Whitefly and whitefly-borne viruses in the tropics : Building a ... - cgiar

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Introduction annual crops, especially legumes and vegetables, in the tropical lowlands. The second problem focused on whiteflies as direct pests in annual crops in the highlands. And the third problem focused on whitefly pests and vectors in a semi-perennial crop, cassava. Based on the initial Whitefly IPM Task Force Meeting, and within the CG framework for an eco-regional problem approach (Bouma et al., 1995), the project was structured into six subprojects: (1) Bemisia tabaci as a virus vector in cassava and sweet potato in sub- Saharan Africa – led by IITA; (2) Bemisia tabaci as a virus vector in mixed cropping systems of the Caribbean, Mexico and Central America – led by CIAT; (3) Bemisia tabaci as a virus vector in mixed cropping systems of Eastern and Southern Africa – led by the International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE); (4) Bemisia tabaci as a virus vector in mixed cropping systems of S.E. Asia – led by the Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center (AVRDC); (5) Trialeurodes vaporariorum as a direct pest in the tropical highlands of Latin America – led by CIAT; and (6) Whiteflies as direct pests on cassava in South America – led by CIAT. There was consensus by the Task Force on the project goal, project purpose and project outputs for the TWF-IPM project. The project goal is to improve living conditions of rural families through the effective management of whiteflies, resulting in increased crop production and a safer environment. The project purpose is to reduce crop losses due to whitefly feeding damage and WTVs. The Task Force agreed to organize the project around six outputs: (1) Formation of an international network for research on whiteflies and WTVs in the tropics; (2) Characterization of whitefly problems in order to prioritize critical target areas; (3) Improvement of the understanding of whitefly pest and disease dynamics in critical target areas; (4) Development and testing of IPM strategies and tactics; (5) Strengthening of NARS research capacity, policy formulation and IPM implementation; and (6) Assessment of project impact. Phase 1 of the CGIAR TWF-IPM Project The project was conceptualized in three phases, to be carried out over 10 years. Phase 1 of the project would focus primarily on Output 1 (network formation) and Output 2 (problem characterization) as the basis for Phase 2 work, with limited activities in Output 3 (pest and disease dynamics) and Output 4 (development and testing of IPM strategies and tactics). The Project was officially launched in 1997 and evolved into a pan-tropical partnership. Five IARCs were included: CIAT Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical IITA International Institute of Tropical Agriculture AVRDC Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center ICIPE International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology CIP Centro Internacional de la Papa 7
8 Twelve ARIs were also included: NRI Natural Resources Institute (UK) JIC John Innes Centre (UK) BBA Biologische Bundesanstalt für Land-und Fortwirtschaft (Germany) CATIE Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza (Costa Rica) UA University of Arizona-Tucson (USA) UFL University of Florida- Gainesville (USA) UW University of Wisconsin- Madison (USA) MSU Montana State University (USA) FSAC Florida State Arthropod Collection USDA- U.S. Department of (ARS) Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (Australia) C&F New Zealand Crop and Food Research And 31 National Agricultural Research and Extension Systems (NARES) in Latin America, the Caribbean, Africa and Asia were included from: Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, El Salvador, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Ecuador, Sudan, Benin, Ghana, Nigeria, Cameroon, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Malawi, Madagascar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Whiteflies and Whitefly-borne Viruses in the Tropics Bangladesh, Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines. This collaborative partnership was possible due to the support of six donor partners: DANIDA Danish International Development Agency ACIAR Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research USAID United States Agency for International Development MFAT Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (New Zealand, now New Zealand Aid) USDA- U.S. Department of (ARS) Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service DFID Department for International Development (UK) The CGIAR TWF-IPM Project was launched in 1997 with the DANIDAfunded Phase 1 project on Sustainable Integrated Management of Whiteflies as Pests and Vectors of Plant Viruses in the tropics. This project covered activities in Output 1 (network formation) and Output 2 (characterization) activities in 23 African and Latin American partner countries in Sub-projects 1, 2, 3 and 5. ACIAR then approved funding for the project Sustainable Integrated Management of Whiteflies as Pests and Vectors of Plant Viruses in S.E. Asia, which covered Output 2 (characterization) activities in the eight Asian countries in Sub-project 4. The USAID-funded project on Biological Control of Whiteflies by Indigenous Natural Enemies for Major Food Crops in the Neotropics and the MFAT-funded project on Sustainable Integrated Management of Whiteflies through Host
Page 2 and 3: About the Partners CIAT The Interna
Page 4 and 5: Centro Internacional de Agricultura
Page 6 and 7: Chapter 4 Whiteflies and Whitefly-b
Page 8 and 9: Chapter 6 Whiteflies and Whitefly-b
Page 10 and 11: Contents Page Foreword vii Introduc
Page 12 and 13: Contents Chapter SECTION THREE Whit
Page 14 and 15: Foreword This book is the product o
Page 16 and 17: Introduction Introduction The Probl
Page 18 and 19: Introduction In addition to the yie
Page 20 and 21: Introduction in pesticide use in La
Page 24 and 25: Introduction Plant Resistance contr
Page 26 and 27: Introduction Otim-Nape, G. W.; Bua,
Page 28 and 29: SECTION ONE Whiteflies as Vectors o
Page 30 and 31: Introduction CHAPTER 1.1 Introducti
Page 32 and 33: Introduction diseases than is cassa
Page 34 and 35: Introduction Sub-project on Whitefl
Page 36 and 37: Introduction References Aritua, V.;
Page 38 and 39: Introduction Thresh, J. M.; Otim-Na
Page 40 and 41: Ghana 1997, on 80 farms. These incl
Page 42 and 43: Ghana (6.2%), Bakentenma (5%) and K
Page 44 and 45: Ghana Legg, J. P.; James, B. D. 199
Page 46 and 47: Benin Northern guinea savannah Sout
Page 48 and 49: Benin or disease problem, the main
Page 50 and 51: Nigeria CHAPTER 1.4 Nigeria Introdu
Page 52 and 53: Nigeria TMS 30572 (18.8%) and TMS 3
Page 54 and 55: Nigeria FAO (Food and Agriculture O
Page 56 and 57: Cameroon protocol, to enable valid
Page 58 and 59: Cameroon Farmers undertook various
Page 60 and 61: Cameroon Robertson, I. A. D. 1987.
Page 62 and 63: Uganda between November 1997 and Ja
Page 64 and 65: Uganda environment, host plant heal
Page 66 and 67: Uganda local varieties. Assessments
Page 68 and 69: Uganda Harrison, B. D. 1987. Proper
Page 70 and 71: Kenya Recent epidemiological studie
Page 72 and 73:
Kenya respective diseases were reco
Page 74 and 75:
Kenya Bock, K. R. 1983. Epidemiolog
Page 76 and 77:
Tanzania CHAPTER 1.8 Tanzania Intro
Page 78 and 79:
Tanzania Adult whiteflies were more
Page 80 and 81:
Tanzania loss) to assess yield loss
Page 82 and 83:
Tanzania Legg, J. P.; Raya, M. 1998
Page 84 and 85:
Malawi Increased Biological Underst
Page 86 and 87:
Malawi Physiology and Ecology in th
Page 88 and 89:
Madagascar Tanzania Madagascar Moza
Page 90 and 91:
Madagascar surprising, particularly
Page 92 and 93:
Diversity of African Cassava Mosaic
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Sweetpotato Virus Disease in East A
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Factors Associated with Damage CHAP
Page 106 and 107:
Factors Associated with Damage Mean
Page 108 and 109:
Factors Associated with Damage % SP
Page 110 and 111:
Factors Associated with Damage thro
Page 112 and 113:
Factors Associated with Damage Gedd
Page 114 and 115:
Conclusions and Recommendations col
Page 116 and 117:
Conclusions and Recommendations Mal
Page 118 and 119:
Conclusions and Recommendations Mpi
Page 120 and 121:
Conclusions and Recommendations com
Page 122 and 123:
Conclusions and Recommendations con
Page 124 and 125:
Conclusions and Recommendations (2)
Page 126 and 127:
Conclusions and Recommendations Ger
Page 128 and 129:
SECTION TWO Whiteflies as Pests and
Page 130 and 131:
Introduction CHAPTER 2.1 Introducti
Page 132 and 133:
Introduction Czosnek, H.; Navot, N.
Page 134 and 135:
Sudan cotton, leading to the introd
Page 136 and 137:
Sudan Table 1. Reproductive host pl
Page 138 and 139:
Sudan Historically, Sudan has been
Page 140 and 141:
Sudan Only 10% of producers reporte
Page 142 and 143:
Sudan Conclusions The work conducte
Page 144 and 145:
Kenya CHAPTER 2.3 Kenya Introductio
Page 146 and 147:
Kenya Increased Biological Understa
Page 148 and 149:
Kenya Samples of 10 plants per fiel
Page 150 and 151:
Kenya Table 4. Maximum incidence (%
Page 152 and 153:
Kenya Seventy-nine percent of tomat
Page 154 and 155:
Kenya under Phase 2 of the TWF-IPM
Page 156 and 157:
Tanzania CHAPTER 2.4 Tanzania Intro
Page 158 and 159:
Tanzania The reproductive host plan
Page 160 and 161:
Tanzania Geographical range of whit
Page 162 and 163:
Tanzania Local names given to white
Page 164 and 165:
Tanzania Nono-Womdim, R.; Swai, I.
Page 166 and 167:
Malawi levels of infestation by the
Page 168 and 169:
Malawi Table 3. Maximum incidence (
Page 170 and 171:
Malawi (40%) believe that the white
Page 172 and 173:
Tomato Yellow Leaf Curl Virus in E.
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Conclusions and Recommendations CHA
Page 180 and 181:
Conclusions and Recommendations (Fi
Page 182 and 183:
Conclusions and Recommendations Cen
Page 184 and 185:
Conclusions and Recommendations the
Page 186 and 187:
SECTION THREE Whiteflies as Vectors
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Introduction especially for export.
Page 192 and 193:
Mexico CHAPTER 3.2 Mexico Introduct
Page 194 and 195:
Mexico Culiacán, Sinaloa, in north
Page 196 and 197:
Mexico Table 2. Virus survey of tom
Page 198 and 199:
Mexico results of the molecular bio
Page 200 and 201:
Mexico Strengthened Research Capaci
Page 202 and 203:
Mexico López, R. 1996. Experiencia
Page 204 and 205:
Guatemala 1960s, and at this time t
Page 206 and 207:
Guatemala Table 2. Results of white
Page 208 and 209:
Guatemala Table 5. Cropping systems
Page 210 and 211:
Guatemala contemplated in this prel
Page 212 and 213:
El Salvador CHAPTER 3.4 El Salvador
Page 214 and 215:
El Salvador During the course of th
Page 216 and 217:
El Salvador markets: common bean, m
Page 218 and 219:
El Salvador Current Status of White
Page 220 and 221:
Honduras Copan Ocotepeque Santa Bá
Page 222 and 223:
Honduras Table 3. Biotyping of whit
Page 224 and 225:
Honduras References Caballero, R. 1
Page 226 and 227:
Nicaragua Nueva Segovia Madriz Este
Page 228 and 229:
Nicaragua Lowlands of Nicaragua. Th
Page 230 and 231:
Nicaragua Region VI is a main horti
Page 232 and 233:
Costa Rica CHAPTER 3.7 Costa Rica I
Page 234 and 235:
Costa Rica Table 1. Characterizatio
Page 236 and 237:
Costa Rica Castillo, J. 1997. Movim
Page 238 and 239:
Panama Bocas del Toro Chiriquí Ver
Page 240 and 241:
Panama Gámez, R. 1970. Los virus d
Page 242 and 243:
Haiti Grande-Anse Sud Grande-Anse S
Page 244 and 245:
Haiti collaborators in this project
Page 246 and 247:
Cuba Ciudad de la Habana Pinar del
Page 248 and 249:
Cuba Table 3. Comparative homologie
Page 250 and 251:
Cuba project provided three keynote
Page 252 and 253:
Dominican Republic CHAPTER 3.11 Dom
Page 254 and 255:
Dominican Republic monoclonal antib
Page 256 and 257:
Dominican Republic Strengthened Res
Page 258 and 259:
Reproductive Crop Hosts of Bemisia
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Biotypes of Bemisia tabaci CHAPTER
Page 268 and 269:
Biotypes of Bemisia tabaci For this
Page 270 and 271:
Biotypes of Bemisia tabaci 100 99 B
Page 272 and 273:
Biotypes of Bemisia tabaci biotype
Page 274 and 275:
Biotypes of Bemisia tabaci Table 2.
Page 276 and 277:
Biotypes of Bemisia tabaci Already
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Conclusions and Recommendations gre
Page 282 and 283:
SECTION FOUR Whiteflies as Pests of
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Introduction control, due to resist
Page 288 and 289:
Introduction Posada, L. 1976. Lista
Page 290 and 291:
Colombia and Ecuador B biotype B. t
Page 292 and 293:
Colombia and Ecuador assistants and
Page 294 and 295:
Colombia and Ecuador and squash. On
Page 296 and 297:
Colombia and Ecuador Table 2. Main
Page 298 and 299:
Colombia and Ecuador Table 6. Patte
Page 300 and 301:
Insecticide Resistance in Colombia
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
Page 312 and 313:
Conclusions and Recommendations res
Page 314 and 315:
Conclusions and Recommendations rot
Page 316 and 317:
SECTION FIVE Special Topics on Pest
Page 318 and 319:
Sustainable IPM through Host Plant
Page 320 and 321:
Page 322 and 323:
Page 324 and 325:
Page 326 and 327:
Page 328 and 329:
Biological Control of Whiteflies by
Page 330 and 331:
Page 332 and 333:
Page 334 and 335:
Page 336 and 337:
Page 338 and 339:
Page 340 and 341:
Progress of Cassava Mosaic Disease
Page 342 and 343:
Page 344 and 345:
Page 346 and 347:
Page 348 and 349:
Management of the Cassava Mosaic Di
Page 350 and 351:
Page 352 and 353:
Page 354 and 355:
Conclusions Conclusions The Tropica
Page 356 and 357:
Conclusions whitefly pests and thus
Page 358 and 359:
Conclusions developing countries, a
Page 360 and 361:
Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronyms
Page 362 and 363:
Acronyms and Abbreviations FIRA Fid
Page 364 and 365:
Acronyms and Abbreviations PROFRIJO
Page 366:
Acronyms and Abbreviations PYR pyre
show all

Whitefly and whitefly-borne viruses in the tropics : Building a ... - cgiar

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?