DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 2 Taxonomic Classification of Pines

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

CHAPTER 2 TAXONOMIC CLASSIFICATION OF PINES The major and minor southern pine species are of some of the historical events and may indicate fairly closely related, but their taxonomic relations future trends. have not been clearly delineated. This has led to rather important name changes in fairly recent years in regard to species, varieties, and races. TAXONOMY OF SOUTHERN PINES Names are important, of course, and when changes Even at this date universal agreement on the in names occur they bring about reviews of hypoth- name-terminology for southern pines has not been eses about relationships among species and groups achieved. Consequently, some confusion persists. of species that may or may not be important in Table 1 illustrates current grouping by Little and applied breeding. The characteristics of the indi- Critchfield (1969) vs. four earlier systems. vidual maternal or paternal parents are of primary The hard pines, subgenus Pinus (Diploxylon), importance and the bearing on the evaluation of the were rearranged from Shaw (1914) by Duffield progeny may be minimal, although the parents are (1952). This classification system was followed by designated as separate species, varieties, or races Critchfield and Little (1966) and Little and Critch- at different times by different taxonomists. field (1969). As shown in table 1, they retained An extremely large amount of silviculture and Sabinianae (group Macrocarpae of Shaw) as dis- forest products research has been done on the basis tinct and gave Latin names to Duffield's groups. of the tree species. The concept of grouping "similar Two pines, P. rigida and P. serótina, were trans- individual" trees under a species name has proven ferred from subsection Insignes to subsection Au- to be extremely useful in forest education, re- strales by Duffield (1952). Australes now includes search, management, and industry. Although indi- P. palustriSy P. taeda, P. echinata, P. glabra, P. vidual trees within different species may not repre- rigida, P. serótina, P. elliottii, P. pungens, as well sent the same degree of "similarity," average val- as nonlocal pines and P. caribaea, P. ocddentalis, ues for distinctive characteristics of each species and P. cubensis. Subsection Contortae contains two have great utility, and much research effort has southern pines, P. virginiana and P. clausa, plus been expanded in computing them. As intensity of P. banksiana of northern states and P. contorta of forest management and research increase with re- the western states, whose range overlaps with the spect to individual species, there is also an increase latter in west-central Canada. in recognition of the degree of "similarity" or lack of The species assigned to subsections 11 and 14 are it, and names or mathematical error terms are listed in the following excerpt quoted from "Sub- adapted to define the subdivisions of species. As divisions of the Genus Pinus (Pines)" by Little and might be expected, the traits or features of signifi- Critchfield (1969, p. 13-15): cant economic value may receive the most study. In the following chapters much will be said about Subsect. 11. Pinus subsect. Australes Loud., emend. variation among individuals or groups of individuals within species, or the degree of "similarity," and southern yellow pines special terms will be used to identify these differ- Pinus sect. ii. Ternatae § ix. Australes Loud., Arb. Frut. Brit. ences. Extremely large groups are recognized, but 4: 2255. 1838; emend. Holotype species: Pinus australis very small groups or individual trees are included Michx. f., Hist. Arb. Amér. Sept. 1: 64, t. 6. 1810 (P. palustris because genetics and tree breeding work is done on Mill, Gard. Diet. ed. 8, Pinus No. 14. 1768). this basis. Pinas palustris Mill., Gard. Diet. ed. 8, Pinus No. 14. 1768; longleaf pine. Southeastern United States. Pinus taeda L., Sp. PL 1000. 1753; loblolly pine. Southeastern TAXONOMY OF THE GENUS PINUS United States. Because of the importance of pines, a vast array Pinus echinata Mill., Gard. Diet. ed. 8, Pinus No. 12. 1768; of literature has accumulated on the phylogeny, shortleaf pine. Eastern United States. taxonomy, and species characteristics, which has Pinus glabra Walt., Fl, Carol. 237. 1788; spruce pine. South- eastern United States. been summarized by Mirov (1967) in a comprehen- Pinus rigida Mill., Gard. Diet. ed. 8, Pinus No. 10. 1768; pitch sive monograph "The Genus Pinus.'' Although the pine. Eastern United States. monograph includes the southern pines, there is a Pinus serótina Michx., Fl. Bor.-Amer. 2: 205. 1803; pond pine. need to review here some of the problems in Southeastern United States. taxonomy that have developed within the group. A Pinus pungens Lamb., Ann. Bot. 2: 198. 1805; Table-Mountain brief discussion will help develop an understanding pine. Eastern United States. 15 Pinas elliottii Engelm., Acad. Sei. St. Louis Trans. 4: 186, t. 1-3. studied intensively, P. echinata apparently has a 1380; slash pine. Southeastern United States. karyotype closely resembling that of loblolly and Pinus caribaea Morelel, Rev. florl. Côte d'Or L: 107. 1851; longleaf pines. On the basis of later work, it was Caribbean pine. Bahama Islands, Cuba, and Central America. concluded that P. echinata differs the most from Pinus occidenlalis Sw., Nov. Gen. Sp. PI. 103. 1788; West Indian the general pattern in Australes and it was the pine. Hispaniola and Cuba. most nearly similar to P. taeda (Saylor 1972). It Pinus cubensis Criseb., Amer. Acad. Mem., Ser. 2, 8: 530. 1862; Cuban pine. Cuba. was learned also that P. rigida had a distinguishing feature in which the b arm of a chromosome other Subsect. 14. Pinus subsect. Contortae Little & than number one is the longest. No differences Critchfield were detected between the two varieties of P. el- Pinus subgen. Pinus sect. Pinus subsect. Conlorlae Little & liottii. A very noticeable difference was found be- Critchfield, U.S. Dep. Agr. Misc. Pub 991: 15. 1966. Holo- tween the b arm sequence of the closely related P. type species: Pinus contona Üougl. ex Loud., Arb. Frut. Brit caribaea and P. elliottii. In Contortae, all species 4: 2292, fig, 2210-2211, 1838. have a b arm pattern of 5, 7, 9, except P. clausa, Pinus banksiana Lamb., Descr. Genus Pinus 1: 7, pi. 3, 1803 ; which differs at position 10. jack pine. Northeastern United States and nearly across Canada. Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud., Arb. Frut. Brit. 4: 2292, fig. 2210-2211. 1838; lodgepole pine. Western North America from Yukon and southeastern Alaska to northern Baja California, Pinus virginiana Mill., Gard. Diet. ed. 8, Pinus No. 9. 1768; Virginia pine. Eastern United States. Pinus chusa (Chapm.) Vasey ex Sarg., U.S. Census, 10th, 1880, vol. 9 (Rpt. Forests No. Amer.) : 199. 1884; sand pine. Florida and southern Alabama» Removal of P. resinosa from subsection Au- strales, where it was placed by Shaw (1914), ap- pears logical. In his karyotype analysis of several pine species, Say lor (1961) observed differences in chromosome shape between P. resinosa and both P. taeda and P. palustris. The anatomical features of the wood are sufficiently different to separate P. resinosa from southern pines (Hudson 1960). Kim (1963) also noted close similarities in the karyotypes of P. taeda and P. rígida. Karyotypes of these two southern pines and that indicated for P. echinata were similar. On the basis of interspecific hybridization work in Korea, Ahn (1963) concluded that crossabiUty in terms of production rate of fertile hybrid seed was Figure 13.—Pinus taeda chromosomes from a root tip sub- jected to 33 hours pretreatment in oxyquinoline. Ar- high between species which are closely related rows denote the smallest chromosomes with subme- taxonomically. dian centromeres. 1650x. (Saylor 1961) The karyotypes of some of the southern pines are very similar but do show differences among species (Saylor 1961) (figures 13 and 14). The b arm pat- A karyotype analysis of P. rigida, P. taeda, and terns and the location of the chromosomes with the their Fi hybrid was made by Kim (1963). He found most median and submedian centromeres (all three that the mean chromosome length of P. xHgitaeda features are possible diagnostic features of the is the shortest and that of P. rigida the longest. In karyotype) have been determined. According to general, there are close similarities between the Baylor's analysis, four different karyotypes exist. chromosomes of P. taeda and the hybrid. When The karyotypes of P. taeda and P. palustris agree chromosomes are arranged in descending order of in all three features and thus can be considered the length of the short arm, the lengths of the long similar. The others, P. strobus and P. resinosa, arms do not form continuous descending sequences. appear to differ sufficiently from this type and The chromosomes in which the long arms are out of among themselves to be regarded as distinctive. order are different in each species, as shown in The number and position of secondary construc- figure 14. In P. rigida, they are 4th, 6th, and 10th tions have thus far proved unreliable as diagnostic chromosomes, but 5th, 6th, and 9th inP. taeda, and features of the karyotypes. Although it was not 3rd, 6th, 8th, and 9th in the Fi hybrid. 16 ¡3 .S ^ g « g fl 50 fl a. SS o go o y^ 'E. 'S, •ä S ^ es s s ¿ ci ^ ü U w Q pq Tf t» Öi u5 o? có ¿ o j- C^ ^ -se ^—*s ^o Oi 'S ^ CO I c^ Ci (O ï >H ofl J J •«s»•Í3 •c es ^ ' 'S V CO ri I to I CO T. i S fe CO o •SX 1ce I" ki X XI 0 -ft, «• M w H ^ . S s "^ ^ s 1 I • &. fe Ö ^ io 11 ¿^-+0 •^o s O ■io CO CO II -♦0 I ^w' to g -^Î- ^-40 ^ to •c 5Í § Ö 1 4 s is .1 .1 >H 1 9 Cembra 9 robus >H mbra fe fe pq 9 lí fe H CO ^ i I Si 1.
Recommended publications
  • Effectiveness of Pheromone Mating Disruption for the Ponderosa

    Effectiveness of Pheromone Mating Disruption for the Ponderosa

    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Christine G. Niwa for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Entomologypresented on October 24, 1988 Title: Effectiveness of Pheromone Mating Disruption for the Ponderosa Pine Tip Moth, Rhyacionia zozana (Kearfott) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), and its Influence on the Associated Parasite Complex Abstract approved: Redacted for Privacy ____(Garyy,w;Aterman Redacted for Privacy Tim DSchowalter The importance of pheromones in insect control relies both on their ability to reduce pest populations and on their relatively benign effects on nontarget organisms.This study was conducted to test the effectiveness of a pheromone application for mating disruption of the ponderosa pine tip moth, Rhyacionia zozana (Kearfott), and to determine if this treatment had any affect on the abundance or structure of the associated parasite complex. Chemical analyses, electroantennograms, and field bioassays showed that the most abundant pheromone component for R. zozana was E-9-dodecenyl acetate with a lesser amount of E-9-dodecenol also present. Acetate/alcohol ratios averaged 70:30 in gland washes; male moths were most attracted to sticky traps with synthetic baits containing ratios ranging from 70:30 to 95:5. Sixteen hymenopteran and one dipteran species of parasites were recovered from R. zozana larvae and pupae collected in Calif. and Oreg. Total percentage parasitism was high, averaging 47.2%. The ichneumonid, Glypta zozanae Walley and Barron, was the most abundant parasite, attacking over 30% of the hosts collected. Mastrus aciculatus (Provancher) was second in abundance, accounting for less than 4% parasitism. Hercon laminated-tape dispensers containing synthetic sex pheromone (a 95:5 mixture of E-9-dodecenyl acetate and E-9-dodecenol) were manually applied on 57 ha of ponderosa pine plantations in southern Oreg.
  • Insects and Diseases

    Insects and Diseases

    INSECTS AND DISEASES Important Problems of Florida’s Forest and Shade Tree Resources INSECTS AND DISEASES Important Problems of Florida’s Forest and Shade Tree Resources by Edward L. Barnard Pathologist, Florida Division of Forestry and Wayne N. Dixon Entomologist, Florida Division of Forestry Illustrations by Wayne N. Dixon Table of Contents FOREWORD ................................................................................................................... 7 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 8 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... 9 HOW TO USE THE BOOK ............................................................................................ 10 DAMAGE KEYS ............................................................................................................ 11 Tree Insects – Key 1 Conifer Foliage .......................................................................... 11 Tree Insects – Key 2 Conifer Branch and Stem .......................................................... 1 Tree Insects – Key 3 Hardwood Foliage ...................................................................... 2 Tree Insects – Key 4 Hardwood Branch and Stem....................................................... 3 Tree Insects – Key 5 Roots ........................................................................................... 4 Diseases of Trees – Key 1 Conifer Foliage .................................................................
  • Arizona Administrative Code Between the Dates of October 1, 2020 Through December 31, 2020 (Supp

    Arizona Administrative Code Between the Dates of October 1, 2020 Through December 31, 2020 (Supp

    3 A.A.C. 4 Supp. 20-4 December 31, 2020 Title 3 TITLE 3. AGRICULTURE CHAPTER 4. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE - PLANT SERVICES DIVISION The table of contents on the first page contains quick links to the referenced page numbers in this Chapter. Refer to the notes at the end of a Section to learn about the history of a rule as it was published in the Arizona Administrative Register. Sections, Parts, Exhibits, Tables or Appendices codified in this supplement. The list provided contains quick links to the updated rules. This Chapter contains rule Sections that were filed to be codified in the Arizona Administrative Code between the dates of October 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020 (Supp. 20-4). Table 1. Fee Schedule ......................................................47 Questions about these rules? Contact: Name: Brian McGrew Address: Department of Agriculture 1688 W. Adams St. Phoenix, AZ 85007 Telephone: (602) 542-3228 Fax: (602) 542-1004 E-mail: [email protected] Website: https://agriculture.az.gov/plantsproduce/industrial- hemp-program The release of this Chapter in Supp. 20-4 replaces Supp. 20-3, 1-50 pages Please note that the Chapter you are about to replace may have rules still in effect after the publication date of this supplement. Therefore, all superseded material should be retained in a separate binder and archived for future reference. i PREFACE Under Arizona law, the Department of State, Office of the Secretary of State (Office), accepts state agency rule filings and is the publisher of Arizona rules. The Office of the Secretary of State does not interpret or enforce rules in the Administrative Code.
  • Longleaf Pine: an Annotated Bibliography, 1946 Through 1967

    Longleaf Pine: an Annotated Bibliography, 1946 Through 1967

    U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Research Paper SO-35 longleaf pine: an annotated bibliography, 1946 through 1967 Thomas C. Croker, Jr. SOUTHERN FOREST EXPERIMENT STATION T.C. Nelson, Director FOREST SERVICE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 1968 Croker, Thomas C., Jr. 1968. Longleaf pine: an annotated bibliography, 1946 through 1967. Southern Forest Exp. Sta., New Orleans, Louisiana. 52 pp. (U. S. Dep. Agr. Forest Serv. Res. Pap. SO-35) Lists 665 publications appearing since W. G. Wahlenberg compiled the bibliography for his book, Longleaf Pine. Contents Page Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1 1. Factors of the environment. Biology........................................................................................ 2 11 Site factors, climate, situation, soil ............................................................................. 2 15 Animal ecology. Game management .......................................................................... 2 16 General botany ............................................................................................................. 2 17 Systematic botany ....................................................................................................... 6 18 Plant ecology................................................................................................................. 7 2. Silviculture...............................................................................................................................
  • Impacts of Native and Non-Native Plants on Urban Insect Communities: Are Native Plants Better Than Non-Natives?

    Impacts of Native and Non-Native Plants on Urban Insect Communities: Are Native Plants Better Than Non-Natives?

    Impacts of Native and Non-native plants on Urban Insect Communities: Are Native Plants Better than Non-natives? by Carl Scott Clem A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Auburn, Alabama December 12, 2015 Key Words: native plants, non-native plants, caterpillars, natural enemies, associational interactions, congeneric plants Copyright 2015 by Carl Scott Clem Approved by David Held, Chair, Associate Professor: Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology Charles Ray, Research Fellow: Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology Debbie Folkerts, Assistant Professor: Department of Biological Sciences Robert Boyd, Professor: Department of Biological Sciences Abstract With continued suburban expansion in the southeastern United States, it is increasingly important to understand urbanization and its impacts on sustainability and natural ecosystems. Expansion of suburbia is often coupled with replacement of native plants by alien ornamental plants such as crepe myrtle, Bradford pear, and Japanese maple. Two projects were conducted for this thesis. The purpose of the first project (Chapter 2) was to conduct an analysis of existing larval Lepidoptera and Symphyta hostplant records in the southeastern United States, comparing their species richness on common native and alien woody plants. We found that, in most cases, native plants support more species of eruciform larvae compared to aliens. Alien congener plant species (those in the same genus as native species) supported more species of larvae than alien, non-congeners. Most of the larvae that feed on alien plants are generalist species. However, most of the specialist species feeding on alien plants use congeners of native plants, providing evidence of a spillover, or false spillover, effect.
  • Mosca Del Olivo) Con Botryosphaeria Dothidea Moug

    Mosca Del Olivo) Con Botryosphaeria Dothidea Moug

    ESCUELA TÉCNICA SUPERIOR DE INGENIEROS AGRÓNOMOS Y DE MONTES Interacciones de Bactrocera oleae Gmel. (Mosca del olivo) con Botryosphaeria dothidea Moug. (Escudete de la aceituna) y de Phloeotribus scarabaeoides Bern. (Barrenillo del olivo) con Verticillium dahliae Kleb. causante de la Verticilosis del olivo TESIS DOCTORAL DOCTORANDO IBRAHIM ELDESOUKI ARAFAT DIRECTORES Dr. HANI KASSIM ALDEBIS ALBUNNAI Dr. FRANCISCO JAVIER LÓPEZ ESCUDERO Córdoba (España), Noviembre de 2012 TÍTULO: Interacciones de Bactrocera oleae Gmel. (Mosca del olivo) con Botryosphaeria dothidea Moug. (Escudete de la aceituna) y de Phloeotribus scarabaeoides Bern. (Barrenillo del olivo) con Verticillium dahliae Kleb. causante de la Verticilosis del olivo AUTOR: Ibrahim Eldesouki Arafat © Edita: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Córdoba. 2013 Campus de Rabanales Ctra. Nacional IV, Km. 396 A 14071 Córdoba www.uco.es/publicaciones [email protected] AGRADECIMIENTOS Terminar una tesis de doctorado es la culminación de largo tiempo de trabajo, estudio y esfuerzo. Sería muy difícil lograrlo si no es con el apoyo y estímulo de muchas personas. Primero me gustaría expresar mi más sincero agradecimiento a mis directores de tesis Dr. HANI KASSIM ALDEBIS ALBUNNAI y Dr. FRANCISCO JAVIER LÓPEZ- ESCUDERO , a quienes debo la realización del doctorado en una Universidad tan prestigiosa como lo es la Universidad de Córdoba y por creer en mí como futuro investigador. Gracias por su enseñar su metodología, por animarme en los momentos difíciles, y especialmente, por ofreceme su amistad. En ustedes he podido apreciar las cualidades humanas más autenticas, por las que merece la pena ser person. Un agradecimiento especial al Dr. ENRIQUE VARGAS OSUNA , por la colaboración, paciencia, apoyo brindados desde siempre y sobre todo por esa gran amistad que me brindó y me brinda, por escucharme y aconsejarme siempre.
  • Controlling Nantucket Pine Tip Moth Infestations in the Southeastern U.S

    Controlling Nantucket Pine Tip Moth Infestations in the Southeastern U.S

    Controlling Nantucket Pine Tip Moth Infestations in the Southeastern U.S. Forest Pests: Insects, Diseases & Other Damage Agents Home About Us Partners Help Search: Insects Diseases Weeds Other Agents Forest Pest Images Controlling Nantucket Pine Tip Moth Infestations in the Southeastern U.S. Christopher J. Fettig – Postdoctoral Research Associate; Mark J. Dalusky – Research Coordinator; and C. Wayne Berisford – Professor of Entomology with the Department of Entomology; University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30605 Abstract The Nantucket pine tip moth, Rhyacionia frustrana (Comstock) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), is a common pest of Christmas tree and pine plantations throughout much of the eastern U.S. As silvicultural practices intensify, insecticide applications are increasingly used to protect trees from the growth and form losses caused by larval feeding. The thermal requirements for the Nantucket pine tip moth to complete a generation were obtained from published data and used along with historical temperature data to produce maps indicating the number of annual generations predicted to occur throughout seven southeastern states. Spray timing prediction values were also obtained from published data and used to predict optimal spray periods based on 5-day increments for each location where either three or four generations occurred. Approximately 80% of the predicted optimal spray periods were within one optimal spray period of previously field-determined spray dates. Land managers who use contact insecticides, such as synthetic pyrethroids, may find the predicted optimal spray periods useful in optimizing spray effectiveness. Key Words: chemical control, Nantucket pine tip moth, phenology, Rhyacionia frustrana, spray timing, loblolly pine, Pinus taeda, pine regeneration pests https://www.forestpests.org/nptm/[6/11/2019 4:14:07 PM] Controlling Nantucket Pine Tip Moth Infestations in the Southeastern U.S.
  • NEARCTIC PINE TIP MOTHS of the GENUS RHYACIONIA: ^ BIOSYSTEMATIC REVIEW Fi ^ 9^

    NEARCTIC PINE TIP MOTHS of the GENUS RHYACIONIA: ^ BIOSYSTEMATIC REVIEW Fi ^ 9^

    ^<c NEARCTIC PINE TIP MOTHS OF THE GENUS RHYACIONIA: ^ BIOSYSTEMATIC REVIEW fi ^ 9^ (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae, Olethreutinae) Vi ^ ^^^ ^ CO :^CH c > - fin ^^ Forest Service U.S. Department of Agriculture Agriculture Handbook No. 514 NEARCTIC PINE TIP MOTHS OF THE GENUS RHYACIONIA: BIOSYSTEMATIC REVIEW (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae, Olethreutinae) by Jerry A. Powell, Professor of Entomology University of California, Berkeley, Calif. 94720 and William E. Miller, Principal Insect Ecologist North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, Minn. 55108 Agriculture Handbook No. 514 Forest Service United States Department of Agriculture Washington, D.C. April 1978 Powell, Jerry A., and William E. Miller. 1978. Nearctic pine tip moths of the genus Rhyacionia: bio- systematic review (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae, Olethreutinae). U.S. Dep. Agrie, Agrie. Handb. 514, 51 p., illus. Knowledge of 13 previously known species of pine tip moths in North America is reviewed, and 11 new species are described and named. KEYWORDS: biogeography, taxonomy, Pinus. Library of Congress Catalog Number 77-600028 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 Stock Number 001-000-03713-7 Class Number A 1.76:514 CONTENTS Page Page INTRODUCTION 1 GROUP 5: ADANA, JENNINGSI 17 BIOLOGY 2 Rhyacionia adana Heinrich 17 Voltinism 2 Rhyacionia jenningsi PoweU, New Species 17 Life Stages 2 GROUP 6: BUSCKANA, BLANCHARDI 19 Host Plant Associations 3 Rhyacionia husckana Heinrich 19 Rhyacionia hlanchardi Miller, New Species 19 GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION 5 GROUP 7: FUMOSANA 21 ALLOPATRIC SPECIES PAIRS 6 Rhyacionia fumo sana Powell, New Species 21 TAXONOMIC CHARACTERS AND GROUP 8: FRUSTRAN A TO AKTITA 22 DIAGNOSIS 6 Rhyacionia frustrana (Comstock) 22 Rhyacionia bushnelli (Busck) 24 GENUS RHYACIONIA HÜBNER [1825] 7 Rhyacionia sonia Miller 24 SYSTEMATICS OF SPECIES 8 Rhyacionia aktita Miller, New Species 24 GROUP 1: BUOLIANA 8 GROUP 9: SUBCERVINANA, Rhyacionia huoliana (Denis and Schiffermüller) .
  • Insects Affecting Seed Production of Slash and Longleaf Pines

    Insects Affecting Seed Production of Slash and Longleaf Pines

    U. S. Forest Service Research Paper SE - 6 October I963 INSECTS AFFECTING SEED PRODUCTION OF SLASH AND LONGLEAF PINES Their Identification and Biological Annotation A!? ermd J;c. &bel U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOREST SERVICE .*a,;, SOUTHEASTERN FOREST EXPERIMENT STATION ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA COVER PHOTO: Second-year slash pine cone with multiple insect injury. Maggots, Itonididae, infested the cone base, while a coneworm, Dioryctria amatella, made the larger galleries in the midcone area. INSECTS AFFECTING SEED PRODUCTION OF SLASH AND LONGLEAF PINES Their Identification and Bioiogkal Annotation bY dsernard .N. Cbel INTRODUCTION Tree planting rates in the South have rocketed over the past three decades, and the area now leads the nation in plantation establishment. During 1960 over a half-million acres were planted in the states of Georgia and Florida alone. Such extensive planting, mainly of pines, has brought in its train a need for more seed and better seed. Each year the demand intensifies for seed from trees of known geographical origin with proven or inheritable desirable traits such as superior growth rates, superior form, disease resistance, or gum- producing capability. This demand in turn has led government and industry to establish extensive seed production areas and seed orchards composed of selected trees. Seed losses to date have. been very heavy, and it is plain that natural losses of developing cones must be reduced if we are to harvest quantity seed yields from such trees. Most damage is done by insects. For these reasons, a three-phase research program was started during 1956 in northern Florida to study insect damage to flowers, cones, and seed of slash pine (Pinus elliottii Engelm.
  • EVALUATION of Lastcall™ NPTM for the CONTROL of the NANTUCKET

    EVALUATION of Lastcall™ NPTM for the CONTROL of the NANTUCKET

    EVALUATION OF LastCall™ NPTM FOR THE CONTROL OF THE NANTUCKET PINE TIP MOTH by MARY JESSICA BECK (Under the Direction of C. Wayne Berisford) ABSTRACT The Nantucket pine tip moth (Rhyacionia frustrana) is a significant pest of pine plantations in the southeastern United States. Current industry practice for controlling tip moth includes backpack application of permethrin insecticides. LastCall™ NPTM is an attracticide encapsulating both pheromone and insecticide components. This technology attempts to address the environmental concerns associated with conventional insecticide sprays. Varied rates of LastCall™ were tested in loblolly pine plantations in the Georgia Coastal Plain to determine optimal application procedures. Applications varied in the area treated and the per acre rate of application. Efficacy of treatments was determined by quantifying shoot damage and pre- and post-treatment tree volume measurements. All treated plots had significantly less damage than control plots with the most intensive treatment consistently yielding the greatest control. Alternative treatments resulted in adequate control but posed additional problems in untreated areas. INDEX WORDS: Nantucket pine tip moth, Rhyacionia frustrana, attracticide, loblolly pine EVALUATION OF LastCall™ NPTM FOR THE CONTROL OF THE NANTUCKET PINE TIP MOTH by MARY JESSICA BECK B.S., The University of Missouri, 2004 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE ATHENS, GEORGIA 2006 © 2006 Mary Jessica Beck All Rights Reserved EVALUATION OF LastCall™ NPTM FOR THE CONTROL OF THE NANTUCKET PINE TIP MOTH by MARY JESSICA BECK Major Professor: C. Wayne Berisford Committee: Dan Horton James Hanula Electronic Version Approved: Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia December 2006 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my advisor, Wayne Berisford, for supporting me and encouraging me during my research.

  • Fsveg Data Dictionary

    FSVeg DATA DICTIONARY SECTION II: REFERENCE TABLES February 2014 Reference Tables FSVeg Data Dictionary TABLE OF CONTENTS Reference Tables Page NRV_COUNTIES...................................................................................................................................... DD/RT-3 NRV_COVER_LAYERS .........................................................................................................................DD/RT-31 NRV_COVER_REFERENCES .............................................................................................................DD/RT-32 NRV_DATUM_CODES .........................................................................................................................DD/RT-41 NRV_DISTURBANCE_AGENTS ........................................................................................................DD/RT-42 NRV_DISTURBANCE_CATEGORIES ..............................................................................................DD/RT-60 NRV_EV_COVER_TYPES ....................................................................................................................DD/RT-61 NRV_EXAM_PURPOSE_CODES ........................................................................................................DD/RT-94 NRV_FUEL_MODELS ...........................................................................................................................DD/RT-96 NRV_FUEL_PHOTOS .......................................................................................................................
  • RHY ACIONIA SUBTROPICA ~Iller, NEW SPECIES

    RHY ACIONIA SUBTROPICA ~Iller, NEW SPECIES

    1960 Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 231 A NEW PINE TIP MOTH (OLETHREUTIDJE) FROM THE GULF OF MEXICO REGION by WILLIAM E. ~ILLERl The pine tip moth treated in this paper has been recognized by taxono­ mists for more than 30 years as being different in some degree from related moths. During this time, specimens have been identified at the U. S. N at­ ional Museum as an undescribed "variety" of Rhyacionia rigidana (Fer­ nald). Although very similar to R. rigidana, the insect is specifically distinct. This southernmost occurring pine tip moth is herein described and named RHYACIONIA SUBTROPICA ~iller, NEW SPECIES Description of H olotype Wingspan-18.S mm. Labial pal pus clothed with white scales, most of which have a light-brown medial transverse bar. Face with similar scales. Antennal base covered anteriorly and dorsally with white-tipped brown scales, elsewhere with silk­ white scales. Head yellowish white. Collar composed of white-tipped brown scales. Dorsa I aspect of thorax cream-colored anteriorly, dirty white posteriorly; ventra I as­ pect silk-white. Anterior part of patagium clothed with brown-barred white scales; rest of patagium similar to dorsal aspect of thorax. Front and middle legs various shades of brown, banded with white. Femur of hind leg clothed with scales varying from dirty white to white with light-brown transverse bars; tibire and tarsi, brown with white bands on outer side, white on inner side. Forewing costa brown, interrupt­ ed by 10 or 12 white patches. Apical 1/5 of forewing rusty brown, gra.ding nearly to cream-colored toward radius.