Coffee is the first traded crop commodity and valuable in the world. Despite it is highly needed many constraints affect its production and quality. Among those constraints, Coffee berry disease and coffee berry borer are a serious pest of coffee that causes huge damage worldwide. Both are pests of the berry of coffee which is an economical part of the traded commodity. Coffee berry disease (CBD), which affects Coffea arabica, is caused by the fungus Colletotrichum kahawae. Some reports showed that the disease caused yield loss up to 81% in Wondo Genet, Ethiopia which is a huge loss and devastating. Coffee berry borer is also the major insect pest that causes significant yield and quality losses to coffee berries. The coffee berry borer can cause yield losses of 30-35% with 100% berries infested at harvest time. Climate change plays a great role in the increments of pests which enhance the damage and yield loss of coffee which is a headache for coffee-producing countries. Pest management of coffee is difficult because of climate change and tree nature. It needs many controlling mechanisms because we cannot control only by one pest management techniques. So, integrated pest management is needed to control both pests that attach the berry of the coffee which is very economical and needs high quality of production. So, the purpose of this review is to assess the behavior and controlling mechanisms for coffee berry disease and coffee berry borer which are the major pests of coffee in the world.

1. Review on Integrated Pest Management of Coffee Berry Disease and Coffee Berry Borer
Review on Integrated Pest Management of Coffee Berry
Disease and Coffee Berry Borer
*Dadi Tolessa Lemma and Damtew Abewoy
1,2Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Wondogenet Agricultural Research Center, P.o.box 198, Shashemene,
Ethiopia
Corresponding Author: Damtew Abewoy, Email: damtewabewoy@gmail.com, Tel: +251 921 58 2397 and Dadi Tolessa
Lemma, Email: daditolessa2003@gmail.com, Tel: +251 912 20 9334
Coffee is the first traded crop commodity and valuable in the world. Despite it is highly
needed many constraints affect its production and quality. Among those constraints, Coffee
berry disease and coffee berry borer are a serious pest of coffee that causes huge damage
worldwide. Both are pests of the berry of coffee which is an economical part of the traded
commodity. Coffee berry disease (CBD), which affects Coffea arabica, is caused by the
fungus Colletotrichum kahawae. Some reports showed that the disease caused yield loss up
to 81% in Wondo Genet, Ethiopia which is a huge loss and devastating. Coffee berry borer is
also the major insect pest that causes significant yield and quality losses to coffee berries.
The coffee berry borer can cause yield losses of 30-35% with 100% berries infested at harvest
time. Climate change plays a great role in the increments of pests which enhance the damage
and yield loss of coffee which is a headache for coffee-producing countries. Pest
management of coffee is difficult because of climate change and tree nature. It needs many
controlling mechanisms because we cannot control only by one pest management
techniques. So, integrated pest management is needed to control both pests that attach the
berry of the coffee which is very economical and needs high quality of production. So, the
purpose of this review is to assess the behavior and controlling mechanisms for coffee berry
disease and coffee berry borer which are the major pests of coffee in the world.
Keywords: Coffee berries, Coffee berry disease, Coffee berry borer, IPM, Yield losses
INTRODUCTION
Coffee (Coffea arabica L) is originated in Ethiopia and the
second largest commodity traded next to oil in the world
(Gray et al., 2013) and plays a great role to balance trade
between developed and developing countries. Coffee is an
important exchange commodity contributing to various
degrees to the national income of the producing countries
(Patricia, 2011). More than 33 million people in 25
countries in Africa are leading their life by producing
coffee. In Ethiopia, about 15 people are directly or
indirectly deriving their livelihoods from the coffee
production system (Gray et al., 2013). Ethiopia is the
largest coffee producer in Sub-Saharan countries and the
fifth largest coffee producer in the world next to Brazil,
Vietnam, Colombia, and Indonesia, contributing about 7-
10% of total world coffee production (Gray et al., 2013).
Current contributions of coffee are more than 25 % of the
country's foreign exchange earnings, over 5% of the GDP,
12 % of the agricultural output, and 10% of the government
revenues (CSA, 2010).
There are four types of coffee production systems in
Ethiopia: forest coffee, semi-forest coffee, garden coffee,
and plantation coffee. These four-production systems
mainly due to varying levels of plants associated with
coffee, the nature of coffee tree regeneration, and human
intervention in the coffee production system
(Woldemariam et al., 2008).
*Corresponding Author: Dadi Tolessa Lemma, Ethiopian
Institute of Agricultural Research, Wondogenet
Agricultural Research Center, P.o.box 198, Shashemene,
Ethiopia, *Email: damtewabewoy@gmail.com Co-Author
Email: daditolessa2003@gmail.com
International Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science
Vol. 8(1), pp. 1001-1008, February, 2021. © www.premierpublishers.org, ISSN: 2167-0449
Review Article

2. Review on Integrated Pest Management of Coffee Berry Disease and Coffee Berry Borer
Dadi and Damtew 1002
Forest with wild Arabica coffee populations occurs in the
southeastern and southwestern highlands of Ethiopia
mainly at altitudes between 1000 and 2000 m.a.s.l.
(Senbeta, 2008). By far the greatest amount of coffee in
Ethiopia is derived from spontaneous forest coffee. Forest
coffee accounts for about 10% of the total coffee
production in Ethiopia. Semi-Forest coffee production
system is also found in the Southern and South-Western
parts of the Country. Farmers thin and select forest trees
to let inadequate sunlight to the coffee trees and still
provide adequate shade. Farmers slash the weeds once a
year to facilitate harvesting of the coffee beans. This
system accounts for about 35% of coffee production.
Plantation coffee is grown on plantations owned by the
state (currently put up for sale/privatization) and on some
well-managed smallholder’s coffee farms. In this
production system, recommended agronomic practices
like improved seedlings, spacing, proper mulching, using
manure, weeding, shade regulation, and pruning are
practiced. It accounts for about 5% of the total production
(Crown Coffee, 2002 as cited by Agegnehu et al., 2015).
Coffee production in Africa has largely stagnated over the
past two decades. Among the major factors limiting
increased Coffee production worldwide are losses due to
pests (insects, disease, nematodes, and weeds), both
indigenous and exotic. Coffee is prone to several diseases
that attack fruits, leaves, stems, and roots, which in turn
reduce yield and marketability (Derso et al., 2000; Kifle et
al., 2015). High rainfall and relative humidity are common
in major coffee-growing areas, which favors disease
development and survival of inoculums on crop or
alternate hosts over seasons. These conditions generally
result in disease epidemics that reduce coffee yield. More
than 13 types of diseases registered to affect the coffee
plant in Ethiopia. While major coffee diseases are Coffee
Berry Diseases (CBD) caused by Colletotrichum kahawae,
Coffee Wilt Disease (CWD) of Gibberella xylarioides, and
coffee leaf rust caused by Hemileia vastatrix, however, the
rest of the diseases considered to be minor (Kifle et al.,
2015 and Derso et al., 2000). Several insect pests are
known to attack coffee berries at different phenological
development stages and affect both the quality and
quantity of the product. Coffeeberry infestation by insects
starts at bud formation and flowering stage. General
feeders such as larvae of Lepidoptera damage buds,
whereas scale insects and aphids infest and suck the sap
from the plant at all times during their nymphal and adult
stages (Chemeda et al., 2011). Therefore, the objective of
this paper is to review the major pests of coffee (coffee
berry disease and coffee berry borer) situation and their
management tactics to reduce the loss they cause on
coffee.
MAJOR PESTS OF COFFEE
Many coffee pests stack growth and development as well
as a challenge for yield and quality of coffee across the
globe. Among those major pests of coffee are discussed
below:
Coffee Berry Disease (CBD)
Coffee berry disease (CBD) is the top major disease of
coffee in Ethiopia, which attack mainly the green berries of
coffee. It was first observed in Ethiopia in 1971 and then it
spreads and is found in all coffee-producing areas in which
it has been favored by favorable environmental conditions
(Kifle et al., 2015). Coffee berry disease (CBD), which
affects Coffea arabica, is caused by the fungus
Colletotrichum kahawae. It is endemic to Africa and was
first recorded in western Kenya in 1922. Since then the
disease has spread to most C. arabica growing countries
on the continent. CBD can cause considerable yield losses
of up to 75% when not adequately controlled. Even though
the application of fungicides to control the disease can
result in yields being doubled, losses of up to 30% can still
occur when the attack is severe (CABI, 2006). Merdassa
(1985) as cited by Kifle and Demelash (2015) reported
that yield losses of 51% at Melko and 81% at Wondo
Genet was occurred due to CBD. According to Eshetu et
al. (2000), coffee berry disease alone is known to reduce
coffee yields between 25-30 %. Hararghe coffee is
susceptible to CBD; as a result, it is under threat of genetic
erosion mainly because of the losses caused by the
disease and farmers prefer growing alternative cash crops
such as chat to planting coffee (Birehanu, 2014). Crop
losses may therefore vary from year to year depending on
weather conditions. Berries are most resistant at the
‘pinhead’ stage (first month) and when fully mature (at 16-
18 weeks from the time of flowering). Active lesions
develop on the berry and expand until the whole berry is
affected. The beans are destroyed and the berries turn
black and either drop or remain on the coffee plant as
mummified berries. Some of the berries drop off after
developing a few active lesions (CABI, 2006).
The losses occur during early infestation by destroying the
beans or by preventing proper wet and dry processing
since the pulp cannot be removed completely, causing so-
called ''stinkers'' in the crop and reducing the quality.
Intensive progress of the disease in the expanding stage
of the berry development finally produces mummified
berries with no economic value at all (Hindorf and Omondi,
2011). Under very wet weather conditions CBD may also
cause brown lesions to develop on flower petals. Also, it
can attack seedling hypocotyls of C. arabica. However,
pale, corky brownish lesions may also develop, mostly on
young pinheads and mature green berries. These lesions
are known as 'scab' lesions and, as a pinhead and mature

3. Review on Integrated Pest Management of Coffee Berry Disease and Coffee Berry Borer
Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 1003
green berries are more resistant to CBD, their
development is due to a resistant reaction to infection
(CABI, 2006).
Figure 1: Coffee berry disease lesions on green berries
Source: CABI, 2006.
The major distinction currently separates C. kahawae from
the other species of Colletotrichum was the old colony of
C. kahawae produces pale yellowish to pinkish with dense
whitish-grey aerial mycelium and a few bright orange
conidial masses on the tips of the active growing hyphae
on MEA media. The young colony produces a grey,
becoming grey to dark, olivaceous grey, dark greenish in
the reverse side of plates (Mohammed and Jambo, 2015).
Weather conditions are critical in the development of CBD.
Adequate moisture is essential as the spores (conidia) of
C. kahawae are dispersed by water and also require liquid
water or 100% relative humidity for germination. This
implies that CBD epidemics should be expected in areas
where rainfall is generally high or during years of high
rainfall in otherwise dry areas (CABI, 2006). Temperature
is another important factor in that temperatures between
12°C and 30°C are also required for conidia to germinate,
the optimum being 22°C. The host plant tissues may be
infected within five hours of germination. The ideal
conditions for CBD development can therefore vary at
different altitudes and from country to country.
Figure 2: Relationship between altitude and CLR and CBD incidence on coffee farms
sampled in the Arabica coffee growing regions of Uganda.
Farm altitude (Meters)
Source: Matovu, 2013

4. Review on Integrated Pest Management of Coffee Berry Disease and Coffee Berry Borer
Dadi and Damtew 1004
Management tactics
CBD can be controlled through cultural measures,
chemical applications, use of resistant varieties, and
biological control. A number of these different approaches
should be considered as part of an integrated approach to
control.
Cultural control methods
Cultural management practices can indirectly control CBD.
Providing wider spacing and ensuring that trees are
pruned appropriately helps to prevent prolonged wetness
and high relative humidity following periods of rainfall
(conditions that are ideal for CBD development). In shaded
coffee, the canopy of the trees should be prevented from
becoming too dense. Any infected berries remaining on
the tree can act as a source of inoculum. All berries
including dried berries should therefore be removed at the
end of the cropping season to prevent them from acting as
a source of inoculum for the new crop.
