Classical and augmentative biological control against ... - IOBC-WPRS

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Giorgini (Appendix for Chapter 2) Kirchmair et al., 2007 Maheshkumar- Katke & Balikai, 2008 Metarhizium anisopliae Metarhizium anisopliae, Verticillium lecanii, Clerodendron inerme Daktulosphaira vitifoliae (grape phylloxera) Maconellicoccus hirsutus (grape mealybug) * + means effective, - means not effective biocontrol agent. Hemiptera: Phylloxeridae Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae Germany Inundative Field + 3 months after application an increase of the M.a. density in soil was observed. Compared with untreated plots a lower infestation was observed in the M.a.- treated plots. Two years after treatment a control effect was still observed whereas the density of M.a. in soil decreased. Three years after treatment no effect on the pest was detectable and the M.a. density had decreased to a value similar to that in the control . A periodically application is necessary. India Inundative Field + 8.6 Nematodes [5 species] Reference Species of biocontrol agent Species of insect pest Taxonomic category of pests Saunders & All, 1985 English-Loeb et al., 1999 Steinernema carpocapsae Heterorhabditis bacteriophora (Oswego strain), Steinernema glaseri (isolate 326) Vitacea polistiformis (grape root borer) Daktulosphaira vitifolia (grape phylloxera - root form) Lepidoptera: Sesiidae Hemiptera: Phylloxeridae Country Type of augmentation Type of test Georgia, USA NY, USA Inundative (soil) Lab, Field Efficacy of biocontrol agents* Lab + Additional information and results + Susceptibility of V.p. 1st-instar larvae. Augmentation of nematode populations during the critical period of V.p. oviposition and eclosion is suggested as a control technique. - - H. bacteriophora: reduced survival of attached phylloxera by up to 80%. S. glaseri had no measurable impact. No evidence that H.b. could successfully reproduce within the bodies of the hosts. Augmentative use in the field in an release programme may be constrained by the need to use high densities, their dependence on moist soils, and their inability to propagate themselves within hosts. 146
Appendix 8 Berner & Schnetter, 2002 Williams et al., 2002 Heterorhabditis bacteriophora, H.bacteriophora + Beauveria brongniartii (fungus) Heterorhabditis bacteriophora, H. zealandica, H. marelata, and Steinernema carpocapsae Melolontha melolontha (European cockchafer) Vitacea polistiformis (grape root borer) Coleoptera: Scarabeidae Lepidoptera: Sesiidae Germany Inundative (soil) Ohio, USA Inundative Lab Field + Only under optimum conditions and with high doses of nematodes control of grubs could be reached. New variant for the application of nematodes proposed. Greenh ouse + + H. bacteriophora strains GPS11 and Oswego, H. zealandica strain X1, and H. marelata. S. carpocapsae strain All less effective H. zealandica strain X1 H. bacteriophora strain GPS11 * + means effective, - means not effective biocontrol agent. 8.7 Bacillus thuringiensis Reference B. thuringiensis subspecies Species of Insect pest Taxonomic category of pests Lepidoptera: Caroli et al., 1998 subsp. aizawai Lobesia botrana (grape berry moth) Tortricidae Keil & Schruft, 1998 L. botrana, Lepidoptera: Eupoecilia Tortricidae ambiguella (grape berry moths) Morando et al., 1998 L. botrana, Lepidoptera: E. ambiguella Tortricidae Boselli et al., 2000 L. botrana Lepidoptera: Tortricidae Fretay & Quenin, 2000 L. botrana Lepidoptera: Tortricidae Bagnoli & Lucchi, subsp. kurstaki Cryptoblabes Lepidoptera : 2001 gnidiella Pyralidae Boselli & Scannavini, 2001 Neves & Frescata, 2001 subsp. kurstaki subsp. aizawai (honey moth) L. botrana Lepidoptera: Tortricidae kurstaki x aizawai L. botrana Lepidoptera: Tortricidae Country Type of test Efficacy Additional results and information Emilia- Romagna, Italy Field + 90-95% reduction in damage against severe pest infestations comparable to the standard chemical products. Lab 4 Bt products (0.2% Bactospeine FC, 0.1 % Delfin, 0.1% Dipel ES and 0.1% Thuricide HP) were compared. The influence of temperature on the efficacy is discussed. Toscana, Italy Field + Piemonte, Italy Field + The efficacy of Bt was compared to 7 insecticides. All the tested insecticides had a significantly good efficacy. Emilia- Field Bt compared to insecticides. Romagna, Italy France Field Evaluation of new formularions. Emilia- Romagna, Italy Bairrada, Portugal Field Treatments included Agree (Bt kurstaki and aizawi), flufenoxuron, chlorpyrifos, lufenuron, tebufenozide, methoxyfenozide, indoxacarb and spinosad. The best control was obtained with methoxyfenozide, indoxacarb, and spinosad. Field + TUREX was tested to control the L. botrana third generation. Great interest of this Bt product regarding its efficiency and persistence based in a correct spray moment determination. 147
Page 1 and 2:
IOBC OILB WPRS SROP In te rn atio n
Page 3 and 4:
Preface One of the Research Activit
Page 5 and 6:
LORITO Matteo UNINA, Dip. Arboricol
Page 7 and 8:
List of Tables (continued) Table 17
Page 9 and 10:
Contents Chapter 1 Potential of bio
Page 11 and 12:
Chapter 1 Potential of biological c
Page 13 and 14:
Chapter 1 To allow for the analysis
Page 15 and 16:
Chapter 1 Table 4: Microbial specie
Page 17 and 18:
Chapter 1 Table 4 (continued) T. lo
Page 19 and 20:
Chapter 1 Table 4 (continued) Cupri
Page 21 and 22:
Chapter 1 other was aiming at ident
Page 23 and 24:
Chapter 2 Table 5: References extra
Page 25 and 26:
Chapter 2 Table 6: Biocontrol agent
Page 27 and 28:
Table 7 (continued) Chapter 2 Hemip
Page 29 and 30:
Chapter 2 Bacillus thuringiensis: 2
Page 31 and 32:
Chapter 3 - financial; since the de
Page 33 and 34:
Chapter 3 Pathogens and Nematodes a
Page 35 and 36:
Chapter 3 [Remark: Estimating the s
Page 37 and 38:
Chapter 3 100% 80% 60% P = Phytopha
Page 39 and 40:
Chapter 3 0,25 4 0,20 % dedicated t
Page 41 and 42:
Chapter 3 Table 9: Recent introduct
Page 43 and 44:
Chapter 3 Table 9: Recent introduct
Page 45 and 46:
Chapter 4 The survey was limited to
Page 47 and 48:
Chapter 4 Table 11 (continued) Othe
Page 49 and 50:
Chapter 4 SCLPs are included in ann
Page 51 and 52:
Chapter 4 laminarin is available on
Page 53 and 54:
Chapter 5 (EC) No 1109/2009. Tests
Page 55 and 56:
Chapter 6 Identified difficulties a
Page 57 and 58:
Chapter 6 Table 12: Evidence for, a
Page 59 and 60:
Table 13: Trichoderma-based prepara
Page 61 and 62:
Chapter 6 Many preparations have be
Page 63 and 64:
Chapter 6 Persistence, physiologica
Page 65 and 66:
Chapter 6 Harman, G. E. (2006) Over
Page 67 and 68:
Chapter 6 Sharon, E., Bar-Eyal, M.,
Page 69 and 70:
Chapter 7 purification, formulation
Page 71 and 72:
Chapter 7 Business profitability Co
Page 73 and 74:
Chapter 8 A survey was carried out
Page 75 and 76:
Chapter 8 80 70 60 %of supply %of a
Page 77 and 78:
Chapter 8 efficacy and the price of
Page 79 and 80:
Conclusions and perspectives reduct
Page 81 and 82:
Appendices For Chapter 1 Appendix 1
Page 83 and 84:
Appendix 1 B O Milsana + Brevibacil
Page 85 and 86:
Appendix 1 Strawberry (target patho
Page 87 and 88:
Appendix 1 Fruits - postharvest (ap
Page 89 and 90:
Appendix 1 Legumes (Fabaceae) (targ
Page 91 and 92:
Appendix 1 Miscellaneous crops (tar
Page 93 and 94:
Appendix 1 Lecanicillium muscarium
Page 95 and 96:
Appendix 1 Bedini, S., Bagnoli, G.,
Page 97 and 98:
Appendix 1 Dik, A., and Wubben, J.
Page 99 and 100:
Appendix 1 Gerlagh, M., Amsing, J.
Page 101 and 102:
Appendix 1 Jing, W., Tu, K., Shao,
Page 103 and 104:
Appendix 1 Li, G. Q., Huang, H. C.,
Page 105 and 106: Appendix 1 Morandi, M. A. B., Maffi
Page 107 and 108: Appendix 1 Rabea, E. I., Badawy, M.
Page 109 and 110: Appendix 1 Sutton, J. C., Liu, W.,
Page 111 and 112: Appendix 1 Zahavi, T., Cohen, L., W
Page 113 and 114: Appendix 2 Powdery mildew on grapes
Page 115 and 116: Appendix 2 Powdery mildew on cucurb
Page 117 and 118: Appendix 2 Askary, H. (1998). Patho
Page 119 and 120: Appendix 2 Malathrakis, N. E. (2002
Page 121 and 122: Appendix 3. Inventory of biocontrol
Page 123 and 124: Appendix 3 References on biocontrol
Page 125 and 126: Appendix 4. Inventory of biocontrol
Page 127 and 128: Appendix 4 Grapes (target pathogen
Page 129 and 130: Appendix 4 References on biocontrol
Page 131 and 132: Appendix 4 Robak, J., and Ostrowska
Page 133 and 134: Appendix 5 Cherry (target pathogens
Page 135 and 136: Appendix 5 Successful inhibition in
Page 137 and 138: Appendix 5 Smilanick, J. L., Denis-
Page 139 and 140: Appendix 6 showed protein content o
Page 141 and 142: Appendix 6 El-Khallal, S. M. (2007)
Page 143 and 144: Appendix 6 Liu, Q., J. C. Yu, et al
Page 145 and 146: Appendix 6 of tomato wilt pathogen
Page 147 and 148: Appendix 6 incognita, respectively.
Page 149 and 150: Appendix 7. Number of references re
Page 151 and 152: Appendix 8. Collection of data on a
Page 153 and 154: Appendix 8 Camporese & Duso, 1996 T
Page 155: Appendix 8 8.5 Fungi [5 species] Re
Page 159 and 160: Appendix 8 Morandi-Filho et al., 20
Page 161 and 162: Appendix 8 Marshall D.B. & Lester P
Page 163 and 164: Appendix 9 9.2. Details on the use
Page 165 and 166: Appendix 9 References 1. Abd-Rabou
Page 167 and 168: Appendix 9 50. Gariepy TD, Kuhlmann
Page 169 and 170: Appendix 9 97. Langewald J, Neuensc
Page 171 and 172: Appendix 9 146. Roltsch WJ, Meyerdi
Page 173 and 174: Appendix 10. Substances included in
Page 175 and 176: Appendix 10 Chemical Dimoxystrobin
Page 177 and 178: Appendix 10 Chemical Prosulfocarb '
Page 179 and 180: Appendix 10 Natural other Abamectin
Page 181 and 182: Appendix 11. Invertebrate beneficia
Page 183 and 184: Appendix 11 11.2. Invertebrate bioc
Page 185 and 186: Appendix 11 Coccinella septempuncta
Page 187 and 188: Appendix 11 Trichogramma brassicae
Page 193 and 194: Appendix 11 Diglyphus isaea Digline
show all

Classical and augmentative biological control against ... - IOBC-WPRS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?