Chilo partellus (spotted stem borer)
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Distribution Table
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
- Growth Stages
- List of Symptoms/Signs
- Biology and Ecology
- Natural enemies
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Plant Trade
- Detection and Inspection
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.Generate report
PicturesTop of page
IdentityTop of page
Preferred Scientific Name
- Chilo partellus (Swinhoe, 1885)
Preferred Common Name
- spotted stem borer
Other Scientific Names
- Argyria lutulentalis Tams, 1932
- Chilo zonellus (Swinhoe, 1884)
- Crambus zonellus
International Common Names
- English: durra stalk borer; pink borer; spotted sorghum stem borer; spotted stalk borer
- Spanish: barrenador manchado del tallo del sorgo; perforador
- French: pyrale tachée de la tige du sorgho
Local Common Names
- Germany: Stengelbohrer, Blassroter
- CHILZO (Chilo partellus)
Taxonomic TreeTop of page
- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Metazoa
- Phylum: Arthropoda
- Subphylum: Uniramia
- Class: Insecta
- Order: Lepidoptera
- Family: Crambidae
- Genus: Chilo
- Species: Chilo partellus
Notes on Taxonomy and NomenclatureTop of page Chilo partellus was first described by Swinhoe in 1885 and is one of many species of Chilo that develop on cereal crops and wild grasses, mostly in the tropics. Bleszynski (1970) published a thorough revision of all known species of Chilo on a world basis and clarified many taxonomic confusions. Before then, the scientific literature often referred to this species as Chilo zonellus (Swinhoe), which is now a synonym.
Bhattacherjee (1971) described two subspecies of Chilo partellus: Chilo partellus acutus and Chilo partellus kanpurensis.
DescriptionTop of page In coloration and general appearance C. partellus closely resembles many other species of Chilo and can only be identified accurately by examination of the male and female genitalia. In doubtful cases, specimens should be referred to taxonomic specialists for positive identification. Illustrated descriptions are included in Polaszek (1998).
Eggs are scale-like, about 1.5 mm across, creamy-white and laid in overlapping batches.
Larvae are up to 25 mm long when fully grown, with a prominent reddish-brown head. The body is creamy-white to yellowish-brown, with four purple-brown longitudinal stripes and usually with very conspicuous dark-brown dorsal spots. The prothoracic shield is reddish-brown to dark-brown, shining and with a pale medial furrow. Prominent dark-brown plates give the larva its characteristic spotted appearance.
Female pupae are up to 15 mm long and male pupae are a few millimetres shorter. They are light yellow-brown to dark red-brown, with bands of small spines on the dorsal anterior margins of the fifth to seventh abdominal segments and with six dorsal spines and two large, thorn-like, flattened ventral spines on the last abdominal segment.
Bleszynski (1970) published technical descriptions of adults, including illustrated descriptions of the male and female genitalia.
Adults are relatively small moths with wing lengths ranging from 7 to 17 mm. Females are generally larger than males and both sexes rest with the wings folded over the abdomen. The forewings are generally light yellow-brown with some darker scale patterns forming longitudinal striations which are usually darker at the wing margins. The hindwings are white.
The male genitalia have a median, strong, tapering projection on the edge of the valve; the juxta plate has a large triangular central lobe, two basal notches and lateral arms not extending dorsally to the edge of the valve. The aedeagus has a bulbous basal projection and a ventral arm.
The female genitalia have a heavily sclerotized and swollen ostial pouch which is longitudinally wrinkled and deeply notched caudally between two semi-circular lobes. There is no bridge linking the ostial pouch with the eighth tergite, and the posterior apophyses are not dilated.
Also see Betbeder-Matibet (1990) for an illustrated data sheet on C. partellus.
DistributionTop of page C. partellus is native of Asia, but became established in East Africa in the 1950s. Since then it has spread to southern and central Africa and there has been an unconfirmed report from Benin (Inter-African Phytosanitary Council, 1985).
Distribution TableTop of page
The distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.Last updated: 23 Apr 2020
|Continent/Country/Region||Distribution||Last Reported||Origin||First Reported||Invasive||Reference||Notes|
|Benin||Absent, Unconfirmed presence record(s)||EPPO (2020)|
|Botswana||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Cameroon||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Comoros||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Eritrea||Present||CABI (Undated)||Original citation: Haile Hofsvang (2001)|
|Ethiopia||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); Leul Mengistu and Thangavel Selvaraj (2013); EPPO (2020)|
|Kenya||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Lesotho||Present||Ebenebe et al. (2001); EPPO (2020)|
|Malawi||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Mozambique||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Réunion||Absent, Invalid presence record(s)||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Somalia||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|South Africa||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); Assefa (2015); EPPO (2020)|
|Sudan||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Tanzania||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|-Zanzibar Island||Present||Ali et al. (2006)|
|Uganda||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Zambia||Present||Sohati et al. (2001); EPPO (2020)|
|Zimbabwe||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Afghanistan||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Bangladesh||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Cambodia||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|India||Present, Widespread||EPPO (2020)|
|-Andhra Pradesh||Present||EPPO (2020)|
|-Himachal Pradesh||Present||EPPO (2020)|
|-Jammu and Kashmir||Present||Bhat and Baba (2007)|
|-Jharkhand||Present||Singh et al. (2005)|
|-Madhya Pradesh||Present||EPPO (2020)|
|-Tamil Nadu||Present||EPPO (2020)|
|-Uttar Pradesh||Present||EPPO (2020)|
|-Uttarakhand||Present||Arun Bhatt and Rameshwar Singh (2003)|
|-West Bengal||Present||EPPO (2020)|
|Indonesia||Present, Localized||EPPO (2020)|
|Iran||Present||Ghahari et al. (2009)|
|Israel||Present, Localized||EPPO (2020)|
|Japan||Absent, Unconfirmed presence record(s)||EPPO (2020)|
|Laos||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Nepal||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Pakistan||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Sri Lanka||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Taiwan||Absent, Unconfirmed presence record(s)||EPPO (2020)|
|Thailand||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Turkey||Present||Bayram and Tonğa (2016); EPPO (2020)|
|Vietnam||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
|Yemen||Present||UK, CAB International (1989); EPPO (2020)|
Hosts/Species AffectedTop of page C. partellus is an important pest of cultivated cereals, especially maize, sorghum and pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum). It has also been recorded from rice, foxtail millet (Setaria italica) and finger millet (Eleusine coracana) and from many grass hosts, including Sorghum halepense, Sorghum verticilliflorum, Panicum maximum, Pennisetum purpureum, Hyparrhenia rufa, Vossia cuspidata and Rottboellia compressa.
Host Plants and Other Plants AffectedTop of page
|Eleusine coracana (finger millet)||Poaceae||Main|
|Hyparrhenia rufa (Jaragua grass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Megathyrsus maximus (Guinea grass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Oryza sativa (rice)||Poaceae||Main|
|Pennisetum glaucum (pearl millet)||Poaceae||Main|
|Pennisetum purpureum (elephant grass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Poaceae (grasses)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Rottboellia compressa||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)||Poaceae||Main|
|Setaria italica (foxtail millet)||Poaceae||Main|
|Sorghum bicolor (sorghum)||Poaceae||Main|
|Sorghum bicolor subsp. verticilliflorum||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Sorghum halepense (Johnson grass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Vossia cuspidata||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Zea mays (maize)||Poaceae||Main|
Growth StagesTop of page Flowering stage, Post-harvest, Seedling stage, Vegetative growing stage
SymptomsTop of page C. partellus larvae feed in leaf funnels, causing characteristic scars and holes. They later feed at the growing point, which may be killed. The dead central leaves then form a characteristic 'dead-heart', especially in young plants. Older larvae tunnel extensively in stems and in maize cobs, weakening the stems, which may break and lodge; damage to inflorescences may interfere with grain formation, causing chaffy heads in sorghum. Similar symptoms are produced by other species of cereal stem borer.
List of Symptoms/SignsTop of page
|Fruit / external feeding|
|Fruit / internal feeding|
|Growing point / dead heart|
|Growing point / internal feeding; boring|
|Leaves / external feeding|
|Leaves / internal feeding|
|Stems / dead heart|
|Stems / internal feeding|
|Whole plant / dead heart|
Biology and EcologyTop of page Many accounts of the biology and ecology of C. partellus have been published. Harris (1990) reviewed recent literature, noting that many research papers relate to work in India, especially at Indian Agricultural Research Institutes and universities, but that there had been a recent increase in the number of papers published from Africa, mostly resulting from work at ICIPE on this pest. Useful summaries of biological, ecological and other information include Nye (1960), Grist and Lever (1969), Siddig (1977), Appert and Deuse (1982), Hill (1983), Harris (1985, 1989), Rensburg (1987) and Polaszek (1998) which includes coloured photographs of live adults and larvae.
In Kenya, work at ICIPE has focused on larval movements (Berger, 1992); dispersal of early instars (Pats and Ekbom, 1992); flight periodicity (Pats and Wiktelius, 1992); and on pheromones (Lwande et al., 1993). In South Africa, work has been carried out at the Plant Protection Institute, Pretoria on duration of diapause (Kfir, 1991a); on seasonal abundance and parasitoids (Kfir, 1992); and on diapause termination (Kfir, 1993); studies have also been made at various locations in India.
Adults emerge from pupae in the late afternoon or early evening and are active at night. They rest on plants and plant debris during the day and are seldom seen, unless disturbed. Females release a pheromone to attract males (Nesbitt et al., 1979; Lwande et al., 1993) and mate soon after emergence. On two or three nights after emergence, each female lays up to a total of 200-600 scale-like overlapping eggs in 10-80 separate batches on the undersides of leaves, mostly near mid-ribs. Larvae hatch after 4-8 days, usually between 06.00 and 08.00 h, and initially feed in the leaf whorl. Subsequent larval instars tunnel into stems, eating out extensive galleries. Larval development is usually completed in 2-4 weeks. Larvae pupate in damaged stems and adults emerge 5-12 days later. The life cycle is completed in 25-50 days when climate and growing conditions are favourable. Five or more successive generations may develop in areas with suitable climates, such as southern India, but in less favourable areas larvae pass the winter or dry season in diapause in stems and stubble. They may remain inactive for up to six months, before pupating and completing their development early in the following growing season.
Biological and ecological studies that are of particular importance in understanding the factors that determine the pest status of C. partellus include Chapman et al. (1983) and Bernays et al. (1985) on survival and dispersal of first- and second-instar larvae on young sorghum plants; Woodhead and Taneja (1987) on larval behaviour and host-plant resistance in sorghum; Ampofo and Kidiavai (1987) on larval movements in maize; Alghali and Saxena (1988) on larval movement, feeding and development in sorghum; Rensburg et al. (1988) on larval infestations in maize; Alghali (1988) on oviposition in sorghum; Kumar (1988) on ovipositional responses in maize; and Sharma and Sharma (1987) on maize floral initiation and infestation.
Natural enemiesTop of page
|Natural enemy||Type||Life stages||Specificity||References||Biological control in||Biological control on|
|Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki||Pathogen||Larvae|
|Bacillus thuringiensis thuringiensis||Pathogen||Larvae|
|Cotesia flavipes||Parasite||Larvae||Comoros; Kenya; Pakistan; South Africa; Uganda; Tanzania||maize; sorghum|
|Cotesia sesamiae||Parasite||Larvae||Comoros; India||maize; sorghum|
|Dentichasmias busseolae||Parasite||Pupae||Comoro Islands; Kenya||maize|
|Invreia soudanensis||Parasite||Pupae||Comoro Islands|
|Itoplectis naranyae||Parasite||Comoro Islands|
|Pediobius furvus||Parasite||Pupae||Comoro Islands; Comoros; Kenya; Pakistan||maize; sorghum|
|Tetrastichus atriclavus||Parasite||Eggs||Comoros||maize; sorghum|
|Tetrastichus howardi||Parasite||Pupae||South Africa|
|Trichogramma chilonis||Parasite||Eggs||Comoros; South Africa||maize|
|Xanthopimpla stemmator||Parasite||Pupae||South Africa|
Notes on Natural EnemiesTop of page Records of natural enemies of C. partellus are scattered in the stem borer literature and there have been few attempts to collate and authenticate them. Mohyuddin and Greathead (1970) published an annotated list of parasites of stem borers in East Africa, and Smith et al. (1993) published an illustrated account of the parasites of lepidopteran stem borers of tropical gramineous plants that includes C. partellus. The main parasitoids mentioned are Hymenoptera (Braconidae, Bethylidae, Chalcididae, Elasmidae, Eulophidae, Ichneumonidae, Scelionidae and Trichogrammatidae) and Diptera (Tachinidae). Smith et al. (1993) and Polaszek (1998) provide details of the biology of the main genera and species, together with identification keys.
The importance of predators has not been fully assessed. Mohyuddin and Greathead (1970) noted the importance of ants as predators on eggs, larvae and pupae.
Plant TradeTop of page
|Plant parts not known to carry the pest in trade/transport|
|Fruits (inc. pods)|
|Growing medium accompanying plants|
|True seeds (inc. grain)|
ImpactTop of page Economic Impact
In Asia, and in parts of Africa where it has become established, C. partellus is a major pest of maize, sorghum and pearl millet. It is generally less important on rice, sugarcane and other crops, although it may be locally troublesome. In southern Africa its importance is growing. Kfir (1997) shows how it had overtaken other stemborers even at higher altitudes than the coastal areas where it had first become established. In East Africa it is acquiring greater importance since it is proving more successful than indigenous congeners (Ofomata et al., 2000).
Reddy and Sum (1992) studied yield-infestation relationships of this species on maize in Kenya and determined economic injury levels, and Bate et al. (1992) developed predictive estimation of maize loss in South Africa. In India, Subhedar et al. (1992) have assessed avoidable losses caused by this species in grain sorghum.
Detection and InspectionTop of page Field infestations of C. partellus are detected by walking through young crops looking for characteristic holing of funnel leaves, the presence of dead hearts and holes in tunnelled stems. Samples of affected stems are then removed and dissected to retrieve larvae and pupae, from which adults are reared for identification. As similar symptoms may be caused by other species of lepidopterous stem borer, by some species of Diptera (especially Chloropidae and Atherigona shoot-flies) and by some diseases, retrieval of larvae or pupae and confirmation of their identity by rearing adults for identification by a taxonomic specialist is essential to ensure a correct diagnosis.
The presence of this species in older crops and in crop residues may be detected by taking random samples of stems or stools for dissection.
Similarities to Other Species/ConditionsTop of page In external appearance C. partellus resembles many other species of Chilo (see Bleszynski, 1970, Plates I and II), but can be distinguished from them by diagnostic characters of the male and female genitalia. According to Bleszynzski (1970), it is most closely related to Chilo tamsi, a species described from southern India.
Prevention and ControlTop of page
Due to the variable regulations around (de)registration of pesticides, your national list of registered pesticides or relevant authority should be consulted to determine which products are legally allowed for use in your country when considering chemical control. Pesticides should always be used in a lawful manner, consistent with the product's label.Introduction
The main international research organizations working on the development of effective control of C. partellus are ICRISAT, in Asia and Africa, mainly for sorghum and pearl millet, and ICIPE in Kenya, mainly for maize and sorghum. Active national research programmes are also well established in India and South Africa. There seems to be little current interest in this species as a pest of rice or of any crops other than maize, sorghum and pearl millet. A review of control in Africa is included in Polaszek (1998).
The relevance of other stem borers must be considered in situations where more than one species is of importance, as on maize in East Africa and southern Africa.
Good crop hygiene, including the destruction of crop residues (stems and stubbles), and removal of volunteer crop plants and/or alternative hosts reduces carryover of diapausing larvae and active populations from one growing season to the next and will help to limit the most damaging attacks on young crops early in the growing season. Manipulation of sowing dates may also be used to avoid periods of peak adult activity.
Verma and Singh (1989) reviewed cultural control measures used against sorghum stem borers, which include time of sowing, crop rotation, tillage, plant spacing, water management, fertilizer management, removal of dead hearts, management of crop residues, field sanitation, mulching and intercropping.
Kfir (1990) assessed the prospects for cultural control of C. partellus (and Busseola fusca) in summer grain crops in South Africa.
Biological control by conservation, augmentation or introduction of natural enemies has potential, but has not been adequately researched. Greathead (1971) reviewed biological control attempts in tropical Africa, including the introduction of parasitoids for use against C. partellus and other species of Chilo. Ingram (1983) also reviewed the situation and noted the need for further critical ecological studies to determine more precisely which exotic parasitoid species are likely to be successfully introduced. Greathead (1990) reviewed the use of natural enemies against Chilo species in Africa and indicated possible lines of further development, including enhancement of the action of indigenous natural enemies by manipulation of the environment and the development of microbial biopesticides. Kfir (1991b, 1994) reported attempted classical biological control of C. partellus (and Busseola fusca) in South Africa by the introduction of egg, larval and pupal parasitoids and concluded that, because of adverse climatic and other factors, the prospect of satisfactory biological control by the introduction of exotic natural enemies is poor.
The efficacy of the entomopathogenic fungus Beauvaria bassiana as a control agent has been assessed on maize in Kenya (Maniania, 1993); formulations of the protozoan Nosema marucae have also been evaluated (Odindo and Mbai, 1993). A new species, Nosema partelli, has been described from C. partellus in South Africa (Walters and Kfir, 1993). Four commercial preparations of Bacillus thuringiensis have also been evaluated in laboratory trials against C. partellus (Brownbridge and Onyango, 1992 a,b).
Plant breeding for resistance or tolerance is generally considered to be the best long-term method of control and much work has been done to identify and use sources of resistance, especially in maize and sorghum. ICRISAT has developed screening procedures for sorghum (Leuschner, 1989), and some progress has been made in breeding for resistance (Agrawal and Taneja, 1989) and in understanding mechanisms of resistance (Taneja and Woodhead, 1989). Gethi and Mihm (1997) reviewed progress in East Africa.
Chemical control is effective in some circumstances but is inappropriate in much of Africa and Asia. Kishore (1989) reviewed recent research and recommendations for chemical control of stem borers on sorghum and maize in India and South Africa and concluded that control can be achieved by applications of granules or dusts to the leaf whorl early in crop growth to kill early larval instars. This method reduces pollution and limits harmful effects on non-target organisms.
Rensburg et al. (1991) reported on progress towards cost-effective control of C. partellus and other pests on maize in South Africa.
Integrated Pest Management
The development of IPM programmes against C. partellus is complicated by the fact that it is only one of a number of species of lepidopterous stem borers that attack its main crop hosts. Biological and ecological differences between these species affect their relative importance on different crops and at different localities. IPM programmes must therefore be developed at local levels to meet local needs. There seem to be few cases where this has actually been achieved.
The components of the female pheromone have been identified (Nesbitt et al., 1979). The possible uses of pheromones to monitor and control stem borers were reviewed by Campion and Nesbitt (1983). They concluded that control by mass trapping is unlikely to be effective, but that control by mating disruption had shown encouraging results and might be used effectively on rice, maize and sugarcane grown under plantation conditions.
No formal phytosanitary measures have been developed against C. partellus and its introduction to Africa from Asia, possibly by introduction of larvae or pupae in infested cereal or grass stems, pre-dates the establishment of phytosanitary services in Africa. Prevention of further spread within Africa might be attempted by controlling the movement of larvae and pupae in stems but, although the species is not known to be a migrant, it seems likely that adults may at times disperse over long distances, and it is impossible to prevent such movements.
ReferencesTop of page
Agrawal BL; Taneja SL, 1989. Breeding for resistance to stem borer (Chilo partellus Swinhoe) in sorghum. International workshop on sorghum stem borers, held in Patancheru, India, on 17-20 November 1987 Patancheru, India; ICRISAT, 159-168
Alghali AM; Saxena KN, 1988. Larval movement, feeding and development of Chilo partellus Swinhoe (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) on two sorghum cultivars. Insect Science and its Application, 9(1):7-11; 15 ref.
Ali AI; Jiang NanQing; Schulthess F; Ogol CKPO; Omwega CO, 2006. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer level on infestations of lepidopterous stemborers and yields of maize in Zanzibar. Annales de la Société Entomologique de France, 42(3/4):481-486. [Special Issue: The cereal stem borers of Sub-Saharan Africa and their antagonists.]
Ampofo JKO; Kidiavai EL, 1987. Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) (Lepid., Pyralidae) larval movement and growth on maize plants in relation to plant age and resistance or susceptibility. Journal of Applied Entomology, 103(5):483-488
Assefa Y, 2015. Potential new pests in the neighbourhood: diversity and abundance of sugarcane stem borers in the Pondoland region of the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. Proceedings of the Annual Congress - South African Sugar Technologists' Association [88th Annual Congress of the South African Sugar Technologists' Association, Durban, South Africa, 18-20 August 2015.], No.88:292-303. http://www.sasta.co.za/publications/congress-proceedings
Bayram A; Tonga A, 2016. First report of Chilo partellus in Turkey, a new invasive maize pest for Europe. Journal of Applied Entomology, 140(3):236-240. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1439-0418
Betbeder-Matibet M; ed, 1990. In: Insect Pests of Food Crops in Africa and the Indian Ocean Region. Montpellier, France: CIRAD-IRAT Entomologie, 15-16.
Bhat ZH; Baba ZA, 2007. Efficacy of different insecticides against maize stem borer Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) and maize aphid Rhopalosiphum maidis (Fitch) infesting maize. Pakistan Entomologist, 29(2):73-76.
Brownbridge M; Onyango T, 1992. Laboratory evaluation of four commercial preparations of Bacillus thuringiensis (Berliner) against the spotted stem borer, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) (Lep., Pyralidae). Journal of Applied Entomology, 113(2):159-167; 24 ref.
Brownbridge M; Onyango T, 1992. Screening of exotic and locally isolated Bacillus thuringiensis (Berliner) strains in Kenya for toxicity to the spotted stem borer, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe). Tropical Pest Management, 38(1):77-81; 20 ref.
Chapman RF; Woodhead S; Bernays EA, 1983. Survival and dispersal of young larvae of Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in two cultivars of sorghum. Bulletin of Entomological Research, 73(1):65-74
Ebenebe AA; Berg Jvan den; Linde TCvan der, 2001. The incidence of Dorylus helvolus (Linnaeus) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) and parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) as mortality factors of Busseola fusca Fuller (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) in Lesotho. African Entomology, 9(1):77-84.
EPPO, 2011. EPPO Reporting Service. EPPO Reporting Service. Paris, France: EPPO. http://archives.eppo.org/EPPOReporting/Reporting_Archives.htm
EPPO, 2014. PQR database. Paris, France: European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. http://www.eppo.int/DATABASES/pqr/pqr.htm
Gethi M, 1997. Search for multiple resistance in maize to stem-borers under natural infestation in mid altitude intermediate maturity areas in Kenya. Insect resistant maize: recent advances and utilization. Proceedings of an International Symposium held at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center, 27 November-3 December 1994., 279-282; 10 ref.
Ghahari H; Tabari M; Ostovan H; Imani S; Parvanak K, 2009. Host plants of rice stem borer, Chilo suppressalis Walker (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) and identification of Chilo species in Mazandaran province, Iran. Journal of New Agricultural Science, 5(17):Pe65-Pe74, en10. http://www.m-iau.ac.ir/SubPages/Emagazine.html
Grist DH; Lever RJAW, 1969. Pests of Rice. London, UK: Longman.
Harris KM, 1985. Lepidopterous stem borers of sorghum. Proceedings of the international sorghum entomology workshop, 15-21 July 1984, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh, India; International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, 161-167
Ingram WR, 1983. Biological control of graminaceous stem-borers and legume pod-borers. [Review]. Insect Science and its Application, 4(1/2):205-209
Inter-African Phytosanitary Council, 1985. Chilo partellus (Swinhoe). Distribution Maps of Major Crop Pests and Diseases in Africa Map No. 199. Yaounde, Cameroon: Inter-African Phytosanitary Council.
Kfir R, 1990. Prospects for cultural control of the stalk borers, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) and Busseola fusca (Fuller), in summer grain crops in South Africa. Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa, 53(1):41-47
Leul Mengistu; Thangavel Selvaraj, 2013. Diversity of sugarcane borer species and their extent of damage status on cane and sugar yield in three commercial sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia. International Journal of Agricultural Technology, 9(6):1461-1473. http://www.ijat-aatsea.com/pdf/v9_n6_13_November/10_IJAT_2013_9(6)_Entomology-Leul%20Mengistu.pdf
Leuschner K, 1989. A review of sorghum stem borer screening procedures. International workshop on sorghum stem borers, held in Patancheru, India, on 17-20 November 1987 Patancheru, India; ICRISAT, 129-135
Lwande W; Gikonyo N; Lux S; Hassanali A; Lofqvist J, 1993. Periodicity in the frequency of calling and quality of pheromone in volatile emissions of the spotted stalk borer, Chilo partellus. Bulletin OILB/SROP, 16(10):174
Maniania NK, 1993. Effectiveness of the entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana (Bals.) Vuill. for control of the stem borer Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) in maize in Kenya. Crop Protection, 12(8):601-604
MOHYUDDIN AI; GREATHEAD DJ, 1970. An annotated list of the parasites of graminaceous stem borers in East Africa, with a discussion of their potential in biological control. Entomophaga, 15(3):241-274.
Nesbitt BF; Beevor PS; Hall DR; Lester R; Davies JC; Reddy KVS, 1979. Components of the sex pheromone of the female spotted stalk borer, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) (Lepidoptera:Pyralidae): identification and preliminary field trials. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 5(1):153-163
Nye IWB, 1960. The insect pests of graminaceous crops in East Africa. Colonial Research Studies, No. 31. London, UK: HMSO.
Ofomata VC; Overholt WA; Lux SA; Huis Avan; Egwuatu RI, 2000. Comparative studies on the fecundity, egg survival, larval feeding, and development of Chilo partellus and Chilo orichalcociliellus (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) on five grasses. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 93(3):492-499; 34 ref.
Polaszek A, 1998. African cereal stem borers: economic importance, taxonomy, natural enemies and control. African cereal stem borers: economic importance, taxonomy, natural enemies and control., x + 530 pp.; 42 pp. of ref.
Reddy KVS; Sum KOS, 1992. Yield-infestation relationship and determination of economic injury level of the stem-borer, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) in three varieties of maize, Zea mays L. Maydica, 37(4):371-376
Rensburg GDJ van; Rensburg JBJ van; Giliomee JH, 1991. Towards cost effective insecticidal control of the maize leafhopper, Cicadulina mbila, and the stalk borers, Busseola fusca and Chilo partellus. Phytophylactica, 23(2):137-140
Rensburg JBJ van; Walters MC; Giliomee JH, 1988. The comparative abundance and in-season distribution of larval infestations of Busseola fusca (Fuller) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) on maize. Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa, 51(1):138-140
Sharma AN; Sharma VK, 1987. The stage of maize, with respect to floral initiation, most vulnerable to infestation by stem borer, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) in India. Tropical Pest Management, 33(2):139-141
Siddig SA, 1977. In: Krantz J, Schmutterer H, Koch W, eds. Diseases, Pests and Weeds in Tropical Crops. Berlin: Paul Parey, 448-450.
Smith JW; Wiedemann RN; Overholt WA, 1993. Parasites of lepidopteran stemborers of tropical gramineous plants. Nairobi, Kenya: ICIPE Science Press.
Sohati PH; Musonda EM; Mukanga M, 2001. Distribution of cereal stemborers in Zambia and release of Cotesia flavipes Cameron, an exotic natural enemy of Chilo partellus (Swinhoe). Insect Science and its Application, 21(4):311-316; [Status and advances in biological control of cereal stemborers in Africa.]; 7 ref.
Taneja SL; Woodhead S, 1989. Mechanisms of stem borer resistance in sorghum. International workshop on sorghum stem borers, held in Patancheru, India, on 17-20 November 1987 Patancheru, India; ICRISAT, 137-143
Walters HS; Kfir R, 1993. Development of Nosema partelli sp. n. (Protozoa: Microsporida: Nosematidae) in the stem borer Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). African Entomology, 1(1):57-62
Ali A I, Jiang NanQing, Schulthess F, Ogol C K P O, Omwega C O, 2006. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer level on infestations of lepidopterous stemborers and yields of maize in Zanzibar. Annales de la Société Entomologique de France. 42 (3/4), 481-486.
Assefa Y, 2015. Potential new pests in the neighbourhood: diversity and abundance of sugarcane stem borers in the Pondoland region of the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. Proceedings of the Annual Congress - South African Sugar Technologists' Association. 292-303. http://www.sasta.co.za/publications/congress-proceedings
Bayram A, Tonğa A, 2016. First report of Chilo partellus in Turkey, a new invasive maize pest for Europe. Journal of Applied Entomology. 140 (3), 236-240. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1439-0418 DOI:10.1111/jen.12232
Bhat Z H, Baba Z A, 2007. Efficacy of different insecticides against maize stem borer Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) and maize aphid Rhopalosiphum maidis (Fitch) infesting maize. Pakistan Entomologist. 29 (2), 73-76.
CABI, Undated. Compendium record. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated a. CABI Compendium: Status as determined by CABI editor. Wallingford, UK: CABI
Ebenebe A A, Berg J van den, Linde T C van der, 2001. The incidence of Dorylus helvolus (Linnaeus) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) and parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) as mortality factors of Busseola fusca Fuller (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) in Lesotho. African Entomology. 9 (1), 77-84.
Ghahari H, Tabari M, Ostovan H, Imani S, Parvanak K, 2009. Host plants of rice stem borer, Chilo suppressalis Walker (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) and identification of Chilo species in Mazandaran province, Iran. Journal of New Agricultural Science. 5 (17), Pe65-Pe74, en10.
Leul Mengistu, Thangavel Selvaraj, 2013. Diversity of sugarcane borer species and their extent of damage status on cane and sugar yield in three commercial sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia. International Journal of Agricultural Technology. 9 (6), 1461-1473. http://www.ijat-aatsea.com/pdf/v9_n6_13_November/10_IJAT_2013_9(6)_Entomology-Leul%20Mengistu.pdf
Sohati P H, Musonda E M, Mukanga M, 2001. Distribution of cereal stemborers in Zambia and release of Cotesia flavipes Cameron, an exotic natural enemy of Chilo partellus (Swinhoe). Insect Science and its Application. 21 (4), 311-316.
Distribution MapsTop of page
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/