Skip to Main Content
U.S. Forest Service
Caring for the land and serving people

United States Department of Agriculture

Home > Search > Publication Information

  1. Share via EmailShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on Twitter
    Dislike this pubLike this pub
    Author(s): Daniel R. Miller; Donald A. Duerr
    Date: 2008
    Source: J. Econ. Entomol., Vol. 101(1): 107-113
    Publication Series: Miscellaneous Publication
    PDF: View PDF  (84.20 KB)

    Description

    We compared the effectiveness of a dry collection cup (with an insecticide killing strip) to a wet collection cup (containing antifreeze) for use with Lindgren multiple-funnel traps in catching several common species of bark and wood-boring beetles, and their associates in southern pine forests. All traps were baited with either the binary combination of ethanol and (±)-a-pinene or the quaternary combination of (±)-ipsenol, (±)-ipsdienol, ethanol, and (±)-±-pinene. We found that cup treatment had little, if any, effect on catches of Ips avulsus (Eichhoff) and I. grandicollis (Eichhoff) (Coleoptera: Scolytidae), Alaus myops (F.) (Elateridae), Chalcophora Solier species (Buprestidae), Temnochila virescens (F.) (Trogositidae), and Lasconotus Erichson species (Colydiidae). In contrast, catches of the following species were signiÞcantly less (by 40Ð97%) in traps with dry cups than in traps with wet cups: Hylobius pales Herbst and Pachylobius picivorus LeConte (Curculionidae); Buprestis lineata F. (Buprestidae); Acanthocinus obsoletus (Olivier), Arhopalus rusticus nubilus (LeConte), Monochamus titillator (F.) and Xylotrechus sagittatus agittatus (Cerambycidae); Hylastes porculus Erichson and Xyleborinus saxeseni (Ratzeburg) (Scolytidae); and (F.) (Cleridae). The same was true in at least one experiment for the following species: Dendroctonus terebrans (Olivier), Hylastes salebrosus Eichhoff, Hylastes tenuis Eichhoff, and Xylosandrus crassiusculus (Motschulsky) (Scolytidae). We conclude that cup treatment can have a signiÞcant impact on catches of some arboreal beetles in baited multiple-funnel traps. Anyone using multiple-funnel traps to capture arboreal beetles should evaluate the potential impacts arising from their choice of collection cup treatment to their trapping objectives and expectations. The issue of cup treatment may be particular important at low population levels when maximum trap efficiency is required such as in the detection of exotic insects at ports-of-entry and within quarantine and containment zones.

    Publication Notes

    • You may send email to pubrequest@fs.fed.us to request a hard copy of this publication.
    • (Please specify exactly which publication you are requesting and your mailing address.)
    • We recommend that you also print this page and attach it to the printout of the article, to retain the full citation information.
    • This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and is therefore in the public domain.

    Citation

    Miller, Daniel R.; Duerr, Donald A. 2008. Comparison of arboreal beetle catches in wet and dry collection cups with lindgren multiple funnel traps. J. Econ. Entomol., Vol. 101(1): 107-113

    Keywords

    Cerambycidae, curculionidae, detection, multiple-funnel trap, scolytidae

    Related Search


    XML: View XML
Show More
Show Fewer
Jump to Top of Page
https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/29382