4.7 Article

Risk assessment of maize damage by wireworms (Coleoptera: Elateridae) as the first step in implementing IPM and in reducing the environmental impact of soil insecticides

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-016-7692-z

关键词

Agriotes brevis; Agriotes sordidus; Agriotes ustulatus; Wireworms; Maize; Damage risk factors; Multifactorial model; Mutual-fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A survey of maize fields was conducted in northeast Italy from 1986 to 2014, resulting in a dataset of 1296 records including information on wireworm damage to maize, plant-attacking species, agronomic characteristics, landscape and climate. Three wireworm species, Agriotes brevis Candeze, A. sordidus Illiger and A. ustulatus Schaller, were identified as the dominant pest species in maize fields. Over the 29-year period surveyed, no yield reduction was observed when wireworm plant damage was below 15 % of the stand. A preliminary univariate analysis of risk assessment was applied to identify the main factors influencing the occurrence of damage. A multifactorial model was then applied by using the significant factors identified. This model allowed the research to highlight the strongest factors and to analyse how the main factors together influenced damage risk. The strongest factors were: A. brevis as prevalent damaging species, soil organic matter content > 5 %, rotation including meadows and/or double crops, A. sordidus as prevalent damaging species, and surrounding landscape mainly meadows, uncultivated grass and double crops. The multifactorial model also showed how the simultaneous occurrence of two or more of the aforementioned risk factors can conspicuously increase the risk of wireworm damage to maize crops, while the probability of damage to a field with no-risk factors is always low (< 1 %). These results make it possible to draw risk maps to identify low-risk and high-risk areas, a first step in implementing bespoke IPM procedures in an attempt to reduce the impact of soil insecticides significantly.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据