Paper · 1995 · Journal of Entomological Science

Yellow Traps and Insecticides for Control of a Strain of Sweet Potato Whitefly and Associated Virus Incidence on Pepper

Joel Avila Valdez; Dan A. Wolfenbarger

13
claims
26
verbatim quotes
5
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) is the most important vector of viruses which cause diseases of “serrano” pepper in southern Tamaulipas, Mexico. This insect is highly attracted to yellow surfaces. When 1,240 yellow traps/ha were uniformly placed in plots, plants with virus symptoms were reduced 61%, 59%, and 15% in 1987/1988, 1988/1989, and 1990/1991, respectively, on the last sampling date yet there was no significant difference in treated and untreated plots. In plots without treatment 78, 91, and 100% of plants exhibit virus symptoms on the last sampling date in the same years, respectively. Plots with traps increased yields of peppers 539%, 202%, and 341% in 1987/1988, 1988/1989, and 1990/1991, respectively, compared to the check. Traps + permethrin at 110 g (AI)/ha reduced populations of B. tabaci adults 78% in the 1987/1988. Permethrin-treated plots without traps increased yields 312% and 366% compared to the control in 1988/1989 and 1990/1991 seasons, respectively. During these same years yield increases were greater than the untreated check when Lambda cyhalothrin, cypermethrin, phosphamidon, dimethoate, naled, Safer™ soap, amitraz, and endosulfan were applied in the same tests.

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 13

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Yellow traps reduced virus symptoms by 61% in 1987/1988, without a significant treated-control difference.

Taxon
Peppert0
Treatment
yellow trapse1
Outcome
plants with virus symptomse0
Direction
reducede0
Value
61%e0
Qualifier
1987/1988e0
Comparator
untreated plotse0

Verbatim

e0

“plants with virus symptoms were reduced 61%, 59%, and 15% in 1987/1988, 1988/1989, and 1990/1991, respectively, on the last sampling date yet there was no significant difference in treated and untreated plots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 251–459 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–119 · show in text ↑
e1

“yellow traps”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 203–215 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Yellow traps reduced virus symptoms by 59% in 1988/1989, without a significant treated-control difference.

Taxon
Peppert0
Treatment
yellow trapse1
Outcome
plants with virus symptomse0
Direction
reducede0
Value
59%e0
Qualifier
1988/1989e0
Comparator
untreated plotse0

Verbatim

e0

“plants with virus symptoms were reduced 61%, 59%, and 15% in 1987/1988, 1988/1989, and 1990/1991, respectively, on the last sampling date yet there was no significant difference in treated and untreated plots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 251–459 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–119 · show in text ↑
e1

“yellow traps”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 203–215 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Yellow traps reduced virus symptoms by 15% in 1990/1991, without a significant treated-control difference.

Taxon
Peppert0
Treatment
yellow trapse1
Outcome
plants with virus symptomse0
Direction
reducede0
Value
15%e0
Qualifier
1990/1991e0
Comparator
untreated plotse0

Verbatim

e0

“plants with virus symptoms were reduced 61%, 59%, and 15% in 1987/1988, 1988/1989, and 1990/1991, respectively, on the last sampling date yet there was no significant difference in treated and untreated plots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 251–459 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–119 · show in text ↑
e1

“yellow traps”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 203–215 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Untreated plots had 78%, 91%, and 100% symptomatic plants in successive seasons.

Taxon
Peppert0
Outcome
plants exhibit virus symptomse0
Value
78, 91, and 100%e0
Qualifier
plots without treatmente0

Verbatim

e0

“In plots without treatment 78, 91, and 100% of plants exhibit virus symptoms on the last sampling date in the same years, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 461–595 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–119 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Traps increased pepper yield 539% in 1987/1988 versus the check.

Taxon
peppersCapsicume0
Treatment
trapse0
Outcome
yields of pepperse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
539%e0
Qualifier
1987/1988e0
Comparator
checke0

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

Capsicum
Capsicum · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Plots with traps increased yields of peppers 539%, 202%, and 341% in 1987/1988, 1988/1989, and 1990/1991, respectively, compared to the check”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 597–738 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Traps increased pepper yield 202% in 1988/1989 versus the check.

Taxon
peppersCapsicume0
Treatment
trapse0
Outcome
yields of pepperse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
202%e0
Qualifier
1988/1989e0
Comparator
checke0

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

Capsicum
Capsicum · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Plots with traps increased yields of peppers 539%, 202%, and 341% in 1987/1988, 1988/1989, and 1990/1991, respectively, compared to the check”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 597–738 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Traps increased pepper yield 341% in 1990/1991 versus the check.

Taxon
peppersCapsicume0
Treatment
trapse0
Outcome
yields of pepperse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
341%e0
Qualifier
1990/1991e0
Comparator
checke0

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

Capsicum
Capsicum · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Plots with traps increased yields of peppers 539%, 202%, and 341% in 1987/1988, 1988/1989, and 1990/1991, respectively, compared to the check”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 597–738 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Traps plus permethrin reduced B. tabaci adults 78% in 1987/1988.

Taxon
Peppert0
Treatment
Traps + permethrin at 110 g (AI)/hae0
Interactor
B. tabaciBemisia tabacie0pest
Outcome
populations of B. tabaci adultse0
Direction
reducede0
Value
78%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Bemisia tabaci
Bemisia tabaci · InteractorPublic domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Traps + permethrin at 110 g (AI)/ha reduced populations of B. tabaci adults 78% in the 1987/1988”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 740–836 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–119 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Permethrin alone increased yield 312% in 1988/1989.

Taxon
Peppert0
Treatment
Permethrin-treated plots without trapse0
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
312%e0
Qualifier
1988/1989e0
Comparator
controle0

Verbatim

e0

“Permethrin-treated plots without traps increased yields 312% and 366% compared to the control in 1988/1989 and 1990/1991 seasons, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 838–980 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–119 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Permethrin alone increased yield 366% in 1990/1991.

Taxon
Peppert0
Treatment
Permethrin-treated plots without trapse0
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
366%e0
Qualifier
1990/1991e0
Comparator
controle0

Verbatim

e0

“Permethrin-treated plots without traps increased yields 312% and 366% compared to the control in 1988/1989 and 1990/1991 seasons, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 838–980 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–119 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lambda cyhalothrin and cypermethrin applications increased yields over the untreated check.

Taxon
Peppert0
Treatment
Lambda cyhalothrin, cypermethrine0
Outcome
yield increasese0
Direction
greatere0
Comparator
untreated checke0

Verbatim

e0

“yield increases were greater than the untreated check when Lambda cyhalothrin, cypermethrin, phosphamidon, dimethoate, naled, Safer™ soap, amitraz, and endosulfan were applied”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1006–1181 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–119 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Phosphamidon, dimethoate, and naled applications increased yields over the untreated check.

Taxon
Peppert0
Treatment
phosphamidon, dimethoate, nalede0
Outcome
yield increasese0
Direction
greatere0
Comparator
untreated checke0

Verbatim

e0

“yield increases were greater than the untreated check when Lambda cyhalothrin, cypermethrin, phosphamidon, dimethoate, naled, Safer™ soap, amitraz, and endosulfan were applied”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1006–1181 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–119 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Safer soap, amitraz, and endosulfan applications increased yields over the untreated check.

Taxon
Peppert0
Treatment
Safer™ soap, amitraz, and endosulfane0
Outcome
yield increasese0
Direction
greatere0
Comparator
untreated checke0

Verbatim

e0

“yield increases were greater than the untreated check when Lambda cyhalothrin, cypermethrin, phosphamidon, dimethoate, naled, Safer™ soap, amitraz, and endosulfan were applied”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1006–1181 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–119 · show in text ↑

trap barrier · yield · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

16 papers: 15 positive, 1 negative or no effect

14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

12 papers more in this group

See all 16 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.