Brown Marmorated Stink Bug: Biology and Crop Damage Nik Wiman, Peter Shearer, Vaughn Walton, Silvia Rondon, & Elizabeth Tomasino Jay Brunner & Todd Murray (WSU)
Outline Background Distribution/Status/Damage Environments/Host plants Dispersal Traps/detection Phenology/Voltinism Biological Control
Brown Marmorated Stink Bug (BMSB), Halyomorpha halys 1 White bands on charcoal antenna 2 Smooth anterior pronotal margin, AKA shoulder 3 Banding pattern on abdominal margin
BMSB Egg Mass Paulownia tomentosa empress tree ornamental and escaped/naturalized 28 eggs
BMSB Nymph Development 1 st Instars 2 nd Instars
Complete Life Cycle Five nymphal instars before adult Four stages can cause damage (2-5) These are strong crawlers and can move long distances Colors and patterns variable in nymphs Antennal bands are consistent
Origin of BMSB A periodic pest/urban nuisance in Asia Recent haplotype analyses: All US/Canadian Pops traced to a single introduction The founding population was from Beijing, China Europe s population has different origin Many port interceptions China Taiwan Korea Japan (Xu et al., Gariepy et al. 2013)
BMSB: soon to be a worldwide pest? Climatic Suitability Matching Zhu et al. 2012 PNW (Coastal and Inland) highly suitable habitat Potential for a single, contiguous US population
Stink bugs as crop pests Many native species Periodic pests Peircing/sucking mouthparts directly damage fruits Reproduce outside of crops Move into crops when primary hosts senesce Damage from adults No economic thresholds Cryptic
Common native stink bugs Banasa dimiata Chinavia hilaris Chlorochroa ligata Euschistus conspersus Euschistus variolarius Thyanta custator
How BMSB differs from natives Limited natural enemies Native SB have egg parasitoids Unchecked population growth Full lifecycle in crop Vegetative feeding Damage: nymphs and adults Population reservoirs Urban habitats Natural habitats Extensive host plant list Continuous immigration to crops Feeding through bark Photo: Tracy Leskey, USDA 11
How BMSB Affects IPM Growers moving to 4-10 d spray intervals on calendar days Immigration of bugs into orchard blocks is difficult to predict and hard to observe/sample Reliance on a few broad spectrum chemistries Very Hard on biological control Increased resistance risk Secondary pest outbreaks Mites and aphids Intensive spray programs still seeing high damage (10-40%) in apple and peach crops
Outline Background Distribution/Status/Damage Environments/Host plants Dispersal Traps/detection Phenology/Voltinism Biological Control
2011: OR/WA 2004: Portland ( ) 2011: Infestation of greater Portland area Minor nuisance problems - houses Occasional outlying reports/detects Low numbers of individuals (1-2)
Distribution of BMSB in PNW Sampling methods (2012-): 1) Active searching Beat sampling Targeted habitats Indicator host plants 2) Reports Threshold of awareness Publicity BMSB Density when do people actually notice? Education affects awareness and accuracy BMSB@oregonstate.edu More than 300 reports from OR, ID, WA, CA since 2012 Less than 20 have yielded important findings 3) Passive sampling problematic
Beat sampling in The Dalles
Willamette: wine grapes, small fruits, hazelnuts, veg crops Gorge: wine grapes and tree fruit Basin: veg and field crops Milton Freewater: wine grapes and tree fruit Malheur: field crops Southern: wine grapes and tree fruits N. Wiman, OSU 2012 N=240 sites, focused on ag. regions
2012: OR/WA 2012: Major BMSB expansion Columbia Gorge (W-E) Along I-84 Willamette Valley (N-S) Along I-5 First finds in desert regions east of the Cascades (WA + OR) First finds in desert region in Southern OR Some nuisance problems Portland area First finds on farms Willamette Valley Hazelnut Caneberry Tree Fruit
Willamette Valley, OR Commercial Crops (2012): Hazelnut Tree fruit Vineyard Blackberry RISK FACTOR: URBAN PROXIMITY
2013: OR/WA 2013: Further expansion East Firmly established populations in desert regions (Eastern OR, Southern OR) Major nuisance problems Portland area Many more BMSB detected on farms, higher numbers Willamette Valley hazelnuts smallfruit/treefruit First economic damage to commercial crops Vancouver, WA ( ) Peppers Apples Asian pear
2013 The Sleeping Giant Awakened The impacts on CA specialty crops could dwarf economic impacts of BMSB on East Coast
Types of damage from BMSB Vegetative feeding plant stress, disease vector, aesthetic Fruits and vegetables Developing fruits catfacing Mature Fruits Corking Secondary decay Stylet tubes
Damaged Granny Crop - WA
Typical BMSB Corking Damage
Late Season Damage to Peppers
Willamette Valley Tree Fruit
Willamette Valley Tree Fruit
Willamette Valley Tree Fruit
Willamette Valley Hazelnuts
Willamette Valley Caneberries
Willamette Valley Blueberries
BMSB in stone fruits Lots of information for BMSB in peaches and nectarines One of the most highly preferred hosts of BMSB Complete BMSB development on leaves and shoots Photos: Tracy Leskey, Doug Pfeiffer Characteristic corking damage
BMSB in stone fruits Very little information on BMSB in cherries relative to peaches but Feeding through bark In Japan, BMSB is regarded as a pest in cultivated sweet cherry Prunus grayana Bird cherry (Prunus grayana) is regarded as an important host Similar to choke cherry in US Prunus virginianus References: Funayama, K. 2007. Reproduction of the brown marmorated stink bug, Halyomorpha halys (Stål) (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae) on Japanese bird cherry trees, Prunus grayana Maxim. Japanese Journal of Applied Entomology and Zoology. 51 Watanabe, K. 1996. Characteristic of damages of Lygocoris (Apolygus) lucorum (Meyer-Duer)(Heteropteraa: Miridae) and Halyomorpha halys (Stål) (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae) on cherry (Prunus avium). Annual Report of the Society of Plant Protection on North Japan..
Contamination Issues Small Fruits Wine Grapes Taint effects Mechanical and hand-harvested crops
Contamination Issues Characterizing BMSB defensive compounds Cilantro smell Despised by many Undetectable to others Tetradecane Trans-2-decenal Dodecane Trans-2-octenal
Contamination Issues Pinot Noir Difference testing (using triangle tests) showed that consumers could tell a difference between the treatment wines and the control (sig. at α=0.05). Consumer rejection threshold was found to be very close to the detection threshold. Low amounts of BMSB taint have a negative impact on Pinot noir quality.
Nuisance Problems
Nuisance Problems
Nuisance Problems Hops Urban environment Definitely a preferred host Not yet known from commercial production in OR
Nuisance Problems
Nuisance Problems
Outline Background Distribution/Status/Damage Environments/Host plants Dispersal Traps/detection Phenology/Voltinism Biological Control
PNW Environments for BMSB High Risk Low Risk? Willamette Valley: similar to PA, VA, WVA Small, diverse farms Farms border forests with hardwood People/structures Columbia Basin Large farm size Few people/structures No forests/hardwoods Limited alternate hosts
Native vs. Exotic Hosts N. Wiman OSU 2012
Important Exotic Hosts PNW Ailanthus, Tree of Heaven, High drought tolerance VERY ABUNDANT DRY SIDE AND WET SIDE
Important Exotic Hosts PNW Himalayan blackberry, Rubus aremeniacus
Important Native Hosts PNW Red Osier Dogwood, Cornus sericea
Important Native Hosts PNW Maples incl. big leaf, vine Common on farm borders Riparian zones Urban areas Huge seed loads
Other Important Hosts, Willamette
Other Important Hosts Catalpa bean tree Native to USA, but not to OR
Outline Background Distribution/Status/Damage Environments/Host plants Dispersal Traps/detection Phenology/Voltinism Biological Control
Human-Assisted Dispersal RV Parks, Train Stations, Bus Stations, Lumber Shipments, Nursery stock shipments, cars
Unassisted Dispersal Simulated free-flight on flight mills BMSBs are strong fliers
Outline Background Distribution/Status/Damage Environments/Host plants Dispersal Traps/detection Phenology/Voltinism Biological Control
Building a better BMSB trap Behavioral barriers SB use aggregation pheromones (not sex) Response depends on motivation to aggregate Motivation can depend on time of year Spring vs. fall response Technology/knowledge barriers Best trap? Best placement? Trap catch related to damage/population density? Detection vs. damage True pheromone and cross-attraction Synergy increasing sensitivity
Trap Research
2012 Trap Performance
Mean BMSB/Trap/Week 2013 Trap Performance 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 USDA + Synergist Synergist doubled mean trap catch Still poor captures in spring 4 2 0 3/17/13 5/6/13 6/25/13 8/14/13 10/3/13 11/22/13 Date
Interspersed light and pheromone traps Brunner, Shearer, Wiman, Leskey & Khrimian. 2013. Improving tools for early detection of brown marmorated stink bug. Washington Tree Fruit Research Commission.
Light vs pheromone trap results: PNW 2013 BMSB captured in light traps: 1of 10 sites. BMSB captured in pheromone traps: 3 of 10 sites. Cooler nights limit capture. Light traps bring BMSB from afar, then they are captured in pheromone traps. Aurora, OR
Outline Background Distribution/Status/Damage Environments/Host plants Dispersal Traps/detection Phenology/Voltinism Biological Control
BMSB Phenology & Voltinism OW adults Eggs + Nymphs SUM adults Assumed Univoltine Model for PNW
BMSB Phenology & Voltinism
BMSB Phenology & Voltinism Study Vancouver, WA 45.6336 N Hood River Aurora Corvallis 3.44 Small cages Ashland, OR 42.1914 N
BMSB Phenology & Voltinism Study Life history event Cum DD C ± DDC (SE) Generation time First EM 120.34 7.12 First Hatch 170.10 15.28 First Summer Adult 458.06 37.12 337 DD First 2 nd Gen. Eggs 571.97 65.35 First Hatch 2 nd Gen. Eggs 610.76 39.80 First 2 nd Gen Adults 792.12 10.53 220 DD TWO Generations are possible in OR 2 nd Generation developed faster ~800 DD needed for 2 gens
BMSB Phenology & Voltinism OW adults Eggs + Nymphs S Ad 1 SUM adults 2 Revised Bivoltine Model for PNW
Outline Background Distribution/Status/Damage Environments/Host plants Dispersal Traps/detection Phenology/Voltinism Biological Control
BMSB Biological control Why is BC important? BMSB Population reservoirs Urban environments Natural environments Huge range of food & reproductive host plants Immigration into crops Very difficult to manage Track record for BC of invasive SB Landmark Case of BC in Hawaii Nezara viridula, (Southern Green SB) Trissolcus basalis Tissolcus wasp on BMSB eggs
BMSB Biological control Trissolcus japonicus Classical approach, imported (China) Primary BMSB egg parasitoid in China 70% parasitism reported, 50% avg. Rapid, multi-institutional (USDA lead) host testing ODA/OSU are involved in specificity testing Quarantine facility, Corvallis OR Concerns for predatory and rare SB Also examining native parasitoids Conservation of native natural enemies adapting to foreign pest. Already adapted to environment Able to use native hosts too Tissolcus emerging from BMSB eggs
Questions? Funding Sources: USDA-NIFA-SCRI #2011-51181-30937 Washington Tree Fruit Research Commission (Technology) Oregon Raspberry and Blackberry Commission Oregon Hazelnut Commission