DOCSLIB.ORG

Comparing an IPM Pilot Program to a Traditional Cover Spray Program in Commercial Landscapes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Comparing an IPM Pilot Program to a Traditional Cover Spray Program in Commercial Landscapes HORTICULTURAL ENTOMOLOGY Comparing an IPM Pilot Program to a Traditional Cover Spray Program in Commercial Landscapes COLIN D. STEWART,1 S. KRISTINE BRAMAN,2 BEVERLY L. SPARKS,2 3 4 5 JEAN L. WILLIAMS-WOODWARD, GARY L. WADE, AND JOYCE G. LATIMER University of Georgia, GrifÞn, GA 30223Ð1797 J. Econ. Entomol. 95(4): 789Ð796 (2002) ABSTRACT An integrated pest management (IPM) pilot program for landscape plants was imple- mented during 1997 and 1998 on two commercial, two residential, and one institutional property managed by landscape professionals. When compared with preprogram, calendar-based cover spray program costs at these sites in 1996, the IPM program was cost-effective at one of the Þve sites in both 1997 and 1998, and cost effective at a second additional site in 1998 when the cooperator, initially skeptical of IPM, discontinued calendar-based cover sprays performed in 1996 and 1997. The mean cost per site was $703.40 (preprogram), $788.26, and $582.22 in 1996, 1997, and 1998, respectively. Volume of pesticide applied decreased a mean of 86.3% on the four sites not receiving cover sprays and increased 2.3% at site 2 (still using cover sprays) in 1997. In 1998, pesticide volume was reduced an average of 85.3% at all Þve sites compared with preprogram levels. The majority of insect pest problems were corrected using spot sprays of insecticidal soap or horticultural oil or by physical means such as pruning. One-third of the woody plant material on the commercial and institutional sites consisted of holly, juniper, and azalea. The most prevalent pests encountered were mites (Tet- ranychidae), aphids, lace bugs, scales, whiteßies, and Japanese beetle. Spiders were the most abundant group of predatory arthropod and ants, green lacewings, and lady beetles were also well represented in the managed landscapes. KEY WORDS integrated pest management, landscape, key plant, beneÞcial arthropods, pesticide use, spiders URBAN PLANTS ARE typically considered to be high value calendar sprays to time pesticide application, whereas and people attach great value to their upkeep (Hart- 55% made applications at the customerÕs request (Bra- man et al. 1986). Most urban residents believe that man et al. 1997). Only 46% of the surveyed Þrms arthropod feeding damage on landscape plants has a monitored pest populations. Cover sprays were the major impact on the quality of life (Paine et al. 1997) method-of-choice of arborists in the urban landscape and they spend a large amount of money maintaining in Illinois (Neely et al. 1984). the plantsÕ health and esthetic appearance. More than There is general agreement that public concern $1 billion per year is spent on commercial arboricul- over pesticide use is a driving force for increased ture for pruning, applying pesticides, and tree removal integrated pest management (IPM) adoption in urban (Neely et al. 1984). Pest control is a major function of areas (Koehler 1989). There is enough information landscape maintenance Þrms (Garber and Bondari available for arboriculture companies to begin effec- 1996). In 1993, 159 Þrms surveyed in the 20 county tive IPM programs and replacing cover sprays metropolitan Atlanta, GA, area purchased 13,210; (Nielsen 1989). In successful landscape IPM pro- 3,867; and 93,447 kg of active ingredients of insecti- grams, control measures were implemented by either cides/miticides, fungicides, and herbicides, respec- a contractor (Smith and Raupp 1986), the sponsoring tively (Braman et al. 1997). Thirty-two percent of the arboriculture company (Holmes and Davidson 1984), Þrms surveyed in the metropolitan Atlanta area used the homeowner (Hellman et al. 1982, Raupp and No- land 1984), or on-campus groundskeepers (Raupp and 1 Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, 1109 Experi- Noland 1984), but site monitoring was done entirely ment Street, GrifÞn, GA 30223Ð1797. Current address: University of by University personnel. Maine Cooperative Extension, 491 College Ave. Orono, ME 04473. Large or corporate Þrms in the metropolitan Atlanta 2 Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, 1109 Experi- area are more inclined to use nonchemical control ment Street, GrifÞn, GA 30223Ð1797. 