Preference of quinoa moth: Eurysacca melanocampta Meyrick (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) for two varieties of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa willd.) in olfactometry assays;Preferencia de la polilla de la quinua: Eurysacca melanocampta Meyrick (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) por dos variedades de quinua (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) en ensayos de olfatometría.

Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research

Volumn 69, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 71-78

  Costa, Juan F ^a   Cosio, Walter ^a   Cardenas, Maritza ^a   Yábar, Erick ^a   Gianoli, Ernesto ^b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE SAN ANTONIO ABAD DEL CUSCO   (Peru)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CONCEPCIÓN   (Chile)

Author keywords

Attraction; Chenopodiaceae; Gelechiidae; Olfactometry; Quinoa; Searching

Indexed keywords

ACER PENSYLVANICUM; AMARANTHACEAE; CHENOPODIUM QUINOA; GELECHIIDAE; HEXAPODA; LEPIDOPTERA;

EID: 70849125979     PISSN: 07185820     EISSN: 07185839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4067/S0718-58392009000100009     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Awmack, C.S., and S.R. Leather. 2002. Host plant quality and fecundity in herbivorous insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 47:817-844.
2. Bernays, E.A., and R.F. Chapman. 1994. Host-plant selection by phytophagous insects. 312 p. Chapman & Hall, New York, USA.
3. Bertero, H.D., A.J. De La Vega, G. Correa, S.E. Jacobsen, and A. Mujica. 2004. Genotype and genotype-byenvironment interaction effects for grain yield and grain size of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) as revealed by pattern analysis of international multienvironment trials. Field Crops Res. 89:299-318.
4. Botero-Garcés, N., and R. Isaacs. 2004. Movement of the grape berry moth, Endopiza viteana: displacement distance and direction. Phisiol. Entomol. 29(5):443-452.
5. Coley, P.D., M.L. Bateman, and T.A. Cursar. 2006. The effects of plant quality on caterpillar growth and defense against natural enemies. Oikos 115(2):219-228.
6. Coracini, M., M. Bengtsson, I. Liblikas, and P. Witzgal. 2004. Attraction of codling moth males to apple volatiles. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 110:1-10.
7. Courtney, S.P., and T.T. Kibota. 1990. Mother doesn't know best: selection of hosts by ovipositing insects. p. 161-188. In Bernays, E.A. (ed.) Insect-plant interactions. CRC Press, Boca Ratón, Florida, USA.
8. Delgado, P.M. 1989. Determinación taxonómica y porcentaje de parasitismo de insectos benéficos sobre Eurysacca melanocampta Meyrick "Kcona Kcona" en quinua. 46 p. Tesis Biólogo. Universidad Nacional del Altiplano, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas y Agrarias, Puno, Perú.
9. De Bruyn, L., Scheirs, J., and R. Verhagen. 2002. Nutrient stress, host plant quality and herbivore performance of a leaf-mining fly on grass. Oecologia 130:594-599.
10. Eiras, A.E., e A. Mafra-Neto. 2001. Olfatometria aplicada ao estudo do comportamento de insetos. p. 27-40. In Vilela, E.F. e T.M.C. Della Lucia (eds.) Feromônios de insetos. 2nd ed. Holos, Ribeirão Preto, Brasil.
11. Francis, G., Z. Kerem, H.P.S. Makkar, and K. Becker. 2002. The biological action of saponins in animal systems: a review. Br. J. Nutr. 88:587-605.
12. Heard, T.A. 2000. Concepts in insect host-plant selection behaviour and their application to host specificity testing. p. 1-10. In Van Driesche, R.G., T. Heard, A.S. McClay, and R. Reardon (eds.) Proceedings: Host Specificity Testing of Exotic Arthropod Biological Agents: The Biological Basis for Improvement in Safety. X International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, Montana, USA. 4-14 July 1999. Bozeman, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Forest Service Bulletin, FHTET-99-1, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.
13. Janz, N., and R. Nylin. 1997. The role of female search behaviour in determining host plant range in plant feeding insects: a test of the information processing hypothesis. Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. B 264:701-707.
14. Joachim-Bravo, I.S., O.A. Fernandes, S.A. De Bortoli, and F.S. Zucoloto. 2001. Oviposition behavior of Ceratitis capitata Wiedemann (Diptera: Tephritidae): association between oviposition preference and larval performance in individual females. Neotrop. Entomol. 30(4):559-564.
15. Kawazu, K., O. Setokuchi, K. Kohno, K. Takahashi, Y. Yoshiyasu, and S. Tatsuki. 2001. Sex pheromone of the rice leaffolder moth, Cnaphalocrocis medinalis (Lepidoptera: Crambidae); synthetic Indian and Philippine blends are not attractive to male C. medinalis, but are attractive to C. pilosa in the South-Western islands in Japan. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 36(4):471-474.
16. Keller, M.A. 1999. Understanding host selection behaviour: the key to more effective host specificity testing. p. 84-92. In Whithers, T.M., L. Barton-Browne, and J. Stanley (eds.) Host specificity testing in Australasia: Towards improved assays for biological control. Scientific Publishing, Queensland Department of Natural Resources, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
17. Larraín, P., M. Guillon, J. Kalazich, F. Graña, and C. Vásquez. 2007. Efficacy of different rates of sexual pheromone of Phthorimaea operculella (Zeller) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) in males of potato tuber moth captures. Agric. Téc. (Chile) 67:431-436.
18. Linn, C.E., and W.L. Roelofs. 1989. Response specificity of male moths to multicomponent pheromones. Chemical Senses 14:421-437.
19. Mannion, C., A. Hunsberger, J. Peña, and L. Osborne. 2003. Oviposition and larval survival of Diaprepes abbreviatus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) on select host plants. Fla. Entomol. 86:165-173.
20. McNeely, C., and M.C. Singer. 2001. Contrasting the roles of learning in butterflies foraging for nectar and oviposition sites. Anim. Behav. 61:1-7.
21. Mastebroek, D., H. Limburg, T. Gilles, and H.J.P. Marvin. 2000. Occurrence of sapogenins in leaves and seeds of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd). J. Sci. Food. Agric. 80:152-156.
22. Meiners, T., N.K. Hacker, and M. Hilker. 2005. Response of the elm leaf beetle to host plant induced by oviposition and feeding: the infestation rate matters. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 115:171-176.
23. Melo, L.A. 2001. Insectos asociados al cultivo de quinua en Cusco. 51 p. Tesis Bachiller en Ciencias Biológicas. Universidad Nacional de San Antonio Abad del Cusco, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas, Cusco, Perú.
24. Morewood, W.D., P.R. Neiner, J.R. McNeil, J.C. Sellmer, and K. Hoover. 2003. Oviposition preference and larval performance of Anoplophora glabripennis (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in four eastern North American hardwood tree species. Environ. Entomol. 32:1028-1034.
25. National Research Council. 1989. Lost crops of the Incas: Little known plants of the Andes with promise for worldwide cultivation. p. 148-161. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington D.C., USA.
26. Nieminen, M., J. Suomi, S. Van Nouhuys, P. Sauri, and M.L. Riekkola. 2003. Effect of iridoid glycoside content on oviposition host plant choice and parasitism in a specialist herbivore. J. Chem. Ecol. 29(4):823-844.
27. Ochoa, M.R. 1990. Ciclo biológico de la polilla de la quinua en condiciones de laboratorio. 60 p. Tesis Biólogo. Universidad Nacional de San Antonio Abad del Cusco, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas, Cusco, Perú.
28. Ochoa, J.A. 1996. Principales plagas y sus enemigos naturales en el cultivo de quinua en la localidad de Huacarpay, Cusco. 45 p. Tesis Bachiller en Ciencias Biológicas. Universidad Nacional de San Antonio Abad del Cusco, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas, Cusco, Perú.
29. Ormachea, E., y D. Quispe. 1993. Evaluación de parasitoides de la "polilla de la quinua" Eurysacca melanocampta, en el Cusco. In XXXV Convención Nacional de Entomología, Arequipa, Perú. 11-14 noviembre 1993. Sociedad Entomológica del Perú, Lima, Perú.
30. Ortíz, R. 1991. Pérdidas ocasionadas por insectos plaga en cultivos andinos: campañas 1990-1991. 10 p. Convenio Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Universidad Nacional del Altiplano (FCA/UNA). Proyecto Programa Interinstitucional de Waru Waru (PIWA), Puno, Perú.
