Gibson, Kenneth E.

Livingston, R. Ladd

Stipe, Lawrence E.

United States. Forest Service. Northern Region. State & Private Forestry

Undetermined

ScholarsArchive@OSU

•PROGRESS REPORT•A PILOT PROJECT TO EVALUATE EFFICACY OF AERIALLY APPLIEDNUCLEOPOLYHEDROSIS VIRUS ON DOUGLAS-FIR TUSSOCK MOTH•	 IN NORTHERN IDAHO1985•	 byLawrence E. Stipe••	Kenneth E. GibsonUSDA Forest ServiceCooperative Forestry & Pest ManagementMissoula, Montana•R. Ladd Livingston•	 Idaho Department of LandsCoeur d'Alene, Idaho•Report 86-13••••••••a••••INTRODUCTIONThe Douglas-fir tussock moth, Orayia pseudotsutata McD., (DFTM) has reachedepidemic levels several times in northern Idaho. The most recent outbreaksbegan in 1947, 1955, 1963, and 1972 and each collapsed after 2 to 4 yearsdue primarily to epizootics of a nucleopolyhedrosis virus (NPV) andtreatment with DDT. Douglas-fir tussock moth pheromone trap catches nearMoscow, Idaho have increased continually from 1981 through 1984. No visibledefoliation has occurred, but it was believed this trend would continuethrough 1985. Dewey et al. 1985, recommended further evaluations for eggand larval populations during 1985. Population and stand conditions werefound suitable, and a pilot project was conducted to evaluate a virusapplication during the early outbreak stage. This report describes theobjectives, project location, materials, project design, and samplingprocedures. Data summaries of the first year are included. Following datacollections in 1986, a final report including complete data analysis,conclusions, and recommendations will be prepared.OBJECTIVES The primary objective of the project was to obtain data on the performanceof a USDA-produced DFTM nucleopolyhedrosis virus formulation (TMBiocontrol-1) produced in Corvallis, Oregon.Specific tasks include:1. Determine the effect of an aerial application of TM Biocontrol-1when applied during an early stage of a DFTM outbreak.2. Identify and attempt to resolve any mixing or application problemsassociated with this tank mix.3. Evaluate defoliation differences in treated and untreated areasduring the year following treatment (1986).4. Determine if DFTM populations in stands adjacent to the treatedblocks are affected during the year following treatment.5. Provide data which will assist research in their devleopment of DFTMsampling designs.'ROJECT LOCATIONThis project was located on State of Idaho and private lands near Potlatch,Idaho (figure 1). The project area extends from Mineral Mountain on thenorth to Moscow Mountain on the south. This area was involved in most ofthe past outbreaks and tends to be a hot spot or area where defoliationfirst appears. Evaluation sites (blocks) were selected in the followingareas:••••• Area	 elevation (feet) •	Bear Creek	 2750-2850•	 Deep Creek	 2720-3000Flat Creek	 2840-3000Hatter Creek	 3000-3500Mineral Mountain	 3200-3350Sheep Creek	 3700-4100•OVERWINTERING POPULATION ASSESSMENT •0•••••As recommended by Dewey et al. (1985), an early spring evaluation was madeto determine (1) if the expected population level was suitable for a projectand (2) if three or more areas of adequate size (200 to 400 acres) could beidentified. Areas with the highest 1984 pheromone trap catches wereexamined for cocoons. A sampling technique being developed by Dick Mason(personal communication) was used to estimate midcrown larval density lasedon the proportion of trees having cocoons in the lower crown. Three 45 cm,lower crown branch tips on each of 50 trees per plot were examined fortussock moth cocoons. When egg masses were found, they were collected forrearing to determine virus levels. Soil samples were taken from these sitesfor virus evaluation.PROJECT DESIGN A random block design with three treatment and three untreated controlblocks was used. Four cluster sites of 15 sample trees each were selectedto represent the block. Trees selected were grand fir or Douglas-fir,approximately 35 to 60 feet tall with full lower crowns. Trees within acluster were located within a 5-acre area. A soil sample was taken fromeach cluster site. Treatment blocks were Bear, Deep, and Flat. Controlareas were Hatter, Mineral, and Sheep.FIELD OPERATIQNSLarval Development Just following egg hatch, another population survey was made to estimate theexpected midcrown population at treatment. The lower crown beatingtechnique described in Agriculture Handbook No. 547 (Mason 1979) wasfollowed.Prespray Larvae From each of the 60 sample trees per block, three midcrown branch tips werecut to estimate larval density per 1,000 square inches of foliage. SeeAgriculture Handbook No. 547 for sampling details. This sample wascompleted within 48 hours prior to treatment.PostsDray 5-Day Sample Five days following treatment, 25 random larvae were collected from eachcluster site. These larvae were placed on prepared diet media for rearingto determine the incidence of virus.••••	-3-rostspray 17-Day Sample The same trees and sampling techniques that were used for the prespraysample were used for the postspray sample. All larvae from this sample werealso placed on diet media for rearing to determine virus infection.Soil Sample Soil samples were collected during both the prespray and postspray larvalcollections. Samples were taken at the drip line of one tree from eachcluster. Washings from these samples were used to inoculate, tussock mothdiet. Cause of larval mortality at 14 days was diagnosed microscopically.This analysis was done at the Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Corvallis,Oregon.Postspray Male Moths Just before adult emergence, five pheromone traps (20 per block) were placedat each cluster site and collected following the flight period (seeAgriculture Handbook No. 546; Daterman et al. 1979) to measure the adultmale moth population at each plot.rsitimaireaulausi.An egg mass survey was conducted during late summer. A lower crownexamination for 15 minutes by two people was used to estimate egg density.JNSECTICIDETM Biocontrol-1 is manufactured by 6he USDA Forest Service and registered atone-half ounce per acre (1.085 x 10 AU). The active ingredient consistsof polyhedral inclusion bodies of the Douglas-fir tussock mothnucleopolyhedrosis virus (figure 2). Polyhedra must be taken into the gutwhere they dissolve and release virions. Fat bodies ultimately becomeinfected and rupture, thus killing the larvae. This material has no contactaction. The DFTM virus is highly infectious to all species of Orgvia. Noadverse effects on other organisms have been reported.APPLICATION TIMING The general guide for block release was when the most advanced larvaereached the fourth instar and when sufficient new foliage was exposed as aspray target. The specific application was scheduled when 25 percent of thelarvae were in the fourth instar.MIXING AND HANDLING All pesticide mixing and handling were done by personnel from the ForestService, Cooperative Forestry and Pest Management and Idaho Department ofLands. Mixing guidelines are found in Technical Bulletin - TM Biocontrol-1(Appendix). Orzan-LS was substituted for Shade in the tank mix.Standard safety equipment was used during mixing and aircraft loading.Approved heliport sites were selected near each spray block.e••••••••••••••-4-	 •DIRECTIONS FOR USEGENERAL CLASSIFICATIONIt is a violation of Federal law to use this product in a mannerinconsistent with its labeling.For population reduction of the Douglas-fir tussock moth, apply byair at the rate of 1/2 ounce (14.2 grams) TM Biocontrol-1 in 1 to 2gallons finished spray per acre. Stickers and u.v. protectants mayenhance performance of this product. Refer to technical bulletin formixing and application instructions. Spray tank mixture pH shouldbe 6.0 to 7.2 NEVER USE CHLORINATED WATER IN THESPRAY FORMULATION.PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENTSCAUTIONENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDSAvoid application to lakes, streams, or ponds. Do not contaminatewater by cleaning of equipment or disposal of wastes.STORAGE AND DISPOSALActivity may be impaired by storage above 80°F.Do not contaminate water, food, or feed by storage or disposal.Open dumping is prohibited. Do not reuse empty container.Pesticide, spray mixture, or rinsate that cannot be used should bedisposed of in a landfill approved for pesticides or buried in a safeplace away from water.Container disposal: Triple rinse and dispose of in an approvedlandfill or bury in a safe place.Consult Federal, State, or local disposal authorities for approvedalternative procedures.TM BIOCONTROL-1BIOLOGICAL INSECTICIDEFOR THEDOUGLAS-FIR TUSSOCK MOTHActive Ingredient:•Polyhedral inclusion bodies of Douglas-firtussock moth nucleopolyhedrosis virus) 	  3.5%Inert ingredients: 	 96.5%TOTAL 	 100.0%'Contains at least 70 million activity units per gram.KEEP OUT OF THE REACH OF CHILDREN 'CAUTIONSee back of tag for additional precautionary statements.For use by or under the supervision of the U.S. Forest Service.NOTICE: The U.S. Forest Service makes no warranty, express orimplied including the warranties or merchantabilityand/or fitness for any particular purpose, concerningthis material except those which are contained on theU.S. Forest Service's label.MFG. BY: U.S. Forest Service, USDA14th and Independence AvenuesWashington, D.C. 20250EPA REG. NO. 27586-1NET WEIGHT: 	  LOT NO.:•••••••Figure 2. Sample label.••n 	–5–•AFPLICATIONA single aerial application of the virus tank mix was applied by helicopterusing full jet type nozzles and was released at approximately 50 feet abovetree tops. Aircraft were calibrated to apply 1 gallon tank mix per acre ata drop size of 200 to 300 volume median diameter (VMD). Bear Creek and FlatCreek blocks were treated on June 28, 1985. The Deep Creek area was sprayedon June 29, 1985.AIR OPERATIONS Air operations were based from a heliport in or near each spray block.Spraying commenced at daybreak and continued until a complete block wasfinished. A project officer monitored weather conditions during treatment.Conditions never reached the cut off points of winds over 8 mi/h andtemperatures above 68°F.The spray pilot was taken on an orientation flight and provided aerialphotography for each block prior to treatment. Aircraft calibration andcharacterization were completed prior to spraying at the garnish, Idaho,airport. The D max system (Dumbauld and Rafferty 1976) was used to estimatedrop VMD.SPRAY DEPOSIT ASSESSMENT Spray deposit assessment was evaluated on the amount of spray materialdeposited on Eromkote cards. Cards were placed around sample trees justbefore spraying. Twenty cards were placed at each cluster site, four persample tree (five trees). Cards were placed at the drip line, one at eachcardinal direction.SECOND YEAR EVALUATIONPosttreatment (1986) surveys are planned to evaluate treatment effects onearly larvae, defoliation, virus level in soil, adult moths (pheromonetraps), and egg mass densities. These surveys will use the same proceduresused during the treatment year. Timing of the early larval sample willcoincide with the treatment year prespray sample. These data will becombined with the 1985 results into a final project report.DMINISTRATIORThis project was a cooperative effort between the Idaho Department of Landsand the USDA Forest Service. This progress report was prepared jointly bythese cooperators.JNFORM AND INVOLVE The I&I functions associated with this project were to insure that keyindividuals and the general public were informed. Of greatest importancewas the environmental safety of the DFTM virus and its role in integratedpest management practices. A news release was prepared for the local mediaprior to treatment.••••••••-6-	 •ASSULTS Overwintering FopulatiogLower crown beatings on June 10 and 11, 1985, showed an overall treeinfestation rate of 98 percent. Data by block were as follows:••••BlockNo. treesexaminedNo. treesinfested Z infestedBear	 No sampleTreat	 Flat	60	57	95Deep	60	60	100Hatter	 60	60	100Control Mineral	60	58	97Sheep	 No sample• Total 240 235 98    40411Larval Developmentdistributions by instar for the prespray collectionFollowing are the larvalon June 27 and 28, 1985.Zercent• Block 2nd ins;ar 3rd instar 4th lusterBear 11 78 11Treat Flat 2 60 38Deep 7 68 25n ControlHatterMineral3748734920Sheep 0 86 14Mean 5.0 68.8 26.2_••••-7-•Prespray PopulationMidcrown population densities (larvae per 1,000 square inches of foliage) aresummarized below:Cluster Block	 1	 2	 3	 4	 MeauBear	 0.38	 6.06	 3.45	 4.02	 3.48Treat	 Deep	 5.92	 6.55	 4.11	 7.34	 5.98Hatter	 3.15	 4.83	 3.23	 2.40	 3.40Control Mineral	 6.61	 2.92	 3.76	 2.47	 3.94Sheep	 1.79	 2.67	 1.15	 0.81	 1.61 Treatment dates were June 28 for Flat and Bear Creek blocks, and June 29 forDeep Creek area. Treatments began each day about 6:30 a.m. and concluded by9:00 a.m.EgardwinaiamaranouLD ut_Midcrown population densities (larvae per 1,000 square inches of foliage) aresummarized below:ClusterBlock	 1	 2	 3Bear	 .52	 1.76	 1.25	 1.64	 1.29Treat	 Deep	 4.06	 3.91	 3.59	 5.27	 4.21ujsA,37	 2.91	 5.10	 9.10	 5.37 Hatter	 1.97	 2.98	 1.73	 2.45	 2.28Control Mineral	 1.98	 3.49	 2.59	 1.94	 2.50Sheep	 1.63	 1.78	 1.60	 0.79	 1.45 Soil S amplePercent mortality of larvae infected with soil washing is summarized below:Prespray	 PostsprayCause of death	 Cause of deathVBear	 0	 24.3	 26.8	 .8Treat	 Deep	 0	 24.3	 15.8	 6.8Hatter	 0	 25.3	 0	 6.8Control	 Mineral	 0	 27.5	 0	 9.3kleAn•• •••••• •••••••-8- nNumber larvae No. adults dead Percentdeadbaring Data Listed below are the results of the 17-day postspray rearing.Number	 Number•	 Bear	 34	 4	 12	 0	 12	 6	 17.6Treat	Deep	116	26	18	45	20	17.2Hatter	 58	 2	 23	 16	 17	 0	 0Control Mineral	 60	 3	 24	 10	 19	 4	 6.70Pheromone Trap Catch The following figures represent the average numbers of male moths capturedin five pheromone traps located at each of the cluster sites aftertreatment.Clpster BlockBear	 6.2	 23.6	 8.4	 71.2	 27.4Treat	Deep	 106.6	 122.0	 93.6	 36.4	 89.7F	 ..Hatter	 89.0	 83.2	 102.4	 109.6	 96.1Control	 Mineral	 106.8	 92.4	 86.0	 99.8	 96.3ahsea4QA1L3L1L2ZA241A215:1Cocoon and Age Mass Data Data are expressed in the number of cocoons and egg masses found per minuteby a two-person crew during a 15-minute lower crown examination.Block	 Cocoons/minute	 Egg macs/minute  Treat •••ControlBear	 .50	 .01Deep	 .75	 .05Flat	 1.33	 .08Hatter	 3.96	 .49Mineral	 1.29	 .17Sheen	 .59	 .02   •    ••••••••-9-Spray Deposit Parameters Drop diameters were estimated using the D-max system ieveloped by Maksymiuk(1964). Drop density is expressed in droplets per cm and drop diameterin microns.prop density Cluster Nock	 1	 2	 3	 4	 HaanBear	 11.39	 11.12	 10.11	 5.90	 9.63Treat	 Deep	 13.74	 20.38	 13.04	 7.68	 13.71Flat	 14.74	 12.72	 3.85	 13.78	 11.27Volume median diameter (um)ClusterTreatBearDeepF277183238189261189233183252186•••••••• •REFERENCESDaterman, G. B., R. L. Livingston, J. W. Wens, and L. L. Sower. 1979. Rowto use pheromone traps to determine outbreak potential. USDA Agric.lindbk. 546.Dewey, J. E., R. L. Livingston, S. Kohler. 1985. Douglas-fir tussock mothpopulation survey, northern Idaho and western Montana - 1983-1984.Dumbauld, R. K. and J. E. Rafferty. 1976. Field guide for characterizingspray from small aircraft. USDA Forest Service, Missoula, MT. ReportTR-76-113 02.Maksymiuk, Bohdan. 1964. A rapid method for estimating the atomization ofoil-based aerial sprays. J. Econ. Entomol., Vol. 57, No. 1.Mason, Richard R. 1979. Row to sample Douglas-fir tussock moth larvae.USDA Agric.	 547.••••-10-	 ••••APPENDIX••• .•••••40	 TECHNICAL BULLETINTM BIOCONTROL-1For use by or under the supervision of the USDA Forest ServiceTM Biocontrol-1 consists of polyhedra of the Douglas-fir tussock mothnucleopolyhedrosis virus. Care must be taken in the mixing and applicationof this product. Stickers and u.v. protectants may enhance performance of41		 this product. The final pH of the spray mixture should be between 6.0 and7.2. Apply at the rate of 1 to 2 gallons spray mixture per acre.TM Biocontrol	 Amount to result in one-half ounce of TMBiocontrol-1 per acre.41	 NaOH	 Amount sufficient to adjust pH to 6.0 to7 .2.•••Molasses	 0.25 gallonShadeR 0.50 poundWater	 0.72 gallonSmall trial sample (100 ml) should be prepared using water from the intendedfield source to determine the amount of NaOH needed to adjust the pH. NEVERUSE CHLORINATED WATER IN THE SPRAY MIXTURE.Mixing sequence for conventional mixing equipment:1. Fill tank with water and start agitation.2. Add NaOH with water and start agitation.3. Add sunscreen (ShadeR) by slowly pouring onto the surface of thewater while under agitation. Avoid large lumps of powder.4. Add molasses by slowly pouring into mixture and mix thoroughly.• 5. Check pH.6. The carrier mixture can be prepared the day before use. TMBiocontrol-1 is added the morning of application and the finalformulation mixed for 10-30 minutes.7. Unused finished spray mixture can be kept 48 hours if the pH ischecked to see that it does not exceed 7.5.8. The mixing equipment should be provided with some type of in-linesfiltering device, such that the mixing can be circulated whileunder agitation. If any foreign materials are in the mixture, thein-line filtering process can be used to remove them. Always usean in-line filter when loading spray mixture.NOTE:	 Read label thoroughly before using. Follow all label cautions anddirections.•••••	-12-

A pilot project to evaluate efficacy of aerially applied nucleopolyhedrosis virus on Douglas-fir tussock moth in Northern Idaho, 1985 : progress report

https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/downloads/z316q308j

A pilot project to evaluate efficacy of aerially applied nucleopolyhedrosis virus on Douglas-fir tussock moth in Northern Idaho, 1985 : progress report

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ScholarsArchive@OSU