DOCSLIB.ORG

The Role of Birds As Predators and Potential Biocontrol Agents of Lnsect Pests in Corn Fields

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

The Role of Birds as Predators and Potential Biocontrol Agents of lnsect Pests in Corn Fields by Annie C. Tremblay A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fuifilment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Sciences Department of Natural Resources Sciences Macdonald Campus of McGill University Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, Quebec, Canada May 1999 O Annie C. Tremblay 1999 National Library Bibliothèque nationale l*l of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395. rwWellington OttawaON K1AW Otfawaûîü KIAW CaMda Canade The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une Licence non exclusive licence aliowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or seil reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or othexwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. ABSTRACT Annie C. Tremblay Natural Resources This project investigated the impact of bird predation on insect pest populations within tvJo cornfields of Southwestern Quebec. Birds were excluded from portions of these fields through the use of bird-proof netting. Rhopalosiphum maidis, Ostrinia nubilalis, Agmtis spp. and Sphenophorus spp. were al1 found at greater densities in plots where birds were excluded as cornpared with the non covered plots. Only the adult Diabrotica longicomis population was not reduced by birds. Results significantly suggest that birds can reduce insect pest populations. Bird visits in cornfields with respect to distance from field edge, type of edge habitat and corn phenology were also studied. Red-winged Blackbird, Song and Chipping Sparrows and American Robin were the most frequently obsewed bird species inside cornfields. Early in the summer. birds tended to stay closer to the field edge, especially when composed of mature coniferous trees. Different bird species visited the cornfields at specific periods during corn development. RÉSUMÉ Annie C. Tremblay Ressources Renouvelables L'objectif de ce projet de recherche était de déterminer l'impact des oiseaux sur les populations d'insectes nuisibles du maïs. Rhopalosiphum maidis. Ostnhia nubilalis, Agrotis spp. et Sphenophoms spp. furent échantillones en plus grand nombre dans les parcelles sans oiseaux. Diabrotica longicomis n'a pas été affectée par la présence des oiseaux. Les oiseaux peuvent donc significativement diminuer les populations d'insectes nuisibles. Les visites d'oiseaux dans les champs ont aussi été étudiées. Le carouge a épaulettes, les bruants chanteurs et familiers et le merle d'Amérique étaient les espèces d'oiseaux les plus fréquemment observées dans les champs. En général, les oiseaux restaient plus près de la bordure du champ, surtout tôt durant l'été et dans le champ près des conifères. Selon la croissance du maïs, différentes espèces d'oiseaux fréquentaient les champs de maïs. La composition et le type de lisière en bordure d'un champ affectent l'abondance des oiseaux à l'intérieur des champs de maïs. The thesis was structured as separated manuscripts. "Candidates have the option of including. as part of the thesis, the text of a paper(s) submitted or to be submitted for publication, or the clearly-duplicated text of a published paper(s). These texts must be bound as an integral part of the thesis. If this option is chosen. conneding texts that provide logical bridges between the different papers are mandatory. The thesis must be written in such a way that it is more than a mere collection of manuscripts; in other words, results of a series of papers must be integrated. The thesis rnust still conform to al1 other requirements of the Guidelines for Thesis Preparation. The thesis must include: A Table of Contents, an abstract, in English and French, an introduction which clearly states the rationale and objectives of the study, a comprehensive review of the literature. a final conclusion and summary, and a thorough bibliography or reference list. at the end of the thesis, after the final conclusion and summary. In the case of rnanuscripts CO-authoredby the candidate and others, the candidate is required to rnake an explicit statement in the thesis as to who contributed to such work and to what extent. Since the task of the examiners is made more difficult in these cases, it is in the candidate's interest to make perfectly clear the responsibilities of all the authon of the CO-authoredpapers. " iii The candidate was responsible for designing and conducting ail research experiments. Dr. Pierre Mineau, from Environment Canada, and Dr. R.K.Stewart, from the Natural Resources department of McGill University, provided assistance for this research, including supervisory guidance and review of manuscripts before subrnission. The hivo CO-supervisorswill be CO-authorsof the articles that will be published. World Wildlife Fund Canada funded this two year project through the Youth Horizon program. First of all, I would like to thank my CO-supervisors,Dr. Pierre Mineau and Dr. Robin K. Stewart. I want to acknowledge Dr. P. Mineau for his contagious enthusiasm about this project and for his confidence in my capacity to complete this research. Many thanks go to Dr. R.K. Stewart who encouraged and advised me during my whole Master program. I also want to thank Dr. R.K. Stewart and Dr. P. Mineau for revising my thesis as well as Lisa Buckman, Johan Perret and Julie Lecours. Special thanks go to everyone who help me in the field building the blinds, sampling, harvesting, and installing and removing the nets: René, Carmen, Johan, Véronique. Jean-Guy, Cécilia, Marsha, Guy, Marie-Josée. Sam, Annie. Boris, Lisa, Julie, Nathalie, Franck. I also want to thank Dr. Bob Bonnell as well as Véronique Aglat for helping me constructing my blinds by providing me useful tools. My field assistant, Andréanne Demers, deserves particular thanks for her help. encouragement, opinions and especially for her friendship. I would like to thank anyone else that I did not mention but that helped me in any way during the past two years. Appreciation is extended to Serge Lussier, Gilles Gagnon and the technicians at Macdonald Campus fann for their srniles, kindness and most of al1 for letting me using their cornfields to carry out experiments. I also wish to thank bath Peter Kirby and Mary Kubecki for their precious and personal advices. I wish to express my appreciation to Brian Collins and Pierre Dutillieul for their statistical expertise. A special thanks goes to Julia Langer, from the World Wildlife Fund. Canada, for supporting this project financially during the past two years. Pour conclure, je voudrais remercier tous ceux qui m'ont encouragée tout au long de cette étape importante de ma vie: mes amis, spécialement mes anciens et présents colocataires, pour leur joie de vivre contagieuse; ma famille qui a toujours cru en moi. Je veux également dédier un merci très spécial à Mireille et Gilbert Bieler pour leur accueile chaleureux et pour m'avoir permis de corriger ma thèse, tout en étant au Salvador. Finalement, merci Johan, mon compagnon de vie, pour ton aide constante et ton amour. 2.4 Bird use of agricultural fields ........................................................... 15 2.4.1 Birds' use of corn field ......................................................... 15 2.4.2 Birds' damages to cornfields ............................................. 18 2.4.3 Positive impact of birds in cornfields.................................... 20 2.4.4 Influence of hedge habitat on birds ....................................... 21 2.5 Concluding remarks..................................................................... 22 Chapter 3: IMPACT OF BIRDS ON INSECTS OF CORN......................... Abstract. ......................................................................................... 3.1 Introduction................................................................................. 3.2 Materials and methods.................................................................. 3.2.1 Study area ....................................................................... 3.2.2 Corn .............................................................................. 3.2.3 Experimental design ......................................................... 3.2.4 Statistical analysis ............................................................ 3.2.5 Sampling methods ..................................... ,. ..... 3.3 Results and discussion .................................................................. 3.3.1 European corn borer................................. .. ..................... 3.3.2 Northern corn rootworm..................................................... 3.3.3 Corn leaf aphid ................................................................. 3.3.4 Cutworms ........................................................................ 3.3.5 Billbugs........................................................................... 3.3.6 Arthropod soil predators....................................................
Recommended publications
  • Birds of the East Texas Baptist University Campus with Birds Observed Off-Campus During BIOL3400 Field Course

    Birds of the East Texas Baptist University Campus with Birds Observed Off-Campus During BIOL3400 Field Course

    Birds of the East Texas Baptist University Campus with birds observed off-campus during BIOL3400 Field course Photo Credit: Talton Cooper Species Descriptions and Photos by students of BIOL3400 Edited by Troy A. Ladine Photo Credit: Kenneth Anding Links to Tables, Figures, and Species accounts for birds observed during May-term course or winter bird counts. Figure 1. Location of Environmental Studies Area Table. 1. Number of species and number of days observing birds during the field course from 2005 to 2016 and annual statistics. Table 2. Compilation of species observed during May 2005 - 2016 on campus and off-campus. Table 3. Number of days, by year, species have been observed on the campus of ETBU. Table 4. Number of days, by year, species have been observed during the off-campus trips. Table 5. Number of days, by year, species have been observed during a winter count of birds on the Environmental Studies Area of ETBU. Table 6. Species observed from 1 September to 1 October 2009 on the Environmental Studies Area of ETBU. Alphabetical Listing of Birds with authors of accounts and photographers . A Acadian Flycatcher B Anhinga B Belted Kingfisher Alder Flycatcher Bald Eagle Travis W. Sammons American Bittern Shane Kelehan Bewick's Wren Lynlea Hansen Rusty Collier Black Phoebe American Coot Leslie Fletcher Black-throated Blue Warbler Jordan Bartlett Jovana Nieto Jacob Stone American Crow Baltimore Oriole Black Vulture Zane Gruznina Pete Fitzsimmons Jeremy Alexander Darius Roberts George Plumlee Blair Brown Rachel Hastie Janae Wineland Brent Lewis American Goldfinch Barn Swallow Keely Schlabs Kathleen Santanello Katy Gifford Black-and-white Warbler Matthew Armendarez Jordan Brewer Sheridan A.
  • L O U I S I a N A

    L O U I S I a N A

    L O U I S I A N A SPARROWS L O U I S I A N A SPARROWS Written by Bill Fontenot and Richard DeMay Photography by Greg Lavaty and Richard DeMay Designed and Illustrated by Diane K. Baker What is a Sparrow? Generally, sparrows are characterized as New World sparrows belong to the bird small, gray or brown-streaked, conical-billed family Emberizidae. Here in North America, birds that live on or near the ground. The sparrows are divided into 13 genera, which also cryptic blend of gray, white, black, and brown includes the towhees (genus Pipilo), longspurs hues which comprise a typical sparrow’s color (genus Calcarius), juncos (genus Junco), and pattern is the result of tens of thousands of Lark Bunting (genus Calamospiza) – all of sparrow generations living in grassland and which are technically sparrows. Emberizidae is brushland habitats. The triangular or cone- a large family, containing well over 300 species shaped bills inherent to most all sparrow species are perfectly adapted for a life of granivory – of crushing and husking seeds. “Of Louisiana’s 33 recorded sparrows, Sparrows possess well-developed claws on their toes, the evolutionary result of so much time spent on the ground, scratching for seeds only seven species breed here...” through leaf litter and other duff. Additionally, worldwide, 50 of which occur in the United most species incorporate a substantial amount States on a regular basis, and 33 of which have of insect, spider, snail, and other invertebrate been recorded for Louisiana. food items into their diets, especially during Of Louisiana’s 33 recorded sparrows, Opposite page: Bachman Sparrow the spring and summer months.
  • Plum Tree Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment January 2017 Front Cover: Salt Marsh Jeff Brewer/USACE

    Plum Tree Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment January 2017 Front Cover: Salt Marsh Jeff Brewer/USACE

    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Plum Tree Island National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment January 2017 Front cover: Salt marsh Jeff Brewer/USACE This blue goose, designed by J.N. “Ding” Darling, has become the symbol of the National Wildlife Refuge System. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is the principal Federal agency responsible for conserving, protecting, and enhancing fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Service manages the National Wildlife Refuge System comprised of over 150 million acres including over 560 national wildlife refuges and thousands of waterfowl production areas. The Service also operates 70 national fish hatcheries and over 80 ecological services field stations. The agency enforces Federal wildlife laws, manages migratory bird populations, restores nationally significant fisheries, conserves and restores wildlife habitat such as wetlands, administers the Endangered Species Act, and helps foreign governments with their conservation efforts. It also oversees the Federal Assistance Program which distributes hundreds of millions of dollars in excise taxes on fishing and hunting equipment to state wildlife agencies. Comprehensive Conservation Plans (CCPs) provide long-term guidance for management decisions on a refuge and set forth goals, objectives, and strategies needed to accomplish refuge purposes. CCPs also identify the Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail program levels that are sometimes substantially above current budget allocations and, as such, are primarily for Service strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. CCPs do not constitute a commitment for staffing increases, operational and maintenance increases, or funding for future land acquisition.
  • Vesper Sparrow

    Vesper Sparrow

    EFFECTS OF MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON GRASSLAND BIRDS: VESPER SPARROW Grasslands Ecosystem Initiative Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center U.S. Geological Survey Jamestown, North Dakota 58401 This report is one in a series of literature syntheses on North American grassland birds. The need for these reports was identified by the Prairie Pothole Joint Venture (PPJV), a part of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. The PPJV recently adopted a new goal, to stabilize or increase populations of declining grassland- and wetland-associated wildlife species in the Prairie Pothole Region. To further that objective, it is essential to understand the habitat needs of birds other than waterfowl, and how management practices affect their habitats. The focus of these reports is on management of breeding habitat, particularly in the northern Great Plains. Suggested citation: Dechant, J. A., M. F. Dinkins, D. H. Johnson, L. D. Igl, C. M. Goldade, and B. R. Euliss. 2000 (revised 2002). Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Vesper Sparrow. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamestown, ND. 41 pages. Species for which syntheses are available or are in preparation: American Bittern Grasshopper Sparrow Mountain Plover Baird’s Sparrow Marbled Godwit Henslow’s Sparrow Long-billed Curlew Le Conte’s Sparrow Willet Nelson’s Sharp-tailed Sparrow Wilson’s Phalarope Vesper Sparrow Upland Sandpiper Savannah Sparrow Greater Prairie-Chicken Lark Sparrow Lesser Prairie-Chicken Field Sparrow Northern Harrier Clay-colored Sparrow Swainson’s Hawk Chestnut-collared Longspur Ferruginous Hawk McCown’s Longspur Short-eared Owl Dickcissel Burrowing Owl Lark Bunting Horned Lark Bobolink Sedge Wren Eastern Meadowlark Loggerhead Shrike Western Meadowlark Sprague’s Pipit Brown-headed Cowbird EFFECTS OF MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON GRASSLAND BIRDS: VESPER SPARROW Jill A.
  • Nest Box Guide for Waterfowl Nest Box Guide for Waterfowl Copyright © 2008 Ducks Unlimited Canada ISBN 978-0-9692943-8-2

    Nest Box Guide for Waterfowl Nest Box Guide for Waterfowl Copyright © 2008 Ducks Unlimited Canada ISBN 978-0-9692943-8-2

    Nest Box Guide for Waterfowl Nest Box Guide For Waterfowl Copyright © 2008 Ducks Unlimited Canada ISBN 978-0-9692943-8-2 Any reproduction of this present document in any form is illegal without the written authorization of Ducks Unlimited Canada. For additional copies please contact the Edmonton DUC office at (780)489-2002. Published by: Ducks Unlimited Canada www.ducks.ca Acknowledgements Photography provided by : Ducks Unlimited Canada (DUC), Jim Potter (Alberta Conservation Association (ACA)), Darwin Chambers (DUC), Jonathan Thompson (DUC), Lesley Peterson (DUC contractor), Sherry Feser (ACA), Gordon Court ( p 16 photo of Pygmy Owl), Myrna Pearman ,(Ellis Bird Farm), Bryan Shantz and Glen Rowan. Portions of this booklet are based on a Nest Box Factsheet prepared by Jim Potter (ACA) and Lesley Peterson (DUC contractor). Myrna Pearman provided editorial comment. Table of Contents Table of Contents Why Nest Boxes? ......................................................................................................1 Natural Cavities ......................................................................................................................................2 Identifying Wildlife Species That Use Your Nest Boxes .....................................3 Waterfowl ..................................................................................................................4 Common Goldeneye .........................................................................................................................5 Barrow’s Goldeneye
  • OWLS of OHIO C D G U I D E B O O K DIVISION of WILDLIFE Introduction O W L S O F O H I O

    OWLS of OHIO C D G U I D E B O O K DIVISION of WILDLIFE Introduction O W L S O F O H I O

    OWLS OF OHIO c d g u i d e b o o k DIVISION OF WILDLIFE Introduction O W L S O F O H I O Owls have longowls evoked curiosity in In the winter of of 2002, a snowy ohio owl and stygian owl are known from one people, due to their secretive and often frequented an area near Wilmington and two Texas records, respectively. nocturnal habits, fierce predatory in Clinton County, and became quite Another, the Oriental scops-owl, is behavior, and interesting appearance. a celebrity. She was visited by scores of known from two Alaska records). On Many people might be surprised by people – many whom had never seen a global scale, there are 27 genera of how common owls are; it just takes a one of these Arctic visitors – and was owls in two families, comprising a total bit of knowledge and searching to find featured in many newspapers and TV of 215 species. them. The effort is worthwhile, as news shows. A massive invasion of In Ohio and abroad, there is great owls are among our most fascinating northern owls – boreal, great gray, and variation among owls. The largest birds, both to watch and to hear. Owls Northern hawk owl – into Minnesota species in the world is the great gray are also among our most charismatic during the winter of 2004-05 became owl of North America. It is nearly three birds, and reading about species with a major source of ecotourism for the feet long with a wingspan of almost 4 names like fearful owl, barking owl, North Star State.
  • Illinois Birds: Volume 4 – Sparrows, Weaver Finches and Longspurs © 2013, Edges, Fence Rows, Thickets and Grain Fields

    Illinois Birds: Volume 4 – Sparrows, Weaver Finches and Longspurs © 2013, Edges, Fence Rows, Thickets and Grain Fields

    ILLINOIS BIRDS : Volume 4 SPARROWS, WEAVER FINCHES and LONGSPURS male Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder female Photo © John Cassady Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder Photo © Mary Kay Rubey Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder American tree sparrow chipping sparrow field sparrow vesper sparrow eastern towhee Pipilo erythrophthalmus Spizella arborea Spizella passerina Spizella pusilla Pooecetes gramineus Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder lark sparrow savannah sparrow grasshopper sparrow Henslow’s sparrow fox sparrow song sparrow Chondestes grammacus Passerculus sandwichensis Ammodramus savannarum Ammodramus henslowii Passerella iliaca Melospiza melodia Photo © Brian Tang Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder Lincoln’s sparrow swamp sparrow white-throated sparrow white-crowned sparrow dark-eyed junco Le Conte’s sparrow Melospiza lincolnii Melospiza georgiana Zonotrichia albicollis Zonotrichia leucophrys Junco hyemalis Ammodramus leconteii Photo © Brian Tang winter Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder summer Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder Photo © Mark Bowman winter Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder summer Photo © Rob Curtis, The Early Birder Nelson’s sparrow
  • Species Profile:Northern Flicker

    Species Profile:Northern Flicker

    For Preferred BirdTracksthis special Youbecause have edition youreceived are of a A special BirdTracks edition from Fall 2012 preferred WBU customer! PRST STD Customers Only U.S. POSTAGE Frequently Asked Are you enjoying BirdTracks? We’d appreciate your feedback and comments MARIETTA,PAID OH PERMIT NO 161 the next time you visit our store. : Our backyard adjoins a railroad right-of-way that we walk through Qregularly. We recently found a small nest about three feet above ground. It was tightly woven into what seemed to be a plant that was more ® by Kevin Cook ’s weed than shrub. Whose nest could it be? and our partner Q : Exactly what bird it could be depends on where you live, but a few likely widespread species include Yellow Warbler, Field Sparrow, or American Goldfinch. A You can distinguish them by structure and materials. Sparrows use bulky material for the outside but build a more compact structure. Warblers and goldfinches use fine, slender materials and build a very tight, compact structure that usually includes much plant floss from thistles, willows, or cottonwoods. Tracks BIRD by DR. DAVID BIRD Species Profi le: Northern Flicker : Birds seem absolutely determined to drink from my roof gutter instead of the birdbath I bought for them. QHow can I get them to use the birdbath where I can see them? orthern Flickers are one of my favorite birds, if only because they Northern Flicker, : A roof gutter that holds enough water to attract birds in not functioning properly. A gutter that holds wa- areN amazingly easy to identify from a male.
  • Predictive Habitat Suitability Models for Nesting Woodpeckers Following Wildfire in the Sierra Nevada and Southern Cascades of California Brent R

    Predictive Habitat Suitability Models for Nesting Woodpeckers Following Wildfire in the Sierra Nevada and Southern Cascades of California Brent R

    AmericanOrnithology.org Volume 122, 2020, pp. 1–27 DOI: 10.1093/condor/duz062 RESEARCH ARTICLE Predictive habitat suitability models for nesting woodpeckers following wildfire in the Sierra Nevada and Southern Cascades of California Brent R. Campos,1,*, Quresh S. Latif,2,a Ryan D. Burnett,1 and Victoria A. Saab2 1 Point Blue Conservation Science, Petaluma, California, USA 2 Rocky Mountain Research Station, U.S. Forest Service, Bozeman, Montana, USA a Current address: Bird Conservancy of the Rockies, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA *Corresponding author: [email protected] Submission Date: April 11, 2019; Editorial Acceptance Date: November 25, 2019; Published January 4, 2020 ABSTRACT Woodpeckers are often focal species for informing management of recently burned forests. Snags generated by wildfire provide key nesting and foraging resources for woodpeckers, and nest cavities excavated by woodpeckers are subse- quently used by many other species. Habitat suitability models applicable in newly burned forest are important manage- ment tools for identifying areas likely to be used by nesting woodpeckers. Here we present and test predictive models for mapping woodpecker nest-site habitat across wildfire locations that can be used to inform post-fire planning and salvage logging decisions. From 2009 to 2016, we monitored 313 nest sites of 4 species—Black-backed Woodpecker (Picoides arcticus), Hairy Woodpecker (Dryobates villosus), White-headed Woodpecker (D. albolarvatus), and Northern Flicker (Colaptes auratus)—from 3 wildfires in the Northern Sierra Nevada and Southern Cascades 1–5 yr after fire. Using these data, we developed habitat suitability index models that compared nest vs. non-nest sites for each species using (1) exclusively remotely sensed covariates, and (2) combinations of remotely sensed and field-collected covariates.
  • ) (51) International Patent Classification: A01N 63/00

    ) (51) International Patent Classification: A01N 63/00

    ) ( (51) International Patent Classification: Declarations under Rule 4.17: A01N 63/00 (2006.01) A01P5/00 (2006.01) — as to applicant's entitlement to apply for and be granted a A01P3/00 (2006.01) A01P 7/00 (2006.01) patent (Rule 4.17(H)) (21) International Application Number: — as to the applicant's entitlement to claim the priority of the PCT/US20 19/040 107 earlier application (Rule 4.17(iii)) (22) International Filing Date: Published: 0 1 July 2019 (01.07.2019) — with international search report (Art. 21(3)) — before the expiration of the time limit for amending the (25) Filing Language: English claims and to be republished in the event of receipt of (26) Publication Language: English amendments (Rule 48.2(h)) (30) Priority Data: 62/692,059 29 June 2018 (29.06.2018) US (71) Applicant: AGBIOME, INC. [US/US]; 104 T.W. Alexan¬ der Drive, Building 1, Durham, North Carolina 27709 (US). (72) Inventors: PALEKAR, Narendra; 121 Amiable Loop, Cary, North Carolina 275 13 (US). KEYSER, Chad Alton; 452 Texanna Way, Holly Springs, North Carolina 27540 (US). (74) Agent: BUCK, B. Logan; Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, P.O. Box 7037, Atlanta, Georgia 30357-0037 (US). (81) Designated States (unless otherwise indicated, for every kind of national protection available) : AE, AG, AL, AM, AO, AT, AU, AZ, BA, BB, BG, BH, BN, BR, BW, BY, BZ, CA, CH, CL, CN, CO, CR, CU, CZ, DE, DJ, DK, DM, DO, DZ, EC, EE, EG, ES, FI, GB, GD, GE, GH, GM, GT, HN, HR, HU, ID, IL, IN, IR, IS, JO, JP, KE, KG, KH, KN, KP, KR, KW,KZ, LA, LC, LK, LR, LS, LU, LY,MA, MD, ME, MG, 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, SD, SE, SG, SK, SL, SM, ST, SV, SY, TH, TJ, TM, TN, TR, TT, TZ, UA, UG, US, UZ, VC, VN, ZA, ZM, ZW.
  • Ohio Economic Insects and Related Arthropods

    Ohio Economic Insects and Related Arthropods

    April 1989 · Bulletin 752 OHIO ECONOMIC INSECTS AND RELATED ARTHROPODS Armyworm feeding on com; 2x. (USDA) This list was prepared in cooperation with faculty of the Ohio Cooperative Extension Service, the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, the Ohio Department of Agriculture, the Ohio Department of Health, The Ohio State University and the Plant Pest Control Division of the United States Department of Agriculture . .Uhio Cooperative Extension Service The Ohio State University 2 OHIO ECONOMIC INSECTS AND RELATED ARTUROPODS For additional information, contact William F. Lyon, Extension Entomologist, The Ohio State University, 1991 Kenny Road, Columbus, Ohio 43210-1090. Phone: (614) m-5274. INTRODUCTION This list of Ohio Economic Insects and Related Arthropods was first assembled back in 1962-1964 while employed as the first "Survey Entomologist" of Ohio based at The Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, Wooster, Ohio. It was felt that such a list would serve as a valuable reference and useful purpose for commercial, government and public needs. This list was prepared and updated in cooperation with faculty of the Ohio Cooperative Extension Service, the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, the Ohio Department of Agriculture, the Ohio Department of Health, the Ohio State University and the Plant Pest Control Division of the United States Department of Agriculture. Common and scientific names are listed under various host and habitat categories. ACKNQWLEDGEMENT Several individuals have made valuable contributions to this list of Ohio Insects and Related Arthropods. by updating common names, scientific names, hosts and habitats. Carl W. Albrecht George Keeney Bruce Eisley Richard K. Lindquist John K.
  • And Bufflehead (Bucephala Albeola) in Alberta, Canada

    And Bufflehead (Bucephala Albeola) in Alberta, Canada

    Copyright © 2011 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance. Corrigan, R. M., G. J. Scrimgeour, and C. Paszkowski. 2011. Nest boxes facilitate local-scale conservation of common goldeneye (Bucephala clangula) and bufflehead (Bucephala albeola) in Alberta, Canada. Avian Conservation and Ecology 6(1): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ACE-00435-060101 Research Papers Nest Boxes Facilitate Local-Scale Conservation of Common Goldeneye (Bucephala clangula) and Bufflehead (Bucephala albeola) in Alberta, Canada Les nichoirs favorisent la conservation à l’échelle locale du Garrot à œil d’or (Bucephala clangula) et du Petit Garrot (Bucephala albeola) en Alberta, Canada Robert M. Corrigan 1,2, Garry J. Scrimgeour 3, and Cynthia Paszkowski 1 ABSTRACT. We tested the general predictions of increased use of nest boxes and positive trends in local populations of Common Goldeneye (Bucephala clangula) and Bufflehead (Bucephala albeola) following the large-scale provision of nest boxes in a study area of central Alberta over a 16-year period. Nest boxes were rapidly occupied, primarily by Common Goldeneye and Bufflehead, but also by European Starling (Sturnus vulgaris). After 5 years of deployment, occupancy of large boxes by Common Goldeneye was 82% to 90% and occupancy of small boxes by Bufflehead was 37% to 58%. Based on a single-stage cluster design, experimental closure of nest boxes resulted in significant reductions in numbers of broods and brood sizes produced by Common Goldeneye and Bufflehead. Occurrence and densities of Common Goldeneye and Bufflehead increased significantly across years following nest box deployment at the local scale, but not at the larger regional scale.