Natural control of the cotton fleahopper, <i>Pseudatomoscelis seriatus</i> (Reuter) (Hemiptera, Miridae), in Texas

Breene, R. G.; Hartstack, A. W.; Sterling, W. L.; Nyffeler, Martin

doi:10.1111/j.1439-0418.1989.tb00459.x

Cited by 8 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 13 publications

(4 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The predators of fleahoppers on cotton may utilize the "lying-in-wait" strategy of Murfloek et al (1985), where the predators maintain their presence sympatrically with the cotton fleahoppers, preventing severe outbreaks of the pest (Breene et al, 1989b). If this is the case, the characteristics of the fleahopper predators described above (lack of a numerical response, etc.)…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…dynamics, and the economics of pest losses and predator or insecticide impact. Calibration of the predator component of TEXCIM, using predators to predict fleahopper dynamics can be found in Breene et al (1989b).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…salticus was more efficient in preying on fleahoppers, consuming a daily overall mean of 2.57 individuals, with a percent control figure of 42 %. O. salticus is the most abundant spider species found on Texas cotton (Nyffeler et al, 1987 ;Breene et aL, 1989b), being often the most numerous arthropod predator (unpublished data), and at times even more than immature and adult fleahoppers combined in un-sprayed cotton fields. In 1987, O. salticus field numbers exceeded fleahopper totals in 54 % of the weekly sampling periods (Breene et al, 1989b).…”

Section: Spider Predationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…O. salticus is the most abundant spider species found on Texas cotton (Nyffeler et al, 1987 ;Breene et aL, 1989b), being often the most numerous arthropod predator (unpublished data), and at times even more than immature and adult fleahoppers combined in un-sprayed cotton fields. In 1987, O. salticus field numbers exceeded fleahopper totals in 54 % of the weekly sampling periods (Breene et al, 1989b). The line beyond nine prey on the x axis is extrapolated for M. celer, since we did not collect data on the higher numbers for this spider species.…”

Section: Spider Predationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Efficacy of spider and ant predators on the cotton fleahopper [Hemiptera: Miridae]

1990

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The efficacy of predators of immature cotton fleahoppers, Pseudatomoscelis seriatus (Reuter), was calculated using field and laboratory cage confinement tests for consumption rate. The predators tested were the striped lynx spider, Oxyopes salticus Hentz ; the black and white jumping spider, Phidippus audax (Hentz) ; the celer crab spider, Misumenops celer Hentz; and the red imported fire ant, Solenopsis invicta Buren. The spider predators were evaluated in a cotton field using predator-prey confinement cages on cotton plants. Average percent control (sensu Abbott, 1925) of fleahoppers by O. salticus, P. audax, and M. celer were 42 %, 66 % and 32 % respectively. The rate of fleahopper consumption by red imported fire ants was measured in the laboratory using various numbers of ants and fleahoppers. Daily percent control by ants ranged from 0.5 % (single ant and fleahopper) to 100 % (colony linked). The functional response of the 4 arthropod species to different prey numbers is illustrated and discussed as is the relative potential usefulness of natural enemies to suppress fleahoppers on cotton. KEY-WORDS:Pseudatomoscelis seriatus, Predation, Miridae, cotton, natural control.The cotton fleahopper, Pseudatomoscelis seriatus (Reuter), is now regarded as the major pest of cotton in Texas and ranks as the 3 rd most damaging cotton insect pest in the United States according to King et al. (1988). Predators of the fleahopper were identified on cotton and woolly croton, Croton capitatus Michaux, in 1986 and 1987 using Phosphorus-32 radiolabeling techniques (Breene et al., 1988;Breene & Sterling, 1988; Breene et aL, 1989a, b). Seventeen species of spiders in 11 families and 10 species of insects in 9 families tested positive for fleahopper predation on cotton. Potential key fleahopper predators, based on capture frequency in the cotton field and/or the relative percentages of radiolabeled individuals versus unlabeled individuals (i.e. efficacy), were Oxyopes salticus Hentz, Solenopsis invicta Buren and Phidippus audax (Hentz). Fleahopper predators found on woolly croton, the major overwintering host of fleahoppers, included 10 species of spiders and 1 species of ant (Breene et al., 1988). On woolly croton, the species most frequently detected preying on fleahoppers was the celer crab spider, Misumenops celer (Hentz).A key predator provides predictive value for forecasting future prey dynamics and is capable of supplying irreplaceable mortality leading to prey population regulation (Sterling, 1984). Irreplaceable mortality is the fraction of the total generation mortality attributed to one natural enemy species so that prey survival would increase significantly if the natural enemy was removed (Sterling, 1989). The purpose of this research was to measure the rate of fleahopper predation by these arthropod species.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Spider Predationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Spider Predationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Efficacy of spider and ant predators on the cotton fleahopper [Hemiptera: Miridae]

1990

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Spider population dynamics can be disrupted by insecticide application (annual crops) or frequent mowing (alfalfa, hay) (LUCZAK 1979;NYFFELER 1982;PLAGENS 1983). The seasonal population trends are modified by changing weather patterns from year to year (BREENE et al 1989a;STERLING et al 1992). Peak spider densities up to > 20/mZ were reported in some agricultural fields (e.g., YEARGAN 1975;DEITZ et al 1976;CULIN and YEARGAN 1983).…”

Section: Feeding Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insectivorous activities of spiders in United States field crops

Nyffeler

Sterling

Dean

1994

J Applied Entomology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A survey of average spider numbers in U.S. field crops (considering a geographic range from the east to the west coast) gave an overall mean density of ≅ 1 plant‐dwelling spider/m2(± 0.18 SEM). This value is more than 100 times lower than Turnbull's famous ‘overall mean value’ (= 130.8/m2) computed from 37 published censuses of spider numbers in a wide variety of environments from all over the world. Crop fields are disturbed systems whose spider numbers are drastically reduced by agricultural practices such as pesticide use, cultivation, harvest, etc. Small sized spider individuals (including large percentages of immatures) numerically dominate the faunas of U.S. field crops, and these feed primarily on tiny prey organisms (< 4 mm in length). Small web‐building spiders are almost strictly insectivore (insects constituting > 99% of total prey). In contrast, the ‘hunters’ (nonweb‐building spiders) that actively search the plant surface for prey, exhibit a mixed strategy of araneophagic and insectivorous foraging patterns (insects constituting ≅ 90% of total prey). The aggressive ‘active searchers’ are highly polyphagous (compared to the small web‐weavers), but can narrow their feeding niche significantly when a suitable prey species reaches high numbers relative to other prey groups. The numerically dominant spider predators in U.S. field crops feed heavily on small plant‐sucking insects such as plant bugs (Miridae), fleahoppers (Miridae), leafhoppers (Cicadellidae), treehoppers (Membracidae), planthoppers (Delphacidae), and aphids (Aphididae), which is of interest from a biocontrol point of view. A typical agroecosystem spider (i.e., striped lynx spider) may capture an average of ≅ 1 prey per rainfree day in the field (by multiplying this value with the overall mean spider density of 1/m2, it follows that the average prey kill may be in the order of magnitude of ≅ 1 prey/m2/day). At prey densities of 100–300/m2 (as recorded in literature), spiders kill perhaps ≅ 0.3‐1 % of the potential prey per day. Extensive field and laboratory observations, experiments, and computer models conducted by research groups in different parts of the U.S. indicate that the collective predation impact of spiders may contribute significantly to lower pest levels in some crop fields.

show abstract

Impact of the Striped Lynx Spider (Araneae: Oxyopidae) and Other Natural Enemies on the Cotton Fleahopper (Hemiptera: Miridae) in Texas Cotton

Nyffeler

Sterling

Dean

1992

Environmental Entomology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Natural predation on nymphs and adults of the cotton feahopper, Pseud,atomoscelis seriatus (Reuter), was assessed during 108 h of visual observation in an insecticide-free cotton ffeld in cenbal Texas. Predaceous arthropods of 13 species (from nine families) were observed to forage on the feahopper. More than 807o of üre predation events observed were afüibutable to spiders. The striped lynx spider, Oxgopes salticus Hentz, was dominant among the predators observed eating fleahoppers (15 records of feeding in action). Cotton fleahoppers composed,-25Vo of the total prey of O. salticus during June and July. It was estimated during midseason that once every 4 d, one O. salticus would kill one cotton fleahopper. The assessment of the killing power of O. salticus, based on the predation rate and the predator-to-prey ratio (i.e., number of O. salticus individuals per feahopper), suggests that these spiders are important mortality agents of the cotton fleahopper (>l1Vo prey mortality per day in the middle of the growing season). Additional feahopper mortality is attributable to other predaceous arthropods such as Peucetia oiridans (Hentz) (Oxyopidae), jumping spiders (Salticidae), crab spiders (Thomisidae), web-building spiders (Araneidae, Dictynidae, Theridiidae), damsel bugs (Nabidae), and ants (Formicidae). KEY WORDS Pseudatomoscelis, Oxgopes, colton THn cotroN FLEAHorer,r., Pseudatomoscelis seröatus (Reuter), is a major pest of cotton in Texas (Adkisson 1973, Sterling et al. 1992b). Fleahoppers are eaten by various polyphagous arthropod predators as has been detected by visual observation (Whitcomb et al. 1963, Dean et al. 1987, Lockley & Young 1987) and by ""Plabeling (Breene & Sterling 1988). These polyphagous predators are numerous in some cotton fields (Whitcomb & Bell 1964, van den Bosch & Hagen 1966, Johnson et al. 1986, Dean & Sterling 1987), suggesting that they may contribute 0/Xü22l5XlS2llL78-f f88$02.00/0 @ 1992 Entomological Society of America This article is the copyright property of the Entomological Society of America and may not be used for any commercial !r othq p{ygte pqrpose without specific written permission of thg Entomological Society of Amedca October 1992 Nvppsrsn ET ÄL.: Spropn PnnoerroN oN CorroN Flnenoppnn merically dominant predator species was estimated. Materials and Methods Sfudy Area. The study site was a weed-free

show abstract

Natural control of the cotton fleahopper, Pseudatomoscelis seriatus (Reuter) (Hemiptera, Miridae), in Texas

Cited by 8 publications

References 13 publications

Efficacy of spider and ant predators on the cotton fleahopper [Hemiptera: Miridae]

Efficacy of spider and ant predators on the cotton fleahopper [Hemiptera: Miridae]

Insectivorous activities of spiders in United States field crops

Impact of the Striped Lynx Spider (Araneae: Oxyopidae) and Other Natural Enemies on the Cotton Fleahopper (Hemiptera: Miridae) in Texas Cotton

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About