Next Article in Journal
Genome-Wide Identification and Expression Analysis of the PIN Auxin Transporter Gene Family in Zanthoxylum armatum DC
Previous Article in Journal
Characterizing Agricultural Diversity with Policy-Relevant Farm Typologies in Mexico
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Whitefly (Bemisia tabaci) Management (WFM) Strategies for Sustainable Agriculture: A Review

1
Department of Plant Science and Biotechnology, Kebbi State University of Science and Technology, Aliero 863104, Nigeria
2
Department of Biotechnology, Lovely Professional University, Phagwara 144411, Punjab, India
3
Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Regional Station, Pune 411067, Maharashtra, India
4
Department of Entomology, Lovely Professional University, Phagwara 144411, Punjab, India
5
Department of Medical Biotechnology, Yeungnam University, Gyeongsan 38541, Korea
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Agriculture 2022, 12(9), 1317; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12091317
Submission received: 15 July 2022 / Revised: 20 August 2022 / Accepted: 22 August 2022 / Published: 26 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Crop Protection, Diseases, Pests and Weeds)

Abstract

:
The whitefly (Bemisia tabaci Gennadius) is a notorious devastating sap-sucking insect pest that causes substantial crop damage and yield losses due to direct feeding by both nymphs and adults and also through transmission of viruses and diseases. Although the foliar application of synthetic pesticides is crucial for efficient control of B. tabaci, it has adverse effects such as environmental pollution, resistance and resurgence of the pest, toxicity to pollinators, and crop yield penalty. Thus, a suitable, safe, and robust strategy for the control of whiteflies in the agricultural field is needed. The reports on whitefly-resistant transgenic plants are scanty, non-reproducible, and/or need secondary trials and clearance from the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC), the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The present review encompasses explicit information compiled from 364 articles on the traditional, mechanical, biological, biotechnological, and chemical strategies for whitefly management (WFM), IPM strategy, and future prospects of WFM for food and agriculture security.

1. Introduction

The whitefly, Bemisia tabaci Gennadius (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae), is a worldwide polyphagous insect pest that has wreaked havoc on agricultural productivity, particularly in some plant families such as Solanaceae, Cucurbitaceae, and Fabaceae [1,2]. Whiteflies are tiny sugar-robbers that originated from southern Asia but are now found across all regions of the globe, most notably in tropical regions [3,4], except Antarctica [5]. Their aggressive feeding on plant sap from leaf tissue causes substantial losses to agricultural crops [6]. Each female is capable of producing about 320 eggs within a single life cycle [7,8]. In a controlled environment with warm climatic conditions, whiteflies maintain a high rate of reproduction for the whole year [9,10] and have the capacity to achieve exceptionally high population size within few generations.
Whiteflies cause substantial damage and economic losses to susceptible crops [11]. Both young (nymphs) and the adult stage [12] (Figure 1) suck sap and while feeding, they excrete honeydew (sugary excreta) that promote ‘sooty mold’ on the foliage and fruits, leading to adverse effects on crop productivity [13,14]. Affected plants show yellowing, folding of the foliage, decreased plant development, and disfigured fruit [15]. The nymphs inject enzymes during feeding which alter the crop physiology and consequently results in decreased internal pigmentation and abnormal fruit ripening [16]. Whiteflies spread viral pathogens that can significantly destroy the crops. Bemisia tabaci may disseminate more than 350 species of viruses in plants including Begomovirus, Carlavirus, Crinivirus, Ipomovirus, and Torradovirus [8,17,18,19]. Tomato, potato, soybean, cassava, okra, and chrysanthemum are among the most susceptible plants to viral infections [20]. Begomovirus infection reduces the crop productivity by 20–100% and brings losses costing millions of dollars [11]. ‘Cassava mosaic’ and ‘cassava brown streak’ are two devastating viral diseases throughout Africa disseminated by whiteflies and culminating in 50% loss of cassava production and annual loss of more than a billion USD [21]. In tomato, B. tabaci-mediated economic injury level (EIL) was four nymphs/leaf and one adult/each tray [22]. Thus, B. tabaci is ranked as a highly disastrous insect pest worldwide [11,23].
Due to accumulated impact of direct damage and secondary damages through transmission of viruses, whiteflies pose socioeconomic challenge [6,10]. Many studies across the globe have attempted to reduce its impact on sustainable agricultural productivity [24,25,26]. Whitefly management (WFM) strategies can be grouped as traditional [27,28], chemical [29,30], herbal [31,32], biological [33,34], biotechnological [35,36], and IPM [37,38]. However, a robust, reliable, and cost-effective WFM strategy is still needed [39,40]. This review focuses on the available WFM strategies, their limitations, and future prospects.

2. Taxonomy of Bemisia tabaci Gennadius

All whitefly species are members of the Aleyrodidae family, which is classified into three known subfamilies, Aleurodicinae, Aleyrodinae, and Udamoselinae. The Aleurodicinae subfamily includes 20 genera and 130 identified species, the majority of which are found in Central and South America and the Caribbean. All other species in about 140 genera are members of the Aleyrodinae that are mostly found in pan tropical and warm-temperate regions. The subfamily Udamoselinae consists of only two South American species (Udamoselis pigmentaria Enderlein and Udamoselis estrellamarinae Martin) in a single genus (Udamoselis) [41,42,43]. Bemisia tabaci (G), Trialeurodes vaporariorum (Westwood), and T. abutilonia are of great economic importance as they are capable to transmit viruses to several important agricultural crops [4]. Bemisia tabaci was reported to transmit about 111 viruses, while T. vaporariorum and T. abutilonia transmit 3 viruses each [44]. Recently, solanum whitefly, Aleurothrixus trachoides (Back). (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) was reported to transmit Duranta leaf curl virus (DLCV) to tomato, bell pepper, and potato in India [45].
Although B. tabaci was previously considered a complex species, current research has disclosed that it is a cryptic species complex composed of morphologically indistinguishable and reproductively isolated species [4,46], previously referred to as biotypes [11,47,48,49]. Bemicia tabaci genotypes and species have been identified based on molecular markers [11,46,49,50,51]. About 43 genetic groups of B. tabaci have been described based on the DNA sequence analysis of mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase subunit I (mtCOI) [5,42,52]. Earlier, it was considered only Middle East-Asia Minor 1 (MEAM1) and the Mediterranean (MED) variants, with a wide range of host species [13,53]. Despite their morphological similarities, B. tabaci genotypes show substantial variability in viral transmission efficiency, development of phytotoxic disorders, mechanism of food consumption, and biological control efficiency [54,55].

3. Life Cycle of Bemicia tabaci

Females lay pear-shaped eggs (0.2 mm long) on the anterior surface of the leaf, often in a semi-circular form. The egg (Figure 1a) hatches after 5–9 days to first instar, based on the type of host variety, temperature, and moisture [12,14]. The whitish-yellow first instar, or ‘crawler,’ is flat, oval, and scale-like in form and transform into yellowish dome-shaped nymphs in the 2nd instar (Figure 1b), and then to the bright yellow freshly molted 3rd instar nymphs that gradually darken and appear slightly constricted in structure [20]. The 4th instar nymphs are yellowish-white in color with bulging eyes projecting through the integument; this phase is also known as the “pupal” or “red-eyed nymph” phase [13]. The nymphal phase is flat, with little resemblance to an insect or mature whitefly. The nymph is stationary and generates waxy filamentous fluids periodically [8,56]. The Bemicia tabaci adult emerges through the dorsal side of the pupal case via an upturned “T”-shaped incision [20]. The stomach of adult female is big and spherical, while the male’s stomach is pointy [13]. The complete life cycle requires about 16–31 days, with considerable variation [57,58].

4. Host Plants

Bemicia tabaci has a broad host range which includes crop plants such as cassava [23] tomato [59,60], eggplant [61], cinnamon, cucurbits [62], muskmelon [63], okra [31], cucumber [33], black pepper [64], sunflower [65], pulses [11], tobacco [66,67], groundnut, cabbage [68], soybeans [69], potatoes [70], cauliflowers [71,72], cotton [35,73], lettuce [74], and numerous other crops of great economic importance. Table 1 summarizes the reports on the effect of whitefly infestations on different agricultural crops.

5. Whitefly Management (WFM) Strategies

WFM (Figure 2) can be achieved by a combination of physical and mechanical approaches [13,97], indigenous technical knowledge [71,98], biological control [99], plant-based products [100], biotechnological strategies [73,74], spray of synthetic pesticides [101,102,103], and IPM strategies [104,105].

5.1. Traditional Strategies

Indigenous technical knowledge (ITK) has been used to control whiteflies traditionally using locally available materials/techniques and expertise. Some of such methods are briefly discussed below.

5.1.1. Cultural Strategies

Cultural practices such as regulating the irrigation and fertilizer application [106,107] can be modified to make the crop fields unfriendly to insect pests [13,97,108]. Drip irrigation reduces whitefly density and viruses transmitted by them in several crops compared to furrow/sprinkler irrigation [109]. Irrigation using sprinkler technique was also reported to decrease the whitefly population and related viruses in tomatoes intercropped with the coriander plant [110]. Sulfur-containing fertilizers have variable impacts on whitefly population in different crops [111]. By adjusting the crop sowing season, a susceptible host can escape peak population of the pest [112,113]. Maintaining the crop areas free of susceptible species for a period of 60 days during the wet summer season minimizes incidence of whiteflies and associated viruses [114]; however, some studies contradict such strategy [115].
Organic (compost, wheat straw, cocoa hulls, bark and wood chips, etc.) and synthetic (rubber chips and plastic sheeting) mulches are useful to combat B. tabaci (G.) infestation on vegetables [106,116]. The organic mulching [11,117,118] and reflective silver or aluminum coated plastic mulches [106,119] lower insect population and viral pathogens in crops such as tomato, squash, melon, and snap bean. Sunlight reflected by silver colorful mulch repels whitefly invasion [120,121]. The trap and barrier crops regulate B. tabaci density by interfering with host location. This approach was useful in controlling the viruses associated with different crops [115,122,123,124,125,126]. The use of brinjal and squash has been reported to help in protecting tomato [127,128] and snap bean [119] against whiteflies. The whitefly population on cucumber decreased by 69.7% when intercropped with lettuce [129]. Zucchini intercropped with okra showed lower population of whiteflies and less severity of squash silver leaf disease [118]. Planting okra with coriander or ginger suppressed whitefly numbers in okra [130,131].
A detailed investigation on the cultural measures on WFM revealed that these strategies have received less priority, which may be due to the difficulty involved in execution [114]. Cultural approaches such as sowing dates/rotational systems/crop-free duration require a significant degree of local collaboration among crop growers, which is difficult to accomplish. Strategies such as intercropping or employing trap crops need considerable changes in agricultural systems. Some of the successful accomplishments include physical protection of crops via the row covers, construction of tunnels, screen buildings, field separation, and the use of virus-free seed. Cultural control measures alone are insufficient to manage whiteflies and whitefly-transmitted viruses but play a crucial role in integrated management.

5.1.2. Miscellaneous

This includes the amalgamation of traditional approaches for effective WFM.

Fermented Curd Water

Farmers spray sour buttermilk on their crops for the control of sucking pests [132]. Milk has a good spreading characteristic; it sticks to the wings of whiteflies due to the presence of casein protein and causes their mortality. Spraying fermented cow milk caused a 60% reduction in whitefly population on okra crops [27,133], and when combined with chili extract, it provides systemic tolerance to whiteflies [71,132]. Buttermilk and detergents in combination decreased the whitefly density on black gram [28].

Cow Dung/Urine and Botanical Extracts

Foliar spray of cattle urine has been reported to control diseases and insects and acts as plant growth promoter [134]. Foliar spray of cow urine has been reported to be effective against a number of insect pests, including whiteflies in different crop plants [98,135], and to increase the yields [136]. Foliar sprays of 10% cow urine and 1% starch, alone or in combination with chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC, control insects on vegetable crops [137]. Herbal aqueous extracts in cow urine have been reported to be effective against whiteflies and safe to their natural antagonists [138,139,140]. Extracts of Lantana camara Linn. and Vitex trifolia L. were effective against the aphid Lipaphis erysimi when combined with cow urine [134]. A combination of cow dung with urine, ash, slurry, or vermiwash significantly reduced insect pest populations on brinjal [141,142]. The application of chili, garlic, and neen leaf extracts in cow urine on okra reduced the whitefly and other pests’ population [143].

Ash

Ash safeguards crops from a wide range of insects including whiteflies [98]. A thick coating of ash on leaves functions as a barrier/toxin, disrupts the molecular signals from the susceptible plants and block insects from locating their host. In brinjal crop, a high benefit to cost ratio of roughly 4.8:1 was achieved by applying 50 kg/ha of ash, 5% kerosene, and spinosad 45SC [137].

Kerosene

The use of a kerosene–soap–water formulation as a contact pesticide for piercing-sucking insects has previously been described [144]. Treatment with kerosene not only lowered whitefly densities on tomato but also caused a yield penalty [145,146]. Table 2 presents the reports on traditional strategies for whitefly management (WFM) in different crop plants.

5.1.3. Botanical Extracts

Several plant-based products have been reported for their efficacy against B. tabaci [156,157,158]. Marigold and chili extract were effective against the majority of insect pests [159] and leaf extracts effective against hemipteran insects [160,161]. The foliar spray of formulation made from crushed roots of turmeric (Curcuma domestica Vahl) which is a spice and medicinal plant and cattle urine [162], controls whiteflies, many other insects, and powdery mildew [154]. The formulation made from leaves of Vitex negundo L. has been used to control different pests including whiteflies [163]. Moreover, neem-based formulations [164,165,166], milkweed (Calotropis sp.) and garlic extracts [166], Jatropha curcas L. extracts [167], and fermented-extracts of neem and wild garlic have also been used against several insect pests [168,169]. Plant-based essential oils have been extensively studied for the control of B. tabaci, [60]. Oils of Piper callosum Ruiz and Pav, Adenocalymma alliaceum Lam, and Plectranthus neochilus Schltr. prevent B. tabaci adults from settling and ovipositing on tomato plants. Table 3 summarizes the reports on the use of plant-based products for WFM in different crops.

5.1.4. Mechanical Strategies

These methods mechanically interfere between pests and the host plant. Polypropylene sheets are efficient in controlling whiteflies and tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV) disease incidence in tomatoes [203]. Zucchini plants are cultivated inside low tunnels coated with Agryl sheets to avoid infestation and disease/contamination by the squash leaf curl begomovirus (SLCV), even during peak pest population [204]. Fifty-mesh screens used as greenhouse walls efficiently prevent whiteflies and spread of TYLCV in greenhouse tomatoes [205], and by including a UV-absorbing protection, efficacy of the screens may be significantly improved [206,207,208,209]. Although handpicking is not possible in large-scale whiteflies control programs, it may be practiced in kitchen gardening where insects are readily accessible to picking. However, a combination of biological (see Section 5.2) and mechanical strategies can synergistically reduce the whitefly population [210].

5.1.5. Drawbacks of Traditional Strategies

The deployment of traditional practices [87,150] and botanicals [211] may not be supported with scientific evidence of their safety and efficacy. Utilizing crude plant extracts for pest control may be advantageous only for small-scale farmers [212,213,214] but such pesticides are inconsistent in their efficiency and not validated for efficacy under complicated agro-ecological conditions [99]. Moreover, large quantities of plant-based products and/or extracts may be difficult to obtain to ensure sustainable WFM [215,216].

5.2. Biological Strategies

Biological control is a method in which one type of organism is utilized to limit the population density of another [217,218,219]. Natural enemies effectively control pests, particularly invasive pests [219]. Natural enemies (predators, parasitoids, and entomophagous fungi) of B. tabaci have been thoroughly investigated and reviewed [104,105,220,221]. Over the last 20 years, enormous studies have proven the efficacy of parasitoids, entomopathogenic organisms, and predators in managing destructive insect pests including whiteflies on different agricultural plants [13,222,223,224].

5.2.1. Predators

There are about 150 species of natural enemies of whiteflies, and only a handful have been extensively investigated [220,221,225]. Coccinellid beetles, lacewings, and phytoseiid mites’ prey on whiteflies [223]. Ladybird beetle, Delphastus catalinae (Horn), also known as Delphastus pusillus (LeConte), is most commonly used for whitefly control in indoor crops [13]. Delphastus catalinae substantially reduces whiteflies on tomato. Mirid bug (Macrolophus pygmaeus Rambur) when introduced at 6 adults/plant significantly suppressed the whiteflies in watermelon. Under greenhouse conditions, Nesidiocoris tenuis Reuter (1 and 4 predators/plant) led to >90% decrease in whitefly densities on tomato, but no effect on the whitefly population was observed in protecting sweet pepper [77]. The effect of a lacewing, Chrysoperla carnea Stephens, at 10 adults/plant has been reported to reduce the whiteflies population in greenhouse-cultivated tomato [31]. Integrating C. carnea with Orius albidipennis Reuter and Phytoseiulus persimilis Athias-Henriot reduced the whiteflies count and enhanced the yield of the greenhouse grown cucumber [226,227]. A predatory mite, Amblyseius barkeri Hughes or Amblyseius cucumeris Oudeman is also effective against the whiteflies on tomatoes in the greenhouse [228].

5.2.2. Parasitoids

Parasitoids Encarsia Spp. and Eretmocerus spp. (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae) are the most common parasitoids used for WFM [13,224]. In a study, augmentative release of Eretmocerus mundus Mercet and Macrolophus melanotoma Costa reduced B. tabaci on the eggplant crops in greenhouse [229]. The antagonistic properties of Encarsia Formosa Gahan, Eretmocerus eremicus Rose and Zolnerowich, and E. mundus Mercet have been well studied [228] but among these, Encarsia Formosa Gahan is the most common parasitoid deployed on leafy vegetables for WFM under contained conditions. Introduction of low-density E. formosa and E. mundus has led to 62.0% and 77.9% reduction in whiteflies number, respectively, on sweet potato. Eretmocerus species have lately acquired prominence in biological control of whiteflies [228,230,231]. In a similar report, E. eremicus substantially reduced whiteflies eggs and nymphs in a greenhouse grown peppermint [232], sweet pepper, tomato [231], and other crops [233]. By combining E. mundus with either Amblyseius swirskii Athias-Henriot or Macrolophus caliginosus Wagner, whitefly densities on sweet pepper and tomato plants can be reduced significantly [77].

5.2.3. Entomopathogenic Organisms

Entomophagous fungi, viruses, nematodes, and bacteria play a critical role in IPM of insect pests [234,235], as a potential substitute to inorganic insecticides, as they are harmless to farmers, non-target species, and the ecosystem [236]. Entomophagous nematode Steinernema feltiae Filipjev caused 32% and 28% whitefly mortality on tomato and cucumber, respectively [237]. Co-treatment of tomato with Steinernema carpocapsae Wesier and chemical pesticides thiacloprid/spiromesifen results in 86.5% and 94.3% whitefly mortality [238]. The entomopathogenic fungi have been used on a commercial scale for regulation of insect densities [236,239]. There are about 20 species of entomopagous fungi detrimental to whiteflies, but Beauveria bassiana (Balsamo-Crivelli) Vuillemin, Cordyceps fumosorosea (Wize) Kepler, B. Shrestha Brown and G. Smith, and Isaria fumosoroseus (Wize) A.H.S have been extensively studied [13,240]. In a study, B. bassiana caused 91.8% mortality on 4th instar nymphs (of whiteflies) within 8 days on vegetable crops [241]. Repeated administration of C. fumosorosea and B. bassiana led to >90% reduction of the insect nymphs on cucumber, cantaloupe melon, and zucchini squash [242]. Under laboratory condition, B. bassiana and C. fumosorosea caused 71 to 86% mortality of B. tabaci nymphs on pea plants [243]. Applications of the Lecanicillium muscarium (Petch) Zare and Gams or co-application with the pesticide imidacloprid caused significant mortality of B. tabaci [244]. Combined treatments of C. fumosorosea and azadirachtin killed 90% of B. tabaci nymphs while entomophagous fungi, Cordyceps javanica (Frieder. and Bally) Kepler, B. Shrestha, and Spatafora sp, caused 62.4% nymphal mortality on bean plant [245].
Pirzadfard et al. [246] analyzed the compatibility and the potential of Orius albidipennis Reuter (Predator) and Eretmocerus mundus Mercet/Eretmocerus eremicus Rose and Zolnerowich (parasitoids) on suppression of Bemisia tabaci using a choice and non-choice test in the laboratory. In non-choice bioassay, both 5th instar nymphs and adults of O. albidipennis were capable of preying on different stages of unparasitized nymphs of B. tabaci and nymphs parasitized by E. eremicus and E. mundus. In choice bioassay, adults of O. albidipennis were reported to consume more than the 5th instar nymphs in the combination of unparasitized 2nd instar B. tabaci nymphs and pupae of E. eremicus and unparasitized 3rd instar nymphs of B. tabaci and larvae of E. eremicus. A functional response method was deployed by [247] to evaluate the potential of Orius albidipennis in the control of whitefly population in cucumber plant under laboratory conditions. The results showed that type ii and iii functional responses were demonstrated by Orius albidipennis when fed on the whitefly eggs and third instar nymphs, respectively, while the maximum rate of attack by Orius albidipennis was determined as 68.39 eggs and 23.20 third instar nymphs. This indicates the effectiveness of Orius albidipennis in managing the population of B. tabaci in cucumber plant. The use of mycoinsecticides for the control of whitefly have been reviewed [248], in which they reported that advances in the synthesis and application of entomopathogenic fungi have led to improvements in longstanding whitefly mycoinsecticide products based on Verticillium lecanii, and production and registration of many novel products using Paecilomyces fumosoroseus and Beauveria bassiana. These products were effective in the WFM in both the field and greenhouse cultivated crops. Moreover [249], in their trial designed to measure and compare the contribution and interaction of biological control and insecticides as tactical components within three pest management systems for Bemisia tabaci in cotton, reported that the natural enemies (predators and parasitoids) can be used along with synthetic chemicals in an integrated setting to effectively suppress the whitefly population. Gould et al. [250] also presented a collection of reports on classical biological control of Bemisia tabaci in the United States in which several entomophaghous fungi, predators, and parasitoids were found to be effective in the management of whitefly infestations on various agricultural plants. The potential of five predatory mites (Typhlodromus athiasae (Porath and Swirski), Neoseiulus barkeri (Hughes), Typhlodromips swirskii (Athias-Henriot), Euseius scutalis (Athias-Henriot), and Phytoseius finitimus (Ribaga.) on whitefly control was assessed [251]. They revealed that the intrinsic rates of increase (rm) of the mite species ranged between 0.131 and 0.215 per day, with E. scutalis having the highest increase rate. When compared with the rm of B. tabaci, the result shows that the mite species have the potential of suppressing local populations of whitefly as they effectively preyed on and reproduced with B. tabaci. The events of predation were noted during the oviposition tests using crawlers and eggs where whole contents of these stages were consumed leaving only the transparent exoskeleton. The effect of varying temperature (20–32 °C) on the development and fecundity of Encarsia acaudaleyrodis Hayat, a parasitoid of Bemisia tabaci was evaluated [252]. They showed that the period of development from egg to adult stage reduced to 9.0 days at 32 °C from 20.3 days at 20 °C. The average oviposition was reported to be 34.2, 54.6, 30.6, and 20.1 eggs at 20, 25, 30, and 32 °C, respectively. The highest value intrinsic rate of population increase of the parasitoid was also found at around 25 °C. This suggests that the moderate temperature (25 °C) is suitable for the activity of E. acaudaleyrodis and thus, might be an effective bio-control agent of B. tabaci during spring and autumn when such temperatures are prevalent.
Table 4 presents the impact of biological methods in the control of whiteflies on a variety of agricultural crops.

5.2.4. Drawbacks of Biological Strategies

Despite being eco-friendly, pollution free, selective, feasible, and cost-effective, biological control measures are associated with farmers’ uncertainty in income sustainability, highly unpredictable, and more prone to environmental factors [272]. Severe heat or cold could negatively affect the biological control of whitefly in greenhouses [273]. The implementation of biological control agents in new surroundings necessitates extensive studies to achieve the desired outcomes. Incompatibility with agrochemicals is another challenge since they are specific to a particular species. Undoubtedly, application of agrochemicals causes rapid reduction of pest populations and therefore, farmers find it hard to rely on biocontrol agents (BCAs) over effective agrochemicals [274].

5.3. Biotechnological Strategies for Whitefly Control

Genetic engineering techniques including transgenesis and RNA interference (RNAi) can be effective in regulating whitefly infestations. Transgenic crops harboring/synthesizing pesticidal toxins or lectins are useful in controlling whiteflies [35,275].

5.3.1. Transgenesis and Whitefly Control

One of the early triumphs of plant biotechnology was the development and commercialization of transgenic crops resistant to key insect pests, including whiteflies [35,276,277]. Transgenic tomato and lettuce successfully have been developed to confer tolerance to B. tabaci and related viruses [278]. Cotton plants expressing fern protein provided resistance/tolerance against the attack of whiteflies [35]. Such insecticidal proteins have a longstanding record of being safe and cause no harm to humans and other non-target organisms lacking specific receptors for the toxin proteins [276], but are effective against lepidopteran and coleopteran insects. Transgenic plants producing dsRNAs for knocking down target genes in whiteflies caused mortality, retarded growth, and sterility [278]. Whitefly counts were drastically reduced on transgenic tobacco expressing dsRNAs against v-ATPaseA [279] and osmoregulators [73]. Transgenic lettuce expressing dsRNA v-ATPase caused approximately 98.1% mortality of whiteflies [74]. Cotton plants overexpressing gh-miRNA166b downregulate the ATPsynthase gene in B. tabaci and reduce whitefly populations [280]. The use of dsRNA detoxification gene in transgenic Arabidopsis thaliana knocks-down the BtBGSTs5 gene in the gut of whiteflies, extends the nymph developmental time, and causes decline in B. tabaci densities [281]. Thus, there is a need for robust biotechnological interventions for sustainable management of whiteflies [282].

5.3.2. Exogenous Application of dsRNA to Control Whiteflies

Non-transgenic application, RNAi techniques for controlling pests, can be achieved through foliar spray, submerging leaf tissues in dsRNA solution, soil treatment, or stem injections [283,284,285,286]. The RNAi approach effectively mutes the genes in a short period without causing heritable alterations to the genome and have a higher public acceptability. The exogenous delivery of dsRNA particles to tomato seedlings led to dsRNA assimilation by whiteflies, aphids, and mites. However, whiteflies and aphids absorbed less dsRNAs than mites did and siRNAs synthesis from dsRNAs was observed in mites and aphids but not in whiteflies [287]. Spraying of dsRNAs to regulate pest populations is a safe and eco-friendly approach, and dsRNA has short residue period, therefore, it has huge potential for adoption by plant growers [284].

5.3.3. Control of B. tabaci through Nanotechnology

The dsRNAs sprinkled on crops or applied using water (to enable plants to uptake through leaves) or soil has a limited life span due to degradation by radiation/microbial cells enzymes, whereas dsRNAs coated onto the layered double hydroxide (LDH) clay nanostructure (BioClay) or carbon nano-tubes of diameter less than 0.1 µm can be complacently reabsorbed into cell membranes [24], stabilize dsRNAs for lengthy continuous delivery, and protect them from proteolytic enzymes. However, such nanomaterials should be recyclable and nontoxic. Foliar spray of nanomaterials to transport dsRNA into the plants, is easy to perform, environmentally friendly, and offers effective protection to crops from pests and pathogens. Nanomaterials laden with insect receptor protein dsRNAs were utilized to manage 3rd instar nymphs of B. tabaci through dripping to explore the role of nuclear receptor (NR) genes in insect metamorphosis [281,288]. The nanoencapsulation of Xylopia aromatica essential oil was reported to promote its protection from environmental degradation and prolonged biological activity [198]. In a similar report, the nanospheres (nanoencapsulation) of Zanthoxylum rhoifolium essential oil caused 95% reduction in the production of eggs and nymphs [289]
Cordyceps fumosorosea-derived zero-valent iron (ZVI) (fungal) nanoparticles have shown significant pathogenicity against B. tabaci nymphs and pupae due to prolonged fungal activity by preventing premature degradation [290]. Reports on the impact of biotechnological strategies for the control of whiteflies summarized in Table 5.

5.3.4. Disadvantages of Biotechnological Strategies

The public recognition and adoption of genetically engineered crops has provided us with a variety of nutritional, socioeconomic, and medical benefits [261,302]. However, there are public resistances regarding the use and ecological consequences related to the release of genetically modified crops into the environment. Acceptability of farmers and consumers, as well as ‘biosafety’ are some of the major concerns [257,303]. Furthermore, the cost and time constraints associated with the manufacturing and marketing of transgenic crops have made it difficult for small businesses and government institutions to embrace (practice and implement) this technique for producing transgenic crops [257].

5.4. Synthetic Chemicals

Chemical pesticides are the most commonly used to manage insect pests including B. tabaci in open-field crop with high reliance [13,224]. Commonly used pesticides against B. tabaci are pyriproxyfen, buprofezen (growth regulators), spiromesifen, spirotetramat (ketoenols), and anthranilic diamides, cyantraniliprole, and chlorantraniliprole (diamides) [13]. Oils, detergents, and soaps have also been widely utilized to combat B. tabaci infestation [13,224]. The neonicotinoid imidacloprid is the world’s most utilized and very effective pesticide against B. tabaci. [101]. Imidacloprid is frequently applied for controlling B. tabaci on vegetables, melons, and other crop plants and has been a crucial strategy in the United States [102,103,112,304,305]. Organochlorines, organophosphates, carbamates, pyrethroids, triazines, and neonicotinoids are also extensively used pesticides against sap sucking insects like whiteflies [306]. Despite the fact that the use of chemicals is linked to a negative impact on human and ecological safety [307,308,309], they have been used globally for managing insect pests on different crop plants (Table 6).

Drawbacks of Synthetic Chemicals

Development of resistance to chemical pesticides (most commonly used for controlling insect pests) has made the pests management strategies increasingly complex [321,328]. More than 540 insect species have developed tolerance to such chemicals [329] and the reckless use of these chemicals has impacted the human health and the ecosystem [11,330]. Resurgence of invasive pest species and the negative effect of synthetic pesticides on non-target organisms is also a matter of concern [331].

5.5. Pesticide Resistance and B. tabaci Control

The control of whiteflies is based conventionally on synthetic pesticides including carbamates, organophosphates, and pyrethroids [331]. The continuous application of these chemicals in larger quantities has led to the development of resistance by B. tabaci [332,333]. Thus, development of insecticide resistance is a major challenge in WFM and once they develop such a resistance, it becomes difficult to control. Recently, several cryptic species viz., MED, MEAM1, Asia I, and Asia II-1 of B. tabaci have been reported to have developed high resistance to various groups of insecticides [224,334]. Study of different whitefly populations in major cotton growing regions of India [334] revealed that B. tabaci cryptic species Asia-II-7 was the most susceptible and Asia-I and Asia-II-1 most resistant populations showing significant resistance to insecticides imidacloprid and thiamethoxam, monocrotophos, cypermethrin, and deltamethrin. The Asia-I population showed LC50 values of 7x (imidacloprid and thiamethoxam), 5x (monocrotophos), and 3x (cypermethrin) compared to the susceptible population, whereas Asia-II-1 showed LC50 values of 7x (cypermethrin), 6x (deltamethrin), and 5x (imidacloprid) compared to susceptible populations. The study further detected possible potential control failure based on extrapolation of resistance dataset for pyrethroids (cypermethrin), monocrotophos and triazophos in B. tabaci populations. Similarly, B. tabaci collected from cotton crop of Pakistan, when selected for five generations, showed very high level of resistance against buprofezin (127-fold) and imidacloprid (86-fold) [335]. Pappas et al. [336] reported that T. vaporariorum was able to resist the effects of neonicotinoid compounds. Bemicia tabaci resistance to a number of pesticides (deltamethrin, thiamethoxam, pyriproxyfen, etc.) has been reported [337,338] and recently, a very low level of resistance to deltamethrin (RF = 4.3) and thiamethoxam (RF = 2.2) was documented in one B. tabaci strain from Oman [339]. A review [224] discussed the various strategies for minimizing the level of resistance to pesticides in B. tabaci, which include chemical control with selective insecticides, rotational use of insecticides with distinct mechanism of action, mixing insecticides, as well as non-chemical management methods such as the use of cultural approach, host plant resistance, and biological control methods. Other strategies involve growing whitefly-resistant genotypes or application of insect growth regulators such as pyriproxyfen or buprofezin to conserve natural enemies’ early stage of crop [112]. Application of “refuges” has been reported to be useful in delaying the development of insecticide resistance [340]. Availability of molecular and gene sequence data of resistant and susceptible B. tabaci populations can be very useful for designing effective insecticide resistance management.
Shelby et al. [341] suggested the use of gene silencing via RNA interference (RNAi) for sustainable pest management of B. tabaci, focusing on the need for species specificity incorporating both life history and population genetic considerations. They showed that these considerations allow an integrated pest control method, with less negative environmental effects and reduced likelihood of the development of B. tabaci-resistant populations. B. tabaci through co-evolutionary process have gained the ability to overcome plant defenses by utilizing key element of the plants’ arsenal to protect itself from plant defense metabolites [342]. Whiteflies are also known to suppress plant defenses by interfering in plant defense hormones [343] and by inducing specific volatile signals in neighboring plants [344]. Heidel-Fischer et al. [345] suggested that the possibility of herbivores detoxifying plant defense substances is a key factor in their capacity to adapt, and it is becoming clear that the transformation of secondary metabolites by detoxifying enzymes is a very efficient method for whiteflies to deactivate plant toxins. The results demonstrate an unusual evolutionary mechanism/route by which whiteflies gained access to malonylate, a common category of plant defense compounds by acquiring a plant detoxifying gene [346]. The horizontal transfer of BtPMaT1 has been demonstrated to give whiteflies the capacity to bind a malonyl group to phenolic glucosides, making these typical plant-produced secondary metabolites virtually totally harmless. Silencing of BtPMaT1 by small interfering RNAs impaired the detoxification ability of the whiteflies in tomato plants. The studies have suggested that interfering with laterally transferred genes can be a highly effective way to combat pests.

5.6. IPM Strategies

Integrated pest management (IPM) is a worldwide-recognized strategy to reduce the ecological and public health risks posed by synthetic insecticides. The IPM for B. tabaci includes use of biocontrol, physical, mechanical measures, and limited use of selected pesticides [331]. Islam et al. [80] reported that the use of neem oil along with B. bassiana-mediated biocontrol enhanced the mortality rate of B. tabaci larvae on eggplant leaves [80]. The combined impact of different concentrations of neem (1.0%) and B. bassiana on B. tabaci caused 92.3% mortality of the nymphs. The combined effects (synergism) of biologicals and chemicals in IPM has high potential (73%) for the control of whitefly-transmitted viruses compared to individual methods [105]. Wawdhane et al. (2020) studied the efficacy of synthetic pesticides, phytochemicals, and microbes for WFM and reported that spiroomesifen caused greatest reduction in whitefly counts (82.27%) [37], while amongst the microbes, Verticillium lecanii (1 × 108 CFU/mL) was found to be efficient against aphids, whiteflies, and thrips. Table 7 presents the summary of IPM approaches for WFM.

Drawbacks of IPM Strategies

Non-adoption by the users is the biggest drawback in the use of integrated pest management (IPM). Most of the times farmers use insecticides on a recurrent basis and with weak frequency. Farmers cultivate different vegetable crops in small land holding, each requiring its own IPM program, which is not easily adopted by farming community. In such a situation, IPM becomes inappropriate and time-consuming. Similarly, the positive effects of chemical pesticides are much more visible and reproducible than their ill effects, but the environmentalists overlook the pesticides’ legitimate involvement in IPM [360].

6. Conclusions

In order to address the global food and health security and sustainable agriculture needs, enhanced crop production is required. However, the damage due to destructive insect pests such as B. tabaci is a limitation in such efforts. WFM with heavy reliance on synthetic chemicals causes serious ecological deterioration [361,362]. However, an IPM program applied and adopted in larger scale can restrict damage caused due to B. tabaci [238,363]. Transgenic plants and RNA interference (RNAi) strategies are useful in the management of whiteflies. Transgenic plants expressing toxins against whiteflies produced by nuclear or chloroplast transformation have opened new vistas for B. abaci control. The use of dsRNA synthesized from insect genomes substantially reduced whitefly population in different crop plants; however, meticulous investigations and joint efforts of academia, government (EPA, GEAC, MoEF) and farmers are needed to advance the practical deployment of these techniques in the fields [363,364].
The deployment of hyperspectral image analysis in conjunction with machine-learning-based evaluations may also provide timely and efficient identification of B. tabaci on plants. Even though such techniques are still in infancy (prototype), they hold possibility of rapid screening of insect attack, even at lowest density. Deployment of computerized devices linked to surveillance are more practicable in a large-scale agricultural scheme. Precision management system might minimize pesticide application, product prices, and toxicity to human and animals. It may preserve the natural enemy and pest control program viability. In a nutshell, the use of IPM strategies along with novel biotechnological approaches have tremendous potential to combat the whitefly infestation and its related damages for sustainable agriculture.

Author Contributions

B.K. and M.A. wrote the initial draft and prepared the tables. K.C. and D.Y. repeatedly revised the manuscript to the final version. A.R. prepared the figures. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

The authors are thankful to the Lovely Professional University (LPU), Punjab, India for the infrastructural support.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

References

  1. Oliveira, M.R.V.; Henneberry, T.J.; Anderson, P. History current status, and collaborative research projects for Bemisia tabaci. Crop Prot. 2001, 20, 709–723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Cruz-Estrada, A.; Gamboa-Angulo, M.; Borges-Argáez, R.; Ruiz-Sánchez, E. Insecticidal effects of plant extracts on immature whitefly Bemisia tabaci Genn.(Hemiptera: Aleyroideae). Electron. J. Biotechnol. 2013, 16, 6. [Google Scholar]
  3. Brown, J.K.; Bird, J. Whitefly transmitted geminiviruses and associated disorders in the Americas and the Caribbean basin. Plant Dis. 1992, 76, 220–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. De Barro, P.J.; Liu, S.S.; Boykin, L.M.; Dinsdale, A.B. Bemisia tabaci: A statement of species status. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2011, 56, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Kanakala, S.; Ghanim, M. Global genetic diversity and geographical distribution of Bemisia tabaci and its bacterial endosymbionts. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0213946. [Google Scholar]
  6. Lee, M.H.; Lee, H.K.; Lee, H.G.; Lee, S.G.; Kim, J.S.; Kim, S.E.; Kim, Y.S.; Suh, J.K.; Youn, Y.N. Effect of cyantraniliprole against of Bemisia tabaci and prevention of tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV). Korean J. Pestic. Sci. 2018, 18, 33–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Burnett, T. The effect of temperature on an insect host-parasite population. Ecology 1949, 30, 113–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Rodríguez, E.; Téllez, M.; Janssen, D. Whitefly control strategies against tomato leaf curl New Delhi virus in greenhouse zucchini. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public health. 2019, 16, 2673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Wintermantel, W.M. Emergence of Greenhouse Whitefly (Trialeurodes vaporariorum) Transmitted Criniviruses as Threats to Vegetable and Fruit Production in North America; APSnet Features: Saint Paul, MN, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. CABI. Trialeurodes Vaporariorum (Whitefly, Greenhouse). 2015. Available online: http://www.cabi.org/isc/datasheet/54660 (accessed on 21 November 2021).
  11. Sani, I.; Ismail, S.I.; Abdullah, S.; Jalinas, J.; Jamian, S.; Saad, N. A review of the biology and control of whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae), with special reference to biological control using entomopathogenic fungi. Insects 2020, 11, 619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Gangwar, R.K.; Charu, G. Lifecycle, distribution, nature of damage and economic importance of whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius). Acta Sci. Agric. 2018, 2, 36–39. [Google Scholar]
  13. Perring, T.M.; Stansly, P.A.; Liu, T.X.; Smith, H.A.; Andreason, S.A. Whiteflies: Biology, ecology, and management. In Sustainable Management of Arthropod Pests of Tomato, 1st ed.; Wakil, W., Brust, G.E., Perring, T.M., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2018; pp. 73–110. [Google Scholar]
  14. Solanki, R.D.; Jha, S. Population dynamics and biology of whitefly (Bemisia tabaci Gennadius) on sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem. 2018, 7, 3055–3058. [Google Scholar]
  15. Khan, I.A.; Wan, F.H. Life history of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) biotype B on tomato and cotton host plants. J Entomol. Zool. Stud. 2018, 3, 117–121. [Google Scholar]
  16. Smith, P.E. Crop and Food Research. In Whitefly: Identification and Biology in New Zealand Greenhouse Tomato Crops; Smith, P.E., Ed.; AsureQuality Ltd.: Auckland, New Zealand, 2009; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  17. Jones, D.R. Plant viruses transmitted by whiteflies. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 2003, 109, 195–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Götz, M.; Winter, S. Diversity of Bemisia tabaci in Thailand and Vietnam and indications of species replacement. J. Asia Pac. Entomol. 2016, 19, 537–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Lu, S.; Chen, M.; Li, J.; Shi, Y.; Gu, Q.; Yan, F. Changes in Bemisia tabaci feeding behaviors caused directly and indirectly by cucurbit chlorotic yellows virus. Virol. J. 2019, 16, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kedar, S.C.; Saini, R.K.; Kumaranag, K.M. Biology of cotton whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) on cotton. J. Entomol. Res. 2014, 38, 135–139. [Google Scholar]
  21. Legg, J.P.; Shirima, R.; Tajebe, L.S.; Guastella, D.; Boniface, S.; Jeremiah, S.; Nsami, E.; Chikoti, P.; Rapisarda, C. Biology and management of whitefly vectors of cassava virus pandemics in Africa. Pest Manag. Sci. 2014, 70, 1446–1453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hasanuzzaman, A.T.M.; Islam, M.N.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, C.Y.; Liu, T.X. Leaf morphological characters can be a factor for intra-varietal preference of whitefly Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) among eggplant varieties. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0153880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Nwezeobi, J.; Onyegbule, O.; Nkere, C.; Onyeka, J.; van Brunschot, S.; Seal, S.; Colvin, J. Cassava whitefly species in eastern Nigeria and the threat of vector-borne pandemics from east and central africa. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0232616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zhang, X.; Ferrante, M.; Wan, F.; Yang, N.; Lövei, G.L. The parasitoid Eretmocerus hayati is compatible with barrier cropping to decrease whitefly (Bemisia tabaci MED) densities on cotton in China. Insects 2020, 11, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Vafaie, E.K.; Pemberton, H.B.; Gu, M.; Kerns, D.; Eubanks, M.D.; Heinz, K.M. Using multiple natural enemies to manage sweetpotato whiteflies (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in commercial poinsettia (malpighiales: Euphorbiaceae) production. J. Integr. Pest Manag. 2021, 12, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Pereyra, J.G.; Martínez, G.N.; De los Santos Villalobos, S.; Graciano, R.R.; Montelongo, A.M.; Roldan, H.M. Formulation of a bioinsecticide based on neem and chamomile used for the greenhouse control of the glasshouse whitefly Trialeurodes Vaporariorum. Mod. Environ. Sci. Eng. 2021, 7, 119–125. [Google Scholar]
  27. Tegene, B.G.; Tenkegna, T.A. Mode of action, mechanism and role of microbes in bioremediation service for environmental pollution management. J. Biotechnol. Bioinform. Res. 2020, 116, 39–50. [Google Scholar]
  28. Taggar, G.K.; Singh, R. Evaluation of some nonconventional insecticides against whitefly Bemisia tabaci in black gram. Indian J. Entomol. 2020, 82, 294–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Chen, J.C.; Wang, Z.H.; Cao, L.J.; Gong, Y.J.; Hoffmann, A.A.; Wei, S.J. Toxicity of seven insecticides to different developmental stages of the whitefly Bemisia tabaci MED (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in multiple field populations of China. Ecotoxicology 2018, 27, 742–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Natikar, P.K.; Balikai, R.A. Bio-efficacy of insecticides against major insect pests of potato during kharif season in India. Potato Res. 2022, 65, 379–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Rehman, H. Use of Chrysoperla carnea larvae to control whitefly (Aleyrodidea: Hemiptera) on tomato plant in greenhouse. Pure Appl. Biol. 2020, 9, 2128–2137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kumar, R.; Kranthi, S.; Nagrare, V.S.; Monga, D.; Kranthi, K.R.; Rao, N.; Singh, A. Insecticidal activity of botanical oils and other neem-based derivatives against whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) on cotton. Int. J. Trop Insect Sci. 2019, 39, 203–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Tian, J.; Diao, H.; Liang, L.; Arthurs, S.; Ma, R. Pathogenicity of Isaria fumosorosea to Bemisia tabaci, with some observations on the fungal infection process and host immune response. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2015, 130, 147–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Iqbal, M.; State, K.; Academy, M.; Naeem, M.; Aziz, U.; Khan, M. An overview of cotton leaf curl virus disease, persistent challenge for cotton production an overview of cotton leaf curl virus disease, persistent challenge for cotton production. Bulg. J. Agaric Sci. 2014, 20, 405–415. [Google Scholar]
  35. Shukla, A.K.; Upadhyay, S.K.; Mishra, M.; Saurabh, S.; Singh, R.; Singh, H.; Srivastava, S. Expression of an insecticidal fern protein in cotton protects against whitefly. Nat. Biotech. 2016, 34, 10461051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Hunter, W.B.; Wintermantel, W.M. Optimizing Efficient RNAi-Mediated Control of Hemipteran Pests (Psyllids, Leafhoppers, Whitefly): Modified Pyrimidines in dsRNA Triggers. Plants 2021, 9, 1782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Wawdhane, P.A.; Nandanwar, V.N.; Mahankuda, B.; Ingle, A.S.; Chaple, K.I. Bio-efficacy of insecticides and bio pesticides against major sucking pests of Bt cotton. J. Entomol. Zoo Stud. 2020, 8, 829–833. [Google Scholar]
  38. Kamlesh, M.; Raghavendra, K.V.; Kumar, M. Vector management strategies against Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) transmitting potato apical leaf curl virus in seed potatoes. Potato Res. 2021, 64, 167–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Papnai, G.; Nautiyal, P.; Joshi, N.; Supyal, V. Traditional knowledge and indigenous practices still in vogue among rural populace of Garhwal Hills, Uttarakhand, India. J. Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2020, 9, 145–147. [Google Scholar]
  40. Deguine, J.P.; Aubertot, J.N.; Flor, R.J.; Lescourret, F.; Wyckhuys, K.A.; Ratnadass, A. Integrated pest management: Good intentions, hard realities. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2021, 41, 1–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Gullan, P.J.; Martin, J.H. Sternorrhyncha:(Jumping plant-lice, whiteflies, aphids, and scale insects). In Encyclopedia of Insects; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2009; pp. 957–967. [Google Scholar]
  42. Boykin, L.M.; Bell, C.D.; Evans, G.; Small, I.; De Barro, P.J. Is agriculture driving the diversification of the Bemisia tabaci species complex (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Aleyrodidae)? Dating, diversification and biogeographic evidence revealed. BMC Evol. Biol. 2013, 13, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Liu, T.X.; Stansly, P.A.; Gerling, D. Whitefly parasitoids: Distribution, life history, bionomics, and utilization. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2015, 60, 273–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Njoroge, M.K.; Mutisya, D.L.; Miano, D.W.; Kilalo, D.C. Whitefly species efficiency in transmitting cassava mosaic and brown streak virus diseases. Cogent Biol. 2017, 3, 1311499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Chandrashekar, K.; Rao, A.; Gorane, A.; Verma, R.; Tripath, S. Aleurothrixus trachoides (Back) can transmit begomovirus from Duranta to potato, tomato and bell pepper. J. Biosci. 2020, 45, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Dinsdale, A.; Cook, L.G.; Riginos, C.; Buckley, Y.M.; De Barro, P. Refined global analysis of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Aleyrodoidea: Aleyrodidae) mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase 1 to identify species level genetic boundaries. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 2010, 103, 196–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Frohlich, D.R.; Torres-Jerez, I.; Bedford, D.; Markham, P.G.; Brown, J.K. A phylogeographical analysis of the Bemisia tabaci species complex based on mitochondrial DNA markers. Mol. Ecol. 1999, 8, 1683–1691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Boykin, L.M.; Shatters, R.G.; Rosell, R.C., Jr.; McKenzie, C.L.; De Barro, P.; Frohlich, D.R. Global relationships of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) revealed using bayesian analysis of mitochondrial COI DNA sequences. Mol. Phylogenet Evol. 2007, 44, 1306–1319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Van den Elsen, F.H. Resistance Mechanisms against Bemisia Tabaci in Wild Relatives of Tomato. Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2013; pp. 9–15. [Google Scholar]
  50. Shatters, R.G., Jr.; Powell, C.A.; Boykin, L.M.; Liansheng, H.; McKenzie, C.L. Improved DNA barcoding method for Bemisia tabaci and related Aleyrodidae: Development of universal and Bemisa tabaci biotype specific mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I polymerase chain reaction primers. J. Econ. Entomol. 2009, 102, 750–758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Guo, Q.; Tao, Y.; Chu, D. Characterization and comparative profiling of miRNAs in invasive Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) B and Q. PLoS ONE. 2013, 8, e59884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. De Marchi, B.R.; Kinene, T.; Mbora Wainaina, J.; Krause-Sakate, R.; Boykin, L. Comparative transcriptome analysis reveals genetic diversity in the endosymbiont hamiltonella between native and exotic populations of Bemisia tabaci from Brazil. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0201411. [Google Scholar]
  53. Shadmany, M.; Boykin, L.M.; Muhamad, R.; Omar, D. Genetic diversity of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) species complex across Malaysia. J. Econ. Entomol. 2019, 112, 75–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Bedford, I.D.; Pinner, M.; Liu, S.; Markham, P.G. Bemisia tabaci potential infestation, phytotoxicity and virus transmission within European agriculture. In Proceedings of the Brighton Crop Protection Conference: Pests and Diseases 3, Brighton, UK, 21–24 November 1994; The British Crop Protection Council: Farnham, UK, 1994; pp. 911–916. [Google Scholar]
  55. Pan, H.; Li, X.; Ge, D.; Wang, S.; Wu, Q.; Xie, W.; Jiao, X.; Chu, D.; Liu, B.; Xu, B.; et al. Factors affecting population dynamics of maternally transmitted endosymbionts in Bemisia tabaci. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e30760. [Google Scholar]
  56. Capinera, J. Handbook of Vegetable Pests; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  57. Fekrat, L.; Shishehbor, P. Some biological features of cotton whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) on various host plants. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 2007, 10, 3180–3184. [Google Scholar]
  58. Lindquist, R.K.; Cloyd, R.A. Identification of Insects and Related Pests of Horticultural Plants; Cuthbert, C., Carver, S.C., Eds.; OFA Services, Inc.: Columbus, OH, USA, 2005; pp. 1–50. [Google Scholar]
  59. Qiu, J.; Song, F.; Mao, L.; Tu, J.; Guan, X. Time-dose-mortality data and modeling for the entomopathogenic fungus. Can. J. Microbiol. 2013, 101, 97–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Baldin, E.L.L.; Fanela, T.L.; Pannuti, L.E.; Kato, M.J.; Takeara, R.; Crotti, A.E. Botanical extracts: Alternative control for silverleaf whitefly management in tomato Extratos botânicos: Controle alternativo para o manejo de mosca-branca em tomateiro. Hortic. Bras. 2015, 33, 59–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Leite, G.L.; Picanço, M.; Guedes, R.N.; Moreira, M.D. Factors affecting attack rate of whitefly on the eggplant. Pesqui. Agropecuária Bras. 2003, 38, 545–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Tressia, W.N. Evaluation of living and synthetic mulches with and without imidacloprid for suppression of whiteflies and aphids and insects transmitted viral diseases in zucchini squash. Master’s Thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  63. Lot, H.; Delecolle, B.; Lecoq, H. A whitefly transmitted virus causing muskmelon yellows in France. Acta Hortic. 1982, 127, 175–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Gonzalez, M.S.; Lima, B.G.; Oliveira, A.F.; Nunes, D.D.; Fernandes, C.P.; Santos, M.G.; Tietbohl, L.A.; Mello, C.B.; Rocha, L.; Feder, D. Effects of essential oil from leaves of Eugenia sulcata on the development of agricultural pest insects. Rev. Bras Farmacogn. 2014, 24, 413–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Qiu, B.L.; De Barro, P.J.; He, Y.R.; Ren, S.X. Suitability of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) instars for the parasitization by Encarsia bimaculata and Eretmocerus sp nr. furuhashii (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae) on glabrous and hirsute host plants. Biocontrol. Sci. Technol. 2007, 17, 823–839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Javaid, S.; Amin, I.; Jander, G.; Mukhtar, Z.; Saeed, N.A.; Mansoor, S. A transgenic approach to control hemipteran insects by expressing insecticidal genes under phloem-specific promoters. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 34706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Dong, Y.; Yang, Y.; Wang, Z.; Wu, M.; Fu, J.; Guo, J. Inaccessibility of doublestranded RNAs in plastids restrict RNA interference in Bemisia tabaci (whitefly). Pest Manag. Sci. 2020, 76, 3168–3176. [Google Scholar]
  68. Maranha, E.A.; Maranha, E. Host plant influences pathogenicity of Beauveria bassiana to Bemisia tabaci and its sporulation on cadavers. Biocontrol 2006, 51, 519–532. [Google Scholar]
  69. Prayogo, Y.; Bayu, M.S.Y.I. Biological control of Bemisia tabaci gennadius by using entomopathogenic fungi Aschersonia aleyrodis. In Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Malang, Indonesia, 2–3 October 2019; IOP Publishing Ltd.: Bristol, UK; Volume 456, pp. 1–8.
  70. Cabanillas, H.E.; Jones, W.A. Pathogenicity of Isaria sp. (Hypocreales: Clavicipitaceae) against the sweet potato whitefly B biotype, Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Crop Prot. 2009, 28, 333–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Elango, K.; Sobhana, E.; Sujithra, P.; Bharath, D.; Ahuja, A. Traditional agricultural practices as a tool for management of insects and nematode pests of crops: An overview. J Entomol Zool Stud. 2020, 8, 237–245. [Google Scholar]
  72. Soumia, P.S.; Pandi, G.G.; Krishna, R.; Ansari, W.A.; Jaiswal, D.K.; Verma, J.P.; Singh, M. Whitefly-transmitted plant viruses and their management. In Emerging Trends in Plant Pathology; Springer: Singapore, 2020; pp. 175–195. [Google Scholar]
  73. Razza, J.M.; Liburd, O.E.; Nuessly, G.S.; Samuel-Foo, M. Evaluation of bioinsecticides for management of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) and the effect on the whitefly predator Delphastus catalinae (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) in organic squash. J. Econ. Entomol. 2016, 109, 1766–1771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Ibrahim, A.B.; Monteiro, T.R.; Cabral, G.B.; Aragão, F.J. RNAi-mediated resistance to whitefly (Bemisia tabaci) in genetically engineered lettuce (Lactuca sativa). Tran. Res. 2017, 26, 613–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Schuster, D.J. Newsletter of work group on Bemisia tabaci. Newsletter 1992, 5, 1–3. [Google Scholar]
  76. Cohen, S.; Antignus, Y. Tomato yellow leaf curl virus, a whitefly-borne geminivirus of tomatoes. In Advances in Disease Vector Research; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1994; pp. 259–288. [Google Scholar]
  77. Calvo, J.; Bolckmans, K.; Stansly, P.A.; Urbaneja, A. Predation by Nesidiocoris tenuis on Bemisia tabaci and injury to tomato. Biocontrol 2009, 54, 237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Calvo, F.J.; Torres-Ruiz, A.; Velázquez-González, J.C.; Rodríguez-Leyva, E.; Lomeli-Flores, J.R. Evaluation of Dicyphus hesperus for biological control of sweet potato whitefly and potato psyllid on greenhouse tomato. BioControl 2016, 61, 237–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Bughdady, A.; Mehna, A.E.; Amin, T. Effectiveness of synthetic insecticides against the whitefly, (Bemisia tabaci G.) on tomato, (Lycopersicon esculentum MILL.) and infestation impacts on certain photosynthetic pigments concentrations of tomato plant leaves. J. Product. Dev. 2020, 25, 307–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Islam, M.T.; Olleka, A.; Ren, S. Influence of neem on susceptibility of Beauveria bassiana and investigation of their combined efficacy against sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci on eggplant. Pestic. Biochem Physiol. 2010, 98, 45–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Islam, T.; Shunxiang, R. Effects of sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) infestation on eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) leaf. J. Pest Sci. 2009, 82, 211–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Li, Q.; Tan, W.; Xue, M.; Zhao, H.; Wang, C. Dynamic changes in photosynthesis and chlorophyll fluorescence in Nicotiana tabacum infested by Bemisia tabaci (Middle East–Asia Minor 1) nymphs. Arthropod-Plant Interact. 2013, 7, 431–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Li, Q.; Tan, W.; Xue, M.; Zhao, H. Dynamic changes in energy metabolism and electron transport of photosystem II in Nicotiana tabacum infested by nymphs of Bemisia tabaci (Middle East-Asia Minor 1). Arthropod Plant Interact. 2018, 12, 505–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Saeedi, Z.; Ziaee, M. Biochemical responses of two sugarcane varieties to whitefly Neomaskellia andropogonis infestation and its control by a new butenolide insecticide, flupyradifurone. Agric. For. 2020, 66, 69–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Al-Shareef, L.A. Impact of whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) infestation on chlorophyl and carotene concentrations, as well as moisture content in some vegetable plants in a greenhouse. Egypt J. Exp. Biol. 2011, 7, 11–15. [Google Scholar]
  86. McAuslane, H.J.; Chen, J.; Carle, R.B.; Schmalstig, J. Influence of Bemisia argentifolii (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) infestation and squash silverleaf disorder on zucchini seedling growth. J Econo Entomol. 2004, 97, 1096–10105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Shen, B.B.; Ren, S.X.; Musa, P.H.; Chen, C. A study on economic threshold of Bemisia tabaci. Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. 2004, 27, 234–237. [Google Scholar]
  88. Chand, R.; Jokhan, A.; Prakash, R. Egg deposition by spiralling whiteflies (Aleurodicus dispersus) reduces the stomatal conductance of cassava (Manihot esculenta). Wētā 2018, 52, 55–60. [Google Scholar]
  89. Schutze, I.X.; Yamamoto, P.T.; Malaquias, J.B.; Naranjo, S.E. Network correlation to evidence the influence of Bemisia tabaci feeding in the photosynthesis and foliar sugar and starch composition in soybean. Ph.D. Thesis, University Sao Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  90. Martinez, A. Georgia Plant Disease Loss Estimates; Annual Publication 102-10; University of Georgia Cooperative Extension: Griffin, GA, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  91. Little, E.L. Georgia Plant Disease Loss Estimates; Annual Publication; University of Georgia Cooperative Extension: Athens, GA, USA, 2016; pp. 102–109. [Google Scholar]
  92. Norman, J.W.J.R.; Riley, D.G.; Stansly, P.A.; Ellsworth, P.C.; Toscano, N.C. Management of Silverleaf Whitefly: A Comprehensive Manual on the Biology, Economic Impact and Control Tactics. 1991. Available online: https://ucanr.edu/sites/CottonIPM/files/181441.pdf (accessed on 9 October 2021).
  93. Attaway, D. Cucurbit Leaf Crumple Virus Found in South Carolina Cucurbit Crops. 2019. Available online: https://news.clemson.edu/cucurbit-leaf-crumple-virus-found-in-south-carolina-cucurbit-crops/ (accessed on 9 October 2021).
  94. Chandel, R.S.; Banyal, D.K.; Singh, B.P.; Malik, K.; Lakra, B.S. Integrated management of whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) and potato apical leaf curl virus in India. Potato Res. 2010, 53, 129–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Selvaraj, K.; Sumalatha, B.V.; Poornesha, B.; Ramanujam, B.; Shylesha, A.N. Biological control of invasive rugo siralling whitefly in coconut. In Biological and Utilizatin of Insect in North East; Hebbal: Bangalore, India, 2019; pp. 1–14. [Google Scholar]
  96. Prasannath, K.; Dharmadasa, N.; Menike, N.; De Costa, D.M. Evaluation of the effects of an eco-friendly crop protection system on management of whitefly-vectored chilli leaf curl virus disease in Sri Lanka. Phytoparasitica 2020, 48, 117–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Dent, D. Insect Pest Management, 1st ed.; CABI: Iver, UK, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  98. Padhi, N.N.; Misra, R.P. Control of Rotylenchulus reniformis on French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Indian J. Nematol. 1987, 17, 130–131. [Google Scholar]
  99. Isman, M.B. Bridging the gap: Moving botanical insecticides from the laboratory to the farm. Ind. Crops Prod. 2017, 110, 10–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Cloyd, R.A.; Galle, C.L.; Keith, S.R.; Kalscheur, N.A.; Kemp, K.E. Effect of commercially available plantderived essential oil products on arthropod pests. J. Econ. Entomol. 2009, 102, 1567–1579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Mullins, J.W. Imidacloprid: A new nitroguanidine insecticide. Am. Chem. Soc. Symp. 1993, 524, 183–198. [Google Scholar]
  102. Riley, D.G. Insecticide control of sweetpotato whitefly in south Texas. Subtrop Plant Sci. 1994, 46, 45–49. [Google Scholar]
  103. Liu, T.X.; Meister, C.W. Managing Bemisia argentifolii on spring melons with insect growth regulators, entomopathogens and imidacloprid in south Texas. Subtrop Plant Sci. 2001, 53, 44–48. [Google Scholar]
  104. Shejulpatil, S.J.; Kakad, M.N.; Lande, G.K. Effect of insecticides against whitefly on brinjal under field condition. Int. J. Chem. Stud. 2019, 7, 1100–1103. [Google Scholar]
  105. Quesada-Moraga, E.E.; Maranhao, E.A.; Valverde-García, P.; Santiago-Álvarez, C. Selection of Beauveria bassiana isolates for control of the whiteflies Bemisia tabaci and Trialeurodes vaporariorum on the basis of their virulence, thermal requirements, and toxicogenic activity. Biol. Control. 2006, 36, 274–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Simmons, A.M.; Kousik, C.S.; Levi, A. Combining reflective mulch and host plant resistance for sweetpotato whitefly (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) management in watermelon. Crop Prot. 2010, 29, 898–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Athar, H.U.R.; Bhatti, A.R.; Bashir, N.; Zafar, Z.U.; Farooq, A. Modulating infestation rate of white fly (Bemicia tabaci) on okra (Hibiscus esculentus L.) by nitrogen application. Acta Physiol. Plant. 2010, 33, 843–850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Lapidot, M.; Legg, J.P.; Wintermantel, W.M.; Polston, J.E. Chapter Three—Management of Whitefy-Transmitted Viruses in Open-Field Production Systems. In Advances in Virus Research; Loebenstein, G., Katis, N., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2014; pp. 147–206. Volume 90. [Google Scholar]
  109. Abd-Rabou, S.; Simmons, A.M. Effect of three irrigation methods on incidences of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) and some whitefly-transmitted viruses in four vegetable crops. Trends Entomol. 2012, 8, 21–26. [Google Scholar]
  110. Togni, P.H.; Marouelli, W.A.; Inoue-Nagata, A.K.; Pires, C.S.; Sujii, E.R. Integrated cultural practices for whitefly management in organic tomato. J. Appl. Entomol. 2018, 142, 998–1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Simmons, A.M.; Abd-Rabou, S. Population of the sweet potato whitefly in response to different rates of three sulfur-containing fertilizers on ten vegetable crops. Int. J. Veg. Sci. 2008, 5, 7–70. [Google Scholar]
  112. Ellsworth, P.C.; Martinez-Carrillo, J.L. IPM for Bemisia tabaci: A case study from North America. Crop Prot. 2001, 20, 853–869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Mohamed, M. Impact of planting dates, spaces and varieties on infestation of cucumber plants with whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Genn.). J. Basic Appl. Zool. 2012, 65, 17–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Hilje, L.; Costa, H.S.; Stansly, P.A. Cultural practices for managing Bemisia tabaci and associated viral diseases. Crop Prot. 2001, 20, 801–812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Ahsan, M.I.; Hossain, M.S.; Parvin, S.; Karim, Z. Effect of varieties and planting dates on the incidence of aphid and white fly attack on tomato. Int. J. Sustain. Agric Technol. 2005, 1, 26–30. [Google Scholar]
  116. Nyoike, T.W.; Liburd, O.E. Effect of living (buckwheat) and UV reflective mulches with and without imidacloprid on whiteflies, aphids and marketable yields of zucchini squash. Int. J. Pest Manag. 2009, 56, 31–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Hilje, L.; Stansly, P.A. Living ground covers for management of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) and Tomato yellow mottle virus (ToYMoV) in Costa Rica. Crop Prot. 2008, 7, 10–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Manandhar, R.; Cerruti, R.; Hooks, R.; Wright, M.G. Influence of cover crop and intercrop systems on Bemisia argentifolli (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) infestation and associated Squash silverleaf disorder in zucchini. Environ. Entomol. 2009, 38, 442–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Smith, H.A.; Koenig, R.L.; McAuslane, H.J.; McSorley, R. Effect of silver reflective mulch and a summer squash trap crop on densities of immature Bemisia argentifolii (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) on organic bean. J. Econ. Entomol. 2000, 93, 726–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Summers, C.G.; Mitchell, J.P.; Stapleton, J.J. Management of aphid-borne viruses and Bemisia argentifolii (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) in zucchini squash by using UV reflective plastic and wheat straw mulches. Environ. Entomol. 2005, 33, 1447–1457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Nasruddin, A.; Agus, N.; Saubil, A.; Jumardi, J.; Rasyid, B.; Siriniang, A.; Nasruddin, A.D.; Firdaus, F.; Said, A.E. Effects of mulch type, plant cultivar, and insecticide use on sweet potato whitefly population in chili pepper. Scientifica 2020, 2020, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Schuster, D.J. Squash as a trap crop to protect tomato from whitefly-vectored tomato yellow leaf curl. Int. J. Pest Manag. 2004, 50, 281–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. El-Serwiy, S.A.; Ali, A.A.; Razoki, I.A. Effect of intercropping of some host plants with tomato on population density of tobacco whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Genn.), and the incidence of Tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV) in plastic houses. J. Agric Water Resour. Res. 1987, 6, 79–81. [Google Scholar]
  124. Musa. A.A. Incidence, economic importance, and control of tomato yellow leaf curl in Jordan. Plant Dis. 1982, 66, 561–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Verma, A.K.; Mitra, P.; Saha, A.K.; Ghatak, S.S.; Bajpai, A.K. Effect of trap crops on the population of the whitefly Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) and the diseases transmitted by it. Bull Indian Aca Seri. 2011, 15, 99–106. [Google Scholar]
  126. Afifi, F.M.L.; Haydar, M.F.; Omar, H.I.H. Effect of different intercropping systems on tomato infestation with major insect pests; Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae), Myzus persicae Sulzer (Homoptera: Aphididae) and Phthorimaea operculella Zeller (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). Bull Fac. Agric. 1990, 41, 885–900. [Google Scholar]
  127. Schuster, D.J. Preference of Bemisia argentifolii (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) for selected vegetable hosts. J. Agric Urban Entomol. 2003, 20, 59–67. [Google Scholar]
  128. Rajasri, M.; Lakshmi, K.V.; Reddy, K.L. Management of whitefly transmitted Tomato leaf curl virus using guard crops in tomato. Indian J. Plant Prot. 2009, 37, 101–103. [Google Scholar]
  129. Yang, Z.; Ma, C.; Wang, X.; Long, H.; Liu, X.; Yang, X. Preference of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) to four vegetable hosts. Acta Entomol. Sin. 2004, 47, 612–627. [Google Scholar]
  130. Asawalam, E.F.; Chukwu, E.U. The effect of intercropping okra with ginger on the population of flea beetle (Podagrica sjostedti Jacoby Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) and whitefly (Bemisia tabaci Genn Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) and the yield of okra in Umudike Abia State, Nigeria. J. Agric Biol. Sci. 2012, 3, 300–304. [Google Scholar]
  131. Sharma, A.; Neupane, K.R.; Regmi, R.; Neupane, R.C. Effect of intercropping on the incidence of jassid (Amrasca biguttula biguttula Ish.) and whitefly (Bemesia tabaci Guen.) in okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L. Moench). J. Agric Nat. Resour. 2018, 1, 179–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Kumar, A.; Raj Bhansali, R.; Mali, P.C. Response of biocontrol agents in relation to acquired resistance against leaf curl virus in chilli. In Proceedings of Asian Congress of Mycology Plant Pathology, Mysore, India, 1–4 October 2002; University of Mysore: Mysore, India; Indian Society of Mycology and Plant Pathology: Udaipur, India, 2002; p. 167. [Google Scholar]
  133. Karthikeyan, C.; Veeraragavathatham, D.; Karpagam, Firdouse, A.A. Cow Based Indigenous technologies in dry farming. Indian J. Tradit Knowl. 2006, 5, 47–50. [Google Scholar]
  134. Singh, R.S.; Sitaramaiah, K. Effect of decomposing green leaves, sawdust and urea on the incidence of root-knot of okra and tomato. Indian Phytopath. 1967, 20, 349–355. [Google Scholar]
  135. Bhattacharya, D.; Goswami, B.K. Comparative efficacy of neem and groundnut oil-cakes with aldicarb against Mezuidugyne incognita in tomato. Revue Nématol. 1987, 10, 467–470. [Google Scholar]
  136. Patel, C.C.; Singh, D.; Sridhar, V.; Choudhary, A.; Dindod, A.; Padaliya, S.R. Bioefficacy of cow urine and different types of bio-pesticide against major sucking insect pests of cowpea. Int. J. Chem. Stud. 2019, 7, 4664–4667. [Google Scholar]
  137. Shailaja, B.; Patnaik, H.P.; Mukherjee, S.K. Assessment of botanicals fermented in cow urine alone and along with panchagavya against brinjal shoot and fruit borer. J. Eco-Friendly Agric. 2012, 7, 24–28. [Google Scholar]
  138. Radhakrishnan, T.; Anandaraja, M.; Ramasubramanian, M.; Nirmala, L.; Israel Thomas, M. Traditional Agricultural Practices-Applications and Technical Implements; New India Publishing Agency: New Delhi, India, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  139. Patel, N.B.; Korat, D.M.; Acharya, R.R. Impact evaluation of cow-urine and vermiwash on insect pests of brinjal. Int. J. Trop Agric. 2017, 35, 591–595. [Google Scholar]
  140. Haroon, S.A.; Hassan, B.A.; Hamad, F.M. The efficiency of some natural alternatives in root-knot nematode control. Adv. Plants Agric Res. 2018, 8, 355–362. [Google Scholar]
  141. Karkar, D.B. Evaluation of cow urine and vermi-wash against insect pests of brinjal. Karnataka J. Agric Sci. 2014, 27, 528–530. [Google Scholar]
  142. Mandal, S.; Padamshali, S.; Rana, N.; Kolhekar, S. ITK based pest management module for sucking pest on brinjal (Solanum melongena L.) under terai agro-ecological system of West Bengal. J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem. 2018, 7, 2065–2070. [Google Scholar]
  143. Singh, S.; Yadav, G.S.; Das, A.; Das, B.; Devi, H.L.; Raghuraman, M.; Kumar, A. Bioefficacy, environmental safety and synergistic impacts of biorational formulations against whitefly, leafhopper and blister beetle in organic okra ecosystem. J. Agric Sci. 2021, 159, 373–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Celsia, S.; Janarthanan, P. Indigenous technology knowledge of rice. Int. J. Curr. Res. 2019, 11, 1810–1811. [Google Scholar]
  145. Van der Werf, E. Pest Management in Ecological Agriculture. AME Foundation, Groenekan/Holland. In Plant in Pest Control—Garlic and Onion; Vijayalakshmi, K., Subhashini, B., Shivani, V.K., Eds.; Centre for Indian Knowledge System: Chennai, India, 1985; pp. 1–20. [Google Scholar]
  146. Oparaeke, A.M.; Dike, M.C.; Amatobi, C.I. Fermented cow dung: A home-produced insecticide against post flowering insect pests of cowpea, Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp. Sam. J. Agric. 2003, 19, 121–125. [Google Scholar]
  147. Yano, E. Control of the greenhouse whitefly, Trialeurodes vaporariorum westwood (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) by the integrated use of yellow sticky traps and the parasite Encarsia formosa Gahan (Hymenoptra: Aphelinidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1986, 22, 159–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Gu, X.S.; Bu, W.J.; Xu, W.H.; Bai, Y.C.; Liu, B.M.; Liu, T.X. Population suppression of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) using yellow sticky traps and Eretmocerus rajasthanicus (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae) on tomato plants in greenhouses. Insect Sci. 2008, 15, 263–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Nair, I.J.; Sharma, S.; Shera, P.S. Impact of sticky traps of different colours and shapes against sucking pests of tomato under protected conditions: A randomized controlled trial. Int. J. Trop Insect Sci. 2021, 41, 2739–2746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Lu, Y.; Bei, Y.; Zhang, J. Are yellow sticky traps an effective method for control of sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci, in the greenhouse or field? J. Insec. Sci. 2012, 12, 113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Hoelmer, K.A.; Roltsch, W.J.; Chu, E.C.; Hekneberry, T.J. Selectivity of whitefly traps in cotton for Eretmocerus eremicus (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae), a native parasitoid of Bemisia argentifolii (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Environ. Entomol. 1998, 27, 1039–1044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Moreau, T.L.; Isman, M.B. Trapping whiteflies? A comparison of greenhouse whitefly (Trialeurodes vaporariorum) responses to trap crops and yellow sticky traps. Pest Manag. Sci. 2011, 67, 408–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Bhutto, N.N.; Shar, Z.U.; Kalroo, M.A.; Rind, A.B.; Solangi, U.A. Management of sucking insect pests of cotton crop through yellow sticky traps under field conditions. Int. J. Farm Alli Sci. 2021, 10, 36–39. [Google Scholar]
  154. Chabra, H.K.; Grewal, P.S.; Singh, A. Efficacy of some plant extracts on root knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita). J. Tree Sci. 1988, 7, 24–25. [Google Scholar]
  155. Wagan, T.A.; Dhaunroo, A.A.; Jiskani, W.M.; Sahito, M.H.; Soomro, A.A.; Lakho, A.B.; Wagan, S.A.; Memon, Q.U.; Tunio, S.K. Evaluation of four-color sticky traps for monitoring whitefly and thrips on Okra crops at Tando Jam, Pakistan. J. Biol. Agric Health. 2017, 7, 12–15. [Google Scholar]
  156. Charavan, R.; Yeotikar, S.; Gaikwad, B.; Dongarjal, R. Management of major pests of tomato with biopesticides. J. Entomol. Res. 2015, 39, 213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Hussein, H.S.; Salem, M.Z.M.; Soliman, A.M. Repellent, attractive, and insecticidal effects of essential oils from Schinus terebinthifolius fruits and Corymbia citriodora leaves on two whitefly species, Bemisia tabaci, and Trialeurodes ricini. Sci. Hortic. 2017, 216, 111–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Vite-Vallejo, O.; Barajas-Fernández, M.G.; Saavedra-Aguilar, M.; Cardoso-Taketa, A. Insecticidal effects of ethanolic extracts of Chenopodium ambrosioides, Piper nigrum, Thymus vulgaris, and Origanum vulgare against Bemisia tabaci. Southwest Entomol. 2018, 43, 383–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Bissdorf, J.K. How to Grow Crops without Endosulfan—Field Guide to Non-Chemical Pest Management; Webber, C., Ed.; Pesticide Action Network (PAN): Hamburg, Germany, 2008; p. 71. [Google Scholar]
  160. Mkenda, P.; Mwanauta, R.; Stevenson, P.C.; Ndakidemi, P.; Mtei, K.; Belmain, S.R. Extracts from field margin weeds provide economically viable and environmentally benign pest control compared to synthetic pesticides. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0143530. [Google Scholar]
  161. Tembo, Y.; Mkindi, A.G.; Mkenda, P.A.; Mpumi, N.; Mwanauta, R.; Stevenson, P.C.; Ndakidemi, P.A.; Belmain, S.R. Pesticidal plant extracts improve yield and reduce insect pests on legume crops without harming beneficial arthropods. Front Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 1425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Ravindran, P.N.; Babu, K.N.; Sivaraman, K. (Eds.) Turmeric: The Genus Curcuma; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  163. Kumar, P.; Poehling, H.M. Persistence of soil and foliar azadirachtin treatments to control sweetpotato whitefly Bemisia tabaci Gennadius (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) on tomatoes under controlled (laboratory) and field (netted greenhouse) conditions in the humid tropics. J Pest Sci. 2006, 79, 189–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. El Shafie, H.A.F.; Abdelraheem, B.A. Field evaluation of three biopesticides for integrated management of major pests of tomato, Solanum lycopersicum L. Agric. Biol. J. N. Am. 2012, 3, 340–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Castillo-Sánchez, L.E.; Jiménez-Osornio, J.J.; Delgado-Herrera, M.A.; Candelaria-Martínez, B.; Sandoval-Gío, J.J. Effects of the hexanic extract of neem Azadirachta indica against adult whitefly Bemisia tabaci. J. Entomol-Ogy Zool. Stud. 2015, 5, 95–99. [Google Scholar]
  166. Barati, R.; Golmohammadi, G.; Ghajarie, H.; Zarabi, M.; Mansouri, R. Efficiency of some herbal pesticides on reproductive parameters of silverleaf whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Arch. Phytopathol. Plant Prot. 2013, 47, 212–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Diabate, D.; Gnago, J.A.; Koffi, K.; Tano, Y. The effect of pesticides and aqueous extracts of Azadirachta indica (A. Juss) and Jatropha carcus L. on Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Homoptera: Aleyrididae) and Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) found on tomato plants in Côte d’Ivoire. J. Appl. Biosci. 2014, 80, 7132–7143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  168. Nzanza, B.; Mashela, P.W. Control of whiteflies and aphids in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) by fermented plant extracts of neem leaf and wild garlic. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2012, 11, 16077–16082. [Google Scholar]
  169. Fanela, T.L.; Baldin, E.L.; Pannuti, L.E.; Cruz, P.L.; Crotti, A.E.; Takeara, R.; Kato, M.J. Lethal and inhibitory activities of plant-derived essential oils against Bemisia tabaci Gennadius (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) biotype B in tomato. Neotrop. Entomol. 2016, 45, 201–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Nottingham, S.F.; Chalfant, R.B. Whiteflies (Bemicia tabaci) on vegetable crops. Proc. Ha. State Hort. Soc. 1994, 107, 163–167. [Google Scholar]
  171. Hammad, E.A.; Nemer, N.M.; Hawi, Z.K.; Hanna, L.T. Responses of the sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci, to the chinaberry tree (Melia azedarach L.) and its extracts. Ann. Appl. Biol. 2000, 137, 79–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Azam, K.M.; Bowers, W.S.; Srikandakumar, A.; Al-Mahmuli, I.H.; Al-Raeesi, A.A. Insecticidal action of plant extracts against nymphs of whitefly, Bemisia tabaci Gennadius. Crop Res. 2002, 24, 390–393. [Google Scholar]
  173. Zhang, W.; McAuslane, H.J.; Schuster, D.J. Repellency of ginger oil to Bemisia argentifolii (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) on tomato. J. Econo. Entomol. 2004, 97, 1310–1318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Aroiee, H.; Mosapoor, S.; Karimzadeh, H. Control of greenhouse whitefly (Trialeurodes vaporariorum) by thyme and peppermint. Curr. Appl. Sci. Technol. 2005, 5, 511–514. [Google Scholar]
  175. Aldana Lllanos, A.; Valdés Estrada, M.E.; Figueroa Brito, R.; Pérez Ramírez, A. Control of whitefly Bemisia tabaci with extracts of Trichillia havanensis and Passiflora edulis in the laboratory. In Proceedings of the Interamerican Society for Tropical Horticulture; Inter-American Society for Tropical Horticulture: Homestead, FL, USA, 2006; Volume 50, pp. 717–774. [Google Scholar]
  176. Porras, M.F.; López-Ávila, A. Effect of extracts from Sapindus saponaria on the glasshouse whitefly Trialeurodes vaporariorum (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Rev. Colomb. Entomol. 2009, 35, 7–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Lin, C.Y.; Wu, D.C.; Yu, J.Z.; Chen, B.H.; Wang, C.L.; Ko, W.H. Control of silverleaf whitefly, cotton aphid and kanzawa spider mite with oil and extracts from seeds of sugar apple Neotrop. Entomol. 2009, 38, 531–536. [Google Scholar]
  178. Ateyyat, M.A.; Al-Mazra’awi, M.; Abu-Rjai, T.; Shatnawi, M.A. Aqueous extracts of some medicinal plants are as toxic as Imidacloprid to the sweet potato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci. J. Insect Sci. 2009, 9, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Sayeda, F.F.; Torkey, H.M.; Hala, M.A. Natural extracts and their chemical constituents in relation to toxicity against whitefly (Bemisia tabaci) and aphid (Aphis craccivora). Aust. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 2009, 3, 3217–3223. [Google Scholar]
  180. Pinheiro, P.V.; Quintela, E.D.; Oliveira, J.P.; Seraphin, J.C. Toxicity of neem oil to Bemisia tabaci biotype B nymphs reared on dry bean. Pesq. Agropec. Bras. 2009, 44, 354–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Yang, N.W.; Li, A.L.; Wan, F.H.; Liu, W.X.; Johnson, D. Effects of plant essential oils on immature and adult sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci biotype B. Crop Prot. 2010, 29, 1200–1207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Lynn, O.M.; Song, W.G.; Shim, J.K.; Kim, J.E.; Lee, K.Y. Effects of azadirachtin and neem-based formulations for the control of sweetpotato whitefly and root-knot nematode. J. Korean Soc. Appl. Biol. Chem. 2010, 53, 598–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Zandi-Sohani, N. Efficiency of Labiateae plants essential oils against adults of cotton whitefly (Bemisia tabaci). Indian J. Agric Sci. 2011, 81, 1164. [Google Scholar]
  184. Regnault-Roger, C.; Charles, V.; John, T.A. Essential oils in insect control: Low-risk products in a highstakes world. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2012, 57, 405–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Baloc, H.A.; Marissa, P.; Bulong, M.P. Efficacy of fermented botanical plant extracts in the management of white flies and 28-Spotted beetles in tomato. Int. J. Sci. Res. 2015, 4, 2566–2569. [Google Scholar]
  186. Barkman, B. Repellent, irritant and toxic effects of essential oil constituents on Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius). Ph.D. Thesis, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  187. Lee, D.H.; Nyrop, J.P.; Sanderson, J.P. Non-consumptive effects of the predatory beetle Delphastus catalinae (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) on habitat use patterns of adult whitefly Bemisia argentifolii (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2014, 49, 599–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Rehmana, H.; Nadeema, M.; Ayyazb, M.; Beguma, H.A. Comparative efficacy of neem oil and lambdacyhalothrin against whitefly (Bemesia tabaci) and Jassid (Amrasca Devastans Dist.) in okra field. Russ. Agric. Sci. 2015, 41, 138–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Sawsan, S.M.; Sharaby, A.; Ebadah, I.M.; El-Behery, H. Efficiency of zinc sulfate and some volatile oils on some insect pests of the tomato crop. Glob. Adv. Res. J. Agric Sci. 2015, 4, 182–187. [Google Scholar]
  190. Ezzat, A.S.; El-Awady, A.A.; Tawfik, A.A. Using some plant extracts to control of mechanical injured, pest management, increasing productivity and storability of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). J. Plant Prod. 2015, 7, 801–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Deletre, E.; Chandre, F.; Barkman, B.; Menut, C.; Martin, T. Naturally occurring bioactive compounds from four repellent essential oils against Bemisia tabaci whiteflies. Pest Man. Sci. 2016, 72, 179–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  192. Azad, M.; Sarker, S. Efficacy of some botanical extracts on plant growth, yield and pest management in eggplant field. J. Environ. Sci. Nat. Resour. 2017, 10, 137–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Moghadam, A.; Saidi, M.; Abdossi, V.; Mirab-Balou, M.; Tahmasebi, Z. Insecticidal effect of extracts from six native plants on Bemisia tabaci and some physiological effects on cucumber as host plant. Pak J. Agric. Sci. 2018, 55, 563–568. [Google Scholar]
  194. Ghosal, A.; Chatterjee, M.L.; Bhattacharyya, A. Field bio-efficacy of some new insecticides and tank mixtures against whitefly on cotton in New Alluvial Zone of West Bengal. Pestic Res. J. 2018, 30, 31–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Sayed, W.A.A.; El-Bendary, H.; El-Helaly, A. Increasing the efficacy of the cotton leaf worm Spodoptera littoralis nucleopolyhedrosis virus using certain essential oils. Egypt. J. Biol. Pest Control 2020, 30, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Okolo, E.T.; Iledun, O.C. Insecticidal effect of neem (Azadirachta indica) extracts obtained from leaves and seeds on pests of cowpea (Vigna Unguiculata). Sumerianz J. Agric Vet. 2019, 2, 20–28. [Google Scholar]
  197. Fabrick, J.A.; Yool, A.J.; Spurgeon, D.W. Insecticidal activity of marigold Tagetes patula plants and foliar extracts against the hemipteran pests, Lygus hesperus and Bemisia tabaci. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0233511. [Google Scholar]
  198. Peres, M.C.; de Souza Costa, G.C.; dos Reis, L.E.; da Silva, L.D.; Peixoto, M.F.; Alves, C.C.; Forim, M.R.; Quintela, E.D.; Araújo, W.L.; de Melo Cazal, C. In natural and nanoencapsulated essential oils from Xylopia aromatica reduce oviposition of Bemisia tabaci in Phaseolus vulgaris. J. Pest Sci. 2020, 93, 807–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  199. Sweetha, G. Is lemon peel responsible for controlling whitefly? A review article. Int. J. Sci. Dev. Res 2021, 6, 1–3. [Google Scholar]
  200. Kobenan, K.C.; Bini, K.K.; Kouakou, M.; Kouadio, I.S.; Zengin, G.; Ochou, G.E.; Boka, N.R.; Menozzi, P.; Ochou, O.G.; Dick, A.E. Chemical composition and spectrum of insecticidal activity of the essential oils of Ocimum gratissimum L. and Cymbopogon citratus Stapf on the main insects of the cotton entomofauna in Côte d’Ivoire. Chem. Biodivers. 2021, 27, e2100497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  201. De Carvalho, S.S.; do Prado Ribeiro, L.; Forim, M.R.; Bicalho, K.U.; Fernandes, J.B.; Vendramim, J.D. Avocado kernels, an industrial residue: A source of compounds with insecticidal activity against silverleaf whitefly. Environ. Sci. Poll Res. 2021, 28, 2260–2268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  202. Soares, M.C.E.; Baldin, E.L.L.; do Prado Ribeiro, L. Lethal and sublethal effects of Annona spp. derivatives on Bemisia tabaci MEAM 1 (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in Tomato. Neotrop. Entomol. 2021, 50, 966–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. Cohen, S.; Berlinger, M.J. Transmission and cultural control of whitefly-borne viruses. Agric Ecosyst Environ. 1986, 17, 89–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  204. Antignus, Y.; Lachman, O.; Pearlsman, M.; Koren, A.; Matan, E.; Tregerman, M.; Ucko, O.; Messika, Y.; Omer, S.; Unis, H. Development of an IPM system to reduce the damage of squash leaf curl begomovirus in zucchini squash crops. In Proceedings of the 2nd European Whitefly Symposium, Cavtat, Croatia, 5–9 October 2004. [Google Scholar]
  205. Berlinger, M.J.; Dahan, R.; Mordechi, S.; Liper, A.; Katz, J.; Levav, N. The use of nets to prevent the penetration of Bemisia tabaci into greenhouse. Hassadeh 1991, 71, 1579–1583. [Google Scholar]
  206. Antignus, Y.; Lapidot, M.; Hadar, D.; Messika, Y.; Cohen, S. UV absorbing screens serve as optical barriers to protect vegetable crops from virus diseases and insect pests. J. Econ. Entomol. 1998, 91, 1401–1405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  207. Diaz, B.M.; Fereres, A. Ultraviolet-blocking materials as a physical barrier to control insect pests and pathogens in protected crops. Pest Tech. 2007, 1, 85–95. [Google Scholar]
  208. Ben-Yakir, D.; Hadar, M.D.; Offir, Y.; Chen, M.; Tregerman, M. Protecting crops from pests using OptiNet® and ChromatiNet® shading nets. Acta Hortic. 2008, 770, 205–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  209. Legarrea, S.; Karnieli, A.; Fereras, A.; Weintraub, P.G. Comparison of UV-absorbing nets in pepper crops, spectral properties, effects on plants and pest control. Photochem. Photobiol. 2010, 86, 324–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. Saady, R.H. Combined effect of mechanical and biological control strategies for managing Bemisia tabaci (hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Asian J. Biol. 2022, 5, 14–18. [Google Scholar]
  211. Dougoud, J.; Toepfer, S.; Bateman, M. Efficacy of homemade botanical insecticides based on traditional knowledge. A review. Agron. Sustain Dev. 2019, 39, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  212. Angioni, A.; Dedola, F.; Minelli, E.V.; Barra, A.; Cabras, P.; Caboni, P. Residues and half-life times of pyrethrins on peaches after field treatments. J. Agric Food Chem. 2005, 53, 4059–4063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  213. Caboni, P.; Sarais, G.; Angioni, A.; Garcia, A.J.; Lai, F.; Dedola, F. Residues and persistence of neem formulations on strawberry after field treatment. J. Agric Food Chem. 2006, 54, 10026–10032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  214. Isman, M.B. Botanical insecticides: For richer, for poorer. Pest Manag. Sci. 2008, 64, 8–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  215. Isman, M.B.; Grieneisen, M.L. Botanical insecticide research: Many publications, limited useful data. Trends Plant Sci. 2014, 19, 140–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  216. Pavela, R.; Žabka, M.; Bednář, J.; Tříska, J.; Vrchotová, N. New knowledge for yield, composition and insecticidal activity of essential oils obtained from the aerial parts or seeds of fennel (Foeniculum vulgare Mill.). Ind. Crop Prod. 2016, 83, 275–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  217. Daniel, C.; Wyss, E. Field applications of Beauveria bassiana to control the European cherry fruit fly Rhogoletis cerasi. J. Appl. Entomol. 2010, 134, 9–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  218. Soloneski, S.; Kujawski, M.; Scuto, A.; Larramendy, M.L. Carbamates: A study on genotoxic, cytotoxic, and apoptotic effects induced in Chinese hamster ovary (CHO-K1) cells. Toxicol Vitr. 2015, 29, 834–844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  219. Singh, H.; Kaur, T. Pathogenicity of entomopathogenic fungi against the aphid and the whitefly species on crops grown under greenhouse conditions in India. Egypt J. Biol. Pest Control. 2020, 30, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  220. Gerling, D.; Alomar, Ò.; Arnò, J. Biological control of Bemisia tabaci using predators and parasitoids. Crop Prot. 2001, 20, 779–799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  221. Arnó, J.; Gabarra, R.; Liu, T.X.; Simmons, A.M.; Gerling, D. Natural enemies of Bemisia tabaci: Predators and parasitoids. In Bemisia: Bionomics and Management of a Global Pest; Stansly, P.A., Naranjo, S.E., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2009; pp. 385–421. [Google Scholar]
  222. Khan, M.M.; Fan, Z.Y.; O’Neill Rothenberg, D.; Peng, J.; Hafeez, M.; Chen, X.Y.; Pan, H.P.; Wu, J.H.; Qiu, B.L. Phototoxicity of Ultraviolet-A against the Whitefly Bemisia tabaci and Its Compatibility with an Entomopathogenic Fungus and Whitefly Parasitoid. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev. 2021, 2021, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  223. Tan, X.; Hu, N.; Zhang, F.; Ramirez-Romero, R.; Desneux, N.; Wang, S.; Ge, F. Mixed release of two parasitoids and a polyphagous ladybird as a potential strategy to control the tobacco whitefly Bemisia tabaci. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 28245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  224. Horowitz, A.R.; Ghanim, M.; Roditakis, E.; Nauen, R.; Ishaaya, I. Insecticide resistance and its management in Bemisia tabaci species. J. Pest Sci. 2020, 93, 893–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  225. Kheirodin, A.; Simmons, A.M.; Legaspi, J.C.; Grabarczyk, E.E.; Toews, M.D.; Roberts, P.M.; Chong, J.H.; Snyder, W.E.; Schmidt, J.M. Can generalist predators control Bemisia tabaci? Insects 2020, 11, 823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  226. Alomar, O.; Riudavets, J.; Castañe, C. Macrolophus caliginosus in the biological control of Bemisia tabaci on greenhouse melons. Biol. Control. 2006, 36, 154–162. [Google Scholar]
  227. Adly, D. Use of predators for controlling the whitefly, Bemisia tabaci Genn. and the two spotted spider mite, Tetranychus urticae koch, in cucumber greenhouses in Egypt. Egypt J. Biol. Pest Control. 2016, 26, 701–706. [Google Scholar]
  228. Chung, B.K.; Xia, C.; Song, Y.H.; Lee, J.M.; Li, Y.; Kim, H.; Chon, T.S. Sampling of Bemisia tabaci adults using a pre-programmed autonomous pest control robot. J. Asia Pac. Entomol. 2014, 17, 737–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  229. Karut, K.; Kazak, C.; Döker, I. Potential of single and combined releases of Eretmocerus mundus and Macrolophus melanotoma to suppress Bemisia tabaci in protected eggplant. Biol. Control. 2018, 126, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  230. Hoddle, M.S. Biological control of whiteflies on ornamental crops. In Biocontrol in Protected Culture; Heinz, K., Van Driesche, R.G., Parrella, M.P., Eds.; Ball Publishing: Batavia, NY, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  231. Stansly, P.A.; Natwick, E.T. Integrated systems for managing Bemisia tabaci in protected and open field agriculture. In Bemisia: Bionomics and Management of a Global Pest; Stansly, P.A., Naranjo, S.E., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2009; pp. 467–497. [Google Scholar]
  232. Kumar, V.; Houben, K.; McKenzie, C.L.; Osborne, L.S. Efficacy of Eretmocerus eremicus and cyantraniliprole on Bemisia tabaci (MED whitefly). Arthropod Manag. Tests 2017, 42, 1–2. [Google Scholar]
  233. Hanan, A.; He, X.Z.; Wang, Q. Insight into the success of whitefly biological control using parasitoids: Evidence from the Eretmocerus warrae-Trialeurodes vaporariorum system. Pest Manag. Sci. 2017, 3, 2294–2301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  234. Shandhu, S.S.; Sharma, A.K.; Beniwal, V.; Goel, G.; Batra, P.; Kumar, A.; Jaglan, S.; Malhotra, S. Myco-biocontrol of insect pests: Factors involved, mechanism, and regulation. J. Pathog. 2012, 2012, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  235. Eslamizadeh, R.; Sajap, A.S.B.; Omar, D.B.; Azura, N.; Adam, B. Evaluation of different isolates of the entomopathogenic fungus, Paecilomyces fumosoroseus (Deuteromycotina: Hyphomycetes) against Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Biol. Control Plant Prot. 2015, 2, 82–90. [Google Scholar]
  236. Lenteren, J.C.; Martin, N.A. Biological control of whiteflies. In Integrated Pest and Disease Management in Green-House Crops; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1999; pp. 202–216. [Google Scholar]
  237. Head, J.; Lawrence, A.J.; Walters, K.F.A. Efficacy of the entomopathogenic nematode, Steinernema feltiae, against Bemisia tabaci in relation to plant species. J. Appl. Entomol. 2004, 128, 543–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  238. Cuthbertson, A.G.; Mathers, J.J.; Northing, P.; Prickett, A.J.; Walters, K.F. The integrated use of chemical insecticides and the entomopathogenic nematode, Steinernema carpocapsae (Nematoda: Steinernematidae), for the control of sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). J. Insect Sci. 2008, 15, 447–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  239. Harris-Shultz, K.; Knoll, J.; Punnuri, S.; Niland, E.; Ni, X. Evaluation of strains of Beauveria bassiana and Isaria fumosorosea to control sugarcane aphids on grain sorghum. Agrosystems Geosci. Environ. 2020, 3, e20047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  240. Lacey, L.A.; Fransen, J.J.; Carruthers, R.I. Global distribution of naturally occurring fungi of Bemisia, their biologies and use as biological control agents. In Bemisia: 1995 Taxonomy, Biology, Damage, Control and Management; Gerling, D., Mayer, R.T., Eds.; Intercept Ltd.: Andover UK, 1996; pp. 401–433. [Google Scholar]
  241. Olleka, A.; Mandour, N.; Ren, S. Effect of host plant on susceptibility of whitefly Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) to the entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana (Ascomycota: Hypocreales). Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 2009, 19, 717–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  242. Wraight, S.; Carruthers, R.; Jaronski, S.; Bradley, C.; Garza, C. Evaluation of the entomopathogenic fungi Beauveria bassiana and Paecilomyces fumosoroseus for microbial control of the silverleaf whitefly, Bemisia argentifolii. Biol. Control. 2000, 17, 203–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  243. Mascarin, G.M.; Kobori, N.N.; Quintela, E.D.; Delalibera, I., Jr. The virulence of entomopathogenic fungi against Bemisia tabaci biotype B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) and their conidial production using solid substrate fermentation. BioControl 2013, 66, 209–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  244. Cuthbertson, A.G.; Walters, K.F.; Deppe, C. Compatibility of the entomopathogenic fungus Lecanicillium muscarium and insecticides for eradication of sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci. Mycopathologia 2005, 160, 35–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  245. James, R.R.; Elzen, G.W. Antagonism between Beauveria bassiana and imidacloprid when combined for Bemisia argentifolii (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) control. J. Econ. Èntomol. 2001, 94, 357–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  246. Pirzadfard, S.; Zandi-Sohani, N.; Sohrabi, F.; Rajabpour, A. Intraguild interactions of a generalist pred ator, Orius albidipennis, with two Bemisia tabaci parasitoids. Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci. 2020, 40, 259–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  247. Shahpouri, A.; Yarahmadi, F.; Zandi Sohani, N. Functional response of the predatory species Orius albidipennis Reuter (Hemiptera: Anthocoridae) to two life stages of Bemisia tabaci (Genn.)(Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Egyp J. Biol. Pest Control. 2019, 29, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  248. Faria, M.; Wraight, S.P. Biological control of Bemisia tabaci with fungi. Crop Prot. 2001, 20, 767–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  249. Naranjo, S.E.; Ellsworth, P.C. The contribution of conservation biological control to integrated control of Bemisia tabaci in cotton. Biol. Control. 2009, 51, 458–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  250. Gould, J.; Hoelmer, K.; Goolsby, J. Classical Biological Control of Bemisia Tabaci in the United States: A Review of Interagency Research and Implementation; Goolsby, J., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2008; pp. 191–204. [Google Scholar]
  251. Nomikou, M.; Janssen, A.; Schraag, R.; Sabelis, M.W. Phytoseiid predators as potential biological control agents for Bemisia tabaci. Experim. Appl. Acarol. 2001, 25, 271–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  252. Zandi-Sohani, N.; Shishehbor, P. Temperature effects on the development and fecundity of Encarsia acaudaleyrodis (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae), a parasitoid of Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) on cucumber. BioControl 2011, 56, 257–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  253. Hagler, J.R.; Blackmer, F. Identifying inter- and intra-guild feeding activity of an arthropod predator assemblage. Ecol. Entomol. 2013, 38, 258–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  254. Vandervoet, T.F.; Ellsworth, P.C.; Carrière, Y.; Naranjo, S.E. Quantifying conservation biological control for management of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in cotton. J Econ Entomol. 2018, 111, 1056–1068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  255. Legaspi, J.C.; Simmons, A.M.; Legaspi, B.C. Prey preference by Delphastus catalinae (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) on Bemisia argentifolii (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae): Effects of plant species and prey stages. Fla. Entomol. 2006, 89, 218–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  256. Ahmed, M.Z.; Hernandez, Y.V.; Kumar, V.; Francis, A.; Skelley, P.; Rohrig, E.; McKenzie, C.; Osborne, L.; Mannion, C. Pallidus beetle, Delphastus pallidus LeConte (Insecta: Coleoptera: Coccinellidae), a native predatory beetle of whitefly species in Florida; FDACS-P-01782, Issue No. 435; Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry: Tallahassee, FL, USA, 2017; p. 10. [Google Scholar]
  257. Kumar, S.; Sachan, S.K.; Singh, R.; Singh, D.V. Bio-efficacy of some newer insecticides and bio-pesticides against whitefly (Bemisia tabaci Gennadius) in brinjal ecosystem. IJCS 2020, 8, 1883–1888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  258. Naranjo, S.E.; Ellsworth, P.C. Mortality dynamics and population regulation in Bemisia tabaci Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2005, 116, 93–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  259. Hagler, J.R.; Naranjo, S.E. Use of a gut content ELISA to detect whitefly predator feeding activity after field exposure to different insecticide treatments. Biocontrol Sci. Technnol. 2005, 15, 321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  260. Montserrat, M.; Albajes, R.; Castañé, C. Functional response of four heteropteran predators preying on greenhouse whitefly (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) and western flower thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae). Environ. Entom. 2000, 29, 1075–1082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  261. Zhang, C.; Shao, Z.F.; Han, Y.Y.; Wang, X.M.; Wang, Z.Q.; Musa, P.D.; Qiu, B.L.; Ali, S. Effects of Aschersonia aleyrodis on the life table and demographic parameters of Bemisia Tabaci. J. Integr. Agric. 2018, 17, 389–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  262. Koike, M.; Higashio, T.; Komori, A.; Akiyama, K.; Kishimoto, N.; Masuda, E.; Sasaki, M.; Yoshida, S.; Tani, M.; Kuramoti, K.; et al. Verticillium lecanii (Lecanicillium spp.) as epiphyte and its application to biological control of arthropod pests and diseases. IOBC/Wprs Bull 2004, 27, 41–44. [Google Scholar]
  263. Kim, J.J.; Lee, M.H.; Yoon, C.S.; Kim, H.S.; Yoo, J.K.; Kim, K.C. Control of cotton aphid and greenhouse whitefly with a fungal pathogen. In Biological Control of Greenhouse Pests; Food & Fertilizer Technology Center Extension Bulletin 502; Fertilizer Technology Center: Taipei, Taiwan; pp. 8–15.
  264. Rahim, E.; Ahmad, S.S.; Dzolkhifli, O.; Nur, A.A. First record of Isaria fumosorosea Wize (Deuteromycotina: Hyphomycetes) infecting Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in Malaysia. J. Entomol. 2013, 10, 182–190. [Google Scholar]
  265. Zafar, J.; Freed, S.; Khan, B.A.; Farooq, M. Effectiveness of Beauveria bassiana against cotton whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Aleyrodidae: Homoptera) on different host plants. Pak J Zool. 2016, 48, 91–99. [Google Scholar]
  266. Imam, I.I. Role of certain Beauveria bassiana isolate as biological control agent against whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) and its effect on the predator Chrysopela carnea (stephens). Egypt J. Desert Res. 2017, 67, 351–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  267. Iqbal, M.; Arif, M.J.; Saeed, S.; Javed, N. Biorational approach for management of whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae), on cotton crop. Inter. J. Trop Insect Sci. 2021, 42, 1461–1469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  268. Nada, M.S.; Gaffar, S.A.; Taman, A. Comparative effect of three entomopathogenic fungi against whitefly Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) infesting eggplant under field conditions at kafr el-Sheik gov Egypt. J. Plant Prot. Path. 2021, 12, 239–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  269. Schoeller, E.N.; Redak, R.A. Climate and seasonal effects on phenology and biological control of giant whitefly Aleurodicus dugesii (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) with parasitoids in southern California, USA. BioControl 2020, 65, 559–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  270. Xu, X.R.; Li, N.N.; Bao, X.Y.; Douglas, A.E.; Luan, J.B. Patterns of host cell inheritance in the bacterial symbiosis of whitefies. Insect Sci. 2018, 27, 938–946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  271. Ou, D.; Ren, L.M.; Liu, Y.; Ali, S.; Wang, X.M.; Ahmed, M.Z.; Qiu, B.L. Compatibility and efficacy of the parasitoid Eretmocerus hayati and the entomopathogenic fungus Cordyceps javanica for biological control of whitefly Bemisia tabaci. Insects 2019, 10, 425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  272. Reichelderfer, K.H. Economic feasibility of biological control of crop pests. BioControl Crop Prod. 1981, 5, 403–417. [Google Scholar]
  273. Van emdem, H.F.; Service, M.W. Pest and Vector Control; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  274. Kidane, D.; Yang, N.W.; Wan, F.H. Effect of cold storage on the biological fitness of Encarsia sophia (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae), a parasitoid of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Eur. J. Entomol. 2015, 112, 460–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  275. Bar, L.; Czosnek, H.; Sobol, I.; Ghanim, M.; Hariton Shalev, A. Down regulation of dystrophin expression in pupae of the whitefly Bemisia tabaci inhibits the emergence of adults. Insect Mol. Biol. 2019, 28, 662–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  276. Koul, B.; Srivastava, S.; Sanyal, I.; Tripathi, B.; Sharma, V.; Amla, D.V. Transgenic tomato line expressing modified Bacillus thuringiensis cry1Ab gene showing complete resistance to two lepidopteran pests. SpringerPlus 2014, 3, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  277. Koul, B.; Yadav, R.; Sanyal, I.; Amla, D.V. Comparative performance of modified full-length and truncated Bacillus thuringiensis-cry1Ac genes in transgenic tomato. SpringerPlus 2015, 4, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  278. Grover, S.; Jindal, V.; Banta, G.; Taning, C.N.T.; Smagghe, G.; Christiaens, O. Potential of RNA interference in the study and management of the whitefly, Bemisia tabaci. Arch. Insect Biochem Physiol. 2018, 100, e21522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  279. Thakur, N.; Upadhyay, S.K.; Verma, P.C.; Chandrashekar, K.; Tuli, R.; Singh, P.K. Enhanced whitefly resistance in transgenic tobacco plants expressing double stranded RNA of v-ATPase A gene. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e87235. [Google Scholar]
  280. Wamiq, G.; Khan, J.A. Over-expression of ghrmiR166b generates resistance against Bemisia tabaci infestation in Gossypium hirsutum plants. Planta 2018, 247, 1175–1189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  281. Eakteiman, G.; Moses-Koch, R.; Moshitzky, P.; Mestre-Rincon, N.; Vassão, D.G.; Luck, K. Targeting detoxification genes by phloem-mediated RNAi: A new approach for controlling phloem-feeding insect pests. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2018, 100, 10–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  282. Suhag, A.; Yadav, H.; Chaudhary, D.; Subramanian, S.; Jaiwal, R.; Jaiwal, P.K. Biotechnological interventions for the sustainable management of a global pest, whitefly (Bemisia tabaci). Insect Sci. 2021, 28, 1228–1252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  283. Zotti, M.; Smagghe, G. RNAi technology for insect management and protection of beneficial insects from diseases: Lessons, challenges and risk assessments. Neotrop. Entomol. 2018, 44, 197–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  284. Cagliari, D.; Dias, N.P.; Galdeano, D.M.; dos Santos, E.Á.; Smagghe, G.; Zotti, M.J. Management of pest insects and plant diseases by non-transformative RNAi. Front Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 1319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  285. Dubrovina, A.S.; Aleynova, O.A.; Kalachev, A.V.; Suprun, A.R.; Ogneva, Z.V.; Kiselev, K.V. Induction of transgene suppression in plants via external application of synthetic dsRNA. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 1585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  286. Dalakouras, A.; Wassenegger, M.; Dadami, E.; Ganopoulos, I.; Pappas, M.; Papadopoulou, K.K. GMO-free RNAi: Exogenous application of RNA molecules in plants. Plant Physiol. 2020, 182, 38–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  287. Gogoi, A.; Sarmah, N.; Kaldis, A.; Perdikis, D.; Voloudakis, A. Plant insects and mites uptake double-stranded RNA upon its exogenous application on tomato leaves. Planta 2017, 246, 1233–1241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  288. He, Y.; Zhao, J.; Zheng, Y.; Weng, Q.; Biondi, A.; Desneux, N.; Wu, K. Assessment of potential sublethal effects of various insecticides on key biological traits of the tobacco whitefly, Bemisia tabaci. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2013, 9, 246–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  289. Christofoli, M.; Costa, E.C.; Bicalho, K.U.; de Cássia Domingues, V.; Peixoto, M.F.; Alves, C.C.; Araújo, W.L.; de Melo Cazal, C. Insecticidal effect of nanoencapsulated essential oils from Zanthoxylum rhoifolium (Rutaceae) in Bemisia tabaci populations. Ind. Crops Prod. 2015, 70, 301–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  290. Wang, X.; Xu, J.; Wang, X.; Qiu, B.; Cuthbertson, A.G.S.; Du, C. Isaria fumosorosea-based zero- valent iron nanoparticles affect the growth and survival of sweet potato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius). Pes. Manag. Sci. 2019, 75, 2174–2181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  291. Malik, H.J.; Raza, A.; Amin, I.; Scheffler, J.A.; Scheffler, B.E.; Brown, J.K.; Mansoor, S. RNAi-mediated mortality of the whitefly through transgenic expression of double-stranded RNA homologous to acetylcholinesterase and ecdysone receptor in tobacco plants. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  292. Zubair, M.; Khan, M.Z.; Rauf, I.; Raza, A.; Shah, A.H.; Hassan, I.; Amin, I.; Mansoor, S. Artificial micro-RNA (amiRNA)-mediated resistance against whitefly (Bemisia tabaci) targeting three genes. Crop Prot. 2020, 137, 105308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  293. Bleeker, P.M.; Mirabella, R.; Diergaarde, P.J.; Van Doorn, A.; Tissier, A.; Kant, M.R.; Prins, M.; De Vos, M.; Haring, M.A.; Schuurink, R.C. Improved herbivore resistance in cultivated tomato with the sesquiterpene biosynthetic pathway from a wild relative. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 20124–20129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  294. Luo, Y.; Chen, Q.; Luan, J.; Chung, S.H.; Van Eck, J.; Turgeon, R.; Douglas, A.E. Towards an understanding of the molecular basis of effective RNAi against a global insect pest, the whitefly Bemisia tabaci. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2017, 88, 21–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  295. Gul, A.; Hussain, G.; Iqbal, A.; Rao, A.Q.; Yasmeen, A.; Shahid, N.; Ahad, A.; Latif, A.; Azam, S.; Samiullah, T.R.; et al. Constitutive expression of asparaginase in Gossypium hirsutum triggers insecticidal activity against Bemisia tabaci. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  296. Ghanim, M.; Kontsedalov, S.; Czosnek, H. Tissue-specific gene silencing by RNA interference in the whitefly Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius). Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2007, 37, 732–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  297. Luan, J.B.; Ghanim, M.; Liu, S.S.; Czosnek, H. Silencing the ecdysone synthesis and signaling pathway genes disrupts nymphal development in the whitefly. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2013, 43, 740–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  298. Ludba, K. Evaluating Plant Root Uptake of dsRNA for Application in Pest Management. Master’s Thesis, The University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  299. Jin, S.; Zhang, X.; Daniell, H. Pinellia ternata agglutinin expression in chloroplasts confers broad spectrum resistance against aphid, whitefly, lepidopteran insects, bacterial and viral pathogens. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2012, 10, 313–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  300. Anwar, W.; Ali, S.; Nawaz, K.; Iftikhar, S.; Javed, M.A.; Hashem, A.; Alqarawi, A.A.; Abd Allah, E.F.; Akhter, A. Entomopathogenic fungus Clonostachys rosea as a biocontrol agent against whitefly (Bemisia tabaci). BiocontrolSci. Technol. 2018, 28, 750–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  301. Puri, H.; Jindal, V. Target of rapamycin (TOR) gene is vital for whitefly survival and reproduction. J. Biosci. 2021, 46, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  302. Brookes, G.; Barfoot, P. Environmental impacts of genetically modified (GM) crop use 1996–2015: Impacts on pesticide use and carbon emissions. GM Crops Food. 2016, 8, 117–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  303. Sheldon, C.C.; Finnegan, E.J.; Dennis, E.S.; Peacock, W.J. Quantitative effects of vernalization on FLC and SOC1 expression. Plant J. 2006, 45, 871–883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  304. Stansly, P.A. Seasonal abundance of silverleaf whitefly in southwest Florida vegetable fields. Proc Fla State Hort Soc. 1996, 108, 234–242. [Google Scholar]
  305. Stansly, P.A.; Liu, T.X.; Vavrina, C.V. Response of Bemisia argentifolii (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) in bioassay, greenhouse tomato transplants and field plants of tomato and eggplant. J. Econ. Entomol. 1998, 91, 686–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  306. Nicolopoulou-Stamati, P.; Maipas, S.; Kotampasi, C.; Stamatis, P.; Hens, L. Chemical pesticides and human health: The urgent need for a new concept in agriculture. Front. Public Health 2016, 14, 148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  307. World Health Organization. Public Health Impact of Pesticides used in Agriculture; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  308. Alewu, B.; Nosiri, C. Pesticides and human health. In Pesticides in the Modern World Effects of Pesticides Exposure; Stoytcheva, M., Ed.; InTech Open: London, UK, 2011; pp. 231–250. [Google Scholar]
  309. Zheng, S.; Chen, B.; Qiu, X.; Chen, M.; Ma, Z.; Yu, X. Distribution and risk assessment of 82 pesticides in Jiulong river and estuary. Chemosphere 2016, 144, 1177–1192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  310. Cuthbertson, A.G.; Walters, K.F.; Northing, P. The susceptibility of immature stages of Bemisia tabaci to the en-tomopathogenic fungus Lecanicillium muscarium on tomato and verbena foliage. Mycopathologia 2005, 159, 23–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  311. Bacci, L.; Crespo, A.L.; Galvan, T.L.; Pereira, E.J.; Picanço, M.C.; Silva, G.A.; Chediak, M. Toxicity of insecticides to the sweetpotato whitefly (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) and its natural enemies. Pest Manag. Sci. 2007, 63, 699–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  312. Bi, J.L.; Toscano, N.C. Current status of the greenhouse whitefly, Trialeurodes vaporariorum, susceptibility to neonicotinoid and conventional insecticides on strawberries in southern California. Pest Manag. Sci. 2007, 63, 747–752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  313. Khan, S.M. Varietal performance and chemical control used as tactics against sucking insect pests of cotton. Sarhad J. Agric. 2011, 27, 255–261. [Google Scholar]
  314. Golmohammadi., G.; Hosseini-Gharalari, A.; Fassihi, M.; Arbabtafti, R. Efficacy of one botanical and three synthetic insecticides against silverleaf whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Hem.: Aleyrodidae) on cucumber plants in the field. J. Crop Prot. 2014, 3, 435–441. [Google Scholar]
  315. Jamieson, L.E.; Page-Weir, N.E.M.; Chhagan, A.; Curtis, C. The efficacy of insecticides against australian citrus whitefly. NZ Plant Prot. 2010, 63, 254–261. [Google Scholar]
  316. Sathyan, T.; Murugesan, N.; Elanchezhyan, K.; Raj, A.S.; Ravi, G. Efficacy of synthetic insecticides against sucking insect pests in cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. Int. J. Entomol. Res. 2016, 1, 16–21. [Google Scholar]
  317. Pachundkar, N.N.; Borad, P.K.; Patil, P.A. Evaluation of various synthetic insecticides against sucking insect pests of cluster bean. Int. J. Sci. Res. Publi. 2013, 3, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  318. Oladimeji, A.; Kannike, M.A. Comparative studies on the efficacy of neem, basil leaf extracts and synthetic insecticide, lambda-cyhalothrin, against Podagrica spp. on okra. Afr. J. Microbiol. Res. 2010, 4, 33–37. [Google Scholar]
  319. Magsi, F.H.; Hussain, L.K.; Ahmed, C.M.; Bhutto, Z.; Channa, N.; Ahmed, J.A. Effectiveness of different synthetic insecticides against Bemisia tabaci (genn) on tomato crop. Int. J. Fauna Biol. Stud. 2017, 4, 6–9. [Google Scholar]
  320. Jha, S.K.; Kumar, M. Relative efficacy of different insecticides against whitefly, Bemisia tabaci on tomato under field condition. J. Entomol. Zool. Stud. 2017, 5, 728–732. [Google Scholar]
  321. Mohammadali, M.T.; Alyousuf, A.A.; Baqir, H.A.; Kadhim, A.A. Evaluation of the efficacy of different Neocontinoid insecticides against cotton whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) on eggplant under greenhouse condition. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 388, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  322. Parhyar, R.A.; Mari, J.M.; Bukero, A.; Lanjar, A.G.; Hyder, M.; Khan, N.; Bukero, A.A.; Soomro, H.U. Relative efficacy of synthetic insecticides against sucking insect pests of chilli crop. Pure Appl. Biol 2019, 8, 2248–2256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  323. El, A.E.; Khaleid, M.S.; AbdAllah, S.A.; Ali, O.S. Effect of some insecticides alone and in combination with salicylic acid against aphid, Aphis gossypii, and whitefly Bemisia tabaci on the cotton field. Bull Natl. Res. Cent 2019, 43, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  324. Thorat, S.S.; Kumar, S.; Patel, J.D. Bio efficacy of different pesticides against whitefly (Bemisia tabaci Gennadius) in tomato. J. Entomol. Zool. Stud. 2020, 8, 1428–1431. [Google Scholar]
  325. Zawrah, M.F.; El Masry, A.T.; Noha, L.; Saleh, A.A. Efficacy of certain insecticides against whitefly Bemicia tabaci (Genn.) infesting tomato plants and their associated predators. Plant Arch. 2020, 20, 2221–2228. [Google Scholar]
  326. Jain, D.; Kumar, H.; Chouhan, B.S.; Singh, B.; Sumeriya, H. Comparative efficacy of different bio and synthetic insecticides against sucking pests of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L. Moench). Pharma Innov. J. SP. 2021, 10, 719–727. [Google Scholar]
  327. Sana, K.; Iqbal, T.; Usman, A. Comparative efficacy of botanicals and a synthetic insecticide against sucking insect pests of brinjal. Ann. Rom. Soc. Cell Biol. 2021, 25, 19381–19389. [Google Scholar]
  328. Dittrich, V.; Ernst, G.H.; Ruesch, O.; Uk, S. Resistance mechanisms in sweetpotato whitefly (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) populations from Sudan, Turkey, Guatemala, and Nicaragua. J. Econ. Entomol. 1990, 83, 1665–1670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  329. Clark, J.M.; Yamaguchi, I. Scope and status of pesticide resistance. In ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, USA, 2001; Volume 808, pp. 1–22. [Google Scholar]
  330. Koul, B.; Taak, P. Soil Pollution: Causes and Consequences. In Biotechnological Strategies for Effective Remediation of Polluted Soils; Springer: Singapore, 2018; pp. 1–37. [Google Scholar]
  331. Horowitz, A.R.; Antignus, Y.; Gerling, D. Management of Bemisia tabaci whiteflies. In the Whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) Interaction with Geminivirus-Infected Host Plants: Bemisia tabaci, Host Plants and Geminiviruses; Thompson, W.M.O., Ed.; Springer: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2011; pp. 293–322. [Google Scholar]
  332. Horowitz, A.R.; Denholm, I.; Morin, S. Resistance to insecticides in the TYLCV vector, Bemisia tabaci. In Tomato Yellow Leaf Curl Virus Disease: Management, Molecular Biology, Breeding for Resistance; Czosnek, H., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2007; pp. 305–325. [Google Scholar]
  333. Shah, R.; Al-Sadi, A.M.; Scott, I.M.; AlRaeesi, A.; AlJahdhami, A.A. Insecticide resistance monitoring in whitefly (Bemisia tabaci)(Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in Oman. J. Asia-Pacific Entomol 2020, 23, 1248–1254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  334. Naveen, N.C.; Chaubey, R.; Kumar, D.; Rebijith, K.B.; Rajagopal, R.; Subrahmanyam, B.; Subramanian, S. Insecticide resistance status in the whitefly, Bemisia tabaci genetic groups Asia-I, Asia-II-1 and Asia-II-7 on the Indian subcontinent. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 40634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  335. Khalid, M.Z.; Ahmed, S.l.; Ashkar, I.; Sabagh, A.E.L.; Liu, L.; Zhong, G. Evaluation of Resistance Development in Bemisia tabaci Genn. (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) in Cotton against Different Insecticides Insects 2021, 12, 996. [Google Scholar]
  336. Pappas, M.L.; Migkou, F.; Broufas, G.D. Incidence of resistance to neonicotinoid insecticides in greenhouse populations of the whitefly, Trialeurodes vaporariorum (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) from Greece. Appl. Entomol. Zool 2013, 48, 373–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  337. Toscano, N.C.; Prabhaker, N.; Castle, S.J.; Henneberry, T.J. Inter-regional differences in baseline toxicity of Bemisia argentifolii (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) to the two insect growth regulators, buprofezin and pyriproxyfen. J. Econ. Entomol. 2001, 94, 1538–1546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  338. Nauen, R.; Denholm, I. Resistance of insect pests to neonicotinoid insecticides: Current status and future prospects. Arch. Ins. Biochem. Physiol. 2005, 58, 200–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  339. Shah, R.; Scott, I.M. Susceptibility of Bemisia tabaci (MEAM1) Gennadius (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) to Deltamethrin, Thiamethoxam and Pyriproxyfen in Oman . Int. J. Agric. Biol. 2020, 24, 279–284. [Google Scholar]
  340. Carrière, Y.; Ellers-Kirk, C.; Hartfield, K.; Larocque, G.; Degain, B.; Dutilleul, P.; Dennehy, T.J.; Marsh, S.E.; Crowder, D.W.P.; Li, X.; et al. Large-scale, spatially-explicit test of the refuge strategy for delaying insecticide resistance. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 775–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  341. Shelby, E.A.; Moss, J.B.; Andreason, S.A.; Simmons, A.M.; Moore, A.J.; Moore, P.J. Debugging: Strategies and considerations for efficient RNAi-mediated control of the whitefly Bemisia Tabaci. Insects 2020, 11, 723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  342. Xia, J.; Guo, Z.; Yang, Z.; Han, H.; Wang, S.; Xu, H.; Yang, X.; Yang, F.; Wu, Q.; Xie, W.; et al. Whitefly hijacks a plant detoxification gene that neutralizes plant toxins. Cell 2021, 184, 1693–1705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  343. Zhang, P.J.; Broekgaarden, C.; Zheng, S.J.; Snoeren, T.A.; van Loon, J.J.; Gols, R.; Dicke, M. Jasmonate and ethylene signaling mediate whitefly-induced interference with indirect plant defense in Arabidopsis thaliana. N. Phytol. 2013, 197, 1291–1299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  344. Zhang, P.J.; Wei, J.N.; Zhao, C.; Zhang, Y.F.; Li, C.Y.; Liu, S.S.; Dicke, M.; Yu, X.P.; Turlings, T.C.J. Airborne host-plant manipulation by whiteflies via an inducible blend of plant volatiles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019, 116, 7387–7396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  345. Heidel-Fischer, H.M.; Vogel, H. Molecular mechanisms of insect adaptation to plant secondary compounds. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2015, 8, 8–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  346. Malka, O.; Easson, M.L.A.E.; Paetz, C.; Go tz, M.; Reichelt, M.; Stein, B.; Luck, K.; Stanisic, A.; Juravel, K.; Santos-Garcia, D. Glucosylation prevents plant defense activation in phloem-feeding insects. Nat. Chem Biol. 2020, 16, 1420–1426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  347. Matsuda, Y.; Nonomura, T.; Kakutani, K.; Kimbara, J.; Osamura, K.; Kusakari, S. Avoidance of an electric field by insects: Fundamental biological phenomenon for an electrostatic pest-exclusion strategy. J. Phys. Conf Ser. 2015, 646, 012003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  348. Javed, M.A.; Matthews, G.A. Bioresidual and integrated pest management status of a biorational agent and a novel insecticide against whitefly and its key parasitoids. Int. J. Pest Manag. 2002, 48, 13–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  349. Jazzar, C.; Hammad, E.A. The efficacy of enhanced aqueous extracts of Melia azedarach leaves and fruits integrated with the Camptotylus reuteri releases against the sweetpotato whitefly nymphs. Bullet Insectol. 2003, 56, 269–276. [Google Scholar]
  350. Reddy, P.P. Organic Farming for Sustainable Horticulture; Scientific Publishers: Jodhpur, India, 2012; Volume 91. [Google Scholar]
  351. Tamilnayagan, T.; Suganthy, M.; Ganapathy, N.; Renukadevi, P.; Malathi, V.G. Integrated pest management strategies against Bemicia tabaci and tomato leaf curl New Delhi virus (TOLCNDV) affecting ash gourd (Benincasa hispida) in tamil nadu. J. Exp. Zool India. 2019, 22, 1133–1138. [Google Scholar]
  352. Arnemann, J.A.; Bevilaqua, J.G.; Bernardi, L.; da Rosa, D.O.; da Encarnação, F.A.; Pozebon, H.; Marques, R.P.; Moro, D.; Ribas, D.; Patias, L.S.; et al. Integrated management of tomato whitefly under greenhouse conditions. J. Agri Sci. 2019, 11, 443–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  353. Riley, D.G.; Srinivasan, R. Integrated management of tomato yellow leaf curl virus and its whitefly vector in tomato. J. Econ. Entomol. 2019, 112, 1526–1540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  354. Abd-Allah, S.M.; Hendawy, M.A.; Heba, A.I. Efficiency of some pesticides on cotton whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae), infesting soybeans plants, Glycine hispida (Max). J. Product Dev. 2015, 20, 47–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  355. Baiomy, F. Efficacy of kaolin foliar application against tomato whitefly; Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Egypt Acad J. Biol. Sci. 2017, 10, 71–80. [Google Scholar]
  356. Jaber, L.R.; Araj, S.E.; Qasem, J.R. Compatibility of endophytic fungal entomopathogens with plant extracts for the management of sweetpotato whitefly Bemesia tabaci Gennadius (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Biol. Cont. 2018, 117, 164–1671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  357. Conboy, N.J.; McDaniel, T.; George, D.; Ormerod, A.; Edwards, M.; Donohoe, P.; Gatehouse, A.M.; Tosh, C.R. Volatile organic compounds as insect repellents and plant elicitors: An integrated pest management (IPM) strategy for glasshouse whitefly (Trialeurodes vaporariorum). J. Chem. Ecol. 2020, 46, 1090–10104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  358. Mokrane, S.; Cavallo, G.; Tortorici, F.; Romero, E.; Fereres, A.; Djelouah, K.; Verrastro, V.; Cornara, D. Behavioral effects induced by organic insecticides can be exploited for a sustainable control of the orange spiny whitefly Aleurocanthus spiniferus. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 15746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  359. Malinga, L.N.; Laing, M.D. Efficacy of three biopesticides against cotton pests under field conditions in South Africa. Crop Prot. 2021, 145, 105578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  360. Gill, G.S.; Chong, J.H. Efficacy of selected insecticides as replacement for neonicotinoids in managing sweetpotato whitefly on poinsettia. Hort Technol. 2021, 31, 745–752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  361. Parsa, S.; Medina, C.; Rodríguez, V. Sources of pest resistance in cassava. Crop Prot. 2015, 68, 79–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  362. Dutcher, J.D. A review of resurgence and replacement causing pest outbreaks in IPM. In General Concepts in Integrated Pest and Disease Management; Ciancio, A., Mukerji, K.G., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2007; pp. 27–43. [Google Scholar]
  363. Li, S.; Li, H.; Zhou, Q. Essential oils from two aromatic plants repel the tobacco whitefly Bemisia tabaci. J. Pest Sci. 2022, 95, 971–982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  364. Xia, C.; Chon, T.S.; Ren, Z.; Lee, J.M. Automatic identification and counting of small size pests in greenhouse conditions with low computational cost. Ecol. Inform. 2015, 29, 139–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. The whitefly life cycle. (A) Oval-shaped eggs attached to the leaf via a stalk-like structure for fluid uptake, (B) the 1st instar nymph, (C) 2nd, 3rd, and 4th instar nymphs, (D) red-eyed 4th instar nymph, (E) pharate adult stage or pupal stage, (F) emergence of adult whiteflies after metamorphosis leaving the transparent shells.
Figure 1. The whitefly life cycle. (A) Oval-shaped eggs attached to the leaf via a stalk-like structure for fluid uptake, (B) the 1st instar nymph, (C) 2nd, 3rd, and 4th instar nymphs, (D) red-eyed 4th instar nymph, (E) pharate adult stage or pupal stage, (F) emergence of adult whiteflies after metamorphosis leaving the transparent shells.
Agriculture 12 01317 g001
Figure 2. A schematic representation of the available whitefly management (WFM) strategies.
Figure 2. A schematic representation of the available whitefly management (WFM) strategies.
Agriculture 12 01317 g002
Table 1. Reports on the impact of whitefly infestation on crop plants.
Table 1. Reports on the impact of whitefly infestation on crop plants.
Crop NameStudy LocationDamages CausedReference
TomatoFloridaEconomic loss of >125 million US dollars.[75]
TomatoIsraelLeaf curl, flower drop, short internodes, dwarfing, and leathery leaves.[76]
TomatoSpainMultiple necrotic rings on the leaves.[77]
TomatoSpainThe average number of holes per leaf were 0.23 ± 0.10 and 0.3 ± 0.12 on the fruits during winter and summer experiments.[78]
TomatoEgyptReduction in chlorophyll A and B in infected tomato leaves by 8 and 12.8%, respectively.[79]
EggplantChinaReduction in plant height: 12.6%, leaf area: 12.7%, dry matter: 8.2%, absolute growth rate: 26.0%, relative growth rate: 25.0%, and net assimilation rate: 22.2%.[80]
EggplantChinaReduction in leaf area, fresh, and dry weight by 26.6, 21.8, and 19.27%, respectively. Reduction in chlorophyll content and photosynthetic by 9.7 and 65.9%, respectively.[81]
TobaccoChinaReduction in plant height: 32.7%, internode length: 4%, and photosynthetic rate: 81.5%.[82]
TobaccoChinaAt 11, 14, and 20 days, infected leaves had 42.36, 56.96, and 81.43% less chlorophyll A than the control plants.[83]
SugarcaneIranChlorophyll content reduced to 0.583 mg/g compared to 1.48 mg/g in the control group.[84]
Cantaloupe, cucumber, and zucchiniSaudi ArabiaAverage reduction in cantaloupe pigments: 0.87, cucumber: 1.12, zucchini: 0.54 compared to 1.13, 2.09, and 1.05 in the control.[85]
ZucchiniFloridaReduced chlorophyll content by 66% in petioles compared to leaf blades at lower infestation stage.[86]
ZucchiniFloridaThere was a reduction in fruits yield using varied number of whiteflies compared to control (control: 5.1 ± 0.5, 30 pairs: 3.9 ± 0.5, 60 pairs: 0.4 ± 0.1 and 120 pairs: 0).[87]
CassavaFiji IslandReduced average conductivity rates (M = 11.90 mmol m2s−1), compared to non-infested foliage (M = 17.80 mmol m2s−1).[88]
SoybeansBrazilReduction in grain weight (33 g/1000 grains) and loss in protein contents (440 kg/ha) were recorded.[89]
Snap beanGeorgiaUp to 45% of snap bean was lost due to whiteflies infestation.[90]
SquashGeorgiaUp to 35% of the squash was lost due to whiteflies infestation.[91]
VegetablesTexasEconomic loss of 29 million US dollars was recorded.[92]
VegetablesSouth CarolinaThe infestations resulted in thickened and distorted leaves, which become curled and crumpled.[93]
PotatoIndiaThe percent incidence (40–75%) of whitefly transmitted viruses was reported.[94]
Coconut palmIndiaIn severe cases, the nymphs covered almost 60% of the leaf, which led to yellowing, necrosis, and dehydration.[95]
ChiliSri LankaChili leaf curl virus, carried by whitefly, has led to leaf distortion and stunted growth in chili plants.[96]
Table 2. Reports on traditional strategies for whiteflies management (WFM).
Table 2. Reports on traditional strategies for whiteflies management (WFM).
CropMaterials UsedMode of PreparationEffectsReference
TomatoYellow sticky trapsThe traps were placed at a height of 1.4 m in the middle of the greenhouse.Up to 67 whiteflies were caught per trap.[147]
TomatoYellow sticky trapsThe traps were hung either vertically or parallel to tomato lines.Vertically hung yellow sticky traps caught more whiteflies (66.57) per row in the fields.[148]
TomatoSeveral colored and shaped adhesive trapsThe traps were placed at different rates: 2, 4, and 6 traps per 250 m2.The yellow rectangular traps proved more effective with a mean of 5.7 whiteflies/trap.[149]
EggplantYellow trapsThe traps were put at 30 cm above the plants at a rate of 1 trap per 5 m2 in the field.Yellow sticky traps caught up to 27 whiteflies in 6 days.[150]
EggplantSludge/slurry, ashes, cattle urine, and dungWood ash sprinkled at 50 g/plants, cow urine, cow dung, slurry and water sprayed at 1:10 ratio for five days.Lower pest densities, reduced production costs, and less harm to the non-target arthropods were recorded.[142]
EggplantCow urine and vermin-washThey were prepared at 20, 30, 40, and 50% concentrations.The whiteflies densities were reduced with 50% concentration being the most effective.[141]
EggplantCow urine, different plant extracts, and vermiwashCow urine (CU) alone formulated at 20, 30, 40, and 50%, then mixed with plant extracts and vermiwash.Lowest whitefly mean number (2.22) was reported in CU 20% + neem leaf extract 10%.[139]
CottonNon-sticky, yellow sticky, and colorless sticky cardThe traps with 7.5 × 12.5-cm, 72 cm2 and 93.75 cm2 were used.After 24 h, non-sticky cards trapped 264, sticky cards caught 523, while colorless sticky cards caught 37 whiteflies per card.[151]
PepperCombination of trap crops with yellow trapsYellow sticky traps and trap crops were evaluated separately and in combination.Yellow sticky traps were more effective (42 whiteflies/traps).[152]
CottonYellow sticky trapsThe traps were hung vertically at 45 cm above the plant using a wooden pole.Average densities were 34.07 whiteflies/trap. The whitefly number decreased to 0.83/leaf.[153]
OkraButtermilk10 L of buttermilk was fermented, 1 L of the fermented material was added to 9 L of water and sprinkled on the crops.The formulation significantly reduced the whiteflies population by 60%.[133]
Crop plantsPlants extracts and soapMixture of marigold and hot chili pods, filtrates diluted with water at 1:2, 1 teaspoon of soap was added per 1 liter of extracts and sprayed on the crops.Most agricultural pests are curtailed/managed effectively.[71]
CowpeaCow urine with botanical extractsThe cow urine was prepared at 25, 50, 75, and 100% with 1% extract of neem seed kernel.Cow urine 100% + neem 1% proved most effective with 13.26/leaf.[136]
OkraCow urine with plant extractsPepper, garlic, neem leaf, and cow urine combination at quaternary level were prepared and applied at 10% w/v.Reduction in whitefly numbers (95.2%) was reported.[143]
Crop plantsCow urine, soap, and plant extract20 g crushed root of turmeric was steeped in 200 mL cattle urine. The mixture was diluted using 2–3 L of tap water (8–12 mL).Sap-sucking insects including whiteflies, aphids, caterpillars, and red mites were significantly reduced.[154]
Agricultural cropsCow urineUrine diluted in water (1: 20).The treatment was effective against insects and pathogens and serves as fertilizer to the crops.[98]
Crop plantsButtermilkITK using fermented curd water (buttermilk).White fly, jassids, aphids, etc. were managed/suppressed efficiently.[132]
Agricultural cropsCow dung and urine with fermented plant extractsFermented plant extracts, cow dung/urine in a ratio of 1:20 water.The insect pests were well managed.[138,140]
OkraColored sticky traps1500 mL empty Pepsi containers coated with yellow, green, purple, and black were kept in the field, 2 m apart and 0.6 m above the crops.Yellow traps were found most promising with a mean of 61.13 whiteflies per trap.[155]
Crop plantsKerosene–soap–water emulsionIndigenous technical knowledge (ITK) using kerosene–soap emulsion.It had a detrimental effect on piercing-sucking insects.[39,144]
CottonTraps/barrier crops and parasitoidsThe intercropping and perimeter cropping strategies involving 3 intercrop schemes and 3 peripheral plantings were examined.About 1.44 and 1.15/100 cm−2 of both nymph and adult whiteflies were recorded on the leaf surface.[24]
Black gramSoap, indoneem, neem, buttermilk, actara, and lisapol detergents.The treatments were used separately and in combinationLower whiteflies number (7.56) was found in treated plants compared to 37.11 whiteflies per leaf in untreated plants. The combined effect led to 26.50–27.35% reduction in whitefly number.[28]
Table 3. Reports on the use of plant-based products for whitefly management (WFM).
Table 3. Reports on the use of plant-based products for whitefly management (WFM).
Crop NamePlant Products UsedResultsReference
Sweet potatoUse of plant extracts (petunia)Whitefly controlled at 0.5 and 1 mg ml−1 concentrations (70% and 82% for adult and eggs mortality).[170]
Tomato, cucumber, and beanAqueous, methanol and acetone fruits and leaf extracts of chinaberryMethanol extract reduced the whitefly number to 1.44± 0.24 per plant.[171]
TomatoSeeds and leaf extracts from eight plant speciesThe highest lethality (41%) was caused by Jatropha dhofanica L. while 30.85% was caused by Azadirachta indica A. Juss as the lowest fatality rate.[172]
TomatoGinger oilsThe oils were effective in repelling the whitefly on tomatoes[173]
MelonEssential oils from thyme and peppermintThe extracts were effective with 62.78% (peppermint) and 100% (thyme) fatality rate.[174]
TomatoSeed extracts from Trichillia havanensis Jack. and Passiflora edulis SimsPassiflora edulis Sims led to 60% lethality while Trichillia havanensis Jack. caused 70% whiteflies fatality.[175]
Winged soapberryCrude and semi-purified saponin extracts from Sapindus saponaria L.D. Benson fruitsWhitefly lethality increased as the quantity of unrefined and semi-purified saponin preparations increased (20 to 80%).[176]
Soybean, cotton and melonOils of sugar appleWhitefly nymphs shrunk and detached from the surface of the leaf after being exposed to the seed oil.[177]
Coleus plantEssential oils from various plant speciesAfter one, two, and three weeks of treatment, none of the essential oil offered sufficient suppression of whitefly.[100]
Sweet potatoAqueous plant extractsThe extracts were as lethal as Imidacloprid to the sweet potato whitefly.[178]
LaboratoryMint and colothyn foliar extracts (crude or formulated)At LC50, the extracts were effective (100% toxicity) against whiteflies and aphids.[179]
Dry beanNeem oilsOn the 6th day after treatment, the fatality rate for first to third instars was above 80% at 1% concentration.[180]
LaboratoryEssential oils from 4 different plantsMortality rate of up to 79% was recorded from the report.[181]
Sweet potatoPlant derived pesticides (neem)The oviposition, egg hatching, and adult eclosion were reduced by 23.1, 53.2, and 26.6% compared to control.[182]
OkraNeem essential oilsNeem oil 5% caused 70.77% mortality in B. tabaci 72 h after application[183]
Different cropsEssential oils from aromatic plantsThe EOs acted as a repellant, insecticide, and growth inhibitors.[184]
TomatoFermented botanicals from neem, kakawate, marigold, and makabuhayMarigold was found to be most effective among the four extracts.[185]
LaboratoryEssential oils and secondary metabolites from lants (cumin, cinnamon, lemongrass and citronella grass.)Cinnamaldehyde (deterrent at 0.084 mg/L and deadly at 8.4 mg/L) and linalool (retardant at 0.006 mg/L with unknown lethality).[186]
Y-tube olfactometerVolatile compounds from six plants species.There was more than 80% attraction response, more than 62% deterrent effect and more than 80% anti oviposition.[82]
TomatoFive different combinations of chemical treatment100% mortality on treatment 1–4 and 2 whiteflies on treatment number 5.[187]
Eugenia Spring ex Mart. foliar extracts80–97% lethality rates on the insects.[64]
OkraPlant extractsSignificant reduction on the whitefly population ranging from 5.19 to 63.17%.[188]
TomatoClove and bitter orange essential oilsThe mortality of whiteflies ranged from 70 to 90%.[189]
TomatoEssential oils from different plant speciesBoth adult and egg number decreased to 6.6 ± 0.93, 6.0 ± 2.39 compared to 22.6 ± 2.23 and 70.6 ± 19.29 in the control.[169]
PotatoExtracts from five plant species viz: neem, licorice, turmeric, pomegranate, and thymeThe most efficient substance was neem oil, with 66.79 and 67.71% reduction of whiteflies density in the two seasons (2014 and 2015).[190]
TomatoPlant aqueous extractsUp to 78% and 72.8% were recorded for ovicidal and mortality rate, respectively.[60]
LaboratoryEssential oils from lemongrass, cumin, and cinnamonAfter 24 h, cinnamaldehyde was the most poisonous (100%) to the whiteflies, followed by geraniol (32.1%) and citronellol (17.1%).[191]
LaboratoryEssential oils from Gardenia jasminoides Ellis and its four primary chemical constituentsThe extracts had fumigant activity against whitefly adults (81.48%) and acute toxicity against the larvae (77.28%).[155]
EggplantsAqueous extracts of nine different plant speciesCotton seed extract demonstrated superior effects to pest infestation in eggplant fields.[192]
ChilliAqueous plant extractsUp to 96.67% mortality rate on the nymph of whiteflies[64]
CucumberPlant extracts and commercial insecticidesUp to 80% whitefly mortality was reported.[193]
EggplantBio pesticidesWhitefly mortality was highest (83.94%) in n spiromesifen+ imidacloprid and lowest (64.04%) in d dinotefuran.[194]
CottonEssential oils from four different plantsAbout 30.8% to 64.2% mortality rates were reported.[195]
CowpeaPlant extracts (Neem leaves)Promising results on population reduction in whiteflies, aphids, and pod borer.[196]
Diets bioassaysFrench marigold plant aqueous and methanolic extractsUp to 80% rate and antioviopostion were recorded on whiteflies.[197]
Common beanNanoencapsulated essential oils from the fruits and foliage of Xylopia aromatic Lam. Mart.Up to 98% reduction in oviposition by the whiteflies was recorded on the snap bean leaves.[198]
Different plantsLemon peel essential oilsAbout 99 to 100% mortality rate in both whitefly and mealy bugs.[199]
Tomato and StrawberryNeem oils and chamomile extractsNeem oil lethality (71.3%), chamomile and lechuguilla extracts (62%) while neem oil with cactus pectin led to 60% mortality.[26]
Tomato and StrawberryEssential oils of neem60 to 71.3% mortality was observed.[26]
CottonOcimum gratissimum Lam. and Cymbopogon citratus Stapf. volatile compoundsA lower dose of C. citratus reduced whitefly number to 3.77 ± 0.51/30 plants, while a high dose of 5% of O. gratissimum reduced whitefly numbers to 3.38 ± 0.53/30 plants.[200]
LaboratoryPlant extract (Avacado Kernel)The extracts caused a high mortality of 90% in adults and 98.3% in the nymphs of whiteflies.[201]
TomatoEthanolic extracts of Anona speciesAt 13 days following treatment, fewer eggs (35.00%) had hatched in the LC90 treatment than in the other groups.[202]
Table 4. Reports on biological strategies for whitefly management (WFM).
Table 4. Reports on biological strategies for whitefly management (WFM).
Crop NameBiological Agents InvolvedEffectsReference(s)
Predators
CottonGeocoris pallens GeocoridaeA predator–prey ratio of 0.75 G. pallens per 100 sweeps to one B. tabaci nymph was recorded.[253,254]
Cotton, tomato, hibiscus, cowpea, collardDelphastus catalinae (Horn) (Coleoptera: CoccinellidaeHigh rate of predation on whiteflies with highest effects on cotton and lowest on collard plants.[255]
CucumberChrysoperla carnea (Steph.), Orius albidipennis (Reuter) and Phytoseiulus persimilis Athias-HenrioIndividual predation suppressed whiteflies density on cucumber with highest effect recorded in the combination of the three predators.[227]
TomatoDicyphus Hesperus KnightAbout 88.8% decrease in whitefly density was recorded.[78]
Cotton, cantaloupeHippodamia convergens CoccinellidaeNymphal mortality per petri-dish reached 45.5%.[253]
Cotton ficus hedgeDelphastus pallidus Coccinellidae68.0% and 55.1% eggs and nymph mortality on leaf disc, respectively.[256,257]
PoinsettiaSerangium parcesetosum CoccinellidaeWhen four individuals/plant were used, B. tabaci fatality reached 60%.[73]
Collards, soybean, and tomatoNephaspis oculatus CoccinellidaeWithin 24 h, up to 72.55% average predation on eggs was reported.[255]
CottonCollops vittatus MelyridaeB. tabaci densities decreased by 86%.[253,254]
CottonGeocoris punctipes HemipteraThere was 36% nymphal predation petri dish. Predation on 4th instar nymphs led to major death of B. tabaci in the crops.[73,258]
CottonSpanagonicus albofasciatus Miridae30–50% of the ova or mature females were reactive for B. tabaci antigen.[259]
CucumberMacrolophus caliginosus Wagner, Dicyphus tamaninii Wagner, Orius majusculus Reuter, and O. laevigatus Feiber.D. tamaninii consumed whitefly effectively at both lower and high densities while Orius majusculus and Macrolophus caliginosus were ineffective on whiteflies.[260]
Entomopathogenic fungi
Melon, zucchini, squash, and cucumberBeauveria bassiana (Balsamo-Crivelli) Vuillemin and Cordyceps fumosorosea (Wize) KeplerMore than 90% suppression of the whitefly recorded.[242]
CottonTrachelas spp. CorinnidaeAbout 33.3% of individuals were reactive for B. tabaci DNA causing low species densities.[253]
EggplantAschersonia aleyrodis Aschal.The rate of egg hatching in treated plants (85.3 ± 61.42) was less than the untreated groups (91.52 ± 2.10).
The viability of the 1st (22.56 ± 1.20%), 2nd (39.30 ± 1.88%), and 3rd (39.30 ± 1.88%) instar nymphs were recorded.
[261]
Cucumber, melon, tomatoVerticillium lecanii (Zimm) strainsReduction in whitefly population and symptoms of powdery mildew disease.[262]
CottonVerticillium lecanii Zimm, Beauveria bassiana (Balsamo-Crivelli) Vuillemin, and Paecilomyces spp.The mortality rate ranged from 57.1 to 100% depending on the strain deployed.[263]
EggplantIsaria fumosoroseus WizeIt killed eggs, second, third, and fourth instars at a rate of 91, 90, 86, and 89%.[264]
SoybeanAschersonia aleyrodis Aschal.Greatest mortality (99%) reported.[69]
Cotton and tomatoBeauveria bassiana (Balsamo-Crivelli) VuilleminThe fungi (Bb-01) reduced whitefly eggs by 65.30% and nymphs by 88.82%.[265]
Cucumber, tomato, melon, and many other cropsBeauveria bassiana (Balsamo-Crivelli) VuilleminThe mean fatality for larvae raised on cotton: 52.3 ± 7.3, cucumber: 91.8 ± 5.8.[68]
TomatoAschersonia. Placenta Berk.The fatality rate varied from 93% to 100%.[59]
Sweet potatoIsaria spp.LC50 and LT50 values when exposed to 1000 spores/mm2: LC50: second instar: 72–118 spores/mm2; third instar: 166–295 spores/mm2; fourth instar: 166–295 spores/mm2.[70]
CottonBeauveria bassiana (Balsamo-Crivelli) VuilleminThe fatality (56%) was observed at a higher dosage (1107 spores/mL)[266]
CucumbersIsaria fumosoroseus (Wize) A.H.SAfter 7 days of treatment, the 2nd instar was the most susceptible phase, with 83% fatalities.[33]
CottonBeauveria bassiana (Balsamo-Crivelli) Vuillemin and Metarhizium anisopliae (Metschnikoff) Sorokin with synthetic insecticidesMortality rate ranging from 62 to 84% was observed.[267]
EggplantMetarhizium anisopliae (Metschnikoff) Sorokin, Verticillium lecanii Zimm, and Beauveria bassiana (Balsamo-Crivelli) VuilleminIn plots of B. bassiana, V. lecanii, and M. anisopliae, the average density of whiteflies dropped from 126 ± 2.8 to 62.8 ± 3.3, 130 ± 3.8 to 61.4 ± 2, and 165.6 ± 2.2 to 62.4 ± 3.5, respectively.[268]
Entomopathogenic nematodes
Cucumber and pepperSteinernema feltiae Filipjev and Heterorhabditis bacteriophora PoinarBoth life stages of the whiteflies were susceptible to infection by the two nematode species.[73]
Parasitoids
EggplantsMetarhizium anisopliae (Metschnikoff) SorokinMortality rate of up to 84.3% was recorded.[215]
HibiscusEncarsia noyesi Hayat, Idioporous affinis LaSalle and Polaszek and Entedononecremnus krauteri Zolnerowich and RoseMean parasitism rates were 28 ± 2% for Idioporous affinis, 28.7 ± 1.9% for Encarsia noyesi, and 1 ± 0.0% by Entedononecremnus krauteri.[269]
TomatoEncarsia formosa Gahan and Encarsia sophia Girault and Dodd (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae)Up to 60% parasitism rate was observed on the whitefly population using individual predators.[223]
CottonEncarsia sophia Girault and Dodd and Eretmocerus hayati Zolnerowich and Rose (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae)Encarsia sophia had a cumulative host consumption rate (C0) of 84.1 whiteflies per individual, while E. hayati had C0 of 17.6 whiteflies per individual.[270]
CottonEretmocerus hayati Zolnerowich and RosEretmocerus hayati parasitized the entire nymphal phases of the whitefly with 2nd nymphs showing the greatest incidence (62.03%).[271]
PoinsettiasEretmocerus eremicus (Rose & Zolnerowich) and Amblyseius swirskii Athias-Henriot compared to synthetic insecticidesAverage density (3.5 ± 1.09) of immature whiteflies per plant were recorded for the IPM.[25]
Table 5. Reports on the use of genetic engineering strategies for whitefly management (WFM).
Table 5. Reports on the use of genetic engineering strategies for whitefly management (WFM).
Crop NameBiotechnology InvolvedResultsReference
CottonRNA interference using v-ATPaseAAfter consuming transgenic plants, the transcript level of v-ATPaseA in whiteflies was lowered by up to 62%.[279]
CottonRNA interference using dsRNAMore than 90% mortality rate was recorded 24 h post treatment.[291]
LettuceRNA interference using v-ATPaseAAfter 5 days of feeding, whiteflies on modified plants die at a range of 83.8–98.1%.[74]
TobaccoRNA interference usingTransgenic plants showed tolerance to whitefly compared to untreated plants.[292]
CottonRNA interference using expression of short interfering RNAs (siRNAs)After 6 days of feeding on modified cotton, 70% mortality rate was recorded.[73]
TomatoNuclear transgenics (transgenic plant)Due to the toxic and repellency effects of 7-epizingiberene, developed tomato trichomes are resilient to whiteflies.[293]
TomatoPlant-mediated RNAi (A. tumefaciens)Up to 50% whitefly mortality.[294]
TobaccoNuclear transgenics (A. tumefaciens)100% mortality of Bemicia tabaci.[66]
CottonTransgenic using ZmASN gene under constitutive promoter (A. tumefaciens)There was a 95% death rate for whiteflies.[295]
ArabidophsissRNA (307 bp) detoxifying gene BtGSTs5 is implicated in the neutralization of glucosides in B. tabaciKnockdown of the BtBGSTs5 gene in the gut extends the developmental time of nymphs and reduces the number of B. tabaci.[281]
Micro-injection (0.1–0.5 µg dsRNA)dsRNA introduction into whiteflies (0.1–0.5 µg)Up to 60% success was recorded from the study.[296]
Micro-injection dsRNAdsRNA introduction into whiteflies (0.1–0.5 µg)Up to 70% decrease in whitefly population.[296]
Micro-injection dsRNAdsRNA introduction into whiteflies (0.1–0.5 µg)There was 75% decline in the salivary gland as well 60% reduction in midgut expression.[296]
Oral feedingdsRNA introduction into whiteflies (Oral feeding)Whitefly reproduction as well as survivability decreased significantly.[278]
TobaccodsRNA applied exogenously to plants (0.5 mg/mL)In 4th instar nymphs of whiteflies, Cyp315a1 was down-regulated by approximately 80%, while Cyp18a1 was down-regulated by 46%.[297]
Citrus and cassavaExogenous application of modified dsRNA via NRAi methodsInsects’ death rate rises from 12–35% in transformed species as related to non-modified ones.[36]
TomatodsRNA applied exogenously to plantsThe development of mature whiteflies was dramatically reduced (48.6%) in the pupae produced on Dys-dsRNA-treated plants.[275]
TomatodsRNA applied exogenously to plants leaves.The dsRNA, were molecularly detected in plants, aphids and mites but not in whiteflies.[287]
TomatoApplication of dsRNA through the rootsThe highest mortality (84%) was recorded at a concentration of 5 (µg/mL).[298]
TobaccoChloroplast transgenics (Transplastomic plants)B. tabaci density decreased by 91–93% in transplastomic plants compared to control plants.[299]
CottonNuclear transgenicsAfter six days, nymphs and adults of B. tabaci died at a rate of 18.37% and 9.65%, respectively.[300]
CottonNuclear transgenicsGenetically modified cotton harboring Tma12 gene at a concentration of 0.01% was effective against whitefly (>90% mortality).[35]
TomatoRNA interference induced by plants (via siRNA) transgenicDecreased reproduction and increased lethality by 81.8% to 85.6% respectively.[5]
CottonRNA interference induced by plants (via miRNA) transgenicUp to 78% mortality rate was recorded.[280]
TobaccoChloroplast-mediated RNAiThe transgenic plants harboring BtACTB had led to 80% mortality rates in B. tabaci.[67]
TobaccoArtificial miRNA mediated resistanceAbnormal egg hatching and poor nymphal development were observed on the modified plant compared to the control.[292]
Citrus, cassavaModified RNAi for dsRNA deliveryThere was an increase in the mortality rate of the insects with 12–35% compared to non-modified plants.[36]
CottonGene silencing (RNAi)Oral delivery of dsRNA led to 42.5% adult death, decreased fertility (36.57 eggs per female), with 62.50% larval death.[301]
Table 6. Reports on the use of chemicals for whitefly management (WFM).
Table 6. Reports on the use of chemicals for whitefly management (WFM).
Crop NamePesticides UsedResultReference
Tomato and verbenaBuprofezin, teflubenzuron, imidacloprid, and nicotineHighest mortality (79:8%) was recorded for buprofezin while imidacloprid caused 58:5% lower mortality.[310]
CabbageSeventeen insecticides including abamectin, acephate, acetamiprid, cartap, imidacloprid, malathion, etc.Cartap caused highest mortality (100%) while trichlorphon had less (4%) mortality.[311]
StrawberryImidacloprid, thiamethoxam, and dinotefuranImidacloprid caused adult mortality of 63.58%, thiamethoxam had 41.95% mortality.[312]
CottonAcetamiprid, imidacloprid, bifenthrin, cypermethrin, triazophos, cyhalothrin and rani.The plots treated with bifenthrin had the highest number of whiteflies per leaf (2.773), followed by imidacloprid (1.83) compared to control plots (5107).[313]
CucumberImidacloprid, thiacloprid, deltamethrin, pyrethrum, thiamethoxam, and lambda-cyhalothrinPyrethrum was the most effective with 90.23% mortality rate followed by thiacloprid+ deltamethrin with 89.57%.[314]
EggplantFour insecticides viz; fipronil, imidacloprid, buprofezin, and thiamethoxam along with emamectin benzoateConfidor was the most effective with 69.0% whitefly mortality.[215]
CitrusDiazinon, endosulfan, imidaclopridAfter 10 weeks of pesticide spraying, there was 100% fatality of whiteflies.[315]
CottonImidacloprid, bifenthrin, chlorpyrifos, and carbosulfanCarbosulfan led to 40% adult whitefly mortality while chlorpyrifos had the least (25%).[288]
CottonDiafenthiuron, quinalphos, flubendiamide, imidacloprid, thiamethoxam, triazophos, carbosulfan, phosalone, and chlorpyriphosThe whitefly found on treated plants range from 0.13 (fipronil 5 SC) to 2.1 (phosalone 35 EC) per leaf.[316]
Cluster beanClothianidin, thiamethoxam spiromesifen, fipronil, acephate, imidacloprid, and carbosulfanSpiromesifen was the best treatment with 1.61 whiteflies/3 leaves while imidacloprid had the least effect (3.46) whiteflies/3 leaves.[317]
OkraLambdacyhalothrinUp to 63.94% lethality at 7 days of treatment. However, a drop (18.99%) in its efficacy was recorded after 15 days of the treatment.[318]
EggplantThiamethoxam, imidacloprid, acephate, fipronil, thiacloprid, and dimethoateTotal control (100%) was reported using thiamethoxam 25 WG @ 100 g/ha 14 days post treatment.[232]
TomatoTransform (sulfoxaflor), polo (diafenthiuron), confidor (imidacloprid), and agrovistaImidacloprid was the most effective having a mortality rate of up 93.24% 2 h post treatment.[319]
TomatoProfenophos, imidacloprid, cypermethrin, and indoxacarb.Imidacloprid was the most effective treatment with 58.1% mortality while indoxacarb was the least effective (51.40%).[320]
CottonSeven common insecticides: cyanantraniliprole, sulfoxaflor, spirotetramat, flonicamid, acetamiprid, etc.Sulfoxaflor has the highest relative toxicity (13.86%).[29]
ZucchiniAcetamiprid, pymetrozine with phosphoric soap, and spirotetramat along with azadirachtinUp to 44% of whiteflies suppression was recorded from the study.[8]
EggplantActara a 25 WDG, calypso 480 SC, polo, confidor 5 G, and confidor 200 SLAfter 14 days, the maximum effectiveness (89.06%) was achieved using actara foliar application.[321]
ChilliSpinetoram, novastar (bifenthrin + abamectin), and
sulfoxaflor 50 WG
Bifenthrin + abamectin had proven to be the most effective for reducing whitefly populations (84.46%).[322]
CottonProfenofos, cyhalothrin, and imidaclopridWhitefly mortality of up to 88% was reported from the study.[323]
TomatoDimethoate, imidacloprid, lambdacyhalothrin, novaluron, imidacloprid, indoxacarb, azadirachtinImidacloprid was found to have the lowest whitefly density (2.18 adults/leaf) compared to the control with 5.69 adult/leaf.[324]
EggplantBuprofezin, imidacloprid, fipronil, spinosad, and emamectin benzoateThe use of imidacloprid at a rate of 100 mL/ha have the greatest effect in lowering the whitefly densities with 1.00/leaf 2 weeks after treatment.[257]
TomatoThiocyclam (hydrogen oxalate), acetambrid, and imidaclopridAbamectin and imidacloprid were the toxic pesticides with 86.98 ± 2.63 and 84.19± 1.56 mortality rate, respectively.[325]
OkraImidaclopridIt was effective against the whiteflies having 3.90 whiteflies/15 leaves 2 weeks after treatment.[326]
PotatoEmamectin, thiodicarb, diafenthiuron, chlorpyriphos, chlorfenapyr, cryantraniliprole, bifenthrin, and spiromesifenIt was discovered that the insecticide spiromesifen 22.9 SC @ 1.00 mL/l was highly effective against mites and whiteflies.[30]
EggplantLambda-cyhalothrinWhen treated with lambda-cyhalothrin, whitefly average density was dramatically reduced (2.21/leaf 2 weeks after application).[327]
Table 7. Reports on the use of IPM strategies for whitefly management (WFM).
Table 7. Reports on the use of IPM strategies for whitefly management (WFM).
Crop NameTreatments DeployedResultsReferences
TomatoPlant extracts, tween 20, and biological agent (predator)Leaf and fruit extracts + tween-20 resulted in death rates ranging from 34.6 to 67.9% for leaf and 53.5 to 74.1% for fruits, respectively.[347]
Tomato and verbenaChemical insecticides and entomopathogenic nematodeThe combined effect of nematodes and imidacloprid caused 70.9% B. tabaci larval mortality.[309]
TomatoesParasitoids, predators, and insecticidesThe most effective treatments were a mix between Eretmocerus mundus and Amblyseius swirskii with an average of 0.7 ± 0.18 whiteflies per leaf.[77]
TomatoesChemical insecticides and entopathogenic nematodeThe use of nematodes + thiacloprid and spiromesifen resulted in a greater B. tabaci lethality (86.5 and 94.3%), compared to nematodes alone (75.2%).[238]
French beanNovel insecticides and fatty acids depositsFatty acid deposits caused 10.7% adult whitefly mortality, diafenthiuron caused 62.7%, and the combined effect led to 69.7% lethality.[348]
Ash gourdSynthetic chemicals, sticky traps, plant extracts, farmers practices, and micronutrientsAfter 18 days, 100% whitefly inhibition was recorded while the average number of whiteflies per plant was 1.86 after 60 days.[349]
TomatoesBiopesticides and synthetic chemicalCytraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin (50 + 30 g a.i. ha-1) reduced whitefly by 64%. 72% larval mortality was recorded using 0.5% flaxseed + 0.3% sodium bicarbonate.[350]
TomatoesMetallic reflective mulches and insecticides and resistant cultivarMetallic reflecting mulch drastically decreased the insect density as well as the disease symptoms on tomatoes.[351]
TomatoIntercropping and irrigation systemIntercropping along with sprinkling irrigation reduced tomato plants’ suitability for B. tabaci multiplication.[110]
PotatoesMineral oils and synthetic chemicalsImidacloprid + thiamethoxam + mineral oils resulted in decrease in B. tabaci population (74.5%) and disease incidence (93.0%).[38]
CucumberBotanicals and synthetic insecticidesThiacloprid + deltamethrin (73.42%), pyrethrum + lambda-cyhalothrin (89.57%), and thiamethoxam + lambda-cyhalothrin (90.29%) mortality were recoded.[313]
BrinjalBotanicals and synthetic insecticidesThe use of 5% neem extract (NSKE) lowered the population (3.5 whiteflies/leaf) as compared to the control (8.0 whiteflies/leaf).[142]
EggplantEntomoathogenic fungi and plant extractsNeem (1%) along with B. bassiana had the highest effect against both eggs (88.25%) and adult whiteflies (80.15%).[80]
SoybeansDifferent chemical pesticidesThere was reduced level of egg hatching greatly to about 4.35% compared to 95% in the control.[352]
TomatoBotanical oils and chemicalsMortality rate of up to 80.5% was reported in the study.[195]
TomatoPhysical method (use of kaolin, a clay mineral)90.1–91.6% drop in whitefly number was reported at 5% while 89% and 85.7% were reported for nymphs at 5% w/v.[353]
CottonEntomopathogenic fungi and insecticidesA greater death rate (96.78%) was seen when matrine was combined with L. muscarium with LC50 values of 0.034, 0.063, and 0.21 mg/L.[354]
Sweet potatoEntomopathogenic fungi and aqueous plant extractsNATURALIS + Calotropis procera had highest mortality rate on eggs (62.6%), nymphs (67%), and adult whiteflies (65.2%).[355]
CucumberPlant extracts and commercial insecticidesThe use of the extracts along with the pesticides resulted in up to 80% whitefly mortality.[193]
EggplantBiopesticides and synthetic insecticidesIn comparison to the control (11.04), the overall mean number of whiteflies per leaf was significantly lower (3.20 to 5.49) across all treated crops.[104]
Bt cottonChemicals, plant extracts, and entomopathogenic fungiSpiromesifen had the greatest reduction in whitefly numbers (82.27%, 80.57), then imidacloprid (82.27%, 80.57%).[37]
EggplantSynthetic chemicals, biopesticidesThe field treated with imidacloprid 17.8 SL @ 100 mL/ha had the lowest whitefly density (2.40 whiteflies/leaf).[256]
TomatoesPlant elicitors (methyl salicylate) and volatile organic compoundsThe plant elicitor was reported to effectively limit whitefly population and enhance production by 11% when used on healthy tomato plants.[356]
Crop plantsMixture of cow urine with nettle leaves, wild azadirachta, and holy basilThe concoction was very effective in controlling crop pests at nearly no costs.[39]
OrangeDifferent organic pesticidesNone of the substances tested resulted in a significant fatality of any of the orange spiny whitefly instars.[357]
CottonThree biopesticides along with synthetic insecticidesEco-Bb® treated plots caused 60% mortality while Karate® led to 67% whitefly mortality.[358]
PoinsettiaIntegrated using systemic and trans laminar insecticidesLowest nymph density (1.0 + 0.5) was reported using imidcloprid.[359]
TomatoPlant derivatives with the neonicotinoid insecticideUp to 94.4% mortality rate was recorded.[202]
EggplantBotanicals and synthetic insecticidesThe average number of whiteflies was higher in integrated treatments (2.37) and lower in the lambda cyhalothrin treatment (2.21).[327]
OkraBiopesticides and synthetic insecticidesOn average, there were 3.90 whiteflies per 15 leaves when imdacloprid 17.8% (0.3 mL per liter) was applied to the plants. Beauveria bassiana and M. anisopliae were found to be less efficient, but still more potent than the control.[326]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Abubakar, M.; Koul, B.; Chandrashekar, K.; Raut, A.; Yadav, D. Whitefly (Bemisia tabaci) Management (WFM) Strategies for Sustainable Agriculture: A Review. Agriculture 2022, 12, 1317. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12091317

AMA Style

Abubakar M, Koul B, Chandrashekar K, Raut A, Yadav D. Whitefly (Bemisia tabaci) Management (WFM) Strategies for Sustainable Agriculture: A Review. Agriculture. 2022; 12(9):1317. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12091317

Chicago/Turabian Style

Abubakar, Mustapha, Bhupendra Koul, Krishnappa Chandrashekar, Ankush Raut, and Dhananjay Yadav. 2022. "Whitefly (Bemisia tabaci) Management (WFM) Strategies for Sustainable Agriculture: A Review" Agriculture 12, no. 9: 1317. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12091317

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop