Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T09:38:27.457Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

CONTROL OF HYLOBIUS CONGENER DALLE TORRE, SHENKLING, AND MARSHALL (COLEOPTERA: CURCULIONIDAE) USING ENTOMOPATHOGENIC NEMATODES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

D.C. Eidt ,
S. Zervos ,
A.E. Pye  and
J.R. Finney-Crawley
D.C. Eidt
Affiliation:
Canadian Forest Service - Maritimes, Natural Resources Canada, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada E3B 5P7
S. Zervos
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A 1S6
A.E. Pye
Affiliation:
BioLogic Biocontrol Products, Willow Hill, Pennsylvania, USA 17271
J.R. Finney-Crawley
Affiliation:
Memorial University, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada A1B 3X9
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Damage by Hylobius congener, the seedling debarking weevil, to newly planted conifer seedlings was reduced to tolerable levels by treating the roots of the seedlings with the nematode Steinernema carpocapsae (Weiser) before planting. A practical treatment method was to apply a suspension of infective juveniles (IJs) in water to seedlings in multipots with a watering can. An application rate of 300 000 IJs per seedling is recommended. The plantation should be at least 500 m from recent clearcuts and the entire plantation should be treated to avoid negation of treatment effects by invading uninfected weevils. It is suggested that a similar method may also be effective against other species of weevils that damage conifers near the soil surface.

Résumé

Les dommages causés par le charançon Hylobius congener à des jeunes pousses de conifères ont pu être réduits jusqu’à des niveaux acceptables par exposition des racines des jeunes plants au nématode Steinernema carpocapsae (Weiser) avant leur repiquage. La méthode la plus pratique est d’arroser les jeunes plants dans des plateaux à semis au moyen d’une suspension aqueuse de nématodes juvéniles infectieux préparée dans un arrosoir. La dose recommandée est de 300 000 juvéniles infectieux par jeune plant. La plantation doit être à au moins 500 m de zones de coupe à blanc récente et toute la plantation doit être traitée pour éviter qu’il n’y ait annihilation des effets du traitement par invasion de charançons sains. Nous croyons que cette méthode pourrait s’appliquer à d’autres espèces de charançons qui endommagent les conifères près de la surface du sol.

[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 127 , Issue 3 , June 1995 , pp. 431 - 438
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bedding, R.A., and Akhurst, R.J.. 1975. A simple technique for the detection of insect parasitic rhabditid nematodes in the soil. Nematologica 21: 109–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doggett, C.A., and Smith, T.. 1992. Pales weevil: A serious threat to longleaf pine production. Tree Planters' Notes 43(3): 87–88.Google Scholar
Eidt, D.C., and Weaver, C.A.A.. 1993. Control Damage by Seedling Debarking Weevil. Forestry Canada - Maritimes Region Technical Note 271: 5 pp.Google Scholar
Eidt, D.C., Zervos, S., and Finney-Crawley, J.. 1995. Susceptibility of Hylobius congener Dalle Torre, Shenkling, and Marshall to entomopathogenic nematodes. The Canadian Entomologist 127: 439–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaugler, R., and Boush, G.M.. 1978. Effects of ultraviolet radiation and sunlight on the entomogenous nematode, Neoaplectana carpocapsae. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology 32: 291–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pendrel, B.A. 1987. How to Live with the Seedling Debarking Weevil: A Key to Determine Degree of Hazard to Planting Sites. Canadian Forestry Service - Maritimes Technical Note 171: 4 pp.Google Scholar
Pendrel, B.A. 1990. Hazard from the Seedling Debarking Weevil: A Revised Key to Predicting Damage on Sites to be Planted. Forestry Canada - Maritimes Region Technical Note 236: 4 pp.Google Scholar
Poinar, G.O. 1990. Taxonomy and biology of Steinemematidae and Heterorhabditidae. pp. 23–61in Gaugler, R., and Kaya, H.K. (Eds.), Entomopathogenic Nematodes in Biological Control. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.Google Scholar
Pye, A.E., and Pye, N.L.. 1985. Different applications of the insect parasitic nematode Neoaplectana carpocapsae to control the large pine weevil, Hylobius abietis. Nematologica 31: 109–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quinn, J.P., Pendrel, B.A., Stewart, J.V., and Murray, T.. 1989. Controlling the Seedling Debarking Weevil: An Economic Analysis. Forestry Canada - Maritimes Region Technical Note 208: 8 pp.Google Scholar
Riley, C.M. 1993. Evaluation of four formulations of Steinernema carpocapsae against Galleria mollonella and Choristoneura fumiferana. New Brunswick Research and Productivity Council Report No. C/93/114 to D.C. Eidt, Forestry Canada.Google Scholar
Rose, A.H., and Lindquist, O.H.. 1973. Insects of Eastern Pines. Department of the Environment, Canadian Forestry Service Publication 1313: 127 pp.Google Scholar
Schmiege, D.C. 1963. The feasibility of using a neoaplectanid nematode for control of some forestry insects. Journal of Economic Entomology 56: 427–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, H.A. 1970. Neoaplectanid nematodes as parasites of the pales weevil larva, Hylobius pales. Entomological News 81: 91.Google Scholar
Welty, C., and Houseweart, M.W.. 1985. Site influences on Hylobius congener (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), a seedling debarking weevil of conifer plantations in Maine. Environmental Entomology 14: 826–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar