Semiochemicals for Integrated Pest Management

  • Maria C. Blassioli-MoraesEmail author
  • Raúl A. Laumann
  • Mirian F. F. Michereff
  • Miguel Borges


In Brazil, implementation of integrated pest management in the mid-1970s until the mid-1990s allowed to develop one of the most robust tropical agriculture systems in the world. However, at the beginning of this century, the intensification of the no-tillage cultivation system combined with multiple crops cultivated in a rotation system provided food and hosts for insects throughout the year. These two factors have been responsible for provoking pest outbreaks. In order to overcome these pest outbreaks, farmers started applying huge amounts of pesticides to arable crops. The excess of pesticides, climate changes and more restrictive laws concerning insecticide use combining with the high costs of developing new synthetic molecules, and taking into account the increase in the world’s population, have put pressure on all food production sectors to develop more sustainable tools for controlling pests. In this aspect, in the last years, scientists have put effort to develop new technologies based on semiochemicals aiming to provide more sustainable, with less cost pest control methods to farmers. In this chapter, the principles of semiochemical use for monitoring and controlling pests as well as the way in which these natural molecules work are presented and discussed.


Pheromones Natural enemies Sustainable agriculture Control pests Arable crops 


  1. Agrofit (2018) Agrotóxicos registrados no AGROFIT. Accessed 12 Oct 2018
  2. Al Abassi SAL, Birkett MA, Pettersson J et al (2000) Response of the seven-spot ladybird to an aphid alarm pheromone and an alarm pheromone inhibitor is mediated by paired olfactory cells. J Chem Ecol 26:1765–1771Google Scholar
  3. Aldrich JR, Oliver JE, Lusby WR et al (1994) Identification of male-specific volatiles from Neartic and Neotropical stink bugs (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). J Chem Ecol 20:1103–1111PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Aldrich JR, Zanuncio JC, Vilela EF et al (1997) Field tests of predaceous pentatomid pheromones and semiochemistry of Podisus and Supputius species (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae: Asopinae). An Soc Entomol Brasil 26:1–14Google Scholar
  5. Andrade R, Rodrigues C, Oehlschager C (2000) Optimization of a pheromone lure for Spodoptera frugiperda (Smith) in central America. J Braz Chem Soc 11:609–613Google Scholar
  6. Aquino MFS, Sujii ER, Borges M et al (2018) Diversity of stink bug adults and their parasitoids in soybean crops in Brazil: influence of a latitudinal gradient and insecticide application intensity. Environ Entomol. Nyv 174. Scholar
  7. Bhagat D, Samanta SK, Bhattacharya S (2013) Efficient management of fruit pests by pheromone nanogels. Sci Rep 3:1–8Google Scholar
  8. Baker R, Borges M, Cooke NG et al (1987) Identification and synthesis of (Z) (1′S,3′R,4′S)–2–(3′,4′–epoxy–4′–methylcyclohexyl)–6–methylhepta–2,5–diene, the sex pheromone of the southern green stink bug, Nezara viridula (L.). J Chem Soc D 6:414–416Google Scholar
  9. Baker TC, Heath JJ (2005) Pheromones – function and use in insect control. In: Gilbert LI, Iatro K, Gill SS (eds) Molecular insect science, vol 6. Elsevier, Academic press, London, pp 407–460Google Scholar
  10. Baker TC (2009) Use of pheromones in IPM (Chapter 21). In: Radcliffe EB, Hutchison WD, Cancelado RE. Integrated Pest Management. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  11. Bakke A (1991) Using pheromones in the management of bark beetle outbreaks. In: Baranchikov Y, Mattson WJ, Hain FP, Payne TL (eds) Forest insect guilds: patterns of interaction with host trees; proceedings of a joint IUFRO working party symposium Abakan, Siberia, U.S.S.R. 13–17 Aug 1889Google Scholar
  12. Batista-Fereira LG, Stein K, De Paula AF et al (2006) Isolation, identification, synthesis, and field evaluation of the sex pheromone of the Brazilian population of Spodoptera frugiperda. J Chem Ecol 32:1085–1099PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Beale MH, Birkett MA, Bruce TJ et al (2006) Aphid alarm pheromone produced by transgenic plants affects aphid and parasitoid behaviour. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:10509–10513PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Bergmann J, González A, Zarbin PHG (2009) Insect pheromone research in South America. J Braz Chem Soc 20:1206–1219Google Scholar
  15. Beroza M (2002) More efficient means of detecting insects. US. Patent 0144452, 19 July 2002Google Scholar
  16. Bino RJ, Hall RD, Fiehn O et al (2004) Potential of metabolomics as a functional genomics tool. Trends Plant Sci 9:418–425PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Blassioli-Moraes MC, Laumann RA, Oliveira MWM et al (2012) Sex pheromone communication in two sympatric Neotropical stink bug species Chinavia ubica and Chinavia impicticornis. J Chem Ecol 38:836–845PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Blassioli-Moraes MC, Borges M, Laumann RA (2013) Chemical ecology of insect parasitoids. In: Wajnberg E, Colazza S (eds) The application of chemical cues in arthropod pest management for arable crops. Wiley, New York, pp 225–244Google Scholar
  19. Blassioli-Moraes MC, Borges M, Michereff MFF et al (2016) Semiochemicals from plants and insects on the foraging behaviour of Platygastridae egg parasitoids. Pesqui Agropecu Bras 51:454–464Google Scholar
  20. Blassioli-Moraes MC, Khrimian A, Borges M et al (2018) The male produced sex pheromone of Tibraca limbativentris revisted: absolute configuration of zingiberenol stereoisomers. 34o International Society Chemical Ecology Meeting. Abstract Book, vol 1, p 68Google Scholar
  21. Bombardi LM (2017) Geografia do Uso de Agrotóxicos no Brasil e Conexões com a União Europeia—São Paulo: FFLCH—USP, 2017.296 p. ISBN:978-85-7506-310-1Google Scholar
  22. Borges M, Jepson PC, Howse PE (1987) Long-range mate location and close range courtship behavior of the green stink bug, Nezara viridula and its mediation by sex pheromones. Entomol Exp Appl 44:205–212Google Scholar
  23. Borges M, Aldrich JR (1992) Instar-specific defensive secretions of stink bugs (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). Experientia 48:893–896Google Scholar
  24. Borges M, Schmidt FVG, Sujii ER et al (1998) Field responses of stink bugs to the natural and synthetic pheromone of the Neotropical brown stink bug, Euschistus heros, (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). Physiol Entomol 23:202–207Google Scholar
  25. Borges M, Costa MLM, Sujii ER et al (1999) Semiochemical and physical stimuli involved in host recognition by Telenomus podisi (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) toward Euschistus heros (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). Physiol Entomol 24:227–233Google Scholar
  26. Borges M, Moraes MCB, Peixoto MF et al (2011) Monitoring the Neotropical brown stink bug Euschistus heros (F.) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) with pheromone-baited traps in soybean fields. J Appl Entomol 135:68–80Google Scholar
  27. Borges M, Blassioli-Moraes MC (2017) The semiochemistry of Pentatomidae in stink bugs. In: Čokl A, Borges M (eds) Biorational control based on communication processes, CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, pp 95–124Google Scholar
  28. Borges M, Michereff MFF, Blassioli-Moraes MC et al (2017) Metodologias para o estudo da defesa de memória (Priming) em plantas frente a estresse biótico. Embrapa Recursos Genéticos e Biotecnologia. Circular Técnica, 91Google Scholar
  29. Bortolotto OC, Pomari AF, Bueno RCO et al (2015) The use of soybean integrated pest management in Brazil: a review. Agron Sci Biotechnol 1(25):32Google Scholar
  30. Braasch J, Kaplan I (2012) Over what distance are plant volatiles bioactive? Estimating the spatial dimensions of attraction in an arthropod assemblage. Entomol Exp Appl 145:115–123Google Scholar
  31. Bradbury JW, Vehrencamp SL (2011) Principles of animal communication. Sinauer Associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  32. Bruce TJA, Pickett JA (2011) Perception of plant volatile blends by herbivorous insects—finding the right mix. Phytochemistry 72:1605–1611PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Bruce TJA, Aradottir GI, Smart LE et al (2015) The first crop plant genetically engineered to release an insect pheromone for defence. Sci Rep 5:11183PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Butenandt VA, Beckmann R, Stamm D, Hecker E (1959) Über den sexuallockstoff des seidenspinners Bombyx mori. Reindarstellung und konstitution. Z. Naturforsch. B. 14:283–284Google Scholar
  35. Byers JA (2007) Simulation of mating disruption and mass trapping with competitive attraction and camouflage. Environ Entomol 36:1328–1338PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Carson R (1962) Silent spring. Mariner Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. Chiozza MV, O’Neal ME, MacIntosh GC (2010) Constitutive and induced differential accumulation of amino acid in leaves of susceptible and resistant soybean plants in response to the Soybean Aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Environ Entomol 39:856–864PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Cook SM, Khan ZR, Pickett JA (2007) The use of push-pull strategies in integrated pest management. Annu Rev Entomol 52:375–400PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. D’Alessandro M, Held M, Triponez Y, Turlings TCJ (2006) The role of indole and other shikimic acid derived maize volatiles in the attraction of two parasitic wasps. J Chem Ecol 32:2733–2748PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Dent D (2000) Insect Pest Management. CABI Publishing, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
  41. Dias AM, Pareja M, Laia M et al (2016) Attraction of Telenomus podisi to volatiles induced by Euschistus heros in three different plant species. Arthropod Plant Inte 10:419–428Google Scholar
  42. Dickens JC (1989) Green leaf volatiles enhance aggregation pheromone of boll weevil, Anthonomus grandis. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 52(3):191–203Google Scholar
  43. Dowd PF, Vega FE (2003) Autodissemination of Beauveria bassiana by sap beetles (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) to overwintering sites. Biocontrol Sci Technol 13:65–75Google Scholar
  44. Du YJ, Poppy GM, Powell W et al (1998) Identification of semiochemicals released during aphid feeding that attract parasitoid Aphidius ervi. J Chem Eco. 24:1355–1368Google Scholar
  45. Dudareva N, Klempien A, Muhlemann JK et al (2013) Biosynthesis, function and metabolic engineering of plant volatile organic compounds. New Phytol 198:16–32PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Dunham W (2018) Semiohcemicals may be the fastest growing segment of the biopesticide market. PDF Accessed on 01 Nov 2018
  47. Edwards LJ, Siddal JB, Dunam LL et al (1973) trans-β-farnesene, alarm pheromone of the green peach aphid, Myzus persicae (Sulzer). Nature 214:126–127Google Scholar
  48. El-Sayed AM, Suckling DM, Wearing CH et al (2006) Potential of mass trapping for long-term pest management and eradication of invasive species. J Econ Entomol 99:550–1564Google Scholar
  49. El-Sayed AM, Suckling DM, Byers JA et al (2009) Potential of ‘lure and kill’ in long-term pest management and eradication of invasive species. J Econ Entomol 102:815–835PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Engelberth J, Alborn HT, Schmelz EA et al (2004) Airborne signals prime plants against insect herbivore attack. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:1781–1785PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Erb M, Veyrat N, Robert CAM et al (2015) Indole is an essential herbivore-induced volatile priming signal in maize. Nat Commun 6, Article number: 6273.
  52. FAO (2018) AGP—integrated pest management. Accessed 15 Sept 2018
  53. Francke W, Dettner K (2005) Chemical signalling in beetles. In: Schulz S (ed) Topics in current chemistry 240. Springer, Heildelberg, pp 85–166Google Scholar
  54. Frost CJ, Appel HM, Carlson JE et al (2007) Within-plant signalling via volatiles overcomes vascular constraints on systemic signalling and primes responses against herbivores. Ecol Lett 10:490–498PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Geier PW (1966) Management of insect pests. Ann Rev Entomol 11:471–490Google Scholar
  56. Grootaert P, Pollet M, Dekoninck W et al (2010) Sampling insects: general techniques, strategies and remarks. In: Eymann J, Degreef J, Hauser CH et al (eds) Manual on field recording techniques and protocols for all taxa biodiversity inventories and monitoring. Abc Taxa, Belgium, pp 377–399Google Scholar
  57. Groot AT, Marr M, Schöfl G et al (2008) Host strain specific sex pheromone variation in Spodoptera frugiperda. Front Zool 5:20. Scholar
  58. Gordon-Weeks R, Smart L, Ahmad S et al (2010) The role of the benzoxazinone pathway in aphid resistance in wheat. HGCA Project Report 473:1–66Google Scholar
  59. Gurr GM, Wratten SD, Altieri MA (2004) Ecological engineering: a new direction for agricultural pest management. AFBM Journal 1:28–35Google Scholar
  60. Hassemer MJ, Sant’ana J, De Oliveira MW et al (2015) Chemical composition of Alphitobius diaperinus (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) abdominal glands and the Influence of 1,4-benzoquinones on its behavior. J Econ Entomol 108:2107–2116PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Hardie J, Pickett JA, Pow EM et al (1999) In: Hardie J, Minks AK (eds) Pheromones of non-lepidopteran insects associated with agricultural plants. CAB CABI Publishing, Wallingford, pp 227–250Google Scholar
  62. Hellmann C, Greiner A, Wendorff JH (2011) Design of pheromone releasing nanofibers for plant protection. Polym Adv Tecnol 22:407–413Google Scholar
  63. Hilker M, Schwachtje J, Baier M et al (2016) Priming and memory of stress response in organisms lacking a nervous system. Biol Rev 91:1118–1133PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Hill AS, Roelofs WL (1981) Sex pheromone of the saltmarsh caterpillar moth, Estugmene acrea. J Chem Ecol 7:655–668PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Heil M, Bueno JCS (2007) Within-plant signalling by volatiles leads to induction and priming of an indirect plant defense in nature. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:5467–5472PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. IBAMA Semioquímicos (2017). Accessed in 28 Jan 2019
  67. Jones VP, Steffan SA, Wiman NG et al (2011) Evaluation of herbivore-induced plant volatiles for monitoring green lacewings in Washington apple orchards. Biol Control 56:98–105Google Scholar
  68. Jones VP, Mills DR, Unruh NJ et al (2016) Evaluating plant volatiles for monitoring natural enemies in apple, pear and walnut orchards. Biol Control 102:53–65Google Scholar
  69. Khan ZR, Midega CAO, Pittchar JO et al (2014) Achieving food security for one million sub-Saharan African poor through push-pull innovation by 2020. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 369:1–11Google Scholar
  70. Kim J, Felton GW (2013) Priming of anti herbivore defensive responses in plants. Insect Sci 20:273–285PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Kreutz J, Zimmermann G, Vaupel O (2004) Horizontal transmission of the entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana among the spruce bark beetle, Ips typographus (Col., Scolytidae) in the laboratory and under field conditions. Biocontrol Sci Technol 14:837–848Google Scholar
  72. Kogan M (1998) Integrated pest management: historical perspectives and contemporary developments. Ann Rev Entomol 43(1):243–270PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Kovaleski A, Mumford JD (2007) Pulling out the evil by the root: the codling moth eradication program in Brazil. In: Vreysen MJB, Robinson AS, Hendrichs J (eds) Area wide control of insect pests: from research to field implementation. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 581–590Google Scholar
