B 



First sampling 

 (June 1-2) 



D Trap trees 

 D Non-trap trees 



A 



A 



a 



— I a 



■a 

 "E, 



No. trap trees 



18 

 ■o "= 15 



B^ .2,12 



e = 



2 Z 9 

 •^ i 6 



3 

 



I 2 



No. trap trees 



Second sampling 

 (June 15-16) 



D Trap trees 

 n Non-trap trees 



A^ 



'n 



o. trap trees 



No. trap trees 



Figure 3. For each of the four sides of orchard blocks composed of either (A) small or (B) large trees, amount of injury by PC 

 that occurred on trap trees or on other perimeter-row trees (= non-trap trees), according to the number of trap trees deployed. 



particular treatment were assigned (i.e., 0, 1, 2, or 4 

 trap trees) were randomized to minimize variation in 

 results due to the nature of habitat (woods, hedgerow, 

 orchard trees) bordermg the different sides of a block. 

 We addressed the first question by sampling 25 

 fruit per tree on the side of blocks having only one trap 

 tree. This showed incidence of PC injury on perimeter- 

 row trees located up to 60 yards on either side of the 

 trap tree. The second question was addressed by 

 comparing PC injury occurring on trap trees, as well 

 as on perimeter-row non-trap trees, on each of the four 

 sides of each block. This showed what effect trap trees 

 exerted on total amount of injury by PC to fruit in 

 perimeter-row trees. Amount of injury by PC to fruit 

 was quantified twice: on June 1-2 (i.e., one week after 

 odor-baiting) and on June 15-16 (i.e., three weeks after 

 odor-baiting). For blocks having large trees, all 

 perimeter-row trees were sampled for PC injury (25 

 fruit per tree). For blocks having small trees, either 

 every other tree or every-two trees were sampled for 

 PC injury (including all trap trees) because of the tree 

 density in these blocks was much higher than in blocks 

 having large trees. 



Results 



Combining both sampling dates, almost 63,000 

 fruit were sampled on the 1 2 orchard blocks used for 

 this study. 



For the first objective. Figure 2 reveals that one 

 week after deploying 4 BEN and 1 GA (i.e., on June 1- 

 2), the maximum distance over which PCs were 

 congregated to a trap tree was 50-56 yards for blocks 

 having small trees, and 42-48 yards for blocks having 

 large trees. Three weeks after deploying the synthetic 

 lures (June 15-16), the maximum distance over which 

 PCs were congregated to a trap tree was 34-40 yards, 

 regardless of tree size. 



For the second objective. Figure 3 A shows that, 

 for both sampling dates and for blocks having small 

 trees, amount of injury to fruit by PC on the trap trees 

 was similar in the sides of blocks having either 1 , 2, or 

 4 trap trees, hnportantly, for both sampling dates, an 

 almost identical amount of injury to fruit by PC 

 occurred on non-trap trees in each of the four sides 

 regardless of the number of trap trees deployed. Figure 

 3B reveals that, for large trees, initial amount of injury 



16 



Fruit Notes, Volume 69, Fall, 2004 



