The impact of some field boundary management practices on the development of Dipsacus fullonum L. flowering stems, and implications for conservation

Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment

Volumn 68, Issue 1-2, 1998, Pages 41-49

  Cheesman, O D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Agroecosystems; Dipsacus; Farm management; Field boundaries; Invasive species; Teasel

Indexed keywords

CONSERVATION; CROP MANAGEMENT; FIELD BOUNDARY; INVASIVE WEED; TEASEL;

NORTH AMERICA; UK, ENGLAND, CAMBRIDGESHIRE;

DIPSACUS FULLONUM; DIPSACUS SYLVESTRIS;

EID: 0031979236     PISSN: 01678809     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0167-8809(97)00131-X     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Bolsinger M., Flückiger W. Ambient air pollution induced changes in amino acid pattern of phloem sap in host plants - relevance to aphid infestation. Environ. Pollut. 56:1989;209-216.
2. Chambers R.J., Adams T.H.L. Quantification of the impact of hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae) on cereal aphids in winter wheat: an analysis of field populations. J. Appl. Ecol. 23:1986;895-904.
3. Cheesman, O.D., 1994. The ecology and population biology of Cochylis roseana (Haworth) and Endothenia gentianaeana (Hübner) on Dipsacus fullonum (wild teasel). Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Cambridge, UK.
4. Cheesman O.D. Life histories of Cochylis roseana and Endothenia gentianaeana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) on wild teasel. The Entomologist. 115:1996;65-80.
5. Corbet S.A. Insects, plants and succession: advantages of long-term set-aside. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 53:1995;201-217.
6. Corbet S.A., Williams I.H., Osborne J.L. Bees and the pollination of crops and wild flowers in the European Community. Bee World. 72:1991;47-59.
7. Corbet, S.A., Saville, N.M., Osborne, J.L., 1994. Farmland as a habitat for bumble bees. In: Matheson, A. (Ed.), Forage for bees in an Agricultural Landscape. IBRA, Cardiff, pp. 35-46.
8. Cowgill S.E., Wratten S.D., Sotherton N.W. The selective use of floral resources by the hoverfly Episyrphus balteatus (Diptera: Syrphidae) on farmland. Ann. Appl. Biol. 122:1993;223-231.
9. Crawley M.J. Insect herbivores and plant population dynamics. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 34:1989;531-564.
10. De Jong T.J., Klinkhamer P.G.L. Population ecology of the biennials Cirsium vulgare and Cynoglossum officianale in a coastal sand dune system. J. Ecol. 76:1988;366-382.
11. Dover, J.W., 1994. Arable field margins: factors affecting butterfly distribution and abundance. In: Boatman, N. (Ed.), Field Margins: Integrating Agriculture and Conservation. BCPC Monograph, No. 58. British Crop Protection Council, Farnham, pp. 59-66.
12. Dover J.W. Factors affecting the distribution of satyrid butterflies on arable farmland. J. Appl. Ecol. 33:1996;723-734.
13. Feber, R.E., Smith, H., 1995. Butterfly conservation on arable farmland. In: Pullin, A.S. (Ed.), Ecology and conservation of butterflies. Chapman & Hall, London, pp. 84-97.
14. Feber, R.E., Smith, H., Macdonald, D.W., 1994. The effects of field margin restoration on the meadow brown butterfly, Maniola jurtina. In: Boatman, N. (Ed.), Field Margins: Integrating Agriculture and Conservation. BCPC Monograph, No. 58. British Crop Protection Council, Farnham, pp. 295-300.
15. Feber R.E., Smith H., Macdonald D.W. The effects on butterfly abundance of the management of uncropped edges of arable field. J. Appl. Ecol. 33:1996;1191-1205.
16. Ferguson I.K. The genera of Valerianaceae and Dipsacaceae in the southeastern United States. J. Arnold Arboretum. 46:1965;218-231.
17. Free, J.B., 1993. Insect Pollination of Crops 3rd edn. Academic Press, London.
18. Fussell M., Corbet S.A. Forage for bumble bees and honey bees in farmland: a case study. J. Apicultural Res. 30:1991;87-97.
19. Fussell M., Corbet S.A. Flower usage by bumble bees: a basis for forage plant management. J. Appl. Ecol. 29:1992;451-465.
20. Gill N.T. The viability of weed seeds at various stages of maturity. Ann. Appl. Biol. 25:1938;447-456.
21. Glass W.D. Vegetation management guideline: cut-leaved teasel (Dipsacus laciniatus L.) and common teasel (Dipsacus sylvestris Huds.). Natural Areas J. 11:1991;213-214.
22. Huenneke L.F., Thomson J.K. Potential interference between a threatened endemic thistle and an invasive non-native plant. Conservation Biol. 9:1995;416-425.
23. Judd W.W. Insects associated with flowering teasel, Dipsacus sylvestris at Dunnville, Ontario. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Ontario. 114:1983;95-98.
24. Klinkhamer P.G.L., De Jong T.J. Is it profitable for biennials to live longer than two years? Ecol. Modelling. 20:1983;223-232.
25. Perring, F.H., Walters, S.M., 1990. Atlas of the British Flora 3rd edn. Botanical Society of the British Isles, London.
26. Pleijel H., Ahlfors A., Skärby L., Pihl G., Selldén G., Sjödin A. Effects of air pollutant emissions from a rural motorway on Petunia and Trifolium. The Sci. Total Environ. 146/7:1994;117-123.
27. Saville, N.M., 1993. Bumblebee ecology in woodlands and arable farmland. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Cambridge, UK.
28. Smith, H., Feber, R.E., Macdonald, D.W., 1994. The role of wild flower seed mixtures in field margin restoration. In: Boatman, N. (Ed.), Field Margins: Integrating Agriculture and Conservation. BCPC Monograph, No. 58. British Crop Protection Council, Farnham, pp. 289-294.
29. Solecki M.K. The viability of cut-leaved teasel (Dipsacus laciniatus L.) seed harvested from flowering stems: management implications. Natural Areas J. 9:1989;102-105.
30. Solecki, M.K., 1993. Cut-leaved and common teasel (Dipsacus laciniatus L. and D. sylvestris Huds.): profile of two invasive aliens. In: McKnight, B.N. (Ed.), Biological Pollution: the control and impact of invasive exotic species. Indiana Academy of Science, Indianapolis, pp. 85-92.
31. Werner P.A. Predictions of fate from rosette size in teasel (Dipsacus fullonum L.). Oecologia. 20:1975;197-201.
32. Werner P.A. The biology of Canadian weeds: 12. D. sylvestris Huds. Can. J. Plant Sci. 55:1975;783-794.
33. Werner P.A. A seed trap for determining patterns of seed deposition in terrestrial plants. Can. J. Bot. 53:1975;810-813.