DOCSLIB.ORG

Field Assessment of Adhesion and Hatch Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Field Assessment of Adhesion and Hatch Of REVIEW ARTICLE ▼ Vineyard managers and researchers seek sustainable solutions for mealybugs, a changing pest complex ▼ by Kent M. Daane, Monica L. Cooper, In an uncontrolled vine mealybug Serguei V. Triapitsyn, Vaughn M. Walton, infestation in a San Glenn Y. Yokota, David R. Haviland, Joaquin Valley raisin- Walt J. Bentley, Kris E. Godfrey grape vineyard, mealybug and honey- and Lynn R. Wunderlich dew accumulate on the fruit, canes and leaves. Mealybugs have become increasingly important vineyard pests — a result of their direct damage to the vine, their role in transmitting grapevine leafroll viruses, and the costs for their control. Numerous mealybug species are found in vineyards, and each has ▼ An obscure mealy- different biological traits that af- bug infestation fect sustainable control options. We in a Central Coast wine-grape vineyard review the mealybug pests and their shows growth of sooty molds that are natural enemies to provide some often associated with clarifi cation about current trends in mealybug excretion (honeydew), espe- biological control tactics and needed cially in cooler grape directions for future work. regions. ver the past 100 years, a series of different mealybug species have beenO found in California vineyards, with fi ve species currently causing damage and a sixth posing a threat. Mealybugs have needlelike mouth- specimens collected on coastal buck- Mealybug pests parts that feed on the plant’s phloem, wheat in California in 1900 and was which contains the nutrients needed Most of California’s vineyard mealy- the only vineyard mealybug thought to for mealybug development. As mealy- bugs are invasive species — although be native to North America (Miller et bugs digest their food, they excrete a some of them have been here for nearly al. 1984) until the arrival of Ferrisia gilli sugar-rich fl uid called “honeydew.” 100 years. For newly invasive species, Gullan. Grape mealybugs can be found All vineyard mealybugs can feed on eradication should be the fi rst response. throughout California’s Central Valley the vine’s trunk, canes, leaves or fruit, If eradication is not feasible, then an and coastal grape regions, as well as and some species feed on vine roots. integrated program that includes clas- in Oregon and Washington vineyards. Crop loss occurs when mealybugs sical biological controls should be con- Typically, there are two generations per infest fruit or excrete honeydew that sidered. For native mealybug species, year (Geiger and Daane 2001). For most covers fruit and leaves, often result- resident natural enemies often provide of the year, grape mealybugs are found ing in sooty mold growth, defoliation substantial control or can be manipu- under the bark, but during the second and sunburned fruit. Continuous high lated to improve their effectiveness. generation (beginning in June) they levels of infestation over successive The history of each mealybug species in move into grape clusters, especially years may also lead to the deteriora- California and its distinctive biological clusters in contact with the trunk or tion of vines. And many mealybug characteristics affect the level of eco- spurs. The population overwinters as species transmit viruses such as grape- nomic damage and potential effective- eggs or small nymphs under the bark, vine leafroll (see sidebar, page 174). ness of biological controls. with a required diapause that helps to However, these mealybug pests can be Pseudococcus. The grape mealybug, synchronize generations each year. controlled, to some extent, by natural Pseudococcus maritimus (Ehrhorn), is one The longtailed mealybug, Pseudo- enemies that are often present in sus- of the oldest California vineyard pests coccus longispinus (Targioni Tozzetti) is tainable management programs. (Essig 1914). It was fi rst described from believed to be of Austro-Oriental origin http://CaliforniaAgriculture.ucop.edu • OctOber–December 2008 167 A B Africa, South Africa, Argentina, the Middle East and Mexico. In California, crawlers blown by wind or carried by animals and farm machinery aid its spread. Infested nursery stock (Haviland et al. 2005) and pomace from the wine-grape crush (see sidebar, page 172) can also harbor this pest. Vine mealybug has a number of traits that make it particularly dam- C D aging and difficult to control. Most notably, there are four to seven annual generations in much of California’s grape-growing regions, resulting in rapid population growth. Vine mealy- bug also feeds on all parts of the vine throughout the season, resulting in a portion of the population protected under the bark. It can feed on a num- ber of plant species; however, while it is common in Europe on fig Ficus( sp.), Common mealybug species in vineyards there are no reports on this host from E are (A) grape mealybug, with orange-to- red ostiolar secretion near the head and California. The closely related citrus anus (the fluid is often a defensive tactic to mealybug, Planococcus citri (Risso), has ward off predators); (B) obscure mealybug; been found on vines but has never been (C) longtailed mealybug; (D) vine mealybug recorded as an economically important approaching a grape berry; and (E) Gill’s mealybug with glasslike rods brushed pest in vineyards. aside to show adult wax pattern. Ferrisia. Ferrisia gilli Gullan is a close relative of the striped mealybug (F. virgata Cockerell), which is probably native to southeastern North America. In fact, until recently the California population was considered to be the (Ben-Dov 1994). This cosmopolitan spe- Biological traits that make obscure striped mealybug, but differences in cies has been resident in California since mealybug more damaging than grape its adult morphology and economic at least 1933 and is best known as a pest mealybug are that it readily feeds on importance in pistachios and almonds of ornamental plants. Longtailed mealy- leaves (causing leaf damage and rain- prompted studies that led to its new bug has been limited to Central Coast ing honeydew down onto grape clus- species description in 2003 (Gullan et vineyards, where it has three generations ters), it can survive on common weeds al. 2003). Damaging vineyard popula- yearly. Unlike the other Pseudococcus spe- such as malva and burclover (Walton tions have only recently been found in cies discussed, longtailed mealybugs give and Pringle 2004b), it has three or four the Sierra foothills. Because F. gilli — birth to live crawlers (1st-instar mealy- overlapping generations per year, and commonly called Gill’s mealybug, after bugs, which disperse before they settle it excretes more honeydew. It is limited, Raymond Gill — is so new to scientists, and feed) rather than depositing eggs. however, to the cooler grape-growing research on its seasonal occurrence The origin of the obscure mealybug, regions, and is most commonly found in has, to date, only been conducted on Pseudococcus viburni (Signoret), is un- Central Coast vineyards. pistachios grown in the Central Valley known, and both Australia and South Planococcus. The vine mealy- (Haviland et al. 2006). There, the mealy- America have been suggested. While bug, Planococcus ficus (Signoret), is bug has three annual generations. In known to be in North America since a relatively new invasive species to fall, adult females produce crawlers that the early 1900s, its history is poorly Californian and Mexican vineyards overwinter in protected crevices of the documented due in part to earlier taxo- (Daane et al. 2006). In 1994, it was trunk and scaffolding branches. During nomic confusion — it is a close relative found in Coachella Valley table grapes, bud-break, the overwintering nymphs of the grape mealybug and was often although it probably entered the state migrate to buds to feed; they become misidentified (Miller et al. 1984). The years before. Vine mealybug has al- adults between late May and mid-June obscure mealybug is primarily a pest of ways been associated with vineyards and give live birth to crawlers, the first ornamental plants but is also found in and was first identified as a new spe- of two in-season generations. Currently, coastal vineyards, especially in associa- cies in the Crimea on grapes in 1868. It studies are ongoing in El Dorado tion with the Argentine ant, Linepithema has since spread and is now a key pest County to determine this mealybug’s humile (Mayr) (Phillips and Sherk 1991). in the vineyards of Europe, northern seasonal occurrence on grapes. 168 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURE • VOLUme 62, NUmber 4 Maconellicoccus. The pink hibiscus A B mealybug, Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green), is an excellent example of an in- vasive species that presents a significant threat to California grapes but has been limited by a successful classical biologi- cal control program (Roltsch et al. 2006). Pink hibiscus mealybug is probably native to Southeast Asia or Australia. It invaded Egypt in 1912, Hawaii in 1984, the Caribbean islands in 1994, Florida in 2002, and reached northern Mexico C D and Southern California in 2003. It has a wide host range of more than 200 plant species. Under optimum temperature conditions, this mealybug can have explosive populations with more than 600 eggs per ovisac and up to 15 genera- tions per year. Natural enemies Hundreds of natural enemies can Common mealybug predators include lady beetles. (A) An adult Scymnus species feeds on a attack mealybugs, making this brief grape mealybug. (B) A large mealybug destroyer larva near the smaller obscure mealybug; review incomplete. Here, we catalog the larvae of many of these lady beetle species have waxy filaments to mimic mealybugs and the more common natural enemies and reduce interference from mealybug-tending ants. (C) A cecidomyiid larva prepares to feed on their potential impact. grape mealybugs. (D) A third-instar green lacewing (Chrysoperla carnea) larva attacks a grape mealybug, prompting it to secrete a ball of red ostiolar fluid in defense. A number of predators contribute to mealybug control; a few specialize on mealybugs, while most are general- Other beetles.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Abiotic and Biotic Pest Refuges Hamper Biological Control of Mealybugs in California Vineyards K.M
    ____________________________________ Abiotic and biotic pest refuges in California vineyards 389 ABIOTIC AND BIOTIC PEST REFUGES HAMPER BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF MEALYBUGS IN CALIFORNIA VINEYARDS K.M. Daane,1 R. Malakar-Kuenen,1 M. Guillén,2 W.J. Bentley3, M. Bianchi,4 and D. González,2 1 Division of Insect Biology, University of California, Berkeley, California, U.S.A. 2 Department of Entomology, University of California, Riverside, California, U.S.A. 3 University of California Statewide IPM Program, Kearney Agricultural Center, Parlier, California, U.S.A. 4 University of California Cooperative Extension, San Luis Obispo, California, U.S.A. INTRODUCTION Four mealybug species cause economic damage in California vineyards. These are the grape mealy- bug, Pseudococcus maritimus (Ehrhorn); obscure mealybug, Pseudococcus viburni (Signoret); longtailed mealybug, Pseudococcus longispinus (Targioni-Tozzeti); and vine mealybug, Planococcus ficus (Signoret) (Godfrey et al., 2002). The grape, obscure, and longtailed mealybugs belong to the Pseudococcus maritimus-malacearum complex–a taxonomically close group of mealybugs (Wilkey and McKenzie, 1961). However, while the origins of the grape and longtailed mealybugs are believed to be in North America, the ancestral lines of the obscure mealybug are unclear. Regardless, these three species have been known as pests in North America for nearly 100 years. The vine mealybug, in contrast, was first identified in California in the Coachella Valley in the early 1990s (Gill, 1994). It has since spread into California’s San Joaquin Valley and central coast regions, with new infestations reported each year. The four species are similar in appearance; however, mealybugs in the P. maritimus- malacearum complex have longer caudal filaments than vine mealybug (Godfrey et al., 2002).
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Control of Insect Pests in Iraq: 1) an Overview of Parasitoids and Predators Research Development
    Academic Journal of Entomology 10 (2): 10-18, 2017 ISSN 1995-8994 © IDOSI Publications, 2017 DOI: 10.5829/idosi.aje.2017.10.18 Biological Control of Insect Pests in Iraq: 1) an Overview of Parasitoids and Predators Research Development Hussain F. Alrubeai Ministry of Science and Technology, Directorate of Agricultural Research, Baghdad, Iraq Abstract: This review consider the first attempt to retrospect biological control activities of insect pests using parasitoids and predators in Iraq from its early beginning. The technology, introduction and implementation faced and still many obstacles, the most important are nation unrest and relaying heavily upon insecticides, which constrains progress in this field. However, successful cases of biological control using parasitoids and predators within the contest of Integrated Pest Management philosophy have been reported in Iraq. The first attempt occurred in the 1980s when lab reared of the predators, Exochomus nigripennis and Dicrodiplosis manihoti, were released in the field to control mealy bug, followed by rearing and releasing of the native parasitoid, Apanteles angaleti to control carob moth, Ectomyelois ceratoniae infesting pomegranate fruits and IPM programs of releasing the egg parasitoid, Trichogramma spp. to control Ephestia spp. in orchards and date fruit warehouses, spiny bollworm, Earias insulana and the lesser date moth, Btrachedra amydraula. Unfortunately, most of the studies in this area have been published in Arabic and are, therefore, not readily available internationally. Key word: Biological Control Parasitoid Predator Iraq INTRODUCTION integrates practices for economic control of pests. IPM aims to suppress pest populations below the economic Biological control (BC), especially using insects injury level, taking into account economical, ecological predators and parasitoids to control pest insects, is a and social criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • Atti Accademia Nazionale Italiana Di Entomologia Anno LIX, 2011: 9-27
    ATTI DELLA ACCADEMIA NAZIONALE ITALIANA DI ENTOMOLOGIA RENDICONTI Anno LIX 2011 TIPOGRAFIA COPPINI - FIRENZE ISSN 0065-0757 Direttore Responsabile: Prof. Romano Dallai Presidente Accademia Nazionale Italiana di Entomologia Coordinatore della Redazione: Dr. Roberto Nannelli La responsabilità dei lavori pubblicati è esclusivamente degli autori Registrazione al Tribunale di Firenze n. 5422 del 24 maggio 2005 INDICE Rendiconti Consiglio di Presidenza . Pag. 5 Elenco degli Accademici . »6 Verbali delle adunanze del 18-19 febbraio 2011 . »9 Verbali delle adunanze del 13 giugno 2011 . »15 Verbali delle adunanze del 18-19 novembre 2011 . »20 Commemorazioni GIUSEPPE OSELLA – Sandro Ruffo: uomo e scienziato. Ricordi di un collaboratore . »29 FRANCESCO PENNACCHIO – Ermenegildo Tremblay . »35 STEFANO MAINI – Giorgio Celli (1935-2011) . »51 Tavola rotonda su: L’ENTOMOLOGIA MERCEOLOGICA PER LA PREVENZIONE E LA LOTTA CONTRO GLI INFESTANTI NELLE INDUSTRIE ALIMENTARI VACLAV STEJSKAL – The role of urban entomology to ensure food safety and security . »69 PIERO CRAVEDI, LUCIANO SÜSS – Sviluppo delle conoscenze in Italia sugli organismi infestanti in post- raccolta: passato, presente, futuro . »75 PASQUALE TREMATERRA – Riflessioni sui feromoni degli insetti infestanti le derrate alimentari . »83 AGATINO RUSSO – Limiti e prospettive delle applicazioni di lotta biologica in post-raccolta . »91 GIACINTO SALVATORE GERMINARA, ANTONIO DE CRISTOFARO, GIUSEPPE ROTUNDO – Attività biologica di composti volatili dei cereali verso Sitophilus spp. » 101 MICHELE MAROLI – La contaminazione entomatica nella filiera degli alimenti di origine vegetale: con- trollo igienico sanitario e limiti di tolleranza . » 107 Giornata culturale su: EVOLUZIONE ED ADATTAMENTI DEGLI ARTROPODI CONTRIBUTI DI BASE ALLA CONOSCENZA DEGLI INSETTI ANTONIO CARAPELLI, FRANCESCO NARDI, ROMANO DALLAI, FRANCESCO FRATI – La filogenesi degli esa- podi basali, aspetti controversi e recenti acquisizioni .
    [Show full text]
  • Specialist and Generalist Cecidomyiid Predators on Aphids, Mites, Scale Insects and Other Invertebrates
    Entomologica, Bari, 38 (2004): 29-40 KEITH M. HARRIS 81 Linden Way, Ripley, Woking, Surrey, GU23 6LP, UK. E-mail: [email protected]. Specialist and generalist cecidomyiid predators on aphids, mites, scale insects and other invertebrates ABSTRACT Published information on predaceous Cecidomyiidae is briefly reviewed and check-lists of the known species of specialist predators on aphids, mites and scale insects are provided. Two species are now used as commercially marketed biocontrol agents, namely Aphidoletes aphidimyza (Rondani) against aphids and Feltiella acarisuga (Vallot) against tetranychid mites. Larvae of most known species of specialist predators (currently assigned to Coccodiplosis De Meijere, Dentifibula Felt, Diadiplosis Felt, Dicrodiplosis Kieffer, Megommata Barnes and Triommata Barnes) feed on Coccoidea (mealybugs and scale insects). Many species in the large and cosmopolitan genus Lestodiplosis Kieffer have been recorded as specialist predators on various invertebrate hosts, including mites, cecidomyiid larvae and lepidopterous caterpillars, but recent observations in the UK indicate that at least some of these ‘species’ may represent opportunistic general predators feeding on a range of different hosts. Past and present studies of the Cecidomyiidae have been hampered by inadequate taxonomic treatment and there is an obvious need for new biosystematic studies to provide a better information base for further research and application. Key words: Cecidomyiidae, predators, aphids, mites, scale insects, mealybugs. 1. INTRODUCTION About 5300 species of Cecidomyiidae have been formally named and described but the cecidomyiid fauna of most parts of the world is still poorly known. There must therefore be many undescribed and unstudied species awaiting discovery and much to be learned about their biology.
    [Show full text]
  • Sveučilište Josipa Jurja Strossmayera
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Repository of Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek SVEUČILIŠTE JOSIPA JURJA STROSSMAYERA POLJOPRIVREDNI FAKULTET U OSIJEKU Gabrijela Kuštera Diplomski studij Ekološka poljoprivreda UTJECAJ BENEFITNIH KUKACA NA PRINOS USJEVA U EKOLOŠKOJ POLJOPRIVREDI Diplomski rad Osijek, 2018. SVEUČILIŠTE JOSIPA JURJA STROSSMAYERA POLJOPRIVREDNI FAKULTET U OSIJEKU Gabrijela Kuštera Diplomski studij Ekološka poljoprivreda UTJECAJ BENEFITNIH KUKACA NA PRINOS USJEVA U EKOLOŠKOJ POLJOPRIVREDI Diplomski rad Povjerenstvo za ocjenu i obranu diplomskog rada: 1. Prof. dr. sc. Zlatko Puškadija 2. Prof. dr. sc. Bojan Stipešević, mentor 3. Izv. prof. dr. sc. Ivana Majić Osijek, 2018. Sadržaj 1. Uvod 1 2. Pregled literature 2 2.1. Ekološka poljoprivreda 2 2.2. Prednosti i nedostaci ekološke poljoprivrede u odnosu na konvencionalnu i 3 integriranu 2.3. Ekološki prihvatljive mjere zaštite bilja 4 2.4. Biološke mjere zaštite bilja 5 2.4.1. Klasična metoda zaštite bilja 6 2.4.2. Konzervacijska metoda zaštite bilja 7 2.4.3. Augmentativna metoda zaštite bilja 7 2.5. Benefitni kukci 8 2.5.1. Oprašivači 9 2.5.1.1. Medonosna pčela (Apis mellifera, L.) 10 2.5.1.2. Solitarne pčele 12 2.5.1.3. Bumbari (Bombus spp.) 13 2.5.2. Predatori 16 2.5.2.1. Red Hemiptera (rilčari) - podred Heteroptera (raznokrilci, stjenice) 16 2.5.2.1.1. Porodica Anthocoridae 16 2.5.2.1.2. Porodica Geocoridae 17 2.5.2.1.3. Porodica Miridae 18 2.5.2.1.4. Porodica Nabidae 19 2.5.2.1.5. Porodica Pentatomidae (potporodica Asopinae) 19 2.5.2.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. XIV, No. 3, March, 1952 443 Additions and Corrections To
    Vol. XIV, No. 3, March, 1952 443 Additions and Corrections to Bryan's Check List of the Hawaiian Diptera1 By D. ELMO HARDY UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII, COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION (Presidential Address, delivered, in part, December 10, 1951) R. C. L. Perkins made the first comprehensive collection of the Ha waiian flies and the dipterous portions of the "Fauna Hawaiiensis" were based largely upon material which he had collected. The "Fauna Ha waiiensis" (Grimshaw, 1901-1902; Speiser, 1902, and Perkins 1910, 1913) recorded one hundred ninety-two species from the Territory. These were arranged in twenty-seven families and apparently represented one hun dred thirty-five endemic species and fifty-seven which had been intro duced. Since that time the order was not reviewed until Bryan's excellent work^ (1934 "Proceedings"2 8:399-458). Except for the "Fauna Hawaii ensis" this is the most important contribution which has been made to the literature pertaining to the Hawaiian Diptera. It has proved an in valuable aid to the study of our flies. Bryan's check list contained three hundred twenty-nine species and one variety. At least fifteen of these were incorrectly recorded from the islands or are synonyms of other species in our fauna. Some of the others are synonyms of species not pre viously recognized from Hawaii and many of the names were based upon misidentifications. Bryan recorded forty-two families in his list. Since Bryan's list, an additional one hundred sixty-two species and one subspecies have been recorded. In addition to these, sixty-plus species have been recorded, by genus only, as new records for the Territory, but at present specific names are not available for these.
    [Show full text]
  • Arthropod Management in Vineyards
    Arthropod Management in Vineyards Noubar J. Bostanian • Charles Vincent Rufus Isaacs Editors Arthropod Management in Vineyards: Pests, Approaches, and Future Directions Editors Dr. Noubar J. Bostanian Dr. Charles Vincent Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Horticultural Research and Horticultural Research and Development Center Development Center 430 Gouin Blvd. 430 Gouin Blvd. Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, QC, Canada Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, QC, Canada Dr. Rufus Isaacs Department of Entomology Michigan State University East Lansing, MI, USA ISBN 978-94-007-4031-0 ISBN 978-94-007-4032-7 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-4032-7 Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg New York London Library of Congress Control Number: 2012939840 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifi cally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfi lms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifi cally for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication of this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the Publisher’s location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer.
    [Show full text]
  • Diptera Chapter 10
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal BioRisk 4(2): 553–602 (2010) Diptera. Chapter 10 553 doi: 10.3897/biorisk.4.53 RESEARCH ARTICLE BioRisk www.pensoftonline.net/biorisk Diptera Chapter 10 Marcela Skuhravá1, Michel Martinez2, Alain Roques3 1 Bítovská 1227/9, 140 00 Praha 4, Czech Republic 2 INRA Centre de Biologie pour la Gestion des Popu- lations (CBGP), Campus International de Baillarguet, 34988 Montferrier-sur-Lez, France 3 INRA UR633 Zoologie Forestière, 2163 Av. Pomme de pin, 45075 Orléans, France Corresponding authors: Marcela Skuhravá ([email protected]), Michel Martinez ([email protected]. fr), Alain Roques ([email protected]) Academic editor: David Roy | Received 4 February 2010 | Accepted 24 May 2010 | Published 6 July 2010 Citation: Skuhravá M et al. (2010) Diptera. Chapter 10. In: Roques A et al. (Eds) Alien terrestrial arthropods of Europe. BioRisk 4(2): 553–602. doi: 10.3897/biorisk.4.53 Abstract Of the 19,400 native species and 125 families forming the European diptera fauna, 98 species (less than 0.5%) in 22 families are alien to Europe. Th ese aliens constitute 66 species (18 families) of the suborder Brachycera and 32 species (4 families) of the suborder Nematocera. By family in this category, there are 23 Cecidomyiidae species, 18 Drosophilidae, nine Phoridae, eight Tachinidae and seven Culicidae. Another 32 fl y species belonging to fi ve families are considered to be alienin Europe. Th ese invasives native to other European countries are composed of 14 species of Cecidomyiidae, seven Syrphidae, fi ve Culicidae and three species each of Anthomyiidae and Tephritidae.
    [Show full text]
  • Diptera. Chapter 10 Marcela Skuhrava, Michel Martinez, Alain Roques
    Diptera. Chapter 10 Marcela Skuhrava, Michel Martinez, Alain Roques To cite this version: Marcela Skuhrava, Michel Martinez, Alain Roques. Diptera. Chapter 10. Alien terrestrial arthropods of Europe, 4 (1), Pensoft Publishers, 2010, BioRisk, 978-9546425546. 10.3897/biorisk.4.53. hal- 02821207 HAL Id: hal-02821207 https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02821207 Submitted on 6 Jun 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. A peer-reviewed open-access journal BioRisk 4(2): 553–602 (2010) Diptera. Chapter 10 553 doi: 10.3897/biorisk.4.53 RESEARCH ARTICLE BioRisk www.pensoftonline.net/biorisk Diptera Chapter 10 Marcela Skuhravá1, Michel Martinez2, Alain Roques3 1 Bítovská 1227/9, 140 00 Praha 4, Czech Republic 2 INRA Centre de Biologie pour la Gestion des Popu- lations (CBGP), Campus International de Baillarguet, 34988 Montferrier-sur-Lez, France 3 INRA UR633 Zoologie Forestière, 2163 Av. Pomme de pin, 45075 Orléans, France Corresponding authors: Marcela Skuhravá ([email protected]), Michel Martinez ([email protected]. fr), Alain Roques ([email protected]) Academic editor: David Roy | Received 4 February 2010 | Accepted 24 May 2010 | Published 6 July 2010 Citation: Skuhravá M et al.
    [Show full text]
  • California Agriculture
    California Agriculture Volume 62, Number 4 2008 Page 167 Vineyard managers and researchers seek sustainable solutions for mealybugs, a changing pest complex Kent M. Daane Monica L. Cooper Serquei V. Triapitsyn Vaughn M. Walton Glenn Y. Yokota David R. Haviland Walter Joseph Bentley Kris Godfrey Lynn R. Wunderlich Copyright c 2008 by Regents of the University of California, unless otherwise noted. This article is part of the collected publications of California Agriculture. California Agriculture is archived by the eScholarship Repository of the California Digital Library. Abstract Mealybugs have become increasingly important vineyard pests — a result of their direct damage to the vine, their role in transmitting grapevine leafroll viruses, and the costs for their control. Numerous mealybug species are found in vineyards, and each has different biological traits that affect sustainable control options. We review the mealybug pests and their natural enemies to provide some clarification about current trends in biological control tactics and needed directions for future work. Keywords: mealybugs, biological control, sustainable agriculture Suggested Citation: Kent M. Daane, Monica L. Cooper, Serquei V. Triapitsyn, Vaughn M. Walton, Glenn Y. Yokota, David R. Haviland, Walter Joseph Bentley, Kris Godfrey, and Lynn R. Wunderlich (2008) “Vineyard managers and researchers seek sustainable solutions for mealybugs, a changing pest complex”, California Agriculture: Vol. 62: No. 4, Page 167. http://repositories.cdlib.org/anrcs/californiaagriculture/v62/n4/p167 REVIEW ARTICLE ▼ Vineyard managers and researchers seek sustainable solutions for mealybugs, a changing pest complex ▼ by Kent M. Daane, Monica L. Cooper, In an uncontrolled vine mealybug Serguei V. Triapitsyn, Vaughn M. Walton, infestation in a San Glenn Y.
    [Show full text]
  • An Update of the Irish Diptera List. Dipterists Digest
    Dipterists Digest 1999 6, 57-60 Corrections and changes to the Diptera Checklist (1) - Editor Corrections in Cecidomyiidae were supplied by Margaret Redfern, and Raymond J. Gagné who has compared the list with his world catalogue of the family in preparation. As indicated in the Review of the German checklist (p. 62 below), a comparison has been made with the British list to assess the differences. This led to detection of some errors in the British list, which are included among those indicated below. There are also about 20 differences in specific nomenclature, authorship or publication dates, of which the validity has not yet been resolved and most of these have been referred to specialists. In the notes below where names of genera and species are given as in the checklist, authorship is not stated here. Corrections are in page order; changes are listed under families; names new to the British list are given in bold type. The notes below result in loss of five names due to synonymy (indicated by *) and addition of 16 species, a net gain of 11 resulting in a new total of 6679 species. Corrections p. 24 Line 7 from bottom, delete b in Robbins (1995b); only one reference in that year is cited. p. 27 Delete Anthodiplosis from synonymy under AMETRODIPLOSIS. APHIDOLETES urticariae should be amended to urticaria. Delete acarisuga* under ARTHROCNODAX (this species was also listed, correctly, under FELTIELLA). The authorship of Camptodiplosis auriculariae should be amended to Buxton & Barnes. p. 28 The authorship of Contarinia artemisiae should be Rübsaamen, not Kieffer. p.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Management of Arthropod Pests and Insect Borne Diseases Integrated Management of Plant Pests and Diseases
    Integrated Management of Arthropod Pests and Insect Borne Diseases Integrated Management of Plant Pests and Diseases Published: Volume 1 General Concepts in Integrated Pest and Disease Management edited by A. Ciancio and K.G. Mukerji ISBN 978-1-4020-6060-1 Volume 2 Integrated Management and Biocontrol of Vegetable and Grain Crops Nematodes edited by A. Ciancio and K.G. Mukerji ISBN 978-1-4020-6062-5 Volume 3 Integrated Management of Diseases Caused by Fungi, Phytoplasma and Bacteria edited by A. Ciancio and K.G. Mukerji ISBN 978-1-4020-8570-3 Volume 4 Integrated Management of Fruit Crops Nematodes edited by A. Ciancio and K.G. Mukerji ISBN 978-1-4020-9857-4 Integrated Management of Arthropod Pests and Insect Borne Diseases Edited by A. Ciancio C.N.R., Bari, Italy and K.G. Mukerji University of Delhi, India Editors Aurelio Ciancio K.G.Mukerji† Consiglio Nazionale delle University of Delhi Ricerche Dept. Botany Istituto per la Protezione delle New Delhi-110007 Piante India Via G. Amendola, 122/D [email protected] 70126 Bari Italy [email protected] ISBN 978-90-481-2463-3 e-ISBN 978-90-481-8606-8 DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-8606-8 Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg London New York Library of Congress Control Number: 2010921597 c Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010 No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.
    [Show full text]