redbacked cutworm
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

18
(FIVE YEARS 0)

H-INDEX

8
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2019 ◽  
Vol 113 (2) ◽  
pp. 731-741
Author(s):  
Ronald E Batallas ◽  
Maya L Evenden

Abstract The redbacked cutworm, Euxoa ochrogaster (Guenée), and the pale western cutworm, Agrotis orthogonia (Morrison), are generalist pests that cause sporadic economic damage to several annual crops in the Canadian Prairies. Early larval instars feed on foliage, whereas mature larvae eat into the stem and sever crop seedlings. Here, we evaluate the influence of annual crop species and host fertilization on the larval performance and feeding preference of both cutworm species. Performance is the ability of an insect to reach its maximum growth potential. The first set of experiments evaluated larval development and preference on canola (Brassica napus L. [Capparales: Brassicaeae]), field peas (Pisum sativa L. [Fabales: Fabaceae]), and spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L. [Cyperales: Poaceae]). The redbacked cutworm had higher performance on canola and peas, while the pale western cutworm had higher performance on wheat. In multiple-choice feeding experiments, the redbacked cutworm consumed more canola, whereas the pale western cutworm consumed more spring wheat. The third set of experiments evaluated larval development on fertilized and unfertilized seedlings of canola and spring wheat seedlings. When fed unfertilized seedlings, the redbacked cutworm had better performance on canola than spring wheat, whereas pale western cutworm had better performance on spring wheat than canola. Fertilizer application enhanced the performance of both cutworms regardless of the crop species. Despite their generalist feeding behavior, both cutworm species have a larval feeding preference for the host plant on which they achieve high performance. Canola-cereal cropping is a common crop rotation schedule in the region; however, this tactic will not negatively impact cutworm performance.


2011 ◽  
Vol 91 (2) ◽  
pp. 425-428 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Willenborg ◽  
Lloyd Dosdall

Willenborg, C. J. and Dosdall, L. M. 2011. First report of redbacked cutworm damage to cow cockle [ Vaccaria hispanica(Mill.) Rauschert], a potential new crop for western Canada. Can. J. Plant Sci. 91: 425–428. We report the effects of redbacked cutworm Euxoa ochrogaster (Guenée) on cow cockle [Vaccaria hispanica (Mill.) Rauschert] plant height, seed yield, and 1000-seed weight (TSW). Euxoa ochrogaster damage to plots varied considerably among genotypes, with some genotypes exhibiting <10% damage and others >45%. Seed yield also varied significantly among genotypes and exhibited a strong linear relationship with the extent of E. ochrogaster damage. This is the first known report of any insect pest feeding on cow cockle. Results suggest that E. ochrogaster has the potential to cause significant losses in cow cockle crops.


2007 ◽  
Vol 139 (2) ◽  
pp. 278-291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Landolt ◽  
Alberto Pantoja ◽  
Aaron Hagerty ◽  
Lars Crabo ◽  
Daryl Green

AbstractTraps baited with two types of chemical feeding attractants yielded 97 species of macrolepidoptera at three areas in Alaska (Fairbanks, Delta Junction, and Palmer). These were 16 geometrid, 1 thyatirid, and 76 noctuid moth species and 4 species of nymphalid butterflies. Potential crop pests trapped included Apamea devastator (Brace) (glassy cutworm), Xestia c-nigrum L. (spotted cutworm), Xestia smithii (Snellen) (Smith's dart), Euxoa ochrogaster (Guenée) (redbacked cutworm), and Discestra trifolii (Hufnagel) (clover cutworm). The clover cutworm was captured early in the season (May into June), while Smith's dart, glassy cutworm, spotted cutworm, and redbacked cutworm were captured in traps in mid to late summer. Many more species and greater numbers of moths were captured in traps baited with acetic acid and 3-methyl-1-butanol than in traps baited with a multicomponent floral lure (phenylacetaldehyde, methyl salicylate, methyl-2-methoxy benzoate, and β-myrcene). However, most of the geometrid moths captured (12 of 16 species) were in floral lure traps, while one species of Hadeninae (Noctuidae) and both species of Plusiinae (Noctuidae) were trapped exclusively in floral lure traps. The one thyatirid, both Catocalinae noctuid species, and most Amphipyrinae, Cuculliinae, Hadeninae, and Noctuinae noctuid species were captured in traps baited with acetic acid and 3-methyl-1-butanol. In addition, large numbers of bumblebees were captured in traps baited with the floral lure, while large numbers of yellowjackets were captured in traps baited with acetic acid and 3-methyl-1-butanol.


1992 ◽  
Vol 124 (3) ◽  
pp. 541-551 ◽  
Author(s):  
G.H. Gerber ◽  
J. Walkof

AbstractThe phenology and reproductive status of adults of the redbacked cutworm, Euxoa ochrogaster (Guenée), were determined from blacklight (BLT) and sex-attractant (SAT) trap catches at four locations in southern Manitoba in 1987 through 1989. The flight period was of 9–12 weeks duration, extending from late June to early October. The first male and female moths were captured at about the same time in the BLT and SAT. The peak catches of the BLT occurred during the first 3 weeks of August (weeks 5 and 6 of the flight period) and those of the SAT about 1 week later. The SAT continued to capture male moths for 2–3 weeks after the last moths appeared in the BLT. Most females captured during the first 2–3 weeks of the flight period were virgins who had not yet initiated egg development. Most mating, egg development, and oviposition took place during a 3- to 4-week period that included the 2 weeks before, the same week as, and the week after the peak BLT catches (weeks 3–7 of the flight period); these activities occurred in the 3–4 weeks before the peak SAT catches. The data suggested that there was competition between SAT and females in attracting males and, consequently, the SAT catch data may not be providing accurate measurements of the sizes of breeding populations of males in the field. The BLT catches underestimated the length of the flight period by about 1.5–3 weeks.


1980 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 585-591 ◽  
Author(s):  
Warren Steck ◽  
M. D. Chisholm ◽  
E. W. Underhill ◽  
C. C. Peters

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document