Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T00:11:55.291Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A 2-YEAR STUDY OF THE EFFICACY OF BACILLUS THURINGIENSIS – CHITINASE COMBINATIONS IN SPRUCE BUDWORM (CHORISTONEURA FUMIFERANA) CONTROL

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

O. N. Morris
O. N. Morris
Affiliation:
Chemical Control Research Institute, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Spruce budworm infested balsam fir trees were aerially sprayed with Bacillus thuringiensis – chitinase combinations at the rate of 4 Billion International Units of B.t. and 18 mg of enzyme in 0.5 gal/acre. Larvae were peak third instar at spray time. Deposit rates ranged from 1.07 to 3.26 BIU/acre. Efficacy of the treatments was assessed in the year of treatment and carry-over effects were assessed 1 year later.

Results in the year of treatment indicated that: (1) Residual activity of B. thuringiensis was drastically reduced after 15 days’ exposure to weathering. (2) Larval mortality alone is not a suitable criterion of efficacy. (3) Dipel and Dipel + chitinase (but not Thuricide 16B or Thuricide + chitinase) were highly effective in reducing budworm densities. (4) Thuricide + chitinase treatment resulted in significant foliage protection. The treatments inhibited feeding in the following order of efficiency: Thuricide + chitinase > Dipel + chitinase > Dipel alone > chitinase alone > Thuricide alone. (5) There was no direct relationship between larval mortality and foliage protection in any of the treatments, likely due to delayed mortality effects. (6) No direct relationship exists between viable spore deposits and deposit of active ingredient (IUs). (7) B.t. treatments retarded development of the spruce budworm and reduced pupal weights, oviposition rates, and egg viability.

Assessment of the plots 1 year after spray showed that the treatments apparently gave no long term protection from defoliation, but this was likely due in part to mass invasion of the test plots by moths from immediately surrounding untreated areas.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 108 , Issue 3 , March 1976 , pp. 225 - 233
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahmed, S. M., Nagarua, M. V., and Majunder, S. K.. 1973. Studies on granular formulations of Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner. Pestic. Sci. 4: 19–23.Google Scholar
Angus, T. A. 1965. Mortality due to Bacillus thuringiensis in post-larval stages of some Lepidoptera. Proc. ent. Soc. Ont. 95: 133–134.Google Scholar
Angus, T. A., Heimpel, A. M., and Fisher, R. A.. 1961. Tests of a microbial insecticide against forest defoliators. Can. For. Ent. Path. Br. Bi-mon. Prog. Rep. 17(3).Google Scholar
Angus, T. A., Yamvrias, C., Luthy, P., Randall, A. P., and Armstrong, J. A.. 1970. Experimental airspray of Thuricide 90TS against the spruce budworm in New Brunswick 1969. Can. For. Ser. Internal Rep.Google Scholar
Burgerjon, A. and Biache, G.. 1967. Effects teratologiques chez les nymphes et les insectes dont les larves ont ingere des doses subtlethales de toxine thermostables de Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner. C. r. hebd. Séanc. Acad. Sci., (Paris) 264: 2423–2425.Google Scholar
DeBoo, R. F., Campbell, L. M., and Copeman, A. G.. 1973. A sampling technique for estimating numerical trends in larval populations of insect defoliation on conifers. 1. Development and experimental evaluation of the technique. Phytoprotection 54: 9–22.Google Scholar
Dimond, J. B. 1972. A demonstration of Bacillus thuringiensis plus the enzyme chitinase against the spruce budworm in Maine. Part I. Efficacy. Misc. Rep. Maine agric. Exp. Stn, No. 144.Google Scholar
Dulmage, H. T. and Martinez, E.. 1973. The effects of continuous exposure to low concentration of the delta-endotoxin of Bacillus thuringiensis on the development of the tobacco budworm, Heliothis virescens. J. invert. Path. 22: 14–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fast, P. G. and Morrison, I. K.. 1972. The alpha-endotoxin ion regulation by natural midgut tissues of Bombyx mori larvae. J. invert. Path. 20: 208–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frye, R. D., Scholl, C. G., E. W., and Funke, B. R.. 1973. Effect of weather on a microbial insecticide. J. invert. Path. 22: 50–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeuniaux, C. 1971. Chitinous structures, pp. 595–632. In Comprehensive biochemistry, Part C, Vol. 26.Google Scholar
Klein, W. H. and Lewis, F. B.. 1966. Experimental spraying with Bacillus thuringiensis for control of the spruce budworm. J. For. 64: 458–462.Google Scholar
Leopold, J. and Samsinakova, A.. 1970. Quantitative estimation of chitinase and several other enzymes in the fungus Beauveria bassiana. J. invert. Path. 15: 34–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louloudes, S. J. and Heimpel, A. M.. 1969. Mode of action of Bacillus thuringiensis toxic crystals on larvae of the silkworm, Bombyx mori. J. invert. Path. 14: 375–380.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luthy, P. 1973. Self-digestion of the gut-epithelium: A possible explanation for the mode of action of the endotoxin of Bacillus thuringiensis. J. invert. Path. 22: 139–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martineau, R. and Benoit, Paul. 1973. A sample technique for estimating numerical trends in larval populations of insect defoliation on conifers. II. Modification and operational use of the technique for extensive sampling of spruce budworm populations in Quebec. Phytoprotection 54: 23–31.Google Scholar
Morris, O. N. 1969. Susceptibility of several forest insects of British Columbia to commercially produced Bacillus thuringiensis. II. Laboratory and field pathogenicity tests, J. invert. Path. 13: 285–295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morris, O. N. 1973. Dosage-mortality studies with commercial Bacillus thuringiensis sprayed in a modified Potter's tower against some forest insects. J. invert. Path. 22: 108–114.Google Scholar
Saxena, S. C. and Sarin, K.. 1972. Chitinase in the alimentary tract of the lesser mealworm, Alphitobius diaperinus (Panzer) (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Appl. Ent. Zool. 7: 94.Google Scholar
Smirnoff, W. A. 1963. Tests of Bacillus thuringiensis var. thuringiensis Berliner and B. cereus Fr. et Fr. on larvae of Choristoneura fumiferana (Clem.). Can. Ent. 95: 127–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smirnoff, W. A., Juneau, A., and Valiro, A.. 1972. Results of experimental aerial sprayings of Bacillus thuringiensis. Dep. Environ., Can. For. Serv., Bi-mon. Prog. Rep. 28(1): 2.Google Scholar
Smirnoff, W. A., Randall, A. P., Martineau, L., Haliburton, W., and Juneau, A.. 1973 a. Field test of the effectiveness of chitinase additive to Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner against Choristoneura fumiferana (Clem.). Can. J. For. Res. 3: 228–236.Google Scholar
Smirnoff, W. A., Fettes, J. J., and Desaulnier, R.. 1973 b. Aerial spraying of a Bacillus thuringiensis – chitinase formulation for control of the spruce budworm (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Can. Ent. 105: 1535–1544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamvrias, C. and Angus, T. A.. 1970. The comparative pathogenicity of some Bacillus thuringiensis varieties for larvae of the spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana. J. invert. Path. 15: 92–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar