The efficacy of verbenone as a stand-level protectant against mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins, attacks was tested in lodgepole and whitebark pine stands at five geographically separated sites, including three consecutive years at one site. Forty and 20 high-dose pouches, with a verbenone emission rate up to 50 mg/d per pouch, were spaced in a grid pattern throughout 0.40-ha plots, replicated up to six times at each site. Although the verbenone treatment did not prevent beetles from dispersing through treated stands, attacking large-diameter trees most frequently, the overall number of trees attacked was, on average, reduced significantly compared with nontreated stands. In a few blocks each year, verbenone-treated plots had more attacked trees than controls. These blocks tended to have a large emerging beetle population, exceeding 140 previously attacked trees within the hectare including and surrounding the treated area. Additional research is needed on the behavioral role of verbenone in mountain pine beetle population dynamics and quantification of the infestation level above which treatment efficacy tends to be reduced.

The efficacy of verbenone as a stand-level protectant against mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins, attacks was tested in lodgepole and whitebark pine stands at five geographically separated sites, including three consecutive years at one site. Forty and 20 high-dose pouches, with a verbenone emission rate up to 50 mg/d per pouch, were spaced in a grid pattern throughout 0.40-ha plots, replicated up to six times at each site. Although the verbenone treatment did not prevent beetles from dispersing through treated stands, attacking large-diameter trees most frequently, the overall number of trees attacked was, on average, reduced significantly compared with nontreated stands. In a few blocks each year, verbenone-treated plots had more attacked trees than controls. These blocks tended to have a large emerging beetle population, exceeding 140 previously attacked trees within the hectare including and surrounding the treated area. Additional research is needed on the behavioral role of verbenone in mountain pine beetle population dynamics and quantification of the infestation level above which treatment efficacy tends to be reduced.

No abstract

To develop safe and effective methods to protect whitebark pines, Pinus albicaulis Engelmann, and limber pines, Pinus flexilis James, from attack by mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), we compared verbenone and verbenone plus green leaf volatiles (GLVs) for prevention of beetle attack. We used two strategies: area-wide protection where semiochemical-releasing flakes are dispersed over the forest floor, and individual tree tests where flakes are applied to tree trunks. The area-wide bioassays were conducted by applying verbenone- and GLV-releasing flakes without stickers to the forest floor on 0.81-ha plots dominated by whitebark pines in the State of Washington with four replicates. We conducted individual tree bioassays by applying the same formulations with stickers to whitebark and limber pines in Montana and Colorado, respectively. In all three situations, both verbenone-alone and verbenone plus GLVs significantly increased the proportion of trees escaping mass attack by beetles, but the two formulations were not significantly different from one another. Despite a lack of significance at a Bonferroni-adjusted α = 0.05, adding GLVs gave slightly greater absolute levels of tree protection in most cases. Monitoring traps placed in the area-wide treatments in Washington showed similar outcomes for numbers of beetles trapped: both treatments had significantly fewer beetles than controls, and they were not significantly different from one another. At peak flight, however, plots with GLVs combined with verbenone had roughly 40% fewer beetles than plots with verbenone alone. GLVs are considerably cheaper than verbenone, so tests of higher application rates may be warranted to achieve enhanced tree protection at reasonable cost.

We studied the biology of Dendroctonus murrayanae Hopkins (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae) in lodgepole pine, Pinus contorta Douglas, in Idaho and Montana. The beetle was not a primary agent of tree mortality. Susceptible host trees were physically damaged, had thin foliage, or were otherwise predisposed to infestation. Beetles attacked individual trees, not in groups, near ground level and at low density. Life stages and their behavior are described. Egg galleries were constructed upward and usually had short spurs. Mating occurred in the egg gallery. Eggs were laid in an elongated group, not in niches, in a shallow excavation along only one side of the egg gallery. Larvae aggregated in a communal chamber, feeding side by side, but separated before pupation. D. murrayanae has four instars. One annual generation is indicated, overwintering as larvae. D. murrayanae occurred in some trees with Pseudips (=Ips) mexicanus (Hopkins), Ips pini (Say), and Hylurgops porosus (LeConte) but seldom with the mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins. No natural enemy or commensal insect was observed in brood chambers. A new character on the frons is described and the relationship of D. murrayanae and the spruce beetle, Dendroctonus rufipennis (Kirby), is discussed.