DOCSLIB.ORG

Field Guidecontrol of Weeds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Field Guidecontrol of Weeds US Department of Agriculture FOR THE BIOLOGICALFIELD GUIDECONTROL OF WEEDS IN THE NORTHWEST Rachel Winston, Carol Bell Randall, Rosemarie De Clerck-Floate, Alec McClay, Jennifer Andreas and Mark Schwarzländer Forest Health Technology FHTET-2014-08 Enterprise Team May 2014 he Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team (FHTET) was created in T1995 by the Deputy Chief for State and Private Forestry, USDA, Forest Service, to develop and deliver technologies to protect and improve the health of American forests. This book was published by FHTET as part of the technology transfer series. http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/technology/ Cover photos: Aphthona nigriscutis (R. Richard, USDA APHIS), Mecinus spp. (Bob Richard, USDA APHIS PPQ), Chrysolina hypericic quadrigemina, Eustenopus villosus (Laura Parsons & Mark Schwarzländer, University of Idaho), Cyphocleonus achates (Jennifer Andreas, Washington State University Extension) The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326- W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call 202-720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement or approval by the U.S. Department of Agriculture or the Forest Service of any product or service to the exclusion of others that may be suitable. Federal Recycling Program Printed on recycled paper BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF WEEDS IN THE NORTHWEST Rachel L. Winston Carol Bell Randall Environmental Consultant Entomologist, Forest Health Protection MIA Consulting, LLC USDA Forest Service Sandpoint, ID, USA Coeur d’Alene, ID, USA [email protected] [email protected] Rosemarie A. De Clerck-Floate Alec S. McClay Weed Biocontrol, Lethbridge Research Centre McClay Ecoscience Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Sherwood Park, Alberta, Canada Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada [email protected] [email protected] Mark Schwarzländer Jennifer E. Andreas Associate Professor for Entomology Integrated Weed Control Project University of Idaho, Department of Plant, Washington State University Extension Soil and Entomological Sciences Puyallup, WA Moscow, ID, USA [email protected] [email protected] For additional copies of this publication, contact: Mark Schwarzländer Richard Reardon University of Idaho USDA Forest Service PSES Department 180 Canfield Street Morgantown, WV 26505 Moscow, ID 83844 304.285.1566 208.885.9319 [email protected] [email protected] Acknowledgments Significant help in reviewing and compiling the content in this field guide was provided by Eric Coombs (Oregon Department of Agriculture), Jeffrey Littlefield (Montana State University), Dan Bean (Colorado Department of Agriculture), Robert Bourchier (Agriculture and Agri- Food Canada), and Susan Turner (British Columbia Ministry of Forests and Range). We would like to thank all of the photographers who granted permission for the use of photos. We also extend our gratitude to Denise Binion, Forest Service-Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team (FHTET) for help with editing, layout and graphics, and Richard Reardon (FHTET) for producing this guide. Field Guide Components About This Field Guide 10 Biological Control of Weeds 12 Weed Botanical Traits 14 Life Cycle 14 Duration 14 Leaf Arrangement and Margination 15 Flower heads 15 Biological Control Agent Life Cycles 16 Insects 16 Butterflies and Moths (Order Lepidoptera) 17 Beetles (Order Coleoptera) 17 Table of Contents of Table Flies (Order Diptera) 17 Aphids (Order Hemiptera) 18 Mites 18 Nematodes 18 Fungi 18 Scientific Name Changes 19 Collection Methods 20 Sweep netting 20 Aspirating 20 Hand-picking/Tapping 21 Vacuuming 21 Light trap 21 Transport Considerations 22 Containers 22 Transporting Biological Control Agents 22 Shipping long distances 22 Other factors to consider 23 Releasing Biocontrol Agents 24 Select release site 24 Establish permanent location marker 24 Record geographical coordinates at release point using GPS 24 Prepare map 24 Complete relevant paperwork at site 25 Set up photo point 25 Release as many agents as possible 25 Table of Contents of Table Monitoring Biocontrol Agents 26 Assessing biocontrol agent populations 26 Assessing the status of the target weed and co-occurring plants 27 Qualitative (descriptive) vegetation monitoring 27 Quantitative vegetation monitoring 28 Assessing impacts on nontarget plants 28 Additional Considerations 29 Avoiding Parasitism 29 Pinkish-Purple Flowers 30 Houndstongue, Cynoglossum officinale 30 Houndstongue Biological Control 32 Longitarsus quadriguttatus (Pontoppidan) 34 Mogulones crucifer (Pallas) 36 Knapweed species comparison (Centaurea) 38 Diffuse knapweed, Centaurea diffusa 40 Spotted knapweed, Centaure stoebe 42 Knapweed Biological Control 44 Agapeta zoegana 46 Bangasternus fausti 48 Chaetorellia acrolophi 50 Cyphocleonus achates 52 Larinus minutus 54 Larinus obtusus 56 Metzneria paucipunctella 58 Pelochrista medullana 60 Pterolonche inspersa 62 Sphenoptera jugoslavica 64 Terellia virens 66 Urophora affinis 68 Urophora quadrifasciata 70 Russian knapweed, Rhaponticum repens 72 Russian Knapweed Biological Control 74 Aulacidea acroptilonica 76 Jaapiella ivannikovi 78 Subanguina picridis 80 Russian Knapweed, Unapproved Agents 82 Puccinia acroptili. 82 Purple loosestrife, Lythrum salicaria 84 Purple Loosestrife Biological Control 86 Galerucella calmariensis 88 Hylobius transversovittatus 90 Table of Contents of Table Nanophyes marmoratus 92 Saltcedar, Tamarix chinensis & T. ramosissima 94 Smallflower tamarisk, Tamarix parviflora 96 Saltcedar Biological Control 98 Saltcedars, Unapproved Agents 99 Coniatus splendidulus 99 Diorhabda spp. 100 Thistle species comparison 102 Bull thistle, Cirsium vulgare 104 Canada thistle, Cirsium arvense 106 Musk thistle, Carduus nutans 108 Thistle Biological Control 110 Cheilosia grossa 112 Hadroplontus litura 114 Rhinocyllus conicus 116 Trichosirocalus horridus 118 Urophora cardui 120 Urophora stylata 122 Thistles, Non-Established Agents 124 Altica carduorum 124 Lema cyanella 124 Table of Contents of Table Psylliodes chalcomera 125 Urophora solstitialis 125 Thistles, Unapproved Agents 126 Puccinia punctiformis 126 Aceria anthocoptes 127 Cassida rubiginosa 127 Cleonis pigra 128 Larinus carlinae (=L. planus) 128 Puccinia carduorum 129 Terellia ruficauda 129 Yellow Flowers 130 Scotch broom, Cytisus scoparius 130 Broom Biological Control 132 Bruchidius villosus 134 Exapion fuscirostre 136 Leucoptera spartifoliella 138 Broom, Unapproved Agents 140 Aceria genistae 140 Agonopterix nervosa 141 Arytainilla spartiophila 141 Gorse, Ulex europaeus 142 Gorse Biological Control 144 Exapion ulicis 146 Tetranychus lintearius 148 Gorse, Unapproved Agents 150 Agonopterix nervosa 150 Orange hawkweed, Pilosella aurantiaca 152 Whiplash hawkweed, Pilosella flagellaris 154 Hawkweed Biological Control 156 Aulacidea subterminalis 158 Puncturevine, Tribulus terrestris 160 Puncturevine Biological Control 162 Microlarinus lareynii 164 Microlarinus lypriformis 166 Tansy ragwort, Jacobaea vulgaris 168 Tansy Ragwort Biological Control 170 Botanophila seneciella 172 Cochylis atricapitana 174 Longitarsus jacobaeae 176 Tyria jacobaeae 180 Tansy Ragwort, Unapproved Agents 182 Table of Contents of Table Longitarsus spp. 182 Rush skeletonweed, Chondrilla juncea 184 Rush Skeletonweed Biological Control 186 Aceria chondrillae 188 Bradyrrhoa gilveolella 190 Cystiphora schmidti 192 Puccinia chondrillina 194 Yellow starthistle, Centaurea solstitialis 196 Yellow Starthistle Biological Control 198 Bangasternus orientalis 200 Chaetorellia australis & C. succinea 202 Eustenopus villosus 204 Larinus curtus 206 Puccinia jacea var. solstitialis 208 Urophora sirunaseva 210 Common St. Johnswort, Hypericum perforatum 212 Common St. Johnswort Biological Control 214 Agrilus hyperici 216 Aphis chloris 218 Aplocera plagiata 220 Chrysolina hyperici & C. quadrigemina 222 Zeuxidiplosis giardi 224 Table of Contents of Table Dalmatian toadflax, Linaria dalmatica ssp. dalmatica 226 Yellow toadflax, Linaria vulgaris 228 Toadflax Biological Control 230 Brachypterolus pulicarius 232 Calophasia lunula 234 Mecinus janthiniformis & M. janthinus 236 Rhinusa antirrhini 238 Rhinusa linariae 240 Toadflaxes, Non-Established Agents 242 Eteobalea intermediella 242 Toadflaxes, Unapproved Agents 243 Rhinusa neta 243 Green Flowers 244 Leafy spurge, Euphorbia esula 244 Leafy Spurge Biological Control 246 Aphthona cyparissiae 248 Aphthona czwalinai 250 Aphthona flava 252 Aphthona lacertosa 254 Aphthona nigriscutis 256 Hyles euphorbiae 258 Lobesia euphorbiana 260 Oberea erythrocephala 262 Spurgia capitigena & S. esulae 264 Leafy Spurge, Non-Established Agents 266 Aphthona abdominalis 266 Chamaesphecia spp. 266 Minoa murinata 267 Pegomya curticornis & P. euphorbiae 267 White Flowers 268 Field bindweed, Convolvulus arvensis 268 Bindweed Biological Control 270 Aceria
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2013 Draft Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Recovery Plan
    DRAFT Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Recovery Plan Derek W. Stinson Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Program 600 Capitol Way N Olympia, Washington January 2013 In 1990, the Washington Wildlife Commission adopted procedures for listing and de-listing species as endangered, threatened, or sensitive and for writing recovery and management plans for listed species (WAC 232-12-297, Appendix A). The procedures, developed by a group of citizens, interest groups, and state and federal agencies, require preparation of recovery plans for species listed as threatened or endangered. Recovery, as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is the process by which the decline of an endangered or threatened species is arrested or reversed, and threats to its survival are neutralized, so that its long-term survival in nature can be ensured. This is the Draft Washington State Status Update and Recovery Plan for the Mazama Pocket Gopher. It summarizes what is known of the historical and current distribution and abundance of the Mazama pocket gopher in Washington and describes factors affecting known populations and its habitat. It prescribes strategies to recover the species, such as protecting populations and existing habitat, evaluating and restoring habitat, and initiating research and cooperative programs. Target population objectives and other criteria for down-listing to state Sensitive are identified. As part of the State’s listing and recovery procedures, the draft recovery plan is available for a 90-day public comment period. Please submit written comments on this report by 19 April 2013 via e-mail to: [email protected], or by mail to: Endangered Species Section Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA 98501-1091 This report should be cited as: Stinson, D.
    [Show full text]
  • (Amsel, 1954) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae, Phycitinae) – a New Species for the Croatian Pyraloid Moth Fauna, with an Updated Checklist
    NAT. CROAT. VOL. 30 No 1 37–52 ZAGREB July 31, 2021 original scientific paper / izvorni znanstveni rad DOI 10.20302/NC.2021.30.4 PSOROSA MEDITERRANELLA (AMSEL, 1954) (LEPIDOPTERA: PYRALIDAE, PHYCITINAE) – A NEW SPECIES FOR THE CROATIAN PYRALOID MOTH FAUNA, WITH AN UPDATED CHECKLIST DANIJELA GUMHALTER Azuritweg 2, 70619 Stuttgart, Germany (e-mail: [email protected]) Gumhalter, D.: Psorosa mediterranella (Amsel, 1954) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae, Phycitinae) – a new species for the Croatian pyraloid moth fauna, with an updated checklist. Nat. Croat., Vol. 30, No. 1, 37–52, 2021, Zagreb. From 2016 to 2020 numerous surveys were undertaken to improve the knowledge of the pyraloid moth fauna of Biokovo Nature Park. On August 27th, 2020 one specimen of Psorosa mediterranella (Amsel, 1954) from the family Pyralidae was collected on a small meadow (985 m a.s.l.) on Mt Biok- ovo. In this paper, the first data about the occurrence of this species in Croatia are presented. The previ- ous mention in the literature for Croatia was considered to be a misidentification of the past and has thus not been included in the checklist of Croatian pyraloid moth species. P. mediterranella was recorded for the first time in Croatia in recent investigations and, after other additions to the checklist have been counted, is the 396th species in the Croatian pyraloid moth fauna. An overview of the overall pyraloid moth fauna of Croatia is given in the updated species list. Keywords: Psorosa mediterranella, Pyraloidea, Pyralidae, fauna, Biokovo, Croatia Gumhalter, D.: Psorosa mediterranella (Amsel, 1954) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae, Phycitinae) – nova vrsta u hrvatskoj fauni Pyraloidea, s nadopunjenim popisom vrsta.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • CDA Leafy Spurge Brochure
    Frequently Asked Questions About the Palisade Insectary Mission Statement How do I get Aphthona beetles? You can call the Colorado Department of We are striving to develop new, effective Agriculture Insectary in Palisade at (970) ways to control non-native species of plants 464-7916 or toll free at (866) 324-2963 and and insects that have invaded Colorado. get on the request list. We are doing this through the use of biological controls which are natural, non- When are the insects available? toxic, and environmentally friendly. We collect and distribute adult beetles in June and July. The Leafy Spurge Program In Palisade How long will it take for them to control my leafy spurge? The Insectary has been working on leafy Biological Control You can usually see some damage at the spurge bio-control since 1988. Root feeding point of release the following year, but it flea beetles are readily available for release of typically takes three to ten years to get in early summer. Three other insect species widespread control. have been released and populations are growing with the potential for future Leafy Spurge What else do the beetles feed on? distribution. All of the leafy spurge feeding The beetles will feed on leafy spurge and insects are maintained in field colonies. cypress spurge. They were held in Additional research is underway to explore quarantine and tested to ensure they would the potential use of soilborne plant not feed on other plants before they were pathogens as biocontrol agents. imported and released in North America What makes the best release site? A warm dry location with moderate leafy spurge growth is best.
    [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]
  • Proceedings of the Tenth Forum Herbulot 2018. Integrative Taxonomy, a Multidisciplinary Approach to Answer Compli- Cated Taxonomic Questions
    SPIXIANA 42 2 291-320 München, Dezember 2019 ISSN 0341-8391 Proceedings of the tenth FORUM HERBULOT 2018. Integrative taxonomy, a multidisciplinary approach to answer compli- cated taxonomic questions (Stuttgart, Germany, 11-16 June 2018) Axel Hausmann & Hossein Rajaei (eds) Hausmann, A. & Rajaei, H. (eds) 2019. Proceedings of the tenth FORUM HERBULOT 2018. Integrative taxonomy, a multidisciplinary approach to answer complicated taxonomic questions (Stuttgart, Germany, 11-16 June 2018). Spixiana 42 (2): 291- 320. The tenth International Congress of FORUM HERBULOT on “Integrative taxonomy, a multidisciplinary approach to answer complicated taxonomic questions” took place in the Staatliches Museum für Naturkunde Stuttgart (SMNS), from 11.- 16.06.2018, with 77 participants and 52 scientific presentations. The proceedings provide short information on the meeting and the abstracts of the oral presenta- tions. Axel Hausmann (corresponding author), SNSB – ZSM, Bavarian State Collection of Zoology, Münchhausenstr. 21, 81247 Munich, Germany; e-mail: [email protected] Short report and results Axel Hausmann & Hossein Rajaei Hausmann, A. & Rajaei, H. 2019. Short report and results. Pp. 291-292 in: Hausmann, A. & Rajaei, H. (eds). Proceedings of the tenth FORUM HERBULOT 2018. Integrative taxonomy, a multidisciplinary approach to answer complicated taxonomic questions (Stuttgart, Germany, 11-16 June 2018). Spixiana 42 (2). Axel Hausmann (corresponding author), SNSB – ZSM, Bavarian State Collection of Zoology, Münchhausenstr. 21, 81247 Mu- nich, Germany; e-mail: [email protected] The meeting was organized by an organization The conference started with a lecture on the ground- team of the ‘Staatliches Museum für Naturkunde breaking effects of “Willi Hennig and the synthesis of Stuttgart’ (SMNS).
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan: US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area, El Paso County, CO
    Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area August 2015 CNHP’s mission is to preserve the natural diversity of life by contributing the essential scientific foundation that leads to lasting conservation of Colorado's biological wealth. Colorado Natural Heritage Program Warner College of Natural Resources Colorado State University 1475 Campus Delivery Fort Collins, CO 80523 (970) 491-7331 Report Prepared for: United States Air Force Academy Department of Natural Resources Recommended Citation: Smith, P., S. S. Panjabi, and J. Handwerk. 2015. Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan: US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area, El Paso County, CO. Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. Front Cover: Documenting weeds at the US Air Force Academy. Photos courtesy of the Colorado Natural Heritage Program © Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area El Paso County, CO Pam Smith, Susan Spackman Panjabi, and Jill Handwerk Colorado Natural Heritage Program Warner College of Natural Resources Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 August 2015 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Various federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, orders, and policies require land managers to control noxious weeds. The purpose of this plan is to provide a guide to manage, in the most efficient and effective manner, the noxious weeds on the US Air Force Academy (Academy) and Farish Recreation Area (Farish) over the next 10 years (through 2025), in accordance with their respective integrated natural resources management plans. This plan pertains to the “natural” portions of the Academy and excludes highly developed areas, such as around buildings, recreation fields, and lawns.
    [Show full text]
  • Micro Moths on Great Cumbrae Island (Vc100)
    The Glasgow Naturalist (online 2017) Volume 26, xx-xx Micro moths on Great Cumbrae Island (vc100) P. G. Moore 32 Marine Parade, Millport, Isle of Cumbrae KA28 0EF E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT Forsythia sp. Behind the office is a large mature Few previous records exist for miCro-moths from black mulberry tree (Morus nigra) and to one side is vC100. Data are presented from the first year-round a tall privet hedge (Ligustrum ovalifolium). To the moth-trapping exerCise accomplished on Great rear of my property is a wooded escarpment with Cumbrae Island; one of the least studied of the old-growth ash (Fraxinus excelsior) frequently ivy- Clyde Isles (vC100). Data from a Skinner-type light- Covered (Hedera helix), sycamore (Acer trap, supplemented by Collection of leaf mines from pseudoplatanus) and rowan (Sorbus aucuparia), local trees, revealed the presence of 71 species of with an undergrowth of hawthorn (Crataegus miCro moths, representing 20 new records for the monogyna), wild garliC (Allium ursinum), nettle vice-County. (Urtica dioica), bracken (Pteridium aquilinum) and bramble (Rubus fructicosus). Rhind (1988) detailed INTRODUCTION the vasCular plants found on Great Cumbrae Island The extensive nineteenth-century list of between 1985 and 1987 and delineated the history Lepidoptera in the 1901 handbook on the natural of the island's botanical investigations. Leaves of history of Glasgow and the West of SCotland issued brambles in my garden, beech trees (Fagus for the Glasgow meeting of the British AssoCiation sylvatica) and hazel (Corylus avellana) at other for the Advancement of SCience (Elliot et al., 1901) locations on the island (respectively Craiglea Wood inCluded few Cumbrae records.
    [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]
  • 1 Appendix 3. Gulf Islands Taxonomy Report
    Appendix 3. Gulf Islands Taxonomy Report Class Order Family Genus Species Arachnida Araneae Agelenidae Agelenopsis Agelenopsis utahana Eratigena Eratigena agrestis Amaurobiidae Callobius Callobius pictus Callobius severus Antrodiaetidae Antrodiaetus Antrodiaetus pacificus Anyphaenidae Anyphaena Anyphaena aperta Anyphaena pacifica Araneidae Araneus Araneus diadematus Clubionidae Clubiona Clubiona lutescens Clubiona pacifica Clubiona pallidula Cybaeidae Cybaeus Cybaeus reticulatus Cybaeus signifer Cybaeus tetricus Dictynidae Emblyna Emblyna peragrata Gnaphosidae Sergiolus Sergiolus columbianus Zelotes Zelotes fratris Linyphiidae Agyneta Agyneta darrelli Agyneta fillmorana Agyneta protrudens Bathyphantes Bathyphantes brevipes Bathyphantes keeni 1 Centromerita Centromerita bicolor Ceratinops Ceratinops latus Entelecara Entelecara acuminata Erigone Erigone aletris Erigone arctica Erigone cristatopalpus Frederickus Frederickus coylei Grammonota Grammonota kincaidi Linyphantes Linyphantes nehalem Linyphantes nigrescens Linyphantes pacificus Linyphantes pualla Linyphantes victoria Mermessus Mermessus trilobatus Microlinyphia Microlinyphia dana Neriene Neriene digna Neriene litigiosa Oedothorax Oedothorax alascensis Pityohyphantes Pityohyphantes alticeps Pocadicnemis Pocadicnemis pumila Poeciloneta Poeciloneta fructuosa Saaristoa Saaristoa sammamish Scotinotylus Scotinotylus sp. 5GAB Semljicola Semljicola sp. 1GAB Sisicottus Spirembolus Spirembolus abnormis Spirembolus mundus Tachygyna Tachygyna ursina Tachygyna vancouverana Tapinocyba Tapinocyba
    [Show full text]
  • New DNA Markers Reveal Presence of Aphthona Species (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) Believed to Have Failed to Establish After Release Into Leafy Spurge
    Biological Control 49 (2009) 1–5 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Control journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ybcon New DNA markers reveal presence of Aphthona species (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) believed to have failed to establish after release into leafy spurge R. Roehrdanz a,*, D. Olson b,1, G. Fauske b, R. Bourchier c, A. Cortilet d, S. Sears a a Biosciences Research Laboratory, Red River Valley Agricultural Research Center, Agricultural Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, 1605 Albrecht Blvd, Fargo, ND 58105, United States b Department of Entomology, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, United States c Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge, AB, Canada d Agricultural Resources Management and Development Division - Weed Integrated Pest Management Unit, Minnesota Department of Agriculture, St. Paul, MN, United States article info abstract Article history: Six species of Aphthona flea beetles from Europe have been introduced in North America for the purpose Received 28 September 2007 of controlling a noxious weed, leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula). In the years following the releases, five of Accepted 10 December 2008 the species have been recorded as being established at various locations. There is no evidence that the Available online 31 December 2008 sixth species ever became established. A molecular marker key that can identify the DNA of the five established species is described. The key relies on restriction site differences found in PCR amplicons Keywords: of a portion of the mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I gene. Three restriction enzymes are required to Flea beetles separate the immature specimens which are not visually separable. Adults which can be quickly sepa- Leafy spurge rated into the two black species and three brown species require only two restriction enzymes to resolve Euphorbia esula Aphthona the species.
    [Show full text]