Skip to main content
Log in

Trap trees for elm bark beetles

Augmentation with pheromone baits and chlorpyrifos

  • Published:
Journal of Chemical Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

European elm bark beetles,Scolytus multistriatus (Marsh.), were strongly attracted to American elms,Ulmus americana L., baited with theS. multistriatus attractant, multilure, or killed by injection of the arboricide, cacodylic acid; a combination of the two treatments was most attractive. Comparisons of beetle catches on sticky bands affixed to the trees with samples of bark from the same trees showed that the number of beetles landing on cacodylic acid-treated trees was approximately 40 times greater than the number boring into them. Spraying the bark with the insecticide chlorpyrifos had no direct effect on attraction. No live bark beetle brood was found in trees that had been treated with cacodylic acid or chlorpyrifos, but trees that were only baited or left untreated (check) were attacked, killed, and colonized. We suggest that the contribution of the cacodylic acid trap tree technique to Dutch elm disease control will be enhanced by baiting treated trees with multilure and spraying their lower boles with 0.5% chlorpyrifos. This treatment will eliminate diseased and unwanted elms as potential breeding material and kill large numbers of elm bark beetles that might otherwise innoculate healthy elms with the Dutch elm disease fungus.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Cuthbert, R.A., andPeacock, J.W. 1975. Attraction ofScolytus multistriatus to pheromone-baited traps at different heights.Environ. Entomol. 4:889–890.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner, L.M. 1979. Attraction ofHylurgopinus rufipes to cacodylic acid-treated trees.Entomol. Soc. Am. Bull. 25:102–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner, L.M., andWebb, D.P. 1980. Tests of chlorpyrifos for control of the North American elm bark beetle (Hylurgopinus rufipes Eichh.).Great Lakes Forest Res. Centre Report 0-X-311, 21pp.

  • Kondo, E.S., Hiratsuka, Y., andDenver, W.B.G. 1982. Procedings of the Dutch elm disease symposium and workshop. Manitoba Department Natural Resources, Winnipeg, 517 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanier, G.N. 1981. Pheromone baited traps and trap trees in the integrated management of bark beetles in urban areas, pp. 115–131,in E.R. Mitchell (ed.). Management of Insect Pests with Semiochemicals. Plenum, New York, 514 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanier, G.N. 1982. Behavior-modifying chemicals in Dutch elm disease control, pp. 371–394,in E.S. Kondo, Y. Hiratsuka, and W.B.G. Denyer (eds.). Proceedings of the Dutch Elm Disease Symposium and Workshop. Manitoba Department Natural Resources, Winnipeg, 517 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanier, G.N., Silverstein, R.M., andPeacock, J.W. 1976. Attractant pheromone of the European elm bark beetle (Scolytus multistriatus): Isolation, identification, synthesis and utilization studies, pp. 149–175,in J.E. Anderson and H.K. Kaya (eds.). Perspectives in Forest Entomology. Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanier, G.N., Sherman, J.F., Rabaglia, R.J., andJones, A.H. 1984. Insecticides for control of bark beetles that spread Dutch elm disease.J. Arboric. 10:265–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Callaghan, D.P., Gallagher, E.M., andLanier, G.N. 1980. Field evaluation of pheromone-baited trap trees to control elm bark beetles, vectors of Dutch elm disease.Environ. Entomol. 9:181–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Callaghan, D.P., Atkins, P.M., andFairhurst, C.P. 1984. Behavioral responses of elm bark beetles to baited and unbaited elms killed by cacodylic acid.J. Chem. Ecol. 10:1623–1634.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peacock, J.W., Cuthbert, R.A., andLanier, G.N. 1981. Deployment of traps in a barrier strategy to reduce populations of European elm bark beetles and the incidence of Dutch elm disease, pp. 155–174,in E.R. Mitchell(ed.). Management of Insect Pests with Semiochemicals. Plenum, New York, 514 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, G.T., Gore, W.E., Silverstein, R.M., Peacock, J.W., Cuthbert, R.A., Lanier, G.N., andSimeone, J.B. 1975. Chemical attractants for the smaller European elm bark beetleScolytus multistriatus (Coleoptera: Scolytidae).J. Chem. Ecol. 1:115–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, W.A., andCampana, R.J. 1978. Dutch elm disease, perspectives after 60 years.Search (Agr.) 8(5):1–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stipes, R.J., andCampana, R.J. 1981. Compendium of Dutch Elm Disease. American Phytopathology Society, St. Paul, Minnesota, 96 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webber, J.F. 1981. A natural biological control of Dutch elm disease.Nature, 292:449–451.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lanier, G.N., Jones, A.H. Trap trees for elm bark beetles. J Chem Ecol 11, 11–20 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00987599

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00987599

Key words

Navigation