DOCSLIB.ORG

Abiotic and Biotic Factors Affecting the Japanese Beetle in Arkansas Bryan Mathew Petty University of Arkansas, Fayetteville

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Abiotic and Biotic Factors Affecting the Japanese Beetle in Arkansas Bryan Mathew Petty University of Arkansas, Fayetteville University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 8-2013 Abiotic and Biotic Factors Affecting the Japanese Beetle in Arkansas Bryan Mathew Petty University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Entomology Commons, Plant Biology Commons, and the Plant Pathology Commons Recommended Citation Petty, Bryan Mathew, "Abiotic and Biotic Factors Affecting the Japanese Beetle in Arkansas" (2013). Theses and Dissertations. 869. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/869 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Abiotic and Biotic Factors Affecting the Japanese Beetle in Arkansas Abiotic and Biotic Factors Affecting the Japanese Beetle in Arkansas A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Entomology By Bryan Mathew Petty Missouri Southern State University Bachelor of Science in Biology, 2009 August 2013 University of Arkansas This thesis is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. ____________________________________ Dr. Donald Steinkraus Dissertation Director ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Dr. Donn Johnson Dr. Fred Spiegel Committee Member Committee Member ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Dr. Fiona Goggin Dr. Mike Richardson Committee Member Committee Member ABSTRACT Japanese beetles are a relatively new pest to Arkansas. During my Ph.D. research I investigated the pathogens and environmental factors influencing Japanese beetle populations in the state. The prevalence of various pathogens and parasitoids attacking Popillia japonica were recorded annually from wild populations. Of specific interest was the microsporidian pathogen Ovavesicula popilliae, which I introduced as a biological control agent in the state. Details of the relationship between this pathogen and the Japanese beetle were investigated, including dose response, host range, and spore production. Additionally, annual abundance of the beetle in the region was recorded and tracked over the course of 4 years using soil sampling for larvae and pheromone traps for adults. Outdoor and indoor rearing methods were developed, and the density of these populations were recorded and compared to wild populations and temperature data, allowing us to model climate impact on the beetle. Results from these studies showed that, naturally occurring pathogens, such as Stictospora villani, Ovavesicula popilliae and Adelina sp., and parasitoids appeared to have minimal influence on the beetle populations in this region. In the case of O. popilliae, low levels of the pathogen appeared in the area naturally. This pathogen also has a narrow physiological host range outside of the Japanese beetle, primarily in other scarab larvae. O. popilliae also appears to primarily infect Japanese beetle larvae and was incapable of infecting adult beetles. Infected larvae which survived to adulthood remained infected, with the adults capable of producing on average 25 million spores. In comparison, high summer temperatures and lack of rain reduced late summer populations of larvae. In 2010, O. popilliae was released at four locations in Northwest Arkansas. In 2011 it was detected at one of those locations. A second introduction of O. popilliae was made in 2012. The results from this classical biological control effort involving the release of O. popilliae require further monitoring to confirm establishment. This information can be used to help establish long term control of this new pest in the Southern United States. This information will be of use to fruit growers, horticulturalists, turf managers, nursery operators, and homeowners. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank those people who have helped me grow professionally. Specifically, thanks to my advisor, Dr. Don Steinkraus, for his guidance, feedback and advice, and endless editorial reviews. I would also like to thanks members of my committee, Dr. Donn Johnson, Dr. Fiona Goggin, Dr. Fred Spiegel and Dr. Mike Richardson, who pushed me toward critical examination of my ideas and into the exploring new ideas outside my comfort zone. Thanks to the public and private land managers and private landowners who allowed me to conduct my research on their property. I would also like to thank the United States Department of Agriculture Specialty Crop Block Grant Program administered by the Arkansas Agriculture Department as my primary funding source for this research. Finally, thanks to my father, Keith Petty, and mother, Terri Petty, who have supported my education for the last decade, and all of the ups and downs that has entailed. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction - Literature review on the life history and control Japanese beetle (Popillia japonica Newman) in the United States ......................................................................................... 1 1.1 General biology of the Japanese beetle ............................................................................ 1 1.2 Chemical and cultural control of the Japanese beetle ...................................................... 4 1.3 Climatic limitations to beetle spread and survival ........................................................... 8 1.4 Biological control of the Japanese beetle ......................................................................... 9 1.4.1 Arthropod natural enemies ........................................................................................ 9 1.4.2 Bacteria ................................................................................................................... 10 1.4.3 Nematodes............................................................................................................... 12 1.4.4 Fungi ....................................................................................................................... 16 1.5 Ovavesicula popilliae and the microsporidia ................................................................. 17 1.6 Thesis and objectives ..................................................................................................... 20 1.7 REFERENCES CITED .................................................................................................. 22 2 Changes in abundance of larval and adult Popillia japonica (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) and other white grub species in relation to temperature ...................................................................... 34 2.1 ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... 34 2.2 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 35 2.3 MATERIALS AND METHODS ................................................................................... 36 2.3.1 Survey of white grub density and adult Japanese beetle abundance ...................... 36 2.3.2 Statistical analysis of abundance data ..................................................................... 37 2.3.3 Temperature data analysis....................................................................................... 37 2.4 RESULTS....................................................................................................................... 38 2.4.1 Survey of white grub density .................................................................................. 38 2.4.2 Survey of adult Japanese beetle abundance ............................................................ 38 2.4.3 Temperature data analysis....................................................................................... 39 2.5 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................ 40 2.6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................... 43 2.7 REFERENCES CITED .................................................................................................. 44 3 Modeling the effects of temperature on the mortality of early instar Popillia japonica (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) ........................................................................................................... 51 3.1 ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... 51 3.2 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 52 3.3 MATERIALS AND METHODS ................................................................................... 54 3.3.1 Thermal model ........................................................................................................ 55 3.3.2 Mortality rate function ............................................................................................ 57 3.3.3 Source of adult Japanese beetles ............................................................................. 58 3.3.4 Production of Japanese beetles in rearing cages for model validation ................... 58 3.3.5 Comparison of model results and field data ........................................................... 61 3.4 RESULTS......................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Natural Products for Managing Landscape and Garden Pests in Florida1 Matthew A
    ENY-350 Natural Products for Managing Landscape and Garden Pests in Florida1 Matthew A. Borden, Eileen A. Buss, Sydney G. Park Brown, and Adam G. Dale2 Pest control professionals and homeowners throughout Florida and the southeastern US are seeking effective options that are safer for people and the environment than some conventional synthetic pesticides. There is also rising interest in organic gardening, which relies on natural pesticides. See the Organic Materials Review Institute (OMRI) website (https://www.omri.org/omri-lists/ download) for products that are acceptable in organic plant production. Natural or biological pesticides, also called biopesticides, can be used by themselves or in combination with conventional pesticide programs as valuable rotation options, thus delaying or preventing onset of resistance caused by repeated use of the same chemical controls. Figure 1. A brown lacewing larva, Micromus posticus, feeding on aphid This publication describes natural products for use in pests of a rose bush. This soft-bodied predator would likely be killed residential landscapes and gardens. They are generally by natural insecticides intended for the aphids. Credits: Lyle Buss, UF/IFAS less toxic to nontarget organisms and the environment and, when used correctly, can be effective tools for plant There is a general lack of knowledge about natural or protection. These products are most effective when used in biological pesticides, including commercial availability and an integrated pest management (IPM) program along with effective use. All pesticides, whether natural or synthetic, sanitation, proper cultural practices, mechanical control carry inherent risks and require safe and responsible use by tactics, use of resistant plant varieties, and biological the applicator.
    [Show full text]
  • Synergistic Mixtures for Controlling Invertebrate Pests Containing An
    (19) TZZ ¥__T (11) EP 2 263 461 B1 (12) EUROPEAN PATENT SPECIFICATION (45) Date of publication and mention (51) Int Cl.: of the grant of the patent: A01N 43/56 (2006.01) A01N 61/00 (2006.01) 12.12.2012 Bulletin 2012/50 (21) Application number: 10009776.5 (22) Date of filing: 30.06.2005 (54) Synergistic mixtures for controlling invertebrate pests containing an anthanilamide compound and a lip biosynthesis inhibitor Synergistische Mischungen zur Bekämpfung von wirbelosen Lästlingen enthaltend ein Anthranilamid und einen Lipidbiosynthese-Hemmer Mélanges synergiques pour la lutte contre les invertébrés comprenant une anthranilamide et un inhibiteur de la biosynthèse lipidique (84) Designated Contracting States: • Lahm, Philip George AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB GR Wilmington, DE 19808 (US) HU IE IS IT LI LT LU MC NL PL PT RO SE SI SK TR • Stevenson, Thomas Martin Newark, DE 19702 (US) (30) Priority: 01.07.2004 US 584601 P • Portillo, Hector Eduardo 29.03.2005 US 666073 P Newark, Delaware 19702 (US) • Flexner, John Lindsay (43) Date of publication of application: Landenberg, Pennsylvania 19350 (US) 22.12.2010 Bulletin 2010/51 (74) Representative: Beacham, Annabel Rose (62) Document number(s) of the earlier application(s) in Dehns accordance with Art. 76 EPC: St Bride’s House 09002571.9 / 2 060 179 10 Salisbury Square 05770891.9 / 1 778 012 London EC4Y 8JD (GB) (73) Proprietor: E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company Wilmington, DE 19898 (US) (56) References cited: WO-A-03/015518 WO-A-03/015519 (72) Inventors: WO-A1-03/024222 • Annan, Isaac Billy Newark, Delaware 19711 (US) Remarks: • Selby, Thomas Paul Thefile contains technical information submitted after Hockessin, DE 19707 (US) the application was filed and not included in this specification Note: Within nine months of the publication of the mention of the grant of the European patent in the European Patent Bulletin, any person may give notice to the European Patent Office of opposition to that patent, in accordance with the Implementing Regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Morphology, Taxonomy, and Biology of Larval Scarabaeoidea
    Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign http://www.archive.org/details/morphologytaxono12haye ' / ILLINOIS BIOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS Volume XII PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS *, URBANA, ILLINOIS I EDITORIAL COMMITTEE John Theodore Buchholz Fred Wilbur Tanner Charles Zeleny, Chairman S70.S~ XLL '• / IL cop TABLE OF CONTENTS Nos. Pages 1. Morphological Studies of the Genus Cercospora. By Wilhelm Gerhard Solheim 1 2. Morphology, Taxonomy, and Biology of Larval Scarabaeoidea. By William Patrick Hayes 85 3. Sawflies of the Sub-family Dolerinae of America North of Mexico. By Herbert H. Ross 205 4. A Study of Fresh-water Plankton Communities. By Samuel Eddy 321 LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS ILLINOIS BIOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS Vol. XII April, 1929 No. 2 Editorial Committee Stephen Alfred Forbes Fred Wilbur Tanner Henry Baldwin Ward Published by the University of Illinois under the auspices of the graduate school Distributed June 18. 1930 MORPHOLOGY, TAXONOMY, AND BIOLOGY OF LARVAL SCARABAEOIDEA WITH FIFTEEN PLATES BY WILLIAM PATRICK HAYES Associate Professor of Entomology in the University of Illinois Contribution No. 137 from the Entomological Laboratories of the University of Illinois . T U .V- TABLE OF CONTENTS 7 Introduction Q Economic importance Historical review 11 Taxonomic literature 12 Biological and ecological literature Materials and methods 1%i Acknowledgments Morphology ]* 1 ' The head and its appendages Antennae. 18 Clypeus and labrum ™ 22 EpipharynxEpipharyru Mandibles. Maxillae 37 Hypopharynx <w Labium 40 Thorax and abdomen 40 Segmentation « 41 Setation Radula 41 42 Legs £ Spiracles 43 Anal orifice 44 Organs of stridulation 47 Postembryonic development and biology of the Scarabaeidae Eggs f*' Oviposition preferences 48 Description and length of egg stage 48 Egg burster and hatching Larval development Molting 50 Postembryonic changes ^4 54 Food habits 58 Relative abundance.
