pdf, 57.71Mb - Entomological Society of Canada

More documents

Recommendations

Info

348 R. J. Finnegan and W. A. Smirnorr Smimoff, W.A.; Valero. J. (1975) Effets II moyen tenne de la fertilisation par urCe ou par potassium sur P;n/IS banks;ana L. el Ie comportement de ses insectcs devastateurs: tels que Neodiprion swa;nei (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae) et TOllmcye//a IlIImismalicum (Homoptcra: Coccidac). Calladian lO/lmal Forest Research 5,236-244. Smirnoff, W.A.; Feltes, J.J.; Haliburton, W. (1962) A virus disease of Swaine's jack pine sawfly. Neodiprion swaine; Midd. sprayed from an aircraft. Canadiall Entomologist 94,4TI-486. Tostowaryk, W. (1971a) Life history and behavior of PodisllS modUlUS (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) in boreal forcst in Quebec. CQlladian Entomologist 103,662-679. Tostowaryk, W. (1971b) Relationship between parasitism and predation of diprionid sawflies. Annals of the Elltom%gica/ Society of America 64,1424-1427. Tostowaryk, W. (1971c) The crfect of prey defense on the functional response of Podisus modutus (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) to densities of the sawflies. Neodiprioll swainti and N. prall; banksiallQ (Hymenoptera: Neodiprionidae). Canadian Entomologist 104,61-69. Tostowaryk, W. (1972) Coleopterous predators of the Swaine jack pine sawDy Ntodiprion swainei Middleton (Hymenoptera: Diprionidae). Canadian Journal of Zoology 50,1139-1146. Tostowaryk, W. (1973) Population estimation and feeding behaviour of adult carnbids in jack pine stands. Quebec. CallQdian Forestry Service InfomuJtion Report Q·X·32. 23 pp.
Pest Status Chapter 60 Operophtera bruceata (Hulst), Bruce Spanworm (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) W.G.H.IVES The Bruce spanworm, Operophlera bruceala (Hulst), attacks a variety of deciduous trees (Prentice 1963), and is very similar in appearance to the winter moth, Operophlera brumala (L.). Adults of the two species can be distinguished by differences in genitalia in males and in vestigial wing length in females (Eidt el al. 1966). Pupae can be separated by differences in the form of the cremaster, and larvae can be distinguished by the placement of the ocelli (Eidt & Embree 1968). In eastern Canada, sugar maples, Acer saccharum Marsh., and beech trees, Fagus grandi/olia Ehrh., are favoured hosts, but in western Canada, trembling aspen. Populus Iremuloides Michx., seems to be the principal host, particularly in Alberta. Although the Bruce spanworrn is not usually considered a major pest, a number of localized infestations, as well as more extensive outbreaks in which damage has been primarily due to this insect, have been reported by the Forest Insect and Disease Survey (Anon. 1952-79). The following account of infestation history is based on these reports, except where otherwise noted. In central and eastern Canada. the first reported damage occurred in a small stand of sugar maple near Merrivale, Ontario, in 1951 and 1952. In Newfoundland a small infestation was reported on white birch, Belula papyri/era Marsh., in 1956. The first reported damage in the maritimes occurred in 1962, when a patch of sugar maple in Nova Scotia was severely defoliated. and a larger area of defoliation was reported in New Brunswick. Infestations in both Maritime Provinces increased in scope and intensity in 1963, and the outbreak reached its peak in 1964, when over 200 000 ha of severe defoliation occurred in Nova Scotia alone (Harrington 1968). Declines in populations were noted in 1965, and by 1966 the outbreak had collapsed. A short-lived outbreak also occurred in Quebec, where the insect reached epidemic proportions in many areas in 1963. However, populations were lower in 1964, and only small pockets of defoliation were reported in 1965. At its peak, this outbreak covered some 39 000 km 2 (Martineau & Monnier 1966). In Ontario, where infestations of Bruce spanworrn were first reported, no further damage occurred until 1963, when a small pocket of aspen defoliation was reported near Sudbury. In 1965, three widely separated areas of severe sugar maple defoliation occurred: one was in Algonquin Park; another was on an island in Lake Huron; and the third was on hilltops and ridges near Sault Stet Marie. The outbreak decreased in intensity in 1966 and collapsed completely in 1967. In western Canada, damage to trembling aspen attributable to the Bruce spanworm was first reported from the Obed area of Alberta in 1956. Widespread areas of defoliation. much of it severe, were reported in 1957 and again in 1958, when about 130000 kml were moderately or heavily infested (Brown 1962). In 1959 some infestations had subsided, and all outbreaks collapsed in 1960. Severe defoliation of trembling aspen in northern British Columbia was reported in 1958 and 1959, but these infestations also collapsed in 1960. No further significant damage attributable to the Bruce spanworm was reported until 1968, when extensive areas of moderate to severe defoliation of trembling aspen were again observed in Alberta. Both the intensity and size of this outbreak increased in 1969. Extensive damage also occurred in 1970, but only patches of aspen were severely defoliated in 1971. In Quebec, several maple groves were infested in 1970, and these were completely stripped in 1971 and again in 1972. The insect was somewhat less 349
Page 2 and 3:
Biological Control Programmes again
Page 4 and 5:
CONTENTS Contents iii Page FOREWORD
Page 6 and 7:
Chapter 50. Coleophora serratella (
Page 8 and 9:
General Introduction Gcncrallntrodu
Page 10 and 11:
PART I BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF AGRICU
Page 12 and 13:
4 J. S. Kelleher Table 1 to be plac
Page 14 and 15:
Blank Page 6
Page 16:
Blank Page 8
Page 19 and 20:
Pest Status Background Chapter 4 Ag
Page 22 and 23:
Blank Page 14
Page 24 and 25:
16 R. P. Jaques and J. E. Laing vir
Page 27:
Pest Status Background Chapter 6 Cu
Page 30 and 31:
Blank Page 22
Page 32 and 33:
24 J. A. Shemanchuk. H. C. Wisler a
Page 34 and 35:
26 R. P. Jaques and J. E. Laing Tab
Page 36 and 37:
Blank Page 28
Page 38 and 39:
30 F. L. McEwen Literature Cited Si
Page 40 and 41:
32 G. H. Gerber Recommendations Lit
Page 42 and 43:
34 H. H. Cheng Parasitoids Predator
Page 46 and 47:
Blank Page 38
Page 49:
Pest Status Background Releases and
Page 52 and 53:
Blank Page 44
Page 54 and 55:
46 C. H. Craig and C. C. Loan Relea
Page 56 and 57:
Blank Page 48
Page 58 and 59:
50 W. J. Turnock Table 7 Table 8 Pa
Page 61 and 62:
Table 9 Mamestra configurata Walker
Page 63 and 64:
Literature Cited Mamestra con/igura
Page 65 and 66:
Pest Status Background Chapter 16 M
Page 67 and 68:
Mtmduca qllillqllemaclliata (Hawort
Page 69 and 70:
Chapter 17 Melanoplus spp., Camnula
Page 71 and 72:
Chapter 18 Musca domestica L., Hous
Page 73 and 74:
Pest Status Background Chapter 19 R
Page 75 and 76:
Recommendations Literature Cited Ou
Page 77:
Pest Status and Background Chapter
Page 80 and 81:
Blank Page 72
Page 82 and 83:
74 H. G. Wylie, W. J. Turnock and L
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87:
Pest Status Background Chapter 23 T
Page 92 and 93:
Blank Page 84
Page 95:
Releases and Recoveries Tipilia pai
Page 98:
90 R. J. McClanahan Releases and Re
Page 101 and 102:
PART II BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF WEEDS
Page 103 and 104:
Success of the Programme Chapter 26
Page 105:
Table 17 Current approaches to biol
Page 108 and 109:
100 P. Harris The number of niches
Page 110:
102 P. Harris The Future Literature
Page 113:
Pest Status Background Chapter 27 A
Page 117:
Evaluation of Control Attempts Reco
Page 120 and 121:
Blank Page 112
Page 123:
Pest Status Chapter 30 Carduus nuta
Page 126 and 127:
118 P. Harris Table 23 Open release
Page 128 and 129:
120 P. Harris Table 25 may have bee
Page 130 and 131:
122 P. Harris Table 26 C. flU/ailS
Page 132:
124 P. Harris Reasons for the impac
Page 135:
Pest Status Chapter 31 Centaurea di
Page 140 and 141:
132 P. Harris and J. H. Myers Metzn
Page 142 and 143:
134 P. Harris and J. H. Myers Table
Page 144 and 145:
136 P. Harris and J. H. Myers Ackno
Page 146 and 147:
Blank Page 138
Page 148 and 149:
140 D. P. Peschken Ceutorhynchus lI
Page 150 and 151:
142 D. P. Pcschken Lema cyanella (L
Page 152:
144 D. P. Peschken Table 33 continu
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Table 35 Cirs;llm I'ulg(lre (Savi)
Page 159 and 160:
The number of seeds per head vs. he
Page 161 and 162:
CiTSiu11I J'lllgaTe (Savi) Ten. , 1
Page 163 and 164:
Pest Status Background Biological C
Page 166 and 167:
Blank Page 158
Page 168 and 169:
160 P. Harris Background desirable.
Page 170:
162 P. Harris Table 40 Table 41 Ope
Page 175 and 176:
Table 44 Evaluation of Control Atte
Page 178 and 179:
Blank Page 170
Page 180 and 181:
172 P. Harris and M. Maw Releases a
Page 182:
174 P. Harris and M. Maw Table 45 O
Page 186 and 187:
Blank Page 178
Page 188 and 189:
180 P. Harris Background Table 47 m
Page 190 and 191:
182 P. Harris Recommendations Ackno
Page 192 and 193:
184 M. G. Maw Discussion Recommenda
Page 194 and 195:
186 M.G. Maw Background R. catharti
Page 196:
188 M. G. Maw Recommendations Liter
Page 199 and 200:
Pest Status Background Chapter 40 S
Page 201 and 202:
Recommendations Acknowledgements Li
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205:
Releases and Recoveries HyJemya sen
Page 209 and 210:
Sellecio jacoba('(/ 201 Myers, 1.H.
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Pest Status Chapter 43 Sonchus arve
Page 215 and 216:
Releases and Recoveries Table 51 Sc
Page 217 and 218:
Sone/Ills arvensis L., 209 Skuhravd
Page 219 and 220:
Pest Status Biological Control Stud
Page 221 and 222:
PART III BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF FORE
Page 224 and 225:
216 M. A. Hulme and G. W. Green Sel
Page 226 and 227:
218 M. A. Hulme and G. W. Green Tab
Page 228 and 229:
220 M. A. Hulme and G. W. Green Eva
Page 230 and 231:
222 M. A. Hulme and G. W. Green lar
Page 232:
224 M. A. Hulme and G. W. Green abi
Page 235 and 236:
Literature Cited Biological control
Page 237 and 238:
Pest Status Chapter 46 Background a
Page 239 and 240:
Tablc 55 continucd Adelges piceadRa
Page 241 and 242:
Table 55 continued Aclelge.\· ph-e
Page 243 and 244:
Pest Status Chapter 47 Choristoneur
Page 245 and 246:
Literature Cited ChorislOIU'lIfCI f
Page 247 and 248:
A. Field development of Bacillus Ih
Page 252 and 253:
244 W. A. Smirnoffand O. N. Morris
Page 254:
246 W. A. Smirnoff and O. N. Morris
Page 258 and 259:
250 J. C. Cunningham and G. M. Hows
Page 261:
Table 67 B. Viruses: Application an
Page 267:
Literature Cited B. Viruscs: Applic
Page 272 and 273:
264 G. G. Wilson, D. Tyrrell and T.
Page 274 and 275:
266 G. G. Wilson. D. Tyrrrell and T
Page 277 and 278:
CephaJogl)pta murinanae Bauer (Hyme
Page 279 and 280:
Agria housei Shewell (Diptera: Sare
Page 282 and 283:
274 I. W. Varty experimental biolog
Page 284 and 285:
276 I. W. Varty Further research Li
Page 286 and 287:
27R R. F. Shcphcrd and J. C. Cunnin
Page 288 and 289:
Blank Page 280
Page 290 and 291:
282 I. S. Otvos and F. W. Quednau C
Page 292 and 293:
2M.. I. S. OtV()S and F. W. Quednau
Page 295:
Background Releases and Recoveries
Page 299:
Pest Status Background Chapter 51 F
Page 305 and 306: Ontario Gilpitlia Ill'rcylliae (Har
Page 308 and 309: -(I) C c::: o '';:; ::::l .c ';: 30
Page 310 and 311: 302 L. P. Magasi and G. A. Van Sick
Page 313 and 314: Lymcltllria dispar (L.). 305 avian
Page 315 and 316: Table 80 Table 81 Ooenc)'rtus kuvsn
Page 317: Recommendations Literature Cited Ly
Page 321 and 322: Malacosoma disstria J-Hibner. 3/3 1
Page 327 and 328: Malam.mma disstria Hiibner, 319 Sta
Page 329 and 330: Pest Status Background Field Trial
Page 331 and 332: Pest Status Background Field Trials
Page 333 and 334: Aerial spray trials in Ontario in 1
Page 335: Table 85 Neodipriotl {ecomei (Fitch
Page 339: Pest Status Background Chapter 58 N
Page 343 and 344: Table 86 Open releases and recoveri
Page 345: PfeoIopbus ba9zonus (Grav.) (Hymeno
Page 348 and 349: 340 K. J. Griffiths, J. C. Cunningh
Page 350 and 351: 342 R. J. Finnegan and W. A. Smirno
Page 353: Evaluation of Control Attempts Tabl
Page 359 and 360: Evaluation of Control Attempt Recom
Page 361 and 362: Pest Status Background Chapter 61 O
Page 366 and 367: Blank Page 358
Page 368 and 369: 360 D. G. Embree. D. E. Elgee and G
Page 374 and 375: 366 J. C. Cunningham and R. F. Shep
Page 379 and 380: Pristiphora erichsollii (Hartig). 3
Page 381 and 382: Releases and Recoveries Olesicampe
Page 384 and 385: 376 W. G. H. Ives and J. A. Muldrew
Page 386: 378 W. G. HIves and J. A. Muldrew R
Page 389: Pest Status Background Chapter 65 P
Page 392: 384 F. W. Quednau Evaluation of Con
Page 395 and 396: Pest Status Chapter 66 Rhyacionia b
Page 397 and 398: Rhyaciollia blloliallll (Schiff.).
Page 399 and 400: c .2 5 :g Cij c Rhyacion;a buoliuna
Page 401 and 402: Agatbis binominata (Mues.) (Hymenop
Page 404 and 405:
396 Appendix Raske, A.G., Newfoundl
Page 406 and 407:
398 Index of Species Apanlt'les rub
Page 408:
400 Index of Species Chrysoc/laris
Page 412 and 413:
404 Index of Species lawn 85 leafy
Page 414 and 415:
406 Index of Species pear 211 pecos
Page 416:
408 Index of Species sibericus. Den
show all

pdf, 57.71Mb - Entomological Society of Canada

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?