Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T12:51:16.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relation of color, size, and canopy placement of prism traps in determining capture of emerald ash borer (Coleoptera: Buprestidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2012

Joseph A. Francese ,
Ivich Fraser ,
Michael L. Rietz ,
Damon J. Crook ,
David R. Lance  and
Victor C. Mastro
Joseph A. Francese*
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, Otis Laboratory, 1398 West Truck Road, Buzzards Bay, MA 02542, United States of America
Ivich Fraser
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Emerald Ash Borer Cooperative Program, 5936 Ford Court, Suite 200, Brighton, MI 48116, United States of America
Michael L. Rietz
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Emerald Ash Borer Cooperative Program, 5936 Ford Court, Suite 200, Brighton, MI 48116, United States of America
Damon J. Crook
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, Otis Laboratory, 1398 West Truck Road, Buzzards Bay, MA 02542, United States of America
David R. Lance
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, Otis Laboratory, 1398 West Truck Road, Buzzards Bay, MA 02542, United States of America
Victor C. Mastro
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, Otis Laboratory, 1398 West Truck Road, Buzzards Bay, MA 02542, United States of America
*
1 Corresponding author (e-mail: joe.francese@aphis.usda.gov).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In 2008 we compared numbers of emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire, captured on glue-coated prism traps of different sizes (standard, double-length narrow, and quarter), colors (green and purple), and height in relation to the canopy of ash host trees (midcanopy (10–13 m) and ground level (1.5 m)). Standard-size prism traps caught more A. planipennis than did quarter-size prism traps, but catch per square metre of surface area did not differ significantly among the three trap sizes. Twenty percent of quarter-size prism traps failed to catch a single beetle, while all traps of the two larger sizes were successful. The larger traps therefore appear to be more useful as detection tools. In 2009 we compared purple and green standard-size prism traps at three heights: midcanopy (13 m), lower canopy (6 m), and ground (1.5 m). Green traps caught more adult emerald ash borers than did purple traps in the mid and lower canopy, but there was no difference between traps hung at 1.5 m. The ratio of male to female adult emerald ash borers was also higher on green than on purple traps at all three heights.

Résumé

En 2008, nous avons comparé les nombres d'agriles du frêne (EAB), Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire, capturés sur des pièges en forme de prisme et enduits de colle, de taille (standard, étroite de longueur double et réduite à un quart), couleur (vert et violet) et hauteur (à mi-feuillage (10–13 m) et près du sol (1,5 m)) différentes en relation avec la canopée des frênes hôtes. Les pièges prismatiques standards capturent plus d'A. planipennis que les pièges d'un quart de taille, mais les captures par m2 de surface ne diffèrent pas significativement entre les trois tailles de pièges. Vingt pour cent des pièges prismatiques d'un quart de la taille n’ont attrapé aucun coléoptère, alors que tous les pièges des deux tailles supérieures ont réussi à en capturer. Les pièges plus grands semblent donc être des outils de détection plus utiles. En 2009, nous avons comparé les pièges prismatiques violets et verts de taille standard à trois hauteurs, soit à mi-canopée (13 m), au niveau de la canopée inférieure (6 m) et près du sol (1,5 m). Les pièges verts capturent plus d'adultes de EAB que les pièges violets dans la canopée intermédiaire et inférieure, mais il n’y a pas de différence entre les pièges pendus à 1,5 m. Le rapport des mâles sur les femelles de EAB est aussi plus élevé sur les pièges verts que sur les pièges violets aux trois hauteurs.

[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 142 , Issue 6 , December 2010 , pp. 596 - 600
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 2010

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

Anonymous. 2010. Emerald ash borer [online]. Available from http://www.emeraldashborer.info [accessed 21 June 2010].Google Scholar
Crook, D.J., Khrimian, A., Francese, J.A., Fraser, I., Poland, T.M., and Mastro, V.C. 2008. Development of a host-based semiochemical lure for trapping emerald ash borer Agrilus planipennis (Coleoptera: Buprestidae). Environmental Entomology, 37: 356–365. PMID:18419907 doi:10.1603/0046-225X(2008)37[356:DOAHSL]2.0.CO;2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crook, D.J., Francese, J.A., Zylstra, K.E., Fraser, I., Sawyer, A.J., Bartels, D.W., Lance, D.R., and Mastro, V.C. 2009. Laboratory and field response of the emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) to selected wavelength regions of the visible spectrum. Journal of Economic Entomology, 102: 2160–2169. PMID:20069845 doi:10.1603/029.102.0620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francese, J.A., Fraser, I., Lance, D.R., Mastro, V.C., Oliver, J.B., and Youssef, N. 2005. Studies to develop an emerald ash borer survey trap: I. Trap design, trap location and tree damage. In Proceedings of the Emerald Ash Borer Research and Technology Development Meeting, Romulus, Michigan, 5–6 October 2004. Edited by Mastro, V. and Reardon, R.. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, Morgantown, WV. pp. 60–61.Google Scholar
Francese, J.A., Oliver, J.B., Fraser, I., Lance, D.R., Youssef, N., Sawyer, A.J., and Mastro, V.C. 2008. Influence of trap placement and design on capture of the emerald ash borer (Coleoptera: Buprestidae). Journal of Economic Entomology, 101: 1831–1837. PMID:19133464 doi:10.1603/0022-0493-101.6.1831.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Francese, J.A., Crook, D.J., Fraser, I., Lance, D.R., Sawyer, A.J., and Mastro, V.C. 2010. Optimization of trap color for emerald ash borer (Coleoptera: Buprestidae). Journal of Economic Entomology, 103: 1235–1241. doi:10.1603/EC10088.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grant, G.G., Ryall, K.L., Lyons, D.B, and Abou-Zaid, M.M. 2009. Differential response of male and female emerald ash borers (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) to (Z)-3-hexenol and manuka oil. Journal of Applied Entomology, 134: 26–33. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0418.2009.01441.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haack, R.A., Jendek, E., Liu, H., Marchant, K.R., Petrice, T.R., Poland, T.M., and Ye, H. 2002. The emerald ash borer: a new exotic pest in North America. Newsletter of the Michigan Entomological Society, 47(3/4): 1–5.Google Scholar
Lance, D.R., Fraser, I., and Mastro, V.C. 2007. Activity and microhabitat-selection patterns of emerald ash borer and their implications for the development of trapping systems. In Proceedings of the Emerald Ash Borer and Asian Longhorned Beetle Research and Technology Development Meeting, Cincinnati, Ohio, 29 October – 2 November 2006. Edited by Mastro, V., Lance, D., Reardon, R., and Parra, G.. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, Morgantown, WV. pp. 77–78.Google Scholar
Lelito, J.P., Fraser, I., Mastro, V.C., Tumlinson, J.H., and Baker, T.C. 2008. Novel visual-cue based sticky traps for monitoring of emerald ash borers, Agrilus planipennis (Coleoptera: Buprestidae). Journal of Applied Entomology, 132: 668–774. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0418.2008.01308.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, J.M., Storer, A.J., Fraser, I., and Mastro, V.C. 2010. Efficacy of trap and lure types for detection of Agrilus planipennis (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) at low density. Journal of Applied Entomology, 134: 296–302. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0418.2009.01455.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millers, I., Lachance, D., Burkman, W.G., and Allen, D.C. 1991. North American sugar maple decline project, organization and field methods. United States Forest Service General Technical Report NE-154.Google Scholar
Pontius, J., Martin, M., Plourde, L., and Hallett, R. 2008. Ash decline assessment in emerald ash borer-infested regions: a test of tree-level, hyperspectral technologies. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112: 2665–2676. doi:10.1016/j.rse.2007. 12.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar