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

Physiological Response of Ash Trees, Fraxinus spp., Infested with Emerald Ash Borer, Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire (Coleoptera: Buprestidae), to Emamectin Benzoate (Tree-Äge) Stem Injections

Ryan P. Hanavan and Molly Heuss
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) July 2019, 45 (4) 132-138; DOI: https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2019.012
Ryan P. Hanavan
Ryan P. Hanavan (corresponding author), USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Area State & Private Forestry, 271 Mast Rd., Durham, NH 03824, U.S.A.,
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
Molly Heuss
Molly Heuss, University of Vermont, Rubenstein School, Burlington, VT 05405, U.S.A.,
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Listen

Street- and park-planted ash (Fraxinus spp.) trees infested with emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire) ranging in size from 30 to 55 cm (11.8 to 21.7 in) dbh and 10 to 20 m (32.8 to 65.6 feet) in height were measured over two sites. The first group was treated with an emamectin benzoate stem injection at 10 ml/2.54 cm dbh (0.4 g ai) in June 2014, and the second group was left as an untreated control. Chlorophyll concentration and fluorescence was measured to assess plant fitness and vitality over three summers. Trees treated with emamectin benzoate showed improvements in chlorophyll concentration and plant fitness and vitality over the course of the study with peak improvement occurring in the second year. The untreated control trees showed continued signs of decline in each year of the study. This work demonstrates the utility of chlorophyll fluorescence for detecting plant stress related to forest health threats and could potentially inform managers on both short-term and long-term management options.

Keywords
  • Agrilus planipennis
  • Ash
  • Emerald Ash Borer
  • Chemical Control
  • Chlorophyll Fluorescence
  • Plant Fitness
  • Plant Vitality

The emerald ash borer Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) is native to East Asia and Russia (Haack et al. 2002). This insect was first discovered in North America in 2002 when widespread ash (Fraxinus spp.) mortality was reported in southeast Michigan and Windsor, Ontario (Haack et al. 2002). Newly infested ash trees do not typically exhibit any external or visible symptoms (McCullough et al. 2009; Poland and McCullough 2006), making early detection difficult. Epicormic shoots, bark deformities, canopy dieback, yellow foliage, and blonding from woodpecker feeding are all external symptoms of an A. planipennis infestation that do not typically occur until trees are heavily infested. Ash yellows, phytoplasmas, are also present in the northeastern United States and can complicate early detection of A. planipennis. Healthy stands of ash, once infested by A. planipennis, can suffer greater than 99% mortality within six years of initial infestation (Knight et al. 2013), but this presumably follows a longer lag period (Klooster et al. 2014).

Adult A. planipennis emergence begins in the spring through characteristic D-shaped emergence holes starting in mid-May with a peak in June (Cappaert et al. 2005). Newly emerged adults feed on ash foliage for approximately one week before mating, followed by oviposition where females can lay 50 to 90 eggs (Bauer et al. 2004). Larvae undergo four instars and create serpentine galleries while feeding in cambial region on phloem and outer xylem (Cappaert et al. 2005). As larval densities increase, water transport is directly impacted through girdling. Girdled tissue ultimately results in a decrease in the photosynthetic electron transport rate and increases photoprotective energy dissipation (Urban and Alphonsout 2007).

As trees experience increased stress (drought, resource competition, extreme temperatures, nutrient deficits, insect and disease attack), photosynthesis is reduced, and plants shift towards photoprotection mechanisms to safely dissipate excess energy (Peñuelas and Munné-Bosch 2005). Chlorophyll fluorescence is a measure of photosynthetic efficiency, illustrating relationships between both structure and function of Photosystem II (PSII), Reaction Center (RC), and core complexes (Rosenqvist and van Kooten 2003). Chlorophyll fluorescence is a useful tool to measure the physiological status of plant performance (fitness and vitality) under a large range of conditions (Baker and Rosenqvist 2004; Johnstone et al. 2014), including the effects of insect herbivory (Tang et al. 2006; Zangerl et al. 2002). Photochemical change due to stress is measured through a unique group of fluorescence parameters derived from chlorophyll a fluorescence kinetics. The maximum quantum yield of PSII photochemistry (FV/FM), where FV is the maximum capacity for photochemical quenching and FM is the maximum chlorophyll fluorescence, can be used to measure solar energy conversion to fixed carbon and serve as a strong indicator of overall plant fitness (Strasser et al. 1995). The average FV/FM value for healthy plants is > 0.8 (Björkman and Demmig 1987) with decreasing values indicating a reduction in maximum quantum efficiency associated with increased stress (Maxwell and Johnson 2000). Plant vitality is characterized by the Performance Index (PIabs) (Strasser et al. 2000) to best explain the functionality of both photosystems I and II while providing quantitative data on plant performance under stress (Strasser et al. 2004).

Millions of ash trees have been killed in urban, rural, and forested settings in North America since 2002, with management costs potentially reaching $10.7 billion across 25 states in the eastern United States (Kovacs et al. 2010). Management options have been proposed for A. planipennis that range from doing nothing to retaining ash trees through insecticide application (Vannatta et al. 2012). There are currently several insecticide products registered to combat A. planipennis infestations, with emamectin benzoate being the most effective option for slowing A. planipennis population growth (McCullough and Mercader 2012). Annual trunk injections have been demonstrated to be efficacious against A. planipennis (Cappaert et al. 2005; Herms et al. 2009; Smitley et al. 2010b). Single, one-time injections have also shown success against A. planipennis for two to four years post-injection, showing promise for reducing annual treatments and injection rates and protecting more trees (Smitley et al. 2010a; Smitley et al. 2015).

Several factors must be considered during the decision process to treat and retain or remove ash trees in A. planipennis infested areas such as tree size, health, location, and value. Measuring the health and potential recovery of a tree over time can serve as a valuable tool in quantifying treatment efficacy and future management decisions. The goal of this study was to gain a better understanding of the physiological response (decline or recovery) of the infested tree using foliar chlorophyll content and fluoresesnce of A. planipennis infested trees treated with emamectin benzoate or un-treated and measured for three years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Listen

Two sites in Concord, New Hampshire were selected for this study. Measurements were collected once every July over the course of three summers from 2014 to 2016. Both sites were identified as A. planipennis infested during a 2013 delimitation survey conducted by the New Hampshire Division of Forests and Lands Forest Health Program and all trees selected for the study had D-shaped exit holes characteristic of adult A. planipennis emergence along the upper stem and crown base. The first site was a dog park (DP) with open-grown green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marshall), all showing early signs of decline due to A. planipennis. The second site was a city street (CS) with smaller diameter white ash (Fraxinus americana L.) in a more advanced state of decline, with characteristic blonding of the bark from woodpeckers and galleries visible in the mid-upper bole. Both sites were selected by the New Hampshire Division of Forests and Lands Forest Health Program as an opportunity to create side-to-side visual comparison of chemically treated and untreated infested trees to increase community awareness.

Ten green ash trees were selected for chemical treatment (Chem) at the DP site and paired with ten un-treated green ash trees (Control). Five white ash trees were selected for treatment at the CS site and paired with five un-treated white ash trees. Diameter at breast height (dbh) (cm) and height (m) was measured for each tree. TREE-äge® (emamectin benzoate, Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc.), a systemic insecticide currently registered in all states where A. planipennis has been detected, was used at both sites. TREE-äge® was applied once at 10 ml/2.54 cm dbh (0.4 g ai) on June 4, 2014 at both sites. The Arborjet Tree IV system was used and TREE-äge® was then diluted 1:1 with water and placed into a pressurized 3.16 kg/cm2 bottle connected to four injection needles. The injection sites were evenly spaced around the base of the trunks at a height of 20 to 40 cm (7.8 to 15.7 in) above the soil surface. Four holes were then drilled into the sapwood at each of the four injection sites and a plastic septum (Arborjet #4 plug) was inserted. The injection needles were then placed in the septa and the injection was completed. The injection process has been found to not compromise structural integrity, lead to infection, or negatively impact tree health (Doccola et al. 2011).

Chlorophyll Content and Fluorescence

Healthy and unhealthy vegetation demonstrate differences in pigment and moisture content. Healthy cells are more capable of quenching and utilizing light energy towards photosynthetic processes than dead or damaged cells. An atLEAF chlorophyll meter (FT Green LLC, Wilmington, Delaware, U.S.A.) was used to measure relative chlorophyll concentration using wavelengths of 660 and 940 nm. Five samples were taken for each individual tree and averaged. Each sample was a leaf collected from the sunlit portion of the canopy. All collection days took place under relatively clear, blue-sky conditions. All atLEAF values were then converted to SPAD units (Zhu et al. 2012) to calculate total chlorophyll concentrations (mg/cm2) (Richardson et al. 2002). A Handy PEA fluorimeter (Hansatech Instruments, Norfolk, UK) using a high light emitting device (LED) light source with rapid measurement capabilities was used to capture the polyphasic rise in chlorophyll fluorescence (OJIP curve) known as the Kautsky effect (Kautsky and Hirsch 1931). Sampling was conducted once per year every July. All foliage was collected from sunlit branches and processed on-site. Five samples were taken per tree and averaged. All samples were immediately placed into a dark adaptation clip for thirty minutes and then subjected to a saturating red actinic light intensity of 1500 μMol m−2 s−1 for one second. The PSII reaction centers of leaves transferred from darkness to light are progressively closed. This creates an immediate increase in yield of chlorophyll fluorescence, primarily in the first second of illumination, before fluorescence levels begin to decrease again. All samples were grouped by treatment (Chem and Control) and measured for vitality (PIabs) and fitness (FV/FM). The PIabs parameter is calculated as follows:Embedded Image

Where F0 is the fluorescence intensity at 50 μs, FM is the maximal fluorescence intensity, VJ is the relative variable fluorescence at 2 ms calculated as VJ – (FJ – F0) / (FM – F0), and M0 represents the initial slope of fluorescence kinetics, which can be derived from the equation: M0 = 4x(F300 μs – F0) / (FM – F0). The maximum quantum efficiency of PS II photochemistry (Fv/Fm) is calculated as follows:Embedded Image

Chlorophyll concentration, plant vitality (PIabs), and plant fitness (Fv/Fm) values were analyzed using a univariate repeated measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) using PROC GLM (SAS Institute, 2004). Tukey’s HSD (α = 0.05) was used for pairwise comparisons among fluorescence means within and between treatments. Each location was analyzed separately.

RESULTS

Listen

Average dbh for the DP site was 53.9 cm (± 5.1) for chemically treated trees and 48.1 cm (± 5.5) for control trees, respectively. Average heights for the DP site were 15.6 m (± 0.9) for the chemically treated trees and 17.1 m (± 0.8) for the control trees, respectively. Average dbh for the CS site were 34.7 cm (± 5.1) for chemically treated trees and 31.6 cm (± 2.2) for control trees, respectively. Average heights for the CS site were 12.9 m (± 0.8) for the chemically treated trees and 13.2 m (± 0.9) for the control trees, respectively.

Results from both DP and CS locations indicate continued health improvement over time from the emamectin benzoate treated trees in year two and three of this study. Figure 1 shows the chlorophyll a fluorescence OJIP transient curves of chemically treated and control trees at the DP and CS sites during the summer (2014–2016).

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Chlorophyll a fluorescence OJIP curves from green ash at the Dog Park site (a-c) and white ash at the City Street site (d-f) in 2014, 2015, and 2016, respectively.

Insecticide-treated trees show improvement in 2015 and continued improvement in 2016. There was a significant interaction between treatment and time for chlorophyll content at the Dog Park (F1, 2 = 46.3, P < 0.001) and City Street (F1, 2 = 15.9, P < 0.001) sites. There was no significant difference between mean chlorophyll concentrations in 2014. However, mean chlorophyll concentration was significantly greater in chemically treated trees at both sites in 2015 and 2016 (Figure 2).

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Mean chlorophyll concentration (mg/cm2) over time for green ash at the Dog Park (a) and white ash at the City Street sites (b), respectively. An asterisk indicates significant differences (P < 0.05) between chemically treated trees and untreated control trees.

There was a significant interaction between treatment and time for plant vitality (PIabs) at the Dog Park (F1, 2 = 51.5, P < 0.001) and City Street (F1, 2 = 158.1, P < 0.001) sites. There was no significant difference between mean plant vitality in 2014. However, mean plant vitality was significantly greater in chemically treated trees at both sites in 2015 and 2016 (Figure 3). There was a significant interaction between treatment and time for plant fitness (FV/FM) at the Dog Park (F1, 2 = 16.7, P < 0.001) and City Street (F1, 2 = 9.9, P < 0.001) sites. There was no significant difference between mean plant fitness in 2014. However, mean plant fitness was significantly greater in chemically treated trees at both sites in 2015 and 2016 (Figure 4).

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

Mean plant vitality measured as Performance Index (PIabs) over time for green ash at the Dog Park (a) and white ash at the City Street sites (b), respectively. An asterisk indicates significant differences (P < 0.05) between chemically treated trees and untreated control trees.

Figure 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 4.

Mean plant fitness measured as maximum quantum yield of PS II photochemistry (FV/FM) over time for green ash at the Dog Park (a) and white ash at the City Street sites (b), respectively. An asterisk indicates significant differences (P < 0.05) between chemically treated trees and untreated control trees.

DISCUSSION

Listen

Trees treated with emamectin benzoate, TREE-äge®, showed positive physiological response in the form of increased chlorophyll concentration and improvements in both vitality and fitness at both sites during this study with the peak of the response occurring in the second year, indicating the untreated control trees were physiologically more stressed due to continued larval attack by A. planipennis. Chlorophyll fluorescence continued to decline in the control trees while the emamectin benzoate–treated trees showed greater improvement during year two with values showing signs of decline again in year three. Smitley et al. (2010a) found emamectin benzoate–treated trees were free of larvae even when the trees were surrounded by heavily infested trees. Plant vitality, measured as the Performance Index (PIabs), and fitness, measured as the maximum quantum yield of PSII photochemistry (FV/FM), are useful tools for measuring solar energy conversion to fixed carbon while measuring plant performance under stress (Dodds et al. 2016; Strasser et al. 2000; Strasser et al. 2004).

Leaf photosynthetic capacity and the hydraulic properties of tree stems have been demonstrated to be related (Brodribb and Field 2000; Brodribb et al. 2007) and directly used for pest-related stress detection (Christen et al. 2007; Dodds et al. 2016). Increased larval densities of A. planipennis negatively impact water transport of the infested tree, ultimately reducing the leaf photosynthetic capacity resulting in direct reduction in plant vitality and fitness. Chlorophyll fluorescence is therefore an excellent non-destructive tool to measure the physiological state of photosynthetic tissues (Maxwell and Johnson 2000) and could provide valuable health information in preparation for potential infestations as well as informing long-term management of an ash resource.

Previous work has shown that a single stem injection of emamectin benzoate at a 0.4 g ai/2.54 cm dbh rate reduces A. planipennis larvae up to almost 100% for three years (Smitley et al. 2010a) with biennial treatments being optimal (Flower et al. 2015). Our work shows that trees previously infested with A. planipennis also show physiological signs of improvement, suggesting at least short-term recovery from attack is also possible through continued applications every three years.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Listen

We greatly appreciate the assistance of the New Hampshire Division of Forests and Lands Forest Health Group for treating the trees and allowing us to measure them over the course of this study. We are also grateful to Andy Graves (USFS) for providing helpful comments to improve this manuscript.

  • © 2019, International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved.

LITERATURE CITED

Listen
  1. ↵
    1. Baker, N.R., and
    2. E. Rosenqvist
    . 2004. Applications of chlorophyll fluorescence can improve crop production strategies: an examination of future possibilities. Journal of Experimental Botany 55: 1607–1621.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Bauer, L.R.,
    2. R.A. Haack,
    3. D.R. Miller,
    4. T.R. Petrice, and
    5. H. Liu
    . 2004. Emerald ash borer life cycle. Emerald Ash Borer Research and Technology Development Meeting, Port Huron, MI.
  3. ↵
    1. Björkman,
    2. O., and
    3. B. Demmig
    . 1987. Photon yield of O2 evolution and chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics at 77 K among vascular plants of diverse origins. Planta 170(4): 489–504.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Brodribb, T., and
    2. T.S. Field
    . 2000. Stem hydraulic supply is linked to leaf photosynthetic capacity: evidence from New Caledonian and Tasmanian rainforests. Plant Cell and Environment 23(12): 1381–1988.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  5. ↵
    1. Brodribb, T.J.,
    2. T.S. Feild, and
    3. G.J. Jordan
    . 2007. Leaf Maximum Photosynthetic Rate and Venation Are Linked by Hydraulics. Plant Physiology 144(4): 1890–1898.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Cappaert, D.L.,
    2. D.G. McCullough, and
    3. T.M. Poland
    . 2005. Emerald ash borer life cycle: a reassessment. Emerald Ash Borer Research and Technology Development Meeting, Romulus, MI.
  7. ↵
    1. Christen, D.,
    2. S. Schönmann,
    3. M. Jermini,
    4. R.J. Strasser, and
    5. G. Défago
    . 2007. Characterization and early detection of grapevine (Vitis vinifera) stress responses to esca disease by in situ chlorophyll fluorescence and comparison with drought stress. Environmental and Experimental Botany 60(3): 504–514.
    OpenUrl
  8. ↵
    1. Doccola, J.J.,
    2. D.R. Smitley,
    3. T.W. Davis,
    4. J.J. Aiken, and
    5. P.M. Wild
    . 2011. Tree wound responses following systemic insecticide trunk injection treatments in green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marsh.) as determined by destructive autopsy. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 37(1): 6–12.
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Dodds, K.J.,
    2. R.P. Hanavan, and
    3. T. Wansleben
    . 2016. Enhancing stand structure through snag creation in Northeastern U.S. forests: Using ethanol injections and bark beetle pheromones to artificially stress red maple and white pine. Forests 7(6): 124–139.
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Flower, C.E.,
    2. J.E. Dalton,
    3. K.S. Knight,
    4. M. Brikha, and
    5. M.A. Gonzalez-Meler
    . 2015. To treat or not to treat: Diminishing effectiveness of emamectin benzoate tree injections in ash trees heavily infested by emerald ash borer. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 14(4): 790–795.
    OpenUrl
  11. ↵
    1. Haack, R.A. et al.
    2002. The emerald ash borer: a new exotic pest in North America. Newsletter of the Michigan Entomological Society 47(3 & 4): 1–5.
    OpenUrl
  12. ↵
    1. Herms, D.A. et al.
    2009. Insecticide options for protecting ash trees from emerald ash borer. <www.emeraldashborer.info>
  13. ↵
    1. Johnstone, D.,
    2. M. Tausz,
    3. G. Moore, and
    4. M. Nicolas
    . 2014. Bark and leaf chlorophyll fluorescence are linked to wood structural changes in Eucalyptus saligna. AoB Plants, 6.
  14. ↵
    1. Kautsky, H., and
    2. A. Hirsch
    . 1931. Neue Versuche zur Kohlensäureassimilation. Naturwissenschaften, 19: 96-4.
    OpenUrl
  15. ↵
    1. Klooster, W. et al.
    2014. Ash (Fraxinus spp.) mortality, regeneration, and seed bank dynamics in mixed hardwood forests following invasion by emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis). Biological Invasions 16(4): 859–873.
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    1. Knight, K.S.,
    2. J.P. Brown, and
    3. R.P. Long
    . 2013. Factors affecting the survival of ash (Fraxinus spp.) trees infested by emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis). Biological Invasions 15: 371–383.
    OpenUrl
  17. ↵
    1. Kovacs, K.F. et al.
    2010. Cost of potential emerald ash borer damage in US communities: 2009-2019. Ecological Economics 69(2010): 569–578.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  18. ↵
    1. Maxwell, K., and
    2. G.N. Johnson
    . 2000. Chlorophyll fluorescence—a practical guide. Journal of Experimental Botany 51(345): 659–668.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. McCullough, D.G., and
    2. R.J. Mercader
    . 2012. Evaluation of potential strategies to SLow Ash Mortality (SLAM) caused by emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis): SLAM in an urban forest. International Journal of Pest Management 58(1): 9–23.
    OpenUrl
  20. ↵
    1. McCullough, D.G.,
    2. T.M. Poland.
    3. A.C. Anulewicz, and
    4. D. Cappaert
    . 2009. Emerald Ash Borer (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) Attraction to Stressed or Baited Ash Trees. Environmental Entomology 38(6): 1668–1679.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Peñuelas,
    2. J., and
    3. S. Munné-Bosch
    . 2005. Isoprenoids: an evolutionary pool for photoprotection. Trends in Plant Science 10: 166–169.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Poland, T.M., and
    2. D.G. McCullough
    . 2006. Emerald Ash Borer: Invasion of the Urban Forest and the Threat to North America’s Ash Resource. Journal of Forestry 104(3): 118–124.
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. Richardson, A.D.,
    2. S.P. Duigan, and
    3. G.P. Berlyn
    . 2002. An evaluation of noninvasive methods to estimate foliar chlorophyll content. New Phytologist 153(1): 185–194.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  24. ↵
