Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Injuries to plants caused by insect toxins

  • Published:
The Botanical Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Literature Cited

  1. Andrews, E. A. A note on the relation between the tea mosquito (Helopeltis theivora) and the soil. Quart. Jour. Sci. Dep. Ind. Tea Assoc., Calcutta4: 31–35. 1914.

    Google Scholar 

  2. —. A preliminary note on the present state of the mosquito-blight enquiry. Quart. Jour. Sci. Dep. Ind. Tea Assoc., Calcutta4: 119–129. 1919.

    Google Scholar 

  3. -. Some notes on attempts to produce immunity from insect attack on tea. Rept. Proc. 4th Ent. Meet., Pusa, Feb. 1921, Calcutta, pp. 56–59.

  4. -. Factors affecting the control of the tea mosquito bug (Helopeltis theivora Waterh.). Indian Tea Assoc. 1923. vi + 260 pp., London.

  5. Annand, P. N. Tumors in kale. Science, N.S.,65: 553–554. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Anstead, R. D., And Ballard, E. Mosquito blight of tea. Planters’ Chron., Coimbatore17: 443–447; 453–455. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Baker, A. C. Feeding punctures of insects. Jour. Econ. Ent.15: 312. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Balch, R. E. Dreyfusia piceae (Ratz.) and its relation to “gout disease” in Balsam fir. 62nd Ann. Rep. Ent. Soc. Ontario 1931, pp. 61–65. 1932.

  9. Ball, E. D. Leaf burn of the potato and its relation to the potato leafhopper. Science48: 194. 1918.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. —. The potato leafhopper and its relation to the hopperburn. Jour. Econ. Ent.12: 149–155. 1919.

    Google Scholar 

  11. —,And Fenton, F. A. What per cent. of tipburn is caused by the potato leafhopper? Jour. Econ. Ent.13: 218–221. 1920.

    Google Scholar 

  12. —,Mann, C. E. T., And Staniland, L. N. Strawberry investigations at Long Ashton. Jour. Ministry Agr.34: 497–510; 627–641. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Bernard, C. De snoeimethode van Tjiboengoer. De bestrijding vanHelopeltis op Tjiboengoer. Meded. Proefst. Thee81: 32–35. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Beyer, A. H. Experiments on the biology and tipburn disease of the bean leafhopper with methods of control (Empoasca mali Le Baron). Jour. Econ. Ent.15: 298–302. 1922.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Binkley, A. M. Transmission studies with the new psyllid-yellows disease of solanaceous plants. Science70: 615. 1929.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Blood, H. L., Richards, B. L., And Wann, F. B. Studies of psyllid yellows of tomato. Abs. in Phytopath.23: 930. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Boode, F. J. C. Van Hooff’s Om-De-Andere-Rij-Snoeisysteem tegenHelopeltis. Meded. Proefst. Thee81: 47–49. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Borden, A. D. The pear leaf blister mite as a cause of fruit-bud injury. Circ. Calif. Agr. Exp. Sta. No. 324, 8 pp. 1932.

  19. Borg, P. Entomological notes. 9 pp. typescript. Malta Dept. Agric., received March 1930.

  20. Börner, C. Neue Aufgaben der Reblausforschung. Zeits. Schädlingsbekämpfung1: 32–38. 1923.

    Google Scholar 

  21. —. Gibt es eine oder zwei Reblausarten amerikanischer Herkunft? Weinbau & Kellerwirtsch. i. pp. 245–249. 1922. Abs. Zeits. Pflanzenkr. & Gallenk. 33: 136–137. 1923.

    Google Scholar 

  22. —,And Schilder, F. A. Ueber das bisherige Auftreten der Blattgallenreblaus in Deutschland. Arb. Biol. Reichsanst. Land- u. Forstw.20: 325–346. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  23. ——. Beiträge zur Züchtung reblaus- und mehitaufester Reben. II. Das Verhalten der Blattreblaus zu den Reben des Naumburger Sortiments. Mitt. Biol. Reichsanst.49: 1–84. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Briton-Jones, H. R. Note on Mr. Edward B. Smith’s suggestions for froghopper control. Min. & Proc. of the Froghopper Inv. Comm., Trinidad & Tobago6: 147–148. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  25. —,And Staniland, L. N. The effects of strawberry aphis (Capitophorus fragariae Theo.) on the strawberry plant. Jour. Pom. Hort. Sci.6: 128–136. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Burkill, Harold J. Some notes on midge galls. Entomologist (London)63: 59–61. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Carpenter, Isetta Pearl. Study of the life history and spotting habits ofEutettix chenopodii (Homoptera, Cicadellidae). Univ. Kansas Sci. Bul.18: 457–483. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Carpenter, P. H., And Andrews, E. A. Report on tea mosquito blight. Planters’ Chron., Bangalore.14: 634–639. 1919.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Carter, Walter. The use of insecticides on pineapple plants in Hawaii. Jour. Econ. Ent.24: 1233–1242. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  30. —. Studies of populations ofPseudococcus brevipes (Ckll.) occurring on pineapple plants. Ecology13: 296–304. 1932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. —. Border plantings as guard rows in pineapple mealybug control. Jour. Econ. Ent.25: 1–8. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  32. —. The pineapple mealybug,Pseudococcus brevipes, and wilt of pineapples. Phytopath.23: 207–242. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  33. —. The spotting of pineapple leaves caused byPseudococcus brevipes, the pineapple mealybug. Phytopath.23: 243–259. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  34. —. Mealybug wilt and green spot in Jamaica and Central America. Phytopath.24: 424–426. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  35. —. The symbionts ofPseudococcus brevipes (Ckll.). Ann. Ent. Soc. America28: 60–64. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  36. —. Diesel oil emulsions as insecticides. Jour. Econ. Ent.28: 268–284. 1935.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. —. Studies on biological control ofPseudococcus brevipes (Ckll.) in Jamaica and Central America. Jour. Econ. Ent.28: 1037–1041. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  38. —. The symbionts ofPseudococcus brevipes in relation to a phytotoxic secretion of the insect. Phytopath.26: 176–183. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  39. —. Insects and plant diseases. Proc. Haw. Ent. Soc.9: 159–170. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  40. —. The toxicogenic and toxiniferous insect. Science83: 522. 1936.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. —. Importation and laboratory breeding of two chalcid parasites ofPseudococcus brevipes (Ckll.). Jour. Econ. Ent.30: 370–372. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  42. —. The toxic dose of mealybug wilt of pineapple. Phytopath.27: 971–981. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  43. -. The geographical distribution of mealybug wilt with notes on some other insect pests of pineapple. (In press.)

  44. —,And Schmidt, Carl T. Mass action phenomena in mealybug wilt. Ann. Ent. Soc. America28: 396–403. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Childs, L. The relation of woolly apple aphis to perennial canker infection with other notes on the disease. Bull. Oregon Agr. Exp. Sta. 243, 31 pp. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Cohen-Stuart, C. P. Iets over den steek vanHelopeltis. Meded. Proefst. Thee81: 24–25. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Cook, M. T. The origin and structure of plant galls. Science, N.S.57: 6–14. 1923.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Cotterell, G. S. Pests of cacao in the Gold Coast. Proc. 1st. W. Afr. Agr. Conf. Ibadan, Nigeria, pp. 98–112. 1927.

  49. Daniels, L. B. The tomato psyllid and the control of psyllid yellows of potatoes. Colo. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 410, 18 pp. 1934.

  50. De Jong, J.K. De invloed van het klimaat op.Helopeltis. I. De invloed van de relatieve vochtigheid op deHelopeltis in theedistricten van Sumatra’s Oostkust. Arch. Theecult. Ned.-Ind. 1931.3: 135–142. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  51. —.Helopeltis in cacaotuinen. Bergcultures8: 658–667. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  52. —. De Voedselopname vanHelopeltis. Bergcultures9: 292–294. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  53. —. Enkele resultaten betreffende de gehouden enquête overHelopeltis en Redrust. Bergcultures9: 318–327. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  54. DeLong, D. M. The rôle of Bordeaux mixture as a leafhopper insecticide. Jour. Econ. Ent.22: 345–353. 1929.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. —. Biological studies on the leafhopperEmpoasca fabae as a bean pest. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bul. 618, pp. 1–60. 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  56. —,Reid, W. J., And Darley, M. M. The toxicity of copper to the potato leafhopper. Jour. Econ. Ent.23: 390–394. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Dieuzeide, R. Contribution à l’étude des néoplasmes végétaux. Le rôle des pucerons en phytopathologie. Actes Soc. Linnéenne Bordeaux81: 1–241. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Docters van Leeuwen-Reijnvaan, J. (Mrs.), and Docters van Leeuwen, W. M. The Zoocecidia of the Netherlands East Indies. ’s Lands Plantentuin: Buitenzorg 1926. 601 p.

  59. ——. Über ein von Gynaikothrips devriesii Karny aus einer Gallmücken-Galle gebildetes Thysanoptero-Cecidium. Rec. Trav. Bot. Neèr.25a: 99–114. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Dudley, J. E. Control of the potato leafhopper (Empoasca mali Le B.) and prevention of “hopperburn.” Jour. Econ. Ent.13: 408–415. 1920.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Egloffstein, H. A. C. F. E., von und zu. Helopeltis-Bestrijding op de Onderneming Tjikopo-Zuid. Meded. Proefst. voor Thee, Buitenzorg59: 39–50. 1918.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Essig, E. O. The blackberry mite, the cause of redberry disease of the Himalaya blackberry, and its control. Cal. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 399, 10 pp. 1925.

  63. Ewing, K. P. Effects on the cotton plant of the feeding of certain Hemiptera of the Family Miridae. Jour. Econ. Ent.22: 761–765. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  64. —,And McGarr, R. L. The effect of certain Homopterous insects as compared with three common mirids upon the growth and fruiting of cotton plants. Jour. Econ. Ent.26: 943–953. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Eyer, J. R. The influence of leafhopper control on potato fields. Jour. Econ. Ent.14: 69–71. 1921.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. —. Preliminary note on the etiology of potato tipburn. Science, N.S.55: 180–181. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  67. —. Notes on the etiology and specificity of the potato tipburn produced byEmpoasca mali Le Baron. Phytopath.12: 181–184. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  68. —. Physiology of psyllid yellows of potatoes. Jour. Eicon. Ent.30: 891–898. 1937.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. —,And Crawford, R. F. Observations on the feeding habits of the potato psyllid (Paratrioza cockerelli Sulc.) and the pathological history of the “psyllid yellows” which it produces. Jour. Econ. Ent.26: 846–850. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Faes, H., Staehelin, M., And Bovey, P. La lutte contre les parasites de la vigne, champignons et insectes, en 1930 et 1931. Ann. Agr. Suisse33: 1–34. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Felt, E. P. The relations of insects and plants in gall production. Ann. Ent. Soc. America29: 694–700. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Fenton, F. A. Progress report on the season’s work on the production of potato tip-burn. Jour. Econ. Ent.14: 71–83. 1921.

    Google Scholar 

  73. —. Notes on the biology of the leafhopperEutettix strobi Fitch. Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci. 1924.31: 437–440. 1925.

    Google Scholar 

  74. -,And Hartzell, A. Control of the potato leafhopper. Iowa Agr. Exp. Sta. Circ.77, 4 pp. 1922.

  75. ——. Bionomics and control of the potato leafhopperEmpoasca mail Le Baron. Iowa Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bul. 78, pp. 379–440. 1923.

    Google Scholar 

  76. —,And Ressler, I. L. Artificial production of tip-burn. Jour. Econ. Ent.14: 510. 1921.

    Google Scholar 

  77. ——. Artificial production of tip-burn. Science55: 54. 1922.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. ——. Artificial production of hopperburn. Jour. Econ. Ent.15: 288–295. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Feuilletau de Bruyn, W. Helopeltis-bestrijding. Meded. Proefst. Thee86: 1–14. 1924.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Fife, L. C. Damage to sea island cotton by the West Indian blister mite (Eriophyes gossypii Banks) in Puerto Rico. Jour. Agr. Univ. Puerto Rico21: 169–177. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Follett-Smith, R. R. The nutrient status of the observation plot soils. Min. & Proc. Frog. Invest. Comm., Trinidad & Tobago13: 145–151. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  82. —. A comparison of the hydrophilic celloid content of sap of leaves of sugar canes growing in good and in bad soil. Min. & Proc. Frog. Invest. Comm., Trinidad & Tobago13: 158–161. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Froggatt, W. W. Leaf galls ofPhylloxera at Howlong. Agr. Gaz. New South Wales33: 360. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Fryer, J. C. F. Capsid bugs. Jour. Board Agr., London22: 950–958. 1916.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Fulmek, L. Die Kräuselkrankheit (Akarinose) des Weinstockes. Sonderabdruck aus Archiv für Chemie and Mikroskopie, 1913. Heft 6. Mitt. Pflanzenschutz Station in Wein. 32 pp.

  86. —. Milbenkräusel und Wanzenkräusel im steierischen Schilcherweinbaugebiet. Das Weinland, 1930.7: 251. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Garretsen, A. J. Het snoeien om de andere rij ter bestrijding vanHelopeltis. Meded. Proefst. Thee81: 36–39. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  88. —. Groenbemesters enHelopeltis. De Thee4: 57–58. 1923

    Google Scholar 

  89. Gescher, C. Zur Reblauskunde und Reblausbekämpfung. Die kranke Pflanze5: 60–62. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Graber, L. F., and Sprague, V. G. Alfalfa yellows. Science78 (2026): Oct. 1933.

  91. Grandori, R. Esperimenti di lotta contro la Filossera della vite (Phylloxera vastatrix Plan.) mediante il Para-Italia (Paradichlorobenzolo). Boll. Lab. Zool. Agr. Bachic. Milano. i (1928–1929), pp. 95–110. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Granovsky, A. A. Studies on leafhopper injury to apple leaves. Phytopath.16: 413–422. 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  93. —. Alfalfa “yellow top” and leafhoppers. Jour. Econ. Ent.21: 261–266. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  94. —. Differentiation of symptoms and effect of leafhopper feeding on histology of alfalfa leaves. Abs. in Phytopath.20: 121. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Greenslade, R. M. Horticultural aspects of woolly aphis control together with a survey of the literature. Imper. Bur. Fruit Prod. Tech. Com. No. 8, 88 pages. 1936.

  96. —,Massee, A. M., And Roach, W. A. A progress report of the causes of immunity to the apple woolly aphis (Eriosoma lanigerum Hausm.) Ann. Rep. East Mailing Res. Sta. 1933.21: 220–224. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Grove, A. J., And Ghosh, C. C. The life history ofPsylla isitis Buckt. (Psyllopa punctipennis Crawford), the “Psylla” disease of indigo. Mem. Dept. Agr. India, Entom. Ser.4: 329–357. 1914.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Hanson, A. J. The redberry disease of blackberries. Proc. Wash. St. Hort. Ass’n26: 199–201. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  99. -. The blackberry mite and its control (Eriophyes essigi Hassan). Bull. Wash. Agr. Exp. Sta. No. 279. 20 pp. 1933.

  100. Hardy, F. The liming problem in Trinidad sugar cane soils. Min. & Proc. Frog. Invest. Comm., Trinidad & Tobago7: 202–210. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  101. —. Investigations into the froghopper blight of sugar cane in Trinidad. Min. & Proc. Frog. Invest. Comm., Trinidad & Tobago8: 218–235. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  102. —,And Urich, F. W. Progress Report. Biochemical work: Soil research. Min. & Proc. Frog. Invest. Comm., Trinidad & Tobago9: 276–281. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  103. ——. Progress report: Recovery of blight canes. Min. & Proc. Frog. Invest. Comm., Trinidad & Tobago14: 182–187. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  104. Harland, S. C. The inheritance of immunity to leaf-blister mite (Eriophyes gossypii Banks) in cotton. West Indian Bull., Barbados17: 162–166. 1919.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Harris, W. V. The mosquito blight of tea. Planter1: 13 & 15. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  106. —. Notes on two injurious psyllids and their control. East Afr. Agr. Jour.1: 498–500. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Hart, S. J. G. De lamtoro in verband met deHelopeltis. Algem. Land-bouwweekblad Ned.-Indie8: 477–478. 1923.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Hartzell, A. Further notes on the life history of the potato leafhopper (Empoasca mali Le Baron). Jour. Econ. Ent.14: 62–68. 1921.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Herford, G. V. B. Studies on the secretion of diastase and invertase byEmpoasca solana DeLong (Rhynchota, Homoptera, Jassidae). Ann. Appl. Biol.22: 301–306. 1935.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  110. Heriot, A. D. Notes on the blister made byEriophyes pyri Nal. Proc. Ent. Soc. B. C.31: 41–42. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  111. Hollowell, E. A., Monteith, Jr.,J., And Flint, W. P. Leafhopper injury to clover. Phytopath.17: 399–404. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  112. Horne, A. S., And Maxwell-Lefroy, H. Effects produced by sucking insects and red spider upon potato foliage. Ann. Appl. Biol.1:370–386. 1915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  113. Houard, C. Les Zoocécidies des plantes de l’Amérique du Sud et de l’Amérique Centrale. 1–546 p., Hermann et Cie: Paris 1933.

  114. Husmann, George C. Testing Phylloxera-resistant grape stocks in the vinifera regions of the United States. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bul. No. 146, pp. 1–54. 1930.

  115. Illingworth, J. F. Preliminary report on evidences that mealybugs are an important factor in pineapple wilt. Tour. Econ. Ent.24: 877–889. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  116. Ito, K. Studies on the life history of the pineapple mealybugPseudococcus brevipes (Ckll.) Jour. Econ. Ent.31: 291–298. 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  117. Jancke, O. Beiträge zur innertherapeutischen Schädlingsbekämpfung. I. Mitteilung. Zeits. ang. Ent.18: 276–318. 1931.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  118. —. Über die Blutlausanfälligkeit von Apfelsorten, wilden Malussorten und -bastarden, sowie die Züchtung blutlausfester Edeläpfel und Unterlagen. Phytopath. Zeits.10: 184–196. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  119. Jewett, H. H. Leafhopper injury to clover and alfalfa. Kentucky Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 293, pp. 157–172. 1929.

  120. -. The resistance of certain red clovers and alfalfa to leafhopper injury. Kentucky Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 329, pp. 155–172. 1932.

  121. —. The resistance of leaves of red clover to puncturing. Jour. Econ. Ent.26: 1135–1137. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  122. -. The relation of time of cutting to leafhopper injury to alfalfa. Kentucky Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 348, pp. 51–59. 1934.

  123. —. The resistance of leaves of some pubescent red clovers to puncturing. Jour. Econ. Ent.28: 697–698. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  124. -. A leafhopper pest of clover and alfalfa. Kentucky Agr. Exp. Sta. Circ.44, 7 pp. 1936.

  125. Johnson, C. G. The biology ofLeptobyrsa rhododendri Horvath (Hemiptera, Tingitidae), theRhododendron lacebug. II. Feeding habits and the histology of the feeding lesions produced in Rhododendron leaves. Ann. Appl. Biol.24: 342–355. 1937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  126. Johnson, H. W. Nature of injury to forage legumes by the potato leafhopper. Jour. Agr. Res.49: 379–406. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  127. —. Further determinations of the carbohydrate-nitrogen relationship and carotene in leafhopper-yellow and green alfalfa. Phytopath.28: 273–277. 1938.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  128. —,And Hollowell, E. A. Pubescent and glabrous characters of soybeans as related to resistance to injury by the potato leafhopper. Jour. Agr. Res.51: 371–381. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  129. Jones, F. R., And Geanovsky, A. A. Yellowing of alfalfa caused by leafhoppers. Abs. in Phytopath.17: 39. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  130. Kendall, J. The structure and development of certain Eriophyid galls. Zeits. Parasitenk. Zeits. Wiss. Biol. Abt. F.2: 477–501. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  131. -. Histological and cytological studies of stems of plants injected with certain chemicals. (A contribution to the gall problem). Doctorate thesis, Sofia Univ. June 1930.

  132. King, W. V., and Cook, W. S. Feeding punctures of mirids and other plant-sucking insects and their effect on cotton. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bul. 296, 11 pp. 1932.

  133. Knight, H. H. An investigation of the scarring of fruit caused by apple redbugs. Cornell Univ. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 396, pp. 187–208. 1918.

  134. Knowlton, G. F., And Thomas, W. L. Host plants of the potato psyllid. Jour. Econ. Ent.27: 547. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  135. Kostoff, D., And Kendall, J. Studies on the structure and development of certain cynipid galls. Biol. Bul. of the Marine Biol. Lab., Woods Hole, Mass.56: 402–458. 1929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  136. -,And -. Studies on plant tumors and polyploidy produced by bacteria annd other agents. Archiv. für Mikrobiologie. Zeitschrift für die Erforschung der pflanzlichen Mikroorganismen. Sonderabdruck aus 4. Band. 4. Heft. 1933.

  137. Kotila, J. E. Hopperburn of potato and its control. Quart. Bull. Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta.3: 128–131. 1921.

    Google Scholar 

  138. Küster, E. Pathologische Pflanzenanatomie. 1903.

  139. —. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der panaschierten Gehölze. xviii–xxii. Mit. Deut. Dend. Ges.1928: 258–267. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  140. Larsen, L. D. Diseases of the pineapple. Haw’n. Sugar Planters’ Assoc. Pathol. and Physiol. Ser. Bull. 10. 1910.

  141. Leach, J. G. Leafhopper injury of potatoes. Abs. in Phytopath.12: 37. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  142. —,And Decker, P. A potato wilt caused by the tarnished plant bugLygus pratensis L. Phytopath,28: 13. 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  143. Leach, R. Insect injury simulating fungal attack on plants. A stem canker, an angular spot, a fruit scab and a fruit rot of mangoes caused byHelopeltis bergrothi Reut. (Capsidae). Ann. Appl. Biol.22: 525–537. 1935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  144. —,And Smee, C. Gnarled stem canker of tea caused by the capsid bug (Helopeltis bergrothi Reut.). Ann. Appl. Biol.20: 691–706. 1933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  145. Lean, O. B. Observations on the life history ofHelopeltis on cotton in Southern Nigeria. Bull. Ent. Res.16: 319–324. 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  146. Leefmans, S. OverHelopeltis in theetuinen. Dept. van Landbouw, Nijverheid en Handel, Buitenzorg, Med. Proefstation voor Thee, No. 46, 21 pp. 1916.

  147. -. Bijdrage tot het Helopeltis-vraagstuk voor de Thee. Meded. v. h. Proefstation voor Thee, Buitenzorg, No. 50. 214 pp. 1916.

  148. Lees, A. H. “Reversion” and resistance to “Big Bud” in black currants. Ann. Appl. Biol.5: 11–27. 1918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  149. Levine, Michael. A preliminary report on plants treated with the carcinogenic agents of animals. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club61: 103–118. 1934.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  150. Light, S. S. Helopeltis in Ceylon. Tea Quart., Jour. Tea Res. Inst. Ceylon3: 21–26. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  151. List, G. M. Lime-sulfur for tomato psyllid control. Colo. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. No. 411, 14 pp. 1934.

  152. —. Psyllid yellows of tomatoes and control of the psyllid,Paratrioza cockerelli Sulc., by the use of sulphur. Jour. Econ. Ent.28: 431–436. 1935.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  153. —,And Daniels, L. B. A promising control for psyllid yellows of potatoes. Science79: 79. 1934.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  154. Lutman, B. F. An outbreak of hopperburn in Vermont. Phytopath.13: 237–241. 1923.

    Google Scholar 

  155. Lutz, Frank E., and Brown, F. Martin. A new species of bacteria and the gall of an aphid. Amer. Mus. Novitates 305, 4 p. 1928.

  156. McDaniel, E. I. Control of the potato leafhopperEmpoasca fabae on dahlia with flour, talc and infusorial earth. Jour. Econ. Ent.29: 464. 1936.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  157. McGarr, R. L. Damage to the cotton plant caused byMegalopsallus atriplicis Kngt. and other species of Miridae. Jour. Econ. Ent.26: 953–956. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  158. Magnus, W. Die Entstehung der Pflanzengallen verursacht durch Hymenopteren. 1914. G. Fischer.

  159. Makarov-Kozhukhov, L. N. The introduction of substances into plants and its prospects in the control ofPhylloxera. Vestn. Vinogr. Vinodel. Vinotorg. S.S.S.R.3: 519–526. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  160. —. Contribution to the elucidation of some questions onPhylloxera in the Kuban Region. Vestn. Vinogr. Vinodel. Vinotorg. S.S.S.R.3: 776–782. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  161. Malpighi, Marcalli. Opera omni: de Gallis Londini2: 17. 1686.

    Google Scholar 

  162. Marchal, P. La question des races duPhylloxera de la vigne. Ann. Epiphyties16: 232–234 (1930). 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  163. Martin, J. P. Stem galls of sugar cane induced with an insect extract. The Haw. Planters’ Record42: 129–134. Second Quarter. 1938.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  164. Massee, A. M. The gall mites of the Himalaya berry and raspberry. Ann. Rept. East Malling Res. Sta., 192513: 154–156. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  165. —. The black currant gall mite on red currants. Ann. Rept. East Malling Res. Sta., 1926 & 192714 &15: 151–152. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  166. Maxwell-Lefroy, H. The psylla disease of indigo in Behar. Agr. Jour. India8: 1–25. 1913.

    Google Scholar 

  167. Menusan, Jr.,H. Leafhopper injury to potato foliage and its relation to tuber yields. Jour. Econ. Ent.30: 772–777. 1937.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  168. Metcalf, Z. P. Peanut “pouts.” Science86: 374. 1937.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  169. Monteith, Jr.,J. Leafhopper injury of legumes. Abs. in Phytopath.18: 137–138. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  170. Monzen, K. The woolly apple aphis (Erisoma lanigera Hausm.) in Japan, with special reference to its life-history and the susceptibility of the host plant. Vehr. III. Internat. Ent.-Kongr. Zürich, 1925.2: 249–275. 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  171. Moreau, A. P. Un nouvel ennemi du cottonier en Afrique équatoriale françaiseHelopeltis bergrothi Reut. Agron. Colon. no. 191. pp. 129–140. 1933.

  172. Mote, D. C., And Wilcox, J. Redberry mite of the blackberry. Proc. Wash. St. Hort. Ass’n27: 203–207. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  173. Müller, A. Zur inneren Therapie der Pflanzen. Verh. Deut. Ges. Angew. Ent.4. Mitgliederversamml. Frankfurt a.M. 10. bis 13. pp. 26–33. 1924.

  174. -. Die innere Therapie der Pflanzen. Monogr. Ang. Ent. no. 8 (Supplement to Zeits. Ang. Ent., xii), vi + 206 pp. 1926.

  175. —. Versuche zur inneren Therapie der Pflanzen. Anz. Schädlingsk., iii, nos. 3–4: pp. 29–33; 41–46. 1927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  176. Müller, K. Reblausimmunität und Brauchbarkeit der Unterlagsreben für deutsche Verhältisse. Mitt. deuts. Landw.-Ges., 1928. St. 15, reprint 2 pp. Berlin. 1928. (Abs. Centralbl. Bakt., (2) 75: 317–318. 1928.)

  177. Nierenstein, M. Galls. Nature (London)125: 348–349. 1930.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  178. Noble, N. S. The citrus gall wasp (Eurytoma fellis Girault). Sci. Bull. Dep. Agr. New South Wales53: 1–41. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  179. Nougaret, R. L., and Lapham, M. H. A study ofPhylloxera infestation in California as related to types of soils. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bul. 20, 38 pp. 1928.

  180. Nowell, W. Investigation of froghopper pest and diseases of sugar cane. Trin. & Tob. Coun. Paper No. 39 of 1919. 10 pp. 1919.

  181. —,And Williams, C. B. Sugar cane blight in Trinidad: A summary of conclusions. Bull. Dept. Agr. Trinidad & Tobago19: 8–10. 1920.

    Google Scholar 

  182. Painter, R. H. A study of the cotton flea-hopperPsallus seriatus Reut., with especial reference to its effect on cotton plant tissues. Jour. Agr. Res.40: 485–516. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  183. Parks, T. H., And Clayton, E. E. Controlling tipburn or hopperburn of potatoes. Cooperative demonstrations establish value of Bordeaux sprays. Monthly. Bull. Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta.6: 168–171. 1921.

    Google Scholar 

  184. ——. Potato hopperburn (tipburn) control with Bordeaux mixture. Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 368, pp. 243–258. 1923.

    Google Scholar 

  185. Parr, Thaddeus J. Matsucoccus sp., a scale insect injurious to certain pines in the northeast (Hemiptera-Homoptera). (In press.)

  186. Parrott, P. J., And Olmstead, R. D. The work ofEmpoasca mali on potato foliage. Jour. Econ. Ent.13: 224–226. 1920.

    Google Scholar 

  187. Petherbridge, F. R., And Husain, M. A. A study of the capsid bugs found on apple trees. Ann. Appl. Biol.4: 179–205. 1918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  188. Phillips, J. S. The biology and distribution of ants in Hawaiian pineapple fields. Exp. Sta., Pine. Prod. Coop. Ass’n. Bull. 15. 1934. Pp. 1–57.

    Google Scholar 

  189. Pickles, A. On the oviposition ofTomaspis saccharina Dist. (Rhynch., Cercop.) an insect pest of the sugar cane in Trinidad. Bull. Ent. Res.22: 461–468. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  190. —. Entomological contributions to the study of the sugar cane froghopper. Trop. Agr.10: 222–233. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  191. —. Entomological contributions to the study of the sugar cane froghopper. Trop. Agr.10: 240–245; 286–295. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  192. Poos, F. W. Leafhopper injury to legumes. Jour. Econ. Ent.22: 146–153. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  193. —,And Haenseler, C. M. Injury to varieties of eggplant by the potato leafhopperEmpoasca fabae (Harris). Jour. Econ. Ent.24: 890–892. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  194. —,And Johnson, H. W. Injury to alfalfa and red clover by the potato leafhopper. Jour. Econ. Ent.29: 325–331. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  195. —,And Smith, F. F. A comparison of oviposition and nymphal development ofEmpoasca fabae (Harris) on different host plants. Jour. Econ. Ent.24: 361–371. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  196. —,And Westover, H. L. “Alfalfa yellows”. Science79: 319. 1934.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  197. —,And Wheeler, N. H. On the hereditary ability of certain insects to transmit diseases and to cause disease-like injuries to plants. Jour. Econ. Ent.27: 58–69. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  198. Printz, Ya. I. Zur Frage der Virulenzveränderung der Reblaus-Biotypen. Plant. Prot. fasc. 12. pp. 137–142. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  199. Rahn, Otto. Invisible radiations of organisms. Protoplasma-Monographien.9: 171. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  200. Rawitscher, F. Wohin stechen die Pflanzenläuse? Zeit. Bot26: 145. 1933. (Abstr. in Zeits. Pflanzenk.43: 699. 1933.)

    Google Scholar 

  201. Rice, P. L. Cat-facing of peaches by the tarnished plant bugLygus pratensis L. Trans. Peninsula Hort. Soc. 1937, pp. 131–136. 1938.

  202. Richards, B. L. A new and destructive disease of the potato in Utah and its relation to the potato psylla. Abs. in Phytopath.18: 140–141. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  203. —. Further studies with psyllid yellows of the potato. Abs. in Phytopath.21: 103. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  204. —,And Blood, H. L. Psyllid yellows of the potato. Jour. Agr. Res.46: 189–216. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  205. Ripley, L. B. “Froghopper” in wattles. Farm. in S. Africa.1: 423. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  206. -. “Froghopper” in wattles. Farm. in S. Africa. Reprint 51, 4 pp. 1929.

  207. Roach, W. A., And Massee, A. M. Preliminary experiments on the physiology of the resistance of certain rootstocks to attack by woolly aphis. 16th–18th Ann. Rep. East Mailing Res. Sta., 1928-19302: 111–120. 1931. 207. Roberts, J. I. The tobacco capsid (Engytatus volucer Kirk.) in Rhodesia. Bull. Ent. Res. 21: 169–183. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  208. Roepke, W. Helopeltis-vraagstuk, in het bijzonder met betrekking tot Cacao. Med. Proefsta. Midden-Java, Batavia21: 40 + iii pp. 1916.

  209. Ruggles, A. G., and Eyer, J. R. Preliminary notes on the life-history and control of the potato leafhopperEmpoasca mali LeB. 19th Rep. Minn. St. Ent. 1921–1922, pp. 10–14. 1923.

  210. Sanford, G. B. A malady of the potato in Alberta similar to psyllid yellows. Sci. Agr.15: 46–48. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  211. Searls, E. M. A preliminary report on the resistance of certain legumes to certain homopterous insects. Jour. Econ. Ent.25: 46–49. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  212. —. The effect of alfalfa cutting schedules upon the occurrence of the potato leafhopper (Empoasca fabae Harris) and alfalfa yellows in Wisconsin. Jour. Econ. Ent.27: 80–88. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  213. —. Further studies on the effect of controlling the potato leaf-hopper (Empoasca fabae Harris) in alfalfa by designed cutting. Jour. Econ. Ent.28: 831–833. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  214. Shapovalov, M. Tuber transmission of psyllid yellows in California. Abs. in Phytopath.19: 1140. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  215. Slocock, O. C. A. The lacewing fly. Yearb. Rhododendr. Ass’n. 89–92. 1934.

  216. Smee, C. Tea mosquito bug in Nyasaland (Helopeltis bergrothi Reut.) and notes on two potential pests of tea, (1) the tea leaf weevil (Dicasticus mlanjensis Mshl.), (2) the bean flower capsid (Callicratides rama Kirby). Bull. Dept. Agr. Nyasaland, Ent. Ser.4: 1–10. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  217. —,And Leach, R. Mosquito bug the cause of stem canker of tea. Bull. Dep. Agr. Nyasaland, N.S.5: 1–7. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  218. Smith, E. B. Suggestions for the control of froghoppers on sugar cane estates. Trin. & Tob.: Min. & Proc. Frog. Invest. Comm.5: 118–123. 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  219. Smith, F. F. Injury to hollyhock and marigold by the potato leaf-hopperEmpoasca fabae (Harris.) Jour. Econ. Ent.25: 318–321. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  220. —. The nature of the sheath material in the feeding punctures produced by the potato leafhopper and the three-cornered alfalfa hopper. Jour. Agr. Res.47: 475–485. 1933.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  221. —,And Poos, F. W. The feeding habits of some leafhoppers of the genusEmpoasca. Jour. Agr. Res.43: 267–285. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  222. Smith, K. M. Investigation of the nature and cause of the damage to plant tissue resulting from the feeding of capsid bugs. Ann. Appl. Biol.7: 40–55. 1920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  223. —. A comparative study of the feeding methods of certain Hemiptera and of the resulting effects upon the plant tissue, with special reference to the potato plant. Ann. Appl. Biol.13: 109–139. 1926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  224. -. Recent advances in the study of plant viruses. 1934.

  225. Smolak, J. Fytoptosa šeřiku. Sborn. čsl. Akad. Zeměd.8A: 39–50. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  226. Staniland, L. N. The immunity of apple stocks from attacks of woolly aphis (Eriosoma lanigerum Hausmann). Part II. The causes of the relative resistance of the stocks. Bull. Ent. Res.15: 157–170. 1924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  227. Stellwaag, F. Die Grundlagen für den Anbau reblauswiderstands-fähiger Unterlagsreben zur Immunisierung verseuchter Gebiete. Monogr. Ang. Ent.7: 1–88. Beiheft Zeits. Ang. Ent. 10, 1924.

    Google Scholar 

  228. —. Die Milben-oder Kräuselkrankheit der Rebe und ihre Bekämpfung. Flugbl. Biol. Reichsanst. Land- u. Forstw.102: 1–4. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  229. —. Die Milbenkräuselkrankheit des Rebstockes in ihrer Differentialdiagnose gegenüber ähnlichen Schäden im Weinbaugebiet der Rheinpfalz. Anz. Schädlingsk.7: 73–77. 1931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  230. Steven, R. M., And Potter, J. A. Cane varieties and froghopper blight. Min. & Proc. Frog. Invest. Comm., Trinidad & Tobago13: 162–164. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  231. Steyaert, R. L., and Vrydagh, J. Étude sur une maladie grave du cotonnier provoquée par les piqûres d’Helopeltis. Mem. Inst. Colon. Belge (Sci. Nat.) 1 fasc.7, 55 pp. 1933.

  232. Tate, H. D. Method of penetration, formation of stylet sheaths and source of food supply of aphids. Iowa State College Jour. Sci.11: 185–206. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  233. Topi, M. Ancora sulla esistenza di diverse specie di filossera della vite e sulla attaccabilita delle viti americane da parte della filossera. Atti R. Acad. Naz. Lincei, Rendiconti, Classe Sci. Fis. Mat. Nat.33: 1 sem. no. 12: 528–530. 1924.

    Google Scholar 

  234. —. Sulle probabili cause del diverso comportamento della fillossera, specialmente gallecola, in rapporto ai vari vitigni americani. Monitore Zool. Ital.37: 74–84. 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  235. —. Sulla esistenza di diverse razze della fillossera della vite e sui loro presunti caratteri distintivi. Monitore Zool. Ital.38: 167–180. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  236. Turner, P. E. The lime status of soil in relation to an insect pest of sugar cane. Jour. Agr. Sci.19(1). 1929.

  237. Underhill, G. W., And Cox, James A. Studies on the resistance of apple to the woolly apple aphidEriosoma lanigerum (Hausm.). Jour. Econ. Ent.31: 622–625. 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  238. Urich, F. W. History of sugar cane blight in Trinidad from 1920–1924. Min. & Proc. Frog. Invest. Comm., Trinidad & Tobago6: 149–152. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  239. —,And Hardy, F. Progress Report: Soil reaction and blight. Min. & Proc. Frog. Invest. Comm., Trinidad & Tobago8: 213–217. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  240. van der Goot, P. De Zwarte Cacao-Mier (Dolichoderus bituberculatus Mayr) en haar Beteekenis voor de Cacao-Cultuur op Java. Meded. v. h. Proefstation Midden-Java, Salatiga.25: 1–142. 1917.

    Google Scholar 

  241. van Hooff, H. W. S. Snoeien enHelopeltis. Meded. Proefst. Thee.81: 26–31. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  242. —. De op Tjiboengoer genomen Maatregelen tegenHelopeltis. Meded. Proefst. Thee.81: 40–44. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  243. Vasil’ev, I. V. On the race of the UkrainianPhylloxera. Vestn. Vinodel. Ukrainui.30: 13–14. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  244. Veitch, R. The grapePhylloxera. Queensland Agr. Jour.39: 79–83. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  245. Venables, E. P., and Heriot, A. D. The blister mite of apple and pear. Publ. Dep. Agr. Canada No. 577, 3 pp. 1937.

  246. Vodinskaya, K. I. Die Gallenreblaus in Tuapse. Bull. Plant. Prot. (1 Ent.)4: 97–118. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  247. Wadley, F. M. Observations on the injury caused byToxoptera graminum Rond. (Homoptera: Aphididae). Proc. Ent. Soc. Wash.31: 130–134. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  248. Watson(Hamilton), M. A. Factors affecting the amount of infection obtained by aphis transmission of the virus Hy. III. Phil. Trans. Royal Soc. London. Ser. B—Biol. Sci.226: 457–489. 1936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  249. Wells, Betram W. The comparative morphology of the Zoocecidia ofCeltis occidentalis. Ohio Jour. Sci.16(7). 1916.

  250. Whitehead, F. E. Preliminary report on the pecanPhylloxerae. Rep. Okl. Agr. Exp. Sta., 1930–1932, pp. 265–267. 1933.

  251. Wiesner, Julius von. Die Rohstoffe des Pflanzenreichs. 4th ed., Vol. 1, edited by Paul Krais, Wilhelm v. Brehmer. iv + 1122 pp. 1927.

  252. Williams, C. B. Froghopper blight of sugar cane in Trinidad. Mem. Dep. Agr. Trin. & Tob.1: 1–170. 1921.

    Google Scholar 

  253. Wilson, H. F. Injurious gall mites. 2nd Biennial Crop Pest and Hort. Rep. 1913 and 1914. Oregon Agr. Exp. Sta., pp. 123–126.

  254. Withycombe, C. L. Studies on the aetiology of sugar cane froghopper blight in Trinidad. I. Introduction and general survey. Ann. Appl. Biol.13: 64–108. 1926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  255. Zweigelt, F. Beiträge zur Kenntnis des Saugphänomens der Blattläuse und der Reaktionen der Pflanzenzellen. Zeits. Pflanzenk.27(4): 207. 1917. (Abs. Centralbl. Bakteriol., II, xlii, 1915, pp. 265–335).

    Google Scholar 

  256. —. Blattlausgallen, unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Anatomie und Aetiologie. Centralbl. Bakt. Parasit., u. Infektionskr., Jena. Ite, Abt.47(16–22): 408–535. 1917.

    Google Scholar 

  257. -. Blattlausgallen. Histogenetische und biologische Studien anTetraeura und Schizoneura-gallen. Die Blattlausgallen im Dienste prinzipieller Gallenforschung. Monog. Angew. Ent. no. 11, Zeits. Ang. Ent. xvii, Beiheft, xxi + 684 pp. 1931.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pineapple Experiment Station, University of Hawaii, USA

    Walter Carter

Authors
  1. Walter Carter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Published with the approval of the Director as Miscellaneous Paper No. 28 of the Pineapple Experiment Station, University of Hawaii.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Carter, W. Injuries to plants caused by insect toxins. Bot. Rev 5, 273 (1939). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02878504

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02878504

Keywords

Search

Navigation