Abstract
Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) crop losses induced by alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica (Gyllenhal), and potato leafhopper, Empoasca fabae (Harris), were assessed from scout-generated data in Maryland, 1983-1988. Weevil-induced expected lossesaveraged from a minimum of $4.25/ha in 1985 to a maximum of $23.80/ha in 1988, whereas leafhopperinduced losses averaged from a minimum of $32.11/ha in 1988 to a maximum of $66.12/ha in 1987. By simulating three pest management programs, we show that a responsive insecticide program (i.e., insecticide used in response to scouting reports) cost an average of $3.11/ha less than a no-action program (i.e., no insecticide applied), and that both of these programs were $20.91 and $17.80/ha less costly, respectively, than the routine prophylactic use of insecticide. In addition, risk, as measured by the variation of loss among fields, was similar in the responsive and prophylactic programs but was greater in the no-action program than in the other two programs. The effect of integrating other control practices on leafhopper management programs was also simulated; these simulations indicated that expected losses are minimized in the no-action program for all years if leafhopper density is reduced by 50%, or if crop tolerance increased 2-fold. However, minimizing risk requires a leafhopper density reduction of ≈95%, or 20-fold increase in crop tolerance. Optimal selection of the insecticide-based pest management strategy depends on a prediction of the extent of pest abundance during the year, information on the effect of pest or crop management practices on pest impact, and whether the primary economic criterion for decision-making is loss or risk.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Expected alfalfa losses from alfalfa weevil ranged from a minimum of $4.25/ha in 1985 to a maximum of $23.80/ha in 1988.
- Taxon
- Alfalfa
Medicago sativae0 - Interactor
- alfalfa weevil
Hypera posticae0pest - Outcome
- Weevil-induced expected lossese1
- Value
- $4.25/hae1
- Qualifier
- a maximum of $23.80/ha in 1988e1
- Setting
- Marylande2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) crop losses induced by alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica (Gyllenhal), and potato leafhopper, Empoasca fabae (Harris)”
e1“Weevil-induced expected lossesaveraged from a minimum of $4.25/ha in 1985 to a maximum of $23.80/ha in 1988”
e2“were assessed from scout-generated data in Maryland, 1983-1988”
Claim · model-written summary
Expected alfalfa losses from potato leafhopper ranged from a minimum of $32.11/ha in 1988 to a maximum of $66.12/ha in 1987.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Interactor
- potato leafhoppere0pest
- Outcome
- leafhopperinduced lossese3
- Value
- $32.11/hae3
- Qualifier
- a maximum of $66.12/ha in 1987e3
- Setting
- Marylande2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) crop losses induced by alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica (Gyllenhal), and potato leafhopper, Empoasca fabae (Harris)”
e3“whereas leafhopperinduced losses averaged from a minimum of $32.11/ha in 1988 to a maximum of $66.12/ha in 1987”
e2“were assessed from scout-generated data in Maryland, 1983-1988”
Claim · model-written summary
A responsive insecticide program cost $3.11/ha less than a no-action program.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- responsive insecticide programe4
- Outcome
- coste4
- Direction
- lesse4
- Value
- $3.11/hae4
- Comparator
- no-action programe4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) crop losses induced by alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica (Gyllenhal), and potato leafhopper, Empoasca fabae (Harris)”
e4“a responsive insecticide program (i.e., insecticide used in response to scouting reports) cost an average of $3.11/ha less than a no-action program (i.e., no insecticide applied)”
Claim · model-written summary
A responsive insecticide program cost $20.91/ha less than the routine prophylactic use of insecticide.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- responsive insecticide programe4
- Outcome
- coste5
- Direction
- less costlye5
- Value
- $20.91e5
- Comparator
- routine prophylactic use of insecticidee5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) crop losses induced by alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica (Gyllenhal), and potato leafhopper, Empoasca fabae (Harris)”
e4“a responsive insecticide program (i.e., insecticide used in response to scouting reports) cost an average of $3.11/ha less than a no-action program (i.e., no insecticide applied)”
e5“and that both of these programs were $20.91 and $17.80/ha less costly, respectively, than the routine prophylactic use of insecticide”
Claim · model-written summary
A no-action program cost $17.80/ha less than the routine prophylactic use of insecticide.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- no-action programe4
- Outcome
- coste5
- Direction
- less costlye5
- Value
- $17.80e5
- Comparator
- routine prophylactic use of insecticidee5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) crop losses induced by alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica (Gyllenhal), and potato leafhopper, Empoasca fabae (Harris)”
e4“a responsive insecticide program (i.e., insecticide used in response to scouting reports) cost an average of $3.11/ha less than a no-action program (i.e., no insecticide applied)”
e5“and that both of these programs were $20.91 and $17.80/ha less costly, respectively, than the routine prophylactic use of insecticide”
Claim · model-written summary
The no-action program had greater risk than the other two programs.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- no-action programe6
- Outcome
- risk, as measured by the variation of loss among fieldse6
- Direction
- greatere6
- Comparator
- the other two programse6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) crop losses induced by alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica (Gyllenhal), and potato leafhopper, Empoasca fabae (Harris)”
e6“risk, as measured by the variation of loss among fields, was similar in the responsive and prophylactic programs but was greater in the no-action program than in the other two programs”
Claim · model-written summary
Risk was similar for the responsive insecticide program and the prophylactic program.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- responsive insecticide programe4
- Outcome
- risk, as measured by the variation of loss among fieldse6
- Direction
- similare6
- Comparator
- prophylactice6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) crop losses induced by alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica (Gyllenhal), and potato leafhopper, Empoasca fabae (Harris)”
e4“a responsive insecticide program (i.e., insecticide used in response to scouting reports) cost an average of $3.11/ha less than a no-action program (i.e., no insecticide applied)”
e6“risk, as measured by the variation of loss among fields, was similar in the responsive and prophylactic programs but was greater in the no-action program than in the other two programs”
Claim · model-written summary
Simulated expected losses were minimized in the no-action program if leafhopper density is reduced by 50%.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- leafhopper density is reduced by 50%e4
- Outcome
- expected lossese4
- Direction
- minimizede4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) crop losses induced by alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica (Gyllenhal), and potato leafhopper, Empoasca fabae (Harris)”
e4“expected losses are minimized in the no-action program for all years if leafhopper density is reduced by 50%, or if crop tolerance increased 2-fold”
Claim · model-written summary
Simulated expected losses were minimized in the no-action program if crop tolerance increased 2-fold.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- crop tolerance increased 2-folde4
- Outcome
- expected lossese4
- Direction
- minimizede4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) crop losses induced by alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica (Gyllenhal), and potato leafhopper, Empoasca fabae (Harris)”
e4“expected losses are minimized in the no-action program for all years if leafhopper density is reduced by 50%, or if crop tolerance increased 2-fold”
Claim · model-written summary
Minimizing risk requires a leafhopper density reduction of ≈95%.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- leafhopper density reduction of ≈95%e7
- Outcome
- riske7
- Direction
- minimizinge7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) crop losses induced by alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica (Gyllenhal), and potato leafhopper, Empoasca fabae (Harris)”
e7“minimizing risk requires a leafhopper density reduction of ≈95%, or 20-fold increase in crop tolerance”
Claim · model-written summary
Minimizing risk requires a 20-fold increase in crop tolerance.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- 20-fold increase in crop tolerancee7
- Outcome
- riske7
- Direction
- minimizinge7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) crop losses induced by alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica (Gyllenhal), and potato leafhopper, Empoasca fabae (Harris)”
e7“minimizing risk requires a leafhopper density reduction of ≈95%, or 20-fold increase in crop tolerance”
Claim · model-written summary
The optimal insecticide-based pest management strategy depends on predicting pest abundance during the year.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Outcome
- Optimal selection of the insecticide-based pest management strategye2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Insect Pest-Induced Losses in Alfalfa”
e2“Optimal selection of the insecticide-based pest management strategy depends on a prediction of the extent of pest abundance during the year”
The same questions in other papers
insecticide · yield · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Results differ
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
21 papers more in this group
See all 25 papers →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.