Paper · 2007 · Research Exchange (Washington State University)

Preliminary research on cereal leaf beetle economic thresholds in maturing spring wheat 2006

David E. Bragg; Patti Murphy-Carr; Kurt Tetrick

7
claims
14
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Cereal Leaf Beetle larvae (Oulema melanoplus (L)) appeared in leaf damaging numbers by June 1, 2006 in each of 2 spring wheat trials. Both trials were rated for CLB larvae per cent per M2 at boot stage on June 15, 2006. Flag leaf loss was calculated in terms of per cent destruction of leaf surface on July 1. In an effort to estimate wheat flag leaf per cent surface lost by cereal leaf beetle larval feeding, flag leaves were sampled from a 1/4 meter square area in each of 4 replicates per treatment. Length of flag leaf was measured in centimeters for each replicate and means were produced statistically by AOV. Levels of flag leaf per cent losses were broken out for each treatment, with percentages in 5 % differences. The tables show increased length in flag leaf and reduced flag leaf damage above 15% by some of the insecticide seed treatment. Effect on flag leaf reduction by mechanical means could relate to flag leaf damage and wheat yield from CLB feeding. The need for a mechanical damage experiment is obvious. From the data tables seed treatment insecticide treatments do affect flag leaf damage and flag leaf length. As a bi-product of the research, a field insectary was established on the trial site to protect the T. julius parasitoid wasp present in ca. 50% of the larvae collected by Terry Miller, WSU Insectary Manager.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cereal leaf beetle larvae appeared in leaf-damaging numbers in both spring wheat trials by June 1.

Taxon
spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
Interactor
Oulema melanoplus (L)e0pest
Outcome
leaf damaging numberse0
Qualifier
by June 1, 2006 in each of 2 spring wheat trialse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Cereal Leaf Beetle larvae (Oulema melanoplus (L)) appeared in leaf damaging numbers by June 1, 2006 in each of 2 spring wheat trials”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–132 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Some insecticide seed treatments increased wheat flag-leaf length.

Treatment
insecticide seed treatmente0
Outcome
length in flag leafe0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The tables show increased length in flag leaf and reduced flag leaf damage above 15% by some of the insecticide seed treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 726–852 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat flag leaf”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 335–350 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Some insecticide seed treatments reduced wheat flag-leaf damage above 15%.

Treatment
insecticide seed treatmente0
Interactor
cereal leaf beetlee2pest
Outcome
flag leaf damagee0
Direction
reducede0
Value
15%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The tables show increased length in flag leaf and reduced flag leaf damage above 15% by some of the insecticide seed treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 726–852 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat flag leaf”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 335–350 · show in text ↑
e2

“cereal leaf beetle larval feeding”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 376–409 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors conclude that seed insecticide treatments affect flag-leaf damage.

Treatment
seed treatment insecticide treatmentse0
Outcome
flag leaf damagee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“seed treatment insecticide treatments do affect flag leaf damage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1048–1112 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat flag leaf”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 335–350 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors conclude that seed insecticide treatments affect flag-leaf length.

Treatment
seed treatment insecticide treatmentse0
Outcome
flag leaf lengthe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“seed treatment insecticide treatments do affect flag leaf damage and flag leaf length”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1048–1133 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat flag leaf”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 335–350 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend a mechanical damage experiment to examine wheat flag-leaf damage.

Outcome
mechanical damage experimente0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The need for a mechanical damage experiment is obvious”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 971–1025 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat flag leaf”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 335–350 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A field insectary was established at the trial site to protect T. julius parasitoid wasps.

Taxon
spring wheatTriticum aestivume1
Interactor
T. julius parasitoid waspe0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
field insectary was establishede0
Qualifier
present in ca. 50% of the larvae collectede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a field insectary was established on the trial site to protect the T. julius parasitoid wasp present in ca. 50% of the larvae collected”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1168–1303 · show in text ↑
e1

“spring wheat trials”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 113–132 · show in text ↑

seed treatment · pest · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

35 papers: 29 positive, 6 negative or no effect

28 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

31 papers more in this group

See all 35 papers →

insecticide · pest · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

38 papers: 30 positive, 8 negative or no effect

29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

34 papers more in this group

See all 38 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.