Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection

, Volume 117, Issue 3, pp 129–135 | Cite as

Control of the Colorado potato beetle (Leptinotarsa decemlineata [Say]) on potato under field conditions: a comparison of the efficacy of foliar application of two strains of Steinernema feltiae (Filipjev) and spraying with thiametoxam

  • Ž. Laznik
  • T. Tóth
  • T. Lakatos
  • M. Vidrih
  • S. TrdanEmail author


The efficacy of entomopathogenic nematodes in controlling Leptinotarsa decemlineata on potato was tested in a field experiment. A Slovenian strain of Steinernema feltiae (B30) was used with the commercial product Entonem and the insecticide thiametoxam. The application of the nematodes and thiametoxam was repeated twice. In the second application half of the first dose (250.000 infective juveniles m–2) was used. Observing the population dynamics of the pest, it has become apparent that entomopathogenic nematodes significantly decreased the number of larvae, while no effect on their eggs and adults was confirmed. In controlling larvae in both years thiametoxam showed the best results in general, meanwhile treatments with EPNs showed no differences. In both years the highest yield was obtained when thiametoxam was used (2008: 24.38 t ha–1; 2009: 21.60 t ha–1), while the lowest yield was in the control treatment (2008: 7.65 t ha–1; 2009: 6.94 t ha–1). Different treatments of EPNs showed differences, and yields ranged from 16.44 (S. feltiae B30 low concentration) to 17.81 t ha–1 (Entonem high concentration) in 2008, and between 11.06 (S. feltiae B30 low concentration) and 14.88 t ha–1 (Entonem high concentration) in 2009. Both strains of entomopathogenic nematodes showed sufficient activity when controlling larvae, but unfortunately the high price of these biological agents at the moment makes it difficult for their broader implementation in the systems of potato production.

Key words

biological control entomopathogenic nematodes field experiment insecticide population dynamics yield 

Bekämpfung des Kartoffelkäfers (Leptinotarsa decemlineata [Say]) an Kartoffeln im Feld: ein Vergleich der Wirksamkeit von Blattbehandlungen mit zwei Stämmen von Steinernema feltiae (Filipjev) mit Thiametoxam


Die Wirksamkeit entomopathogener Nematoden bezüglich der Bekämpfung des Kartoffelkäfers (Leptinotarsa decemlineata) wurde im Feld an Kartoffeln untersucht. Ein slowenischer Stamm von Steinernema feltiae (B30) und das kommerzielle Produkt Entonem wurden mit dem Insektizid Thiametoxam in zweifacher Wiederholung verglichen. Bei der zweiten Anwendung wurde mit 250.000 Nematodenlarven m–2 die halbe Dosis der ersten ausgebracht. Populationsdynamische Beobachtungen am Schadtier ergaben, dass die entomopathogenen Nematoden zwar die Anzahl der Käferlarven signifikant verminderten, die Anzahl der Eier und Adulten aber nicht beeinflussten. Gegenüber den Käferlarven zeigte Thiametoxam in beiden Jahren generell die stärkste Wirkung, während sich die Wirkung der Varianten mit entomopathogenen Nematoden nicht voneinander unterschied. Die höchsten Kartoffelerträge wurden in beiden Versuchsjahren mit Thiametoxam erzielt (2008: 24,38 t ha–1; 2009: 21,60 t ha–1), während die geringsten Mengen in der Kontrolle geerntet wurden (2008: 7,65 t ha–1; 2009: 6,94 t ha–1). Die verschiedenen Behandlungen mit Nematoden wirkten unterschiedlich; die Erträge variierten zwischen 16,44 (S. feltiae B30 in geringer Dosierung) und 17,81 t ha–1 (Entonem in hoher Dosierung) im Jahr 2008, sowie zwischen 11,06 (S. feltiae B30 in geringer Dosierung) und 14,88 t ha–1 (Entonem in hoher Dosierung) im Jahr 2009. Beide untersuchten Nematodenstämme zeigten gegenüber den Larven des Kartoffelkäfers ausreichende Wirksamkeit, aber ihr derzeitig hoher Preis beeinträchtigt noch ihre verbreitetere Anwendung im Kartoffelbau.


biologische Bekämpfung entomopathogene Nematoden Ertrag Feldversuch Insectizid Populationsdynamik 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ábrahám, E.B., E. Zsom, M. Sárvári, 2006: The effect of year and irrigation on the yield quantity and quality of the potato. J. Agric. Sci., Debrecen, 24, 12–16.Google Scholar
  2. Armer, C.A., R.E. Berry, G.L. Reed, S.J. Jepsen, 2004: Colorado potato beetle control by application of the entomopathogenic nematode Heterorhabditis marelata and potato plant alkaloid manipulation. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 111, 47–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arthurs, S., K.M. Heinz, J.R. Prasifka, 2004: An analysis of using entomopathogenic nematodes against above-ground pests. Bull. Entomol. Res. 94, 297–306.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bednarek, A., T. Nowicki, 1986: Effect of intrapopulation factors in the nematodes Steinernema feltiae (Steinernematidae) on the intensity of insect infestation. Zesz. Probl. Postepow Nauk Roln. 323, 199–212.Google Scholar
  5. Berry, R.E., 1998: Insects and Mites of Economic Importance in the Nortwest, 2nd edn. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA.Google Scholar
  6. Berry, R.E., J. Liu, G. Reed, 1997: Comparison of endemic and exotic entomopathogenic nematode species for control of Colorado potato beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 90, 1528–1533.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Cantelo, W.W., W.R. Nickle, 1992: Susceptibility of prepupae of the Colorado potato beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) to entomopathogenic nematodes (Rhabditida: Steinernematidae, Heterorhabditidae). J. Entomol. Sci. 27, 37–43.Google Scholar
  8. Chavarría-Hernandez, N., M. De La Torre, 2001: Population growth kinetics of the nematode, Steinernema feltiae, in submerged monoxenic culture. Biotechnol. Lett. 23, 311–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cranshaw, W.S., E.B. Radcliffe, 1980: Effect of defoliation on yield of potatoes. J. Econ. Entomol. 73, 131–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dent, D., 2002: Can biological control replace chemicals? Pestic. News 58, 17.Google Scholar
  11. Ehlers, R.-U., 1998: Entomopathogenic nematodes–Save biocontrol agents for sustainable systems. Phytoprotection 79, 94–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Glazer, I., M. Klein, A. Navon, Y. Nakache, 1992: Comparison of efficacy of entomopatohgenic nematodes combined with antidesiccants applied by canopy sprays against three cotton pests (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 85, 1636–1641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hare, J.D., 1980: Impact of defoliation by the Colorado potato beetle on potato yields. J. Econ. Entomol. 73, 369–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hare, J.D., 1990: Ecology and management of the Colorado potato beetle. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 35, 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hoffmann, E.J., S.M. Middleton, J.C. Wise, 2008: Ovicidal activity of organophosphate, oxadiazine, neonicotinoid and insect growth regulator chemistries on northern strain plum curculio, Conotrachelus nenuphar. J. Insect Sci. 8, 1536–2442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hough-Goldstein, J.A., G.E. Heimpel, H.E. Bechmann, C.E. Mason, 1993: Arthropod natural enemies of the Colorado potato beetle. Crop Prot. 12, 324–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Igrc-Barčič, J., R. Dobrinčč, M. Maceljski, 1999: Effect of insecticides on the Colorado potato beetles resistant to OP, OC and P insecticides. Anz. Schädlingskd. 72, 76–80.Google Scholar
  18. Ishibashi, N., D.-R. Choi, 1991: Biological control of soil pests by mixed application of entomopathogenic and fungivorous nematodes. J. Nematol. 23, 175–181.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Journey, A.M., K.R. Ostlie, 2000: Biological Control of Western Corn Rootworm (Coleoptera: Crysomelidae) Using the Entomopathogenic Nematode, Steinernema carpocapsae. Biol. Control 29, 822–831.Google Scholar
  20. Kakaty, B.M., S. Thamburaj, P. Stalin, 1992: Study on the growth and yield of sweet potato at different stages of harvest. J. Root Crops 18, 73–76.Google Scholar
  21. Kaya, H.K., 1990: Soil ecology. In: R. Gaugler, H.K. Kaya (eds.): Entomopathogenic Nematodes in Biological Control, pp. 93–115. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA.Google Scholar
  22. Kos, K., B. Tschöpe, E. Jörg, S. Trdan, 2009: Testing the suitability of SIMLEP decision support system for protection of potato against Colorado potato beetle (Leptinotarsa decemlineata [Say], Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) in Slovenia. Acta Agric. Slov. 93, 93–104 [In Slovenian].Google Scholar
  23. Laznik, Ž., T. Tóth, T. Lakatos, M. Vidrih, S. Trdan, 2009: First record of Steinernema feltiae (Filipjev) (Rhabditida: Steinernematidae) in Slovenia. Helminthologia 46, 135–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Laznik, Ž., T. Tóth, T. Lakatos, M. Vidrih, S. Trdan, 2010: The activity of three new strains of Steinernema feltiae against adults of Sitophilus oryzae under laboratory conditions. J. Food Agric. Environ. 8, 132–136.Google Scholar
  25. Lebeck, L.M., R. Gaugler, H.K. Kaya, A.H. Hara, M.W. Johnson, 1993: Host stage suitability of the leafminer Liriomyza trifolii (Diptera: Agromyzidae) to the entomopathogenic nematode Steinernema carpocapsae (Rhabditida: Steinernematidae). J. Invertebr. Pathol. 62, 58–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lopez, R., D.N. Ferro, R.G. Van Driesche, 1995: Two tachinid species discriminate between parasitized and non-parasitized hosts. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 74, 37–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. MacVean, C.M., J.W. Brewer, J.L. Capinera, 1982: Field test of antidesiccants to extend the infection period of an entomogenous nematode, Neoaplectana carpocapsae, against the Colorado potato beetle. J. Econ. Entomol. 75, 97–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mannan, M.A., M.K.R. Bhuiyan, A. Quasem, M.M. Rashid, M.A. Siddique, 1992: Study on the growth and partitioning of dry matter in sween potato. J. Root Crops 18, 1–5.Google Scholar
  29. Miloševič, D., I. Djalovič, Z. Bugarčič, 2008: The importance of a healthy planting material for potato production increases. Agro-Knowl. J. 9, 5–17.Google Scholar
  30. MINISTRY of AGRICULTURE, FOOD, and FORESTRY of REPUBLIC SLOVENIA [Maff], 2008: Decision on the change of the status of the exotic agent for biological control (no. 3430-9/ 2008/5) [In Slovenian].Google Scholar
  31. Musa, F., D. Bericha, B. Kelmendi, I. Rusinovci, O. Zhitia, R. Bekqeli, I. Lushi, 2009: Tuber yield and other relevant parameters of some Netherlands potato varieties in agro-climatic conditions of Kosova. Bull. 44th Croatian and 4th Int. Symp. Agric., 444–448.Google Scholar
  32. Pap, L., A. Toth, S. Karikas, 1997: A survey of the insecticide resistance status of the Colorado potato beetle, Leptinotarsa decemlineata, in Hungary between 1987 and 1991: Pestic. Sci. 49, 389–392.Google Scholar
  33. Stewart, J.G., G. Boiteau, J. Kimpinski, 1998: Management of late-season adults of the Colorado potato beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) with entomopathogenic nematodes. Can. Entomol. 130, 509–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Trdan, S., M. Vidrih, N. Valič, 2006: Activity of four entomopathogenic nematode species against young adults of Sitophilus granarius (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) and Oryzaephilus surinamensis (Coleoptera: Silvanidae) under laboratory conditions. J. Plant Dis. Protect. 113, 168–173.Google Scholar
  35. Trdan, S., M. Vidrih, N. Valič, Ž. Laznik, 2008: Impact of entomopathogenic nematodes on adults of Phyllotreta spp. (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) under laboratory conditions. Acta Agric. Scand. B Soil Plant. Sci. 58, 169–175.Google Scholar
  36. Trdan, S., M. Vidrih, L. Andjus, Ž. Laznik, 2009: Activity of four entomopathogenic nematode species against different developmental stages of Colorado potato beetle, Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae). Helminthologia 46, 14–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Unruh, T.R., L.A. Lacey, 2001: Control of codling moth, Cydia pomonella (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), with Steinernema carpocapsae: effects of supplemental wetting and pupation site on infection rate. Biol. Control 20, 48–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Welch, H.E., L.J. Briand, 1961: Tests of the nematode DD136 and an associated bacterium for control of the Colorado potato beetle, Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say). Can. Entomol. 93, 759–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Whalon, M.E., D.L. Miller, R.M. Hollingworth, E.J. Grafius, J.R. Miller, 1993: Selection of a Colorado potato beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) strain resistant to Bacillus thuringiensis. J. Econ. Entomol. 86, 226–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Deutsche Phythomedizinische Gesellschaft 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ž. Laznik
    • 1
  • T. Tóth
    • 2
  • T. Lakatos
    • 2
  • M. Vidrih
    • 1
  • S. Trdan
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Agronomy, Chair of Phytomedicine, Agricultural Engineering, Crop Production, Pasture and Grassland ManagementUniversity of Ljubljana, Biotechnical FacultyLjubljanaSlovenia
  2. 2.Research and Extension Centre for FruitgrowingÚjfehértóHungary

Personalised recommendations