Skip to main content
Bulletin of the National Research Centre
Download PDF

Population dynamics of Fall Army Worm [(Spodoptera frugiperda) J.E. Smith] (Lepidoptera: Nuctuidae) in maize-cassava intercrop using pheromone traps in Niger Delta Region

Bulletin of the National Research Centre volume 45, Article number: 44 (2021) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

This study was conducted to generate baseline information on population dynamics of Fall Army Worm (FAW) in cassava-maize intercrop for management technique. Maize (Zea mays) is Africa’s most staple food crop with pest complex as major constraints to its production. The study was carried out at the Abuja Campus of the University of Port Harcourt, Faculty of Agriculture Teaching and Research Farm. A plot size of 3298 m2 was cleared and ploughed; afterward, thirty six (36) ridges were made for the planting. Three varieties of maize grains (a hybrid Oba Super 98, white and yellow locals) were used for the study. Two cropping patterns (Sole maize and Cassava-Maize.-Intercrop) as main factor with a total of 18 sole and 18 intercrop plots and pheromone trap heights (at 1 m and 1.5 m) as sub-factor were used. The traps were mounted 18 days after planting and insect collection commenced at dawn the following day. FAW data in each trap were collected daily between 06.00 and 07.00 h. Maize cobs, fresh and dry weights, numbers of FAW exit holes, tunnels and tunnel lengths were recorded for both cropping patterns in each maize variety. Data were subjected to two-way analysis of variance.

Results

The results show higher mean value of FAW count in pheromone trap height placed at 1.5 m, and Oba super 98 maize variety intercropped with cassava had higher FAW count. There were significantly higher (P < 0.05) FAW exit holes in maize with pheromone trap height placed at 1.5 m, and maize-cassava intercrops had higher mean values of FAW exit holes. Number of tunnels and tunnel lengths (cm) due to FAW infestation were higher in maize varieties where pheromone traps were placed at 1.5 m.

Conclusion

Intercropping maize with cassava may suggest increase in FAW bionomics and the presence of abundant host which might increase a spike in its peak period of infestation. The presence of cassava in maize-cassava cropping pattern encourages feeding and/or oviposition of FAW on maize plant; therefore, an alternative cropping pattern should be encouraged in the region.

Background

Population dynamics of various organisms particularly insects are of great concern since change in population size affects human, health, ecosystem services and the quality of aquatic and terrestrial life (Schowalter 2011). Insect population varies with response to changes in ecological conditions which is critical in determining species population (Schowalter 2011). Maize (Zea mays) is Africa’s most staple food crop (FAO 2009; Ado et al. 2010) and ranks third after millet and sorghum in Nigeria (Uzozie 2001; FAO 2010). Pest is major constraints to its production and infestation starts from the field to store with varying levels of infestation depending on the agro-climatic conditions (Zakka et al. 2014), and the yield capability of maize is enormously influenced by insect invasion (Sosan and Daramola 1991; Ndemah and Schulthess 2002; Kfir et al. 2002).

Cassava (Manihot esculenta) is widely cultivated in tropical and subtropical areas for its tuberous root highly valued as sources of carbohydrates. Cassava has been accounted for to be a significant staple food in the diet of large proportion of people across the globe (Fauquet and Fargette 1990). Some of the general pest of cassava includes cassava mealy bugs, cassava green mites, variegated grasshopper, termites, whiteflies, cassava white scale and mite. These pests affects the leaves, stem and root of the plant (FAO 2013; IITA 2016).

The Fall Army Worm (FAW) Spodoptera frugiperda J.E. Smith (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) is a native to the Americas and a key pest of maize (Z. mays L.) (Abraham et al. 2017; Boaventura et al. 2020). It feeds in great numbers on the leaves, stems and reproductive regions of more than 350 plant species causing major damages to maize and a considerable number of other crops which includes cultivated grasses (such as rice, sorghum, sugarcane and wheat) vegetable crops and cotton throughout the Americas (Abraham et al. 2017; Ganiger et al. 2018). S. frugiperda is an invasive alien species in Africa particularly in Nigeria, Sao Tome, (Georgen et al. 2016) and subsequently in Benin and Togo (Nagoshi et al. 2017). FAW attacks major cereals in Nigeria but has much preference to maize and when left unchecked is capable of causing severe economic yield loss in maize (Day et al. 2017; Rwomushana et al. 2018).

Pheromones are volatile organic molecules produced and released by insect that evokes a behavioral response from individuals of a like species (Phillips 1997; Ayasse et al. 2001; Abd El-Ghany 2020). There are different behaviorally functional groups of pheromone released by insect for communication such as trail, aggregation, alarm, maturation and sex pheromone (Billen and Morgan 1998; Tillman et al. 1999; Abd El-Ghany 2020). Sex pheromones are attractants released mainly by female insect to attract males of same species for mating (Sufyan et al. 2013). They have been used in insect pest management for the identification of pest, mass trapping and mating disruption (Kloosterman and Mager 2014). Pheromone-baited traps such as a sticky board, bucket, funnel, Delta are used to catch insect pests both in the field and in storage (Kloosterman and Mager 2014). The study was aimed at generating baseline information for possible integrated management of FAW pest in cassava-maize intercropping pattern using pheromone traps placed at different heights.

Methods

Study area

The research was carried out at the Abuja Campus of the University of Port Harcourt, Faculty of Agricultural Science Teaching and Research farm located on latitude 4° 54′ 9 N and longitude 6° 55′ 13 E with an elevation of approximately 20 m above sea level and an annual rainfall ranging from 2000 to 2680 mm. The rainfall pattern was essentially bimodal with peaks in June and September while from April to August are periods of low precipitation. The mean monthly minimum and maximum temperatures ranged from 20 to 23 °C and 28 to 33 °C, respectively.

Land preparation/planting/agronomic practices

A plot size of 3298 m2 was cleared and ploughed; afterward, thirty six (36) ridges were made for the planting. Three varieties of maize grains (an improved variety Oba Super 98 obtained from Agricultural Development Program (ADP), white and yellow locals purchased at Rumuokoro slaughter market all in Port Harcourt) were used for the study. Cassava variety TMS 1414 was planted at a distance of 1 m by 1 m and 2–3 maize seeds sown at a depth of 2–3 cm at a planting distance of 0.75 m × 0.25 m making a total of 20 plant stands on each ridge were used. Two cropping patterns (Sole maize and Cassava-Maize intercrop) as main factor with a total of 18 sole and 18 inter crop plots and pheromone trap heights (at 1.0 m and 1.5 m) as sub-factor were used. Each variety was replicated three times in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) experiment. The maize plants were thinned after 14 days to one plant per stand. Fertilizer was applied in split at a total of 60 kgN and 60 kgP2O5 ha−1 as recommended (ICAR 2006). Regular agronomic practiced was carried out as recommended by ADP Rivers State.

Mounting of pheromone traps

The sex pheromone of FAW was placed at the centre of a white triangular Delta trap with a sticky pad manufactured by Koppert Biological Systems Company, USA. The pheromone contained an active ingredient 97% (Z)-9-tetradecenyl acetate (z-9-14:Ac), 2% (Z)-7-dodecenyl acetate (Z7–12:Ac) and 1% (Z)-9-dodecenyl acetate (Z9–12:Ac), prepared by Russell IPM with batch number 69/5094, labeled and marketed with the trade name S. frugiperda PH-869-1PR. The traps were mounted at two different heights (1.0 m and 1.5 m) on a bamboo stick 18 days after planting and insect data collection commenced the following day up to the 35th day. Trap sticky bottom was changed every 7 days, while the lure was changed fortnightly.

Data collections

Data collection of the (FAW) caught by the pheromone-baited trap was done daily between 06.00 and 07.00 h, and all insects seen in each trap were counted and removed from the traps. Cobs were harvested at maturity, and fresh weights of the maize ear for each cropping pattern were weighed using electronic kitchen scale (Starfrit model 93016) and recorded. The cobs were left to dry for 25 days under an open shade and the dry weights of the ear, husk, cobs and empty cobs were taken using same scale. Numbers of FAW exit holes and tunnels found in the stems of the maize were counted and recorded. Tunnel lengths were measured using 30 cm rule and thread, and the values were recorded for both cropping patterns of the maize varieties.

Data analysis

The data collected were entered and stored in a spreadsheet of Microsoft Excel and subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA), using SPSS Version 20.0 statistical packages. Significant means were separated using Tukey test, standard errors, and others for result interpretations.

Results

Pheromone trap placed at 1.5 m trapped had more FAW (Table 1). Oba super 98 maize variety intercropped with cassava had higher FAW counts which was followed by white maize variety planted as a sole crop both at pheromone trap height of 1.5 m, while the least FAW counts were found in Oba super 98 maize variety in a sole cropping pattern at pheromone height of 1.5 m. The result also shows mean number of FAW exit holes in maize cultivated as sole and intercropped with cassava with pheromone traps placed at 1.0 m and 1.5 m heights. There were significantly higher FAW exit holes in maize variety with pheromone traps height at 1.5 m, conversely, local maize varieties (white and yellow) cultivated in cassava intercropping pattern had higher exit holes, and the least was in sole yellow local variety.

Table 1 Fall Army Worm counts and Exit holes in Maize-Cassava intercrop cultivated in Niger Delta Region using two pheromone traps
Full size table

Severity of damage as a result of Fall Army Worm infestation in MCi cultivated in Niger Delta Region under two pheromone trap heights as a means of determining population dynamic is shown in Table 2. The number of tunnels and tunnel lengths (cm) due to FAW infestation on the stem of different maize varieties cultivated under maize-cassava intercrop with pheromone traps heights at 1.0 m and 1.5 m indicated that the highest number of stem tunnels and tunnel length were recorded in maize-cassava intercrop cropping pattern, while number of tunnels and tunnel length of FAW in maize intercropped with cassava were higher in maize varieties where pheromone traps were placed at 1.5 m. Significantly, higher number of FAW tunnels were recorded in yellow and white maize intercropped with cassava, while the least number of FAW tunnel was recorded in sole yellow maize where pheromones traps were placed at 1.5 m height. Similar results were obtained for FAW tunnel length.

Table 2 The mean ± SD effect of cropping pattern and maize variety on the number of tunnels and tunnels length caused by Fall Army Worm on maize cultivated in the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria under two pheromone trap heights as a means of determining population dynamics
Full size table

Table 3 shows that maize fresh weights (g) of different maize varieties cultivated in a maize-cassava intercrop technique under FAW infestation in Niger Delta region at two pheromone trap heights were higher in maize varieties with a pheromone traps placed at 1.5 m and the least in maize-cassava intercropped with pheromone traps placed at 1.0 m. The result also shows that Oba super 98 intercropped with cassava had higher maize fresh weight, while sole white maize recorded the least fresh weight. Interaction between maize varieties and pheromone heights showed that yellow maize intercropped with cassava with pheromone trap height at 1.5 m had the highest fresh weight followed by white maize in the same cropping pattern and pheromone trap height, while yellow maize in cassava intercrop had the least fresh weight followed by sole maize cultivated where pheromone trap was placed at 1.5 m.

Table 3 The mean ± SD effect of cropping pattern and maize variety on the fresh weight of maize cob cultivated in the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria under two pheromone heights as a means of determining FAW population dynamics
Full size table

Table 4 shows the results of the various yield and yield components of maize intercropped with cassava and pheromone traps placed at two different heights to traps to determining FAW population dynamics. Maize ear weight was significantly higher in maize cultivated where pheromone traps were placed at 1.5 m. Yellow maize intercropped with cassava had higher ear weight followed by Oba super 98 both cultivated under intercrop pattern and pheromones traps placed at 1.5 m height, while the least maize ear weight was recorded in a sole maize with pheromone trap placed at 1.5 m. Interaction between maize variety and pheromone heights shows that yellow maize intercropped with cassava had higher ear weight followed by white maize in the same cropping pattern, and the least was recorded in yellow maize with a pheromone trap placed at 1.0 m height. Similar results were recorded for husk weight. Interaction effect of pheromone trap heights and maize variety under different cropping pattern shows that yellow maize intercropped with cassava with pheromone trap height of 1. 5 m had higher cob weight which was closely followed by white maize under same cropping pattern, and the least cob weight was recorded in white maize intercropped with cassava but with pheromone traps placed at 1.0 m which was followed by yellow maize in the same cropping pattern. Similar results were obtained for empty cob weight.

Table 4 Yield and yield components of dry maize grains in maize-cassava cropping pattern infested by Fall Army Worm cultivated in the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria under two pheromone heights as a means of determining population dynamics
Full size table

Discussion

The utilization of the pheromone trap in this investigation to determine FAW population dynamics was a suitable tool as propounded by Knodel and Petzoldt (1995) and Nandagopal et al. (2008) that pheromone is an excellent tool for monitoring pest populations, suppressing and timing of management procedures Thomas 2008). It also enhances the ability for early detection, establishing baseline data for action thresholds/decision support, mapping pest distribution, quarantine inspection, estimation of population dynamics, prevalence (Nandagopal et al. 2008) and reconnaissance and exploration (Mc Grath et al. 2018). Cruz et al. (2010) stated that utilizing pheromone is the best method for settling on the number of pesticide applications.

Fall armyworm is a key pest of maize (Abraham et al. 2017). This was affirmed in this investigation as adult FAW were caught in critical numbers. Rojas et al. (2004) revealed that traps get just adult male moths; however, the plant harm is caused by hatchlings and that it is not sufficient to just include moth numbers in the snares and disregard different factors, for example, temperature and harvest development stage and even common control. Likewise, that trap catches are also connected with wind speed and temperature, and contrarily, associated with relative moistness. The burrowing of the fall army worm into the stem of the maize plants results in exit holes on the stems and thus leading to severe damage thereby reducing movement of nutrient in the plants vascular system especially the photosynthate and minerals (Shana 2016). The result indicating higher FAW exit holes and tunnel length in maize varieties cultivated under maize cassava intercrop (MCi) with a pheromone trap placed at 1.5 m shows the degree of severity of damage suffered under the cropping pattern. This could be attributed to the presence of cassava which may have served as an alternative host (FAO 2018) and modified microclimate thus making it suitable for continuous breeding (Cabi 2017) especially at larval stage where they burrow into soil causing damages to seedlings (Cruz 1995). However, the result was at variance with Afrin et al. (2017) that aphid infestation in intercropped mustard seed and attributed it to improved biodiversity and communications among plants and arthropods thereby creating a conducive agro-ecological system which may enhance proper nutrient uptake, high compensatory mechanism and ability to withstand insect pest infestation (Echezona and Nganwuchu 2006). The variation could also be due to suitability of cropping system in the management of insect pest and selection of best companion crops (Afrin et al. 2017). Intercropping maize with cassava may suggest increase in FAW bionomics although Adeniyan et al. (2014) expressed its advantage of having high total productivity per unit land area. FAW is a generalist feeder and can thrive on large group of plants families (Yu et al. 2003; Rojas et al. 2004; Wychkhuys and O’Neil 2006) and the presence of abundant host might increase a spike in its peak period of infestation (Vonny and Thomas 2009).

The number of tunnels and tunnel lengths due to FAW infestation on maize stem in both cropping systems with pheromone traps placed at two different heights may suggest the degree of damage attributed to FAW on the different maize varieties. Therefore, the infestation expressed in either tunnel length or number or both may have translated to grain yield loss as observed by Chouraddi and Mallapur (2017) as an important parameter for assessing intensity of damage, dead hearts and stunting growth to maize (Mohyuddin and Attique 1978). Such loss attributed to FAW infestation could potentially reduce crop yields by 21–53% in tropical African countries (Maes 2018) and could translate to over $13 billion loss in the continent (All Africa 2018; Kebede 2018; Tamakloe 2018). However, the results showing higher yield and yield performance of maize in MCi above sole cropping pattern concurs with Ibrahim (1998) that intercrop improves agronomic practices and is the dominant cropping pattern among peasant farmers in Nigeria and reduces risk aversion, extensive and intensive use of resources (land and labor), greater return per unit land area, reduction in pest and diseases and the possible improvement of soil fertility and complements resources in time and space among different species (Guo et al. 2016). Although Adeniyan et al. (2014) reported an increase in plant population density of maize intercropped with cassava may lead to lodging percentage and reduced stalk diameter, average cob weight, dry matter yield and grain yield although it may lead to increase agronomic parameters such as height at tasseling and height at harvest.

Spodoptera frugiperda in the study were observed on maize plants 24 h after the traps were set, indicated their presence around the maize crops as soon as the maize start forming whorls. Similar observation was made by Bokonom et al. (2003) that FAW larvae feed on young whorls, ears and tassels causing substantial damage to maize crops; also Harrison (1984) reported that plants at the early whorl stage and younger were preferred by FAW for oviposition and maize plants infested early in their development were less tolerant than plants infested later. Seshu-Reddy and Sun (1991) found a linear relationship between infestation and yield loss and that the extent of loss increased with earlier infestation. Ric (2004) advocated control measures where the egg masses are present on 5% of the plants or when 25% of the plants show damage symptoms and live larvae are still present. Since severe attack may lead to huge loss by the farmers (Barlow and Kuha 2012). Cruz and Turpin (1983) and Cruz et al. (1996) reported that, when 20% of maize plants in the mid-whorl stage of growth were infested with fall armyworm egg masses, yield reduced by 17–18%.

Conclusion

The pheromone trap was effective in the trapping of fall army worm (FAW), and its use in this agroecology zone for effective monitoring FAW invasion will be effective and economically if integrated in the management of FAW on maize plant. Pheromone traps in maize should be mounted at height range of 1.5 m for adequate catch during FAW surveillance and monitoring. Maize-Cassava intercrop system which has been a long tradition in the region should be revisited with caution since cassava plant was shown to significantly attract FAW for feeding and/or oviposition on maize plant; therefore, an alternative cropping pattern should be encouraged in the region.

Availability of data and materials

The pheromone contained an active ingredient 97% (Z)-9-tetradecenyl acetate (z-9-14:Ac), 2% (Z)-7-dodecenyl acetate (Z7–12:Ac), and 1% (Z)-9-dodecenyl acetate (Z9–12:Ac), prepared by Russell IPM with batch number 69/5094, labeled and marketed with the trade name Spodoptera frugiperda PH-869-1PR and can be obtained under the label details.

Abbreviations

FAW:

Fall Army Worm

ADP:

Agricultural Development Programme

MCi:

Maize-Cassava intercrop

References

  1. Abd El-Ghany NM (2020) Pheromones and chemical communication in insects. In: Pheromones. IntechOpen. Retrived 17 Jan 2021

  2. Abraham P, Beale T, Cock M, Corniani N, Day R, Godwin J, Murphy S, Richards G, Vos J (2017) Fall Armyworm Status Impacts and control options in Africa. Preliminary Evidence Note

  3. Adeniyan ON, Aluko OA, Olanipekun SO, Olasoji JO, Aduramigba-Modupe VO (2014) Growth and yield performance of cassava/maize intercrop under different plant population density of maize. J Agric Sci 6(8):35

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ado SG, Usman IS, Abdullahi US (2010) Recent development in maize research at Institute for Agricultural Research (IAR) Samaru, Zaria Nigeria. J Life Sci 4(32):1934–1939

    Google Scholar 

  5. Afrin S, Latif A, Banu NMA, Kabir MMM, Haque SS, Emam-Ahmed MM, Tonu NN, Ali MP (2017) Intercropping empower reduces insect pests and increases biodiversity in agro-ecosystem. Agric Sci 8:1120–1134

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. All Africa (2018) U.S. Joins Africa's Fight to Stop Spread of Fall Armyworm. All Africa. https://allafrica.com/view/group/main/main/id/00060194.html. Accessed 21 Nov 2018

  7. Ayasse M, Paxton RJ, Tengo J (2001) Mating behavior and chemical communication in the order Hymenoptera. Annu Rev Entomol 46:31–78

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Barlow M, Kuha P (2012) Fall armyworm in vegetable crops. Department of Entomology Publication, pp 444-015

  9. Billen J, Morgan ED (1998) Pheromone communication in social insects: sources and secretions. In: Vandermeer RK, Breed MD, Espelie KE, Winston ML (eds) Pheromone communication in social insects. West View Press, Boulder, pp 3–33

    Google Scholar 

  10. Boaventura D, Martin M, Pozzebon A, Mota-Sanchez D, Nauen R (2020) Monitoring of target-site mutations conferring insecticide resistance in Spodoptera frugiperda. Insects 11(8):545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bokonon G, Bernal JS, Pietrantonio PV, Etamou MS (2003) Survivorship and development of fall armyworm. Int J Pest Manag 49(2):169–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. CABI (2017) Digest of an Evidence Note commissioned by the UK Department for International Development (Fall Armyworm: Impacts and Implications for Africa). The full report is available at www.Invasivespecies.org/fawevidence note

  13. Chouraddi M, Mallapur CP (2017) Assessment of crop loss and economic injury level of maize stemborer, Chilo partellus (swinhoe). J Entomol Zool Stud 5(4):1530–1535

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cruz I, Turpin FT (1983) Yield impact of larval infestation of the fall army worm Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) to mid-whorl growth stage of corn. J Econ Entomol 76:1052–1054

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cruz I (l995) A lagarta-do-cartucho na cultura do milho (Circula techinica, 21). Embrapa-CNPMS, Sete Lagoas

  16. Cruz I, Oliveira LJ, Oliveira AC, Vasconcelos CA (1996) Eleito do nível de saturação de alumínio emsolo ácido sobre os danos de Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) em milho. Anais Sociedade Entomológica do Brasil 25:293–297

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Cruz I, Figueiredo MLC, Silva RB, Foster JE (2010) Efficiency of chemical pesticides to control Spodoptera frugiperda and validation of pheromone trap as a pest management tool in maize crop. Rev Bras Milho e Sorgo. 9(2):20–27

    Google Scholar 

  18. Day R, Abrahams P, Bateman M, Beale T, Clottey V, Cock M, Colmenarez Y, Corniani N, Early R, Godwin J, Gomez J (2017) Fall armyworm: impacts and implications for Africa. Outlooks Pest Manag 28(5):196–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Echezona BC, Nganwuchu OG (2006) Poultry manure application and varietal effects of Chilli Pepper (Capsicum sp) on insect pests and disease in a humid-tropical environment. J Agric Food Environ Ext 5(2):147–154

    Google Scholar 

  20. Fauquet C, Fargette D (1990) African cassava mosaic virus: etiology, epidemiology, and control (PDF). Plant Dis 74(6):404–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. FAO (2009) Quarterly Bulletin of statistics. Statistical Data base of Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  22. FAO (2010) Food and Agriculture Organization Statistics. Maize production. http://faostat.fao.org/site/567/retrievedfebruary2018

  23. FAO (2013) Save and Grow: Cassava (PDF). Rome

  24. FAO (2018) Integrated management of the fall army worm on maize: a guide for farmer field schools in Africa, Rome

  25. Ganiger PC, Yeshwanth HM, Muralimohan K, Vinay N, Kumar ARV, Chandrashekara K (2018) Occurrence of the new invasive pest fall army worm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in the maize fields of Karnataka, Indian. Curr Sci 115(4):621–623

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Georgen G, Kumar PL, Sankung SB, Togola A, Tamo’ M (2016) First report of outbreaks of the fall army worm Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae), a new alien invasive pest in west and central Africa. PLoS ONE 11(10):e0165632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Guo F, Ittersum MK, Van der Werf W (2016) Simulating potential growth in a relay-strip intercropping system: model description, calibration and testing. Field Crops Res 200(2017):122–142

    Google Scholar 

  28. Harrison FP (1984) Observations on the infestation of corn by Fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) with reference to Plant maturity. Florida Entomol 67:333–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ibrahim HA (1998) Yield Performance of some Cowpea Varieties under Sole and Intercropping with Maize at Bauchi, Nigeria, pp 278–291

  30. ICAR (2006) Handbook of Agriculture 5th edition. In: Sharma RP (editor English Editorial Unit) Kuldeep Sharma Charge, Director of Information and Publications of Agriculture, Indian Council Of Agricultural Research Krishi Anusandhan Bhavan, New Delhi

  31. IITA (International Institute of Tropical Agriculture) (2016) pest control in cassava farms. IITA Plant Health Management Division Biological control Center for Africa

  32. Kebede M (2018) Out-break, distribution and management of fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda J.E. Smith in Africa: the status and prospects. Acad Agric J 3(10):551–568

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kfir R, Overholt WA, Khann ZK, Polaszek A (2002) Biology and management of economically important Lepidopteran cereal stem borers. Annu Rev Entomol 47:701–731

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Kloosterman L, Mager K (2014) Pest control in food businesses: an introduction. In: Hygiene in food processing, 2nd edn

  35. Knodel JJ, Petzoldt CH (1995) Pheromone traps effective tools for monitoring Lepidopterous insects of sweet corn. http://www.nysipm.cornell.edu/factsheets/vegetables/swcorn/pheromone-traps. Retrived 17 Jan 2021

  36. Maes S (2018). This invasive Pest is threatening India's food security Food and hunger. https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/an-invasivepestthreatens-food-security-in-india/. Accessed 21 Nov 2018

  37. McGrath D, Huesing JE, Beiriger R, Nuessly GH, Ghislain T (2018) Monitoring surveillance, and scouting for Fall armyworm. In: Prasanna BM, Huesing JE, Eddy R, Peschke VM (eds) Two of Fall armyworm in Africa: a guide for integrated pest management, 1st edn. CIMMYT, Mexico, pp 11–28

    Google Scholar 

  38. Mohyuddin AI, Attique MR (1978) An assessment of loss caused by Chilo partellus (swinh.) to maize in Pakistan. PANS 24:111–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Nagoshi RN, Fleiseher S, Meagher RL, Hay-Roel M, Khan A, Muru’a MG, (2017) Fall army worm migration aerosive across the lesser Antiles and the potential for genetic exchanges between North and south American Populations. PLoS ONE 12(2):e0171743

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Nandagopal V, Anand P, Rao J (2008) Know the pheromones: basic and its application. J Biopestic 1(2):210–215

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Ndemah R, Schulthess F (2002) Yield of maize in relation to natural field infestation and damage by Lepidopterous stemborers in the forest region and forest/savanna transition zones of Cameroon. Insect Sci Appl 22:183–193

    Google Scholar 

  42. Philips TW (1997) Semiochemicals of stored product insects: research and applications. J Stored Prod Res 33(1):17–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Ric B (2004) Fall Armyworm in Corn ENT FACT-110: extension Entomologist University of Kentucky college of Agriculture

  44. Rojas JC, Virgen A, Malo EA (2004) Seasonal and nocturnal flight activity of Spodoptera frugiperda males (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) monitored by pheromone traps in the coast of Chiapas, Mexico. Florida Entomol 87(4):496–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Rwomushana I, Bateman M, Beale T, Beseh P, Cameron K, Chiluba M, Clottey V, Davis T, Early R, Godwin J, Gonzalez-Moreno P (2018) Fall armyworm: impacts and implications for Africa Evidence Note Update, October 2018. Report to DFID. CAB International, Wallingford

  46. Schowalter TD (2011) Population dynamics. In: Insect ecology, 3rd edn

  47. Seshu-Reddy KV, Sum KOS (1991) determination of economic injury level of the stem borer, Chilo partellus (swinhoe) in maize, Zea mays L. Insect Sci Appl 12:269–274

    Google Scholar 

  48. Shana K (2016) Content of Biology 1520. Introduction to organismal biology and Biological principles. Georgia Tech Biological Sciences. http://bio1520.biology.gatech.edu

  49. Sosan MB, Daramola AM (1991) Studies on the relationship between methods of assessing Lepidopterous Stem borer infestation and grain yield losses in maize, Zea mays L. Nigeria J Plant Prot 18(199):12–20

    Google Scholar 

  50. Sufyan M, Neuhoff D, Furlan L (2013) Effect of male mass trapping on Agriotes species on wireworm abundance of potato tuber damage. Bull Insectol 66:135–142

    Google Scholar 

  51. Tamakloe S (2018) Fall armyworm causes Africa to lose over $13bn. Joy Online. https://www.myjoyonline.com/business/2018/April-11th/fall-armyworm-causes-africa-to-lose-over13bn.php. Accessed 21 Nov 2018

  52. Tillman JA, Seybold SJ, Jurenka RA, Blomquist GJ (1999) Insect pheromones—an overview of biosynthesis and endocrine regulation. Insect Biochem Mol Biol 29(6):481–514

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Thomas CB (2008) Use of Pheromones in IPM. ISBN: 978 0 521 87595 0

  54. Uzozie SD (2001) Effects of time of inter planting maize on the performance of cassava–maize intercrop. J Agric Sci 12:18–21

    Google Scholar 

  55. Vonny MB, Thomas PK (2009) Fall Armyworm in Vegetable Crops. Virginia CooperativeExtension. Publication444-015. https://pubs.ext.vt.edu/content/dam/pubs_ext_vt_edu/444/444-015/444-015_pdf.pdf

  56. Wyckhuys KAG, O’Neil RJ (2006) Populations dynamics of Spodoptera frugiperda (Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and associated arthropod natural enemies in Honduran subsistence maize. Crop Protect 25(11):1180–1190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Yu SJ, Nguyen SN, Abo-Elghar GE (2003) Biochemical characteristics of insecticidal resistance in the fall army worm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith). Pestic Biochem Phys 77(1):1–11

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Zakka U, Lale NES, Umeozor OC (2014) Field application of λ-Cyhalothrin 2.5 EC on maize cobs for the management of Sitophilus zeamais (Motschulsky) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) infestation in the field and store. Int J Agric For Adv Life Sci 4(1):1–11

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Faculties of Agriculture University of Port Harcourt and Natural and Applied Science Ignatius Ajuru University for providing research facilities to conduct this study.

Funding

No funding was received to carry out this work.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Biological Science, Faculty of Science, Ignatius Ajuru University of Education, Port Harcourt, Nigeria

    J. A. C. Nwanze & R. B. Bob-Manuel

  2. Department of Crop and Soil Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Port Harcourt, Port Harcourt, Nigeria

    U. Zakka & E. B. Kingsley-Umana

Authors
  1. J. A. C. Nwanze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. B. Bob-Manuel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. U. Zakka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E. B. Kingsley-Umana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

NJAC and UZ conceived and performed the research; RBB read the manuscript and revised the final version and KEB supplied the pheromone and traps. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to U. Zakka.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

We have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nwanze, J.A.C., Bob-Manuel, R.B., Zakka, U. et al. Population dynamics of Fall Army Worm [(Spodoptera frugiperda) J.E. Smith] (Lepidoptera: Nuctuidae) in maize-cassava intercrop using pheromone traps in Niger Delta Region. Bull Natl Res Cent 45, 44 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s42269-021-00500-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Pheromone
  • Spodoptera frugiperda
  • Cropping pattern
  • Trap
  • Population dynamics