4.1 Article Proceedings Paper

Seasonal occurrence, distribution and sampling indices for Myzus persicae (Hemiptera: Aphidoidea) and its parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) on tobacco

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ENTOMOLOGY
卷 102, 期 3, 页码 459-468

出版社

CZECH ACAD SCI, INST ENTOMOLOGY
DOI: 10.14411/eje.2005.066

关键词

aphidoidea; Myzus persicae; aphidiinae; Aphidius colemani; Diaeretiella rapae; tobacco; seasonal occurrence; sampling indices

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Field studies were conducted, in order to assess the seasonal occurrence and the spatial distribution of Aphidius colemani Viereck, Aphidius matricariae Haliday, Diaeretiella rapae (M'Intosh), Praon staryi Kavallieratos & Lykouressis and Praon volucre (Haliday), all parasitoids of Myzus persicae (Sulzer) on tobacco. The experiments took place in western Greece (Agrinion, Aitoloakarnania), during the 1996 and 1997 growing seasons, in an area of approximately 2.5 ha, where tobacco was the main crop. The experimental field was insecticide-free and tobacco leaf samples (from the upper and lower half of plants) were taken from June until September, in both years. The distribution of the species found was also represented and discussed. Generally, high M persicae densities were recorded in August (mid-season) of both seasons. The mummification rate showed a specific increasing trend late in the season (August-September). In 1996, the percentage of mummification reached almost 61% at the end of the period, whereas in 1997 it remained at very low levels, (< 2%). The density of M persicae was higher on the leaves collected from the upper part of the plants than on those from the lower part, but without significant difference. In contrast, the numbers of mummified M. persicae individuals were significantly higher on leaves collected from the lower part of the plants than on those from the upper part in both years. The relative abundance of the aphidiine parasitoid species differed between the two years.

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

4.1
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