Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • All Issues
  • Contribute
    • Submit to AUF
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
  • About
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • Journal Metrics
    • International Society of Arboriculture
  • More
    • Contact
    • Feedback
  • Alerts

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
  • Log in
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • All Issues
  • Contribute
    • Submit to AUF
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
  • About
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • Journal Metrics
    • International Society of Arboriculture
  • More
    • Contact
    • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
Research ArticleArticles

An Evaluation of the Residual Activity of Traditional, Safe, and Biological Insecticides Against the Gypsy Moth

Ralph E. Webb, Randy Peiffer, Roger W. Fuester, Kevin W. Thorpe, Louis Calabrese and Joseph M. McLaughlin
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) September 1998, 24 (5) 286-293; DOI: https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.1998.035
Ralph E. Webb
1Insect Biocontrol Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, Bldg. 306, Rm. 322, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD 20705
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
Randy Peiffer
2Delaware State University, Dover, DE 19901
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
Roger W. Fuester
3USDA, ARS, Beneficial Insects Introduction Research, Newark, DE 19713
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
Kevin W. Thorpe
1Insect Biocontrol Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, Bldg. 306, Rm. 322, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD 20705
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
Louis Calabrese
2Delaware State University, Dover, DE 19901
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
Joseph M. McLaughlin
2Delaware State University, Dover, DE 19901
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Literature Cited

  1. ↵
    1. Bartlett, B.R.
    1963. The contact toxicity of some pesticide residues to hymenopterous parasites and coccinellid predators. J. Econ. Entomol. 56: 694–698.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  2. ↵
    1. Brown, J.J.
    1996. The compatibility of tebufenozide with a laboratory Lepidopteran host/Hymenopteran parasitoidpopulation. Biol. Control 6: 96–104.
    OpenUrl
  3. ↵
    1. Cook, S.P.,
    2. R.E. Webb, and
    3. K.W. Thorpe
    . 1996. Potential enhancement of the gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) nuclear polyhedrosis virus with the triterpene azadirachtin. Environ. Entomol. 25: 1209–1214.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. ↵
    1. Dougherty, E.M.,
    2. K.P. Guthrie, and
    3. M. Shapiro
    . 1996. Optical brighteners provide baculovirus activity enhancement and UV radiation protection. Biol. Control 7: 71–74.
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Nielsen, D.G.
    1990. Evaluation of biorationalpesticides for use in arboriculture. J. Arboric. 16:82–88.
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Podgwaite, J.D.,
    2. R.C. Reardon,
    3. D. Kolodny-Hirsch, and
    4. G.S. Walton
    . 1991. Efficacy of ground application of gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) nucleopolyhedrosis virus product, Gypchek. J. Econ. Entomol. 84:440–444.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  7. ↵
    1. Raupp, M.J.,
    2. C.S. Koehler, and
    3. J.A. Davidson
    . 1992. Advances in implementing pest management for woody landscape plants. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 37:561–585.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  8. ↵
    SAS Institute Inc. 1996. SAS/STAT Software: Changes and Enhancements through Release 6.11. Cary, NC.
  9. ↵
    1. Shapiro, M.,
    2. J.L. Robertson, and
    3. R.E. Webb
    . 1994. Effect of neem extract upon the gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) and its nuclear polyhedrosis virus. J. Econ. Entomol. 87: 356–360.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Skatulla, U., and
    2. J. Meisner
    . 1975. Effects of neem-extracts on caterpillars of the gypsy moth.Lymantria dispar L. Anz. Schadlingsk. Pflanzenschutz Umweltschutz 48:38–40.
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Thorpe, K.W.
    1996. Effects of ground-based applications of soap. Bacillus thuringiensis, cyfluthrin, and trunk barriers on gypsy moth density and defoliation. J. Arboric. 22:87–91.
    OpenUrl
  11. ↵
    1. Thorpe, K.W.,
    2. K.M. Tatman,
    3. P. Sellers,
    4. R.E. Webb, and
    5. R.L. Ridgway
    . 1995. Management of gypsy moths using sticky barriers and larval removal. J. Arboric. 21:69–76.
    OpenUrl
  12. ↵
    1. Webb, R.E.,
    2. M. Shapiro,
    3. J.D. Podgwaite,
    4. R.C. Reardon,
    5. K.M. Tatman,
    6. L. Venables, and
    7. D.M. Kolodny-Hirsch
    . 1989. Effect of aerial spraying with Dimilin, Dipel, or Gypchek on two natural enemies of the gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 82:1695–1701.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. ↵
    1. Webb, R.E.,
    2. J.D. Podgwaite,
    3. M. Shapiro,
    4. K.M. Tatman, and
    5. L.W. Douglass
    . 1990. Hydraulic spray application of Gypchek as a homeowner control tactic against gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). J. Entomol. Sci. 25:383–393.
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    1. Webb, R.E.,
    2. R.L. Ridgway,
    3. K.W. Thorpe,
    4. K.M. Tatman,
    5. A.M. Wieber, and
    6. L. Venables
    . 1991. Development of a specialized gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) management program for suburban parks. J. Econ. Entomol. 84:1320–1328.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  15. ↵
    1. Webb, R.E.,
    2. M. Shapiro,
    3. J.D. Podgwaite,
    4. D.E. Lynn,
    5. E.M. Dougherty,
    6. R.L. Ridgway,
    7. L. Venables, and
    8. D.L. Cohen
    . 1993. Field comparison of different strains of gypsy moth nuclear polyhedrosis virus against gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) in Western Maryland in 1990. J. Econ. Entomol. 86:1185–1190.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  16. ↵
    1. Webb, R.E.,
    2. N.H. Dill,
    3. J.D. Podgwaite,
    4. M. Shapiro,
    5. R.L. Ridgway,
    6. J.L. Vaughn,
    7. L. Venables, and
    8. R.J. Argauer
    . 1994a. Control of third and fourth instar gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) with Gypchek combined with a stilbene disulfonic acid additive on individual shade trees. J. Entomol. Sci. 29:82–91.
    OpenUrl
  17. ↵
    1. Webb, R.E.,
    2. W.H. McLane,
    3. J.A. Finney,
    4. L. Venables,
    5. G.B. White,
    6. A.M. Wieber, and
    7. D.L. Cohen
    . 1994b. Destruction of gypsy moth egg masses (using surfactants, detergents, oils, or conventional insecticides) for quarantine and community action programs. J. Entomol. Sci. 29:305–317.
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    1. Webb, R.E.,
    2. M. Shapiro,
    3. J.D. Podgwaite,
    4. R.L. Ridgway,
    5. L. Venables,
    6. G.B. White,
    7. R.J. Argauer,
    8. D.L. Cohen,
    9. J. Witcosky,
    10. K.M. Kester, and
    11. K.W. Thorpe
    . 1994c. Effect of optical brighteners on the efficacy of gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) nuclear polyhedrosis virus in forest plots with high or low levels of natural virus. J. Econ. Entomol. 87: 134–143.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  19. ↵
    1. Webb, R.E.,
    2. N.H. Dill,
    3. J.M. McLaughlin,
    4. L.S. Kershaw,
    5. J.D. Podgwaite,
    6. S.P. Cook,
    7. K.W. Thorpe,
    8. R.R. Farrar, Jr.,
    9. R.L. Ridgway,
    10. R.W. Fuester,
    11. M. Shapiro,
    12. R.J. Argauer,
    13. L. Venables, and
    14. G.B. White
    . 1996. Blankophor BBH as an enhancer of nuclear polyhedrosis virus in arborist treatments against the gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 89:957–962.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  20. ↵
    1. Wilkinson, J.D.,
    2. K.D. Biever,
    3. C.M. Ignoffo,
    4. W.J. Pons,
    5. R.K. Morrison, and
    6. R.S. Seay
    . 1978. Evaluation of diflubenzuron formulations on selected insect parasitoids and predators. J. Ga. Entomol. Soc. 13:227–236.
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF)
Vol. 24, Issue 5
September 1998
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Arboriculture & Urban Forestry.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
An Evaluation of the Residual Activity of Traditional, Safe, and Biological Insecticides Against the Gypsy Moth
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Arboriculture & Urban Forestry web site.
Citation Tools
An Evaluation of the Residual Activity of Traditional, Safe, and Biological Insecticides Against the Gypsy Moth
Ralph E. Webb, Randy Peiffer, Roger W. Fuester, Kevin W. Thorpe, Louis Calabrese, Joseph M. McLaughlin
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Sep 1998, 24 (5) 286-293; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.1998.035

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
An Evaluation of the Residual Activity of Traditional, Safe, and Biological Insecticides Against the Gypsy Moth
Ralph E. Webb, Randy Peiffer, Roger W. Fuester, Kevin W. Thorpe, Louis Calabrese, Joseph M. McLaughlin
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Sep 1998, 24 (5) 286-293; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.1998.035
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgements
    • Literature Cited
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Contribution of Urban Trees to Ecosystem Services in Lisbon: A Comparative Study Between Gardens and Street Trees
  • Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) in Tree Risk Assessment (TRA): A Systematic Review
  • Assessing Biodiversity Associated with Four Monumental Trees in Madrid Region (Spain)
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

© 2025 International Society of Arboriculture

Powered by HighWire