Content uploaded by S. G. Tan
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by S. G. Tan on Jun 18, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
*Corresponding author: Email: rita@upm.edu.my;
Annual Research & Review in Biology
4(22): …………, 2014
SCIENCEDOMAIN international
www.sciencedomain.org
Oryctes rhinoceros Beetles, an Oil Palm Pest in
Malaysia
G. Manjeri
1
, R. Muhamad
1*
and Soon Guan Tan
2
1
Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Universiti Putra Malaysia,
43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia.
2
Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Biotechnology and Biomolecular
Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia.
Authors’ contributions
This work was carried out in collaboration between all authors. Author GM performed the
literature searches, reviewed all relevant materials and wrote the manuscript. The final
manuscript was read and approved by Authors GM, RM and SGT.
Received 22
nd
April 2014
Accepted 15
th
May 2014
Published 16
th
June 2014
ABSTRACT
Oryctes rhinoceros, commonly known as the rhinoceros beetle is an important agricultural
pest that is known to inflict serious damage on young oil palm trees. Many researches
have been conducted on its development, life cycle, habitat, management and genomic
variation ever since the need to understand this pest arose. Oryctes rhinoceros is among
the longest present agricultural pest in Malaysia and it has witnessed the formulation and
implementation of various phases of control and management strategies. To date,
research and development activities are still ongoing in Malaysia for the successful
management of this pest. In this review, we look into details on the characteristics of this
pest, the modes of its introduction into Malaysia, as well as the events that helped to
establish and contribute to the proliferation of this pest as a major oil palm threat in
Malaysia. The progressive development of various research and development activities
concerning the management and control of this pest are also highlighted.
Keywords: Oryctes rhinoceros; rhinoceros beetle; oil palm pest; Malaysia
Mini-Review Article
Annual Research & Review in Biology, 4(22): ………….., 2014
3430
1. INTRODUCTION
The oil palm, Elais guineensis Jacq. is a native West African plant [1]. It was first introduced
into Southeast Asia in 1848 when it was planted in the Bogor Botanic Gardens, Java, as an
ornamental plant. Subsequently, it was commercially developed as a plantation crop in
Sumatera. In Malaysia, this plant was first introduced by Sir M. H. Fauconnier during 1911
and 1912. This later led to the establishment of Tennamaram Estate, the first Malaysian
commercial oil palm estate in 1917 [2]. Since its early introduction into Malaysia in 1911, oil
palm plants have rapidly developed to become the number one commercial crop of the
country resulting in Malaysia being the second highest producer of palm oil in the world after
Indonesia [3]. However, various hurdles and trials were faced by planters and researchers
throughout the process. Amidst the various problems that arose, attacks by Oryctes
rhinoceros beetles had been an unremitting dilemma faced by Malaysian planters. Often,
beetle attack results in loss of productivity, irreversible damage to plants and plant death.
Attacked oil palm plants are also predisposed to further lethal secondary infestation by the
red palm weevils (Rhynchophorus spp.). In Malaysia, O. rhinoceros has established its self
as a major Coleopteran pest of the oil palm industry and this had been made possible by a
series of events that began with the development of this pest in Malaysia through the
coconut industry up to its establishment as an oil palm pest due to several plantation
practices that caused unanticipated population increase. To date, the severity and impact of
the damage by O. rhinoceros is often observed and recorded in plantations throughout the
country to aid monitoring and control practices. Various control measures and integrated
pest management strategies have been applied in field and constant research and
developments are undertaken to improvise control measures as well as to improve the
understanding on the O. rhinoceros its self.
2. TAXONOMIC CLASSIFICATION
Oryctes rhinoceros being an important agricultural pest has been widely studied in various
aspects over a very long period of time. Incomplete taxonomic studies on this beetle began
very early and constant revisions were made in the classification of this beetle. This species
was originally described as Scarabaeus rhinoceros by Linnaeus. In further taxonomic work
published in 1840, this beetle was called Oryctes stentor Castelnau. Finally, with the
establishment of the zoological nomenclature system, this species was renamed as Oryctes
rhinoceros [4]. Oryctes rhinoceros is a member of the superfamily Scarabaeoidea which has
been on the face of the earth for as long as 200 million years [5]. Out of the 42 species in
this genus [4] only O. rhinoceros is present as an oil palm pest in the Asian region [6].
Locally in Malaysia, this beetle is known as the ‘kumbang badak’, whereby ‘kumbang’ means
beetle and ‘badak’ means rhinoceros.
3. BIOLOGY AND HABITAT OF THE RHINOCEROS BEETLES
Several works had been done on the life cycle of this pest which comprises four stages
namely egg, larva, pupa and imago with the duration of each stage being variable,
depending on climatic conditions, nutrition and humidity of the different localities in which the
developmental process occurred [4,7-9]. Generally the whole life cycle lasts for around four
to nine months allowing for more than one generation per year [10]. Throughout this period
the female lays 70 to 100 eggs [8]. Adult beetles have been observed to mate right after their
first feeding once they have left their pupal site [11]. These observations further conclude
Annual Research & Review in Biology, 4(22): ………….., 2014
3431
and support the fact that O. rhinoceros are robust, long-lived and highly productive and this
contributes towards the large and frequent events of beetle attack [12].
There is a clear difference in the choice of habitats between the immature and the adult O.
rhinoceros beetles. A dead standing coconut palm which has been previously affected by
disease, pest or lightning provides a suitable breeding environment for the immature beetles
[13]. Materials like compost, sawdust heaps, rotting logs, decaying vegetable, bridges made
of coconut trunk, dead pandanus, old latrines, sugar cane bagasse, rice straws and also
humus rich soil also serve as suitable habitats for immature beetles [4,6,8,14-15].
Meanwhile, the adults spend most of their life time on fresh plants but they also return to
decomposing sites for mating and breeding [11-12]. Studies were also conducted by several
researchers to understand the role of abiotic factors in the beetles’ habitat selection. It was
successfully revealed that ground cover of more than 70 cm, decomposing tree trunk with
77% moisture content, soil pH lower than 4.2 and a high rainfall are important features in the
beetles’ habitat which increase their population density [16].
4. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE RHINOCEROS BEETLE IN MALAYSIA
Oryctes rhinoceros began to establish themselves in Malaysia with the emergence of
coconut cultivation. Beetles were previously introduced into Malaysia from other countries
via various activities such as shipping and cargo transportation of timber, nursery trade and
transportation of habitat material. As the beetles have a range of hosts, they soon adapted
well to survive on coconut trees which were abundant along the Malaysian coastline. This
slowly led to the establishment of the O. rhinoceros populations along the east and west
coast of Malaysia. Later on in the 1970s, oil palm estates were developed on ex-rubber land.
Old rubber trees were uprooted and left to rot in the newly developed oil palm planting sites
as estate owners and small holders could not afford complete clearing due to the high cost
of planting the palms. In addition, during that time land owners disregarded the importance
of field sanitation and the consequences of improper field management. In this case, a
combination of readily available suitable breeding ground in the form of rotting rubber tree
stumps as well as abundant food resources provided by the young oil palm trees led to a
drastic increase in the beetle population in Malaysia [17].
In addition, enforcement of the Zero Burning Concept [Environment Quality Clean Air:
Amendment Regulation, 2000] in Malaysia further aggravated the situation. Previous
replanting techniques adopted felling, shredding, partial burning and complete burning as
common practices at replanting sites [18]. These methods minimized the availability of
suitable breeding sites for O. rhinoceros. However, under the new Zero Burning Concepts,
open burning was not permitted due to environmental pollution issues and this led to
increasing numbers of rotting materials [19]. In addition, an under planting technique was
also introduced to overcome burning problems. In this technique, new palms were planted
under old palms which were gradually poisoned [9]. It was found that the techniques
introduced by the Zero Burning Concepts facilitated the increase in the beetle population as
windrowed and poisoned plant biomass took two years to decompose [20]. In addition,
practices of piling old palm around nurseries, leaving dead palms standing upright and
usage of empty fruit bunches as fertilizers for young palms are common practices in
Malaysia and these contributed greatly to the increase in the beetle population in the country
[21-22]. Above all, an ideal climate as well as suitable geographic landscapes of an altitude
less than 900 m and suitable ecological surroundings in addition to food availability and
plentiful breeding ground further facilitated the rapid spread of this pest [4].
Annual Research & Review in Biology, 4(22): ………….., 2014
3432
5. INCIDENCE OF RHINOCEROS BEETLE ATTACK IN MALAYSIA
In Malaysia, articles on the attack of this pest on local plantation in the west and east coasts
of Peninsular Malaysia appeared a few years after the introduction of this crop into our
country [23]. Beetle attacks were more serious in the west coast of Peninsular Malaysia due
to the earlier usage of the land for coconut cultivation [24,17]. Immature and young mature
palms are the major targets of this pest. This was proven during an 18 months of
observation in a two-year-old oil palm replanting site in northern Perak that revealed the
presence of 200 adult beetles per acre [25]. It was observed that the beetles were present
in most estates within one to six months after replanting. This observation further confirmed
that replanting sites played an important role as a breeding ground for the beetles in
Malaysia [25].
The feeding activity of the beetles causes major crop loss in many coconut and oil palm
plantations. As the beetles are nocturnal and feeding as well as mating activities are carried
out at night, many events of initial attacks go unnoticed. Often, the beetle bores into the base
of the cluster of unopened fronds (spears) of the young oil palms, damaging several of the
still-furled fronds [9]. This boring activity produces holes on the petioles and ‘V’ shaped cuts
on leaves as they unfold. The beetle’s mandibles are used to chisel the inner part of the
palm while the horn, clypeus and tibiae are used to bore holes. Beetles did not ingest the
solid plant material but sucked the juices [4]. Damage to the inflorescence due to the beetle
attack often leads to a reduction in the photosynthesizing area resulting in decreased or
delayed fruit production [4,18,26]. Continuous attacks on young oil palms may often be
lethal.
Due to the gregarious nature of this beetle, usually more than one beetle attacks a single
palm and this often results in serious damage and often plant death. Such incidences have a
negative impact on the oil palm production and the industry. Serious damage to plantations
due to O. rhinoceros attacks have been well documented in Malaysia. Damage by O.
rhinoceros could cause an average crop loss of 40% to 92% during the first year of
harvesting [22]. In addition, more than 15% reduction in canopy size had also been observed
due to beetle attack [27]. Reduction in canopy size often results in reduced photosynthetic
activity, delayed plant maturity, reduced fruit bunch size and an approximately 25% crop loss
[18].
6. CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT OF RHINOCEROS BEETLES: RELATED
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENTS IN MALAYSIA
With the increasing number of beetles, the damage faced by the oil palm industry was
significant. This brought upon the interest to control and manage this incessant pest. A
successful pest management technique generally incorporates the applications of several
control techniques together with a fair understanding and appreciation of the surrounding
ecological factors [28]. Records highlighting devastating damages to palm crops by the O.
rhinoceros have raised concern on the importance of the establishment of suitable
eradication methods. Biological control agents, chemical controls, mass trapping and cultural
controls are commonly practiced in managing the beetle population with each procedure
having a different success rate [28].
The first step that is highly recommended among the control and management techniques of
this pest is the proper management of field sanitation as it helps to the control beetle
Annual Research & Review in Biology, 4(22): ………….., 2014
3433
population thus avoiding sudden population outbursts. A hygienic plantation ground can be
achieved by clearing standing logs, stumps and rubbish piles that may serve as breeding
grounds [4,6]. Apart from that, three commonly used pulverizing techniques in Malaysia
namely the Enviro Mulcher Method, The Mountain Goat Method and The Beaver Method are
often applied [20]. All three pulverization techniques proved to be useful as the
decomposition period of the felled palm could be reduced, thus restricting the availability of
the breeding grounds for the beetles. Planting of a cover crop is also important as it acts as
a physical barrier to the breeding sites. Beetles were not present when cover crops
measured more than 70 cm in height. Centrosema pubescens and Pueraria javanica are
among the commonly grown cover crops in Malaysia [16].
When considering chemical control procedures, direct application of insecticides is not an
appropriate technique in the management of this beetle due to its insufficiently exposed
situation. Nevertheless, a variety of chemical treatments have been considered for managing
O. rhinoceros. According to [29] lambdacyhalothrin, cypermethrin, fenvelarate,
monocrotophos and chlorpyrifos were effective at both the nursery stage and in field trials.
Lambdacyhalothrin effectively reduced the number of broken spear dieback while carbofuran
and cypermethrin were effective in reducing the number of holes on the spears and fronds
[9,29,30]. Gamma benzene hexachloride, aldrin and carbaryl were used to control the larval
stage. Naphthalene balls had also been considered once as a prophylactic method [4,17].
Although various chemical control methods have been tried on the population of O.
rhinoceros, this choice of treatments are still not effective and it imposes health and
environmental hazards.
The usage of biological control agents to control this beetle is another option that has been
looked into for a long time. The release of natural predators into the fields was recorded in
the early 1950s to 1970s. Among the list of natural predators that were tried were Scolia
patricialis (Hymenoptera), Scolia procer (Hymenoptera) and Catascopus fascialis
(Coleoptera). Unfortunately, this has proven to be a futile method as these natural pests
failed to establish themselves and produce satisfactory results [8,31].
Later on, the use of Oryctes virus as a biological control agent in the 1960s was a milestone
in the classical biological control procedure. Baculovirus oryctes was originally discovered in
Malaysia and identified as Rhabdionvirus oryctes [32]. Since then, it has been introduced
into many countries. The presences of three Oryctes viral types were revealed in Malaysia
[33]. Virus type A, was common throughout the peninsula but showed less efficacy than the
restricted virus type B. Meanwhile, type C was only found in Sabah and appeared to have
little effect on either larvae or adult beetles. This study also revealed that the Oryctes virus is
widespread in Malaysia and is transmitted readily in the adult beetle populations. However,
the incidence of the virus in the larvae, pupae, and neonate adults was low [34] which could
lead to the emergence healthy adults. Therefore, controlling the beetles using the virus
needs to be based on localized release of high virulence virus strains and integration with
other control procedures.
The entomopathogenic fungus, Metarhizium anisopliae is another common biological control
agent that has been used to control the O. rhinoceros beetles [35]. Known as the green
Muscardine fungus, it generally attacks larvae. Further development of M. anisopliae as a
potential biopesticide in Malaysia has also been studied [33,35-36]. M. anisopliae variety
major [37] is the most virulent isolate which has the potential to kill 100% of the third instar
larvae of O. rhinoceros between 12 to 14 days after treatment [35]. M. anisopliae can remain
lethal for a long period of time. However, the limited mobility of the fungus between the
Annual Research & Review in Biology, 4(22): ………….., 2014
3434
breeding sites is a drawback. Field applications using both fresh spore solution and
broadcasting of the solid substrate with spores onto the breeding sites were observed to
significantly reduce the beetle population, especially the larvae [35]. To date, various
attempts to release the fungus into the plantations have been carried out [35-36,38].
Continuous investigations are being pursued to further improvise the usage of this
biopesticide. In addition, various application strategies, formulation and modes of introducing
the fungus into the plantations are consistently being studied [35,38-39,40-42].
Apart from that, several trapping techniques have been considered by planters in order to
manage this pest. In the earlier days, self-constructed trapping pits in the form of coconut
logs or compost pits that are similar to the natural breeding sites were used. Some work on
light trapping methods had also been tried [6]. However the light traps were found to be an
inefficient control method. The beetles were attracted to the light but the results were merely
beneficial for monitoring purposes. Recent advances have modified the concept of mass
trapping by incorporating the usage of the species specific semiochemical called
aggregation pheromone. Currently, mass trapping using an aggregation pheromone with the
active component ethyl 4-methyloctonoate is the commonly used technique by many
Malaysian plantation owners to trap and monitor the beetles in young oil palm replanting
sites [43-44]. This technique gained popularity among plantation managers due to its
efficiency and economical value [9]. The pheromone traps are also integrated with biological
control agents like M. anisopliae and also B. oryctes [30] to improve the management and
control procedures.
Ethyl 4-methyloctanoate was first found in Indonesia to be the major aggregation pheromone
component produced by the beetle males [43]. Male-produced attractants have been
referred to as aggregation pheromones, because they result in the arrival of both sexes at a
calling site leading to an increase in the density of beetles at the pheromone source.
Aggregation pheromones are useful for mate selection, defense against predators and for
overcoming host resistance through mass attack [45]. In O. rhinoceros beetles, the
aggregation pheromone helps the insect to find mates, breeding sites and food [46-47]. To
further improve the efficiency of mass trapping using pheromone traps, the influence of
these traps on the immigration activity of the beetles into the replanting sites was studied
[47]. Apart from that, it was also found that the occurrence of the aggregation pheromone
was irregular in different beetle samples suggesting a possible influence of specific
conditions that controlled the production of this pheromone by the male beetles [48].
Selective attraction level to the pheromone traps had also been claimed to be observed
among the beetle populations (Chung, Ebor Research, Sime Darby Plantations, pers. comm.
2002) suggesting the possible occurrence of a cryptic species complex. This hypothesis
stimulated interest to study on the pest’s genome.
With interest to understand the O. rhinoceros beetles and to improve management and
control techniques, much research work was conducted on this pest’s development and life
cycle [4], habitat [16] and management [29,35]. However, little work has been carried out on
the population genetic structure of this pest species until recently. This scope of research
gained interest with the claim of selective attraction levels among the beetles to the
pheromone trap and the possible presence of a cryptic species complex. This hypothesis led
to the detailed analysis of the population genetic variation and genetic structure of O.
rhinoceros from several locations in Malaysia.
It is acknowledged that speciation events are crucial in pest management as accurate
detection and monitoring of the individuals are extremely important. The detection of a
Annual Research & Review in Biology, 4(22): ………….., 2014
3435
cryptic complex is difficult as it often occurs in small population sizes [48]. However, the
failure to identify the presence of reproductively isolated pest species could result in serious
errors in pest management control strategies [49]. Therefore, several studies [50-51] were
carried out to study the molecular genetic variation of this pest from several locations in
Malaysia. By studying the genetic structure of this beetle the researchers intended to identify
any isolated gene pool that could relate to the presence of a cryptic species complex that
could have resulted from prezygotic isolation behavior such as variations in communication
signals like pheromones which often contribute to reproductive isolation between sympatric
species [52].
Based on the use of randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers [50] and
randomly amplified microsatellite markers (RAMs) [53], the possible presence of two
separate gene pools in O. rhinoceros had been reported. However, when a morphometric
analysis of O. rhinoceros was performed [54] it revealed that the beetles are morphologically
indistinguishable; consequently strengthening the need for further molecular analysis of the
insect. Hence, to obtain more concrete results, species specific codominant single locus
DNA microsatellite marker were for O. rhinoceros [55]. As such microsatellite markers are
powerful and promising genetic markers that allow analysis of fine-scale ecological
questions concerning population genetics and species-level population structures [56], it was
hoped that this set of markers would provide definitive answers on the species status of this
pest. However, the subsequent analysis on the genetic structure of this insect pest species
using the newly developed codominant microsatellite markers indicated no isolated gene
pools. The Peninsular Malaysian O. rhinoceros population was close to panmixia as only low
to moderate differentiation occurred between geographical populations from different
locations such as Selangor, Perak, and Pahang in the peninsula and a high gene flow
occurred among them. Overall, beetles of the different population interacted freely, thus
permitting gene flow between closely and distantly located populations. Based on this study,
the possibility of a cryptic complex occurring in O. rhinoceros was ruled out [51]. This study
showed that the selective attraction exhibited by the beetles toward the pheromone trapping
system was not due to prezygotic isolation behavior that is commonly exhibited by cryptic
species of a sympatric nature but to other yet unknown environmental or behavioral factors.
As the non-existence of a cryptic species complex has been confirmed, the current pest
management strategies can be carried out without worrying about the influence of possible
genetic variations in the beetles towards the success of the control techniques. However,
there always exist possibilities of changes in the genetic structure of a pest like O.
rhinoceros which is widely exposed to insecticides. If such a situation arises, future genetic
studies on the beetle populations from any other regions could be conducted with ease by
using the codominant microsatellite markers developed [55].
7. CONCLUSION
Malaysia shares a very close and undeniable relationship with the Oryctes rhinoceros beetle.
Although this beetle has been a pest that is much feared by oil palm planter, incidence of
beetle attack has in fact contributed towards the various development and improvement in
the scope of science and pest management. In our battle to control this beetles, the
researcher of the country has contributed toward great understanding of this beetle which
will be beneficial worldwide and in fact contribute towards future ideas and theories in the
management of other similar pests.
Annual Research & Review in Biology, 4(22): ………….., 2014
3436
COMPETING INTERESTS
Authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
REFERENCES
1. Hartley CWS. The Oil Palm (Elaeis guineensis). 3rd Edition. New York: Longman;
1988.
2. Harcharan Singh K. The Oil Palm Industry of Malaysia: An Economic Study. Kuala
Lumpur: Penerbit Universiti Malaya; 1976.
3. FAO, 2010. FAOSTAT: Online Statistical Service. Retrieved 25 July 2011 from
Available: http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx.
4. Gressit JL. The coconut rhinoceros beetle (Oryctes rhinoceros) with particular
reference to the Palau Islands. Bishop Museum Bulletin; 1953.
5. Jackson TA, Klein MG. Scarabs as pests: a continuing problem. Coleopterists Society
Monographs. Coleopt Bull. 2006;5:102–119.
6. Wood BJ. Studies on the effect of ground vegetation and infestations of Orvctes
rhinoceros (L.) (Col. Dynastidae) in young oil palm replantings in Malaysia. Bull Ent
Res.1968;59:85-96.
7. Catley A. The coconut rhinoceros beetle Oryctes rhinoceros (L.) (Coleoptera:
Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae). PANS. 1969;15:18-30.
8. Bedford GO. Observations on the biology and ecology of Oryctes rhinoceros and
Scapanes australis: pests of coconut palms in Melanesia. J Aust Entomol Soc.
1976;15:241-251.
9. Norman K, Basri MW. Control methods for rhinoceros beetles, Oryctes rhinoceros (L)
(Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). PORIM Occasional Paper. 1995;35:30.
10. Chandrika M, Nair CPR. Effect of Clerodendron infortunatum on grubs of coconut
rhinoceros beetle, Oryctes rhinoceros. In Muraleedharan N, Rajkumar R, editors.
Recent advances in Plantation Crops Research; 2000.
11. Zelazny B. Behavior of young rhinoceros beetles, Oryctes rhinoceros. Entomol Exp
Appl. 1975;18:135-140.
12. Young EC. The Rhinoceros Beetle Project: History and review of the research
programme. Agric Ecosys Environ. 1986;15:149-166.
13. Bedford GO. Biology, ecology and control of palm rhinoceros beetles. Annu Rev
Entomol. 1980;25:309-339.
14. Peter ACO, Mislamah AB. The rhinoceros beetle (Oryctes rhinoceros L.). Kuala
Lumpur: Ministry of Agriculture; 1977.
15. Bedford GO. Biological control of the rhinoceros beetle (Orvctes rhinoceros) in the
South Pacific by baculovirus. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 1986;15:141-147.
16. Norman K, Basri MW, Ramle M. Environmental factors affecting the population density
of Oryctes rhinoceros in a zero-burn oil palm replant. J Oil Palm Res. 2005;17:53-63.
17. Gurmit, S. Napthelene balls for the protection of coconuts and oil palms against
Oryctes rhinoceros (L.). Planters. 1987;63:286-292.
18. Liau SS, Ahmad A. The control of Oryctes rhinoceros by clean clearing and its effect
on early yield in palm to palm replants. In: Proceedings PORIM International Palm Oil
Development Conference. 1991;1:396-403.
19. Tajudin MH, Teoh CH, Aribi K, Ali M. Zero-burning-an environmentally friendly
replanting technique. In: Proceedings of PORIM International Palm Oil Congress;
1993.
Annual Research & Review in Biology, 4(22): ………….., 2014
3437
20. Ling HO, Heriansyah. Palm pulverization in sustainable oil palm replanting. Plant Prod
Sci.
2005;8(3):345-348.
21. Ho CT, Teh CL. Integrated pest management in plantation crops in Malaysia.
Challenges and realities. In: Proceedings of the 1997 International Planters
Conference – Plantation Management for the 21st Century. 1997;1:125-149.
22. Chung GF, Sim SC, Balasubramaniam R. Effects of pest damage during immature
phase on the early yields of oil palm. In: Proceeding PORIM International Palm Oil
Congress: Emerging Technologies and Opportunities in the next Millennium.
1999;1:454-476.
23. Corbett GH. Insects of coconuts in Malaya. Straits settlement and Federated Malay
States, Dept of Agriculture, General Series. 1932;10:106.
24. Barlow HS, Chew PS. The rhinoceros beetle Oryctes rhinoceros in young oil palms
replanted after rubber on some estates in Western Malaysia. In: Proceeding of the
Malaysian Crop Protection Conference. 1970;133-144.
25. Norman K, Basri MW. Status of rhinoceros beetle, Oryctes rhinoceros (Coleoptera:
Scarabaeidae) as a pest of young oil palm in Malaysia. Planter. 1997;73(850): 5-21.
26. Zelazny B. Loss in coconut yield due to Oryctes rhinoceros damage. FAO Plant
Protect B. 1979;27(13):65-70.
27. Samsudin A, Chew PS, Mohd MM. Oryctes rhinoceros: Breeding and damage on oil
palm in an oil palm to oil palm replanting situation. Planter. 1993;69(813):583-591.
28. Wood BJ. Pest control in Malaysia’s perennial crops: a half century perspective
tracking the pathway to integrated pest management. Integrated Pest Manag Rev.
2002;7:173-190.
29. Chung GF, Sim SC, Tan MW. Chemical control of rhinoceros beetles in the nursery
and immature oil palms. In: Proceedings of the PORIM International Palm Oil
Development Conference - Progress, Prospect and Challenges Towards the 21st
Century. 1991;1:380-395.
30. Ho CT. The integrated management of Oryctes rhinoceros (L) populations in the zero
burning environment. In: Proceeding of the PORIM International Palm Oil Congress -
Agriculture Conference. 1996;1:336-368.
31. Hoyt CP, Catley A. Current research on the biological control of Oryctes (Coleoptera:
Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae). Mushi. 1967;39:3-8.
32. Huger AM. A virus disease of the Indian rhinoceros beetle Oryctes rhinoceros (L.)
caused by a new type of insect virus, Rhabdionvirus oryctes gen. n., sp. n. J.
Invertebr Path. 1966;8:38-51.
33. Ramle M, Basri MW, Norman K, Glare TR, Jackson TA. The incidence and use of
Oryctes virus for control of rhinoceros beetle in oil palm plantations in Malaysia. J
Invertebr Pathol. 2005;89:85-90.
34. Ramle M, Glare T, Jackson T, Basri MW, Norman K, Ramlah Ali SA. The incidence,
virulence and impact of Oryctes rhinoceros virus on the oil palm rhinoceros beetle in
Malaysia. Paper presented at the 3
rd
International Conference on Biopesticides -
Positioning Biopesticide in Pest Management System; 2002.
35. Ramle M, Basri MW, Norman K, Sharma M, Siti Ramlah AA. Impact of Metarhizium
anisopliae (Deuteromycotina: Hyphomycetes) applied by wet and dry inoculums on oil
palm rhinoceros beetles, Oryctes rhinoceros (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). J. Oil Palm
Res. 1999;11(2):25-40.
36. Tey CC, Ho CT. Infection of Oryctes rhinoceros (L) by application of Metarhizium
anisopliae (Metsch.) sorokin to breeding sites. Planter. 1995;71(837):563-567.
37. Tulloch M. The genus of Metahizium. Transaction of the British Mycological Society
1979;66:407-441.
Annual Research & Review in Biology, 4(22): ………….., 2014
3438
38. Ramle M, Norman K, Ang BN, Ramlah Ali AS, Basri MW. Application of powder
formulation of Metarhizium anisopliae to control Oryctes rhinoceros in rotting oil palm
residues under leguminous cover crops. J Oil Palm Res. 2007;19:319–331.
39. Ramle M, Basri MW, Norman K, Siti Ramlah AA, Noor Hisham H. Research into the
commercialization of Metarhizium anisopliae (Hyphomycetes) for biocontrol of the
rhinoceros beetle, Oryctes rhinoceros (Scarabaeidae), in oil palm. J. Oil Palm Res.
2006;18:37-49.
40. Ramle M, Norman K, Basri MW. Pathogenicity of granule formulations of Metarhizium
anisopliae against the larvae of the oil palm rhinoceros beetle, Oryctes rhinoceros (L.).
J Oil Palm Res. 2009;21:602–612.
41. Ramle M, Norman K, Basri MW. Trap for the auto dissemination of Metarhizium
anisopliae in in management of rhinoceros beetle, Oryctes rhinoceros. J. Oil Palm
Res. 2011;23:101–117.
42. Ramle M, Norman K, Noor Hisham H, Cik Mohd RZA. Delivery techniques of
Metarhizium for biocontrol of rhinoceros beetles in oil palm plantations. Planter.
2013;89(1049):571-583.
43. Hallet RH, Perez AL, Gries G, Gries R, Pierce JHD, Yue J, Oehlschlager C, Gonzalez
LM, Borden JH. Aggregation pheromone of the coconut rhinoceros beetle Oryctes
rhinoceros L. (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). J Chem Ecol. 1995;2:1549-1570.
44. Chung GF. The bioefficacy of the aggregation pheromone in mass trapping of
rhinoceros beetles (Oryctes rhinoceros L.) in Malaysia. Planter. 1997;73(852):119-
127.
45. Landolt JP. Sex attractant and aggregation pheromones of male phytophagous
insects. Am Entomol. 1997;43(1):12-22.
46. Zelazny B, Alfiler AR. Ecology of baculovirus-infected and healthy adults of Oryctes
rhinoceros (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) on coconut palms in the Philippines. Ecol
Entomol. 1991;16:253-259.
47. Norman K, Basri MW. Immigration and activity of Oryctes rhinoceros within a small oil
palm replanting area. J Oil Palm Res. 2004;16(2):64-77.
48. Vine SJ, Crowther MS, Lapidge SJ, Dickman CR, Mooney N, Piggott MP, English AW.
Comparison of methods to detect rare and cryptic species: A case study using the red
fox (Vulpes vulpes). Wildlife Res. 2009;36:436-446.
49. Hyde JR, Kimbrell CA, Budrick JE, Lynn EA, Vetter RD. Cryptic speciation in the
vermilion rockfish (Sebastes miniatus) and the role of bathymetry in the speciation
process. Mol Ecol. 2008;17:1122-1136.
50. Yong SH. Molecular polymorphism in Oryctes rhinoceros. BSc (Honours) Thesis.
Universiti Putra Malaysia; 2002.
51. Manjeri G. Morphometric and molecular genetic studies on rhinoceros beetle (Oryctes
rhinoceros Linnaeus) populations in oil palm plantations. PhD thesis. Universiti Putra
Malaysia; 2013.
52. Groot AT, Marr M, Heckel DG, Schofl G. The roles and interactions of reproductive
isolation mechanisms in fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) host strains. Ecol
Entomol. 2010;35:105-118.
53. Manjeri G, Muhamad R, Faridah QZ, Tan SG, Genetic variation studies in Oryctes
rhinoceros (L.) (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) from oil palm plantations using random
amplified microsatellite (RAMs) markers. Afr J Biotechnol. 2011;10(14):2611-2617.
54. Manjeri G, Muhamad R, Faridah QZ, Tan SG. Morphometric analysis of Oryctes
rhinoceros (L.) (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) from oil palm plantations. Coleopt Bull.
2013;67(2):194-200.
Annual Research & Review in Biology, 4(22): ………….., 2014
3439
55. Manjeri G, Muhamad R, Faridah QZ, Tan SG. Development of single locus DNA
microsatellite markers in Oryctes rhinoceros (Linnaeus) using 5’ anchored RAMs-PCR
method. J Genet. 2012;91:e92–e96.
56. Schlotterer C, W iehe T. Microsatellites, a neutral marker to infer selective sweeps, In:
Goldstein DB, Schlotterer C,
editors.
Microsatellites: Evolution and applications. New
York: Oxford University Press; 1999.
_________________________________________________________________________
© 2014 Manjeri et al.; This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Peer-review history:
The peer review history for this paper can be accessed here:
http://www.sciencedomain.org/review-history.php?iid=561&id=32&aid=4942
