Plant Resistance as a Part of Integrated Pest Management for Whiteflies on Floral Crops 1993 Proposal
Floral Crops
A. SUMMARY: The development of integrated pest management (IPM) programs is crucial
for the future of insect and mite pest control on floral crops, especially
in light of the current and impending regulations and costs (monetary and
environmental) of pesticide use. This proposal requests the second year
of funding for a three year project that investigates plant resistance
as part of IPM for whiteflies on floral crops. This project proposes to
examine a fundamental component of any IPM program: the interaction between
the crop cultivar, the pest(s), and the control strategies. As part of
the overall effort to develop pest management strategies for floral crops,
this project win expand the work on plant resistance to whiteflies by investigating
the biology of both sweetpotato (Bemisia tabaci) and greenhouse (Trialeurodes
vaporariorum) whiteflies on a broader range of floral crops, examine the
influence of crop fertilization practices on plant susceptibility to whiteflies,
examine the interaction of chemical control and plant resistance, and the
interaction of biological control with plant resistance. A knowledge of
the degree of cultivar susceptibility/resistance and the biology of a pest
on a crop are fundamental components of an integrated pest management program
for any crop. Such information can aid in detecting and monitoring pest
infestations, cultivar selection, and crop breeding. Also, although it
is known that the kind and amount of nutrients that an insect ingests directly
affects its survival and reproduction, and that plant-feeding insects are
dependent on the quantity and quality of nutrients in their host plant,
it is currently unknown whether plant susceptibility to pests can be reduced
by modifying the way a floral crop is fertilized, without sacrificing crop
quality. Promising research on biological control of greenhouse pests is
underway on several floral crops. However, to fully exploit biological
control, and ascertain whether certain plant characteristics are likely
to influence the effectiveness of natural enemies, the interaction between
plant characteristics and natural enemies should be understood. Research
on greenhouse vegetable crops has shown that biological control may be
more successful on some cultivars than on others because of differences
in physical and/or chemical aspects of a plant. Chemical control of pests
will remain a fundamental component of integrated pest management, particularly
with “biorational” insecticides. However, chemical control may be better
on some cultivars than on others, once again because of the interaction
between characteristics of the crop cultivar, the pest, and the pesticide.
This project is designed to investigate these issues.
Benefits to the floral industry: Whiteflies are one of the most serious
pests of floral crops world-wide. This research will aid in whitefly control
with less insecticide on a wider range of floral crops. Less use of chemical
pesticides reduces the economic, regulatory, environmental, and social
costs of chemical pest control, and reduces pesticide resistance problems.
The information generated may be useful in breeding for resistance to pests
in floral crops, or for introducing plant resistance into new cultivars
through biotechnology. In addition to improved whitefly control, results
of this research may be directly or indirectly applicable to the control
of other pests of floral crops. For example, cultivars that are resistant
to one pest species are often resistant to others as well. Insights will
be gained in the integration of cultural, biological, and chemical pest
control, which are the components of a complete IPM program.
B. DETAILED PROPOSAL 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION.
(Note: Because the thrust of this three-year project has not changed since
it was initially funded, the background information that follows is not
substantially different from the previously-funded proposals (submitted
in 1990 and 1991) and is provided for those who are unfamiliar with this
project. Updated information has been provided whenever appropriate and
available.)
The development of effective IPM programs requires a thorough knowledge
of the interactions between the crop, the pest(s), and the control strategies.
Some pests may be more severe on some crops or cultivars than on others,
and the degree of control achieved by a given strategy can be influenced
by the crop or cultivar. Thus, of central importance to an IPM program
is a knowledge of the degree of susceptibility/resistance of crop cultivars,
as well as how the effectiveness of control strategies can be influenced
by crop cultivar.
Identifying and exploiting the degree of resistance/susceptibility of
crop cultivars for pest control falls under the realm of host plant resistance
studies. Host plant resistance can be described as any reduction in population
growth of a target pest, as influenced by heritable characteristics of
the host plant, compared to a standard variety (De Ponti et al. 1990).
On floral crops, two categories of plant resistance can be important for
insect and mite pest control; these are antixenosis (or non-preference)
where the pest is not attracted to a plant because of the presence or lack
of chemical and/or physical cues, and antibiosis, where a plant possesses
chemical and/or physical characteristics which adversely affect the pest.
Host plant resistance against floricultural pests can be exploited in
several ways. Initial screening for plant resistance can quickly identify
the relative degree of resistance/susceptibility of each cultivar tested.
A simple knowledge of the degree of susceptibility of different cultivars
can aid in detecting and monitoring pest populations. For example, cultivars
on which the pests are particularly severe could be placed together in
a greenhouse operation and monitored for pests more carefully than the
more resistant cultivars. Time involved in monitoring for pests could be
reduced in this way, and early detection of pest problems would be easier.
Our results of relative numbers of sweetpotato whitefly on several popular
red varieties (Sanderson 1992) may be helpful. This preliminary screening
for whitefly resistance may also provide a preliminary indication of resistance
to other pests. For example, during my previous project funded by the American
Floral Endowment, we observed that poinsettia cultivars that were the most
susceptible to greenhouse whiteflies were also the most susceptible to
spider mites and mealybugs. The same may also be true for other floral
crops. It may also be possible to breed for plant resistance through traditional
breeding programs, once resistant cultivars are identified. If the mechanism(s)
that confer resistance to a pest(s) is identified, it may eventually be
possible to introduce plant factors which confer resistance into susceptible
cultivars by means of tissue culture or biotechnological procedures. Because
floricultural crops are not food crops, the production of chemicals which
are toxic to humans by the plants is not of great concern, yet could be
exploited for pest control. Despite the potential benefits of studies on
whitefly resistance on floral crops, little work is currently underway.
The degree of resistance/susceptibility of a cultivar may also be influenced
by horticultural practices. Plant-feeding insects and mites are obviously
dependent on their host plant for their nutritional requirements. Tbus,
the way that a crop is gown might influence its level of resistance. Preliminary
observations of whiteflies on poinsettia from my previous American Floral
Endowment project indicated that fertilization practices might influence
whitefly development on this crop. By modifying fertilizer inputs it may
be possible to change the degree of plant susceptibility to whiteflies,
or adversely affect the whiteflies. It is also possible that these fertilizer
modifications would affect other pests in addition to whiteflies. However,
except for one study (Haseman 1946), the effect of plant nutrition on whiteflies
has not been studied on a floral crop. The possibility of modifying horticultural
practices for improved pest control should be examined as a cultural control
component of an IPM program.
As mentioned previously, the degree of control achieved by a given strategy
can be influenced by the crop or cultivar, and this should be examined
as part of an effective IPM program. Some studies have shown that better
chemical control of floricultural pests can be achieved on resistant cultivars
than on susceptible ones (Selander et al. 1972, Alverson & Gorsuch
1982). In our previous Endowment project we found that whitefly nymphal
control can be significantly affected by an interaction between insecticide
and poinsettia cultivar. That is, sweetpotato whitefly nymphal control
with horticultural oil was better on TopWhite’ than on ‘Mini Minniken’
(probably due to differences in spray coverage caused by canopy architecture),
although the degree of control by both fluvalinate (Mavrik) and a mixture
of fenpropathrin plus acephate (Tame plus Orthene) was not affected by
cultivar.
Other studies have shown the benefit of integrating the use of resistant
crop cultivars with biological control organisms in an integrated pest
management program (van Emden 1966, Starks et al. 1972, Obrycki et al.
1983, Li Zhoa Hua et al. 1987). Biological control of whiteflies with parasitic
wasps is a particularly promising control strategy on certain crops. Several
floricultural entomologists are actively pursuing the commercial development
of this strategy (Lindquist 1988, Parrella et al. 1991, Heinz & Parrella
1990, Osborne & Hoelmer), including our efforts at Cornell (Sanderson
& Ferrentino 1990, Sanderson 1992, Zchori-Fein et al. 1992). The effectiveness
of parasitoids against whiteflies on selected crop cultivars should be
investigated to determine if certain plant characteristics have a positive
or negative influences on the parasitoid’s effectiveness. For example,
it is conceivable that biological control is enhanced on those cultivars
which cause a reduction in immature whitefly developmental rate, because
immature whiteflies remain for a longer time in life stages that are susceptible
to the parasitoid’s attack. Alternatively, certain cultivars may have undesirable
characteristics, such as excessively hairy leaves, that impede the searching
ability of the parasitoid, and thus interfere with biological control (Hulspas-Jordaan
and van Lenteren 1978). As part of a complete integrated pest management
program for whitefly control on poinsettia, wherein plant resistance, biological
control, and/or chemical control are integrated, the influence of cultivar
on parasitoid effectiveness should be investigated.
For example, in studies of whitefly control by Encarsia formosa among
seven popular red poinsettia cultivars, we found that whitefly numbers
were affected by both the parasitoids and the cultivars, and that percent
parasitism was higher on some cultivars than on others (Sanderson 1992).
In summary, the results of this project will provide information that
may be valuable for optimal whitefly chemical control, biological control,
and cultural control (i.e., crop nutrient modifications, cultivar selection),
and thus be adaptable to IPM programs in a wide range of greenhouse operations.
2. REVIEW OF SIGNIFICANT LITERATURE. (Note: This review has been
updated to include any pertinent studies that have recently appeared in
the literature since the 1991 proposal, plus some of our research results.)
Many studies have documented differing levels of susceptibility to a given
pest among varieties of a given floricultural crop, and/or the effect that
the variety of crop may have on the biology of the pest (e.g., Craig et
al. 1986, Al-Abassi et al. 1987, Alverson & Gorsuch 1982, Fraenkel
et al. 1960, Parrella et al. 1983, Parrella & Bethke 1984, Poe &
Green 1974, Selander et al. 1972, Schuster & Harbaugh 1979, Webb &
Smith 1969, Hussey & Parr 1965, Markkula & Tiitanen 1969, Parr
& Thurston 1968, Singh 1984, Broadbent & Blom 1984, Hargreaves
& Cooper 1980). However, the heritability or mechanism of resistance
has rarely been carefully examined (notable exceptions: Al-Abassi et al.
1987, Craig et al. 1986). Most work on plant resistance in floricultural
crops has involved spider mites, leafminers, and aphids (e.g., all of the
above except Parr & Thurston 1968, Fraenkel et al. 1960, Singh 1984,
and Hargreaves & Cooper 1980). Limited research on plant resistance
to the greenhouse whitefly in floricultural crops has been done (De Pond
et al. 1990), although this is one of the industry’s major pests, and potential
in this area exists, considering the plant resistance work that has been
done with whiteflies on tomato and cucumber (De Pond & Steehuis 1984,
De Pond et al. 1983, Berlinger et al. 1983, Van der Kamp & Van Lenteren
1981, Kowalewski & Robinson 1977). Recently, Castane & Albajes
(1992) evaluated factors involved in greenhouse whitefly adult selection
of 13 cultivars of geranium (Pelargonium x domesticum). Adult greenhouse
whitefly numbers were greater on cultivars with larger leaves and less
leaf hairiness (for non-glandular trichomes). Whitefly adult distribution
was not correlated with leaf cuticle thickness, nor leaf protein, glucose,
and fructose content. Number of eggs per leaf was not affected by any of
these factors. Fischer & Shanks (1974) evaluated the degree of greenhouse
whitefly infestation on 68 poinsettia cultivars. They found a wide variation
in whitefly infestations among these cultivars, and concluded in part that
whiteflies preferred to lay eggs on cultivars with lighter colored bracts.
Bilderback and Mattson (1977a) reported more whiteflies on Annette Hegg
cultivars (white, pink, and red) than on Eckespoint C-1 or Rochford cultivars,
although their results were not analyzed for statistical significance.
Bract coloration apparently had little or no effect on whitefly abundance
in their study. Bilderback and Mattson (1977b) found significantly more
whitefly nymphs on Hot Pink Annette Hegg and White Annette Hegg cultivars
than on Dark Red Annette Hegg or the Eckespoint C-1 and Rochford cultivars.
Rochford (red) had significantly fewer nymphs than any cultivar tested.
They concluded that leaf color and leaf trichome characteristics appear
to influence whitefly preference for poinsettia cultivates, although their
conclusions are based only (in correlations between whitefly numbers and
selected characteristics of certain poinsettia cultivars, rather than on
direct experimental evidence.
Other than our project at Cornell, few published reports have appeared
on plant resistance to sweetpotato whitefly on floral crops. Most of the
work with sweetpotato whitefly has been done on cotton and tomato. Sweetpotato
whitefly infestations are generally higher on hairy varieties of cotton
than on glabrous ones (Sippell et al. 1983, Butler & Henneberry 1984).
Sap pH, leaf size and morphology, leaf hair density, glandular leaf hairs,
and canopy structure have also been reported to influence sweetpotato whitefly
abundance (Kisha. 1981,1984, Sippell et al. 1983, Berlinger 1986, Butler
et al. 1983). In our studies at Cornell we found that sweetpotato whitefly
abundance differed significantly among the poinsettia cultivars tested
thus far. Among common red cultivars tested thus far, ‘Annette Hegg Dark
Red’, ‘V14 Glory’, ‘Angelika’, ‘Lilo’, and ‘Annette Hegg Lady’ had more
than twice as many whiteflies as ‘Celebrate’ or ‘Celebrate 2′ in choice
tests. Sweetpotato whiteflies also laid significantly more eggs on ‘Mini
Minniken’ than on ‘Lilo’ in both choice and no-choice tests. Trichome (leaf
hair) densities vary significantly among 27 cultivars examined (’Lady’
and ‘Annette Hegg Dark Red’ have 5 to 6 times as many trichomes per mm2
as other cultivars), and we think that sweetpotato, whitefly abundance
may be in part related to leaf hairiness. However, because egg production
was greater on ‘Mini Minneken’ than on ‘Lilo’ in choice tests, yet these
cultivars do not differ significantly in trichome densities, it appears
that additional factors are important in whitefly cultivar choice.
It is well known that horticultural practices that influence the levels
and availability of plant nutrients can influence the abundance of insects
and mites. For example, spider mites develop faster on water-stressed almonds
(Youngman et al. 1988, Oi et al. 1989). Fertilizers can affect the nitrogen
content of plants and thus their suitability to whiteflies (Onillon et
al. 1986). Joyce (1958) reported that an increased concentration of leaf
tissue nitrogen correlated to an increase in sweetpotato whitefly populations
on cotton. Haseman (1946) reported that magnesium and potassium deficiencies
positively affected greenhouse whitefly populations on petunias. By manipulating
plant nutrient levels it may be possible to adversely affect pest levels
on susceptible cultivars.
3. OBJECTIVES OF PROPOSED RESEARCH. a. Screen cultivars of several
important floral crops for resistance to whiteflies. b. Investigate the
degree to which crop fertilizing practices affect whitefly biology (and
perhaps that of other pests), and determine if pest problems can be reduced
by modifying crop fertilizer programs without sacrificing crop quality.
c. Compare the efficacy of insecticides against whiteflies on resistant
and susceptible cultivars. d. Compare the effectiveness of whitefly parasitoids
on selected crop cultivars.
4. MATERIALS AND METHODS Objective a. Over the three year duration
of this project, we will expand our previous work on screening for whitefly
resistance on poinsettias to include cultivars of several other important
floral crops. Possible crops of interest include gerbera, geranium, lantana,
fuchsia, salvia, petunia, or others. Important and promising cultivars
to screen will be determined by consultation with breeders and other knowledgeable
industry and academic personnel. These resistance screening studies have
been initiated and will continue for the duration of the project. Colonies
of greenhouse and sweetpotato whiteflies that originated from commercial
greenhouses are established at Cornell and will be used in the work. Our
standard screening procedure has been to evaluate whitefly infestation
levels in “choice” tests (where whitefly adults can “choose” between cultivars)
and “no-choice” tests (where whitefly adults are confined to a given cultivar).
In “no-choice” tests, adult whiteflies are caged on various cultivars for
48 hours. After the adults are removed, observations on the number, overall
survival, and egg to adult developmental time of resulting offspring are
made. In “choice” tests, adult whiteflies are released uniformly among
replicated blocks containing one plant of each cultivar, after which the
number of resulting nymphs per plant is determined.
The results of these screening studies may yield information about possible
mechanisms of whitefly resistance, such as certain characteristics of leaf
morphology or plant chemistry. Based on our observations, hypotheses about
mechanisms of resistance will be developed and tested experimentally in
an attempt to identify any resistance mechanism(s). These experiments may
involve studies such as detailed observations of whitefly behavior, characterization
and modifications of plant architecture/morphology, analysis of leaf tissue
or sap content, and/or other experimental procedures.
Objective b. Because of the results of our previous work with both sweetpotato
and greenhouse whiteflies on poinsettia, and the importance of the poinsettia
crop in the industry, we are using this crop in these nutrient studies.
Studies on the effect of the amount of nitrogen provided to poinsettias
on whitefly biology is currently being evaluated. Cultivars ‘Lilo’ and
‘V14 Glory’ that differ in their rate of nutrient utilization have been
grown at low, normal, and high nitrogen regimes for several weeks, and
choice and no- choice studies have been conducted with sweetpotato whiteflies.
Leaf tissue samples were analyzed for nutrient content at regular intervals,
and the results are being examined for correlation with whitefly abundance
and biology. Observations on crop growth characteristics and quality have
been made. The results of these studies are currently under analysis. If
a correlation exists between the density of B. tabaci and the concentration
of leaf nitrogen in poinsettias as Joyce (1958) found in cotton, then we
may find a difference in population levels between plants fertilized with
different amounts of nitrogen, similar to the findings of Onillon et al.
(1986). We will also look at the two common forms of nitrogen in fertilizers;
calcium nitrate and ammonium nitrate. Ammonium fertilizers make a plant
darker and more succulent than nitrate fertilizers, and it is possible
that these changes also affect whiteflies. Several poinsettia cultivars
will be grown with these two different forms of nitrogen, providing them
with the same total amount of nitrogen in solution, to see if there is
an effect on the biology of B. tabaci. We will evaluate differences by
choice and no-choice tests as described above. Leaf tissue samples will
be analyzed for nutrient content at regular intervals during the study.
Objective c. Standard insecticide efficacy studies are currently being
done during the first phase of the project to identify candidate insecticides
to use in future tests, while cultivars are being screened for resistance.
Thereafter, standard insecticide efficacy studies will be conducted on
resistant and susceptible cultivars. Several insecticides will be applied
to the plants under whitefly pressure in the greenhouse, and compared with
unsprayed plants of the same varieties. A factorial experimental design
will be used to determine the individual controlling effect of each insecticide,
and each variety, as well as the possible interaction between plant resistance
and control with insecticides.
Objective d. We will conduct laboratory and small-scale greenhouse tests
to investigate the relative effectiveness of the commercially-available
parasitoid E. formosa on various crop cultivars. Research elsewhere may
identify more promising parasitoid species for sweetpotato whitefly control,
and if so, we will cooperate to examine the relative effectiveness of these
new parasitoid(s) on various cultivars of interest. Several cultivars will
be chosen, including some that vary in characteristics (such as leaf hair
density) that are most likely to influence parasitoid performance. Parasitoids
will be released onto plants that have been grown under standardized conditions
and infested with uniform numbers of whiteflies. Observations on parasitoid
searching efficiency, rate of parasitism, and degree of control will be
made and compared among cultivars. As mentioned previously, studies on
the effect of poinsettia cultivar on whitefly control with E. formosa have
begun, with work on other crops to follow.
5. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE
The necessary equipment and facilities to accomplish this work are
available at Cornell University. No funds for major equipment or facilities
are requested.
6. LITERATURE CITED
Al-Abbasi, S. H., J. L. Weigle & E. R. Hart. 1987. Biological interactions
between New Guinea
Impatiens and the twospotted spider mite (Acari: Tetranychidae): J.
Econ. Entomol. 80: 47-50.
Alverson, D. R. & C. S. Gorsuch. 1982. Evaluation of chrysanthemum
cultivars: and insecticides for control
of damage by a leafminer, Liriomyza trifolii (Diptera: Agromyzidae).
J. Econ. Entomol. 75: 888-
891.
Berlinger, M. J. 1986. Host-plant resistance to Bemisia tabaci. Agriculture,
Ecosystems and Environment
17:69-82.
Berlinger, M. J., R. Dalian & E. Shevach-Urkin. 1983. Breeding
for resistance to whiteflies in tomatoes -
in relation to integrated pest control in greenhouses. Bulletin SROP
6: 172-176.
Bilderback, T., & R. Mattson. 1977a. Whitefly preference for Annette
Hegg, Eckespoint C-1 and Rochford
poinsettia cultivars drenched with ancymidol. Florist’s Review (January
1977): 38, 79, 80.
Bilderback, T.E., & R.H. Mattson. 1977b. Whitefly host preference
associated with selected biochemical and
phenotypic characteristics of poinsettias. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci.
102: 327-331.
Broadbent, A. B. & T. J. Blom. 1984. Comparative susceptibility
of chrysanthemum cultivars to Liriomyza
trifolii (Diptera: Agromyzidae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Ont. 114: 91-93.
Butler, G.D., Ur.], & T.J. Henneberry. 1984. Bemisia tabaci: Effect
of cotton leaf pubescence on
abundance. Southwestern Entomologist 9: 91-94.
Butler, G.D., D. Rimon, & T.J. Hermeberry. 1988. Bemisia tabaci
(Homoptera: Aleyrodidae): populations
of different cotton varieties and cotton stickiness in Israel. Crop
Prot. 7: 43-47.
Castane, C. & R. Albajes. 1992. Pelargonium cultivar selection
by adults of greenhouse whitefly
(Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Environ. Entomol. 21: 269-275.
Craig, R., R. O. Mumma, D. L. Gerhold B. L. Winner & R. Snetsinger.
1986. Genetic control of a
biochemical mechanism for mite resistance in geraniums. In: Natural
resistance of plants to pests.
M. B. Green & P. A. Hedin [eds.]. Am. Chem. Soc. Symp. Ser. No.
296. 243 pp.
De Ponti, O.M.B., L.R. Romanow and M.J. Berlinger. 1990. Whitefly-plant
relationships: plant resistance,
PP. 91-106. In: Whiteflies: their Bionomics, Pest Status and Management.
D. Gerling [ed.]. Intercept
Ltd.: Andover.
De Ponti, O. M. B. & M. M. Steehuis. 1984. Prospects of resistance
to whiteflies from Lycopersicon
hirsutum glabratum, pp.103-106. In: A New Era in Tomato Breeding. Synopses,
IXth Eucarpia
Tomato Working Group, May 1984, Wageningen.
Elhag, E. A. & D. J. Horn. 1983. Resistance of greenhouse whitefly
(Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) to
insecticides in selected Ohio greenhouses. J. Econ. Entomol. 76: 945-948.
Fischer, S.J., & J.B. Shanks. 1974. Host preference of greenhouse
whitefly: Effect of poinsettia cultivars.
J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 99: 260-262.
Fraenkel, G., J. K. Nayer, O. Nalbandou & R. T. Yamamoto. 1960.
Further investigations into the chemical
basis of insect-host plant relationship. Proc. 11th Int’l. Cong. Entomol.,
Vienna, 3: 122-126.
Hargreaves, J. R. & L. P. Cooper. 1980. Differential susceptibility
of some gladiolus cultivars to gladiolus
Thrips, Taeniothrips simplex (Morison). Qslnd. J. Agric. Animal Sci.
37: 161-163.
Haseman, L. 1946. Influence of soil minerals on insects. J. Econ. Entomol.
39:8-1 1.
Heinz, K.M. & M.P. Parrella. 1990. Biological control of insect
pests on greenhouse marigolds. Environ.
Entomol. 19: 825-835.
Hulspas-Jordaan, P. M. and J. C. van Lenteren. 1978. The relationship
between host-plant leaf structure and
paratization efficiency of the parasitic wasp Encarsia formosa Gahan
(Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae).
Mededefingen Faculteit Landbouwwetenschappen Rijksuniversiteit Gent
43/2: 431-440.
Hussey, N. W. & W. J. Parr. 1965. Glasshouse red spider mite. Glasshouse
Crops Res. Inst. Ann. Rep.,
pp.87-88.
Ibrahim, A. G. & D. S. Madge. 1977. The susceptibility of eighteen
chrysanthemum cultivars to the
chrysanthemum leaf miner, Phytomyza syhgenesiae. Plant Pathology 26:
103-108.
Joyce, R. J. V. 1958. Effect on the cotton plant in the Sudan Gerzira
of certain leaf feeding pests. Naturew
182: 1463-1464.
Kisha, J. S. A. 1981. Observations on the trapping of the whitefly
Bemisia tabaci by glandular hairs on
tomato leaves. Ann. Appl. Biol. 97:123-127.
Kisha, J. S. A. 1984. Whitefly, Bemisia tabaci, infestations on tomato
varieties and a wild Lycopersicon
species. Ann. Appl. Bio. (Supplement, Tests of Agrochemicals and Cultivars,
5) 184: 124-125.
Kowalewski, E. & R. W. Robinson. 1977. Whitefly resistance in Cucumis.
Bulletin SROP, pp. 149-153.
Lindquist, R. K. 1988. Biological control of whiteflies on greenhouse
ornamentals, pp. 158-162. In J.A.
