Use of Systemic Fipronil and Imidacloprid to Control Regeneration Pests of Loblolly Pine

Abstract

Regeneration pests of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) threaten growth and survival in intensively managed loblolly pine plantations throughout the southeastern United States. The Nantucket pine tip moth, Rhyacionia frustrana (Comstock), in particular, often reduces growth of loblolly pine but has been difficult to control with traditional insecticides due to multiple annual generations and multi-year infestations which are difficult to predict in timing and location. Relatively new systemic insecticide products offer a solution in that their efficacy persists through multiple generations and years after a single application. Efficacy of systemic imidacloprid and fipronil were evaluated side by side across multiple sites in Virginia. Significant reductions in Nantucket pine tip moth damage were noted in trees treated with either the imidacloprid or fipronil product compared with check trees. After 2 yr, growth improvement of treated trees relative to controls was modest and not significant at all sites, but per acre volume indices were significantly greater in treated blocks as a result of higher tree survival. Reduced seedling mortality was attributed primarily to prevention of damage by pales weevil, Hylobius pales Herbst (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), by both insecticide treatments. Control of pales weevil in addition to pine tip moth suggests that systemic insecticide products with a long window of efficacy might control additional nontargeted pests.

Effects of neonicotinoids and fipronil on non-target invertebrates

“…Sublethal effects included a significant reduction in the survival and fecundity as well as increased mortality in the first and subsequent generations. Asaro and Creighton ( 2011 a, b) noted that loblolly pines appeared to be protected from the Nantucket pine tip moth ( Rhyacionia frustrana ) even 1 year after treatment, and the treatment effect apparently was not confined to the target pest species, but extended to further non-target insect species.…”

A critical analysis of species selection and high vs. low-input silviculture on establishment success and early productivity of model short-rotation wood-energy cropping systems

“…Because weed control is a necessary part of plantation silviculture [6,24] but represents a significant expense [12], we wanted to examine relative species performance with and without competition control. Finally, as it has been shown that protection of new pine plantations from common insect pests can greatly enhance establishment success and early productivity [32,33], we wanted to test whether use of a commercially available systemic insecticide had any benefit for establishing hardwood SRWC bioenergy plantations.…”

Efficacy of four systemic insecticides for reducing Nantucket pine tip moth (Rhyaciona frustrana) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) infestation levels and improving growth metrics in loblolly pines

“…Forest products that we use every day, such as paper towels, mulch, diapers, and paper, are all created from the most economically important timber species in the Southeast, loblolly pine ( Pinus taeda L.) (Pinales: Pinaceae) (Schultz 1999). However, intensively managed loblolly pine plantations are vulnerable to a number of pathogens and pests that alter wood quality and production, including the Nantucket pine tip moth (NPTM) ( Rhyaciona frustrana Comstock) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), an abundant and ubiquitous pest in young pine plantations (Schultz 1999, Asaro and Creighton 2011).…”

“…In the 1960s, the systemic insecticides phorate and disulfoton were assessed (Cade and Heikkenen 1965, Rauschenberger et al 1969). However, new systemic insecticide classes with less mammalian toxicity and extended efficacy for NPTM management set the stage for more recent reevaluations of systemic insecticide use (Asaro and Creighton 2011, King et al 2014). Systemic insecticides for NPTM management can be applied as a soil injection, soil drench, tablet, or injected into containerized seeding plugs where the chemicals are then absorbed and translocated throughout the seedling.…”