International Workshop on Arthropod Pest Problems in Pome Fruit Production
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Moths Count Newsletter 2011
16 Moths Count Newsletter 2011 Half Price Membership Offer Why not become a member of Butterfly Conservation for one Moths Count year at half the usual price? Offer available online from 16 th to 3 1st July 2 011 Ne wsl etter 2011 Membership subscriptions are essential to enable us to The NMRS: Pu tting continue all the important work we do to save threatened moths . By taking advantage of this special half price offer you will not Moths on the Map only get yourself a bargain but will also directly contribute to In the early days of the Moths Count project the the survival of these amazing creatures. Moths Count establishment of a National Moth Recording Scheme (NMRS) Contacts was extremely ambitious, particularly as many vice-counties As a member of Butterfly Conservation didn’t have a computerised dataset; records were stored you will receive the following benefits: General enquiries on a card-index or in some cases even on scraps of paper info @butterfly-conservation.org 01929 400209 in cardboard boxes! Furthermore, 34 vice-counties didn’t I New member welcome pack Richard Fox have an active County Moth Recorder. Fortunately, due to I Our exclusive full-colour magazine Butterfly , three times a year Surveys Manager the enthusiasm and willingness of many individuals these I Membership of your local Butterfly Conservation Branch rfox @butterfly-conservation.org 01626 368385 hurdles were overcome. The moth recording community I Opportunities to take part in monitoring and recording schemes Les Hill rose to the challenge of either volunteering themselves for I Regional newsletters and local events Database Manager the vital role of County Moth Recorder or in assisting in lhill @butterfly-conservation.org 01929 406008 the computerisation of hundreds of thousands of paper To take advantage of this special half price offer join online at Zoë Randle records enabling County Recorders to concentrate on the www.butterfly-conservation.org between 16th and 3 1st July Surveys Officer verification of records. -
(Cydia Pomonella L.) and Woolly Apple Aphid, (Eriosoma Lanigerum) on Apple (Malus Domestica L
International Journal of Entomology Research International Journal of Entomology Research ISSN: 2455-4758; Impact Factor: RJIF 5.24 Received: 17-05-2020; Accepted: 19-05-2020; Published: 08-06-2020 www.entomologyjournals.com Volume 5; Issue 3; 2020; Page No. 156-160 Population trend of codling moth (Cydia pomonella l.) And woolly apple aphid, (Eriosoma lanigerum) on apple (Malus domestica L. Borkh) fruit tree orchard Muhammad Umer1, Noor Muhammad2*, Nisar Uddin3, Muhammad Khalil Ullah Khan4, Shariat Ullah5, Niaz Ali6 1 Department of Plant Protection, The Agriculture University of Peshawar, Peshawar, KP, Pakistan 2, 4 Department of Pomology, College of Horticultural Hebei Agricultural University, Baoding, Hebei China 3, 5 Department of Botany University of Malakand, KP, Pakistan 6 Department of Botany Hazara University, KP, Pakistan Abstract The population trends of Cydia pomonella L. and Eriosoma lanigerum were studied on apple fruit orchard. These two pests caused serious losses in district Mastung, Balochistan Province, Pakistan. The results of weekly mean population dynamics showed that the mean population of Cydia pomonella L. on each apple fruit tree varied. For the first week it varied from 0.0 to 8.0 in which the maximum attack of the Codling moth was 8.0 for treatment (T) 6. In the same way the highest attack in the week; first, second, third, fourth, to tenth was 3.5, 8.0, 4.5, 3.0, 3.0, 4.0, 4.5, 4.5, and 4.5 respectively. While the mean population dynamics of (Eriosoma lanigerum) ranged from 0.0 to 4.0 in first week. Among the population maximum invasion of Woolly apple aphid for week first, second, third, fourth, to tenth was 4.0, 3.0, 3.0, 6.0, 6.0, 3, 4, 3, 4 and 6 respectively. -
Data Sheet on Helicoverpa
EPPO quarantine pest Prepared by CABI and EPPO for the EU under Contract 90/399003 Data Sheets on Quarantine Pests Helicoverpa zea IDENTITY Name: Helicoverpa zea (Boddie) Synonyms: Heliothis zea (Boddie) Bombyx obsoleta Fab. Phalaena zea (Boddie) Heliothis umbrosus Grote Taxonomic position: Insecta: Lepidoptera: Noctuidae Common names: American bollworm, corn earworm, tomato fruitworm, New World bollworm (English) Chenille des épis du maïs (French) Amerikanischer Baumwollkapselwurm (German) Notes on taxonomy and nomenclature: The taxonomic situation is complicated and presents several problems. Hardwick (1965) reviewed the New World corn earworm species complex and the Old World African bollworm (Noctuidae), most of which had previously been referred to as a single species (Heliothis armigera or H. obsoleta), and pointed out that there was a complex of species and subspecies involved. Specifically he proposed that the New World H. zea (first used in 1955) was distinct from the Old World H. armigera on the basis of male and female genitalia. And he described the new genus Helicoverpa to include these important pest species, Some 80 or more species were formerly placed in Heliothis (sensu lato) and Hardwick referred 17 species (including 11 new species) to Helicoverpa on the basis of differences in both male and female genitalia. Within this new genus the zea group contains eight species, and the armigera group two species with three subspecies. See also Hardwick (1970). Because the old name of Heliothis for the pest species (four major pest species and three minor) is so well established in the literature, and since dissection of genitalia is required for identification, there has been resistance to the name change (e.g. -
Micro-Moth Grading Guidelines (Scotland) Abhnumber Code
Micro-moth Grading Guidelines (Scotland) Scottish Adult Mine Case ABHNumber Code Species Vernacular List Grade Grade Grade Comment 1.001 1 Micropterix tunbergella 1 1.002 2 Micropterix mansuetella Yes 1 1.003 3 Micropterix aureatella Yes 1 1.004 4 Micropterix aruncella Yes 2 1.005 5 Micropterix calthella Yes 2 2.001 6 Dyseriocrania subpurpurella Yes 2 A Confusion with fly mines 2.002 7 Paracrania chrysolepidella 3 A 2.003 8 Eriocrania unimaculella Yes 2 R Easier if larva present 2.004 9 Eriocrania sparrmannella Yes 2 A 2.005 10 Eriocrania salopiella Yes 2 R Easier if larva present 2.006 11 Eriocrania cicatricella Yes 4 R Easier if larva present 2.007 13 Eriocrania semipurpurella Yes 4 R Easier if larva present 2.008 12 Eriocrania sangii Yes 4 R Easier if larva present 4.001 118 Enteucha acetosae 0 A 4.002 116 Stigmella lapponica 0 L 4.003 117 Stigmella confusella 0 L 4.004 90 Stigmella tiliae 0 A 4.005 110 Stigmella betulicola 0 L 4.006 113 Stigmella sakhalinella 0 L 4.007 112 Stigmella luteella 0 L 4.008 114 Stigmella glutinosae 0 L Examination of larva essential 4.009 115 Stigmella alnetella 0 L Examination of larva essential 4.010 111 Stigmella microtheriella Yes 0 L 4.011 109 Stigmella prunetorum 0 L 4.012 102 Stigmella aceris 0 A 4.013 97 Stigmella malella Apple Pigmy 0 L 4.014 98 Stigmella catharticella 0 A 4.015 92 Stigmella anomalella Rose Leaf Miner 0 L 4.016 94 Stigmella spinosissimae 0 R 4.017 93 Stigmella centifoliella 0 R 4.018 80 Stigmella ulmivora 0 L Exit-hole must be shown or larval colour 4.019 95 Stigmella viscerella -
UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DEL MOLISE Department
UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DEL MOLISE Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Food Sciences Ph.D. course in: AGRICULTURE TECHNOLOGY AND BIOTECHNOLOGY (CURRICULUM: Sustainable plant production and protection) (CYCLE XXIX) Ph.D. thesis NEW INSIGHTS INTO THE BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY OF THE INSECT VECTORS OF APPLE PROLIFERATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SUSTAINABLE CONTROL STRATEGIES Coordinator of the Ph.D. course: Prof. Giuseppe Maiorano Supervisor: Prof. Antonio De Cristofaro Co-Supervisor: Dr. Claudio Ioriatti Ph.D. student: Tiziana Oppedisano Matr: 151603 2015/2016 “Nella vita non c’è nulla da temere, c’è solo da capire.” (M. Curie) Index SUMMARY 5 RIASSUNTO 9 INTRODUCTION 13 Phytoplasmas 13 Taxonomy 13 Morphology 14 Symptomps 15 Transmission and spread 15 Detection 17 Phytoplasma transmission by insect vectors 17 Phytoplasma-vector relationship 18 Homoptera as vectors of phytoplasma 19 ‘Candidatus Phytoplasma mali’ 21 Symptomps 21 Distribution in the tree 22 Host plant 24 Molecular characterization and diagnosis 24 Geographical distribution 25 AP in Italy 25 Transmission of AP 27 Psyllid vectors of ‘Ca. P. mali’ 28 Cacopsylla picta Förster (1848) 29 Cacopsylla melanoneura Förster (1848) 32 Other known vectors 36 Disease control 36 Aims of the research 36 References 37 CHAPTER 1: Apple proliferation in Valsugana: three years of disease and psyllid vectors’ monitoring 49 CHAPTER 2: Evaluation of the current vectoring efficiency of Cacopsylla melanoneura and Cacopsylla picta in Trentino 73 CHAPTER 3: The insect vector Cacopsylla picta vertically -
IOBC/WPRS Working Group “Integrated Plant Protection in Fruit
IOBC/WPRS Working Group “Integrated Plant Protection in Fruit Crops” Subgroup “Soft Fruits” Proceedings of Workshop on Integrated Soft Fruit Production East Malling (United Kingdom) 24-27 September 2007 Editors Ch. Linder & J.V. Cross IOBC/WPRS Bulletin Bulletin OILB/SROP Vol. 39, 2008 The content of the contributions is in the responsibility of the authors The IOBC/WPRS Bulletin is published by the International Organization for Biological and Integrated Control of Noxious Animals and Plants, West Palearctic Regional Section (IOBC/WPRS) Le Bulletin OILB/SROP est publié par l‘Organisation Internationale de Lutte Biologique et Intégrée contre les Animaux et les Plantes Nuisibles, section Regionale Ouest Paléarctique (OILB/SROP) Copyright: IOBC/WPRS 2008 The Publication Commission of the IOBC/WPRS: Horst Bathon Luc Tirry Julius Kuehn Institute (JKI), Federal University of Gent Research Centre for Cultivated Plants Laboratory of Agrozoology Institute for Biological Control Department of Crop Protection Heinrichstr. 243 Coupure Links 653 D-64287 Darmstadt (Germany) B-9000 Gent (Belgium) Tel +49 6151 407-225, Fax +49 6151 407-290 Tel +32-9-2646152, Fax +32-9-2646239 e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] Address General Secretariat: Dr. Philippe C. Nicot INRA – Unité de Pathologie Végétale Domaine St Maurice - B.P. 94 F-84143 Montfavet Cedex (France) ISBN 978-92-9067-213-5 http://www.iobc-wprs.org Integrated Plant Protection in Soft Fruits IOBC/wprs Bulletin 39, 2008 Contents Development of semiochemical attractants, lures and traps for raspberry beetle, Byturus tomentosus at SCRI; from fundamental chemical ecology to testing IPM tools with growers. -
Biodiversa-Project Description-Final Version-110213
1.A. Detailed description of the research area and research plan Context of the proposal Biological invasions (bioinvasions) are defined as the successful establishment and spread of species outside their native range. They act as a major driver of global changes in species distribution. Diverse organisms and ecosystems may be involved, and although not all invasions have a negative impact, the ecological consequences often include the loss of native biological diversity and changes in community structure and ecosystem activity. There may also be additional negative effects on agriculture, forests, fisheries, and human health. National governments, intergovernmental structures like the European Commission and international organizations such as EPPO, CABI and IUCN have therefore mobilized to (i) introduce international laws on invasive species, (ii) organize international networks of scientists and stakeholders to study bioinvasions, and (iii) formalize the cooperation between national environmental or agricultural protection agencies (e.g. the French Agence Nationale de Sécurité Sanitaire, ANSES). Several billion euros are spent annually to address the problems caused by bioinvasions and the scientific community has focused on predicting and controlling future invasions by understanding how they occur. A peer-reviewed journal entitled "Biological Invasions” has been published since 1999. Ecologists have long drawn attention to the negative ecological effects of invasive species, whereas the evolutionary aspects of bioinvasions have received comparatively little attention. This reflects the fact that: i) invasive populations were thought to experience significant bottlenecks during their introduction to new environments and thus possess a limited potential to evolve; and ii) evolution was considered too slow to play a significant role given the relatively short timescale of the invasion process. -
Monitoring of Pear Psylla for Pest Management Decisions and Research
Integrated Pest Management Reviews 4: 1–20, 1999. © 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. Monitoring of pear psylla for pest management decisions and research David R. Horton USDA-ARS, 5230 Konnowac Pass Rd., Wapato, WA 98951 U.S.A. (Tel.: (509) 454-5639; Fax: 509-454-5646) Received 6 May 1998; accepted 3 November 1998 Abstract Pear psylla, Cacopsylla pyricola (Foerster) (Homoptera: Psyllidae), is one of the key insect pests in North American pear production. In some growing areas, more than 50% of dollars spent to control arthropod pests in commercial pear are directed specifically at controlling this species. Control measures require accurate and timely information about dispersal, onset of egg-laying in spring, densities in the orchard, and age composition of the population. To meet these ends, a number of sampling methods have been developed to monitor pear psylla, the most common being (for pest management purposes) visual inspection of spurs and foliage for nymphs and eggs, and use of beat trays to monitor adults. Action thresholds have been developed for counts obtained with either method. However, threshold estimates are fairly narrowly defined, referring to a somewhat limited group of pear cultivars, type of injury to be prevented, and pest management program being used. Further refinement has been difficult because of an incomplete understanding of psylla’s spatial distribution, seasonal changes in spatial distribution, and unknown or seasonally changing action thresholds. Beat trays and visual inspection of foliage have also been used to monitor pear psylla in various types of research projects, including studies of dispersal and biological control. -
Boyne Valley Provincial Park
BOYNE VALLEY PROVINCIAL PARK One Malaise trap was deployed at Boyne Valley Provincial Park in 2014 (44.11563, -80.12777, 468m ASL; Figure 1). This trap collected arthropods for twenty weeks from April 28 – September 19, 2014. All 10 Malaise trap samples were processed; every other sample was analyzed using the individual specimen protocol while the second half was analyzed via bulk analysis. A total of 1571 BINs were obtained. Over half the BINs captured were flies (Diptera), followed by bees, ants and wasps (Hymenoptera), moths and butterflies (Lepidoptera), and beetles (Coleoptera; Figure 2). In total, 427 arthropod species were named, representing 29% of the BINs from the site (Appendix 1). All BINs were assigned at least to Figure 1. Malaise trap deployed at Boyne Valley family, and 66.6% were assigned to a genus (Appendix Provincial Park in 2014. 2). Specimens collected from Boyne Valley represent 183 different families and 558 genera. Figure 2. Taxonomy breakdown of BINs captured in the Malaise trap at Boyne Valley. APPENDIX 1. TAXONOMY REPORT Class Order Family Genus Species Arachnida Araneae Clubionidae Clubiona Clubiona obesa Philodromidae Philodromus Philodromus rufus Theridiidae Mesostigmata Digamasellidae Dinychidae Halolaelapidae Parasitidae Phytoseiidae Opiliones Phalangiidae Sclerosomatidae Leiobunum Sarcoptiformes Acaridae Oribatulidae Phenopelopidae Scheloribatidae Trombidiformes Anystidae Cunaxidae Cunaxoides Erythraeidae Leptus Hygrobatidae Atractides Scutacaridae Tarsonemidae Tetranychidae Tetranychus Trombidiidae -
12551503.Pdf
Th e Serpentine Leaf- Miner of The Peach , A Species of Lyolletia. By Chukichi Harukawa Nð~akus"i and Nobuma 錨 Yagi. [Dec ember 30 ,1918] L In troduotory Re m 町ko. A considerable amount of aUention has been paid in Japan for a long time to a species of leaf-miner belongillg to the genus Id olletia Hb. as one of of the important peach pests. Sasaki first described this leaf-miner in 190i) and again in 1910. め However , its complete life-history has not been worked out until 1909 , when Kuwana and Takachiho studied this insect at the Imperial Agricul- tural tural Experiment Station ,Tokyo ,and published their re 叩lt in 1911. め In In their paper they used Lyolletia clerkella L. as the spedfic name of this this peach leaf-miner. Since that time no one seems to have studied the life-history life-history of this insect ,though there are a few more descriptions め of it. In In Europe Lyonetia clet ルル L. has been known since the time of Linnaeus. 5 And the accounts of this insect are numerous. Stainton ) described it in Great Great Britain as early as 1859; in Ge rmany Heinemann described this 6 species species in his celebrated work ) which was published from 1863 to 1870 and stated in that work that it was very common on the Continent. Theo- bald 7) reported that it had done considerable inj ury to the apple in a certain district district of Great Britain. Spuler 8】 gives the description of it in his ・'Sch- 9 metterlinge metterlinge Europas ," and Reh ) wrote a brief account of it in Sorauer's “ Pflanzen krankhei ten." Lyonttia Lyonttia clerke l! a L. -
VINEYARD BIODIVERSITY and INSECT INTERACTIONS! ! - Establishing and Monitoring Insectariums! !
! VINEYARD BIODIVERSITY AND INSECT INTERACTIONS! ! - Establishing and monitoring insectariums! ! Prepared for : GWRDC Regional - SA Central (Adelaide Hills, Currency Creek, Kangaroo Island, Langhorne Creek, McLaren Vale and Southern Fleurieu Wine Regions) By : Mary Retallack Date : August 2011 ! ! ! !"#$%&'(&)'*!%*!+& ,- .*!/'01)!.'*&----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------&2 3-! "&(')1+&'*&4.*%5"/0&#.'0.4%/+.!5&-----------------------------------------------------------------------------&6! ! &ABA <%5%+3!C0-72D0E2!AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!F! &A&A! ;D,!*2!G*0.*1%-2*3,!*HE0-3#+3I!AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!J! &AKA! ;#,2!0L!%+D#+5*+$!G*0.*1%-2*3,!*+!3D%!1*+%,#-.!AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!B&! 7- .*+%)!"/.18+&--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------&,2! ! ! KABA ;D#3!#-%!*+2%53#-*MH2I!AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!BN! KA&A! O3D%-!C#,2!0L!L0-H*+$!#!2M*3#G8%!D#G*3#3!L0-!G%+%L*5*#82!AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!&P! KAKA! ?%8%53*+$!3D%!-*$D3!2E%5*%2!30!E8#+3!AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!&B! 9- :$"*!.*;&5'1/&.*+%)!"/.18&-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------&3<! -
Oregon Invasive Species Action Plan
Oregon Invasive Species Action Plan June 2005 Martin Nugent, Chair Wildlife Diversity Coordinator Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife PO Box 59 Portland, OR 97207 (503) 872-5260 x5346 FAX: (503) 872-5269 [email protected] Kev Alexanian Dan Hilburn Sam Chan Bill Reynolds Suzanne Cudd Eric Schwamberger Risa Demasi Mark Systma Chris Guntermann Mandy Tu Randy Henry 7/15/05 Table of Contents Chapter 1........................................................................................................................3 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 What’s Going On?........................................................................................................................................ 3 Oregon Examples......................................................................................................................................... 5 Goal............................................................................................................................................................... 6 Invasive Species Council................................................................................................................. 6 Statute ........................................................................................................................................................... 6 Functions .....................................................................................................................................................