Plant growth regulator (Stronghold) enhances repellency of anthraquinone formulation (flight control) to Canada geese
There is a need for nonlethal methods of reducing conflicts between burgeoning populations of resident giant Canada geese (Branta canadensis) and humans at airports and other settings. An anthraquinonebased formulation (Flight Control™ [FC]; 50% anthraquinone [AQ], active ingredient) has shown promi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of wildlife management 1999-10, Vol.63 (4), p.1336-1343 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1343 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 1336 |
container_title | The Journal of wildlife management |
container_volume | 63 |
creator | Blackwell, B.F Seamans, T.W Dolbeer, R.A |
description | There is a need for nonlethal methods of reducing conflicts between burgeoning populations of resident giant Canada geese (Branta canadensis) and humans at airports and other settings. An anthraquinonebased formulation (Flight Control™ [FC]; 50% anthraquinone [AQ], active ingredient) has shown promise in deterring grazing by Canada geese. We hypothesized that the addition of a plant growth regulator (Stronghold™ [SH]) might enhance the effectiveness of FC by minimizing the exposure of new, untreated grass. To isolate the effects of grass height, plant growth regulator, and the combination of a repellent with a plant growth regulator on grazing by geese, we conducted 3 experiments, each using 24 geese in 6 18.3- × 30.5-m pens in northern Ohio during 1998. We evaluated the response of geese to short (4-11 cm) and tall grass (16-21 cm) in a 9-day test (15-23 Jul). Next, SH (applied at 1.2 L/ha) was evaluated as a grazing repellent in a 14-day test (30 Jul-12 Aug). Finally, we evaluated the effectiveness of FC (2.3 L/ha) combined with SH (0.9 L/ha SH) as a grazing repellent in a 22-day test (11 Sep-2 Oct). We found no difference (P = 0.529) in the number of geese per observation in tall- (1.7 ± 1.5; x̄ ± SE) versus short-grass plots (2.3 ± 1.5), nor in bill contacts per minute (P = 0.777) in tall- (12.6 ± 9.3) versus short-grass plots (11.1 ± 7.9). In the SH test, 14 days postapplication, mean grass height was 12.9 cm in untreated plots and 7.2 cm in treated plots. However, the number of geese per observation on untreated (1.8 ± 1.3) and treated plots (2.2 ± 1.3) did not differ (P = 0.567). Also, there was no difference (P = 0.706) in the number of bill contacts per minute in untreated (15.3 ± 9.9) versus treated plots (18.1 ± 14.2). In contrast, over a 22-day FC/SH test, the mean number of geese per observation was 2.6 times greater (P < 0.001) on untreated (2.9 ± 0.5) versus treated plots (1.1 ± 0.5). Further, the mean number of bill contacts per minute was 8.2 times greater (P < 0.001) on untreated (54.4 ± 11.2) than treated plots (6.6 ± 2.3). We observed no abatement in repellency 22 days posttreatment. Thus, we conclude that SH greatly enhanced the repellency of FC to grazing Canada geese, and we contend that the use of a plant growth regulator with FC will prove effective in reducing goose foraging at airports and other sites. |
doi_str_mv | 10.2307/3802852 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_17490588</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>3802852</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>3802852</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-7adc2a3adc6ccaf1b4ab9c3314ffb9e77cfdd3bbc4550366b98295663e9e0b4d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMlKBDEQhoMoOC74CAYRl0Nrlt5ylMENBhRU8NZUp5PuHjLJmHQjvr0ZZkDx4KXqUF99VP0IHVFyxTgprnlJWJmxLTShghcJK2mxjSaEMJZkKX3fRXshzAnhlJb5BI3PBuyAW-8-hw571Y4GBufxxcvgnW07Z5pLrGwHVqoQ50tljLLyCzuN42Ln4WPsrbMKa-cXq-XeWXyhTd92A5bORo25xIPDU7DQAG6VCuoA7WgwQR1u-j56u7t9nT4ks6f7x-nNLJE850NSQCMZ8FhzKUHTOoVaSM5pqnUtVFFI3TS8rmWaZYTneS1KJrI850ooUqcN30dna-_Su49RhaFa9EHGF8AqN4aKFqkgWVlG8OQPOHejt_G2ivGUMR7JCJ2vIeldCF7paun7BfivipJqlX21yT6SpxsdBAlG-xhfH35wUUT8FzYPMfN_bMdrTIOroPXR9PbCCI0KQQVlgn8D3CmZHA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>234223174</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Plant growth regulator (Stronghold) enhances repellency of anthraquinone formulation (flight control) to Canada geese</title><source>JSTOR</source><creator>Blackwell, B.F ; Seamans, T.W ; Dolbeer, R.A</creator><creatorcontrib>Blackwell, B.F ; Seamans, T.W ; Dolbeer, R.A</creatorcontrib><description>There is a need for nonlethal methods of reducing conflicts between burgeoning populations of resident giant Canada geese (Branta canadensis) and humans at airports and other settings. An anthraquinonebased formulation (Flight Control™ [FC]; 50% anthraquinone [AQ], active ingredient) has shown promise in deterring grazing by Canada geese. We hypothesized that the addition of