Developing trapping protocols for wood-boring beetles associated with broadleaf trees
- 296 Downloads
Longhorn and jewel beetles are often moved intercontinentally within woody materials. The common use of hardwoods in solid wood-packaging requires efficient trapping protocols for broadleaf-associated species. We tested the effect of lure (ethanol vs multi-lure), trap color (green vs purple), and trap height (understory vs canopy) on the longhorn and jewel beetle species trapped in multi-funnel traps set up in both seminatural forests and reforested forests in Italy. Traps were deployed in a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial scheme, and the eight different treatments were replicated 17 times in a randomized complete block design, in which each block was a different site. Thirty-five longhorn beetle species (2 non-native) and 15 jewel beetle species (all native) were trapped. The multi-lure was more effective than ethanol at detecting most longhorn beetles at both the species and subfamily level (except Lepturinae), but had no effect on the detection of jewel beetles. Trap color affected both jewel (green better than purple) and longhorn beetles with mixed responses among subfamilies. Species richness and/or abundance of both families was greater in the canopy than the understory, but trends were more heterogeneous at lower taxonomic levels (i.e., significant effect on Cerambycinae and Lepturinae but not on Lamiinae). In general, we showed that green multi-funnel traps baited with multi-lure, and setup in the canopy may be an efficient trapping protocol for European longhorn and jewel beetles associated with broadleaf trees. This information can increase efficacy of early-detection programs carried out both inside and outside of Europe.
KeywordsBuprestidae Cerambycidae Early-detection Multi-lure Trap height Trap color
The authors thank Franco Rassati and Carlo del Fabbro for field assistance, Cory Hughes and Deepa Abeysekera for technical assistance in the laboratory, Peter Silk, Troy Kimoto, and Joe Francese for logistical support, Andrea Battisti and three anonymous reviewers for comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript. This study was supported by funding from Natural Resources Canada, US Department of Agriculture—Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service—Plant Protection Quarantine, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources through SERG International, and by the University of Padua (ex-60%).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interests
Authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.
Human and animal rights
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- Bense U (1995) Longhorn beetles: illustrated key to the Cerambycidae and Vesperidae of Europe. Margraf Verlag, WeikersheimGoogle Scholar
- Bush RJ, Araman PA (2009) Material use and production changes in the US Wood pallet and container industry: 1992 to 2006. Pallet Enterp. http://www.palletenterprise.com/articledatabase/view.asp?articleID=2866. Accessed 25 Sept 2017
- Colwell RK (2016) EstimateS: statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 9. User’s Guide and application. http://purl.oclc.org/estimates. Accessed 23 July 2017
- Curletti G, Rastelli M, Rastelli S, Tassi F (2003) Coleotteri Buprestidi d’Italia. Piccole Faune. Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Carmagnola (Torino) e Progetto Biodiversità Comitato Parchi—Centro Studi (Roma), CDRom. ISBN 88-901201-9-3Google Scholar
- Eyre D, Haack RA (2017) Invasive cerambycid pests and biosecurity measures. In: Wang Q (ed) Cerambycidae of the world: biology and pest management. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 563–618Google Scholar
- Flaherty L, Gutowski JM, Mayo P, Mokrzycki T, Pohl G, Silk P, Sweeney J (2018) Pheromone-enhanced lure blends and multiple trap heights improve detection of bark and wood-boring beetles potentially moved in solid wood-packaging. J Pest Sci (in press)Google Scholar
- Haack RA (2017a) Cerambycid pests in forests and urban trees. In: Wang Q (ed) Cerambycidae of the world: biology and pest management. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 351–408Google Scholar
- Haack RA (2017b) Feeding biology of cerambycids. In: Wang Q (ed) Cerambycidae of the world: biology and pest management. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 105–132Google Scholar
- Hardersen S, Curletti G, Leseigneur L, Platia G, Liberti G, Leo P, Cornacchia P, Gatti E (2014) Spatio-temporal analysis of beetles from the canopy and ground layer in an Italian lowland forest. Bull Insectol 67:87–97Google Scholar
- Hughes CC, Johns RC, Sweeney JD (2014) A technical guide to installing beetle traps in the upper crown of trees. J Acad Entomol Soc 10:12–18Google Scholar
- Kubáň V, Volkovitsh MG, Kalashian MJ, Jendek E (2016) Buprestidae. In: Löbl I, Löbl D (eds) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera, vol 3. Revised and updated edition. Scarabaeoidea, Scirtoidea, Dascilloidea, Buprestoidea and Byrrhoidea. Brill, Leiden, Boston, pp 432–574Google Scholar
- Lelito JP, Fraser I, Mastro VC, Tumlinson JH, Böröczky K, Baker TC (2007) Visually mediated ‘paratrooper copulations’ in the mating behavior of Agrilus planipennis (Coleoptera: Buprestidae), a highly destructive invasive pest of North American ash trees. J Insect Behav 20:537–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Malmusi M, Saltini L, Poloni R (2017) Nuovo contributo alla redazione di un catalogo dei Vesperidae e dei Cerambycidae dell’Emilia. Atti Soc Nat Mat Modena 148:239–272Google Scholar
- Millar JG, Hanks LM (2017) Chemical ecology of cerambycid beetles. In: Wang Q (ed) Cerambycidae of the world: biology and management. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 161–208Google Scholar
- Millar JG, Mitchell RF, Mongold-Diers AJ, Zou Y, Bográn CE, Fierke MK, Ginzel MD, Johnson CW, Meeker JR, Poland TM, Ragenovich I, Hanks LM (2017) Identifying possible pheromones of cerambycid beetles by field testing known pheromone components in four widely separated regions of the United States. J Econ Entomol 111:252–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Monnè ML, Monnè MA, Wang Q (2017) General morphology, classification, and biology of Cerambycidae. In: Wang Q (ed) Cerambycidae of the world: biology and pest management. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 1–70Google Scholar
- Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D, R Development Core Team (2013) nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1–111Google Scholar
- R Development Core Team (2015) A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
- Rabaglia RJ, Duerr D, Acciavatti RE, Ragenovich I (2008) Early detection and rapid response for non-native bark and ambrosia beetles. US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Forest Health Protection, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- Sama G (2002) Atlas of the Cerambycidae of Europe and Mediterranean Area. Northern, Western, Central and Eastern Europe, British Isles and Continental Europe from France (excl. Corsica) to Scandinavia and Urals. Nakladatelstvi Kabourek, ZlinGoogle Scholar
- Sama G, Rapuzzi P (2011) Una nuova Checklist dei Cerambycidae d’Italia (Insecta Coleoptera Cerambycidae). Quad Studi Nat Romagna 32:121–164Google Scholar
- Wu Y, Trepanowski NF, Molongoski JJ, Reagel PF, Lingafelter SW, Nadel H, Myers SW, Ray AM (2017) Identification of wood-boring beetles (Cerambycidae and Buprestidae) intercepted in trade-associated solid wood packaging material using DNA barcoding and morphology. Sci Rep 7:40316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis, 4th edn. Prentice-Hall, Inc., TorontoGoogle Scholar