DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Control of Yellow Starthistle

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological Control of Yellow Starthistle Biological Control of Yellow Starthistle Lincoln Smith, USDA-ARS-WRRC, 800 Buchanan St, Albany CA 94710 Joe Balciunas, USDA-ARS-WRRC, 800 Buchanan St, Albany CA 94710 Michael J. Pitcairn, California Dept. of Food and Agriculture, 3288 Meadowview Road, Sacramento, CA 95832 Yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis L.) is an alien plant that probably originated from the eastern Mediterranean. It was first collected in California in 1869, and now infests 42% of the state’s townships. It interferes with land use such as grazing and recreation, displaces native species, and is toxic to horses (Sheley, et al. 1999 and papers cited therein). This weed is much less invasive in its land of origin. This is presumably because natural enemies, such as insects, plant diseases, animals or competing plants help to keep it under natural control. We are exploring for insects and pathogens that attack this plant. They are tested for host specificity to make sure they do not attack other plants. After evaluation and approval by state and federal agencies, these agents will be released to try to reestablish the natural control that occurs in the land of origin. So far, six species of insect biological control agents have been introduced to control yellow starthistle (Turner et al. 1995; Rees et al. 1996; Jette, et al. 1999). All six attack the seedheads. The most promising agent is the hairy weevil (Eustenopus villosus), which is well established in California and occurs in high densities, attacking 25 to 80% of seedheads. Adults damage young flower buds by feeding on them, and lay eggs on later-developing flower buds. Their larvae develop inside a seedhead and consume all the seeds. However, this insect has only one generation per year and does not attack flowers that develop later in the summer. The other established agents, Urophora sirunaseva, Bangasternus orientalis, Chaetorellia australis and Larinus curtus are fairly widespread (see Table) but do not attain high numbers and appear to have little impact on yellow starthistle populations. Chaetorellia australis is better synchronized with bachelor button, which blooms earlier in the spring than yellow starthistle. Bangasternus orientalis appears to suffer from high egg predation and parasitism. The gall fly, Urophora jaculata, failed to establish because yellow starthistle in California is unsuitable for the fly (Clement 1994). The fly originated from a population of yellow starthistle in Italy that was much more susceptible to its attack. Recently, the parasitic mite Pymotes tritici has been found attacking seedhead insects in California and may be reducing their effectiveness. The false peacock fly (Chaetorellia succinea), which was accidentally introduced in 1991, emerges in the spring about a month before the plant has developed flower buds large enough for egg-laying. However, the fly has several generations per year and increases numbers progressively through the growing season, complementing the seasonal activity of the hairy weevil. The false peacock fly is being tested for nontarget impact on safflower and native thistles and preliminary results have shown no significant adverse effects. The rust pathogen, Puccinia jaceae, has been evaluated for host specificity by William Bruckart at the USDA-ARS laboratory in Fort Detrick, MD. A petition for its introduction has 2001 Proceedings of the California Weed Science Society (Volume 53) 105 recently been submitted. Foreign exploration and evaluation of additional agents is currently increasing in Turkey, Russia, Greece and Italy. Status of yellow starthistle biological control agents Biological control First agent Common name release Status Urophora jaculata 1969 Never established in USA. Urophora sirunaseva YST1 gall fly 1984 Widely established, present at most YST infestations in CA & OR; a few sites in WA, ID. Bangasternus orientalis YST bud weevil 1985 Widespread in CA, OR, WA & ID. Chaetorellia australis YST peacock fly 1988 Prefers bachelor button; established at a few sites in CA; widespread in OR, WA, ID. Eustenopus villosus YST hairy weevil 1990 Well established in CA; widespread in OR, WA; a few sites in ID, UT. Larinus curtus YST flower weevil 1992 Established at a few sites in CA, WA, ID; widespread in OR. Unapproved accidental introduction: Chaetorellia succinea YST false peacock 1991 Widely established in CA & OR, and spreading into fly WA, ID & NV. Currently being evaluated for nontarget impacts. 1 YST = yellow starthistle References Clement, S. L. 1994. Resistence among populations of yellow starthistle to thistle-head insects: Results from garden plots in Italy. Biol. Contr. 4: 149-156. Jette, C., J. Connett and J. P. McCaffrey. 1999. Biology and Biological Control Agents of Yellow Starthistle. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. FHTET-98-17. Rees, N. E., P. C. Quimby, G. L. Piper, E. M. Coomb, C. E. Turner, N. R. Spencer and L. V. Knutson (eds.). 1996. Biological Control of Weeds in the West. Western Society of Weed Science., USDA-ARS, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT. World Color Printers, Bozeman, MT. Sheley, R. L., L. L. Larson and J. J. Jacobs. 1999. Yellow starthistle, pp. 408-416. In, Sheley, R. L. & J. K. Petroff, eds., Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis. Shishkoff, N.; W. L. Bruckart. 1996. Water stress and damage caused by Puccinia jaceae on two Centaurea species. Biological control: theory and applications in pest management 6(1): 57. Turner, C. E., J. B. Johnson and J. P. McCaffrey. 1995. Yellow starthistle, pp. 270-275. In J.R. Nechols, L.A. Andres, J.W. Beardsley, R.D. Goeden and C.G. Jackson (editors), Biological Control in the Western United States: Accomplishments and Benefits of Regional Research Project W-84, 1964- 1989. University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Oakland. Publ. 3361. 106 2001 Proceedings of the California Weed Science Society (Volume 53).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Coleoptera: Curculionidae, Lixinae)
    J. Entomol. Res. Soc., 14(2): 71-85, 2012 ISSN:1302-0250 New Faunistic Data on Selected Palaearctic Species of the Genus Larinus Dejean, 1821 (Coleoptera: Curculionidae, Lixinae) Levent GÜLTEKİN1 Attila PODLUSSÁNY2 1Atatürk University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Plant Protection, 25240 Erzurum, TURKEY. e-mail: [email protected] 2Hungarian Natural History Museum, H-1088 Budapest, Baross utca 13, HUNGARY. e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT Faunistic data regarding 50 species of the weevil genus Larinus Dejean, 1821 (Curculionidae: Lixinae) from the Palaearctic region are registered. New country records are: Larinus elegans Desbrochers, 1897 and L. puncticollis Capiomont, 1874 for Iran; L. filiformis Petri, 1907 for Georgia; L. fucatus Faust, 1891 and L. rectinasus Petri, 1907 for Syria; L. hedenborgi Boheman, 1845 for Cyprus; L. idoneus Gyllenhal, 1835 and L. darsi Capiomont, 1874 for Turkey; L. carinirostris Gyllenhal, 1835 for Bulgaria; L. curtus Hochhuth, 1851 and L. minutus Gyllenhal, 1835 for Croatia; L. leuzeae Fabre, 1870 for Spain; L. modestus Gyllenhal, 1835 for Syria and Israel; L. nubeculosus Gyllenhal, 1835 for Greece, Hungary, Slovenia; L. gravidus Olivier, 1807 and L. rectinasus Petri, 1907 for Greece; L. serratulae Becker, 1864 for Turkmenistan; L. sibiricus Gyllenhal, 1835 for Macedonia; L. sulphurifer Boheman, 1843 and L. ochreatus (Olivier, 1807) for Tunisia; L. syriacus Gyllenhal, 1835 for Croatia and Macedonia; L. vitellinus Gyllenhal, 1835 for Israel; L. vulpes (Olivier, 1807) for Bulgaria, Croatia, Serbia and Turkey. Keywords: Curculionidae, Larinus, new records, faunistic data. INTRODUCTION The weevil genus Larinus Dejean, 1821 (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Lixinae) contains many species which are closely associated with thistles, knapweeds or other noxious weeds belonging to the tribe Cardueae (Asteraceae) in the Palaearctic (Ter-Minassian, 1967; Zwölfer et al., 1971).
    [Show full text]
  • Multi-Trophic Level Interactions Between the Invasive Plant
    MULTI-TROPHIC LEVEL INTERACTIONS BETWEEN THE INVASIVE PLANT CENTAUREA STOEBE, INSECTS AND NATIVE PLANTS by Christina Rachel Herron-Sweet A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Land Resources and Environmental Sciences MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Bozeman, Montana May 2014 ©COPYRIGHT by Christina Rachel Herron-Sweet 2014 All Rights Reserved ii DEDICATION To my parents and grandparents, who instilled in me the value of education and have been my biggest supporters along the way. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Special thanks go to my two advisers Drs. Jane Mangold and Erik Lehnhoff for all their tremendous support, advice and feedback during my graduate program. My two other committee members Drs. Laura Burkle and Jeff Littlefield also deserve a huge thank you for the time and effort they put into helping me with various aspects of my project. This research would not have been possible without the dedicated crew of field and lab helpers: Torrin Daniels, Darcy Goodson, Daniel France, James Collins, Ann de Meij, Noelle Orloff, Krista Ehlert, and Hally Berg. The following individuals deserve recognition for their patience in teaching me pollinator identification, and for providing parasitoid identifications: Casey Delphia, Mike Simanonok, Justin Runyon, Charles Hart, Stacy Davis, Mike Ivie, Roger Burks, Jim Woolley, David Wahl, Steve Heydon, and Gary Gibson. Hilary Parkinson and Matt Lavin also offered their expertise in plant identification. Statistical advice and R code was generously offered by Megan Higgs, Sean McKenzie, Pamela Santibanez, Dan Bachen, Michael Lerch, Michael Simanonok, Zach Miller and Dave Roberts. Bryce Christiaens, Lyn Huyser, Gil Gale and Craig Campbell provided instrumental consultation on locating field sites, and the Circle H Ranch, Flying D Ranch and the United States Forest Service graciously allowed this research to take place on their property.
    [Show full text]
  • Том 4. Вып. 2 Vol. 4. No. 2
    РОССИЙСКАЯ АКАДЕМИЯ НАУК Южный Научный Центр RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Southern Scientific Centre CAUCASIAN ENTOMOLOGICAL BULLETIN Том 4. Вып. 2 Vol. 4. No. 2 Ростов-на-Дону 2008 Кавказский энтомол. бюллетень 4(2): 209—213 © CAUCASIAN ENTOMOLOGICAL BULL. 2008 Hibernation places and behavior of the some weevil species (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) Места зимовки и поведение некоторых видов жуков- долоносиков(Coleoptera: Curculionidae) L. Gültekin Л. Гюльтекин Atatürk University, Faculty of Agriculture, Plant Protection Department, Erzurum 25240 Turkey. E-mail: [email protected]; lgultekin@ gmail.com Университет им. Ататюрка, сельскохозяйственный факультет, кафедра защиты растений, Эрзерум 25240 Турция Key words: hibernation places, behavior, Curculionidae, Eastern Turkey. Ключевые слова: локализация диапаузы, поведение, Curculionidae, Восточная Турция. Abstract. Hibernation places and behavior of перед зимовкой. Cleonis pigra (Scopoli), Larinus onopordi the 40 species of weevil from subfamilies Lixinae, (Fabricius), L. inaequalicollis Capiomont, L. ochroleucus Ceutorhynchinae, Baridinae, Gymnetrinae and Entiminae Capiomont, L. sibiricus Gyllenhal, L. sp. n. pr. leuzeae Fabre, (Curculionidae) were determined in Eastern Turkey during L. filiformis Petri, Herpes porcellus Lacordaire и Mononychus 1997–2007. Larinus latus (Herbst), L. fucatus Faust, punctumalbum (Herbst) часто образуют скопления под Lixus ochraceus Boheman, L. furcatus Olivier, L. obesus камнями, корой растений или в почве. Conorhynchus Petri, L. siculus Boheman, L. korbi Petri, and Mononychus hololeucus (Pallas), Mecaspis incisuratus Gyllenhal, schoenherri Kolenati prefer to migrate by flight before Leucophyes pedesteris (Poda), Otiorhynchus brunneus hibernation. Cleonis pigra (Scopoli), Larinus onopordi Steven, O. latinasus Reitter зимуют под растительными (Fabricius), L. inaequalicollis Capiomont, L. ochroleucus остатками и под камнями. Gymnetron netum (Germar) Capiomont, L. sibiricus Gyllenhal, L. sp. n. pr. leuzeae и Larinus puncticollis Capiomont заселяют на зимовку Fabre, L.
    [Show full text]
  • Population Buildup and Combined Impact of Introduced Insects on Yellow Starthistle (Centaurea Solstitialis L.) in California
    Proceedings of the X International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds 747 4-14 July 1999, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, USA Neal R. Spencer [ed.]. pp. 747-751 (2000) Population Buildup and Combined Impact of Introduced Insects on Yellow Starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis L.) in California MICHAEL J. PITCAIRN1, DALE. M. WOODS1, DONALD. B. JOLEY1, CHARLES E. TURNER2, and JOSEPH K. BALCIUNAS2 1California Department of Food and Agriculture, Biological Control Program, 3288 Meadowview Road, Sacramento, California 95832, USA 2United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, 800 Buchanan Street, Albany, California 94710, USA Abstract Seven exotic seed head insects have been introduced into the western United States for control of yellow starthistle. Six are established; three are widespread. Preliminary evaluations suggest that no one insect species will be able to reduce yellow starthistle abundance in California. Rather, a combination of the current, and possibly, future natu- ral enemies may be necessary. Studies were initiated in 1993 to evaluate the population buildup, combined impact, and interaction of all available biological control insects on yellow starthistle. Three field sites were established in different climatic regions where yellow starthistle is abundant. Four insects, Bangasternus orientalis, Urophora sirunase- va, Eustenopus villosus, and Larinus curtus, were released at each site in 1993 and 1994 and long-term monitoring was initiated. The accidentally-introduced insect, Chaetorellia succinea, was recovered in 1996-98 at these sites. Four years after the first releases, we have evidence that these biological control agents are having an impact on yellow starthistle seed production that may translate into a decline in mature plant populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Control of Noxious Weeds in Oregon
    Biological Control of What is Biological Weed Control? DALMATIAN TOADFLAX GORSE Linaria dalmatica Ulex europaeus Invasive noxious weeds in Oregon cost millions of dollars It is important to make sure the correct species of biocontrol Key to Biocontrol Agent Status Noxious Weeds in Oregon in economic and environmental damage. Biological agents are released, to use the most effective species, and to Gorse seed weevil control is a tool vegetation managers employ to help The following general information is provided for each document the release and establishment of weed biocontrol Exapion ulicis naturally suppress weed infestations. This pamphlet agents. biocontrol agent. shows many of the common biological agents you may Year: 1956 Distribution: Widespread A guide to common biological Since 1947, 77 species of biocontrol agents have been released Year: Year of introduction. encounter in Oregon. Attack rate: Heavy Control: Good control agents found in Oregon in Oregon against 32 species of targeted weeds. A total of Distribution: Distribution of agent in host infested counties. Collectability: Mass Release No. 100 Classical biological control is the use of selected natural Dalmatian toadflax stem weevil 67 species are established. The majority of the bioagents Widespread >50% Limited <50% Timing: Apr–May Method: Sweep net/ enemies to control targeted weeds. Most of our worst are insects (71), plus three mites, one nematode, and two Mecinus janthiniformis racquet Stage: Adult Comment: No need for Attack rate: noxious weeds originated from other continents. pathogens. Successful projects can generate 15:1 benefit to Percent of plants attacked. Year: 2001 Distribution: Widespread redistribution. Prospective biocontrol agents are thoroughly tested to cost ratios.
    [Show full text]
  • A Revision of the Genus <Italic>Chaetorellia</Italic> Hendel
    Six species of overseas insects low starthistle replaces desirable veg- Yellow starthistle, one of California’s more pernicious weeds, infests this field in have been approved for release as etation, in both natural and managed Nevada County. biological control agents of yellow settings. In natural settings, it dimin- starthistle, California’s most per- ishes recreational values, and dense vasive weed. Previously, four stands of this invasive exotic can re- Mayfield 1985). Yellow starthistle’s biocontrol insects were known to duce biodiversity and help carry wild logarithmic range expansion contin- be established in California; we fires. Within California’s agricultural ues. A 1997 survey by California De- now confirm the establishment of community, yellow starthistle most se- partment of Food and Agriculture the peacock fly, as well as the ac- verely impacts ranchers. While young (CDFA) found this weed in 42% (n = 1,935) of California’s 4,638 townships cidentally introduced false pea- yellow starthistle shoots can be grazed - each 6 by 6 square miles - and in cock fly. Remarkably, the false by cattle, the sharp spines of older plants deter feeding, thereby greatly 22% (1,019 townships) the infestations peacock fly is significantly more reducing the forage value of hundreds are reported as ”high” (Pitcairn et al. widespread and more effective of thousands of acres for most of the 1998a). “High“ abundance was de- against yellow starthistle than the year. Yellow starthistle can be toxic to fined as being, at a minimum, several peacock fly - or any other horses that feed on it, causing a fatal miles of dense roadside infestation.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Control Is the Use of Natural Enemies
    CHAPTER 6: Biological Control iological control is the use of natural enemies B(biological control agents) to control a target weed. The objective is to establish self-sustaining populations of the biological control agents that will proliferate and attack the target weed throughout its range. Most noxious weeds in North America are exotic and without specialized natural enemies that occur in their area of origin. As a result, these plants have a competitive advantage over our native spe- cies, which have their own specialized herbivores and diseases. Use of biological control to manage a noxious weed differs from other methods in that manage- ment measures are not directed at particular patches or infestations. Biological control agents are living organisms and land managers cannot accurately direct their activity. Instead, the goal of these pro- grams is to release control agents at strategic loca- tions throughout the infested area with the intention that the control agent will establish, build up high Bud weevil. Bangasternus orientalis is one of many biocontrol agents released in California to control yellow populations, and spread throughout the infestation. starthistle. (Photo: B. Villegas) Eventually, all areas infested by the target weed will be colonized. The establishment, build-up, and spread of a control agent usually requires years, so their safety for introduction into the United States. this method is directed at long-term control of the A high degree of host-specificity is critical for suc- weed. Biological control methods do not eradicate; cessful biological control of a weed, and natural en- rather they provide sustained suppression of the emies that attack agricultural crops or related native target weed populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team Biological Control of Invasive
    Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Biological Control Biological Control of Invasive Plants in the Eastern United States Roy Van Driesche Bernd Blossey Mark Hoddle Suzanne Lyon Richard Reardon Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team—Morgantown, West Virginia United States Forest FHTET-2002-04 Department of Service August 2002 Agriculture BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF INVASIVE PLANTS IN THE EASTERN UNITED STATES BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF INVASIVE PLANTS IN THE EASTERN UNITED STATES Technical Coordinators Roy Van Driesche and Suzanne Lyon Department of Entomology, University of Massachusets, Amherst, MA Bernd Blossey Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY Mark Hoddle Department of Entomology, University of California, Riverside, CA Richard Reardon Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, USDA, Forest Service, Morgantown, WV USDA Forest Service Publication FHTET-2002-04 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank the authors of the individual chap- We would also like to thank the U.S. Depart- ters for their expertise in reviewing and summariz- ment of Agriculture–Forest Service, Forest Health ing the literature and providing current information Technology Enterprise Team, Morgantown, West on biological control of the major invasive plants in Virginia, for providing funding for the preparation the Eastern United States. and printing of this publication. G. Keith Douce, David Moorhead, and Charles Additional copies of this publication can be or- Bargeron of the Bugwood Network, University of dered from the Bulletin Distribution Center, Uni- Georgia (Tifton, Ga.), managed and digitized the pho- versity of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, (413) tographs and illustrations used in this publication and 545-2717; or Mark Hoddle, Department of Entomol- produced the CD-ROM accompanying this book.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Guidecontrol of Weeds
    US Department of Agriculture FOR THE BIOLOGICALFIELD GUIDECONTROL OF WEEDS IN THE NORTHWEST Rachel Winston, Carol Bell Randall, Rosemarie De Clerck-Floate, Alec McClay, Jennifer Andreas and Mark Schwarzländer Forest Health Technology FHTET-2014-08 Enterprise Team May 2014 he Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team (FHTET) was created in T1995 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: Aphthona nigriscutis (R. Richard, USDA APHIS), Mecinus spp. (Bob Richard, USDA APHIS PPQ), Chrysolina hypericic quadrigemina, Eustenopus villosus (Laura Parsons & Mark Schwarzländer, University of Idaho), Cyphocleonus achates (Jennifer Andreas, Washington State University Extension) 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 the information and convenience of the reader.
    [Show full text]
  • Fruit Flies (Dip.: Tephritidae) Reared from Capitula of Asteraceae in the Urmia Region, Iran
    J o u r n a l o f E n t o m o l o g i c a l S o c i e t y o f I r a n 53 2011, 30(2), 53-66 Fruit flies (Dip.: Tephritidae) reared from capitula of Asteraceae in the Urmia region, Iran Y. Karimpour Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Urmia University, P.O. Box 165, Urmia, Iran, E-mail: [email protected] Abstract A list of 20 species of the subfamily Tephritinae (Diptera: Tephritidae) from the Urmia region (Azarbaijan-e Gharbi province, Iran) is presented. The specimens were collected during 2005-2008 from six different localities. Adults were obtained from overwintering and mature seed heads of 17 plant species of Asteraceae. The species, Urophora xanthippe (Munro, 1934) is newly recorded for the fauna of Iran. Thirteen new host plants are also reported for the first time. The host plants, collection date, locality as well as general distribution and associated plants of each species are given. Key words: Tephritidae, fauna, Asteraceae, host plants, fruit flies, Urmia, Iran Tephritinae (Diptera: Tephritidae) ƵŶǀƨģ ƱŚŤºſř ƶǀƯƹŹřƽƶ ƤƐƴƯŻř ƽƵŵřƺƳŚųźƿŻƽŚƷž ĮƯŻřƶƳƺĭçåƪƯŚƃƾŤſźƸƟ ƽƶ ƤƐƴƯƂƃŻřæèíìŚţæèíÑƽŚƷƩŚſŹŵƵŶƃƭŚŬƳřƽŚƷƾſŹźŝƩƺƏŹŵŚƷƶƳƺĭƲƿřŢſřƵŶƃƾƟźƘƯ ƾŝźƛƱŚŬƿŚŝŹŷō ƾƷŚǀĭƽƶ ƳƺĭæìƚƫŚŝƹƱřŹŸĭƱ ŚŤƀƯŻƽŚƷƢ ŞƏŻřơƺƟƽŚƷƶ ƳƺĭƪƯŚƧšřźƄůŶƳŶƃƽŹƹōƖưūƶǀƯƹŹřƝřźƏřŹŵƞƬŤŴƯ Urophora xanthippe (Munro, 1934) (Asteraceae) ƱřźºƿřƱƺºƟƽřźºŝ ŚƷƱ ōƲǀŝŻřƶƧŶƳŶƯōŢſŵƶ ŝ ƱřŵźĮŝŚŤƟōƽƵźǀţ ƹŲƿŹŚţƱŚŝżǀƯƱŚƷŚǀĭŶƳƺƃƾ ƯƁŹřżĭƵŵřƺƳŚųƲƿřƽŚƷž ĮƯƽřźŝŶƿŶūƱŚŝżǀƯƱřƺƴƗƶŝƾƷŚǀĭƽƶ ƳƺĭæèƹƵŵƺŝŶƿŶū ŢſřƵŶƃƶŗřŹřƶƳƺĭźƷŚŝƎŞţźƯƱŚƷŚǀĭƹƾƯƺưƗŹŚƄŤƳřƽƵŻƺůƵřźưƷƶŝƶƤƐƴƯŹŵŚƷž ĮƯƲƿřƽŹƹōƖ ưūƪŰƯ Asteraceae Tephritidae ƱřźƿřƶǀƯƹŹřƵƺǀƯƽŚƷž ĮƯƾƷŚǀĭƽŚƷƱ ŚŝżǀƯ ƱƺƟƽŶǀƬƧƱŚĭĥřƹ Introduction Fruit flies (Tephritidae) are cosmopolitan and also one of the largest families of acalypterate Diptera, comprising over 4300 valid species worldwide (Norrbom, 2004). They contain medium sized flies with often a characteristic wing patterns (Foote & Steyskal, 1987; White & Elson-Harris, 1992).
    [Show full text]
  • Scope: Munis Entomology & Zoology Publishes a Wide Variety of Papers
    _____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 7, No. 2, June 2012__________ 957 THE FRUIT FLIES (DIPTERA: TEPHRITIDAE) FAUNA OF GAZİANTEP PROVINCE, TURKEY Mehmet Yaran* & Murat Kütük* * Gaziantep University, Faculty of Sciences and Arts, Department of Biology, 27310, Gaziantep – TURKEY. E-mail: [email protected] [Yaran, M. & Kütük, M. 2012. The fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) fauna of Gaziantep province, Turkey. Munis Entomology & Zoology, 7 (2): 957-969] ABSTRACT: This study based on the fruit fly materials collected in Gaziantep province of Turkey in spring and summer months of 2008-2009 years. Twenty-eight species belonging to 12 genera from 4 subfamilies of fruit flies were determined in the study region. Figures of wing patterns and zoogeographic distribution of each species are given. KEY WORDS: Fruit flies, Tephritidae, Fauna, Gaziantep, Turkey. The fruit flies (Tephritidae) are one of the families of the acalyptrate Diptera, numbering over 4300 valid species worldwide (Norrbom, 2004). Many species of fruit flies, especially the subfamily Tephritinae, develop in plants of the family Asteraceae (Freidberg & Kugler, 1989). Some species of Tephritidae infest the flowerheads of Asteraceae hosts, collectively belonging to several tribes, with or without the induction of galls. Some species induce the formations of galls in flower heads, stems, or roots of Asteraceae (Freidberg & Kugler, 1989). Görmez (2011) reported 115 species of fruit flies from Turkey on his M. Sc. thesis. And then Kütük et al. (2011a) described a new species of Terellia (Terellia askaleensis) from Turkey. Kütük et al. (2011b) described a new species of Tephritis (Tephritis ozaslani) from Turkey. So far 117 species of fruit flies are recorded in Turkey.
    [Show full text]
  • Dipterists Forum
    BULLETIN OF THE Dipterists Forum Bulletin No. 84 Autumn 2017 Affiliated to the British Entomological and Natural History Society Bulletin No. 84 Autumn 2017 ISSN 1358-5029 Editorial panel Bulletin Editor Darwyn Sumner Assistant Editor Judy Webb Dipterists Forum Officers Chairman Rob Wolton Vice Chairman Howard Bentley Secretary Amanda Morgan Meetings Treasurer Phil Brighton Please use the Booking Form downloadable from our website Membership Sec. John Showers Field Meetings Field Meetings Sec. vacancy Now organised by several different contributors, contact the Secretary. Indoor Meetings Sec. Martin Drake Publicity Officer Erica McAlister Workshops & Indoor Meetings Organiser Conservation Officer vacant Martin Drake [email protected] Ordinary Members Bulletin contributions Stuart Ball, Malcolm Smart, Peter Boardman, Victoria Burton, Please refer to guide notes in this Bulletin for details of how to contribute and send your material to both of the following: Tony Irwin, Martin Harvey, Chris Raper Dipterists Bulletin Editor Unelected Members Darwyn Sumner 122, Link Road, Anstey, Charnwood, Leicestershire LE7 7BX. Dipterists Digest Editor Peter Chandler Tel. 0116 212 5075 [email protected] Secretary Assistant Editor Amanda Morgan Judy Webb Pennyfields, Rectory Road, Middleton, Saxmundham, Suffolk, IP17 3NW 2 Dorchester Court, Blenheim Road, Kidlington, Oxon. OX5 2JT. [email protected] Tel. 01865 377487 [email protected] Treasurer Phil Brighton [email protected] Dipterists Digest contributions Deposits for DF organised field meetings to be sent to the Treasurer Dipterists Digest Editor Conservation Peter Chandler Robert Wolton (interim contact, whilst the post remains vacant) 606B Berryfield Lane, Melksham, Wilts SN12 6EL Tel. 01225-708339 Locks Park Farm, Hatherleigh, Oakhampton, Devon EX20 3LZ [email protected] Tel.
    [Show full text]