Contents - Faperta

88 Biotechnological Approaches for Pest Management and Ecological Sustainability
FIGURE 4.4 Wild relatives of pigeonpea (Cajanus sericeus and Cajanus scarabaeoides) that have shown high levels
of resistance to pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera.
G. somalense (Guerke), G. armourianum Kearny, G. gossypiodes (Ulbrich) Standley, G. capitis
viridis Mauer, G. raimondii Ulbrich, G. trilobum (DC) Skovsted, G. latifolium (Murray) Roberty,
and G. barbosanum L.L. Phillips & D. Clement, and in the wild races of G. hirsutum (P. Singh
and Narayanan, 1994). Gossypium raimondii is resistant to pink bollworm, Pectinophora
gossypiella (Saunders) and H. armigera, while G. armourianum and G. raimondii are resistant to
white fl y, Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) and the leafhopper, A. biguttulla biguttulla. In potato, the
wild relative, Solanum brachistotrichum (Bitter) Rydberg is resistant to green peach potato
aphid, M. persicae. In cultivated tomato, insect resistance is rare, but it is more prevalent in
wild accessions of Lycopersicon esculentum var. cerasiforme (Mill. & Alef.) (Eigenbrode,
Trumble, and Jones, 1993). Accessions belonging to L. hirsutum f. glabratum C. H. Müll, and
L. hirsutum Dunal are resistant to H. armigera (Kashyap et al., 1990).
Wild relatives of pigeonpea, such as Cajanus scarabaeoides (L.) Thouars, C. sericeus (Benth.
ex Bak.) van der Maesen, C. acutifolius (F.v. Muell.) van der Maesen, C. albicans (W. & A.) van
der Maesen, Rhynchosia aurea (Willd.) DC, and R. bracteata Benth. ex Bak. are highly resistant
to H. armigera (Sharma et al., 2001; Green et al., 2006) (Figure 4.4). Some of the wild relatives
of pigeonpea have also shown resistance to pod fl y, Melanagromyza obtusa Malloch
and pod wasp, Tanaostigmodes cajaninae La Salle (Sharma, Pampapathy, and Reddy, 2003).
Of these, C. scarabaeoides, C. sericeus, C. acutifolius, and C. albicans can be easily crossed with
cultivated pigeonpea. Wild chickpea species, such as Cicer bijugum Rech., C. reticulatum
(Lad.), C. judaicum Boissier., C. pinnatifi dum Jaub. & Sp., C. microphyllum Benth., and C. cuneatum
A. Rich., have shown high levels of resistance to H. armigera (Sharma et al., 2005e,
2005f) (Figure 4.5). Accessions belonging to C. bijugum, C. pinnatifi dum, and C. echinospermum
(Davis) have also shown resistance to the bruchid, Callosobruchus chinensis L. (K.B.
Singh, Ocampo, and Robertson, 1998). Accessions belonging to wild relatives of groundnut,
such as Arachis cardenasii Krapov. & WC Gregory, A. duranensis Krapov. & WC Gregory,
A. kempff-mercadoi Krapov, WC Gregory & CE Simpson, A. monticola Krapov. & Rigoni, A.
stenosperma Krapov. & WC Gregory, A. paraguariensis Chodat & Hassl., A. pusilla Benth.,
and A. triseminata Krapov. & WC Gregory, have shown multiple resistances to leaf miner, A.
modicella, H. armigera, and E. kerri (Sharma et al., 2003a). Arachis cardenasii (ICG 8216), A. ipaensis
Krapov. & WC Gregory (ICG 8206), A. paraguariensis (ICG 8130), and A. appressipila
Krapov. & WC Gregory (ICG 8946) exhibit antibiosis to S. litura under no-choice conditions.
Wild relative of pea, Pisum fulvum (Sibth. & Sm.) is resistant to the bruchid, Bruchus pisorum
L. (Clement, Hardie, and Elberson, 2002), while the wild relative of cowpea, Vigna vexillata
(L.) Benth is resistant to spotted pod borer, M. vitrata and the pod sucking bug, Clavigralla
tomentosicollis Stal (Jackai and Oghiakhe, 1989). Lines showing high levels of resistance to
insects can be used in wide hybridization to increase the levels and diversify the basis of
resistance to the target insects.