Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of the Boll Weevil Anthonomus grandis Boheman (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) Suppression Program in the State of Goiás, Brazil

  • Pest Management
  • Published:
Neotropical Entomology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The boll weevil Anthonomus grandis Boheman (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) is the most important cotton pest in Brazil. A large-scale field-testing of a Boll Weevil Suppression Program (BWSP) was implemented to assess its technical and operational feasibility for boll weevil suppression in the state of Goiás, Brazil. The pilot plan focused on 3,608 ha of cotton during the 2006/2007 and 6,011 ha in the 2007/2008 growing seasons; the areas were divided into four inner zones with an outer buffer zone. We analyzed data on boll weevil captures using pheromone traps installed in the BWSP fields, on the detection of the first insect and the first damaged floral bud, greatest damage, and number of insecticide applications. The nonparametric Mann–Whitney U test was used to evaluate the differences between presuppression and suppression years. Fourteen pheromone-baited trapping evaluations were used to compare the weevil populations from 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 growing seasons. The BWSP regime reduced in-season boll weevil captures from 15- to 500-fold compared to presuppression levels in the preceding year. The low capture rates were related to delays in infestation and damage by weevils. The smaller population size measured by trapping and field monitoring reduced the number of required insecticide treatments. The BWSP strategy was efficient in suppressing populations of this pest and is a viable program for cotton production in subtropical and tropical regions, with long-term economic and environmental benefits.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bacheler J S (1994) Impact of boll weevil eradication on cotton production and insect management in Virginia and North Carolina, USA. In: Constable G A, Forrester N W Challenging the future: proceedings of the world cotton research. CSIRO Conference: Brisbane, Australia February 14-17, p. 405-410.

  • Barbosa S, Lukefahr MJ, Sobrinho RB (1986) O bicudo-do-algodoeiro. Brasília. Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária. Departamento de difusão de tecnologia, Brasília, 314p

  • Bleicher E (1990) Manejo integrado de pragas do algodoeiro. In: Crocomo WB (ed) Manejo Integrado de Pragas, chap. 14. Editora Unesp, Botucatu, pp 271–291

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd FJ (1976) Operational plan and execution of the pilot boll weevil eradication experiment. In: Boll weevil suppression, management and elimination technology. USDA-ARS Southern Region Conference, Memphis, TN, February 13-15, 1974. Proceedings 5–71:62–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannerday TD, Womack H, Jordan CR (1973) Evaluation of a boll weevil diapause control program in Georgia. J Georgia Entomol Soc 8(4):287–294

    Google Scholar 

  • Degrande PE (1991) Bicudo-do-algodoeiro: manejo integrado. Dourados, UFMS/Embrapa-Uepae, Dourados, 142p

    Google Scholar 

  • Degrande PE (1998) Guia prático de controle das pragas do algodoeiro. UFMS, Dourados, p 60p

    Google Scholar 

  • Degrande P E (2006) Ameaça do bicudo exige organização e empenho de todos. Visão Agrícola (6): 55-58.

  • R Development Core Team (2008) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org.

  • Dickerson WA (1986) Grandlure: use in boll weevil control and eradication programs in the United States. Florida Entomol 69(1):147–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickerson WA, McKibben GH, Lloyd EP, Kearney JF, Lam JJ, Cross WH (1981) Field evaluation of a modified in-field trap. J Econ Entomol 78:280–282

    Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2006) Glossary of phytosanitary terms. In: International standards for phytosanitary measures 1 to 27, no. 5, p.55-79Rome.

  • Gallo D, Nakano O, Neto SS, Carvalho RPL, Baptista GC, Filho EB, Parra JRP, Zucchi RA, Alves SB, Vendramin JD, Lopes JRS, Omoto C (2002) Entomologia Agrícola. Piracicaba, Agronômica Ceres, 920p

    Google Scholar 

  • Genovesi P (2001) Guidelines for eradication of terrestrial vertebrates: a European contribution to the invasive alien species issue. Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats Standing Committee. T-VPS 65 revised 2. Council of Europe.

  • Guerra A A (1986) Boll weevil movement: dispersal during and after the cotton season in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas. Southwest. Entomol. (11): 10-16.

  • Haney P B, Lewis W J, Lambert W R (2009) Cotton production and boll weevil in Georgia: history, costs of control, and benefits of eradication. Research Bulletin, no. 428.

  • Heilman M D, Namken L N, Norman J W, Lukefhar M J (1979) Evaluation of an integrated short-season management production system for cotton. J. Econ. Entomol. (72): 896-900.

  • Heilman MD, Namken LN, Summy KR (1986) Sistema de produção de algodões de ciclo curto para áreas infestadas pelo bicudo. In: Barbosa S, Lukefhar MJ, Braga Sobrinho R (eds) O Bicudo do Algodoeiro. Embrapa, Departamento de Difusão de Tecnologia, Brasília, pp 253–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Helms D (1977) Just lookin’ for a home: the cotton boll weevil and the South. Ph.D. Dissertation, Florida State University, Tallahassee

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter WD, Hinds WE (1995) The Mexican cotton boll weevil. Bureau of Entomology Bulletin, 51. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, p 181p

    Google Scholar 

  • IBGE Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (2011) Levantamento Sistemático da Produção Agrícola, Rio de Janeiro. IBGE 24(2):1–82

    Google Scholar 

  • International Cotton Advisory Committee (ICAC) (2010) Cotton: review of the world situation. Cotton 63(5):1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Knipling EF (1986) Tecnologia disponível para erradicação ou manejo do bicudo do algodoeiro. In: Barbosa S, Lukefahr MJ, Sobrinho RB (eds) O Bicudo-do-algodoeiro. Embrapa, Departamento de Difusão de Tecnologia, Brasília, pp 31–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd E P, Merkl M E, Tingle F C, Scott W P, Hardee D D, Davich T B (1972) Evaluation of male-baited traps for control of boll weevils following a reproduction-diapause program in Monroe County, MS. J. Econ. Entomol. (65): 552-555.

  • Marur C J, Ruano O (2001) A reference system for determination of developmental stages of upland cotton. Rev. Oleag. Fibr. (5): 313-317.

  • Miranda J E (2006) Manejo de pragas do algodoeiro no Cerrado Brasileiro. Campina Grande: Embrapa Algodão. 22 p. (Circular Técnica, 98).

  • Mitchell E B, Hardee D D (1974) In field traps: a new concept in survey and suppression of low populations of boll weevils. J. Econ. Entomol. (67): 506-508.

  • Newell W, Paulsen T C (1908) The possibility of reducing boll weevil damage by autumn spraying of cotton fields to destroy the foliage and squares. J. Econ. Entomol. (49): 696-698.

  • Ramalho F S, Gonzaga J V (1992) Methodology of the application of pyrethroids against cotton boll weevil and pink bollworm. Trop. Pest Manag. (37): 324-328.

  • Ramalho F S, Silva J R B (1993) Período de emergência e mortalidade natural do bicudo-do-algodoeiro. Pesq. Agropec. Bras. (28): 1221-1231.

  • Rummel D R, Jordan L B, White J R, Wade L J (1977) Seasonal variation in the height of boll weevil flight. Environ. Entomol. (6): 674-678.

  • Silva M A O, Degrande P E, Santos W J, Miranda J E, Senhorelo W L P (2005) Resultados da aplicação do Plano Estratégico de Controle do Bicudo-do-algodoeiro (Anthonomus grandis) na Região de Ipameri, Goiás. In: Congresso Brasileiro de Algodão, V, Resumos. Embrapa Algodão, Salvador, 29 de agosto a 01 de setembro de 2005.

  • Smith JW (1998) Boll weevil eradication: area-wide pest management. Ann Entomol Am 91(3):239–247

    Google Scholar 

  • Villavaso EJ, McGovern WL (1981) Boll weevil: disruption of pheromonal communication in the laboratory and small field plots. J. Ga. Entomol. Soc (16):306–310

  • Vietmeyer N D (1982) Our 90-year war with the boll weevil isn’t over. Smithsonian Mag., Aug. 1982: 60-68.

  • Wagner F (1999) “Boll Weevil”, the handbook of Texas online. Texas State Historical Association. (http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/teb01), accessed April 28, 2011.

  • Wagner TL, Villavaso EJ (1999a) Diapause in the boll weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae): seasonal occurrence in Mississippi populations. Ann Entomol Soc Am 92(3):382–395

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner TL, Villavaso EJ (1999b) Effects of temperature and adult diet on development of hypertrophied fat body in prediapausing boll weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 92(3):403–413

    Google Scholar 

  • Westbrook JK, Adamczyk Jr JJ, Allen CT, Kostroun D (2010) ARS, university and regulatory partnerships needed to address the challenge and complete eradication. In: Proceedings of the beltwide cotton production research conference, New Orleans: National Cotton Council Beltwide Cotton Conference, p. 1027-1028.

  • Wolfenberger DA, Hamed AA, Luttrell RG (1997) Toxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis against the boll weevil Anthonomus grandis Boh. (Coleoptera, Curculionidae). In: Proceedings of the beltwide cotton production research conference, Memphis: National Cotton Council Beltwide Cotton Conference, p. 1296-1300.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the agronomists Marcio Silvano da Silva and Marcio Antonio Oliveira Silva, the staff of Pamplona Farm, and the Foundation for Support of Agricultural Research and Development of Goiás (Fundação Goiás) for their technical assistance as well as for providing the materials necessary for carrying out this research and the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) for the Master’s scholarship awarded to Izidro dos Santos de Lima Junior.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fac de Ciências Agrárias, Univ Federal da Grande Dourados, Dourados, MS, Brasil

    I S de Lima Jr. & P E Degrande

  2. Embrapa Algodão, Núcleo do Cerrado, Santo Antônio de Goiás, GO, Brasil

    J E Miranda

  3. Área de Proteção de Plantas, Instituto Agronômico do Paraná, Londrina, PR, Brasil

    W J dos Santos

  4. Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias, Universidade Federal da Grande Dourados, Rodovia Dourados, Itahum, km 12, Cx. P. 533, 79.804-970, Dourados, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brasil

    I S de Lima Jr.

Authors
  1. I S de Lima Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P E Degrande
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J E Miranda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. W J dos Santos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to I S de Lima Jr..

Additional information

Edited by André L Lourenção—IAC

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

de Lima, I.S., Degrande, P.E., Miranda, J.E. et al. Evaluation of the Boll Weevil Anthonomus grandis Boheman (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) Suppression Program in the State of Goiás, Brazil. Neotrop Entomol 42, 82–88 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13744-012-0083-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13744-012-0083-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation