Paper · 1996 · Environmental Entomology

Response ofMononychellus tanajoa(Acari: Tetranychidae) to Cropping Systems, Cultivars, and Pest Interventions

Muaka Toko; John S. Yaninek; Robert J. O'Neil

6
claims
12
verbatim quotes
11
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The effects of cropping systems (cassava monocropped and intercropped with maize), pest interventions (spray of acaricide and release of an exotic phytoseiid) and cultivars (‘Agric’ and ‘TMS 30572’) on the population dynamics of the green mite, Mononychellus tanajoa (Bondar), were evaluated in 2 locations (Dogbo and Intemational Institute of Tropical Agriculture) in Benin Republic, West Africa. Maize and cassava were intercropped at the beginning of the wet season. Pest interventions were applied during the dry season with Amblyseius manihoti Moraes (= limonicus s.l.) (Garman & McGregor) (Acari: Phytoseiidae) released at the beginning of the dry season at both sites and the acaricide dimethoate sprayed bimonthly at Dogbo and once in December at the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture. Intercropping cassava with maize had no significant effect on M. tanajoa and associated phytoseiid predator populations during the intercropping, dry, and postdry seasons. The acaricide spray reduced M. tanajoa densities 50% below those of the predator and the control (no predator and no spray) treatments. A. manihoti reduced M. tanajoa densities 20% below the control treatment by the end of the experiment. Agric supported 2–3 times more mites per leaf than did TMS 30572. A pest management strategy that combines resistant cultivars and an efficient exotic predator is suggested to control M. tanajoa .

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping cassava with maize had no significant effect on M. tanajoa populations during the intercropping, dry and postdry seasons.

Treatment
Intercropping cassava with maizee1
Interactor
M. tanajoaMononychellus tanajoae1pest
Outcome
M. tanajoae1
Direction
no_changeinferrede1
Comparator
cassava monocroppede0
Setting
during the intercropping, dry, and postdry seasonse1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Intercropping cassava with maize had no significant effect on M. tanajoa and associated phytoseiid predator populations during the intercropping, dry, and postdry seasons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 808–978 · show in text ↑
e0

“cassava monocropped and intercropped with maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 33–80 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping cassava with maize had no significant effect on the associated phytoseiid predator populations during the intercropping, dry and postdry seasons.

Treatment
Intercropping cassava with maizee1
Interactor
phytoseiid predatore1biocontrol_agent
Outcome
associated phytoseiid predator populationse1
Direction
no_changeinferrede1
Comparator
cassava monocroppede0
Setting
during the intercropping, dry, and postdry seasonse1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Intercropping cassava with maize had no significant effect on M. tanajoa and associated phytoseiid predator populations during the intercropping, dry, and postdry seasons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 808–978 · show in text ↑
e0

“cassava monocropped and intercropped with maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 33–80 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The acaricide spray reduced M. tanajoa densities by 50% relative to those of the predator and the control (no predator and no spray) treatments.

Treatment
The acaricide spraye2
Interactor
M. tanajoaMononychellus tanajoae2pest
Outcome
M. tanajoa densitiese2
Direction
reducede2
Value
50%e2
Comparator
control (no predator and no spray)e2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e2

“The acaricide spray reduced M. tanajoa densities 50% below those of the predator and the control (no predator and no spray) treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 980–1114 · show in text ↑
e0

“cassava monocropped and intercropped with maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 33–80 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The exotic phytoseiid Amblyseius manihoti reduced M. tanajoa densities by 20% below the control treatment by the end of the experiment.

Treatment
A. manihotie3
Interactor
M. tanajoaMononychellus tanajoae3pest
Second interactor
A. manihotiAmblydromalus manihotie3biocontrol_agent
Outcome
M. tanajoa densitiese3
Direction
reducede3
Value
20%e3
Qualifier
by the end of the experimente3
Comparator
control treatmente3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e3

“A. manihoti reduced M. tanajoa densities 20% below the control treatment by the end of the experiment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1116–1217 · show in text ↑
e0

“cassava monocropped and intercropped with maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 33–80 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cultivar Agric supported 2-3 times more mites per leaf than cultivar TMS 30572 on cassava.

Material
Agrice4
Interactor
mitese4pest
Outcome
mites per leafe4
Direction
moree4
Value
2–3 timese4
Comparator
TMS 30572e4

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e4

“Agric supported 2–3 times more mites per leaf than did TMS 30572”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1219–1283 · show in text ↑
e0

“cassava monocropped and intercropped with maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 33–80 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

A pest management strategy combining resistant cultivars and an efficient exotic predator is suggested to control M. tanajoa on cassava.

Outcome
pest management strategy that combines resistant cultivars and an efficient exotic predatore5

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e5

“A pest management strategy that combines resistant cultivars and an efficient exotic predator is suggested to control M. tanajoa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1285–1413 · show in text ↑
e0

“cassava monocropped and intercropped with maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 33–80 · show in text ↑

Zea mays · pest · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

intercropping · pest · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.