The Food Insects Newsletter Home
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Grasshoppers
Grasshoppers Orthoptera: Acrididae Plains Lubber Pictured grasshoppers Great crested grasshopper Snakeweed grasshoppers Primary Pest Grasshoppers • Migratory grasshopper • Twostriped grasshopper • Differential grasshopper • Redlegged grasshopper • Clearwinged grasshopper Twostriped Grasshopper, Melanoplus bivittatus Redlegged Grasshopper, Melanoplus femurrubrum Differential Grasshopper, Melanoplus differentialis Migratory Grasshopper, Melanoplus sanguinipes Clearwinged Grasshopper Camnula pellucida Diagram courtesy of Alexandre Latchininsky, University of Wyoming Photograph courtesy of Jean-Francoise Duranton, CIRAD Grasshoppers lay pods of eggs below ground Grasshopper Egg Pods Molting is not Linedfor wimps! bird grasshopper molting to adult stage Grasshopper Nymphs Some grasshoppers found in winter and early spring Velvet-striped grasshopper – a common spring species Grasshopper Controls • Weather (rainfall mediated primarily) • Natural enemies – Predators, diseases • Treatment of breeding areas • Biological controls • Row covers Temperature and rainfall are important mortality factors Grasshoppers and Rainfall Moisture prior to egg hatch generally aids survival – Newly hatched young need succulent foliage Moisture after egg hatch generally reduces problems – Assists spread of diseases – Allows for plenty of food, reducing competition for rangeland and crops Grasshopper predators Robber Flies Larvae of many blister beetles develop on grasshopper egg pods Blister beetle larva Fungus-killed Grasshoppers Pathogen: Entomophthora grylli Mermis -
An Inventory of Short Horn Grasshoppers in the Menoua Division, West Region of Cameroon
AGRICULTURE AND BIOLOGY JOURNAL OF NORTH AMERICA ISSN Print: 2151-7517, ISSN Online: 2151-7525, doi:10.5251/abjna.2013.4.3.291.299 © 2013, ScienceHuβ, http://www.scihub.org/ABJNA An inventory of short horn grasshoppers in the Menoua Division, West Region of Cameroon Seino RA1, Dongmo TI1, Ghogomu RT2, Kekeunou S3, Chifon RN1, Manjeli Y4 1Laboratory of Applied Ecology (LABEA), Department of Animal Biology, Faculty of Science, University of Dschang, P.O. Box 353 Dschang, Cameroon, 2Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture and Agronomic Sciences (FASA), University of Dschang, P.O. Box 222, Dschang, Cameroon. 3 Département de Biologie et Physiologie Animale, Faculté des Sciences, Université de Yaoundé 1, Cameroun 4 Department of Biotechnology and Animal Production, Faculty of Agriculture and Agronomic Sciences (FASA), University of Dschang, P.O. Box 222, Dschang, Cameroon. ABSTRACT The present study was carried out as a first documentation of short horn grasshoppers in the Menoua Division of Cameroon. A total of 1587 specimens were collected from six sites i.e. Dschang (265), Fokoue (253), Fongo – Tongo (267), Nkong – Ni (271), Penka Michel (268) and Santchou (263). Identification of these grasshoppers showed 28 species that included 22 Acrididae and 6 Pyrgomorphidae. The Acrididae belonged to 8 subfamilies (Acridinae, Catantopinae, Cyrtacanthacridinae, Eyprepocnemidinae, Oedipodinae, Oxyinae, Spathosterninae and Tropidopolinae) while the Pyrgomorphidae belonged to only one subfamily (Pyrgomorphinae). The Catantopinae (Acrididae) showed the highest number of species while Oxyinae, Spathosterninae and Tropidopolinae showed only one species each. Ten Acrididae species (Acanthacris ruficornis, Anacatantops sp, Catantops melanostictus, Coryphosima stenoptera, Cyrtacanthacris aeruginosa, Eyprepocnemis noxia, Gastrimargus africanus, Heteropternis sp, Ornithacris turbida, and Trilophidia conturbata ) and one Pyrgomorphidae (Zonocerus variegatus) were collected in all the six sites. -
Invertebrate Distribution and Diversity Assessment at the U. S. Army Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site a Report to the U
Invertebrate Distribution and Diversity Assessment at the U. S. Army Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site A report to the U. S. Army and U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service G. J. Michels, Jr., J. L. Newton, H. L. Lindon, and J. A. Brazille Texas AgriLife Research 2301 Experiment Station Road Bushland, TX 79012 2008 Report Introductory Notes The invertebrate survey in 2008 presented an interesting challenge. Extremely dry conditions prevailed throughout most of the adult activity period for the invertebrates and grass fires occurred several times throughout the summer. By visual assessment, plant resources were scarce compared to last year, with few green plants and almost no flowering plants. Eight habitats and nine sites continued to be sampled in 2008. The Ponderosa pine/ yellow indiangrass site was removed from the study after the low numbers of species and individuals collected there in 2007. All other sites from the 2007 survey were included in the 2008 survey. We also discontinued the collection of Coccinellidae in the 2008 survey, as only 98 individuals from four species were collected in 2007. Pitfall and malaise trapping were continued in the same way as the 2007 survey. Sweep net sampling was discontinued to allow time for Asilidae and Orthoptera timed surveys consisting of direct collection of individuals with a net. These surveys were conducted in the same way as the time constrained butterfly (Papilionidea and Hesperoidea) surveys, with 15-minute intervals for each taxanomic group. This was sucessful when individuals were present, but the dry summer made it difficult to assess the utility of these techniques because of overall low abundance of insects. -
Spur-Throated Grasshoppers of the Canadian Prairies and Northern Great Plains
16 Spur-throated grasshoppers of the Canadian Prairies and Northern Great Plains Dan L. Johnson Research Scientist, Grassland Insect Ecology, Lethbridge Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Box 3000, Lethbridge, AB T1J 4B1, [email protected] The spur-throated grasshoppers have become the most prominent grasshoppers of North Ameri- can grasslands, not by calling attention to them- selves by singing in the vegetation (stridulating) like the slant-faced grasshoppers, or by crackling on the wing (crepitating) like the band-winged grasshoppers, but by virtue of their sheer num- bers, activities and diversity. Almost all of the spur-throated grasshoppers in North America are members of the subfamily Melanoplinae. The sta- tus of Melanoplinae is somewhat similar in South America, where the melanopline Dichroplus takes the dominant role that the genus Melanoplus pated, and hiding in the valleys?) scourge that holds in North America (Cigliano et al. 2000). wiped out so much of mid-western agriculture in The biogeographic relationships are analysed by the 1870’s. Chapco et al. (2001). The grasshoppers are charac- terized by a spiny bump on the prosternum be- Approximately 40 species of grasshoppers in tween the front legs, which would be the position the subfamily Melanoplinae (mainly Tribe of the throat if they had one. This characteristic is Melanoplini) can be found on the Canadian grass- easy to use; I know elementary school children lands, depending on weather and other factors af- who can catch a grasshopper, turn it over for a fecting movement and abundance. The following look and say “melanopline” before grabbing the notes provide a brief look at representative next. -
The Effects of Native and Non-Native Grasses on Spiders, Their Prey, and Their Interactions
Spiders in California’s grassland mosaic: The effects of native and non-native grasses on spiders, their prey, and their interactions by Kirsten Elise Hill A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Environmental Science, Policy, and Management in the GRADUATE DIVISION of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Joe R. McBride, Chair Professor Rosemary G. Gillespie Professor Mary E. Power Spring 2014 © 2014 Abstract Spiders in California’s grassland mosaic: The effects of native and non-native grasses on spiders, their prey, and their interactions by Kirsten Elise Hill Doctor of Philosophy in Environmental Science and Policy Management University of California, Berkeley Professor Joe R. McBride, Chair Found in nearly all terrestrial ecosystems, small in size and able to occupy a variety of hunting niches, spiders’ consumptive effects on other arthropods can have important impacts for ecosystems. This dissertation describes research into spider populations and their interactions with potential arthropod prey in California’s native and non-native grasslands. In meadows found in northern California, native and non-native grassland patches support different functional groups of arthropod predators, sap-feeders, pollinators, and scavengers and arthropod diversity is linked to native plant diversity. Wandering spiders’ ability to forage within the meadow’s interior is linked to the distance from the shaded woodland boundary. Native grasses offer a cooler conduit into the meadow interior than non-native annual grasses during midsummer heat. Juvenile spiders in particular, are more abundant in the more structurally complex native dominated areas of the grassland. -
Elements for the Sustainable Management of Acridoids of Importance in Agriculture
African Journal of Agricultural Research Vol. 7(2), pp. 142-152, 12 January, 2012 Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/AJAR DOI: 10.5897/AJAR11.912 ISSN 1991-637X ©2012 Academic Journals Review Elements for the sustainable management of acridoids of importance in agriculture María Irene Hernández-Zul 1, Juan Angel Quijano-Carranza 1, Ricardo Yañez-López 1, Irineo Torres-Pacheco 1, Ramón Guevara-Gónzalez 1, Enrique Rico-García 1, Adriana Elena Castro- Ramírez 2 and Rosalía Virginia Ocampo-Velázquez 1* 1Department of Biosystems, School of Engineering, Queretaro State University, C.U. Cerro de las Campanas, Querétaro, México. 2Department of Agroecology, Colegio de la Frontera Sur, San Cristóbal de las Casas, Chiapas, México. Accepted 16 December, 2011 Acridoidea is a superfamily within the Orthoptera order that comprises a group of short-horned insects commonly called grasshoppers. Grasshopper and locust species are major pests of grasslands and crops in all continents except Antarctica. Economically and historically, locusts and grasshoppers are two of the most destructive agricultural pests. The most important locust species belong to the genus Schistocerca and populate America, Africa, and Asia. Some grasshoppers considered to be important pests are the Melanoplus species, Camnula pellucida in North America, Brachystola magna and Sphenarium purpurascens in northern and central Mexico, and Oedaleus senegalensis and Zonocerus variegatus in Africa. Previous studies have classified these species based on specific characteristics. This review includes six headings. The first discusses the main species of grasshoppers and locusts; the second focuses on their worldwide distribution; the third describes their biology and life cycle; the fourth refers to climatic factors that facilitate the development of grasshoppers and locusts; the fifth discusses the action or reaction of grasshoppers and locusts to external or internal stimuli and the sixth refers to elements to design management strategies with emphasis on prevention. -
Food Plants of Melanoplus Femurrubrum Femurrubrum (Degeer
FOOD PLANTS OF MELANOPLUS FEMURRUERU?' ^'? URRUBRUM (DEGEER) THE BLUESTEM GRASS REGION OF KANSAS by ORLO KENNETH JANTZ I B. S., Kansas State University, 1957 A MASTER 1 S THESIS submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Entomology KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY Manhattan, Kansas 1962 LD 2(ofc8 T^ \%a ii cm TABLE c £ OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 2 MATERIALS AND METHODS 5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 10 SUMMARY 22 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 77 LITERATURE 78 INTRODUCTION The species of grasshoppers in a given area and their populations are determined to a considerable extent by food plants. Food prefer- ences and relationships of grasshopper species and plant species in pastures of the Great Plains are not well understood. Cage studies on plant food preferences are one of the current phases of the grasshopper project which has been in progress since 1957 and is part of Regional Project NC-52 on factors influencing the distribution and abundance of grasshoppers. The Kansas portion of the project involves a study of a series of habitats within a bluestem grass range, the Donaldson Pastures, near Manhattan, Kansas. Nine pastures, each under different experimental treatments, are studied. Three of these pastures are included in an intensity-of-grazing treat- ment, three in a deferred grazing treatment and three in a time-of- spring-burning treatment. Range sites *ithin each of the nine treat- ments are: limestone breaks, ordinary upland, and clay upland. Axnett (i960) was the initial investigator. Largest grasshopper populations were found on the early spring burned and the heaviest grazed pastures. -
2009 Pinon Canyon Invertebrate Survey Report
"- - 70.096 60.096 50.096 40.096 30.096 20.096 10.096 0.0% Fig. 1 Most abundant Apiformes species calculated as a proportion of the total abundance of Apiformes in the collection period. Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site, 2008. 04% 1 j 0.391> 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% Fig. 2 Least abundant Apiformes species calculated as a proportion of the total abundance of Apiformes in the collection period. Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site, 2008.7 Fig. 3 Most abundant Carabidae species calculated as a proportion of the total abundance of Carabidae in the collection period. Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site, 2008. Fig. 4 Least abundant Carabidae species calculated as a proportion of the total abundance of Carabidae in the collection period. Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site, 2008. Fig. 5 Asilidae species abundance calculated as a proportion of the total abundace of Asilidae in the collection period. Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site, 2008. 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Fig. 6 Butterfly species abundance calculated as a proportion of the total abundance of butterflies in the collection period. Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site, 2008. Fig. 7 Most abundant Orthoptera species calculated as a proportion of the total abundance of Orthoptera in the collection period. Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site, 2008. Fig. 8 Moderately abundant Orthoptera species calculated as a proportion of the total abundance of Orthoptera in the collection period. Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site, 2008. Fig. 9 Least abundant Orthoptera species calculated as a proportion of the total abundance of Orthoptera in the collection period. -
Redlegged Grasshopper
Pest Profile Photo credit: Russ Ottens, University of Georgia, Bugwood.org Common Name: Redlegged Grasshopper Scientific Name: Melanoplus femurrubrum Order and Family: Orthoptera and Acrididae Size and Appearance: Redlegged grasshoppers range in size, from ¾ to 1-inch long. They are variable in color but they can be identified by their reddish-brown color with a yellow underside, their bright red tibia on the hind legs, and a black colored line right behind the eyes. Nymphs resemble the adults, but are smaller in size and have a solid black stripe that runs across the sides of the head and along the sides of the thorax. Length (mm) Appearance Egg Light brown colored; elongate shaped; eggs are laid in soil in clusters in earthen cell; females lay 25-30 eggs in a cluster; hatch late spring to summer. Larva/Nymph 4-6mm, 1st Resemble adults but smaller; have solid black stripe running instar across sides of head and along sides of thorax; wings absent, but have developing wing buds in later instars; 5 instars. Adult 17-30mm Variable in color from yellow, green, dark brown, or reddish brown; yellow underside; bright red tibia on hind legs; black line behind eyes; black herringbone pattern on femur of back legs. Pupa (if applicable) Type of feeder (Chewing, sucking, etc.): Nymphs and Adults: Chewing. Host plant/s: They have a wide range of host plants; grasses particularly favored, but they can also damage garden plants and grain crops. More commonly damaged garden plants include bean, leafy vegetables, corn, soybean, alfalfa, and iris among others. Description of Damage (larvae and adults): Redlegged grasshoppers are leaf chewers primarily feeding on leaves, sometimes causing total defoliation of the host plant leaves by chewing most leaf tissue but leaving the tougher veins. -
This Is Normal Text
NUTRIENT RESOURCES AND STOICHIOMETRY AFFECT THE ECOLOGY OF ABOVE- AND BELOWGROUND INVERTEBRATE CONSUMERS by JAYNE LOUISE JONAS B.S., Wayne State College, 1998 M.S., Kansas State University, 2000 AN ABSTRACT OF A DISSERTATION submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Division of Biology College of Arts and Sciences KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY Manhattan, Kansas 2007 Abstract Aboveground and belowground food webs are linked by plants, but their reciprocal influences are seldom studied. Because phosphorus (P) is the primary nutrient associated with arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) symbiosis, and evidence suggests it may be more limiting than nitrogen (N) for some insect herbivores, assessing carbon (C):N:P stoichiometry will enhance my ability to discern trophic interactions. The objective of this research was to investigate functional linkages between aboveground and belowground invertebrate populations and communities and to identify potential mechanisms regulating these interactions using a C:N:P stoichiometric framework. Specifically, I examine (1) long-term grasshopper community responses to three large-scale drivers of grassland ecosystem dynamics, (2) food selection by the mixed-feeding grasshopper Melanoplus bivittatus, (3) the mechanisms for nutrient regulation by M. bivittatus, (4) food selection by fungivorous Collembola, and (5) the effects of C:N:P on invertebrate community composition and aboveground-belowground food web linkages. In my analysis of grasshopper community responses to fire, bison grazing, and weather over 25 years, I found that all three drivers affected grasshopper community dynamics, most likely acting indirectly through effects on plant community structure, composition and nutritional quality. In a field study, the diet of M. -
Arizona Wildlife Notebook
ARIZONA WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ARIZONA WILDLIFE NOTEBOOK GARRY ROGERS Praise for Arizona Wildlife Notebook “Arizona Wildlife Notebook” by Garry Rogers is a comprehensive checklist of wildlife species existing in the State of Arizona. This notebook provides a brief description for each of eleven (11) groups of wildlife, conservation status of all extant species within that group in Arizona, alphabetical listing of species by common name, scientific names, and room for notes. “The Notebook is a statewide checklist, intended for use by wildlife watchers all over the state. As various individuals keep track of their personal observations of wildlife in their specific locality, the result will be a more selective checklist specific to that locale. Such information would be vitally useful to the State Wildlife Conservation Department, as well as to other local agencies and private wildlife watching groups. “This is a very well-documented snapshot of the status of wildlife species – from bugs to bats – in the State of Arizona. Much of it should be relevant to neighboring states, as well, with a bit of fine-tuning to accommodate additions and deletions to the list. “As a retired Wildlife Biologist, I have to say Rogers’ book is perhaps the simplest to understand, yet most comprehensive in terms of factual information, that I have ever had occasion to peruse. This book should become the default checklist for Arizona’s various state, federal and local conservation agencies, and the basis for developing accurate local inventories by private enthusiasts as well as public agencies. "Arizona Wildlife Notebook" provides a superb starting point for neighboring states who may wish to emulate Garry Rogers’ excellent handiwork. -
Pinon Canyon Report 2007
IIInnnvvveeerrrttteeebbbrrraaattteee DDDiiissstttrrriiibbbuuutttiiiooonnn aaannnddd DDDiiivvveeerrrsssiiitttyyy AAAsssssseeessssssmmmeennnttt aaattt ttthhheee UUU... SSS... AAArrrmmmyyy PPPiiinnnooonnn CCCaaannnyyyooonnn MMMaaannneeeuuuvvveeerrr SSSiiittteee PPPrrreeessseeennnttteeeddd tttooo ttthhheee UUU... SSS... AAArrrmmmyyy aaannnddd UUU... SSS... FFFiiissshhh aaannnddd WWWiiillldddllliiifffeee SSSeeerrrvvviiicceee BBByyy GGG... JJJ... MMMiiiccchhheeelllsss,,, JJJrrr...,,, JJJ... LLL... NNNeeewwwtttooonnn,,, JJJ... AAA... BBBrrraaazzziiilllllleee aaannnddd VVV... AAA... CCCaaarrrnnneeeyyy TTTeeexxxaaasss AAAgggrrriiiLLLiiifffeee RRReeessseeeaaarrrccchhh 222333000111 EEExxxpppeeerrriiimmmeeennnttt SSStttaaatttiiiooonnn RRRoooaaaddd BBBuuussshhhlllaaannnddd,,, TTTXXX 777999000111222 222000000777 RRReeepppooorrttt 1 Introduction Insects fill several ecological roles in the biotic community (Triplehorn and Johnson 2005). Many species are phytophagous, feeding directly on plants; filling the primary consumer role of moving energy stored in plants to organisms that are unable to digest plant material (Triplehorn and Johnson 2005). Insects are responsible for a majority of the pollination that occurs and pollination relationships between host plant and pollinator can be very general with one pollinator pollinating many species of plant or very specific with both the plant and the pollinator dependant on each other for survival (Triplehorn and Johnson 2005). Insects can be mutualist, commensal, parasitic or predatory to the benefit or detriment