Bagrada hilaris (painted bug)
Index
- Pictures
- Identity
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Description
- Distribution
- Distribution Table
- History of Introduction and Spread
- Risk of Introduction
- Habitat
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
- Growth Stages
- Symptoms
- List of Symptoms/Signs
- Natural enemies
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Pathway Causes
- Plant Trade
- Impact Summary
- Economic Impact
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Uses List
- Detection and Inspection
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- References
- Principal Source
- Contributors
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.
Generate reportIdentity
Top of pagePreferred Scientific Name
- Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister)
Preferred Common Name
- painted bug
Other Scientific Names
- Bagrada cruciferarum Kirkaldy
- Bagrada picta (Fabricius)
International Common Names
- English: bagrada bug; caper bug; colorful bug; harlequin bug; mustard bug; mustard painted bug
EPPO code
- BAGRHI
Summary of Invasiveness
Top of pageBagrada hilaris is a hemipteran insect with a host range of over 70 plant species in 23 families. A major pest of crucifers in its native land, many Asian and African countries, the pest’s geographical range of distribution has recently expanded to Europe and the Americas. It has been a serious pest in India since the early twentieth century. It is reported in localized areas in Italy and Malta. First detected in North America in 2008 in California (USA), this bug has spread to coastal production regions in California, several southern states of the USA, Hawaii and Mexico. The worldwide distribution of its host plants, the ability to reproduce quickly in a suitable environment and the absence of natural enemies in new habitats show the potential of B. hilaris to expand and establish in new areas, especially warmer regions of the western world.
Taxonomic Tree
Top of page- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Metazoa
- Phylum: Arthropoda
- Subphylum: Uniramia
- Class: Insecta
- Order: Hemiptera
- Suborder: Heteroptera
- Family: Pentatomidae
- Genus: Bagrada
- Species: Bagrada hilaris
Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Top of pageThe taxonomic nomenclature of painted bug has been reviewed and described by Palumbo et al. (2016). Fabricius first described this species in 1775 as Cimex pictus Fabricius from specimens in India. The species went through several nomenclatural changes over the years as Cimex hilaris Burmeister, 1835; Cimex hebraicus Germar, 1838; Cimex jucundus Klug, 1845; Bagrada cruciferarum Kirkaldy, 1909; Bagrada (Bagrada) picta var. connectens Horváth, 1936; and Bagrada (Bagrada) picta var. modesta Horváth, 1936, before it was finally designated as Bagrada hilaris.
Description
Top of pageThe biology and life history of B. hilaris have been described and reviewed in several publications (Rakshpal, 1949; Azim and Shafee, 1986; Verma et al., 1993). A true bug, B. hilaris is a hemi-metabolous insect in the family Pentatomidae. It completes its life-cycle in approximately 6 weeks in the laboratory at 24°C. Adult bugs are black with orange and white markings and are, on average, 5-7 mm long and 2.5-3.5 mm wide. Adults lay barrel-shaped eggs, which are white initially but gradually turn orange then red before hatching, singly or in small clusters of about 10. Eggs are 0.87-1.0 mm long and 0.55-0.75 mm wide. Female bugs mostly deposit eggs individually in loose soil in the field but can also lay them on the leaves or stems of plants or any other structures present around the plants. An adult female can lay as many as 200 eggs throughout its life, within 1 month. Eggs hatch into nymphs within 4 days and the nymphs pass through five instars before moulting into adults. Nymphs are orange or red immediately after hatching or moulting, but become darker quickly. Younger nymphs have a red abdomen that turns orange with age. Moreover, older nymphs have dark wing pads that the younger nymphs lack.
Under suitable warm weather conditions, painted bugs can develop from eggs to adults in less than 3 weeks and can produce as many as 10 generations a year (Palumbo et al., 2016). Adult bugs may be present in low numbers throughout the year or overwinter in cracks and crevices or under leaf litter during cold winters, though they may become active on warmer days (Reed et al., 2013; Palumbo et al., 2016). In general, two seasonal peaks of painted bugs occur, at planting and harvest, in the western USA (Palumbo et al., 2016).
