Nezara viridula ( L .) 353
7.1 Introduction
Nezara viridula (L.) is a worldwide pest of numerous crops and cropping systems. The species also is
adept at exploiting a wide range of noncultivated plant species in the absence of preferred food resources
and during the overwintering period, and this may contribute to its broad distribution. In fact, N. viridula
may possess the broadest distribution range of the pentatomids (Panizzi and Slansky 1985, CABI/EPPO
1998). McPherson and McPherson (2000) is the most recent authority on the biology, ecology, distribu-
tion, and management of N. viridula. This chapter is intended to build upon McPherson and McPherson
(2000), presenting pertinent research findings to date.
Nezara viridula is known commonly as the southern green stink bug. This current common name is
only one of many that has been used for the species, including: “chinche verde” (Peña M. and Sifuentes
1972, Rodríguez Vélez 1974), “cosmopolitan stink bug” (Hokkanen 1986), “cotton green bug” (Kamal
1937), “green bug” (Hubbard 1885), “green-bug” (Drake 1920), “green-bug of India” (Atkinson 1889),
“green plant-bug” (Drake 1920), “green soldier bug” (Riley and Howard 1893a, Turner 1918, Watson
1918), “green soldier-bug” (Hubbard 1885), “green stink bug” (CABI Invasive Species Compendium
2015), “green vegetable bug” (Gu and Walter 1989), “plant-bugs” (Riley and Howard 1893b), “pumpkin
bug” (Watson 1918, 1919a), “southern green plant-bug” (Jones 1918), “southern green stink-bug” (Drake
1920), “southern green stinkbug” (Wolfenbarger 1947), “southern stinkbug” (Demaree 1922), “southern
stink bug” (Nishida 1966), “stink-bugs” (Jones 1918), and “tomato and bean bug” (Froggatt 1916). Drake
(1920) originally recommended “southern green stink-bug” as a common name; apparently, the hyphen
was omitted at some point after his report.
The exact, or even approximate, date of the invasion of Nezara viridula into the United States is unknown,
but the species was recorded in Texas in 1880 (Distant 1880). Subsequently, Hubbard (1885) first reported
N. viridula as a pest of citrus in Florida following correspondence from West Apopka, FL, in 1883. The
population dynamics of the insect in citrus and “pea-vines” influenced the pest status of N. viridula in
Florida (Hubbard 1885). Specifically, when “pea-vines” reached maturity, N. viridula abandoned the vines
and infested surrounding citrus trees. In reviewing the description of nymphs provided by Hubbard (1885),
however, he incorrectly identified the scientific name of the insect as Raphigaster hilaris Fitch [sic]. He
described the nymphs as: “...young are black, with white spots, which color they retain until nearly fully
grown, ...”. This description more closely resembles nymphs of N. viridula (Morrill 1910, Jones 1918) than
those of Chinavia (as Nezara) hilaris (Say) (green stink bug), which do not have white spots (Morrill 1910,
Jones 1918). Drake (1920) also noted that Hubbard (1885) was incorrect in his identification of C. hilaris,
stating he (referring to Hubbard) “undoubtedly refers to N. viridula Linn. as hilaris Say (the northern green
soldier-bug) has never been known to occur in great numbers in Florida.” Additionally, Riley and Howard
(1893b) identified specimens of N. viridula from citrus, making specific reference to the description by
Hubbard (1885). Similar to the Texas invasion, Drake (1920) noted that “Owing to the paucity of data it is
impossible to conjecture how, when, or even where the insect was introduced into Florida.”
7.6 Impacts on General Public ........................................................................................................... 400
7.7 Management ................................................................................................................................. 400
7.7.1 Monitoring Options ......................................................................................................... 400
7.7.2 Cultural Control ............................................................................................................... 401
7.7.3 Biological Control............................................................................................................ 401
7.7.3.1 General ............................................................................................................. 401
7.7.3.2 Classical Biological Control ............................................................................ 402
7.7.3.3 Augmentation Biological Control .................................................................... 402
7.7.3.4 Conservation Biological Control...................................................................... 402
7.7.4 Attract-and-Kill Strategies .............................................................................................. 403
7.7.5 Chemical Control ............................................................................................................ 403
7.8 Future Outlook ............................................................................................................................. 403
7.9 Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................ 404
7.10 References Cited........................................................................................................................... 404