Wild relatives of chickpea as sources of genes for resistance to Helicoverpa armigera
Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India
www.icrisat.org
Sciencewithahumanface
Dec 2009
Wild Relatives of Chickpea as Sources of Genes for
Resistance to Helicoverpa armigera
For more information contact: HC Sharma, Principal Scientist (Entomology), email: h.sharma@cgiar.org
1
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India.
2
USDA, ARS Plant Germplasm Introduction and Testing Research Unit, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-6402 USA.
3
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), Entomology, Private Bag 5, Wembley 6913, Western Australia, Australia.
Introduction
Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is an important grain legume in Asia and parts of East and North Africa,
Mediterranean Europe, Australia, Canada and USA. The noctuid pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera
(Hubner) is one of the most important constraints to chickpea production worldwide, causing an
estimated loss of $325 million annually in the semi-arid tropics. Due to widespread use of insecticides,
particularly on cotton and other high value crops, it has developed resistance to conventional insecticides
(Kranthi et al. 2002). Development of resistant cultivars would minimize the losses due to this pest.
However, only moderate levels of resistance are available in the cultivated germplasm of chickpea, and
thus, there is need to identify wild relatives as sources of genes for resistance to this pest (Sharma 2005).
Results and Discussion
Larval weights at 10-days after release
(DAR) were less than 51 mg on twelve
accessions of C. reticulatum, compared to
225 mg on ICCC 37 (susceptible check),
and 136 mg on ICC 506 (resistant check)
(Fig 1).
Weights on annual wild relatives at 10
DAR ranged from 11.72 to 26.66 mg
compared to 46.48 mg on ICC 506 and
80.94 mg on ICCC 37 (Fig 2). There
was a significant reduction in both leaf
feeding (except in ICC 17242) and larval
weights when the larvae were fed on
the leaves of perennial wild relatives of
chickpea (Table 1).
There was considerable reduction in
larval survival and weights of survivors
on many accessions of the wild relatives,
indicating that antibiosis is an important
component of resistance to H. armigera.
Table 1. Evaluation of perennial wild relatives of chickpea for resistance to H. armigera.
Accession Species Damage rating* Larval survival (%) Larval weight (mg)
ICC 17202 Cicer canariense 3.7 90.0 1.985
ICC 17146 Cicer microphyllum 3.2 85.8 0.999
ICC 17234 Cicer microphyllum 4.8 82.0 1.456
ICC 17236 Cicer microphyllum 2.0 85.2 0.769
ICC 17242 Cicer microphyllum 7.0 86.0 2.280
ICC 506 Cicer arietinum 4.8 94.0 4.686
ICCC 37 Cicer arietinum 7.2 86.0 6.602
* Damage rating (1=<10% leaf area damaged; 9=>80% leaf area damaged).
Fig. 2. Weights of Helicoverpa armigera larvae at 10 days after
release on leaves of wild relatives of chickpea.
Materials and Methods
Accessions of wild relatives of chickpea, along with three cultivated chickpea genotypes (ICC 506 –
moderately resistant, ICCC 37- susceptible check, and Annigeri – local landrace) were evaluated for
resistance to H. armigera under field conditions.
The accessions showing resistance were also bioassayed under greenhouse conditions and evaluated
in three sets belonging to Cicer reticulatum (secondary gene pool), annual wild species (C. judaicum, C.
bijugum and C. pinnatifidum), and perennial wild species (C. microphyllum and C. canariense).
The terminal leaf branches were evaluated for resistance to the neonate larvae of H. armigera using
the detached leaf assay at the flowering stage. Terminal branches (2 to 3 fully expanded leaves and a
bud) were used to measure genotypic resistance to H. armigera (Sharma et al. 2005). Observations
on leaf feeding were recorded on a 1 to 9 scale (1 = <10% leaf area damaged, and 9 = >80% leaf area
damaged), number of larvae surviving after the feeding period, and weights of the surviving larvae.
Detached leaf assay to screen for resistance to H. armigera
Wild relatives of chickpea evaluated for resistance to pod borer
Malic acid and oxalic acid are the principal components of resistance to H. armigera in the cultivated
chickpea, which result in oviposition nonpreference and antifeedant effects (Yoshida et al. 1995).
However, antibiosis seems to be the major component of resistance in the wild relatives of chickpea,
which may be due to isoflavones such as judaicin, maackiain, and 2-arylbenzofuran, which have shown
antifeedant and antibiotic activity towards the larvae of H. armigera (Simmonds and Stevenson 2001).
Thus, wild relatives of chickpea seem to have different mechanisms of resistance to H. armigera unlike
cultivated chickpeas. Therefore, wild species showing resistance can be exploited to increase the levels
and diversify the basis of resistance to H. armigera in cultivated chickpea.
Acknowledgments
The funding support provided by the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC), Australia;
and USAID Linkage Grant, USA, is gratefully acknowledged.
References
Kranthi KR, Jadhav DR, Kranthi S, Wanjari RR, Ali SS and Russel DA. 2002. Insecticide resistance in
five major insect pests of cotton in India. Crop Protection 21:449-460.
Sharma HC. 2005. Heliothis/Helicoverpa Management: Emerging Trends and Strategies for Future
Research. New Delhi, India: Oxford and IBH Pvt. Ltd. 469 pp.
Sharma HC, Pampapathy G, Dhillon MK and Ridsdill-Smith JT. 2005. Detached leaf assay to screen
for host plant resistance to Helicoverpa armigera. Journal of Economic Entomology 98:568-576.
Simmonds MSJ and Stevenson PC. 2001. Effects of isoflavnoids from Cicer on larvae of Helicoverpa
armigera. Journal of Chemical Ecology 27:965-977.
Yoshida M, Cowgill SD and Wightman JA. 1995. Mechanisms of resistance to Helicoverpa armigera
(Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in chickpea – role of oxalic acid in leaf exudates as an antibiotic factor. Journal
of Economic Entomology 88:1783–1786.
Cicer arietinum. Cicer bijugum.
Cicer reticulatum.
Cicer judaicum. Cicer cuneatum. Cicer bijugum.
Cicer chrossanicum. Cicer pinnatifidum.
Fig. 1. Weights of Helicoverpa armigera larvae at 10 days after
release on leaves of 12 wild accessions of C. reticulatum and three
cultivated chickpea genotypes (ICC 506, Annigeri, and ICCC 37).
HC Sharma1
, G Pampapathy1
, SL Clement2
and TJ Ridsdill-Smith3
Adult. Eggs. Larva. Damaged crop.