10jenniferklutsch

Development of monitoring tools to detect mountain pine beetle at low densities at the edge of beetle expansion Jennifer Klutsch Nadir Erbilgin

(klutsch@ualberta.ca) (erbilgin@ualberta.ca)

Department of Renewable Resources University of Alberta FRI MPB Information Exchange Forum 23 April 2014

Pheromones as a monitoring tool for MPB • MPB life history – Migration → Colonization → Development

• Use of synthetic pheromones for monitoring and management – Uncertainties about effectiveness to monitor MPB populations at low densities in novel habitats

Volatile chemicals and life history of MPB Dispersal & Host Selection Aggregation & Host Colonization

Sean Twiddy 2010

Three features of bark beetles’ relationship with their hosts are influenced by host secondary compounds 1. Beetles must kill their hosts to reproduce and complete their development • Failure to kill the host usually results in failed reproduction due to toxic host secondary compounds 2. Some species utilize plant compounds to locate their hosts; in others the role of plant compounds in host location is less clear • MPB utilizes a combination of random landings and visual orientation for host location 3. Pheromonal communication is closely linked to host compounds, particularly monoterpenes • Some beetles may convert monoterpenes to oxygenated products, which serve as aggregation pheromones • Exposure to host monoterpenes may also stimulate de novo synthesis of pheromones

INITIAL ATTACK

♀ ♀

trans-verbenol

♀ ♂

Host terpenes

♂

Myrcene Terpinolene 3-carene

DURING ATTACK

♀ ♂

trans-verbenol exo-brevicomin

Host terpenes Myrcene Terpinolene 3-carene

♀♀ ♂♂ ♂♂

♀ ♂ ♂ ♂ ♀ ♂ ♀

HOST SWITCHING exo-brevicomin frontalin verbenone

Host terpenes Myrcene Terpinolene 3-carene

♀ ♂

♀ ♀ ♀ ♂ ♂ ♂

MPB in Alberta 2005

2013

Use of pheromones in Alberta to monitor MPB

ESRD – Mountain pine beetle action plan (2007)

Objectives 1. Phase I a) Improve the currently available commercial lures to attract MPB in novel habitats

2. Phase II a) Develop field protocol for deployment of lures on trap trees to monitor and detect MPB populations in novel habitats b) Evaluate the use of trap trees as: • Indicators of annual trends • Part of direct control strategy

Comparison of available MPB lures • Study area – Five sites in stands with a history of MPB attack

• Four treatments – Contech-Inc MPB lure – Synergy Semiochemical lure – New lure developed in Erbilgin’s lab (Erbilgin et al. 2014, New Phytologist)

– Blank control

David Wakarchuk Art Stock

Comparison of MPB pheromones in combination with tree volatiles • Purpose: test the attraction of MPB to tree volatiles with MPB pheromones at differing release rates of individual chemical(s) • Use three candidate tree volatiles alone and in combination: – Myrcene – Terpinolene – 3-carene

Landscape evaluation of trapping protocol in the Leading-edge Zone • Best performing lure used in Leading-edge Zone to determine optimum: – Density of bait sites – Number of baits per site – Configuration of baits in each bait site

• Methodology – 3 different bait site densities and configurations, including the current ESRD baited tree design

• Number of nonattacked and attacked trees will be recorded • Cost analysis

Applications • Exploit pheromones and tree volatiles to monitor and manage MPB – Alberta in unique position - low densities and novel host species

• The use of trap trees with the most effective bait can: – Concentrate MPB attack for more efficient sanitation logging – Be used to monitor MPB and identify populations changes without aerial survey – Reduce dispersal/spread

Acknowledgements