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.

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

Species, elevation, and diameter affect whitebark pine and lodgepole pine stored resources in the sapwood and phloem: implications for bark beetle outbreaks

2014 ◽  
Vol 44 (11) ◽  
pp. 1312-1319 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleanor C. Lahr ◽  
Anna Sala
Keyword(s):  
Nutritional Quality ◽  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Large Diameter ◽  
Small Diameter ◽  
Whitebark Pine ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Trees ◽  
Lodgepole Pines

Stored resources in trees reflect physiological and environmental variables and affect life history traits, including growth, reproduction, resistance to abiotic stress, and defense. However, less attention has been paid to the fact that stored resources also determine tissue nutritional quality and may have direct consequences for the success of herbivores and pathogens. Here, we investigated whether stored resources differed between two hosts of the mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins, 1902): lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Douglas ex. Loudon), a common host, and whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis Engelmann), a more naïve host that grows at higher altitudes. Phloem and sapwood were sampled in small- and large-diameter trees at two elevations, and nitrogen, phosphorus, nonstructural carbohydrates, and lipids were measured. We found that concentrations of stored resources increased with elevation and tree diameter for both species and that whitebark pine had thicker phloem than lodgepole pine. Overall, stored resources were higher in whitebark pine such that small-diameter whitebark pine trees often had resource concentrations higher than large-diameter lodgepole pines. These results suggest that whitebark pine is of higher nutritional quality than lodgepole pine, which could have implications for the current expansion of mountain pine beetles into higher altitude and latitude forests in response to climate warming.

EMERGENCE OF IPS PINI AND HYLURGOPS POROSUS (COLEOPTERA: SCOLYTIDAE) FROM DUFF AT THE BASE OF LODGEPOLE PINES (PINACEAE) KILLED BY MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE (COLEOPTERA: SCOLYTIDAE)

1999 ◽  
Vol 131 (6) ◽  
pp. 825-827 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Safranyik ◽  
D.A. Linton ◽  
T.L. Shore
Keyword(s):  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Dendroctonus Ponderosae ◽  
Ips Pini ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pines ◽  
Root Collar

Lodgepole pines, Pinus contorta var. contorta Engelmann, killed by mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins, are often subsequently infested by other scolytid species (Safranyik et al. 1996). Ips pini (Say) breeds in the phloem region of the main bole and larger branches in areas not occupied by mountain pine beetle. Adults emerge in the fall and drop to overwinter in the duff near the bases of their brood trees (Safranyik et al. 1996). Hylurgops porosus (LeConte) infests lodgepole pine (Keen 1952; Bright 1976) stumps or severely weakened trees near the root collar and in large roots (Wood 1982). We examined the pattern of emergence of I. pini and H. porosus from the duff around infested trees to describe changes in density over distance from the trees.

scholarly journals Gallery success, brood production, and condition of mountain pine beetles (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) reared in whitebark and lodgepole pine from Alberta, Canada

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 557-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan D. Esch ◽  
David W. Langor ◽  
John R. Spence
Keyword(s):  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Whitebark Pine ◽  
Brood Production ◽  
Female Body Size ◽  
Sequence Of Events ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pines

Breeding pairs of mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) were introduced into freshly cut bolts of whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis Engelm.) and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia Engelm. ex S. Watson) in the laboratory. Brood adults emerging from the bolts were collected and galleries were dissected to compare reproductive success, brood production, and adult condition between the two pines. Beetles were more likely to establish egg galleries that produced brood in lodgepole pine than in whitebark pine. Larval gallery density per centimetre of egg gallery was significantly higher in whitebark pine than in lodgepole pine; however, egg galleries also tended to be shorter in whitebark pine bolts, and consequently, brood adults emerging production per gallery did not differ between the two host species. Female body size, mass, and fat content of brood adults and survival from larva to adult did not differ between beetles reared in the two hosts. Though this no-choice assay did not simulate the sequence of events occurring during host selection, these results are consistent with other data suggesting that beetles could be less likely to attack whitebark pines in southwestern Alberta. Whitebark pines that are attacked will produce brood in similar numbers and condition as those from lodgepole pines.

Mountain pine beetle outbreak enhanced resin duct-defenses of lodgepole pine trees

2019 ◽  
Vol 441 ◽  
pp. 271-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shiyang Zhao ◽  
Jennifer G. Klutsch ◽  
Jonathan A. Cale ◽  
Nadir Erbilgin
Keyword(s):  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Resin Duct ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Pine Trees

scholarly journals Evaluating doses of SPLAT® verb to protect lodgepole pine trees and stands from mountain pine beetle

2020 ◽  
Vol 136 ◽  
pp. 105228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Fettig ◽  
Brytten E. Steed ◽  
A. Steven Munson ◽  
Robert A. Progar ◽  
Agenor Mafra-Neto
Keyword(s):  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Pine Trees
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document