Journal of Economic Entomology (2020) 113, 2745-2757

From Pestinfo-Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Matteo Marchioro, Davide Rassati, Massimo Faccoli, Kate Van Rooyen, Chantelle Kostanowicz, Vincent Webster, Peter Mayo and Jon Sweeney (2020)
Maximizing bark and ambrosia beetle (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) catches in trapping surveys for longhorn and jewel beetles
Journal of Economic Entomology 113 (6), 2745-2757
Abstract: Bark and ambrosia beetles are commonly moved among continents within timber and fresh wood-packaging materials. Routine visual inspections of imported commodities are often complemented with baited traps set up in natural areas surrounding entry points. Given that these activities can be expensive, trapping protocols that attract multiple species simultaneously are needed. Here we investigated whether trapping protocols commonly used to detect longhorn beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) and jewel beetles (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) can be exploited also for detecting bark and ambrosia beetles. In factorial experiments conducted in 2016 both in Italy (seminatural and reforested forests) and Canada (mixed forest) we tested the effect of trap color (green vs purple), trap height (understory vs canopy), and attractive blend (hardwood-blend developed for broadleaf-associated wood-boring beetles vs ethanol in Italy; hardwood-blend vs softwood-blend developed for conifer-associated wood-boring beetles, in Canada) separately on bark beetles and ambrosia beetles, as well as on individual bark and ambrosia beetle species. Trap color affected catch of ambrosia beetles more so than bark beetles, with purple traps generally more attractive than green traps. Trap height affected both beetle groups, with understory traps generally performing better than canopy traps. Hardwood-blend and ethanol performed almost equally in attracting ambrosia beetles in Italy, whereas hardwood-blend and softwood-blend were more attractive to broadleaf-associated species and conifer-associated species, respectively, in Canada. In general, we showed that trapping variables suitable for generic surveillance of longhorn and jewel beetles may also be exploited for survey of bark and ambrosia beetles, but trapping protocols must be adjusted depending on the forest type.
(The abstract is excluded from the Creative Commons licence and has been copied with permission by the publisher.)
Full text of article
Database assignments for author(s): Davide Rassati, Massimo Faccoli

Research topic(s) for pests/diseases/weeds:
pheromones/attractants/traps


Pest and/or beneficial records:

Beneficial Pest/Disease/Weed Crop/Product Country Quarant.


Xyleborinus saxeseni Italy
Xyleborinus saxeseni Canada (east)
Hylastinus obscurus Canada (east)
Trypodendron lineatum Canada (east)
Ips pini Canada (east)
Dryocoetes affaber Canada (east)
Gnathotrichus materiarius Canada (east)
Xyleborinus attenuatus Canada (east)
Xylosandrus germanus Italy
Xylosandrus germanus Canada (east)
Ips grandicollis Canada (east)
Dryocoetes autographus Canada (east)
Crypturgus pusillus Canada (east)
Orthotomicus caelatus Canada (east)
Polygraphus rufipennis Canada (east)
Pityogenes hopkinsi Canada (east)
Xylosandrus crassiusculus Italy
Xyloterinus politus Canada (east)
Orthotomicus latidens Canada (east)
Pseudopityophthorus minutissimus Canada (east)
Ambrosiodmus rubricollis Italy
Xyleborus monographus Italy