<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id>0120-0488</journal-id>
<journal-title><![CDATA[Revista Colombiana de Entomología]]></journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title><![CDATA[Rev. Colomb. Entomol.]]></abbrev-journal-title>
<issn>0120-0488</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Sociedad Colombiana de Entomología]]></publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id>S0120-04882014000100002</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Non-preference for oviposition and antibiosis in bean cultivars to Bemisia tabaci biotype B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae)]]></article-title>
<article-title xml:lang="es"><![CDATA[No preferencia de oviposición y antibiosis en cultivares de frijol por Bemisia tabaci biotipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae)]]></article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[DA SILVA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[ANDERSON GONÇALVES]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A01"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOIÇA JUNIOR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[ARLINDO LEAL]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A02"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[S. FARIAS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[PAULO ROBERTO]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A01"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[L. RODRIGUES]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[NARA ELISA]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A02"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[S. DE SOUZA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[BRUNO HENRIQUE]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A02"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOTTEGA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[DALINE BENITES]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A02"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CHIORATO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[ALISSON FERNANDO]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A03"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="A01">
<institution><![CDATA[,Universidade Federal Rural da Amazonia Instituo de Ciencias Agrárias ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Belém ]]></addr-line>
<country>Brasil</country>
</aff>
<aff id="A02">
<institution><![CDATA[,Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho Departamento de Fitossanidade ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Jaboticabal ]]></addr-line>
<country>Brasil</country>
</aff>
<aff id="A03">
<institution><![CDATA[,Centro de Análise e Pesquisa Tecnológica dos Agronegócios dos Graos e Fibra Instituto Agronómico de Campinas ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Campinas ]]></addr-line>
<country>Brasil</country>
</aff>
<pub-date pub-type="pub">
<day>00</day>
<month>06</month>
<year>2014</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>00</day>
<month>06</month>
<year>2014</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>40</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<fpage>7</fpage>
<lpage>14</lpage>
<copyright-statement/>
<copyright-year/>
<self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S0120-04882014000100002&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&amp;pid=S0120-04882014000100002&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_pdf&amp;pid=S0120-04882014000100002&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="en"><p><![CDATA[Among the pests that cause reduction on common bean yield, the whitefly Bemisia tabaci biotype B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) stands out. The insect causes direct damages due to its feeding on plants and indirect damages by the sugary excretion of honeydew, providing the development of the sooty mould. In addition this species is an important vector of virus such as the golden bean mosaic virus. Thus, this work aimed to study the non-preference for oviposition and antibiosis in bean cultivars to the whitefly. Experiments were carried out in a greenhouse at Jaboticabal, SP, Brazil, from January to March 2012. The following cultivars were used in the assays: IAC-Centauro, IAC-Una, IAC-Formoso, IAPAR-81, IPR-Eldorado, IPR-Siriri (all resistant); and Pérola and IAC-Harmonia (both susceptible), previously screened from field experiments. Cultivars IAC-Harmonia, IPR-Eldorado, IAPAR-81 and IPR-Siriri were the least preferred for oviposition; and the cultivar IAC-Harmonia extended the whitefly life cycle, expressing nonpreference for feeding and or/antibiosis-type resistance.]]></p></abstract>
<abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="es"><p><![CDATA[Entre las plagas que causan la disminución de la producción de frijol común, la mosca blanca Bemisiatabaci biotipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) es notable. Esta causa daños directos debido a la forma de alimentación e indirectos debido a la excreción de melaza y producción de fumagina, además de ser importante para la transmisión del virus del mosaico dorado del frijol. Los objetivos de esta investigación fueron estudiar la no preferencia para la oviposición y antibiosis en cultivares de frijol de la mosca blanca. Los experimentos se llevaron a cabo en el invernadero del Departamento de Fitosanidad, en Jaboticabal, SP, Brasil, de enero a marzo de 2012. Se utilizaron las cultivares: IAC-Centauro, IAC-Una, IAC-Formoso, IAPAR-81, IPR-Eldorado, IPR-Siriri (resistentes); Pérola y IAC-Harmonia (susceptibles), seleccionados en experimentos de campo. Los cultivares IAC-Harmonia, IPR-Eldorado, IAPAR 81 y IPR-Siriri fueron los menos preferidos para la oviposición; y el cultivar IAC-Harmonia prolongó el ciclo de vida de la mosca blanca, mostrando no preferencia para la alimentación y/o antibiosis.]]></p></abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Whitefly]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Phaseolus vulgaris]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Genetic resistance]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Categories and levels of resistance]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[Mosca blanca]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[Phaseolus vulgaris]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[Resistencia genética]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[Tipos y grados de resistencia]]></kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front><body><![CDATA[  <font size="2" face="Verdana">       <p align="right"><b>Secci&oacute;n Agr&iacute;cola</b></p>       <p align="center"><font size="4" face="Verdana"><b>Non-preference for oviposition and antibiosis in bean cultivars to <i>Bemisia tabaci</i>  biotype B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae)</b></font></p>     <p align="center"><font size="3" face="Verdana"><b> No preferencia de oviposici&oacute;n y antibiosis en cultivares de frijol por <i>Bemisia tabaci</i> biotipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae)</b></font></p> <b> ANDERSON GON&Ccedil;ALVES DA SILVA<sup>1</sup>, ARLINDO LEAL BOI&Ccedil;A JUNIOR<sup>2</sup>, PAULO ROBERTO S. FARIAS<sup>1</sup>,   NARA ELISA L. RODRIGUES<sup>2</sup>, BRUNO HENRIQUE S. DE SOUZA<sup>2</sup>, DALINE BENITES BOTTEGA<sup>2</sup>   and ALISSON FERNANDO CHIORATO<sup>3</sup></b></p>      <p><sup>1</sup> Instituo de Ciencias Agr&aacute;rias - Universidade Federal Rural da Amazonia - UFRA, Av. Presidente Tancredo Neves, 2501, 660077-530, Bel&eacute;m, PA, Brasil. Ph.D. and professor <a href="mailto:agroanderson.silva@yahoo.com.br"><i>agroanderson.silva@yahoo.com.br</i></a><i> </i>(corresponding author); Ph. D. and professor <a href="mailto:paulo.farias@ufra.edu.br"><i>paulo.farias@ufra.edu.br</i></a><i>.</i>    <br> <sup>2</sup> Departamento de Fitossanidade - Universidade Estadual Paulista J&uacute;lio de Mesquita Filho (FCAV/UNESP), Via Acesso Prof. Paulo Donatto Castellane,s/n - CEP: 14870-000, Jaboticabal-SP, Brasil. Ph. D. and professor <a href="mailto:aboicajr@fcav.unesp.com.br"><i>aboicajr@fcav.unesp.com.br</i></a><i>; </i>Ph. D. <a href="mailto:nara_elr@yahoo.com.br"><i>nara_elr@yahoo.com.br</i></a><i>; </i>Ph. D. <a href="mailto:souzabhs@gmail.com"><i>souzabhs@gmail.com</i></a><i>; </i>Ph. D. <i> </i><a href="http://daline4@bol.com.br"><i>daline4@bol.com.br</i></a><i>. </i>    <br> <sup>3</sup> Instituto Agron&oacute;mico de Campinas - IAC, Centro de An&aacute;lise e Pesquisa Tecnol&oacute;gica dos Agroneg&oacute;cios dos Graos e Fibra. Rua Barao de Itapura, 1481 Botafogo, CEP 13001-970 - Campinas, SP,Brasil. Ph. D. pesquisador <a href="mailto:afchiorato@iac.sp.gov.br"><i>afchiorato@iac.sp.gov.br</i></a><i>.</i></p>     <p>Received: 21-Mar-2013 &bull; Accepted:  4-Jun-2014 </p> <hr>      <p><b>Abstract:</b> Among the pests  that cause reduction on common bean yield, the whitefly <i>Bemisia  tabaci </i>biotype B   (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) stands out.  The insect causes direct damages due to its feeding on plants and indirect  damages   by the sugary excretion of honeydew,  providing the development of the sooty mould. In addition this species is an   important vector of virus such as  the golden bean mosaic virus. Thus, this work aimed to study the non-preference  for   oviposition and antibiosis in bean  cultivars to the whitefly. Experiments were carried out in a greenhouse at  Jaboticabal,   SP, Brazil, from January to March  2012. The following cultivars were used in the assays: IAC-Centauro, IAC-Una,   IAC-Formoso, IAPAR-81, IPR-Eldorado,  IPR-Siriri (all resistant); and P&eacute;rola and IAC-Harmonia (both susceptible),   previously screened from field  experiments. Cultivars IAC-Harmonia, IPR-Eldorado, IAPAR-81 and IPR-Siriri were   the least preferred for oviposition;  and the cultivar IAC-Harmonia extended the whitefly life cycle, expressing  nonpreference for feeding and or/antibiosis-type  resistance.</p>     <p><b>   Key words: </b>Whitefly. <i>Phaseolus  vulgaris</i>. Genetic  resistance. Categories and levels of resistance.</p>  <hr>      ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p>  <b>Resumen:</b> Entre  las plagas que causan la disminuci&oacute;n de la producci&oacute;n de frijol com&uacute;n, la mosca  blanca <i>Bemisiatabaci </i>biotipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) es notable. Esta causa da&ntilde;os  directos debido a la forma de alimentaci&oacute;n e   indirectos  debido a la excreci&oacute;n de melaza y producci&oacute;n de fumagina, adem&aacute;s de ser  importante para la transmisi&oacute;n   del  virus del mosaico dorado del frijol. Los objetivos de esta investigaci&oacute;n fueron  estudiar la no preferencia para la   oviposici&oacute;n  y antibiosis en cultivares de frijol de la mosca blanca. Los experimentos se  llevaron a cabo en el invernadero   del  Departamento de Fitosanidad, en Jaboticabal, SP, Brasil, de enero a marzo de  2012. Se utilizaron las cultivares:   IAC-Centauro,  IAC-Una, IAC-Formoso, IAPAR-81, IPR-Eldorado, IPR-Siriri (resistentes); P&eacute;rola  y IAC-Harmonia   (susceptibles),  seleccionados en experimentos de campo. Los cultivares IAC-Harmonia,  IPR-Eldorado, IAPAR 81 y   IPR-Siriri  fueron los menos preferidos para la oviposici&oacute;n; y el cultivar IAC-Harmonia  prolong&oacute; el ciclo de vida de la   mosca  blanca, mostrando no preferencia para la alimentaci&oacute;n y/o antibiosis.</p>     <p>  <b>Palabras  clave: </b>Mosca  blanca. <i>Phaseolus  vulgaris</i>.  Resistencia gen&eacute;tica. Tipos y grados de resistencia.</p>  <hr>      <p><font size="3" face="Verdana"><b>Introduction</b></font></p>      <p>  Among the pest insects that cause  economical losses to common   bean (<i>Phaseolus  vulgaris </i>L.), the  whitefly <i>Bemisia</i>   <i>tabaci </i>(Genn., 1889)  biotype B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae)   stands out due to its direct damage  by feeding on the phloem,   weakening the plant by sucking  nutrients, in addition to injection   of toxins, resulting in  physiological problems in bean   plants, as well as indirect damages  through the excretion of   honeydew. This excretion serves as  substrate for the growth   of saprophyte fungi from genus <i>Capnodium </i>(sooty mould)  on   leaves, flowers and fruits,  preventing gas exchange, such as   respiration and photosynthesis and  hence decreasing yield. It   also complicates pesticide action,  resulting in higher production costs (Lima 2001).</p>     <p>  However, the most serious damage  caused by <i>B.  tabaci</i>   biotype B is concerning to virus  transmission, such as the   golden bean mosaic virus (GBMV), one  of the major problems   for common bean crop in Latin  America. This disease   causes economical losses that may  range from 30 to 100% depending on the cultivation, plant growth stage,  population   level of the vector, presence of  alternative hosts and environmental conditions (Salguero 1993).</p>     <p>  Use of pesticides is the main  control method adopted by   bean growers. However, Horowitz and  Ishaaya (1995) reported   that in several cases, treatment  with conventional insecticides   is not efficient mainly because  adults are located in the   lower surface of leaves and due to  fast resistance deployment   against the active ingredients.  Moreover, successive utilization   of pesticides may unbalance the  environment and eliminate beneficial arthropods (Prabhaker <i>et al. </i>1985).</p>     <p>  The intrinsic ability that some  genotypes possess in comparison   to others from the same species, in  order to obtain   higher yield and/or quality under  the same attack of pest population   in equal conditions is known as host  plant resistance   (HPR) (Lara 1991). Screening of  plants resistant to <i>B. tabaci</i>   biotype B, transmitting geminivirus  or causing physiological   disorders in cultivated plants,  represents an important   research tool aiming to diminish  injuries and losses caused   by this insect (Mcauslane <i>et al. </i>1994). For HPR  use, it is necessary to know morphological and physiological traits of   the plant and the insect behavior  and biology as well as its   relationship with the plant host.  These factors are indispensable   to the host response to pest action,  determining plant resistance or susceptibility (Campos  2003).</p>     <p>  Resistance categories described by  Painter (1951) were   related as non-preference,  antibiosis and tolerance. Nonpreference   or antixenosis refers to insect  behavioral aspects   on the plant, which may be  non-preference for feeding, oviposition   or shelter, and the two formers are  the most studied.   Regarding antibiosis, direct lethal  effects are verified on the   different stages of the insect,  whereas tolerance is defined as   the plant ability to withstand  insect attack without significant yield reduction.</p>     <p>  Several studies have pointed out  resistant cultivars that   can be utilized by the growers, thus  minimizing <i>B.  tabaci</i>   biotype B attack on bean crop,  especially non-preference for   oviposition-  and antibiosis-type resistance (Toscano <i>et  al.</i>   2002;  Campos <i>et al. </i>2005; Paron and Lara 2005; Jesus <i>et al.</i>   2010; Rodrigues <i>et al. </i>2012a). In  addition, HPR can be associated   harmoniously with other control  methods, according   to studies conducted by Jesus <i>et al. </i>(2009), Costa <i>et al.</i> (2010) and Janini <i>et al. </i>(2011).</p>     <p>  In this context, HPR should be used  as one more control   method within the integrated pest  management (IPM) concepts,   aiming to attenuate injuries caused  by <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype   B. Among the main benefits provided  by this method adoption,   the following are highlighted:  reduction of insect population   to uninjured levels;  non-interference on agroecosystem; is   non-pollutant; provides cumulative  and persistent effects; and   does not demand specific knowledge  by the producer (Boi&ccedil;a   J&uacute;nior <i>et al. </i>2013). Given  the importance of bean crop to Brazilian   population and HPR as a control  method, the present research   aimed to study the non-preference  for oviposition and antibiosis in bean cultivars to the  whitefly.</p>      ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font size="3" face="Verdana"><b>  Materials  and methods</b></font></p>      <p>  Non-preference for oviposition and  antibiosis experiments   were carried out in a greenhouse of  the Departamento de   Fitossanidade  at the Faculdade de Ci&ecirc;ncias Agr&aacute;rias e Veterin&aacute;rias   - FCAV/UNESP, Jaboticabal, SP,  Brazil, from January   to March 2012. The following  cultivars were used   for the tests: IAC-Centauro,  IAC-Una, IAC-Formoso,   IAPAR-81, IPR-Eldorado, IPR-Siriri  (all resistant), P&eacute;rola   and IAC-Harmonia (all susceptible).  These cultivars were   previously screened from field  experiments in winter, water   and dry seasons (Silva 2012).</p>     <p><b>  Non-preference  for oviposition</b></p>     <p>  <b>Maintenance  colony of <i>Bemisia tabaci </i>biotype B</b>. The   whitefly colony was maintained  inside cages made by antiaphid   screen (2.0 m length x 3.0 m width x  2.0 m height),   using kale as the host plant,  cultivar Manteiga da Georgia   (<i>Brassica  oleracea </i>L. var. <i>acephala</i>), grown in 4 L  pots. To   obtain high infestations of the  pest, adults of the whitefly   were released into the cages, which  were obtained from colonies   of the Entomology sector of the  Instituto Agron&ocirc;mico   de Campinas (IAC), given by Dr. Andr&eacute;  Luiz Louren&ccedil;&atilde;o,   and identified as <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B.  Fortnightly, new plants   were introduced to replace senescent  plants. Cultural practices   and irrigation were done when  needed.</p>     <p>  <b>Free-choice  test.</b> Oviposition  preference by <i>B. tabaci </i>biotype   B was observed on eight common bean  cultivars: IAC-Centauro,   IAC-Una,  IAC-Formoso, IAPAR-81, IPR-Eldorado,   IPR-Siriri, P&eacute;rola and IAC-Harmonia.  They were screened as   resistant (six formers) and  susceptible (two latter), taking into   account the three sowing seasons in  experiment conducted in   field conditions, and considering  the cultivars performance   against the incidence of BGMV.</p>     <p>  The cultivars were sown in 5 L pots,  containing soil and   manure in the proportion of 3:1, and  20 days after the emergence   one plant per plot was kept after  thinning, which received   cultural practices and fertilization  as recommended   for the crop. Twenty-five days after  emergence (V4 growth   stage &#150;  three opened trifoliates),  the pots with bean cultivars   were distributed at random and  circularly inside screened   cages (2.0 m base x 1.8 m height) in  which 100 non-sexed   adults of the whiteflies per plot  (treatment) were released in   the center (total of 800 adults).  Adults were from the maintenance   colony, and were reared according to  the methodology   by Toscano <i>et al. </i>(2002). The  number of adults of <i>B. tabaci</i>   biotype B released per treatment  followed the methodology   recommended by Jesus <i>et al. </i>(2011), who  reported this density   provides adequate oviposition for  plant resistance studies   on bean cultivars. Five replicates  were used for each cultivar.</p>     <p>  After 24 hours of the insects  release, plants were removed   and  taken to the Laborat&oacute;rio de Resist&ecirc;ncia de Plantas a Insetos   at FCAV/UNESP. In the laboratory,  eggs were counted   per cm<sup>2</sup> on the abaxial surface of one  trifoliate from the upper,   middle and lower thirds of the  cultivars through a stereoscope.  Leaf area of the plants thirds was  measured using an   electronic leaf area meter, model  LI-COR 3100A<sup>&reg;</sup>.</p>     <p> <b>No-choice  test.</b> For the  no-choice test, pots with one 25 dayafter   emergence plant of each cultivar  were individualized into cylindrical cages (40 cm diameter x 60 cm height) coated   with <i>voile </i>fabric. Next,  100 non-sexed adults of <i>B. tabaci </i>biotype   B per cultivar were released into  each cage. At 24 hours   after release, the whole leaf area  was removed from plants   and taken to the laboratory, where  the same assessments were   performed as described for the  free-choice test. Five cages   (replicates) were used for each bean  cultivar in this assay.</p>     <p>   <b>Experimental  design and statistical analysis.</b> A completely   randomized design was used for both  tests in a 8 x 3 (cultivars   x plant thirds) split-plot  arrangement for the free-choice   test, and in a 8 x 3 factorial  arrangement for the no-choice   test. The assays consisted in five  replicates for each cultivar. Data obtained from both assays were  first transformed in (x   + 1)&frac12; for normalization. Next, data  recorded from the freechoice   test were subjected to ANOVA of a  split-plot arrangement,   and data from the no-choice test  were subjected to the   two-way ANOVA to determine the main  effects of cultivars,   plants thirds and the interaction of  cultivars x plants thirds.   Scott-Knott&#39;s post-hoc test was used  for means separation at   the level of 5% probability.</p>     <p>  <b>Oviposition  preference index (OPI).</b> Oviposition preference   index (OPI) was calculated using the  formula proposed   by Fenemore (1980): OPI =  &#91;(T-P)/(T+P)&#93; x100, where T =   number of eggs on the tested  cultivar, and P = number of eggs   on the standard cultivar  (susceptible). OPI varies from +100   (very stimulant), 0 (neutral) to  -100 (total deterrence). The   cultivar IAC-Centauro was set as the  susceptible standard   as it exhibited the highest  oviposition means in free-choice   and no-choice tests. Classification  of cultivars (stimulant/   deterrent) was done from comparison  of the mean numbers   of eggs on treatments with the  pattern cultivar, taking into   account the mean standard error (&plusmn;  SE) in order to allow differentiation   among cultivars, according to the  methodology   used by Baldin <i>et al. </i>(2000).</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p>  <b>Antibiosis  test.</b> Antibiosis  assay was conducted in a greenhouse   using pots with one 25 day-old plant  of each cultivar.   One leaflet per plant was  individualized and cages made by <i>voile </i>fabric were  attached to the leaflet, according to methodology   by Campos <i>et al. </i>(2005), and  then, 50 non-sexed   adults were released inside each  cage. Infestation was remained   for 24 hours, and next the whitefly  adults were withdrawn   and the leaflets were examined. We  attempted to keep   50 eggs on the abaxial surface of  leaves, and the excess of   eggs was removed using a pair of  tweezers. Each leaflet containing   initially 50 eggs represented one replication,  totaling   five replications per cultivar, and  the assay was set in a completely   randomized design.</p>     <p>  The leaflets were uncovered until  the end of the nymphal   stage, when the cages were attached  to leaves again in order   to avoid adults to escape. Observations  were done daily and   at the same time, evaluating the  duration of the incubation   period, duration of period and  viability of nymphs, duration   of development (from egg to adult)  and adult longevity   (without food). For longevity  observation, 25 recentlyemerged   adults were collected randomly (five  adults from   each leaflet) from the cages and  placed into glass tubes (2.5   cm diameter x 8.5 cm height), and  the number of dead insects   was reported daily.</p>     <p>  Data recorded from duration of  incubation period, duration   of the nymphal period, duration from  egg to adult, and longevity   of adults were transformed in (x +  0.5)&frac12;, and data  recorded   from nymphal viability in arcsine (x  + 0.5/100)&frac12; for  normalization   and then were subjected to the  one-way ANOVA.   Tukey&#39;s post-hoc test was used at 5%  probability for means   separation, using the software SAS  (Sas Insitute 1994).</p>     <p>  In order to discriminate the bean  cultivars regarding the   resistance degrees to <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B, the  biological parameters   duration of incubation period,  duration of period   and viability of nymphs, duration of  development from egg   to adult and adult longevity were  evaluated through the Principal   Component Analysis (PCA) (Jackson  1991) to classify   the cultivars that showed the  maximum similarity and minimum   dissimilarity among groups. Results  from multivariate   (PCA) and univariate (ANOVA)  analyses were adopted to   discriminate the bean cultivars  regarding the resistance degrees   to <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B. For  multivariate analysis and   graph preparation, the software  Statistica version 7.0 (Statsoft   2012) was  used.</p>      <p><font size="3" face="Verdana"><b>  Results  and discussion</b></font></p>      <p><b>  Non-preference  for oviposition</b></p>     <p>  <b>Free-choice  and no-choice tests. </b>There were significant differences   in the oviposition preference of <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B among  the evaluated cultivars only the in free-choice test   (<a href="#(tab1)">Table 1</a>). The cultivars IPR-Siriri,  IAPAR-81, IPR-Eldorado,   IAC-Formoso, IAC-Una and  IAC-Harmonia highlighted as   the least preferred for oviposition,  with means ranging from   0.38 to 0.71 eggs per cm<sup>2</sup>. Overall,  these cultivars are early   development cultivars which may have  interfered on resistance   expression. On the other hand, the  cultivars IAC-Centauro   and P&eacute;rola were the most preferred  for oviposition, with   1.50 eggs per cm<sup>2</sup> (<a href="#(tab1)">Table 1</a>), and  we may infer this cultivar   holds traits acting as oviposition  stimulant for the whitefly.</p>     <p align="center"><a name="(tab1)"></a><img src="img/revistas/rcen/v40n1/v40n1a02tab1.jpg"></p>     <p>  In the no-choice test, no  significant differences were observed   among cultivars. However, there was  a trend of higher   number of eggs on the cultivar  IAC-Centauro (2.80 per cm<sup>2</sup>),   and numerically the lowest mean of  eggs were observed on   IAPAR-81 (0.49 cm<sup>2</sup>) (<a href="#(tab1)">Table 1</a>).</p> </font>    <p><font size="2" face="Verdana">  It is reported in literature that  the presence of trichomes   acts as a stimulant factor for the <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B  oviposition,   and the most pilose cultivars are  the most infested since   these cultivars may provide a more  suitable microclimate   for oviposition and better  protection for the nymphs (Butter   and Vir 1989). In addition, females  prefer to lay eggs on   the base of trichome insertion  (Omram and El-khidir 1978). Three types of trichomes are found  in bean plants: acicular   trichomes (needle-shaped), which are  long, erect, distally   narrowed and formed by two basal  cells and one terminal   cell; unciform trichomes  (hook-shaped), which are smaller   and also possess two basal cells and  one terminal cell; and   glandular trichomes, which are  short. These characteristics   were first described by Moutt (1932)  cited by Dahlin <i>et al.</i>   (1992). Costa <i>et al. </i>(2004) reported  that non-preference for   oviposition of <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B on  cowpea cultivars may   be related to lower content of  attractant substances or higher   content of repellents, which  influence the insect behavior on   host selection. These factors may  also be associated to the   relationship whitefly-common bean.</font></p> <font size="2" face="Verdana">    ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p>  Significant differences were found for  plants thirds in   both free-choice and no-choice tests  (<a href="#(tab1)">Table 1</a>). In the freechoice   test, the upper and middle thirds  were equally preferred   for oviposition, with means of 1.08  and 1.07 eggs per   cm<sup>2</sup>, respectively, differing from the  lower third (0.16 eggs   per cm<sup>2</sup>). In the no-choice test, the  highest number of eggs   was observed on the upper third  (3.43 eggs per cm<sup>2</sup>), differing   from the middle third (1.22 eggs per  cm<sup>2</sup>), which on the   other hand, differed from the lower  third (0.04 eggs per cm<sup>2</sup>)   (<a href="#(tab1)">Table 1</a>). Similar results were  obtained by Rodrigues <i>et al.</i>   (2012b), while studying the life  history and non-preference   for oviposition of <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B on  cowpea cultivars.  The authors reported the whitefly  prefers to lay eggs on the   abaxial surface of leaves from the  upper part of plant canopy.</p>     <p>  The whitefly probably estimates the  age and quality of   the host plant through stylet  insertion into the plant tissue   before selecting the oviposition  site (Vendramim <i>et al. </i>2009),   nevertheless, without ingesting sap  in order to find a favorable   chemical or morphological  constitution depending on   the plant age (Walker and Perring  1994) and stimuli involved   between the insect and plant (Lara  1991). Likewise, Campos   <i>et al. </i>(2005) reported  the highest number of eggs laid by the   whitefly on the apex leaf on cotton.  According to Van Lenteren   and Noldus (1990), preference for  the youngest parts of   the bean plant may be related to the  highest concentration of   nutrients (amino acids), which are  promptly available for the   sucking insects. In addition,  younger leaves have thinner and   softer cuticle, as well as a higher  amount of water. Therefore,   these characteristics may facilitate  the whitefly oviposition   (Eichelkraut and Cardona 1989) and  eggs hydration (Gill   1990), providing a higher  survivorship of the nymphs.</p>     <p>  For the interaction of cultivar x  plant third, significant   difference was observed only in the  free-choice test (<a href="#(tab2)">Table   2</a>). Although numerically, means of  number of eggs per cm<sup>2</sup>   were higher on the upper third of  bean plants of most cultivars. <font size="2" face="Verdana">We observed through the deployment  of the interaction   significant differences only in the  cultivars that had over 3   eggs per cm<sup>2</sup>. The cultivar P&eacute;rola stood out with  3.16 eggs   per cm<sup>2</sup> on the upper third, differing from  the middle and   lower thirds. On the cultivar  IAC-Centauro, preference was   observed for the middle third (3.35  eggs per cm<sup>2</sup>) and differed   significantly from the other plant  thirds (<a href="#(tab2)">Table 2</a>).</font> </p> </font><font size="2" face="Verdana">     <p align="center"><a name="(tab2)"></a><img src="img/revistas/rcen/v40n1/v40n1a02tab2.jpg"></p>     <p>  Because they were the most preferred  for oviposition   (over 3 eggs per cm<sup>2</sup>), the cultivars  IAC-Centauro and P&eacute;rola   also differed significantly from the  other cultivars regarding   the plant thirds separately. As  results, P&eacute;rola exhibited the   higher number of eggs on the upper  third, and the cultivar   IAC-Centauro on the middle third.  There were no differences   for the lower third among the bean  cultivars, which had low   infestation (<a href="#(tab2)">Table 2</a>). Berlinger  (1986) underlines that physical   traits of leaf surfaces, such as  pilosity, presence of adherent   glandular trichomes and leaf format  are aspects affecting   oviposition preference by the  whitefly. In addition, pubescence   is one of the factors that allows <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B   oviposition preference on the lower  surface of leaves, but,   other traits, e.g. number of leaves  and foliar area, are also   important for host selection  (Simmons 1994).</p>     <p>  For beans, specifically, feeding and  oviposition non-preference   are the most prevalent  resistance-types, in addition   to antibiosis. There are few reports  of tolerance in common beans against the whitefly. A study conducted by Oriani <i>et</i>   <i>al. </i>(2005) showed  that, among other factors, resistance in   common bean against <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B is  related to the   presence of arcelin or acicular  trichomes. The presence of   trichomes acts as stimulant for the  oviposition of <i>B. tabaci</i>   biotype B on beans, and the pilose  cultivars were more infested   as previously reported by Pe&ntilde;a <i>et al. </i>(1992), Pe&ntilde;a <i>et</i>   <i>al. </i>(1993), Oriani  and Lara (2000) and Oriani <i>et al. </i>(2005). Also, trichomes are stimulant in  other crops such as soybean   (Valle  and Louren&ccedil;&atilde;o 2002), tomato (Toscano <i>et  al. </i>2002),   and cotton (Chu <i>et al. </i>2001).  Therefore, this feature should   be avoided in breeding programs of  common bean against the   whitefly.</p>     <p>  Further studies are needed to unveil  the resistance mechanisms   present in the least preferred  cultivars IPR-Siriri,   IAPAR-81,  IPR-Eldorado, IAC-Formoso, IAC-Una and   IAC-Harmonia, especially in  free-choice test, in order to   head investigations to transfer or  increase these resistancerelated   traits to new cultivars.</p>     <p>  <b>Oviposition  preference index (OPI).</b> In the free-choice test,   all cultivars were deterrent for <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B  oviposition   (<a href="#(tab3)">Table 3</a>), except P&eacute;rola, which  behaved as neutral. In the   no-choice test, all cultivars were  classified as deterrent but   IAC-Formoso, which were neutral  (<a href="#(tab3)">Table 3</a>). According to   Lara (1991), the presence of  deterrence is of great importance   in resistant entries, by reducing  feeding and/or oviposition of   the insect on that genotype.</p>     <p align="center"><a name="(tab3)"></a><img src="img/revistas/rcen/v40n1/v40n1a02tab3.jpg"></p>     <p>  In both assays, there was an  increase of the OPI when the   condition was switched from the  no-choice to free-choice test   (<a href="#(tab3)">Table 3</a>). The expressive augment of  oviposition deterrence   on P&eacute;rola in the no-choice test is  highlighted as this cultivar   was neutral in the free-choice test.  Similar results were also   reported for IAC-Formoso. This  cultivar was classified as deterrent   in the free-choice test, since the  expectation was an   increase on deterrence (OPI =  -52.45), and in the no-choice   test it behaved as neutral (OPI =  -2.56) (<a href="#(tab3)">Table 3</a>). According   to Blua <i>et al. </i>(1995),  behavioral changes of the whitefly is   attributed to several factors that  modify insect preference as   the confinement conditions are  different for free-choice and   no-choice tests.</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p>  Baldin <i>et al. </i>(2005), while  evaluating the resistance in   tomato genotypes against <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B,  found that   the OPI calculated in free-choice  and no-choice tests classified   all genotypes as oviposition  deterrent to the whitefly   when compared to the susceptible  pattern IAC-Santa Clara. The same authors still emphasized  that results obtained with   the genotypes LA-716, PI 134418 and  PI 134417 are similar   from those found by Toscano <i>et al. </i>(2002) and  Fancelli <i>et al.</i>   (2003), reporting expression of  non-preference for oviposition-   type resistance in these genotypes  against the whitefly.</p>     <p>  For most experiments, we underline  that the genotypes   with deterrence traits were not  commercial cultivars, but wild   entries or breeding lines with  agronomical characteristics of   low yield, whereas for the present  work oviposition deterrence   was reported for high yielding  cultivars.</p>     <p>  <b>Antibiosis  test.</b> There were no  significant differences in the   mean duration of eggs incubation  (<a href="#(tab4)">Table 4</a>), lasting nearly six   days after oviposition for all  cultivars evaluated. Similar results   were obtained by Lima and Lara  (2004) on soybean plants   (6.4 to 6.6 days), by Baldin <i>et al. </i>(2005) on  tomato genotypes   (about 6 days) and by Rodrigues <i>et al. </i>(2012b) on  cowpea cultivars   (5.53 to 6.72 days), demonstrating  that this biological   parameter is apparently little affected  by the host plant.</p>          <p align="center"><a name="(tab4)"></a><img src="img/revistas/rcen/v40n1/v40n1a02tab4.jpg"></p>      <p>  For the nymphal period, we observed  that cultivar IACHarmonia   extended the biological development  of the whitefly   (23.41 days), differing  significantly from the results obtained   for IAC-Centauro, IAC-Formoso,  IAPAR-81 and   IPR-Siriri, which had duration of  the biological development   around 21 days (<a href="#(tab4)">Table 4</a>). These data  suggest the expression   of non-preference for feeding and/or  antibiosis in IAC-Harmonia,   which, according to Lara (1991), is  characterized by   the longer period nymphs require to  complete the immature   stage comparatively to a susceptible  plant (<a href="#(tab4)">Table 4</a>). The   other cultivars were intermediate.</p>     <p>  Shorter duration of nymphal periods  than those obtained   in the present study were found by  Oriani and Lara (2000)   while assessing the antibiotic  effects of bean genotypes possessing   arcelin on <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B in  Jaboticabal, SP, Brazil,   who observed duration varying from  11.0 to 15.4 days. It   is important to mention that the  study of the authors was car ried out in the dry season, i.e. the hottest  period of the year,   which may have favored the insect  development. In the same   work, when the water season was  evaluated the results were   similar to our study, with means of  23 days for the duration   of nymphal period.</p>     <p>  Nymphal viability had amplitude  between 69.30% on the   cultivar IPR-Eldorado and 100% on  IAC-Centauro, however,   there was no significant difference  among cultivars (<a href="img/revistas/rcen/v40n1/v40n1a02tab4.jpg"target="_blank">Table   4</a>). These percentages are considered  high when compared   to other studies with common bean or  other plant species in   the literature. Fancelli <i>et al. </i>(2003) obtained  31.2 to 86.9%   nymphal viability on tomato  genotypes, Campos (2003)   found 30.7 to 64.2% on cotton and  Rodrigues <i>et al. </i>(2012b)   observed from 50.0 and 90.0% nymphal  viability on cowpea   cultivars. These results prove this  biological parameter is   variable depending on the host  plant.</p>     <p>  With respect to the total period  (duration from egg to   adult), results were influenced by  the nymphal period, with   significant differences. The  cultivar IAC-Harmonia highlighted   as the most harmful to <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B  development,   evidenced by the elongation of its  life cycle (29.41 days), and   differed from IPR-Siriri (27.09  days), IAC-Centauro (27.01   days) and IAC-Formoso (26.71 days),  which were the most   suitable for the whitefly  development. Duration of the total   period on these cultivars was about  2.5 days shorter than on   IAC-Harmonia (<a href="#(tab4)">Table 4</a>).</p>     <p>  For this parameter, Oriani and Lara  (2000), while studying   the antibiotic effects of nine bean  cultivars with or without   arcelin in greenhouse conditions,  observed that <i>B. tabaci</i>   biotype B total cycle was between 21  and 37 days in experiments   conducted in the water and dry  seasons in Jaboticabal,   SP, Brazil, respectively. Studies  conducted by Rodrigues <i>et</i>   <i>al. </i>(2012b) on  cowpea showed that the cultivar Sempre Verde   was the most adequate for the  whitefly development, and the   cultivars BRS Urubuquara and IPA-206  expressed non-preference   for feeding and or/antibiosis-type  resistance.</p>     <p>  Adults of the whitefly lived less  when their nymphs were   fed the cultivars IAC-Una (1.0 day),  IPR-Eldorado (1.02   days) and IAC-Harmonia (1.02 days),  differing significantly   from IAC-Formoso (1.28 days) and  IAC-Centauro (1.26   days) (<a href="#(tab4)">Table 4</a>). Most studies in  literature do not report differences   among treatments for adults  longevity, mainly because   experiments were evaluated without  adults feeding (Oriani <i>et</i>   <i>al. </i>2008; Rodrigues <i>et  al. </i>2012b).</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p>  It is important to note that the  cultivar IAC-Harmonia,   which stood out as the least  suitable for whitefly development   by extending its life cycle, was  considered susceptible   in the water season, with the  highest infestation in comparison   to other 18 cultivars. In addition,  this cultivar exhibited   the highest incidence of the BGMV in  field conditions (Silva   2012).</p>     <p>  Considering the biological  parameters concomitantly   through the multivariate Principal  Component Analysis, the   first principal component (PC1)  concentrated 61.39% of the   entire variability from the original  variables, and the parameters   that most influenced this factor  were nymphal period   (- 0.93), total period (- 0.91) and  adults longevity (0.90). The   second principal component (PC2)  concentrated 16.08%   of the variability presented in the  original biological parameters,   and the most influent variable was  nymphal viability   (-0.67) (<a href="#(fig1)">Fig. 1</a>).</p>          <p align="center"><a name="(fig1)"></a><img src="img/revistas/rcen/v40n1/v40n1a02fig1.jpg"></p>      <p>  Analyzing the distribution of the  bean cultivars following   the PCA obtained from the <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B  biological   parameters, values of duration of  nymphal period and total   period were the factors that most  influenced the analysis by   isolating the cultivar IAC-Harmonia  in the third quadrant   (<a href="#(fig1)">Fig. 1</a>). Thus, based on the  distribution of the cultivars from   the whitefly biological aspects in  univariate (ANOVA) and multivariate (PCA) analyses, and according to criteria  established   by Kaiser (1960), it is possible to  classify the cultivars   regarding the resistance degrees:  IAC-Harmonia was   classified as moderately resistant;  IAC-Una, IPR-Eldorado   and P&eacute;rola, as susceptible; and  IAC-Centauro, IAPAR-81 and   IPR-Siriri, are highly susceptible.</p>     <p>  The biological parameters period of  incubation and   nymphal viability were the factors  that least influenced the   differentiation and classification  of the bean cultivars for the   resistance degrees to <i>B.  tabaci </i>biotype B (<a href="#(fig1)">Fig.  1</a>), and these   parameters also did not differ  significantly in the univariate   (ANOVA) analysis (<a href="#(tab4)">Table 4</a>).</p>     <p>  It is important to emphasize that  multivariate analyses,   amongst them the Principal Component  Analysis, have been   used as an important tool for  Entomology, especially Host   Plant Resistance, as they are  methods that take into account   the assessment of the insect  biological parameters altogether.   Principal Component Analysis  provides the formation of   groups with genotypes that behaved  similarly under the pest   attack, allowing the researcher  differentiate the genotypes   concerning the resistance degrees.</p>     <p>  <font size="3" face="Verdana"><b>Conclusions</b></font></p>     <p>  The cultivars IAC-Harmonia,  IPR-Eldorado, IAPAR-81, and   IPR-Siriri were the least preferred  when adults of the whitefly   were given a choice for oviposition.  In addition, the cultivarIAC-   Harmonia extended the life cycle of  the whitefly, and   holds moderate non-preference for  feeding and/or antibiosistype   resistance. These cultivars,  especially IAC-Harmonia,   can potentially be grown in the  field aiming to suppress populations   of the whitefly.</p>     <p>  <font size="3" face="Verdana"><b>Acknowledgements</b></font></p>     <p>  To Coordena&ccedil;&atilde;o de Aperfei&ccedil;oamento de  Pessoal de N&iacute;vel Superior   (CAPES) for the Doctorate  scholarship granted to the   first author and to Conselho  Nacional de Desenvolvimento   Cient&iacute;fico  e Tecnol&oacute;gico (CNPq) for the scholarships granted   to the second, third and seventh  authors. Appreciation is also   given to Instituto Agron&ocirc;mico de  Campinas (IAC) for supplying   the seeds of bean cultivars assessed  in the present work   and to Prof. Dr. Gener Tadeu Pereira  from Departamento de   Ci&ecirc;ncias Exatas of FCAV/UNESP for  the assistance with the   statistical  analysis.</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font size="3" face="Verdana"><b>  Literature cited</b></font></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  BALDIN,  E. L. L.; TOSCANO, L. C.; LIMA, A. C. S.; LARA, F.   M.;  BOI&Ccedil;A JUNIOR, A. L. 2000. Prefer&ecirc;ncia para oviposi&ccedil;&atilde;o   de <i>Bemisia tabaci </i>bi&oacute;tipo &quot;B&quot; por gen&oacute;tipos de <i>Cucurbita moschata</i>   e <i>Cucurbita maxima</i>. Boletin de Sanidad Vegetal Plagas   26  (3): 409-413.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000074&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  BALDIN,  E. L. L.; VENDRAMIM, J. D.; LOUREN&Ccedil;&Atilde;O, A. L.   2005.  Resist&ecirc;ncia de gen&oacute;tipos de tomateiro &agrave; mosca-branca <i>Bemisia</i>   <i>tabaci </i>(Gennadius) bi&oacute;tipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae).   Neotropical Entomology 34 (3):  435-441.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000076&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200002&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  BERLINGER, M. J. 1986. Host plant  resistance to <i>Bemisia tabaci</i>.   Agriculture, Ecosystems and  Environment 17 (1): 69-82.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000078&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200003&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  BLUA, M. J.; YOSHIDA, H. A.;  TOSCANO, N. C. 1995. Oviposition   preference of two <i>Bemisia </i>species  (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae).   Environmental  Entomology 24 (1): 88-93.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000080&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200004&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  BOI&Ccedil;A  J&Uacute;NIOR, A. L.; SOUZA, B. H. S.; LOPES, G. S.; COSTA,   E.  N.; MORAES, R. F. O.; EDUARDO, W. I. 2013. Atualidades   em  resist&ecirc;ncia de plantas a insetos. pp. 207-224. In: Busoli, A.   C.;  Alencar, J. R. D. C. C.; Fraga, D. F.; Souza, L. A.; Souza, B.   H. S.; Grigolli, J. F. J. (Eds.). T&oacute;picos em Entomolog&iacute;a Agr&iacute;cola  &#150;VI. Jaboticabal: Gr&aacute;fica Multipress. 327 p.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000082&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200005&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  BUTTER, N. S.; VIR, B. K. 1989.  Morphological basis of resistance   in cotton to the whitefly <i>Bemisia  tabaci</i>. Phytoparasitica   17  (4): 251-261.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000084&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200006&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  CAMPOS,  O. R. 2003. Resist&ecirc;ncia de gen&oacute;tipos de algodoeiro a   mosca  branca <i>Bemisia tabaci </i>(Gennadius 1889) bi&oacute;tipo B   (Hemiptera:  Aleyrodidae). Thesis, Faculdade de Ci&ecirc;ncias   Agron&ocirc;micas,  Universidade Estadual Paulista, 69 p.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000086&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200007&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  CAMPOS,  Z. R.; BOI&Ccedil;A JUNIOR, A. L.; LOUREN&Ccedil;&Atilde;O, A. L.;   CAMPOS,  A. R. 2005. Fatores que afetam a oviposi&ccedil;&atilde;o de <i>Bemisia</i>   <i>tabaci </i>(Genn.) bi&oacute;tipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) em   algodoeiro. Neotropical Entomology  34 (5): 823-827.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000088&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200008&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  CHU, C. C.; FREEMAN, T. P.; BUCKNER,  J. S.; NATWICK, E. T.;   HENNEBERRY, T. J.; NELSON, D. 2001.  Silverleaf whitefly   colonization and trichome density  relationships on upland cotton   cultivars.  Southwestern Entomologist 25 (4): 237-242.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000090&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200009&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  COSTA,  N. P.; SANTOS, T. M.; BOI&Ccedil;A JUNIOR, A. L. 2004.   Prefer&ecirc;ncia  para oviposi&ccedil;&atilde;o de <i>Bemisia tabaci </i>bi&oacute;tipo-B em   gen&oacute;tipos  de caupi. Acta Scientiarum 26 (2): 227-230.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000092&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200010&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  COSTA,  G. M; BOI&Ccedil;A JUNIOR, A. L.; JESUS, F. G.; CHAGAS   FILHO.  2010. Efeito do uso de &oacute;leos vegetais, associados ou   n&atilde;o  a inseticida, no controle de <i>Bemisia  tabaci </i>(Genn.) e <i>Thrips</i>   <i>tabaci </i>(Lind.), em feijoeiro, na &eacute;poca das &aacute;guas. Bioscience   Journal 26 (1): 15-23.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000094&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200011&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  DAHLIN, R. M.; BRICK, M. A.; OGG, J.  B. 1992. Characterization   and density of trichomes on three  common bean cultivars.   Economic Botany 46 (3): 299-304.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000096&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200012&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  EICHELKRAUT, K.; CARDONA, C. 1989. Biologia, cria massal   y  aspectos ecol&oacute;gicos de la mosca blanca <i>Bemisia  tabaci </i>(Gennadius)   (Homoptera:  Aleyrodidae), com plaga del frijol comum.   