Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

EVALUATION OF REGIONAL SWEET POTATO ENTRIES FOR RESISTANCE TO SOIL INSECT PESTS, 2000

EVALUATION OF REGIONAL SWEET POTATO ENTRIES FOR RESISTANCE TO SOIL INSECT PESTS, 2000 (M19) SWEET POTATO: Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam EVALUATION OF REGIONAL SWEET POTATO ENTRIES FOR RESISTANCE TO SOIL INSECT PESTS, 2000 D. Michael Jackson and J. R. Bohac USDA-ARS U. S. Vegetable Laboratory 2875 Savannah Highway Charleston, SC 29414 Phone: (843) 556-0840 Fax: (843) 763-7013 E-mail: mjackson@awod.com E-mail: jbohac@awod.com J. D. Mueller Clemson University Edisto Research and Education Center Blackville, SC 29817 Spotted cucumber beetle: Diabrotica undecimpunctata howardi Barber Banded cucumber beetle: Diabrotica balteata LeConte Sweetpotato flea beetle (SPFB): Chaetocenema confinis Crotch Elongate flea beetle: Systena elongata (F.) Wireworms: Conoderus spp. White grubs: Phyllophaga spp. and Plectris aliena Chapin The field experiment described herein is an evaluation of advanced sweet potato entries that were entered into the 2000 National Sweet potato Collaborator Trials. Cuttings of three insect-susceptible cultivars ('Beauregard', 'Porto Rico', and SC1149-19), an intermediate check ('Jewel'), two insect-resistant checks ('Regal' and 'Ruddy'), and eight regional entries (L94-96, L97-119, W-328, W-334, W-337, W-346, W-352, and W-359) were planted at the U. S. Vegetable Laboratory (USVL), Charleston, SC, on 15 June. Four replications of each entry were grown in single-row, 10-plant plots arranged in a RCB experimental design. L94-96 and L97-119 were advanced lines from the program of D. L. LaBonte (Louisiana State University), and the ~quot;W~quot; lines were from the USDA-ARS/Clemson program at the USVL. Normal production practices were followed, except that no insecticides were applied. When rainfall was not adequate during the growing season, supplemental irrigation was applied. Plots were harvested on 17 Oct (124 days after planting). Yields were typical for the check varieties. Individual roots were evaluated for insect damage by the WDS complex (Wireworm, Diabrotica, Systena), SPFB, and white grub larvae. WDS severity index was calculated by averaging the rating given to each root (1 = 1-5 holes or scars, 2 = 6-10 holes, 4 = ~gt;10 holes). Flea beetle and grub data were the percentages of total roots that showed any damage by these insects. The percentages of uninjured roots (undamaged by any of the soil insect pests) were also determined for each entry. Data were subjected to ANOVA, and means were separated by DMRT at the 5% probability level for type I errors. ANOVA indicated that there were highly significant entry effects for WDS index, percent uninjured roots, percent flea beetle infestations, and percent grub infestations. There were no significant replication effects for any of the parameters. The highest levels of resistance to WDS (based on severity index) were observed for Ruddy, W-328, W-334, W-346, W-352, and W-359 (Table 1). These entries were significantly more resistant than the standard cultivars Beauregard and SC1149-19. Two other regional lines (L97-119 and W- 337) and Regal were significantly more resistant than SC1149-19 but not more resistant than Beauregard. L94-96 showed no resistance to WDS in this experiment. All regional entries had significantly lower infestation levels of flea beetles than SC1149-19. Regal, Ruddy, and W-334 also were more resistant to flea beetles than Porto Rico and Jewel. All regional entries, except L94-96, had significantly lower infestations of white grub larvae than SC1149-19. Regal, Ruddy, W-328, and W-352 also were more resistant to grubs than Beauregard. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arthropod Management Tests Oxford University Press

EVALUATION OF REGIONAL SWEET POTATO ENTRIES FOR RESISTANCE TO SOIL INSECT PESTS, 2000

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/evaluation-of-regional-sweet-potato-entries-for-resistance-to-soil-Q8OZnr70ZP
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© Published by Oxford University Press.
eISSN
2155-9856
DOI
10.1093/amt/27.1.M19
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

(M19) SWEET POTATO: Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam EVALUATION OF REGIONAL SWEET POTATO ENTRIES FOR RESISTANCE TO SOIL INSECT PESTS, 2000 D. Michael Jackson and J. R. Bohac USDA-ARS U. S. Vegetable Laboratory 2875 Savannah Highway Charleston, SC 29414 Phone: (843) 556-0840 Fax: (843) 763-7013 E-mail: mjackson@awod.com E-mail: jbohac@awod.com J. D. Mueller Clemson University Edisto Research and Education Center Blackville, SC 29817 Spotted cucumber beetle: Diabrotica undecimpunctata howardi Barber Banded cucumber beetle: Diabrotica balteata LeConte Sweetpotato flea beetle (SPFB): Chaetocenema confinis Crotch Elongate flea beetle: Systena elongata (F.) Wireworms: Conoderus spp. White grubs: Phyllophaga spp. and Plectris aliena Chapin The field experiment described herein is an evaluation of advanced sweet potato entries that were entered into the 2000 National Sweet potato Collaborator Trials. Cuttings of three insect-susceptible cultivars ('Beauregard', 'Porto Rico', and SC1149-19), an intermediate check ('Jewel'), two insect-resistant checks ('Regal' and 'Ruddy'), and eight regional entries (L94-96, L97-119, W-328, W-334, W-337, W-346, W-352, and W-359) were planted at the U. S. Vegetable Laboratory (USVL), Charleston, SC, on 15 June. Four replications of each entry were grown in single-row, 10-plant plots arranged in a RCB experimental design. L94-96 and L97-119 were advanced lines from the program of D. L. LaBonte (Louisiana State University), and the ~quot;W~quot; lines were from the USDA-ARS/Clemson program at the USVL. Normal production practices were followed, except that no insecticides were applied. When rainfall was not adequate during the growing season, supplemental irrigation was applied. Plots were harvested on 17 Oct (124 days after planting). Yields were typical for the check varieties. Individual roots were evaluated for insect damage by the WDS complex (Wireworm, Diabrotica, Systena), SPFB, and white grub larvae. WDS severity index was calculated by averaging the rating given to each root (1 = 1-5 holes or scars, 2 = 6-10 holes, 4 = ~gt;10 holes). Flea beetle and grub data were the percentages of total roots that showed any damage by these insects. The percentages of uninjured roots (undamaged by any of the soil insect pests) were also determined for each entry. Data were subjected to ANOVA, and means were separated by DMRT at the 5% probability level for type I errors. ANOVA indicated that there were highly significant entry effects for WDS index, percent uninjured roots, percent flea beetle infestations, and percent grub infestations. There were no significant replication effects for any of the parameters. The highest levels of resistance to WDS (based on severity index) were observed for Ruddy, W-328, W-334, W-346, W-352, and W-359 (Table 1). These entries were significantly more resistant than the standard cultivars Beauregard and SC1149-19. Two other regional lines (L97-119 and W- 337) and Regal were significantly more resistant than SC1149-19 but not more resistant than Beauregard. L94-96 showed no resistance to WDS in this experiment. All regional entries had significantly lower infestation levels of flea beetles than SC1149-19. Regal, Ruddy, and W-334 also were more resistant to flea beetles than Porto Rico and Jewel. All regional entries, except L94-96, had significantly lower infestations of white grub larvae than SC1149-19. Regal, Ruddy, W-328, and W-352 also were more resistant to grubs than Beauregard.

Journal

Arthropod Management TestsOxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2002

There are no references for this article.