SEASOML APPEARANG OF SELECTED SPECIES OF WWW [N MICE-{EGAN “mats 50? {15:9 chm «if M. S. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Rhodes E Thompson 1966 WHENWIWWHT‘WITIWIWI ; [gym] 3 1293 01101 5587 chhxgan $203 Universny . _ Fxf: QM IT." MAY 0 3 29m ABSTRACT SEASONAL APPEARANCE OF SELECTED SPECIES OF NOCTUIDAE IN MICHIGAN by Rhodes E. Thompson Results of a two year survey of Michigan Noctuidae, specifically known agricultural pests, are presented. Blacklight trapping was con- ducted at East Lansing, Michigan and Galien, Michigan, during 1964 and 1965. Graphs of the occurrence of twelve pest species during these years are included. Where possible, information deduced from these graphs concerning probable overwintering stage, number of broods per year, and peaks of occurrence are discussed. Charts concerning the relative abundance of 159 additional Noctuid species on a monthly basis during the two years are also included. During the study five moths, previously unknown from Michigan, were collected at Galien. These state records, not included in the other data, are also listed with their previous distributional history. Mention is made of possible areas for continued work as a result of this study. SEASONAL APPEARANCE OF SELECTED SPECIES OF NOCTUIDAE IN MICHIGAN BY Rhodes E. Thompson A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Entomology 1966 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to thank Dr. Gordon Guyer and Dr. Roger Hoopingarner for working as committee members and proof readers, and also to Dr. Guyer as Department Chairman for providing the necessary financial assistance. To my major professor, Dr. Robert Ruppel, I extend sincere thanks for the gentle hand of guidance through two years of this work. The author does not consider his escape to Argentina shortly before completion to have had any connection with the forthcoming results. I wish, likewise, to thank my major professor in absentia, Dr. Roland Fischer, for his many hours and pencils spent on this paper. I shall ever be indebted for his many, many, many timely reminders and pressures. Expressions of thanks go also to Mr. Melvin Gomulinski for faithfully tending the trap at Galien during two summers, and to Dr. Paul Wooley for excusing me from so many duties to work on this paper. Finally, my sincere appreciation goes to Mr. John Newman for the countless hours he donated to this project at or shortly after lunch each day. With parched throat, hours of discussion and hundreds of determinations were made. Without his unceasing patience and understanding this work would surely have proven impossible. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS LIST OF GRAPHS INTRODUCTION A REVIEW OF THE LIGHT TRAP METHOD OF SURVEY . METHODS . RESULTS . ADDITIONAL NOCTUID RECORDS DISCUSSION CONCLUSION LITERATURE CITED APPENDIX iii Page ii iv 39 41 43 44 46 Graph 10. ll. 12. LIST OF GRAPHS Accumulative Thermal Units for East Lansing and Galien, Michigan, during 1964 and 1965 Occurrence of HELIOTHIS ZEA at East Lansing, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . Occurrence of HELIOTHIS ZEA at Galien, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals Occurrence of PSEUDALETIA UNIPUNCTA at East Lansing, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals Occurrence of PSEUDALETIA UNIPUNCTA at Galien, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . . . . . . . . . . . Occurrence of AGROTIS IPSILON at East Lansing, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . . . . . . Occurrence of AGROTIS IPSILON at Galien, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on ten day thermal unit intervals Occurrence of LACINIPOLIA RENIGERA at East Lansing, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals Occurrence of LACINIPOLIA RENIGERA at Galien, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . . . . Occurrence of FELTIA SP. at East Lansing, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . . . . . . . . Occurrence of FELTIA SP. at Galien, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals Occurrence of PERIDROMA SAUCIA at East Lansing, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals iv Page 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Graph 13. 14. 15. 16. l7. l8. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. Occurrence of PERIDROMA SAUCIA at Galien, Michigan in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . . . . . . . . Occurrence of NEPHELODES EMMEDONIA at East Lansing, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . . . . . . . Occurrence of NEPHELODES EMMEDONIA at Galien, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals Occurrence of CAENURGINA CRASSIUSCULA at East Lansing, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . . . . . . . . . . . Occurrence of CAENURGINA CRASSIUSCULA at Galien, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Occurrence of CRYMODES DEVASTATOR at East Lansing, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . . Occurrence of CRYMODES DEVASTATOR at Galien, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . . . . Occurrence of ANAGRAPHA FALCIFERA at East Lansing, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . . . Occurrence of ANAGRAPHA FALCIFERA at Galien, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . . . . . . . Occurrence of AMATHES C-NIGRUM at East Lansing, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . . Occurrence of AMATHES C-NIGRUM at Galien, Michigan, in 1964 and 1965 based on thermal units at ten day intervals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Occurrence of PLATHYPENA SCABRA at East Lansing, Michigan, based on thermal units at ten day intervals in 1964 and 1965 . . Occurrence of PLATHYPENA SCABRA at Galien, Michigan, based on thermal units at ten day intervals in 1964 and 1965 . Page 26 27 28 29 3O 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 INTRODUCTION Cutworms and armyworms are serious agricultural pests in many areas of the United States. Michigan is occasionally plagued by large populations of certain species, but because of its northern location, few species may be considered serious pests year after year. Despite the importance of the group, there are few published records relating to Michigan pest species. Severe outbreaks have been recorded in Michigan by Slingerland (1895). Pettit (1905, 1910) drew attention to the occurrence of several species on field crops and home gardens, but discusses only the Armyworm, Corn Earworm, and Forage Looper in detail. Forbes, (1904) and Crumb (1929) made occasional mention of severe out- breaks which they were aware of from Michigan, but biological studies conducted on the species as they occur within the state seem to be lacking. For years the "U.S.D.A. Cooperative Economic Insect Report" and more recently the "Weekly Insect Report for Michigan Agriculture” have reported sporadic outbreaks of various pest species throughout the state. In 1964, work was begun in ten states including Michigan1 to study the movement of certain Noctuids, specifically Heliothis zea (Boddie), the Corn Earworm, within the region. This study, the first portion of a ten year project, covers a three year survey of Noctuids attracted to light. Its objectives were to check blacklight catches 1Work sponsored by U.S.D.A. NC-67 Project. 1 for the time of occurrence of certain pest species. This included the seasonal distribution at each site and also the times of occurrence of peak populations between the southern and central locations--approxi- mately 150 miles apart. Also, it was intended to add to the existing records of the biology of these species in Michigan by interpretation of light trap samples. For example, is a particular species an inva- sionary form or is it capable of overwintering in Michigan? What is the probable overwintering stage for the state? How many broods per year are there in Michigan? Is there any correlation between peak occurrence of a species and cumulative thermal units over the two year period? A REVIEW OF THE LIGHT TRAP METHOD OF SURVEY Survey work by means of a blacklight trap is perhaps the most effective and productive single method known for sampling populations of Lepidoptera. Catches of over 2,000 Lepidoptera per night in one trap were not unusual during the study period. This apparent success however, may be biased for there are many possible fallacies and dif- ficulties connected with a light trap study of this sort. C. B. Williams (1939, 1940) has set forth the idea that a light trap catch is propor- tional to both the size of the population and the activity of the in- dividuals in it. There may be a very large population present around a trap and yet the catch will be negligible because there is no activity due to a number of factors. King (1962) states that, ”The catch in any attractant sampling device does not reflect either the population or the weather, but both." A combination of these two statements is essential in analyzing any light trap results. Possible effects of weather and other environmental factors on the activity of night-flying insects are perhaps paramount in deter- mining the resultant catch. According to Williams, daily fluctuations in catch are the result of differences in activity, while monthly or long term fluctuations are actual population differences. The effect of a single weather factor is very difficult to analyze because of the great amount of interaction. The factors most commonly considered are: temperature, radiation, moisture, wind, atmospheric pressure, and thunderstorm activity. He continues, ”. . . maximum temperature is 3 positively associated with minimum temperature, with the difference between minimum and grass minimum, with sunshine, and with the level of the barometer; but it is negatively associated with relative humid- ity, day rain, cloud and perhaps wind. Minimum temperature, on the other hand, is positively correlated with night rain, cloud, wind, and barometer.” Intensity and duration of moonlight are also factors which affect catch size (Williams, 1936). This may have been due simply to competi- tion with the trap light source, as he demonstrated a definite reduction in catch when the moon was out. Field workers who have baited for moths have also noticed this effect with greater catches on cloudy nights. In a study similar to this conducted in Maine, higher catches were consistently recorded for cloudy nights (Dirks, 1937). Uvarov (1931) states regarding the effects of light, temperature, humidity, and atmospheric pressure that, "Data show that the daily activities of insects are directly dependent on the daily rhythm of the weather. It appears that most activities are influenced by combinations of several meteorological factors." He was of the opinion that it was not pos- sible to explain these activity fluctuations by a single factor. Cook in 1923 did work in Minnesota on environmental influences that was comparable to a study completed earlier in Montana (Cook, 1921). He found humidity very important in moth flight, more activity occurring when the humidity is near the seasonal mean. The highest emergence of moths was found to occur during times of low humidity in Montana and during high humidity in Minnesota. Flight was affected more by fluctua- tions in temperature and pressure than in humidity. He felt that further studies along these lines would definitely intensify these relationships. Placement of the trap is another factor which has been shown to influence catch. Obviously, a trap placed on a woodlot will not secure an accurate sample of a species which characteristically inhabits fields and vice versa. The distance at which a trap is effective or the distance at which it can be plainly seen, is another factor to be considered. Although the population may be very large over a wide area, there are many areas within this range in which the species will be scarce. A trap placed on a hill with very few obstructions around it will normally produce a much larger catch on any given night than one placed near a building, or in a depression which tends to obstruct the view on one or more sides. Trap height has also been shown to influence catch size. Williams (1939) consistently obtained a larger catch from a trap 35 feet above ground level as compared to one 3-1/2 feet above ground level. Stanley (1936) concurs and adds that the trap at 35 feet above the ground caught more than a trap on an 18 story building. These are very impor- tant considerations to make for placement of the light trap. Obviously comparisons between populations, areas, or traps are difficult if the trap locations are different from one station to the next, yet to attain equality in every detail is almost impossible. The attractiveness of the light for a particular species is one more factor for consideration in light trap data. Results may be negative for a common species simply because it is not attracted to the trap. A source emitting close to the ultraviolet (3650 angstoms) was found most attractive by Dirks (1937). Gui, Porter, and Prideaux (1942) found that different colors of light (i.e., different wave lengths) vary in their attractiveness. They found blue light to be the most attractive, followed by white, yellow, and red. More recent studies (Click and Hollingsworth, 1954) show that blacklight traps, similar to the ones used in this study, are probably the most attractive source. This seems especially true for H. zea_which was of special interest in this study. Deay (1965) found that lamps emitting in the middle and near ultraviolet regions attracted more earworm moths than any other lamp type. Similar results were obtained by Belton and KEmpster (1963) in Canada. Although the light may be very attractive to many moths, their flight habits or secondary reactions to it may also influence the catch. Robinson (1952) illustrates this possibility in his discussion of congregation, inhibition, and repulsion by light sources. Observa- tions of operating traps show that many moths will come to the vicinity of the trap, but prefer to remain just outside its halo, or to hover above the trap, or light on the ground or on objects around the trap. These moths should also be included in occurrence data, but because they do not end up in the trap, are not considered statistically. Males and females of a given species may possibly be attracted differently to a light source. Williams (1939) found that in almost all species of Noctuidae captured in numbers large enough for analysis, the proportion of males was much greater than of females. Males also commonly emerge earlier in the brood than females. It can readily be seen that the possibility of error in predicting the duration of a brood as shown by nightly sampling is considerable. METHODS All sampling was conducted with light traps of two kinds--a motor driven "Spinsect”l and a U.S.D.A. omnidirectional blacklight trap (Bull. Ent. Soc. Am., Mar. 1966, pp. 31). The "Spinsect" trap consists of a fan located inside a circular blacklight tube approxi- mately 8 inches in diameter, which is designed to throw the insects attracted to the light into a detachable plastic box for retaining the collection. These were in operation during 1964 from May 1 through September 15 in Galien, Michigan, and from June 20 through September 15 in East Lansing, Michigan. During 1965 both traps were in operation from April 15 through September 15. The traps were examined daily and the collections stored in a refrigerator until identifications and counts could be accurately made. All macrolepidoptera were identified. A small paper sack containing approximately two tablespoons of "Cyanogas G. Fumigant" was placed in the traps as a killing agent every two days. Moths damaged beyond recognition for any reason were not considered in the counts. 1Manufactured by Ampsco Corporation, Columbus, Ohio 7 RESULTS All data are presented in the form of graphs of occurrence for the two years at each location. All graphs use the log (n + l) for the number (Williams, 1939) and accumulative thermal units (Arnold, 1960) for the time of occurrence. The use of the geometric instead of the arithmetic mean by the use of the log (n + 1) for the number of insects more equally distributes the number of samples above as well as below the mean. Also it is an advantage in graphing results of this sort which may range from zero to 1,000 or more in that the space neces- sary to graph a thousand or more becomes proportional to that necessary to graph 10 or less, reducing the size of the graph to reasonable limits. Thermal units are used on the graphs in place of dates be- cause of the probability of these being more constant over a prolonged period than calendar dates. A thermal unit by Arnolds' definition is a heat unit similar to a day degree, but with a slight correction unit for lower temperatures. In figuring day degrees a base temperature, usually 50 degrees, is selected and the difference between this base temperature and the average of the maximum and minimum temperatures for the day is the number of day degrees, provided the number is positive. If, as is often the case in the spring, there is a warm day which aids in development of the insect, but a very cool night, no day degrees would be accumulated even though during the warm part of the day heat units were absorbed. With Arnolds' method, units would be added to the cumulative total to account for this midday warmth by 8 using his thermal unit chart for days with average temperatures below the normal base temperature (in this study 50 degrees). Graph 1 gives the accumulative thermal units for the two loca- tions by year during the time of operation of the traps. 1964 was slightly warmer throughout the season than 1965, but the slopes of the lines for both years appear identical and there does not seem to be a consistently earlier occurrence of peak populations in 1964 over 1965 as might be expected, since 1964 was warmer. Of foremost importance in this project is the Corn Earworm, Heliothis zea (Boddie). This pest occurs throughout much of the United States and is given a number of common names that coincide with its varied food habits. In Michigan it is an important pest of corn. In the south up to six generations per year have been recorded (Forbes, 1904). This diminishes towards the North, and in Michigan there is one generation with a partial second brood each year. The species overwinters in the pupal stage in the southern states. Graphs 2 and 3 show the occurrence of H. ge§_over the past two years. The adult moths occur sparingly (4 or 5 captures being the maximum number) be- fore the middle of August, with the greatest numbers occurring the second week in September. Adults were still being taken at Galien after the first of November. On June 1, 1965, one specimen was taken at Galien, the earliest record known for the state. During the re- mainder of the month three other specimens were taken by collectors in the southern and central parts of the state: in Berrien County on June 4 and June 28, 1965; in Newaygo County on June 27, 1965; and in Ionia County on July 1, 1965. This poses the question of the possi- bility of the earworm overwintering in Michigan under favorable 10 conditions. For years it has been felt that this moth is incapable of overwintering north of a line through Cleveland, Ohio, parallel to the southern border of Michigan. Recently, however, earworm pupae have been shown to overwinter in sheltered locations in Wisconsin (Mangat and Apple, 1965). Assuming that a number of these sheltered pupation sites could occur naturally, it does not seem unreasonable that the overwintering of a small portion of the resident population is also possible in Michigan. Previously the population build-up here has been attributed solely to earworm moths which have migrated into the state. The record taken on June 1 was a bright immaculate specimen, which gave no indication of having flown for an extended period. The data indicate then, that overwintering experiments are desirable. If the findings are coupled with expanded trapping for the state they might well demonstrate a small overwintering population which, together with the invasionary group each spring, combine to produce the big fall population. This of course suggests the possibility of earlier and more severe outbreaks following winters of mild, favorable weather due to an increase in the number of pupae overwintering in the state. The true armyworm, Pseudaletia unipuncta Haworth, is a pest whose populations often increase into destructive numbers in parts of Michigan. Graphs 4 and 5 show the occurrence of this moth during the study. In June of 1964, a severe outbreak of the armyworm occurred in southwestern Michigan, including the area around Galien. The adults of this population appear in the trap data during late June and early July 1964 (thermal units 1100-1700). There does not appear to be an unusual jump in the East Lansing population for the period, although a late start for that trap in 1964 may be misleading. The first armyworm 11 adults appear in early May and then seem to remain in a continuous population throughout the rest of the season. Larvae, pupae, and adults are reported to overwinter, with the majority being larvae. From the unusually early build-up (some moths being present in April) the survey indicates that in Michigan sufficient adults overwinter to form the nucleus for the seasonal build-up. The occurrence of the bristly cutworm, Lacinipolia renigera Stephens, is shown in Graphs 8 and 9. This is a very common moth at blacklight traps throughout the state. It overwinters as a larva and has two broods per year (Forbes, 1878; 1904), which is well authen- ticated by the data. No reports were received of serious damage by this cutworm during the study. ' A common problem genus is the Feltia EEE- group of cutworms depicted in Graphs 10 and 11. These were by far the most numerous moth species taken, up to 700 in a trap in one night. These graphs concern three species, Feltia ducens Walker, R. subgothica Haworth, and E. herilis Grote, which were lumped collectively under Feltia s22. because of their apparent similarity in the adult and larval stages. This species complex is single brooded and overwinters in the larval stage (Stanley, 1936). Slingerland (1895) mentions the complex as common but rarely damaging. He does cite one severe outbreak in Michigan during 1890. Despite the large numbers trapped, no reports are known of damage during either year due to the Dingy Cutworm or related species. Graphs l6 and 17 give the occurrence of the Clover Looper, Caenurgina crassiuscula Haworth, and the Forage Looper, g. erechtea Cramer. Again the adults are very similar and both species are 12 lumped under 9. crassiuscula on the graphs. This moth occurs from May to October, but economically during the past two years was not impor- tant. Smith (1924) records three broods for the Species with an occasional fourth in Kansas. Forbes records three broods for the species with an unexplained break in June. This is borne out by these records including the unexplained dip in June (700-800 thermal units). The first brood was extremely small and dark by comparison with the others. Plathypena scabra Fabricius, the Green Clover Worm, occurred sporadically at Galien, but at East Lansing remained constant, espe- cially in 1964. Reports of damage by this insect were heavier than normal from the bean growing area of the state, in the Saginaw and Bay County areas, in 1964. This infestation may have been indicated by the very high East Lansing catches that summer, but as mentioned earlier, differences in trap location between Galien and East Lansing, or different activity levels in the populations at the two sites may have been responsible. The species overwinters as a pupa or adult (Hill, 1918) and some seasons produces a partial third generation in Michigan. Several of the species are graphed in addition to those discussed above for the purpose of showing seasonal trends in the population. Included in this report are graphs of the occurrence of Amathes c~nigrum Linnaeus (Spotted Cutworm), Anagrapha falcifera Kirby (Celery Looper), Crymodes devastator Brace (Glassy Cutworm), Agrotis ipsilon Linnaeus (Black Cutworm), Nephelodes emmedonia Guenee (Bronzed Cutworm), and Peridroma saucia Hubner (Variegated Cutworm) for the two years of the study. All are known pests at various times in the state, but no l3 serious outbreaks occurred during the two years of intense trapping. Numbers taken during the trap years were insufficient to attempt any conclusions regarding seasonal history for the state. East Lansing and Galien, Michigan, Graph l. Accumulative thermal units for during I964 and I965. 14 ‘l0/ll-20 ‘IO/l-lO 19/21-30 19/ll-20 x East Lansing I964 x----x East Lansing I965 Galien I964 o--—--0 Galien I965 49/1-10 +8/2l-3] ‘8/ll-20 ‘8/l-l0 \\ 17/21-31 \\ \§\\ 17/11-20 \‘\ 4 7/1-10 \X (6/21-30 \{V .6/11-20 \QK .6/1-10 \x ‘5/21-31 \\ \\ K <5/II-2o \ gs, *S/I-IO \ ”34/21-30 \. h/ll-ZO Wh/I-Io \“ 3300 3/21-3] O (I) O m 2970 2640 2310 1650 I320 990 660 330 Thermal units Dates- l0 day intervals 27 mu_c: _meto;h no no no 0. no 0. nu no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no nu no 24 I. 04 7/ c; 2; 1. OJ 7/ ,9 .3 .I no no no nu nu Q; 2, 9. 9. 9. 7. 9. I. l. I. I. I. o; 7/ c; 2, I. mmm_ mc_mcm4 ummuollllllb :09 33%... “wow? 11111 s .m_m>cou:_ >mv cou um mu_c: .cmm_zo_z .mc_mcm4 ummm um < _mELo;u co momma mom_ pcm :wm. c_ _zoomzzm muoonmzmmz mo oocottsouo .:_ cameo mm. no. Do.— mm._ mm._ log (n+1) oo.~ mm.N mm.~ oo.m mm.m 34 mg_c: .mecosh 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no 3 .l. 9 7 5 3 1 OJ 7 5 3 .l. 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 ...l ..I. .l .l. .I. 9 7 5 3 ..| x c e; \ / \ //, \\> / g / \ /.. / x / . « /\ / S /, :J // \\. / 0o.— \ / \ I K/ \ / . // / \ mm _ //\ / \ H 1.1 / . m . aw // x m _ 9 J o 1 oo.m mmm_ co__murlllllllc mm.~ 40m. coZmo? nnnnnn no mo.~ oo.m .m_m>couc_ >mp cop um mu_c: .oEcocu co vommg mom. pcm :0m. c_ mm.m .cmm_;o_z .co__mo um touc_ >mp cop um mu_c: .m5cocu co woman mom. pcm Jew. c_ .cmm_;u_z .cm__mo um <¢mo_zmm <_noa_z_u<3 co mocottauuo .m Lance 36 mu_c: .m5cozh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 no no no n. n. no no no no no no no no no no no no 2; 1. o; 7/ :2 2; 1. o; 71 r: 2. I. no no no no nu 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 l. .I .l l. .I 9 7 5 3 .IO 0 / / m No. 8.. mm._ No.— mom. 5:31 $9 5:3... ...... .o oo.~ mm.~ no.~ oo.m .m_m>couc_ >mv sou um mu_c: .m5cozu co comma mom. tam :0m. :_ mm.m .cmm_;o_z .co__mw am zsmo_zuu mmzhtouc_ >mv sou um mu_c: .mEcmLH co vommn mom_ vcm :mm_ :_ .cmm_;u_z .cm__mu um <_zoomzzm mmoonmzamz no mucmttsuoo .m_ gamto YMMO no. 00.— mm.— mm.— oo.~ mm.~ um.m oo.m mm.m log (n+l) l9 mu_c: .mscogh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 .I 9 7 5 3 .I 9 7 5 3 .I 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 .l .l .I .I .I 9 7 5 3 .I. mmm_ mc_mcm4 ummmullllllt :09 95ch “wow? 11111 .5 .m_m>touc_ >mo sou um mu_c: .mEcogu co comma mom. 6cm :mm_ c_ .cmm_;o_z .mc_mc64 “mom um zon_mm_ m_homo< mo oocottsuoo .0 Leona mm.N oo.m mm-m 20 3300 3100 2900 2700 mu_:: _mEco:H 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 2 2 I I I I l mom. co__muylllllla $9 3:8? ..... .. .m_m>couc_ u_c: _mEco;u >mp sou co momma mom. ucm Jew. c_ .cmm_;o_z .co__mo um zog_mm_ m_Homw< *0 oocotcsooo .n Lento co.— mm._ 3.. oo.N mm.~ no.m oo.m mm.m log (n+l) 38 mu_c: _mEco;H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 ..| 9 7 5 3 l 9 7 5 3 .l 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 .l .I .I .l .I. 9 7 5 3 1| \ mm. G. 8; 3..) H [m S; 9 0 $9 8:81 SJ $9 5:31 ...... .. mm.~ $.N ooé .mmm_ pcm :mm_ c_ m_m>c0uc_ >mp cop um mu_c: .mEcogu co momma mm.m .cmm_;u_z .cml_mo um <¢mzh<3a Co ascertaooo .mN gamto ADDITIONAL NOCTUID RECORDS In addition to the species previously discussed, 159 other Species of Noctuidae were taken in the two years of trapping. The Appendix lists the relative abundance of these species. The majority of these species were taken in numbers of less than 10. The numbers are combinations of the Galien and East Lansing traps for each year. Five species of noctuid moths were taken during the study for the first time in the state. These included: Bendis detrahens Walker.--Taken at Galien on June 1, 1965. According to Forbes (1954), previously known from southern states, north to the vicinity of Washington, D.C., with stragglers to east New York, Long Island, Pennsylvania and Decatur, Illinois. Condica cupentia Cramer.--At Galien on September 22, 1965. Forbes reports this species as southern, straggling as far north as Idaine and Wisconsin. Elydna gulnare Strecker.—~A male at Galien on June 26, 1965; EEemale at Galien on July 14, 1965. Existing records shown by Forbes ifrom Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Texas. Schinia thoreaui Grote and Robinson.--At Galien on August 22, 1965. Previously recorded by Forbes from New York to Alabama, west tic) Illinois, Kansas and Arizona. Spragueia onagrus Guenee.-—At Galien on July 2, 16, 21, 1964; (\lagust 6, 1964; September 4, 5, 6, 1964. None taken in 1965. Gener- a11y southern distribution, rarely reaching as far north as Illinois. 39 40 All of the above records were taken at Galien. Galien, being in the extreme southern part of the state, appears an ideal location for picking up extensions of distribution for species which have previously been known only from areas further south or west. DISCUSSION These data as presented are not meant to be a comparison between locations because of the obvious differences between sites. Of prime importance in locating the traps was ease of servicing and the avail- ability of electricity. In order to satisfy these requirements, the East Lansing trap was placed in the bee yard at the Michigan State University apiary. The trap, a "Spinsect” type was located on a mowed section of lawn next to a small woodlot and overlooking pastureland on one side during both years. The Galien trap during 1964, a "Spinsect" type, was placed on top of a one story building in an open field located about a mile east of town on Highway M-60. During both years this open location at Galien produced much larger and more varied catches than the East Lansing trap. During 1965 a U.S.D.A. omni- directional trap, placed on the ground was used at Galien instead of the ”Spinsect". This reduces the possibility of comparing 1964 and 1965 catches at the Galien location because of possible differences in trap efficiency. During 1965 both a "Spinsect" and a U.S.D.A. omnidirectional trap were placed in an open field at the Rose Lake Wildlife Experiment Station, ten miles northeast of East Lansing, with the intention of comparing the two types of traps. During the first three weeks of trapping, counts of the moths taken in each trap were kept, but it soon became apparent that for sheer numbers, the U.S.D.A. omnidirectional type was best. Deay (1965) found that traps equipped with fans were 41 42 definitely superior to gravity types, so once again the idea of trap location may be interfering. It should perhaps be noted that the catch of midges was consistently higher in the "Spinsect" trap. Further study using the two traps might result in positive preference by certain groups for one trap or the other, but no conclusion is possible from these data at present. The August and September catches were consistently larger each year than those of any other month. The Agrotis spp. and Graphiphora EBB: comprised the majority of the daily catches during these months. These data, being taken strictly for survey purposes, are not suitable for analysis of the effect of the environmental factors dis- cussed in the Introduction. In addition, the two year duration of the study is too short a period to attempt any conclusions regarding the apparent effect of these factors due to the difficulty of estab- lishing a reliable mean for comparison. Trapping is to be continued however, at one of these locations and in another three years enough information of the proper type will have been gathered to allow analysis of the activity of many of these important species. CONCLUSION Complying with plans for a ten—year project, data from a pre- liminary survey of Noctuidae occurring in the state has been presented in the form of graphs of occurrence of several known pest species. These data are presented as an aid to the study of the biology of these species by measuring, within the limitations mentioned, the numbers of any species active at any particular locality or date. Of particular interest has been the dates of appearance and relative lengths and size of broods, as well as preliminary records for changes in populations from Galien to East Lansing during 1964 and 1965. In view of the variation in trapping stations and the lack of specific measurements of associated environmental conditions, nothing outside of the survey data has been attempted. A discussion of some of the inherent problems has been included as a foundation for the next phase of the project. The work shows the need for greatly expanded blacklight survey within the state. The need for biological information on these species within the state such as overwintering experiments with the Corn Ear~ worm is pointed out. Other possibilities suggested by this project include work on species preference for different traps and or wave- lengths of light; the affects of trap location on catch and further information on the problem of environmental factors influencing activity. 43 LITERATURE CITED Arnold, C. Y. 1960. Maximum-minimum temperatures as a basis for com- puting heat units. Prox. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 76:682-692. Belton, P. and R. H. Kempster. 1963. Some factors affecting light trap catches of Lepidoptera. Can. Ent. 95:832—837. Cook, W. C. 1921. Studies on the flight of nocturnal Lepidoptera. State Ent. Minn. 1920 Rep. 18:43-56. 1923. Studies in the physical ecology of the Noctuidae. Minn. Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. 12:1-38. 1928. Light traps as indicators of cutworm moth popula- tion. Can. Ent. 60:103-109. Crumb, S. E. 1929. Tobacco Cutworms. U.S.D.A. Tech. Bull. 8831-180. Deay, H. 0., J. R. Barrett, Jr., and J. G. Hartsock. 1965. Field studies of flight response of H, EEE.t° electric light traps, including radiation characteristics of the traps used. Proc. North Central Branch Ent. Soc. Amer. 20:109-116. Forbes, S. A. 1878. Cutworms. 6th Ann. Rep. I11. State Ent. pp. 199-217. . 1904. The more important insect injuries to Indian corn. Univ. of Ill. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 95:347-381. Forbes, W. T. 1954. Lepidoptera of New York and Neighboring States. Part III. Noctuidae. Frost, W. S. 1952. Light traps for insect collection, survey, and control. Penn. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 55021-32. Glick, P. A. and J. P. Hollingsworth. 1954. Response of the Pink Bollworm Moth to certain ultraviolet and visible radiation. Journ. Econ. Ent. 47:81-86. Gui, H. L., L. C. Porter, and G. F. Prideaux. 1942. Response of insects to color, intensity, and distribution of light. Agricultural Engineering Journ. 23:51-58. Hill, C. C. 1918. Control of the Green Clover Worm in alfalfa fields. U.S.D.A. Farmer's Bull. 982. 44 45 Hutchins, R. E. 1940. Insect activity at a light trap during various periods of the night. Journ. Econ. Ent. 33:654-657. King, E. W. 1962. The use of weather in the estimation of field populations of insects. South Carolina Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. 1008:1—12. Knutson, H. 1944. Minnesota Phalaenidae. Univ. of Minn. Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. 165:1-128. Mangat, B. S. and J. W. Apple. 1965. Synchronization of overwintering Corn Earworm with field information. Proc. North Central Branch Ent. Soc. Amer. 20:119-121. Pettit, R. H. 1905. Insects of the garden. Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 233:60-62. 1910. Insects of field crops. Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 258:41-59. Robinson, H. S. 1952. On the behaviour of night-flying insects in the neighborhood of a bright source of light. Royal Ent. Soc. Lond. Proc., Ser. A 27:13-21. Slingerland, M. V. 1895. Climbing cutworms. Cornell Univ. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 104:555-600. Smith, R. C. 1924. Caenurgia erechtea (Cram.) (Noctuidae) as an alfalfa pest in Kansas. Journ. Econ. Ent. 17:312—320. Stanley, W. W. 1936. Studies of the ecology and control of cutworms in Tennessee. Tenn. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 15923-15. Uvarov, V. P. 1931. Insects and climate. Trans. Roy. Ent. Soc. Lond. 79:1-247. Williams, C. B. 1935. The times of activity of certain nocturnal insects, chiefly Lepidoptera, as indicated by a light trap. Trans. Roy. Ent. Soc. Lond. 83:523-556. 1936. The influence of moonlight on the activity of certain nocturanl insects, particularly of the family Noctuidae, as indicated by a light trap. Roy. Soc. of Lond. Philosophical Trans., Ser. B Vol. 226:357-389. . 1939. An analysis of four years captures of insects in a light trap. Part I. General Survey; Sex Proportion; Phenology; and time of flight. Trans. Roy. Ent. Soc. Lond. 89:79-131. 1940. An analysis of four years captures of insects in a light trap. Part II. The effect of weather conditions on insect activity; and the estimation and forecasting of changes in the insect population. Trans. Roy. Ent. Soc. Lond. 90:227-308. APPENDIX RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF NOCTUIDAE TAKEN AT LIGHT TRAPS IN SOUTHERN MICHIGAN 47 xxx xxx xx xxx xxx x xx xx x xx x x x xxx x x x xx x x x xx x x x x x x x x x xx xx x x xx x umnEmummm umswn< kHSW mash xmz HHHQ< fine: moma doma mood domfi momH womfi momfi doma moma «oma mama qoafi momfi coma mood coma moma «oma ummw umxamz mflfiwnmxmco> mfluouwfl acmwuuoz mflumwvmdw mfluouw< muouu m>~m£ mapmmoww< meHmB mcmuflnsw mcflummouwd .mmm muoxcouo< Apocasmv mowumm mflucoo< mfluumm mmmu mmoOum£o< omcwdo mwucou: mHODmoun< ououo mvwomfim mwuouwmn< oopHSuooz mEmz om awn» muoEnuucmmmum OMnHH ucmmmnm OHIH ucmmmum XXX XX X 48 x x xxx xxx x x xxx xxx x x x x xx x x x x x x xx xx x xx x xxx xx HmnEoummm um3m5< hash wand xmz kua< 5.52 moma «omfi moafi «00H mama doma momfl domfi moma qoma momH «oma mama womfi moma womfi momfl «oofi momfi doma moma «omfl ummw ummeB mumam> moEmm¢ umxoam mcmoHHmEm moEmm< mmcmsw mvwmu mmwocuuoc< mmcmsw mumEHHm waxonoc< mmcmsw mflumHSmQWU mwmvc< acmcflnom B muouo mulm stumc< JwSOCCDQUZ mewmmxm mmvwouomflmmc< mmcwso Ouoo mahfi< mocmsu mmwwovHEmuhm mumawnae< mwuumm mHHflQSHo> mfluouw< meHmB womaum> mHuon¢ mEmz 49 x x x x x x xxx xx xxx xx xx x x xx x x x x xxx x x x xx x x x x x xx x x x x HwQEmuamm umsms< %H3h mash hm: HHHQ< zucoz moma domfl momfl «oma momfi «omfi momfi «omfi moma doma moma quad moma qomfl moma demfl moma doma mama domfl moma domfi Hmow Lough meHmE Mmfimm Amocosov mcmuHEuow mxoflxmm muouu mHHmuumnm mwoawmm mmcwso mflcoflumommm mzmmuw0u3< umxmw mEEmmwhxo mammuwou5< mmcmso.mm mmeuw0us< Aumswuov.mm magnuw0u3< muouo muxmucoo msmmuw0u54 chmcamumv mnoflfln mammuwous< Axmxamzv MMMEQ mnmmuw0u54 xxsxn mflaflcm mfiuouumoumwu< oEmz 50 x x x x x x x x x x xx xx x xxx x x x x x x x umnEmuamm umswsx hand mCSW xmz HHHQx ficoz mama domfi momfi «omfl moafi «omfi moma qomfi mama qoma mood domfi momfl @oma mama ¢©mH mood domfi moma «omfi momH qomfl Hmmw Amuouwv mfiflwmcmm chouwco Awmcmsov mfisofluumwfifimm xHCODKLU GOmCHaom @ muouw Esuowcsm muocmooso onsomufioxHV mLquumo mxphEmzu Aumxamzv mumMHpamcmu mflummumo Amwuxmmv muofim moHEmwmo mucosa Esfisumsum mxmumwfimo .mmm mfimooumo mocmdo mflamowumEm maflsoofimummcmo .mmw msooHoEom mefimz mmwxocxuuow musfifimm mEmz 51 XX HmnEwuamm uwswa< xxsw coco: mash xmz qua< moma «oma mama domfl momfi doma momH «omfi mead «omH moma coma noma coma mood domfi momH «omfi mama womfi mama qomfi know Hocndm mHDUWHHmn mfluummum muoxw womflmw mmmfiwxmm chnsz mumpw mfluzmwam AwsmmccHAv manomaflxnmom mflwmumumxa Ammcmswv madmoEmu muHoQ acmanom @ ououo mxccmmwxm>c00 mwflsosu QmCMDU meHOHmumm wwHDUDU AmCSSummv mflmcmflvmom mHmUODQNuU mmcmdw mHExOMflwfiHmu mmvonEmuU Hfiwm mCmUmmCMU QHEmOU Aououov mmcfififlswcflaomm mammoofioo mEmz 52 x xx x x xx xx x xxx x xxx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xx x x x xx xx x x umnEmuawm umsw5< xash ocnh mm: qum< ficoz moma qcma moaa qoma momfi domfi momfl qomfi mwma qomfi mood «omfi moma domfi mama Gama mama domfi moma «oma momH domfi “mow acmwuuoz mHDUflEvax moxnm mwpumm mfiHOmmoE moxsm mefimz mmumumw moxsm umxamz mumpmaomw moxsm mdxowunmm mumpw mfiuocmmwcudm Amuouwv mucmascfl> mflfiwmmsm Awuoxwv mumeHumwpu mHmemim Amuouov mfl>m© mwfiwmmsm Aomcmsov mxmwwumcoE mwcowuxmcsm Amocosov mcmowundfi mwuouwwsm QQGQDU QHOmCHwU wunhummhm mEmz 53 nucoz x x xxx xx x x xxx xxx x xx xx xx x x x xxx xxx xx xxx xxx xx x x xx xx x xxx xx x x x xxx xxx xxx xx x x umpEmuaom um3w3< xHSW wand xmz HHHQ< momfi qoma moma domfi momfi qoma momfl doma mama @omfi momfi domfi moma comfi mama qoma momfi doma momfi domfi mama doma Hmmw AGOwHuxozv mmoxpmm mmmfiwmmumm Amuouuv kummuu myocmwsmmxw xxmcm Hnuxem muocmxnmwho Awuonov mamficmEHoc muonmfifimmxo somcflnom @ mu0pu mwumHHoo muosmwzmmuo mmcmso monumown muonmfismmxw muoxo meocflwmn muonmflsmmxo mmcmso mufluumm mfinwfimu acmcflnom a macho wumfisoflcmw mfiuflmm Aououwv mflccwmflonHw> moxsm Amfiuummv mumHHmmmmu moxsm mEmz 54 x xx xx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x umnEmuamm umaws< kHSh mash an: kum< 582 doma moma «oma moma «omfi momH «omfi moma «omfi mama domfl momfl «oma mood domfi mood qomfi moma «oma mead qoma pmow LuHEm a uonn< moxmmwmsum mawxrmmq Amuonv mumuflwme mHHOQMCHomA zwjoccsnoz mumowamew mflHQchHomA Ammcmswv mowflocwfihx mmmhz Amfluummv wfisesz mcomxm QQCMDU NmOquF—mhum Mw UQOHUKA: acmfluuoz mcfiouwc mmmaonom Amuouuv mfiExomwcmu osmouuofimm mswowpnmm mcoommxfl> mHLDOMme COmcflnom @ muouu mwmnmwxo-mm mwzuoHHmm Amuouov mxowmumm mwzuo«fiom mEmz 55 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xxx xxx x xxx xxx x xxx xxx xx xx x umnEmuawm umsws< mash mash xmz Hflum< fine: momfl dooH moma «oma mama «omfi momfi «oma momfi «omfl mood @oma moma coma mama qomfi moma #omfi moma qoma mama doma ummw Ammcmsov maomumcflo mucooouwo Amsomccflqv muomam mudmmMOH£oo Acuuozmmv mwooflmm mwuummumomz Apocnsmv mmsmcoo MHCOmHHHOZ muouw muHDCH mmmawmxmumz quHU mumSCO NDUUOCOHUmz Amuouwv mmoxmcflo mchMO£uHA Aumxfimzv mumccmucm ocmcmonuflq mmcmsu mmwwonmusmww muommwoswa .mmm wwcmosmq Amuouov mHHmuwwflv mflumEEmA mEmz 56 KN KNN KN NN xmnEmummm umsws< xxua< momfi domfi momfi @oma momfi coma mama qoaa mood «cod meme doma momfi qoma moma domfi momfl qomfi momfl qoafi mama dcma know meamz mumsco> mxmzfimomfimm AooCmsov xflpumfisoo mouommm ComfiHHOz MUUH>GH Amuouov mumusmu3m mflwonupo mmcmso Homwnwn mxmonuxo wocosw mucom> mooonupo mmvocupo mocmsw moHQNu mmwonuuo mmwonuuo ApmHusmv mumHDmeo Amocoswv moHUoE mflmflfio AmmCoswv wumuome mflwflfio mocha «maxxxuomum mxwxxo mEmz 57 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xx x x x x x x x xxx xxx xx x x x x umnEmuaom umsw3< hadh wand hm: Hflua< Lucoz momH ¢omH mama doma moma doma mama «oma moma qomfl mood doma mama ¢©ma momH «omfi momfi qoma mama coma moaa qoma Hmmw omcmsw msmfimmflmmmMMEoo muc0©0stam uwxmo monafimn mflmsflm QUOHU mmfiomumm mHmDHm umcadm mmuom mmeHm Amocmsov mcmvw> mucmmwumfim muoxw mSEoufioofimwflm mdoHEHEonmHm Hocnnm mHHmEoum mfiuonocm mmcoso mmoHSUxumm muoLMOmoHSm .mMm «Emmflmmmm moansm Qwumeflmsp woomwcmm possum mHHmaswcm mwsuamm oEmz x x x xxx xxx xx x xx xx xx x xx x x x x xxx xx x x x xx x xx xx x x x no xx x 5 xx x x x x x x xx x x xx x x x umnEmuamm umswsx mash mesa xmz Hflua< nose: moma «00H moma «omH momfi coma momfl doafi momd domfi mama «omfi momfl «oma moma «oma momfi «oma moma «oma moma doma ummw ACOmfluquv HmDOuw mbxsmmmm acmfluuoz mfifiwuomfio mwxzmmmm QUOHU QUCQHHE MDCQXOHAH Amuouuv mfiflaoowmccsxn mumEmHODOMm mocosw HHHmwocuflcuo mxcmvoxm COmCflaom @ ououu muocsmnsm mwflom Amuouwv mEHunmH mxxom mmamdu xmumfi mHHom Hm>svmflom mflvcmmw mxxom Aumcnsmv wuocflumfiv «Haom Hm>svmflom muoCmem mEmz mxxom 59 xxx xxx xx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x HonEmuaom umsms< hash mczh km: HHMQ< coco: momfi qoma moma «oma mead domfi momfi ¢©mH momfi qomfi mama doma mama domfi mama qoma moma ¢omH moma «oma momH «omfl umow wxnncmuuom wflaomeu mEEmquDOom xmcadm mflommmxuu mflcwsom Asuxo3mmv mumcxwme mxcHLom Amocoswv xQNH mflcfinom mocmso mumwfloum chHLom Amwcmswv ommxofioofla mcflmsm mmcmso mvfluoflw muozmowo:m muouo umumum wwsmmm HmwmcMsm manD mflsuuxm Auwxflmzv muomxwwcfi muxmmmumm xmmeB meEdmmu mvxcmmmm mEmz 60 xx xx x xx xxx xxx xxx xxx xx x x x x x x x x x xx xx x x x x x xx x x x x x x x x x x x x umnEmuamm um5w3< hand mesa max kua< £82 moma coma moma ¢©mH mama doma mo¢H .qomfi momfi doma mama doma memfl doma momH coma moma «omfi moma ¢omH momfi doma umww xmcnsm muommmwcmo mwownomumH Amuouwv mmcHHHGDH mEoHocmHum Amfluummv mafiummwcmao mxuoHomam muOHU woxpcos muhEHm mxuumm momox mspfluowflm Amocosuv whofiooxcwwa Aouoxwv mxcouSHm mflumom mxummm muouo mHHwUOBCM mwummm Aomcmsuv mmowumo mwumom Hm>3UmHom mowuoum mwummw Ammcmsuv mafia mwummm mEmz 61 HmnEMuamm umswn< mash Loco: wand xmz xxpa< moma doafi mama dome moaa coma mama «omH momfi comfi moma domfi momfi domfi umow .mmm onN muouo amoHov mmwMEonw Ammcmdov mumxumsoma mosxosucmx mommso mmfiso mfiocoHoHD xoxfimz mumawxm wuwfioowuH umcnsm mm mfimsamdfiownH Amuouuv mumoflfimv mmcomuH mEmz HIGH 6 l 11117111111111.1111I?“