31. Pettersson, J. 1970. Studies on Rhopalosiphum padi (L.): laboratory studies on olfactometric responses to winter host Prunus padus L. Lantbrukshoegsk. Ann. 36:381-399.
32. Rasmussen, C., S.E. Jacobsen, y A. Lagnaoui. 2000. Las polillas de la quinua. Especies en Perú de Eurysacca (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) en la quinua (Chenopodium quinoa Willdenow). In XLII Convención Nacional de Entomología, Tarapoto, Perú. 22-26 de octubre de 2000. Sociedad Entomológica del Perú, Lima, Perú.
33. Rasmussen, C., S.E. Jacobsen, y A. Lagnaoui. 2001. Las polillas de la quinua (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) en el Perú: Eurysacca (Lepidopt.: Gelechiidae). Rev. Per. Entomol. 42:57-59.
34. Rasmussen, C., A. Lagnaoui, and P. Esbjerg. 2003. Advances in the knowledge of quinoa pests. Food Rev. Int. 19:61-75.
35. Roitberg, B.D., I.C. Robertson, and J.G.A. Tyerman. 1999. Vive la variance: a functional oviposition theory for insect herbivores. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 91:187-194.
36. Sequeiros, P.A. 2001. Fluctuación poblacional de plagas insectiles en quinua y sus controladores naturales. 82 p. Tesis Biólogo. Universidad Nacional de San Antonio Abad del Cusco, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas, Cusco, Perú.
37. Sharov, A.A., K.W. Thorpe, and K. Tcheslavskaia. 2002. Effect of synthetic pheromone on gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) trap catch and mating success beyond treated areas. Environ. Entomol. 31:1119-1127.
38. Singer, M.C. 2000. Reducing ambiguity in describing plant-insect interactions: "preference", "acceptability" and "electivity". Ecol. Lett. 3:159-162.
39. Singer, M.C., and J.R. Lee. 2000. Discrimination within and between host species by a butterfly: implications for design of preference experiments. Ecol. Lett. 3:101-105.
40. Stamps, W.T., and M.J. Linit. 2002. Oviposition choice by the black walnut curculio (Coleoptera: Curculionidae): A ten-year study. Environ. Entomol. 31:281-284.
41. StatSoft. 2001. Statistica (data analysis software system), version 6. StatSoft Inc., Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA. Available at http://www.statsoft.com.
42. Takanashi, T., I. Yukio, P. Anderson, Y. Huang, C. Löfstedt, S. Tatsuki, and B.S. Hansson. 2006. Unusual response characteristics of pheromone-specific olfactory receptor neurons in the Asian corn borer moth, Ostrinia furnacalis. J. Exp. Biol. 209:4946-4956.
43. Tapia, M. 1997. Cultivos andinos subexplotados y su aporte a la alimentación. 2da. ed. 273 p. FAO, Oficina Regional para América Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, Chile.
44. van Klinken, R.D. 2000. Host specificity testing: why do we do it and how we can do it better. p. 54-68. In Van Driesche, R.G., T. Heard, A.S. McClay, and R. Reardon (eds.) Proceedings: Host Specificity Testing of Exotic Arthropod Biological Agents: The Biological Basis for Improvement in Safety. X International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, Montana, USA. 4-14 July 1999. Bozeman, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Forest Service Bulletin, FHTET-99-1, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.
45. West, S.A., and J.P. Cunningham. 2002. A general model for host plant selection in phytophagous insects. J. Theor. Biol. 214:499-513.
46. White, M.A., Host, G.E., and D.R. Benson. 2003. Northeastern Minnesota trapping study: Effects of temperature and trap density on male gypsy moth recapture and flight patterns. Forest Insect Dis. Newsl. November 2003. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA. Available at http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fid/nov03/research.html (Accessed July 2007).
47. Whitman, D.W., M.S. Blum, and D.W. Alsop. 1990. Allomones: chemicals for defense. p. 289-351. In Evans, D.L., and J.O. Schmidt (eds.) Insect defenses: adaptive mechanisms and strategies of prey and predators. State University of New York Press, Albany, New York, USA.
48. Zar, J.H. 1996. Biostatistical analysis. 662 p. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, USA.