title: Physical barriers for suppression of movement of adult stink bugs into cotton.
abstract: Nezara viridula(L.),Euschistus servus(Say), andChinavia hilaris(Say) (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae) are economic pests of cotton in the southeastern USA. Because adult stink bugs exhibit edge-mediated dispersal at crop-to-crop interfaces as they colonize cotton, strategic placement of physical barriers at these interfaces could manage these pests. The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a physical barrier, either synthetic or plant-based, at the peanut-to-cotton interface for suppressing stink bugs that would move to cotton. In 2012 and 2013, sorghum sudangrass (2.4 and 2.1 m high, respectively) was significantly taller than cotton (1.4 and 1.3 m high, respectively) which was taller than peanut (0.4 and 0.5 m high, respectively). Buckwheat (0.6 m high), planted only in 2012, was significantly taller than peanut, but shorter than cotton. For both years of the study, sorghum sudangrass and a 1.8-m-high polypropylene barrier wall effectively deterred dispersal of stink bugs into cotton. Because each of these barriers was taller than cotton, their success in protecting cotton likely was due to disruption of the flight of stink bugs from low-growing peanut into cotton. The shortest barrier wall (0.6-m-high) did not suppress stink bug dispersal into cotton probably because it was approximately the same height as peanut. In 2012, flowering buckwheat increased the efficacy ofTrichopoda pennipes(F.) attackingN. viridulain cotton although it did not deter dispersal of stink bugs. In conclusion, a barrier at least as tall as cotton can effectively retard the entry of stink bug adults into cotton.
authors.affiliation: Crop Protection and Management Research Laboratory, USDA, ARS, PO Box 748, Tifton, GA 31793 USA.
authors.forename: P Glynn
authors.initials: PG
authors.lastname: Tillman
keywords: Barrier wall; Buckwheat; Nectar provision; Sorghum sudangrass
references.citation: Bull Entomol Res. 2014 Feb;104(1):56-64
references.pmid: 24044749
references.citation: Environ Entomol. 2009 Aug;38(4):1038-52
references.pmid: 19689882
references.citation: J Econ Entomol. 2008 Feb;101(1):216-25
references.pmid: 18330138
references.citation: Environ Entomol. 2010 Jun;39(3):944-55
references.pmid: 20550810
references.citation: J Econ Entomol. 2009 Aug;102(4):1515-22
references.pmid: 19736764
references.citation: J Econ Entomol. 2006 Jun;99(3):648-57
references.pmid: 16813294
references.citation: Ann Bot. 2008 Nov;102(5):675-84
references.pmid: 18765442
references.citation: Environ Entomol. 2014 Apr;43(2):370-6
references.pmid: 24763094
references.citation: Environ Entomol. 2013 Jun;42(3):438-44
references.pmid: 23726052
references.citation: J Econ Entomol. 2000 Jun;93(3):697-706
references.pmid: 10902318