Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T11:49:20.613Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Weevil (Notaris bimaculatus) Feeding Reduces Effectiveness of Glyphosate on Quackgrass (Agropyron repens)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Philip H. Westra
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Plant Genetics, Univ. of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Donald L. Wyse
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Plant Genetics, Univ. of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Edwin F. Cook
Affiliation:
Dep. Entomol., Fisheries and Wildlife, Univ. of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108

Abstract

The life cycle of Notaris bimaculatus Fab. and the influence of this weevil on the control of quackgrass [Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv.] with glyphosate [N-(phosphonomethyl) glycine] were studied. Observations on this insect in 1978 and 1979 showed that its life cycle occurs in close association with quackgrass. The adult weevils feed on quackgrass culms and caryopses and use the inside of the culms for ovipositing. Adult populations, measured in quackgrass infestations during the summer months, ranged from 3 to 44/25 sweeps of an insect net. Larvae emerge from the eggs after 2 weeks, feed down the inside of the culms, chew an exit hole, and move into the soil where they attack the rhizomes. Larval numbers ranged from two to six/28 dm3 of soil during the summer months. Larvae feed on the rhizome surface or enter the rhizomes where they devour the vascular and cortical tissue. In dense quackgrass sods treated with glyphosate at 1.7 kg/ha, feeding damage on quackgrass rhizomes caused by the larvae reduced the control of quackgrass by disrupting the translocation of glyphosate in the rhizomes. Although soil-borne larvae of several insects were found in quackgrassinfested soil, larvae of N. bimaculatus were always present. Controlling these soil-borne insect larvae with a soil-applied insecticide for 2 months before applying glyphosate resulted in significantly increased quackgrass control. Shoot regrowth several months after the application of glyphosate at 1.4 kg/ha to quackgrass grown in cages infested with 400 adult weevils was 298 and 611 shoots/m2 in the 1979 and 1980 experiments, respectively. Similar glyphosate applications to weevil-free quackgrass resulted in only 26 and 15 shoots/m2 in the 1979 and 1980 experiments.

Type
Research Article
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

1. Baird, D. D. and Begeman, G. F. 1972. Postemergence characterization of a new quackgrass herbicide. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 26.100106.Google Scholar
2. Buchanan, L. L. 1927. A short review of Notaris (coleoptera: curculionidae.). Bull. Brook. Entomol. Soc. 22:3640.Google Scholar
3. Chittenden, F. H. 1906. The north American species of the genus Notaris Germ. J. N.Y. Entomol. Soc. 14:113115.Google Scholar
4. Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., and Herbeger, J. P. 1977. The World's Worst Weeds. Univ. Press Hawaii, Honolulu. 609 pp.Google Scholar
5. Kissinger, D. G. 1964. Pages 4547 in Curculionidae of America North of Mexico – A Key to the Genera. Taxonomic Publications, South Lancaster, Mass. Google Scholar
6. Palmer, J. H. and Sagar, G. R. 1963. Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv. [Triticum repens L.; Elytrigia repens (L.) Nevski]. J. Ecol. 51: 783794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Sprankle, P., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1975. Absorption, action, and translocation of glyphosate. Weed Sci. 23:235240.Google Scholar
8. Werner, P. A., and Rioux, R. 1977. The biology of Canadian weeds. 23. [Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv.]. Can. J. Plant Sci. 57:905919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Westra, P. and Wyse, D. L. 1978. Control of quackgrass biotypes with glyphosate. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 33:106.Google Scholar
10. Wyse, D. L. 1976. Quackgrass control in field crops. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 31:152.Google Scholar