International Journal of Tropical Insect Science

, Volume 2, Issue 4, pp 227–231 | Cite as

Susceptibility of the Coffee Berry Borer Hypothenemus Hampei Ferrari to Various Insecticidal Formulations

  • Llewellyn F. Rhodes
  • Ajai Mansingh


The LC50 values (% active ingredient in parentheses) for 34 formulations of 29 insecticides, obtained by dipping green berries (GWB) infested with adult Hypothenemus hampei, were: thiodan EC 35 (0.0003) > perfekthion (0.0004) > carbicron (0.00044) > decis (0.0005) > actellic (0.0008) > basudin (0.0009) > belmark and ciodrin (0.0012) > thiodan EC 3 (0.0013) > malathion (0.0014) > folimat and bidrin (0.002) > aldicarb and lindane (0.003) > nexion > tiovel EC 3 > dursban (0.0046-0.006) > supo-na > methomyl > kelthane (0.011–0.012) > chlordane > aldrin > dimilin > chlorfenvinphos > phosdrin > sevin > methoxychlor > dieldrin (0.016–0.025) > nexagan (0.034) > azodrin (0.04) > fenitro-thion (0.07) > bimarit (0.14) > chlorpyrifos (0.39) > gardona (0.96).

The order of toxicity remained the same for borers in the pulp (GP) or endosperm (GE) of green berries or endosperm of red (RE) berries, though the LC50 of each formulation of the same or different insecticides varied significantly. The respective LC50 values for the four leading, and the rest of the formulations were about 7–21- and 2–6-fold higher in GWB than GP, 9–23 and 2–5-fold higher in GE than GP, 1–2.3- and 1–3-fold higher in RE than GE, and 12–25- and 3–37-fold higher in RE than GWB. The practical significance of the results is discussed.

Key Words

Coffee berry borer Hypothenemus hampei insecticides formulations 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Almedia P. R., Cavalcante R. E. and Holand A. A. (1966) New results in the control of coffee berry borer, H. hampei (Ferr., 1867). An Reuniao Fitossanitar Brasil 10, 51–54.Google Scholar
  2. Amaral S. F., Arruda H. V. and Orlando A. (1973) Some insecticides and coffee liquor. Archos Inst. bioi. S Paulo 40, 173–180.Google Scholar
  3. Amaral S. F. and Oliviera D. A. (1974) The behaviour of some chlorinated insecticides for the control of coffee berry borer H. hampei (Ferr., 1867). Secao de Pragas das Plantas Alimenticias Basices e Olericolas, Instituto Biologici, Sao Paulo, Brazil 40, 106–110.Google Scholar
  4. Bardner R. (1978) Pest control in coffee. Pestic. Sci. 9, 458–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bergamin J. (1943) Contribucao para o conhecimento da biologia da broca do cafe. Archos Inst, bioi, S Paulo 14, 31–72.Google Scholar
  6. Boncato A. A. and Gandia I. M. (1967) Effect of four spraying frequencies with six insecticides in the control of coffee berry borer Stephanoderes hampei (Ferr.). Phillip. J. Plant Ind. 32, 109–119.Google Scholar
  7. Busvine J. R. (1957) Techniques for Testing Insecticides, pp. 167–184. Commonwealth Institute of Entomology, London.Google Scholar
  8. Evans D. E. (1965) The coffee berry borer in Kenya. Kenya Coffee 134, 15–21.Google Scholar
  9. Hernandez-Paz P. and Penagos D. H. (1974) Evaluation of a system of low volume application, in the control of the borer of coffee fruit. Ana cafe 134, 15–21.Google Scholar
  10. Ingram W. R. (1968) Observations on the control of the coffee berry borer Hypothenemus hampei (Ferr.) with endosulfan in Uganda. Bull. ent. Res. 57, 539–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lepage H. S. and Giannotti O. (1950) The action of some modern insecticides on the coffee berry borer. Archos Inst, bioi, S Paulo 19, 299–308.Google Scholar
  12. Lepelley R. H. (1969) Pests of Coffee, pp. 114–138. Longman, London.Google Scholar
  13. Liceras Z. L. and Farge G. G. (1975) Chemical control of the coffee berry borer with early and late applications in Tingo Maria. Revista Peruva de Entomologia 17, 78–80.Google Scholar
  14. Mcpherson G. I. (1978) Report on the presence of coffee berry borer in Jamaica. Symposium on Coffee Cultivation, Curso Reuniones, IICA 184, 15–24. Guatemala City.Google Scholar
  15. Penados-Robles R. and Ochoa M. H. (1978) Evaluation of insecticides in the control of the borer of coffee fruit in the Republic of Guatemala. In Symposium on Coffee Cultivation, Curso Reuniones, IICA 184, 25–37. Guatemala City.Google Scholar
  16. Thomson W. T. (1980) Agricultural Chemicals, Book I, Insecticides. Thomson, Fresno, California.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ICIPE 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Llewellyn F. Rhodes
    • 1
  • Ajai Mansingh
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of the West IndiesKingston 7Jamaica

Personalised recommendations