DOCSLIB.ORG

Nebraska Soybean and Corn Pocket Field Guide – 2019 Edition

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nebraska Soybean and Corn Pocket Field Guide – 2019 Edition NEBRASKA SOYBEAN & CORN POCKET FIELD GUIDE — 2019 EDITION — 1 in 2 3 4 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: Funding support for this Nebraska Soybean and Corn Pocket Field Guide was provided by the Nebraska Soybean Board: http://nebraskasoybeans.org/. The mission of the Nebraska Soybean Board (NSB) is to invest checkoff funds towards innovative research and soybean productivity, enhancing consumer and industry education, and creating demand for soybean products. The nine volunteer farmer-leaders who serve on the NSB board of directors invest your checkoff dollars in research to improve soybean production practices to make your farm more profitable and ensure the sustainability of Nebraska soybean production. United Soybean Board: http://unitedsoybean.org/. The 73 farmer-leaders of the United Soybean Board (USB) oversee the investments of the national soy checkoff to maximize profit opportunities for all U.S. soybean farmers by investing and leveraging soybean checkoff resources. Please visit the USB website (above) for more information on how the soy checkoff benefits you and other soybean farmers throughout the U.S. Nebraska Corn Board: http://www.nebraskacorn.org/. Enhancing Demand — Adding Value — Ensuring Sustainability The Nebraska Corn Board is funded by Nebraska corn farmers through the ½-cent-per-bushel corn checkoff and is managed by a nine-farmer member board of directors. The Nebraska Corn Board works to promote the value of corn by creating opportunities. 3 AUTHOR CREDITS: Senior Authors: Dr. James E. Specht and Dr. Thomas Hoegemeyer Emeritus Professors Dept. of Agronomy & Horticulture University of Nebraska–Lincoln Contributing Authors and Reviewers: Dept. of Agronomy & Horticulture: George L. Graef Leah Ruff Jessica A Torrion (now at Montana State Univ.) Patricio Grassini Juan Ignacio Rattalino Edreira Fatima-Amor Tenorio Bhupinder Farmaha (now at Purdue Univ.) Joshua Miller Bijesh Maharjan Charles Wortmann Charles Shapiro Brian Krienke Stevan Knezevic Amit Jhala Greg Kruger Rodrigo Werle Chris Procter 4 AUTHOR CREDITS (CONT.): Dept. of Agronomy & Horticulture (cont.): Humberto Blanco Roger Elmore Dept. of Biological Systems Engineering: Suat Irmak Dept. of Entomology: Robert Wright Thomas Hunt Justin McMechan Dept. of Plant Pathology: Loren Giesler Tamra Jackson-Ziems Nebraska State Climate Office: Martha Shulski Al Dutcher Stonie Cooper Nebraska Extension: Keith Glewen Nathan Mueller Jennifer Rees Laura Thompson 5 PREFACE: This guide was designed to provide Nebraska soybean and corn producers with key crop management information (photos, tables, charts, etc.) in an easy-to-carry, pocket-sized format. Thus, the guide can be hand-carried when scouting crop fields, and then used when the producer observes some specific insect or weed, or observes plants exhibiting symptoms of disease, nutrient deficiency, or herbicide injury, and wants to make an initial identification/diagnosis by comparison with photos. Of course, the producer is advised to confirm any initial diagnosis by contacting an Extension Specialist at their local county extension office (see guide page 374), and/or by submitting a plant tissue sample or specimen to the UNL Plant & Pest Diagnostic Clinic (see next page). Comprehensive crop management information cannot be provided in a small pocket guide. For more detailed information, the reader is advised to go to the References and Sources cited at the end of each topic. For reader convenience, Internet URLs are provided for most of these citations. The first page in the soybean-specific(guide pages 18-135) and in the corn-specific(guide pages 136-245) management sections of this guide has a list of website URLs that the soy or corn producer can access to read articles/commentary authored by UNL research/ extension specialists about current management issues. Example: http://cropwatch.unl.edu/. Producers can subscribe at no cost to automatically receive the CropWatch eNewsletter emails on a weekly basis during the growing season. 6 PREFACE: Nebraska Plant & Pest Diagnostic Clinic Nebraska producers, as well as county, regional and state research/ extension personnel, are provided diagnostic support by the Clinic. After submission of a plant tissue sample or an insect/weed specimen to the Clinic, the submitter will be provided with a report and recommendations from the Clinic. For detailed Clinic instructions and tips on how to: (a) properly collect a sample, (b) package it before mailing or hand-delivering, (c) download, print, and complete a sample submission form, and (d) get information about the nominal fees applicable for diagnosis, contact the Clinic Coordinator at 402-472-2559 or visit: http://plantpathology.unl.edu/plant-pest-diagnostic-clinic. For a NebGuide PDF on this topic, visit: http://extensionpublications.unl.edu/assets/pdf/g2226.pdf. To deliver samples to the UNL office, see: http://cropwatch.unl.edu/plantdisease/unl-diagnostic-clinic-lincoln. The below websites offer detailed management recommendations for producers after the discovery and confirmation of a disease/ insect/nutrient deficiency in a corn or soybean field: http://extensionpublications.unl.edu/assets/pdf/ec130.pdf. http://cropwatch.unl.edu/insect/soybeanpestmgt. http://cropwatch.unl.edu/plantdisease/soybean. http://cropwatch.unl.edu/soybeans/weedmgt. http://cropwatch.unl.edu/soybeans/soils. http://cropwatch.unl.edu/corn/insectmgt. http://cropwatch.unl.edu/plantdisease/corn. http://cropwatch.unl.edu/corn/weedmgt. http://cropwatch.unl.edu/corn/soilmgt. 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS: Topic Page Acknowledgements ...................................................................... 3 Authors. ........................................................................................ 4 Preface ......................................................................................... 6 Nebraska Plant & Pest Diagnostic Clinic ...................................... 7 Nebraska’s Climate Maps ........................................................... 11 Nebraska’s Soil Maps .................................................................. 13 Nebraska Production Density Maps ............................................ 16 SOYBEAN MANAGEMENT ......................................................... 18 County Maps (Yield & Acreage) ................................................... 21 Maturity Group Maps ................................................................... 24 Planting (Seeding Date, Rate, Depth, Spacing) ............................ 27 Replant Considerations................................................................ 38 Stages of Vegetative Development ............................................. 40 Stages of Reproductive Development ......................................... 53 Root Development and N-Fixation ............................................... 62 Days to V1 > R1 > R8 (Impact of Planting Date) ......................... 64 Converting Plants/Foot to Plants/Acre ......................................... 65 Pre-Harvest Yield Estimation ....................................................... 66 Yield Component (Seed No., Size, Yield) Table ............................. 73 Understanding Flowering & Branching ........................................ 76 Estimating Harvest Loss .............................................................. 78 Shrink Tables ............................................................................... 79 Environmental Factors Causing Yield Loss .................................. 81 Impact of Drought ........................................................................ 86 Irrigation Recommendations ....................................................... 88 Scouting Calendar (SoyCal) ......................................................... 92 Insects ......................................................................................... 93 Diseases ..................................................................................... 108 CORN MANAGEMENT ............................................................... 136 County Maps (Yield & Acreage) .................................................. 138 Stages of Vegetative Development ............................................. 141 Stages of Reproductive Development ........................................ 145 8 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.): Topic Page Calculating Growing Degree Days .............................................. 151 Planting (Seeding Date, Rate, Depth, Spacing) ........................... 154 Root Establishment ..................................................................... 162 Replant Considerations............................................................... 165 Pre-Harvest Yield Estimation ...................................................... 169 Grain Shrinkage .......................................................................... 172 Environmental Factors Causing Yield Loss ................................. 174 Irrigation Recommendations ...................................................... 188 Insects ........................................................................................ 195 Nematodes ................................................................................. 215 Diseases ..................................................................................... 217 GENERAL CROP MANAGEMENT .............................................. 246 Soil Management ....................................................................... 246 Nutrients ....................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Epidemiology and Disease Management of Stewart's Disease of Corn in Iowa Paul David Esker Iowa State University
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2005 Epidemiology and disease management of Stewart's disease of corn in Iowa Paul David Esker Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Part of the Agriculture Commons, and the Plant Pathology Commons Recommended Citation Esker, Paul David, "Epidemiology and disease management of Stewart's disease of corn in Iowa " (2005). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 1727. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/1727 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Epidemiology and disease management of Stewart's disease of corn in Iowa by Paul David Esker A dissertation submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Co-majors: Plant Pathology; Statistics Program of Study Committee: Philip M. Dixon, Co-major Professor Forrest W. Nutter, Jr., Co-major Professor Charles C. Block Petrutza C. Caragea Mark L. Gleason S. Elwynn Taylor Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2005 UMI Number: 3200414 INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Management
    C H A P T E R 5 INSECT MANAGEMENT “change in form.” Pests of field crops undergo either sim- LEARNING OBJECTIVES ple or complete metamorphosis. After completely studying this chapter, you should: Group 1. Simple Metamorphosis I Understand how insects grow and develop. When insects that develop by simple metamorphosis hatch from their eggs, they resemble the adult insects I Understand the difference between simple and com- except that the immatures, or nymphs, do not have plete metamorphosis. wings. Nymphs periodically molt, growing larger. After I Be able to identify general and major insect pests of the final molt, nymphs become adults and generally have alfalfa, corn, dry beans, soybeans, small grains, and wings. Many pests of field crops such as potato leafhop- sugar beets. per, sugarbeet root aphid, tarnished plant bug, and grasshoppers develop by simple metamorphosis. I Be able to describe the life cycles and habitats of the Nymphs and adults are often found together in the crop major field crop pests. and usually eat the same food. Insect damage reduces crop yield or quality, or conta- minates the final product. Insects can also transmit plant diseases. To effectively control insect pests, you should understand how insects grow and develop. Egg Nymphs Adult GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT A plant bug is an example of an insect with simple Growth metamorphosis. An insect’s body is confined in a protective exoskele- Group 2. Complete Metamorphosis ton. This hard outer covering does not grow continuous- ly. A new, soft exoskeleton is formed under the old one, Insects that develop by complete metamorphosis and the old exoskeleton is shed—a process called molt- make a radical change in appearance from immature to ing.
    [Show full text]
  • Corn Flea Beetle
    Pest Profile Photo credit: North Central Branch-Entomological Society of America, UNL-Entomology Extension Common Name: Corn flea beetle Scientific Name: Chaetocnema pulicaria Order and Family: Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae Size and Appearance: Length (mm) Appearance white have a pointy end Egg ~0.35 darken slightly in color before hatching white slimly shaped Larva/Nymph < 9 cylindrical prothorax and last abdominal segment are slightly darkened small shiny black Adult < 2 enlarged hind legs white Pupa (if soft in texture applicable) gets dark before development is complete Type of feeder (Chewing, sucking, etc.): Chewing mouthparts Host plant/s: Corn is the preferred host plant, but they are also found on a number of different grass types, oats, Timothy, barley and wheat. Description of Damage (larvae and adults): The adult corn flea beetle injures corn plants by removing leaf tissue and by transmitting pathogenic bacteria. Injury by the adults appears as scratches in the upper and lower surfaces of the leaf, usually parallel to the veins. They feed on both the upper and the lower epidermis of corn leaves, but they do not chew completely through the leaves. The scratches rarely result in economy injury. The leaves of severely injured plants appear whitish or silvery. More importantly, the beetles transmit the bacterium Erwinia stewartia, the casual organism of Stewart’s wilt, to susceptible varieties of corn. Field corn infested with Stewart’s disease will show little sign of disease until late in the summer when numerous leaf lesions will appear on the leaves. The result is often small ears or no ears at all.
    [Show full text]
  • CERTAIN INSECT VECTORS of APLANOBACTER STEWARTI ' by F
    CERTAIN INSECT VECTORS OF APLANOBACTER STEWARTI ' By F. W. Poos, senior entomologist, Division of Cereal and Forage Insects, Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine; and CHARLOTTE ELLIOTT, associate pa- thologist, Division of Cereal Crops and Diseases, Bureau of Plant Industry, United States Department of Agriculture ^ INTRODUCTION Bacterial wilt of corn (Zea mays L.) caused by Aplanobacter stewarti (E. F. Sm.) McC. was exceedingly destructive and more widely dis- tributed during 1932 and 1933 than during any previous time in the history of the disease. Since 1897, when it was first described by Stewart, it has been studied by a number of investigators whose work has pointed more and more toward insects as a means of dis- semination of the causal organism. Kand and Cash (7) ^ during 1920-23 found that bacterial wilt could be transmitted from diseased to healthy com plants by two species of flea beetles, Chaetocnema pulicaria Melsh. and C, denticulata (111.), and by the spotted cucum- ber beetle, Diabrotica duodecimpunctata (Fab.). IvanoíF (ö) reported transmission from diseased to healthy plants by the larval stage of the corn rootworm, Diabrotica longicornis (Say), as it attacked the roots of young seedling com plants. He also reported that the bac- teria of A. stewarti entered the corn plants through wounds made by white grubs, the larvae of Phyllophaga sp., feeding upon the roots in infested soil. A summary of this work, together with a brief review of the other literature on this disease, has recently appeared else- where (1), The results of experiments by previous investigators on soil trans- mission of the causal organism indicate that transmission through the soil to uninjured roots of com plants is exceedingly rare, if it ever occurs.
    [Show full text]
  • Erwinia Stewartii in Maize Seed
    www.worldseed.org PEST RISK ANALYSIS The risk of introducing Erwinia stewartii in maize seed for The International Seed Federation Chemin du Reposoir 7 1260 Nyon, Switzerland by Jerald Pataky Robert Ikin Professor of Plant Pathology Biosecurity Consultant University of Illinois Box 148 Department of Crop Sciences Taigum QLD 4018 1102 S. Goodwin Ave. Australia Urbana, IL 61801 USA 2003-02 ISF Secretariat Chemin du Reposoir 7 1260 Nyon Switzerland +41 22 365 44 20 [email protected] i PREFACE Maize is one of the most important agricultural crops worldwide and there is considerable international trade in seed. A high volume of this seed originates in the United States, where much of the development of new varieties occurs. Erwinia stewartii ( Pantoea stewartii ) is a bacterial pathogen (pest) of maize that occurs primarily in the US. In order to prevent the introduction of this bacterium to other areas, a number of countries have instigated phytosanitary measures on trade in maize seed for planting. This analysis of the risk of introducing Erwinia stewartii in maize seed was prepared at the request of the International Seed Federation (ISF) as an initiative to promote transparency in decision making and the technical justification of restrictions on trade in accordance with international standards. In 2001 a consensus among ISF (then the International Seed Trade Federation (FIS)) members, including representatives of the seed industry from more than 60 countries developed a first version of this PRA as a qualitative assessment following the international standard, FAO Guidelines for Pest Risk Analysis (Publication No. 2, February 1996). The global study completed Stage 1 (Risk initiation) and Stage 2 (Risk Assessment) but did not make comprehensive Pest Risk management recommendations (Stage 3) that are necessary for trade to take place.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Insects of Indiana in 1953 J. J. Davis, Purdue University The 1953 season in Indiana provided variable climatic conditions, favorable to some insects and unfavorable to others; likewise favorable to some crops and unfavorable to others. Field Crop Insects Early in the season insects attacking crops of the grass family were unusually prominent. Of these the army worm was most prominent. The army worm (Pseudaletia unipuncta) was the most widespread and abundant in my experience in Indiana, which dates back to 1911, and apparently was indirectly due to weather conditions. Army worm moths were abundant the last of April and early May and notices were sent out predicting possible abundance of army worms a month hence. It is not uncommon in Indiana to have army worm moths abundant in the early spring, but only every three or four years do the worms cause appreciable damage, because they are normally checked by parasites. The first reports of army worm abundance were received the last week in May. From June 1-20 we were answering long distance telephone calls almost continuously regarding army worm outbreaks. The early reports all came from southern Indiana. Beginning about June 10 we began receiving reports of abundance and damage in the northern half of the state, although not as general and severe as in southern Indiana. By June 20 we were receiving reports of abundance of "eggs of army worms," which proved to be cocoons of common army worm parasites. No further trouble was experienced during 1953. Major damage was to corn, wheat and pastures. The absence of normal parasitism will explain the outbreak, and the absence of parasites may be explained by the weather.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Article Confirmation on Status of Chaetocnema Basalis
    Jurnal Perlindungan Tanaman Indonesia, Vol. 21, No. 2, 2017: 114–119 DOI: 10.22146/jpti.23002 Research Article Confirmation on Status of Chaetocnema basalis (Coleoptera: Chrysomellidae) as A Vector of Stewart Wilt Disease Konfirmasi Status Chaetocnema basalis (Coleoptera: Chrysomellidae) sebagai Vektor Penyakit Layu Stewart Heri Widodo1)*, Arman Wijonarko2), Witjaksono2), & Suputa2) 1)Agricultural Quarantine Station of Tanjung Balai Karimun, Jln. Jend. Sudirman Tanjung Balai Karimun, Kepulauan Riau 29661 2)Department of Crop Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Gadjah Mada Jln. Flora 1, Bulaksumur, Sleman, Yogyakarta 55281 *Coresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] Submitted March 14, 2017; accepted May 16, 2017 ABSTRACT Chaetocnema pulicaria and C. denticulata are recognized as vectors of Stewart wilt disease caused by Pantoea stewartii on maize. These insects have not been reported yet in Indonesia, but Stewart wilt disease has been reported in Java and Sumatera Islands. Genus Chaetocnema which presented in Indonesia is C.basalis. It is not cleared whether C. basalis is a vector for Stewart wilt disease like C. pulicaria and C. denticulata. This reseach was aimed to conduct the confirmation on status whether C. basalis have a role as vector of Stewart wilt disease on maize or not. C. basalis imago were collected from maize growing areas in Yogyakarta, and then starved for 24 h. Treatments were applied by placing imago of C. basalis on infected-P. stewartii plants for 72 h. Five insects were then transferred to each plot of healthy plant (1 plot consisted of 5 plants) for 72 h. For control, imago of C. basalis were put on healthy plants for 72 h and five insects were then transferred to other healthy plant (1 plot consisted of 5 plants) for 72 h.
    [Show full text]
  • Science and the Sustainable Intensification of Global Agriculture
    Reaping the benefits Science and the sustainable intensification of global agriculture October 2009 Cover image: From an illustration of a push-pull system for pest control, courtesy of The Gatsby Charitable Foundation. The Quiet Revolution: Push-Pull Technology and the African Farmer. Gatsby Charitable Foundation 2005. Reaping the benefi ts: science and the sustainable intensifi cation of global agriculture RS Policy document 11/09 Issued: October 2009 RS1608 ISBN: 978-0-85403-784-1 © The Royal Society, 2009 Requests to reproduce all or part of this document should be submitted to: The Royal Society Science Policy 6–9 Carlton House Terrace London SW1Y 5AG Tel +44 (0)20 7451 2500 Email [email protected] Web royalsociety.org Design by Franziska Hinz, Royal Society, London Copyedited and Typeset by Techset Composition Limited Reaping the benefi ts: science and the sustainable intensifi cation of global agriculture Contents Foreword v Membership of working group vii Summary ix 1 Introduction 1 1.1 An urgent challenge 1 1.2 Trends in food crop production 2 1.3 Science in context 5 1.4 The need for sustainable intensifi cation 6 1.5 Agricultural sustainability 7 1.6 Agriculture and sustainable economic development 7 1.7 Other major studies 8 1.8 Further UK work 9 1.9 About this report 9 1.10 Conduct of the study 10 2 Constraints on future food crop production 11 2.1 Climate change 11 2.2 Water 11 2.3 Temperature 12 2.4 Ozone 13 2.5 Soil factors 13 2.6 Crop nutrition 15 2.7 Pests, diseases and weed competition 16 2.8 Energy and greenhouse
    [Show full text]
  • Butterflies of North America
    Insects of Western North America 7. Survey of Selected Arthropod Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma. 4. Hexapoda: Selected Coleoptera and Diptera with cumulative list of Arthropoda and additional taxa Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1177 2 Insects of Western North America. 7. Survey of Selected Arthropod Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma. 4. Hexapoda: Selected Coleoptera and Diptera with cumulative list of Arthropoda and additional taxa by Boris C. Kondratieff, Luke Myers, and Whitney S. Cranshaw C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 August 22, 2011 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity. Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1177 3 Cover Photo Credits: Whitney S. Cranshaw. Females of the blow fly Cochliomyia macellaria (Fab.) laying eggs on an animal carcass on Fort Sill, Oklahoma. ISBN 1084-8819 This publication and others in the series may be ordered from the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, 80523-1177. Copyrighted 2011 4 Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................7 SUMMARY AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
    [Show full text]
  • Overall Invertebrate Review
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Preliminary risk assessment for soil, soil surface and foliar invertebrates for Bacillus thuringiensis Cry3Bb protein, EPA Reg. No. 524-LEI; Barcode No. D262045; Case No. 066221; Submission No. S572997, submitted by Monsanto Co. for corn containing Bacillus thuringiensis Cry3Bb protein and the genetic material necessary for its production (vector ZMIR13L) in corn for control of corn root worm (Diabrotica spp.) FROM: Zigfridas Vaituzis, Ph.D., Senior Scientist Phil Hutton, Chief Microbial Pesticides Branch Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, 7511C PEER REVIEW: Robyn Rose, Entomologist Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, 7511C TO: Michael Mendelsohn, Regulatory Action Leader Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division 7511C Pesticide Name: Modified Bacillus thuringiensis Cry3Bb1 insecticidal protein and genetic material necessary for its expression in corn developed with event MON 863 (vector ZMIR13L). Registrant: Monsanto Company, 700 Chesterfield Parkway North, St. Louis, MO 63198 The Monsanto Company has requested a registration for Bacillus thuringiensis Cry3Bb1 protein and the genetic material (ZMIR13L) necessary for its production in all corn lines and varieties. The Cry3Bb1 protein is intended to control the corn rootworm (CRW, Diabrotica spp.), a coleopteran pest of corn. The CRW is a primary pest of corn in the U.S., it feeds on corn roots as larvae leading to a reduction in the plant’s ability to absorb water and nutrients from soil and lodging. In areas where the CRW is a pest (e.g., corn belt), significant financial losses are realized from a decrease in production and chemical insecticide usage.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Guide-Virginia Wildrye
    Natural Resources Conservation Service Plant Guide Virginia wildrye Elymus virginicus L. Plant Symbol = ELVI3 Common Names: Virginia wildrye, wildrye Scientific Names: Elymus virginicus L. Description General: Virginia wildrye is a native, cool season, pe rennial, bunch grass. It is similar to Canada wildrye (Elymus canadensis) in appearance, but is typically shorter in height with shorter awns on the seed head. The seed heads aer more erect than those of Canada wildrye which typically bow or droop (Philips Petroleum Company, 1963). There is evidence of variation in E. virginicus and E. canadensis due to hybridization of the two species ( Grelen and Hughes, 19. 84)It reaches approximately three feet in height, lacks rhizomes and reproduces by seed and tillers. Seed heads are typically 3 to 6 inches in length, erect, and have numerous, coarse awns. Each spikelet has 2 or more florets that decrease in size as they extend to the end of the inflorescence. The glumes bow outward at the base producing a “U” shape and are strongly nerved (Hatch et al., 1993). The spiklets are densely packed on the inflorescence. They are sessile, have a pair of glumes with a cluster of 2 to 4 lemmas, and their florets (Hilty, 2009). Virginia wildrye blooms in the spring from March through May, and is wind pollinated (Hilty, 2009). Color may vary from green to silvery blue, and foliage often has a waxy appearance. The culms are tufted, strictly erect, or decumbent at the base. The ligule is a minute, truncated membrane (Gould, 1975). The alternately arranged leaves are approximately 12 inches in length and 2/3 inch in width.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the RESTRUCTURING of ARTHROPOD TROPHIC RELATIONSHIPS in RESPONSE to PLANT INVASION by Adam B. Mitchell a Dissertation Submitt
    THE RESTRUCTURING OF ARTHROPOD TROPHIC RELATIONSHIPS IN RESPONSE TO PLANT INVASION by Adam B. Mitchell 1 A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the University of Delaware in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Entomology and Wildlife Ecology Winter 2019 © Adam B. Mitchell All Rights Reserved THE RESTRUCTURING OF ARTHROPOD TROPHIC RELATIONSHIPS IN RESPONSE TO PLANT INVASION by Adam B. Mitchell Approved: ______________________________________________________ Jacob L. Bowman, Ph.D. Chair of the Department of Entomology and Wildlife Ecology Approved: ______________________________________________________ Mark W. Rieger, Ph.D. Dean of the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources Approved: ______________________________________________________ Douglas J. Doren, Ph.D. Interim Vice Provost for Graduate and Professional Education I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Signed: ______________________________________________________ Douglas W. Tallamy, Ph.D. Professor in charge of dissertation I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Signed: ______________________________________________________ Charles R. Bartlett, Ph.D. Member of dissertation committee I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Signed: ______________________________________________________ Jeffery J. Buler, Ph.D. Member of dissertation committee I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
    [Show full text]