Turrialba  39 (1): 55- 62.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000098&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200013&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  FANCELLI,  M.; VENDRAMIM, J. D.; LOUREN&Ccedil;&Atilde;O, A. L.;   DIAS,  C. T. S. 2003. Atratividade e prefer&ecirc;ncia para oviposi&ccedil;&atilde;o   de <i>Bemisia tabaci </i>(Gennadius) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) bi&oacute;tipo   B  em gen&oacute;tipos de tomateiro. Neotropical Entomology 32   (2):  319-328.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000100&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200014&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  FENEMORE,  P. G. 1980. Oviposition of  potato tuber moth,   <i>Phthorimaea operculella </i>Zell. (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae);   identification of host-plant factors  influencing oviposition response.   New Zealand Journal of Zoology 7  (3): 435-439.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000102&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200015&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  GILL, R. J. The morphology of whiteflies.  1990. pp. 13-46. In: Gerling,   D. (Ed.). Whitefly: their bionomics,  pest status management.   Newcastle: Intercept, Andover. 348  p.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000104&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200016&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p> </font>    <!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana">  HOROWITZ, A. R.; ISHAAYA, I. 1995.  Chemical control of <i>Bemisia</i>   - management and application. pp.  537-556. In: Gerling,   D.; Mayer, R. T. (Eds.). <i>Bemisia</i>: Taxonomy,  biology, damage,   control and management. Newcastle:  Intercept Ltd. Andover,   Hants, UK.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000106&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200017&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>     <!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana"> JACKSON, J. E. 1991. A user&#39;s guide  to principal components.   New York: Wiley. 569 p.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000108&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200018&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p> <font size="2" face="Verdana">    <!-- ref --><p>  JANINI, J. C.; BOICA JUNIOR, A. L.;  JESUS, F. G.; SILVA, A.   G.; CARBONEL, S. A. M.; CHIORATO, A.  F. 2011. Effect of   bean genotypes, insecticides, and  natural products on the control   of <i>Bemisia  tabaci </i>(Gennadius)  biotype B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae)   and <i>Caliothrips  phaseoli </i>(Hood)  (Thysanoptera: Thripidae).   Acta Scientiarum, Agronomy 33 (3):  445-450.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000110&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200019&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  JESUS, F. G.; BOICA JUNIOR, A. L.;  JANINI, J. C.; SILVA, A.   G.; CARBONEL, S. A. M.; CHIORATO, A.  F. 2009. Intera&ccedil;&atilde;o   de  variedades, &oacute;leo de nim e inseticida no controle de <i>Bemisia</i>   <i>tabaci </i>(Gennadius) biotipo B (Hemiptera:Aleyrodidae) e <i>Caliothrips</i>   <i>phaseoli </i>(Hood)  (Thysanoptera:Thripidae) na cultura do   feijoeiro.  Bolet&iacute;n de Sanidad Vegetal. Plagas 35 (2): 491-500.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000112&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200020&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  JESUS, F. G.; BOI&Ccedil;A JUNIOR, A. L;  CARBONELL, S. A.   M; STEIN, C. P.; PITTA, R. M.;  CHIORATO, A. F. 2010. Infesta&ccedil;&atilde;o   de <i>Bemisia tabaci </i>bi&oacute;tipo B e <i>Caliothrips  phaseoli </i>em   gen&oacute;tipos  de feijoeiro. Bragantia 69 (3): 637-648.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000114&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200021&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  JESUS,  F. G.; BOI&Ccedil;A JUNIOR, A. L.; PITTA, R. M.; CAMPOS, A.   P.;  TAGLIARI, S. R. 2011. Fatores que afetam a oviposi&ccedil;&atilde;o de   <i>Bemisia tabaci </i>bi&oacute;tipo b (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) em feijoeiro.   Bioscience Journal 27 (2): 190-195.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000116&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200022&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  KAISER, H. F. 1960. The application  of electronic computers to   factor analysis. educational and  psychological measurement.   Thousand Oaks 20: 141-151.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000118&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200023&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  Lara , F. M. 1991. Princ&iacute;pios de resist&ecirc;ncia de plantas a insetos.   S&atilde;o  Paulo: &Iacute;cone. 336 p.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000120&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200024&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  LIMA,  A. C. S. 2001. Resist&ecirc;ncia de gen&oacute;tipos de soja &#91;<i>Glycine</i>   <i>Max </i>(L.) Merrill&#93; &agrave; mosca branca, <i>Bemisia tabaci </i>(Gennadius,   1889)  bi&oacute;tipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Thesis, Faculdade   de  Ci&ecirc;ncias Agr&aacute;rias e Veterin&aacute;rias, Universidade Estadual Paulista.   56  p.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000122&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200025&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  LIMA,  A. C. S.; LARA, F. M. 2004. Resist&ecirc;ncia de gen&oacute;tipos de   soja  &agrave; mosca-branca <i>Bemisia tabaci </i>(Genn.) bi&oacute;tipo B (Hemiptera:   Aleyrodidae). Neotropical Entomology  33 (1): 71-75.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000124&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200026&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  McAUSLANE, H. J.; JOHNSON, F. A.;  KNAUFT, D. A. 1994.   Population levels and parasitism of <i>Bemisia  tabaci </i>(Gennadius)   (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) on peanut  cultivars. Environmental   Entomology  23 (5): 1203-1210.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000126&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200027&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  OMRAM,  H. H.; EL-KHIDIR, E. 1978. On the preference of <i>Bemisia</i>   <i>tabaci </i>Genn.  (Homoptera, Aleyrodidae) on various cotton   cultivars in Cukurova, Turkey.  Agriculture, Ecosystems &amp;   Environment 17 (3): 83-88.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000128&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200028&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  ORIANI, M. A. G.; LARA F. M. 2000.  Antibiosis effects of wild   bean lines containing arcelin on <i>Bemisia  tabaci </i>(Genn.) biotype   B  (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Anais da Sociedade Entomol&oacute;gica   do  Brasil 29 (3): 573-582.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000130&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200029&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  ORIANI,  M. A. G.; VENDRAMIM, J. D.; BRUNHEROTTO, R.   2005.  Atratividade e n&atilde;o-prefer&ecirc;ncia para oviposi&ccedil;&atilde;o de <i>Bemisia</i>   <i>tabaci </i>(Genn.) bi&oacute;tipo B (Hemiptera, Aleyrodidae) em   gen&oacute;tipos  de feijoeiro. Neotropical Entomology 34 (1): 105-111.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000132&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200030&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  ORIANI,  M. A. G.;VENDRAMIM, J. D.; BRUNHEROTTO, R.   2008.  Aspectos biol&oacute;gicos de <i>Bemisia tabaci </i>(Genn.) Bi&oacute;tipo   B  (Hemiptera, Aleyrodidae) em 6 gen&oacute;tipos de feijoeiro. Neotropical   Entomology 37 (2):191-195.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000134&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200031&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  PAINTER, R. H. 1951. Insect  resistance in crop plantas. McMilan,   New York. 520 p.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000136&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200032&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  PARON, M. J. F. O.; LARA, F. M.  2005. Rela&ccedil;&atilde;o entre tricomas   foliares  de gen&oacute;tipos de feijoeiro comum, <i>Phaseolus  vulgaris</i>   L.  e resist&ecirc;ncia a <i>Diabrotica speciosa </i>Germar, 1824 (Coleoptera:   Chrysomelidae).  Ci&ecirc;ncia e Agrotecnologia 29 (4): 894-   898.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000138&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200033&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  PE&Ntilde;A,  E. A.; PANTOJA, A.; BEAVER, J. 1992. Determinaci&oacute;n de   la  pubescencia de cuatro genotipos de habichuela, <i>Phaseolus</i>   <i>vulgaris </i>L. Journal of  Agriculture of the University of Puerto   Rico  76 (4): 71-82.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000140&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200034&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  PE&Ntilde;A,  E. A.; PANTOJA, A.; BEAVER, J.; ARMSTRONG, A.   1993.  Oviposicion de <i>Bemisia tabaci </i>Genn. (Homoptera, Aleyrodidae)   en  cuatro genotipos de <i>Phaseolus vulgaris </i>L. (Leguminosae)   con  diferentes grados de pubescencia. Folia Entomologica   Mexicana  87: 1-12.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000142&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200035&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  PRABHAKER,  N.; COUDRIET, D. L.; MEYER-DIRK, D. E.   1985. Insecticide resistance in the  sweetpotato-whitefly <i>Bemisia</i>   <i>tabaci </i>(Homoptera:  Aleyrodidae). Journal of Economic Entomology   78  (4): 748-752.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000144&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200036&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  RODRIGUES,  N. E. L.; BOTTEGA, D. B.; SOUZA, B. H. S.; CHIORATO,   A.  F.; SILVA, A. G.; BOICA JUNIOR, A. L. 2012a. Infestation   of <i>Bemisia  tabaci </i>B biotype on  bean cultivars. Annual   Report of the Bean Improvement  Cooperative 55 (1): 195-196.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000146&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200037&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  RODRIGUES,  N. E. L.; BOICA JUNIOR, A. L.; FARIAS, P. R. S.   2012b.  Antibiose e n&atilde;o prefer&ecirc;ncia para oviposi&ccedil;&atilde;o de <i>Bemisia</i>   <i>tabaci </i>(Genn.) bi&oacute;tipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) por cultivares   de <i>Vigna unguiculata </i>(L.) Walp. Arquivos do Instituto Biol&oacute;gico   79  (1): 25-31.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000148&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200038&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  SALGUERO,  V. 1993. Perspectivas para el manejo del complejo   mosca  blanca-virosis. pp. 20-26. In: TALLER, del cenroamericano   y  del caribe sobre moscas blancas, Turrialba, Costa Rica.   1992.  Las moscas blancas (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) em America   Central  y Caribe: Mem&oacute;ria. Turrialba: CATIE. (Informe   T&eacute;cnico  205).    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000150&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200039&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  SAS/STAT  1994. User&#39;s Guide, Version 6, Fourth Edition, vol. 1 e   2.  SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000152&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200040&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  SILVA,  A. G. 2012. Resist&ecirc;ncia de cultivares de feijoeiro, din&acirc;mica   populacional  de <i>Bemisia tabaci </i>(Genn., 1889) (Hemiptera:   Aleyrodidae)  e incid&ecirc;ncia de mosaico dourado. Thesis, Faculdade   de  Ci&ecirc;ncias Agr&aacute;rias e Veterin&aacute;rias de Jaboticabal, Universidade   Estadual  Paulista, Jaboticabal, 95 p.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000154&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200041&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  SIMMONS,  A. M. 1994. Oviposition on  vegetables by <i>Bemisia</i>   <i>tabaci </i>(Homoptera:  Aleyrodidae): temporal and leaf surface   factors. Environmental Entomology 23  (2): 381-389.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000156&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200042&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  STATSOFT 2012. STATISTICA. (Data  Analysis Software System   and User&#39;s Manual). Version 10.  StatSoft Inc., Tulsa.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000158&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200043&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  TOSCANO, L. C.; BOI&Ccedil;A JUNIOR, A. L.;  MARUYAMA, W. I.   2002. Non preference of whitefly for  oviposition in tomato genotypes.   Sciencia  Agricola 59 (4): 677-681.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000160&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200044&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  VALLE,  G. E.; LOUREN&Ccedil;&Atilde;O, A. L. 2002. Resist&ecirc;ncia de gen&oacute;tipos   de  soja a <i>Bemisia tabaci </i>(Genn.) Bi&oacute;tipo B (Hemiptera:   Aleyrodidae).  Neotropical Entomology 31 (2): 285-295.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000162&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200045&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  VAN  LENTEREN, J. A.; NOLDUS, L. P. J. J. 1990. Whitefly-plant   relationships: behavioral and  ecological aspects pp. 47-89. In:   GERLING, D. (Ed.). Whiteflies: their  bionomics, pest status   and management. Andover: Intercept.  348 p.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000164&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200046&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  VENDRAMIM,  J. D.; SOUZA, A. P.; ONGARELLI, M. G. 2009.   Comportamento  de oviposi&ccedil;&atilde;o da mosca-branca <i>Bemisia  tabaci</i>   (Genn.)  (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) bi&oacute;tipo B em tomateiro. Neotropical   Entomology 38 (1): 126-132.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000166&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200047&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <!-- ref --><p>  WALKER, G. P.; PERRING, T. M. 1994.  Feeding and oviposition   behavior of whiteflies (Homoptera:  Aleyrodidae) interpreted   from AC electronic feeding monitor  waveforms. Annals of the   Entomological Society of American 87  (3): 363-374.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000168&pid=S0120-0488201400010000200048&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></p>     <p><b>  Suggested citation:</b></p>     <p>  DA  SILVA, A. G.; BOI&Ccedil;A JUNIOR, A. L.; FARIAS, P. R. S.; RODRIGUES,   N.  E. L.; DE SOUZA, B. H. S.; BOTTEGA, D. B.;   CHIORATO, A. L. 2014. Non-preference  for oviposition and   antibiosis in bean cultivars to <i>Bemisia  tabaci </i>biotype B  (Hemiptera:   Aleyrodidae).  Revista Colombiana de Entomolog&iacute;a 40 (1): 7-14.  Enero-julio 2014. ISSN: 0120-0488. </p> </font>      ]]></body><back>
<ref-list>
<ref id="B1">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BALDIN, E.]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L. L.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[TOSCANO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L. C.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[LIMA, A.]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C. S.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[LARA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[F. M.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOIÇA JUNIOR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Preferência para oviposição de Bemisia tabaci biótipo "B" por genótipos de Cucurbita moschata e Cucurbita maxima.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Boletin de Sanidad Vegetal Plagas]]></source>
<year>2000</year>
<volume>26</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>409-413</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BALDIN]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[E. L. L.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[VENDRAMIM]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. D.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[LOURENÇÃO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Resistência de genótipos de tomateiro à mosca-branca Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) biótipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae).]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Neotropical Entomology]]></source>
<year>2005</year>
<volume>34</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>435-441</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BERLINGER]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M. J.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Host plant resistance to Bemisia tabaci.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment]]></source>
<year>1986</year>
<volume>17</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>69-82</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BLUA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M. J.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[YOSHIDA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[H. A.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[TOSCANO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[N. C.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Oviposition preference of two Bemisia species (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae).]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Environmental Entomology]]></source>
<year>1995</year>
<volume>24</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>88-93</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B5">
<nlm-citation citation-type="">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOIÇA JÚNIOR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[SOUZA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[B. H. S.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[LOPES]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G. S.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[COSTA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[E. N]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[MORAES]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R. F. O.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[EDUARDO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[W. I.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Atualidades em resistência de plantas a insetos.]]></article-title>
<person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Busoli]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. C.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Alencar]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. R. D. C. C.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Fraga]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D. F.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Souza]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L. A.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Souza]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[B. H. S.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Grigolli]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. F. J.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Tópicos em Entomología Agrícola -VI. Jaboticabal: Gráfica Multipress.]]></source>
<year>2013</year>
<page-range>207-224</page-range><page-range>327</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B6">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BUTTER]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[N. S.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[VIR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[B. K.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Morphological basis of resistance in cotton to the whitefly Bemisia tabaci.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Phytoparasitica]]></source>
<year>1989</year>
<volume>17</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>251-261</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7">
<nlm-citation citation-type="">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CAMPOS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[O. R.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Resistência de genótipos de algodoeiro a mosca branca Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius 1889) biótipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae).]]></source>
<year>2003</year>
<page-range>69</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B8">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CAMPOS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Z. R.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOIÇA JUNIOR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[LOURENÇÃO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CAMPOS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. R.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Fatores que afetam a oviposição de Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) biótipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) em algodoeiro.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Neotropical Entomology]]></source>
<year>2005</year>
<volume>34</volume>
<numero>5</numero>
<issue>5</issue>
<page-range>823-827</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B9">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CHU]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C. C.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[FREEMAN]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[T. P.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BUCKNER]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. S.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[NATWICK]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[E. T.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[HENNEBERRY]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[T. J.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[NELSON]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Silverleaf whitefly colonization and trichome density relationships on upland cotton cultivars.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Southwestern Entomologist]]></source>
<year>2001</year>
<volume>25</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>237-242</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B10">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[COSTA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[N. P]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[SANTOS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[T. M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOIÇA JUNIOR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Preferência para oviposição de Bemisia tabaci biótipo-B em genótipos de caupi.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Acta Scientiarum]]></source>
<year>2004</year>
<volume>26</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>227-230</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B11">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[COSTA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G. M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOIÇA JUNIOR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[JESUS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[F. G]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CHAGAS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[FILHO]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Efeito do uso de óleos vegetais, associados ou não a inseticida, no controle de Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) e Thrips tabaci (Lind.), em feijoeiro, na época das águas.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Bioscience Journal]]></source>
<year>2010</year>
<volume>26</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>15-23</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B12">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[DAHLIN]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R. M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BRICK]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M. A]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[OGG]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. B]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Characterization and density of trichomes on three common bean cultivars.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Economic Botany]]></source>
<year>1992</year>
<volume>46</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>299-304</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B13">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[EICHELKRAUT]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[K]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CARDONA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="es"><![CDATA[Biologia, cria massal y aspectos ecológicos de la mosca blanca Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae), com plaga del frijol comum.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Turrialba]]></source>
<year>1989</year>
<volume>39</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>55- 62</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B14">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[FANCELLI]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[VENDRAMIM]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. D.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[LOURENÇÃO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[DIAS, C]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[T. S]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Atratividade e preferência para oviposição de Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) biótipo B em genótipos de tomateiro]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Neotropical Entomology]]></source>
<year>2003</year>
<volume>32</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>319-328</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B15">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[FENEMORE]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[P. G]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Oviposition of potato tuber moth, Phthorimaea operculella Zell. (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae); identification of host-plant factors influencing oviposition response]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[New Zealand Journal of Zoology]]></source>
<year>1980</year>
<volume>7</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>435-439</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B16">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[GILL]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R. J]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The morphology of whiteflies.]]></article-title>
<person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Gerling]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Whitefly: their bionomics, pest status management.]]></source>
<year>1990</year>
<page-range>13-46</page-range><page-range>348</page-range><publisher-loc><![CDATA[Newcastle ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Intercept, Andover]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B17">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[HOROWITZ]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. R]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[ISHAAYA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[I]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Chemical control of Bemisia - management and application.]]></article-title>
<person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Gerling]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Mayer]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R. T]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Bemisia: Taxonomy, biology, damage, control and management.]]></source>
<year>1995</year>
<page-range>537-556</page-range><publisher-loc><![CDATA[Newcastle ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Intercept Ltd. Andover, Hants]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B18">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[JACKSON]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. E]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[A user's guide to principal components.]]></source>
<year>1991</year>
<page-range>569</page-range><publisher-loc><![CDATA[New York ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Wiley]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B19">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[JANINI]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. C]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOICA JUNIOR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[JESUS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[F. G]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[SILVA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. G]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CARBONEL]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S. A. M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CHIORATO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. F]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Effect of bean genotypes, insecticides, and natural products on the control of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) biotype B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) and Caliothrips phaseoli (Hood) (Thysanoptera: Thripidae).]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Acta Scientiarum, Agronomy]]></source>
<year>2011</year>
<volume>33</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>445-450</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B20">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[JESUS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[F. G]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOICA JUNIOR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[JANINI]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. C]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[SILVA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. G]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CARBONEL]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S. A. M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CHIORATO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. F]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Interação de variedades, óleo de nim e inseticida no controle de Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) biotipo B (Hemiptera:Aleyrodidae) e Caliothrips phaseoli (Hood) (Thysanoptera:Thripidae) na cultura do feijoeiro.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Boletín de Sanidad Vegetal. Plagas]]></source>
<year>2009</year>
<volume>35</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>491-500</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B21">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[JESUS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[F. G]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOIÇA JUNIOR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CARBONELL]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S. A. M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[STEIN]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C. P]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[PITTA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R. M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CHIORATO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. F]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Infestação de Bemisia tabaci biótipo B e Caliothrips phaseoli em genótipos de feijoeiro.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Bragantia]]></source>
<year>2010</year>
<volume>69</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>637-648</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B22">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[JESUS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[F. G]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOIÇA JUNIOR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[PITTA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R. M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CAMPOS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. P]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[TAGLIARI]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S. R]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Fatores que afetam a oviposição de Bemisia tabaci biótipo b (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) em feijoeiro.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Bioscience Journal]]></source>
<year>2011</year>
<volume>27</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>190-195</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B23">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[KAISER]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[H. F]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. educational and psychological measurement.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Thousand Oaks]]></source>
<year>1960</year>
<volume>20</volume>
<page-range>141-151</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B24">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Lara]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[F. M]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Princípios de resistência de plantas a insetos.]]></source>
<year>1991</year>
<page-range>336</page-range><publisher-loc><![CDATA[São Paulo ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Ícone]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B25">
<nlm-citation citation-type="">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[LIMA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. C. S.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Resistência de genótipos de soja [Glycine Max (L.) Merrill] à mosca branca, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius, 1889) biótipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae).]]></source>
<year>2001</year>
<page-range>56</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B26">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[LIMA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. C. S]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[LARA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[F. M]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="fr"><![CDATA[Resistência de genótipos de soja à mosca-branca Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) biótipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae).]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Neotropical Entomology]]></source>
<year>2004</year>
<volume>33</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>71-75</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B27">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[McAUSLANE]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[H. J]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[JOHNSON]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[F. A]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[KNAUFT]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D. A.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Population levels and parasitism of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) on peanut cultivars.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Environmental Entomology]]></source>
<year>1994</year>
<volume>23</volume>
<numero>5</numero>
<issue>5</issue>
<page-range>1203-1210</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B28">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[OMRAM]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[H. H]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[EL-KHIDIR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[E]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[On the preference of Bemisia tabaci Genn. (Homoptera, Aleyrodidae) on various cotton cultivars in Cukurova, Turkey.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment]]></source>
<year>1978</year>
<volume>17</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>83-88</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B29">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[ORIANI]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M. A. G]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[LARA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[F. M.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Antibiosis effects of wild bean lines containing arcelin on Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) biotype B (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae).]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Anais da Sociedade Entomológica do Brasil]]></source>
<year>2000</year>
<volume>29</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>573-582</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B30">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[ORIANI, M]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. G]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[VENDRAMIM]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. D]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BRUNHEROTTO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Atratividade e não-preferência para oviposição de Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) biótipo B (Hemiptera, Aleyrodidae) em genótipos de feijoeiro.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Neotropical Entomology]]></source>
<year>2005</year>
<volume>34</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>105-111</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B31">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[ORIANI]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M. A. G]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[VENDRAMIM]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. D.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BRUNHEROTTO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Aspectos biológicos de Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) Biótipo B (Hemiptera, Aleyrodidae) em 6 genótipos de feijoeiro.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Neotropical Entomology]]></source>
<year>2008</year>
<volume>37</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>191-195</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B32">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[PAINTER]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R. H]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Insect resistance in crop plantas.]]></source>
<year>1951</year>
<page-range>520</page-range><publisher-loc><![CDATA[New York ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[McMilan]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B33">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[PARON, M]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. F. O]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[LARA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[F. M]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Relação entre tricomas foliares de genótipos de feijoeiro comum, Phaseolus vulgaris L. e resistência a Diabrotica speciosa Germar, 1824 (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae).]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Ciência e Agrotecnologia]]></source>
<year>2005</year>
<volume>29</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>894- 898</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B34">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[PEÑA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[E. A]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[PANTOJA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BEAVER]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="es"><![CDATA[Determinación de la pubescencia de cuatro genotipos de habichuela, Phaseolus vulgaris L.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Journal of Agriculture of the University of Puerto Rico]]></source>
<year>1992</year>
<volume>76</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>71-82</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B35">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[PEÑA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[E. A]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[PANTOJA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BEAVER]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[ARMSTRONG]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="es"><![CDATA[Oviposicion de Bemisia tabaci Genn. (Homoptera, Aleyrodidae) en cuatro genotipos de Phaseolus vulgaris L. (Leguminosae) con diferentes grados de pubescencia.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Folia Entomologica Mexicana]]></source>
<year>1993</year>
<volume>87</volume>
<page-range>1-12</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B36">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[PRABHAKER]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[N.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[COUDRIET]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D. L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[MEYER-DIRK]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D. E.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Insecticide resistance in the sweetpotato-whitefly Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae).]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Journal of Economic Entomology]]></source>
<year>1985</year>
<volume>78</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>748-752</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B37">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[RODRIGUES, N.]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[E. L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOTTEGA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D. B.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[SOUZA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[B. H. S]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[CHIORATO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. F.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[SILVA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. G.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOICA JUNIOR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Infestation of Bemisia tabaci B biotype on bean cultivars.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Annual Report of the Bean Improvement Cooperative]]></source>
<year>2012</year>
<month>a</month>
<volume>55</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>195-196</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B38">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[RODRIGUES]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[N. E. L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOICA JUNIOR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[FARIAS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[P. R. S.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="es"><![CDATA[Antibiose e não preferência para oviposição de Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) biótipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) por cultivares de Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Arquivos do Instituto Biológico]]></source>
<year>2012</year>
<month>b</month>
<volume>79</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>25-31</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B39">
<nlm-citation citation-type="">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[SALGUERO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[V.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="es"><![CDATA[Perspectivas para el manejo del complejo mosca blanca-virosis.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[TALLER, del cenroamericano y del caribe sobre moscas blancas]]></source>
<year>1993</year>
<month>19</month>
<day>92</day>
<page-range>20-26</page-range><publisher-loc><![CDATA[Turrialba ]]></publisher-loc>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B40">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>SAS/STAT</collab>
<source><![CDATA[User's Guide]]></source>
<year>1994</year>
<volume>1 e 2</volume>
<edition>Fourth</edition>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B41">
<nlm-citation citation-type="">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[SILVA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. G.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Resistência de cultivares de feijoeiro, dinâmica populacional de Bemisia tabaci (Genn., 1889) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) e incidência de mosaico dourado.]]></source>
<year>2012</year>
<page-range>95</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B42">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[SIMMONS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. M.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Oviposition on vegetables by Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae): temporal and leaf surface factors.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Environmental Entomology]]></source>
<year>1994</year>
<volume>23</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>381-389</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B43">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>STATSOFT 2012. STATISTICA</collab>
<source><![CDATA[(Data Analysis Software System and User's Manual).]]></source>
<year></year>
<edition>10</edition>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[StatSoft Inc., Tulsa]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B44">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[TOSCANO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L. C]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BOIÇA JUNIOR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[MARUYAMA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[W. I]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Non preference of whitefly for oviposition in tomato genotypes.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Sciencia Agricola]]></source>
<year>2002</year>
<volume>59</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>677-681</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B45">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[VALLE]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G. E.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[LOURENÇÃO]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. L.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Resistência de genótipos de soja a Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) Biótipo B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae).]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Neotropical Entomology]]></source>
<year>2002</year>
<volume>31</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>285-295</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B46">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[VAN LENTEREN]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. A]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[NOLDUS, L]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[P. J. J]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Whitefly-plant relationships: behavioral and ecological aspects]]></article-title>
<person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[GERLING]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Whiteflies: their bionomics, pest status and management.]]></source>
<year>1990</year>
<page-range>47-89</page-range><page-range>348</page-range><publisher-name><![CDATA[Andover: Intercept]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B47">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[VENDRAMIM]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. D]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[SOUZA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A. P]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[ONGARELLI]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M. G.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Comportamento de oviposição da mosca-branca Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) biótipo B em tomateiro.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Neotropical Entomology]]></source>
<year>2009</year>
<volume>38</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>126-132</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B48">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[WALKER]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G. P.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[PERRING]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[T. M.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Feeding and oviposition behavior of whiteflies (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) interpreted from AC electronic feeding monitor waveforms.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Annals of the Entomological Society of American]]></source>
<year>1994</year>
<volume>87</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>363-374</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>
