DOCSLIB.ORG

European Chafer Beetle in the Metro Vancouver Region Disclaimer

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
European Chafer Beetle in the Metro Vancouver Region Disclaimer Amphimallon majale BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR European Chafer Beetle in the Metro Vancouver Region Disclaimer This publication is not intended to endorse or recommend Copyright to this publication is owned by the Metro any particular product material or service provider, nor is Vancouver Regional District (“Metro Vancouver”). it intended as a substitute for engineering, legal, or other Permission to reproduce this publication, or any professional advice. Such advice should be sought from substantial part of it, is granted only for personal, non- qualified professionals. commercial, educational and informational purposes, provided that the publication is not modified or altered While the information in this publication is believed to and provided that this copyright notice and disclaimer be accurate, this publication and all of the information is included in any such production or reproduction. contained in it are provided “as is” without warranty of any Otherwise, no part of this publication may be reproduced kind, whether express or implied. All implied warranties, except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright including, without limitation, implied warranties of Act, as amended or replaced from time to time. merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, are expressly disclaimed by Metro Vancouver. The material provided in this publication is intended for educational and informational purposes only. Created by: Metro Vancouver and the Invasive Species Council of Metro Vancouver In partnership with: The Invasive Species Council of British Columbia Diamond Head Consulting Requested by: Metro Vancouver’s Regional Planning Advisory Committee – Invasive Species Subcommittee 4730 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, V5H 0C6 metrovancouver.org March 2019 Contents Introduction ___________________________________________________________________ 4 Regulatory Status _______________________________________________________________ 4 Impacts ______________________________________________________________________ 4 Reproduction and Spread _________________________________________________________ 5 Habitat and Distribution __________________________________________________________ 6 Identification ___________________________________________________________________ 7 Similar Species _________________________________________________________________ 9 Tracking ______________________________________________________________________ 10 Reporting_____________________________________________________________________ 10 Prevention and Control Strategies _______________________________________________ 10 Prevention: Imperative ___________________________________________________________ 11 Biological: Recommended ________________________________________________________ 11 Cultural: Recommended _________________________________________________________ 14 Chemical: Caution _____________________________________________________________ 15 Manual/Mechanical: Not Recommended _____________________________________________ 17 Disposal _____________________________________________________________________ 17 On Site Disposal _______________________________________________________________ 17 Off Site Disposal _______________________________________________________________ 18 Cleaning and Disinfection ________________________________________________________ 18 Follow-Up Monitoring __________________________________________________________ 19 Restoration ___________________________________________________________________ 19 References ____________________________________________________________________20 Additional Resources __________________________________________________________ 22 Acknowledgements ____________________________________________________________ 22 Best Management Practices for European Chafer Beetle in the Metro Vancouver Region 3 CREDIT: DAVID CAPPAERT, BUGWOOD.ORG Introduction The impacts of invasive species on ecological, human and European chafer beetle in British Columbia, it is anticipated economic health are of concern in the Metro Vancouver that the recommended best management practices may region. Successful control of invasive species requires change over time and this document will be updated. Please concerted and targeted efforts by many players. This check metrovancouver.org regularly to obtain the most document – “Best Management Practices for European recent version of these best management practices. Chafer Beetle in the Metro Vancouver Region” – is one of a series of species-specific guides developed for use by REGULATORY STATUS practitioners (e.g., local government staff, crews, project managers, contractors, consultants, developers, stewardship Section 2 (1) (b) (iii) of the Community Charter, Spheres groups and others who have a role in invasive species of Concurrent Jurisdiction – Environment and Wildlife management) in the region. Together, these best practices Regulation, states that “municipalities may regulate, provide a compendium of guidance that has been tested prohibit and impose requirements in relation to control locally by researchers and operational experts. and eradication of alien invasive species”, which includes European chafer beetle. The European chafer beetle was first recorded in British Columbia in 2001 in lawns and turf along boulevards (City of New Westminster 2018). It has since spread to many IMPACTS communities in the Metro Vancouver region and best The European chafer beetle has been found in turf, practices for identifying and managing the European horticulture, and field crops in Eastern North America. These chafer beetle have advanced rapidly. Academic institutions, beetles have damaged turfgrass lawns and sports fields government, and non-government organizations continue throughout the Metro Vancouver region (BC AGRI 2016). to study this species in British Columbia. As researchers and The larvae eat fibrous grass roots, which damages the grass practitioners learn more about the biology and control of plant. This damage is mostly caused by the third and final 4 Best Management Practices for European Chafer Beetle in the Metro Vancouver Region instar grubs in the fall and early spring, but damage can The primary food source for grubs is turfgrass, however if be masked by the abundant moisture at these times (BC grubs are numerous and food is scarce, they may move on to AGRI 2016). The grass often feels spongy if there is a heavy the fibrous roots of planted crops, including corn, potatoes, infestation (CNLA and WCTA n.d.). Drier weather can make blueberries, strawberries, conifers, and other crop roots (BC damage more apparent, creating brown, dying patches AGRI 2016). They can also cause damage to ornamental and in the lawn. The grubs have a strong scent, which attracts nursery plants by reducing their root system; relatively small birds and medium-sized mammals (e.g., crows, skunks, infestations can cause extensive root loss when plants are racoons, etc.). These predators tear up lawns to consume containerized (Purdue University 2013). grubs. Photos of chafer beetle damage versus damage by While adult beetles may be active and visible (at dusk) both predators are shown below. on the lawn and in nearby trees in the month of June, this life stage does not eat and the adults do not actually cause damage to the lawns (BC AGRI 2016). REPRODUCTION AND SPREAD European chafer beetles go through several life stages over the course of a year. As illustrated on page 6, adult beetles emerge in July. The grubs moult twice over eight weeks and the mature grubs continue to feed throughout the fall. In the The difference winter, they generally remain within 5 cm of the soil surface, between grass except during periods of freezing conditions when they will damaged by dig deeper (BC AGRI 2016). During freezing conditions, chafer beetle they have been known to dig up to 1 m below the surface grubs (top) and (Denbow 2017), but rarely go deeper than 10 cm in Metro by vertebrates Vancouver (LeDoux 2017). Lawns are most susceptible to consuming the damage in fall and winter as birds and mammals search grubs (bottom). for and consume the grubs. The remaining grubs begin to CREDIT: BC AGRI feed again in the spring until April, when they transform into 2016 pupae. The adults emerge in late May and June and fly to nearby tall trees (BC AGRI 2016), telephone poles, peaks of houses and other vertical structures to mate (LeDoux 2017). They mate in swarms at dusk, then the females return to nearby exposed soil and typically deposit between 20 to 50 eggs (CNLA and WCTA n.d.) (BC AGRI 2016). Adults don’t eat, and die shortly after first leaving the soil (Purdue University 2013). Males die shortly after mating, while females die shortly after laying their eggs (LeDoux 2017). Best Management Practices for European Chafer Beetle in the Metro Vancouver Region 5 The Lifecycle of the European Chafer Beetle CREDIT: CITY OF RICHMOND (ADAPTED FROM LANDSCAPE ONTARIO HORTICULTURAL TRADES ASSOCIATION) The European chafer beetles’ short life cycle can lead to The European chafer beetle was first found in British a rapidly increasing population if not managed (City of Columbia in New Westminster in 2001, in lawns and turf Vancouver 2017). along boulevards (City of New Westminster 2018). Their 1-year life cycle has allowed them to spread relatively quickly The spread of European chafer beetle can be accelerated throughout the region. The European chafer beetle is by the use of infested soil and turf, plants, and landscaping currently
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Plant Viruses
    Western Plant Diagnostic Network1 First Detector News A Quarterly Pest Update for WPDN First Detectors Spring 2015 edition, volume 8, number 2 In this Issue Page 1: Editor’s Note Dear First Detectors, Pages 2 – 3: Intro to Plant Plant viruses cause many important plant diseases and are Viruses responsible for huge losses in crop production and quality in Page 4: Virus nomenclature all parts of the world. Plant viruses can spread very quickly because many are vectored by insects such as aphids and Page 5 – Most Serious World Plant Viruses & Symptoms whitefly. They are a major pest of crop production as well as major pests of home gardens. By mid-summer many fields, Pages 6 – 7: Plant Virus vineyards, orchards, and gardens will see the effects of plant Vectors viruses. The focus of this edition is the origin, discovery, taxonomy, vectors, and the effects of virus infection in Pages 7 - 10: Grapevine plants. There is also a feature article on grapevine viruses. Viruses And, as usual, there are some pest updates from the West. Page 10: Pest Alerts On June 16 – 18, the WPDN is sponsoring the second Invasive Snail and Slug workshop at UC Davis. The workshop Contact us at the WPDN Regional will be recorded and will be posted on the WPDN and NPDN Center at UC Davis: home pages. Have a great summer and here’s hoping for Phone: 530 754 2255 rain! Email: [email protected] Web: https://wpdn.org Please find the NPDN family of newsletters at: Editor: Richard W. Hoenisch @Copyright Regents of the Newsletters University of California All Rights Reserved Western Plant Diagnostic Network News Plant Viruses 2 Ag, Manitoba Photo courtesy Photo Food, and Rural Initiatives and Food, of APS Photo by Giovanni Martelli, U of byBari Giovanni Photo Grapevine Fanleaf Virus Peanut leaf with Squash Mosaic Virus tomato spotted wilt virus Viruses are infectious pathogens that are too small to be seen with a light microscope, but despite their small size they can cause chaos.
    [Show full text]
  • ANNUAL REPORT 2020 Plant Protection & Conservation Programs
    Oregon Department of Agriculture Plant Protection & Conservation Programs ANNUAL REPORT 2020 www.oregon.gov/ODA Plant Protection & Conservation Programs Phone: 503-986-4636 Website: www.oregon.gov/ODA Find this report online: https://oda.direct/PlantAnnualReport Publication date: March 2021 Table Tableof Contents of Contents ADMINISTRATION—4 Director’s View . 4 Retirements: . 6 Plant Protection and Conservation Programs Staff . 9 NURSERY AND CHRISTMAS TREE—10 What Do We Do? . 10 Christmas Tree Shipping Season Summary . 16 Personnel Updates . .11 Program Overview . 16 2020: A Year of Challenge . .11 New Rule . 16 Hawaii . 17 COVID Response . 12 Mexico . 17 Funding Sources . 13 Nursery Research Assessment Fund . 14 IPPM-Nursery Surveys . 17 Phytophthora ramorum Nursery Program . 14 National Traceback Investigation: Ralstonia in Oregon Nurseries . 18 Western Horticultural Inspection Society (WHIS) Annual Meeting . 19 HEMP—20 2020 Program Highlights . 20 2020 Hemp Inspection Annual Report . 21 2020 Hemp Rule-making . 21 Table 1: ODA Hemp Violations . 23 Hemp Testing . .24 INSECT PEST PREVENTION & MANAGEMENT—25 A Year of Personnel Changes-Retirements-Promotions High-Tech Sites Survey . .33 . 26 Early Detection and Rapid Response for Exotic Bark Retirements . 27 and Ambrosia Beetles . 33 My Unexpected Career With ODA . .28 Xyleborus monographus Early Detection and Rapid Response (EDRR) Trapping . 34 2020 Program Notes . .29 Outreach and Education . 29 Granulate Ambrosia Beetle and Other Wood Boring Insects Associated with Creosoting Plants . 34 New Detections . .29 Japanese Beetle Program . .29 Apple Maggot Program . .35 Exotic Fruit Fly Survey . .35 2018 Program Highlights . .29 Japanese Beetle Eradication . .30 Grasshopper and Mormon Cricket Program . .35 Grasshopper Outbreak Response – Harney County .
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Invasive Species Action Plan
    Oregon Invasive Species Action Plan June 2005 Martin Nugent, Chair Wildlife Diversity Coordinator Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife PO Box 59 Portland, OR 97207 (503) 872-5260 x5346 FAX: (503) 872-5269 [email protected] Kev Alexanian Dan Hilburn Sam Chan Bill Reynolds Suzanne Cudd Eric Schwamberger Risa Demasi Mark Systma Chris Guntermann Mandy Tu Randy Henry 7/15/05 Table of Contents Chapter 1........................................................................................................................3 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 What’s Going On?........................................................................................................................................ 3 Oregon Examples......................................................................................................................................... 5 Goal............................................................................................................................................................... 6 Invasive Species Council................................................................................................................. 6 Statute ........................................................................................................................................................... 6 Functions .....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Supplementary Material
    Parisi F, Lombardi F, Marziliano PA, Russo D, De Cristofaro A, Marchetti M, Tognetti R (2020). Diversity of saproxylic beetle communities in chestnut agroforestry systems iForest – Biogeosciences and Forestry – doi: 10.3832/ifor3478-013 Supplementary Material Fig. S1 - Differences of means for the occurring forms of MHs through the application of a Tukey test. In detail, if an interval does not contain the zero value, then the corresponding means are significantly different. s1 Parisi F, Lombardi F, Marziliano PA, Russo D, De Cristofaro A, Marchetti M, Tognetti R (2020). Diversity of saproxylic beetle communities in chestnut agroforestry systems iForest – Biogeosciences and Forestry – doi: 10.3832/ifor3478-013 Tab. S1 - List of species of Coleoptera and number of specimens collected from young coppice (YC), mature coppice (MC) and traditional fruit orchard (TO). IUCN = Red List Categories (Audisio et al. 2015). LC = Least Concern, NT = Near Threatened, VU = Vulnerable, EN = Endangered, DD = Data Deficient. CT = Trophic Categories. XY = xylophagous (also on healthy trees), SX = saproxylophagous (on dead wood and woody rotting material, including woodmould), PR = predator (as larvae and/or adults) of Sx/xy or of other saproxylic insects, MY = mycophagous (on hyphae of saproxylic fungi or yeasts, and myxomycetes, mostly under bark), MB = mycetobiontic on carpophora of large Polyporales and other fungi living on old trees and stumps, NI (CO) = inhabiting birds’ and small mammals’ nests in hollow trees, CO = commensal of Sx/xy or of other saproxylic insects, SF = sap-feeder on trees attacked by xy, SP = saprophytophagous (on dead vegetal rotting material associated with dead wood debris) (Audisio et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenetic Relationships and Distribution of the Rhizotrogini (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae, Melolonthinae) in the West Mediterranean
    Graellsia, 59(2-3): 443-455 (2003) PHYLOGENETIC RELATIONSHIPS AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE RHIZOTROGINI (COLEOPTERA, SCARABAEIDAE, MELOLONTHINAE) IN THE WEST MEDITERRANEAN Mª. M. Coca-Abia* ABSTRACT In this paper, the West Mediterranean genera of Rhizotrogini are reviewed. Two kinds of character sets are discussed: those relative to the external morphology of the adult and those of the male and female genitalia. Genera Amadotrogus Reitter, 1902; Amphimallina Reitter, 1905; Amphimallon Berthold, 1827; Geotrogus Guérin-Méneville, 1842; Monotropus Erichson, 1847; Pseudoapeterogyna Escalera, 1914 and Rhizotrogus Berthold, 1827 are analysed: to demonstrate the monophyly of this group of genera; to asses the realtionships of these taxa; to test species transferred from Rhizotrogus to Geotrogus and Monotropus, and to describe external morphological and male and female genitalic cha- racters which distinguish each genus. Phylogenetic analysis leads to the conclusion that this group of genera is monophyletic. However, nothing can be said about internal relationships of the genera, which remain in a basal polytomy. Some of the species tranferred from Rhizotrogus are considered to be a new genus Firminus. The genera Amphimallina and Pseudoapterogyna are synonymized with Amphimallon and Geotrogus respectively. Key words: Taxonomy, nomenclature, review, Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae, Melolonthinae, Rhizotrogini, Amadotrogus, Amphimallon, Rhizotrogus, Geotrogus, Pseudoapterogyna, Firminus, Mediterranean basin. RESUMEN Relaciones filogenéticas y distribución de
    [Show full text]
  • PCR-Based Gut Content Analysis to Identify Arthropod Predators of Haplodiplosis Marginata by Rowley, C., Cherrill, A.J., Leather, S.R., Mccormack, A., Skarp, J.E
    PCR-based gut content analysis to identify arthropod predators of Haplodiplosis marginata by Rowley, C., Cherrill, A.J., Leather, S.R., McCormack, A., Skarp, J.E. and Pope, T.W. Copyright, Publisher and Additional Information: This is the author accepted manuscript. The final published version (version of record) is available online via Elsevier Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2017.10.003 Rowley, C., Cherrill, A.J., Leather, S.R., McCormack, A., Skarp, J.E. and Pope, T.W. 2017. PCR‐based gut content analysis to identify arthropod predators of Haplodiplosis marginata, 115, pp.112‐118. 1 PCR-based gut content analysis to identify arthropod predators of Haplodiplosis 2 marginata 3 4 Charlotte Rowley1*, Andrew J. Cherrill1, Simon R. Leather1, Alexander W. McCormack1, 5 Janetta E. Skarp2, & Tom W. Pope1 6 7 1Centre for Integrated Pest Management, Harper Adams University, Newport, Shropshire 8 TF10 8NB, UK 9 2Imperial College London, Kensington, London SW7 2AZ, UK 10 11 *Correspondence: Charlotte Rowley, Centre for Integrated Pest Management, Harper Adams 12 University, Newport, Shropshire TF10 8NB, UK. E-mail: [email protected] 13 14 Keywords Natural enemies, IPM, cereals, primers, Cecidomyiidae 15 Running Title PCR-based H. marginata gut content analysis 16 17 Abstract 18 Saddle gall midge (Haplodiplosis marginata) is a cereal pest exhibiting sporadic outbreaks 19 for which chemical control options are limited. Integrated Pest Management programs may 20 offer a means of suppressing H. marginata outbreaks, reducing pesticide input. Many IPM 21 programs benefit from the natural population suppression inflicted through predation and 22 parasitism.
    [Show full text]
  • Masked Chafer (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) Grubs in Turfgrass
    Journal of Integrated Pest Management (2016) 7(1): 3; 1–11 doi: 10.1093/jipm/pmw002 Profile Biology, Ecology, and Management of Masked Chafer (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) Grubs in Turfgrass S. Gyawaly,1,2 A. M. Koppenho¨fer,3 S. Wu,3 and T. P. Kuhar1 1Virginia Tech, Department of Entomology, 216 Price Hall, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0319 ([email protected]; [email protected]), 2Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected], and 3Rutgers University, Department of Entomology, Thompson Hall, 96 Lipman Drive, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8525 ([email protected]; [email protected]) Received 22 October 2015; Accepted 11 January 2016 Abstract Downloaded from Masked chafers are scarab beetles in the genus Cyclocephala. Their larvae (white grubs) are below-ground pests of turfgrass, corn, and other agricultural crops. In some regions, such as the Midwestern United States, they are among the most important pest of turfgrass, building up in high densities and consuming roots below the soil/thatch interface. Five species are known to be important pests of turfgrass in North America, including northern masked chafer, Cyclocephala borealis Arrow; southern masked chafer, Cyclocephala lurida Bland [for- http://jipm.oxfordjournals.org/ merly Cyclocephala immaculata (Olivier)]; Cyclocephala pasadenae (Casey); Cyclocephala hirta LeConte; and Cyclocephala parallela Casey. Here we discuss their life history, ecology, and management. Key words: Turfgrass IPM, white grub, Cyclocephala, masked chafer Many species of scarabs are pests of turfgrass in the larval stage southern Ohio, and Maryland. The two species have overlapping (Table 1). Also known as white grubs, larvae of these species feed distributions throughout the Midwest, particularly in the central on grass roots and damage cultivated turfgrasses.
    [Show full text]
  • Histoires Naturelles N°16 Histoires Naturelles N°16
    Histoires Naturelles n°16 Histoires Naturelles n°16 Essai de liste des Coléoptères de France Cyrille Deliry - Avril 2011 ! - 1 - Histoires Naturelles n°16 Essai de liste des Coléoptères de France Les Coléoptères forment l"ordre de plus diversifié de la Faune avec près de 400000 espèces indiquées dans le Monde. On en compte près de 20000 en Europe et pus de 9600 en France. Classification des Coléoptères Lawrence J.F. & Newton A.F. 1995 - Families and subfamilies of Coleoptera (with selected genera, notes, references and data on family-group names) In : Biology, Phylogeny, and Classification of Coleoptera. - éd. J.Pakaluk & S.A Slipinski, Varsovie : 779-1006. Ordre Coleoptera Sous-ordre Archostemata - Fam. Ommatidae, Crowsoniellidae, Micromathidae, Cupedidae Sous-ordre Myxophaga - Fam. Lepiceridae, Torridincolidae, Hydroscaphidae, Microsporidae Sous-ordre Adephaga - Fam. Gyrinidae, Halipidae, Trachypachidae, Noteridae, Amphizoidae, Hygrobiidae, Dytiscidae, Rhysodidae, Carabidae (Carabinae, Cicindelinae, Trechinae...) Sous-ordre Polyphaga Série Staphyliniformia - Superfam. Hydrophyloidea, Staphylinoidea Série Scarabaeiformia - Fam. Lucanidae, Passalidae, Trogidae, Glaresidae, Pleocmidae, Diphyllostomatidae, Geotrupidae, Belohinidae, Ochodaeidae, Ceratocanthidae, Hybrosoridae, Glaphyridae, Scarabaridea (Scarabaeinae, Melolonthinae, Cetoniinae...) Série Elateriformia - Superfam. Scirtoidea, Dascilloidea, Buprestoidea (Buprestidae), Byrrhoidea, Elateroidea (Elateridae, Lampyridae, Cantharidae...) + Incertae sedis - Fam. Podabrocephalidae, Rhinophipidae
    [Show full text]
  • Том 15. Вып. 1 Vol. 15. No. 1
    РОССИЙСКАЯ АКАДЕМИЯ НАУК Южный научный центр RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Southern Scientific Centre CAUCASIAN ENTOMOLOGICAL BULLETIN Том 15. Вып. 1 Vol. 15. No. 1 Ростов-на-Дону 2019 Кавказский энтомологический бюллетень 15(1): 61–106 © Caucasian Entomological Bulletin 2019 Фауна пластинчатоусых жуков (Coleoptera: Scarabaeoidea) Азербайджана The fauna of lamellicorn beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeoidea) of Azerbaijan © И.В. Шохин © I.V. Shokhin Федеральный исследовательский центр Южный научный центр Российской академии наук, пр. Чехова, 41, Ростов-на-Дону 344006 Россия Federal Research Centre the Southern Scientific Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Chekhov str., 41, Rostov-on-Don 344006 Russia. E-mail: [email protected] Ключевые слова: Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea, фауна, Азербайджан, Кавказ, каталог. Key words: Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea, fauna, Azerbaijan, Caucasus, catalogue. Резюме. На основании литературных и Abstract. A checklist of the Scarabaeoidea of коллекционных данных впервые составлен список Azerbaijan is given for the first time. In total298 species надсемейства Scarabaeoidea фауны Азербайджана. and 12 subspecies of scrarab beetles are registered Список почти в 2 раза увеличивает количество for Azerbaijan, from which Sinodendron cylindricum отмеченных в страны таксонов: если в 2004 году (Linnaeus, 1758), Bodilus insperatus (Petrovitz, 1967) and их число оценивалось в 162 вида, то к настоящему Amphimallon circassicum Brenske, 1894 are recorded for времени зарегистрировано не менее 298 видов и the country for the first time. In addition 4 species are 12 подвидов, кроме того, еще 4 вида известны с этой known only by the original descriptions. The following территории только по первоописанию; 33 таксона species are distributed in border areas of Russia, Georgia, обитают в пограничных районах и могут быть Armenia, Iran, and can be found in Azerbaijan in future найдены в Азербайджане.
    [Show full text]
  • Minnesota's Top 124 Terrestrial Invasive Plants and Pests
    Photo by RichardhdWebbWebb 0LQQHVRWD V7RS 7HUUHVWULDO,QYDVLYH 3ODQWVDQG3HVWV 3ULRULWLHVIRU5HVHDUFK Sciencebased solutions to protect Minnesota’s prairies, forests, wetlands, and agricultural resources Contents I. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1 II. Prioritization Panel members ....................................................................................................... 4 III. Seventeen criteria, and their relative importance, to assess the threat a terrestrial invasive species poses to Minnesota ...................................................................................................................... 5 IV. Prioritized list of terrestrial invasive insects ................................................................................. 6 V. Prioritized list of terrestrial invasive plant pathogens .................................................................. 7 VI. Prioritized list of plants (weeds) ................................................................................................... 8 VII. Terrestrial invasive insects (alphabetically by common name): criteria ratings to determine threat to Minnesota. .................................................................................................................................... 9 VIII. Terrestrial invasive pathogens (alphabetically by disease among bacteria, fungi, nematodes, oomycetes, parasitic plants, and viruses): criteria ratings
    [Show full text]
  • Тюменской Области the Fauna Of
    Амурский зоологический журнал, 2021, т. XIII, № 1 Amurian Zoological Journal, 2021, vol. XIII, no. 1 www.azjournal.ru УДК 595.764 https://www.doi.org/10.33910/2686-9519-2021-13-1-124-145 http://zoobank.org/References/BD356894-1A58-4739-AB9C-90323A669B2E Фауна пластинчатоусых жуков (Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea) Тюменской области Е. В. Сергеева1, В. А. Столбов2 1 Тобольская комплексная научная станция УрО РАН, ул. академика Ю. Осипова, д. 15, 626150, г. Тобольск, Россия 2 Тюменский государственный университет, ул. Володарского, д. 6, 625003, г. Тюмень, Россия Сведения об авторах Аннотация. В работе приводится аннотированный список Сергеева Елена Викторовна пластинчатоусых жуков (Scarabaeoidea) Тюменской области. В E-mail: [email protected] настоящее время на основе собственных сборов и литературных SPIN-код: 4452-1058 данных на территории области достоверно выявлен 71 вид из 23 родов, Scopus Author ID: 57205367781 ORCID: 0000-0001-5985-2759 14 триб, 11 подсемейств и 4 семейств. Впервые для региона указано 13 видов: Trox scaber (Linnaeus, 1767), Ceruchus chrysomelinus (Hochenwarth, Столбов Виталий Алексеевич 1785), Aphodius immundus Creutzer, 1799, A. luridus (Fabricius, 1775), A. E-mail: [email protected] SPIN-код: 5949-5420 foetens (Fabricius, 1787), A. ictericus (Laicharting, 1781), A. circumcinctus ORCID: 0000-0003-4324-792X W. L. E. Schmidt, 1840, A. varians Duftschmid, 1805, A. haemorrhoidalis (Linnaeus, 1758), A. caspius Ménétriés, 1832, Oxyomus sylvestris (Scopoli, 1763), Onthophagus marginalis (Gebler, 1817) и Amphimallon altaicum (Mannerheim, 1825). Из них O. sylvestris впервые приводится для фауны Права: © Авторы (2021). Опублико- Сибири. вано Российским государственным педагогическим университетом им. А. И. Герцена. Открытый доступ на Ключевые слова: фауна, Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea, Тюменская область, условиях лицензии CC BY-NC 4.0.
    [Show full text]
  • White Grubs (Japanese Beetle, May/June Beetle, Masked Chafer, Green June Beetle, European Chafer, Asiatic Garden Beetle, Oriental Beetle, Black Turfgrass Ataenius)
    White Grubs (Japanese Beetle, May/June Beetle, Masked Chafer, Green June Beetle, European Chafer, Asiatic Garden Beetle, Oriental Beetle, Black Turfgrass Ataenius) There are 8 different white grubs that are commonly known to cause turfgrass plant damage. They include the Japanese beetle, May and June beetle, masked chafer, green June beetle, European chafer, Asiatic garden beetle, oriental beetle, and black turfgrass ataenius. They all do the most damage in their larval stage, although some adults can also cause damage. Japanese Beetle (Popillia japonica) Japanese beetles are concentrated mostly in the northeastern and Mid Atlantic states. The Japanese beetle larvae are the primary cause of turf damage. They feed on turfgrass roots, which causes yellowing and a wilting, thinning appearance to the plants. Turf that has been damaged can easily be rolled or lifted back from the soil because the grubs have eaten through the fibrous roots. Typical Japanese beetle raster pattern. Typical Japanese beetle adult. Pictures: http://creatures.ifas.ufl.edu/orn/beetles/Japanese_beetle_02.htm; http://extension.usu.edu/files/publications/factsheet/ENT-100-06PR.pdf; http://ohioline.osu.edu/hyg-fact/2000/2510.html Text: Handbook of Turfgrass Insect Pests by Rick Brandenburg and Michael Villani For more information on Japanese beetles: Ohio State University Extension Fact Sheet – Japanese Beetle http://ohioline.osu.edu/hyg-fact/2000/2504.html University of Maryland – Japanese Beetle http://iaa.umd.edu/umturf/Insects/japanese_beetle.html Utah State University Extension Fact Sheet – Japanese Beetle http://extension.usu.edu/files/publications/factsheet/ENT-100-06PR.pdf University of Florida – Japanese Beetle http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/IN630 May and June Beetles (Phyllophaga species) May and June beetles can be found all across the United States.
    [Show full text]