<%BANNER%>

UFIR



LAND USE, SPATIAL ECOLOGY AND CONTROL OF THE ANDEAN POTATO WEEVIL IN THE CENTRAL ANDES OF PERU
CITATION PDF VIEWER
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/IR00000745/00001
 Material Information
Title: LAND USE, SPATIAL ECOLOGY AND CONTROL OF THE ANDEAN POTATO WEEVIL IN THE CENTRAL ANDES OF PERU
Physical Description: Dissertation
Creator: ALFREDO ARTURO RIOS
 Notes
Acquisition: Collected for University of Florida's Institutional Repository by the UFIR Self-Submittal tool. Submitted by Peter E. Hildebrand.
Publication Status: Unpublished
 Record Information
Source Institution: University of Florida Institutional Repository
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management:
This item is licensed with the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commerical License. This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon this work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge the author and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.
System ID: IR00000745:00001

Downloads

This item is only available as the following downloads:

alfredo_dissertation ( PDF )


Full Text

PAGE 7

tikpa barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 8

cutilpo tikpa barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 12

cutilpo tikpa cutilpo

PAGE 13

tikpa cutilpo tikpa cutilpo

PAGE 14

tikpa cutilpo tikpa cutilpo tikpa

PAGE 15

cutilpo tikpa tikpa tikpa barbecho cutilpo barbecho cutilpo barbech o cutilpo

PAGE 18

Background Leptinotarsa decemlineata Alternaria

PAGE 19

Alternaria solani Globodera spp. Epitrix tuberis Premnotrypes

PAGE 20

The Problematic Situation

PAGE 21

Objectives and Research Questions

PAGE 22

Study Sites

PAGE 23

Methodology and Theoretical Frameworks

PAGE 24

Relevance

PAGE 27

Introduction encomienda reducciones Ayllus

PAGE 28

Epitrix tuberis Alternaria solani

PAGE 29

Phytophthora infestans Globodera spp Leptinotarsa decemlineata

PAGE 30

The Mantaro Valley

PAGE 31

Solanum

PAGE 32

Oxalis tuberosa Ullucus tuberosus Tropaeolum tuberosum Study Site Methodology

PAGE 34

Results Informal E thnographic C onversations History of the community of Aymar and its former cropping practices tikpa

PAGE 35

San Jose de Aymar current cropping s ystem

PAGE 36

Vicia faba Lupinus Chenopodium quinoa Lepidium meyenii

PAGE 38

primera segunda segunda tercera cuarta chu o chu o Chuo chuoChuo

PAGE 39

Farmers Focus Group Results P otato in tikpa volteo champas champas tikpa Tikpa Potato in barbecho terroneo

PAGE 40

tikpa Potato in cutilpo Cutilpo kutishi barbecho Other Andean tubers kalpeo

PAGE 41

Adioristidius Oats huapal Labor requirements by crop barbecho cutilpo tikpa barbecho Farmers Survey Results Livestock holdings

PAGE 42

Aymars cropping pattern tikpa tikpa barbecho cutilpobarbecho cutilpo Dates of planting and harvest tikpa cutilpo barbecho cutilpo barbecho cutilpo tikpa barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 43

Pota to yields in rel ation to potato type and type of planting and non potato tuber yields tikpa barbecho cutilpo tikpa barbecho cutilpo Fertilizer and pesticide use tikpa cutilpo tikpa barbecho tikpa cutilpo

PAGE 44

Potato weevil damage by potato type and type of planting tikpa barbecho barbecho cu tilpo Reason for planting in cutilpo cutilpo Factors increasing /decreasing yields for potato seeded in tikpa, barbecho, and cutilpo cutilpo cutilpo tikpa barbecho cutilpo Phytophthora infestans

PAGE 45

Phoma Alternaria so lani cutilpo Phoma Reasons for harvesting late Discussion tikpa barbecho cutilpo barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 46

cutilpo cutilpo cutilpo cutilpo cutilpo cutilpo

PAGE 47

cutilpo cutilpo barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 50

tikpa barbecho cutilpo barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 52

tikpa barbe cho cutilpo

PAGE 54

tikpa barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 56

tikpa barbecho cutilpo barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 58

tikpa barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 59

tikpa barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 60

tikpa barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 61

cutilpo

PAGE 62

Introduction Phyrdenus Premnotrypes, Rhigopsidius Premnotrypes

PAGE 63

Solanum Harpalus turmalinus Metius Hylitus

PAGE 65

Ma terials and Methods Study Sites tikpa cutilpo Avena sativa Ullucus tuberosus tikpa

PAGE 66

Field Sampling for Weevils tikpa cutilpo Dete rmination of the Sampling Unit Size and Depth tikpa

PAGE 68

tikpa cutilpo Determination of the Number of Sampling Units Needed per Field.

PAGE 69

s x) baxs a b IT TIStStbaxs s a) +b log( x)+St log(x)+St2 log(x) +I log(x)+ T log(x) I T log(x) b xaxDtn t

PAGE 70

Comparison of Weevil Overw intering Populations among Different Types of Potato Fields tikpa tikpa Relationship between the Weevil Infestation Level and Harvest Times of Potato Fields at Different Cropping Intensit ies

PAGE 71

Comparison of Weevil Overw intering Sources in Different Types of Fields

PAGE 72

Results Determinati on of the Sampling Unit Size and Depth tikpa cutilpo

PAGE 73

Determination of the Number of Sampling Units Needed per Field. a b C omparison between Weevil Over w intering Populations in Different Types of Potato Fields

PAGE 74

C omparison of Weevil Over w intering Sources in Different Types of Fields tikpa chuo chuo

PAGE 75

Relationship between the Infestation Level and Harvest Times of Potato Fields with Different Cropping Intensities cutilpo tikpa cutilp otikpa Discussion tikpa tikpa Tikpa

PAGE 76

b Premontrypes latithorax tikpa cutilpo

PAGE 77

cutilpo cutilpo cutilpo

PAGE 80

tikpa cutilpo

PAGE 81

tikpa cutilpo

PAGE 82

tikpa cutilpo

PAGE 87

Introduction

PAGE 88

Necrophorus humator

PAGE 90

Materials and Methods Weevil Ranging and Host Plant Location Site of release

PAGE 91

Processing of the study weevils

PAGE 92

Weather monitoring Weevil tracking

PAGE 93

Ranging and perceptual range model

PAGE 94

H(r) log | |r| log (r) r

PAGE 97

Movement Simulation under different weather conditions

PAGE 98

Tuberization Architecture and Larval Colonization Tuber depth and infestation potential Solanum tuberosum) Horizontal tuber distance and infestation potential

PAGE 99

Tuber size and infestati on potential Weevil infestation at the plot level Solanum tuberosum) Solanum goniocalyx barbecho

PAGE 101

Results Weevil Ranging and Host Plant Location Environmental conditions Movement model selection and posterior simulation checks

PAGE 103

Vel = wxp+wxn+wyp+wyn+(wxp)2+(wxn)2+ (wyp)2+(wyn)2123+wxn2+wyp2+wxp3+wyp3+ wyn3 w p wxp wy 123 Movement Simulation under Different Weather Conditions

PAGE 104

Tuberization Architecture and Larval Colonization Tuber I nfestation Plot infestation Descriptive results

PAGE 105

Field plot tuber architecture model results

PAGE 106

Discussion

PAGE 111

radius

PAGE 112

N S W E

PAGE 113

-100 0 100 200 300 -100 0 100 200 x y North R VP PF

PAGE 114

-100 0 50 150 250 -100 0 100 200 300 1 -100 0 50 150 250 -100 0 100 200 300 2 -100 0 50 150 250 -100 0 100 200 300 3 -100 0 50 150 250 -100 0 100 200 300 4 -100 0 50 150 250 -100 0 100 200 300 5 -100 0 50 150 250 -100 0 100 200 300 6 -100 0 50 150 250 -100 0 100 200 300 7 -100 0 50 150 250 -100 0 100 200 300 8 -100 0 50 150 250 -100 0 100 200 300 9 -100 0 50 150 250 -100 0 100 200 300 10 -100 0 50 150 250 -100 0 100 200 300 11 -100 0 50 150 250 -100 0 100 200 300 12 -100 0 100 200 300 13

PAGE 115

2 4 6 8 10 12 85 90 95 day Displacement in x direction simulated observed prediction 95% CI

PAGE 117

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 300 day Net squared displacement (m^2)

PAGE 118

Distance in meters from origin Percent of Total 0 2 4 6 8 10 50 100 150 200 Distance in meters from origin Percent of Total 0 5 10 50 100 150 200

PAGE 119

Distance in meters from origin Percent of Total 0 2 4 6 8 10 50 100 150 200

PAGE 121

100 200 300 400 50 100 150 200 250 300 Plot distance in the x Plot distance in the y dir 100 200 300 400 50 100 150 200 250 300 Plot distance in the x Plot distance in the y dir 100 200 300 400 50 100 150 200 250 300 Plot distance in t Plot distance in the y dir 100 200 300 400 50 100 150 200 250 300 35 Plot distance in the x Plot distance in the y dire 100 200 300 400 50 100 150 200 250 300 Plot distance in the x Plot distance in the y dire 100 200 300 400 50 100 150 200 250 300 35 Plot distance in the x Plot distance in the y dire

PAGE 124

12, 1 2 3 2 d wind 2 3 d wind 3 +wind +wind 2 1 2 + 3 + 1 d wind 1 2 d wind 2 3 d wind 3 +wind +wind 2 1 2 + 3 1 d wind 1 2 dwind 2 3 d wind 3 +wind 1 2 1 d wind 1 2 dwind 2 +wind+wind 2 1 2 + 3 1 d wind 1 2 dwind 2 +wind+wind 2 1 2 + 3 + 1 d wind 1 3 d wind 3 +wind +wind 2 2 + 3 2 d wind 2 3 d wind 3 +wind +wind 2 1 2 + 3 + 1 d wind 1 2 d wind 2 3 d wind 3 1 3 1 d wind 1 3 d wind 3 +wind+wind 2

PAGE 125

Downwind 1 Southward wind Northward wind Westward wind Eastward wind (Southward wind ) 2 (Northward wind ) 2 (Westward wind ) 2 (Eastward wind ) 2 1 2 3 1 Downwind 1 2 Northward wind 2 Westward wind 3 Eastward wind 3 Southward wind 3 Northward wind

PAGE 126

Variable X stem X field (X field ) 2 Depth N of tubers

PAGE 127

Introduction

PAGE 128

Livelihood Systems Framework and Its Relation to Pest Management

PAGE 130

Assessing Potential for the Adoption of Ecologically -Based Alternatives

PAGE 131

Study Site tikpa barbecho cutilpo Methods Farmer Surveys and Informant Focus Groups

PAGE 132

Perception of Benefits and Problems of Three Ecologically-Based Alternative Technologies kalpeo Ethnographic Linear Program Model

PAGE 133

Max (or min): P= CjXj (j = 1. .n) Subject to: AijXj <= Rj (i = 1. .m) Xi >= 0 Cj Xj Aij j i Family labor use and expenses

PAGE 135

tikpa barbecho cutilpo cutilpo barbecho Potato uses primera segunda segunda tercera cuarta Chuo Pest and disease management barbecho cutilpotikpa

PAGE 136

Land use

PAGE 137

Family Life Cycle Simulations, Initial Conditions and Model Description

PAGE 138

Sensitivity Analysis of Pest Management Adoption Farmer Survey Results Perceptions of Benefits and Problems of Three EBA Practices

PAGE 139

kalpeo

PAGE 140

Results of the Ethnographic Linear Program Multiyear household simulation cutilpo tikpa

PAGE 141

Ecological based alternatives, costs, and, labor tikpa tikpa tikpa cultilpo barbecho Ecologically based alternatives, percent damage, and, cost

PAGE 142

cutilpo cutilpo tikpa Barbecho Barbecho cutilpo tikpa barbecho Ecologically based alternatives, percent damage, and, labor cutilpo barbecho

PAGE 143

Ecologically based alternatives, percent damage, and, potato consumption cuarta, cuarta Discussion

PAGE 145

cuarta tikpa cutilpo tikpa tikpa cut ilpo cuarta cutilpo cutilpo t ikpa cutilpo tikpa cutilpo tikpa

PAGE 156

Native-Tikpa crop protection year 15 LaborCost 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Native-Tikpa crop protection year 24 LaborCost 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Native-Tikpa crop protection year 34 LaborCost 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 tikpa

PAGE 157

Improved-Cutilpo crop protection yea LaborCost 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Improved-Cutilpo crop protection yea LaborCost 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Improved-Cutilpo crop protection yea LaborCost 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 cutilpo

PAGE 158

Native-Tikpa crop protection year 15 Proportion damageCost 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Native-Tikpa crop protection year 24 Proportion damageCost 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Native-Tikpa crop protection year 34 Proportion damageCost 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 tikpa

PAGE 159

Improved-Cutilpo crop protection yea Proportion damageCost 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Improved-Cutilpo crop protection yea Proportion damageCost 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Improved-Cutilpo crop protection yea Proportion damageCost 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 cutilpo

PAGE 160

Native-Tikpa crop protection year 15 Proportion damageLabor 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Native-Tikpa crop protection year 24 Proportion damageLabor 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Native-Tikpa crop protection year 34 Proportion damageLabor 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 tikpa

PAGE 161

Improved-Cutilpo crop protection yea Proportion damageLabor 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Improved-Cutilpo crop protection yea Proportion damageLabor 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Improved-Cutilpo crop potection yea Percent damageLabor 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 cutilpo

PAGE 163

tikpa

PAGE 164

tikpa

PAGE 165

tikpa

PAGE 166

barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 167

barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 168

barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 171

cutilpo cutilpo cutilpo cutilpo cutilpo cutilpo t ikpa barbecho

PAGE 172

cutilpo cutilpo

PAGE 173

tikpa tikpa cutilpo cutilpo

PAGE 174

cutilpo cutilpo

PAGE 177

cuarta

PAGE 179

Introducci n PARTE 1. Datos demogrf icos

PAGE 180

PARTE 2. Produccin de animales PARTE 3. Produccin fertilizacin y destino de los cultivos promedio total Apuntar la cantidad sembrada y el mes por ejemplo: AGO (1) en agosto se sembro un saco. tikpa barbecho cutilpo tikpa barbecho

PAGE 181

cuti lpo barbecho cutilpo tikpa barbecho cutilpo barbecc ho cutilpo

PAGE 182

tikpa barbecho cutilpo barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 183

total shiri tikpa shiri barbecho cutilpo shiri ti kpa barbecho cutilpo barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 184

shiri

PAGE 185

Barbecho Tikpa Cutilpo

PAGE 186

Practicas de Manejo Integrado de Plagas Leer: plantas cebo poner plantas fumigadas bajo yute en sus campos antes de la siembra

PAGE 187

tikpa barbecho cutilpo barbecho cutilpo sin usar insecticida tikpa barbecho cutilpo barbecho cutilpo usando insecticidas tikpa barbecho cutilpo barbecho cutilpo Barreras plsticas poner en el permetro barreras de plstico para evitar que el gorgojo llegue al campo.

PAGE 188

tikpa barbecho cutilpo barbecho sin usar insecticida tikpa barbecho cutilpo barbecho cutilpo usando insecticidas tikpa/barbecho cutilpo barbecho kaillpar

PAGE 189

Remocin de suelo arar el campo que ya ha sido sembrado el ao anterior con yunta o tractor o chakitacclla para volver a sembrar (cutilpo) sin usar insecticida cutilpo cutilpo usando insecticidas cutilpo cutilpo

PAGE 190

Shiri tikpa barbech cutilpo barbecho cutilpo

PAGE 191

Shiri cutilpo tikpa cutilpo barbecho cutilpo barbecho

PAGE 193

Alcazar, J. 1976. Premnotrypes suturicallus Alcazar, J. 1995.In Alcazar, J. 1997.Epitrix Alcazar, J., and F. Cisneros. 1999. Premnotrypes Altieri, A. M., and C. Nicholls. 2004. In Altieri, M. A. 1995. Altieri, M. A., and C. I. Nichol. 1999. In Ambrogi, B. G., D. M. Vidal, P. H. G. Zarbin, and G. H. Rosado-Neto. 2009. Andow, D. A. 1992. Ostrinia nubialis Antezana, I., A. Fabian, S. Freund, E. Gehrke, G. Glimmann, and S. Seher. 2005. Apple, J. L. 1972. Arica, D., J. Kroschel, G. Forbes, and K. Saint Pere. 2006.

PAGE 194

Bajwa, W. I., and M. Kogan. 2003. In Beets, W. 1990. Begon, M., J. Harper, and C. Twosend. 1990. Bentle y, J., and K. Andrews. 1996. Bernard, H. R. 2002. Bierzychudek, P., K. A. Warner, A. McHugh, and L. Thomas. 2009. Blanco, O. 1994. In Boiteau, G., J. D. Picka, and J. Watmough. 2008. Boiteau, G., F. Meloche, C. Vincent, and T. C. Leskey. 2009. Bolker, B. M., M. E. Brooks, C. J. Clark, S. W. Geange, J. R. Poulsen, M. H. H. Stevens, and J. S. S. White. 2009. Botrell, D. G. 1983. Brillinger, D. R. 2007. Brillinger, D. R., H. K. Preisler, A. A. Ager, J. G. Kie, and B. S. Stewart. 2002. Caballero, J. M. 1983. In

PAGE 195

Carvajal, C. P. 1992. Premnotrypes latithorax Cataln, W., W. Villano, and A. Inquiltupa. 19 93. In Chavez, C. R. 1996. Premnotrypes sp. Conservation_International. 2009. Coronado, G. 2004. Cotlear, D. 1989. Crissman, C. C., Espinosa, C. E. H. Ducrot, D. C. Cole, and F. Carpio. 1998. In Dacke, M., M. J. Byrne, C. H. Scholtz, and E. J. Warrant. 2004. Davies, F. T., C. M. Caldero, Z. Huaman, and R. Gomez. 2005. Dollfus, O. 1982. Durand, J. A. 2001. Premnotrypes latithorax In Dusenbery, D. B. 1989a. Dusenbery, D. B. 1989b. Dusenbery, D. B. 1992.

PAGE 196

Eckholm, E. P. 1975. Ellis, F. 1993. Ellis, F. 2000. Fahrig, L. 2007. Flynn, D. F. B., M. Gogol-Prokurat, T. Nogeire, N. Molinari, B. T. Richers, B. B. Lin, N. Simpson, M. M. Mayfield, and F. DeClerck. 2009. Franco, E., and D. E. Horton. 1979. Fry, W. E. 1994. In Fujimoto, A. 2005. Fujimoto, A., I. Miyaura, and R. Ugas. 2004. Gelman, A., and J. Hill. 2007. Gibbs, K. E., R. L. Mackey, and D. J. Currie. 2009. Harrel, F. 2001. Hayek, L.-A. C., and M. A. Buzas. 1997. Heinzel, H. G., and H. Bhm. 1989. Hildebrand, P., N. Breuer, V. Cabrera, and A. Sullivan. 2003.

PAGE 197

Hildebrand, P. E., and A. J. Sullivan. 2001. Holland, J. M., and M. L. Luff. 2000. Horton, D. E. 1987. Jander, R. 1975. Johnson, S. N., and P. J. Gregory. 2006. Kabaluk, J. T., and R. S. Vernon. 2000. Epitrix tuberis Karandinos, M. G. 1976. Kaya, B., P. E. Hildebrand, and P. K. R. Nair. 2000. Kervyn, B. 1996. In Kjaerpedersen, C. 1992. Krebs, C. J. 1999. Kroschel, J., J. Alcazar, and P. Poma. 2009. Kuhne, M. 2007. Lima, S. L., and P. A. Zollner. 1996. Martnez, A., E. Nez, Y. Silva, K. Takahashi, G. Trasmonte, K. Mosquera, and P. Lagos. 2006.

PAGE 198

Mayer, E. 1979. Mayer, E. 1992. Mayer, E. 2002. Meir, C., and S. Williamson. 2005. In MINAG. 2003. Morante, M. C., V. H. Ticona, W. C. Plata, and I. T. Tordoya. 2007. NietoCabrera, C., C. Francis, C. Caicedo, P. F. Gutierrez, and M. Rivera. 1997. Norman, D. W. 1983.In Norton, G. 2005. In Norton, G. A., and J. D. Mumford. 1984. Okubo, A., and P. Kareiva. 2001. In Olanya O. M., C. W. Honeycutt, R. P. Larkin, T. S. Griffin, Z. Q. He, and J. M. Halloran. 2009. Orlove, B., G. R., and P. Morlon. 1996.In Orr, A., and J. M. Ritchie. 2003.

PAGE 199

Ortiz, O. 1997. Ortiz, O., and S. Swinton. 1999. Ortiz, O., J. Alcazar, W. Catalan, W. Villano, V. Cerna, H. Fano, and T. S. Walker. 1996. Oswald, A., S. De Haan, J. Sanchez, and R. Ccanto. 2009. Palis, F., S. Morin, and M. Hossain. 2002. Pelletier, Y., and R. Caissie. 2001. Pienkowski, R., and Z. Golik. 1969. Pimentel, D ., H. Acquay, M. Biltonen, P. Rice, M. Silva, J. Nelson, V. Lipner, S. Giordano, A. Horowitz, and M. Damore. 1992. Pinheiro, J., and D. Bates. 2000. PinstrupAndersen, P., and R. Pandya -Lorch. 1998. Pluke, R. W. 2004. Preisler, H. K., A. A. Ager, B. K. Johnson, and J. G. Kie. 2004. Pretty, J. N. 2005.In

PAGE 200

Putter, C. 1987. Ravnborg, H. M., M. P. Guerrero, and O. Westermann. 2002. In Roling, N., and E. van de Fliert. 1994. Routledge, R. D., and T. B. Swartz. 1991. Sabelis, M. W., and P. Schippers. 1984. Schooley, R. L., and J. A. Wiens. 2003. Schooley, R. L., and J. A. Wiens. 2004. Schoonhoven, L., T. Jermy, and J. van Loon. 1998. Schultz, T. W. 1964. Scott, G. J. 1985. Sexson, D. L., and J. A. Wyman. 2005. Silva, Y., K. Takahashi, N. Cruz, G. Trasmonte, Kobi Mosquera, E. Nickl, R. Chavez, B. Segura, and P. Lagos. 2006. Sotelo, J. M. 1996. Sullivan, A. 2000. Taylor, L. R. 1961.

PAGE 201

Thangata, P. H., P. E. Hildebrand, and F. Kwesigal. 2007. Thorner, D. 1986. In Thurston, H. D. 1994. In Turchin, P. 1998. Vacha, M., D. Drstkova, and T. Puzova. 2008. Valdivia, C. 2004. Van Tilborg, M., J. N. C. Van Der Pers, P. Roessingh, and M. W. Sabelis. 2003. Villano, W. V. 1994.Premnotrypes latithorax Visser, J. H. 1986. Walters, R. J., M. Hassall, M. G. Telfer, G. M. Hewitt, and J. P. Palutikof. 2006. Weisz, R., Z. Smilowitz, and B. Christ. 1994. Wiegers, E. S., R. J. Hijmans, D. Herve, and L. O. Fresco. 1999. Wilson, L. T. 1983.

PAGE 202

Yabar, E. 1994. Zimmerer, K. S. 2002. Zollner, P. A., and S. L. Lima. 1999. Zuur, A. F., E. N. Ieno, A. A. Savelive, N. W. Walker, and G. M. Smith. 2009.