DOCSLIB.ORG

Biodiversity of Insects Associated with Rice ( Oryza Sativa L.) Crop Agroecosystem in the Punjab, Pakistan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biodiversity of Insects Associated with Rice ( Oryza Sativa L.) Crop Agroecosystem in the Punjab, Pakistan Biodiversity of insects associated with rice ( Oryza sativa L.) crop agroecosystem in the Punjab, Pakistan By MUHAMMAD ASGHAR M.Sc. (Hons.) Agricultural Entomology A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Agricultural Entomology FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE, FAISALABAD PAKISTAN 2010 1 To The Controller of Examinations, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad. We, the Supervisory Committee, certify that the contents and form of thesis submitted by Mr. Muhammad Asghar, Regd. 92-ag-1261 have been found satisfactory and recommend that it be processed for evaluation by the External Examiner (s) for the award of degree. SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE 1. CHAIRMAN: ………………………………………………. (DR. ANJUM SUHAIL) 2. MEMBER ………………………………………………. (DR. MUHAMMAD AFZAL) 3. MEMBER ……………………………………………….. (DR. MUHAMMAD ASLAM KHAN) 2 DEDICATED To My Affectionate Parents Loving Brothers, Sisters and Wife 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS All praises are for “Almighty Allah” who is the creator of this multifaceted and beautiful universe. I consider it as my foremost duty to acknowledge the omnipresent kindness and love of Almighty Allah who made it possible for me to complete the writing of this thesis. I think it is also my supreme obligation to express the gratitude and respect to Holy Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (SAW) who is forever a torch of guidance and knowledge for humanity as a whole. How honourable it is to offer my cordial gratitude to my worthy supervisor and supervisory committee, Prof. Dr. Anjum Suhail; Dr. Muhammad Afzal, Department of Agri. Entomology and Prof. Dr. Muhammad Aslam Khan, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, for their constant interest, valuable suggestions, inspirational guidance and encouragement throughout the course of my studies. I am grateful to Prof. Dr. Muhammad Ashfaq (T.I), Chairman, and faculty, Department of Agri. Entomology, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, for providing support and necessary facilities for conducting my research. I would like to express my deep sense of gratitude and heartfelt thanks to Higher Education Commission (HEC), Pakistan who sponsored my studies with financial assistance. I am highly obliged to Dr. Mansoor-ul-Hasan, Dr. Muhammad Yousaf (Department of Agri. Entomology, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad), Dr. Muhammad Athar Rafai (NIM, Islamabad) and Dr. Imtiaz Ahmad (University of Karachi) for help in insects' identification. Besides this my extremely thanks are to Dr. Zaheer ul Islam (Bangladesh Rice Research Institute, Bangladesh), Dr. Ravindra C. Joshi (International Rice Research Institute, Philippines), Dr. Sandy Smith (Prof. University of Toronto , Canada), Dr. Geoff M. Gurr (Charles Sturt University, NSW, Australia), Dr. Louis S. Hesler (Northern Grain Insects Research Laboratory, USA), Dr. V.V. Ramamurthy (Indian Agricultural Research Institute, India) for providing valuable suggestions and relevant literature about the studies. I am very much indebted for the help rendered by my colleagues Department from Pest Warning and Quality Control of Pesticides, Punjab and friends, especially Muhammad Arshad, Arshad Makhdoom Sabir, Muhammad Sajjad, Faisal Hafeez, Unsar Naeem Ullah, Muhammad Tayyab and Dr. Sikandar Hayat, as their company boosted my spirits during the period of my study. It is impossible to mention every individual’s name and his/her contribution to my career at University of Agriculture, Faisalabad. I extend my thanks all of them personally. Finally I apologize if I have caused anger or offence to anybody . Muhammad Asghar iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………..…..…………. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………..…..…….……… v LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………..………...….……….. vii LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………..…….…...………… xi LIST OF APPENDICES……………………………………………………….......….……….. xiii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS…………………………………………………………………. xiv ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………….….……… xvi SECTION: 1…………….…………………………………..…….. 1 1.1: INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………. 2 1.2: REVIEW OF LITERATURE…………………………………………………..………… 4 1.3: MATERIALS AND METHODS…………………………………………….…..……….. 12 1.3.1: Data analysis………………………………………………………………….….…..….. 14 1.4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………………………..…….…… 15 1.5: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION……………………………………………..…..…….. 52 SECTION: 2……………………………………………….……… 56 2.1: INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………..……..……. 57 2.2: REVIEW OF LITERATURE……………………………………………….…..……….. 60 2.2.1 Stem borers…………………………………………………………………….…..…….. 60 2.2.2 Leaffolder…………………………………………………………………….……..…… 64 2.3: MATERIALS AND METHODS………………………………………………..….…….. 67 2.3.1: Data analysis………………………………………………………………..…..………. 67 2.4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………………………..….……… 69 2.5: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION……………………………………….…..……..……. 73 SECTION: 3………………………………………………….…… 74 3.1: INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………….….….……. 75 3.2: REVIEW OF LITERATURE……………………………………………….….…..…….. 80 3.3: MATERIALS AND METHODS……………………………………………..……..……. 91 3.3.1 Selection of research sites…………………………………………………..……..…… 91 v 3.3.2 Insect Collection…………………………………………………………………..…….. 91 3.3.2.1 Sweep net………………………………………………………………………..…… 92 3.3.2.2 Light trap……………………………………………………………………….….… 92 3.3.2.3 Pitfall trap…………………………………………………………………….……… 92 3.4.2.4 Aquatic net……………………………………………………………………..…….. 93 3.3.3 Insect preservation and identification………………………………………………… 93 3.3.4 Metrological data……………………………………………………………….………. 94 3.3.5: Data analysis………………………………………………………………………..….. 94 3.3.5.1: Shannon-Weaver’s diversity index………………………………………….……… 94 3.3.5.2: Simpson's diversity index…………………………………………………………… 95 3.3.5.3: Hill’s diversity numbers…………………………………………………………….. 96 3.3.5.4: Estimation of species richness…………………………………………….………… 96 3.3.5.5 Cluster analysis………………………………………………………………………. 97 3.3.5.6 Principal Component Analysis……………………………………………………….. 97 3.3.5.7 Sorensen’s similarity index……………………………………………...…………… 97 3.3.6 Cost/benefit ratio……………………………………………………………………….. 97 3.4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…………………………………………………………... 98 3.5: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION…………………………………………….…………. 164 LITERATURE CITED……….………………………………………………. 170 vi LIST OF TABLES Sr. No. Title Page Section 1 Table 1.1: Some characteristics of the districts of the Kallar tract……………….... 14 Table 1.2: Educational level and age groups of the farmers in sampled area…….... 16 Table 1.3: Land holding of the surveyed farmers………………………………..… 17 Table 1.4: Knowledge about the safety of organic farming……………….……..… 18 Table 1.5: Reasons for non adoption of organic farming ………………….……… 19 Table 1.6: Knowledge about the harmful effects of HIP…………………………... 20 Table 1.7: Favour for High inputs/ Organic farming……………….…………….... 21 Table 1.8: Perception about the best method of farming …………….………….… 21 Table 1.9: Perception about pest insects attack in rice crop…………..…………… 22 Table 1.10: Perception about diseases attack in rice crop……………..……………. 24 Table 1.11: Perception about beneficial organisms in rice crop………..…..……….. 25 Table 1.12: Farmers’ views on number of years VS pest insects attack.....….……… 27 Table 1.13: Most problematic pest………………………………………………….. 27 Table 1.14: Most problematic pest insect and disease……………………...………. 29 Table 1.15: Weeds VS insect attack ……………………………….………….…..… 29 Table 1.16: Reasons for using insecticides……………………………………......... 30 Table 1.17: Problems related to pesticides with specific reference to health………. 32 Table 1.18: Average number of applications of various pesticides in rice crop……. 33 Table 1.19: Change in pesticides’ usage during last five years……………….…..… 35 Table 1.20: Practices of insecticide applications…………………………………..... 36 Table 1.21: Farmers’ favour for aerial spray against rice crop pest insects …….….. 38 Table 1.22: Seed treatment……….………………………………………….….…... 38 Table 1.23: Fungicides used by rice farmers………………………………………... 39 Table 1.24: Weedicides used by rice farmers ……………………………………… 39 Table 1.25: Insecticides used by rice farmers…………………………..…………... 41 Table 1.26: Fertilizers used by rice farmers……………….…………..…………..… 42 vii Table 1.27: Source of seed for rice crop ……………………………..…………..…. 43 Table 1.28: Plant population in farmer’s fields… ……………….……………….… 44 Table 1.29: Effect of weedicides on crop and sources of irrigation for rice crop..…. 45 Table 1.30: Rice straw burning …………………………………………………..…. 47 Table 1.31: Sources of information regarding plant protection measures against rice crop pest insects……..…………….………………….…… 49 Table 1.32: Area (acres) sown under different rice varieties……………………..…. 50 Section 2 Table 2.1: Comparison of mean values of different yield components for rice stem borers…………………………………………………..…. 69 Table 2.2: Comparison of mean values of different yield components for rice leaffolder……………………………………………………...... 71 Table 2.3: Economics of chemical control for rice stem borers……………………. 72 Table 2.4: Economics of chemical control for rice leaffolder……………………… 72 Section 3 Table 3.1: Number of insect species under different families and insect orders…… 98 Table 3.2: Diversity of insect orders…………………………………………..…… 101 Table 3.3: Comparison of order wise insect diversity in HIP and LIP rice farms..... 106 Table 3.4: Comparison of insect diversity among three districts..……………….... 113 Table 3.5: Effect of LIP & HIP rice crop agroecosystems on insect diversity among three districts……………………………………………………. 115 Table 3.6: Temporal variation in insect faunal diversity associated with rice crop agroecosystem in the District Sialkot………..………………………….
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pyrilla Perpusilla): Distribution, Life Cycle, Nature of Damage and Control Measures
    Pest of Sugarcane (Pyrilla perpusilla): Distribution, Life cycle, Nature of damage and Control measures Distribution Pyrilla perpusilla commonly known as Sugarcane plant hopper is mainly found is Asian countries like Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Burma, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Nepal, Pakistan, South China, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Vietnam. The original host of P. perpusilla is not known but it has been recorded feeding and reproducing on a wide range of species of Gramineae, Leguminae and Moraceae families. Identification of Pyrilla perpusilla Adult Pyrilla perpusilla is a pale tawny-yellow, soft-bodied insect with head prominently drawn forward to form a snout. The wingspan of males is 16 - 18 mm and 19 - 21 mm for females. Females have cretaceous threads called anal pads, arranged as bundles on terminal segment. The fore wings are semi-opaque in nature, with yellow-brown color. The fore wings are lightly covered with minute black spots. Both adults and nymphs are very active and suck sap from the leaves of sugarcane. On the slightest disturbance, they jump from leaf to leaf. Lifecycle or Pyrilla perpusilla Egg: Females lay eggs on the lower, shady and concealed side of the leaves near the midrib. Eggs are laid in clusters of 30-40 in number in rows of 4-5. They are covered by pale waxy material. Eggs are oval-shaped, pale whitish to bluish green when laid and turn brown just before hatching. A female lays 600 - 800 eggs in her lifetime. Nymph: Nymph passes through five nymphal instar stages to reach adult stage. The following table gives
