The response of mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) to lodgepole pine trees baited with verbenone and exo-brevicomin

1992 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 533-541 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. L. Shore ◽  
L. Safranyak ◽  
B. S. Lindgren
Keyword(s):  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Dendroctonus Ponderosae ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Pine Trees

OBSERVATIONS ON A TRIAL OF BROADCAST BURNING TO CONTROL AN INFESTATION OF THE MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE DENDROCTONUS PONDEROSAE

1989 ◽  
Vol 121 (6) ◽  
pp. 521-523 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.J. Stock ◽  
R.A. Gorley
Keyword(s):  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Dendroctonus Ponderosae ◽  
Management Plan ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Direct Control ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle

The mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopk., causes extensive mortality of lodgepole pine, Pinus contorta var. latifolia Engelm., throughout western North America (Van Sickle 1982). The Prince Rupert Forest Region, in the northwest of British Columbia, initiated an aggressive beetle management program in 1981. Logging of infested stands, and winter felling and burning of individual infested trees are the most common direct control techniques.The “Bristol Lake” infestation developed in the Bulkley Forest District, approximately 55 km northwest of Smithers, B.C., on a steep rocky ridge within the valley of Harold Price Creek. The area contained large volumes of mature lodgepole pine, and control of the infestation was therefore considered critical to the local beetle management plan, but the size (50 ha) and rough topography of the infested area precluded normal direct control measures.

Carbohydrate allocation and mountain pine beetle attack in girdled lodgepole pines

1986 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1036-1040 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. H. Miller ◽  
A. A. Berryman
Keyword(s):  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Soluble Sugars ◽  
Lower Trunk ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Pine Trees ◽  
Lodgepole Pines

Healthy lodgepole pine trees (Pinuscontorta Dougl. var. latifolia Engelm.) were girdled on the lower trunk in patterns designed to selectively eliminate the influence of materials transported from the roots, lateral tissues, and crown. Titres of soluble sugars and starch observed in areas isolated by girdling were significantly lower than those observed in areas open to the upper bole and crown. Corresponding decreases were observed in the numbers of Dendroctonusponderosae Hopkins attacking those areas.

DENDROCTONUS PONDEROSAE (COLEOPTERA: SCOLYTIDAE): PRE-AGGREGATION LANDING AND GALLERY INITIATION ON LODGEPOLE PINE

1980 ◽  
Vol 112 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry G. Hynum ◽  
Alan A. Berryman
Keyword(s):  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Dendroctonus Ponderosae ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle

AbstractLanding rates as monitored by landing traps indicate that the mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins, is not attracted to lodgepole pine, Pinus contorta Dougl., prior to the first gallery start. Bark terpene odors and DBH were not correlated with beetle landing rates, with the exception of beta-phellandrene which accounted for a statistically significant 18% of the variation in landing rates. Beetles were unable to distinguish between hosts, dead hosts and nonhosts during landing. The elderberry pith bioassay indicated the presence of a gallery initiation stimulant in the bark.

Pre-logging Baiting with Semiochemicals for the Mountain Pine Beetle, Dendroctonus Ponderosae, in High Hazard Stands of Lodgepole Pine

1986 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. H. Borden ◽  
L. J. Chong ◽  
T. E. Lacey
Keyword(s):  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Dendroctonus Ponderosae ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Additional Advantage ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Massive Influx ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
High Hazard

Baiting of trees with attractive semiochemicals prior to logging in three high hazard blocks of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia Engelm.) was effective in inducing attack by the mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) on baited trees and on surrounding unbaited trees. There was evidence for partial shifting of attack loci, concentration of dispersing beetles and containment of emergent beetles as a result of the baiting program. However, baiting was ineffective when the baits were within the understory canopy, and the baiting program did not cause a massive influx of beetles from infestations 75-200 m away from the baited blocks. Such baiting programs would be cost effective if they avoided the necessity of disposing of two attacked trees/ha outside of the baited blocks. They have the additional advantage of reducing the risk of future beetle attacks by removing beetles and their broods during logging of induced infestations.

A New Formulation and Reduced Rates of Carbary for Protecting Lodgepole Pine from Mountain Pine Beetle Attack

1987 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 114-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick J. Shea ◽  
Mark McGregor
Keyword(s):  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Pine Trees ◽  
Large Scale Field ◽  
Lodgepole Pines ◽  
New Formulation

Abstract A large-scale field experiment was conducted on the Flathead National Forest, Montana, to evaluate the efficacy of 0.5%, 1.0%, and 2.0% formulations of Sevimol® and Sevin brand XLR® for protecting individual lodgepole pines (Pinus contorta var. latifolia Engelm.) from attack by mountain pine beetles (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopk.). All concentrations and formulations were highly effective (>95%) in protecting lodgepole pine trees from lethal attack by mountain pine beetle for 1 year, and the 1% and 2% concentrations were effective (>90%) for 2 years. West. J. Appl. For. 2(4):114-116, October 1987

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document