Progress in Plant Protection

Comparison of damage caused by Arion vulgaris Moquin Tandon and Arion rufus (Linnaeus) (Gastropoda: Arionidae) in pea (Pisum sativum L.)
Porównanie uszkodzeń odmian grochu siewnego (Pisum sativum L.) przez Arion vulgaris Moquin Tandon i Arion rufus (Linnaeus) (Gastropoda: Arionidae) 

Jan Kozłowski, e-mail: j.kozlowski@iorpib.poznan.pl

Instytut Ochrony Roślin – Państwowy Instytut Badawczy, Władysława Węgorka, 60-318 Poznań, Polska

Monika Jaskulska, e-mail: m.jaskulska@iorpib.poznan.pl

Instytut Ochrony Roślin – Państwowy Instytut Badawczy, Władysława Węgorka, 60-318 Poznań, Polska

Maria Kozłowska, e-mail: markoz@up.poznan.pl

Uniwersytet Przyrodniczy w Poznaniu, Katedra Metod Matematycznych i Statystycznych, Wojska Polskiego 28, 60-637 Poznań , Polska
Streszczenie

Slugs damage all organs of pea-plants; causing significant damage in cultivations of certain pea (Pisum sativum L.) cultivars. The aim of the study was to identify the degree of susceptibility of different pea cultivars to grazing of two economically important species of slugs Arion vulgaris Moquin Tandon and Arion rufus (Linnaeus) (Gastropoda: Arionidae). The experiments were performed under laboratory conditions. Seeds and seedlings (at the 3–4 leaf stage) of eleven pea cultivars were exposed to feeding of Arion vulgaris and Arion rufus. The rate and extent of plant damages were determined and the susceptibility to injuries was assessed for each cultivar. It was demonstrated that seeds and plants of Muza cultivar were susceptible to feeding of both slug species the most. Additionally, the data revealed that plants of Mentor cultivar were also highly susceptible to A. vulgaris, while plants of Medal cultivar to A. rufus.


Ślimaki nagie uszkadzają wszystkie organy grochu, wyrządzając w uprawach niektórych odmian znaczne szkody. Celem badań było poznanie stopnia podatności poszczególnych odmian grochu na żerowanie dwóch gospodarczo ważnych gatunków ślimaków. Doświadczenia wykonano w warunkach laboratoryjnych, w których eksponowano nasiona i siewki (w fazie 3–4 liści) jedenastu odmian grochu na żerowanie Arion vulgaris i Arion rufus. W przeprowadzonych testach określono tempo i wielkość uszkodzeń roślin oraz oceniono podatność odmian na uszkodzenia. Wykazano, że najbardziej podatne dla obydwóch gatunków ślimaków były nasiona i rośliny grochu odmiany Muza. W przypadku A. vulgaris wysoką podatność na uszkodzenia wykazały także rośliny odmiany Mentor, a dla A. rufus rośliny odmiany Medal.


Słowa kluczowe
slugs; pea; cultivars; damage; ślimaki; groch siewny; odmiany; uszkodzenia
Referencje

Aguiar R., Wink M. 1999. Mollusc-deterrent activity of lupin alkaloids. p. 97–98. In: Proceeding 9th International Lupin Conference. Germany, Klink/Mültriz, 20–24 June 1999. International Lupin Association, Canterbury, New Zeeland, 481 pp.

Airey W.J., Henderson I.F., Pickett J.A., Scott G.C., Stephenson J.W., Woodcock C.M. 1989. Novel chemical approaches to mollusc control. p. 301–307. In: “Slugs and Snails in World Agriculture”, Monograph 41 (I.F. Henderson, ed.). British Crop Protection Council, Thornton Heath.

Barlow S.E., Close A.J., Port G.R. 2013. The acceptability of meadow plants to the slug Deroceras reticulatum and implications for grassland restoration. Annals of Botany 112 (4): 721–730.

Byers R.A. 2002. Agriolimacidae and Arionidae as pests in lucerne and other legumes in forage systems of north-eastern North America. p. 325–335. In: “Molluscs as Crop Pests” (G.M. Barker, ed.). Landcare Research Hamilton, New Zealand, CABI Publishing, UK, 468 pp.

Clark S.J., Dodds C.J., Henderson I.F., Martin A.P. 1997. A bioassay for screening materials influencing feeding in the field slug Deroceras reticulatum (Müller) (Mollusca, Pulmonata). Annals of Applied Biology 130: 379–385.

Dirzo R., Harper J.L. 1982. Experimental studies on slug–plant interactions. IV The performance of cyanogenic and acyanogenic morphs of Trifolium repens in the field. Journal of Ecology 70: 119–138.

Ester A., Trul R. 2000. Slug damage and control of field slug (Deroceras reticulatum (Müller)) by carvone in stored potatoes. Potato Research 43 (3): 253–261.

Fritz R.S., Hochwender C.G., Lewkiewicz D.A., Bothwell S., Orians C.M. 2001. Seedling herbivory by slugs in a willow hybrid system: developmental changes in damage, chemical defense, and plant performance. Oecologia 129: 87–97.

Gebauer J. 2002. Survival and food choice of the grey field slug (Deroceras reticulatum) on three different seed types under laboratory conditions. Anzeiger für Schädlingskunde. Journal of Pest Science 75: 1–5.

Hanley M.E., Fenner M., Edwards P.J. 1995. The effect of seedling age on the likelihood of herbivory by the slug Deroceras reticulatum. Functional Ecology 9: 754–759.

Kigel J. 1995. Seed development and germination. p. 7–13. In: “The Seed: Structure and Function” I (F.D. Boesewinkel, F. Boumann, eds.). Hebrew University of Jerusalem Rehovot, Israel and Gad Gailili Weizmann Institute of Science Rehovot, Israel.

Kloos H., McCullough F.S. 1982. Plant molluscicides. Planta Medica 46: 195–209.

Moens R., Glen D.M. 2002. Agriolimacidae, Arionidae and Milacidae as pests in West European oilseed rape. p. 301–314. In: “Molluscs as Crop Pest” (G.M. Barker, ed.). Landcare Research Hamilton New Zealand, CABI Publishing, UK, 468 pp.

Molgaard P. 1986. Food plant preferences by slugs and snails: a simple method to evaluate the relative palatability of the food plants. Biochemical Systematics Ecology 14 (1): 113–121.

Port R., Ester A. 2002. Gastropods as pests in vegetables and ornamental crops in Western Europe. p. 337–352. In: “Molluscs as Crop Pests” (G.M. Barker, ed.). Landcare Research Hamilton, New Zealand, CABI Publishing, UK, 468 pp.

Runham N.W., Hunter P.J. 1970. Terrestrial Slugs. 1st ed. Hutchinson and Co. Ltd., London, UK, 184 pp.

Spaull A.M., Eldon S. 1990. Is it possible to limit slug damage using choice winter wheat culivars? p. 703–708. In: Proccedings of the Brighton Crop Protection Conference: Pest and Diseases. Vol. 2. UK, Brighton, 17–20 November 1986, 865 pp.

Webbe G., Lambert J.D.H. 1983. Plants that kill snails and prospects for disease control. Nature 302: 754.

Progress in Plant Protection (2017) : 0-0
Data pierwszej publikacji on-line: 2017-02-16 08:24:28
http://dx.doi.org/10.14199/ppp-2017-005
Pełny tekst (.PDF) BibTeX Mendeley Powrót do listy