Pheromones

What are they and how do they work?

Pheromones are volatile chemicals produced by a given species to communicate with other individuals of the same species to change their behavior. For example, various species use pheromones to attract a mate, to mark territory, or to warn others of danger. Pheromones are usually effective in tiny amounts. The pheromones that EPA approved are synthetic versions of these naturally occurring compounds. When these pheromones are released into the air where the males are looking for females, the males become confused and cannot easily locate the females. As a result, many of the females do not mate and lay eggs and there are many fewer offsprings that usual. (26) They are dispersed by airplane about one cup of flakes per acre.(8)

Effectiveness

- The mating disruption technique should be used only to manage low density populations of the European strain of the gypsy moth. (22 &7 p.33)

- Pheromone flakes cannot reduce gypsy moth populations in areas that are heavily infested with moths. In these areas there are enough males and females wandering about for them to find each other without the help of pheromones. In contrast, when populations are very low, mating disruption works well and is cost effective.(8)

- Treatments applied in 1993 resulted in >97% reduction in mating and>82% suppression of population in the following year.(2)

- The Gypsy Moth Slow-The-Spread pilot project conducted in West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, and Michigan has clearly demonstrated that the rate at which the gypsy moth is spreading can be reduced by at least 60%.(11)

Availability

The Ohio Department of Agricultural, in conjunction with the Federal Govt. will provide the Pheromone flakes and distribute them. In fact they are scheduled to release the pheromone flakes over Clifton Gorge, Bryan Park and Glen Helen in July. It is doubtful that this offer will be made next year. 

Costs

There will be no costs to Yellow Springs.(19)

Human Health Risks

- During more than 10 years of using pheromones, no adverse effects have been reported.(26)

[US EPA Generic Fact Sheet for Lepidopteran Pheronomes, 12/1999]

- The toxicity of insect pheromones is relatively low and their activity is target-specific. Therefore the EPA requires less rigorous testing of these products than of conventional insecticides.(6) [Environmental Assessment Cooperative Gypsy Moth Project for Porter Co. Indiana, by Indiana Dept. of Nat Resources and the US Dept. of Agriculture 1999]

- Exposure to the pheromone is not expected to pose any health risk to adults, children or other sensitive populations. No adverse effects have ever been reported for pheromone products( 25)

[US EPA Biopesticide Fact Sheet 1999]

- No acute effects in humans have been reported.(5)[Disparlure Fact Sheet, prepared by the Dept. of Agriculture, forest Service Information Ventures, Inc., 1995]

- Pheromones are non-toxic to humans.(8)[Gypsy Moth in Indiana Q &A, Cliff Sadof, Dept. of Entomology, Purdue Univ.]

- The Pheromone is non toxic to humans.(10)[Gypsy Moth in Southern Michigan, Michigan State Univ. WK Kellogg Biological Station 1999]

- There were no complaints of health related incidences following the release of Pheromones in Beavercreek in 2000.(12)[Jack Haney, Beavercreek asst manager in charge of Pheromone release in Beavercreek in June 2000] 

- Mating disruption is safe for humans and the environment.(11)

- No significant toxicity is expected.(14)

- Pheromones are in actuality perfume, not poison, which is extremely Gypsy Moth specific, and has no documented deleterious or adverse effects on any other non-target species.(16)

- Disrupt II is specific to gypsy moths and is not harmful to any other species, including humans, threatened or endangered species, or beneficial insects and predators, (18)

- There have been cases where workers who are exposed to high levels of the pheromones over a long period of time will attract the moth. While this may be a nuisance, no health problems have been reported related to this.(5)

Environmental Factors

- Adverse effects on non target organisms (mammals, birds, aquatic organisms are not expected because these pheromones are released in very small amounts to the environment and act on a select group of insects. (26)[US EPA Generic Fact sheet for Lepidopteran Pheronomes, 12/1999]

- Pheromone application will only affect gypsy moths. Caterpillars of other moths and butterflies will not be harmed.(8)[Gypsy Moth in Indiana Q & A, Cliff Sadof, Department of Entomology, Purdue Univ.

- The pheromone is not toxic to humans, other mammals, birds fish or insects.(10)[Gypsy Moth in Southwest Michigan, Michigan State Univ., W.K. Kellogg Biological Station, 1999]

- Disparlure is practically non-toxic to fish. It does not build up in fish. Studies have not been conducted in aquatic invertebrates. It is not expected to be a hazard to endangered species.(5)

[Disparlure Fact Sheet, Prepared for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service by Information Ventures, Inc., 1995]

- The pheromone in the flake dispenser is specific to gypsy moth and will not have an affect on other insects or organisms including not-target and threatened and endangered butterflies or moths. Most ingredients in the flakes are insoluble in water, so the risk of Disparlure leaching into ground water is minimal.(6)[Environmental Assessment, Cooperative Gypsy Moth Project for Porter County, Indiana, by Indiana Department of Natural Resources and U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Forest Service, 1999] 

- Mating disruption is safe for humans and the environment.(11)

- Pheromones are in actuality perfume, not poison, which is extremely Gypsy Moth specific, and has no documented deleterious or adverse effects on any other non-target species.(16)

- Disrupt II is specific to gypsy moths and is not harmful to any other species, including humans, threatened or endangered species, or beneficial insects and predators, (18)
 

Pros:


1. There is no evidence of health problems related to pheromone dispersal

2. The pheromone treatment has a high rate of success

3. It is cost effective (i.e. it will cost the Yellow Springs nothing)

4. If nothing else it will buy some time and hopefully prevent a large infestation

5. Treatment does not need to be repeated annually 
 

Cons:


1. Potential damage from the plastic flakes (1/32"x3/32", 1cup per acre). Currently research is being done on developing a biodegradable flake.

2. Some people are uncomfortable because of the "no information available" in areas such as chronic toxicity on the Disparlure Fact Sheet (5) This is addressed in the Porter County Environmental Assessment report where they state "The toxicity of insect pheromones to mammals is relatively low and their activity is target specific. Therefore the EPA requires less rigorous testing of these products than conventional pesticides."(6) 

Peggy Erskine


 
 

Bibliography for General Overview and Pheromone and Wasp Treatments
*See Pheromone and Wasp Sources for actual articles 

(1). Bennett, Pam, Clark County Extension Office, Articles in Springfield Sun
(2). Comparative efficacy of two controlled-release gypsy moth mating disruption formulations, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD, 1999
(3). Competition between the gypsy moth and the northern swallowtail: interactions mediated by host plant chemistry, pathogens and parasitoids, A.M. Redman & J.M. Scriber, Department of Entomology, Michigan State Univ., 2000
(4). Containing Gypsy Moth, Wisconsin Natural Resources Magazine, 1998
(5). Disparlure Fact Sheet, Prepared for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service by Information Ventures, Inc., 1995
(6). Environmental Assessment, Cooperative Gypsy Moth Project for Porter County, Indiana, by Indiana Department of Natural Resources and U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Forest Service, 1999
(7). Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team 1998
(8). Gypsy Moth in Indiana Q & A, Cliff Sadof, Department of Entomology, Purdue Univ.
(9). Gypsy Moth in Southwest Michigan, Deborah G. McCullough, Assistant Professor Dept. of Entomology and Dept. of Forestry, Michigan State Univ., 8/1999
(10). Gypsy Moth in Southwest Michigan, Michigan State Univ., W.K. Kellogg Biological Station, 1999
(11). Gypsy Moth Slow the Spread 2/2001
(12). Haney, Jack, Asst. manager of Beavercreek where Pheromones were released in 2000
(13). Herms, Daniel ,Assistant Professor, Department of Entomology, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, Ohio State Univ., 2001
(14). Hercon Material Safety Data Sheet, Hercon Environmental, Producers of Pheromone Disrupt, 2000
(15). How Risky is Biological Control, Daniel Simberloff, Department of Biological Science, Florida State Univ., Ecology Society of America, 1996
(16). Mickey, Jim Letter, Ohio Department of Agriculture, 3/21/2001
(17). Parasitism of gypsy moth, Journal of Economic Entomology, 1997
(18). Pheromone Flake Fact Sheet, Ohio Department of Agriculture
(19). Praxis estimate 1/2000
(20). Praxis WEB Site literature 2001 & literature sent from Praxis
(21). Quarantined counties in Ohio
(22). Roberts, Andy
(23). Status of Gypsy moth in Ohio
(24). Useing Mating Disrupt to Manage Gypsy Moth, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service 1998
(25). US EPA Biopesticide Fact Sheet, 1999
(26). US EPA Generic Fact sheet for Lepidopteran Pheronomes, 12/1999