Advertisement

Effects of cadmium on two biocontrol insects and their host weeds

  • P. C. QuimbyJr.
  • K. E. Frick
  • R. D. Wauchope
  • S. H. Kay
Article

Conclusion

Cd added to the nutrient solution at 1 mg·L−1 significantly reduced growth of alligatorweed and purple nutsedge. Both plant species increased about threefold in Cd content when exposed to the added Cd over the 3 to 4 wk periods. A significant difference existed between the two insect species in their response to Cd; the alligatorweed flea beetle was very sensitive to Cd levels in the alligatorweed and the nutsedge moth was virtually unaffected by the levels in the purple nutsedge and diet. These results implied that the alligatorweed/alligatorweed flea beetle system might serve as a sensitive bioassay for heavy metal pollution in sewage effluent, particularly since alligatorweed has been considered as a potential biological filter for effluent (Wolvertonet al. 1975). Other trace elements may be involved in the biogeography of plants and insects and would merit investigation.

Keywords

Heavy Metal Waste Water Plant Species Cadmium Sewage 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. BYERS, R. A. and K. E. ZEIDERS: J. Environ. Qual.5, 205 (1976).Google Scholar
  2. FRICK, K. E.: p. 204 In F. G. Maxwell, and F. A. Harris (eds.), “Proceedings of the Summer Institute on Biological Control of Plant Insects and Diseases.” University Press of Mississippi, Jackson (1974).Google Scholar
  3. FRICK, K. E. and C. GARCIA, JR.: Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am.68, 7 (1975).Google Scholar
  4. FRICK, K. E. and P. C. QUIMBY, JR.: Weed Sci.25, 13 (1977).Google Scholar
  5. GARCIA, C., JR. and K. E. FRICK: Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am.68, 15 (1975).Google Scholar
  6. HOLM, L. G., D. L. PLUCKNETT, J. V. PANCHO, and J. P. HERBERGER: The World's Worst Weeds, Distribution and Biology, 1st ed. Honolulu, The University Press of Hawaii (1977).Google Scholar
  7. HURD-KARRER, A. M. and F. W. POOS: Science84, 252 (1936).Google Scholar
  8. LELAND, H. V., E. D. COPENHAVER, and L. S. CORRILL: J. WPCF46, 1452 (1974).Google Scholar
  9. MADDOX, D. M. and R. M. MCCREADY: Entomophaga20, 409 (1975).Google Scholar
  10. MADDOX, D. M. and M. RHYNE: Environ. Entomol.4, 682 (1975).Google Scholar
  11. MILLER, W. E.: Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am.70, 253 (1977).Google Scholar
  12. QUIMBY, P. C., JR. and S. H. KAY: Physiol. Plant.40, 163 (1977).Google Scholar
  13. PAGE, A. L., F. T. BINGHAM, and C. NELSON: J. Environ. Qual.1, 288 (1972).Google Scholar
  14. SPENCER, N. R. and J. R. COULSON: Aquatic Bot.2, 177 (1976).Google Scholar
  15. TURNER, M. A.:J. Environ. Quality2, 118 (1973).Google Scholar
  16. WILLIAMS, C. H. and D. J. DAVID: Soil Sci.121, 86 (1976).Google Scholar
  17. WOLVERTON, B. C., R. C. MCDONALD, and J. GORDON: Water Hyacinths and Alligatorweed for Final Filtration of Sewage. NASA Technical Memorandum No. TM-X-72724, Natl. Space Tech. Lab., Bay St. Louis, Mississippi, 8 pp. (1975).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. C. QuimbyJr.
    • 1
  • K. E. Frick
    • 1
  • R. D. Wauchope
    • 1
  • S. H. Kay
    • 1
  1. 1.Southern Weed Science Laboratory, Science and Education AdministrationU. S. Department of AgricultureStoneville

Personalised recommendations