Tea mosquito bug (Helopeltis spp.) – A devastating pest of cashew plantations in India: A review

P L SAROJ; P S BHAT; K K SRIKUMAR

doi:10.56093/ijas.v86i2.55868

Authors

P L SAROJ ICAR-Directorate of Cashew Research, Puttur, Karnataka 574 202
P S BHAT ICAR-Indian Institute of Horticultural Research, Bangalore, Karnataka 560 089
K K SRIKUMAR Tea Research Institute, Valparai, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 642 127

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v86i2.55868

Keywords:

Biology, Cashew, Host range, Management, Reduviids, Taxonomy, Tea mosquito bug

Abstract

More than 32 countries are growing cashew in the world, wherein India occupies largest area under cashew plantations (20%) and earning foreign exchange of over 5 000 crores per annum through export of cashew kernels and cashew nut shell liquid. Often, there is a serious loss in cashew nut yield due to attack of tea mosquito bug (Helopeltis spp., Heteroptera: Miridae) which is a major sucking pest of cashew plantations in India. Under severe out break conditions, yield losses are as high as 40-50%. There are three common species of Helopeltis, viz. H. antonii Signoret, H. bradyi Waterhouse and H. theivora Waterhouse found in west coast and H. antonii is most predominant in the east coast, though in east coast its occurrence is prevalent from Tamil Nadu to Odisha. Whereas, H. theivora is predominant species in north-east region. Besides cashew, a large number of host plants like, tea, guava, cocoa, neem, cinchona etc. are reported. The seasonality study suggested that the population of tea mosquito bug reaches its peak during the flushing, flowering and fruiting season in cashew, i.e. from November to February. As a management strategy, varietal screening suggested that no cashew varieties are resistant to tea mosquito bug infestation but Dhana and Bhaskara varieties are moderately susceptible. Therefore, even today only chemical means of tea mosquito bug management is adopted under commercial cashew plantation. As a biological control strategy, the solitary egg parasitoids, viz. Telenomus cuspis, Chaetostricha sp. and Erythmelus helopeltidis Gahan were specifically promising against Helopeltis. The adult parasitoid, Leiophron sp. is additional asset for natural control strategies of Helopeltis spp. on cashew. Recent researches have incorporated 117 species of spiders and 18 species of reduviids into cashew management strategies. Laboratory mass culture techniques of reduviids have also been standardized using wax moth larvae as prey. Adults of H. antonii and H. theivora were found to be infested by predatory mite, Leptus sp. attached ecdysial line from head and thorax. Moreover, sex pheromone based technology development is the need of the hour to manage this pest. In this paper, efforts have been made to review the literature pertaining to the pest taxonomy, biology, distribution, host plants, nature of damage, seasonality and management strategy of Helopeltis spp. focusing on Indian subcontinent, so as to bring out non-chemical based management strategies.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abraham E V. 1958. Pests of cashew (Anacardium occidentale) in south India. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 28: 531–43.

Abraham C C and Nair G M. 1981. Effective management of the tea mosquito bugs for breaking the yield barriers in cashew. Cashew Causerie 3: 6–7.

Abraham C C and Remamony K S. 1979. Pests that damage cocoa plants in Kerala. Indian Arecanut Spices Cocoa Journal 2: 77–81.

Akingbohungbe A E. 1983. Variations in testis follicle number in the Miridae (Hemiptera: Heteroptera) and its relationship to the higher classification on the family. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 76: 37–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/76.1.37

Ambika B and Abraham C C. 1979. Bio-ecology of Helopeltis antonii Sign. (Miridae: Hemiptera) infesting cashew trees. Entomon 4: 335–42.

Ambika B and Abraham C C. 1984. Effect of tropical application of JH analogue on the development and survival of the cashew mirid bug Helopeltis antonii Sign. (Miridae: Heteroptera). Cashew Research and Development, Indian Society for Plantation crops, CPCRI. Kasargod, India, pp 111–5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.1985.108.20

Angaiah K. 1995. ‘Evaluation of neem triterpenes as ovipositional and feeding deterrents to the tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis antonii Sign. on cashew’ M Sc (Ag) thesis, KAU, Vellanikara, Thrissur, Kerala, p 71.

