enemies in horticultural crops in North Island, New Zealand, with implications for biological control. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 3 (4): 405–418.
5.
Cox J.M. 1989. The mealybug genus Planococcus (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae). Bull. British Museum (Natural History). Entomology 58: 1–78.
6.
Daane K.M., Bentley W.J., Walton V.M., Malakar-Kuenen R., Yokota G.Y., Millar J.G., Ingels C.A., Weber E.A., Gispert C. 2006. New controls investigated for vine mealybug. Calif. Agric. 60 (1): 31–38.
7.
Daane K.M., Bentley W.J., Millar J.G., Walton V.M., Cooper M.L., Biscay B., Yokota G.Y. 2008. Integrated management of mealybugs in California vineyards. Int. Symposium on Grape Production and Processing. 06–11 February 2006, Baramati, India. ISHS Acta Hortic. 785: 235–252.
8.
De Borbòn C.M., Gracia O., Gómez Talquenca G.S. 2004. Mealybugs and grapevine leafroll-associated virus 3 in vineyards of Mendoza, Argentina. Am. J. Enol. Viticult. 55 (3): 283–285.
9.
Felsot A.S., Cone W., Yu J., Ruppert J.R. 1998. Distribution of imidacloprid in soil following subsurface drip chemigation. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 60 (3): 363–370.
10.
Flaherty D.L., Peacock W.L., Bettiga L., Leavitt G.M. 1982. Chemicals losing effect against grape mealybug. Calif. Agric. 36 (5): 15–16.
11.
Franco J.C., Zada A., Mendel Z. 2009. Novel approaches for the management of mealybug pests. p. 233–278. In: “Biorational Control of Arthropod Pests Application and Resistance Management” (I. Ishaaya, A.R. Horowitz, eds.). Springer, Netherlands, 408 pp.
12.
Godinho M.A., Franco J.C. 2001. Survey on the pest status of mealybugs in Portuguese vineyards. IOBC/WPRS Bull. 24 (7): 221–225.
13.
Mahfoudhi N., Dhouibi M.H. 2009. Survey of mealybugs (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) and their natural enemies in Tunisian vineyards. Afr. Entomol. 17 (2): 154–160.
14.
Mahfoudhi N., Digiaro M., Dhouibi M.H. 2009. Transmission of grapevine Leafroll viruses by Planococcus ficus (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) and Ceroplastes rusci (Hemiptera: Coccidae). Plant Dis. 93 (10): 999–1002.
15.
Mansour R. 2008. Etude des Cochenilles Farineuses, Planococcus citri Risso et Planococcus ficus Signoret, en Viticulture: Systématique, Biologie et Lutte Intégrée. MS thesis in Biological and Integrated Control in Agriculture, Université du 7 Novembre à Carthage, Institut National Agronomique de Tunisie, Tunis, Tunisia, 72 pp.
16.
Mansour R., Grissa Lebdi K., La Torre I., Zappalà L., Russo A. 2009. Preliminary study on mealybugs in two vineyards of the Cap-Bon Region (Tunisia). Tunis. J. Plant Prot. 4 (2): 185–196.
17.
Miller D.R., Miller G.L., Hodges G.S., Davidson J.A. 2005. Introduced scale insects (Hemiptera: Coccoidea) of the United States and their impact on U.S. agriculture. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 107: 123–158.
18.
Okazawa A., Akamatsu M., Ohoka A., Nishiwaki H., Cho W.J., Nakagawa N., Ueno T. 1998. Prediction of the binding mode of imidacloprid and related compounds to house-fly head acetylcholine receptors using three-dimensional QSAR analysis. Pestic. Sci. 54 (2): 134–144.
19.
Placke F.J., Weber E. 1993. Method for determination of imidacloprid residues in plant materials. Pflanzensch.-Nachrichten Bayer 46 (1993), p. 2.
20.
Rosciglione B., Castellano M.A., Martelli G.P., Savino V., Cannizzaro G. 1983. Mealybug transmission of grapevine virus A. Vitis. 22 (4): 331–347.
21.
Tsai C.W., Chau J., Fernandez L., Bosco D., Daane K.M., Almeida R.P.P. 2008. Transmission of grapevine leafroll-associated virus 3 by the vine mealybug (Planococcus ficus). Phytopathology 98 (10): 1093–1098.
22.
Viggiani G. 1980. Progress towards the integrated control of citrus pests in Italy. p. 293–296. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium IOBC/WPRS Integrated Control in Agriculture and Forestry. 8–12 October 1979, Vienna, Austria, 648 pp.
23.
Walton V.M., Pringle K.L. 1999. Effects of pesticides used on table grapes on the mealybug parasitoid Coccidoxenoides peregrinus (Timberlake) (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae). S. Afr. J. Enol. Viticult. 20 (1): 31–34.
24.
Walton V.M., Daane K.M., Pringle K.L. 2004. Monitoring Planococcus ficus in South African vineyards with sex pheromone-baited traps. Crop Prot. 23 (11): 1089–1096.
25.
Walton V.M., Daane K.M., Bentley W.J., Millar J.G., Larsen T.E., Malakar-Kuenen R. 2006. Pheromone-based mating disruption of Planococcus ficus (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) in California vineyards. J. Econ. Entomol. 99 (4): 1280–1290.
26.
Williams D.J., Watson G.W. 1988. The Scale Insects of the Tropical South Pacific Region, Part 2: The Mealybugs (Pseudococcidae). C.A.B. International Institute of Entomology, London, UK, 260 pp.
27.
Zada A., Dunkelblum E., Assael F., Franco J.C., Silva E.B., Protasov A., Mendel Z. 2008. Attraction of Planococcus ficus males to racemic and chiral pheromone baits: flight activity and bait longevity. J. Appl. Entomol. 132 (6): 480–489.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1899-007X |
| ISSN: | 1427-4345 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
