United Sates 

Department al 

Agricufture 

Forest Sewice 

Nantucket Pine Tip Moth 

ogy and Timing of lnseclicide 

Spray App ications in Seven 

Southeastern States 

Southern 

Research Stallan 

Research Paper Christopher J. Fettig, Mark J. Dalusky, 

SRS-18 and C. Wayne Berisford 
Nantucket Pine Tip Moth Phenology and Timing 

of Insecticide Spray Applications in Seven 

Southeastern States 

Christopher J. Fettig, Mark J. Dalusky, and C. Wayne Berisford 

Abstract old (Berisford 1988). In the Southeastern United States, 

preferred hosts include loblolly (Pinus taeda L.), shortleaf 

The Nantucket pine tip moth, Rhyacionia fiustrana (Comstock) (P, echinata Mill.), and Virginia (P. virginbna Mill.) pines. 

(Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), is a common pest of Christmas tree and Slash (P. elliottii Engelm.) and longleaf (P. palustris Mill.) pine plantations throuaout much of the Eastern United States. The 

moth completes two to five generations annually, and insecticide pines are considered resistant to attack (Berisford 1988, 

spray timing models are currently available for controlling Yates 1960). 

populations where three or four generations occur. The thermal * - requirements for the Nantucket pine tip moth to complete a 

generation were obtained from published data and used along with 

historical temperature data to produce maps indicating the number of 

annual generations predicted to occur throughout seven Southeastern 

States. Spray timing prediction values were also obtained &om 

published data and used to predict optimal spray periods based on 5- 

day increments for each location where either three or four 

generations occurred. Approximately 80 percent of the predicted 

optimal spray petiods were within one optimal spray period of 

previously field-determined spray dates. Land managers who use 

contact insecticides, such as synthetic pyrethroids, may find the 

predicted optimal spray periods useful in optimizing spray 

effectiveness. 

Keywords: Chemical control, Nantucket pine tip moth, phenology, 

Rhyaeionia fiustrana, spray timing. 

The Nantucket pine tip moth, RhyacioniaJiwstrana 

(Cornstock) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), is a common pest of 

Christmas tree and pine plantations in the Eastern United 

States (Berisford 1988). Females deposit eggs singly on 

needles and shoots with a significantly greater proportion 

being laid on needles (McGravy and Berisford 1998). The 

first visible sims of attack are small droplets of resin exuding 

&om needle bases where the first instar lawae have bored 

entrance holes (Berisfclrd 1988). Second instars construct 

silken webs. which increase in size as the larvae develop. 

Later larval instars enter the lateral and terminal shoots 

where their feeding severs the cfascular tissue and kills the 

apical meristem. Fifth instars pupate within the damaged 

shoots. Larval feeding can cause shoot mortality and tree 

defomity (Berrsford and Kulmm 19671, heig3nt and volume 

reductions (Cade and Hedden 1987, Stephen and others 

1982), compression wood increases (Hedden and Clason 

1980), md occasionaI tree mortali~ (Yates and others 198 1). 

Damage is most severe on seedlings and saplings <5 years 

Within the natural range of the Nantucket pine tip moth, the 

life cycle is synchronized to produce a new generation of 

egg laying adults during each growth flush of the primary 

host. Two to five generations occur annually depending on 

the prevailing climate (Berisford 1988). Where the moth has 

been studied extensively, boundaries delineating moth 

phenology, i.e., number of generations annually, have been 

well established, while in other areas this information is 

limited. Two generations have been reported for parts of the 

Mountain Province of Virginia (Berisford and Kulman 1967). 

Three generations occur in much of the Piedmont Plateau 

and Coastal Plain of Virginia (Berisford and Kulman 1967, 

Fettig and Berisford 1999), the Mountain Province and 

Piedmont Plateau of Georgia (Berisford 1974, Berisford and 

others 1992, Gargiullo and others 1983), and parts of North 

Carolina (Fettig and Berisford 1999). Four generations have 

been reported for the Coastal Plain of Georgia and South 

Carolina (Berisford and others 1 992, Gargiullo and others 

1985, Moreira and others 1994). Apparently, five generations 

occur in extreme southeastern Georgia (Ross and others 

1989), the Gulf Coast, and northern Florida (Yates and others 

198 1). A more detailed description of Nantucket pine tip 

moth phenology within the range of comrnercially important 

Pinus species would be useful for both management and 

research purposes. 

The number of thermal units required to complete a 

generation varies somewhat among studies and locations 

and ranges from 580 to 818 degree-days OC (33.7 to 47.6 days 

assuming a daily mean temperature of26.7 "C) (Fettig and 

Berisford 1999, Gargiullo and Berisford 1983, Gargiullo and 

others 1985, Haugen and Stephen 1984, Ross and others 

1989). Assuming that development is largely controlled by 

climate, possible sources of variation include sampling 

intensity, temperame data acquisition, computational 

methods, and genetic and diet eEects (Mawby and Rock 

1986, Ross and others 1989). However, Ross and others 
(1989) detemined that division ofthe mml number of 

emulative degee-days by 754 degee-days "G, using lower 

and upper developmen@l thresholds of 9.5 and 33.5 "C, 

resulted in phenology predictions that correlated well with 

know- Nantucket pine tip moth phenologies throughout 

Georga. 

Insecticide applications are a viable control method if attacks 

cause substantial pine gowth or form losses (fig. I). Spray 

timing models have been developed to predict optimal spray 

dates where either three (Dalusky, mpublished hta) 

(Fettig and Berisford 1999, Car@ullo and others 1983) or fou: 

generations occur mually (Fettig and others 1998, Casgiullo 

and others 1985). Degee-days are accumulated commencing 

on the date of an average of one moth cau&t per trap per 

day in pheromone-baited traps (fig. 2) and continuing until 

an experimental 1 y determined sum, based primarily on moth 

phenology and insecticide properties, is attained for each 

generation (Cargidlo and others 1 983,1985). This sum 

Figure I-An applicator using a hand-pump backpack sprayer to 

control Nantucket pine tip moth infestations in a 3-year-old loblolly 

pine plantation. 

Figure 2-A pheromone-baited wing trap used to determine male 

moth emergence. 

indicates the optimal spray date for each generation and 

correlates with an abundance of susceptible life stages in the 

field perisford and others 1984). Spray timing models have 

helped increase insecticide eEcacy, reduce application 

frequency, and decrease the growth and form losses 

associated with late instar larval feeding. 

The objectives of this study were to (1) identi@ the number 

of Nantucket pine tip moth generations occurring annually 

based on data from weather stations located in a sevenState region of the Southeastern United States and (2) 

estimate optirnal spray periods for each generation in 

locations where three or four generations occur annually. 

Materials and Methods 

Mean maximum and minimum temperatblres for each day of 

the year were obtained online (http: 

Southeast Regional Climate Center, Souah Carolina 

Department of Natuml Resowes, Golurnbia, SC) for selected 

weather stations in Virginia (n = 49), North Casolina (n = 58), 

South Carolina (n = 49, Georgia (n = 70), Alabama (n - 54), 

Mississippi (n -. 52), and northern Florida (n = 26). The 

distribution of weather stations was chosen to provide a 

complete description of the climates that occur in each State. 

In most cases, mean temperatwe data are based on >40 

years of climatic data. Weather stations with < 1 5 years of 

data were excluded &om analyses. 

Dalusky, N.J. October 17, 1986. Unpublished data on spray timing 

for esfenvalerate in the Georgia Piedmont. 4 p. Unpublished report. 

On file with: Department of Entomology, The University of Georgia, 

Athens 30602. 

Daily mean mmimum and minimum tempratures for each 

weather station were placed in a spreadsheet program 

(Microsoft ~xcel@, Microsoft Corp., Seattle, WA) and then 
transferred to a degee-day computational promm (DepeDay Utility, University of California StatevvJde Intepted 

Pest Management Program, Davis, CA). Degeehys were 

accmulated using the shgle-sine, intermediate cutoff 

computation method (Seaver and others 1990) with lower 

and upper developmental thresholds of 9.5 and 33.5 "6, 

respectively (Haugen and Stephen 1984). The amual nmber 

of degree-days accumulated at each station was divided by 

754 degee-hys "C and rouflded to the next lowest whole 

nmber to provide an estimate of the number ofNantucket 

pine tip moth generations occurring annually at that location 

(Ross and others 1989). The weather station locations and 

the numbers of corresponding generations were then 

mapped for each State. 

The lengh of winter diapause and the precise conditions 

required to break it are own for the Nantucket pine tip 

moth, and temperatures above the lower developmental 

threshold may occur throu&out the year. merefore, spray 

timing prediction values were accumulated &om an arbitsarily 

established biofix of January 7 where four generations occur 

annmlly and March 1 where three generations occur 

annually. These dates are based on the average male moth 

emergence periods for the first generation that were 

detemined duing previous studies. Although actual 

emergence dates vary fiom year to year (typically 7 days), 

the effect on spray date deteminations should be minimal. 

Maximum temperatures are typically at or near the lower 

developmental keshold and few degee-day accumulations 

occur initially. 

Three different sets of spray timing values were used to 

detemine optimal spray dates depending on geographic 

location. In portions of Vkginia and North Carolina where 

three generations occur annually, the values were 188,784, 

and 1,472 degee-days "C (Fettig and Berisford 1 999). In 

remaining portions of the Southeast where three generations 

occur amually, the values were 204,968, and 1,787 degreedays "C (see footnote I). In locations where bur generations 

occur annually, the values were 237,899,1,757, and 2,5 13 

degree-days "C (Fettig and others 1998). Spray timing values 

are not available for controlling populations with two or five 

annual generations and, therefore, are not provided for such 

locations (tables 1-7). Degee-days were accumulated 

continuously for each weather station &om the assiped 

biofix until the appropriate spray prediction value was 

reached for each generation, The corresponding date was 

desipated the optimal spray date. Each optimal spray date 

was then located in an optimal spray period established by 

dividing the calendar year into %day increments. 

To test the validity of spray pe~od predictions, the 

predictions were compared to 44 spray &tes detemined at 

16 diAFermt field sites d g 1 99-8. The fietd-d&emined 

spray dales were determined on site by monitoring moth 

fli@t with pheromone-baited sticky traps (Pberecm 1 C@; 

Trece Inc., Salinas, CA) and accumulating degee-day totals 

fiom the initiation of moth flight for each generation with a 

continuously recording biophenometer (h/lodel TA5 1 ; 

Dataloggers Inc., Logan, UT). During this period, mean 

tempemtwes were generally nomal (1 996), below nomal 

(1997), and above nomal (1 998) (Athens, GA, June departure 

£tom nomal: -0.06 'C, -2.3 3 "C, and 2.06 'C, respectively) 

throuaout most of the Southeastem United States. 

Results and Discussion 

CXld phenology predictions indicated that the Nantucket pine 

tip moth would complete one to five generations annually in 

this regim. The nmber of generations generally increased 

fiom northern to southern latitudes and %om higher to lower 

elevations but was apparently subject to variations in local 

topography that affect climate. The Nantucket pine tip moth 

is typically reported to have two to five generations amually 

throughout its native range (Berisford 1988). However, at Big 

Meadows, Virginia (elevation: a1 100 meters), only one 

generation was predicted (station 7, fig. 3). It is unlikely that 

one genemion would occur in Virginia because two 

generations are reported to occur in the Northeastern United 

States (Yates 1960, Yates and others 198 1). It is more likely 

that the thermal requirements to complete a generation that 

were established in more southerly latitudes at lower 

elevations are no longer accurate in this environment. 

Phenology studies conducted in northern portions of the 

Southeastem United States have generally reported reduced 

themal requirements to complete a generation (Fettig and 

Berisford 1 999, Haugen and Stephen 1 984). Therefore, we 

conclude that two to five generations occur amually in the 

Southeastem United States. 

Two to three generations were predicted to occur 

throu&out Virginia (fig. 3). The prediction of two 

generations for the Mountain Province agrees with other 

studies conducted in southwest portions of the Mountain 

Province (Berisford and Kulmafl1967, Lewis and others 

19701, northern Vir@ia (Craighead 19501, and adjacent 

Maryland (Lashomb and others 1978). Three generations 

were predicted for much of the Piedmont Plateau and 

throu&out the Coastal Plain (fig. 3). Studies limited to the 

southern portions of these regions also found that three 
Figure 3-Weather station locations and corresponding number of predicted Nantucket pine tip moth generations per year in Virginia and North Carolina. @en circle (8) denotes 

one generation, open squares (U) denote two generations, closed circles (a) denote three generations, and open triangles (A) denote four generations per year, (Numbers 

correspond to weather statian locations in tables 1 and 2.) 
gmemtiom occurred amually (Berisford and Kulman 1967, 

Fettig and Berisford 1 999). Appmattox, Vk, (station 3, fig. 3) 

is presumed to be an outlier because only two generations 

were predicted to occur there. This station is located in the 

Piedmont Plateau and is not associated with any particular 

topogaphic feature that would explain its cooler 

temperatures relative to adjacent stations. It is 

whether this location represents a real cold pocket or 

whether errors have occurred at the recording station. In 

locations with three generations, the predicted first 

generation spray periods generally occurred in late April, the 

second in mid- to late June, and the third in early August 

(table 1). 

North Carolina 

Two to four generations were predicted to occur in North 

Carolina (fig. 3). Two generations were predicted for the 

Mountain Province, and three generations throughout the 

Piedmont Plateau and northem two-thirds of the Coastal 

Plain. Fettig and Berisford (1999) identified three generations 

in extreme northeastern portions of the Piedmont Plateau and 

Coastal Plain. Four generations were predicted for a small 

area located in the southeastern comer of the Coastal Plain 

(fig. 3). The distribution of a fourth generation phenology 

appears to reach its northern limit in this region (Gargiullo 

and others 1984). Although Lumberton, NC, (station 38, 

fig. 3) appears to be an outlier, its temperatures agree with 

those of adjacent station 19 located in South Carolina (fig. 4). 

The location presumably indicates an actual cold pocket. 

Mere three generations occur annually, the predicted first 

generation spray period generally occurred in mid-April, the 

second in mid-June, and the third in late July (table 2). In the 

few locations where a fourth generation was predicted, the 

first generation spray period was predicted in early to midApril, the second in early June, the third in late July to early 

August, and the fourth in mid-September (table 2). 

South GaroLinrm 

Two to four generations were predicted to occur in South 

Carolina (fig. 4). Two generations were predicted for a single 

location (station 8) in the extreme northwest portion of the 

Mountain Province (fig. 4). Three generations were predicted 

for much of the Piedmont Plateau, while a fourth generation 

occurred in most of the Coastal Plain. Four generations have 

previously been reported for portions of the Coastal Plain 

woreira and others 1994). Calhoun Falls and Clarks Hill, SC, 

(stations 9 and 14, respectively, fig. 4) appear to be outliers 

relative to adjacent statiohs where three generations were 

predicted However, their warmer climates could be attributed 

to the western proximity of Russell and J. Strom Thurmond 

Mes, which may mderate temperature extremes early and 

late in the growing season. In locations with three 

generations annually, the predicted first generation spray 

period generally occmed in mid-April, the second in mid- ta 

late June, and the third in early August (table 3). 'Where a 

fourth generation occurs, the predicted first generation 

spray period trpically occurred in late March to early April, 

the second in late May to early June, the third in mid- to late 

July, and the fourth in late August to mid-Sqtember 

(table 3). 

Two to five generations were predicted to occur in Georgia 

(fig. 4). Two generations were predicted for a single location 

(station 11) at one of the highest elevations in the Mountain 

Province (fig. 4). Berisford and others (1 992) found three 

generations occurred throughout the Mountain Province. 

This study did not include the higher elevations because 

they lacked simificant Nantucket pine tip moth infestations. 

Ross and others (1989) predicted that two generations would 

occur throughout a more extensive area of northeast 

Georgia. Three generations were predicted for much of the 

Piedmont Plateau and Mountain Province, which agrees with 

numerous studies on Nantucket pine tip moth phenologies 

in these regions (Berisford 1974; Berisford and others 1984, 

1992; Canalos and Berisford 198 1 ; Gargiullo and Berisford 

1983; Gargiullo and others 1983; Kudon and others 1988). 

Four generations were predicted for most of the Coastal 

Plain except the extreme southern portions of the State where 

a fifth generation was predicted (fig. 4). These results are 

also supported by several previous studies (Berisford and 

others 1992, Gargiullo and others 1985, Moreira and others 

1994, Ross and others 1989). Mere three generations occur 

annually, the predicted first generation spray period 

generally occurred in mid-April, the second in mid- to late 

June, and the third in early August (table 4). In locations 

where a fourth generation occurs, the predicted first 

generation spray period typically occurred in mid- to late 

March, the second in late May, the third in mid-July, and the 

fourth in mid-August to early September (table 5). 

Northern Florida 

Investigations were limited to regions north of Ocala, FL, 

(figs. 4 and 5). To the south of this region susceptible 

southern pine species (loblolly and shortleaf pines) become 

increasingly rare and an associated species of tip moth, the 

subtropical pine tip moth (Rhyacionia subeopica Miller), 

becomes increasingly dominant. The limit of the natural 

range of the Nantucket pine tip moth occurs in central 

Florida (Berisford 1988, Yates and others 198 1 ). 
Figure 4--Weather station locations and corresponding number of predicted Nantucket pine tip moth generations per year in South 

Carolina, Georgia, and northern Florida. Open squares (D) denote two generations, closed circles (a) denote three generations, open 

triangles (A) denote four generations, and closed squares (R) denote five generations per year. (Numbers correspond to weather station 

locations in tables 3, 4, and 5.) 
Figure 5-Weather station locations and corresponding number of predicted Nantucket pine tip moth generations per year in northwestern Florida, Alabama, 

and Mississippi. Closed circles (0) denote three generations, open triangles (A) denote four generations, and closed squares (D) denote five generations per 

year. (Numbers correspond to weather station locations in tables 5, 6, and 7.) 
Four to five generations were predicted to occur in northern 

Florida (figs. 4 and 5). Four generations were predicted for 

several locations in the western. pa&andle, while remaining 

areas appear to have five generations (figs. 4 and 5). Recent 

pheromone hraming programs have not revealed definitive 

diff'erences in emergence patterns among the third, fourth, 

and possible fifth generations, making it difficult to conclude 

how many generations actually exist2 Yates and others 

(198 1) suggested that five generations occur throu&out 

most of northern Florida. Where four generations were 

predicted, the first generation spray period was predicted in 

mid-March, the second in mid-May, the third in mid-Jdy, and 

the fourth in mid-Aupt (table 5). 

Alabama and -hippi 

Three to five generations were predicted to occur in both 

Alabama and Mississippi. Three generations were predicted 

for northern portions of each State, and a fourth generation 

throughout much of the remaining Coastal Plain (fig. 5). 

Alexandria and Anniston, AIL, (stations 1 and 4, respectively, 

fig. 5) appear to be outliers relative to surrounding stations 

with three generations. These stations are not associated 

with any particular topographic features that would explain 

their warmer temperatures relative to adjacent stations. They 

may represent actual warm pockets or errors in data 

acquisition at the recording stations. Based on the close 

proximity of these sites (1 5 kilometers), the phenology 

predictions are probably accurate. Hernando, MS, (station 

24, fig. 5) is also an outlier when compared to surrounding 

stations where three generations were predicted, but no 

particular topopphic features explain its warm 

temperatwes. A fifth generation was predicted for extreme 

southern portions of each State (fig. 5). Sates and others 

(1 98 1 ) suggested that a fifth generation occurs in southern 

portions of the Gulf States. 

In locations of Alabama and Mississippi where three 

generations occur annually, the predicted first generation 

spray period generally occurred in mid-April, the second in 

mid- to late June, and the third in early to mid-August (tables 

6 and 7). In locations with a predicted fourth generation, the 

first generation spray period typically occurred in late March 

to early April, the second in late May to early June, the third 

in mid- to late July, and the fourth from late August to early 

September (tables 6 and 7). 

' Personal communication. 1998. J. Foltz, Professor, Department of 

Entomology and Nematology, University of Florida, GainesviHe, FL 

326 1 1-0620. 

Fourteen f 3 f .8 percent) of the predicted spray periods 

aged with fieldaetermined spray dates, 2 1 (47.7 prcent) 

differed by 1 spray period, 6 (1 3.6 percmt) differed by 2 

spray periods, and 3 (6.8 percent) diEered by 3 spray periods 

(table 8). Six (66.7 percent) of the spray predictions that 

differed by two or three periods occurred during the first 

Nantucket pine tip moth generation and may reflect 

discrepancies between the arbitrary biofix date and the 

actual initiation of moth flight at these locations. Spray 

timing values are typically ktemined experimentally by 

applying insecticide sprays at specified degree-day 

intervals, assessing damage levels for each spray, and using 

second degree polynomial regressions (parabolas) to 

determine optimal spray timing values. Although an optimal 

value exists, approximately 105 degree-days occur around 

the optimal value in which little or no variation in damage 

levels is observed (Gargiullo and others 1985). Assuming a 

typical mean daily temperature of 15.5 'C for the first 

generation, 1 7.5 days would pass during the 105 degree-day 

interval. Therefore, a large spray efficacy window exists 

during the first generation, and spray timing is often less 

critical. 

Management Implications 

Although largely effective, improper use of Nantucket pine 

tip moth spray timing models have occasionally led to errors 

in spray date predictions. These models require a detailed 

knowledge of moth biology; proper pheromone trap 

deployment (placement, spacing, and timing); intensive trap 

monitoring; knowledge of degree-day calculations, 

conversions, and utility; and the ability to acquire daily 

maximum and minimum temperatures on or near the site 

(Gargiullo and others 1985). Although the collection of data 

required to use timing models is costly and laborious to 

obtain, these costs can be mitigated by increased insecticide 

efficacy and reduced application frequency. However, 

scheduling problems may still arise from short-term advance 

notice of approaching optimal spray dates or inclement 

weather patterns that limit insecticide spray opportunities. 

When considering the dificulties associated with using 

spray timing models, the spray period predictions presented 

here are a viable alternative to detemining optimal spray 

dates in the field. Land mangers who apply contact 

insecticides, such as synthetic pyrethroids, and are unabIe 

to run the appropriate moth trapping and degree-day 

accumulation model can locate the closest weather station to 

their pine plantation (figs. 3-5) and use the optimal spray 
periods to time their insecticide applications accordingly 

ng extended periods of inclement weather, 

land managers may choose to adjust the spray period 

predictions by one period, depending on the prevailing 

temperatwe deviations from normal. 

Acknowledgments 

We thank Brad Dorou& and hthony Coody of the 

University of Georgia for support with data entry. In 

addition, we thank Champion International Corporation, 

Georgia Pacific Corporation, International Paper Corporation, 

and Weyerhaeuser Company for providing study sites. We 

also thank Donald Grosman (Texas Forest Service), Kenneth 

McCrav (University of Georgia), John Nowak (Kversity 

of Georga), and two anonymous reviewers for their 

comments on earlier versions of this manuscript. This 

research was supported in part by the Georgia Agricultural 

Experiment Sbtions and the Universiv of Georgia Pine Tip 

Moth Consortium-Champion International Corporation; 

International Paper Corporation; USDA Forest Service, 

Southern Research Station; The Timber Company; and 

Weyerhaeuser Company. 

Literature Cited 

Berisford, C.W. 1974. Comparisons of adult emergence periods and 

generations of the pine tip moths, Rhyacionia Jizlstrana and R. 

rigidana. Annals of the Entomological Society of America. 67: 

666-668. 

Berisford, C.W. 1988. The Nantucket pine tip moth. In Berryman, 

A.A., ed. Dynamics of forest insect populations: patterns, causes, 

and implications. New York: Plenum Publication Corporation: 

141-161. 

Berisford, C.W.; Canalos, C.G.; Godbee, J.F., Jr.; Yates, H.O., 

HI. 1992. Occutrence and seasonal activity of pine tip moth in 

Ceorgia. Georgia For. Comm. For. Res. Pap, 87. Macon, GA: 

Georgia Forestry Commission. 1 1 p. 

Berisford, C.W.; Gargiullo, P.M.; Canalos, C.G. 1984. Optimum 

timing for insecticidal control of the Nantucket pine tip moth 

(Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Journal of Economic Entomology. 77: 

174-1 77, 

Berisford, C.W.; Kulman, H.M. 1967. Infestation rate and damage 

by the Nantucket pine tip moth in six IoblolIy pine categories. 

Forest Science. 13: 428-438. 

Cade, S.C.; Hedden, R.L. 1987. Growth impact of pine tip moth 

on loblolly pine plmtations in the Ouachita Mountains of 

Arkansas. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 1 1 : 128-1 33. 

Canalos, G.G.; Berisford, C.W. 1981. SeasonaI activity of two 

syrnpatric Rhyaeionia species detemined by pheromone traps. 

Journal of the Georgia Entomologicaf Society. 16: 219-222. 

Craighead, F.G. 1950. Insect enemies of eastern forests. Misc. Publ. 

657. Washington, DC: U.S. Depament of Agriculture. 679 p. 

Fettig, G.J.; Berisford, C.W. 1999. Nantucket pine tip moth 

phenology in eastern North Carolina and Virginia: implications for 

effective timing of insecticide applications. Southern Journal of 

Applied Forestry. 23: 30-38. 

Fettig, C.J.; Berisford, C.W.; Dalusky, M.J. 1998. Revision of a 

timing model for chemical control of the Nantucket pine tip moth 

(Lepidopetra: Tortricidae) in the Southeastern Coastal Plain. 

Journal of Entomologicai Science. 33: 336-342. 

Gargiullo, P.M.; Berisford, C.W. 1983. Life tables for the 

Nantucket pine tip moth, Rhyacionia fistrana (Comstock), and 

the pitch pine tip moth, Rhyacionia rigidana (Fernald) 

(Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Environmental Entomology. 12: 

1391-1402. 

Gargiullo, P.M.; Berisford, G.W.; Canalos, C.G. [and othersj. 

1984. Mathematical descriptions of Rhyacionia JEush.ana 

(Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) cumulative catches in pheromone traps, 

cumulative egg hatching, and their use in timing of chemical 

control. Environmental Entomology. 13: 168 1-1 685. 

Gargiullo, P.M.; Berisford, C.W.; Canalos, C.G.; Richmond, 

J.A. 1983. How to time dimethoate sprays against the Nantucket 

pine tip moth. Georgia For. Comm. For. Res. Pap. 44. Macon, GA: 

Georgia Forestry Commission. 11 p. 

Gargiullo, P.M.; Berisford, C.W.; Godbee, J.F., Jr. 1985. 

Prediction of optimal timing for chemical control of the 

Nantucket pine tip moth, Rhyacionia frustrana (Comstock) 

(Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), in the southeastern Coastal Plain. 

Journal of Economic Entomology. 78: 148-1 54. 

Haugen, D.A.; Stephen, F.M. 1984. Development rates of 

Nantucket pine tip moth, Rhyacionia JEustrana (Comstock) 

(Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) life stages in relation to temperature. 

Environmental Entomology. 13 : 56-60. 

Hedden, R.L.; Clason, T. 1980. Nantucket pine tip moth impact on 

loblolly pine wood and product quality. For. Res. Rep. 1979. 

Homer, LA: Louisiana State University Agricultural Experinlent 

Station. 90 p. 

Kudon, L.H.; Berisford, C.W.; Dalusky, M.J. 1988, Refinement 

of a spray timing technique for the Nantucket pine tip moth 

(Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Journal of Entomological Science. 23: 

180-1 86. 

Lashomb, J.H.; Steinhauer, A.L.; Douglzlss, L. 1978. Impact 

studies of Nantucket pine tip moth populations on loblolly pine. 

Environmental Entomology. 7: 9 10-9 12. 

Lewis, K.R.; Kulman, H.M.; Heikkenen, H.J. 1970. Parasites of 

the Nantucket pine tip moth in Virginia with notes on ecological 

relationships. Journal of Economic Entomology. 63: 1 135- 1 139. 
Mawby, W.D.; Rock, G.C. 1986. Eflfects of food, strain, and sex on 

estimating thermal requirements for nondiapause larval and pupal 

development of tufted apple bud moth (Lepidoptera: Tomicidae). 

Environmental Entomology. 15: 2 10-21 5. 

McCravy, K.W; Berisford, C.W. 1998. Parasitism by 

Trichogrumma spp. (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) in 

relation to Nantucket pine tip moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) egg 

density and location. Environmental Entomology. 27: 355-359. 

Moreira, A.F.C.; Berisford, C.W.; Hedden, R.L.; Silva, J.A.A.D. 

1994. Methodology for rating Pinus taeda stands for pine tip 

moth, Rhyacionia spp. infestation (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). 

Anais da Sociedade Entomologica do Brasil. 23: 227-236. 

Ross, D.W.; Pickering, J.; Berg, J.D.; Berisford, C.W. 1989. 

Mapping Nantucket pine tip moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) 

phenology in Georgia. Journal of Entomological Science. 24: 

405-41 2. 

Seaver, D.; Strand, J.; Strawn, A.J. 1990. Degree day utility-user's 

guide. Version 2. Davis, CA: University of California. 86 p. 

Stephen, F.M.; Wallis, G.W.; Colvin, R.J. [and others]. 1982. 

Pine tree growth and yield: influences of species, plant spacings, 

vegetation, and pine tip moth control. Arkansas Farm Research. 

31: 10. 

Yates, H.O., 111. 1960. The Nantucket pine tip moth: a literature 

review. Stn. Pap. 115. Asheville, NG: U.S. Department of 

Agiculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment 

Station. 19 p. 

Yates, H.O., 111; Overgaard, N.A.; Koeber, T.W. 1981. Nantucket 

pine tip moth. For. Insect and Dis. Leafl. 70. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 7 p. 
TaMe l-Site number, location, and optimal spray period predictions for 49 weather stations located 

throughout Virginia 

Spray perioda 

Site no. Location 1 2 3 

Abingdon 

Amelia 

Appmattox 

Ashland 

Back Bay 

Bedford 

Big Meadows 

Blacksburg 

Buena Vista 

Camp Pickett 

Charlotte Court House 

Charlottesvi lle 

Chase City 

Chatham 

Colonial Beach 

Covington 

Danville 

Emporia 

Farmville 

Floyd 

Fredric ksbwg 

Galax 

-dy 

Holland 

Hopewell 

J. Kerr Dam 

Kiltnarnock 

Lawrenceville 

Louisa 

Martinsville 

Mathews 

Norfolk 

Painter 

Philpott Dam 

Richmond 

Roanoke 

Rocky Mount 

South Boston 

St aunt on 

Stony Creek 

Seolk 

Vienna 

Wakefield 

Warnenton 

West Point 

Williamsbwg 

Winchester 

Wise 

Wytheville 

- 

April 26-30 

- 

June 25-29 

- 

Aug. 9-13 - 

April 26-30 

April 26-30 

April 26-30 

- 

June 20-24 

June 20-24 

June 25-29 

- 

Aug. 9-13 

July 30-Aug. 3 

Aug. 9-13 

- 

April 26-30 

April 26-30 

April 26-30 

April 2 1-25 

April 26-30 

April 26-30 

- 

June 25-29 

June 25-29 

June 20-24 

June 15-19 

June 25-29 

June 20-24 

- 

Aug. 9-1 3 

Aug. 9-13 

Aug. 9-1 3 

July 30-Aug. 3 

Aug. 9-13 

July 30-Aug. 3 - 

April 2 1-25 

April 26-30 

April 2 1-25 

- 

June 15-19 

June 20-24 

June 20-24 

- 

July 30-Aug. 3 

July 30-Aug. 3 

Aug. 4-8 - 

May 1-5 

- 

Aug. 4-8 - 

- 

April 2 1-25 

April 16-20 

April 26-30 

April 26-30 

April 2 1-25 

April 26-30 

- 

June 20-24 

June 10-14 

June 20-24 

June 25-29 

June 20-24 

June 20-24 

- 

July 30-Aug. 3 

July 25-29 

July 30-Aug. 3 

Aug. 4-8 

July 30-Aug. 3 

Aug. 9-1 3 - 

April 26-30 

April 26-30 

May 1-5 

- 

June 20-24 

June 15-19 

June 25-29 

Aug. 4-8 

July 30-Aug. 3 

Aug. 9-13 - 

April 26-30 

- 

June 20-24 

- 

July 30-Aug. 3 

- 

June 20-24 

- 

April 26-30 Aug. 4-8 - 

June 15-19 

June 15-19 

- 

July 30-Aug. 3 

July 30-Aug. 3 

April 2 1-25 

April 2 1-25 - 

April 26-30 

- 

June 20-24 July 30-Aug. 3 - 

April 2 1-25 

April 2 1-25 

June 15-19 

June 20-24 

July 25-29 

July 30-Aug. 3 

" - refers to spray periods that are not applicable to spray timing because models have not been developed for 

populations with two annual generations. 
n 

Tct 

0 

. C3 

lj; 

a 

X 

fs" 

m 

om0 wowo WOO^ moo WWWWOV~ 82% NWm Nc\tNm c\tNc\t ~~o~IC;VIOVIO WNN~WW.-.INc\tc\t 

&A& &LA L&L& L&&L I TNWm WNH WWW NHmM mWHW L&&&LLLL&L "?&&~J--&LJ WWW WWWNWN WWW WcqWUWW --- dm@ M-U- --w---.--,--- rn~~~~,--x~-U~ .T& .g 'g *g .g .g g, -g -T& 'T& .g .g +g *g .C .C .f .C *C .C .C .G 'C 'f: 'f; 'f: "f: 'C 'f: 'C 'f: 'G 'f: 'G 

aaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaa 1 444 144-4 14444 l4444 1 I 4444444464 I 444<dd44444 
Table 24ite number, location, and optimal spray period predictions for 58 weather stations 

lwated throughout North Carolina (continued) 

Spray periodu 

Site no. Location 1 2 3 4 

Murfkeesboro 

New Bern 

New Holland 

N. Wilkesboro 

Plymoutt.1 

Raleigh 

Reidsville 

Roanoke Rapids 

Salisbury 

Sanford 

Southport 

Tarboro 

Wadesboro 

Warsaw 

Wad 

Wilnnington 

Wilson 

April 2 1-25 

April 11-15 

April 11-15 

April 16-20 

April 16-20 

April 26-30 

April 26-30 

April 2 1-25 

April 11-15 

April 11-15 

April 16-20 

April 16-20 

April 11-15 

April 6-1 0 

April 6-1 0 

April 16-20 

June 15-19 

June 10-14 

June 10-14 

- 

June 10-14 

June 10-14 

June 20-24 

June 20-24 

June 20-24 

June 10-14 

June 10-14 

June 10-14 

June 5-9 

June 10-14 

June 5-9 

June 10-14 

June 10-14 

July 30-Aug. 3 

July 3Mug. 3 Sept, 18-22 

July 20-24 

- - 

July 2 5-29 

July 25-29 

Aug. 4-43 

July 30-Aug. 3 

Aug, 4-8 

July 2 5-29 

July 30-Aug. 3 Sept. 18-22 

July 20-24 

July 20-24 

July 30-Aug. 3 Sept. 18-22 

July 30-Aug. 3 Sept. 18-22 

July 30-Aug. 3 Sept. 18-22 

July 25-29 

" - refers to spray periods that are not applicable to spray timing because models have not been developed for 

populations with two annual generations. 
Table &Site number, location, and optima1 spray period predictions for 45 weather stations located 

throughout South Carolina 

Spray period" 

Site no. Location 1 2 3 4 

Aiken 

Allendale 

Anderson 

Andrews 

Bamberg 

Bishopville 

Blackville 

Caesars Head 

Calhoun Falls 

Camden 

Charleston 

Cheraw 

Chester 

Clarks Hill 

Clemson 

Columbia 

Conway 

Barlingon 

Dillon 

Edisto Island 

Florence 

Greenwood 

Harnpton 

Hilton Head Island 

Johnston 

Kingstree 

Laurens 

Little Mountain 

Loris 

Mming 

McClellanville 

Myrtle Beach 

Newberry 

Pageland 

Pickens 

Ridgeland 

Smmerville 

Smter 

la 

Walterboro 

Yemassee 

March 27-3 1 

March 27-3 1 

April 16-20 

March 27-3 1 

March 27-3 1 

April 16-20 

March 27-3 1 - 

April 11-15 

April 16-20 

March 27-3 1 

April 16-20 

April 16-20 

April 6-1 0 

April 16-20 

March 27-3 1 

April 1-5 

April 1-5 

April 16-20 

April 6-10 

April 11-15 

April 16-20 

April 16-20 

March 17-21 

March 22-26 

April 16-20 

April 1-5 

April 16-20 

April 6- 10 

April 6-10 

April 1-5 

April 1-5 

April 1-5 

April 6- 10 

April 11-15 

April 16-20 

March 17-2 1 

April 11-15 

April 16-20 

March 27-3 1 

April 1-5 

April 16-20 

April 21-25 

March 22-26 

March 22-26 

May 3 1-June 4 

May 26-30 

June 20-24 

May 3 1-June 4 

May 26-30 

June1 5-19 

May 26-30 - 

June 10-14 

June 20-24 

May 26-30 

June 20-24 

June 20-24 

June 5-9 

June 20-24 

May 26-30 

May 3 1-June 4 

May 3 I -June 4 

June 20-24 

May 3 1-June 4 

June 5-9 

June 25-29 

June 20-24 

May 21-25 

May 26-30 

June 20-24 

May 3 1-June 4 

June 20-24 

June 5-9 

June 5-9 

May 3 1-June 4 

May 3 1-June 4 

June 5-9 

June 5-9 

June 10-14 

June 20-24 

May 2 1-25 

June 15-19 

June 20-24 

Nay 3 1-June 4 

May 3 1-June 4 

June 25-29 

June 25-29 

May 26-30 

May 26-30 

July 20-24 

July 15-19 

Aug. 9-13 

July 20-24 

July 20-24 

Aug. 4-8 

July 20-24 

- 

July 30-Aug. 3 

Aug. 9- 1 3 

July 15-19 

Aug. 4-8 

Aug. 9- 1 3 

July 30-Aug. 3 

Aug. 9- 1 3 

July 15-19 

July 20-24 

July 25-29 

Aug. 4-8 

July 20-24 

July 25-29 

Aug. 14-18 

Aug. 9-1 3 

July 15-19 

July 15- 19 

Aug. 4-8 

July 20-24 

Aug. 4-8 

July 25-29 

July 30-Aug. 3 

July 25-29 

July 25-29 

July 25-29 

July 25-29 

July 30-Aug. 3 

Aug. 14-18 

July 15-19 

Aug. 4-8 

Aug. 9- 13 

July 20-24 

July 25-29 

Aug. 14-1 8 

Aug. 19-23 

July 20-24 

July 15-19 

Sept. 3-7 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Sept. 3-7 

Sept. 3-7 

Sept. 3-7 - 

Sept. 13-1 7 

Aug. 24-28 

Sept. 13-1 7 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Sept. 3-7 

Sept. 8-12 

Sept. 3-7 

Sept. 13-17 

Aug. 24-28 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Sept. 3-7 

Sept. 8-12 

Sept. 18-22 

Sept. 8-12 

Sept. 8-12 

Sept. 13-1 7 

Sept. 13-17 

Sept. 18-22 

Aug. 24-28 

Sept. 3-7 

Sept. 8-12 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

" - refers to spray periods that are not applicable to spray timing because models have not been developed for 

populations with two annual generations. 
Table &Site number, location, and optimal spray period pr~ctions for 70 weather slations located 

throughout Georgia 

Spray periodu 

Site no. Location 1 2 3 4 

Albany 

Alma 

Alpharetta 

Americus 

Appling 

Ashburn 

Athens 

Atlanta 

Augusta 

Bainbridge 

Blairsville 

Brunswick 

Byron 

Calhsun 

Camilla 

Carrollton 

Cartersville 

Cedartown 

Claxton 

Clayton 

Colquitt 

Columbus 

Gommerce 

Cordele 

Cornelia 

Covington 

Cuthbert 

Dalton 

Douglas 

Dublin 

East man 

Elberton 

Experiment 

Fargo 

Fitzgemld 

Folkston 

Forsyth 

Gainesville 

Helen 

Homerville 

Jasper 

La Fayette 

Louisville 

Lumpkin 

March 17-21 - 

April 2 1 -25 

March 22-26 

April 11-15 

March 27-3 1 

April 16-20 

April 16-20 

April 1-5 

March 12-1 6 

April 1-5 

April 16-20 

April 16-20 

April 16-20 

April 16-20 

March 22-26 

April 26-30 

March 12-16 

March 27-3 1 

April 16-20 

March 17-2 1 

April 2 1-25 

April 1 1-1 5 

Mar~h 17-2 1 

April 2 1-25 

March 17-2 1 

March 22-26 

March 22-26 

April 11-15 

April 16-20 

March 12-1 6 

Mach 17-2 1 - 

April 1-5 

April 2 1-25 

April 2 1-25 

March 12-1 6 

April 2 1-25 

April 2 1-25 

Mar~h 22-26 

March 22-26 

May 21-25 

- 

June 30-July 4 

May 26-30 

June 20-24 

May 26-30 

June 20-24 

June 15-19 

May 3 1 -June 4 

May 21-25 

June 5-9 

June 25-29 

Jug, 20-24 

June 20-24 

June 20-24 

May 26-30 

July 5-9 

May 16-20 

May 26-30 

June 25-29 

May 2 1-25 

June 30-July 4 

June 15-19 

May 2 1-25 

June 25-29 

May 2 1-25 

May 26-30 

May 26-30 

June 20-24 

June 20-24 

May 16-20 

May 2 1-25 - 

June 5-9 

June 25-29 

July 5-9 

May 16-20 

June 30-July 4 

June 25-29 

May 26-30 

May 26-30 

July 1 0-1 4 - 

Aug. 24-28 

July 15-19 

Aug. 9- 1 3 

July 15-19 

Aug. 4-8 

Aug. 4-8 

July 20-24 

July 10-14 

- 

- 

July 25-29 

Aug. 1418 - 

Aug. 14-18 

Aug. 9- 1 3 

Aug. 9-1 3 

July 20-24 

Sqt. 8-12 

July 10-14 

July 15-19 

Aug. 14-18 

July 10-14 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Aug. 4-8 

July 10-14 

Aug. 14-18 

July 1 5-1 9 

July 15-19 

July 15-19 

Aug, 14-18 

Aug. 9-1 3 

July 10-14 

July 10-14 

- 

July 2 5-29 

Aug, 14-18 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

July 10-14 

Aug. 24-28 

Aug. 19-23 

July 15-19 

July 20-24 

Aug. 19-23 - 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Sept. 3-7 

Aug. 19-23 - 

- 

Sepi. 8-12 

- 

Aug. 19-23 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Aug. 19-23 

Aug. 19-23 

Aug. 24-28 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Aug. 2SSept. 2 

Aug. 19-23 

Aug. 24-28 - 

Sept. 13-17 

Aug. 24-28 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Sept. 3-7 

continued 
Table 47Site numkr, l-ocation, and optimal spray period prdetions for 70 weather stations located 

throughout Georgia (continued) 

Spray perioda 

Site no. Location 1 2 3 4 

Macon 

Midville 

Milledgeville 

Millen 

Monticello 

Moultrie 

Nahunta 

Newnan 

Quitman 

Rome 

Sandersville 

Sapelo Island 

Savannah 

Siloam 

Surrency 

Swainsboro 

Talbotton 

Thomaston 

Thomasville 

Tifion 

Warrenton 

Washington 

Waycross 

Waynesboro 

West Point 

Winder 

March 27-3 1 

March 27-3 1 

April 6-10 

March 17-2 1 

April 6-10 - 

March 7-1 1 

April 11-15 - 

April 16-20 

April 1-5 

March 17-2 1 

Mmh 17-2 1 

April 6-1 0 

March 12-16 

March 22-26 

March 27-3 1 

March 27-3 1 - 

March 17-21 

April 6-10 

April 16-20 

- 

April 1-5 

April 1-5 

April 16-20 

May 26-30 

May 3 1-June 4 

June 5-9 

May 26-30 

June 5-9 - 

May 16-20 

June 15-19 - 

June 20-24 

June 5-9 

May 2 1-25 

May 2 1-25 

June 5-9 

May 2 1-25 

May 26-30 

May 3 1-June 4 

May 3 1-June 4 - 

May 2 1-25 

June 5-9 

June 20-24 - 

May 3 1-June 4 

June 5-9 

June 20-24 

July 15-19 

July 20-24 

July 25-29 

July 15-19 

July 25-29 - 

July 10-14 

Aug. 4-8 - 

Aug. 9-1 3 

July 25-29 

July 10-14 

July 10-14 

July 30-Aug. 

July 10-14 

July 15-19 

July 25-29 

July 25-29 - 

July 10-14 

July 25-29 

Aug. 9- 1 3 - 

July 25-29 

July 25-29 

Aug. 14-18 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Sept. 3-7 

Sept. 13-17 

Aug. 24-28 

Sept. 13-17 - 

Aug. 24-28 

Sept. 8-12 

Aug. 24-28 

Aug. 19-23 

3 Sept.13-17 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Aug. 24-28 

Sept. 8-12 

Sept. 8-12 

Aug. 24-28 

Sept. 8-12 

Sept. 8-12 

Sept. 8-12 

" - refers to spray periods that are not applicable to spray timing because models have not been developed for 

populations with two or five annual generations. 
Table 5---43ite numkr, location, and optimal spray period prdctions for 26 weather stations 

located throughout northern Florida 

Spray perioda 

Site no. Location 1 2 3 4 

Apalachicola 

Chipley 

Crescent City 

Crestview 

Cross City 

DeFuniak Springs 

Federal Point 

Fernandina Beach 

Gainesville 

Glen Saint Mary 

High Springs 

Jacksonville 

Jasper 

Lake City 

Live Oak 

Madison 

Mayo 

Monticello 

Ocala 

Panama City 

Pensacola 

pew 

Quinc y 

Saint Augustine 

Steinhatc hee 

Tallahassee 

- 

March 12-1 6 

- 

May 16-20 

- 

July 10-14 

- 

Aug. 19-23 - 

May 16-20 - 

- 

Aug. 19-23 - March 12-16 - July 10-14 - 

- 

March 12-1 6 

- 

May 16-20 

- 

July 10-14 

- 

Aug. 19-23 

- 

March 12-16 May 16-20 - July 10-14 

- Aug. 24-28 - 

" - refers to spray periods that are not applicable to spray timing because models have not been developed 

for populations with five annual generations. 
00 C*u2zd~u a, 00 

7i3~62~5 C* NC* 

bb&&p,&xxbb 3<z-3Zzz3 

a2 a2 V] 

8 a a‘2 a !? ;=:% E: ).e- o.iypsm =C i? %g.z Gm 3.: tj+j)E: g == r. g.c rn 5 gQi3 87 rn+~ g g g ZqjOg E 

s3c~*-~~Fj0~~""g~ooco~?$~g~~~&g

$*gz.-m .r ""SS~*;."E~$ Q.t: hmx.~ 8 2 g3 ~$63 Z 

.rm ~5% $+ i:gE% 2 &cs-,~B ;, nt Q'C ~~~<~<mmmmmmuuuuuuu~8:~rf~i]~i]~~~~~4r3r3r3r3

22~ 
Table 6--Site number, location, and optimal spray period predictions for 54 weather stat-ions located 

throughout Alabama (continued) 

Spray periodu 

Site no. Location 1 2 3 4 

Muscle Shoals 

Oneonta 

Robert sdale 

Scottsboro 

Talladega 

Thornasville 

Troy 

Tuscaloosa 

Union Springs 

Valley Head 

April 16-20 June 20-24 

Aprif.21-25 June25-29 

March 12-1 6 May 26-30 

April 16-20 June 20-24 

Aprifll-15 June15-19 

Mach 27-3 1 May 26-30 

March 22-26 May 26-30 

April 1-5 May 3 1 -June 4 

April 1-5 May 3 1-June 4 

April 26-30 July 5-9 

Aug. 9- 1 3 

Aug. 14-18 

July 15-1 9 Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Aug. 9- 1 3 

Aug. 4-8 

July 1 5-1 9 Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

July 15-19 Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

July 20-24 Sept. 3-7 

July 25-29 Sept. 8-12 

Aug. 24-28 

" - refers to spray periods that are not applicable to spray timing because models have not been developed for 

populations with five annual generations. 
Table 7-Site number, lwation, and oph.mal spray peaiod predictions for 52 weather stations located 

throughout Msdssippi 

Spray period " 

Site no. Location 1 2 3 4 

Aberdeen 

Batesville 

Bay Saint Louis 

Belzoni 

Biloxi 

Booneviile 

Brookhaven 

Calhoun City 

Carthage 

Charleston 

Clarksdale 

Collins 

Columbia 

Columbus 

Crystal Springs 

D Lo 

Eupora 

Forest 

Fulton 

Greenville 

Greenwood 

Grenada 

Hattiesburg 

Hernando 

Hickory Flat 

Houston 

luka 

Jackson 

Kosciusko 

Laurel 

Lexington 

Liberty 

Louisville 

Macon 

McComb 

Meridian 

Natchez 

Newton 

Pascagoula 

Philadelphia 

Pontotoc 

Poplarville 

Port Gibson 

Quitman 

Ripley 

Rolling Fork 

Tunica 

Tylertown 

Vicksburg 

Waynesboro 

Wiggins 

Woodville 

April 6-10 

April 16-20 - 

April 6-10 - 

April 2 1-25 

March 22-26 

April 6- 10 

April 6-10 

April 11-15 

April 11-15 

March 22-26 

March 12-16 

April 6-10 

March 22-26 

April 1-5 

April 6-10 

March 27-3 1 

April 11-15 

April 6-10 

April 6-10 

April 11-15 

March 17-21 

April 16-20 

April 16-20 

April 16-20 

April 21-15 

March 27-3 1 

April 6-10 

March 27-3 1 

April 6- 10 

March 27-3 1 

April 6-10 

April 6-10 

March 22-26 

March 27-3 1 

March 17-21 

April 1-5 - 

April 6-10 

April 16-20 - 

March 27-3 1 

March 27-3 1 

April 21-25 

April 6-10 

April 16-20 

March 17-21 

March 22-26 

March 22-26 

March 17-21 

March 17-21 

June 5-9 

June 15-19 - 

May 3 1-June 4 - 

June 20-24 

May 3 1 -June 4 

June 5-9 

June 5-9 

June 10-14 

June 5-9 

May 26-30 

May 16-20 

June 5-9 

May 21-25 

May 31-June 4 

June 5-9 

May 3 1 -June 4 

June 15-19 

May 3 ]-June 4 

May 3 1 -June 4 

June 5-9 

May 21-25 

June 10-14 

June 20-24 

June 20-24 

June 25-29 

May 3 1-June 4 

June 5-9 

May 26-30 

June 5-9 

May 26-30 

June 5-9 

June 5-9 

May 26-30 

May 3 1 -June 4 

May 21-25 

May 3 1 -June 4 - 

June 5-9 

June 20-24 - 

May 26-30 

May 3 1 -June 4 

June 20-24 

June 5-9 

June 15-19 

May 21-25 

May 26-30 

May 26-30 

May 2 1-25 

May 21-25 

July 25-29 

Aug. 4-8 - 

July 20-24 - 

Aug. 9-13 

July 20-24 

July 30-Aug. 

July 25-29 

July 25-29 

July 20-24 

July 15-19 

July 5-9 

July 25-29 

July 15-19 

July 25-29 

July 25-29 

July 20-24 

Aug. 4-8 

July 20-24 

July 20-24 

July 25-29 

July 10-14 

July 30-Aug. 

Aug. 4-8 

Aug. 9- 13 

Aug. 14-18 

July 20-24 

July 25-29 

July 15-19 

July 25-29 

July 20-24 

July 25-29 

July 25-29 

July 15-19 

July 20-24 

July 10-14 

July 25-29 - 

July 25-29 

Aug. 4-8 - 

July 20-24 

July 20-24 

Aug. 9- 13 

July 20-24 

Aug. 4-8 

July 10-14 

July 15-19 

July 15-19 

July 10-14 

July 10-14 

Sept. 8-1 2 

- 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 - 

Sept. 3-7 

3 Sept.13-17 

Sept. 8-12 

Sept. 13-17 

Sept. 3-7 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Aug. 19-23 

Sept. 3-7 

Aug. 24-28 

Sept. 8-12 

Sept. 8-12 

Sept. 3-7 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Sept. 3-7 

Sept. 8-12 

Aug. 24-28 

3 Sept.13-17 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Sept. 13-17 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Sept. 8-12 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Sept. 8-12 

Sept. 8-12 

Aug. 24-28 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Aug. 24-28 

Sept. 8-12 - 

Sept. 8-12 

- 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Sept. 3-7 

Sept. 3-7 

Aug. 24-28 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Aug. 29-Sept. 2 

Aug. 19-23 

Aug. 24-28 

" - refers to spray periods that are not applicable to spray timing because models have not been developed for 

populations with five annual generations. 
ornpaPisons between optimal spray dates determined on site at 16 field Iwa~ons 

throughout the Southeastern United States during 1996-.9%3 and prMlcted opgmal spray peria& 

Generation 

1 2 3 4 

Location Year Weather station locationff Spray Spray Spray Spray 

Alabama 

Escmbia Go. 1996 Brewiton (30 h ESE) 06 1 NAc NA 

Georgia 

Athens 1997 Athens (5 km SW) 3 1 3 - 

JeEerson Co. 1997 Louisville (8 km W) 3 1 1 2 

1998 Louisville (7.5 km W) 0 0 2 NA 

Oglethorpe Co. 1998 Athens (3 0.5 km 2 I 1 - 

Taylor Co. 1998 Talbotton (37 km NA 1 f\3A NA 

North Carolina 

Chow Co. 1996 Edenton (9.5 h S) 2 1 1 - 

Comarista 1996 Lewiston (1 3.5 kzn SVV) 2 1 1 - 

tfaliEax Co. 1996 Roanoke Rapids (2 1 h E) 0 0 1 - 

Hertford Co. 1998 Murfkeesboro (1 6 km SW) 0 1 NA --- 

Pleasant Hill 1996 ErnWqVA(22.5hN) 0 0 0 

South Carolina 

1997 Hmpton(l7hNW) 2 0 I I 

Bnrnswick Co. 1996 Lawenceille (1 3 km WS 1 0 l - 

Isle of Wight Co. 19% Wakefield (30.5 km 1 1 Z - 

Southampton Co. 1998 Holland (22.5 km Em) 0 0 NA - 

Sussex Co. 1998 ErnMa(5hVV) 1 0 NA - 

NA - data not available; - = data not applicable. 

" Approximate distance and coordinate from field site to weather station location. 

Numbers refer to the differences between dates in terms of 5-day optimal spray periods. 
Fenig, Christopher J.; Dalusky, Mark J,; Berisford, G. Wayne. 2000. Nantucket pine tip moth 

phenology and timing of insecticide spray applications in seven Southeastern States. Res. Pap. 

SRS- 18. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agiculture, Forest Sewice, Sou&em Research 

Station. 21 p. 

The Nantucket pine tip moth, Rhytrcionia@usaana (Cornstock) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), is a 

common pest of Christmas tree and pine plmtations throu&out much of the Eastern United States. 

The moth completes two to five generations annually, md insecticide spray timing models are 

currently available for controlling populations where three or four generations occur. The themal 

requirements for the Nantucket pine tip moth to complete a generation were obtained from 

published data and used along with historical temperature data to produce maps indicating the 

number of annual generations predicted to occur throughout seven Southeastern States. Spray 

timing prediction values were also obtained from published data and used to predict optimal spray 

periods based on 5-day increments for each location where either three or four generations occ 

Approximately 80 percent of the predicted optimal spray periods were within one optimal spray 

period of previously field-detemined spray dates, Land managers who use contaet insecticides, 

such as synthetic pyrethroids, may find the predicted optimal spray periods useful in optimizing 

spray effectiveness. 

Keywords: Chemical control, Nantucket pine tip moth, phenology, Rhyacioniafiustrana, spray 

timing.