Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:24:47.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Two Species of Musk Thistle (Carduus spp.) as Hosts of Rhinocyllus conicus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Norman E. Rees*
Affiliation:
Rangeland Insect Lab., U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Serv., Bozeman, MT 59717

Abstract

Plant growth, stem numbers per plant, receptacle diameters, number of Rhinocyllus conicus Froelich (Coleoptera:Curculionidae) larval cells per seed head, and mortality of the weevil within cells were monitored in infestations of the thistles Carduus thoermeri Weinmann and C. macrocephalus Deft. Both species of thistle provided similar seed head area for weevil development, and no differential effects on the biology of R. conicus were detected.

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Copyright
Copyright © 1986 by the 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. Hodgson, J. M. and Rees, N. E. 1976. Dispersal of Rhinocyllus conicus for biocontrol of musk thistle. Weed Sci. 24:5962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Hurlbert, S. H. 1984. Pseudoreplication and design of ecological field experiments. Ecol. Monogr. 54(2):187211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Kazmi, S.M.I. 1964. Revision der Gattung Carduus (Compositae) Teil II, Mitteillungen aus der Botanischen Stratssammlung. Munchen 5:279550.Google Scholar
4. McCarty, M. K. 1978. The genus Carduus in the United States, Pages 710 in Frick, K. E., ed. Biological Control of Thistles in the Genus Carduus in the United States: A Progress Report. U.S. Dep. Agric./Sci. and Educ. Admin.Google Scholar
5. McGregor, R. L. 1985. Carduus L., plumeless thistles. In Barkley, T. M., ed. Flora of the Great Plains by the Great Plains Flora Association. Kansas Univ. Press. (In press).Google Scholar
6. Moore, R. J. and Frankton, C. 1974. The thistles of Canada. Can. Dep. Agric., Res. Branch. Monogr. No. 10 112 pp.Google Scholar
7. Politis, D. J., Watson, A. K., and Bruckhart, W. L. 1984. Susceptibility of musk thistle and related composites to Puccina carduorum . Phytopathology 74:687691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Rees, N. E. 1978. Interactions of Rhinocyllus conicus and thistles in the Gallatin Valley. Pages 3138 in Frick, K. E., ed. Biological Control of Thistles of the Genus Carduus in the United States, A Progress Report. U.S. Dep. Agric./Sci. and Educ. Admin.Google Scholar
9. Rees, N. E. 1982. Collecting, handling and releasing Rhinocyllus conicus, a biological control agent of musk thistle. U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Serv. Agric. Handb. 579 pp.Google Scholar