Prerpints.org logo

You are currently viewing a beta version of our website. If you spot anything unusual, kindly let us know.

Leave Feedback
Preprint
Article

The Evaluation Effectiveness of Parasitoids Phenacoccus manihoti Matile-Fererro (He-miptera: Pseudococcidae) on Cassava Plants in Bali Province

Altmetrics

Downloads

146

Views

67

Comments

0

Submitted:

11 September 2023

Posted:

14 September 2023

You are already at the latest version

Alerts
Abstract
Phenacoccus manihoti (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae), is an invasive pest that is very detrimental to cassava cultivation in Indonesia. Control efforts by utilizing natural enemies of the parasitoid have succeeded in overcoming the cassava mealybug in 25 countries such as in Africa and Thailand. The purpose of this study was to specifically evaluate the potential for parasitoid species associated with the mealybug P. manihoti by (1) determining the level of parasitization against mealybugs on various varieties of cassava, (2) determining parasitoid preference for P. manihoti instars, and (3) determining the type of parasitoid. This study was undertaken in the field to re-evaluate the kinds of parasitoids associated with cassava pests, and in the laboratory to assess the amount of parasitization, predilection, and functional response of parasitoids to P. manihoti population density. The findings revealed three of parasitoids linked with P. manihoti in the field: Anagyrus lopezi, Acerophagus sp., and Blepyrus sp. The parasitoid A. lopezi had the greatest parasitization rate in the field, which was 18.67 %. Furthermore, the parasitoids A. lopezi and Blepyrus sp. preferred 3rd instar nymphs, but Acerophagus sp. preferred 2nd instar nymphs. The parasitoid A. lopezi demonstrated a type-III functional response, while Acerophagus sp. and Blepyrus sp. demonstrated a type-II functional response. The handling capacity (Th) of A. lopezi is the shortest at 3.42 minutes. This work is a comprehensive study of the parasitoid A. lopezi's potential as a biological agent, highlighting how it effectively suppresses P. manihoti on various cassava varieties in Bali, providing an inexpensive, environmentally friendly, and applicable control in tropical countries.
Keywords: 
Subject: Biology and Life Sciences  -   Insect Science

1. Introduction

Indonesia is the fourth largest cassava-producing country in the world after Brazil, Nigeria, and Thailand [1]. However, from 2010 to 2015, the amount of cassava output in Indonesia varied. The disruption of pests and plant diseases that changed from year to year was one of the elements that produced these swings and reductions. Cassava plant diseases, such as Cassava Bacterial Blight (CBB) caused by Xanthomonas campestris pv. manihoti, Cassava Mosaic Disease (CMD), and Cassava Brown Streak Disease (CBSD), are an issue in various Asia-Pacific nations [2]. Meanwhile, whiteflies, mealybugs, and red spider mites have emerged as the most serious pests affecting cassava plants in Asia [3]. Mealybugs, among other diseases and pests, are still in the spotlight today due to the harm they do to cassava fields in multiple nations. According to reports, mealybugs have impacted negatively on cassava crops in Africa and South America [4].
Phenacoccus manihoti (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) is an invasive pest that has spread and destroyed cassava plants around the country, including Indonesia [4, 5]. P. manihoti originated in South America and eventually spread to Africa in 1973, where it caused production losses of up to 82 % [6]. The mealybug P. manihoti was discovered in Thailand in 2008 and was related to a 30% yield loss [7]. P. manihoti occurred in Indonesia and was found for the first time in Bogor in 2010 [8]. Mealybug attacks on plants are distinguished by the emergence of thick white and/or black substances on the leaf surface, which is a combination of adult insects, ovisacs, and insect nymphs.
However, control measures were implemented against these mealybugs, which are often treated with pesticides. Chemical control is accomplished by soaking cassava cuttings in one of the suggested chemicals [9]. Considering that the usage of pesticides may generate environmental contamination and pest resistance, new control approaches that are more ecologically benign in the long run are required [10]. Biological control strategies have been investigated as alternative control strategies [11, 12]. The use of antagonistic organisms or microorganisms such as parasitoids, predators, and insect pathogens may be used in biological control strategies [13]. This biological control technique is one component of an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategy in a tropical country including Indonesia.
Essentially, the employment of potential natural enemies to manage pest populations, particularly cassava mealybugs and other damaging pests, may be attributed to their function in intra and interspecies interactions [14]. In essence, the cassava mealybug must be controlled using the proper manner in order to avoid having a negative influence on the environment. The use of organisms or microbes such as parasitoids, predators, and insect diseases are critical to attempts to attain environmental equilibrium [15]. In 25 countries, including Africa and Thailand, the use of natural enemies in pest management approaches has been found to be effective in eliminating the cassava mealybug. Plesiochrysa ramburi and Coccinellidae beetles were utilized as predators, while Anagyrus lopezi De Santis (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae) was used as a parasitoid [16]. In Africa, it has been recorded that 18 natural enemy species attack P. manihoti, including solitary parasitoids such as Epidinocarsis lopezi (DeSantis) (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae) and predators such as Hyperaspis notata Mulsant, Diomus spp. (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae), and Ocyptamus spp. (Diptera: Syrphidae) in Africa [17].
Preliminary study has been conducted on the sort of parasitoid that is sensitive to the invasive cassava mealybug in Bali in 2020. The investigation discovered four forms of parasitoids that reacted to the cassava mealybug: Anagyrus lopezi (Encyrtidae), Acerophagus sp. (Encyrtidae), Blepyrus sp. (Encyrtidae), and Encarsia sp. (Aphelinidae) [5]. When compared to Encarsia sp., A. lopezi, Acerophagus sp., and Blepyrus sp., were shown to be more susceptible to mealybugs, with greater population density, parasitization rate, and distribution rate.
As a consequence, host preference and host specificity seem to be crucial in biological control efforts, as they may impact mass rearing techniques and may accelerate the development of new forms of potential parasitoids [18]. To ensure the strength of the three types of parasitoids' roles, a special assessment of their potential is required, which includes determining parasitoid preference for instar mealybugs P. manihoti, and determining the type of functional response of the parasitoid to P. manihoti population density. This research re-evaluates the type of parasitoid that responds to P. manihoti, and it is intended to give more thorough information and carry out more experiments through preferences and functional response.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Description of the Study Area

This research was carried out on a field and laboratory scale from October 2022 – March 2023. The field research was carried out in all districts and cities in the province of Bali. Meanwhile, laboratory research, which includes specimen maintenance, parasitoid identification, preference testing, and functional response, was carried out at the Integrated Pest and Disease Management Laboratory (IPMLab), Faculty of Agriculture, Udayana University.

2.2. Site Determination and Sampling

Determination of the sampling location in each district/city is done by making five sample points diagonally. The area of each sample point is ± 500 m2. Therefore, 2,500 m2 is required in each district/city. Leaf sampling was carried out by purposive sampling at each sample point by taking 5 shots of plants attacked by mealybugs. Each leaf sample or shoot of the affected plant is accommodated in a plastic bag with a volume of 2 L. Then it is taken to the laboratory for further counting and recording per leaf. Then, the leaves of plants containing mealybugs were cultured until the time limit for parasitoids to appear.

2.3. Mealybug and Parasitoid Maintenance

Maintenance of plant leaves containing mealybugs is carried out until the time limit for parasitoids appears. Observations on the type and number of parasitoids that appeared were carried out every day. To determine the type of parasitoid that appears, identification is carried out under a microscope using an identification method that refers Gordh [19]. Based on the identification results, the number and type of parasitoids were counted and recorded, and each parasitoid was photographed.

2.4. Preparation of Host Plants

The host plant used for the study was the UJ5 variety. The choice of the UJ5 variety as the host plant was made because it was the most widely cultivated by farmers in the field. The size of the cuttings used for host plant seeds was 15 cm, which was bred in a plastic cup pot measuring 5 cm in diameter on the upper surface and 4 cm on the lower surface with a height of 7 cm. Each container is filled with a seedling stem, then poured with water as a planting medium, and then placed in the open. Cassava seeds used as research material were aged for 15-20 days after growing about 5 to 8 leaves.

2.5. Mealybugs Propagation

Nymphs and adult’s mealybug were collected from a farmer's cassava plantation in Temesi Village, Gianyar Regency (8028`26"S 115011`225"E). The nymphs and adults were raised in the laboratory by infecting them with pre-prepared cassava plant seeds. on the breeding table, which is located in the propagation room, 40-50 plant pots made of plastic cups containing cassava plant seeds are inserted and arranged in a row. Some propagation outcomes are employed for parasitoid breeding and propagation.

2.6. Parasitoid Breeding

The parasitoids collected in the field were maintained in the lab. In cages with hardwood frames measuring 80 cm long, 45 cm wide, and 65 cm high, parasites were propagated. Gauze is used to cover the cage's top, right, and left walls, as well as the rear wall. Meanwhile, the front wall serves as an access door for entering and removing mealybug and parasitoid-infested plant pots. A total of 10 mealybug-infected cassava plants were included in the study, and the data was kept safe. Parasitoids from the wild were placed in breeding cages and maintained to generate offspring for experimental experiments. A cotton coil with a 10% honey solution was introduced as a source of nutrition to boost the parasitoid's fitness.

2.7. Parasitoid Preference Testing for Nymph Instars and Adults of P. manihoti

The assessed host insects are placed in a Petri dish as a container in this test. Each Petri plate included P. manihoti instar-2, instar-3, and adult hosts. Following that, previously copulated parasitoid insects were infected and allowed for 24 hours. The parasitoids were removed after the copulation phase, and the instar- 2, instar-3, and adult host-treated hosts were kept in various containers. Every day, observations and data were recorded until the time limit for mature parasitoids emerged from each host instar. This experiment was conducted 10 times using a totally randomized design. The parasitoids Acerophagus sp. and Blepyrus sp. were subjected to the same technique.

2.8. Parasitoid preference and parasitization index

The index used to measure preference for P. manihoti host instars is the Manly index [20], namely:
Bi = ln (Ri/Ai)/
Where Bi = preference index for host instars, Ai = Initial host density: I = 1;2;3…k, and Ri = number of unparasited hosts.
Parasitization rate of parasitoids using the equation:
P a r a s i t i z a t i o n = Σ P a r a s i t o i d   A Σ E m e r g i n g   p a r a s i t o i d + Σ H o s t
Where ΣParasitoid A = the number of one type of parasitoid that appears, ΣHost = the total number of hosts.

2.9. Functional responsiveness testing

The functional response is the parasitoid's reaction to the density of the host population. The population density of the examined host was 3; 7; 15; 25; 35; and 50 P. manihoti 3rd instar nymphs. Infesting nymph-3 P. manihoti on cassava plants housed in plastic glass containers filled with plants provided hosts for each density. The cassava plant is then placed in a cage. After mating the female and adult male parasitoids, the adult female was placed in a cage for 24 hours to lay eggs on the mealybugs. The mealybugs and parasitoid larvae that are present in the host's body are allowed to mature until the adult parasitoids emerge. The test included 6 treatments and was performed 5 times. Every day, observations were made on the number of mature parasitoids that emerged, which were differentiated by sex. The parasitoids that emerged were collected in a 1 mL collection container with 0.5 mL of 70% alcohol.
Estimation of parameters a and Th for the functional response of A. lopezi using the Hassel in Fenlon and Faddy [21] equation:
Ne = N0 {1- exp [(d + bN0) (ThNe - T) / (1 + cN0)]}
with b = 0,209, c = 0,027 and d = 0.
Meanwhile, the estimation of a and Th parameters for the functional response of Acerophagus sp. and Blepyrus sp. using Rogers (1972) [22] equation:
Ne = N0 {1- exp [a (ThNe - T)]}
Where Ne is the number of hosts being parasitized, No the number of hosts provided, the instantaneous search rate, T the length of time the host was exposed to the parasitoid, and Th the length of time the host was handled.
Data analysis for determining the type of functional response (logistic regression) and estimating model parameters (a and Th) with the non-linear regression analysis above was carried out using the R-Studio version 4.1.2 program (RStudio, Inc).

3. Results

3.1. Parasitoid preference for mealybug instar P. manihoti

The results showed that the three parasitoid species found were able to parasitize the 2nd instar, the 3rd instar, and the adult P. manihoti. However, each parasitoid species has a significantly different level of preference for the host stadia. The parasitoid A. lopezi showed a significantly stronger preference for instar-3 than in instar-2 and adults. The strength of this preference was also shown by the higher number of individuals in instar-3 (2.90 individuals) when compared to instar-2 (1.80 individuals) and adults (1.10 individuals).
In this investigation, Blepyrus sp. preferred instar-3 but was not significantly different from instar-2 or adults. Although a greater host selection value suggested preference support in instar-3, it was not substantially different when compared to instar-2 and adults. Unlike Acerophagus sp., which demonstrated a greater preference for instar-2 than instar-3 and adults, the strength of this preference was further confirmed by a significantly higher value of the instar-2 selection (0.17 individuals) vs instar-3 (0.90 individuals) and adults (0.80 individuals) (Table 1).

3.2. Effect of host density on parasitization rate of P. manihoti

The number of parasitized hosts and the rate of parasitization were both impacted by an increase in host density (Table 2). The number of hosts parasitized by A. lopezi, Acerophagus sp., and Blepyrus sp. was considerably impacted by P. manihoti population density. The parasitization rate of A. lopezi, on the other hand, exhibited a very sharp increase in the host population density of 3–15 individuals. The rate of increase in the percentage of parasitization peaked at 78 % at a host population density of 15 individuals, following which the rate of increase started to decrease (Table 2). Unlike the parasitization rates of Acerophagus sp. and Blepyrus sp., which showed the percentage of parasitization that had reached its peak at a population density of 7 and 3 individuals, respectively, 62.86 % at a density of 7 individuals by Acerophagus sp., and 60 % at a density of 3 species by Blepyrus sp.

3.3. Functional Response to Population Density of P. manihoti

The logistic regression study of the parasitoid A. lopezi revealed that the linear component of the coefficient was positive (0.1252) and the quadratic component was negative (-0.0073) at the 5% level. Both coefficients differed substantially from zero, with a P-value of 0.1699 and 0.0426 (Table 3).
This indicated that the density of P. manihoti parasitized by A. lopezi showed a type-III functional response model (Figure 1). The parasitoid Acerophagus sp. revealed that the linear coefficient component was negative (-0.1691) and the quadratic component was positive (0.0032), with P-values of 0.0754 and 0.4141, respectively. It was indicated that the parasitoid Acerophagus sp. exhibited a type-II functional response model. The same thing was also shown by the parasitoid Blepyrus sp., which showed a negative linear coefficient value (-0.2523) and a positive quadratic component (0.0068), with P-values of 0.0125 and 0.1067, indicating a functional type model-II. The estimated values of the parasitoid A. lopezi's search capacity (a) and handling time (Th) were 2.54 and 3.42, respectively, based on non-linear regression analysis. Meanwhile, the parasitoids Acerophagus sp. were 1.81 and 10.00, and Blepyrus sp. was 1.83 and 14.79. (Table 4).

4. Discussion

The potential of A. lopezi to parasitize P. manihoti instars 2–3 and adults may be related to A. lopezi's properties as a particular parasitoid on the host [17]. Similarly, Acerophagus papayae. selection of instar-2 This is due to physical considerations such as having a lower body size range of 0.55–0.55 mm, therefore they prefer the 2nd instar host [23]. In addition, there is a possibility of host response to parasitoids, such as encapsulation of parasitoid eggs, which causes the development of parasitoids in the host's body to be less optimal in early instars [24]. Encapsulation is a common form of host insect defense in response to invasion by endoparasitoids or other foreign organisms [13]. Blepyrus sp. chose instar-3 due to its larger size, which is about 1.0 mm–1.2 mm, thus preferring instar-3 with a body length range of 1.1 mm–1.5 mm [25]. Therefore, Blepyrus sp. prefers instar-3 and adults as hosts in several families of Pseudocococcidae [26].
The selection of instars 2 and 3 by parasitoid species in mealybugs as hosts is associated with the fulfillment of more nutrients and is beneficial to parasitoid progeny growth. Furthermore, the requirement for quantity and quality nutrients is strongly associated with offspring that mature into adult females in order to be more active [27, 28, 29, 30]. The cuticle of the 2nd and 3rd instar hosts was softer, and the kairomone generated by the young instar host was more specialized for triggering parasitoid activity. Similar studies show that parasitoid species grow 9.5 days quicker in nymph-3 mealybugs than in nymph-1 [31].
The amount of parasitization of the three examined parasitoids revealed considerable variations in the density of P. manihoti's host population. The relationship between parasitization level and host density is important in the dynamics of parasitoid and host populations. Previous studies revealed that a host density of 2–100 had a substantial influence on the quantity of P. manihoti parasitized by A. lopezi [32,33]. The parasitoid Anagyrus kamali, which parasitized Maconellicoccus hirsutus, was likewise impacted by host density in terms of parasitization, progeny, and sex ratio [34,35,36]. Interestingly, in large numbers, parasitoids lay just a few eggs on a single host. As a result, the fewer individuals that grow in the host egg, the greater the body size [37], which may be associated to the number of offspring (adult eggs) [38]. This has also been seen in wasps associated with Anagyrus spp., where the quantity of developed eggs increased as host population density increased [39].
The parasitoid A. lopezi showed a type-II functional response to P. manihoti in a study by Maharani et al. [40] at a host density of 2–100 individuals. Type-II is the functional reaction of the parasitoid Acerophagus papayae to the nymph Paracoccus marginatus [41]. The parameters in the laboratory, however, are not identical to those in the field. Temperature and competition with other insects are two elements that influence functional responsiveness in the field [42]. In a recent investigation, we found the parasitoid Blepyrus sp. parasitizing P. manihoti on cassava plants in the environment. Gronotoma micromorpha parasitoid we utilized against Liriomyza huidobrensis, on the other hand, demonstrated a type-2 functional response in which the amount of parasitization increased as the host density of L. huidobrensis increased [43].
The search efficiency of parasitoids is an important concept in understanding parasitoid host population dynamics, parasitoid evolution, and host behavior, as well as the use of parasitoids as natural enemies of insect pests in biological management [44,45]. Because the host search pattern is carried out systematically and parasitoids are no longer visited by parasitoids, different estimate values of a and Th might be considered [22].
According to these findings, A. lopezi is the most promising parasitoid as a biological control agent for P. manihoti. The use of these three parasitoids, on the other hand, has the potential to raise their function as biological control agents for P. manihoti pests in the field.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, our findings indicate that the three species of parasitoids, namely A. lopezi, Acerophagus sp., and Blepyrus sp., are associated with P. manihoti in the field. A. lopezi had the highest level of parasitization, whereas Blepyrus sp. had the smallest percentage of parasitization. Our results emphasize A. lopezi's capacity to parasitize all three P. manihoti instars, particularly the third instar, in contrast to Acerophagus sp. and Blepyrus sp., which prefer the 2nd and 3rd instars, respectively. The parasitoid A. lopezi demonstrated a type-III functional response, while the parasitoids Acerophagus sp. and Blepyrus sp. had a type-II functional response.
As a result of our findings, we recommend further research on the potential for biological control by utilizing A. lopezi on a field scale, so that the information obtained can be used to design integrated pest management strategies for A. lopezi conservation in the future, as well as support organic farming of cassava commodities in Bali Province, Indonesia.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I.W.S.; methodology, I.W.S., I.W.S., A.U., and A.N.; software, A.N.; validation, X.X., Y.Y. and Z.Z.; resources, I.W.E.K.U and I.K.W.Y.; supervision, I.W.S.; validation, I.W.S., and A.R.; writing—original draft, I.W.S., I.W.S., K.A.Y., A.M., D.K., I.W.E.K.U and I.K.W.Y.; writing—review and editing, A.N. and I.W.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Institute for Research and Community Service (LPPM) of Udayana University for the support of the 2021 PNBP grant with the contract number: B/96-22/UN14.4.A/PT.01.05/2021.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank the Chancellor and Head of the Institute for Research and Community Service (LPPM) of Udayana University for the support of the 2021 PNBP grant with the contract number: B/96-22/UN14.4.A/PT.01.05/2021. The authors also thank the Dean of the Faculty of Agriculture at Udayana University and the Head of the Integrated Pest Management Laboratory (IPMLab) for their support and facilities during the research.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Badan Pusat Statistik. Luas panen, produktivitas, produksi tanaman ubi kayu seluruh provinsi. 2022. Available https://bps.go.id/indicator/53/62/1/luas-panen-produksi-dan-produktivitas-ubi-kayu.html.
  2. Food and Agricultural Organisation, Chapter 6: Pest and disease., In: Save and Grow: Cassava A Guide to Sustainable Production Intensification. FAO Published, Rome FAO. 2013. 74–86.
  3. Calatayud PA, Le Ru B. Cassava-Mealybug Interactions. IRD Éditions Institut De Recherche Pour Le Développement Paris, France. 2006. 110.
  4. El-Zahi, E.Z.S.; Aref, S.A.E-S.; Korish, S.K.M. The cotton mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) as a new menace to cotton in Egypt and its chemical control. Journal of Plant Protection Research. 2016. 56(2): 111–115. https://doi.org/10.1515/jppr-2016-0017. [CrossRef]
  5. Supartha, I.W.; Yudha, I.K.W.; Wiradana, P.A.; Susila, I.W. Response of parasitoids to invasive pest Phenacoccus manihoti Matile-Ferrero (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) on cassava crop in Bali, Indonesia. Biodiversitas Journal of Biological Diversity. 2020. 21(10): 4543-4549. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d211011. [CrossRef]
  6. Nwanze, K.F. Relationships between cassava root yields and crop infestations by the mealybug, Phenacoccus manihoti. Tropical Pest Management. 1982. 28(1): 27–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670878209370669. [CrossRef]
  7. Parsa, S.; Kondo, T.; Winotai, A. The Cassava Mealybug (Phenacoccus manihoti) in Asia: First Records, Potential Distribution, and an Identification Key. PLoS ONE. 2012. 7(10): p. e47675. 1 – 11. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047675. [CrossRef]
  8. Muniappan, R.; Shepard, B.M.; Watson, G.W.; Carner, G.R.; Rauf, A.; Sartiami, D.; Hidayat, P.; Afun, J.V.K.; Goergen, G.; Rahman, A.K.M.Z. New Records of Invasive Insects (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha) in Southeast Asia and West Africa. Journal of Agricultural and Urban Entomology. 2009. 26(4): 167-174. https://doi.org/10.3954/1523-5475-26.4.167. [CrossRef]
  9. Belloti, A.C. Arthropod Pests. In: J.M.T. and A.C.B. Hillock R.J, Ed. Pest Cassava: Biology, Production and Utilization. CAB International. 2002. 209–234.
  10. Damalas, C.A.; Eleftherohorinos, I.G. Pesticide Exposure, Safety Issues, and Risk Assessment Indicators. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2011. 8(5): 1402–1419. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph8051402. [CrossRef]
  11. Barratt, B.I.P.; Moran, V.C.; Bigler, F.; van Lenteren, J.C. The status of biological control and recommendations for improving uptake for the future. BioControl. 2018. 63(1): 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10526-017-9831-y. [CrossRef]
  12. Kevan, P.G.; Shipp, L. Biological Control as Biotechnological Amelioration and Ecosystem Intensification in Managed Ecosystems ☆. In: Reference Module in Life Sciences. Elsevier. 2017. 1 – 10. https://doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-809633-8.09246-3. [CrossRef]
  13. Adriani, E.; Rauf, A.; Pudjianto. Laju enkapsulasi parasitoid Anagyrus lopezi (De Santis) (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae) oleh kutu putih singkong Phenacoccus manihoti Matile-Ferrero (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae). Jurnal Entomologi Indonesia. 2016. 13(3):147–155. https://doi.org/10.5994/jei.13.3.147. [CrossRef]
  14. Thomson, L.J.; Hoffmann, A.A. Natural enemy responses and pest control: Importance of local vegetation. Biological Control. 2010. 52(2): 160–166. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2009.10.008. [CrossRef]
  15. Pretty, J.; Bharucha, Z. Integrated Pest Management for Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture in Asia and Africa. Insects. 2015. 6(1): 152–182. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects6010152. [CrossRef]
  16. James, B.; Yaninek, J.; Neuenschwander, P.; Cudjoe, A.; Modder, W.; Echendu, N.; Toko, M. Pest Control in Cassava Farms. IPM Field Guide for Extension Agents. Wordsmithes Printers Lagos. Nigeria. 2000. 36 p.
  17. Löhr, B.; Varela, A.M.; Santos, B. Exploration for natural enemies of the cassava mealybug, Phenacoccus manihoti (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae), in South America for the biological control of this introduced pest in Africa. Bulletin of Entomological Research. 1990. 80(4): 417–425. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485300050677. [CrossRef]
  18. Rezaei, M.; Talebi, A.A.; Tazerouni, Z. Parasitoids: The Role of Host Preference and Host Specificity in Biological Control. In: E. Donnelly, Ed. Parasitoids: Biology, Behaviour, and Ecology. Nova Publisher, Inc, New York. 2019.
  19. Gordh, G. Oriental Mealybug Parasitoids of the Anagyrini (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America. 1996. 89(4): 606–607. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/89.4.606. [CrossRef]
  20. Manly. A model for certain types of selection experiments. Biometrics. 1974. 30(2): 281–294. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529649. [CrossRef]
  21. Fenlon, J.S.; Faddy, M.J. Modelling predation in functional response. Ecological Modelling. 2006. 198(1–2): 154–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.04.002. [CrossRef]
  22. Rogers, D. Random search and insect population models. Journal of Animal Ecology. 1972. 41(2): 369-383. https://doi.org/10.2307/3474. [CrossRef]
  23. Megawati.; Rauf, A.; Pujianto. Aspects of Biology of Acerophagus papayae Noyes & Schauff (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae), Parasitoid of The Papaya Mealybug. Jurnal Hama Penyakit Tumbuhan Tropika. 2019. 19(1): 52 - 63. https://doi.org/10.23960/j.hptt.11952-63. [CrossRef]
  24. Luna, M.G.; Desneux, N.; Schneider, M.I. Encapsulation and Self-Superparasitism of Pseudapanteles dignus (Muesebeck) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), a Parasitoid of Tuta absoluta (Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). PLOS ONE. 2016. 11(10): p. e0163196. 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0163196. [CrossRef]
  25. Wardani, N.; Rauf, A.; Winasa, I.W.; Santoso, S. Parameter Neraca Hayati dan Pertumbuhan Populasi Kutu Putih Phenacoccus manihoti Matile-Ferrero (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) pada Dua Varietas Ubi Kayu. Jurnal Hama Penyakit Tumbuhan Tropika. 2014.. 14(1): 64–70. https://doi.org/10.23960/j.hptt.11464-70. [CrossRef]
  26. Evans, G.; Abd-Rabou, S. An annotated list of the encyrtids of egypt (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea: Encyrtidae). Acta Phytopathologica et Entomologica Hungarica. 2013. 48(1): 107–128. https://doi.org/10.1556/aphyt.48.2013.1.10. [CrossRef]
  27. Le, T.T.N.; Graziosi, I.; Cira, T.M.; Gates, M.W.; Parker, L.; Wyckhuys, K.A.G. Landscape context does not constrain biological control of Phenacoccus manihoti in intensified cassava systems of southern Vietnam. Biological Control. 2018. 121: 129–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2018.02.011. [CrossRef]
  28. Thancharoen, A.; Lankaew, S.; Moonjuntha, P.; Wongphanuwat, T.; Sangtongpraow, B.; Ngoenklan, R.; Kittipadakul, P.; Wyckhuys, K.A.G. Effective biological control of an invasive mealybug pest enhances root yield in cassava. Journal of Pest Science. 2018. 91(4): 1199–1211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-018-1012-y. [CrossRef]
  29. Wyckhuys, K.A.G.; Zhang, W.; Prager, S.D.; Kramer, D.B.; Delaquis, E.; Gonzalez, C.E.; van der Werf, W. Biological control of an invasive pest eases pressures on global commodity markets. Environmental Research Letters. 2018. 13(9): p 094005. 1 – 13. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aad8f0. [CrossRef]
  30. Godfray, H.C.J. Parasitoids: Behavioral and Evolutionary Ecology. Princeton University Press. 1994. 64. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvs32rmp. [CrossRef]
  31. Sagarra, L.; Vincent, C. Influence of Host Stage on Oviposition, Development, Sex Ratio, and Survival of Anagyrus kamali Moursi (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae), a Parasitoid of the Hibiscus Mealybug,Maconellicoccus hirsutus Green (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae). Biological Control. 1999. 15(1): 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1006/bcon.1999.0696. [CrossRef]
  32. Fanani, M.Z.; Rauf, A.; Maryana, N.; Nurmansyah, A.; Hindayana, D. Geographic distribution of the invasive mealybug Phenacoccus manihoti and its introduced parasitoid Anagyrus lopezi in parts of Indonesia. Biodiversitas Journal of Biological Diversity. 2019. 20(12): 3751-3757. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d201238. [CrossRef]
  33. Maharani, J.S.; Rauf, A.; Maryana, N. Masa hidup imago, progeni, dan kemampuan parasitisasi Anagyrus lopezi (De Santis) (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae), parasitoid kutu putih singkong. Jurnal Entomologi Indonesia. 2020. 16(3): 138-150. https://doi.org/10.5994/jei.16.3.138. [CrossRef]
  34. Chong, J.H.; Roda, A.L.; Mannion, C.M. Life history of the mealybug, Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae), at constant temperatures. Environ Entomol. 2008. 37(2): 323–332. https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/37.2.323. [CrossRef]
  35. Saini, A.; Sharma, P.L. Functional Response and Mutual Interference of Cotesia vestalis (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) on Plutella xylostella (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae). Journal of Entomological Science. 2018. 53(2): 162–170. https://doi.org/10.18474/JES17-36.1. [CrossRef]
  36. Eliopoulos, P.A.; Kapranas, A.; Givropoulou, E.G.; Hardy, I.C.W. Reproductive efficiency of the bethylid wasp Cephalonomia tarsalis: the influences of spatial structure and host density. Bulletin of Entomological Research. 2017. 107(2): 139–147. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485316000651. [CrossRef]
  37. Boivin, G.; Martel, V. Size-induced reproductive constraints in an egg parasitoid. Journal of Insect Physiology. 2012. 58(12): 1694–1700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinsphys.2012.10.014. [CrossRef]
  38. Segoli, M.; Rosenheim, J.A. The effect of body size on oviposition success of a minute parasitoid in nature. Ecological Entomology. 2015. 40(4): 483–485. https://doi.org/10.1111/een.12194. [CrossRef]
  39. Segoli, M.; Rosenheim, J.A. Limits to the reproductive success of two insect parasitoid species in the field. Ecology. 2013. 94(11): 2498–2504. https://doi.org/10.1890/13-0262.1. [CrossRef]
  40. Maharani, Y.; Rauf, A.; Sartiami, D.; Anwar, R. Biology and life table of papaya mealybug Paracoccus marginatus Williams & Granara de Willink (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) on three host plant species Paracoccus marginatus Williams & Granara De Willink. Jurnal Hama dan Penyakit Tumbuhan Tropika. 2016. 16(1): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.23960/j.hptt.1161-9. [CrossRef]
  41. Rebu, Y.U.; Rauf, A.; Winasa, I.W. Tanggap Fungsional Parasitoid Acerophagus papayae Noyes & Schauff Terhadap Kutu Putih Pepaya Paracoccus marginatus Granara de Willink (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae). Buletin Leguminosae. 2012. 18(3).
  42. Bale, J.S.; Masters, G.J.; Hodkinson, I.D.; Awmack, C.; Bezemer, T.M.; Brown, V.K.; Butterfield, J.; Buse, A.; Coulson, J.C.; Farrar, J.; Good, J.E.G.; Harrington, R.; Hartley, S.; Jones, T.H.; Lindroth, R.L.; Press, M.C.; Symrnioudis, I.; Watt, A.D.; Whittaker, J.B. Herbivory in global climate change research: direct effects of rising temperature on insect herbivores. Global Change Biology. 2002. 8(1): 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2002.00451.x. [CrossRef]
  43. Supartha, I.W.; Susila, I.W.; Yohanes.; Yudha, I.K.W.; Wiradana, P.A. Potential of parasitoid Gronotoma micromorpha Perkin (Hymenoptera: Eucoilidae) as a biocontrol agent for pea leafminer fly, Liriomyza huidobrensis Blanchard (Diptera: Agromyzidae). Acta Ecologica Sinica. 2022. 42(2): 90 – 94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chnaes.2021.06.008. [CrossRef]
  44. Vet, L.E.M. Parasitoid searching efficiency links behaviour to population processes. Applied Entomology and Zoology. 2001. 36(4): 399–408. https://doi.org/10.1303/aez.2001.399. [CrossRef]
  45. Wahyuni, S.; Supartha, I.W.; Ubaidillah, R.; Wijaya, I.N. Parasitoid community structure of leaf miner Liriomyza spp. (Diptera: Agromyzidae) and the rate of parasitization on vegetable crops in Lesser Sunda Islands, Indonesia. Biodiversitas Journal of Biological Diversity. 2017. 18(2): 593–600. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d180221. [CrossRef]
Preprints 84799 g001
Figure 1. Functional response curves for the three parasitoids.
Figure 1. Functional response curves for the three parasitoids.
Preprints 84799 g001
Table 1. Test of parasitoid preference on several instars of the mealybug P. manihoti.
Table 1. Test of parasitoid preference on several instars of the mealybug P. manihoti.
         The emergence of parasitoids (ind) Preference Index (Li)
Treatments A. lopezi Acerophagus sp. Blepyrus sp. A. lopezi Acerophagus sp. Blepyrus sp.
Instar -2 1,80 ± 0,92b 1,70 ± 0,67a 0,40 ± 0,70b 0,18 ± 0,20b 0,19 ± 0,17a 0,03 ± 0,10a
Instar- 3 2,90 ± 0,74a 0,90 ± 0,57b 1,10 ± 0,57a 0,39 ± 0,06a 0,03 ± 0,10b 0,06 ± 0,13a
Adults 1,10 ± 0,74b 0,80 ± 0,63b 0,60 ± 0,52b 0,09 ± 0,15b 0,03 ± 0,10b 0,03 ± 0,10a
Values in the same row followed by the same letter do not show a significant difference (Duncan's test = 5%).
Table 2. Effect of host density on parasitization rate of P. manihoti.
Table 2. Effect of host density on parasitization rate of P. manihoti.
Host density Number of parasitized hosts (ind) Parasitization rate (%)
A. lopezi Acerophagus sp Blepyrus sp A. lopezi Acerophagus sp Blepyrus sp
3 2,0 ± 0,71d 1,8 ± 0,84b 1,8 ± 0,84b 66,67 ± 2,35ab 60,00 ± 2,78a 60,00 ± 1,27a
7 5,4 ± 0,55c 4,2 ± 0,82a 3,2 ± 0,84a 77,14 ± 1,78a 62,86 ± 1,62a 45,71 ± 1,19a
15 11,8 ± 1,30b 4,8 ± 0,45a 3,2 ± 0,45a 78,67 ± 1,86a 30,67 ± 3,65b 21,33 ± 2,98b
25 14,8 ± 1,64a 5,0 ± 0,00a 3,4 ± 0,55a 59,20 ± 1,65b 20,80 ± 1,79bc 13,60 ± 2,19b
35 15,2 ± 1,30a 5,2 ± 0,45a 4,0 ± 0,00a 42,29 ± 3,73c 14,29 ± 2,02bc 10,29 ± 1,56b
50 15,6 ± 1,14a 5,6 ± 0,55a 4,0 ± 0,00a 30,80 ± 1,79c 10,00 ± 1,41c 7,20 ± 1,10b
Values in the same row followed by the same letter do not show a significant difference (Duncan's test = 5%).
Table 3. Results of logistic regression analysis of functional response curves of parasitoids A. lopezi, Acerophagus sp., and Blepyrus sp.
Table 3. Results of logistic regression analysis of functional response curves of parasitoids A. lopezi, Acerophagus sp., and Blepyrus sp.
Coefficient Estimating SD1 z-count P-Values
Parasitoid: A. lopezi
Intercept (P0) 0.6093 0.6514 0.94 0.3496
Linear (P1) 0.1252 0.0912 1.37 0.1699
Quadratic (P2) -0.0073 0.0036 -2.03 0.0426
Cubic (P3) 0.0001 0.0000 2.07 0.0385
Parasitoid: Acerophagus sp.
Intercept (P0) 1.2040 0.6368 1.89 0.0587
Linear (P1) -0.1691 0.0951 -1.78 0.0754
Quadratic (P2) 0.0032 0.0039 0.82 0.4141
Cubic (P3) 0.0000 0.0000 -0.49 0.6251
Parasitoid: Blepyrus sp.
Intercept (P0) 1.2030 0.6452 1.86 0.0624
Linear (P1) -0.2523 0,1010 -2.50 0.0125
Quadratic (P2) 0.0068 0,0042 1.61 0.1067
Cubic (P3) -0.0001 0.0000 -1.29 0.1963
Table 4. The results of the estimation of model parameters (a and Th) using non-linear regression analysis for the three parasitoids.
Table 4. The results of the estimation of model parameters (a and Th) using non-linear regression analysis for the three parasitoids.
Parasitoid a (mealybugs/hour) Th (minutes)
A. lopezi 2,54 ± 1,47 3,42 ± 0,52
Acerophagus sp. 1,81 ± 0,62 10,00 ± 1,18
Blepyrus sp. 1,83 ± 0,90 14,79 ± 2,00
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Old Parasitoids for New Mealybugs: Host Location Behavior and Parasitization Efficacy of Anagyrus vladimiri on Pseudococcus comstocki

Renato Ricciardi

et al.

Insects,

2021

The Potential of Parapanteles hyposidrae and Protapanteles immunis (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) as Biocontrol Agents for the Tea Grey Geometrid Ectropis grisescens (Lepidoptera)

Zi-Qi Wang

et al.

Insects,

2022

Impact of the Parasitoids Anisopteromalus calandrae (Howard) and Lariophagus distinguendus (Förster) on Three Pests of Stored Rice

Jordi Riudavets

et al.

Insects,

2023

Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

facebook logotwitter logolinkedin logo
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated