Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:16:34.814Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

TWO-YEAR EFFECTS OF A BACILLUS THURINGIENSIS TREATMENT ON SPRUCE BUDWORM, CHORISTONEURA FUMIFERANA (LEPIDOPTERA: TORTRICIDAE)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

J. B. Dimond  and
C. J. Spies III
J. B. Dimond
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, University of Maine, Orono, Maine 04469
C. J. Spies III
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, University of Maine, Orono, Maine 04469
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Multiyear benefits or carryover effects of single treatments of Bacillus thuringiensis (B.t.) have been suggested in a few reports. Morris (1977) noted that over 2 to 3 years after treatment both defoliation by and oviposition rates of the spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana) were lower in B.t.-treated plots than in untreated plots. Smirnoff et al. (1974) suggested that “metabolic perturbations” in survivors of B.t. treatments affected fecundity and numbers the following year. With other insects, Ruelle et al. (1977) suggested multigenerational effects in the browntail moth, Euproctis chrysorrhoea, and Pruett et al. (1980) described an “exceptional” case with the Siberian silkworm, Dendrolimus sibericus, where over-wintering larvae harbored sublethal infections of B.t., which spread to subsequent generations.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 113 , Issue 7 , July 1981 , pp. 661 - 663
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1981

References

Dimond, J. B. and Spies, C. J. III. 1980. A comparison of BT alone with BT plus the additives chitinase and Orthene in control of eastern spruce budworm. Misc. Rep. 224, Me. Life Sci. agric. Exp. Stn. 15 pp.Google Scholar
Morris, O. N. 1977. Long term study of the effectiveness of aerial application of Bacillus thuringiensis – acephate combinations against the spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Can. Ent. 109: 1239–1248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pruett, C. J. H., Burges, H. C., and Wyborn, C. H.. 1980. Effects of exposure to soil on potency and spore viability of Bacillus thuringiensis. J. invert. Path. 35: 168–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruelle, P., Nef, L., and Lebrun, P.. 1977. Étude en laboratoire de l'efficacité prolongée de Bacillus thuringiensis sur Euproctis chrysorrhoea. Parasitica 33: 127–137.Google Scholar
Sanders, C. J. (Comp.). 1980. A summary of current techniques used for sampling spruce budworm populations and estimating defoliation in Eastern Canada. Can. For. Serv. Inf. Rep. O-X-306.Google Scholar
Smirnoff, W. A., Larsen, L. V., Juneau, A., and Velero, J.. 1974. Test with a highly concentrated low-volume formulation of Bacillus thuringiensis against spruce budworm. Can. For. Serv. Bi-Mon. Res. Notes 30: 9.Google Scholar
Smirnoff, W. A. 1980. Results of aerial treatments with Bacillus thuringiensis against spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana, during 3 consecutive years. Can. Ent. 112: 857–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar