New Horizons in Insect Science Towards Sustainable Pest Management

296 V. Selvanarayanan

2000 ). As the young larvae of H. armigera feed
on tender foliage and flowers while older larvae
feed on the fruits, a promising resistant/tolerant
accession should have the defense traits both in
the foliage and fruits. Hence, in vitro and in situ
studies were made to ascertain the mechanisms
and factors of resistance in the selected acces-
sions in comparison with the susceptible check,
I 979. Feeding preference of H. armigera toward
the foliage and fruits of the selected accessions
was less compared to the susceptible check. In
contrast, the selected accessions recorded higher

ovipositional preference but egg hatching got

impaired considerably (Selvanarayanan and Na-

rayanasamy 2004 ). Larval feeding on the foliage

and fruits of these accessions exerted pronounced

antibiosis on H. armigera as evidenced by higher

larval and pupal mortality; prolongation of lar-

val and pupal tenure; decline in emergence and

longevity of adults and also higher malformation

in the adults (Selvanarayanan and Narayanasamy

2006 ; Selvanarayanan 2011) as observed earlier

by Farrar and Kennedy ( 1990 ).

Table 4 Reports on resistance in tomato against whitefly, B.tabaci/ B. argentifolii Trialeurodes vaporiorum W

Plant spp. (variety/accession/line/

cultivar)

Reports on resistance Reference

L. pennellii Significant levels of resistance Gentile et al. 1968 ; de Ponti et al. 1975

L. hirsutum High level of antibiosis Juvik 1980

Four cultivars Glandular trichome mediated resistance Jennifer and Kisha 1981

L. pennellii ecotypes Trichome mediated resistance Shevach-Urkin 1983 ; Dahan 1985 ;

Morag 1986

L. pennellii and L. hirsutum Glandular trichome secretions Berlinger et al. 1984

L. pennellii accessions Sticky exudates from type IV glandular

trichomes

Goffreda et al. 1989 ; Steffens and

Walters 1991

Ecotypes of L. hirsutum f.

glabratum

Glandular secretions Berlinger and Dahan 1987

Seven accessions Varying susceptibility to TLCV Banerjee and Kalloo 1987a

L. hirsutum f. glabratum Biochemicals mediated resistance Banerjee and Kalloo 1987b

Wild accessions Acyl sugar based resistance Liedl et al. 1995

cv. Pusa Ruby and 6 hybrids Hybrid Abinash susceptible to leaf

miner but tolerant to whitefly

Chaudhuri et al. 2000

Selected cultivars L 27, 8484, Fiona and TY 172 found

resistant and lower incidence of leaf curl

Lapidot et al. 2001

L. hirsutum var. hirsutum Leaf glandular trichome based

resistance

Freitas et al. 2002

Hybrid derivatives Hybrid derivatives of Varushanadu

Local tolerant

Muthukumaran 2004

Mutants Mutants of Varushanadu Local tolerant Gopalakrishnan 2010

Backcross generations (PKM1 × VL) × PKM1 (BC 1 ) tolerant Manikandan 2012

Table 3 Evaluation of insect resistance in tomato at Annamalai University
Plant spp. (variety/accession/line/cultivar) Reports on resistance Reference
32 accessions Less damage in No. 1101, Hybrid F3 and
No. 986

Krishnakumar 1993

321 accessions (285 L. esculentum; 32 L.
pimpinellifolium; four suspected crosses)

Varushanadu Local, Seijima Jeisei, Ac

238, Roma found resistant

Selvanarayanan 2000

F1 Hybrids Hybrid of Ac 238 × Roma tolerant Dhakshinamoorthy 2002
Mutants Mutants of Varushanadu Local tolerant Gopalakrishnan 2010
Backcross generations (PKM1 × VL) × PKM1 (BC 1 ) tolerant Manikandan 2012