Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T23:58:56.636Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

RESIN CRYSTALLIZATION RELATED TO WEEVIL RESISTANCE IN WHITE PINE (PINUS STROBUS)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

J. P. van Buijtenen  and
Frank S. Santamour Jr.
J. P. van Buijtenen
Affiliation:
Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Durham, New Hampshire
Frank S. Santamour Jr.
Affiliation:
National Arboretum, Agricultural Research Station, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Differences in weevil attack between trees containing crystallizing and non-crystallizing resin were observed. Among twenty non-crystallizers only three trees were successfully attacked by the white-pine weevil. About 50% of the remaining population was successfully attacked. Resin crystallization can thus be used as a characteristic to screen for resistance to the white-pine weevil.Since several other characteristics such as leader diameter, depth of cortical resin ducts and bark thickness are also related to weevil resistance, a discriminant function could be developed to maximize discrimination between susceptible and resistant trees by a properly weighted combination of characteristics related to weevil resistance.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 104 , Issue 2 , February 1972 , pp. 215 - 219
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1972

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

Gerhold, H. D. and Stroh, R. C.. 1963. Integrated selection for white pine weevil resistance and its components. Proc. World Consultation on Forest Genetics and Tree Improvement. Stockholm FAO/FORGEN 63-6b/1, 7 p.Google Scholar
Kriebel, H. B. 1954. Bark thickness as a factor in resistance to white pine weevil injury. J. For. 52(11): 842–845.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, W. J. 1964. Table for both the sign test and distribution-free confidence intervals of the median for sample sizes to 1000. J. Am. stat. Ass. 59: 935–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mergen, F. and Furnival, G. M.. 1960. Discriminant analysis of Pinus thunbergii × Pinus densiflora hybrids. Proc. Soc. Am. Foresters, p. 36–40.Google Scholar
Santamour, F. S. Jr. 1965. Insect induced crystallization of white pine resins. I. White pine weevil. U.S. Dep. Agric. Forest Serv. Res. Note NE-38, 8 p.Google Scholar
Stroh, R. C. and Gerhold, H. D.. 1965. Eastern white pine characteristics related to weevil feeding. Silvae Genetica 14(5): 160–169.Google Scholar