FIELD AND FORAGE CROPS Verde Plant Bug (: ) Feeding Injury to Cotton Bolls Characterized by Boll Age, Size, and Damage Ratings

1 2 2 3 J. SCOTT ARMSTRONG, MICHAEL J. BREWER, ROY D. PARKER, AND J. J. ADAMCZYK, JR.

J. Econ. Entomol. 106(1): 189Ð195 (2013); DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1603/EC12018 ABSTRACT The verde plant bug, signatus (Distant), has been present in south Texas for several years but has more recently been documented as an economic threat to cultivated cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. Our studies over 2 yr (2009 and 2010) and two locations (Weslaco and Corpus Christi, TX) investigated feeding-injury of the verde plant bug to a range of cotton boll age classes deÞned by boll diameter and accumulated degree-days (anthesis to the time of infesting) for Þrst-position cotton bolls infested with the plant bugs. The most detrimental damage to younger cotton bolls from verde plant bug feeding was boll abscission. Cotton bolls Ͻ04 accumulating daily degree- days (ACDD), or a boll diameter of 1.3 cm were subject to 60Ð70% higher boll abscission when compared with the noninfested controls. SigniÞcantly higher boll abscission occurred from verde plant bug injured bolls compared with the controls up to 162 ACDD or a mean boll diameter 2.0 cm. Cotton seed weights were signiÞcantly reduced up to 179 ACDD or a boll diameter of 2.0 cm at Weslaco in 2009, and up to 317 ACDD or boll diameter 2.6 cm for Weslaco in 2010 when compared with the noninfested controls. Lint weight per cotton boll for infested and noninfested bolls was signiÞcantly reduced up to 262 ACDD or boll diameter 2.5 for Corpus Christi in 2010 and up to 288 ACCD or boll diameter 2.6 cm for Weslaco, TX, in 2010. Damage ratings (dependant variable) regressed against infested and noninfested seed-cotton weights showed that in every instance, the infested cotton bolls had a strong and signiÞcant relationship with damage ratings for all age classes of bolls. Damage ratings for the infested cotton bolls that did not abscise by harvest showed visual signs of verde plant bug feeding injury and the subsequent development of boll rot; however, these two forms of injury causing lint and seed mass loss are hard to differentiate from open or boll-locked cotton bolls. Based on the results of both lint and seed loss over 2 yr and four studies cotton bolls should be protected up to Ϸ300 ACDD or a boll diameter of 2.5 cm. This equilibrates to bolls that are 12Ð14 d of age dependent upon daily maximum and minimum temperatures.

KEY WORDS , verde plant bug, feeding injury, cotton

True bugs, including mirids and stink bugs, have in- 2011). Observations of the verde plant bug over the creased in importance as signiÞcant pests of cotton in last 10 yr indicate that infestations occur later in the most areas of the cotton belt over the last Þfteen years. cotton season, with young cotton bolls being the most The adoption of transgenic cotton varieties that ef- susceptible to feeding injury. The insertion of the fectively control lepidopteran pests, along with the stylets, probing, and the injection of digestive en- development and use of more target speciÞc insecti- zymes reduce boll growth by damaging the accumu- cides has resulted in an overall reduction in broad lation of assimilates. This results in damage to the spectrum insecticides that may have suppressed or developing lint and seed, or the abscission of the boll. controlled heteropteran species. The Lower Rio The developing lint Þbers are damaged during the Grande Valley (LRGV) and Coastal Bend region of process of probing, but Armstrong et al. (2010) notes south Texas are being challenged with a native mirid that preference in feeding is for the developing ovules. species Creontiades signatus (Distant) recently given The feeding and probing sites also provide for invasive the common name “verde plant bug” (Armstrong pathways for the pathogens that cause boll rot (Arm- strong et al. 2009) where the economic loss caused by these invasive pathogens may be at least equal to, if not 1 Corresponding author: USDAÐARS BeneÞcial Research greater than, that of the feeding injury alone. The Unit, Kika de la Garza Subtropical Agricultural Research Center, 2413 East Highway 83, Weslaco, TX 78596 (e-mail: scott. development of boll rot is dependent upon environ- [email protected]). mental conditions that prevail after the feeding and 2 Texas A & M AgriLife Research and Extension Center, 10345 injury. Highway 44, Corpus Christi, TX, 78406. Crop consultants, extension personnel, and growers 3 USDAÐARS Thad Cochran Southern Horticultural Laboratory Southern Horticultural Research Unit, 810 Highway 26, West, Pop- producing south Texas cotton have posed the question larville, MS 39470. as to when a cotton boll may be mature enough that 190 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY Vol. 106, no. 1 feeding from the verde plant bug will not result in Cotton bolls were infested by enclosing two adult economic damage. The determination of a “boll verde plant bugs on Þrst-position bolls by using a 15 ϫ threshold” that deÞnes when a cotton boll has reached 11.5 cm nylon bag equipped with a draw string (Arm- a point of maturity that insects can no longer cause the strong and Camelo 2005). The bags used for infesting boll to abscise from the plant, or the boll does not and those on the paired controls (no bug enclosed) sustain any economic loss in marketable value to the were left on the plants for 72 h. Each boll was sprayed lint and seed has not been determined. with pyrethrin, (0.02% by volume, United Industries, Our objectives for this study were to deÞne the St. Louis, MO) following the 72 h period. The bags relationship of boll feeding injury of the verde plant were left on the plants until harvest to help prevent bug to cotton boll-age as deÞned by degree-days ac- further damage from other pests. No sex deter- cumulated past anthesis to 1) determine the size and minations were made for the adult verde plant bugs. age of the cotton boll at which time abscission or lint When the infested and noninfested cotton bolls and seed damage from verde bugs is no longer signif- reached harvestable maturity, all were noted as pres- icant, and 2) assess the extent of damage to lint and ent or aborted and taken to the laboratory. The lint seed cotton caused by feeding injury and resulting boll and the seed were hand separated from each boll that rot. The results will help producers gain a knowledge remained on the plant. A subjective damage rating base for determining when management strategies system (0Ð4) developed by Lei et al. (2003) was used (i.e., insecticides applications) can be justiÞably ter- to categorize the damage at the time of harvest for the minated. bolls that remained on the plant. The damage ratings ranged from 0.0 for no damage to any of the locules from each boll, to a rating of 4.0 where feeding injury Materials and Methods and or boll rot affected all four locules. Bolls that were Experimental Design and Factors. Studies were aborted at harvest were given a damage score of 4. conducted at both the USDAÐARS (Agriculture Ser- Because the southern portion of Texas remains under vice Review) research farm, Weslaco, TX, and the active boll weevil eradication, the studies at Weslaco, Texas A & M AgriLife Research and Extension Center, TX, were conducted under large screen cages to pre- Corpus Christi, TX, during the 2009 and 2010 cotton vent the establishment of boll weevils, and to prevent growing seasons. At these sites, Þrst-position cotton the necessity of spraying the cotton with ULV Mala- bolls of FiberMax 840B2RF were identiÞed at white thion. Verde plant bugs used to infest Þrst position bloom (Þrst day of anthesis), so that a treatment rep- cotton bolls were either collected from cowpeas, resented infested (verde plant bugs enclosed with a ÔTexas PinkeyeÕ (Vigna unguiculata L.) planted at the bag) and noninfested (bolls enclosed with a bag but USDAÐARS research farm just south of Weslaco, TX, no insect) cotton bolls of a speciÞc age as deÞned by or reared at the USDAÐARS laboratory (Weslaco, accumulated degree-days and size. Bolls were tagged TX). Collected insects were kept in plexi-glass cages and infested from 1 to 2 times a week so that a range overnight on cowpeas before being used to infest. of sizes were available for infesting at known boll ages. Only healthy unsexed adults, with all appendages in- First-position cotton bolls were used for uniformity tact, were used for infesting cotton bolls. and because they are a signiÞcant portion of the total Statistical Analysis. The measured variables per- yield (Jenkins et al. 1990). centage boll abscission, seed weight per boll, and An experimental plot used for infesting cotton bolls lint weight per boll were compared using PROC with verde plant bugs was deÞned as the four rows of GLIMMIX (SAS Institute 2003) procedure for the cotton, 10 m in length, but only the center two rows Þxed effects of treatment (infested and noninfested) were used for tagging and infesting. Four to six blocks and the ACDD using the LS MEANS Statement. The containing sets of replicate plots for the date of in- LS MEANS were adjusted using TukeyÐKramerÕs sig- festing cotton bolls were used to infest across a range niÞcance test (␣ ϭ 0.05). Further interactions for lint of boll ages. Boll age was determined by accumulating weights and seed weights were examined using the daily degree-days (ACDD; 60ЊF base temperature) SLICE option of the LS MEANS statement for test from anthesis to the time of infesting (Bagwell and effects of treatment (infested vs. noninfested) by Tugwell 1992). Boll diameter was measured along the ACDD, sliced by ACDD. Because of the subjective diagonal from the locules at the widest point with nature of the damage scores, infested and noninfested calipers at the time of infesting. For each infesting bolls were compared using one-way nonparametric date, a minimum of 25 white-blooms per replicate statistics (PROC NPAR1WAY) for the overall model, (100Ð150 total across replicates) that exhibited an- and by each age class as deÞned by ACDD at the time thesis were identiÞed with color coded tags secured of infesting. SigniÞcance between the infested and with cotton strings placed around the main stem and control cotton bolls was detected by the using the pedicle of Þrst position white-blooms. The color of the KruskalÐWallis type of ␹2 Likelihood ratio test (␣ ϭ tag identiÞed the date of infesting. Blooms were 0.05) (SAS Institute 2003). We further examined the tagged 1Ð2 times a week depending upon progress of linear relationship (PROC REG) of damage score (de- growth and the availability of Þrst-position cotton pendent variable) and the seed cotton yield (seed blooms from each plot. The number of boll age classes weights ϩ lint weights, independent variable) for each varied from 5 to 9 wk by location and year depending location and year of the study with ACDD used as the upon weather and resources. independent variable. February 2013 ARMSTRONG ET AL.: VERDE PLANT BUG INJURY TO COTTON BOLLS 191

Fig. 1. Percentage (ϮSE) of abscised cotton bolls for (A) Weslaco, TX, 2009; (B) Corpus Christi, TX, 2009; (C) Weslaco, TX, 2010; (D) Corpus Christi, TX, 2010, infested with verde plant bugs, and noninfested Þrst-position cotton bolls. Accu- mulated degree-days (ACDD) were calculated from the time of anthesis to the time of infesting; double asterisks above abscission percentages designate signiÞcance of TukeyÐKramer adjusted LS means for infested and noninfested bolls means within ACDD (P ϭ 0.01).

Results The 2010 growing season contrasted the 2009 season for Weslaco and Corpus Christi because precipitation Cotton Boll Abscission. The overall Þxed effects for was much higher as a result of tropical storms (43.5 and boll abscission for infested versus noninfested (F ϭ 96.4; P Ͼ 0.001; df ϭ 1, 29) and the interaction of 44.5 cm, respectively), especially for the second por- ϭ Ͻ tion of during boll set. The treatment effects of in- infested versus noninfested * ACDD (F 24.69; P ϭ Ͼ 0.001; df ϭ 14, 29) was signiÞcant for cotton bolls from fested versus noninfested (F 23.48; P 0.01; df 1, 38) and the interaction terms for infested versus nonin- the Weslaco location in 2009 (Fig. 1A). Younger cot- ϭ Ͻ ton bolls, Ͻ40 ACDDs from anthesis (Ͻ1.1 cm in fested * ACDD (F 7.46; P 0.01; df 6, 38) were also diameter) were signiÞcantly damaged by verde plant signiÞcant for Weslaco 2010 site (Fig. 1C). The com- bug feeding for the Weslaco in 2009. Boll abscission bined damage from feeding injury and boll rot caused ranged from Ͼ60% for the smallest bolls to Ͻ10% for bolls to abort for up to 317 ACDD; however, there bolls that were 158 ACDDs. There were no bolls that were no signiÞcant differences in abscission for in- abscised for either verde plant bug infested or the fested bolls compared with controls for the last two controls for bolls Ͼ179 ACDD or Ͼ1.9 cm in diameter, age classes of 187 and 317 ACDD, or boll diameters of and for up to 610 ACDDs for the last infestation date 2.1 and 2.6 cm, respectively. Finally, the treatment and for Weslaco in 2009. The Þxed effects for Corpus main effect interaction (infested vs. noninfested, F ϭ Christi in 2009 for infested versus noninfested (F ϭ 10.41, P Ͼ 0.003, df ϭ 1, 22; infested vs. noninfested * 15.47; P Ͼ 0.002; df ϭ 1, 12) and the interaction of ACDD, F ϭ 8.51, P Ͻ 0.001, df 4, 22) for the percentage infested versus noninfested * ACDD (F ϭ 11.37; P Ͻ boll abscission were signiÞcant for the Corpus Christi 0.01; df 5, 12) were also signiÞcant for abscission that experimental site, resulted in signiÞcant bolls loss up occurred after the Þrst infestation of 104 ACDDs, or to 162 ACDD, followed by Ͻ5% for both the infested a boll diameter of 1.5 cm, although bolls lost at 154 and controls at 261 ACDD, or boll diameter 2.7 cm ACDD were numerically higher for the infested ver- (Fig. 1D). sus the controls (Fig. 1B). There were 10 fewer in- Cotton Boll Seed and Lint Weights. Cotton boll festations dates for Corpus Christi in 2009 when com- seed weights (total seed mass/cotton boll) were sig- pared with Weslaco for 2009, and the results indicate niÞcantly affected by verde plant bug feeding from that no appreciable rain occurred at Corpus Christi or infested versus the controls (F ϭ 64.824; P Ͻ 0.001; Weslaco in 2009, with minimal total precipitation from df ϭ 1, 18.0) for Weslaco in 2009 (Fig. 2A) This planting to harvest being 6.2 and 8.2 cm, respectively. occurred consecutively for up to 179 ACDD with an Cotton fruit development was rapid and boll retention average boll diameter of 2.0 cm. No signiÞcant differ- was high under these conditions with very little boll ence between the infested and controls occurred for shed. the remainder of the boll classes for up to 610 ACDD 192 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY Vol. 106, no. 1

Fig. 2. Mean (ϮSE) seed weight per cotton boll and boll diameter for (A) Weslaco, TX, 2009; (B) Corpus Christi, TX, 2009; (C) Weslaco, TX, 2010; and (D) Corpus Christi, TX, 2010, for infested and noninfested Þrst-position cotton bolls exposed to verde plant bugs across a range of accumulated degree-days (ACDD). ACDD were calculated from anthesis to the time of infesting; boll diameters were measured at the time of infesting. Asterisks above mean seed weights designate signiÞcance (LS means, adjusted with TukeyÐKramer; P Ͻ 0.01). and an average boll diameter of 3.4 cm. Seed weights for the infested bolls (F ϭ 82.09; P Ͻ 0.001; df ϭ 1, 18) for Corpus Christi in 2009 were signiÞcantly lower when compared with the noninfested bolls from 92 to (F ϭ 78.43; P Ͻ 0.001; df ϭ 1, 18.0) from the Þrst 279 ACDDs (Fig. 3B). Lint weights for 2010 Weslaco infestation of 104 ACDD past anthesis, up to 279 were consistently lower than the noninfested for up to ACDD (Fig. 2B). The boll diameter for the Corpus 317 ACDDs, or 10 d of age (Fig. 3C), while the infested Christi site was just over 3.0 cm, compared with all bolls for Corpus Christi were signiÞcantly lower (F ϭ other site and locations being Ͼ3.3 cm. This is an 9.36; P Ͻ 0.015; df ϭ 9.56) up to 262 ACDDs (Fig. 3D). indication of the drought conditions that adversely Cotton Boll Damage. If younger cotton bolls did not affected boll size. SigniÞcant losses in seed weights for abscise from verde plant bug feeding, the resulting the Weslaco location (F ϭ 51.32; P Ͻ 0.001; df ϭ 1, damage ratings show that infested bolls were subject 10.0) occurred in 2010 from Þrst tag date of 69 ACDD to much more damage when compared with the non- up to 317 ACDD or (Fig. 2C). The Corpus Christi infested bolls, as indicated by the KruskalÐWallace location had extended loss in seed weights (F ϭ 37.94; tests for each location and year (Fig. 4AÐD). The P ϭϽ0.001; df ϭ 1, 8.0) compared with the previous noninfested bolls were generally damaged Ͻ0.5 for year. Seed weight loss per boll occurred up to 262 both study sites in 2009. However, damage ratings ACDD (Fig. 2D). recorded for the controls in 2010 at both locations Cotton bolls from Weslaco in 2009 infested with were numerically more persistent across boll sizes and verde plant bugs were signiÞcant lower in lint weights ACDDs (Fig. 4C, D). Damage ratings for the infested versus the controls (F ϭ 133.28; P Ͻ 0.001; df ϭ 1,18) bolls ranged from 2.4 to Ͼ3.0 for bolls that are Ͻ150 from the youngest bolls infested (40 ACDD) to 288 ACDDs for bolls that remained on the plant at harvest. ACDDs (Fig. 3A). There was no difference in bolls These observations are further supported by the linear tagged at 314 ACDD, but at 334 ACDDs, the controls relationships of seed cotton weights regressed against were signiÞcantly higher than infested bolls. Interest- damage scores (Table 1). In every instance, across ingly, at 423 ACDDs, the infested lint weights were years and sites, the models for infested bolls were signiÞcantly higher than the controls, where over- signiÞcant, with higher R2 values and slopes when compensation may have promoted the growth of more compared with the noninfested bolls. Damage ratings lint. Corpus Christi lint weights for 2009 were lower include both the combined effects of feeding injury February 2013 ARMSTRONG ET AL.: VERDE PLANT BUG INJURY TO COTTON BOLLS 193

Fig. 3. Mean (ϮSE) lint weights per cotton boll for (A) Weslaco, TX, 2009; (B) Corpus Christi, TX, 2009; (C) Weslaco, TX, 2010; and (D) Corpus Christi, TX 2010, from individual cotton bolls artiÞcially infested with verde plant bugs versus the controls across a range of accumulated degree-days (ACDD). ACDD were calculated from anthesis to the time of infesting; boll diameters were measured at the time of infesting. Double or single asterisks above infested and noninfested weights designate signiÞcance (LS means, adjusted with TukeyÐKramer; P ϭ 0.01; or P ϭ 0.05, respectively). and the subsequent development of boll rot, and this conditions then dictate the development of those appears to increase the susceptibility of the boll to pathogens; however, the model system is for green pathogens even as they age and increase in ACDD. stinkbugs that have more robust stylets and prefer to feed on larger, more mature cotton bolls with thicker carpel walls (Esquivel et al. 2010, Medrano et al. 2009). Discussion We also recognize that cotton bolls that are enclosed Our interest in determining the relationships be- with nylon bags may be injured by other insects (i.e., tween verde plant bug feeding, and cotton boll diam- stink bugs, lepidopterans) through penetration of the eter and ACDD are centered on Þeld observations of bag, either before enclosure or after enclosure de- production cotton Þelds where infestations of verde pending upon the age of the boll. This would explain plant bugs occurs when the majority of bolls that why damage ratings Ͻ0.5 may be sustained even in the provide a signiÞcant contribution to seed and lint controls of this study. yields are present, and fruiting forms that are in an- In conclusion, the combined effects of verde plant thesis or younger will not produce harvestable lint bug feeding injury and the development of boll rot within the growing season. We recognize that verde over the 2 yr study sites and locations using Fiber- plant bugs will feed on squares and cause abscission or Max 840B2RF cotton shows that small bolls ranging injury to both the developing lint and seed. We believe in size from 1.0 to 2.0 cm, or 40Ð160 ACDD, respec- that as cotton bolls mature, the carpel wall and endo- tively, are most susceptible to the feeding injury and carp become too thick and tough for penetration for subsequent boll rot and that will result in 60Ð70% of the stylets, and no further damage occurs. The more the bolls to abscise from the plant at some point complicating factors are the interactions of feeding before harvestable maturity. Cotton bolls larger injury and moisture conditions that prevail after that than 2.0 cm may sustain some degree of lint or seed injury. During the process of verde plant bugs probing mass loss, but the percentage of bolls that remain on the exterior of the boll for undeveloped ovules as the plant greatly increases and will still contribute reported by Armstrong et al. (2010), the penetration to seed and lint production. Loss in lint weight mass of stylets through the carpel wall provides entry routes occurred up to 334 ACDD or a diameter of 2.5 in for pathogens to develop. The prevailing moisture 2009 at Weslaco, TX; however, the lint loss for We- 194 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY Vol. 106, no. 1

Fig. 4. Mean (ϮSE) damage rating (0Ð4) for cotton bolls that were infested with verde plant bugs, and for controls (noninfested cotton bolls) located at (A) Weslaco, TX, 2009; (B) Corpus Christi, TX, 2009; (C) Weslaco, TX, 2010; and (D) Corpus Christi, TX, 2010. slaco 2009 stopped after 187 ACDD or a boll diam- attractive and or physically impossible to feed upon eter 2.1 cm. These data indicate that the youngest and require less protection. Further research that cotton bolls that are from 1.0 cm (the average size develops and compares the most accurate sampling of the youngest boll observed after the bloom falls schemes, and the development of economic thresh- off) to 2.5 cm should be protected from verde plant olds based on the densities of verde plant bug re- bug feeding in terms of a boll protection threshold. lated as related to economic loss needs to be con- As the carpel wall thickens and toughens during the ducted. However, this simplistic boll threshold process of maturity, older cotton bolls become less should help as further information on economic thresholds are developed and provided to cotton growers. Table 1. Relationship between proportion seed cotton yield compared with the damage rating for verde plant bug infested and noninfested across a range of boll ages classified by accumulating degree-days from anthesis for Weslaco and Corpus Christi, TX, Acknowledgments 2009 and 2010 We appreciate the dedicated work of J. Martinez, D. An- Dependent variable Root Adjusted derson, and Megan Bloemer for technical assistance with this Slope SE dfa (seed cotton yield) MSE R2 study. We also thank Cotton incorporated for Þnancial sup- port for conducting this study, and J. Goolsby and C. Allen Weslaco 2009 for reviewing this manuscript. Controls Ϫ0.070 0.043 1.46 1,676 0.003 Verde infested Ϫ5.607 0.193 0.93 1,631 0.572 Weslaco 2010 Controls Ϫ1.368 0.570 1.35 1,248 0.023 References Cited Verde infested Ϫ3.695 0.223 0.93 1,228 0.533 Corpus Christi 2009 Armstrong, J. S. 2011. Common names of insects and related Controls Ϫ0.762 2.45 0.58 1,286 0.021 organisms. Entomological Society of America, Lanham, Ϫ Infested 4.144 0.26 0.73 1,271 0.601 MD. (www.entsoc.org/pubs/common_names). Corpus Christi 2010 Controls Ϫ1.26 0.94 3.20 1,269 0.017 Armstrong, J. S., R. J. Coleman, and B. L. Duggan. 2010. Infested Ϫ3.27 0.21 0.87 1,250 0.625 Actual and simulated injury of Creontiades signatus Dis- tant (Hemiptera: Miridae) feeding on cotton bolls. J. a Degrees of freedom are lower for verde plant bug infested bolls Entomol. Sci. 45: 170Ð177. because boll damage ratings were not conducted for bolls that Armstrong, J. S., E. G. Medrano, and J. F. Esquivel. 2009. aborted. Isolating and identifying the microbes associated with February 2013 ARMSTRONG ET AL.: VERDE PLANT BUG INJURY TO COTTON BOLLS 195

green mirid feeding injury to cotton bolls. In Proceedings Lei, T., M. Khan, and L. Wilson. 2003. Boll damage by suck- of the Beltwide Cotton Conference, pp. 712Ð716. ing pests: an emerging threat, but what do we know about Armstrong, J. S., and L. D. Camelo. 2005. A comparison of it, pp. 1337Ð1344. In A. Swanepoel (ed.), World Cotton feeding damage from Lygus hesperus and Lygus elisus to Research Conference III: Cotton for the New Millen- pre-bloom cotton squares. J. Entomol. Sci. 40: 143Ð148. nium. Agricultural Research CouncilÐInstitute for Indus- Bagwell, R. D., and N. P. Tugwell. 1992. DeÞning the period trial Crops, Cape Town, South Africa. of boll susceptibility to insect damage in heat units from Medrano, E. G., J. F. Esquivel, R. L. Nichols, and A. A. Bell. ßower. 1992 Proceedings Beltwide Cotton Conf., Na- 2009. Temporal analysis of cotton boll symptoms re- tional Cotton Council, Memphis, TN. pp. 767Ð768. sulting from southern green stink bug feeding and Esquivel, J. F., E. G. Medrano, and A. Bell. 2010. Southern transmission of a bacterial pathogen. J. Econ. Entomol. green stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) as vectors of 102: 36Ð42. pathogens affecting cotton bolls: a brief review. South- SAS Institute. 2003. SAS/STAT userÕs guide, release 9.1. SAS west. Entomol. 35: 457Ð461. Institute, Cary, NC. Jenkins, J. N., J. C. McCarty, Jr., and W. L. Parrott. 1990. Effectiveness of fruiting sites on cotton: yield. Crop Sci. 30: 365Ð369. Received 13 January 2012; accepted 21 October 2012.