Biological control methods
Components of the microbiota (fungi and bacteria) on
coffee plants have been tested against C. kahawae, many
of which have shown very high levels of antagonism.
However, these have not yet been developed as
commercial biocontrol agents (CABI, 2006). It has also
been established that applying fewer than the
recommended number of sprays or lower rates of
fungicide than recommended for control of CBD results in
increased disease severity, due to the elimination of
natural antagonists that compete with C. kahawae on the
twigs and berries.
Host plant resistance
Coffee varieties resistant to CBD are available. They
include Ruiru 11, Hibrido de Timor, Rume Sudan, K7, and
several Catimors. In Ethiopia, 37 CBD resistant coffee
cultivars were released and disseminated for growers. Of
those commercial coffee varieties, three of them are
hybrids, and eleven are developed for specialty coffee
growing areas of Ethiopia (Kifle and Demelash, 2015).
Chemical control methods
Several fungicides are available for controlling CBD, but
the use of chemicals is costly. Copper-based fungicides
are relatively cheap, very effective against CBD, and also
give protection against coffee leaf rust. The most
economical approach is to use a tank mixture containing
half the normal rate of copper fungicide (5 kg of 50% WP
copper oxychloride) and half the normal rate of organic
fungicide (2 kg chlorothalonil 75% WP). Fungicides should
be applied every three to four weeks during the rainy
season to protect developing berries (CABI, 2006).
Coffee Berry Borer
The coffee berry borer, Hypothenemus hampei is a major
insect pest of coffee in many of the world's main coffee-
producing countries causing considerable damage (Baker,
2000). Hypothenemus hampei was first recorded in coffee
seeds of unknown origin being traded in France in 1867
and the first reports of the pest in Africa were from Gabon
in 1901 and Zaire in 1903 (Murphy and Moore, 1990).
Infestations of this small beetle are difficult to combat; most
of the insect’s lifecycle is completed inside coffee berries,
making insecticide penetration and contact difficult (Baker
1999, Damon 2000). The suggestion that the original host
of H. hampei was C. canephora was initially strengthened
by the report from Davidson (1967) who concluded that the
pest was absent from Ethiopia, the home of Arabica coffee.
Apart from a few reports of characteristically damaged
berries from the southwest of the country, there was no
further mention of H. hampei in Ethiopia until Abebe (1998)
reported the pest to be present at all but one of the sites
studied. The borer was found at all altitudes from below
1000 m to over 1900 m, in the major coffee-growing areas
in the south and south-west of the country, with a relatively
higher infestation at lower altitudes. The losses occur in
Ethiopia due to this insect pest is high. EARO, (2000) cited
in Mendesil et al. (2004) showed that the insect can infest
13.3% to 61% of dry leftover coffee berries. This may be
due to the preference of the insect and the unsuitability of
the dropped berry as affected by decaying and rotting.
Climate change particularly the rise in temperature in
coffee-growing areas has aggravated the problem by
creating an environment conducive to the rapid growth of
the pest (Abdu and Tewodros, 2013). Characteristic
damage includes the rotting of developing beans as a
result of saprophytic microorganisms that enter through
the hole, the drop of young berries due to attack, and the
loss of bean weight due to insect feeding. The borer can
cause bean yield losses of 30-35% with 100% of
perforated berries at harvest time; nevertheless, damage
can be greater if the harvest is delayed (Barrera, 2008).
In Africa, CBB is regarded as the most prevalent and
important coffee pest and a problem for the coffee industry.
In Kenya, infestation levels of 80% during the peak season
with significant losses in yield and quality have been
reported (Masaba et al., 1985). Severe infestation may
result in up to 80% of berries being attacked in Uganda
and Ivory Coast, and 96% in Congo and Tanzania
(Waterhouse and Norris, 1989). In Uganda, the damage
has been found to vary mainly due to the uneven
distribution of bio-control agents, and differences in
cropping systems and farmer practices (Kucel and
Orozco-Hoyos, 1998).
The Coffee Berry Borer (Hypothenemus hampei), a major
pest originating in Congo but now seen around the Bean
Belt, causes crop damage above $US 500 million
annually. Since 2001, the borer, previously confined to

5. Review on Integrated Pest Management of Coffee Berry Disease and Coffee Berry Borer
Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 1005
crops below 1,500 meters above sea level, has spread
upslope, drawn by hotter, wetter conditions in places like
Tanzania, Uganda, and Indonesia On Mt Kilimanjaro, the
borer is now found 300 meters higher than where it was
last century. Warming of 1-2°C will see the borer’s
numbers explode, spreading outwards from the equator
and upwards to higher altitudes (Killeen and Harper,
2016).
Figure 3: Larvae of the coffee berry borer, H. hampei, and damaged coffee
Source: CABI (2006)
Management tactics
Cultural Control
Harvesting coffee berries is itself an important control
measure. Rigorous collection of remnant berries after
harvest, both from tree and ground, can substantially
reduce infestations as it breaks the cycle and leaves little
substrate for immigrating H. hampei. Collected berries
should be boiled or buried if infestation levels are high. If
processed, they should be placed in a drier, or if sun-dried,
placed under netting smeared with grease or oil to capture
escaping borers. These methods are most successful
when done carefully by resource-poor farmers (Le Pelley,
1968). However, such manual collection methods are
laborious, especially the collection of fallen berries or
those on the lower branches. Studies in Colombia have
shown that farmers tend to leave many berries after
harvest, especially low down on the trees and that the
older the tree, the harder the farmers find it to remove the
berries (Baker, 1997).
There are some suggestions that populations of H. hampei
tend to be lower under shade trees rather than in the full
sun. Armbrecht and Gallego (2007) recorded significantly
more predation under shade than full sun coffee. Others,
however (e.g. Bosselmann et al., 2009) have found the
reverse. It is likely therefore that the effect of shade is
highly dependent on many local factors, for example,
Jonsson et al. (2015) found higher levels of H. hampei
under unshaded than shaded coffee in Uganda, whereas
the reverse was true for the white stem borer
(Monochamus leuconotus).
Biological Control
The two bethylid parasitoids, Cephalonomia
stephanoderis, and Prorops nasuta have been introduced
from Africa to India and many Latin-American countries in
the 1980s and 1990s. The few studies undertaken on their
effectiveness suggest that in general, they have only a
moderate controlling effect and that it is rare to find more
than 5% of perforated berries parasitized one or more
years after releases were made (Barrera, 1994). However,
a follow-up study seven years after a campaign to rear and
release large numbers of C. stephanoderis in different
coffee growing areas of Pulney Hills, Tamil Nadu, India,
recorded 16-45% parasitism from five different areas
(Roobakkumar et al., 2014). Phymastichus coffea was
seen as a promising biocontrol agent because it attacks
adults and thus might help to prevent the establishment of
the borer in the endosperm, where economic damage is
caused. (Baker, 1999).
In recent years there have been several studies to
evaluate the effect of bird predation (e.g. Johnson et al.,
2010; Karp et al., 2013) which through exclusion cage
experiments show significant control effects in heavily

6. Review on Integrated Pest Management of Coffee Berry Disease and Coffee Berry Borer
Dadi and Damtew 1006
infested field conditions. The presence of H. hampei in the
diet of some birds has been confirmed through DNA
analysis of fecal samples (Karp et al., 2014), however, less
than 10% of birds tested positive for H. hampei. Exclusion
studies have also been carried out with ants
e.g. Solenopsis geminata; (Trible and Carroll, 2014) which
show a significant predation effect.
Chemical control
Chemical control of CBB previously relied on insecticides
such as dihedron and BHC (benzene hexachloride) but
these have been largely replaced by Endosulfan,
chlorpyrifos, fenitrothion, and fenthion. However, all of
these chemicals are toxic to humans and other animals
and, without protective equipment and careful use,
spraying of coffee trees would prove hazardous.
Endosulfan was traditionally used for CBB control and
would appear to be the most effective chemical, but it is
also now being withdrawn due to problems with safety and
resistance in the borer. In particular, there are major health
concerns for those applying the chemical who can become
highly contaminated when spraying tall trees on difficult
terrain. Furthermore, and as mentioned above, CBB
spends much of its life protected within the coffee berry. If
used, a pesticide must therefore be applied before the
insect bores into the berry to be effective, so timing is
crucial. Effectively this means spraying before the
endosperm has developed which means applying
probably no later than 100 days after flowering. The
amount of chemical used and the risks associated with
their use may be reduced by spot application as opposed
to spraying (Johnson et al., 2010).
Host-Plant Resistance
Extensive studies by Kock (1973) reported C.
canephora variety Kouilou (or Quoillou) is attacked less
than the Robusta variety. Villagran (1991) found C.
kapakata supporting very significantly fewer immature
stages of the borer than other varieties and some tendency
for C. arabica variety. However, Romero and Cortina-
Guererro (2007) did find differences in antibiosis
(expressed as fecundity) with Ethiopian accession CC532
and C. liberica both yielding significantly fewer borer
progeny. Gongora et al. (2012) confirmed the inhibitory
effects of C. liberica through a functional genomics study
using EST libraries, cDNA microarrays, and an oligo array
containing 43,800 coffee sequences. The results allowed
for a comparison of C. liberica vs. C. arabica berry
responses to H. hampei infestation after 48h. Out of a set
of 2,500 plant sequences that exhibited differential
expression under H. hampei attack, twice the number were
induced in C. liberica, than in C. arabica. Hence it seems
certain that varying amounts of resistance or antibiosis to
the borer exists within species of Coffea. Also, some
scientists tried to develop transgenic coffee resistant to
pests and diseases and are still few to meet consumer
resistance (Gongora et al., 2012).
CONCLUSION
Coffee one of the major exporting commodity in the world.
The plant is produced in more than seventy countries
including Ethiopia. It is consumed largely in the world in
which Brazil is the huge producer and consumer in the
world. Even though it is widely produced around the globe
there are many constraints in its production which are
occurred due to biotic and abiotic factors. Among biotic
factors, different diseases and insect pests are the major
problems and devastating organisms of coffee. Among
these pests, coffee berry disease and coffee berry borers
are economically important pests. Both of them attach the
berries of coffee which is economical. The market needs
quality beans without any defects, but these pests attack
the beans and reduce the quality of the coffee.
Currently, both pests are devastating coffee farms and
reduce the yield of coffee. Coffeeberry disease is a very
important disease in many countries including Ethiopia.
Control the disease many works have been done by many
countries by using many pest control strategies. For
example, in our country, different resistance varieties like
Aba Buna have been developed, but still, the disease is
attacking and reducing the yield of coffee. Also, coffee
berry borer is a major pest of coffee especially in southern
America which are the major producers and exporter of
coffee. The countries have tried to establish different
management options to control the pest, but still, it is the
major insect pest that reduces the berries of coffee which
is very economical and needs care for export quality. Even
though many works have been done there is a need to
establish different pest controlling mechanism which is
friendly to the health of human and environment. For this
integrated pest management is the best method to fulfill
this criterion. So, finding the mechanism that can reduce
the problem and suitable for coffee growing should be
established.
REFERENCES
Abebe M (1998). Further Evidence on the Occurrence of
Coffee Berry Borer in Ethiopia. Second
Intercontinental Conference on Coffee Berry
Borer, Tapachula, 75-76.
Abdu A, Tewodros A (2013). Gedeo: Highland Home
Garden Agroforestry System. In "Farmers‟
Strategies for Adapting to and Mitigating Climate
Variability and Change through Agroforestry in
Ethiopia and Kenya" (C. M. Davis, B. Bernart, and
A. Dmitriev, Eds.), pp. 45-50. Forestry
Communications Group, Oregon State University,
Corvallis, Oregon.

7. Review on Integrated Pest Management of Coffee Berry Disease and Coffee Berry Borer
Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 1007
Agegnehu E, Thakur A and Mulualem T (2015). Potential
Impact of Climate Change on Dynamics of Coffee
Berry Borer (Hypothenemus hampi Ferrari) in
Ethiopia. Open Access Library Journal, 2: e1127.
Armbrecht I and Gallego MC (2007). Testing ant predation
on the coffee berry borer in shaded and sun coffee
plantations in Colombia. Entomologia
Experimentalis et Applicata, 124(3), pp.261-267.
