DOCSLIB.ORG

Conservation Biological Control of Western Bean Cutworm

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Conservation Biological Control of Western Bean Cutworm View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Dissertations and Student Research in Entomology Entomology, Department of 8-2017 Conservation Biological Control of Western Bean Cutworm: Molecular gut content analysis of arthropod predators, feeding trials for key predators and agricultural surveys for integrated pest management Westen Ray Archibald University of Nebraska-Lincoln Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/entomologydiss Part of the Entomology Commons Archibald, Westen Ray, "Conservation Biological Control of Western Bean Cutworm: Molecular gut content analysis of arthropod predators, feeding trials for key predators and agricultural surveys for integrated pest management" (2017). Dissertations and Student Research in Entomology. 49. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/entomologydiss/49 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Entomology, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Student Research in Entomology by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. i Conservation Biological Control of Western Bean Cutworm: Molecular gut content analysis of arthropod predators, feeding trials for key predators and agricultural surveys for integrated pest management by Westen Ray Archibald A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Master of Science Major: Entomology Under the Supervision of Professors Julie Peterson and Robert Wright Lincoln, Nebraska August 2017 ii Conservation Biological Control of Western Bean Cutworm: Molecular gut content analysis of arthropod predators, feeding trials for key predators and agricultural surveys for integrated pest management Westen Ray Archibald, M.S. University of Nebraska, 2017 Advisors: Julie A. Peterson and Robert J. Wright Western bean cutworm (WBC), Striacosta albicosta is a major pest of corn in western Nebraska. In 1999, its range expanded into much of North America causing damage from Nebraska to Canada and Mexico. WBC periodically causes kernel damage as severe as 15 bu/ac for one larva/plant. Control for WBC relies on Bt corn hybrids with Vip3A and Cry1F traits and insecticides. There has been a 5.2-fold decrease in efficacy of Cry1F for WBC. Concerns over management tactics may be creating space for conservation biological control to become part of a WBC integrated pest management (IPM) program. Objective 1, used an online survey to determine Nebraska stakeholder concerns, understanding, and practices for WBC IPM. Respondents self-reported significantly higher yield loss due to WBC in 2016 than in 2015 and 2014. Growers demonstrated low knowledge of WBC identification and management. There were frequent reports (58.45%) of Cry1F Bt corn providing decreased control against WBC. In objective 2, predator surveys for natural enemies of WBC indicated that four generalist predators were ubiquitous in Nebraska corn fields. Some species had population dynamics that were associated with the WBC population dynamics in corn. Lab-based feeding trials indicated that Coleomegilla maculata (De Geer) was a superior predator for WBC eggs and larvae. However, molecular gut content analysis of surveyed predators found in-field predation by multiple generalist predators but not C. maculata. By determining the needs iii of growers and the role of predators for WBC, conservation biological control may be incorporated into a WBC IPM program. iv Acknowledgements I would like to thank my Co-advisors Julie A. Peterson and Robert J. Wright and committee member Jeff Bradshaw for their support, guidance, corrections, and wisdom. Also, thank you for sharing your resources funding this project. Thank you to the USDA-Critical Agricultural Research & Extension Grant #2015-67028- 23519 and USDA-HATCH Multistate Project #NEB-42-113 for funding this project. Thank you to the Entomology Department, especially the many wonderful members of the Agroecosystems Entomology Lab. Kayla Mollet and Grace Hirzel for your excellent help as technicians. Alex Lehmann for helping with collecting predators. Débora Montezano and Camila Oliveira Hofman for your guidance and help in this process. Thanks to Dr. Tony Adesemoye and his lab for sharing their molecular equipment and facilities with me. Thank you to Dr. Brewer, Chief Charles Ragland, the Bruner Club, and the U.S. Navy for teaching me that the military needs entomologists and helping bring so many dreams together in one place. Thank you to the USDA National Agricultural Statistical Service for helping me at the beginning stages of survey design. Thank you to Jason Adams and YouTube for helping me with my statistics. A special thanks to all the friends and family who have helped me through this process of discovery and growth. v Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ iv Table of Contents ................................................................................................................ v Table of Figure Legends .................................................................................................. vii List of Tables ................................................................................................................... viii Chapter 1 : Review of Literature ....................................................................................... 1 Western bean cutworm ................................................................................................. 1 Biology and ecology ............................................................................................................................... 1 Range and expansion .............................................................................................................................. 4 Surveys for integrated pest management .................................................................... 7 Current western bean cutworm management practices ............................................ 8 Injury ...................................................................................................................................................... 8 Trapping adults ....................................................................................................................................... 9 Scouting ................................................................................................................................................ 10 Foliar insecticides ................................................................................................................................. 11 Cultural methods................................................................................................................................... 12 Transgenic corn .................................................................................................................................... 12 Biological control of western bean cutworm............................................................. 13 Biological control of other lepidopteran pests .......................................................... 15 Spodoptera frugiperda .......................................................................................................................... 15 Helicoverpa zea .................................................................................................................................... 16 Ostrinia nubilalis................................................................................................................................... 17 Coleomegilla maculata ................................................................................................ 17 Biology and ecology ............................................................................................................................. 17 Coleomegilla maculata in biological control ........................................................................................ 19 Chapter 2 : Using an online survey to measure Nebraska stakeholders’ understanding and implementation of western bean cutworm ............................................................... 22 Materials and Methods ............................................................................................... 23 Survey design ....................................................................................................................................... 23 Results .......................................................................................................................... 24 Distribution of responses ...................................................................................................................... 24 WBC damage in 2014- 2016 ................................................................................................................ 27 Scouting practices ................................................................................................................................. 28 Degree day models ............................................................................................................................... 31 Confidence with
Load more

Recommended publications
  • BRS Weed Risk Assessment Data Entry Form 4.0 Use the Weed Risk Assessment (WRA) Work Instructions to Fill out the Fields Below
    BRS Weed Risk Assessment Data Entry Form 4.0 Use the Weed Risk Assessment (WRA) Work Instructions to fill out the fields below. Be sure to read all of the text associated with each question every time you conduct a WRA. Basic information (8 questions) (1) WRA version number (2) WRA number 4.0 2015­163­001 (3) GE or baseline (4) Baseline WRA number GE 2014­273­001 (5) CBI (6) Applicant no N/A (7) Preparers (8) Reviewers BRS BRS Taxonomy and sexually compatible relatives (6 questions) (9) Common name (10) Scientific name Corn (NRCS, 2015b) Zea mays ssp. mays L. (ITIS, 2015) (11) Other common names Draft GE information Roundup Ready corn ­­­­­ Baseline information Maize, Indian corn (NCBI Taxonomy Browser, 2015) (12) Scientific name synonyms GE information N/A ­­­­­ Baseline information z Zea alba Mill. z Zea amylacea Sturtev. z Zea everta Sturtev. z Zea indentata Sturtev. z Zea indurata Sturtev. z Zea japonica Van Houtte z Zea saccharata Sturtev. z Zea tunicata (Larrañaga ex A. St.­Hil.) Sturtev. z Zea mays ssp. ceratina (Kuelshov) Zhuk. (ITIS, 2015) z Zea mays subsp. mays (NCBI_Taxonomy Browser, 2015) There are others but these synonyms show up in the literature more often. (13) Taxonomic scope GE information The taxonomic scope of this WRA remains limited to Zea mays ssp. mays. ­­­­­ Baseline information This weed risk assessment covers only Zea mays ssp. mays. There are other subspecies of Zea mays but they will not be addressed here. 14) Sexually compatible relatives GE information Draft N/A ­­­­­ Baseline information Teosinte ­Teosinte is the closest relative of corn; it hybridizes with corn and hybrids can be fully fertile (Wilkes, 1977; OGTR, 2008).
    [Show full text]
  • Coleomegilla Maculata (Degeer) Predation on Eggs of Colorado Potato Beetle, Leptinotarsa Decemlineata (Say)
    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Masters Theses 1911 - February 2014 1989 Coleomegilla maculata (DeGeer) predation on eggs of Colorado potato beetle, Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say). Ruth V. Hazzard University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/theses Hazzard, Ruth V., "Coleomegilla maculata (DeGeer) predation on eggs of Colorado potato beetle, Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say)." (1989). Masters Theses 1911 - February 2014. 3055. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.umass.edu/theses/3055 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]. COLEOMEGILLA MACULATA (DEGEER) PREDATION ON EGGS OF COLORADO POTATO BEETLE, LEPTINOTARSA DECEMLINEATA (SAY) A Thesis Presented by RUTH V. HAZZARD Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE May 1989 Department of Entomology COLEOMEGILLA MACULATA (DEGEER) PREDATION ON EGGS OF COLORADO POTATO BEETLE, LEPTINOTARSA DECEMLINEATA (SAY) A Thesis Presented by RUTH V. HAZZARD Approved as to style and content by: David N. Ferro, Chairperson of Committee Jo^epl/ S. Elkinton, Member ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful to Dave Ferro for keeping the door to his office always open for me, and thereby opening the door to the profession of Entomology. Special thanks to Roy Van Driesche and Joe Elkinton for their assistance in this work, and to all of my professors for their generosity in teaching. I appreciate the help of Buddy, Tuan and Jennifer in counting eggs and feeding beetles, which made these experiments possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Biosecurity Plan for the Vegetable Industry
    Biosecurity Plan for the Vegetable Industry A shared responsibility between government and industry Version 3.0 May 2018 Plant Health AUSTRALIA Location: Level 1 1 Phipps Close DEAKIN ACT 2600 Phone: +61 2 6215 7700 Fax: +61 2 6260 4321 E-mail: [email protected] Visit our web site: www.planthealthaustralia.com.au An electronic copy of this plan is available through the email address listed above. © Plant Health Australia Limited 2018 Copyright in this publication is owned by Plant Health Australia Limited, except when content has been provided by other contributors, in which case copyright may be owned by another person. With the exception of any material protected by a trade mark, this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivs 3.0 Australia licence. Any use of this publication, other than as authorised under this licence or copyright law, is prohibited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/ - This details the relevant licence conditions, including the full legal code. This licence allows for redistribution, commercial and non-commercial, as long as it is passed along unchanged and in whole, with credit to Plant Health Australia (as below). In referencing this document, the preferred citation is: Plant Health Australia Ltd (2018) Biosecurity Plan for the Vegetable Industry (Version 3.0 – 2018) Plant Health Australia, Canberra, ACT. This project has been funded by Hort Innovation, using the vegetable research and development levy and contributions from the Australian Government. Hort Innovation is the grower-owned, not for profit research and development corporation for Australian horticulture Disclaimer: The material contained in this publication is produced for general information only.
    [Show full text]
  • WO 2016/038067 Al 17 March 2016 (17.03.2016) P O P C T
    (12) INTERNATIONAL APPLICATION PUBLISHED UNDER THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT) (19) World Intellectual Property Organization International Bureau (10) International Publication Number (43) International Publication Date WO 2016/038067 Al 17 March 2016 (17.03.2016) P O P C T (51) International Patent Classification: (81) Designated States (unless otherwise indicated, for every A01N 43/90 (2006.01) A01P 13/00 (2006.01) kind of national protection available): AE, AG, AL, AM, A01N 57/20 (2006.01) AO, AT, AU, AZ, BA, BB, BG, BH, BN, BR, BW, BY, BZ, CA, CH, CL, CN, CO, CR, CU, CZ, DE, DK, DM, (21) Number: International Application DO, DZ, EC, EE, EG, ES, FI, GB, GD, GE, GH, GM, GT, PCT/EP2015/070554 HN, HR, HU, ID, IL, IN, IR, IS, JP, KE, KG, KN, KP, KR, (22) International Filing Date: KZ, LA, LC, LK, LR, LS, LU, LY, MA, MD, ME, MG, >September 2015 (09.09.2015) MK, MN, MW, MX, MY, MZ, NA, NG, NI, NO, NZ, OM, PA, PE, PG, PH, PL, PT, QA, RO, RS, RU, RW, SA, SC, (25) Filing Language: English SD, SE, SG, SK, SL, SM, ST, SV, SY, TH, TJ, TM, TN, (26) Publication Language: English TR, TT, TZ, UA, UG, US, UZ, VC, VN, ZA, ZM, ZW. (30) Priority Data: (84) Designated States (unless otherwise indicated, for every 62/048,308 10 September 2014 (10.09.2014) US kind of regional protection available): ARIPO (BW, GH, GM, KE, LR, LS, MW, MZ, NA, RW, SD, SL, ST, SZ, (71) Applicant: BASF SE [DE/DE]; 67056 Ludwigshafen TZ, UG, ZM, ZW), Eurasian (AM, AZ, BY, KG, KZ, RU, (DE).
    [Show full text]
  • Contrasting Ladybird Beetle Responses to Urban Environments Across Two US Regions
    sustainability Article Context Matters: Contrasting Ladybird Beetle Responses to Urban Environments across Two US Regions Monika Egerer 1,* ID , Kevin Li 2 and Theresa Wei Ying Ong 3,4 ID 1 Environmental Studies Department, University of California, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA 2 Department of Plant Sciences, University of Göttingen, Göttingen NI 37077, Germany; [email protected] 3 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA; [email protected] 4 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-734-775-8950 Received: 8 April 2018; Accepted: 30 May 2018; Published: 1 June 2018 Abstract: Urban agroecosystems offer an opportunity to investigate the diversity and distribution of organisms that are conserved in city landscapes. This information is not only important for conservation efforts, but also has important implications for sustainable agricultural practices. Associated biodiversity can provide ecosystem services like pollination and pest control, but because organisms may respond differently to the unique environmental filters of specific urban landscapes, it is valuable to compare regions that have different abiotic conditions and urbanization histories. In this study, we compared the abundance and diversity of ladybird beetles within urban gardens in California and Michigan, USA. We asked what species are shared, and what species are unique to urban regions. Moreover, we asked how beetle diversity is influenced by the amount and rate of urbanization surrounding sampled urban gardens. We found that the abundance and diversity of beetles, particularly of unique species, respond in opposite directions to urbanization: ladybirds increased with urbanization in California, but decreased with urbanization in Michigan.
    [Show full text]
  • Agro-Biotechnology: New Plant Pest Caused by Genetically Engineered Corn
    TEST BIOTECH Testbiotech Institute for Independent Impact Assessment in Biotechnology Agro-Biotechnology: New plant pest caused by genetically engineered corn The spread of the western bean cutworm causes massive damage in the US Testbiotech Report March 2010, prepared for Greenpeace Germany Author: Christoph Then Cooperation: Lars Neumeister, Andreas Bauer Editing: Andrea Reiche New plant pest caused by genetically engineered corn The spred of the western bean cutworm causes massive damage in the US A Testbiotech Report prepared for Greenpeace Germany Imprint Testbiotech e.V. Frohschammerstr. 14 80807 München Tel.: +49 (0) 89 358 992 76 Fax: +49 (0) 89 359 66 22 [email protected] www.testbiotech.org Executive Director: Dr. Christoph Then Date of Publication March 2010 Content | New plant pest caused by genetically engineered corn | 3 Content 03 Content 04 Summary 05 Genetically engineered corn exposes Bt toxin in a new way 05 New pest spreads 06 Fig. 1: Western Bean Cutworm infestation 2000-2009 07 Genetically engineered corn as the cause 08 Fig. 2: „Pest replacement“ in Cry1Ab producing Bt-corn (MON810, YieldGard) 09 Massive damage 09 Industry´s solution: More genetically engineered corn 10 Fig. 3: Examples for damages caused by the western bean cutworm to corn with and without expressing Cry1F 14 Industry´s solution: More hazardous insecticides 16 Table 1: Insecticides labelled for western bean cutworm in corn 17 Some points for discussion 19 Conclusions 20 References 4 | New plant pest caused by genetically engineered corn | Summary Summary In the US genetically engineered corn plants expressing the Bt toxin classified as Cry1Ab are being infested by the larvae of the western bean cutworm (Striacosta albicosta).
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Target Organism Risk Assessment of MIR604 Maize Expressing Mcry3a for Control of Corn Rootworm
    J. Appl. Entomol. 131(6), 391–399 (2007) doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0418.2007.01200.x Ó 2007 The Authors Journal compilation Ó 2007 Blackwell Verlag, Berlin Non-target organism risk assessment of MIR604 maize expressing mCry3A for control of corn rootworm A. Raybould1, D. Stacey1, D. Vlachos2, G. Graser2,X.Li2 and R. Joseph2 1Syngenta, Jealott’s Hill International Research Centre, Bracknell, Berkshire, UK; 2Syngenta Biotechnology, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, USA Ms. received: February 19, 2007; accepted: April 6, 2007 Abstract: Event MIR604 maize expresses a modified Cry3A protein (mCry3A), for control of corn rootworm. As part of the environmental safety assessment of MIR604 maize, risks to non-target organisms of mCry3A were assessed. The potential exposure of non-target organisms to mCry3A following cultivation of MIR604 maize was determined, and the hypothesis that such exposure is not harmful was tested. The hypothesis was tested rigorously by making worst-case or highly conservative assumptions about exposure, along with laboratory testing for hazards using species taxonomically related to the target pest and species expected to have high exposure to mCry3A, or both. Further rigour was introduced by study designs incorporating long exposures and measurements of sensitive endpoints. No adverse effects were observed in any study, and in most cases exposure to mCry3A in the study was higher than the worst-case expected exposure. In all cases, exposure in the study was higher than realistic, but still conservative, estimates of exposure. These results indicate minimal risk of MIR604 maize to non-target organisms. Key words: environmental safety, exposure, hazard, hypothesis testing, transgenic plants 1 Introduction Control of corn rootworms requires insecticides or crop rotation, and both methods can occasionally fail Corn rootworms are serious pests of maize in the USA, to prevent yield loss because of adaptation of the pest where they cause estimated annual losses of 1 billion (Rice 2003).
    [Show full text]
  • Arthropod Communities and Transgenic Cotton in the Western United States: Implications for Biological Control S.E
    284 Naranjo and Ellsworth ___________________________________________________________________ ARTHROPOD COMMUNITIES AND TRANSGENIC COTTON IN THE WESTERN UNITED STATES: IMPLICATIONS FOR BIOLOGICAL CONTROL S.E. Naranjo1 and P.C. Ellsworth2 1U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Phoenix, Arizona, U.S.A. 2University of Arizona, Maricopa, Arizona, U.S.A. INTRODUCTION Cotton, transgenically modified to express the insecticidal proteins of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), has been available commercially in the United States since 1996. Bt cotton is widely used throughout the cotton belt (Layton et al., 1999), and more than 65% of the acreage in Arizona has been planted to Bt cotton since 1997. In the low desert production areas of Arizona and California, Pectinophora gossypiella (Saunders), the pink bollworm, is the major target of Bt cotton. A number of other lepidopterous species occur in this area, but they are sporadic secondary pests of cotton whose population outbreaks are typically induced by indiscriminate use of broad-spectrum insecticides. As a result of the adoption of Bt-cotton and the coincident introduction and adoption of selective insect growth regulators for suppression of Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius), insecticide usage in Arizona cotton over the past decade as declined from a high of 12.5 applications per acre in 1995 to 1.9 in 1999 (Ellsworth and Jones, 2001). These reductions in insecticide use have broadened opportunities for all biological control approaches in cotton. Beyond concern for the maintenance of susceptibility in target pest populations there also are a number of ecological and environmental questions associated with use of transgenic crops, one of the most prominent being effects on non-target organisms.
    [Show full text]
  • Striacosta Albicosta) in Pennsylvania
    © 2010 Plant Management Network. Accepted for publication 14 April 2010. Published 16 June 2010. First Report of Western Bean Cutworm (Striacosta albicosta) in Pennsylvania John F. Tooker and Shelby J. Fleischer, Department of Entomology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802 Corresponding author: John F. Tooker. [email protected] Tooker, J. F., and Fleischer, S. J. 2010. First report of western bean cutworm (Striacosta albicosta) in Pennsylvania. Online. Crop Management doi:10.1094/CM-2010-0616-01-RS. The western bean cutworm [Striacosta albicosta (Smith); Noctuidae] (Fig. 1) is a lepidopteran species native to western North America; however, this occasionally serious pest of corn (Zea mays L.) and dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) has been expanding its range eastward (1,2,3,4). From 1998 to 2004, it was reported invading Minnesota, Illinois, and Missouri (2,3,4). Moths were first reported from Indiana in 2005, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio in 2006 (2), and in Ontario, Canada, as well as Wayne Co., OH, less than 150 km from Pennsylvania, in 2008. Fig. 1. Male western bean cutworm moth captured in Franklin Co., PA, 2009. In 2009, we established a statewide trapping network to determine whether western bean cutworm was present in Pennsylvania. We deployed 30 traps among 25 counties (1 to 3 traps per county) weighting the distribution of traps more heavily in the western portion of the state because we hypothesized moths would be dispersing eastward from Ohio. Our network used two types of pheromone traps to detect male moths: milk-jug (2) and tricolor (green, white, yellow) universal traps (Great Lakes IPM, Inc., Vestaburg, MI).
    [Show full text]
  • CHECKLIST of WISCONSIN MOTHS (Superfamilies Mimallonoidea, Drepanoidea, Lasiocampoidea, Bombycoidea, Geometroidea, and Noctuoidea)
    WISCONSIN ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY SPECIAL PUBLICATION No. 6 JUNE 2018 CHECKLIST OF WISCONSIN MOTHS (Superfamilies Mimallonoidea, Drepanoidea, Lasiocampoidea, Bombycoidea, Geometroidea, and Noctuoidea) Leslie A. Ferge,1 George J. Balogh2 and Kyle E. Johnson3 ABSTRACT A total of 1284 species representing the thirteen families comprising the present checklist have been documented in Wisconsin, including 293 species of Geometridae, 252 species of Erebidae and 584 species of Noctuidae. Distributions are summarized using the six major natural divisions of Wisconsin; adult flight periods and statuses within the state are also reported. Examples of Wisconsin’s diverse native habitat types in each of the natural divisions have been systematically inventoried, and species associated with specialized habitats such as peatland, prairie, barrens and dunes are listed. INTRODUCTION This list is an updated version of the Wisconsin moth checklist by Ferge & Balogh (2000). A considerable amount of new information from has been accumulated in the 18 years since that initial publication. Over sixty species have been added, bringing the total to 1284 in the thirteen families comprising this checklist. These families are estimated to comprise approximately one-half of the state’s total moth fauna. Historical records of Wisconsin moths are relatively meager. Checklists including Wisconsin moths were compiled by Hoy (1883), Rauterberg (1900), Fernekes (1906) and Muttkowski (1907). Hoy's list was restricted to Racine County, the others to Milwaukee County. Records from these publications are of historical interest, but unfortunately few verifiable voucher specimens exist. Unverifiable identifications and minimal label data associated with older museum specimens limit the usefulness of this information. Covell (1970) compiled records of 222 Geometridae species, based on his examination of specimens representing at least 30 counties.
