5.3 Crop Protection

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

5.3 Crop Protection 5 Crop Protection 5.3 Insect & Mite Pests of Grape Revised February, 2015 D. Thomas Lowery, AAFC-PARC, Summerland Biological Control of Insects and (Graphics by Robyn DeYoung) Mites Insect and mite pests of grapes are attacked by Fewer insect and mite pests attack grapes grown many species of beneficial organisms, including in British Columbia compared with many other bacterial and viral diseases, spiders, insect major grape producing regions, which allows for predators, predacious mites, and vertebrates a ‘softer’ approach to pest management that such as toads and birds. Maintaining and preserves beneficial insects and predacious enhancing numbers of these natural ene- mites that help regulate secondary pests such as mies of grape pests forms the cornerstone of spider mites and grape mealybug. Adoption of a successful IPM program. Healthy popula- integrated pest management (IPM) practic- tions of predators and parasites prevent es that minimize the use of chemical sprays outbreaks of secondary pests and reduce the can also help reduce production costs, numbers of sprays required for the control of reduce human exposure to insecticides, and primary pests such as leafhoppers and climbing preserve the local environment. Insect and Mite cutworm. Pests of Grape in British Columbia (Lowery et al., 2014), a companion publication contains colour Beneficial organisms can be preserved or photographs of many of the pests outlined in enhanced in several ways. The negative impact this chapter of the production guide. In the of pesticides can be minimized by spraying only following descriptions of grapevine pests, when and where required. Monitoring of pest numbers and letters indicated in parentheses numbers will often indicate that only a small refer to the pages and plates of the correspond- portion of a vineyard requires chemical treat- ing photo guide. Additional sources for ment. Selecting the most appropriate spray information on insect and mite pests of grapes material will help reduce damage to non-target are listed at the end of this section. organisms. Compared with broad-spectrum insecticides that are often more toxic to benefi- Integrated Pest Management cial insects than the pests they are intended to control, insecticides that are less damaging to IPM utilizes a number of principles and practic- beneficial insects and predacious mites (e.g. es to manage pest populations, including AltacorTM) should be chosen whenever possible. biological, cultural, and physical control meth- Malathion is considered to be less damaging to ods. Insecticides remain an essential beneficial insects and mites than other insecti- component of an IPM program, but they are cides in the same class (organophosphates), and applied as a last resort only when monitor- carbaryl (Sevin XLRTM) can be used at a low ing has shown that pest numbers are likely rate when the target is the susceptible Virginia to exceed the economic threshold. When creeper leafhopper rather than the more re- insecticides are required, their selectivity, persis- sistant western grape leafhopper. Other tence, and effects on non-target organisms materials, such as the microbial insecticide Dipel should be considered. Some have minimal (B.t.), are highly selective and require that the effects on beneficial insects and predacious pest consumes the treated plant part, reducing mites, while others cause significant reductions toxicity to most non-target species. As listed in in natural enemy populations. A brief descrip- the BCMAL fact sheet ‘Pest Control Products tion and a few examples of the various Recommended for Use on Grapes in British Columbia’, components of a grape IPM program are (http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/cropprot/grapeipm outlined below. For additional information, /grape_pesticides.pdf), all of the Class 4 (neon- refer to the Integrated Pest Management section icotinoid) insecticides (AssailTM, ClutchTM, (5.1) of this guide. CloserTM) combined should not be applied more than twice per season to avoid mite outbreaks. Best Practices Guide for Grapes for British Columbia Growers 5.3-1 5 Crop Protection These materials are listed as toxic to bees. The water and nutrients. Recent research in Califor- Class 3 pyrethroids (PounceTM, AmbushTM, nia has shown that deficit irrigation from berry RipcordTM) and natural pyrethrins (PyganicTM) set to veraison reduced leafhopper numbers by are toxic to most beneficial insects, but they more than 60%. The modest reduction in yield, persist in the environment for only a short time. around 15%, was more than offset by a signifi- cant improvement in wine quality. In addition, Thoughtful choice of management practices can berries were smaller and exposed to more light also help preserve beneficial insects. Mowing and air and pruning costs were slightly lower. less often and mowing only alternate rows at The presence of broadleaf weeds in and be- one time are simple and cost effective ways to tween vine rows is associated with lower levels increase populations of most natural enemies. of cutworm damage. In spring, when possible Adults of many beneficial species feed on nectar avoid controlling shepherd’s purse and other of flowering plants that also serve as hosts for weeds in the vine row until after buds have alternate prey species. As a general rule, in- broken, as removal of these alternate sources of creased plant diversity is associated with greater food forces cutworm larvae to feed more on the numbers of beneficial insects. A diversity of buds of grapes. plants can be provided in the vineyard in mixed ground covers, or in hedgerows and uncultivat- ed areas within or adjacent to the vineyard. Pruning Pruning can be altered to help reduce damage Cultural and Physical Controls from cutworm larvae. Slightly more buds can be Vine Vigour and Resistance left on vines to compensate for damage, but this will require the removal of more unwanted For most crops, varieties can be selected that shoots later in the season. Some growers delay are partially or wholly resistant to one or more suckering and shoot thinning to divert some pests and diseases. Except for rootstocks that leafhopper feeding and egg-laying to these are resistant to grape phylloxera or nematodes, unwanted plant parts. Thinning of the canopy this is generally not a viable option for wine by shoot removal, shoot positioning, and grapes. Most desirable wine grape varieties removal of basal leaves improves air flow and possess little resistance to foliar feeding pests. light penetration, which is important for the Vine vigour does, however, influence insect and management of diseases as well as insects. mite numbers. Leafhoppers and grape mealy- bug, for example, will reach significantly higher Leafhoppers and erineum or blister mite infest numbers on overly vigorous vines as they prefer the first leaves that emerge in spring, and these the darker, sheltered environment and elevated lower leaves can be removed in June to reduce humidity that excessive vine growth provides. numbers of these pests. A study conducted in Insects developing on these plants survive commercial British Columbia vineyards showed better and grow faster due to better nutrition, that removal of basal leaves in June rather than softer tissues, and changes in concentrations of August reduced numbers of leafhoppers and the secondary plant compounds. At the other incidence of bunch rot. Vine vigour and berry extreme, chlorotic vines with low vigour are less size were reduced only slightly and there was able to tolerate insect feeding damage and are little effect on ripening or quality of fruit. Early more susceptible to attack by hard scale insects season leaf removal might not be suitable for and wood boring beetles. Fortunately, the stressed vines or vines on sandy sites with optimum balance in vine growth that results intense heat and light where fruit can become in the highest quality wines is also best for sunburned. As for late season removal, partial minimizing the growth of pest populations. removal of leaves from only the shaded sides of the vines might be more suitable in these areas. Management of vine vigour is an important consideration in the establishment of a new Physical controls vineyard and is discussed elsewhere. After vines are established, growth is controlled by pruning, For some vineyards, the use of yellow sticky cropping, selection and management of appro- tape applied below the cordon in spring can be priate ground-cover plants, and the provision of an economical way to manage leafhoppers. 5.3-2 Best Practices Guide for Grapes for British Columbia Growers 5 Crop Protection Although costly, this physical control method that begin laying eggs at this time. Thrips preserves beneficial insects and reduces or damage table grapes from 75% bloom to fruit eliminates the need for additional insecticides set, and if scale or mealybug were noted earlier, later in the season. Use of yellow sticky tape is sprays can be timed based on the presence of most practical in vineyards where damaging crawlers. The need to spray for first generation numbers of leafhoppers occur in small, isolated leafhoppers should be based on monitoring for areas or on a few outer rows of the vineyard. small nymphs from mid June to mid July, while Other physical controls include pruning out of second generation nymphs will reach their peak canes infested with scale insects and application usually after the first week of August. In sum- of barriers to prevent climbing cutworm from mer, the presence of soft scale and mealybug is reaching developing buds. often betrayed by the presence of honeydew and attendant ants. Throughout summer, Monitoring and Chemical Controls monitor for thrips, spider mites and grape leaf Insecticides should only be applied when rust mite. For table grapes, watch for mealybug monitoring indicates that sprays are warranted. infesting clusters in mid-summer and for snail- The mere presence of a pest does not indi- case bagworm and earwigs closer to harvest.
Recommended publications
  • Bulletin No. 206-Treehopper Injury in Utah Orchards
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU UAES Bulletins Agricultural Experiment Station 6-1928 Bulletin No. 206 - Treehopper Injury in Utah Orchards Charles J. Sorenson Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/uaes_bulletins Part of the Agricultural Science Commons Recommended Citation Sorenson, Charles J., "Bulletin No. 206 - Treehopper Injury in Utah Orchards" (1928). UAES Bulletins. Paper 178. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/uaes_bulletins/178 This Full Issue is brought to you for free and open access by the Agricultural Experiment Station at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in UAES Bulletins by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Bulletin 2 06 June, 1928 Treehopper Injury in Utah Orchards By CHARLES J. SORENSON 3 Dorsal and side views of the following species of treehoppers: 1. Ceresa bubalus (Fabr.) ( Buffalo treehopper) 2. Stictocephala inermis (Fabr.) 3. Stictocephala gillettei Godg. (x 10 ) UTAH AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION LOGAN. UTAH UTAH AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION , BOARD OF TRUSTEES . ANTHONY W. IVINS, President __ _____ ____________________ __ ___________________ Salt Lake City C. G. ADNEY, Vice-President ____ ___ ________________________________ ________________________ Corinne ROY B ULLEN ________ __________________________ _______ _____ _____ ________ ___ ____ ______ ____ Salt Lake City LORENZO N . STOHL ______ ___ ____ ___ ______________________ __ ___ ______ _____ __________ Salt Lake City MRS. LEE CHARLES MILLER ___ ______ ___ _________ ___ _____ ______ ___ ____ ________ Salt Lake City WE S TON V ERN ON, Sr. ________________________ ___ ____ ____ _____ ___ ____ ______ __ __ _______ ________ Loga n FRANK B. STEPHENS _____ ___ __ ____ ____________ ____ ______________ __ ___________ __.___ Salt Lake City MRS.
    [Show full text]
  • Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)
    Acta Biol. Univ. Daugavp. 10 (2) 2010 ISSN 1407 - 8953 MATERIALS ON LATVIAN EUMOLPINAE HOPE, 1840 (COLEOPTERA: CHRYSOMELIDAE) Andris Bukejs Bukejs A. 2010. Materials on Latvian Eumolpinae Hope, 1840 (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Acta Biol. Univ. Daugavp., 10 (2): 107 -114. Faunal, phenological and bibliographical information on Latvian Eumolpinae are presented in the current paper. Bibliographycal analysis on this leaf-beetles subfamily in Latvia is made for the first time. An annotated list of Latvian Eumolpinae including 4 species of 3 genera is given. Key words: Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, Eumolpinae, Latvia, fauna, bibliography. Andris Bukejs. Institute of Systematic Biology, Daugavpils University, Vienības 13, Daugavpils, LV-5401, Latvia; [email protected] INTRODUCTION (Precht 1818, Fleischer 1829). Subsequently, more than 15 works were published. Scarce faunal The subfamily Eumolpinae Hope, 1840 includes records can also be found in following other more than 500 genera and 7000 species distributed articles (Lindberg 1932; Pūtele 1974, 1981a; mainly in the tropics and subtropics (Jolivet & Stiprais 1977; Rūtenberga 1992; Barševskis 1993, Verma 2008). Of them, 11 species of 6 genera are 1997; Telnov & Kalniņš 2003; Telnov et al. 2006, known from eastern Europe (Bieńkowski 2004), 2010; Bukejs & Telnov 2007). and only 4 species of 3 genera – from Fennoscandia and Baltiae (Silfverberg 2004). Imagoes of Eumolpinae feed on leaves of host plants; larvae occur in the soil, feed on In Latvian fauna, 3 genera and 4 species of underground parts of plants; pupate in the soil Eumolpinae are known. In adjacent territories, the (Bieńkowski 2004). number of registered Eumolpinae species slightly varies: Belarus – 5 species are recorded (Lopatin The aim of the current work is to summarize & Nesterova 2005), Estonia – 3 species information on Eumolpinae in Latvia.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution of Insect Color Vision: from Spectral Sensitivity to Visual Ecology
    EN66CH23_vanderKooi ARjats.cls September 16, 2020 15:11 Annual Review of Entomology Evolution of Insect Color Vision: From Spectral Sensitivity to Visual Ecology Casper J. van der Kooi,1 Doekele G. Stavenga,1 Kentaro Arikawa,2 Gregor Belušic,ˇ 3 and Almut Kelber4 1Faculty of Science and Engineering, University of Groningen, 9700 Groningen, The Netherlands; email: [email protected] 2Department of Evolutionary Studies of Biosystems, SOKENDAI Graduate University for Advanced Studies, Kanagawa 240-0193, Japan 3Department of Biology, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia; email: [email protected] 4Lund Vision Group, Department of Biology, University of Lund, 22362 Lund, Sweden; email: [email protected] Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2021. 66:23.1–23.28 Keywords The Annual Review of Entomology is online at photoreceptor, compound eye, pigment, visual pigment, behavior, opsin, ento.annualreviews.org anatomy https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-061720- 071644 Abstract Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2021.66. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org Copyright © 2021 by Annual Reviews. Color vision is widespread among insects but varies among species, depend- All rights reserved ing on the spectral sensitivities and interplay of the participating photore- Access provided by University of New South Wales on 09/26/20. For personal use only. ceptors. The spectral sensitivity of a photoreceptor is principally determined by the absorption spectrum of the expressed visual pigment, but it can be modified by various optical and electrophysiological factors. For example, screening and filtering pigments, rhabdom waveguide properties, retinal structure, and neural processing all influence the perceived color signal.
    [Show full text]
  • The Importance of Behavior and Venom System Morphology in Understanding Its Ecology and Evolution
    Toxins 2019, 11, 666; doi:10.3390/toxins11110666 S1 of S11 Supplementary Materials: The Diversity of Venom: The Importance of Behavior and Venom System Morphology in Understanding Its Ecology and Evolution Vanessa Schendel, Lachlan D. Rash, Ronald A. Jenner, and Eivind A. B. Undheim Table S1. Independently evolved venomous animal lineages and the primary ecological roles of their venoms. Taxa for which no direct support of their venomous nature could be found are shown in grey font. General Venom System Animal Group Venomous Lineage Primary Role References Morphology Predation, defense, Cnidarians All Nematocysts [1] intraspecific competition Coleoid Posterior and anterior glands, cephalopods, venom injected through salivary Predation [2,3] including octopus papilla. and squid Long duct/venom gland, venom Cone snails and injected through hollow radular Predation, [4] relatives (Conoidea) tooth on proboscis by a distal defense venom pump. Tritons, helmet Two-lobed salivary (venom) Molluscs shells, etc. glands that open through Predation [5] (Tonnoidea) common duct into buccal mass. Dwarf tritons, Single-lobed salivary (venom) including vampire glands that open through Predation [6] snails common duct into buccal mass. (Colubrariidae) Primary and accessory salivary Murex snails (venom) glands that open Predation [7] (Muricidae) through common duct into buccal mass. Proboscis with venom secreting cells, sometimes with stylet to Nemerteans Ribbon worms facilitate venom delivery Predation [8] (Enopla), or pseudocnidae with a potential role in venom delivery. Toxin-producing “lappets” secreting venom into large Blood worms muscular and glandular venom Predation [9] (Glyceridae) reservoir, which is presumably Annelids also involved in venom expulsion. Secretory cells dispersed along Predation, Leeches (Hirudinea) the buccal cavity in jawed [10–12] blood feeding leeches (Arhynchobdellida); Toxins 2019, 11, 666; doi:10.3390/toxins11110666 S2 of S11 presence of two paired salivary glands in jawless leeches (Glossiphoniidae).
    [Show full text]
  • Diptera, Tabanoidea, Tabanidae) Dorian D
    Dörge et al. Parasites Vectors (2020) 13:461 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-020-04316-7 Parasites & Vectors RESEARCH Open Access Incompletely observed: niche estimation for six frequent European horsefy species (Diptera, Tabanoidea, Tabanidae) Dorian D. Dörge1*, Sarah Cunze1 and Sven Klimpel1,2 Abstract Background: More than 170 species of tabanids are known in Europe, with many occurring only in limited areas or having become very rare in the last decades. They continue to spread various diseases in animals and are responsible for livestock losses in developing countries. The current monitoring and recording of horsefies is mainly conducted throughout central Europe, with varying degrees of frequency depending on the country. To the detriment of tabanid research, little cooperation exists between western European and Eurasian countries. Methods: For these reasons, we have compiled available sources in order to generate as complete a dataset as possi- ble of six horsefy species common in Europe. We chose Haematopota pluvialis, Chrysops relictus, C. caecutiens, Tabanus bromius, T. bovinus and T. sudeticus as ubiquitous and abundant species within Europe. The aim of this study is to esti- mate the distribution, land cover usage and niches of these species. We used a surface-range envelope (SRE) model in accordance with our hypothesis of an underestimated distribution based on Eurocentric monitoring regimes. Results: Our results show that all six species have a wide range in Eurasia, have a broad climatic niche and can there- fore be considered as widespread generalists. Areas with modelled habitat suitability cover the observed distribution and go far beyond these. This supports our assumption that the current state of tabanid monitoring and the recorded distribution signifcantly underestimates the actual distribution.
    [Show full text]
  • Grape Insects +6134
    Ann. Rev. Entomo! 1976. 22:355-76 Copyright © 1976 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved GRAPE INSECTS +6134 Alexandre Bournier Chaire de Zoologie, Ecole Nationale Superieure Agronornique, 9 Place Viala, 34060 Montpellier-Cedex, France The world's vineyards cover 10 million hectares and produce 250 million hectolitres of wine, 70 million hundredweight of table grapes, 9 million hundredweight of dried grapes, and 2.5 million hundredweight of concentrate. Thus, both in terms of quantities produced and the value of its products, the vine constitutes a particularly important cultivation. THE HOST PLANT AND ITS CULTIVATION The original area of distribution of the genus Vitis was broken up by the separation of the continents; although numerous species developed, Vitis vinifera has been cultivated from the beginning for its fruit and wine producing qualities (43, 75, 184). This cultivation commenced in Transcaucasia about 6000 B.C. Subsequent human migration spread its cultivation, at firstaround the Mediterranean coast; the Roman conquest led to the plant's progressive establishment in Europe, almost to its present extent. Much later, the WesternEuropeans planted the grape vine wherever cultiva­ tion was possible, i.e. throughout the temperate and warm temperate regions of the by NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY on 02/01/10. For personal use only. world: North America, particularly California;South America,North Africa, South Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1977.22:355-376. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org Africa, Australia, etc. Since the commencement of vine cultivation, man has attempted to increase its production, both in terms of quality and quantity, by various means including selection of mutations or hybridization.
    [Show full text]
  • Novel Bacteriocyte-Associated Pleomorphic Symbiont of the Grain
    Okude et al. Zoological Letters (2017) 3:13 DOI 10.1186/s40851-017-0073-8 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Novel bacteriocyte-associated pleomorphic symbiont of the grain pest beetle Rhyzopertha dominica (Coleoptera: Bostrichidae) Genta Okude1,2*, Ryuichi Koga1, Toshinari Hayashi1,2, Yudai Nishide1,3, Xian-Ying Meng1, Naruo Nikoh4, Akihiro Miyanoshita5 and Takema Fukatsu1,2,6* Abstract Background: The lesser grain borer Rhyzopertha dominica (Coleoptera: Bostrichidae) is a stored-product pest beetle. Early histological studies dating back to 1930s have reported that R. dominica and other bostrichid species possess a pair of oval symbiotic organs, called the bacteriomes, in which the cytoplasm is densely populated by pleomorphic symbiotic bacteria of peculiar rosette-like shape. However, the microbiological nature of the symbiont has remained elusive. Results: Here we investigated the bacterial symbiont of R. dominica using modern molecular, histological, and microscopic techniques. Whole-mount fluorescence in situ hybridization specifically targeting symbiotic bacteria consistently detected paired bacteriomes, in which the cytoplasm was full of pleomorphic bacterial cells, in the abdomen of adults, pupae and larvae, confirming previous histological descriptions. Molecular phylogenetic analysis identified the symbiont as a member of the Bacteroidetes, in which the symbiont constituted a distinct bacterial lineage allied to a variety of insect-associated endosymbiont clades, including Uzinura of diaspidid scales, Walczuchella of giant scales, Brownia of root mealybugs, Sulcia of diverse hemipterans, and Blattabacterium of roaches. The symbiont gene exhibited markedly AT-biased nucleotide composition and significantly accelerated molecular evolution, suggesting degenerative evolution of the symbiont genome. The symbiotic bacteria were detected in oocytes and embryos, confirming continuous host–symbiont association and vertical symbiont transmission in the host life cycle.
    [Show full text]
  • Insects That Feed on Trees and Shrubs
    INSECTS THAT FEED ON COLORADO TREES AND SHRUBS1 Whitney Cranshaw David Leatherman Boris Kondratieff Bulletin 506A TABLE OF CONTENTS DEFOLIATORS .................................................... 8 Leaf Feeding Caterpillars .............................................. 8 Cecropia Moth ................................................ 8 Polyphemus Moth ............................................. 9 Nevada Buck Moth ............................................. 9 Pandora Moth ............................................... 10 Io Moth .................................................... 10 Fall Webworm ............................................... 11 Tiger Moth ................................................. 12 American Dagger Moth ......................................... 13 Redhumped Caterpillar ......................................... 13 Achemon Sphinx ............................................. 14 Table 1. Common sphinx moths of Colorado .......................... 14 Douglas-fir Tussock Moth ....................................... 15 1. Whitney Cranshaw, Colorado State University Cooperative Extension etnomologist and associate professor, entomology; David Leatherman, entomologist, Colorado State Forest Service; Boris Kondratieff, associate professor, entomology. 8/93. ©Colorado State University Cooperative Extension. 1994. For more information, contact your county Cooperative Extension office. Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
    [Show full text]
  • Catalogue of Latvian Leaf-Beetles (Coleoptera: Megalopodidae, Orsodacnidae & Chrysomelidae)
    Latvijas Entomologs 2013, 52: 3-57. 3 Catalogue of Latvian leaf-beetles (Coleoptera: Megalopodidae, Orsodacnidae & Chrysomelidae) ANDRIS BUKEJS Vienības iela 42-29, LV-5401, Daugavpils, Latvia; e-mail: [email protected] BUKEjS A. 2013. Catalogue OF Latvian LEAF-BEETLES (COLEOPTERA: MEGALOPODIDAE, ORSODACNIDAE & Chrysomelidae). – Latvijas Entomologs 52: 3-57. Abstract: Critical catalogue of Latvian leaf-beetles (Megalopodidae, Orsodacnidae & Chrysomelidae) is presented. In the current work all available bibliography on Latvian leaf-beetles are reviewed and analyzed. In total, 326 species are confirmed from Latvia till now, although few of them are known from the old records only, and their occurrence in the local fauna should be confirmed by new material. All doubtful species recorded till now from Latvia are commented and removed from the list. Key words: Coleoptera, Megalopodidae, Orsodacnidae, Chrysomelidae, Latvia, fauna, bibliography, catalogue. Introduction Kaliningrad region (Russian enclave in Central Europe) – 280 (Alekseev 2003; Leaf-beetles, represented by 30 000–50 Bukejs, Alekseev 2009, 2012; Alekseev, 000 species, are one of the largest families of Bukejs 2010, 2011; Alekseev et al. 2012). the order Coleoptera worldwide (Bieńkowski The first information on leaf-beetles 2004; Brovdij 1985; jolivet 1988). They (Chrysomelidae s. l.) from the present territory are phytophagous: imagines mostly occur of Latvia was published in the second half of on leaves and flowers, larvae mostly feed the 18th century in the works of j.B. Fischer on leaves and roots, occasionally larvae are (1778, 1784, 1791). In the first edition of saprophagous or carpophagous. Some species his monograph describing nature of Livland of leaf-beetles are considered serious pests (Fischer 1778), three species of leaf-beetles, of agriculture and forestry (Kryzhanovskij Cassida viridis LINNAEUS, 1758, Phratora 1974; Lopatin, Nesterova 2005).
    [Show full text]
  • Pseudotsuga Menziesii
    SPECIAL PUBLICATION 4 SEPTEMBER 1982 INVERTEBRATES OF THE H.J. ANDREWS EXPERIMENTAL FOREST, WESTERN CASCADE MOUNTAINS, OREGON: A SURVEY OF ARTHROPODS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CANOPY OF OLD-GROWTH Pseudotsuga Menziesii D.J. Voegtlin FORUT REJEARCH LABORATORY SCHOOL OF FORESTRY OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY Since 1941, the Forest Research Laboratory--part of the School of Forestry at Oregon State University in Corvallis-- has been studying forests and why they are like they are. A staff or more than 50 scientists conducts research to provide information for wise public and private decisions on managing and using Oregons forest resources and operating its wood-using industries. Because of this research, Oregons forests now yield more in the way of wood products, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Wood products are harvested, processed, and used more efficiently. Employment, productivity, and profitability in industries dependent on forests also have been strengthened. And this research has helped Oregon to maintain a quality environment for its people. Much research is done in the Laboratorys facilities on the campus. But field experiments in forest genetics, young- growth management, forest hydrology, harvesting methods, and reforestation are conducted on 12,000 acres of School forests adjacent to the campus and on lands of public and private cooperating agencies throughout the Pacific Northwest. With these publications, the Forest Research Laboratory supplies the results of its research to forest land owners and managers, to manufacturers and users of forest products, to leaders of government and industry, and to the general public. The Author David J. Voegtlin is Assistant Taxonomist at the Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, Illinois.
    [Show full text]
  • Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Species List, Version 2018-07-24
    Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Species List, version 2018-07-24 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge biology staff July 24, 2018 2 Cover image: map of 16,213 georeferenced occurrence records included in the checklist. Contents Contents 3 Introduction 5 Purpose............................................................ 5 About the list......................................................... 5 Acknowledgments....................................................... 5 Native species 7 Vertebrates .......................................................... 7 Invertebrates ......................................................... 55 Vascular Plants........................................................ 91 Bryophytes ..........................................................164 Other Plants .........................................................171 Chromista...........................................................171 Fungi .............................................................173 Protozoans ..........................................................186 Non-native species 187 Vertebrates ..........................................................187 Invertebrates .........................................................187 Vascular Plants........................................................190 Extirpated species 207 Vertebrates ..........................................................207 Vascular Plants........................................................207 Change log 211 References 213 Index 215 3 Introduction Purpose to avoid implying
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the United States National Museum
    : BEETLE LARVAE OF THE SUBFAMILY GALERUCINAE B}^ Adam G. Boving Senior Entoniolotjist, Bureau of Etitomology, United States Department of Agricvltwe INTRODUCTION The present pajxn- is the result of a continued investigation of the Chrysomelid hirvae in the United States National Museum, Wash- ington, D. C. Of the subfamily Galerucinae ^ belonging to this family the larvae are preserved in the Museum of the following species Monocesta coryli Say. Trirhabda canadensis Kirby. TrU'habda hrevicollis LeConte. Trirhabda nitidicollis LeConte. Trirhabda tomentosa Linnaeus. Trirhabda attenuata Say. Oalerucella nymphaeae Liiniaeus. Oalerucella lineola Fabrleius (from Euroiie). Galerucclla sagittarUu' Gylleuhal. Oalerucella luteola Miiller. Galerucclla sp. (from Nanking, China). Galcrucella vibvrni Paykull (from Europe). Oalerucella decora Say. Oalerucella notata Fabricius. Oalerucella cribrata LeConte. Monoxia puncticolUs Say. Monoxia consputa LeConte. Lochmaca capreae Linnaeus (from Europe). Qaleruca tanacett Linnaeus (from Europe). Oaleruca laticollis Sahlberg (from Europe). Oalcruca, pomonae Scopoli. Sermylassa halensls Linnaeus. Agelastica alnl Linnaeus.^ 1 The generic and specific names of tlie North American larvae are as listed in C W. Leng's " Catalogue of Coleoptera of America north of Mexico, 1920," with corrections and additions as given in the "supplement" to the catalogue published by C. W. Leng and A. J. Mutchler, 1927. The European species, not introduced into North America, are named according to the " Catalogus Coleopterorum Europae, second edition, 1906," by L. V. Heyden, E. Rcitter, and .7. Weise. 2 It will be noticed that in the enumeration above no species of Dinhrlica and Pliyllo- brotica are mentioned. The larvae of those genera were considered by tlie present author as Halticinae larvae [Boving, Adam G.
    [Show full text]