Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-kw2vx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T04:05:22.101Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A taxonomic review of white grubs and leaf chafers (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae) recorded from forestry and agricultural crops in Sub-Saharan Africa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2015

J.du G. Harrison*
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology and Entomology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa Forestry and Agriculture Biotechnology Research Institute (FABI), University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa School of Animal, Plant and Environmental Sciences (AP&ES), University of the Witwatersrand, 2050 Johannesburg, South Africa Department of Invertebrates, Ditsong: National Museum of Natural History (Formerly Transvaal Museum), Pretoria 0001, South Africa
M.J. Wingfield
Affiliation:
Forestry and Agriculture Biotechnology Research Institute (FABI), University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa
*
*Author for correspondence Fax: +27 11 717 6494 E-mail: James.Harrison@wits.ac.za
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Integrated pest management (IPM) is difficult to implement when one knows little about the pest complex or species causing the damage in an agricultural system. To implement IPM on Sub-Saharan African melolonthine pests access to taxon specific knowledge (their identity) and what is known (their biology) of potential pest species is a crucial step. What is known about Sub-Saharan African melolonthine white grubs and chafers has not yet been amalgamated, and this review thus synthesizes all available literature for the Region. The comprehensive nature of the review highlights pest taxon trends within African melolonthines. To facilitate the retrieval of this information for IPM purposes, all relevant taxonomic and biological information is provided for the taxa covered including an on-line supplementary annotated-checklist of taxon, crop, locality and reference(s). Based on the literature reviewed, recommendations are made to promote effective and efficient management of African melolonthine scarab pests. An on-line supplementary appendix provides a list of specialists, useful internet resources, keys, catalogues and sampling methods for the larvae and adults of melolonthine scarab beetles for subsequent morphological or molecular work.

Type
Review Paper
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Introduction

This review aims to provide a checklist of the species of Sub-Saharan African Melolonthinae that have been recorded as pests in agricultural and forestry crops (Table 1 supplementary material), and draws attention to groups most in need of revision from a pest management perspective. Additionally, it provides comprehensive review and bibliography of all traced literature (especially taxonomic) specific to the melolonthine white grubs and chafers of the Region. It is hoped that this will facilitate white grub research in Sub-Saharan Africa via enhanced access to information, and the reduction of duplicated research efforts. Based on this synthesis, recommendations relevant to white grub and chafer taxonomy in Sub-Saharan Africa are proposed. To constrain the size and scope of the review, it covers only the subfamily Melolonthinae, with the remaining scarab subfamilies that contain species of economic concern being dealt with in forthcoming studies.

The larvae (white grubs) and adults (chafers) of five subfamilies of Scarabaeidae (Aphodiinae, Dynastinae, Cetoniinae, Melolonthinae and Rutelinae) include species that feed on the roots, stems, fruit or foliage of many crops, and therefore may be sporadic forestry and agricultural pests (Table 1 supplementary material). Colloquially, these larvae are known as white grubs, cane grubs or curl grubs when they damage agricultural crops in different regions of the World. White grubs are readily identified by their ‘C-shaped’ bodies and sclerotized head capsules, while the more variable adults generally have an ovoid body shape and lamellate antennae (Richter, Reference Ritcher1958, Reference Ritcher1966). Related scarab families, for example dung beetles (Scarabaeinae), have similar larvae, but as these groups are beneficial recyclers, they are generally not referred to as white grubs.

Melolonthine scarab beetles have a complete life-cycle (holometabolous); a fertilized female lays eggs, these hatch into the first of three larval stages or instars, the final (or third) instar enters a pre-pupal stage before pupation, from which adults emerge when environmental conditions are conducive (Ritcher, Reference Ritcher1958, Reference Ritcher1966). The duration of the larval stage can vary from 1 to 3 years depending on the environmental conditions and species’ life cycle (Ratcliffe, Reference Ratcliffe1991). However, species with 2–3 year life-cycles often have adults active each year due to an overlapping of generations. The phenology of the adults is unknown for most species, but based on adult phenological data compiled from museum records for Asthenopholis (Harrison, Reference Harrison2009) and Pegylis (Harrison, Reference Harrison2014b ), adults from these genera are present in varying numbers throughout summer each year.

Species distributions are dependent on a variety of factors. Some white grubs have a narrow distribution (stenotopic, e.g. Asthenopholis subfasciata (Harrison, Reference Harrison2009) and Macrophylla spp.), while others have a wider distribution (eurytopic, e.g. Pegylis sommeri (Harrison, Reference Harrison2014b )). Soil type, texture and moisture content can play an important role in the distribution of certain white grub species (Cherry & Allsopp, Reference Cherry and Allsopp1991; Allsopp et al., Reference Allsopp, Klein and McCoy1992; Logan, Reference Logan1997). Females of some white grub species are flightless, e.g. Macrophylla pubens (Omer-Cooper et al., Reference Omer-Cooper, Whitnall and Fenwick1941, Reference Omer-Cooper, Whitnall and Fenwick1941–1942, Reference Omer-Cooper, Whitnall and Fenwick1948; Fenwick, Reference Fenwick1947), and this has implications for control strategies and the geographic extent of an outbreak. The adult activity period can be quite narrow (just a few days after rain) for some species of chafer (Harrison, personal observations) or extend over a longer time period, i.e. weeks and months for Pegylis sommeri (see phenology figs in Harrison (Reference Harrison2014b )).

Pest status of scarabs

In large numbers the feeding activity of white grubs and chafers in crops reduces yields and facilitates secondary microbial infections through the damaged plant cuticle (Smith et al., Reference Smith, Petty and Villet1995; Miller et al., Reference Miller, Allsopp, Graham and Yeates1999). For example, in southern Africa, white grubs have been recorded as sporadic subterranean pests on tree-seedlings, sorghum, sugarcane, pineapples, potatoes and turf grass (see Table 1 supplementary material for a complete list). Additionally, the adult chafers are often defoliators (e.g. Pegylis spp.) in forest plantations, fruit orchards, vineyards and rose gardens (Table 1 supplementary material). At least 50 different species of commercially grown plants have records of Melolonthinae being destructive to parts of these plants (Table 1 supplementary material).

Introduced alien species

Most, if not all, African melolonthine scarab pests are endemic to parts of Africa, and no introduced scarab pest species are recorded for South Africa (Picker & Griffiths, Reference Picker and Griffiths2011). However, as this is a broad and general information source, it by no means rules out the possibility of there being alien scarabs in Sub-Saharan Africa. A possible exception is Phyllophaga smithi (Arrow, Reference Arrow1912), which was originally described as Phytalus smithi from the Caribbean (Barbados and Trinidad) and introduced into Mauritius (Evans, Reference Evans2003). This species was recorded (Katagira, Reference Katagira, Macdonald, Reaser, Bright, Neville, Howard, Murphy and Preston2003: 74) from Tanzania and mentioned as a sorghum stem-borer in eastern Ethiopia (Tefera, Reference Tefera2004). However, there is no published confirmation of this introduction in the primary literature for sugarcane pests known from Tanzania, but the African endemic Cochliotis melolonthoides is well established as a sugarcane pest in Tanzania (Jepson, Reference Jepson1956; Carnegie, Reference Carnegie, Carnegie, Dick and Harris1974a , Reference Carnegie b ). Consequently, the Katagira (Reference Katagira, Macdonald, Reaser, Bright, Neville, Howard, Murphy and Preston2003) and Tefera (Reference Tefera2004) records of P. smithi occurring on the African mainland may be based on the exotics being confused with an African species of Schizonycha, which is quite similar to Phyllophaga (=Phytalus) Arrow (Reference Arrow1912).

Conservation of localized endemic species

Localized endemics are of particular conservation importance. For example, Asthenopholis subfasciata can become an important sporadic pest of pineapples in the Eastern Cape of South Africa (Petty, Reference Petty1976, Reference Petty1977a , Reference Petty b , Reference Petty1978, Reference Petty1982, Reference Petty1990, Reference Petty1994, Reference Petty, van den Berg, de Villiers and Joubert2001, Petty et al., Reference Petty, Stirling, Bartholomew, Peña, Sharp and Wysoki2002). However, it is endemic to South Africa and is also one of only seven known species of Asthenopholis (Harrison, Reference Harrison2009). As a localized endemic and part of the country's biodiversity, we need to control it responsibly when it reaches localized pest levels. Another example of a localized endemic that can become a sporadic pest species is Pseudachloa leonina on golf greens near Pretoria, South Africa (A. Schoeman, Reference Haddad, Dippenaar-Schoeman and Pekár2005, personal communication).

Access to information

Fragmentary, unsynthesized information relating to scarabs as pests in African crops reduces the efficiency of research on economically important species. For example, the paucity of information on Eucamenta eugeniae, originally described as a pest of clove (Eugenia caryophyllata) from Zanzibar (Arrow, Reference Arrow1932; Andre Moutia, Reference Andre Moutia1941). But a recent paper (Conlong & Mugalula, Reference Conlong and Mugalula2003) omitted these early publications and reported E. eugeniae only as a new pest of sugarcane in Uganda.

Information relating to the same insect taxon, but disguised due to an incorrect identification is another problem. For example, the incorrect identification of Pegylis sommeri (previously Hypopholis) as Macrophylla ciliata (Herbst) as a pest of pineapple in South Africa (Petty, Reference Petty1976, Reference Petty1977b , Reference Petty1978, Reference Petty1990, Reference Petty, van den Berg, de Villiers and Joubert2001; Petty et al., Reference Petty, Stirling, Bartholomew, Peña, Sharp and Wysoki2002) resulted in the redescription of the larvae of P. sommeri (Smith et al., Reference Smith, Petty and Villet1995), which had previously been described (Prins, Reference Prins1965). Misidentification resulted in a duplication of effort, lack of efficient control strategies, crop destruction and reduced economic benefits.

The importance of having named pests

The success of an integrated pest management (IPM) program for melolonthine white grubs depends strongly on accurate identification of larvae and adults (Danks, Reference Danks1988). Species level identification is important because life cycles of white grub species vary from 1 to 3 years and susceptibility to insecticides varies for species (as demonstrated in Australian cane grubs; Allsopp et al., Reference Allsopp, McGill and Bull1995). Correct diagnosis relies upon available taxonomic expertise, published research, trained systematists, and access to museum specimens, voucher specimens and type material. In contrast to more developed countries (e.g. the USA, Australia and New Zealand) southern Africa in our view lags behind by a number of years in scarab taxonomic research on melolonthine white grub identification and research.

In a discussion on white grub identification (Omer-Cooper et al., Reference Omer-Cooper, Whitnall and Fenwick1941, Reference Omer-Cooper, Whitnall and Fenwick1941–1942) the authors state that, ‘… very little work has been done on these insects in South Africa, and with the present state of our knowledge we would not be prepared to say in all cases which are pests and which are not’. Later (Sweeney, Reference Sweeney1967) added that ‘Few published papers deal with the morphology and taxonomy of larval Scarabaeoidea in southern Africa, and the larvae of many species are undescribed’. However, recent taxonomic work by Ahrens (Reference Ahrens2007a , Reference Ahrens b ), Conlong & Mugalula (Reference Conlong and Mugalula2003), Dittrich-Schröder et al. (Reference Dittrich-Schröder, Conlong, Way, Harrison and Mitchell2009), Goble et al. (Reference Goble, Costet, Robene, Nibouche, Rutherford, Conlong and Hill2012) and Harrison (Reference Harrison2004, Reference Harrison2009, Reference Harrison2014a , Reference Harrison b , this review) is a positive advancement in melolonthine research in the Region.

Morphological identification of melolonthine larvae and adults

To morphologically describe a scarab larva, the chitinous head capsule is softened in lactic acid or a weak solution of KOH and disarticulated from points of natural articulation of structures (Dittrich-Schröder et al., Reference Dittrich-Schröder, Conlong, Way, Harrison and Mitchell2009). Ritcher (Reference Ritcher1966) provided numerous illustrations and descriptions of disarticulated scarab head capsules. This requires association of the larva with a named adult and formal description in a published paper. African melolonthines in which larvae have been described and illustrated (Table 2 supplementary material), include a small percentage of the known melolonthine diversity.

Adult identification also relies on the beetle species having been described in a validly published paper. Insect drawers of African Melolonthinae sorted only to subfamily in museum collections are testament to the lack of taxonomists dealing with this diverse group of beetles. Consequently, in many cases one can at best identify a pest melolonthine to genus level only, and even here good taxonomic keys for generic diagnoses (e.g., Péringuey, Reference Péringuey1904; Lacroix, Reference Lacroix2010) are the exception rather than the rule.

An ideal scenario would be as follows: a taxonomist is presented with larvae and adults of Pegylis sommeri and asked to identify these. In this particular instance, the larvae could be identified using Prins (Reference Prins1965) and the adults using Harrison (Reference Harrison2014b ). Adult specimens of Asthenopholis can be identified using Harrison (Reference Harrison2009), but the larva of only one species of this genus has been described, i.e., A. subfasciata in Smith et al. (Reference Smith, Petty and Villet1995), leaving the larvae of the remaining six species unassociated with their adults via the taxonomic literature.

Molecular diagnostic techniques

A frequently encountered problem with white grub outbreaks is determining the white grub species. Identification is especially important because control action must be immediate to prevent further losses. Molecular DNA barcoding techniques allow for the DNA of grubs or adults to be matched with DNA sequence data (e.g., archived Genbank sequences) and possible retrieval of an identification based on these data. Once a match is retrieved the morphology of the grubs can be described in order to facilitate accurate and efficient identification in the future. This process can be used to develop identification tools. For example, Dittrich-Schröder et al. (Reference Dittrich-Schröder, Conlong, Way, Harrison and Mitchell2009) compiled an identification key to the scarab beetle larvae attacking sugarcane in South Africa. Using molecular methods and associating grubs with adults, tools for identification of chafers were developed for use on the Nepalese fauna (Ahrens et al., Reference Ahrens, Monaghan and Vogler2007a , Reference Ahrens, Zorn, Dhoj, Keller and Nagel b ). This research is best done by a collaborating team of molecular biologists, beetle taxonomists and crop specialists.

IPM options for white grubs and chafers

IPM of white grubs and chafers is a review topic of its own, and consequently only brief mention is included here. Control options include various forms of chemical control, cultural methods, parasitic Diptera (flies), Hymenoptera (wasps), fungi and tillage methods. Smit (Reference Smit1964), Annecke & Moran (Reference Annecke and Moran1982) and Visser (Reference Visser2005, Reference Visser2009) provide general coverage of IPM methods relevant to the African context for many of the taxa included in this review.

Taxonomic review of the Melolonthinae with published records of significance to Sub-Saharan African forestry and agricultural crops

The world melolonthine fauna is presently divided into 28 extant tribes and 12 subtribes (Smith, Reference Smith2006), of which six tribes and nine subtribes are known to occur on the African mainland. Sub-Saharan Africa includes taxa from six tribes and six subtribes as presented below. All known Sub-Saharan African Melolonthinae recorded in the literature as having the potential to become sporadic pests in agricultural and forestry crops are reviewed (table 1). Included in table 1 are taxonomic details (generic and specific description dates and authors) and thus this information is not repeated in the text. However, taxa not included in the checklist (table 1) are referred to in the text including their author and publication date.

Table 1. Checklist of Sub-Saharan African melolonthine white grubs and leaf chafers (Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae) of potential significance to forestry and agricultural crops. This list is based on the literature sources cited in Table 1 supplementary material.

1 Misidentified as Adoretus tessulatus (Rutelinae) in Petty's earlier papers.

2 An incorrect identification has placed this species name in the literature as a pest of pineapple; the correct species identification is Pegylis sommeri (see Harrison, Reference Harrison2014b ). Petty (Reference Petty1978) provides a clear photograph of P. sommeri, but identified as Macrophylla ciliata.

3 Von Schmutterer (Reference Schmutterer1964) refers to this species as S. vastatrix Chiar. (Chiaromonte). Paul Schoolmeesters (personal communication) drew our attention to its first description in Paoli (1934); no mention is made to this species in Pope (Reference Pope1960) or Lacroix (Reference Lacroix2010).

4 To a non-specialist the genera Phyllophaga and Schizonycha are morphologically similar. The former is not known from Africa, while the latter is (see Pope, Reference Pope1960).

5 Incorrectly referred to as Macrophylla ciliata (Herbst, 1790).

6 Afrolepis Decelle, 1968 (replacement name for preoccupied Oligolepis Brenske, 1903).

7 ‘Williams (Reference Williams1985) records A. minor (as A. subfasciata) to have a limited distribution in the Nokwane (Mhlume) and S.I.S. (Swaziland Irrigation Scheme) sugarcane farms in Swaziland. Carnegie (Reference Carnegie1988) mentions A. minor and A. subfasciata as sugarcane pests in Swaziland and Emoyeni, KwaZulu–Natal. White grubs of A. subfasciata (Anonymous, 1992) are reported from sugarcane fields from the Mhlume area (Vuvulane) in Swaziland. However, the present study establishes that these are misidentifications. Asthenopholis subfasciata does not occur in Swaziland or KwaZulu–Natal (i.e., Port Natal = Durban), save for a few old and questionable records. Asthenopholis minor is more likely to be a sporadic pest of sugarcane in these regions.’ Harrison (Reference Harrison2009).

8 Sweeney (Reference Sweeney1967) includes A. subfasciata for Swaziland (Mhlume). After revising Asthenopholis Harrison (Reference Harrison2009) suggests that the Swaziland (Mhlume) specimens are most likely attributable to A. minor.

9 Currently valid genus name is Maladera Mulsant & Rey, 1871 (Dirk Ahrens, personal communication).

10 Swain & Prinsloo (Reference Swain and Prinsloo1986) list this species as Maladera tesselata (Péringuey), but we follow Dalla Torre (Reference Dalla Torre1912) and include it here as Autoserica tessellata Péringuey, 1904.

11 Currently valid genus name is Maladera Mulsant & Rey, 1871 (Dirk Ahrens, personal communication).

12 This species was originally described in Serica (Dirk Ahrens, personal communication).

13 The taxonomic position of Lepiserica in relation to Maladera requires investigation (Dirk Ahrens, personal communication).

14 Swain & Prinsloo (Reference Swain and Prinsloo1986) list this species as Maladera carneola (Péringuey), but we follow Dalla Torre (Reference Dalla Torre1912) and include it here as Neoserica carneola Péringuey, 1892.

15 Currently valid genus name is Triodontella Reitter, 1919 (Dirk Ahrens, personal communicaiton).

16 Spelt as T. aerugineus in Sweeney (Reference Sweeney1967), but as T. aeruginosus in Dalla Torre (Reference Dalla Torre1912).

Also summarized are melolonthine species, crop attacked, life stage involved, country of origin and the source reference (Table 1 supplementary material). Thus, if not specifically mentioned below, the life stage, larva or adult, involved in the damage is included in Table 1 supplementary material.

Tribe ABLABERINI Blanchard, 1850

For garden flowers, Annecke & Moran (Reference Annecke and Moran1982) list adults of Ablabera pellucida as feeding on carnations. Adults of Camenta innocua appears to occur in most major centers in South Africa (JduGH, personal observations) and can be found at night feeding on a variety of garden plants, with roses, being one of those most seriously damaged (JduGH, personal observations). The larvae of what was possibly C. innocua caused significant damage to raspberry seedlings in the George and Hermanus areas of South Africa (Tim Sobey Nov. 2012, personal communication). Oberholzer (Reference Oberholzer1959a , Reference Oberholzer b ) described the third instar larvae of C. innocua from specimens collected in Johannesburg, South Africa, but he did not indicate any pest status for the species.

In the interests of taxonomic stability, Ahrens (Reference Ahrens2007a ) designated types for various African genera in the Ablaberini, including Ablabera Dejean, 1833; Eucamenta Péringuey, Reference Péringuey1904; Hybocamenta Brenske, 1898; and Paracamenta Péringuey, Reference Péringuey1904. Neither Ablabera nor Camenta have been recently revised, making species level identification in these genera difficult or impossible, especially bearing in mind the large number of undescribed taxa within the Ablaberini. The syntype of C. innocua is a single female (Dirk Ahrens, personal communication), making the unequivocal identity of this species currently impossible in the absence of the male genitalia necessary for identification.

Tribe DIPLOTAXINI Kirby, 1837

Peacock (Reference Peacock1913), looking at insect pests of cacao or cocoa bean (Theobroma cacao L.) in southern Nigeria, recorded Apogonia nitidula together with various other scarabs, but included these in a list of taxa with doubtful significance (associated with the crop but not showing signs of being an actual pest). Lepesme & Paulian (Reference Lepesme and Paulian1944) recorded the same species on Coffea robusta in Gabon, but they provided no further details about the association. In work applying to species from neighbouring South Asia Islam et al. (Reference Islam, Ahmed and Joarder1984) included species of Apogonia among the insect pests associated with green gram (Vigna radiata L.) from Bangladesh, India. Of the beetles studied by Islam et al. (Reference Islam, Ahmed and Joarder1984), Apogonia were responsible for consuming the largest leaf area.

Bezděk (Reference Bezděk2004a ) provided a catalogue of Diplotaxini of the Old World and a detailed revision on the African monotypic genus Ceratogonia Kolbe, 1899 (Bezděk, Reference Bezděk2004b ). He provided synonymic notes for Apogonia cupreoviridis Kolbe, 1886 and A. nigroolivacea Heyden, 1886 (Bezděk, Reference Bezděk2008), and notes on the synonymy and geographic distribution of Apogonia niponica Lewis, 1895 (Bezděk, Reference Bezděk2009). Lacroix (Reference Lacroix2008a , Reference Lacroix b ) described new genera and species of Diplotaxini, and Lacroix & Bezděk (Reference Lacroix and Bezdĕk2009) proposed replacement names for Metagonia Kolbe, 1899 (nec Simon, Reference Simon1893).

Tribe HOPLIINI Latreille, 1829

In South Africa, these beetles are colloquially referred to as monkey beetles (Picker & Midgley Reference Picker and Midgley1996). Smit (Reference Smit1964) recorded adult Hopliini burrowing into garden Compositae (Asteraceae), especially marigolds in Pretoria, South Africa. Prins (Reference Prins1965) listed Monochelus calcaratus, which he refered to as the small wattle chafer, as a wattle defoliator. Prins (Reference Prins1965) also described its larva, the only description of an African Hopliini larva (known to us). For garden flowers, Annecke & Moran (Reference Annecke and Moran1982) recorded Eriesthis stigmatica and Heterochelus connatus feeding on carnations, and E. vestita feeding on dahlias. Swain & Prinsloo (Reference Swain and Prinsloo1986) listed species of Heterochelus feeding on Acacia mearnsii, and Monochelus calceratus feeding on Acacia decurrens, A. mearnsii and A. melanoxylon. Gess (Reference Gess1968), Myburgh et al. (Reference Myburgh, Rust and Starke1973, Reference Myburgh, Starke and Rust1974), Myburgh & Rust (Reference Myburgh and Rust1975) and Coetzee & Giliomee (Reference Coetzee and Giliomee1985) investigated insects associated with Protea flowers as both pests damaging the flowers and insects likely to be exported with flowers due to their biological associations with the Protea. Myburgh & Rust (Reference Myburgh and Rust1975) provided a list of 34 ‘free-living pests in protea flower-heads’, including the following monkey beetles: Anisonyx nasuus, Heterochelus rufimanus, and a species of Platychelus. Coetzee & Giliomee (Reference Coetzee and Giliomee1985), in a study specific to Protea repens (L.), listed adult Diaplochelus longipes as a floral visitor. Dombrow (Reference Dombrow2006b ) described two new species of Diaplochelus sent abroad with consignments of exported Protea from South Africa to Poland and the USA.

Due to the charismatic morphological diversity of the southern African Hopliini, this tribe has received greater taxonomic attention than any other in the Region. Dombrow, in particular, has revised many of the southern African genera (a list of his known papers is provided). These papers included taxonomic revisions of Eriesthis (Dombrow, Reference Dombrow1997c , Reference Dombrow2002b ), Heterochelus (Dombrow, Reference Dombrow2001c ) and Diaplochelus (Dombrow, Reference Dombrow2006b ). Schein (Reference Schein1958) studied South African Heterochelus and his paper included a key (pp. 256–257) to the genera and subgenera of Heterochelina (= Hopliina).

Subtribe HOPLIINA Latreille, 1829

Swain & Prinsloo (Reference Swain and Prinsloo1986) included adults of Hoplia sordita as feeding on Acacia mearnsii. We are not aware of any other references relating to the biology or pest status of Hoplia species in Sub-Saharan Africa, but there is extensive literature on the non-African Hoplia. For example, Ansari et al. (Reference Ansari, Adhikari, Ali and Moens2008) examined the susceptibility of Hoplia philanthus (Füessly) larvae and pupae to entomopathogenic nematodes in Belgium, while Zhang et al. (Reference Zhang, Ma, Yang, Byers, Klein, Zhao and Luoe2011) examined the attractive responses of Hoplia spectabilis Medvedev to un-baited yellow or white cross-pane funnel traps in China.

Tribe PACHYDEMINI Burmeister, 1855

Omer-Cooper et al. (Reference Omer-Cooper, Whitnall and Fenwick1941) noted that southern Africa turf (golf courses) is a human-made habitat often composed of the indigenous grass (Cynodon dactylon Pers.), and thus its pests are endemic, opportunistically making use of an abundant food resource. The damage caused by white grubs when they feed on grass roots, completely ‘scalps’ the roots and can result in death of the grass, especially following a dry period. Larvae of species of Macrophylla are potential pests of golf greens in the Eastern Cape of South Africa (Omer-Cooper et al., Reference Omer-Cooper, Whitnall and Fenwick1941).

Omer-Cooper et al. (Reference Omer-Cooper, Whitnall and Fenwick1941, Reference Omer-Cooper, Whitnall and Fenwick1941–1942, Reference Omer-Cooper, Whitnall and Fenwick1948) provided notes on the biology of species of Macrophylla, where the females of atleast some of the species appear to be flightless. Fenwick (Reference Fenwick1947) redescribed the male of M. pubens and provided the first description of its flightless female based on specimens collected on the Humewood Golf Green near Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Schoeman (Reference Schoeman, Way and du Toit1996) recorded that white grubs in turfgrass are ‘usually patchily distributed, unpredictable and capable of doing severe damage before they are detected’. Due to the incorrect identification of Hypopholis sommeri (now Pegylis sommeri) as Macrophylla ciliata and published as M. ciliata in Petty's earlier papers, the larva of M. ciliata (but actually P. sommeri) was described by Smith et al. (Reference Smith, Petty and Villet1995). However, this is actually a redescription of the larva of P. sommeri (see Prins, Reference Prins1965). Consequently, we are not aware of any descriptions of southern African Pachydemini larvae (here we exclude Sparrmannia flava covered by Evans (Reference Evans1989) and Scholtz (Reference Scholtz1988), due to the preferred placement of Sparrmannia in the Melolonthini).

Evans (Reference Evans1988a ) reviewed the taxonomy and systematics of southern Africa Pachydemini and revised some genera (Evans, Reference Evans1987a , Reference Evans b , Reference Evans c , Reference Evans1988b ). Lacroix provided descriptions of many new African Pachydemini genera and species in 14 papers (Lacroix, Reference Lacroix1997, Reference Lacroix1999, Reference Lacroix2001, Reference Lacroix2003, Reference Lacroix2004, Reference Lacroix2005a , Reference Lacroix b , Reference Lacroix2006a , Reference Lacroix b , Reference Lacroix c , Reference Lacroix d , Reference Lacroix2008e , Reference Lacroix2008 f, Reference Lacroix2011) and a catalogue (Lacroix, Reference Lacroix2007).

Tribe MELOLONTHINI Leach, 1819

Subtribe MELOLONTHINA Leach, 1819

Swain & Prinsloo (Reference Swain and Prinsloo1986) included Psilonychus groendahli on Acacia mearnsii in a list of phytophagous insects on forest trees and shrubs in South Africa. Specimens of Psilonychus were collected in pheromone traps set to catch the lepidopterous pest Helicoverpa armigera (African Bollworm) from chicory fields in the Eastern Cape of South Africa (Midgley et al., Reference Midgley, Hill and Villet2008, Midgley, personal communication). There are eight described species of Psilonychus and Harrison (in preparation) plans to revise this genus, making its species and what we know about them accessible to other entomologists.

The adults of three Sparrmannia species (S. acicularis, S. flava and S. transvaalica) were recorded in the vicinity of pistachio nut trees in the Prieska area of the Northern Cape of South Africa by Louw (Reference Louw2001). However, only S. flava caused economic damage by defoliating trees, thereby forcing them to produce new leaves. It is suspected that this regrowth reduced the ultimate nut yield of trees (Louw, Reference Louw2001). Haddad et al. (Reference Haddad, Dippenaar-Schoeman and Pekár2005) and Haddad & Louw (Reference Haddad and Louw2006) recorded the spider groups present in pistachio orchards in South Africa and noted their potential as biological control agents for pistachio pests. Sparrmannia species are caught in spiders’ webs (Harrison, personal observations) and thus one can expect that both large sedentary and orb-weaving spiders would catch and feed on Sparrmannia adults. Scholtz (Reference Scholtz1988) investigated the breeding biology of S. flava in the arid Kalahari and noted that, under desert conditions, the life cycle is 1 year in duration. Larvae are able to maximize feeding after rain and then become dormant until rain allows them to feed again. Quite unique for the melolonthines, or perhaps just unrecorded due to the absence of studies on African arid chafers, is the larval behaviour of foraging at night on the soil surface for antelope dung, which is then taken below the soil surface, rehydrated and fed upon by these larvae. Evans (Reference Evans1989) summarized what is known about the biology of Sparrmannia. All species appear to feed on plants as adults, but there is a lack of established host plant records, even from mass swarming observations. Of the 24 known species, two appear to be diurnal while many other species have been collected at light traps at night. Mating swarms of S. transvaalica have been observed at dusk, and in the morning and late afternoon (Harrison, personal observations). Evans (Reference Evans1989) provided a detailed and thorough revision of the 24 known species of Sparrmannia and a description of the second instar larvae of S. flava.

Subtribe SCHIZONYCHINA Burmeister, 1855

Larvae of Entyposis impressa were recorded by Mansfield-Aders (Reference Mansfield-Aders1920) feeding on the roots of caladiums and castor oil plants. Lacroix & Montreuil (Reference Lacroix and Montreuil2012) revised Entyposis and recognized nine species in the genus. Male Entyposis are unusual among melolonthines in that they have indented dynastine-like pronota including small pronotal horns making it easy to recognize this genus of African melolonthines.

Von Schmutterer (Reference Schmutterer1964), in an overview of the insect pests on southern Somalian crops, noted larvae of a species of Schizonycha feeding on banana plant roots. Büttiker & Bünzli (Reference Büttiker and Bünzli1957) included Schizonycha profuga, S. citima and Hecistopsilus molitor in their survey of the more important leaf chafers on tobacco in Zimbabwe. Tarr (Reference Tarr1958) examined the relationship between feeding by species of Schizonycha grubs on Dolichos Bean (Dolichos lablab) seedlings, resulting in wilt and often followed by stem blight. They discuss how various chemical seed dressings can reduce losses. In a list of phytophagous insects in South Africa, Swain & Prinsloo (Reference Swain and Prinsloo1986) listed S. fimbriata as associated with Acacia mearnsii. Larvae of S. fimbriata caused damage to soya beans in KwaZulu-Natal (Hittersay, Reference Hittersay2005). In the Trans Nzoia district of Kenya, changes in the intercropping practices to enhance soil nutrition resulted in an increase in the abundance of root-feeding chafer (Schizonycha spp.) grubs (Medvecky et al., Reference Medvecky, Ketterings and Vermeylen2006, Reference Medvecky, Ketterings and Nelson2007; Medvecky & Ketterings, Reference Medvecky and Ketterings2009). Apparently, the enhanced soil nutrition may have benefitted white grubs developing in the soil. In a review of the insect pests associated with yam production and storage, Korada et al. (Reference Korada, Naskar and Edison2010) included unnamed species of Schizonycha larvae as boring into and feeding on the tubers during the pre-harvest period. Hajek et al. (Reference Hajek, McManus and Delalibera Júnior2005) in their ‘Catalogue of introductions of pathogens and nematodes for classical biological control of insects and mites’ listed Paenibacillus popilliae (Dutky) (Bacillaceae) as having been released in 1956 in Kenya for the control of Schizonycha spp. In this instance, P. popilliae was not recovered after release (Hajek et al., Reference Hajek, McManus and Delalibera Júnior2005). Schizonycha is the African equivalent to the diverse Phyllophaga Harris of the New World. Pope (Reference Pope1960) revised the southern African species of Schizonycha, and at that time recorded over 300 described species, with 292 of these being from Africa, and 120 being from southern Africa. Undoubtedly, many undescribed species remain, complicating efforts for routine identification of this important pest containing genus. Lacroix (Reference Lacroix2010) provided a World checklist of 349 species for Schizonycha.

Subtribe PEGYLINA Lacroix, 1989

Harrison (Reference Harrison2014a ) provides a phylogeny for the Pegylina while Harrison (Reference Harrison2014b ) provides detailed coverage of the natural history, pest status, larval description, parasites and previous chemical control of South African Pegylis species. Lacroix (Reference Lacroix2008c , Reference Lacroix d ) described new species of Pegylis and included all known species of Pegylis in his 2010 book.

Subtribe LEUCOPHOLINA Burmeister, 1855

Lepesme & Paulian (Reference Lepesme and Paulian1944) recorded larvae of Afrolepis pygidialis feeding on the roots of Coffea excelsa in Gabon, provided a brief description of the larvae and pupae of A. pygidialis, and a key to the species in the genus. Decelle (Reference Decelle1968) proposed Afrolepis as a replacement name for Oligolepis Brenske, 1903 as the latter generic name was already occupied within the vertebrates. Lacroix (Reference Lacroix2010) provided redescriptions, a key to species, and maps for the five known species of Afrolepis.

Harrison (Reference Harrison2009) provides detailed coverage of the natural history and pest status of Asthenopholis, revises the genus and recognizes seven species of Asthenopholis from these countries: South Africa (five spp.), Lesotho (one), Swaziland (one), Kenya (one), Tanzania (two) and Uganda (one).

The larvae of Cochliotis melolonthoides are considered an important pest of sugarcane in Tanzania (Jepson, Reference Jepson1956). Lacroix (Reference Lacroix2009a ) provided a revision of the four known species of Cochliotis, including the description of a new species from Somalia. Cochliotis species are known from Kenya, Tanzania and Somalia (Lacroix, Reference Lacroix2009a ). Jepson (Reference Jepson1956) discussed the biology, larvae (including third instar head capsule and rastal pattern illustrations) and adults of C. melolonthoides. Additionally, Jepson (Reference Jepson1956) included recommendations for the cultural, biological and chemical control of C. melolonthoides larvae, which are pests of sugarcane in Tanzania. Hajek et al. (Reference Hajek, McManus and Delalibera Júnior2005) listed Paenibacillus popilliae (Dutky) (Bacillaceae) as having been released in 1968 in Tanzania for the control of C. melolonthoides. It is possible that P. popilliae became established, but the presence of an indigenous milky disease confounded conclusive results.

Taylor & Smithers (Reference Taylor and Smithers1959) recorded Eulepida mashona as a pest of Ley pasture in Zimbabwe. ‘In ley farming, the field is alternately used for grain or other cash crops for a number of years and ‘laid down to ley’, i.e., left fallow, used for growing hay or used for pasture for another number of years. After that period it is again ploughed and used for cash/field crops’ (Wikipedia, 2015). Towards the end of the growing season in Zimbabwe, Wilson (Reference Wilson1963, Reference Wilson1972) mentioned that larvae of E. mashona can damage maize plants when the cobs begin to ripen in March. In their list of phytophagous insects on forest trees and shrubs, Swain & Prinsloo (Reference Swain and Prinsloo1986) included E. mashona as associated with Acacia mearnsii. Gomez (Reference Gomez1988) included E. mashona in the list of ‘indigenous and traditional foods in Zimbabwe’. From an IPM perspective eating E. mashona would reduce high populations of this chafer and also provide rural communities with free nutrients. However, Tagwireyi et al. (Reference Tagwireyi, Ball, Loga and Moyo2000) reported a case of cantharadin poisoning presumably caused by ingestion of a blister beetle (Meloidae) by a 4-year-old child in Zimbabwe. The cause of the ingestion is thought to be due to mistaken identification of the edible Eulepida mashona with the blister beetle Mylabris distincta Thomas. Lacroix (Reference Lacroix2008f , Reference Lacroix2009a , Reference Lacroix b , Reference Lacroix c , Reference Lacroix d , Reference Lacroix e , Reference Lacroix2011) revised various genera of Leucopholina. Lacroix (Reference Lacroix2010) covered the 26 known species of Eulepida (including descriptions of three new species); he also provided descriptions, keys, distribution maps and line drawings, including the male genitalia for all 26 species.

Tribe SERICINI Kirby, 1837

Subtribe SERICINA Kirby, 1837

In Nigeria, Pseudotrochalus concolor is associated with the following plant species: Bixa orellana, Citrus acida, Citrus limonia, Gossypium hirsutum, Haematoxylon campechianum, Quisqualis indica, Spondias lutea and Zea mais (Golding, Reference Golding1927, Reference Golding1937). Certain genera of African Sericinae (Ahrens, Reference Ahrens2007a ) are currently being revised (Ahrens personal communication).

Subtribe TROCHALINA Brenske, 1898

In southern Nigeria, Peacock (Reference Peacock1913) recorded several species of Trochalus together with other scarabs on cacao or cocoa beans (Theobroma cacao L.), but he placed these taxa on his list of doubtful significance (associated with the crop but not an actual pest). Hargreaves (Reference Hargreaves1937) recorded T. carinatus, T. gibbus and T. pilula as feeding on avocado, Cola nitida and cotton in Sierra Leone. Swain & Prinsloo (Reference Swain and Prinsloo1986) included T. byrrhinus and T. fulgidus in their list of phytophagous insects of forest trees and shrubs in South Africa for Acacia mearnsii.

Conclusion

Identification of melolonthine white grubs and adult chafers unlocks published information on these taxa and creates the necessary nomenclatural foundation for research into the biology and ecology of the species. This review provides a foundation for taxonomic research on this agriculturally important pest group. Research is required in all areas relating to African white grub and leaf chafers in order to improve our ability to make species level pest identifications, understand their biology and implement IPM strategies when required. It is important to conserve these same species as they are also African endemics and an integral part of the continent's rich biodiversity. Recent work by Ahrens, Bezděk, Conlong, Dittrich-Schröder, Goble, Harrison, Lacroix and Way (see reference list) indicates a positive trend to more taxonomic and applied research being undertaken on South African and southern African scarab pests.

Recommendations

Based on this review of the literature from 1889 (Ormerod & Janson, Reference Ormerod and Janson1889) to the present, the following recommendations can be made to improve the continuity of information relating to African scarab pest taxonomy and associated research in future. These include:

  • inclusion of the following key words in paper titles/keyword lists to facilitate electronic literature searchers, i.e., ‘white grub, leaf chafer, Scarabaeidae, Melolonthinae, Africa and scarab pest’;

  • clear indication of the methods used to establish larvae-to-adult conspecificity, when identifications are provided, e.g., adults bred from larvae, larvae and adults found in association with one another, or via molecular matching techniques;

  • a clear statement of the person responsible (and their professional affiliation) for taxon identifications, e.g., ‘Riaan Stals of the ARC-PPRIFootnote 1 ’; and

  • information on the national museum/research institution in which the vouchers on which the identification is based have been deposited, e.g., ‘ARC-PPRI or SANCFootnote 2 ’.

The supplementary materials for this article can be found at http://www.journals.cambridge.org/BER

Acknowledgements

The authors extend their gratitude to these people and organizations for their contributions to this paper: Darren J. Mann, Gudrun Dittrich-Schroder, Mike Way, Paul Schoolmeesters, Petr Šípek and Tarryn Goble for providing literature; Riaan Stals and Beth Grobbelaar (ARC-PPRI) for access to their extensive pest related beetle reprint collection; Kevin Balkwill allowed JduGH to attend a number of writing retreats at WITS’ Pullen Nature Reserve, where much of the review was written; Irene and Mick Jackson provided funding for the upgrade of facilities at Pullen N.R. making the Jackson Field Station such a pleasant research environment; The WITS Faculty Research Committee and WITS SPARC covered JduGH's research costs. Marcus Byrne (WITS, RSA), Mary Liz Jameson (Wichita State University, USA), Connal Eardley (ARC-PPRI), Simon van Noort (SAMCFootnote 3 ) and Brett Hurley (FABIFootnote 4 ) provided valuable comments to an earlier version of the paper; Dirk Ahrens provided his knowledge and insight into the current taxonomy of the Ablaberini, Sericini and Trochalina. Most importantly, JduGH thanks his family and especially Margaret A.C. Harrison for their love, support and patience while completing his PhD.

Footnotes

1 Agricultural Research Council – Plant Protection Research Institute. http://www.arc.agric.za

2 South African National Collection of Insects. http://www.arc.agric.za/home

4 Forestry and Agricultural Biotechnology Institute http://www.fabinet.up.ac.za/

References

Ahrens, D. (2007 a) Type species designations of Afrotropical Ablaberini and Sericini genera (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). Zootaxa 1496, 5362.Google Scholar
Ahrens, D. (2007 b) Taxonomic changes and an updated catalogue for the Palaearctic Sericini (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). Zootaxa 1504, 151.Google Scholar
Ahrens, D., Monaghan, M.T. & Vogler, A.P. (2007 a) DNA-based taxonomy for associating adults and larvae in multi-species assemblages of chafers (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 44, 436449.Google Scholar
Ahrens, D., Zorn, C., Dhoj, Y.G.C., Keller, S. & Nagel, P. (2007 b) Illustrated key of phytophagous scarabs of Nepal. A guide to white grubs and chafers of the lower central regions (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae). Opuscula Biogeographica Basiliensia 5, 144.Google Scholar
Allsopp, P.G., Klein, M.G. & McCoy, E.L. (1992) Effect of soil moisture and soil texture on oviposition by Japanese beetle and rose chafer (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 85, 21942200.Google Scholar
Allsopp, P.G., McGill, N.G. & Bull, R.M. (1995) Use of suSCon Blue against larvae of Lepidiota picticollis Lea (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) in Australian sugar-cane and the effect of infestation on yield. Crop Protection 14, 6973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andre Moutia, L. (1941) The search for parasites of white grubs (Melolonthids) in Zanzibar, Algeria, Morocco and France. Bulletin of Entomological Research 31, 193208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Annecke, D.P. & Moran, V.C. (1982) Insects and Mites of Cultivated Plants in South Africa. pp. 1383. Durban, South Africa, Butterworths.Google Scholar
Anonymous (1992) White Grub Survey Report 1991–1992 Season. 10 pp. Swaziland, Swaziland Sugar Association Extension Services.Google Scholar
Ansari, M.A., Adhikari, B.N., Ali, F. & Moens, M. (2008) Susceptibility of Hoplia philanthus (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) larvae and pupae to entomopathogenic nematodes (Rhabditida: Steinernematidae, Heterorhabditidae). Biological Control 47, 315321.Google Scholar
Arrow, G.J. (1912) XLVII – On a new species of Melolonthine beetle (Phytalus smithi) destructive to sugar-cane. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 8(9), 455459.Google Scholar
Arrow, G.J. (1917) Some insects injurious to Cacao plants in the Belgian Congo. Bulletin of Entomological Research 8, 111118.Google Scholar
Arrow, G.J. (1925) XXIII. A few new species of melolonthine Coleoptera. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 16(9), 209221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arrow, G.J. (1932) XXVII. A few new species of melolonthine Coleoptera. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 9(10), 209221.Google Scholar
Bezděk, A. (2004 a) Revision of the genus Ceratogonia Kolbe, 1899. Annales Zoologici 54(4), 797801.Google Scholar
Bezděk, A. (2004 b) Catalogue of diplotaxini of the old world. Zootaxa 463, 190.Google Scholar
Bezděk, A. (2008) Synonymical notes on Apogonia cupreoviridis and A. nigroolivacea . Annales Zoologici (Warsaw) 58(1), 7177.Google Scholar
Bezděk, A. (2009) Synomical and geographic distribution notes for Apogonia niponica Lewis, 1895. Coleopterists Bulletin 63(4), 438444.Google Scholar
Büttiker, W.W. & Bünzli, G.H. (1957) Biological notes on Southern Rhodesian tobacco pests (1): records of host plants of adult chafer beetles. Rhodesian Agricultural Journal 54(5), 462472.Google Scholar
Carnegie, A.J.M. (1974 a) Insects of sugarcane in South Africa. pp. 1–14 in Carnegie, A.J.M., Dick, J. & Harris, R.H.G. (Eds). Insects and Nematodes of South African Sugarcane. Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa Memoirs 39, 1–19.Google Scholar
Carnegie, A.J.M. (1974b) Sugarcane white grubs (Scarabaeoidea) and their control in South Africa. Proceedings of International Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 15, 498512.Google Scholar
Carnegie, A.J.M. (1988) White grubs (Scarabaeoidea) continue to cause sporadic damage to sugarcane in South Africa and Swaziland. pp. 161–163 in Proceedings of the Sixty-Second Annual Congress of the South African Sugar Technologists' Association, held at Durban and Mount Edgecombe, 6–9 June. Mount Edgecombe, SASTA.Google Scholar
Cherry, R.H. & Allsopp, P.G. (1991) Soil texture and the distribution of Antitrogus parvulus Britton, Lepidiota crinita Brenske and L. negatoria Blackburn (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) in South Queensland sugarcane fields. Journal of the Australian Entomological Society 30, 8992.Google Scholar
Coetzee, J.H. & Giliomee, J.H. (1985) Insects in association with the inflorescence of Protea repens (L.) (Proteaceae) and their role in pollination. Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa 48(2), 303314.Google Scholar
Conlong, D.E. & Mugalula, A.M. (2003) Idaecamenta eugeniae (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae): a new species of white grub in Ugandan sugarcane. Proceedings of the South African Sugar Technologists Association 77, 250255.Google Scholar
Dalla Torre, K.W. von (1912) Fam. Scarabaeidae. Subfam. Melolonthinae. I. Coleopterorum catalogus, vol. 20, pars 45, Scarabaeidae; Melolonthidae I. pp. 184. W. Junk, Berlin.Google Scholar
Danks, H.V. (1988) Systematics in support of entomology. Annual Review of Entomology 33, 271296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Decelle, J. (1968) Contribution à létude des Melolonthidae d Afrique: II. Notes sur les Leucopholini et description d'espèces nouvelles. Revue de Zoologie et de Botanique Africaines 77, 6282.Google Scholar
Dittrich-Schröder, G., Conlong, D.E., Way, M.J., Harrison, J. du G. & Mitchell, A. (2009) Identification key to scarabaeid larvae attacking sugarcane in South Africa using DNA barcoding and integrative taxonomy. Proceedings of the South African Sugar Technologists Association 82, 500524.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (1997 a) Revision of the genus Denticnema Schein 1959 (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 1, 121.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (1997 b) Revision of the genus Pareriesthis Moser 1918 (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 1, 2239.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (1997 c) Revision of the genus Eriesthis Burmeister (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 1, 41115.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (1997 d) New species of Hopliini from the Northern and Western Cape Provinces of the Republic of South Africa (Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 1, 137159.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (1997 e) Revision of the genera Chasme Serville 1825, Khoina Péringuey 1902 and Lepitrichula Schein 1959 (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 1, 161201.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (1998 a) Revision of the genus Hoplocnemis Harold 1869 (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 2, 137.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (1998 b) Revision of the genus Pachycnema Serville 1825 (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 2, 39110.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (1999 a) New species of Hopliini from southern Africa. 8th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini (Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 3, 139144.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (1999 b) Revision of the genus Clania Schein, 1956 (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 9th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 3, 145158.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (1999 c) Revision of the genus Lepisia Serville, 1825 (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 10th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 3, 159176.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (1999 d) Revision of the genus Scelophysa Burmeister, 1844 (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 11th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 3, 177202.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2000 a) Revision of the genus Lepithrix Serville, 1825 (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 12th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 4, 93146.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2000 b) Two new species of the genus Hoplocnemis Harold, 1869 from southern Africa (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 13th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 4, 147152.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2001 a) Revision of the genus Gymnoloma Burmeister 1844 with observations on three new genera (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 14th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 5, 107148.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2001 b) Two new species of the genus Lepithrix Serville from Northern and Western Cape Provinces of the Republic of South Africa (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 15th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 5, 427432.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2001 c) Three new species of the genus Heterochelus Burmeister, 1844 out of Kulzer's 11th group from Northern Cape (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 16th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 5, 433440.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2002 a) Dentiheterochelus gen. n. and Toxocnemis gen. n., two new genera of Hopliini from the Republic of South Africa (Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). 17th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 6, 103108.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2002 b) A new species of the genus Eriesthis Burmeister, 1844 from Namibia (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 18th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 6, 109112.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2002 c) A new species of the genus Gymnoloma Burmeister from Western Cape of the Republic of South Africa (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 19th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 6, 113116.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2002 d) Amblymelanoplia a new genus of South African Hopliini (Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). 20th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 6, 117128.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2002 e) Nigroplia gen. n. and Mauromecistoplia gen. n., two new genera of South African Hopliini (Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). 21st Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 6, 129137.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2002 f) Ceratochelus gen.n. and Paraceratochelus gen.n., two new genera of South African Hopliini (Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). 22nd Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 6, 139156.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2003) Argoplia gen.n., Burmeistoplia gen.n. and Dolichiomicroscelis gen.n. three new genera of South African Hopliini (Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). 23rd Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 7, 103115.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2005 a) Three new species of the genus Lepithrix Serville from the Northern and Western Cape Provinces of the Republic of South Africa (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 24th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 9, 117124.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2005 b) Beckhoplia a new genus of Hopliini from the Northern Cape of the Republic of South Africa (Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). 25th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 9, 125130.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2006 a) Two new species of the genus Knysna Péringuey from Western Cape of the Republic of South Africa (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 28th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 10, 8388.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2006 b) Two new species of the genus Diaplochelus Burmeister from the Republic of South Africa (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 29th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 10, 8994.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2006 c) Two new species of the genus Scelophysa Burmeister from Western Cape of the Republic of South Africa (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 30th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 10, 95100.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2006 d) Two new species of the genus Lepisia Serville from the Northern and Western Cape of the Republic of South Africa (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 31st Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 10, 101106.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2007 a) Three new species of the genus Denticnema Schein 1959 from the Western Cape of the Republic of South Africa (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 32nd Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 11, 125132.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2007 b) Two new species of the genus Dolichiomicroscelis Dombrow 2003 from the Western Cape of the Republic of South Africa (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 33rd Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 11, 133138.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2007 c) Eleven new species of the genus Lepithrix Serville from the Northern and Western Cape Provinces of the Republic of South Africa (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 34th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 11, 139160.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2007 d) Six new species of the genus Kobousa Péringuey from the Western Cape of the Republic of South Africa (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 35th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 11, 161174.Google Scholar
Dombrow, H. (2008) Omocnemus mitzlaffi sp. n. a new species of the genus Omocnemus Schein from Namibia (Melolonthinae: Hopliini). 36th Contribution to the knowledge of African Hopliini. Coleoptera, Schwanfelder Coleopterologische Mitteilungen 12, 221226.Google Scholar
Evans, A.V. (1987 a) A new genus of Melolonthinae from southern Africa. Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa 50(2), 363370.Google Scholar
Evans, A.V. (1987 b) Revision of the genus Aipeiopsis Péringuey. Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa 50(2), 481486.Google Scholar
Evans, A.V. (1987 c) A new species of Eucyclophylla Waterhouse. Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa 50(2), 487491.Google Scholar
Evans, A.V. (1988 a) Systematics of the Subsaharan Pachydemini (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae, Melolonthinae). Doctoral dissertation, Department of Entomology, Pretoria, University of Pretoria, pp. 1210.Google Scholar
Evans, A.V. (1988 b) Three new species of Glyptoglossa Brenske. Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa 51(1), 8796.Google Scholar
Evans, A.V. (1989) Revision of the genus Sparrmannia Laporte (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae, Melolonthinae). Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa 52(1), 1144.Google Scholar
Evans, A.V. (2003) A checklist of the New World chafers (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). Zootaxa 211, 1458.Google Scholar
Evans, A.V. & Smith, A.B.T. (2009) An Electronic Checklist of the New World Chafers (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). pp. 353. Version 3. Ottawa, Canada, Electronically published. Available online at http://museum.unl.edu/research/entomology/SSSA/nwmelos.htm (accessed 15 February 2015).Google Scholar
Fenwick, E.M. (1947) On Macrophylla pubens Péringuey (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae, Melolonthinae). Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa 10, 2430.Google Scholar
Gess, F.W. (1968) Insects found on Proteas. Journal of the Botanical Society of South Africa 54, 2933.Google Scholar
Goble, T.A., Costet, L., Robene, I., Nibouche, S., Rutherford, R.S., Conlong, D.E. & Hill, M.P. (2012) Beauveria brongniartii on white grubs attacking sugarcane in South Africa. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology 111, 225236.Google Scholar
Golding, F.D. (1927) Notes on the food-plants and habits of some southern Nigerian Insects. Bulletin of Entomological Research 17, 9599.Google Scholar
Golding, F.D. (1937) Further notes on the food plants of Nigerian Insects IV. Bulletin of Entomological Research 28, 59.Google Scholar
Gomez, M. (1988) A resource inventory of indigenous and traditional foods in Zimbabwe. Zambezia 15(1), 5373.Google Scholar
Haddad, C.R. & Louw, S. vd M. (2006) Phenology, ethology and fecundity of Heliophanus pistaciae Wesołowska (Araneae: Salticidae), an agrobiont jumping spider in South African pistachio orchards. African Plant Protection 12, 111.Google Scholar
Haddad, C.R., Dippenaar-Schoeman, A.S. & Pekár, S. (2005) Arboreal spiders (Arachnida: Araneae) in pistachio orchards in South Africa. African Plant Protection 11, 3241.Google Scholar
Hajek, A.E., McManus, M.L., Delalibera Júnior, I. (2005) Catalogue of Introductions of Pathogens and Nematodes for Classical Biological Control of Insects and Mites. pp. 165. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Publication FHTET-2005–05. Morgantown, USA, USDA Forest Service.Google Scholar
Hargreaves, E. (1937) Some insects and their food plants in Sierra Leone. Bulletin of Entomological Research 28, 505520.Google Scholar
Harrison, J.du G. (2004) Revision of the endemic southern African genus Rhabdopholis Burmeister, 1855 (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). African Entomology 12(1), 3954.Google Scholar
Harrison, J.du G. (2009) A taxonomic revision of the African leaf chafer genus Asthenopholis Brenske, 1898 (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae): a SEM study. Zootaxa 2225, 148.Google Scholar
Harrison, J.du G. (2014 a) A morphological analysis of the subtribe Pegylina Lacroix, 1989 (Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae: Melolonthini) reconstitutes its generic composition. African Entomology 22(4), 726741.Google Scholar
Harrison, J.du G. (2014 b) Review of the South African species of Pegylis Erichson, 1847 (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae) commonly known as large wattle chafers. African Entomology 22(4), 685713.Google Scholar
Hittersay, P. (2005) White grub damages soya crop. Farmers Weekly 1 April. 23.Google Scholar
Islam, W., Ahmed, K.N. & Joarder, O.I. (1984) Timing and extent of damage caused by insect pests of green gram (Vigna radiata L.) in Bangladesh. Crop Protection 3(3), 343348.Google Scholar
Jepson, W.F. (1956) The biology and control of the sugar-cane chafer beetles in Tanganyika. Bulletin of Entomological Research 47, 377397.Google Scholar
Katagira, F. (2003) Tanzania. pp. 74–75 in Macdonald, I.A.W., Reaser, J.K., Bright, C., Neville, L.E., Howard, G.W., Murphy, S.J. & Preston, G. (Eds) Invasive Alien Species in Southern Africa: National Reports & Directory of Resources. Cape Town, South Africa, Global Invasive Species Programme.Google Scholar
Korada, R.R., Naskar, S.K. & Edison, S. (2010) Insect pests and their management in yam production and storage: a world review. International Journal of Pest Management 56(4), 337349.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (1997) Contribution à la connaissance des Pachydeminae africains. I. Nouveaux genres et nouvelles espèces (Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea, Melolonthidae). Revue française d'Entomologie, (N.S.) 19(1–2), 5162.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (1999) Contribution à la connaissance des Pachydeminae africains. II. Nouveaux genres et nouvelles espèces. Définition des caractères génériques pour la région afrotropicale (Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 5(4), 4383.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2001) Pachydeminae de l'Est africain (Kenya et Tanzanie) (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 7(13), 173226.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2003) Contribution à la connaissance des Pachydeminae africains, III. Nouveau genre et nouvelles espèces (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 9(6), 6382.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2004) Contribution à la connaissance des Pachydeminae africains, IV. Nouvelles espèces (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 10(9), 107118.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2005 a) Contribution à la connaissance des Pachydeminae africains, V. Nouvelles espèces de Oedanomerus Waterhouse (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 11(6), 5165.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2005 b) Contribution à la connaissance des Pachydeminae africains, VI. Nouveaux genres et nouvelles espèces (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 11(22), 273300.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2006 a) Contribution à la connaissance des Pachydeminae africains, VII. Le genre Goniorrhina Quedenfeldt, 1888 (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 12(4), 2346.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2006 b) Contribution à la connaissance des Pachydeminae africains, VIII. Nouveaux genres et nouvelles espèces (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 12(11), 159178.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2006 c) Contribution à la connaissance des Pachydeminae africains, IX. Nouveau genre et nouvelles espèces (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 12(14), 203214.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2006 d) Contribution à la connaissance des Pachydeminae africains, X. Nouveau genre, mises au point et désignation de lectotypes (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 12(18), 235270.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2007) Pachydeminae du Monde, Genera et Catalogue (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Editions M. Lacroix/Collection Hannetons. 1–450 + 264 plates.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2008 a) Contribution à la connaissance des Melolonthidae africains, I. Nouveaux genres et nouvelles espèces du complexe Apogonia Kirby, 1819 (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 14(7), 6798.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2008 b) Contribution à la connaissance des Melolonthidae africains, II. Nouvelles espèces d’ Apogonia Kirby (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 14(9), 105116.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2008 c) Contribution à la connaissance des Melolonthidae africains, III. Nouvelles espèces de Pegylis Erichson, 1848 (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 14(12), 133147.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2008 d) Nouvelles espèces de Pegylis Erichson, 1848, d'Afrique orientale (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 14(16), 163186.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2008 e) Révision du genre Aglaphyra Brenske, 1896, d'Afrique orientale (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae, Pachydeminae). Coléoptères 14(19), 213228.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2008 f) Tanzanilepis badia, nouveau genre et nouvelle espèce de Leucopholini d'Afrique orientale (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 14(20), 229240.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2009 a) Révision du genre Cochliotis Kolbe (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae, Leucopholini). Coléoptères 15(6), 3950.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2009 b) Révision du genre Lepidomela Kolbe (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae, Leucopholini). Coléoptères 15(7), 5162.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2009 c) Révision des genres Spaniolepis Kolbe et Camerunopholis Lacroix (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae, Leucopholini). Coléoptères 15(8), 6378.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2009 d) Révision du genre Brachylepis Kolbe (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae, Leucopholini). Coléoptères 15(19), 153168.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2009 e) Révision du genre Pholidochris Kolbe (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae, Leucopholini). Coléoptères 15(20), 169196.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2010) Melolonthinae afrotropicaux, Genera et Catalogue (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Editions Marc Lacroix/Collection Hannetons, France. 1–277. ISBN: 978-2-9529275-1-2. Available directly from publisher: http://hannetons.free.fr Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. (2011) Kenyalepis montana, nouveau genre et nouvelle espèce de Leucopholini d'Afrique orientale (Coleoptera, Melolonthidae). Coléoptères 17(2), 1320.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. & Bezdĕk, A. (2009) Battle of two replacement names for the genus Metagonia Kolbe, 1899 (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). Zootaxa 2237, 6768.Google Scholar
Lacroix, M. & Montreuil, O. (2012) Révision du genre Entyposis Kolbe, 1894 (Insecta, Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea, Melolonthidae). Zoosystema 34(4), 721735.Google Scholar
Lepesme, P. & Paulian, R. (1944) Sur deux Mélolonthides récoltés sur Caféier dans l'Ouest africain. Revue de Zoologie et de Botanique Africaines 38(1–2), 99103.Google Scholar
Logan, P. (1997) Effect of soil moisture on oviposition by Childers Canegrub, Antitrogus parvulus Britton (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Australian Journal of Entomology 36, 175178.Google Scholar
Louw, S. vd M. (2001) Diversity and flight activity of chafers (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) associated with pistachio in South Africa. Proceedings of the 13th Entomological Congress of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa, pp. 4142.Google Scholar
Mansfield-Aders, W. (1920) Insects injurious to economic crops in the Zanzibar Protectorate. Bulletin of Entomological Research 10(2), 145155 + plates XIII-XV.Google Scholar
Medvecky, B.A. & Ketterings, Q.M. (2009) Incorporation of legume residues does not increase productivity of intercropped beans on smallholder farms in Trans-Nzoia District, Kenya. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 26(4), 323335.Google Scholar
Medvecky, B.M., Ketterings, Q.M. & Vermeylen, F.M. (2006) Bean seedling damage by root-feeding grubs (Schizonycha spp.) in Kenya as influenced by planting time, variety, and crop residue management. Applied Soil Ecology 34, 240249.Google Scholar
Medvecky, B.M., Ketterings, Q.M. & Nelson, E.B. (2007) Relationships among soil borne bean seedling diseases, Lablab purpureus L. and maize stover residue management, bean insect pests, and soil characteristics in Trans Nzoia District, Kenya. Applied Soil Ecology 35, 107119.Google Scholar
Midgley, J.M., Hill, M.P. & Villet, M.H. (2008) Baited traps may be an alternative to conventional pesticides in integrated crop management of chicory (Compositae) in South Africa. Journal of Economic Entomology 101(1), 99106.Google Scholar
Miller, L.J., Allsopp, P.G., Graham, G.C. & Yeates, D.K. (1999) Identification of morphologically similar canegrubs (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae, Melolonthini) using a molecular diagnostic technique. Australian Journal of Entomology 38, 189196.Google Scholar
Myburgh, A.C. & Rust, D.J. (1975) A survey of pests of the Proteaceae in the western and southern Cape Province. Journal of the Entomological Society of southern Africa 38(1), 5560.Google Scholar
Myburgh, A.C., Rust, D.J. & Starke, L.C. (1973) Pests of protea cut-flowers. Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa 36(2), 251255.Google Scholar
Myburgh, A.C., Starke, L.C. & Rust, D.J. (1974) Destructive insects in the seed heads of Protea barbigera Meisner (Proteaceae). Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa 37(1), 2329.Google Scholar
Oberholzer, J.J. (1959 a) A morphological study of some South African Lamellicorn larvae. I – Descriptions of the third instar larvae. South African Journal of Agricultural Science 2, 4174.Google Scholar
Oberholzer, J.J. (1959 b) A morphological study of some South African Lamellicorn larvae. II – Comparative morphology. South African Journal of Agricultural Science 2, 7588.Google Scholar
Omer-Cooper, J., Whitnall, A.B.M. & Fenwick, E.M. (1941) The problem of South African turf in relation to invertebrate pests. South African Journal of Science 37, 273284.Google Scholar
Omer-Cooper, J., Whitnall, A.B.M. & Fenwick, E.M. (1941–1942) The insect and the golfer. Reprinted from South African Golf (June 1941 to August 1942), 120.Google Scholar
Omer-Cooper, J., Whitnall, A.B.M. & Fenwick, E.M. (1948) Notes on four species of Coleoptera attacking turf in the Eastern Cape Province. South African Journal of Science 44, 125134.Google Scholar
Ormerod, E.A. & Janson, O.E. (1889) Notes and Descriptions of a few Injurious Farm and Fruit Insects of South Africa, pp. 1116. London, Simpkin, Marshall and Co., Stationer's Hall Court.Google Scholar
Peacock, A.D. (1913) Entomological pests and problems of southern Nigeria. Bulletin of Entomological Research 4, 191220 + plates XXIII-XXVIII.Google Scholar
Péringuey, L. (1904) Descriptive catalogue of the Coleoptera of South Africa (Lucanidae and Scarabaeidae). Transactions of the South African Philosophical Society 13, 1293 + 4 plates.Google Scholar
Petty, G.J. (1976) The bionomics and control of pineapple white grubs (Coleoptera: Scarabaeoidea) in the Eastern Cape. Crop Production 5, 5559.Google Scholar
Petty, G.J. (1977 a) Beetle pests of pineapples, some biological aspects. The Citrus and Subtropical Fruit Journal 529, 47.Google Scholar
Petty, G.J. (1977 b) White-grub rears head in Eastern Cape. Citrus and Subtropical Fruit Research Institute Information Bulletin 53, 12.Google Scholar
Petty, G.J. (1978) White grubs in pineapples. Farming in South Africa 12, 14.Google Scholar
Petty, G.J. (1982) Isazophos, a promising new insecticide for control of larvae of fossorial rhizophagous beetles (Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea) in pineapple fields. Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa 45(1), 3341.Google Scholar
Petty, G.J. (1990) White grubs in pineapples. Farming in South Africa 12, 12.Google Scholar
Petty, G.J. (1994) White grubs in pineapples, an alternative prevention strategy. Institute for Tropical and sub-tropical Crops Information Bulletin 265, 1112.Google Scholar
Petty, G.J. (2001) Order Coleoptera: family Scarabaeidae: white grubs. pp. 247–257 in van den Berg, M.A., de Villiers, E.A. & Joubert, P.H. (Eds) Pests and Beneficial Arthropods of Tropical and Non-Citrus Subtropical Crops in South Africa. pp. 1525. Mbombela, ARC-Institute for Tropical and Subtropical Crops.Google Scholar
Petty, G.J., Stirling, G.R. & Bartholomew, D.P. (2002) Pests of pineapple. pp. 157189 in Peña, J.E., Sharp, J.L. & Wysoki, M. (Eds) Tropical Fruit Pests and Pollinators: Biology, Economic Importance, Natural Enemies and Control. Wallingford, UK, CABI Publishing.Google Scholar
Picker, M.D. & Griffiths, C. (2011) Alien and Invasive Animals. A South African Perspective. pp. 1240. Cape Town, Struik.Google Scholar
Picker, M.D. & Midgley, J.J. (1996) Pollination by monkey beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Hopliini): flower and colour preferences. African Entomology 4(1), 714.Google Scholar
Pope, R.D. (1960) A revision of the species of Schizonycha Dejean (Col., Melolonthidae) from southern Africa. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History) Entomology 9(2), 65216 + 14 plates.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prins, A.J. (1965) Notes on the biology and morphology of the wattle chafers Monochelus calcaratus Burm. (Melolonthidae), Hypopholis sommeri Burm. (Melolonthidae), and Adoretus ictericus Burm. (Rutelidae) with some references to natural enemies (Coleoptera: Lamellicornia). Entomology Memoirs 9, 155.Google Scholar
Ratcliffe, B.C. (1991) The scarab beetles of Nebraska. Bulletin of the University of Nebraska State Museum 12, 1333.Google Scholar
Ritcher, P.O. (1958) Biology of Scarabaeidae. Annual Review of Entomology 3, 311334.Google Scholar
Ritcher, P.O. (1966) White grubs and their allies, a study of North American Scarabaeoid Larvae. Oregon State University Monograph Series No. 4, 1219.Google Scholar
Schein, H. (1958) Bestimmungstabellen der Heterochelides mit ausnahme von Heterochelus und Ischnochelus . Annals of the South African Museum 44(6), 229267.Google Scholar
Schmutterer, H. von (1964) Zur kenntnis der schädlinge and krankheiten der kulturpflanzen in Südsomalia. Journal of Pest Science 37(7), 102106.Google Scholar
Schoeman, A. (1996) Scarabaeidae as pests of turfgrass in South Africa. pp 123 in Way, M.J. & du Toit, H.A. (Eds) White Grub Working Group: Pest Status, Biology and Rearing of White Grub (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) Pests in Southern Africa. 6–7 June 1996. SASRI Technical Report, Mount Edgecombe, KwaZulu-Natal.Google Scholar
Scholtz, C.H. (1988) Biology of Sparrmannia flava Arrow (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae, Melolonthinae). Coleopterists Bulletin 42(1), 5762.Google Scholar
Simon, E. (1893) Études Arachnologiques. 25e Mémoire (1). Descriptions d’espèces et de genres nouveaux de l’ordre des Araneae. Annales de la Société Entomologique de France 62, 299–330.Google Scholar
Smit, B. (1964) Chapter 27. Dung beetles, cockchafers, and other beetles. pp. 273–278 in Insects in Southern Africa: How to Control Them. Cape Town, Oxford University Press, 1399.Google Scholar
Smith, A.B.T. (2006) A review of the family-group names for the Superfamily Scarabaeoidea (Coleoptera) with corrections to nomenclature and a current classification. Coleopterists Society Monograph 5, 144204.Google Scholar
Smith, T.J., Petty, G.J. & Villet, M.H. (1995) Description and identification of white grubs (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae) that attack pineapple crops in South Africa. African Entomology 3(2), 153166.Google Scholar
Swain, V.M. & Prinsloo, G.L. (1986) A list of phytophagous insects and mites on forest trees and shrubs in South Africa. Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa Memoirs 66, 191.Google Scholar
Sweeney, C. (1967) The Scarabaeoidea associated with sugar-cane in Swaziland; an account of preliminary investigations into the bionomics and control, August 1965 –June 1967. Swaziland Ministry of Agriculture Research Bulletin 16, 1163.Google Scholar
Tagwireyi, D., Ball, D.E., Loga, P.J. & Moyo, S. (2000) Case report. Cantharidin poisoning due to blister beetle ingestion. Toxicon 38, 18651869.Google Scholar
Tarr, S.A.J. (1958) Experiments in the Sudan Gezira on control of wilt of Dolichos bean (Dolichos lablab) associated with attach by cockchafer grubs (Schizonycha sp.). Annals of Applied Biology 46(4), 630638.Google Scholar
Taylor, C.E. & Smithers, C.N. (1959) The biology and control of whitegrubs (Eulepida mashona Arrow) in Ley Pastures. Rhodesia Agricultural Journal 56(6), 240242.Google Scholar
Tefera, T. (2004) Farmers’ perceptions of sorghum stem-borer and farm management practices in eastern Ethiopia. International Journal of Pest Management 50(1), 3540.Google Scholar
Visser, D. (2005) Guide to Potato Pests and their Natural Enemies in South Africa. pp. 1105. Pretoria, ARC-Roodeplaat Vegetable and Ornamental Plant Institute.Google Scholar
Visser, D. (2009) A Complete Guide to Vegetable Pests in South Africa. pp. 1316. Pretoria, ARC-Roodeplaat Vegetable and Ornamental Plant Institute.Google Scholar
Wikipedia (2015) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ley_farming (accessed 13 March 2015).Google Scholar
Williams, J.R. (1985) White grubs in sugar cane. Report on a consultancy visit to Swaziland 30 July – 4 September 1985. Swaziland Sugar Cane Association, Mbabane, Swaziland. pp. 1–21.Google Scholar
Wilson, K.J. (1963) Underground pests of maize in Northern Rhodesia. Rhodesia Agricultural Journal 60(4), 111114.Google Scholar
Wilson, K.J. (1972) A review of soil dwelling insects that have become important pests of agriculture in Rhodesia. Rhodesia Agricultural Journal 69(1), 1721.Google Scholar
Zhang, Q.-H., Ma, J.-H., Yang, Q.-Q., Byers, J.A., Klein, M.G., Zhao, F.-Y. & Luoe, Y.-Q.. (2011) Olfactory and visual responses of the long-legged chafer Hoplia spectabilis Medvedev (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) in Qinghai Province, China. Pest Management Science 67, 162169.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1. Checklist of Sub-Saharan African melolonthine white grubs and leaf chafers (Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae) of potential significance to forestry and agricultural crops. This list is based on the literature sources cited in Table 1 supplementary material.

Supplementary material: File

Harrison and Wingfield supplementary material S1

Harrison and Wingfield supplementary material

Download Harrison and Wingfield supplementary material S1(File)
File 34.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Harrison and Wingfield supplementary material S2

Harrison and Wingfield supplementary material

Download Harrison and Wingfield supplementary material S2(File)
File 352.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Harrison and Wingfield supplementary material S3

Harrison and Wingfield supplementary material

Download Harrison and Wingfield supplementary material S3(File)
File 48.6 KB