DOCSLIB.ORG

U. S. Forest Seruice Research Note SE- 7 July 1963

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
U. S. Forest Seruice Research Note SE- 7 July 1963 U. S. Forest Seruice Research Note SE- 7 July 1963 PINE TIP MOTH DAMAGE TO PLANTED PINES IN SOUTH FLORIDA Resistance to insect attack is an important consideration to the landowner or manager who must decide which tree species to plant. Results from several studies in artificial regeneration of pines in south Florida indicate that the in­ digenous slash pine variety, South Florida slash pine (Pinus elliottii var. densa Little & Dorman), is less susceptible to a pine tip moth(Rhyacionia subtropica Miller) than other commonly planted southern pines. Early planting studies on the Corkscrew Experimental Forestlf in south Florida included both typical slash pine (Pinus elliottii var. elliottii) and the South Florida variety. The incidence of pine tip moths in the terminal leaders was inventoried in plantations established in 1952, 1953, and 1954. The num­ ber of trees inventoried varied from 106 typical slash pine in the 1952 planting to 8,814 South Florida slash in the 1954 planting. Data from the early plantations showed that typical slash pine were not only more susceptible than South Florida slash pine to leader infestation by pine tip moths (table 1), but that injury to typical slash was severe, often resulting in death of the infested leader, deformation, and sometimes death of the tree. Although some damage was recorded every year, widespread attacks began the fourth year after planting, the most serious damage 5 years after planting. Table 1. --Incidence of pine tip moth infestation in Additional data on pine tip the terminal leaders of slash pines at age 5 on moth attacks were obtained from the Corkscrew Experimental Forest a study installed in 1955 to test four pine species at eight locations Planting date South Florida Typical slash (year) slash throughout south Florida (fig. 1). Species included typical slash, - - - Percent - - - South Florida slash, loblolly (Pinus 1952 75 6 taeda L.), and longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.). Careful records of 1953 79 5 insect infestation were maintained. 1954 70 8 1/ A 4,000-acre tract in Collier County, Florida, owned by the Alico Land Development Company and leased for research purposes to the Southeastern Forest Experiment Station in cooperation with the Florida Board of Forestry. I >.. \-..... \).. ~,..,1 ... ,--1~( - - ----l.... 7Tt-.1~ rJ - ..... 7-_ •. 5j1I .-+-=:_? - .... \ '1 -5 I "'- t-.=- .: ---t-· - --- -- - I 'f- rffil Cork~ew'---1 '-·-7 -- 8 - L.__ __. - I Figure 1. --Location of the eight species comparison plantings in south Florida. A pine tip moth, Rhyacionia subtropica Miller; a pine sawfly, Neodiprion merkeli; the pine webworm, Tetralopha robustella; and Dioryctria amatella were noted in some or all of the plantings established in 1955. 2/ However, only pine tip moth damaged trees appreciably (table 2). Data from this study not only confirmed observations from the earlier plantations that typical slash pine is more susceptible than South Florida slash pine to attacks from pine tip moth, but also indicated that the relative susceptibility of typical slash varied considerably by location. Incidence in typical slash pine increased from north to south for the four southwest Florida plots, but the pattern. did not hold true for the southeast Florida plantings. There, the incidence of pine tip moth dropped from location 6 south. 5!/ Specimens were identified by E. P. Merkel and B. H. Ebel, Entomologists, Olustee Research Center, Olustee, Florida. I Table 2. --Incidence of pine tip moth infestation in the terminal leaders of 6-year-old pines planted at eight south Florida locations in 1954-5511 Infestation on-- Location Vegetative cover (number) T . al h [ South Florida I yp1c s 1as slash Loblolly I Longleaf - - - - - - - - - - - Percent - - - - - - - - - - - 1 Cutover longleaf 8.4 2.7 2.2 0.9 2 Cutover longleaf 18.3 2.4 8.0 1.2 3 Cutover South Florida slash 27.8 6.6 15.3 .8 4 Cutover South Florida slash 52.0 6.8 14.4 .o 5 Cutover longleaf 13.8 4.2 20.9 .6 6 Cutover South Florida slash 47.6 9.4 10.4 .o 7 Cutover South Florida slash 28.1 14.8 15.2 .o 8 Drained saw grass marsh 10.1 9.5 13.6 .o All sites 25.8 7.0 12.5 .4 11 196 trees of each species were planted at each location. Pine tip moth infested a larger percentage of typical slash pine than South Florida slash pine at every location, More typical slash than loblolly were infested at six of the eight locations; and more loblolly than South Florida slash pine at seven of the eight locations, Pine tip moth attack on longleaf pine was negligible. Rhyacionia subtropica Miller has been identified on both varieties of slash pine, on longleaf pine, loblolly pine, and tropical pine (Pinus tropicalis). ~ However, typical slash pine has been considered quite resistant to pine tip moth within its natural range, 1/ and until recently, longleaf has been regarc:led as immune to its infestation. W The increased susceptibility of these species in south Florida may be because typical slash pine does not extend naturally into ~ Miller• William E. A new pine tip moth (Olethreutidae) from the Gulf of Mexico region. Jour. Lepidopterists' Society 14: 231-236. 1960. 1;/ Yates, Harry O. III. Influence of tip moth larvae on oleoresin crystallization of southern pines. U. S. Forest Serv. Southeast. Forest Expt. Sta. Res. Notes 174. 1962. fl/ Yates, Harry 0, III. The Nantucket pine moth. A literature review. U, S. Forest Serv. Southeast. Forest Expt. Sta. Paper 115, 19 pp •• illus. 1960, li the area studied, and longleaf pine is near or below its southern limits at these locations. Species planted at or below their limits of natural distribution are reported more than normally susceptible to injury from pine tip moths. 9/ In south Florida. plantings of typical slash can be expected to experience severe tip moth damage. 9/ Wakeley, Philip C. Planting the southern pines. U. S. Dept. Agr. Monog. 18, 233 pp., illus. 1954. James E. Bethune Agricullure - Arbevill• Fort Myers, Florida .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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 .................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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...............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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) .
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Taxonomic Classification of Pines
    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).
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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 .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]