Distribution
Top of pageB. hilaris is native to Africa and Asia. In Africa, it is reported in the eastern and southern parts of the continent (Infonet-Biovision, 2015). In Asia, it is present mainly in South Asia and the Middle East (Joseph, 2014). It has been a problematic pest of brassicaceous crops in India since the 1900s (Rakshpal,1949). In its non-native habitat, it has been reported in Europe on Pantelleria island, Italy as a pest on caper (Capparis spinosa) and in Malta (Infantino et al., 2007). It was first reported in the USA (California) in 2008, and has since spread to coastal regions of California and neighbouring states. It has recently been reported in Chile and Mexico (Sánchez-Peña, 2014; Faúndez et al., 2016).
Distribution Table
Top of pageThe 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: 12 May 2022History of Introduction and Spread
Top of pagePublished literature on B. hilaris indicates that it has been an important pest of crucifers in the Indian subcontinent (Rakshpal, 1949) since the 1900s. More recently, it has become a severe pest in Africa (Nyabuga, 2008; Obopile et al., 2008) and is becoming a pest problem in southern Europe (Infantino et al., 2007) and the Middle East (Alyousuf and Al-Masudey, 2012). In the USA, it was first reported in 2008 in California, where it was presumed to have entered via shipping containers (Arakelian, 2008; Reed et al., 2013). Several interceptions made at agricultural inspection centres in the USA suggest that the movement of bugs is assisted by the transportation of plant material across states (LeVeen and Hodges, 2015). B. hilaris has also been reported in isolated areas such as the island of Hawaii and Maui, highlighting the risk of the spread of this bug through air or water transportation (Matsunaga, 2014).
Risk of Introduction
Top of pageB. hilaris has a broad host range and host plants are available worldwide. This bug can reproduce quickly in warmer climates and lacks natural enemies in new habitats. These features make B. hilaris a potentially risky pest for introduction to areas where it is not currently present, particularly in warmer regions of the western world. Though deliberate introductions are unlikely to occur because there is no explicit value of this insect, B. hilaris may be indirectly transported to new areas through the movement of produce (Matsunaga, 2014).
Habitat
Top of pageB. hilaris is primarily a pest of crucifers. In South Asian countries, oilseed Brassica crops such as oilseed rape (Brassica napus var. oleifera) are the most common hosts. On the island of Pantelleria in Italy (Colazza et al., 2004), host plants of B. hilaris include crops such as caper (Capparis spinosa). Hosts also include many non-Brassica crops such as maize (Zea mays), pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum) and wheat (Triticum aestivum) during outbreak years. Thus, the primary habitat of this pest includes cultivated crop fields and the surrounding area where it can find non-cultivated wild hosts. Moreover, a recent report from Chile shows that B. hilaris may invade residential buildings and urban habitats (Faúndez, 2018).
Hosts/Species Affected
Top of pagePalumbo et al. (2016) lists 74 plant species in 23 families, including 56 crops, 13 weeds and five ornamentals, as hosts of B. hilaris. However, many of these plants are believed to be ‘bridging hosts’ that B. hilaris infests when Brassica host plants are absent between planting seasons (Palumbo et al., 2016). Reed et al. (2013) and Huang et al. (2014) reported that brassicaceous plants are the primary hosts of this insect. Among the brassicaceous plants, studies have shown that B. hilaris prefers plants such as radish (Raphanus sativus) to red cabbage (Brassica oleracea var. capitata). Other plant hosts such as sweet alyssum (Lobularia maritima), arugula (Eruca vesicaria) and broccoli (B. oleracea var. italica) are less attractive (Huang et al., 2014).
Reed et al. (2013) reported that plants such as Capsicum annuum, Chenopodium spp., Coriandrum sativum, Cucumis melo, C. sativus, Cucurbita foetidissima, C. pepo, Glycine max, Lactuca sativa, Lotus corniculatus, Nicotiana glauca, Senecio vulgaris, Solanum nigrum, S. lycopersicum, Sonchus spp., Spinacia oleracea and Vicia faba are not hosts of B. hilaris.
Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
Top of pageSymptoms
Top of pageB. hilaris feeds by inserting its piercing and sucking mouthparts, stylets, between the epidermal layers of the host (Reed et al., 2013) and releasing a salivary enzyme into the cells (Palumbo et al., 2016). The combination of mechanical damage and the injection of salivary enzyme during feeding can cause the death of cells at feeding sites (Reed et al., 2013). The bugs also remove sap from host tissues during feeding. Chlorotic lesions may form as a result of feeding and can eventually become necrotic. Severe damage caused by B. hilaris to the leaves or other plant parts may prevent normal growth and development of those parts and the whole plant.
Young seedlings are extremely susceptible to feeding damage, especially at the cotyledon stage (Palumbo and Natwick, 2010; Joseph et al., 2017). Feeding at the seedling stage results in wilting and desiccation of the plants, which eventually die. Older plants are susceptible to feeding damage at the growing point. Damage to the apical meristem of many head-forming Brassica crops results in the production of several smaller and unmarketable heads, or no heads at all (Palumbo and Natwick, 2010). Nymphs and adults leave sticky excreta on various parts of plants, potentially affecting the market value (Rajpoot et al., 1996). Feeding on leaves of non-head forming Brassica reduces their marketability by causing aesthetic damage. Such feeding damage also lowers the nutritional value of the produce. B. hilaris also feeds on the developing seeds and seed pods of Brassica plants (Verma et al., 1993; Rajpoot et al.,1996) which can result in damage to the seeds and potentially reduces the oil content of the seeds.
List of Symptoms/Signs
Top of pageSign | Life Stages | Type |
---|---|---|
Leaves / external feeding | ||
Leaves / necrotic areas | ||
Whole plant / external feeding | ||
Whole plant / plant dead; dieback |
Natural enemies
Top of pageNatural enemy | Type | Life stages | Specificity | References | Biological control in | Biological control on |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Alophora | Parasite | Adults | not specific | |||
Chrysoperla carnea | Predator | |||||
Erynia radicans | Pathogen | Acosta et al. (2016) | ||||
Gryon | Parasite | Eggs | not specific | |||
Ooencyrtus | Parasite | Eggs | not specific | |||
Paratelenomus | Parasite | Eggs | not specific | |||
Phasia | Parasite | Adults | not specific | |||
Rhynocoris segmentarius | Predator | Adults; Arthropods|Nymphs | not specific | |||
Sarcophaga kempi | Parasite | Adults | not specific | |||
Telenomus | Parasite | Eggs | not specific | |||
Trissolcus | Parasite | Eggs | not specific | |||
Zelus | Predator | Adults; Arthropods|Nymphs | not specific |
Notes on Natural Enemies
Top of pageSeveral parasitic wasps have been identified as biocontrol agents of B. hilaris in India and Pakistan (Samuel, 1942; Chacko and Katiyar, 1961; Mani and Sharma, 1982; Ghosal, 2006; Mahmood et al., 2015). These include egg parasitoids, mostly in the family Platygastridae, and include several species of Telenomus (=Liophanurus), Paratelenomus, Gryon (= Hadrophanurus), Trissolcus and Ooencyrtus.
Egg parasitoids of B. hilaris in the family Scelionidae have been collected and identified in Mexico (Felipe-Victoriano et al., 2019). However, the rate of parasitism for these parasitoids appears to be low in the field. No natural enemies specific to B. hilaris have been reported in the USA (Reed et al., 2013). Dipteran parasitoids of adult B. hilaris (Crosskey, 1984) include sarcophagid and tachinid flies (Anwar Cheema et al., 1973). The efficacy of these natural enemies is unknown.
Chemical defence, emissions from the scent glands, makes B. hilaris less prone to predatory arthropod attack. However, there are reports of some predators that prey on painted bug. Many of these predators are thought to have significantly less impact on the regulation of painted bug populations. Some of those predators include the reduviid bug (Rhynocoris segmentarius) that feeds on nymphs and adults of B. hilaris (Gunn, 1918). Other predators observed to feed on painted bug nymphs or adults include spiders (Araneae), mantids, predatory heteroptera (Zelus sp.) (Palumbo et al., 2016) and a predatory mite (Bochartia sp.) (Thakar et al., 1969).
Means of Movement and Dispersal
Top of pageThe movement and dispersal behaviour of B. hilaris is not well studied. Grettenberger and Joseph (2019) showed that movement by B. hilaris for host finding is regulated by the level of food scarcity in the area. The long-distance movement and dispersal of B. hilaris is mostly accidental through trade. There were several interceptions of B. hilaris in Florida, USA, from 2011 to 2013, on trucks transporting plant material across state lines suggesting that such movement may play an important role in the spread of the bug (LeVeen and Hodges, 2015).
Pathway Causes
Top of pageCause | Notes | Long Distance | Local | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Crop production | Yes | Yes | Matsunaga (2014); LeVeen and Hodges (2015) | |
Hitchhiker | Yes | Yes | Matsunaga (2014); LeVeen and Hodges (2015) |
Plant Trade
Top of pagePlant parts liable to carry the pest in trade/transport | Pest stages | Borne internally | Borne externally | Visibility of pest or symptoms |
---|---|---|---|---|
Leaves | arthropods/adults; arthropods/eggs; arthropods/larvae; arthropods/nymphs | Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope | ||
Seedlings/Micropropagated plants | arthropods/adults; arthropods/eggs; arthropods/larvae; arthropods/nymphs | Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope | ||
Stems (above ground)/Shoots/Trunks/Branches | arthropods/adults; arthropods/eggs; arthropods/larvae; arthropods/nymphs | Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope |
Economic Impact
Top of pageFeeding damage caused by B. hilaris causes serious economic losses due to a reduction in yield. In India, where painted bug has been a serious pest for a long period, mustard farmers in Rajasthan lost one quarter to three quarters of the expected seed yield due to B. hilaris feeding (Joshi et al., 1989). Similarly, Ahuja et al. (2008) reported that feeding damage caused by B. hilaris resulted in a 37% reduction in seed yield primarily due to stand loss.
In California and Arizona, where B. hilaris outbreaks were first reported in the USA, seedling mortality as high as 60% was reported in highly infested broccoli (Brassica oleracea var. italica) fields. Similarly, cauliflower (B. oleracea var. botrytis) growers in the same area reported losses as high as 25% due to B. hilaris feeding damage.
Risk and Impact Factors
Top of page- Proved invasive outside its native range
- Has a broad native range
- Abundant in its native range
- Is a habitat generalist
- Capable of securing and ingesting a wide range of food
- Highly mobile locally
- Host damage
- Negatively impacts agriculture
- Negatively impacts livelihoods
- Negatively impacts animal/plant collections
- Damages animal/plant products
- Highly likely to be transported internationally accidentally
Detection and Inspection
Top of pageThere are currently no monitoring techniques specific to B. hilaris. However, Reed et al. (2013), from observation of B. hilaris activity on cole crop seedlings, suggested that sampling should be performed during mid-morning to late afternoon when painted bug activity is highest. Huang et al. (2014) reported that B. hilaris is most active between mid-morning (10.00 h) and late afternoon (16.00 h) when ambient temperatures are >29°C.
B. hilaris has been observed feeding on seedlings immediately after emergence. Therefore, sampling is recommended when seedlings begin to emerge (Reed et al., 2013). The young seedlings should be checked thoroughly for the presence of B. hilaris adults and feeding damage. Sampling of larger or transplanted seedlings (i.e., two- to three-leaf stage or larger) should involve thorough inspection of the undersides of leaves, the stem and the soil surface (Palumbo et al., 2016).
Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
Top of pageThe colour pattern of B. hilaris adults and nymphs resembles some other stink bugs and ladybeetle adults in the USA (LeVeen and Hodges, 2015). The adults resemble and may be confused with, harlequin bug, Murgantia histrionica, another related stink bug, due to similarity in colouring pattern. However, painted bugs are smaller, about a quarter to a third of the size, and have smaller orange markings than harlequin bugs.
Prevention and Control
Top of pageDue 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.
Cultural Control and Sanitary Measures
Field sanitation is important in minimizing B. hilaris infestation in crops. Sanitation measures involve the removal of crop residues from the field after harvest and keeping the field and surrounding habitat free of wild hosts (Infantino et al., 2007; Sachan and Purwar, 2007; Hill, 2008; Nyabuga, 2008). Cultivation of vegetable beds to kill the eggs of B. hilaris in the soil has been recommended for control (Bok et al., 2006). Keeping the plant stand healthy by the application of fertilizer, especially nitrogen, and keeping the plants free of moisture stress may reduce damage to seedling crops (Parsana et al., 2001). Similarly, varying the planting times of Brassica crops has also been used to avoid pest damage (Parsana et al., 2001; Ahuja et al., 2008).
In the USA, many direct-seeded Brassicas are now transplanted to minimize the severity of damage by B. hilaris (Reed et al., 2013).
Literature from the early twentieth century has indicated that mustard was successfully used as a trap crop to divert painted bugs away from cabbage (Brassica oleracea var. capitata) fields (Howard, 1907). More recent studies have shown that the use of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) to attract B. hilaris away from the main crop, followed by insecticide sprays, was effective in reducing damage by the pest (Reddy, 2013). Huang et al. (2014) found that B. hilaris preferred radish (Raphanus sativus) to other Brassica crops suggesting that it was a good candidate as a trap crop for painted bug.
Physical/Mechanical Control
Many small-scale growers have traditionally removed painted bugs by hand to manage the pest (Nyabuga, 2008). Other methods of physical control include the use of cloth cover or mosquito netting to keep B. hilaris from feeding on plants (Howard, 1907).
Biological Control
Several species of hymenopteran parasitoids have been found to parasitize the eggs of B. hilaris (Chacko and Katiyar, 1961; Mani and Sharma, 1982; Ghosal et al., 2005) in the Old World. Similarly, a species of tachinid parasitoid (Rakshpal, 1949) has been reported to attack the adults. In the New World, laboratory studies have indicated that some generalist parasitoids can attack the eggs of B. hilaris. However, the behaviour of B. hilaris, laying eggs individually or in small masses in the soil, makes attack by generalist predators more difficult. No native natural enemies that specifically target B. hilaris in the USA have been reported.
Chemical Control
The use of synthetic chemicals is a primary method of control for B. hilaris throughout the world. Various groups of insecticides (carbamates, organophosphates, pyrethroids and neonicotinoids) are used. Foliar application of organophosphates, pyrethroids and neonicotinoid insecticides can provide good knockdown control of B. hilaris; however, many of the old generation organophosphate insecticides, popular in countries such as India for control of B. hilaris, have been phased out in western countries.
Current pest management practices for B. hilaris involve multiple sprays of mostly broad-spectrum insecticides to provide effective control. In India, pyrethroids and other older organophosphate products such as chlorpyrifos, malathion and profenofos are the most widely used insecticides (Sachan and Purwar, 2007; Nagar et al., 2011). In the USA, where B. hilaris is relatively new, pyrethroids (e.g. bifenthrin and lambda-cyhalothrin) and neonicotinoids (imidacloprid, dinotefuran, clothianidin) provide effective knockdown control (Palumbo, 2011a). Many neonicotinoids that offer systemic control of some pests through soil applications have not been able to provide such protection of young seedlings from feeding damage by B. hilaris (Palumbo, 2011b). However, drench application of these insecticides during seedling establishment reduced damage by B. hilaris in broccoli fields in California (Joseph et al., 2016). Similarly, seed dressing with neonicotinoid insecticide provided acceptable control (Joseph, 2019).
Several reduced-risk insecticides have been evaluated against B. hilaris including diamides, sulfoxamines and ketoenols, which are generally effective against hemipteran and other pests that have piercing and sucking mouthparts. However, preliminary studies have shown that these new insecticides are ineffective against this bug on cole crops (Palumbo, 2011c).
In the USA, some studies have attempted to explore other options, such as the use of insect growth regulators (IGR). In the laboratory, IGRs such as novaluron were observed to affect nymph development of B. hilaris (Palumbo et al., 2013; Joseph, 2017), reducing the number of nymphs developing into adults. Other insecticides, such as azadirachtin, which is also found to act as an IGR, have been reported to reduce painted bug injuries to broccoli (Palumbo et al., 2013).
Though much is yet to be explored for management of B. hilaris in organic production systems, a couple of studies conducted in the USA have indicated that chemical insecticides approved for organic use are not very effective as stand-alone treatments. For example, Joseph (2018) found that spinosad, pyrethrins, azadirachtin and potassium salts applied as stand-alone or combined treatments were ineffective in providing consistent bug control.
References
Top of pageAlyousuf, AA, Al-Masudey, AD, 2012. New record of painted bug Bagrada hilaris (burmeister) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) on radish and its chemical control in Basrah province. Basrah Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 25, 595-607.
Arakelian G, 2008. Bagrada bug, Bagrada hilaris. Riverside, California, USA: Center of Invasive Species Research, University of California.http://cisr.ucr.edu/Bagrada_bug.html
Azim MN, Shafee SA, 1986. The life cycle of Bagrada picta (Fabricius). Articulata, 11, 261-265.
Bok I, Madisa M, Machacha D, Moamogwe M , More M, 2006. Manual for vegetable production in Botswana. Botswana: Botswana Ministry of Agriculture.www.dar.gov.bw/manual1_veg_prod_botswana.pdf
Colazza S, Guarino S, Peri E, 2004. Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister) (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae) a pest of caper in the island of Pantelleria. Informatore Fitopatologico, 54, 30-34.
Crosskey RW, 1984. Annotated keys to the genera of Tachinidae (Diptera) found in tropical and southern Africa. Annals of the Natal Museum, 26, 189-337.
EPPO, 2020. EPPO Global database. In: EPPO Global database Paris, France: EPPO.https://gd.eppo.int/
Faúndez EI, 2018. From agricultural to household pest: the case of the painted bug Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister) (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae) in Chile. Journal of Medical Entomology, 55, 1365-1368.
Faúndez, EI, Lüer, A, Cuevas, AG, Rider, DA, Valdebenito, P, 2016. First record of the painted bug Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister, 1835) (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae) in South America. Arquivos Entomolóxicos, 16, 175-179.
Ghosal TK, 2006. Field observation of biocontrol potential of Trissolcus sp. (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). Insect Environment, 12, 30.
Hill, DS, 2008. Pests of crops in warmer climates and their control, London, UK: Springer.
Howard CW, 1907. The Bagrada bug (Bagrada hilaris). Transvaal Agriculture Journal, 5, 168-173.
ICAR, 2010. Annual report 2009-10, ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalaya. ICAR, India: http://www.kiran.nic.in/pdf/reports/Annual_Report_2009-10.pdf
Infantino, A, Tomassoli, L, Peri, E, Colazza, S, 2007. Viruses, fungi and insect pests affecting caper. European Journal of Plant Science and Biotechnology, 1, 170-179.
Infonet-Biovision, 2015. Bagrada bug. Infonet Biovision.http://infonet-biovision.org/node/28470
IPPC, 2017. Official pest control declared to Bagrada hilaris. In: IPPC Official Pest Report, No. CHL-26/1 Rome, Italy: FAO.https://www.ippc.int/
Joseph SV, 2019. Seed treatment with clothianidin reduces Bagrada hilaris (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) damage to crucifers. J. Entomol. Sci, 54, 319-324.
LeVeen E, Hodges AC, 2015. Bagrada bug, painted bug, Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister) (Insecta:Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). In: IFAS Publ. EENY596 . Gainesville, University of Florida.http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/in1041
Matsunaga, JN, 2014. Bagrada bug, Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). In: State of Hawaii Department of Agriculture, new pest advisory , (No.14-02) . https://hdoa.hawaii.gov/pi/files/2013/01/Bagrada-hilaris-NPA4-5-16.pdf
NAPPO, 2015. Florida Official Control Program of Bagrada hilaris (bagrada bug) Recognized by APHIS Under the Federally Recognized State Managed Phytosanitary (FRSMP) Program. NAPPO.http://www.pestalert.org/oprDetail.cfm?oprID=635
Nyabuga F, 2008. Sustainable management of cabbage aphid and Bagrada bugs: case study from Kenya. Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Verlag.70 pp.
Palumbo JC, 2011a. Control of Bagrada hilaris with foliar insecticides on broccoli, 2010. In: Arthropod Management Tests, 36:E8 2 doi: 10.4182/ amt.2011.E8
Palumbo JC, 2011b. Evaluation of soil systemic insecticides for control of Bagrada hilaris on broccoli, 2010. In: Arthropod Management Tests, 36:E10 2 doi: 10.4182/amt.2011.E10
Palumbo JC, 2011c. Evaluation of experimental insecticides against Bagrada hilaris on broccoli, 2010. In: Arthropod Management Tests, 36:E9 2 doi: 10.4182/amt.2011.E9
Palumbo JC, Huang T, Perring TM, Reed DA, Prabhaker N, 2013. Control of Bagrada hilaris, on broccoli with organically-approved insecticides, 2012. Arthropod Management Tests, 38(E7), doi: 10.4182/amt.2013.E7
Palumbo JC, Huang T, Perring TM, Reed DA, Prabhaker N, 2013. Evaluation of experimental insecticides for control of Bagrada hilaris, on broccoli, 2012. Arthropod Management Tests, 38(E5), doi: 10.4182/amt.2013.E
Parsana GJ, Vyas HJ, Bharodia RK, 2001. Effect of irrigation, sowing date and nitrogen on the incidence of painted bug, Bagrada hilaris Burm., in mustard. Journal of Oilseeds Research, 18, 89-90.
Patel, S, Yadav, SK, Singh, CP, 2017. The incidence of painted bug, Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister) on Brassica spp. and Eruca sativa with respect to the date of sowing. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies, 5, 774-776.
Rakshpal, 1949, 1949. Notes on the biology of Bagrada curciferarum Kirk. Indian Journal of Entomology, 11, 11-16.
Reddy PP, 2013. Recent advances in crop protection, Bangalore, India: Springer.
Sachan GC, Purwar JP, 2007. . Integrated pest management in rapeseed and mustard. In: Entomology: novel approaches, [ed. by Jain PC, Bhargava MC]. New Delhi, India: New India Publishing. 399-423.
Samuel CK, 1942. Biological notes on two new egg parasites of Bagrada picta Fabr., Pentatomidae. Indian Journal of Entomology, 4, 92-93.
Distribution References
Alyousuf AA, Al-Masudey AD, 2012. New record of painted bug Bagrada hilaris (burmeister) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) on radish and its chemical control in Basrah province. Basrah Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 595-607.
CABI, 2021. CABI Distribution Database: Status as determined by CABI editor. Wallingford, UK: CABI
Faúndez EI, Lüer A, Cuevas AG, Rider DA, Valdebenito P, 2016. First record of the painted bug Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister, 1835) (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae) in South America. Arquivos Entomolóxicos. 175-179.
Gunn D, 1918. The Bagrada Bug (Bagrada hilaris). In: Bull. Dep. Agric. S. Afr. Pretoria. 16 pp.
Hill DS, 2008. Pests of crops in warmer climates and their control. London, UK: Springer.
ICAR, 2010. Annual report 2009-10, ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalaya., ICAR, India: http://www.kiran.nic.in/pdf/reports/Annual_Report_2009-10.pdf
Infantino A, Tomassoli L, Peri E, Colazza S, 2007. Viruses, fungi and insect pests affecting caper. European Journal of Plant Science and Biotechnology. 170-179.
IPPC, 2017. Official pest control declared to Bagrada hilaris. In: IPPC Official Pest Report, No. CHL-26/1, Rome, Italy: FAO. https://www.ippc.int/
Matsunaga JN, 2014. Bagrada bug, Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). In: State of Hawaii Department of Agriculture, new pest advisory, https://hdoa.hawaii.gov/pi/files/2013/01/Bagrada-hilaris-NPA4-5-16.pdf
NAPPO, 2015. Florida Official Control Program of Bagrada hilaris (bagrada bug) Recognized by APHIS Under the Federally Recognized State Managed Phytosanitary (FRSMP) Program., NAPPO. http://www.pestalert.org/oprDetail.cfm?oprID=635
Patel S, Yadav SK, Singh CP, 2017. The incidence of painted bug, Bagrada hilaris (Burmeister) on Brassica spp. and Eruca sativa with respect to the date of sowing. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies. 774-776.
Rakshpal 1949, 1949. Notes on the biology of Bagrada curciferarum Kirk. Indian Journal of Entomology. 11-16.
Contributors
Top of page11/09/20 Original text by:
Sudan Gyawaly, University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, 3800 Cornucopia Way, Modesto, CA 95358, USA
Jhalendra Rijal, University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, 3800 Cornucopia Way, Modesto, CA 95358, USA
Shimat V. Joseph, University of Georgia, Turf Science R and E Facility, 1109 Experiment Street, Griffin, GA 30223, USA
Distribution Maps
Top of pageSelect a dataset
Map Legends
-
CABI Summary Records
Map Filters
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/