See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279456307

Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora

Waterhouse (Hemiptera: Miridae): A Threat to
Tea Cultivation in Bangladesh

Conference Paper · October 2014

CITATIONS READS

0 404

2 authors:

Mustak Ahmed Dr-Mohammad Shameem Al Mamun

University of Rajshahi Bangladesh Tea Research Institute
235 PUBLICATIONS 2,181 CITATIONS 52 PUBLICATIONS 55 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

An IPM approaches in controlling major pests of tea in Bangladesh View project

Development of Integrated Pest Management Strategies for Red Spider Mite in Tea in Bangladesh View
project

All content following this page was uploaded by Dr-Mohammad Shameem Al Mamun on 19 September 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora Waterhouse (Hemiptera: Miridae):
A Threat to Tea Cultivation in Bangladesh
M. Ahmed1 and M.S.A. Mamun2
1Director, Bangladesh Tea Research Institute, Srimangal, Moulvibazar
2Senior Scientific Officer, Entomology Division, Bangladesh Tea Research Institute, Srimangal, Moulvibazar

Abstract
Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora Waterhouse (Hemiptera: Miridae) is one of the most destructive pests of
tea causing damage to tea plant resulting in significant loss of crop yield in Bangladesh. Enormous crop loss
was incurred due to the attack of this pest. It has been estimated that 80% of the affected tea plantations area
resulting in crop loss to the tune of 10-50%. Currently, Helopeltis theivora has become the most serious threat
for tea cultivation in Bangladesh because of its severe attack in almost all tea estates of Sylhet and
Panchagarh. Although several approaches such as safe use of synthetic insecticides and bio control measures
have been adopted for the management as well as eradication of tea insects especially H. theivora, but still it is
a serious challenge to restore their contribution in domestic and overseas tea trade in future. Barrier spraying
is very effective for the control of Helopeltis. Spraying should be done at early in the morning or late in the
afternoon for better result. Extensive use of chemical pesticides began only a few decades ago with
tremendous immediate economic gains but its abuses were not foreseen but ignored. As a consequence there
arose the development of resistance to pesticides, pest resurgence and secondary pest outbreak as the major
problems. Current trends in eco-friendly insect pest-management practices emphasize preparation and
application methods of new botanical and microbial pesticide formulations, mass rearing techniques for
biocontrol agents, evaluation of field bio-efficacy and conservation of biological agents, cultural control
measures, genetic techniques in pest and vector management, and pheromones attractants and repellents. In
tea husbandry, cultural control measures such as plucking, pruning, shade regulation, field sanitation, fertilizer
application, host plant resistance, manipulation or destruction of alternate hosts and selection of pest
resistant/tolerant varieties and mechanical mechanisms like manual removal, light traps and sex pheromone
trap need to be given more importance in pest management programme of Helopeltis in tea. As pesticides will
continue to play a vital role in the pest management in tea, urgent investigations need to be taken up on the
effect of pesticides on predators, and parasites active in the tea ecosystem, on pesticide residues in tea and
also on the newer technologies of pesticide application.

Key words: Helopeltis theivora, Threat, Tea plantation, Pest Management

Introduction diseases and weeds. 1034 species of arthropods and 82

Tea is a perennial crop and grown as a monoculture over
large contiguous areas during last 160 years had formed a
stable tea ecosystem for widely divergent endemic or
introduced pests. Moreover, a characteristic feature viz.
the permanence of shade trees, ancillary crops forests, an
uniformity of cultural practices such as sequential pruning
cycles, weekly plucking rounds, weeding, mulching etc.
have a greater impact on the subsequent colonization,
stabilization and distribution of pests. As a long-lived
woody perennial of tea provides a stable microclimate
and a continuous supply of food for rapid build up of
phytophagous species that includes insects, mites and
eelworms. Some tea pests are cosmopolitan and widely
distributed over a wide range of ecological zones but
many are found in the restricted areas of the tea world.
Each tea growing country has its own distinctive pests,
species of nematodes are associated with tea plants (Chen
and Chen, 1989). Among them, 25 species of insects, 4
species of mites and 10 species of nematodes are
recorded from Bangladesh (Ahmed, 2005). Only few of
them have become major pests while most of them are
minor and localized and cause occasional damage. In tea,
a major pest of today may be minor of tomorrow. About
15% of its crop could be lost per year by various pests
particularly insects, mites and nematodes if adequate
control measures are not taken (Ahmed, 1996). Moreover
crop losses to the extent of 50% or more may be inflicted
by the advent of an epidemic or outbreak of specific pests
in a particular season or tea estate.
Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis thievora is the most important
sucking pests of tea in Bangladesh. It is also widely
distributed in India, SriLanka, Vietnam, Indonesia,
Malaysia and Africa. It is also a phytophagous pest of

Paper Presented in the Regional Seminar of Zoological Society of Bangladesh at BTRI