3 Plant Pathology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602. than small or independent Þrms (Hubbell et al. 1997) 4 Horticulture, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602. and 40% of the small Þrms surveyed predicted an 5 Virginia Tech Department of Horticulture, Blacksburg, VA 24061. increase in the use of pesticides in the future (Garber 0022-0493/02/0789Ð0796$02.00/0 ᭧ 2002 Entomological Society of America 790 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY Vol. 95, no. 4 and Bondari 1996). Small Þrms were not as aware of sprays in addition to making additional pesticide ap- the available IPM products and information as were plications recommended by the landscape monitor medium and large Þrms. These Þrms requested work- (scout) in 1997. In 1998, this cooperator discontinued shops focused on IPM practices, seasonal newsletters, the cover sprays and implemented the scouting-based IPM reminders, increased public education, and “fre- IPM program. The program provided training, joint- quent on-site consultation” (Garber and Bondari scout cooperator monitoring, management recom- 1996). Forty-six percent of these Þrms cite lack of mendations, scouting tools, a reference guide (Wood- information on pest biology, whereas 66 and 73% cite ward and Sparks 2000), and pocket-sized cards for the lack of availability or ineffectiveness of alterna- arthropod and disease identiÞcation. The landscape tives to traditional pesticides as impediments to IPM monitor also prepared a collection of 50ϩ beneÞcials, implementation, respectively (Braman et al. 1998). other nontargets, and key pests for each cooperator. The IPM Pilot Project was designed to meet the Cooperators were taught to assess pest problems and needs of these small Þrms by evaluating IPM practices evaluate control measures in 1997 and 1998. In 1999, with a select group of landscape professionals. The joint scout-cooperator monitoring was discontinued objectives were to compare the costs of traditional and the scout served as an information resource, mak- pest management programs (calendar-based cover ing occasional site visits. sprays) to an IPM program, compare pesticide use, Plant Composition. The location and identiÞcation assess the appearance of the clientsÕ properties, de- (genus, species, and cultivar, when possible) of key termine the sitesÕ plant composition, assess key pest plant material at each site was mapped. Con-speciÞc and beneÞcial arthropod occurrence, better reÞne plant material with a continuous canopy was por- monitoring efforts, and demonstrate IPM techniques trayed as one plant unit (Raupp and Noland 1984). to the cooperators at their places of business for in- Key Pests and Beneficial Arthropods. Woody orna- corporation into management of their other proper- mentals were sampled bi-weekly for arthropod, patho- ties. These techniques included scouting for pest and gen, or abiotic stress, and beneÞcial arthropods from beneÞcial arthropods, soil sampling and fertilization, 9 April to 27 August 1997 and 26 March to 8 September using properly-timed spot sprays directed at the pestsÕ 1998. With the exception of the red imported Þre ant, most vulnerable stage, using lower toxicity pesticides Solenopsis invicta Van Buren, turf pests and diseases such as horticultural oils and insecticidal soaps, using were not monitored. Sampling tactics varied to ac- cultural controls such as pruning, and replacing highly commodate the diversity of plant material. Large susceptible plants with nonsusceptible or resistant shrubs (Ͼ1.5 m high) at all locations and tree-form plants. Burford hollies (Ilex cornuta ÔcanariensisÕ Poiret) at one commercial site (due to a dense canopy) were scouted by taking three beat samples over a 40 by Materials and Methods 20-cm white enamel pan. One beat sample was taken Site Selection. In 1996, County Extension Agents from small shrubs (Ͻ1.5 m high). Magnolias (Magnolia assisted in selecting Þve landscape sites located in x soulangiana Soulange-Bodin and M. stellata Siebold Clayton, Coweta, Fayette, and Pike Counties in Geor- & Zuccarini) were scouted by performing one, 30-s gia. All were established landscapes installed before foliar exam. Five, 30.5-cm branch terminals and the 1996 and contained a high degree of plant diversity. accompanying foliage from hemlock (Tsuga canaden- Sites were Ϸ0.2Ð0.4 ha or possessed a readily identi- sis (L.) Carriere.) and birch (Betula nigra Michaux Þable section of similar size. Commercial, residential, and B. papyrifera Marsh) were visually examined, as and institutional sites were included to provide a range were three terminals from all other trees. in type of client properties. All properties were man- The Þrst instar (crawler) is the most vulnerable aged by landscape professionals implementing calen- scale insect stage to contact insecticides because it dar-based cover spray programs. Three additional does not have the protective wax cover characteristic sites, for a total of eight properties (two of which had of later instars (Kosztarab 1996). Stem-infesting scale received no cover sprays) were scouted for 1 yr (1998) insects were monitored for crawlers by attaching dou- to educate cooperators and to obtain data on pest and ble-backed sticky tape to branches near female scales beneÞcial insect activity. or through direct observation of crawler activity. Fo- Pilot Program. Cooperators (landscape
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Checkered Beetles Moths (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae) – Hazardous Phytophags of Arboreal and Shrubby Plants of Botanical Gardens and Plantings of Kiev M
    UDC 632.634.791.937 (477.75) © 2017 Checkered beetles moths (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae) – hazardous phytophags of arboreal and shrubby plants of botanical gardens and plantings of Kiev M. Lisovyi, O. Sylchuk Natsional University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine, Heroev Oborony str., 13, Kyiv, 03041, Ukraine P. Chumak, V. Kovalchuk, Botanichny Garden of Acad. O. Fomina The purpose. To carry out probes on revealing and specification of species composition of checkered moths (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae) in conditions of botanical gardens and plantings of Kiev. Methods. Standard methods of faunistic research in entomology, population ecology, and protection of plants. Results. It is determined that 24 kinds of checkered moths are eating 54 kinds of plants which are widely used for gardening in Kiev. For the first time the following kinds are revealed: Phyllonorycter issikii, Phyllonorycter platani, and Phyllonorycter emberizaepennella. At calculation of Palii-Kovnatski indexes they specified that in city plantings the dominant phytophags are Cameraria ohridella (94,11%), Phyllonorycter populifoliella (86,37%) and Gracillaria syringella (59,14%). They consider that in formation of the secondary areal of invasion kinds of checkered moths the great value has an areal of spread of the host-plant. Environmental analysis is carried out of checkered moths of family Gracillariidae which is spread in cities of the Europe and which are absent in fauna of cities of Ukraine. That has important theoretical and practical value for ecology, entomology and protection of plants against hazardous checkered moths. Conclusions. All the probed kinds of checkered moths by their trophic specialization may be distributed into polyphages (6 kinds), oligophages (14 kinds) and monophages (3 kinds).
    [Show full text]
  • A New Leaf-Mining Moth from New Zealand, Sabulopteryx Botanica Sp
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 865: 39–65A new (2019) leaf-mining moth from New Zealand, Sabulopteryx botanica sp. nov. 39 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.865.34265 MONOGRAPH http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research A new leaf-mining moth from New Zealand, Sabulopteryx botanica sp. nov. (Lepidoptera, Gracillariidae, Gracillariinae), feeding on the rare endemic shrub Teucrium parvifolium (Lamiaceae), with a revised checklist of New Zealand Gracillariidae Robert J.B. Hoare1, Brian H. Patrick2, Thomas R. Buckley1,3 1 New Zealand Arthropod Collection (NZAC), Manaaki Whenua–Landcare Research, Private Bag 92170, Auc- kland, New Zealand 2 Wildlands Consultants Ltd, PO Box 9276, Tower Junction, Christchurch 8149, New Ze- aland 3 School of Biological Sciences, The University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand Corresponding author: Robert J.B. Hoare ([email protected]) Academic editor: E. van Nieukerken | Received 4 March 2019 | Accepted 3 May 2019 | Published 22 Jul 2019 http://zoobank.org/C1E51F7F-B5DF-4808-9C80-73A10D5746CD Citation: Hoare RJB, Patrick BH, Buckley TR (2019) A new leaf-mining moth from New Zealand, Sabulopteryx botanica sp. nov. (Lepidoptera, Gracillariidae, Gracillariinae), feeding on the rare endemic shrub Teucrium parvifolium (Lamiaceae), with a revised checklist of New Zealand Gracillariidae. ZooKeys 965: 39–65. https://doi.org/10.3897/ zookeys.865.34265 Abstract Sabulopteryx botanica Hoare & Patrick, sp. nov. (Lepidoptera, Gracillariidae, Gracillariinae) is described as a new species from New Zealand. It is regarded as endemic, and represents the first record of its genus from the southern hemisphere. Though diverging in some morphological features from previously de- scribed species, it is placed in genus Sabulopteryx Triberti, based on wing venation, abdominal characters, male and female genitalia and hostplant choice; this placement is supported by phylogenetic analysis based on the COI mitochondrial gene.
    [Show full text]
  • New Immigrant Insects in Hawaii: 1962 Through 197612
    Vol. XIII, No. 1, April 1979 35 New Immigrant Insects in Hawaii: 1962 through 197612 John W. Beardsley, Jr. DEPARTMENT OF ENTOMOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII HONOLULU, HAWAII In December 1961,1 delivered a presidential address before this Society which was titled "On Accidental Immigration and Establishment of Terrestrial Ar thropods in Hawaii During Recent Years" (Beardsley, 1962). In it I reviewed and analyzed accidental insect immigration into Hawaii for the 25 year period of 1937 through 1961. I thought that this time around it might be of interest to review the same subject for the 15 year period since my earlier presentation, and to again analyze our accidental immigrants in an attempt to determine whether or not trends which were indicated in 1961 have continued, and if the inferences which were drawn then have been substantiated. The data on which these remarks are based are contained largely in the Proceed ings of this Society, mostly in the Notes and Exhibitions sections. The annual lists of new immigrant species contained in the "Proceedings" were a valuable starting point, but they do contain occasional errors and quite a few omissions. Omissions have resulted because not all new immigrant records for Hawaii are reported in the Notes and Exhibitions. Quite a few new records appear only in submitted papers published in the ''Proceedings," or occasionally, in other journals (e.g.: Pacific In sects). I have attempted to include all such records which have come to my atten tion. I would like to urge all of you who either publish or find records of immigrant insects or other terrestrial invertebrates new to Hawaii in other journals to submit notes on these organisms for inclusion in this Society's "Proceedings." By so doing you will help to make a more complete and readily accessible record avail able for Hawaiian entomologists.
    [Show full text]
  • Additions, Deletions and Corrections to An
    Bulletin of the Irish Biogeographical Society No. 36 (2012) ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AN ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF THE IRISH BUTTERFLIES AND MOTHS (LEPIDOPTERA) WITH A CONCISE CHECKLIST OF IRISH SPECIES AND ELACHISTA BIATOMELLA (STAINTON, 1848) NEW TO IRELAND K. G. M. Bond1 and J. P. O’Connor2 1Department of Zoology and Animal Ecology, School of BEES, University College Cork, Distillery Fields, North Mall, Cork, Ireland. e-mail: <[email protected]> 2Emeritus Entomologist, National Museum of Ireland, Kildare Street, Dublin 2, Ireland. Abstract Additions, deletions and corrections are made to the Irish checklist of butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera). Elachista biatomella (Stainton, 1848) is added to the Irish list. The total number of confirmed Irish species of Lepidoptera now stands at 1480. Key words: Lepidoptera, additions, deletions, corrections, Irish list, Elachista biatomella Introduction Bond, Nash and O’Connor (2006) provided a checklist of the Irish Lepidoptera. Since its publication, many new discoveries have been made and are reported here. In addition, several deletions have been made. A concise and updated checklist is provided. The following abbreviations are used in the text: BM(NH) – The Natural History Museum, London; NMINH – National Museum of Ireland, Natural History, Dublin. The total number of confirmed Irish species now stands at 1480, an addition of 68 since Bond et al. (2006). Taxonomic arrangement As a result of recent systematic research, it has been necessary to replace the arrangement familiar to British and Irish Lepidopterists by the Fauna Europaea [FE] system used by Karsholt 60 Bulletin of the Irish Biogeographical Society No. 36 (2012) and Razowski, which is widely used in continental Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • The Taxonomy of the Side Species Group of Spilochalcis (Hymenoptera: Chalcididae) in America North of Mexico with Biological Notes on a Representative Species
    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Masters Theses 1911 - February 2014 1984 The taxonomy of the side species group of Spilochalcis (Hymenoptera: Chalcididae) in America north of Mexico with biological notes on a representative species. Gary James Couch University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/theses Couch, Gary James, "The taxonomy of the side species group of Spilochalcis (Hymenoptera: Chalcididae) in America north of Mexico with biological notes on a representative species." (1984). Masters Theses 1911 - February 2014. 3045. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.umass.edu/theses/3045 This thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses 1911 - February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE TAXONOMY OF THE SIDE SPECIES GROUP OF SPILOCHALCIS (HYMENOPTERA:CHALCIDIDAE) IN AMERICA NORTH OF MEXICO WITH BIOLOGICAL NOTES ON A REPRESENTATIVE SPECIES. A Thesis Presented By GARY JAMES COUCH Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE May 1984 Department of Entomology THE TAXONOMY OF THE SIDE SPECIES GROUP OF SPILOCHALCIS (HYMENOPTERA:CHALCIDIDAE) IN AMERICA NORTH OF MEXICO WITH BIOLOGICAL NOTES ON A REPRESENTATIVE SPECIES. A Thesis Presented By GARY JAMES COUCH Approved as to style and content by: Dr. T/M. Peter's, Chairperson of Committee CJZl- Dr. C-M. Yin, Membe D#. J.S. El kin ton, Member ii Dedication To: My mother who taught me that dreams are only worth the time and effort you devote to attaining them and my father for the values to base them on.
    [Show full text]
  • Your Beautiful Flower Garden
    Chapter Three Your Beautiful Flower Garden Introduction Whether it’s one planter next to your door, or a show-stopping floral garden, flowers are a bonus of color and texture we can all appreciate. If you’re an experienced green thumb, or have read up on basic gardening in Chapter Two, you’ll know that, rather than insects and diseases, most plant problems are cultural—meaning that if you give plants what they need (proper soil, location and care), they’ll be healthy most of the time. Keep an eye on your garden. Noticing problems and identifying them early are essential steps toward a satisfying result. What follows are common cultural, disease, and insect problems, and their solutions. That’s a lot to cover. We’ll start with general concerns, then focus on specifics for annuals, tender perennials, biennials, and perennials. (Don’t worry if you see a