DOCSLIB.ORG

PARA EL MANEJO INTEGRADO DE PLAGAS Y ENFERMEDADES DEL CULTIVO DE PIÑA Ananas Comosus (L.) Merr EN LA REGIÓN HUETAR NORTE DE COSTA RICA

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
PARA EL MANEJO INTEGRADO DE PLAGAS Y ENFERMEDADES DEL CULTIVO DE PIÑA Ananas Comosus (L.) Merr EN LA REGIÓN HUETAR NORTE DE COSTA RICA DESARROLLO DE PROCEDIMIENTOS ESTANDARIZADOS DE OPERACIÓN (PEO) PARA EL MANEJO INTEGRADO DE PLAGAS Y ENFERMEDADES DEL CULTIVO DE PIÑA Ananas comosus (L.) Merr EN LA REGIÓN HUETAR NORTE DE COSTA RICA JOSÉ DANIEL QUESADA JIMÉNEZ Práctica de Especialidad presentada a la Escuela de Agronomía como requisito parcial para optar por el Título de Ingeniero Agrónomo con grado de Bachiller Instituto Tecnológico De Costa Rica Sede Regional San Carlos Escuela de Agronomía 2013 DESARROLLO DE PROCEDIMIENTOS ESTANDARIZADOS DE OPERACIÓN (PEO) PARA EL MANEJO INTEGRADO DE PLAGAS Y ENFERMEDADES DEL CULTIVO DE PIÑA Ananas comosus (L.) Merr EN LA REGIÓN HUETAR NORTE DE COSTA RICA JOSÉ DANIEL QUESADA JIMÉNEZ APROBADA Ing. Joaquín Durán Mora, M.Sc. _________________________ Asesor Ing. Johnny Arias Sánchez, M.Sc. _________________________ Asesor Ing. Zulay Castro Jiménez, MGA. _________________________ Jurado _________________________ Ing. Fernando Gómez Sánchez, MAE. Coordinador de Trabajos Finales de graduación Ing. Luis Alberto Camero Rey, M.Sc. _________________________ Director de Escuela de Agronomía 2013 2 Dedicatoria Es de gran entusiasmo dedicar este trabajo a la familia Quesada Jiménez, mi familia, quienes siempre me animaron a salir adelante con todos los obstáculos y retos que la vida me ha presentado. Desde pequeño siempre me enseñaron que si quieres lograr algo en la vida debes de ponerle empeño, constancia y amor a las acciones realizadas para lograr un fin; el cual es el éxito personal. i Agradecimiento Doy gracias a Dios, mi familia, mis amigos, mis colegas y mis tutores que formaron parte de mi formación profesional como Ingeniero Agrónomo. ii Contenido RESUMEN ............................................................................................................. XI ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................... XII 1. INTRODUCCIÓN .......................................................................................... 1 1.1. Objetivo general ......................................................................................... 2 1.2. Objetivos específicos ................................................................................. 3 2. REVISIÓN DE LITERATURA ....................................................................... 4 2.1 Procedimientos Estándar de Operación..................................................... 4 2.1.1 Preparación de PEO ............................................................................ 5 2.1.2 Estructura de los PEO ......................................................................... 5 2.1.3 Tipos de PEO ...................................................................................... 6 2.2 Generalidades del cultivo de piña. ............................................................. 7 2.2.1 Plagas y enfermedades en el cultivo de la piña. ................................. 8 3. MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS....................................................................... 15 3.1 Ubicación ................................................................................................. 15 3.2 Período de práctica de especialidad ........................................................ 15 3.3 Compilación de información ..................................................................... 15 3.4 Conformación de los PEO ........................................................................ 15 3.4.1 Encabezado ...................................................................................... 15 3.4.2 Objetivo ............................................................................................. 17 3.4.3 Alcance General ................................................................................ 17 3.4.4 Responsable (s) Generales ............................................................... 17 3.4.5 Definiciones ....................................................................................... 17 3.4.6 Flujo de Proceso ................................................................................ 17 3.4.7 Descripción e instrucciones de proceso ............................................ 18 3.4.8 Descripción de la Plaga ..................................................................... 18 3.4.9 Control Cultural.................................................................................. 19 3.4.10 Control Biológico ............................................................................... 19 3.4.11 Control Químico................................................................................. 19 3.4.12 Cuidados Ambientales ....................................................................... 19 iii 3.4.13 Seguridad y Capacitaciones .............................................................. 19 3.4.14 Monitoreo y Registro ......................................................................... 19 3.4.15 Verificación y Medidas Correctivas .................................................... 20 3.4.16 Documentos de referencia ................................................................ 20 3.4.17 Variaciones en algunos de los PEO .................................................. 20 4. RESULTADOS ............................................................................................ 21 4.1 Manejo Integrado de Plagas .................................................................... 22 4.1.1 Muestreo General .............................................................................. 22 4.1.2. Elaphria: ............................................................................................ 35 4.1.3. Roedores ........................................................................................... 40 4.1.4. Tecla .................................................................................................. 47 4.1.5. Cochinilla y Escamas ........................................................................ 53 4.1.2. Caracoles .......................................................................................... 60 4.1.3. Picudo ............................................................................................... 64 4.1.4. Mosca del Establo ............................................................................. 70 4.1.5. Nematodos. ....................................................................................... 76 4.1.6. Sinfílidos ............................................................................................ 82 4.1.7. Phyllophaga (Joboto, Gallina Ciega) ................................................. 86 4.1.8. Genospaschia y Larva Rosada.......................................................... 91 4.1.9. Zompopas y Hormigas. ................................................................... 100 4.1.10. Plagas Menores ........................................................................... 105 4.1.11 Plagas Accionables ......................................................................... 117 4.2 Manejo Integrado de Enfermedades. ..................................................... 123 4.2.10 Phytophthora ................................................................................... 123 4.2.11 Fusarium ......................................................................................... 131 4.2.12 Erwinia ............................................................................................. 134 4.2.13 Pseudomonas.................................................................................. 138 4.3 Manejo Integrado de Enfermedades y plagas Post-cosecha. ................ 142 4.3.10 Thielaviopsis Paradoxa ................................................................... 142 4.3.11 Penicillium y Aspergillium ................................................................ 145 4.3.12 Manejo de Plagas en Planta Empacadora. ..................................... 149 iv 4.4 Otros PEO relacionados con el Manejo Integrado de Plagas y Enfermedades en el cultivo de la piña. ............................................................... 156 4.4.10 Manejo Integrado de Malezas. ........................................................ 156 4.4.11 Arranque Manual de Malezas. ......................................................... 165 4.4.12 Calibración de Equipos de aplicación. ............................................. 169 5 CONCLUSIONES ..................................................................................... 180 6 RECOMENDACIONES ............................................................................. 181 7 LITERATURA CITADA ............................................................................. 182 8 ANEXOS. .................................................................................................. 188 9 APÉNDICES ............................................................................................. 189 v Índice de Figuras Figura Título Página 1………....FORMATO DE ENCABEZADO DE FORMULARIO. ............................................ 16 2………....FLUJO DE PROCESO CORRESPONDIENTE AL MANEJO DE LA ELAPHRIA. ........ 18 3...............ILUSTRACIÓN DE PUNTOS DE MUESTREO. .................................................. 25 4…………EJEMPLO PARA PUNTOS DE MUESTREO DE TECLA. ..................................... 28 5…………EXTRACCIÓN DE PLANTAS DENTRO DE CADA BLOCK DESTINADO PARA MUESTREO. ............................................................................................................. 31 6………….METODOLOGÍA DE MUESTREO PARA ROEDORES; CADA PUNTO ES
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Insect Survey of Four Longleaf Pine Preserves
    A SURVEY OF THE MOTHS, BUTTERFLIES, AND GRASSHOPPERS OF FOUR NATURE CONSERVANCY PRESERVES IN SOUTHEASTERN NORTH CAROLINA Stephen P. Hall and Dale F. Schweitzer November 15, 1993 ABSTRACT Moths, butterflies, and grasshoppers were surveyed within four longleaf pine preserves owned by the North Carolina Nature Conservancy during the growing season of 1991 and 1992. Over 7,000 specimens (either collected or seen in the field) were identified, representing 512 different species and 28 families. Forty-one of these we consider to be distinctive of the two fire- maintained communities principally under investigation, the longleaf pine savannas and flatwoods. An additional 14 species we consider distinctive of the pocosins that occur in close association with the savannas and flatwoods. Twenty nine species appear to be rare enough to be included on the list of elements monitored by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (eight others in this category have been reported from one of these sites, the Green Swamp, but were not observed in this study). Two of the moths collected, Spartiniphaga carterae and Agrotis buchholzi, are currently candidates for federal listing as Threatened or Endangered species. Another species, Hemipachnobia s. subporphyrea, appears to be endemic to North Carolina and should also be considered for federal candidate status. With few exceptions, even the species that seem to be most closely associated with savannas and flatwoods show few direct defenses against fire, the primary force responsible for maintaining these communities. Instead, the majority of these insects probably survive within this region due to their ability to rapidly re-colonize recently burned areas from small, well-dispersed refugia.
    [Show full text]
  • Contributions Toward a Lepidoptera (Psychidae, Yponomeutidae, Sesiidae, Cossidae, Zygaenoidea, Thyrididae, Drepanoidea, Geometro
    Contributions Toward a Lepidoptera (Psychidae, Yponomeutidae, Sesiidae, Cossidae, Zygaenoidea, Thyrididae, Drepanoidea, Geometroidea, Mimalonoidea, Bombycoidea, Sphingoidea, & Noctuoidea) Biodiversity Inventory of the University of Florida Natural Area Teaching Lab Hugo L. Kons Jr. Last Update: June 2001 Abstract A systematic check list of 489 species of Lepidoptera collected in the University of Florida Natural Area Teaching Lab is presented, including 464 species in the superfamilies Drepanoidea, Geometroidea, Mimalonoidea, Bombycoidea, Sphingoidea, and Noctuoidea. Taxa recorded in Psychidae, Yponomeutidae, Sesiidae, Cossidae, Zygaenoidea, and Thyrididae are also included. Moth taxa were collected at ultraviolet lights, bait, introduced Bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum), and by netting specimens. A list of taxa recorded feeding on P. notatum is presented. Introduction The University of Florida Natural Area Teaching Laboratory (NATL) contains 40 acres of natural habitats maintained for scientific research, conservation, and teaching purposes. Habitat types present include hammock, upland pine, disturbed open field, cat tail marsh, and shallow pond. An active management plan has been developed for this area, including prescribed burning to restore the upland pine community and establishment of plots to study succession (http://csssrvr.entnem.ufl.edu/~walker/natl.htm). The site is a popular collecting locality for student and scientific collections. The author has done extensive collecting and field work at NATL, and two previous reports have resulted from this work, including: a biodiversity inventory of the butterflies (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea & Papilionoidea) of NATL (Kons 1999), and an ecological study of Hermeuptychia hermes (F.) and Megisto cymela (Cram.) in NATL habitats (Kons 1998). Other workers have posted NATL check lists for Ichneumonidae, Sphecidae, Tettigoniidae, and Gryllidae (http://csssrvr.entnem.ufl.edu/~walker/insect.htm).
    [Show full text]
  • Surveying for Terrestrial Arthropods (Insects and Relatives) Occurring Within the Kahului Airport Environs, Maui, Hawai‘I: Synthesis Report
    Surveying for Terrestrial Arthropods (Insects and Relatives) Occurring within the Kahului Airport Environs, Maui, Hawai‘i: Synthesis Report Prepared by Francis G. Howarth, David J. Preston, and Richard Pyle Honolulu, Hawaii January 2012 Surveying for Terrestrial Arthropods (Insects and Relatives) Occurring within the Kahului Airport Environs, Maui, Hawai‘i: Synthesis Report Francis G. Howarth, David J. Preston, and Richard Pyle Hawaii Biological Survey Bishop Museum Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96817 USA Prepared for EKNA Services Inc. 615 Pi‘ikoi Street, Suite 300 Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96814 and State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation, Airports Division Bishop Museum Technical Report 58 Honolulu, Hawaii January 2012 Bishop Museum Press 1525 Bernice Street Honolulu, Hawai‘i Copyright 2012 Bishop Museum All Rights Reserved Printed in the United States of America ISSN 1085-455X Contribution No. 2012 001 to the Hawaii Biological Survey COVER Adult male Hawaiian long-horned wood-borer, Plagithmysus kahului, on its host plant Chenopodium oahuense. This species is endemic to lowland Maui and was discovered during the arthropod surveys. Photograph by Forest and Kim Starr, Makawao, Maui. Used with permission. Hawaii Biological Report on Monitoring Arthropods within Kahului Airport Environs, Synthesis TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents …………….......................................................……………...........……………..…..….i. Executive Summary …….....................................................…………………...........……………..…..….1 Introduction ..................................................................………………………...........……………..…..….4
    [Show full text]
  • Moths: Lepidoptera
    Moths: Lepidoptera Vítor O. Becker - Scott E. Miller THE FOLLOWING LIST summarizes identi- Agency, through grants from the Falconwood fications of the so-called Macrolepidoptera Corporation. and pyraloid families from Guana Island. Methods are detailed in Becker and Miller SPHINGIDAE (2002). Data and illustrations for Macrolepi- doptera are provided in Becker and Miller SPHINGINAE (2002). Data for Crambidae and Pyralidae will Agrius cingulatus (Fabricius 1775). United States be provided in Becker and Miller (in prepara- south to Argentina. tion). General, but outdated, background infor- Cocytius antaeus (Drury 1773). Southern United mation on Crambidae and Pyralidae are pro- States to Argentina. vided by Schaus (1940). Data for Pterophoridae Manduca sexta (Linnaeus 1763). Widespread in are provided in Gielis (1992) and Landry and the New World. Gielis (1992). Author and date of description Manduca rustica (Fabricius 1775). Widespread in are given for each species name. Earlier dates the New World. were not always printed on publications; those Manduca brontes (Drury 1773). Antilles north to in square brackets indicate that the year was Central Florida. determined from external sources not the pub- lication itself As in previous lists, authors' MACROGLOSSINAE names are put in parentheses when their Pseudosphinx tetrio (Linnaeus 1771). (See plate generic placement has been revised. Detailed 37.) United States through the Antilles to acknowledgments are provided in Becker and Argentina. Miller (2002), but, in addition, we are espe- Erinnyis alope (Drury 1773). Widespread in the cially grateful to C. Gielis, E.G. Munroe, M. New World. Shaffer, and M. A. Solis for assistance with iden- Erinnyis ello (Linnaeus 1758). Neotropical.
    [Show full text]
  • Rapport Fytosanitaire Signaleringen 2014
    Rapport fytosanitaire signaleringen 2014 Datum 23 april 2015 FYTOSIGNALERING 2014 COLOFON Colofon Projectnaam: Rapport fytosanitaire signaleringen 2014 Versienummer 2.0 Projectleider: dr. W.H. van Eck Contactpersoon: Antoon Hermans T 088 223 11 45 M 065 318 25 49 F 088 223 33 34 [email protected] Divisie Landbouw & Natuur | Afdeling toezichtontwikkeling Catharijnesingel 59 | Utrecht Postbus 43006 | 3540 AA Utrecht Pagina 2 van 155 FYTOSIGNALERING 2014 COLOFON Pagina 3 van 155 FYTOSIGNALERING 2014 INHOUD Inhoud COLOFON 2 VOORWOORD 8 Samenvatting 9 Notificaties 9 Bloemisterij 9 Groenten en fruit 9 Akkerbouw 10 Bloembollen 10 Boomkwekerij en groene ruimte 11 Houtige producten 11 Diagnostisch fytosanitair jaaroverzicht 11 Pest Status 12 1 Inleiding 13 1.1 Fytosanitaire signaleringen 13 1.2 Het fytosanitaire inspectieprogramma 13 1.3 Afhandeling en registratie van inspecties in CLIENT 15 1.4 Leeswijzer 15 2 Notificaties bij import en export 17 2.1 Inleiding 17 2.2 Notificaties bij import 17 2.3 Notificaties bij export vanuit Nederland 24 2.3.1 Onderscheppingen door derde landen 24 2.3.2 Notificaties vanwege de vondst van schadelijke organismen 26 2.3.3 Onderscheppingen door EU-lidstaten in intern verkeer 26 2.3.4 Conclusies notificaties door derde landen en EU-lidstaten 27 3 Bloemisterij 29 3.1 Samenvatting inspectieresultaten 30 3.2 Import 31 3.3 Teelt 32 3.4 Fytobewaking 34 3.5 Export en handel 38 3.6 Organismen 39 3.7 Nieuwe risico’s 40 4 Groenten en fruit 43 4.1 Samenvatting inspectieresultaten 43 4.2 Import 45 4.2.1 Importinspectie Capsicum vanaf 1 oktober 2014 45 4.2.2 Wijzigingen Fytorichtlijn vanaf 1 oktober 2014 46 4.2.3 Citrus Black Spot ( Phyllosticta citricarpa ) – Zuid Afrika 46 4.2.4 Handhaving inspectielocaties 47 4.2.5 Vondsten uit Suriname 48 4.2.6 Response to Emerging Risks from Imports (RERI) 48 4.3 Teelt 49 4.3.1 Afrikaanse Fruitmot 49 Pagina 5 van 155 FYTOSIGNALERING 2014 INHOUD 4.3.2 Xanthomonas fragariae 50 4.3.3 Clavibacter 51 4.3.4 Clavibacter michiganensis subsp .
    [Show full text]
  • US EPA, Pesticide Product Label, Liberty Methoxyfen 2,07/27/2021
    U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EPA Reg. Number: Date of Issuance: Office of Pesticide Programs Registration Division (7505P) 89168-92 7/27/21 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20460 NOTICE OF PESTICIDE: Term of Issuance: X Registration Reregistration Unconditional (under FIFRA, as amended) Name of Pesticide Product: Liberty Methoxyfen 2 Name and Address of Registrant (include ZIP Code): Liberty Crop Protection, LLC, 1880 Fall River Drive, Suite 100 Loveland, CO 80538 Note: Changes in labeling differing in substance from that accepted in connection with this registration must be submitted to and accepted by the Registration Division prior to use of the label in commerce. In any correspondence on this product always refer to the above EPA registration number. On the basis of information furnished by the registrant, the above named pesticide is hereby registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act. Registration is in no way to be construed as an endorsement or recommendation of this product by the Agency. In order to protect health and the environment, the Administrator, on his motion, may at any time suspend or cancel the registration of a pesticide in accordance with the Act. The acceptance of any name in connection with the registration of a product under this Act is not to be construed as giving the registrant a right to exclusive use of the name or to its use if it has been covered by others. This product is unconditionally registered in accordance with FIFRA section 3(c)(5) provided that you: 1. Submit and/or cite all data required for registration/reregistration/registration review of your product when the Agency requires all registrants of similar products to submit such data.
    [Show full text]
  • Quickscan Elaphria Nucicolora
    National Plant Protection Organization, the Netherlands Quick scan number: QS.ENT.2014.6 Quick scan date: 5 February 2015 1 What is the scientific name (if possible up to Elaphria nucicolora (Guenee, 1852) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) species level + author, also include (sub)family and Common name: sugarcane midget moth; wingspan approximately 21 mm. order) and English/common name of the organism? Add picture of organism/damage if available and publication allowed . 2 What prompted this quick scan? On 15 April 2014, a finding of a fully grown caterpillar at import inspection of 1278 plants of Polyscias Organism detected in produce for import, export, in (Araliaceae) from Costa Rica, intended for further cultivation in a greenhouse. cultivation, nature, mentioned in publications, e.g. EPPO alert list, etc. 3 What is the (most likely) area of distribution? Americas: common in Florida and to a lesser extent in Georgia; further it is being found along the coast of Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina and Texas (Patterson, 2014). To the south it is present in Central-America including the West Indies and in tropical South-America (amongst others Peru and French Guyana); it is also present in Hawaii (Swezey 1947, Zimmerman 1958). 4 Has the organism been detected, sighted and/or No has it established itself in nearby countries (DE, BE, LU, FR, UK) Yes/no. If ‘yes’, provide details. No interceptions 1 5 Does the organism cause any kind of plant damage E. nucicolora has been indicated as a major pests of pineapples in the tropical regions of the Western in the current area of distribution and/or does the Hemisphere, including Mexico, Central and South America (VBC 2013).
    [Show full text]
  • Key to Frequently Named Lepidopteran Larvae Intercepted, Or Potentially Encountered, at Us Ports
    KEY TO FREQUENTLY NAMED LEPIDOPTERAN LARVAE INTERCEPTED, OR POTENTIALLY ENCOUNTERED, AT US PORTS S. C. Passoa, 2014 This key is designed to identify the most frequently named Lepidoptera at United States ports of entry as of 2013. Because many species cannot be named (early instars or poorly studied groups), it is not a given that this key has all the most frequently intercepted taxa. Some genera may regularly intercepted but unrecognized. The huge variety of early instar Noctuidae/Erebidae is a good example of this problem. There are many other taxa in this category. Trade patterns are constantly changing over time, users should expect a need to delete or add species to this key in the future. Good comprehensive larval keys exist (Carter and Kristensen 1998, Stehr 1987) but as a rule they are too long and complicated for the volume of material we get in APHIS. Also, they rarely go past family. This key is a compromise between the need to for precision and speed. Thus, a good collection and detailed understanding of larval morphology is assumed and required. All of the references cited in the LepIntercept fact sheets need to be part of any port library. This document serves as a blanket recommendation for their purchase or copying costs from the APHIS Lepidoptera specialist to any port needing a justification. This key assumes eventual full access to the appropriate literature. Getting this information needs to be a priority for ports frequently intercepting larval Lepidoptera. Many of the copyrighted books are never going to be "on-line" and go out of print relatively fast.
    [Show full text]
  • Hawaiian Entomological Society
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE Hawaiian Entomological Society Vol. XIV, No. 2 For the Year 1950 March, 1951 JANUARY 9, 1950 The 529th meeting was held at the H.S.P.A. Experiment Station on Monday, January 9, at 2:00 p.m., with President Pemberton in the chair. Members present: Bess, Bonnet, Bryan, Clancy, Fullaway, Hardy, Inada, Keck, Look, Marucci, Newell, Pelot, Pemberton, Peterson, Rosa, Martin Sherman, Tanada, Thomsen, Tuthill, Van Zwaluwenburg and Weber. Visitors: T. C. Lawrence and W. C. Mitchell. Francis Rathburn was elected an associate member, and W. C. Mitchell was nominated for membership. Mr. Lawrence, en route to India to col lect parasites of fruit flies, was introduced by Dr. Clancy. NOTES AND EXHIBITIONS Protaetia fusca (Herbst) —Mr. Peterson reported observations which indicate that this cetoniine beetle feeds both by day and by night. On mango blossoms, attention seems first to be directed to stamens and pistils; the individual flowers are sheared off at the juncture of calyx and pedun cle. Considerable damage is done to blossoms of candle bush (Cassia alata), the individual flowers being sheared from the bloom spike and the petals eaten. Control of earthworms—Mr. Keck reported success in killing earth worms in lawns with applications of one-fourth of 1 per cent chlordane. Limax maximus l.—Mr. Pemberton exhibited a specimen of this slug, new to the Territory, collected December 20, 1949, by H. W. Brodie at the H.S.P.A. substation in upper Manoa Valley. It is a European species which is established in the eastern United States and on the Pacific Coast.
    [Show full text]
  • JESSICA COCCO.Pdf
    UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO PARANÁ JÉSSICA COCCO RELAÇÕES TRI-TRÓFICAS EM MILHO TRANSGÊNICO ENVOLVENDO LEPIDÓPTEROS PRAGAS E SEUS INIMIGOS NATURAIS EM MILHO TRANSGÊNICO CURITIBA 2019 JÉSSICA COCCO RELAÇÕES TRI-TRÓFICAS EM MILHO TRANSGÊNICO ENVOLVENDO LEPIDÓPTEROS PRAGAS E SEUS INIMIGOS NATURAIS EM MILHO TRANSGÊNICO Tese apresentada ao Programa de Pós-Graduação em Zoologia, Setor de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal do Paraná, como requisito parcial à obtenção do título de Doutor em Zoologia. Orientador: Dr. Luís Amilton Foerster CURITIBA 2019 Aos meus pais Ildo José Cocco e Angela Maria Giuliani Cocco. AGRADECIMENTOS “Se A é sucesso, então A é igual a X mais Y mais Z.” (Albert Einstein) Então o trabalho é X; Y é o lazer e Z são as pessoas. Neste momento quero agradecer as variáveis X e Z: Ao Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), pelo apoio em forma de bolsa. Aos Professores Drª. Alessandra Regina Butnariu, Drª. Beatriz Spalding Corrêa Ferreira, Dr. Celso Omoto, por aceitarem participar da banca de defesa e contribuir com meu trabalho. Aos membros da minha comissão de acompanhamento Drª. Alessandra Regina Butnariu, Drª. Beatriz Spalding Corrêa Ferreira e Dr. César Augusto Marchioro, pela dedicação e por contribuírem com a minha formação. Ao meu orientador Luís Amilton Foerster, por aceitar me orientar, pela confiança, paciência e dedicação comigo ao longo do doutorado. Muito Obrigada Professor! Aos taxonomistas que identificaram os exemplares da ordem Lepidoptera Dr. Eduardo Carneiro e Dr. Diego Rodrigo Dolibaina, da família Ichneumonidae Drª Helena C. Onody e Dr. Daniel Fernandes, da família Braconidae Dr. Eduardo Shimbori e Drª Angélica Penteado Dias, e da ordem Dermaptera Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Proceedings of the HAWAIIAN ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY/Orl959
    'Proceedings of the HAWAIIAN ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY/orl959 OTTO HERMAN SWEZEY MEMORIAL NUMBER VOL. XVII, No. 2 JULY, 1960 Suggestions for Manuscripts Manuscripts should be typewritten on one side of standard-size white bond paper, double or triple spaced, with ample margins. The sheets should not be fastened together; they should be mailed flat. Pages should be numbered con secutively. Inserts should be typed on separate pages and placed in the manu script in the proper sequence. Footnotes should be numbered consecutively and inserted in the manuscript immediately below the citation, separated from the text by lines. They should be used only where necessary. All names and references should be checked for accuracy, including diacritical marks. Authors' names must be spelled out when first mentioned. Illustrations should be planned to fit the type page, 4Vi x 7 inches. They should be drawn to allow for at least one-third reduction. Each should be labeled on the back with the author's name and title of the paper, as well as the number of the figure referred to in the text. Where size or magnification is important, some indication of scale should be given. They should be num bered consecutively, using capital letters to indicate parts of a composite figure. Printed letters are available from the Secretary. Legends should be typed on a separate sheet of paper and identified by the figure number. Tables and graphs should be used only where necessary and omitted if essentially the same information is given in the paper. Graphs and figures should be drawn in India ink on white paper, tracing cloth, or light blue cross-hatched paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Control Pacific Prospects - Supplement 2 Plate 1 Top Line: 1
    Biological Control Pacific Prospects - Supplement 2 Plate 1 Top line: 1. Bactrocera tryoni ovipositing in an apple. 2. Fopius arisanus probing a banana for tephritid eggs. 3. Diachasmimorpha longicaudata probing for lephritid larvae. Middle li ne: 4. Icerya aegyptiaca on a breadfruit leaf (D.P.A. Sands). 5. Adult I. aegyptiaca with wax filaments displaced by blowing lightly (G.S. Sandhu). 6. Larvae of Rodolia attacking I. aegyptiaca (D.P.A. Sands). Bottom line: 7. Coconut palm with bark channels of Neotermes rainbowi (M. Lenz). 8. Coconut palm stump following loss of lOp (M. Lenz). 9. Bark channels characteristic of N. rainbowi (M. Lenz). Plate 2 Top line: 1. Thicket of Clerodendrum chineme in Western Samoa. 2. Roadside thicket of C. chinense in Fiji CD .P.A. Sands). Middle line: 3. Flower head of C. chinense CD.P.A. Sands). 4. Phyllocharis undulata and damage to Clerodendrum leaf CB. Napompeth). Bottom line: 5. Young prostrate plant of Portulaca oleracea (J.T. Swarbrick). 6. P. oleracea in flower CW.A. Whistler). Biological Control Pacific Prospects - Supplement 2 D.F. Waterhouse Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research Canberra 1993 The Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (AClAR) was established in June 1982 by an Act of the Australian Parliament. Its mandate is to help identify agricultural problems in devcloping countrics and to commission collaborative research between Australian and developing country researchers in fields where Australia has a special research competence. Where trade names are used this constitutes neither endorsement of nor discrimination against any product by the Centre. ACIAR MONOGRAPH SERIES This peer-reviewed series contains the results of original research supported by AClAR, or deemed relevaI1lto AClAR's research objectives.
    [Show full text]