Journal of Chemical Ecology

, Volume 20, Issue 8, pp 1825–1841 | Cite as

Absorption and release of pheromone ofEpiphyas postvittana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) by apple leaves

  • G. Karg
  • D. M. Suckling
  • S. J. Bradley


The absorption and release of the pheromone ofEpiphyas postvititana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae),E 11–14: OAc andE,E 9, 11–14: OAc (95:5) by apple leaves was studied using electroantennograms (EAG) and sticky traps baited with pheromone-treated leaves. Leaves exposed to an airstream containing pheromone reached a constant level of pheromone release within 3 min. Release occurred over a period greater than 24 hr, following removal of leaves from the pheromone-saturated environment. Pheromone-treated leaves were effective as lures in sticky traps for at least three nights, although the average catch per night decrease logarithmically with time. In the field, pheromone was detected by EAG on leaves harvested from up to 25 cm away from a central point source of pheromone. The shape of a surface representing equal pheromone re-release from leaves around a central point source was defined by interpolation from a three-dimensional transect. Leaves harvested from 5 cm under the dispensers showed the highest pheromone release rate. Leaves downwind of the dispensers also had higher release of pheromone. In a treated orchard, significantly higher EAG measurements were recorded in the rows of trees that contained dispensers, compared to grass interrows or untreated trees. The implications of foliar pheromone adsorption and release on atmospheric concentrations and insect behavior require further investigation.

Key Words

Epiphyas postvittana Lepidoptera Tortricidae electroantennogram pheromone dispenser apple mating disruption atmospheric concentration 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baker, A.E. 1982. Chemistry and morphology of plant epicuticular waxes, pp. 139–165,in D.F. Cutler, K.L. Alvin, and E. Price (eds.). The Plant Cuticle. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, T.C., andHaynes, K.F. 1989. Field and laboratory electroantennographic measurements of pheromone plume structure correlated with oriental fruit moth behavior.Physiol. Entomol. 14:1–12.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, T.C., Willis, M.A., Haynes, K.F., andPhelan, P.L., 1985. a pulsed cloud of sex pheromones elicits upwind flight in male moths.Physiol. Entomol. 10:257–265.Google Scholar
  4. Baker, T.C., Hansson, B.S., Löfstedt, C., andLöfqvist, J. 1988. Adaptation of antennal neurons in moths is associated with cessation of pheromone-mediated upwind flight.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 85:9826–9830.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bartell, R.J. 1982. Mechanisms of communication disruption by pheromones in the control of Lepidoptera: A review.Physiol. Entomol. 7:353–364.Google Scholar
  6. Bartell, R.J., andLawrence, L.A. 1973. Reduction of responsiveness ofEpiphyas postvittana (Lepidoptera) to sex pheromone following previous brief pheromonal exposure.J. Insect Physiol. 19:845–855.Google Scholar
  7. Bellas, T.E., Bartell, R.J., andHill, A. 1983. Identification of the two components of the sex pheromone of the moth,Epiphyas postvittana (Lepidoptera, Tortricidae).J. Chem. Ecol. 9:503–512.Google Scholar
  8. Bengtsson, M., Karg, G., Kirsch, P.A., Löfqvist, J. Sauer, A.E., andWitzgall, P. 1994. Mating disruption of the pea mothCydia nigricana F. (Lepidoptera, Tortricidae) with a repellent blend of sex pheromone and attraction inhibitors.J. Chem. Ecol. 20:871–887.Google Scholar
  9. Bossert, W.H., andWilson, E.O. 1963. The analysis of olfactory communication among animals.J. Theor. Biol. 5:443–469.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Cardé, T.C. 1990. Principles of mating disruption, pp. 42–71,in R.L. Ridgeway, R.M. Silverstein, and M.N. Insche (eds.). Behavior-Modifying Chemicals for Insect Management. Dekker, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Den Otter, C.J., Schuil, H.A., andSander-Van Oosten, A. 1978. Reception of host-plant odours and female sex pheromone inAdoxophyes orana (Lepidoptera: Torticidae): Electrophysiology and morphology.Entomol. Exp. Appl. 24:370–378.Google Scholar
  12. Dunn, J.S., andStolp, M. 1987. Apples on the Lincoln canopy: Mechanized management.HortScience 22:568–572.Google Scholar
  13. Fernandes, A.M.S., Batt, R.F., andMartin, J.T. 1964. The cuticular waxes of apples leaves and fruit and the cuticles of pear fruits during growth. Report of Long Ashton Research Station for 1963, University of Bristol.Google Scholar
  14. Jeffree, C.E. 1986. The cuticle, epicuticular waxes and trichomes of plants, with reference to their structure, function and evolution, pp. 23–64in B.E. Juniper and T.R.E. Southwood (eds.). Insects and the Plant Surfaces. Edward Arnold, London.Google Scholar
  15. Jutsum, A.R., andGordon, R.F.S. (eds.). 1989. Insect Pheromones in Plant Protection. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  16. Karg, G., Sauer, A.E., andKoch, U.T. 1990. The influence of plants on the development of pheromone atmospheres measured by EAG method, p. 301,in N. Elsner and G. Roth (eds.). Brain-Perception-Cognition. Proceedings of the 18th Göttingen Neurobiology Conference. Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  17. Kennedy, J.S. 1978. The concept of olfactory “arrestment” and “attraction.”Physiol. Entomol. 3:91–98.Google Scholar
  18. Kennedy, J.S. 1982. Mechanisms of moth sex attraction: A modified view based on wind tunnel experiments with flying Axoxophes.colloq. INRA 7:184–192.Google Scholar
  19. Kennedy, J.S., Ludlow, A.R., andSanders, C.J. 1980. Guidance system used in moths sex attraction.Nature 288;475–477.Google Scholar
  20. Kennedy, J.S., Ludlow, A.R., andSanders, C.J. 1981. Guidance of flying male moths by wind-borne sex pheromone.Physiol. Entomol. 6:109.120.Google Scholar
  21. Murlis, J. 1986. The structure of odour plumes, pp. 27–38,in T.L. Payne, M.C. Birch, and C.E.J. Kennedy (eds.). Mechanisms on Insect Olfaction. Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K.Google Scholar
  22. Murlis, J., andJones, C.D. 1981. Fine-scale structure of odour plumes in relation to insect orientation to distant pheromone and other attractant sources.Physiol. Entomol. 6:71–86.Google Scholar
  23. Murlis, J., Elkinton, J.S., andCardé, R.T. 1992. Odor plumes and how insects use them.Annu. Rev. Entomol. 37:505–532.Google Scholar
  24. Noldus, L.P.J.J., Potting, R.P.J., andBarendregt, H.E. 1991. Moth sex pheromone adsorption to leaf surfaces: Bridge in time for chemical spies.Physiol. Entomol. 16:329–344.Google Scholar
  25. Ridgeway, R.L., Silverstein, R.M., andInscoe, M.N. (eds.). 1990. Behavior-Modifying Chemicals for Insect Management: Applications of Pheromones and Other Attractants, Marcel Dekker, New York.Google Scholar
  26. Roelofs, W.L. 1978. Threshold hypothesis for pheromone perception.J. Chem. Ecol. 4:685–699.Google Scholar
  27. Rumbo, E.R. 1981. Study of the single sensillum responses to pheromone in the light brown apple moth,Epiphyas postvittana, using the averaging technique.Physiol. Entomol. 6:87–98.Google Scholar
  28. Rumbo, E.R., Deacon, S.M., andRegan, L.P. 1993. Spatial discrimination between natural pheromone and inhibitor in the light-brown apple mothEpiphyas postvittana (Walker) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae).J. Chem. Ecol. 19:953–962.Google Scholar
  29. Sauer, A.E. 1991. Bestimmung von Pheromonkonzentrationen im Freiland mit Elektroantennogrammen zur Unterstützung der Paarungsstörmethode bei den TraubenwicklerartenLobesia botrana undEupocelia ambiguella. PhD thesis. University of Kaiserslautern, Germany.Google Scholar
  30. Sauer, A.E., Karg, G., Koch, U.T., De Kramer, J.J., Milli, R. 1992. A portable system for the measurement of pheromone concentrations in the field.Chem. Senses 17:543–588.Google Scholar
  31. Suckling, D.M. 1993. Sex pheromones: Are they delivering to expectations: pp. 62–65,in S.A. Corey, D.J. Dall, and W.M. Milne (eds.). Pest Control and Sustainable Agriculture. CSIRO, Canberra.Google Scholar
  32. Suckling, D.M. andClearwater, J.R. 1990. Small scale trials of disruption ofEpiphyas post-vittana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in New Zealand.Environ. Entomol. 19:1702–1709.Google Scholar
  33. Suckling, D.M., andShaw, P.W. 1990. Preliminary trails of mating disruption of lightbrown apple moth in Nelson.Proc. 43rd N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conf. 1990:311–316.Google Scholar
  34. Suckling, D.M., andShaw, P.W. 1991. Evaluation of mating disruption of lightbrown apple moth in Nelson.Proc. 44rd N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conf. 1991:47–51.Google Scholar
  35. Suckling, D.M., andShaw, P.W. 1992. Conditions that favour mating disruption ofEpiphyas postvittana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae).Environ. Entomol. 21:949–956.Google Scholar
  36. Suckling, D.M., Shaw, P.W., Khoo, J.G.I., andCruickshank, V. 1990. Resistance management ofEpiphyas postvittana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) using mating disruption.N.Z. J. Crop Hortic. Sci. 18:89–98.Google Scholar
  37. Suckling, D.M., Karg, G., Bradley, S.J., andHoward, C.R. (1994). Electroantennogram and behavioral responses ofEpiphyas postvittana under low pheromone concentrations.Environ. Entomol. In Press.Google Scholar
  38. Wall, C., Sturgeon, D.M., Greenway, A.R., andPerry, J.N. 1981. Contamination of vegetation with synthetic sex attractant released from traps for the pea moths,Cydia nigricana.Entomol. Exp. Appl. 30:111–115.Google Scholar
  39. Willis, M.A., andBaker, T.C. 1984. Effects of intermittent and continuous pheromone stimulation on the flight behaviour of the oriental fruit moth,Grapholita molesta.Physiol. Entomol. 9:341–358.Google Scholar
  40. Wilson, E.O., Bossert, W.H., andReigner, F.E. 1969. A general method for estimating threshold concentrations of odourants.J. Insect Physiol. 15:597–610.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Wright, R.H. 1958. The olfactory guidance of flying insects.Can. Entomol. 90:81–89.Google Scholar
  42. Zeoli, L.T., Kydonieus, A.F., andQuisumbing, A.R. 1981. Controlled release technologies,in A.F. Kydonieus and M. Beroza (eds.). Insect Suppression with Controlled Release Pheromone Systems, Vol. 1. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Karg
    • 1
  • D. M. Suckling
    • 1
  • S. J. Bradley
    • 1
  1. 1.HortResearchLincoln CanterburyNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations