PL EN


Preferences help
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results
Journal
2017 | 66 | 2 | 231-239
Article title

Aktualny stan i perspektywy ochrony roślin przed ślimakami

Authors
Content
Title variants
EN
Protection of plants against slug pests - the present state and future prospects
Languages of publication
PL EN
Abstracts
PL
Ślimaki nagie Deroceras reticulatum, Arion vulgaris, A. rufus, A. distinctus i A. subfuscus oraz niektóre inne gatunki z rodzin Agriolimacidae, Arionidae i Milacidae, powodują poważne szkody w uprawach roślin rolniczych, ogrodniczych i sadowniczych. Znaczne straty ekonomiczne z powodu ich żerowania występują w uprawach rzepaku ozimego, pszenicy ozimej, ziemniaka, buraka, kapusty, sałaty oraz niektórych roślin strączkowych. Najbardziej narażone na uszkodzenia są ziarniaki zbóż oraz siewki rzepaku. W celu oceny stopnia zagrożenia roślin przez ślimaki, konieczne jest prowadzenie stałego monitoringu ich występowania. Podstawą podejmowania decyzji wykonania chemicznych zabiegów zwalczania jest ustalenie liczebności ślimaków i stopnia uszkodzenia roślin oraz przekroczenie progów szkodliwości. Wzrost szkód wyrządzanych przez ślimaki wymaga doskonalenia strategii ich ograniczania, zgodnie z zasadami integrowanej ochrony roślin. Strategia ta powinna opierać się na kompleksowym wdrażaniu wszystkich znanych i potencjalnych metod, profilaktycznych, agrotechnicznych, kulturowych, biologicznych i chemicznych. Duże znaczenie, obok stosowania granulowanych moluskocydów, będzie miało wykorzystanie, alternatywnych pokarmów, mniej wrażliwych odmian oraz czynników biologicznych, w tym nicienia Phasmarhabditis hermaphrodita.
EN
The slugs Deroceras reticulatum, Arion vulgaris, A. rufus, A. distinctus and A. subfuscus and certain other species of the Agriolimacidae, Arionidae and Milacidae families bring serious damage to agricultural, horticultural and orchard crops. Their grazing produces significant economic losses in crops of winter rape, winter wheat, potatoes, beetroot, cabbage, lettuce and certain pulses. The most susceptible to damage are grain caryopses and rape seedlings. To evaluate the degree to which plants are at risk of slug damage, the occurrence of slugs needs to be continuously monitored. Decisions on chemical treatments are based on determination of the size of slug populations and the extent of plant damage that exceeds acceptable thresholds. Increasing levels of slug damage make it necessary to improve strategies for combating these pests, in accordance with the principles of integrated plant protection. Such a strategy should be based on application of the full range of known and potential methods: preventive, agritechnical, cultural, biological and chemical. Besides the application of granular molluscicides, most important techniques shall include the use of alternative foods, less susceptible plant cultivars and biological agents such as nematode Phasmarhabditis hermaphrodita.
Journal
Year
Volume
66
Issue
2
Pages
231-239
Physical description
Dates
published
2017
Contributors
  • Instytut Ochrony Roślin, Państwowy Instytut Badawczy, Władysława Węgorka 20, 60-318 Poznań, Polska
  • Institute of Plant Protection, National Research Institute, Władysława Węgorka 20, 60-318 Poznań, Poland
References
  • Aguiar R., Wink M., 1999. Mollusc-deterrent activity of lupin alkaloids. [W]: Proc. 9th Inter. Lupin Conference, Klink/Müritz, Germany, 20-24 June, 1999. Inter. Lupin Assoc. 2000, Canterbury, New Zealand, 97-98.
  • Airey W. J., 1987. Laboratory studies on damage to potato tubers by slugs. J. Moll. Stud. 53, 97-104.
  • Brooks A. S., Crook M. J., Wilcox A., Cook R. T., 2003. A laboratory evaluation of the palatability of legumes to the field slug Deroceras reticulatum Müller. Pest Manag. Sci. 59, 245-251.
  • Byers R. A., 2002. Agriolimacidae and Arionidae as pests in lucerne and other legumes in forage systems of north-eastern North America. [W]: Molluscs as Crop Pests. Barker G.M. (red.). Landcare Res. Ham. New Zealand, CABI Publish, 325-335.
  • Chevalier L., Desbuquois C., Papineau J., Charrier M., 2000. Influence of the quinolizidine alkaloid content of Lupinus albus (Fabaceae) on the feeding choice of Helix aspersa (Gastropoda: Pulmonata). J. Moll. Stud. 66, 61-68.
  • Cook R. T., Bailey S. E. R., McCrohan C. R., 1997. The potential for common weeds to reduce slug damage to winter wheat: laboratory and field studies. J. Appl. Ecol. 34, 79-87.
  • 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. J. Ecol. 70, 119-138.
  • Douglas M. R., Tooker J. F., 2012. Slug (Mollusca: Agriolimacidae, Arionidae) ecology and management in no-till field crops, with an emphasis on the mid-Atlantic region. J. Integr. Pest Manag. 3, 1-9.
  • Ester A., Trul R., 2000. Slug damage and control of field slug (Deroceras reticulatum (Müller)) by carvone in stored potatoes. Potato Res. 43, 253-261.
  • Ferguson C. M., Lewis G. C., Hanks C. B., Parsons D. M. J., Asteraki E. J., 1989. Incidence and severity of damage by slugs and snails to leaves of twelve white clover cultivars. Tests Agrochemicals and Cultivars No 10. Ann. Appl. Biol. 114, 138-139.
  • Fletcher M. R., Hunter K., Barnet E. A., 1994. Pesticide poisoning of animals. Ministry of Agriculture Fishing and Food (MAFF). Public., London, UK.
  • Frank T., Barone M., 1999. Short-term field study on weeds reducing slug feeding on oilseed rape. Zeitsch. Pflanz. Pflanz. 106, 534-538.
  • Glen D. M., Moens R., 2002. Agriolimacidae, Arionidae and Milacidae as pests in West European cereals. [W]: Molluscs as Crop Pests. Barker G. M. (red.). Landcare Res. Ham. New Zealand, CABI Publish, 271-300.
  • Glen D. M., Spaull A. M., Mowat D. J., Green D. B., Jackson A. W., 1993. Crop monitoring to assess the risk of slug damage to winter wheat in the United Kingdom. Ann. Appl. Biol. 122, 161-172.
  • Godan D., 1983. Pest Slugs and Snails: Biology and Control. Springer-Verlag. Berlin, Germany.
  • Grewal S. K., Grewal P. S., Hammond R. B., 2003. Susceptibility of north American native and non-native slugs (Mollusca: Gastropoda) to Phasmarhabditis hermaphrodita (Nematoda: Rhabditidae). Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 13, 119-125.
  • Grimm B., 2002. Effect of the nematode Phasmarhabditis hermaphrodita on young stages of the pest slug Arion lusitanicus. J. Moll. Stud. 68, 25-28.
  • Kozłowski J., 2000. Reproduction of Arion lusitanicus Mabille, 1868 (Gastropoda: Pulmonata: Arionidae) introduced in Poland. Folia Malacol. 8, 87-94.
  • Kozłowski J., 2010. Ślimaki nagie w uprawach. Klucz do identyfikacji. Metody zwalczania. Inst. Ochr. Roślin, PIB, Poznań.
  • Kozłowski J., 2012. The significance of alien and invasive slug species for plant communities in agrocenoses. J. Plant Protect. Res. 52, 67-76.
  • Kozłowski J., Jaskulska M., 2014. The effect of grazing by the slug Arion vulgaris, Arion rufus and Deroceras reticulatum (Gastropoda: Pulmonata: Stylommatophora) on extent of damage to leguminous plants and other small-area crops. J. Plant Protect. Res. 54, 258-266.
  • Kozłowski J., Kałuski T., Jaskulska M., Kozłowska M., 2009. Analiza skuteczności zaprawiania nasion rzepaku w ochronie przed ślimakami (Pulmonata: Arionidae). Prog. Plant Protection/ Postępy Ochr. Roślin 49, 1705-1708.
  • Kozłowski J., Jaskulska M., Kozłowska M., 2014. Evaluation of the effectiveness of iron phosphate and parasitic nematode Phasmarhabditis hermaphrodita in reducing plant damage caused by the slug Arion vulgaris Moquin-Tandon, 1885. Folia Malacol. 22, 293-300.
  • Meredith R. H., 2003. Slug pellets - risks and benefits in perspective. [W]: Slug and Snails Agricultural, Veterinary and Environmental Perspectives. Dussart G. B. J. (red.). British Crop Prot. Conf., Symp. Proc. No. 88, 2003, Canterbury, UK, 235-242.
  • Moens R., Glen D. M., 2002. Agriolimacidae, Arionidae and Milacidae as pests in West European oilseed rape. [W]: Molluscs as Crop Pests. Barker G. M. (red.). Landcare Res. Ham. New Zealand, CABI Publish., 301-314.
  • Nichols C. J., 2014. Implications of not controlling slugs in oilseed rape and wheat in the UK. Res. Rev. No. 79, HGCA, AHDB, www.ahdb.org.uk/projects/documents/AHDBResearchReview-Slugs.pdf
  • Pinder L. C. V., 1974. The ecology of slugs in potato crops, with special reference to the differential susceptibility of potato cultivars to slug damage. J. Appl. Ecol. 11, 439-452.
  • Port R, Ester A., 2002. Gastropods as pests in vegetables and ornamental crops in Western Europe. [W]: Molluscs as Crop Pests. Barker G. M. (red.). Landcare Res. Ham. New Zealand, CABI Publish., 337-352.
  • Rae R. G., Robertson J. F., Wilson M. J., 2009. Optimization of biological (Phasmarhabditis hermaphrodita) and chemical (iron phosphate and metaldehyde) slug control. Crop Prot. 28, 765-773.
  • Simms L. C., Mullins C. E., Wilson M. J., 2002. Seed dressings to control slug damage in oilseed rape. Pest Manag. Sci. 58, 687-694.
  • South A., 1992. Terrestrial Slugs: Biology, Ecology, and Control. Chapman and Hall, London.
  • Speiser B., Kistler C., 2002. Field test with a molluscicide containing iron phosphate. Crop Prot. 21, 389-394.
  • Symondson W. O. C., Glen D. M., Langdon C. J., Wiltshire C. W., Lyddell J. E., 1996. Effects of cultivation techniques and methods of straw disposal on predation by Pterostichus melanarius (Coleoptera:Carabidae) upon slugs (Gastropoda: Pulmonata) in an arable field. J. Appl. Ecol. 33, 741-753.
  • Wiktor A., 2004. Ślimaki Lądowe Polski. Mantis, Olsztyn.
  • Wilson M. J., Glen D. M., George S. K., 1993. The rhabditid nematode Phasmarhabditis hermaphrodita as a potential biological control agent for slugs. Biocont. Sci. Technol. 3, 503-511.
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.bwnjournal-article-ksv66p231kz
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.