2023
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2023.105318
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A predator breeding station for augmentative biological control of scolytine crop pests

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…If this species cannot be used in other regions, it is suggested to evaluate generalist predators such as Cathartus quadricollis (Guérin-Méneville, 1829) and Ahasverus advena Waltl, 1834 (Coleoptera: Silvanidae), which reduced CBB populations under laboratory conditions by up to 69% and 63%, respectively [20]. Liang and collaborators [37] have also reported predation of CBBs by C. quadricollis ranging 12 to 49% in Hawaii, and recently, Follet et al [38] developed a breeding station for increasing this species in a field conservation biology approach to control CBB in Hawaii.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If this species cannot be used in other regions, it is suggested to evaluate generalist predators such as Cathartus quadricollis (Guérin-Méneville, 1829) and Ahasverus advena Waltl, 1834 (Coleoptera: Silvanidae), which reduced CBB populations under laboratory conditions by up to 69% and 63%, respectively [20]. Liang and collaborators [37] have also reported predation of CBBs by C. quadricollis ranging 12 to 49% in Hawaii, and recently, Follet et al [38] developed a breeding station for increasing this species in a field conservation biology approach to control CBB in Hawaii.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To develop successful area-wide IPM programs, it is critical to understand how coffee berry borer populations persist and disperse across the landscape ( Rodríguez et al 2013 ). Field studies conducted in Hawaii over the last 13 years have provided location-specific information on coffee berry borer development ( Hamilton et al 2019 ), flight activity ( Messing 2012 , Aristizábal et al 2017b , Johnson and Manoukis 2021 ), infestation ( Aristizábal et al 2017b , Johnson and Manoukis 2020 ), postharvest reservoirs ( Johnson et al 2019 ), Beauveria bassiana efficacy and spray strategies ( Greco et al 2018 , Hollingsworth et al 2020 , Woodill et al 2021 , Wraight et al 2021 , 2022 ), biological controls ( Brill et al 2021 , Castrillo et al 2020 , Follett et al 2016 , 2023 , Hollingsworth et al 2011 , Kawabata et al 2016 , Sim et al 2016 , Wraight et al 2018 , 2022 , Yousuf et al 2021 ), physical controls ( Johnson et al 2020 ), chemical controls ( Kawabata et al 2023 ), and cultural controls ( Aristizábal et al 2023b ). Still, there remain gaps in our knowledge of coffee berry borer population dynamics over space and time, limiting our understanding of the relative importance of site-specific differences among farming districts and elevations in this small but economically important and world-renowned coffee-growing region.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%