PHENOLOGY, MOVEMENT, AND WITHIN-FIELD DISTRIBUTION OF THE GRAPE BERRY MOTH, ENDOPIZA VITEANA (CLEMENS) (LEPIDOPTERA: TORTRICIDAE), IN NEW YORK VINEYARDS

Abstract

Can. Ent. 121: 325-335 (1989) From 1976 to 1986, the average date of first male pheromone trap catch of grape berry moth was 20 May with an average degree-day (DD) accumulation (base 10°C) of 150.1 (SE = 13.2). Fifty percent cumulative trap catch of the first generation of males averaged 334.1 (SE= 7.8) DD with an average date of 11 June. Degree-day accumulation was a more accurate method for predicting peak male trip catch than predictions based upon vine phenology and calendar date. Within-field distribution and levels of berry moth infestation were markedly affected by the surrounding habitat. Wooded edges or hedgerows were closely associated with an increase in the level of damage along vineyard borders and higher levels of overall infestation when c o m p a d with vineyards without wooded edges. Egg and larval infestation levels in wild hosts (Vitis spp.) were greater than those within adjacent commercial vineyards. Early in the season, male beny moth were trapped in high numbers in wooded area-adjacent to vineyards. After mid-July, males were trapped predominantly within vineyards and few were trapped in wooded edges. Movement of adults from wooded areas into vineyards is not suggested hy observed patterns of female oviposition. Females oviposited primarily on wild hosts within the wooded areas and within the adjoining vineyard edges throughout the season.De 1976 B 1986, la date moyenne de prernik capture au pitge a pheromone de la tordeuse de la vigne ttait le 20 mai. soit en moyenne a m s I'accurnulation de 150,l DJ (base 10°C) (SE = 13,2). Le cinquante pourcent de capture cumulative des maes de prernihre generation s'est produit en moyenne i 334.1 (SE = 7.8) DJ, B la date moyenne du 11 juin. L'accurnulation du temps en DJ s'est avC& une mCthode plus exacte de pdvision du pic de capture des males que les prtvisions ba&s sur la ph6-nologie de la vigne ou sur le calcndrier. La distribution intra-champ et le degt d'infestation ttaient t&s affect& par I'habitat. La pr6sence de bordures boisks et de haies ttait associte B un niveau plus 6levt de dommage en ptriphtrie des vignobles, ainsi que des niveaw plus 6lev6s d'infestation d'ensembie, compad 3 des vignobles aux bordures non boisks. Les niveaux d'infestation par oeufs ou larves chez des hates naturels (Wris spp.) ttaient plus 6levks que ceux des vignobles cornrnerciaux adjacents. T6t en saison, les m5les ont Ctt captur6s en nombres Clevts dans les boisks adjacents aux vignobles. Ap*s la mi-juillet, les maes ont Ct C captuks surtout dans les vignobles, peu Ctant piCg6s dans les bordures boisees. Le dCplacement des adultes des boists vers les vignes n'apparait pas comme une possibilitt d'aprks les patrons de pointe des femelles. Les femelles pondaient surtout sur des h6tes naturels dans les boisCs et dans la p6riphCrie des vignes durant toute la saison.

Monitoring Grape Berry Moth (Paralobesia viteana: Lepidoptera) in Commercial Vineyards using a Host Plant Based Synthetic Lure

“…One block of juice grapes (cultivar ÔNiagaraÕ, Vitis labrusca L.) and referred hereafter as the Niagara site (5.25 ha, total area), was planted along the east side of a narrow, wooded, riparian zone that runs North and South (42.43554 N, 77.13178 W), whereas the second site, planted with the V. vinifera interspeciÞc hybrid wine grape Cayuga White, and referred to hereafter as the Cayuga White site (2.5 ha, total area), was located Ϸ0.25 km to the North, on the west side of the same wooded zone (42.44039 N, 77.13226 W). grape berry moth damage is often more severe along vineyard edges near forests (Hoffman and Dennehy 1989, Trimble et al 1991, Botero-Garcé s and Isaacs 2003 and these sites had a previous history of moderate to high grape berry moth populations. Conventional pro- See text for loading rates of lures and method of deployment.…”

“…The sex pheromone of grape berry moth was identiÞed a number of years ago and pheromone-baited traps have been used to monitor ßight activity of male grape berry moth (Roelofs et al 1971, Hoffman and Dennehy 1989, Witzgall et al 2000. Flight activity in the spring appears to correlate relatively well with female activity and the onset of Þrst generation larvae.…”

Sprayable pheromone for controlling the North American grape berry moth by mating disruption

“…The average percentage of grape clusters with E. viteana feeding injury was greater in the border than in the interior zone on 13 ocassions, and greater in the interior zone than in the border zone of experimental plots on seven of the 72 occasions when clusters were inspected during the 2‐year study. Higher levels of infestation by E. viteana along the edges of vineyards have been observed in New York state (Hoffman & Dennehy, 1989) and Ontario (Trimble et al ., 1991). The increase in damage along borders has been associated with the close proximity of hedgerows or woodlots that are sources of immigrating moths (Hoffman & Dennehy, 1989).…”

“…Higher levels of infestation by E. viteana along the edges of vineyards have been observed in New York state (Hoffman & Dennehy, 1989) and Ontario (Trimble et al ., 1991). The increase in damage along borders has been associated with the close proximity of hedgerows or woodlots that are sources of immigrating moths (Hoffman & Dennehy, 1989). The greater incidence of damage that was observed in the interior zone of test plots treated with pheromone or insecticide has not been previously reported.…”

Behavioural and electrophysiological responses of grape berry moth (Lep., Tortricidae) to selected plant extracts

“…It is the primary lepidopteran pest of commercial viticulture in this region (Dennehy et al. 1990), causing yield loss, contamination of grape clusters (Hoffman and Dennehy 1989; Botero‐Garcés and Isaacs 2003) and rendering the fruit more susceptible to disease. Female moths lay eggs directly on grape clusters, and the larvae burrow into berries where they feed until pupation (Slingerland 1904; Johnson and Hammar 1912).…”