Testing the Interactions of Pest–Predator–Plant Components of the TEXCIM Model

Legaspi, B. A. C.; Sterling, W. L.; Hartstack, A. W.; Dean, David A.

doi:10.1093/ee/18.1.157

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The data used in calibrating the TEXCIM cotton fleahopper model was collected at three locations, all of which received no insecticide treatments. The first was the Ellis Unit of the Texas Department of Corrections from 1980to 1982(LEGASPI et al 1989). Data at the Ellis unit were gathered from an 8 ha field of cotton, 8 km northeast of Huntsville, Texas.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, cotton produces much more fruit than it can mature and some fruit injury by fleahoppers does not automatically result in yield loss or delay of harvest STERLING and HARTSTACK 1988;STEWART and STERLING 1988). In one eleven year study where cotton not influenced by pesticides was compared to treated cotton, the untreated fields produced greater average yields than did treated fields over the course of the study (STERLING 1989).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Breene

Hartstack

Sterling

et al. 1989

J Applied Entomology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The population dynamics of the cotton fleahopper, Pseudatomoscelis seriatus (Reuter), on cotton was predicted using the Texas Cotton Insect Model (TEXCIM) and compared with observed field data from east Texas. The presence of natural enemies and their estimated rate and efficacy of fleahopper consumption were used to calibrate the model to east Texas conditions. A correcting equation was incorporated into the model to account for fleahopper mortality due to rain. Current economic thresholds for cotton fleahoppers were used to determine the frequency of correct decisions made by the model. TEXCIM was free of type I and type II errors in 93% of 71 sampling periods compared with a previous rate of 86% in 57 sampling dates in an earlier version of TEXCIM. Cotton producers may now use either traditional chemical control or monitoring and conserving natural enemies to maximize profits. Zusammenfassung Natürliche Bekämpfung der Baumwollwanze Pseudatomoscelis seriatus (Reuter) (Hemiptera, Miridae) in Texas Die Populationsdynamik der Wanze Pseudatomoscelis seriatus (Reuter) in Baumwolle wurde mittels des “Texas‐Baumwoll‐Insekten‐Modells” (TEXCIM) vorhergesagt und mit beobachteten Felddaten aus Osttexas verglichen. Zur Angleichung des Modells an die Bedingungen in Osttexas wurden die geschätzte Rate und Effizienz der Vertilgung von P. seriatus durch natürliche Feinde verwendet. Um die durch Regen verursachte Mortalität von P. seriatus in Rechnung zu ziehen, wurde eine Korrektur‐gleichung in das Modell eingebaut. Gegenwärtige ökonomische Schadenschwellen für P. seriatus wurden verwendet, um die Frequenz der auf das Modell zurückgehenden Korrektur‐Entscheidungen zu bestimmen. TEXCIM erwies sich in 93% von 71 Sammelperioden frei von Irrtümern des Typus I und Typus II, was 86% von 57 Sammelperioden in einer früheren Version von TEXCIM entspricht. Zwecks Gewinnmaximierung können Baumwollproduzenten nun zwischen traditioneller chemischer Bekämpfung sowic Überwachung und Schonung der natürlichen Feinde wählen.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Breene

Hartstack

Sterling

et al. 1989

J Applied Entomology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Evidence of spiders as predators of insect eggs (table 3) is reported from North and South America, and Australia (WHITCOMB and BELL 1964;WHITCOMB 1967;PAMANES-GUER-RERO 1975;BUSCHMAN et al 1977;ROOM 1979;MCCARTY et al 1980;RICHMAN et al 1980;MCDANIEL andSTERLING 1979, 1982;GRAVENA and STERLING 1983;GRAVENA and PAZETTO 1987). This evidence was collected largely from projects conducted in cotton fields.…”

Section: Spiders As Predators Of Insect Eggsmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Validations of this model have shown the importance of spiders and other polyphagous predators in predicting the abundance of Hefiothis spp. on cotton (LEGASPI et al 1989).…”

Section: Spiders As Predators Of Insect Eggsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to traditional foraging theory, spiders are considered to be predators of live, moving prey (GERTSCH 1949;TURNBULL 1973). More recent studies expanded this view since evidence was found that spiders utilize a much broader range of foraging strategies, including feeding o n dead animals (KNOST and ROVNER 1975;WILLIAMS et al 1986), artificial diets (PECK and WHITCOMB 1968), plant components ( V I T~ 1953;SMITH and MOMMSEN 1984), and arthropod eggs (WHITCOMB and BELL 1964;WHITCOMB 1967;NUESSLY 1986). The purpose of this paper is to provide examples of arthropod egg predation by spiders from the literature (tables 1-3) to contribute to a better understanding of the predatory role of spiders (for a detailed literature survey o n spiders as natural control ee NYFFELER 1982a, 1982bRIECHERT and LOCKLEY 1984; NYFFELER and BENZ agents, 1987a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Spiders as predators of arthropod eggs

Nyffeler

Breene

Dean

et al. 1990

J Applied Entomology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Examples of spiders pre ing upon the e gs of Araneae and Insecta are iven from descriptions found in the literature from digerent regions of the world. In many cases, spiterlings or female spiders were feeding on the e g r of conspecifics (cannibalism). Evidence of conspecific redation on eggs has been reported for the amilies Dipluridae, Uloboridae, Scytodidae, LoxosceliJe, Pholcidae, Theridiidae, Agelenidae, Lycosidae, Gnaphosidae, Clubionidae, Thomisidae and Salticidae. Spiders feeding on the eggs of other species (interspecific predation by Salticidae upon eggs of other Salticidae and Uloboridae; Theridiidae upon the eggs of orb-weaving spiders) has also been noted.Evidence of spiders as predators of insect eggs is reported from North and South America, and Australia, largely in agroecosystems and forest ecosystems. In most cases, the spiders were observed feeding on the eggs of Lepidoptera (families Noctuidae, Tortricidae, Lymantriidae, Pyralidae and Sphingidae), and to a lesser extent, on coleopteran eggs (family Curculionidae). Spider species found to be predaceous on insect eggs were principally from the families Salticidae, Oxyopidae, Lycosidae, Clubionidae and Anyphaenidae.The phenomenon of egg-predation in spiders may be more common than was reviously thought. Oophagy has often been overlooked in the past probably due to recognition d i f f h i e s in the field (small size of e gs, and the brief "handling time" required for egg consumption). We suspect similar insect egg prefiation behavior by spiders will eventual1 be detected in European habitats. Since spiders are predaceous on the eggs of insect pest species kund in agricultural and forest ecosystems, failure to monitor oophagy may result in missing an important source of mortality of insects and other arthropods.

show abstract

An empirical oviposition model of bollworms (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in cotton representing stochasticity due to migration

Schaub¹,

Stone²

1994

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Testing the Interactions of Pest–Predator–Plant Components of the TEXCIM Model

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

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

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

Spiders as predators of arthropod eggs

An empirical oviposition model of bollworms (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in cotton representing stochasticity due to migration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About