Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T04:01:50.631Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bionomics of the Aspen Leaf Miner, Phyllocnistis populiella Cham. (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae)1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

S. F. Condrashoff
Affiliation:
Forest Entomology and Pathology Laboratory, Victoria, British Columbia

Abstract

The aspen leaf miner, Phyllocnistis populiella Cham., has recently become common and very abundant in western North America, and has been authoritatively identified only from trembling aspen, Populus tremuloides Michx. Overwintered adults lay eggs on young aspen leaves in spring, and new-generation moths emerge in about two months. Only the single epidermal cell layer is mined on the upper or lower leaf surface, most of the feeding being done by the third-instar larva in about a week. Heavy attack results in defoliation by mid-summer. Activities of breeding populations are affected by temperature (50-55°F. is optimal for copulation, 54-56°F. for feeding, and 52-58°F. for oviposirion) and developmental stage of aspen leaves. Eggs are laid singly near the apex of the leaf and tend to be evenly spaced. Distribution of eggs between leaves tends to be uniform in a particular level of the tree, although more eggs are laid in the lower crown. A female moth can develop more than 40 eggs, but only about 7 are usually laid because of limited opportunities. Mortality in the larval and pupal stages is often high; population decline usually follows mortalities above 70%. Parasitism sometimes plays an important role, but the independence of population changes between broad geographic areas suggests that numbers of P. populiella may be strongly influenced by climatic factors. Population trends and damage can be assessed conveniently for large geographic areas and for specific sites by continuing studies in permanent sample plots. Expected damage may be predicted from estimates of new-generation adult populations. Because inter-tree variation exceeds intra-tree variation, more trees and fewer branches per tree should be taken to increase sampling efficiency. Also, greater precision is attained by the use of the individual leaf surface rather than the leaf as a basic sample unit.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1964

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Braun, A. F. 1925. Microlepidoptera of northern Utah. Trans. Amer. ent. Soc. 51: 183226.Google Scholar
Busck, A. 1904. Tineid moths from British Columbia, with descriptions of new species. Proc. U. S. nat. Mus. 27: 745778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, V. T. 1875. Tineina of the Central United States. Cincinn. Quart. J. Sci. 2: 97121.Google Scholar
Chambers, V. T. 1877a. The Tineina of Colorado. Bull. U.S. geol. & geogr. Surv. 3: 121142.Google Scholar
Chambers, V. T. 1877b. On the distribution of Tineina in Colorado. Bull. U. S. geol. & geogr. Surv. 3: 147150.Google Scholar
Conrashoff, S. F. 1958. Differences in aspen phenology and survival of immature stages of Phyllocnistis populiella Cham. Bi-m. prog. Rep., Div. For. Biol., Dep. Agric. Can. 14(6): 34.Google Scholar
Condrashoff, S. F. 1962. A description of the immature stages of Phyllocnistis populiella Chambers (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae). Canad. Ent. 94: 902909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Condrashoff, S. F., and Arrand, J. C.. 1962. Chemical control of the aspen leaf miner, Phyllocnistis populiella Cham. (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae). Prcc. ent. Soc. B. C. 59: 34.Google Scholar
Doane, R. W. et al. , 1936. Forest insects. McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc., New York and London.Google Scholar
Dyar, H. G. 1904. The lepidoptera of the Kootenai District of British Columbia. Proc. U. S. nat. Mus. 27: 779938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, E. L. 1953. Check list of native and naturalized trees of the United States (including Alaska). U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Ser., Agric. Handbook 41, 472 pp.Google Scholar
Martynova, E. F. 1955. Leaf-mining moths of the genus Phyllocnistis Z. (Lepidoptera: Phyllocnistidae) of the U.S.S.R. fauna. Ent. Obozr. 34: 244251.Google Scholar
Putman, W. L. 1963. Nectar of peach leaf glands as insect food. Canad. Ent. 95: 108109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Randall, A. P. 1957. Plastic rearing cage for maintaining fresh conifer foliage for insect rearing. Canad. Ent. 89: 448449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehder, A. 1958. Manual of cultivated trees and shrubs. 2nd ed. McMillan Co., New York.Google Scholar
Rössler, A. 1866. Verzeichniss der Schmetterlinge des Herzogthums Nassau, mit besonderer Verücklichtigung der biologischen Verhältnisse und der Enwicklungsgeschichte. Jb. nassau. Ver. Naturk. 19–20: 101416.Google Scholar
Sich, F. E. S. 1902. Observations of the early stages of Phyllocnistis suffusella Zell. City of Lond. ent. nat. Hist. Soc. 12: 8093.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. 1956. Statistical methods. 5th ed. Iowa State Coll. Press, Ames, Iowa.Google Scholar
Sundby, R. 1953. Studies on the leaf-mining moth Phyllocnistis labyrinthella Bjerk. 1. Nytt Mag. Zool. 1: 98128.Google Scholar
Sundby, R. 1958. The marking of the moth Phyllocnistis labyrinthella Bjerk. with radioactive phosphorus. Oikos 9: 253259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar