
@article {90595,
	title = {Behavioral Ecology of the Coffee White Stem Borer: Toward Ecology-Based Pest Management of India{\textquoteright}s Coffee Plantations},
	journal = {FRONTIERS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION},
	volume = {9},
	year = {2021},
	month = {02/2021},
	abstract = {<p>India is the seventh largest producer of coffee with 395,000 tons of coffee exports that earn 10 billion US dollars annually. Two varieties of coffee are grown in India, Coffea arabica (arabica) and Coffea canephora (robusta). Xylotrechus quadripes, commonly known as Coffee White Stem Borer (CWSB), is a major pest of arabica, causing yearly crop damage of 17-40 million dollars. Management strategies, over 100 years in development, have provided successful, yet inconsistent solutions due to differences in local climate, elevation, natural enemies, grower diligence, and other factors. In addition, increased pesticide use affects both pests as well as their natural enemies, which has severe negative impacts on the biodiverse regions where coffee is grown. As a result, our goal is to develop an ecology-based solution for long term management of CWSB that reduces the use of pesticides and focuses on the importance of natural enemies and native hosts. In situ behavioral experiments were performed to examine the preferences of CWSB for various local species under field conditions. We found that CWSB beetles were attracted to both healthy arabica and robusta plants, and host plant volatiles played a key role in host selection. In addition, the beetles were attracted to the leaves of these coffee plants and also two species of cut stems from common shade trees; Spathodea campanulata (nandi flame) and Grevillea robusta (silver oak). Beetles were not attracted toward cut stems of Tectona grandis (teak) or Coffea arabica. GC-EAD and EAG experiments were then performed to identify host plant volatiles for these species, and these compounds were tested in field conditions to assess their effectiveness against the known chemical attractant pheromone. We found that the CWSB was attracted to our identified host volatile blend as much as the pheromone lure, although trap catches in general were very low. Having an understanding of the behavioral ecology of this pest can form the basis for new methods that use natural attractant and repellent plants to control the pests, reduce the cost of plantation pest management, and avoid the extensive use of insecticides.</p>
},
	doi = {10.3389/fevo.2021.607555},
	author = {Rajus, Santosh and Bhagavan, Sriraksha G. and Kharva, Hinal and Rao, Srinivas and Olsson, Shannon B}
}
@article {43848,
	title = {Differences in spatial resolution and contrast sensitivity of flight control in the honeybees  and .},
	journal = {J Exp Biol},
	year = {2018},
	month = {2018 Aug 20},
	abstract = {<p>Visually-guided behaviour is constrained by the capacity of the visual system to resolve detail. This is, in turn, limited by the spatial resolution and contrast sensitivity of the underlying visual system. Because these properties are interdependent and vary non-uniformly, it is only possible to fully understand the limits of a specific visually guided behaviour when they are investigated in combination. To understand the visual limits of flight control in bees, which rely heavily on vision to control flight, and to explore whether they vary between species, we tested how changes in spatial resolution and contrast sensitivity affect the speed and position control of the Asian and European honeybees ( and ). Despite their apparent similarity, we found some interesting and surprising differences between the visual limits of these species. While the effect of spatial frequency and contrast on position control is similar between the species, ground speed is differently affected by these variables. A comparison with published data from the bumblebee reveals further differences. The visual resolution that limits the detection and use of optic flow for flight control in both species of honeybees is lower than previously anatomically determined resolution and differs from object detection limits of , providing evidence that the limits of spatial resolution and contrast sensitivity are highly tuned to the particular behavioural task of a species.</p>
},
	issn = {1477-9145},
	doi = {10.1242/jeb.184267},
	author = {Chakravarthi, Aravin and Rajus, Santosh and Kelber, Almut and Dacke, Marie and Baird, Emily}
}
