Abstract
Understanding the role of insects in forest ecosystems is vital to the development of environmentally and economically sound pest management strategies in forestry Most of the research on forest insects has been confined to phytophagous species associated with economically important tree species The roles of most other insects in forest environments have generally been ignored, including the natural enemies and associates of phytophagous species identified as being important In the past few years several investigations have begun to reevaluate the role of phytophagous species responsible for perturbation in forest ecosystems, and it appears that these species may be playing an important role in the primary productivity of those ecosystems Also, there is an increasing awareness that forest pest managers have been treating the symptoms and not the causes of the problems in the forest Many insect problems are associated with poor sites or sites where trees are growing poorly because of crowding As a result, there is considerable emphasis on the hazard rating of stands of trees for their susceptibility to various phytophagous insects The next step is to manipulate forest stands to make them less susceptible to forest pest complexes A thinning study in California is used as an example and shows that tree mortality in ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) attributable to the western pine beetle (Dendroctonus brevicomis) can be reduced by commercial thinning to reduce stocking
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Literature cited
Amman, G. D. 1977. The role of the mountain pine beetle in lodgepole pine ecosystems: impact on succession. Pages 3–18in W. J. Mattson, ed. The role of arthropods in forest ecosystems. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY. 104 pp.
Bess, H. A., S. H. Spurr, and E. W. Littlefield. 1947. Forest site conditions and the gypsy moth. Harvard Forest Bull. 22. 56 pp.
Blais, J. R. 1974. The policy of keeping trees alive via spray operations may hasten the recurrence of spruce budworm out-breaks.Forestry Chron. 50:19–21.
Bormann, F. H., and G. E. Likens. 1979. Pattern and process in a forested ecosystem. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY. 253 pp.
Campbell, K. G. 1966. Aspects of insect-tree relationships in forests of eastern Australia. Pages 239–250in H. D. Gerhold, F. J. Schreiner, R. E. McDermott, and J. A. Winisski, eds. Breeding pest-resistant trees. Pergamon Press, Oxford. 505 pp.
Campbell, R. W., and R. J. Sloan. 1977. Forest stand responses to defoliation by the gypsy moth. Forest Sciences Monograph 19. 34 pp.
Cobb, F. W., Sr., D. L. Wood, R. W. Stark, and J. R. Parmeter, Jr. 1968. Photochemical oxidant injury and bark beetle (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) infestation of ponderosa pine. IV. Theory of the relationships between oxidant injury and bark beetle infestation.Hilgardia 39:141–152.
Ferrell, G. T. 1980. Risk-rating systems for mature red fir and white fir in northern California. Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-39. US Department of Agriculture. 29 pp.
Fowells, H. A. 1965. Silvics of forest trees of the United States. US Dep. Agr. Hndbk. 271. 762 pp.
Goheen, D. J., and F. W. Cobb, Jr. 1980. Infestation ofCerotocystis wagneri infested ponderosa pine by bark beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) in the central Sierra Nevada.Can. Entomol. 112:725–730.
Graham, S. A. 1956. Forest inserts and the law of natural compensations.Can. Entomol. 88:45–55.
Hedden, R. L., S. J. Barras, and J. E. Coster, technical coordinators. 1981. Hazard-rating systems in forest pest management: Symposium proceedings. Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-27. US Department of Agriculture. 169 pp.
Houston, D. R. 1979. Classifying forest susceptibility to gypsy moth defoliation. U.S. Dep. Agr. Hndbk. 542. 21 pp.
Jennings, D. T., F. B. Knight, S. C. Hacker, and M. E. McKnight. 1979. Spruce budworms bibliography. University of Maine Life Science and Agric. Exp. Sta. Misc. Rep. 213. 687 pp.
Knight, F. B., and M. J. Heikkenen. 1980. Principles of forest entomology. 5th ed. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. 461 pp.
Lang, J., R. C. Heald, E. C. Stone, D. L. Dahlsten, and R. Akers. 1978. Silvicultural treatments to reduce losses to bark beetle.Calif. Agr. 32(7):12–13.
Massey, C. L., and W. D. Wygant. 1954. Biology and control of the Engelmann spruce beetle in Colorado. US Dep. Agr. Circular 944. 35 pp.
Mattson, W. J., ed. 1977. The role of arthropods in forest ecosystems. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY. 104 pp.
Mattson, W. J., and N. D. Addy. 1975. Phytophagous insects as regulators of forest primary production.Science 190(4214):515–522.
McFadden, M. W., D. L. Dahlsten, C. W. Berisford, F. B. Knight, and W. W. Metterhouse. 1981. Integrated pest management in China's forests.J. Forestry 79:723–726.
McLoed, J. M. 1980. Forests, disturbances, and insects.Can. Entomol. 112:1185–1192.
Miller, P. C. 1970. Age-distribution of spruce and fir in beetle-killed forests on the White River Plateau, Colorado.Amer. Midland Nat. 83:206–212.
Nilson, S. 1976. Rationalization of forest operations gives rise to insect attack and increment losses.Ambio 5(1):17–22.
Rafes, P. M. 1966. Influence of animals upon the productivity of forest biogeocoenoses. Pages 5–68in Izdatel'stro “Nauka.” Academy of Sciences, USSR, Laboratory of Forest Science, Moscow. Canada Dept. of Forestry and Rural Development Translation No. 89.
Rudinsky, J. A. 1962. Ecology of Scolytidae.Ann. Rev. Entomol. 7:327–348.
Safranyik, L., D. M. Shrimpton, and H. S. Whitney. 1974. Management of lodgepole pine to reduce losses from the mountain pine beetle. Environment Canada, Forestry Services, Forestry Technical Report 1. 24 pp.
Salman, K. A., and J. W. Bongberg. 1942. Logging high-risk trees to control insects in pine stands of northeastern California.J. Forestry 40:533–539.
Sartwell, C., and R. E. Stevens. 1975. Mountain pine beetle in ponderosa pine.J. Forestry 73:136–140.
Schmid, J. M., and R. H. Frye. 1976. Stand ratings for spruce beetles. Forest Service Research Note RM-309. US Department of Agriculture. 4 pp.
Smith, D. M. 1976. Changes in eastern forests since 1600 and possible effects. Pages 3–20in J. F. Anderson and H. K. Kaya, eds. Perspectives in forest entomology. Academic Press, London. 428 pp.
Stoszek, K. J., P. G. Mika, J. A. Moore, and H. L. Osborne. 1981. Relationships of Douglas-fir tussock moth defoliation to site and stand characteristics in northern Idaho.Forest Science 27:431–442.
Telford, A. D. 1961. Lodgepole needleminer parasites: biological control and insecticides.J. Econ. Entomol. 54:347–355.
Wickman, B. E. 1980. Increased growth of white fir after a Douglasfir tussock moth outbreak.J. Forestry 78:31–33.
Williams, C. B., Jr., J. M. Wenz, D. L. Dahlsten, and N. X. Norick. 1979. Relation of forest site and stand characteristics to Douglas-fir tussock moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) outbreaks in California.Bull. Societe Entomologique Suisse 52:297–307.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dahlsten, D.L., Rowney, D.L. Insect pest management in forest ecosystems. Environmental Management 7, 65–72 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867043
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867043