DOCSLIB.ORG

Land Retirement Demonstration Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Land Retirement Demonstration Project Land Retirement Demonstration Project Five-Year Report U.S. Department of the Interior Interagency Land Retirement Team 1243 N Street Fresno, California September 2005 Cover photos: The imprinter used to plant native seed, restored native perennial shrub habitat, and an alkali scrub annual flower called Monolopia stricta or Crum's monolopia. Land Retirement Demonstration Project Five-Year Report Prepared by U.S. Department of the Interior California State University, Stanislaus Bureau of Reclamation Endangered Species Recovery Program Interagency Land Retirement Team 1900 N Gateway Boulevard, Suite 101 1243 N Street Fresno, CA 93727 Fresno, CA 93721-1813 Georgia Basso Siran Erysian Krista R. Garcia Stephen L. Lee Adrian J. Howard Robert May Patrick A. Kelly Amy J. Kokx Bureau of Reclamation Darren P. Newman Technical Service Center Scott E. Phillips PO Box 25007 Nur P. Ritter Denver, CO 80225-0007 Curtis E. Uptain Daniel F. Williams Joseph Brummer Jim Yahnke U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service San Diego State University Interagency Land Retirement Team San Diego, CA 92182 1243 N Street Stuart H. Hurlbert Fresno, CA 93721-1813 Beatrice A. Olsen Bureau of Land Management Fresno, CA 93721-1813 Stephen Laymon Tracy Rowland Prepared for U.S. Department of the Interior Interagency Land Retirement Team 1243 N Street Fresno, California September 2005 Acknowledgments Acknowledgments The Land Retirement Demonstration Project has been implemented with considerable team effort. Bob May (Bureau of Reclamation), Stephen Lee (Reclamation), Bea Olsen (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS]), Tracy Rowland (Bureau of Land Management [BLM]), and Stephen Laymon (BLM) have had the daunting role of administration, land acquisition, agency coordination, and management of the Atwell Island land retirement site. Siran Erysian (Reclamation) provided Geographic Information System (GIS) support and maps for the physical impacts chapter and Scott Phillips (California State University [CSU], Stanislaus, Endangered Species Recovery Program [ESRP]) provided GIS support and maps for the remainder of the chapters. ESRP field staff (in addition to the authors) that contributed immense effort to this project include Howard Clark, Ellen Cypher, Scott Deal, Patrick Morrison, Richard Gebhardt, Emily Magill, Steve Messer, Laurie Williams, Kimberly Kreitinger, Jenn Haas, Michelle Selmon, Karen Dulik, Gene “Woody” Moise, Paul Brandy, Tamra Sandoval, Rachel Zwerdling-Morales, Geoff Gray, Rhianna Lee, Roberta Fargo, and Foung Vang. They, along with many of the authors, have spent many late nights, early mornings, and hot afternoons in the field. They have spent much time and effort organizing equipment, implementing research trials, maintaining an on-site nursery, sampling, entering and analyzing data, and writing progress reports and annual reports. Administrative support was provided by Cecilia Lopez, Cristina Lopez, Alicia Villegas, Jacqueline Furr, Daniela Giovannetti, and Heather Williams. Dr. Fred Schreiber (CSU Fresno) and Rain Healer (CSU Fresno) assisted with invertebrate identifications, and Dr. Norman Smith (Fresno County Agricultural Commission) assisted in invertebrate ecological classifications. Mr. Robert Jones and Billy Costello, our neighboring farmers, assisted in site maintenance, planted barley in the buffer areas surrounding the study plots, assisted with nursery maintenance and installing a variety of experimental trials. Staff from Richard F and F Contracting Inc., including Jeronimo Diaz, Valentina Diaz, Maria Diaz, Reyna Diaz, Francisco Rodriquez, and others spent a great deal of time and effort helping to plant, weed, and harvest the nursery. Richard Lopez at Westlands Water District (WWD) has been a tremendous help in guiding us through the convoluted web of water allocations, orders, and transfers. Without his help, we may well have needlessly spent a great deal of money on unused water. Battalion Chief Gary Karle, Captain Doug Johnson, and Fire Captain Specialist Josh Chrisman collaborated with us in writing a pre-fire management plan and provided methods to reduce fire hazard. We would like to thank Ray Laclergue and Bonnie Bladen of Intermountain Nursery for providing native plant materials and for giving invaluable advice for iii Land Retirement Demonstration Project Five Year Report growing native plants in our nursery. We purchased seed from Jody Miller at S and S seeds, David Gilpin at Pacific Coast Seeds, and Scott Stewart at ConservaSeed. They provided invaluable advice for our various restoration trials, as did John Anderson at Hedgerow Farms. David Dyer, at the Natural Resource Conservation Service’s Plant Materials Center in Lockeford, California, donated some plant materials and provided advice during the installation of our own seed processing facility. Willard Schaff and William House provided native seed collecting services. Andy Pon, at Westside Transplants, allowed us to use his seed cleaning equipment and advised us on nursery practices. John Stebbins at California State University, Fresno, provided space in a lathe house for growing seedlings. The California Department of Fish and Game, Fresno West Golf and Country Club, Westlands Water District, and Paul Lanfranco granted us permission to collect native seed from various locations in Fresno County. Richard Kochevar at New Mexico Department of Agriculture, State Seed Laboratory, performed seed testing on our native seed collections. Robert J. Huddleston and Richard Knoernschild of the Mendota Wildlife Area provided storage space for our tractor and implements, seed, and other materials. Dr. Ted St. John provided information that enabled us to build a seed imprinter. Sherrill Campbell at HCL Machineworks assisted in developing and constructing modifications to the imprinter to improve seed imprinting. iv Contents Contents Page Acknowledgments ................................................................................................iii Acronyms and Abbreviations .......................................................................... xvii Executive Summary........................................................................................... xix Chapter 1. Introduction........................................................................................ 1 1.1. Background................................................................................................ 1 1.2. Development, Implementation, and Scope of the Land Retirement Demonstration Project ............................................................................. 3 1.3. Tranquillity Project Site Location and Description ................................... 5 1.4. Literature Cited .......................................................................................... 7 Chapter 2. Physical Impacts of Agricultural Land Retirement in the San Joaquin Valley ...................................................................................... 9 2.1. Introduction................................................................................................ 9 2.2. Tranquillity Site ....................................................................................... 10 2.2.1. Geology ......................................................................................... 10 2.2.2. Soils ............................................................................................... 10 2.2.3. Groundwater .................................................................................. 13 2.2.4. Climate and Weather ..................................................................... 14 2.2.5. Irrigation ........................................................................................ 16 2.2.6. Monitoring of Selenium Levels..................................................... 16 2.2.6.1. Surface Water Monitoring ............................................... 16 2.2.6.2. Soil Monitoring................................................................ 17 2.2.6.3. Soil Chemical Analyses ................................................... 19 2.2.6.4. Groundwater Level Monitoring ....................................... 19 2.2.6.5. Groundwater Quality Monitoring .................................... 21 2.2.7. Groundwater Response to Land Retirement.................................. 22 2.2.8. Groundwater Quality ..................................................................... 32 2.2.8.1. Groundwater Salinity....................................................... 32 2.2.8.2. Groundwater Major Ion Chemistry.................................. 32 2.2.8.3. Trace Elements in Groundwater ...................................... 35 2.2.8.4. Selenium Trend in Groundwater...................................... 38 2.2.8.5. Boron in Groundwater ..................................................... 44 2.2.8.6. Origin and Isotopic Composition of Groundwater .......... 44 2.2.8.7. Groundwater Age............................................................. 45 2.2.9. Evaporative Concentration of Shallow Groundwater.................... 46 2.2.10. Trend Analysis for Soils.............................................................. 48 2.2.11. Change Detection Analyses......................................................... 51 2.2.12. Soil Interpretive Summary........................................................... 52 2.2.13. Conclusions ................................................................................. 59 v Land Retirement Demonstration Project Five Year Report 2.3. Atwell Island Site....................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Alfalfa PMG 12 19 11
    UC IPM Pest Management Guidelines: ALFALFA September 2010 Contents (Dates in parenthesis indicate when each topic was updated) Alfalfa Year-Round IPM Program Checklist (11/06) ........................................................................................................................ iv General Information Integrated Pest Management (11/06) ................................................................................................................................................... 1 Selecting the Field (11/06) ................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Transgenic Herbicide-Tolerant Alfalfa (11/06) ................................................................................................................................... 3 Biological Control (11/06) ................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Sampling with a Sweep Net (11/06) .................................................................................................................................................... 6 Crop Rotation (11/06) .......................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Aphid Monitoring (9/07) .....................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ELIZABETH LOCKARD SKILLEN Diversity of Parasitic Hymenoptera
    ELIZABETH LOCKARD SKILLEN Diversity of Parasitic Hymenoptera (Ichneumonidae: Campopleginae and Ichneumoninae) in Great Smoky Mountains National Park and Eastern North American Forests (Under the direction of JOHN PICKERING) I examined species richness and composition of Campopleginae and Ichneumoninae (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) parasitoids in cut and uncut forests and before and after fire in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Tennessee (GSMNP). I also compared alpha and beta diversity along a latitudinal gradient in Eastern North America with sites in Ontario, Maryland, Georgia, and Florida. Between 1997- 2000, I ran insect Malaise traps at 6 sites in two habitats in GSMNP. Sites include 2 old-growth mesic coves (Porters Creek and Ramsay Cascades), 2 second-growth mesic coves (Meigs Post Prong and Fish Camp Prong) and 2 xeric ridges (Lynn Hollow East and West) in GSMNP. I identified 307 species (9,716 individuals): 165 campoplegine species (3,273 individuals) and a minimum of 142 ichneumonine species (6,443 individuals) from 6 sites in GSMNP. The results show the importance of habitat differences when examining ichneumonid species richness at landscape scales. I report higher richness for both subfamilies combined in the xeric ridge sites (Lynn Hollow West (114) and Lynn Hollow East (112)) than previously reported peaks at mid-latitudes, in Maryland (103), and lower than Maryland for the two cove sites (Porters Creek, 90 and Ramsay Cascades, 88). These subfamilies appear to have largely recovered 70+ years after clear-cutting, yet Campopleginae may be more susceptible to logging disturbance. Campopleginae had higher species richness in old-growth coves and a 66% overlap in species composition between previously cut and uncut coves.
    [Show full text]
  • Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) 321-356 ©Entomofauna Ansfelden/Austria; Download Unter
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Entomofauna Jahr/Year: 2007 Band/Volume: 0028 Autor(en)/Author(s): Yefremova Zoya A., Ebrahimi Ebrahim, Yegorenkova Ekaterina Artikel/Article: The Subfamilies Eulophinae, Entedoninae and Tetrastichinae in Iran, with description of new species (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) 321-356 ©Entomofauna Ansfelden/Austria; download unter www.biologiezentrum.at Entomofauna ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR ENTOMOLOGIE Band 28, Heft 25: 321-356 ISSN 0250-4413 Ansfelden, 30. November 2007 The Subfamilies Eulophinae, Entedoninae and Tetrastichinae in Iran, with description of new species (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) Zoya YEFREMOVA, Ebrahim EBRAHIMI & Ekaterina YEGORENKOVA Abstract This paper reflects the current degree of research of Eulophidae and their hosts in Iran. A list of the species from Iran belonging to the subfamilies Eulophinae, Entedoninae and Tetrastichinae is presented. In the present work 47 species from 22 genera are recorded from Iran. Two species (Cirrospilus scapus sp. nov. and Aprostocetus persicus sp. nov.) are described as new. A list of 45 host-parasitoid associations in Iran and keys to Iranian species of three genera (Cirrospilus, Diglyphus and Aprostocetus) are included. Zusammenfassung Dieser Artikel zeigt den derzeitigen Untersuchungsstand an eulophiden Wespen und ihrer Wirte im Iran. Eine Liste der für den Iran festgestellten Arten der Unterfamilien Eu- lophinae, Entedoninae und Tetrastichinae wird präsentiert. Mit vorliegender Arbeit werden 47 Arten in 22 Gattungen aus dem Iran nachgewiesen. Zwei neue Arten (Cirrospilus sca- pus sp. nov. und Aprostocetus persicus sp. nov.) werden beschrieben. Eine Liste von 45 Wirts- und Parasitoid-Beziehungen im Iran und ein Schlüssel für 3 Gattungen (Cirro- spilus, Diglyphus und Aprostocetus) sind in der Arbeit enthalten.