    1. J. DeEll and
    2. P.A. Toivonen
    1. Rosenqvist, E., and
    2. O. van Kooten
    . 2003. Chlorophyll Fluorescence: A General Description and Nomenclature. In: J. DeEll and P.A. Toivonen (Editors), Practical Applications of Chlorophyll Fluorescence in Plant Biology. Springer U.S., pp. 31–77.
  25. ↵
    1. SAS Institute, i.
    , 2004. SAS/STAT software: the GLM Procedure, release 8.0.
  26. ↵
    1. Smitley, D.R.,
    2. J. Doccola, and
    3. D.L. Cox
    . 2010a. Multiple-year protection of ash trees from emerald ash borer with a single trunk injection of emamectin benzoate, and single-year protection with an imidacloprid basal drench. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 36(5): 206–211.
    OpenUrl
  27. ↵
    1. Smitley, D.R.,
    2. E.J. Rebek,
    3. R.N. Royalty,
    4. T.W. Davis, and
    5. K.F. Newhouse
    . 2010b. Protection of individual ash trees from emerald ash borer (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) with basal soil applications of imidacloprid. Journal of Economic Entomology 103(1): 119–126.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Smitley, D.R.,
    2. D.A. Herms, and
    3. T.W. Davis
    . 2015. Efficacy of Soil-Applied Neonicotinoid Insecticides for Long-Term Protection against Emerald Ash Borer (Coleoptera: Buprestidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 108(5): 2344–2353.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Strasser, R.J., and
    2. A. Srivastava
    . 1995. Polyphasic chlorophyll a fluorescence transient in plants and cyanobacteria. Photochemistry and Photobiology, 61(1): 32–42.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  30. ↵
    1. M. Yunus,
    2. U. Pathre and
    3. P. Mohanty
    1. Strasser, R.J.,
    2. A. Srivastava, and
    3. M. Tsimilli-Michael
    . 2000. The fluorescence transient as a tool to characterize and screen photosynthetic samples. In: M. Yunus, U. Pathre and P. Mohanty (Editors), Probing Photosynthesis: Mechanism, Regulation and Adaptation. Taylor and Francis, London, pp. 445–483.
  31. ↵
    1. S. Dordrecht
    1. Strasser, R.J.,
    2. M. Tsimilli-Michael, and
    3. A. Srivastava
    . 2004. Analysis of the fluorescence transient. In: S. Dordrecht (Editor), Chlorophyll fluorescence: A Signature of Photosynthesis. Advances in Photosynthesis and Respiration Series, pp. 321–362.
  32. ↵
    1. Tang, J.Y. et al.
    2006. The differential effects of herbivory by first and fourth instars of Trichoplusia ni (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on photosynthesis in Arabidopsis thaliana. Journal of Experimental Botany 57(3): 527–536.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Urban, L., and
    2. L. Alphonsout
    . 2007. Girdling decreases photosynthetic electron fluxes and induces sustained photoprotection in mango leaves. Tree physiology 27(3): 345–352.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. ↵
    1. Vannatta, A.R.,
    2. R.H. Hauer, and
    3. N.M. Schuettpelz
    . 2012. Economic Analysis of Emerald Ash Borer (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) Management Options. Journal of Economic Entomology 105(1): 196–206.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. ↵
    1. Zangerl, A.R. et al.
    2002. Impact of folivory on photosynthesis is greater than the sum of its holes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99(2): 1088–1091.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. ↵
    1. Zhu, J.,
    2. N. Tremblay, and
    3. Y. Liang
    . 2012. Comparing SPAD and atLEAF values for chlorophyll assessment in crop species. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 92(4): 645–648.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF): 45 (4)
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF)
Vol. 45, Issue 4
July 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • 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.
Physiological Response of Ash Trees, Fraxinus spp., Infested with Emerald Ash Borer, Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire (Coleoptera: Buprestidae), to Emamectin Benzoate (Tree-Äge) Stem Injections
(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
Physiological Response of Ash Trees, Fraxinus spp., Infested with Emerald Ash Borer, Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire (Coleoptera: Buprestidae), to Emamectin Benzoate (Tree-Äge) Stem Injections
Ryan P. Hanavan, Molly Heuss
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Jul 2019, 45 (4) 132-138; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.2019.012

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Physiological Response of Ash Trees, Fraxinus spp., Infested with Emerald Ash Borer, Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire (Coleoptera: Buprestidae), to Emamectin Benzoate (Tree-Äge) Stem Injections
Ryan P. Hanavan, Molly Heuss
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Jul 2019, 45 (4) 132-138; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.2019.012
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
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • 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

  • Urban Trees and Cooling: A Review of the Recent Literature (2018 to 2024)
  • Aerial Imagery as a Tool for Monitoring Urban Tree Retention: Applications, Strengths and Challenges for Backyard Tree Planting Programs
  • Contribution of Urban Trees to Ecosystem Services in Lisbon: A Comparative Study Between Gardens and Street Trees
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Agrilus planipennis
  • ash
  • emerald ash borer
  • Chemical Control
  • chlorophyll fluorescence
  • Plant Fitness
  • plant vitality

© 2025 International Society of Arboriculture

Powered by HighWire