Annapoorna K R and Nagaraj K V. 1988. Tea mosquito bug (Helopeltis antonii) induced chemical changes in cashew (Anacardium occidentale). Cashew Bulletin 25(1 & 2): 1– 4.

Anstead R D and Ballard E. 1922. Mosquito blight of tea. Planters Chronicle 17: 443–7.

Asokan R, Rebijith K B, Srikumar K K, Bhat P S and Ramamurthy V V. 2012. Molecular identification and diversity of Helopeltis antonii Signoret & Helopeltis theivora Waterhouse (Hemiptera: Miridae), in India. Florida Entomologist 95(2): 350–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1653/024.095.0217

Awang A, Muhamad R and Chong K K. 1988. Comparative merits of cocoa pod and shoot as food sources of the mind Helopeltis theobromae Miller. Planter 64: 100–4.

Ayyar T V R. 1940. Hand Book of Economic Entomology for South India. Govt. Press, Madras. pp. 518.

Babu R S H, Rath S and Rajput C B S. 1983. Insect pests of cashew in India and their control. Pesticides 17(4): 8–16.

Bakthavatsalam N, Sundararaju D and Bhat P S. 1993. Chemical control of tea mosquito bug in cashew with dust formulation. Cashew 7(3): 12–3.

Basu C J C. 1962. Preliminary investigation on the insect pests of cashew plants in Kerala. Indian Forester 88: 516–22.

Beevi S P and Mahapatro G K. 2007. A new field screening methodology for cashew genotypes against tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis antonii Sign. Journal of Plantation Crops 35: 139– 45.

Beevi P S and Mahapatro G K. 2008. Species-spectrum and inter-relationship between ant and spider fauna in cashew agro-ecosystem. Journal of Plantation Crops 36(3): 375–81.

Beevi S P, Susannamma K, Lyla K R and Krishnan S. 2001. Field screening for the selection of cashew genotypes susceptible to tea mosquito bug Helopeltis antonii Sign. (Hemiptera: Miridae). (In) Proc. 2nd National Symposium on IPM in Horticultural Crops: New Molecules, Biopesticides and Environment, 17–19 Oct, Bangalore, India, pp 127–8.

Betrem J G. 1950. The control of the mosquito blight on the cocoa on Java. (In) Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Entomology, Stockholm pp 593–6.

Bhat P S and Srikumar K K. 2013. Genitalia structure examination for interspecific mating of Helopeltis antonii and H. theivora. Current Science 105(1): 23–5.

Bhat P S Srikumar K K and Raviprasad T N. 2013. Seasonal Diversity and Status of Spiders (Arachnida: Araneae) in Cashew Ecosystem. World Applied Sciences Journal 22(6): 763–70.

Bhat P S, Srikumar K K, Raviprasad T N, Vanitha K, Rebijith K B and Asokan R. 2013. Biology, behaviour, functional response and molecular characterization of R. trochantericus Stal var. luteous (Hemiptera: Reduviidae: Harpactorinae) a potential predator of Helopeltis spp. (Hemiptera: Miridae). Entomological News 23(4): 264–77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3157/021.123.0409

Bhat P S, Sundararaju D and Raviprasad T N. 1994. Proceedings of National Workshop on Non-pesticidal approach to pest management, Hyderabad, p 24.

Carvalho J C M. 1957-1960. Catalogue of the Miridae of the world. Arquivos do Museu National, Rio de Janeiro. Part I, Cylapinae, Deraeocorlnae, Bryocorinae, 44(1): 1-158 (1957); Part II, Phylinae, 45(2): 1-216 (1958); Part III. Orthotylinae,

(3): 1-161 (1958); Part lV. Mirinae. 48(4): 1-384, (1959); Part V. Bibliography and Index, 51(5): 1-194.

CCRS. 1966. Annual Progress Report, 1965-66. Central Cashew Research Station Ullal, Karnataka.

