• The indication is that the major diseases of hot peppers in the Caribbean are those caused by Phytophtora spp., Sclerotium spp. and Rhizoctonia spp. Although these fungal pests have been recorded in the Caribbean, the degree of infestation seems to be mild. Refer to CARDI (1982).
  • The control measures needed to control these incidences of mild infection are available.
  • The most important disease of hot pepper is the seed borne Pepper Mosaic Virus. Management includes a high level of field sanitation, selective intercropping and rotation and the judicious use of pesticides. Although the insect pest complex of hot peppers includes a great variety of insects and mites, most are of minor importance as they occur seasonally. Refer to Jones (1988).
  • The major insect pest is the pepper flower bud moth. Although mentioned in the TIF, there is no guide available for its management.
  • A follow-up is needed on the Jones (1988) report of the treat posed by the wet season mite Polyphagotarsonemus latus in Trinidad and Tobago.
  • The pesticide residue data compiled by Montalvo-Zapata et al (1988) in Puerto Rico for non-bell peppers should provide a guide for the Caribbean Basin. For herbicides (fluazifop-butyl); Nematicides (fenamiphos and oxamyl); Insecticides (permethrin and acephate) and Fungicides (benomyl).
  • The disease problems of hot pepper are described by St. Hill and Rajnauth.

In Technical Bulletin No. 18 Characteristics and Control of Viruses Infecting Peppers: A Literature Review by Green and Kim (1991) and published by the Asian Vegetable Research and Development Centre, some 35 viruses were reported as infecting peppers (Capsicum spp.). Of these, more than half are transmitted by aphids. The other viruses are transmitted by nematodes, thrips, leafhoppers, whiteflies, beetles and fungi. Several are transmitted by contact and/or through the soil by mechanisms not yet understood. Most pepper viruses are distributed worldwide with the exception of chili veinal mottle virus, pepper severe mosaic virus, pepper veinal mottle virus, pepper mild mosaic virus and pepper mottle virus. These have been reported only in certain geographic areas. Virus?infected peppers generally exhibit a variety of symptoms, the most common of which are mosaic, mottle, necrosis and leaf distortion. Many of these viruses cause considerable yield losses. Various methods of control, aimed primarily at the vectors of the viruses, and are reported in the Review.

Some of the symptoms of pepper viruses and virus-like symptoms presented by Green and Kim (1991) are shown below.

Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus Pepper Mild Mottle Virus
Pepper Mild Mottle Virus Tomato Mosaic Virus Pepper Mottle Virus
  Pepper Mottle Virus  

McDonald (1999) states that the major constraints to sustained growth and development in hot pepper production in the Caribbean are pests and diseases and soil and water management. In Jamaica the 'Scotch Bonnet' cv. is plagued with two major viral diseases:

  1. Tobacco Etch Virus (TEV)
  2. Potato Virus Y (PVY)

The aphid vectors (Aphis gossypii, Myzus persicae) are known to be pests by themselves. Other arthropod pests of hot pepper in Jamaica and the rest of the Caribbean itself have been reported:

Gall midge complex Contarinia lycopersici/Prodiplosis longifila
Banded cucumber beetle Diabrotica balteata
Tobacco whitefly Bemisia tabaci (B-type and non B-type)
Broad mite Polyphagotarsonemus latus
Mealy bugs Pseudococcus spp, Maconellicoccus hirsutus

The economic important disease complex on hot pepper 'W.I. Red' cv. is the White Fly/Gemini virus complex in the Eastern Caribbean and Trinidad. Whitefly (Bemisia tabaci) alone can incur economic damage on plant growth and vigour.

Pictures taken by Jim Davis on his trip to Jamaica are presented below showing insect and viral damage to hot pepper at Brampton Farm:

   

In recent work carried out in Barbados, in validating a production system for hot pepper, the following was reported:

A system of windbreaks was planted to keep out whiteflies. Coupled with this, sticky traps and an insecticide were used. Bright yellow plastic containers painted with grease on the inside, were placed at ground level. A number of straps (500) were distributed over the 0.91 ha plot at equal distances. The 3-week old seedlings were drenched with a systemic insecticide, Admire 2F®, a.i. imidacloprid, at a rate of 2.4 l/ha (2 pints/ac). The pH of the solution was adjusted to 4.5 before mixing the Admire 2F®. The main target insects were whitefly and aphid. Immediately, after transplanting Diazinon®, (an organophosphate), was sprayed against whitefly and other insects. The rate of application was 1.4 l/ha (1 pint/ac). This contact insecticide was sprayed another time on 8th July 1998 targeting a Heliothis sp. which drilled holes in the berries within which the larvae fed. Sherpa®, a.i. cypermethrin, was also sprayed on 16th April 1998 against the same insect, at a rate of 165 ml/ha (75 ml/ac in 30 gallons of water). In July, fungi and bacterial rots on berries and leaves were combated by two sprays 8 July 1998 and 23 July 1998, of Safer Insecticidal Soap® at 11 l/ha (1 gallon/ac) mixed with Spraytech Oil® at 1.4 l/ha (1 pint/ac).

 

 

 

This database is copyright Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute except where otherwise indicated in Source or copyright statements.
CARDI Management must be contacted for permission to copy or redistribute this material.
This information product was prepared under the auspices of the Caribbean Agricultural Information Service (CAIS) with the
financial support of the ACP-EU Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA).