DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Assessment Twin Falls District Noxious Weed and Invasive

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental Assessment Twin Falls District Noxious Weed and Invasive United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment Twin Falls District Noxious Weed and Invasive Plant Treatment DOI-BLM-ID-T000-2012-0001-EA U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Twin Falls District 2878 Addison Avenue East Twin Falls, ID 83301 Phone: (208) 735-2060 FAX: (208) 735-2076 Table of Contents CHAPTER 1 - PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION .............................................................. 13 Background ............................................................................................................................... 13 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 14 Location of Proposed Action ................................................................................................ 15 Purpose and Need for Action .................................................................................................... 19 Conformance with Applicable Land Use Plans ........................................................................ 19 FMDA ................................................................................................................................... 20 Jarbidge RMP........................................................................................................................ 20 Craters of the Moon Monument MP ..................................................................................... 21 Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness MP.................................................................................. 22 Idaho and Southwestern Montana and Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage- Grouse Approved Resource Management Plan Amendments (ARMPA)/Final EISs .......... 22 Relationship to Statutes, Regulations or Other Plans ............................................................... 22 Tiering and Incorporation by Reference ................................................................................... 25 Scoping, Public Involvement, and Issues ................................................................................. 26 CHAPTER 2 - PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ................................................. 32 Proposed Action ........................................................................................................................ 32 Targeted Plant Communities..................................................................................................... 32 Noxious Weeds ..................................................................................................................... 32 Invasive Plants ...................................................................................................................... 33 Treatment Planning ................................................................................................................... 34 Integrating Vegetation Treatments ....................................................................................... 35 General Site Selection and Treatment................................................................................... 35 Cooperative Weed Management Areas and Partnerships ..................................................... 37 Prevention ............................................................................................................................. 37 Treatment Methods ................................................................................................................... 37 Manual Methods ................................................................................................................... 38 Mechanical Methods ............................................................................................................. 39 Prescribed Fire ...................................................................................................................... 41 Biological Control ................................................................................................................. 42 Herbicides ............................................................................................................................. 45 Re-vegetation ........................................................................................................................ 47 Summary of Proposed Actions ................................................................................................. 50 Livestock and Wild Horse Management ................................................................................... 50 Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................... 51 Paleontological Resources ........................................................................................................ 51 Design Features and Conservation Measures ........................................................................... 52 Soils....................................................................................................................................... 52 Water Resources and Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) ................................................ 52 Special Status Aquatic Animal Species (TEP and BLM sensitive) ...................................... 56 Wildlife (General) ................................................................................................................. 58 Special Status Plants and Wildlife ........................................................................................ 59 Migratory Bird Species of Conservation Concern ................................................................ 75 Livestock ............................................................................................................................... 77 Wild Horses .......................................................................................................................... 77 Native American Traditional Use Areas ............................................................................... 78 Human Health and Safety ..................................................................................................... 78 Special Management Areas ................................................................................................... 78 Travel Management .............................................................................................................. 80 Monitoring ................................................................................................................................ 81 No Action Alternative - Continue Present Herbicide Use ........................................................ 82 Alternatives Considered But Eliminated From Detailed Analysis ........................................... 82 No Use of Herbicides ............................................................................................................ 82 No Aerial Application of Herbicides .................................................................................... 83 CHAPTER 3 – AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS .................... 84 Soils........................................................................................................................................... 86 Affected Environment ........................................................................................................... 86 Environmental Impacts ......................................................................................................... 86 Proposed Action Impacts – Soils .......................................................................................... 86 No Action Alternative Impacts – Soils ................................................................................. 90 Cumulative Effects – Soils.................................................................................................... 91 Water Quality ............................................................................................................................ 92 Affected Environment ........................................................................................................... 92 Environmental Impacts ......................................................................................................... 92 Proposed Action Impacts – Water Quality ........................................................................... 93 No Action Alternative Impacts – Water Quality .................................................................. 98 Cumulative Effects – Water Quality ..................................................................................... 99 Air Quality .............................................................................................................................. 100 Affected Environment ......................................................................................................... 100 Environmental Impacts ....................................................................................................... 103 Proposed Action Impacts – Air Quality .............................................................................. 103 No Action Alternative Impacts – Air Quality ..................................................................... 104 Cumulative Effects – Air Quality ......................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Integrated Weed Control Project Western WA
    Integrated Weed Control Project – Western Washington Non-native invasive plant species threaten biological diversity, decrease forage and habitat for wildlife and livestock, increase wind and water erosion and decrease land values throughout Washington. Many years of manual and chemical control are required to impact large infested areas, which results in significant expenses for landowners and public agencies. Biological control offers an inexpensive control method that can provide long-term weed suppression. Biocontrol agents are self-perpetuating and can disperse to new and undetected weed infestations or those difficult to reach with other control practices. J.Andreas Although it can take agents several years to establish and begin impacting weed infestations, biocontrol is often a highly effective tool and in many cases is the best management option. Stem-mining beetle on Dalmatian toadflax. WSU Extension heads the Integrated Weed Control Project (IWCP) aimed at promoting the use of biocontrol agents for invasive plant management. Project Goals: • Establish biocontrol agents and manage them on a statewide scale to suppress noxious weeds. • Increase public awareness of the benefits and appropriate use of biocontrol as part of an integrated management strategy. • Foster and expand the westside component of the statewide project by providing biocontrol agents, information and expertise to land-managers from county, state and federal agencies, conservation organizations, tribes and private and industry landowners. IWCP in Thurston County County Highlights! The IWCP partners with the Thurston • An hour-long television County Noxious Weed Control Program to special featuring the provide biocontrol education and TCNWCP, The Nature implementation in the region. The TCNWCP Conservancy and the finds suitable release sites through field IWCP aired on Thurston surveys and works with IWCP personnel County TV over 20 times to redistribute biocontrol agents throughout since July 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • Manipulation of Plant Primary Metabolism by Leaf-Mining Larvae 4 in the Race Against Leaf Senescence 5 6 Mélanie J.A
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/777334; this version posted September 20, 2019. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-ND 4.0 International license. Body et al. 1 Submitted to: Frontiers in Physiology 2 3 Manipulation of plant primary metabolism by leaf-mining larvae 4 in the race against leaf senescence 5 6 Mélanie J.A. Body1,2, Jérôme Casas1, and David Giron1* 7 8 (1) Institut de Recherche sur la Biologie de l’Insecte, UMR 7261, CNRS/Université François- 9 Rabelais de Tours, Parc Grandmont, 37200 Tours, France 10 11 (2) Present address: Department of Environmental Sciences, Bowman-Oddy Laboratories, 12 2801 West Bancroft Street, University of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio 43606, United States of 13 America 14 15 * Corresponding author 16 David Giron 17 Address: Institut de Recherche sur la Biologie de l’Insecte, UMR 7261, CNRS/Université 18 François-Rabelais de Tours, Parc Grandmont, 37200 Tours, France 19 Email: [email protected] 20 Phone number: +33 2 47 36 73 49 21 22 Running head: Plant nutrient alteration by a leafminer 23 24 Conflict of interest 25 26 The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. 27 28 Author Contributions 29 30 MJAB and DG designed the overall study, and set up the analytical protocols for total 31 sugars, starches, and protein-bound and free amino acid analyses. MJAB carried out the 32 experiments and analyzed the data, supervised by DG.
    [Show full text]
  • Description of Coleophora Oreiosella Baldizzone, Sp. N. And
    SHILAP Revista de Lepidopterología ISSN: 0300-5267 ISSN: 2340-4078 [email protected] Sociedad Hispano-Luso-Americana de Lepidopterología España Baldizzone, G. Description of Coleophora oreiosella Baldizzone, sp. n. and new records on the distribution of some European Coleophoridae (Lepidoptera: Coleophoridae) SHILAP Revista de Lepidopterología, vol. 47, no. 186, 2019, May-August, pp. 269-277 Sociedad Hispano-Luso-Americana de Lepidopterología España Available in: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=45561111015 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System Redalyc More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America and the Caribbean, Spain and Journal's webpage in redalyc.org Portugal Project academic non-profit, developed under the open access initiative SHILAP Revta. lepid., 47 (186) junio 2019: 269-277 eISSN: 2340-4078 ISSN: 0300-5267 Description of Coleophora oreiosella Baldizzone, sp. n. and new records on the distribution of some European Coleophoridae (Lepidoptera: Coleophoridae) G. Baldizzone* Abstract A new species of the genus Coleophora Hübner, 1822, C. oreiosella Baldizzone, sp. n., known to be found only in the Sierra Nevada, Spain, is described. New data on the distribution of some European species are provided. The male of C. depunctella Toll, 1961, is shown for the first time. KEY WORDS: Lepidoptera, Coleophoridae, Coleophora, new species, new records, Europa. Descripción de Coleophora oreiosella Baldizzone, sp. n. y nuevos registros sobre la distribución de algunos Coleophoridae europeos (Lepidoptera: Coleophoridae) Resumen Se describe una nueva especie del género Coleophora Hübner, 1822, C. oreiosella Baldizzone sp. n., sólo conocida de Sierra Nevada, España. Se proporcionan nuevos datos sobre la distribución de algunas especies europeas.
    [Show full text]
  • Introductions for Biological Control in Hawaii: 1979 and 1980
    Vol. 24, No. 1, September 15, 1982 109 Introductions for Biological Control in Hawaii: 1979 and 1980 PY. LAI, G.Y. FUNASAKI, S Y. HIGA1 The Plant Pest Control Branch (formerly Entomology Branch) of the Hawaii Department of Agriculture has maintained a beneficial organism introduction program for many years. This paper provides notes on the status of some pests and their purposely introduced natural enemies and a list of insects introduced and released for biological control during 1979 and 1980 (Table 1). All benefi cial introductions are thoroughly screened and studied in a quarantine facility and must go through a clearance process prior to being released. WEED PEST CONTROL Ageratina riparia (Regel) K. & R. (Hamakua pamakani) Three organisms contributing to the control of Hamakua pamakani are the stem galling tephritid, Procecidochares alani Steyskal, the leaf defoliating ptero- phorid, Oidaematophorus sp., and the leaf spotting fungus, Cercosporella sp. (introduced by Dr. E.E. Trujillo, Univeristy of Hawaii Plant Pathologist). P. alani was initially released on Hawaii Island in 1974, Oidaematophorus sp. in 1973 andC. sp.in 1975. The combined activities of these purposely introduced beneficial organisms have contributed by severely reducing thickets of Hamakua pamakani on the island of Hawaii. Desirable forage grasses have replaced pamakani in 16,000 to 20,000 ha of pasture lands. Many of these previously heavily infested lands have been restored to productive use. Salsola pestifer A. Nelson (Russian thistle) Through the cooperation of the USDA Biological Control of Weeds Labora tory, Albany, California, two beneficial coleophorids, Coleophora parthenica Meyrick and C. klimeschiella Toll, were introduced to aid in the control of Rus sian thistle, a noxious weed that infests about 320 ha of rangelands on Hawaii.
    [Show full text]
  • Centaurea Stoebe Ssp. Micranthos
    Species: Centaurea stoebe ssp. micranthos http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/cenmac/all.html SPECIES: Centaurea maculosa Introductory Distribution and occurrence Management Considerations Botanical and ecological characteristics Fire ecology Fire effects References INTRODUCTORY SPECIES: Centaurea maculosa AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION FEIS ABBREVIATION SYNONYMS NRCS PLANT CODE COMMON NAMES TAXONOMY LIFE FORM FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS OTHER STATUS AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION: Zouhar, Kris. 2001. Centaurea maculosa. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [2007, September 24]. FEIS ABBREVIATION: CENMAC SYNONYMS: Centaurea biebersteinii DC. [82] Centaurea stoebe L. ssp. micranthos (Gugler) Hayek [137] NRCS PLANT CODE [212]: CEBI2 1 of 58 9/24/2007 4:04 PM Species: Centaurea stoebe ssp. micranthos http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/cenmac/all.html COMMON NAMES: spotted knapweed TAXONOMY: The scientific name for spotted knapweed is Centaurea maculosa Lam. (Asteraceae) [45,67,217,233]. Oschmann [137] suggests that in North America, the name Centaurea maculosa has been misapplied to Centaurea stoebe ssp. micranthos. The taxonomy of spotted knapweed is discussed in Ochsmann [137] and on the Centaurea website. Oschsmann [136] also cites evidence of hybridization between spotted and diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa) in at least 7 U.S. states. The hybrid is named Centaurea × psammogena Gayer. LIFE FORM: Forb FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS: No special status OTHER STATUS: Spotted knapweed has been declared a noxious or restricted weed in at least 15 states in the U.S. and 4 Canadian provinces [213].
    [Show full text]
  • The Taxonomy of the Side Species Group of Spilochalcis (Hymenoptera: Chalcididae) in America North of Mexico with Biological Notes on a Representative Species
    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Masters Theses 1911 - February 2014 1984 The taxonomy of the side species group of Spilochalcis (Hymenoptera: Chalcididae) in America north of Mexico with biological notes on a representative species. Gary James Couch University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/theses Couch, Gary James, "The taxonomy of the side species group of Spilochalcis (Hymenoptera: Chalcididae) in America north of Mexico with biological notes on a representative species." (1984). Masters Theses 1911 - February 2014. 3045. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.umass.edu/theses/3045 This thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses 1911 - February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE TAXONOMY OF THE SIDE SPECIES GROUP OF SPILOCHALCIS (HYMENOPTERA:CHALCIDIDAE) IN AMERICA NORTH OF MEXICO WITH BIOLOGICAL NOTES ON A REPRESENTATIVE SPECIES. A Thesis Presented By GARY JAMES COUCH Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE May 1984 Department of Entomology THE TAXONOMY OF THE SIDE SPECIES GROUP OF SPILOCHALCIS (HYMENOPTERA:CHALCIDIDAE) IN AMERICA NORTH OF MEXICO WITH BIOLOGICAL NOTES ON A REPRESENTATIVE SPECIES. A Thesis Presented By GARY JAMES COUCH Approved as to style and content by: Dr. T/M. Peter's, Chairperson of Committee CJZl- Dr. C-M. Yin, Membe D#. J.S. El kin ton, Member ii Dedication To: My mother who taught me that dreams are only worth the time and effort you devote to attaining them and my father for the values to base them on.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Insects, Primarily Impacts of Biological Control Organisms and Their Parasitoids, Associated with Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea Stoebe L
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-2004 Assessment of Insects, Primarily Impacts of Biological Control Organisms and Their Parasitoids, Associated with Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea stoebe L. s. l.) in Eastern Tennessee Amy Lynn Kovach University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Plant Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Kovach, Amy Lynn, "Assessment of Insects, Primarily Impacts of Biological Control Organisms and Their Parasitoids, Associated with Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea stoebe L. s. l.) in Eastern Tennessee. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2004. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/2267 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Amy Lynn Kovach entitled "Assessment of Insects, Primarily Impacts of Biological Control Organisms and Their Parasitoids, Associated with Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea stoebe L. s. l.) in Eastern Tennessee." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Entomology and Plant Pathology. Jerome F. Grant, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Paris L. Lambdin, B. Eugene Wofford Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R.
    [Show full text]
  • (Centaurea Stoebe Ssp. Micranthos) Biological Control Insects in Michigan
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Valparaiso University The Great Lakes Entomologist Volume 47 Numbers 3 & 4 - Fall/Winter 2014 Numbers 3 & Article 3 4 - Fall/Winter 2014 October 2014 Establishment, Impacts, and Current Range of Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea Stoebe Ssp. Micranthos) Biological Control Insects in Michigan B. D. Carson Michigan State University C. A. Bahlai Missouri State University D. A. Landis Michigan State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation Carson, B. D.; Bahlai, C. A.; and Landis, D. A. 2014. "Establishment, Impacts, and Current Range of Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea Stoebe Ssp. Micranthos) Biological Control Insects in Michigan," The Great Lakes Entomologist, vol 47 (2) Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle/vol47/iss2/3 This Peer-Review Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Biology at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Great Lakes Entomologist by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. Carson et al.: Establishment, Impacts, and Current Range of Spotted Knapweed (<i 2014 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST 129 Establishment, Impacts, and Current Range of Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea stoebe ssp. micranthos) Biological Control Insects in Michigan B. D. Carson1, C. A. Bahlai1, and D. A. Landis1* Abstract Centaurea stoebe L. ssp. micranthos (Gugler) Hayek (spotted knapweed) is an invasive plant that has been the target of classical biological control in North America for more than four decades.
    [Show full text]
  • PUBLICATIONS (Heinz Müller-Schärer, February 2020)
    PUBLICATIONS (Heinz Müller-Schärer, February 2020) By February 2020, Heinz Müller-Schärer authored or co-authored >200 publications in internationally refereed journals with 7388 citations, h-index = 47 (29 since 2015) i10-index 114 (google scholar). List of Authors Sun Y, Bossdorf O, Diaz Grados R, Liao ZY, Müller-Schärer H. 2020. High standing genetic variation in an invasive plant allows immediate evolutionary response to climate warming. bioRxiV https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.20.957209doi: Augustinus BA, Lommen STE, Fogliatto S, Vidotto F, Smith T, HorVath D, Bonini M, Gentili RF, Citterio S, Müller-Schärer H, Schaffner U. 2020. In-season leaf damage by a biocontrol agent explains reproductive output of an invasive plant species. Neobiota, in press. Schaffner U, Steinbach, Sun Y, Skjøth C, de Weger LA, Lommen ST, Augustinus BA, Bonini M, Karrer G, Šikoparija B 8, Thibaudon M and Müller-Schärer H. 2020. Biological control to relieVe millions from Ambrosia allergies in Europe. Nature Comms, in press. NoVoa A, Richardson DM, Pysek P, Meyerson LA, Bacher S, CanaVan S, Catford JA, Cuda J, Essl F, Foxcroft LC, GenoVesi P, Hirsch H, Hui C, Jackson MC, Kueffer C, Le Roux JJ, Measey J, Mohanty NP, Moodley D, Müller-Schäer H, Packer JG, Pergl J, Robinson TB, Saul W-C, Shackleton RT, Visser V, Weyl OLF, Yannelli FA, Wilson JRU. 2020. InVasion syndromes: a systematic approach for predicting biological invasions and facilitating effective management. Biol Invasions, in print https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-020-02220-w Qin TJ, Zhou J, Sun Y, Müller-Schärer H, Luo FL, 1, Dong BC, Li HL, Fei-Hai Yu FH.
    [Show full text]
  • 13 SPOTTED KNAPWEED PEST STATUS of WEED Nature Of
    In: Van Driesche, R., et al., 2002, Biological Control of Invasive Plants in the Eastern United States, USDA Forest Service Publication FHTET-2002-04, 413 p. 13 SPOTTED KNAPWEED J. Story Montana State University, Western Agricultural Research Center, Corvallis, Montana, USA runoff and soil sedimentation (Lacey et al., 1989), and PEST STATUS OF WEED lowers plant diversity (Tyser and Key, 1988). Spot- Spotted knapweed, Centaurea maculosa Lamarck, is ted knapweed produces an allelopathic compound a purple-flowered, herbaceous, perennial weed, liv- that reduces germination of some grass species ing three to five years on average. It infests semiarid (Kelsey and Locken, 1987). range lands in the western United States and road- Geographical Distribution sides and fields in the eastern part of the country. Infested areas are dominated by the plant, reducing Spotted knapweed is native to Europe and western their grazing value and suppressing native plant com- Asia but has become widespread in parts of the munities. The plant, originally from Central Asia, has United States and Canada. The plant occurs through- been in North America for over 120 years. out the United States except for Alaska, Texas, Okla- homa, Mississippi, and Georgia (USDA, NRCS, Nature of Damage 2001). The plant is a serious invader of rangeland in Economic damage. Spotted knapweed is a serious the Rocky Mountain region. In Montana alone, the problem on rangeland, especially in the western plant infests an estimated 1.9 million ha of rangeland United States. Bucher (1984) estimated that an and pasture (Lacey, 1989). In Canada, the plant is 800,000 ha infestation in Montana was causing $4.5 abundant in British Columbia, and is common in million in annual forage losses, and that invasion of Ontario, Quebec, and the Maritimes (Watson and 13.6 million ha of vulnerable rangeland in Montana Renney, 1974).
    [Show full text]
  • Differential Susceptibility of Russian Thistle Accessions to Colletotrichum Gloeosporioides
    Differential susceptibility of Russian thistle accessions to Colletotrichum gloeosporioides William Bruckart , , a, Craig Cavina, Laszlo Vajnab, Ildiko Schwarczingerb and Frederick J. Ryanc a USDA-ARS-FDWSRU, 1301 Ditto Ave., Ft. Detrick, MD 21702, USA b Plant Protection Institute, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, P.O. Box 102, Budapest 1525, Hungary c USDA-ARS-EIDP, 9611 South Riverbend Ave., Parlier, CA 93648, USA Received 16 May 2003; accepted 1 December 2003. Available online 30 December 2003. Abstract Molecular information suggests that Russian thistle (Salsola tragus L.) in the US may consist of more than one genetic entity. This genetic variation needs to be taken into account when developing agents for biological control of this important weed. Preliminary evidence suggests that there are differences in susceptibility of Salsola sp. to infection by fungal pathogens. In the present study, an isolate of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides, a pathogen of Russian thistle collected in Hungary was tested for its ability to infect and damage California accessions of S. tragus (referred to as Type A) and the related S. tragus, Type B. The minimum dew period and temperature required for infection of S. tragus with C. gloeosporioides was determined to be 12–16 h and 25 °C. Both Type A and Type B were susceptible, but C. gloeosporioides caused greater damage and reductions in biomass of Type A than of Type B. Fresh weights of Type A and Type B were reduced from controls by 60 and 9%, respectively, after inoculations with C. gloeosporioides. Results from this study illustrate the importance of understanding target plant taxonomy in biological control evaluations.
    [Show full text]
  • 2011 Crop Report
    Organic Production In Merced County ................................... 1 Top Twelve Leading Farm Commodities 2011 ...................... 2 Significant Events Of The 2011 Crop Year ............................ 3 Field Crops ..................................................................................... 4 Vegetable Crops ........................................................................... 5 Apiary Industry .............................................................................. 5 Seed Crops .................................................................................... 6 Fruit And Nut Crops ..................................................................... 6 Fruit And Nut Acreage Planting ................................................ 7 Nursery Products .......................................................................... 7 Livestock And Poultry Production .......................................... 10 Livestock And Poultry Products ............................................. 10 Aquaculture .................................................................................. 11 Other Agriculture ........................................................................ 11 Pest Prevention ........................................................................... 12 Pest Exclusion Program ............................................................ 12 Pierce’s Disease Control Program ........................................ 12 Federal Phytosanitary Certification Program .................. 12 Pest Detection Program
    [Show full text]