Chang Y C. 1982. The life history, population density and control of the bamboo mirid Mecistocelis scirtetoides Reuter (Miridae: Hemiptera). National Science Council Monthly, ROC 10(4): 335–47.

Chatterjee M L. 1989. Insect pests of West Bengal and status of some important pests. Cashew 3(3): 19–20.

CIBC (Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control). 1983. Possibility for the use of natural enemies in the control of Helopeltis spp. (Miridae). Biocontrol News and Information 4: 7–11.

Collingwood C A. 1977. Biological control and relations with other insects. (In) Les mirides du cacaoyer, p 366. Lavabre E M (Ed). Paris, Maisoneuve et Larouse. Biocontrol News and Information 4: 7-11 (cf = CIBC 1983.

Damodaran V K and Nair M P B. 1969. Studies on the insecticidal control of Helopeltis antonii Signoret on cashew. Agricultural Research Journal of Kerala 7: 28–30.

Das S, Roy S and Mukhopadhyay A. 2010. Diversity of arthropod natural enemies in the tea plantations of North Bengal with emphasis on their association with tea pests. Current Science 99(10): 1 457–63.

Das S C. 1984. Resurgence of tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora Waterh., a serious pest of tea. Two and a Bud 31: 36–9.

De Silva M D. 1957. A new species of Helopeltis (Hemiptera- Heteroptera, Miridae) found in Ceylon. Bulletin of Entomological Research 48: 459–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485300002637

Desai M A, Kulkarni S V and Rodrigues A. 1977. Report on the marketing survey on cashew in Goa. Government of Goa, Daman and Diu pp 11–7.

Devasahayam, S. 1985. Seasonal biology of tea mosquito bug Helopeltis antonii Signoret (Heteroptera: Miridae) a pest of cashew. Journal of Plantation Crops 13: 145–7.

Devasahayam S. 1989. Erythmelus helopeltidis Gahan (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae)-a new egg parasite of Helopeltis antonii Signoret on cashew. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 86: 113.

Devasahayam S and Nair C P R. 1986. The mosquito bug, Helopeltis antonii Sign. on cashew in India. Journal of Plantation Crops 14: 1–10.

Durgadas M and Sambhunath R. 1956. Occurrence of a mermethid worm parasite on Helopeltis theivora Waterhouse. Current Science 2: 60–1.

Fletcher T B. 1914. Some south Indian Insects, pp 488–9. Government’ Press, Madras.

Ghosh S N and Chatterjee M L. 1987. Study on performance of some cashew types and their susceptibility levels against tea mosquito at Cashew Research Station, Jhargram, West Bengal. Cashew 1(1): 21–3.

Giesberger G. 1983. Biological control of Helopeltis pest of cocoa in Java. A critical review of forty years (1901-1941) research on Helopeltis with special reference to the role of black cocoa ant, Dolichoderus bituberculatus Mayr. Ib the biological control system. (In) Archives of Cocoa Research, pp 91–180.

Toxopeus H and Wessel P C (Eds). American Cocoa Research Institute, Washington DC.

Godse S K, Dumbre R B and Kharat S B. 1993. Evaluation of some insecticides for control of tea mosquito bug on cashew. Cashew 7(2): 13–4.

Hamid A A. 1987. Insect pests of Acacia mangium Willd. (In) Sarawak. Sarawak Forest Department, Research Report FE 1, pp 1–10.

Hinton H E. 1962. Respiratory systems of insect egg shells. Annual Review of Entomology 14: 343–68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.14.010169.002015

Hiremath I G. 1991. Promising cashew genotypes for the management of inflorescence bug, Helopeltis antonii Sign. Cashew Bulletin 28(7): 9–13.

Ibrahim WA. 1989. Erythmelus helopeltidis - an egg parasitoid of Helopeltis theobromae in cocoa. Planter 65: 211–5.

Jeevaratnam K and Rajapakse R H S. 1981. Biology of Helopeltis antonii Sign. (Heteroptera: Miridae) in Sri Lanka. Entomon 6: 247–51.

Karthikeyan K. 1992. ‘Pests of Neem, Azadirachta indica A. Juss and their management’. M Sc (Ag) thesis, AC & RI, TNAU, Killukulam. pp. 96.

Latip S N H, Muhamad R, Manjeri G and Tan S G. 2010. Development of microsatellite markers for Helopeltis theivora Waterhouse (Hemiptera: Miridae). African Journal of Biotechnology 9: 4 478–81.

Lever R J AW. 1949. The Tea Mosquito Bugs (Helopeltis spp.) in the Cameron Highlands. Malayan Agriculture Journal 32: 91–108.

Mahapatro G K. 2008. Evaluation of insecticidal sprays for control of Tea Mosquito Bug Helopeltis antonii and other insect-pests in cashew. Indian Journal of Entomology 70(3): 217–22.

Mamun M S A and Ahmed M. 2011. Integrated pest management in tea: prospects and future strategies in Bangladesh. Journal of Plant Protection Sciences 3(2): 1–13.

Mandal R C. 2000. Cashew Production and Processing Technology, p 195. Agrobios, India.

Mann H H. 1902. Notes on a disputed point in the life-history of Helopeltis theivora. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 71: 133–4.

Mann H H. 1907. Individual and seasonal variations in Helopeltis theivora, Waterhouse, with description of a new species of Helopeltis. Memoirs of the Department of Agriculture in India (Entomological Series) 1(4): 275–337.

Miles P W. 1987. Plant-sucking bugs can remove the contents of cells without mechanical damage. Experientia 43: 937–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01951678

Miller N C E. 1941. Insects associated with cocoa (Theobroma cocoa) in Malaya. Bulletin of Entomological Research 32: 1– 15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485300005186

Naik B G and Sundararaju D. 1982. (In) CPCRI Annual Report, Central Plantation Crops Research Institute, Kasaragod, India, pp 132–4.

Naik C M. and Chakravarthy. 2013. Sustainable management practices for tea mosquito bug Helopeltis antonii Signoret (Miridae: Hemiptera) on cashew. Karnataka Journal Agricultural Sciences 26(1): 54–57.

NRCC. 1988. Annual Report for 1987, National Research Centre for Cashew Puttur, Karnataka, India, p 41.

NRCC. 1993. Annual Report for 1992-93, National Research Centre for Cashew Puttur Karnataka, India, p 87.

NRCC. 1994. Annual Report for 1993-94, National Research Centre for Cashew Puttur, Karnataka, India, p 108.

Onkarappa S and Kumar C T A. 1997. Biology of tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis antonii Sign. (Miridae: Hemiptera) on neem. Mysore Journal of Agricultural Sciences 31: 36–40.

Peng R K, Christian K and Gibb K. 1995. The effect of the green ant, Oecophylla smaragdina (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), on insect pests of cashew trees in Australia. Bulletin of Entomological Research 85: 279–84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485300034374

Peng R K, Christian K and Gibb K.1997. Control threshold analysis for the tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis pernicialis (Hemiptera: Miridae) and preliminary results concerning the efficiency of control by the green ant, Oecophylla smaragdina (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in northern Australia. International Journal of Pest Management 43(3): 233–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/096708797228735

Pillai G B and Abraham V A. 1975. Tea mosquito-a serious menace to cashew. Indian Cashew Journal 10(1): 5– 7.

Pillai G B. 1987. Integrated pest management in plantation crops. Journal of Coffee Research 17: 150–3.

Pillai G B, Singh V, Dubey O P and Abraham V A. 1984. Seasonal abundance of tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis antonii on cashew in relation to meteorological factors. (In) Cashew Research and Development, pp 103–10. (Eds): Rao E V V B and Khan H H (Eds). Indian Society for Plantation Crops, CPCRI, Kasaragod. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.1985.108.19

Pillai K S, Saradamma K and Nair M R G K. 1979. Helopeltis antonii Sign. as a pest of Moringa oleifera. Current Science 49: 288–9.

Puttarudriah M. 1952. Blister disease “Kajji” of guava fruits (Psidium guava). Mysore Agricultural Journal 28: 8–13.

Puttarudriah M. 1958. A dangerous potential pest of cotton. Indian Cotton Growing Review 12: 406–7.

Puttarudriah, M. and Appanna, M. 1955. Two new hosts of Helopeltis antonii in Mysore. Indian Journal of Entomology 17: 391–2.

Rajmohana K, Srikumar K K, Bhat P S, Raviprasad T N and Jalali S K. 2013. A new species of Platygastrid Telenomus cuspis sp.nov. (Hymenoptera), egg parasitoid of tea mosquito bug from India, with notes on its bionomics and mtCo1 data. Oriental Insects 47: 226–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00305316.2013.871819

Rao Y R. 1915. Helopeltis antonii as a pest of neem trees. Agricultural Journal of India 10: 412–6.

Rao S A. 1970. Helopeltis: a breakthrough in its control. UPASI Tea Science Department Bulletin 28, pp 21–8.

Rao V P, Ghani M A, Sankaran T and Mathur K C. 1971. A review of the biological control of insects and other pests in Southeast Asia and the Pacific region. CIBC Technical communications No. 6, Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux Farnham Royal, UK.

Raviprasad T N, Sundararaju D and Bhat P S. 2005. Efficacy of botanicals against Helopeltis antonii Sig. infesting cashew. The Cashew 19: 9–14.

Rebijith K B, Asokan R, Krishna Kumar N K, Srikumar K K, Ramamurthy V V, Bhat P S. 2012. DNA barcoding and development of species-specific markers for the identification of Tea Mosquito Bugs (Miridae: Heteroptera) in India. Environmental Entomology 5: 1 240–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1603/EN12096

Roepke W. 1916. Het Helopeltis- vraagstuk, in het bijzonder met betrekking tot cocoa. (The Helopeltis – problem with particular reference to coca) Mededeelingen Proefstation Midden- Java, 21, pp 1–40.

Roy S, Mukhopadhyay A. and Gurusubramanian G. 2009. Field efficacy of a biopesticide prepared from Clerodendrum viscosum Vent. (Verbenaceae) against two major tea pests in the sub Himalayan tea plantation of North Bengal, India. Journal of Pest Science 83(4), 371–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-010-0306-5

Sachin J P, Selvasundaram R, Babu A and Muraleedharan N. 2008. Behavioral and electroantennographic responses of the Tea Mosquito, Helopeltis theivora, to female sex pheromones. Environmental Entomology 37(6): 1 416–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1603/0046-225X-37.6.1416

Samiayyan K, Kumar M G and Shah H A. 1989. Efficacy of insecticides for the control of tea mosquito bug on cashew. South Indian Horticulture 37: 346–7.

Satapathy C R. 1993. ‘Bioecology of major insect pests of cashew (Anacardium occidentale Linn.) and evaluation of certain pest management practices’. Ph D thesis, UAS, Bangalore, p 224.

Sathiamma B. 1977. Nature and extent of damage by Helopeltis antonii S., the tea mosquito on cashew. Journal of Plantation Crops 5: 58–62.

Sathiamma B. 1981. Occurrence of colour variants in Helopeltis antonii S. (Hemiptera: Miridae) on cashew. Cashew Bulletin 18(6): 5–6.

Sathiamma B and Saraswathy N. 1990. Mycosis on tea mosquito, Helopeltis antonii. Indian Journal of Entomology 52: 516.

Savolainen V, Cowan R S, Vogler A P, Roderick G K and Lane R. 2005. Towards wring the encyclopaedia of life: an introduction to DNA barcoding. Philosophical Transactions, Royal Society, Series B 360. 1 805–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1730

Schaefer C W and Panizzi A R. 2010. Heteroptera of Economic Importance, p 856. CRC Press, Boca. Raton:

Schmitz G. 1968. Monographie des especes africaines du genre Helopeltis Signoret (Heteroptera, Miridae) avec un expose des problemes relatifs aux structures genitales. Annales Musee Royal de I’Afrique Centrale, Serie In-8°, Sciences Zoologiques 168: 1–247.

Schmitz G. 1988. Note sur les Helopeltis Signoret, 1850 de la Region de Tai (Cote d’lvoire) (Heteroptera, Miridae). Revue Franqaise d’Entomologie (Nouvelle Series) 10: 91–9.

Schuh R T. 1976. Pretarsal structure in the Miridae (Hemiptera) with a cladistic analysis of relationships within the family. American Museum Novitates 2601: 1–39.

Schuh R T. 1986. The influence of cladistics on heteropteran classification. Annual Review of Entomology 31: 67–93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.31.010186.000435

Senguttuvan T and Baskaran M R K. 1993. Influence of weather factors on the incidence of cashew pests. Cashew Bulletin 30(4 & 5): 22–6.

Signoret V. 1858. Descriptions de nouvelles especes d’Hemipteres. II. Note sur les Hemipteres Heteropteres de la famille des unicellules. Annales de la Societe Entomologiquede France 3(6): 499–502.

Shaw W S. 1928. Observations on Helopeltis (Tea mosquito blight) for South India Tea Planters. The Diocesan Press, Madras, p 56.

Simmonds F J. 1970. A memorandum on the possibilities of biological control of cocoa - infesting mirids. Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control Report (Mimeographed), p 9.

Siswanto R M, Muhamad R, Omar D and Karmawati E. 2008. Dispersion pattern of Helopeltis antonii Signoret (Hemiptera: Miridae) on cashew plantation. Indonesian Journal of Agriculture 1(2): 103–8.

Smith E S C.1977. Presence of a sex attractant pheromone in Helopeltis clavifer (Walker) (Heteroptera: Miridae). Journal of Australian Entomological Society 16: 113–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-6055.1977.tb00070.x

Smith E S C, Thistleton B M and Pippet J R. 1985. Assessment of damage and control of Helopeltis clavifer (Heteroptera: Miridae) on tea in Papua New Guinea. Papua New Guinea Journal of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries 33: 123–31.

Somchoudhury A K, Samanta A and Dhar P. 1993. Proceeding of International Symposium on tea science and human health (Teatech 1993). Tea Research Association, India, pp 330–8.

Songyot P and Punpen C. 1997. Biology of mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora Waterhouse, an insect pest of cashewnut. Khon Kaen Agricultural Journal 25(3): 132–8.

Sreekumar K M, Vasavan N, Madhu S, Sijila J, Sreedharan M P and Sreelekha S. 2011. Managing tea mosquito bug in cashew by augmenting red ants. Journal of Plantation Crops 39(1): 119–22.

Srikumar K K. and Bhat P S. 2011. Comparison of the developmental and survival rates, adult longevity and fecundity of Helopeltis antonii Signoret (Hemiptera: Miridae) on different phenological stages of cashew. Journal of Plantation Crops 39(3): 347–50.

Srikumar K K and Bhat P S. 2013a. Biology and feeding behaviour of Helopeltis antonii (Hemiptera: Miridae) on Singapore cherry (Muntingia calabura)-a refuge host. Journal of Entomological Research 37(1): 11–6.

Srikumar K K and Bhat PS. 2013b. Biology of the tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora Waterhouse on Chromolaena odorata (L.). Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research 73(3): 309–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-58392013000300015

Stonedahl G M. 1991. The Oriental species of Helopeltis (Heteroptera: Miridae): a review of economic literature and DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485300032041

guide to identification. Bulletin of Entomological Research 81: 465–90.

Stonedahl G M, Malipatil M B and Houston W. 1995. A new mirid (Heteroptera) pest of cashew in northern Australia. Bulletin of Entomological Research 85: 275–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485300034362

Sudarmadji D and Gunawan S. 1994. Patogenisitas fungi entomopathogen Beaveria bassiana terhadap Helopeltis antonii (Pathogeniticty of entomopathogenic fungus Beaveria bassiana to Helopeltis antonii) Menara Perkebunan 62(1): 1–5.

Sudhakaran R and Muraleedharan N. 2006. Biology of Helopeltis theivora (Hemiptera: Miridae) infesting tea. Entomon 31: 165– 80.

Sundararaju D. 1984. Cashew pests and their natural enemies in Goa. Journal of Plantation Crops 12: 38–46.

Sundararaju D.1993. Studies on the parasitoids of the mosquito bug, Helopeltis antonii Sign. (Heteroptera: Miridae) on cashew with special reference to Telenomus sp. (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). Journal of Biological Control 7: 6–8.

Sundararaju D. 1996. ‘Studies on Helopeltis spp. with special reference to H.antonii Sign. in Tamil Nadu.’ Ph D thesis, TNAU, Coimbatore, p 210.

Sundararaju D. 2002. Description of endoparasitism in nymph and adults of Helopeltis spp. infesting cashew. Journal of Plantation Crops 30: 66–8.

Sundararaju D. 2005. Seasonal abundance and extent of damage of tea mosquito bug on cashew. Journal of Plantation Crops 33(1): 53–8.

Sundararaju D and Bakthavatsalam N. 1994. Pests of cashew. (In) Advances in Horticulture, pp 759–85 Chadha K L and Rethinam P (Eds). Malhotra Publishing House, New Delhi.

Sundararaju D and John N J. 1992. Mass rearing technique for Helopeltis antonii Sign. (Heteroptera: Miridae) - An Important pest of cashew. Journal of Plantation Crops 20: 46–53.

Sundararaju D and John N J 1993. Susceptibility of cashew accessions to Helopeltis antonii (Heteroptera: Miridae), in the preflowering phase. Journal of Plantation Crops 21: 50–3.

Sundararaju D and Sundarababu P C 1999. Helopeltis spp. (Heteroptera: Miridae) and their management in plantation and horticultural crops of India. Journal of Plantation Crops 27: 155–74.

Sundararaju D and Sundarababu P C. 2000. Egg parasitoids of neem mosquito bug from cashew. Cashew 14(1): 32–4.

Sundararaju D, Bakthavatsalam N and Bhat P S. 1993. Ovicidal activity and residual toxicity of certain insecticides of tea mosquito bug Helopeltis antonii Sign. (Heteroptera: Miridae) infesting cashew. Pestology 17: 14–7.

Sundararaju D, Bhat P S and Raviprasad T N. 2002. New refuge host plant for Helopeltis spp. Insect Environment 8(3): 137– 8.

Sundararaju D, Bakthavatsalam N, John J N, Vidyasagar P S P V and Vidyasagar. 1994. Presence of female sex pheromone in tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis antonii Sign. (Heteroptera: Miridae). Entomon 19: 47–51.

Tan G S. 1974. Helopeltis theivora theobromae on cocoa in Malaysia. I. Biology and population fluctuations. Malaysian Agricultural Research 3: 127–13.

Thontadarya T S and Basavanna C G P. 1962. Mode of egg- laying in Helopeltis antonii Sign. (Hemiptera: Miridae). Current Science 31: 338–9.

Tocklai T R A. 2010. Special bulletin on Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora Waterhouse, p. 10.

Tuck HC. 1987. Experiments on the chemical control of some insect pests of cocoa in Peninsular Malaysia with particular emphasis on Helopeltis theobromae. Planter 63: 66–74.

Uthaiah B C, Raj P S, Herle P S, Rao K B and Inderesh K M. 1994. Preliminary evaluation of cashew types for tea mosquito bug (Helopeltis antonii Signoret). Cashew 8(3): 10–8.

Venkata Rami. 2009. Record of Helopeltis antonii (Homoptera: Miridae) on the fruits of Annona spp. Pest Management in Horticultural Ecosystems 15(1): 74–6.

Vennison S J and Ambrose D P. 1990. Biology and behaviour of Sphedanolestes signatus Distant (Insecta: Heteroptera: Reduviidae) a potential predator of Helopeltis antonii Signoret. Uttar Pradesh Journal of Zoology 10: 30–43.

Visalakshy P NG and Mani M. 2011. Record of Beauveria Bassiana on tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis antonii, Signoret in guava ecosystem. Journal of Biological Control 25(2): 149– 51.

Way M J and Khoo KC. 1992. Role of ants in pest management. Annual Review of Entomology 37: 479–503. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.37.010192.002403

Wheeler A G. 2001. Biology of Plant Bugs, p 507. Cornell University Press.