a plant growth regulator (Stronghold™ [SH]) might enhance the effectiveness of FC by minimizing the exposure of new, untreated grass. To isolate the effects of grass height, plant growth regulator, and the combination of a repellent with a plant growth regulator on grazing by geese, we conducted 3 experiments, each using 24 geese in 6 18.3- × 30.5-m pens in northern Ohio during 1998. We evaluated the response of geese to short (4-11 cm) and tall grass (16-21 cm) in a 9-day test (15-23 Jul). Next, SH (applied at 1.2 L/ha) was evaluated as a grazing repellent in a 14-day test (30 Jul-12 Aug). Finally, we evaluated the effectiveness of FC (2.3 L/ha) combined with SH (0.9 L/ha SH) as a grazing repellent in a 22-day test (11 Sep-2 Oct). We found no difference (P = 0.529) in the number of geese per observation in tall- (1.7 ± 1.5; x̄ ± SE) versus short-grass plots (2.3 ± 1.5), nor in bill contacts per minute (P = 0.777) in tall- (12.6 ± 9.3) versus short-grass plots (11.1 ± 7.9). In the SH test, 14 days postapplication, mean grass height was 12.9 cm in untreated plots and 7.2 cm in treated plots. However, the number of geese per observation on untreated (1.8 ± 1.3) and treated plots (2.2 ± 1.3) did not differ (P = 0.567). Also, there was no difference (P = 0.706) in the number of bill contacts per minute in untreated (15.3 ± 9.9) versus treated plots (18.1 ± 14.2). In contrast, over a 22-day FC/SH test, the mean number of geese per observation was 2.6 times greater (P < 0.001) on untreated (2.9 ± 0.5) versus treated plots (1.1 ± 0.5). Further, the mean number of bill contacts per minute was 8.2 times greater (P < 0.001) on untreated (54.4 ± 11.2) than treated plots (6.6 ± 2.3). We observed no abatement in repellency 22 days posttreatment. Thus, we conclude that SH greatly enhanced the repellency of FC to grazing Canada geese, and we contend that the use of a plant growth regulator with FC will prove effective in reducing goose foraging at airports and other sites.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-541X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1937-2817</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2307/3802852</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JWMAA9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bethesda, MD: The Wildlife Society</publisher><subject>Airports ; Anthraquinones ; Aquatic birds ; Biological and medical sciences ; bird control ; bird repellents ; Branta canadensis ; Flight control ; Flight control systems ; Flowers & plants ; Foraging ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Geese ; Grasses ; Grazing ; Growth regulators ; Medically important nuisances and vectors, pests of stored products and materials: population survey and control ; Nuisances ; Plant growth ; Plant growth regulators ; plant growth substances ; vertebrate pests ; Waterfowl ; Wildfowl ; Wildlife damage management ; Wildlife management</subject><ispartof>The Journal of wildlife management, 1999-10, Vol.63 (4), p.1336-1343</ispartof><rights>Copyright 1999 The Wildlife Society</rights><rights>1999 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Wildlife Society Oct 1999</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-7adc2a3adc6ccaf1b4ab9c3314ffb9e77cfdd3bbc4550366b98295663e9e0b4d3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3802852$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/3802852$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=1972302$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Blackwell, B.F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seamans, T.W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dolbeer, R.A</creatorcontrib><title>Plant growth regulator (Stronghold) enhances repellency of anthraquinone formulation (flight control) to Canada geese</title><title>The Journal of wildlife management</title><description>There is a need for nonlethal methods of reducing conflicts between burgeoning populations of resident giant Canada geese (Branta canadensis) and humans at airports and other settings. An anthraquinonebased formulation (Flight Control™ [FC]; 50% anthraquinone [AQ], active ingredient) has shown promise in deterring grazing by Canada geese. We hypothesized that the addition of a plant growth regulator (Stronghold™ [SH]) might enhance the effectiveness of FC by minimizing the exposure of new, untreated grass. To isolate the effects of grass height, plant growth regulator, and the combination of a repellent with a plant growth regulator on grazing by geese, we conducted 3 experiments, each using 24 geese in 6 18.3- × 30.5-m pens in northern Ohio during 1998. We evaluated the response of geese to short (4-11 cm) and tall grass (16-21 cm) in a 9-day test (15-23 Jul). Next, SH (applied at 1.2 L/ha) was evaluated as a grazing repellent in a 14-day test (30 Jul-12 Aug). Finally, we evaluated the effectiveness of FC (2.3 L/ha) combined with SH (0.9 L/ha SH) as a grazing repellent in a 22-day test (11 Sep-2 Oct). We found no difference (P = 0.529) in the number of geese per observation in tall- (1.7 ± 1.5; x̄ ± SE) versus short-grass plots (2.3 ± 1.5), nor in bill contacts per minute (P = 0.777) in tall- (12.6 ± 9.3) versus short-grass plots (11.1 ± 7.9). In the SH test, 14 days postapplication, mean grass height was 12.9 cm in untreated plots and 7.2 cm in treated plots. However, the number of geese per observation on untreated (1.8 ± 1.3) and treated plots (2.2 ± 1.3) did not differ (P = 0.567). Also, there was no difference (P = 0.706) in the number of bill contacts per minute in untreated (15.3 ± 9.9) versus treated plots (18.1 ± 14.2). In contrast, over a 22-day FC/SH test, the mean number of geese per observation was 2.6 times greater (P < 0.001) on untreated (2.9 ± 0.5) versus treated plots (1.1 ± 0.5). Further, the mean number of bill contacts per minute was 8.2 times greater (P < 0.001) on untreated (54.4 ± 11.2) than treated plots (6.6 ± 2.3). We observed no abatement in repellency 22 days posttreatment. Thus, we conclude that SH greatly enhanced the repellency of FC to grazing Canada geese, and we contend that the use of a plant growth regulator with FC will prove effective in reducing goose foraging at airports and other sites.</description><subject>Airports</subject><subject>Anthraquinones</subject><subject>Aquatic birds</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>bird control</subject><subject>bird repellents</subject><subject>Branta canadensis</subject><subject>Flight control</subject><subject>Flight control systems</subject><subject>Flowers & plants</subject><subject>Foraging</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Geese</subject><subject>Grasses</subject><subject>Grazing</subject><subject>Growth regulators</subject><subject>Medically important nuisances and vectors, pests of stored products and materials: population survey and control</subject><subject>Nuisances</subject><subject>Plant growth</subject><subject>Plant growth regulators</subject><subject>plant growth substances</subject><subject>vertebrate pests</subject><subject>Waterfowl</subject><subject>Wildfowl</subject><subject>Wildlife damage management</subject><subject>Wildlife management</subject><issn>0022-541X</issn><issn>1937-2817</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1999</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kMlKBDEQhoMoOC74CAYRl0Nrlt5ylMENBhRU8NZUp5PuHjLJmHQjvr0ZZkDx4KXqUF99VP0IHVFyxTgprnlJWJmxLTShghcJK2mxjSaEMJZkKX3fRXshzAnhlJb5BI3PBuyAW-8-hw571Y4GBufxxcvgnW07Z5pLrGwHVqoQ50tljLLyCzuN42Ln4WPsrbMKa-cXq-XeWXyhTd92A5bORo25xIPDU7DQAG6VCuoA7WgwQR1u-j56u7t9nT4ks6f7x-nNLJE850NSQCMZ8FhzKUHTOoVaSM5pqnUtVFFI3TS8rmWaZYTneS1KJrI850ooUqcN30dna-_Su49RhaFa9EHGF8AqN4aKFqkgWVlG8OQPOHejt_G2ivGUMR7JCJ2vIeldCF7paun7BfivipJqlX21yT6SpxsdBAlG-xhfH35wUUT8FzYPMfN_bMdrTIOroPXR9PbCCI0KQQVlgn8D3CmZHA</recordid><startdate>19991001</startdate><enddate>19991001</enddate><creator>Blackwell, B.F</creator><creator>Seamans, T.W</creator><creator>Dolbeer, R.A</creator><general>The Wildlife Society</general><general>Wildlife Society</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19991001</creationdate><title>Plant growth regulator (Stronghold) enhances repellency of anthraquinone formulation (flight control) to Canada geese</title><author>Blackwell, B.F ; Seamans, T.W ; Dolbeer, R.A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-7adc2a3adc6ccaf1b4ab9c3314ffb9e77cfdd3bbc4550366b98295663e9e0b4d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1999</creationdate><topic>Airports</topic><topic>Anthraquinones</topic><topic>Aquatic birds</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>bird control</topic><topic>bird repellents</topic><topic>Branta canadensis</topic><topic>Flight control</topic><topic>Flight control systems</topic><topic>Flowers & plants</topic><topic>Foraging</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Geese</topic><topic>Grasses</topic><topic>Grazing</topic><topic>Growth regulators</topic><topic>Medically important nuisances and vectors, pests of stored products and materials: population survey and control</topic><topic>Nuisances</topic><topic>Plant growth</topic><topic>Plant growth regulators</topic><topic>plant growth substances</topic><topic>vertebrate pests</topic><topic>Waterfowl</topic><topic>Wildfowl</topic><topic>Wildlife damage management</topic><topic>Wildlife management</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Blackwell, B.F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seamans, T.W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dolbeer, R.A</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The Journal of wildlife management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Blackwell, B.F</au><au>Seamans, T.W</au><au>Dolbeer, R.A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Plant growth regulator (Stronghold) enhances repellency of anthraquinone formulation (flight control) to Canada geese</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of wildlife management</jtitle><date>1999-10-01</date><risdate>1999</risdate><volume>63</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>1336</spage><epage>1343</epage><pages>1336-1343</pages><issn>0022-541X</issn><eissn>1937-2817</eissn><coden>JWMAA9</coden><abstract>There is a need for nonlethal methods of reducing conflicts between burgeoning populations of resident giant Canada geese (Branta canadensis) and humans at airports and other settings. An anthraquinonebased formulation (Flight Control™ [FC]; 50% anthraquinone [AQ], active ingredient) has shown promise in deterring grazing by Canada geese. We hypothesized that the addition of a plant growth regulator (Stronghold™ [SH]) might enhance the effectiveness of FC by minimizing the exposure of new, untreated grass. To isolate the effects of grass height, plant growth regulator, and the combination of a repellent with a plant growth regulator on grazing by geese, we conducted 3 experiments, each using 24 geese in 6 18.3- × 30.5-m pens in northern Ohio during 1998. We evaluated the response of geese to short (4-11 cm) and tall grass (16-21 cm) in a 9-day test (15-23 Jul). Next, SH (applied at 1.2 L/ha) was evaluated as a grazing repellent in a 14-day test (30 Jul-12 Aug). Finally, we evaluated the effectiveness of FC (2.3 L/ha) combined with SH (0.9 L/ha SH) as a grazing repellent in a 22-day test (11 Sep-2 Oct). We found no difference (P = 0.529) in the number of geese per observation in tall- (1.7 ± 1.5; x̄ ± SE) versus short-grass plots (2.3 ± 1.5), nor in bill contacts per minute (P = 0.777) in tall- (12.6 ± 9.3) versus short-grass plots (11.1 ± 7.9). In the SH test, 14 days postapplication, mean grass height was 12.9 cm in untreated plots and 7.2 cm in treated plots. However, the number of geese per observation on untreated (1.8 ± 1.3) and treated plots (2.2 ± 1.3) did not differ (P = 0.567). Also, there was no difference (P = 0.706) in the number of bill contacts per minute in untreated (15.3 ± 9.9) versus treated plots (18.1 ± 14.2). In contrast, over a 22-day FC/SH test, the mean number of geese per observation was 2.6 times greater (P < 0.001) on untreated (2.9 ± 0.5) versus treated plots (1.1 ± 0.5). Further, the mean number of bill contacts per minute was 8.2 times greater (P < 0.001) on untreated (54.4 ± 11.2) than treated plots (6.6 ± 2.3). We observed no abatement in repellency 22 days posttreatment. Thus, we conclude that SH greatly enhanced the repellency of FC to grazing Canada geese, and we contend that the use of a plant growth regulator with FC will prove effective in reducing goose foraging at airports and other sites.</abstract><cop>Bethesda, MD</cop><pub>The Wildlife Society</pub><doi>10.2307/3802852</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-541X |
ispartof | The Journal of wildlife management, 1999-10, Vol.63 (4), p.1336-1343 |
issn | 0022-541X 1937-2817 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_17490588 |
source | JSTOR |
subjects | Airports Anthraquinones Aquatic birds Biological and medical sciences bird control bird repellents Branta canadensis Flight control Flight control systems Flowers & plants Foraging Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Geese Grasses Grazing Growth regulators Medically important nuisances and vectors, pests of stored products and materials: population survey and control Nuisances Plant growth Plant growth regulators plant growth substances vertebrate pests Waterfowl Wildfowl Wildlife damage management Wildlife management |
title | Plant growth regulator (Stronghold) enhances repellency of anthraquinone formulation (flight control) to Canada geese |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T13%3A33%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Plant%20growth%20regulator%20(Stronghold)%20enhances%20repellency%20of%20anthraquinone%20formulation%20(flight%20control)%20to%20Canada%20geese&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20wildlife%20management&rft.au=Blackwell,%20B.F&rft.date=1999-10-01&rft.volume=63&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=1336&rft.epage=1343&rft.pages=1336-1343&rft.issn=0022-541X&rft.eissn=1937-2817&rft.coden=JWMAA9&rft_id=info:doi/10.2307/3802852&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E3802852%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=234223174&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=3802852&rfr_iscdi=true |