Lethal trap trees and semiochemical repellents as area host protection strategies for spruce beetle (Coleoptera: Curculionidae, Scolytinae) in UtahAuthor(s): Matt Hansen; A. Steven Munson; Darren C. Blackford; David Wakarchuk; Scott Baggett
Source: Journal of Economic Entomology. 109(5): 2137–2144.
Publication Series: Scientific Journal (JRNL)
Station: Rocky Mountain Research Station
Download Publication (512.0 KB)
We tested lethal trap trees and repellent semiochemicals as area treatments to protect host trees from spruce beetle (Dendroctonus rufipennis Kirby) attacks. Lethal trap tree treatments ("spray treatment") combined a spruce beetle bait with carbaryl treatment of the baited spruce. Repellent treatments ("spray-repellent”) combined a baited lethal trap tree within a 16-m grid of MCH (3-methylcyclohex-2-en-1-one) and two novel spruce beetle repellents. After beetle flight, we surveyed all trees within 50 m of plot center, stratified by 10-m radius subplots, and compared attack rates to those from baited and unbaited control plots. Compared to the baited controls, spruce in the spray treatment had significantly reduced likelihood of a more severe attack classification (e.g., mass-attacked over strip-attacked or unsuccessful-attacked over unattacked). Because spruce in the spray treatment also had significantly heightened probability of more severe attack classification than those in the unbaited controls, however, we do not recommend lethal trap trees as a stand-alone beetle suppression strategy for epidemic beetle populations. Spruce in the spray-repellent treatment were slightly more likely to be classified as more severely attacked within 30 m of plot center compared to unbaited controls but, overall, had reduced probabilities of beetle attack over the entire 50-m radius plots. The semiochemical repellents deployed in this study were effective at reducing attacks on spruce within treated plots despite the presence of a centrally located spruce beetle bait. Further testing will be required to clarify operational protocols such as dose, elution rate, and release device spacing.
- You may send email to firstname.lastname@example.org 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.
CitationHansen, E. Matthew; Munson, A. Steven; Blackford, Darren C.; Wakarchuk, David; Baggett, L. Scott. 2016. Lethal trap trees and semiochemical repellents as area host protection strategies for spruce beetle (Coleoptera: Curculionidae, Scolytinae) in Utah. Journal of Economic Entomology. 109(5): 2137–2144.
Keywordspheromone, bark beetle management, Dendroctonus rufipennis, carbaryl, MCH
- 3-Methylcyclohex-2-en-1-one for area and individual tree protection against spruce beetle (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae) attack in the southern Rocky Mountains
- Spruce beetle (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) response to traps baited with selected semiochemicals in Utah.
- Use of semiochemicals of secondary bark beetles to disrupt spruce beetle attraction and survival in Alaska.
XML: View XML