Journal of Chemical Ecology

, 34:1170 | Cite as

Electrophysiological Response and Attraction of Emerald Ash Borer to Green Leaf Volatiles (GLVs) Emitted by Host Foliage

  • Peter de GrootEmail author
  • Gary G. Grant
  • Therese M. Poland
  • Roger Scharbach
  • Linda Buchan
  • Reginald W. Nott
  • Linda Macdonald
  • Doug Pitt


Green leaf volatiles (GLVs) function as host attractants, pheromone synergists, or sexual kairomones for a number of coleopteran folivores. Hence, we focused on host GLVs to determine if they were attractive to adults of the emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis (Coleoptera: Buprestidae), which feeds on ash (Fraxinus) foliage. Eight GLVs were identified by chromatography-electroantennogram (GC) and GC-mass spectrometry in foliar headspace volatiles collected in traps containing Super-Q from white ash, Fraxinus americana, and green ash, Fraxinus pennsylvanica, trees. GLVs in the aeration extracts elicited antennal responses from both male and female adults in gas chromatography-electroantennogram detection bioassays. Male antennae were more responsive than female antennae and showed the strongest response to (Z)-3-hexenol. Six field experiments were conducted in Canada and the USA from 2004 to 2006 to evaluate the attractiveness of candidate GLVs, in various lure combinations and dosages. Field experiments demonstrated that lures containing (Z)-3-hexenol were the most effective in increasing trap catch when placed on purple traps in open areas or along the edges of woodlots containing ash. Lures with (Z)-3-hexenol were more attractive to males than females, and dosage may be a factor determining its effectiveness.


Buprestidae Agrilus planipennis Bioassay Green leaf volatiles (Z)-3-hexenol Emerald ash borer GC-EAD Aeration extracts Fraxinus spp. Leaf volatiles 



We thank Gene Jones and Pat Roden for rearing beetles in quarantine for the GC-EAD study, and Dorothy Ambeault, Tim Dalseg, Laura Chouinard, Jordana Fera, Tasha Gauthier, Erin Clark, Tina Kuhn, and Toby Petrice for assistance with the field studies. We appreciate the assistance of Vic Mastro and Joseph Francese, USDA-APHIS, in providing the traps for our 2005 studies. Funding and support were provided by the Canadian Forest Service, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and the USDA Forest Service Special Technology Development Program (Project No. NA-2003-02).


  1. Box, G. E. P., and Cox, D. R. 1964. An analysis of transformations. J. Royal Stat. Soc. 26:211–243.Google Scholar
  2. Canadian Food Inspection Agency. 2007. Emerald ash borer—Agrilus planipennis.
  3. Chinese Academy of ScienceS, Institute of Zoology 1986. Agrilus marcopoli Obenberger, p. 445. China Agriculture, Beijing.Google Scholar
  4. Cossé, A. A., Bartlet, R. J., Zilkowski, B. W., Bean, D. W., and Andress, E. R. 2006. Behaviorally active green leaf volatiles for monitoring the leaf beetle, Diorhabda elongata, a biocontrol agent of saltcedar, Tamarix spp. J. Chem. Ecol. 32:2695–2708.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Crook, D. J., Khrimian, A., Fraser, I., Francese, J.A., Poland, T.M., and Mastro, V.C. 2008. Electrophysiological and behavioral responses of Agrilus planipennis (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) to host bark volatiles. Environ. Entomol. 37:356–365.Google Scholar
  6. De Groot, P., Biggs, W. D., Lyons, D. B., Scarr, T., Czwerwinski, E., Evans, H. J., Ingram, W., and Marchant, K. 2006. A visual guide to detecting emerald ash borer damage. Natural Resources Canada and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
  7. Dickens, J. C. 2000. Orientation of Colorado potato beetle to natural and synthetic blends of volatiles emitted by potato plants. Agric. For. Entomol. 2:167–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dickens, J. C., Jang, E. B., Light, D. M., and Alford, A. R. 1990. Enhancement of insect pheromone response by green leaf volatiles. Naturwissenschaften. 77:29–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. EAB Info. 2007. Emerald Ash Borer.
  10. Fernandez, P. C., Meiners, T., BjÖrkman, C., and Hilker, M. 2007. Electrophysiological responses of the blue willow leaf beetle, Phratora vulgatissima, to volatiles of different Salix viminalis genotypes. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 125:157–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Francese, J. A., Mastro, V. C., Oliver, J. B., Lance, D. R., and Youssef, N. 2005. Evaluation of colors for trapping Agrilus planipennis (Coleoptera: Buprestidae). J. Entomol. Sci. 40:93–95.Google Scholar
  12. Grant, G. G., Guo, J., MacDonald, L., and Coppens, M. D. 2007. Oviposition response of spruce budworm (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) to host terpenes and nonhost green leaf volatiles. Can. Entomol. 139:564–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Haack, R. A., Jendek, E., Lui, H., Marchant, K. R., Petrice, T. R., Poland, T. M., and Ye, H. 2002. The emerald ash borer: a new exotic pest in North America. Newsl. Mich. Entomol. Soc. 47:3&41–5.Google Scholar
  14. Hansson, B. S., Larsson, M. C., and Leal, W. S. 1999. Green leaf volatile-detecting olfactory receptor neurons display very high sensitivity and specificity in a scarab beetle. Physiol. Entomol. 24:121–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Larsson, M. C., Leal, W. S., and Hansson, B. S. 2001. Olfactory receptor neurons detecting plant odors and male volatiles in Anomala cuprea beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). J. Insect Physiol. 47:1065–1076.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lelito, J. P., Fraser, I., Mastro, V. C., Tumlinson, J. H., Böröczky, K., and Baker, T. C. 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. 20:537–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lyons, D. B., and Jones, G. C. 2005. The biology and phenology of the emerald ash borer, pp 62–63, in K. W. Gottschalk (ed.) Proceedings, 16th U.S. Department of Agriculture interagency research forum on gypsy moth and other invasive species 2005; January 18–21, Annapolis, MD. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-337.Google Scholar
  18. Lyons, D. B., Caister, C., de Groot, P., Hamilton, B., Marchant, K., Scarr, T., and Turgeon, J. 2007. Survey guide for detection of emerald ash borer. Government of Canada, Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
  19. McCullough, D. G., Poland, T. M., and Cappaert, D. L. 2006. Attraction of emerald ash borer to trap trees: effects of stress agents and trap height, pp. 61–62, in V. Mastro, R. Reardon, and G. Parra (Comp.) Emerald Ash Borer Research Technology Development Meeting, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 26–27 September 2006. USDA Forest Service, FHTET-2005–16.Google Scholar
  20. Montgomery, D. C. 2004. Design and Analysis of Experiments. 6th edn.Wiley, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  21. Mize, C. W., and Schultz, R. C. 1985. Comparing treatment means correctly and appropriately. Can. J. For. Res. 15:1142–1148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Otis, G. W., Youngs, M. E., and Umphrey, G. 2005. Effects of colored objects and purple background on emerald ash borer trapping, pp. 31–32, in V. Mastro and R. Reardon (Comp.). Emerald Ash Borer Research and Technology Development Meeting. 4–6 October 2004. Romulus Michigan, 30 September–1 October 2003. USDA Forest Service, FHTET-2004–15.Google Scholar
  23. Poland, T. M. 2007. Twenty million ash trees later: current status of emerald ash borer in Michigan. Newsl. Mich. Entomol. Soc. 52:1&210–14.Google Scholar
  24. Poland, T. M., de Groot, P., Grant, G., MacDonald, L., and McCullough, D.G. 2004. Developing attractants and trapping techniques for the emerald ash borer, pp. 15–16, in V. Mastro and R. Reardon (Comp.). Emerald Ash Borer Research and Technology Development Meeting. 30 September–1 October 2003. Port Huron, Michigan. USDA Forest Service, FHTET-2004–02.Google Scholar
  25. Poland, T. M., Rodriguez-Saona, C., Grant, G., Buchan, L., De Groot, P., Miller, J., and McCullough, D. G. 2006. Trapping and detection of emerald ash borer: Identification of stress-induced volatiles and tests of attraction in the lab and field, pp. 64–65, in V. Mastro, R. Reardon, and G. Parra (Comp.). Emerald Ash Borer Research Technology Development Meeting, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 26–27 September 2005. USDA Forest Service, FHTET-2005–16.Google Scholar
  26. Poland, T. M., Crook, D., Francese, J., Oliver, J., Otis, G., de Groot, P., Grant, G., MacDonald, L., McCullough, D., Fraser, I., Lance, D., Mastro, V., Youssef, N., Turk, T., and Youngs, M. 2007. Towards the development of survey trapping technology for the emerald ash borer, pp. 4–5, in K.W. Gottschalk (ed.). Proceedings 17th U.S. Department of Agriculture Interagency Research Forum on Gypsy Moth and Other Invasive Species, 2006, Annapolis, Maryland, 10–13 January 2006. USDA Forest Service, Gen. Tech. Report NRS-P-10.Google Scholar
  27. Reinecke, A., Ruther, J., Mayer, C. J., and Hilker, M. 2006. Optimized trap lure for male Melolontha cockchafers. J. Appl. Entomol. 130:171–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Reinecke, A., Ruther, J., Tolasch, T., Francke, W., and Hilker, M. 2002. Alcoholism in cockchafers: orientation of male Melolontha melolontha towards green leaf alcohols. Naturwissenschaften 89:265–269.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rodriguez-Saona, C., Poland, T. M., Miller, J. R., Stelinski, L. L., Grant, G. G., de Groot, P., Buchan, L., and MacDonald, L. 2006. Behavioral and electrophysiological responses of the emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis, to induced plant volatiles of Manchurian ash, Fraxinus mandshurica. Chemoecology 16:75–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ruther, J. 2004. Male-biased response of garden chafer, Phyllopertha horticola, to leaf alcohol and attraction of both sexes to floral plant volatiles. Chemoecology 14:187–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ruther, J., Reinecke, A., Thiemann, K., Tolasch, T., Francke, W., and Hilker, M. 2000. Mate finding in the forest cockchafer, Melolontha hippocastani, mediated by volatiles from plants and females. Physiol. Entomol. 25:172–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ruther, J., Reinecke, A., and Hilker, M. 2002. Plant volatiles in the sexual communication of Melolontha hippocastani: response toward time dependent bouquets and novel function of (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol as a sexual kairomone. Ecol. Entomol. 27:76–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. SAS Institute Inc. 2004. SAS OnlineDocÒ 9.1.3. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
  34. Siegert, N. W., McCullough, D. G., and Tluczek, A. R. 2007. Two years under the bark: towards understanding multiple-year development of emerald ash borer, pp. 20, in V. Mastro, D. Lance, R. Reardon and G. Parra (Comp.). Emerald Ash Borer and Asian Longhorned Beetle Research Technology Development Meeting, 29 October-2 November 2006. USDA Forest Service, FHTET-2007–04.Google Scholar
  35. Steel, R. G. D., and Torrie, J. H. 1980. Principles and procedures of statistics. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  36. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. 2007. Emerald Ash Borer
  37. Warren, W. G. 1986. On the presentation of statistical analyses: reason or ritual. Can. J. For. Res. 16:1185–1191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yu, C. -M. 1992. Agrilus macropoli Obenberger (Coleoptera: Buprestidae), pp. 400–401, in G.-R. Xiao (ed.). Forest Insects of China2nd edn.China Forestry, Beijing.Google Scholar
  39. Zhang, Q. -H., and Schlyter, F. 2004. Olfactory recognition and behavioral avoidance of angiosperm nonhost volatiles by conifer-inhabiting bark beetles. Agric. For. Entomol. 6:1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter de Groot
    • 1
    Email author
  • Gary G. Grant
    • 1
  • Therese M. Poland
    • 2
  • Roger Scharbach
    • 1
  • Linda Buchan
    • 1
  • Reginald W. Nott
    • 1
  • Linda Macdonald
    • 1
  • Doug Pitt
    • 1
  1. 1.Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest ServiceGreat Lakes Forestry CentreSault Ste. MarieCanada
  2. 2.USDA Forest ServiceNorthern Research StationEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations