International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences (IJSRES), 1(5), pp. 78-84, 2013 Available online at http://www.ijsrpub.

com/ijsres ISSN: 2322-4983; 2013 IJSRPUB http://dx.doi.org/10.12983/ijsres-2013-p078-084

Full Length Research Paper Studies on Incidence of Insect Pests (Aphids) and Their Natural Enemies in Canola Brassica napus L. (Brassicaceae) Crop Ecosystem
Muhammad Sarwar
Nuclear Institute of Agriculture (NIA), Tandojam-70060, Sindh, Pakistan; E-mail: drmsarwar64@yahoo.com
Recieved 4 March 2013; Accepted 11 April 2013

Abstract. It is important to identify insect pests, and their predators and parasites for pests management program in order to develop an effective biological control strategy in an economically and ecologically sound way. The monitoring, sampling and identification of insects fauna in canola Brassica napus L., field determined lady beetles (Coccinellidae: Coleoptera), green lacewing Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens) (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae), spider Tibellus oblongus (Walckenaer) (Araneae: Philodromidae) and syrphid fly Syrphus balteaus De Geer (Diptera: Syrphidae) as frequently found predators associated with aphid colonies. The most common parasite was Aphidius species (Hymenoptera: Aphidiidae) occurring in aphid populations. The relative abundance of different natural enemies in November and December was found minimum. All the natural enemies showed increasing trend from pods formation till prior to their maturation. During the months of January and February, the relative abundance of biological control agents was the highest, but their population started decreasing during March to onwards. Studies on relative abundance of natural enemies of aphid, revealed that populations of Coccinellid were highest followed by Aphidius, C. carnea and spider, while syrphid fly was with relatively less in profusion. Aphid Myzus persicae (Sulzer) (Hemiptera: Aphididae), was the major insect pest at the canola site and its incidence continued throughout the duration of the crop season. Obviously, meteorological conditions were more favorable for development of insect pests and natural enemies due to the combination of different abiotic factors. Key words: Canola, aphid, natural enemies, Predator, parasites, Myzus persicae.

1. INTRODUCION Pakistan being an agricultural country is still spending millions of dollars on the import of edible oil, causing a major depletion in the foreign exchange reserves of the country. The indigenous oil production of the country could not match the growing demand of its population. Among different oilseed crops, canola Brassica napus L. belonging to the Brassicaceae (Cruciferae) family, also known as the mustard family, is a popular oilseed cash crop, and has a recent introduction in Pakistan, hence, many aspects of its production technology are needed to be exposed. The average yield of canola is less than the potential of the existing cultivars due to many factors which affect the yield, but insect pests are the most important one. Many aphid species are serious pests of field crops and their populations may increase very rapidly under natural conditions. The aphid Myzus persicae (Sulzer) has many host plants and inflicts major losses to the rapeseed crop. It sucks on the phloem of different plant parts including inflorescence and seed pods resulting in substantial yield hammering (Sarwar et al., 2011). It causes distortion of young leaves and shoots, and subsequently yields failure (Sarwar et al., 2009). Aphids on canola usually are pale green to grayish green in color and found in large numbers near the top

of individual plant. Infested plants often appear shiny due to the honeydew they excrete (Knodel and Beauzay, 2011). Farmers spend much money in applying insecticides against canola insect pests with the aim to obtain a good yield at harvest, but many of them achieve a yield below their expectation. Generally, the goal of the studies presented here was to acquire information that might serve as the basis for identifying biological control agents for using in canola cultivation. The need for this kind of information is currently very great, since many of the cultivated products can not be exported readily to other countries due to the high level of insecticide contamination and visible damage to the products (Nicholls and Altieri, 1997). Alternative control measures those are simple and inexpensive to implement have not been properly developed with the consequence that farmers continue to use chemical pesticides, thereby exacerbating problems of resistance, environmental pollution, degradation of important ecosystem services such as control by natural enemies, and creating significant hazards to human health (Corriols et al., 2009). This necessitates a rethink in the control strategies currently employed, and therefore, control measures which reduce dependence on pesticides are needed to be developed. The natural enemies have been a favorite subject for biological control programs because they tend to

78

Sarwar Studies on Incidence of Insect Pests (Aphids) and Their Natural Enemies in Canola Brassica napus L. (Brassicaceae) Crop Ecosystem

be highly specific to one or a few species of host, and therefore can be used to target specific pests. Predatory insects kill and consume their prey and tend to be generalists, they have a fairly broad diet of arthropods prey upon that they can feed on. Mortality caused by invertebrate predators and parasitoids is an important factor in the regulation and dynamics of pest populations, but the role of predators has often been underestimated (Symondson et al., 2002). The generalist insect predators consume large numbers of prey, and cause no or only minor damage to plants. Such predators can reach high enough densities to become important agents in pest control, although at very high densities their numbers may be reduced by territorial behavior and cannibalism (Lee and Kim, 2001). Multiple predator species can interact and their combined effects on lower trophic levels may result in complex non-additive effects on prey populations and community structure (Griswold and Lounibos, 2006). Sometimes the interactions between predator species are synergistic and the impact of several species together will then be greater than the sum of the impacts of individual species (Simberloff and Holle, 1999). As a result, crop monitoring practices are essential for successful pest management, while scouting of field crops for pests and identifying their natural enemies can be easily integrated into an existing scouting program. There is a range of natural enemies which can contribute to reduce the numbers of pests and their contribution to pest control could be significant. As a consequence, there seems to be potential for the development of more sustainable biological control methods by learning more about generalist predators. The present study was, therefore, carried out to examine and identify predators and parasites for aphid pest management program of canola in order to develop an effective biological control strategy in an economically and ecologically sound way for realizing the maximum yield potential of crop. 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS This research was carried out in the experimental fields of Nuclear Institute of Agriculture, Tandojam, Sindh, Pakistan. The study was conducted between November and March growing season. Generally, the site had a soil of intermediate type between loam and clay. The land was cleaned and root stumps removed after weeding prior to sowing of seeds. Ploughing and raking activities were carried out on the land before beds were made. The canola variety Rainbow was sown without seeds treated with any pesticide. There were three blocks, plant rows 2.5 meters long and spaced 30 cm apart and seed sown using single row

hand drill. The trial consisted of two fertilization systems, first arrangement included treating plants before crop planting, and meanwhile the second application comprised field treating after planting. Nitrogen and phosphorus were applied @ 100 kg ha-1 and 90 kg ha-1, respectively. Urea and diammonium phosphate were used as a source of nitrogen and phosphorus, respectively. Half nitrogen and full phosphorus were applied at planting, while the remaining nitrogen was applied after one month. The watering was done thrice in the crop growing season. The design of experiment was a Randomized Complete Block (RCBD) consisting estimation of population of pests and natural enemies per plant as treatments replicated three times. Suitable plant population (spaced 30 cm) was maintained by thinning the crop at early growth stages. All other agronomic practices were kept normal and uniform for all the treatments. Synthetic or natural pesticides were not used for ecologically grown canola crop. Meteorological data (air temperature and relative humidity) were also recorded during the observation period. 2.1. Data recording Data collection started four weeks after crop sowing and observations were started when first winged forms of aphid appeared. Five plants were selected randomly for data recording on predators and parasites populations, and winged or non-winged forms of aphids on per plant basis. The assessment of the numbers of various insect species was done on the selected canola plants by carefully examining leaves from the upper and under-surface of the leaves. The insects collected from each replicate were identified, counted and recorded. Data were collected at weekly intervals until the crop was harvested. In order to study the population densities of aphids and natural enemies, their populations were counted from three replications. Different sampling points were selected at each observation and the most abundant natural enemies of the aphid on the plants were recorded. Parasitized aphids were taken to laboratory to allow the emergence of the next generations of the parasites. From various plants, specimen including egg clusters, larvae, pupae and adults insects were collected and kept separately in laboratory. Larvae or pupae were placed individually in a plastic Petri dish, closed with Parafilm to prevent parasitoid escape and kept at room temperature (232C). Densities per plant of natural enemies, and aphids were assessed over the entire period of crop growing season.

79

International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences (IJSRES), 1(5), pp. 78-84, 2013

2.2. Statistical analysis Data obtained on the number of aphids, their predators and parasitoids were compared among treatments of study by a single factor analysis of variance (ANOVA). The differences between means were separated with LSD test using the analysis by the Statistix-8.1 program package (P 0.05). 3. RESULTS The canola plants attracted a number of insects at different stages of the plant growth due to their nutritive and luxuriant nature, but aphid Myzus persicae was the most prevailing pest.
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. LSD value

3.1. Incidence of aphid population The aphid M. persicae was the most dominant among all the insect pests and recoded as major pest. Initially, at the end of January, the aphid population was found low and with the passage of time its population increased. It was observed that the flower initiation of canola crop and coincided with alates aphid settling. Peak activity period of aphid was recorded during 2nd week of February to second week of March. During the 3rd and 4th weeks of March, its population started declining and up to the beginning of April it disappeared from the study site.

Table 1: Population of natural enemies of aphid Myzus persicae on canola crop. Natural Enemies Population/ plant Spider 0.433 b Syrphid fly 0.300 b Lady beetles 3.833 a Green lacewing 0.533 b Aphidius 2.667 a 1.176 Table 2: Meteorological conditions during the whole period of observations at field site.

Means with the same letters in the different rows of the column are not significantly different at P= 0.05.

Year/ Month 2005-06 November December January February March Mean

Minimum 16.1 8.6 8.69 16.41 16.35 13.2

Temperature (0C) (0C) Maximum (0C) 31.2 25.1 22.85 29.91 31.82 28.1

Relative Humidity (%) 78.3 72.5 75.06 75.61 74.65 75.2

Source: Regional Agromet Center, and Drainage Research Center Campus, Tandojam.

3.2. Populations of natural enemies The natural enemies of aphid pest in canola, identified were predators lady beetles (Coccinellidae: Coleoptera), green lacewing Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens) (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae), spider Tibellus oblongus (Walckenaer) (Araneae: Philodromidae) and syrphid fly Syrphus balteaus (De Geer) (Diptera: Syrphidae), and parasite Aphidius species (Hymenoptera: Aphidiidae). The mean numbers of the various natural enemies are presented in Table 1, and significant differences of mean number of natural enemies were found between treatments. Any significant differences of mean numbers of predators were not found between green lacewing, spider & syrphid fly populations, and lady beetles & Aphidius densities in study site. In study year abundance of predatory lady beetles was significantly higher followed by Aphidius (3.83 and 2.66, respectively, per plant) than other natural enemies. Abundance of green

lacewing, spider & syrphid fly was 0.53, 0.43 and 0.30 per plant, respectively, in all treatments. Pollinator honey bee population was observed just before flowering, at full-flowering and maturation stages. But the activities of honey bee were found highest at full-flowering stage. During any natural enemies monitoring program, if these predators and parasites are present and aphid numbers are declining, then chemical intervention could be delayed. The meteorological conditions of field site varied during all the period of observations (Table 2). At the beginning and ending of crop season, weather was warm [November, February & March 16.1-16.35 0C (minimum) and 29.91-31.82 0C (maximum)] and humid 78.35% R.H (November). Later on, it was cooler in December & January (minimum 8.6-8.69 0C and maximum 22.85-25.1 0C) and to some extent dry 72.5-75.06% R.H. Mean meteorological conditions during all the period of observations were temperature 13.2 0C (minimum) and 28.1 0C (maximum), and

80

Sarwar Studies on Incidence of Insect Pests (Aphids) and Their Natural Enemies in Canola Brassica napus L. (Brassicaceae) Crop Ecosystem

relative humidity 75.2%. Obviously, meteorological conditions were more favorable for development of natural enemies due to the combination of different abiotic factors. Thus, microclimate can become more favorable for pests and sometimes for predators to develop. 4. DISCUSSIONS The study established differences in aphid and its natural enemies activity/ density that arose in canola crop grown in the field conditions. The results thus justify the need to reveal the causes of variations of pests and predators or parasite communities in crop ecosystem. The differences were apparently due to climatic factors and the importance of the plant growth stage has already been recognized. The presence of varying aphid densities may be related to the phonological stage of rapeseed. Present finding is in accordance to observation made by Akhtar et al., (2010) that aphid population was less contiguous both at the beginning and ending of the crop seasons. Coccinellid populations were recorded at 3rd week of February, whereas, during the 1st week of March to onwards these predators occupied major share with maximum relative abundance. Studies on their relative abundance revealed that population of seven-spot ladybird Coccinella septempunctata L. was numerous followed by transverse ladybird beetle Coccinella transversalis F., while, lady beetle Menochilus sexmaculatus (F.) was with less relative abundance. Similar observations were made by Sarwar (2009), Sarwar and Saqib (2010) and Saljoqi et al., (2011), who reported similar occurrence of coccinellids with aphids and found such predators as the most effective to predate on this host pest. Population builds up of C. carnea was recorded at seedling and vegetative growth of canola, and peak flowering and pods formation stages. The larvae of C. carnea were voracious predators and appeared in the beginning of March and their peak population was recorded during the last week of March. The C. carnea has been reported very predaceous and all its three instars are voracious eaters of soft-bodied arthropods (Tauber et al., 2000). Similar observations were also made by Ashfaq et al., (2007), on the release of C. carnea for aphid control. Present findings can partially be compared with the previous work conducted by earlier workers (Farooq and Zahida, 2008), who stated that application of biological agent C. carnea have potential to control the aphids. Syrphid fly inhabited canola during peak flowering and pods formation growth stages. Flower flies were noticed a very important group of insects because their services to ecosystems were twofold i.e., their

larvae found important natural enemies of herbivorous arthropods and their adults appeared pollinators of many of the crops and wild plants (Tooker et al., 2006). It is estimated that their importance as predator was equal to that of parasitoids, pathogenic fungi, lady birds and lacewings (Ankersmit et al., 1986). Thus, syrphid flies are very important group of insects in ecosystem from viewpoint of pollination and biological control (Asif and Shafqat, 2010). Their conservation might help for the better biological control of herbivorous pests and these aphidophagous species might play a vital role in biological control of aphids in canola. Spider population was recorded at seedling/ vegetative, peak flowering and pods formation stages. Numerous studies have suggested that spiders can play an essential role in the natural control of insect pests. For instance, spiders consume large numbers of prey, and such predators can reach high enough densities to become important agents in pest control, although at very high densities their numbers may be reduced by territorial behavior and cannibalism (Lee and Kim, 2001). Spiders in particular have long been considered important predators able to help regulate the population densities of insect pests, especially in agricultural ecosystems (Tanaka, 1989). Aphidius female adults (small slender winged parasitic wasps), were found laying eggs in an aphid and after the eggs hatched, the larvae developed inside the growing host during their larval stage, and were observed feeding within the body of an aphid. A parasitized aphid appeared swollen and mummified in appearance, turning in color from gold or bronze to brown or black. The adult parasite chewed its way out of the mummy leaving a hole; the circular emergence hole was visible on the back of the aphid. Thus, species of genus Aphidius may provide biological control of aphids in agricultural crops. In agreement with these findings, studies from Bilu et al., (2006); and Adabi et al., (2010) indicated that when they evaluated the effects of Aphidius on aphids, it was observed that the parasitoid performed better to control pest. The knowledge gained through this finding could be used to develop biological pest control methods that are highly effective against aphids and thus can avoid the side effects of traditional chemical control, while maintaining productivity and profit of crop. Hopefully the results presented in this work can provide the basis for alternative methods for farmers who currently use insecticides to control aphids. Such alternatives should be particularly useful for farmers in developing countries, allowing them to reduce their uses of pest control chemicals. Maintaining populations of these natural enemies is an integral part of successful pest management program because they

81

International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences (IJSRES), 1(5), pp. 78-84, 2013

can often keep pests under control naturally. Even when pest control by natural enemies is not completely effective, even then they can contribute to pest suppression, necessitating conserving of natural enemies in brassica crops. The M. persicae population can often be held below damaging levels by its naturally occurring biological control agents (Natwick et al., 2002). Plant monitoring should begin at the seedling stage, and continue throughout the duration of the crop season and the presence of natural enemies as well as aphids should be noted in the field. The crop treatment may be necessary when the canola is planted late, plants are still in pod development and low populations of natural enemies are present. More studies comparing pest populations on plants treated with parasites and predators versus check are needed. An understanding how parasites and predators improve plant health may lead to new and better integrated pest management strategy in canola. In conclusion, it must be noted that though natural enemies are essential for pest control, yet they ought to be applied at certain times to augment their natural population in the field. Other pest control measures such as the host plant resistance and additional pest management options should be put in place to mitigate the impact of insect infestation on crop productivity. 5. CONCLUSION An experiment on population dynamics of natural enemies and sucking insect pests particularly aphids of canola crop was conducted. On the basis of the present results, it is concluded that the sucking insect pest namely green peach aphid, Myzus persicae attacked crop from germination till its maturity and was regular and predictable pest at the flowering and pod formation stage of plants. Studies on relative abundance of natural enemies of aphid, revealed that populations of Coccinellid were highest followed by Aphidius, C. carnea and spider, while syrphid fly was with relatively less in profusion. The predators were more active and their maximum activities were recorded on the plants having maximum activities of aphid insect pest. The coccinellid beetles and lacewings appeared somewhat late in the season, when the crop is mature. At this stage aphid populations are decreasing due to a rise in temperature and maturity of the crop. It has also been noted that populations of natural enemies played a significant role in suppression of aphids in Brassica agroecosystem. REFERENCES Adabi ST, Talebi AA, Fathipour Y, Zamani AA (2010). Life History and Demographic

Parameters of Aphis fabae (Hemiptera: Aphididae) and Its Parasitoid, Aphidius matricariae (Hymenoptera: Aphidiidae) on Four Sugar Beet Cultivars. Acta Entomologica Serbica, 15 (1): 61-73. Akhtar MS, Dey D, Usmani MK (2010). Spatial Distribution of Mustard Aphid Lipaphis erysimi (Kaltenbach) vis-a-vis its Parasitoid, Diaeretiella rapae (Mintosh). World Applied Sciences Journal, 11 (3): 284-288. Ankersmit GW, Dijkman H, Keuning NJ, Mertens H, Sins A, Tacoma H (1986). Episyrphus balteatus as a predator of the aphid Sitobion avenae on winter wheat. Entomol. Exp. Appl., 42: 271277. Ashfaq M, Hassan M, Salman B, Salman W, Rana N (2007). Some Studies on the Efficiency of Chrysoperla carnea against Aphid, Brevicoryne brassicae, Infesting Canola. Pak. Entomol., 29 (1): 37-41. Asif S, Shafqat S (2010). Floral Host Plant Range of Syrphid Flies (Syrphidae: Diptera) Under Natural Conditions in Southern Punjab, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 42 (2): 1187-1200. Bilu E, Hopper K, Coll M (2006). Host choice by Aphidius colemani: effects of plants, plantaphid combinations and the presence of intraguild predators. Ecological Entomology, 31: 331-336. Corriols M, Marin J, Berroteran J, Lozano LM, Lundberg I (2009). Incidence of acute pesticide poisonings in Nicaragua: a public health problem. Occup. Environ. Med., 66: 205-210. Farooq A, Zahida T (2008). Evaluation of Integrated Management of Aphid Pests, Brevicoryne Brassicae and Lipaphis Erysimi on Canola Crop in Southern Punjab, Pakistan. Pakistan J. Zool., 40 (1): 13-17. Griswold MW, Lounibos LP (2006). Predator identity and additive effects in a treehole community. Ecology, 87: 987-995. Knodel JJ, Beauzay P (2011). Insect Management and Control. pp 39-55. In: Canola Production Field Guide. Edit. H. Kandel and J.J. Knodel. North Dakota State University Extension Service, pp 61. Lee JH, Kim ST (2001). Use of spider as natural enemies to control rice in Korea. Pp. 441-744. Entomology Program, School of Agricultural biotechnology, Seoul National University, Suwon, Korea. Natwick ET, Chaney WE, Toscano NC (2002). UC IPM Pest Management guidelines: Lttuce. UC ANR Public. 3450. Nicholls CI, Altieri MA (1997). Conventional agricultural development models and the

82

Sarwar Studies on Incidence of Insect Pests (Aphids) and Their Natural Enemies in Canola Brassica napus L. (Brassicaceae) Crop Ecosystem

persistence of the pesticide tread mill in Latin America. Int. J. Sust. Developm. World Ecol., 4: 93-11. Saljoqi AR, Zada R, Khan IA, Munir I, Rehman S, Khan HJA (2011). Population Trend of Canola Aphid, Lipaphis erysimi (Kalt.) (Homoptera: Aphididae) and its Associated Natural Enemies in Different Brassica Lines along with the Effect of Gamma Radiation on Their Population. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 73: 187-194. Sarwar M (2009). Populations synchronization of aphids (Homoptera: Aphididae) and ladybird beetles (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) and exploitation of food attractants for predator. Biological Diversity and Conservation, 2 (2): 85-89. Sarwar M, Ahmad N, Khan GZ, Tofique M (2009). Varietals Resistance and Susceptibility in Mustard (Brassica campestris L.) Genotypes against Aphid Myzus persicae (Sulzer) (Homoptera: Aphididae). The Nucleus, 46 (4): 507-512. Sarwar M, Saqib SM (2010). Rearing of Predatory Seven Spotted Ladybird Beetle Coccinella septempunctata L. (Coccinellidae) on Natural

and Artificial Diets under Laboratory Conditions. Pakistan Journal of Zoology, 42 (1): 47-51. Sarwar M, Ahmad N, Tofique M (2011). Impact of Soil Potassium on Population Buildup of Aphid (Homoptera: Aphididae) and Crop Yield in Canola (Brassica napus L.) Field. Pakistan Journal of Zoology, 43 (1): 15-19. Simberloff D, Von-Holle B (1999). Positive interactions of non indigenous species: invasional meltdown? Biological Invasions, 1: 21-32. Symondson WO, Sunderland KD, Greenstone MH (2002). Can generalist predators be effective biocontrol agents? Ann. Rev. Entomol., 47: 561-594. Tanaka K (1989). Movement of the spiders in arable land. Plant Protection, 43: 34-39. Tauber MJ, Tauber CA, Daane KM, Hagen KS (2000). Commercialization of predators, recent lessons from green lacewings (Neuroptera: Chrysoperla). American Entomol., 46: 26-38. Tooker JF, Hauser H, Hanks LM (2006). Floral host plants of Syrphidae and Tachinidae (Diptera) of Central Illinois. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 99 (1): 96-112.

83

International Journal of Scientific Research in Environmental Sciences (IJSRES), 1(5), pp. 78-84, 2013

Dr. Muhammad Sarwar has more than 22 years research experience in the field of integrated insect pests management including opening a new avenue for culturing and applications of bio-control agents like Predatory mites, Coccinelid beetle and Chrysopid for pests control needs. The Investigator has been an active member of a IAEA project on IPM of Fruit Fly in Pakistans environment together with use of radiations as tactic of fruit fly control and production of their parasitoids. He has completed one year fellowship at Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, and awarded Post Doctorate certificate from China Postdoctoral Council, 2008, after fellowship. There the Investigator attained a vast experience of culturing predatory mites for their releasing in field and protected environment for insect and mite pests management. For outstanding and significant contributions on the work of innovative methodology with a particular focus on insect pests control strategy, awarded Gold Medal2010, from Zoological Society of Pakistan; Research Productivity Award-2011, by Pakistan Council for Science and Technology; and selected as approved Ph. D. Supervisor on Higher Education Commission of Pakistans panel. Par ticipated in FAO/ IAEA training courses on Surveillance of Tephrited Fruit Flies in Support of Planning and Implementing Area Wide Integrated Pest Management program-2010, Thailand; Control of Aedes mosquitoes using SIT and other suppression techniques, Seibersdorf, Austria-2011; Basic Surveillance and Control for Dengue Vectors in Pakistan and Elsewhere, and 2 nd Regional Dengue Workshop-2012, Pakistan, financed by IAEA under Technical Cooperation. Current responsibilities include research on topics relating to Mosquitoes surveillance, identification, biology; and experimentation towards integrated mosquitoes control to prevent mosquito-borne diseases, and IPM of Fruit flies.

84