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Morphology of the Male Genitalia in Lepidoptera
    COMPARATIVE MORPHOLOGY OF THE MALE GENITALIA IN LEPIDOPTERA. By DEV RAJ MEHTA, M. Sc.~ Ph. D. (Canta.b.), 'Univefsity Scholar of the Government of the Punjab, India (Department of Zoology, University of Oambridge). CONTENTS. PAGE. Introduction 197 Historical Review 199 Technique. 201 N ontenclature 201 Function • 205 Comparative Morphology 206 Conclusions in Phylogeny 257 Summary 261 Literature 1 262 INTRODUCTION. In the domains of both Morphology and Taxonomy the study' of Insect genitalia has evoked considerable interest during the past half century. Zander (1900, 1901, 1903) suggested a common structural plan for the genitalia in various orders of insects. This work stimulated further research and his conclusions were amplified by Crampton (1920) who homologized the different parts in the genitalia of Hymenoptera, Mecoptera, Neuroptera, Diptera, Trichoptera Lepidoptera, Hemiptera and Strepsiptera with those of more generalized insects like the Ephe­ meroptera and Thysanura. During this time the use of genitalic charac­ ters for taxonomic purposes was also realized particularly in cases where the other imaginal characters had failed to serve. In this con­ nection may be mentioned the work of Buchanan White (1876), Gosse (1883), Bethune Baker (1914), Pierce (1909, 1914, 1922) and others. Also, a comparative account of the genitalia, as a basis for the phylo­ genetic study of different insect orders, was employed by Walker (1919), Sharp and Muir (1912), Singh-Pruthi (1925) and Cole (1927), in Orthop­ tera, Coleoptera, Hemiptera and the Diptera respectively. It is sur­ prising, work of this nature having been found so useful in these groups, that an important order like the Lepidoptera should have escaped careful analysis at the hands of the morphologists.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Maize Shootfly: Atherigona Orientalis (Muscidae: Diptera)
    Lecture No 4 PESTS OF MAIZE AND WHEAT I. PEST OF MAIZE More than 130 insects have been recorded causing damage to maize in India. Among these, about half a dozen pests are of economic importance. Shoot fly, borers, shoot bug and aphid, polyphagous pest like cornworm cause considerable yield reduction in maize. Major pests 1. Maize shootfly Atherigona orientalis Muscidae Diptera 2. Stem borer Chilo partellus Crambidae Lepidoptera 3. Pink stem borer Sesamia inferens Noctuidae Lepidoptera 4. Cornworm/ Earworm Helicoverpa armigera Noctuidae Lepidoptera 5. Web worm Cryptoblabes gnidiella Pyraustidae Lepidoptera 6. Aphid Rhopalosiphum maidis Aphididae Hemiptera 7. Shoot bug Peregrinus maidis Delphacidae Hemiptera Minor Pests 8. Climbing Mythimna separata Noctuidae Lepidoptera cut worm 9. Ash weevil Myllocerus sp., Curculionidae Coleoptera 10. Phadka grasshopper Hieroglyphus Acrididae Orthoptera nigrorepletus 11. Leafhopper Pyrilla perpusilla Lophopidae Hemiptera Major pests 1. Maize shootfly: Atherigona orientalis (Muscidae: Diptera) Distribution and status Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Karnataka. Host range: Maize, sorghum, ragi and bajra Damage symptoms The maggot feeds on the young growing shoots resulting in “dead hearts”. Bionomics: Small grey coloured fly. Management • Grow resistant cultivars like DMR 5, NCD, VC 80 • Furrow application of phorate granules 10 G 10 kg/ha (or) lindane 6 G 25 kg per ha 2. Stem borer: Chilo partellus (Crambidae: Lepidoptera) Distribution and status India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Iraq, Japan, Uganda, Taiwan, Sudan, Nepal, Bangladesh and Thailand. Host range: Jowar, bajra, sugarcane and rice Damage symptoms It infests the crop a month after sowing and upto emergence of cobs. Central shoot withering leading to “dead heart” is the typical damage symptom.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Pest Management Package for Leafhoppers and Planthoppers (Insecta: Hemiptera) in Paddy Fields
    Journal of Agricultural Science and Engineering Vol. 6, No. 3, 2020, pp. 26-37 http://www.aiscience.org/journal/jase ISSN: 2381-6821 (Print); ISSN: 2381-6848 (Online) Integrated Pest Management Package for Leafhoppers and Planthoppers (Insecta: Hemiptera) in Paddy Fields Muhammad Sarwar * National Institute for Biotechnology & Genetic Engineering (NIBGE), Faisalabad, Pakistan Abstract The aim of the present article is to shed light on the current status, species composition, abundance, habitat affinities, distribution patterns of leafhoppers and planthoppers along with their integrated pest management (IPM) in the rice growing regions. Leafhoppers and planthoppers such as white rice leafhopper ( Cofana spectra Distant), brown planthopper (Nilaparvata lugens Stal), whitebacked planthopper [ Sogatella furcifera (Horvath)], green planthoppers [Nephotettix nigropictus (Stal)] and Nephotettix virescens (Distant), and lophopid leafhopper (Pyrilla perpusilla Walker) are sap feeders from the xylem and phloem tissues of the plant. Both adults plus nymphs of leafhoppers and planthoppers have piercing mouthparts that they insert into the leaf blades and leaf sheaths of rice plants to suck sap, and egg laying by hoppers blocks the water and food channels inside the plant. Severely damaged plants become dry and take on the brownish appearance as these have been damaged by fire, hence termed as hopper burn and at this level, crop loss may be 100%. The Integrated Pest Management (IPM) philosophies are growing a healthy crop by conserving of natural
    [Show full text]
  • List of Parasitic Hymenopterans Recorded from Rice Ecosystems of India
    J. Exp. Zool. India Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 877-889, 2019 www.connectjournals.com/jez ISSN 0972-0030 LIST OF PARASITIC HYMENOPTERANS RECORDED FROM RICE ECOSYSTEMS OF INDIA J. Alfred Daniel* and K. Ramaraju Department of Agricultural Entomology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore - 641 003, India. *e-mail : [email protected] (Received 20 February 2019; Accepted 17 June 2019) ABSTRACT : An inventory of the diversity of hymenopteran parasitoids associated with rice agroecosystem of Indian subcontinent has revealed 377 species recorded so far. Of all the 377 species, only 6 per cent (22 Nos.) is represented by Aculeata and 94 per cent (355 Nos.) are Parasitica. These parasitoids fall under 206 genera belonging to 11 super families and 28 families. The eleven super families were, Apoidea (1), Chrysidoidea (16), Vespoidea (5), Ceraphronoidea (3), Chalcidoidea (171), Cynipoidea (2), Diaproidea (6), Evanoidea (3), Incheumonoidea (112), Platygastroidea (57) and Prototrupoidea (1). A total of 85 species of parasitoids were added in the list from the present study itself and 136 species were added in the existing check list by Dey et al (1999), which suggest that there is much scope in the aspect of studying the diversity of parasitic hymenopterans associated with rice ecosystems of India and to exploit them as biological control agents to make Indian agriculture less dependent on insecticides. Key words : Parasitic hymenopterans, rice ecosystems, insecticides. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS Rice fields harbour a rich and varied fauna than any Though the inventory was principally supported by other agricultural crop (Heckman, 1979; Fritz et al, 2011). the Thompson’s catalogue (1953) and was framed on the The fauna is dominated by micro, meso and macro basis of Dey et al (1999), information from many other arthropods inhabiting soil, water and vegetation sub- primary and secondary sources of information retrieval habitats of the rice fields.
    [Show full text]
  • Pyrilla the Sugarcane Leafhopper, Pyrilla Perpusilla Walker
    IPM Package of Practices for Management of Sugarcane Leaf hopper/ Pyrilla The sugarcane Leafhopper, Pyrilla perpusilla Walker (Lophopidae: Homoptera), commonly known as Indian sugarcane leafhopper, is one of the most destructive pests, and widely distributed in India including in Bihar, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, and Madhya Pradesh than in peninsular India. It is a threat to Indian sugar industry and a serious pest, causing 31.6% reduction in cane yield and 2-3% reduction in sugar recovery if not properly managed. Life cycle of Sugarcane Pyrilla Egg: The female Pyrilla lays eggs during day time, on the abaxial surface of the leaves along the midrib and it prefers a lower, shady and concealed side of leaves near midrib for oviposition. They are deposited in four to five rows (30-40 numbers/cluster) and are covered with a waxy thread-like material secreted by the female. During the winter, eggs are laid on the inside of the base of the leaf sheath, giving some protection from adverse climatic conditions. The females usually lay white to greenish yellow eggs which are 0.9-1.0 mm long and 0.45-0.64 mm wide. The interval between each laying during April-October is 2-6 days, 7-25 days during November-December and 57-126 days during November-January. Twenty to fifty eggs are laid at a time, with a life-time fecundity of 600-800. The incubation period varies with season, ranging from 6 to 30 days. Eggs mass of Pyrilla Nymph: Newly emerged nymphs are 0.8-1.0 mm long and 0.54-0.64 mm wide, milky white in colour and pass through five instars, each occupying 7-41 days with a maximum total nymphal period of 134 days, to become adult.
    [Show full text]
  • Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) in Eastern and Northeastern Parts of Turkey 419-462 ©Biologiezentrum Linz, Austria, Download Unter
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Linzer biologische Beiträge Jahr/Year: 2008 Band/Volume: 0040_1 Autor(en)/Author(s): Coruh Saliha, Özbek Hikmet Artikel/Article: A faunistic and systematic study on Pimplinae (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) in Eastern and Northeastern parts of Turkey 419-462 ©Biologiezentrum Linz, Austria, download unter www.biologiezentrum.at Linzer biol. Beitr. 40/1 419-462 10.7.2008 A faunistic and systematic study on Pimplinae (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) in Eastern and Northeastern parts of Turkey S. ÇORUH & H. ÖZBEK Abstract: This is a faunistic and systematic study on the subfamily Pimplinae (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) occurring in eastern and northeastern parts of Turkey, during 1999-2004. Totally, 55 species in 24 genera and 5 tribes were recognized. Of these, 16 species are new for the Turkish fauna. New distribution areas are added for almost all previous known species. Keys to the tribes, genera and species are prepared. New hostes are designated for some species. Total species in the subfamily Pimplinae have been recorded occurring in Turkey compile 77 species in 30 genera. K e y w o r d s : Pimplinae, Ichneumonidae, Hymenoptera, Fauna, Systematics, new Records, new Hosts, Turkey. Introduction The Ichneumonidae (Hymenoptera), is a widespread and extremely large family, with an estimated 60.000 extant species in 35 genera worldwide (TOWNES 1969). GAULD (2000) estimated, by extrapolating from recent collections that the total global species-richness of the family will be more than 100.000 species. The family is most species-rich in the temperate regions and the humid tropics; relatively more species in cool moist climates than in warm dry ones (GAULD 1991).
    [Show full text]
  • The Phylogeny and Evolutionary Biology of the Pimplinae (Hymenoptera : Ichneumonidae)
    THE PHYLOGENY AND EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY OF THE PIMPLINAE (HYMENOPTERA : ICHNEUMONIDAE) Paul Eggleton A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the University of London Department of Entomology Department of Pure & Applied B ritish Museum (Natural H istory) Biology, Imperial College London London May 1989 ABSTRACT £ The phylogeny and evolutionary biology of the Pimplinae are investigated using a cladistic compatibility method. Cladistic methodology is reviewed in the introduction, and the advantages of using a compatibility method explained. Unweighted and weighted compatibility techniques are outlined. The presently accepted classification of the Pimplinae is investigated by reference to the diagnostic characters used by earlier workers. The Pimplinae do not form a natural grouping using this character set. An additional 22 new characters are added to the data set for a further analysis. The results show that the Pimplinae (sensu lato) form four separate and unconnected lineages. It is recommended that the lineages each be given subfamily status. Other taxonomic changes at tribal level are suggested. The host and host microhabitat relations of the Pimplinae (sensu s tr ic to ) are placed within the evolutionary framework of the analyses of morphological characters. The importance of a primitive association with hosts in decaying wood is stressed, and the various evolutionary pathways away from this microhabitat discussed. The biology of the Rhyssinae is reviewed, especially with respect to mating behaviour and male reproductive strategies. The Rhyssinae (78 species) are analysed cladistically using 62 characters, but excluding characters thought to be connected with mating behaviour. Morphometric studies show that certain male gastral characters are associated with particular mating systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Doctor of Philosophy Agricultural Entomology
    INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT OF SUGARCANE PYRILLA, Pyrilla perpusilla WLK. (HOMOPTERA : LOPHOPIDAE) IN PUNJAB, PAKISTAN By Amer Rasul 94-ag-1212 M.Sc. (Hons.) Agri Entomology Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN AGRICULTURAL ENTOMOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ENTOMOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE, FAISALABAD PAKISTAN 2011 i The Controller of Examinations, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad. We, supervisory committee certify that contents and form of thesis submitted by Mr. Amer Rasul (94-ag-1212) have been found satisfactory and recommend that it may be processed for evaluation by external examiner(s) for the award of degree. SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN _______________________________ (DR. MANSOOR UL HASAN) MEMBER _______________________________ (DR. ANJUM SUHAIL) MEMBER _______________________________ (DR. SHAHBAZ TALIB SAHI) ii Dedicated To My Beloved Parents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to the ALMIGHTY ALLAH, the propitious, the benevolent and the sovereign, whose blessing and glory flourished my thoughts and thrived my ambitions, giving me talented teachers, affectionate parents, sweet sisters and caring brothers. Trampling lips and wet eyes praise the HOLY PROPHET MUHAMMAD (Peace be upon him), for enlightening our conscience with the essence of faith in ALLAH, converging all His kindness and mercy upon him. With profound gratitude and a deep sence of devotion, I wish to thank my worthy supervisor, Dr. Mansoor-ul-Hassan, Professor, Department of Agri. Entomology, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, for his co-operative/encouraging attitude, utilizing help, keen interest, valuable comments and guidance throughout the course of this study. I do not find appropriate words to express my deep gratitude to my sincere and respectable teachers: Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX G. Bibliography of ECOTOX Open Literature
    APPENDIX G. Bibliography of ECOTOX Open Literature Explanation of OPP Acceptability Criteria and Rejection Codes for ECOTOX Data Studies located and coded into ECOTOX must meet acceptability criteria, as established in the Interim Guidance of the Evaluation Criteria for Ecological Toxicity Data in the Open Literature, Phase I and II, Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, July 16, 2004. Studies that do not meet these criteria are designated in the bibliography as “Accepted for ECOTOX but not OPP.” The intent of the acceptability criteria is to ensure data quality and verifiability. The criteria parallel criteria used in evaluating registrant-submitted studies. Specific criteria are listed below, along with the corresponding rejection code. · The paper does not report toxicology information for a chemical of concern to OPP; (Rejection Code: NO COC) • The article is not published in English language; (Rejection Code: NO FOREIGN) • The study is not presented as a full article. Abstracts will not be considered; (Rejection Code: NO ABSTRACT) • The paper is not publicly available document; (Rejection Code: NO NOT PUBLIC (typically not used, as any paper acquired from the ECOTOX holding or through the literature search is considered public) • The paper is not the primary source of the data; (Rejection Code: NO REVIEW) • The paper does not report that treatment(s) were compared to an acceptable control; (Rejection Code: NO CONTROL) • The paper does not report an explicit duration of exposure; (Rejection Code: NO DURATION) • The paper does not report a concurrent environmental chemical concentration/dose or application rate; (Rejection Code: NO CONC) • The paper does not report the location of the study (e.g., laboratory vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Bt Crops: Predicting Effects of Escaped Transgenes on the Fitness of Wild Plants and Their Herbivores
    Environ. Biosafety Res. 2 (2003) 219–246 © ISBR, EDP Sciences, 2004 DOI: 10.1051/ebr:2003014 Bt crops: Predicting effects of escaped transgenes on the fitness of wild plants and their herbivores Deborah K. LETOURNEAU1,*, Gaden S. ROBINSON2 and Joy A. HAGEN1 1 Department of Environmental Studies, University of California, Santa Cruz, USA 2 Department of Entomology, The Natural History Museum, London, UK One prominent concern about genetically modified crops is the possibility of environmental impacts from the movement of fitness-enhancing traits to wild plant populations. Decisions to deregulate Bt crops in the USA have relied strongly on arguments that these crops will not interbreed with wild relatives in the permitted growing regions. Limited attention therefore has been directed to analyses of the consequences of gene flow. To provide a transparent evaluation process for risks associated with insecticidal transgene escape, we crafted a series of questions designed to guide this aspect of the risk assessment. We then explored the current knowledge base available for answering such risk-related questions for three Bt crops (cotton, rapeseed, and rice). First, we generated a list of wild relatives of these crops. A definitive list of potential transgene recipients is not yet possible for some crops. Sufficient data are not available for some crops to eliminate certain related plant species from consideration of fertile hybrid formation, thus making lists for these crops subject to speculation. Second, we queried the HOSTS database (UK) to obtain a worldwide listing of lepidopteran species that feed on these crops and their wild relatives, and to determine the host range of the larvae.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix H. Accepted ECOTOX Data Table (Sorted by Effect) and Bibliography
    Appendix H. Accepted ECOTOX Data Table (sorted by effect) and Bibliography Table H-1. Freshwater fish data from ECOTOX. Data are arranged in alphabetical order by Effect Group. The code list for ECOTOX can be found at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ecotox/blackbox/help/codelist.pdf. Chemical Effect Conc Conc Conc % Species Effect Meas Endpt1 Endpt2 Dur Dur Unit Ref # Name Group Value1 Value2 Units Purity Hyphessobrycon bifasciatus, Endosulfan II ACC ACC GACC BCF 21 d 0.0001 mg/L 100 7009 Yellow tetra Hyphessobrycon bifasciatus, Endosulfan ACC ACC GACC BCF 21 d 0.0003 mg/L 100 7009 Yellow tetra Hyphessobrycon bifasciatus, Endosulfan I ACC ACC GACC BCF 21 d 0.0002 mg/L 100 7009 Yellow tetra Hyphessobrycon bifasciatus, Endosulfan ACC ACC GACC BCF 21 d 0.0002 mg/L 100 8035 Yellow tetra Hyphessobrycon bifasciatus, Endosulfan ACC ACC GACC BCF 21 d 0.0003 mg/L 100 8035 Yellow tetra Hyphessobrycon bifasciatus, Endosulfan ACC ACC GACC BCF 21 d 0.0001 mg/L 100 8035 Yellow tetra Endosulfan I Salmo salar, Atlantic salmon ACC ACC GACC BAF 92 d 0.724 ppm 100 104113 Endosulfan II Salmo salar, Atlantic salmon ACC ACC GACC BAF 92 d 0.315 ppm 100 104113 Endosulfan I Salmo salar, Atlantic salmon ACC ACC RSDE NOAEL 49 d 0.03 ppm 99.8 104340 Channa punctata, Snake-head Endosulfan BCM ENZ GSTR LOEC 1 d 0.005 mg/L 100 81028 catfish Channa punctata, Snake-head Endosulfan BCM BCM PCAR LOEC 1 d 0.005 mg/L 100 81028 catfish Channa punctata, Snake-head Endosulfan BCM ENZ GSTR LOEC 1 d 0.005 mg/L 100 81028 catfish Channa punctata, Snake-head Endosulfan BCM ENZ CTLS LOEC 1 d 0.005 mg/L 100 81028 catfish Channa punctata, Snake-head Endosulfan BCM BCM GLTH LOEC 1 d 0.005 mg/L 100 81028 catfish Channa punctata, Snake-head Endosulfan BCM ENZ GLRE LOEC 1 d 0.005 mg/L 100 81028 catfish Page H-1 Table H-1.
    [Show full text]