  74. Kunert G, Otto S, Weisser WW et al (2005) Alarm pheromone mediates production of winged aphids. Ecol Lett 8:596–603Google Scholar
  75. Lampson BD, Han YJ, Khalilian A (2013) Automatic detection and identification of brown stink bug, Euschistus servus, and southern green stink bug, Nezara viridula, (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae) using intraspecific substrate borne vibrational signals. Comp Elect Agr 91:154–159Google Scholar
  76. Landis DA, Wratten SD, Gurr GM (2000) Habitat management to conserve natural enemies of arthropod pests in agriculture. Ann Rev Entomol 45:175–201Google Scholar
  77. Laumann RA, Bottura DM, Čokl A (2017) Use of vibratory signals for stink bug monitoring and control. In: Čokl A, Borges M (eds) Stink bugs: biorational control based on communication. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 226–245Google Scholar
  78. Lopes RB, Laumann RA, Moore D, Oliveira WM, Faria M (2014) Combination of the fungus and pheromone in an attract-and-kill strategy against the banana weevil. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 151(1):75–85Google Scholar
  79. McKibben GH, Smith JW, McGovern WL (1990) Design of an attract-and-kill device for the boll weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). J Entomol Sci 25:581–586Google Scholar
  80. Magalhães DM, Borges M, Laumann RA et al (2012) Semiochemicals from herbivory induced cotton plants enhance the foraging behavior of the cotton boll weevil, Anthonomus grandis. J Chem Ecol 38:1528–1538PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Magalhães DM, Borges M, Laumann RA et al (2016) Influence of two acyclic homoterpenes (tetranorterpenes) on the foraging behavior of Anthonomus grandis Boh. J Chem Ecol 42:305–313PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Magalhães DM, Borges M, Laumann RA et al (2018) Identification of volatile compounds involved in host location by Anthonomus grandis (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Front Ecol Evol 6:98. Scholar
  83. Market & Market (2018) Pheromones Market in Agriculture worth 4.23 Billion USD by 2002. Accessed on 05 Nov 2018
  84. Michereff MFF, Laumann RA, Borges M et al (2011) Volatiles mediating plant herbivory-natural enemy interaction in resistant and susceptible soybean cultivars. J Chem Ecol 37:73–285Google Scholar
  85. Michereff MFF, Borges M, Diniz IR et al (2013) Influence of volatile compounds from herbivore-damaged soybean plants on searching behavior of the egg parasitoid. Entomol Exp Appl 147:9–17Google Scholar
  86. Michereff MFF, Borges M, Santos MA et al (2016) The influence of volatile semiochemicals from stink bug eggs and oviposition-damaged plants on the foraging behaviour of the egg parasitoid Telenomus podisi. Bull Entomol Res 106:663–671PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Michereff MFF, Magalhães DM, Hassemer MJ et al (2018) Variability in herbivore induced defence signalling across different maize genotypes impacts on natural enemy foraging behaviour. J Pest Sci. Scholar
  88. Midega CA, Murage AW, Pittchar JO, Khan ZR (2016) Managing storage pests of maize: Farmers’ knowledge, perceptions and practices in western Kenya. Crop Protect 90:142–149Google Scholar
  89. Miller JR, Mcghee PS, Siegert PY et al (2010) General principles of attraction and competitive attraction as revealed by large-cage studies of moths responding to sex pheromone. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:22–27PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Moscardi F, Soza-Gomes DR, Corrêa-Ferreira BS (1999) Soybean IPM in Brazil, with emphasis on biological control tactics. In: Proceeding of VI world soybean research conference, Chicago Illinois, USA 1: 331–339Google Scholar
  91. Neves RCS, Torres JB, Barros EM et al (2018) Boll weevil within season and off season activity monitored using a pheromone-and-glue reusable tube trap. Sci Agric 75:313–320Google Scholar
  92. Nordlund DA, Lewis WJ (1976) Terminology of chemical releasing stimuli in intraspecific and interspecific interactions. J Chem Ecol 2:211–220Google Scholar
  93. Oehlschlager AC, Chinchilla C, Castillo G et al (2002) Control of red ring disease by mass trapping of Rhynchophorus palmarum (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Fla Entomol 85:507–513Google Scholar
  94. Oliveira MWM, Borges M, Andrade CKZ et al (2013) Zingiberenol, (1R,4R,1′S)-4 (1′,5′-Dimethylhex-4′-enyl)-1-methylcyclohex-2-en-1-ol, identified as the sex pheromone produced by males of the rice stink bug Oebalus poecilus (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). J Agric Food Chem 61:777–7785Google Scholar
  95. Oliveira CM, Auad AM, Mendes SM et al (2014) Crop losses and economic impact of insect pests on Brazilian agriculture. Crop Prot 56:50–54Google Scholar
  96. Padilha AC, Arioli CJ, Boff MIC, Rosa JM, Botton M (2018) Traps and Baits for Luring Grapholita molesta (Busck) Adults in Mating Disruption-Treated Apple Orchards. Neotropical Entomology 47(1):152–159PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Panizzi AR (2013) History and contemporary perspectives of the integrated pest management of soybean in Brazil. Neotrop Entomol 42:119–127PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. Pavis C, Malosse PH (1986) Mise en evidence d’un attractif sexuel produit par les males de Nezara viridula (L.) (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). C.R Acad Sci Series III 7:272–276Google Scholar
  99. Pareja M, Mohib A, Birkett MA et al (2009) Multivariate statistics coupled to generalized linear models reveal complex use of chemical cues by a parasitoid. Anim Beh 77:901–909Google Scholar
  100. Petschenka G, Agrawal AA (2015) Milkweed butterfly resistance to plant toxins is linked to sequestration, not coping with a toxic diet. Proc R Soc B 282:20151865. Scholar
  101. Pherobase (2018) Pherobase database of pheromones and semiochemicals.
  102. Pichersky E, Gang DR (2000) Genetics and biochemistry of secondary metabolites in plants: an evolutionary perspective. Trends Plant Sci 5:439–445PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  103. Price PW (1997) Insect ecology. Wiley, New York, pp 73–138Google Scholar
  104. Ridgway RL, Inscoe MN, Dickerson WA (1990) Role of the boll weevil pheromone in pest management. In: Ridgway RL, Silverstein RM, Inscoe MN (eds) Behavior modifying chemicals for insect management. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 437–471Google Scholar
  105. Rodriguez-Saona CR, Rodriguez-Saona LE, Frost CJ (2009) Herbivore-induced volatiles in the perennial shrub, Vaccinium corymbosum, and their role in inter-branch signaling. J Chem Ecol 35:163–175PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. Rostás M (2007) The effects of 2,4-dihydroxy-7-methoxy-1,4-benzoxazin-3-one on two species of Spodoptera and the growth of Setosphaeria turcica in vitro. J Pest Sci 80(35):41Google Scholar
  107. Sant’Ana J, Bruni R, Abdul-Baki AA et al (1997) Pheromone-induced movement of nymphs of the predator, Podisus maculiventris (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). Biol Control 10:123–128Google Scholar
  108. Schnee C, Köllner TG, Held M et al (2006) The products of a single maize sesquiterpene synthase form a volatile defense signal that attracts natural enemies of maize herbivores. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:1129–1134PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. Schulz S (2005) The chemistry of pheromones and other semiochemicals I. Part of the topics in current chemistry book series (TOPCURRCHEM, vol 239). Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  110. Simpson M, Gurrr GM, Simmons AT et al (2011a) Insect attraction to synthetic herbivorie-induced plant volatile-treated field crops. Agric For Entomol 13:45–57Google Scholar
  111. Simpson M, Gurrr GM, Simmons AT et al (2011b) Field evaluation of the ‘attract and reward’ biological control approach in vineyards. Ann Appl Biol 159:69–78Google Scholar
  112. Smith JW, McKibben GH, Villavaso E et al (1995) Management of the cotton boll weevil with attract-and-kill-devices. In: Constable GA, Forrester NW (eds) Challenging the future: proceedings of the world cotton conference, Brisbane, pp 480–484Google Scholar
  113. Smith JW (1998) Boll weevil eradication: area-wide pest management. Ann Entomol Soc Am 91:239–247Google Scholar
  114. Steiner S, Hermann N, Ruther J (2006) Characterization of a female-produced courtship pheromone in the parasitoid Nasonia vitripennis. J Chem Ecol 32:1687–1702PubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. Steiner S, Ruther J (2009) Mechanism and behavioral context of male sex pheromone release in Nasonia vitripennis. J Chem Ecol 35:416–421PubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. Stenberg JA (2017) A conceptual framework for integrated pest management. Trend Plant Sci 22(9):759–769PubMedGoogle Scholar
  117. Stern VM, Smith RF, van den Bosch R et al (1959) The integrated control concept. Hilgardia 29:81–101Google Scholar
  118. Tewari S, Leskey TC, Nielsen AL, Piñero JC, Rodriguez-Saona CR (2014a) Use of pheromones in insect pest management, with special attention to weevil pheromones. In: Abrol DP (eds) Integrated Pest Management, Academic Press, pp 141–168. ISBN 9780123985293. Scholar
  119. Tewari S, Leskey TC, Nielsen AL, Piñero JC, Rodriguez-Saona CR (2014b) Use of Pheromones in Insect Pest Management, with Special Attention to Weevil Pheromones. In: INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT: Current Concepts and Ecological Perspective. Edited by Dahram P. Abrol. Elsevier, London, UK. 2014Google Scholar
  120. Tilmann PG, Cottrel T (2017) Use of pheromones for monitoring phytophagous stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) In: Colk A, Borges M (eds) Stink bugs: biorational control based on communication. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 210–225Google Scholar
  121. Trigo JR (2000) The chemistry of antipredator defense by secondary compounds in Neotropical Lepidoptera: facts, perspectives and Caveats. J Braz Chem Soc 11:551–561Google Scholar
  122. Tognon R, Sant’ana J, Jahnke SM (2014) Influence of original host on chemotaxic behaviour and parasitism in Telenomus podisi Ashmead (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae). Bull Entomol Res 104:781–787PubMedGoogle Scholar
  123. Vega FE, Dowd PF, Bartelt RJ (1995) Dissemination of microbial agents using an auto inoculating device and several insect species as vectors. Biol Control 5:545–552Google Scholar
  124. Vieira CR, Moraes MCB, Borges M et al (2013) cis-Jasmone indirect action on egg parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) and its application in biological control of soybean stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). Biol Control 64:75–82Google Scholar
  125. Vieira CR, Moraes MCB, Borges M et al (2014) Field evaluation of (E)-2-hexenal efficacy for behavioral manipulation of egg parasitoids in soybean. Biocontrol 1:1–13Google Scholar
  126. Yasuda K (1999) Auto-infection system for the sweet potato weevil, Cylas formicarius (Fabricius) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) with entomopathogenic fungi, Beauveria bassiana, using a modified sex pheromone trap in the field. App Entomol Zoo 34(501):505Google Scholar
  127. Weber DC, Khrimian A, Blassioli-Moraes MC et al (2018) Semiochemistry of pentatomoidea. In: McPherson JE (ed) Invasive stink bugs and related Species (Pentatomoidea): biology, higher systematics, semiochemistry, and management. CRC Press Boca Raton, pp 677–725Google Scholar
  128. Wermelinger B (2004) Ecology and management of the spruce bark beetle Ips typographus a review of recent research. For Ecol Manag 202:67–82Google Scholar
  129. Witzgall P, Kirsch P, Cork A (2010) Sex pheromones and their impact on pest management. J Chem Ecol 36:80–100PubMedGoogle Scholar
  130. Wheeler CA, Cardé RT (2014) Following in their footprints: cuticular hydrocarbons as overwintering aggregation site markers in Hippodamia convergens. J Chem Ecol 40:418–428PubMedGoogle Scholar
  131. Wouters FC, Reichelt M, Glauser G et al (2014) Reglucosylation of the benzoxazinoid DIMBOA with inversion of stereochemical configuration is a detoxification strategy in Lepidopteran herbivores. Angew Chem-Ger Edit 126:11502–11506Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria C. Blassioli-Moraes
    • 1
    Email author
  • Raúl A. Laumann
    • 1
  • Mirian F. F. Michereff
    • 1
  • Miguel Borges
    • 1
  1. 1.Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation, National Research Center for Genetic Resources and Biotechnology—Laboratory for SemiochemicalsBrasilia-DFBrazil

Personalised recommendations