Bemisia tabaci (MEAM1) (silverleaf whitefly)
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Distribution Table
- History of Introduction and Spread
- Risk of Introduction
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
- Growth Stages
- List of Symptoms/Signs
- Species Vectored
- Biology and Ecology
- Natural enemies
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Plant Trade
- Wood Packaging
- Impact Summary
- Environmental Impact
- 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
IdentityTop of page
Preferred Scientific Name
- Bemisia tabaci (MEAM1) (Gennadius, 1889)
Preferred Common Name
- silverleaf whitefly
Other Scientific Names
- Bemisia argentifolii Bellows, Perring, Gill & Hendrick, 1994
- Bemisia tabaci (B biotype)
- Bemisia tabaci B
- Bemisia tabaci Middle East Asia Minor 1 species
- Middle East Asia Minor 1 (MEAM1) species (Bemisia tabaci)
International Common Names
- English: poinsettia whitefly; tobacco whitefly, B biotype
- BEMIAR (Bemisia argentifolii)
Summary of InvasivenessTop of page
The exact origin of the MEAM1 species of Bemisia tabaci, and the reasons why it became such an important pest are still not fully known. MEAM1 was first identified in the mid 1980s when it invaded the southern states of North America. Vast numbers of whiteflies were found to be infesting winter vegetable crops and consequently caused an estimated $500 million loss to the 1991 winter harvest in California. Investigations led to the assumption that the B biotype had spread to the USA on ornamental plants that were being transported around the world. Species such as poinsettia and gerbera were highlighted as probable hosts. During the 1990s MEAM1 was reported on every continent. Biological traits of MEAM1 implied that it had evolved within intensive agricultural regions with exposure to pesticides and modern cultural practices. These included an ability to feed and develop on a wide range of plant and crop species, a high level of fecundity and a predisposition to develop resistance to a wide range of pesticides. MEAM1 is also an effective vector of many different plant viruses which, in conjunction with its high level of polyphagy, make it extremely problematic within agricultural regions where crops may be susceptible to viruses acquired from indigenous plants. Despite B. tabaci being a tropical/sub-tropical whitefly species, MEAM1 is often transported on plant species to temperate regions of the world. Within these cooler regions, MEAM1 can survive within a protected environment and could feasibly spread virus diseases to new locations. It is for this reason that B. tabaci and members of its species complex, including MEAM1, are on EPPO A2 Alert list.
Taxonomic TreeTop of page
- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Metazoa
- Phylum: Arthropoda
- Subphylum: Uniramia
- Class: Insecta
- Order: Hemiptera
- Suborder: Sternorrhyncha
- Unknown: Aleyrodoidea
- Family: Aleyrodidae
- Genus: Bemisia
- Species: Bemisia tabaci (MEAM1)
Notes on Taxonomy and NomenclatureTop of page
The silverleaf whitefly, formerly known as Bemisia tabaci biotype B, but now widely known as Middle East-Asia Minor 1 species was first identified as a new strain of B. tabaci when it appeared in the Americas during the mid-1980s (Brown et al., 1995a). It differed from the indigenous strain of B. tabaci by the ability of its larvae to induce a phytotoxic 'silverleaf' disorder of squash (Costa and Brown, 1991) and by its distinctive esterase profile (Bedford et al., 1993), although the latter feature is not infallible (Byrne et al., 1995). Until 1994, it was universally known as biotype B of B. tabaci. However, Bellows et al. (1994) described it as a separate species, naming it Bemisia argentifolii. This decision was a contentious issue between researchers and taxonomists worldwide, because the naming of the B biotype as B. argentifolii was based on a comparison with the indigenous American strain (the A biotype) and not between the many other biotypes that were being identified worldwide (Bedford et al., 1994a). A study by Rosell et al. (1997) which used SEM to examine the morphological characters documented by Bellows et al. (1994) for identifying B. argentifolii showed that most Old World populations of B. tabaci were morphologically indistinguishable from the B biotype. These Old World populations did not induce silverleaf disorders or produce similar esterase banding patterns to the B biotype. However, within the New World, the B biotype has been readily accepted as a new species, B. argentifolii. In 2005 the phylogenetic relationships between genotypes of B. tabaci were compared using ITS1 and CO1 nucleotide sequences. This identified six distinct 'races' throughout the world. The study concluded that there was insufficient data to raise races to species status, but supported the recognition of the six races as an unresolved core of ungrouped genotypes under the single Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) species name. As a consequence there is insufficient molecular and biological data to support the separation of B. tabaci and B. argentifolii as different species and this should now be discontinued (De Barro et al., 2005). Further research comparing mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase 1 (mtCO1) gene has demonstrated that, rather than one complex species, B. tabaci is a complex of 11 genetic groups. These genetic groups are composed of at least 34 morphologically indistinguishable species, which are merely separated by a minimum of 3.5% mtCOI nucleotide divergence (Dinsdale et al., 2010; De Barro et al., 2011; Boykin and De Barro, 2014). The decision is supported by many whitefly researchers worldwide and by the International Whitefly Symposium Network.
DescriptionTop of page
Eggs are pear shaped with a pedicel spike at the base, approximately 0.2 mm long.
A flat, irregular oval shape, about 0.7 mm long, with an elongate, triangular vasiform orifice. On a smooth leaf the puparium lacks enlarged dorsal setae, but if the leaf is hairy, 2-8 long dorsal setae are present.
Adults are approximately 1 mm long, the male slightly smaller than the female. The body and both pairs of wings are covered with a powdery, waxy secretion, white to slightly yellowish in colour.
DistributionTop of page
MEAM1 species is fast establishing a global presence. However, certain areas within Europe are still MEAM1 free, e.g. Finland, Sweden, Republic of Ireland and the UK (Cuthbertson and Vänninen, 2015).
See also CABI/EPPO (1998, No. 35).
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
History of Introduction and SpreadTop of page
The MEAM1 species of B. tabaci was first reported as an invasive species within the USA in the mid-1980s (Costa and Brown, 1991). By 1990 it had spread throughout most of the southern states of the USA (Perring et al., 1993). By 1994, MEAM1 had also been reported from Central America, the Caribbean, South America, Japan, South Africa, southern Europe, the Middle East (Bedford et al., 1992, 1993, 1994a, c) and Australasia (De Barro, 1995). It was also being reported as interceptions and sporadic appearances within glasshouses in northern Europe and the UK (Bedford et al., 1993). In 2000 MEAM1 was appearing for the first time within South-East Asia (Simon et al., 2003; Rekha et al., 2005). It is assumed that all these introductions have been accidental.
Risk of IntroductionTop of page
The risk to the EPPO region is primarily to the glasshouse industry in northern countries, and mainly concerns MEAM1 species. Present legislation relates to B. tabaci, so reference to B. argentifolii should be avoided to prevent confusion in these areas. Since the recent introduction of this whitefly to several of these countries, the pest has proved particularly difficult to combat because of its polyphagy, its resistance to many insecticides and its disruption of biological control programmes (Prabhaker et al., 1985; Della Giustina et al., 1989; Mushtaq Ahmad et al., 2002). Furthermore, it is also a pest of field crops in other countries in the south of the EPPO region. However, initial fears that MEAM1 species may eventually displace other whiteflies on outdoor crops in southern Europe and cause much greater problems, have so far been unfounded.
Countries that already contain many begomoviruses that infect indigenous plants and weeds, and are associated with localized populations of B. tabaci that exhibit narrow host ranges may be particularly at risk from MEAM1. Should MEAM1 B. tabaci species become established in these countries its polyphagous feeding activities could enable viruses to move into new susceptible host plants, causing new crop protection problems.
Hosts/Species AffectedTop of page
MEAM1 B. tabaci species is documented as being polyphagous, having a host range of around 600 different plant species. This includes many glasshouse and field crops, as well as weeds. However, a study by De Courcy Williams et al. (1996) indicated that only a small number of individuals within a population can readily change host plants. It is the progeny of these particular individuals that lead to the species as a whole being highly polyphagous.
Host Plants and Other Plants AffectedTop of page
|Abelmoschus esculentus (okra)||Malvaceae||Other|
|Aristolochia (dutchman's pipe)||Aristolochiaceae||Wild host|
|Asclepias (Silkweed)||Asclepiadaceae||Wild host|
|Asteraceae (Plants of the daisy family)||Asteraceae||Wild host|
|Brassica oleracea var. botrytis (cauliflower)||Brassicaceae||Main|
|Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis||Brassicaceae||Other|
|Brassicaceae (cruciferous crops)||Brassicaceae||Other|
|Capsicum annuum (bell pepper)||Solanaceae||Main|
|Carica papaya (pawpaw)||Caricaceae||Main|
|Catharanthus roseus (Madagascar periwinkle)||Apocynaceae||Other|
|Convolvulaceae (Plants of the bindweed family)||Convolvulaceae||Wild host|
|Euphorbia pulcherrima (poinsettia)||Euphorbiaceae||Main|
|Fabaceae (leguminous plants)||Fabaceae||Main|
|Gossypium hirsutum (Bourbon cotton)||Malvaceae||Main|
|Lactuca sativa (lettuce)||Asteraceae||Main|
|Manihot esculenta (cassava)||Euphorbiaceae||Other|
|Menispermum (moonseed)||Menispermaceae||Wild host|
|Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)||Solanaceae||Main|
|Origanum majorana (sweet marjoram)||Lamiaceae||Main|
|Oxalis (wood sorrels)||Oxalidaceae||Wild host|
|Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)||Solanaceae||Main|
|Solanum melongena (aubergine)||Solanaceae||Main|
|Umbelliferae (Plants of the parsley family)||Umbelliferae||Wild host|
|Verbena (vervain)||Verbenaceae||Wild host|
Growth StagesTop of page Flowering stage, Fruiting stage, Seedling stage, Vegetative growing stage
SymptomsTop of page
Early indication of infestation may consist of chlorotic spots caused by larval feeding, which may also be disfigured by honeydew and associated sooty moulds. Leaf curling, yellowing, mosaics or yellow-veining may also indicate the presence of whitefly-transmitted viruses. These symptoms are also observed in B. tabaci infestations, however phytotoxic responses such as a severe silvering of courgette and melon leaves, mis-ripening of tomato fruits, stem whitening of Brassica crops and yellow veining of some solanaceous plants are only caused by MEAM1 (Costa et al., 1993; Secker et al., 1998).
The feeding of adults and nymphs causes chlorotic spots to appear on the surface of the leaves. Depending on the level of infestation, these spots may coalesce until the whole of the leaf is yellow, apart from the area immediately around the veins. Such leaves are later shed. The honeydew produced by the feeding of the nymphs covers the underside of leaves and can cause a reduction in photosynthetic potential when colonized by moulds. Honeydew can also disfigure flowers and, in cotton, can cause problems in lint processing. Following heavy infestations, plant height, the number of internodes, and yield quality and quantity can be affected, for example, in cotton.
Phytotoxic responses in many plant and crop species caused by larval feeding include severe silvering of courgette leaves, white stems in pumpkin, white streaking in leafy Brassica crops, uneven ripening of tomato fruits, reduced growth, yellowing and stem blanching in lettuce and kai choy (Brassica campestris) and yellow veining in carrots and honeysuckle (Lonicera) (Bedford et al., 1994a,b).
A close observation of leaf undersides will show tiny, yellow to white larval scales. In severe infestations, when the plant is shaken, numerous small and white adult whiteflies will emerge in a cloud and quickly resettle. These symptoms do not appreciably differ from those of Trialeurodes vaporariorum, the glasshouse whitefly, which is common throughout Europe.
List of Symptoms/SignsTop of page
|Leaves / abnormal colours|
|Leaves / abnormal leaf fall|
|Leaves / abnormal patterns|
|Leaves / fungal growth|
|Leaves / honeydew or sooty mould|
|Leaves / necrotic areas|
|Leaves / wilting|
|Leaves / yellowed or dead|
|Stems / honeydew or sooty mould|
|Whole plant / early senescence|
Species VectoredTop of page Bean golden mosaic virus (BGMV-type 1)
Tomato chlorosis virus (yellow leaf disorder of tomato)
Biology and EcologyTop of page
Eggs are usually laid in circular groups, on the underside of leaves, with the broad end touching the surface and the long axis perpendicular to the leaf. They are anchored by a pedicel which is inserted into a fine slit made by the female in plant tissue, and not into stomata as is the case with many other members of the Aleyrodidae. Eggs are whitish in colour when first laid, but gradually turn brown. Hatching occurs after 5-9 days at 30°C but this depends very much on host species, temperature and humidity.
On hatching, the first instar, or 'crawler', is flat, oval and scale-like in shape. The first instar is the only larval stage of this whitefly which is mobile. It moves from the egg site to a suitable feeding location on the lower surface of the leaf, after which its legs are lost in the next moult and the larva becomes sessile. It does not move again throughout the remaining nymphal stages. The first three nymphal stages last 2-4 days each, according to temperature. The fourth nymphal stage is termed the puparium, and is approximately 0.7 mm long. True pupation within the whitefly life-cycle does not occur, although the last (fourth) nymphal instar is typically referred to as a pupa after apolysis has been completed. Metamorphosis to adult occurs over about 6 days.
The adult emerges through a 'T'-shaped rupture in the skin of the puparium and spreads its wings for several minutes before beginning to powder itself with a waxy secretion from glands on the abdomen. Copulation begins 12-20 hours after emergence and takes place several times throughout the life of the adult. The life span of the female can extend to 60 days. The life of the male is generally much shorter, being between 9 and 17 days. Each female can oviposit over 300 eggs during her lifetime, these are often arranged in an arc around the female as she rotates on her stylet. Some 11 to 15 generations can occur within 1 year.
MEAM 1 species is the vector of over 60 plant viruses in the genera Geminivirus, Closterovirus, Nepovirus, Carlavirus, Potyvirus and a rod-shaped DNA virus (Markham et al., 1994). Whitefly-transmitted geminiviruses, now designated Begomoviruses (Mayo and Pringle, 1998), are the most important of these agriculturally, causing yield losses to crops of between 20 and 100% (Brown and Bird, 1992; Cathrin and Ghanim, 2014). Begomoviruses cause a range of different symptoms which include yellow mosaics, yellow veining, leaf curling, stunting and vein thickening. Mansoor et al. (1993) reported that 1 million hectares of cotton were decimated in Pakistan by Cotton leaf curl virus (CLCuV) and important African subsistence crops such as cassava are affected by begomoviruses such as African cassava mosaic virus (ACMV) (see datasheet on African cassava mosaic disease). Tomato crops throughout the world are particularly susceptible to many different begomoviruses, and in most cases exhibit yellow leaf curl symptoms. This has caused their initial characterization as Tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV). A number of different species of TYCLV have now been recorded from within both the New World and Old World where MEAM1occur (Jones, 2003). MEAM1 has also been associated with transmission of several other begomoviruses such as Tomato mottle virus (EPPO, 1996), Tobacco leaf curl virus (TLCV), Sida golden mosaic virus (SiGMV), Squash leaf curl virus (SLCV), Cotton leaf crumple virus (CLCV), Bean golden mosaic virus (BGMV) and Cotton leaf curl virus (Simon et al., 2003), some of which cause heavy yield losses in their respective hosts. Dual infections have also been shown to occur (Bedford et al., 1994c).
Although MEAM1 B. tabaci is not responsible for many of the begomovirus epidemics within Africa and Asia, it is now present on these continents and it is able to acquire and transmit these viruses (Bedford et al., 1994a). Its ability to feed on many different host plants enables whitefly-transmitted viruses to infect new plant species. This could cause greater problems to the agriculture in these areas as has already been demonstrated in the Americas.
Europe has five known begomoviruses, two of which have been shown to be no longer transmissible by B. tabaci and in particular MEAM1, Tobacco leaf curl virus (TLCV) (also known as Honeysuckle yellow vein mosaic virus (HYVMV)), Ipomea yellow vein virus and Abutilon mosaic virus (AbMV), possibly through many years of vegetative propagation of their ornamental hosts (Jones 2003; Bedford et al., 1994a). The others are two different transmissible tomato yellow leaf curl viruses that are causing major crop losses within the tomato industries of Spain, Portugal and Italy (Moriones et al., 1993; Louro et al., 1996). Indigenous weed species have also been shown as field reservoirs for one of these tomato viruses (Bedford et al., 1998) and may be the source of others yet to be identified within Europe. A closterovirus, Cucurbit yellow stunting disorder virus (CYSDV) and an Ipomovirus, Cucumber vein yellowing virus (CVYV) transmitted by B. tabaci (including MEAM1), are also causing severe damage to cucumbers and melons in Spain and around the Mediterranean basin (Celix et al., 1996; Jones, 2003).
Natural enemiesTop of page
|Natural enemy||Type||Life stages||Specificity||References||Biological control in||Biological control on|
|Isaria poprawskii||Pathogen||Cabanillas et al., 2013|
|Lecanicillium muscarium||Pathogen||Cuthbertson and Walters, 2005; Cuthbertson et al., 2005a; Cuthbertson et al., 2005b||UK||Tomato, Verbena|
|Steinernema carpocapsae||Pathogen||Larvae||Cuthbertson et al., 2007a||UK||Tomato, Verbena|
|Steinernema feltiae||Pathogen||Larvae||Cuthbertson et al., 2003a; Cuthbertson et al., 2007b||UK||Tomato, Verbena|
Notes on Natural EnemiesTop of page
Natural enemies of whiteflies will, in most cases, have co-evolved with their prey and may, in some regions, be more efficient at controlling their native prey than an introduced one. Since the origin of MEAM1 B. tabaci species is still unknown, its specific natural enemies have not yet been identified. However, it appears that most, if not all the natural enemies listed for B. tabaci, should attack MEAM1, although this has not been fully investigated.
Various species of predatory mites have also been shown to be effective in feeding upon Mediterranean species of B. tabaci populations, including Amblyseius limonicus, A. swirskii and Transeius montdorensis (Cuthbertson, 2014). No doubt they will also feed on MEAM1 species. A large range of natural enemies of B. tabaci have been recorded in China (Li et al., 2011). Their specificity to individual members of the B. tabaci species complex is unknown.
Entomopathogenic nematodes and fungi have been shown to offer much potential in controlling what has now been determined as MEAM1 species Bemisia populations (Cuthbertson et al., 2003a, 2005a, 2007a, b; Cuthbertson and Walters, 2005).
Means of Movement and DispersalTop of page
Adults do not fly very efficiently, but once airborne, can be transported long distances by convection or by wind. The greater dispersive capacity of MEAM1 B. tabaci has been instrumental in its greater economic importance. All stages of this whitefly are likely to be transported within the international trade of ornamental plants and cut flowers. The international trade in poinsettia and gerbera has played a significant role in the dispersal of MEAM1 (Cuthbertson, 2013) to all continents.
