Control of Sugarbeet Root Maggot with the Fungus Metarhizium anisopliae

Campbell, L. G.; Eide, John D.; Smith, L. J.; Smith, G. A.

doi:10.5274/jsbr.37.1.57

Cited by 12 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Adult T. myopaeformis activity was assessed in early June of 1998 at both St. Thomas and Glyndon by using a standard insect sweep-net (i.e., 38 cm diameter; canvas net; 92-cm long handle) to make ten 180Њ sweeping arcs per treatment plot. Larval feeding injury was assessed in late July to mid-August of each year on 10 sugarbeet roots per replicate (5 from each of the outer 2 treated rows) by using the 10-point root injury rating scale (0 ϭ no visible feeding scars; 9 ϭ more than threefourths of root surface blackened with feeding scars) of Campbell et al (2000). A score of 9 was recorded for cases in which plants were absent from randomly selected within-row sampling sites caused by severe root maggot feeding pressure.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Oat Cover Cropping and Soil Insecticides in an Integrated Sugarbeet Root Maggot (Diptera: Otitidae) Management Program

Dregseth

Boetel

Schroeder

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sugarbeet, Beta vulgaris L., producers occasionally establish cereal cover crops to minimize early-season soil erosion, wind abrasion, and mechanical injury of seedlings. We evaluated the use of living oat, Avena sativa L., cover cropping as a cultural tactic to minimize feeding injury from sugarbeet root maggot, Tetanops myopaeformis (Röder), larvae at five field sites during 1996, 1998, and 1999. Sweep-net sampling yielded 4.8-, 11.2-, and 7.2-fold more flies from oat cover-cropped chlorpyrifos, terbufos, and untreated control plots, respectively, than in noncover counterparts. However, larval feeding injury in terbufos-treated plots was reduced when cover-cropped (383 seeds/m2) at St. Thomas in all years. A reduced oat seeding rate (224 seeds/m2) also enhanced root protection in terbufos-treated plots at St. Thomas in 1999. Less root injury was sustained in cover-cropped chlorpyrifos plots than in noncover counterparts at St. Thomas in 2 study yr. Oat cover cropping also frequently resulted in reduced T. myopaeformis feeding injury in the absence of a soil insecticide. Although trends toward increased yields were often evident, significant yield benefits were limited to a 6.8% root yield increase in oat cover plots when compared with noncover treatments overall at St. Thomas in 1996 and an 18.4% sucrose yield increase in terbufos-treated plots at St. Thomas in 1999. These findings suggest that beneficial interactions between planting-time soil insecticides and cereal cover crops are achievable in areas infested by T. myopaeformis. Demonstrated reductions in root feeding injury, combined with additional agronomic benefits, may warrant use of this production practice as part of an integrated management program for this key insect pest of sugarbeet.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…a Rating means in a row within a contrast (Steele and Torrie 1980) are not signiÞcantly different where P exceeds 0.05. b Root injury ratings are based on the 0 Ð9 scale of Campbell et al (2000).…”

Section: Producers In the North Central And Western Unitedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oat Cover Cropping and Soil Insecticides in an Integrated Sugarbeet Root Maggot (Diptera: Otitidae) Management Program

Dregseth

Boetel

Schroeder

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Persistence and consistency of formulations also have been suggested as important features of a biopesticide for insect control in sugarbeet (Campbell, Eide, and Jonason 2000;Jaronski, FuUer-Schaeffer, Jung, Boetel, and Majumdar 2007). Obviously, an efficacious concentration of live conidia in the path of larvae is critically important for insect control, and a number of factors can affect the viability of conidia in soil (Jaronski 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cover crop and conidia delivery system impacts on soil persistence ofMetarhizium anisopliae(Hypocreales: Clavicipitaceae) in sugarbeet

Boetel

Majumdar

Jaronski

et al. 2012

Biocontrol Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sugarbeet root maggot, Tetanops myopaeformis (Rôder), is a major North American pest of sugarbeet. Beta vulgaris L. Previous research suggests that moderate T. myopaeformis control is possible with the entomopathogen Metarhizium anisopliae (Metch.) Sorok. We conducted a three-year (2002)(2003)(2004) experiment to assess impacts of" oat. Avena sativa L. and rye. Sécale céréale L., cover crops on persistence of corn grit-based granular or spray formulations of M anisopliae isolate ATCC 62176 (i.e. MA 1200) applied at 8 x lO'^ viable conidia/ha in sugarbeet. More colony forming units (CFUs) were detected immediately after application [0 days after treatment (DAT)] in spray plots than granule-treated plots. However, 76-92% declines in CFUs per gram of soil occurred in spray plots within 30 DAT. Substantially (i.e. 83-560%) more rainfall occurred in June 2002 than during June of any other year. Subsequently, 71-670% increases in CFU concentrations occurred by 60 DAT in M anisopliae granuletreated plots with oat or rye cover crops that year. CFU density increases were higher in cover crops in 2002, but no significant cover crop effects were detected. Conidia persisted for up to 30 DAT in M anisopliae spray plots and 60 DAT in granule-treated plots in 2002; however, no increases occurred in the years with less June rainfall. Trends suggest that M. anisopliae aqueous sprays result in greater conidia concentrations than granules at sugarbeet plant bases in June during T myopaeformis oviposition and larval establishment on host plants. Increases are possible when delivering conidia via granules, but high post-application rainfall could be necessary for conidia production.

show abstract

“…They observed greater virulence against T. myopaeformis larvae in M. anisopliae than in B. bassiana, and found M. anisopliae isolate ATCC 62176 (MA1200) to result in the highest larval mortality among several isolates tested. Campbell et al (2000Campbell et al ( , 2006 tested M. anisopliae for potential as a root maggot mycoinsecticide under field conditions, and achieved encouraging results. They suggested that T. myopaeformis control via entomopathogenic fungi could be improved by using more virulent strains.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discovery of Fusarium solani as a naturally occurring pathogen of sugarbeet root maggot (Diptera: Ulidiidae) pupae: Prevalence and baseline susceptibility

Majumdar

Boetel

Jaronski

2008

Journal of Invertebrate Pathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Control of Sugarbeet Root Maggot with the Fungus Metarhizium anisopliae

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

Oat Cover Cropping and Soil Insecticides in an Integrated Sugarbeet Root Maggot (Diptera: Otitidae) Management Program

Oat Cover Cropping and Soil Insecticides in an Integrated Sugarbeet Root Maggot (Diptera: Otitidae) Management Program

Cover crop and conidia delivery system impacts on soil persistence ofMetarhizium anisopliae(Hypocreales: Clavicipitaceae) in sugarbeet

Discovery of Fusarium solani as a naturally occurring pathogen of sugarbeet root maggot (Diptera: Ulidiidae) pupae: Prevalence and baseline susceptibility

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About