Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T16:12:31.227Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

TOWARDS PHEROMONE-BASED DETECTION OF LYMANTRIA MONACHA (LEPIDOPTERA: LYMANTRIIDAE) IN NORTH AMERICA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

P. Morewood ,
G. Gries ,
D. Häußler ,
K. Möller ,
J. Liska ,
P. Kapitola  and
H. Bogenschütz
P. Morewood
Affiliation:
Centre for Environmental Biology, Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Bumaby, British Columbia, Canada VSA 1S6
G. Gries*
Affiliation:
Centre for Environmental Biology, Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Bumaby, British Columbia, Canada VSA 1S6
D. Häußler
Affiliation:
Landesforstanstalt Eberswalde, Alfred-Möller-Straβe 1, 16225 Eberswalde, Germany
K. Möller
Affiliation:
Landesforstanstalt Eberswalde, Alfred-Möller-Straβe 1, 16225 Eberswalde, Germany
J. Liska
Affiliation:
Forestry and Game Management Research Institute, Jiloviste-Strnady, 15604 Praha 5 - Zbraslav, Czech Republic
P. Kapitola
Affiliation:
Forestry and Game Management Research Institute, Jiloviste-Strnady, 15604 Praha 5 - Zbraslav, Czech Republic
H. Bogenschütz
Affiliation:
Brunnstubenstraβe 31, 791 11 Freiburg, Germany
*
1Author to whom all correspondence should be addressed (E-mail: gries@sfu.ca).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The research objective of this study was to develop a pheromone-based detection system for the nun moth, Lymantria monacha (Linnaeus), an important defoliator of spruce, Picea A. Dietrich, and pine, Pinus Linnaeus (Pinaceae), forests in central Europe. In northeastern Germany, comparative analyses of rubber- and polyurethane-based dispensers impregnated with a 20:20:1 blend of (±)-disparlure (cis-7,8-epoxy-2-methyloctadecane), (±)-monachalure (cis-7,8-epoxy-octadecane), and 2-methyl-Z7-octadecene revealed that polyurethane-based dispensers afforded higher captures of male L. monacha. Species specificity and optimal dose of the pheromone dispenser were tested in deciduous rather than coniferous forests in central Europe to better reflect nonhabitat settings, such as North American ports, in which detection surveys would be conducted. Baiting Unitraps with 2, 20, 200, or 2000 μg [based on (±)-disparlure] of the L. monacha volatile blend resulted in increasing, species-specific captures of male L. monacha with increasing volatile dose. (±)-Disparlure, previously used for detection of L. monacha, tested at the same four doses indiscriminately attracted male L. monacha and male Lymantria dispar (Linnaeus). Polyurethane-based dispensers loaded with at least 200 μg of the L. monacha volatile blend are recommended for sensitive detection surveys of L. monacha in North America.

Résumé

Au cours de cette étude, nous avions pour objectif de mettre au point un système de détection de la Nonne, Lymantria monacha (Linnée), à base de phéromones; cet insecte est un défoliateur important des forêts d’épinettes, Picea A. Dietrich et de pins, Pinus Linnée (Pinaceae), en Europe centrale. Dans le nord-est de l’Allemagne, des analyses comparatives de systèmes à base de caoutchouc ou de polyuréthane imbibés d’un mélange 20 : 20 : 1 de (±)-disparlure (cis-7,8-époxy-2-méthyloctadécane), de (±)-monachalure (cis-7,8-époxy-octadécane) et de 2-méthyl-Z7-octadécène, ont révélé que les pièges à base de polyuréthane capturaient plus de mâles de L. monacha. La spécificité du piège à phéromone et la dose optimale à utiliser ont été vérifiées dans des forêts décidues plutôt que des forêts de conifères d’Europe centrale, parce que ces forêts reflètent mieux les conditions d’habitats inusités, comme par exemple les ports nord-américains, où seront faits les repérages. À l’installation de pièges à appâts (Unitraps) garnis de 2, 20, 200 ou 2000 μg d’un extrait volatile [à base de (±)-disparlure] de L. monacha, le nombre de captures spécifiques de mâles de L. monacha augmentait en fonction de la dose du mélange. Le (±)-disparlure, utilisé précédemment pour attirer des L. monacha et testé aux quatre mêmes doses, attirait tout aussi bien des mâles de L. dispar (Linnée) que des mâles de L. monacha. Nous recommandons donc l’utilisation de pièges à base de polyuréthane imbibés d’au moins 200 μg d’extrait volatile de L. monacha pour repérer la présence de la Nonne L. monacha en Amérique du Nord.

[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 131 , Issue 5 , October 1999 , pp. 687 - 694
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1999

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

Atmospheric Environment Service. 1984. Climatic Atlas of Canada. Map Series 1 — Temperature and degree day. Ottawa: Canadian Government Publishing CentreGoogle Scholar
Bejer, B. 1988. The nun moth in European spruce forest. pp. 211–31 in Berryman, A.A. (Ed), Dynamics of Forest Insect Populations: Patterns, Causes, Implications. New York: Plenum PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bierl, B.A., Beroza, M., Adler, V.E., Kasang, G., Schröter, H., Schneider, D. 1975. The presence of disparlure, the sex pheromone of gypsy moth in the female nun moth. Zeitschrift für Naturforschung 30(c): 672–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryson, R.A., Hare, F.K.(Eds). 1974. Climates of North America. World Survey of Climatology. Vol. 11. New York: Elsevier Scientific Publishing CompanyGoogle Scholar
Campion, D.C. 1984. Survey of pheromone uses in pest control. pp. 405–37 in Hummel, H.E., Miller, T.A. (Eds), Techniques in Pheromone Research. New York: Springer-VerlagCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evenden, M.L., Borden, J.H., van Sickle, G.A., Gries, G. 1995. Development of a pheromone-based monitoring system for western hemlock looper (Lepidoptera: Geometridae): effect of pheromone dose, lure age, and trap type. Environmental Entomology 24: 923–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, G.G., Langevin, D., Liška, J., Kapitola, P., Chong, J.M. 1996. Olefin inhibitor of gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar, is a synergistic pheromone component of nun moth, L. monacha. Naturwissenschaften 83: 328–30Google Scholar
Gries, G., Gries, R., Khaskin, G., Slessor, K.N., Grant, G.G., Liška, J., Kapitola, P. 1996. Specificity of nun and gypsy moth sexual communication through multiple-component pheromone blends. Naturwissenschaften 83: 382–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klimetzek, D., Loskant, G., Vité, J.P., Mori, K. 1976. Disparlure: differences in pheromone perception between gypsy moth and nun moth. Naturwissenschaften 63: 581–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonhardt, B.A., Cunningham, R.T., Dickerson, W.A., Mastro, V.C., Ridgway, R.L., Schwalbe, C.P. 1990. Dispenser design and performance criteria for insect attractants. pp. 113–29 in Ridgway, R.L., Silverstein, R.M., Inscoe, M.N. (Eds), Behaviour-modifying Chemicals for Insect Management. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc.Google Scholar
Leonhardt, B.A., Mastro, V.C., DeVilbiss, E.D. 1993. New dispenser for the pheromone of the gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 86: 821–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milliken, G.A., Johnson, D.E. 1984. Analysis of Messy Data: Designed Experiments. Toronto: Lifetime Learning PublicationsGoogle Scholar
Niemelä, P., Mattson, W.J. 1996. Invasion of North American forests by European phytophagous insects. BioSciences 10: 741–53Google Scholar
Sanders, C.J., Meighen, E.A. 1987. Controlled-release sex pheromone lures for monitoring spruce budworm populations. The Canadian Entomologist 119: 305–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute Inc. 1988. SAS User's Guide: Basics, 6.03 ed. Cary: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Schwerdtfeger, F. 1981. Die Waldkrankheiten. Vierte Auflage. Hamburg: Paul PareyGoogle Scholar
Skuhravy, V. 1987. A review of research on the nun moth (Lymantria monacha L.) conducted with pheromone traps in Czechoslovakia, 1973–1984. Anzeiger für Schädlingskunde, Pflanzenschutz, Umweltschutz 60: 96–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skuhravy, V., Capek, M., Hochmut, R. 1974. Verwendung von Lymantria dispar-Pheromone zur Kontrolle des Vorkommens und der Flugdauer von Lymantria monacha L. und Lymantria dispar L. Anzeiger für Schädlingskunde, Pflanzenschutz, Umweltschutz 47: 58–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turgeon, J.J., McNeil, J.N., Roelofs, W.L. 1983. Field testing of various parameters for the development of a pheromone-based monitoring system for the armyworm, Pseudaletia unipuncta (Haworth) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Environmental Entomology 12: 891–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wall, C. 1989. Monitoring and spray timing. pp. 39–68in Jutsum, A.R., Gordon, R.F.S. (Eds), Insect Pheromone in Plant Protection. Toronto: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.Google Scholar
Wall, C. 1990. Principles of monitoring. pp. 9–23in Ridgway, R.L., Silverstein, R.M., Inscoe, M.N. (Eds), Behaviour-modifying Chemicals for Insect Management. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc.Google Scholar
Wellenstein, G. 1978. Lymantria monacha L., Nonnenspinner, Nonne. pp. 349–46 in Schwenke, W. (Ed), Die Forstschädlinge Europas. Hamburg: Paul PareyGoogle Scholar
Zar, J.H. 1984. Biostatistical Analysis. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall Inc.Google Scholar