Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0Feb 2021View details →

Рис. 1. Àинамика посевных пΛощаΔей сои в Приморском крае в 1996–2018 гг. (по Δанным Àепартамента сеΛьского хозяйства и проΔовоΛьствия Приморского края) Fig. 1. The dynamic of soybean crop area at Primorsky Region in 1996–2018 (based on data from the Department of Agriculture and provision of the Primorsky Region) in Reproductive potential of Soybean Cyst Nematode Heterodera glycines - quarantine pest of soybean - in Primorsky Region conditions

Рис. 1. Àинамика посевных пΛощаΔей сои в Приморском крае в 1996–2018 гг. (по Δанным Àепартамента сеΛьского хозяйства и проΔовоΛьствия Приморского края) Fig. 1. The dynamic of soybean crop area at Primorsky Region in 1996–2018 (based on data from the Department of Agriculture and provision of the Primorsky Region)

Figure 4 in Plant age, crop stage and surrounding habitats: their impact on sucking pests and predators complex in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) field plots in arid climate at district Layyah, Punjab, Pakistan

Figure 4. Means (±SE) number of sucking insect pests (jassid, thrips, whitefly) and predators (green lacewing, spider) in cotton field plots at three locations (five replications) with different surrounding habitats (sugarcane + sesame, monoculture, sesame) during cropping season of cotton from June 20 to September 18, 2018 at Layyah, Punjab, Pakistan.

Figure 3 in Plant age, crop stage and surrounding habitats: their impact on sucking pests and predators complex in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) field plots in arid climate at district Layyah, Punjab, Pakistan

Figure 3. Means (±SE) number of sucking insect pests (jassid, thrips, whitefly) and predators (green lacewing, spider) in cotton field plots at three locations (five replications) at different crop developmental stages (crop phenology) of cotton from June 20 to September 18, 2018 at Layyah, Punjab, Pakistan.

Figure 2 in Plant age, crop stage and surrounding habitats: their impact on sucking pests and predators complex in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) field plots in arid climate at district Layyah, Punjab, Pakistan

Figure 2. Means (±SE) number of sucking insect pests (jassid, thrips, whitefly) and predators (green lacewing, spider) in cotton field plots at three locations (five replications) during cropping season of cotton from June 20 to September 18, 2018 at Layyah, Punjab, Pakistan.

Figure 1 in Plant age, crop stage and surrounding habitats: their impact on sucking pests and predators complex in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) field plots in arid climate at district Layyah, Punjab, Pakistan

Figure 1. Percent numbers of sucking insect pests (jassid, thrips, whitefly) and predators (green lacewing, spider) in cotton field plots at three locations (five replications) during 2018 at Layyah, Punjab, Pakistan.

opencc-by-4.0Mar 2015View details →

Fig. 2 in Crop diversification for sustainable insect pest management in eggplant (Solanales: Solanaceae)

Fig. 2. Total ion current (TIC) mode chromatographic plot of marigold leaf volatiles sampled using the thermal desorption (TD) technique.

opencc-by-4.0Mar 2015View details →

Fig. 3 in Crop diversification for sustainable insect pest management in eggplant (Solanales: Solanaceae)

Fig. 3. Total ion current (TIC) mode chromatographic plot of mint leaf volatiles sampled using the thermal desorption (TD) technique.

Fig. 12 in Comparison of sensory structures present on larval antennae and mouthparts of lepidopteran crop pests

Fig. 12. Enlarged labial palp (lef) showing sensillum chaeticum (C) and sensillum styloconicum (S); and enlarged apical maxillary palp (right) showing apical sensilla basiconica (A1, A2, A3), medial sensilla basiconica (M1, M2, M3), and lateral sensilla basiconica (L1, L2).

Fig. 11 in Comparison of sensory structures present on larval antennae and mouthparts of lepidopteran crop pests

Fig. 11. Apical maxillary palp showing apical sensilla basiconica (A1, A2, A3), medial sensilla basiconica (M1, M2, M3), and lateral sensilla basiconica (L1, L2) in 4 species of Lepidoptera: A) Spodoptera litura, B) Chilo partellus, C) Plutella xylostella, and D) Maruca vitrata.

Fig. 8 in Comparison of sensory structures present on larval antennae and mouthparts of lepidopteran crop pests

Fig. 8. Labrum (L) showing distribution and number of sensilla chaetica (C1–C15) in 4 species of Lepidoptera: A) Spodoptera litura, B) Chilo partellus, C) Plutella xylostella, and D) Maruca vitrata.

Fig. 7 in Comparison of sensory structures present on larval antennae and mouthparts of lepidopteran crop pests

Fig. 7. Ventral and lateral view of larval mouthparts showing labrum (L), mandible (M), maxillae (MX), labium (LI), antennae (A), stemma (ST), and long tactile setae (LTS) in 4 species of Lepidoptera: A) Spodoptera litura, B) Chilo partellus, C) Plutella xylostella, and D) Maruca vitrata.

Fig. 4 in Comparison of sensory structures present on larval antennae and mouthparts of lepidopteran crop pests

Fig. 4. SEM images of larval antennae of Plutella xylostella at different instars: A) 1st instar, B) 2nd instar, C) 3rd instar, and D) 4th instar.

Fig. 15 in Comparison of sensory structures present on larval antennae and mouthparts of lepidopteran crop pests

Fig. 15. Multiple sequence alignment of the partialsequence of the Or83b gene in Spodoptera litura, Chilo partellus, Plutella xylostella, and Maruca vitrata with the reference sequence of Spodoptera litura Or83b (Accession No. JQ811935) using ClustalW sofware. Grey shades represent completely conserved bases. Primer sequences used for amplification of the partial Or83b gene are underlined.

Fig. 1 in Comparison of sensory structures present on larval antennae and mouthparts of lepidopteran crop pests

Fig. 1. Dorsal surface of the larval head showing short tactile setae (STS) and long tactile setae (LTS) in 4 species of Lepidoptera: A) Spodoptera litura, B) Chilo partellus, C) Plutella xylostella, and D) Maruca vitrata.

Fig. 6 in Comparison of sensory structures present on larval antennae and mouthparts of lepidopteran crop pests

Fig. 6. Antenna is segmented (I–III), showing the presence of sensilla styloconica (S1, S2), sensilla basiconica (B1, B2, B3), and sensillum chaeticum (C) in 4 species of Lepidoptera: A) Spodoptera litura, B) Chilo partellus, C) Plutella xylostella, and D) Maruca vitrata.

Fig. 3 in Comparison of sensory structures present on larval antennae and mouthparts of lepidopteran crop pests

Fig. 3. SEM images of larval antennae of Chilo partellus at different instars: A) 1st instar, B) 2nd instar, C) 3rd instar, D) 4th instar, E) 5th instar, and F) 6th instar.

Fig. 5 in Comparison of sensory structures present on larval antennae and mouthparts of lepidopteran crop pests

Fig. 5. SEM images of larval antennae of Maruca vitrata at different instars: A) 1st instar, B) 2nd instar, C) 3rd instar, D) 4th instar, and E) 5th instar.

Fig. 2 in Comparison of sensory structures present on larval antennae and mouthparts of lepidopteran crop pests

Fig. 2. SEM images of larval antennae of Spodoptera litura at different instars: A) 1st instar, B) 2nd instar, C) 3rd instar, D) 4th instar, and E) 5th instar.

Fig. 10 in Comparison of sensory structures present on larval antennae and mouthparts of lepidopteran crop pests

Fig. 10. Enlarged maxillae (MX) showing maxillary palp (MP), galea (G), stipes (ST), and cardo (CA), with galea showing the distribution of sensilla styloconica (S1–S4) and sensilla chaetica (C) in 4 species of Lepidoptera: A) Spodoptera litura, B) Chilo partellus, C) Plutella xylostella, and D) Maruca vitrata.