| Title: | Mating Disruption as a Suppression Tactic in Programs Targeting Regulated Lepidopteran Pests in US |
| Author(s): | Lance DR; Leonard DS; Mastro VC; Walters ML; |
| Address: | "USDA APHIS PPQ, CPHST Otis Laboratory, 1398 W Truck Rd, Buzzards Bay, MA, 02542, USA. david.r.lance@aphis.usda.gov. USDA Forest Service, Southern Region, Forest Health Protection, 200 WT Weaver Blvd, Asheville, NC, 28804, USA. USDA APHIS PPQ, CPHST Otis Laboratory, 1398 W Truck Rd, Buzzards Bay, MA, 02542, USA. USDA APHIS PPQ, CPHST Phoenix Laboratory, 3645 E. Wier Ave, Phoenix, AZ, 85040, USA" |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10886-016-0732-9 |
| ISSN/ISBN: | 1573-1561 (Electronic) 0098-0331 (Linking) |
| Abstract: | "Mating disruption, the broadcast application of sex-attractant pheromone to reduce the ability of insects to locate mates, has proven to be an effective method for suppressing populations of numerous moth pests. Since the conception of mating disruption, the species-specificity and low toxicity of pheromone applications has led to their consideration for use in area-wide programs to manage invasive moths. Case histories are presented for four such programs where the tactic was used in the United States: Pectinophora gossypiella (pink bollworm), Lymantria dispar (gypsy moth), Epiphyas postvittana (light brown apple moth), and Lobesia botrana (European grapevine moth). Use of mating disruption against P. gossypiella and L. botrana was restricted primarily to agricultural areas and relied in part (P. gossypiella) or wholly (L. botrana) on hand-applied dispensers. In those programs, mating disruption was integrated with other suppression tactics and considered an important component of overall efforts that are leading toward eradication of the invasive pests from North America. By contrast, L. dispar and E. postvittana are polyphagous pests, where pheromone formulations have been applied aerially as stand-alone treatments across broad areas, including residential neighborhoods. For L. dispar, mating disruption has been a key component in the program to slow the spread of the infestation of this pest, and the applications generally have been well tolerated by the public. For E. postvittana, public outcry halted the use of aerially applied mating disruption after an initial series of treatments, effectively thwarting an attempt to eradicate this pest from California. Reasons for the discrepancies between these two programs are not entirely clear" |
| Keywords: | "Animals Insect Control/*methods Moths/*drug effects Sex Attractants/*pharmacology Sexual Behavior, Animal/*drug effects Aerial application Containment Disparlure Eradication European grapevine moth Gypsy moth Invasive pests Light brown apple moth Pink bol;" |
| Notes: | "MedlineLance, David R Leonard, Donna S Mastro, Victor C Walters, Michelle L eng Review 2016/08/06 J Chem Ecol. 2016 Jul; 42(7):590-605. doi: 10.1007/s10886-016-0732-9. Epub 2016 Aug 4" |