Ahmed and Mamun (2014) Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora: A threat to Bangladesh tea

coffee, cocoa, cashew, etc. A group of genomes are Differentiation between common mosquito and tea
treated as a mosquito bug. This bug bears no relation to mosquito bug
mosquito and the name "Tea mosquito bug" is simply a
misnomer. Helopeltis theivora Waterhouse, popularly known Common mosquito Tea mosquito bug
as tea mosquito bug (not common house mosquito), Class- Insecta Class- Insecta
belongs to the Order- Hemiptera and family Miridae. Order- Diptera Order- Hemiptera
From the economic point of view, the pest is considered Family- Culicidae Family- Miridae
to be the major one causing damage to tea both in respect Genus- Culex, Anophilis Genus- Helopeltis
of quantity and quality. It is interesting that this pest is
only severe in greater Sylhet Zone while almost absent in Different Helopeltis species in different crops in the
Chittagong Zone. It is interesting to note that in the world
recently opened tea area in Panchagarh (extreme north-
west of Bangladesh) there occurs a Helopeltis infestation. Name of species Name of Name of crop
This might have the result of close proximity of Indian Country attacked
territorial teas on the other side of the border. It has Helopeltis theivora Bangladesh, Tea, Coffee
assumed considerable significance in the last few years Waterhouse India: Dooars,
due to its widespread occurrence in all the six valleys in Terai,
Sylhet Zone. The pest has reappeared in an alarming way Darjeeling,
even in clear and plain tea fields. The damage is caused by Kerala, North-
both adults and nymphs of the insect which are most East India,
active during hours daily in the morning and late Sri Lanka,
afternoon. The nymphs and adults of these insects suck Indonesia
sap from terminal twigs, buds and leaves by piercing the
Helopeltis Malaysia, Tea, Cocoa,
plant tissues with their mouth stylets besides injecting
theobromae Miller Indonesia- Cinchona
toxic substances present in their saliva. As a result of this
Sumatra, Java
injury, the leaves become curled up and deformed. The
Helopeltis East Africa Tea, Cotton,
feeding punctures on leaves appear as reddish brown
schoutedeni Reuter Cameroon, Castor,
spots. The attacked shoots may present dieback
Malawi Cashew,
symptoms. Eventually the terminals of tea bushes will dry
Avocado
up leading to total loss of the crop. The process of egg
laying also causes damages to the tender tissues. Helopeltis orophila Brundi, Uganda, Tea
Ghesq. Zaire
Helopeltis antonii Sri Lanka Tea
Bio-ecology Signoret South India Tea
Indonesia Tea
Adult bugs appear black in color with red thorax and Helopeltis bradyi Malaysia Tea, Cinchona
greenish brown wings. They look like any other mosquito Waterhouse
species and hence the name mosquito bug. A Helopeltis cinchona Malaysia Tea
characteristic knob is present on the scutellum. These Mann
Helopeltis clavifer New Guinea Tea
bugs are active early in the morning and late in the
Walker
evening. Each female bug can insert as many as 500 eggs Helopeltis anacardi Ghana, Cashew,
in plant tissues. The eggs hatch in about a week's period Miller Nigeria,Congo, Sweet potato
by releasing the nymphs. After passing through five Sierra Leone,
moltings they turn into adults in a fortnight's period. The Uganda, Kenya
entire life cycle is completed in about a month. In a year Records of Helopeltis
there may be several generations. Adults hibernate during Indonesia (Java) 1847 in tea
winter. These insects are active from January to India-
September. Their damage is predominant in moist and Cachar 1865 ,,
shaded areas especially after monsoon showers. Assam 1869 ,,
Darjeeling 1869 ,,
South India 1940 ,,
Kerala 1940 ,,
Bangladesh 1957 ,,
Sri Lanka (Ceylon) 1884 in cocoa and cinchona
Ahmed and Mamun (2014) Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora: A threat to Bangladesh tea

Every species has a natural tendency to spread as widely Longevity of Helopeltis in different months
as possible but its dispersion is checked by certain
limiting factors which make it impossible for the insect to Month(s) Days
live successfully everywhere. Male Female
November - January 46 32
Crop loss by Helopeltis February 26 33
Crop loss assessment by Helopeltis is very difficult because March - April 38 36
the attack varies seasonally depending upon the climate, May 36 36
shade condition, aspect, altitude and cultural practices. At
June - July 36 32
the same time the damage relationship compared to
August - September 34 28
weight of an uninfested shoot is weak. But, later shoot
growth or new shoot emergence show delay as a result October 38 32
final yield is depressed. It is interesting that the male (♂)- female (♀) sex ratio of
Helopeltis in different temperature varies as follows.
Country Crop loss
India- Male-female sex-ratio related to temperature
Kerala, 1950 4 - 46%
N.East India, 1984 0- 100% Male( ♂)- female (♀) ratio Temperature
South India, 1989 1 - 100% 1:1 250 C
Dooars, 1994 50% 1:2 280C
Malawi, 1984 55% 1:3-4 300 C
Bangladesh, 1989 10- 15% 1:5 >320 C

Nature of damage Sucking spots in 24 hours (a laboratory study)

Nymphs at 1st instar produces 85 - 106 spots
The male and female bugs are almost black. Both the
,, 2nd ,, ,, 74 ,,
nymphs and adults damage the plant by sucking sap from
,, 3rd ,, ,, 28 ,,
young leaves, buds and tender stems. Due to intensive
,, 4th ,, ,, 72 ,,
feeding by nymphs and adults leaves curl up and are badly
Young nymphs emerge and start its feeding immediately.
deformed. The tissues around the affected spots first turn
Life cycle is completed with three stages- eggs, nymphs
brown and then black. The feeding activity is at its peak
and adults. Life cycle is prolonged during winter period.
during the morning and afternoon. The cloudy weather is There are 18 generations of the pest during one year in
also favourable for the bug. Generally infested shoots dry
tea plantations. Both nymphs and adult cause damage by
up and consequently almost the entire crop is lost. In
sucking the cell sap from succulent stems, buds and
addition to direct crop loss, damage by Helopeltis leads to
young leaves by inserting the proboscis. An adult can
debilitation of bushes resulting in die-back with crows-
produce 150 sucking spots in a day and a single late
feet and delayed or meager flushing thereafter
instars nymph can produce up to 80 sucking spots in 24
consequently almost the entire crop is lost. This situation
hours. A laboratory study is mentioned below:
is aggravated by the unexpected drought in early part of
the season. Feeding intensity trend of Helopeltis on shoots of
seedling tea, TV1 and BT1 (%)
Biological information in different seasons
Position Seedling tea TV1 BT1
Maximum fecundity (June - October) 400 - 660 nos.egg Bud 1.4 5 8
Minimum fecundity (November - May) 40 - 280 nos.egg
1st leaf 24.0 13 10
Maximum life cycle (November - March) 22 - 57 days 2nd leaf 30.0 19 50
Minimum life cycle (April - October) 15 -19 ,, 3rd leaf 8.0 24 17
Incubation period in different months
Nuptial behaviour of Helopeltis
Months Days  Capable of mating just after moulting.
November - January 11-23 days  Fertilized eggs laid within few hours after mating.
February 19 days  Copulation last for 60 - 210 minutes.
March - April 10-12 days  ♂ finds out a ♀ for mating.
May 8 days  Repeated mating ensures a sure chance of
June - July 6- 7 days fertilization and consequently a greater build up of
August - September 5 - 6 days population.
October 7 days
Ahmed and Mamun (2014) Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora: A threat to Bangladesh tea

Alternate hosts Susceptibility of tea plants

Different tea clones show varying degrees of
Tea mosquito bug attacks or live on a number of host susceptibility to Helopeltis. However, at present there are
plants. Sometimes the hosts are treated as a hiding place no clones with a high degree of resistance to Helopeltis. It
or as a breeding source. Mikania, Cinchona, Cashew, is clear that the dark leaved varieties are more prone to
Cocoa, Tephrosia, Guava, Jackfruit, Coffee, Mango, Sweet damage by tea Helopeltis than the light leaved ones.
potato, Rangan (Ixora coccinea L.) etc. are common
alternate hosts. a) Tocklai clone
Different factors and response to Helopeltis TV1 is very much susceptible to Helopeltis attack followed
by TV4, TV5, TV6 & TV9. A later study showed TV1,
Factors Response TV9, TV12, TV14, TV16, TV18, TV19, TV20, TV22,
Temperature Positively thermotropic TV23 & TV24 to be highly preferred by Helopeltis and
Humidity Positively hydrotropic TV11, TV17, TV21, TV25 & TV26 moderately
Rainfall Adversely affect the population susceptible. Teenali also prone to Helopeltis attack.
Light Negatively phototropic (Barbora and Singh, 1994)
Cloud Positive
Host specificity Polyphagous (feeds on various plants) b) BTRI clone
Protection Embedded eggs in plant tissues BT1 is also observed to be highly vulnerable to this pest.
Dispersion Slow flier BT5, BT6, BT11 and BT13 are also susceptible to
Population dynamics considerable degree. BT8 is moderately susceptible and
other clones are not immune (Chowdhury et al., 2008).
Rapid growth potential (e.g. highly reproductive,
c) Seedling
maximum fecundity, shorter incubation period and
overlapping generations) is important factor for the pest Of the seed jats (types), China hybrids suffer the worst.
outbreak (Ahmed, et al., 1992).
Effect on cultural practices
Helopeltis damage
1. Direct loss of crop due to pluckable shoot and shoots Cultural practices Effect
being damaged and rendered unless; Bush sanitation (+) ++
2. Acute debilitation of the bushes leading to die-back (-) +
with cross-feet symptom and delayed and meagre flushing Pruning (3 yr. cycle) (+) +++
thereafter which account for poor yield. (4 yr. cycle) (-) ++
Plucking rounds (Frequent plucking) (+) +++
Factors influencing the population build up (-) +
Weeding (+) +++
1. Alternate weed species as host (feeding, hiding or (-) --
breeding). Irrigation (+) +
2. Pruning time. (-) -
3. Longer pruning cycle. Shade reduction (+) ++
4. Higher or lower dose (reduction of dose will ultimately (-) -
create resistant strains). Agrotypes (+) ++
5. Same chemicals used in the same fields for longer (-) --
period.
Note: most beneficial (+++), moderately beneficial (++),
6. Density of shade.
slightly beneficial (+), most detrimental (---), moderately
7. Typical topography.
detrimental (--) and slight detrimental (-). These effects
8. Microclimate.
may be either direct or indirect.
9. Lack of proper understanding and monitoring of the + More practised
pest. - Less practised
10. Lack of timely control measures.
11. Height bound bushes- spraying is often inefficient in
such areas.
12. Spraying interval: During June-July spraying period
must be within 8-10 days.
13. Resistant or susceptible clone or seed jat.
14. Avoid higher dose of MOP (KCl) as a foliar
application, increase resistance to Helopeltis.
 Ahmed and Mamun (2014) Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora: A threat to Bangladesh tea

Evaluation of cultural methods of control

Treatments Average % SE F Green leaf / 5 SE F

infestation (5 bushes (g) Av.
replications)
T1 = Normal plucking 22.50 c 96.00 c
T2 = Normal plucking and
intensive removal of 18.75 b 120.40 b
stalks
T3 = Normal plucking, intensive
removal of stalks and
insecticide application 5.75 a 1.07 144. 145.00 a 6.52 26.74
(Endosulfan 1:300) 33
T4 = Normal plucking, intensive
removal of stalks and
insecticide application
(Pyrethroid 1:1000) 4.50 a 146.40 a
Note: Means followed by same letters are not significantly different from each other at 1% level.
Cultural control options Theaflavin content of seedling and clonal teas
 Allow sufficient sunlight and better aeration.
 Over shaded plantation should be thinned. Samples Theaflavin concentration (u mole/g) % mean
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th value(u
 Avoid damping condition. set set set set set set mole/g)
 Drainage should be improved. Uninfested 22.03 15.81 21.55 17.01 16.53 14.37 17.88
 Remove alternate hosts. seedling
 Remove jungles as much as possible. Infested 23.95 16.29 21.55 12.45 17.48 17.96 18.28
seedling
 Keep sections free from weeds. Uninfested 33.53 15.81 26.35 19.88 23.95 20.36 23.31
 Barrier spraying may be used. clone
 Plucking round should be maintained. Infested 28.50 15.33 1940 20.12 21.56 19.16 20.68
clone
 Prefer 3 year cycle in Helopeltis prone areas.
 Interval between 2 rounds of spraying is very
important. Toxin studies of Helopeltis infestation in made
(Biosynthesis of toxin)
Ovicidal effect of some insecticides on Helopeltis
eggs Freshly infested tea shoots were sent to BCSIR for
In a laboratory experiment at the dilution of 1: 333, 1:222, biosynthesis of toxins and also to see the biological
1: 222, 1:1000 ratio effects of toxins. But only detection and quantification of
Thiodan 35EC 80% eggs were killed aflatoxin have been done. Further analysis is not possible.
Malathion 57EC 60% " " " Methodology cannot be provided at this stage. The
Dimethoate 40EC 65% " " " contamination of aflatoxin in the supplied sample was
Ripcord 10EC 70% " " " found to be negative.
Decis 10EC 70% " " " Bio-control agent of Helopeltis

Bio-chemical effect of Helopeltis infestation in tea Common name Systematic position Status
An experiment was conducted at BTRI in order to assess
the impact of Helopeltis infestation on the quality of made Preying mantis Class: Insects +++
tea with uninfested and infested leaves with Helopeltis at Order: Orthoptera
different degree of infestation and quality of tea in respect Family: Mantidae
of theaflavin and solid contents. Genus: Mastispa
Species: Mantispa sp.
Soluble solid contents of seedling and clonal tea
Samples % Soluble solid % In an experiment preying mantis was found more active
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th mean during daytime i.e. in the first phase dawn to midday (6
set set set set set set value am to 12 am) and second phase mid day to dusk (12 am
Uninfested 39.03 40.78 45.40 41.85 36.75 36.65 40.07 to 6 pm) (Anonymous, 1999-2000). The average feeding
seedling
Infested 40.03 41.45 41.60 41.78 40.18 37.68 40.45 intensity was also high during first and second phases of
seedling daily rhythm. The intensity was reduced considerably
Uninfested 45.43 38.18 45.48 38.55 40.08 33.95 40.28 during the third phase dusk to mid night (6 pm to 12 pm).
clone Very poor intensity was observed during the fourth phase
Infested 43.63 35.68 42.83 40.18 42.80 35.02 40.02
clone
mid night to dawn.
Ahmed and Mamun (2014) Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora: A threat to Bangladesh tea

Application procedure
Feeding intensity of preying mantis
 Do not use same chemical in the same fields for long
time.
Phases Prey captured/adult  Do not spray when rainfall is apprehended.
mantis
 Spraying is preferable on the following day of
1st phase (6 am to 12 am) 9 plucking.
2nd phase (12 am to 6 pm) 12  To enhance the shoots foliar application of Urea (1-
2%) may be given along with insecticides.
3rd phase (6 pm to 12 pm) 2  1% MOP could also be applied as a foliar application
thus enhance the healthy vegetative growth (avoid
4th phase (12 pm to 6 am) 1
higher dosage of potassium KCl).
 Prune the badly affected sections during December-
In serious cases- Chemical control options could be January.
used as follows- Spraying schedule of Helopeltis
1. Pluck off (black plucking) all affected shoots and
leaves and then one round of cocktail solution could be March - April During initial symptom noticed
applied. - 1st application
Thiodan 35EC @ 1.50 lit + DDVP 250 ml in 500 lit - 2nd application at 12
water days interval
Thiodan 35EC @ 1.50 lit + Ripcord 10EC @ 100 ml in May - June 2 rounds at 7- 8 days interval
500 lits. of water July - August 2 rounds at 7-10 days interval
Thiodan 35EC @ 1.50 lit + Dursban 20EC @ 100 ml in September - October 2 rounds at 7- 8 days interval
500 lits. of water
Ripcord 10EC@ 500ml in 500 lits of water Note: For severe cases - black plucking followed by
Ripcord 10EC@ 500ml + 100ml Dursban in 500 lits of spraying of skiffing (Fungicide Cupravit / Macuprax
water or any insecticide + any Copper fungicide could be mixed with the insecticide.)
Should be applied (if infestation is severe). A second
round of spray is always necessary at 7 days interval. Control steps
2. BTRI approved any copper fungicide @ 200gm/drum 1. Infested sections should be earmarked.
could be mixed with insecticide to avoid acute debilitation 2. Barrier spraying will be more effective, 2 - 3 peripheral
of the bushes leading to Die-back and delayed and rows treat first.
meager flushing thereafter. 3. Best spraying times are at 5am to 8am and 4pm to
3. Insecticide belonging to different chemical groups and 7pm.
different modes of action are to be alternated for 4. Plucking round should be minimized (7-8 days).
satisfactory control. 5. Short interval plucking to reduce Helopeltis.
6. Pluck off affected shoots.
Special care
7. Light pruning to prevent Helopeltis.
The small scattered pockets (early/late/or cropping 8. Avoid slash down practice.
season) from where infestation starts, must be identified Climatic factors related to Helopeltis infestation
and all efforts should be made to keep these areas free
from attack.
Climatic factors Correlation Level of
In case of severe infestation (r) significance
 Black-Off-plucking followed by insecticidal spraying Cloud coverage 0.99 at 5%
will eliminate the nymphs along with eggs embedded Temperature] 0.92
in the tea plant tissues Relative humidity 0.81
 Removal of eggs would decrease the possible (%) 0.95
population growth in the infested area Rainfall 0.78
 Repeated removal of infested shoots immediately Wind speed -0.91
before plucking results in removal of potentials of Sun-shine hours -0.46
infestation Water requirement
 2nd round of plucking prior to 2nd round of spraying Adopted from Ahmed and Uddin (2001)
will minimise the build-up of population
 Plucking at regular intervals will accelerate the
growth of new buds
 1-2% Urea could be used during the 2nd round of
application
Ahmed and Mamun (2014)
Development of Integrated pest management
strategies for Helopeltis in tea
Tea pests and tea productivity are two antagonistic
factors. Tea crop protection is an essential component of
tea husbandry to safeguard tea plants from the ravages of
a multitude of pests, diseases and other maladies. The
development of a specific pest control programme
depends on many factors, such as, the nature of pest
spectrum, type of crops to be protected, economics of
pest control technologies available, etc. In view of tea
ecosystem and diversity of pest complex, a multiple
approach of pest management is adopted for Bangladesh
tea. Of all standard control strategies such as natural
control like- Climatic factors, Topographic features,
Predators and Parasites, etc., applied control like- Cultural
control, Mechanical control, Physical control, Chemical
control, Biological control, Microbial control, Regulatory
control and Integrated control, Breeding of resistant
agrotypes, Ionizing radiation, Chaemosterilant, etc. has
been incorporated and still to be continued because of
immediate protection of tea and various constraints to
employ with different control methods. For a decision
profile of control options for tea mosquito bug, all facets
of crop production technology and crop protection
technology are blended to harness maximum crop.
Pest forecasting and pest monitoring
Pest forecasting and pest monitoring is an important
approach, which can be employed by extension officers,
field officers and supervisors to analyze field situations
with regard to pest defenders, soil conditions, plant
health, influence of weather factors and their inter
relationship for growing a healthy crop. The Economic
Threshold Level (ETL) is a matter of judgment, giving
time for the farmer to take action for the control measure
to take effect before economic injury level itself is
reached. Critical studies on crop loss due to pests and
establishment of economic threshold levels of major pest
species are pre-requisites for minimizing the use of
pesticides. The ETL of the Tea mosquito bug is 5%
shoot infestation (Mamun and Iyengar, 2010). The
occurrence of this pest is during the cropping season i.e.
March to November. Considering the economic injury
level, application of chemical pesticides is used as and
when really required.
Cultural practices
Cultural control apparently is the most economical and
widely applicable method of pest control. This involves
the intelligent manipulation of all aspects of crop
husbandry. In tea culture, certain routine cultural
practices such as plucking rounds, adjustment of pruning
cycles, the modification of shade trees and timely weed
control may be effectively employed as pre-emptive
measures of pest control. This approach of pest control is
comparatively cheap, risk free and often effective for long
period without adverse effect on the environment.
Cultural practices have some effect on Helopeltis incidence
Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora: A threat to Bangladesh tea
and these should be considered for the decision analysis
techniques.
Plucking
Plucking is one of the common phenomena in tea culture.
This process has a significant impact on the removal or
reduction of Tea mosquito bug. The shorter the plucking
rounds, the more removal of eggs, larvae and juvenile
stages of pests from the bush will take place. Tea
mosquito laid eggs on the broken ends (stalks) of plucked
shoots. Plucking can help control populations of H.
theivora, by removing either eggs deposited in the young
stems or larvae present in the young leaves. However,
plucking intensity is important; the higher the intensity,
the greater the reduction in pest population (Satake et al.,
2006). Intensive removal of stalks during plucking will
reduce the incidence of this pest.
Pruning
Pruning is one of the important cultural operations in tea
husbandry. Pruning is an essential agronomic practice
implemented in winter for renovating vegetative growth
at the expense of reproduction, to increase crop
productivity in subsequent years. Pruning removes a large
part of the pest populations present on the foliage and
stems. Major foliar pest including tea mosquito bugs are
removed during pruning operation. Prune the badly
affected sections during December-January.
Shade regulation
The culture of shade trees and many ancillary crops in the
tea ecosystem is considered to be a necessary evil. In tea,
shade regulation plays a predominant role in pest
suppression. Dense shaded areas are prone to the attack
of Helopeltis (Ahmed, et al., 1993). As tea mosquito bug is
a negatively phototropic pest, over shaded plantation
should be thinned to allow sufficient sunlight and better
aeration. The pest cannot tolerate the sunlight and
ultimately reduce the infestation. So, the recommendation
of shade management will help to prevent the excessive
build up of Helopeltis.
Filed sanitation
Field sanitation assumes significance in the management
of several pests. Tea mosquito bug attacks or live on a
number of host plants. Sometimes the hosts are treated as
a hiding place or as a breeding source. Mikania, Cinchona,
Cashew, Cocoa, Tephrosia, Guava, Jackfruit, Coffee,
Mango, Sweet potato, Rangan (Ixora coccinea L.) etc. are
common alternate hosts. Weeds like Micania cordata, Bidens
bitrnata, Emillia sp., Polygonum Chinese, Oxalis acetocella,
Malastoma malabethricum and Lantana camara offer excellent
hiding places and serve as alternate hosts for the Tea
mosquito bug. Remove weeds as well as jungles from the
sections or surrounding as much as possible. Damping
condition of the estate is also a reason to increase the
infestation. Drainage condition should be improved to
reduce the infestation. So, growth of host plants in and
around tea fields should be controlled and this will help
to reduce the growth of pest population.
Ahmed and Mamun (2014) Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora: A threat to Bangladesh tea

Fertilizer application Host plant resistance is perhaps one of the least

Fertilizer produces more nutritious plant for man, so
many insects may also benefit. Tea mosquito bugs have
been found to breed or develop rapidly on plants given
good nitrogen fertilization. By contrast, there is some
evidence that manuring with potassium and phosphate
may reduce the incidence of some pests. One per cent
MOP could also be applied as a foliar application to
enhance the healthy vegetative growth (avoid higher
dosage of potassium KCl).
Host plant resistance
expensive, safest and most practical ways of integrated
pest management in tea plantation. Tea being a perennial
crop, research on clonal selection and breeding is
primarily aimed at the resistance to pests. Different tea
clones show varying degrees of susceptibility to Helopeltis
(Table 1). However, at present there are no clones with a
high degree of resistance to Helopeltis. It is clear that the
dark leaved varieties are more prone to damage by tea
Helopeltis than the light leaved ones. Of the seed jats
(types), China hybrids suffer the worst.

Table 1. Susceptibility of tea mosquito bug to Tocklai Clone and BTRI Clone.

Tocklai Clone Susceptibility BTRI Clone Susceptibility

TV1 Highly susceptible BT1 Fairly Resistant
TV9 Highly susceptible BT2 Fairly Resistant
TV11 Moderately susceptible BT3 Very Susceptible
TV12 Highly susceptible BT4 Susceptible
TV14 Highly susceptible BT5 Susceptible
TV16 Highly susceptible BT6 Susceptible
TV17 Moderately susceptible BT7 Fairly Resistant
TV18 Highly susceptible BT8 Fairly Resistant
TV19 Highly susceptible BT9 Susceptible
TV20 Highly susceptible BT10 Fairly Resistant
TV21 Moderately susceptible BT11 Very Susceptible
TV22 Highly susceptible BT12 Fairly Resistant
TV23 Highly susceptible BT13 Susceptible
TV25 Moderately susceptible BT14 Susceptible
TV26 Moderately susceptible BT16 Fairly Resistant
Regulatory Method from different countries are available to control the
Almost all countries, including India, have legal Helopeltis with Hymenopteran ants.
enactments, called quarantine laws, to prevent the entry
of foreign pests and pathogens. Quarantine measures are Parasitoid
advocated for the introduction of tea germplasm either as The egg parasitoid, Erythmelus helopeltidis was found
seed material or vegetative propagule in the form of scion effective against tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora
and rooted cuttings (Venkata, 1983). Only healthy, pest (Sudhakaran and Muraleedharan, 1998). Percentage
and disease free planting materials should be procured. parasitism in the field varied between 52 and 83% and
this is the first record of this species attacking H. theivora.
Biological Control
Biological methods of control involve the conservation, Pathogens
preservation and introduction of natural enemies of tea Several microbes are pathogenic to tea pests. A local
pests, like predators, parasitoids and pathogens for strain of Beauveria bassiana has been found effective
suppression of pests within tolerable levels. The minor against Helopeltis. The nymphs are parasitized by an
status of several pests such as aphids, scale insects, emtomopathogenic nematode, Agamermis paradecaudate.
flushworms and leaf rollers is due to the action of these Certain entomopathogenic fungi, Verticillium lecani,
natural enemies. Efforts towards the conservation and Paecilomyces fumosoroseus and Hirsutella thompsonii may also
augmentation of natural enemies in the tea ecosystem, effective against Helopeltis.
could offer significant advances in biological control Use of botanicals
programme of Helopeltis in tea. Botanical products are environmentally safe, less
Predator hazardous, economic and easily available. Certain
Recently, Chrysoperla carnea has been identified as a products derived from indigenous plants are used for tea
predator of thrips and Helopeltis. Preying mantis has been pest control. Products containing azadirachtin, an
found to capture and feed on all stages of Helopeltis theivora oxygenated triterpenoid obtained from the seed kernel of
both in laboratory and in field condition. Many reports neem, Azadirachta indica is now being evaluated against
certain tea pests and has been found effective against
Ahmed and Mamun (2014) Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora: A threat to Bangladesh tea

Helopeltis. Besides, Mahogany, Karanja, Datura, Tobacco,
Bishkatali, Katamehedi, Lantana, Xanthium and
Clerodendrum extracts may also effective against this pest
(Mamun and Ahmed, 2011).
Use of sex pheromone
Sex pheromones have been utilized extensively in IPM
programme in field crops but their use is rather unknown
in plantation crops like tea. Sex pheromones could be
integrated into the pest management programme in tea
(Noguchi et al., 1981; Hiyori et al., 1986). Sex pheromones
of the tea mosquito Helopeltis theivora were studied at
UPASI Tea Research Institute to determine the presence
and activity of sex pheromones to H. theivora (Sudhakaran
et al., 2000). Responses of the tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis
theivora to female sex pheromone compounds were
measured using wind tunnel and electroantennogram
(EAG) bioassays (Sachin et al., 2008). This female sex
pheromone blend may be useful for tea mosquito control
and management programs. This recent strategy may be
incorporated in IPM of tea mosquito bug in Bangladesh.
Chemical Control
Table 2. Recommendation on chemical control of Tea mosquito bug in Bangladesh.
Pesticide will continue to play a vital role in pest control
programme in the foreseeable future. Pesticides have
been considered to be one of the most essential
agricultural inputs for increasing crop production. The
correct choice of pesticides, dosage, timing and method
of application are of paramount importance for the
successful control of insects and mite pests of tea.
Insecticides ranging from DDT to the most recent
synthetic pyrethroids do find a place in the schedule of
pest control programs in tea. Retrospective records or
memories of the use of pesticides against this pest over a
period of three decades show that Endosulfan (Thiodan
35EC) was the most dominant pesticide used against this
malady. Continuous "Blanket spraying" with this
insecticide has helped develop strains of the bug with
increased tolerance/resistance (Ahmed et al., 2011). The
same pesticide used in the same field for long period
might have increased tolerance/resistance capacity of the
tea mosquito bug. So, it would be wise to switch over the
other group of insecticides like Synthetic Pyrethroid, or
Organophosphate, at least temporarily for immediate and
efficient control (Table 2).

Chemical Name Chemical Group Dosage Spray volume

Quinalphos 25EC Organophosphate 750 ml/ha 500 lit/ha
Malathion 57EC Organophosphate 2.25 lit/ha 500 lit/ha
Dimethion 40EC Organophosphate 2.25 lit/ha 500 lit/ha
Deltamethrin 2.5EC Pyrethroid 500 ml/ha 500 lit/ha
Cypermethrin 10EC Pyrethroid 500 ml/ha 500 lit/ha
Fenvalerate 20EC Pyrethroid 1.25 lit/ha 500 lit/ha
Metasystox 25EC Oxydimiton Methyl 500 ml/ha 500 lit/ha
Calypso 240SC Thiacloprid 375 ml/ha 500 lit/ha
Viraat 23EC Quinalphos+Cypermethrin 700 ml/ha 500 lit/ha

Bio-control agents Resistant agrotypes

Weed control

Use of pheromone Removal of stalks

trap
IPM Package of
Helopeltis
Frequent Plucking
Chemical control

Use of botanicals Black Plucking

Selection and dose of
chemical

Fig. 1. Component of IPM package of Helopeltis theivora W.

Ahmed and Mamun (2014) Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora: A threat to Bangladesh tea
For effective control of Helopeltis following spraying
schedule should be considered. First spray of the
recommended pesticides should be done during initial
symptom noticed in early part of the cropping season i.e.
March - April. Second round spray should be done at 10
days interval. Then a sequential three applications should
be done during May – June, July – August and September
– October respectively. A second round of spray is always
necessary at 7 days interval. Barrier spraying will be more
effective for the efficient control of Helopeltis. In case of
barrier spraying, 8-10 rows of bushes at the outer
periphery of the section spraying first and spraying can be
directed from periphery towards center. In case of severe
infestations, pluck off (black plucking) all affected shoots
and leaves and then one round of cocktail solution of
Endosulfan 35EC @ 1.50 lit + Cypermethrin 10EC
@100 ml in 500 lit of water per hectare could be applied.
Spraying should be done on the following day of
plucking. Best spraying times are at 5:00 am to 8:00 am
and 4:00 pm to 7:00 pm.
Do,s and Don't,s
 Allow sufficient sunlight and better aeration.
 Over shades should be thinned.
 Avoid damp condition.
 Drainage condition should be improved.
 Remove alternate hosts.
 Remove adjacent jungles as much as possible.
 Keep sections free from weeds.
 Do not allow short heighted operators to spray
height-bound sections.
 Do not use pesticides indiscriminately.
 Spraying same chemical in the same field for
several years is not wise.
 Take timely control measure.
 Do not spray during sun or rain.
 Lung on LP/rejuvenation pruned bushes may
be a shelter place of the pest during cold
weather. Hence may be better not to keep it.
 Do not keep sections unpruned for longer
period.
 Prune badly affected sections little later i.e.
during December - January.
 If the attack is severe during cropping season,
do not skiff; only black plucking should be
enough.
 Pluck "Black" from periphery towards the
center of the section where few bushes should
be left untouched as a "trap crop" and then
"pluck black" and spray with chemical.
 Spray from periphery towards the centre of the
section.
 Spray strictly in the morning or late afternoon.
 Barrier spraying will keep the section better
protected.
 In general clonal plants are more vulnerable
compared to seedling because of genetic
homogeneity in clones and cross-resistance in
seedlings. Hence deserves constant monitoring
and prophylactic/palliative measures in time.
 To enhance new shoots, maximum 2% Urea can
be applied with the insecticide.
 In conventional spraying, more than 60% of the
spray fluid is lost due to drip.
 Major wastage is due to the formation of larger
droplets that fall off quickly
 There is effect of temperature and water
hardness on emulsion stability.
 More than 350C temperature interferes with the
chemical efficacy.
 Typical canopy structure can help hide the
Helopeltis.
 Heavy rainfall affects its breeding.
 Target site must be followed during spraying.
 Mode of action of pesticide is very important
for effective Helopeltis control.
 Do not allow unskilled spray team.
 Improper dose creates resistance problem.
 Rapid growth potential of the pest is difficult to
control.
 Cloud coverage helps the damage intensity.
 EC formulation is very common against
Helopeltis and its a.i.% is optimum in that
formulation type.
 Monitor the pest in the field at regular interval.
Collect the nymphs and adults by using hand
nets at twilight hours.
 Remove the tea bushes which provide moist and
warm atmosphere. Grow resistant tea genotypes.
 Cultivate Annatto (Bixa orellana) as trap crop on
the contours of the plantation.
 Certain parasitoids exert biological control of
these insects in nature. Spray Chlorpyrifos 20EC
or Malathion 50EC or Indane 20EC or
Phosalone 35EC @2ml/lit of water.
 Application of the mixture of
quinalphos+dichlorvos may also be resorted to
at spray intervals depending on the intensity of
incidence.
 Spraying of insecticides should be started from
the periphery of the infested plantations to trap
the migratory and escaping population.
Conclusion
The future tea pest management lies in developing an
information-based system in which prevention and
therapy are combined to reduce the damage/loss caused
by pests. As such, thresholds based on damage/loss will
need to be established for many more key pests in the
near future. Because commodity value per land area is
high in tea, emphasis on prevention may prove to be
useful and may include advance planning with respect to
the implementation of strategies. Need based, judicious
 Ahmed and Mamun (2014)
and safe application of pesticides is the most vital aspect
of chemical control measures under IPM strategy. It
involves developing IPM skills to play safe with
environment by proper crop health monitoring, observing
ETL and conserving the natural bio-control potential
before deciding in favor of use of chemical pesticides as a
last resort. Habitat management, exploitation of hitherto
under used natural enemies such as predator, parasitoid &
entomopathogen, use of the novel biorational pesticides,
management of pesticides to extend their useful life,
proper use of semiochemicals and the use of information
technology are some major tactics to be employed in the
IPM programme in tea in the coming years.
REFERENCES
Ahmed, M. 1996. Relationship between infestation
intensity and crop loss by Helopeltis in tea. Tea J.
Bangladesh . 32 (1&2): 20-36.
Ahmed, M. 2005. Tea Pest Management. Evergreen
Printing & Packaging, Dhaka P.118.
Ahmed, M. and Uddin, M.J. 2001. Effect of some climatic
factors on Helopeltis infestation of tea. Tea J.
Bangladesh. 37(1&2): 8-17.
Ahmed, M., Huq, M., Haq, M.I. and Ali, M.A. 1993.
Influence of shade on the incidence of pests in
tea plantation in Bangladesh, Proc. of Int. Symp. on
Tea Science & human health, India, 326-329.
Ahmed, M., Mumford, J.D. and Holt, J. 1992. A
population model of Helopeltis in Bangladesh tea,
Sri Lanka J. Tea Sci., 61(1): 24-30.
Ahmed, M., Paul, S.K. and Mamun, M.S.A. 2011. Field
performance and economic analysis of some
commonly used insecticides against tea
mosquito bug (Helopeltis theivora Waterhouse).
Bangladesh J. Agril. Res. 36(3): 449-454.
Anonymous. 1999-2000. Searching of natural enemies as
bio-control agents and their use as a means of
controlling tea pests. BTRI Biennial Report
1999-2000. 54p.
Barbora, B.C. and Karan Singh, K. 1994. Two and a Bud.
41 (2): 19-21.
Chen, Z.M. and Chen, X.F. 1989. An analysis of world
tea pest fauna. J. Tea Sci. 9: 13-22.
Chowdhury, R.S., Ahmad, S. and Ahmed, M. 2008.
Resistance of BTRI released tea clones to tea
View publication stats
Tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora: A threat to Bangladesh tea
mosquito bug, Helopeltis theivora W. (Hemiptera:
Miridae). Bangladesh J. Life Sci. 20(1): 153-156.
Hiyori, T., Kainoh, Y and Ninomiya, Y. 1986. Wind
tunnel tests on the disruption of pheromonal
orientation of male smaller tea tortrix moth,
Adoxophyes sp. (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae).
Disruptive effect of sex pheromone
components. Appl. Enomol. Zool. 21: 153-158.
Mamun, M.S.A. and Ahmed, M. 2011. Prospect of
indigenous plant extracts in tea pest
management. Int. J. Agril. Res. Innov. & Tech., 1
(1-2): 16-23.
Mamun, M.S.A. and Iyengar, A.V.K. 2010. Integrated
approaches to tea pest management in south
India. Int. J. Sustain. Agril. Tech. 6(4): 27-33.
Noguchi, H., Tamak, Y., Arai, S., Shimoda, M. and
Ishikawa, I. 1981. Field evaluation of synthetic
sex pheromone of the oriental tea tortrix moth,
Homona magnanima Diakonoff (Lepidoptera:
Tortricidae). Jap. J. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 25: 170-
175.
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. Environ Entomol. 37(6):1416-21.
Satake, A., Ohgushi, T., Urano, S. and Uchimura, K.
2006. Modeling population dynamics of a tea
pest with temperature-dependent development:
predicting emergence timing and potential
damage. Ecol. Res. 21:107–16.
Sudhakaran, R. and Muraleedharan, N. 1998. An egg
parasitoid of Helopeltis theivora infesting tea.
Newsl. UPASI Tea Res. Inst. 8(2):4.
Sudhakaran, R., Muraleedharan, N., Narasimhan, S. and
Selvasundaram, R. 2000. Studies on the sex
pheromone of the tea mosquito bug, Helopeltis
theivora Waterhouse. pp. 155-158. In: Proc. Indo-
UK workshop on Innovative pest and disease
management in horticultural and plantation
crops. SPIC Science Foundation, Chennai.
Venkata Ram, C.S. 1983. Pathogens and pests of tea. 117-
144. In: Exotic plant quarantine pests and
procedures for introduction of plant materials.
K.G. Singh (Ed.). ASEAN Plant Quarantine
Centre and Training Institute, Selangor. pp. 333.