slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
What is an EAB’s Favorite Meal and Why is it Important? PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
What is an EAB’s Favorite Meal and Why is it Important?

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 47

What is an EAB’s Favorite Meal and Why is it Important? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 90 Views
  • Uploaded on

What is an EAB’s Favorite Meal and Why is it Important?. Therese M. Poland Deborah G. McCullough Andrea C. Anulewicz Deepa S. Pureswaran. EAB Host Range. China - Fraxinus spp. Japan & Korea – Juglans - Pterocarya - Ulmus North America - ??. Why Study Host Range?.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'What is an EAB’s Favorite Meal and Why is it Important?' - ellery


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

What is an EAB’s Favorite Meal and Why is it Important?

Therese M. Poland

Deborah G. McCullough

Andrea C. Anulewicz

Deepa S. Pureswaran

slide2

EAB Host Range

China - Fraxinus spp.

Japan & Korea – Juglans - Pterocarya- Ulmus

North America - ??

slide3

Why Study Host Range?

  • Know what species are at risk
  • Understand susceptibility of urban & forest trees
  • Improve survey and detection
  • Enhance management options
  • Propogate and enhance resistance
slide4

Host Range Objectives

Assess EAB feeding preference & larval development

(1) Alternate species of concern

(2) Compare North American Species

(3) Stressed & vigorous trees

(4) North American & Asian ash

slide5

(1) Alternate Species of Concern

No-choice lab bioassay

Caged adult female & male with wood section & ash leaf.

American elm, black walnut, shagbark hickory, hackberry & privet tested.

Reared until females died.

After 4 weeks, eggs counted & bark dissected to assess 1st stage larval galleries.

slide10

No-choice lab bioassay

Black walnut

Black ash

slide11

Caged-Stem Bioassay

Screen cages confined 3 pairs of beetles on each tree

Dead beetles replaced June-Sept.

Stems dissected: 4 blocks in Nov.6 blocks in March

Repeated in 2004 & 2005

slide13

Host Range Field Tests

Ash, Elm, Walnut, Hickory, Hackberry logs & drain pipe set on t-posts at 4 sites. Adult landing rates monitored using Tanglefoot. Logs dissected.

slide14

Landing Rates of EAB Adults

Total adults

Elm

Hickory

Green ash

Pipe

White ash

Hackberry

Black walnut

slide16

Host Range Field Tests

Green ash, elm & walnut logs suspended in heavily infested ash tree canopies; Will EAB females make a mistake?

Logs dissected.

slide17

Mean density of EAB galleries per m2in Suspended logs

3 logs per tree on 5 trees in 2 sites; 30 total logs

Green ash 195.5 ± 49.5

Elm 0.0

Walnut 0 ± 0

slide20

Alternate Species Results

  • Adults will oviposit on alternate species under no-choice conditions.
  • Oviposition “mistakes” occur but rare.
  • 1st stage larvae fed readily on ash species; a few larvae attempted to feed on other species but development impaired.
slide21

(2) Preference Among North American Ash Species

Green vs. White ash trees

4 neighborhoods over 3 years.

2003: canopy dieback was significantly higher in green ash than white ash

2004: canopy dieback increased in both species, still higher in green ash

2005: canopy dieback reached 100% for most green ash and rose sharply in white ash

Similar pattern for exit holes and woodpecker attacks.

slide22

Preference Among North American Ash Species

White vs. Blue ash trees

2 woodlots over 2 years.

2004: exit holes and woodpecker attacks were significantly higher in white ash than blue ash

2005: exit holes and woodpecker attacks increased in white ash but not blue ash and the difference was more significant.

slide23

Host selection and feeding preference on ash spp.

  • Green – F. pennsylvanica
  • Black – F. nigra
  • White – F. americana
  • Blue – F. quadrangulata
  • European – F. excelsior
  • Manchurian – F. mandshurica
slide24

Experimental set up

beetles released

slide25

Host selection - landing

    • number of beetles on each ash species counted every 2h during the day for 48h
  • Feeding preference – amount consumed
    • Leaves were scanned before and after the experiment
    • Amount fed determined
slide26

a

2

males

1.8

Host selection - landing

b

1.6

b

1.4

No. of beetles on foliage (mean +SE)

1.2

c

1

c

0.8

c

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

a

2.2

females

2

ab

ab

1.8

1.6

1.4

bc

1.2

c

c

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

green

black

white

blue

European

Manchurian

species

slide27

ab

a

males

12

Feeding preference

10

8

ab

bc

6

4

cd

d

2

0

Amount of foliage consumed (%)

14

a

females

a

12

a

a

10

8

b

6

b

4

2

0

green

black

white

blue

European

Manchurian

species

slide28

(3) Stressed and Vigorous Trees

Trap trees with different stress treatments:

Girdled, herbicide, methyl jasmonate, wounded

Plantation study:Girdled, fertilized, and control trees of different ash species

slide29

(4) Beetle performance on American vs. Asian Species

  • Raised beetles (n=40) on green and Manchurian ash until they died
  • Leaves changed and retrieved each week
  • Measured amount consumed, weight gained / lost over two weeks and longevity
slide30

Foliage consumption

16

a

20

a

14

18

12

16

14

10

b

12

total amount consumed (cm)2

proportion consumed (%)

8

10

b

8

6

6

4

4

2

2

0

0

green

Manchurian

green

Manchurian

slide31

Beetle performance

a

a

6

20

a

18

a

5

16

14

4

longevity (days)

12

weight loss at age 2 weeks (mg)

3

10

8

2

6

4

1

2

0

0

green

Manchurian

green

Manchurian

slide32

Results

  • Total amount and proportion of foliage consumed was greater in beetles fed on green ash compared to Manchurian
  • No difference in weight or longevity
slide33

What may be going on?

  • Higher nutritive value of Manchurian ash?
  • Presence of anti-feedants in Manchurian ash?
  • Higher consumption of green ash by larvae — mortality of trees in North America?
slide34

Compounds Identified and

Quantified in Different Ash Species

  • hexanol
  • E-2-hexenal
  • Z-3-hexenol
  • E-2-hexenol
  • butoxyethanol
  • Z-3-hexenyl acetate
  • hexyl acetate
  • E-β-ocimene
  • nonanal / linalool
  • nonatriene
  • Z-E-α-farnasene

Green

White

Black

Blue

European

Manchurian

slide37

healthy

3

green

2.5

black

white

2

blue

1.5

European

Manchurian

1

0.5

0

-0.5

-1

-1.5

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

stressed

2

1.5

1

0.5

0

-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2

-2.5

-3

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

slide38

Hybrid study

  • North American ashes are preferred relative to Chinese ashes
  • What would happen with hybrids?
  • Crossed F. americana with F. chinensis to obtain two putative hybrids chiam1 and chiam2
  • Tested beetle landing and feeding on the four genotypes
  • Compared volatile profiles by aeration
slide39

Host selection by landing and feeding preference

F. americana

F. chinensis

Chiam 1

Chiam 2

slide41

Hybrid study: landing

Mean number of beetles

Observations over time

slide42

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

F. americana

F. chinensis

Chiam 1

Chiam 2

Hybrid study: feeding

a

a

a

a

amount consumed (cm2)

(mean + SE)

a

a

a

a

proportion consumed (%)

(mean + SE)

species

slide44

Compounds quantified

  • hexanal
  • e-2-hexenal
  • z-3-hexenol
  • e-2-hexenol
  • z-3-hexenyl acetate
  • hexyl acetate
  • e-β-ocimene
  • nonanal / linalool
  • farnesene

Gas chromatography

slide45

Hybrid study: Comparison of volatiles

F. americana

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

F. chinensis

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

chiam1

Amount(ng / g dry wt)

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

40

chiam2

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

e-ocimene

hexanal

nonanal

farnesene

linalool

z-3-hexenol

e-2-hexenal

e-2-hexenol

hexyl_acetate

z-3-hexenyl_acetate

hybrid study results
Hybrid study - Results
  • Landing and feeding: no significant differences
  • Hybrids have taken on some characteristics from F. americana parent
  • Volatile profiles of hybrids different from either parent – may not be simply inherited
slide47

Conclusions

  • EAB feed and develop in all ash species
  • No evidence of larval survival or development on any non-ash species
  • EAB prefer Green>Black>White>>Blue ash
  • EAB prefer N. American ash to Asian ash
  • Hybrids may be intermediate and volatile characteristics are not simply inherited
  • Surveys should focus on preferred trees (green ash)
  • More research needed to develop resistance and attractive lures