Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T21:50:50.293Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

EFFECTS OF A NATURAL BIVOLTINE STRAIN OF THE EUROPEAN CORN BORER, OSTRINIA NUBILALIS (LEPIDOPTERA: PYRALIDAE), ON GRAIN CORN YIELDS IN SOUTHWESTERN ONTARIO, 1973–77

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

W. H. Foott
Affiliation:
Research Station, Agriculture Canada, Harrow, Ontario N0R 1G0
P. R. Timmins
Affiliation:
Research Station, Agriculture Canada, Harrow, Ontario N0R 1G0

Abstract

A 5-year study of a bivoltine strain of the European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner), showed that first-generation moths deposited more eggs on early-planted corn, whereas second-generation moths oviposited more frequently on late-planted corn. The second generation was much larger than the first generation and caused the greater reduction in yield, regardless of whether the yields were based on physiological losses or a combination of physiological losses and dropped ears. It was shown that delay of harvest beyond the time that moisture content of the corn was sufficiently low for machine harvesting could result in severe yield losses from broken stalks and dropped ears during autumn storms.

Résumé

Une étude de cinq ans d’une lignée bivoltine de la pyrale du maïs, Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner), a révélé que les femelles de première génération déposaient plus d’oeufs sur du maïs précoce, alors que les femelles de seconde génération en pondaient davantage sur du maïs tardif. La seconde génération est beaucoup plus nombreuse que la première et cause la plus grande baisse de rendement, peu importe si celui-ci s’appuie sur des pertes physiologiques (p.p.) ou sur une combinaison de p.p. et de chute des épis. L’étude révèle que le recul de la récolte après l’époque où la teneur en eau du maïs est assez basse pour permettre la rçolte mécanique pouvait entraîner des baisses de rendement substantielles par rupture des tiges ou chute des épis au cours des tempêtes automnales.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1981

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

Anonymous. 1961. The European corn borer and its control in the north central states. Iowa St. Univ. Pamph. 176 (Rev.).Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1967. The European corn borer — how to control it. U.S. Dep. Agric. Farmers' Bull. 2190. 14 PP.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1975. Status of the European corn borer in 1974. U.S. Dep. Agric. Coop. Econ. Insect Rep. 25: 6970.Google Scholar
Chiang, H. C. 1973. Ecological considerations in developing recommendations for chemical control of pests: European corn borer as a model. FAO Pl. Prot. Bull. 21: 3039.Google Scholar
Chiang, H. C. and Hodson, A. C.. 1950. Stalk breakage caused by the European corn borer and its effect on the harvesting of field corn. J. econ. Ent. 43: 415422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiang, H. C. and Hodson, A. C.. 1959. Population fluctuations of the European corn borer, Pyrausta nubilalis, at Waseca, Minnesota, 1948-1957. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 52: 710724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiang, H. C. and Hodson, A. C.. 1972. Population fluctuations of the European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis, at Waseca, Minnesota, 1948–70. Environ. Ent. 1: 716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiang, H. C., Cutkomp, L. K., and Hodson, A. C.. 1954. The effects of the second generation European corn borer on field corn. J. econ. Ent. 47: 10151020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deay, H. O., Patch, L. H., and Snelling, R. O.. 1949. Loss in yield of dent corn infested with the August generation of the European corn borer. J. econ. Ent. 42: 8187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Decker, G. C. and Bigger, J. H.. 1949. Spraying and dusting field corn for corn borer control. Ill. agric. Exp. Stn Circ. 642. 8 pp.Google Scholar
Dicke, F. F. 1954. Breeding for resistance to European corn borer. Proc. Ann. Hybrid Corn Industry Res. Conf. 9: 4453.Google Scholar
Everett, T. R., Chiang, H. C., and Hibbs, E. T.. 1958. Some factors influencing populations of European corn borer [Pyrausta nubilalis (Hbn.)] in the north central states. Minn. agric. Exp. Stn Tech. Bull. 229. 63 pp.Google Scholar
Guthrie, W. D., Russell, W. A., Neumann, F. L., Reed, G. L., and Grindeland, R. L.. 1975. Yield losses in maize caused by different levels of infestation of second-brood European corn borers. Iowa State J. Res. 50: 239253.Google Scholar
Jarvis, J. L., Everett, T. R., Brindley, T. A., and Dicke, F. F.. 1961. Evaluating the effect of European corn borer populations on corn yield. Iowa State J. Sci. 36: 115132.Google Scholar
Jennings, C. W., Russell, W. A., Guthrie, W. D., and Grindeland, R. L.. 1974. Genetics of resistance in maize to second-brood European corn borer. Iowa State J. Res. 48: 267280.Google Scholar
Lynch, R. E. 1980. European corn borer: Yield losses in relation to hybrid and tage of corn development. J. econ. Ent. 73: 159164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lynch, R. E., Robinson, J. F., and Berry, E. C.. 1980. European corn borer: Yield losses and damage resulting from a simulated natural infestation. J. econ. Ent. 73: 141144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLeod, D. G. R., Ritchot, C., and Nagai, T.. 1979. Occurrence of a two generation strain of the European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), in Quebec. Can. Ent. 111: 233236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pesho, G. R., Dicke, F. F., and Russell, W. A.. 1965. Resistance of inbred lines of corn (Zea mays) to the second brood of the European corn borer [Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner)]. Iowa State J. Sci. 40: 8598.Google Scholar
Russell, W. A., Guthrie, W. D., and Grindeland, R. L.. 1974. Breeding for resistance in maize to first and second broods of the European corn borer. Crop Sci. 14: 725727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, G. E., Guthrie, W. D., and Pesho, G. R.. 1967. Effect of second-brood European corn borer infestations on 45 single-cross corn hybrids. Crop Sci. 7: 229230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar