This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 69-15,938

LYON, William Francis, 1937- BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE OF THE ADULT CEREAL LEAF melanopus (Linnaeus), (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) TO VARIOUS CHEMICAL LURES.

The Ohio State University, P h .D ., 1969 Entomology

University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE OF THE ADULT CEREAL

Oulema melanopus (Linnaeus), (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae)

TO VARIOUS CHEMICAL LURES

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

By

William Francis Lyon, B.Sc., M.S.

f ********

The Ohio State University

1969

\ MA O -

Advisers Faculty of Entomology ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author is indebted to his co-advisers, Dr. Robert E.

Treece of Wooster, Ohio and Dr. Ralph H. Davidson of Columbus,

Ohio for their guidance, encouragement, and suggestions during

the course of these investigations.

Special appreciation is given to Dr. Frank W. Fisk for the

use of his laboratory and equipment, and for guidance in the

attraction studies; and to Mr. John McCabe, who provided host

oat plants for the beetle attraction tests.

Thanks are also extended to Dr. C. R. Weaver for suggesting

experimental designs and analyzing the data; to Dr. Roy W. Rings

for assigning the author a research assistantship; and to my wife,

Marjorie, for her patience during the many hours the author spent ,

away from home testing the attractants.

This research was supported primarily from Hatch 282 funds made available to the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development

Center, Wooster, Ohio. VITA

January 24, 1937 ...... Born - Marion, Ohio.

1959 ...... B.Sc. - The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1959-1961 ...... County Extension Agent, 4-H, Kenton, Ohio

1961-1962 ...... Teaching Assistant, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1962 ...... M.Sc., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1962-1964 ...... Survey Entomologist, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, Wooster, Ohio

1964-1966 ...... Research Assistant, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1966-1969 ...... Instructor, Extension Entomology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

PUBLICATIONS

Lyon, W. F., and R.H. Davidson. 1965. The effect of humidity on the volatilization of certain insecticides. J. Econ. Entomol. 58:1037.

Lyon, W. F., and R.E. Treece. 1968. The cereal leaf beetle in Ohio. Cooperative Extension Service Leaflet L-150, 11-15. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. CONTENTS Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... ii

VITA ...... iii

LIST OF TABLES ...... v

LIST OF FIGURES ...... viii

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...... 7

MATERIALS AND METHODS ...... 13 Controlled air flow olfactometer ...... 13 Cage type olfactometer ...... 23 Test ...... 26 Outdoor c a g e ...... 30 USDA synthetic lures ...... 32 Plant extraction techniques ...... 35 Filter paper and agar substrates ...... 38 Field traps ...... 43 Field treatments ...... 43 Statistical analysis ...... 47

RESULTS - LABORATORY ...... 50 Olfactometer reliability ...... 50 USDA synthetic lures ...... 51 Live , dead beetles, and beetle feces ...... 53 Host and non-host plants ...... 53 Oat host plant studies ...... 54 Light effects ...... 61 Filter paper and agar substrates ...... 64 Response between sexes ...... 66 Antennectomy studies ...... 68

RESULTS - FIELD ...... 71 Trap reliability ...... 71 USDA synthetic lures ...... 71 Oat host plant studies ...... 73

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 80

APPENDIX...... 84

LITERATURE CITED ...... 91 iv LIST OF TABLES Number Page

1 Volatilization rates of various compounds in a controlled air flow olfactometer ...... 17

2 Test materials with treatment numbers illustrating the solvent or method used, plant condition, and type of storage in field investigations ...... 46

3 Response of 7/7/65 field collected unsexed adults, tested 7/10/65 in a cage type olfactometer, to succulent oat leaves ...... 50

4 Response of 7/7/65 field collected unsexed adults tested 7/10/65 in a controlled air flow olfactometer ...... 51

5 Response of field collected unsexed adults, tested in controlled air flow and cage type olfactometers, to USDA synthetic lures ...... 52

6 Response of 4/20/66 field collected unsexed adults, tested 4/25/66 in a cage type olfac­ tometer, to leaves of ginkgo, oats, red clover, wheat, alfalfa, and red kidney beans .... 54

7 Response of 5/22/66 outdoor cage unsexed adults, tested 5/25/66 in a cage type olfac­ tometer, to dark green, light green, and green-yellow oat leaves ...... 55

8 Response of 5/6/66 outdoor cage unsexed adults, tested 5/9/66 in a cage type olfac­ tometer to dried, succulent, and mature oat leaves ...... 56

9 Response of field collected unsexed spring and summer adults, tested in a cage type olfactometer, to various oat leaf conditions ..... 57

10 Response of 7/14/65 field collected unsexed adults, tested 9/17/65 in a cage type olfac­ tometer, to freeze dried oat extracts and distilled water ...... 57 v Number Page

11 Response of 7/15/65 field collected unsexed adults, tested 9/23/65 in a controlled air flow olfactometer, to freeze dried extracts of mature and succulent oats, and distilled water ...... 58

12 Response of field collected unsexed adults, tested in a cage type olfactometer, to various oat plant extracts obtained by different methods ...... 59

13 Response of field collected unsexed adults, tested in a cage type olfactometer, to various oat extracts ...... 59

14 Response of 7/12/68 field collected unsexed adults, tested 7/15/68 in a controlled air flow olfactometer, to oat extracts from various solvents and plant extraction methods .... 60

15 Response of 7/7/66 field collected unsexed adults to water and acetone extracts of succulent dark green oat leaves upon agar substrates and a check agar substrate ...... 66

16 Response of 4/20/66 field collected sexed adults, tested 5/25/66 in a cage type olfactometer, to dark green oat leaves ...... 68

17 Response of 7/4/68 field collected unsexed adults, tested 7/6/68 in a cage type olfactometer, to green oat leaves. Beetles were in various stages of antennectomy...... 69

18 Response of adult cereal leaf beetles to various USDA synthetic lures tested 6/2/66 in a wheat field near New Carlisle, Indiana ...... 72

19 Response of overwintering adult cereal leaf beetles to various oat plant treatments tested 5/26/67 in a winter wheat field near New Carlisle, Indiana ...... 74

20 Response of overwintering^ adult cereal leaf beetles to various oat plant treatments tested 5/27/67 in a winter wheat field near New Carlisle, Indiana ...... 75 vi Number Page

21 Response of new summer adult cereal leaf beetles to various oat plant treatments tested 7/12/67 in an oat field near New Carlisle, Indiana ...... 76

22 Response of new summer adult cereal leaf beetles to various oat plant treatments tested 7/13/67 in an oat field near New Carlisle, Indiana ...... 78

23 Analysis of variance of adult cereal leaf beetle response in 1967 field tests at New Carlisle, Indiana, to various treatments of oat plant extracts ...... 85

24 Analysis of variance of adult cereal leaf beetle response in 1967 field tests at New Carlisle, Indiana, to various treatments of oat plant extracts ...... 86

25 Mean response of adult cereal leaf beetles in 1967 field tests at New Carlisle, Indiana, to various treatments of oat plant extracts ...... 87

26 Mean response of adult cereal leaf beetles in 1967 field tests at New Carlisle, Indiana, to various treatments of oat plant extracts ...... 87

27 Mean response of adult cereal leaf beetles in 1967 field tests at New Carlisle, Indiana, to various treatments of oat plant extracts ...... 88

28 Analysis of variance of unsexed spring and summer adult cereal leaf beetle response to various oat plant conditions in the laboratory .... 89

29 Analysis of variance of unsexed spring and summer adult cereal leaf beetle response to various treatments of solvents in the laboratory ...... 89

30 Analysis of variance of unsexed spring and summer adult cereal leaf beetle response to various treatments of oat plant extraction methods in the laboratory ...... 90

vii LIST OF FIGURES Number Page

1 Severe damage to wheat plants at New Carlisle, Indiana ' ...... 3

2 Undamaged (top), and damaged (bottom), spring oats at Berrian County, Michigan...... 4

3 A controlled air flow olfactometer (initial design) ...... 15

4 Diagrammatic sketch of the olfactometer (top view) ...... 16

5 Air flow measurement with manometers ...... 19

6 The port end of the reaction chamber during a test ...... 20

7 Portable air pump aspirator ...... 22

8 Screened cage housing 2 port controlled air flow olfactometer ...... 24

9 Lighting over the olfactometer set - u p...... 25

10 Cage type olfactometer with Plexiglasv-4...... 27

11 Screen cage type olfactometer ...... 28

12 Outdoor cereal leaf beetle cage with zippered doorway ...... 29

13 Interior view of the outdoor cereal leaf beetle cage ...... 31

14 The freeze drying apparatus ...... 36

15 Lipid and aqueous portions ...... 39

16 Volume reduction with an air s t r e a m ...... 40

viii Number Page

17 Agar substrates in plastic refrigerator chambers ...... 42

18 A field trap ...... 44

19 Schematic field design of replicated and randomized treatments ...... 47

20 Collecting adult cereal leaf beetles from field traps ...... 48

21 Accumulative response in various time intervals of 5/10/68 field collected unsexed adults, tested 5/11/^68 in a cage type olfactometer, to different storage conditions of water solutions of green oat plant extracts ...... 62

22 Accumulative response in various time intervals of 7/3/68 field collected unsexed adults, tested 7/4/68 in a cage type olfactometer, to different storage conditions of water solutions of green oat plant extracts ...... 63

23 Accumulative response in various time intervals of 5/25/66 field collected unsexed adults, tested 5/27/66 in a controlled air flow olfactometer, to freeze dried oat extracts with and without lights ...... 65

24 Adult cereal leaf beetles during the act of copulation ...... 67

25 Antennae of adult cereal leaf beetle (greatly enlarged) ...... 70

ix INTRODUCTION

The cereal leaf beetle, Oulema melanopus (Linnaeus) has been a pest of small grains in Europe for many years (Hodson, 1929). Losses in Russia have been estimated to range from 25 to 50% of the crop during certain seasons. Attacks were so severe in Rumania in 1931 that crops had to be plowed under, while in Spain during 1938 the wheat crop was almost totally destroyed (Anonymous, 1964).

The first identification of this pest in the United States occurred in July of 1962 (Anonymous, 1962) from specimens obtained in

Berrien County, Michigan. At that time oats were being severely damaged and several farmers plowed this crop under and replanted to another crop. Without question the cereal leaf beetle had been present for several years prior to its discovery and identification.

(Unpublished reports of Michigan Department of Agriculture, 1962).

Oats in Ohio were found infested for the first time in north­ western Williams County in May of 1963 (Anonymous, 1963). During the following weeks, additional specimens were collected in Fulton,

Defiance, and Allen Counties. Five years later, in 1968, virtually all of Ohio was found to be infested. The known distribution of the beetle in North America now includes parts of Michigan, Indiana, Ohio,

Pennsylvania, Illinois, Kentucky, West Virginia, and Ontario, Canada

(Anonymous, 1968). 1 Host crops of the cereal leaf beetle in Europe are similar to

those in North America, and include oats, Avena sativa; wheat,

Triticum aestivum; barley, Hordeum vulgare; and rye, Secale cereale (Manolache, C., 1923) (Fig. 1). Host grasses both in

Europe and North America include wild oats, Avena fatua; quackgrass,

Agropyron repens; timothy, Phleum pratense; rye grass, Lolium sp.; orchardgrass, Dactylis glomerata; reed canarygrass, Phalaris arundinacea; and canary grass, Phalaris canarienses. Corn, Zea mays, is also an infrequent host (Castro, Ruppel, and Gomulinski, 1965).

In general, grasses in the family Gramineae are hosts to a varying degree.

The economic importance of the cereal leaf beetle is due to the

fact that both larvae and adults infest succulent young plants and _ chew out long strips of tissue between the leaf veins (Fig. 2). These

seedlings may die or become stunted in growth as a result of heavy

feeding damage. Research has demonstrated that if an average of one

completes its development per stem, oat yields will be reduced

2.24 bushels per acre (Treece, 1967). With Ohio leading the United

States in 1968 with an estimated average yield of 68 bushels per acre (387> increase in oat acreage over 1967), the cereal leaf beetle could be a definite threat to the farm economy (Anonymous, 1968).

Although insecticides such as carbaryl, malathion, and azinphos- methyl have been found effective as control chemicals against the cereal

leaf beetle (Wilson, Ruppel, and Treece, 1965; Ruppel and Yun, 1965), it was felt that a better understanding of the behavior of the beetle Fig. 1.--Severe damage to wheat plants at New Carlisle, Indiana. 4

Pig. 2.--Undamaged (top) and damaged (bottom) spring oats at Berrien County, Michigan. 5 would be a prerequisite to improving the efficiency of chemical and

biological control programs.

Since it has been demonstrated with other host specific insects

that specificity is related to the presence or absence in plants of

certain chemical substances, such as glucosides, essential oils,

alkaloids, saponins, or tannins (Fraenkel, 1953), it seemed conceiv­

able that there could be a chemical basis for host selection of the

cereal leaf beetle. This dissertation describes the investigation of

the effect of odors on the behavior of the adult cereal leaf beetle.

Adults were selected as the stage to be tested because of availability best locomotion response, and hardiness. Larvae were not bioassayed i because of poor locomotion responses and their failure to move from

plant to plant as readily as do adults.

Olfaction studies with the cereal leaf beetle have been in pro­ gress since autumn 1964 at The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, and in New Carlisle, Indiana.

The overall objectives of these investigations have been to (1) construct an efficient cereal leaf beetle olfactometer, (2) screen

USDA synthetic lures, (3) confirm or refute the attractiveness of certain known host plants, (4) prepare and test various plant ex­ tracts, (5) observe behavioral patterns in beetles particularly attraction or arrestant responses, and (6) confirm the results of laboratory investigations with field tests.

Since chemical attractants and arrestants, in combination with chemosterilants, insecticides, and traps, have proved to be of value f in the control of certain insect pests, it seemed that the response of the cereal leaf beetle to a certain group of plants could be utilized as a control measure. An attractant in traps would lure

the beetles and these could be killed or sterilized, or an arrestant scattered in the environment might confuse the beetles

to the extent that they would be unable to make a mass attack on a specific crop (Wood, 1961). REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Since Vershaffelt (1910) first reported that sinigrin, present

in cruciferous plants, governed feeding by the larvae of cabbage

butterflies, Pieris rapae L. and P. brassicae L., the literature has

contained conflicting theories concerning insect host specificity and

odors. Fraenkel (1953) argues that host specificity is determined by

the presence or absence in plants of odd chemical substances such as

glucosides, essential oils, alkaloids, saponins, or tannins. He

indicates that the chemical composition of leaves, as far as it is of

importance in the nutrition of insects, seems to be very similar in

different plants and therefore specificity of host plants for their

insects cannot be explained by the chemical differences in food

substances as protein, carbohydrates, fats, minerals, sterols, or

vitamins. He feels that it is the "odd substances" with no nutritional

value which act as chemical stimuli, and therefore determine the

specificity of a food plant.

Thorsteinson (1960) states that the effect of host plant odors

is negligible beyond a few meters and host selection beyond that distance is probably random. He feels that there are other factors

in food plant selection besides plant odors such as vision, phototaxis, geotaxis, and hygrotaxis. Also, food plant selection by insects is believed determined by perception and plant availability. Dethier

(1953) proposed orientation to feeding, biting response, and continued 8

feeding in host selection. Callahan (1965) believes that insects can

detect different wavelengths in the infrared spectrum emitted from

other insects, , and plants. He feels that odors are rela­

tively unimportant in host specificity.

Von Frisch (1937) believed that both odor and sight served to

guide an insect to a substance. He devised an experiment to determine

whether color or scent attracted bees. A number of bees were trained

to fly to a yellow box possessing rose scent. Later two boxes were

used; a yellow box without rose scent and a white box with rose scent.

The bees flew towards the yellow box but when very near it veered away

and went to the white box with the rose scent. He concluded that bees

recognized flowers from a distance by their color but when near the

flowers the sense of smell predominated.

Moncrieff (1967) indicates that smell is a primitive sense which

emerged long before vision. Even the simplest of animals, such as

Protozoa, have some sort of chemical sensitivity. As the scale of

life rises, this sensitivity differentiates into taste and

smell. The ewe recognizes its own lamb by sniffing. Hounds follow

the scent of a fox or raccoon over the ground. This ability to smell

serves the needs of the organism particularly in nutrition and repro­

duction. If these two needs are not met, the species will disappear.

Fifty years ago, Mclndoo (1919) gathered evidence to indicate

that specific plant odors had a definite role in host plant selection by insects. He confirmed that plants emit odors, and insects are 9

guided by these odors. The effective odor emitted by a plant may be

a combination of all volatile constituents or one odor may be so

strong that it masks others. Moncrieff (1967) indicates that a

variety of odors are emitted from roots, stems, leaves, and flowers

of plants. He states that 738 different kinds of plant leaves have

been examined and about half of them were characterized by the fresh

green odor of a,b-hexylene aldehyde, a compound partly responsible

for the flavor of tea. He further points out that the perfumes of

fragrant flowers are usually complex and not due to one chemical

constituent, but to the combined effects of many. Only occasionally

one individual odorant is almost entirely responsible for the flower

perfume such as methyl anthranilate in orange blossom perfume.

Beroza and Green (1963) state that attractants are either natural or synthetic in origin. Natural sources would include the

particular test insect, host animal, or host plant, whereas synthetic

sources would be man made.

Dethier (1968) states that no group of animals has smell or taste

so diversified and sharply delineated as insects. An insect may be so associated with a particular plant that it is named for its food host.

Examples are the potato beetle, hog louse, tobacco hornworm, and alfalfa weevil. 10

In olfaction studies, entomologists must also consider other

factors which induce insects to feed. Many compounds are reported as active phagostimulants (Davis, 1968). Carbohydrates are present in all plants, and sucrose has been frequently recognized as a feeding stimulant (Ito, 1960; Davis, 1961; Augustine et al., 1964; and Ridgway et al., 1966). Fructose, raffinose, arabinose, rhamnose, galactose, maltose, and melizitose also have some influence in elicit­ ing feeding responses (Ito, 1960; Davis, 1961), but glucose has very slight or no influence. Yamamoto and.Fraenkel (1960), Thorsteinson and Nayar (1963), and Heron (1965) report that glucosides are phago- stimulatory in low concentrations and inhibitory in higher concentra­ tions. Beck (1956) discovered that larvae of the European corn borer fed selectively on a diet of tissue containing the highest concentra­ tion of sugars. He considered this fact very important in host plant selection.

Mittler and Dadd (1964) and Robbins et al. (1965) used proteins with a phosphate buffer to elicit feeding. Gluten was moderately effective in eliciting feeding response in the confused flour beetle.

Davis (1965) reported that the feeding response of certain insects is intensified by combining amino acids with sucrose.

Lipids have also been associated with insect phagostimulation.

Wheat germ oil and soybean oil enhance the feeding activity of locusts and silkworms (Ito, 1961). Stride (1965) prepared an oil from fresh leaves of Solanum campylacanthum which contained phagostimulants for

Epilachna fulvosignata. B-Sitosterol is a phagostimulant for the 11 silkworm (Hamamura et al., 1961; and Nayar and Fraenkel, 1962).

Phospholipids are effective stimulants to grasshoppers (Thorsteinson

and Nayar, 1963).

Thorsteinson (1960), and Fraenkel and Gunn (1940), and Dethier

(1947) stated that there is no reason not to consider hygroreception

as a type of chemoreception.

Maxwell et al. (1963) discovered a powerful arrestant and feeding

stimulant for boll weevils, Anthonomus grandis Boheman, to exist in water extracts of all cotton plant parts and square components investi­

gated. Wood et al. (1961) found that moisture played an important role

in response of Scolvtus multistriatus (Marsham). Dethier (1968) points out that flies can distinguish between water, sugar, and salt. Davis

(1961) found that cold and hot water extracts of flour made from germinated rye seed elicited a biting or feeding response from the

larvae of the prairie grain wireworm. On the other hand, ethanol and petroleum either extracts and the residue from extractions did not.

It is now generally known that the principal olfactory sites in insects are the antennae (Schoonhoven and Dethier, 1966). They also

indicate that other appendages on the head, especially the maxillary and labial palpi bear olfactory organs. The basic question always arises: what makes a substance odorous and detectable by insects while other substances are not? Mbncrieff (1967) gives three pre­ requisites for a substance to be odorous and detected by insects:

(1) It must be volatile so that molecules can be lost to the atmosphere and detected in the olfactory sensitive region. (2) The odorant must 12 be capable of being adsorbed on the sensitive surface of the olfac­ tory epithelium. (3) The substance must be one which is not already present on the olfactory epithelium, so that when it arrives a change causes sensation.

In summary, over the past years the study of insect olfaction and the influence of "odors" in host plant selection has been a subject of much entomological work. Although much information has been discovered, Thorsteinson (1960) states that the extraordinary variety of insect-plant relationships is likely to be based on more diverse mechanisms than can be foreseen at the present time. MATERIALS AND METHODS

Controlled air flow olfactometer

If insect responses to stimuli are purely mechanistic, results obtained from a device to measure reaction to specific stimuli are dependable only when all stimuli but one remain constant. This requirement is nearly impossible to achieve. The complexity of a device such as an olfactometer would depend on the extent to which variables are to be controlled. Variables involved would be quality and intensity of light, temperature, humidity, air flow, and the stimulus in question.

The degree of reliability of an olfactometer would be reflected by the intensity and consistency of response. The devise should provide a means of observing the insect response, have the criteria to measure the particular response, and have a means to know the concentration of the stimuli. With these goals in mind, much time and labor were involved in designing, constructing, and calibrating an olfactometer useful for the cereal leaf beetle, Oulema melanopus (L.)

The instrument employed was modified from one described by

Dethier and Yost (1952). It was constructed in the shape of a truncate sector of a circle with vation of the test insects and to allow for introduction and removal of insects as desired. One-fourth inch plywood boards were used on 13 14 the sides and the bottom of the olfactometer with the overall dimensions as 3 feet long, 4 1/2 inches across the truncate end,

14 inches across the circle end, and 3 1/2 inches deep. A three port olfactometer was used initially (Fig. 3). However, after several preliminary tests, a two port olfactometer was found to be more effec­ tive in the attraction studies (Fig. 6).

The two port olfactometer principle of operation was simple.

The air source was split into three streams each of which was metered.

These streams ultimately entered into a reaction chamber through two ports. Stream c. passed directly to the port which was to serve as the control. Streams a and b ended at the test port. Of the two streams entering the test port, a was passed through a bottle contain­ ing the compound on test and into a second air mixing bottle where the remaining stream b entered to dilute the desired concentration before the material entered the final test port. In other words, odor con­ centration was regulated by varying the ratio of the rates of flow of streams a and b. Stream a passed through the saturator containing the test compound in a liquid state (Fig. 4). The test compound in the liquid state was placed in a 5 ml beaker containing a cotton dental roll wick. The liquid evaporated from the wick and was carried by the air stream to the test port. The concentration was ascertained by measure­ ment of the weight loss of the liquid after a measured amount of air had passed within a given period of time. Fig. 3.--A controlled air flow olfactometer (initial design). air flow 16

' KEY

1. Air purifier and flow equalizer 2. Flow meter 3. Saturator 4. Mixing bottle 5. Fluorescent light 6 . Control or test air streams port 7. Reaction chamber 8 . Stockinette material 9. Screened cage 10. Exhaust port 11. Light bulb

i nr

air flow 11 Fig. 4.--Diagrammatic sketch of the olfactometer (top view). 17

After several preliminary tests, a standard "odor concentration"

was established for each of the materials tested. The standard was

based on a total air flow rate of 60 liters per hour with stream a

comprising one part and stream b comprising nine parts of the 60 L/hr.

Volatility rates in milligrams/liter and millimoles/liter were calcu­

lated after an hour's test period. The compound volatilization rates

are in descending order.

TABLE 1

VOLATILIZATION RATES OF VARIOUS COMPOUNDS IN A CONTROLLED AIR FLOW OLFACTOMETER

Hourly Hourly Hourly Compound Formula Mol. Wt. Wt. Loss Mg/L Loss mM/L Loss

Chloroform CHCI3 119.4 .6420 10.70 .0895

Acetone c2h 60 58.1 .5620 9.36 .1611

Hexane G6h 14 86.2 .5120 8.53 .0989

Petroleum Ether — -- .4962 8.27 —

Methyl Alcohol ch40 32.0 .4204 7.00 .2187

95% Ethyl Alcohol 46.1 .4080 6.80 C2H6° .1475 Hot Water Oat Extract —— .0706 1.17 --

Cold Water Oat Extract — -- .0700 1.16 --

Freeze Dried Extract —— .0690 1.15 --

Water h 2o 18.0 .0673 1.12 .0622 Benzene FPn 78.1 .0476 .79 .0101 18

The system of switching hoses at the two ports permitted

directing the control stream or the test stream to either the right

or left port. In all tests the rate of air flow through the control

port was made equal to the total air flow through the test port (both

streams a and b combined). The air flow rate was measured by manometers with a range of 0.36 to 3.6 liters of air per minute at the

standard conditions of 14.7 psi absolute pressure and with a tempera­

ture of 20 C. Sixty liters per hour of air flow were used in testing

all synthetic lures and plant extracts (Fig. 5). ‘The laboratory

compressed air which carried the odors into the test chamber was first passed through a Koby "Junior K i n g " ® a i r purifier and flow equalizer to remove impurities.

The reaction chamber was constructed so the two air streams, control and test, passed through it with little or no mixing. This was verified by blowing cigar smoke into the reaction chamber and observing the pattern of smoke movement. A vacuum was employed at the exhaust port permitting the exhaust of odors at a slightly greater rate than that when they entered the reaction chamber. In this manner turbu­ lence and dead air space areas were reduced to a minimum.

Insects to be tested were placed in the truncate (square) end of the reaction chamber and allowed to make free movements to the control or test ports. A single two-foot General Electric Cool White fluores­ cent tube (15 watts) yielded light through the ports and attracted beetles to the circular (port) end of the reaction chamber during the test (Fig. 6). In a control experiment, when pure air passed through 19 Fig. 6 .--The port end of the reaction chamber during a test. 21 both ports, the beetles distributed themselves equally on the screen

of the ports. When odor replaced the air at one port, the distribu­

tion of beetles shifted so that a greater number congregated at the

test port if the odor was attractive and a lesser number if it w a s

repellent. After the 30-minute test period, the fluorescent light was turned off and the beetles were removed from the reaction chamber by means of a 250 ml flask connected by TygonGD tubing to a portable

vacuum pump. This device worked efficiently in serving as an

aspirator for gathering the beetles. Beetles could also be rapidly

counted when using this device (Fig. 7). In testing it was felt that

the control port took care of the light bias and any right or left bias was corrected by alternating the test and control ports. Beetles

were presented with three choices, namely, the control port, the test

port, or some neutral area in the test chamber. The response criteria

involved the positive movement of the beetles to the ports with a given

number of beetles counted on the port screen. Each test required 30 minutes. Generally 90-95% of the beetles would move towards the ports but not completely locate on the screens.

Beetles apparently became fatigued if used over and over again in

consecutive 30-minute tests, and the results were not consistent in

repeat tests with the same test sample. Therefore, beetles used more

than once responded more consistently if an hour or more elapsed before

retesting.

Another method of testing materials in the controlled air flow

olfactometer involved using a piece of cotton wick held upright by a Fig. 7.— Portable air pump aspirator pin stuck into a cork. The cotton wick was impregnated with a synthetic lure or plant extract and placed near the port (Fig. 3).

An air flow directed over the impregnated cotton wicks carried the odor down the chamber to the test beetles. Criteria used for posi- tive response involved the presence of the test beetles within a

11/2 inch radius from the center of the wick position at the end of a 30-minute test period.

It was necessary to construct a screened cage 30"x46"x48M in order to house the "controlled air-flow olfactometer" during a test.

This screened cage was used to prevent escape of flying beetles into the room, which occasionally occurred when raising and closing the

chamber. Also, at the time that the tests were initiated Ohio had strict quarantine laws since the beetle was not yet in Franklin County. This large cage contained a 30-inch piece of stockinette material attached to a rectangular frame on one side of the cage in order that insects and materials could be inserted or removed with ease (Fig. 8). Over the head of this screened cage was placed a pair of six foot General Electric Cool White'^(&) fluorescent tubes (40 watts each) to insure uniform light intensity at all areas within the olfactometer (Fig. 9).

Cage type olfactometer

The second type of olfactometer used functioned as a "non- conttolled air flow olfactometer." The test chamber involved a 15-inch cubed box with the top, bottom, and one side made facilitate easy observation. Different synthetic lures or plant Fig. 8.— Screened cage housing 2 port controlled air flow olfactometer.

26 extracts were placed at three corners with the fourth corner as the control or check Beetles were introduced into the center of the floor of the cage and allowed to move freely into any one of the four corners. This test chamber contained an 8" x 8" door to intro­ duce or remove beetles and materials. Small circular air vents were present in the PlexiglasO^ side with a ventilation screen in the ply- wood side to permit aeration (Fig. 10).

Also used as a "non-controlled air flow olfactomer" was a cubicle type screened cage. Each cage was assembled into a 1 foot cube, using

1-foot-square alumir urn window screen panels on back, sides and top and sheet aluminum on tte bottom. A 30-inch piece of stockinette material was attached to a rectangular frame on the cage front permitting easy introduction or removal of insects and materials. The stockinette material was long enough to permit it being tied into a knot (Fig. 11).

After each test, caies were washed with hot, soapy water, rinsed with cool water, and dri^d.

Test insects

During the investigation virtually all beetles used in tests were field collected. 0 /erwintering spring adults were collected in early

April and new summe r adults were collected in early July. Beetles were then stored in pint size ice cream cartons at about 40 F* hundred beetles were placed in each carton with a moistened paper towel,

Cartons were then inspected periodically to make certain that the beetles had adequate moisture on the paper towels. Usually, when beetles were held for 2 1/2 to 3 months, about 80-90% mortality occurred. Fig. 10.--Cage type olfactometer with Plexiglass Fig. 11.— Screen cage type olfactometer. 29

Fig. 12.--Outdoor cereal leaf beetle cage with zippered doorway. 30

Beetles tested 1-4 days after field collection responded best to materials in the olfactometer. Beetles kept 5-6 weeks in cold storage gave decreased response to materials in the olfactometer.

Test beetles were removed from the refrigerator at least 24 hours before testing and were given 5% sucrose solution absorbed on cellu- cotton. This time allowed beetles to adequately warm up to room

temperature and to obtain liquid food and water prior to actual olfac­

tion tests.

During testing great variations in response could usually be attributed to improper insect pre-conditioning or poor light distri­ bution. Experience gained during the testing program indicated that cereal leaf beetle adults were very phototactic and controlled light­

ing was essential in laboratory tests.

Outdoor insect cage

In order to facilitate the availability of cereal leaf beetle adults for testing purposes throughout the year, an outdoor insect

t cage obtained from the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development

Center was utilized. The overall cage dimensions were 9 lxl5'x6l.

Three by 6-foot screened panels were bolted together to form the cage.

Also, a hinged door 2 1 wide x 5 1 high, located near the center of one

side of the cage, provided easy access into or out of the structure.

It was necessary to install inside the doorway stockinette material

split vertically by a 60" zipper to prevent escape of flying beetles when one entered or departed from the cage. The zipper could be operated from inside or outside the cage (Fig. 12). 31

Fijf^ 13.--Interior view of the outdoor cereal leaf beetle cage. The soil within the cage was tilled, planted with oats, wheat and barley, straw-mulched, and watered regularly depending on weather conditions (Fig. 13). After plant growth occurred 10,000 summer adult cereal leaf beetles were introduced into the cage.

These beetles fed on the plants for about 2 to 3 weeks and then went into estivation for the remaining summer months. As autumn and winter approached, it was noticed that many of the beetles had entered into individual straws of the wheat stubble mulch. This behavior was found advantageous since merely collecting the wheat straws containing beetles provided the test insects. The straw was brought into the laboratory, placed on a table under a heat lamp, and beetles soon crawled out from the straws. Beetles were then quickly collected with an aspirator and stored in the refrigerator or used immediately in tests if needed.

USDA synthetic lures

It was felt that possibly certain synthetic lures would be attractive to the adult cereal leaf beetles. At this particular time

(in 1964) there existed an urgent need for an additional survey and detection tool to aid the existing cereal leaf beetle sampling techniques which was usually net sweepings. Consequently, 25 USDA synthetic lures were tested in the laboratory for attractant pro­ perties. Listed on the following sheet with their entomology numbers are the materials which were investigated. 33

Entomology Number Material

1170 Anisyl alcohol

30686 m-Dioxane, 5-ethyl-2-phenethyl- 4-propyl-

11010 Linoleic acid

673 1-Acetomaphthone

21040 Veratrole, 4-allyl- (or Methy- leugenol)

203 Citronellal

24118 Carbostyril, 1-methyl-

4466 2-furaldehyde

222 3-Buten-2-one, 4-(p-methoxyphenyl)- (Anisalacetone)

24225 Ether, butyl vinyl

24483 Nopinene

25001 Eugenol Terpenes (a complex mixture of terpenes having the general formula C^0**16^

25073 beta-Ionone

18142 Alpha-phellandrene

514 Safrole

11510 Fhenethyl alcohol, alpha-ethyl

23404 2-Butanone, 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-

31627 Butyric acid, 3-piperonyl-

15356 Isoeugenol

5514 Butyrophenone, 4-methoxy-

4094 Propriophenone, 4-methoxy- 34

Entomology Number Material

24486 p-Menthane

24594 alpha-Pinene

20991 Benzene, l-allyl-2-butoxy-

206 Geraniol

The USDA synthetic lure stock was diluted at the rate of 0.2 ml of lure per 2 ml of acetone as suggested by Michigan State

University personnel (personal correspondence). The cotton wick control was immersed in acetone and allowed to evaporate as with the given synthetic lure wick_jprior to testing. The completion .of the acetone evaporation could be detected by a smell test.

Listed below are six additional USDA synthetic lures which had been laboratory and field tested by Michigan State University personnel. These six materials showed enough beetle response to warrant further screening by Ohio personnel (Jantz, 1965).

Entomology Number Material

3294 Acetic acid, cyclohexyl ester

4162 Octanoic acid

11747 Unknown

24748 l,2,cyclohexonediol, l-methyl-4- isopropenyl-, 2 acetate

24766 Butyric acid, 2-ethyl-, ethyl ester

30443 Formic acid, decyl ester 35

Plant extraction techniques

The extraction of volatile compounds from oat foliage was made possible by using a "Virtis Freeze-Drying

combination with a "Cenco-Megavac Vacuum methyl cellusolve (ethylene glycol monomethyl ether) and dry ice

(chunks of solid carbon dioxide) in the condenser provided the necessary refrigeration to the vacuum chamber (Fig. 14).

Fresh green oat foliage was clipped by scissors and either

placed into a plastic freezer bag and stored in the deep freeze

until use, or was used immediately after clipping. Oat foliage

was placed in the freeze-drying flask and infrared heating or a hot

water bath outside the flask greatly aided in the rapid plant

dehydration. As the foliage dehydrated under vacuum, volatiles

would move as vapors to the cold surface of the central well,

then condense and immediately freeze. After each plant extraction

the vacuum ports of the freeze-drying apparatus were tightly

stoppered, the central well emptied of the methyl cellusolve-dry

ice solvent, and the mixture of water vapor and volatile fraction

frozen on the outer surface of the well was allowed to thaw and

collect in the bottom flask. Then the collected freeze-dried

samples of volatiles were immediately used in bioassay. The

dehydration of a 40 g oat foliage sample to 10 g occurred in about Fig. 14.— The freeze drying apparatus. o\ 37

2-2 1/2 hours yielding approximately 25 ml of water vapor plus volatile fractions. No explanation is known for the fact that some of the extract (approximately 5 ml) was lost in the process.

Cold water extraction consisted of soaking oat leaves for 24 to 48 hours in a stoppered Erlenmeyer flask. After extraction, the leaves were removed and stripped of the water and the plant residue was discarded.

Hot water extraction involved blanching the oat leaves in boiling distilled water for three minutes to denature destructive enzymes and then quick freezing to cause as much cellular disruption as possible. After thawing, the material was macerated with all the blanching water as the extracting solvent. The plant residue was then discarded. Both cold and hot water extracts were held in the refrigerator before testing.

A few tests were made using beetle feces, dead beetles, and live beetles as lures. Feces and dead beetles were macerated and mixed with distilled water before testing. Live beetles were wrapped in cheese­ cloth prior to testing.

Ten gram samples of fresh green oat foliage were plunged into a

"Waring" blendor containing 125 ml of 80% ethanol. This rapid proces­

sing of the leaves was necessary in order to inactivate enzymatic

reactions, especially the hydrolysis of sucrose. Samples were blended

for 5 minutes after which the macerated foliage and alcohol were poured

into a flask with an additional 25 ml of alcohol used to rinse the 38

"Waring" blendor. This flask was allowed to stand with occasional shaking for a period of about 12 hours. Next the material was filtered using a Buchner funnel which was also rinsed with an additional 25 ml of 80% ethanol.

The filtrate was poured into a separatory funnel with 125 ml of chloroform (Fig. 15). After the layers separated, the aqueous portion contained the amino acids and sugars, while the chloroform portion contained the lipids. The total volume in both portions was reduced by a slow stream of air without the use of heat (Fig. 16).

After the alcohol and chloroform solvents had been removed, the residue was brought to 5 ml in volume with distilled water and then used in bioassay.

Filter paper and agar substrates

Augustine et al. (1964) treated filter paper with an extract from bean plant leaves. Mexican bean beetle biting marks on the filter paper indicated the presence of a short range attractant in the volatile constituents and arrestants from the sugars of the host plant extract.

This filter paper method was employed with the cereal leaf beetle. However, very few feeding marks were observed on the treated filter paper saturated with the oat volatile and a 2% sucrose

solution. Feeding mark examination on the filter paper was made using a binocular microscope. Apparently mandibular action failed to leave distinct feeding prints on the filter paper as was so obvious with the Fig. 15.--Lipid and aqueous portions. Fig. 16.— Volume reduction with an air stream. 41

Mexican bean beetle. However, the cereal leaf beetles were attracted to the filter paper.

Consequently, agar powder prepared from Difco "Bacto-agar" was used as a substrate for the cereal leaf beetle adults in place of filter paper. A 2% agar solution in 100 ml of distilled water was prepared. Acetone and water extracts of oat plants were added on the cold agar surface immediately prior to testing.

Discs 2 mm in diameter were cut out of the cold agar sheet with a cork borer. Discs were cut approximately 0.2 mm thick to encourage beetles to attack the top surface of the agar disc and not the sides.

Disc thickness was accomplished by measuring the desired height of the liquid agar after pouring into a flat bottom glass dish.

There were four agar discs per petri dish and four petri dishes per plastic refrigerator box. Petri dishes were individually covered with screened ice cream carton lids. Four clear plastic refrigerator boxes contained the 16 petri dishes and 64 agar discs. These plastic chambers were suspended on rods above a 2-foot General Electric Cool

White fluorescent light (Fig. 17). The light was placed under the chambers, the beetles remained at the bottom of the petri dish and responded to the agar disc surface as desired. Each plastic refrig­ erator box contained a short glass nipple through the lower left and upper right corners at the ends permitting thorough air ventilation and diffusion. The humidifier consisted of a 1 1/2 gallon bottle 1/3

filled with water and fitted with a fidtted glass aerator placed inside near the bottom. A second hole was drilled in the bottle neck with a

"Y" tube inserted to serve as the humidity outlet. Tygon tubing Fig. 17.--Agar substrates in plastic refrigerator chambers. 43 connected the outlet to the four chambers. The rate of laboratory compressed air bubbled through the bottle determined the percent humidity in the testing chambers. Tests were conducted at 80% RH and a room temperature of 72 F. Tiny 3x3" Taylor "humidiguides" were used to measure the humidity and temperature.

Field traps

The field trap used was obtained from the USDA Methods Improve­ ments Laboratory at.Niles, Michigan. The trap consisted of a canary yellow painted masonite sheet measuring 5 inches wide by 9 inches long with a 1 1/2 inch diameter hole located 1/3 the distance down from the end and in the center of each sheet. A hairpin stapled slightly above the hole to which a cotton wick was attached served as the attractant carrier. A piece of galvanized tin roofing was bent over the upper 1/3 of the trap, protecting the lure-impregnated cotton wick from rainfall

(Fig. 18). "Stickem" (polymerized, isobutene, and butane 97%) was spread on both sides of the lower 2/3 of the masonite sheet with a putty knife. Then the entire trap was wire suspended 2 feet above the host field plant foliage by use of a steel rod bent in an inverted "L" shape. All traps were placed at 25 ft intervals from one another within the test field and suspended 2 ft above the plant foliage.

Field treatments

It was discovered that certain oat plant extracts displayed some attractiveness or arrestiveness to adult cereal leaf beetles under 44

Fig. 18.— A field trap. 45 laboratory tests. Consequently, effort was made to confirm the results of laboratory investigations with field tests.

Oat extracts derived from solvents of 957. alcohol, chloroform, water, and freeze drying processes were both refrigerated and frozen prior to field tests. Extracts were prepared from both green and dried plant foliage in the Insect Physiology laboratory at The Ohio

State University and transported to New Carlisle, Indiana, for field tests. The extracts stored in vials were packed in 4 to 5 pounds of dry ice within a styrofoam ice chest and taken to the field in frozen condition. The refrigerated samples were maintained at refrigerator temperatures until the time of testing.

Listed are the test materials with designated treatment numbers illustrating the solvent or method used, plant condition, and type of storage (Table 2).

Fresh test materials were put out at the beginning of each test day and trapped adult beetle counts were recorded before the end of the test day (Fig. 20). The 20 treatments were replicated four times and randomized within the replicates (Fig. 19). Spring adults were trapped the last weeks of May and summer adults trapped during the first weeks of July. 46

TABLE 2

TEST MATERIALS WITH TREATMENT NUMBERS ILLUSTRATING THE SOLVENT OR METHOD USED, PLANT CONDITION, AND TYPE OF STORAGE IN FIELD INVESTIGATIONS

Treatment Solvent or Plant Type of Number Method Used Condition Storage

1 95% alcohol Green Frozen 2 95% alcohol Green Refrigerated 3 Water Green Frozen 4 Water Green Refrigerated

5 Chloroform Green Frozen 6 Chloroform Green Refrigerated 7 95% alcohol Dried Frozen 8 95% alcohol Dried Refrigerated

9 Water Dried Frozen 10 Water Dried Refrigerated 11 Chloroform Dried Frozen 12 Chloroform Dried Refrigerated

13 Freeze Dried Green Frozen 14 Freeze Dried Green Refrigerated 15 Freeze Dried Dried Frozen 16 Freeze Dried Dried Refrigerated

17 95% alcohol 18 Water 19 Chloroform 20 Check 47

Listed is the schematic field design.

WEST

Black-Top Road

13 8 17 11 19 14 ' 20 16 1 16 2 10 20 9 9 2 15 7 13 6 8 4 18 17 4 11 15 1 16 12 13 5 Dirt 10 6 8 12 18 2 15 1 (NORTH Lane 2 19 4 9 5 7 19 10 17 9 20 3 13 11 8 3 5 18 7 14 10 1 12 11 14 3 5 16 6 17 6 9 12 20 19 18 15 3 14 4

A B C D

Fig. 19.— Schematic field design of replicated and randomized treatments.

Statistical analysis

These data were analyzed at the Statistics Laboratory of the Ohio

Agricultural Research and Development Center at Wooster, Ohio.

Laboratory data from 1965 and 1966 were analyzed by using the normal

curve concerning proportions of beetles responding. In tests where

these laboratory treatments were unbalanced, the necessary statistical

adjustments were incorporated before final computations. If the normal

curve approximation was suitable it was so stated as "OK." If the normal curve could not be used, it was stated "NCNA" meaning normal

curve not applicable. The insufficient sample size due to inavail­

ability of test beetles and the low percentage of beetles responding 48.

Fig. 20.— Collecting adult cereal leaf beetles from field traps. 49 in these tests resulted in the need for certain statistical correction factors.

Field data in 1967 were analyzed by an analysis of variance to test for differences among the means. Specific mean differences were determined by calculating a least significant difference (LSD) accord­ ing to the method of Steel and Torrie (1960). Both the 1967 and 1968 data came from tests where the sample size was adequate and the number of beetles responding was sufficient for satisfactory statistical analysis.

In interpreting the results of these analyses, it was important to learn any significant differences which existed among the treatments and to observe any consistent treatment patterns which might exist over a period of time both in the laboratory and in the field investi­ gations .

Listed in the Appendix are tables of statistical analyses from

1967 and 1968 data. RESULTS - LABORATORY

Olfactometer reliability

Since the degree of reliability of any olfactometer is reflected by the intensity and consistency of response, it was first necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of two types of olfactometers in tests with the adult cereal leaf beetle.

During preliminary testing, many tests were conducted where the number of insects per test and the number of test replications were unequal in size. Consequently the use of statistical correction factors was necessary before evaluating data. The proportions of beetles responding were listed as "OK" or "NCNA" as explained in the Materials and Methods Section.

TABLE 3

RESPONSE OF 7/7/65 FIELD COLLECTED UNSEXED ADULTS, TESTED 7/10/65 IN A CAGE TYPE OLFACTOMETER, TO SUCCULENT OAT LEAVES

Test Repli- Number Number of Percent Confidence Normal Materials cations of Test Beetles Beetle Limits Curve ______Insects Responding Response 95%______

Oat leaves 4 1390 753 54.1 51.5-56.7 OK Control 4 4170 104 2.4 2.0-2.9 OK

50 51

As shown in Table 3, adult beetles responded quite significantly

to oat leaves in preference to the control in the cage type olfacto­

meter.

TABLE 4

RESPONSE OF 7/7/65 FIELD COLLECTED UNSEXED ADULTS, TESTED 7/10/65, IN A CONTROLLED AIR FLOW OLFACTOMETER

Test Repli­ Number Number of Percent Confidence Normal Materials cations of Test Beetles Beetle Limits Curve Insects Responding Response 95% - - Oat leaves 2 450 144 32.0 27.6-36.3 OK Control 2 900 108 12.0 9.8-14.1 OK

Likewise as shown in Table 4, adult beetles responded signifi­

cantly to oat leaves in preference to the control in the controlled

air flow olfactometer. After observing subsequent beetle preference

response to the known host plant oats in both types of olfactometers,

attention was next turned to testing USDA synthetic lures.

USDA synthetic lures

During this particular testing period, beetle availability was

limited and some tests were conducted where the number of insects per

test and number of test replications were unequal in size. Likewise,

the use of statistical correction factors was necessary before

evaluating data. Only the percent of the proportions of beetles

responding to a test material and its suitability to the normal curve

is given in Table 5. 52 TABLE 5

RESPONSE OF FIELD COLLECTED UNSEXED ADULTS, TESTED IN CONTROLLED AIR FLOW AND CAGE TYPE OL­ FACTOMETERS, TO USDA SYNTHETIC LURES

Test Percent Beetle Suitability of Normal Materials3, Response Curve (Proportions of Beetles Responding)

1170 4.8 NCNA 30686 4.9 NCNA 11010 1.9 NCNA 673 5.3 NCNA 21040 9.2 OK

203 10.2 OK 24118 5.8 NCNA 4466 5.9 NCNA 222 4.0 NCNA 24225 4.2 NCNA

24483 1.1 NCNA 25001 4.7 NCNA 25073 3.6 NCNA 18142 2.6 NCNA 514 5.8 NCNA

11510 5.9 NCNA 23404 6.2 NCNA 31627 2.9 NCNA 15356 3.8 NCNA 5514 4.5 NCNA

4094 8.2 NCNA 24486 6.3 NCNA 24594 4.2 NCNA 20991 3.7 NCNA 206 7.6 NCNA

Control 6.7 NCNA

See pages 33 and 34 for names of test materials. 53

The screening of 25 USDA synthetic lures resulted in no particular lure appearing outstanding. Only citronellal and methy- leugenol gave any significant results in attracting adult cereal leaf beetles. Many of the lures attracted fewer beetles than the control, indicating a possible repellent action. However, it is quite possible that lower concentrations of these synthetic lures might have proven attractive rather than repellent to the beetles. Byrne et al. (1966) reported that alfalfa produced a volatile substance which elicited an olfactory response by the alfalfa weevil. A 0.0257o dilution of the substance elicited a maximum weevil response with the undiluted form causing repellency.

Live beetles, dead beetles, and beetle feces

Subsequent preliminary tests involved exposing test beetles to other live beetles, dead beetles, and their feces. Test insects were

field collected and unsexed with the controlled air flow olfactometer used. Best response occurred when the beetle feces were presented as an attractant followed by live beetles, dead beetles, and the check.

However, beetle response was very low in all treatments. Thus, further

tests of this type were abandoned in order to examine host and non­ host plant preference.

Host and non-host plants

Tests were conducted to determine whether cereal leaf beetle adults could be attracted to legumes as well as to grasses in the

olfactometer. Treatments involved the fresh succulent plant leaves of the particular plant in question. 54

TABLE 6

RESPONSE OF 4/20/66 FIELD COLLECTED UNSEXED ADULTS, TESTED 4/25/66 IN A CAGE TYPE OLFACTOMETER, TO LEAVES OF GINKGO, OATS, RED CLOVER, WHEAT, ALFALFA, AND RED KIDNEY BEANS

Test Repli­ Number Number of Percent Confidence Normal Materials cations of Test Beetles Beetle Limits Curve Insect-s Responding Response 95%

Ginkgo leaves 4 200 3 1.5 0.1- 3.1 NCNA Oat leaves 4 200 96 48.0 41.0-54.9 OK Red Clover leaves 4 200 17 8.5 4.6-12.3 NCNA Check 4 200 12 6.0 2.7- 9.2 NCNA Wheat leaves 4 200 62 31.0 24.0-37.4 OK Alfalfa leaves 4 200 16 8.0 4.2-11.7 NCNA Red Kidney bean leaves 4 200 8 4.0 1 .2- 6.8 NCNA Check 4 200 10 5.0 1.9- 8.0 NCNA

Higher beetle response occurred at the oat and wheat leaves than

any of the other treatments (Table 6). Beetles would randomly wander

to leaves such as ginkgo, but would fail to remain on or near this

leaf. Also, red clover, alfalfa, and red kidney bean leaves did not

reflect feeding marks. Oat and wheat leaves were severely fed upon.

Oat host plant studies

The next test involved the response to different stages of plant

growth. Oat plants 14 days old (4-5 inches tall, deep green color);

21 days old (7-8 inches tall, light green color), and 28 days old 55

(9-10 inches tall, greenish yellow color) were tested for

attraction properties.

TABLE 7

RESPONSE OF 5/22/66 OUTDOOR CAGE UNSEXED ADULTS, TESTED 5/25/66 IN CAGE TYPE OLFACTOMETER, TO DARK GREEN, LIGHT GREEN, AND GREEN'-YELLOW OAT LEAVES

Test Repli- Number Number of Percent Confidence Normal Materials cations of Test Beetles Beetle Limits Curve Insects Responding Response 95%

Dark green leaves 4 200 55 27.5 21.3-33.6 OK Light green leaves 4 200 34 17.0 11.7-22.2 OK Green yellow leaves 4 200 22 11.0 6.6-15.3 OK

Check 4 200 7 3.5 0.9- 6.0 NCNA

Adults were attracted to all stages of plant maturity (Table 7).

However, the most favorable response was recorded on the deep green color youngest plants. Severe feeding damage resulted on the deep green and light green plants with less feeding damage on the greenish yellow plants. The younger plant leaves were more palatable and attractive to the adult beetles during the test.

It was assumed that if a volatile substance was responsible for olfactory attraction, the volatile could be removed by drying the plant leaves. Consequently, 14-day-old oat leaves were dried by placing the blades between sheets of blotting paper for 30 days. 56

TABLE 8

RESPONSE OF 5/6/66 OUTDOOR CAGE UNSEXED ADULTS, TESTED 5/9/66 IN A CAGE TYPE OLFACTOMETER, TO DRIED, SUCCULENT, AND MATURE OAT LEAVES

Test Repli­ Number Number of Percent Confidence Normal Materials cations of Test Beetles Beetle Limits Curve Insects Responding Response 95%

Dried oat leaves 4 100 5 5.0 0.7- 9.2 NCNA Succulent oat leaves 4 100 36 36.0 26.5-45.4 OK Mature oat leaves 4 100 20 20.0 12.1-27.8 OK

Check 4 100 6 6.0 1.3-10.6 NCNA

Succulent- oat leaves were definitely favored by the adult

beetles (Table 8). Beetles moved to the succulent oat leaves and

usually began feeding immediately on the blades. Mature oat leaves

were the second choice of the beetles with the dried and check treat­ ments attracting less insects. Several of the beetles crawled to the

olfactometer top or sides and could not be counted as a response.

Additional plant condition tests were conducted to determine

whether spring and summer adults preferred the same plant conditions

(Table 9, Statistical Analysis in Appendix Table 28).

Green oat leaves were preferred over the other treatments by both the spring and summer adults. Beetle response was practically

immediate and feeding occurred shortly thereafter. Yellow plants were

the second choice and brown plants the third choice. Severe feeding occurred on the green oat leaves. It did seem that the summer adults 57 were more active than the spring adults in overall response. However there was no statistically significant difference in response between spring and summer adults.

TABLE 9

RESPONSE OF FIELD COLLECTED UNSEXED SPRING AND SUMMER ADULTS, TESTED IN A CAGE TYPE OLFACTOMETER, TO VARIOUS OAT LEAF CONDITIONS

Type Number of Number of Percent Treatment Response After Adults Test Replica­ 30 Minutes Insects tions Fresh Green Fresh Green Dried Yellow Check

Spring 100 4 36.2 10.7 16.7 5.2 Summer 100 4 55.7 9.2 15.0 3.0

Freeze dried extracts collected from fourteen-day-old succulent oat plants were offered to beetles in a cage type olfactometer.

TABLE 10

RESPONSE OF 7/14/65 FIELD COLLECTED UNSEXED ADULTS, TESTED 9/17/65 IN A CAGE TYPE OLFACTOMETER, TO FREEZE DRIED OAT EXTRACTS AND DISTILLED WATER

Test Repli- Number Number of Percent Confidence Normal Materials cations of Test Beetles Beetle Limits Curve Insects Responding Response 957.

Freeze dried oat extract 4 60 18 30 18.4-41.5 OK Distilled water 4 60 0 0 0-0 NCNA

Although the number of test insects was relatively low (Table 10),

these beetles immediately responsed and moved upon the filter paper 58 impregnated with freeze dried oat extract. Beetles lowered both their head and antennae when in contact with this filter paper. In contrast, beetles moved on and off the filter paper impregnated with distilled water.

Next, freeze dried extracts of 14-day-old succulent oat plants and 28-day-old mature oat plants were compared with distilled water.

TABLE 11

RESPONSE OF 7/14/65 FIELD COLLECTED UNSEXED ADULTS, TESTED 9/23/65 IN A CONTROLLED AIR FLOW OLFACTOMETER, TO FREEZE DRIED EXTRACTS OF MATURE AND SUCCULENT OATS, AND DISTILLED WATER

Test Repli- Number Number of Percent Confidence Normal Materials cations of Test Beetles Beetle Limits Curve Insects Responding Response 95%

Freeze dried succulent oat volatile 2 380 136 35.7 30.9-40.6 OK Distilled water 2 380 60 15.7 12.1-19.4 OK

Freeze dried mature oat volatile 2 90 22 24.4 15.5-33.3 OK Distilled water 2 90 4 4.4 0.1-8.7 NCNA

Oat volatiles were more attractive than the distilled water in these tests. The freeze dried succulent oat volatiles were preferred over freeze dried mature oat volatiles as shown in Table 11.

Further testing involved comparing the response of both spring and summer adults in a cage type olfactometer with freeze dried, cold water, and hot water oat extracts with check. 59

TABLE 12

RESPONSE OF FIELD COLLECTED UNSEXED ADULTS, TESTED IN A CAGE TYPE OLFACTOMETER, TO VARIOUS OAT PLANT EXTRACTS OBTAINED BY DIFFERENT METHODS

Type Number of Number of Percent Treatment Response Adults Test Repli­ After 30 Minutes Insects cations Freeze Cold Hot dried water water Check

Spring 100 4 17.2 16.5 18.7 5.0 Summer 100 4 20.2 25.0 25.0 4.2

Both spring and summer adults responded to freeze dried, cold water, and hot water extracts in preference to the check (Table 12,

Statistical Analysis in Appendix Table 30). It was surprising to ob­ serve that the hot water extract seemed to be more preferred by the beetles. Summer adults responded significantly greater than spring adults and the oat extracts were significantly preferred over the check.

Tests were next set up to compare spring and summer adult response in a cage type olfactometer with oat extracts from water, chloroform, and alcohol.

TABLE 13

RESPONSE OF FIELD COLLECTED UNSEXED ADULTS, TESTED IN A CAGE TYPE OLFACTOMETER, TO VARIOUS OAT EXTRACTS

Type Number of Number of Percent Treatment Response After Adults Test Replica­ 30 Minutes Insects tions Water CHCI3 Alcohol Check Spring 100 4 19.0 2.0 4.5 17.2 Summer 100 4 33.0 2.0 5.7 10.5 60

Beetle response was greatest toward the water oat extract and

check treatments (Table 13, Statistical Analysis in Appendix Table

29). A low response occurred with the chloroform and alcohol oat

extracts. There was no significant difference among spring and summer

adult response to the treatments. However, water and check response

were significantly greater than the chloroform and alcohol response.

The controlled air flow olfactometer was used to test summer adult

preference to oat extracts of various solvents using different extrac­

tion methods.

TABLE 14

RESPONSE OF 7/12/68 FIELD COLLECTED UNSEXED ADULTS, TESTED 7/15/68 IN A CONTROLLED AIR FLOW OLFACTOMETER, TO OAT EXTRACTS FROM THE VARIOUS SOLVENTS AND PLANT EXTRACTION METHODS ) Solvent Choice Number of Beetle Response Percent and Port Test After Total Location Insects 30 Minutes Response

Water oat extract 30 22 73 Check 6 20 Freeze dried extract 30 18 60 Check 8 27 Water 30 10 33 Check 8 27 Benzene 30 9 30 Check 8 27 Methyl alcohol 30 7 23 Check - 13 95% ethyl alcohol 30 6 20 Check 3 10 Hexane 30 5 16 Check 4 13 Acetone 30 5 16 Check 4 13 CHC13 30 3 10 Check 2 7 Pet. ether 30 3 10 Check 5 16 61 Summer adults responded more positively toward the water oat ex­ tract and freeze dried extract than to any other treatment (Table 14).

Descending order of preference is as follows: water, freeze dried, wateraalone, benzene, methyl alcohol, 95% ethyl alcohol, hexane, ace­ tone, chloroform, and petroleum ether. However the checks gave a relatively high response.

Water extracts from green oat plants were frozen (0 F.), refrig­ erated (40 F.), and held at room temperature (72 F.) before testing beetle response. Particular interest involved the effect of storage on the response of both spring and summer adults. Effort was made to determine the effects of storage on the length of time that beetles

could continue to be attracted.

Spring adults responded greatest during the first 10 minutes to room temperature, refrigerated, and frozen oat extracts (Fig. 21).

The initial response was to room temperature, refrigerated, check, and frozen extracts. However, the check preference decreased after

the initial response and leveled off over the 120 minutes. The other

treatments decreased in attractiveness after the first 10 minutes.

The active"fraction" appears to be most attractive at room temperatures.

Cooler temperatures appear to reduce attraction initially until the

extract warms up.

Initially, summer adults responded similarly to the spring adults

(Fig. 22). Peak response was reached at 5 minutes and decreased thereafter.

Light effects

During early preliminary laboratory tests it was discovered that

summer adult cereal leaf beetles were phototactic. Unequal lighting 62

100

frozen ______refrigerated room temperature ------check

at 15 m _ , g 14

S 13

60 120 Minutes

Fig. 21.--Accumulative response in various time intervals of 5/10/68 field collected unsexed adults, tested 5/11/68 in a cage type olfactometer, to different storage conditions of water solutions of green oat plant extracts. i. 22.“-AccumulativeFig.response in various timeintervals of Percent Total Beetle Response 17 18 - 20 19 ■ 15 16 1 1 13 . 14 - 10 12 IOC 4-1 8 9 4 r 5 6 7. 21 3. 1

- -

-

extracts. conditionsof watersolutions greenof oat plant 7/3/68 fieldcollected unsexed adults, tested 7/4/68 ina cagetype olfactometer, todifferentstorage 1 3 60 30 10 5 Minutes \ check — refrigerated «— — ______t— 120 r0omtemperature frozen

63

64 in the room as a result of huge windows caused beetles to orient towards the light regardless of the attractant on test. Therefore, tests were set up to observe the effects of light on spring adult response in a controlled air flow olfactometer with freeze dried oat extract treatments. Counts were made at 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, and 20 minutes.

Results in Figure 23 provided evidence that spring adults are phototactic as was observed with summer adults. A significant response occurred when the lights were present in the olfactometer. Unfortun­ ately, response to treatments was rather low. However, beetles had to travel 3 feet to this type olfactometer in contrast to 1 foot in the cage type olfactometer to give a recorded response. Most of the beetles moved only a few inches or not at all in total darkness.

Filter paper and agar substrates

Discovering from the previous laboratory tests that freeze dried and water extracts of oat foliage yielded positive olfactory response from beetles, it was decided to treat the surface of agar substrates in an attempt to record any feeding marks that might occur (Table 15).

By placing the lights under the petri dishes, responses were confined to the bottom of the dishes and on the agar. The agar treated with oat extracts attracted more beetles than the check. Beetles rapidly flexed their antennae and performed strange foot movements when

r moving toward and at the oat extract treatments. Feeding marks on the agar were difficult to separate from clay or foot marks. Few beetles appeared to be biting the agar. Percent Total Beetle Response 100 Fig. 23.--Accumulativeresponse in various timeintervals of 10 11 12 13L 15. 16 17- 20 - . - 5/27/66in acontrolled flowair olfactometer, to 5/25/66 fieldcollected unsexed adults, tested freeze driedextractsoat withand lights. without (Normalcurve95% - OK or NCNA) Minutes without lightswithout ih lightswith

66

TABLE 15

RESPONSE OF 7/7/66 FIELD COLLECTED UNSEXED ADULTS TO WATER AND ACETONE EXTRACTS OF SUCCULENT DARK GREEN OAT LEAVES UPON AGAR SUBSTRATES AND A CHECK AGAR SUBSTRATE

Test Repli­ Number Number of “ Percent Confidence Normal Materials cations of Test Beetles Beetle Limits Curve Insects Responding Response 95%

Oat water extract 4 160 53 33.1 25.8-40.4 OK Oat acetone extract 4 160 42 26.2 19.4-33.0 OK Check 8 320 14 4.3 2 .1- 6.6 NCNA

Response between sexes

The next question arose as to whether plant preference differed

between the two sexes. Field collected overwintering spring adults

were often 60-70% females in a population. Therefore, beetles had to

be sexed and tested as a 50:50 ratio to determine difference between

response of males and females.

The best method of sexing the beetles involved separation during

the act of copulation (Figure 24), which shows the male uppermost.

In addition (Myser and Schultz, 1967) discovered a method for sexing

the beetles based on morphological characters. They found that the

males were flat or concave in the intercoxal process of the first

abdominal sternite, whereas the females were humped or convex at this

process. This technique of sexing assisted in the tests. However,

it was still time consuming, since one needed a binocular scope to

individually sex each beetle. 67

Fig. 24.--Adult cereal leaf beetles during the act of copulation. 68

TABLE 16

RESPONSE OF 4/20/66 FIELD COLLECTED SEXED ADULTS,TESTED 4/24/66 IN A CAGE TYPE OLFACTOMETER, TO DARK GREEN OAT LEAVES

Test Repli­ Number Number of Percent Confidence Normal Materials cations of Test Beetles Beetle Limits Curve Insects Responding Response 95%

Dark green oat leaves 8 2408$'s 39 16.2 11.5-20.9 OK Check 8 24(®'s 5 2.0 0.2-3.8 NCNA Dark green oat leaves 8 240^f,g 29 12.0 7.9-16.2 OK Check 8 2 4 0 # t s 17 7.0 3.8-10.3 NCNA

There was no significant difference in response to test materials between the two sexes (Table 16). Males showed a trend to be more exploratory than females.

Antennectomy studies

The antennae of adult cereal leaf beetles are composed of 12 segments. The first segment is small and when in a natural position is somewhat hidden by the second segment (Fig. 25). The second segment is thick and globular. All successive segments are almost equal, cylindrical, and provided with hairs. Observations were made on response of beetles having both antennae intact, the distal 1/2 of both antennae removed, and both antennae completely removed.

However, it may be quite possible that the distal 5 to 7 segments were removed rather than the distal 6 segments. Segments were rapidly removed with a single edge razor blade. 69

TABLE 17

RESPONSE OF 7/4/68 FIELD COLLECTED UNSEXED ADULTS,TESTED 7/6/68 IN A CAGE TYPE OLFACTOMETER, TO GREEN OAT LEAVES. BEETLES WERE IN VARIOUS STAGES OF ANTENNECTOMY

Insect Number of Number Beetles Percent Total Treatment Test Responding After Response Insects 30 Minutes

Both antennae removed 25 4 16 Distal 1/2 of both antennae removed 25 10 40 No antennae removed 25 18 72

It was interesting to observe that the beetles with approxi­ mately 1/2 of the distal part of both antennae removed oriented surprisingly well to the succulent green oat plant leaves (Table

17). Orientation decreased when both antennae were removed. Fig. 25.--Antennae of adult cereal leaf beetle (greatly enlarged), a.— X360; b.— X970. RESULTS - FIELD

Trap reliability

Various kinds of field traps were tried by Indiana and Michigan personnel shortly after the entry of the cereal leaf beetle. These early traps were often ineffective and caught only a few beetles. It was not until 1965, that "canary yellow" was found to be the most attractive color for adult cereal leaf beetles (Jantz, 1965). Utiliz­ ing this color plus "stickem," the field trap as described in the

Materials and Methods Section was built by the Methods Improvement

Station of the Plant Pest Control Division at Niles, Michigan. After development, this trap was used by Michigan and Ohio personnel as the

field trap in attractant and arrestant studies. During the 1967 season of Ohio field tests, statistical analysis revealed a mean per trap per day of 3.5 beetles from the check and 8.2 beetles from an oat plant extract (Table 27). However, daily catches often would range

from 0 to 30 beetles per trap depending on the weather conditions.

USDA synthetic lures

The 25 USDA synthetic lures previously tested in the laboratory were field tested. None of the lures attracted more beetles than the

control or checks. No further effort was spent on field screening

these lures.

71 72

Attention was next turned to testing six additional USDA synthetic lures. These six USDA lures gave the best beetle response out of 431 lures field tested by Michigan personnel in 1965 (Jantz,

1965).

TABLE 18

RESPONSE OF ADULT CEREAL LEAF BEETLES TO VARIOUS USDA SYNTHETIC LURES TESTED 6/2/66 IN A WHEAT FIELD NEAR NEW CARLISLE,INDIANA

Test Mean Number of Materials3, Replications Beetles Trapped

3294 2 12.0 4162 2 12.0 11747 2 11.5 24748 2 10.5 24766 2 10.5 30443 2 12.0 Control 2 8.5 Check 2 9.0

cL See page 34 for names of test materials.

As shown in Table 18, the number of beetles trapped were essentially the same among the six USDA candidate lures. However, all lure catches were higher than the control and check treatments which does support the Michigan findings. At that time, I did not feel that these six lures showed enough promise for further replica­ tions. Effort was shifted to testing various plant extracts which had looked good in previous laboratory investigations. 73

Oat host plant studies

It was discovered in laboratory tests that plant condition, method of extraction, and method of storage were all influential in determining oat plant preference. Consequently, the final step involved confirming the results of laboratory investigations with field tests.

Tests were conducted during the spring and summer months of 1967 at New Carlisle, Indiana, in wheat and oat fields.

Treatments were applied at 10:00 AM and adult counts taken at

11:00 AM and 4:00 PM (See Table 19). The temperature was 70 F. and the wheat plants were 18 inches high.

A few adult beetles were caught one hour after treatments were

•employed. Most accumulation of adults occurred up until 4:00 PM.

More beetles were trapped than expected in spite of a strong wind from the southeast at 15 to 20 miles per hour. The beetles were not removed from the board until the final 4:00 PM reading. A common putty knife worked well when removing the beetles from the sticky board traps. It was noted that attraction was slightly greater toward the green oat extract water solvent and freeze dried process than the other treatments. 74

TABLE 19

RESPONSE OF OVERWINTERING ADULT CEREAL LEAF BEETLES TO VARIOUS OAT PLANT TREATMENTS TESTED 5/26/67 IN A WINTER WHEAT FIELD NEAR NEW CARLISLE, INDIANA

Treatment Replicate Counts at: Accumula­ Number3, A B C D 11 :00 AM 4:00 PM tive Total Trap Board Side Count East West East West

1 4 6 2 4 2 5 4 12 16 2 3 5 4 2 1 6 5 9 14 3 8 7 5 1 0 11 3 18 21 4 3 2 5 2 0 6 2 10 12 5 2 3 4 0 4 0 4 5 9

6 3 1 1 1 0 2 0 6 6 7 2 3 3 1 1 3 2 7 9 8 3 2 2 2 0 2 1 8 9 9 9 6 3 4 1 12 4 18 22 10 5 4 4 3 1 10 1 15 16

11 2 1 2 0 0 1 0 5 5 12 3 1 1 2 2 1 4 3 7 13 8 4 3 4 2 8 7 12 19 14 7 8 3 6 2 10 3 21 24 15 6 6 2 3 1 10 2 15 17

16 4 4 5 3 1 11 2 14 16 17 3 3 4 1 1 8 1 10 11 18 4 3 2 4 0 5 2 11 13 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 4 3 1 5 1 5 4 9 13

See page 46 for treatment number identification. 75

TABLE 20

RESPONSE OF OVERWINTERING ADULT CEREAL LEAF BEETLES TO VARIOUS OAT PLANT TREATMENTS TESTED 5/27/67 IN A WINTER WHEAT FIELD NEAR NEW CARLISLE, INDIANA

Treatment Replicate Counts at: Accumula­ Number3- A B C D 11:00 AM 4:00 PM tive Total Trap Board Side Count East West East West

1 2 0 2 2 0 3 2 4 6 2 2 3 4 1 1 5 4 6 10 3 9 4 2 2 0 10 1 16 17 4 6 2 2 0 1 6 3 7 10 5 2 3 4 2 2 3 3 8 11

6 1 2 2 1 1 3 2 4 6 7 2 0 1 2 2 0 2 3 5 8 2 1 3 0 2 1 2 4 6 9 6 4 2 1 3 8 4 9 13 10 7 3 3 4 4 12 5 12 17

11 1 1 0 3 2 3 2 3 5 12 2 3 1 1 1 1 3 4 7 13 7 2 1 3 3 5 6 7 13 14 6 3 3 4 2 8 2 14 16 15 7 4 2 2 2 9 3 12 15

16 5 3 4 3 3 10 4 11 15 17 2 1 0 3 2 3 2 4 6 18 3 3 2 2 3 6 3 7 10 19 1 1 0 2 1 2 2 2 4 20 2 2 1 2 1 4 2 5 7

aSee page 46 for treatment number identification.

The total beetle counts were slightly less than the preceding

day probably due to cooler temperatures at approximately 65 F. or

less. New treatments had been put out in the morning at approxi­

mately 10:00 AM. A refrigerator in the Purdue Mobile Trailer kept

the samples either frozen or refrigerated as desired. The water 76 solvent seemed to attract slightly more beetles than the other treatments. Alcohol appeared undesirable in beetle attraction.

Beetles were trapped primarily on the west side of the trap board.

After testing spring adults in wheat fields, the same treat­ ments were used for summer adult response in oat fields.

TABLE 21

RESPONSE OF NEW SUMMER ADULT CEREAL LEAF BEETLES TO VARIOUS OAT PLANT TREATMENTS TESTED 7/12/67 IN AN OAT FIELD NEAR NEW CARLISLE, INDIANA

Treatment Replicate Counts at: Accumu­ Number3 A B C D 11:00 AM 4:00 PM lative Trap Board Side Total North South North South Count

1 4 5 2 2 8 1 11 2 13 2 4 6 5 1 9 0 15 1 16 3 8 8 4 3 8 2 20 3 23 4 12 9 9 2 7 2 28 4 32 5 2 3 2 0 1 0 6 1 7

6 3 1 4 0 1 0 5 3 8 7 2 3 3 2 3 0 8 2 10 8 3 1 4 1 2 1 5 4 9 9 10 6 4 5 12 2 20 5 25 10 7 5 5 2 8 0 18 1 19

11 3 2 2 0 0 0 3 4 7 12 2 2 1 0 0 0 1 4 5 13 9 7 5 2 12 3 18 5 23 14 9 11 4 3 10 2 24 3 27 15 6 9 2 4 10 0 20 1 21

16 7 7 5 2 8 0 18 3 21 17 3 4 3 2 5 0 10 2 12 18 6 6 5 4 11 1 18 3 21 19 2 3 2 3 1 0 5 5 10 20 4 2 2 2 2 0 6 4 10 cl See page 46 for treatment number identification. 77

The wind came from the northwest at about 20 miles per hour.

Most of the adults were trapped on the north side of the board.

The response data received from these treatments were analyzed at the statistics laboratory at Wooster, Ohio. As shown in the

Appendix Table 23, the differences among the type plant condition and solvents (methods of extraction) were significant, whereas dif­ ferences among the types storage were nonsignificant. The fresh succulent plants were significantly better than dried brown plants and the water solution and freeze dried extracts were significantly better than chloroform and 95% alcohol extracts. However, there was no significant difference between frozen and refrigerated stored extracts.

As indicated in the Appendix Table 24, the plant-storage combi­ nation was significant with the green refrigerated extract better than the green frozen extract. The interaction of solvent times plant-storage combination was not significant.

The LSD's as shown in the Appendix Tables 25 and 26, indicate that the green plant was significantly better than the dried plant in beetle preference. Also, the refrigerated water extract was best since it gave the highest mean of trapped beetles. The chloroform - extract attracted significantly fewer beetles when stored by refrigeration than when frozen. 78

TABLE 22

RESPONSE OF NEW SUMMER ADULT CEREAL LEAF BEETLES TO VARIOUS OAT PLANT. TREATMENTS TESTED 7/13/67 IN AN OAT FIELD NEAR NEW CARLISLE,. INDIANA

Treatment Replicate Counts at: Accumu- Numbera A B C -D - 11:00 AM 4 : 0 0 P M " lative _ Trap Board Side Total North South North South Couni

1 6 3 3 2 5 2 8 6 14 2 5 4 3 4 8 0 12 4 16 3 12 8 9 2 12 1 28 3 31 4 10 9 6 6 14 2 26 5 31 5 4 . 5 6 6 10 0 20 1 21

6 3 1 3 3 3 0 7 3 10 7 2 3 3 0 6 0 8 0 8 8 5 6 3 2 6 0 14 2 16 9 8 6 4 1 11 0 19 0 19 10 11 7 2 2 7 1 15 7 22

11 7 2 2 2 5 0 10 3 13 12 2 4 1 1 4 0 8 0 8 13 6 5 3 3 7 1 14 3 17 14 9 8 5 3 12 0 20 4 24 15 9 11 2 4 11 1 25 1 26

16 7 5 4 3 5 2 12 7 19 17 6 1 1 0 4 1 7 1 8 18 9 5 7 7 10 1 23 5 28 19 4 1 0 0 2 0 4 1 5 20 3 3 2 2 5 0 8 2 10

0 See page 46 for treatment number identification. 79

After study of the beetle means of the individual treatments, it was interesting to discover that water alone yielded 6.93 beetles in contrast to alcohol alone yielding 4.24 beetles and chloroform alone yielding 2.11 beetles (Table 27).

It appeared that the water could be considered an attractant or arrestant, whereas the alcohol and chloroform were repellent to cereal leaf beetle adults. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Field collected unsexed adult cereal leaf beetles responded significantly in olfactometers when oat leaves as lures were com­ pared with controls. Of the twenty-five USDA synthetic lures screened in the laboratory for attractant or arrestant properties, only citronellal and methyleugenol elicited enough beetle response to warrant further testing.

Subsequent preliminary laboratory tests indicated the following order of attractiveness: beetle feces > live beetles > dead beetles > control. However, most treatments usually had a very low overall beetle response resulting in the normal curve not being applicable from a statistical standpoint.

Host preference tests indicated that adult cereal leaf beetles have a restricted host range. Beetles consistently responded to oat and wheat leaves over red clover, ginkgo, alfalfa, and red kidney bean leaves. No legumes were found attractive.

The host plant condition was very important in laboratory tests.

Succulent green leaves were always preferred over mature yellow leaves and the control by both spring and summer adults. Also, freeze dried oat extracts were significantly preferred over distilled water by both spring and summer adults. 81

Various oat plant extracts were evaluated in the controlled air flow olfactometer. Order of beetle preference was oat extracts from water > freeze dried > water alone > benzene > methyl alcohol> 957o ethyl alcohol > hexane > acetone > chloroform > petroleum ether.

Usually, the greater the volatility of the solvent, the less the attractancy in laboratory olfactometer tests.

Highest beetle response usually occurred during the first 5-10 minutes of an olfactometer test. Freeze dried volatiles were pre­ ferred to distilled water extracts initially, but lost attractiveness after 10-15 minutes. The "active fraction or fractions" are appar­ ently short-lived because of high volatility. Beetles responded slightly to agar substrates treated with water extracts of oats but

failed to leave distinct feeding marks in the agar. Beetles did

display antennal and foot movements on oat extract agar substrates.

Beetles are phototactic. Light was found to be a definite

auxiliary stimulus in laboratory olfactometer tests. Response of male and female beetles was similar. Also, antennae studies revealed

surprisingly good response to oat treatments when the distal halves

of both antennae were removed. Orientation decreased greatly when

both antennae were removed.

Field investigations revealed that extracts of fresh succulent

oat plants were significantly more attractive than dried brown oat

plants, and that water plus freeze dried extractions were significantly

better than chloroform and 95% alcohol extractions. There was no

significant difference between frozen and refrigerated storage of 82 extracts. No explanation is known for the fact that the refrigerated extract of green oats was more attractive than was the frozen extract of green oa ts . The most attractive test material was the refrigerated water extract of fresh oat plants.

These results indicate that water alone could be a possible

"arrestant" and in combination with certain plant substances a pos­ sible "attractant" for adult cereal leaf beetles. It is well known that under certain weather conditions plants transpire greatly. There undoubtedly exists in nature a water gradient with molecules moving from a higher concentration to a lower concentration. The water molecules could possibly carry the plant arrestant or attractant which the beetles would detect through their highly refined receptor system. Beetles would then orient toward the source and move to the water-odor origin.

The following hypothesis is proposed:

1. The volatility of a given plant substance could be influenced by its reaction with water. Water could serve as a catalyst in the decomposition of a plant substance resulting in greater volatility.

Water is the best solvent known because more substances dissolve in

it than in any other solvent. Certain substances dissolved in water

could readily ionize because water molecules by virtue of their own dipolar charged nature could act as small magnets attracting the

ions of the plant substance, thereby weakening the attraction in the material itself. 2. Water molecules could act as a carrier of "odor" molecules.

A moving humid air flow would hydrotransport the plant odor molecules away from the plant. Water does tend to form hydrogen bonds which link relatively negative atoms like oxygen, nitrogen, fluorine, or chlorine present in one molecule, to the relatively positive hydrogen atoms in another.

Consideration must be given to temperature, humidity, wind velocity, light, insect stage, plant condition, and other factors.

Then after recognizing that various stimuli do exist; farmers can forecast the stage of crops most susceptible to attack, survey teams can more accurately detect this pest in uninfested regions, and entomologists can best wage the war of pest destruction. APPEN DIX

84 APPENDIX

TABLE 23

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF ADULT CEREAL LEAF BEETLE RESPONSE IN 1967 FIELD TESTS AT NEW CARLISLE, INDIANA, TO VARIOUS TREATMENTS OF OAT PLANT EXTRACTS

Source DF MS F

Replication 3 225.71 33.313 Solvent 3 325.67 48.067** Plant 1 71.31 10.525** Storage 1 .01 .001 ns

Solvent x Plant 3 13.67 Solvent x Storage 3 19.03 2.809* Plant x Storage 1 .88 Time 7 1742.32

Mean 1 5630.70 Error 345 6.77 Total 368

**Significant at the .01 level of probability

^Significant at the .05 level of probability

ns Nonsignificant 86

TABLE 24

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF ADULT CEREAL LEAF BEETLE RESPONSE IN 1967 FIELD TESTS AT NEW CARLISLE, INDIANA, TO VARIOUS TREATMENTS OF OAT PLANT EXTRACTS

Source DF MS F

Replication 3 216.48 31.530 Solvent 3 410.21 59.746** Plant-Storage Combination 4 20.28 2.954*

Solvent x Plant-Storage Combination 11 11.00 1.603 ns Time 7 2080.20 Mean 1 6598.21

Error 408 6.86 Total 437

“Significant at the .01 level of probability

Significant at the .05 level of probability

ns Nonsignificant 8.7

TABLE 25

MEAN RESPONSE OF ADULT CEREAL LEAF BEETLES IN 1967 FIELD TESTS AT NEW CARLISLE, INDIANA, TO VARIOUS TREATMENTS OF OAT PLANT EXTRACTS

Plant Condition Mean Collection3

Green 5.57 Dried 4.69

^ S D (.05) = .53

TABLE 26

MEAN RESPONSE OF ADULT CEREAL LEAF BEETLES IN 1967 FIELD TESTS AT NEW CARLISLE, INDIANA, TO VARIOUS TREATMENTS OF OAT PLANT EXTRACTS

Storage3,

Solvent Refrigerator Freezer

Alcohol ' 4.15 3.82 Water 7.63 6.58 Chloroform 2.58 3.67 Freeze Dry 6.15 6.47

aLSD (.05) = .74 88

TABLE 27

MEAN RESPONSE OF ADULT CEREAL LEAF BEETLES IN 1967 FIELD TESTS AT NEW CARLISLE, INDIANA, TO VARIOUS TREATMENTS OF OAT PLANT EXTRACTS

Treatment3, Mean Number Response

4 _ 8.24 10 7.19 18 6.93 13 6.80

3 6.76 9 6.59 15 6.33 16 6.33

14 6.15 2 5.41 1 4.76 17 4.24

5 4.15 20 3.47 11 3.37 7 3.06

8 3.06 6 2.85 12 2.50 19 2.11

See page 46 for treatment identification. TABLE 28

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF UNSEXED SPRING AND SUMMER ADULT CEREAL LEAF BEETLE RESPONSE TO VARIOUS OAT PLANT CONDITIONS IN THE LABORATORY

Source DF MS F

Replications 3 33.66 A Treatments9 1 98.00 3.814 ns B Treatments*3 3 2776.08 108.058** AB Interaction 3 227.75 8.865** Error 21 25.69 Total 31

aSpring and Summer Adults Fresh green plants, green dried plants, fresh yellow plants, and check •jf Significant at the .01 level of probability nsNonsignificant

TABLE 29

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF UNSEXED SPRING AND SUMMER ADULT CEREAL LEAF BEETLE RESPONSE TO VARIOUS TREATMENTS OF SOLVENTS IN THE LABORATORY

Source DFMSF

Replications 3 52.75 A Treatments3 1 36.12 2.346 ns B Treatments*3 3 924.08 60.033** AB Interaction 3 150.04 9.747** Error 21 15.39 Total 31

aSpring and Summer Adults ^Water, Chloroform, Alcohol, and Check •Jf Significant at the .01 level of probability nsNonsignificant 90

TABLE 30

ANALYSIS OP VARIANCE OF UNSEXED SPRING AND SUMMER ADULT CEREAL LEAF BEETLE RESPONSE TO VARIOUS TREATMENTS OF OAT PLANT EXTRACTION METHODS IN THE LABORATORY

Source DF MS F

Replications 3 18.75 A Treatments3 1 - 144.50 10.847** B Treatments*3 3 514.75 38.640** AB Interaction 3 32.41 2.433 ns Error 21 13.32 Total 31

aSpring and Summer Adults

^Freeze dried, cold water, hot water, and check

•jf |||j Significant at the .01 level of probability

ns • . Nonsignificant LITERATURE CITED

Anonymous. 1962. Cereal leaf beetle, Oulema melanopus (L.). Plant Pest Cont. Div. Agri. Res. Serv. USDA. 3pp.

Anonymous. 1963. Watch for the cereal leaf beetle. Plant Pest Cont. Div. Agri. Res. Serv. USDA. PA-550. 4pp.

Anonymous. 1963. Cereal leaf beetle quarantine. Ohio Dept, of Agri. Leaflet. 2pp.

Anonymous. 1964. Economic importance of the cereal leaf beetle. Plant Pest Cont. Div. Agri. Res. Serv. USDA. Leaflet 803-19.1100. 1pp.

Anonymous. 1968. Cereal leaf beetle state quarantines expanded. Plant Pest Cont. Div. Agri. Res. Serv. USDA. Leaflet 2689-68. 1 pp.

Augustine, M.G., F.W. Fisk, R.H. Davidson, J.B. LaPidus, and R.W. Cleary. 1964. Host plant selection by the Mexican bean beetle, Epilachna varivestis. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 57:127-134.

Beck, S.D. 1956. The European corn borer, Pyrausta nubilalis (Hubn.), and its principal host plant. II. The influence of nutritional factors on larval establishment and develop­ ment on the corn plant. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 49:582-588.

Beck, S.D. 1960. The European corn borer, Pyrausta nubilalis (Hubn.), and its principal host plant. IV. Larval feeding behavior andhost plant resistance. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 53:206-212.

Beck, S. D. 1965. Resistance of plants to insects. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 10:207-232.

Beroza, M., and N. Green. 1963. Materials tested as insect attractants. Plant Pest Cont. Div. Agri. Res. Serv. USDA. Agri. Handbook Number 239.

Byrne, H.D., and A.L. Steinhauer. 1966. The attraction of the alfalfa weevil, Hypera postica (Coleoptera:Curculionidae), to alfalfa. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 59:303-309.

91 92

Callahan, P.S. 1965. Intermediate and far infrared sensing on nocturnal insects. Part I. Evidences for a far infrared (FIR) electromagnetic theory of communication and sensing in moths and its relationship to the limiting biosphere of the corn earworm. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 58:727-745.

Castro, T.R., R.F. Ruppel, and M.S. Gomulinski. 1965. Natural history of the cereal leaf beetle in Michigan. Mich. Agri. Expt. Sta. Quart. Bull. 47(4):623-653.

Davis, G.R.F. 1961. The biting response of larvae of the prairie grain wireworm, Ctenicera aeripennis destructor (Brown) (Coleoptera:Elateridae), to various extracts of germinating rye seed. Can. J. Zool. 39(3):299-303.

Davis, G.R.F. 1965. Phagostimulatory effects of amino acids for larvae of Ctenicera destructor (Brown) (Coleoptera: Elateridae). Arch. Internat. Physiol. Biochem. 73(4): 610-626.

Davis, G.R.F. 1968. Phagostimulation and consideration of its role in artificial diets. Entomol. Soc. Amer. Bull. 14(1): 27-30.

Dethier, V.G. 1947. Chemical insect attractants and repellents. Blakiston, Philadelphia, Pa.

Dethier, V.G., and M.T. Yost. 1952. Olfactory stimulation of blow flies by homologous alcohols. J. Gen. Physiol. 35:823-839.

Dethier, V.G. 1953. Host plant perception in phytophagous insects. Trans. Ninth Inter. Cong. Entomol. 2:81-89.

Dethier, V.G. 1968. To each his taste. Entomol. Soc. Amer. Bull. 14(1):10-14.

Fraenkel, G.S., and D. L. Gunn. 1940. The Orientation of Animals. Oxford Clarendon Press.

Fraenkel, G.S. 1953. The nutritional value of green plants for insects. Trans. Ninth Inter. Cong. Entomol. 2:90-100.

Hamanura, Y., K. Hayashiya, and D. Naito. 1961. Food selection by silkworm larvae, Bombvx mori. II. Betasitosterol as one of the biting factors. Nature. 190(4779):880-881.

Heron, R.J. 1965. The role of chemotactic stimuli in the feeding behavior of spruce budworm larvae on white’spruce. Can. J. Zool. 43:247-269. 93

Hodson, W.E.H. 1929. The bionomics of Lema melanopa L. () in Great Britain. Bull. Entomol. Res. 20:5-14.

Ito, T. 1960. Effect of sugars on feeding of larvae of the silk­ worm, Bombyx mori. J. Insect. Physiol. 5(2):95-107.

Ito, T. 1961. Nutrition of the silkworm, Bombvx mori. IV. Effects of ascorbic acid. Bull. Ser. Expt. Sta. 17(1): 119-136.

Jantz, O.K. 1965. Cereal leaf beetle field attractant tests during 1965. Mich. Agri. Expt. Sta. and Plant Pest Cont. Div. Agri. Res. Serv. USDA. Special Report W-209.

Keller, J.C., F.G. Maxwell, and J.N. Jenkins. 1962. Cotton extracts as arrestants and feeding stimulants for the boll weevil. J. Econ. Entomol. 55:800-801.

Kennedy, J.S. 1958. Physiological condition of the host plant and susceptibility to aphid attack. Ent. Exptl. et Appl. 1:50-56.

Manolache, C. 1923. On the occurrence of L. melanopa in Rumania. Pub. Soc. Nat. Rumania 10. 4pp. (Rev. Appl. Ent. Ser. A. 20:340).

Maxwell, F.G., J.N. Jenkins, J.C. Keller, and W.L. Parrot. 1963. An arrestant and feeding stimulant for the boll weevil in water extracts of cotton plant parts. J. Econ. Entomol. 56: 449-454.

Mclndoo, N.E. 1919. The olfactory sense of lepidopterous larvae. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 12(2):65-84.

Mittler, T.E., and R.H. Dadd. 1964. Gustatory discrimination between liquids by the aphid, Mvzus persicae (Sulzer). Entomol. Expt. Appl. 7(4):315-328.

Moncrieff, R.W. 1967. The chemical senses. CRC Press. Cleveland, Ohio.

Myser, W.C., and W.B. Schultz. 1967. Sexing the adult cereal leaf beetle, Oulema melanopus (Coleoptera:Chrysomelidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 60:1329.

Nayar, J.K., and G.S. Fraenkel. 1962. The chemical basis of host selection in the silkworm, Bombvx mori (L.). J. Insect Physiol. 8:505-525. 94

Ridgeway, R.L., S.L. Jones, and L.J. Gorzycki. 1966. Tests for boll weevil control with a systemic insecticide and a boll weevil feeding stimulant. Ji' Econ. Entomol. 59(1):149-153.

Robbins, W.E., M.J. Thompson, R.T. Yamanoto, and T.J. Shortino. 1965. Feeding stimulants for the female house fly, Musca domestica Linneaus. Science. 147(3658):628-630.

Ruppel, R.F., and Y.M. Yun. 1965. Ground-applied insecticides against the cereal leaf beetle. J. Econ. Entomol. 58(1): 41-46.

Schoonhoven, L.M., and V.G. Dethier. 1966. Sensory aspects of host plant discrimination by lepidopterous larvae. Arch. Neerl. Zool. 16:497-500. ~

Stride, G.O. 1965. Studies on the chemical basis of host selec­ tion in the genus Enilachna (Coleoptera:). I. A volatile phagostimulant in Solanum campylacanthum for Epilachna fulvosignata. J. Insect. Physiol. 11:21-23.

Treece, R.E. 1967. Insect pest gains foothold in Ohio. Ohio Agric. Res. and Dev. Center. Ohio Report 52(6):91-92.

Thorsteinson, A.J. 1960. Host selection on phytophagous insects. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 5:193-218.

Thorsteinson, A.J., and J.K. Nayar. 1963. Plant phospholipids as feeding stimulants for grasshoppers. Can. J. Zool. 41(6): 931-935.

Vershaffelt, E. 1910. The cause determining the selection of food in some herbivorous insects. Proc. Acad. Sci. Amsterdam. 13:536:542.

Von Frisch. 1937. The language of bees. Sci. Prog. July 1937.

Wilson, M.C., and R.E. Shade. 1964. The influence of various Gramineae on weight gains of postdiapause adults of the cereal leaf beetle, Oulema melanopa (Coleoptera:Chrysomelidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 57(6):659-661.

Wood, D.L., and J.P. Vite. 1961. Studies on the host selection behavior of Ips confusus (Le Conte) (Coleoptera:Scolytidae) attacking Pinus ponderosa. Contrib. Boyce Thompson Inst. 21(2): 79-96.

Yamamoto, R.T., and G. Fraenkel. 1960. Assay of the principal gustatory stimulant for the tobacco hornworm, Protoparce sexta, from solanaceous plants. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 53:499-503.