Ha]l, A.D. Ali, & M.P. Parrella [eds.), Proc. 4th Conf. on Insect
& Dis. Mgt. on Ornamentals. Soc.
Amer. Florists, Alexandria, VA.
Li Zhao Hua, F. Lammes, J. C. van Lenferen, P. W. T. Huisman, A. van
Vianen, and O. M. B. De Ponti.
1987. The parasitc-host relationship between Encarsia formosa Gahan
(Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae)
and Trialeurodes vaporariorum (Westwood)(Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). J.
Applied Entomol 104: 297-
304.
Markkula, M., K. Roukka & K. Tiittanen. 1969. Reproduction of Myzus
persicae (Sulz.) and Tetranychus
telarius (L. ) on different chrysanthemum cultivars. Ann. Agric. Fenn.
8: 175-183.
Markkula, M., K. Tiittanen. 1969. Effect of fertilizers on the reproduction
of Tetranychus telarius (L.),
Myzus persicae (Sulz.) and Acyrthosiphon pisum Harris. Ann. Agric.
Fenn. 8: 9-14.
Obrycki, J. J., M. J. Tauber, & W. M. Tingey. 1983. Predator and
parasitoid interaction with aphid-resistant
potatoes to reduce aphid densities: A two-year field study. J. Econ.
Entomol. 76: 456-462.
Oi., D.H., J. P. Sanderson, R. R. Youngman, and M. M. Barnes. 1989.
Developmental times of the pacific
spider mite (Acari: Tetranychidae) on water-stressed almond trees.
Environ. Entomol. 18(2): 208-212.
Onillon, J. C., J. Onillon, P. Brun, E. Franco, and G. DeCoux. 1986.
Effect of fertilizer on the population
level of the citrus whitefly Dialeurodes citri (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae).
Proceedings of the Expert's
Meeting Integrated Pest Control in Citrus Groves (Acireale, 26-29 March
1985) pp. 109-120. Balkema,
Rotterdam.
Parr, J. C. & R. Thurston. 1968. Toxicity of Nicotiana and Petunia
species to larvae of the tobacco
hornworm. J. Econ. Entomol. 61: 1525-31.
Parrella, M. P., K. L. Robb, & J. A. Bethke. 1983. Influence of
selected host plants on the biology of
Liriomyza trifolii (Diptera: Agromyzidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer.
76: 112-115.
Parrella, M. P., & J. A. Bethke. 1984. Biological studies of Liriomyza
huidobrensis (Diptera:
Agromyzidae) on chrysanthemum, aster, and pea. J. Econ. Entomol. 77:
342-345.
Parrella, M.P., T.D. Paine, J.A. Bethke, K.L. Robb, & J. Hall.
1991. Evaluation of Encarsia formosa
(Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae) for biological control of sweetpotato whitefly
(Homoptera: Aleyrodidae)
on poinsettia. Environ. Entomol. 20: 713-719.
Poe, S. L. & G. J. Wilfret. 1972. Factors affecting spider mite
(Tetranychus urticae Koch) population
development on carnation: relative cultivar susceptibility and physical
characteristics. Proc. Fla. St.
Hort. Soc. 85: 384-387.
Sanderson, J.P. 1992. Planning ahead for sweetpotato and greenhouse
whiteflies. pp. 25-36. In M.
Daughtrey fed.], Proc. 8th Conf. on Insect & Dis. Mgt. on Ornamentals.
Soc. Amer. Florists,
Alexandria, VA.
Sanderson, J.P., and G.W. Ferrentino. 1990b. Beat greenhouse whiteflies
with a proven
biological — Encarsia formosa. GrowerTalks 54(4): 108-114.
Schuster, D. J. & B. K. Harbaugh. 1979a. Chrysanthemum cultivars
differ in foliar leafminer damage.
HortScience 14: 271-272.
Schuster, D. J. & B. K. Harbaugh. 1979b. Factors affecting evaluation
of foliar damage of chrysanthemum
cultivars by a leafminer. HortScience 14: 273-274.
Selander, J., M. Markkula, & K. Tiittanen. 1972. Resistance of
the aphids Myzus persicae. Aulacorthum
solani and Aphis gossypii to insecticides, and the influence of the
host plant on this resistance.
Ann. Agric. Fenn. 11: 141-145.
Singh, V. S. 1984. Relative resistance of ornamental poppy, Papaver
spp. to Phytomyza horticola
Goureau and Aphis fabae solanella Theobald. J. Entomol. Res. 8: 215-216.
Sippell, D.W., O.S. Bindra, & H. Khalifa. 1983. Resistance in cotton
to whitefly (Bemisia tabaci). In:
10th Intl. Cong. Pi. Prot. 1983. Vol.2. Proceedings of a conference
held at Brighton, England, 20-25
Nov., 1983. Plant protection for human welfare. Croyden, U.K.; British
Crop Protection Council.
P-84 1.
Starks, K. J., R. Muniappan, & R. D. Eikenbary. 1972. Interaction
between plant resistance and parasitism
against the greenbug on barley and sorghum. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer.
65: 650-655.
Van der Kamp, R. J. & J. C. Van Lenteren. 1981. The parasite-host
relationship between Encarsia
formosa Gahan (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae) and Trialeurodes vaporariorum
(Westwood)
(Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). XI. Do mechanical barriers of the host plant
prevent successful penetration
of the phloem by whitefly larvae and adults? Z. Ang. Ent. 92: 149-159.
van Emden, H. F. 1966. Plant insect relationships and pest control.
World Rev. Pest Control 5: 115-123.
Wardlow, L. R. 1985. Pyrethroid resistance in glasshouse whitefly.
Med. Fac. Lanbouww. Rijksuniv.
Gent, 50: 555-557.
Wardlow, L. R., F. A. B. Ludlam & L. F. Bradley. 1976. Pesticide
resistance in glasshouse whitefly
(Trialeurodes vaporariorum West). Pestic. Sci. 7: 320-324.
Wardlow, L. R., F. A. B. Ludlam & N. French. 1972. Insecticide
resistance in glasshouse whitefly. Nature
239: 164-165.
Wardlow, L. R., F. A. B. Ludlam & R. P. Hammon. 1975. A comparison
of the effectiveness of insecticides
against glasshouse whitefly (Trialeurodes vaporariorum). Ann. Appl.
Biol. 81:433-435.
Webb, R. E. & F. F. Smith. 1969. Effect of temperature on resistance
in lima bean, tomato, and
chrysanthemum to Liriomyza munda . J. Econ. Entomol. 62: 458-462.
Wyatt, I. J. 1965. The distribution of Myzus persicae (Sulz.) on year-round
chrysanthemums I. Summer
season. Ann. Appl. Biol. 56: 439-459.
Youngman, R. R., J. P. Sanderson, and M. M. Barnes. 1988. Life history
parameters of Tetranychus
pacificus McGregor (Acari: Tetranychidae) on almonds under differential
water stress. Environ.
Entomol. 17(3): 488-495.
Zchori-Fein, E., R.T. Roush, and J.P. Sanderson. 1992. Potential for
integration of
biological and chemical control of greenhouse whiteflies on poinsettia.
(submitted to J. Econ.
Entomol.)
7. DETAILED BUDGET
Graduate Research Assistant $17,254
Research Technician (Half-time) 8,000
Benefits (36.78% of salary) 2,942
Materials and Supplies
[Fertilizers, pots, growing media, rooting strips, 1,000
several types of insect cages, parasitoids,,
lab fees for plant and soil nutrient analyses,
shipping costs for plant material, computer supplies,
mainframe computer time, demur-rage charge for CO2
tanks, lab equipment (carboys, pipettes, vials, etc.),
other miscellaneous supplies]
Total 1992 Project Cost $29,196
C. PROJECT LEADER QUALIFICATIONS Dr. John Sanderson is Assistant
Professor of Entomology at Cornell University with research (50%) and extension
(50%) responsibilities on insect and mite pest management on greenhouse
floral crops. He received his B.S. degree in Zoology at San Diego State
University, and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Entomology at the University
of Califomia, Riverside. He then completed a postdoctoral position with
Dr. Michael Parrella at UC Riverside prior to coming to Cornell. He has
published numerous scientific and extension articles, and has been an invited
speaker at numerous industry conferences, including several of the SAF
Conferences on Insect and Disease Management on Omarnentals. Dr. Sanderson
is also organizer of the North American Working Group on Integrated Control
in Greenhouses, under the auspices of the Intemational Organization for
Biological and Integrated Control of Noxious Animals and Plants. He is
an integral member of Cornell’s Greenhouse IPM Team, and of Cornell’s effort
in Controlled Environment Agriculture.
