Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-2h6rp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-12T22:59:42.514Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EVALUATION OF MONOSODIUM METHANE ARSENATE FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF NATIVE ELM BARK BEETLES, HYLURGOPINUS RUFIPES (EICHHOFF) (COLEOPTERA: SCOLYTIDAE)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

I.L. Pines  and
A.R. Westwood
I.L. Pines
Affiliation:
Forest Landscape Management, Forestry Branch, Manitoba Natural Resources, 300 - 530 Kenaston Boulevard, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3N 1Z4
A.R. Westwood
Affiliation:
Forest Landscape Management, Forestry Branch, Manitoba Natural Resources, 300 - 530 Kenaston Boulevard, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3N 1Z4
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The native elm bark beetle, Hylurgopinus rufipes (Eichhoff), is the major vector of Dutch elm disease, Ophiostoma ulmi (Buisman) Nannf., in Manitoba. The herbicide Glowon™, monosodium methane arsenate (MSMA), was applied to a chainsaw cut in American elm, Ulmus americana L., tree stems to determine if the treated elms would become effective trap trees for H. rufipes. Three treatments were compared: treated with herbicide and girdled, girdled, and control. All herbicide-treated elms died within 18 days after application. Significantly higher numbers (P < 0.01) of native elm bark beetles were attracted to the herbicided elms, compared with the other treatments. Beetles bred only in the elms treated with herbicide. Of the total brood galleries constructed, 72% had no egg hatch while the remaining 28% had larval tunnels. Progeny adults emerged from less than 1% of the larval tunnels. MSMA application could supplement the Dutch elm disease management program in Manitoba.

Résumé

Le Scolyte de l’orme, Hylurgopinus rufipes (Eichhoff), est le principal vecteur de la maladie hollandaise de l’orme, Ophiostoma ulmi (Buisman) Nannf., au Manitoba. Nous avons badigeonné d’un herbicide, le Glowon™, de l’arsénate de méthane monosodique (MSMA), des entailles à la scie à chaîne faites dans des tiges d’ormes, Ulmus americana L., afin de vérifier si ces arbres pourraient servir d’appâts efficaces pour les scolytes. Trois formes de traitement ont été comparées : certains arbres ont été entaillés et traités à l’herbicide, d’autres ont été seulement entaillés, d’autres ont servi de témoins. Tous les ormes traités à l’herbicide sont morts moins de 18 jours après l’application. Des nombres significativement plus élevés (P < 0,01) de scolytes ont été attirés vers les ormes traités à l’herbicide que vers les autres ormes. Les scolytes ne se sont reproduits que dans les arbres traités à l’herbicide. Parmi toutes les galeries de ponte construites, 72% ne contenaient pas d’oeufs éclos et les autres 28% contenaient des tunnels larvaires. Moins de 1% des tunnels larvaires ont produit des adultes. L’application de MSMA peut donc s’avérer utile dans les programmes d’éradication de la maladie hollandaise de l’orme au Manitoba.

[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 128 , Issue 3 , June 1996 , pp. 435 - 441
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1996

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

Cannon, W.N. Jr., and Worley, D.P.. 1980. Dutch Elm Disease Control: Performance and Costs, Updated to 1979. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Broomall, PA. Research Paper NE–457, 1980: 8 pp.Google Scholar
Finnegan, R. J. 1957. Elm bark beetles in southwestern Ontario. The Canadian Entomologist 89: 275–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardiner, L.M. 1979. Attraction of Hylurgopinus rufipes to cacodylic acid-treated elms. Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America 25: 102–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardiner, L.M. 1981. Seasonal activity of the native elm bark beetle, Hylurgopinus rufipes, in central Ontario (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). The Canadian Entomologist 113: 341–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Himelick, E.B., and Neely, D.. 1961. Prevention of bark beetle development in undesirable elms for control of Dutch elm disease. Plant Disease Reporter 45: 180–184.Google Scholar
Hoaglin, D.C., Mosteller, F., and Tukey, J.. 1983. Understanding Robust and Exploratory Data Analysis. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, NY. 447 pp.Google Scholar
Hostetler, B.B., and Brewer, J.W.. 1976. Translocation of cacodylic acid in Dutch elm-diseased American elms and its effect on Scolytus multistriatus (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). The Canadian Entomologist 108: 893–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huntley, G.D. 1982. The elm—A resurgent resource or a persistent problem? pp. 103–111 in Kondo, E.S., Hiratsuka, Y., and Denyer, W.B.G. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Symposium and Workshop on Dutch Elm Disease, Winnipeg, Manitoba, 5–9 Oct. 1981. Environment Canada and Manitoba Department Natural Resources. 517 pp.Google Scholar
Kaston, B.J. 1939. The native elm bark beetle Hylurgopinus rufipes (Eichhoff) in Connecticut. Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 420: 1–39.Google Scholar
Kostichka, C.J. 1982. Coordination of Dutch elm disease management programs: Bringing people, pathogen, and politics together. pp. 117–120 in Kondo, E.S., Hiratsuka, Y., and Denyer, W.B.G. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Symposium and Workshop on Dutch Elm Disease, Winnipeg, Manitoba, 5–9 Oct. 1981. Environment Canada and Manitoba Department Natural Resources. 517 pp.Google Scholar
Lanier, G.N. 1982. Behavior-modifying chemicals in Dutch elm disease vector control. pp. 371–394 in Kondo, E.S., Hiratsuka, Y., and Denyer, W.B.G. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Symposium and Workshop on Dutch Elm Disease, Winnipeg, Manitoba, 5–9 Oct. 1981. Environment Canada and Manitoba Department Natural Resources. 517 pp.Google Scholar
Lanier, G.N. 1989. Trap trees for control of Dutch elm disease. Journal of Arboriculture 15: 105–111.Google Scholar
Maclauchlan, L.E., Borden, J.H., D'Auria, J.M., and Wheeler, L.A.. 1988. Distribution of arsenic in MSMA-treated lodgepole pines infested by mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae (Coleoptera: Scolytidae), and its relationship to beetle mortality. Journal of Economic Entomology 81: 274–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neely, D. 1972. Municipal control of Dutch elm disease in Illinois cities. Plant Disease Reporter 56: 460–462.Google Scholar
Norris, L.A., Canutt, P.R., and Neuman, J.F.. 1983. Arsenic in the forest environment after thinning with MSMA and cacodylic acid. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 30: 309–316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Callaghan, D.P., Atkins, P.M., and Fairhurst, C.P.. 1984. Behavioral responses of elm bark beetles to baited and unbaited elms killed by cacodylic acid. Journal of Chemical Ecology 10: 1623–1634.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Callaghan, D.P., Gallagher, E.M., and Lanier, G.N.. 1980. Field evaluation of pheromone-baited trap trees to control elm bark beetles, vectors of Dutch elm disease. Environmental Entomology 9: 181–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rexrode, C.O. 1974. Effects of pressure-injected oxydemetonmethyl, cacodylic acid, and 2,4-D amine on elm bark beetle populations in elms infected with Dutch elm disease. Plant Disease Reporter 58: 382–384.Google Scholar
Sinclair, W.A., and Campana, R. J.. 1978. Development and status of Dutch elm disease. pp. 5–6 in Sinclair, W.A., and Campana, R.J. (Eds.), Dutch Elm Disease: Perspectives After 60 Years. Northeast Regional Research Publication. Search (Agriculture) 8 (5): 52 pp.Google Scholar
Swedenborg, P.D., Jones, R.L., Ascerno, M.E., and Landwehr, V.R.. 1988. Hylurgopinus rufipes (Eichhoff) (Coleoptera: Scolytidae): Attraction to broodwood, host colonization behavior, and seasonal activity in central Minnesota. The Canadian Entomologist 120: 1041–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, H.V., Delavault, R.E., and Barakso, J.. 1968. The arsenic content of Douglas-fir as a guide to some gold, silver, and base metal deposits. Transactions of the (Canadian) Institute of Mining and Metallurgy 75: 860–866.Google Scholar
Westwood, A.R. 1991. A cost benefit analysis of Manitoba's integrated Dutch elm disease management program 1975–1990. Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Manitoba 47: 44–59.Google Scholar
Whitten, R.R. 1964. Elm Bark Beetles. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Division of Forest Insect Research Leaflet 185. Revised 1963.Google Scholar