4.6 Article

Seasonal population dynamics of wireworms in wheat crops in the Pacific Northwestern United States

期刊

JOURNAL OF PEST SCIENCE
卷 90, 期 1, 页码 77-86

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10340-016-0750-y

关键词

Elateridae; Limonius; Degree days; IPM; Phenology models; Click beetles

资金

  1. Washington Grain Commission

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Insect pests often exhibit predictable seasonal population dynamics in response to temperature and other environmental drivers. Understanding these dynamics is critical to developing effective integrated pest management strategies. Here we studied the seasonal phenology and feeding activity of two wireworm species that are major pests of wheat crops in the Pacific Northwestern United States, Limonius californicus and L. infuscatus. We conducted monthly sampling of the damaging larval stages of both species in commercial spring wheat fields in Washington and Idaho throughout 2013 and 2014. These data were used to model the seasonal phenology and feeding activity of each species in relation to soil temperature. We found larvae of both species were most abundant relatively early in the season, with total wireworms captures in soil cores declining as the season progressed. Larvae of both species were collected predominantly in the top 70 cm of the soil profile, suggesting that they primarily feed on plant roots and seeds up to this depth. While patterns of seasonal abundance of both species were similar, feeding activity varied significantly between the two species. Our results indicate that as spring moves into summer L. californicus feeds more aggressively, whereas the activity of L. infuscatus decreases as the crop season progresses. These differences might help explain why L. californicus is generally a more economically damaging pest that also threatens winter crops, while damage from L. infuscatus is generally limited to the spring. Accordingly, management strategies for each species should be tailored to their specific seasonal dynamics.

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

4.6
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