Back One Page
Table 2. Effect of mating disruption on the number of moths captured in flight traps in 2002.
Site 1
Site 2
Date
Treatmenta
Control
P (Treatment > Control)
Treatment
Control
P (Treatment > Control)
13-Mar
0 ± 0
0 ± 0
ns
0 ± 0
0 ± 0
ns
20-Mar
0.2 ± 0.1
0.2 ± 0.1
ns
4.6 ± 1.3*
0.5 ± 0.2
< 0.0001
27-Mar
4.2 ± 0.9*
6.6 ± 2.2*
ns
19.8 ± 3.3*
9.8 ± 2.5*
0.0185
3-Apr
14.3 ± 2.9*
9.9 ± 1.8*
ns
10.7 ± 2.2*
11.6 ± 1.8*
ns
10-Apr
7.2 ± 1.9*
10.4 ± 2.1*
0.0187
4.6 ± 1.1*
10.2 ± 1.7*
0.0012
17-Apr
6.8 ± 2.5*
5 ± 1.3*
ns
3.5 ± 0.8*
2.8 ± 1.1*
ns
24-Apr
31.6 ± 5.3*
22.3 ± 3.4*
ns
11.6 ± 1.6*
8.6 ± 1.5*
ns
1-May
11.8 ± 2.2*
11.9 ± 3*
ns
10.4 ± 1.9*
12.3 ± 2.6*
ns
8-May
8.4 ± 1.6*
7.8 ± 1.9*
ns
5.6 ± 0.9*
12.8 ± 3.9*
ns
15-May
9.9 ± 1.9*
11.9 ± 2.7*
ns
5 ± 0.9*
7.2 ± 1.5*
ns
22-May
4.8 ± 1.3*
7.4 ± 2.4*
ns
3.2 ± 0.8*
7.3 ± 1.9*
ns
29-May
2.4 ± 0.6*
2.4 ± 0.5*
ns
0.9 ± 0.3*
2.3 ± 0.4*
0.0366
5-Jun
2.8 ± 0.8*
1.6 ± 0.4*
ns
0.7 ± 0.3*
1.2 ± 0.4*
ns
12-Jun
2.4 ± 0.4*
2.5 ± 0.7*
ns
0.7 ± 0.3*
1.3 ± 0.4*
ns
19-Jun
1.6 ± 0.5*
1 ± 0.3*
ns
0.6 ± 0.2*
1.2 ± 0.3*
ns
Mating disruption treatment applied
26-Jun
0.1 ± 0.1
1.3 ± 0.6*
0.0002
0.4 ± 0.2
0.4 ± 0.2*
ns
3-Jul
0 ± 0
0.6 ± 0.2*
0.0091
0 ± 0
0.4 ± 0.2*
ns
10-Jul
0 ± 0
0 ± 0
ns
0 ± 0
0.1 ± 0.1
ns
17-Jul
0 ± 0
0.8 ± 0.3*
0.0169
0 ± 0
1 ± 0.5*
0.0176
24-Jul
0.3 ± 0.3
1.2 ± 0.3*
0.0155
0 ± 0
2.1 ± 0.7*
0.0003
31-Jul
0 ± 0
2.5 ± 0.7*
< 0.0001
0.1 ± 0.1
2.6 ± 1*
0.0005
7-Aug
0 ± 0
5.6 ± 1.6*
< 0.0001
0 ± 0
3.2 ± 1.2*
0.0017
14-Aug
0 ± 0
8.9 ± 2.3*
< 0.0001
0 ± 0
11.9 ± 2.4*
< 0.0001
21-Aug
0 ± 0
16 ± 2.9*
< 0.0001
0.1 ± 0.1
20.6 ± 4.3*
< 0.0001
28-Aug
0 ± 0
11.4 ± 2.5*
< 0.0001
0 ± 0
20.7 ± 4.6*
< 0.0001
4-Sep
0.3 ± 0.2
16 ± 2.4*
< 0.0001
0.8 ± 0.3*
12.9 ± 2.6*
< 0.0001
aNavel orangeworm per trap per week е standard error, n = 16.
*Significantly > 0.
Back One Page