4.6 Article

Evaluating companion planting and non-host masking odors for protecting roses from the Japanese beetle (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae)

期刊

JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY
卷 96, 期 1, 页码 81-87

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1603/0022-0493-96.1.81

关键词

Popillia japonica; pest management; associational resistance; interplanting; Rosa X hybrida

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Effectiveness of companion planting, and use of norhost masking odors were evaluated under field conditions for protecting roses against the Japanese beetle, Popillia japonica Newman. Three reputedly effective companion species, rue (Ruta graveolens L.), zonal geranium (Pelargo nium X hortorum Bailey), and garlic chives (Allium scheonparum L.) were interplanted with roses in replicated garden plots. Numbers of beetles on these roses were compared with rose-only control plots on 6 d during beetle flight. The masking odor hypothesis was tested by banging mesh bags of aromatic herbs or other sources of reputedly repellent nonbost volatiles around potted roses in the field. Treatments included crushed red pepper (Capsicum frutescens cens L.), fennel seeds (Foeniculm vulgare Miller), crushed spearmint (Mentha picata L.), cedar shavings (juniperus sp.), osage orange fruits (Maclura pomifera (Raif) Schneid.), and fleshy gingko seeds (Gingko biloba L.). No treatment significantly reduced numbers of beetles relative to the controls. Interplanting with geraniums significantly increased numbers of Japanese beetles on roses. Similarly, roses surrounded by sacbets with fennel seeds, cedar shavings, crushed red pepper, or osage orange fruits had significantly more beetles than the control plants on two or more sample dates. Our results suggest that the use of companion or reputedly repellent plants or plant odors probably will be ineffective for protecting roses or other highly-susceptible ornamentals from P.japonica. Use of such tactics in an effort to discourage other garden pests might even increase Japanese beetle damage in those plantings.

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