MSU Extension IPM Bulletin, Fall 2014

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

MSU Extension IPM Bulletin, Fall 2014 Fall 2014 Crop harvesting and weed management by Fabian Menalled, MSU Crop Weeds Specialist, Department of Land Resources and Environmental Sciences Many times we think of crop harvesting and have resulted in an increased weed survivorship weed management as two independent tasks. and growth? Carefully considering these and Yet harvesting provides a great opportunity other potential mechanisms responsible for the to improve weed management. First and success of the weed population you detect in a foremost, while in the combine farmers have particular feld can help adjust the management a unique opportunity to refect on the season’s approach to prevent the growth of these patches. successes and failures. Systematically travelling Post-harvest weed management. Weed across the felds provides a great chance to species such as kochia are diÿcult to control refect on approaches for the next crop’s weed once they have been cut by the combine management program by carefully checking because they drop their seeds in one spot. locations of which species thrived this year. ˛e Because kochia seedlings can emerge at any next step is to fnd out what went wrong and time during the winter, they can produce what can be improved. ˛e following is a list of dense clumps of seedlings which are very hard some of the many things farmers could think to control as their mass impedes e˙ective about at harvest. herbicide coverage. Post-harvest treatments Weeds occur in patches. In general, weeds with glyphosate (Roundup and other generic are not distributed uniformly across felds but names) and paraquat applied late August FIGURE 1. Wheat field. Photo courtesy of to early September when kochia plants are USDA-ARS. in patches of high densities. Several causes could be responsible for these patches. Is actively growing and have produced enough it possible that you have selected herbicide leaf tissue for herbicide absorption can help to INSIDE: resistant weed biotypes? Did you get bad crop substantially reduce seed production. However, Crop harvesting and weed establishment during the summer that resulted post-harvest herbicide options should not be management ...................................1 in a less competitive canopy at the site of the based or planned solely on the weed species weed patch? Is there any underlying nutrient currently in the feld, but also take into account Sugarbeet Intergrated Pest the spring planting intentions. Management Impacts .....................2 or moisture characteristic at that site that could Regional Private Applicator Programs ......................................3 What’s that grass growing on the other side of the fence? ............................4 Wheat Head Armyworm ................5 Ask the Expert ................................6 Pest Management Tool Kit .............7 Meet Your Specialist .......................8 FIGURE 2. Barley harvest. Photo courtesy of USDA-ARS. (Crop Harvesting, continues on page 2) 2 (Crop harvesting, continued from page 1) Impact of harvesting on weed and fower and complete their life cycle the Cooler temperatures trigger the movement communities. Weed species are di˙erently following summer. Farmers increasing acreage of food reserves down to the root systems, infuenced by crop harvesting operations and of winter crops shouldn’t be surprised that enhancing movement of herbicides to the their strength and selectivity depend on timing winter annual weeds become a widespread plant’s root system and improving control. and technique. For example, repeated growing management issue. Managing winter annual However, farmers should be aware that of the same crop harvested at similar times weeds starts in fall when they are more perennial species vary in sensitivity to frost, and by similar methods selects specifc weed susceptible to weed control practices and and the application window di˙ers between species. ˛e timing of harvest and stubble scouting for their presence can give a head species. For example, Canada thistle can height are decisive selective factors for which start on management. survive light frosts and is e˙ectively controlled weed species will produce seeds, the amount Harvest the weediest feld last and with relatively late fall herbicide applications. of seeds being produced, as well as dispersal carefully clean the combine. Leaving the Other perennial weeds such as hemp dogbane patterns. For example, high stubble can lead worst felds for last is a simple approach to and common milkweed complete their life to higher seed production of species such as minimize the spread of weed seed and has cycles by late summer and do not tolerate frost common mallow or prostrated knotweed. been shown to be economically e˙ective. well, so fall herbicide applications should not Variations in timing and methods of Carefully cleaning equipment is another be delayed when controlling these species. harvesting and diversifed crop sequences can simple approach to minimize the transfer Finally, although fall application will not help avoid selecting for specifc and diÿcult to of weed seeds between felds. ˛ese simple guarantee excellent control of feld bindweed, manage weed species. steps can help farmers minimize the spread of late control practices can be e˙ective, provided Managing winter annual species. Winter weeds, including herbicide resistant biotypes. there is re-growth of this species. ˛ese are just a few fall season annual species such as cheatgrass and Fall is the time to manage perennial weeds. considerations farmers can take into account jointed goatgrass germinate and emerge in As fall temperatures cool, growers have an to develop e˙ective integrated weed control late summer, become semi-dormant and opportunity to manage perennial weeds. overwinter, resume growth in early spring, programs. Sugarbeet Integrated Pest Management Impacts in Montana by Barry Jacobsen, Interim Department Head of Montana Agricultural Experiment Stations and Agricultural Research Centers, MSU Professor of Plant Pathology Cercospora leaf spot reduced sugar production with strong resistance management training of tonnage per acre by 10-12% and dramatically both growers and feld workers. To date sugar increased storage losses. In 1996 there was beets have not lost another class of fungicides widespread resistance to the key benzimazole to resistant Cercospora isolates, while fungicides, which were commonly used to resistance to the QoI fungicides in Minnesota, treat Cercospora leaf spot, and great concern North Dakota and Michigan have resulted in about resistance to other fungicide alternatives. this class of fungicides being lost to growers in Something needed to be done. those states. Infection and sporulation by the Historically sugarbeet varieties with Cercospora leaf spot pathogen is strongly resistance to Cercospora have also had very a˙ected by environmental conditions, low yield potential. We began evaluating and a weather-based prediction system varieties with varying levels of resistance FIGURE 3. Cercospora leaf spot early defoliation. Photo by Barry Jacobsen. borrowed from the Minnesota/North Dakota and demonstrated that varieties with partial production area was adapted for Montana. resistance could be sprayed with fewer Sugarbeets are grown on 60,000-70,000 Sugarbeet company feld workers were trained fungicide applications with no loss in yield acres in Montana, with 35,000+ acres in the use of the system and feld monitoring compared to susceptible varieties sprayed with grown in the Sidney Sugars factory district techniques, and they communicated infection four fungicide applications. Based on this and 30,000 acres in the Western Sugar period information to growers. ˛is resulted research and Extension education programs, Billings factory district. ˛ese two areas have in better and more e˙ective timing for the Sidney Sugars reduced its variety requirements somewhat di˙erent challenges. From 1990- frst fungicide application, and growers saved to a KWS rating of 5.3 or less. ˛is was a 2000 the key problem in the Sidney Sugars on the average $15-16 per acre (about one signifcant change from no prior Cercsopora factory district was Cercospora leaf spot. spray per year). In addition, new classes of resistance requirement or varieties having Growers sprayed each acre four times per fungicides were identifed and labelled along year with fungicides to control this disease. (Sugarbeet, continues on page 4) 3 Regional Private Applicator Programs by Cecil ˜arp, MSU Pesticide Education Specialist, Department of Animal and Range Sciences employees) pesticide applicators. For calibration demonstrations using on-site receiving your commercial or government spray equipment as well as interactive applicator license contact Jolene demonstrations of pesticide exposure Warnke-Roszel, Montana Department and personal protective equipment. of Agriculture, (406)444-5400. For Presentations will also focus on many more information on the private (farm) herbicide fate scenarios that impact applicator license, see the MontGuide Montanans including 1) non-target titled ‘˛e Montana Private Applicator pesticide toxicity in homeowner gardens, 2) Program’ at www.pesticides.montana.edu/ why over 70% of private applicators spray by selecting ‘Reference Materials’ and ‘PAT in high wind, 3) non-target damage from in Montana.’ spraying in high wind and 4) how to avoid FIGURE 4. Pesticide applicator training. Photo by Cecil Tharp. ˛e MSU Pesticide Education Program these growing threats. Individuals applying pesticides on land is
Recommended publications
  • Lepidoptera of North America 5
    Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera by Valerio Albu, 1411 E. Sweetbriar Drive Fresno, CA 93720 and Eric Metzler, 1241 Kildale Square North Columbus, OH 43229 April 30, 2004 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Cover illustration: Blueberry Sphinx (Paonias astylus (Drury)], an eastern endemic. Photo by Valeriu Albu. ISBN 1084-8819 This publication and others in the series may be ordered from the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 Abstract A list of 1531 species ofLepidoptera is presented, collected over 15 years (1988 to 2002), in eleven southern West Virginia counties. A variety of collecting methods was used, including netting, light attracting, light trapping and pheromone trapping. The specimens were identified by the currently available pictorial sources and determination keys. Many were also sent to specialists for confirmation or identification. The majority of the data was from Kanawha County, reflecting the area of more intensive sampling effort by the senior author. This imbalance of data between Kanawha County and other counties should even out with further sampling of the area. Key Words: Appalachian Mountains,
    [Show full text]
  • MOTHS and BUTTERFLIES LEPIDOPTERA DISTRIBUTION DATA SOURCES (LEPIDOPTERA) * Detailed Distributional Information Has Been J.D
    MOTHS AND BUTTERFLIES LEPIDOPTERA DISTRIBUTION DATA SOURCES (LEPIDOPTERA) * Detailed distributional information has been J.D. Lafontaine published for only a few groups of Lepidoptera in western Biological Resources Program, Agriculture and Agri-food Canada. Scott (1986) gives good distribution maps for Canada butterflies in North America but these are generalized shade Central Experimental Farm Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C6 maps that give no detail within the Montane Cordillera Ecozone. A series of memoirs on the Inchworms (family and Geometridae) of Canada by McGuffin (1967, 1972, 1977, 1981, 1987) and Bolte (1990) cover about 3/4 of the Canadian J.T. Troubridge fauna and include dot maps for most species. A long term project on the “Forest Lepidoptera of Canada” resulted in a Pacific Agri-Food Research Centre (Agassiz) four volume series on Lepidoptera that feed on trees in Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Canada and these also give dot maps for most species Box 1000, Agassiz, B.C. V0M 1A0 (McGugan, 1958; Prentice, 1962, 1963, 1965). Dot maps for three groups of Cutworm Moths (Family Noctuidae): the subfamily Plusiinae (Lafontaine and Poole, 1991), the subfamilies Cuculliinae and Psaphidinae (Poole, 1995), and ABSTRACT the tribe Noctuini (subfamily Noctuinae) (Lafontaine, 1998) have also been published. Most fascicles in The Moths of The Montane Cordillera Ecozone of British Columbia America North of Mexico series (e.g. Ferguson, 1971-72, and southwestern Alberta supports a diverse fauna with over 1978; Franclemont, 1973; Hodges, 1971, 1986; Lafontaine, 2,000 species of butterflies and moths (Order Lepidoptera) 1987; Munroe, 1972-74, 1976; Neunzig, 1986, 1990, 1997) recorded to date.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Egg Size and Shape Evolve with Ecology but Not Developmental Rate Samuel H
    ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1302-4 Insect egg size and shape evolve with ecology but not developmental rate Samuel H. Church1,4*, Seth Donoughe1,3,4, Bruno A. S. de Medeiros1 & Cassandra G. Extavour1,2* Over the course of evolution, organism size has diversified markedly. Changes in size are thought to have occurred because of developmental, morphological and/or ecological pressures. To perform phylogenetic tests of the potential effects of these pressures, here we generated a dataset of more than ten thousand descriptions of insect eggs, and combined these with genetic and life-history datasets. We show that, across eight orders of magnitude of variation in egg volume, the relationship between size and shape itself evolves, such that previously predicted global patterns of scaling do not adequately explain the diversity in egg shapes. We show that egg size is not correlated with developmental rate and that, for many insects, egg size is not correlated with adult body size. Instead, we find that the evolution of parasitoidism and aquatic oviposition help to explain the diversification in the size and shape of insect eggs. Our study suggests that where eggs are laid, rather than universal allometric constants, underlies the evolution of insect egg size and shape. Size is a fundamental factor in many biological processes. The size of an 526 families and every currently described extant hexapod order24 organism may affect interactions both with other organisms and with (Fig. 1a and Supplementary Fig. 1). We combined this dataset with the environment1,2, it scales with features of morphology and physi- backbone hexapod phylogenies25,26 that we enriched to include taxa ology3, and larger animals often have higher fitness4.
    [Show full text]
  • Microlepidoptera.Hu Redigit: Fazekas Imre
    Microlepidoptera.hu Redigit: Fazekas Imre 5 2012 Microlepidoptera.hu A magyar Microlepidoptera kutatások hírei Hungarian Microlepidoptera News A journal focussed on Hungarian Microlepidopterology Kiadó—Publisher: Regiograf Intézet – Regiograf Institute Szerkesztő – Editor: Fazekas Imre, e‐mail: [email protected] Társszerkesztők – Co‐editors: Pastorális Gábor, e‐mail: [email protected]; Szeőke Kálmán, e‐mail: [email protected] HU ISSN 2062–6738 Microlepidoptera.hu 5: 1–146. http://www.microlepidoptera.hu 2012.12.20. Tartalom – Contents Elterjedés, biológia, Magyarország – Distribution, biology, Hungary Buschmann F.: Kiegészítő adatok Magyarország Zygaenidae faunájához – Additional data Zygaenidae fauna of Hungary (Lepidoptera: Zygaenidae) ............................... 3–7 Buschmann F.: Két új Tineidae faj Magyarországról – Two new Tineidae from Hungary (Lepidoptera: Tineidae) ......................................................... 9–12 Buschmann F.: Új adatok az Asalebria geminella (Eversmann, 1844) magyarországi előfordulásához – New data Asalebria geminella (Eversmann, 1844) the occurrence of Hungary (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae, Phycitinae) .................................................................................................. 13–18 Fazekas I.: Adatok Magyarország Pterophoridae faunájának ismeretéhez (12.) Capperia, Gillmeria és Stenoptila fajok új adatai – Data to knowledge of Hungary Pterophoridae Fauna, No. 12. New occurrence of Capperia, Gillmeria and Stenoptilia species (Lepidoptera: Pterophoridae) ……………………….
    [Show full text]
  • 02 October 2015 Radebeul-Germany
    ©Societas Europaea Lepidopterologica; download unter http://www.soceurlep.eu/ und www.zobodat.at XIXth European Congress Welcome .............................................................................................................................................................. 3 of Lepidopterology Programme ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 27 September – 02 October 2015 Monday, 28 September 2015 ........................................................................................................ 5 Radebeul · Germany Tuesday, 29 September 2015 ....................................................................................................... 7 Wednesday, 30 September 2015 ................................................................................................ 9 Thursday, 1 October 2015 ............................................................................................................ 10 Friday, 2 October 2015 ................................................................................................................... 14 Honouring Niels Peder Kristensen ............................................................................................... 15 Abstracts .......................................................................................................................................................... 16 Oral presentations ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Moths of the Kingston Study Area
    Moths of the Kingston Study Area Last updated 30 July 2015 by Mike Burrell This checklist contains the 783 species known to have occurred within the Kingston Study. Major data sources include KFN bioblitzes, an earlier version created by Gary Ure (2013) and the Queen’s University Biological Station list by Kit Muma (2008). For information about contributing your sightings or to download the latest version of this checklist, please visit: http://kingstonfieldnaturalists.org/moths/moths.html Contents Superfamily: Tineoidea .................................................................................................................................................... 5 Family: Tineidae ........................................................................................................................................................... 5 Subfamily: Tineinae .................................................................................................................................................. 5 Family: Psychidae ......................................................................................................................................................... 5 Subfamily: Psychinae ................................................................................................................................................ 5 Superfamily: Gracillarioidea ............................................................................................................................................. 5 Family: Gracillariidae ...................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Desktop Biodiversity Report
    Desktop Biodiversity Report Southwater Parish SxBRC/16/548 Prepared for Jennifer Nagy (Southwater Parish Council) 11th November 2016 ADDENDUM TO SxBRC/16/548 Sussex Protected Species Register Report It has been brought the Steering Group’s attention that the following evidence of Door Mice has been found within the Parish which is not mentioned in this report: 2012 Nut Hunt – PTES confirmed Dormouse chewed nuts found at TQ16405 27394 2018 PTES confirmed summer Dormouse nest found in hedgerow at TQ16414 27333 Sussex Biodiversity Record Centre desktop report regarding Southwater Parish 11th November 2016 Prepared for Jennifer Nagy Southwater Parish Council SxBRC/16/548 The following information was requested: Information Available Requested Format Designated Sites, Habitats & Ownership Maps Yes PDF Sussex Protected Species Register Yes Excel Sussex Bat Inventory Yes Excel Sussex Notable Bird Report Yes Excel UK BAP Species Inventory Yes Excel Sussex Rare Species Inventory Yes Excel Sussex Invasive Alien Species Yes Excel Full Species List Yes Excel Environmental Survey Directory No The following designations are within the search area: Local Wildlife Sites H08 ‐ Sparrow Copse H33 ‐ The Downs Link, Nutham Wood & Greatsteeds Farm Meadow H50 ‐ Courtland Wood H70 ‐ Southwater Country Park Complex Sites of Special Scientific Interest None Other Designations/Ownership Country Park Environmental Stewardship Agreement Important information regarding this report It must not be assumed that this report contains the definitive species information for the site concerned. The species data held by the Sussex Biodiversity Record Centre (SxBRC) is collated from the biological recording community in Sussex. However, there are many areas of Sussex where the records held are limited, either spatially or taxonomically.
    [Show full text]
  • Moth Records
    MOTHS of the University of Guelph Arboretum Contributions by Candice Talbot (2012-2014) and Andrew Bendall (2013-present) Other contributors: Andalyne Tofflemire, Chris Earley, Fiona Reid, Mike Kent The 2018 edition of the Arboretum list contains 851 species of moth. Most adults were seen at or near the J.C. Taylor Nature Centre, being attracted to the white building lights, or to a black light and sheet hung by the building, or to painted bait on nearby trees. Semi-regular monitoring was started by Candice Talbot in the spring of 2012, with a small number of incidental observations pre-dating that time. First record dates, where known, are shown at right as YYYYMMDD. Those with an asterisk represent a first documented sighting if the date of an earlier record was not available. We now follow the taxonomy outlined in Pohl, Patterson & Pelham (2016) Annotated taxonomic checklist of the Lepidoptera of North America, North of Mexico, and adopt their revised numbering system for all valid North American species. Identifications are made (with varying degrees of certainty) from photographs using a variety of published print and online resources for comparison. This is a work in progress and identifications are revisited from time to time. We acknowledge that definitive identification of some species is not possible without dissection of the genitalia or, in the case of some microlepidoptera, rearing larvae collected from the host plant. Our uncertainty is indicated in various ways, including the use of [t] for a tentative identification, by indicating a group of species that can't be separated from external features, or by identifying to genus only.
    [Show full text]
  • (Lepidoptera) Inhabiting the Funk Bottoms Wildlife Area, Wayne and Ashland Counties, Ohio1
    Survey of the Moths (Lepidoptera) Inhabiting the Funk Bottoms Wildlife Area, Wayne and Ashland Counties, Ohio1 R. N. WILLIAMS, R. W. RINGS, M. S. ELLIS, AND D. S. FICKLE, Department of Entomology, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, The Ohio State University, 1680 Madison Avenue, Wooster, OH 44691 ABSTRACT. In 1995, the Funk Bottoms Wildlife Area was the subject of an ongoing series of insect surveys intended to establish benchmark information on arthropod diversity of wetlands in northeast Ohio. This article concentrates on the moths which were collected at ultraviolet light traps within the Funk Bottoms Wildlife Area. A companion report will follow focusing on the Coleoptera along with several orders of aquatic insects. 3252 specimens were identified to 306 species in 19 families. These species are classified as follows: Abundant = 34; Locally Abundant = 1; Common = 257; Locally Common = 2; Uncommon = 10; Rare = 1; and Special Interest = 1. OHIO J. SCI. 97 (3): 34-39, 1997 INTRODUCTION Army Corps of Engineers. All the land behind the dam, The Funk Bottoms Wildlife Area was founded in 1991 below an elevation of 294 m, is under flood easement. with the initial purchase of land. The fact that this Wild- As a result, 3560 ha, including the Funk Bottoms Wildlife life Area is so new only magnifies the importance of Area, make up this wetland. There is relatively little area understanding the species existing there and what effect (around 80 ha) of permanently wet soils (marsh) within environmental changes might have upon them. This the easement area. However, hundreds to thousands of Wildlife Area currently consists of 467 ha which will be hectares may be inundated for periods of days to several expanded as funds and lands become available.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Guelph ARBORETUM MOTHS All Species Found by CANDICE TALBOT (CT) Unless Otherwise Indicated
    University of Guelph ARBORETUM MOTHS All species found by CANDICE TALBOT (CT) unless otherwise indicated. Other contributors: AB – Andrew Bendall AT – Andalyne Tofflemire CE – Chris Earley FR – Fiona Reid MK – Mike Kent Some notes about the records: Most moths were found at or near the J.C. Taylor Nature Centre, coming to building lights, or to a black light and sheet hung by the building, or to painted bait on nearby trees. Semi-regular monitoring was started by CT in 2012, with a small number of incidental observations pre- dating that time. Dates are written as 20140503 (e.g. May 3, 2014) and photographic records likely exist for all specific dates listed. Dates in brackets indicate that the moth was first recorded as present by CT before that date, but an image may not be available for the earlier sight record. Our list follows the order and groups of Beadle & Leckie (2012) Peterson Field Guide to Moths of Northeastern North America. Identifications are based on photographs using this guide as well as other published print and online resources for comparison. We acknowledge that, in some cases, definitive identification may not be possible without dissection and professional examination of the genitalia. Therefore some of our species identifications for difficult groups should be considered tentative. In other cases identification to genus is all that is possible, given the current knowledge of some groups or species complexes. Moss-Eaters - Family Micropterigidae 1. Goldcap Moss-eater Epimartyria auricrinella 20140530 AB Ghost Moths – Family Hepialidae 2. Lupulina Ghost Moth Korscheltellus lupulina 20120531 AB 3. Gold-spotted Ghost Moth Sthenopis auratus 20140621 Family Nepticulidae 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Microlepidoptera.Hu 15 2019
    Microlepidoptera.hu 15 2019 Aglossa caprealis (Hübner, [1809]) | Pyralidae Fotó / Photo: Csaniga Krisztina Redigit Fazekas Imre Pannon Intézet | Pannon Institute | Pécs | Hungary 2019 Microlepidoptera.hu 15: 1–41. | 02.12.2019 | HU ISSN 2062–6738 DOI: 10.24386/Microlep.2019.15.1 A folyóirat évente 1–3 füzetben jelenik meg. Taxonómiai, faunisztikai, állatföldrajzi, ökológiai és természetvédelmi tanulmányokat közöl Magyarországról és más földrajzi területekről. Az archivált publikációk az Országos Széchenyi Könyvtár Elektronikus Periodika Adatbázis és Archívumban (EPA) érhetők el: http://epa.oszk.hu/microlepidoptera valamint REAL J | EBSCO A folyóirat, nyomtatott formában, a szerkesztő címén megrendelhető. Hungarian Microlepidoptera News. A journal focused on Hungarian Microlepidopterology. Can be purchased in printed form and in CD. For single copies and further information contact the editor. Szerkesztő | Editor Fazekas Imre E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.microlepidoptera.hu A szerkesztő munkatársai | The editor’s assistants Ábrahám Levente (H-Kaposvár), Bálint Zsolt (H-Budapest), Barry Goater (GB-Eastleigh), Buschmann Ferenc (H-Jászberény), Gál Miklós (H-Komló), Nowinszky László (H- Szombathely), Puskás János (H-Szombathely), Pastorális Gábor (SK-Komárno), Szeőke Kálmán (H-Székesfehérvár), Tóth Sándor (H-Zirc) Kiadványterv, tördelés, tipográfia | Design, lay-out, typography: Fazekas Imre Kiadó | Publisher: Pannon Intézet | Pannon Institute | H-Pécs Nyomtatás | Print: Rotari Nyomdaipari Kft., H-Komló Megjelent | Published:
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Pathways for Exotic Plant Pest Movement Into and Within the Greater Caribbean Region
    Evaluation of Pathways for Exotic Plant Pest Movement into and within the Greater Caribbean Region Caribbean Invasive Species Working Group (CISWG) and United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Center for Plant Health Science and Technology (CPHST) Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory (PERAL) EVALUATION OF PATHWAYS FOR EXOTIC PLANT PEST MOVEMENT INTO AND WITHIN THE GREATER CARIBBEAN REGION January 9, 2009 Revised August 27, 2009 Caribbean Invasive Species Working Group (CISWG) and Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory (PERAL) Center for Plant Health Science and Technology (CPHST) United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) ______________________________________________________________________________ Authors: Dr. Heike Meissner (project lead) Andrea Lemay Christie Bertone Kimberly Schwartzburg Dr. Lisa Ferguson Leslie Newton ______________________________________________________________________________ Contact address for all correspondence: Dr. Heike Meissner United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Plant Protection and Quarantine Center for Plant Health Science and Technology Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory 1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 300 Raleigh, NC 27607, USA Phone: (919) 855-7538 E-mail: [email protected] ii Table of Contents Index of Figures and Tables ........................................................................................................... iv Abbreviations and Definitions .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]