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): Christopher J. FettigChristopher P. Dabney; Stepehen R. McKelvey; Robert R. Borys
    Date: 2006
    Source: Agricultural and Forest Entomology. 8: 267-271
    Publication Series: Scientific Journal (JRNL)
    Station: Pacific Southwest Research Station
    PDF: View PDF  (66.87 KB)


    Numerous studies have explored the role of semiochemicals in the behavior of bark beetles (Scolytidae). Multiple funnel traps are often used to elucidate these behavioral responses. Sufficient sample sizes are obtained by using large numbers of traps to which treatments are randomly assigned once, or by frequent collection of trap catches and subsequent re-randomization of treatments. Recently, there has been some debate about the potential for trap contamination to occur when semiochemical treatments (i.e., baits), and not trap-treatment units (i.e., traps and baits), are re-randomized among existing traps. Due to the volatility of many semiochemicals, small levels of contamination could potentially confound results. We conducted a literature survey to determine the frequency of re-randomizing semiochemical treatments (baits) versus trap-treatment units (traps and baits) in scolytid trapping bioassays. We then conducted an experiment to determine if differences in the response of Dendroctonus brevicomis LeConte to attractant-baited traps exist between the two methods. The majority of papers examined reported use of a large number of fixed replicates (traps) rather than re-randomization of treatments at frequent intervals. Seventy-five percent of papers for which re-randomization methods could be determined reported relocation of semiochemical treatments (baits) only. No significant differences in trap catch were observed among multiple funnel traps aged with D. brevcomis baits (Phero Tech Inc., Delta, BC) for 0 d, 30 d and 90 d, suggesting that sufficient levels of contamination did not exist to influence results. We conclude that re-randomizing baits is a viable option to re-randomizing trap and bait units, and could result in a considerable time and cost savings.

    Publication Notes

    • You may send email to 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.


    Fettig, C.J.; Dabney, C.P.; McKelvey, S.R.; Borys, R.R. 2006. An assessment of re-randomization methods in bark beetle (Scolytidae) trapping bioassays. Agricultural and Forest Entomology. 8: 267-271.


    bark beetles, Dendroctonus brevicomis, experimental design, pheromone, randomization, semiochemicals, Scolytidae, trapping

    Related Search

    XML: View XML
Show More
Show Fewer
Jump to Top of Page