DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Control of Noxious Weeds in Oregon

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological Control of Noxious Weeds in Oregon Biological Control of What is Biological Weed Control? DALMATIAN TOADFLAX GORSE Linaria dalmatica Ulex europaeus Invasive noxious weeds in Oregon cost millions of dollars It is important to make sure the correct species of biocontrol Key to Biocontrol Agent Status Noxious Weeds in Oregon in economic and environmental damage. Biological agents are released, to use the most effective species, and to Gorse seed weevil control is a tool vegetation managers employ to help The following general information is provided for each document the release and establishment of weed biocontrol Exapion ulicis naturally suppress weed infestations. This pamphlet agents. biocontrol agent. shows many of the common biological agents you may Year: 1956 Distribution: Widespread A guide to common biological Since 1947, 77 species of biocontrol agents have been released Year: Year of introduction. encounter in Oregon. Attack rate: Heavy Control: Good control agents found in Oregon in Oregon against 32 species of targeted weeds. A total of Distribution: Distribution of agent in host infested counties. Collectability: Mass Release No. 100 Classical biological control is the use of selected natural Dalmatian toadflax stem weevil 67 species are established. The majority of the bioagents Widespread >50% Limited <50% Timing: Apr–May Method: Sweep net/ enemies to control targeted weeds. Most of our worst are insects (71), plus three mites, one nematode, and two Mecinus janthiniformis racquet Stage: Adult Comment: No need for Attack rate: noxious weeds originated from other continents. pathogens. Successful projects can generate 15:1 benefit to Percent of plants attacked. Year: 2001 Distribution: Widespread redistribution. Prospective biocontrol agents are thoroughly tested to cost ratios. There are a number of non-approved natural Heavy >70% Medium >30% Light >10% Slight <10% Attack rate: Heavy Control: Excellent ensure they will be safe to release in North America. enemies found on some weeds. Biocontrol agents are listed Control: Observed reduction of weed density or seed Collectability: Mass Release No. 100 Once approved, they are released at nursery sites where here under host weed, type of agent, and scientific name. Timing: May–Jun Method: Sweep net/racquet they can establish resident populations. Surplus bioagents production. Stage: Adult Comment: Stand reductions at many Generally, the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA), are later harvested and released at other infestations Poor: little change <10% Fair: noticeable change >10% sites. A sibling species M. janthinus attacks yellow the USDA Animal Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), throughout Oregon. It may take several years for their Good: significant control <90% Excellent >90% control toadflax. and cooperators can provide needed biocontrol agents at populations to reach levels that effectively control the Collectability: no cost. Whenever approved biocontrol agents are shipped Availability of agents for redistribution. target weeds. across state lines, a PPQ 526 permit from APHIS is required. Mass—available for mass collection. FIELD BINDWEED Biocontrol agents rarely eradicate entire infestations. Parties interested in implementing biocontrol are encouraged Limited—available in limited numbers or difficult to collect. Convolvulus arvense The goal is to weaken weeds so desirable vegetation can to contact ODA or APHIS to determine the availability and N/A—not available at this time. Gorse spider mite Field bindweed gall mite Tetranychus lintearius compete and suppress the weeds below an economically need for biocontrol agents of specific weeds. Release number: Recommended minimum number to Aceria malherbae or environmentally damaging level. Biocontrol works establish a new colony. Year: 1994 best when integrated with land management practices Nontarget Impacts Distribution: Widespread Timing: Year: 1999 that improve desirable competitive vegetation. Even after Optimum time of year to redistribute. Distribution: Widespread Attack rate: Light Most weed biocontrol agents are safe to use throughout control, some weed infestations may rebound. Generally Life stage: Attack rate: Heavy Control: Poor Oregon. However, the thistle seed head weevil Rhinocyllus Life stage of biocontrol agent best suited for Collectability: Limited resident biocontrol agent populations regain control collection and establishment. Control: Good after several years. Biological control requires a long- conicus (see below) was found to attack native thistles a Collectability: Mass Release No. 500 term commitment to weed management and may not be decade after its introduction in 1979. It is therefore not Method: Preferred method to collect agents from Release No. 1000 Timing: Aug–Sep recommended for use as a biocontrol agent of thistles. well-established populations. Timing: Jun–Sep Method: Harvest infested suitable at all infestations. plant material ODA curtailed redistribution of this weevil in 1989 due to its Sweep net—heavy duty canvas net to dislodge agents from Method: Harvest Biocontrol agents affect weeds by either directly targeting Stage: All impact on native thistles. USDA APHIS restricted interstate vegetation, can be used in conjunction with a racquet. Stage: All plant tissues through their removal or destruction, or Comment: Ineffective movement of the weevil in 2000. Current protocols for host Aerial net—lightweight net for fragile flying insects. Comment: Mostly in indirectly by causing galls, that interfere with tissue Northeastern Oregon. Use about one sandwich bag of due to predatory mite. specificity testing would have prevented the introduction of Aspirate—special aspirator to suck insects into a vial. functions and stress the plants. infested plant material. Look for gnarled leaves. Multiple generations per this weevil. The weevil is widespread and commonly found Beating sheet—knock insects off plants with a racquet onto year. on bull, Canada, Italian, milk, musk, and slenderflower Benefits of biological control include: host specific canvas sheet and collect with aspirator. Field bindweed moth to target weed, self-perpetuating populations, thistles. It has however, significantly controlled weedy thistles Hand pick—collect by hand. synchronization with target weed lifecycle, ability at various locations in Oregon. Light trap—UV light to attract night flying insects to white Tyta luctuosa to locate host plants in variable environments, and sheet or funnel trap. Year: 1998 economic feasibility on low-value lands. Vacuum—motorized vacuum to suck insects from plants. Distribution: Limited Attack rate: Light Some of the disadvantages of biological control include: Harvest—collect infested plant materials (i.e. galls, seed heads, roots which can be released or rear agents out). Control: Poor slow rate of impact, dependence on minimum weed Collectability: Limited density, fluctuating availability of agents, and limited Release No. 50 efficacy in variable environments. Timing: Jun–Sept Method: Aerial net Stage: Adult Comment: Flush adults and sweep net, one to two Adult weevil and egg sites (brown bumps) on thistle bracts (R). adults per vial. Mostly in Willamette Valley. KNAPWEED, DIFFUSE KNAPWEED, RUSSIAN for more information Centaurea diffusa Acroptilon repens = Rhapanticum repens KNAPWEED, MEADOW Knapweed root weevil Knapweed seed head moth Russian knapweed gall wasp Centaurea jacea x nigra = C. moncktonii Cyphocleonus achates Metzneria paucipunctella Aulacidea acroptilonica Oregon Department of Agriculture Year: 1993 Year: 1981 Year: 2014 (ODA) KNAPWEED, SPOTTED Distribution: Limited Distribution: Widespread Distribution: Limited Centaurea stoebe = C. maculata Attack rate: Heavy Attack rate: Light Control: Fair Attack rate: Slight Noxious Weed Control Program Control: Fair Collectability: Limited Control: Unknown 635 Capitol St. NE Sulfur knapweed root moth Collectability: Mass Release No. 200 Collectability: N/A Agapeta zoegana Release No. 50–100 Timing: March Release No. 50 Salem, OR 97301 Timing: Aug–Sept Method: Harvest seed heads Timing: May–Aug www.oregon.gov/ODA Year: 1987 Method: Hand pick Stage: Larva/pupa Method: Harvest Stage: Pupa Distribution: Widespread Stage: Adult Comment: Displaced by seed Banded knapweed Comment: Collect bouquets (503) 986-4621 Attack rate: Heavy Comment: Collect adults head weevils. Ineffective, often seed gall fly of infested plants. All female Control: Good under rosettes. Disperse upon release. parasitized. species. May become available Collectability: Limited Urophora affinis soon. ODA biocontrol projects Release No. 50–100 Year: 1975 Timing: July Knapweed root beetle http://go.usa.gov/39rkG Sphenoptera jugoslavica Distribution: Method: Light trap Stage: Adult Widespread Comment: Hard to collect in sufficient number. Year: 1980 Attack rate: Heavy Distribution: Widespread Control: Good Biocontrol release form Broad-nosed knapweed Lesser knapweed Attack rate: Heavy Collectability: Mass http://go.usa.gov/39rkz seed head weevil flower weevil Control: Fair Release No. 100 Bangasternus fausti Larinus minutus Collectability: Limited Timing: Jun–Aug Method: Aerial net Year: 1992 Release No. 100 Stage: Adult Comment: Little need for redistribution. USDA APHIS PPQ Year: 1989 Timing: Jun–Jul Method: Sweep net Stage: Adult Produces hard gall. Distribution: Widespread Distribution: Widespread Comment: Low density, hard to collect. Larva most Airport Business Center Attack rate: Heavy commonly encountered. Control: Good Attack rate: Heavy UV knapweed seed gall fly 6135 NE
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Release and Recovery of Bradyrrhoa Gilveolella on Rush Skeletonweed in Southern Idaho
    478 Session 9 Post-release Evaluation and Management The Release and Recovery of Bradyrrhoa gilveolella on Rush Skeletonweed in Southern Idaho J. L. Littlefield1, G. Markin2, J. Kashefi3, A. de Meij1 and J. Runyon2 1Montana State University, Department of Land Resources & Environmental Sciences, PO 173120, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA [email protected] [email protected] 2US Forest Service (retired), Rocky Mountain Research Station, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 1648 S. 7th Ave, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA [email protected] [email protected] 3USDA-ARS, European Biological Control Laboratory, Tsimiski 43, 7th Floor, Thessaloniki, Greece [email protected] Abstract Rush skeletonweed (Chondrilla juncea L.) is a major noxious weed in Idaho and other areas of the Pacific Northwest. A biological control program was implemented during the late 1970s in an attempt to manage infestations of rush skeletonweed and to limit its spread into new areas. Three agents, Cystiphora schmidti (Rübsaamen) (a gall midge), Aceria chondrillae (Canestrini) (a gall mite), and Puccinia chondrillina Bubak & Sydenham (a rust fungus) have been established in Idaho and other areas of the western United States. However these agents have provided only limited control of the weed. One additional agent, the root-feeding moth Bradyrrhoa gilveolella (Treitschke) (Lepidoptera, Pyralidae), was approved by the USDA-APHIS for release in the United States in 2002. Initial releases were made in southern Idaho in November 2002 and during the summers of 2003 through 2009 (excluding 2005). Releases were made using infested plants (the 2002 initial release) then utilizing first instar larvae and adults from greenhouse colonies. In total we released the moth at eight sites utilizing nine infested plants (est.
