Special Issue "Arthropod Pest Control in Orchards and Vineyards"

A special issue of Insects (ISSN 2075-4450).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 July 2017)

Special Issue Editors

Guest Editor
Dr. Alberto Pozzebon

Department of Agronomy Food Natural resources Animals and Environment, University of Padova, Agripolis - viale Dell' Università, 16 - 35020 Legnaro (PD), Italy
Website | E-Mail
Interests: Integrated pest management and biocontrol tactics; Ecotoxicology in agro-ecosystems; Ecology and conservation of biocontrol agents in perennial cropping systems
Guest Editor
Prof. Dr. Carlo Duso

Department of Agronomy, Food, Natural resources, Animals and the Environment, University of Padua, Agripolis, Viale dell'Università 16, 35020 Legnaro, Padova, Italy
Website | E-Mail
Phone: 0039 0498272805
Interests: Biological and integrated pest management, Side effects of pesticides, Functional biodiversity
Guest Editor
Prof. Dr. Gregory M. Loeb

Department of Entomology, Cornell University, Geneva, NY 14456, USA
Website | E-Mail
Interests: insect ecology; integrated pest management, biological control, small fruit entomology; plant-insect interactions; chemical ecology and behavior
Guest Editor
Prof. Dr. Geoff M. Gurr

Graham Centre for Agricultural Innovation, Charles Sturt University. Orange, New South Wales, Australia and State Key Laboratory of Ecological Pest Control for Fujian and Taiwan Crops, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou 350002, China
Website | E-Mail
Interests: insect-plant and insect-microbe interactions; chemical ecology; habitat management for ecosystem services; developing country agriculture

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

In the last decades pest management in orchards and vineyards has been driven by continual innovations aimed at the reduction of pesticides use in these systems. On one hand, research has been focused on a deeper understanding on the biology and ecology of the key pests in orchards and vineyards and the development of new approaches for their management. On the other hand, new invasive or emerging pests pose new challenges. This special issue will collect original research articles that shed light on basic aspects of the biology and ecology of arthropod pests occurring in orchards and vineyards as well as articles devoted to the management of these pests within an IPM framework.

Dr. Alberto Pozzebon
Prof. Carlo Duso
Prof. Gregory M. Loeb
Prof. Geoff M. Gurr
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Insects is an international peer-reviewed open access quarterly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 550 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Integrated Pest Management  
  • Biological Control
  • Primary and secondary pest
  • Invasive pest
  • Chemical ecology
  • Pesticides

Published Papers (2 papers)

View options order results:
result details:
Displaying articles 1-2
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle Minimal Pruning and Reduced Plant Protection Promote Predatory Mites in Grapevine
Insects 2017, 8(3), 86; doi:10.3390/insects8030086 (registering DOI)
Received: 25 July 2017 / Revised: 9 August 2017 / Accepted: 15 August 2017 / Published: 18 August 2017
PDF Full-text (1071 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text | Supplementary Files
Abstract
Improving natural pest control by promoting high densities of predatory mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) is an effective way to prevent damage by pest mites (e.g., Eriophyidae, Tetranychidae) and other arthropod taxa that can cause serious damage to vineyards. Here, we investigate the influence of
[...] Read more.
Improving natural pest control by promoting high densities of predatory mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) is an effective way to prevent damage by pest mites (e.g., Eriophyidae, Tetranychidae) and other arthropod taxa that can cause serious damage to vineyards. Here, we investigate the influence of innovative management on predatory mite densities. We compare (i) full versus reduced fungicide applications and (ii) minimal pruning versus a traditional trellis pruning system in four fungus-resistant grapevine varieties. As predatory mites also feed on fungus mycelium, we assessed fungal infection of grapevine leaves in the experimental vineyard. Predatory mites were significantly more abundant in both minimal pruning and under reduced plant protection. Increases in predatory mites appeared to be independent of fungal infection, suggesting mostly direct effects of reduced fungicides and minimal pruning. In contrast to predatory mites, pest mites did not increase under innovative management. Thus, conditions for natural pest control are improved in fungus-resistant grapevines and under minimal pruning, which adds to other advantages such as environmental safety and reduced production cost. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Arthropod Pest Control in Orchards and Vineyards)
Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle Sublethal Effects in Pest Management: A Surrogate Species Perspective on Fruit Fly Control
Insects 2017, 8(3), 78; doi:10.3390/insects8030078
Received: 29 May 2017 / Revised: 14 July 2017 / Accepted: 25 July 2017 / Published: 29 July 2017
PDF Full-text (651 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Tephritid fruit flies are economically important orchard pests globally. While much effort has focused on controlling individual species with a combination of pesticides and biological control, less attention has been paid to managing assemblages of species. Although several tephritid species may co-occur in
[...] Read more.
Tephritid fruit flies are economically important orchard pests globally. While much effort has focused on controlling individual species with a combination of pesticides and biological control, less attention has been paid to managing assemblages of species. Although several tephritid species may co-occur in orchards/cultivated areas, especially in mixed-cropping schemes, their responses to pesticides may be highly variable. Furthermore, predictive efforts about toxicant effects are generally based on acute toxicity, with little or no regard to long-term population effects. Using a simple matrix model parameterized with life history data, we quantified the responses of several tephritid species to the sublethal effects of a toxicant acting on fecundity. Using a critical threshold to determine levels of fecundity reduction below which species are driven to local extinction, we determined that threshold levels vary widely for the three tephritid species. In particular, Bactrocera dorsalis was the most robust of the three species, followed by Ceratitis capitata, and then B. cucurbitae, suggesting individual species responses should be taken into account when planning for area-wide pest control. The rank-order of susceptibility contrasts with results from several field/lab studies testing the same species, suggesting that considering a combination of life history traits and individual species susceptibility is necessary for understanding population responses of species assemblages to toxicant exposure. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Arthropod Pest Control in Orchards and Vineyards)
Figures

Planned Papers

The below list represents only planned manuscripts. Some of these manuscripts have not been received by the Editorial Office yet. Papers submitted to MDPI journals are subject to peer-review.

Planned Papers

Title: Conservation Biological Control of Cacopsylla pyricola (Hemiptera: Psyllidae) in Pacific Northwest Pears

Authors: Kaushalya G. Amarasekare 1,* and Peter W. Shearer 2

Affiliation: 1  Tennessee State University, Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, 3500, John A. Merritt Blvd., Nashville, TN, 37209, USA; kamarase@tnstate.edu ; 2 Washington State University, Tree Fruit Research & Extension Center, 1100 N. Western Ave. Wenatchee, WA. 98801, USA; peter.shearer@wsu.edu

Abstract: This study focused on conservation biological control of pear psylla Cacopsylla pyricola, in the Pacific Northwest, USA. We hypothesized that insecticides applied against the primary insect pest, the codling moth (CM) Cydia pomonella, negatively impact natural enemies of psylla, thus, causing outbreaks of this secondary pest. Hence, the objective of this study was to understand how CM management influences the abundance of pear psylla and its natural enemy complex in pear orchards managed under long-term CM mating disruption programs. This study was conducted within a pear orchard that had been under seasonal mating disruption for CM for six years. Two treatments, “natural enemy disrupt” (application of two combination sprays of Spinetoram plus Chlorantraniliprole timed against first generation CM to disrupt natural enemies) and “natural enemy non-disrupt” were replicated four times in a pear orchard. Field sampling of psylla and natural enemies (i.e. lacewings, Coccinellids, spiders, Campylomma sp., syrphids, earwigs) revealed that psylla populations remained well below treatment thresholds all season despite the reduced abundance of key psylla natural enemies in the natural enemy disrupt plots compared with the non-disrupt treatment. We speculate that long-term use of CM mating disruption tends to buffer psylla populations when their natural enemies are disrupted.

 

 

 

 

Journal Contact

MDPI AG
Insects Editorial Office
St. Alban-Anlage 66, 4052 Basel, Switzerland
E-Mail: 
Tel. +41 61 683 77 34
Fax: +41 61 302 89 18
Editorial Board
Contact Details Submit to Insects Edit a special issue Review for Insects
logo
loading...
Back to Top