Barrera JF (2008). Coffee pests and their management.
In Encyclopedia of Entomology (pp. 961-998).
Springer Netherlands.
Barrera JF (1994). Dynamique des populations du scolyte
des fruits du caféier, Hypothenemus hampei
(Coleoptera: Scolytidae), et lutte biologique avec
le parasitoide Cephalonomia stephanoderis
(Hymenoptera: Bethylidae), au Chiapas, Mexique.
301 pp. PhD thesis, Université Paul-Sabatier,
Toulouse III, France.
Bosselmann AS, Dons K, Oberthur T, Olsen CS, Ræbild
A, and Usma H (2009). The influence of shade
trees on coffee quality in smallholder coffee
agroforestry systems in Southern
Colombia. Agriculture, ecosystems &
environment, 129(1), 253-260.
CAB International (2006). Pests and diseases of coffee in
eastern Africa: a technical and advisory manual.
CAB International, Wallingford, UK Compiled &
edited by Mike Rutherford and Noah Phiri.
Chemda A, Emana G, Emiru S, and Holger H (2011).
Coffee Berry Insect Pests and their Parasitoids in
the Afromontane Rainforests of Southwestern
Ethiopia. East African Journal of Sciences: 5 (1)
41-50.
Crown Coffee (2002). Ethiopian Coffee Speciality. Addis
Ababa.
Derso E, Gebrezigi T, Adugna G (2000). Significance of
minor diseases of Coffea arabica L. in Ethiopia: A
review. In: Proceedings of the workshop on control
of coffee berry disease (CBD) in Ethiopia, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia, pp. 58-65.
Davidson, A., 1967. The Occurrence of Coffee Berry Borer
Hypothenemus (stephanoderis) hampei in
Ethiopia. Cafei, 8, 1-3.
Eshetu Derso (2000). Pre-selection method for coffee
berry disease (CBD) resistance in Ethiopia. In:
Proceedings of the workshop on control of coffee
berry disease (CBD) in Ethiopia, pp. 47-57. 13-15
August 1999, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
EARO (2000). Jimma Agricultural Research Centre
progress report for the period 1998. EARO,
Jimma, 133 pp.
Gray Q, Tefera A, and Tefera T (2013). Ethiopia: Coffee
annual report. GAIN Report No. ET-1302, GAIN
Report Assessment of Commodity and Trade by
USDA, USA., May 14, 2013.
Hindorf H and Omondi OC., 2011. A review of three major
fungal diseases of Coffea arabica L. in the
rainforests of Ethiopia and progress in breeding
for resistance in Kenya. Journal of Advanced
Research: 2, 109–120
Jaramillo J, Eric M, Fernando EV, Davis A, Borgemeister
C and Chabi-Olaye A (2011). Some Like It Hot:
The Influence and Implications of Climate Change
on Coffee Berry Borer (Hypothenemus hampei)
and Coffee Production in East Africa. PLOS ONE,
6 (9) 1-14.
Jonsson M, Raphael IA, Ekbom B, Kyamanywa S, and
Karungi J (2015). Contrasting effects of shade
level and altitude on two important coffee
pests. Journal of Pest Science, 88(2), 281-287.
Johnson, MD, Kellermann JL and Stercho AM (2010). Pest
reduction services by birds in shade and sun
coffee in Jamaica. Animal Conservation, 13(2),
140-147.
Karp DS and Daily GC (2014). Cascading effects of
insectivorous birds and bats in tropical coffee
plantations. Ecology, 95(4), 1065-1074.
Karp DS, Mendenhall CD, Sandí RF, Chaumont N, Ehrlich
PR, Hadly EA and Daily GC (2013). Forest
bolsters bird abundance, pest control, and coffee
yield. Ecology Letters, 16(11), pp.1339-1347.
Kifle B, Demelash T, Gabisa G (2015). Screening of some
Coffee arabica Genotypes against Coffee Wilt
Diseases (Gibberella xylarioides Heim and
Saccus) at Jimma, Southwest Ethiopia.
International Journal of Sustainable Agricultural
Research 2: 66-76.
