Tom W Coleman, Andrew D Graves, Brent W Oblinger, Robbie W Flowers, James J Jacobs, Bruce D Moltzan, Stephanie Sky Stephens, Robert J Rabaglia
{"title":"Evaluating a decade (2011–2020) of integrated forest pest management in the United States","authors":"Tom W Coleman, Andrew D Graves, Brent W Oblinger, Robbie W Flowers, James J Jacobs, Bruce D Moltzan, Stephanie Sky Stephens, Robert J Rabaglia","doi":"10.1093/jipm/pmad020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract To sustain healthy forests in the United States, the USDA Forest Service, Forest Health Protection and cooperators utilize integrated pest management (IPM) programs to prevent, suppress, and eradicate insect and disease outbreaks affecting trees across all land ownerships. Forest pest management projects supported by federal funding from 2011 to 2020 were assessed to determine the most frequently used project types, IPM strategies and tactics, identify the dominant forest pests and associated hosts managed, and identify the most comprehensive forest IPM programs in practice. Forest pest management projects were obtained primarily from two centralized databases and included 2,416 projects that treated a total of 2,284,624 ha. Two project types accounted for most of the forest pest projects (suppression: 63% and prevention: 30%). Native forest pests were targeted more (79%) than non-native pests (21%) in these projects; however, non-native pests accounted for more treatment areas. Forest pest projects were directed mostly at phloem-feeding insects (70%) and subsequently followed by foliage feeders (10%), sap feeders (6%), and all other pest groups (each < 5%), including diseases. Four IPM control strategies (silvicultural: 32%, semiochemical: 22%, chemical: 21%, and physical/mechanical: 18%) accounted for most of the forest pest projects. Foliage feeders possessed the most comprehensive IPM programs that adopted two or more types of control tactics. Few pest programs incorporated microbial/biopesticide control strategies and this represents an area where research is needed. In addition, better-centralized records are needed for genetic control projects, treatment efficacy, and survey and technical assistance activities.","PeriodicalId":16119,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Integrated Pest Management","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Integrated Pest Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jipm/pmad020","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENTOMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract To sustain healthy forests in the United States, the USDA Forest Service, Forest Health Protection and cooperators utilize integrated pest management (IPM) programs to prevent, suppress, and eradicate insect and disease outbreaks affecting trees across all land ownerships. Forest pest management projects supported by federal funding from 2011 to 2020 were assessed to determine the most frequently used project types, IPM strategies and tactics, identify the dominant forest pests and associated hosts managed, and identify the most comprehensive forest IPM programs in practice. Forest pest management projects were obtained primarily from two centralized databases and included 2,416 projects that treated a total of 2,284,624 ha. Two project types accounted for most of the forest pest projects (suppression: 63% and prevention: 30%). Native forest pests were targeted more (79%) than non-native pests (21%) in these projects; however, non-native pests accounted for more treatment areas. Forest pest projects were directed mostly at phloem-feeding insects (70%) and subsequently followed by foliage feeders (10%), sap feeders (6%), and all other pest groups (each < 5%), including diseases. Four IPM control strategies (silvicultural: 32%, semiochemical: 22%, chemical: 21%, and physical/mechanical: 18%) accounted for most of the forest pest projects. Foliage feeders possessed the most comprehensive IPM programs that adopted two or more types of control tactics. Few pest programs incorporated microbial/biopesticide control strategies and this represents an area where research is needed. In addition, better-centralized records are needed for genetic control projects, treatment efficacy, and survey and technical assistance activities.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Integrated Pest Management is an open access, peer-reviewed, extension journal covering the field of integrated pest management. The Editors-in-Chief are Dr. Marlin E. Rice (formerly with Iowa State University) and Dr. Kevin L. Steffey (formerly with the University of Illinois). The journal is multi-disciplinary in scope, publishing articles in all pest management disciplines, including entomology, nematology, plant pathology, weed science, and other subject areas.