Abstract
Separate and combined releases of P. persimilis and N. californicus were tested for the control of T. urticae ongreenhouse cut roses under integrated pest management conditions. Release strategies were carried out in separate greenhouses and were not replicated. Mite densities were controlled at regular intervals on 50 single, randomly collected leaves per greenhouse. Natural infestations of 23.9 T. urticae per leaf at the start of the trial were controlled throughout the growing season by the simultaneous, combined release of 26 P. persimilis/m² and 24 N. californicus/ m². Separate releases of each phytoseiid species - 32 P. persimilis/m² at an initial infestation of 0.16 T. urticae per leaf, or 51 N. californicus/m² in total at an initial infestation of 10.2 T. urticae per leaf - failed to adequately suppress spider mite populations. Additional treatments with selective acaricides were required. Reasons for the different control success of the three release strategies and their implications for practical use are discussed.
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 3
Claim · model-written summary
Simultaneous combined release of P. persimilis and N. californicus controlled natural T. urticae infestations throughout the growing season.
- Taxon
- cut rosese0
- Treatment
- simultaneous, combined release of 26 P. persimilis/m² and 24 N. californicus/ m²e1
- Interactor
- T. urticae
.jpg?width=60)
Tetranychus urticaee0pest - Second interactor
- P. persimilis
Phytoseiulus persimilise0biocontrol_agent - Outcome
- Natural infestationse1
- Direction
- controllede1
- Qualifier
- were not replicatede4
- Comparator
- Separate releases of each phytoseiid speciese2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Separate and combined releases of P. persimilis and N. californicus were tested for the control of T. urticae ongreenhouse cut roses”
e1“Natural infestations of 23.9 T. urticae per leaf at the start of the trial were controlled throughout the growing season by the simultaneous, combined release of 26 P. persimilis/m² and 24 N. californicus/ m²”
e2“Separate releases of each phytoseiid species - 32 P. persimilis/m² at an initial infestation of 0.16 T. urticae per leaf, or 51 N. californicus/m² in total at an initial infestation of 10.2 T. urticae per leaf - failed to adequately suppress spider mite populations”
e4“Release strategies were carried out in separate greenhouses and were not replicated”
Claim · model-written summary
Separate releases of each phytoseiid species failed to adequately suppress spider mite populations.
- Taxon
- cut rosese0
- Treatment
- Separate releases of each phytoseiid speciese2
- Interactor
- T. urticaeTetranychus urticaee2pest
- Second interactor
- P. persimilisPhytoseiulus persimilise2biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- spider mite populationse2
- Direction
- failed to adequately suppresse2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Separate and combined releases of P. persimilis and N. californicus were tested for the control of T. urticae ongreenhouse cut roses”
e2“Separate releases of each phytoseiid species - 32 P. persimilis/m² at an initial infestation of 0.16 T. urticae per leaf, or 51 N. californicus/m² in total at an initial infestation of 10.2 T. urticae per leaf - failed to adequately suppress spider mite populations”
Claim · model-written summary
Additional treatments with selective acaricides were required on the greenhouse cut roses.
- Taxon
- cut rosese0
- Interactor
- T. urticaeTetranychus urticaee0pest
- Outcome
- Additional treatments with selective acaricidese3
- Qualifier
- were requirede3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Separate and combined releases of P. persimilis and N. californicus were tested for the control of T. urticae ongreenhouse cut roses”
e3“Additional treatments with selective acaricides were required”
The same questions in other papers
Phytoseiulus persimilis · Tetranychus urticae · RosaResults agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
Neoseiulus californicus · Tetranychus urticae · RosaResults 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.