scholarly journals Differences in defence responses of Pinus contorta and Pinus banksiana to the mountain pine beetle fungal associate Grosmannia clavigera are affected by water deficit

2015 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 726-744 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adriana Arango-Velez ◽  
Walid El Kayal ◽  
Charles C. J. Copeland ◽  
L. Irina Zaharia ◽  
Inka Lusebrink ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Water Deficit ◽  
Pinus Banksiana ◽  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Defence Responses ◽  
Grosmannia Clavigera ◽  
Fungal Associate

scholarly journals Influence of water deficit on the molecular responses of Pinus contorta x Pinus banksiana mature trees to infection by the mountain pine beetle fungal associate, Grosmannia clavigera

2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (11) ◽  
pp. 1220-1239 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Arango-Velez ◽  
L. M. G. Gonzalez ◽  
M. J. Meents ◽  
W. El Kayal ◽  
B. J. Cooke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Water Deficit ◽  
Pinus Banksiana ◽  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Mature Trees ◽  
Molecular Responses ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Influence Of Water ◽  
Grosmannia Clavigera ◽  
Fungal Associate

Pathogenicity of Leptographium longiclavatum associated with Dendroctonus ponderosae to Pinus contorta

2006 ◽  
Vol 36 (11) ◽  
pp. 2864-2872 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sangwon Lee ◽  
Jae-Jin Kim ◽  
Colette Breuil
Keyword(s):  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Dendroctonus Ponderosae ◽  
Wide Band ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Breast Height ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pines ◽  
Fungal Associate

We assessed the pathogenicity of Leptographium longiclavatum sp. nov., a recently reported fungal associate of the mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae (Hopkins, 1902). In September 2003, 30 lodgepole pines (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud. var latifolia Engelm. ex S. Wats) between 98 and 130 years old were inoculated with L. longiclavatum, the known pathogen Ophiostoma clavigerum, or an agar control. Inoculation densities consisted of 200 and 800 points/m2 in a 60 cm wide band at breast height. The inoculated trees were examined in July 2004, 9 months after inoculation. Five of six trees inoculated with L. longiclavatum at high density (800 points/m2) developed yellow crowns, while the foliage of all trees inoculated at low density (200 points/m2) remained green. Both O. clavigerum and L. longiclavatum generated significantly longer necrotic lesions in the phloem and more occlusions in the sapwood than in the agar controls. In addition, the sapwood colonized by both fungi had a reduced moisture content compared with controls. These results suggest that L. longiclavatum is pathogenic and may contribute to the mortality of mountain pine beetle infested pines.

Comparison of two methods to assess the virulence of the mountain pine beetle associate, Grosmannia clavigera, to Pinus contorta

2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 98-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jae-Jin Kim ◽  
Alex Plattner ◽  
Young Woon Lim ◽  
Colette Breuil
Keyword(s):  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Grosmannia Clavigera

Forest structure altered by mountain pine beetle outbreaks affects subsequent attack in a Wyoming lodgepole pine forest, USA

2011 ◽  
Vol 41 (12) ◽  
pp. 2403-2412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel M. Kashian ◽  
Rebecca M. Jackson ◽  
Heather D. Lyons
Keyword(s):  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Stand Structure ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Climate Change Scenarios ◽  
Cone Production ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Large Trees ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
The 1960S

Extensive outbreaks of the mountain pine beetle ( Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) will alter the structure of many stands that will likely be attacked again before experiencing a stand-replacing fire. We examined a stand of lodgepole pine ( Pinus contorta var. latifolia Engelm. ex S. Watson) in Grand Teton National Park currently experiencing a moderate-level outbreak and previously attacked by mountain pine beetle in the 1960s. Consistent with published studies, tree diameter was the main predictor of beetle attack on a given tree, large trees were preferentially attacked, and tree vigor, age, and cone production were unimportant variables for beetle attack at epidemic levels. Small trees killed in the stand were killed based mainly on their proximity to large trees and were likely spatially aggregated with large trees as a result of the previous outbreak. We concluded that the driving factors of beetle attack and their spatial patterns are consistent across outbreak severities but that stand structure altered by the previous outbreak had implications for the current outbreaks in the same location. This study should catalyze additional research that examines how beetle-altered stand structure affects future outbreaks — an important priority for predicting their impacts under climate change scenarios that project increases in outbreak frequency and extent.

Variation in pathogenicity of a mountain pine beetle–associated blue-stain fungus,Grosmannia clavigera, on young lodgepole pine in British Columbia

2008 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 457-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Plattner ◽  
Jae-Jin Kim ◽  
Scott DiGuistini ◽  
Colette Breuil
Keyword(s):  
British Columbia ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Blue Stain ◽  
Grosmannia Clavigera

OBSERVATIONS ON A TRIAL OF BROADCAST BURNING TO CONTROL AN INFESTATION OF THE MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE DENDROCTONUS PONDEROSAE

1989 ◽  
Vol 121 (6) ◽  
pp. 521-523 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.J. Stock ◽  
R.A. Gorley
Keyword(s):  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Dendroctonus Ponderosae ◽  
Management Plan ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Direct Control ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle

The mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopk., causes extensive mortality of lodgepole pine, Pinus contorta var. latifolia Engelm., throughout western North America (Van Sickle 1982). The Prince Rupert Forest Region, in the northwest of British Columbia, initiated an aggressive beetle management program in 1981. Logging of infested stands, and winter felling and burning of individual infested trees are the most common direct control techniques.The “Bristol Lake” infestation developed in the Bulkley Forest District, approximately 55 km northwest of Smithers, B.C., on a steep rocky ridge within the valley of Harold Price Creek. The area contained large volumes of mature lodgepole pine, and control of the infestation was therefore considered critical to the local beetle management plan, but the size (50 ha) and rough topography of the infested area precluded normal direct control measures.

scholarly journals Mountain Pine Beetle Infestation: Cycling and Succession in Lodgepole Pine Forest

1981 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 131-135
Author(s):  
W. Romme ◽  
J. Yavitt ◽  
D. Knight
Keyword(s):  
National Parks ◽  
Yellowstone National Park ◽  
National Park ◽  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Pine Forest ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Surrounding Areas

A research project was initiated in 1980 to study the effects of outbreaks of the mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) on lodgepole pine forest (Pinus contorta Dougl. ssp. latifolia) in Yellowstone National Park and surrounding areas. This native insect apparently has long been associated with lodgepole pine, and reports of small numbers of beetles can be found in Park records as early as 1925. However, in the late 1940's and early 1950's major outbreaks began to occur on the Caribou and Targhee National Forests immediately to the west and southwest of Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks. An outbreak in Grand Teton National Park and the adjacent Teton National Forest began in the 1950's, with an explosive increase in 1961 followed by an eventual subsidence in the late 1960's. The first major outbreak in Yellowstone National Park began in the late 1960's in the Bechler and South Entrance areas, reaching a peak there in 1970 and later declining. Yearly aerial surveys conducted thereafter showed a steady northward movement of the outbreak through the western half of the Park at a rate of 1 - 5 km per year. By 1978 the peak outbreak was centered around West Yellowstone, with hundreds of infested trees per hectare. The outbreak is now moving north and east along the Madison and Gibbon Rivers, with the greatest beetle populations currently in the vicinity of Madison Junction.

Evaluation of the push-pull tactic against the mountain pine beetle using verbenone and non-host volatiles in combination with pheromone-baited trees

2006 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 579-590 ◽  
Author(s):  
John H Borden ◽  
Anna L Birmingham ◽  
Jennifer S Burleigh
Keyword(s):  
Pest Management ◽  
Untreated Control ◽  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Dendroctonus Ponderosae ◽  
Wide Band ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Lodgepole Pines

Experiments were conducted near Williams Lake and Quesnel, BC in 2003 to evaluate the effectiveness of the anti-aggregation pheromone verbenone and a three-component non-host volatile (NHV) blend (E-2- and Z-3-hexen-1-ol and benzyl alcohol) in deterring attack of lodgepole pines, Pinus contorta var. latifolia Engelmann, by the mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins. In 0.16-ha square plots, with a pheromone-baited tree in the centre and 16 release points at 10-m centres, either verbenone (in a polyurethane gel inside plastic membrane pouches, released at ca. 100 mg/day) or the NHVs (released from separate bubble caps at ca. 1.2 mg/day) deterred attack, but efficacy was not increased by combining them. When deployed from 25 release points at 10-m centres in 0.25-ha square plots, verbenone plus NHVs were effective in deterring attack in some (but not all) cases, when compared to attack in a 25-m wide band around the treated zone. In a test of the push-pull tactic, verbenone plus the NHV blend were tested in a 10-replicate experiment with 100, 44.4 or 25 release points/ha at 10-, 15- or 20-m centres, respectively, in a 1-ha square central zone surrounded by a 3-ha, 50-m-wide band containing 12 pheromone-baited lodgepole pines 50 m apart. Other treatments were pheromonebaited trees alone, and an untreated control. In the three push-pull treatments (but not the bait only or control treatments), 28 of 30 replicates had significantly more mass-attacked trees in the pheromone-baited outer 3 ha than in the inner ha treated with verbenone plus NHVs. The percentage of available trees ≥ 17.5 cm diameter at breast height (dbh) that were mass-attacked was < 10% in 5, 4 and 3 of 10 replicates when verbenone plus NHVs were deployed at 10-, 15- and 20-m centres, respectively, and was < 10% in two each of the bait only and control replicates. The mean ratios of newly-attacked green trees in 2003 to red trees killed in 2002 were significantly lower in the inner ha of the 10-m and 15-m centre treatments (2.6 and 2.7, respectively) than 5.9 in the untreated control. Also the pooled percentages of attacked trees that were not mass-attacked were significantly higher in the inner ha of the treatments with centres at 15 m (24.7%) and 10 m (17.6%) than in the other three treatments (all between 12% and 13%). Despite the apparent efficacy in 10-m and 15-m centre treatments, some replicates failed spectacularly. Failure was not significantly related to the incidence of red trees, but was negatively related to density/ha of available trees and positively related to mean dbh. We recommend operational implementation of the push-pull tactic at 10-m or 15-m centres when the density of available lodgepole pines is > 400/ha, the mean dbh is ≤ 25 cm, current attack is ≤ 15%, and the tactic is part of an integrated pest management program that includes sanitation harvesting. Using verbenone alone at 15-m centres would cost $380/ha (CAD), excluding labour. Key words: mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae, lodgepole pine, Pinus contorta var. latifolia, pheromones, semiochemicals, pest management

Balancing risks of disturbance from mountain pine beetle and western spruce budworm

2009 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 839-848 ◽  
Author(s):  
V.G. Nealis ◽  
M.K. Noseworthy ◽  
R. Turnquist ◽  
V.R. Waring
Keyword(s):  
Pinus Contorta ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Lodgepole Pine ◽  
Spruce Budworm ◽  
Douglas Fir ◽  
Closed Field ◽  
Western Spruce Budworm ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle ◽  
Population Processes

The effect of removing lodgepole pine ( Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud.) and retaining Douglas-fir ( Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) to reduce the risk of disturbance from mountain pine beetle ( Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopk.) in mixed conifer stands in southern British Columbia, Canada, on population processes influencing outbreaks of western spruce budworm ( Choristoneura occidentalis Free.) was evaluated in 10 paired (open vs. closed) field plots. Overall feeding damage to Douglas-fir was significantly, but only slightly, lower in open stands compared with closed stands. Although open plots tended to recruit more budworms, the losses resulting from the dispersal of spring-emerging budworms in search of feeding sites were significantly greater in open plots. The forest management benefits of these early season losses were mitigated, however, by more mortality of budworms from natural enemies, particularly diseases, in the closed plots during the budworm feeding period. These results are discussed in terms of compensating population processes and balancing objectives in forest pest management. In this case, selective harvesting of lodgepole pine as a mitigation strategy for the mountain pine beetle conserved the midterm timber supply potential represented by associated Douglas-fir even in the presence of an outbreak of the western spruce budworm.

scholarly journals Water-deficit and fungal infection can differentially affect the production of different classes of defense compounds in two host pines of mountain pine beetle

2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 338-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadir Erbilgin ◽  
Jonathan A. Cale ◽  
Inka Lusebrink ◽  
Ahmed Najar ◽  
Jennifer G. Klutsch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Fungal Infection ◽  
Water Deficit ◽  
Mountain Pine Beetle ◽  
Defense Compounds ◽  
Mountain Pine ◽  
Pine Beetle
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document