Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T11:15:17.846Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

PRIMARY ATTRACTION OF MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE, DENDROCTONUS PONDEROSAE HOPK. (COLEOPTERA: SCOLYTIDAE), TO BOLTS OF LODGEPOLE PINE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Henry A. Moeck  and
Clarence S. Simmons
Henry A. Moeck
Affiliation:
Forestry Canada, Pacific Forestry Centre, 506 West Burnside Rd., Victoria, British Columbia, Canada V8Z 1M5
Clarence S. Simmons
Affiliation:
Forestry Canada, Pacific Forestry Centre, 506 West Burnside Rd., Victoria, British Columbia, Canada V8Z 1M5
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Three field tests were conducted in which fresh lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Douglas var. latifolia Engl.) material, namely bolts with and without bark, bark only, and freshly tapped resin, were placed in beetle-excluding “greenhouse” cages; empty cages served as controls. Two “window” flight traps per cage, at right angles to each other, caught mountain pine beetles (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) arriving at the cages. Significantly more mountain pine beetles were trapped at cages baited with bolts and wood only than at empty control cages. Primary attraction in the mountain pine beetle is thus established, in the absence of pheromones and normal visual cues (tree stem silhouette). More beetles were trapped at cages baited with bark only and with resin than at empty control cages, but differences were not significant at p = 0.05. The sex ratio of trapped beetles (4.83 females: 1 male) was more than twice as high as the reported sex ratios of free-flying and emerging beetles.

Résumé

Trois essais sur le terrain ont été conduits auxquels ont été placés dans les cages de “serres” à l’épreuve d’adultes les fagots du pin tordu frais (Pinus contorta Douglas var. latifolia Engl.) avec et sans écorce; l’écorce seule; ou de la résine fraîchement gemmée. Les cages vides ont servi comme témoins. Deux pièges de vol avec “fenêtres” par cage, à angle droit l’un de l’autre, ont attrapé les dendroctones adultes (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) à leur arrivée aux cages. Significativement plus de dendroctones du pin ponderosa ont été pris par les cages avec les appâts des fagots et du bois, seuls, que par les cages vides témoins. L’attirance primaire au dendroctone du pin ponderosa est donc établie, dans l’absence des phéromones et des signaux visuels normaux (la silhouette du tronc d’arbre). Les cages ayant des appâts d’écorce seulement ou de résine ont attrapé davantage d’adultes que les cage vides témoins, mais les différences n’ont pas été significatives à p = 0.05. Le rapport sexuel des adultes pris (4,83 femelles : 1 mâle) a été deux fois plus élevé que les rapports sexuels signalés pour les adultes en libre vol et pour les adultes en éclosion.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 123 , Issue 2 , April 1991 , pp. 299 - 304
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1991

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

Amman, G.D. 1983. Strategy for reducing mountain pine beetle infestations with ponderosa pine trap logs. USDA Forest Serv., Intermountain For. Range Exp. Stn. Res. Note INT-338. 3 pp.Google Scholar
Amman, G.D., and Cole, W.E.. 1983. Mountain pine beetle dynamics in lodgepole pine forests Part II: Population dynamics. USDA Forest Serv., Intermountain For. Range Exp. Stn. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-145. 59 pp.Google Scholar
Blackman, M.W. 1931. The Black Hills beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopk.). Bull. N.Y. State College of Forestry, Syracuse Univ., Tech. Publ. No. 36, 4(4): 1–97.Google Scholar
Brown, C.L., and Franklin, R.T.. 1977. Southern pine beetle attractant: A criticism. J. For. Letters 75: 627.Google Scholar
Chapman, J.A. 1964. Studies on chemical attraction of the Douglas-fir beetle, Dendroctonus pseudotsugae Hopk., and other forest Coleoptera. Can. Dept. For., For. Ent. Path. Branch, Victoria, B.C., Interim Rep. Unpublished.Google Scholar
Chapman, J.A. 1966. The effect of attack by the ambrosia beetle Trypodendron lineatum (Olivier) on log attractiveness. Can. Ent. 98: 50–59.Google Scholar
Chapman, J.A., and Kinghorn, J.M.. 1955. Window flight traps for insects. Can. Ent. 87: 46–47.Google Scholar
Conn, J.E. 1981. Pheromone production and control mechanisms in Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins. M.Sc. thesis, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C. 66 pp.Google Scholar
Gara, R.I., Geiszler, D.R., and Littke, W.R.. 1984. Primary attraction of the mountain pine beetle to lodgepole pine in Oregon. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 77: 333–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goheen, D.J., Cobb, F.W. Jr, Wood, D.L., and Rowney, D.L.. 1985. Visitation frequencies of some insect species on Ceratocystis wageneri infected and apparently healthy ponderosa pines. Can. Ent. 117: 1535–1543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gries, G., Nolte, R., and Sanders, W.. 1989. Computer simulated host selection in Ips typographus. Entomologia exp. appl. 53: 211–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrington, T.C., and Cobb, F.W. Jr, (Eds.). 1988. Leptographium Root Diseases on Conifers. The American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, MN. Symposium Series. 149 pp.Google Scholar
Heikkenen, H.J. 1977. Southern pine beetle: A hypothesis regarding its primary attractant. J. For. 75: 408, 413.Google Scholar
Hynum, B.G., and Berryman, A.A.. 1980. Dendroctonus ponderosae (Coleoptera: Scolytidae): Pre-aggregation landing and gallery initiation on lodgepole pine. Can. Ent. 112: 185–191.Google Scholar
Jantz, O.K., and Rudinsky, J.A.. 1966. Studies of the olfactory behavior of the Douglas-fir beetle, Dendroctonus pseudotsugae Hopkins. Oregon State Univ., Agric. Exp. Stn., Corvallis, Tech. Bull. 94. 38 pp.Google Scholar
Libbey, L.M., Ryker, L.C., and Yandell, K.L.. 1985. Laboratory and field studies of volatiles released by Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins (Coleoptera, Scolytidae). Z. angew. Ent. 100: 381–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merrifield, L.E. 1972. Studies on the host selection behavior of the mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins (Coleoptera, Scolytidae). MS thesis, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. 54 pp.Google Scholar
Moeck, H.A. 1978. Field test for primary attraction of the spruce beetle. Fish. Environ. Can., For. Serv., Bimon. Res. Notes 34: 8.Google Scholar
Moeck, H.A., Wood, D.L., and Lindahl, K.Q. Jr, 1981. Host selection behavior of bark beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) attacking Pinus ponderosa, with special emphasis on the western pine beetle, Dendroctonus brevicomis. J. Chem. Ecol. 7: 49–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterman, R.M. 1974. Some aspects of the population dynamics of the mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae, in lodgepole pine forests of British Columbia. Ph.D. thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C. 208 pp.Google Scholar
Reid, R.W. 1960. Studies on the biology of the mountain pine beetle Dendroctonus monticolae Hopkins (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). Ph.D. thesis, Montana State College, Bozeman, MT. 133 pp.Google Scholar
Renwick, J.A.A., and Vité, J.P.. 1970. Systems of chemical communication in Dendroctonus. Contrib. Boyce Thompson Inst. 24: 283–292.Google Scholar
Richmond, H.A. 1933. Host selection studies of Dendroctonus monticolae Hopk. in southern British Columbia. For. Chron. 9: 60–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudinsky, J.A., Novák, V., and Svihra, P.. 1971. Attraction of the bark beetle Ips typographus L. to terpenes and a male-produced pheromone. Z. angew. Ent. 67(2): 179–188.Google Scholar
Safranyik, L., and Linton, D.A.. 1985. The relationship between density of emerged Dendroctonus ponderosae (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) and density of exit holes in lodgepole pine. Can. Ent. 117: 267–275.Google Scholar
Shepherd, R.F. 1960. Distribution of the Black Hills beetle over the host tree and factors controlling the attraction and behavior of the adult. Ph.D. thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. 82 pp.Google Scholar
Siegel, S. 1956. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. McGraw-Hill Co., New York, NY. 312 pp.Google Scholar
Steel, R.G.D., and Torrie, J.H.. 1960. Principles and Procedures of Statistics With Special Reference to the Biological Sciences. McGraw-Hill Co., New York, NY. 481 pp.Google Scholar
Syed, A. 1972. Chemical determinants of tree susceptibility to mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins). MF thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C. 76 pp.Google Scholar
Whitehead, A.T. 1986. Electroantennogram responses by mountain pine beetles, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins, exposed to selected semiochemicals. J. Chem. Ecol. 12: 1603–1621.Google Scholar
Wood, D.L. 1972. Selection and colonization of ponderosa pine by bark beetles. pp. 101–117in Van Emden, H.F. (Ed.), Insect/Plant Relationships. Symp. of the Royal Ent. Soc. London No. 6. Blackwell Sci. Publ., London.Google Scholar
Wood, D.L. 1982. The role of pheromones, kairomones, and allomones in the host selection and colonization behavior of bark beetles. A. Rev. Ent. 27: 411–446.Google Scholar