DOCSLIB.ORG

Cryptoblabes Gnidiella

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

2014 Table of Contents Table of Contents Authors, Reviewers, Draft Log ........................................................................................ 4 Introduction to Reference ................................................................................................ 6 Arthropods ................................................................................................................... 14 Primary Pests of Grape (Full Pest Datasheet) .............................................................. 14 Autographa gamma ................................................................................................ 14 Cryptoblabes gnidiella ............................................................................................ 23 Diabrotica speciosa ................................................................................................ 36 Epiphyas postvittana .............................................................................................. 45 Eupoecilia ambiguella ............................................................................................ 59 Heteronychus arator ............................................................................................... 67 Lobesia botrana ..................................................................................................... 75 Scirtothrips dorsalis ................................................................................................ 89 Spodoptera littoralis ............................................................................................. 103 Spodoptera litura .................................................................................................. 113 Secondary Pests of Grape (Truncated Pest Datasheet) ........................................... 124 Adoxophyes orana ............................................................................................... 124 Aleurocanthus spiniferus ...................................................................................... 128 Eudocima fullonia ................................................................................................. 133 Eutetranychus orientalis ....................................................................................... 138 Oxycarenus hyalinipennis .................................................................................... 143 Planococcus lilacinus ........................................................................................... 149 Thaumatotibia leucotreta ...................................................................................... 153 Pests of Grape Requested by the CAPS Community................................................ 161 Homalodisca vitripennis ....................................................................................... 161 Mollusks ..................................................................................................................... 171 Primary Pests of Grape (Full Pest Datasheet) ............................................................ 171 None at this time .................................................................................................. 171 Secondary Pests of Grape (Truncated Pest Datasheet) ........................................... 171 Cernuella virgata .................................................................................................. 171 Lissachatina fulica ................................................................................................ 174 Nematodes ................................................................................................................. 179 Primary Pests of Grape (Full Pest Datasheet) ............................................................ 179 Xiphinema italiae .................................................................................................. 179 Secondary Pests of Grape (Truncated Pest Datasheet) ........................................... 189 Meloidogyne mali ................................................................................................. 189 Plant Pathogens ........................................................................................................ 193 Primary Pests of Grape (Full Pest Datasheet) ............................................................ 193 ‘Candidatus Phytoplasma australiense’ ............................................................... 193 ‘Candidatus Phytoplasma vitis’............................................................................. 206 Phellinus noxius ................................................................................................... 221 2 Table of Contents Pseudopezicula tracheiphila ................................................................................ 230 Appendix A: Diagnostic Resource Contacts ................................................................ 237 Appendix B: Glossary of Terms ................................................................................... 239 3 Authors, Reviewers, Draft Log Authors, Reviewers, Draft Log Authors CAPS Commenters Melinda Sullivan Darryl Jewett – Pest Survey Specialist - NY Plant Pathologist National Weed Management Laboratory Gary Russell – State Operations Support 2301 Research Blvd., Suite 108 Officer – USDA-APHIS-PPQ – Phoenix, Fort Collins, CO 80526 Arizona Nehalem Breiter Erin N Stiers- Pest Survey Specialist - KS, Biological Science Technician OK, CO National Weed Management Laboratory 2301 Research Blvd., Suite 108 Craig Webb- Domestic Identifier –USDA- Fort Collins, CO 80526 APHIS-PPQ – Manhattan, Kansas Talitha Price Andrea Simao Biological Science Technician National Program Manager - LBAM USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST USDA APHIS PPQ 1730 Varsity Dr., Suite 400 Riverdale, MD Raleigh, NC 27606 Eileen Smith CPHST Reviewers National Program Manager - EGVM Thomas Culliney USDA APHIS PPQ Entomologist Riverdale, MD Pest Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory Draft Log 1730 Varsity Drive July 2007 - Draft sent for CPHST review Raleigh, NC 27606 September, 2007 – Draft sent for CAPS Lisa Jackson comment. Biological Science Technician CPHST Director’s Office December, 2007 – Draft sent to NAPIS for 1730 Varsity Drive posting Raleigh, NC 27606 February, 2008 – Revised draft posted on Kimberly Schwartzburg NAPIS Risk Analyst Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis May, 2008 – Grape Commodity map Laboratory updated. 1730 Varsity Drive Raleigh, NC 27606 September, 2009 – Updated risk maps added to document. June, 2010 - Datasheets for Diabrotica speciosa and Eupoecilia ambiguella added, CAPS-Approved survey and diagnostic method information added, updated risk maps added, and tertiary pests removed. All tertiary pests were listed with name and photo only. A full datasheet will be added for each ‘tertiary’ pest as they become available and undergo the pest list prioritization process. 4 Authors, Reviewers, Draft Log Draft Log Continued: July, 2010 – Added datasheet for Xiphinema italiae (a tertiary pest). August, 2010 – Updated hyperlinks for links now on the CAPS Resource and Collaboration site April, 2012 – Trap and lure information updated to reflect names used in the IPHIS Survey Supply Ordering System. Lobesia botrana lure effectiveness changed from three to four weeks. New maps added for pests. Xylella fastidiosa (citrus variegated chlorosis strain) datasheet was removed per suggestion of the CAPS Pest List Working Group. Minor changes made for a few pest datasheets (host/distribution information primarily). Information about Tort AI- Tortricids of Agricultural Importance, a new diagnostic tool developed by CPHST’s Identification Technology Program, was added where appropriate. June 2012 – Removed Copitarsia spp. and Planococcus minor datasheets at the suggestion of the CAPS Pest List Working group for FY 2013 surveys. Planococcus minor has been deregulated. Both pests are not available for the 2013 survey season. June 2013: Updated ‘Candidatus Phytoplasma australiense’ datasheet. August 2013: Added datsheets for three new 2014 AHP CAPS targets: Candidatus Phytoplasma vitis, Cryptoblabes gnidiella, and Pseudopezicula tracheiphila. August 2016: Removed outdated maps. 5 Introduction to the Reference Introduction to Reference History of Commodity-Based Survey The CAPS community is made up of a large and varied group of individuals from federal, state, and university organizations who utilize federal (and other) funding sources to survey for, and (in some cases) diagnose exotic and invasive plant pests. By finding pests early, eradication efforts will likely be less expensive and more efficient. For more information on CAPS and other Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) pest detection programs see: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/plant_pest_info/pest_detection/index.shtml. Traditionally, states have been given a list of pests. Each year, states choose (from this list) a number of pests to incorporate in their own specialized surveys. There is certainly value in surveying for plant health threats in terms of discreet pests. However, this may not always be the most efficient means of survey. For example, a single pest may occur on a myriad of different hosts, making a comprehensive survey too time consuming and expensive. An alternative method has been suggested. Grouping important pests under the umbrella of a single commodity could be a more efficient way to look for certain pests. The rationale for choosing a commodity survey in certain instances includes the following:
Recommended publications
  • 1 1 DNA Barcodes Reveal Deeply Neglected Diversity and Numerous

    1 1 DNA Barcodes Reveal Deeply Neglected Diversity and Numerous

    Page 1 of 57 1 DNA barcodes reveal deeply neglected diversity and numerous invasions of micromoths in 2 Madagascar 3 4 5 Carlos Lopez-Vaamonde1,2, Lucas Sire2, Bruno Rasmussen2, Rodolphe Rougerie3, 6 Christian Wieser4, Allaoui Ahamadi Allaoui 5, Joël Minet3, Jeremy R. deWaard6, Thibaud 7 Decaëns7, David C. Lees8 8 9 1 INRA, UR633, Zoologie Forestière, F- 45075 Orléans, France. 10 2 Institut de Recherche sur la Biologie de l’Insecte, UMR 7261 CNRS Université de Tours, UFR 11 Sciences et Techniques, Tours, France. 12 3Institut de Systématique Evolution Biodiversité (ISYEB), Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, 13 CNRS, Sorbonne Université, EPHE, 57 rue Cuvier, CP 50, 75005 Paris, France. 14 4 Landesmuseum für Kärnten, Abteilung Zoologie, Museumgasse 2, 9020 Klagenfurt, Austria 15 5 Department of Entomology, University of Antananarivo, Antananarivo 101, Madagascar 16 6 Centre for Biodiversity Genomics, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road E., Guelph, ON 17 N1G2W1, Canada 18 7Centre d'Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive (CEFE UMR 5175, CNRS–Université de Genome Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV GUELPH on 10/03/18 19 Montpellier–Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier–EPHE), 1919 Route de Mende, F-34293 20 Montpellier, France. 21 8Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, SW7 5BD, UK. 22 23 24 Email for correspondence: [email protected] For personal use only. This Just-IN manuscript is the accepted prior to copy editing and page composition. It may differ from final official version of record. 1 Page 2 of 57 25 26 Abstract 27 Madagascar is a prime evolutionary hotspot globally, but its unique biodiversity is under threat, 28 essentially from anthropogenic disturbance.
  • DNA Barcodes Reveal Deeply Neglected Diversity and Numerous Invasions of Micromoths in Madagascar

    DNA Barcodes Reveal Deeply Neglected Diversity and Numerous Invasions of Micromoths in Madagascar

    Genome DNA barcodes reveal deeply neglected diversity and numerous invasions of micromoths in Madagascar Journal: Genome Manuscript ID gen-2018-0065.R2 Manuscript Type: Article Date Submitted by the 17-Jul-2018 Author: Complete List of Authors: Lopez-Vaamonde, Carlos; Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), ; Institut de Recherche sur la Biologie de l’Insecte (IRBI), Sire, Lucas; Institut de Recherche sur la Biologie de l’Insecte Rasmussen,Draft Bruno; Institut de Recherche sur la Biologie de l’Insecte Rougerie, Rodolphe; Institut Systématique, Evolution, Biodiversité (ISYEB), Wieser, Christian; Landesmuseum für Kärnten Ahamadi, Allaoui; University of Antananarivo, Department Entomology Minet, Joël; Institut de Systematique Evolution Biodiversite deWaard, Jeremy; Biodiversity Institute of Ontario, University of Guelph, Decaëns, Thibaud; Centre d'Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive (CEFE UMR 5175, CNRS–Université de Montpellier–Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier–EPHE), , CEFE UMR 5175 CNRS Lees, David; Natural History Museum London Keyword: Africa, invasive alien species, Lepidoptera, Malaise trap, plant pests Is the invited manuscript for consideration in a Special 7th International Barcode of Life Issue? : https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com/genome-pubs Page 1 of 57 Genome 1 DNA barcodes reveal deeply neglected diversity and numerous invasions of micromoths in 2 Madagascar 3 4 5 Carlos Lopez-Vaamonde1,2, Lucas Sire2, Bruno Rasmussen2, Rodolphe Rougerie3, 6 Christian Wieser4, Allaoui Ahamadi Allaoui 5, Joël Minet3, Jeremy R. deWaard6, Thibaud 7 Decaëns7, David C. Lees8 8 9 1 INRA, UR633, Zoologie Forestière, F- 45075 Orléans, France. 10 2 Institut de Recherche sur la Biologie de l’Insecte, UMR 7261 CNRS Université de Tours, UFR 11 Sciences et Techniques, Tours, France.
  • Jumping Mechanisms in Dictyopharid Planthoppers (Hemiptera

    Jumping Mechanisms in Dictyopharid Planthoppers (Hemiptera

    © 2014. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd | The Journal of Experimental Biology (2014) 217, 402-413 doi:10.1242/jeb.093476 RESEARCH ARTICLE Jumping mechanisms in dictyopharid planthoppers (Hemiptera, Dicytyopharidae) Malcolm Burrows* ABSTRACT legs in the same plane underneath the body. A catapult-like The jumping performance of four species of hemipterans belonging to mechanism is used in which the trochanteral depressor muscles the family Dictyopharidae, from Europe, South Africa and Australia, contract slowly, energy is stored and is then released suddenly were analysed from high-speed images. The body shape in all was (Burrows, 2006a; Burrows, 2007b; Burrows, 2009). Despite these characterised by an elongated and tapering head that gave a important common features, each group has particular streamlined appearance. The body size ranged from 6 to 9 mm in specialisations of its own that define its jumping abilities. These length and from 6 to 23 mg in mass. The hind legs were 80–90% of include differences in body shape, in the length of the hind legs body length and 30–50% longer than the front legs, except in one and in the anatomy of the coxae. species in which the front legs were particularly large so that all legs Most leafhoppers have hind legs that are two to three times longer were of similar length. Jumping was propelled by rapid and than the other legs and are 90% of the body length (Burrows, simultaneous depression of the trochantera of both hind legs, powered 2007b). By contrast, froghoppers and planthoppers have hind legs by large muscles in the thorax, and was accompanied by extension of that are only 40–50% longer than the other legs and approximately the tibiae.
  • Host Plants and Seasonal Presence of Dictyophara Europaea in the Vineyard Agro-Ecosystem

    Host Plants and Seasonal Presence of Dictyophara Europaea in the Vineyard Agro-Ecosystem

    Bulletin of Insectology 61 (1): 199-200, 2008 ISSN 1721-8861 Host plants and seasonal presence of Dictyophara europaea in the vineyard agro-ecosystem Federico LESSIO, Alberto ALMA Di.Va.P.R.A., Entomologia e Zoologia applicate all’Ambiente “C. Vidano”, Facoltà di Agraria, Università di Torino, Italy Abstract Seasonal presence and host plants of Dictyophara europaea (L.), a candidate vector of phytoplasmas to grapevine, were studied in Piedmont during 2006 in different vine growing regions. Sampling consisted in net sweeping on different candidate host plants, and captures of adults with yellow sticky traps placed on grapevine. D. europaea nymphs and adults were collected on many weeds, showing how this planthopper should be considered a poly- phagous species, although Amaranthus retroflexus L. and Urtica dioica L. seem to be its preferred hosts, and may also bear phy- toplasmas. Larvae of Dryinidae were observed on almost 5% of collected individuals. The peak of adult presence was recorded in the middle of August, but few adults were captured on sticky traps placed on grapevine. Molecular analyses will be performed to detect the presence of phytoplasmas in captured individuals; however, given its scarce presence on grapevine, D. europaea does not seem capable to play a major role in the transmission of phytoplasmas to grapevine even if its vector ability were proved. Key words: Dictyophara europaea, vector, sweep net, Amaranthus retroflexus, grapevine. Introduction Holzinger et al. (2003). During 2007, collected nymphs and adults were put into a rearing cage made of plexi- The genus Dictyophara Germar is represented in Italy glas and insect-proof mesh, with a single plant of Ama- with four species: Dictyophara cyrnea Spinola (only in ranthus retroflexus L., to observe feeding behaviour and Sardinia), Dictyophara pannonica (Germar) (doubtful), ovoposition.
  • Molecular Basis of Pheromonogenesis Regulation in Moths

    Molecular Basis of Pheromonogenesis Regulation in Moths

    Chapter 8 Molecular Basis of Pheromonogenesis Regulation in Moths J. Joe Hull and Adrien Fónagy Abstract Sexual communication among the vast majority of moths typically involves the synthesis and release of species-specifc, multicomponent blends of sex pheromones (types of insect semiochemicals) by females. These compounds are then interpreted by conspecifc males as olfactory cues regarding female reproduc- tive readiness and assist in pinpointing the spatial location of emitting females. Studies by multiple groups using different model systems have shown that most sex pheromones are synthesized de novo from acetyl-CoA by functionally specialized cells that comprise the pheromone gland. Although signifcant progress was made in identifying pheromone components and elucidating their biosynthetic pathways, it wasn’t until the advent of modern molecular approaches and the increased avail- ability of genetic resources that a more complete understanding of the molecular basis underlying pheromonogenesis was developed. Pheromonogenesis is regulated by a neuropeptide termed Pheromone Biosynthesis Activating Neuropeptide (PBAN) that acts on a G protein-coupled receptor expressed at the surface of phero- mone gland cells. Activation of the PBAN receptor (PBANR) triggers a signal trans- duction cascade that utilizes an infux of extracellular Ca2+ to drive the concerted action of multiple enzymatic steps (i.e. chain-shortening, desaturation, and fatty acyl reduction) that generate the multicomponent pheromone blends specifc to each species. In this chapter, we provide a brief overview of moth sex pheromones before expanding on the molecular mechanisms regulating pheromonogenesis, and con- clude by highlighting recent developments in the literature that disrupt/exploit this critical pathway. J. J. Hull (*) USDA-ARS, US Arid Land Agricultural Research Center, Maricopa, AZ, USA e-mail: [email protected] A.
  • Lepidoptera on the Introduced Robinia Pseudoacacia in Slovakia, Central Europe

    Lepidoptera on the Introduced Robinia Pseudoacacia in Slovakia, Central Europe

    Check List 8(4): 709–711, 2012 © 2012 Check List and Authors Chec List ISSN 1809-127X (available at www.checklist.org.br) Journal of species lists and distribution Lepidoptera on the introduced Robinia pseudoacacia in PECIES S OF ISTS L Slovakia, Central Europe Miroslav Kulfan E-mail: [email protected] Comenius University, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Department of Ecology, Mlynská dolina B-1, SK-84215 Bratislava, Slovakia. Abstract: Robinia pseudoacacia A current checklist of Lepidoptera that utilize as a hostplant in Slovakia (Central Europe) faunalis provided. community. The inventory Two monophagous is based on species, a bibliographic the leaf reviewminers andMacrosaccus new unreported robiniella data and from Parectopa southwest robiniella Slovakia., and Thethe polyphagouslist includes 35pest Lepidoptera Hyphantria species cunea belonging to 10 families. Most species are polyphagous and belong to Euro-Siberian have subsequently been introduced to Slovakia. Introduction E. The area is a polygon enclosed by the towns of Bratislava, Robinia pseudoacacia a widespread species in its native habitat in southeastern North America. It was L.introduced (black locust, to orEurope false acacia),in 1601 is Komárno, Veľký Krtíš and Myjava. Ten plots were located in the southern part of the study area. Most were located in theThe remnant trophic ofgroups the original of the floodplain Lepidoptera forests larvae that found were (Chapman 1935). The first mention of planting the species distributed along the Danube and Morava rivers. (Keresztesiin Slovakia dates 1965). from Today, 1750, itwhen is widespread black locust wasthroughout planted (1986). The zoogeographical distribution of the species western,around the central, fortress eastern in Komárno and southern in southern Europe, Slovakia where followswere defined the arrangement following the give system by Reiprichof Brown (2001).
  • Pu'u Wa'awa'a Biological Assessment

    Pu'u Wa'awa'a Biological Assessment

    PU‘U WA‘AWA‘A BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT PU‘U WA‘AWA‘A, NORTH KONA, HAWAII Prepared by: Jon G. Giffin Forestry & Wildlife Manager August 2003 STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE ................................................................................................................................. i TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................. ii GENERAL SETTING...................................................................................................................1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................1 Land Use Practices...............................................................................................................1 Geology..................................................................................................................................3 Lava Flows............................................................................................................................5 Lava Tubes ...........................................................................................................................5 Cinder Cones ........................................................................................................................7 Soils .......................................................................................................................................9
  • Identification and Ecology of Alternative Insect Vectors Of

    Identification and Ecology of Alternative Insect Vectors Of

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE www.nature.com/scientificreportsprovided by AIR Universita degli studi di Milano OPEN Identifcation and ecology of alternative insect vectors of ‘Candidatus Phytoplasma solani’ to grapevine Fabio Quaglino1, Francesco Sanna2, Abdelhameed Moussa 1, Monica Faccincani3, Alessandro Passera1, Paola Casati1, Piero Attilio Bianco1 & Nicola Mori 2* Bois noir, a disease of the grapevine yellows complex, is associated with ‘Candidatus Phytoplasma solani’ and transmitted to grapevines in open felds by the cixiids Hyalesthes obsoletus and Reptalus panzeri. In vine-growing areas where the population density of these vectors is low within the vineyard, the occurrence of bois noir implies the existence of alternative vectors. The aim of this study was to identify alternative vectors through screening of the Auchenorrhyncha community, phytoplasma typing by stamp gene sequence analyses, and transmission trials. During feld activities, conducted in Northern Italy in a vineyard where the bois noir incidence was extremely high, nine potential alternative insect vectors were identifed according to high abundance in the vineyard agro-ecosystem, high infection rate, and harbouring phytoplasma strains characterized by stamp gene sequence variants found also in symptomatic grapevines. Transmission trials coupled with molecular analyses showed that at least eight species (Aphrodes makarovi, Dicranotropis hamata, Dictyophara europaea, Euscelis incisus, Euscelidius variegatus, Laodelphax striatella, Philaenus spumarius, and Psammotettix alienus/confnis) are alternative vectors of ‘Candidatus Phytoplasma solani’ to grapevines. These novel fndings highlight that bois noir epidemiology in vineyard agro-ecosystems is more complex than previously known, opening up new perspectives in the disease management. Bois noir (BN), a disease of the grapevine yellows (GY) complex, causes serious crop losses in wine-making grape varieties in the Euro-Mediterranean area and in other vine-growing countries.
  • Autographa Gamma

    Autographa Gamma

    1 Table of Contents Table of Contents Authors, Reviewers, Draft Log 4 Introduction to the Reference 6 Soybean Background 11 Arthropods 14 Primary Pests of Soybean (Full Pest Datasheet) 14 Adoretus sinicus ............................................................................................................. 14 Autographa gamma ....................................................................................................... 26 Chrysodeixis chalcites ................................................................................................... 36 Cydia fabivora ................................................................................................................. 49 Diabrotica speciosa ........................................................................................................ 55 Helicoverpa armigera..................................................................................................... 65 Leguminivora glycinivorella .......................................................................................... 80 Mamestra brassicae....................................................................................................... 85 Spodoptera littoralis ....................................................................................................... 94 Spodoptera litura .......................................................................................................... 106 Secondary Pests of Soybean (Truncated Pest Datasheet) 118 Adoxophyes orana ......................................................................................................
  • Biodiversity and Ecology of Critically Endangered, Rûens Silcrete Renosterveld in the Buffeljagsrivier Area, Swellendam

    Biodiversity and Ecology of Critically Endangered, Rûens Silcrete Renosterveld in the Buffeljagsrivier Area, Swellendam

    Biodiversity and Ecology of Critically Endangered, Rûens Silcrete Renosterveld in the Buffeljagsrivier area, Swellendam by Johannes Philippus Groenewald Thesis presented in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Masters in Science in Conservation Ecology in the Faculty of AgriSciences at Stellenbosch University Supervisor: Prof. Michael J. Samways Co-supervisor: Dr. Ruan Veldtman December 2014 Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za Declaration I hereby declare that the work contained in this thesis, for the degree of Master of Science in Conservation Ecology, is my own work that have not been previously published in full or in part at any other University. All work that are not my own, are acknowledge in the thesis. ___________________ Date: ____________ Groenewald J.P. Copyright © 2014 Stellenbosch University All rights reserved ii Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za Acknowledgements Firstly I want to thank my supervisor Prof. M. J. Samways for his guidance and patience through the years and my co-supervisor Dr. R. Veldtman for his help the past few years. This project would not have been possible without the help of Prof. H. Geertsema, who helped me with the identification of the Lepidoptera and other insect caught in the study area. Also want to thank Dr. K. Oberlander for the help with the identification of the Oxalis species found in the study area and Flora Cameron from CREW with the identification of some of the special plants growing in the area. I further express my gratitude to Dr. Odette Curtis from the Overberg Renosterveld Project, who helped with the identification of the rare species found in the study area as well as information about grazing and burning of Renosterveld.
  • Parasitoids (Hymenoptera) of Leaf-Spinning Moths (Lepidoptera) Feeding on Vaccinium Uliginosum L

    Parasitoids (Hymenoptera) of Leaf-Spinning Moths (Lepidoptera) Feeding on Vaccinium Uliginosum L

    © Entomologica Fennica. 25 February 2011 Parasitoids (Hymenoptera) of leaf-spinning moths (Lepidoptera) feeding on Vaccinium uliginosum L. along an ecological gradient in central European peat bogs Aurel I. Lozan, Karel Spitzer, Josef Jaro, Andrey Khalaim, Maria Concetta Rizzo, Emilio Guerrieri & Ale Bezdìk Lozan,A.I.,Spitzer,K.,Jaro,J.,Khalaim,A.,Rizzo,M.C.,Guerrieri,E.& Bezdìk, A. 2010: Parasitoids (Hymenoptera) of leaf-spinning moths (Lepidop- tera) feeding on Vaccinium uliginosum L. along an ecological gradient in central European peat bogs. Entomol. Fennica 21: 243253. Parasitoids of leaf-spinning Lepidoptera associated with two isolated central Eu- ropean peat bogs were investigated. Five families of parasitoid Hymenoptera (Braconidae, Ichneumonidae, Eulophidae, Pteromalidae and Encyrtidae) were recorded. Three categories were recognised: (1) primary parasitoids, (2) faculta- tive hyperparasitoids and (3) obligatory hyperparasitoids. Ten species of Braco- nidae, five species and seven marked morphospecies among Ichneumonidae, and three species of Chalcidoidea were identified. Despite of some niche-specific (but less host-specific) parasitoids, all these hymenopterans are likely to be gen- eralists and none of them were confirmed to be habitat and/or host specialists. Unlike their eurytopic (opportunistic tyrphoneutral) parasitoids, the Lepidoptera hosts associated with peat bogs are partially highly stenotopic (tyrphobionts and tyrphophiles). The occurrence of parasitoids compared to their potential hosts was structured along an ecological (mesoclimatic) gradient, so most parasitoids were recorded from margins while stenotopic (narrow habitat adaptation) moths were mostly distributed near the centre of the bog habitat. A. I. Lozan, K. Spitzer, J. Jaro & A. Bezdìk, Biology Centre, Institute of Entomo- logy, Czech Academy of Sciences, Braniovská 31, 37005 Èeské Budìjovice, Czech Republic; E-mails: [email protected], [email protected], jaros@entu.
  • The Isolation and Genetic Characterisation of a Novel Alphabaculovirus for the Microbial Control of Cryptophlebia Peltastica and Closely Related Tortricid Pests

    The Isolation and Genetic Characterisation of a Novel Alphabaculovirus for the Microbial Control of Cryptophlebia Peltastica and Closely Related Tortricid Pests

    RHODES UNIVERSITY Where leaders learn The isolation and genetic characterisation of a novel alphabaculovirus for the microbial control of Cryptophlebia peltastica and closely related tortricid pests Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY At RHODES UNIVERSITY By TAMRYN MARSBERG December 2016 ABSTRACT Cryptophlebia peltastica (Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) is an economically damaging pest of litchis and macadamias in South Africa. Cryptophlebia peltastica causes both pre- and post-harvest damage to litchis, reducing overall yields and thus classifying the pest as a phytosanitary risk. Various control methods have been implemented against C. peltastica in an integrated pest management programme. These control methods include chemical control, cultural control and biological control. However, these methods have not yet provided satisfactory control as of yet. As a result, an alternative control option needs to be identified and implemented into the IPM programme. An alternative method of control that has proved successful in other agricultural sectors and not yet implemented in the control of C. peltastica is that of microbial control, specifically the use of baculovirus biopesticides. This study aimed to isolate and characterise a novel baculovirus from a laboratory culture of C. peltastica that could be used as a commercially available baculovirus biopesticide. In order to isolate a baculovirus a laboratory culture of C. peltastica was successfully established at Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa. This is the first time a laboratory culture of C. peltastica has been established. This allowed for various biological aspects of the pest to be determined, which included: length of the life cycle, fecundity and time to oviposition, egg and larval development and percentage hatch.