Killeen JT, Harper G (2016). Coffee in the 21st century.
Will Climate Change and Increased Demand Lead
to New Deforestation?
Kucel P, and Orozco-Hoyos J (1998). Biological studies of
the coffee berry borer (Hypothenemus hampei
Ferr.) and its natural enemies, and development
of a biological control program in Uganda.
Centenary Conference, October 1998, Entebbe-
Uganda.
Le Pelley RH (1968). Pests of coffee. Pests of coffee.
Masaba DM, Mugo HM and King’ori PN (1985). Insect and
disease problems in Kenya coffee: current status
and future management. Paper presented in
Workshop on coffee entomology and pathology,
Douala, Cameroun: 3-8.
Mendesil E, Jembere B and Seyoum E (2004). Population
dynamics and distribution of the coffee berry
borer, Hypothenemus hampei (Ferrari)
(Coleoptera: Scolytidae) on Coffea arabica L. in
southwestern Ethiopia. SINET: Ethiopian Journal
of Science, 27(2), 127-134.
Merdassa Ejetta (1985). A review of coffee diseases and
their control in Ethiopia. In: Proceedings of the first
Ethiopian crop protection symposium, PP. 179-
195. Tsedeke Abate, ed.). 4-7 February 1985.
IAR, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Mitchell HW (1985). Cultivation and Harvesting of the
Arabica Coffee TREE. In: Clarke, R.J. and
Macrae, R., Eds., Coffee Agronomy, Vol. 4, 43-90
pp. Booker Agriculture International Limited,

8. Review on Integrated Pest Management of Coffee Berry Disease and Coffee Berry Borer
Dadi and Damtew 1008
Westport Publishing Company, London, Thame,
Oxon., UK), 163-178 pp. IAR, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
Mohammed A, Jambo A (2015) Importance and
Characterization of Coffee Berry Disease
(Colletotrichum kahawae) in Borena and Guji
Zones, Southern Ethiopia. J Plant Pathol Microb
6: 302. doi:10.4172/2157-7471.1000302
Murphy ST and Moore D (1990). Biological Control of
Coffee Berry Borer, Hypothenemus hampei
(Ferrari) (Coleoptera: Scolytidae): Previous
Programmes and Possibilities for the Future.
Biocontrol News and Information, 11, 107-117
Patricia F (2011). The Coffee Exporters Guide. 3rd Edn.
International Trade Center, Geneva, pages, 247.
Roobakkumar A, Samuel SD, Balakrishnan MM and
Sreedharan K (2014). Release and Establishment
of the Parasitoid Cephalonomia stephanoderis
Betrem Against the Coffee Berry Borer
Hypothenemus hampei Ferrari in Pulney Hills,
Tamil Nadu, India. Entomological News, 124(3),
221-223.
Senbeta WF (2008) Biodiversity and Ecology of
Afromontane Rainforests with wild Coffee arabica
L. Populations in Ethiopia. Ph.D. Dissertation,
Ecology and Development Series No. 38, Cuviller
Verlag, Gottinge, 144 p.
Trible W and Carroll RON (2014). Manipulating tropical fire
ants to reduce the coffee berry borer. Ecological
Entomology, 39(5), 603-609.
Waterhouse DF and Norries KR (1989). Biological Control
Pacific Prospects. Supplement 1. Hypothenemus
hampei (Ferrari). Australian Centre for
International Agricultural Research, Canberra, 57-
75.
Woldemariam T, Denich M, Gatzweler F, Balcha G and
Tekatay D (2008). In Situ Conservation of Genetic
Resources of Wild Arabica Coffee in Montane
Rain Forest Ethiopia. In: Adugna, G., Shimber,
B.B.T., Taye, E. and Kufa, T., Eds., Coffee
Diverslly & Know Ledge, EIRO, Addis Ababa, 29-
343.
Accepted 18 November 2020
Citation: Dadi T.L and Damtew A (2021). Review on
Integrated Pest Management of Coffee Berry Disease and
Coffee Berry Borer. International Journal of Plant Breeding
and Crop Science, 8(1): 1001-1008.
Copyright: © 2021: Dadi and Damtew. This is an open-
access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original author and source are cited.