STS Technical Committee Report STS Operations Committee August

STS Technical Committee Report STS Operations Committee August 17, 2011 Salt Fork State Park, OH

(1) Mating disruption field trials – update (2) Replacement of Btk blocks with high rate MD? (3) Lure experiment – final results (4) Autotraps and sentinel traps – update (5) MN –moth wing measurements – update (6) Gypsy moth dispersal – update (7) Mating success, climate, and reproductive asynchrony – update (8) Mating success meta-analysis (9) VA Coastal Plain analysis – update (10) Tech Development Plan, FY 11

Gypsy Moth Mating Disruption Research Program Update Ksenia Onufrieva August 2011

Experiments, 2011 1. Second-year effect of Disrupt® II and SPLAT GM in Wisconsin Ø Ø Control Hercon Disrupt® II 6 g AI/acre SPLAT® GM Organic 6 g AI/acre

Experiments, 2011 2. Mating Disruption Test Ø Control Ø SPLAT® GM 4 g AI/acre Ø SPLAT® GM Organic 4 g AI/acre

Experiments, 2011 4. Efficacy of SPLAT® GM for ground application ØControl ØSPLAT® GM 20 g AI/acre 9 point sources ØSPLAT® GM 20 g AI/acre 25 point sources ØSPLAT® GM 20 g AI/acre 49 point sources

Plot Layout (second-year effect and mating disruption tests) - Pheromone trap - Male moth release point

Plot Layout (SPLAT® GM for ground application) 3 x 3 grid 5 x 5 grid - SPLAT® GM Point source - Pheromone trap - Male moth release point 7 x 7 grid

Male Moth Catches In Pheromone-Baited Traps (In-season Mating Disruption Tests) Virginia, 2010 Wisconsin, 2010 1. 8 1. 6 3. 1* 1. 4 1. 2 1 0. 8 1 0. 6 0. 8 0. 4 0. 6 0. 4 0. 2 3. 1 * 0. 2 0. 3 0. 2 0 Control Disrupt II, Bio. Flakes, SPLAT 6 4 4. 6 Organic, 9. 15 0 control 0. 3 Disrupt II Bio. Flakes 0. 1 SPLAT Organic

Male Moth Catches In Pheromone-Baited Traps (second-year effect test, VA) Trap catches, % of control 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Disrupt II SPLAT Pheromone Treatment, 6 g AI/acre

Male Moth Catches In Pheromone-Baited Traps (second-year effect test, WI – preliminary results) 100 Trap catches, % of control 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 SPLAT Org Pheromone Treatment, 6 g AI/acre Disrupt II

Trap catch reduction in plots treated 1 year prior to evaluation in VA and WI State Tested Treated 2005 2004 Disrupt® II 50 2008 2007 Disrupt® II 53 SPLAT GM 29 Disrupt® II 68 SPLAT GM 60 Disrupt® II 52 SPLAT GM no data Disrupt® II 71 SPLAT GM 44 SPLAT GM Org 30 VA 2009 2010 WI (preliminary) 2011 2008 2009 2010 Formulation Reduced by, % of control

Future Work Ø Evaluate second-year effect of SPLAT GM applied at 4 g AI/acre in VA Ø Evaluate the efficacy of SPLAT GM for ground application - dosage response test

Replacement of Btk blocks with high rate MD? Reduce treatment costs Possible use on sensitive lands How would this impact the spread rate, comparison of costs, and would we end up treating again sooner than later?

Lure Experiment – Final Results Big (!!!) thanks to: Matthew Andresen and James Graham (North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Raleigh, NC), Laura Blackburn (USDA Forest Service, Morgantown, WV), Kimberly Thielen Cremers (Stearns County Soil and Water Conservation District, Cold Spring, MN), Carl Harper (University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY), Bob Kangas (Minnesota Department of Agriculture, Schroeder, MN), Katie Kittrell (Princeton Research and Education Center, Princeton, KY), Chris Lettau (Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, Madison, WI), J. D. Loan (University of Kentucky, Greenup, KY), Dana Miller and Stephen Krecik (Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Vallonia, IN), Alexey V. Onufriev (Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA), Michael Saunders (Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA), Amy Stone (Ohio State University, Toledo, OH), Herbie Ward (North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Elizabethtown, North Carolina), Nancy Williams (Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Bureau Junction, IL), and James Wilson (Mason, WI).

Mean Daily Temperature, °C (±SD) Mean Daily Degree Days (±SD) Maximum Accumulated Degree Days Schroeder, MN 15. 7 (3. 1) 5. 9 (2. 9) 570. 8 Blacksburg, VA 18. 4 (2. 9) 8. 5 (2. 6) 750. 3 Mason, WI 17. 8 (3. 6) 8. 1 (3. 2) 769. 3 State College, PA 18. 6 (2. 9) 8. 7 (2. 7) 787. 0 Morgantown, WV 19. 5 (3. 7) 9. 6 (3. 4) 846. 3 Cold Spring, MN 19. 8 (2. 9) 891. 6 Toledo, OH 20. 9 (2. 9) 10. 9 (2. 8) 929. 8 Greenup, KY 21. 6 (2. 3) 11. 6 (2. 3) 985. 2 Madison, WI 21. 4 (2. 6) 1011. 7 Elizabethtown, KY 22. 9 (2. 8) 1072. 5 Vallonia, IN 22. 1 (3. 8) 12. 2 (3. 7) 1143. 3 Bureau Junction, IL 23. 7 (2. 4) 1166. 7 Princeton, KY 23. 9 (2. 8) 14. 0 (2. 7) 1186. 9 Raleigh, NC 24. 2 (3. 5) 1308. 7 Lexington, KY 25. 3 (2. 8) 1404. 0 Site

900 Lure residue (mg) 600 Release rate of disparlure across all study locations and years. 300 0 900 600 300 Subset of the above showing the data from one of the warmest (Raleigh, NC) and the coldest location (Schroeder, MN) Accumulated Degree Days 0 0 500 1, 000 1, 500

Lure residue (mg) Lure residue over degree days, 2008 -2010 900 600 300 0 0 500 1, 000 1, 500 Accumulated Degree Days Overall average initial load = 525. 6 mg Overall average half-life = 144. 4 days Overall average release rate = 2. 1 mg per day (Beroza et al. 1971: 1 virgin female ≈ 1 -6 mg of disparlure)

Initial lure load, mg Location Daily release rate (±SE) Half-life (d) (mg) Schroeder, MN 534. 3 (18. 5) 433. 2 0. 8 Mason, WI 388. 7 (34. 2) 266. 6 0. 9 Cold Spring, MN 426. 3 (27. 2) 288. 8 0. 9 Blacksburg, VA 549. 8 (26. 6) 256. 7 1. 3 State College, PA 440. 8 (37. 5) 182. 4 1. 4 Morgantown, WV 539. 3 (19. 9) 161. 2 1. 9 Elizabethtown, NC 530. 5 (35. 0) 150. 7 2. 0 Madison, NC 556. 1 (20. 4) 128. 4 2. 4 Raleigh, NC 543. 0 (17. 7) 119. 5 2. 5 Vallonia, IN 522. 0 (25. 2) 92. 4 2. 9 Toledo, OH 650. 4 (25. 5) 82. 5 3. 9 Princeton, KY 661. 9 (38. 9) 75. 3 4. 2 Bureau Junction, IL 483. 9 (34. 6) 35. 7 4. 6 Greenup, KY 634. 6 (50. 4) 56. 8 4. 8 Lexington, KY 560. 0 (25. 1) 37. 3 5. 3

2011 Autotraps and Sentinel Traps 1 trap with 1 lure 1 trap with 2 lures

MN wing moth measurements 2007 -2009

Number of moths 2007; 1, 333 moths Mean length=19. 85 mm (15. 66 -23. 74) 2009; 3, 946 moths Mean length= 20. 83 mm (15. 41 -25. 44) Wing length (mm) 2008; 2, 159 moths Mean length=19. 37 mm (14. 99 -23. 99)

Flight period (days) of male moths based on ‘live’ moth reports (1 st to last live moth) 2009 1, 687 moths; July 16 -Oct. 8 84

INTERPRETATION OF GYPSY MOTH SPREAD USING METEOROLOGY IN A CONDITIONAL ALGORITHM K. L. Frank 1, P. C. Tobin 2, H. W. Thistle, Jr. 3, L. S. Kalkstein 4 1 Center for Climatic Research, Department of Geography, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 2 USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Morgantown, WV 3 USDA Forest Service, Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, Morgantown, WV 26505, USA. 4 Department of Geography and Regional Studies, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL

(A) Number of traps % of total moths trapped 60 40 20 Predicted flight 0 28 30 32 34 Week of the year 36 30 (B) Predicted flight duration 20 10 0 7 21 35 49 63 77 91 Flight duration (days) (A) Percent of male moths trapped over time in four counties in eastern Wisconsin, 1993, with only a minority of males trapped during the predicted flight period based upon local climatic conditions (modified from Krause et al. 1994). (B) Frequency distribution of the number of traps in Wisconsin, 2004 -2008, by the duration of male moth flight, which is predicted to occur over 14 -28 days (modified from Tobin et al. 2009)

Development of the Conditional Algorithm Step 1: Identification of “east-wind” events Wind direction at the weather station nearest to a potential gypsy moth source population (in Michigan) was within ± 22. 5 of the straight-line direction from the receiving weather station (in Wisconsin) Step 2: Calculation of particle travel distance Distance that a particle would travel each hour based upon the wind speed observed at the weather station nearest the source or receiving end. The event “ends” when the total distance traveled reaches the distance from the source to the target or if an elimination criterion is met. Step 3: Elimination of unsuccessful transport events Any precipitation, changes in wind direction (see step 1), and wind speed (i. e. , if speed dropped below 2 m/s for 2 hours for larval transport, which was based upon larval settling velocity; Mc. Manus and Mason 1983), were used to eliminate events deemed unsuccessful Step 4: Weighting of transport events based upon source population phenology (using Gray’s model in Bio. SIM).

Examined weather data from 1996 -2007 A total of 585 individual hourly transport events were identified. Approximately 2/3 occurred during a period coinciding with early instars. Duration of the events ranged from 41 to 4 hours, with a mode of 8 hours. Events occurring during the larval period tended to be of shorter duration due to higher wind speeds. The overall time required to transport larvae was generally shorter for larval transport events (average 11. 8 hours for early instars and 18. 8 hours for adults)

Data processing Grouping the hourly transport events by date of occurrence and removing the biologically unsuccessful transport events left 52 favorable transport periods. Of these 52 events, 31 were associated with cyclones (low pressure systems) in or near the study area, with 22 of them occurring during the period of early instars. Many of these were considered to be of a high weight (i. e. , overlapped more with peak hatch or adult emergence). There was a significant positive correlation between the weight of the event and spread

120 Northern WI Central WI 90 20 15 10 30 0 5 -30 -60 120 Southern WI All WI 90 0 20 15 Model Weights Rate of Spread (km yr-1) 60 60 10 30 0 5 -30 -60 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 0 Year Annual gypsy moth spread rates (grey bars) relative to the corresponding model weights of favorable transport events for larval (dotted line), adult (dashed line), both life stages combined (solid line), 1996– 2007. Note the correspondence between high rates of spread and model weights for 1997 and 2007, and low rates of spread and model weights for 2004 -2006.

Sum of model weights 20 Spread in current year Spread in following year 15 10 5 0 r=0. 58, P=0. 05 r=0. 44, P=0. 16 Annual rate of gypsy moth spread, km/yr The relationship between the sum of the weights representing “most favorable” larval and adult transport events and the annual rate of gypsy moth spread in Wisconsin. Note that in years with higher weights that there tends to be a higher rate of gypsy moth spread.

Mating success, climate, and reproductive asynchrony (current field work) Objectives: (1) To quantify the relationship between overwintering temperatures and the distribution of egg hatch in the subsequent spring. (2) To quantify the consequent relationship between the distribution of egg hatch and variability in male moth emergence. (3) To quantify the consequent mating success of females when deployed across the distribution of male moth flight.

Mean # first instars (10 egg masses) Egg hatch, 2011 CRC, Blandy, VA Mt. Morris, PA WVU Forest Calendar Day

Hatch period (days): first the last hatch Period of egg hatch (days) in 2010 and 2011

Gypsy moth developmental asynchrony-mating success study design Tethered gypsy moth female (n=16) 200 m (656. 17 ft) Milk carton pheromonebaited trap (n=2) 20 m (65. 62 ft) 140 m (459. 32 ft) 540 m (1, 771. 65 ft)

Goals for 2012 After analyzing 2011 data, we should have a good handle on the relationship between mating success and moth density. Next year, we will measure egg hatch and male moth flight distributions at same sites, and would like to add a site in the Coastal Plain of VA and maybe northern Wisconsin (Chequamegon. Nicolet NF)

Mating success meta-analysis Patrick C. Tobin and Ksenia S. Onufrieva Compiling data from studies where gypsy moth mating success (through deployed females) was ascertained relative to trap catch. Currently we have data from studies published between 1974 and 2010 Many studies were those conducted to measure the efficiency of mating disruption products and tactics (i. e. , Beroza, Webb, Thorpe, etc. ) To date, we have compiled 446 unique plot observations of which 326 are from untreated controls We are looking at mating success relative to daily male moth trap catch, and season-long trap catch.

Percent of females mated Mating success in treated (closed circles) and untreated (open circles) plots 50 th percentile curve. Overall, half of females get mated when males/trap/day = 4. 5 Male moths/trap/day (log 10)

Mating success in treated (closed circles) and untreated (open circles) plots vs. season-long trap catch Mean % mating Max % mating Season-long trap catch (log 10) Mean of 50% mating occurs at roughly a season long trap catch = 316 males

VA Coastal Plain analysis Sandy Liebhold, David Gray, and Patrick Tobin “Traditional” moth lines (1, 3, 10, etc. ) not useful to estimate spread in the coastal plain because trap catches are so low

Used STS data to estimate spread based upon the 0. 1 and 0. 5 mothlines. Overall mean (SE) rates of spread, 1989 -2009 Mothline Western VA/WV Piedmont, VA Coastal Plain, VA 0. 1 8. 3 (1. 1) -0. 1 (1. 4) -8. 7 (2. 4) 0. 5 8. 7 (1. 0) 0. 5 (1. 2) -12. 4 (2. 1)

Location of the 0. 1 mothline in selected years N VA/WV Piedmont Coastal Plain

Developmental Rate David Gray: exploring weather data Third Instars 82. 4 °F Logan et al. 1991 Temperature (°C)

Tech Development Plan, FY 12 STS Technical Committee Meeting, Aug. 17 -18