Distribution and Dispersal of Urophora Cardui (Diptera, Tephritidae) in Finland in 1985-1991
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Best Management Practice for Canada Thistle Matthew P
Weeding Out a Solution: Best Management Practice for Canada Thistle Matthew P. Stasica, Environmental Studies Senior Thesis October 2009 Collegeville, Minnesota Control methods mentioned in this paper are only examples. They have not been tested unless stated. It is advised that if you are to assimilate any of the control methods discussed in this thesis that you better know what you are doing or understand if the treatment is right for your infestation problem. Also, there are a plethora of other control methods for managing Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). The methods in this thesis should not be regarded as implying that other methods as inferior. Stasica 1 Weeding Out a Solution: Best Management Practice for Canada Thistle Table of Contents: Page Number Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………....3 Biology……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………………………..5 Laws and Regulation……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 Interview: County Agricultural Inspector- Greg Senst…………………………………………………….……………..8 Mechanical Control Methods…………………………………………………………………………………………….………..10 Physical Control Methods……………………………...……………………………………………………………………………13 -Hand Pulling…………………………………………………………………………………………………….……..13 -Grazing……………………………………………………………………………………………..………… .……....13 -Fire…………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………..……...15 Chemical Control Methods………………………………………………………………………………………………………….15 Biological Control Methods…………………………………………………………………………………………..…………….18 Integrated Pest Management……………………………………………………………………………………….…………….20 -
Superfamilies Tephritoidea and Sciomyzoidea (Dip- Tera: Brachycera) Kaj Winqvist & Jere Kahanpää
20 © Sahlbergia Vol. 12: 20–32, 2007 Checklist of Finnish flies: superfamilies Tephritoidea and Sciomyzoidea (Dip- tera: Brachycera) Kaj Winqvist & Jere Kahanpää Winqvist, K. & Kahanpää, J. 2007: Checklist of Finnish flies: superfamilies Tephritoidea and Sciomyzoidea (Diptera: Brachycera). — Sahlbergia 12:20-32, Helsinki, Finland, ISSN 1237-3273. Another part of the updated checklist of Finnish flies is presented. This part covers the families Lonchaeidae, Pallopteridae, Piophilidae, Platystomatidae, Tephritidae, Ulididae, Coelopidae, Dryomyzidae, Heterocheilidae, Phaeomyii- dae, Sciomyzidae and Sepsidae. Eight species are recorded from Finland for the first time. The following ten species have been erroneously reported from Finland and are here deleted from the Finnish checklist: Chaetolonchaea das- yops (Meigen, 1826), Earomyia crystallophila (Becker, 1895), Lonchaea hirti- ceps Zetterstedt, 1837, Lonchaea laticornis Meigen, 1826, Prochyliza lundbecki (Duda, 1924), Campiglossa achyrophori (Loew, 1869), Campiglossa irrorata (Fallén, 1814), Campiglossa tessellata (Loew, 1844), Dioxyna sororcula (Wie- demann, 1830) and Tephritis nigricauda (Loew, 1856). The Finnish records of Lonchaeidae: Lonchaea bruggeri Morge, Lonchaea contigua Collin, Lonchaea difficilis Hackman and Piophilidae: Allopiophila dudai (Frey) are considered dubious. The total number of species of Tephritoidea and Sciomyzoidea found from Finland is now 262. Kaj Winqvist, Zoological Museum, University of Turku, FI-20014 Turku, Finland. Email: [email protected] Jere Kahanpää, Finnish Environment Institute, P.O. Box 140, FI-00251 Helsinki, Finland. Email: kahanpaa@iki.fi Introduction new millennium there was no concentrated The last complete checklist of Finnish Dipte- Finnish effort to study just these particular ra was published in Hackman (1980a, 1980b). groups. Consequently, before our work the Recent checklists of Finnish species have level of knowledge on Finnish fauna in these been published for ‘lower Brachycera’ i.e. -
Milk Thistle
Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Biological Control BIOLOGY AND BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF EXOTIC T RU E T HISTL E S RACHEL WINSTON , RICH HANSEN , MA R K SCH W A R ZLÄNDE R , ER IC COO M BS , CA R OL BELL RANDALL , AND RODNEY LY M FHTET-2007-05 U.S. Department Forest September 2008 of Agriculture Service FHTET he Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team (FHTET) was created in 1995 Tby the Deputy Chief for State and Private Forestry, USDA, Forest Service, to develop and deliver technologies to protect and improve the health of American forests. This book was published by FHTET as part of the technology transfer series. http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/technology/ On the cover: Italian thistle. Photo: ©Saint Mary’s College of California. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call 202-720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for information only and does not constitute an endorsement by the U.S. -
Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan: US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area, El Paso County, CO
Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area August 2015 CNHP’s mission is to preserve the natural diversity of life by contributing the essential scientific foundation that leads to lasting conservation of Colorado's biological wealth. Colorado Natural Heritage Program Warner College of Natural Resources Colorado State University 1475 Campus Delivery Fort Collins, CO 80523 (970) 491-7331 Report Prepared for: United States Air Force Academy Department of Natural Resources Recommended Citation: Smith, P., S. S. Panjabi, and J. Handwerk. 2015. Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan: US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area, El Paso County, CO. Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. Front Cover: Documenting weeds at the US Air Force Academy. Photos courtesy of the Colorado Natural Heritage Program © Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area El Paso County, CO Pam Smith, Susan Spackman Panjabi, and Jill Handwerk Colorado Natural Heritage Program Warner College of Natural Resources Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 August 2015 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Various federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, orders, and policies require land managers to control noxious weeds. The purpose of this plan is to provide a guide to manage, in the most efficient and effective manner, the noxious weeds on the US Air Force Academy (Academy) and Farish Recreation Area (Farish) over the next 10 years (through 2025), in accordance with their respective integrated natural resources management plans. This plan pertains to the “natural” portions of the Academy and excludes highly developed areas, such as around buildings, recreation fields, and lawns. -
Cirsium Arvense (L.) Scop
NEW YORK NON -NATIVE PLANT INVASIVENESS RANKING FORM Scientific name: Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. (C. setosum, C. incanum, Carduus arvensis, Serratula arvensis & all varieties of C. arvense) USDA Plants Code: CIAR4 Common names: Creeping thistle, Californian thistle, Canada thistle, field thistle Native distribution: Eurasia Date assessed: April 28, 2009 Assessors: Gerry Moore Reviewers: LIISMA SRC Date Approved: May 13, 2009 Form version date: 3 March 2009 New York Invasiveness Rank: High (Relative Maximum Score 70.00-80.00) Distribution and Invasiveness Rank ( Obtain from PRISM invasiveness ranking form ) PRISM Status of this species in each PRISM: Current Distribution Invasiveness Rank 1 Adirondack Park Invasive Program Not Assessed Not Assessed 2 Capital/Mohawk Not Assessed Not Assessed 3 Catskill Regional Invasive Species Partnership Not Assessed Not Assessed 4 Finger Lakes Not Assessed Not Assessed 5 Long Island Invasive Species Management Area Widespread High 6 Lower Hudson Not Assessed Not Assessed 7 Saint Lawrence/Eastern Lake Ontario Not Assessed Not Assessed 8 Western New York Not Assessed Not Assessed Invasiveness Ranking Summary Total (Total Answered*) Total (see details under appropriate sub-section) Possible 1 Ecological impact 40 ( 40 ) 20 2 Biological characteristic and dispersal ability 25 ( 25 ) 21 3 Ecological amplitude and distribution 25 ( 25 ) 21 4 Difficulty of control 10 ( 10 ) 9 Outcome score 100 ( 100 )b 71 a † Relative maximum score 71.00 § New York Invasiveness Rank High (Relative Maximum Score 70.00-80.00) * For questions answered “unknown” do not include point value in “Total Answered Points Possible.” If “Total Answered Points Possible” is less than 70.00 points, then the overall invasive rank should be listed as “Unknown.” †Calculated as 100(a/b) to two decimal places. -
Flies) Benjamin Kongyeli Badii
Chapter Phylogeny and Functional Morphology of Diptera (Flies) Benjamin Kongyeli Badii Abstract The order Diptera includes all true flies. Members of this order are the most ecologically diverse and probably have a greater economic impact on humans than any other group of insects. The application of explicit methods of phylogenetic and morphological analysis has revealed weaknesses in the traditional classification of dipteran insects, but little progress has been made to achieve a robust, stable clas- sification that reflects evolutionary relationships and morphological adaptations for a more precise understanding of their developmental biology and behavioral ecol- ogy. The current status of Diptera phylogenetics is reviewed in this chapter. Also, key aspects of the morphology of the different life stages of the flies, particularly characters useful for taxonomic purposes and for an understanding of the group’s biology have been described with an emphasis on newer contributions and progress in understanding this important group of insects. Keywords: Tephritoidea, Diptera flies, Nematocera, Brachycera metamorphosis, larva 1. Introduction Phylogeny refers to the evolutionary history of a taxonomic group of organisms. Phylogeny is essential in understanding the biodiversity, genetics, evolution, and ecology among groups of organisms [1, 2]. Functional morphology involves the study of the relationships between the structure of an organism and the function of the various parts of an organism. The old adage “form follows function” is a guiding principle of functional morphology. It helps in understanding the ways in which body structures can be used to produce a wide variety of different behaviors, including moving, feeding, fighting, and reproducing. It thus, integrates concepts from physiology, evolution, anatomy and development, and synthesizes the diverse ways that biological and physical factors interact in the lives of organisms [3]. -
Attack of Urophora Quadrifasciata (Meig.) (Diiptera: Tephritidae) a Biological Control Agent for Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea Maculosa Lamarck) and Diffuse Knapweed (C
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Valparaiso University The Great Lakes Entomologist Volume 36 Numbers 1 & 2 - Spring/Summer 2003 Numbers Article 4 1 & 2 - Spring/Summer 2003 April 2003 Attack of Urophora Quadrifasciata (Meig.) (Diiptera: Tephritidae) A Biological Control Agent for Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea Maculosa Lamarck) and Diffuse Knapweed (C. Diffusa Lamarck) (Asteraceae) by a Parasitoid, Pteromalus Sp. (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) in Michigan Ronald F. Lang United States Department of Agriculture Jane Winkler Michigan Department of Agriculture Richard W. Hansen United States Department of Agriculture Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation Lang, Ronald F.; Winkler, Jane; and Hansen, Richard W. 2003. "Attack of Urophora Quadrifasciata (Meig.) (Diiptera: Tephritidae) A Biological Control Agent for Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea Maculosa Lamarck) and Diffuse Knapweed (C. Diffusa Lamarck) (Asteraceae) by a Parasitoid, Pteromalus Sp. (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) in Michigan," The Great Lakes Entomologist, vol 36 (1) Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle/vol36/iss1/4 This Peer-Review Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Biology at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Great Lakes Entomologist by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. Lang et al.: Attack of <i>Urophora Quadrifasciata</i> (Meig.) (Diiptera: Tephr 16 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST Vol. 36, Nos. 1 & 2 ATTACK OF UROPHORA QUADRIFASCIATA (MEIG.) (DIIPTERA: TEPHRITIDAE) A BIOLOGICAL CONTROL AGENT FOR SPOTTED KNAPWEED (CENTAUREA MACULOSA LAMARCK) AND DIFFUSE KNAPWEED (C. -
Question 1 – Philosophy of Science – Open Book (Hard Copies Only); Laptop Acceptable; No Internet
Question 1 – Philosophy of Science – Open book (hard copies only); laptop acceptable; no internet Using the scientific method as the basis for your discussion, discuss the basis of the scientific philosophy first proposed by Karl Popper. Explain how this changed the way that we have practiced science over the last 50 years. Is the approach that Popper proposed applicable in the field of systematics/taxonomy? Why/why not? Provide examples. Are there other ways to seek understanding and explanation? My Answer Karl Popper’s view on the philosophy of science, commonly referred to as Falsificationism, revolutionized the way in which scientists approached their work. Popper argued that scientific theories can only be shown to be false using empirical data, instead of the previous notion that empirical data served to confirm or prove a theory. The scientific method is generally regarded as 4 general steps: 1) make an observation of a phenomenon, 2) create a hypothesis that predicts or explains the observation, 3) gather empirical data through experimentation that tests the hypothesis, and 4) assess how the data relates to the hypothesis. Prior to Popper, scientists would seek to confirm their hypotheses, and so would assess their collected data on whether it supported the hypothesis they proposed. If it did, they would move on to other work having shown their idea was correct. Popper however, argued that confirmation in science is not possible, and that only through a series of falsifiable hypotheses can we begin to understand the truth. This required the development of the null hypothesis, which allows one of two possible options to be falsified. -
Chapter 12. Biocontrol Arthropods: New Denizens of Canada's
291 Chapter 12 Biocontrol Arthropods: New Denizens of Canada’s Grassland Agroecosystems Rosemarie De Clerck-Floate and Héctor Cárcamo Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge Research Centre 5403 - 1 Avenue South, P.O. Box 3000 Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada T1J 4B1 Abstract. Canada’s grassland ecosystems have undergone major changes since the arrival of European agriculture, ranging from near-complete replacement of native biodiversity with annual crops to the effects of overgrazing by cattle on remnant native grasslands. The majority of the “agroecosystems” that have replaced the historical native grasslands now encompass completely new associations of plants and arthropods in what is typically a mix of introduced and native species. Some of these species are pests of crops and pastures and were accidentally introduced. Other species are natural enemies of these pests and were deliberately introduced as classical biological control (biocontrol) agents to control these pests. To control weeds, 76 arthropod species have been released against 24 target species in Canada since 1951, all of which also have been released in western Canada. Of these released species, 53 (70%) have become established, with 18 estimated to be reducing target weed populations. The biocontrol programs for leafy spurge in the prairie provinces and knapweeds in British Columbia have been the largest, each responsible for the establishment of 10 new arthropod species on rangelands. This chapter summarizes the ecological highlights of these programs and those for miscellaneous weeds. Compared with weed biocontrol on rangelands, classical biocontrol of arthropod crop pests by using arthropods lags far behind, mostly because of a preference to manage crop pests with chemicals. -
Biological Control of Canada Thistle (Cirsium Arvense) in South Dakota Z
South Dakota State University Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange Agronomy, Horticulture and Plant Science Faculty Department of Agronomy, Horticulture, and Plant Publications Science 2000 Biological control of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) in South Dakota Z. Liu South Dakota State University S. A. Clay South Dakota State University M. Brinkman South Dakota State University Follow this and additional works at: https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/plant_faculty_pubs Recommended Citation Liu, Z.; Clay, S. A.; and Brinkman, M., "Biological control of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) in South Dakota" (2000). Agronomy, Horticulture and Plant Science Faculty Publications. 197. https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/plant_faculty_pubs/197 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Agronomy, Horticulture, and Plant Science at Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Agronomy, Horticulture and Plant Science Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Proceedings of the South Dakota Academy of Science,Vol. 79 (2000) 21 BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF CANADA THISTLE (CIRSIUM ARVENSE) IN SOUTH DAKOTA Z. Liu, S.A. Clay and M. Brinkman Plant Science Department South Dakota State University Brookings, SD 57007 ABSTRACT Canada -
Habitat Management Plan Turnbull National Wildlife Refuge Turnbull National Tfildlife Refuge
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Habitat Management Plan Turnbull National Wildlife Refuge Turnbull National TfildLife Refuge Habi tat lvlanagement PIan October 1999 Preppred bY U. S . Fish and Tüild1ife Service Turr¡bull NWR 26OLO South Smith Road Cheney, WA 99004 ", Turnbutrl National WildHfe R.efuge HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN APPROVAL u. s. FISH AND WTLDLTFE SERVICE, REGION I PREPARED BY: /o- 2L- 91 Michael Rule Date Wildlife Biologist SUBMITTED BY: Ò Z Nancy Curry Date Refllge Manager CON rr/zr/77 Don Voros Dat6 Refuge Supervisor, Columbia Basin Ecoregion Bill Date Geographic Assistant Regional Director Coltrmbia Basin ø-lqlvÞ Date stant Regional Director Reñrges ancl Wildlife APPROVE; Aíne Badgley / ry Regional Director, Region 1 Table of Contents I. Introduction.................................................1 A. Area/Location...........................................1 B. Climate.................................................1 C. Environment.............................................1 D. History.................................................3 E. Mission and Direction...................................4 II. Resource problems and challenges............................7 A. Regional Scale..........................................7 B. On Refuge Challenges....................................8 1. Water quantity.....................................8 2. Ponderosa Pine Forest..............................8 3. Aspen/Deciduous shrub Riparian Zones...............9 4. Wet meadows and seasonal wetlands..................9 III. Meeting the Challenge....................................11 -
Field Guide for the Biological Control of Weeds in Eastern North America
US Department TECHNOLOGY of Agriculture TRANSFER FIELD GUIDE FOR THE BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF WEEDS IN EASTERN NORTH AMERICA Rachel L. Winston, Carol B. Randall, Bernd Blossey, Philip W. Tipping, Ellen C. Lake, and Judy Hough-Goldstein Forest Health Technology FHTET-2016-04 Enterprise Team April 2017 The Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team (FHTET) was created in 1995 by the Deputy Chief for State and Private Forestry, USDA, Forest Service, to develop and deliver technologies to protect and improve the health of American forests. This book was published by FHTET as part of the technology transfer series. http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/technology/ Cover photos: Purple loosestrife (Jennifer Andreas, Washington State University Extension), Galerucella calmariensis (David Cappaert, Michigan State University, bugwood.org), tropical soda apple ((J. Jeffrey Mullahey, University of Florida, bugwood.org), Gratiana boliviana (Rodrigo Diaz, Louisiana State University), waterhyacinth (Chris Evans, University of Illinois, bugwood.org), Megamelus scutellaris (Jason D. Stanley, USDA ARS, bugwood.org), mile-a-minute weed (Leslie J. Mehrhoff, University of Connecticut, bugwood.org), Rhinoncomimus latipes (Amy Diercks, bugwood.org) How to cite this publication: Winston, R.L., C.B. Randall, B. Blossey, P.W. Tipping, E.C. Lake, and J. Hough-Goldstein. 2017. Field Guide for the Biological Control of Weeds in Eastern North America. USDA Forest Service, Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, Morgantown, West Virginia. FHTET-2016-04. In accordance with