Trapping Effects of Different (S)-(-)-ipsenol Carrier Lures on Rubber Bark Beetles

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2020.06.018

Abstract

Abstract:

To effectively develop a safe and efficient technique by using (S)-(-)-ipsenol lures in trapping rubber bark beetles, the effects of different (S)-(-)-ipsenol carrier lures were systematically studied. The results indicated that the self-made sponge lure and non-woven lure had the best trapping effects on rubber bark beetles, the average number of trapped adults was 69.16 and 66.22 in a single trap per day, respectively. Besides, the trapping effects gradually increased first and reached the peak on the 30th day, then gradually decreased to a significant level after 60 days, and the average number of trapped adults was 75.22-120.45 and 70.69-112.22 per day during 60 days. The tank lure also had a good trapping effects on rubber bark beetles, the average number of trapped adults was 24.85 per day, and the trapping effects gradually increased first and reached the peak on the 10th day, then gradually decreased to a significant level after 30 days, the average number of trapped adults was 48.53-64.66 per day during 30 days. The above three lures had particularly significant trapping effects on Xyleborus perforans and X. aquilus, which seriously damaged rubber trees, the percentage of the number of X. perforans and X. aquilus to the total trapped beetles was 48.36% and 47.89%, 46.89% and 40.48%, and 40.45% and 40.24%, respectively. The trapping effects of starch granular slow-release lure and cyclodextrin slow-release lure show insignificant difference, the average trapped adults per day were all below 10. The results above illustrated that the self-made sponge lure, non-woven lure and ampoule-type lure of (S)-(-)-ipsenol could be widely used for the effective green monitoring and control of rubber beetles, moreover, the field validity period of the three lures was 60 d, 60 d and 30 d, respectively.

Key words: (S)-(-)-ipsenol, different carrier lures, rubber bark beetle, trapping effect

CLC Number:

S433.5

LIANG Xiao,CHEN Qing,WU Chunling,CHEN Qian,ZHANG Zhe,FAN Dongzhe,DOU Hongshuang. Trapping Effects of Different (S)-(-)-ipsenol Carrier Lures on Rubber Bark Beetles[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2020, 41(6): 1196-1201.

Figures/Tables 4

Fig. 1 Trapping effect of different (S)-(-)-bark ipsenol lures on rubber bark beetles Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among different lures at 0.05 level.

Fig. 2 Ratio of trapped specific bark beetles to total trapped beetles while treated with different (S)-(-)-ipsenol lures Different uppercase letters indicate significant difference in the trapping effect of different lures on the same bark beetle species (P<0.05); Different lowercase letters indicate significant difference in the trapping effect of the same lures on different bark beetle species (P<0.05).

Fig. 3 Trapping effect of different (S)-(-)-bark ipsenol lures on specific rubber bark beetle species Different uppercase letters indicate significant difference in the trapping effect of different lures on the same bark beetle species (P<0.05); Different lowercase letters indicate significant difference in the trapping effect of the same lures on different bark beetles species (P<0.05).

Fig. 4 Time-dependent trapping effect of different (S)-(-)-bark ipsenol lures on rubber bark beetles

References 27

[1]	谭汉虎. 从安全视角看天然橡胶“走出去”战略[J]. 合作经济与科技, 2018(8):90-92.
[2]	佘时英. 2008年我国天然橡胶产业状况与形势分析[J]. 世界热带农业信息, 2008(8):11-14.
[3]	安榆林. 外来森林有害生物检疫[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2012.
[4]	方加兴, 张苏芳, 刘福, 等. 小蠹虫类异戊二烯类聚集信息素的生物合成[J]. 昆虫学报, 2018,61(10) : 1222-1236.
[5]	周祥, 杨松灵, 杨文坚. 胶林寒害与橡胶小蠹虫发生为害的关系浅析[J]. 植物保护, 2011,37(3):67-71.
[6]	阿红昌, 杨焰平, 李国华, 等. 云南橡胶树小蠹虫研究[J]. 热带农业科技, 2009,32(1):1-10, 33.
[7]	黄雅志, 阿红昌. 橡胶小蠹虫的危害和防治[J]. 云南热作科技, 2001,24(3):1-4.
[8]	殷蕙芬, 黄复生, 李兆麟. 中国经济昆虫志[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1984.
[9]	刘勇, 沈荣方, 李晓宇, 等. 小蠹虫信息化合物研究进展及其在检疫中的应用[J]. 植物检疫, 2009,23(1):45-48.
[10]	陈辉. 信息素在小蠹综合治理中应用的现状与展望[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2002,17(2):60-63, 82.
[11]	Ross D W, Niwa C G. Using aggregation and antiaggregation pheromones of the Douglas-fir beetle to produce snags for wildlife habitat[J]. Western Journal of Applied Forestry, 1997,12(2):52-54. DOI URL
[12]	Bakke A, Frøyen P, Skattebøl L. Field response to a new pheromonal compound isolated from Ips typographus[J]. Naturwissenschaften, 1977,64(2):98-99 DOI URL
[13]	赵玉民, 王艳军, 陈国发, 等. 小蠹聚集信息素研究与应用的进展[J]. 内蒙古林业科技, 2011,37(3):55-60.
[14]	高长启, 徐桂莲, 张晓军, 等. 应用聚集信息素监测与防治纵坑切梢小蠹[J]. 中国森林病虫, 2004,23(2):30-32.
[15]	左天兴, 黄桂英. 利用信息化合物诱捕防治云南切梢小蠹试验效果分析[J]. 林业调查规划, 2018,43(2):64-68, 98.
[16]	杨松灵, 周祥. 简易橡胶小蠹虫诱捕器的制作与应用[J]. 广东农业科学, 2010,37(10):113-115, 128.
[17]	中国热带农业科学院环境与植物保护研究所. 一种鞘翅目害虫成虫田间诱捕方法: 201210556721.1[P]. 2013-04-10.
[18]	中国热带农业科学院环境与植物保护研究所. 一种鞘翅目害虫成虫田间诱捕方法: 201210556721.1[P]. 2013-06-05.
[19]	中国热带农业科学院环境与植物保护研究所. 一种热带地区防控小蠹虫的诱捕器: 201620452040.4[P]. 2016-09-28.
[20]	王玉洁, 赵冬香, 曹海鹏. 小蠹虫信息素的研究与应用现状[J]. 华东昆虫学报, 2007,16(4):299-303.
[21]	朱槿, 王树梅, 冯留贵, 等. 西部松小蠹集合信息素的合成[J]. 合成化学, 1993,1(1):35-38.
[22]	Wood D L. The role of pheromones, kairomones, and allomones in the host selection and colonization behavior of bark beetles[J]. Annual Review of Entomology, 1982(27):411-446.
[23]	陈青, 梁晓, 伍春玲, 等. 12种聚集信息素对橡胶小蠹虫的诱捕效果[J]. 热带作物学报, 2019,40(12):2432-2439.
[24]	李学琳, 孔祥波, 张苏芳, 等. 4类昆虫信息化学物质在不同缓释载体上的释放速率[J]. 林业科学, 2015,51(12):63-70. DOI URL
[25]	李晓, 鞠倩, 金青, 等. 不同种类诱芯及诱捕器对暗黑鳃金龟的田间诱捕效果[J]. 花生学报, 2015,44(3):41-46.
[26]	蔡波, 林明光, 张艳, 等. 不同诱捕器和诱芯对橘小实蝇诱捕效果的比较[J]. 植物检疫, 2013,27(6):64-68.
[27]	胡琴, 金京, 杜永斌, 等. 野外条件下松墨天牛诱芯中引诱剂成分变化及其对诱捕效果的影响[J]. 昆虫学报, 2018,61(11):1310-1318.