Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T04:25:31.186Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

AN OPTIMIZATION MODEL FOR LYGUS HESPERUS (HETEROPTERA: MIRIDAE) DAMAGE IN COTTON: THE ECONOMIC THRESHOLD REVISITED1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

A. P. Gutierrez
Affiliation:
Division of Biological Control, University of California, Berkeley 94720
Y. Wang
Affiliation:
Division of Biological Control, University of California, Berkeley 94720
Uri Regev
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Ben Gurion University, Beersheva, Israel

Abstract

This paper presents results of a multidisciplinary optimization study on the impact of Lygus hesperus Knight on cotton in the Great Central Valley of California. The results of the empirical studies indicate that lygus bug is not a serious pest of cotton under most circumstances and, furthermore, illustrate why cotton yield enhancements have occurred when their populations have not been controlled. An economic analysis of these results sheds some light on the concept of economic threshold. In particular it is shown how in this case an economic threshold exists even if the costs of pesticides are zero. The theoretical implications of these results are quite general.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1979

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

Byerly, K.F., Gutierrez, A.P., Jones, R.E., and Luck, R.F.. A comparison of sampling methods for some arthropod populations in cotton. Hilgardia (in press).Google Scholar
Falcon, L.A., van den Bosch, R., Gallagher, J., and Davidson, A.. 1971. Investigations on the pest status of Lygus hesperus in cotton in central California. J. econ. Ent. 64: 5661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutierrez, A.P., Falcon, L.A., Loew, W., Leipzig, P.A., and van den Bosch, R.. 1975. An analysis of cotton production in California: a model for Acala cotton and the effects of defoliators on its yields. Environ. Ent. 4(1): 125136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutierrez, A.P., Leigh, T.F., Wang, Y., and Cave, R.. 1977. An analysis of cotton production in California: Lygus hesperus (Heteroptera: Miridae) injury—an evaluation. Can. Ent. 109: 13751386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutierrez, A.P., Regev, U., and Sahlit, H.. Simulation models of pesticide resistance in crop production and protection. Environ. Ent. (in press).Google Scholar
Headley, J.C. 1972. Defining the economic threshold, pp. 100108in Pest control strategies for the future. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Leslie, P.H. 1945. On the use of matrices in certain population mathematics. Biometrika 35: 213245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinnion, J.M., Jones, J.W., and Hesketh, J.D.. 1974. Analysis of Simcot photosynthesis and growth. pp. 117124in Beltwide Cotton Prod. Res. Conf. Proc., Memphis.Google Scholar
Monsi, M. and Saeki, T.. 1953. Uker denLichtfaktor in den Pflanzengesellschaften und Seine Bedenfung fur die Staff produktion. Jap. J. Bot. 14: 2252.Google Scholar
Powell, M.J.D. 1964. An efficient method for finding the minimum of a function of several variables without calculating derivatives. Computer Journal 7: 155162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Regev, U., Shalit, H., and Gutierrez, A.P.. 1976. Economic conflicts in plant protection: the problems of pesticide resistance; theory and application to the Egyptian alfalfa weevil. Proc. Conf. Pest Mngt. (Norton, G.A. and Holling, C.S., Eds.) IIASA, Luxenburg, Austria. 352 pp.Google Scholar
Southwood, T.R.E. 1966. Ecological methods. Methuen, London. 383 pp.Google Scholar
van den Bosch, R.The bug bomb. In press.Google Scholar
Wang, Y., Gutierrez, A.P., Oster, G., and Daxl, R.. 1977. A population model for plant growth and development: coupling cotton–herbivore interactions. Can. Ent. 109: 13591374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar