GUIDANCE H:
Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
Document SA-G-SD-9
Version 1.1
EnglishPublished on July 1st, 2022

© 2022 Rainforest Alliance. All rights reserved.

The Rainforest Alliance is creating a more sustainable world by using social and market forces
to protect nature and improve the lives of farmers and forest communities.
Name of the document

Date of firstpublication

Expires by

Guidance H: Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

December 31, 2020

Until further notice

Linked to
SA-S-SD-1 Rainforest Alliance 2020 Sustainable Agriculture Standard, Farm Requirements
SA-S-SD-22 Annex Chapter 4: Farming
SA-P-SD-9 Rainforest Alliance Exceptional Use Policy: Granted exceptions and their conditions for using
Rainforest Alliance Prohibited Pesticides

Replaces
SA-G-SD-9 Guidance H: Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Version 1

Applicable to
Farm Certificate Holders
Guidance documents are non-binding. Guidance documents provide information to help readers
understand, interpret, and implement the standard requirements, however, following the guidance in thisdocument is not mandatory.
More information
For more information about the Rainforest Alliance, visit www.rainforest-alliance.org, contact info@ra.org or
contact the Rainforest Alliance Amsterdam Office, De Ruijterkade 6, 1013AA Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Translation Disclaimer
For any question related to the precise meaning of the information contained in the translation, please referto the official English version for clarification. Any discrepancies or differences in meaning due to translation
are not binding and have no effect for auditing or certification purposes.
Any use of this content including reproduction, modification, distribution, or republication, without the prior writtenconsent of Rainforest Alliance is strictly prohibited.

2
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

OVERVIEW OF KEY CHANGES
Section3
5.4

ChangeAddition: Chapter on Integrated Weed Management
Addition: Paragraph on Integrated Weed Management for Tea

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1

Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Why Integrated Pest Management? ................................................................................. 4

IPM requirements in the standard ............................................................................................... 6
2.1

Implementation of the requirements ................................................................................. 6

2.2

Example Questions For Developing A Good IPM Strategy .............................................. 8

Integrated weed management ................................................................................................ 20
3.1

What is a weed? ................................................................................................................. 20

3.2

What happens if herbicides are applied as first control methods for weeds? ........... 21

3.3

What is Integrated Weed Management (IWM)? ............................................................ 22

3.4

An example of a good Integrated Weed Management strategy .............................. 25

Coffee specific guidance .......................................................................................................... 27
4.1

Common coffee pests ....................................................................................................... 29

4.2

Common coffee diseases ................................................................................................. 40

Tea specific guidance ................................................................................................................ 48
5.1

Common Tea Pests ............................................................................................................. 50

5.2

Common Tea Diseases ....................................................................................................... 59

5.3

Additional information on Root Diseases ......................................................................... 65

5.4

Integrated Weed Management-Tea ............................................................................... 65

Cocoa specific guidance .......................................................................................................... 70
6.1

Common Cocoa Pests ....................................................................................................... 72

6.2

Common Cocoa Diseases ................................................................................................ 84

Banana specific guidance......................................................................................................... 92
7.1

Common banana pests ..................................................................................................... 94

7.2

Common diseases in banana ......................................................................................... 107

7.3

Natural enemies of banana (Musa AAA) pests and diseases. .................................. 119

8

IPM resources ............................................................................................................................. 133

9

Examples of natural enemies ................................................................................................... 134
9.1

Other natural enemies ..................................................................................................... 140

3SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Objective
This guidance aims to provide background knowledge on Integrated Pest Management tohelp farmers understand and implement the requirements of the standard for successful andsustainable farming.

Scope
This guidance focuses on section 4.5 INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT (IPM) of the standard. It
looks particularly at the major processes affecting occurrence of pests and the different
control methods available for their management in a sustainable farming system. In thisguidance the term PEST refers to arthropods, rodents, diseases and weeds. Sometimes
interventions are specific to particular types of pests.

Audience
This guidance shall serve technical staff who are preparing farmer groups (or plantation
owners) for certification to help them understand the importance of the requirements in thestandard and how they can best be implemented in their particular circumstances. The
document shall also be a guidance for internal inspectors/ auditors who check oncompliance with the requirements, to be better able to assess the situation found on the
ground as well as the suitability of farmers’ management practices in the given
agroecological environment.

1 INTRODUCTION
This IPM guidance does not intend to cover all possible pests or crops. The intention is topresent the most common pests that affect key crops certified by the Rainforest Alliance indifferent regions worldwide.
For the relevant binding definitions please see Annex S1, Glossary.

1.1 Why Integrated Pest Management?
Indiscriminate use of pesticides in agriculture is associated with negative environmental andhuman health effects, as well as biodiversity loss, particularly in the global South.
The arrival of synthetic pesticides made it possible to grow large amounts of food but also led
to the simplification of ecosystems, making them less resilient and more reliant on external
inputs like pesticides and synthetic fertilizers. The reduction of pesticide use in agriculture isurgent, not only to avoid side effects on humans and the environment but also to avoid pest
resistance problems and the creation of new pests.
Pesticides are frequently applied by force of habit or in situations of uncertainty, whether or
not pests occur and independently of their actual need. This can create a vicious cycle ofan unbalanced ecosystem leading over time to pest resistance and resurgence, andsecondary pest outbreaks. This in turn can lead to the need to use ever more aggressive
methods to manage the problems.

4
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Figure 1. Flowering strips to enhance natural pest control. Photos: Jack Kelly Clark and Rachael Long. Photo source:
UC Statewide IPM program Regents, University of California.

The implementation of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) programs is key to effectively
reduce the use of pesticides. Good IPM implementation is an investment in the future ofsustainable farming.
A solid IPM program requires a shift in the mindset on agronomic practices and continuous
improvement of the farm system, which for some crops means gradual change and forothers a more systemic change to managing pests and diseases or the entire
agroecosystem.
What happens if pesticides are applied as first option to control pests, diseases and weeds?
If pesticides are used as the first option to control pests, or as a preventive measure, theirnatural enemies will also be killed leading to even greater pest problems like pest resistance.
It can also lead to an increase of new pests because other natural enemies have been
killed. However, the root of the problem is still there because the factors in the farms thatmake it possible for those pests to appear are still there. These include unhealthy soil, cropsthat are not properly nourished or are susceptible to pests and diseases, weather that is
conducive to the pest, or that there is not enough biodiversity in the farm. The correctintervention would be to prevent the pest from appearing in the farm from the start.
What are the advantages of using IPM?
•

Biodiversity is conserved and the risk of human and environmental contamination is
reduced. The conservation of biodiversity is key to prevent pest problems.

•

Crop losses and pest management costs are reduced, because pest control
measures, and the use of inputs are optimized.

•

Unnecessary pesticide use is avoided.

•

Development of pest resistance to pesticides is reduced.

•

Crop production is more stable over time and productivity is enhanced.

5
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

2 IPM REQUIREMENTS IN THE STANDARD
Overview
In the Integrated Pest Management section of the standard (4.5), there are four corerequirements, two mandatory improvement requirements and one smart meterrequirement1.

2.1 Implementation of the requirements
2.1.1

Core Requirement 4.5.1

Objective
Establishment of an IPM strategy that reduces yield losses by pests, reduces or optimizes theuse of pesticides and increases profitability.

How to implement

An IPM strategy is not an
To implement Integrated Pest Management at
eradication strategy, but a strategy
farm level it is helpful to develop an IPM strategy.
to manage pest populations in the
An IPM strategy is developed for a specificlong-term to minimize infestations
context and takes into account environmental
and their economic impact.
and economic aspects of a specific region
and/or farm. It is therefore based on the reality of the farm operations, and practices in thefield. An IPM strategy should always aim to prevent pest incidences in the first place andprioritize the growth of a healthy crop, conserve/enhance natural enemies, monitor the crop
regularly, minimize the use of chemicals by -for example not following calendar spraying but,instead basing the use of chemicals on where a need is observed on the farm.
Key elements of the IPM strategy:•••

Pest prevention and suppression
Monitoring of pests to identify their presence and assess if intervention is required(based on thresholds)
Intervention - determine pest control actions like cultural practices, physical andbiological mechanisms, or non-restricted low toxicity pesticides.

Find an example of an IPM strategy for aphids in this link:
http://ipm.ucanr.edu/PMG/PESTNOTES/pn7404.html

1 Core requirement: These are requirements that always have to be met in order to achieve certification. Most core requirements prescribe good practices

with respect to key sustainability risk topics and are formulated as compliance requirements (a binary pass/fail).
Mandatory improvement requirement: Designed to further promote and measure progress. Mandatory improvement requirements need to be included in
the standard compliance as the producer or producer group advances on its journey to sustainability.
Smart meter requirement: Smart Meters aim to give farmers a structured way to incorporate continuous improvement on context-specific data. Smart
Meters do not have predefined targets set by the Rainforest Alliance. Instead, the producers themselves set the targets for these indicators and define theadequate actions to take to realize these improvements. Producers conduct a baseline assessment and define targets for these indicators in year 0 or year
1 (depending on the requirement), plan and implement actions to achieve the targets, and then monitor progress towards the targets. Producers use theindicator data to reflect yearly on the progress, and to adapt the activities in case no or little progress is shown. This provides producers with a feedback
loop so that they can continuously improve their practices

6
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Prevention

IPM
Intervention

Monitoring

1. Pest Prevention and Suppression means preventing the numbers of pests going up.
Preventive measures always take priority in an IPM strategy. Activities include [but are
not limited to]:•Using tolerant or resistant plant material and avoiding plant varieties thatare attractive to important pests•

Preventing the introduction of pests to the farm: keeping healthy plantmaterial, also in nurseries•

Not planting the crop in areas of the farm where pests can build up•

Eliminating alternative hosts of insect pests and diseases (selective weeding)•

Preventing pests spreading between different fields on the farm (cleaning
equipment, clothes, etc. between field visits)•

Preventing pests developing within fields on the farm (crop rotation, proper
irrigation, proper plant spacing, prevent weed reproduction, maintaining
good shade levels)•

Carrying out appropriate fertilization based on soil tests, keeping healthy soil
with appropriate organic matter content•

No tillage (if applicable)•

Preserving and enhancing natural enemies of pests by limiting theapplication of pesticides or by increasing spatial and temporaldiversification, for example by keeping living mulches or preserving patchesof natural vegetation in or around the field which would serve as refuge
and food source for natural enemies of pests.

•

Use of trap cropping and / or pheromone traps•

Crop residue management

2. Pest Monitoring meaning keeping an eye on if, when and how interventions should be
used to control the buil- up of pest populations to prevent economic losses.
Check requirement 4.5.2 for more details
3. Intervention: this is an action to control pest numbers and bring pest populations down.
Also called a control measure
Check requirement 4.5.3 for more details

7
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

2.2 Example Questions For Developing A Good IPM Strategy
Prevention:-

Identify which pest and diseases the planting material is susceptible or tolerant to.

-

What are the most economically important pests in your farm?

-

Identify areas on the farm that are susceptible to pest attack.

-Identify the underlying cause (low soil fertility, incorrect fertilization (not based on soiltest), erosion, waterlogging or drought, unfavourable light conditions, unsuitabletemperature, unsuitable crop variety, monoculture, etc.).

-

Plan preventive measures to change these conditions, adjust fertilization, add organic
matter, adjust microclimatic conditions, and add plant diversity.

-

Identify common pests (insect pests and diseases, weeds) that regularly cause
problems.

-

Identify conditions that are favourable for increased pest incidents (time of the year orcrop cycle, wet or dry conditions, temperature fluctuations, etc.). you should increase
monitoring vigilance when these conditions occur.

-

Always keep patches of natural vegetation (making sure there are no alternative hostsof the pest), preferably that have flowering plants and a good mixture of shrubs andbushes that can serve as refugee and food source of natural enemies.

Monitoring-

Establish monitoring and scouting procedures and schedules for main pests: answer
the following questions: how many trees or plants should be monitored per hectare?
How often?

-

Monitor them on a regular basis (minimum every two weeks) and record their numbers
and infestation levels, as well as the date and location of the sampling.

-

Identify main natural enemies of pest and record their numbers, life stage as well as thedate and location of the sampling-

Keep records of the monitoring results in the context of the underlying conditions (cropstage, crop state, location, climate, prevailing weather conditions, temperature, andday/night temperature fluctuations, etc.)-

Research and know the thresholds of the most important pests in your farm. Define thethreshold level at which the crop can no longer tolerate pest presence and at which
the loss will cause higher economic damage than the cost of the chosen intervention

Intervention
1. Intervene ONLY when the economic thresholds so indicate. First always use nonchemical options:
2. Identify possible control methods for each pest in the following order of preference:
3. Manage the pest using good agricultural practices like soil fertility management,
adequate shade, water management and encouraging natural enemies.
4. Physical and cultural control methods: pruning infested plant parts, can you do generalcrop sanitation? physically killing or collecting insect, hand weeding. Is trapping a
possibility? Are there pheromones and trapping systems for the pest? Can you
physically cover fruits?
5. Biological control (of pests): can you buy commercially available natural enemies andrelease them in your farm? Can you do something to improve biodiversity conservationand create patches where natural enemies can live and feed? The natural enemy

8SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

may not be present in your farm because it lacks its habitat. Providing this home andfood for the natural enemy may incentivize its establishment.
6. “Soft” pesticides or those approved for use in organic agriculture: is the application ofsoapy solutions or garlic extract, chili extract or neem or other plant extracts an option?
7. Spot Application of chemical pesticides which have the lowest possible toxicity
following label instructions. Please note that spot applications of nematodes are
difficult to carry out.
8. Chemical pesticides of the lowest possible toxicity and highest selectivity. Do not apply
chemicals present in the RA list of prohibited pesticides and avoid pesticides in the risk
mitigation list. If the latter not possible, please follow all the risk mitigation measuresindicated.
Use the records to understand pest incident occurrence and underlying courses
better and to continuously improve your IPM strategy. The IPM strategy needs to be
updated annually•

Reduced•Rotation of pesticides to avoid resistance

2.2.1

Core Requirement 4.5.2

Objective
To assess the severity of pest infestations and the presence of natural enemies to inform thedecision on IPM interventions.

How to implement
After pest prevention (see above), the second most important component of an IPM strategy
is monitoring. This includes inspecting fields and scouting 2 for early signs of possible pest or
disease outbreaks or aggressive weeds to prevent further spread. Farmers and advisers should
regularly inspect the farms and crops, especially during times in the crop cycle that are known
to be susceptible or during weather conditions that have been identified to promote pest,disease and weed outbreaks.
It is also very important to monitor for natural enemies of the pests. Where there are natural
enemies, the pests will not be able to reproduce and get out of control. Natural enemies canbe predators, parasitoids or microorganisms like fungi, bacteria and viruses or insects that eat
weeds. It is important to observe if you see 10 insect pests alone or if you see 10 insect pests
together with two natural enemies. Knowing that natural enemies are present is important to
inform your choice of interventions. See Chapter H for examples on natural enemies.
Scouting can be done visually by selecting a certain number of plants or trees and inspecting
them in a randomized fashion making sure to cover all the field so as not to miss pests/natural
enemies that aggregate in certain spots. Monitoring should follow a systematic approach(always use the same scouting pattern and sampling method appropriate for the pest (orspecific life stage)). The recommendation is to develop protocols on how to scout for all pests
and natural enemies and include those in the IPM strategy. Training of farmers and technicalstaff on how to scout for pests is also needed.
Another less accurate way of monitoring insect pests is using sticky traps or traps withpheromones, but their accuracy needs to be checked for particular pest problem.
Monitoring is not enough. It is crucial to also record (write down) what is observed. It is important
to design a template that captures information relevant to the farm’s specific conditions andcircumstances, including the prevalence/infestation level of the pests, diseases and weeds
observed. Always record:
2 Scouting is inspecting a field for the presence of pests (including insects, weeds, and pathogens); monitoring is scouting the field in a regular manner tofind out how the pest populations develop over time

9
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

•

The type of pest and/or natural enemy seen•

The number of pests per tree or plant or their infestation level observed•

The date and time of the sampling and the location where the data was collected orwhere the trap was locatedMake sure to monitor and record, as frequently as possible, to see the progression of theinfestation and to avoid pests getting out of control. Start recording as early as possible in theseason and pay attention to all (potential) pests even if they still only occur in very small
numbers and in specific locations. Accurate and up-to-date records assist in scheduling future
monitoring visits and serve as indicators of when to intervene with control measures.

Recommendation to groups:
Record the pests found in the area 3 and identify them. Gather information about their life
stages, feeding and reproduction cycles. Record the symptoms of their presence on crops.
For diseases, seek advice and information from government Agricultural offices, plant
protection experts or other sources to identify the disease, its cause and possible routes of
disease transmission. Provide this information to all farmers, best with illustrations or as life
specimens. Identify the times and conditions under which these pests usually become invasive
and establish a monitoring or scouting plan accordingly. Enter this information into the IPM
strategy.

Example of a monitoring and reporting schedu le:
In a coffee plantation in Colombia the monitoring plan for coffee berry borer was established.
The person sampling made a zig-zag path through the farm, and randomly sampled 30 trees
per hectare. For each sampled tree, a representative branch in the middle section of the tree
was selected and all developing berries examined for coffee berry borer entry holes 4. Numbersof total berries per branch and numbers of infested berries were recorded. Infestation level iscalculated as the percentage of infested berries out of total berries sampled.
A sample template to record information on pests and natural enemies for coffee can befound on the next page.

3 To determine the percentage of infestation samples (e.g. leaves) have to be taken over the area at random and the incidents ofdamage/infestation/number of pests, etc. counted. Calculation example: 35 out of 100 = 35% infestation.
1

4 Implementing an integrated pest management program for coffee berry borer in a specialty coffee plantation in Colombia; Luis F. Aristizábal, etal; Journal of integrated pest management, volume 3, issue 1, 1 March 2012, pages g1–g5

10
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Name of farm: _______________________ Plot / location of sampling:_______________Name of person collecting data:_______________________
Pest: Coffee berry borer
Date
3rd June2020

10th June
2020

17th June
2020

Tree/
plant
1

Numbers

Notes

30 berries
with holes

2

5 berries
with holes

Starting
penetration
in berry
CBB deep
inside…..
30
1Naturalenemy
Beauveriabassianano

Numbers

Notes

5 berries
with CBB
infested
no

Dead
borer

0

….
30
1
….
30

Pest: Coffee leaf rust
Date
Tree/
plant
3rd June
1
2020

10th June
2020

17th June
2020

2
…..
30
1

Numbers
5 leaves
with X
number ofpustulesNotesNaturalenemy
Trichoderma

Numbers

no

no

Notes

0

….
30
1
….
30

Note: please note that there are sample protocols for each pest. Inform yourself about the correct
way and number of samples before starting the monitoring
Please note pest and natural enemy should be carried out at least every two weeks: Ideally whenconditions/time of the year are conducive for the spread of the pest/disease this should be done
every week.

2.2.2

Core Requirement 4.5.3

Objective
Non-chemical prevention and control methods are used first. Thresholds levels are used todecide when to use chemical control and if used, chemical applications do not harm peopleor the environment.

How to implement it
Since this is a complex requirement, we have divided the explanations in three parts.
Part I: Non-chemical prevention and control methods.

11
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Part II: Threshold levels.
Part III: Preconditions for the application of agrochemicals.
Part I: For pest prevention and control, producers use biological, physical, and other nonchemical control methods first, and document the use and the effectiveness of these methods.
There are many alternatives to choose from when it comes to non-chemical prevention andcontrol interventions. These should be considered before even starting to think about chemical
control (pesticide applications). These include cultural, physical and biological interventions.

Physical control
These are control methods aimed at using physical characteristics of the environment or using
mechanical methods to injure the pests or reduce pest populations. For example, temperature,physical barriers, water applied with pressure, cutting, chopping etc.
There are many different methods of physical control. Some of them are:•

Manipulating micro-climatic conditions, like pruning or using the sun to solarize the soil•

Rain seems to knock off spider mites, therefore a forceful jet of water from a hose canbe used to keep away spider mites and other small insects.

•

Direct removal or destruction of the pests, like hand weeding, destruction of crop
residues, pruning to remove infected parts or immature stages of pests (eggs, larvaeetc), hand picking of large insects•

Traps, such as light, colour or sticky traps, or traps with attractants (pheromones,
kairomones).

•

Use of repellents: substances that disorient insect pests and do not let them find their
host plant easily.

•

Bags - valuable fruits are sometimes covered with individual bags to protect them from
insect attacks. This method is time-consuming and labour-intensive, but can lead togood results•

Polyester row covers/mulches for plant beds to prevent insect egg laying and to
suppress weeds or mesh, net or plastic covers over plants or fruits to keep out insects
and birds.

•

Burning infested trees or parts of the plants that have been attacked badly

Cultural control
Cultural control methods are very similar to methods used during prevention. These aremethods that either avoid promoting environments that are conducive to pests and diseases,or methods that lead to conditions that are detrimental to pests and diseases. Examples
include crop sanitation, pruning of diseased parts of the plants or eradication of entire plants(also a physical method), manipulating planting and harvesting dates to avoid pest
populations etc, or introducing structures that make the agroecosystem a good place fornatural enemies.
Some examples of cultural control are:•Diversified farm or multi-cropping. Growing several crops in the farm can make it more
resilient to attacks by pests•

Keeping a cover crop that can at the same time help improve soil conditions, serve asa refugee or food source for natural enemies and avoid the establishment of
detrimental weeds.

•

Border crops. Planted around the field

12
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

•

Trap crops. These are plants that are more attractive to the pests than the main crop.
Once the pests is in there, it can be killed.

•

Mulches. They are a layer of material applied to the surface of an area of soil. They canbe either made of materials like plastic or nets (for weed control or to exclude pests
and to heat cold soils), or they can be living mulches, like flowering herbs, which help
improve soil condition and increase biodiversity.

•

Efficient harvest that can break pest cycles (avoid re-infestation)

Biological Control
Biological control is the use of natural enemies of pests to manage pest problems. Biologicalcontrol can be highly selective, and there are rarely negative side-effects. Released organisms(microorganisms or natural enemies) may become established on the farm, and if used early
may breed at a rate that keeps pest numbers within acceptable limits.
Some examples of natural enemies include:•

Predators, which are mainly free-living species that consume large numbers of preyduring their lifetime, like praying mantis, ladybug beetles, spiders, wasps, bugs,
dragonflies. Predators are not necessarily only insects. Birds are also very important
predators that control pests, such as caterpillars or beetles.

•

Parasitoids: insects whose larvae develops inside the body, eggs or larvae of anotherinsect, ultimately killing them. Many species of wasps and some flies are parasitoids.
Some of these insect parasitoids are commercially available.

•

Microorganisms or pathogens like fungi, bacteria and viruses. Just as humans get sickfrom microorganisms, so do insects. Examples are Beauveria bassiana and Metarhizium
anisopliae two fungi that can kill pests, such as termites, thrips, beetles and aphids.
Some of these fungi are commercially available, but also may be present naturally inyour farm.

Increasing natural enemies on the farm so they can control pests
The easiest and cheapest option is to promote the natural enemies that live in the farm andare adapted to the local environment. For this, habitats need to be prepared and conserved(flowering strips, hedges, planting aromatic plants). When you conserve the soil, manage
weeds by leaving flowering plants in the plantation, and have it covered by natural vegetation,
it serves as a habitat for the natural enemies. Conserved water sources become habitats forthe predators. Planted native trees become habitats for birds and bats. All these practices
contribute to IPM.
Well-managed conservation areas promote natural enemies that prevent the onset of pest
problems, so that additional interventions such as chemical applications are not needed or
may be reduced.
An alternative is to buy natural enemies the same way you buy pesticides. Many companies
produce and sell natural enemies that can be very effective in controlling pests. But they canalso be costly, and the natural enemies may not be well adapted to the local conditions
because they haven’t lived there.
Caution needs to be always given to the introduction of new insect species not endemic to a
country or region as they might not be able to sustain a population, or the population might
get out of control if their own natural enemies are missing and then become a pest themselves.
If you are artificially releasing natural enemies in your plantation, always do so guided by acompetent professional.
Part II: When threshold levels of pests are reached, producers can use agrochemical
applications, as advised by a competent technician and/or upon the advice or instruction of
an official national organization.

13
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

What are threshold levels?
Eradication or total control of pests is in many cases not necessary (or even desirable) to ensureprofitability. Almost all crops can tolerate a certain amount of pest damage without affecting
yields. The focus should therefore be on determining the relationship between the level ofdamage that a pest causes and crop yield and establishing what are allowable levels ofdamage or pest population densities. In this way, a farmer can know if the costs of controlling
the pest is higher than the damage the pest will eventually cause.
There are two threshold levels:
1. The Economic Injury Level (EIL), which is the point where the value of the crop lost will
be greater than the expense of a control method. If a control method is used on a pest
population level below the EIL, the producer loses money because the intervention
cost more than the amount earned from the crop that was saved. If the farmer waits
until the pest population has increased past the EIL then he or she has lost more cropthan the cost of intervention. In theory, intervening just before the EIL always maximizes
profit. The producer will need to maintain pest populations below the EIL or take someaction before a pest population reaches the EIL and causes economic damage.
2. The Economic Threshold (ET). It is ‘the pest density at which control measures should be
implemented to prevent it from reaching the Economic-injury Level’. This thresholdalways represents a pest density or level of pest damage lower than the EIL (usually 80%of the EIL).
It is important to have a good idea of the threshold levels of the main pests in your focus crops,
and to plan a specific action in case the threshold level is crossed. It is also very important tokeep monitoring the population of natural enemies.
Government and research institutions might also be able to provide guidance regarding
common pests and diseases thresholds in a particular region.
Please see crop specific guidance for cocoa, coffee, tea and banana at the end of thisdocument.
Note of caution:
Threshold levels given in this document are based on literature review and should only be
used as an indication. IPM strategies need to consider contextual parameters and local
experience.
Part III: When agrochemicals are used:•

Agrochemicals with the lowest possible toxicity and highest selectiveness are used•

Applications are made only on the impacted plants and areas•

Active ingredients are rotated to avoid and reduce resistance•

Calendar spraying is avoided, and only allowed when recommended by a competenttechnician or official national organization

2.2.3

Agrochemical use

Many so-called IPM programs are based largely on the use of synthetic pesticides (‘pest killers’i.e., insecticides, fungicides, nematicides, herbicides, rodenticides), but this is not inaccordance with the principle of IPM.
This popular approach to combat pests and diseases first through application of pesticides is
not an IPM program and has created problems like secondary pest problems, resistant pests,
and an increase of new pests because of the natural enemies being killed. Indiscriminate useof pesticides apart from being detrimental to human health and the environment, always
damages the populations of natural enemies that support pest control and leads to vicious
cycles of ever-increasing number of pest infestations.

14
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Chemical control should only be used if cultural, physical and/or biological controls have been
applied, and pests still reach threshold levels.
When using chemical pesticides, the Rainforest Alliance Standard requires that:
1. The pesticide must be registered for use in your country.
2. Priority should be given to pesticides with the lowest possible toxicity. For this, always
follow the label of the pesticide and the MSDS (material safety datasheet). Pesticides
containers have warning labels which indicate the level of toxicity using a color code
(see below5). This is based on World Health Organization (WHO) requirements. The WHO
classifies pesticides by hazard based on their oral and dermal lethal dose (LD50) – i.e.,
how much of the pesticide would kill a person if they absorb it through the mouth or
the skin. Each insecticide is then put into one of four classes:
1a, extremely hazardous
1b, highly hazardous
II, moderately hazardous
III, slightly hazardous
You must ensure that people handling pesticides also read, understand and comply
with the information and instructions provided on a product’s label and MSDS. If an
MSDS is not available in your country, you can contact your local government agency,
pesticide provider or manufacturer to obtain this information. It is your responsibility tomake this information available to everyone involved in handling pesticides in yourgroup or on your farm.

Figure 2. Colour coding indicating the level of toxicity of a pesticide. Source: WHO. 2010. The WHO
recommended classification of pesticides by hazard and guidelines to classification 2019. World HealthOrganization, Geneva [Available at: http://www.who.int/ipcs/publications/pesticides_hazard/en/index.html]

3. Chemical control should be used through spot/patch applications6, this means only
where it is needed (areas with high concentration of pest) and not on the entire plotor farm. If pesticides are applied to areas where pests are not present, they will also kill
the beneficial organisms.
4. Active ingredients are rotated to avoid and reduce resistance. All pesticides have a“mode of action” which refers to the way in which it actively disrupts pest populationsat its target site. If pesticides with the same modes of action are applied continuously
and repetitively, the pests will develop resistance. Meaning at some point they will nolonger be killed by the pesticide. To avoid this, always rotate pesticides with different
modes of action. You can find information on how to rotate modes of action in the
5 http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4854e.pdf
6 Spot applications are not possible in generalized nematode infestations.

15
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

website of IRAC: https://irac-online.org/modes-of-action/. Or you may download theirapplication here: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=irac.moa&hl=en.
This app is an easy-to-use searchable database which allows you to identify insecticide
active ingredients and their respective Mode of Action groups, so you know how torotate them.
5. Synthetic pesticides should not be applied based on a fixed schedule, by crop
phenology or by calendar applications. This is only allowed when recommended by acompetent technician or official national organization.
In addition, always remember that…
•

Every country has its own pesticides regulations. Registered and approved productsvary from country to country. That’s why it is important to check your national legislation.

•

If there is a difference between what is permitted in your country and on the Rainforest
Alliance list, the strictest standard prevails. This means that pesticides allowed andregistered in your country cannot be used if they are included on the List of Prohibited
Pesticides of the Rainforest Alliance and vice versa•

The List of Prohibited Pesticides of the Rainforest Alliance (Annex 7 of the Sustainable
Agriculture Standard 2020) includes the names of active ingredients and not thecommercial name of the pesticide product. This is because pesticides are registeredwith different commercial names in different countries, but the active ingredient has
the same name all over the world.

•

If substances from the Rainforest Alliance Risk Mitigation List (Annex 7of the Sustainable
Agriculture Standard 2020) are used, this is within the implementation of the IPM
Strategy and the respective measures are taken to minimize risks.

2.2.4Core Requirement 4.5.4

Objective
All people involved in farm production understand the concept and principles of IPM and areable to conduct their activities properly.

How to implement
Providing training and knowledge on IPM will help to implement a good program. You willneed to ensure that:•

Producers are aware of the common pests on the farm and what can be done to
reduce their populations and that they know where to find information on pests andcontrol measures•

The person responsible for developing and monitoring the IPM strategy has the required
knowledge and skills•

Training is given regularly, and records or training are kept updated•

The training is of good quality, addresses the real pest problems found on the farm,includes practical examples and is given by a qualified person

Farmer Field Schools (FFS) can be established to support your members. This has been
demonstrated to be an effective way to adopt IPM. Demonstration plots are helpful to show
successful experiences in regard to pest control.

2.2.5

Mandatory Improvement 4.5.5 (L1)

Objective
Small farms implement the IPM strategy as developed by the group management and pestlevels are kept under control.

16SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

How to implement
The following to-do list shows a set of information to collect at farm level to identify if the IPM
strategy is implemented and working:
To do list

Yes/NoPending. Why?

Preventing the problem of pests
All the prevention components that apply to the farm are
implemented
Soil is in healthy condition
Plant material is tolerant to the pests on the farm and it is ina healthy condition
Producers carry out all good agricultural practices that arerecommended for the crop
The farm is diverse and has patches of natural vegetation,flowering gardens, riparian areas etc that serve as refugee
and food source for natural enemies

Identify the problem or pest and its natural enemies
Producers have a very clear understanding about themain pests of the crop, the damage they cause and theircycles and development stages
Producers have a good knowledge of the main natural
enemies of the main pests present on the farm and know
how to take care of them and promote them

Determine the severity of the problem
Producers know the threshold levels of the main pests ofthe crop. They know how much damage is tolerable andwhen to take action
Producers monitor and record (minimum every two weeks),numbers of pests and natural enemies per location andknow exactly when they should implement control
measures

Assess the management options (do nothing, physical, cultural, biological, chemical
control?)
Producers have a clear idea of what kind of non-chemicalmeasures they can implement in the farm and where. They
know what kind of cultural and physical control measure
will work
Producers know what the advantages, disadvantages andcosts are of using each method
Producers know if using traps is possible

Measure the success of options employed. Record the results
Producers have recorded the results of using non-chemical
methods and know if they are successful or not
Producers have clarity regarding when they should apply apesticide and how to choose the lowest possible toxicity
If producers have to apply a pesticide, they first do spot
applications (not applicable to nematode control)
Producers are familiar with the different modes of action ofpesticides and know how to rotate them

Please remember that…
For the successful implementation of the IPM strategies, group management supports its
members on making sure that the above list of activities has been implemented.

2.2.6

Mandatory Improvement 4.5.6 (L2)

Objective

17
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

To have a farm where biodiversity is conserved and that has enough places where natural
enemies of pests can live, feed and thrive. Natural enemies help keeping pest levels undercontrol.

General Guidance
Large-scale monocultures, and monocultures in general, provide little room and feed forbeneficial organisms. In such an environment, harmful organisms can multiply quickly becauseof the absence of natural enemies.
Diversity of natural enemies is directly related to plant diversity as they depend on a large
variety of wild plants. Many natural enemies depend on flowering plants for provision of nectar
and pollen or need hedges for protection as well as breeding grounds. To have a healthy
environment where natural enemies of the pests can thrive and where prevention is the mostimportant component of pest management, it is crucial that the natural habitats of the farm
are increased and maintained. These include patches of natural vegetation, keeping a cover
crop, keeping patches of native flowering plants, native trees and vegetation around small
ponds and little rivers.
Some examples look like this:

2.2.7

Mandatory Smart Meter 4.5.7

Objective
To track and have accurate data on pesticide use to be able to reduce its use over time.

18
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

How to implement
Producers need to have accurate data and define feasible reduction targets. Groupmanagement is responsible to monitor this data for a representative sample of small farms.
For the first indicator: Active ingredients per ha (a.i. kg/ha, per year or per cropping cycle),
Producers must know which products are being applied and in what quantities. This should beindicated not as commercial name but as active ingredient. The amount should be given ingrams or kilograms of active ingredient per year or per cropping cycle.
To calculate the Active ingredients per ha (a.i. kg/ha, per year or per cropping cycle), of agiven product, producers need the following information:•

Active ingredient in a given product in g or kg (found on the label as percentage)•

Amount of applied product per year or cropping cycle (total)•# hectares where the product is applied

For example, you applied 8 litres of a product in 4 hectares over the year. The label of the
product says it contains 36% active ingredient. Meaning, per each 1 litre or 1 kg of product,
there are 360 grams or ml of active ingredient. Meaning 360 times 8 litres that were applied =2,880 grams (or 2,88 kg) of active ingredient in the 4 hectares per year.
For the second indicator: Active ingredients used that are listed in the Exceptional Use list andRisk mitigation list, Producers must list which pesticides from the Risk Mitigation list (Annex 7 of
the Sustainable Agriculture Standard) or pesticides from the Exceptional Use Policy are used.

19
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

3 INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT
Some general information about Integrated Weed Management can be found here:
Plant Production and Protection Division: What is Integrated Weed Management (fao.org)
A good plan for Weed Management includes:
1. Prevent the establishment of weeds using the following interventions when applicable:•

Know your major weeds. The time of their flowering and seeding•

Field margin management•

Clean seeds•

Use of cover crops•

Mulching (dead or living)•

Allelopathic compounds•

Cover crops•

Timing and depth of cultivation

2. Reduce the impact of weeds on the crops through:•Plant variety choice•Spatial arrangement of crop•

Mechanical or manual weeding•

Intercropping•

Biological control (pests that attack the weed)

3. Reduce seed return by:•

Clean machinery•

Water and fertilizer management•

Weed seed collection and destruction•

Last resort: post emergence and spot application of post-emergence herbicides
Hand weeding

3.1 What is a weed?
Weeds are commonly recognized as the most important biotic factor affecting crop
production, but what is actually a weed?
A weed is a plant that grows in an unwanted place, and that in agriculture competes fornutrients, water and sunlight with the crop grown. Some of them can also release root exudates
toxic to crops; or they can create favorable habitat for the proliferation of other pests(arthropods, mites, pathogens and others), serving as hosts. And last, weeds can interfere with
the normal harvesting process and contamination of produce.
Weeds survive under conditions where other plants would not thrive, and they share somecommon characteristics7:•

They tend to produce lots of seed — sometimes tens of thousands of seeds per plant.
Or have the ability to reproduce vegetatively (without seeds)

7 https://wssa.net/wssa/weed/articles/wssa-what-makes-a-weed/20
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

•

Their seed can sometimes survive for a very long time in the soil, going dormant but
then sprouting just as soon as conditions are right. Simply disturbing the soil is often
enough to trigger new growth.

•

They can establish themselves quickly.

•

They can grow in inhospitable places.

The more of these characteristics a plant has, the more problematic it will be. Weeds may
directly reduce crop yield and quality and increase harvest costs. In general, the most sensitive
phase of a crop is in its early growth stage, when the plant is young, vulnerable, and highly
dependent on nutrients, light, and water/moisture supply. If it competes with weeds at thisstage, the crop may become weak and prone to pest and disease infections. Once the plant
has grown, weed competition for nutrients and water is less of a problem.
However, there is another way of looking at weeds. In the context of ecosystem management,
as Ralph Aldo Emerson once said: “What is a weed? A plant whose virtues have not yet been
discovered”. There are also “good weeds”. These weeds are not aggressive, do not have sucha big reproductive potential (do not produce so many seeds or rhizomes), create a permanent
cover of the soil without competing with the crop, have flowers, and some can fixate nitrogen.
They can have a beneficial role by providing biological diversity, supporting ecosystemservices, and the conservation of the soil.
For example, they can provide refuge and food (nectar and pollen) to pollinators, natural
enemies, and mycorrhizal fungi. They cover bare soil keeping beneficial soil microorganism
communities alive through their root exudates of sugars and proteins. And protect the soil from
erosion.

3.2 What happens if herbicides are applied as first control methods forweeds?
Weeds are often seen as the enemy that has to be eliminated, and often an indicator of failure
as a farmer. Good farmers are usually perceived as those that have only crops on their farms.
That’s why many farmers mis/overuse herbicides in their fields as a first strategy of control.
But this strategy of having crops with absolutely or minimum soil cover is not only uneconomic
but also not desired from the ecological standpoint.
The use of herbicides, particularly broad spectrum, as the first resort is simply wrong andunsustainable. Their application can lead to changes of weed species composition in
cropping areas, to herbicide resistance if herbicides applications are not carried out properly,
to changes in the physical and chemical properties of the soil 8. The consequent unhealthy soil
leads to plant that are not properly nourished (making necessary the application of chemicalfertilizers – implying more costs!) and crops being more susceptible to pests and diseases. A
vicious cycle is created and the plantation enters the “pesticide treadmill”. Meaning more
and more external and costly inputs are needed to keep the system going.
The use of herbicides, if well-applied, offer some advantages to the farmer; however, it isimportant to emphasize the need to use other methods to reduce the dependency on
herbicides and associated problems, e.g., herbicide resistance.
To protect soil fertility (and therefore have a stable and increased crop production),
ecosystem services, and human and environmental health, there is a need to reduce andgradually overcome the dependency on herbicides and other pesticides. The key is to invest
in sustainable agriculture strategies9, like Integrated Weed Management.

8 http://www.fao.org/3/a0884e/a0884e.pdf
9 https://www.pan-europe.info/sites/pan-

europe.info/files/public/resources/reports/Alternative%20methods%20in%20weed%20managment%20to%20glyphos
ate_PAN%20Europe_171026.pdf

21
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

3.3 What is Integrated Weed Management (IWM)?
Integrated weed management is the use of multiple strategies to manage weed populations
in a manner that is economically and environmentally sound. The use of IWM may help toreduce the use of herbicides, thus improving the productivity (cost-benefit ratio). Methods
include cultural, mechanical, chemical, and biological. These methods can be integrated
according to the locally problematic weeds. The application of more than one control
measure will greatly depend on the type of weeds present and their density. It is important toalways keep in mind local geographic and climatic conditions, soil texture and profile,irrigation practices, topography and cost, when choosing the control practices.
As with Integrated Pest Management (see the guidance), it can also be divided into
prevention, monitoring and intervention.
•

Preventive practices to reduce weed germination.

•

Monitoring - observation and identification of weeds throughout the process.

•Intervention - Physical control of weeds (mechanical, thermal), and as last resort spot
applications of herbicides if necessary.

•

Please keep in mind that an IWM strategy is not fixed, but it needs to be adjusted
according to the context-specific requirements and from year to year

Prevention
Prevention is better than cure: it is the most effective method for dealing with weeds.
Step 1: Get to know your weeds
Preventing the establishment of new weeds and existing weeds from producing seed are themost cost-effective methods of weed management
A successful weed management approach should take into consideration the biological andecological characteristics of weeds that are present in the farm and understand how theirpresence can be regulated by agronomic/agricultural practices.
It is crucial to have an idea of the composition of weed species in the farm. The correct
identification of the species is indispensable in evaluating the weed population.
Weeds can be classified in numerous ways. Sometimes they are classified as broadleaves andgrasses. Another common way to categorize weeds is by their lifecycle – annuals, biennials,
and perennials.
We recommend you separate the weeds in your farm in two groups: noxious and good.
Noxious are aggressive highly competitive weeds, and “goods” are the ones that bring
benefits to the farm.
Knowledge of the biology of weeds and losses caused by them is vital for developing
appropriate weed control strategies. Above all to reduce the seed bank of noxious weeds inthe soil.
It is recommended to list the top 3-5 key species and make maps of their location in the farm.
Help with the identification of weeds can be obtained from local advisors, apps or on theinternet. In many countries there are locally available crop specific manuals.
Step 2: Keep noxious weeds at bay
Weeds are naturally dispersed by wind, water, birds and animals. However, human activities
contribute with a much larger proportion of spread compared to natural dispersion. Meaningthat the spread of weeds in the farm can be reduced by proper planning.
When moving equipment or animals from a weed-infested field clean the tools and the feetof animals to stop spread, and pay special attention to seed banks of noxious weeds that canform along fences, farm borders, canals etc.

22
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Another strategy is not to leave patches of bare soil. Noxious weeds will tend to colonize these
empty areas. A strategy is to keep a permanent live cover with good weeds.
Finally, closely monitor new plants in the nursery to prevent introducing weeds as small plants
or seeds that are in the substrate of the plants in the nursery.

Monitoring
Monitoring fields is a key component of an integrated weed management system. It allows
farmers to make decisions about weed control practices that will be most effective in specificfields. Detection of new weeds and those that escaped previous control efforts is an importantcomponent of a weed management plan.
The collection of data on the composition, distribution and number of weed species is usefulin:
The short term it helps to make immediate weed management decisions to avoid crop losses.
The long term because records tell the farmer how effective the weed control practice or
strategy is
Note: we strongly encourage you to set up a monitoring and record system of the weeds inthe farm. Records over a period will show the kind of weeds present and help determine themost effective control strategy.
How to monitor
Walk a chosen plot in the farm and use visual inspection. Record and map infestations (noting
their location), paying particular attention to noxious and perennial weeds.
It is very important to regularly collect data on the following:•

The composition of weed species in the farm (The prior correct identification of thespecies is crucial);•

The general weed cover.

•

The cover of the most abundant weed species

Follow a similar data collection sheet to monitor the weeds in the farm:
Plot number: ________________________________Date:_________________________
Soil surface texture: sandy____ loamy___ clay____ other__________
Weed control method used: IWM______ herbicide only_____ mechanical_______
Stage of growth of most important weeds (list weed species):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Degree of infestation (what percent of total vegetation on the site is weed species)(listweed species)
Total area sampled_____________ This is a key area because__________________
<1% )
1-5%
5-25%
>25%

Where are the weeds located (add sketch of plot)

23
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Intervention
Intervention means that the time to control has come due to the high prevalence of noxious
weeds.
Common methods used for weed control are•

Cultural methods like crop rotation, land preparation, use of cover crops, multicropping,mulching)•

Mechanical methods like hand or mechanical weeding•

Biological methods in the form of introduction of exotic natural enemies and increasing
the population of already existing natural enemies. Although they exist they are rarely
use commercially (and therefore will not be covered in this guide);•

Chemical methods - use of herbicides

Cultural control
Refers to agronomic practices used to maintain field conditions in a way that are notconducive for weeds to become established or reproduce out of control.
Some methods are:-

Mixed cropping: or multi-cropping, inter-cropping, under-sowing or co-cultivationmeans planting two or more plants simultaneously in the same field, so that theproperties of one plant facilitate the growth of the other. Benefits of mixed cropping
include a balanced input and output of nutrients in the soil, suppression of weed
growth, suppression of insects and plant diseases and an increase in overall
productivity. In diversity lies the strength of the farm.

-

Mulching: means covering the soil with plant residues or synthetic mulches. They workby preventing weed seed germination or by suppressing the growth of emerging
seedlings. Mulches cut the supply of water and sunlight to the weeds and regulate thetemperature of the soil (keeping the soil from excessive increases of temperature in hot
climates). Mulches can be straw, plant residues or even synthetic.

-

Appropriate fertilization management in the plantation to allow optimum crop uptake
while starving the weeds can also be part of the cultural control practices-

Living cover: is a type of intercropping or a selection of good weeds in the field thatguarantees the presence of a sort of carpet that will protect the soil, possibly providing
it with nitrogen (e.g. leguminous plants) and that it is so dense that doesn’t allow for
the establishment of noxious weeds. Living cover planted in the inter-row of perennial
crops is highly advisable for reducing weed infestation and avoiding problems of soil
erosion. Living covers in the form of soft weeds has the benefit of reduced costs once
they are established. The cover can be the habitat of natural enemies and pollinatorsthat can benefit production of the crop.

MechanicalThis means the removal of the weeds using physical methods, e.g., the hands or the help of
weeding machines.
The choice of methods depends on several factors like costs of machinery or labour.
On small areas or where sufficient labour is not a constrain, hand-weeding remains a possibility,
particularly in high value crops. Mechanical weeders or tractor devices can be used in bigger
plantations. But please keep in mind that tillage is not recommended as a weed management
option.
Perennial weeds should be cut/uprooted before seed production, preferably during floweringand if cut, as close to the ground as possible.

24
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Chemical
Chemical control refers to the use of herbicides, which are substances used to kill or suppress
the growth of plants (Weed Science Society of America). A wide number of different types ofherbicides have been produced and are used in the field. They can provide a convenient,economical, and effective way to help manage weeds but also have many unintended
negative effects on the environment, soil health and people. Therefore, they should not be
used alone but integrated, only as last resort, with effective nonchemical tactics. This isbecause the perfect herbicide does not exist. No single herbicide can control all weeds thatcan be present in a plantation10.
Please note: before deciding to apply herbicides in the farm, consult the list of prohibited andrisk
mitigation
pesticidesoftheRainforest
Alliance(https://www.rainforestalliance.org/business/resource-item/annex-7-pesticides-management/). And please also
follow all the good pesticide management practices as described in the Standard.

3.4 An example of a good Integrated Weed Management strategy
Take this example for tea:
Weed control is among the main cost factors in tea production and in most tea estates thecommon practice is to eradicate by using chemical herbicides, all plant growth in a tea field,
except the tea bushes and shade trees. With labour shortage getting more acute with eachpassing year, farmers have become heavily dependent on herbicides and see it to be the only
option. The excessive use of herbicides, especially in the last three decades, is affecting thesustainability of the tea sector, particularly because of its effect on the quality of the soil. Thiscan be seen in many ways:
1. Loss of vegetative cover (in and around the estates) and loss of biodiversity.
2. Compaction of soils that increases run-off and thus soil wash, leaching and reduced
ground water recharge.
3. Formation of soil algae on bare soils that, in dry periods, peel off, exposing topsoil thatthen becomes susceptible to erosion by rain and wind. (see the picture on the right)
4. Effects on living organisms in soils (including archaea, bacteria, actinomycetes, fungi,
algae, protozoa, and a wide variety of larger soil fauna such as springtails, mites,
nematodes, earthworms, ants, insects, burrowing rodents….) is devastating.
This problem has contributed greatly to the decline in land productivity, threatening theindustry’s viability.
By eradicating weeds the competition of the weed with the crop is minimized. But it has
become almost standard practice to brand the entire "weed" vegetation in a tea field asnoxious and, as a result, the farmers tend to eradicate all other vegetation other than the crop.
However, do we really need to control all "weeds" in the tea plots? And is weed control
impossible without herbicides? It has been claimed that this would cause the “cost of
production” to increase and profits to dwindle. But effective non-chemical/’low-chemical-use’weed control is certainly possible.
In a tea plantation if one wants to start with an Integrated Weed Management (IWM). theprinciple here is to first categorize weeds into ‘noxious’ and ‘soft & more acceptable’. Then try
to uproot (or spot-spray with herbicides) the noxious ones to reduce their numbers andpromote the proliferation of the softer weeds. The increase of soft weeds will reverse the current
management system which has made the weeds predominantly noxious and requiring
increasing use of herbicides.

10 See page 38 onwards of: https://growiwm.org/wp-

content/uploads/2019/11/IWMguide.pdf?x60544

25
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Once "soft" weeds are carefully managed, they will form a thick ground cover that willcompete out the noxious weeds, minimizing soil erosion and land degradation. The soft weeds
are cut (after seed formation so that they can spread and add to the ground cover) at regulartimes and the cuttings are left as mulch in the field, particularly around the tea bushes. Thisbiomass provides additional soil cover but also nutrients to the tea bushes. By this combinationof practices, we can convert the weed control practice to genuine weed management.
Monitoring:
To find out if there is progress in terms of weed control, it is recommended that in such amanagement system in tea, the following parameters are collected:-

Get baseline data collected on all soil parameters (including microbial, percolation rates,
soil compaction) (if possible). Periodically this will be repeated to see changes.
1. Costs (man-days, materials, inputs),
2. Record the species of weeds at the start and every three months.
3. Record crop and crop patterns, general observation on pest and disease incidence

Advantages of having such system:•

Reduced incidence of noxious weeds → reduced herbicide use and costs•

Soil protected from rain, sun, wind and compaction → less erosion•

Huge increase in Organic Matter at very low cost → increased soil fertility → reduced
application of chemical fertilizer•

Protect/increase soil life - insects, fungi, microbes, etc. → increased soil fertility →reduced application of chemical fertilizer•

More natural enemies (predators, parasites) of pests and more alternate food for somepests → reduced incidence of pests → reduce use of pesticides•

The natural selection of noxious weeds that takes place with repeated herbicides does
not take place → reduce development of herbicide resistance

Besides, certain soft weeds can be used as food or for medicinal purposes. Eliminating theblanket application of herbicides will increase the presence of these weeds.
This IWM method was originally developed in India but became more widespread. This weed
management system was introduced to Sri Lanka, Vietnam and China as well as the Assamand Darjeeling regions of India. In all these countries, but particularly in Sri Lanka and Sulawesi,
smallholder farmers reacted very positively to the method.

26
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

4 COFFEE SPECIFIC GUIDANCE
Disclaimer
This crop specific IPM guidance does not intend to cover all possible pests per crop. The
intention is to present the most common pests /diseases that affect certain crops in several
regions worldwide.
Introduction
It is important to realize that the coffee plant is only one element of the complete coffee
ecosystem. Every part of the ecosystem plays its part and so other elements of this need to beconsidered.
General information
Coffee (arabica and robusta) Recommendations
Choice of adequate site
for the cropGrowing
conditionsforArabica

Growing
conditionsfor
Robusta

Altitudetemperature
RainfallSlope
Altitudetemperature
RainfallSlope
Choice of healthy cropvarieties suitable for thesite
Maintenance of soil healthand fertility

Subtropical and equatorial regions at higher altitudes thatprovide adequate rain fall and moderate temperatures.
Robusta coffee is better suited to higher temperatures than
Arabica. Shade conditions that mimic the original coffee
forest conditions and provide sufficient shade during thehottest time of the day but don’t produce an overly wet
microclimate are ideal for high quality coffee.
Above 1000 meters above the sea level (m.a.s.l.) up to 2500
m.a.s.l. (frost line) depending on latitude
optimum daily temperature: 15° - 25°C.
>1000 to 1500 mm annually evenly distributed over 7 months
per year, with a dry, stress period afterwards to induce a
uniform flowering
Above15%200 m.a.s.l. – 1000 m.a.s.l.
20º to 30ºC
1000 – 3000 mm annually distributed over 9 months per yearwith a well-defined wet coffee growing season and a dry
and warm maturation season.
Minimal slope > 7% slope
Preference should be given to resistant varieties where
possible. Bourbon Pointu/Laurina e.g., is known to be very
susceptible to leaf rust
Weakened plants not only produce a poor crop but are also
more susceptible to pest and disease attack. Ideally soils aretested once per year before flowering and therecommended type and amount of input is applied.
For every 1 ton of green bean removed from the plants,
appr. 40 kg N, 2.2 kg P and 53 kg K must be replaced
annually11. Organic manure applications alongside
inorganic fertilizer applications increase the uptake rate fornutrients. Recommended pH (H20) range: 5.5 - 6.0, if soil
acidity is below this range, application of calcium is
recommended to facilitate uptake of P and other nutrients.
(For more details, please refer to the Soil Guidance
document).

11 Fertilization rates need to be calculated by taking soil type, SOM levels, soil nutrient levels and average loss rates into account. Average loss estimate: N =30-70% (higher at higher temperatures, and if exposed to O2 and H2O), P = 50-100% (higher at low pH and high Al or Fe levels in the soil), K = 30%, Ca = 10%,
Mg, Cu, Fe, Zn, B = 25%

27
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Maintenance of adequate
soil organic matter (SOM)
levels

Maintenance of adequate
microclimatic conditionsin the plantation

Maintenance of adequate
shade levels

Timely and adequate
pruning and desuckering

Adequate SOM of 1 – 3 % is necessary to sustain beneficial
microorganisms’ levels, ensures good drainage (coffee issensitive to water logging), as well as adequate water
retention levels. To increase and maintain adequate SOM
levels frequent additions of animal or compost manure arenecessary as well as mulching or the use of cover crops withsuitable materials (e.g., leguminous crops or even a weed
like Paspalum conjugatum)
Creating a microclimate in the plantation that is favorable
for the coffee variety grown and unfavorable for pests anddiseases can be a critical prevention factor or at least
reduce the severity of an outbreak. This is especially
important during unusually dry and hot seasons, which may
more frequently occur due to climate change in someareas. This can be achieved with adequate shade levels,
but also through soil covers in form of mulch or cover crops(mixed cropping). Mulch is kept away from the base of theplant to reduce the risk of disease. Mulch is re-applied at theend of each rainy season. Beneficial insects, such as bees
and natural enemies, can be attracted to the area by
allowing patches of indigenous flowering plants to grow inthe plantation, creating a more diverse and resilient
ecosystem as a habitat for them to proliferate.
For the same reason, selective weeding is encouraged.
Selective weeding means eliminating the most invasive
weeds, keeping low & slow growing weeds if possible
Leguminosae with small roots, which in the end will look likea green carpet on the farm and will conserve soil moisture
as well as prevent other weeds to grow, reducing the needfor herbicides.
Shade levels of 15% - 50% are recommended, depending on
the life zone. Shade protects young coffee plants fromdrought stress and over exposure to sun, which causes
yellowing and death of leaves, tree overbearing and/or
dieback in older trees. Too much shade however can
reduce flowering and create a too humid microclimate as
which can increase fungal diseases. Therefore, the shadelevel needs to be managed closely according to the local
climatic conditions as well as pest and disease pressure.
Leguminous shade like Erythrina subumbrans, Gliricidia
sepium, Cassia siamea, or Albizia polycephala, Albizia
coriaria can also contribute to soil fertility.12 Suggested
spacing for smaller, deciduous trees like Erythrina, Gliricidia,
and Cassia is 5 x 5 m (400 trees/ha), while that of larger
timber trees a is 10 x 10m or more depending on canopy size
(max. 100 trees/ha) planted within the coffee rows. Lower
branches need to be regularly removed.
Diseased plant material must not remain in the plantation as
it provides feeding and breeding ground for pests anddiseases. Injuries caused by inadequate pruning or broken
are vulnerable to fungal infections.

The free mobile app” HabitApp” helps to give an instant reading of coffee shade cover. It
can be downloaded through the following link: HabitApp - Apps on Google Play

12 Availability and suitability of tree species need to be checked with competent local technicians or research centers.

28
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

4.1 Common coffee pests
Key:
Pest type

Life stages of the pest that cause damage
life stages of the pest that do NOT cause damage

Egg

Duration (depends on species and environmental
conditions)< weekLarva

2 - 3 weeks

inside the seed/berry/beanPupa

4 - 9 days

inside the feeding chamber

Adult

Few days up to 5 months

moving around to find seeds/berries/beans

Stage

Grain/bean borers
and Weevils(General Info)

Coffee berry borer (Hypothenemus hampei)

Habitatinserted into the seed/berries/beans

CBB grubs inside the berry
Berries damaged by CBBi

29
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Coffee berry borer (CBB) (Hypothenemus hampei)• Most serious pest of coffee. Tiny (1.5 to 2.5 mm long), cylindrical black brown beetle. Females emerge from infested berries left on the trees
and on the ground and bore tunnels and chambers into berries of around 90-100 days old to lay eggs. After hatching, larvae (grubs) feed
inside the beans, rendering them unsuitable. Pupation and adult development take place in the berry. There are 10 females per every male.
• Symptoms: One or more small round holes near the apex of the berries with brown frass over the holes. Berries show a distinct blue-green
staining. When cut open the seed reveals the female or eggs, grubs, pupae and new young adults.
• Damage: Crop losses from 50-100% of berries attacked if no control measures are applied. If consignment is not dried properly CBB willcontinue breeding in the stored crop.Coffee berry borer damage also encourages secondary fungal infection.
• Favored by a too low altitude (high temperatures), abandoned/infested plantations nearby, as well as over-ripe berries left on the tree orground.
• CBB survives between cropping periods in old dry berries remaining on the tree and ground.
• Prevention: Reduce shade if microclimate is too wet. Prune properly and timely. Heavy shade and/or inadequately pruned coffee cause
unfavorable conditions for the natural enemies of the berry borer.
• Behavioral control: Starting 8 weeks after flowering use red multi-funnel traps baited with a 1 : 1 mixture of ethanol and methanol at 0.5 doses
or commercial BROCAP traps13 to attract mobile females before they bore into berries.
• Mechanical control: Sanitation. Remove infested berries.
• Harvest and collect all coffee berries on trees as well as dropped berries on the ground; Pick berries fortnightly in infested areas.
• Biological control: Parasitoids like Cephalonomia stephanoderis, C. hyalinipennis, Prorops nasuta or Phymastichus coffea; fungus Beauveria
bassiana using a dose of 1010 to1012 spores per coffee tree (especially effective in humid conditions).
• Chemical control: Neem products sprayed during early berry development may be applied to repel female borers. Once the female has
penetrated the berry chemical control is not effective.
• Also Millettia pinnata on its own and as a combination with Neem works well for managing pests• Threshold level: Sample monthly from eight weeks after flowering until harvest (>32 weeks). Randomly select 30 trees for every 5000. Select a
branch in the middle of a tree, containing 30-100 green berries and examine all for coffee berry borer holes. Calculate percentage infestation(100/(total green berries/infested berries) = % infestation). Another sampling method is using the Brocap trap
• Start intervention (like crop sanitation) when infestation rate is > 2-5%.

13 https://www.cirad.fr/en/innovation-expertise/products-and-services/brocap-r near processing and coffee washing areas.

30
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Eggs

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)
7 daysNymph

3 weeks

Before morphing into adults nymphs hide in the ground without feeding

Adult< 30 days

Underside of leaves

Stage

Thrips(General Info)

Habitat
Inserted into plant tissue

Coffee thrips (Diarthrothrips coffeae)
Minute (1.5mm) slender insects scratching and sucking on leaf tissue, during heavy infestation also berries. Nymphs
spend the last stage before maturing inside the ground around the tree.

Coffee thrips (Diarthrothrips
coffeae) on the underside of a
leaf

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: Affected leaves show yellow-white patches. Leaves might shrivel and die.
Damage: Heavy infestation, cause death of leaves or total leaf drop.
Favored by drought and high temperatures. repeated use of Carbaryl or other insecticides that kill predatory
mites.
Prevention: Maintain adequate shade tree cover. Mulching reduces thrips considerably especially during the dry
season. Remove infested leaves.
Mechanical control: use of blue sticky traps
Biological control: Predatory mites that breed in areas of natural vegetation are good natural enemies. Also
predatory mites are commercially available. they should be introduced at the beginning of the crop season andreleased several times over the season. Minute Pirate Bug species are also very effective in controlling thrips.
Chemical control: Horticultural oil or oil-soap solution can be sprayed to suffocate the pest.
Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides application,
always consult the list of prohibited and risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020
Standard.
Threshold level: 1-2 per leaf during drought and 2-3 during rains. Release of predatory mites or other control
methods

31
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Egg

Duration (depends on species andenvironmental conditions)
1 - 3 weeks

Larva

3 - 4 weeks

Pupa

1 - 2 weeks

Adult< 1 monthStage

Moths and
Butterflies(General Info)

Coffee leafminer moth Prophantis
smaragdina damage

Coffee Leafminer moth (Leucoptera
coffeella)

HabitatOn the surface or inserted into host plantFeeding on or in tissue of host plant
Hanging from the host plant or rolled up into a leaf. Some pupate in the
soil.
Mobile winged

Coffee Leafminer moth (Leucoptera
coffeella) damage

Coffee leafminer cocoon

Coffee leafminer (Leucoptera spp.) Coffee leafminer moth (Prophantis smaragdina)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: The mines of Leucoptera meyricki caterpillars are initially separated eventually form one large mine. The caterpillars of L. coffeellaproduce one communal mine, which appears as irregular brown blotches on the upper side of leaves.
Damage: The mining activity causes a reduction of the active leaf surface, reducing assimilation. Attacked leaves are usually shedprematurely.
Favored by hotter and drier weather.
Prevention: Intercropping with Artemisia sp drastically reduces the incidence of coffee leafminer. First infested leaves can be removed anddestroyed manually. Provide sufficient room for beneficial insect populations in form of indigenous flowering plants and thick mulch layers.
Biological control: Parasitic wasps, which occur naturally in the field, control larvae. Predacious mites feed on leafminer eggs.
Entomopathogenic fungi can also control the pest.
Chemical control: Chemical control is difficult as the damage causing caterpillars are protected inside the leaves, instead it will only damage
beneficial insect populations. It is therefore not recommended.
Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides application, always consult the list ofprohibited and risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: If the tree is shaken vigorously and more than 35 moths are seen, the yield of coffee can be affected.
A density of 4 mines per leaf causes leaf-drop and may cause yield loss of 50%.

32
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

StageNematodes(General Info)

Duration (depends on species andenvironmental conditions)

HabitatSeveral weeks

In the soil near roots, or inside the roots' cortex, usually host specific

Cyst
Egg
Juvenile
Adult

Root-knot nematode damage on coffee
root system

Root-not nematodes (Meloidogyne spp., Pratylenchus coffeae, Radopholus similis, Rotylenchus spp.)
Attacks the roots, disrupting root function.
• Symptoms: Stunted, poorly growing plants with yellowing, droopy leaves. Infected root systems show
characteristic knots.
• Damage: Reduces the ability of the coffee tree to absorb water and nutrient, causing a decline in thegeneral health and vigor of the tree also impacting yield and bean quality.
• Yield may be reduced by 20-25%. Plants can eventually succumb to nematode infestation.
• May cause secondary fungi infections, such as Rhizoctonia solani.
• Caused by transport of diseased plant materials between farms, or by downstream water.
• Prevention: Ensure the use of nematode-free plant material or resistant or tolerant rootstocks. Soil used in
the nursery for seedlings can be heat, treated with calcium or ashes, or mixed with Entomopatjogenic fungi
like Beauveria bassiana, Metarhizium anisopliae or Paecilomyces sp sterilized prior to planting.
• Mixed cropping with groundnut or maize, which are both poor or non-hosts to M. incognita, have beenused to manage this nematode.
• Adequate soil fertility and organic matter may assist the trees to partially overcome the effects ofnematode attack and thereby help to minimize impact on yield.
• Chemical control: is extremely expensive and not economically effective if larger areas have to betreated. Best treatment is during nursery. Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort.
Before carrying out insecticides application, always consult the list of prohibited and risk mitigation
insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
• Threshold level: ranges from 100 to 5000 nematodes per kg of• soil depending on the nematode genera, and needs to be determined by a soil test.

33
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

StageScales(General Info)

Habitat

Eggs

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)< 1 monthNymph< 2 months

Adult♀ dies after laying eggs

Mobile crawlers
Immobile ♀ along midrib of leaves, twigs, branches, stems. ♂ mobile withwings.

Soft green scale (Coccus viridis) along leaf veins

Protected under the female scale

Soft green scale on green berries

Soft green scale adults and nymphs on young stem and bud

Soft green scale (Coccus viridis) Common, depending on location, minor to serious pest. More serious on transplanted seedlings during the first 2
years. Immobile and usually found settled at underside of leaf, close to central vein or near tips of green shoots. Flat and oval scales (about 3 x 2 mm).
They are often tended and spread by ants. Their exuded honeydew encourages the development of sooty black mould.
•
•
•
•
•

•
•

Damage: sucking will lead to decreased yield and low quality coffee beans. Excessive feeding causes wilt and can result in the death of thetree.
Favoured by low humidity and long, hot dry seasons and too little shade.
Prevention: Only use scale-free seedlings for planting. Improve shade to create a more humid microclimate. Control ants e.g. by placing
sticky bands around the stems. Absence of ants encourages control by naturally occurring enemies. Planting pumpkins as a cover crop
encourages beneficial insect populations. Avoid alternate hosts of the scale.
Biological control: predators (Chilocorus melanophthalmus, Chilocorus nigrita), Azya luteipes, Chilocorus cacti); parasitic wasps(Coccophagus cowperi, Diversinervus stramineus, Metaphycus stanleyi, Metaphycus baruensis); parasitic fungus (Verticillium lecanii),
particularly effective in the rainy season.
Chemical control: Weekly spray applications until scales disappear of either Neem products, horticultural oil (200ml/20l water (or homemadeoil-soap solution). Chili extract mixed with soapy water. Indian soapnut tree (Sapindus Mukorossi)aka Indian Soapberry) these nuts soaked for
48 hours produce soap that also has insecticidal properties. This combined with Neem/Pongamia pinatta works well against scale insects& mealy bugs.
Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides application, always consult the list ofprohibited and risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: >10 leaves infested with 1+ scales

34
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

StageBugs (General Info)

Eggs

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)5 - 26 days

Nymph

10 - 30 days

Inserted into plant tissue of a host plant

Young nymphs often aggregate
Mobile, often host specific but also hide in crevices of bark,
Adult
Variedstructures, etc.
Coffee lace bug (Habrochila placida) Sporadically severe pest.
••••

Coffee lace bug (Habrochila placida)

Habitat••••Symptoms: Infestation often starts on the lower leaves of a small group of coffee trees. Small winged bug (4mm long). Both adults and nymphs suck on the leaves. Nymphs always feed in groups on the underside ofthe leaf.
Damage: Their feeding causes yellow patches on the leaves. The underside of affected leaves is covered
with black spots from their excretes. Severe attack causes leaves to turn yellow and drop-off.
Favored by hot dry weather and injudicious use of pesticides.
Prevention: Avoid use of broad-spectrum pesticides to protect natural enemies. Maintain soil fertility by
regular manure additions and fertilization as needed.
Biological control: Predatory mirid bug, (Stethoconus sp.), parasitic wasps, predatory assassin bugs,
lacewing larvae, lady beetles, jumping spiders, pirate bugs, and predatory mites.
Chemical control: Insecticidal soap, Horticultural Oil, Neem oil, and pyrethrin products.
Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides
applications, always consult the list of prohibited and risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest
Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: For early detection sample bushes at random, beating the bush and collecting thedislodged lace bugs on a white sheet of nylon. Alternatively green sticky plates can be used formonitoring. Intervention is recommended at 2 lace bugs per trap/day.

35
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Antestia bugs (Antestiopsis spp) is a major pest of Arabica coffee in East Africa.
••
Antestia bugs (Antestiopsis spp)

•
•
•
•
•

Damage: Adults and nymphs feed on beans causing rot through infection Nematospora coryli fungus. Also
attacks flower buds which turn black and fail to set fruit. Attacked branches grow side shoots (fanbranching). Dried beans show "Zebra" beans produce poor quality coffee (potato taste) and are possible
avenues for fungal infection.
Favored by dense foliage. Another important role might be played by alternative host plants, especiallyuncontrolled herbaceous weeds near the coffee trees.14
Prevention: regular and timely pruning and desuckering.
Biological control: Naturally occurring parasitic wasps attack antestia eggs. Attacked eggs are black while
normal eggs are white.
Chemical control: Spraying with Neem extracts.
Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides
application, always consult the list of prohibited and risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest
Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: > 2 bugs / tree

14 For an extensive list of possible alternative host plants refer to Régis Babin et al, “The Antestia Bug Complex in Africa and Asia”, in: “Invasive Stink Bugs and Related Species[…]”, Chapter: 10, Publisher: CRC Press, pages 465-494

36
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

StageStemborer beetles(General Info)

Habitat

Egg

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)
2 weeksLarva

0.5 - 3 years

Inside woody parts of the host plantPupa≅ 4 weeks

Inside the host plantAdult< 4 months

Mobile, winged beetle in search of host plant and mating partner

Inserted into the host plant

White Stemborer (Xylotrechus quadripes)
adultWhite Stemborer larva
White Coffee Stemborer (Monochamus
leuconotus / syn. Anthores leuconotus)

White Stemborer damage on bark

White Stemborer (Xylotrechus quadripes)and White Coffee Stemborer (Monochamus/ syn. Anthores leuconotus)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: Frass (sawdust-like) on the ground, missing bark. =Damage: Leaves wilt and branches or entire trees die.
Favored by insufficient shade, low altitude and weak seedlings. Coffee trees cultivated on shallow or eroded soils or near shade trees are
more likely to be attacked. Younger trees are also more prone to damage.
Prevention: Plant at adequate altitude (> 800m). Do not plant seedlings with twisted/deformed taproots. Ensure good soil fertility to keep trees
strong. Remove and burn infested trees or branches.
Biological control: None commercially available yet. Natural enemies include woodpeckers and ants. Larvae get attacked by the parasitoid
Aprostocetus ssp. and the fungus Beauvaria bassiana. Smearing cooking oils or animal fats on the holes made by larvae of the coffee stem
borer attracts ants to feed on oils and fats and eventually enter and kill stem borer larvae in the tunnels.
Chemical control: as the feeding are hidden inside the stem they are impossible to control chemically. Timely removal of early infestation isthe best control method.
Threshold level: Farmers should be alert with the first sighting of stemborers. At a level of 2 to 3 stemborers / tree interventions are necessary.

37
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

StageMealy Bugs
(General Info)

Eggs

Duration (depends on species andenvironmental conditions)
1 weekNymph

1 - 2 months

Adult

•
•
•
•
•
•

Mealybugs (Planococcus kenyae)
affecting coffee berries

In a sticky sac on axils of stems or leaves

Mobile crawlers
Males are mobile with wings. Female are sessile on shoots, leaf axils and midribs
Female dies after laying eggs
or roots.
Mealybugs (Planococcus spp, Dysmicoccus ssp., Coccidella ssp., Ferrisia ssp., Formicoccus ssp., Nipaecoccus ssp.,
Rhizoecus ssp., Puto ssp., Neochavesia ssp., etc).
Common pest, often tended by ants.
•

Mealybugs (Planococcus spp)

Habitat•Damage: Infected plants shed their leaves. Heavy infestation can cause plant death. Secondary infection
with Sooty black mold is common. Negatively impacts coffee aroma (off-flavors, acidity) and quality.
Favored by warm weather and drought or high humidity and cold. Often found in areas with high insecticide(especially organo-phosphate) usage, as natural enemies have been eradicated. Excessive shade tree
removal causes flare ups.
Prevention: Control ants. Stop ants from climbing up into the tree by placing a sticky band around the trunk.
This will help natural enemies to control smaller mealybug colonies. Maintain adequate shade levels (2530%). Manage a healthy microclimate in the plantation (mulch).
Biological control: Best control is achieved by the predatory Crytolaemus montrouzieri ladybug, whose
nymphs resemble the mealybug. Recommended release rate: 5 beetles/infested Robusta coffee tree, 3
beetles/infested Arabica coffee tree.
In India, the caterpillars of Spalgis epeus, which also resembles a mealybug, is the most common mealybug
predator. Natural enemies include also different species of parasitic wasp and lacewings.
Chemical control: Homemade neem oil-soap solutions can be sprayed to suffocate the pest.
Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides application,
always consult the list of prohibited and risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s
2020 Standard.
Threshold level:Infested trees can be treated individually by spot applications.

38
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Root Mealybug
Dysmicoccus cryptus, Planococcus ssp. )In some cases associated to a soil fungus (Polyporus coffeae) and ants.
•••
Root Mealybug (Planococcus ssp.)

•
•
•

•

Damage: Attacks the roots of coffee, sucking sap from the roots causing wilt like symptoms - yellowing anddrooping of leaves and death of entire trees.
Favored by old, weak or trees stressed by inadequate nutrition or drought. Possible alternative hosts areother stressed plants, and turf grasses.
Prevention: Inspect roots of seedlings before transplanting. Only transplant strong and healthy seedlings
free of pests. Improve soil nutrient status by manure and fertilizer additions. Apply mulch to avoid stress in
the root area and to promote the growth of fungal mealybug pathogens.
Mechanical control: Uproot and burn affected or dead trees.
Biological control: The fungus Beauveria bassiana and the nematode Steinernema carpocapsae are
known to cause high mortality in short time of adult female root mealybugs. They need certain humidity
levels in the soil.
Chemical control: Pyrethrins or pyrethroids may show some sort of efficacy but their applications should be
avoided if possible. Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carrying out
insecticides application, always consult the list of prohibited and risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of
the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: Monitor for ant activity in the stem/root area. Every infested tree needs to be uprooted ortreated.

39
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

4.2 Common coffee diseases
Most coffee diseases are caused by pathogenic fungi and less frequently by bacteria and viruses. Root rot disease, rust, and coffee berry
disease can attack healthy trees without any particular physiological weakness, whereas most of the other diseases of economic importanceonly occur in trees that are physiologically weakened (Fabienne Ribeyre, CIRAD, 2012)

4.2.1

Coffee leaf rust(CLR)

Coffee leaf rust CLR (Hemileia vastatrix)

Defoliation and die-back caused by Coffee leaf rust

Coffee leaf rust CLR (Hemileia vastatrix) fungal disease that attacks mostly older leaves.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: Rust lesions show as yellow – orange spots on the underside of the leaf that coalesce as the disease progresses.
Damage: Can lead to defoliation of the plantation if not controlled. The disease has a weakening effect on the trees over successive seasons.
Severe infestation can cause up to 75% yield losses and reduced coffee quality.
More prevalent in C. arabica plantations grown under humid conditions at lower altitudes (1000m.a.s.l. - 1500 m.a.s.l.).
Favored by humid or wet conditions (e.g. night temperatures > 15C), when leaves remain wet for 3+ hours. Low soil fertility, low pH increases
the damage.
Prevention: Use of resistant varieties (please consult your local agronomic extension officer or research institute to chose the correct one).
Optimize spacing and pruning to improve aeration and avoid humidity remaining on the leaves for prolonged periods, which encourages
fungus growth.
Biological control: Naturally occurring enemies of CLR are parasitic pathogen like Verticillium lecanii and Darluca ssp., Some insects and mites
also feed on the rust spores but none of these are yet commercially exploited.
Chemical control: commonly controlled by fungicides, which are however very expensive. Application before the start and during the early
period of the rainy season. The fungicide has to be reapplied after each rain. Care must be taken to apply the fungicide to the underside ofthe leaves.
Applications of copper have been used in coffee producing countries to control the disease.
Threshold: 1% infected leaves necessitates cultural and hygiene control actions. 20% infected leaves is regarded as severe infection.

40
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

4.2.2 Coffee Wilt Disease (CWD)

Coffee Wilt Disease CWD (Fusarium xylarioides) showing on
the the left

Prematurely ripened berries and blackened branch due to
CWD

Typical blue-black discoloration underneath the bark of astem infected by CWD

Coffee Wilt Disease (CWD), also known as ‘fusarium wilt’,affects arabica and robusta coffee, as well as wild coffee species. It is a vascular wilt disease caused by the fungus Fusarium xylarioides.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: Drooping of the leaves is the first signs of CWD. The leaves are limp, yellow, then dry up and eventually drop off, leaving affected
trees completely leafless. A unique symptom to identify CWD is a blue-black discoloration of the wood directly beneath the bark towards thebase of the stem.
Damage: The ‘dieback’ often starts on one side of the tree but rapidly spreads to the entire tree. Immature beans ripen prematurely, having anegative impact on aroma and bitterness.
Favored by low pH, water logging, injuries to the roots.
Prevention: Plant material must not be obtained from areas with known CWD infections. Only use disease-free seeds and material for cuttings.
Infected trees must be uprooted and burned immediately. Regular inspections aid in early disease detection and help contain a spread ofthe disease. Affected areas should be taken out of coffee production for several years.
Chemical control: unlikely to be effective as the pathogen lives in the soil or inside the plant, making it hard to target even with systemic
fungicides.
Threshold level: Immediate action required if symptoms are observed

41
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

4.2.3Coffee berry disease (CBD)

Coffee berry disease (Colletotrichum kahawae)

Typical lesions and sporulation on green berries affected by CBD

Coffee berry disease (CBD)
which affects only arabica coffee. It is caused by the fungus Colletotrichum kahawae and is endemic to Africa.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: Berries at any stage become black, dry, wrinkled and decayed, with a hard skin. Berries are most resistant during the first monthand when fully mature.
Damage: mummified berries, which can cause considerable yield losses of up to 75% if not adequately controlled.
Favored by humid conditions or high rainfall and temperatures around 22C. Prevalent in areas with bi-modal rainfall patterns. Plantations withregular copper applications are more susceptible to CBD.
Prevention: Use of resistant varieties like Ruiru 11, Hibrido de timor, Rume Sudan, 45 K7 and several Catimors. Planting at wider spacing andadequate pruning to prevent prolonged wetness and high relative humidity following periods of rainfall. For the same reason avoid too dense
shade. All berries should be removed at the end of the cropping season as they act as a source of inoculum for the new crop.
Biological control: Naturally occurring funguses and bacteria act as antagonists to CBD, but none are yet commercially available.
Chemical control: Fungicides. Insufficient applications are more harmful than no application at all.
Threshold level: No information available as effectiveness of fungicide use has not been proven yet.

42
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

4.2.4

American Leaf Spot Disease (ALSD)

American Leaf Spot Disease (ALSD) (Mycena citricolor) spots on leaves and green berries

American Leaf Spot Disease (ALSD) (Mycena citricolor) Fungal disease in the neotropics
•
•
•
•
•
•

•

Symptoms: dry, brown spots on all above-ground plant parts.
Damage: can cause significant defoliation, resulting in reduced growth, berry shedding and subsequently yield loss of up to 20 %, as well as
reduced quality.
Favored by coffee grown at high altitude, humid conditions, too much cloud cover (low radiation) and high shade levels. Also promoted byerratic climatic conditions and spread by lack of hygiene.
Prevention: Adjust shade levels to reduce humidity. Hygiene is key in controlling this disease. Remove all inoculum sources.
Biological control: Research regarding antagonistic Bacteria seems successful, but has not yet been commercialized.
Chemical Control: Fungicides like Bordeaux mixture and other copper fungicides or in severe cases Triazole. Application of calcium hydroxide
has been shown to suppress symptoms. (Rao and Tewari, 1988). Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before
carrying out insecticides application, always consult the list of prohibited and risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s
2020 Standard.
Threshold level: Hygiene measure and shade adjustment must start with the occurrence of first symptoms. Chemical control threshold level: 15
lesions/leaf.

43
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

4.2.5

Coffee brown-eye spot

Coffee brown-eye spot (Mycosphaerella coffeicola andCercospora coffeicola) on leaves

Coffee brown-eye spot on seedling

Berry Blotch caused by Cercospora coffeicola

Coffee brown-eye spot (Mycosphaerella coffeicola and Cercospora coffeicola)
•
•
•
•

•

Damage: Infected berries shrivel and ripen before the beans are mature, resulting in off flavors. Other fungi often invade the berries following
infections of Cercospora.
Favored by cooler, wet growing conditions above 600 m.a.s.l., under low shade, high humidity and rain, or warm temperatures and drought
after flowering. Usually occurs in areas of poor nutrition (especially nitrogen and potassium deficiency) or insufficient shade.
Prevention: Improve soil fertility and shade management. Improve aeration through adequate spacing and pruning that allows sufficient air
movement. Avoid water-logging. Control competition from weeds through sufficient mulching or cover crops. Remove pruned materials from
infected plants as spores remaining in the plantation will infect more plants. Increase shade density.
Chemical control: 3 applications/month of copper products starting from flowering. Warning: copper overuse can cause copper toxicity in thesoil and also be harmful to beneficial insects controlling coffee scales. Monthly applications of captafol (0.3% a.i.) are recommended for use
in nurseries. Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides application, always consult the listof prohibited and risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: 20% - 35% attacked plants

44
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

4.2.6Bacterial Blight of coffee BBC

Bacterial Blight of coffee BBC (Pseudomonas syringae pv. garcae) symptoms on leaves

BBC symptoms on twigs and leaves

Bacterial Blight of coffee BBC (Pseudomonas syringae pv. garcae)
•
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: Leaves dry up, roll inwards, but do not shed. Twigs die back as infection extends downwards from the terminal bud.
Damage: Both, flowers and pin heads shrivel, turn black and the entire crop may be lost.
Favored by cool and wet weather, injuries on the plant and high nitrogen fertilization rates.
Prevention: Don’t use seedlings or plant material from BBC prone areas. Avoid wounding the tree during pruning. Split N application or apply
animal manure instead of N-fertilizer. Cut off and burn infected twigs and branches. Frequent de-suckering. Avoid pruning when trees are wet.
Use resistant varieties.
Chemical control: Copper based products are most effective but attention must be paid to toxicity of copper accumulating in the soil.
Threshold level: Hygiene measures should be taken immediately on every infested tree.

Damping off
Damping off (Phytium spp. or Rhizoctonia solani) i
is a fungal disease affecting seedlings in the nursery.
•
•
•
•
•
Damping off (Phytium spp)•

Symptoms: Patches of young seedlings die quickly, their stems are dark and rotten.
Damage: Economic loss due to seedling failure.
Favored by wet soil, too much shade and high plant densities that prevent sufficient air movement.
Prevention: Ensure seedbed conditions that allow sufficient drying of the soil. Space seedlings 2.5cm x
10cm apart. Don’t reuse old soil as the disease is soil borne and can be carried over.
Chemical control: Soil drenches with Benomyl are possible but often not warranted. Improving drainage
conditions is usually sufficient.
Threshold level: none, as disease kills and treatments can only be preventive.

45
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

4.2.7

Leaf Blight of coffee
Leaf Blight of coffee(Phoma costaricensis) fungal disease known in Costa Rica as "derrite orquema". It has become more common due to erratic climate change.
•

Leaf Blight of coffee(Phoma costarricensis) damage on leaves•••

Favored by growing areas at around 1400 m.a.s.l. or conditions of heavy condensation or
frequent rain, moderate winds, and average temperatures around 20°C, that cause leaves toremain wet for longer periods. Low soil fertility increases the damage.
Prevention: Use of windbreaks.
Threshold level:
Accurate assessment of disease severity is difficult and farmers should consult a local advisor.

Leaf Blight damage on coffee berries

46
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Further Information
Rainforest alliance app on pesticides and its alternatives:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.ipmcoalition.pesticidealternatives
https://apps.apple.com/app/id1461460997#?platform=iphone
CABI and infonet biovision have both published comprehensive lists of coffee disorders, which
can be found here: https://www.plantwise.org/FullTextPDF/2018/20187800554.pdf and here:
https://www.infonet-biovision.org/PlantHealth/Crops/Coffee#simple-table-of-contents-3
KALRO has published a coffee growing manual that features East African coffee diseases and
pest.
It
can
be
found
here:
http://www.kalro.org/sites/default/files/Coffee_Propagation_Production_Manual_13_Feb_2019_ed_LW.pdf
A very informative article by C. Staver, et all. on shade management in coffee plantations tocontrol pests and diseases can be found here: https://sites.evergreen.edu/terroir/wpcontent/uploads/sites/134/2015/10/Designing-pest-suppresive-multistrata-systems_coffee.pdf
Photo credits:
AVELINO, Jacques (CIRAD/IICA-PROMECAFE/CATIE)LADERACH, Peter (CIAT)COLLET, Laure (CIAT)BARQUERO, Miguel (ICAFE)CILAS, Christian (CIRAD)
Infonet-biovision
http://www.fao.org/3/ae939e/ae939e0b.htm
CABI - Plantwise Knowledge Bank
Georg Goergen/IITA Insect Museum, Cotonou, BeninKohler F, Pellegrin F, Jackson G, McKenzie E (1997) Diseases of cultivated crops in Pacific Island countries. South Pacific Commission. Pirie Printers Pty Limited,
Canberra, Australia.
Jonathan D. Eisenback, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Bugwood.org
https://www.molidoyservido.com
A. A. Seif, icipe
Luis Miguel Constantino, et.al., Natural enemies of the coffee leaf miner Leucoptera coffeella (Lepidoptera: Lyonetiidae), Jun 2018
Noah Phiri, CABI
Mike Rutherford, CABI
Julie Flood, CABI
Nelson, S.C. Cercospora Leaf Spot and Berry Blotch of Coffee. Plant Disease. PD-41, 2008.
Casa Brasil Coffees, 415 E. St. Elmo Rd Ste 4A Austin, TX 78745
Thais D. M. Pongeluppi, Phoma no cafeeiro - diversos fungos em uma mesma planta, Nov 2018, BASFANACAFE, 2014
Cody Lance, UK
Julio Guevara, Perfect Daily Grind Ltd, UK
Grahame Jackson, CABI (2015)
Jennifer Hashim, UCCE Kern Co. and Steven J. Castle, USDA-ARS, University of California
Flávia Patrício, Agrolink
Uganda Training Materials for Coffee Production, First edition, 2014
Gabisa Giddisa Hinkosa, Alemu Lencho, Thangavel Selvaraj, Arvind B Chavhan, Kasahun Sadessa

47
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

5 TEA SPECIFIC GUIDANCE
Disclaimer
This crop specific IPM guidance does not intend to cover all possible pests per crop. The
intention is to present the most common pests /diseases that affect certain crops in several
regions worldwide.
General information
Tea (Camellia sinensis var. sinensis and C. sinensis var. assamica) Recommendations

Choice of adequate site
for the crop

AltitudeGrowing
conditions

Slope

Temperature
RainfallHumidity

Choice of healthy cropvarieties suitable for thesite

Erosion control measures

Maintenance of soil healthand fertility

Tea needs a moderately hot and humid climate which isfound under cooler tropical conditions. Tea is a forest plantand grows best on cleared forest soils but does also well on
any fertile soil, especially red soils as it tolerates highAluminum levels well. Soils should be free draining with adepth of about 1.0 to 1.5m, which nevertheless provide
sufficient moisture throughout the year. Close proximity tooriginal forest helps provide an ideal microclimate as well asprotection against wind. In the right agro-ecologicalenvironment it is not difficult to grow tea without the use ofpesticides. Disease and pest pressure are a sure sign of
inadequate growing conditions or wrong management.
800 - 2000 m.a.s.l.
Some slope is needed to allow for good drainage.
15 – 25° = very highly suitablegentle slope (>5–7°) = highly suitablevery steep slope” (> 35°) unsuitable In relatively flat lands
there has to be adequate drainage to drain out subsoil
water
16 - 30ºC with an average temperature of 21 – 26ºC during
the growing season
1250 – 2000 mm, well distributed over 8-9 months/year~ 80% throughout the year
Preference should be given to varieties adapted to theclimatic conditions of the location. C. sinensis, although
lower yielding, is known to be a hardier, being moreresistant to both cold and drought. For Kenya NGC15,
NGC17, NGC19, C235, C357 were shown to be highly insect
pest resistant.
It is also recommended that a single clone should notexceed 10% of the plantation, but instead a blend ofdifferent clones be planted.
Contour planting in single or double hedgerows. Deep
cultivation or intensive weeding must be avoided as it would
also damage the roots of the tea bushes. Weeds need to becontrolled however, therefore soil cover should be planted
between rows like: Eragrostis curvula, Tephrosia
candida, Crotalaria anagyroides or Crotolaria usaramoensis.
Adequate shade levels also regulate leaf temperature, addorganic matter to soils, work as wind breaks, increase
biodiversity, attract birds & suppress weeds.
Weakened plants not only produce a poor crop but are also
more susceptible to pest and disease attack. Ideally soils aretested once a year and the recommended type andamount of inputs are applied. Balanced nutrition(NPK),

48
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Maintenance of adequate
soil organic matter (SOM)
levels

Maintenance of adequate
shade levels

based on soil analysis, crop yields and the geographicallocation is recommended.
Organic manure applications alongside inorganic fertilizer
applications increase the uptake rate for nutrients.
Recommended pH (H20) range: 4.5 - 5.0(For more details please refer to the Soil Guidance
document.)
Adequate SOM varies with geographies and altitudes:
whereas 1.2 to 3 % might be ideal for low altitudes 3 – 6 % isideal for higher elivations. SOM helps sustain beneficial
microorganisms’ levels, ensures good drainage (tea does
not tolerate water logging), as well as adequate water
retention levels. To increase and maintain adequate SOM
levels frequent additions of animal or compost manure arenecessary as well as mulching (including with tea prunings
left in situ). Leaf litter from shade trees also provides
substantial amounts of SOM.
Shade levels of 20% - 50% are recommended. Shade isnecessary to protect tea bushes from drought stress andover exposure to sun, which causes yellowing and or
dieback. Too much shade however reduces production andcan create a too humid microclimate as which canincrease fungal diseases. Therefore the shade level needs tobe managed closely. On the other hand is the dispersion ofpathogens by rain-splash and wind minimized if the force ofrain and wind is reduced by shade trees. Leguminous shadetrees like Erythrina subumbrans, Erythrina lithosperma,
Gliricidia sepium, Cassia siamea, or Albizia polycephala
Albizia coriaria, Albizzia chinensis, Albizzia Procers, albizzia
odrotissima, albizzia chinensis, acacia lenticularis, dalbergia
sericea established at 7 x 10 m also contribute to soil
fertility. Suggested spacing for larger timber trees like
Grevillea, cypress or pine is 10-12 x 10-12m planted within thetea rows. For windbreaks banana or Hakea salign may be
used. In the plains when young tea is planted it is advisable
to have a quick growing temporary shade tree planted
between the permanent shade species.

49
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

5.1 Common Tea Pests
Pest type

Tea Mosquito Bugs
(General Info)

Life stages of the pest that cause damage
Life stages of the pest that do NOT cause damage
Stage

Duration (depends on species andenvironmental conditions)

HabitatEgg

5 - 26 days

Inserted into plant tissue of a host plantNymph

10 - 30 days

Young nymphs often aggregate

Adult

VariedMobile, often host specific but also hide in crevices of bark,structures, etc.

Tea mosquito bug(Helopeltis antonii/theivora)••

Helopeltis antonii/theivora

•
•
•
•
•

Damage on leave caused by Tea
mosquito bug•••

Alternate hosts plants: Weeds like Mikania cordata/micrantha, Bidens biternata, Emillia sp., Polygonum
chinese and Lantana camara. Cashew, neem, moringa and guava.
Symptoms: Adult bugs and hairy orange nymphs suck the sap from fresh leaves and tender shoots, causing
brownish-red necrotic spots.
Damage: leaves curl up, dry and die.
Active during early morning and late evenings and during the day on overcast days.
Favored by incomplete removal of stalks/breaking stalks during plucking. Tea mosquito bugs lay their eggs
preferably on these broken ends of plucked shoots. Temperatures > 15ºC.
Prevention: Collect and destroy bugs and damaged plant parts during the initial stages as best as possible.
Suppress weeds through thorough mulching. Avoid planting China jats and susceptible clonal material like TV1, P-126A in Mosquito bug prone areas.
Biological control: Parasitoids: Mymarid, Erythmelus helopeltidis. Predators: Chrysoperla zastrowii
sillemi/carnea, Mallada sp, Predatory Lynx spider (Oxyopes sheweta), Reduviid bug, Praying Mantids.
Pathogens: Nematodes (Hexamermis ssp.), fungus Beauveria bassiana
Mechanical control: Skiff severely affected patches. Pluck hard removing all leaf above the plucking table
and all affected leaf visible. Pluck on short rounds.
Chemical control: ‘Spinosad’, diatomaceous earth or pyrethrum sprays during early morning hours. Spraying
with a 5% chloroform extract of Pongamia pinnata. Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a lastresort. Before carrying out insecticides application, always consult the list of prohibited and risk mitigation
insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: 5% infestation or 8 adult Helopeltis bugs/2 m2

50
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Egg

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)
2 weeksLarva

0.5 - 3 years

inside woody parts of the host plantPupa≅ 4 weeks

inside the host plant

Stage

Stemborer beetles(General Info)

Adult< 4 months
Shot-hole borer (Xyleborus fornicatus)••••
Shot-hole borer (Xyleborus
fornicatus)•••

Habitatinserted into the host plant

mobile, winged beetle in search of host plant and mating partner

Symptoms: Bores typical “shot-holes” in the roots and the lower part of main trunk; frass protruding from the holes.
Damage: Larvae tunnel the woody parts of bushes. Crop losses of 18 – 40 %A serious problem in low and mid elevation areas on badly draining soils. Weak host plants.
Prevention: Avoid water logging. Remove affected branches. Apply nitrogen and potassium at 1:2 ratio.Place
400 wilted stems of Montanoa bipinnatifida per ha to attract shot hole borer adults and burn regularly. Avoid
susceptible planting material, like TRI2024 and TRI2025 clones in shot-hole borer prone areas.
Biological control: Spray Beauveria bassiana wettable powder
Chemical control: Cover main stem with Carbaryl paste. Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as alast resort. Before carrying out insecticides application, always consult the list of prohibited and risk mitigation
insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: 15% infestation

Typical Shot-hole borer damage
on stem

51
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Egg

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)4 - 5 daysNymph

5 - 6 days

Stage

Mites (General Info)

Habitat
Underside of leaves
Before morphing into adults nymphs hide in the ground without feedingAdult
2 - 4 weeks
Underside of leaves
Red spider mite (Oligonychus coffeae), Scarlet mite/tea mite (Brevipalpus californicus), Purple mite (Calacarus
carnatus), Pink mite (Acaphylla theae), and Yellow mite (Polyphagota rosnemus latus)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: Damage usually shows first along the midrib, spreading along the veins. Leaves turn greyish or
brownish-pale and brittle.
Damage: Nymphs and adults pierce the leaf tissue and suck sap plant loses vigor and infested leaves are nolonger consumable. Severe infestation can lead to drying of leaves and defoliation.
Favored by drought and delayed plucking or over-plucking. Absence of shade. Temperatures above 25ºC , lowhumidity; elevations below 1500.m.a.s.l.
Prevention: Improve microclimate and Soil Organic Matter levels to avoid drought stress. Increase shade levels.
Mechanical control: Remove all infested parts.
Biological control: Predatory mites (Ambleyseius ssp., Agistemus ssp, Zetzellia ssp., etc.) Predatory thrips (Oligota
spp.), Pirate bug (Orius ssp, Wollastionella testudo), Hover flies, Mirid bug, Chrysoperla carnea. Pathogenic fungi:
Penicillium ssp., Aspergillus ssp., Cladosporium ssp., Botryosporium., Verticillium lecanii.
Chemical control: Horticultural oil or homemade soap-oil spray(white oil)Threshold level: 50% infested leaves or 5 adult mites or 25 eggs per leaf

Scarlet mite (Brevipalpus
californicus) damage on tea
leaves52
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Eggs

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)
7 daysNymph

3 weeksStage

Thrips (General Info)

Adult< 30 days
Thrips (Scirtothrips bispinosus)
•
•
•
•
•
•

Thrips (Scirtothrips bispinosus)
damage••Habitat
Inserted into plant tissue
Before morphing into adults nymphs hide in the ground without feeding
Underside of leaves

Symptoms: Leaf surface becomes uneven, curly and mottled exhibiting parallel lines of silver feeding marks oneither side of the midrib.
Damage: young nymphs and adults prefer to suck sap from young leave and buds plants lose vigor, leaves
shrivel. Infested leaves become distorted, crinkled and unusable. At threshold level thrips may cause up to
13% yield loss. Virus vector.
Favored by lack of shade, warm and humid conditions; in some growing areas dry weather is conducive totheir growthFrequent copper applications.
Prevention: Maintain optimum shade levels.
Biological control:Anthocoris and Orius spp., Wollastoniella testudo bugs, predatory thrips (Aeolothrips
intermedius, Mymarothrips garuda), predatory mites of the subfamily Stigmaeidae. Chrysoperla carnea,
Mallada ssp., praying mantids, ladybird beetles, syrphid flies, spiders etc. Pathogens: Steinernema ssp.,
Verticillium lecanii, Beauveria bassiana, Metarhizium anisopliae, Paecilomyces fumerosus
Chemical control: Horticultural oil, or a prescribed insecticide. Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides
only as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides application, always consult the list of prohibited and risk
mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: 3 thrips per shoot,Thrips damage on leaf –lines parallelto the midrib

53
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Egg

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)
1 - 3 weeks

Larva

3 - 4 weeks

Pupa

1 - 2 weeks

Adult< 1 monthStage

Moths and Butterflies(General Info)

Tea semilooper moth (Biston suppressaria)

HabitatOn the surface or inserted into host plantFeeding on or in tissue of host plant
Hanging from the host plant or rolled up into a leaf. Some pupate in the
soil.
Mobile winged

Tusock moth caterpillars (Euproctis pseudoconspersa)

Bunch caterpillar moth (Andraca bipunctata)

Caterpillars of Lepidoptera butterflies and moths, like case-bearers (Coleophora scaleuta or C. vigilis), Bunch caterpillar (Andraca bipunctata),
tussock moth (Euproctis pseudoconspersa), Tea semilooper (Biston suppressaria), or Endoclita ssp
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: caterpillars appear in aggregated masses and defoliate leaves.
Damage: 2 generations per year may destroy several bushes of tea plantation.
Favored by chemical control of shot-hole borer that also eradicates Parasitoids of caterpillars.
Prevention: Increase monitoring vigilance each time a fresh flush grows and react early, before several generations develop.
Mechanical control: Smaller populations can be removed/squashed by hand if detected early enough.
Biological control: Larval Parasitoids: Tachinid fly, Cylindromyia sp., Cotesia ruficrus, Braconid wasps (Macrocentrus homonae); Pathogen:Bacillus thuringensis. Euproctis pseudoconspersa NPV (EupsNPV) is pathogenic to the tea tussock moth.
Chemical control: Neem oil applications.
Threshold level: 15% damaged leaves or 4 -5 caterpillars per plant.

54
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Caterpillars of Tea leafroller moths like (Caloptilia theivora, Adoxophyes honmai or Homona magnanima)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: The larvae roll up leaves and feed on the inside. Some also pupate inside a rolled up leaf-nest.
Damage: Cause sporadic damage.
Favored by chemical control of shot-hole borer that also eradicates parasitoids of caterpillars.
Prevention: 5 pheromone traps/ha, suspended 30cm above the crop canopy; lures replaced once or twice
per month, depending on weather conditions.
Biological control: Braconid wasps (Macrocentrus homonae); Bacillus thuringensis
Chemical control: Not recommended
Threshold level: 5 rolled up leaves per bush or 8 moths per day/trap.

Tea leaf rolled up by caterpillars ofCaloptilia theivora, Adoxophyeshonmai or Homona magnanima

Red stem borer moth (Zeuzera coffeae) (larvae)•

Red stem borer (Zeuzera coffeae)
larva inside branch

•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: Caterpillar bores into stem or branches which then show wilting. Pellet-like excrement accumulates
at the base of the plant.
Damage: In advanced cases, the branch dries up.
Favored by:high light conditions.
Prevention: Sufficient shade.
Mechanical control: Cut off and burn affected branches, proven to be the most effective control.
Biological control: Fungus (Beauveria bassiana) or Gibberella fujikuroi; Braconid wasp (Amyosoma zeuzerae);
Parasitoids: Bracon zeuzerae, Isosturmia chatterjeeana, Myosoma chinensis, Senometopia kockiana.
Chemical control: Neem oil or Lime sulfur sprays.
Threshold level: 15 holes per 45 bushes.

Red stem borer (Zeuzera coffeae)
adult moth

55
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

StageAphids(General Info)

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)

Habitat10 – 14 days life cycle

Underside of leaves, young shoots, green branches

Eggs
Nymph
Adult
Tea aphid (Toxoptera auranti)••

Tea aphid (Toxoptera auranti)
infestation

•
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: Tiny blackish round insects aggregate on young shoots and underside of leaves. Often tended byants.
Damage: Nymphs and adults pierce the leaf tissue and suck sap Plant growth is stunted. Heavy infestation cancause leaves and shoots to yellow and get distorted/stunted. Typically causes secondary infection with sooty
black mold. Virus vector
Favored by stressed plants, low soil fertility, drought. Lack of natural predators.
Prevention: check transplants for aphids before planting; use tolerant varieties if available (e.g. Aa /NTRI 101 of
Rupi, Aa /NTRI 117 of Chuye and Bb /NTRI 470, Bd/NTRI 180 of Qi-men)
Mechanical control: If aphid population is limited to just a few leaves or shoots then the infestation can bepruned out to provide control; sturdy plants can be sprayed with a strong jet of water to knock aphids fromleaves;Biological control: Lacewings, ladybugs, gall midge, predatory bugs, hoverflies, parasitic wasps, as well as
Metarhizium anisopliae or Entomophtorales ssp fungus
Chemical control: Oil-soap spray or neem oil.
Threshold level: 20% infestation

56
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Eggs

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)7 - 70 days

Nymph

< 2 months

Adult< 5 months

Stage

Hoppers and locusts(General Info)

HabitatLocusts: soil, hoppers: midrib of leaves
Mobile, feeding while roosting on plants mainly in the evening

Tea green leaf hopper/Jassid /Green fly(Empoasca flavescens)
especially nymphs cause damage through sap sucking.Virus vector••••
Tea green leaf hopper(Empoasca flavescens)

•
•
•
•

Symptoms: So-called ‘Rim Blight’: Leaves margins curl downwards, becoming curved, turn purplish-brown anddry. Affecting especially tissue of new tea buds and shoot, particularly in the internode.
Damage: Hoppers suck sap. Their saliva causes leaf damage. Reduced photosynthesis leading to stunted growth.
Favored by higher temperatures and reversed rain/drought patterns.
Prevention: Moderately shaded tea shows less leafhopper problems, however, heavy shade can increase theincidence. Mulching improves the microclimate and also reduces leafhopper populations.
Mechanical control: Use of light taps/Yellow sticky traps
Biological control: Ladybeetles, lacewings, praying mantids, Damsel fly. Verticillium lecanii spray (2 gm/ltr).
Chemical control: Pyrethrum spray, Neem oil or a mixture of menthol and camphor oils.
Threshold level: 50% (50 jassids/100 leaves)

57
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

StageNematodes(General Info)

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)

HabitatSeveral weeks

In the soil near roots, or inside the roots' cortex, usually host specific

cyst
egg
Juvenile
Adult
Nematodes like (Meloidogyne ssp.)••

Nematode damage on roots•••

Symptoms : Infested roots develop galls and branch profusely.
Damage: Severely infected plants show a reduced root system which seriously hampers their function of waterand nutrient uptake. Plants wilt during the hot periods and are often stunted . Nematode infection predisposes
plants to fungal and bacterial root pathogens.
Favoured by soil temperature of 21 – 26C and light soils.
Prevention: Never re-use old potting soil or heat-sterilize nursery soil before use.
Threshold level: > 6 – 7 nematodes per10g of soil tested

58
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

5.2 Common Tea Diseases
Most tea diseases are caused by pathogenic fungi and less frequently by bacteria and viruses. Most diseases in tea can be prevented or managedwith good agricultural practices and plantation management.
Blister Blight
Blister Blight (Exobasidium vexans)
Fungal disease.
•

•
•
•
•

Blister Blight (Exobasidium vexans)

•
•
•

•

Symptoms: Infects young leaves (less than one month old). Tiny translucent spots develop, become larger turnlight brown. After a week the lower leaf surface develops blisters with water-soaked zones surrounding theblisters. After spores are released blisters become white-brown and soft. Affected leaves are distortedirregularly rolled. Stem infection leads to goose neck shape, dieback and snapping at the point of infection.
Damage: Young infected stems bend and get distorted and may snap off or die. Losses up to 43%.
Favored by humid or wet conditions under too much shade or during cloudy and wet weather conditions.
Temperatures between 17 and 22 ºC . High altitudes >1500m.a.s.l. and sunshine below 4 - 5 hours/day. Sporesare dispersed by wind. The fungus survives in infected leaves.
Prevention: adjusting the time of shade regulation in susceptible areas before conditions normally getconducive for blister blight infection.
Biological control: Ochrobactrum anthropi BMO‐111 applied weekly. If temperature exceeds 30° C then treat it
as a round of a Fungicide spray.
Mechanical control: Skiff off and destroy all affected branches.
Tolerant varieties: Clone PS1 is highly resistant to blister blight in Indonesia. GMB-1, GMB-2 and GMB-3 show
some resistance. TV34 and TV35 are high yielding clones that can be grown under dry conditions to reduce
fungal diseases.
Chemical control: Spraying of Bordeaux mixture or Copper oxychloride (350g in 67 l of water) in combination
with nickel chloride15 in pruned field at 3 days intervals. Alternatively spray 2-3 rounds of 5-10% aqueous extractsof Cassia alata/Polygonum hamiltoni/Acorus calamus/ Adhatoda vasica/ Equisetum arvense/ Polygonumhydropiper/ Tagetis petula fortnightly.
Threshold level: 25 - 35% infected plants. Biological control and mechanical control should start with first signs ofinfection.

15 Should be used as last resort

59
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Grey and Brown Blight (Pestalotiopsis theae and Colletotrichum camellia)
Fungal disease.
••••
Grey blight(Pestalotiopsis theae)••

Symptoms: Starting on younger leaves round, irregular, grey or brown necrotic leaf lesions develop. Leaves
often also show some yellowing. Later black spores become visible.
Damage: Leaf drop leading to defoliation. Declines in yield leading to crop loss of ~17%.
Favored by shear harvesting or stripping, during rainy season. Mostly attacks weak or damaged tea bushes.
Secondary infection after inadequate blister blight control.
Prevention: Avoid plant stress. Adequate spacing to allow sufficient air circulation and reduce humidity and theduration of leaf wetness. Use of resistant varieties, such as IRB88-15 from Yakubita variety (Japan), CP-1 and TV26 in SE-Asia, and 31/11 and 303/199 in Africa (Kenya).
Chemical control: Fungicides. Alternatively spray 2-4 rounds of 5% aqueous extracts of Amphineuron
opulentum/ Cassia alata/ Polygonum sinensis fortnightly.
Threshold level: 35% infected plants

Brown Blight (Colletotrichum ssp)

60
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Black blight, Thread blight (Corticium/ Pellicularia koleroga, C. invisum)
Fungal disease that also affects coffee, black pepper, capsicum, citrus, ginger, and mahogany.
Caused by these two fungi. More prevelent in the plains than in the hills••••

White strands of the fungus
Pellicularia koleroga on the
Underside of a coffee leaf

•
•
•
•

Symptoms: Leaves and twigs turn brown with a mat of white fungal threads on the underside of leaves. Dead
leaves are hanging on thin threads from the branches.
Damage: Acute defoliation.
Favored by humid, warm conditions
Prevention: Plucking tea only in dry weather avoids disease transmission. Pluck regularly. Improve aeration anddrainage.
Mechanical control: Pruning off and burning affected shoots at least 30cm below the affected area.
Biological control: C. invisum is controlled by the bacterium Bacillus subtilis.
Chemical control: New growth is protected with copper or fungicide sprays.
Threshold level: Immediate mechanical control. Chemical control at 35% infected trees.

Black root diseases (see end of the document for more information) (Rosellinia arcuata)
Fungal disease
•
•
•
•
•
•
Black root disease (Rosellinia
arcuata)••

Symptoms: Black mycelium on infected roots, white star shaped mycelium between bark and wood. A ring ofswollen tissue develops above the dead area and surrounds the stem.
Damage: Infection at 60-90% and can cause about 27% and infection over 90% can cause 36% yield reduction
respectively.
Favored by high humidity and water-logging (usually prevalent during the rainy season).
Prevention: Avoid water-logging. After pruning always remove diseased material.
Mechanical control: dig a trench around affected bushes to dry out the soil and prevent the spread of themycelium. In severe cases remove and destroy infected bushes.
Biological control: Trichoderma sp. and Gliocladium virens applied in the planting pits for prevention of root
diseases.
Chemical control: Soil drenches with fungicides. Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort.
Before carrying out insecticides application, always consult the list of prohibited and risk mitigation insecticidesof Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: Each individual infected tree needs to be treated immediately.

61
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Red root disease(Poria hypolateritia)
Fungal disease that also affects Coffee, Grevillea, Albizia and Erythrina.
•
•
•
•
•
Red root disease (Poria
hypolateritia)••

Symptoms: White mycelium later turning blood red on infected roots and also growing into the soil.
Damage: Spreads fast, slowly killing the bushes. Yellowing and wilting of foliage; sudden death of part of plant;
withered leaves remain attached to the plant for several days.
Favored by close spaced planting as spread happens from root to root.
Prevention: Increase drainage in the soil and avoid too close spacing.
Biological control: Trichoderma sp. and Gliocladium virens applied in the planting pits for prevention of root
diseases. Soil drenches with fungi of the genus Cunninghamella. Streptomyces griseus and Streptomyces lydicus
Mechanical control: Uproot and burn infected bushes including all root material.
Threshold level: Every infected plant needs to be uprooted immediately. Surrounding area needs to be treated
and rehabilitated before replanting.

Brown root disease (Fomes lamaensis/noxius/Phellinus noxius)
Fungal disease that also affects Coffee, Grevillea, Albizia and Erythrina.

Root rot caused by Brown root
disease (Fomes noxius)

•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: A netted pattern of brown mycelium shows under the bark. Infected roots turns soft and spongy.
Damage: Spreading slowly, quickly killing the bushes.
Favored by low elevations. Close spaced planting.
Prevention: Avoid too close planting as infection spreads from root to root.
Mechanical control: Uproot and completely remove affected bushes.
Biological control: Trichoderma sp. and Gliocladium virens applied in the planting pits for prevention of root
diseases.
Threshold level: Each infected bush needs to be treated individually.

Wilt caused by Brown root
disease (Fomes noxius/ Formes
lamaoensis )62
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Stem canker (Macrophoma theicola)
Fungal disease••

Stem canker (Macrophoma
theicola)

•
•
•
•
•

•

Symptoms: The first symptoms include browning and drooping of affected leaves. As the disease spreads into
the shoots, they become dry and die.
Damage: The entire branch can die from the tip downward. Dying branches show shallow, slowly spreading
lesions surrounded by a thickened area of bark.
Favored by too deep planting and water-logging.
Prevention: Plant in well-draining, acidic soils.
Biological control: Trichoderma harzianum and Gliocladium virens, applied both to the soil around the bush andused for wound dressing.
Mechanical control: Remove diseased twigs by cutting several inches below cankered areas and disinfectingthem.
Chemical control: Spray appropriate protective fungicides during periods of wet weather or natural leaf drop toprotect leaf scars from infection. Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before
carrying out insecticides application, always consult the list of prohibited and risk mitigation insecticides ofAnnex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: Each infected bush needs to be treated individually.

Twig dieback caused byMacrophoma theicola

Rust (Cephaleurus parasiticus, C. virescens)An algal pathogen of tea plants.
•
•
•
•
•
Rust or Red Rust (Cephaleurusparasiticus)•••

Symptoms: Rust-red colored sports covering leaves and branches
Damage: Crop loss of >20%
Favored by low soil fertility. Starts with onset of rains.
Prevention: Ensure sufficient fertilization with Nitrogen and potassium. Avoid water-logging. Improve aircirculation between bushes.
Partially resistant clones: (0-10% susceptibility), such as TV-17, TV-23, TV-24, TV-25, TV-26 and TV27. Avoid broad
leaved Assam jats.
Biological control: Bacteria Streptomyces sannanensis or Streptomyces griseus.
Chemical control: Spraying with systemic fungicides. Alternatively spray 4-6 rounds of 5% aqueous extracts ofArgimone maxicana/ Polygonum hemiltonii at15-days intervals.
Threshold level: 30% infected leaves.

63
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Pink Disease (Corticium salmonicolor syn. C salmonicolor)
Fungal disease.
••••
Pink Disease (Erythricium ssp.)•••

Symptoms: Early warning sign is often the presence of a cobweb. Followed by appearance of salmon-coloredspots that develop into a smooth mat of fungus towards the tips of shaded twigs and branches.
Damage: The part above the outbreak dies off and causes dieback.
Favored by humid and hot conditions.
Prevention: Avoid overcrowding by regular pruning. Closely spaced plantings should be avoided. Maintaining
healthy, vigorous plant growth reduces disease incidence.
Mechanical control: Improve spacing to allow free air movement. Prune off and destroy infected branches well
below the affected areas.
Chemical control: copper-based fungicides application directly on the main stem and woody parts ofbranches. Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides
application, always consult the list of prohibited and risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest
Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: Each infected bush needs to be treated individually.

Pink Disease (Corticium
salmonicolor) crust on a died-backbranch64
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

5.3 Additional information on Root Diseases
Primary
1. Charcoal stump rot (Ustulina zonata)
2. Red Root rot (Poria hypolateritia)
3. Brown Root rot(Fomes lamaensis/noxius)
4. Terry Root Rot (Hypoxylon asarcodes)
5. Purple Root rot (Helicobasidum compactum Boedijn)
6. Balck Root Rot (Rosellinia arcuate)
7. Armillaria (Armillaria mellea) in Africa. Uproot the affected bushes with all the roots andremove the rootlets in a bag from the field & burn. Ensure that when land is preparedfor planting all roots of trees/shrubs removed are extracted from the soil and taken
away to burn/firewood. Trees that have to be removed must be ringbarked to ensurethat their starch reserves are depleted as then the fungus can not live long on any
rootlets left by mistake.

5.4 Integrated Weed Management-Tea
Like with many other crops, weeds compete with tea bushes mainly for light, water andnutrients, thereby affecting their growth and yield. Factors that contribute to profuse weed
growth in tea fields have been well recognized, and it includes herbicide resistance due toindiscriminate use of this type of pesticides. Other factors are patches of land without
vegetation (ground exposure), high rain fall (2500-3500 mm per annum) and regular use of
nitrogenous fertilizer without taking into account the nutritional needs of the crop.
When are weeds a problem in tea plantations?
There are three critical periods for weed control in tea. These are:
1. New clearing (during the first two years after planting), particularly in young tea (8-16
weeks after planting)
2. During the pruning phases
3. In old tea fields where plants are missing, or where there are neglected andabandoned bushes. These conditions provide very conducive conditions for weed
proliferation
Some considerations for weed control in tea plantations
Identification of weeds: not all weeds are bad . Many weeds are heavy competitors with thecrop but many others can bring benefits. For example, many weeds can be of high medicinalor food value, or help with erosion control; serve as habitat for natural enemies of pests andpollinators, help with water retention in the soil, and prevent soil compaction Therefore, theidea is to identify and manage only those species that can affect the productivity of the cropand leave the “soft ones” on the field.
What criteria to apply when classifying the weeds?
Noxious weeds:•

Have strong root systems - Compete with the tea for resources such as nutrients, water,
space and sunlight•

Difficult to kill using herbicides (herbicide resistance)•

Release chemicals which are harmful for tea bushSome examples of noxious weeds in tea plantations are:65
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Pennisetum polystachion

Clidemia hirta

Mikania micrantha

Panicum repens

Imperata cylindrica

Sphagneticola trilobata

Anredera cordifolia

Panicum maximum

Austroeupatorium inulifolium

Ipomoea carnea

Sida acuta

Spermacoce hispida

Source: https://aslm.lk/2018/08/15/herbicidesfree-weedmanagement/

Soft weeds:• Have weak roots system - compete less with the tea bushes• Spreads covering the soil thereby helping with retaining moisture in the soil
• Protect and enrich the soil – some can fixate nitrogen or provide organic matter• Provide habitat for predators and pollinators (e.g., nectar/pollen)
Some examples of soft weeds in tea plantations include:
Ageratum conyzoides

Lagascea mollis

Digitaria sanguinalis

Hedyotis corybosa

Emilia sonchifolia

Drimaria cordata

66
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Phyllanthus niruri

Centella asiatica

Amaranthus Viridis

Oxalis Corniculata

Solanum americanum

Desmodium Triflorum
Source: https://aslm.lk/2018/08/15/herbicidesfree-weedmanagement/

Removal of noxious weeds before they flower:
The objective of doing this is to interrupt the reproductive cycle of the noxious weeds,
eliminating them before they can flower and produce seeds, and therefore a second
generation of weeds. Complete manual uprooting or spot application with a low toxicity
herbicide may be necessary for those noxious weeds that do not reproduce by seed. The
removed noxious weeds can be used to make compost.

By continuously doing this, the seed bank of these weeds in the soil gradually reduced
over time and soft / beneficial weeds takeover the space and establish permanently. The
establishment of soft weeds leads to more stable productivity, better soil moisture, betterorganic matter content in the top soil, less insect pests and finally reduction of production costs.
Weed control at different stages of the Tea crop
Before the plantation is set up, at the beginning of planting or following uprooting of old tea:
1. Prevent the entry and establishment of weeds to/in the crop area
2. Minimize the weed seedbank in the soil by frequently removing noxious weeds before
they flower or vegetatively reproduce further. Delayed weeding results in the weed
seedbank in the plantation growing.
3. Be mindful of cuttings or not properly decomposed noxious weeds in the compost.
Preferably use hot composting. There is a risk of propagating cuttings or seeds ofnoxious weeds if they are not properly composted.
4. Do not leave clean neglected land areas to avoid seed weed banks growing. Leaving
exposed bare soil is the most critical factor that determines the growth of weeds inyoung tea plantations (particularly during the first and second year after planting), or
during first year after pruning. Use these unused areas to establish patches of naturalvegetation or trees.
5. The border areas of tea fields, roadsides, steep terrains etc. should be kept free of
noxious weeds , but still cover with “soft” vegetation in order to avoid continuous
dispersal of noxious weed seeds to adjoining tea fields.
Nursery management
Hand weeding/uprooting weeds while soils are moist is encouraged as opposed to chemical
control. Healthy and well nourished plants establish better in the field, therefore decreasing
the chances of mortality of plants thus reducing vacancies in the plantation.
Establishment and early crop stage

67
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

1. During land preparation all stubs, rhizomes and other reproductive propagules of
noxious weeds should be removed and the establishment of soft weeds promoted (seeabove)
2. Start with good planting material: healthy and vigorous nursery plants should beselected for field planting as they establish fast and outcompete weeds better. In
addition, use of quick growing planting material will help uniform ground coverageand thereby reduce weed growth.
3. Spacing: In order to attain an early ground cover, planting of tea at closer spacing
would be more favourable than planting at wider spacing, although too close cancreate plant to plant competition. The correct spacing will depend on the cultivar
selected for planting (please inform yourself). The purpose of this is to have a close
canopy that impedes the sunlight on the ground and therefore the growth of weeds.
4. Hand weeding around collar region of young tea bushes, and brush cutting between
the bushes is recommended and then this region can be mulched.
Established crop
1. Mulching the ground with live or dead material is the recommended practice for tea,
especially in the new clearings as it smothers the weed growth, conserves the soil
moisture and improves soil fertility through addition of organic matter. Mulching should
be done at least 2-3 times per year and care should be taken to use only
uncontaminated vegetation without vegetative parts of noxious weeds species.
2. Soft weeds tend to grow slowly and laterally, covering the soil surface. As long as you
keep them at low height with regular weeding, they do not compete with tea fornutrients. Soft weeds, when sickled, die easily and take time to come back. The sickled
soft weeds can be laid over the soil surface and used as mulch. They get decomposed
and add organic matter to the soil.
3. Infilling vacant patches with a tea clone which exhibits fast growth, is also important toestablish an early ground cover to make minimum room for weeds.
4. Ideally herbicides should not be used, but if their use is necessary, please consult thelist of prohibited and risk mitigation pesticides in Annex 7.Follow all the criteria regarding
pesticide management section 94.6)of the standard
Some useful links to tea weed management materials from the Rainforest Alliance:
Video 1: https://stichtingra.resourcespace.com/?r=2117&k=44b3f8615d
Video 2: https://stichtingra.resourcespace.com/?r=2116&k=0c89f77daa
Video 3: https://stichtingra.resourcespace.com/?r=2134&k=a799a43c72
Secondary
1. Violet Root rot (sphaerostilbe repens)
2. Thorny Blight (Aglaospora.sp)
Resources
Rainforest Alliance app on pesticides and its alternatives:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.ipmcoalition.pesticidealternatives
https://apps.apple.com/app/id1461460997#?platform=iphone
References
A list of recommended Sri Lankan clones for different elevations and their resistance to pests
can
be
found
here:
https://www.tri.lk/userfiles/file/Advisory_Circulars/TRI_Advisory_Ciculars_PN_01.pdf

68
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

An extensive list of pests and diseases of tea
http://www.upasitearesearch.org/pests-and-diseases/A
comprehensive
AESA
manualforhttps://niphm.gov.in/IPMPackages/Tea.pdf

tea

in

India

growers

can

can

be

be

found

here:

found

here:

Der Tropenlandwirt (Journal of Agriculture in the Tropics and Subtropics) 101 (April 2000) pp.
13-38 provides descriptions of many factors leading to disease and pest infestations.
Photo Credits
Mick Talbot [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons
Keith, l., Ko, W.H and Sato D.M. 2006. Identification Guide for Diseases of Tea (Camellia sinensis). Plant Disease, 33, pp-1-4.
Ravi Pujari
Directorate of Plant Protection Quarantine and Storage; N. H. IV, Faridabad, Haryana
National Institute of Plant Health Management; Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, Telaangana
Department of agriculture and cooperation; ministry of agriculture government of India
https://www.revolvy.com/page/Corticium
J. Erikss. & Hjortstam
Nagesh, I. University of Horticultural Sciences, Bagalkot College of Horticulture
Biswapriya Misra, University Sains Malaysia
Centre for e-Learning, Kerala Agricultural University, KAU Agri Infotech Portal
Kohler F, Pellegrin F, Jackson G, McKenzie E (1997) Diseases of cultivated crops in Pacific Island countries. South Pacific Commission. Pirie Printers Pty Limited,
Canberra, Australia.
Prof. Dr S A Samad, Dept of Microbiology and Biotechnology, GNIPST, Calcutta, India
Jürgen Kranz - http://ecoport.org/ep?SearchType=pdb&PdbID=20164, EcoPort
Shutterstock, Leong9655, Malaysia
http://eagri.org, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University
Ryan Brookes, http://insecta.pro
Agritech Portal: Crop Protection, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University (TNAU)
Kyoto Prefecture via Ricardo Caicedo
Bettman, https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/124755-Endromidae
Takashi Shinkai, Minden Pictures
Nan Jiang, Dayong Xue, Hongxiang Han - A review of Biston Leach, 1815
Satyajit Sarkar, S. E. Kabir, Department of Tea Science, University of North Bengal
www.vikaspedia.gov.in
S. Bambara
Ravi Pujari69
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

6 COCOA SPECIFIC GUIDANCE
Disclaimer
This crop specific IPM guidance does not intend to cover all possible pests per crop. The
intention is to present the most common pests /diseases that affect certain crops in several
regions worldwide.
General information
Cocoa (Theobroma cacao) Recommendations
Choice of adequate site
for the cropGrowing
conditions

altitudetemperature

rainfallhumidity

Choice of suitablevarieties and plantmaterial for the site

Maintenance of soil healthand fertility

Successful cocoa growing requires reliable, year-roundrainfall or else irrigation will be necessary. Cocoa is typicallygrown under remnant forest, planted shade trees orintercropped with other commercial crops that give cocoa
sufficient shade and protection from wind, especially during
the first 5 years of development.
< 1200 m.a.s.l.
Temperature: in addition to Rainfall, it is one of the mostcritical climatic factors for the growth and development ofcocoa. optimum daily average: 24°C.
min. 15C; max. 35°C, but fluctuations reduce yield.
1500 - 2000 mm annually evenly distributed. Dry spells (with<100mm/month) should not exceed 3 months. Otherwise
irrigation is necessary.
80% - 100%A hot and humid atmosphere is essential for the optimum
development of cocoa trees.
Preference should be given to drought and disease resistantand approved by local or national competent authority
varieties/hybrids where possible like UF-18 (released by the
National Seed Industry Council in the Philippines).
Use good and healthy planting material, as well as vigorousand healthy seedlings from genuine or reputed certified
nurseries. Seedling or budded or grafted which are 46months old.
Disease free, high yielding, drought resistant and resistantvarieties that are approved by local or national competentauthority should be used.
As cocoa has a 1.5m long taproot deep, friable soil, free of
hardpans is necessary to successfully grow cocoa trees.
The ideal pH range is 6.5 - 7.0.
For every 1 t of dry bean harvested, 25 kg N, 4 -10 kg P, 40 60 kg K, 8 - 11kg Mg, and 5 - 9kg Ca must be replaced per
hectare annually.
(For more details please refer to the Soil Guidance document.)70
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Maintenance ofadequate soil organic
matter (SOM) levels

Maintenance of soil
temperature and humidity

Maintenance ofadequate shade levels

Important cacao pests
and diseases by region

Cocoa is sensitive to drought as well as waterlogging
therefore high soil organic matter content is a must (> 3%).
Adequate SOM ensures adequate drainage as well aswater retention and sustains beneficial microorganisms
levels. As cocoa is often established on previously cleared
forest soils the SOM levels usually rapidly decrease if not
replenished through frequent additions of animal orcompost manure or mulching. Suitable cover crops can also
be used, if the organic material remains as a mulch cover inthe plantation.
Creating a microclimate in the plantation that is favorable
for cocoa and not favorable for pests and diseases can bea critical prevention factor or at least reduce the severity ofan outbreak. This is especially important during unusually dry
and hot seasons, which may occur more frequently due toclimate change. This can be achieved with adequate
shade levels, but also through soil covers in form of mulch or
cover crops (during the first 5 years). Mulch is kept awayfrom the base of the plant to reduce the risk of disease.
Mulch is re-applied at the end of each rainy season.
Shade protects young cocoa trees from drought stress andexposure to sun. Diversity of tree species, providing Shadelevels of 30% - 50% are recommended. Shade levels can beas high as 70% for young cocoa and as the cocoa trees
grow and start self-shading, the number of other shade trees
can be decreased gradually. Agroforestry settings which
provide several different layers of shade might however beadvantageous for greater biodiversity and a favorable
microclimate.
West Africa: Black pod (mainly Phytophthora megakarya),
Cocoa Swollen Shoot Virus (Badnavirus), Mirids (Sahlbergellasingularis and Distantiella theobroma)
South America: Witches’ broom (spread all the way up to
Panama) (Moniliophthora perniciosa), Moniliophthora podrot (except Brazil) (Moniliophthora roeri), Black pod (mainly
Phytophthora palmivora, P. capsici), Mirids
Mesoamerica: Moniliophthora pod rot (Moniliophthora
roreri), Black pod (Phytophthora palmivora), Mirids
Southeast Asia: Vascular streak dieback (Oncobasidium
theobromae), Cocoa pod borer (Conopomorphacramerella), Mirids (Helopeltis spp.)16

The free mobile app” HabitApp” helps to give an instant reading of cocoa shade cover. It
can be downloaded through the following link: HabitApp - Apps on Google Play

16 Source: ICCO (2015), http://www.icco.org/about-cocoa/pest-a-diseases.html.

71
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

6.1 Common Cocoa Pests
Key:
Life stages of the pest that cause damage

Pest type

Life stages of the pest that do NOT cause damage

Tea mosquito bugs
(General Info)

Stage

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)

HabitatEggs

5 - 26 days

Inserted into plant tissue of a host plantNymph

10 - 30 days

Young nymphs often aggregate

Adult

VariedMobile, often host specific but also hide in crevices of bark,structures, etc.

Tea mosquito bugs (Helopeltis antonii)

Damage caused by the Tea mosquito bug

Tea mosquito bugs (Helopeltis antonii)
Slender reddish-brown insects, <10 mm long with antennae, that are almost twice as long as the body.
•••

Symptoms: Infested pods develop circular water soaked spots caused by multiple feeding injuries. These punctures subsequently turn black.
Pods appear deformed and scarred.
Damage: Eggs are inserted into the soft tissue near the tips of flowering or vegetative shoots as well as developing fruits. Feeding damage
appears as a discolored lesions. Heavy infestations result in pod malformations and premature drop. Secondary disease pathogens can enter
through damaged plant tissue. Dropped fruits attract pests.
Favored by: Rainy season or erratic rains leading to flush of young shoots. Populations usually build up during wet, sunny seasons. Temperatures >
28ºC.

72
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

•
•
•
•

Prevention: Regular monitoring as attacks occur suddenly. Conserve the numerous natural enemies like weaver ants. Do not intercrop withalternative host plants like cashew, tea, sweet potato, guava, cotton and mango. Maintain good plantation management in regard to pruning,
weeding and shading.
Biological control: parasitoidids: Telenomus ssp, Chaetostricha sp, Erythmelus helopeltidis. predators: Panthous bimaculatus, Sycanus collaris,
Rihirbus trochantericus luteous, Chrysoperla sp; entomopathogen: Beauveria bassiana
Chemical control: Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides application, always consult
the list of prohibited and risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: Damage level of 1- 5%

Sahlbergella singularis

Distantiella Theobroma
Dieback in a young tree caused by mirid bug damage.

Cocoa mirid bugs (Sahlbergella singularis) or (Distantiella theobroma)
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: mirid bug nymphs and adults pierce the surface of cocoa stems, branches and pods to suck sap, causing necrotic lesions.
Damage: can result in the death of terminal leaves and branches, causing dieback. Entire young trees can die. Mirids are vectors of fungal
infections (Calonectria rigidiuscula, etc.) that may cause cocoa dieback.
Favored by trees being exposed to sunlight, trees bearing the first fresh flush of leaves, shots and pods. Populations usually build up during wet,sunny seasons. Temperatures > 28ºC.
Prevention: Shade should be designed to achieve a balance between mirid control, flowering and black pod management. Alternative hosts
should not be used as shade trees on cocoa farms. Timing of interventions is key to successful control. Acquire forecast information from farmers
groups or extension officers. Populations usually start to build up from June already and scouting/ monitoring should start then.
Some new clones seem to be less attractive to mirid bugs. In Ghana for example, the hybrids (commonly called mixed) from COCOBOD
authorized seed gardens, are known to have some tolerance for mirids. CIRAD identified a few resistant genotypes from French Guyana. As

73
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

•••

mirids lay their eggs in the bark of stems or inside the pod husks, painting the stems with lime to cover crevices and collecting all husks could
help reduce infestation rates.
Biological control: The black ant (Dolichoderus thoracicus) has been used in some farms as a control measure. Maintenance of abundant
weaver ant (Oecophylla longinoda) colonies in the plantation
Chemical control: Resistance to commonly used insecticides is increasingly becoming a problem in mirid bug control. Therefore the use of
locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides application, always consult the list of prohibited andrisk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard. Spraying is most effective from September to May.
Threshold level: Sticky glue traps and pheromone traps can be used for monitoring. 1 - 4 mirid bugs per tree
Stink bugs (Bathycoelia thalassina)
use long mouthparts to penetrate through the pod husk to suck the contents of the beans.
•
•
•
•
•

Stink bugs (Bathycoelia thalassina) on
cocoa pod with mirid bug damage.

••

Symptoms: Stink bugs do not leave feeding marks on the pods but cause premature ripening of the pods.
Pods turn yellow, cherelles are deformed.
Damage: Loss of pods causes yield reduction. Also attack new flushes and chupons.
Prevention: Maintain sufficient shade and canopy levels. If stink bugs are a major pest in the area avoid using
alternative host trees like: also mangoes (Mangifera indica), kola (Cola acuminata), and Citrus spp as shade.
Remove chupons frequently as these attract stink bugs and are also used as egg-laying sites.
Biological control: Release of parasitic wasp (Hymenoptera) or Tachinid fly species. Research on other stink
bug species shows success with pheromone baited lure traps placed on the ground.
Chemical control: Pyrethroids sprayed in infested localized areas. Otherwise keep insecticide applications at aminimum to maintain healthy natural enemy populations. the use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only
as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides application, always consult the list of prohibited and risk
mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level:10% prematurely immature pods or a total of 25 stinkbugs on 10 trees that are exposed to thesun.
Monitor for peak population levels from March to June and August to September.

Prematurely ripened immature cocoa
pod caused by stink bug (Bathycoelia
thalassina)damage.

74
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

eggs

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)
1 weeknymph

1 - 2 months

adult

Female dies after laying eggs

Stage

Mealy Bugs (General Info)

Planococcus lilacinus

Paracoccus marginatus

Habitat
In a sticky sac on axils of stems or leaves
Mobile crawlers
Males are mobile with wings. Female are sessile on shoots, leaf
axils and midribs or roots.

Rastrococcus iceryoides

Mealybugs (Planococcus lilacinus, Planococcus citri, Paracoccus marginatus, Drosicha mangiferae, Planococcoides jalensis,
and Rastrococcus iceryoides)
•
•
•
•
•

•
•
•

Symptoms: Mealybugs colonize on tender parts of the plant as well as mature pods, which appear to be covered with fluffy white spots.
Damage: Feeding of mealy bugs induces cherelle wilt. Vector of Cocoa Swollen Shoot Virus (CSSV) and other viral diseases.
Favored by presence of Philidris ants, hot and dry conditions, excessive nitrogen fertilization.
Prevention: Control ants. Stop Philidris ants from climbing up into the tree by placing a sticky band around the trunk. This will help natural
enemies (parasitic wasp and lacewings). Birds play an important role in reducing mealybug populations.
Biological control: Best control is achieved by the predatory Crytolaemus montrouzieri ladybug, whose nymphs resemble the mealybug.
Recommended release rate: 5 beetles/infested cocoa tree. In India, the caterpillar of Spalgis epeus, which also resembles a mealybug, is themost common mealybug predator. Predators that resemble mealybugs can be differentiated from their prey by their high level of mobility while
mealybugs are immobile.
Chemical control: Indian soapnut tree (Sapindus Mukorossi aka Indian Soapberry) these nuts soaked for 48 hrs produce soap that also has
insecticidal properties. So this combined with Neem/Pongamia pinatta works well against scale insects & mealy bugs.
Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides application, always consult the list of prohibitedand risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: Infested trees can be treated individually by spot applications. Spraying is recommended if 5% of trees are affected at fruit-set
stage.

75
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Eggs

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)7 - 70 days

Nymph

< 2 months

Stage
Hoppers and locusts(General Info)Adult< 5 months
Flatid Plant Hoppers several Flatidae spp.
Serious pest in Asia and the Pacific region.
•••
Flatid Plant hoppers nymphs(Melormenis basalis)

•
•
•
•

HabitatLocusts: soil, hoppers: midrib of leaves
Mobile, feeding while roosting on plants mainly in the evening

Damage: Nymphs and adults suck the sap from flowers, tender shoots and pods. They excrete honey dew
resulting in the development of sooty mold fungus on the leaves and pods.They can also be virus and disease
vectors.
Favored by reversed rain/drought patterns. Populations build-up during low sunshine seasons.
Prevention: Shade-grown tree show less leafhopper problems. Mulching improves the microclimate and also
reduces leafhopper populations.
Mechanical control: Use of light taps
Biological control: Ladybeetles, lacewings, praying mantids. Verticillium lecanii spray (2 gm/ltr).
Chemical control: Pyrethrum spray, Neem oil or a mixture of menthol and camphor oils. Use of locally approved
synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides application, always consult the list ofprohibited and risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: 5% of trees affected at fruit-set stage.

Adult Flatid Plant Hopper (Metcalfa
pruinosa)

76
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

StageAphidsDuration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)

Habitat10 – 14 days life cycle

Underside of leaves, young shoots, green branches

Egg
Nymph
Adult

Toxoptera aurantii on young leaves and bloom

Aphis gossypii on the underside of a leaf

Aphids (Toxoptera aurantii and Aphis gossypii)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Symptoms: Aphids form colonies on the underside of tender leaves, succulent stem, flower buds and small cherelles.
Damage: nymphs and adults pierce the leaf tissue and suck sap. Plant growth is stunted. Virus vector. Premature shedding of flowers and curlingof leaves.
Usually occur during hot summers and after the rainy season. Favored by stressed plants, lack of natural predators.
Prevention:Improve plantation management to avoid plant stress, especially microclimate and SOM levels to ensure sufficient nutrient andwater supply. Provide areas with flowering host plants to attract predator populations long-term.
Mechanical control: If aphid population is limited to just a few leaves or shoots then the infestation can be pruned out to provide control; sturdy
plants can be sprayed with a strong jet of water to knock aphids from leaves
Biological control: Lacewings, ladybugs, gall midge, predatory bugs, hoverflies, parasitic wasps, as well as Metarhizium anisopliae or
Entomophtorales ssp fungus
Chemical control: Oil-soap spray or neem oil. Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort.
Threshold level: 20% infestation

77
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Egg

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)
1 - 3 weeks

Larva

3 - 4 weeks

Pupa

1 - 2 weeks

Adult< 1 monthStage

Moths and Butterflies(General Info)

Hairy caterpillars defoliation

Pericallia ricini adult

HabitatOn the surface or inserted into host plantFeeding on or in tissue of host plant
Hanging from the host plant or rolled up into a leaf. Some pupate in the
soil.
Mobile winged

Typical hairy caterpillar (Eupterote Testacea)

Caterpillars (Lymantriya sp., Euproctis sp., Dasychira sp. Pericallia ricini, Spilosoma obliqua, Metanastria hyrtaca, Hyposidra talaca, Parasa lepida)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Damage:serious leaf damage on seedlings and young trees. Skeletonized leaves
Favored by reversed dry/rainy seasons.
Prevention: Maintain high levels of biodiversity to provide alternative food sources for caterpillars as well as high numbers of natural enemies.
Inspect plants regularly and remove early colonies before the damage gets out of hand.
Biological control: Entomopathogenic bacterium Bacillus thuringensis (Bt); predatory bugs like Macrolophus pygmaeus or Nesidiocoris tenuis;parasitic wasps (Trichogramma ssp)
Chemical control: Neem oil or Pyrethrum products. In worst case: foliar spray of acephate @ 2g/liter targeted only at the infested section of theplant.
Warning: this insecticide is on RA’s risk mitigation list and needs to be used within an IPM program and following risk mitigation measures as
explained by Annex 7. Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carrying out insecticides application, always
consult the list of prohibited and risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.
Threshold level: 10% of trees affected

78
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Camouflaged CPB (Conopomorpha crammerella) mothunderneath a horizontal branchInternal damage of CPB (Conopomorpha crammerella)
Damage of CPB (Characoma stictigrapta)

Cocoa Pod-borer/CPB (Characoma stictigrapta, Conopomorpha crammerella)
Pod-borers are serious pests of cocoa. Characoma stictigrapta occurs in West Africa.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Damage: CPB attacks pods at all maturity stages. Infested pods ripen unevenly and prematurely. Pod-borer larvae bore holes into pods of all
sizes producing a mass of frass held together by silk at the entrance of the holes. If infestation happens during Cherelle stage it wilts. Infestation
at an early stage leads to heavy losses because the quantity and quality of the bean becomes seriously affected.
Favored by inadequately drained soils and bad plantation management.
Prevention: Adjust shade level and improve aeration through appropriate spacing or pruning. Improve soil drainage if necessary. Harvest andremove diseased pods completely and regularly.
Mechanical control: Wrap pods in paper bags or a polythene sleeve to create a physical barrier to oviposition when they are 8 – 10cm long.
Biological control: Ants such as Dolichoderus thoracicus and Oecophylla smaragdina The fungus Beauvaria bassiana has also been found toinfect larvae and pupae, causing a 100% death rate. The use of traps with synthetic pheromones or female pod borer moths can control theattack if enough males are caught, thereby interrupting their reproduction cycle.
Chemical control: CPB can be controlled by relatively small amounts of contact pyrethroid applied to the undersides of lower branches, keeps
the CPB population below economic damage levels. However, this is usually not economically viable. Use of locally approved synthetic
pesticides only as a last resort.
Threshold level: The insect is usually not controlled except for improved sanitation and plantation management. If pheromone traps areavailable the threshold level can be set to 10 males per trap per week.

79
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Cocoa stem borer (Eulophonotus Myrmeleon) larva inside abranchHole in a stem caused by the tunneling of the Cocoa stem
borer (Eulophonotus Myrmeleon) larva.

Adult stem borer moth (Eulophonotus myrmeleon)

Cocoa stem borer (Eulophonotus Myrmeleon)used to be considered a minor pest but has increasingly become a problem in West Africa.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Damage: Larvae tunnel in the cocoa trees, causing damage to around 5% of trees. Recovery from the damage is unlikely. Stems show holes,
sometimes with protruding frass at the base of the tree or gum oozing out of the holes. Tunneling causes discoloration on stems and shoots. Two
periods of severe attacks occur during the rainy seasons with peaks in June and December/January.
Prevention: Weekly monitoring to prevent infestation.
Monitor for adults appearing in August and February. Strict sanitation. Encourage woodpecker populations.
Mechanical control: Pruning of infested branches. Uproot and destroy heavily infested trees. Planting of barriers like dense stands of taro has
been suggested. Barriers need to be 15m wide and established before new plantings. Removing alternative host plants is also recommended.
Plugging holes to prevent adult moths from emerging could help.
Biological control: Release of parasitoids like Bracon zeuzerae or Glyptomorpha ssp. Fungus Beauveria bassiana where commercially available.
Chemical control: Sprays are ineffective and not recommended.
Threshold level: As soon as bore holes are observed action needs to be taken, even on an individual tree basis.

80
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Spiny bollworm (Earias biplaga)attacks cocoa amongst a wide range of other host plants.
•••

Spiny bollworm (Earias biplaga)•••

Damage: The larva eats the growing tips of the stems and young soft leaves. Feeding activity prevents theplant from growing properly to form canopy.
Favored by high light (no shade) conditions.
Prevention: Plant fast growing shade trees in newly established plantations. Increase biodiversity, as thebollworm prefers wild host plants and will use those as food source instead of cocoa. In a ecosystem withhigher biodiversity the number of natural enemies is also increased.
Biological control: Entomopathogenic bacterium Bacillus thuringensis (Bt); predatory bugs like Macrolophus
pygmaeus or(Nesidiocoris tenui); parasitic wasps (Trichogramma ssp)
Chemical control: Not necessary. Biological control measures are sufficient.
Threshold level: 40% of trees are affected.

Earias biplaga adult moth81
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Egg

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)
30 hours

Larva> 1 week

Tunnel inside fruits

Pupa

6 days

Inside the fruit or in the groundStage

Fruit flies(General Info)

Habitat
Inserted into fruit tissue

Adult
Mobile, winged fly in search of host plant and mating partner
Fruit flies (Bactrocera dorsalis and Ceratitis capitata) tiny flies (4 - 6mm long) attack Cocoa in Kenya.
••••
Fruit fly adults (Bactrocera dorsalis)••

Damage: caused by maggots developing inside the pod after adult flies lay their eggs in maturing fruit pods.
Secondary rot infections increase the level of damage.
Worsened by infected fruit pods remaining on the ground where maggots develop and re-infest the crop.
Temperatures of 20ºC - 30ºC.
Prevention: Thorough monitoring and crop sanitation. Collect and destroy all dropped and infected pods to
avoid pest numbers build up and to cut re-infestation cycles. Threshold level monitoring is usually done withbait traps and calculated as captured flies / week. Wrap pods at early stage in paper bags or a polythene
sleeve to create a physical barrier to oviposition.
Biological control: bait traps
Threshold level: 4 flies per trap/week

Fruit fly adults (Ceratitis capitata)82
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Eggs

Duration (depends on species
and environmental conditions)
7 daysNymph

3 weeksStage
Thrips (General Info)

Habitat
Inserted into plant tissue
Before morphing into adults nymphs hide in the ground without feeding

Adult< 30 days
Underside of leaves
Thrips (Selenothrips rubrocinatus, Heliothrips rubrocinctus) and Red-banded thrips (Selenothrips rubrocinctus)
•
•
•
•
•
Red-banded Thrips (Selenothrips
rubrocinctus)•••

Symptoms: Thrips attack older leaves, flowers and shoots, rasping plant tissue and sucking sap. Attacked leaves
drop off, leaving bare shoots with few young leaves at the tip. Plants lose vigor and leaves shrivel.
Damage: Infestation of flowers causes poor fruit formation. Even locally limited infestations may cause
considerable damage. Virus vector.
Favored by drought stress. Temperatures of 25ºC - 30ºC, low humidity, presence of pollen.
Prevention: Conserve natural enemies.
Mechanical control: Blue sticky traps (use only during the infestation period. As soon as you see no targeted pest
being trapped, it is best to remove them to prevent unwanted insects being trapped, which might break thebalance in the environment)
Biological control: Anthocorid bugs are important in natural control of thrips. Predatory mites can be used tocontrol thrips. they should be introduced at the beginning of the crop season and released several times overthe season.
Chemical control: horticultural oil or soap-oil solution can be sprayed to suffocate the thrips.
Threshold level: 1-2 per leaf during drought and 2-3 during rains.

Thrips damage on leaf

83
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

6.2 Common Cocoa Diseases
Fungal diseases are of major importance both to the trees and the pods, and the disease severity usually varies with variety. Of major importanceare Botryodiplodia theobromae, Oncobasidium Theobroma, and Moniliophthora spp strains. The other large group of diseases is caused byoomycetes, fungus-like microorganisms, like Phytophtora spp strains.
Infection with Phytophtora palmivora can lead to different disease expressions. During nursery stage it usually causes root rot, which leads todamping off, called seedling blight. In mature plantations it leads to black pod rot. However, similar diseases that are also classified as black pod
rot can also be caused by several other Phytophtora species. In West Africa and in Trinitario cocoa hybrids Phytophtora palmivora causes stem
cankers.
Seedling blight (Phytophthora palmivora)
•
•
•
•
•
•

Damage: Lesions can appear on leaves or stems. Lesions develop into complete blighting of leaves or
blackened stem, quickly causing the death of seedlings. More severe on 1 - 4 months old seedlings.
Favored by waterlogging and high rainfall.
Prevention: Remove and destroy all infected seedlings in the nursery. The disease is soil-borne and infectedsoil must therefore not be reused or at least be sterilized. Provide adequate drainage and avoid
waterlogging.
Biologicl control: none yet.
Chemical control: Prophylactic soil drenches with Bordeaux mixture 1% or copper oxychloride 2 -2.5%.
Threshold level: Immediate action to improve drainage and to remove diseased seedling is needed.

Seedling blight (Phytophthora palmivora)

84
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Black Pod rot (Phytophthora palmivora) damage on pod

Black pod rot internal damage (left) and white fungus starting to cover the pod (on the right)

Black Pod rot (Phytophthora palmivora, P. megakarya and P. capsica)
fungal disease which can be caused by a variety of pathogens
Damage: Pods can be attacked at any stage of development, and the initial symptoms are small, hard, dark spots on any part of the pod.
Internal tissues, including the beans, shrivel to form a mummified pod, turning dark brown. It can eventually be covered with white fungus growth.
The internal tissues as well as the beans become discolored. If beans are almost ripe at the time the pod gets infected, they might escape damage
because they are already separated from the husk.
P. palmivora causes global yield loss of 20-30% and tree deaths of 10% annually,
P. megakarya is the most important and aggressive pathogen in Central and West Africa. If not treated can cause entire crop yield loss in a season
P. capsici is widespread in Central and South America, causing significant losses.
•• Favored by conditions of excessive rain or high humidity, insufficient sunshine, and temperatures below 21 °C.
Inadequate spacing and low aeration. In dry conditions or seasons, the fungus survives in flower cushions, mummified (dry) pods, pod husks and in thesoil. Pods and other tissue injured by pests are highly susceptible to infection.
• Prevention: Regular and complete harvesting is key. Maintain high levels of sanitation by periodically removing and disposing infected pods anddebris.Optimize shade and aeration through appropriate spacing and pruning to reduce surface wetness. Improve soil fertility and apply
sufficient mulch layers.
• Chemical control: Copper-containing fungicides at frequent intervals from the start of the main rainy season.
• Threshold level:Immediate sanitation is required once first symptoms appear.

85
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Purple discoloration visible once the lesion causedby Stem Canker (Phytophthora palmivora) is scraped off.

Lesion caused by Stem Canker

Stem Canker (Phytophthora palmivora)
•

•
•
•
•
•

Damage: Cankers appear either on the main trunk, jorquettes or fan branches. Starts as greyish brown oval or round lesion on the outer bark,oozing a liquid, that forms rusty-brown crusts. The tissues beneath the outer lesion is purple (rot). If uncontrolled lesions will completely cover thestem hindering water circulation in the plant tissue, eventually causing the death of the tree. Causes significant losses in West Africa and in
Trinitario hybrids.
Favored by wet, damp conditions, and inadequate drainage. Bark damage is necessary for wood infection and canker development.
Prevention: Increase soil organic matter levels to improve drainage. Avoid injuries to the bark. Cut and remove wilted branches.
Biological control: none available yet.
Chemical control: It can be controlled in the initial stages by the scraping off of diseased bark followed by wound dressing with Bordeaux mixture
or copper oxychloride paste.
Threshold level: Immediate sanitation is required once the first symptoms appear.

86
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Witches’ broom (Moniliophthora perniciosa) is one of the most devastating and widespread diseases in South America,
the Caribbean and Panama.

Whitish fungal growth on the midveinsof leaves killed by Witches’ Broom(Moniliophthora perniciosa)•

Damage:cocoa trees produce branches with no fruit and ineffective leaves. Pods are distorted and show
uneven ripening. Drastically reduced yields.

•

Favored by high level of humidity (=80%) and temperatures between 20 - 30ºC. Spread by water, wind, seeds
on workers or through infected plant material moved between plantations.

•

Prevention: Plant resistant varieties/ clones e.g. those derived from Sca6 parent trees. Pruning provides the best
control of Witches' Broom. Completely remove of all infected plant parts. Improve aeration. CIRAD identified a
few resistant genotypes from French Guiana.

•

Chemical control: Fungicides. Use of locally approved synthetic pesticides only as a last resort. Before carryingout insecticides application, always consult the list of prohibited and risk mitigation insecticides of Annex 7 of
the Rainforest Alliance’s 2020 Standard.

Cocoa beans inside the pod
destroyed by Witches’ Broom

87
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Charcoal Pod Rot (Botryodiplodia theobromae)
•
•
•
•
•
•

Damage: Light yellow spot develop anywhere on the pod surface and spread rapidly later turning dark brown.
The entire pod including the beans turn black. Beans don’t develop fully and get mummified if infected at an
early stage.
Favored by dry season, on trees which are under stress. Caused by wounds on pods from insect or rodent
damage. Typical disease in badly managed plantations.
Prevention: Control insect pests or rodents that could cause injury to the pods. Improve shade and soil
management as well as sanitation. Increase water retention capacity by adding sufficient amounts of organic
matter (mulching) to avoid drought stress.
Biological control: none yet
Chemical control: Spraying with Bordeaux mixture 1%.
Threshold level: Plantation management should be improved immediately once first symptoms appear.

Damage of Charcoal Pod Rot

88
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

6.2.1•••

Frosty Pod Rot damage•••

Frosty pod/Watery pod rot (Moniliophthora roreri)fungal disease.
Damage: affects only immature pods. Spots appear on the on surface of immature pods, turn brown andrapidly enlarge to cover the entire pod surface. Causes serious losses in South-Western parts of South America.
Favored by periods of high rainfall.
Prevention: Selecting varieties that produce pods during the dry season. Remove pods showing symptoms of
disease.
Biological control: none yet.
Chemical control:application of copper containing fungicides will help reduce disease incidence.
Threshold level: Immediate sanitary action once first symptoms appear is recommended to avoid spread.

Frosty Pod Rot damage on beans

Vascular Streak Dieback VSD (Oncobasidium theobroma) fungal disease•••

Vascular Streak Dieback (VSD)•••

Damage: The first indication of the disease is a characteristic yellowing of one or two leaves on the second or
third flush behind the growing tip. Diseased leaves fall within a few days of turning yellow and the other leaves
on the shoot show similar symptoms. When the infected shoot is split lengthwise there is always a characteristic
brown streaking. Causes the tree to dry out, starting from the branch tips, usually resulting in the death of thetree.
Favored by dry weather conditions and wind that disperses spores.
Prevention: Can be controlled by regular pruning of chupons and disposing of diseased branches. Pruning
diseased material about 30cm below the discolored tissue prevents further expansion of infection. Don’t locatecocoa nurseries near a diseased area, and don’t receive seedlings from diseased areas. Seedlings can also beraised under plastic to prevent infections from nearby plantations.
Resistant Varieties: like CCRP-1 to CCRP-7 from India.
Chemical Control: Not effective.
Threshold level: Sanitation measures need to be undertaken immediately first symptoms appear.

89
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Swollen Shoot is a viral disease transmitted by mealybugs. It is a problem only in Togo, Ghana, Cote d'Ivorie andNigeria.
•
•
•

6.2.2

•
•
•

Cocoa Swollen Shoot
Virus/CSSV

Damage: Swelling of shoots or stems accompanied by red leaf veining, especially in younger leaves withchlorotic interveinal mottling. Pods are uncharacteristically smooth and mottled, with reduced beans.
Progressive defoliation may occur ultimately leading to the death of the tree.
Favored by: high levels of mealybug infestation. Alternative hosts: several tree species such as Ceiba
pentandra, Sterculia tragacantha, Adansonia digitate, Cola chlamydantha and Cola gigantia have beenshown to be alternative host of CSSV in Ghana.
Prevention: If infections are detected early, this spot treatment of removing and destroying infected trees andthose surrounding (up to 5 m from infected tree if <10 trees are infected and up to a distance of 15m if >100
trees are infected) to prevent further spread is carried out; Establish a non-host plant (e.g. oil palm) barrier of atleast 10m to isolate cocoa plantations from each other.
Control mealybugs.
Chemical control: none
Threshold level: immediate sanitation action is needed once first symptoms appear.

Cherelle/Young Pod Wilt: Physiological disorder
•
•
•
•
•
•

Damage: Cherelles die off and mummify to a degree this is a natural process to avoid overbearing but can leadto significant losses. Also encourages secondary infection with Anthracnose.
Favored by tree-weakening factors like pest or disease attack, low soil fertility or bad plantation management.
Prevention: Improve soil fertility and soil organic matter levels. Appropriate planting density or avoiding
overcrowding of trees.
Biological control: none
Chemical control: none
Threshold level: Signs of infection should prompt improvements in soil fertility management.

Cherelle wilt

90
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Photo credits:
Kissan Kerala, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University (TNAU), India
Jeffrey W. Lotz, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Bugwood.org
Florida Division of Plant Industry
Lyle J. Buss, University of Florida
Infonet Biovision
CABI - Cocoa Research Institute of Ghana
CABI - Plantwise Knowledge BankDr YSRHU University Hortiportal
https://plantvillage.psu.edu/topics/cocoa-cacao/infos http://www.dropdata.org/cocoa/cocoa_prob.htm (RPB)
Wikipedia - Bernard Dupont
University of Florida
Farmersgrid, Adhish Technologies, Madurai, Tamil Nadu, India
Forum for Agricultural Risk Management in Development
Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research - Helen Tsatsia & Grahame Jackson
Scott Bauer, USDA
Jake Teo
Depositphotos.com
Raymond Cloyd
Akua Konadu Antwi-Agyakwa
Haravu Lokesh
Luntian Farm91
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

7 BANANA SPECIFIC GUIDANCE
Disclaimer
This crop specific IPM guidance does not intend to cover all possible pests per crop. The
intention is to present the most common pests /diseases that affect certain crops in several
regions worldwide.Introduction
For producing and exporting countries, banana crops (Musa AAA) are of utmost economic
importance. Besides contributing towards food security, banana cultivation is a source of
direct and indirect jobs and foreign exchange. However, banana production offers many
challenges, since it is an extensive crop with long production periods (the average plantationspans 25 year), making it susceptible to attack from pests and diseases. Among the most
relevant pests and diseases for banana production are black sigatoka (Mycosphaerellafijienses), insects (diverse genera and species attacking the bunch, leaves and rhizome),
weeds (diverse plant genera and species), post-harvest fungi (Fusarium spp., Colletotrichumspp.) and moko disease (Ralstonia solanacearum). In addition to the above, a new threat has
appeared in recent years, Fusarium wilt (Fusarium oxysporum f.s. cubensi race 4), which could
devastate entire plantations.
As a consequence of losses caused by pests, Integrated Pest Management (IPM) (Stephen
and Hansen, cited by Cubillo, 2013) was established in 1959 as an integral strategy for lowering
production costs and protecting human and environmental health. The IPM strategy was
adopted in banana production after a series of historic crises in plant protection of the crop,
characterized by dependence on pesticides and their undesirable effects, such as surging of
new pests, resistant organisms, cost increases, and pest-associated losses.
The ultimate goal of an integrated pest management strategy is to grow healthy crops
minimizing pesticide use.
General recommendations
Site selection for the cropGrowth conditions

Altitude

Slope
Temperature
RainfallHumidity
Selection of adequate varieties bysite

Latitude between 0 and 15º; Class 1 and 2 soils; 0-1%
sloped planes; 1.20 m deep; loamy, light-loamy, loamysandy; loamy-silty textures; pH 5.5-7.0; water table > 1.20 m;
soils without rocks; no flooding threat.
Optimum altitude between 0-300 meters above sea level
for lowland banana. Between 350 and 1500 meters above
sea level for midland and highland banana.
Optimum slope between 0-1%
Between 21 and 30 °C; mean optimum temperature at
25 C.
100-180 mm/month. Less precipitation requires
supplementary irrigation.
50%, although this is not a limiting variable.
The three most important varieties in the Cavendish
subgroup (AAA) worldwide are: Grand Dwarf (normal
Grand Dwarf, Oaxacan, French) Williams and Valery.

92
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Measures for erosion control

Maintaining soil health and fertility

Maintaining adequate levels oforganic matter in the soil

1. Plant on leveled ground or level the ground when
preparing soils.
2. Keep a good natural vegetation cover (between 50 and60%) without affecting production.
3. Maintain an adequate population density according to
the variety and type of soil.
4. Reduce the chemical burden on the crop by reducing
synthetic pesticide usage and increasing biological andbotanical pesticide usage.
5. Place sedimentation or sediment gauges in both thecultivation area and at the base of drainage canals(primary, secondary and tertiary canals).
6. Establish vegetative coverage in the drainage canals (inthe entire drainage network) to prevent canalembankment and base erosion.
7. In operations that use irrigations, apply only the layer ofwater necessary for the crop.
1. Use and conservation of organic matter; this is thesource of fertility for the soil and improves its physical andchemical characteristics.
2. Reduction of synthetic fertilizer use (if production notcompromised), specially of those that are a source ofnitrogen.
3. Adequate maintenance of the drainage network inorder to have good soil aeration and permeability.
4. Maintenance of a good vegetative coverage in thecrop area.
5. Determine need for additional nutrient application to
the crop, based on results of foliar and soil analyses.
6. Use soil conditioners containing calcium sources(dolomite limestone, gypsum rock, silicon) to improve soil
structure.
7. Adequate and responsible use of agrochemicals isessential for maintaining good soil health.
1. Leave crop residues on the field.
3. Keep good vegetative coverage on the field.
4. Maintain adequate crop population density.
5. Carry out additional applications of sources of organic
matter.
6. Good drainage.
7. Establish plant coverage in drainage canals (in the entire
drainage network).
8. Maintain adequate soil moisture.
9. Apply bioconditioners, such as marine algae and others.
10. Reduce use of synthetic fertilizers.

93
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

7.1 Common banana pests
Mealybugs
General Information
Mealybugs (scales), mealy or cottony scale, are insects belonging to the Hemiptera order and thePseudococcidae family. It is considered a quarantine pest. The main mealybugs associated with bananas are:Planococcus citri Risso, Dysmicoccus brevipes Cokerell, Pseudococcus jackbeardsleyi Gimpel and Miller,
Pseudococcus elisae Borchsenius and Ferrisa virgata Cokerell (Cubillo, 2013). Diverse species participate as
vectors of the Banana Streak Virus (BSV).
Adult female Pseudococcus
elisae17

Ants associated with banana
mealybugs (Pseudococcus
elisae)18•

Symptoms: the following are the symptoms caused by infestation of the different organs: terminal andaxillary bud deformities; leaves drying up and falling off; small and deformed fruit that fall due to theimpact of injected toxins; and lastly a severely infested host may die (Palma et al., 2019).

•

Damage: Mealybugs are known for their commercial importance, because they can affect all stages incrop development and cause crop losses and fruit rejection for export. It causes direct damage to theplant, due to suction of sap, as well as indirect damage from the amount of sugar substances(honeydew) excreted, which attract ants and favors leaf and bunch sooty mold development.
Damages caused by mealybugs are evident as plant weakening and also by discoloration of leaves
with necrosis along their edge.

•

Predisposing Conditions: Periods with prior spells of high precipitation (> 400 mm/month) favor
mealybugs.

•

Prevention:o Destruction of the habitat where the insect breeds or develops and of alternate host plants 20;
moisture reduction.
o If allowed in the production cpuntry, sulfur application at the base of the plant, pseudostem andbud up to the stalk necktie knot (a practice used for organic banana in Peru) (Pasapera 2013).

17 Taken from Cubillo 201318 Source: Taken from Cubillo 2013
20 Wide range of families: Aizoaceae, Arecaceae, Asclepiadaceae, Asteraceae, Boraginaceae, Cactaceae, Cannaceae, Chenopodiaceae, Convolvulaceae, Crassulaceae, Cruciferae, Euphorbiaceae, Lauraceae, Fabaceae, Liliaceae,

Malvaceae, Musaceae, Nyctaginaceae, Portulacaceae, Proteaceae, Rutaceae, Scrophulariaceae, Solanaceae, Verbenaceae (Williams and Granara-de-Willink, 1992; Ramos and Serna, 2004; Ben-Dov et al., 2013, cited by Palma et al.,2019). In species such as: Acalypha setosa (Cuban copperleaf), Cissus sicyoides (princess vine), Physalis pubescens (husk tomato, husk cherry or strawberry tomato), Piper tuberculatum (cord), Rivinia humilis (pigeonberry), Urera elata (nettle)
and Zingiber officinale (ginger) (Williams y Granara-de-Willink, 1992, cited by Palma et al., 2019).

94
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Presence of banana mealybugs(Pseudococcus elisae) and sooty
mold in a banana bunch. 19oProper population density management, desuckering and defoliation (cycles as appropriate).
Avoid accumulation of vegetative residue at the base of the banana plant to disfavor ants andtheir colonies, as they transport mealybugs.
Eliminate leaves that are in contact with the fruit and separate stems from pseudostems.
Carry out good premature bagging practice with closed inflorescence or an open bract.
Maintain adequate drainage throughout the plantation to prevent puddling.
Avoid applying nematicides and insecticides that affect natural enemies.
Good undergrowth grass management or control, especially Cyperacea (González & Cubillo,2014).
Avoid applying excess nitrogenated fertilization that favors plant susceptibility to increased pests(Hernández et al., 2011).
Mealybugs are generally carried by ants, thus control of this pest is recommended, as well as
correctly folding the flag leaf so ants have no access to the bunch (Melendez, 2019).

•

Mechanical Control :When recently harvested bunches have pests, pressure washing with water is necessary in order to eliminate thepest in the terminal ends of harvested bunches.

•

Biological control : Diverse natural enemies have been determined, such as parasitoids particularly from the Encyrtidae family andpredators from the Coccinellidae family. Other natural enemies are entomopathogenic fungi, lacewings and mites. Specificparasitoids for mealybugs are Anagyrus kamali Moursi and Gyranusoidea indica Shafee (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae) (Palma et al.,2019). Koppert, cited by Meléndez (2019), stated that Anagyrus pseudococci is a parasitic wasp widely recognized for its use inbiological control for mealybugs. Anagyrus spp parasites different species and mealybug stages.

•

Threshold: The basis for management is a sampling system at the pseudostem or on the bunch. This allows for the definition of areas
with the greatest problems, the age of the bunch when the pest is entering and the management option can be selected promptly(Cubillo, 2013). At this time, there is no tolerance, as it is a destination port quarantine pest.

19 Source: Taken from Cubillo 2013.

95
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Scales

General Information: Scales are insects belonging to the order Hemiptera and family Diaspididae(Loor, 2016). The most economically important species for banana cultivation is Diaspis boisduvalii,
known as banana scale or white scale. These insects are circular to stretched oval in form, thin,
flattened, white to pale yellow in color, semitransparent and between 1.2 and 2.25 mm in diameter(Orellana, 2007). They are not an important pest in all banana growing countries; however, boisduval
scale is currently one of the main insect pests in banana crops in Costa Rica and Ecuador, as well as
in the Philippines; for this reason, this scale is considered one of the 43 most severe pests of this kind in
the world (Miller and Davison cited by Solano, 2019; Loor, 206). Their main hosts are bananas andplantains (Cota and Saunders, cited by Cubillo,2013). It is a quarantine pest in destination ports(Cubillo, 2013).
Presence of Diapsis boisduvalii
scale on banana fruits. 21)

Presence of Diapsis boisduvalii
scale on the foliage.22•

Symptoms: It is a sucking insect covered with a layer of proteins (nymphal exuviae)and othersubstances that make up a carapace, cover or armor that although deposited on the body,it may be separated from it, constituting a true shield or scale (Beardsley and González;Guillén and Laprade; Antonelli cited by Solano, 2019; Cubillo, 2013). They cause concave andchlorotic lesions (Vargas et al., 2017).

•

Damageo The female adult and nymph scales feed on pseudostem sap, crown leaves andnecks of the fruit. The fungus Capnodium spp. grows on the insects’ excrement,
forming sooty mold affecting photosynthesis and reducing fruit quality andappearance. The sooty mold causes the fruit to lose presentation quality (cosmetic
quality), while also causing necrosis in affected parts (Pasapera, 2013). These lesions
cause irregular ripening of the fruit.
o It increases production costs and banana fruit rejection in packing plants anddestination ports.

21 Source: González and Cubillo, 2014
22 Source: Solano, 2019

96
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

•Favored by: Generally, conditions of high precipitation levels (high relative humidity) and high temperatures, inadequate
control of weeds that act as alternate hosts for both scale insects and ants; inadequate cleansing of the pseudostem (pooror inadequate removal of dry sheaths from the pseudostem); excess accumulated water in drainages and a high watertable due to inadequate drainage; excessive nitrogenated fertilization; application of nematicides-insecticides that affectpopulations of their natural enemies.

•

Prevention:o Deep removal of dry sheaths from the pseudostem,o Refresh the pseudostem meaning every so often, usually every 6 weeks, eliminate old rotting or dried out sections.
o Elimination of rotten/dried out sections at harvest time.
o Application of sulfur at the base of the plant, pseudostems and shoot or bud as far as the rachis “necktie knot” (apractice used in organic bananas in Peru) (Pasapera, 2013).
o Good management of population density, up to date removal of leaves (cycles as appropriate).
o Elimination of leaves touching the fruit.
o Separation of the bunch from the pseudostem.
o Implement a good premature bagging practice, in such a way that the person carrying out this activity avoids
touching the leaves of infested plants.
o Maintain adequate drainage in the plantation avoiding puddling.
o Avoid application of nematicides and insecticides that may affect natural enemies.
o Avoid excessive nitrogenated fertilization that may favor plant susceptibility for increased pest attacks (Hernández,
et al., 2011).
o In some farms in Ecuador, the most affected pseudostems are removed, being very careful not to propagate scale
insects and transmit them to the remaining plants in the area (Meléndez, 2019).
o Adequate weed management and/or control, since some weeds may become alternate hosts for ants living insymbiosis with scale and favor increasing their colonies by not allowing their predators and parasites to regulate
populations (Loor, 2016).

•

Mechanical Control: In the event of pest presence in recently harvested bunches, it is important to pressure wash them withwater, in order to eliminate the pest from terminal parts of harvested bunches.

•

Biological control:o Guillén cited by Vargas, et al., 2017, indicates and confirms that scales have a very broad group of natural
enemies, such as parasitic wasps of the Aphytis family, predators from the Coccinelidae family (Pentilia sp.,
Delphatus sp.) and chrysopas (Ceraeochrysa sp.). In addition to the aforementioned, populations of white scale or
D. boisduvalii have been regulated by net-winged insects, such as Chrysoperla sp. (Cubillo, 2013). (Cubillo, 2013).

97
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

ooSolano, 2019, reports on the presence of three parasitic species for boisduval scale (Diaspis boisduvalii: Hemiptera:
Diaspididae) in banana plantations (Musa AAA, Cavendish sub-group) from the Costa Rican Caribbean slope,which were identified at the genus level as Coccobius spp. (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae), Plagiomerus spp.
(Hymenoptera: Encrytidae) and Aphytis spp. (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae) as well as one hyperparasitic specimengrouped in the Ablerus genus (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae).
Use of entomopathogens such as Beauveria bassiana and Metarhizium sp. if the products are available in the area
(González and Cubillo, 2014).

Threshold: There is no specific threshold; for quarantine pests, the threshold is zero. Sampling is carried out to determine entry timesof the pest and to determine the effectiveness of management measures.

Weeds (diverse plant genera and species)

Paspalum conjugatum Berg. 23

General Information:• Weeds are plants that compete quantitatively but not qualitatively with crops; they are
detrimental by means of additive effects (competition) and allelopathy. Furthermore, it has
been proven that some weeds are alternate hosts for pests. However, not all is untoward. Most
weeds provide good soil coverage, preventing erosion. Grasses in drainage or irrigation
canals are magnificent at preserving slopes.
• Furthermore, they add organic matter to the soil and allow recycling and conservation ofminerals in the soil; some fix nitrogen and all of them help maintain wildlife and natural
biological balance.

Parthenium hysterophorus L.24•

Weed control should be integrated and should follow a study of each weed, their growthhabits and control.

•

Symptoms: Among the effects caused by the interference of weeds in banana cultivation thefollowing have been reported: reduction in height, pseudostem thickness and bunch weight;
nitrogen deficiency caused by competition and reflected in yellowing of young leaves; slower

23 Source: Taken from fr. wikipedia.org
24 Source: Personal files 2019

98
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

growth with few suckers; flowering delay with the consequent lengthening of the crop’s cycle;
reduced yield.
•

Damage: A critical period of weed competition during crop establishment is recognized inbanana production. A second period of weed competition occurs between blooming of theflower or budding of the bunch and thickening of the fruit. Costs related to weed control are
estimated to be around 5 to 6% of total agronomic operation costs (Quintero y Carbono,2015), as well as lower yields in perennial crops, such as banana, in the order of 23 to 62%.

•

Prevention: The best method for the fight against weeds is to prevent introducing new species
in the fields, as well as the systematic reduction of the weed seed bank in the soil. Anothermeasure is the establishment of an effective monitoring system.

•

Mechanical Control: The most common methods for weed control are:- Soil preparation before planting, which is the basis for eliminating perennial weeds; if
present.
- Manual control (clearing), which is a routine practice to eliminate weeds between
plant rows.
- Use of mulch (padding) for weed control and soil moisture preservation.
- Use of vegetative cover interspersed with banana plants; aside from aiding
production, could help improve soil fertility preservation.

•

Biological control: No references of practical use for biological control against specific weeds
are known.

•

Threshold: 40-60% weed cover

Cyperus rotundus (L.) Retz 25

25 Source: Taken from plants.ces.ncsu.edu

99
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Weevil borer (picudo)
General Information• The weevil borer (Cosmopolites sordidus Germar; Coleoptera: Cuculionidae) is considered
one of the most important insect pests for banana cultivation 28. It is found throughout
tropical and subtropical areas where banana, plantain, abaca (Musa textilis) and other
Musaceae are cultivated 29.
• The adult weevil is black in color and measures 10-15 millimeters; it is free-living, although it ismore commonly found among foliage sheaths, on the ground at the plant’s base or
associated with crop residues 30.
•

Symptoms: Wright, cited by Ajanel (2003), determined that putrefaction can occur incompletely perforated rhizomes that have been reduced to a blackened mass of tissue,
while leaves die prematurely. Infested plants have a pale yellowish-green color and soft
foliage. Young sprouts are frequently withered and their development is deficient.

•

Damage: The weevil borer reduces yields due to smaller size and inferior quality of bunches,
as well as delayed maturation and shortened useful life of plantations due to the poor
budding quality. Perforations caused by larvae of this insect can be utilized by otherorganisms as an entryway, mainly by the screwworm Castniomera humboldti (Lepidoptera;
Castaniidae) or by microorganisms such as Ralstonia solanacearum and Fusarium
oxysporum (Ajanel, 2003). The presence of rot caused by bacteria of the Erwinia sp. genus
in the corms was directly proportional to corm damage by weevils 31.

•

Favored by: Weevils are active at night and are very susceptible to desiccation; thus they
prefer humid conditions and avoid light (Gold and Messiaen, 2000). Weevils are attracted
to host plant volatile substances emitted by recently cut corms. Furthermore, they can feed
on decomposing vegetal material. Corms left on the ground in the plantation are visited by
the insect at night and eggs are laid before corms are planted, causing the loss of recently
planted material32.

Adult Cosmopolites sordidus 26.

Plants overturned or fallen due toweevil borer damage. 27

26 Source: Gold and Messiaen, 2000
27 Source: Pasapera, 2013
28 Cubillo and Guzmán, 2003
29 Cubillo, 2013
30 Gold and Messiaen, 2000
31 Cubillo and Guzmán, 2003

32 Cubillo, 2013

100
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

•
Weevil borer damage in thecorm.( Source: Alarcón and
Jiménez, 2012.)

Adult Weevil borer parasitized by
Beauveria bassiana. (Source:
Ramírez and Torres, 2016)

Preventiono Use vigorous and healthy seed (uninfested) in good conditions (Ajanel, 2003).
o Submerge vegetative seeds or corms in water at 52-55°C for 15-27 minutes. These baths
are very effective for eliminating nematodes, but will only kill one-third of weevil borer
larvae (Gold and Messiaen, 2000).
o Whenever possible, new planting areas should be free of Musaceae residues and thepresence of the insect (Cubillo, 2013).
o Carry out adequate weed control.
o Maintenance of well drained soils.
o Opportune dedaughtering.
o Maintain adequate plant nutrition. Alarcón and Jiménez (2012) recommend correcting
boron and potassium deficiencies.
o Maintain an adequate propping system.
o Adequate management of the irrigation system.
o Adequate management of other pests and diseases.
o Do not leave the bent pseudostem after harvesting, i.e. a hanging pseudostem end
after the harvest (Pasapera, 2013).
o To maintain low weevil populations, old rhizomes should be dug up and removed, as
well as waste and other vegetative materials where weevils can reproduce. Remove
buds and corms regularly. When harvesting the bunch, the pseudostem should be cut
close to the ground (Ajanel, 2003).

101
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Mechanical Control:o

Use of traps made from pseudostems or corms, that function as food attractors, can be employed at high densities (25-50
traps/ha). Insects are collected manually from these traps (Cubillo, 2013).

oa high number of pheromone traps can be used to manage reduction of the C. sordidus adult population and 6 to 25
traps/ha can be set. This method can capture up to 18 times more than pseudostem traps (Cubillo, 2013).

•

Biological control: Insect larvae have the following predators: Plaesius javanus, Hololepta quadridentada (Coleoptera:
Histeridae) and Dactylosternum hydrophiloides (Coleoptera: Hydrophilidae), the ants: Pheidole megacephala, P.
guineense, Azteca sp. and Tetramorium guineense (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) (Cubillo, 2013; Gold and Messiaen, 2000).
Additionally, nematodes from the families Heterorhaditidae (Heterorhabditis spp.) and Steinernematidae (Steinernemaspp.), attack both adult and larval weevils in the field, (Cubillo, 2013; Gold and Messiaen, 2000). Yet cost and efficacy ofthese nematodes allow their use only where weevil borers are found in high population densities, currently limiting extensive
use. Entomopathogenic fungi such as Beauveria bassiana (Balsamo) and Metarhizium anisopliae (Merch) are sources forcontrolling this insect (Cubillo, 2013). Under laboratory and field conditions, some strains of B. bassiana can cause a greaterthan 60% mortality (Cubillo, 2013). Other reported larval and egg predators are Euborellia annulipes Lucas (Dermaptera:
Carcinophoridae) y Labia borelli Burr (Dermaptera: Labiidae), Ontophagus sp. (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) and Eutochia
sp. (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) (Navas, 2011). Chemical combat includes the use of vegetal extracts with insecticidal
properties, such as neem (Azadirachta indica A. Juss), which contains insecticidal compounds such as phytoalexins.
Musabyimana, cited by Navas (2011), determined that powder from neem seeds at 60 to 100 gr/plant at planting time andlater at four-month intervals for a three-year period, was effective in combatting weevils, causing an interference inlocating the host by producing repellence, reduced oviposition, anti-fedant and growth inhibition in larvae. Gold andMessiaen (2000) mention that immersion of sprouts in a 20% solution of A. indica during planting protects the young plantsfrom lesions, reducing oviposition through the repellent effect on weevils.

•

Threshold: There is no unified criterion regarding a threshold for action; however, Alarcón and Jiménez (2012), indicate that
20 to 25 traps per hectare are placed, then checked two to three days later after being installed and afterwards on a
weekly basis, for no more than four weeks. During these revisions, trapped insects are collected and counted. If theaverage number of insects per trap is greater than 5, massive trapping should be applied to lower the population; abiological insecticide or in extreme cases, a chemical insecticide should be applied.

•

Sampling: If sampling lesions in the corm or rhizome, management measures are recommended when there is an averageof > 15 lesions(Cubillo, 2013).

102
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Nematodes

Lesions caused by R. similis inbanana roots.( Source: Guzmán,
2011.)

General Information
Nematodes are somewhat transparent, filiform animals with an unsegmented body that is covered by ahyaline cuticle, which has stripes or other marks; they have a round transversal cross-section, with amouth but no extremities or other appendages (Guzmán, 2011; Agrios, 2005).
There are 146 species of nematodes reported in Musaceae, distributed in 43 genera. Of the total of
nematodes, 10% correspond to phytoparasitic species representing an important factor for reduction in
many crops.
According to Araya, cited by Salazar, et al., 2012, the most devastating and widely disseminatedphytonematodes are the migratory endoparasites: Radopholus similis, Pratylenchus coffeae, and thesemi-endoparasite Helicotylenchus multicinctus. R. similis (a borer nematode) is the most important inbanana crops. Thus, in this study we will focus on the measures for managing and/or controlling R. similis,
which are also applicable to the other species of nematodes that attack bananas.
•

Symptoms: According to the mode of action of the different species, the symptoms vary frommost severe, which is uprooting the plant, to the less obvious, such as prolonged production
cycles (Morales, 2014). Bayer, cited by Sierra (1993), states that when the nematode populations
exceed certain levels, symptoms appear in the aerial part, such as yellowing, wilting, which isespecially strong at critical times, due to deficient water absorption; with reduced stalk diameterand reduction in the number and size of the leaves; delayed growth of the daughters, reduced
size and weight of the bunches, plantation degeneration and the need to re-establish or
renovate in just a few years, loss of anchorage and possible plant falls.

•

Damage: López, cited by Sierra (993), mentions several types of damage produced bynematodes: they invade the root system, destroying it; they reduce the anchorage, causing
plants to fall with a consequent loss of the bunch; they drain the strength of the crop and cause
nutritional deficiencies; they are the entry way for numerous diseases caused by microorganisms;
they cause fertilizer waste as well as destroying the plants’ defense mechanisms by interferingwith their enzymatic system.
R. similis is the most abundant and the main phytoparasite species constituting between 82 and
97% of the nematode population in roots and corms (Guzmán, 2011); and when this
phytonematode isn’t controlled, it reduces the bunch weight and, yield is reduced (t ha-1) due
to the effect of uprooting, between 60 and 52% in first and second harvest, respectively. But yield
reduction may go as high as 80% (Guzmán, 2011).

Lesions caused by P.coffeae inbanana roots. (Source: Soto,
2008.)

Superficial lesions caused by H.
multicinctus in banana roots.
Source: Coyne and Kidane, 2019.

•

103
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

•Favored by: The nematodes are concentrated primarily within the first 50 cm of depth. Their
mobility is minimal, some of them being able to travel a few centimetres throughout their
lifetime, so that their diffusion operates by external means, such as agricultural machinery,irrigation water, humans and animals, among others. They move more rapidly when the soil is wet(Sierra, 1993).

Banana plant uprooted withsevere damage from R. similis.
(Source: Licona and Mldonado,n.d.)Prevention:
o
o
o

o

o

o
o
o
o

Use clean nematode-free planting material. Submersion of seed or corms in 52-55 °C water for 15-27 minutes isrecommended. These baths are very efficient for eliminating nematodes (Gold and Messiaen, 2000).
Whenever possible, use plants sourced from in vitro tissue cultures (Sarah et al., 1996).
Before establishing a crop, try solarization; that is, treating the soil with heat from solar radiation. Sun exposure of“peeled” material for two weeks may further reduce nematode populations. However, this technique should not be
used on small suckers, since they are quite fragile and need to be replanted rapidly (Sarah et al., 1996).
Optimal soil preparation should be carried out before planting, for better growth and development of root systems inloose soils. This will result in greater amounts and longer roots, as opposed to what will happen in heavy andcompacted soils.
Constant incorporation of well-processed organic conditioners, such as chicken manure, coffee pulp, vermicompost,
bokashi, ash, swine manure, etc., will promote root health and vigor in Musaceae crops, enabling them to better
compete against nematodes.
Apply a balanced fertilization to the plants.
Provide adequate water layers through the irrigation system according to banana crop requirements.
Application of banana or plantain rachis leachates can reduce phytoparasitic nematode populations, but theirmechanism of action is still unclear (Salazar et al., 2012)Land where Musaceae plants have been grown should be left unplanted (fallow) for six months or more, up to two
years, so it can rest. Sarah et al., 1996, has indicated that nematode populations can be reduced to imperceptiblelevels after a single year of remaining fallow, using non-hosting crops such as Chromolaena odorata (Asteracea),
which is very efficient in Africa, and Panicum maximum (Poaceae) in Queensland (Australia) (Coyne and Kidane2019). In the Cote d'Ivoire, rotation with pineapple (Ananas comosus) contributed to reduction of R. similis populations(Coyne and Kidane, 2019) and rotation with sugar cane (Saccharum officinarum) was somewhat successful in Central
America (Coyne and Kidane, 2019).

104
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

•

Mechanical Control: Considering that R. similis survives in infected corms and roots, remove external layers of “peeled”
rhizomes to eliminate infected tissue and reduce nematode populations; furthermore, this practice allows for inspection ofwhite tissue, in order to detect the presence of weevils. Sanitary cleansing of corms by “peeling” should be carried out
outside the fields and severely damaged necrotic corms should be discarded. Only clean corms should be used for planting(Guzmán, 2011).

•

Biological control: The most commonly used entomopathogenic fungi against R. similis in banana crops are probably those
based on the Purpureocillium lilacinus (formerly known as Paecilomyces lilacinus). There are several commercially available
products and formulations. The fungus attacks eggs, juveniles and adults. Results vary depending on conditions, however, ingeneral they exert a good level of control and are financially viable. It has been demonstrated that banana root invasion by
R. similis is inhibited by entomopathogenic bacteria like Bacillus species, such as B. firmus and B. subtilis, as well as
Pseudomonas fluorescens (Coyne and Kidane, 2019). Pasteuria spp., which are nematode parasitic bacteria, differ withrespect to their range of hosts and their pathogenicity towards nematodes. It has been found that Pasteuria penetrans is an R.
similis parasite (Coyne and Kidane, 2019) but this species has not been fully developed as agent against this pest. Diverse trials
have been carried out on use and inoculation of endophytic fungi (Trichoderma spp. and Fusarium spp.) in greenhousevitroplants with promising results. According to Meneses (2003) and Morales (2014), the endophytic fungi Trichoderma spp.
and Fusarium spp. cause 75% to 100% reductions of R. similis populations. Improved results were obtained by combining both
species of bacteria. Furthermore, the plants developed greater radicular weight and superior growth when free ofnematodes. Lastly, growth promoting effects in plants caused by arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi not only provide potential
benefits for banana, but they have also been shown to reduce infection and damage by R. similis (Coyne and Kidane, 2019).
Total R. similis density decreased by 60% and root necrosis by 56% in arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi- colonized banana seedlings
under greenhouse conditions (Coyne and Kidane, 2019). However, as has been repeatedly seen when evaluating andapplying biological control agents, reactions can be fairly specific depending on the host cultivar and control agent species
or strains (Coyne and Kidane, 2019). With respect to chemical control with natural products, neem (Azidirachta indica)
formulations stand out for providing good management of banana nematodes (Coyne and Kidane, 2019). It has been shownthat sesame-based products, essential oil mixtures containing sesame or garlic, furfuraldehydes and Myrothecium verrucariabased products are very toxic for nematodes and can provide a very promising R. similis reduction.

105
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

•

Threshold: The threshold triggering nematicide application will depend on local parameters, such as climate and soil
conditions and pathotype aggressivity. For this exercise to be worthwhile, verification should be based on precise nematodecounts. Nematodes should be extracted from vegetative material and surrounding soil, using approved protocols (Coyne andKidane, 2019). In the North coast of Guatemala, the following are the defined critical levels or action thresholds:
o Functional root weight under 50 gr/plant.
o Dead root percentage greater than 10%.
o Nematode populations between 30,000 and 40,000 R similis/100 gr roots.
o Uprooting greater than 3 plants/ha/week.
o Bunch weight reduction greater than 10%/6-month period.

In other Central American (including Costa Rica) and South American countries, a population level of 10,000 specimens/100 gr roots is
used.

106
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

7.2 Common diseases in banana
Black Sigatoka (Mycosphaerella fijiensis)
General Information
Black sigatoka is caused by a fungus (Mycosphaerella fijiensis) that attacks bananas and plantains. It is present
throughout the tropics. Dissemination is carried out by wind, water and human carriers. This is a polycyclic disease
that will always be present in a permanent crop. Reproduction is by asexual (conidia) and sexual (ascospores)
means.

Early ripening of the fruit in transit
due to problems with Black
Sigatoka. 33•

Symptoms: The fungus mainly attacks the leaves and it is characterized by a great number of streaks andspots, particularly noted on the underside of the leaves. All stages of the disease will be found in aplantation; initial symptoms are virtually imperceptible streaks that will develop towards later stages withsymptoms of necrosis and burning of the foliar area.

•

Damage: This is the most destructive of foliar diseases and the one with the greatest economic crops
losses in banana. Without control measures, losses can reach up to 50% of the yield and up to 100% of
production due to quality issues for export. Costs for managing this disease are high – between 15 and
18% of total production costs.

•

Predisposing conditions: High temperature, high levels of precipitation, high humidity, poor drainage, poor
nutrition•

Prevention: Preventive actions are focused on constant monitoring and appropriate management of
cultural practices:o Adequate nutritional level in the plantation; elements such as silicon, copper, calcium, boron andzinc contribute towards reducing severity of the disease 36.
o Promote ideal moisture conditions in the soil (avoid excessive accumulation, such as puddling).
o Adequate weed management or control to prevent greater moisture accumulation.
o Avoid unnecessary loss of leaves due to other causes or practices (protective defoliation,
deflowering, bagging, harvesting); should be avoided as much as possible.

33 Source: Taken from personal files 201936 Guzmán & Paladines, n.d

107SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

A banana plant without
functional leaves due to poor
black sigatoka management.34

A banana plant that is ready for
harvest and has lost all its foliage
due to poor black sigatoka
management.35

oApplication of a mixture or 10% solution of urea on leaves with sigatoka that are on the ground,thus accelerating vegetal matter decomposition and reducing the inoculum.

•

Mechanical Control
o Trimming, consisting of cutting off the apical portion of the leaf.
o Surgery, a practice that only eliminates the affected area of the leaf.
o Delamination, whereby a longitudinal half of the leaf is removed because of high infection of thefoliar area.
o At a minimum, a weekly sanitary or sigatoka defoliation needs to be carried out in order toprevent accumulation of necrotic tissue affected by the sigatoka fungus; if necessary, twodefoliation cycles per week should be executed.

•

Biological control: Strains QST 713, FZB24, MBI600 and D747 of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (sin. B. subtilis) or
Melaleuca alternifolia (FRAC, 2018)•

Threshold:o Position of streak in leaf 8 (HJE)o Position of late spot in leaf 12 (HJMT)
o Number of leaves to flowering or parturition 12
o Number of leaves to harvest 6 leaveso 5. Severity of the disease greater than 1

34 Source: Ronny Mancilla, 201935

Source: Ronny Mancilla, 2019.

108
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Moko or bacterial wilt (Ralstonia solanacearum)
General Information
This important banana disease is caused by the bacteria Ralstonia solanacearum race 2, which is a naturalsoil inhabitant. Triploid bananas are attacked by at least four race 2 types: D or distortion, B or Bananas, SFR(Semi-Fluid Round) and H.
•

Symptoms: Because this is a systemic disease, symptoms may appear at any phenological stage ofthe crop and all organs of the plant, from the roots to the bunch, may be infected and may exhibit
symptoms. External symptoms consist of plant wilting and yellowing, younger leaves dry up and breakwithout falling from the plant and the cigar leaf suffers necrosis. Suckers and regrowth from diseased
plants may remain small, twisted and blackened. Leaf edges dry up and an intense yellow streak
follows. Deformed bunches and fingers, some fruit ripens prematurely, and fingers split open when thebunch is very developed. The male bud dries up, followed by the stem until the entire bunch dries up(Alarcón y Jiménez, 2012).

•

Damage: Moko is one the major diseases attacking banana crops and can cause great economic
losses if not adequately managed. Moko destroys the bunch and prevents the plant from completingits vegetative cycle. (Martínez y García, 2004, cited por Álvarez et al., 2013).

•

Predisposing Conditions: This bacteria are transmitted or disseminated by infested tools used in crop
practices, vector insects, transport of crop residues or infected materials and infested soil, contact of
diseased plant roots with healthy plants caused by nematode populations moving from one plant toanother, and by planting in infested areas. The bacteria can disseminate by water runoff in canals,
rivers and streams, by machinery, host weeds and, in general, any mobile medium introduced byhumans (Alarcón and Jiménez, 2012; Álvarez et al., 2013).

•

Prevention: Available prevention mechanisms are the use of clean seeds; worker and visitor footwear
and tool disinfection at the time of defoliation; removal of host vegetation37 and signage at theaffected sites (Mesa and Triviño, 2007, cited by Álvarez et al., 2013).

•

Mechanical Control: Eradication of plants with disease symptoms. Eradication of Moko cases consistsof eliminating the sick and all neighboring plants in an 18-foot (5.5 meter) radius. Each diseased plant

External Moko symptoms.(Source:
Taken from Dita, 2020.)

Premature ripening from Moko in abanana bunch.( Source: Personal
files, 2001. )37 The following are the carrier weeds of the variant causing crop damage:

Heliconia latispatha, H. caribae, H. acuminata, H. imbricata, H. bihai, Brassica campestris, Datura stramonium, Solanum caripense, Solanum nigrum, Cyphomandra betacea, Lycopersicum sculentum, Photomorpe peltata & Physalis anguiata.

109
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

within an 18-foot radius will cause a new case, thus new plants within an 18-foot radius must be
removed.

Internal Moko symptoms ( Source:
Dita, 2020.)•

Non-chemical Control: Arenas et al., 2004, cited by Álvarez et al., 2013, determined that theR. solanacearum bacterial population could be reduced by 84.7% by adding French marigold flowers(Tagetes patula) to the soil. Furthermore, pathogenic bacteria in the soil were significantly reduced
after applying other sources, such as a 58.2% control with liquid fertilizer (composed of 2.7% total
nitrogen, 1.7% phosphorus, 5% potassium, 12% fulvic acids, and 5% humic substances); a 50.8%
reduction after adding Calfos and 31.6% with banana stalk compost lixiviate.

•

Threshold: The appearance of a single plant requires eradication. Quarantine should be set when 5 ormore cases in a single cable appear within a 6-month period or less.

110
SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Fusarium (Fusarium oxysporum f.s. cubensi race 4) (TR4)
Dita et al. (2017) indicate that Fusarium wilt in Musaceae (also known as Panama disease due
to its early 20th century impact in this region) is caused by the fungus Fusarium oxysporum f. sp.
cubense (Foc). This is the most destructive disease in Musaceae (the family including bananas
and plantains) and it is considered among the ten most significant diseases in the history ofagriculture. In the Americas, race 1 triggered an epidemic that impacted the banana exportindustry, which is based on the Gros Michel variety, and caused the destruction by United Fruitof more than 379,000 hectares just in Central America (May and Plaza, 1958; Stover, 1972) withan economic impact of approximately US $2,300 million in the 50s and 60s. Substitution of ‘Gros
Michel’ with resistant clones of the Cavendish subgroup, currently representing almost allexport bananas planted in the Americas, was the only solution to this problem.
For a long time, Cavendish subgroup clones were affected by the pathogen solely underconditions of nutritional stress and low temperature, such as those seen in bananas grown in
subtropical regions. However, at the beginning of the 90s, a new race was reported inSoutheast Asia, known as tropical race 4 (R4T), which severely attacks Cavendish subgroupvarieties under tropical conditions. The rapid dissemination of this race and its pathogenic
capacity are a serious threat for the Latin American and Caribbean banana industry. An
additional factor to consider is that Foc R4T can affect other important varieties for foodsecurity and income generation aside from Cavendish group varieties, among which can be
the following: plantains (AAB), Bluggoe cooking bananas (ABB), Gros Michel (AAA), Prata (AAB)
and Manzano (AAB). Considering the above precedent, Foc R4T entering Colombia in 2019evidently places the remaining American continent in jeopardy; a menace that could impact
food security in the region.
In Southeast Asia, vast areas planted with Cavendish subgroup varieties have been affectedby Foc R4T, causing multi-million losses. Damages are not only associated with losses from
diseased plants but also with the cost of necessary management measures and technologicalchanges which implementation has been required for disease impact minimization.
Exclusion (preventing entry) is the best option for avoiding the impact from Foc R4T in
Musaceae production in a given country. Once this pest invades an area, severe
phytosanitary measures must be implemented to forestall pathogen movement from infected
to uninfected areas. These strict measures are costly and require trained personnel for pest
recognition and management.
Fusarium wilt symptoms
The term and concept of race has been used to classify F. oxysporum f. sp. cubense strains
after the 1950s (Stover, 1962). Foc races have been named based on pathogenicity of thedifferent reference varieties under field conditions. Four Foc pathogenic races have been
described (Stover y Waite, 1960; Stover, 1962; Moore et al., 1993; Su et al., 1998).
Race 1 attacks Gros Michel (AAA), Manzano (Silk, AAB), Pome (AAB) and Latundan clones;
race 2 affects Bluggoe and other ABB genome clones; race 3, which was previously described(Stover, 1962; Waite y Stover, 1960) attacks heliconia (Heliconia spp.); and race 4 is pathogenic
for Cavendish and all susceptible cultivars to races 1 and 2 (Dita et al., 2017).
Fusarium wilt typical symptoms result from severe water stress caused by clogging of the xylem
and from the combination of pathogenic activities such as mycelia accumulation, toxin
production, and/or host defense responses, including tylose and gum production and crushingof vessels due to associated parenchymatous cell growth (Beckman, 1990; Xiao et al., 2013).
The different Foc races cause similar symptoms in Musaceae; thus, races cannot be
differentiated based on symptomatology (Stover, 1962; Ploetz, 1990; Ploetz y Pegg, 2000).
The disease is characterized by two types of external symptoms: the yellow leaf “syndrome”
and the green leaf “syndrome” (Stover, 1962; Pérez-Vicente, 2004).
Yellow leaf “syndrome”: this is the most classic and distinctive external symptom of Fusarium
wilt in bananas. Early on in the infection process, is characterized by yellowing of the edges

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

111

of older leaves (this symptom can be initially confused with potassium deficiency, particularly
under dry or cold conditions). Leaf yellowing progresses from older to younger leaves.
Eventually, the petiole bends and leaves collapse or, most commonly, leaves buckle towards
the central vein and hang around the pseudostem, forming a skirt of dead leaves.
Green leaf “syndrome”: As opposed to the yellow leaf syndrome, in some clones leaves ofaffected plants will predominantly remain green until petioles bend and leaves collapse.
In general, younger leaves are the last to show symptoms and frequently will remain erect,
giving the plant a “spiky” appearance. An infected plant will continue growing and emerging
leaves are usually paler than healthy leaves. The blade in emerging leaves may be markedly
reduced, wrinkled, and distorted. Longitudinal cracks may develop in the pseudostem. Thereis no evidence of symptoms in the fruit.
Internal symptoms are characterized by vascular coloring that starts with yellowing of root andcorm vascular tissue, progressing to form a yellow, red, or dun continuously colored vascularbundle in the pseudostem, which is typical for the disease. In very susceptible clones, coloredbundles on leaf petioles can be seen.
In some cases, Fusarium wilt caused by Foc has been confused with Moko bacterial wilt
caused by Ralstonia solanacearum race 2. The following criteria can be used to differentiate
between these two diseases:•

In Fusarium wilt, symptoms progress from older to younger leaves. In bacterial wilt orMoko, symptoms usually progress from younger to older leaves;•

In bacterial wilt, young suckers emerging from the rhizome are distorted and rotten andcan die. In Fusarium wilt, young and growing suckers show no symptoms.

•

In Moko, bacterial exudation is seen in all tissues when cut (roots, pseudostem, stem,
flowers and rhizome, etc.). In Fusarium wilt, there is no exudation.

•

In Moko, there is internal necrosis and rotting in the fruit, while in Fusarium wilt, no
symptoms are apparent in the fruit. (Dita et al., 2017).

Prevention
Action lines to prevent entry of the pathogens in the farms (exclusion):
Foc R4T can remain in the soil for several decades, even if bananas are not grown. Currently
there are no known effective measures for eradication from contaminated soil (Ploetz 2018,cited by Guzmán et al., 2018). Countries that are still free from this pathogenic race cancontinue being so with joint efforts for exclusion of the pathogen. Implementation of basic
prevention measures in farms such as the following, can substantially contribute to reducing
entry and dissemination risk:•

Farm biosafety•

Use of disease-free planting material•

Management of biotic factors favoring the disease, such as weevil and nematodeattacks•

Management of soil abiotic factors, pH, nutrition [P, Ca, Zn & N], silicon, use of N sourcesthat increase NO3 and reduce NH4, calcium, since whitewashing increases soil
suppressiveness and reduces chlamydospore germination(Höper et al., 1995; Peng etal., 1999); iron, as reducing availability increases soil suppressiveness (Scher y Baker,1982) and reduces chlamydospore germination (Peng et al., 1999), adequate
drainage network maintenance.

•

Soil health-oriented fertilization (organic matter + beneficial microorganisms thatsuppress the pathogen and/or promote plant growth, etc.), compost, green fertilizers.

•

Acid soils (pH <5.0) are more favorable for the disease; pH over 5.6 is less optimum forthe fungus.

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

112

•

At present, no tolerant and/or resistant varieties or hybrids are available in the market
that provide adequate quality fruit which is acceptable for marketing. In Taiwan, GCTV
119 and GCTV 218 somaclones with partial resistance are used; however, these arereinfected over time.

•

Crop rotation with non-hosting plants for Foc R4T, although this practice is not possible
in commercial plantations.

•

Use of cover crops (Dita, 2020).

•

Keeping an updated registry of all persons entering the farm.

•

Restricting non-authorized persons from entering the farm and not allowing entry ofpeople that have been in countries with Foc R4T in the last three months.

•

If for some reason it is strictly necessary that a person such as indicated above should
enter the farm, he or she should comply with a biosafety protocol, including: use of
farm-provided footwear, clean clothing and refrain from introducing tools or
equipment that has been previously used in countries having Foc R4T, all of whichshould nevertheless be disinfected beforehand. All tools should be provided by the
farm.

•

Farm vulnerable boundaries and main entrance should be protected with fences ordefenses to ensure people move solely through safe areas.

•

At principal entry points in the farm (including the packing plant), use of footbaths forshoe disinfection should be mandatory and these should be kept clean and in goodcondition. Additionally, establishing sites for vehicle disinfection (tire baths) andsanitation tunnels are highly recommended.

•

Before entering a farm, visitors should change their footwear for farm-provided rubber
high-leg boots, which have been duly cleaned and disinfected and are preferably not
black in color.

•

Workers should be trained in prevention methods for the disease. Instruction should
include mandatory tool disinfection before going to the files and periodically during
the workday. Disinfection of both blade and handle of tools should be considered, as
well as other utensils such as sheaths, files, ropes and strings, stakes, among others. Tools
should be exclusively used on the farm; therefore, removing them from the farm should
be prohibited unless such a practice is duly authorized and biosafety measures havebeen taken.

•

Workers should be trained and informed about the disease’s symptoms. They should
be instructed to inform farm administrators if any plant with symptoms similar to Foc R4T
is detected and what procedure should be followed. Workers should never cut downa suspicious plan.

•

Any type of machinery or agricultural equipment to be used in the plantation shouldbe thoroughly washed and disinfected before entering or leaving the farm.

•

Disinfectants with proven efficacy against the pathogen should be used to disinfecttools, machinery and agricultural equipment and in footbaths (Taken from Guzmán
et al., 2018).

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

113

Recommended dose (mg/L)1
Residual effect up to seven days
Type of disinfectant

For usein tool disinfection

For use in footbaths andagricultural equipment
disinfection

Quaternary ammonium

2,000

4,000

Iodophor

2,000

4,000

Glutaraldehyde

1,000

3,000

1/.

Doses recommended for their efficacy in eliminating chlamydospores, based on studies carried out by
CORBANA on Foc race 1, with high inoculum concentrations, soil and organic matter. Source: Guzmán et al.,
2018.

Monitoring
This activity is carried out solely and exclusively in countries and/or farms having Foc R4T inorder to characterize Foc R4T incidence in infected areas (Dita et al., 2017). However, eachfarm should have technical staff that has been trained in Foc R4T symptoms so plants withsymptoms similar to this disease are promptly detected (suspicious plants). Such plants mustbe isolated and confined to prevent the risk of dissemination of the fungus and Ministry ofAgriculture authorities in each country should be immediately notified so the confirmatory
molecular diagnosis can be executed.
Control and intervention
Just like monitoring, control activities are carried out solely and exclusively in countries and/or
farms having Foc R4T, in order to contain, suppress and eradicate detected Foc R4T cases(Dita et al., 2017).
For further information on monitoring, control and intervention, the OIRSA document isrecommended as the basis for a contingency plan when facing a tropical race 4 (Foc R4T)
outbreak. This very complete text includes all legal, technical, and scientific guidelines for Foc
R4T management, with exclusion, suppression, and eradication measures. The document was
prepared and is frequently updated by professionals who are experts on this disease. It isavailable at: https://www.oirsa.org/contenido/2018/Sanidad_Vegetal/Manuales OIRSA 20152018/Plan_conting_FOC_R4T_2017-V2-Final-FEB18-2017.pdf

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

114

Image 1: Fusarium wilt external symptoms in banana.

A. Plant with generalized chlorosis on the leaves (“Yellow leaf syndrome”) at anadvanced disease stage.
B. Cracks at the pseudostem base.
C. Plant affected by Fusarium wilt with green leaves (“Green leaf syndrome”).
D. Detailed view of leaves breaking off at the petiole base.
(Source: taken from Dita et al., 2017)

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

115

Image 2: Fusarium wilt internal symptoms in banana.

A. Cross section of the corm (rhizome) showing tissue necrosis.
B. Cross section of the pseudostem, showing advanced vascular tissue necrosis.
C. longitudinal section of the pseudostem, showing vascular bundle necrosis.
Image 3: Infograph of Foc R4T Symptoms

Tropical Race 4 Fusarium (Foc R4T)

Symptoms
Leaf yellowing

Affected
leaves arecompletel
y wilted
and hangfrom theplant

Brown internal
coloring is
seen

The
pseudostembase cancrack
If any of these symptoms are suspected, immediately contact the
Ministry or Secretariat of Agriculture in your country,

Source: Infograph from OIRSA 2019 Foc R4T Course

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

116

References
Alarcón, J; Jiménez, Y. 2012. Manejo fitosanitario del plátano (Musa spp.): Medidas para latemporada invernal. Instituto colombiano agropecuario. Bogotá, Colombia. 51 p.
Álvarez, E; Pantoja, A; Gañan, L; Ceballos, G. 2013. Estado del arte y opciones de manejodel moko y la sigatoka negra en América Latina y el caribe. CIAT/FAO. Cali, Colombia. 45 p.
Cubillo, D. 2013. Manejo integrado de plagas: conceptos y aplicaciones. Chemplast
International Corp., San José, Costa Rica. 105 p.
Cubillo, D. 2013. Manual para el conocimiento y manejo de las principales plagas insectiles
en el banano orgánico. III curso internacional de banano orgánico. Piura, Perú. 24 p.
Dita, M. 2020. Marchitez por Fusarium de las musáceas. Detección y Diagnóstico raza 4
tropical – R4T. III jornada fitosanitaria virtual. Taller de capacitación regional sobre lamarchitez por Fusarium de las Musáceas, raza 4 tropical. OIRSA. 58 p.
Dita, M. 2020. Marchitez por Fusarium, raza 4 tropical: escenarios y alternativas de manejo. III
jornada fitosanitaria virtual. Taller de capacitación regional sobre la marchitez por Fusariumde las musáceas, raza 4 tropical. OIRSA. 76 p.
Dita, M; Echegoyen, P; Pérez, L. 2017. Plan de contingencia ante un brote de la raza 4
tropical de Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. cubense en un país de la región de OIRSA. OIRSA. San
Salvador, El Salvador. 211 p.
Dita, M; Pérez, L. 2013. Mal de Panamá: historia, síntomas, conceptos de razas, importancia
económica, situación actual de la raza 4 tropical. Curso de capacitación sobre diagnósticoy manejo del Mal de Panamá de las musáceas (Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. cubense) creando
capacidades para la prevención de la entrada y detección temprana de la raza 4 tropical.
Santa Marta, Colombia. 68 p.
FRAC, 2018. Minutas de la reunión del grupo de trabajo de banano. Miami, USA. 21 p.
González, M; Cubillo, D. 2014. Guía de manejo de plagas. Lista verde y amarilla. Cochinilladel banano. CABI/Chemplast/CATIE. Costa Rica. 1 p.
Guzmán, M; Pérez, L; Villalta, R; Carr, C; Sandoval, J. 2018. Marchitamiento por Fusarium raza
4 tropical (Foc R4T) una seria amenaza para la producción de bananos y plátanos:
recomendaciones para prevenir el ingreso del patógeno en fincas bananeras. CORBANA.
Guápiles, Costa Rica. CORBANA 44(64):1-8. 2018. 8 p.
Guzmán, M.; Paladines, R. (s.f.). Sigatoka negra. CropLife Latin America. Consultado 16 jul.
2020. Disponible en https://www.croplifela.org/es/plagas/listado-de-plagas/sigatoka-negra
Hernández, E; Camero, A; Velázquez, Y; Ramos, C. 2011. La cochinilla de la platanera.
Agrocabildo. Islas Canarias. 6 p.
Meléndez, G. 2019. Manejo y prevención de cochinilla (Pseudococcus sp.) en el racimo debanano en la hacienda María José 1, zona de Babahoyo. Tesis Ingeniero Agrónomo.
Ecuador. Universidad Técnica de Babahoyo. 38 p.
Palma, M; Blanco, M; Guillén, C. 2019. Las cochinillas harinosas (Hemiptera:
Pseudococcidae) y su impacto en el cultivo de Musáceas. Agron. Mesoam. 30(1):281-298,
enero-abril, 2019. San José, Costa Rica. 18 p.

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

117

Pasapera, E. 2013. Manejo integrado de plagas en banano orgánico. MINAGRI. Piura, Perú.
13 p.
Palacino, J. 2020. Programa de control y manejo de Fusarium R4T. Lecciones aprendidas en
Colombia. III jornada fitosanitaria virtual. Taller de capacitación regional sobre la marchitez
por Fusarium de las musáceas, raza 4 tropical. OIRSA. 16 p.
Quintero, I; Carbonó, E. 2015. Panorama del manejo de malezas en cultivos de banano en el
departamento de Magdalena, Colombia. Revista colombiana de ciencias hortícolas, Vol. 9,
No. 2: pp. 329-340.

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

118

7.3 Natural enemies of banana (Musa AAA) pests and diseases.
Mealybugs/ Planococcus citri Riss/ Dysmicoccus brevipes Cokerell /Pesudococcus jackbeardsleyi Gimpel and Miller/Pesudococcus elisae
Borchsenius/ Ferrisa virgata Cokerell.
Mealybugs• Mealybugs have a large number of natural enemies, unfortunately the blanket application of pesticides
affects the populations of these biocontrol agents. We will focus on the natural enemies considered to beof most importance.

Cryptolaemus montrouzieri
adult38•

Predators: two coccinelids, Cryptolaemus montrouzieri and Cycloneda spp. and a neuropter (Chrysopa
spp.) (Cubillo 2013).

•

Cryptolaemus montrouzieri is a polyphagous species. The small larvae, and the adults, prefer to feed on
mealybug eggs while the older larvae have a preference for all mealybugs life stage .

•Cycloneda spp.: is a polyphagous species, voracious predators of soft-bodied insects such as aphids,
mealybugs, mites, coccids, and immature stage of lepidoptera and Homoptera, they also feed onhoneydew and flower nectar. They are density dependent and therefore are able to switch from one
area to another where the prey is more abundant. They prefer the underside of leaves, almost always
close to a colony of aphids or other pests. It is a very efficient insect predator and a biological control
agent thanks to its voracity, functional response and numerical response. Its pupa has the amazing ability
to “bite” potential prey43.

Cycloneda spp. adult preying on
an aphid39

Lacewings• Chrysopa spp.: The voracity of the larvae makes them one of the most favored biological control agentsin agricultural crops.44•
Chrysopa spp. adult40

Larvae of all species and adults of some genera are predators and feed on a wide variety ofphytophagous insects such as mealybugs, aphids, whiteflies, and other soft-bodied insects found on thefoliage. For this reason, some species are currently being mass produced and and released in the field forthe biological control of agricultural pests45.

38 Source: controlbiologico.info - Cochinillas
39 Source: Google Image Search
40 Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/99/Chrysopa_perla01.jpg/250px-Chrysopa_perla01.jpg.
43 EcuRed 2020
44 Oswald et al., cited by Valencia et al. 2006
45 New, Adams & Penny, Hunter, Arredondo, cited by Valencia et al., 2006.

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

119

•

Chrysoperla spp.: from the same family as Chrysopa spp. Chrysoperla spp.

•

Its larvae has been observed preying on more than seventy different species of insects belonging to five
separate orders. Most of the prey belong to the Homoptera order (sucking pests including mealybugs).

•

Adults are not predators but feed on pollen and sugary substances. However, they have also been
identified in agricultural crops attacking various species of aphids, spider mites, thrips, whiteflies, caterpillar
eggs, leaf miners, psyllas, small moths and caterpillars, beetle larvae. They are also considered important
predators of mealybigs in greenhouses.

•

Predators of mealybugs are Hemerobius sp., Sympherobius maculipennis, Sympherobius sp. (Neuroptera:
Sympherobiidae), Scymnus nitidus, Hyperaspis funesta (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae).46•

Parasitoids: of the Encyrtidae families (ex. Anagyrus spp., Acerophagus spp. and Leptomastix spp.),
Platygasteridae (ex. Allotropa spp.)47•

Allotropa musae is a parasitoid not commercially-available. Described for the first time in 2004, it
parasitizes the first-growth stages of the pest and is most frequently found on petioles and leaves.48

Chrysoperla spp. larva preying
on an aphid41.
Allotropa musae adult 42

41 Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ee/Chrysoperla_carnea_larva02.jpg/220px-Chrysoperla_carnea_larva02.jpg.
42 Source: Hernández 2011.
46 New, Adams & Penny, Hunter, Arredondo, cited by Valencia et al., 2006
47 Hernández, 2011; Waterhouse, cited by Cubillo 201348 Hernández, 2011; Waterhouse, cited by Cubillo 2013

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

120

Scales/ Diaspis boisduvalli Signoret/Aspidiotus destructor Signoret/Chrysomphalus aonidium Linn.
•

Parasitoids: Hymenoptera of the Aphelinadae family such as Aphytis sp., Coccobius sp., and theEncyrtidae family, for example Plagiomerus sp. 52•

Aphytis sp.: are ectoparasitoids which place an egg under the shield of scales and mealybugs,
depositing it on the body of the victim after having paralyzed them. In addition, a large part ofDiaspis die directly when the parasite pierces them with its ovipositor, aiming to feed on the fluidsthat arise from the wound they have just caused. This predatory action (nutritional bites) constitutes
a very important step in the field for Diaspis control.

•

Predators: predatory ladybugs Cryptolaemus montrouzieri, Pentilia spp. and Delphastus spp.
(Coleoptera: Coccinelidae) and lacewings Chrysoperla sp. and Ceraeochrysa spp.53•

Entomopathogens: Beauveria bassiana: Capable of infecting more than 200 species of insects. It is
powdery in appearance, cottony white or creamy yellowish in color.

•

The spores of the fungus land on the insect’s cuticle, germinate and penetrate the cuticle and thefungus penetrates the insect soft tissues. Once inside the insect, the fungus branches its structuresand colonizes the host cavities. Then it starts producing a toxin called Beauvericin that helps tobreak down the host’s immune system, which facilitates the invasion of all tissues by the fungus.
After the death of the insect, the fungus multiplies its infective units (hyphae) which growsimultaneously, and ultimately invade all the insect tissues and become resistant to decomposition,
apparently due to the antibiotics secreted by the fungus.54

Aphytis sp. adult49

Pentilia spp. adult50

Insect parasitized by Beauveria bassiana51

49 Source: http://gipcitricos.ivia.es/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/A.-melinus-1-206x155.jpg.
50 Source: Google Image Search
51 Source: Google Image Search
52 Cubillo 2013; Solano 201953 Guillén et al., Guillén and Laprade, cited by Solano 2019; Cubillo 2013
54 INTAGRI 2020

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

121

Banana weevil / Cosmopolites sordidus Germar.

Tetramorium guineense adult56
Plaesius javanus adult55

Black weevil adult (C. sordidus) parasitized by
Beauveria bassiana57•

The insect larvae have the following predators: Plaesius javanus, Hololepta quadridentada (Coleoptera: Histeridae) andDactylosternum hydrophiloides (Coleoptera: Hydrophilidae), ants: Pheidole megacephala, P. guineense, Azteca sp. and Tetramorium
guineense (Hymenoptera: Formicidae).58•

Plaesius javanus: is considered a native to Southeast Asia, specifically the islands that comprise Indonesia such as Java and Sumatra. P.
javanus was introduced to numerous countries in Asia, Africa and the Americas. It was released in the wild in 29 countries or islands,
and it has become established in 12 (41.4%): Cock (Islands), Fiji, Guam, Jamaica, Marianas (Islands), Mexico, New Caledonia, Puerto
Rico, Samoa, Tahiti, Tonga and Trinidad. P. javanus can consume up to eight fully developed larvae of C. sordidus per day. 59•

Based on laboratory tests, P. javanus larvae and adults attacked 75-88% of the larvae and 38-53% of C. sordidus pupae placed intunnels made artificially in plant parts60. However, attempts to introduce these natural enemies into other banana regions were largely
unsuccessful. Research on endemic predators (beetles and earwigs) in Africa suggests only a limited potential for control under field
conditions61.

•

Tetramorium guineense: ants are capable of locating and preying on some C. sordidus larvae62.

55 Source: Google Image Search
56 Source: Google Image Search
57Source: Ramírez y Torres 2016.
58 Sirjusingh et al. and Sponagel et al., cited by Cubillo 2013; Gold and Messiaen 2000
59 Jepson, cited by Arredondo and Rodríguez 2015
60 Arredondo and Rodríguez 2015
61 Gold and Messiaen 2000
62 Castañeda 2016

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

122

•

The entomopathogenic nematodes (EPNs), Steinernema spp. and Heterorhabditis spp., attack both adult weevils and larvae in the field(Gold and Messiaen 2000). The diversity of isolated strains presents a wide range of hosts. The ability of EPNs to eliminate pest insects in
24-48 hours, as well as the development of commercial formulations, make them an alternative for controlling C. sordidus in banana
plantations 63. However, since EPNs can be affected by environmental conditions, such as temperature, solar radiation (UV rays) andsoil characteristics like acidity, organic matter and texture ( 64), strategies are needed to improve their survival in the field, such as theuse of different encapsulation methods 65 or strain isolation adapted to the agricultural ecosystem conditions.

•

Entomopathogenic fungi: Cordyceps bassiana, Beauveria bassiana Bals and Metarhizium anisopliae Metch are bio control agents of
the insect66. B. Bassiana is an entomopathogenic fungus currently used in general applications within the crop, placed in traps; thismethod renders the best infection and control results 67.

•

Other reported larval and egg predators are Euborellia annulipes Lucas (Dermaptera: Carcinophoridae) and Labia borelli Burr
(Dermaptera: Labiidae) 68, Ontophagus sp. (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae)69, Eutochia sp., (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae),70.

63 Kaya; Hiltpold, cited by Vidaurre et al., 2020
64 Bedding; Andaló et al., cited by Viaduarre et al., 2020
65 Peters; Bogantes, Flores, Castellón, and Uribe, cited by Vidaurre et al., 2020
66 Contreras, Carballo cited by Cubillo 2013; Maharaj & Khan; González et al., cited by Vidaurre et al., 2020
67 Navas 2011
68 Koppenhöfer, Tinzaara et al., cited by Navas 2011
69 Cubillo et al., Ríos et al., cited by Navas 2011
70 Castrillo, cited by Navas 2011

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

123

Nematodes/ Radopholus similis (Cobb) Thorne/Pratylenchus coffeae Sher & Allen/Helicotylenchus multicinctus Cobb /H. dihysteria Cobb/
Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid and White) Chitwood/ Meloidogyne javanica (Treub) Chitwood,a) conidia adhesion to the nematode,b) conidia germination, c) penetration,d) fungus colonization nematode body,e) external growth and conidia production71

Antibiosis action of the endophytic fungus about the nematode.72•

Meloidogyne javanica (Treub) Chitwood, fungus parasitizes nematode eggs, adults and cysts. It can also affect mobile nematodes
found outside the roots. In this way, it can infect the nematode in any of these stages, causing death or preventing the nematode fromcompleting its life cycle, thereby reducing populations in the field 73.

•

Bacillus species, such as B. firmus and B. subtilus, and strains of Pseudomonas fluorescens bacterium have been shown to inhibit theinvasion of banana roots by R. similis 74.

•

Trials on the use and inoculation of endophytic fungi (Trichoderma spp. and Fusarium spp.) in in vitro plants at greenhouse level haveshown really promising results. Meneses (2003) and Morales (2014) showed that the endophytic fungi Trichoderma spp. and Fusarium
spp. reduced the R. similis populations from 75 to 100%, and obtained better results by combining both.

71 Source: Monzón et al., 2009.
72 Source: Meneses 2003.
73 Monzón et al., 2009
74 Aalten et al.; Mendoza and Sikora, cited by Coyne and Kidane 2019

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

124

Weeds/Various genera and species.
There are no known practical use references for biological control against specific banana and plantainweeds, but these crops will possibly benefit once current research identifies predators or pathogens for
Chromolaena odorata, Mikania micrantha H.B.K. control and that of other weeds76.
The biological control of weeds utilizes natural enemies that feed on the plant, including but not limited toinsects, mites and nematodes, or they can also be controlled by diseases caused by fungi 77.

Example of biological control in othercrops. Symptoms of disease caused by
Fusarium oxysporum FOXY 2 on Striga
hermonthica (right) stems and control(left).75

Meloidogyne javanica (Treub) Chitwood, fungus parasitizes nematode eggs, adults and cysts. It can also
affect mobile nematodes found outside the roots. In this way, it can infect the nematode in any of thesestages, causing death or preventing the nematode from completing its life cycle, thereby reducing
populations in the field79.
Bacillus species, such as B. firmus and B. subtilus, and strains of Pseudomonas fluorescens bacterium havebeen shown to inhibit the invasion of banana roots by R. similis 80.

Antibiosis action of the endophytic
fungus about the nematode.78

Trials on the use and inoculation of endophytic fungi (Trichoderma spp. and Fusarium spp.) in in vitro plants
at greenhouse level have shown really promising results. Meneses (2003) and Morales (2014) showed thatthe endophytic fungi Trichoderma spp. and Fusarium spp. reduced the R. similis populations from 75 to
100%, and obtained better results by combining both.

75 Source: Elzein y Kroschel 2004
76 Terry 1996
77 FAO 2004
78 Source: Meneses 2003.
79 Monzón et al., 2009
80 Aalten et al.; Mendoza and Sikora, cited by Coyne and Kidane 2019

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

125

Black Sigatoka Mycosphaerella fijiensis Morelet.
•

Bacillus subtilis QST-713 (sin. B. amyloliquefaciens): Biofungicide of protective and contact action.
Lipopeptides, substances resulting from bacteria fermentation, destroy fungal structures' cell
membranes (shattering the germ tube and mycelium of the fungus). It also creates an inhibitionzone in the leaf, preventing pathogen attack and stopping pathogen growth competing fornutrients and space on the leaf’s surface. It attacks target organisms exclusively, making it safe forfish, pollinators, and other beneficial organisms. Due to its natural origin, this product is harmless forhuman beings, and it has no use restriction in relation to the number of applications, it also helps toreduce the crop's chemical load82.

•

Bacillus pumilus QST-2808: Biofungicide of protective and contact action. It inhibits the fungus byproducing an amino sugar that interrupts cell metabolism and destroys the cell walls of the host. It
also creates an inhibition zone on the plant surface, preventing the fungi from setting, stopping
growth by nutrients and space competition on the leaf surface. It attacks target organisms
exclusively, making it safe for fish, pollinators, and other beneficial organisms. Due to its natural
origin, this product is harmless for human beings and it has no use restriction in relation to thenumber of applications, it also helps to reduce the crop's chemical load 84.

•

Other biocontrol agents under investigation are: bacteria: Paenibacillus spp., Serratia spp. andStreptomyces spp.; fungi: Trichoderma spp. and Rhizophagus irregularis. 85.

Bacillus subtilis81

Bacillus pumilus83

81 Source: Google Image Search
82 Bayer, 2018; Guzmán, 2012; Guzmán et al., 201983 Source: Google Image Search
84 Bayer, 2018; Guzmán, 2012; Guzmán et al., 201985 Guzmán, 2012; Guzmán, et al. 2019

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

126

Black Sigatoka Mycosphaerella fijiensis Morelet.

Pseudomonas spp.86

Trichoderma spp.87

There are currently no commercially available biocontrol agents against Moko bacteria. Biocontrol agents under investigation are:
Small populations of Ralstonia solanacearum race 2 (Smith), which were observed in banana plants (Musa AAB Simmonds)88 and antagonist
bacteria 89.

86 Source: Google Image Search
87 Source: Google Image Search
88 Alexopoulus and Mims, cited by Ceballos et al., 201489 Guzmán et al., 2019

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

127

TR4 Fusarium banana wilt or banana fusariosis (Fusarium oxysporum f. Sp. cubense) – Foc .

Trichoderma spp.92
Fusarium spp fungus growth in PDA medium (A and C). Chlamydospores of Fusarium spp(B). Fusarium spp spores (D)90
91•

There are currently no biocontrol agents in commercial use aimed at controlling TR4 (Foc).

•

The perennial nature of the banana plant and the need for long-term efficacy of such controls are rarely considered when developing
management strategies for this disease. Much of the literature on this topic reveals the results of short-term in-vitro or greenhousestudies with no indication that they have proven to be useful in the field.

•

For example, although many biological control studies have been conducted, none of the published results indicates it would be
helpful because of field cost effectiveness 93.

•

Biocontrol agents under investigation: There is experimental evidence that Trichoderma spp., non-pathogenic Fusarium oxysporum andsome species of bacteria have potential for the biological control of TR4. However, this evidence has been obtained in studies carriedout in vitro and in greenhouses94. Scientific literature indicates that some soils are carriers of non-pathogenic isolates of Fusarium spp. or
belonging to another special form, and act as suppressants to pathogenic strains 95.

90 Source: Google Image Search
91 Source: Google Image Search
92 Source: Google Image Search
93 Ploetz, 2019
94 Dita et al., 201795 Amir & Alabouvette, cited by López and Castaño 2019

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

128

•

Endophytic fungi volatile compounds isolated from Musa spp. have shown a highly significant inhibitory effect on Foc( 96).

•

Regarding other microorganisms, it has been documented that B. subtilis inhibits mycelial growth, colonizes plant tissues, reduces
vascular discoloration and the incidence of the disease 97•

Studies have shown that:o Serratia marcescens can act as an inducer of enzymes production involved in the defense of banana plants, suppressing theincidence of the disease.98
o Streptomyces griseus affects the development of Foc, by inhibiting spores formation and degradation of fungus cell wall.99
o Streptomyces violaceusniger G10 inhibits mycelial growth and prevents conidia•

Endophytic fungi volatile compounds isolated from Musa spp. have shown a highly significant inhibitory effect on Foc 100.

•

Regarding other microorganisms, it has been documented that B. subtilis inhibits mycelial growth, colonizes plant tissues, reduces
vascular discoloration and the incidence of the disease 101

96 Ting et al., cited by López and Castaño 201997 Sun et al., cited by López and Castaño 201998 Ting et al., cited by López and Castaño 201999 Zacky & Ting, cited by López and Chestnut 2019
100 Ting et al., cited by López and Castaño 2019
101 Sun et al., cited by López and Castaño 2019

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

129

References
Arredondo, H; Rodríguez, L. 2015. Casos de control biológico en México. Vol. 2 biblioteca
básica de agricultura. 38 p. ISBN 978-607-715-258-3.
Bayer CropScience. 2018. Racimo de soluciones. Guía técnica para banano. Ecuador. 40 p.
Castañeda, R. 2016. Control biológico de plagas y enfermedades. Universidad popular dela Chontalpa. México. 216 p. Consultado 24 oct. 2020. Disponible enhttps://images.app.goo.gl/vGDi6RFSFN4jirEb8.
Ceballos, G; Álvarez, E; Bolaños, M. 2014. Reduction in populations of Ralstonia
solanacearum race 2 in plantain (Musa AAB, Simmonds) with extracts from Trichoderma spp.
Alexopoulus y Mims) and antagonistic bacteria. Acta agronómica 63, p. 83-90.
Cock, M. 1996. Control biológico de malezas. Manejo de malezas para países en desarrollo.
FAO. Roma, Italia. 394 p. ISBN 92-5-303427-0.
Control Bío. 2020. ¿Quiénes son los enemigos naturales de la cochinilla? Consultado 26 oct.
2020. Available in http://controlbiologico.info/index.php/es/control-biologico-de-plagas-yenfermedades/plagas-agricolas/cochinillas
Coyne, D; Kidane, S. 2019. Nematode pathogens. Handbook of Diseases of Banana, Abacáand Enset. Edited by David R. Jones. UK. CABI. P. 429-461.
Cubillo, D. 2013. Manejo integrado de plagas: conceptos y aplicaciones. Chemplast
International Corp., San José, Costa Rica. 105 p.
Dita, M; Echegoyen, P; Pérez, L. 2017. Plan de contingencia ante un brote de la raza 4 tropicalde Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. cubense en un país de la región de OIRSA. OIRSA. San Salvador,
El Salvador. 211 p.
EcuRed. 2020. Cycloneda sanguinea L. Consultado 27 oct. 2020. Disponible enhttps://www.ecured.cu/Cycloneda_sanguinea_L.
Eden-Green, S. 2019. Moko bacterial wilt and bugtok. Handbook of diseases of banana,abacá and enset. Edited by David R. Jones. UK. CABI. p. 314-323.
Elzein, A; Kroschel, J. 2004. Progresos en el manejo de malezas parásitas. Manejo de malezaspara países en desarrollo. Estudio FAO, Producción y Protección vegetal. Roma, Italia. 319 p.
ISSN 1014-1227. ISBN 92-5-303427-0120.
FAO. 2004. Manejo de malezas para países en desarrollo. Estudio FAO, Producción yProtección vegetal. Roma, Italia. 319 p. ISSN 1014-1227. ISBN 92-5-303427-0120.
González, M; Cubillo, D. 2014. Guía de manejo de plagas. Lista verde y amarilla. Escama de
Boisduval en banano. CABI/Chemplast/CATIE. Costa Rica. 1 p.
Guzmán, M. 2012. Control biológico y cultural de la sigatoka negra. Tropical Plant Pathology
37 (suplemento), agosto 2012. 45º Congreso Brasileiro de Fitopatología. Manaus, AM. 5 p.
Guzmán, M; Pérez, L; Carlier, J; Abadie, C; De Lapeyre, L; Carreel, F; Marín, D; Romero, R;
Gauhl, F; Pasberg, C; Jones, D. 2019. Black Leaf Streak. Handbook of diseases of banana,abacá and enset. Edited by David R. Jones. UK. CABI. p. 41-115.
Hernández, E; Camero, A; Velázquez, Y; Ramos, C. 2011. La cochinilla de la platanera.
Agrocabildo. Islas Canarias. 6 p.
INTAGRI. 2020. Beauveria bassiana en el control biológico de patógenos. Consultado el 25
oct. 2020. Available in https://www.intagri.com/articulos/fitosanidad/beauveria-bassiana-enel-control-biologico-de-patogenos.

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

130

IVIA. 2020. Aphytis melinus. Gestión integrada de plagas y enfermedades en cítricos. Instituto
Valenciano de Investigaciones Agrícolas. Consultado 23 oct. 2020. Disponible en
http://gipcitricos.ivia.es/ahytis-melinus-debach.html.
Labrada, R. 2006. Recomendaciones para el manejo de malezas. FAO. Roma, Italia. 61 p.
Loor, J. 2016. Control cultural, físico y químico de la escama blanca (Diaspis boisduvalii) en
cultivos de banano del cantón Marcelino Maridueña. Tesis Ingeniero Agrónomo. Ecuador.
Universidad de Guayaquil. 56 p.
López, S; Castaño, J. 2019. Manejo integrado del mal de panamá [Fusarium oxysporum
Schlechtend.: Fr. sp. cubense (E.F. SM.) W.C. Snyder & H.N. Hansen]: una revisión. Revista
U.D.C.A. Actualidad y divulgación científica volumen 22 No. 2:e1240 ISSN:2619-2551 en línea.
ISSN:0123-4216 impreso. Colombia. 13 p.
Meléndez, G. 2019. Manejo y prevención de cochinilla (Pseudococcus sp.) en el racimo debanano en la hacienda María José 1, zona de Babahoyo. Tesis Ingeniero Agrónomo.
Ecuador. Universidad Técnica de Babahoyo. 38 p.
Meneses, A. 2003. Utilización de hongos endofíticos provenientes de banano orgánico parael control de biológico del nemátodo barrenador Radopholus similis Cobb, Thorne. Tesis deMaestría. CATIE. Costa Rica. 89 p.
Milán, O. 2010. Los coccinélidos benéficos en Cuba. Historia y actividad entomófaga.
Instituto de Investigaciones de Sanidad Vegetal. Fitosanidad V. 14, No. 2, Junio 2010, p. 127135.
Monzón, A; Herrera, I. Méndez, E. 2009. Guía: Uso y Manejo de Paelomyces lilacinus para elcontrol de nemátodos fitoparásitos. Universidad Nacional Agraria. Nicaragua. 15 p.
Morales, D. 2014. Bioprospección de hongos endofíticos para el control biológico delnemátodo barrenador Radopholus similis (Cobb) Thorne en el cultivo de banano. Tesis deMaestría. Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica. Costa Rica. 54 p.
Moreira, C. 2017. Evaluación de tres insecticidas orgánicos en el control de cochinilla(Dysmicoccus texensis) en el cultivo de banano (Musa spp.) variedad Williams en la época
lluviosa en la zona la Maná. Tesis Ingeniero Agrónomo. Ecuador. Universidad Técnica Estatalde Quevedo. 74 p.
Ploetz, R. 2019. Fusarium wilt. Handbook of diseases of banana, abacá and enset. Edited byDavid R. Jones. UK. CABI. p. 207-228.
Ramírez, J; Torres, H. 2016. Control del picudo (Cosmopolites sordidus) en el cultivo deplátano (Musa paradisiaca) usando tres agentes biológicos, Heterorhabditis bacteriophora,
Beauveria bassiana y Metarhizium anisopliae. Tesis Ingeniero Agrónomo. Zamorano.
Honduras. 19 p.
Solano, M. 2019. Parasitoides de la escama de boisduval (Diaspis boisduvalii) y porcentaje
de parasitismo, en plantaciones de banano (Musa AAA, subgrupo Cavendish) de lavertiente de Costa Rica. Tesis Ingeniero Agrónomo. Costa Rica. Universidad de Costa Rica.
88 p.
Terry, P. 1996. Manejo de las malas hierbas en bananos y plátanos. Manejo de malezas parapaíses en desarrollo. Estudio FAO, Producción y Protección vegetal. Roma, Italia. 394 p. ISBN
92-5-303427-0.
Valencia, L; Romero, J; Valdez, J; Carrillo, J; López, V. 2006. Taxonomía y registros deChrysopidae (Insecta: Neuróptera) en el estado de Morelos, México. Acta zoológica
mexicana (n.s.) 22(1):17-61 (2006). 45 p.

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

131

Valverde, 2004. Progreso en el manejo de Rottboellia cochinchinensis. Manejo de malezaspara países en desarrollo. Estudio FAO, Producción y Protección vegetal. Roma, Italia. 319 p.
ISSN 1014-1227. ISBN 92-5-303427-0120.
Vidaurre, D; Rodríguez, A. Uribe, L. 2020. Factores edáficos y nemátodos entomopatógenos
en un agroecosistema neotropical de banano. Revista de Biología Tropical, 68(1), 276-288.
Wikipedia. 2020. Chrysoperla carnea. Consultado 25 oct. 2020. Available inhttps://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysoperla_carnea

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

132

8 IPM RESOURCES
IPM apps“Pesticides and Alternatives” app: https://www.rainforest-alliance.org/articles/app-forintegrated-pest-management
You can download it free from the GooglePlay or iTunes app Store in English, Portuguese, orSpanish. Once it’s downloaded, it can run offline so you can access it wherever you are. Thisapp will provide you information about pesticides and its alternatives by country
Other resources on safe use pesticide handling, storage and transport of pesticides
FAO. 2008. Guidance on Management Options for Empty Pesticide Containers:
http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/agphome/documents/Pests_Pesticides/Code/Containers08.pdf
CropLife guidelines for container Management: https://croplife.org/cropprotection/stewardship/container-management/
Template of the minimum type of information to be recorded for the IPM strategy:
Monitoring and recording data is a very important component of the IPM strategy to be able
to know if there is success or whether you need to make any type of update or change inthe strategy.
It will also help you in the annual update of the strategy. As a minimum - record and keep thefollowing information about each pest:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
-

Name of pest (local name, scientific name)
Time and location of occurrence:
Main natural enemies:
Threshold and sampling method:
Management:
Preventive measures
Control measureso Non-chemicalo Chemical

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

133

9 EXAMPLES OF NATURAL ENEMIES
Example illustration

Beneficial organism

Pest controlled (prey or host)

Predators

Ladybugs(Coccinellidae)
larva and adult(several species)

aphids are the preferred prey, but will
also eat mealy bugs, spider mites andother soft bodied pests and their eggs

Delphibug(Delphastus catalinae)

Feeds on whitefly at
all stages

Adult (above) and larvae(below) and adult of
Mealybug Destroyer(Cryptolaemus montouzieri).

Feeds on mealybugs and aphids

The larva resembles
mealybugs and can be easily
confused

Caterpillar of the Apefly
butterfly (Spalgis epeus),
which resembles its prey, themealybug

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Mealybugs

134

Larvae and adults of the
Predatory beetle (Rhyzobius
lophantae)

Feeds on armored scales

Larvae and adult ofVedalia beetle(Rodolia cardinalis)

Feeds on Cottony cushion scale, Citrus
mealy bugGreen Lacewing larvae(Chrysoperla ssp)

Aphids, mites and other insects

Nymphs and adults of
Predatory mite (family:
Phytoseiidae)
Feeds on spider mites, whiteflies, thrips
larvae, fly larvae, psyllid nymphs

Gall midge larvae(Feltiella ssp)
Feeds on spider mites, aphids,
The adult can be easily
mistaken for a small mosquito

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

135

Adult of Predatory Bug(Macrolophus ssp)

Adult: preferred prey is whitefly, but will
also prey on aphids, moth eggs andsmall caterpillars (incl. larvae of leaf
miners), psyllid nymphs,
nymph feeds on spider mites

dult of Predatory bug (Oriusssp)nymphs and adult of Praying
MantisAdult (above) and Larvae(below) of Hoverflies (several
genera)SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Feeds on thrips nymphs and adult,
aphidsFeeds on grasshoppers, crickets, bees,
wasps and flies

Feeds on aphids(adults feed on pollen and nectar)

136

Parasitoids

Parasitic wasp
(several genera)

Parasitises whitefly larvae, aphids,
mealybug nymphs, eggs and larvae of
butterflies and moths, eggs of bugs,
psyllid nymphs

Trichogramma wasp adult(several Trichogramma sp.)

More than 200 pest species, including
cutworms, armyworms, fruit worms andmany moth and butterfly eggs

Tiny Trichogramma wasp on fruit
worm egg

Braconid wasps adults(several species)

Adult Diglyphus isaea wasp

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Parasitizes a broad range of pests(lepidoptera, coleoptera etc)

leaf miner larvae

137

Pathogens

Entomopatogenic nematode(Steinerma ssp )Kills thrips pupae, fly larvae, soil-dwelling
caterpillars, and a large number ofother insects

Entomopatogenic nematode(Heterorhabditis
bacteriophora)

Infects soil-dwelling larvae of beetles,
borers and weevils

Healthy Galleria mellonella(waxworm) (left), infected with
Steinerma carpocapsae (middle),
and infected with Steinernema
glaseri (right)

Healthy grub (left) and grub
infected with Heterorhabditis
bacteriophora (right)

Infects and kills chafers, grubs, locusts,
termites, leafhoppers, aphids, thrips,
whitefly, weevils and ticks.
Entomopatogenic fungus
Metarhizium anisopliae

Entomopathogenic Fungi should be
used in a temperature range of 12 to 32
degrees Celsius and targeted to thepest.

Entomopatogenic fungus
Lecanicillium muscarium
Infects whitefly larvae, sometimes also
pupa and adult.
Entomopathogenic Fungi should be
used in a temperature range of 12 to 32
degrees Celsius and targeted to thepest.
Whiteflies killed by L. muscarium

Entomopatogenic Fungi
Beauveria bassiana and Isaria
fumosorosea

Infect whitefly larvae, thrips.
Entomopathogenic Fungi should be
used in a temperature range of 12 to 32
degrees Celsius and targeted to thepest.

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

138

Entomopatogenic bacteria
Bacillus thuringiensis

Larvae of several moths and butterflies

Caterpillar killed by Bacillus
thuringiensis

Entomopatogenic bacteria
Root infected by nematodes

Bacillus subtilis and B.
licheniformis

Infects and kills nematodes (several
species)

Root treated with B. subtilis

Predators – here are some more. Also birds, owls and bats are important predators. Spiders
are some of the best predators (because of their numbers & species).

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

139

9.1 Other natural enemies
Assassin bugs

Damselflies

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

Birds

140

Owls

Bats

Spiders

SA-G-SD-9-V1.1

141