Erianthus arundinaceus a source for resistance against sugarcane early shoot borer

Chilo infuscatellus (Snellen)

M. Punithavalli1 and A. Jebamalaimary2

Sugarcane Breeding Institute, Coimbatore - 641007, India
1
Scientist, Sugarcane Breeding Institute, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu
2
Project Fellow, Sugarcane Breeding Institute, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu
1
Email: punithaentomol@yahoo.co.in
Sugarcane crop is attack by more than 200 insect pests in India. The actual losses due to
various insect pests have been estimated to 20% in sugarcane (Dhaliwal et al., 2015). In India,
hypothetical production of sugarcane in absence of losses was estimated at approximately
440.18 MT as against actual production of 352.14 MT leading to widespread losses of 3160.25
USD. Among 20 key pests of sugarcane, borer pest ie., early shoot borer Chilo infuscatellus
Snellen (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) pose a major threat in the early stage of the crop which cause
serious economic losses in terms of yield and sugar recovery estimated at an approximately 22–
33% and 2% CCS, respectively. Currently growing all commercial hybrids for higher
production of sugarcane are become highly susceptible to pests particularly early shoot borer.
The efforts so far has been made for the management of shoot borer through chemical and
biological control which has yielded only partial success. In this context, resistant cultivars is
one of the viable alternate for the management of shoot borer in sugarcane. Erianthus is one of
the important wild species that are closely related to the genus of Saccharum officinarum. E.
arundinaceus is one of eight species in the genus Erianthus, and it possess valuable traits for
resistance to sugarcane pest and diseases as well as improved qualities like high biomass
production, vigour, ratoonability, tolerance to drought and waterlogging. Besides, it plays an
important role in resistance breeding for insects to evolve resistant hybrids for their wide
adoptability against biotic stresses in sugarcane. Keeping in view, the present study was
undertaken to confirm the resistance of field promising C. infuscatellus E. arundinaceus
genotypes for further screening under laboratory and also explore the defensive biochemicals
that occurs in E. arundinaceus genotypes for resistance against sugarcane shoot borer.
Field promising E. arundinaceous genotypes viz., IK 76 78, IJ 76 400, IK 76 84, IK 76
88 and IJ 76 370, FIJI 55 and IJ 76 364 and ERI 2798 were brought from Regional station of
Sugarcane Breeding Institute (SBI), Kannur, Kerala and raised with a spacing of 6 x 0.9m in the
Research Farm of SBI. Shoots bit method of screening was followed against shoot borer at
Entomology Laboratory, SBI, Coimbatore, India. Temperature and relative humidity in the
laboratory ranged between 27 to 300 C and 60 to 65%, respectively. Six freshly emerged neonate
larvae were released in the aerated plastic box (6.5 x 9.0 cm) containing three shoots of each
selected genotypes. The shoots were changed on alternative days till pupation. Ten replications
were maintained in each genotype. The larval period, larval survival, pupal period, pupal
survival and total developmental period were recorded in all genotypes. Immediately after
pupation in each genotype, the male and female pupae were sexed based on ventral pupal
characteristics and kept separately in the plastic box. Adults emerged from the pupae of each
chosen genotype were paired and released in the oviposition cage containing middle leaf bits of
respective genotype for the observation of fecundity. Besides, male and female longevity on
each genotype were also recorded. The biochemical parameters for resistance viz., proteinase
inhibitors, total phenols and poly phenol oxidase were estimated which correlated with
developmental characteristics of sugarcane shoot borer. The data obtained from the experiment
was statistically analyzed.
 There was a significant difference observed in the larval and pupal survivability of shoot
borer and ranged from 44 to 82% and 28 to 56% on selected genotypes. The lowest larval and
pupal survival was recorded in the genotypes IJ 76 370, IK 76 78 and IJ 76 364 resulting with
44 & 32%, 56 & 36% and 60 & 28%, respectively. However, it was highest in the genotypes IJ
76 400 (82 & 48 %) and Co 86032 (69 & 48%). The results revealed that shoot borer larval
period differed significantly among the selected genotypes and ranged from 16.0 ± 0.71 to 26.1
± 0.96 days. The prolonged larval duration was recorded in the genotypes IJ 76 370 and IJ 76
364 resulted with 26.1 ± 0.96 and 24.88 ± 1.98 days. However, it was shorter in IK 76 84 (16.0
± 0.71 days), ERI 2798 (16.2 ± 0.49 days) and Co 86032 (16.5 ± 1.48 days). Similarly, pupal
period varied from 4.71 ± 0.22 to 7.22 ± 0.49 days due to genotypes. The maximum pupal
period was recorded in the genotype IJ 76 370 while, it was minimum in the genotypes IK 76
88, Fiji 55 and IK 76 84. Among the genotypes, shoot borer male and female adults longevity
were shorter in IJ 76 370, Fiji 55 and IJ 76 364. The total egg laying capacity of shoot borer
female ranged from 142 ± 10 to 315 ± 26 eggs / female on selected Erianthus genotypes. The
genotypes IJ 76 364, IJ 76 370 and IK 76 88 recorded minimum fecundity of 142 ± 10, 157 ± 15
and 171 ± 17 eggs / female, respectively. However, maximum fecundity was recorded in the
genotypes Co 86032 (315 ± 26 eggs / female) and ERI 2798 (264 ± 27 eggs/female).
Biochemical constituents viz., proteinase inhibitors (PIs), total phenols and poly phenol
oxidase (PPO) were analyzed in shoot borer promising E. arundinaceous genotypes. Profiling
of proteinase inhibitors on the different plant parts of E. arundinaceous genotypes were
estimated and the results revealed that the amount of trypsin inhibition in leaf sheath, apical
meristem and stalk tissues differed significantly among the genotypes. However, it was
comparatively higher in apical meristem followed by leaf sheath and stalk tissues of the selected
genotypes. The trypsin inhibition was highest in the leaf sheath (32.26%) and apical meristem
(90.94%) of the genotype IJ 76 370. However, it was lowest in leaf sheath (11.64%) and apical
meristem (15.86%) of the genotype IK 76 84. None of the selected genotypes were recorded
with marked increase of trypsin inhibition in stalk tissues except the genotype IK 76 84
(39.62%). Similarly, the total phenolic content was significantly highest in the genotypes IJ 76
370 (2.70 ± 0.33 mg/g), IJ 76 364 (2.60 ± 0.17 mg/g) and IJ 76 400 (2.02 ± 0.12 mg/g).
However, it was lowest in the genotypes IK 76 78 (0.64 ± 0.08 mg/g), followed by IK 76 84
(0.88 ± 0.09 mg/g) and ERI 2798 (1.10 ± 0.24 mg/g), respectively. The poly phenol oxidase
activity was significantly highest in IJ 76 370, IJ 76 364 and IK 76 88 and lowest in Co 86032
and ERI 2798. Among the genotypes assayed, IK 76 84 had absolutely meager activity of poly
phenol oxidase as compared to other genotypes. In general, these defensive biochemical
compounds and enzymes might have reduced the pest incidence and simultaneously increase the
yield in sugarcane. In conclusion, significant reduction of shoot borer larval & pupal survival
along with extended larval, pupal and total developmental period was recorded in the genotypes
IJ 76 370 and IJ 76 364. Total phenols, poly phenol oxidase (PPO) and peroxidase (PO) were
the highest in the shoot tissues of the genotypes IJ 76 370 and IJ 76 364 which indicated the
antibiosis mechanism of resistance (Falco et al., 2001). Induction of defensive molecules
particularly phenolic substances, oxidative enzymes (PPO and PO) and proteinase inhibitors
(PIs) could have affected the shoot borer behavior, physiology and growth. From the study, we
have identified some of the defensive molecules from shoot borer resistant E. arundinaceous
which could be used as markers for the selection of resistant sugarcane varieties against shoot
borer.
Directorate of Sugarcane Development. (2014). Major insect pest management of sugarcane
crop. Available from <http://dsd.dacnet.nic.in/PestManage.htm>
Falco, M.C. Marbach, P.A.S. Pompermayer, P. Lopes, F.C.C. and M.C. Silva-Filho. 2001.
Mechanisms of sugarcane response to herbivory. Genetics and Molecular Biology, 24:
113-122.