Introduction
The importance of dispersal in insect population dynamics has been
largely ignored when formulating integrated pest management (IPM)
programs. This is because studies on dispersal by insect pests have
focused largely on long-range migration by moths and locusts at high
altitudes. For example, the cases of forecasted dispersal reviewed by
Pedgley (1993) all involve migration by insects over considerable
distances. Migration on a smaller scale has been somewhat ignored.
Some feel that long-range dispersal, which we conveniently define as
less than 5.0 km, may be rare (Davis 1980; Loxdale et al. 1993), and
more emphasis should be placed on short-range dispersal. Short-range
migration is certainly as important biologically as long-range
dispersal, and is probably more important agronomically. Laboratory
and field experiments concerning migration of agronomic pests on a
local scale have largely focused on homopteran insects (Homoptera:
Aleyrodidae and Aphididae). Examples are discussed below.
There is no lack of understanding among many academics and growers
that migration by pest insects is a phenomenon that impacts crop
production. Migration is, however, often omitted as a component of
IPM programs at the local level, for two main reasons. To begin, too
little is known about the factors that influence migration and
dispersal by a particular insect pest. Secondly, testing the impact
of this phenomenon on pest populations in agricultural settings is
notoriously difficult. This situation is unfortunate, since we
require accurate models of insect dispersal to enable realistic
forecasting of pest pressure on crops, and this is not possible
without detailed knowledge of insect flight behavior and ecology. The
interactions between migration and other aspects of pest biology are
also critical in developing IPM strategies to deal with mobile pests.
For example, in the case of aphids and whiteflies, dispersal of only
a few individuals that are insecticide resistant or virus vectors
into a crop may give rise to offspring that will cause a significant
impact on crop yields.
Definitions
Before discussing specific examples of migratory behavior, we will
provide you with important definitions. Migration is a widespread
phenomena that has evolved independently in most insect orders
(Johnson 1969; Dingle 1972, 1979, 1996; Taylor and Taylor, 1983;
Taylor 1986). The definition that best suits the purposes of our
research, and that is most consistent with insect behavior we have
observed, has been provided by Kennedy (1985).
"Migratory behavior is persistent and straightened-out movement
effected by the animal's own locomotory exertions on or by its active
embarkation on a vehicle. It depends on some temporary inhibition of
station-keeping responses, but promotes their eventual disinhibition
and recurrence."
According to Dingle (1996), important characteristics of this
definition are:
- persistence; that is, the activity of the insect is tenacious
so that it carries the migrant beyond its original habitat to a
new one where it gathers previously unavailable resources.
- dispersal is straightened out; that is, there is a
directionality to the dispersal and a minimum of turning and
backtracking.
- dispersal is undistracted; that is, the insect ignores
vegetative cues (cues to resources that could promote growth and
maintenance) and keys on other cues, such as sky light, that might
be used for activities such as reproduction are employed to
support migration.
Flight that has no migratory behavioral component is termed
'trivial flight', and is usually associated with short duration
flights between hosts. Crop pest insects that are exhibiting this
behavior are attracted to green and yellow wavelengths of light and
not to ultraviolet light.In our studies on whitefly flight, insects
have been observed in both migratory and trivial flight behavioral
phases.
Dispersal is a term that is inclusive of migratory and trivial
flight (insects can disperse by either behavior, or by random
locomotion). Dispersal can be accomplished by populations and
not individuals (Southwood 1981). Dispersal may or may not be
associated with the characteristics described above.
Dispersal is more simply defined as movement that results in an
increase in the mean distance between individuals.
Both migration and dispersal may lead to emigration of a pest from
one crop and its eventual immigration into another. Local dispersal
by insects may be effected by migratory behaviors, or by short
host-seeking flights.
Local Dispersal by Pest Insects
Aphid Examples
Dispersal by insects on a local scale has been extensively studied
in aphids. All of these studies use techniques that show that the
insects moved from one place to another, but their behavior during
dispersal is not known, i.e., they may or may not be engaged in
migratory flight. Thus, we cannot categorically state that the
insects were all true migrants in the sense of the definition we have
provided. Whatever the behavioral states of the insects, they are
primarily relocated to new host plants as a result of being carried
by the wind. Some of the aphids that take off and have phototactic
flight behavior are evidently carried large distances on the wind
(see Loxdale et al. 1993 for review). These insects may embark on
windborne migratory flights that can carry them for great distances,
but the ecological importance of this has recently been challenged
(Loxdale et al. 1993). They argue that while long distance dispersal
is possible, the majority move locally.
Evidence for local migration by pest insects has been collected
from a number of reports on the green peach aphid, Myzus persicae
(Sulzer). For example, a variant of this species (R2) that
is particularly resistant to insecticides was found to be
concentrated in northern Britain in samples taken between 1980 and
1984, and the incidence of resistant aphids had not changed
appreciably since surveys in 1976 (Furk 1986). Other resistant
variants of this species have been surveyed, and are known to have
stable regional distributions (ffrench-Constant and Devonshire 1988).
This situation would be predicted by a local dispersal of individuals
with limited regional gene flow. In the UK, green peach aphid
populations in the south and west are more susceptible to
insecticides than those in the north, and thus it seems that there is
limited interaction between these populations.
As discussed in Loxdale et al. (1993), we must have
knowledge of insect population dispersal to be able to understand
dispersal of viruliferous or resistant pests and forecasting pest
outbreaks. This is especially true if we need to predict these
occurrences or design management programs that take dispersal into
account. The control of virus disease in Idaho in the 1960's is a
good example of this approach, demonstrating how short-range flight
of insects can be economically important.
In the early 1960's, potato crops in Idaho, United States (US) were
suffering large economic losses to viruses, especially to potato leaf
roll virus that is transmitted by green peach aphids and causes
stunted growth and yellowing of foliage. A strong correlation
was found between the number of aphids per 100 leaves in the potato
crop, and the fieldís distance from principal towns. In
addition, within field sampling showed a greater number of aphids,
and higher disease incidence on the side of the field closest to the
towns (Bishop 1965). Viruliferous aphids and potatoes were found in
the towns' gardens. Problems were related to the fact that is was
common practice for gardeners to use small, diseased potatoes as seed
pieces. Short duration flights of aphids from the gardens to the
surrounding fields were implicated as the cause of the disease
outbreaks. Based on this implied local migration by green peach
aphids, a control program was implemented in an area-wide
program in southeastern Idaho beginning in 1961 (Bishop 1967). There
were three main components to this IPM program: 1: supplying seed
potatoes certified as being virus free to home gardeners, 2:
malathion application to transplants and gardeners' potatoes and 3:
removal or treatment of peach and apricot seedlings with
oxydemeton-methyl where the insects overwinter. Implementation of
this program drastically reduced aphid numbers in the potato crop to
less than 1% of the pre-program level, and significantly reduced the
incidence of the virus.
Whitefly Examples
Introduction
The focus of our laboratory's research is the ecology of the sweet
potato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius). This insect has
been observed in the US since the early part of this century (Russell
1975). It has the ability to transmit a number of viral pathogens
(Brown and Nelson 1986) and additionally reduces yield through direct
feeding damage (Perring et al. 1991, Johnson et al. 1992, Riley and
Palumbo 1995 and Palumbo and Sanchez 1995). More recently, the
problems associated with honeydew (whitefly excreta) and sooty mold,
Capnodium spp., (i.e., stickiness and staining) have
become more important for growers across the southern tier of the US
and around the world (Hector and Hodkinson 1989; Byrne and Miller
1990).
Although sampling plans and action thresholds are now being
developed for melons,
(Tonhasca et al. 1994a and 1994b; Palumbo et al. 1996) and cotton,
Gossypium spp. (Dennehy et al. 1995), only a few current
management programs incorporate more than a few of the strategies we
associate with IPM. Growers of most crops are primarily left with one
principal option, i.e., the direct application of pesticides. The
situation mandates the need for alternative control strategies. We
are convinced that a better understanding of flight behavior by
Bemisia will lead to the development of new cultural control
techniques involving computer simulation models that can predict
when, where and how far Bemisia is going to
disperse.
Initial Experiments
An early concern, which was pivotal, was whether B. tabaci
was capable of exhibiting migratory behavior. We had discovered
that wingbeat frequency was not significantly correlated with wing
loading for these small insects (Byrne et al. 1988). Larger insects
seem to employ a strategy similar to other flying animals, i.e., they
compensate for high wing loading with higher wingbeat frequencies.
