Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T12:00:36.891Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

SUSCEPTIBILITY OF LARVAL INSTARS OF SPRUCE BUDWORM, CHORISTONEURA FUMIFERANA (LEPIDOPTERA: TORTRICIDAE), TO BACILLUS THURINGIENSIS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Paul G. Fast  and
John B. Dimond
Paul G. Fast
Affiliation:
Forest Pest Management Institute, Canadian Forestry Service, Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario P6A 5M7
John B. Dimond
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, University of Maine, Orono, Maine 04469
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Diet incorporation assays detected no difference in susceptibility of instars IV, V, and VI of spruce budworm exposed to Bacillus thuringiensis, either in terms of dose, LC50, or time, LT50. The hypothesis that the dose–response for larvae of each instar fitted a common regression line was statistically acceptable. Differences in the pattern of changes in larval weight of instars IV, V, VI larvae in response to dose were not detected.

Small plots were sprayed with 5.5, 10.9, 21.9 BIU/ha at times corresponding to peak instar III, early IV, peak IV, peak V, and peak VI. Instar III larvae were controlled less effectively than were instar IV or V larvae which were controlled equally well. Instar VI larvae were also less effectively controlled than instar IV and V larvae probably because a significant proportion had reached the non-feeding prepupal stage before the full effect of B.t. was obtained.

Résumé

Aucune différence de vulnérabilité en fonction de la dose, CL50, et du temps, TL50, n'a été décelée chez des larves de la tordeuse des bourgeons de l'épinette du 4e au 6e stades soumises à un régime alimentaire contenant Bacillus thuringiensis. À l'analyse groupée des résultats obtenus pour chaque stade, l'hypothèse d'une droite commune de régression était statistiquement acceptable. On n'a pas décelé de différence dans l'évolution pondérale des larves en fonction de la dose.

Sur des parcelles traitées avec 5.5, 10.9 et 21.9 U.I./ha à divers moments correspondant au maximum du 3e stade, au début du 4e stade, au maximum du 4e, au maximum du 5e et au maximum du 6e, les larves du 3e stade ont été moins bien réprimées que celles des 4e et 5e stades. Même constat pour les larves du 6e stade, peut-être parce qu'une partie notable d'entre elles ont cessé de se nourir avant de métamorphoser aux chrysalides, avant que B.t. ne fasse complètement effet.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 116 , Issue 2 , February 1984 , pp. 131 - 137
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1984

References

Dulmage, H. T., Martinez, A. J., and Peva, T.. 1976. Bioassay of Bacillus thuringiensis (Berliner) -endotoxin using the tobacco budworm. Tech. Bull. U.S. Dep. Agric. 1528. Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Fast, P. G. 1976 a. Calculations relevant to field applications of Bacillus thuringiensis. Bi-mon. Res. Notes 32: 21.Google Scholar
Fast, P. G. 1976 b. Further calculations on field application of Bacillus thuringiensis. Bi-mon. Res. Notes 32: 27.Google Scholar
Fast, P. G. and Régnière, J.. 1984. Effect of exposure time to Bacillus thuringiensis on mortality and recovery of the spruce budworm (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Can. Ent. 116: 123–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finney, D. J. 1971. Probit Analysis. Cambridge University Press. 333 pp.Google Scholar
Grisdale, D. 1970. An improved method for rearing large numbers of spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Can. Ent. 102: 1111–1117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, O. N. 1973. Dosage-mortality studies with commercial Bacillus thuringiensis sprayed in a modified Potter's tower against some forest insects. J. invert. Path. 22: 108–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, O. N. 1976. A 2-year study of the efficacy of Bacillus thuringiensis -chitinase combinations in spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana) control. Can. Ent. 108: 225–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, O. N. 1981. Report on 1980 cooperative Bacillus thuringiensis (B.T.) spray trials. Can. For. Serv. Inform. Rep. FPM-X-49.Google Scholar
Retnakaran, A. 1983. Spectrophotometric determination of larval ingestion rates in the spruce budworm (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Can. Ent. 115: 31–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, C. J. 1980. Summary of current techniques used for sampling spruce budworm populations and estimating defoliation in eastern Canada. Can. For. Serv. Inf. Rep. O-X-306. Sault Ste. Marie.Google Scholar
Smirnoff, W. A. 1981. In Hudak, J. and Raske, A. G. (Eds.), Review of the spruce budworm outbreak in Newfoundland — Its control and forest management implications. Can. For. Serv. Inf. Rep. N-X-205. St. John's, Nfld.Google Scholar