Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T19:06:32.515Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gross Effects of Some Pesticides on Populations of Phytophagous Mites in Ontario Peach Orchards and Their Economic Implications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

W. L. Putman  and
D. C. Herne
W. L. Putman
Affiliation:
Entomology Laboratory, Research Branch, Canada Department of Agriculture, Vineland Station, Ontario
D. C. Herne
Affiliation:
Entomology Laboratory, Research Branch, Canada Department of Agriculture, Vineland Station, Ontario
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Since 1946, a major project at the Vineland Station laboratory has been one on the indirect effects of pesticides on populations of injurious arthropods in peach orchards of the Niagara Peninsula. Plant-feeding mites have been the most readily affected. This paper describes the gross changes in mite populations produced by the pesticides and considers their economic importance and the possibility of reducing their injurious effects. The controversial problem of the means whereby some pesticides, particularly DDT, promote mite increase is still under study and will be treated in later papers.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 91 , Issue 9 , September 1959 , pp. 567 - 579
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1959

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, N. H., and Morgan, C. V. G.. 1958. The role of Typhlodromus spp. (Acarina: Phytoseiidae) in British Columbia apple orchards. Proc. 10th Int. Congr. Ent., Montreal. 1956, 4: 659–673.Google Scholar
Anthon, E. W. 1954. Peach silver mite control. J. Econ. Ent. 47: 866–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, M. M. 1951. Studies with acaricides for control of mites in apple and pear orchards in southern California. J. Econ. Ent. 44: 672–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blair, C. A., and Groves, J. R.. 1952. Biology of the fruit tree red spider mite Metatetranychus ulmi (Koch) in south-east England. J. Hon. Sci. 27: 14–43.Google Scholar
Chapman, P. J., and Lienk, S. E.. 1952. Orchard mite control experiments in western New York. J. Econ. Ent. 43: 309–314.Google Scholar
Cutright, C. R. 1951. Late season control of European red mite. J. Econ. Ent. 44: 363–367.Google Scholar
Driggers, B. F. 1946. DDT on peaches; three years' field experiments. J. Econ. Ent. 39: 181–193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamilton, D. W. 1949. Oriental fruit moth control with DDT. J. Econ. Ent. 42: 25–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, C. F., and McBurnie, H. V.. 1943. sampling technique for determining populations of the citrus red mite and its predators. U.S. Dept. Agr. Circ. 671.Google Scholar
Lienk, S. E., Dean, R. W., and Chapman, P. J.. 1952. Resistance of European red mite to parathion. J. Econ. Ent. 45: 1082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lord, F. T. 1949. The influence of spray programs on the fauna of apple orchards in Nova Scotia. III. Mites and their predators. Canadian Ent. 81: 202–230.Google Scholar
Lord, F. T. 1956. The influence of spray programs on the fauna of apple orchards in Nova Scotia. IX. Studies on means of altering predator populations. Canadian Ent. 88: 129–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, L. W. 1953. Effects of certain new fungicides on the European red mite in Tasmanian apple orchards. Tasmanian J. Agr. 24: 209–212.Google Scholar
Morgan, C. V. G., and Anderson, N. H.. 1957. Bryobia arborea n. sp. and morphological characters distinguishing it from B. praetiosa Koch (Acarina: Tetranychidae). Canadian Ent. 89: 485–490.Google Scholar
Morgan, C. V. G., Anderson, N. H., and Swales, J. E.. 1958. Influences of some fungicides on orchard mites in British Columbia. Canadian J. plant Sci. 38: 94–105.Google Scholar
Newcomer, E. J. 1951. Orchard mites becoming resistant to parathion. Proc. 47th Ann. Meet. Washington State Hort. Assoc., pp. 67–69.Google Scholar
Newcomer, E. J., and Dean, F. P.. 1952. Orchard mites resistant to parathion in Washington. J. Econ. Ent. 45: 1076–1078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Neill, W. J., and Hantsbarger, W. H.. 1951. apple and pear pest control experiments for 1951. Proc. 47th Ann. Meet. Washington State Hort. Assoc., pp. 134–137.Google Scholar
Pieken, A. D., Putman, W. L., and LeRoux, E. J.. 1958. Progress in harmonizing biological and chemical control of orchard pests in Eastern Canada. Proc. 10th Int. Cong. Ent., Montreal, 1956, 3: 169–174.Google Scholar
Ripper, W. E. 1956. Effect of insecticides on balance of arthropod populations. Ann. Rev. Ent. 1: 403–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Targe, A. 1954. Remarques sur les tetranyques et leur traitements dans les régions méditerranéenes. Phytoma 7: 21–22. Cited i. Rev. Appl. Ent. (A) 43: 260–261. 1955.Google Scholar
Weldon, G. P. 1909. Two common orchard mites. The brown mite. The red spider. Colorado Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 1952.Google Scholar
Wheeler, E. H., and Laplante, A. A.. 1946. DDT and Ryanex to control oriental fruit moth: their effect upon parasite populations. J. Econ. Ent. 39: 211–215.Google Scholar