Design Factors That Influence the Performance of Flight Intercept Traps for the Capture of Longhorned Beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) from the Subfamilies Lamiinae and Cerambycinae

Abstract

In North America, cerambycid beetles can have significant ecological and economic effects on forest ecosystems, and the rate of introduction and/or detection of exotic species is increasing. Detection and survey programs rely on semiochemical-baited intercept traps which are often ineffective for large woodborers like cerambycid beetles. This study examined the effects of flight intercept trap design on the capture of cerambycid beetles in the subfamilies Lamiinae and Cerambycinae. These subfamilies are the two largest in the Cerambycidae and they include many of the most damaging cerambycid pests and species on regulatory watch lists in North America. This study demonstrates that intercept trap design, treatment of trap surfaces with a lubricant, and the type of collection cup all influence the capture of beetles from the subfamilies Lamiinae and Cerambycinae. It also demonstrates that the addition of a large lubricant-treated collar to the bottom funnel of a multiple-funnel trap significantly increases the capture of some Lamiinae. The best trap design for both subfamilies was a lubricant treated multiple-funnel [MF] trap equipped with a wet cup and lubricant treated large collar on the bottom funnel. This design captured between 4 and 14 times more Lamiinae and Cerambycinae than commercially-available MF and panel traps.

Considering species richness and rarity when selecting optimal survey traps: comparisons of semiochemical baited flight intercept traps for Cerambycidae in eastern North America

“…Standard funnel traps generally fell between SLAM and modified funnel and intercept panel traps in their effectiveness at capturing cerambycids. Intercept panel traps were generally out‐competed by the other trap types, even though they were previously reported to be more effective than other trap types for cerambycids (McIntosh et al , ; Morewood et al , ; Dodds et al , ; Graham et al , ; but see also Allison et al , ). Discrepancies in these results may be attributed to differences in lure composition and surfactant treatments.…”

“…The development of improved trapping technology for arboreal insects has received renewed attention with the expansion of exotic species surveys, biological diversity inventories and the need to protect threatened or endangered species (Sweeney et al , ; Brockerhoff et al , ; Francardi et al , ; Hyvärinen et al , ; Bouget et al , ; Dodds et al , ; Graham et al , ; Allison et al , ). Cerambycidae are often primary targets of these efforts, however, the trapping methodology has often relied on traps that were developed for other purposes such as mass‐trapping efforts (Lindgren, ; Lindgren & Fraser, ; Czokajlo et al , ).…”

The response of cerambycid beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) to long‐term fire frequency regimes in subtropical eucalypt forest

“…; Allison et al . ). Areas with a more open understory provide more open flight paths, allowing them to move around without difficulty between food sources.…”

“…; Allison et al . ). The abundance and diversity of cerambycid beetles, with a diverse range of feeding habits, life cycles, mating and dispersal methods, make them an important part of ecosystems (Maeto et al .…”

Identifying floral hosts of cerambycid beetles using palynology

“…Recent advances in the chemical ecology of cerambycids have allowed more efficient collection methods. A broad range of beetles in large quantities can be collected using sexaggregation pheromones (Hanks andMillar 2013, Millar andHanks 2017) and panel traps (Graham et al 2010, Allison et al 2014. Sympatric and congeneric beetles usually share chemical motifs; however, species-specific minor components and host plant volatiles may inhibit attraction by congeneric species (Hanks and Millar 2013).…”