Use este identificador para citar ou linkar para este item: http://www.alice.cnptia.embrapa.br/alice/handle/doc/1125356
Registro completo de metadados
Campo DCValorIdioma
dc.contributor.authorHOLLINGSWORTH, R. G.
dc.contributor.authorARISTIZÁBAL, L. F.
dc.contributor.authorSHRINER, S.
dc.contributor.authorMASCARIN, G. M.
dc.contributor.authorMORAL, R. de A.
dc.contributor.authorARTHURS, S. P.
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-09T09:12:51Z-
dc.date.available2020-10-09T09:12:51Z-
dc.date.created2020-10-08
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.citationFrontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, v. 4, article 22, March 2020.
dc.identifier.issn2571-581X
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.alice.cnptia.embrapa.br/alice/handle/doc/1125356-
dc.descriptionSince its recent establishment in Hawaii, the coffee berry borer (CBB), Hypothenemus hampei (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), threatens yields, quality, and price of coffee production. A limited number of insecticides (primarily Beauveria bassiana) are used to control CBB with minimal disruption in this agroecosystem. We evaluated two insecticide spray strategies across eight coffee farms in the Kona and Ka?u districts of Hawaii Island. Coffee growers sprayed insecticides approximately monthly (calendar basis) or else in response to CBB field monitoring data (threshold based). Overall, farms adopting spray thresholds performed more insecticide applications early in the season (May to July), but significantly fewer overall, when compared with calendar-based strategies (i.e., 4?5 vs. 7?11 seasonal sprays, respectively). Generalized linear models assessing the variability in CBB infestation rates, berry penetration, and infection by B. bassiana indicated that threshold-based sprays provided equivalent CBB control compared with calendar ones. When corrected for yield, there were economic savings for threshold- vs. calendar-based spray programs (i.e., cost 5.4 vs. 11.8% of gross yield). Total defects in processed coffee after harvest were statistically similar between the two spray regimes, i.e., 8.5 ± 1.0% and 10.4 ± 1.7%, respectively. We hypothesize that B. bassiana applied early in the season is more effective, since the fungus targets initial CBB infestations when the prolonged location of founder females in the outer berry endosperm favors its infection. Our study suggests that spray timing for CBB based on field monitoring data can reduce costs; however, additional measures, such as field and post-harvest sanitation, are necessary to achieve sustainable CBB control in the Islands.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rightsopenAccesseng
dc.subjectMycoinsecticide
dc.subjectCoffee farms
dc.titleIncorporating Beauveria bassiana into an integrated pest management plan for coffee berry borer in Hawaii.
dc.typeArtigo de periódico
dc.subject.thesagroFungo Para Controle Biológico
dc.subject.thesagroBeauveria Bassiana
dc.subject.thesagroPraga de Planta
dc.subject.thesagroHypothenemus Hampei
dc.subject.thesagroCafé
dc.subject.thesagroControle Biológico
dc.subject.nalthesaurusBiological control agents
dc.subject.nalthesaurusEntomopathogenic fungi
dc.subject.nalthesaurusInsect pests
dc.subject.nalthesaurusBiological control
dc.subject.nalthesaurusCoffea arabica var. arabica
dc.format.extent2p. 1-10.
riaa.ainfo.id1125356
riaa.ainfo.lastupdate2020-10-08
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.00022
dc.contributor.institutionROBERT G HOLLINGSWORTH, USDA-ARS; LUIS F ARISTIZÁBAL, Coffee Growers and Synergistic Hawaii Agriculture Council; SUZANNE SHRINER, Coffee Growers and Synergistic Hawaii Agriculture Council; GABRIEL MOURA MASCARIN, CNPMA; RAFAEL DE ALMEIDA MORAL, Maynooth University; STEVEN P ARTHURS, BioBee USA.
Aparece nas coleções:Artigo em periódico indexado (CNPMA)

Arquivos associados a este item:
Arquivo Descrição TamanhoFormato 
Mascarin-Incorporating-Beauveria-2020.pdf3,44 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
Visualizar/Abrir
Mostrar registro simples do item Visualizar estatísticas

FacebookTwitterDeliciousLinkedInGoogle BookmarksMySpace