International Journal of Tropical Insect Science

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 259–265 | Cite as

Assessment of Grain Yield Losses in Pearl Millet Due to the Millet Stemborer, Coniesta ignefusalis (Hampson)

  • Aissetou Drame-Yaye
  • Ousmane YoumEmail author
  • Jonathan N. Ayertey
Research Article


Studies were conducted at the ICRISAT Sahelian Centre, Niger, to assess damage and yield loss by the millet stemborer, Coniesta ignefusalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) on Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Brown. Although 78% of stems were infested, late attack by the millet stemborer on millet plants resulted in bored stems yielding more than unbored ones. Artificial infestations with 5 and 10 larvae per plant at 2 weeks after plant emergence (WAE) resulted in 50 to 70% plants with deadhearts and 24 to 100% avoidable yield loss. At 4 weeks after plant emergence, infestations with 5 larvae and 10 larvae per plant resulted in 7% increase in yield and 16% yield loss, respectively. Therefore, both the age of plant and density of borer population at the time of infestation can influence resulting stemborer damage and yield loss on pearl millet.

Key Words

Coniesta ignefusalis stemborer millet Pennisetum yield loss West Africa 


Des études ont été menées à l’ICRISAT Centre Sahélien de Niamey au Niger pour évaluer le niveau de dégâts et les pertes de récolte causés sur Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Brown, par le foreur des tiges de mil, Coniesta ignefusalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Les résultats ont montré que les attaques tardives du foreur n’étaient pas préjudiciables à la production de grains, puisque dans les champs de mil où 78% des plants étaient naturellement infestés, les pieds attaqués ont produit plus de grains que les pieds sains. Les infestations artificielles deux semaines après l’apparition des plants, avec 5 et 10 larves par pied ont causé respectivement 50 et 70% de dessèchement des sommités et 24 et 100% de perte de récolte. Par contre les mêmes taux d’infestation artificielle appliqués quatre semaines après l’apparition des plants, ont donné respectivement 7% d’augmentation de récolte et 16% de perte de récolte. Par conséquent, aussi bien la période que le taux d’infestation sont importants et peuvent influencer le niveau de dégâts et les pertes de rendement dus au foreur des tiges de mil.

Mots Clés

foreur de tiges mil Pennisetum perte de récolte Afrique de l’Ouest 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ajayi O. (1990) Possibilities for integrated control of the millet stem borer Acigona ignefusalis Hampson (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in Nigeria. Insect Sci. Applic. 11, 109–117.Google Scholar
  2. Ajayi O. and Uvah I. I. (1989) Review of research on millet entomology in Nigeria. In Regional Pearl Millet Workshop, ICRISAT-IAR/ABU Samaru, Zaria, Nigeria, 15–19 Aug. 1988. IAR, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria and International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, India. 10 pp.Google Scholar
  3. Chiarappa L. (Ed.) (1981) Crop Loss Assessment Methods. Supplement 3. Rome, FAO, 123 pp.Google Scholar
  4. Flattery K. E. (1982) An assessment of pest damage on grain sorghum in Botswana. Exp. Agric. 18, 319–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gahukar R. T. (1990) Population ecology of Acigona ignefusalis Hampson (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in Senegal. Environ. Entomol. 19, 13–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Harris K. M. (1962) Lepidopterous stem borers of cereals in Nigeria. Bull. Entomol. Res. 53, 139–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Leuschner K., Taneja S. L. and Sharma H. C. (1985) The role of host plant resistance in pest management in sorghum in India. Insect Sci. Applic. 6, 453–460.Google Scholar
  8. Natural Resources Institute (NRI) (1993) Millet crop-loss assessment methods. Bulletin 62. NRI, UK.Google Scholar
  9. Nvvanze K. F. (1988) Assessment of on-farm losses in millets due to insect pests. Insect Sci. Applic. 9, 673–677.Google Scholar
  10. SAS Institute (1987) User’s Guide: Statistics. SAS Institute, Cary, N.C.Google Scholar
  11. Seshu Reddy K. V. (1988) Assessment of on farm yield loss in sorghum due to insect pests. Insect Sci. Applic. 9, 679–685.Google Scholar
  12. Seshu Reddy K. V. and Sum K. O. S. (1991) Determination of economic injury level of the stem borer, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) in maize, Zea mays L. Insect Sci. Applic. 12, 269–274.Google Scholar
  13. Seshu Reddy K.V. and Walker P. T. (1990) A review of the yield losses in graminaceous crops caused by Chilo spp. Insect Sci. Applic. 11, 563–569.Google Scholar
  14. Setamou M., Schulthess F., Bosque-Perez N. A. and Odjo T. (1993) The effects of plant nitrogen and silica on the bionomics of Sesamia calamistis (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Bull. Entomol. Res. 83, 405–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Taneja S. L. and Leuschner K. (1985) Methods of rearing, infestation and evaluation for Chilo partellus resistance in sorghum, pp. 175–188. In Proceedings of the International Sorghum Entomology Workshop, 15–21 July 1984, Texa A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA. International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Patancheru, India.Google Scholar
  16. Taneja S. L. and Nwanze K. F. (1989) Assessment of yield loss of sorghum and pearl millet due to stem borer damage. In International Workshop on Sorghum Stem Borers, ICRISAT (International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics), 17–20 Nov. 1987. International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Patancheru, India. 6 pp.Google Scholar
  17. Teng P. S. (Ed.) (1987) Crop loss assessment and pest management. The American Phytopathol. Soc. 270 pp. APS Press.Google Scholar
  18. Walker P. T. (1981) The relation between infestation by lepidopterous stem borers and yield in maize: Methods and results. Eppo bulletin 11, 101–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Walker P. T. (1983) Crop losses: The need to quantify the effects of pests, diseases, and weeds on agricultural production. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 9, 119–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Youm O. (1990) Evaluation of natural enemies associated with the millet stalk borer Hambachia ignefusalis (Hampson) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in Niger. 145 pp. PhD dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.Google Scholar
  21. Youm O. and Beevor P. S. (1995) Field evaluation of pheromone-baited traps for Contesta ignefusalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in Niger. J. Econ. Entomol. 88, 65–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Youm O. and Gilstrap F. E. (1993) A note on the bioecology of the millet stem borer Conicsla (=Haimbachia) ignefusalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in Niger. Samaru J. Agric. Res. 10, 97–104.Google Scholar
  23. Youm O., Mamalo A. K. and Nwanze K. F. (1993) Bioecology and integrated management of the millet stem borer (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): A review and current research at the ICRISAT Sahelian Centre, pp. 55–63. In Proceedings of the Regional Pearl Millet Workshop, 19–21 September, 1990 (Edited by O. Youm and K. A. Kumar). ICRISAT Sahelian Centre, BP12404, Niamey, Niger. Pearl Millet Improvement Program, ICRISAT Sahelian Center, International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ICIPE 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aissetou Drame-Yaye
    • 1
  • Ousmane Youm
    • 2
    Email author
  • Jonathan N. Ayertey
    • 3
  1. 1.Faculté d’AgronomieUniversité Abdou MoumouniNiameyNiger
  2. 2.ICRISAT Sahelian CentreNiameyNiger
  3. 3.Department of Crop ScienceUniversity of GhanaLegon AccraGhana

Personalised recommendations