2012
DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-9563.2012.00579.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Felling date affects the occurrence of Pityogenes chalcographus on Scots pine logging residues

Abstract: 1 Logging residues form a substantial portion of the dead wood in managed forests, and logging residues can facilitate bark beetle multiplication and outbreaks. For these reasons, it is highly advisable to find a way of reducing the risk of bark beetle outbreaks without extensive removal of logging residues, which is inconsistent with nature conservation. 2 The coverage of Pityogenes chalcographus (L.) galleries and the presence of other bark beetle species on 3520 fragments of logging residues of the Scots pi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

4
8
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
4
8
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the status of P. pityographus as a pest is disputed. Based on the results of the present study and those of Foit (2012b), we can infer that the risk of multiplication of these pests could be minimised if the fellings were conducted in August (and probably also in September or October). Furthermore, gathering the LRs into piles reduced the multiplication of particular pests (I. acuminatus, P. bidentatus, P. pityographus and T. minor).…”
Section: Foitsupporting
confidence: 58%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…However, the status of P. pityographus as a pest is disputed. Based on the results of the present study and those of Foit (2012b), we can infer that the risk of multiplication of these pests could be minimised if the fellings were conducted in August (and probably also in September or October). Furthermore, gathering the LRs into piles reduced the multiplication of particular pests (I. acuminatus, P. bidentatus, P. pityographus and T. minor).…”
Section: Foitsupporting
confidence: 58%
“…In contrast, the LRs produced in August and November were not colonised in the year of felling, and the LRs were too wilted to attract P. chalcographus entering the next mating and egg-laying period (the LRs from August were particularly unattractive). Additionally, in a study conducted in the Czech Republic on various Scots pine LRs in 135 different stands (Foit 2012b), P. chalcographus obviously avoided Scots pine LRs produced during August and September (and partially also those produced during October and November). In the present study, I. acuminatus and P. pityographus were affected by felling date in a similar manner to that for P. chalcographus (Figure 3), which exhibits analogous mating and egg-laying periods.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In contrast, LRs generated by thinning were documented to support the substantial multiplication of P. chalcographus in the present study. However, the main host tree of this important forest pest is Norway spruce (Pfeffer 1955;Schwenke 1972;Gregoire et al 2004;Bertheau et al 2009), its common development on Scots pine LRs was previously documented at several localities in the Czech Republic (Foit 2012b).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%