Advertisement

International Journal of Tropical Insect Science

, Volume 10, Issue 5, pp 631–638 | Cite as

Anatomical Basis of Cowpea Resistance to the Pod Borer, Maruca Testulalis (Geyer)

  • T. O. Tayo
Research Article

Abstract

The anatomy of damaged and undamaged young stem, peduncle and young pods were examined from transverse sections in three varieties of cowpea in order to evaluate the anatomical basis of resistance to the pod borer Maruca testulalis.

While tissue development in the stem, peduncle and pods of the three varieties of cowpea were similar, the relative thickness of the various tissues were different in the order Vita-1>ICV-2>TVu 946. The smaller diameter and the relative abundance of strengthening tissues in the stem and peduncle of TVu 946, by limiting total ingestible biomass, might be restricting the damage to these organs by the pod borer.

Pod damage, on the other hand, was concentrated on the parenchymatous tissue of the pod wall lining and inter-seed spaces and the sizes of this tissue were also different among the varieties in the order Vita-l>ICV-2>TVu 946, the same order of susceptibility to attack by M. testulalis.

Résumé

L’anatomie d’une jeune tige endommagée et non-endommagee, le pédoncule et des feunes cosses ont été examinés de la section transversale pour trois variétiés d’haricot pour évaluer la base anatomique de la résistance au perceur de la cosse, Maruca testulalis.

Tandis que le développement du tissu dans la tige, le pédoncule et les cosses des trois variétiés d’haricot étaient similaires, l’épaisseur relative des divers tissus était différente dans l’ordre Vita-1>1CV-2>TVU 946. Le petit diamètre et l’abondance relative des tissus de renforcement dans la tige et le pédoncule du TVU 946 en limitant la biomasse totale ingérable, auraient restreint le dommage à ces organes par le perceur de la cosse.

L’abîme de la cosse, de l’autre part, était concentré sur le tissu parenchymateux de l’écorse de la cosse et l’éspace entre les grains et les grosseurs de ce tissu étaient aussi differentes parmi les variétiés dans l’ordre Vita-1>1CV-2>TVU 946, susceptibilité à l’attaque par Maruca testulalis.

Key Words

Cowpea resistance pod borer Maruca testulalis anatomy of stem peduncle pod 

Mots Clefs

La résistance de l’haricot (cowpea) le perceur de la cosse Maruca testulalis l’anatomie de la tige le pédoncule et la cosse 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Chiang H. S. and Norris D.M. (1983) Physiological and anatomical stem parameters of soyabean resistance to agromyzid bean flies. Entomol. Exp. appl. 33, 203–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Esau K. (1976) Anatomy of Seed Plants. 2nd ed., John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  3. Jackai L.E.N. (1981) Relationship between cowpea crop phenology and field infestation by the legume pod borer M. testulalis. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 74, 402–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Jackai L.E.N. (1982) A field screening technique for resistance of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) to pod borer Maruca testulalis (Geyer) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Bull. Entomol. Res. 72, 145–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. MacFoy C.A. and Dabrowski Z.T. (1984) Preliminary studies on cowpea resistance to Aphis craccivora Koch (Horn., Aphididae). Z. angew. Entomol. 97, 202–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. MacFoy C.A., Dabrowski Z.T. and Okech S. (1983) Studies on the legume pod-borer, Maruca testulalis (Geyer) —IV. Cowpea resistance to oviposition and larval feeding. Insect Sci. Applic. 4, 147–152.Google Scholar
  7. Norris D.M. and Kogan M. (1980) Biochemical and morphological bases of resistance. In Breeding Plants Resistant to Insects (Edited by Maxwell F.G. and Jennings P.R.). John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Okech S.H. (1986) Colonizing responses of Maruca testulalis (Geyer) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) to different cowpea cultivars in relation to their resistance/susceptibility. PhD. Thesis. Rivers State University of Science and Technology. Port Harcourt, Nigeria.Google Scholar
  9. Okeyo-Owuor J.B. and Ochieng R.S. (1981) Studies on the legume pod-borer, Maruca testulalis (Geyer)—I. Life cycle and behaviour. Insect Sci. Applic. 1, 263–268.Google Scholar
  10. Okeyo-Owuor J.B., Agwaro P.O. and Simbi C.O.J. (1983) Studies on the legume pod-borer, Maruca testulalis (Geyer)—V. Larval population. Insect Sci. Applic. 4, 75–81.Google Scholar
  11. Otieno D.A., Hassanali A. and Njoroge P.W. (1985) Chemical basis of TVu 946 stem resistance to Maruca testulalis (Geyer). Insect Sci. Applic. 6, 259–262.Google Scholar
  12. Wallace L.E., McNeal F.H. and Berg M.A. (1973) Minimum stem solidness required in wheat for resistance to the wheat stem sawfly. J. econ. Entomol. 66, 1121–1123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ICIPE 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. O. Tayo
    • 1
  1. 1.The International Centre of Insect Physiology and EcologyMbitaKenya

Personalised recommendations