Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-swr86 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-24T06:23:26.730Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Studies on Host Preference and its Influence on European Pine Shoot Moth Success and Development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Dean L. Haynes
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan
James W. Butcher
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan

Extract

The European pine shoot moth (Rhyacionia buoliana (Schiff.)) attacks pine species grown in Michigan for forestry, Christmas tree, and ornamental purposes. Much research has been carried out on life history and direct insecticide control, (Butcher and Haynes 1960; Donley 1960) in efforts to minimize injury. As a result of these studies, practical control methods have been developed for intensively managed stands such as Christmas trees and nursery stock. While the need for a better understanding of shoot moth biology and ecology is generally accepted, the inability of foresters and entomologists to obtain satisfactory shoot moth control with low gallonage insecticide applications under forestry conditions has given impetus to studies on host preference and the influence of the host on shoot moth success and development. Such information, when available, might conceivably suggest planting and management steps that foresters could take in order to minimize attack and injury by this pest in the future. In Michigan, the European pine shoot moth overwinters as a partially grown larva and feeding is resumed about April 20. By late May or early June, pupation takes place in the bud area and adults emerge in about 2 weeks. Eggs are laid on the bark and needles, and hatching occurs within 10 to 15 days. Newly hatched larvae feed at the base of the current year's needles, later moving to the terminal and lateral buds where they remain until the following spring. Pitch blisters or “tents” formed as a result of feeding. in the bud area are useful indicators of shoot moth presence and activity.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1962

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

Butcher, James W., and Haynes, Dean L.. 1960. Influence of timing and insect biology on the effectiveness of insecticides applied for control of European pine shoot moth, Rhyacionia buoliana. Jour. Econ. Ent. 53: 349354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donley, David E. 1960. Field testing of insecticides for control of the Nantucket pine moth, Rhyacionia frustrana, and the European pine shoot moth, R. buoliana. Jour. Econ. Ent. 53: 365367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, David B. 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11: 142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, David B. 1957. Multiple range tests for correlated and heteroscedastic means. Biometrics 13: 164176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friend, R. B., and West, A. S.. 1933. European pine shoot moth Rhyacionia buoliana (Schiff.) with special reference to its occurrence in Eli Whitney Forest. Yale Univ. Sch. For. Bul. 37, pp. 165.Google Scholar
Haynes, Dean L. 1959. Dorsal contact toxicity of six insecticides to wintering larvae of the European pine shoot moth. Jour. Econ. Ent. 52: 588590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, W. E. 1960. The European pine shoot moth; relationship between proportion of trees infested and number of insects per tree. Jour. For. 58: 647648.Google Scholar
Miller, William E., and Heikkenen, H. J.. 1959. The relative susceptibility of eight pine species to European pine shoot moth attack in Michigan. Jour. For. 57: 912914.Google Scholar
Snedecor, George W. 1957. Statistical methods. Iowa State College Press, Ames, Iowa. 534 pp.Google Scholar