pdf, 57.71Mb - Entomological Society of Canada

More documents

Recommendations

Info

234 H. O. Schooley. J. W. E. Harris and B. Pendrel Recommendations Literature Cited As previously recommended by Clark et al. (1971) no further introduction of predators should be made into eastern Canada until new species that might effectively control the adelgids are identified. Suitable predators may be found attacking two closely related fir shoot adelgids. Adelges merkeris Eichhorn and Adelges nusslini C.B .• in Europe. The milder winter temperatures of coastal British Columbia could favour a species that failed in the east. Also. some species already tested on the west coast may have failed because too few individuals were released or because of unfavourable weather conditions at the time of release. Therefore. further introductions may be considered for western Canada. Any predator successfully introduced and proved to be effective in western Canada should be considered for testing in the mild coastal areas of eastern Canada. Population dynamics studies should be conducted regularly in all regions where the adelgid is present. These studies should include observations that will identify any factors that successfully control mortality. Financial support should also be made available for periodic reappraisal of the effect that natural insect and disease organisms have in controlling the balsam woolly adelgid in other countries. Bryant. D.G. (1971) Forest protection: balsam woolly aphid. Adelges piceae (Ratz.). Annual Report Newfoundland Forest Protection Associalion 1971. 43 PI'. Clark, R.e.; Greenbank, D.O.; Bryant. D.G.; Harris, J.W.E. (1971) Adelges piceae (Ratz.). balsam woolly aphid (Homoptera: Adclgidae). In: Biological control programmes against insects and weeds in Canada. Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control Technical Communication 4. 113-127. Fedde. G.F. (1971) A parasitic fungus disease of Adelges piceae (Homoptera: Phylloxeridae) in North Carolina. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 64, 749-750 Greenbank, D.O. (1970) Climate and the ecology of the balsam woolly aphid. Canadian Entomologist 102. 546-578. Harris. J.W.E. (1968) Balsam woolly aphid in British Columbia. Canadian Department of Forestry and Rural Development Forestry Researcl. Forest Pest Leaflet B.C.-I, 5 PI'. Harris, J. W. E.; Dawson. A. F. (1979) Predator release program for balsam woolly aphid, Adelges piceae (Homoptera: Adelgidae), in British Columbia, 1960-1969. Journal of the Entomological Society of British Columbia 76, 21-26. Harris. J.W.E.; Allen. S.1.; Collis, D.G.; Harvey, E.G. (1966) Studies of the balsam woolly aphid. Adelges piceae (Ratz.), in British Columbia. Canadian Department of Forestry Information Report BC-X-5, 5 pp. Johnson, K. (1980) Fraser fir and balsam woolly aphid. Summary of information. Southern Appalachian Reserve Resources Management Commillee Report, 62 pp. Mitchell. R.G.; Amman, D.G.; Waters. W.E. (1970) Balsam woolly aphid. US Department of Agriculture Forestry Service, Forest Pest Leaflet 118. 10 PI'. Nigam. P.e. (1972) Summary of toxicity of insecticides and chemical control studies against balsam woolly aphid. Canadian Forestry Sen'ice Information Report CC-X-26. 7 pp. Nigam. P.C. (1976) Summary of chemical control studies against balsam woolly aphid in British Columbia. 1973-74.Canadian Forestry Service Information Report CC-X-133, 6 PI'. Oechssler. G. (1962) Sucking injuries to the tissue of native and exotic firs caused by central European fir aphids. Zei/Schriftfiir angl'wandte EnlOmologie SO, 418-459 (Canadian Department of Forestry Translation 57). Puritch. G.S. (1973) The effects of water stress on photosynthesis. respiration and transpiration of four Abies species. Canadian Journal of Forl'st Rl'search 3. 293-298. Puritch. G.S. (1975) The toxic effects of fatty acids and their salts on the balsam woolly aphid. Adelges piceae (RalZ.). Canadian Journal of Forest Resl'arch 5, 515-522. Schooley. H.O. (1980) The introduction. spread and occasional resurgence ofthe balsam woolly aphid in Newfoundland. Proceedings of thl' International Union Forest Research Organizations Conference on Dispersal of Forest Insec/S, Aug.Lrt 27-31. 1979. Washington State University, Pullman, Washington. PI'. 116-127. Schooley, H.O. (1981) An evaluation of the hazard rating systcm for balsam woolly aphid damage in Newfoundland. Procel'dings of a Symposium on Hazard Rating Systems in Forest Insect Pest Management, July 31 - August I, 1980. Athens, Georgia. US Department of AgriculTUre Forestry Service General Technical Report WO-27. Smirnoff. W.A. (1970) Fungus diseases affecting Adelges piceae in the fir forest of the Gaspe Peninsula. Quebec. Canadian Entomologist 102. 799-805.
Pest Status Chapter 47 Choristoneura fumiferana (Clemens), Spruce Budworm (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) C.A. MILLER The spruce budworm, CllOristoneura fumiferana (Clem.). is a native defoliator of the spruce, Picea spp., and balsam fir. Abies balsamea (L.) Mill., forests of North America, which extend from northern Alberta to the Atlantic seaboard. It is the most important economic pest in forests of eastern Canada because of the frequency of epidemics and the intensity and extent of fibre losses. Budworm populations periodically irrupt to epidemic proportions and cause extensive tree mortality and reduced growth in surviving trees. There have been three major epidemics in this century. The first occurred around 1915 and covered most of the eastern Quebec - Atlantic Region; the second irrupted in Ontario - western Quebec in the late 1930s and appeared in the Atlantic Region in the late 1940s, but had little impact in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland; and the current outbreak irrupted in the late 1960s. In sequence, these three outbreaks of the 20th century have tended to increase in size and frequency. The review period of this publication, 1969-80 largely coincides with the third major epidemic. The prolonged second epidemic collapsed in the 1960s, except for a persistent infestation covering less than a million hectares in central New Brunswick. During the 4 years 1967 - 70, spruce budworm population increases were recorded in all provinces from Ontario to Newfoundland, and by 1975 the epidemic reached its peak, covering about 54 x 10 6 ha, or about half of the land area in eastern Canada classified as productive forest. Much of the remainder is not occupied by spruce and fir. In general, the intensity of the infestation, as measured by egg-mass densities across eastern Canada, declined in the latter part of the 1970s but the density of feeding larvae relative to the decreased quality of foliage on previously attacked trees remained high enough to cause severe damage. Thus in 1980 the epidemic still caused moderate to severe defoliation over 36 x 10" ha and it is expected that extensive defoliation will continue into the mid-1980s. Maturing balsam fir trees in unprotected forests usually die after 3 or 4 successive years of severe spruce budworm attack. Spruce trees, particularly black spruce, Picea mariana (Mill.) B.S.P., are more tolerant of defoliation and may withstand up to 6 years of attack. In the current outbreak, tree mortality was first recorded in northeastern Ontario and western Quebec in 1972, about 5 years after the beginning of the epidemic. In Nova Scotia (Cape Breton Highlands) and Newfoundland, mortality was first recorded between 1975 and 1976. Throughout the whole region, the area of vulnerable forest containing dying and dead trees increased each year and by 1980 was estimated at about 19 x 10" ha (Table 56). Although 'zones of heavy defoliation' and 'zones of tree mortality' were delineated, it has proved difficult to translate these spatial data to a volumetric estimate of fibre loss. Inventory data on spruce and fir before the outbreak are meagre; moreover, the rapid detection of dying stands of trees by remote sensing is not yet operational. However, some estimates of fibre loss in mortality zones are available (Table 56). Generally, in eastern Canada in the late 1970s there was (1) continuing loss of radial and height growth in severely defoliated stands; (2) tree mortality ranging from 10 to 80% at the stand level in a mortality zone of about 19 x 10" ha; (3) a loss in fibre quality and volume due to secondary pest attack in dead trees that were salvaged; and (4) 235
Page 2 and 3:
Biological Control Programmes again
Page 4 and 5:
CONTENTS Contents iii Page FOREWORD
Page 6 and 7:
Chapter 50. Coleophora serratella (
Page 8 and 9:
General Introduction Gcncrallntrodu
Page 10 and 11:
PART I BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF AGRICU
Page 12 and 13:
4 J. S. Kelleher Table 1 to be plac
Page 14 and 15:
Blank Page 6
Page 16:
Blank Page 8
Page 19 and 20:
Pest Status Background Chapter 4 Ag
Page 22 and 23:
Blank Page 14
Page 24 and 25:
16 R. P. Jaques and J. E. Laing vir
Page 27:
Pest Status Background Chapter 6 Cu
Page 30 and 31:
Blank Page 22
Page 32 and 33:
24 J. A. Shemanchuk. H. C. Wisler a
Page 34 and 35:
26 R. P. Jaques and J. E. Laing Tab
Page 36 and 37:
Blank Page 28
Page 38 and 39:
30 F. L. McEwen Literature Cited Si
Page 40 and 41:
32 G. H. Gerber Recommendations Lit
Page 42 and 43:
34 H. H. Cheng Parasitoids Predator
Page 46 and 47:
Blank Page 38
Page 49:
Pest Status Background Releases and
Page 52 and 53:
Blank Page 44
Page 54 and 55:
46 C. H. Craig and C. C. Loan Relea
Page 56 and 57:
Blank Page 48
Page 58 and 59:
50 W. J. Turnock Table 7 Table 8 Pa
Page 61 and 62:
Table 9 Mamestra configurata Walker
Page 63 and 64:
Literature Cited Mamestra con/igura
Page 65 and 66:
Pest Status Background Chapter 16 M
Page 67 and 68:
Mtmduca qllillqllemaclliata (Hawort
Page 69 and 70:
Chapter 17 Melanoplus spp., Camnula
Page 71 and 72:
Chapter 18 Musca domestica L., Hous
Page 73 and 74:
Pest Status Background Chapter 19 R
Page 75 and 76:
Recommendations Literature Cited Ou
Page 77:
Pest Status and Background Chapter
Page 80 and 81:
Blank Page 72
Page 82 and 83:
74 H. G. Wylie, W. J. Turnock and L
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87:
Pest Status Background Chapter 23 T
Page 92 and 93:
Blank Page 84
Page 95:
Releases and Recoveries Tipilia pai
Page 98:
90 R. J. McClanahan Releases and Re
Page 101 and 102:
PART II BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF WEEDS
Page 103 and 104:
Success of the Programme Chapter 26
Page 105:
Table 17 Current approaches to biol
Page 108 and 109:
100 P. Harris The number of niches
Page 110:
102 P. Harris The Future Literature
Page 113:
Pest Status Background Chapter 27 A
Page 117:
Evaluation of Control Attempts Reco
Page 120 and 121:
Blank Page 112
Page 123:
Pest Status Chapter 30 Carduus nuta
Page 126 and 127:
118 P. Harris Table 23 Open release
Page 128 and 129:
120 P. Harris Table 25 may have bee
Page 130 and 131:
122 P. Harris Table 26 C. flU/ailS
Page 132:
124 P. Harris Reasons for the impac
Page 135:
Pest Status Chapter 31 Centaurea di
Page 140 and 141:
132 P. Harris and J. H. Myers Metzn
Page 142 and 143:
134 P. Harris and J. H. Myers Table
Page 144 and 145:
136 P. Harris and J. H. Myers Ackno
Page 146 and 147:
Blank Page 138
Page 148 and 149:
140 D. P. Peschken Ceutorhynchus lI
Page 150 and 151:
142 D. P. Pcschken Lema cyanella (L
Page 152:
144 D. P. Peschken Table 33 continu
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Table 35 Cirs;llm I'ulg(lre (Savi)
Page 159 and 160:
The number of seeds per head vs. he
Page 161 and 162:
CiTSiu11I J'lllgaTe (Savi) Ten. , 1
Page 163 and 164:
Pest Status Background Biological C
Page 166 and 167:
Blank Page 158
Page 168 and 169:
160 P. Harris Background desirable.
Page 170:
162 P. Harris Table 40 Table 41 Ope
Page 175 and 176:
Table 44 Evaluation of Control Atte
Page 178 and 179:
Blank Page 170
Page 180 and 181:
172 P. Harris and M. Maw Releases a
Page 182:
174 P. Harris and M. Maw Table 45 O
Page 186 and 187:
Blank Page 178
Page 188 and 189:
180 P. Harris Background Table 47 m
Page 190 and 191:
182 P. Harris Recommendations Ackno
Page 192 and 193: 184 M. G. Maw Discussion Recommenda
Page 194 and 195: 186 M.G. Maw Background R. catharti
Page 196: 188 M. G. Maw Recommendations Liter
Page 199 and 200: Pest Status Background Chapter 40 S
Page 201 and 202: Recommendations Acknowledgements Li
Page 205: Releases and Recoveries HyJemya sen
Page 209 and 210: Sellecio jacoba('(/ 201 Myers, 1.H.
Page 213 and 214: Pest Status Chapter 43 Sonchus arve
Page 215 and 216: Releases and Recoveries Table 51 Sc
Page 217 and 218: Sone/Ills arvensis L., 209 Skuhravd
Page 219 and 220: Pest Status Biological Control Stud
Page 221 and 222: PART III BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF FORE
Page 224 and 225: 216 M. A. Hulme and G. W. Green Sel
Page 226 and 227: 218 M. A. Hulme and G. W. Green Tab
Page 228 and 229: 220 M. A. Hulme and G. W. Green Eva
Page 230 and 231: 222 M. A. Hulme and G. W. Green lar
Page 232: 224 M. A. Hulme and G. W. Green abi
Page 235 and 236: Literature Cited Biological control
Page 237 and 238: Pest Status Chapter 46 Background a
Page 239 and 240: Tablc 55 continucd Adelges piceadRa
Page 241: Table 55 continued Aclelge.\· ph-e
Page 245 and 246: Literature Cited ChorislOIU'lIfCI f
Page 247 and 248: A. Field development of Bacillus Ih
Page 252 and 253: 244 W. A. Smirnoffand O. N. Morris
Page 254: 246 W. A. Smirnoff and O. N. Morris
Page 258 and 259: 250 J. C. Cunningham and G. M. Hows
Page 261: Table 67 B. Viruses: Application an
Page 267: Literature Cited B. Viruscs: Applic
Page 272 and 273: 264 G. G. Wilson, D. Tyrrell and T.
Page 274 and 275: 266 G. G. Wilson. D. Tyrrrell and T
Page 277 and 278: CephaJogl)pta murinanae Bauer (Hyme
Page 279 and 280: Agria housei Shewell (Diptera: Sare
Page 282 and 283: 274 I. W. Varty experimental biolog
Page 284 and 285: 276 I. W. Varty Further research Li
Page 286 and 287: 27R R. F. Shcphcrd and J. C. Cunnin
Page 288 and 289: Blank Page 280
Page 290 and 291: 282 I. S. Otvos and F. W. Quednau C
Page 292 and 293:
2M.. I. S. OtV()S and F. W. Quednau
Page 295:
Background Releases and Recoveries
Page 299:
Pest Status Background Chapter 51 F
Page 305 and 306:
Ontario Gilpitlia Ill'rcylliae (Har
Page 308 and 309:
-(I) C c::: o '';:; ::::l .c ';: 30
Page 310 and 311:
302 L. P. Magasi and G. A. Van Sick
Page 313 and 314:
Lymcltllria dispar (L.). 305 avian
Page 315 and 316:
Table 80 Table 81 Ooenc)'rtus kuvsn
Page 317:
Recommendations Literature Cited Ly
Page 321 and 322:
Malacosoma disstria J-Hibner. 3/3 1
Page 327 and 328:
Malam.mma disstria Hiibner, 319 Sta
Page 329 and 330:
Pest Status Background Field Trial
Page 331 and 332:
Pest Status Background Field Trials
Page 333 and 334:
Aerial spray trials in Ontario in 1
Page 335:
Table 85 Neodipriotl {ecomei (Fitch
Page 339:
Pest Status Background Chapter 58 N
Page 343 and 344:
Table 86 Open releases and recoveri
Page 345:
PfeoIopbus ba9zonus (Grav.) (Hymeno
Page 348 and 349:
340 K. J. Griffiths, J. C. Cunningh
Page 350 and 351:
342 R. J. Finnegan and W. A. Smirno
Page 353:
Evaluation of Control Attempts Tabl
Page 357 and 358:
Pest Status Chapter 60 Operophtera
Page 359 and 360:
Evaluation of Control Attempt Recom
Page 361 and 362:
Pest Status Background Chapter 61 O
Page 366 and 367:
Blank Page 358
Page 368 and 369:
360 D. G. Embree. D. E. Elgee and G
Page 370 and 371:
Blank Page 362
Page 374 and 375:
366 J. C. Cunningham and R. F. Shep
Page 376 and 377:
Blank Page 368
Page 379 and 380:
Pristiphora erichsollii (Hartig). 3
Page 381 and 382:
Releases and Recoveries Olesicampe
Page 384 and 385:
376 W. G. H. Ives and J. A. Muldrew
Page 386:
378 W. G. HIves and J. A. Muldrew R
Page 389:
Pest Status Background Chapter 65 P
Page 392:
384 F. W. Quednau Evaluation of Con
Page 395 and 396:
Pest Status Chapter 66 Rhyacionia b
Page 397 and 398:
Rhyaciollia blloliallll (Schiff.).
Page 399 and 400:
c .2 5 :g Cij c Rhyacion;a buoliuna
Page 401 and 402:
Agatbis binominata (Mues.) (Hymenop
Page 404 and 405:
396 Appendix Raske, A.G., Newfoundl
Page 406 and 407:
398 Index of Species Apanlt'les rub
Page 408:
400 Index of Species Chrysoc/laris
Page 412 and 413:
404 Index of Species lawn 85 leafy
Page 414 and 415:
406 Index of Species pear 211 pecos
Page 416:
408 Index of Species sibericus. Den
show all

pdf, 57.71Mb - Entomological Society of Canada

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?