Susceptibility of cereal and non‐cereal grasses to attack by Hessian fly (<i>Mayetiola destructor</i>(Say))

Harris, M. O.; Dando, John; Griffin, W. B.; Madie, C.

doi:10.1080/01140671.1996.9513957

Cited by 17 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the Hessian ßy is a pest of wheat, it can infest a number of other grasses, both cultivated and wild, from the tribes Triticeae and Bromeae (Jones 1936(Jones , 1939Zeiss et al 1993;Harris et al 1996). We have seen Hessian ßy infest another alternative grass species from a different tribe in our laboratory with little to no impact on ßy survival (B. J. Schemerhorn, unpublished data).…”

mentioning

confidence: 61%

Population Structure and Spatial Influence of Agricultural Variables on Hessian Fly Populations in the Southeastern United States

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Population structure dictates the evolution of each population, and thus, the species as a whole. Incorporating spatial variables with population genetic statistics allows for greater discovery beyond traditional population genetics alone and can inform management decisions. The understanding of population structure in Hessian fly, Mayetiola destructor (Say), a pest of wheat, has been limited in the past. We scored 14 microsatellite loci from 12 collections of Hessian fly in the southeastern United States. Through Bayesian clustering analysis, we found two major populations of Hessian fly covering the entire southeastern United States. We evaluated correlations between agriculturally significant spatial variables and population genetic differentiation to test if genetic structure has an ecological component in a wheat agro-ecosystem. Our results suggest the total amount of alternative host plants in the county may be driving some genetic differentiation. Although planting date may also be influential, geographic distance, mean annual temperature, and harvested wheat for grain do not seem to be contributing factors. The ecological or spatial component to population structure, however, may be minimal compared to factors such as genetic drift.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 61%

Population Structure and Spatial Influence of Agricultural Variables on Hessian Fly Populations in the Southeastern United States

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An oviposition choice test comparing egg numbers on the four nearisogenic wheat genotypes showed no difference in egg numbers on resistant versus susceptible genotypes. Earlier studies using different R genes and less closely related genotypes also showed that Hessian ßy females do not lay fewer eggs on R gene plants (Painter 1951, Harris et al 1996. Reasons why reduced egglaying by insects on R gene plants has not have evolved are discussed by Larsson and Ekbom (1995) and Harris et al (2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Proximate Cues for Reduced Oviposition by Hessian Fly on Wheat Plants Attacked by Conspecific Larvae

2006

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The amount of surface cereal residue is being increased to reduce soil erosion by wind and water. Similar conservation measures to protect the quality of air, water, and soil resources seem responsible for the increasing importance of Hessian ßy in New Zealand (Harris et al 1996).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Impact of Hessian Fly (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) on Spring Wheat in Oregon and Additive Yield Losses with Fusarium Crown Rot and Lesion Nematode

Smiley¹,

Gourlie²,

Whittaker³

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Damage caused by Hessian fly, Mayetiola destructor (Say), was quantified in spring wheat, Triticum aestivum L., trials near Pendleton and Moro, OR, during 2001 and 2002. Five field experiments were established to examine genetic resistance to Fusarium crown rot, Fusarium pseudograminearum (O'Donnell & Aoki), and economic damage by lesion nematode, Pratylenchus neglectus (Rensch, 1924) (Filipjev Schuurmanns & Stekhoven, 1941) and Pratylenchus thornei (Sher & Allen, 1941). Hessian fly became the dominant factor affecting grain yield in four experiments. Genotypes carrying the H3-resistance gene had grain yields 66 and 68% higher than susceptible genotypes in cultivar trials during 2001 and 2002, respectively. Yield reductions were detected when Hessian fly infestation rates exceeded 50% plants during 2001 and 15% plants (8% tillers) during 2002. In two trials during 2001, in-furrow application of aldicarb (Temik) at planting improved yields of four Hessian fly-susceptible cultivars by 72 and 144% (up to 1,959 kg/ha) and yields of one Hessian fly-resistant cultivar by 2 and 3%. Resistant cultivars and aldicarb improved grain quality as much as two market grades during 2001. The value of increased grain production with Hessian fly-resistant cultivars in four field experiments ranged from dollar 112 to dollar 252/ha, excluding price incentives for improved market quality. Yield reduction due to combined damage from Hessian fly and either Fusarium crown rot or lesion nematode was additive. This report seems to be the first quantitative yield loss estimate for Hessian fly in spring wheat in the semiarid environment of the inland Pacific Northwest.

show abstract

Susceptibility of cereal and non‐cereal grasses to attack by Hessian fly (Mayetiola destructor(Say))

Cited by 17 publications

References 19 publications

Population Structure and Spatial Influence of Agricultural Variables on Hessian Fly Populations in the Southeastern United States

Population Structure and Spatial Influence of Agricultural Variables on Hessian Fly Populations in the Southeastern United States

Proximate Cues for Reduced Oviposition by Hessian Fly on Wheat Plants Attacked by Conspecific Larvae

Economic Impact of Hessian Fly (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) on Spring Wheat in Oregon and Additive Yield Losses with Fusarium Crown Rot and Lesion Nematode

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About