Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
TIGERS IN THE TIGERS IN THE TURF: POTENTIAL TURF: POTENTIAL IMPACT OF TIGER IMPACT OF TIGER
BEETLES IN BEETLES IN MANAGED TURFMANAGED TURF
Kris BramanKris Braman
University of GeorgiaUniversity of Georgia
GENERALIST GENERALIST PREDATORSPREDATORS
GEOCORIDAE
Geocoris uliginosus (Say)
Geocoris punctipes (Say)
CARABIDAE
Harpalus pennsylvanicus De Geer
Calosoma sayi Dejean
GENERALIST GENERALIST PREDATORSPREDATORS
CARABIDAECARABIDAE
Megacephala carolina Megacephala carolina carolina L.carolina L.
Lycosa Lycosa sp. sp. WalckenaerWalckenaer
FORMICIDAEFORMICIDAE
Solenopsis invictaSolenopsis invicta BurenBuren
ObjectivesObjectives
Document abundance as Document abundance as influenced by ground cover influenced by ground cover including turf typeincluding turf type
Determine potential impact on Determine potential impact on common turf pestscommon turf pests Fall armywormFall armyworm Twolined spittlebugTwolined spittlebug Japanese beetleJapanese beetle
MethodsMethods
6 grasses (6 grasses (Sea Sea Isle-1, 561-79, Isle-1, 561-79, Cavalier, Palisades Cavalier, Palisades ,TifSport, TifEagle),TifSport, TifEagle)
RCB design with RCB design with 6 reps6 reps
Plots 25 mPlots 25 m22
Materials and MethodsMaterials and MethodsField samplesField samples
Pitfall samples collected weekly for Pitfall samples collected weekly for 16 weeks ; 6 May- 29 Aug16 weeks ; 6 May- 29 Aug
Split plot design with grass genotype as Split plot design with grass genotype as whole plotswhole plots
Dates as the split plot for repeated measures Dates as the split plot for repeated measures analysisanalysis
Means separated using LSDMeans separated using LSD Orthogonal contrasts to identify influence of Orthogonal contrasts to identify influence of
turf genera on arthropod community turf genera on arthropod community structurestructure
Turf genotype affects Turf genotype affects arthropod abundance arthropod abundance
(pitfall samples)(pitfall samples)Turf Genotype Carabidae Cicindellidae Sea Isle 1 2.1 bc 0.7 b 561-79 1.9 c 1.8 a Cavalier 1.9 c 0.2 b Palisades 1.6 c 0.1 b TifSport 2.6 b 0.3 b TifEagle 3.4 a 1.8 a
Orthogonal contrasts, pitfall Orthogonal contrasts, pitfall samplessamples
Contrast Carab. Staph. Cicind. Araneae
B vs Z *** NS *** NS
P vs B *** NS NS NS
P vs Z NS NS *** NS
Tiger beetlesTiger beetles
Most numerous in 561-79 paspalum Most numerous in 561-79 paspalum and ‘TifEagle’ bermudagrassand ‘TifEagle’ bermudagrass
Arthropod predator occurrence and Arthropod predator occurrence and performance…. Braman et al. 2003. Environ. performance…. Braman et al. 2003. Environ. Entomol. 32: 907-914Entomol. 32: 907-914
Influence of commercially available Influence of commercially available wildflower mixes on beneficial wildflower mixes on beneficial
arthropod abundance and predation in arthropod abundance and predation in turfgrassturfgrass
Braman et al. 2002. Environ. Entomol. 564-572
Mean number of tiger beetles in Mean number of tiger beetles in flower mixes, wheat straw mulch flower mixes, wheat straw mulch
or in grasses with flower or mulch or in grasses with flower or mulch bordersborders
ContrastContrast Year 1Year 1 Year 2Year 2
Smith MixSmith Mix .31.31 .32.32
Border PatrolBorder Patrol .26.26 .27.27
MulchMulch .59.59 1.361.36
Bermuda- SMBermuda- SM .14.14 .09.09
Bermuda-BPBermuda-BP .12.12 .08.08
Bermuda-MulchBermuda-Mulch .14.14 .07.07
Zoysia-SMZoysia-SM .07.07 .02.02
Zoysia-BPZoysia-BP .09.09 .09.09
Zoysia-MulchZoysia-Mulch .12.12 .22.22
P=P= 0.0020.002 0.00010.0001
Experimental arena
Functional response of M. carolina carolina on P. bicincta and S. frugiperda in single-prey system
0
2
4
6
8
10
1 3 5 7 9 11 15
Prey density
S. frugiperda P. bicincta
Mea
n nu
mbe
r of
pre
y ki
lled
/24h
Total prey type available per arena
P. bicincta S. frugiperda
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f p
rey
kill
ed
in
24
h
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0 Prey alone Both prey together
ab
c
a
b
Comparison of the total prey consumed by M. carolina carolina during 24 h.
Nachappa et al. J. Econ Entomol. In review
White grubs
Consumption of Japanese beetle eggs or 1st instars during 24 h (petri dish trials)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
JB Eggs JB 1st instars
M. carolina H. pennsylvanicus
Nu
mb
er
eate
n
a
b
aa
Consumption of Japanese Consumption of Japanese beetle eggs in soil (1-day)beetle eggs in soil (1-day)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
10 20 30 40
Prey density
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
M. carolina H. pennsylvanicus M. carolina H. pennsylvanicus
Nu
mb
er
eate
n
Pro
port
ion
eate
n
a
b
a
b
a
b
a
b
Consumption of Japanese Consumption of Japanese beetle eggs/larvae in soil beetle eggs/larvae in soil
(1-week)(1-week)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
10 20 30 40
Prey density
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
M. carolina H. pennsylvanicus M. carolina H. pennsylvanicus
Nu
mb
er
eate
n
Pro
port
ion
eate
n
ab
ab
a
b
a
b
Consumption of Japanese Consumption of Japanese beetle eggs/larvae in soil beetle eggs/larvae in soil
(3-week)(3-week)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
10 20 30 40
Prey density
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
M. carolina H. pennsylvanicus M. carolina H. pennsylvanicus
Nu
mb
er
eate
n
Pro
port
ion
eate
n
ab
ab
a
b
aa
ConclusionsConclusions
The tiger beetle The tiger beetle M. carolinaM. carolina occurs in occurs in turf and landscape beds in synchrony turf and landscape beds in synchrony with common pestswith common pests
M. carolinaM. carolina’s abundance was influenced ’s abundance was influenced by turfgrass type and surrounding by turfgrass type and surrounding “habitat”“habitat”
The common turfgrass pests The common turfgrass pests S. S. frugiperda, P. bicincta, frugiperda, P. bicincta, andand P. japonica P. japonica were suitable prey for were suitable prey for M. carolinaM. carolina in in laboratory studieslaboratory studies
ConclusionsConclusions
In laboratory evaluations, In laboratory evaluations, M. carolinaM. carolina exhibited a Type II functional response exhibited a Type II functional response to to P. bicinctaP. bicincta and and S. frugiperdaS. frugiperda
Greater numbers of Greater numbers of S. frugiperdaS. frugiperda than than P. bicincta P. bicincta were captured by adult were captured by adult M. M. carolinacarolina when only one type of prey when only one type of prey was presentwas present
In a “two-prey” system this difference In a “two-prey” system this difference was even more apparent; was even more apparent; S. S. frugiperda frugiperda was more frequently killedwas more frequently killed
ConclusionsConclusions
In petri dish trials, In petri dish trials, M. carolinaM. carolina and and H. pennsylvanicusH. pennsylvanicus consumed similar consumed similar numbers of numbers of P. japonicaP. japonica eggs eggs
M. carolinaM. carolina consumed more first consumed more first instar instar P. japonicaP. japonica larvae than larvae than H. H. pennsylvanicuspennsylvanicus in petri dish assays in petri dish assays however….however….
ConclusionsConclusions
When When M. carolinaM. carolina and and H. H. pennsylvanicuspennsylvanicus adults were confined adults were confined with different densities of with different densities of P. japonicaP. japonica (initially as eggs) for three weeks in soil, (initially as eggs) for three weeks in soil, H. pennsylvanicusH. pennsylvanicus consumed a greater consumed a greater
proportion of prey at all densities on day 2 proportion of prey at all densities on day 2 and 1 week. and 1 week.
Numbers consumed by week 3 were similar Numbers consumed by week 3 were similar at the highest density, but still lower for at the highest density, but still lower for M. M. carolinacarolina at lower densities at lower densities
Implications and Implications and Research NeedsResearch Needs
M. carolinaM. carolina is a prominent predator in is a prominent predator in turf that ..turf that ..
Demonstrated potential to suppress three Demonstrated potential to suppress three common turfgrass pests in laboratory common turfgrass pests in laboratory trialstrials
Laboratory evaluations in simplistic Laboratory evaluations in simplistic systems are insufficient to define systems are insufficient to define comparative predatory potentialcomparative predatory potential
Field assessment of predator impact is Field assessment of predator impact is requiredrequired