    [Show full text]
  • The Curculionoidea of the Maltese Islands (Central Mediterranean) (Coleoptera)
    BULLETIN OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF MALTA (2010) Vol. 3 : 55-143 The Curculionoidea of the Maltese Islands (Central Mediterranean) (Coleoptera) David MIFSUD1 & Enzo COLONNELLI2 ABSTRACT. The Curculionoidea of the families Anthribidae, Rhynchitidae, Apionidae, Nanophyidae, Brachyceridae, Curculionidae, Erirhinidae, Raymondionymidae, Dryophthoridae and Scolytidae from the Maltese islands are reviewed. A total of 182 species are included, of which the following 51 species represent new records for this archipelago: Araecerus fasciculatus and Noxius curtirostris in Anthribidae; Protapion interjectum and Taeniapion rufulum in Apionidae; Corimalia centromaculata and C. tamarisci in Nanophyidae; Amaurorhinus bewickianus, A. sp. nr. paganettii, Brachypera fallax, B. lunata, B. zoilus, Ceutorhynchus leprieuri, Charagmus gressorius, Coniatus tamarisci, Coniocleonus pseudobliquus, Conorhynchus brevirostris, Cosmobaris alboseriata, C. scolopacea, Derelomus chamaeropis, Echinodera sp. nr. variegata, Hypera sp. nr. tenuirostris, Hypurus bertrandi, Larinus scolymi, Leptolepurus meridionalis, Limobius mixtus, Lixus brevirostris, L. punctiventris, L. vilis, Naupactus cervinus, Otiorhynchus armatus, O. liguricus, Rhamphus oxyacanthae, Rhinusa antirrhini, R. herbarum, R. moroderi, Sharpia rubida, Sibinia femoralis, Smicronyx albosquamosus, S. brevicornis, S. rufipennis, Stenocarus ruficornis, Styphloderes exsculptus, Trichosirocalus centrimacula, Tychius argentatus, T. bicolor, T. pauperculus and T. pusillus in Curculionidae; Sitophilus zeamais and
    [Show full text]
  • Diversification, Selective Sweep, and Body Size in the Invasive Palearctic
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Diversifcation, selective sweep, and body size in the invasive Palearctic alfalfa weevil infected with Wolbachia Midori Tuda1,2,12*, Shun‑ichiro Iwase1,11,12, Khadim Kébé3,12, Julien Haran4,12, Jiri Skuhrovec5,12, Ehsan Sanaei6, Naomichi Tsuji7, Attila Podlussány8, Ottó Merkl8, Ahmed H. El‑Heneidy9 & Katsura Morimoto10 The alfalfa weevil Hypera postica, native to the Western Palearctic, is an invasive legume pest with two divergent mitochondrial clades in its invading regions, the Western clade and the Eastern/Egyptian clade. However, knowledge regarding the native populations is limited. The Western clade is infected with the endosymbiotic bacteria Wolbachia that cause cytoplasmic incompatibility in host weevils. Our aim was to elucidate the spatial genetic structure of this insect and the efect of Wolbachia on its population diversity. We analyzed two mitochondrial and two nuclear genes of the weevil from its native ranges. The Western clade was distributed in western/central Europe, whereas the Eastern/ Egyptian clade was distributed from the Mediterranean basin to central Asia. Intermediate mitotypes were found from the Balkans to central Asia. Most Western clade individuals in western Europe were infected with an identical Wolbachia strain. Mitochondrial genetic diversity of the infected individuals was minimal. The infected clades demonstrated a higher nonsynonymous/synonymous substitution rate ratio than the uninfected clades, suggesting a higher fxation of nonsynonymous mutations due to a selective sweep by Wolbachia. Trans‑Mediterranean and within‑European dispersal routes were supported. We suggest that the ancestral populations diversifed by geographic isolation due to glaciations and that the diversity was reduced in the west by a recent Wolbachia‑driven sweep(s).
    [Show full text]
  • Population Genetics and Genetic Structure in San Joaquin Woolly
    POPULATION GENETICS AND GENETIC STRUCTURE IN SAN JOAQUIN WOOLY THREADS (Monolopia congdonii (A. Gray) B.G. Baldwin Bureau of Land Management – UC Berkeley Grant/Cooperative Agreement Number: L12AC20073 Susan Bainbridge Jepson Herbarium 1001 VLSB #2465 University of California Berkeley, CA 94720 Ryan O’Dell Bureau of Land Management California & Bruce Baldwin UC Berkeley INTRODUCTION Conservation of genetic variability is one of the most important and concrete measures ecologists and land managers can implement to maintain viability for specific organisms vulnerable to climate change and to increase success of restoration. Genetic diversity via adaptation and gene flow can help organisms increase chances of surviving environmental changes (Anderson et al. 2012, Reusch et al. 2005, Jump et al. 2008, Doi et al. 2010). Genetic diversity is also threatened by climate change by erosion due to range shifts and/or reductions (Aguilar et al. 2008, Alsos et al. 2012). Genetic diversity is also an important criterion for restoration and conservation planning, and prioritizing protection of populations. For plant taxa with a declining or limited geographical range or declining populations, perspective on regional and local genetic structure and history is important for developing effective management and restoration planning. Genetic diversity and the processes that shape or maintain that diversity are considered integral for population viability. Inherently rare taxa or those that have had a reduction in population size or an increase in fragmentation may have low levels of genetic variability, in addition to other factors. This increases their vulnerability to inbreeding depression and changes in environmental conditions. At the same time, these taxa are also more vulnerable to unintended consequences of restoration or attempts at enhancement, such as insufficient genetic sampling; swamping of rare genotypes or alleles; or hampered local adaptation by introduction of non-local material.
    [Show full text]
  • Biosecurity Risk Assessment
    An Invasive Risk Assessment Framework for New Animal and Plant-based Production Industries RIRDC Publication No. 11/141 RIRDCInnovation for rural Australia An Invasive Risk Assessment Framework for New Animal and Plant-based Production Industries by Dr Robert C Keogh February 2012 RIRDC Publication No. 11/141 RIRDC Project No. PRJ-007347 © 2012 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. All rights reserved. ISBN 978-1-74254-320-8 ISSN 1440-6845 An Invasive Risk Assessment Framework for New Animal and Plant-based Production Industries Publication No. 11/141 Project No. PRJ-007347 The information contained in this publication is intended for general use to assist public knowledge and discussion and to help improve the development of sustainable regions. You must not rely on any information contained in this publication without taking specialist advice relevant to your particular circumstances. While reasonable care has been taken in preparing this publication to ensure that information is true and correct, the Commonwealth of Australia gives no assurance as to the accuracy of any information in this publication. The Commonwealth of Australia, the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC), the authors or contributors expressly disclaim, to the maximum extent permitted by law, all responsibility and liability to any person, arising directly or indirectly from any act or omission, or for any consequences of any such act or omission, made in reliance on the contents of this publication, whether or not caused by any negligence on the part of the Commonwealth of Australia, RIRDC, the authors or contributors. The Commonwealth of Australia does not necessarily endorse the views in this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • A Larval Parasitoid of the Alfalfa Weevil, Hypera Postica (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in Japan
    Biological Control 34 (2005) 144–151 www.elsevier.com/locate/ybcon Establishment of Bathyplectes anurus (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae), a larval parasitoid of the alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in Japan Megumi Shoubu a,¤, Masami Okumura a, Akinori Shiraishi a, Hidenori Kimura a, Masami Takagi b, Takatoshi Ueno b a Moji Plant Protection Station, Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Moji Ward, Kitakyushu City, Fukuoka 801-0841, Japan b Institute of Biological Control, Faculty of Agriculture, Kyushu University, Fukuoka 812-8581, Japan Received 15 November 2004; accepted 21 April 2005 Available online 1 June 2005 Abstract The alfalfa weevil invaded Japan in the early 1980s. In Southwestern Japan, the weevil infests Chinese milk vetch, which is a main source of honey products. Since apiarists avoid application of insecticides, four species of parasitoid wasps were introduced from the US into Japan for biological control of the weevil in 1988 and 1989. In 1996, one of the parasitoids, Bathyplectes anurus (Thomson) was recovered. Accordingly, we started the survey to assess the incidence and eVectiveness of this parasitoid in suppressing the alfalfa weevil. B. anurus expanded its distribution during 1998–2003. In 1998 and 1999, the percentages of parasitism were mostly less than 5% but quickly increased to about 40% in 2003. The survey also showed that the extent of damage of the weevil on Chinese milk vetch decreased from 2001 to 2004; there was a negative correlation between the extent of weevil damage and the percentage parasit- ism one year previously. These results suggest that the parasitoid reduced damage by the alfalfa weevil. 2005 Elsevier Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenies and Secondary Chemistry in Arnica (Asteraceae)
    Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 392 Phylogenies and Secondary Chemistry in Arnica (Asteraceae) CATARINA EKENÄS ACTA UNIVERSITATIS UPSALIENSIS ISSN 1651-6214 UPPSALA ISBN 978-91-554-7092-0 2008 urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-8459 !"# $ % !& '((" !()(( * * * + , - . , / , '((", + 0 1# 2, # , 34', 56 , , 70 46"84!855&86(4'8(, - 1# 2 . * 9 10-2 . * . # 9 , * * 1 ! " #! !$ 2 1 2 .8 # * * :# 77 1%&'(2 . !6 '3, + . .8 ) / , ; < * . * ** # , * * * , 09 * . # * * 33 * != , 0- # 9 * * 1, , * 2 . * , 0 * * * * * . * , $ * 0- * % # , # 8 * * * * * * $8> # . * * !' , * * . ** , ? . 0- , +,- # # 7-0 -0 :+' 9 +# $8> ./0) . ) 1 ) 2 * 3) ) .456(7 ) , @ / '((" 700 !=5!8='!& 70 46"84!855&86(4'8( ) ))) 8"&54 1 );; ,/,; A B ) ))) 8"&542 List of Papers This thesis is based on the following papers, which are referred to in the text by their Roman numerals: I Ekenäs, C., B. G. Baldwin, and K. Andreasen. 2007. A molecular phylogenetic
    [Show full text]
  • Alfalfa Weevil (Hypera Postica Gyllenahl) Insect Fact Sheet University of Illinois Integrated Pest Management
    Alfalfa Weevil (Hypera postica Gyllenahl) Insect Fact Sheet University of Illinois integrated pest management The alfalfa weevil is one of the primary insect defoliators of alfalfa. Thought to be of Asian origin, the alfalfa weevil was introduced into the United States from southern Europe. First discovered in 1904 in Utah, it is now present in all 48 mainland states. Annually, insect pests of alfalfa, including the alfalfa weevil and potato leafhopper, cause hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. Though difficult to estimate, these same insects are estimated to reduce yields by 10 to 15% annually (forage quality not taken into account). Introduced biologicalcontrol agents and natural enemies have reduced alfalfa weevil populations in many areas, though it continues to be a sporadic pest of alfalfa. Description Alfalfa weevil adults are small (1/4 inch) brown snout beetles that have a distinctive dark, narrow stripe which extends down their back. Adult weevils insert yellow oval eggs into alfalfa stems. Following egg hatch, small legless yellowish-green larvae, each with a white stripe along the middle of the back, emerge. A fainter white stripe is also present on each side of the more prominent central stripe. Each larva has a very conspicuous black head and is approximately 3/8 inch when mature. Transformation to the adult stage is passed in a loosely woven white cocoon, about the size of a pea, to which leaves may be attached. The alfalfa weevil can be confused with the clover leaf weevil which is another pest of alfalfa. However, clover leaf weevils rarely cause economic injury in alfalfa in Illinois.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Principles for Resource Planners
    United States Department of National Biology Handbook Agriculture Subpart B—Conservation Planning Natural Resources Conservation Service Part 610 Ecological Principles for Resource Planners (190-VI-NBH, November 2004) Part 610 Ecological Principles for Resource Planners Contents: 610.00 Ecosystems and landscapes 610–1 610.01 Ecosystem processes 610–2 (a) Energy flow ............................................................................................... 610–2 (b) Water and nutrient cycles ........................................................................ 610–3 610.02 Ecosystem structure and its relation to ecosystem function 610–6 610.03 Ecosystem changes and disturbance 610–7 (a) Stability in ecosystems ............................................................................. 610–7 610.04 Biological diversity 610–8 (a) Hierarchy of diversity ............................................................................... 610–8 (b) Species interactions ............................................................................... 610–10 610.05 Applying ecological principles to habitat conservation, 610–11 restoration, and management (a) Area of management actions ................................................................. 610–11 (b) Edge effects ............................................................................................. 610–11 (c) Disturbance effects................................................................................. 610–11 (d) Isolation and distance effects ...............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Alfalfa Weevils : a New Look at an Old Pest
    ALFALFA WEEVILS : A NEW LOOK AT AN OLD PEST Larry Godfrey, Karey Windbiel-Rojas, Richard Lewis, Dan Putnam, Mick Canevari, Carol Frate, Dan Marcum, Steve Orloff, and Jerry Schmierer1 ABSTRACT Alfalfa fields can act as an “insectary” (producer of beneficial insects) for other neighboring crops in the Central Valley and other areas. However, several insect pests also injure alfalfa plants reducing crop yields and quality. The alfalfa weevil complex, comprised of the Egyptian alfalfa weevil (EAW), Hypera brunneipennis, and alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica, is the most damaging arthropod in California alfalfa. An insecticide application is commonplace in the late winter/early spring to control this pest. Organophosphate, carbamate, and pyrethroid materials as well as other products are used. These treatments are generally effective and the effects on populations of natural enemies appear fairly short-term. However, the occurrence of organophosphate insecticides in surface waters, particularly chlorpyrifos (Lorsban®), coinciding with the timing of treatment for EAW larvae, has placed added emphasis on refining IPM programs for this pest in alfalfa. Pyrethroid insecticides have also recently been implicated in some environmental concerns. We initiated studies in 2002 to re-evaluate the EAW treatment threshold under current production practices and to improve sampling strategies for this pest. Preliminary data were collected from one site in 2002-03 and 2004 and 2005 studies were expanded to several locations. At the Davis location, first harvest yield losses from EAW larvae were very severe in 2002 (~50% from 10 larvae per sweep), moderate in 2003 (25% from 10 larvae per sweep), no losses from 35 larvae per sweep in 2004, and ~10% from 10 larvae per sweep in 2005.
    [Show full text]