    [Show full text]
  • Tachinidae, Tachinid Flies
    Beneficial Insects Class Insecta, Insects Order Diptera, Flies, gnats, and midges Diptera means “two wings,” and true flies bear only one pair of functional wings. Flies are one of the largest insect groups, with approximately 35 families that contain predatory or parasitic species. All flies have piercing/sucking/sponging mouthparts. Tachinid flies Family Tachinidae Description and life history: This is a large and important family, with up to 1300 native parasitoid species in North America and additional introduced species to help control foreign pests. These flies vary in color, size, and shape but most resemble houseflies. Adults are usually gray, black, or striped, and hairy. Adults lay eggs on plants to be consumed by hosts, or they glue eggs to the outside of hosts, so the maggots can burrow into the host. Rarely will tachinids insert eggs into host bodies. Tachinid flies develop rapidly within their host and pupate in 4–14 days. By the time they emerge, they have killed their host. Many species have several generations a year, although some are limited by hosts with a single annual generation. Prey species: Most tachinid flies attack caterpillars and adult and larval beetles, although others specialize on Tachinid fly adult. (327) sawfly larvae, true bugs, grasshoppers, or other insects. Photo: John Davidson Lydella thompsoni is a parasitoid of European corn borer, Voria ruralis attacks cabbage looper caterpillars, Myiopharus doryphorae attacks Colorado potato beetle larvae, and Istocheta aldrichi parasitizes adult Japanese beetles. Although these are very important natural en- emies, none is available commercially. IPM of Midwest Landscapes 263.
    [Show full text]
  • Japanese Beetle Popillia Japonica Japanese Beetle Damages Plants in Two Distinct Ways
    Japanese Beetle Popillia japonica Japanese beetle damages plants in two distinct ways Japanese beetle adults chew on leaves and flowers of many plants White grubs prune the roots, producing drought stress symptoms Flowers are often a favored plant part targeted by adult Japanese beetles Issue of unusual concern with Japanese beetle Overlap of adult feeding on flowers – and use of those flowers by pollinators Uber-host Plants Favored by Japanese Beetle Adults in CO • Roses** • Littleleaf Linden* • Virginia Creeper* • Silver lace** Damage to Virginia creeper Damage to linden Other Plants Commonly Grown in CO that are Highly Favored by Japanese Beetle Ornamentals Food Crops • Hollyhock* • Beans (green, edamame) • Gaura** • Basil • Rose-of-Sharon** • Raspberry* • Crabapple • Grape • Japanese maple • Peking cotoneaster • * JB populations overlap with flowering • ** JB populations overlap >alot< with flowering Japanese beetle traps are excellent for detecting presence of the insect in an area 9 Proposed Project for 2019 Repeat/Expand the 2008 Japanese beetle survey to establish the present situation in eastern Colorado 10 Should we now consider trying to introduce natural enemies of Japanese beetle into Colorado? Yes! Natural Enemies of Japanese Beetle Exist Elsewhere in the US • Paenibacillus popilliae (Milky spore) –Bacterium • Istocheta aldrichi* –Tachinid fly • Tiphia species* –Parasitic wasps • Ovavesicula popilliae* –Microsporidium (fungus) * Species involved in Colorado Japanese Beetle Biological Control Program Natural Enemies of Japanese Beetle for Potential Introduction into Colorado? Ovavesicula popilliae – a microsporidian disease of Japanese beetle larvae Ovavesicula infection of Malphighian tubules of Japanese beetle larva Main observed effects from infection – reduced fecundity, reduced winter survival The Malpighian tubules of insects filter wastes from the blood, functioning somewhat like what the kidney does in humans Heavy O.
    [Show full text]
  • Dutch Elm Disease
    2/16/2021 Dutch Elm Disease Published on Center for Agriculture, Food and the Environment (https://ag.umass.edu) Dutch Elm Disease [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] Dutch elm disease (DED) is a lethal vascular wilt disease of American elm (Ulmus americana) that is caused by Ophiostoma novo-ulmi and O. ulmi. While once widespread in the region, O. ulmi has been displaced by the more aggressive O. novo-ulmi and is now believed to be uncommon to rare in the region. Both O. novo-ulmi and O. ulmi are non-native to North America and Europe. Overland spread of DED from diseased to healthy elms is facilitated by the native elm bark beetle (Hylurgopinus rufipes) and European elm bark beetle (Scolytus multistriatus). The disease also spreads from diseased to healthy trees through root grafts when elms are in close proximity to one another. Hosts All North American elms are susceptible to DED to some degree. American elm, the most abundant elm species in New England, is highly susceptible while the two other native elms occasionally found in landscape settings, rock elm (U. thomasii) and slippery elm (U. rubra), vary from susceptible to somewhat resistant. Several DED-resistant cultivars of American elm have been developed, with Princeton (U. americana ′Princeton′) and Valley Forge (U. americana ′Valley Forge′) the most abundant in area nurseries. While both cultivars offer good to excellent resistance to DED, they both suffer from poor canopy structure and are prone to stem and branch breakage under high winds and snow. Additional cultivars that are not as widely available, but offer more desirable canopy structure and form, include Jefferson (U.
    [Show full text]
  • No Slide Title
    Tachinidae: The “other” parasitoids Diego Inclán University of Padova Outline • Briefly (re-) introduce parasitoids & the parasitoid lifestyle • Quick survey of dipteran parasitoids • Introduce you to tachinid flies • major groups • oviposition strategies • host associations • host range… • Discuss role of tachinids in biological control Parasite vs. parasitoid Parasite Life cycle of a parasitoid Alien (1979) Life cycle of a parasitoid Parasite vs. parasitoid Parasite Parasitoid does not kill the host kill its host Insects life cycles Life cycle of a parasitoid Some facts about parasitoids • Parasitoids are diverse (15-25% of all insect species) • Hosts of parasitoids = virtually all terrestrial insects • Parasitoids are among the dominant natural enemies of phytophagous insects (e.g., crop pests) • Offer model systems for understanding community structure, coevolution & evolutionary diversification Distribution/frequency of parasitoids among insect orders Primary groups of parasitoids Diptera (flies) ca. 20% of parasitoids Hymenoptera (wasps) ca. 70% of parasitoids Described Family Primary hosts Diptera parasitoid sp Sciomyzidae 200? Gastropods: (snails/slugs) Nemestrinidae 300 Orth.: Acrididae Bombyliidae 5000 primarily Hym., Col., Dip. Pipunculidae 1000 Hom.:Auchenorrycha Conopidae 800 Hym:Aculeata Lep., Orth., Hom., Col., Sarcophagidae 1250? Gastropoda + others Lep., Hym., Col., Hem., Tachinidae > 8500 Dip., + many others Pyrgotidae 350 Col:Scarabaeidae Acroceridae 500 Arach.:Aranea Hym., Dip., Col., Lep., Phoridae 400?? Isop.,Diplopoda
    [Show full text]
  • Check List of the Rutelinae (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae) of Oceania
    CHECK LIST OF THE RUTELINAE (COLEOPTERA, SCARABAEIDAE) OF OCEANIA By FRIEDRICH OHAUS BERNICE P. BISHOP MUSEUM OCCASIONAL PAPERS VOLUME XI, NUMBER 2 HONOLULU, HAWAII PUBLISHED BY THE MUSJ-:UM 1935 CHECK LIST OF THE RUTELINAE (COLEOPTERA, SCARABAEIDAE) OF OCEANIA By FRIEDRICH OHAUS MAINZ, GERMANY BIOLOGY The RuteIinae are plant feeders. In Parastasia the beetle (imago) visits flowers, and the grub (larva) lives in dead trunks of more or less hard wood. In Anomala the beetle is a leaf feeder, and the grub lives in the earth, feeding on the roots of living plants. In Adoretus the beetle feeds on flowers and leaves; the grub lives in the earth and feeds upon the roots of living plants. In some species of Anornala and Adoretus, both beetles and grubs are noxious to culti­ vated plants, and it has been observed that eggs or young grubs of these species have been transported in the soil-wrapping around roots or parts of roots of such plants as the banana, cassava, and sugar cane. DISTRIBUTION With the exception of two species, the Rutelinae found on the continent of Australia (including Tasmania) belong to the subtribe Anoplognathina. The first exception is Anomala (Aprosterna) antiqua Gyllenhal (australasiae Blackburn), found in northeast Queensland in cultivated places near the coast. This species is abundant from British India and southeast China in the west to New Guinea in the east, stated to be noxious here and there to cultivated plants. It was probably brought to Queensland by brown or white men, as either eggs or young grubs in soil around roots of bananas, cassava, or sugar cane.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural* Pest Control in the Home Garden Why Go the Natural Route?
    Natural* Pest Control in the Home Garden Why go the natural route? • Safety • Sustainability • Insect resistance • Cost considerations • $ • Time • Health Natural Controls • At least some natural forces act on all organisms, causing populations to rise and fall • Be aware of the influence of natural forces and whether or not you can harness them to balance the scales in your favor • Climate • Natural enemies • Geography/Environment • Sustenance • Shelter Disease Triangle So I want to go more natural. What are my strategies? First Thing’s First: Document everything. Plant/Variety Selection • Right plant, right place (think of the disease triangle) • Stressed plants emit pheromones that attract insect pests • Some plants resist pest attacks better than others • Heirlooms vs hybrids Timing • Time plantings so that majority of crop will avoid peak pest infestations Cultural/Mechanical Control • Spacing • Plant strength • Airflow/circulation • Pathogen dispersal • Plant Strength Cultural/Mechanical Control • Weeds, grass around garden may harbor harmful pests • Gardens started on formerly turfed area may contain harmful larvae and formidable weeds Cultural/Mechanical Control • Crop Rotation/Cover Crop • Soil health • Weed control Cultural/Mechanical Control • Row Covers Cultural/Mechanical Control Sanitation • Removal of sick, dying, dead plant material • Mulch • Know when to call it quits Trapping • Very practical, just require a threshold • Traps for wide range of pests available commercially Scouting • Not just what you see – context is
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Domestic Japanese Beetle Harmonization Plan"
    U.S. Domestic Japanese Beetle Harmonization Plan Adopted by the National Plant Board August 19, 1998 Last Revision June 20, 2016 i Collins National Plant Board OsamaEI-Lissy Deputy Administrator Plant Proteclion and Quarantine Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service United States Department of Agriculture CraigRegelbrugge Senior Yice President- Industry Advocacy & Research AmericanHort TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECTIVE SUMMARY 1 I. GOALS AND BACKGROUND 1 II. CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING JAPANESE BEETLE INFESTATION STATUS 2 III. DEFINITIONS 3 IV. REGULATORY STRATEGIES 3 Category 1 - Uninfested/Quarantine Pest 3 Category 2 – Uninfested or Partially Infested 4 Category 3 – Partially or Generally Infested 4 Category 4 –Not Known To Be Infested/Unlikely To Become Established 4 V. HARMONIZATION PLAN COMMITTEES AND MEMBERSHIP 5 VI. HARMONIZATION PLAN MODIFICATIONS 5 VII. REGULATORY TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS AND PESTICIDE DISCLAIMERS 6 APPENDIX 1. SHIPMENT TO CATEGORY 1 STATES 7 Certification Options 1-4 1. Production in an Approved Japanese Beetle Free Greenhouse/Screenhouse 7 2. Production During a Pest Free Window 7 3. Application of Approved Regulatory Treatments 8 4. Detection Survey for Origin Certification 10 Adult Japanese Beetle Mitigation Requirements 11 APPENDIX 2. SHIPMENT TO CATEGORY 2 STATES 14 Certification Options 1-5 1. Application of Approved Regulatory Treatments 14 2. Japanese Beetle Nursery Trapping Program 15 3. Field Grown Nursery Stock Accreditation Program 16 4. Containerized Nursery Stock Accreditation Program 17 5. Shipment of Sod 18 Adult Japanese Beetle Mitigation Requirements 18 APPENDIX 3: SHIPMENT INTO CANADA FROM THE UNITED STATES 21 APPENDIX 4: STATEWIDE DETECTION & DELIMITING SURVEY 23 APPENDIX 5. BIOLOGY AND PEST RISK ANALYSIS 25 APPENDIX 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Quick Guide for the Identification Of
    Quick Guide for the Identification of Maryland Scarabaeoidea Mallory Hagadorn Dr. Dana L. Price Department of Biological Sciences Salisbury University This document is a pictorial reference of Maryland Scarabaeoidea genera (and sometimes species) that was created to expedite the identification of Maryland Scarabs. Our current understanding of Maryland Scarabs comes from “An Annotated Checklist of the Scarabaeoidea (Coleoptera) of Maryland” (Staines 1984). Staines reported 266 species and subspecies using literature and review of several Maryland Museums. Dr. Price and her research students are currently conducting a bioinventory of Maryland Scarabs that will be used to create a “Taxonomic Guide to the Scarabaeoidea of Maryland”. This will include dichotomous keys to family and species based on historical reports and collections from all 23 counties in Maryland. This document should be cited as: Hagadorn, M.A. and D.L. Price. 2012. Quick Guide for the Identification of Maryland Scarabaeoidea. Salisbury University. Pp. 54. Questions regarding this document should be sent to: Dr. Dana L. Price - [email protected] **All pictures within are linked to their copyright holder. Table of Contents Families of Scarabaeoidea of Maryland……………………………………... 6 Geotrupidae……………………………………………………………………. 7 Subfamily Bolboceratinae……………………………………………… 7 Genus Bolbocerosoma………………………………………… 7 Genus Eucanthus………………………………………………. 7 Subfamily Geotrupinae………………………………………………… 8 Genus Geotrupes………………………………………………. 8 Genus Odonteus...……………………………………………… 9 Glaphyridae..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Grubs / Scarab Beetles Know Thy Enemy: White Grubs / Scarab Beetles • Scarab Beetles (Scarabaeidae) Are Part of the Coleoptera Order (General Beetles)
    A Novel, Effective Approach to Grub Control That is Safe for Pollinators, People, Animals and the Environment with EPA Exemptions in CT Joe Magazzi, MS President Outline WHAT? WHY? HOW? Know Thy Enemy: White Grubs / Scarab Beetles Know Thy Enemy: White Grubs / Scarab Beetles • Scarab Beetles (Scarabaeidae) are part of the Coleoptera order (General Beetles). • There are about 30,000 scarab species comprising about 10 percent of all known beetles. The term “white grub” is the immature or larval form of the scarab beetle. • Most consume live plants, fruits and vegetable and are considered agricultural pests with a large negative economic impact. In Connecticut, the most prevalent and damaging species are: Japanese beetles, European chafers, Asiatic garden beetles, Oriental beetles, Northern masked chafer Know Thy Enemy: White Grubs / Scarab Beetles Economic Impact • “White grubs are the most damaging group of turf grass insect pests in our region”…Connecticut IPM Annual Report from UCONN in 2013. • According to a USDA/APHIS report in 2000, about $156 million is spent in the US annually renovating or replacing damaged turf or ornamental plants. • That same report from 2000 estimated that $460 million is spent each year to control the grubs and adults. • Today, the economic impact is likely higher than it was 16 years ago. • These numbers are only for the Japanese beetle – total white grub & adult beetle damage is likely in the billions. Know Thy Enemy: Beetle Life Cycles From Cornell University Integrated Pest Management Program (www.nysipm.cornell.edu/publications/grubs/life.asp) beetleGONE! & grubGONE! (Bacillus thuringiensis) & The Cry Proteins: An Introduction & Mode of Action Against Grubs & Beetles “The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend” Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) • Bacteria first isolated in 1901 by Ishiwatari from diseased silkworms and again by Berliner from diseased flour moth larvae in 1911.
    [Show full text]