Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T08:29:56.116Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weed control and root maggots: making canola pest management strategies compatible

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Lloyd M. Dosdall ,
George W. Clayton ,
K. Neil Harker ,
John T. O'Donovan  and
F. Craig Stevenson
George W. Clayton
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lacombe Research Centre, 6000 C&E Trail, Lacombe, AB, Canada T4L 1W1
K. Neil Harker
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lacombe Research Centre, 6000 C&E Trail, Lacombe, AB, Canada T4L 1W1
John T. O'Donovan
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Beaverlodge Research Farm, P.O. Box 29, Beaverlodge, AB, Canada T0H 0C0
F. Craig Stevenson
Affiliation:
142 Rogers Road, Saskatoon, SK, Canada S7N 3T6
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Early weed removal in canola gives the crop a competitive advantage over weeds and is therefore widely recommended for optimal crop production, but no studies have been undertaken previously to determine the effect of this practice on insect infestations. Four field experiments were conducted at Lacombe and Beaverlodge, AB, Canada, in 1999–2001 for a total of 10 site-years to determine the effect of time of weed removal on root maggot (Delia spp.) egg deposition and larval damage to taproots. The experiments also investigated the effects of other factors such as cultivar, seeding date, herbicide application rate, fertilizer rate and placement, and use of a nitrification inhibitor on root maggot damage and oviposition. Damage to taproots and oviposition declined by approximately 6 and 23%, respectively, with a delay in weed removal from the two- to six-leaf stage of canola development. The effect of time of weed removal on root maggot damage and egg density sometimes varied with site and cultivar, but the main effect of time of weed removal was more prominent (smaller P values) than interactions with site. The most plausible explanation for this effect relates to the behavioral sequence of events that precedes oviposition in mated, gravid female flies. Heterogeneous environments, such as weedy backgrounds in canola plantings, minimize opportunities for females of Delia spp. to complete the behavioral sequence required for oviposition, leading to reduced infestation levels in weedy systems. However, yield improvements achieved with early weed removal exceeded the yield benefit derived by lowered root maggot pressure when weeds were removed later. Nevertheless, current efforts to reduce pesticide use in agriculture may promote broader adoption of cultural control strategies for weed and root maggot management. In some situations, it may then be appropriate to ameliorate root maggot damage by maintaining some weedy background.

Keywords

Glufosinateglyphosateimazamoximazethapyrcanola, Brassica napus L. ‘45A71’, ‘Exceed’, ‘InVigor 2153’, ‘InVigor 2663’, ‘LG3295’Cabbage maggotDelia radicum Lturnip maggotDelia floralis Fallénintegrated pest managementoilseed rape
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 51 , Issue 4 , August 2003 , pp. 576 - 585
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

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

Literature Cited

Altieri, M. A. and Whitcomb, W. H. 1980. Weed manipulation for insect pest management in corn. Environ. Manag. 4:483–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, D. J. and Kassam, A. H. 1976. The importance of multiple cropping in increasing world food supplies. Pages 1–10 In Papendick, R. I., Sanchez, P. A., and Triplett, G. B., eds. Multiple Cropping. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy. Special Publication 27. 10 p.Google Scholar
Buranday, R. P. and Raros, R. S. 1975. Effects of cabbage-tomato intercropping on the incidence and oviposition of the diamond-back moth, Plutella xylostella (L.). Philipp. Entomol. 2:369–374.Google Scholar
Clayton, G.W, Harker, K. N., O’Donovan, J. T., Baig, M. N., and Kidnie, M. J. 2002. Time of glyphosate application and tillage system effects on glyphosate tolerant canola (Brassica napus L.). Weed Technol. 16:124–130.Google Scholar
Coaker, T. H. 1980. Insect pest management in brassica crops by intercropping. Bull. Section Regionale Quest Palearctique 3:117–125.Google Scholar
Dempster, J. P. and Coaker, T. H. 1974. Diversification of crop ecosystems as a means of controlling pests. Pages 106–114 In Price Jones, D. and Solomon, M. E., eds. Biology in Pest and Disease Control. Oxford, Great Britain: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dent, D. 2000. Insect Pest Management. Wallingford, Great Britain: CABI. pp. 318–341.Google Scholar
Dosdall, L. M. 1998. Incidence and Yield Impact of Root Maggots in Canola. Vegreville, Canada: Alberta Research Council Technical Rep. 42 p.Google Scholar
Dosdall, L. M., Florence, L. Z., Conway, P. M., and Cowle, N. T. 1998. Tillage regime, row spacing, and seeding rate influence infestations of root maggots (Delia spp.) (Diptera: Anthomyiidae) in canola. Can. J. Plant Sci. 78:671–681.Google Scholar
Dosdall, L. M., Herbut, M. J., and Cowle, N. T. 1994. Susceptibilities of species and cultivars of canola and mustard to infestation by root maggots (Delia spp.) (Diptera: Anthomyiidae). Can. Entomol. 125:251–260.Google Scholar
Dosdall, L. M., Herbut, M. J., Cowle, N. T., and Micklich, T. M. 1995. The effect of plant density on root maggot (Delia spp.) (Diptera: Anthomyiidae) infestations in canola. Pages 1306–1308 In Proceedings of the 9th International Rapeseed Congress, Cambridge, Great Britain. Dorchester, Great Britain: The Dorset Press.Google Scholar
Dosdall, L. M., Herbut, M. J., Cowle, N. T., and Micklich, T. M. 1996. The effect of seeding date and plant density on infestations of root maggots, Delia spp. (Diptera: Anthomyiidae), in canola. Can. J. Plant Sci. 76:169–177.Google Scholar
Finch, S. 1988. Entomology of crucifers and agriculture—diversification of the agroecosystem in relation to pest damage in cruciferous crops. Pages 39–72 In Harris, M. K. and Rogers, C. E., eds. The Entomology of Indigenous and Naturalized Systems in Agriculture. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Finch, S. 1992. Appraisal of integrated pest management systems for controlling insect pests of vegetable crops. Pages 49–65 In van Lenteren, J. C., Minks, A. K., and de Ponti, O.M.B., eds. Biological Control and Integrated Crop Protection: Towards Environmentally Safer Agriculture. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Pudoc Scientific.Google Scholar
Finch, S. and Ackley, C. M. 1977. Cultivated and wild host plants supporting populations of the cabbage root fly. Ann. Appl. Biol. 85:13–22.Google Scholar
Finch, S. and Collier, R. H. 2000. Host-plant selection by insects—a theory based on ‘appropriate/inappropriate landings’ by pest insects of cruciferous plants. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 96:91–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, G.C.D. 1986a. Phenology and dispersion of Delia radicum (L.) (Diptera: Anthomyiidae) in canola fields at Morinville, Alberta. Quaest. Entomol. 22:29–50.Google Scholar
Griffiths, G.C.D. 1986b. Relative abundance of the root maggots Delia radicum (L.) and D. floralis (Fallén) (Diptera: Anthomyiidae) as pests of canola in Alberta. Quaest. Entomol. 22:253–260.Google Scholar
Griffiths, G.C.D. 1991. Economic assessment of cabbage maggot damage in canola in Alberta. Pages 528–535 In Proceedings of the 8th International Rapeseed Congress. Saskatoon, Canada: Groupe Consultatif International de Recherche sur le Colza and the Canola Council of Canada.Google Scholar
Harker, K. N., Blackshaw, R. E., and Clayton, G. W. 2001. Timing weed removal in field pea (Pisum sativum). Weed Technol. 15:277–283.Google Scholar
Horn, D. J. 1981. Effect of weedy backgrounds on colonization of collards by green peach aphid, Myzus persicae, and its major predators. Environ. Entomol. 10:285–289.Google Scholar
Horn, D. J. 1987. Vegetational background and parasitism of larval diamondback moth on collards. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 43:300–303.Google Scholar
Kostal, V. and Finch, S. 1994. Influence of background on host-plant selection and subsequent oviposition by the cabbage root fly (Delia radicum). Entomol. Exp. Appl. 70:153–163.Google Scholar
Littel, R. C., Milliken, G. A., Stroup, W. W., and Wolfinger, R. D. 1996. SAS System for Mixed Models. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 656 p.Google Scholar
Liu, H. J. and Butts, R. A. 1982. Delia spp. (Diptera: Anthomyiidae) infesting canola in Alberta. Can. Entomol. 114:651–653.Google Scholar
Martin, S. G., Friesen, L. F., and Van Acker, R. C. 2001. Critical period of weed control in spring canola. Weed Sci. 49:326–333.Google Scholar
O’Donovan, J. T. 1992. Seed yields of canola and volunteer barley as influenced by their relative times of emergence. Can. J. Plant Sci. 72:263–267.Google Scholar
O’Donovan, J. T. 1994. Canola (Brassica rapa) plant density influences tartary buckwheat (Fagopyrum tataricum) interference, biomass, and seed yield. Weed Sci. 42:385–389.Google Scholar
O’Donovan, J. T., Blackshaw, R. E., Harker, K. N., McAndrew, D. W., and Clayton, G. W. 2001. Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) management in canola (Brassica rapa) and barley (Hordeum vulgare) rotations under zero tillage. Can. J. Plant Sci. 81:83–90.Google Scholar
O’Donovan, J. T., de St. Remy, E. A., O’Sullivan, P. A., Dew, D. A., and Sharma, A. K. 1985. Influence of the relative time of emergence of wild oat (Avena fatua) on yield loss of barley (Hordeum vulgare) and wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Sci. 33:498–503.Google Scholar
Peterman, R. M. 1990. Statistical power analysis can improve fisheries research and management. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 47:2–15.Google Scholar
Peters, N.C.B. 1984. Time of onset of competition and effects of various fractions of an Avena fatua L. population on spring barley. Weed Res. 24:305–315.Google Scholar
Root, R. B. 1973. Organization of a plant-arthropod association in simple and diverse habitats: the fauna of collards (Brassica oleraceae). Ecol. Monogr. 43:95–124.Google Scholar
Ryan, J., Ryan, M. F., and McNaeidhe, F. 1980. The effect of interrow plant cover on populations of the cabbage root fly, Delia brassicae (Wiedemann). J. Appl. Ecol. 17:31–40.Google Scholar
Soroka, J. 1999. Occurrence and Damage Potential of Root Maggots in Canola. Saskatoon, Canada: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Technical Rep. 79 p.Google Scholar
Theunissen, J. 1994. Intercropping in field vegetable crops: pest management by agrosystem diversification—an overview. Pestic. Sci. 42:65–68.Google Scholar
Theunissen, J., Booij, C.J.H., and Lotz, L. A. 1995. Effects of intercropping white cabbage with clovers on pest infestation and yield. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 74:7–16.Google Scholar
Theunissen, J. and Schelling, G. 1992. Cabbage-clover intercropping: oviposition of Delia radicum . Proc. Exp. Appl. Entomol. Neth. Ent. Soc. 3:191–196.Google Scholar
Tukahirwa, E. M. and Coaker, T. H. 1982. Effect of mixed cropping on some insect pests of brassicas; reduced Brevicoryne brassicae infestations and influences on epigeal predators and the disturbance of oviposition behaviour in Delia brassicae . Entamol. Exp. Appl. 32:129–140.Google Scholar