Slide 1

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

Slide 2

(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, FY11

Slide 3

Gypsy Moth Mating Disruption Research Program Update Ksenia Onufrieva August 2011

Slide 4

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

Slide 5

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

Slide 6

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

Slide 7

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

Slide 8

Plot Layout (SPLAT GM for ground application) 3x3 grid5x5 grid7x7 grid - Pheromone trap - Male moth release point - SPLAT GM Point source

Slide 9

Male Moth Catches In Pheromone-Baited Traps (In-season Mating Disruption Tests) Virginia, 2010 Wisconsin, 2010

Slide 10

Male Moth Catches In Pheromone-Baited Traps (second-year effect test, VA)

Slide 11

Male Moth Catches In Pheromone-Baited Traps (second-year effect test, WI preliminary results)

Slide 12

Trap catch reduction in plots treated 1 year prior to evaluation in VA and WI StateTestedTreatedFormulationReduced by, % of control VA 20052004Disrupt II50 20082007Disrupt II53 SPLAT GM29 20092008Disrupt II68 SPLAT GM60 20102009Disrupt II52 SPLAT GM no data WI (preliminary) 20112010 Disrupt II71 SPLAT GM44 SPLAT GM Org30

Slide 13

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

Slide 14

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?

Slide 15

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).

Slide 16

Slide 17

Site Mean Daily Temperature, C (SD) Mean Daily Degree Days (SD) Maximum Accumulated Degree Days Schroeder, MN15.7 (3.1)5.9 (2.9)570.8 Blacksburg, VA18.4 (2.9)8.5 (2.6)750.3 Mason, WI17.8 (3.6)8.1 (3.2)769.3 State College, PA18.6 (2.9)8.7 (2.7)787.0 Morgantown, WV19.5 (3.7)9.6 (3.4)846.3 Cold Spring, MN19.8 (2.9)9.8 (2.9)891.6 Toledo, OH20.9 (2.9)10.9 (2.8)929.8 Greenup, KY21.6 (2.3)11.6 (2.3)985.2 Madison, WI21.4 (2.6)11.4 (2.6)1011.7 Elizabethtown, KY22.9 (2.8)12.9 (2.8)1072.5 Vallonia, IN22.1 (3.8)12.2 (3.7)1143.3 Bureau Junction, IL23.7 (2.4)13.7 (2.4)1166.7 Princeton, KY23.9 (2.8)14.0 (2.7)1186.9 Raleigh, NC24.2 (3.5)14.2 (3.5)1308.7 Lexington, KY25.3 (2.8)15.3 (2.8)1404.0

Slide 18

Release rate of disparlure across all study locations and years. Subset of the above showing the data from one of the warmest (Raleigh, NC) and the coldest location (Schroeder, MN) 900 600 300 0 900 600 300 0 Lure residue (mg) 05001,0001,500 Accumulated Degree Days

Slide 19

Lure residue over degree days, 2008-2010 Overall average initial load = 525.6 g Overall average half-life = 144.4 days Overall average release rate = 2.1 g per day (Beroza et al. 1971: 1 virgin female 1-6 g of disparlure) 900 600 300 0 Lure residue (mg) 05001,0001,500 Accumulated Degree Days

Slide 20

Location Initial lure load, mg (SE) Half-life (d) Daily release rate (mg) Schroeder, MN534.3 (18.5)433.20.8 Mason, WI388.7 (34.2)266.60.9 Cold Spring, MN426.3 (27.2)288.80.9 Blacksburg, VA549.8 (26.6)256.71.3 State College, PA440.8 (37.5)182.41.4 Morgantown, WV539.3 (19.9)161.21.9 Elizabethtown, NC530.5 (35.0)150.72.0 Madison, NC556.1 (20.4)128.42.4 Raleigh, NC543.0 (17.7)119.52.5 Vallonia, IN522.0 (25.2)92.42.9 Toledo, OH650.4 (25.5)82.53.9 Princeton, KY661.9 (38.9)75.34.2 Bureau Junction, IL483.9 (34.6)35.74.6 Greenup, KY634.6 (50.4)56.84.8 Lexington, KY560.0 (25.1)37.35.3

Slide 21

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

Slide 22

MN wing moth measurements 2007-2009

Slide 23

Wing length (mm) Number of moths 2007; 1,333 moths Mean length=19.85 mm (15.66-23.74) 2008; 2,159 moths Mean length=19.37 mm (14.99-23.99) 2009; 3,946 moths Mean length= 20.83 mm (15.41-25.44)

Slide 24

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

Slide 25

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

Slide 26

Slide 27

Predicted flight Predicted flight duration (A)(B) 60 40 20 0 % of total moths trapped 30 20 10 0 Number of traps 7 21 3549 63 7791 2830 32 3436 Week of the year 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)

Slide 28

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; McManus and Mason 1983), were used to eliminate events deemed unsuccessful Step 4: Weighting of transport events based upon source population phenology (using Grays model in BioSIM).

Slide 29

Slide 30

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)

Slide 31

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

Slide 32

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), 19962007. 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. Northern WI Southern WI Central WI All WI 1996 19982000 200220042006 Year Rate of Spread (km yr -1 ) 120 90 60 30 0 -30 -60 120 90 60 30 0 -30 -60 20 15 10 5 0 Model Weights 20 15 10 5 0

Slide 33

Annual rate of gypsy moth spread, km/yr 20 15 10 5 0 Sum of model weights Spread in current yearSpread in following year 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. =0.58, P=0.05 =0.44, P=0.16

Slide 34

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.

Slide 35

Slide 36

Slide 37

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

Slide 38

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

Slide 39

Tethered gypsy moth female (n=16) Milk carton pheromone- baited trap (n=2) 200 m (656.17 ft) 20 m (65.62 ft) 140 m (459.32 ft) 540 m (1,771.65 ft) Gypsy moth developmental asynchrony-mating success study design

Slide 40

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)

Slide 41

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.

Slide 42

Male moths/trap/day (log 10 ) 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

Slide 43

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

Slide 44

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

Slide 45

Used STS data to estimate spread based upon the 0.1 and 0.5 mothlines. Overall mean (SE) rates of spread, 1989-2009 MothlineWestern VA/WV Piedmont, VA Coastal Plain, VA 0.18.3 (1.1)-0.1 (1.4)-8.7 (2.4) 0.58.7 (1.0)0.5 (1.2)-12.4 (2.1)

Slide 46

VA/WVPiedmontCoastal Plain N Location of the 0.1 mothline in selected years

Slide 47

David Gray: exploring weather data Temperature (C) Developmental Rate Third Instars Logan et al. 1991 82.4 F

Slide 48

Tech Development Plan, FY12 STS Technical Committee Meeting, Aug. 17-18