The lack of correlation for these two values in whiteflies led to
erroneous assumptions concerning the ability of whiteflies to sustain
flight. On the other hand, we knew that the internal lipids in adult
females of B. tabaci represented 40% of their total dry
weight (Cohen and Byrne 1992). These compounds are commonly
thought to serve as an energy source for insects during flight. For
comparison, in the pea aphid, Acrythosiphum pisum (Harris),
which is known for its migratory ability, lipids account for only 10%
of the dry weight. These findings suggested that, despite their small
size (33 mg [Byrne et al.,
1988]), B. tabaci might possess enough energy stores to
engage in extended flight.
Laboratory Behavioral Studies
To investigate a series of hypotheses, a vertical flight chamber
(Blackmer and Phelan 1991 was used to examine untethered flight of
B. tabaci. Blackmer and Byrne (1993a) characterized the
periodicity, intensity and duration of whitefly flight. Behaviorally
they reaffirmed that there was a dichotomy between groups of
whiteflies relative to flight behavior. Some flew for more than 3 h,
others flew sporadically, some flew not at all.
Blackmer and Byrne (1993a) also examined how whitefly age and host
quality (vegetative vs. senescing) affected flight activity. The
propensity to takeoff, proportion exhibiting phototactic orientation,
and flight duration varied with whitefly age. Longer-duration flights
occurred between three and five days of age. Six days following
eclosion little flight took place because, among other things,
indirect flight muscles and mitochondria in the thorax had started to
deteriorate (Blackmer et al. 1995). Host quality also influenced the
timing of flight behavior. Whiteflies reared on senescing plants
exhibited greater takeoff rates and initiated longer phototactic
flights than individuals reared on vegetative plants.
Laboratory Physiological Studies
It is often assumed that there is a trade-off between migratory
capability and reproduction. In migrating individuals, nutritional
and energy resources are diverted away from growth and reproduction
towards building and maintaining flight muscles and energy resources
needed for flight. This allocation of resources into either migration
or reproduction has been called the "oogenesis-flight syndrome"
(Johnson 1969), and has been well documented in alate aphids. We
found small, but significant increases, in egg-protein levels were
found with longer flights and increasing weights. This was in
contrast to the expected (Blackmer et al. 1995).
Lipids are the most suitable materials for storage of energy
reserves. Compared to carbohydrates, lipids can supply as much as
eight times more energy per unit weight (Beenakkers et al. 1985). In
addition, twice as much metabolic water is produced by metabolizing
lipids instead of carbohydrates (Downer 1985). A high lipid content
associated with migration has been found in many aphids and some bark
beetles. In the sweet potato whitefly we found no evidence that
lipids are stored for dispersal of less than 3 km. However, flight
chamber experiments indicate that in females, lipid content is
correlated with flight duration (unpublished data). Thus, lipid
reserves could be of more importance for long distance migration.
Understanding the factors leading to production of migratory
morphs is important for IPM strategies. Physiological studies can
lead to valuable insight into migratory capabilities and will allow
us to estimate the effective range of dispersal of insect pests.
Field studies with whiteflies
In order to corroborate laboratory observations, field experiments
were conducted beginning in 1992 (Byrne et al. 1996). Initial
experiments concentrated on the impact of wind flow on the
directionality of flight by B. tabaci. A 0.73 ha circular
field was planted with cantaloupe, Cucumis melo L. The area
around the field was surveyed for placement of muffin fan traps along
a series of 16 transects placed 22.50 apart. These traps
are described in Byrne et al. (1996). They allowed the capture of
living whiteflies.
The evening before each sampling day the melon field was dusted
with fluorescent
dust. Tracking insects from where they alight to their landing
place is possible in the field, and has been done with small insects
with some success using the techniques
listed separately. The traps were turned on the morning of each
sampling day (at approximately 6:00 a.m.). After 3 h, whiteflies
marked with dust were collected from the traps. For each sampling
date in 1992 the relationship between wind flow and the number of
whiteflies captured in traps in the direction opposite the prevailing
wind was evaluated. Prevailing wind directions from the northeast
(Brown et al. 1995) and trap catch were in agreement for all dates
(when the wind was from the northeast > 90% of the whiteflies were
caught in traps placed to the southwest of the marked field). This
provided empirical evidence that whitefly migration is
wind-aided.
Following 1992, traps were located as part of a grid to the
southwest of the marked field. Maps of fields and trap locations were
digitized using a digitizing tablet. Data were analyzed using the
Geostatistical Information System (GIS). The principal feature
evident when we examined the data from our field experiments was that
whitefly distribution following dispersal was patchy. Almost all of
the sampling dates show greatest trap catches of marked insects near
the marked field and on the periphery of the grid than in the center
of the grid. Pooling data from all sampling dates in 1993 produced a
line graph indicating a bimodal distribution. It is evident that the
trap catches did not indicate a simple diffusion pattern, a pattern
that might be expected if dispersal was passive across featureless
topography. This is in contrast to patterns seen by Turchin and
Thoeny (1993) who described dispersal by southern pine beetles,
Dendroctonus frontalis Zimm., using a diffusion model. We
believe our pattern may be explained by the existence in whitefly
populations of two behaviorally distinct types; trivial flying
individuals and migratory individuals as described by Byrne and Houck
(1990) and Blackmer and Byrne (1993 a and b). Insects caught in the
immediate vicinity of the source field are likely to be trivial
fliers, while those caught on the grid perimeter are thought to be
migratory individuals. The explanation for the relative paucity of
whiteflies caught in the middle of the grid is that migratory
whiteflies do not fly towards green vegetation until they have flown
for a given period of time (Blackmer and Byrne 1993a).
In our studies, the greatest distance marked whiteflies have been
trapped is 2.7 km from a source field (Byrne et al. 1996). Since
whiteflies were consistently captured in the most distant traps, the
effective migrational range of B. tabaci may be considerably
greater than this. Future experiments will be conducted with an
expanded grid to further define the effective migrational range
(i.e., the distance they can travel and still initiate a colony)
of B. tabaci.
Field research is still ongoing, and these experiments have
already revealed a few surprises. For example, we have found that
whiteflies were caught in traps placed at the edge of the source
field, at over 20 ft above the crop. Traps were in place just before
dawn, because the air starts to move at sunrise, and flight is
observed as soon as there is sufficient light available to stimulate
take-off. Thus, it would seem that the migrants are taking maximum
advantage of the low wind speeds to gain height and take them away
from the plant boundary layer.This has far-reaching implications for
our understanding of whitefly migration and their dispersal on the
wind. That whiteflies can take off and ignore plant cues in the field
also reinforces our faith that the behaviors observed in the
laboratory are those employed by the insects in the field.
Development of predictive models
Ideally, our knowledge of insect migration would lead to the
development of simulation models, that serve as an aid to growers in
making management decisions. To our knowledge, no such models exist
as of yet. This is, in our opinion, partially due to some inherent
difficulties in developing and implementing such models.
The "art" of modeling involves reducing a complex biological
reality down to a few mathematical statements. For example, one could
treat a field of melons, as one unit, with specified size, location,
and time of planting. However, the development of whiteflies in a
given melon field and their migratory tendencies, are likely to be
influenced by the many other factors, like watering regime, amount of
fertilizer applied, soil type, or disease incidence. In order to
incorporate these factors into the model we need to know the effect
of each of these factors on whitefly biology. If one of these factors
turned out to be critical for the model, growers would have to spend
time (and money) collecting data on this variable. That would
severely diminish the value of these models as a management tool.
In addition, one typically has only data available from a small
number of successive years for the development of migration models.
Thus, the model will be based on a subset of potential environmental
conditions. For example, the years for which data were available
could be characterized by relatively cool summers. Whether the model
thus developed could be extended to years with different temperature
regimes can only be examined by collecting data over longer time
periods.
Summary
The migratory behavior of pest insects is an important aspect of
their life cycle that has obvious implications for where populations
will be exerting pressure on crop production. Our research on
whitefly flight behavior has already yielded information that can be
used to assist growers when making decisions concerning crop
placement and planting times. The important findings with relevance
to IPM are summarized below:
- Small insect pests can have the capacity for extended flights,
controlled by migratory behavior.
- Insect dispersal is often in response to both biotic and
abiotic conditions that promote migratory behavior.
- Migration by insects is an adaptation to a rapidly changing
environment. The way in which biotic and abiotic factors influence
migration differs widely between species.
- Wind speed and direction play a significant role in dispersal
of small insects.
- In many insects, migrating individuals are different from
non-migrating individuals in physiology and/or morphology.
- Dispersal by insects acquires additional importance for IPM
when they are carrying genes for resistance or are vectors of
plant pathogens.
- They can disperse large distances, but most whiteflies land
less than 5.0 km from their original point of take-off.
- Crop placement and timing should take account of the likely
pest pressure from mobile insects.
- Models can be constructed that help in predicting insect
dispersal, but they are only as good as the information they are
based on.
- Knowledge of migration is important for many IPM programs.
This does require, however, detailed knowledge of the migratory
capacity of each pest insect species.
LINKS
About the authors, and to contact us by email
David N.
Byrne
Rufus
Isaacs
Klaas
H. Veenstra
References
Beenakkers, A. M. Th., D. J. van der Horst and W. J. A. van
Marrewijk. Biochemical processes directed to flight muscle
metabolism. In: G. A. Kerkut and L. I. Gilbert (eds.), Comprehensive
Insect Physiology, Biochemistry, and Pharmacology. Vol.10, pp.
451-486. Permagon Press, New York.
Bishop, G. W. 1965. Green peach aphid distribution and potato
leafroll virus occurrence in the seed-potato producing areas of
Idaho. Journal of Economic Entomology 58: 150-153.
Bishop, G. W. 1967. A leaf roll virus control program in Idaho's
seed potato areas. American Potato Journal 44: 305-308.
Blackmer, J. L. and D. N. Byrne. 1993a. Flight behavior of Bemisia
tabaci in a vertical flight chamber. Physiological Entomology 18:
223-232.
Blackmer, J. L. and D. N. Byrne. 1993b. Environmental and
physiological factors influencing phototactic orientation in Bemisia
tabaci (Gennadius). Physiological Entomology 18: 336-342.
Blackmer, J. L., V. A. Lindley and D. N. Byrne. 1995. Histological
examination of flight muscle development and breakdown in Bemisia
tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae): relationship to age and flight
behavior. Journal of Morphology 226: 213-221.
Blackmer, J. L. and P. L. Phelan. 1991. Behavior of Carpophilus
hemipterus in a vertical flight chamber: transition from phototactic
to vegetative orientation. Entomologia. experimentalis et applicata
58: 137-148.
Brown, J. K. and M. R. Nelson. 1986. Whitefly-borne viruses of
melons and lettuce in Arizona. Phytopathology 76: 236-239.
Brown, P. W., Machibya, T. and Russell, B. (1995). Wind flow
patterns at the University of Arizona agricultural centers.
University of Arizona Exp Sta Tech Bull No. 268. 215 pp.
Byrne, D. N., S. L. Buchmann and H. G. Spangler. 1988.
Relationship between wing loading, wingbeat frequency and body mass
in homopterous insects. Journal of Experimental Biology 135:
9-23.
Byrne, D. N. and M. A. Houck. 1990. Morphometric identification of
wing polymorphism in Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Annals
of the Entomological Society of America 83: 487-493 .
Byrne, D. N. and W. B. Miller. 1990. Carbohydrate and amino acid
composition of phloem sap and honeydew produced by Bemisia tabaci.
Journal of Insect Physiology 36: 433-439.
Byrne, D. N., R. J. Rathman, T. V. Orum and J. C. Palumbo. 1996.
Localized migration and dispersal by Bemisia tabaci. Oecologia 105:
320-328..Cohen, A. C. and D. N. Byrne. 1992. Geocoris punctipes as a
predator of Bemisia tabaci: a laboratory evaluation. Entomologia
experimentalis et applicata 64: 195-202.
Costa, H. S. and Byrne, D. N. 1988. Neutron activation of a rare
element to mark the sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci. Ecological
Entomology 13: 465-467.
David, C. T. and Hardie, J. 1988. The visual responses of
free-flying summer and autumn forms of the black bean aphid, Aphis
fabae, in an automated flight chamber. Physiological Entomology 13:
277-284.
Davis, M. A 1980. Why are most insects short flyers? Evolutionary
Theory 5: 103-111.
Dennehy, T. J., Ellsworth, P. C. and Nichols, R. L. 1995. Whitefly
management in Arizona cotton. University of Arizona Experiment
Station IPM Series No. 3. 4 pp.
Dingle, H. 1972. Migration strategies of insects. Science 174:
1327-1335.
Dingle, H. 1979. Adaptive variation in the evolution of insect
migration. pp. 64-87 in R. L. Rabb and G. G. Kennedy (eds.), Movement
of Highly Mobile Insects. Concepts and Methodology in Research.
Dingle, H. 1996. Migration: the Biology of Life on the Move.
Oxford University Press. New York, 474 pp.
Dixon, A. F. G. 1969. Quality and availability of food for a
sycamore aphid population in A. Watson (ed.) Symposium
Downer, R. G. H. 1985. Lipid metabolism. In: G. A. Kerkut and L.
I. Gilbert (eds.), Comprehensive Insect Physiology, Biochemistry, and
Pharmacology. Vol. 10, pp. 77-113 Permagon Press, New York.
ffrench-Constant, R. H. and Devonshire, A. L. 1988. Monitoring
frequencies of insecticide resistance in Myzus persicae (Sulzer)
(Hemiptera: Aphididae) in England during 1985-86 by immunoassay.
Bulletin of Entomological Research 78: 163-171.
Furk, C. 1986. Incidence and distribution of insecticide-resistant
strains of Myzus persicae (Sulzer) (Hemiptera: Aphididae) in England
and Wales in 1980-84. Bulletin of Entomological Research 76:
53-58.
Hector D. J, and I. D. Hodgkinson. 1989. Stickiness in Cotton. C.
A. B. International, Oxon, UK
Kennedy, J. S and A. R. Ludlow. R 1974. Co-ordination of two kinds
of flight in an aphid. Journal of Experimental Biology 61:
173-196.
Kennedy, J. S 1985. Migration, behavioural and ecological. pp 7-26
in M. A Rankin (ed.). Migration: Mechanisms and Adaptive
Significance. Contributions in Marine Science Suppl. Vol. 27.
Johnson, C.G. 1969 Migration and Dispersal of Insects by Flight.
Metheun & Co. Ltd., London.
Johnson, M. W., L. C. Caprio, J. A. Coughlin, B. E. Tabashnik, J.
A. Rosenheim and S. C. Welter. 1992. Effect of Trialeurodes
vaporariorum (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) on yield of fresh market
tomatoes. Journal of Economic Entomology 85: 2370-2376.
Loxdale, H. D., Hardie, J., Halbert, S., Foottit, R., Kidd, N. A.
C. and Carter, C. I. 1993. The relative importance of short- and long
range movement of flying aphids. Biological Reviews 68: 291-311.
Nottingham, S. F. and Hardie, J. 1989. Migratory and targeted
flight in seasonal forms of the black bean aphid, Aphis fabae.
Physiological Entomology 14: 451-458. Palumbo, J. C. and Sanchez, C.
A. 1995. Imidacloprid does not enhance growth and yield of cantaloupe
in the absence of sweetpotato whitefly. HortScience in press.
Palumbo J. C., A. Tonhasca and D. N. Byrne. 1996. Evaluation of
sampling methods for estimating adult sweetpotato whitefly
(Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) abundance on cantaloupes. Journal of
Economic Entomology 88: 1393-1400.
Perring, T. M., A. Cooper, D. Kazmer, C. Shields and J. Shields.
1991. New strain of sweetpotato whitefly invades California
vegetables. California Agriculture 45: 10-12.
Riley, D. G. and Palumbo, J. C. 1995. Interaction of silverleaf
whitefly (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) with melon crop quality. Journal of
Economic Entomology in press.
Pedgley, D. E 1993. Managing migratory insect pests - a review.
International Journal of Pest Management 39: 3-12.
Russell, L. M. 1975. Collection records of Bemisia tabaci
(Gennadius) in the United States. USDA Cooperative Economic Insect
Report 25: 229-230.
Southwood, T. R. E. 1978. Ecological methods. Chapman and Hall,
London.
Southwood, T. R. E. 1981. Ecological aspects of insect migration.
pp. 196-208 in D. J. Aidley (ed.) Animal Migration. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Taylor, L. R. 1986. The four kinds of migration. pp. 265-280 in W.
Danthanarayana (ed.). Insect Flight: Dispersal and Migration.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin
Taylor, L. R. and Taylor, R. A. J. 1983. Insect migration as a
paradigm for survival by movement. pp. 181-214 in I. R. Swingland and
P. J. Greenwood (eds.) The Ecology of Insect Movement. Clarendon
Press, Oxford.
Tonhasca, A., J. C. Palumbo and D. N. Byrne. 1994a. Distribution
patterns of Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) in cantaloupe
fields in Arizona. Environmental Entomology 23: 949-954.
Tonhasca, A. and D. N. Byrne. 1994b. The effects of crop
diversification on herbivorous insects: a meta-analysis approach.
Ecological Entomology 19: 239-244.
Turchin, P. and Thoeny, W. T. 1993. Quantifying dispersal of
southern pine beetles with mark-recapture experiments and a diffusion
model. Ecological Applications 3: 187-198.
Return to Radcliffe's IPM World Textbook Home
Page.
The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity
educator and employer.
Last modified: Thursday, 13 June, 1996
© Regents of the University of Minnesota, 1996
|