Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:30:58.093Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

COMPARISON OF ARTIFICIAL PUPATION SHELTERS AND OTHER MONITORING METHODS FOR ENDEMIC POPULATIONS OF DOUGLAS-FIR TUSSOCK MOTH, ORGYIA PSEUDOTSUGATA (MCDUNNOUGH) (LEPIDOPTERA: LYMANTRIIDAE)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

D.L. Dahlsten ,
D.L. Rowney ,
W.A. Copper  and
J.M. Wenz
D.L. Dahlsten
Affiliation:
Division of Biological Control, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA94720
D.L. Rowney
Affiliation:
Division of Biological Control, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA94720
W.A. Copper
Affiliation:
Division of Biological Control, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA94720
J.M. Wenz
Affiliation:
Stanislaus National Forest, U.S. Forest Service, Sonora, California, USA95370
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two artificial pupation shelter types were compared as Douglas-fir tussock moth, Orgyia pseudotsugata (McDunnough), monitoring methods in El Dorado County, CA. No difference in attraction was found; wood shelters are recommended as they are both inexpensive and durable. Shelters were compared with three-crown-level larval sampling and with pheromone trapping. Cocoon counts from shelters were significantly correlated with same-year larval density, reflecting larval sample differences between ridges and the general trend in plots along ridges. Egg masses from shelters in 1978 were significantly correlated with the next year’s larval counts, and are of potential value as an early predictor of larval population. The shelter method also provides information on adult sex ratio and pupal and egg emergence, parasitism, and predation.

Résumé

Nous avons évalué deux types de gîtes artificiels de nymphose comme méthodes d’échantillonnage de la Chenille à houppes du Douglas, Orgyia pseudotsugata (McDunnough), dans le comté d’El Dorado, en Californie. Les deux types de gîtes avaient le même pouvoir d’attraction; nous recommandons les gîtes en bois, car ils sont durables et ne coûtent pas cher. Cette méthode a été comparée à l’échantillonnage de larves au sommet des arbres à trois niveaux et au piégeage à l’aide de phéromones. Le nombre de chrysalides trouvées dans les gîtes artificiels était en corrélation significative avec la densité des larves la même année, et reflétait les différences entre des échantillons larvaires d’une crête forestière à une autre, de même que la tendance générale des grilles-échantillons le long de chacune des crêtes. Les masses d’oeufs recueillies dans les gîtes en 1978 se sont avérées en corrélation significative avec le nombre de larves échantillonnées l’année suivante et elles peuvent donc servir d’indice d’évaluation de la population larvaire tôt au cours du cycle. La méthode des gîtes artificiels fournit également des informations sur le rapport mâles : femelles chez les adultes, sur l’éclosion et la nymphose, sur le parasitisme et sur la prédation.

[Traduit par la rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 124 , Issue 2 , April 1992 , pp. 359 - 369
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1992

