Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T04:46:28.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

DOUGLAS-FIR TUSSOCK MOTH (HEMEROCAMPA PSEUDOTSUGATA) EGG-MASS DISTRIBUTION ON WHITE FIR IN NORTHEASTERN CALIFORNIA1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Robert F. Luck  and
Donald L. Dahlsten
Robert F. Luck
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology and Parasitology, University of California, Berkeley
Donald L. Dahlsten
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology and Parasitology, University of California, Berkeley
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The distribution of Douglas-fir tussock moth (Hemerocampa pseudotsugata McD.) egg-masses on white fir (Abies concolor (Gord. and Glend.) Lindl.) was studied in three areas of northern California. In each area 100 trees between 4.5 and 8.4 in. in diameter were stratified into five defoliation classes and four crown classes, giving a total of 20 classes per study area with five trees per class. Trees were divided into four crown levels and samples were taken at each of the cardinal directions at each level. Two branches comprised n sample unit in the top half of the tree (eight branches per level) and one branch the sample unit in the bottom half of the tree (four branches per level). Egg masses were recorded per 10 sq. ft of foliage or branch area. Eighty per cent or more of the egg masses were found in the bottom half of the crown. This percentage in the bottom half of the crown increased on trees with heavy defoliation or with increased exposure of the crown. Of the four possible sources of variation considered in this study, crown level, defoliation class, and crown class were significant while cardinal direction was not. A sampling method is proposed on the basis of the information gathered in this investigation.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 99 , Issue 11 , November 1967 , pp. 1193 - 1203
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1967

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

Baker, F. S. 1950. Principles of silviculture. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York.Google Scholar
Balch, R. E. 1932. The fir tussock moth (Hemerocampa pseudotsugata McD.). J. econ. Ent. 25: 1143–1148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Condrashoff, S. F., and Grant, J.. 1962. Sampling Douglas-fir tussock moth populations. Bi-mon. Prog. Rep. Div. Forest Biol., Ottawa 18(4): 3Google Scholar
Dodge, H. R., and Trostle, G. C.. 1964. Douglas-fir tussock moth. U.S. Forest Serv. Pest Leaflet 86.Google Scholar
Eaton, C. B., and Struble, G. R.. 1957. The Douglas-fir tussock moth in California. Pan-Pacif. Ent. 33(3): 105–108.Google Scholar
Evenden, J., and Jost, E. J.. 1947. A report of the tussock moth control, north Idaho—1947. U.S. Dep. Agric. Forest Serv. and Idaho St. For. Dep.Google Scholar
Howse, G. M., and Dimond, J. B.. 1965. Sampling populations of pine leaf adelgid, Pineus pinifoliae (Fitch). I. The gall and associated insects. Can. Ent. 97: 952–961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luck, R. F. 1966. The distribution of the egg-masses of the Douglas-fir tussock moth (Hemerocampa pseudotsugata McD.) on white fir (Abies concolor (Gord. and Glend) Lindl.) in northeastern California and a proposed sampling method. M.S. Thesis, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Mathers, W. G. 1949. Douglas-fir tussock moth. Bi-mon. Prog. Rep. Forest Insect Invest. 5(1): 4.Google Scholar
Morris, O. N. 1963. The natural and artificial control of the Douglas-fir tussock moth, Orgyia pseudotsugata McDunnough, by a nuclear polyhedrosis virus. J. Insect Path. 5(4): 401–414.Google Scholar
Morris, R. F. 1955. The development of sampling techniques for forest insect defoliators, with particular reference to the spruce budworm. Can. J. Zool. 33: 225–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, R. F. 1960. Sampling insect populations. A. Rev. Ent. 5: 243–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stark, R. W. 1952. Analysis of a population sampling method for the lodgepole needle miner in Canadian Rocky Mountain parks Can. Ent. 84: 316–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steel, R. G. D., and Torrie, J. H.. 1960. Principles and procedures of statistics. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York.Google Scholar
Waters, W. E. 1955. Sequential sampling in forest insect surveys. Forest Sci. 1: 68–79.Google Scholar
Wickman, B. E. 1963. Mortality and growth reduction of white fir following defoliation by Douglas-fir tussock moth. U.S. Forest Serv. Pacif. Southwest Forest and Range Exp. Stn, Berkeley, Calif., Res. Paper PSW-7.Google Scholar