Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Home
  • Home
EnglishFrançais
The Canadian Entomologist The Canadian Entomologist

Article contents

3-Methylcyclohex-2-en-1-one and the Douglas-fir beetle (Coleoptera: Curculionidae): history of successful bark beetle pheromone treatments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 November 2020

Darrell W. Ross [Opens in a new window]
Darrell W. Ross
Affiliation:
Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, College of Forestry, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, 97331, United States of America
Corresponding
E-mail address:
Darrell.ross@ndsu.edu
Get access
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper reviews the literature on the identification of 3-methylcyclohex-2-en-1-one (MCH) as the antiaggregation pheromone of the Douglas-fir beetle (Dendroctonus pseudotsugae Hopkins) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) and the development of successful management applications using the pheromone. Previously unpublished data from two studies on novel uses of MCH are included. The successful development of antiaggregation pheromone-based treatments for the Douglas-fir beetle is discussed in relation to efforts to develop similar treatments for other bark beetle species, and opportunities for future research on MCH and the Douglas-fir beetle are suggested.

Type
Research Papers
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 153 , Issue 1: Managing bark and ambrosia beetles (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae) with semiochemicals , February 2021 , pp. 62 - 78
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Entomological Society of Canada

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.
If you should have access and can't see this content please contact technical support.

Footnotes

†

Present address: Department of Entomology, School of Natural Resource Sciences, College of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Natural Resources, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota, 58108, United States of America.

Subject editor: Therese M. Poland

References

Baker, W.L. and Veblen, T.T. 1990. Spruce beetles and fires in the nineteenth-century subalpine forests of western Colorado, USA. Arctic and Alpine Research, 22: 65–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bedard, W.D. 1950. The Douglas-fir beetle. Circular No. 817. United States Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Berg, E.E., Henry, J.D., Fastie, C.L., De Volder, A.D., and Matsuoka, S.M. 2006. Spruce beetle outbreaks on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska, and Kluane National Park and Reserve, Yukon Territory: relationship to summer temperatures and regional differences in disturbance regimes. Forest Ecology and Management, 227: 219–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borden, J.H., Silverstein, R.M., and Brownlee, R.G. 1968. Sex pheromone of Dendroctonus psuedotsugae (Coleoptera: Scolytidae): production, bio-assay, and partial isolation. The Canadian Entomologist, 100: 597–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brookes, H.B., Ross, D.W., Strand, T.M., Thistle, H.W., Ragenovich, I.R., and Lowrey, L. 2016. Evaluating high release rate MCH (3-methylcyclohex-2-en-1-one) treatments for preventing Dendroctonus pseudotsugae (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) infestations. Journal of Economic Entomology, 109: 2424–2427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornelius, R.O. 1955. How forest pests upset management in the Douglas-fir region. Journal of Forestry, 53: 711–713.Google Scholar
Daterman, G.E. 1974. Synthetic sex pheromone for detection survey of European pine shoot moth. Research Paper PNW-180. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Portland, Oregon, United States of America.Google Scholar
Edmonds, R.L. and Eglitis, A. 1989. The role of the Douglas-fir beetle and wood borers in the decomposition of and nutrient release from Douglas-fir logs. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 19: 853–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fettig, C.J., Grosman, D.M., and Munson, A.S. 2013. Chapter 13: Advances in insecticide tools and tactics for protecting conifers from bark beetle attack in the western United States. In Insecticides: development of safer and more effective technologies. Edited by S. Trdan. IntechOpen Limited, London, United Kingdom. Pp. 471–492.Google Scholar
Fredericks, S.E. and Jenkins, M.J. 1988. Douglas-fir beetle (Dendroctonus pseudotsugae Hopkins, Coleoptera: Scolytidae) brood production on Douglas-fir defoliated by western spruce budworm (Choristneura occidentalis Freeman, Lepidoptera: Totricidae) in Logan Canyon, Utah. Great Basin Naturalist, 48: 348–351.Google Scholar
Furniss, M.M. 1959. Reducing Douglas-fir beetle damage – how it can be done. Research Note No. 70. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, Utah, United States of America.Google Scholar
Furniss, M.M. 1965a. Susceptibility of fire-injured Douglas-fir to bark beetle attack in southern Idaho. Journal of Forestry, 63: 8–11.Google Scholar
Furniss, M.M. 1965b. An instance of delayed emergence of the Douglas-fir beetle and its effect on infestation in southern Utah. Journal of Economic Entomology, 58: 440–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furniss, M.M. 2014a. The Douglas-fir beetle in western forests a historical perspective - Part 1. American Entomologist, 60: 84–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furniss, M.M. 2014b. The Douglas-fir beetle in western forests a historical perspective - Part 2. American Entomologist, 60: 166–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furniss, M.M., Clausen, R.W., Markin, G.P., McGregor, M.D., and Livingston, R.L. 1981. Effectiveness of Douglas-fir beetle antiaggregative pheromone applied by helicopter. General Technical Report INT-101. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, Utah, United States of America.Google Scholar
Furniss, M.M., Daterman, G.E., Kline, L.N., McGregor, M.D., Trostle, G.C., Pettinger, L.F., and Rudinsky, J.A. 1974. Effectiveness of the Douglas-fir beetle antiaggregative pheromone methylcyclohexenone at three concentrations and spacings around felled host trees. The Canadian Entomologist, 106: 381–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furniss, M.M., Markin, G.P., and Hager, V.J. 1982. Aerial application of Douglas-fir beetle antiaggregative pheromone: equipment and evaluation. General Technical Report INT-137. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, Utah, United States of America.Google Scholar
Furniss, M.M., McGregor, M.D., Foiles, M.W., and Partridge, A.D. 1979. Chronology and characteristics of a Douglas-fir beetle outbreak in northern Idaho. General Technical Report INT-59. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, Utah, United States of America.Google Scholar
Furniss, M.M. and Schmitz, R.F. 1971. Comparative attraction of Douglas-fir beetles to frontalin and tree volatiles. Research Paper INT-96. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service.Google Scholar
Furniss, M.M., Young, J.W., McGregor, M.D., Livingston, R.L., and Hamel, D.R. 1977. Effectiveness of controlled-release formulations of MCH for preventing Douglas-fir beetle (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) infestation in felled trees. The Canadian Entomologist, 109: 1063–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furniss, R.L. and Carolin, V.M. 1977. Western forest insects. Miscellaneous Publication 1339. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Washington, D.C., United States of America.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gillette, N.E., Mehmel, C.J., Webster, J.N., Mori, S.R., Erbilgin, N., Wood, D.L., and Stein, J.D. 2009. Aerially applied methylcyclohexenone-releasing flakes protect Pseudotsugae menziesii stands from attack by Dendroctonus pseudotsugae . Forest Ecology and Management, 257: 1231–1236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadley, K.S. and Veblen, T.T. 1993. Stand response to western spruce budworm and Douglas-fir bark beetle outbreaks, Colorado Front Range. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 23: 479–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, E.M. and Goheen, E.M. 2000. Phellinus weirii and other native root pathogens as determinants of forest structure and process in western North America. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 38: 515–539.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hood, S. and Bentz, B. 2007. Predicting postfire Douglas-fir beetle attacks and tree mortality in the northern Rocky Mountains. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 37: 1058–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, D.P.W., Aukema, B.S., Hodgkinson, R.S., and Lindgren, B.S. 2009. Successful colonisation, reproduction, and new generation emergence in live interior hybrid spruce Picea engelmannii × glauca by mountain pine beetle Dendroctonus ponderosae . Agricultural and Forest Entomology, 11: 83–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, M.J., Hebertson, E.G., and Munson, A.S. 2014. Spruce beetle biology, ecology and management in the Rocky Mountains: an addendum to spruce beetle in the Rockies. Forests, 5: 21–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, N.E. 1967. The influence of temperature and moisture on the overwintering mortality of the Douglas-fir beetle, Dendroctonus pseudotsugae, in western Washington (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 60: 199–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, N.E. and Belluschi, P.G. 1969. Host-finding behavior of the Douglas-fir beetle. Journal of Forestry, 67: 290–295.Google Scholar
Johnson, N.E. and Pettinger, L.F. 1961. Douglas-fir beetle attacks in living trees as influenced by the presence of fresh windthrow. Forestry Research Note Number 37. Weyerhaeuser Company, Forestry Research Center, Centralia, Washington, United States of America.Google Scholar
Johnson, N.E., Wright, K.H., and Orr, P.W. 1961. Attack and brood survival by the Douglas-fir beetle in four types of windthrown trees in western Oregon. Forestry Research Note Number 40. Weyerhauser Timber Company, Centralia, Washington, United States of America.Google Scholar
Kinzer, G.W., Fentiman, A.F. Jr., Foltz, R.L., and Rudinsky, J.A. 1971. Bark beetle attractants: 3-methyl-2-cyclohexen-1-one isolated from Dendroctonus psuedotsugae . Journal of Economic Entomology, 64: 970–971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knopf, J.A.E. and Pitman, G.B. 1972. Aggregation pheromone for manipulation of the Douglas-fir beetle. Journal of Economic Entomology, 65: 723–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lejeune, R.R., McMullen, L.H., and Atkins, M.D. 1961. The influence of logging on Douglas fir beetle populations. The Forestry Chronicle, 37: 308–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Libbey, L.M., Oehlschlager, A.C., and Ryker, L.C. 1983. 1-Methylcyclohex-2-en-1-ol as an aggregation pheromone of Dendroctonus psuedotsugae . Journal of Chemical Ecology, 9: 1533–1541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindgren, B.S. 1995. Research needs for anti-aggregation pheromones of bark beetles. In Research, Development, and Commercialization of Semiochemicals in Insect Pest Management in Canada. Proceedings, Entomological Societies of Manitoba and Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, October 1994. Pest Management Alternatives Office and Pest Management Alternatives Program, Canadian Forest Service. Pp. 62–67.Google Scholar
McCowan, V.F. and Rudinsky, J.A. 1958. Biological studies on the Douglas-fir bark beetle, Millicoma Forest Tree Farm, Coos Bay, Oregon: a progress report. Forestry Research Note Number 14, revised. Weyerhaeuser Timber Company, Forestry Research Center, Centralia, Washington, United States of America.Google Scholar
McGregor, M.D., Furniss, M.M., Oaks, R.D., Gibson, K.E., and Meyer, H.E. 1984. MCH pheromone for preventing Douglas-fir beetle infestation in windthrown trees. Journal of Forestry, 82: 613–616.Google Scholar
Negron, J.F. 1998. Probability of infestation and extent of mortality associated with the Douglas-fir beetle in the Colorado Front Range. Forest Ecology and Management, 107: 71–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Negron, J.F., Anhold, J.A., and Munson, A.S. 2001. Within-stand spatial distribution of tree mortality caused by the Douglas-Fir beetle (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). Environmental Entomology, 30: 215–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Negron, J.F., Schaupp, W.C. Jr., Gibson, K.E., Anhold, J., Hansen, D., Their, R., and Mocettini, P. 1999. Estimating extent of mortality associated with the Douglas-fir beetle in the central and northern Rockies. Western Journal of Applied Forestry, 14: 121–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Connor, C.A. III 1990. Registration of pheromones in practice. In Behavior modifying chemicals for insect management. Edited by R.L. Ridgway, R.M. Silverstein, and M.N. Inscoe. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, New York, United States of America. Pp. 605–618.Google Scholar
Pitman, G.B. 1973. Further observations on douglure in a Dendroctonus pseudotsugae management system. Environmental Entomology, 2: 109–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pitman, G.B., Hedden, R.L., and Gara, R.I. 1975. Synergistic effects of ethyl alcohol on the aggregation of Dendroctonus pseudotsugae (Col., Scolytidae) in response to pheromones. Zeitshrift für angwandte Entomologie, 78: 203–208.Google Scholar
Pitman, G.B. and Vité, J.P. 1970. Field response of Dendroctonus pseudotsugae (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) to synthetic frontalin. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 63: 661–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pitman, G.B. and Vité, J.P. 1974. Biosynthesis of methylcyclohexenone by male Douglas-fir beetle. Environmental Entomology, 3: 886–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ringold, G.B., Gravelle, P.J., Miller, D., Furniss, M.M., and McGregor, M.D. 1975. Characteristics of Douglas-fir beetle infestation in northern Idaho resulting from treatment with douglure. Research Note INT-189. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Intermountain Forest & Range Experiment Station, Ogden, Utah, United States of America.Google Scholar
Ross, D.W. and Daterman, G.E. 1994. Reduction of Douglas-fir beetle infestation of high-risk stands by antiaggregation and aggregation pheromones. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 24: 2184–2190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, D.W. and Daterman, G.E. 1995a. Response of Dendroctonus pseudotsugae (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) and Thanasimus undatulus (Coleoptera: Cleridae) to traps with different semiochemicals. Journal of Economic Entomology, 88: 106–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, D.W. and Daterman, G.E. 1995b. Efficacy of an antiaggregation pheromone for reducing Douglas-fir beetle, Dendroctonus pseudotsugae Hopkins (Coleoptera: Scolytidae), infestation of high risk stands. The Canadian Entomologist, 127: 805–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, D.W., Daterman, G.E., and Gibson, K.E. 2002. Elution rate and spacing of antiaggregation pheromone dispensers for protecting live trees from Dendroctonus pseudotsugae (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). Journal of Economic Entomology, 95: 778–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, D.W., Gibson, K.E., and Daterman, G.E. 2001. Using MCH to protect trees and stands from Douglas-fir beetle infestation. FHTET-2001-09. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America. 11 pp.Google Scholar
Ross, D.W., Gibson, K.E., and Daterman, G.E. 2015 (Revision of 2001 publication). Using MCH to protect trees and stands from Douglas-fir beetle infestation. FHTET-2001-09. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America. 9 pp.Google Scholar
Ross, D.W., Gibson, K.E., Their, R.W., and Munson, A.S. 1996. Optimal dose of an antiaggregation pheromone (3-methylcyclohex-2-en-1-one) for protecting live Douglas-fir from attack by Dendroctonus pseudotsugae (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). Journal of Economic Entomology, 89: 1204–1207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, D.W. and Niwa, C.G. 1997. Using aggregation and antiaggregation pheromones of the Douglas-fir beetle to produce snags for wildlife habitat. Western Journal of Applied Forestry, 12: 52–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, D.W. and Wallin, K.F. 2008. High release rate 3-methylcyclohex-2-en-1-one dispensers prevent Douglas-fir beetle (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) infestation of live Douglas-fir. Journal of Economic Entomology, 101: 1826–1830.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rudinsky, J.A. and Michael, R.R. 1972. Sound production in Scolytidae: chemostimulus of sonic signal by the Douglas-fir beetle. Science, 175: 1386–1390.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rudinsky, J.A., Morgan, M., Libbey, L.M., and Michael, R.R. 1973. Sound production in Scolytidae: 3-methyl-2-cyclohexen-1-one released by the female Douglas-fir beetle in response to male sonic signal. Environmental Entomology, 2: 505–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudinsky, J.A., Morgan, M.E., Libbey, L.M., and Putnam, T.B. 1974a. Additional components of the Douglas-fir beetle (Col., Scolytidae) aggregative pheromone and their possible utility in pest control. Zeitshrift für angwandte Entomologie, 76: 65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudinsky, J.A., Sartwell, C. Jr., Graves, T.M., and Morgan, M.E. 1974b. Granular formulation of methylcyclohexenone: an antiaggregative pheromone of the Douglas-fir and spruce bark beetles (Col., Scolytidae). Zeitshrift für angwandte Entomologie, 75: 254–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Safranyik, L. and Carroll, A.L. 2006. The biology and epidemiology of the mountain pine beetle in lodgepole pine forests. In The mountain pine beetle: a synthesis of its biology, management and impacts on lodgepole pine. Edited by L. Safranyik and and B. Wilson. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Pacific Forestry Centre, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. Pp. 3–66.Google Scholar
Schmitz, R.F. and Gibson, K.E. 1996. Douglas-fir beetle. Forest Insect and Disease Leaflet 5. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, Oregon, United States of America.Google Scholar
Shore, T.L., Safranyik, L., Riel, W.G., Ferguson, M., and Castonguy, J. 1999. Evaluation of factors affecting tree and stand susceptibility to the Douglas-fir beetle (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). The Canadian Entomologist, 131: 831–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strand, T., Ross, D.W., Thistle, H., Ragenovich, I., Matos, I., and Lamb, B. 2012. Predicting Dendroctonus pseudotsugae (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) antiaggregation pheromone concentrations using an instantaneous puff dispersion model. Journal of Economic Entomology, 105: 451–460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. 1998. 3-Methylcyclohexen-1-one (MCH) – human health and ecological risk assessment: final report [online]. Available from https://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/pesticide/pdfs/091602_mch.pdf [accessed 25 August 2020].Google Scholar
Steele, R., Williams, R.E., Weatherby, J.C., Reinhardt, E.D., Hoffman, J.T., and Their, R.W. 1996. Stand hazard rating for Central Idaho forests. General Technical Report INT- GTR-332. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, Utah, United States of America. 30 pp.Google Scholar
Tinsworth, E.F. 1990. Regulation of pheromones and other semiochemicals in the United States. In Behavior modifying chemicals for insect management. Edited by R.L. Ridgway, R.M. Silverstein, and M.N. Inscoe. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, New York, United States of America. Pp. 569–603.Google Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 2000. Assessment and response to bark beetle outbreaks in the Rocky Mountain area. Report to Congress from Forest Health Protection, Washington Office, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-62. Edited by S. Samman and J. Logan. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States of America. 46 p.Google Scholar
Vité, J.P., Pitman, G.B., Fentiman, A.F. Jr., and Kinzer, G.W. 1972. 3-Methyl-2-cyclohexen-1-ol isolated from Dendroctonus . Naturwissenschaften, 59: 469.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vité, J.P. and Rudinsky, J.A. 1957. Contribution toward a study of Douglas fir beetle development. Forest Science, 3: 156–167.Google Scholar
Wallin, K.F. and Raffa, K.F. 2002. Density-mediated responses of bark beetles to host allelochemicals: a link between individual behavior and population dynamics. Ecological Entomology, 27: 484–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, R.L. and Price, F.E. 1971. Initial thinning effects in 70- to 150-year-old Douglas-fir, western Oregon and Washington. Research Paper PNW-117. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service.Google Scholar
Wood, D.L., Browne, L.E., Bedard, W.D., Tilden, P.E., Silverstein, R.M., and Rodin, J.O. 1967a. Response of Ips confusus to synthetic sex pheromones in nature. Science, 159: 1373–1374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, D.L., Browne, L.E., Silverstein, R.M., and Rodin, J.O. 1966. Sex pheromones of bark beetles. I. Mass production, bio-assay, source, and isolation of the sex pheromone of Ips confusus (LeC.). Journal of Insect Physiology, 12: 523–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, D.L., Stark, R.W., Silverstein, R.M., and Rodin, J.O. 1967b. Unique synergistic effects produced by the principal sex attractant compounds of Ips confusus (LeConte) (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). Nature, 215: 206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, L.C., Berryman, A.A., and Wickman, B.E. 1984. Abundance of the fir engraver, Scolytus ventralis, and the Douglas-fir beetle, Dendroctonus pseudotsugae, following tree defoliation by the Douglas-fir tussock moth, Orgyia peudotsugata . The Canadian Entomologist, 116: 293–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 7
Total number of PDF views: 30 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 13th November 2020 - 24th January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-76cb886bbf-gtgjg Total loading time: 0.372 Render date: 2021-01-24T18:02:31.777Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metrics": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "peerReview": true, "crossMark": true, "comments": true, "relatedCommentaries": true, "subject": true, "clr": true, "languageSwitch": true, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

3-Methylcyclohex-2-en-1-one and the Douglas-fir beetle (Coleoptera: Curculionidae): history of successful bark beetle pheromone treatments
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

3-Methylcyclohex-2-en-1-one and the Douglas-fir beetle (Coleoptera: Curculionidae): history of successful bark beetle pheromone treatments
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

3-Methylcyclohex-2-en-1-one and the Douglas-fir beetle (Coleoptera: Curculionidae): history of successful bark beetle pheromone treatments
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *