Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T06:24:39.380Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

DEVELOPMENT OF SAMPLING METHODS FOR THE DOUGLAS-FIR TUSSOCK MOTH, HEMEROCAMPA PSEUDOTSUGATA (LEPIDOPTERA: LYMANTRIIDAE)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Richard R. Mason
Affiliation:
Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Corvallis, Oregon

Abstract

Methods were developed to standardize sampling of the Douglas-fir tussock moth. Population density was estimated in terms of the number of eggs or larvae per 1,000 sq. in. of branch area of Abies concolor (Gord. and Glend.) Lindl. The density of eggs and larvae varied significantly in different parts of the tree crown. In an outbreak, egg masses were concentrated on inside branches near the bottom of the crown, but in light populations they were most common on outside branches in the top of the crown. Larvae were found over the entire tree, but they were especially concentrated on foliage in the top. Mean density of larvae in the middle crown was representative of the whole tree. Egg density is estimated from whole branches sampled representatively from three crown levels; however, density of larvae is estimated accurately from 17-in. twig samples taken from just the middle crown. Because eggs are clumped in masses and larvae are dispersed over the foliage, larval density can be estimated with much less sampling than can egg density for the same precision.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1970

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

Bliss, C. I., and Fisher, R. A.. 1953. Fitting the negative binomial distribution to biological data and a note on the efficient fitting of the negative binomial. Biometrics 9: 176200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Condrashoff, S. F., and Grant, J.. 1962. Sampling Douglas-fir tussock moth populations. Bi-mon. Prog. Rep. Forest Ent. Pathol. Br., Ottawa 18(4): 3.Google Scholar
Luck, R. F., and Dahlsten, D. L.. 1967. Douglas-fir tussock moth (Hemerocampa pseudotsugata) egg mass distribution on white fir in northeastern California. Can. Ent. 99: 11931203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, R. R. 1969. Sequential sampling of Douglas-fir tussock moth populations. Pacif. NW. Forest and Range Exp. Stn Forest Serv. Res. Note PNW-102.Google Scholar
Morris, R. F. 1955. The development of sampling techniques for forest insect defoliators, with particular references to the spruce budworm. Can. J. Zool. 33: 225294.Google Scholar
Waters, W. E. 1959. Measure of aggregation in insects. J. econ. Ent. 52: 11801184.Google Scholar