Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nmvwc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T10:39:19.316Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

FEEDING AND BORING BEHAVIOR OF THE BARK BEETLE IPS PARACONFUSUS (COLEOPTERA: SCOLYTIDAE) ON THE BARK OF A HOST AND NON-HOST TREE SPECIES12

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

J. S. Elkinton  and
D. L. Wood
J. S. Elkinton
Affiliation:
Department of Entomological Sciences, University of California, Berkeley 94720
D. L. Wood
Affiliation:
Department of Entomological Sciences, University of California, Berkeley 94720
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Male Ips paraconfusus selected a host, ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), over a non-host, white fir (Abies concolor), only after the beetles had bored through the outer bark and into the phloem. Males, when given a choice between bark discs of these tree species in petri dishes, bored readily through the outer bark of either species. However, the beetles penetrated no more than 1 mm into the phloem of white fir, but they bored extensively in the phloem of ponderosa pine. The beetle’s preference for the pine over fir phloem was apparent with intact samples of phloem with the outer bark removed and with ground phloem. No preferences were apparent for the ground or intact pine or fir outer bark, with the phloem removed. The beetles bored preferentially in fissured as opposed to smooth outer bark of either tree. Beetles did not feed in the outer bark but did feed in the phloem of either species. In field experiments beetles attracted to logs of pine and fir bored through the outer bark of each species in nearly equal numbers. In white fir they re-emerged and departed soon after penetration of the phloem, whereas in ponderosa pine they continued excavation of tunnels in the phloem. In contrast, few beetles penetrated even the outer back of incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens), another non-host species.

Résumé

Des mâles d’Ips paraconfusus n’ont préféré Pinus ponderosa, un hôte habituel, à Abies concolor, une espèce non-hôte, qu’après avoir foré au travers de l’écorce jusqu’au phloème. Des mâles ayant le choix entre des disques d’écorce provenant de l’une ou l’autre de ces 2 espèces et présentés sur plats de pétri, ont foré indifféremment dans l’écorce des 2 espeèces d’arbres. Cependant les scolytes ont pénétré à moins de 1 mm dans le phloème du sapin alors qu’ils ont creusé sans restriction dans le phloème du pin. La préférence des scolytes pour le phloème du pin au détriment du sapin s’est révélée lors de tests impliquant des échantillons intacts de phloème séparé de l’écorce superficielle, et de phloème moulu. Aucune préférence n’a pu être observée pour l’écorce superficielle du pin ou du sapin, intacte ou moulue. Pour les 2 espèces d’arbres, les scolytes ont montré une préférence pour l’écorce superficielle fissurée plutôt que pour l’écorce lisse. Les scolytes n’ont pas consommé l’écorce superficielle de l’une ou l’autre essence, mais ont consommé le phloème des deux. Au cours d’expériences de terrain, des scolytes attirés sur des billes de pin et de sapin ont foré au travers de l’écorce superficielle en nombres à peu près égaux pour les deux espèces d’arbres. Sur Abies concolor, les scolytes sont ressortis et repartis peu après avoir atteint le phloème, alors que sur Pinus ponderosa, ils ont poursuivi le forage de tunnels dans le phloème. Par contre, peu de scolytes ont pénétré l’écorce, même superficielle, du cèdre Calacedrus decurrens, une autre essence non-hôte.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 112 , Issue 8 , 01 August 1980 , pp. 797 - 809
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baker, J. E. and Norris, D. M.. 1967. A feeding stimulant for Scolytus multistriatus isolated from the bark of Ulmus americana. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 60: 1213–1215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, J. E., Rainey, D. P., Norris, D. M., and Strong, F. M.. 1968. p-Hydroxy-benzaldehyde and other phenolics as feeding stimulants for the smaller European bark beetle. Forest Sci. 14: 91–95.Google Scholar
Barr, B. A. 1969. Sound production in Scolytidae (Coleoptera) with emphasis on the genus Ips. Can. Ent. 101: 636–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bedard, W. D. and Browne, L. E.. 1969. A delivery-trapping system for evaluating insect chemical attractants in nature. J. econ. Ent. 62: 1202–1203.Google Scholar
Browne, L. E. 1972. An emergence cage and refrigerated collector for wood-boring insects and their associates. J. econ. Ent. 65: 1499–1501.Google Scholar
Dethier, V. G. 1953. Host plant perception in phytophagous insects. Trans. 9th int. Congr. (Amsterdam, 1951) 2: 81–89.Google Scholar
Doskotch, R. W., Chatterji, S. K., and Peacock, J.. 1970. Elm bark derived feeding stimulants for the smaller European elm bark beetle. Science, Wash. 167: 380–382.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doskotch, R. W., Mikhail, A. A., and Chatterji, S. K.. 1973. Structure of the water soluble feeding stimulant for Scolytus multistriatus: a revision. Phytochemistry 12: 1153–1155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elkinton, J. S., Wood, D. L., and Hendry, L. B.. Pheromone production by the bark beetle Ips paraconfusus in the non-host, white fir. J. Chem. Ecol. (in press).Google Scholar
Gilbert, B. L., Baker, J. E., and Norris, D. M.. 1967. Juglone (5-hydroxy-1, 4-naphthoquinone) from Carya ovata, deterrent to feeding by Scolytus multistriatus. J. Insect Physiol. 13: 1453–1459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamamura, Y., Hayashiya, K., Naito, K., Matsuura, K., and Nishida, J.. 1962. Food selection by silkworm larvae. Nature, Lond. 194: 754–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedin, P. A., Maxwell, F. G., and Jenkins, J. N.. 1974. Insect plant attractants, feeding stimulants, repellents, deterrents, and other related factors affecting insect behavior. pp. 494–527 in Maxwell, F. G. and Harris, F. A. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Summer Institute on Biological Control of Plant Insects and Diseases. University Press of Mississippi, Jackson.Google Scholar
Lanier, G. N. and Wood, D. L.. 1975. Specificity of responses to pheromones in the genus Ips (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). J. Chem. Ecol. 1: 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipke, H. and Fraenkel, G.. 1956. Insect nutrition. A. Rev. Ent. 1: 17–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, E. C., Ishaaya, I., Gurevitz, E., Cooper, R., and Lavie, D.. 1974. Isolation and identification of host compounds eliciting attraction and bite stimuli in the fruit tree bark beetle, Scolytus mediterraneus. J. Agric. Fd Chem. 22: 376–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moeck, H. A., Wood, D. L., and Lindahl, K. Q.. Host selection behavior of bark beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) attacking Pinus ponderosa, with special emphasis on the western pine beetle, Dendroctonus brevicomis. J. Chem. Ecol. (in press).Google Scholar
Schoonhoven, L. M. 1968. Chemosensory bases of host plant selection. A. Rev. Ent. 13: 115–136.Google Scholar
Schoonhoven, L. M. 1972. Plant recognition by lepidopterous larvae. pp. 87–99in van Emden, H. F. (Ed.), Insect/plant relationships. Sym. R. ent. Soc. Lond., No. 6. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
Shepherd, R. F. 1965. Distribution of attacks by Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopk. on Pinus contorta Dougl. var. latifolia Engelm. Can. Ent. 97: 207–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, R. M., Rodin, J. O., and Wood, D. L.. 1966 a. Sex attractants in frass produced by male Ips confusus in ponderosa pine. Science, Wash. 154: 509–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, R. M., Rodin, J. O., Wood, D. L., and Browne, L. E.. 1966 b. Identification of two new terpene alcohols from frass produced by Ips confusus in ponderosa pine. Tetrahedron 22: 1929–1936.Google Scholar
Struble, G. R. and Hall, R. C.. 1955. The California five-spined engraver, its biology and control. U.S. Dep. Agric. Circ. 964. 21 pp.Google Scholar
Thorsteinson, A. J. 1960. Host selection in phytophagous insects. A. Rev. Ent. 5: 193–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vité, J. P., Gara, R. I., and Kliefoth, R. A.. 1963. Collection and bioassay of a volatile fraction attractive to Ips confusus (LeC.) (Coleoptera:Scolytidae). Contr. Boyce Thompson Inst. Pl. Res. 22: 39–50.Google Scholar
Wood, D. L. 1962. The attraction created by males of a bark beetle, Ips confusus (LeConte) (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) attacking ponderosa pine. Pan-Pacif. Ent. 38: 141–145.Google Scholar
Wood, D. L. 1963. Studies on host selection by Ips confusus (LeConte) (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) with special reference to Hopkins' host selection principle. Univ. Calif. Publs. Ent. 27: 241–282.Google Scholar
Wood, D. L. 1972. Selection and colonization of ponderosa pine by bark beetles. pp. 101–117in Van Emden, H. F. (Ed.), Insect/plant relationships. Sym. Roy. ent. Soc. Lond., No. 6. Blackwell, Oxford.Google 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.). J. Insect Physiol. 12: 523–536.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wood, D. L., Browne, L. E., Bedard, W. D., Tilden, P. E., Silverstein, R. M., and Rodin, J. O.. 1968. Response of Ips confusus to synthetic sex pheromones in nature. Science, Wash. 159: 1373–1374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed