Credit seminar

on
Bemisia tabaci : An obnoxious insect pest
SEMINAR IN-CHARGE
Dr. S.K. Shrivastava
Head of the Deptt.
Department of Entomology
PRESENTED BY
R. S. Marabi
Ph.D. (Ag.) Scholar
Roll No.:188

Department of Entomology
College of Agriculture, JNKVV, Jabalpur- 482 004 (M.P.)

Introduction
C.N.: Whitefly
Whiteflies are

S. N.: Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius,1989)

Hemipteran

insects

which belong to family Aleyrodidae.

They are small and typically feed on
the undersides of plant leaves and
suck the cell sap.

It was first reported as a pest in 1919 in India (Hussain and

Trehan, 1933). Since then, it has been recognized as a pest
of crops in tropical and subtropical countries.

Cont.
To date more than 1200 species of whiteflies have been
identified .
The genus Bemisia contains 37 species and is thought to
have originated from Asia (Mound & Halsey, 1978).
B. tabaci have wide host range of 506 species in 74 plant
families (Greathead, 1986).
It transmit over 200 different plant viruses belonging to the
genus Begomovirus.
So far about 6 biotypes of B. tabaci have been detected
worldwide by molecular methods (Hilje, 2003).

Taxonomic position of Bemisia tabaci

Kingdom Animal
Phylum Arthropoda
Class Insecta
Division Pterygota
Sub-division Exopterygota
Order Hemiptera
Sub order-Homoptera
Family Aleyrodidae
Genus Bemisia
Species tabaci

The

B.

Geographical distribution

tabaci

mitochondrial

is

DNA

not

genetically

markers,

the

uniform.

B.

Based

tabaci

on

complex

(comprising B and non-B type variants) can be placed into

five major groups according to their geographical origin:
(1) New World (US, Mexico, Puerto Rico),
(2) Southeast Asia (Thailand, Malaysia),
(3) Mediterranean basin (Southwest Europe, North Africa,
Middle East),
(4) Indian subcontinent (India, Pakistan, Nepal),
(5) Equatorial Africa (Cameroon, Mozambique, Uganda, and Zambia)
(Frohlich et al.1999).

Species of whiteflies
Hilje (2003) reported that 1200 species of whiteflies
worldwide and only three are recognized as a vectors of
plant viruses:
Cotton whitefly (Bemisia tabaci Genn.)
Greenhouse whitefly (Trialeurodes vaporariorum West.)
Silverleaf whitefly (B. argentifolii Bellows & Perring)
Of this number, B. tabaci is considered the most
important of the whitefly vectors of plant virus and the
only species transmitting geminiviruses (Duffus 1987 and
Harrison, 1985).


Behavior & population biology
Dispersal
Whitefly tend to remain in groups until the population
becomes dense.
This means infestations stay concentrated in a few
places, especially during the earlier stages of the crop.
Later as temperatures rise, they become more active
and spread widely over the whole crop.
Adults are the most important dispersal stage.

Distribution
Only the first nymph (crawler) stage of whitefly is
capable of movement, and this is limited to short
distances, usually on the same leaf on which it
hatched.
Adults of greenhouse whitefly only lay eggs on the
young leaves at the top of the plant, so as the plant
grows, younger nymphs are found on the upper parts
of the plant and older ones are found lower down.
In contrast, sweet potato whitefly adults tend to lay
eggs over the entire plant, so all life cycle stages can
be found on the same leaf.

Morphology and marks of identification

Egg:
Adult females lay their elongated Egg
oval eggs on the undersides of the
youngest leaves towards the shoot
tips with the help of a short stalk.
Females may produce up to 300
eggs in their lifetime.
They are about 0.25 mm long and Egg
oval in shape.
For the first couple of days the eggs
are transparent to pale creamyellow, then after a day or two they
begin to turn brown-black.
www.flickr.com
Egg

Crawler (1st nymphal stage):

The egg hatches into the first
instar which is mobile and called
crawler stage.
It is flat, oval, almost transparent
and only 0.3 mm long with tiny
legs that allow it to move across
the leaf surface.
It remains at this location until it turns into an adult.
A modified alimentary system concentrates sugar in the
interior midgut while the excess fluid is passed on to the
midgut and excreted outside the body as honeydew.

Cont
Scale (2nd 4th nymphal stages):
When the crawler moults, it turns into a
legless, 0.30.4 mm long, scale-like
creature that is fixed to the leaf
surface. The body is oval and almost
transparent,

although

some

yellow

internal organs may be visible.

There are longer hairs on top of the body. It remains
immobile, feeding off sap and moulting between nymphal
stages (Reddy & Rao, 1989).

Cont
Pupa:
An oval, white case with a fringe of
white threads projecting outwards
around the body.
The fourth nymphal stage starts off
flat and oval.
At the end of this stage it stops
feeding, swells, becomes denser and
forms waxy, spiny rods over its body
As a result it becomes creamy white in appearance and
about 0.7 mm long.
Shortly before it emerges parts of the adult, especially its
eyes, can be seen through the pupa skin.

Adult:
The malesare about0.9 mm
and females are about 1.1
mm long with a pale yellow
body which remains covered
with pairs of tent like white

wingsofuniformsize.
Atrest,thewingsareheldinaninvertedVposition.
Adultemergenceusuallytakesplacefromtheirpupal
case (pseudo-pupa) in the morning. Compound eyes
oftheadultareredcolour.

Adult B. tabaci

Life cycle of B. tabaci

2-4days

2-3 days

4-7days
Inc. Metamorphosis
TLC- 15-18 days
(Temp. 25-32C)
Generation-11-15/year

300 eggs

2-3 days

4-7 days

Pupa

Weather factors
The availability of favourable weather (dry and humid) in
recent years has paved the way for build up of whitefly
population (Singh et al., 1998).
The mild winter conditions in North India during the last
two decades are known to trigger further carryover of
whitefly.

Host plants of B. tabaci

S.No. Host plants

Botanical name

Vegetable crops
Tomato
Lycopersicon esculentum

Potato

Solanum tuberosum

Okra

Abelmoschus esculentus

Radish

Raphanus sativus

Cabbage

B. oleracea var. capitata

Broccoli

B. oleracea var. italica

Cauliflower

B. oleracea var. botrytis

Eggplant

Solanum melongena

Lettuce

Lactuca sativa

Cont
S.No.

Host plants
Cucurbits

Botanical name

Melon

Cucumis melo

Watermelon

Citrullus lanatus

Cucumber

Cucumis sativus

Ayote

Cucurbita moschata

Oilseed crops
1

Soybean

Glycine max

Sunflower

Helianthus annuus

Sesame

Sesamum indicum

Pulses
1

Common bean

Phaseolus vulgaris

Blackgram

Vigna mungo

Mungbean

Vigna radiata

Cont

S.No.

Host plants

Botanical name

Tuber crops
Sweet potato

Ipomoea batatas

Cassava

Manihot esculenta

Fruits crops
Papaya

Carica papaya

Guava

Psidium guajava

Spices crops
1

Chilli

Capsicum annuum

Hot pepper

Capsicum frutescens

Cont
S.No. Host plants

Botanical name

Fiber crop
1

Cotton

Gossypium hirsutum

Other/forage/weeds
1

Tobacco

Nicotiana tabacum

Alfalfa

Medicago sativa

Sida

Sida rhombifolia

(Devid, 2003)

Nature of Damage
Whiteflies cause damage to the plant by two ways:
1. Direct feeding:
Introducing
decreasing

toxic
the

saliva

plants'

and
overall

turgor pressure.

Both nymph and adult whitefly

cause direct damage when they

suck plant juices.

As a result, infestations of whitefly can give plants a yellow,
mottled look, stunting their growth, causing wilting and
defoliation and thereby seriously reducing crop yield.

Cont
Nymphs of sweet potato whitefly inject enzymes that cause
changes in the plants chemistry. The result can be irregular
ripening of fruit which remain hard and sour tasting, with
retarded internal colour.

SPFMV/SPFMV.htm

Cont
2. Indirect damage:
I. Sooty mold growth: encouraged by the honeydew
secretion that block photosynthesis.

Leaves and fruits of tomato infected by honeydew of whiteflies

Cont
II. As a vector of plant viruses:
Transmission of plant viral
diseases
whiteflies

through

adult

have the potential

to cause crop losses indirectly

by transmitting plant viruses.
Bean calico mosaic virus Arizona 1998

The ability of whiteflies to carry and spread disease is the

widest impact on global food production viz; TYLcV, MYMV
etc.

Cont
In the tropics and subtropics regions, whiteflies have
become one of the most serious crop protection
problems.
Economic losses are estimated in hundreds to millions
of dollars.
Bemisia

tabaci and B.

argentifolii,

transmit African

cassava mosaic, bean golden mosaic, bean dwarf

mosaic, bean calico mosaic, tomato yellow leaf curl,
tomato

mottle,

and

family Geminiviridae.

other Begomoviruses,

in

the

Cont
The worldwide spread of emerging biotypes, such as B.
tabaci biotype B, also known as 'B. argentifolii', and a
new biotype Q, continue to cause severe crop losses
which will likely continue to increase, resulting in higher
pesticide use on many crops (tomato, beans, cassava,
cotton, cucurbits, potato, sweet potato, etc.).

Plant virus transmitted by insect vectors

55%
11%

Plant
Virus

11%
9%
7%
5%
2%
(Astier et al., 2001)

Plant virus transmitted by Bemisia tabaci

S.N.

Host plant

Name of disease

Reference

Cassava
(Manihot
esculenta)

Africancassavamosaicvirus(ACMV) Briddonetal.1990

Potato

Tobacco

Cotton

Tomato

Potatoyellowmosaicvirus(PYMV)

Chilli

chillimosaicvirus(ChLCV)

Sweetpotato Sweetpotatoveinmosaic

virus(SPVMV)

3
4
5

Tobaccoleafcurlvirus(TLCV)
cottonleafcurlvirus(CLCuV)

Lazarowitz&
Lazdins,1991
Osaki&Inouye,
1981
Kapuretal.1994

Tomatoyellowleafcurlvirus(TYLCV) Norisetal.1998,
Tomatogoldenmosaicvirus(TGMV), Dryetal.1993
TLCV,TLCrV
Venkatesh,1998
Valverde,2003

Cont
S.N.
Host plant
Name of disease
8
Courgettes
Squashleafcurlvirus(SqLCV)
(Cucurbita pepo
9
Beans
beangoldenmosaic(BGMV)viruses,
MYMIV
10
Poinsettia
Euphorbia mosaic virus (EuMV)
(Euphorbia
pulcherrima)
11
13
14
16
17

Gerbera
(Gerbera sp.)
Okra

Gerberamosaicvirus(GMV)

Reference
Lazarowitz&
Lazdins,1991
Azametal.
1994
Martinez,
2000

Visalakshy,
2001
Bhindiyellowveinmosaicvirus
Briddonetal.
(BYVMV)
2001
Lettuces
Lettuce infectious yellows virus(LIYV) Martellietal.
(Lactuca sativa)
2002
Soybean
Soybeancrinkleleafvirus(SCLV)
Biswasand
MYMIV
Varma,2001
Cucumbers
Cucumberveinyellowingvirus(CVYV) Morris,2006

Symptoms of plant virus caused by Bemisia

Cotton leaf crumple virus

Tomato leaf curl virus

Cabbage leaf curl virus

Potato leaf curl virus

galleryhip.com

Bhindi yellow vein mosaic virus

www.apsnet.org

Cucumber mosaic virus

www.apsnet.org
Cassava yellows virus

Pest status & economic importance

About 1200 whitefly species have been described (Anon.,
2001, Mound and Halsey 1978), but relatively few transmit
plant viruses.
Economic losses which is caused by whiteflies are
estimated in hundreds to millions of dollars.
Only whiteflies in the Bemisia and Trialeurodes genera are
virus vectors.
B. tabaci has been of increasing importance as a pest and
vector of virus diseases of plants since the early 1980s.

Cont.
This has been due to the emergence of the B biotype and
its rapid expansion in geographic distribution and host
range.
The whitefly transmit plant viruses in many region of
tropical, subtropical arid and Mediterranean climates e.g.
cassava, cotton, cowpea, cucurbits, crucifers, tobacco,
tomatoes, potato, soybean, sweet potato, okra, lettuce,
pea, bean, pepper, poinsettia and chrysanthemum are
some of those crops that are vulnerable.
In addition to outdoor crops, B. tabaci is also a serious
pest protected environments, which enable it to survive
during the winter in temperate climates in North America
and Europe (De Barro, 1995).

Cont.
The global spread of the polyphagous B. tabaci biotype B
as a "hitch hiker" on traded plant material is a major factor
in the world

wide

increase in whitefly transmitted

diseases.
Changes in agronomic practices: Irrigated crops being
grown for longer overlapping

periods, monoculture,

Resistance against injudicious use of insecticides have

also

been given as reasons for B. tabaci

associated virus becoming major problems.

1995).

and its
(De Barro,

Percentage of plant virus transmitted B. tabaci

(David, 2003)

Mechanismofplantvirustransmissionby
Insect vectors
Over 75% of plant viruses are transmitted by insects
vectors (Hogenhout et al. 2008).
Begomoviruses and whiteflies (9%)
viruses

and

vectors

which

are a complex of

threaten

many

crops

worldwide.
The specific cells of the whitefly, primary salivary glands
control viral transmission specificity and that virion
transport in the glands follows specific paths to reach
secretory cells in the central region and then to reach the
salivary duct.

Cont
Results indicate that the secretory cells in the central
region

of

primary

salivary

glands

determine

the

recognition and transmission of Begomoviruses.

These findings set a foundation for future research on
circulative plant virus transmitted by arthropod vectors.

View of adult B. tabaci

Fig.: Showing the digestive system in a nongravid individual

and the location of one primary salivary gland in the
prothorax. Note: In gravid females the midgut was sometimes
found in the thorax pressed against the primary salivary
glands. AM- Ascending midgut; CA-Caeca; CC- Connecting
chamber; CIB-Cibarium; DM-Descending midgut; EE- External
esophagus; FC-Filter chamber; HG- Hindgut; PSG- Primary
salivary gland; PSGD-Primary salivary gland duct; RS-Rectal

Typicalfeedingmechanismofsuckingpests

Modeloftheingestion-salivationmechanismof
noncirculative,nonpersistenttransmission.
Salivation into protoplast

Ingestion from protoplast

Virus

Stylet sheath

Stylet

Plasmalemma

Cell wall
Virus is ingested into the food canal (right), along with the cytoplasm. Virus adheres to the
epicuticular lining of the food canal and the common duct at the very distal tip of the stylet, which is
shared with the salivary canal. When the aphid first probes a cell after acquiring virus (left), saliva is
injected into the cell. The watery salivary secretions will release virus from the cuticle lining the
common duct, but virus farther inside the food canal would not be released by this mechanism.

Begomovirus s genomic organization

Mechanism of plant virus transmission

Bowdoin, 2013

Mechanism of feeding

Fig.: Showing the digestive system in a nongravid

individual psg-primary salivary gland; e-esophagus;
fc-filter chamber; mg-mid gut and hg-hind gut

Tomato yellow leaf curl virus

Management strategies of B. tabaci

Pyramid of IPM Tactics

Insecticides

Host plant resistance

Predators, parasites, microbials

Monitoring, Traps, barriers etc.

Field sanitation, plant variety,

crop rotations etc.

Cultural Control
Clean cultivation:
Destruction of off-season host plants of whitefly.
The removal of weed flora in/around the fields during the crop season
e.g. Lantana sp., Solanum sp., Euphorbia sp., Datura sp. and Hibiscus
sp. etc.

Barrier /Mulching:
Mulching with yellow polythene sheets delayed of tomato leaf curl
virus (Cohen and Madjar, 1978).

Intercropping :
Cucumber planting in alternate rows 30 days before tomato, delay
infection of TLCV (Al-Musa, 1982)

Mechanical control
Removal and destruction of first appeared plant with
virus infection.
Installation of yellow sticky traps.

Installation of yellow sticky traps in field ag.arizona.edu

Monitoring of B. tabaci
Regular monitoring of B.tabaci apopulation should be done
from the early stage of the crop.
Yellow sticky traps can be use monitoring the pest
population.

Yellow sticky trap

Biological control

Fig. A) An adult big-eyed bug, Geocoris punctipes, B) Green

lacewing larva, Chrysoperla sp., C) Pirate bug, Orius
insidiosus feeding on preying on whitefly nymphs
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitefly)

Cont
Whitefly
Parasites
(Encarsia
formosa Gahan-3rd) are the most
cost nymphal and pupal effective
biological control agent to control
whiteflies.
It is a aggressive, non-stinging
parasitic wasp, which attract to its
host by the actual smell of the
honeydew produced by the pest,
detecting this from several feet
distance.
Adult parasites will feed on this
honeydew but also on pest body
fluids through a hole made in the
whitefly larvae.

www.planetnatural.com

Botanical insecticides
Botanicals

Dosage

Remarks

Neemguard

0.03%

NSKE

5%

Neem oil

5%

Rakshak Gold 1%

0.5 lit./ha

Econeem 1%

0.5 lit./ha

Nimbecidine 0.003%

5.0 Lit./ha

Very effective

Achook 0.15%

3.0 Lit./ha

Very effective

Reference

Moderate control Puri et al. 1998;

Dhawan, 1998,
1999, Mann et
al. 2001
--do--

Chemical control
Insecticide
Seed treatment
Imidacloprid17.8SL

Thiomethoxam70WS

Dosage

Remarks

References

3.5g/kg
seed

Effectiveonly
whereWFis
seriousasearly
seasonpest

Raoetal.1990;

4.2g/kg
seed

--do--

Jayswaland
Sundaramurthy,
1992;Purietal.
1998;Dhawan,

Foliar spray
Imidacloprid17.8SL

0.5ml/lit.

Effectivebut
Comparatively
verycostly

Thiomethoxam25WG

1000g/ha

Effective

Trizophos40EC

600ml/ha

Veryeffective

Ethion50EC

1000ml/ha

2000,Butterand
Dhawan,2001

Resistance crop varieties against B.tabaci

Crop
Cotton

Crop variety

Reference

LK 861, Amravathi, Kanchan, Dhawan 1999 and

Supriya and LPS 141
Sharma, 2002,
Mungbean ML 337, ML 5, Mh 85-61 and
Ml 325
Brinjal
Pusa purple
Chilli
HC 144
Soybean
JS 93-05, JS 97-52, JS 95-60
Sunflower EC 93442
Basappa and
Sriharan, 1999

BiophysicalbasesofresistanceagainstB. tabaci
Crop

Response

Cotton
Thinnerandsmooth Reducehostsearching
glabrousleaves
abilityofparasitoids
Hairsand
Largequantityof
nongladularleaves honeydewinhairsimpede
theparasitoids
Laminathickness
Spongetissue
Narrowleaves
Cucumber
Nongrandularleaves

Reference
Natrajan,1990
and
Raoetal.,
1990

Reducefeedingand
ovipositionability
--do-Resistance
Resistance

ElKhidir,1965

Cont.
Crop
Poinsettia

Response

Reference

Nongrandularleaves

Resistance

Bilderbacand
Mattson,1977

Resistance

Kishna,1984

Tomato
Glandularleaves
Soybean

Glabrousleavesandhairs Resistance
Cabbage

McAuslane,1996

Nonwaxyleaves

Thompson,1963

Resistance

BiochemicalbasesofresistanceagainstB. tabaci
Crop

Nutrients/
Allelochemical

Effect on
insect

Cotton

K,P,Mg,Gossypol,
tannins,totalsugars,
flavonols,phenols

Resistance Raoetal.1990

Mungbean Sugaraminoacids

Reference

Resistance Chhabraetal.
1988

Insecticide resistance management

The indiscriminate and non judicious use of insecticides
particularly

synthetic

pyrethroids

like

cypermethrin,

fenvalerate, deltamethrin and alpha-cypermethrin induces

the resurgence of whitefly population due to increased
fecundity and growth rate (Anonymous. 1989)
The excessive use of insecticides like Acephate in late
season also flares up the whitefly population beyond
manageable limits (Dhawan et al. 2000).

Cont
As a result of development of resistance to different
insecticides,

the

farmers

apply

several

round

of

insecticides to obtain potential yield, which further led to

the build up of whitefly population (Singh et al., 1999).
Lack of appropriate spray technology for whitefly is also
being considered as one of the important factors for
giving further momentum in population build up of this
notorious pest.

IRM strategies
Alternative insecticide classes:
To avoid or reduce the development of insecticide
resistance in whitefly, different classes of insecticides
should of apply.
Integration of chemical tactics with other tactics.
Timely application of insecticides.
Insecticides also kill beneficial organisms:
Only selective insecticides should be applied.
Frequently and repeated spraying of insecticides from
same chemical group should be avoided.

Preserve

susceptible

genes:

Preserve

susceptible

individuals within the target population by providing a

haven for susceptible insects like:
Such as unsprayed areas within treated fields, adjacent
"refuge" fields, or habitat attractions within a treated
field that facilitate immigration.
These susceptible individuals may outcompete and
interbreed

with

resistant

individuals,

diluting

the

resistant genes and therefore the impact of resistance.

Consider crop residue options:

Destroying crop residue can deprive insects of food and
overwintering sites. This cultural practice will kill
insecticide-resistant pests (as well as susceptible ones)
and prevent them from producing resistant offspring for
the next season.

Classical findings against plant viruses

Cotton:
Cotton crop damage caused by CLCuV which is transmitted by whitefly.
Table: Economic threshold levels for cotton whitefly in India:

Threshold level

Area

Reference

20nymphs/leaf

Punjab

ButterandKular,1986

6-8adults/leaf

Punjab

Sukhijaetal.,1986

Appearanceofhoneydew

Punjab

Dhawan,1999

Andhra

Reddyand

Pradesh

Krishnamurthy,1989

symptomson50%plants
10adults/leaf
8-10adults/leaf

TamilNadu Sundaramurthy,1992

Activity of whitefly in cotton zones in India

Central Zone
Activity Period
January to November
Max. Activity Period
Sept. to Dec.

Northern Zone

Southern Zone

Activity Period
May to November

Activity Period
February to September

Max. Activity Period

Sept. to Oct.

Max. Activity Period

Sept. to Jan.

(Dhawan et al., 2007)

Population

Canopy leaves

(Dhawan et al., 2007)

Fig. Distribution of whitefly stages on canopy leaves

Classical findings .
Soybean:
Yellow mosaic virus:
Causal organism- Mungbean Yellow Mosaic Virus (MYMV)
Alternative hosts: Vigna radiata, Alternanthera sessilis, Sida rhombifolia
Symptoms:
Disease first appears on young leaves with mottling of the leaves with
an intense contrast between the yellow and the green areas.
Yellow area are either scattered or produced in indefinite bands along
the major veins. Rusty necrotic spots appears in the yellow area as the
leaves mature.
Under severe condition plants produces shriveled and lightweight
seeds or sometimes fail to form flowers and pods.

Symptoms of virus transmission

Infected with Yellow vein mosaic

Management strategies of B.tabaci

Mechanical
practices

Resistance Seed
/Tolerance Treatment
var.

Destructionof JS97-52,
weedhosts
JS93-05,
JS95-60
Removalof
infectedplants
andburn
them.

Spray of
Insecticides

Thiamethoxam Metasystox25
(70WS)
EC1.0ml
3.0g/kgseed
OR
Imidacloprid0.5
ml/literwater
OR
Thiamethoxam
(25WG)100g/
haafter35days
ofsowing.

References
DhawanA.K.(1999).Majorinsectpestsofcottonandtheirintegratedmanagement.In:
R.K.Updadhyay,G.K.MukerjiandR.L.Rajak(eds).IPMSysteminAgriculture
Vol.6-cashCrops.AdityaBooksPvt.Ltd.,NewDelhi,pp.165-255.
Greathead,A.H.(1986).Hostplants.InBemisia tabaci-AliteratureSurvey.M.J.W.Cock
(Ed.), CAB International Institute of Biological Control, Silwood Park, Ascot,
Berks.,UK,pp.17-25.
Husain M.A., and Trehan K. N. (1993). Observations on the life-history, bionomics and
control of white-fly of cotton (Bemisia gossypiperda M.& L.). Indian Journal of
AgriculturalScience3:701-753.
Natarajan K. (1990). Natural enemies of Bemisia tabaci Gennadius and effect of
insecticidesontheiractivity.J.Biol.Cont.4(2):86-88.
Rao N.V. Reddy A.S. and Reddy P.S. (1990). Relative efficiency of some new
insecticidestocottonwhitefly,Bemisia tabaci Genn.IndianJ.Pl.Prot.18(1):5358.

References
DhawanA.K.(1999).Majorinsectpestsofcottonandtheirintegratedmanagement.In:
R.K.Updadhyay,G.K.MukerjiandR.L.Rajak(eds).IPMSysteminAgriculture
Vol.6-cashCrops.AdityaBooksPvt.Ltd.,NewDelhi,pp.165-255.
Greathead,A.H.(1986).Hostplants.InBemisia tabaci-AliteratureSurvey.M.J.W.Cock
(Ed.), CAB International Institute of Biological Control, Silwood Park, Ascot,
Berks.,UK,pp.1725..