G80-521 Common Stalk Borer in Corn (Revised April 2000)

The life history and appearance of common stalk borers is described, along with information on damage they can cause, economic injury levels and ways to control them in corn. In the past, the common stalk borer, Papaipema nebris, has not been a major pest of corn in Nebraska. Stalk borer damage in corn commonly is confined to occasional plants in the first few rows near field margins, fence rows, grass terraces and waterways. In addition to attacking corn, this insect attacks over one hundred other species of plants, including ornamentals, broadleaf weeds and grasses. It may feed on soybeans as well, but is not an economically important pest of that crop. Understanding the common stalk borer life cycle and behavior is critical to selecting management practices to reduce its damage in corn

G80-521 Common Stalk Borer in Corn (Revised April 2000)

The life history and appearance of common stalk borers is described, along with information on damage they can cause, economic injury levels and ways to control them in corn. In the past, the common stalk borer, Papaipema nebris, has not been a major pest of corn in Nebraska. Stalk borer damage in corn commonly is confined to occasional plants in the first few rows near field margins, fence rows, grass terraces and waterways. In addition to attacking corn, this insect attacks over one hundred other species of plants, including ornamentals, broadleaf weeds and grasses. It may feed on soybeans as well, but is not an economically important pest of that crop. Understanding the common stalk borer life cycle and behavior is critical to selecting management practices to reduce its damage in corn

NF97-343 Returning CRP Land to Crops: Warm-Season Grass Management/Cropping Suggestions

This NebFact has information on returning CRP land to crop production including tillage and no-till recommendations

NF97-343 Returning CRP Land to Crops: Warm-Season Grass Management/Cropping Suggestions

This NebFact has information on returning CRP land to crop production including tillage and no-till recommendations

A de novo paradigm for male infertility

Genetics of Male Infertility Initiative (GEMINI) consortium: Donald F. Conrad, Liina Nagirnaja, Kenneth I. Aston, Douglas T. Carrell, James M. Hotaling, Timothy G. Jenkins, Rob McLachlan, Moira K. O’Bryan, Peter N. Schlegel, Michael L. Eisenberg, Jay I. Sandlow, Emily S. Jungheim, Kenan R. Omurtag, Alexandra M. Lopes, Susana Seixas, Filipa Carvalho, Susana Fernandes, Alberto Barros, João Gonçalves, Iris Caetano, Graça Pinto, Sónia Correia, Maris Laan, Margus Punab, Ewa Rajpert-De Meyts, Niels Jørgensen, Kristian Almstrup, Csilla G. Krausz & Keith A. Jarvi.De novo mutations are known to play a prominent role in sporadic disorders with reduced fitness. We hypothesize that de novo mutations play an important role in severe male infertility and explain a portion of the genetic causes of this understudied disorder. To test this hypothesis, we utilize trio-based exome sequencing in a cohort of 185 infertile males and their unaffected parents. Following a systematic analysis, 29 of 145 rare (MAF < 0.1%) protein-altering de novo mutations are classified as possibly causative of the male infertility phenotype. We observed a significant enrichment of loss-of-function de novo mutations in loss-of-function-intolerant genes (p-value = 1.00 × 10−5) in infertile men compared to controls. Additionally, we detected a significant increase in predicted pathogenic de novo missense mutations affecting missense-intolerant genes (p-value = 5.01 × 10−4) in contrast to predicted benign de novo mutations. One gene we identify, RBM5, is an essential regulator of male germ cell pre-mRNA splicing and has been previously implicated in male infertility in mice. In a follow-up study, 6 rare pathogenic missense mutations affecting this gene are observed in a cohort of 2,506 infertile patients, whilst we find no such mutations in a cohort of 5,784 fertile men (p-value = 0.03). Our results provide evidence for the role of de novo mutations in severe male infertility and point to new candidate genes affecting fertility.This project was funded by The Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (918-15-667) to J.A.V. as well as an Investigator Award in Science from the Wellcome Trust (209451) to J.A.V. a grant from the Catherine van Tussenbroek Foundation to M.S.O. a grant from MERCK to R.S. a UUKi Rutherford Fund Fellowship awarded to B.J.H. and the German Research Foundation Clinical Research Unit “Male Germ Cells” (DFG, CRU326) to C.F. and F.T. This project was also supported in part by funding from the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1120356) to M.K.O.B., by grants from the National Institutes of Health of the United States of America (R01HD078641 to D.F.C. and K.I.A., P50HD096723 to D.F.C.) and from the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/S008039/1) to D.J.E.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Global maps of soil temperature

Research in global change ecology relies heavily on global climatic grids derived from estimates of air temperature in open areas at around 2 m above the ground. These climatic grids do not reflect conditions below vegetation canopies and near the ground surface, where critical ecosystem functions occur and most terrestrial species reside. Here, we provide global maps of soil temperature and bioclimatic variables at a 1-km² resolution for 0–5 and 5–15 cm soil depth. These maps were created by calculating the difference (i.e., offset) between in-situ soil temperature measurements, based on time series from over 1200 1-km² pixels (summarized from 8500 unique temperature sensors) across all the world’s major terrestrial biomes, and coarse-grained air temperature estimates from ERA5-Land (an atmospheric reanalysis by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts). We show that mean annual soil temperature differs markedly from the corresponding gridded air temperature, by up to 10°C (mean = 3.0 ± 2.1°C), with substantial variation across biomes and seasons. Over the year, soils in cold and/or dry biomes are substantially warmer (+3.6 ± 2.3°C) than gridded air temperature, whereas soils in warm and humid environments are on average slightly cooler (-0.7 ± 2.3°C). The observed substantial and biome-specific offsets emphasize that the projected impacts of climate and climate change on near-surface biodiversity and ecosystem functioning are inaccurately assessed when air rather than soil temperature is used, especially in cold environments. The global soil-related bioclimatic variables provided here are an important step forward for any application in ecology and related disciplines. Nevertheless, we highlight the need to fill remaining geographic gaps by collecting more in-situ measurements of microclimate conditions to further enhance the spatiotemporal resolution of global soil temperature products for ecological applications

Global maps of soil temperature.

Research in global change ecology relies heavily on global climatic grids derived from estimates of air temperature in open areas at around 2 m above the ground. These climatic grids do not reflect conditions below vegetation canopies and near the ground surface, where critical ecosystem functions occur and most terrestrial species reside. Here, we provide global maps of soil temperature and bioclimatic variables at a 1-km2 resolution for 0-5 and 5-15 cm soil depth. These maps were created by calculating the difference (i.e. offset) between in situ soil temperature measurements, based on time series from over 1200 1-km2 pixels (summarized from 8519 unique temperature sensors) across all the world's major terrestrial biomes, and coarse-grained air temperature estimates from ERA5-Land (an atmospheric reanalysis by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts). We show that mean annual soil temperature differs markedly from the corresponding gridded air temperature, by up to 10°C (mean = 3.0 ± 2.1°C), with substantial variation across biomes and seasons. Over the year, soils in cold and/or dry biomes are substantially warmer (+3.6 ± 2.3°C) than gridded air temperature, whereas soils in warm and humid environments are on average slightly cooler (-0.7 ± 2.3°C). The observed substantial and biome-specific offsets emphasize that the projected impacts of climate and climate change on near-surface biodiversity and ecosystem functioning are inaccurately assessed when air rather than soil temperature is used, especially in cold environments. The global soil-related bioclimatic variables provided here are an important step forward for any application in ecology and related disciplines. Nevertheless, we highlight the need to fill remaining geographic gaps by collecting more in situ measurements of microclimate conditions to further enhance the spatiotemporal resolution of global soil temperature products for ecological applications

G93-1136 Potato Leafhopper Management in Alfalfa

This NebGuide explains how to detect and manage potato leafhoppers to minimize alfalfa damage. The potato leafhopper is capable of causing serious damage to alfalfa in Nebraska. This insect overwinters in the gulf states and migrates northward in the spring, usually in April or early May. During the summer months, several generations develop while feeding primarily on legumes such as alfalfa and clover. Although an occasional host, soybeans rarely suffer economic damage, particularly with the pubescent (i.e. hairy) soybean varieties that are commonly grown today. Infested potatoes also can sustain economic damage from this insect. Generally, the potato leafhopper is an economic pest in only the eastern one-third of the state but it will occasionally spread and cause major problems in other portions of the state

NF91-30 The Clover Leaf Weevil in Alfalfa

In 1991, there has been a lot of concern about the clover leaf weevil in alfalfa in eastern Nebraska. Many farmers in the eastern one-third of the state experienced problems with the regrowth of alfalfa after the first cutting in 1990, caused by the feeding of the adult of this insect. This NebFact discusses the difference between the alfalfa weevil and the clover leaf weevil and to control them in the field(s)