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

Dahlsten, D.L., Cameron, E.A., and Copper, W.A.. 1970. Distribution and parasitization of cocoons of the Douglas-fir tussock moth, Hemerocampa pseudotsugata (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae), in an isolated infestation. Can. Ent. 102(2): 175–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahlsten, D.L., and Copper, W.A.. 1979. The use of nesting boxes to study the biology of the mountain chickadee (Parus gambeli) and its impact on selected forest insects. pp. 217–260in Dickson, J.G., Conner, R.W., Fleet, R.R., Kroll, J.C., and Jackson, J.A. (Eds.), Proceedings of a Symposium: The Role of Insectivorous Birds in Forest Ecosystems, 13–14 July, 1978, Nacogdoches, Texas. Academic Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
Dahlsten, D.L., Luck, R.F., Schlinger, E.I., Wenz, J.M., and Copper, W.A.. 1977. Parasitoids and predators of the Douglas-fir tussock moth, Orgyia pseudotsugata (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae), in low to moderate populations in central California. Can. Ent. 109: 727–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahlsten, D.L., Norick, N.X., Wenz, J.M., Williams, C.B., and Rowney, D.L.. 1985. The dynamics of Douglasfir tussock moth populations at low levels at chronically infested sites in California. pp. 132–139in Bevan, D., and Stokley, J.T. (Eds.), Site Characteristics and Population Dynamics of Lepidopteran and Hymenopteran Forest Pests. Proceedings of International Union of Forest Research Organizations Conference Subject Group S2.07.06, 1–7 September, 1980, Dornoch, Scotland. Forestry Commission Research and Development Paper 135. Edinburgh, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Dahlsten, D.L., Rowney, D.L., Copper, W.A., Tait, S.M., and Wenz, J.M.. 1990. Long-term population studies of the Douglas-fir tussock moth in California. pp. 45–58in Watt, A.D., Leather, S.R., Hunter, M.D., and Kidd, N.A. (Eds.), Population Dynamics of Forest Insects. Intercept Limited, Andover, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Daterman, G.E., Livingston, R.L., Wenz, J.M., and Sower, L.L.. 1979. How to use pheromone traps to determine outbreak potential. Agriculture Handbook 546, USDA Combined Forest Pest Research and Development Program. Washington, DC. 11 pp.Google Scholar
Fisher, R.A. 1941. Statistical Methods for Research Workers. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Mason, R.R. 1970. Development of sampling methods for the Douglas-fir tussock moth, Hemerocampa pseudotsugata (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). Can. Ent. 102: 836–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, R.R. 1977. Sampling low density populations of the Douglas-fir tussock moth by frequency of occurrence in the lower tree crown. USDA Forest Service Research Paper PNW-216, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Portland, OR. 8 pp.Google Scholar
Mason, R.R. 1987. Frequency sampling to predict densities in sparse populations of the Douglas-fir tussock moth. For. Sci. 33: 145–156.Google Scholar
Mason, R.R., and Overton, W.S.. 1983. Predicting size and change in nonoutbreak populations of the Douglasfir tussock moth (Lepidoptera:Lymantriidae). Environ. Ent. 12: 799–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, R.R., Torgersen, T.R., Wickman, B.E., and Paul, H.G.. 1983. Natural regulation of a Douglas-fir tussock moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) population in the Sierra Nevada. Environ. Ent. 12: 587–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepherd, R.F. 1985. Pest management of Douglas-fir tussock moth: Estimating larval density by sequential sampling. Can. Ent. 117: 1111–1115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepherd, R.F., Bennett, D.D., Dale, J.W., Tunnock, S., Dolph, R.E., and Thier, R.W.. 1988. Evidence of synchronized cycles in outbreak patterns of Douglas-fir tussock moth, Orgyia pseudotsugata (McDunnough) (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). pp. 107–121 in Sahota, T.S., and Holling, C.S. (Eds.), Paths from a Viewpoint: The Wellington Festschrift on Insect Ecology. Mem. ent. Soc. Can. 146: 213 pp.Google Scholar
Shepherd, R.F., Gray, T.G., Chorney, R.J., and Daterman, G.E.. 1985. Pest management of Douglas-fir tussock moth, Orgyia pseudotsugata (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae): Monitoring endemic populations with pheromone traps to detect incipient outbreaks. Can. Ent. 117: 839–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepherd, R.F., Otvos, I.S., and Chorney, R.J.. 1984. Pest management of Douglas-fir tussock moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae): A sequential sampling method to determine egg mass density. Can. Ent. 116: 1041–1049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torgersen, T.R., and Mason, R.R.. 1985. Characteristics of egg parasitization of Douglas-fir tussock moth, Orgyia pseudotsugata (McD.) (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae), by Telenomus californicus Ash. (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). Environ. Ent. 14: 323–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tukey, J.W. 1977. Exploratory Data Analysis. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.Google Scholar
Wickman, B.E., and Beckwith, R.C.. 1978. Life history and habits. pp. 30–36in Brookes, M.H., Stark, R.W., and Campbell, R.W. (Eds.), The Douglas-fir Tussock Moth: A Synthesis. Technical Bulletin 1585, USDA Forest Service. Washington, DC.Google Scholar