Content uploaded by Srinivasan Ramasamy
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Srinivasan Ramasamy
Content may be subject to copyright.
Integrated Pest Management for eggplant fruit and shoot borer
(Leucinodes orbonalis) in south and southeast Asia: Past,
Present and Future
R. Srinivasan
ABSTRACT
The integrated pest management (IPM) strategy for the control of eggplant fruit and shoot borer (EFSB) consists
of resistant cultivars, sex pheromone, cultural, mechanical and biological control methods. Eggplant accessions
EG058, BL009, ISD006 and a commercial hybrid, Turbo possess appreciable levels of resistance to EFSB. Use of
EFSB sex pheromone traps based on (E)-11-hexadecenyl acetate and (E)-11-hexadecen-1-ol to continuously trap
the adult males significantly reduced the pest damage on eggplant in South Asia. In addition, prompt destruction
of pest damaged eggplant shoots and fruits at regular intervals, and withholding of pesticide use to allow
proliferation of local natural enemies especially the parasitoid, Trathala flavo-orbitalis reduced the EFSB
population. The IPM strategy was implemented in farmers’ fields via pilot project demonstrations in selected
areas of Bangladesh and India and its use was promoted in both countries. The profit margins and production
area significantly increased whereas pesticide use and labor requirement decreased for those farmers who adopted
this IPM technology. The efforts to expand the EFSB IPM technology to other regions of South and Southeast
Asia are underway.
INTRODUCTION
Eggplant (Solanum melongena) is one of the most
important vegetables in South and South-East Asia. It is
grown on over 678,000 ha, which is about 37% of the world
eggplant area, with a production of 10.50 million t (FAO,
2007). Eggplant fruit and shoot borer (EFSB), Leucinodes
orbonalis Guenée (Lepidoptera: Pyrallidae) is one of the
most destructive pests on eggplant in South and
Southeast Asia. Larvae of this insect bore inside plant
shoots and fruits adversely affecting plant growth, yield
and fruit quality, and thus making it unfit for human
consumption. The yield reduction could be as high as
70% (Islam and Karim, 1991; Dhandapani et al., 2003).
Hence, the farmers in the region rely exclusively on the
application of chemical insecticides to combat EFSB which
has resulted in a tremendous misuse of pesticides in an
attempt to produce damage-free marketable fruits. Survey
of pesticide use in Bangladesh indicated that farmers spray
up to 180 times with chemical insecticides during a year
to protect their eggplant crop against EFSB (SUSVEG-
Asia, 2007). The pesticide use is equally intensive in the
Philippines. It was about 56 times during a cropping
season and the total quantity of pesticide used per hectare
was about 41 l of the different brands belonging to the
four major pesticide groups (Gapud and Canapi, 1994;
Orden et al., 1994). In addition to the adverse effects on
environment and human health, such pesticide use
IPM for Eggplant fruit and shoot borer
increases the cost of production making eggplant
expensive for poor consumers. For instance, the share of
the cost of pesticide to total material input cost was 55%
for eggplant and it ranked first when compared to tomato
(31%) and cabbage (49%) in the Philippines (Orden et al.,
1994), whereas it was 40-50% in Bangladesh (SUSVEG-
Asia, 2007). Hence, many farmers refrained from growing
eggplant because of this pest (Gapud and Canapi, 1994).
Any single method of pest management cannot achieve a
level of EFSB control acceptable to producers in the
region. The integrated pest management (IPM) techniques
could provide satisfactory control, but it should be simple
and economic. Some IPM models have been suggested in
the past and the farmers were given training on IPM.
However, the impact of the IPM training was ambivalent,
as the farmers increased the level of pesticide use after
receiving training (Potutan et al., 1997). Probably the
absence of economical IPM solutions for this pest was a
key constraint in the region (IPM CRSP, 2001). AVRDC –
The World Vegetable Center has recently developed,
validated and promoted an IPM strategy for the control
of EFSB in South Asia during 2000-2005 (Alam et al., 2003;
Alam et al., 2006). The IPM strategy is composed of
healthy seedling production, use of resistant cultivars,
and EFSB sex pheromone to continuously trap the adult
males, prompt destruction of pest damaged eggplant
shoots and fruits at regular intervals, and withhold
105
© JBiopest. 23
Journal of Biopesticides, 1(2):105 - 112 (2008)
R. Srinivasan
Table 1. Natural enemies of EFSB in South and Southeast Asia
Natural enemy species Family and Order Country where Reference
recorded
Predators
Chrysopa kulingensis Chrysopidae, Neuroptera China Yang, 1982
Campyloneura sp Miridae, Heteroptera India Tewari and Moorthy, 1984; Tripathi
and Singh, 1991
Cheilomenes sexmaculata, Coccinellidae, Coleoptera India Kadam et al., 2006
Coccinella septempunctata,
Brumoides suturalis
Parasitoids
Pseudoperichaeta sp Tachinidae, Diptera India Patel et al., 1971
Phanerotoma sp Braconidae, Hymenoptera India, Sri Lanka Patel et al., 1971; Tewari and Moorthy,
1984; Tripathi and Singh, 1991;
Sandanayake and Edirisinghe, 1992
Apanteles sp Braconidae, Hymenoptera Philippines Navasero, 1983
Chelonus sp Braconidae, Hymenoptera Philippines, Sri Lanka Navasero, 1983; Sandanayake and
Edirisinghe, 1992
Brachymeria lasus Chalcididae, Hymenoptera Philippines Navasero, 1983
Dermatopelte sp Eulophidae, Hymenoptera China Yang, 1982
Trathala flavoorbitalis Ichneumonidae, Bangladesh, India, Alam and Sana, 1964;
Malaysia, Philippines, Patel et al., 1967 ; Yunus and Ho, 1980;
Sri Lanka Naresh et al., 1986; Mallik et al., 1989 ;
Sandanayake and Edirisinghe, 1992;
Gapud et al., 1998; Yasodha and
Natarajan, 2006
Cremastus hapaliae Ichneumonidae, Malaysia Yunus and Ho, 1980
Hymenoptera
Xanthopimpla punctata Ichneumonidae, Philippines Navasero, 1983
Hymenoptera
Itamoplex sp Ichneumonidae, India Verma and Lal, 1985
Hymenoptera
Eriborus argenteopilosus Ichneumonidae, India Tewari and Sardana, 1987
Hymenoptera
Diadegma apostata Ichneumonidae, India Krishnamoorthy and Mani, 1998
Hymenoptera
Entomopathogens
Bacterium China Yang, 1982
Fungus (Bipolaris tetramera) India Tripathi and Singh, 1991
Baculovirus India Tewari and Singh, 1987
Nuclear polyhedrosis virus India Tripathi and Singh, 1991
106
pesticide use to allow proliferation of local natural
enemies to encourage the pest suppression.
EFSB Resistant Cultivars
One of the major elements in any IPM program is the use
of resistant cultivars to insect pests. Resistant varieties
have successfully been developed in several crops such
as rice, wheat, corn, soybean, common bean, tomato,
potato, etc against key pests. Despite the attempts which
have been made to explore resistant sources as well as to
develop resistant varieties against EFSB in the region, no
commercial cultivar with appreciable levels of resistance
has been developed. Because, most of the screening
programs involved only few eggplant accessions and the
programs were not mostly continued which may be due to
lack of adequate levels of resistance. For instance, a
screening program in Bangladesh involved only 24 local
and exotic eggplant accessions, and only one accession
exhibited comparatively lower infestation, but it was a
low-yielding accession (Mannan et al., 2003). Another
screening program involved only 20 accessions, and none
of them exhibited significant levels of resistance (Hossain
et al., 2002). Similar efforts have also been made in India
with few dozens of eggplant accessions and they ended
with few or none as resistant to EFSB (Darekar et al.,
1991; Singh and Kalda, 1997; Behera et al., 1999; Doshi et
al., 2002). Some of the wild Solanum species such as
anomalum, gilo, incanum, indicum, integriifolium,
khasianum, sisymbriifolium, xanthocarpum, etc were
reported to possess high resistance to EFSB (Khan et al.,
1978; Sharma et al., 1980; Chelliah and Srinivasan, 1983;
Singh and Kalda, 1997; AVRDC, 1999; Behera et al., 1999;
Behera and Singh, 2002). However, the resistance in these
wild species should carefully be evaluated and confirmed
before attempting to transfer the resistance to cultivated
eggplant, because S. indicum had been reported as an
alternate host to EFSB (Isahaque and Chaudhuri, 1983),
although it was reported as a resistant source in other
reports. In addition, the crossability and hybridization of
cultivated eggplant with its wild relatives generally pose
difficulties due to breeding incompatibilities (Dhankhar
et al., 1982), and in several cases, crosses were only
successful if in vitro embryo rescue was employed
(Kashyap et al., 2003).
Research at AVRDC – The World Vegetable Center
identified an eggplant accession (EG058) that consistently
suffered less damage to shoot and fruits (AVRDC, 1999).
This accession was later tested with a known susceptible
check (EG075) in Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka and
Thailand. In most places except Bangladesh, it was less
damaged than EG075 (Alam et al., 2003). Hence, EG058
could be an important source of resistance to develop
EFSB-resistant cultivars for several countries in the
region, except Bangladesh. Turbo, a commercial F1 hybrid
grown in Thailand also exhibited significant resistance to
EFSB in Thailand and Taiwan (Alam et al., 2003 and
Srinivasan et al., 2005). In addition, two Bangladesh
accessions viz., BL009 and ISD006 possess appreciable
levels of resistance in Taiwan. Further research on these
resistant sources indicated neither the trichomes nor the
antibiosis as the basis of resistance (Srinivasan et al.,
2005). Instead, the anatomical characters may probably
contribute to the resistance as explained by Mishra et al.
(1988) in some resistant accessions, which needs to be
confirmed in further studies.
Sex Pheromones
Sex pheromones are important component of IPM
programs and they are mainly used to monitor as well as
mass-trap the male insects. Zhu et al. (1987) identified
(E)-11-hexadecenyl acetate (E11-16: Ac) as the major
component of EFSB sex pheromone in China. They
synthesized this chemical in the laboratory and used at
the rate of 300-500 µg per trap to attract the EFSB males in
the field. Attygalle et al. (1988) and Gunawardena et al.
(1989) also identified the presence of this compound from
the sex pheromone glands of EFSB in Sri Lanka. In
addition, they have also identified trace quantities of (E)-
11-hexadecen-1-ol (E11-16:OH). E11-16:Ac was
synthesized in the laboratory and tested for its attraction
in Sri Lanka. Although it attracted male moths in the
laboratory, its performance under field conditions was
inferior to live virgin female moths (Gunawardena, 1992;
Gunawardena et al., 1989). However, E11-16:Ac when used
alone or in combination with E11-16:OH attracted
significantly high numbers of male moths in India and
Bangladesh, although E11-16:OH alone showed no
attraction at any concentration (AVRDC, 1996; Srinivasan
and Babu, 2000). Cork et al. (2001) at the Natural
Resources Institute (NRI), UK also identified the presence
of E11-16:Ac as a major component and E11-16:OH as a
minor component in the pheromone gland extracts of EFSB
from India and Taiwan. They also found that E11-16:Ac
and E11-16:OH (100:1) attracted significantly more
numbers of male moths than E11-16:Ac alone in India.
Hence, the EFSB sex pheromone was included as a
potential component in the EFSB IPM program that was
implemented by AVRDC in South Asia.
Delta traps and funnel traps could be used for the EFSB
sex pheromone lures in field conditions. However, the trap
design that would attract more numbers of insects will
vary from one location to the other. Hence, it had to be
confirmed in repeated field experiments. For instance, in
the AVRDC-led EFSB IPM program in South Asia, delta
IPM for Eggplant fruit and shoot borer 107
traps consistently caught more EFSB male moths than
funnel traps in Gujarat, whereas funnel traps performed
better than delta and water-trough traps in Uttar Pradesh
(Alam et al., 2003). Similarly, delta traps caught and
retained ten times more moths than either Spodoptera or
uni-trap designs in Bangladesh (Cork et al., 2003). The
optimal trap height will also vary with locations. As an
example, the traps placed at crop canopy level caught
significantly more male moths than traps placed 0.5 m
above or below the crop canopy in Bangladesh (Cork et
al., 2003), whereas traps installed 0.25 m above crop
canopy caught higher moths than either at crop canopy
or at 0.25 m below crop canopy in Uttar Pradesh (Alam et
al., 2003). The traps should be erected at every 10 m or
less for effective attraction (Prasad et al., 2005). In general,
it has been suggested to place the traps at a density of
100 per ha (Cork et al., 2003). Thus, the EFSB sex
pheromone traps as a component of IPM significantly
reduced the fruit damage and increased the yield in South
Asia (Alam et al., 2003; Cork et al., 2003).
Cultural and Mechanical Control
Cultural control methods involve the manipulation of crop
environment as well as management, whereas mechanical
control involves the use of mechanical forces or manual
operations to interfere with the insect feeding, shelter and
reproduction. For instance, sanitation of the field before,
during and after the cropping, removal of the alternate
food sources for the pests and mechanical barriers are
some of the cultural and mechanical control measures to
manage EFSB in the field.
Solanum nigrum, S. indicum, S. torvum, S. myriacanthum,
tomato and potato were recorded as alternative host plants
of EFSB (Fletcher, 1916; Menon, 1962; Nair, 1967; Das and
Patnaik, 1970; Mehto et al., 1980; Isahaque and Chaudhuri,
1983; Srinivasan and Babu, 1998; Murthy and Nandihalli,
2003; Reddy and Kumar, 2004). Although it may be a rare
occurrence, and it is not clear about the size of EFSB
population that would develop and migrate from these
plants, the new plantings or seedling nurseries can be
kept free of or away from these Solanum species and fields.
However, EFSB moths that emerge from the pupae in soil
or migrate from neighboring eggplant crops are important
sources of infestation.
In addition to these known sources of infestation, dry
eggplant stalks from previous crop that have been stored
by the farmers as fuel for cooking serve as another
important source of EFSB infestation (Alam et al., 2003).
Sometimes, farmers may grow their eggplant seedlings in
the vicinity of dry eggplant stubble heaps, which may
likely to get infested by those moths emerging from the
stubble heaps. However, this needs to be investigated in
detail. In general, it would be ideal to grow the seedlings
away from the dry eggplant stubble heaps, or under net-
tunnels if it is grown in the vicinity of dry eggplant stubble
heaps.
Removal and prompt destruction of the EFSB infested
shoots and fruits at regular intervals have been suggested
as an effective strategy to manage the EFSB on eggplant
in South and Southeast Asia (Rahman et al., 2002; Talekar,
2002; Arida et al., 2003; Satpathy et al., 2005). This pruning
is especially important in early stages of the crop growth,
and this should be continued until the final harvest. This
will be more effective when it is being followed by the
whole community in a particular region than an individual
grower. In addition, this pruning will not adversely affect
the plant growth as well as yield (Talekar, 2002;
Srinivasan, unpublished data).
As the EFSB adults are relatively small moths and weak
fliers, it was hypothesized that the inter-field movement
could effectively be restricted by erecting suitable barriers.
This hypothesis was tested by erecting 2 m high nylon
net barrier around the eggplant soon after transplanting
in Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka and Thailand. The use of
barriers combined with prompt destruction of the EFSB
infested shoots significantly reduced the damage to
shoots than by using either the barrier or the sanitation
alone (Alam et al., 2003). However, the damage to fruits
was not so significant, although the reduction in damage
over untreated control was about 33%. Protective
cultivation such as net-house or poly-house production
systems are emerging in states like Punjab in India. Kaur
et al. (2004) found that sanitation and neem spraying
recorded 50% lower fruit damage in net-house cultivation
than the damage under open field conditions in Punjab.
Hence field sanitation and mechanical barriers could
significantly reduce the EFSB damage and could be an
effective component in EFSB IPM. However, economic
feasibility of adopting net-barriers or net-houses should
be considered while promoting this technology among
resource-poor eggplant growers.
Biological Control
Although several natural enemies (predators, parasitoids
and entomopathogens) have been recorded against EFSB
in South and Southeast Asia (Table 1, modified from
Waterhouse, 1998), their role in keeping the EFSB
population at levels below causing economic damage is
not significant (Srivastava and Butani, 1998). However,
Trathala flavoorbitalis seems to be a potential candidate
in biological control of EFSB among all these natural
enemies, because of its presence in several countries in
the region as well as its higher rate of parasitism in field
conditions. But, it is not a specific parasitoid of EFSB as
R. Srinivasan 108
it could also attack other pyralid insect pests. For instance,
it was introduced in the Fiji Islands from Hawaii for the
control of rice leaf-folder, Marasmia exigua in 1928 (Islam
and Cohen, 2007).
Although T. flavoorbitalis has been recorded on EFSB in
several countries, its potential role in EFSB management
has not been studied in detail. Hence, AVRDC has started
exploring the local natural enemies including T.
flavoorbitalis that have the potential to control EFSB in
the region. T. flavoorbitalis was the only active parasitoid
against EFSB in Sri Lanka, Gujarat (India) and Bangladesh,
with maximum parasitism of 61.7%. In addition to T.
flavoorbitalis, Goryphus nursei (Ichneumonidae:
Hymenoptera) was recorded in Uttar Pradesh. This was
an active parasitoid during winter season, with maximum
parasitism of 7%. Similarly, few specimens of Pristomerus
testaceus, Elasmus corbetti and Euagathis sp. have been
recorded from EFSB in Thailand, although T. flavoorbitalis
remained predominant species. The level of parasitism by
T. flavoorbitalis has significantly increased after
withholding the pesticide use (Alam et al., 2003). Hence,
T. flavoorbitalis would be an ideal bio-control candidate
in EFSB IPM program in the region.
Promotion of EFSB IPM in South Asia
In a later phase during 2003-2005, the EFSB IPM strategy
was promoted among the eggplant growers in selected
areas of Bangladesh and India. The promotional activities
included organization of farmers’ field days on pilot project
sites, meetings between farmers and researchers, training
of farmers in the use of IPM, production and distribution
of extension publications, news releases and telecasting
of an IPM documentary film in local languages to drive
home the message of IPM, especially to farmers and
consumers. The pilot projects were implemented in an area
of about 325 ha owned by about 2000 growers, in which
nearly 35 Farmers’ Field Days have been organized over a
period of two years. About 10,000 farmers were trained on
the IPM technology, and about 22,000 extension
publications in local languages have been distributed
(Alam et al., 2006).
In addition, small and medium sized entrepreneurs (SMEs)
were also involved in the project activities to encourage
commercialization of sex pheromone and promotion
through them the use of this pest control tool as a part of
IPM. Nine SMEs were selling the EFSB sex pheromones
in India by the end of 2005. The sales volume of EFSB sex
pheromone lures by four of these SMEs have nearly tripled
from 74,000 in 2002 to 193,000 in 2004 (Alam et al., 2006),
which reflected the adoption of the technology by the
eggplant growers.
Socioeconomic Impact and Future of the EFSB IPM
Technology
The profit margins and production area significantly
increased whereas pesticide use and labor requirement
decreased for those farmers who adopted this IPM
technology. For instance, socioeconomic studies in
Bangladesh revealed that the adoption of EFSB IPM has
reduced about 30% of the total production cost when
compared to the non-IPM adopters (Alam et al., 2003). In
West Bengal, the IPM adopters has reduced their labor
requirements by 5.9%, sprayed pesticides 52.6% less often
than before and increased their eggplant production area
by 21.6%. The economic surplus model revealed an
internal rate of return of 38% and a benefit cost ratio of
2.78 (Baral et al., 2006). It has clearly been proven that
this IPM technology has positive impacts on the lives of
eggplant growers in the region. Hence, AVRDC – The
World Vegetable Center is currently exploring grants to
expand the EFSB IPM program to other regions of South
and Southeast Asia, especially Bangladesh, India (Andhra
Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and West
Bengal), Nepal and the Philippines. In addition to the
upscaling of the IPM technology, partnerships will be
strengthened with the existing national IPM programs in
the region to enhance the capacity building.
REFERENCES
Alam, A. Z. and Sana, D. L. 1964. Biology of Leucinodes
orbonalis Guenee in East Pakistan. In: Review of
Research, Division of Entomology, 1947–64. Dhaka:
Agriculture Information Service, Department of
Agriculture. 192–200 P..
Alam, S. N., Hossain, M. I., Rouf, F. M. A., Jhala, R. C.,
Patel, M. G., Rath, L. K., Sengupta, A., Baral, K.,
Shylesha, A. N., Satpathy, S., Shivalingaswamy, T. M.,
Cork, A. and Talekar, N. S. 2006. Implementation and
promotion of an IPM strategy for control of eggplant
fruit and shoot borer in South Asia. Technical Bulletin
No. 36. AVRDC publication number 06-672. AVRDC –
The World Vegetable Center, Shanhua, Taiwan. 74 PP.
Alam, S. N., Rashid, M. A., Rouf, F. M. A., Jhala, R. C.,
Patel, J. R., Satpathy, S., Shivalingaswamy, T. M., Rai,
S., Wahundeniya, I., Cork, A., Ammaranan, C., and
Talekar, N. S. 2003. Development of an integrated pest
management strategy for eggplant fruit and shoot borer
in South Asia, Technical Bulletin TB28, AVRDC – The
World Vegetable Center, Shanhua, Taiwan, 66 PP .
Arida, G. S., Duca, A. A., Punzal, B. S. and Rajotte, E. G.
2003. Management of the eggplant fruit and shoot
borer, Leucinodes orbonalis (Guenee): Evaluation of
farmer’s indigenous practices. In: Overview of the
Southeast Asia Site in the Philippines. 45-47 PP. http:/
/www.oired.vt.edu/ipmcrsp/communications/annrepts/
annrep03/Philippines/6phillipinescombined.pdf
Attygalle, A. B., Schwarz, J. and Gunawardena, N. E. 1988.
Sex pheromone of brinjal shoot and pod borer
Leucinodes orbonalis Guénee (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae:
Pyraustinae). Z. Naturforsch, 43C: 790–792.
IPM for Eggplant fruit and shoot borer 109
Atwal, A. S. 1976. Agricultural pests of India and
Southeast Asia. Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi, India.
502 PP.
AVRDC. 1996. AVRDC .1995. Report. AVRDC Publication
No. 96-449. Asian Vegetable Research and Development
Center, Shanhua, Taiwan. 187 PP .
AVRDC. 1999. AVRDC Report .1998. AVRDC Publication
No. 99-492. Asian Vegetable Research and Development
Center, Shanhua, Taiwan. 148 PP .
AVRDC. 2000. AVRDC Report .1999. AVRDC Publication
No. 00-503. Asian Vegetable Research and Development
Center, Shanhua, Taiwan. 152 PP .
Baral, K., Roy, B. C., Rahim, K. M. B., Chatterjee, H.,
Mondal, P., Mondal, D., Ghosh, D. and Talekar, N. S.
2006. Socio-economic parameters of pesticide use and
assessment of impact of an IPM strategy for the control
of eggplant fruit and shoot borer in West Bengal, India.
Technical Bulletin No. 37. AVRDC publication number
06-673. AVRDC – The World Vegetable Center, Shanhua,
Taiwan. 36 PP .
Behera, T. K. and Singh, N. 2002. Inter-specific crosses
between eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) with related
Solanum species. Science Horticulture – Amsterdam,
95: 165-172.
Behera, T. K., Singh, N., Kalda, T. S. and Gupta, S. S. 1999.
Screening for shoot and fruit borer incidence in
eggplant genotypes under Delhi condition. Indian
Journal of Entomology, 61(4): 372-375.
Chelliah, S. and Srinivasan, K. 1983. Resistant in bhendi,
brinjal and tomato to major insect and mite pests. In:
Proceedings of the National Seminar on Breeding
Crop Plants for Resistance to Pests and Diseases, May
25-27, 1983. Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India, . 47 P.
Cork, A., Alam, S. N., Das, A., Das, C. S., Ghosh, G. C.,
Farman, D. I., Hall, D. R., Maslen, N. R., Vedham, K.,
Phythiam, S. J., Rouf, F. M. A. and Srinivasan, K. 2001.
Female sex pheromone of brinjal fruit and shoot borer,
Leucinodes orbonalis blend optimization. Journal of
Chemical Ecology, 27(9): 1867–1877.
Cork, A., Alam, S. N., Rouf, F. M. A. and Talekar, N. S.
2003. Female pheromone of brinjal fruit and shoot borer,
Leucinodes orbonalis: trap optimization and
preliminary mass trapping trials. Bulletin of
Entomological Research, 93: 107–113.
Darekar, K. S., Gaikwad, B.P. and Chavan, U. D. 1991.
Screening of eggplant cultivars for resistance to fruit
and shoot-borer. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural
Universities, 16(3): 366-369.
Das, M. S. and Patnaik, B. H. 1970. A new host of the
brinjal shoot and fruit borer, Leucinodes orbonalis
Guen., and its biology. Journal of the Bombay Natural
History Society, 63: 601–603.
Dhandapani, N., Shelkar, U. R. and Murugan, M. 2003.
Bio-intensive pest management in major vegetable
crops: An Indian perspective. Journal of Food,
Agriculture and Environment, 1(2): 330-339.
Dhankhar, B. S., Kishore, N., Sharma, D. R. and Pandita,
M. L. 1982. Susceptibility of Solanum khasianum to
brinjal shoot and fruit borer (Leucinodes orbonalis
Guen.). Journal of Research Haryana Agricultural
University, 12(3): 523-524.
Doshi, K. M., Bhalala, M. K., Kathiria, K. B. and
Bhanvadia, A. S. 2002 Screening of eggplant genotypes
for yield, fruit borer infestation, little leaf incidence and
quality traits. Capsicum and Eggplant Newsletter, (21):
100-101.
FAO. 2007. FAOSTAT data 2005. http://www.fao.org
(accessed on 28 August 2007)
Fletcher, T. B. 1916. One hundred notes on Indian insects.
Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa, Bulletin 59, No
27 (from Waterhouse, 1998).
Gapud, V. P. and Canapi, B. L. 1994. preliminary survey of
insects of onions, eggplant and string beans in San
Jose, Nueva Ecija. Philippines Country Report, IPM
CRSP – First Annual Report, http://www.oired.vt.edu/
ipmcrsp/communications/annrepts/annrep94/
Phil_country_rpt.html
Gapud, V. P., Pile, C. C., Santiago, B., Suiza, R. C.,
Martinv, E. C., Balagot, G., Lit, M. C., Rajotte, E. and
Talekar, N. S. 1998. Management of eggplant and string
bean insect pests in rice-vegetable system. Third IPM
CRSP Symposium abstracts, http://www.oired.vt.edu/
ipmcrsp/meetings/symp98/abstracts3.html
Gunawardena, N. E. 1992. Convenient synthesis of (E)-
11-hexadecenyl acetate, the female sex pheromone of
the brinjal moth Leucinodes orbonalis Guenee. Journal
of the National Science Council of Sri Lanka, 20(1):
71-80.
Gunawardena, N. E., Attygalle, A. B. and Herath, H. M. W.
K. B. 1989. The sex pheromone of the brinjal pest,
Leucinodes orbonalis Guenee (Lepidoptera): problems
and perspectives. Journal of the National Science
Council of Sri Lanka, 17(2): 161-171.
Hossain, M. M., Shahjahan, M., Abdus Salam, M. and
Begum, M. A. 2002. Screening of some brinjal varieties
and lines against brinjal shoot and fruit borer,
Leucinodes orbonalis Guenee. Pakistan Journal of
Biological Sciences, 5(10): 1032-1040
IPM CRSP. 2001 Overview of the Southeast Asian site in
Philippines, IPM CRSP Annual Highlights for Year 8.
2000-2001, Virginia Tech, Virginia, USA. 63 PP .
Isahaque N. M. M. and Chaudhuri, R. P. 1983. A new
alternate host plant of brinjal shoot and fruit borer,
Leucinodes orbonalis Guen. in Assam. Journal of
Research, Assam Agricultural University, 4: 83-85.
R. Srinivasan 110
Islam, M. N. and Karim, M. A. 1991. Management of the
brinjal shoot and fruit borer, Leucinodes orbonalis
Guen, (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in field. In: Annual
Research Report 1990-91. Entomology Division,
Bangladesh Agric. Res. Inst. Joydebpur, Gazipur, 44 –
46 PP.
Islam, Z. and Cohen, M. 2007 Biological control of rice
insect pests. International Rice Research Institute
(IRRI), Philippines. 33 PP. http://www. knowledge
bank.irri.org/ipm/biocontrol/print.doc (accessed on 19
September 2007)
Kadam, J. R., Bhosale, U. D. and Chavan, A. P. 2006.
Influence of insecticidal treatment sequences on
population of Leucinodes orbonalis Gn and its
predators. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural
Universities, 31(3): 379-382
Kashyap, V., Vinod Kumar, S., Collonnier, C., Fusari, F.,
Haicour, R., Rotino, G. L., Sihachakr, D. and Rajam, M.
V. 2003. Biotechnology of eggplant. Scientia
Horticulturae – Amsterdam, 97: 1-25.
Kaur, S., Bal, S. S., Singh, G., Sidhu, A. S. and Dhillon, T. S.
(2004) Management of brinjal shoot and fruit borer,
Leucinodes orbonalis Guenee through net house
cultivation. Acta Horticulturae, 659: 345-350.
Khan, R., Rao, G. R. and Baksh, S. 1978. Cytogenetics of
Solanum integrifolium and its possible use in eggplant
breeding. Indian Journal of Genetics and Plant
Breeding, 38: 343–347.
Krishnamoorthy, A. and Mani, M. 1998. New record of
parasitoid Diadegma apostata (G.) on brinjal shoot and
fruit borer. Insect Environment 4(3): 87.
Mallik, S. N., Kumar, M., Sinha, A. N. and Karn, B. P. 1989.
Trathala flavoorbitalis Cameron (Ichneumonidae) - a
parasite of Leucinodes orbonalis Guen. From Bihar.
Current Science, 58: 1098Ð1099.
Mannan, M. A., Begum, A., Rahman, M. M. and Hossain,
M. M. 2003. Screening of local and exotic brinjal
varieties/cultivars for resistance to brinjal shoot and
fruit borer, Leucinodes orbonalis Guen. Pakistan
Journal of Biological Sciences, 6(5): 488-492.
Mehto, D. N., Singh, K. M. and Singh, R. N. 1980. Dispe-
rsion of Leucinodes orbonalis Guen. during different
seasons. Indian Journal of Entomology, 42: 539-540.
Menon, P. P. V. 1962. Leucinodes orbonalis Guen.
(Pyralidae: Lep.) new record on Solanum indicum Linn.
in South India. Madras Agricultural Journal, 49: 194
(from Waterhouse, 1998).
Mishra, P. N., Singh, Y. V. and Nautiyal, M. C. 1988.
Screening of brinjal varieties for resistance to shoot
and fruit borer (Leucinodes orbonalis Guen.)
(Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). South Indian Horticulture,
36: 188-192.
Murthy, P. N. and Nandihalli, B. S. 2003. Crop loss
estimation caused by Leucinodes orbonalis Guenee in
potato. Pest Management in Horticultural Ecosystem,
9: 59-62.
Nair, K. R. 1967. Leucinodes orbonalis Guen. (Lepidoptera:
Pyralidae) as a serious pest of potato plants in Mysore
State. Indian Journal of Entomology, 29(1): 96–97.
Naresh, J. S., Malik, V. S. and Balan, J. S. 1986. Estimation
of fruit damage and larval population of brinjal fruit
borer, Leucinodes orbonalis Guen. and its parasitization
by Trathala sp. on brinjal. Bulletin of Entomology
(India), 27: 44-47.
Navasero, M. V. 1983. Biology and chemical control of the
eggplant fruit and shoot borer, Leucinodes orbonalis
Guen.e (Pyraustidae: Lepidoptera). BS Thesis,
University of the Philippines at Los Banos, Philippines.
Orden, M. E. M., Patricio, M. G. and Canoy, V. V. 1994.
Extent of pesticide use in vegetable production in
Nueva Ecija: Empirical evidence and policy implications.
Research and Development Highlights 1994, Central
Luzon State University, Republic of the Philippines.
196-213 PP.
Patel, R. C., Patel, J. C. and Patel, J. K. 1971. New records
of parasites of Leucinodes orbonalis Guen. from
Gujarat. Indian Journal of Entomology, 33: 358.
Potutan, G. E., Janubas, L. G., Marnado, J., Holmer, J. and
Schnitzler, W. H. 1997. Peri-urban vegetable production,
consumption and marketing in Cagayan de Oro,
Philippines. Kasetsart Journal (Natural Sciences,) 32:
61-66.
Prasad, H., Singh, H. M. and Singh, A. K. 2005. Effective
range of sex pheromone of Leucinodes orbonalis Guen.
Journal of Applied Zoological Researches, 16(1): 81-
82.
Rahman, M. S., Alam, M. Z., Haq, M., Sultana, N. and
Islam, K. S. .2002. Effect of some integrated pest
management (IPM) packages against brinjal shoot and
fruit borer and its consequence on yield. Online
Journal of Biological Sciences, 2(7): 489-491.
Reddy, N. A. and Kumar, C. T. A. 2004. Insect pests of
tomato, Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. in eastern dry
zone of Karnataka. Insect Environment, 10: 40-42.
Sandanayake, W. R. M. and Edirisinghe, J. P. 1992. Trathala
flavoorbitalis: parasitization and development in
relation to host-stage attacked. Insect Sciences and its
Applications, 13(3): 287–292.
Satpathy, S., Shivalingaswamy, T. M., Akhilesh Kumar,
Rai, A. B. and Mathura Rai. 2005. Biointensive
management of eggplant shoot and fruit borer
(Leucinodes orbonalis Guen.). Vegetable Science,
32(1): 103-104.
IPM for Eggplant fruit and shoot borer 111
Sharma, D. R., Chawdhury, J. B., Ahuja, U. and Dhankhar,
B. S. 1980. Interspecific hybridization in the genus
Solanum. A cross between S.melongena and S.
khasianum through embryo culture. Zeitschrift Fur
Pflanzenzuchtung Journal of plant Breeding, 85: 248–
253.
Singh, T. H. and Kalda, T. S. 1997. Source of resistance to
shoot and fruit borer in eggplant (Solanum melongena
L.). PKV Research Journal, 21(2): 126-128.
Srinivasan, G., and Babu, P. C. S. 1998. Life table studies
on shoot and fruit borer, Leucinodes orbonalis Guenee
(Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) on brinjal, tomato and potato.
Advances in IPM for horticultural crops. Proceedings
of the First National Symposium on Pest Management
in Horticultural Crops: environmental implications and
thrusts, Bangalore, India 15-17 October, 1997.
Srinivasan, G. and Babu, P. C. S. 2000. Sex pheromone for
brinjal shoot and fruit borer, Leucinodes orbonalis.
Indian Journal of Entomology, 62: 94–95.
Srinivasan, R., Huang, C. C. and Talekar, N. S. 2005.
Characterization of resistance in eggplant to eggplant
fruit and shoot borer. In: Proc. of the National
Symposium on Recent Advances in Integrated
Management of Brinjal Shoot and Fruit Borer, October
3-4, 2005, Varanasi, India. 90-93 PP..
Srivastava, K. P. and Butani, D. K. 1998. Pest management
in vegetables, Part 1. Houston, USA: Research
Periodical and Book Publishing House. 294 PP.
SUSVEG-Asia. 2007. SUSVEG-Asia Brinjal integrated pest
management (IPM). http://susveg-asia.nri.org/
susvegasiabrinjalipm4.html (Accessed on 19 September
2007)
Talekar, N. S. 2002. Controlling eggplant fruit and shoot
borer: A simple, safe and economical approach.
International Cooperators’ Guide, AVRDC Pub. #02-534.
Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center,
Shanhua, Taiwan. 4 PP.
Tewari, G. C. and Moorthy, P. N. K. 1984. New records of
two parasites of brinjal shoot and fruit borer,
Leucinodes orbonalis Guen. Entomon., 9: 63-64.
Tewari, G. C. and Sardana, H. R. 1987. Eriborus
argenteopilosus (Cameron) - a new parasite of
Leucinodes orbonalis Guen. Entomon., 12: 227-228.
Tewari, G. C. and Singh, S. J. 1987. New record of a
baculovirus disease in Leucinodes orbonalis Guen.
Current Science, 56: 671-672.
Tripathi, S. R. and Singh, A. K. 1991. Some observations
on population dynamics of brinjal borer, Leucinodes
orbonalis (Guen.) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Annals of
Entomology, 9(1): 15-24
Verma, T. S. and Lal, O. P. 1985. A new record of Itamoplex
sp. (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) parasitising
eggplant shoot and fruit borer in Kulu valley, Himachal
Pradesh. Bulletin of Entomology, 26: 219-222.
Waterhouse, D. F. 1998 Biological Control of Insect Pests:
Southeast Asian Prospects. ACIAR Monograph No.
51, 548 pp + viii, 1 fig. 16 maps.
Yang, Z. Q. 1982. A preliminary study on Leucinodes
orbonalis Guenee. Kunchong Zhishi, 19(2): 20-22 (in
Chinese).
Yasodha, P. and Natarajan, N. 2006. Seasonal abundance
of Trathala flavo-orbitalis Cameroon (Hymenoptera:
Ichneumonidae), a predominant parasitoid of
Leucinodes orbonalis Guenee (Lepidoptera:
Pyraustidae). Journal of Plant Protection and
Environment, 3(2): 103-108
Yunus, A. and Ho, T. H. 1980. List of economic pests, host
plants, parasites and predators in West Malaysia (1920-
1978). Ministry of Agriculture, Malaysia, Bulletin 153.
538 PP.
Zhu, P., F. Kong, S. Yu, Y. Yu, S. Jin, X. Hu and J. Xu. 1987.
Identification of the sex pheromone of eggplant borer
Leucinodes orbonalis Guénee (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae).
Zeitschrift Fur Naturforschung C-A Journal of
Biosciences, 43C:1347–1348.
______________________________________________
R. Srinivasan
Entomologist, AVRDC – The World Vegetable Center,
Shanhua, Tainan, Taiwan, E-mail:amrasca@netra.avrdc.
org.tw
R. Srinivasan 112
