06.07.2013 Views

Contents - Faperta

Contents - Faperta

Contents - Faperta

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Evaluation of Transgenic Plants and Mapping Populations for Resistance to Insect Pests 59<br />

Arnon solution. Place a cotton swab around the stem at the neck of the conical<br />

fl ask to keep the infl orescences in upright condition.<br />

• Place the plants or infl orescences inside a cage (30 30 30 or 50 50 50 cm)<br />

under no-choice, dual-choice, or multi-choice conditions. Known resistant or<br />

susceptible checks should also be placed inside the cage in dual-choice and multichoice<br />

tests. Release 5 to 20 pairs of insects inside the cage for three days, and<br />

repeat the experiment 5 to 10 times.<br />

• Record data on eggs laid after three days. The number of eggs can also be recorded<br />

daily, and the plants changed every day. Compute the oviposition nonpreference<br />

in relation to the number of eggs laid on the resistant or the susceptible check.<br />

Diet Impregnation Assay to Assess Antibiosis<br />

Antibiosis to insects in general is mainly because of poor nutritional quality or secondary<br />

plant substances, for example, gossypol and tannins in cotton (Lukefahr, Martin, and<br />

Meyer, 1965; Sharma and Agarwal, 1983b), tridecanone and tomatine in tomato (Campbell<br />

and Duffey, 1979; W.G. Williams et al., 1980), maysin in maize (Waiss et al., 1979), oxalic<br />

and malic acids in chickpea (Yoshida, Cowgill, and Wightman, 1997), and fl avonoids in<br />

pigeonpea (Stevenson et al., 2005). Antibiosis effects of secondary metabolites can be<br />

measured in terms of survival and development of insects on host plant tissues incorporated<br />

into inert materials or artifi cial diet (Table 3.5). To assess the antibiosis component of<br />

TABLE 3.5<br />

Artifi cial Diet Impregnation Assay to Assess Antibiosis Component of Resistance to Insect Pests<br />

Crop Insect Species Remarks References<br />

Cotton Spodoptera littoralis<br />

(Boisd.)<br />

Pigeonpea Pod borer, Helicoverpa<br />

armigera<br />

Chickpea Pod borer, Helicoverpa<br />

armigera<br />

Maize European corn borer,<br />

Ostrinia nubilalis<br />

Southwestern corn<br />

borer, Diatraea<br />

grandiosella (Dyar)<br />

Sorghum Fall armyworm,<br />

Spodoptera frugiperda<br />

Spotted stem borer,<br />

Chilo partellus<br />

Soybean Corn earworm,<br />

Helicoverpa zea<br />

Gossypol incorporated in artifi cial diet. Meisner et al. (1977)<br />

Ten grams of leaf powder mixed in 250 mL<br />

of artifi cial diet differentiates resistant and<br />

susceptible genotypes.<br />

Ten grams of leaf powder mixed in 250 mL<br />

of artifi cial diet can be used to assess<br />

antibiosis component of resistance.<br />

Bioassays for antibiotic effects should utilize<br />

a diet with limited contaminants,<br />

incorporate tissue on a weight basis,<br />

and focus on silk tissue.<br />

Add 15 g lyophilized husk tissue collected<br />

within 3 days of silk emergence to artifi cial<br />

diet. Weigh the larvae after 21 days.<br />

Greater antibiosis was observed when the<br />

dried milk stage fl orets were mixed with<br />

diet without pinto bean.<br />

Lyophilized leaf powder (10 to 20 g per<br />

250 mL of diet) can be used to assess<br />

antibiosis component of resistance.<br />

Lyophilized pod powder in artifi cial diet can<br />

be used to assess antibiosis component of<br />

resistance.<br />

Kumari, Sharma, and<br />

Jagdishwar Reddy<br />

(2008)<br />

Sharma et al. (2005a)<br />

Warnock et al. (1997)<br />

W.P. Williams and<br />

Buckley (1996)<br />

Diawara, Wiseman, and<br />

Isenhour (1991)<br />

Kishore Kumar, Sharma,<br />

and Dharma Reddy<br />

(2005)<br />

Dougherty (1976)

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!