Indian Journal of Agricultural Research

  • Chief EditorV. Geethalakshmi

  • Print ISSN 0367-8245

  • Online ISSN 0976-058X

  • NAAS Rating 5.60

  • SJR 0.293

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, volume 39 issue 2 (june 2005) : 103 - 109

COLONIZATION OF MARKER STRAINS OF BACTERIA IN FRUIT FLY, BACfROCERA TAU

Pankaj Sood, Amit Nath*
1CSK HPKV Research Station, Sangla (H.P.) - 172 106, India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Sood Pankaj, Nath* Amit (2024). COLONIZATION OF MARKER STRAINS OF BACTERIA IN FRUIT FLY, BACfROCERA TAU. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 39(2): 103 - 109. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Symbiotic association among Tephritidae has been known since the beginning of century. These symbiotes have some useful functions in fruit flies viz., hydrolization of proteins and degradation of toxic substances. In the present studies antibiotic resistant strains of Pseudomonas putida (fruit fly symbiote), Bacillus subtilis(fruit fly pathogen) and Escherichia coli (non associated strain) were fed to Bactrocera tau, fruit flies to study their establishment and growth in fruit flies. All the three strains could colonize fruit flies, however maximum population was of P. putida, followed by B. subtilis and E. coli. It was concluded that it is possible to establish strains of P. putida modified with toxin genes to suppress fruit fly population in the field

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. Baker, AC. et al. (1944). US Dept. agric. Misc. Publ., 531: 155.
    2. Bateman, MA and Morton, T.e. (1981). Aust. J. Agric. Res., 32: 883-903.
    3. Chinnarajal1, AM. et al, (1972). Hindustan Antibiot, Bull., 15(1&2): 16-22.
    4. Courtice, Ae. and Drew, RAJ. (1984). Aust. Zool., 21: 251-268.
    5. Dean. RW. and Chapman, P.J. (1973). Search Agric. Ent. Geneva., 3(10): 1-64.
    6. Drew, R.A.I. (1987). Bull. Ent. Res., 77: 73-81.
    7. Drew, RA.I. and Fay, HA (1988). J. Plant Prot. Trop., 5: 127-130.
    8. Drew, RAJ. and Uyod, AC. (1987). Ann. Ent. Soc. Am., 80: 629-636.
    9. Fytlzas, E. and Tzanakakis, M.E. (1966a). Ann. Ent. Soc. Am., 59: 269-273.
    10. Fytizas, E. and Tzanakakis, M.E. (1966b). Landbouwwetensch Gent., 31: 782-789.
    11. Girolami, V. (1973). £Stratto da redia., 54: 269.
    12. Girolami, V. (1983). In: Fruit Flies of Economic Importance (Cavalloro, Red.), Balkema, Rotterdam. pp.74.
    13. Jang, F.B. and Nishijima, KA (1990). Environ. Ent., 19: 1726-1731.
    14. Luthey, P. etal. (1983). Mitt. Schweiz. Ent. Ges., 56: 67-72.
    15. Prokopy, RJ. (1977a). Colloq. Int. duo C.NR.S., 265: 305-336.
    16. Prokopy, RJ. (1977b). In: Semiochemicals, Their Role in Pest Control (Nordlung, A et al, ed.), John WUeyand Sons, New York, USA pp. 181-213.
    17. Rosseter, M.C. et aI. (1983). In: Flllit Hies of Economic bnportance (Cwalloro, Red.), Balkema, Rotterdam. pp.77-84.
    18. Yamvrias, C. etaJ. (1970). Ann. Inst. PhytopathoJ. Benaki., 9: 201-206.
    Reviewed By

    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)