Journal of Environmental and Agricultural Sciences (JEAS). Erdogan, 2025. 27(1&2):1-9.
Open Access – Research Article
Host Plant Suitability of Tuta absoluta Meyrick (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) on Four Plant Species
Pervin Erdogan
Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agricultural Science and Technology, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Gultepe, Mecnun Otyakmaz Cd No:1, 58000 Sivas Merkez, Sivas, Türkiye
Abstract: Tomato leaf miner [Tuta absoluta Meyrick (Lepitoptera: Gelehiidae)] is a major pest causing significant losses in tomato crops. This study examined the growth and development of T. absoluta when fed on four host plant species. The host plant potential of three species from Solanaceae family (Solanum lycopersicum L., Solanum tuberosum L., Solanum nigrum L.) and one species from Chenopodiaceae family (Chenopodium album L.) was evaluated. Key development parameters including egg hatching, larval, pupal and total development periods of T. absoluta were recorded to assess the completed life cycle of T. absoluta, from egg to adult. The results showed that T. absoluta fed on solanaceous plants successfully completed its life cycle, but failed to complete life cycle on C. album, where larvae died during the egg stage. It was determined that the stage of all periods obtained in S. nigrum plants. In S. lycopersicum and S. tuberosum plants, values close to each other were obtained. The highest survival rate was observed in S. nigrum plant. This study concludes that S. nigrum, S. lycopersicum and S. tuberosum plants (Solanaceae family) are suitable hosts for T. absoluta, whereas C. album (Amaranthaceae family) is non-conducive for its development.
Keywords: Host plant preference, development period, pest management, Solanaceae plants, tomato pests, tomato leaf miner.
*Corresponding author: Pervin Erdogan
Cite this article as:
Erdogan, P. 2025. Host Plant Suitability of Tuta absoluta Meyrick (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) on Four Plant Species. Journal of Environmental & Agricultural Sciences. 27 (1&2): 1-9 [View Full–Text]Â [Citations]. 
Copyright © Erdogan, 2025  This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium provided the original author and source are appropriately cited and credited.
Similar Articles Published in JEAS
- Jabeen, F., A. Aslam and M. Salman. 2020. Heavy metal contamination in vegetables and soil irrigated with sewage water and health risks assessment. Journal of Environmental and Agricultural Sciences 22(1):23- 31. [Abstract] [View Full-Text] [Citations]
- Mazhar, M.S., B.E. Bajwa, G. McEvilly, G. Palaniappan and M.R. Kazmi. 2019. Improving vegetable value chains in Pakistan for sustainable livelihood of farming communities. Journal of Environmental & Agricultural Sciences. 18:1-9.. [Abstract] [View Full-Text]Â [Citations]
Competing Interest Statement: The authors have declared that they have no competing interests and there is no conflict of interest exists.
1. Introduction
Tomato [(Solanum lycopersicum) (Solanaceae)] is an edible herbaceous plant that originated from South and Central America and is widely cultivated across the world (Fuentes et al., 2021; Kumar et al., 2020). Tomato fruits are a significant source of vitamins including vitamins C and D, and are rich in beneficial phytochemicals including lycopene and glycoalkaloids (Perveen et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2023; Woods, 2015).
Tomato production is susceptible to various diseases and pests, causing significant crop losses (Gatahi, 2020; Kennedy, 2003; Panno et al., 2021). Tomato leaf miner [(Tuta absoluta Meyrick (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae)] is among the most destructive pests, causing substantial damage to tomato crops. The larvae of T. absoluta destroy the tomato canopy by burrowing into the leaves, buds and shoots. Moreover, they also damage flowers and fruits (Biondi et al., 2018; Erdogan and Babaroglu, 2014; Pandey et al., 2023; Yadav et al., 2022). Under favorable conditions, this pest can potentially cause complete failure of tomato crops (Chouikhi et al., 2023; Negi et al., 2018).
Though tomato is the most preferred host of T. absoluta, it has also been reported to infest potato, brinjal, common bean, tobacco and many other plants of the families Solanaceae, Fabaceae, Cucurbitaceae, Euphorbiaceae, and Amaranthaceae (Bawin et al., 2015; Negi et al., 2018). T. absoluta is a highly prolific species with wide adaptability and capable of rapid growth under favorable conditions (Guenaoui et al., 2010; Terzidis et al., 2014).
Tomato plant volatiles are more attractive to the female moths, especially leaf miner, Tuta absoluta, than to males (Biondi et al., 2018; Subramani et al., 2021). Olfactometer assay demonstrates a strong preference among female moths for the volatiles emitted by tomato plants. This preference plays a crucial role in their oviposition behavior. Subsequently, female moths tend to lay more eggs on tomato plants than on other Solanaceous host plants like potatoes and eggplant (Chen et al., 2023; Mandour et al., 2020).
T. absoluta is a highly prolific and adaptable species, capable of rapid growth under favorable conditions. As a multivoltine pest with overlapping life cycles, it grows well under suitable environments that support its development (Ong’onge et al., 2023; Vivekanandhan et al., 2024). Despite having a strong predisposition preference for tomato, T. absoluta is an oligophagous pest that can infest the aerial parts of various other Solanaceous host plants, including weeds, potato, eggplant, pepino, and tobacco (Idriss et al., 2020; Konan et al., 2022; Pandey et al., 2023).
 The successful invasion of T. absoluta can be attributed to its primary biological traits, including high reproductive capacity, the ability to produce multiple generations each year, and a short generation time (de Campos et al., 2021; Mansour et al., 2019). Adults, eggs, larvae, and pupae are the four life cycle stages of T. absoluta. The optimum temperature range for development throughout these stages is between 19°C and 25°C. This temperature range is aligned with the average daily temperatures generally observed during the tomato growing season. Under these thermal conditions T. absoluta. Can potentially produce nine to twelve generations throughout the year, depending on diverse factors including agroclimatic conditions, crop management and host plant characteristics (Desneux et al.,2022; Mohamed et al., 2022; Silva et al., 2021; Tabikha et al., 2015).
T. absoluta affects all parts of the host plant, leaves, blossoms, stems, and fruits, from seedlings to fully grown plants. Larvae feed on mesophyll tissues, creating distinct galleries filled with larval excrement leading to browning, necrosis, reduced functional leaf area, structural damage and impaired photosynthesis (Pandey et al., 2023; Uygun and Ozguven, 2024). This can result in severe yield losses, including complete fruit damage, if not properly managed (Aynalem, 2022; Loyani et al., 2021).
The emergence and success of invasive phytophagous insects in specific agroclimatic conditions depend on their ability to locate and adapt to new host plants, influencing their development, reproduction, and interactions with host plants (de la Masselière et al., 2017; Skendžić et al., 2021).  However, physiological and behavioral characteristics of insects limit the host range (Bodlah et al., 2023; Idriss et al., 2020; Suckling et al., 2014).
In addition to the current impediment to global tomato production, T. absoluta is also a threat to other cultivated species of Solanaceae, including black nightshade (Solanum nigrum L.), potatoes (Solanum tuberosum L.), and tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) (Desneux et al., 2022; Subramani et al., 2021; Mohamed et al., 2015).
T. absoluta was also reported to infest non-solanaceous host plants, such as Malva spp. (M. cathayensis, M. pusilla, M. verticillate (Caponero 2009), Vicia faba L. (Abdul-Ridha et al.,2012), Chenopodium album L. (Portakaldali et al., 2013), and Volvulus arvensis L. (Portakaldali et al., 2013). Moreover, numerous wild plant species, often found in urban areas, logged regions, croplands, and wastelands (Bawin et al., 2015), may serve as alternate host plants for T. absoluta, supporting pest survival and spread.
The potential to exploit these diverse conditions and host plants describes the adaptability and resilience of T. absoluta as an invasive pest (Desneux et al., 2022; Pandey et al., 2023). This broad host range complicates management efforts and poses significant challenges to crop productivity. This emphasizes the significance of its efficient monitoring and management (Colmenárez et al., 2022; Vivekanandhan et al., 2024).
This study was designed to evaluate the development and life span of T. absoluta from egg to adult on both cultivated and wild plants, including potential hosts from the Solanaceae and Amaranthaceae.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Host Plants
The tomato (cv Daffodil) and potato (cv Agria) plants used in the experiment were grown in pots in the greenhouse. Chenopodium album and Solanum nigrum plants were freshly collected from unsprayed fields when necessary.
2.2. Tuta absoluta culture
Larvae of T. absoluta were collected from tomato greenhouses in Adana, Turkey. The tomato plant and T. absoluta larvae were maintained in a 50 × 50 × 30 cm cage. Newly emerged adults were transferred to separate cages containing tomato plants (cv Daffodil) grown in greenhouses. T. absoluta cultures were maintained in a climate-controlled room (25±1ºC, 65±5% R.H., with a photoperiod of 16 h light: 8 h dark).
Fig. 1. The experiment T. absoluta no-choice test.
2.3. Experiment procedure
Female and male pupae (10 each) were collected from larvae reared on the tomato plant. When adults emerged, moths were provided a sucrose solution (10 % sucrose) and allowed to mate for one day in a cage. Subsequently, one-day-old eggs were placed in Petri dishes (3.5 cm diameter) containing moistened disc cotton and a 3 cm leaf disc from the experimental plants (Solanum lycopersicum, Solanum tuberosum, Solanum nigrum, and Chenopodium album). A total of 60 eggs per plant species were used, with each egg placed in a separate petri dish (Fig.1). Observations included the duration of egg hatching, larva instar, pupa instar and the total development period from egg to adult.
2.4. Choice and No-Choice Tests
To evaluate the feeding behavior of third-instar larvae on C. album, both choice and no-choice tests were conducted. In the choice test, one leaf of C. album and one leaf of S. lycopersicum were placed in a Petri dish (9 cm diameter) lined with moistened cotton wool. However, in the no-choice test, only C. album leaves were provided. Five larvae were introduced into each Petri dish, with four replicates for each test condition. Daily observations were conducted to monitor larval feeding behavior. All experiments were conducted in a climate-controlled room under standardized conditions (25±1ºC, 65±5% relative humidity (R.H.), and a 16:8 h light: dark photoperiod).
2.5. Statistical Analysis
The obtained results were analyzed using analysis of variance, and means were compared with Duncan’s test (P = 0.05) using SPSS version 20.6.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Choice and No-Choice Tests
T. absoluta eggs deposited on four different plant species successfully completed their development only on S. lycopersicum, S. tuberosum and S. nigrum plants. A very low emergence rate (8.33%) was observed for larvae from eggs laid on C. album plants, but none of these larvae died before completing their development (Fig. 2b).
The remaining eggs desiccated before hatching. T. absoluta eggs laid on the leaves of four different plants completed development only on S. lycopersicum, S. tuberosum and S. nigrum plants. The mean egg hatching periods were 3.87, 4.54, and 5.10 days for S. nigrum, S. lycopersicum and S. tuberosum. On all three host plants, the newly hatched larvae successfully formed galleries or leaf mines and developed normally. Statistical analyses revealed significant differences in egg hatching periods among the host plants (F= 87.44; p<0,05). Based on egg hatching period, S. nigrum and S. lycopersicum were grouped together, while S. tuberosum formed a separate group (Table 1).
The period of larva instar was assessed on S. nigrum, S. lycopersicum and S. tuberosum as host plants. The average larval period was shortest when fed on S. nigrum (9.53 days), followed by S. lycopersicum (12.83 days) and S. tuberosum (13.06 days) (Table 1).
Statistical analyses revealed significant differences among host plants (F = 50.96; *p* < 0.05). The data obtained from S. nigrum and S. lycopersicum plants were in the same group, while S. tuberosum plants were in different groups (F=50.96; p<0.05).
The period of pupa instar was determined as 8.01 days in S. nigrum, 8.54 days in L. lycopersicum and 9.03 days in S. tuberosum. In statistical analyses in terms of the period of pupa instar, S. tuberosum plants were in different groups and L. lycopersicum and S. nigrum plants were in the same group. (Table 1) (F=11.16; p<0.05).
The total development time from egg to adult was 23.24, 28.0, and 27.80 days in S. nigrum, L. lycopersicum and S. tuberosum plants, respectively (Table 1). The development stage indicated that the survival rates of S. nigrum, S. lycopersicum, and S. tuberosum plants from egg to adult were 38.34, 36.67, 33.34 and 0.00 days, respectively (Table 1).
In addition, in the no-choice and choice tests using third-instar larvae, it was determined that all larvae fed on C. album plants died. In the choice test, the larvae consumed L. lycopersicum leaves and avoided C. album leaves. Since no larvae fed on C. album leaves (Fig. 2a, b), therefore, no statistical analysis was performed in this experiment.
In previous studies, T. absoluta prefers tomato as its host it also attacks several other of solanaceous crops including Solanum melongena L., Solanum tuberosum L., Nicotiana tabacum L., Solanum aethiopicum L. (Cherif and Verheggen, 2019; EPPO, 2005; Pereyra and Sánchez, 2006; Megido et al., 2013; Negi et al., 2018).
It was recorded that the hatching time of T. absoluta eggs in tomato plants was around 4-5 days (EPPO, 2005; Torrest et al., 2001). Similarly, Erdogan and Babaroglu (2014), reported that the average egg hatching time in tomato plants of 4.10 days. Idriss et al., (2020) revealed that the egg hatching period on S. lycopersicum plants was 6.8 days. In the same study, it was recorded that the egg hatching period was 6.6 days in S. nigrum plants. According to the results of the study conducted by Bawin et al. (2015), it was reported that T. absoluta eggs hatch in 4.3 days in S. tuberosum plant. In the same study, it was determined as 3.8 days in Solanum dulcamara, which is in the same family with S. nigrum.
According to the results obtained from our study, the period of larva instar was 9.53, 12.83 and 13.06 days in S. nigrum, S. lycopersicum and S. tuberosum plants, respectively. Our study results were similar to those reported for T. absoluta. Torres et al. (2001) who stated the period of larvae instar of T. absoluta was 12 and 16 days at 27 ºC. Pereyra and Sanches (2006) reported that the period of larvae instar of T. absoluta was 12.14 days at 25±1ºC S. lycopersicum. It was found that the period of larvae instar was 13-15 days S. lycopersicum (EPPO, 2005). Similarly, in the study conducted by Erdogan and Babaroglu (2014), the period of larva instar in S. lycopersicum plants was determined as 10.97 days. In another study, the period of larva instar in S. tuberosum and S. dulcamara was 8.5 and 11.8, respectively (Bawin et al.,2015). Also, according to İdriss et al. (2020), the period of larva instar was 10.9 days in S. lycopersicum and 12.3 days in S. nigrum.
In the present study, the pupal instar duration of T. absoluta varied significantly among host plants, lasting 8.01 days on S. nigrum, 8.54 days on S. lycopersicum, and 9.03 days on S. tuberosum. These findings are supported by earlier reports, though with slight variations. These variations can be attributed to differences in experimental conditions (Erdogan and Babaroglu, 2014; Idriss et al., 2020; Torres et al., 2001). Pupal duration of 9.53 days on tomato plants (Erdogan and Babaroglu, 2014), while Torres et al., (2001) observed a range of 7-9 days. Similarly, Idriss et al. (2020) recorded longer pupal durations of 10.8 and 10.7 days on S. lycopersicum and S. nigrum, respectively. Additionally, Bawin et al. (2015) noted durations of 7.6 and 9.2 days on S. tuberosum and S. dulcamara, further supporting the influence of host plants on pupal development.
At 25ºC, the average development time of T. absoluta from egg to adult varied significantly among host plants, on S. lycopersicum, (28.0 days), S. tuberosum (27.80 days) and S. nigrum (23.24 days). These findings are consistent with the results of Bawin et al. (2015) reported a development period of 24.8 days on S. dulcamara (a close relative of S. nigrum) and 20.04 days on S. tuberosum. Erdoğan and Babaroğlu (2014) observed a longer development period of 30.18 days on S. lycopersicum, which aligns with EPPO (2005), reporting 30 days for the complete life cycle.
However, Cuthbertson et al. (2013) noted contrasting results: while development took 23.8 days at 27.1°C, it extended to 35 days at 25°C. Similarly, Idriss et al. (2020) recorded the total development time of T. absoluta 29.0 days on S. nigrum and 27.9 days on S. lycopersicum, which are slightly longer than our findings (28.0 days on S. lycopersicum and 23.24 days on S. nigrum). These variations can be result of differences in environmental conditions, genotypic variations of host plant cultivars, or experimental conditions.
Significant differences observed in the life stages and development periods of T. absoluta across different host plants, with eggs failing to hatch of deed on C. album. This disparity in survival could be caused by defense mechanism triggered by oviposition or by the morphological traits of host plants, which could disrupt embryonic development. For example, leaf desiccation potentially caused by stomatal closure regulated by anomalies in the humidity or hypersensitive responses, could impair egg viability (Bawin et al., 2015; Hilker and Meiners, 2011; Woods, 2010). Similar defensive strategies have been documented in Brassica nigra (Brassicaceae), where necrotic leaf tissue formation beneath eggs of Pieris rapae and P. napi (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) led to egg desiccation (Griese et al., 2017; Peters et al., 2024; Shapiro & DeVay, 1987). Moreover, plant tissues may contain volatile or contact compounds that interfere with embryonic growth and development (Hilker and Meiners 2011).
An alternate hypothesis suggests that females responded to a low-quality host plant by devoting fewer resources in embryos, which may compromise offspring fitness (Boggs, 1992). This aligns with the studies suggesting that high-quality diet is associated with the improved survival and faster development in herbivorous insects (Awmack and Leather 2002; Pereyra and Sánchez 2006).
Our findings demonstrate that non-solanaceous plant species are unlikely to be T. absoluta hosts because of none supported larval development. According to Proffit et al. (2011), T. absoluta females assess host plant quality by using volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which may have led them astray during host selection. Furthermore, the larval development significantly varied among the host plants. T. absoluta raised on S. nigrum showed faster growth to adulthood than the other host species. The larval instars, or feeding stage, are the primary determinant of development rate under optimum and stress-free conditions. These differences likely reflect variations in the quality of nutrients and/or the production of plant secondary metabolites (Bawin et al., 2015).
In the present study, it was revealed that T. absoluta did not feed on C. album. Some results are supported by the findings of our findings. For example, Bawin et al. (2016) found that many plant species (Calystegia sepium, Convolvulus arvensis, Beta vulgaris vulgaris, Vicia paba), including C. album, are not suitable hosts of T. absoluta, do not develop, and do not lay eggs. In the same study, it was noted that the eggs laid on these plants could not feed on the plant. T. absoluta can show restricted development on a few wild Solanaceae species, such as Nicotiana glauca, S. nigrum, S. elaeagnifolium, Lycopersicum puberulum, Datura ferox, and D. stramonium. T. absoluta did not lay eggs on any of the Solanaceous species, including D. ferox, Physalis viscosa, and Salpichroa origanifolia. T. absoluta was prevented from completing its life cycle by Datura stramonium (Abbes et al., 2016; Bawin et al., 2015; Cherif and Verheggen, 2019). In addition, plants such as Geranium robertianum and C. pepo did not show any development (Ingegno et al., 2017).
There are studies with different results from our findings. Portakaldalı et al. (2013) reported that vinegar grass was also found among the hosts of T. absoluta, and this finding was the first record. Similarly, in the study conducted by Ögür et al. (2014), it was reported that C. album is the host of T. absoluta. There is no literature on the feeding of T. absoluta with C. album. Thus, it was determined that T. absoluta was hosted by S. nigrum, S. lycopersicum, and S. tuberosum plants of the Solanaceae family and that the C. album plant of the Amaranthaceae family could not be the host.
4. Conclusion
This study identified Solanum nigrum and tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) as the most suitable host plants for Tuta absoluta development, though the pest also demonstrated successful establishment on potato (Solanum tuberosum). These results highlight the importance and need of continuous monitoring of host plant species, as they support critical developmental stages like larval development and life cycle processes, including population expansion and overwintering success. Contrarily, Chenopodium album, found to be unsuitable for the survival and development of T. absoluta. Results presented demonstrate a strict host specificity of T. absoluta on S. nigrum, tomato, and potato plants, while being unable to utilize C. album as a viable host. These findings have significant implications for integrated pest management programs, particularly in guiding host plant resistance strategies and informing crop rotation decisions in agricultural systems affected by T. absoluta.
Acknowledgement The author thanks Dr. Z. Mustafa (Field Crops Department, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkiye) for assistance in statistical analysis of experimental data.
References
Abbes, K., A. Harbi, M. Elimen, A. Hafsi, and B. Chermiti. 2016. Bioassay of three solanaceous weeds as alternative hosts for the invasive tomato leaf miner Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) and insights on their carryover potential. Afr. Entomol. 24 (2):334-342. https://doi.org/10.4001/003.024.0334
Abdul-Ridha, M., S.L. Alwan, S.M. Helal and K.A. Aziz. 2012. Alternative hosts of South American tomato moth Tuta absoluta (Gelechiidae: Lepidoptera) in some tomato farms of Najaf Province. J. Agric. Sci. 4: 130–137.
Awmack, C.S. and S.R. Leather. 2002. Host plant quality and fecundity in herbivorous insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 47: 817–844. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.47.091201.145300
Aynalem, B. 2022. Empirical review of Tuta absoluta Meyrick effect on the tomato production and their protection attempts. Adv. Agric. 2022: 2595470. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2595470
Bawin, T., D. Dujeu, L.D. Backe, F. Francis and F. J. Verheggen. 2015. Ability of Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) to develop on alternative host plant species. Can. Entomol. 148 (4):434-442. https://doi.org/10.4039/tce.2015.59
Bodlah, M.A., J. Iqbal, A. Ashiq, I. Bodlah, S. Jiang, M.A. Mudassir, M.T. Rasheed and A.G.E. Fareen. 2023. Insect behavioral restraint and adaptation strategies under heat stress: An inclusive review. J. Saudi Soc. Agric. Sci. 22: 327-350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2023.02.004
Boggs, C.L. 1992. Resource allocation: exploring connections between foraging and life history. Func. Ecol. 6: 508–518. https://doi.org/10.2307/2390047.
Caponero, A. 2009. Solanacee, rischio in serre. Resta alta l’attenzione alla tignola del pomodoro nelle colture protette. Colture Protette. 10: 96–97.
Chen, T., L. Chen, J. Wang, J. Cheng, S. Yi, M. Hafeez, S. Zhou, Y. Li, X. Li and Y. Lu. 2023. Development of attractants and repellents for Tuta absoluta based on plant volatiles from tomato and eggplant. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 7: 1155317. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1155317
Cherif, A. and F. Verheggen, 2019. A review of Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) host plants and their impact on management strategies. Biotechnol. Agron. Soc. Environ. 23 (4): 270-278. https://doi.org/10.25518/1780-4507.18211; https://orbi.uliege.be/bitstream/2268/240504/1/Cherif%26Verheggen_2019.pdf
Chouikhi, S., B.H. Assadi, R. Ettaib, K.G. Lebdi and M.S. Belkadhi. 2023. Effectiveness of mating disruption applied alone or in combination with bioinsecticides against Tuta absoluta in heated greenhouse tomato crops of southern Tunisia. Phytoparasitica. 51: 521-532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12600-023-01080-z
Colmenárez, Y.C., C. Vásquez, A. de Freitas Bueno, F. Cantor, E. Hidalgo, N. Corniani and J.J. Lagrava. 2022. Sustainable management of the invasive Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae): An overview of case studies from Latin American countries participating in Plantwise. J. Integ. Pest Manag. 13(1): 15. https://doi.org/10.1093/jipm/pmac012
Cuthbertson, A. G. S., Blackburn, L. F. Northing, P. Mathers, W. Luo and K.F.A. Walters. 2013. Population development of Tuta absoluta (Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) under simulated UK glasshouse conditions. Insects. 4: 185–197. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects4020185
de la Masselière, M.C., V. Ravigné, B. Facon, P. Lefeuvre, F. Massol, S. Quilici and P.-F. Duyck. 2017. Changes in phytophagous insect host ranges following the invasion of their community: Long-term data for fruit flies. Ecol. Evol. 7: 5181-5190. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.2968
Desneux, N., P. Han, R. Mansour, J. Arnó, T. Brévault, M.R. Campos, A. Chailleux, R.N.C. Guedes, J. Karimi, K.A.J. Konan, et al. 2022. Integrated pest management of Tuta absoluta: practical implementations across different world regions. J. Pest Sci. 95: 17-39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-021-01442-8
EPPO, European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. 2005. Data sheets on quarantine pests: Tuta absoluta. European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Bulletin. 35: 434–435.
Erdogan, P. and N. Babaroglu. 2014. Life table of the tomato leaf miner, Tuta absoluta (Meyrick)(Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). J. Agric. Faculty Gaziosmanpas Uni. 31(2):80-89. https://doi.org/10.13002/jafag723
Fuentes, R.R., D. de Ridder, A.D.J. van Dijk and S.A. Peters. 2021. Domestication Shapes Recombination Patterns in Tomato. Mol. Biol. Evol. 39(1): msab287 https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msab287
Galarza J. 1984. Laboratory assessment of some solanaceous plants. Possible food-plants of the tomato moth Scrobipalpula absoluta (Meyr.) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). Agri. F. Sci. Biology, 421/424, 30-32.
Griese, E., M. Dicke, M. Hilker and N.E. Fatouros. 2017. Plant response to butterfly eggs: inducibility, severity and success of egg-killing leaf necrosis depends on plant genotype and egg clustering. Sci. Rep. 7: 7316. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-06704-z
Guenaoui, Y., F. Bensaad, and K. Ouezzani. 2010. First experiences in managing tomato leaf miner Tuta absoluta Meyrick (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) in the Northwest area of the country. Preliminary studies in biological control by use of indigenous natural enemies. Phytoma Espana. 217: 112-113.
Hilker, M. and T. Meiners. 2011. Plants and insect eggs: how do they affect each other? Phytochem. 72: 1612–1623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2011.02.018
Idriss, G. E. A., H. Plessis, M.F Khamis, S. Ekesi, M.T. Chrysantus and A.M. Samira. 2020. Host range and effects of plant species on preference and fitness of Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). J. Eco. Entomol. 113(3):1279-1289. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toaa002
Ingegno B.L., V. Candian and L. Tavella L. 2017. Behavioural study on host plants shared by the predator Dicyphus errans and the prey Tuta absoluta. Acta Hortic. 1164:377-382. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2017.1164.48
Konan, K.A.J., S.W.M. Ouali-Ngoran, L. Fondio, G.O. Ochou, D. Koné, N. Desneux and T. Martin. 2022. Geographical distribution and host range status of Tuta absoluta Meyrick (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) in Côte d’Ivoire. Int. J. Tropical Insect Sci. 42: 365-377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42690-021-00554-z
Loyani, L.K., K. Bradshaw and D. Machuve. 2021. Segmentation of Tuta absoluta’s damage on tomato plants: A computer vision approach. Appl. Artif. Intell. 35: 1107-1127. https://doi.org/10.1080/08839514.2021.1972254
Megido, R.C., Y. Brostaux, E. Haubruge and F.J. Verheggen. 2013. Propensity of the tomato leafminer, Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae), to develop on four potato plant varieties. Am. Potato J. 90: 255-260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12230-013-9300-9
Mohamed, E.S.I., M.E.E. Mahmoud, M.A.M. Elhaj, S.A. Mohamed and S. Ekesi. 2015. Host plants record for Tomato leaf miner Tuta absoluta (Meyrick) in Sudan. EPPO Bull. 45: 108–111. https://doi.org/10.1111/epp.12178
Mohamed, S.A., A.G.A. Azrag, F. Obala and S. Ndlela. 2022. Estimating the demographic parameters of Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) using temperature-dependent development models and their validation under fluctuating temperature. Biol. 11: 181. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology11020181
Negi, S., P.L. Sharma, K.C. Sharma and S.C. Verma. 2018. Effect of host plants on developmental and population parameters of invasive leafminer, Tuta absoluta (Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). Phytoparasitica, 46: 213-221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12600-018-0661-y
Ong’onge, M.A., I.J. Ajene, S. Runo, B.M. Sokame and F.M. Khamis. 2023. Population dynamics and insecticide resistance in Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae), an invasive pest on tomato in Kenya. Heliyon. 9:e21465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21465
Pereyra, P.C. and N.E. Sánchez. 2006. Effect of two solanaceous plants on developmental and population parameters of the tomato leaf miner, Tuta absoluta (Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). Neo. Entomol. 35: 671–676. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2006000500016
Peters, D.H., L.O. Greenberg and N.E. Fatouros. 2024. Oviposition strategies in Pieridae butterflies and the role of an egg-killing plant trait therein. Ecol. Evol. 14: e11697. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.11697
Portakaldali, M., S. Oztemiz, and H. Kütük 2013. A new host plant for Tuta absoluta (Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) in Turkey. J. Entomol. Res. Soc. 15: 21–24. https://www.entomol.org/journal/index.php/JERS/article/view/519
Proffit, M., G. Birgersson, M. Bengtsson, R. Reis, P. Witzgall and E. Lima 2011. Attraction and oviposition of Tuta absoluta females in response to tomato leaf volatiles. J. Chem. Ecol. 37: 565–574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-011-9961-0
Shapiro, A.M. and J.E. DeVay. 1987. Hypersensitivity reaction of Brassica nigra L. (Cruciferae) kills eggs of Pieris butterflies (Lepidoptera: Pieridae). Oecologia, 71: 631–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00379310
Skendžić, S., M. Zovko, I.P. Živković, V. Lešić and D. Lemić. 2021. The impact of climate change on agricultural insect pests. Insects. 12: 440. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12050440
Subramani, V., K.J. Pagadala Damodaram, R. Goravale Krishnegowda, S.K. Parepally, V. Kempraj, R. Thimmappa, S. Kodthalu Seetharamaiah, S. Vaddi and L. Hookunda Boregowda. 2021. Volatile chemical signals underlying the host plant preferences of Tuta absoluta. Â Entomol. Exp. Appl. 169: 997-1007 https://doi.org/10.1111/eea.13099.
Suckling, D.M., Charles, J.G., Kay, M.K., Kean, J.M., Burnip, G.M., Chhagan, A., et al. 2014. Host range testing for risk assessment of a sexually dimorphic polyphagous invader, painted apple moth. Agric. Forest Entomol. 16: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/afe.12028
Uygun, T. and M.M. Ozguven. 2024. Determination of tomato leafminer: Tuta absoluta (Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) damage on tomato using deep learning instance segmentation method. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 250: 1837-1852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-024-04516-w
Vivekanandhan, P., K. Swathy, P. Sarayut and K. Patcharin. 2024. Biology, classification, and entomopathogen-based management and their mode of action on Tuta absoluta (Meyrick) in Asia. Front. Microbiol. 15: 1429690. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1429690
Woods, H.A. 2010. Water loss and gas exchange by eggs of Manduca sexta: trading off costs and benefits. J. Insect Physiol. 56: 480–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinsphys.2009.05.020.