“…The major compound (4) could reach 80% of the blend. The corresponding EAD‐active compounds were identified by GC‐MS as (1) 2‐methyl‐4‐heptanol [GC‐EI‐MS m‐z 112 (M + ‐18, 1%), 97 (1), 87 (38), 73 (68), 69 (70), 55 (100), 43 (90)] (mass spectrum match with the 2‐methyl‐4‐heptanol reported as pheromone component of Metamasius hemipterus L.; Ramirez‐Lucas et al., 1996); (2) 2‐methyl‐4‐octanol [GC‐EI‐MS m‐z 126 (M + ‐18, 1%), 111 (1), 87 (38), 69 (100), 57 (14), 43 (53)] (mass spectrum match with 2‐methyl‐4‐octanol reported as pheromone component of Sphenophorus levis Vaurie ; Zarbin et al., 2003); (3) 2‐methyl‐4‐heptanone [GC‐EI‐MS m‐z 128 (M + , 25%) (113 (M + ‐15, 10), 85 (75), 71 (73), 57 (100), 43 (75)] (mass spectrum match with 2‐methyl‐4‐heptanone reported as pheromone component of Metamasius spinolae Gyllenhal ; Tafoya et al., 2007); and (4) 2‐methyl‐4‐octanone [GC‐EI‐MS m‐z 142(M + , 15%), 127 (M + ‐15, 5), 100 (10), 85 (75), 57 (100), 43 (25)] (mass spectrum match with 2‐methyl‐4‐octanone produced by M. hemipterus sericus ; Perez et al., 1997). When 10 ng of synthetic compounds were subjected to GC‐EAD analysis, repeatable EAD responses were evoked by all four compounds (Figure 1B).…”