Host condition effects upon Agrilus planipennis (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) captures on decoy-baited branch traps

Domingue, Michael J.; Berkebile, Jennifer; Steiner, Kim C.; Hall, Loyal P.; Cloonan, Kevin R.; Lance, D. R.; Baker, Thomas C.

doi:10.14411/eje.2016.057

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…cyanescens on traps with decoys even though they observed this species landing directly on these decoys. Third, positive response to decoy was mostly reported in association with small sticky traps placed in the branches, within the foliage [ 21 , 46 , 54 – 56 , 59 ]. This position may provide the necessary visual and olfactory stimuli to allow the decoys to work.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another study reports increased catches of European Agrilus species on sticky traps with pinned dead EAB compared to similar traps without decoys, confirming that decoys could improve trap attractiveness [ 46 ]. The vast majority of studies to date have investigated the decoy effect on trapping efficiency using sticky traps, which are usually small in size and generally placed directly on branches within living foliage [ 21 , 46 , 54 – 56 , 59 ] but see [ 60 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Enhancing Buprestidae monitoring in Europe: Trap catches increase with a fluorescent yellow colour but not with the presence of decoys

Kuhn,

San Martin,

Hasbroucq

et al. 2024

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the efficacy of various traps differing in colour (green or yellow), presence or absence of decoys (dead Agrilus planipennis) or design (commercial MULTz or multifunnel traps, and homemade bottle- or fan-traps) for monitoring European Buprestidae in deciduous forests and pear orchards. Over two years, we collected 2220 samples on a two-week basis from 382 traps across 46 sites in Belgium and France. None of the traps proved effective for monitoring Agrilus sinuatus in infested pear orchards (17 specimens captured in 2021, 0 in 2022). The decoys did not affect the catch rates whatever the trap model, colour, buprestid species or sex. The fluorescent yellow traps (MULTz and yellow fan-traps) tended to be more attractive than the green traps (green fan-traps and, to a lower extent, multifunnel green traps). Most Agrilus species showed similar patterns in mean trap catches, with the exception of Agrilus biguttatus, which had the largest catches in the green multifunnel traps. Finally, we observed a high variation in catch rates between localities: the site explained 64% of the catches variance, while the tree within the site and the type of trap explained only 6–8.5% each. In many sites, we captured very few specimens, despite the abundance of dying mature trees favourable to the development of Buprestidae. For the early detection of non-native Buprestidae, it therefore seems essential to maximise the number of monitoring sites. Due to their cost-effectiveness, lightweight design, and modularity, fan-traps emerged as promising tools for buprestid monitoring. The study’s findings extend beyond European fauna, as a preliminary trial in Canada suggested that yellow fan-traps could also improve captures of non-European buprestid species and catch species of interest such as Agrilus bilineatus (a species on the EPPO A2 list of pests/pathogens recommended for regulation in the EU).

show abstract