Abstract
Wireworms, the larval stage of click beetles (Coleoptera: Elateridae), are serious soil dwelling pests of small grains, corn, sugar beets, and potatoes. Limonius californicus and Hypnoidus bicolor are the predominant wireworm species infesting wheat in Montana, particularly in the 'Golden Triangle' area of north-central Montana. Wireworm populations in field crops are increasing, but currently available insecticides provide only partial control, and no alternative management tools exist. In our study, three entomopathogenic fungi were tested for their efficacy against wireworms in spring wheat at two field locations (Ledger and Conrad, Montana, USA) in 2013. The three fungi (Metarhizium brunneum F52, Beauveria bassiana GHA, and Metarhizium robertsii DWR 346) were evaluated as seed-coat, in-furrow granular, and soil band-over-row drench applications in addition to imidacloprid (Gaucho® 600) seed treatment (as a chemical check), the approach currently being used by growers. Wireworm damage in these treatments was evaluated as standing plant counts, wireworm population surveys, and yield. The three fungi, applied as formulated granules or soil drenches, and the imidacloprid seed treatment all resulted in significantly higher plant stand counts and yields at both locations than the fungus-coated seed treatments or the untreated control. Significant differences were detected among the application methods but not among the species of fungi within each application method. All three fungi, when applied as granules in furrow or as soil drenches, were more effective than when used as seed-coating treatments for wireworm control, and provided an efficacy comparable or superior to imidacloprid. The fungi used in this study provided significant plant and yield protection under moderate wireworm pressure, supporting their value in the management of this pest.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 7
Claim · model-written summary
Granular or soil drench fungal applications and imidacloprid seed treatment gave higher plant stands than fungus-coated seed or untreated controls at both sites.
- Taxon
- spring wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- formulated granules or soil drenchese0
- Interactor
- wirewormst0pest
- Outcome
- plant stand countse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- fungus-coated seed treatments or the untreated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The three fungi, applied as formulated granules or soil drenches, and the imidacloprid seed treatment all resulted in significantly higher plant stand counts and yields at both locations than the fungus-coated seed treatments or the untreated control”
t0“wireworms (Coleoptera: Elateridae) on spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Granular or soil drench fungal applications and imidacloprid seed treatment gave higher yields than fungus-coated seed or untreated controls at both sites.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- formulated granules or soil drenchese0
- Interactor
- wirewormst0pest
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- fungus-coated seed treatments or the untreated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The three fungi, applied as formulated granules or soil drenches, and the imidacloprid seed treatment all resulted in significantly higher plant stand counts and yields at both locations than the fungus-coated seed treatments or the untreated control”
t0“wireworms (Coleoptera: Elateridae) on spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Application methods differed significantly in wireworm control.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Interactor
- wirewormst0pest
- Outcome
- differences were detected among the application methodse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Significant differences were detected among the application methods but not among the species of fungi within each application method”
t0“wireworms (Coleoptera: Elateridae) on spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Fungal species did not differ significantly within application methods.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Interactor
- wirewormst0pest
- Outcome
- not among the species of fungi within each application methode0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Significant differences were detected among the application methods but not among the species of fungi within each application method”
t0“wireworms (Coleoptera: Elateridae) on spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Granular in-furrow application of all three fungi was more effective for wireworm control than seed coating and comparable or superior to imidacloprid.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- granules in furrowe0
- Interactor
- wirewormst0pest
- Outcome
- wireworm controle0
- Direction
- more effectivee0
- Comparator
- seed-coating treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“All three fungi, when applied as granules in furrow or as soil drenches, were more effective than when used as seed-coating treatments for wireworm control, and provided an efficacy comparable or superior to imidacloprid”
t0“wireworms (Coleoptera: Elateridae) on spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil drenches of all three fungi were more effective for wireworm control than seed coating.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- soil drenchese0
- Interactor
- wirewormst0pest
- Outcome
- wireworm controle0
- Direction
- more effectivee0
- Comparator
- seed-coating treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“All three fungi, when applied as granules in furrow or as soil drenches, were more effective than when used as seed-coating treatments for wireworm control, and provided an efficacy comparable or superior to imidacloprid”
t0“wireworms (Coleoptera: Elateridae) on spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
The fungal treatments provided significant plant and yield protection under moderate wireworm pressure.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Interactor
- wirewormst0pest
- Outcome
- plant and yield protectione0
- Qualifier
- moderate wireworm pressuree0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The fungi used in this study provided significant plant and yield protection under moderate wireworm pressure”
t0“wireworms (Coleoptera: Elateridae) on spring wheat”
The same questions in other papers
application · control · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
33 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
35 papers more in this group
See all 39 papers →application · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
272 papers in the same direction as this paper · 32 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
303 papers more in this group
See all 307 papers →application · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
794 papers in the same direction as this paper · 75 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
873 papers more in this group
See all 877 papers →irrigation · control · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.