DOCSLIB.ORG

Field Guide to Diseases & Insects of the Rocky Mountain Region

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Field Guide to Diseases & Insects of the Rocky Mountain Region United States Department of Agriculture / Forest Service Rocky Mountain Region, Forest Health Protection Rocky Mountain Research Station General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-241 December 2010 Rocky Mountain Region, Forest Health Protection. 2010. Field guide to diseases & insects of the Rocky Mountain Region. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-241 Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 336 p. Abstract This field guide is a forest management tool for field identification of biotic and abiotic agents that damage native trees in Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, and Wyoming, which constitute the USDA Forest Service’s Rocky Mountain Region. The guide focuses only on tree diseases and forest insects that have significant economic, ecological, and/ or aesthetic impacts; this guide does not necessarily cover all possible damage agents. Management suggestions are provided where available. The field guide is divided into two sections: one describes both diseases and damage caused by animals and abiotic factors, and the other describes insects. Agents are presented by the type and/or location of the injury on the tree. Written descriptions, color photographs, a general index, an index by host tree species, descriptive tables, and line drawings are all provided to assist users in identifying damaging agents. You may order additional copies of this publication by sending your mailing information in label form through one of the following media. Please specify the publication title and series number. Publishing Services Telephone (970) 498-1392 FAX (970) 498-1122 E-mail [email protected] Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/publications Mailing address Publications Distribution Rocky Mountain Research Station 240 West Prospect Road Fort Collins, CO 80526 Authors Kurt K. Allen James T. Blodgett Kelly S. Burns Robert J. Cain Sheryl L. Costello Tom J. Eager Jeri Lyn Harris Brian E. Howell Roy A. Mask Willis C. Schaupp, Jr. Jeffrey J. Witcosky James J. Worrall Acknowledgments Great appreciation is extended to the entomologists and pathologists who have studied and published on the often complicated life cycles, subtle taxonomic variations, and effective management strategies of the diverse organisms presented in this field guide. References are cited at the end of this guide. The following individuals have all provided invaluable observations through personal communication and published materials: Whitney Cranshaw and William Jacobi with Colorado State University; David Leatherman and Ingrid Aguayo, formerly with Colorado State Forest Service; Mark Harrell with Nebraska Forest Service; John Ball with South Dakota State University; Robert Mathiasen from Northern Arizona University; Les Koch with the Wyoming State Forestry Division; Jose Negron with the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station (RMRS); and John Schmid, formerly with RMRS. Field guides produced in the Pacific Northwest, Northern and Intermountain, and Southwestern Regions of the USDA Forest Service provided insights for layout and design. Many of the photographs presented here were taken by Federal, State, and university pathologists and entomologists from the Rocky Mountain Region or adjacent USDA Forest Service regions and were made available by the University of Georgia through www.bugwood.org. Thanks to MaryLou Fairweather with USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, for providing scanned photographs from the Field Guide to Insects and Diseases of Arizona and New Mexico. Special thanks also to Jose Negron and Bill Jacobi for their reviews and comments, to Justin Backsen and Diane Hildebrand for their help during manuscript preparation, and to Lindy Myers, Lane Eskew, and Connie Lemos for editing, layout, and publication of the field guide. ii Contents About This Field Guide ............................................................................1 Role of Diseases and Insects in Forest Ecosystems .................................2 Diagnosing Tree Problems .......................................................................3 Diseases Dwarf and True Mistletoes Introduction to Dwarf Mistletoes ........................................................6 Douglas-Fir Dwarf Mistletoe ............................................................10 Limber Pine Dwarf Mistletoe ...........................................................12 Lodgepole Pine Dwarf Mistletoe ......................................................13 Pinyon Dwarf Mistletoe ....................................................................15 Southwestern Dwarf Mistletoe ..........................................................16 Juniper Mistletoe ................................................................................18 Root Diseases and Stem Decays Introduction to Decay Diseases .........................................................19 Annosus Root Disease .......................................................................25 Armillaria Root Disease .....................................................................28 Black Stain Root Disease ...................................................................31 Coniophora Root and Butt Rot .........................................................35 Root Diseases with White Pocket Rots .............................................38 Schweinitzii Root and Butt Rot ........................................................40 White Mottled Rot ............................................................................42 Aspen Trunk Rot ...............................................................................44 Brown Crumbly Rot ..........................................................................46 Gray-Brown Saprot ...........................................................................48 Red Ray Rot .......................................................................................49 Red Ring Rot .....................................................................................51 Rust-Red Stringy Rot and Red Heart Rot ........................................53 Stem Decays of Hardwoods in the Plains .........................................56 Cankers Introduction to Cankers and Overview of Aspen Cankers ...............60 Black Canker ......................................................................................64 Black Knot of Cherry and Plum ........................................................66 Botryodiplodia Canker.......................................................................67 Cryptosphaeria Canker ......................................................................69 Cytospora Canker of Aspen...............................................................71 Cytospora Canker of Conifers ...........................................................73 Hypoxylon Canker .............................................................................75 Sooty-Bark Canker ............................................................................77 iii Wilts Introduction to Wilt Diseases ............................................................79 Dutch Elm Disease ............................................................................81 Oak Wilt ............................................................................................84 Pine Wilt ............................................................................................87 Verticillium Wilt ................................................................................89 Rusts Introduction to Rust Diseases ............................................................91 Broom Rusts of Spruce and Fir .........................................................94 Comandra and Stalactiform Blister Rusts .........................................97 Gymnosporangium Rusts ................................................................100 Western Gall Rust ...........................................................................103 White Pine Blister Rust ...................................................................105 Foliage Diseases Introduction to Foliage Diseases ......................................................107 Anthracnose .....................................................................................110 Brown Felt Blight ............................................................................113 Cercospora Blight of Junipers ..........................................................114 Davisomycella and Lophodermella Needle Casts ...........................115 Elytroderma Needle Cast ................................................................118 Ink Spot ...........................................................................................120 Marssonina Leaf Blight ...................................................................121 Melampsora Rusts ...........................................................................124 Red Band and Brown Spot Needle Blights .....................................125 Septoria Leaf Spot and Canker .......................................................128 Shoot Blights Pine Shoot Blight and Canker .........................................................129 Shepherd’s Crook .............................................................................132 Abiotic Injuries and Miscellaneous Burls, Galls, and Tumors ..................................................................134 Animal Damage ...............................................................................135 Abiotic Foliage
Load more

Recommended publications
  • June 2016 1 THINGS to DO / THINGS to THINK ABOUT THIS MONTH
    Spring/early summer is here and the 2016 growing season is well underway. The predictable unpredictability of the weather has brought the typical challenges that we face on an annual basis. Hopefully the majority of you are untouched or unaffected by the quirky weather that has been observed. Hopefully you’ve gotten some of the rain that has fallen across the Prairies. To combat or counteract the unpredictability of the weather, welcome to another ever-so-predictable edition of Hort Snacks. The content isn’t always predictable, but the arrival of it is. In this edition, you’ll notice a theme. And that theme is largely creepy/crawly. The season of insect wildlife is upon us, and to prepare you (and perhaps some of your customers) for identifying and dealing with some of those pests, you’ll find some caterpillar-related resources. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t more things out there, but this is a start. Otherwise, please take a moment to look at the various bits and pieces that might be of interest to you. Regardless, we wish you all the best for your growing season. Stay in touch. Rob Spencer/Dustin Morton, Commercial Horticulture Specialists Alberta Ag-Info Centre Alberta Agriculture and Forestry 310-FARM (3276) In this edition of Hort Snacks . Featured Surveys ………1 . Things to Do / Things to Think About ………2 . Interesting News/Articles to Read ………2 FEATURED SURVEYS . DED Awareness Week Reminder ………2 . Upcoming Conferences/Workshops ………3 . Input being sought with regards to Future Government Hort Snacks in the Field - Veg & Fruit Field Days ………3 .
    [Show full text]
  • Fig Tree with Unrelated Fig Wasps
    International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) ISSN (Online): 2319-7064 Index Copernicus Value (2015): 78.96 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391 Fig Tree with Unrelated Fig Wasps Aravind Krishnan K.1, Gayathri G. S.2, Sreedevi Amma3 Department of Zoology, University College, Thiruvananthapuram Abstract: A few non-agaonid wasps can enter figs to oviposit and effectively pollinate their fig hosts. In the study site (Karakulam, Thiruvananthapuram) Ficus hispida is pollinated by Ceratosolen marchali (Agaonidae). Two species of non-agaonid fig wasps, Philotrypesis pilosa and Apocrypta bakeri, also enter the fig to oviposit. Yet such wasps do not establish a mutualistic relationship with figs similar to that of agaonids. Using controlled experiments in which only one foundress per species was introduced to a fig, and compared the effect of the three wasp species on pollination. It has been recorded that foundress distribution in the fig female floral phase, and counted the number of wasps and seeds in the male floral phase, and found both non-agaonids are efficient pollinators too. The species of fig-entering non-agaonid wasps significantly reduced the number of C. marchali emerging from mature figs but had no effect on seed production. If P. pilosa or A. bakeri was introduced to figs containing one foundress of C. marchali, both non-agaonid wasps produced offspring. But without the C. marchali, P. pilosa and A. bakeri failed to reproduce. P. pilosa and A. bakeri depend on the agaonid, C. marchali, to make galls. Because they depend on the legitimate pollinator to make galls, neither P. pilosa nor A.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Forest Pests and Diseases in Protected Areas of Georgia Final Report
    Assessment of Forest Pests and Diseases in Protected Areas of Georgia Final report Dr. Iryna Matsiakh Tbilisi 2014 This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The content, findings, interpretations, and conclusions of this publication are the sole responsibility of the FLEG II (ENPI East) Programme Team (www.enpi-fleg.org) and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the Implementing Organizations. CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ............................................................................................................................. 3 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ...................................................................................................................... 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................. 7 Background information ...................................................................................................................................... 7 Literature review ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Results and Discussion ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Zootaxa,Phylogeny and Higher Classification of the Scale Insects
    Zootaxa 1668: 413–425 (2007) ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2007 · Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) Phylogeny and higher classification of the scale insects (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Coccoidea)* P.J. GULLAN1 AND L.G. COOK2 1Department of Entomology, University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected] 2School of Integrative Biology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia. Email: [email protected] *In: Zhang, Z.-Q. & Shear, W.A. (Eds) (2007) Linnaeus Tercentenary: Progress in Invertebrate Taxonomy. Zootaxa, 1668, 1–766. Table of contents Abstract . .413 Introduction . .413 A review of archaeococcoid classification and relationships . 416 A review of neococcoid classification and relationships . .420 Future directions . .421 Acknowledgements . .422 References . .422 Abstract The superfamily Coccoidea contains nearly 8000 species of plant-feeding hemipterans comprising up to 32 families divided traditionally into two informal groups, the archaeococcoids and the neococcoids. The neococcoids form a mono- phyletic group supported by both morphological and genetic data. In contrast, the monophyly of the archaeococcoids is uncertain and the higher level ranks within it have been controversial, particularly since the late Professor Jan Koteja introduced his multi-family classification for scale insects in 1974. Recent phylogenetic studies using molecular and morphological data support the recognition of up to 15 extant families of archaeococcoids, including 11 families for the former Margarodidae sensu lato, vindicating Koteja’s views. Archaeococcoids are represented better in the fossil record than neococcoids, and have an adequate record through the Tertiary and Cretaceous but almost no putative coccoid fos- sils are known from earlier.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Imidacloprid and Horticultural Oil on Nonâ•Fitarget
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-2007 Impact of Imidacloprid and Horticultural Oil on Non–target Phytophagous and Transient Canopy Insects Associated with Eastern Hemlock, Tsuga canadensis (L.) Carrieré, in the Southern Appalachians Carla Irene Dilling University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation Dilling, Carla Irene, "Impact of Imidacloprid and Horticultural Oil on Non–target Phytophagous and Transient Canopy Insects Associated with Eastern Hemlock, Tsuga canadensis (L.) Carrieré, in the Southern Appalachians. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2007. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/120 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Carla Irene Dilling entitled "Impact of Imidacloprid and Horticultural Oil on Non–target Phytophagous and Transient Canopy Insects Associated with Eastern Hemlock, Tsuga canadensis (L.) Carrieré, in the Southern Appalachians." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Entomology and Plant Pathology. Paris L. Lambdin, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Jerome Grant, Nathan Sanders, James Rhea, Nicole Labbé Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigations Into Stability in the Fig/Fig-Wasp Mutualism
    Investigations into stability in the fig/fig-wasp mutualism Sarah Al-Beidh A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of Imperial College London. Declaration I hereby declare that this submission is my own work, or if not, it is clearly stated and fully acknowledged in the text. Sarah Al-Beidh 2 Abstract Fig trees (Ficus, Moraceae) and their pollinating wasps (Chalcidoidea, Agaonidae) are involved in an obligate mutualism where each partner relies on the other in order to reproduce: the pollinating fig wasps are a fig tree’s only pollen disperser whilst the fig trees provide the wasps with places in which to lay their eggs. Mutualistic interactions are, however, ultimately genetically selfish and as such, are often rife with conflict. Fig trees are either monoecious, where wasps and seeds develop together within fig fruit (syconia), or dioecious, where wasps and seeds develop separately. In interactions between monoecious fig trees and their pollinating wasps, there are conflicts of interest over the relative allocation of fig flowers to wasp and seed development. Although fig trees reap the rewards associated with wasp and seed production (through pollen and seed dispersal respectively), pollinators only benefit directly from flowers that nurture the development of wasp larvae, and increase their fitness by attempting to oviposit in as many ovules as possible. If successful, this oviposition strategy would eventually destroy the mutualism; however, the interaction has lasted for over 60 million years suggesting that mechanisms must be in place to limit wasp oviposition. This thesis addresses a number of factors to elucidate how stability may be achieved in monoecious fig systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Membership 2005: Year in Review
    ESA Newsletter Information for the Members of the Entomological Society of America MARCH 2006 • VOLUME 29, NUMBER 3 Membership 2005: Year in Review By Chris Stelzig, Director of Membership we get too far into the year, I wanted to fin- not withstanding, this is a great, inexpensive and Marketing ish the update on 2005. way to get general feedback from you on a Sections and Branches—The Pacific wide range of topics. Headquarters uses this For the first time since 1992, ESA posted Branch saw the most growth when we com- data for planning purposes. In the Member- two back-to-back years of membership pare 2004 to 2005 with a 12% increase in ship Toolbox on the website (http://www. growth. This is a milestone, especially when membership. Only the Southeastern Branch entsoc.org/membership/toolbox/support_ coupled with the fact that just five years ago saw an actual decline, and that was merely esa/survey.htm), you will find a list of all our we were losing members by the hundreds by one person (a case in point to say that active surveys and an invitation to partici- every year and our funds were quickly dry- EVERY membership renewal is important!). pate in one. ing up. You’ve heard me say “Strength in Section B saw the largest growth last year, Performance—About 80% of members Numbers” for nearly five years now. The leaping more than 10%. who responded felt that they were satisfied reason for this is that membership is the Membership Types—As I mentioned with performance from ESA headquarters.
    [Show full text]
  • Lodgepole Pine Dwarf Mistletoe in Taylor Park, Colorado Report for the Taylor Park Environmental Assessment
    Lodgepole Pine Dwarf Mistletoe in Taylor Park, Colorado Report for the Taylor Park Environmental Assessment Jim Worrall, Ph.D. Gunnison Service Center Forest Health Protection Rocky Mountain Region USDA Forest Service 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 2 2. DESCRIPTION, DISTRIBUTION, HOSTS ..................................................................................... 2 3. LIFE CYCLE....................................................................................................................................... 3 4. SCOPE OF TREATMENTS RELATIVE TO INFESTED AREA ................................................. 4 5. IMPACTS ON TREES AND FORESTS ........................................................................................... 4 5.1 TREE GROWTH AND LONGEVITY .................................................................................................... 4 5.2 EFFECTS OF DWARF MISTLETOE ON FOREST DYNAMICS ............................................................... 6 5.3 RATE OF SPREAD AND INTENSIFICATION ........................................................................................ 6 6. IMPACTS OF DWARF MISTLETOES ON ANIMALS ................................................................ 6 6.1 DIVERSITY AND ABUNDANCE OF VERTEBRATES ............................................................................ 7 6.2 EFFECT OF MISTLETOE-CAUSED SNAGS ON VERTEBRATES ............................................................12
    [Show full text]
  • Researchcommons.Waikato.Ac.Nz
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Research Commons@Waikato http://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/ Research Commons at the University of Waikato Copyright Statement: The digital copy of this thesis is protected by the Copyright Act 1994 (New Zealand). The thesis may be consulted by you, provided you comply with the provisions of the Act and the following conditions of use: Any use you make of these documents or images must be for research or private study purposes only, and you may not make them available to any other person. Authors control the copyright of their thesis. You will recognise the author’s right to be identified as the author of the thesis, and due acknowledgement will be made to the author where appropriate. You will obtain the author’s permission before publishing any material from the thesis. Identifying Host Species of Dactylanthus taylorii using DNA Barcoding A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science in Biological Sciences at The University of Waikato by Cassarndra Marie Parker _________ The University of Waikato 2015 Acknowledgements: This thesis wouldn't have been possible without the support of many people. Firstly, my supervisors Dr Chrissen Gemmill and Dr Avi Holzapfel - your professional expertise, advice, and patience were invaluable. From pitching the idea in 2012 to reading through drafts in the final fortnight, I've been humbled to work with such dedicated and accomplished scientists. Special mention also goes to Thomas Emmitt, David Mudge, Steven Miller, the Auckland Zoo horticulture team and Kevin.
    [Show full text]
  • Diseases of Trees in the Great Plains
    United States Department of Agriculture Diseases of Trees in the Great Plains Forest Rocky Mountain General Technical Service Research Station Report RMRS-GTR-335 November 2016 Bergdahl, Aaron D.; Hill, Alison, tech. coords. 2016. Diseases of trees in the Great Plains. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-335. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 229 p. Abstract Hosts, distribution, symptoms and signs, disease cycle, and management strategies are described for 84 hardwood and 32 conifer diseases in 56 chapters. Color illustrations are provided to aid in accurate diagnosis. A glossary of technical terms and indexes to hosts and pathogens also are included. Keywords: Tree diseases, forest pathology, Great Plains, forest and tree health, windbreaks. Cover photos by: James A. Walla (top left), Laurie J. Stepanek (top right), David Leatherman (middle left), Aaron D. Bergdahl (middle right), James T. Blodgett (bottom left) and Laurie J. Stepanek (bottom right). To learn more about RMRS publications or search our online titles: www.fs.fed.us/rm/publications www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/ Background This technical report provides a guide to assist arborists, landowners, woody plant pest management specialists, foresters, and plant pathologists in the diagnosis and control of tree diseases encountered in the Great Plains. It contains 56 chapters on tree diseases prepared by 27 authors, and emphasizes disease situations as observed in the 10 states of the Great Plains: Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming. The need for an updated tree disease guide for the Great Plains has been recog- nized for some time and an account of the history of this publication is provided here.
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Insect Conditions in the United States 1966
    FOREST INSECT CONDITIONS IN THE UNITED STATES 1966 FOREST SERVICE ' U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Foreword This report is the 18th annual account of the scope, severity, and trend of the more important forest insect infestations in the United States, and of the programs undertaken to check resulting damage and loss. It is compiled primarily for managers of public and private forest lands, but has become useful to students and others interested in outbreak trends and in the location and extent of pest populations. The report also makes possible n greater awareness of the insect prob­ lem and of losses to the timber resource. The opening section highlights the more important conditions Nationwide, and each section that pertains to a forest region is prefaced by its own brief summary. Under the Federal Forest Pest Control Act, a sharing by Federal and State Governments the costs of surveys and control is resulting in a stronger program of forest insect and disease detection and evaluation surveys on non-Federal lands. As more States avail themselves of this financial assistance from the Federal Government, damage and loss from forest insects will become less. The screening and testing of nonpersistent pesticides for use in suppressing forest defoliators continued in 1966. The carbamate insecticide Zectran in a pilot study of its effectiveness against the spruce budworm in Montana and Idaho appeared both successful and safe. More extensive 'tests are planned for 1967. Since only the smallest of the spray droplets reach the target, plans call for reducing the spray to a fine mist. The course of the fine spray, resulting from diffusion and atmospheric currents, will be tracked by lidar, a radar-laser combination.
    [Show full text]
  • Insects That Feed on Trees and Shrubs
    INSECTS THAT FEED ON COLORADO TREES AND SHRUBS1 Whitney Cranshaw David Leatherman Boris Kondratieff Bulletin 506A TABLE OF CONTENTS DEFOLIATORS .................................................... 8 Leaf Feeding Caterpillars .............................................. 8 Cecropia Moth ................................................ 8 Polyphemus Moth ............................................. 9 Nevada Buck Moth ............................................. 9 Pandora Moth ............................................... 10 Io Moth .................................................... 10 Fall Webworm ............................................... 11 Tiger Moth ................................................. 12 American Dagger Moth ......................................... 13 Redhumped Caterpillar ......................................... 13 Achemon Sphinx ............................................. 14 Table 1. Common sphinx moths of Colorado .......................... 14 Douglas-fir Tussock Moth ....................................... 15 1. Whitney Cranshaw, Colorado State University Cooperative Extension etnomologist and associate professor, entomology; David Leatherman, entomologist, Colorado State Forest Service; Boris Kondratieff, associate professor, entomology. 8/93. ©Colorado State University Cooperative Extension. 1994. For more information, contact your county Cooperative Extension office. Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
    [Show full text]