    [Show full text]
  • Coleoptera: Curculionidae, Lixinae)
    J. Entomol. Res. Soc., 14(2): 71-85, 2012 ISSN:1302-0250 New Faunistic Data on Selected Palaearctic Species of the Genus Larinus Dejean, 1821 (Coleoptera: Curculionidae, Lixinae) Levent GÜLTEKİN1 Attila PODLUSSÁNY2 1Atatürk University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Plant Protection, 25240 Erzurum, TURKEY. e-mail: [email protected] 2Hungarian Natural History Museum, H-1088 Budapest, Baross utca 13, HUNGARY. e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT Faunistic data regarding 50 species of the weevil genus Larinus Dejean, 1821 (Curculionidae: Lixinae) from the Palaearctic region are registered. New country records are: Larinus elegans Desbrochers, 1897 and L. puncticollis Capiomont, 1874 for Iran; L. filiformis Petri, 1907 for Georgia; L. fucatus Faust, 1891 and L. rectinasus Petri, 1907 for Syria; L. hedenborgi Boheman, 1845 for Cyprus; L. idoneus Gyllenhal, 1835 and L. darsi Capiomont, 1874 for Turkey; L. carinirostris Gyllenhal, 1835 for Bulgaria; L. curtus Hochhuth, 1851 and L. minutus Gyllenhal, 1835 for Croatia; L. leuzeae Fabre, 1870 for Spain; L. modestus Gyllenhal, 1835 for Syria and Israel; L. nubeculosus Gyllenhal, 1835 for Greece, Hungary, Slovenia; L. gravidus Olivier, 1807 and L. rectinasus Petri, 1907 for Greece; L. serratulae Becker, 1864 for Turkmenistan; L. sibiricus Gyllenhal, 1835 for Macedonia; L. sulphurifer Boheman, 1843 and L. ochreatus (Olivier, 1807) for Tunisia; L. syriacus Gyllenhal, 1835 for Croatia and Macedonia; L. vitellinus Gyllenhal, 1835 for Israel; L. vulpes (Olivier, 1807) for Bulgaria, Croatia, Serbia and Turkey. Keywords: Curculionidae, Larinus, new records, faunistic data. INTRODUCTION The weevil genus Larinus Dejean, 1821 (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Lixinae) contains many species which are closely associated with thistles, knapweeds or other noxious weeds belonging to the tribe Cardueae (Asteraceae) in the Palaearctic (Ter-Minassian, 1967; Zwölfer et al., 1971).
    [Show full text]
  • 2007 Annual Report Summary
    BIOLOGICAL CONTROL PROGRAM 2008 SUMMARY Developed by: Jim Brown Kris Godfrey Syed Khasimuddin Charles Pickett Mike Pitcairn William Roltsch Baldo Villegas Dale Woods Lue Yang CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE PLANT HEALTH AND PEST PREVENTION SERVICES INTEGRATED PEST CONTROL BRANCH Cite as: Dale M. Woods, Editor, 2009, Biological Control Program 2008 Annual Summary, California Department of Food and Agriculture, Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services, Sacramento, California. 69pp. CDFA CONTRIBUTING PERSONNEL Mr. Jim Brown Dr. Kris Godfrey Dr. Syed Khasimuddin Dr. Charles Pickett Dr. Mike Pitcairn Dr. William Roltsch Mr. Baldo Villegas Dr. Dale Woods Mr. Lue Yang CDFA Technical Assistants Ms. Penny Baxley Ms. Kathleen Cassanave Ms. Lia Chase Ms. Leann Horning Ms. Chia Moua Ms. Viola Popescu Ms. Nancy Saechao Mr. Ciprian Simon County Co-operator Acknowledgement The CDFA Biological Control Program greatly appreciates the many biologists and agriculture commissioners throughout the state whose co-operation and collaboration made this work possible. FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY This report contains unpublished information concerning work in progress. The contents of this report may not be published or reproduced in any form without the prior consent of the research workers involved. Cover developed by Baldo Villegas, Dale Woods, and John P. Mattia (Orange, CT). Infestation of perennial pepperweed east of Susanville, California. (Photo courtesy of Lassen County Weed Management Area). Inset photo shows severe infection of perennial pepperweed by the plant pathogen, Albugo candida. (Photo by Villegas and Woods) COOPERATING SCIENTISTS Ms. Jodi Aceves, Siskiyou County Department of Agriculture, Yreka, California Dr. Pat Akers, CDFA, Integrated Pest Control Branch, Sacramento, California Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Classical Biological Control of Nodding and Plumeless Thistles
    Biological Control 21, 206–213 (2001) doi:10.1006/bcon.2001.0940, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on Classical Biological Control of Nodding and Plumeless Thistles L. T. Kok Department of Entomology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061-0319 Received March 15, 2001; accepted March 20, 2001; published online May 22, 2001 group. Both thistles are winter annuals or biennials. Nodding (musk) thistle (Carduus thoermeri Wein- Seeds produced in summer form rosettes which over- mann in the Carduus nutans L. group) and plumeless winter. The rosettes resume development in spring, thistle (Carduus acanthoides L.) are introduced nox- followed by stem elongation and flowering. Nodding ious weeds of Eurasian origin. Both weeds are prob- thistle was first recorded in 1853 at Harrisburg, Penn- lematic in pastures, rangelands, and croplands and sylvania (Stuckey and Forsyth, 1971) and has been along state highways in many parts of the United reported in 40 of the 48 contiguous states (Frick, 1978). States. The success of both species of thistles is largely Plumeless thistle first appeared in 1878 at Camden, due to their prolific seed production, seed longevity, New Jersey and in Ohio (Batra, 1978) and is found in competitive ability, and lack of natural enemies. Clas- sical biological control of nodding thistle in Virginia 19 states (Frick, 1978). The two thistle species often has been achieved with three exotic thistle herbivores, occupy the same habitats in the northeast, such as Rhinocyllus conicus Froelich (Coleoptera: Curculion- overgrazed pastures and disturbed roadsides, some- idae), Trichosirocalus horridus (Panzer) (Coleoptera: times occurring in mixed stands (Batra, 1978).
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B Natural History and Control of Nonnative Invasive Species
    Appendix B: Natural History and Control of Nonnative Invasive Plants Found in Ten Northern Rocky Mountains National Parks Introduction The Invasive Plant Management Plan was written for the following ten parks (in this document, parks are referred to by the four letter acronyms in bold): the Bear Paw Battlefield-BEPA (MT, also known as Nez Perce National Historical Park); Big Hole National Battlefield-BIHO (MT); City of Rocks National Reserve-CIRO (ID); Craters of the Moon National Monument and Preserve-CRMO (ID); Fossil Butte National Monument-FOBU (WY); Golden Spike National Historic Site-GOSP (UT); Grant-Kohrs Ranch National Historic Site-GRKO (MT); Hagerman Fossil Beds National Monument-HAFO (ID); Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument-LIBI (MT); and Minidoka National Historic Site-MIIN (ID). The following information is contained for each weed species covered in this document (1) Park presence: based on formal surveys or park representatives’ observations (2) Status: whether the plant is listed as noxious in ID, MT, UT, or WY (3) Identifying characteristics: key characteristics to aid identification, and where possible, unique features to help distinguish the weed from look-a-like species (4) Life cycle: annual, winter-annual, biennial, or perennial and season of flowering and fruit set (5) Spread: the most common method of spread and potential for long distance dispersal (6) Seeds per plant and seed longevity (when available) (7) Habitat (8) Control Options: recommendations on the effectiveness of a. Mechanical Control b. Cultural
    [Show full text]
  • Koexistence a Rozdělení Niky U Pavouků Rodu Philodromus
    Masarykova univerzita Přírodovědecká fakulta Ústav botaniky a zoologie Koexistence a rozdělení niky u pavouků rodu Philodromus Diplomová práce Autor: Radek Michalko Brno 2012 Vedoucí DP: doc. Mgr. Stano Pekár Ph.D. 1 Souhlasím s uloţením této diplomové práce v knihovně Ústavu botaniky a zoologie PřF MU v Brně, případně v jiné knihovně MU, s jejím veřejným půjčováním a vyuţitím pro vědecké, vzdělávací nebo jiné veřejně prospěšné účely, a to za předpokladu, ţe převzaté informace budou řádně citovány a nebudou vyuţívány komerčně. V Brně 8.1.2012 ………………………………… Podpis 2 PODĚKOVÁNÍ Zejména bych chtěl poděkovat vedoucímu mé diplomové práce panu docentu Stanu Pekárovi, ţe mi umoţnil pracovat na tomto tématu, za trpělivé vedení a uţitečné rady. Dále bych chtěl velice poděkovat mým rodičům, bez jejichţ osobní a finanční podpory by tato práce nevznikla. Rovněţ bych chtěl poděkovat Lence Sentenské, Evě Líznarové, Pavlovi Šebkovi a Stanovi Korenkovi za podporu a cenné rady všeho druhu. 3 ABSTRAKT Koexistence a rozdělení niky pavouků rodu Philodromus V této diplomové práci byl zkoumán mechanismus umoţňující koexistenci mezi Philodromus albidus, P. aureolus a P. cespitum. Studie probíhala na území významného krajinného prvku U Kříţe v Brně Starém Lískovci. Studované území se skládá ze třech typů biotopů: listnatý les, křoviny a monokultura švestek. Pavouci byli získáváni pomocí sklepávání. U zkoumaných druhů byly porovnávány různé dimenze niky. Prostorová nika byla zkoumána na základě mikro- aţ makrobiotopových preferencí. Trofická nika byla zkoumána na základě velikosti a typu přirozené kořisti a pomocí laboratorních experimentů potravních preferencí. Časová nika byla zkoumána na základě fenologie jednotlivých druhů. Studované druhy se lišily v prostorové a trofické nice.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Biological Control on Two Knapweed Species in British Columbia
    Impact of Biological Control on Two Knapweed Research Report Species in British Columbia Don Gayton, FORREX & Val Miller, B.C. Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations Abstract Diffuse and spotted knapweed ( Centaurea diffusa Lam and C. stoebe L.) are two closely re - lated invasives found in many parts of British Columbia’s Southern Interior, causing sub - stantial economic losses in rangelands. Beginning in 1970, the provincial government initiated a long-term biological control effort against the knapweeds, introducing 10 dif - ferent insect agents from 1970 to 1987. In an effort to evaluate the efficacy of the program, archival (1983–2008) data was amassed from 19 vegetation monitoring sites that contained knapweed. In 2010, these sites were relocated and re-monitored and cover values were an - alyzed. Diffuse knapweed showed significant declines at 14 of 15 sites; spotted knapweed declined at three of four sites. Possible alternative explanations for the decline are dis - cussed. Evidence strongly points to a suite of biocontrol agents (seed feeders and root feed - ers) as the primary drivers of knapweed decline in British Columbia’s Southern Interior. KEYWORDS : biological control; British Columbia; Centaurea ; knapweed; monitoring Introduction iffuse knapweed ( Centaurea diffusa Lam.) and spotted knapweed ( Centaurea stoebe L.) are two introduced, closely related invasive forbs. These species are most com - Dmon in the northwestern United States and in western Canada. Centaurea stoebe (also referred to as C. maculosa Lam. and C. biebersteinii DC) is particularly widespread, reported in 45 US states and all provinces of Canada (Marshall 2004; Zouhar 2001). The drought-tolerant C. diffusa has an altitudinal range of 150–900 m, whereas C.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Control of Yellow Starthistle
    Biological Control of Yellow Starthistle Lincoln Smith, USDA-ARS-WRRC, 800 Buchanan St, Albany CA 94710 Joe Balciunas, USDA-ARS-WRRC, 800 Buchanan St, Albany CA 94710 Michael J. Pitcairn, California Dept. of Food and Agriculture, 3288 Meadowview Road, Sacramento, CA 95832 Yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis L.) is an alien plant that probably originated from the eastern Mediterranean. It was first collected in California in 1869, and now infests 42% of the state’s townships. It interferes with land use such as grazing and recreation, displaces native species, and is toxic to horses (Sheley, et al. 1999 and papers cited therein). This weed is much less invasive in its land of origin. This is presumably because natural enemies, such as insects, plant diseases, animals or competing plants help to keep it under natural control. We are exploring for insects and pathogens that attack this plant. They are tested for host specificity to make sure they do not attack other plants. After evaluation and approval by state and federal agencies, these agents will be released to try to reestablish the natural control that occurs in the land of origin. So far, six species of insect biological control agents have been introduced to control yellow starthistle (Turner et al. 1995; Rees et al. 1996; Jette, et al. 1999). All six attack the seedheads. The most promising agent is the hairy weevil (Eustenopus villosus), which is well established in California and occurs in high densities, attacking 25 to 80% of seedheads. Adults damage young flower buds by feeding on them, and lay eggs on later-developing flower buds.
    [Show full text]
  • Том 4. Вып. 2 Vol. 4. No. 2
    РОССИЙСКАЯ АКАДЕМИЯ НАУК Южный Научный Центр RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Southern Scientific Centre CAUCASIAN ENTOMOLOGICAL BULLETIN Том 4. Вып. 2 Vol. 4. No. 2 Ростов-на-Дону 2008 Кавказский энтомол. бюллетень 4(2): 209—213 © CAUCASIAN ENTOMOLOGICAL BULL. 2008 Hibernation places and behavior of the some weevil species (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) Места зимовки и поведение некоторых видов жуков- долоносиков(Coleoptera: Curculionidae) L. Gültekin Л. Гюльтекин Atatürk University, Faculty of Agriculture, Plant Protection Department, Erzurum 25240 Turkey. E-mail: [email protected]; lgultekin@ gmail.com Университет им. Ататюрка, сельскохозяйственный факультет, кафедра защиты растений, Эрзерум 25240 Турция Key words: hibernation places, behavior, Curculionidae, Eastern Turkey. Ключевые слова: локализация диапаузы, поведение, Curculionidae, Восточная Турция. Abstract. Hibernation places and behavior of перед зимовкой. Cleonis pigra (Scopoli), Larinus onopordi the 40 species of weevil from subfamilies Lixinae, (Fabricius), L. inaequalicollis Capiomont, L. ochroleucus Ceutorhynchinae, Baridinae, Gymnetrinae and Entiminae Capiomont, L. sibiricus Gyllenhal, L. sp. n. pr. leuzeae Fabre, (Curculionidae) were determined in Eastern Turkey during L. filiformis Petri, Herpes porcellus Lacordaire и Mononychus 1997–2007. Larinus latus (Herbst), L. fucatus Faust, punctumalbum (Herbst) часто образуют скопления под Lixus ochraceus Boheman, L. furcatus Olivier, L. obesus камнями, корой растений или в почве. Conorhynchus Petri, L. siculus Boheman, L. korbi Petri, and Mononychus hololeucus (Pallas), Mecaspis incisuratus Gyllenhal, schoenherri Kolenati prefer to migrate by flight before Leucophyes pedesteris (Poda), Otiorhynchus brunneus hibernation. Cleonis pigra (Scopoli), Larinus onopordi Steven, O. latinasus Reitter зимуют под растительными (Fabricius), L. inaequalicollis Capiomont, L. ochroleucus остатками и под камнями. Gymnetron netum (Germar) Capiomont, L. sibiricus Gyllenhal, L. sp. n. pr. leuzeae и Larinus puncticollis Capiomont заселяют на зимовку Fabre, L.
    [Show full text]
  • Diptera : Anthomyiidae)
    Title JAPANESE RECORDS OF ANTHOMYIID FILES (DIPTERA : ANTHOMYIIDAE) Author(s) Suwa, Masaaki Insecta matsumurana. New series : journal of the Faculty of Agriculture Hokkaido University, series entomology, 55, Citation 203-244 Issue Date 1999-03 Doc URL http://hdl.handle.net/2115/9895 Type bulletin (article) File Information 55_p203-244.pdf Instructions for use Hokkaido University Collection of Scholarly and Academic Papers : HUSCAP INSECTA MATSUMURANA NEW SERIES 55: 203-244 MARCH 1999 JAPANESE RECORDS OF ANTIIOMYIID FLIES (DIPTERA: ANTIIOMYIIDAE) By MAsAAKI SUWA Abstract SUWA, M. 1999. Japanese records of anthomyiid flies (Diptera: Anthomyiidae). Ins. matsum. n. s. 55: 203-244. Up to the present 216 species of Anthomyiidae belonging to 29 genera have been recorded from Japan. Of them 42 species (19.4 %) are resticted to Japan in their known distribution. For future discussion on the biogeography, all the known species of the family from Japan are enumerated together with their localities including newly added ones if present. Each species is given the reference which recorded the species for the first time in Japan. New host records or additional information on their biology is given for some species. Author saddress. Systematic Entomology, Faculty ofAgriculture, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, 060-8589 Japan. Contents. Introduction - Japanese records of Anthomyiidae - Acknowledgements - References. Supported by the Special Grant-in-Aid for Promotion of Education and Science in Hokkaido University provided by the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture, Japan. 203 IN1RoDucnoN Some anthomyiid species, e.g., Delia platura, Delia antiqua, Pegomya cunicularia and Strobilomyia laricicola, are serious pests to agricultural crops or to coniferous trees, and there have been a lot of reports in applied field on these injurious insects in Japan.
    [Show full text]
  • Montana Knapweeds
    Biology, Ecology and Management of Montana Knapweeds EB0204 revised August 2017 Celestine Duncan, Consultant, Weed Management Services, Helena, MT Jim Story, Research Professor, retired, MSU Western Ag Research Center, Corvallis, MT Roger Sheley, former MSU Extension Weed Specialist, Bozeman, MT revised by Hilary Parkinson, former MSU Research Associate, and Jane Mangold, MSU Extension Invasive Plant Specialist Table of Contents Plant Biology . 3 SpeedyWeed ID . 5 Ecology . 4 Habitat . 4 Spread and Establishment Potential . 6 Damage Potential . 7 Origins, Current Status and Distribution . 8 Management Alternatives . 8 Prevention . 8 Mechanical Control . .9 Cultural Control . .10 Biological Control . .11 Chemical Control . .14 Integrated Weed Management (IWM) . 16 Additional Resources . 17 Acknowledgements . .19 COVER PHOTOS large - spotted knapweed by Marisa Williams, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, bugwood.org top inset - diffuse knapweed by Cindy Roche, bugwood.org bottom inset - Russain knapweed by Steve Dewey, Utah State University, bugwood.org Any mention of products in this publication does not constitute a recommendation by Montana State University Extension. It is a violation of Federal law to use herbicides in a manner inconsistent with their labeling. Copyright © 2017 MSU Extension The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Montana State University and Montana State University Extension prohibit discrimination in all of their programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital and family status. Issued in furtherance of cooperative extension work in agriculture and home economics, acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Jeff Bader, Director of Extension, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717.
    [Show full text]
  • Population Buildup and Combined Impact of Introduced Insects on Yellow Starthistle (Centaurea Solstitialis L.) in California
    Proceedings of the X International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds 747 4-14 July 1999, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, USA Neal R. Spencer [ed.]. pp. 747-751 (2000) Population Buildup and Combined Impact of Introduced Insects on Yellow Starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis L.) in California MICHAEL J. PITCAIRN1, DALE. M. WOODS1, DONALD. B. JOLEY1, CHARLES E. TURNER2, and JOSEPH K. BALCIUNAS2 1California Department of Food and Agriculture, Biological Control Program, 3288 Meadowview Road, Sacramento, California 95832, USA 2United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, 800 Buchanan Street, Albany, California 94710, USA Abstract Seven exotic seed head insects have been introduced into the western United States for control of yellow starthistle. Six are established; three are widespread. Preliminary evaluations suggest that no one insect species will be able to reduce yellow starthistle abundance in California. Rather, a combination of the current, and possibly, future natu- ral enemies may be necessary. Studies were initiated in 1993 to evaluate the population buildup, combined impact, and interaction of all available biological control insects on yellow starthistle. Three field sites were established in different climatic regions where yellow starthistle is abundant. Four insects, Bangasternus orientalis, Urophora sirunase- va, Eustenopus villosus, and Larinus curtus, were released at each site in 1993 and 1994 and long-term monitoring was initiated. The accidentally-introduced insect, Chaetorellia succinea, was recovered in 1996-98 at these sites. Four years after the first releases, we have evidence that these biological control agents are having an impact on yellow starthistle seed production that may translate into a decline in mature plant populations.
    [Show full text]