Title: | Recapture of codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) males: influence of lure type and pheromone background |
Author(s): | Grieshop MJ; Brunner JF; Jones VP; Bello NM; |
Address: | "Tree Fruit Research and Extension Center, Washington State University, 1100 N. Western Ave., Wenatchee, WA 98801, USA. grieshop@msu.edu" |
ISSN/ISBN: | 0022-0493 (Print) 0022-0493 (Linking) |
Abstract: | "Recapture of marked male codling moths, Cydia pomonella (L.) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), released four distances from traps was measured in experiments comparing either lure type or mating disruption. Experiment 1 assessed recapture by 0.1, 1, and 10 mg of codlemone lures. Experiments 2 and 3 assessed moth recapture in orchard plots with 0, 500, or 1,000 Isomate C Plus dispensers per ha. Moths were released 1, 3, 10, and 30 m downwind of the trap in experiments 1 and 2, and 3, 10, 30, and 45 m in experiment 3. Lure type did not affect recapture, however, significantly more moths were recaptured at 3 m compared with 10 or 30 m. Most moths recaptured < or = 10 m of the trap were recaptured by day 3, whereas most of the moths recaptured > or = 10 m were recaptured after day 3. Thus, 0.1-, 1-, and 10-mg lures, have an attractive range of between 10 and 30 m in orchards lacking mating disruption. Both mating disruption rates greatly reduced moth recapture, and moths recaptured under a 1,000 dispenser per ha rate were recaptured from < or = 10 m and within the first 2 d after release. Similar results were observed when release points were expanded to 45 m. Thus, results suggest that pheromone dispenser technologies and placement strategies that maximize disruption of males that arise within 10 m of a female are needed to markedly improve mating disruption" |
Keywords: | "Animals Female Insect Control/*methods Male Moths/*drug effects/*physiology Pest Control, Biological/*methods Pheromones/*pharmacology;" |
Notes: | "MedlineGrieshop, Matthew J Brunner, Jay F Jones, Vincent P Bello, Nora M eng Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't England 2010/09/23 J Econ Entomol. 2010 Aug; 103(4):1242-9. doi: 10.1603/ec09282" |