vol. no. 1 spring 1989 the great lakes entomologisttrimerotropis huroniana (orthoptera: acrididae),...

Vol 22 No 1 Spring 1989

THE

GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST

PUBLISHED BY

THE MICHIGAN ENTOMOLOGICAL

SOCIETY

THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST

Published by the Michigan Entomological Society

Volume 22 No 1

ISSN 0090middot0222

TABIE OF CONTENTS

Two new genera of Hemisarcoptidae (Acari Astigmata) from the Huron Mountains of northern Michigan

Barry M OConnor and Marilyn A Houck

Some aspects of the biology of a predaeeous anthomyiid fly Coenosia tigrina Francis A Drummond Eleanor Groden DL Haynes and Thomas C Edens II

State records and confirmations of Arkansas flat bugs (Heteroptera Aradidae) Steven J Taylor and JE McPherson 19

Insect pests associated with birdsfoot trefoil Lotus corniculatus in Wisconsin Mark S Wipfli John L Wedberg David B Hogg and Thomas D Syverud 25

Late lilac Syringa villosa New host of the lace bug Leptoypha mutica (Heteroptera Tingidae)

AG Wheeler Jr 35

An annotated list of the Orthoptera of Beaver Island Lake Michigan RG Bland 39

Trimerotropis huroniana (Orthoptera Acrididae) a new record for Wiseonsin Harvey E Ballard Jr 45

Estimating parasitism of Colorado potato beetle eggs Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Coleoptera Chrysomelidae) by Edovum puttleri (Hymenoptera Eulophidae)

E Groden FA Drummond RA Casagrande and JH Lashomb 47

A new location for Valgus hemipterus (Coleoptera Scarabaeidae) Joseph Mahar 55

COVER ILLUSTRATION

Papilio glaucus canadensis butterflies puddling at a site near Agawa Canyon Ontario Photograph by John Hicks

THE MICHIGAN ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY

1988-89 OFFICERS

President Phil Watson President-Elect Richard 1 Snider Executive Secretary M C Nielsen Journal Editor Mark F OBrien Newsletter Editor Robert Haack

The Michigan Entomological Society traces its origins to the old Detroit Entomological Society and was organized on 4 Novemher 1954 to promote the seience of entomology in all its branches and by all feasible means and to advance cooperation and good fellowship among persons interested in entomology The Society attempts to facilitate the exchange of ideas and information in both amateur and professional circles and encourages the study of insects by youth Membership in the Society which serves the North Central States and adjacent Canada is open to all persons interested in entomology There are four paying classes of membership

Student (including those currently enrolled as college sophomores-annual dues $400 Active-annual dues $800 Institutional-annual dues $2000 Sustaining--annual contribution $2500 or more Lif~$16000

Dues are paid on a calendar year basis (Jan J-Dec 3J)

Memberships accepted before July I shall begin on the preceding January I memberships accepted at a later date shall begin the following January I unless the earlier date is requested and the required dues are paid All members in good standing receive the Newsletter of the Society published quarterly All Active and Sustaining Members may vote in Society affairs

All dues and contributions to the Society are deductible for Federal income tax purposes

SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION

Institutions and organizations as well as individuals not desiring the henefits of memhership may subscribe to The Great Lakes Entomologist at the rate of $1500 per volume The journal is published quarterly subscriptions are accepted only on a volume (4 issues) basis Single copies of The Great Lakes Entomgist are available at $425 each with a 20 percent discount for 25 or more copies sent to a single address

MICROFILM EDITION Positive microfilm copies of the current volume of The Great Lakes Entomologist will he available at nominal cost to members and bona fide subscrihers of the paper edition only at the end of each volume year Please address all orders and inquiries to University Microfilms Inc 300 Zeeb Road Ann Arhor Michigan 48106 USA

Inquiries about back numbers subscriptions and Society business should be directed to the Executive Secretary Michigan Entomological Society Department of Entomology Michigan State University East Lansing Michigan 48824 USA Manuscripts and related correspondence should be directed to the Editor (see inside back cover)

Copyright 1989 The Michigan Entomological Society

1989 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST

TWO NEW GENERA OF HEMISARCOPTIDAE (ACARI ASTIGMATA) FROM THE HURON MOUNTAINS OF

NORTHERN MICHIGAN

Barry M OConnor i and Marilyn A Houck2

ABSTRACT

Two new genera and species of Hemisarcoptidae Superioropus huronmontanus and Huronopus michiganensis are described from deutonymphs phoretic on ichneumonid wasps from the Huron Mountains Marquette County Michigan

The family Hemisarcoptidae is a poorly known group of astigmatid mites associated with a wide variety of insects OConnor (1982) diagnosed the family and recognized 5 genera Hemisarcoptes species of which are predators of diaspidid scale-insects with deutonymphs phoretic on coccinellid beetles of the genus Chilocorus Linobia the single species of which is an ectoparasite of the chrysomelid beetle Chrysomela populi in Europe Congovidia most species of which are known only from deutonymphs phoretic on a variety of insect groups from Europe Africa and South America Nanacarus a Holarctic genus known from polypore fungi and synanthropic habitats and Divilia with a single described species from ants in the Soviet Union

Volgin and Mironov (1979) described the genus Nanacaroides from a single species from a polypore fungus from Siberia OConnor (1984) regarded this genus as a synonym of Congovidia however this synonymy was based upon ancestral character states retained in both genera We now believe Nanacaroides should be regarded as a valid genus Finally Fain (1987) added a seventh genus Espletiacarus described from a deutonymph collected from flowers of Espletia incana (Asteraceae) in Colombia Fain (1988) has given additional information on character states in some of these genera

To date only 2 species of Hemisarcoptidae have been described from the Nearctic region Hemisarcoptes malus (Shimer 1868) and H cooremani (Thomas 1964) As part of a systematic revision of the family we have collected free living stages and phoretic deutonymphs representing a number of new species in North America

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Insects were collected on the property of the Huron Mountain Club by sweep net Malaise traps and pitfall traps during the summers of 1986 and 1987 The site consists of mixed deciduous and coniferous forest and attempts were made to collect in as many habitat types as possible Detailed descriptions of the habitats are included in Wells and Thompson (1976) and Gosling (1986) Whenever possible insects were collected and

IMuseum of Zoology and Department of Biology The University of Michigan Ann Arbor Michigan 48109-1079

2Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology The University of Arizona Tucson Arizona 85721

2 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST Vol 22 No 1

stored in individual vials to prevent contamination Mites were mounted in Hoyers medium insect hosts were labelled with voucher numbers and identificd by specialists

RESULTS

From our extensive collections from the Huron Mountains we have identified 16 species of Hemisarcoptidae all previously undescribed Species in the genera Congovshyidia Nanacarus and Divilia will be treated separately Due to the presence of combinations of ancestral and derived character states two species could not be included within the named genera without seriously altering generic concepts These new taxa are described below In the descriptions all lengths are given in micrometers (fLm)

Superioropus New Genus

This genus is known only from the deutonymph Diagnosis hemisarcoptid mites with deutonymphs rctaining the following ancestral

character states propodosornal and hysterosomal sclerites with linear sculpturing dorsal hysterosomal chaetotaxy complete including setae dl gnathosoma with subcapitulum separate palps and palpal solenidia anterior coxal apodemes II not connected to sternum by surface sclerotization posterior median apodeme free anteriorly simple posteriorly tibiae I-II with apical triangular projections leg setation tarsi 6-6-4-6 tibiae 1-1-1-0 genua 2-2-0-0 femora 1-1-0-1 trochanters 1-1-1-0 Solenidion (t)-3 of tarsus I subapical solenidion IT II present Derived character states of the known species include the loss of solenidia (t)-2 from tarsus I and 4gt from tibia III and the loss of the famulus from tarsus 1

Type-species Superioropus huronmontanus n sp by original designation

Superioropus huronmontanus New Species

Deutonymph (figs 1-7) Body ovoid length and width of holotype 202 x 145 of two paratypes 200 x 150 and 205 x 139 Gnathosoma with subcapitulum and palps well-developed palpal solenidia long gnathosomal setae absent

Venter (fig 1) Coxal fields unsclerotized Anterior apodemes of coxal fields I fused to form sternum posterior apodemes I fused to anterior apodemes II anterior apodemes II with surface sclerotization directed laterally from medial apices posterior apodemes II with surface sclerotization along 34 of length apodemes III directed antero-medially medial apices not closely associated with posterior median apodeme anterior apodemes IV fused with median apodeme posterior apodemes IV underlying anterior margin of attachment organ median apodeme ending simply Setae of coxal fields I and III absent represented by vestigial alveoli setae of coxal fields IV filiform Genital opening posterior to coxal fields IV anterior genital setae long and filiform positioned at junction of apodemes IV and median a odeme posterior genital setae filiform f1anking anterior end of genital opening genit Hae two segmented elongate and pointed medially Attachment organ broadly ov with raised margin anterior suckers stalked median suckers relatively small similar in size to anterior suckers lateral conoidal setae slightly posterior to a plane connecting centers of median suckers posterior conoidal setae with bases almost contiguous anterior lateral and posterior median cuticular suckers well developed

Dorsum (fig 2) Dorsum largely covered by propodosomal and hysterosomal sclerites scjugal furrow well developed separating sclerites Propodosomal and hysterosomal sclerites with a pattern of coarse furrows and smaller pits Ocelli present near apex of propodosomal sclerite overlying single pigment spot Dorsal setation complete for family (ve absent from ancestral astigmatid mite pattern) setae dl present but shorter than most

1989 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST 3

l

) 50 tm

1

Figure 1 Superioropus huronmontanus n sp deutonymph venter

other dorsal setae All dorsal setae filiform supracoxal setae of legs I slightly inf1ated basally Cupules ia between bases of setae 1I and h im ventral to setae 13 ip not observed ih ventral near postero-Iateral margins of attachment organ Opisthonotal gland openings between setae 12 and 13


50 ~m

2

Figure 2 Superioropus huronmontanus n sp deutonymph dorsum

Legs (figs 3-7 figured from femur-tarsus) Legs similar in structure to other Hemisarcoptidae all segments free except tibia-tarsus IV fused Tibiae I-II bear triangular scIerotized processes at their apices Setation trochanters 1-1-1-0 all setae filifonn femora 1-1-0-1 all setae filiform seta wF IV extending beyond the apex of leg IV genua 2-2-0-0 setae cG mG filifonn tibiae 1-1-1-0 all setae filifonn tarsi 6-6-4-6 tarsi I-II with ventral setae la wa and ra filiform la and ra very long dorsal setae d and e coupled setae d and f short and filifonn e foliate tarsus HI with setae d rand w filifonn and ventral seta s a heavy spine tarsus IV with 6 filifonn setae wand d very long and apical with w (length 211) longer than d (length 160) three thin filifonn setae (s p and q lengths 10-12) more proximo-ventral and a final longer filifonn seta (r length 23) even more proximal

Solenidiotaxy tarsi 2-1-0-0 tarsus I with w-l basal w-3 positioned slightly more than


ra

Figure 3-7 Superioropus huronmontanus n sp deutonymph 3 Leg I dorsal 4 Leg II dorsal 5 Leg III dorsal 6 Tarsus III ventral 7 Leg IV ventral

2i3 the distance from base to apex of tarsus w-2 absent position marked by a thin spot in the cuticle tarsus II with w basal more spindle shaped than w-l of tarsus 1 Tibiae 1-1-0-0 ltjJ I distinctly longer than ltjJ II ltjJ III absent position marked by a thin spot in the cuticle Genua 1-1-0-0 (J II very short Famulus not observed on tarsus 1 Pretarsi I-III consisting of empodial claw and membranous ambulacrum condylophores not apparent pretarsus IV absent

Etymology The generic name Superioropus is derived from Lake Superior largest of the North Ameriean great lakes and the old generic name Hypopus used for astigmatid mite deutonymphs The specific name huronmontanus refers to the Huron Mountains where the specimens were collected

Material examined Holotype and two paratype deutonymphs from Exeristes comshystockii (Cresson 1880) (Hymenoptera Ichneumonidae) USA Michigan Marquette Co Huron Mountain Club 26 June 1986 BM OConnor (BMOC 86-0626-18) Host wasp deposited in the University of Michigan Museum of Zoology (UMMZ) labelled Mites removed BM OConnor 86-0626-18 This host also harbored 14 individuals of an undescribed species of Nanacarus

Type deposition Holotype and two paratypes in the University of Michigan Museum of Zoology Ann Arbor Michigan

Systematic position Superioropus exhibits the most plcsiomorphic morphology of any known hemisarcoptid deutonymph The retention of 6 setae on tarsus IV is unique in the family (all other taxa have 5 or fewer) and suggests that the genus may be the sister group of all the remaining taxa Retention of hysterosomal seta dl is shared only with Divilia all other hemisarcoptid deutonymphs have lost this pair of setae On the other hand Superioropus shares the loss of soIenidion w-2 and the famulus from tarsus I with

6 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST VoL 22 No1

Huronopus n gen Divilia and some but not all Hemisarcoptes species These structures are retained in other hemisarcoptid deutonymphs

Huronopus New Genus

This genus is known only from the deutonymph Diagnosis hemisarcoptid mites retaining the following ancestral character states

gnathosoma with subcapitulum scparate palps and palpaJ solenidia anterior coxal apodemes not connected to sternum by surface sclerotization posterior median apodcme not bifurcate posteriorly tibiac I-II with triangular apical projections leg setation tarsi 6-6-4-5 tibiae 1-1-1-0 genua 2-2-0-0 femora 1-1-0-1 trochanters 1-1-1-0 Apico-dorsal seta d of tarsus IV longer than anterior apico-ventral seta w soIenidion (0-3 of tarsus I subapical not apical soIenidion (T II present Derived character states of the known species include the lack of sculpture on the propodosomal sc1erite and anterior portion of the hysterosomal sclerite the loss of dorsal hysterosomal setae dl the connection of coxal apodemes III to the anterior end of the posterior median apodeme by surfacc sclerotizashytion the loss of solenidion (0-2 and the famulus from tarsus I and the reduction to 5 setae on tarsus IV

Type-species Huronopus michiganensis n sp by original designation

Huronopus michiganensis New Species

Deutonymph (figs 8-14) Body elongate-ovoid length and width of holotype 229 x 154 of one paratype 225 x 150 Gnathosoma as in previous species but palps and palpal solenidia slightly longer

Venter (fig 8) Coxal fields largely sclerotized with an area of striate cuticle extending between posterior apodemes II Otherwise coxal fields and apodemes generally as in previous species except coxal apodemes III connected to median apodeme by surface sclerotization Posterior apodemes IV almost triangular with a distinct anterior extension Coxal field setae IV filiform coxal field III setae represented by vestigial alveoli no alveoli visible on coxal fields I genital and subhumeral setae as in previous species Genital papillae and attachment organ as in previous species

Dorsum (fig 9) Dorsum entirely sclerotized except in sejugal region Sejugal furrow ocelli cupules and gland openings as in previous species Propodosomal sclerite without sculpture hysterosomal sclerite with sculpture in the form of small thin furrows and pits restricted to posterior median and lateral regions Dorsal setae positioned as in previous species but setae longer and dorsal setae dl absent represented by refractile spots

Legs (figs 10-14 figured from femur-tarsus) Legs and leg setation generally similar to previous species with the following differences On tarsus I solenidion w-3 is positioned more basally arising more basal than the ventral position of seta wa Tibia III retains solenidion $ Tarsus IV bears only 5 setae two very long apical setae with the dorsal seta (d length 237) longer than the anterior-ventral seta (w length 150) two short filiform setae (q length 17 s length 18) more proximo-ventral and the final seta (r length 24) more proximal more elongate and thickened basally

Etymology The generic name Huronopus is derived from Lake Huron the second largest of the great lakes and the old generic name Hypopus The specific name michiganensis refers to the state of Michigan

Material examined Holotype and one paratype deutonymph from Neoxorides pillulus Townes 1960 (Hymenoptera Ichneumonidae) USA Michigan Marquette Co Huron Mountain Club 24 June 1986 HM OConnor (BMOC 86-0624-13) Host wasp deposited in UMMZ labelled Mites removed BM OConnor 86-0624-13 This host also harbored I deutonymph of llistiogaster arborsignis Woodring (family Acaridae) 1 deutonymph of an undescribed Nanacarus species and 4 deutonymphs of an undescrihed Divilia species


50 )JITl

Figure 8Huronopus michiganensis n sp deutonyrnph venter

Type deposition Holotype and paratype deposited in UMMZ Systematic position Huronopus shares with Divilia the absence of ornamentation on

the propodosomal sclerite partial fusion of the apodemes of coxal fields III to the

8 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST Vol 22 No1

Figure 9 Huronopus michiganensis n sp deutonymph dorsum

posterior median apodeme relatively long dorsal setae and seta d longer than w on tarsus IV conditions we regard as derived With respect to the other genera of Hemisarcoptidae (except Superioropus) Huronopus and Divilia retain the more ancestral condition of 5 setae on tarsus IV The new genus differs from Divilia in retaining setae on trochanters I-III and seta wF on femur IV and in lacking dorsal hysterosomal setae dl The latter state

1989 9 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST

0n13 251lt

12

Figures 10-14 Huronopus michiganensis n sp deutonymph 10 Leg I dorsal II Leg II dorsal 12 Leg III dorsal 13 Tarslls III ventral 14 Leg IV ventral

is shared with Hemisarcoptes Congovidia Nanacarus Nanacaroides and Espletiacarus As noted above Huronopus shares the loss of solenidion w-2 and the famulus from tarsus I with Superioropus Divilia and some Hemisarcoptes

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation (BSRshy8307711) Field work in the Huron Mountains was supported by the Huron Mountain Wildlife Foundation We thank Mark and Adrienne OBrien University of Michigan and Dr David CL Gosling Huron Mountain Wildlife Foundation for their assistance in collecting insects in the Huron Mountains We also thank Dr Henry Townes American Entomological Institute for identifying the Ichneumonidae

LITERATURE CITED

Fain A 1987 Notes on the mites living in the flowers of Espletla spp (Asteraceae) in Colombia U Espletiacarus andinus gen n spec n (Hemisarcoptidae) and Michaelopus incanus sp n (Acaridae) Entomol Mitt zoo Mus Hamburg 9 (no 130)37-47


Fain A 1988 Observations on Congovidia Fain amp Elsen 1971 and allied genera (Acari Hemisarcoptidae) Bull Ann Soc r Beige En 124 125-130

Gosling DCL 1986 Ecology of the Cerambycidae (Coleoptera) of the Huron Mountains in Northern Michigan Great Lakes Entomol 19 153-162

OConnor BM 1982 Acari Astigmata in Parker SB (ed) Synopsis and Classification of Living Organisms vol II McGraw-Hill New York pp 146-169

OConnor BM 1984 Acarine-fungal relationships the evolution of symbiotic associations in Wheeler Q and M Blackwell (eds) Fungus-Insect Relationships Perspectives in Ecology and Evolution Columbia University Press New York pp 354-381

Volgin VI and SV Mironov 1979 New species and a new genus of mites of the family Saproglyphidae (Acarina Acaroidea) Trudy ZooL Inst Akad Nauk SSSR Leningrad 8591-98 (in Russian)

Wells JR and PW Thompson 1976 Vegetation and flora of the Huron Mountains Occas Papers Huron Mt Wildlife Found 31-59


SOME ASPECTS OF THE BIOLOGY OF A PREDACEOUS ANTHOMYIID FLY COENOSIA TIGRINAI

Francis A Drummond2 Eleanor Groden2

DL Haynes3 and Thomas C Edens3

ABSTRACT

The results of a two-year study in Michigan on the incidence of Coenosia tigrina adults under different onion production practices is presented In Michigan C tigrina has three generations and is more abundant in organic agroecosystems than chemically-intensive onion production systems

Adults of the tiger fly Coenosia tigrina (F) are primarily predators of Diptera The species is common to both Europe and North America Hobby (1931 1934) published lists of prey species reported for C tigrina in Europe mostly represented by muscid and anthomyiid flies Studies designed to quantify predation by C tigrina are lacking Thomas (1967) suggests that the tiger fly is a key predator of the face fly Musca autumnalis DeGeer in the United States although this hypothesis is solely based upon the abundance of C tigrina It is very abundant in apple orchards in the northeastern United States where it preys upon adults of the apple maggot fly Rhagoietis pomonella Walsh (Drummond unpubl obs) Yellow panel and red sphere traps caught C tigrina there from the beginning of July into October (Drummond et al 1982) C tigrina has also been referred to as an important predator of the seedcorn maggot fly Delia platura (Meigen) in England (Miles 1948) and Canada (Miller and McClanahan 1960)

In Michigan (USA) C tigrina is a very common predator associated with the onion agroecosystem where it preys upon the seedcorn maggot adult Delia platura and the onion maggot adult Delia antiqua (Meigen) (Groden 1982 Carruthers et al 1985) This is also the case in the onion growing regions of eastern Canada (Perron and LaFrance 1952 Perron and LaFrance 1956 LeRoux and Perron 1960 Tomlin et al 1985) In fact what little is known about the biology of C tigrina has been obtained in association with D antiqua

All life stages of C tigrina have been found in onion fields (LeRoux and Perron 1960) Detailed descriptions of the stage are presented by LeRoux and Perron (1960) and Perron and LaFrance (1956) The life cycle is as follows In the spring (late April-early May) adult females lay eggs singly on or just beneath the soil surface (LeRoux and Perron 1960) Only one larval instar occurs from egg hatch to pupation (LeRoux and Perron 1960) Perron and LaFrance (1956) failed to rear the larvae to maturity on a variety of vegetable and animal diets but believed the larvae fed upon organic matter in the soil Yahnke and George (1972) discovered larvae of C tigrina preying on the earthworm Eisenia rosea (Savigny) in the field Repeated sampling confirmed the hypothesis that the larvae are predaceous on earthworms (Yahnke and George 1972) These researchers found that survival in the laboratory of C tigrina larvae reared on E rosea was significantly greater on dissected prey than on live intact earthworms They also found

IMichigan Agricultural Experiment Station Journal Article 12656 2Prescnt address Department of Entomology University of Maine Orono ME 04469 3Department of Entomology Michigan State University East Lansing MI 48824-1115


that earthworms parasitized by the cluster fly Pollenia rudis (F) increased the survival of C tigrina larvae compared to unparasitized earthworms C tigrina is multivoltine having 3-4 generations in onion fields between May and October This period of activity coincides with that of D antiqua in eastern Canada (Perron and LaFrance 1961 Perron 1972) and Michigan (Whitfield et al 1985) The tiger fly overwinters as mature larvae which pupate in the eady spring (LeRoux and Perron 1960)

Additional information on some aspects of tiger fly biology in the Michigan organic soil onion agroecosystem was obtained during studies we conducted between 1979 and 1982 The objective of the studies was to compare the invertebrate fauna found in onion farms without pesticide inputs to the fauna found in chemically-intensive farms


Study sites in 1979 were located in Laingsburg (Clinton Co) Grant (Newaygo Co) and Eaton Rapids (Eaton Co) Michigan In two of the three muck soil onion agroecosystems a field representative of a chemically-intensive onion production system and one representative of an unsprayed organic onion production system were chosen for investigation In Grant three fields were selected an unsprayed onion field and two sprayed fields Earthworm populations were sampled from these fields and compared

In 1979 the earthworm survey was conducted 11 July and 18 July and after harvest 20 October and 4 November The sampling ~roeedure utilized in July consisted of taking ten randomly selected sample units 1647 cm in soil volume (Par-Aidereg turf cutter) between onion rows Earthworms were hand-picked from each soil sample After harvest the sampling method was changed to 15 quadrat samples (926 m2 to a depth of 15 cm) per field stratified such that one-third of the randomly-selected samples were from areas of low cull density (1-40 culls926 m2) one-third were from areas of medium cull density (41-80 culls926 m2) and one-third were from areas of high cull density (81-120 culls926 m2) relative to the specific field level density of culls During both survey periods each field within a region was sampled on the same day so as to minimize the effect of day-to-day fluctuations in weather conditions on earthworm vertical distribution Friedmans Two-way Analysis of Ranks was used in interpreting the data (SAS 1985) This nonparametric test was used due to the high frequency of zero counts in the data

During 1981 and 1982 adult tiger fly populations were monitored using yellow water traps in both unsprayed and pesticide treated fields Four farms were chosen for this study They had similar soil types different levels of pesticide input and different cultural practices The Control plot was in a commercially cultivated field that received no pesticide applications but prior to our study received high levels of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides The Organic site received no pesticides or synthetic fertilizers was lightly disked and intercropped This field had been in organic production for ca 15 years Both High Input (referred to as A and B) sites were treated with high levels of pesticides and chemical fertilizers were disked heavily and were not intercropped The Control and High Input A sites were on the same commercial farm in Grant Township MI The farm was 333 hectares in size and bordered by a paved road as m wide ditch a two-lane dirt road and a single row wilIow tree wind break A strip of oats and rye was planted in the middle of the field The High Input B site also was on a commercial farm in Grant Township MI This farm had 50 hectares of alternating onion and carrot crops 8 to 13 hectares each Two sides were bordered by paved roads and a third side by forest The fourth margin abutted 12 hectares of carrots The organic site studied had 13 hectares of onions bounded by weeds on two opposite sides trees and weeds on another and a poly culture of radishes spinach potatoes carrots and oats on the fourth

Twenty water traps were randomly placed in four rows of each site every Thursday throughout the growing season of 1981 and 1982 Traps were collected from the fields every Monday Because the traps were checked and rcset every four days the confounding effects of rainfall and soil deposition on trap efficiency were minimized The traps were 10 X 10 X 10 em and contained a 1-25 cm depth of 50 aqueous antifreeze


Table l Results of 1979 Earthworm Survey

Mean Earthworm Density (SE)aRegion Significanced

X2Fieldb October November

Eaton Rapids 210 10 K 400 (096) 267 (068) R 007 000

Grant 2040 16 GR 020 (023) G1 000 G3 000

Laingsburg 210 10 R 080 (037) 0040 (018) P 000 000

aStandard error bFields without pesticide treatment = K (Eaton Rapids) GR (Grant) R (Laingshurg) others received pesticides typical of conventional onion farms during the growing season eNot sampled dBased on Friedmans two-way analysis

Each sample was rinsed with water through a sieve put into 95 alcohol and thoroughly gleaned of all invertebrates and small vertebrates

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The earthworm species sampled in this study were all of the family Lumbricidae as determined from Edwards and Lofty (1972) Earthwonlls were not identified to the species level although subsamples identified to the generic level suggested that more than 80 of the individuals were ofthe genus Eisenia (taxonomic keys were from Edwards and Lofty 1972) A classification of the Michigan earthworm fauna by Murchie (1956) suggests that the predominant species in Michigan organic soil agroecosystems is Eisenia rosea (Savigny)

An inspection of the data collected during the July sampling period suggests that a trend might exist in which fields without a pesticide history have higher earthworm densities than fields that had pesticides applied throughout the season however upon analysis of the data no supportive evidence of this hypothesis exists (Laingsburg region X2 = 100 P = 0317 Grant region X2 3804 P = 0703 and the Eaton Rapids region X2 100 P = 0317 [based on Friedmans two-way analysis of ranks]) Low population levels characterized all fields

Researchers in Europe have shown that high soil temperatures (gt20degC) along with low soil moisture levels laquo25) are responsible for vertical migrations of earthworms (Edwards and Lofty 1972) Murchie (1958) found that E rosea in southern Michigan were at low densities near the soil surface during late July and August compared with densities in the spring and fall Similar results were found by Drummond (1982) in Michigan onion fields

The fall earthworm survey was initiated in a response to the high surface densities (relative to the July survey) of earthworms found in onion fields toward the end of October 1979 The results of the survey (Table 1) in which fields that had not received pesticides during the growing season and those that had (within each of three regions) were compared suggest that in two of the three regions (Eaton Rapids and Laingsburg)

bull bull bull


30 bullgtshy

I-en z w 20 a ~ a bull0 3 10 J I-a bullbulllaquo w

0 0 3 0 60 90 1 20

ONION CULL DENSITY

Figure 1 Correlation between onion cull density and earthworm density Fitted line is used only to help depict relationship

earthworm densities were higher in fields that did not receive pesticides than fields that did

Pesticides have been shown to cause mortality to earthworms There has not been sufficient evidence from research findings to suggest that herbicides directly affect earthworm populations in this manner (except for the triazine compounds) However herbicides may still play a major role in reducing population densities by killing the vegetation that serves as the earthworms food source (Edwards and Lofty 1972) Fungicides in general have not been considered deleterious to earthworm populations although copper fungicides have proven to be extremely toxic to earthwonns (Edwards and Lofty 1972 Stringer and Lyons 1974) There have been many studies on the effects of insecticides on earthworms many of which are reviewed by Edwards and Lofty (1972) Some insecticides such as aldrin dieldrin and BHC (all chlorinated hydrocarbons) have little effect on earthworms as far as direct mortality is concerned whereas chlordane is extremely toxic to earthworms The effect of organophosphate insecticides the basis for onion maggot control in Michigan is also dependent upon the particular chemical in question Azinphosmethyl and carbofuran have not been shown to effect earthworms whereas Diazinonreg Dyfonatereg and Dursbanreg (all common soil insecticides used for the control of onion maggot) have deleterious effects on earthworm popUlations (Edwards and Lofty 1972) Parathion and malathion (two commonly used foliar insecticides used to control adults of the onion maggot) have been reported as being toxic to earthworms (Hopkins and Kirk 1957)

The relationship between cull density and earthworm dentisy in the organic field in Eaton Rapids for both the October and November sampling dates is shown in Figure 1 Correlation analysis for both dates respectively yielded correlation coefficients of +077 (n = 15) and +055 (n 15) Since the sampling variation in r is quite large for small sample sizes homogeneity of the correlation coefficients was tested through the use of the inverse tangent transformation (Steel and Torrie 1980) The correlation coefficients


50 a laquo a 40 lshy-

30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC

0-gt CONVENTIONAL eshy-- CONVENTIONAL NO SPRAY

JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT

1982 30

a laquo a Ishy- en w J u

a w ()

i=

20

10

0-0-0 o~~~~~~~~middot~middotmiddot~middot-~middotmiddotmiddot~~~


Figure 2 Relative abundance of Coenosia tigrina adults during 1981 and 1982

were not found to be significantly different (z 98 ns a 05 df = 30) A pooled estimate of the association (r + 72 plusmn 12 P 001) indicated that there is sufficient evidence to suspect a positive correlation between onion cull density and earthworm density Therefore growers harvest practices may greatly influence the population dynamics of the tiger fly Depending on the affinity the earthworms have for onions and the maximum distance of horizontal migration it may be possible to manipulate the density of culls in such a manner that predation and survival of the tiger fly is increased

In both 1981 and 1982 tiger fly trap catches suggest three distinct generations from the beginning of June until September (Fig 2) The first generation peaked on approximately 10 June in 1981 and in 1982 The second generation peaked on ca 13 July in 1981 and 12 July in 1982 Not enough of the incidence curve could be constructed to determine the date or peak third generation occurrence in 1981 but in 1982 it appears peak abundance


Table 2 Adult Tigerfly Abundanceb in 1981 and 1982

Treatment Year

Control High Input A High Input B Organic

1981 092 plusmn 206b 062 plusmn 145 008 plusmn 028 1660 plusmn 2000 1982 108 plusmn 124 033 plusmn 065 008 plusmn 028 733 plusmn 954

Analysis of Variance

Source DF SS MS F Sig Level

Total 63 22643 Treatment 3 18984 6328 10946 0001 Years I 047 047 082 037 Treatment

X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058

dMean number of adult C tigrina per trap per collection date bSignificantly different between years at p = 0001

of adults occurred between 6 and 20 September Since it is known that the tiger fly overwinters as a larva a generation of adults probably occurs in April and May

Tiger fly populations in both years are much higher in the organic field than either the control or high input fields (Table 2) The low tiger fly trap catches in the ontrol field in 1981 and 1982 suggest that it may take more than two years for a population to recover after the cessation of chemical input Also the control site had little structure relative to the organic site which was intercropped and had field borders supporting diverse biotic systems (Motyka and Edens 1984) Tomlin et al (1985) conducted a study in Ontario Canada where they caught tiger fly adults only from onion fields which did not receive pesticides over the two years of the study period

Management practices in commercial onion fields in Michigan may have both detrimental and beneficial effects on the tiger fly Direct pesticide-induced mortality of C tigrina adults was investigated by Carruthers et al (1985) They found that three commonly used herbicides (Chloro-IPC nitrofen and CDAA) and two fungicides (maneb and chlorothalanil) had no effect on mortality at recommended field application rates The LCso of Malathion for the tiger fly was ca one and a half times higher on a numerical basis than that of the seed corn maggot fly and almost six times higher than that of the onion maggot fly However there appears to be little residual activity of malthion Residue five hours after application resulted in only ten percent mortality Mortality was less than one percent ten hours after application However some Michigan onion growers apply insecticide as frequently as every three days during portions of the season (Whitfield et al 1985) and C tigrina is certainly detrimentally affected by insecticide applications relative to onion maggot flies

In conclusion we have provided a preliminary data set which supports previously published laboratory studies showing the deleterious effects of pesticides upon the tiger fly We are aware that the proper design for a study aimed at quantifying the impact of onion production practices upon tiger fly populations needs to be replicated across regions In the study however limited resources and a lack of organic onion farms prevented us from carrying this out Admittedly this does not allow us to draw strong conclusions about differences in abundance between fields Future studies aimed at elucidating this relationship between the tiger fly and its prey earthworm populations


and cropping practices may make it possible for less damaging management practices to be implemented in commercial onion production

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to thank Mr Fred Warner and Me William Taft for assisting in the collection of pitfall trap data and Me Neal Newman for assisting in the collection of the earthworm data We also thank Ms Becky Mather for typing the manuscript

LITERATURE CITED

Carruthers R 1 G H Whitfield and D L Haynes 1985 Pesticide-induced mortality of natural enemies of the onion maggot Delia antiqua (Dip Anthomyiidae) Entomophaga 30151-161

Drummond F A 1982 Post-harvest biology of the onion maggot Hylemya antiqua (Meigen) MS Thesis Michigan State University 353 pp

Drummond F A E Groden and R J Prokopy 1982 Comparative efficacy and optimal positioning of traps for monitoring apple maggot flies (Diptera Tephritidae) Environ EntomoL 13232-235

Edwards C A and J R Lofty 1972 Biology of Earthworms Bookworm Publishing Co London England 283 pp

Groden E 1982 The biology of two parasitoids of the onion maggot Hylemya antiqua (Meig) and the potentials for management MS Thesis Michigan State University 152 pp

Hobby B M 1931 The prey of Coenosia tigrina F Proc EntomoL Soc London 613-15 Hobby B M 1934 Prey of Coenosia tigrina F (Diptera Anthomyiidae) J EntomoL Soc S EngL

169-77 Hopkins A R and V M Kirk 1957 Effects of several insecticides on the English red worm J

Econ EntomoL 50699-700 LeRoux E J and J P Perron 1960 Descriptions of immature of Coenosia tigrina (F)

(Diptera Anthomyiidae) with notes on hibernation of larvae predation by adults Can Entomol 93264-96

Miles M 1948 Field observations on the bean seed fly (seed corn maggot) Chortophila cilicrura Rond and C trichodactyla Rond Bull Ent Res 38559-574

Miller L A and R J McClanahan 1960 Life history of the seed corn maggot Hylemya cilicrura Rond and H liturata (Mg) (Diptera Anthomyiidae) in southwestern Ontario Can Entomol 42210-221

Motyka G and T C Edens 1984 A comparison of heterogeneity and abundance of pests and beneficials across a spectrum of chemical and cultural controls Pest Mgmt Tech Dept 4[ Dept of Entomol Mich State Univ 44 pp

Murchie W R 1956 Survey of the Michigan earthwonn fauna Pap Mich Acad Sci Arts and Letters 15153-72

Murchie W R 1958 Biology of the oligochaete Eisenia rosea (Savigny) in an upland forest soil of southern Michigan Am Mid Nat 66113-131

Perron J P 1972 Effects of some ecological factors on populations of the onion maggot Hylemya antiqua under field conditions in southwestern Quebec Ann Soc Entomo Que 1720-47

Perron J P and 1 LaFrance 1952 A note on a dipterous predator of the onion maggot Hylemya antiqua (Mg) Can EntomoJ 84112

Perron J P and J LaFrance 1956 Notes on Coenosia tigrina (F) (Diptera Anthomyiidae) mainly on habits and rearing Can Entomo 88608-11

Perron J P and J LaFrance 1961 Notes on the life history of the onion maggot HyJemya antiqua (Meig) (Diptera Anthomyiidae) reared in field cages Can Entomol 93101-106

SAS Institute 1985 SAS users guide statistics SAS Institute Cargo NC Stringer A and C H Lyons 1974 The effect of benomyl and thiophantemethyl on earthworm

populations in apple orchards Peslic Sci 5 [89-196


Steel R G D and J H Torrie 1980 Principles and Procedures of Statistics A Biometrical Approach McGraw-Hili Book Co NY NY 633 pp

Thomas G D 1967 Natural enemies of the face fly Musca autumnalis DeGeer in Missouri PhD Thesis University of Missouri Columbia 131 pp

Tomlin A D 1 J Miller C R Harris and J H Tolman 1985 Arthropod parasitoids and predators of the onion maggot (Diptera Anthomyiidae) in Southwestern Ontario 1 Econ Entomol 78975-981

Whitfield G H R 1 Carruthers and D L Haynes 1985 Phenology and control of the onion maggot tDiptera Anthomyiidae) in Michigan onion production Agriculture Ecosystem and Environment 12 (19841985)189-200

Yahnke W E and 1 A George 1972 Earthworms as prey for larvae of Coenosia ligrina J Econ Entomoi 651478-79


STATE RECORDS AND CONFIRMATIONS OF ARKANSAS FLAT BUGS (HETEROPTERA ARADIDAE)

Steven J Taylor and J E McPherson

ABSTRACT

Eight aradid species are reported for the first time from Arkansas including Aneurus pygmaeus Aradus cillcticornis Aradus crenatus Quinus niger Mezira granulata Mezira lobata Mezira sayi and Neuroctenus simplex The presence of Aradus acufus Aradus falleni and Aradus robustus in Arkansas is confirmed

Few records have been published on Arkansas Aradidae Parshley (1922) reported Aradus acutus Say and Aradusfalleni Still from the state and Drake and Kormilev (1958) extended the range of Acaricoris ignotus Harris and Drake from Louisiana Mississippi and Georgia to include Arkansas Leschen and Taylor (1987) found Aradus robustus Uhler in Arkansas and provided information on its biology

Because information on these bugs in Arkansas is so limited a faunal survey was conducted from 1984 to 1987 A total of 1125 specimens of 11 species was collected most by hand picking For the listing of these specimens below data were collected by SJT unless stated otherwise Specimens collected by SJT were found under bark of dead hardwoods unless stated otherwise Collections from under bark of dead Quercus sp are indicated by UBDQ Numbers of adult males and females and additional host plant data are indicated in parentheses following each locality Cadron Settlement Park Quail Restoration Area and Bell Slough Wildlife Management Area the most frequent collection localities are indicated by CSP QRA and BSWMA respectively Immature stages were not included in counts since they cannot be reliably identified however immatures often outnumbered adults at various sites The sequence of aradid taxa follows Kormilev and Froeschner (1987) Specimens are deposited in the SJT collection and the Southern Illinois University Entomology Collection (SIUEC)

ANEURINAE

Aneurus pygmaeus Kormilev is known from Florida Georgia Texas and California (Picchi 1977) Here we rcport material representing a northern range extension for the species and the first record of Aneurus in Arkansas

FAULKNERCoCSP 12-VI-85 (4 00 3 S S) 13-VI-85 (l S) S andJ D Taylor coil I-V-86 (4 007 S lt UBDQ) 2-XII-86 (1 0 1 lt UBDQ)

ARADINAE

Aradus acutus Say is one of the most frequently encountered species of Aradus and is widely distributed from Maine and Florida west to Washington California and Texas

Department of Zoology Southern Illinois University Carbondale IL 62901


(Matsuda 1977) Parshley (1922) reported A acutus from Arkansas and its presencc in Arkansas is here confirmed

CONWAY Co Petit Jean State Park-near Rock House Cave 16-III-85 (1 2) FAULKNER Co Conway-near Hwy 64 21-VIII-84 (10 00 8 (2) 5 mi E of Conway 22-VII-85 (1 2)2 mi E of Hwy 65 on Lower Ridge Road 24-XI-84 ([1400 19 2 2 UBDQ][5 006 i i under bark of dead tree]) CSP 29-V-85 (1 i) ll-IX-85 (1 0) 15-IX-85 (1 0) 2-XII-86 (7 006 ltgt l UBDQ) Near CSP 19-XI-85 (2 00 4 l l under bark of dead Quercus marilandica) QRA 24-X-85 (1 l under bark of standing dead Quercus stellata) 1 112 mi NW of Davis Lake-W of Mayflower 6-XI-85 (3 00 4 i i) Near Lake Conway Spillway Il-III-85 (12 00 3 l i UBDQ) BSWMA-S end 11-IV-86 (I 0 UBDQ) IZARD Co 9 mi S of Melbourne off Hwy 9 5-X-85 (2 i i under bark of dead Salix nigra)

Aradus cincticornis Bergroth was described from Alabama and subsequently reported from Missouri by Froeschner (1942) It is here reported as a first record for Arkansas

FAULKNER Co CSP 13-II-87 (13 00 29 UBDQ) 112 mi E of CSP 30-XII-86 00 14 under bark of fallen dead Q marilandica branches) IZARD Co 9 mi of Melbourne offHwy 9 28-XII-84 (600 15 i UBDQ) S and M J Taylor colI LOGAN Co Mt Magazine-Sloakum Springs 19-III-87 (21 if 020 under Quercus velutina bark) R Leschen coli

Aradus crenatus Say occurs throughout much of eastern North America from Qucbcc and Ontario south to Georgia Alabama Illinois and Mexico (Blatchley 1926) It was formerly thought to be a Holarctic species but the European taxon (Aradus conspicuus Herrich-Schaeffer) is now considered a separate species (Heiss 1980) A crenatus has not previously been reported from Arkansas

LOGAN Co Mt Magazine (RL-367) l-VII-86 (I on fungus Polyporus caesius) R Leschen coIl Cove Lake-9 mi SE of Paris 3-X-87 (I on Bjerkandra adusta) R Leschen colI WASHINGTON Co Fayetteville 3-V-86 (8 if 0)

Aradus falleni Stal is the most widespread of the New World Aradus species being found from Brazil north to British Columbia and New York (Parshley 1922) Parshley (1922) reported this species from Arkansas and its presence in Arkansas is here confirmed

POPE Co Ozark National Forest Long Pool 23-VI-85 (I i on rainfly of tent) Aradus robustus Uhler is widely distributed from the Northwest Territories Nebraska

and Texas east to Quebec and Florida (Leschen and Taylor 1987) It has previously been reported from Arkansas (Leschen and Taylor 1987) and additional Arkansas material reported here includes a new county record (Polk County)

POLK Co Bard Springs 15-III-87 (1 if I i on Irpex lacteus) R Leschen coil WASHINGTON Co Lake Wedington 5- III-87 (7 00 18 i on I lacteus on branch) R Leschen colI

Quilnus niger (Stiil) is found from Nova Scotia and South Carolina west to Colorado Texas and Mexico (Blatchley 1926) This genus has not previously been reported from Arkansas

PULASKI Co Little Rock Maumelle Park 1O-III-85 (1 0 under bark of dead Pinus sp)

MEZIRINAE

Mezira granulata (Say) ranges from Maryland and Florida west to Missouri and Texas it has also been reported from Cuba and Mexico (Blatchley 1926) Mezira sayi Kormilev was recently described (Kormilev 1982) and since these two are both common closely related and appear to have broadly overlapping ranges distributions of both species need to be confirmed Kormilev (1982) reported M granulata from Maryland and North Carolina It has not previously been reported from Arkansas

CONWAY Co Petit Jean State Park-near rock house cave 16-III-85 (6 ci ci 5 i i) Petit Jean State Park-Cedar Falls trail 5-IV -86 (1 0 3 i i under bark of fallen dead


Quercus alba) FAULKNER Co Conway 16-I1I-84 (8005 22) Conway-500 ft S of N entrance to railroad tunnel 23-XI-84 (10 00 2 2 2 under bark of dead Q alba) 2 mi E of Hwy 65 on Lower Ridge Road nr Conway 24-XI-84 (95 00 74 22 UBDQ) CSP 12-I1I-85 (1 0 3 22) 14-X-85 (12 00 1 2 under bark of dead Q stellata) 20-XI -85 (1 0 under bark of dead Q alba) 23-VIII -86 (2 2 2 under bark of dead tree) S Taylor and R Leschen coli 12-IX-86 (2 00 3 22 UBDQ) 12-IX-86 (3 00 4 22 under bark of Q alba branch on ground) QRA 19-VI-85 (3 004 22 UBDQ) 13-1-86 (21 00 10 22 UBDQ) 18-IX-85 (4 22 UBDQ) Near Lake Conway Spillway by swamp 12-VII-85 (10 00 1 2) Near Lake Conway Spillway 20-VII-85 (10 00 7 2 2) Near upper end of Lake Conway 16-VIII-86 (3 00 2 2 2) 1 112 mi NW Davis Lake-W of Mayflower 12-XI-85 (11 00 9 22 under bark of dead Q alba) 97 mi S of Hwy 64 on Hwy 286 28-V-85 (3 002 22 UBDQ) BSWMA-E end 31-X-86 (13 00 16 22 under bark of fallen dead Quercus phellos) BSWMA-S end I-N-86 (5 00 11 22 UBDQ) 3-XII-86 (3 00 1 2) IZARD Co 9 mi S of Melbourne off Hvy 9 28-XII-84 (1 0 1 2 under bark of dead Q alba) S and M J Taylor colI LfITLE RNER Co Near Lake Millwood 19-X-85 (3 22 UBDQ) LOGAN Co 2 mi NW of Mt Magazine 17-VII-85 (3 00 1 2 under bark) LOGAN or YELL Co near common border Workmans cabin on Mt Magazine 17-VIII-86 (2 00 2 2 2 under bark of fallen logs) R Leschen coil PERRY Co near Cypress Creek Park 27-11-86 (1 2) PULASKI Co Little Rock Maumelle Park IO-III-85 (1 2) Pinacle 10untain northeast face 26-XI-87 (2 2 2 Berlese funnel) C E Carlton coli STONE Co Blanchard Springs 27-VIII-84 (6 004 22 under bark of Q stellata and Quercusfalcata) D and A Johnson coli WASHINGTON Co 2 mi S of Hwy 156 x Hwy 265 lil mi E of Hwy 265 3-V-86 (2 22) Lake Weddington 24-V-86 (1 0 on fungus) R Leschen colI 2 mi NW of Lake Wedington 4-V-86 (8 00 6 2 2)

Mezira lobata (Say) ranges from New York and Georgia west to California and Texas (Blatchley 1926) and has been reported from Canada (Kormilev 1971) It has not previously been reported from Arkansas

FAULKNER Co Conway 17-III-84 (2 00 3 22) Near Lake Conway Spillway ll-I1I-85 (2 ~ 2 under bark of dead tree) Near Lake Conway Spillway by swamp 12-VII-85 (1 ~) LfITLE RIVER Co Near Lake Millwood 20-X-85 (9 004 22) S Taylor and A Johnson colI LOGAN Co Mt Magazine-electronic site 19-III-87 (13 00 7 2 Q bull in rotten log) R Leschen coli

Mezira sayi Kormilev is known from Florida Georgia South Carolina and Indiana (Kormilev 1982) Some reported records for M granulata are probably based on this species We here report M sayi from Arkansas

DREW Co Seven Devils Swamp l6-III-87 (1 0 on Stereum ostrea in log) R Leschen coli FAULKNER Co Conway-500 ft S of N entrance to railroad tunnel 23-XI-84 (1 2 under bark of dead Q alba) 24-XII-84 (1 0 UBDQ) 3 mi W of Conway offHwy 6519-11-86 (400222 UBDQ) CSP 20-VII-84 (1 0222 under bark) l2-I1I-85 (12 20 4 2 2) 12-VI-85 (1 0) 13-VI-85 (10 00 7 2 2) S and J D Taylor colI 6-I1I-86 (6003 22) 17-X-86 (200) 22-X-86 (12007 22) Near CSP 31-X-85 (4 03 3 2 2) 2-XI-85 (2 002 2 2 under bark of dead Q alba limb) 18-XI-85 (1 2 under bark of dead Q marilandica) QRA 19-VI-85 1 2 UBDQ) 18-IX-85 (5 00 1 2 UBDQ) 24-X-85 (2 00 1 2 under bark of dead Q stellata limb) Between Lake Conway Spillway and Clear Lake 24-VII-84 (1 0 1 2 under bark) N Murray D Johnson and S Taylor coli Near Lake Conway Spillway 11-I1I-85 (2 SO 2 under bark of dead tree) Near Lake Conway Spillway by swamp 12-VII-85 (1 2) Near upper end of Lake Conway 16-VIII-86 (2 22) 1 1I2mi NW of Davis Lake-W of Mayflower 6-XI-85 (1 0) BSWMA 29-X-85 (28 00 9 22) 28-I1I-86 (1 2 UBDQ) 24-VIII-86 (3 002 22) 17-XII-86 (10 UBDQ) BSWMA-S end 3-I1I-86 (7001 2) 11-IV-86 (4007 22 UBDQ) 17-IV-86 (9 005 22) IZARD Co 9 mi S of Melbourne offHwy 9 28-XII-84 (1 2 UBDQ) S and M J Taylor colI 28-XII-84 (1 0 under bark of dead Q alba) S and M J Taylor colI LTITLE RNER Co Near Lake Millwood 19-X-85 (1 0 3 22) 19-X-85 (11 00 3 22 under bark of fallen limb) LOGAN Co Flattop Mt 112 mi W of Cove

22 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST Vol 22 No I

Lake near Cove creek 17-VIJ-85 (2 00 I 1) LONOKE Co Near Coy 5-VI-86 (l 1 under bark of fallen dead Q pheilos limb) PERRY Co Harris Brake Wildlife Management Area 9-IX-85 (4 00 I 1) PULASKI Co Little Rock-Maumelle Park IO-III-85 (13 009 I 1) WASHINGTON Co Lake Weddington 5-VIII-86 (2 I 1 on branch) R Leschen colI

Neuroctenus simplex (Uhler) is the commonest of the North American species of Neuroctenus and ranges from Maine and Florida west to Missouri and Texas it has also been reported from Cuba (Bl atchley 1926) This genus has not previously been reported from Arkansas

FAULKNER Co Conway at white light-1930 h 30-III-86 (l 1) CSP 12-III-85 (1 O I 9) 29-V-85 (6 008 91 UBDQ) 12-VI-85 (l 02 I 9) 13-VI-85 (12 00 699) S and J D Taylor colI 13-II-87 (4005 91 UBDQ) Near CSP 31-X-85 (2 004 99) 2-XI-85 (1 0 1 1 under bark of fallen dead Q falcata limb) QRA 19-VI-85 (2 99 UBDQ) Near Lake Conway Spillway IJ-III-85 (1 0 2 99) BSWMA-S end 12-XII-86 (60010 99) IZARD Co 9 mi S of Melbourne off Hwy 9 28-XII-84 (19 0021 I 1 UBDQ) S and M J Taylor coli PULASKI Co Little Rock Maumelle Park 1O-1II-85 (2 I 9)

DISCUSSION

Zoogeographic affmities of aradids at the generic level havc been discussed by Slater (1974) and Kormilev and Froeschner (1987) Of the five Arkansas genera reported here (ie Quilnus Aneurus Aradus Mezira and Neuroctenus) Quilnus is Holarctic in distribution whereas the other genera occur worldwide The Arkansas species of Quilnus Aneurus and Aradus have affinities with Pale arctic aradids and those of Mezim and Neuroctenus are more closely related to the fauna of the Neotropics Acaricoris which is known from Arkansas (Drake and Kormilev 1958) but was not collected in our study is primarily a Neotropical genus which includes two species in the southern United States and four Neotropical species

Slater (1974) reported that the Connecticut aradid fauna is dominated by species associated with the Palearctic region We found that while the Palearctic element of the Arkansas fauna (Quilnus Aneurus Aradus) contains more species the Neotropical element (Le Mezira Neuroctenus) appears to contain more individuals

The distributions of North American species of Aradidae are not well known possibly because the cryptic coloration and secretive habits of these bugs necessitate specific collecting techniques not usually employed by the general collector The fact that this paper includes several new state records and yet is based upon collecting done primarily in only a few counties of Arkansas emphasizes how poorly known the distributions of flat bugs are A general survey of Arkansas Aradidae would probably result in the addition of several more species to the states known fauna

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Richard C Froeschner National Museum of Natural History Washington DC for confirming our identifications We also thank C E Carlton A Johnson D Johnson R Leschen N Murray J D Taylor and M J Taylor for their help in collecting

LITERATURE CITED

Blatchley W S 1926 Heteroptera or true bugs of eastern North America with especial reference to the faunas of Indiana and Florida Nature Pub Co Indianapolis 1116 pp


Drake C J and N A Kormilev 1958 Concerning the apterous Aradidae of the Americas (Hemiptera) Ann Entomol Soc Amer 51241-247

Froeschner R C 1942 Contributions to a synopsis of the Hemiptera of Missouri Pt II Coreidae Aradidae Neididae Amer Midland Natur 27591-609

Heiss E 1980 Nomenklatonsche Anderungen und Differenzierung von Aradus crenatus Say 1831 und Aradus cinnamomeus Panzer 1806 aus Europa Lnd USA (Insecta Heteroptera Aradidae) Ber Natur-Med Ver Innsbruck 67103-116

Kormilev N A 1971 Key to American species of the genus Mezira Proc Entomol Soc Washington 73282-292

___ 1982 On Mezira granulata (Say) group (Hemiptera Aradidae) J Natur Hist 16 775-779

Kormilev N A and R C Froeschner 1987 Flat bugs of the world A synonymic list (Heteroptera Aradidae) Entomography 51-245

Leschen R A B and S J Taylor 1987 Notes on the biology and distribution of Aradus robustus (Hemiptera Aradidae) Entomol News 98183-185

Matsuda R 1977 The insects and arachnids of Canada Part 3 The Aradidae of Canada Hemiptera Aradidae Canadian Dept Agric Pub 16341-116

Parshley H M 1922 Essay on the American species of Aradus (Hemiptera) Trans Amer Entomol Soc 471-106

Picchi V D 1977 A systematic review of the genus Aneurus of North and Middle America and the West Indies (Hemiptera Aradidae) Quaest Entomol 13255-308

Slater J A 1974 A preliminary analysis of the derivation of the Heteroptera fauna of the northeastern United Siaies with special reference to the fauna of Connecticut 25th Anniv Mem Connecticut Entomol Soc 1974 pp 145-213


INSECT PESTS ASSOCIATED WITH BIRDSFOOT TREFOIL LOTUS CORNICULATUS IN WISCONSIN

Mark S Wipflil John L Wedberg2 David B Hogg2 and Thomas D Syverud3

ABSTRACT

Insect surveys taken during 1984-1986 in Ashland and Bayfield Counties of northern Wisconsin revealed that several potential insect pest species were common in birdsfoot trefoil Lotus corniculatus Three plant bug species including the tarnished plant bug Lygus lineolaris alfalfa plant bug Adelphocoris lineolatus and Plagiognathus chrysanshythemi were abundant in most sampled fields P chrysanthemi was the most abundant species was only present in the northern locations and completed one generation per year A lineolatus and L lineolaris were second and third in abundance respectively and completed two generations per year Population levels of the potato leafhopper Empoasca fabae exceeded a combined total of 45 nymphs and adults per sweep in a southern Wisconsin location but were uncommon in northern Wisconsin Present but less abundant were the trefoil seed chalcid Bruchophagus platypterus meadow spittlebug Philaenus spumarius and pea aphid Acyrthosiphon pisum all occurring at densities of less than one insect per sweep

Birdsfoot trefoil Lotus corniculatus has become an important perennial forage legume in parts of the United States and Canada Trefoil is frequently grown on poorly drained soils which are marginal for alfalfa Medicago sativa production (Rohweder 1972) Likewise trefoil has become a popular forage for growers in northern Wisconsin and grows well on the clay soils of the Superior Lowland Subsequently Ashland Bayfield and Douglas counties of northern Wisconsin aided by ample moisture moderate humidity and long daylengths have collectively become an important trefoil seed producing region Despite the increasing popularity of trefoil little has been reported on the insect pests associated with forage or seed production especially in the Midwest

Neunzig and Gyrisco (1955) reported that the meadow spittlebug Philaenus spumarius (L) potato leafhopper Empoasca fabae (Harris) and several plant bug species including the alfalfa plant bug Adelphocoris lineolatus (Goeze) tarnished plant bug Lygus lineolaris (palisot de Beauvois) and Plagiognathus chrysanthemi (Wolff) were abundant in trefoil grown in New York and were responsible for bud and flower drop plant stunting and other types of damage Other damaging insects included the trefoil seed chalcid BruchophpoundIgus platypterus (Walker) the larvae of which fed on the developing seeds Guppy (1958) found that A lineolatus L lineloaris P chrysanthemi and the rapid plant bug Adelphocoris rapidus (Say) attack trefoil and several other legumes in Ontario Canada A lineolatus and L lineolaris have recently been reported to damage trefoil in Minnesota (Elling et al 1985) and Michigan (Copeland et al 1984)

IDepartment of Entomology Michigan State University East Lansing MI48824 2Department of Entomology University of Wisconsin Madison WI 53706 3 Ashland Agricultural Research Station University of Wisconsin Ashland WI 54806


Copeland et al (1984) also reported that the potato leafbopper meadow spittlebug and pea aphid appear to be potential trefoil pests in Michigan

The purpose of this study was to identify the more abundant insect pests of trefoil in Wisconsin study their seasonal distribution and occurrence and consider their damage potentials to trefoil Trefoil seed producers in northern Wisconsin have frequently applied insecticides without knowing when or how often to spray or which insect species to target However the growers have indicated that one or more insecticide applications during the growing season appear to increase seed yields


Several trefoil fields cultivars Leo Maitland and Norcen were sampled in Ashland and Bayfield Counties of northern Wisconsin during 1984-1986 from 15 May through 30 September and one trefoil field (cultivar Empire) in Columbia County in southern Wisconsin was sampled I June through 31 August 1986

Samples were taken with a 38 em diameter sweep net at ca biweekly intervals during 1984 and ca weekly intervals during 1985 and 1986 Twenty pendulum sweeps per sample and ten samples per field were taken while walking a U-shaped pattern through each field Samples were immediately transferred to nylon mesh bags and placed in a freezer for subsequent sorting

The Leo field located on the University of Wisconsin-Ashland Agriculture Research Station in Bayfield County was planted during May 1983 This field received no insecticide applications and forage was harvested once in July 1984 but was not harvested during 1985 or 1986

The Maitland field planted during August 1983 was a privately owned seed production field located in Ashland County The field received one insecticide application during July 1984 two during 1985 (June and July) and one during June 1986 The field was harvested for seed during August each year

The Noreen field was also a privately owned commercial seed production field located in Ashland County and was planted in August 1981 This field received a July insecticide application and was harvested for seed during August 1984 In 1985 because of the dense weed growth and uneven trefoil distribution a nearby one-year-old Noreen field was sampled The cooperating grower applied an insecticide in June and harvested the seed during August Because of severe winterkilling of plants this field was replaced with an adjacent Noreen field during 1986 which was seeded during May 1985 This field received an insecticide application in June and the seed was harvested during August 1986

The Empire field seeded during May 1985 was located in southern Wisconsin on the University of Wisconsin-Arlington Agriculture Field Station in Columbia County and was samplcd only during 1986 In addition to sweep net samples a D-vacreg sampler was used for monitoring potato leafhopper populations Ten samples at 10 sucks per sample were taken while walking a U-shaped pattern through the field Fleischer et al (1982) describes a procedure for transforming adult potato leafhopper densities estimated with a D-vac to sweep net densities Thus the potato leafhopper densities were all converted from D-vac to sweep net estimates using this method This field was neither harvcsted nor sprayed

Only those potentially damaging insects that were numerous and consistently present were counted and identified to species The other insects including infrequently collected but potentially damaging species beneficials and non-pests were noted but not counted


Surveys indicated that A lineolatus L lineolaris and P chrysanthemi were abundant in fields which were sampled in northern Wisconsin during all three years of the study


Adelphocoris lineolatus completed two generations per year in Wisconsin trefoil with first generation nymphs occurrin May through June and adults observed primarily from late June through July ( IA) Second generation nymphs were collected throughout August followed by adults in late August and into September Adelphocoris lineolatus is known to overwinter in the egg stage (Hughes 1943) which is consistent with the phenology we observed

Lygus lineoaris had two generations per year in Wisconsin trefoil and adults were collected at very low densities throughout May and early June (Fig IB) First generation nymphs occurred throughout June and early July and subsequent adults were observed during July and early August Second generation nymphs occurred in August and adults were present from late August through September Hughes (1943) indicated that L lineoaris overwinters in the adult stage which is consistent with the phenological pattern we observed

Plagiognathus chrysanthemi completed one generation per year in sampled fields with nymphs occurring from May through June and adults observed from ca mid-June through mid-August (Fig 1 C) Guppy (1963) indicated that P chrysanthemi overwinters as eggs which conformed to the pattern we observed

Population trends were similar for all fields (Figs 23 and 4) except when populations were disrupted by insecticide applications or harvest In the one-year-old stands however A lineolatus and P chrysanthemi populations were generally lower (Figs 2-1984 3-1984 4-1985 and 4-1986) than in two- and three-year-old stands This was probably the result of these two species being unable to fully colonize and subsequently oviposit in newly-seeded trefoil before the end of the growing season

During the early portion of the growing season (May-July) P chrysanthemi tended to be the most abundant of the three plant bug species in the northern Wisconsin locations (Figs 2-4) A lineolatus was generally the second most abundant and L lineolaris the least abundant of the three species

Sweep samples indicated that P chrysanthemi was not present in the Empire field in southern Wisconsin A lineolatus and L lineolaris however were detected at densities comparable to those in the northern fields (Fig 5)

Plant bug feeding in relation to trefoil development

Peak plant bug populations (which included primarily P chrysanthemi and A lineolatus) usually occurred during June and early July (Figs 2-4) This is most easily seen in the unsprayed and unharvested Leo field during 1985 and 1986 (Fig 2) Coincidentally peak flower prodUction (which was visually observed and recorded) generally occurred during this same period (June through early July) Results from feeding experiments (Wipfli 1987) suggested that trefoil plants are most sensitive to plant bug feeding during bud and blossom setting and exhibit severe bud and flower abortion in response to plant bug feeding

Plant bug damage can be so severe during June and July that the trefoil plants are unable to produce flowers (ie trefoil flower buds are immediately aborted in response to plant bug feeding) This phenomenon was noted at several locations but was especially apparent in the Leo field where mirid densities commonly exceeded 15 per sweep A natural break in the mirid populations (between generations) was observed during late July (Fig 2 1985 and 1986) and subsequent flower prodUction was observed in early August

Several other potentially injurious insect species were present The trefoil seed chalcid Bruchophagus platypterus (Walker) was present in all fields sampled in the northern part of the state but at densities below one or two per sweep in most cases The meadow spittlebug was common but was not considered to be an important pest during the three sampling years when less than one spittle mass per four or five plants was observed in the most heavily infested fields Although there is no established spittlebug threshold for trefoil seed production this is well below the level for alfalfa forage of one spittle massstem (Wedberg et al 1988)


6----------------------------- A lineolatus

A -m-shy nymphs --shy adults

4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads

B Q -m-- nymphs Q) Q) --- adults 3 2 III -Q)

a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi

-m-shy nymphs --shy adults

22-May la-June l7-Juy 19-Aug l6-Sept

Figure 1 Nymph and adult Adelphocaris linea latus Lygus lineolaris andPlagiognathus chrysanshythemi seasonal occurrcnce in the Leo fleld-198S


10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z

total 1984 -- P chrysanthemi----1Ilo--- A lineolatus hay L lineoads~

harvest

20

15

10

5

22-May l8middotJune 17 middotJuly 1 9middotAug 16middotSept

Figure 2 Sweep counts of Adelphocoris lineolatus Lygus lineoiaris and Plagiognathus chrysanmiddot themi in the Leo field-1984-1986


10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy

bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull

total P chrysanthemi

A lineolatus

1984

G)

1J bull_ - shy L lineolads en 5 G)

D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5

insecticide application 1985

seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest

22-May 1a-June 17-July 19-Aug 16middotSept

Figure 3 Sweep counts of Adelphocoris lineolatus Lygus lineolaris and Plagiognathus chrysanshythemi in the Maitland field-1984-1986


15

Q Ql Ql 10 3 til -Ql

1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0


t -a-- total bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull-0- P chrysanthemi~ o

middotmiddotmiddotmiddotilImiddotmiddotmiddotmiddot A lineolatus

bull __--_ L lineolaris

bull41-

insecticide application

1985

seed halVest

-it

1986

seed insecticide halVest application

22-May 18June 17-July 19-Aug 1S-Sept

Figure 4 Sweep counts of Adelphocoris lineolatus Lygus lineolaris and Plagiognathus chrysanshythemi in the Noreen fields-1984 = three-year-old stand 1985 amp 1986 = one-year-old stands

--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~

a total -_ -shy L lineolaris middotmiddotmiddotmiddot111middotmiddotmiddot A lineoiatus

1986

5

22-May 18-June 17-July 19-Aug 1S-Sept

Sweep counts of Adelphocoris lineolatus and Lygus lineolaris in the Empire fieldshy

4080

70 ~ () a I Q)30rtI SO Q)Adults () rtIIII 50 j gtI Q)c 0- 40 20 EQ)

I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0

3-June 3-July 4-Aug 9-Sept

0

Figure 6 Sweep and D-vacreg counts of the potato leatbopper Empoasca fabae in the Empire field-1986

Also present were the potato leafhopper and pea aphid although neither exceeded a density of one insect per sweep in the northern fields The potato leafhopper however became very abundant at the southern location reaching densities (nymphs + adults) of nearly 50 per sweep (Fig 6)

In conclusion P chrysanthemi A lineolatus andL lineolaris were the most abundant


pests of birdsfoot trefoil and due to their feeding habits appear to be the most important and destructive pests P chrysanthemi and A lineolatus appear to be the two most important pests of trefoil primarily because they were abundant early in the growing season (through June and into the first part of July) a critical period for bud and flower development and subsequent seed set (Wipfli 1987) P chrysanthemi has one generation per year and was the most abundant of the three mirids in northern Wisconsin during 1984-1986 reaching densities of more than twice that of A lineolatus and five to ten times that of L lineolaris Adelphocoris lineolatus was the second most abundant species with a second generation occurring during trefoil pod set This second generation reached high levels in some fields and may be economically important late in the season (late July through early August) during pod set Wipfli (1987) reported that A lineolatus damaged developing trefoil seeds causing significant seed shriveling Lygus lineolaris was the least abundant species and was uncommon in some fields As with A lineolatus L lineoaris had a second generation during pod set at densities usually slightly higher than the first generation but remained low relative to A Uneolatus

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors thank Lloyd Knutson Biosystematics and Beneficial Insects Institute Beltsville MD who provided insect identifications We thank Bill Leakey Lee Stadnyk and Jeff Anderson for the use of their production fields Thanks to Michael Mlynarek and the rest of the crew at the University of Wisconsin-Ashland Agricultural Research Station for their technical assistance We also thank Kim Levendusky Matthew Grenning and Michael Haggard for their technical help This research was supported by the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences University of Wisconsin Madison WI (Hatch Project No 3041)

LITERATURE CITED

Copeland L 0 R H Leep R F Ruppel and M B Tesar 1984 Birdsfoot trefoil seed production in Upper Michigan Mich State Univ Ext Bull E-I745 8 pp

Elling L J R L McGraw and D L Wyse 1985 Birdsfoot trefoil seed production in northern Minnesota Univ of Minn Ext Bull AG-FO 2678 4 pp

Fleischer S J W A Allen J M Luna and R L Pienkowski 1982 Absolute-density estimation from sweep sampling with a comparison of absolute-density sampling techniques for adult potato leafhopper in alfalfa 1 Econ Entomol 75425-430

Guppy J C 1958 Insect surveys of clovers alfalfa and birdsfoot trefoil in eastern Ontario Can Entomol 90(9)523-531

Guppy J C 1963 Observations on the biology of Plagiognathus chrysanthemi (Hemiptera Miridae) a pest of birdsfoot trefoil in Ontario Ann Entomol Soc Amer 56804-809

Hughes J H 1943 The alfalfa plant bug Adelphocoris lineolatus (Goeze) and other Miridae (Hemiptera) in relation to alfalfa seed production in Minnesota Minn Tech Bull 161 80 pp

Neunzig H H and G G Gyrisco 1955 Some insects injurious to birdsfoot trefoil in New York 1 Econ Entomol 48447-450

Rohweder D A 1972 Birdsfoot trefoil Univ Wise Fact Sheet A2363 Wedberg J L J D Doll C R Grau G L Worf and R A Flashinski 1988 Forage and small

grain pest management in Wisconsin Wisc Tech Bull A1981 p 23 Wipfli M S 1987 Seasonal occurrence damage potentials analysis of sweep counts and control

strategies of the insect pests associated with birdsfoot trefoil Lotus corniculatus L in Wisconsin M S Thesis University of Wisconsin-Madison


LATE LILAC SYRINGA VILLOSA NEW HOST OF THE LACE BUG LEPTOYPHA MUTICA (HETEROPTERA TINGIDAE)

A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT

The lace bug Leptoypha mutica a specialist on trees and shrubs of the Oleaceae feeds mainly on ash Fraxinus spp and fringetree Chionanthus virginicus In July 1987 and 1988 nymphs and adults were observed on late lilac Syringa villosa in a landscape planting in northwestern Pennsylvania Infested leaves showed chlorotic blotches the damage concentrated around midribs and lateral veins This is the first report of lilac serving as a host for a North American tingid

Leptoypha mutica (Say) is an apparently bivoltine tingid that overwinters in the adult stage (Dickerson and Weiss 1916) Known from Quebec and Ontario south to Florida and west from North and South Dakota to Texas this wide-ranging species also has been recorded from Socorro Island Mexico (Drake and Ruboff 1965) It often is only locally abundant on shrubs and trees of the Oleaceae Sometimes referred to as the fringetree lace bug (Blatchley 1926 Mead 1975 Beshear et al 1976) L mutica is an occasional pest of ornamental fringetree Chionanthus virgillicus In describing the immature stages of L mutica Dickerson and Weiss (1916) reported damage to nursery-grown fringetree in New Jersey Foliage of infested plants showed the mottling or chlorosis typical of lace bug feeding and in severe infestations leaves turned yellowish brown and withered

Ash trees also serve as hosts (eg McAtee 1917 1923 Bailey 1951 USDA 1963 Horn et al 1979) with L mutica specifically recorded from white ash Fraxinus americana (Hussey 1922 Froeschner 1944) Several authors have noted an apparent preference for seedling or sapling ash (Hussey 1922 Bailey 1951 1959 Horn et al 1979) In Texas Drake (1918) reported L mutica from the oleaceous shrub swamp privet Forestiera acuminata

Herein I report an ornamental lilac as a new host of L mutica This is the first record of a North American lace bug developing on a species of Syringa

Leptoypha mutica on Lilac

On 30 July 1987 my attention was drawn to chlorotic areas on leaves of late lilac Syringa villosa growing on the campus of Alliance College Cambridge Springs in Crawford Co Pennsylvania Lilacs may be infested by privet thrips Dendrothrips ornatus (Jablonowski) which impart a grayish or silvery cast to the foliage (eg Schread 1969) but pale discolored areas characteristic of injury inflicted by mesophyll-feeding mites leafhoppers or plant bugs are unusual on leaves of Syringa spp The insect causing foliar chlorosis on late lilac a Chinese shrub (Everett 1982) proved to be L mutica Four adults were collected on one large plant (about 3 m high) and severallate-instar nymphs

IBureau of Plant Industry Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture Harrisburg PA 17110


Fig 1 Chlorosis on leaf of lale lilac Syringa vilosa caused by the feeding of Leptoypha mutica

were found on lower leaf surfaees Cast skins and black spots of excrement also were present on abaxial surfaces The infestation was restricted to only a few leaves as Horn et al (1979) noted for L mutica on ash in North Carolina Chlorosis on infested leaves was mainly adjacent to the midrib and lateral veins (Fig 1)

In 1988 L mutica was found to have colonized the same late lilac by 20 July Observations at Alliance College showed that four of five additional S villosa plants in separate areas of the campus had chlorotic foliage Sevcn adults and about that many fourth and fifth instars were collected additional adults and nymphs were seen As many as eight exuviae were present on an infested leaf Nymphs and adults also were observed on seedling lilacs growing heneath a large S villosa


No lace bugs were found on large green ash F pennsylvanica trees growing on campus or on volunteer ash adjacent to infested lilacs in some cases branches of volunteer ash intertwined with lilac branehes Only one leaf of a seedling ash growing under a lilae showed possible laee bug injury but no tingids or nymphal exuviae were found on the lower surface

DISCUSSION

Lilacs are not known to serve as host plants of North American Tingidae Drake and Ruhoffs (1965) catalog of world lace bugs does not list any species from Syringa but L capitata (Jakolev) has now been recorded from S reticulata Rara in Japan (Tomokuni 1987)

Whether L mutica infests late lilac at other localities and whether other Syringa spp will be included in its range of oleaceous hosts await further observations Bailey (1951) remarked that specimens from fringetree showed constant differences and cited a personal communication from R I Sailer these differences however were not described The question of possible host-induced variation-color ranges from light brown to black and hemelytral markings are variable-therefore deserves study It has been suggested that L mutica might be a composite of sibling taxa (Slater and Baranowski 1978) Although this is possible it appears that the observed differences in coloration and markings represent intraspecific variation within a lace bug that feeds on several genera of the Oleaceae

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I thank R C Froeschner (Department of Entomology Smithsonian Institution Washington DC) for eonfirming the identification of L mutica H G Wolff (BPI PDA) for assistance in the field J F Stimmel (BPIPDA) for the photograph used in Fig 1 W L Mountain (BPIPDA) for identifying the host plant and T J Henry (Systematic Entomology Laboratory USDA clo U S National Museum of Natural History Washington) and K Valley (BPIPDA) for helpful comments on the manuscript

LITERATURE CITED

Bailey N S 1951 The Tingoidea of New England and their biology Entomo Amer 311-140 Bailey N S 1959 Additions to the bioecology of the New England Tingidae and Piesmidae

(Heteroptera) Psyche 6663-69 Beshear R J H H Tippins and J P Howell 1976 The lace bugs (Tingidae) of Georgia Georgia

Agric Exp Stn Res Bull 188 29 pp Blatchley W S 1926 Heteroplera or true bugs of eastern North America with especial reference

to the faunas of Indiana and Florida Nature Pub Co Indianapolis 1116 pp Dickerson E L and H B Weiss 1916 Notes on Leptoypha mutica Say (Hemip) Entomo News

27308-310 Drake C J 1918 Notes on North American Tingidae (Hem-Het) Bull Brooklyn Entomo Soc

1386-88 Drake C J and F A Ruhoff 1965 Lacebugs of the world a catalog (Hemiptera Tingidae) U

S Natl Mus Bull 243 634 pp Everett T H 1982 The New York Botanical Garden illustrated encyclopedia of horticulture Vo

10 Ste-Zy Garland Pub New York pp 3225-360J Froeschner R C 1944 Contributions to a synopsis of the Hemiptera of Missouri Pt Ill

Lygaeidae Pyrrhocoridae Piesmidae Tingidae Enicocephalidae Phymatidae Ploiariidae Redushyviidae Nabidae Amer MidI Nat 31638-683


Hom K Fbull C O Wright and M H Farrier 1979 The lace bugs (Hemiptera Tingidae) of North Carolina and their hosts North Carolina Agric Exp Stn Tech Bull 257 22 pp

Hussey R F 1922 Hemiptera from Berrien Connty Michigan Occas Pap Mus Zoo Univ Michigan 1181-39

McAtee W L 1917 Key to the Nearctic species of Leptoypha and Leptostyla (Heteroptera Tingidae) Bull Brooklyn Entomo Soc 1255-64

McAtee W L 1923 Tingitoidea of the vicinity of Washington D C (Heteroptera) Proc Entomo Soc Wash 25143-151

Mead F W 1975 The fringetree lace bug Leptoypha mutica (Say) (Hemiptera Tingidae) Florida Dep Consum Serv Div Plant Ind Entomo Circ 161 2 pp

Schread C 1969 Privet thrips Connecticut Agric Exp Stn Circ 230 4 pp Slater J A and R M Baranowski 1978 How to know the true bugs (Hemiptera-Heteroptera)

Wm C Brown Dubuque Iowa 256 pp Tomokuni M 1987 The Tingidae of Hokkaido Japan (Insecta Heteroptera) [in Japanese English

summary] Mem Nat Sci Mus Tokyo 20115-122 USDA 1963 A lace bug (Leptoypha mutica) Coop Econ Insect Rep 13(32)924


AN ANNOTATED LIST OF THE ORTHOPTERA OF BEAVER ISLAND LAKE MICHIGAN

R G Bland l

ABSTRACT

Thirty-six species of Orthoptera were collected from Beaver Island in northern Lake Michigan Species distribution was Tetrigidae 4 Acrididae 16 Tettigoniidae 8 Gryllacrididae 1 and Gryllidae 7

Beaver Island (Charlevoix County Michigan) is located approximately 52 km northshywest of Charlevoix in northern Lake Michigan It is 21 km long and 11 km wide with an area of 135 square km The relatively undisturbed habitats include sand beaches with dune vegetation upland fields meadows cedar swamps bogs and mixed deciduous and coniferous forests

Little is known about orthopterans on islands of the Great Lakes Pettit amp McDaniel (1918) and Cantrall (1968) listed 15 species from Isle Royale but only 3 species from Beaver Island Several references have included Michigan species as part of broader geographical studies (Blatchley 1920 Otte 1981 amp 1984 Vickery amp Kevan 1986) but do not refer to Beaver Island The paucity of recorded species on the island was likely due to minimal collecting Thus the objective of this study was to determine which orthopteran species occurred on Beaver Island

Collecting was done from 20 July to 7 August and 9 to 11 September 1987 and 4 to 6 June 1988 A few specimens collected by students in the 1960s and by the author in 1975 and 1980 were also recorded A variety of habitats were sampled by sweeping and included dune vegetation gravel pits dry upland fields agricultural fields mowed grass damp meadows shorelines of lakes shrubby edges of bogs and mixed deciduous and coniferous woods Pitfall traps containing molasses or antifreeze were placed in the above habitats and molasses-oatmeal trails were occasionally used Katydids stridulating at night were stalked and captured

Thirty-six species of Orthoptera were collected out of approximately 62 species listed from nearby counties of the Upper and Lower Peninsula of Michigan (Cantrall 1968 Vickery amp Kevan 1986) An asterisk next to a species indicates a new Charlevoix County record

Family TETRIGIDAE

Subfamily TETRIGINAE

Tetrix arenosa angusta (Hancock) 5 June-IO Sept This commonly collected species occurred in the greatest diversity of habitats for tetrigids and was the most variable in

lBiology Department Central Michigan University Mt Pleasant Ml48859


structure and colored markings a characteristic common in this family (Rehn amp Grant 1961)

Tetrix ornata ornata (Say) 4 June-lO Sept Tetrix subulata (L) 5 June-I5 Sept This species was as abundant as T arenosa

angusta

Subfamily BATRACHIDEINAE

Tettigidea lateralis (Say) 5 June-II Sept Nearly 85 of the specimens collected at Greens Lake in June were infested with larvae of an undescribed Leptus sp (Erythraeishydae) a bright pinkish-red mite The infestation occurred in a damp to wet habitat dominated by two species of Cyperaceae (sedges) Eleocharis sp (spike rush) and clumps of Scirpus sp (bulrush) Iris (Iris sp) were also present

Tetrigids were encountered most frequently along the damp flat shorelines of pools (eg in gravel pits swamps) marshes and shallow lakes Shoreline vegetation was primarily short sedges and grasses mosses and organiC debris Tetrigids also frequented mixtures of damp short grass and broad-leaf vegetation growing on new logging trails at forest openings

Family ACRIDIDAE

Subfamily GOMPHOCERINAE

Chloealtis conspersa (Harris) 20 July-6 August Specimens were collected primarily in pitfall traps under trees along a field edge or in rank vegetation of fields

Chorthippus curtipennis curtipennis (Harris) 12 July-II Sept This species was a very common acridid in lowland fields

Pseudopomala brachyptera (Scudder) 20 July-2 August

Subfamily OEDIPODINAE

Arphia pseudonietana pseudonietana (Thomas) 10 Sept Groups of individuals occurred on extremely dry upland habitats consisting of sparse grass and broad-leaf herbs or grass and reindeer lichen

Chortophaga viridifasciata (DeGeer) 4 June-12 August This was the only adult acridid observed in early June except for a few freshly-molted Melanoplus borealis borealis (Fieber)

Camnula pellucida (Scudder) 20 July-II Sept This acridid was the most abundant species it occurred in all upland moist lowland and agricultural fields

Dissosteira carolina (L) 21 July-7 August Spharagemon collare (Scudder) 7 August-lO Sept The few individuals observed

occurred in a small corn field and a recently abandoned weedy agricultural field Trimerotropis huroniana E M Walker 20 July-ll Sept Individuals frequented the

sparsely vegetated sand dunes of Lake Michigan shorelines

Subfamily MELANOPLINAE

Booneacris glacialis canadensis (E M Walker) 3 August-ll Sept Individuals were captured on leatherleaf along the birch and maple edge of the nearly dry remnant bog of Greens Lake

Melanoplus bivittatus (Say) 22 July-5 August Melanoplus borealis borealis (Fieber) 4 June-6 August Individuals were netted or


collected from pitfall traps in rank vegetation of fields or under trees at field edges The first adults were collected 14 days before the earliest collecting record listed by Cantrall (1968)

Melanoplus confusus Scudder July 23 Melanoplus femurrubrum femurrubrum (DeGeer) 27 July-lO Sept Melanoplus islandicus Blatchley 30 July-ll Sept Individuals were captured in a

habitat of grass broad-leaf ground cover and moss at forest edges as well as sunlit forest openings alongside a trail above Iron Ore Creek

Melanoplus sanguinipes sanguinipes (F) 20 July-IO Sept This species reached a peak in late August and early September to become nearly as abundant as C pellucida

Cantrall (1968) listed approximately 14 species found in nearby mainland counties that might be expected to occur on Beaver Island but were not collected in my study In particular the yellow wings and crepitation of A sulphurea (F) would have made this species easy to locate in June if present and the same for S bolli Scudder in sandy fields roadsides or forest edges in August and September Trimerotropis verruculata (Wm Kirby) would have produced loud crepitations around gravel pits near wooded areas (Vickery amp Kevan 1986) Orphulella speciosa (Scudder) M dawsoni (Scudder) and M keeleri luridus (Dodge) were missing species common on the sandy grassy wasteland of the surrounding mainland and M fasciatus was not found in sunlit woodland openings of Vaccinium or other low shrubs as expected Encoptolophus sordidus (Burmeister) is a common September mainland species also not observed

Family TETTIGONIIDAE

Subfamily PHANEROPTERINAE

Scudderia curvicauda (DeGeer) 20 July-IO Sept Scudderia furcata furcata Brunner 31 July-25 Sept Scudderia pistillata Brunner 20 July-l0 Sept Scudderia spp were collected primarily from shrubs and broad-leaf herbs of upland and

lowland grassy fields

Subfamily COPIPHORINAE

Neoconocephalus ensiger (Harris) 29 July-lO Sept

Subfamily CONOCEPHALINAE

Conocephalus fasciatus (DeGeer) 22 July-IO Sept This species ranged from dry upland fields to damp shoreline vegetation

Conocephalus saltans (Scudder) 21 July-lO Sept Individuals occurred in dry upland fields

Orchelimum gladiator Bruner 20 July-30 Sept This species was most common in damp meadows of tall sedges and grasses

Subfamily DECTICINAE

Atlantieus montieola Davis 20 July-22 Sept This species was collected from low branches of small hemlock and oak trees in open areas as well as pitfall traps placed among bracken ferns near maple woods under a maple tree and in a weedy corn field The other Michigan species A testaeeous (Scudder) was not found


Family GRYLLACRIDIDAE

Subfamily RHAPHIDOPHORINAE

Ceuthophilus maculatus (Harris) 17 July-7 August Several individuals were collected at night from inside an old stump Otherwise the same pit traps that captured A monicoLa and another next to a fallen log yielded most of the specimens Four additional species C brevi pes Scudder in particular may occur on the island based on their ranges (Cantrall 1968)

Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE

Gryllus pennsylvanicus Burmeister 22 July-II Sept Gryllus veletis (R D Alexander amp Bigelow) 5 June-2 JUly

Subfamily NEMOBIINAE

Allonemobius (= Nemobius) allardi (R D Alexander amp E S Thomas) 11 July-30 Sept The first adult was collected 7 days before the earliest date listed by CantraIl (1968)

Allonemobius Nemobius)fasciatus (DeGeer) 31 July-tO Sept Allonemobius Nemobius) griseus griseus (E M Walker) 2 August-lO Sept Eunemobius ( Nemobius) carolinus carolinus (Scudder) 11 Sept

Subfamily OECANTHINAE

Oecanthus quadripunctatus Beutenmiiller 5 August-lO Sept The six species of Gryllinae and Nemobiinae represent all species naturally occurring

in northern Michigan They were collected from pitfall traps in a variety of upland and lowland habitats O quadripunctatus was common on low shrubs and broad-leaf herbs of fields and roadsides O nigricornis F Walker was not collected but its habitats IVickery amp Kevan 1986) occur on the island and most likely it is present

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

D Profant Biology Department Central Michigan University (CMU) assisted in collecting insects V Vickery Lyman Entomological Museum of McGill Cniversity Quebec confirmed the identification of several species and W Welboum Acarology Laboratory Ohio State University identified the mite species This study was funded by a CMU faculty research grant and facilities were made available by the CMU Biological Station Beaver Island

LITERATURE CITED

Blatchley W S 1920 Orthoptera of Northeastern America Nature Publ Co Indianapolis 784 pp Cantrall 1 J 1968 An annotated list of the Dermaptera Dictyoptera Phasmatoptera and

Orthoptera of Michigan Mich Entomol 1299-346 Otte D 1981 The North American Grasshoppers Vol 1 Acrididae Gomphocerinae and

Acridinae Harvard Univ Press Cambridge MA 275 pp


1984 The North American Grasshoppers Vol II Oedipodinae Harvard Univ Press Cambridge MA 366 pp

Pettit R H and E McDaniel 1918 Key to Orthoptera of Michigan with annotations Mich Agr Coli Spec Bull 83 48 pp

Rchn J A G and H J Grant Jr 1961 A monograph of the Orthoptera of North America (North of Mexico) Vol 1 Mon Aead Nat Sci Phi1a no 12 257 pp + 8 pI

Vickery V R and DK McE Kevan 1986 The insects and arachnids of Canada Part 14 The grasshoppers crickets and related insects of Canada and adjacent regions Ulonata Dermaptera Cheleutoptera Notoptera Dictyoptera Grylloptera and Orthoptera Agric Canada Publ 1777 (1985)


TRlMEROTROPIS HURONlANA (ORTHOPTERA ACRIDIDAE) A NEW RECORD FOR WISCONSIN

Harvey E Ballard Jr

Trimerotropis huroniana Walker (Subfamily Oedipodinae) is a distinetive first described by Walker (1902) from a small area of open dunes near Southampton Ontario Studies by Cantrall (1968) Hubbell (1929) and Otte (1984) have suggested that T huroniana is endemic to the sand dune communities of the northern Great Lakes region Until now its recorded range included northern Michigan and four localities in Ontario (Vickery amp Kevan 1983) As a consequence of its restricted range narrow ecological tolerance and threatened habitat the species is currently listed as Special Concern in Michigan and has been recommended to the US Fish amp Wildlife Service for consideration as a federally listed species

Since the summer of 1987 I have searched for T huroniana throughout northern Michigans dunes and made observations on its autecoogy I recently confirmed my suspicions that the species also exists in Wisconsins limited Lake Michigan dunes At Whitefish Dunes State Park Door County Wisconsin on August 17 1988 DNR District Naturalist Gene Tiser and I discovered an estimated 150 individuals of T huroniana at a half-acre perched blowout south of the park headquarters We captured four individuals for vouchers One of these was an uncommon burnt orange color morph found occasionally over the range of the species with the typical Silver-gray morpho

Like Michigan popUlations the Whitefish Dunes population was concentrated in the barest sand where the characteristic dune grasses Ammophila breviligulata and Calashymovilfa longifolia were sparse Other locusts rarely associating with T huroniana were Dissosteira carolina (L) and Melanoplus foedus Scudder The latter was restricted to the immediate vicinity of dune shrubs such as Prunus pumila while the former was probably accidental from its nearby haunts along paths and in heavily degraded dunes

Bad weather eliminated searches of other similar blowouts in the park Nevertheless Trimerotropis huroniana is now confirmed as an established species of Wisconsins insect fauna Further searches of suitable dune sites north of the tension zone in Wisconsin will likely yield additional populations of this handsome species in the state I have notified the Natural Heritage Program of the Department of Natural Resources of the discovery and have recommended that the species be listed as state-threatened in Wisconsin

Specimens of T huroniana from the Whitefish Dunes State Park population are deposited at the zoological collections of the University of Wisconsin Madison and at Michigan State University East Lansing

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am grateful to Park Naturalist Jennie Haen of Whitefish Dunes State Park for her help in selecting suitable search sites to DNR District Naturalist Gene Tiser for his enthusiastic assistance in the field and to two anonymous reviewers for helpful criticisms and suggestions on the manuscript

IThe Nature Conservancy Michigan Chapter 2840 E Grand River Suite 5 East Lansing MI 48823


LITERATURE CITED

Cantrall I J 1968 An annotated list of the Dermaptera Dictyoptera Phasmatoptera and Ortiloptera of Miciligan Mich EntomoL 1299-346

Hubbell T H 1929 The distribution of the beaeh-grasshoppers Trimerotropis huroniarlll and Trimerotropis maritima interior in the Great Lakes region J New York Entomol Soc 3731-38

Otte D 1984 The North American Grasshoppers Vol 2 Ocdipodinae Harvard University Press Cambridge 366 pp

Vickery V R and D K McE Kevan 1983 A monograph of the orthopteroid insects of Canada and adjacent regions Vol II Lyman Entomol Mus and Res Lab Mem 131-1462

Walker E M 1902 Tile Canadian species of Trimerotropis Canadian Entomol 341-11


ESTIMATING PARASITISM Olt COLORADO POTATO BEETLE EGGS LEPTINOTARSA DECEMLINEATA (COLEOPTERA

CHRYSOMELIDAE) BY EDOVUM PUTTLERI (HYMENOPTERA EULOPHIDAE)l

E Groden2 FA Drummond2 RA Casagrande3 and JH Lashomb4

ABSTRACT

A computer simulation was used to evaluate methods for estimating parasitism of Colorado potato beetle egg mass populations by Edovum puttieri The algorithm incorporated the specific attack behavior of E puttleri and a development time for parasitized egg masses of ca 29 times that of healthy egg masses Of the methods compared a modification of Southwoods graphical technique was found to be most accurate in relation to the true parasitism derived from the algorithm A regression equation is presented to correct the error in this method at high levels of parasitism A second simulation was used to test the accuracy of this correcter where in a jacknife procedure was used to generate a mean and variance for estimates of parasitism

An exotic hymenopteran egg parasitoid Edovum puttleri Grissell is currently being reared by several state and federal laboratories for experimental releases against the Colorado potato beetle (CPB) Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say) on potatoes tomatoes and eggplant This parasitoid has not been found to overwinter in the Northeast (Obrycki et a1 1985) and its use is presently restricted to inundative releases throughout the growing season Evaluation of the percent parasitism is complicated by the difference in developmental time between parasitized and nonparasitized eggs E puttieri requires ca 29 times as long to develop as healthy CPB eggs (Obrycki et a 1985) hence parasitized eggs are in the field three times as long and are more likely to be encountered in sampling than unparasitized eggs This development time differential must be considered in constructing sampling programs to avoid inflating percent parasitism estimates

A technique for estimating percent parasitism described by Groden (1982) accounts for the difference itt host and parasitoid development times by estimating parasitized and nonparasitized densities independently using a modification of Southwoods graphical technique (Southwood 1978) With repeated frequent sampling where the sampling interval is less than the development or residence times of parasitized and nonparasitized hosts incidence curves (time [x~axisl vs density [y~axis]) for the two populations can be constructed Total densities are calculated by determining the area under these curves and dividing by their respective development times Percent parasitism is calculated by dividing the parasitized host density by the sum of the parasitized and nonparasitized densities and multiplying by 100 Estimating the parasitized and nonparasitized populashy

University of Rhode Island Agricultural Experiment Station Journal Article Number 12234 2Present Address Department of Entomology University of Maine Orono ME 04469 3Department of Plant Sciences University of Rhode Island Kingston RI 02881 4Department of Entomology and Economic Zoology Cook College New Jersey Agricultural

Experiment Station Rutgers University New Brunswick NJ 08903


Table I Methods used for estimating percent E puttleri parasitism of CPB egg masses from simulated field samples (PDENSj = parasitized egg density at time j TDENSj total egg density at time j p peak host density DDj = degree-days at time j TPDENS = total parasitized egg density NPDENS = total nonparasitized egg density N = number of samples)

PARI = (PDENSITDENSp)IOO

N

2 PAR2 laquo(I(PDENSTDENSj raquoiN)100 1

t

3 PAR3 = (I(PDENSj)l(ITDENSjraquoN) 100 I I

t

I(PDENSj + PDENSj _ l l2(DDj - DDj _ d PAR4 c (_2______________4 100

t

I(TDENSj + TDENSj _li2(DD - DDj _ Il 2

5 PARS = (TPDENS(TPDENS + NPDENS))lOO where

t

TPDENS = I (PDENS + PDENSj_aI2(DDj DDj _ 1raquo217 2

t

NPDENS IlaquoNPDENSj + NPDENSj _ 1)i2(DDj - DDj _ 1))175 2

tions independently does not take into account that individuals are moving from the nonparasitized to the parasitized population as one is sampling This error is dependent upon the parasitoid attack pattern (age-dependence of parasitoid susceptibility Groden 1982) but can be corrected if the pattern of attack for a given species of parasitoid has been described and quantified

The purpose of this study is to show how the difference in development times between healthy CPB eggs and those parasitized by E puttleri influence estimates of percent parasitism derived from commonly used methods The accuracy of the method described by Groden (1982) is examined for this host-parasitoid system


We used a computer program to simulate field populations of unparasitized and parasitized CPB egg masses in potatoes following a release of Edovum puttIed Recruitment and loss of individuals both parasitized and unparasitized are a function of degree-day accumulation Recruitment into the egg stage was based upon field data collected in Rhode Island from 1980 to 1985

Development period ofunparasitized egg masses was 75 DD base lQoC (Logan 1981) Development period of parasitized egg masses was 217 DD base lQoC (Obrycki et a1 1985) The flow of egg masses from an unparasitized to a parasitized state was determined by applying an exponential decay attack rate to the unparasitized egg mass population


Table 2 Sample output of simulated field samples generated from the CPB-E puttleri model using parasitoid release times of 40 and 80 DD True percentage of the population parasitized 3783

Parasitized Egg Masses Egg Masses Parasitized

DD per Plant per Plant Egg Masses

1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000

Table 3 Comparison of different methods for estimating total () E puttleri parasitism of CPB egg masses over a range of true parasitism Parasitoid release times = 40 and 80 DD

Estimates of Total Parasitism ()True Parasitism Method 1 Method 2 Method 3 Method 4 Method 5

5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83

following a parasitoid release This attack rate was derived from data collected by Lashomb ~npublished) and is a function of degree-days from release time (t) rate = e(423-)0102 t) ~ = 093 This attack rate was not applied equally across all age classes of unparasitized egg masses Krainacker et al (1986) found that susceptibility of egg masses to parasitoid attack was greatest between 0 and 20 DD age declined linearly from 20 DD to 50 DD age and egg masses 50 DD and older were no longer parasitized Egg mass mortality independent of parasitism was not considered in the model

In modeling egg mass susceptibility we used a discrete boxcar approach by keeping track of 1 DD age intervals of egg masses All the masses in the age classes from 1-20 DD were susceptible to parasite attack (the attack rate was multiplied by the numbers of egg masses in each age class) A linearly decreasing proportion of individuals (100 to 0) were susceptible to parasitism in the age classes 20 to 50 DD and no egg masses were allowed to be parasitized that were older than 50 DD Only unparasitized egg masses were attacked since E puttleri discriminates between parasitized and unparasitized egg masses (Obrycki et al 1985)

We used this program to evaluate various methods for estimating field-level parasitism by incorporating a sampling subroutine summed the number of healthy and parasitized egg masses in the program at 50 DD intervals This provided a minimum of 7 data points to describe the host incidence curve as suggested by Ruesink (1975) These simulated samples represent sample means through time and were used to estimate generational percent parasitism of the egg mass population using the following five methods (Table 1)


200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40

A single release at 40 dd [] double release at 40 and 60 dd (l double release at 40 and 110 dd

0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()

Figure 1 Predicted errors in estimates of percent E puttlai parasitism of CPE egg masses with different parasitoid release patterns using modifications of Southwoods technique where ta) differences in parasitoid and host development times are not taken into account and (b) difference in parasitoid and host development times are taken into account

(1) percent parasitism at peak host abundance (2) mean percent parasitism over all sample dates (3) percentage of the pooled samples (over the entire generation) parasitized (4) a modification of Southwoods method that does not take into account differences in development time between parasitoid and host (Gage 1974 Lampert and Haynes 1985) and (5) a modification of Southwoods method described by Groden (1982) that does account for differences in development time The accuracy of these estimates was compared over a range of parasitism levels by varying the number of parasitoids released

The influence of the parasitoid release pattern on the accuracy of these methods was examined Three different release patterns were simulated and compared a single release at 40 DD after initial CPB oviposition a double release at 40 and 80 DD and a double release at 40 and 110 DD True parasitism was regressed as a function of the estimated parasitism to yield an equation that corrects for the error in method five

The final stage of this study tested the accuracy of estimating E puttleri parasitism with method 5 over a range of parasitism levels sample sizes and seasonal densities Again this was done with simulation The spatial distribution of CPB egg masses in the field was examined over a range of densities (using field-collected data from two CPB egg mass generations in Rhode Island) and was best described as a Poisson frequency distribution


Table 4 Percentage of time jackknife estimtes fell within set error of the true parasitism Based on 10 simulations per seasonal density sample size and parasitism level

Seasonal Density (egg massesplant)

05 15 50

True Percentage

Point

Jackknife Sample Size



Parasitism Error Rangc 50 100 200 50 100 200 50 100 200

413 10 plusmn 041 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 15 plusmn 062 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 25 plusmn 103 10 0 20 20 0 0 0 0 0 50 plusmn 206 70 40 40 60 40 20 60 40 30




(Groden unpublished data) Therefore the generated sample means from the computer program wcre input into a random number generating subroutine (Davies 1971) to generate random samples of various sizes from a Poisson distribution for each of 13 sample dates Sample means of parasitized and nonparasitized densities per sample date were calculated from these data and estimates of percent E puttleri parasitism were calculated using method 5 and the regression corrector The jackknife technique (Mosteller and Tukey 1972 Zahl 1977) was used to generate a mean and variance for estimates of percent parasitism for each set of samples Ten samples per sample date were omitted sequentially for each estimate calculated thus 5 10 and 20 estimates were used to calculate the jackknife mean and variance with sample sizes of 50 100 and 200 respectively For each sample size 10 simulations were run for each of four levels of true percent parasitism and the three levels of seasonal egg mass density The error in the jackknife means was calculated as a percentage of the true percent parasitism


An example of the simulated samples generated by the program is presented in Table 2 Estimates of percent parasitism increase through time eventually reaching 100 In this case peak parasitoid attack occurred at the time of second release (80 DD) yet percent parasitism increased as the healthy egg masses hatched and the parasitized eggs remained in the population This is the same trend that has been found to occur in potato fields in Michigan (Drummond and Miller 1987) The comparison of the different methods for estimating percent E puttleri parasitism over a range of true parasitism levels is presented in Table 3 The first method (estimating parasitism at peak host abundance)

o 20 40 60 80 100

ESTIMATED PARASITISM () Figure 2 True percent E puttleri parasitism of CPB egg masses as a function 0f ~ percent parasitism when parasitized and nonparasitized egg mass densities are estimated ~tly

severely underestimated parasitism except at extremely high levels of attack The soond method (mean percent parasitism of all samples) severely over estimated me true parasitism except at the highest rates of true parasitism Methods 3 and 4 aL-O 5oeerely overestimated the true impact of E puttleri except at high levels of parasitism ~ The modification of Southwoods method which estimates parasitized and Ihlnparasitized densities independently (method 5) was accurate at low levels of parasitism but underestimated percent parasitism as true parasitism increased Among me release patterns compared the magnitude of this error in method 5 did not vary signiricantly (Fig I) Regressing true parasitism as a function of the estimated parasitism (Fig I yielded

5Because the model sampled the population at exact regular degree day intervals and e used a step-wise integration to solve for the area under the incidence curve with the lThodificatioo of Southwoods method these estimates are exactly equaL Given differences in DD accumulation from one day to the next in a real field situation this would not be the case but the trend in the errors would be the same


the following equation for correcting the estimate of percent E puttleri parasitism calculated by method 5

y = I20x - 283 r = 099

where y = true parasitism () and x = estimated parasitism ()

The results of simulation runs to determine the accuracy of method 5 with the regression corrector for estimating E puttleri parasitism are presented in Table 4 At low levels of parasitism even with a large sample size the estimate did not even fall within 50 of the true percent parasistism in half the runs Hence the estimates of percent parasitism at low levels of parasitism are more accurate without the regression corrector As parasitism increases this error in nonparasitized egg mass density becomes more significant as was evident in Fig 1 The usefulness of the corrector increased with increasing parasitism and also with increasing seasonal density and sample size At high levels of parasitism and high CPE egg mass densisities 100 of the estimates of parasitism fell within 10 of the true parasitism with sample sizes of 100 or greater At moderate levels of parasitism and low CPE egg mass densities the sample size must be increased to maintain the same level of accuracy Though with a true parasitism of 23 and a sample size of 200 one can only be assured of the estimate falling within 25 of the true parasitism but this is till within an absolute value of six percentage points

Estimating parasitized egg mass an nonparasitized egg mass densities independently with Southwoods graphical technique and using the regression equation to correct estimates of percent parasitism calculated from these densities is one way of accounting for the differences in E puttleri and CPE egg masss development times and evaluating releases of this parasitoid Other investigators have marked individual egg masses as they are laid and followed the fate of those egg masses through time This can be extremely labor intensive as new cohorts must be identified and followed continuously through the egg generation for accurate estimates However if the difference in developmental times of this parasitoid and its host are not taken into account when sampling erroneous conclusions regarding E puttleris potential for biological control of the CPE could results Using the technique described above one may be able to estimate percent E puttleri with an acceptable level of precision over a range of CPE infestation levels by adjusting the sample size

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to thank Dr J Heltshe Department of Experimental Statistics University of Rhode Island Kingston RI for critically reviewing this manuscript

LITERATURE CITED

Drummond F A and D Miller 1987 Evaluation of Edovum puttleri Grissell for biological control of the Colordao potato 1987 Michigan Potato Research Report Vol 1985-90

Gage S H 1974 Ecological investigations on the cereal leaf beetle Oulema melanopus (L) and the principal larval parasite Tetrastichus juli (Walker) PhD dissertation Michigan State University East Lansing MI

Groden E 1982 The interactions of root maggots and two parasitoids Aleochara bilineata (Gyll) and Aphaereta pallipes (Say) MS thesis Michigan State University East Lansing MI

Lashomb J D D Krainacker R K Jansson Y S Ng and R Chianese 1987 Parasitism of Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say) eggs by Edovum puttleri (Hymenoptera Eulophidae) effects of host age parasitoid age and temperature Can Entomol 11975-82

Lampert E and D L Haynes 1985 Population dynamics of the cereal leaf beetle Oulema


melanopus (Coleoptera Chrysomelidae) at low population densities Environ EntomoL 14 75-79

Logan P A 1981 Estimating and projecting Colorado potato beetle density and potato yield loss pp 105-117 In JH Lashomb and RA Casagrande (cds) Advances in Potato Pest Management Hutchinson Ross Publishing Company Stroudsburg PA

Mosteller F and T W Tukey 1977 Data Analysis and Regression Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Reading MA

Obrycki J M M J Tauber C A Tauber and B Gollands 1985 Edovum puttleri (Hymenoptera Eulophidae) an exotic egg parasitoid of the Colorado potato beetle (Coleoptera Chrysomelidae) responses to temperate zone conditions and resistant potato plants Environ EntomoL 1448-54

Ruesink W G 1975 Estimating time-varying survival of arthropod life stages from population density 56244-247

Southwood T 1978 Ecological Methods With Particular Reference To The Study of Insects 2nd ed Chapman and Hall London 524 pp

Zahl S 1977 Jackknifing an index of diversity Ecology 58907-913


A NEW LOCATION FOR VALGUS HEMIPTERUS (COLEOPTERA SCARABAEIDAE)

Joseph Maharl

On 12 June 1987 a live female specimen of Valgus hemipterus (L) was collected from a car hood at a dairy farm ca 48 km north of Martin Allegan Co Michigan This is approximately 113 km west of the site where V hemipterus was first recorded in North America northeast of Lansing Michigan (Mahar and Oemke 1981) The car had been parked for at least 1 hr before the beetles discovery reducing the chance that it had been transported to the farm Regardless this suggests that Valgus hemipterus is spreading over lower Michigan though at very low densities as far as known no additional specimens have been collected

Finding the female beetle away from wood is consistent with the life cycle described by Mahar and Oemke in 1981 Females apparently leave colonized wood to seek new oviposition sites in early summer In Europe set wooden fenceposts are one of the favored habitats for this wood-boring scarab (Fallou 1889) There were wooden posts in the barnyard fence at this dairy but there was no external evidence of any wood boring

LITERATURE CITED

Fallou J 1889 Sur les ravages causes par deux coleoptres nuisibles des environs de Paris Rev Sci Nat app 3658-64

Mahar 1 and M Oemke 1981 A North American record for Valgus hemipterus (Coleoptera Scarabaeidae) and information on its life cycle Great Lakes EntomoL 1477-79

1195 N Broadway Pennsville NJ 08070

INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS

Papers dealing with any of entomology will be considered for publication in The Great Lakes Entomologist Appropriate are those of interest to amateur and professional entomologists in the North Central States and Canada as well as general papers and revisions directed to a larger audience while retaining an interest to readers in our area

All manuscripts are two reviewers except for short notes which are reviewed at the discretion of the Editor Manuscripts must be double-spaced with 1 margins on white 8 li2 x 11 or equivalent size paper and submitted in triplicate underline only those words that are to be italicized Use subheadings sparingly Footnotes (except for authors addresses which should be on the title page) legends and captions of iIlustnltions should be typed on separate sheets of paper Titles should be concise identifying the order and family discussed The author of each must be fully at least once in the text but not in the title or abstract If a common name exists for a or should be given at least once in the text in accordance with the approved common names by Society of America The format for references must follow that used in recent issues of Tile Great Lakes Literature cited is just that-no unpublished manuscripts or internal memos

Photographs should be finish Drawings charts graphs and maps must be scaled to proper reduction without loss of reduce illustrations or plates to a size no greater than 9 x to permit easier handling Attach a figure number to the reverse side of each figure and include the authors names We do not return original drawings to the author(s) unless requested and reimbursed for postage

Tables should be kept as uncluttered as possible and should be able to fit normally across a when typeset by the printers Contributors should follow the Council of Biology Editors Style Manual and examine recen issues of The Great Lakes Entomologist for proper format of manuscripts

Papers publiShed in The Great Lakes Entomgist are subject to a page charge of $3000 per published page Members of the Society who are authors without funds from grants institutions or industry and who are unable to pay costs from personal fimds may apply to the Society for financial assistance Application for subsidy must be made at the time a manuscript is initially submitted for publication

Authors will receive page proof together with an order blank for separates All manuscripts for The Great Lakes Emomologist should be sent to the Editor Mark F OBrien Insect

Division Museum University of Michigan Ann Arbor MI 48109-1079 USA Other correspondence should be directed to the Secretary (see inside front cover)

THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST

Published by the Michigan Entomological Society

Volume 22 No 1

ISSN 0090middot0222

TABIE OF CONTENTS

Two new genera of Hemisarcoptidae (Acari Astigmata) from the Huron Mountains of northern Michigan

Barry M OConnor and Marilyn A Houck

Some aspects of the biology of a predaeeous anthomyiid fly Coenosia tigrina Francis A Drummond Eleanor Groden DL Haynes and Thomas C Edens II

State records and confirmations of Arkansas flat bugs (Heteroptera Aradidae) Steven J Taylor and JE McPherson 19

Insect pests associated with birdsfoot trefoil Lotus corniculatus in Wisconsin Mark S Wipfli John L Wedberg David B Hogg and Thomas D Syverud 25

Late lilac Syringa villosa New host of the lace bug Leptoypha mutica (Heteroptera Tingidae)

AG Wheeler Jr 35

An annotated list of the Orthoptera of Beaver Island Lake Michigan RG Bland 39

Trimerotropis huroniana (Orthoptera Acrididae) a new record for Wiseonsin Harvey E Ballard Jr 45

Estimating parasitism of Colorado potato beetle eggs Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Coleoptera Chrysomelidae) by Edovum puttleri (Hymenoptera Eulophidae)

E Groden FA Drummond RA Casagrande and JH Lashomb 47

A new location for Valgus hemipterus (Coleoptera Scarabaeidae) Joseph Mahar 55

COVER ILLUSTRATION

Papilio glaucus canadensis butterflies puddling at a site near Agawa Canyon Ontario Photograph by John Hicks


1988-89 OFFICERS














NORTHERN MICHIGAN


ABSTRACT











RESULTS











l

) 50 tm

1




50 ~m

2





ra









Huronopus New Genus












50 )JITl








0n13 251lt

12



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













ABSTRACT


















Eaton Rapids 210 10 K 400 (096) 267 (068) R 007 000

Grant 2040 16 GR 020 (023) G1 000 G3 000

Laingsburg 210 10 R 080 (037) 0040 (018) P 000 000








bull bull bull


30 bullgtshy


0 0 3 0 60 90 1 20

ONION CULL DENSITY







30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC



1982 30


a w ()

i=

20

10








Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED













1988-89 OFFICERS














NORTHERN MICHIGAN


ABSTRACT











RESULTS











l

) 50 tm

1




50 ~m

2





ra









Huronopus New Genus












50 )JITl








0n13 251lt

12



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













ABSTRACT


















Eaton Rapids 210 10 K 400 (096) 267 (068) R 007 000

Grant 2040 16 GR 020 (023) G1 000 G3 000

Laingsburg 210 10 R 080 (037) 0040 (018) P 000 000








bull bull bull


30 bullgtshy


0 0 3 0 60 90 1 20

ONION CULL DENSITY







30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC



1982 30


a w ()

i=

20

10








Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED














NORTHERN MICHIGAN


ABSTRACT











RESULTS











l

) 50 tm

1




50 ~m

2





ra









Huronopus New Genus












50 )JITl








0n13 251lt

12



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













ABSTRACT


















Eaton Rapids 210 10 K 400 (096) 267 (068) R 007 000

Grant 2040 16 GR 020 (023) G1 000 G3 000

Laingsburg 210 10 R 080 (037) 0040 (018) P 000 000








bull bull bull


30 bullgtshy


0 0 3 0 60 90 1 20

ONION CULL DENSITY







30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC



1982 30


a w ()

i=

20

10








Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED














RESULTS











l

) 50 tm

1




50 ~m

2





ra









Huronopus New Genus












50 )JITl








0n13 251lt

12



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













ABSTRACT


















Eaton Rapids 210 10 K 400 (096) 267 (068) R 007 000

Grant 2040 16 GR 020 (023) G1 000 G3 000

Laingsburg 210 10 R 080 (037) 0040 (018) P 000 000








bull bull bull


30 bullgtshy


0 0 3 0 60 90 1 20

ONION CULL DENSITY







30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC



1982 30


a w ()

i=

20

10








Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED













l

) 50 tm

1




50 ~m

2





ra









Huronopus New Genus












50 )JITl








0n13 251lt

12



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













ABSTRACT


















Eaton Rapids 210 10 K 400 (096) 267 (068) R 007 000

Grant 2040 16 GR 020 (023) G1 000 G3 000

Laingsburg 210 10 R 080 (037) 0040 (018) P 000 000








bull bull bull


30 bullgtshy


0 0 3 0 60 90 1 20

ONION CULL DENSITY







30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC



1982 30


a w ()

i=

20

10








Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED













50 ~m

2





ra









Huronopus New Genus












50 )JITl








0n13 251lt

12



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













ABSTRACT


















Eaton Rapids 210 10 K 400 (096) 267 (068) R 007 000

Grant 2040 16 GR 020 (023) G1 000 G3 000

Laingsburg 210 10 R 080 (037) 0040 (018) P 000 000








bull bull bull


30 bullgtshy


0 0 3 0 60 90 1 20

ONION CULL DENSITY







30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC



1982 30


a w ()

i=

20

10








Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED













ra









Huronopus New Genus












50 )JITl








0n13 251lt

12



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













ABSTRACT


















Eaton Rapids 210 10 K 400 (096) 267 (068) R 007 000

Grant 2040 16 GR 020 (023) G1 000 G3 000

Laingsburg 210 10 R 080 (037) 0040 (018) P 000 000








bull bull bull


30 bullgtshy


0 0 3 0 60 90 1 20

ONION CULL DENSITY







30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC



1982 30


a w ()

i=

20

10








Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED














Huronopus New Genus












50 )JITl








0n13 251lt

12



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













ABSTRACT


















Eaton Rapids 210 10 K 400 (096) 267 (068) R 007 000

Grant 2040 16 GR 020 (023) G1 000 G3 000

Laingsburg 210 10 R 080 (037) 0040 (018) P 000 000








bull bull bull


30 bullgtshy


0 0 3 0 60 90 1 20

ONION CULL DENSITY







30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC



1982 30


a w ()

i=

20

10








Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED













50 )JITl








0n13 251lt

12



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













ABSTRACT


















Eaton Rapids 210 10 K 400 (096) 267 (068) R 007 000

Grant 2040 16 GR 020 (023) G1 000 G3 000

Laingsburg 210 10 R 080 (037) 0040 (018) P 000 000








bull bull bull


30 bullgtshy


0 0 3 0 60 90 1 20

ONION CULL DENSITY







30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC



1982 30


a w ()

i=

20

10








Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED
















0n13 251lt

12



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













ABSTRACT


















Eaton Rapids 210 10 K 400 (096) 267 (068) R 007 000

Grant 2040 16 GR 020 (023) G1 000 G3 000

Laingsburg 210 10 R 080 (037) 0040 (018) P 000 000








bull bull bull


30 bullgtshy


0 0 3 0 60 90 1 20

ONION CULL DENSITY







30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC



1982 30


a w ()

i=

20

10








Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED























ABSTRACT


















Eaton Rapids 210 10 K 400 (096) 267 (068) R 007 000

Grant 2040 16 GR 020 (023) G1 000 G3 000

Laingsburg 210 10 R 080 (037) 0040 (018) P 000 000








bull bull bull


30 bullgtshy


0 0 3 0 60 90 1 20

ONION CULL DENSITY







30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC



1982 30


a w ()

i=

20

10








Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED
























Eaton Rapids 210 10 K 400 (096) 267 (068) R 007 000

Grant 2040 16 GR 020 (023) G1 000 G3 000

Laingsburg 210 10 R 080 (037) 0040 (018) P 000 000








bull bull bull


30 bullgtshy


0 0 3 0 60 90 1 20

ONION CULL DENSITY







30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC



1982 30


a w ()

i=

20

10








Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED












bull bull bull


30 bullgtshy


0 0 3 0 60 90 1 20

ONION CULL DENSITY







30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC



1982 30


a w ()

i=

20

10








Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED














30en w i 20u

a w 10 ()

i= 0

1981

O--ORGANIC



1982 30


a w ()

i=

20

10








Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED














Treatment Year






X Years 3 374 125 215 011 Error 56 3237 058








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED














ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED






























ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED





















ABSTRACT




ANEURINAE



ARADINAE
















MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED

























MEZIRINAE













DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED






















DISCUSSION




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED

















ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED



























ABSTRACT






























6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED





































6----------------------------- A lineolatus


4

2

3----------------------------- L lineoads


a E )

z

0

Q 4) 4)

3 III 4)

a E )

z

9

6

3

C P chrysanthemi





10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED













10~------------------------------

0 Gl Gl

-~ 5 Gl Q

E l Z

0

20

150 Gl ltI)

-~ 10 ltI)

Q

E l Z 5

0

0 Gl Gl

~ Gl

Q

E l Z


harvest

20

15

10

5




10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED













10--------------------------------

c G)

-a- shy



A lineolatus

1984

G)


D

E J Z

15-------------------------------

c G)

CD

1J en -Gl

D

E I Z

10

5


seed harvest

10--------------------------------

c G)

Gl 1J en -G)

D

E I Z

5


seed harvest




15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED













15


1l

E 5 Z I

0

10

Q Ql Ql

3 ~ 5 Ql

1l E J Z

0

10

Q Ql Ql til 5 -Ql

1l

E I Z

0





bull41-


1985

seed halVest

-it

1986




--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED












--


a Q) Q)

rtI

- Q)

0 E I Z

Figure 5 1986

10-------------------------------~


1986

5



4080


I0 z30E I Z

1020

10

0


0






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED














ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED













A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED














A G Wheeler Jr

ABSTRACT














DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED


















DISCUSSION



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED





















R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED























R G Bland l

ABSTRACT






Family TETRIGIDAE







angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED















angusta




Family ACRIDIDAE





































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED


































Family GRYLLIDAE

Subfamily GRYLLINAE








ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED











Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED



















Harvey E Ballard Jr






ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED













LITERATURE CITED










ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED
















ABSTRACT









N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED















N


t


t


t



t


t











1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED
















1 000 000 000 51 017 001 690

101 133 036 2713 151 096 057 5900 201 070 059 8430 251 062 060 9707 301 OAI OAI 10000 351 006 006 10000 401 001 001 10000



5 4 60 14 14 5 20 14 70 42 42 20 40 29 76 63 63 37 60 45 81 76 76 53 80 65 86 86 86 69 95 98 91 94 94 83





200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED













200

160

120 ~ -shy

~ 800 ~ ~ ~ 40

0

-40


0 20 40 60 80 i OCshy

TRUE PARASITISM ()








05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED















05 15 50

True Percentage

Point












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED












o 20 40 60 80 100






y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED














y = I20x - 283 r = 099




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


LITERATURE CITED
















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED






















Joseph Maharl



LITERATURE CITED












vol. no. 1 spring 1989 the great lakes entomologisttrimerotropis huroniana (orthoptera: acrididae),...

Documents