Advertisement

The Susceptibility of Some Maize Varieties to Sitophilus Zeamais Mots (Coleoptera: Curculionidae)

  • D. A. Enobakhare
  • E. I. Obasuyi
Article
First Online:

Abstract

Four maize varieties, 8321-21-W, DMR-LSR-W, ACR-83TZUT-W and TZB were simultaneously fed to Sitophilus zeamais in a completely randomized design. Susceptibility was assessed on such parameters as weight loss of grains caused by the weevil infestation, number of progenies at 42 days after infestation and the percentage of damaged kernels. The least susceptible in terms of loss of weight of grains was TZB. Losses in the other three were not significantly different at 5% level (P > 0.05).

The least percentage mortality of adult weevils and the highest number of punctured kernels were observed in var. 8321-21-W (48%), 27 kernels respectively while var. DMR-LSR-W had the highest mortality score (80%) and ranked second in the total number of kernels punctured (13). Details of the description of maize varieties used and the analysis of damage caused by the weevil are discussed in the paper.

Key Words

Susceptibility Sitophilus zeamais maize teneral 

Résumé

Sitophilus zeamais était alimenté simultanément de quatre variétés de maïs (8321-21-W, DMR-LSR-W, ACR-83TZUT-W et TZB) d’une façon complètement choisie au hasard. Tels paramètres que la perte de poids des grains causée par l’invasion des charançons, le nombre de progénitures à 42 jours après l’invasion et la pourcentage des grains endommagés étaient employés pour l’évaluation de la susceptibilité. Le moindre susceptible en ce qui concerne la perte de poids des grains était le TZB. Les pertes dans d’autres trois variétés n’étaient pas différentes d’une manière significative au niveau de 5% (P > 0.05). Le moindre pourcentage de mortalité des charançons adultes et le nombre le plus élevé des grains crevés étaient observés dans la variété 8321-21-W (48%, 27 respectivement), pendant que la variété DMR-LSR-W avait les points les plus élevés de mortalité (80%), et avait le second rang au nombre total des grains crevés (13). Les details de description des variétés de maïs utilisées et l’analyse et le dégat causé par les charancons sont discutés dans cette communication.

Mots Clés

Susceptibilité Sitophilus zeamais maïs jeune charançon 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams J. M. (1976) Weight loss caused by development of S. zeamais Motsch. in maize. J. Stored Prod, Res. 12, 269–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adesuyi S. A. (1979) Relative resistance of some varieties of maize to attack by Sitophilus (Mots.). Ann. Rep. Niger. Stored Prod. Res. Inst., 1976/77, Tech. Rep. No. 8, pp. 79–82.Google Scholar
  3. Adesuyi S. A. (1977) Assessment of losses in two varieties of maize (PARZ 26 and NSI) stored in cribs in the humid tropics. Niger. J. Plant Prot. 3, 98–101.Google Scholar
  4. Anonymous (1975) Production Yearbook, F.A.O. Publication, Rome.Google Scholar
  5. Anonymous (1980) Nigeria rural economic survey. Report on Crop Estimates 1978–1979. Agriculture Survey Unit Federation Office of Statistics, Lagos, Nigeria.Google Scholar
  6. Bernardo E. N. (1972) Varietal resistance of corn to the rice weevil Sitophilus oryzae (L.) The Philippine Entomol. 2, 195–203.Google Scholar
  7. Burges H. D. and Haskins K. P. F. (1965) Life cycle of the tropical warehousemoth, Cadra cautella (Wlk.) at controlled temperature and humidities. Bull. entomol. Res. 55, 775–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coombs C. W. (1972) The interpretation of experiments assessing the susceptibility of stored cereals to attack by Sitophilus spp. (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). J. Stored Prod. Res. 8, 81–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Coombs C. W. and Porter J. E. (1986) Some factors affecting the infestation of wheat and maize by Sitophilus oryzae (L) and Sitophilus zeamais Mots. (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). J. Stored Prod. Res. 22, 33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Comes M. A. (1965) A revised listing of the insects associated with stored products in Nigeria. Ann. Rep. Niger. Stored Prod. Res., Inst. 1964, Tech. Rep. No. 19, p. 96.Google Scholar
  11. Cornes M. A. (1973) A checklist of the insects associated with stored products in Nigeria (Revised ed.) Ann. Rep. Niger. Stored Prod. Res. Inst. 1971, Tech. Rep. No. 11, pp. 73–98.Google Scholar
  12. Davey P. M. (1965) The susceptibility of sorghum to attack by the weevil Sitophilus oryzae (L.). Bull. Entomol. Res. 56, 287–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dennis S. H. (1975) Agricultural Insect Pests of the Tropics and Their Control. Cambridge University Press, Great Britain.Google Scholar
  14. Dobie P. (1974) The laboratory assessment of the inherent susceptibility of maize varieties to post harvest infestation by Sitopilus zeamais Motsch. (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). J. Stored. Prod. Res. 10, 183–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Falomo A. A. (1981) Post harvest susceptibility of maize varieties to infestation by Sitophilus zeamais Motsch. Ann. Rep. Niger. Stored Prod. Res. Inst., 1978/79 Tech. Rep. 6, 57–63.Google Scholar
  16. Giles P. H. (1969) Observations in Kenya on flight activity of stored products insects particularly Sitophilus zeamais Motsch. J. Stored Prod. Res. 4, 317–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Halstead G. H. (1962) External sex differences in stored products Coleoptera. Bull. Entomol. Res. 54, 119–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Howe R. W. (1956) The effect of temperature and humidity on the role of development and mortality of Tribolium castaneum (Herbst.) (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Ann. appl. Biol. 44, 356–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hurlock E. T. (1965) Some observations on the loss in weight caused by Sitophilus granarius (L.) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) to wheat under constant experimental conditions. J. Stored. Prod. Res. 1, 193–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ivbijaro M. F., Osisanya E. O. and Akinlade E. E. (1979) The deterioration of commercial maize (Zea mays L.) by insects and fungi. Int. Biodeterior. Bull. 15, 74–76.Google Scholar
  21. Longstaff B.C. (1981) Density-dependent fecundity in Sitophilus oryzae (L.) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). J. Stored Prod. Res. 17, 73–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Morah S. C. (1977) A comparison of two techniques for testing in the laboratory the susceptibility of maize varieties to infestation by Sitophilus zeamais (Mots). Rep. Nig. Stored. Prod. Res. Inst. 1977 Tech. Rep. No. 4, pp. 45–50.Google Scholar
  23. Morah S. C. and Mbata G. N. (1986) Assessment of the relative susceptibility of some maize varieties to post-harvest infestation by the maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais (Mots). Ann. Rep. Niger. Stored Prod. Res. Inst. 1982, Tech. Rep. No. 5, pp. 63–68.Google Scholar
  24. Riley J., Effiong E. A. and Ogunmodede S. I. (1956) Damage to various maize varieties in store. Ann. Rep. West. Afr. Stored Prod. Res. Unit. 1956, pp. 164–169.Google Scholar
  25. Russel D. (1966) Influence of rice varieties on oviposition and development of S. oryzae and S. zeamais. J. Stored Prod. Res. 16, 1–28.Google Scholar
  26. Schoonhoven A.V., Mills R.B.and Horber E. (1974) Development of Sitophilus zeamais Mots. in maize kernels and pellets made from maize kernels fractions. J. Stored Prod. Res. 10, 73–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Singh D.N. and McCain F.S. (1963) Therelationship of some nutritional properties of the com kernel to rice weevil infestation. Crop Sci. 3, 259–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Singh K., Agrawal N. S. and Girish G. K. (1974) The oviposition and development of Sitophilus oryzae (L.) in different high yielding varieties of maize. J. Stored Prod. Res. 10, 105–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tropical Development and Research Institute (TDRI) (1987) Insects and Arachnids of Tropical Stored Products—itTheir Biology and Identification (A Training Manual). Storage Department, TDRI, London.Google Scholar
  30. Tipping P. W., Rodriguez C. G., Poneleit and Legg D. E. (1986) Feeding activity of Sitophilus zeamais (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) on resistant and susceptible corn genotypes. Environ. Entomol. 15, 654–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tyagi A. K. and Girish G. K. (1977) Studies on the assessment of storage losses of food grains by insects Factors affecting extent of damage. Bull. Grain. Technol. 15, 46–61.Google Scholar
  32. Windstrom N. W., Redlinger L. M. and Wiser W. J. (1972) Appraisal of methods for measuring com kernel resistance to Sitophilus zeamais. J. econ. Entomol. 65, 790–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ICIPE 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. A. Enobakhare
    • 1
  • E. I. Obasuyi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AgricultureUniversity of BeninBenin CityNigeria

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options