plant in both the Perennial and Annual charts. Some, like verbena and geranium, can be perennial in warmer climates.) Later we’ll discuss hostas, roses, bulbs and peonies. Photo: Pixabay. Perennial, biennial, or annual? Perennials tend to come back In this chapter: over repeated years and expand each season. They may live three or four years, thirty or a hundred. Biennials need two years to Common Cultural (Abiotic) Problems complete their life cycle but because of re-seeding, some may of Annuals, Perennials, Bulbs, and seem to be perennial when they re-appear in the same spot for Groundcovers years. Annuals can, but rarely, make it through more than one IPM Solutions for Cultural (Abiotic) season depending on the climate, or come back from seed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Entomologist's Record and Journal of Variation
    . JVASV^iX ^ N^ {/) lSNrNVIN0SHilWS*^S3ldVaan^LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Ni <n - M ^^ <n 5 CO Z ^ ^ 2 ^—^ _j 2 -I RIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIinillSNI NVINOSHilWS S3iyVdan U r- ^ ^ 2 CD 4 A'^iitfwN r: > — w ? _ ISNI NVINOSHilWS SBiyVdan LIBRARIES'SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION f^ <rt .... CO 2 2 2 s;- W to 2 C/J • 2 CO *^ 2 RIES SMITHSONIAN_INSTITUTlON NOIiniliSNI_NVINOSHilWS S3liiVyan_L; iiSNi"^NViNOSHiiNS S3iyvaan libraries smithsonian'^institution i^ 33 . z I/' ^ ^ (^ RIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIiniliSNI NVINOSHilWS S3lbVHan Li CO — -- — "> — IISNI NVINOSHimS S3IMVHan LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION N' 2 -J 2 _j 2 RIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIifllliSNI NVINOSHIIWS SSIMVyail L! MOTITI IT I f\t _NviN0SHiiws'^S3iMvaan libraries'^smithsonian^institution NOlin z \ '^ ^—s^ 5 <^ ^ ^ ^ '^ - /^w\ ^ /^^\ - ^^ ^ /^rf^\ - /^ o ^^^ — x.ii:i2Ji^ o ??'^ — \ii Z ^^^^^""-^ o ^^^^^ -» 2 _J Z -J , ; SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIXniliSNI NVINOSHillMS $3 I M VH 8 !!_ LI BR = C/> ± O) ^. ? CO I NVINOSHimS S3iaVHan libraries SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIlf CO ..-. CO 2 Z z . o .3 :/.^ C/)o Z u. ^^^ i to Z CO • z to * z > SMITHS0NIAN_1NSTITUTI0N NOIiniliSNI_NVINOSHimS S3 I d ViJ 8 n_LI B R UJ i"'NViNOSHiiws S3ibvyan libraries smithsonian"^institution Noiir r~ > z r- Z r- 2: . CO . ^ ^ ^ ^ ; SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIiniliSNI NVINOSHillNS SSiyVMail LI BR CO . •» Z r, <^ 2 z 5 ^^4ii?^^ ^' X^W o ^"^- x life ^<ji; o ^'f;0: i >^ _NVIN0SHiIlMs'^S3iyVdan^LIBRARIEs'^SMITHS0NlAN INSTITUTION NOlif Z \ ^'^ ^-rr-^ 5 CO n CO CO o z > SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIiniliSNI NVINOSHimS S3 I ^Vd 8 11 LI BR >" _ . z 3 ENTOMOLOGIST'S RECORD AND Journal of Variation Edited by P.A. SOKOLOFF fre s Assistant Editors J.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Leafminer Pests of Connecticut Nurseries
    Dr. Hugh Smith Valley Laboratory The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station 153 Cook Hill Road Windsor, CT 06095-0248 Phone: (860) 687-4763 Fax: (860) 683-4987 Founded in 1875 Email: [email protected] Putting science to work for society Website: www.ct.gov/caes Leafminer Pests of Connecticut Nurseries Leafminers are pests of annual flowering plants, Larvae that feed in a manner that clears a patch of perennials, shrubs and trees. The larvae of tissue produce blotch mines. There is considerable leafminers spend part or all of their development variation in the form and pattern of mines produced feeding between the two surfaces of the leaf. by different leafminer species. Larvae of the birch Leafmining behavior is found among the larvae of leafminer initiate several individual linear mines in certain moths, sawflies, flies and beetles. The the leaf which eventually coalesce to form a blotch. majority of leafminers damaging trees and woody Leafmining can combine with gall-making, stem- ornamentals are moth larvae; most leafminers boring, leaf-rolling and case-bearing damage in some attacking herbaceous perennials are fly larvae in the species. For example, the azalea leafminer produces family Agromyzidae. blotch-like mines for the first half of its larval life, then exits the mine and feeds as a leaf-roller or leaf- Moth females whose larvae are leafminers usually tier. lay their eggs on the leaf surface. Females of the azalea leafminer lay eggs individually on the Leafmining larvae may pupate in the mine, elsewhere undersides of leaves or along the midrib or vein. All on the plant, or in the ground, depending on species.
    [Show full text]
  • Azalea Leafminer
    Pest Profile Photo credit: (left, larva) J.A. Davidson, Univ. Md, College Pk, Bugwood.org, (right, adult) Mark Dreiling, Bugwood.org Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial 3.0 license Common Name: Azalea Leafminer Scientific Name: Caloptilia azaleela Order and Family: Lepidoptera, Gracillariidae Size and Appearance: Length (mm) Appearance Egg deposited singly on the undersides of leaves along the midribs Larva/Nymph yellowish 3.0 – 6.3 mm three pairs of abdominal pro-legs found on abdominal segments 3, 4, and 5 Adult small 10.0 – 13.0 mm yellow or golden colored (wingspan) moth with purplish markings on the wings Type of feeder (Chewing, sucking, etc.): Chewing (larvae & caterpillar) Host plant/s: The larvae only eat azalea leaves. Description of Damage (larvae and adults): When young, the larvae tunnel inside the underside of a leaf like a mine. The tunneling causes blotches and lines in the underside of the leaf. When the larvae move to the upper side of the leaf when they are older, they cause leaf curl damage and chew holes in the leaf. The damage from the larvae causes the leaves to turn yellow and fall of the plant. References: Azalea (Rhododendron)-Azalea leafminer. (2018, April 13). Retrieved from https://pnwhandbooks.org/insect/hort/landscape/hosts-pests-landscape-plants/azalea- rhododendron-azalea-leafminer Cranshaw, W. (2014). Garden Insects of North America: The Ultimate Guide to Backyard Bugs. Princeton University Press. Dekle, G.W., Buss, J. L., Mizell, F. R. (2010 April). Azalea Leafminer, Caloptilia Azaleella (Brants). Retrieved February 11, 2016 from http://entnem.ufl.edu/creatures/orn/shrubs/azalea_leafminer.htm McLeod, R., Ron, M.
    [Show full text]
  • Impacts of Native and Non-Native Plants on Urban Insect Communities: Are Native Plants Better Than Non-Natives?
    Impacts of Native and Non-native plants on Urban Insect Communities: Are Native Plants Better than Non-natives? by Carl Scott Clem A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Auburn, Alabama December 12, 2015 Key Words: native plants, non-native plants, caterpillars, natural enemies, associational interactions, congeneric plants Copyright 2015 by Carl Scott Clem Approved by David Held, Chair, Associate Professor: Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology Charles Ray, Research Fellow: Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology Debbie Folkerts, Assistant Professor: Department of Biological Sciences Robert Boyd, Professor: Department of Biological Sciences Abstract With continued suburban expansion in the southeastern United States, it is increasingly important to understand urbanization and its impacts on sustainability and natural ecosystems. Expansion of suburbia is often coupled with replacement of native plants by alien ornamental plants such as crepe myrtle, Bradford pear, and Japanese maple. Two projects were conducted for this thesis. The purpose of the first project (Chapter 2) was to conduct an analysis of existing larval Lepidoptera and Symphyta hostplant records in the southeastern United States, comparing their species richness on common native and alien woody plants. We found that, in most cases, native plants support more species of eruciform larvae compared to aliens. Alien congener plant species (those in the same genus as native species) supported more species of larvae than alien, non-congeners. Most of the larvae that feed on alien plants are generalist species. However, most of the specialist species feeding on alien plants use congeners of native plants, providing evidence of a spillover, or false spillover, effect.
    [Show full text]
  • The Entomologist's Record and Journal of Variation
    >ss> HARVARD UNIVERSITY Library of the Museum of Comparative Zoology MCZ LIBRARY MAR 2 9 1990 ' JARVARD IVERSITY Entomologist's Record AND JOURNAL OF VARIATION EDITED BY P. A. SOKOLOFF, f.r.e.s. Vol. 101 1989 Ill CONTENTS Aberration of Gymnoscelis rufifasciata Bivoltinism in Eupithecia tripunctaria H.- (Haworth) (Lep.: Geometridae) — the S. (Lep.: Geometridae) in south-east Double-striped pug. C. W. Plant, 105. England. B.K. West, 57 Abraxas grossulariata L. (Lep.: Geo- Book talk W.J.M. Chalmers-Hunt, 275 metridae), has it been shifting its Hfe Brachypalpus laphriformis (Fallen) (Dipt.: cyclQl A. A. Allen, 13% Syrphidae) A^.L. Birkett, 59 Acleris abietana (Hiibn) (Lep.: Tortrici- Breeding Gnorimus nobilis Linn. (Col.: dae) in Aberdeenshire. M.C. Townsend, Scarabidae) in captivity. J. A. Owen. 19 208 Brimstone moth {Opisthograptis luteolata Acleris abietana (Hiibn. (Lep.: Tortrici- L.). (Lep.: Geometridae) B.K. West, 167 dae) - records and foodplants, M.R. Browne versus Watson: Round two. R.R. Young. 37 Uhthoff-Kaufmann, 61. Agonopterix carduella Hiibner (Lep.: Bryaxis puncticollis Denny (Col.: Psela- Oecophoridae) in October. J.M. Chal- phidae) apparently new to Kent. A. A. mers-Hunt, 39 Allen, 11 Agriopis marginaria Fab. (Lep.: Geometri- Butterflies in winter. A. Archer-Lock, 117 dae), the Dotted-border moth caught in Butterflies of New Providence Island, December, A.M. Riley. 35 Bahamas, A further review. B.K. West, Agrotis ipsilon Hufn. (Lep.: Noctuidae) 109 Butterfly in March. J. Owen, 187 records from Dorset, 1988. A.M. and D.K. Riley, 33 An apparently new species of Homoneura (Dipt.: Lauxaniidae) from north-west Cacoecimorpha pronubana (Hiibn.) (Lep.: Kent.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Growing Degree Days for Insect Management Nancy E
    Using Growing Degree Days For Insect Management Nancy E. Adams Extension Educator, Agricultural Resources UNH Cooperative Extension is working in cooperation with the New England Agricultural Statistics and the NH Department of Agriculture to bring you weekly growing degree day (GDD) information throughout the growing season. GDD can be used to help predict events in an insect’s life cycle during the season by measuring growth in terms of temperature over time. When control measures are warranted, growing degree days can be used, along with scouting, as a guide for timing control actions. The GDD method takes into account the average daily temperature accumulations which influence insect development. Due to temperature differences, insect development varies from year to year and among locations throughout New Hampshire. For each day that the average temperature is one degree above the base temperature of 50oF, one degree day accumulates – negative numbers are ignored. GDD data is collected beginning March 1. Early in the season the numbers will accumulate slowly but as the average daily temperature increases, the GDD will accumulate faster. The GDD for insects is listed on the accompanying pages. The time for pest control is expressed in a range of numbers beginning with first perceptible feeding injury and continuing until approximately the end of the insect’s plant injury cycle. For example, Cooley spruce gall adelgid GDD are 22-92 and 1500-1775. This means the insect is active starting around 22 GDD and control measures can be implemented until approximately 92 GDD. Cooley spruce gall adelgid also has another period during the growing season when controls may be effective and necessary.
    [Show full text]