DOCSLIB.ORG

I Principali Insetti Fitofagi Del Castagno a Rischio Di Introduzione in Italia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
I Principali Insetti Fitofagi Del Castagno a Rischio Di Introduzione in Italia Giuseppino Sabbatini Peverieri - Pio Federico Roversi I principali insetti fitofagi castagnodel a rischio di introduzione in Italia rogetto «Bioinfocast» MiPAAF DD n. 4496 del 27/11/2012 P Giuseppino Sabbatini Peverieri - Pio Federico Roversi I principali insetti fitofagi castagnodel a rischio di introduzione in Italia Progetto «Bioinfocast» MiPAAF DD n. 4496 del 27/11/2012 Consiglio per la Ricerca e la sperimentazione in Agricoltura (CRA) ESCLUSIONE DI RESPONSABIILITÀ Lo scopo del presente documento è quello di fornire una panoramica sulle specie di insetti fitofagi delle piante del genere Castanea a livello mondiale, ma non è da consi- derarsi un lavoro omnicomprensivo. La presente pubblicazione può fornire importanti informazioni, ma gli autori non garantiscono che il contenuto sia privo di errori di alcun genere e non garantiscono la veridicità delle informazioni riportate in quanto ottenute attingendo dalla bibliografia disponibile sull’argomento in ambito internazionale. Le immagini riportate nel presente documento possono essere soggette a copyright o a limitazioni specifiche al loro uso. Gli autori declinano ogni responsabilità per eventua- li errori, perdite o altra conseguenza che possono derivare dall’uso delle informazioni del presente documento. Le denominazioni utilizzate e la presentazione del materiale in questa pubblicazione non implicano l'espressione di alcuna opinione da parte degli auto- ri relativa allo status giuridico di alcun paese, territorio, città o area o delle sue autorità o alla delimitazione delle loro frontiere o confini. GIUSEPPINO SABBATINI PEVERIERI, PIO FEDERICO ROVERSI CRA-ABP, Consiglio per la Ricerca e la sperimentazione in Agricoltura, Centro di Ricerca per l’Agrobiologia e la Pedologia, via di Lanciola 12a, 50125 Firenze e-mail: [email protected] [email protected] Citazione: Sabbatini Peverieri G., Roversi P.F., 2014. I principali inset- ti fitofagi del castagno a rischio di introduzione in Italia. Editore: Consiglio per la Ricerca e la sperimentazione in Agricoltura (CRA), pp. 1-112. Edizione fuori commercio © 2014 Consiglio per la Ricerca e la sperimentazione in Agricoltura (CRA) Via Nazionale 82, 00184 Roma CRA-ABP – Centro di Ricerca per l’Agrobiologia e la Pedologia Via Lanciola 12a, 50125 Firenze ISBN 978-88-97081-75-3 (edizione digitale) Tipografia Coppini - Firenze, dicembre 2014 INDICE GENERALE INTRODUZIONE ............................................. 7 Adoretus tenuimaculatus Waterhouse, 1875 ........... 35 Elenco delle specie di artropodi fitofagi esotici Alsophila pometaria (Harris, 1841)....................... 35 dannosi alle piante del genere Castanea e non Anisota senatoria (Smith, 1797)........................... 36 ancora presenti in Italia .................................... 11 Anisota virginiensis (Drury, 1773)........................ 36 Guida iconografica ai danni da fitofagi ................... 15 Anomala corpulenta Motschulsky, 1854................ 37 Guida al livello di rischio fitosanitario ................... 16 Antheraea polyphemus Cramer, 1776.................... 37 Anthracophora rusticola Burmeister, 1842............. 38 FITOMIZI Poegilophilides rusticola Cinalathura folial (Theobald).............................. 20 Apethymus kuri Takeuchi, 1952 ........................... 38 Cryptotympana atrata (Fabricius, 1775) ................ 20 Apoderus nigroapicatus Jekel, 1860 ..................... 38 Eurostus validus Dallas, 1851.............................. 20 Argyresthia castaneella Busck, 1915..................... 38 Erthesina fullo (Thunberg, 1783) ......................... 20 Aulacophora femoralis (Motschulsky, 1857) .......... 38 Erthesina japonica Caligula japonica Moore, 1872 ............................ 39 Erthesina mucorea Dictyopea japonica Halyomorpha picus (Fabricius, 1794) ................... 21 Dictyoploca japonica Halyomorpha halys (Stål, 1855)........................... 21 Saturnia japonica Kermes flavus Liu, 1995 ..................................... 22 Caliroa castanae (Rohwer, 1915) ......................... 39 Kermes nakagawae Kuwana, 1902 ....................... 22 Camptoloma interiorata (Walker, 1865) ................ 40 Kermes nawae (Kuwana, 1902)............................ 22 Chalia larminati Heylaerts, 1904.......................... 40 Lachnus tropicalis (Van der Goot, 1916)................ 23 Clania minuscula (Butler, 1881) .......................... 40 Lachnus japonicus Eumeta minuscula Pterochlorus tropicalis Clania variegata (Snellen, 1879) .......................... 40 Schizodryobius tropicalis Eumeta variegata Longistigma caryae (Harris, 1841) ....................... 24 Cnidocampa flavescens (Walker, 1855) ................. 41 Lycorma delicatula White, 1845 .......................... 25 Monema flavescens Magicicada neotredecim (Marshall et Cooley, 2000) 25 Croesus castanae Rohwer, 1915 ........................... 42 Magicicada tredecim (Walsh et Riley, 1868) Culcula panterinaria (Bremer et Grey, 1855).......... 42 Magicicada tredecassini (Alexander et Moore, 1962) Amphidasis panterinaria Magicicada tredecula (Alexander et Moore, 1962) Biston panterinaria Magicicada cassini (Fisher, 1851) Buzura abraxata Magicicada septendecim (Linnaeus, 1758) Culcula panterinaria lienpingensis Magicicada septendecula (Alexander et Moore, 1962) Culcula panterinaria szechuanensis Melanaspis obscura (Comstock, 1881).................. 26 Dasychira thwaitesii Moore, 1883 ........................ 42 Moritziella castaneivora Miyazaki, 1968 ............... 27 Datana ministra (Drury, 1773) ............................ 43 Myzocallis castaneae (Fitch, 1856) ....................... 28 Eacles imperialis (Drury, 1773)............................ 43 Calaphis castaneae Endoclita sinensis (Moore, 1877) ......................... 44 Myzocallis castaneoides (Baker, 1916) Phassus sinensis Myzocallis nanae (Tissot, 1932) Phassus sinifer Myzocallis tissoti Quednau & Remaudière, 1987 Eriogyna pyretorum (Westwood, 1847) ................. 44 Myzocallis kuricola (Matsumura, 1917)................. 28 Saturnia pyretorum Tuberculatus kuricola Euhampsonia cristata (Butler, 1877) .................... 45 Neoasterodiaspis castaneae Borchsenius, 1960 ....... 29 Euproctis flava Fabricius, 1775 ............................ 45 Pseudaulacaspis kiushiuensis (Kuwana, 1909) ....... 30 Hdotrichia oblita .............................................. 45 Pseudaulacaspis kuwanai Hdotrichia parallela Chionaspis kuwanai Homona coffearia (Nietner, 1861) ........................ 45 Phylloxera castaneae Haldeman, 1850 .................. 30 Godana nubiferana Stephanitis nashi Esaki et Takeya, 1931 ................ 30 Godana simulana Taihorina sp. ................................................... 31 Homona euryptera Tuberculatus castanocallis Zhang et Zhong, 1981 ... 31 Homona fasciculana Castanocallis castanocallis Homona picrostacta Nippocallis castanocallis Homona socialis Urostylis yangi Maa........................................... 31 Homona stenoptera Pandemis menciana DEFOGLIATORI Tortrix coffearia Actias luna (Linnaeus, 1758) ............................... 33 Tortrix fimbriana Actias ningpoana Fielder, 1862 ........................... 34 Kunugia yamadai Nagano, 1917 .......................... 46 Actias selene nigpoana Latoia hilarata (Staudinger, 1887) ........................ 46 4 I PRINCIPALI INSETTI FITOFAGI DEL CASTAGNO A RISCHIO DI INTRODUZIONE IN ITALIA Lebeda nobilis Walker, 1855 ................................ 46 Harmandiola castaneae (Stebbins, 1910)............... 63 Lophocampa caryae Harris, 1841 ......................... 47 Cecidomyia castaneae Lymantria mathura Moore, 1879 ......................... 47 Rhopalomyia castaneae Lymantria aurora Arnoldia castaneae (Felt, 1909) ........................... 63 Lymantria fusca Rhopalomyia castaneae Maladera orientalis (Motschulsky, 1857) ............... 48 Cecidomyia chinquapin Beutenmüller, 1907 .......... 63 Marumba sperchius (Ménétriés, 1857) .................. 48 Dasineura dentatae (Stebbins, 1910)..................... 64 Nematocampa resistaria Herrich-Schäffer, 1856 ..... 49 Dryophanta japonica Ashmead, 1904 ................... 64 Nematocampa filamentaria Orgyia leucostigma (Smith, 1797) ........................ 49 Hemerocampa leucostigma XILOFAGI Orgyia thyellina Butler, 1881............................... 50 Aegeria molybdoceps Hampson, 1919 ................... 66 Orthaga achatina (Butler, 1878) .......................... 50 Sesia molybdoceps Oxycetonia jucunda (Falderman, 1835) ................. 51 Agrilus bilineatus (Weber, 1801) .......................... 66 Paleacrita vernata (Peck, 1795) ........................... 51 Anoplophora leechi (Gahan, 1888) ....................... 68 Parasa consocia Walker, 1865 ............................. 52 Apriona germari Hope, 1831 ............................... 69 Parasa sinica Moore, 1877.................................. 52 Apriona cribrata Phalera assimilis Bremer et Grey, 1852 ................. 52 Apriona deyrollei Phalera flavescens (Bremer et Gery, 1852) ............. 53 Apriona plicicollis Popillia gracilicornis Blanchard, 1871 .................. 53 Apriona rugicollis Popillia japonica Newman, 1841 .......................... 54 Lamia germari Popillia quadriguttata Fabricius, 1787 .................. 55 Batocera horsfieldi (Hope, 1839) ......................... 69 Proagopertha lucidula Faldermann, 1835 .............. 55 Batocera lineolata Chevrolat, 1852 ....................... 69 Profenusa castaneivora Togashi, 1981 .................. 55 Chelidonium
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CHESTNUT (CASTANEA Spp.) CULTIVAR EVALUATION for COMMERCIAL CHESTNUT PRODUCTION
    CHESTNUT (CASTANEA spp.) CULTIVAR EVALUATION FOR COMMERCIAL CHESTNUT PRODUCTION IN HAMILTON COUNTY, TENNESSEE By Ana Maria Metaxas Approved: James Hill Craddock Jennifer Boyd Professor of Biological Sciences Assistant Professor of Biological and Environmental Sciences (Director of Thesis) (Committee Member) Gregory Reighard Jeffery Elwell Professor of Horticulture Dean, College of Arts and Sciences (Committee Member) A. Jerald Ainsworth Dean of the Graduate School CHESTNUT (CASTANEA spp.) CULTIVAR EVALUATION FOR COMMERCIAL CHESTNUT PRODUCTION IN HAMILTON COUNTY, TENNESSEE by Ana Maria Metaxas A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Environmental Science May 2013 ii ABSTRACT Chestnut cultivars were evaluated for their commercial applicability under the environmental conditions in Hamilton County, TN at 35°13ꞌ 45ꞌꞌ N 85° 00ꞌ 03.97ꞌꞌ W elevation 230 meters. In 2003 and 2004, 534 trees were planted, representing 64 different cultivars, varieties, and species. Twenty trees from each of 20 different cultivars were planted as five-tree plots in a randomized complete block design in four blocks of 100 trees each, amounting to 400 trees. The remaining 44 chestnut cultivars, varieties, and species served as a germplasm collection. These were planted in guard rows surrounding the four blocks in completely randomized, single-tree plots. In the analysis, we investigated our collection predominantly with the aim to: 1) discover the degree of acclimation of grower- recommended cultivars to southeastern Tennessee climatic conditions and 2) ascertain the cultivars’ ability to survive in the area with Cryphonectria parasitica and other chestnut diseases and pests present.
    [Show full text]
  • Fung Yuen SSSI & Butterfly Reserve Moth Survey 2009
    Fung Yuen SSSI & Butterfly Reserve Moth Survey 2009 Fauna Conservation Department Kadoorie Farm & Botanic Garden 29 June 2010 Kadoorie Farm and Botanic Garden Publication Series: No 6 Fung Yuen SSSI & Butterfly Reserve moth survey 2009 Fung Yuen SSSI & Butterfly Reserve Moth Survey 2009 Executive Summary The objective of this survey was to generate a moth species list for the Butterfly Reserve and Site of Special Scientific Interest [SSSI] at Fung Yuen, Tai Po, Hong Kong. The survey came about following a request from Tai Po Environmental Association. Recording, using ultraviolet light sources and live traps in four sub-sites, took place on the evenings of 24 April and 16 October 2009. In total, 825 moths representing 352 species were recorded. Of the species recorded, 3 meet IUCN Red List criteria for threatened species in one of the three main categories “Critically Endangered” (one species), “Endangered” (one species) and “Vulnerable” (one species” and a further 13 species meet “Near Threatened” criteria. Twelve of the species recorded are currently only known from Hong Kong, all are within one of the four IUCN threatened or near threatened categories listed. Seven species are recorded from Hong Kong for the first time. The moth assemblages recorded are typical of human disturbed forest, feng shui woods and orchards, with a relatively low Geometridae component, and includes a small number of species normally associated with agriculture and open habitats that were found in the SSSI site. Comparisons showed that each sub-site had a substantially different assemblage of species, thus the site as a whole should retain the mosaic of micro-habitats in order to maintain the high moth species richness observed.
    [Show full text]
  • SHORT-TERM EFFECTS of SPRINGTIME PRESCRIBED FIRES on ADULT POPULATIONS of SOIL-EMERGING WEEVILS in CENTRAL APPALACHIAN HARDWOOD STANDS David P
    SHORT-TERM EFFECTS OF SPRINGTIME PRESCRIBED FIRES ON ADULT POPULATIONS OF SOIL-EMERGING WEEVILS IN CENTRAL APPALACHIAN HARDWOOD STANDS David P. McGann, David W. McGill, Thomas M. Sehuler, and W Mark Ford' Absmct-Numerous biotic and abtotic factors Interact to affect oak regeneration in the central Appalachians. F~re,whtte- tailed deer, rodents, other vertebrate seed predators, inmlve plants, Insects, fungi, climate, and tree physrology contribute singularly or addit~velyto oak regeneration problems. Moreaver, fire suppressron has signifi~antlyenhanced the deleter~ous impacts of several of these brotrc tnfluences. The relattonshrp between fire and acorn werrJils IS unknom, but acorn weevils are significant contributors to regeneraon problems in some oak stands and may be vuineraMe to fire at certain life stages. As part of a broader tnvest~gationof ftre use as a silvicuitural tool, we examined presctibed fire impacts on acorn weevils (genera: Cumuiio and Conotractieius)that inhibit oak (Quemus spp.! regeneration by lam! consumption of embryonic or newly dropped acorns. We prescribe burned two stands on the Fernow Experimental Forest in north-central West Virginia: One was burned April, 2002, and the other Aprii, 2003. We placed soil emergence traps under oak and other tree species on five plots within each burn treatment and four adjacent unburned plots. Arthropod samples were collected April to October in 2003 and 2004. We collected 233 weevils representing 11 species from 9 genera. CuwIio and Cyrtepistomus species predominated; Gono~chelusspecies were notable. Our preliminary data indicates that acorn weevil emergence may not be reduced following a stngle spring fire. Herein, we describe the pattern and intensity of acorn weevil emergence during the first 2 years of our study.
    [Show full text]
  • Integration of Entomopathogenic Fungi Into IPM Programs: Studies Involving Weevils (Coleoptera: Curculionoidea) Affecting Horticultural Crops
    insects Review Integration of Entomopathogenic Fungi into IPM Programs: Studies Involving Weevils (Coleoptera: Curculionoidea) Affecting Horticultural Crops Kim Khuy Khun 1,2,* , Bree A. L. Wilson 2, Mark M. Stevens 3,4, Ruth K. Huwer 5 and Gavin J. Ash 2 1 Faculty of Agronomy, Royal University of Agriculture, P.O. Box 2696, Dangkor District, Phnom Penh, Cambodia 2 Centre for Crop Health, Institute for Life Sciences and the Environment, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Queensland 4350, Australia; [email protected] (B.A.L.W.); [email protected] (G.J.A.) 3 NSW Department of Primary Industries, Yanco Agricultural Institute, Yanco, New South Wales 2703, Australia; [email protected] 4 Graham Centre for Agricultural Innovation (NSW Department of Primary Industries and Charles Sturt University), Wagga Wagga, New South Wales 2650, Australia 5 NSW Department of Primary Industries, Wollongbar Primary Industries Institute, Wollongbar, New South Wales 2477, Australia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] or [email protected]; Tel.: +61-46-9731208 Received: 7 September 2020; Accepted: 21 September 2020; Published: 25 September 2020 Simple Summary: Horticultural crops are vulnerable to attack by many different weevil species. Fungal entomopathogens provide an attractive alternative to synthetic insecticides for weevil control because they pose a lesser risk to human health and the environment. This review summarises the available data on the performance of these entomopathogens when used against weevils in horticultural crops. We integrate these data with information on weevil biology, grouping species based on how their developmental stages utilise habitats in or on their hostplants, or in the soil.
    [Show full text]
  • 4 Reproductive Biology of Cerambycids
    4 Reproductive Biology of Cerambycids Lawrence M. Hanks University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, Illinois Qiao Wang Massey University Palmerston North, New Zealand CONTENTS 4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 133 4.2 Phenology of Adults ..................................................................................................................... 134 4.3 Diet of Adults ............................................................................................................................... 138 4.4 Location of Host Plants and Mates .............................................................................................. 138 4.5 Recognition of Mates ................................................................................................................... 140 4.6 Copulation .................................................................................................................................... 141 4.7 Larval Host Plants, Oviposition Behavior, and Larval Development .......................................... 142 4.8 Mating Strategy ............................................................................................................................ 144 4.9 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 148 Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Transcriptome and Gene Expression Analysis of Rhynchophorus Ferrugineus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) During Developmental Stages
    Transcriptome and gene expression analysis of Rhynchophorus ferrugineus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) during developmental stages Hongjun Yang1,2, Danping Xu1, Zhihang Zhuo1,2,3, Jiameng Hu2 and Baoqian Lu4 1 College of Life Science, China West Normal University, Nanchong, Sichuan, China 2 Key Laboratory of Genetics and Germplasm Innovation of Tropical Special Forest Trees and Ornamental Plants, Ministry of Education, Key Laboratory of Germplasm Resources Biology of Tropical Special Ornamental Plants of Hainan Province, College of Forestry, Hainan University, Haikou, Hainan, China 3 Key Laboratory of Integrated Pest Management on Crops in South China, Ministry of Agriculture, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China 4 Key Laboratory of Integrated Pest Management on Tropical Crops, Ministry of Agriculture China, Environ- ment and Plant Protection Institute, Chinese Academy of Tropical Agricultural Sciences, Haikou, Hainan, China ABSTRACT Background. Red palm weevil, Rhynchophorus ferrugineus Olivier, is one of the most destructive pests harming palm trees. However, genomic resources for R. ferrugineus are still lacking, limiting the ability to discover molecular and genetic means of pest control. Methods. In this study, PacBio Iso-Seq and Illumina RNA-seq were used to generate transcriptome from three developmental stages of R. ferrugineus (pupa, 7th-instar larva, adult) to increase the understanding of the life cycle and molecular characteristics of the pest. Results. Sequencing generated 625,983,256 clean reads, from which 63,801 full-length transcripts were assembled with N50 of 3,547 bp. Expression analyses revealed 8,583 differentially expressed genes (DEGs). Moreover, gene ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) enrichment analysis revealed that these Submitted 5 March 2020 Accepted 29 September 2020 DEGs were mainly related to the peroxisome pathway which associated with metabolic Published 2 November 2020 pathways, material transportation and organ tissue formation.
    [Show full text]
  • (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2010/0071096 A1 Yamada Et Al
    US 20100071096A1 (19) United States (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2010/0071096 A1 Yamada et al. (43) Pub. Date: Mar. 18, 2010 (54) PLANT DISEASE AND INSECT DAMAGE Publication Classification CONTROL COMPOSITION AND PLANT (51) Int. Cl. DISEASE AND INSECT DAMAGE AOIH 5/10 (2006.01) PREVENTION METHOD AOIN 55/10 (2006.01) AOIN 25/26 (2006.01) (75) Inventors: Eiichi Yamada, Chiba (JP): AOIH 5/00 (2006.01) Ryutaro Ezaki, Shiga (JP); AOIH 5/02 (2006.01) Hidenori Daido, Chiba (JP) AOIH 5/08 (2006.01) AOIP3/00 (2006.01) Correspondence Address: BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC (52) U.S. Cl. ............................ 800/295: 514/63; 504/100 POST OFFICE BOX 1404 (57) ABSTRACT ALEXANDRIA, VA 22313-1404 (US) The invention provides a plant disease and insect damage control composition including, as active ingredients, dinote (73) Assignee: Mitsui Chemicals, Inc., Minato-ku furan and at least one fungicidal compound; and a plant (JP) disease and insect damage prevention method that includes applying Such a composition to a plant body, Soil, plant seed, (21) Appl. No.: 12/516,966 stored cereal, stored legume, stored fruit, stored vegetable, silage, stored flowering plant, or export/import timber. The (22) PCT Filed: Nov. 22, 2007 invention provides a new plant disease and insect damage (86). PCT No.: PCT/UP2007/072635 control composition and a plant disease and insect damage prevention method with very low toxicity to mammals and S371 (c)(1), fishes, the composition and method showing an effect against (2), (4) Date: May 29, 2009 plural pathogens and pest insects, including emerging resis tant pathogens and resistant pest insect, by application to a (30) Foreign Application Priority Data plant body, soil, plant seed, stored cereal, stored legume, stored fruit, stored vegetable, silage, stored flowering plant, Nov.
    [Show full text]
  • A Survey of Arthropod Biodiversity in the Canopy
    A SURVEY OF ARTHROPOD BIODIVERSITY IN THE CANOPIES OF SOUTHERN RED OAK TREES IN THE MARYVILLE COLLEGE WOODS A Report of a Senior Study by Jenna Ann Wade Major: Biology Maryville College Fall, 2005 Date Approved _______________, by _______________ Faculty Supervisor Date Approved _______________, by _______________ Editor ABSTRACT Over the past 75 years, biologists have become increasingly interested in how many and what kinds of organisms live in forest canopies. Numerous studies have shown that large quantities of insects reside in forest canopies, many of which were previously unknown to science. It has also been demonstrated that trees in tropical forests are often stratified in regard to the kinds of organisms found in them, with the canopies having more biological activity than the understories. In this study, the canopies and understories of four Southern Red Oaks located in the Maryville College Woods in Maryville, Tennessee were sampled over a period of eight weeks using a composite flight-interception trap. Two sample trees were located on top of a low ridge. The other two were located on the floodplain of a small creek. A total of 2,142 arthropods were collected from 11 Orders and 65 Families. Shannon’s and Simpson’s diversity indices indicated minimal difference between each sampling site. However, Sorenson’s quantitative index measuring community similarity revealed more distinct differences. The least similar communities were the ridgetop canopies versus the floodplain canopies, which shared 49% of the Families found in them. The most similar communities were all canopies compared to all understories, which shared 67% of the Families found in them.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Pest List by Host Tree and Reported Country
    Insect pest list by host tree and reported country Scientific name Acalolepta cervina Hope, 1831 Teak canker grub|Eng Cerambycidae Coleoptera Hosting tree Genera Species Family Tree species common name Reported Country Tectona grandis Verbenaceae Teak-Jati Thailand Scientific name Amblypelta cocophaga Fruit spotting bug|eng Coconut Coreidae Hemiptera nutfall bug|Eng, Chinche del Hosting tree Genera Species Family Tree species common name Reported Country Agathis macrophylla Araucariaceae Kauri Solomon Islands Eucalyptus deglupta Myrtaceae Kamarere-Bagras Solomon Islands Scientific name Anoplophora glabripennis Motschulsky Asian longhorn beetle (ALB)|eng Cerambycidae Coleoptera Hosting tree Genera Species Family Tree species common name Reported Country Paraserianthes falcataria Leguminosae Sengon-Albizia-Falcata-Molucca albizia- China Moluccac sau-Jeungjing-Sengon-Batai-Mara- Falcata Populus spp. Salicaceae Poplar China Salix spp. Salicaceae Salix spp. China 05 November 2007 Page 1 of 35 Scientific name Aonidiella orientalis Newstead, Oriental scale|eng Diaspididae Homoptera 1894 Hosting tree Genera Species Family Tree species common name Reported Country Lovoa swynnertonii Meliaceae East African walnut Cameroon Azadirachta indica Meliaceae Melia indica-Neem Nigeria Scientific name Apethymus abdominalis Lepeletier, Tenthredinidae Hymenoptera 1823 Hosting tree Genera Species Family Tree species common name Reported Country Other Coniferous Other Coniferous Romania Scientific name Apriona germari Hope 1831 Long-horned beetle|eng Cerambycidae
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Season Summary Index NEW WOFTHE~ Zone 1: Yukon Territory
    2010 Season Summary Index NEW WOFTHE~ Zone 1: Yukon Territory ........................................................................................... 3 Alaska ... ........................................ ............................................................... 3 LEPIDOPTERISTS Zone 2: British Columbia .................................................... ........................ ............ 6 Idaho .. ... ....................................... ................................................................ 6 Oregon ........ ... .... ........................ .. .. ............................................................ 10 SOCIETY Volume 53 Supplement Sl Washington ................................................................................................ 14 Zone 3: Arizona ............................................................ .................................... ...... 19 The Lepidopterists' Society is a non-profo California ............... ................................................. .............. .. ................... 2 2 educational and scientific organization. The Nevada ..................................................................... ................................ 28 object of the Society, which was formed in Zone 4: Colorado ................................ ... ............... ... ...... ......................................... 2 9 May 1947 and formally constituted in De­ Montana .................................................................................................... 51 cember
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Insects on Seed Set of Ozark Chinquapin, Castanea Ozarkensis" (2017)
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 5-2017 The ffecE t of Insects on Seed Set of Ozark Chinquapin, Castanea ozarkensis Colton Zirkle University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Botany Commons, Entomology Commons, and the Plant Biology Commons Recommended Citation Zirkle, Colton, "The Effect of Insects on Seed Set of Ozark Chinquapin, Castanea ozarkensis" (2017). Theses and Dissertations. 1996. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1996 This Thesis 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], [email protected]. The Effect of Insects on Seed Set of Ozark Chinquapin, Castanea ozarkensis A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Entomology by Colton Zirkle Missouri State University Bachelor of Science in Biology, 2014 May 2017 University of Arkansas This thesis is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. ____________________________________ Dr. Ashley Dowling Thesis Director ____________________________________ ______________________________________ Dr. Frederick Paillet Dr. Neelendra Joshi Committee Member Committee Member Abstract Ozark chinquapin (Castanea ozarkensis), once found throughout the Interior Highlands of the United States, has been decimated across much of its range due to accidental introduction of chestnut blight, Cryphonectria parasitica. Efforts have been made to conserve and restore C. ozarkensis, but success requires thorough knowledge of the reproductive biology of the species. Other Castanea species are reported to have characteristics of both wind and insect pollination, but pollination strategies of Ozark chinquapin are unknown.
    [Show full text]
  • The Entomologist's Record and Journal of Variation
    M DC, — _ CO ^. E CO iliSNrNVINOSHilWS' S3ldVyan~LIBRARlES*"SMITHS0N!AN~lNSTITUTl0N N' oCO z to Z (/>*Z COZ ^RIES SMITHSONIAN_INSTITUTlON NOIiniIiSNI_NVINOSHllWS S3ldVaan_L: iiiSNi'^NviNOSHiiNS S3iavyan libraries Smithsonian institution N( — > Z r- 2 r" Z 2to LI ^R I ES^'SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTlON'"NOIini!iSNI~NVINOSHilVMS' S3 I b VM 8 11 w </» z z z n g ^^ liiiSNi NviNOSHims S3iyvyan libraries Smithsonian institution N' 2><^ =: to =: t/J t/i </> Z _J Z -I ARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIiniliSNI NVINOSHilWS SSIdVyan L — — </> — to >'. ± CO uiiSNi NViNosHiiws S3iyvaan libraries Smithsonian institution n CO <fi Z "ZL ~,f. 2 .V ^ oCO 0r Vo^^c>/ - -^^r- - 2 ^ > ^^^^— i ^ > CO z to * z to * z ARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIinillSNl NVINOSHllWS S3iaVdan L to 2 ^ '^ ^ z "^ O v.- - NiOmst^liS^> Q Z * -J Z I ID DAD I re CH^ITUCnMIAM IMOTtTIITinM / c. — t" — (/) \ Z fj. Nl NVINOSHIIINS S3 I M Vd I 8 H L B R AR I ES, SMITHSONlAN~INSTITUTION NOIlfl :S^SMITHS0NIAN_ INSTITUTION N0liniliSNI__NIVIN0SHillMs'^S3 I 8 VM 8 nf LI B R, ^Jl"!NVINOSHimS^S3iavyan"'LIBRARIES^SMITHS0NIAN~'lNSTITUTI0N^NOIin L '~^' ^ [I ^ d 2 OJ .^ . ° /<SS^ CD /<dSi^ 2 .^^^. ro /l^2l^!^ 2 /<^ > ^'^^ ^ ..... ^ - m x^^osvAVix ^' m S SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION — NOIlfliliSNrNVINOSHimS^SS iyvyan~LIBR/ S "^ ^ ^ c/> z 2 O _ Xto Iz JI_NVIN0SH1I1/MS^S3 I a Vd a n^LI B RAR I ES'^SMITHSONIAN JNSTITUTION "^NOlin Z -I 2 _j 2 _j S SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIinillSNI NVINOSHilWS S3iyVaan LI BR/ 2: r- — 2 r- z NVINOSHiltNS ^1 S3 I MVy I 8 n~L B R AR I Es'^SMITHSONIAN'iNSTITUTIOn'^ NOlin ^^^>^ CO z w • z i ^^ > ^ s smithsonian_institution NoiiniiiSNi to NviNosHiiws'^ss I dVH a n^Li br; <n / .* -5^ \^A DO « ^\t PUBLISHED BI-MONTHLY ENTOMOLOGIST'S RECORD AND Journal of Variation Edited by P.A.
    [Show full text]