    [Show full text]
  • Wikipedia Beetles Dung Beetles Are Beetles That Feed on Feces
    Wikipedia beetles Dung beetles are beetles that feed on feces. Some species of dung beetles can bury dung times their own mass in one night. Many dung beetles, known as rollers , roll dung into round balls, which are used as a food source or breeding chambers. Others, known as tunnelers , bury the dung wherever they find it. A third group, the dwellers , neither roll nor burrow: they simply live in manure. They are often attracted by the dung collected by burrowing owls. There are dung beetle species of different colours and sizes, and some functional traits such as body mass or biomass and leg length can have high levels of variability. All the species belong to the superfamily Scarabaeoidea , most of them to the subfamilies Scarabaeinae and Aphodiinae of the family Scarabaeidae scarab beetles. As most species of Scarabaeinae feed exclusively on feces, that subfamily is often dubbed true dung beetles. There are dung-feeding beetles which belong to other families, such as the Geotrupidae the earth-boring dung beetle. The Scarabaeinae alone comprises more than 5, species. The nocturnal African dung beetle Scarabaeus satyrus is one of the few known non-vertebrate animals that navigate and orient themselves using the Milky Way. Dung beetles are not a single taxonomic group; dung feeding is found in a number of families of beetles, so the behaviour cannot be assumed to have evolved only once. Dung beetles live in many habitats , including desert, grasslands and savannas , [9] farmlands , and native and planted forests. They are found on all continents except Antarctica. They eat the dung of herbivores and omnivores , and prefer that produced by the latter.
    [Show full text]
  • Western Bean Cutworm, Striacosta Albicosta (Smith) (Lepidoptera
    TRANSGENIC PLANTS AND INSECTS Western Bean Cutworm, Striacosta albicosta (Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), as a Potential Pest of Transgenic Cry1Ab Bacillus thuringiensis Corn Hybrids in South Dakota 1 MICHAEL A. CATANGUI AND ROBERT K. BERG Department of Plant Science, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD 57007Ð1096 Environ. Entomol. 35(5): 1439Ð1452 (2006) ABSTRACT Injuries caused by the western bean cutworm, Striacosta albicosta (Smith), on trans- genic Cry1Ab Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) corn hybrids were documented and quantiÞed. The western bean cutworm is an emerging or potential pest of transgenic Bt corn in South Dakota. The proportion of ears infested with western bean cutworm larvae in the Cry1Ab Bt corn hybrids were 18Ð20, 38Ð70, and 0Ð34% in 2000, 2003, and 2004, respectively. The Cry1Ab Bt corn hybrids were almost completely free of European corn borer infestations. Untreated conventional corn hybrids were less infested with western bean cutworm larvae but more infested with European corn borer larvae. The proportion of ears infested with European corn borer larvae alone were 33, 58Ð80, and 8Ð25% in 2000, 2003, and 2004, respectively. Infestations with western bean cutworm alone were 28, 8Ð28, and 13Ð19%, respectively. Proportion of ears simultaneously infested with both western bean cutworm and European corn borer larvae were much lower than single infestations by either species alone, indicating niche overlap and competition. Simultaneous infestations by the two species on untreated conventional corn hybrids were only 8, 0Ð18, and 0Ð1% in 2000, 2003, and 2004. The corn grains harvested from injured ears were also analyzed for fumonisin and aßatoxin through quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. More mycotoxins were found in 2003 when the levels of insect infestation in the corn ears were higher than in 2004.
    [Show full text]