As with other species of whitefly and biotypes of B. tabaci, MEAM1 can easily disperse over short distances. This dispersal can occur in vast numbers when host plants become heavily infested and begin to senesce. Large 'clouds' comprising many millions of individuals have been recorded leaving a dying host crop. Dispersal is almost certainly assisted by wind.
Physical movement of infested plants, whether it be through plant care, harvesting or spraying, can result in adult MEAM1 dispersal from an infested plant.
Movement in trade
Any susceptible plant or crop, where leafy material is produced for distribution and export can act as a means of dispersing MEAM1. Seasonal plants such as poinsettia, bedding plants, grafted crop plants and cut flowers are all potential means for MEAM1 distribution. However, this usually involves dispersal of whitefly larvae and pupae rather than adults.
Plant TradeTop of page
|Plant parts liable to carry the pest in trade/transport||Pest stages||Borne internally||Borne externally||Visibility of pest or symptoms|
|Flowers/Inflorescences/Cones/Calyx||adults; pupae||Yes||Pest or symptoms usually visible to the naked eye|
|Leaves||adults; pupae||Yes||Pest or symptoms usually visible to the naked eye|
|Seedlings/Micropropagated plants||eggs; larvae||Yes||Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope|
|Stems (above ground)/Shoots/Trunks/Branches||adults; pupae||Yes||Pest or symptoms usually visible to the naked eye|
|Plant parts not known to carry the pest in trade/transport|
|Fruits (inc. pods)|
|Growing medium accompanying plants|
|True seeds (inc. grain)|
Wood PackagingTop of page
|Wood Packaging not known to carry the pest in trade/transport|
|Loose wood packing material|
|Processed or treated wood|
|Solid wood packing material with bark|
|Solid wood packing material without bark|
Impact SummaryTop of page
|Fisheries / aquaculture||None|
ImpactTop of page
MEAM1 species of B. tabaci can have a serious impact on the production of certain field crops as well as a wide range of protected horticultural crops. In the majority of cases, this is due to viruses that the whitefly transmits between susceptible crops or acquires from indigenous host reservoirs. MEAM1 is also able to induce a phytotoxic response from a number of plant species that could cause yield loss or reduced quality produce. This includes squash silver leaf (Bedford et al., 1994b), pumpkin white stem (Costa and Brown, 1991), white streaking of cole crops (Brown et al., 1992), reduced growth and stem blanching of kai choy (Costa et al., 1993) and uneven ripening of tomato (Maynard and Cantliffe, 1989). All of these can affect the yield and quality of a crop and thus its market value. In 1991, MEAM1 alone caused an estimated $500 million loss to the 1991 winter harvest in California, USA, mainly through virus damage. However, in other areas of the world where MEAM1 has appeared, it is found alongside an indigenous non-B biotype, so it is extremely difficult to determine specific economic damage. For example, MEAM1 is found alongside the K biotype in Pakistan where both biotypes transmit a disease of cotton, Cotton leaf curl virus. Around 2 million tonnes of cotton are grown in Pakistan and between 30 and 40% crop losses can be expected through whitefly-transmitted viruses based on figures in the mid-1990s. An estimate of 2.4 billion dollars damage was caused by the virus between 1993 and 1994 (Bhatti and Soomro 1996). In 1994, the cotton virus spread to India as did a whitefly-transmitted virus of tomato, Tomato leaf curl virus (Colvin et al., 2002), which caused a number of complete crop failures. This tomato virus was then reported to have spread to potato (Gard et al., 2001). Again MEAM1 was present within the epidemics although indigenous biotypes G, H and I were also recorded from India, so specific damage attributed to MEAM1 alone, could not be calculated.
Within Israel around the Mediterranean Basin, North Africa and on the Canary Islands MEAM1 is present alongside the indigenous Mediterranean (MED) species (formerly known as biotype Q). As seen in Pakistan, it is impossible to calculate the economic impact of MEAM1 alone in these areas. The economic impact of more recent appearances of MEAM1 within Africa, South and Central America and Australasia currently remains unknown.
Environmental ImpactTop of page
The appearance of MEAM1 within new areas is, in most cases, the result of movement of infested plant material. The movement and establishment of MEAM1 populations through this route brings along the possibility of insecticide resistance genes. This invariably leads to an increase in the use of insecticides as whitefly control becomes increasingly more difficult. This in turn can produce an ever increasing spiral in the levels of insecticide resistance and insecticide use, having a direct impact on the environment.
Detection and InspectionTop of page
Numerous chlorotic spots develop on the leaves of affected plants, which may also be disfigured by honeydew and associated sooty moulds. Leaf curling, yellowing, mosaics or yellow veining could indicate the presence of whitefly-transmitted viruses, and phytotoxic responses such as a severe silvering of courgette and melon leaves indicate the presence of the B biotype, the immature stages being mainly responsible for this symptom (Costa et al., 1993). Other phytotoxic responses to the B biotype include mis-ripening of tomato fruits (Maynard and Cantliffe, 1989), white streaking of Brassica leaves (Brown et al., 1992) and yellow veining of some solanaceous plants (Bedford et al., 1998).
Close observation of the undersides of the leaves will show the tiny, yellow/white larval scales and in severe infestations, when the plant is shaken, numerous small white adult whiteflies will flutter out and quickly resettle.
Similarities to Other Species/ConditionsTop of page
B. tabaci is now widely regarded to be a multi-species complex consisting of as many as 34 species that are morphologically indistinguishable from each other. They can, however, be distinguished molecularly (De Barro et al., 2011; Boykin and De Barro, 2014).
Differentiation of MEAM1 from other whitefly species on the basis of adult morphology is often difficult, although close observation of adult eye morphology may often show differences in ommatidial arrangements between some species. At rest, MEAM1 species has wings more closely pressed to the body than Trialeurodes vaporariorum, which is a larger whitefly and more triangular in appearance.
The fourth instar or puparium can also be used to distinguish MEAM1 from T. vaporariorum as a glasshouse pest. T. vaporariorum is 'pork-pie shaped', regularly ovoid, has straight sides (viewed laterally) resulting from the vertical wax pallisade surrounding each puparium, and in most instances, 12 large setae. MEAM1 species has an irregular 'pancake-like' oval shape, oblique sides and shorter, finer setae. Although the number of enlarged setae in the B biotype and wax rods in T. vaporariorum can vary according to host plant morphology, the two caudal setae are always stout and nearly always as long as the vasiform orifice in the B biotype. The length of caudal setae can be used to distinguish some Bemisia species.
For more information on the identification of B. tabaci from slide-mounted pupae, see Martin (1987).
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.
Intercropping practices using non-hosts have been used in many countries aiming to reduce numbers of whiteflies on specific crops. However, intercropping with susceptible crops can promote whitefly populations, by offering a greater leaf area for feeding.
Weed species can play an important role in harbouring whiteflies between crop plantings and attention should be paid to removing these in advance of planting susceptible crops. Weeds also often harbour whitefly-transmitted viruses (Bedford et al., 1998) and may be a major source of crop virus epidemics, especially where MEAM1 species is present, due to its polyphagous nature.
Cultural control is generally much more effective where whiteflies are physical pests rather than virus vectors.
The development of transgenic resistant plant and crop species through genetic engineering must be considered and accepted as a future method of control where whitefly-transmitted viruses are already endemic and causing severe crop losses (Wilson, 1993; Raman and Altman, 1994). Traditional sources of resistance have been used successfully for the control of other whitefly species.
The following active ingredients have been reported as effective in controlling MEAM1 species worldwide: bifenthrin, buprofezin, imidacloprid, fenpropathrin, amitraz, fenoxycarb, deltamethrin, azadirachtin, pymetrozine.
MEAM1 has been documented as being able to exhibit resistance to all groups of pesticide that have been developed for its control (Cahill et al., 1994, 1995; Mushtaq Ahmad et al., 2002). A rotation of insecticides that offer no cross-resistance must therefore be used to control infestations.
A new group of environmentally safer insecticides that effectively kill whitefly by a physical mode of action are appearing on the market in many countries. These products do not have a specific active ingredient, but appear to utilise surfactant-like properties to overcome the protective waxes on whitefly larvae and adults.
The increased fecundity and polyphagous habit of MEAM1 species has exacerbated many control problems in field and glasshouse crops worldwide, compounded by insecticide resistance. It appears that no single control treatment can be used on a long-term basis against this pest, and that approaches should be integrated to achieve an effective level of control.
IPM appears to offer the best option for controlling MEAM1 infestations without causing contamination of the environment. Beneficial insects are used alongside chemicals that offer a high level of selectivity, such as insect growth regulators. However, if whitefly-transmitted viruses are present, it is unlikely that the threshold of whitefly vectors would ever be reduced to a level where virus transmission would cease by using these methods, because MEAM1 is such an efficient viral vector. Plant and crop species that exhibit a high level of resistance to both vector and virus must also be considered when designing an IPM system.
Entomopathogenic nematodes and fungi have been shown to be successfully tank-mixed with several chemical products for use in eradication programmes against what has now been deemed as MEAM1 species in the UK (Cuthbertson et al., 2003b, 2005b, 2007b).
In countries where MEAM 1 species is not already present, the enforcement of strict phytosanitary regulations as required for B. tabaci, may help to reduce the risk of this whitefly becoming established (Cuthbertson and Vänninen, 2015).
Because of the difficulty of detecting low levels of infestation in consignments, it is best to ensure that the place of production is free from the pest (OEPP/EPPO, 1990). Particular attention is needed for consignments from countries where certain B. tabaci-listed viruses, now on the EPPO A1 or A2 quarantine lists, are present. These viruses are also transmitted by MEAM1.
ReferencesTop of page
Barro PJDe; Driver F; Trueman JW; Curran J, 2000. Phylogenetic relationships of world populations of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) using ribosomal ITS1. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol, 16:29-36.
Barro PJde; Liebregts W; Carver M, 1998. Distribution and identity of biotypes of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in member countries of the Secretariat of the Pacific Community. Australian Journal of Entomology, 37(3):214-218; 8 ref.
Barro PJde; Liu ShuSheng; Boykin LM; Dinsdale AB, 2011. Bemisia tabaci: a statement of species status. Annual Review of Entomology, 56:1-19. http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-ento-112408-085504
Bartlett PW, 1992. Experience of polyphagous alien pests of protected crops in Great Britain. Bulletin OEPP, 22:337-346.
Bedford ID; Briddon RW; Brown JK; Rosell RC; Markham PG, 1994. Geminivirus transmission and biological characterisation of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) biotypes from different geographic regions. Annals of Applied Biology, 125(2):311-325.
Bedford ID; Briddon RW; Jones P; Alkaff N; Markham PG, 1994. Differentiation of three whitefly-transmitted geminiviruses from the Republic of Yemen. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 100(3-4):243-257.
Bedford ID; Briddon RW; Markham PG; Brown JK; Rosell RC, 1992. Bemisia tabaci - biotype characterisation and the threat of this whitefly species to agriculture. Proceedings - Brighton Crop Protection Conference Pests and Diseases, 1992. Farnham, UK: British Crop Protection Council, 1235-1240.
Bedford ID; Briddon RW; Markham PG; Brown JK; Rosell RC, 1993. A new species of Bemisia or biotype of Bemisia tabaci (Genn) as a future pest of European agriculture. Plant Health and the European Single Market, BCPC Monograph, 54:381-386.
Bedford ID; Kelly A; Banks GK; Briddon RW; Cenis JL; Markham PG, 1998. Solanum nigrum: an indigenous weed reservoir for a tomato yellow leaf curl geminivirus in southern Spain. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 104(2):221-222; 12 ref.
Bedford ID; Pinner M; Liu S; Markham PG, 1994b. Bemisia tabaci - potential infestation, phytotoxicity and virus transmission within European agriculture. In: Proceedings Brighton Crop Protection Conference, Pests and Diseases, vol. 2. Bracknell, UK: British Crop Protection Council, BCPC Publications, 911-916.
Beitia F; Mayo I; Robles-Chillida EM; Guirao P; Cenis JL, 1997. Current status of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) in Spain: The presence of biotypes of this species. Proceedings of the IOBC Symposium, Integrated Control in Protected Crops - Mediterranean Climate, Tenerife. Bulletin IOBC, 20(4):99-107.
Bhatti IM; Soomro AH, 1996. Agricultural inputs and field crop production in Sindh. Hyderabad, India: Agricultural Research Sindh.
Boykin LM; Barro PJDe, 2014. A practical guide to identifying members of the Bemisia tabaci species complex: And other morphologically identical species. Frontiers of Ecology and Evolution, 45:1-5.
Brown JK; Coats SA; Bedford ID; Markham PG; Bird J; Frohlich DR, 1995. Characterization and distribution of esterase electromorphs in the whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Biochemical Genetics, 33(7/8):205-14; 22 ref.
Brown JK; Costa HS; Laemmlen F, 1992. First report of whitefly-associated squash silverleaf disorder of Cucurbita in Arizona and of white streaking disorder of Brassica species in Arizona and California. Plant Disease, 76(4):426
Byrne FJ; Bedford ID; Devonshire AL; Markham PG, 1995. Esterase variation and squash induction in B-type Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research, 85(2):175-179; 15 ref.
Cabanillas HE; León JHde; Humber RA; Murray KD; Jones WA, 2013. Isaria poprawskii sp. nov. (Hypocreales: Cordycipitaceae), a new entomopathogenic fungus from Texas affecting sweet potato whitefly. Mycoscience, 54(2):158-169. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S134035401200023X
Cahill M; Byrne FJ; Denholm I; Devonshire AL; Gorman KJ, 1994. Insecticide resistance in Bemisia tabaci. Pesticide Science, 42(2):137-139.
Cahill M; Byrne FJ; Gorman K; Denholm I; Devonshire AL, 1995. Pyrethroid and organophosphate resistance in the tobacco whitefly Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research, 85(2):181-187.
Cahill M; Jarvis W; Gorman K; Denholm I, 1996. Resolution of baseline responses and documentation of resistance to buprofezin in Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research, 86(2):117-122; 29 ref.
Cathrin PB; Ghanim M, 2014. Recent advances on interactions between the whitefly Bemisia tabaci and begomoviruses, with emphasis on Tomato yellow leaf curl virus. In: Plant Virus-Host Interaction: Molecular Approaches and Viral Evolution. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier, 79-103.
Célix A; López-Sesé A; Almarza N; Gómez-Guillamón ML; Rodríguez-Cerezo E, 1996. Characterization of cucurbit yellow stunting disorder virus, a Bemisia tabaci-transmitted Closterovirus. Phytopathology, 86(12):1370-1376; 27 ref.
Chen Q; Liu Y; Zhu G; Xiao L, 2003. Effect of different host plants on development of B biotype Bemisia tabaci. Plant Physiology Communications, 39(6):479-481.
Chermiti B; Braham M; Cenis JL; Alonso C; Beitia F, 1997. Sur la presence en Tunisie des biotypes "B" et "Non B" de Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera, Aleyrodidae) et de leurs parasitoides Associes. Proceedings of the IOBC Symposium, Integrated Control in Protected Crops - Mediterranean Climate, Tenerife. Bulletin IOBC, 20(4):108-113.
Colvin J; Muniyappa V; Valand GB; Govindappa MR; Venkatesh HM; Kiran Kumar M; Bikramjit S; Banks GK; Hanson PM; Green SK, 2002. .
Costa HS; Brown JK, 1991. Variation in biological characteristics and esterase patterns among populations of Bemisia tabaci, and the association of one population with silverleaf symptom induction. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 61(3):211-219.
Cuthbertson AGS, 2013. Update on the status of Bemisia tabaci in the UK and the use of entomopathogenic fungi within eradication programmes. Insects, 4(2):198-205. http://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/4/2/198
Cuthbertson AGS; Head J; Walters KFA; Gregory SA, 2003. The efficacy of the entomopathogenic nematode, Steinernema feltiae, against the immature stages of Bemisia tabaci. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology, 83(3):267-269.
Cuthbertson AGS; Head J; Walters KFA; Murray AWA, 2003. The integrated use of chemical insecticides and the entomopathogenic nematode, Steinernema feltiae, for the control of sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci. Nematology, 5(5):713-720.
Cuthbertson AGS; Mathers JJ; Northing P; Luo WeiQi; Walters KFA, 2007. The susceptibility of immature stages of Bemisia tabaci to infection by the entomopathogenic nematode Steinernema carpocapsae. Russian Journal of Nematology, 15(2):153-156. HTTP://www.russjnematology.com
Cuthbertson AGS; Walters KFA, 2005. Pathogenicity of the entomopathogenic fungus, Lecanicillium muscarium, against the sweet potato whitefly Bemisia tabaci, under laboratory and glasshouse conditions. Mycopathologia, 160(4):315-319. http://springerlink.metapress.com/link.asp?id=102966
Cuthbertson AGS; Walters KFA; Deppe C, 2005. Compatibility of the entomopathogenic fungus Lecanicillium muscarium and insecticides for eradication of sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci. Mycopathologia, 160(1):35-41. http://springerlink.metapress.com/link.asp?id=102966
Cuthbertson AGS; Walters KFA; Northing P, 2005. The susceptibility of immature stages of Bemisia tabaci to the entomopathogenic fungus Lecanicillium muscarium on tomato and verbena foliage. Mycopathologia, 159(1):23-29. http://springerlink.metapress.com/link.asp?id=102966
Cuthbertson AGS; Walters KFA; Northing P; Luo W, 2007. Efficacy of the entomopathogenic nematode, Steinernema feltiae, against sweetpotato whitefly Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) under laboratory and glasshouse conditions. Bulletin of Entomological Research, 97(1):9-14. http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=ber
de Barro PJ, 1995. Bemisia tabaci Biotype B: A Review of its Biology, Distribution and Control. Technical Paper No. 36 (second edition). Brisbane, Australia: CSIRO Division of Entomology.
De Courcy Williams M; Bedford ID; Kelly A; Markham PG, 1996. Bemisia tabaci: potential infestation and virus transmission within the ornamental plant industry. Brighton Crop Protection Conference: Pests & Diseases - 1996: Volume 1: Proceedings of an International Conference, Brighton, UK, 18-21 November 1996., 63-68; 19 ref.
Della Giustina W; Martinez M; Bertaux F, 1989. Bemisia tabaci: le nouvel ennemi des cultures sous serres en Europe. Phytoma No. 406:48-52.
Dinsdale A; Cook L; Riginos C; Buckley YM; Barro Pde, 2010. Refined global analysis of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Aleyrodoidea: Aleyrodidae) mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase 1 to identify species level genetic boundaries. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 103(2):196-208. http://esa.publisher.ingentaconnect.com/content/esa/aesa/2010/00000103/00000002/art00007
EPPO, 1990. Specific quarantine requirements. EPPO Technical Documents, No. 1008. Paris, France: European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization.
EPPO, 2014. PQR database. Paris, France: European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. http://www.eppo.int/DATABASES/pqr/pqr.htm
Esterhuizen LL; Mabasa KG; Heerden SWvan; Czosnek H; Brown JK; Heerden Hvan; Rey MEC, 2013. Genetic identification of members of the Bemisia tabaci cryptic species complex from South Africa reveals native and introduced haplotypes. Journal of Applied Entomology, 137(1/2):122-135. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1439-0418
EWSN, 1999. European Network On European Whiteflies, Their Associated Plant Pathogens And Disorders. (European Whitefly Studies Network). Commission of the European Communities Directorate-General for Agriculture DG VI - FII.3. World Wide Web page at http://www.whitefly.org
Gharahi H; Shojai M; Bayat-Asadi H, 2003. Morphological variations in different populations of Bemisia tabaci Gennadius (Homoptera:Aleyrodidae). Agricultural Science Tabriz, 13(2):25-45.
Gunning RV; Byrne FJ; Devonshire AL, 1997. Electrophoretic analysis of non-B and B-biotype Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in Australia. Australian Journal of Entomology, 36(3):245-249; 18 ref.
Gupta VK; Sharma P; Rakesh Sharma; Jawala Jindal; Dilawari VK, 2008. Development of SCAR markers for specific identification of B-biotype of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius). Annals of Plant Protection Sciences, 16(2):274-281. http://www.indianjournals.com/ijor.aspx?target=ijor:apps&type=home
Gutierrez-Olivares M; Rodriguez-Maciel JC; Llanderal-Cazares C; Teran-Vargas AP; Lagunes-Tejeda A; Diaz-Gomez O, 2007. Stability of resistance to neonicotinoids in Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) B biotype, from San Luis Potosí, México. Agrociencia (Montecillo), 41(8):913-920. http://www.colpos.mx/agrocien/agrociencia.htm
He YuXian; Huang Jian; Weng QiYong; Liang ZhiSheng, 2008. Biochemical mechanisms of resistance to chlorpyrifos and dichlorvos in field populations of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) B-biotype. Acta Entomologica Sinica, 51(4):384-389. http://www.insect.org.cn
Howard RJ; Garland JA; Seaman WL, 1994. Diseases and Pests of Vegetable Crops in Canada., Canada: Canadian Phytopathological Society and Entomological Society of Canada, 554 pp.
Li ShaoJian; Xue Xia; Ahmed MZ; Ren ShunXiang; Du YuZhou; Wu JianHui; Cuthbertson AGS; Qiu BaoLi, 2011. Host plants and natural enemies of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in China. Insect Science, 18(1):101-120. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1744-7917
Lin KeJian; Wu KongMing; Zhang YongJun; Guo YuYuan, 2006. Evaluation of piemarker Abutilon theophrasti medic as a trap plant in the integrated management of Bemisia tabaci (biotype B) in cotton and soybean crops. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 39(7):1379-1386. http://www.ChinaAgriSci.com
Ma DeYing; Denholm I; Gorman K; Luo WanChun, 2007. The resistance status and management strategies of Bemisia tabaci B biotype in Xinjiang. Acta Phytophylacica Sinica, 34(3):311-315. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn
Mansoor S; Bedford I; Pinner M; Stanley J; Markham P, 1993. A whitefly transmitted geminivirus associated with cotton leaf curl disease in Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 25:105-107.
Maruthi MN; Rekha AR; Kiran Kumar M; Chowda Reddy RV; Muniyappa V; Colvin J, 2004. Diversity of Bemisia tabaci populations in Karnataka, South India, and emerging problems associated with the spread of the B-biotype. In: Proceedings of the 2nd European Whitefly Symposium, Cavtat, Croatia. EWSN, 15-16.
Maynard DN; Cantliffe DJ, 1989. Squash silverleaf and tomato irregular ripening: New vegetable disorders in Florida. Vegetable crops fact sheet VC-37, Florida cooperative extension service. University of Florida, Gainsville.
Moore AD; Sequeira RV; Woodger TA, 2004. Susceptibility of crop plants to Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) B-biotype (Hemiptera; Aleyrodidae) in Central Queensland, Australia. Australian Entomologist, 31(2): 69-74.
Papayiannis LC; Brown JK; Hadjistylli M; Katis NI, 2008. Bemisia tabaci biotype B associated with tomato yellow leaf curl disease epidemics on Rhodes Island, Greece. Phytoparasitica, 36(1):20-22. http://www.phytoparasitica.org
Perring TM, 2001. The Bemisia tabaci species complex. Crop Protection, 20(9):725-737; [Special issue: Challenges and opportunities for pest management of ^italic~Bemisia tabaci^roman~ in the new century]; many ref.
Raman KV; Altman DW, 1994. Biotechnology initiative to acheive plant pest and disease resistance. Crop Protection 13(8):91-606.
Reddy MCG; Shankararappa KS; Raghavindra N; Govindappa MR; Muniyyapa V; Rangaswamy KT, 2006. Status of tomato leaf-curl virus disease and whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius), B-biotype, in some parts of southern Karnataka growing open pollinated varieties of tomato. Pest Management and Economic Zoology, 14(1/2):67-71.
Rekha AR; Maruthi MN; Muniyappa V; Colvin J, 2005. Occurrence of three genotyle clusters of Bemisia tabaci in south India. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 117(3) 221-233.
Rodriguez I; Moralez H; Bueno JM; Cardona MC, 2005. The B biotype of Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) becomes more important in the Cauca Valley. Revista Colombiana de Entomologia, 31(1):21-28.
Rosell RC; Bedford ID; Frohlich DR; Gill RJ; Brown JK; Markham PG, 1997. Analysis of morphological variation in distinct populations of Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 90(5):575-589; 39 ref.
Secker AE; Bedford ID; De Courcy Williams ME; Markham PG, 1998. Squash, a reliable field indicator for the presence of the B biotype, tobacco whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) Proceedings of the 1998 British Crop Protection Conference - Pests and Diseases. Farnham, UK: British Crop Protection Council.
Shankarappa KS; Govindappa MR; Muniyappa V; Rangaswamy KT, 2006. Spread of whitefly Bemisia tabaci B-biotype in open-pollinated tomato growing areas of southern Karnataka and its associated problems in tomato. Environment and Ecology, 24(1):57-61.
Simon B; Cenis JL; Beitia F; Khalid S; Moreno IM; Fraile AY; Garcia-Arenal F, 2003. Genetic structure of field populations of begomoviruses and of their vector Bemisia tabaci in Pakistan. Phytopathology, 93:1422-1429.
Sousa AHde; Andrade WGde; Moura AMNde; Maracajá PB, 2007. Aqueous extracts of Azadirachta indica against Bemisia tabaci B biotype (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in melon. Revista Científica Rural, 12(1):93-98.
Ulusoy MR; Bayhan E, 2003. A new whitefly species on vegetable fields in the east Mediterranean region of Turkey: Silverleaf Whitefly, Bemisia argentifolii Bellows and Perring (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Turkiye Entomoloji Dergisi, 27(1):51-60.
Villevieille M; Lecoq H, 1992. L'argenture de la courgette - Une maladie nouvelle en France, liée à un aleurode. Phytoma, 440:35-36.
Viscarret MM; Torres-Jerez I; Agostini de Manero E; L=pez SN; Botto EE; Brown JK, 2003. Mitochondrial DNA evidence for a distinct New World group of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Hemiptera:Aleyrodidae) indigenous to Argentina and Bolivia, and presence of the Old World B biotype in Argentina. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 96(1):65-72; many ref.
Wilson TMA, 1993. Strategies to protect crop plants against viruses: pathogen-derived resistance blossoms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 90(8):3134-3141
Zhang LP; Zhang YJ; Zhang WJ; Wu QJ; Xu BY; Chu D, 2005. Analysis of genetic diversity among different geographical populations and determination of biotypes of Bemisia tabaci in China. Journal of Applied Entomology, 129(3): 121-128.
Barro P J de, Liebregts W, Carver M, 1998. Distribution and identity of biotypes of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in member countries of the Secretariat of the Pacific Community. Australian Journal of Entomology. 37 (3), 214-218.
Bartlett PW, 1992. Experience of polyphagous alien pests of protected crops in Great Britain. In: Bulletin OEPP, 22 337-346.
Bedford I D, Briddon R W, Brown J K, Rosell R C, Markham P G, 1994. Geminivirus transmission and biological characterisation of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) biotypes from different geographic regions. Annals of Applied Biology. 125 (2), 311-325. DOI:10.1111/j.1744-7348.1994.tb04972.x
Bedford ID, Briddon RW, Markham PG, Brown JK, Rosell RC, 1993. A new species of Bemisia or biotype of Bemisia tabaci (Genn) as a future pest of European agriculture. In: Plant Health and the European Single Market, BCPC Monograph, 54 381-386.
Beitia F, Mayo I, Robles-Chillida E M, Guirao P, Cenis J L, 1997. Current status of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) in Spain: the presence of biotypes of this species. In: Bulletin OILB/SROP [Integrated control in protected crops, Mediterranean climate. Proceedings of the meeting at Tenerife, Canary Islands, 3-6 November 1997.], 20 (4) [ed. by Albajes R, Carnero A]. 99-107.
Brown J K, Coats S A, Bedford I D, Markham P G, Bird J, Frohlich D R, 1995. Characterization and distribution of esterase electromorphs in the whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Biochemical Genetics. 33 (7/8), 205-14. DOI:10.1007/BF02401851
CABI, Undated. Compendium record. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated a. CABI Compendium: Status as determined by CABI editor. Wallingford, UK: CABI
Cahill M, Jarvis W, Gorman K, Denholm I, 1996. Resolution of baseline responses and documentation of resistance to buprofezin in Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research. 86 (2), 117-122. DOI:10.1017/S0007485300052342
Cuthbertson A G S, 2013. Update on the status of Bemisia tabaci in the UK and the use of entomopathogenic fungi within eradication programmes. Insects. 4 (2), 198-205. http://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/4/2/198
de Barro PJ, 1995. Bemisia tabaci Biotype B: A Review of its Biology, Distribution and Control. Technical Paper No. 36 (second edition)., Brisbane, Australia: CSIRO Division of Entomology.
Gupta V K, Sharma P, Rakesh Sharma, Jawala Jindal, Dilawari V K, 2008. Development of SCAR markers for specific identification of B-biotype of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius). Annals of Plant Protection Sciences. 16 (2), 274-281. http://www.indianjournals.com/ijor.aspx?target=ijor:apps&type=home
He YuXian, Huang Jian, Weng QiYong, Liang ZhiSheng, 2008. Biochemical mechanisms of resistance to chlorpyrifos and dichlorvos in field populations of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) B-biotype. Acta Entomologica Sinica. 51 (4), 384-389. http://www.insect.org.cn
Lin KeJian, Wu KongMing, Zhang YongJun, Guo YuYuan, 2006. Evaluation of piemarker Abutilon theophrasti medic as a trap plant in the integrated management of Bemisia tabaci (biotype B) in cotton and soybean crops. Scientia Agricultura Sinica. 39 (7), 1379-1386. http://www.ChinaAgriSci.com
Ma DeYing, Denholm I, Gorman K, Luo WanChun, 2007. The resistance status and management strategies of Bemisia tabaci B biotype in Xinjiang. Acta Phytophylacica Sinica. 34 (3), 311-315. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn
Papayiannis L C, Brown J K, Hadjistylli M, Katis N I, 2008. Bemisia tabaci biotype B associated with tomato yellow leaf curl disease epidemics on Rhodes Island, Greece. Phytoparasitica. 36 (1), 20-22. http://www.phytoparasitica.org
Reddy M C G, Shankararappa K S, Raghavindra N, Govindappa M R, Muniyyapa V, Rangaswamy K T, 2006. Status of tomato leaf-curl virus disease and whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius), B-biotype, in some parts of southern Karnataka growing open pollinated varieties of tomato. Pest Management and Economic Zoology. 14 (1/2), 67-71.
Shankarappa K S, Govindappa M R, Muniyappa V, Rangaswamy K T, 2006. Spread of whitefly Bemisia tabaci B-biotype in open-pollinated tomato growing areas of southern Karnataka and its associated problems in tomato. Environment and Ecology. 24 (1), 57-61.
Sousa A H de, Andrade W G de, Moura A M N de, Maracajá P B, 2007. Aqueous extracts of Azadirachta indica against Bemisia tabaci B biotype (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in melon. Revista Científica Rural. 12 (1), 93-98.
ContributorsTop of page
25/07/15 Reviewed by:
Andrew Cuthbertson, Food and Environment Research Agency, Sand Hutton, York, UK
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/