Hostname: page-component-6d856f89d9-5pczc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T05:34:10.950Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EFFICACY OF BACILLUS THURINGIENSIS BERLINER FOR SUPPRESSING POPULATIONS OF LARGE ASPEN TORTRIX IN ALASKA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

E.H. Holsten  and
J. Hard
E.H. Holsten
Affiliation:
State and Private Forestry, Alaska Region, USDA Forest Service, Anchorage, Alaska 99508
J. Hard
Affiliation:
Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Institute of Northern Forestry, Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The efficacy of Bacillus thuringiensis was evaluated against the large aspen tortrix on trembling aspen in Alaska. A concentration of 4 × 109 IU per 378.5 L of water was applied to infested trees using a hydraulic sprayer. Treatments with Dipel 4L and Thuricide 32LV resulted in population reductions of 69 and 76% respectively. Both products provided significant foliage protection. Timing of treatment is critical to successful population suppression and foliage protection.

Résumé

On a évalué l'efficacité du Bacillus thuringiensis contre la tordeuse du tremble sur le tremble en Alaska. On a appliqué une concentration de 4 × 109 UI dans 378,5 L d'eau sur des arbres infestés avec un pulvérisateur hydraulique. Des traitements utilisant le Dipel 4L et le Thuricide 32LV ont causé des réductions de populations de 69 et 76%, respectivement. Ces 2 produits ont protégé le feuillage de façon évidente. Le moment du traitement est critique pour réussir la suppression de la population et la protection du feuillage.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 117 , Issue 5 , May 1985 , pp. 587 - 591
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1985

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

Abbott, W.S. 1925. A method for computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. J. econ. Ent. 18: 265–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckwith, R.C. 1968. The large aspen tortrix, Choristoneura conflictana (Wlkr.) in interior Alaska. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Res. Note PNW-81. 10 pp.Google Scholar
Conover, W.J. 1971. Practical nonparametric statistics. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York. 462 pp.Google Scholar
Henson, W.R. 1954. A sampling system for poplar insects. Can. J. Zool. 32: 421–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holsten, E.H. 1979. Large aspen tortrix: Willow, Alaska. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Biolog. Eval. R10-79-3. 9 pp.Google Scholar
Holsten, E.H. 1980. The large aspen tortrix: an insect pest of quaking aspen. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Alaska Region Leaflet No. 91. 6 pp.Google Scholar
Holsten, E.H., and Hard, J.. 1981. An evaluation of Bacillus thuringiensis Berl. for suppressing large aspen tortrix populations in Alaska. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Tech. Rep. R10-4. 18 pp.Google Scholar
Holsten, E.H., Ward, T., and Zogas, K.P. 1980. Large aspen tortrix-Pt. McKenzie, Ak. and laboratory evaluation of Bacillus thuringiensis. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Biolog. Eval. R10-80-5. 14 pp.Google Scholar
Morris, O.N. 1983. Protection of Bacillus thuringiensis from inactivation by sunlight. Can. Ent. 115: 1215–1227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, O.N., and Moore, A.. 1975. Studies on the protection of insect pathogens from sunlight inactivation. II. Preliminary field trials. Chem. Contr. Res. Inst. Environ. Can. For. Serv. Rep. CC-X-113. 34 pp.Google Scholar
USDA Forest Service. 1983. Forest insect and disease conditions in Alaska (R-10), 1981–1982. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Serv., Alaska Region. 20 pp.Google Scholar