Editorial

5 pages, 214 KiB

Open AccessEditorial

Rodents in Crop Production Agricultural Systems—Special Issue

by Radek Aulicky

Agronomy 2022, 12(11), 2813; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/agronomy12112813 - 11 Nov 2022

Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2726

Rodents are among the major pests that have accompanied human society and agriculture since ancient times [...] Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rodents in Crop Production Agricultural Systems)

Research

Jump to: Editorial, Review

8 pages, 551 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Efficacy of Eight Anticoagulant Food Baits in House Mouse (Mus musculus): Comparison of Choice and No-Choice Laboratory Testing Approaches

by Marcela Frankova, Radek Aulicky and Vaclav Stejskal

Agronomy 2022, 12(8), 1828; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/agronomy12081828 - 01 Aug 2022

Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1522

Abstract

House mouse (Mus musculus) is a cosmopolitan pest in agricultural facilities, commodity stores and rural and urban environments. It is regularly controlled by anticoagulant-based baits. Since the number of registered active ingredients is limited, the producers are trying to develop new [...] Read more.

House mouse (Mus musculus) is a cosmopolitan pest in agricultural facilities, commodity stores and rural and urban environments. It is regularly controlled by anticoagulant-based baits. Since the number of registered active ingredients is limited, the producers are trying to develop new formulations with increased tamper-resistance, attractiveness and palatability. Reliable and economical methods for laboratory screening/testing are needed. Therefore, this work compared simple no-choice with more economically demanding choice feeding tests for laboratory evaluation of efficacy of rodenticide anticoagulant-based preparations in wild populations of house mouse. We analyzed mice survival and bait intake of the various rodenticide commercial preparations differing in a toxic active substance (warfarin, bromadiolone, brodifacoum, difethialone) and nontoxic food lure components. In most cases, we found insignificant differences in survival of house mice treated with eight test baits within the no-choice and choice feeding tests. We rejected the tested hypothesis that there would be significant differences in all tested preparations for two different testing approaches. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rodents in Crop Production Agricultural Systems)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

6 pages, 217 KiB

Open AccessCommunication

Rodents in Agriculture: A Broad Perspective

by Gary Witmer

Agronomy 2022, 12(6), 1458; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/agronomy12061458 - 17 Jun 2022

Cited by 14 | Viewed by 5842

Abstract

There are thousands of rodent species in the world. While they provide a number of ecosystem functions, unfortunately, some species cause significant damage to agriculture. Rodent damage occurs to crops in the field, but also to stored foods, livestock feed, and structures. There [...] Read more.

There are thousands of rodent species in the world. While they provide a number of ecosystem functions, unfortunately, some species cause significant damage to agriculture. Rodent damage occurs to crops in the field, but also to stored foods, livestock feed, and structures. There are many methods available to reduce rodent populations and/or damage, including both lethal and non-lethal methods. There are advantages and disadvantages to most methods, and many are regulated by federal, state, and local ordinances. Public acceptance of the various methods also varies greatly. Examples and details of these topics are presented in this review. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rodents in Crop Production Agricultural Systems)

15 pages, 2255 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Farmers’ Knowledge, Attitudes, and Control Practices of Rodents in an Agricultural Area of Taiwan

by Ian Nicholas Best, Pei-Jen Lee Shaner, Kurtis Jai-Chyi Pei and Chi-Chien Kuo

Agronomy 2022, 12(5), 1169; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/agronomy12051169 - 12 May 2022

Cited by 3 | Viewed by 4947

Abstract

Rodents threaten agricultural industries and food security on a global scale. Rodent management practices routinely involve the use of chemical products, mainly anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs). An understanding of farmer rodent control behaviors is crucial in order to implement management changes to more environmentally [...] Read more.

Rodents threaten agricultural industries and food security on a global scale. Rodent management practices routinely involve the use of chemical products, mainly anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs). An understanding of farmer rodent control behaviors is crucial in order to implement management changes to more environmentally friendly practices. In this study, we surveyed farmers in an agricultural area of northwestern Taiwan on their knowledge, attitudes, and control practices for rodent pests. From our survey sample of 126 farmers, rodents were perceived to be the most problematic for vegetable crops, followed by rice, and then fruit. Farmers in the oldest age group and those that perceived rodents to cause extensive damage to their crops were found to have the most negative attitudes toward the pests. One-third of the farmers in our survey stated they currently use rodenticides, with crop type, perceived problems caused by rodents, and attitudes toward rodents found to be important explanatory variables. Our results indicate that the use of rodenticides is reactive; farmers are more likely to apply the chemical products if they perceive rodents to cause damage. Additionally, cost–benefit assessments are likely important in governing rodent control behaviors; farmers may be more inclined to use control products that are subsidized by the government, which include ARs, when they observe damage to their crops inflicted by rodents. We also describe how ecologically based rodent management (EBRM) practices could be feasible and sustainable alternatives to rodenticide use. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rodents in Crop Production Agricultural Systems)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

9 pages, 1080 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Bark Gnawing by Rodents in Orchards during the Growing Season—Can We Detect Relation with Forest Damages?

by Josef Suchomel, Jan Šipoš, Jana Ouředníčková, Michal Skalský and Marta Heroldová

Agronomy 2022, 12(2), 251; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/agronomy12020251 - 19 Jan 2022

Cited by 6 | Viewed by 1924

Abstract

Rodent bark gnawing is common during winter in times of low or unavailable food supply. During the growing season, it is a rare phenomenon, but can occur due to low food supply and/or poor food quality resulting from climatic influence. We evaluated this [...] Read more.

Rodent bark gnawing is common during winter in times of low or unavailable food supply. During the growing season, it is a rare phenomenon, but can occur due to low food supply and/or poor food quality resulting from climatic influence. We evaluated this unusual damage of apple tree (Malus domestica) orchards by rodents in two localities in the Czech Republic. In 2019, 24% of trees in the orchard in Brno were gnawed by the common vole (Microtus arvalis) population. Damage in the Holovousy orchard by water vole (Arvicola amphibius) was inspected in 2020 and showed that 15% of trees were damaged with massive root gnawing. These findings were compared with gnawing in forest beech plantations in 2019, with up to 13% of trees damaged. Three rodent species (Microtus agrestis, M. arvalis and Clethrionomys glareolus) participated in the damage. Detailed description of the various vole species’ damage in vegetation period, which somehow differs from winter time damage, may help in the future in early recognition and early application of plant protection in times when this phenomenon may reappear. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rodents in Crop Production Agricultural Systems)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

9 pages, 258 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Control of Common Vole (Microtus arvalis) in Alfalfa Crops Using Reduced Content of Anticoagulants

by Goran Jokić and Tanja Blažić

Agronomy 2022, 12(1), 53; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/agronomy12010053 - 27 Dec 2021

Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2545

Abstract

The common vole, Microtus arvalis, which is prone to cyclic overpopulation, poses a significant threat to sustainable alfalfa production by either chewing shoots periodically or gnawing and damaging roots permanently. In areas with established vole colonies, the density of alfalfa plants was [...] Read more.

The common vole, Microtus arvalis, which is prone to cyclic overpopulation, poses a significant threat to sustainable alfalfa production by either chewing shoots periodically or gnawing and damaging roots permanently. In areas with established vole colonies, the density of alfalfa plants was shown to decrease 55.3–63.4%. Simultaneously, the number of alfalfa shoots decreased by 60.9–71.7%. These experiments were conducted in compliance with an EPPO standard method in alfalfa fields at three geographically remote sites. The experiment tested the efficacy of the most widely used acute rodenticide zinc phosphide (2%), and anticoagulants applied at significantly reduced doses of active ingredients, i.e., bromadiolone (25 ppm) and brodifacoum (25 ppm), as well as a combination of these active ingredients at a low concentration (10 + 10 ppm). Three weeks after treatment, zinc phosphide and brodifacoum achieved the highest average efficacy, at 98.5% and 92.05%, respectively, while the average efficacy of the anticoagulant combination and bromadiolone was 87.2% and 75.5%, respectively. The achieved efficacy of baits based on brodifacoum and the combination of brodifacoum and bromadiolone in controlling common voles indicates their possible utilization in the field. Baits with 25 ppm of brodifacoum and the combination of bromadiolone and brodifacoum (10 + 10 ppm) showed satisfactory results and their introduction could significantly improve pest management programs for rodent control. At the same time, the use of anticoagulant rodenticides with reduced contents of active ingredients would significantly reduce their exposure to non-target animals, especially predators and vultures. By further improving the palatability of tested baits for target rodent species, their efficacy and safety of application would be significantly improved. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rodents in Crop Production Agricultural Systems)

6 pages, 816 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Assessing the Attractiveness of Three Baits for Roof Rats in California Citrus Orchards

by Kallista N. Wales, Ryan Meinerz and Roger A. Baldwin

Agronomy 2021, 11(12), 2417; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/agronomy11122417 - 27 Nov 2021

Cited by 5 | Viewed by 2311

Abstract

Roof rats (Rattus rattus) are common pests of tree fruit and nut orchards in California. Tracking tunnels are an effective and practical tool for monitoring changes in roof rat numbers in orchard systems, but they rely on the use of attractive [...] Read more.

Roof rats (Rattus rattus) are common pests of tree fruit and nut orchards in California. Tracking tunnels are an effective and practical tool for monitoring changes in roof rat numbers in orchard systems, but they rely on the use of attractive baits to draw in rats to the tracking surface. The identification of baits that are both attractive and readily available would be of great assistance for monitoring changes in roof rat numbers within agricultural fields. Therefore, we tested the attractiveness of a soft bait (Liphatech Rat and Mouse Attractant^TM), a wax block (Liphatech NoTox^TM), peanut butter, and a control (i.e., no bait applied) to roof rats when applied within tracking tunnels. We did not observe a difference in visitation to any of the tested attractants, although all attractants yielded greater visitation rates than control tunnels. However, tracking tunnels without any attractant were still visited at a relatively high rate, indicating the tracking tunnel is attractive to roof rats. As such, monitoring tools that provide shelter may increase detectability, although this would need to be verified. Regardless, all three food-based lures we tested increased the attractiveness of tracking tunnels and could be used to increase visitation to these monitoring devices. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rodents in Crop Production Agricultural Systems)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Editorial, Research

23 pages, 592 KiB

Open AccessReview

Management of the Common Vole in the Czech Lands: Historical and Current Perspectives

by Radek Aulicky, Emil Tkadlec, Josef Suchomel, Marcela Frankova, Marta Heroldová and Vaclav Stejskal

Agronomy 2022, 12(7), 1629; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/agronomy12071629 - 07 Jul 2022

Cited by 6 | Viewed by 2370

Abstract

The integrated management of a serious agricultural pest, the common vole (Microtus arvalis), should be based on modern and empirically proven approaches. The aim of this paper was to map the historical development of the monitoring and control practices of the [...] Read more.

The integrated management of a serious agricultural pest, the common vole (Microtus arvalis), should be based on modern and empirically proven approaches. The aim of this paper was to map the historical development of the monitoring and control practices of the common vole in the Czech Republic (CR) territory. Published records of vole population outbreaks and heavy crop damage have been documented in the Czech literature since the turn of the 20th century, and even in crops planted in highly fragmented and diversified agricultural landscapes. In the CR, systematic state monitoring was introduced in 1955. In the 1930’s, there were more than 100 various rodent preparations against the common vole, which were formulated as smoke generators, gases, baits, dusts, toxic mushy mass, and insecticide sprays. Currently, there are only six preparations with three active ingredients registered in the CR. Zinc phosphide is the only active ingredient that has been used from the 1940s to the present, whereas anticoagulants were banned for vole control in 2011 owing to the high environmental risks. The poisoning of nontarget animals by rodenticides is not a new phenomenon tied to synthetic pesticides; poisoning by botanical extracts (strychnine) was documented more than 100 years ago. This review may provide both historical lessons for current practice and new incentives for future research. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rodents in Crop Production Agricultural Systems)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 1168 KiB

Open AccessReview

Impacts of House Mice on Sustainable Fodder Storage in Australia

by Peter R. Brown and Steve Henry

Agronomy 2022, 12(2), 254; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/agronomy12020254 - 20 Jan 2022

Cited by 7 | Viewed by 3293

Abstract

Mice cause substantial economic, social, and environmental damage to rural production systems and communities in Australia, especially during mouse plagues. The losses and damage caused by mice to hay/fodder storage are not well understood, given the size of the industry, so a pilot [...] Read more.

Mice cause substantial economic, social, and environmental damage to rural production systems and communities in Australia, especially during mouse plagues. The losses and damage caused by mice to hay/fodder storage are not well understood, given the size of the industry, so a pilot study (survey of 14 growers) was designed to better understand the physical and economic damage, consider disease implications, and identify the management strategies available. During a mouse plague, mice were regarded as the only factor (other than weather) that affected the long-term sustainability of fodder storage. Growers were feeding fodder to livestock (sheep/cattle) at twice the rate they normally would because of mouse damage and contamination. Mice damaged strings and the structure of bales, making transport impractical, leading to destruction of some stacks. Losses caused by mice were estimated at AUD 140,000 (range = AUD 7000–461,580; equivalent to 30–40% loss of value) and included estimates of physical damage to hay/fodder bales, rodenticides, and labour costs. Growers were concerned about contamination and disease transfer to livestock (and workers) from mice through urine/faeces and their carcasses, especially during mouse plagues. There are significant gaps in our knowledge on the impacts of mice to fodder storage in Australia. Research is needed to (1) identify effective mouse control options, (2) determine the economic impact of mice, and (3) undertake a disease study of mice, to help inform appropriate management strategies for effective control. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rodents in Crop Production Agricultural Systems)

► Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Rodents in Crop Production Agricultural Systems

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editor

Special Issue Information

Keywords

Related Special Issue

Published Papers (9 papers)

Editorial

Research

Review

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI