progress in pheromone-based trapping€¦ · progress in pheromone-based trapping tracy leskey,...

Progress In Pheromone-Based Trapping Tracy Leskey, Ashot Khrimian, Aijun Zhang, Don Weber, Doug Pfeiffer, Cesar Rodriguez-Saona, George Hamilton, Dean Polk, Chris Bergh, Paula Shrewsbury, Galen Dively, Greg Krawczyk, Jay Brunner, Peter Shearer, Peter Jentsch, and Art Agnello

• Visual Stimulus – Large black pyramid

• Olfactory Stimuli – BMSB aggregation pheromone – Synergist

• Capture Mechanism – Tapered pyramid to inverted

funnel jar with DDVP toxicant strip

• Deployment Strategy – Traps placed in peripheral row of

orchard

Broad Validation in Multi-State Trial • Is BMSB attracted to #10 in

the early season?

• Is BMSB attracted to #10 season-long?

• How attractive is this stimulus relative to MDT and unbaited traps?

• WV, MD, VA, PA, NJ, NY, DE, NC, OR, WA, and OH

General Protocol

• Black pyramid traps

• Three odor treatments – 1) #10 – 2) MDT – 3) unbaited control

• Traps are deployed between wild

host habitat and agricultural production area.

• Traps were deployed in mid-April and left in place season-long.

Reliable Season-Long Monitoring in Commercial Orchards

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

19-Apr 26-Apr 3-May 10-May 17-May 24-May 31-May 7-Jun 14-Jun

Mean

No.

Per

Tra

p

Sample Date

#10 MDT Control

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

25-Jun 2-Jul 9-Jul 16-Jul 23-Jul 30-Jul 6-Aug 13-Aug

Mean

No.

Per

Tra

p

Sample Date

#10 MDT Control

Early Season Mid-April – Mid June

Mid-Season Mid June - Mid August

Late Season Mid-August – Early October

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

20-Aug 3-Sep 17-Sep 1-Oct

Mean

No.

Per

Tra

p

Sample Date

#10 MDT Control

• BMSB reliably captured during early season. • Low numbers during much of mid-season. • MDT very attractive and #10 attractive in the late season.

Early Season Mid-April – Mid June

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Adults Nymphs

% To

tal C

aptu

res (

All S

ites)

Lifestage

ControlMDT#10

201

2415

2

11

6#10:

Unbaited MDT:

Unbaited Adults 13 : 1 2 : 1

Nymphs 0.3 : 1 2 : 1


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Adults Nymphs

% To

tal C

aptu

res (

All S

ites)

Lifestage

ControlMDT#10

612

476

58

4850

11,421

592

#10: Unbaited

MDT: Unbaited

Adults 11 : 1 8 : 1 Nymphs 8 : 1 19 : 1

Late Season Mid-August – Early October

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Adults Nymphs

% To

tal C

aptu

res (

All S

ites)

Lifestage

ControlMDT#10

3,879

11,449

438

3,070

10,042

706

#10: Unbaited

MDT: Unbaited

Adults 9 : 1 26 : 1 Nymphs 4: 1 14 : 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Control 0.1 mg 1 mg 10 mg 100 mg

Mean

No.

BMS

B Pe

r Tra

p

Dose

ShepherdstownKeedysville

a

b

b

bb

Adults

a

ab

bbb

0

50

100

150

200

250

Control 0.1 mg 1 mg 10 mg 100 mg

Mean

No.

BMS

B Pe

r Tra

p

Dose

ShepherdstownKeedysville

a

cbbb

a

b

b

b

b

Nymphs

bab

a

Dose Response Trial June 14-July 19, 2012

11:1 Ratio (Baited: Unbaited) for 10 mg lure

~25:1 Ratio (Baited: Unbaited) for 100 mg lure

Lure Affordability: Encouraging Results from Purity Trial

a

b

a a

Effect of Synergist

2-4 x

~5-100 x

1 x

8–11 x

~5-120 x

1 x

#10

#10 + Synergist

Control

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

23-May 16-Jun 10-Jul 3-Aug 27-Aug 20-Sep 14-Oct 7-Nov

Mean

No A

dults

Per

Trap

Sample Date

MDT#10CombinationControl

Season-Long Synergist Results Mid-May – Mid November

Synergist

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

25-Jun 2-Jul 9-Jul 16-Jul 23-Jul 30-Jul 6-Aug 13-Aug

Mean

No A

dults

Per

Trap

Sample Date


Synergist


0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

27-Aug 3-Sep 10-Sep 17-Sep 24-Sep 1-Oct 8-Oct 15-Oct

Mean

No A

dults

Per

Trap

Sample Date


Synergist

Late Season Mid-August – Mid October

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

23-Oct 30-Oct 6-Nov

Mean

No A

dults

Per

Trap

Sample Date


Synergist

Post-Harvest Mid-October – Mid-November

Broad Validation in Multi-State Trial in 2013 • Document season-long

patterns of activity.

• Compare commercially available synergists in combination with #10

• ME, NH, CT, MA, PA, NJ,

VA, WV, MD, DE, NC, FL, AL, MI, OH, IA, MO, UT, CA, OR, WA

Season-Long Captures in Apple in 2013 April 3-June 3 2013

0

5

10

15

20

25

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

8-Apr 15-Apr 22-Apr 29-Apr 6-May 13-May 20-May 27-May 3-Jun

Mean

No.

Adu

lts P

er Tr

ap

Sample Date

#10#10+Syn#10+SynControlAverage Temp

Coordinated Trial Results To Date

Total Captures

#10 #10 + Synergist

#10 + Synergist

Control

Adults 96 430 411 13

Results from WV, MD, PA, VA, NJ, OR, DE, NY and NC

Current Studies Commercial Orchard Threshold Studies

Woodlot Fruit Block

Row Crop / Field / Pasture

1

3

2

Residential

Preliminary Peach Results

• Significant linear relationship between exterior trap captures and temperature (P=0.002; r2=0.89) but not interior trap captures and temperature (P=0.204; r2=0.44) .

• No significant correlation between exterior and interior trap captures.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

15-Apr 22-Apr 29-Apr 6-May 13-May 20-May 27-May

Mean

Tem

pera

ture

Mean

No.

Adu

lts P

er Tr

ap

Sample Date

EXTINTTEMP

Woodlot Fruit Block


Residential

3.5 / trap

Preliminary Trends in Trap Captures and Border Landscapes in the Early Season in Peach

1.0 / trap

0.4 / trap

5.0 / trap

0.4 / trap

y = 0.008x + 0.0116R² = 0.8369

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

% F

ruit

Inju

ry in

Nea

rest

Neig

hbor

Tree

s

Mean No. Adults Per Trap

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

15-Apr 22-Apr 29-Apr 6-May 13-May 20-May 27-May

Mean

Tem

pera

ture

Mean

No.

Adu

lts P

er Tr

ap

Sample Date

EXTINTTEMP

Preliminary Apple Results

• Linear relationship between exterior trap captures and temperature at P = 0.0955; r2=0.46 and interior trap captures and temperature at P = 0.0594; r2=0.54

• Significant relationship interior trap and exterior trap captures (P=0.002; r2=0.89)

Woodlot Fruit Block


Residential

14.0 / trap

Preliminary Trends in Trap Captures and Border Landscapes in the Early Season in Apple

4.3 / trap

2.2 / trap

2.0 / trap

7.4 / trap

On-Station Threshold Studies in Apple

Woodlot Fruit Plot

Sprays Triggered at: 1 bug

10 bugs 20 bugs

Every 7 Days (ARM)

No Spray (Control)

Dispersal from Overwintering Sites

• Under what abiotic conditions (temperature), do BMSB become active?

• What does the pattern of emergence from overwintering sites look like?

• Do they respond to pheromone traps immediately after exiting overwintering sites?

Collect Overwintering Bugs

Marked Over 4,000 Bugs For Release

Provisioned Each Overwintering Shelter With 300 Marked Bugs

Deployed Paired Overwintering Shelters and Baited Traps in Wooded Locations in Late

February

Bugs Can Exit Freely

Bugs Can Exit Shelter, But Can’t

Escape

Shelters encircled by 4 baited and 4

unbaited traps

Emergence Results to Date

05

101520253035404550

7-Mar 21-Mar 4-Apr 18-Apr 2-May 16-May 30-May

Tota

l Num

ber A

dults

Sample Date

Site 1Site 2Site 3

% Total Emergence

Site 1 = 43% Site 2 = 50% Site 3 = 43%

Emergence and Wild Bug Captures

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

7-Mar 21-Mar 4-Apr 18-Apr 2-May 16-May 30-May

Mean

No.

Wild

Adu

lts P

er B

aited

Trap

Mean

No.

Adu

lts P

er S

ite

Sample Date

EmergersWild Bug

Emergence and Wild Bug Captures

• Similar patterns of emergence at all sites.

• Similar pattern of wild bug activity in traps and emergence.

• No marked bugs. Obligatory dispersal flight?

Trap Type Study

• Are capture patterns similar among ground-mounted standard 4-ft pyramid trap and smaller pyramid style traps?

Season-Long Trial in Commercial Apple Orchards

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

23-Apr 1-May 9-May 17-May 25-May 2-Jun

Mean

No.

Adu

lts P

er Tr

ap

Sample Date

StandardHangingLimbGround

Preliminary Results

Preliminary Results

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Standard Hanging Limb-Mounted Ground

Mean

No.

Per

Trap

Trap Type

Conclusions • Aggregation pheromone of BMSB

has been identified.

• Synergist has been identified.

• These stimuli provide reliable detection of BMSB activity.

• Applied questions can now be addressed.

Acknowledgements • USDA-ARS, USDA NIFA SCRI # 2011-51181-30937, VDACS, and USDA-APHIS

Starker Wright Doo-Hyung Lee

Torri Hancock

Cameron Scorza

Sean Wiles Brent Short John Cullum

Brittany Rankin

Zoe Milburn

Teresa Mersing

Jeanne Sullivan

progress in pheromone-based trapping€¦ · progress in pheromone-based trapping tracy leskey,...

Documents