Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T08:11:13.389Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE INTERACTION OF COTTON AND BOLL WEEVIL (COLEOPTERA: CURCULIONIDAE) — A STUDY OF CO-ADAPTATION1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

A. P. Gutierrez ,
Y. Wang  and
R. Daxl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The growth parameters for cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) were examined via optimization studies to determine if the observed values were optimal for the season lengths and weather patterns found in California and Nicaragua. The parameters observed for Nicaraguan cotton were further examined to determine if predation by boll weevil (Anthonomus grandis Boh.) of small cotton fruit (squares) could explain the observed discrepancies. All of the observed growth parameters except the fruit bud production rate for the Acala SJ II variety of cotton which is grown in California appeared to be reasonably optimal for California condition (i.e. boll weevil does not occur in California). By contrast, the parameters for the Nicaraguan variety were sub-optimal if boll weevil was excluded from the analysis, but near optimal if the population dynamics of pest were included.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 111 , Issue 3 , March 1979 , pp. 357 - 366
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

Burke, H. R. 1976. Bionomics of the anthonomine weevils. A. Rev. Ent. 21: 283–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, O. F. 1904. Evolution of weevil-resistance in cotton. Science 20: 666–670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cross, W. H. 1973. Biology, control and eradication of the boll weevil. A. Rev. Ent. 18: 17–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cushman, R. A. 1911. Studies in the biology of the boll weevil in the Mississippi delta region of Louisiana. J. econ. Ent. 4: 432–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, L. E. 1975. In Co-evolution of Animals and Plants (Eds. Gilbert, L. E. and Raven, P. H.). Texas Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Gilbert, N. E. and Gutierrez, A. P.. 1973. An aphid-parasite plant relationship. J. Anim. Ecol. 42: 323–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutierrez, A. P. 1976. Management of Cotton Pests. Proc. EPPO Conf. on Systems Modelling. Paris, France.Google Scholar
Gutierrez, A. P., Leigh, T. F., Wang, Y., and Cave, R. D.. 1977 a. An analysis of cotton production in California: Lygus hesperus (Heteroptera: Miridae) injury — an evaluation. Can. Ent. 109: 1375–1386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutierrez, A. P., Butler, G. D. Jr., Wang, Y., and Westphal, D.. 1977 b. The interaction of pink bollworm (Lepidoptera: Gelichiidae), cotton and weather: A detailed model. Can. Ent. 109: 1457–1468.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 yield. Environ. Ent. 4: 125–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutierrez, A. P. and Wang, Y.. 1976. Applied population ecology: Models for crop production and pest management. pp. 250–280ion Norton, G. A. and Holling, C. S. (Eds.), Proc. Conf. Pest Management. Laxenburg, Austria.Google Scholar
Isley, D. 1928. Oviposition of the boll weevil in relation to food. J. econ. Ent. 21: 152–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, J. W., Bowen, H. D., Stinner, R. E., Bradley, J. R., and Bacheler, J. S.. 1977. Simulation of boll weevil populations as influenced by weather, crop status and management practices. Trans. ASAE 20: 121–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, J. C., Mitchell, E. B., McKibben, G., and Davich, T. B.. 1964. A sex attractant for female boll weevils from males. J. econ. Ent. 57: 609–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leslie, P. H. 1945. On the use of matrices in certain population mathematics. Biometrika 33: 183–212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Powell, M. J. D. 1964. An efficient method for finding the minimum of a function of several variables without calculating derivatives. Comput. J. 7: 155–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, J. R., Gutierrez, A. P., and Adkisson, P. L.. (In Press). General accomplishments toward better insect control in cotton, Chap. 5 in Technology of Pest Control (Ed. C. B. Huffaker). Wiley-Interscience, New York.Google Scholar
Shoemaker, C. 1976. Optimal management of an alfalfa ecosystem. In Proc. Conf. Pest Management (Eds. Norton, G. A. and Holling, C. S.), pp. 301–339. Laxenburg, Austria.Google Scholar
Sterling, W. L. and Adkisson, P. L.. 1970. Season rates of increase for a population of boll weevil, Anthonomus grandis, in the high and rolling plains of Texas. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 63: 1696–1700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, J. H. 1974. History of Acala cotton varieties bred for San Joaquin Valley, California. USDA/ARS Western Regional Bull. W-16. 23 pp.Google Scholar
Walker, J. K. and Niles, G. A.. 1971. Population dynamics of the boll weevil on modified cotton types. Implications for pest management. Texas agric. Exp. Stn Bull. 1109. 14 pp.Google Scholar
Wang, Y., Gutierrez, A. P., Oster, G., and Daxl, R.. 1977. A population model for plant growth and development: coupling cotton-herbivore interaction. Can. Ent. 109: 1359–1374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar