Electroantennograms (EAGs) of Cydia pomonella (L.), Pandemis pyrusana Kearfott, and Grapholita molesta (Busck) documented the presence and duration of long-lasting peripheral adaptation after pheromone preexposure. Moths of each species were preexposed for 1 h to varying dosages (100 ngÐ100 mg) of the major components of their respective pheromone blends in 1-liter Teßon containers with constant throughput of air. EAGs were performed on all insects 1 min after preexposure and at several subsequent intervals up to 120 min after exposure. Long-lasting peripheral adaptation was recorded by EAG after pheromone preexposure over a range of pheromone dosages in both C. pomonella (100 gÐ10 mg) and P. pyrusana (100 ngÐ100 mg). This reduction in EAG responsiveness lasted Ϸ60 and 10 min, respectively, for these two species. For G. molesta, a reduction in EAG responsiveness occurred only after 1 h of exposure to the highest dosage of pheromone tested (100 mg). Recovery from adaptation was also rapid in this species: EAGs were signiÞcantly reduced to all applied stimulus dosages only at 1-min postexposure. There was substantial variation in the prevalence and duration of decreased EAG responsiveness across the species investigated. However, where long-lasting adaptation was described, the phenomenon lasted Յ60 min. In addition, longlasting adaptation was induced after prolonged exposures at estimated airborne concentrations of pheromone in the range of nanograms per milliliter, which are much higher than the pheromone concentrations in Þeld plots treated with synthetic pheromone dispensers. Long-lasting peripheral adaptation after pheromone preexposure does not seem to be an important contributor to mating disruption.KEY WORDS long-lasting adaptation, electroantennogram, Grapholita molesta, Cydia pomonella, Pandemis pyrusana PHEROMONE-BASED MATING DISRUPTION IS an important biorational alternative to insecticides for controlling lepidopteran pests and has been under development for more than three decades (Cardé and Minks 1995, Gut et al. 2004). Mating disruption is achieved by the release of synthetic pheromones into a crop canopy to disrupt pheromone-mediated mate-Þnding behaviors. Various mechanisms have been proposed to explain how mating disruption works (Rothchild 1981, Bartell 1982, Cardé 1990. In no speciÞc order, synthetic pheromones are thought to camoußage natural, female-released plumes; act as false trails for searching males; cause an imbalance of sensory input; or desensitize males to pheromone through peripheral sensory adaptation or central nervous system habituation. These mechanisms are thought not to be mutually exclusive (Cardé et al. 1998).A plethora of studies have been conducted examining the possible mechanisms of mating disruption (Sanders 1982(Sanders , 1985(Sanders , 1996(Sanders , 1998Valeur and Lö fstedt 1996;Mafra-Neto and Baker 1996;Cardé et al. 1998;Evenden et al. 1999a Evenden et al. , b, c, 2000Stelinski et al. 2004Stelinski et al. , 2005. However, progress has been modest in di...