this document has been scanned from hard-copy archives for

This document has been scanned from hard-copy archives for research and study purposes. Please note not all information may be current. We have tried, in preparing this copy, to make the content accessible to the widest possible audience but in some cases we recognise that the automatic text recognition maybe inadequate and we apologise in advance for any inconvenience this may cause.

! '-. EUCALYPT PLANTATION PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS STUDY

By Jack Simpson Christine Stone and Robert Eldridge

S TAT E

FORESTS

EUCALYPT PLANTATION

PESTS AND DISEASES -

CROP Loss STUDY

by

JACK SIMPSON CHRISTINE STONE

ROBERT ELDRIDGE

FOREST RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION STATE FORESTS OF NEW SOUTH WALES

SYDNEY 1997

Research Paper No. 35 December, 1997

The Authors:

Jack Simpson, Forest Pathologist, Plantation Technology, Forest and Wood Products, Forest Research and Development Division, State Forests of New South Wales

Christine Stone, Research Scientist-Forest Entomology, Plantation Technology, Forest and Wood Products, Forest Research and Development Division, State Forests of New South Wales

Robert Eldridge, Program Manager, Plantation Technology, Fprest and Wood Products, Forest Research and Development Division, State Forests of New South Wales.

Published by:

Forest Research and Development Division,

State Forests of New South Wales,

121-131 Oratava Avenue, West Pennant Hills, 2125

p.a. Box 100, Beecroft. 2119

Australia.

Copyright © 1997 by State Forests of~ew South Wales

DDC ISSN ISBN

634.9609944/SIM , 1324-3829 07310 91051

CONTENTS

SUMMARY

INTRODUCI'ION

MATERIALS AND METHODS

1. SITE DESCRIPTIONS

2. SITE PREPARATION AND PLANTINGS

3. PLANT MATERIAL

4. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

5. TREATMENTS

6. MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT

7. DATA ANALYSES

RESULTS

1. RAINFALL

2. COMPARISONS OF SPECIES AND PROVENANCES

(a) Tree growth

(b) Disease and insect damage

3. IDENTIFICATION OF FUNGI AND INSECI'S

(a) Insects

(b) Fungi

4. RESPONSE TO CHEMICAL TREATMENTS

(a) General comparisons

(b) Seasonality offungal and insect damage scores

(c) Specific response to chemical treatments

DISCUSSION

1. SYMPHYOMYRTUS VERSUS MONOCAL YPTUS

Hi

1

2

2

3

4

4

5

5

6

7

7

7

7

10

13

13

14

14

14

17

24

25

27

2. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE PEST AND DISEASE STUDIES 28 IN NORTHERN NEW SOUTH WALES

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 30

REFERENCES 31

TABLES

Table 1. Summary description of pest and disease eucalypt trial sites 3

. Table 2. Symphyomyrtus species/provenance rankings according to mean tree 8 height (m), 27 months after planting, at three sites (pooling treatments)

Table 3. Monocalyptus and Corymbia species/provenance rankings according to mean 9 tree height (m), 27 months after planting, at three sites (pooling treatments)

Table 4. Summation of fungal and insect foliar damage scores (pooling treatments) for 11 Symphyomyrtus species/provenances at three sites, assessed in December and June

STA TB FORESTS OF NEW SOUTII WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 35

EUCALYPT PLANTATION PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS STUDY

F

Table 5. Summation of fungal and insect foliar damage scores (POOling treatments) for 12 Monocalyptus and Corymbia species/provenances at three sites, assessed in December and June

. .

Table 6A. Summary of the chemical treatment effects on tree growth and relative foliar 16 damage scores for the Symphyomyrtus species from each site, assessee in June, 27 monthS after planting

Table 6B. Summary of the chemical treatment effects on tree growth and relative 16 foliar damage scores for the Monocalyptus species from each site, assessed in June, 27 months after planting

Table 6C. Summary of the chemical treatment effects on tree growth and relative foliar 17

FIGURES

Figure 1.

Figure 2A.

Figure 2B.

Figure 2C.

Figure 2D.

Figure 2E.

Figure 2F.

damage scores for the Corymbia species from each site, assessed in June, 27 months after planting

Location of the three trial sites used in the eucalypt plantation pest and disease crop loss study

Fungal damage scores - Symphyomyrtus

Fungal damage scores - Monocalyptus

Fungal damage scores - Coryinbia

Insect damage scores - Symphyomyrtus

Insect damage scores - Monocalyptus

Insect damage scores - Corymbia

2

18

19

20

21

22

23

Figure 3. Summary of some of the interactions prevailing in eucalypt plantations that 26 influence species/provenance selection (in red) and possible research options (in blue)

APPENDICES

Appendix 1. Selected species/provenances and their origin 34

Appendix 2. Eucalypt plantation trials - pest and disease monitoring sheet 37

Appendix 3. Disease and insect damage assessment codes associated with monitoring sheets 39

Appendix 4. List of potential insect pests sampled from each of the three trial sites 41

Appendix 5. List of potential fungal pathogens sampled from each of the three trial sites 44

ii EUCALYPT PLANT AnoN PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS STIJDY

STATE FORESTS OF NEW SOUTH WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 35

SUMMARY

1. In 1993 the Biology Section at the Research Division initiated a research program in northern New South Wales designed principally to compare tree growth losses due to infectious diseases and insect pest attack on a range of eucalypt species and provenances during the plantation establishment phase. Plantations were established at three sites, namely Fridays Creek and Kennaicle Creek near Coffs Harbour and Cussacks Section near Walcha .and were regularly monitored for a period of27 months. The experiment involved regular application of fungicide and insecticide treatments to replicated plots.

2. Numerous fungal pathogens (eg Aulographina eucalypti, Colletotrichum gloeosporioides, Hainesia lythrii, Harknessia spp., Macrophomina phaseolina, Mycosphaerella cryptica, Phomopsis sp., Pestalosphaeria sp., Ramularia pitareka, Seimatosporium!alcatum) and insect pest species, including Christmas beetles, chrysomelids, psyllids, autumn gum moth larvae and tip-feeding stink bugs, were sampled from the sites during this study. All these species are capable of causing considerable defoliation of young eucalypt plantations. It was not until the second summer, however, that trees were significantly attacked and many of the biological agents sampled ceased to be a problem after canopy closure (eg Christmas beetles). In general, trees on the ex-forested site at Fridays Creek, on average, grew faster than the trees at the Kennaicle Creek ( ex-pasture) site and at Cussacks Section (Tablelands) site, and hence were exposed to these damaging pests and diseases for a shorter period of time.

3. At each site there was significant variation between species within the Symphyomyrtus ,Monocalyptus and Corymbia groupings in their susceptibility to damage from these biological agents. This variable specific response, in turn, was reflected in the relative benefits, in terms of height increment gained, from the chemical treatments.

4. Our results confirm that, in general, the Monocalyptus species suffered less leaf damage from insects and fungal diseases than the Symphyomyrtus. At27 months of age both the mean heights and diameters of untreated monocalypts exceeded that of the untreated Symphyomyrtus. However, when insecticide and fungicide treatments were applied, the average growth of the Symphyomyrtus species were equal to or, in some cases, better than the Monocalyptus species. At Kennaicle Creek, the Symphyomyrtus trees treated with insecticides were, on average, 25% taller than the control trees of the same species.

5. A phenomenon that requires further investigation was the presence of elevated fungal damage on some of the insecticide-treated trees compared to the untreated controls. It occurred for several months at all three sites during both hot and colder times of the year and more commonly during periods of high levels offungal damage. It was more often associated with species ofSymphyomyrtusthanMonocalyptus or Corymbia. This phenomenon was not repeated when a fungicide was applied with the insecticide. It highlights the need to monitor both insect and fungal damage and, in future field trials, the need for water controls when applying foliar insecticide treatments.

6. The major insect pest problem in the study arose from the high levels of Christmas beetles present on the ex-pastural site at Kennaicle Creek. The eucalypt species most susceptible to attack from Christmas beetle were C. maculata, Eucalyptus amplifolia, E. botryoides, E. dunnii and E. grandis. The species which appeared most resistant to Christmas beetle attack were E. badjensis, E. cloeziana, E. agglomerata and E. g/oboidea. Hence the possibility of attempting to hybridize E. grandis with E. badjensis or E. pilularis with E. cloeziana may be worthy of consideration.


EUCALYPT PLANTATION PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS STUDY iii

-

7. The significant fungal pathogens varied between locations. All species of Corymbia were infected with Ramularia pitareka which caused dieback of leaders and shoots and a proliferation of apical branches. The pathogen was not recorded from any species of Eucalyptus. If plantations of species of Corymbia are to be commercially successful methods of managing this pathogen will be needed. Species of Monocalyptus at Cussacks were commonly infected with Aulographina eucalypti which caused premature leaf fall. This pathogen may be important in the long tem,: management of plantations of monocalypts on Tablelands sites. Mycosphaerella cryptica was recOrded from species of Symphyomyrtus (including E. globulus, E. nitens, E. sa/igna) at Cussacks but damage was not severe. The root rotpathogenMacrophomina phaseolina was present on species of Eucalyptus at both coastal sites. It is known to be able to infect roots during periods of drought stress. Species such as E. globulus, E. nitens, E. sieberi and some other monoc'llypts seemed especially susceptible. This requires further study .

. 8. If one only compared the untreated control trees, the best growth perfOImers at Cuss;tcks Section were: E. nitens (all three provenances),E.jastigata (Roberston), andE.jraxinoides (Nimmitabel). At Fridays Creek, the best performers wereE. badjensis (MtDromedary) and E. pilularis (Orarii East State Forest) while at the Kennaicle Creek site the best growing monoealypts were E. sieberi (Nullica), E. pilularis (OraraEast State Forest) andE.laevopinea (Tenterfield). The two Symphyomyrtus species atKennaic1e Creek with the tallest mean heights in the controls were E. badjensis and E. sa/igna (40 km west of Coffs Harbour).

9. At the two coastal sites, replicates of the routine provenance of E. pilularis (Orara East State Forest) grew consistently well. The two southern C. maculata provenances were among the fastest growing provenances at Fridays Creek. However, all the Corymbia species/provenances achieved only moderate height rankings on the ex-pastoral site at Kennaicle Creek. Damage from Ramularia and Christmas beetles were both more severe at Kennaic1e Creek.

10. Seedling/sapling mortality was significantly higher amongst the monocalypts than theSymphyomyrtus or Corymbia species. The level of survival was not correlated to either fungal or insect foliar damage. It may be possible to compensate for the higher monocalypt mortality through adoption of various planting density strategies.

11. A major sOurce of tip dieback on the tablelands site was frost damage, with several species of Symphyomyrtus (eg E. globulus bicostata, E. globulus maidenii, E. quadrangulata, E. smithii and E. viminalis) and monocalypts (eg E. andrewsii, E.jastigata, E. laevopinea, E.obUqua and E. sieberi) affected. Selection for frost and snow tolerance will have to be given greater priority if plantations of eucalypts are to be successful on the Tablelands.

12. Unfortunately this trial did not identify a species or provenance of eucalypt which had all of the following attributes: is suited to all of the wide range of sites available on the north coast, is capable of sustained rapid growth, is suitable for both solid wood products and pulp and can achieve these desirable outcomes with minimal intervention in terms of pest and disease management. Research options addressing this and other issues are discussed at the conclusion of the Discussion Section. However, on coastal sites of medium to high site quality E. pilularis seems to be a fast growing multiple use species with minimal pathogen and invertebrate pest problems. Some species of Symphyomyrtus (eg E. dunnii and E. grandis) offer potential for faster growth but only ifpests and diseases are managed and kept below economic threshold levels. For Tableland sites the two most promising species are E. nitens and E. jastigata.

13. At present there is insufficient information available on growth rates, crop values, pest and pathogen impacts, and costs of pest and disease management strategies to engage in integated pest management programs.

iv EUCALYPT PLANT A nON PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS S11JDY


INTRODUCTION

State Forests of New South Wales (SFNSW) currently owns approximately 26 500 ha of eucalypt plantation, most which is planted on the north coast As a result of recent State Government policy decisions (eg New South Wales Interim Forest Assessment Report, October 1996), State Forests of New South Wales has embarked on an ambitious expansion of its eucalypt plantation estate, with the goal of establishing 100 000 ha by the year 2010. A major process to achieving this goal is to enhance the existing sharefarming program through State Forests' Eucalypt Plantation Joint Ventures. Participation in this program has greatly increased the diversity of people requiring specific infonnation on plantation health.

A principle aim of successful plantation establishment is the rapid growth and increase in canopy leaf area and early canopy closure (fumbull et al. 1988). This can be directly challenged by fungal pathogens an.d insects. In other regions of Australia young eucalypt plantations, have sometimes been severely defoliated by arangeofleafpathogens and insect pests (egCamegie etal.I994,Farrow et al. 1994,Floydetal. 1994). The high establishment costs (approx. $1,000 - $2,000/ha) and management costs of eucalypt plantations also raises the economic status of any destructive agents. It has also been suggested that the artificial dynamics of mono specific even-aged plantations may enable some fungal and insect species, not currently a problem in native forests, to achieve pest status in the expanding plantation estate ( Elliott et al. 1990, Ohmart 1990).

Although the role of insects and fungi in rural tree decline in northern New South Wales has been studied extensively (eg Mackay et al. 1984, Landsberg and Wylie 1988', Lowman and Heatwole 1992) much less is known of the leaf-damaging agents present in eucalypt plantations in this region. The few studies that have been done were on an ad hoc basis (eg Came et al. 1974, Stone 1993). Our limited knowledge is exacerbated by diverse local temporill and spacial climatic conditions and site characteristics. In addition, the tendency for many eucalypt species to have specific sit~ requirements for optimal growth and the variable host specificity of insects and fungi can produce a range of potential outcomes, in tenns of pest! host tree interactions, that are difficult to predict.

In response to the obvious lack of knowledge offungal pathogens and insect pests in eucalypt plantations in northern New South Wales, a series of field trials were initiated in 1993 as part of a comprehensive research strategy of eucalypt plantation and regrowthforests (Stanton 1992). The specific aims of the study were:-

(i) To compare tree growth losses due to infectious diseases and insect pest attack on a range of species and provenances during the plantation establishment phase, prior to canopy "closure.

(ii) To identify what fungal pathogens and insect pests were present on the various species and provenances.

(iii) To examine possible interactions 'between tree genotype, fungal disease, insect pests, chemical treatments and sites.


EUCALYPT PLANTATION PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS STUDY 1

MATERIALS AND METHODS

1. SITE DESCRIPTIONS

Trials were established at three sites. Two were low elevation coastal sites located near Fridays Creek in Cpt. 136 of Orara West State Forest, 11 km west of Coffs Harbour and near Kennaicle Creek, on an expasture site of Glad stone State Forest, 12km south-westofBelligen. The third site was on the New England Tablelands in Cussacks Section in Nowendock State Forest, located 50 km south-east of Walcha (Figure 1). A summary description of the sites is provided in Table 1.

FC. COFFS HARBOUR KC.

WALCHA .... . "-CS

Figure 1. Location of the three trial sites used in the eucalypt plantation pest and disease' crop loss study.

2 EUCALYPT PLANTATION PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS STUDY

STATE FORESTS OF NEW SOUTII WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 3S

Table 1. Summary description of pest and disease eucalypt trial sites.

Fridays Creek Kennaicle Creek Cussacks Section

Forestry District Urunga Urunga Walcha

Location Lat. 30019' Long. 152°59' Lal 30033' Long. 152"49' Lat.31"27' Long. 151°35'

Elevation 200 m

Mean annual rainfall 1600 mm

Rainfall distribution Predominately summer maximum

Temperaiure

Frosts

Soils

Topography

Recent history

Av. 27"C in January. av. min. of 7°C in July.

Approx.1O/year

High quality site. fertile. well structured reddish soils based on sediments .

Undulating. mostly northeast aspect, straddles northerly running ridges

Originally tall wet .....•.....

scletophyll forest, (m~tl.y E. grandis but E. pilulatis on ridges) then cleared for banana growing and ...• grazing; heavy weed cover at time of site preparation

lOOm

1250 mm

Predominately summer maximum

Av.of3~inJanuary. ay. min. of 5"C in July.

Rare

Good quality site. moderately fertile, .\ on deep alluvial; . ./\ well structured, reddish soils and loams

Lower slope. relatively level with shallow drainage line; mostly with a northerly aspect

1200 m

1400 mm

\ Predominantly summet maximum, possibility of spring droughts

Av. max. of25"Cin January. av. min. of 2"C in July

Frequentin winter, snowfalls on ay. 3 - 4 times per year

Moderate site quality • soils . ... are pale loams over light clays of brown to red in colour on sedimentarY rocks

Uniform moderate slope fallirig to flat, with eaSterly

... aspect

opginally taq~~t ·..: .... ·· Qnginally Moist TaI>.leIan~ sclerophyU fore$tJ~~r- }. .. Hardwood fotest (mostly ········ E, gratldis). Cteared;used} ) E.obliquaandE. vilni1idlis)~ to grow soya beanS,s~wnC Area surrounded by . to improved pasture .•.... . E. tUtellS plantations

and native forest .

2. SITE PREPARATION AND PlANTINGS

1) Fridays Creek - In early February 1993 a bulldozer pushed the burnt windrows out of the trial area. spread the ash beds and scalped the heavy weed cover. The most prevalent weeds were tobacco bush (Nicotiana sp.), cobbler's pegs (Bidens spp.) , inkberry (Phyto/acca octandra). lantana(Lantana sp.). wattle (Acacia melaloxylon) and Paddy's lucerne (Sida rhombifolia). A herbicide application was not required on this ex-forested site. The site was planted on 1st- 2nd March 1993 with adequate moisture at planting depth (>3 cm). Follow up rain was experienced although less than average for this time of year. Handplanting was carried out with a rabbit hoe. Preliminary inspections indicated a high survival rate and good early growth. Each tree was fertilised one month later with 150 g of StarterfosR (aj. = 10.0% N : 21.9% P : 2.3% K, Incitec), applied in a slit trench made 15 cm from the base of the plant.


EUCALYPT PLANT A nON PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS S11JDY 3

2) Kennaicle Creek - The site was sprayed with Roundup R (a.i. = 360 gL -I, Monsanto) at 6 L ha·1 in early February 1993. This resulted in an almost complete kill of existing pasture and weed species. In early March a winged ripper was used to rip planting lines 30-50 cm deep across the contours at 3 m intervals producing excellent soil tilt in the planting rips. The site was then sprayed with SimazineR

(a.i. = 500 gL-I ,Nufann) at 6 kg ha .1. The seedlings were planted, relatively late in the season, on 20th - 22nd April 1993 under warm moist conditions. Planting and fertilisation was done in the same manner as at the Fridays Creek site.

3) Cussacks Section - The clearing, windrowing and mounding of this site had taken place in the 1992/ 93 summer. In February 1993 it was sprayed with a Roundup R (6 Lha-I) and Simazine R (14 Lha -I) weedicide mixture and Sulphate of Ammonia. A follow up weedicide treatment of Glyphosate (6 Lha -I) was carried out in January 1994. The site was planted on 8th - 9th February 1994 in favourable conditions. The seedlings were hand-planted using a rabbit hoe. Each tree was fertilised with a Greenleaf Tree Tab R 20 g pill (aj. = 20.0% N : 4.4% P : 6.2% K , Langley Tree Tablets) at the time of planting.

3. PLANT MATERIAL

Appendix 1 lists the species and provenances selected for this study and the origin of each seedlot purchased from the Australian Seed Centre (CSIRO Division of Forestry Canberra). The plants for the Fridays Creek and Kennaicle Creek sites were grown by Australian Paper Manufacturers at Morwell, Victoria and then delivered to State Forest's Coffs Harbour nursery. TIle Cussacks Section plants were raised at the Coffs Harbour nursery. No Corymbia (Hill and Johnson 1995) species were planted at the colder Cussacks Section site.

Due to difficulties experienced by the nursery, some of the provenances originally intended for inclusion are not represented in the trials and were replaced with routine material. For example, at the Fridays Creek site a replication of E. badjensis was replaced with routineE. grandis while at Kennaicle Creek a replication of E. microcorys was replaced with E. grandis. At Cussacks Section, E. sieberi was not fully replicated and replaced with E.fastigata. In general, the seedling failure rate was higher within the Monocalyptus and Corymbia groups than for the Symphyomyrtus species. The plants were hardened offin the open before planting. Most plot trees were 250-400 mm high and ofhealthy appearance except for some E. microcorys and E. globoidea (Fridays Creek) and E. microcorys, E. globoidea and E. laevopinea (Kennaicle Creek). A total of20 species and 30 provenances of Symphyomyrtus, 15 species and 30 provenances of M onocalyptus and three species of the genus Corymbia were planted across the three sites.

4. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

At each site two adjacent trials were established, one of species of Eucalyptus informal Symphyomyrtus and the other of species from the informal subgenus M onocalyptus and the genus Corymbia (blood woods ) (Hill and Jotulson 1995). The design of each trial was two replications of a 2 x 2 factorial for fungicide and insecticide spray treatments in randomised blocks in which each whole-plot had 25 sub-plots of species (or provenances) arranged in lattice squares (see Appendix 1 for identification of each sub-plot). The treatment plots consisted of25 sub-plots arranged in five rows and five columns, forming a 15 m x 75 m rectangle. Each species/provenance sub-plot contained five trees in a row planted at 3.0 m x 3.0 m spacing. Thus after establishment, there were two trials (comprising of either Symphyomyrtus or Monocalyptus and Corymbia species/provenances) x two replications of four treatment plots (C, I, F, I+F) x 25 sub-plots (species/provenances) x five subplot trees making a total of 2000 experimental trees at each site. In addition, at each site, a single tree buffer surrounded each of the 16 treatment plots/site. The layout of plots was arranged so as to minimise within site variation.

4 EUCALYPT PLANT A nON PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS S11JDY

STATE FORESTS OF NEW SOUTH WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO_ 35

5. TReATMENTS

The chemical treatments were randomly assigned to each of the four whole plots per replicate. The treatment specifications were as follows: '

i) Control (C)

ii) Fungicide (F)

iii) Insecticide (n

iv) Fungicide + Insecticide (IF)

Nil treatment Applications of the fungicide chlorothalonil in water + wetting agent (0.27%' Bravo 500 scR or 0.27% Daconil flowableR + 0.1 % Agml 6OQR) Applications of the insecticide mixture of dimethoate and carbaryl in water + wetting agent (0.1 % Rogor 400 ecR + 0.2% Carbene 500 scR + 0.1 % Agrol6OQR)

Applications of both the fungicide and insecticide treatments, each treatment applied separately.

The treatments were applied using a four wheel drive mounted unit incorporating a 200 L spray tank, petrol powered pump and reeled hose. Foliage was sprayed until dripping. The Fridays Creek site was treated 18 times, the first in April1993 and the last in June 1995. Similarly at Kennaicle Creek the chemical treatments were applied 18 times from May 1993 to July 1995. The trial at Cussacks Section was first treated in April 1995 and then a further 10 times, until June 1996. The treatments were usually applied on a monthly basis during the warmer periods but less frequently during the cooler months. Physical and financial constraints prevented the treatments being applied every month.

6. MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT

Every plot tree was assessed at the time of each treatment application. The results and observations were recorded on copies of the assessment sheet presented in Appendix 2, using the scoring systems described in Appendix 3. For each tree, height and crown diameter was measured, with stem diameters (DBHOB at 1.3 m) measured at the conclusion of the study at each site. The overall general appearance of the tree was visually assessed (e.g. dead, stunted, epicormic regrowth etc.) along with the identification of any damage-causing agents (e.g. wallaby grazing, frost, lack of moisture etc.). In order to obtain a relatively comprehensive description of the fungal diseases and insect pests present (and to force the observers to examine the foliage closely), the foliage was categorised into the following leaf age classes: bud/growing tips; immature foliage; mature foliage and old foliage. Definitions of these leaf age classes are provided on the Assessment Code Sheets (Appendix 3). A distinction between juvenile foliage and true adult foliage was also requested. '

Each leaf age class was assessed separately for disease and insect damage. For the disease assessment, both severity and intensity of the diseases were estimated using a scoring system provided on the Assessment Code Sheets (Appendix 3). A series of damage assessment diagrams were'prepared to assist with the visual scoring of fungal leaf pathogens (similar to those prepared by Carnegie et al. 1994). For the insect damage each leaf age class was assessed for the type of insect damage (eg edge scalloping, necrosis by psyllids, leaf mining etc.); estimates of the amount of foliage actually damaged and the abundance of any insects present (Appendices 2 and 3). Samples of damaged or diseased foliage and any suspected damaging insects

, were collected in labelled containers and forwarded to the State Forests Research Division, Sydney for identification. The collection of nocturnal insects was not attempted.

STATE FORFSTS OF NEW SOUTII WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 35


7. DATA ANALYSES

At the completion of each monthly assessment the record sheets were sent to the Research Division, Sydney, for collation into a database (DBASE IV). From the llu'ee sites a total of 47 months worth of data were collected, with each monthly data set from each site consisting of 2000 records from 2000 trees.

All analyses were done using procedures in the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) for Windows, Release 6.10(1994). Level of significance was set at ~ 5 .0%. The lattice square design (row and column allocation) of species/provenances in the treatment whole plots, allowed for the testing of significant site variation within the whole plots. This was done using the LATTICE procedure on tree heights for a subsample of months from each site. In all analyses, the "Blocks within Replications" term was insignificant. This allowed the design to revert to a standard split-plot design. The following outlines the form of the splitplot analysis of variance used in the GLM procedure to test for differences between tree heights and stem diameters (DBHOB) at each site for any particular month. .

Source of Variation d.f. Replication 1 Treatments (= whole plots) 3 Rep * Treatment (= Error a) 3 Species (= subplots) 24 Treatment * Species (interaction) 72 Rep (treatment * species) (= Error b) 96

Significant differences between treatments were tested using the Error' a' term while Species/provenances and the Treatment * Species interaction were tested using the Error 'b' term. Species /provenance and treatment means were compared using Fisher's LSD t-tests.

The ordinal score data obtained from the damage assessments were examined initially using the LOGISTIC procedure (SAS 1990). This procedure fits linear logistic regression models for ordinal response data by the method of maximum likelihood. Difficulties in the analysis arose as a consequence of the high frequency of zeros (= nil damage) for some species and treatments. To improve the distribution of the foliage damage scores, the scores from each of the three age classes (refer to Appendices 2 and 3) were subjectively given equal weighting and summed to provide three values per tree. That is, a summary insect damage score, a disease severity score and a disease intensity score. The disease severity and intensity scores were then averaged to produce a summary fungal damage score. These summary damage scores were then used for relative comparisons between species and treatments. Because of their derivation it was not appropriate to attempt to transform the scores back into absolute values ofleaf area loss nor was the scoring system designed accurately to determine actual amounts of damaged foliage. Treatmentmeans derived from these damage scores and percent mortality were compared using non-parametric procedures (Kruskal-Wallis tests or pair-wise comparisons using the Mann-Whitney U-tests in the NPARIWAY procedure (SAS 1990).



RESULTS

1. RAINFALL

During 1993 and 1994 much of northern New South Wales experienced very dry conditions. At all three sites the winter and spring rainfall of 1994 was less than half the average rainfall for those districts. The drought ended in 1995 with above average rainfall in February and March 1995.

2. COMPARISONS OF SPECIES AND PROVENANCES

(a) Tree growth

The comparative rankings (after pooling the four treatments per site) of the species/provenances, based on mean tree heights 27 months after planting, are provided in Tables 2 and 3. At each site there was significant variation between species within both theSymphyomyrtus (Table 2) and the Monocalyptus and Corymbia (Table 3) groupings. Significant mean height differences also occurred between some provenances of the same species such as E. ovata, E. jraxinoides and E. regnans at Cussacks Section; E. meullerana andE.laevopineaatFridays Creek; and E.laevopinea andE. globoidea at Kennaicle Creek. At both coastal sites, the Coffs Harbour Seed Orchard provenance of E. grandis produced taller trees than the Atherton provenance. At Fridays Creek, the southern provenances of Corymbia had better height rankings than the provenances from Queensland, however, this pattern was not repeated at Kennaicle Creek.

The species with the best mean tree heights and stem diameters of the entire study was the Symphyomyrtus species, E. badjensis growing on the ex-forested site at Fridays Creek (overall mean height after 27 months = 10.9 m, no. of trees = 33) (Table 2). Eucalyptus badjensis also grew well on the ex-pastoral site at the Kennaicle Creek. The tallest provenance at the Kennaicle site was E. nitens (Majors Point) (mean height = 9.2) while the Mt Toorongo provenance was the fastest growing species at Cussacks Section (mean height = 6.1 m). In fact, all three provenances of E. nitens had significantly better mean heights and diameters than any other species at Cussacks Section. The untreated trees of E. smithii (Mt Dromedary) grew very well at Fridays' Creek but were sUIpassed by several species such as E. grandis, E. sa/igna and E. dunnii when the insecticide treatments were applied. AlthoughE. grandis (Coffs Harbour Seed Orchard) and E. dunnii were ranked slightly below the fastest growing trees they both achieved very high establishment sUlvival rates. The only species that completely failed was the Symphyomyrtus species E. rummeryi at Cussacks Section.

The bes~mean height and stem diameter within the Monocalyptus species at Cussacks Section was attained by E. jraxinoides (Nimmitabel) (overall mean height after 27 months = 5.4 m), with E. fastigata (Roberston) and E. regnans (Strzelecki Range) also growing well in the colder conditions (Table 3). At the two coastal sites, all the replicates of the routine E. pilularis provenance from Orara East State Forest grew consistently well, achieving the largest mean stem diameters, whileE. sieberi (Nullica) (overall mean

. height = 9.0 m) was the tallest provenance at Kennaicle Creek.

The two southern C. maculata provenances were among the faster growing provenances at Fridays Creek. However, all the Corymbia species/provenances achieved only moderate height rankings on the expastoral site at Kennaicle Creek. The relative rankings for the Corymbia species at Kennaicle Creek were C. citriodora, C. maculata and C. variegata, with C. variegata (Warwick) having a mean height 32% lower than the bestmonocalypt(E. sieberi) at that site. In general, the Corymbia species had small stem diameters when compared to other species of similar mean tree heights.


EUCALYPT PLANTA nON PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS STUDY 7

00

~g "tI>

~§ ~§ ><>

g z ril ~ ~ ~ ~ f}l

en ~ @

~ ~~ ttj'TJ

~~ ::t:en

~~ ril5:j :;.tI~ ~> ;.,~ ""en

Table 2. Symphyomyrtus species/provenance rankings according to mean tree height (m), 27 months after planting, at three sites (pooling treatments).

Cussacks Section Frid Creek Kennaicle Creek Mean Species I Provenance n Mean Species / Provenance n Mean Species / Provenance

a 6.07 E. nitens Mt Tooronqo 38 a 10.93 E. badiensis Cathcart SF 33 a 9.17 E. nitens Majors Point b a 5.49 E. nitens Majors Point 40 b 9.90 E. smithii Mt Dromedary 30 b a 9.00 E. badjensis Glenbog SF b a 5.48 E. nit ens Majors Point 40 c b 9.38 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard 40 b a 8.95 E. smithii Mt Dromedary b a 5.43 E. nit ens Majors Point 39 c b d 9.32 E. glob.maidenii Yurammie S.F. 34 b a 8.94 E.grandis Coffs Seed Orchard b 5.16 E. nitens Macalister 37 c b d 9.29 E. arandis Coffs Seed Orchard 39 b a c 8.86 E. glob.maidenii Yurammie S.F:

c 3.95 E. viminalis Apollo Bay 35 c e b d 9.10 E. dunnii Clouds Creek 40 b d a c 8.82 E. saligna 40 km W of Coffs d c 3.92 E. badjensis Glenboq SF 39 c e d 9.08 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard 37 b d a c 8.80 E. dunnii Clouds Creek d c 3.92 E. glob.globu/us Otway SF 32 c e d 9.04 E. g/ob.bicostata Rylestone 35 b d a c 8.65 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard d c 3.84 E. ovata Port Huon 34 c e d 8.99 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard 38 b d a c 8.56 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard d c e 3.80 E. smithii Tallaganda SF 40 c e d 8.97 E. nitens Majors Point 28 b d a c 8.53 E. saligna Armidale d c e 3.75 E. glob.g/obulus Flinders Is. 28 c e f d 8.94 E. saligna Armidale 38 b d a c 8.50 E. botryoides Orbost d c e 3.68 E. glob.maidenii Yurammie SF 30 c e f d 8.92 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard 40 b d a c 8.43 E. g/ob.globulus Flinders Is

9 d c e 3.34 E. smithii Mt. Domedary 22 c e f d 8.75 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard 39 b d a c 8.41 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard

9 d e 3.18 E. glob.maidenii Eden 34 9 e f d 8.52 E. saligna 40 km W of Coffs 36 b d e c 8.20 E. botryoides Milton

9 h e 3.09 E. glob.bicostata Ryestone 37 9 e f 8.35 E. orooinaua Woolgoolga 39 d e c 8.10 E. grandis Atherton

9 h 3.05 E. glob.bicostata Mt Strathbogie 34 9 8.21 E. botrvoides Milton 39 d e 8.00 E. quadrangu/ata Clouds Creek

9 h 2.93 E. cvpellocarpa Nimmitabel 31 9 7.88 E. botrvoides Orbost 39 e 7.43 E. glob.bicostata Mt Strathbogie

9 h 2.87 E. ovata Bombala 31 9 7.74 E. grandis Artherton 40 9 7.15 E. deanei Watagan

9 h 2.74 E. dalrv.heptantha Mt Gibbo 33 9 7.73 E. deanei Wataqan 37 9 7.08 E. glob.bicostata Rylestone

9 h 2.70 E. viminalis Kaputar NP 35 9 6.67 E. deanei Boonoo 36 h 9 6.56 E. propinqua Woolgoolga h 2.35 E. cvpellocarpa Bonanq 28 h 6.54 E. microcorvs Kempsey 35 h 6.17 E. amplifolia Moleton

1.66 E. saligna Armidale 18 h 6.25 E. amplifo/ia Moleton 34 j 5.52 E. microcorys Kempsey 1.66 E. dunnii Clouds Creek 12 h 6.10 E. microcorvs Kenilworth 35 j 5.32 E. microcorys Kenilworth 1.63 E. quadrangulata Clouds Creek 15 h 6.00 E. viminalis Kaputar NP 30 j 5.11 E. amplifolia Nerriga

5.20 E. amplifolia Nerriqa 36 j 5.02 E. viminalis Kaputar NP

Mean heights in each column with the same letter are not significantly different (using Fisher's LSD test), n = number of surviving trees where max. = 40.

n 40 32 39 40 37 39 40 40 40 40 39 31 40 38 37 39 34 39 40 37 37 35 28 37 32

~~ tIl>

~tTl ~~ :;;~ ~~ ~o z't'l

~~ tIl

~ ~ ~

trl C

~ ~ ~

~

Table 3.

a b a b a c b d c bed c bed c 9 e d c 9 e d 9 e d 9 e d 9 e d 9 e 9 9 9

h h h h j h j h j

k h j k j k j k

Monocalyptus and Corymbia species/provenance rankings according to mean tree height (m), 27 months after planting, at three sites (pooling treatments).

Cussacks Section ... _- - -.--.. Kennaicle Creek Mean Species I Provenance nl Mean S~ecies I Provenance n Mean ~~ecies I Provenance 5.36 E. fraxinoides Nimmitabel 37 I a 9.57 E. pilularis Orara East SF 39 a 8.96 E. sieberi Nullica 4.91 E. fastigata Roberston 31 ! b a 9.27 E. pilularis Orara East SF . 37 b a 8.42 E. pilularis Orara East SF 4.74 E. regnans Strzelecki Range 29 ' b a 9.23 E. pilularis Orara East SF 37 b a c 8.38 E. pilularis Orara East SF 4.51 E. fastigata Roberston 35 b a 9.22 E. pilularis Orara East SF 36 b a c 8.38 E. pilularis Orara East SF 4.41 E. fastiqata Roberston 34 b a 9.20 E. maculata Moleton 37 b a c 8.38 E. pilularis Orara East SF

.4.36 E. fastigata Oberon 39 b a c 9.18 E. pilularis Orara East SF 39 b a c 8.36 E. pilularis Orara East SF 4.13 E. delegatensis Mt Gibbo 33 ! b d a c 9.13 C. maculata Batemans Bay 39 b d c 8.09 E. pilularis Orara East SF 4.11 E. regnans Forester, Tas 17 ! b d a c 9.06 E. pilular is Grafton 32 b d c 8.03 E. pilularis Orara East SF 4.04 E. fastigata Roberston 38 b d a c 9.05 E. pilularis Orara East SF 38 bed c 7.90 E. laevQpinea Tenterfield 4.01 E. oreades Newnes 32 e b d a c 8.87 E. pilularis Orara East SF 37 bed c 7.59 E. globoidea Nowa Nowa 4.01 E. fastigata Tallaganda SF 33 e b d c 8.76 E. meullerana Narooma 34 e d c 7.57 E. pilular is Orara East SF 3.79 E. fraxinoides Pikes Saddle 32 ebdfcg 8.56 E. pilularis Orara East SF 38 9 e d 7.28 C. citriodora Irvine Bank 3.77 E. oreades Newnes SF 34 e h d f c 9 8.40 E. sieberi Nullica 12 9 e d 7.28 E. meullerana Cann River 3.73 E. obliqua Lavers Hill 29 e h d f 9 8.38 C. citriodora Irvine Bank 39 9 e h 7.10 E. pilular is Grafton 3.72 E. sieberi Nullicasf SF 14 e h f 9 8.25 C. variegata Warwick 34 9 h 7.01 E. meullerana Narooma 3.02 E. and.campanulata Njangala 34 e h 9 8.20 E. meullerana Cann River 34 9 h 6.75 E. meullerana Orbost 2.93 E. laevopinea Tenterfield 29 e h f 9 8.14 E. laevopinea Tenterfield 29 9 j h 6.69 C. citriodora Mareeba 2.89 E. and.campanulata Diehappy SF 19 h j f 9 8.04 C. citriodora Mareeba 36 9 j h 6.55 E. cloeziana Blackdown 2.70 E. muellerana Narooma 10 h j k 9 7.81 E. globoidea Nowa Nowa 31 9 j h 6.48 C. maculata Bateman's Bay 2.64 E. laevopinea Walcha 38 h j k 7.67 E. meullerana Orbost 33 9 j h 6.44 C. maculata Moleton 2.63 E. laevopinea New England 40 j k 7.48 E. agglomerata Batemans Bay 31 j h 6.37 E. laevopinea New EnQland 2.47 E. sieberi NE Tasmania 16 j k 7.24 E. cloeziana Blackdown 32 j 6.23 E. agglomerata Bateman's Bay 2.27 E. andrewsii Krombit 20 k 7.21 E. laevopinea New England 35 j 6.10 C. variegata Warwick 2.22 E. globoidea NE of Bega 17 6.97 E. globoidea Barcoongere 22 j k 5.91 E. globoidea Barcoongere 1.98 E. andrewsii Winterbourne 15 n 4.69 E. globoidea Bega 25 k 5.21 E. qloboidea Bega

~ Mean heights in each column with the same letter are not significantly ditTerent (using Fisher's L~D test), n=number of surviving trees where max. = 40.

~~

~~ ~~ tIltrl

Cl~ om ><:,

\0

n 32 35 39 35 36 39 39 36 36 38 38 31 38 37 34 37 35 40 39 37 37 38 35 35 24

The overall relative species/provenances height rankings at the conclusion of the study differed little from the relative mean heights measured in December (six months earlier, at the commencement of the second summer), at Cussacks Section. At the Coastal sites there was more variation in tenns of relative height rankings amongst the Symphyomyrtus but not significantly so. For example, at Fridays Creek, E. nitens dropped six places over the six month period while at Kennaicle Creek E. badjensis improved from sixth to second position and E. globulus var. globulus dropped from first to twelfth. Amongst the monocalypts at Fridays Creek, there was a general improvement amongst the E.pilularis provenances, while the Corymbia provenance, C. maculata (Batemans Bay) fell from first to seventh position in relative height rankings. At Kennaicle Creek, E. sieberi maintained its height superiority and the E. pilularis provenances overtook the well ranked E. globoidea (Nowa Nowa).

(b) Disease and insect damage

Tables 4 and 5 present the summary fungal and insect damage scores (pooling data from all four treatments) recorded in December and six months later in June of all the species/provenances assessed at each site. There was no obvious overall correlation or pattern between the mean height rankings of the species! provenances and their fungal and insect foliar damage scores (Tables 4 and 5). Variability in susceptibility to either fungi or insect attack was high at the species level compared to,possible overall differences at the subgenus level. The species specificity to fungal susceptibility is demonstrated in the differences in fungal damage scores between the monocalypt species, E. regnans and E.fastigata at Cussacks Section. Notable differences also occurred between provenances of a species eg E. nitens (Symphyomyrtus) andE.laevopin'ea (Monocalyptus) at Cussacks Section. However, within Eucalyptus series Transversaria (E. saligna group) all the species recorded relatively low levels of fungal infection at Fridays Creek (but higher levels in June at Kennaicle) while they all appeared to be relatively susceptible to insect attack.

Other Symphyomyrtus species with relatively low fungal attack were E. microcorys and E. dunnii. The poorly performing species, E. viminalis, suffered high levels of fungal leaf damage at all three sites. At Cussacks Section, the best provenance of E. nitens, Mt Toorongo, appeared to be more susceptible to fungal attack than the Majors Point Provenance. TheSymphyomyrtus species with the lowest insect damage scores at all three sites was E. badjensis. Eucalyptus badjensis, however, was susceptible to fungal attack at Cussacks Section but not at the two coastal sites. AlthoughE. grandis provenances and E. dunnii (Clouds Creek) tended to have relatively high insect damage scores they attained better than average tree heights. Two Symphyomyrtus species with only moderate to poor growth rates and high levels of insect damage were E. botryoides and E. ampliJolia.

Both the faster growing successful monocalypt species, E.fastigata at Cussacks Section and E. pilularis at Fridays Creek recorded relatively low fungal damage scores. At Cussacks Section, however, several monocalypt species recorded high damage scores, including E. delegatensis (Mt Gibbo) and E. obliqua (Lavers Hill) in June and E. oreades in December. Although E. regnans (Sn-zelecki Range) at Cussacks Section and E. sieberi (Nullica) at Kennaicle Creek had high levels offoliardisease they both reached good mean heights (Table 4). This is in contrast to the slow growing E. cloeziana which had low levels of both fungal and insect attack. In general, none of the monocalypt species suffered very high levels of insect attack, the only possible exceptions being E. regnans (Forester) in December at Cussacks andE. meullerana (Orbost) at Kennaicle Creek. Both provenances of E.fastigata at Cussacks Section consistently had low levels of insect attack.

Of the Corymbia species, the C. citriodora provenances appeared to be more susceptible to fungal attack than the C. maculata provenances, especially at Kennaicle Creek. At Fridays Creek, the Corymbia species had relatively low levels of insect damage but much higher levels were recorded in June at Kennaicle Creek.


STA TB FORESTS OF NEW SOU'TIl WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 35

~~ §i ?;~ ~o z'T.I 9~ ~~

en

~ ~ ~

~ §

~ > g Z '"d f;]

fJ~ ~~ 5 ~~ en tIl

d~ of;] t-<: •

..... .....

Table 4. Summation of fungal and insect foliar damage scores (pooling treatments) for Symphyomyrtus species/provenances at three sites, assessed in December (1994 for F.C. and K.c., 1995 for C.S.) and then June (1995 for F.C. and K.C., 1996 for C.S.). Species are ranked according to mean height in June (1995 for F.K. and K.C., 1996 for C.S.), 27 months after planting.

Cussacks Section ••• - .... y ..... _.- ...... '" Kennaicle Creek Fungal Insect

Species I Provenance Dec. June Dec. June Fungal Insect

Species I Provenance Dec. June Dec: June Fungal Insect

Species / Provenance Dec. June Dec. June E. nilens Mt Tooronqo 16.4 25.9 6.8 5.3 E. badjensis Cathcart SF 1.9 3.6 1.8 0.3 E. nil ens Majors Point 8.9 14.4 4.7 21.2 E. nilens Majors Point 2.1 11.8 6.0 4.0 E. smithii Mt Dromedarv 9.6 5.0 6.8 3.6 E. badjensis Glenboq SF 6.5 12.8 1.8 1.9 E. nilens Majors Point 12.0 6.8 4.3 3.3 E. qrandis Coffs Seed Orchard 2.0 0.7 15.5 14.0 E. smilhii Mt Dromedary 10.1 8.8 5.6 13.8 E. nilens Majors Point 8.3 10.1 2.8 4.4 E. qlob.maidenii Yurammie sF" 12.2 5.3 6.1 12.9 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard 5.4 33.9 17.2 22.2 E. nil ens Macalister 12.0 18.2 2.2 4.3 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard 3.8 0.3 20.0 19.0 E. g/ob.maidenii Yurammie SF 15.0 18.4 19.2 22.7 E. viminalis Apollo Bay 22.3 110 21.4 8.0 E. dunnii Clouds Creek 9.2· 4.7 20.5 25.0 E. sa/igna 40 km W of Coffs 6.3 18.7 11.5 16.5 E. badjensis Glenboq SF 14.8 53.2 1.8 1.0 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard 0.0 1.6 12.3 10.3 E. dunnii Clouds Creek 5.4 3.4 26.4 26.5 E. qlob.qlobulus Otway SF 25.3 42.0 4.7 6.3 E. glob.bicoslala Rylestone 20.0 16.4 5.4 16.0 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard 6.5 24.2 20.5 29.7 E. ovala Port Huon 1.6 38.9 9.1 11.5 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard 5.4 4.5 18.2 20.0 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard 9.7 27.0 21.5 29.5 E. smilhii Tallaganda SF 17.7 67.5 8.5 3.3 E. nilens Maiors Point 11.2 6.1 2.1 6.8 E. sa/iqna Armldale 8.4 25.9 16.7 21.3 E. glob.qlobulus Flinders Is. 37.4 49.1 2.0 3.2 E. saliqna Armidale 4.5 0.5 14.5 20.8 E. bolryoides Orbost 6.7 25.5 12.2 28.5 E. glob.maidenii Yurammie SF 32.8 19.1 4.0 10.0 E. qrandis Coffs Seed Orchard 3.3 5.7 17.1 14.0 E. g/ob.g/obu/us Flinders Is 36.9 23.7 11.3 20.6 E. smilhii Mt. Domedarv 14.4 78.2 2.8 3.6 E. qrandis Coffs Seed Orchard 3.2 7.4 7.4 15.4 E. grandis Coffs Seed Orchard 4.8 34.0 22.3 22.7 E. qlob.maidenii Eden 25.0 11.9 3.2 7.9 E. saligna 40 km W of Coffs 3.9 6.9 17.5 17.2 E. botryoides Milton 2.5 30.0 29.2 29.2 E. qlob.bicoslala Rylestone 27.6 12.6 3.3 6.7 E. propinaua Wooloooloa 1.8 0.7 11.5 12.0 E. grandis Atherton 19.4 32.6 17.4 31.1 E. glob.bicoslata Mt Strathbooie 24.3 35.1 0.6 5.6 E. bolrvoides Milton 11.5 4.6 23.3 27.4 E. quadrangu/ala Clouds Creek 8.3 7.6 24.6 25.4 E. cypellocarpa Nimmitabel 18.5 26.3 4.2 5.2 E. bolrvoides Orbost 4.8 7.4 17.9 22.6 E. g/ob.bicostata Mt Strathbogie 38.2 2.6 8.7 5.5 E. ovala Bombala 1.3 23.4 2.9 3.9 E. grandis Artherton 7.0 2.5 15.7 15.5 E. deanei Wataqan 4.9 10.9 15.9 23.3 E. darlY.heplanlha Mt Gibbo 4.3 32.7 3.8 7.6 E. deanei Wataoan 3.5 4.8 9.2 11.3 E. g/ob.bicoslala Rylestone 26.7 22.6 3.3 8.0 E. viminalis Kaputar NP 35.7 108 5.8 5.1 E. deanei Boonoo 10.0 4.7 12.7 15.8 E. propinqua Woolgoolga 9.6 9.7 19.7 19.7 E. cypellocarpa Bonano 15.9 42.6 1.8 9.3 E. microcorvs Kempsey 8.3 4.0 13.9 22.0 E. amp/ifo/ia Moleton 11.0 10.6 28.7 48.1 E. saligna Armidale 5.6 30.8 0.4 2.8 E. amp/ifo/ia Moleton 12.4 5.9 26.7 24.7 E. microcorys Kempsey 2.5 5.8 25.7 16.3 E. dunnii" Clouds Creek 5.8 12.5 1.5 6.7 E. microcorvs Kenilworth 1.3 1.1 13.2 15.4 E. microcorys Kenilworth 2.1 1.8 13.2 18.6 E. quadrangulala Clouds Creek 15.9 36.7 5.4 12.7 E. vimina/is Kaputar NP 32.0 28.0 4.8 12.3 E. amp/ifo/ia Nerriqa 4.3 4.8 17.6 37.6

E. amplifo/ia Nerriga 3.5 6.1 16.5 19.1 E. vimina/is Kaputar NP . 13.6 21.1 14.3 12.5

Fungal and Insect foHar damage scores = total sum of individual tree fungal and insect damage scores/number of trees.

...... IV

~~ 'tl>

~§ ~§ >-<> ~ ~ tE ~ ~ ~ en

~ el

en

~ ~

~~ tI'l'Il

~~ (')~ ::t::en 'tlO >5 tE3 ~~ ~> ;.,t;; Ulen

Table 5. Summation of fungal and insect foliar damage scores (pooling treatments) for Monocalyptus and Corymbia species/provenances at three sites, assessed in December (1994 for F.e. and K.C., 1995 for C.S.) and then June (1995 for F.C. and K.C., 1996 for C.s.). Species are ranked according to mean height in June (1995 for F.K. and K.c., 1996 for C.S.), 27 months after planting.

Cussacks Section . - - ~- - --- Kennaicle Creek Fungal Insect

I Species I Provenance Dec. June Dec. June Fungal Insect

Species I Provenance Dec. June Dec. June \

Fungal Insect Sp'ecies I Provenance Dec. June Dec. June

E. fraxinoides Nimmitabel 18.7 8.4 5.5 3.2 E. pilularis Orara East SF 3.3 1.4 15.4 3.1 E. sieberi Nullica 47.0 22.6 2.1 18.7 E. fastigata Roberston 1.5 4.2 1.6 2.9 E. pilularis Orara East SF 3.9 1.4 11.6 2.7 E. pilularis Orara East SF 4.3 4.8 1.7 16.5 E. regnans Strzelecki Ranoe 20.6 52.6 15.0 7.2 E. pilularis Orara East SF 4.8 0.5 10.3 2.4 E. pilularis Orara East SF 9.6 10.5 2.2 16.9 E. fastiqata Roberston 7.4 5.7 2.0 3.4 E. pilularis Orara East SF 5.0 2.8 14.7 3.9 E. pilularis Orara East SF 5.0 13.4 1.8 13.7 E. fastiqata Roberston 4.5 3.1 3.0 2.3 C. maculata Moleton 8.2 1.9 6.7 4.6 E. pilularis Orara East SF 4.8 10.8 1.6 15.0 E. fastiqata Oberon 3.2 3.4 6.4 7.4 E. pilularis Orara East SF 9.0 2.6 9.5 1.3 E. pilularis Orara East SF 4.3 13.7 2.6 15.6 E. deleqatensis Mt Gibbo 12.5 68.3 10.3 4.5 C. maculata Batemans Bay 2.6 2.3 5.1 2.8 E. pilularis Orara East SF 4.2 9.6 4.0 14.1 E. regnans Forester, Tas 28.1 44.7 20.0 7.6 E. pilularis Grafton 8.3 3.4 4.8 5.6 E. pilularis Orara East SF 6.5 4.4 1.8 12.5 E. fasUqata Roberston 7.3 10.4 3.8 4.7 E. pilularis Orara East SF 2.4 0.6 19.2 2.6 E. laevopinea Tenterfield 10.8 6.5 0.5 14.1 E. oreades Newnes 36.4 29.2 4.6 5.0 E. pilularis Orara East SF 8.5 3.5 11.4 6.7 E. globoidea Nowa Nowa 9.5 8.5 2.8 7.4 E. fastigata Taliaganda SF 1.1 9.4 3.6 3.0 E. meu/lerana Narooma 12.8 4.7 10.9 4.7 Epilularis Orara East SF 3.1 9.6 4.4 12.4 E. fraxinoides Pikes Saddle 1.7 10.1 4.5 7.2 E. pilularis Orara East SF 5.6 3.9 15.8 3.1 C. citriodora Irvine Bank 18.3 10.8 0.3 10.3 E. oreades Newnes SF 50.3 30.7 5.9 3.8 E. sieberi Nullica 53.2 12.5 2.3 0.8 E. meu/lerana Cann River 10.9 17.1 5.7 13.6 E. obliqua Lavers Hill 31.5 67.9 17.0 6.2 C. citriodora Irvine Bank 11.4 5.6 1.5 2.8 E. pilularis Grafton 14.8 21.7 3.0 12.1 E. sieberi Nullica SF 33.7 45.0 2.5 5.0 C. variegata Warwick 10.0 8.5 2.8 0.9 E. meullerana Narooma 6.3 16.6 7.1 10.0 E. and.campanulata Njanqala 16.3 25.6 10.6 9.7 E. meu/lerana Cann River 27.0 7.6 7.3 6.2 E. meu/lerana Orbost 8.1 11.2 8.4 22.7 E. laevopinea Tenterfield 9.0 7.6 4.0 8.3 E. laevopinea T enterfield 7.9 1.4 3.4 5.9 C. citriodora Mareeba 15.1 12.3 1.1 9.4 E. and.campanulata Diehappy SF 32.7 30.5 5.5 9.5 C. citriodora Mareeba 4.2 1.7 0.0 0.8 E. c/oeziana Blacdown 6.5 3.3 0.0 1.2 E. mue/lerana Narooma 9.5 37.0 11.8 3.0 E. globoidea Nowa Nowa 8.8 7.2 3.3: 2.3 C. maculata Bateman's Bay 4.0 5.9 13 42.5 E. laevopinea Walcha 19.3 29.8 5.0 7.4 E. meu/lerana Orbost 13.2 6.4 9.7 3.9 C. maculata Moleton 7.1 8.5 12.1 40.8 E. laevopinea New Enqland 3.6 5.3 5.5 8.5 E. agglomerata Bcitemans Bay 13.1 4.2 2.8 1.0 E. laevopinea New England 5.4 18.8 0.3 11.9 E. sieberi NE Tasmania 41.7 40.3 9.4 2.5 E. cloeziana Blacdown \ 2.3 3.1 2.1 0.0 E. agglomerata Bateman's Bay 6.5 4.7 0.5 2.4 E. andrewsii Krombit 17.6 17.0 9.6 9.5 E. laevopinea New Enoland 10.7 6.5 6.5 2.3 C. variegata Warwick 10.0 16.7 7.5 28.3 E. globoidea NE of Bega 37.9 28.2 2.3 7.6 E. globoidea Barcoonoere 4.1 0.4 1.3 3.1 E. globoidea Barcoongere 8.3 9.0 1.4 3.7 ~. andre~sli vvlrlterbourne__ _ 6.0 .. ~ ~."L ~ globoidea Bega 11.6 11.8 0.3 0.0 E.globoidea .. l3.ega

.-15.6 20.2 , 0.0 4.6

Fungal and Insect foliar damage scores = total sum of individual tree fungal and insect damage scores/number of trees.

The results from the numbers of trees present at the conclusion of the study, indicate that seedling/sapling swvival was independent of the levels of either fungal or insect foliar damage for all three groups of eu~alypts.

Nutrient deficiency symptoms were not observed in any of the crop-loss pla,ntings at Kennaicle Creek or Fridays Creek nor in the Symphomyrtus plantings at" Cussacks. However, in the Monocalyptus trial at Cussacks a mild chlorosis of young leaves was widespread. Eucalyptus oreades appeared to be the most severely affected .species but the problem was widespread. Foliar analysis indicated the problem was caused by a marginal iron deficiency probably induced by the high base levels and neutral pH of the sedimentary rock underlying the soil.

A major source of tip dieback on the Tablelands site was frost damage with several species of Symphyomyrtus (eg E. globulus bicostata, E. globulus maidennii, E. quadrangulata, E. smitlJ.ii and E. viminalis) and Monocalyptus (eg E. andrewsii, E,fastigata, E. laevopinea, E. obliqua and E. sieberi) affected.

3. IDENTIFICATION OF FUNGI AND INSECTS

(a) Insects

A list of the potential insect pests sampled from individual eucalypt species is presented in Appendix 4. Many of the common insect defoliators of young eucalypts in south eastern Australia were also recorded during this study, although the actual species composition differed somewhat between sites. The most ubiquitous group of insect herbivores were the chrysomelids. Chrysomelid larvae tend to defoliate tenninal shoots in the upper canopies while the adults characteristically cause scalloping of the leaf margins on older leaves. They were the most common group recorded at Cussacks Section, responsible for the relatively high levels of damage on E. viminalis (Apollo Bay) and both provenances of E. regnans and E. obliqua. Although no single species or group of insects were considered to be at outbreak levels at the Cussacks Section site, autumn gum moth larvae (M nesampela privata) were frequently recorded on species with glaucous juvenile foliage, for example the Symphyomyrtus species of E. viminalis, E. nitens, E. globulus maidenii and the monocalypt E. delegatensis. Two sap-sucking insects common on the E. globulus subspecies were the tip-feeding bug (Amorbus rubiginosus) and the tip-feeding bluegum psyllid (Ctenarytaina eucalypt1.), which was also common on E. nitens.

Both the general incidence of insect damage and the levels of insect damage recorded at the two coastal sites were higher than that at the colder site of Cussacks Section. At Fridays Creek several groups of known insect pests were present, including chrysomelid beetles (eg Chrysophtharta cloelia and Paropsis atomana), Christmas beetles (Anoplognathus chloropyrus and A. porosus), autumn gum moth larvae,leaf blister sawfly larvae (Phylacteophaga froggatn) and cupmoths (Doratifera spp.) but these insects were not in high populations duririg this study. The most obvious group of insects at this site were the psyllids, in particular the Cardiaspina species. High levels of Cardiaspina damage were recorded on many of the . . closely related Salignae group of eucalypts. Appendix 4 reveals that E. grandis and E. sa/igna were hosts to three defoliating species of Cardiaspina, that is,. C. fiscella, C. maniformis, C. albitextura. Although E. dunnii recorded lower levels of infestation by Cardiaspina maniformis it was prone to higher levels of attack from the Christmas beetle (A. chloropyrus). No psyllids were recorded on E. badjensis. At Fridays Creek both the abundance and diversity of insects sampled on both the Monocalyptus and Corymbia species were lower than on the Symphyomyrtus species (Appendix 4).

Although the diversity of pest insects was less on the ex-pastoral site at Kennaicle Creek compared with Fridays Creek, the trials at Kennaicle Creek recorded the highest levels ofleaf damage. This was due to the presence oflarge numbers of Christml;lS beetles (Anoplognathus chloropyrus and A. porosus) during the summer months. Feeding by Christmas beetles characteristically produces partially eaten leaves with

STA TB FORESTS OF NEW SOUTII WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 3S


irregular edges along the remaining midrib. Species of Symphyomyrtus that were susceptible to Christmas beetleherbivory includedE. ampli/olia, E. botryoides. E. dunnii, E. grandis, and Kquadrangulata. Several of the Monocalyptus species were also attacked by Christmas beetles, including E. pilularis, but to a lesser extent. Surprisingly, the eucalypts which Suffered the highest levels of Christmas beetle defoliation were the two provenances of C. maculata. The species which appeared most resistant to the Christmas beetles were E. badjensis, E. cloeziana, E. agglomerata and E. globoidea.

(b) Fungi

A list of the potential fungal pathogens sampled from individual eucalypt spe9ies is presented in Appendix 5. No species of Armillaria or Phytophthora was recorded from any of these trials. No root rots caused by species ofbasidiomycetes were recorded. Macrophomina phaseoli infected roots and caused death of plants ofE. globulus, E. nitens and E. sieberi during periods of dry weather. These are tree species that some foresters considered would be off-site on the north coast of New South Wales.

The communities offoliarpathogens present at Cussacks Section were different to those at the two lowland sites (Appendix 5). Species of Monocalyptus at Cussacks were commonly infected with the ascomycete Aulographina eucalypti and its anamorph Thyrinula eucalypti. Eucalyptus delegatensis (Mt Gibbo), E. obliqua, E. oreades, E.' regnans and E. sieberi had the highest incidence of infection. Eucalyptus jastigata in general showed only low levels of Aulographina leaf disease. Aulographina eucalypti was also recorded from species of Monocalyptus at Fridays Creek and Kennaicle Creek but only at very low levels. The fungus was recorded from the adjacent native forest on foliage of mature E. obUqua at Cussacks and E. pilularis at both lowland sites. In the Symphyomyrtus planting at CussacksA. eucalypti was rarely recorded. Mycosphaerella cryptica was present on E. nitens and E. globulus but rarely at high levels. Frost injury was widespread in the Monocalyptus trial and appeared to increase susceptibility to M. cryptica.

All species and provenances of Corymbia at Fridays Creek and Kennaicle Creek were infected with the ~yphomycete Ramularia pitareka which infected young shoots, leaves and petioles causing shoot dieback. Only immature tissues were susceptible. The fungus was not observed on any species of Eucalyptus. Infection occured iillate spring each year and persisted through to winter. Thus there was repeated infection of new shoots causing a significant loss of height increment and stem form and an increase in apical branching. This fungus appears to pose a significant threat to successful establishment of plantations of species of Corymbia and requires further study. Mature foliage of species of Corymbia at both sites was subject to spotting

Species of Symphomyrtus at the lowland sites were subject to infection by a range of foliar pathogens including Fairmaniella leprosa, Hainesia lythrii, and species of Harknessia, Seimatosporium, and Vennisporium. There is little published information on the impacts on tree growth of any of these fungi. Hainesia lythrii is not uncommon on seedlings in forest nurseries in New South Wales, and persisted on trees throughout the duration of the study.

4. RESPONSE TO CHEMICAL TREATMENTS

(a) General comparisons

Tables 6A, B and C summarise the overall chemical treatment effects on tree growth and the relative foliar damage sCores for the Symphyomyrtus, Monocalyptus and Corymbia groupings at each of the three sites. In general, the fungicide and insecticide treatments applied during this study were only partially successful at suppressing the levels of fungal and insect foliar damage. The cost and labour required for total control would have been prohibitive. Nevertheless, the treatment application regime undertaken did achieve, in most cases, a significant reduction in the overall levels of foliar damage by both fungi and insects. In general the greatest stem volumes were in trees at the Fridays Creek site; this site also had lower overall

14 EUCALYPT PLANT AnON PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS STUDY

STATE FORESTS OF NEW SOUTII WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 35

fungal damage scores than either of the other sites and less insect damage than that observed on both the untreated and treated trees at Kennaicle Creek. Thus, not unexpectedly, the response to the chemical treatments was less at Fridays Creek than at Kennaicle Creek.

At the two coastal sites, the greatest response to the chemical applications, in terms of height and diameter increments, was achieved by the Symphyomyrtus species (Tables 6A, B and C). A significant response was not detected amongst trees at Cussacks Section where the trees were much slower growing. At Kennaicle Creek the insecticide-treated trees were on average 25 % taller than the untreated trees. This corresponded to a significant overall reduction in the insect damage scores for the insecticide-treated trees. The level of insect damage in the Symphyomyrtus at the colder Cussacks Section site was relatively very low, even in the untreated trees. The mortality level at Cussacks Section, however, was noticeably higher than at either of the two coastal sites. In addition, there was a significant reduction in percent mortality amongst those Symphyomyrtus trees sprayed with both the fungicide and insecticide. This was in contrast to trees at the two coastal sites where establishment survival appeared to be independent of foliar damage by fungi and insects at the levels recorded.

When compared to Symphyomyrtus, the monocalypt species gave a lesser response to either the fungicide or the insecticide treatments. At the two coastal sites, the mean heights and diameters of the untreated Monocalyptus trees were greater than for the Symphyomyrtus species. In fact, the mean diameters of the Monocalyptus trees in all treatments were greater than those of the Symphyomyrtus trees after 27 months. The monocalypts however, suffered much higher establishment mortalities, especially at Cussacks Section. This higher level of mortality was not improved by any of the pesticide treatments. Although the trend in site differences in terms of amounts of fungal and insect damage was parallel to that of the Symphyomyrtus group, overall levels were noticeably less for each treatment.

The Corymbia provenances achieved similar mean heights to the Symphyomyrtus and Monocalyptus at Fridays Creek but were slightly smaller trees at Kennaicle Creek; the diameter of the Corymbia trees was noticeably smaller at both coastal sites. The levels of establishment mortality were similar to those recorded for the Symphyomyrtus at Fridays Creek, but higher at Kennaicle Creek for those trees not treated with an insecticide. The overall levels of foliar damage by fungi resembled that of the Symphyomyrtus and Monocalyptus species. Although insect damage was similar to that recorded on the monocal ypts at Fridays Creek it was noticeably higher for the non insecticide-treated trees at Kennaicle Creek. Height increment gained was therefore highest with the insecticide-treated trees but of a level intermediate between that gained by the Symphyomyrtus and Monocalyptus.

STA TB FORESTS OF NEW SOU1ll WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 35

EUCALYPT PLANTATION PFSTS AND DISEASFS -CROP LOSS STUDY 15

Table 6A. Summary of the chemical treatment effects on tree growth and relative foliar damage scores for the Symphyomyrtus species from each site, assessed in June (1995 for F.C. and K.C.; 1996 for C.S.) 27 months after planting.

Table 68. Summary chemical treatment effects on tree growth and relative foliar damage scores for the Monocalyptus from each site, assessed in June, 27 months after planting.

16 EUCALYPT PLANT A nON PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS S1UDY

STA TB FORESTS OF NEW SOU1ll WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 3S

Table 6C. Summary of the chemical treatment effects on tree growth and relative foHar damage scores for the Corymbia species from each site, assessed in June (1995 for F.C and K.c., 1996 for C.S.), 27 months afierplanting.

,Corymbla

Tree trait Site Control Fungicide Insecticide Insecticide & Fungicide

Height (m) Fridays Ck. 8.3' (46) 8.4' (45) 9.0· (49) 8.6 '(45) Kennaicle Ck. 6.4' (42) 6.5' (48) 6.9· (41) 6.5 ·(46)

Diameter Fridays Ck. 7.0' (46) 7.8' (45) 8.1· (49) 8.0 &(45) (DOBBH,cm) Kennaic1e Ck. 5.6' (42) 5.6' (48) 5.9' (41) 6.1 '(46)

% Mortality Fridays Ck. 8.0 • (5) 10.0' (5) 2.0· (5) 10.0 & (5) Kennaicle Ck. 16.0 • (5) 10.0 • (5) 8.0' (5) 8.0' (5)

l: Fungal scores 1 Fridays Ck. 0.9 • (5) 4.2 • (5) 5.8 • (5) 2.6 ' (5) Kennaicle Ck. 20.7 • (5) 6.0 b (5) 18.1 • (5) 9.0 b (5)'"

t Insect scores 1 Fridays Ck' 4.6 • (5) 4.4' (5) 0.20 b (5) 0.44 b(5)'" Kennaicle Ck. 38.1 • (5) 33.5 ' (5) 19.0 • (5) 14.9' (5)

% Incremental Ht. ,.

differences Fridays Ck. 1.3 • (5) 7.5 ' (5) 2.9' (5) with controls Kennaicle Ck. 3.6 • (5) 10.4 • (5) 4.6· (5)

1 Fungal and insect scores obtained from the pooled mean sum of damage assessment scores of ten trees per specieslprovenance.

Means in each row followed by different letters are significantly different (P S 0.05). Nwnbers in parentheses is the nwnber of trees for height and DOBBH (means compared using Fisher lsd t tests) and nwnber of specieslprovenances for the other

variables (means compared using stepwise Mann-Whitney U test comparisons).

(b) Seasonality offungal and insect damage scores

The graphs in Figures 2 (a) to f) illustrate the relative seasonal patterns of fungal (a to c) and insect (d to f) attack on the Symphyomyrtus, M onocalyptus and C orymbia eucalypt groupings at all three sites. They also illustrate the effects of the chemical treatments on these relative damage scores. The graphs confirm the relatively high level of fungal attack at Cussacks Section. They also illustrate that at the two coastal sites, for both the Symphyomyrtus and M onocalyptus species, a seasonal fungal peak occurred in September during the second year. This peak then declined over the summer months, whereas at Cussacks Section the level of fungal damage steadily increased through the second summer and autumn. Figure 2c shows that the levels of fungal damage on the Corymbia species at Fridays Creek was relatively low throughout the study period. However, noticeably higher levels were recorded during the cooler months in the second season at Kennaicle Creek.

Figures 2A-2F graphs show seasonality of the relative levels of fungal and insect foliar damage for the Symphyomyrtus, M onocalyptus and Corymbia eucalypt groupings, for each treatment, at each of the three trial sites.


EUCALYPT PLANT A nON PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS STUDY 17

Friday's Creek

1100 o control

1000 • fungicide

900 A insecticide

• 800 x fung & insect a>

700 en C1l

E 600 C1l 0 500 Cii en 400 A 0 c: A ::J U. 300 A A

200 0 A 0

A 0 ~ X o ~ A

100 a A ~ i ~ ~ . x • • 0

May-93 Aug-93 Nov-93 Mar-94 Jun-94 Sep-94 Jan-95 Apr-95 Jul-95

Kennaicle Creek

1100

1000 o control

900 • fungicide

800 A insecticide • a> X fung & insect A en 700 C1l

E 600 0 0 C1l 0

500 Cii ~ A en 400 c: ::J A

i i x u. 300 A • i x

200 A • • • 100 I

0 • May-93 Aug-93 Nov-93 Mar-94 Jun-94 Sep-94 Jan-95 Apr-95 Jul-95

Cussacks Section

1100 o control A 1000 • fungicide A

900 A insecticide 0 • 800 A a> X fung&insect i A en 700 A C1l 0 0 E 600 0 0 C1l X 0 500

x ~

Cii A 0 A A X

en 400 0 ~ ~ ~ c: • ::J 300 A 0 ~ • u. 200 x • x • 100 ~

• • •

0

May-94 Aug-94 Nov-94 Feb-95 Jun-95 Sep-95 Oec-95 Mar-96 Jul-96

Figure 2A. Fungal damage scores - Symphyomyrtus l•

EUCALYPT PLANT A nON PESTS AND DISEASES - STATE FORESTS OF NEW SOUTII WALES 18 CROP LOSS STUDY RESEARCH PAPER NO. 35

Friday's Creek

1100 o control

1000

900 • fungicide

800 A insecticide

iI Q)

g> 700 x fung & insect

~ 600

:: 500 A

C'tl

g> 400 0 :J LL 300 • 200 .. X A • x

100 x a'l e x ~ • • • ..

0

MaY-93 Aug-93 Nov-93 Mar-94 Jun-94 Sep-94 Jan-95 Apr-95 JUI-95

Kennaicle Creek

1100

1000 o control

900 • fungicide

800 A insecticide

iI

Q)

700 x fung & insect 0> 0 C'tl E 600 )[ C'tl 0

500 Ci5 0> 400 • c:

)[ 0 :J

lK LL 300 0

200 I ~ 0 • )[ ~ I • 100 • • 0

e May-93 ,Aug-93 Nov-93 Mar-94 Jun-94 Sep-94 ' Jan-95 Apr-95 Jul-95

Cussacks Section

1100 o Control 1000 • fungicide 900 A insecticide

iI 800 x fung & insect Q) 0> 700 0 C'tl E 600 o A 0 0 C'tl 0 0 0 500 A Ci5 0 A A A 0> 400 A • i c: 0 :J A • l • LL 300 x I !i • • • 200 " x x x x

100 ~ I x

0

May-94 Aug-94 Nov-94 Feb-95 Jun-95 Sep-95 Oec-95 Mar-96 JUI-96

Figure 2B. Fungal damage scores - Monoca/yptus1•

STA TB FORESTS ,OF NEW SOUTII WALES EUCALYPT PLANTATION PESTS AND DISEASES -RESEARCH PAPER NO. 3S CROP LOSS STUDY 19

Friday's Creek

1100 o control 1000

• fungicide 900

A insecticide it 800

x fung & insect Cl> 700 Cl

ro E 600 ro 0 500 co Cl 400 c: ::l

~ u.. 300 A

A 200 •

A • ~ A III • 100 i x 0 A • ! • • R X • 0 • "I!l~ • 0 • • • ! I I I I 0 I


Kennaicle Creek

1100 o control 1000 • fungicide

900 A insecticide

it 800 x fung & insect Cl>

Cl 700 ro E 600 0 ro 0 0

0 500 co

I Cl 400 c: ::l A • u.. 300 •

200 x 0

100 ~ x x

0 May-93 Aug-93 Nov-93 Mar-94

Figure 2e. Fungal damage scores - Corymbia1•

EUCALYPT PLANTATION PESTS AND DISEASES -20 CROP LOSS STUDY

0

A

I

Jun-94

0

A

• 0

x ID

.t. J • • x

Sep-94 Jan-95 Apr-95 Jul-95


900

800

700

~ 600 co E 500 co o 400 1:5 ~ 300 c:

200

o control

• fungicide

A insect

x fung & insect

100 i. ~ e I A

0 0

11 •

0

• x A

Friday's Creek

0 0

• • 0 • A

A X X

o 0 • • x ~ I A

o •

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0~~~~~~~r---=-~----_+------~-----r-----4----~

MaY-93 Aug-93 Nov-93 Mar-94 Jun-94 Sep-94 Jan-95 Apr-95 Jul-95

900

800

700 ... ~ 600 co E 500' co 0 1:5 Q) (/) c:

...

400

300

200

100

0

May-93

900

800

700

~ 600 co E 500 co o 400 1:5 ~ 300 c:

200

o control 0

• fungicide

A insecticide • x fung & insect

0

x • A

~

Aug-93 Nov-93

o control

• fungicide '

A insecticide

x fung&insect

Kennaicle Creek

0

• 0

0

• 0 • :.: o ~ I • 0 . ~ ~ x • ~ A

:.: * Mar-94 Jun-94 Sep-94 Jan-95 Apr-95 Jul-95

Cussacks Section

o • i i

100 8 i ~ j * * I • • ~ * ~ ~ O+------+------r-----~~--_+~~~~----_r----~--~~

May-94 Aug-94 Nov-94 Feb-95 Jun-95 Sep-95 Dec-95 Mar-96 Jul-96

Figure 2D. Insect damage scores - Symphyomyrtus1•



•

900

800

700

Q) 600 0> Cil E 500 Cil

o 400 t5 ~ 300 c::

200

100

o control

• fungicide

~ insecticide

x fung & insect

Friday's Creek

• 11 0

0

• ~ • #I .. 0 ~ o +4~~~~~-A~~~~~------~-----+------~------+-~~~


Kennaicle Creek

900

800

700

~ 600 Cil

E 500 Cil

o 400 t5 ~ 300 c::

200

100

o

o control

• fungicide

A insecticide

x fung & insect

i o ~

I I lI( Ill(

0 • lI(

• 0

*

0

• ~

;- * May-93 Aug-93 Nov-93

0 • 0 0 ~

• • ~ i 11 x i JIt: 3£1 lI( • 1* * t Ill( I I I

Mar-94 Jun-94 Sep-94 Jan-95 Apr-95 Jul-95

Cussacks Section 900

800

700

~ 600 Cil E 500 Cil

o 400 t5 Q) IF) c::

300

200

100

0

May-94

o control

• fungicide

A insecticide

x fung&insect

Aug-94 Nov-94

0

• Feb-95 Jun-95

Figure 2E. Insect damage scores - Monoca/yptus1•

EUCALYPT PLANTATION PESTS AND DISEASES -22 CROP LOSS STUDY

o 0 0

I o 0 i 0 • El

• • • • • ~ x JIt: * * *

~

Sep-95 Oec-95 Mar-96 Jul-96


900

800

700

~ 600 C1l E 500 C1l

o 400 t5 ~ 300 c::

o control

• fungicide

.& insecticide

x fung &insect

200 •

Friday's Creek

• • IS i!iI

o • 0

0 i • 100 ~ 0 0 0

O+~~-.i~.~'I~I~~·~·~*~~~*~~~*~---~----~~~----~--~~ • 1*

I I~ ~ 1 1 :.: 1

Ma~93 Au~93 No~93 Ma~94 Jun-94 Sep-94

900

800

700

o control

• fungicide

.& insecticide

o

•

Kennaicle Creek

Jan-95 Apr-95 JUI-95

~ 600 x fung & insect C1l E 500 C1l

o 400 t5 •

0

i • Q)

(/) c::

x ~ 300 0 •

200 .& ~ • 0 .& X

100 . ~ x ~ .& .&

0 III __ ,. li .. - -,- = May-93 Aug-93 Nov-93 Mar-94 Jun-94

Figure 2F. Insect damage scores - Corymbia1•

• 0

0 ~ .& )I(

.& X

Sep-94 Jan-95 Apr-95

.& X

Jul-95

1 Calculation of fungal and insect damage = initially a summary damage score, adjusted for tree mortality, was calculated for each species/provenance at each assessment per eucalypt subgrouping and site. The species/provenance values were then pooled for each treatment before weighting these monthly treatment summary scores for differences in numbers of species/provenance within each eucalypt grouping (for Symphyomyrtus n = 25, Monocalyptus n = 20, and Corymbia n = 5). .



Highlighted in these graphs (Figures 2A to 2C) is the presence of elevated fungal damage on the insecticide-treated trees compared to the untreated controls (ie the triangles above'the open circles). This effect was not detected when comparing the pooled monthly mean scores in Tables 6A, B and C. In fact, it occurred for several months at all three sites during both hot and colder times of the year thus reducing the likelihood of chemical leaf burn of being a possible explanation. In addition, it did not occur on those trees treated with both the insecticide and fungicide. It most commonly occurred during periods of high levels of fungal damage and more often on the Symphyomyrtus species than either the monocalypt or Corymbia species. At the two coastal sites the final spraying took place in December. This correlated with a relative drop in the fungal damage on the insecticide-treated Symphyomyrtus at Fridays Creek during the final foliage assessment in the following June. At Cussacks Section the overall fungal damage scores remained higher than on the control trees right to the conclusion of the study. However, the period between the fmal spraying and final assessment was only two months, compared to five months for the two coastal sites.

The graphs illustrating the seasonality of the insect damage (Figures 2D to F) affirms the higher damage levels at the two coastal sites amongst the Symphyomyrtus compared to the Monocalyptus. At Fridays Creek there is a generally sustained high level of herb ivory from the commencement of the second summer, with no seasonal peaks. At Kennaic1e Creek there were two distinct summer peaks confirming the consecutive seasons of high Christmas beetle populations. These peaks did not occur in theM onocalyptus species. The seasonal pattern of foliarinsect damage at Fridays Creek for the C orymbia species was similar

, to that of the monocalypts. However, at Kennaicle Creek the pattern was more similar to that of the Symphyomyrtus in response to the high Christmas beetle populations.

(c) Specific response to chemical treatments

When the effects of the chemical treatments were examined on individual species it was revealed that some eucalypts were more prone to the phenomenon of elevated fungal damage on the insecticide-treated trees than other species. Of the Symphyomyrtus, it was most prevalent on the E. viminalis, E. nitens, E. deanei andE. glob. globulus at Fridays Creek and the three E. globulussubspecies andE. viminalis at the Kennaicle Creek site. This trend, although present when examining the overall levels of foliage damage, was less distinct at the species level at the Cussacks Section site. At Cussacks Section it appeared to occur on E. viminalis,E. ovata andE. glob. globulus. It was much less extensive on the Corymbia and monocalypts, with the most affected being E. sieberi and E. meullerana (Cann River) at Fridays Creek.

At Cussacks Section, the monocalypt E. regnans (both provenances) had relatively high levels of fungal and insect damage and responded well when sprayed with both the insecticide and fungicide. Eucalyptus delegatensis also had relatively high fungal damage levels but its relative mean height ranking did not improve when sprayed with the fungicide treatment. There was a general improvement in the relative height rankings amongst the provenances of E. grandis at Fridays Creek but this trend was less clear at Kennaic1e Creek. The untreated E. smithii had the tallest mean heights at Fridays Creek but was surpassed by several species including E. grandis, E. glob. bicostata, E. dunnii and E. saligna when both chemical treatments were applied. The good height performance of E. badjensis appeared to be independent of chemical treatment. .

At Kennaic1e Creek, the Symphyomyrtus species E. nitens (Majors Point) responded well to the insecticide treatment while E. glob. globulus (Flinders Is.) responded well to both treatments. Most noticeably both the Southern provenances of E. maculata significantly improved their relative mean height rankings when the insecticide treatment was applied, especially E. maculata (Batemans Bay), whose mean height ranking improved from 24th to 7th.

24 EUCALYPT PLANT AnON PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS STUDY

STATE FORESTS OF NEW soum WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 35

DISCUSSION

In general, the trees on the ex -forested site at Fridays Creek tended to be taller than trees of the same species planted on the ex-pastoral site at Kennaicle Creek. This was due, in part. to the later planting of the Kennaicle Creek site (in April) compared to Fridays Creek (early March) and the superior site quality at Fridays Creek. Although comparisons between the two coastal sites and the Tablelands site at Cussacks Section have to be treated cautiously, as the Cussacks section site was planted in the following season, the final mean heights showed that trees on the cooler Cussacks Section site grew much more slowly than trees on the warmer coastal sites. Many of the insects sampled during this study cease to be a significant problem after canopy closure (eg Christmas beetles, Came et al. 1974). Thus the faster growing trees at Fridays Creek would have achieved canopy closure more rapidly than trees at the other two sites and hence been exposed to defOliating insects for a shorter period of time.

The results from this study agree with those obtained from many other species field trials in demonstrating the wide range of growth rates between species and often between provenances of some species during the pre-canopy phase of plantation development (eg Griffm et al. 1982, Cotterill et al. 1985, Amold et al. 1996). 'There was also significant variation in the relative susceptibility to the local fungal pathogens and insect pests. More importantly, the chemical treatments applied during this study demonstrated that the impact of these pests and diseases in terms of relative tree heights differed significantly between eucalypt species. For many species the level of foliar damage and loss of growth increment appeared correlated (eg ChrisUIlas beetle attack on C. maculata (Batemans Bay)) while other species appeared much more able to tolerate a certain level of damage without losing their relative tree height ranking (eg fungal attack on E. nitens (Mt Toorongo Plt.)). This study also identified species which appeared to suffer minimal foliar damage, even in the presence of relativel y high population levels of certain defoliating insects or diseases (eg E. badjensis (Glenbog State Forest) or E. c/oeziana (Blacdown) exposed to Christmas beetle attack). This variable specific response, in turn, was reflected in the relative benefits, in terms of height increment, obtained from the chemical treatments. For example, the chemically-treated E. grandis (Coffs Harbour S.O.) at Fridays Creek significantly improved its relative height ranking whereas although the overall mean height of E. smithii (Mt Dromedary) improved with the insecticide application, its relative height ranking worsened.

'The relative height rankings are the outcome of an array of complex interactions including inherent growth rates and host resistance to specific pests and diseases, the suite oflocal pests and diseases, their population levels, and host preferences (Ohmart 1991, Raymond 1995). Superimposed on the growth dynamics of the trees and defoliating pests are the local climatic and site conditions (DeLinle 1991, see Figure 3 for summary of interactions). Hence extensive local knowledge must be acquired before any predictions can be made on the potential impact of the pests and diseases on specific eucalypt species. There is, however, a generiU entomological tenet that rapidly growing healthy trees are better able to quickly out-grow the effects of partial defoliation and thereby minimise its overall impact. Other factors which impede growth such as poor site quality, drought, frost or weed competition will only accentuate the impact and delay the recovery from insect pests and diseases.

At least a dozen insect species capable of causing considerable defoliation of young eucalypt plantations were sampled from the three sites during this study. Many other insect and fungi species were present on the foliage but their pest status at this stage is unknown. It is anticipated that some species not currently considered pests may well become of economic importance when exposed to the artificial dynamics of large eucalypt plantations (Elliott et al. 1990). Each insect and fungal species has its own individual attributes in terms of eucalypt host preferences. They also differ in their seasonality, generational synchrony and mode offeeding (damage symptoms). All these factors influence the overall impact on their

STATE FORESTS OF NEW sOlrrn WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 3S

EUCALYPT PLANT A nON PESTS AND DISEASES -CROP LOSS STUDY 25

host Because of the varying degrees of host specificity and climate/site requirements. the pest and disease species profile differed somewhat between sites and between the three eucalypt subgroupings. At the cooler Tablelands site foliar damage from insects was less severe than that incurred from the fungal pathogens. Potentially important insects included Mnesampela privata (autumn gum moth). Perga spp. (black sawfly larvae). Paropsis spp. and Chrysophtharta spp. (chrysomelid leaf beetles). Gonipterus spp. (eucalypt weevil) and Amorbus spp. (tip-feeding bugs). PsyUids and chrysomelids were the most common insect pests at Fridays Creek. The overall level of insect damage at Fridays Creek was not as high as that obtained on the ex-pastoral site at Kennaic1e Creek although seedling mortality was slightly higher.

The major insect pest problem in the study arose from the high levels of Ouistmas beetles present at the Kennaic1e Creek site. It was at Kennaic1e Creek that the best response to the insecticide treatments were obtained. The eucalypt species which appeared most susceptible to Christmas beetle anack were C. maculata, E. amplifolia, E. botryoides. E. dunnii and E. grandis. In general, the monocalypts were much more resistant to Ouistmas beetle attack. The species with the lowest levels of damage from the Ouistmas beetles were the relatively fast growing E. badjensis and the slow growing E. cloeziana. A significant finding arising from this study was the apparent susceptibility of C. maculata to Ouistmas beetle attack. The C. maculata grew much better at Fridays Creek in the absence of high numbers of Christmas beetles than they did at Kennaic1e Creek.

26

local fungal

pathogens

local insect pests

genetic selection and improvement / intensive

monitoring

market requirements

~

1 site quality

local climate

susceptibility to insect! fungal

damage

--------. overall growth

~ rate

•

chemical intervention

quantity & quality of product

cost benefit

/analyses

economic • return

Figure 3. Summary of some of the interactions prevailing in eucalypt plantations that influence species/provenance selection (in red) and possible research options (in blue).

EUCALYPT PLANT A nON PESTS AND DISEASES . CROP LOSS STIJOY

STATE FORESTS OF NEW SOUTIl WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 35

If one only compared the untreated control trees, the best growth perfonners at Cussacks Section were: E. nitens (all three provenances), E.jastigata (Robertson), and E.jraxinoides (Nimmitabel). At Fridays Creek, the best perfonners were E. badjensis (Mt Dromedary) and E. pilularis (Orara East State Forest) while at the Kennaicle Creek site the best growing monocalypts were E. sieberi (Nullica), E. pilularis (Orara East State Forest) and E.laevopinea (Tenterfield). The two Symphyomyrtus species at Kennaicle Creek with the tallest mean heights in the controls were E. badjensis and E. sa/igna (40 km west of Coffs Harbour).

Not unexpectedly, survival rates were higher amongst the Symphyomyrtus species than the monocalypts at the two coastal sites (see discussion by Noble 1989 and Turnbull et al. 1993) while tree deaths were much higher in both eucalypt groupings on the colder Tablelands site. Our results support earlier field observations, in that sapling mortality by defoliation is rare (eg Candy et al. 1992). Hence tree mortality was not influenced by the chemical treatments, except amongst the Symphyomyrtus species when sprayed with both the insecticide and fungicide treatments at Cussacks Section, thus suggesting a possible interaction between frost damage and injury from fungi and insects (especially tip sap-sucking insects such as Amorbus spp.). It may be possible to compensate for the higher mortality of monocalypt: saplings through various planting density strategies.

This study also demonstrated the advantage of multiple assessments over several seasons in order to obtain a more complete picture of canopy damage by insect pests and fungal diseases (Recher et al. 1996). Our results compliment the observations of Pry or and Clarlce (1964) and Came et al. (1974) in that, it was not until the second summer that trees were significantly attacked. Figure 2D also illustrates the consecutive attack from Christmas beetles at Kennaicle Creek during the second and third summers. Several authors have repOrted that repetitive low-intensity defoliation of eucalypt saplings has a greater impact on growth than a lower frequency of high-intensity defoliations (eg Candy et al. 1992, Abbott et al. 1993). The final important feature illustrated in the graphs of Figure 2 was the apparent susceptibility of certain eucalypt species to elevated fungal attack after being sprayed with the insecticide treatment. A possible explanation for this was that all treatments were sprayed as an aqueous solution to the point of"nm-off' over the entire canopy of treated trees. The control trees were left completely untreated. The regularly applied film of moisture to the leaves may have resulted in more favourable conditions for fungal spore gennination compared to untreated foliage. This phenomenon was not repeated when a fungicide was applied with the insecticide. Conditions were very dry during the 1993 and 1994 seasons in northern New South Wales.

An alternative explanation is that the insecticide treatment may have killed any invertebrate fungal feeders that were feeding on the surfaces of the leaves. More work is required to validate these conjectures. They do however, highlight the need to monitor both insect and fungal damage and in future research field trials, the need for water controls when applying foliar insecticide treatments.

1. SYMPHYOMYRTUS VERSUS MONOCAL YPTUS

Several 'earlier publications have claimed that the Symphyomyrtus species tend to establish more rapidly than Monocalyptus species (Davidson and Reid 1980, Duff et a11983, Noble 1989, Turnbull et al. 1993). When young, they have higher initial growth rates, however, as the trees mature the Monocalyptus species eventually gain dominance. A primary mechanism for this changeover in dominance has been suggested to be the greater susceptibility of Symphyomyrtus species to foliar damage from fungi and insects (Burdon

. and Chilvers 1974, Duff et al. 1983, Woinarski and Cullen 1984, Noble 1989). Our field trials have been one of the few studies designed to test this hypothesis.

Our results confinn that, in general, the Monocalyptus species suffered less leaf damage from insects and fungal diseases than the Symphyomyrtus. At 27 months of age both the height and diameter growth of the untreated Monocalyptus exceeded that of the Symphyomyrtus. However, when insecticide and fungicide treatments were applied the average mean heights and diameters of the Symphyomyrtus were equal to or,



in some cases, better than the Monocalyptus species. These mean'results need to interpreted cautiously because examination of individual species/provenance results reveal that the variation in heights and diameters between species oftheSymphyomyrtus was much greater that of the Monocalyptus in the untreated controls at all three sites (not withstanding the differences in numbers of species/provenances used in each eucalypt grouping). In addition, at Fridays Creek where the pressure from insects' and diseases was lower than at Kennaicle Creek, the tallest species were Symphyomyrtus species (ie E. smithii (Mt Dromedary) and E. badjensis (Cathcart State Forest)). At Kennaicle Creek, where there was a high defoliation pressure from the Christmas beetles and fungi, the tallest species were E. sieberi (Nullica) and E. pilularis (Orara East State Forest), both monocalypt species. When this high defoliation pressure was alleviated through application of pesticides then the average height of the Symphyomyrtus significantly exceeded that of the Monocalyptus species (8.4 ± 0.14 m verses 7.5 ± 0.14 m, Table 6A and 6B).

The field studies undertaken by Turnbull et al. (1988) in Tasmania showed that in stands receiving regUlar applications of both fertiliser and insecticides during the first four growing seasons the standing volumes of the Symphyomyrtus eucalypts (E. globulus and E. nitens) were consistently greater at several sites than those of the Monocalyptus eucalypts (E. regnans and E. delegatensis). They concluded it was the larger size of the photosynthetic canopy that resulted in the faster volume growth of the Symphyomyrtus compared to the Monocalyptus species.

A possible explanation as to why Symphyomyrtus species tend to suffer higher levels of damage than species ofMonocalyptus is because many 'pest' insect species and fungal pathogens tend to be opportunistic and respond quickly to the presence of vigorous host tree canopies (aark and Dall witz 1975, Ohmart 1991 but see White 1969). Frequent or prolonged presence of large areas of susceptible foliage facilitates generational success of insect herbivores and production and carryover of fungal spore inoculum. Thus a possible evolutionary mechanism driving this ecological divergence is the association between insect species and foliar pathogens capable of exploiting and inflicting damage to the larger canopy leaf areas of the Symphyomyrtus (relative to Monocalyptus) (see Landsberg and Cork 1997 for review of supporting hypotheses).

2. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE PEST AND DISEASE STUDIES IN NORTHERN NEW SOUTH WALES

This study has identified an array of insect pests and fungal pathogens capable of preventing optimal growth rates in plantation eucalypts grown on ~e north coast of New South Wales. Unfortunately, at present, there does not appear to be ,a eucalypt that has the following attributes: is well suited to most available sites on the north coast of New South Wales, is capable of sustained rapid growth, is suitable for both solid wood products and pulping and can achieve these desirable outcomes with minimal inteIVention.

We have identified a number of pathogens and insect pests that need further study. For example, studies of infection biology, epidemiology of the pathogens and feeding and oviposition preference studies of the insects and their economic impacts are required. The crop-loss trials involved a mosaic of species and provenances planted in small plots. It is likely that when larger monoculture plantations are established ' the impacts of some pathogens and insects will be greater. There is evidence of this happening in plantations of species of Corymbia where R. pitareka is a destructive pathogen, though in native forests it appears to be oflittle significance. Similarly species ofMycosphaerella are now recognised as growth limiting pathogens in plantations of E. globulus and E. nitens in parts of southern Australia and overseas. Pathogens in this category identified as significant from the crop-loss trials includeAulographina eucalyptii on species of Monocalyptus, Ramularia pitareka on species of Corymbia, species of Seimatosporium and Vermisporium on species of Symphyomyrtus and Hainesia lythrii on Eucalyptus spp.

We suggest that there exists two broad options for the future direction of pest and disease management on the north coast. To be successful, both options will require committed long-term research programmes (Figure 3). The first option is a classical integrated pest management strategy. This would be based on



thoroughknow1edgeofthebio10giesofthekeypestsandandpathogensandcost/benefitanalysesofimpact of damage on tree growth and effective control measures. It also depends on regular accurate monitoring and rapid implementation of any necessary controls. The pros and cons of this approach are discussed by Elliott et al. (1992) and Clarke (1995). This is the approach undertaken by the Tasmanian forest industry. The situation in Tasmania, however, differs significantly from that in northern New South Wales, in that they have selected three commercial species (E. nitens, E. globulus and E. regnans) for the pulpwood industry and they have a good knowledge of their (relatively few) key pests, an effective monitoring program in place and knowledge of the cost benefits associated with chemical control. For a cost benefit approach to be successful there would need to be changes in approach and greater availability of economic parameters. At present joint venture plantations are being established primarily for pole, veneer and sawlog production. The aim is to produce a merchantable product at age 30 years. However, if the aim was to produce logs of particular dimensions in the shortest time the approach to pest and disease management would necessarily be different With an emphasis on maximizing the rate of production it would become more economically viable to actively minimize damage from insect pests and fungal diseases (possibly through the development and application of environmentally acceptable but often relatively expensive novel biotic insecticides/fungicides).

The second option is based principally on tree breeding and/or a clonal forestry approach using vegetative1y propagated planting stock selected for having desirable attributes in all three traits, ie growth, wood propei:tie~ and pest and disease resistance. The most common approach is the field screening for natural growth traits and resistance amongst a wide range of selected species and provenances (eg Farrow et al. 1994, Floyd et al. 1994, Floyd and Farrow 1994, Rayrnond 1995). For example, the selection of provenances which switch early from glaucous juvenile foliage and hence escape the build-up of autumn gum moth populations (Farrow et al. 1994). The pest and disease crop loss study is the very early stage of such a process. Other studies have demonstrated that the extent of defoliation was correlated with levels of the essential oil, 1,8-cineole and this can vary significantly between species and provenances (Edwards et al. 1993, Stone and Bacon 1994, Li and Madden 1995). It is likely each attribute will be independently inherit~. Thus it will be necessary to identify resistance factors for each economically significant pathogen or pest An alternative procedure would be through the development and screening of species hybrids. The crop-loss trials indicate, for example, the hybrid of E. grandis withE. badjensis or E. pilularis with E. cloeziana might have considerable potential for the north coast.

Notwithstanding the progress that has been made with modern vegetative propagation and tissue culture techniques, it would be very desirable to start any research programs in this area as soon as possible because of the generational times associated with eucalypts. There is a third approach which is being used in high value agricultural crops and that is gene engineering. However, much more high-technology research is required before the genes controlling the physical and chemical traits which confer resistance to specific insects and fungal pathogens are identified in commercial eucalypt species. The inclusion of the genes for toxin -production from Bacillus thuringiensis to confer resistence to insect herbivores, or genes for tolerence to glyphosate herbicide is often mentioned. -

-Finally, although rapid establishment and early growth is very important the trend towards meeting Plultiple end-use requirements means that the final sawlog crop will be harvested 30 to 40 years after planting. In eucalypt plantations the profIle of economically important pests and diseases shiftS from defOliating agents to those causing stem defect with increasing length of rotation (eg Wylie and Peters 1993). We currently have very little knowledge of the species complex causing stem defect or of the variability in eucalypt species/provenance resistance to this form of stem degrade.


EUCALYPT PLANTATION PESTS AND DISEASES-CROP LOSS STUDY 29

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This large field study would not have been possible without the participation and sheer effort from the following technical field staff: Darrel Johnstone, Desmond Gibbons, James C'Hara, Ken Craig, Gary Hardcastle, Adrian Thompson and Bob Christensen, all from t:(Ie Coffs Harbour Research Centre. We would like to thank Spencer Bruskin who was Manager ofNorth~m Research during the time of this study and Richard Stanton who was responsible for the early development of the overall plantation research strategy. Also the Biology Section staff (Forest Research and Development Division, West Pennant Hills) who were involved in the laborious task of data entry, Kerrie Bacon; Helen Smith and Grahame Price. Chris Ann Urquhart identified insects sampled from the plantations and Debbie Kent provided assistance with the figures. The experimental design was provided by Cameron Kirtin (Biometrical Consultant) while statistical advice was obtained from Idris Barchia (Biometrican, NSW Dept Agric.).


STATE FORESTS OF NEW SOUTII WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 3S

REFERENCES

Abbott, I., Van Heurck, P. and Burbidge, T. (1993). Impact of frequency and intensity of defoliation on growth ofJarrah (Eucalyptus marginata): an experimental study with saplings. For. Ecol. Manage. 56: 175-183.

Arnold, RJ., Burgess, LP. and Ailender, E.B. (1996). Eucalyptus grandis seed source variation for growth and form in the southern Murray-Darling Basin. Aust. For. 59: 114-119.

Burdon, JJ. and Orllvers, G.A. (1974). Fungal and insect parasites contributing to niche differentiation in mixed species stands of eucalypt saplings. AuSt. J. Bot. 22: 103-114.

Candy, S.q., Elliott, H.J., Bashford, R and Greener, A. (1992). Modelling the impact of defoliation by the leaf beetle, Chrysophtharta bimaculata (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), on height growth of Eucalyptus regnans. For. Ecol. Manage. 54: 69-87.

Came, P.B., Greaves, R.T.G. and McInnes, R.S. (1974). Insect damage to plantation-grown eucalypts in north coastal New South Wales, with particular reference to Christmas beetles (Coleoptera : ~arabaeidae). J. Aust. ent. Soc. 13: 189-206.

Camegie, A.J., Keane, PJ. Ades, P.K. and Smith, LW. (1994). Variation in susceptibility of Eucalyptus globulus provenances to Mycosphaerella leaf disease. Can. J. For. Res. 24: 1751-1757.

Oaric, L.R and Dallwitz, MJ. (1975). The life system of Cardiaspina albitextura (psyllidae), 1950-74. Aust. J. 2001. 23: 523-561.'

Clarice, A.R (1995). Integrated pest management in forestry: some difficulties in pursuing the holy-grail. Aust. For. 58: 147-150.

Cotterill, P.P., Moran, G.F. and Grigg, B.R (1985). Early growth of36 species of eucalypts near Mount Gambier, South Australia. Aust. For. Res. 15: 409-416.

Davidson, N.J. and Reid, J.B. (1980). Comparison of the early growth characteristics of the Eucalyptus subgenera Monocalyptus and Symphyomyrtus. Aust. J. Bot. 28: 453-461.

DeLittle, D.W. (1991). Insects and pathogens: site interactions and limits to productivity. Productivity in Perspective. (Ed. PJ. Ryan.) Proceedings Third Australian Forest Soils and Nutrition

'Conference. Melbourne, 7-11 October 1991.

Duff, G.A., Reid, J.B. and Jackson, W.D. (1983). The occurrence of mixed stands of the Eucalyptus subgeneraMonocalyptus and Symphyomyrtus in south-eastern Tasmania. Aust. J. Ecol. 8: 405-414.

Edwards, P.B., Wanjura, WJ. and Brown, W.V. (1993). Selective herbivory by Christmas beetles in response to intraspecific variation in Eucalyptus terpenoids. Oecologia 95: 551-557.

Elliott, H.J., Bashford, R, Greener, A. and Candy. S.G. (1992). Integrated pest management of the Tasmanian Eucalyptus beetle Chrysophtharta bimaculata (Oliver) (Coleoptera:Chrysomelidae). For. Ecol. Manage. 53: 29-38.

STA TB FORESTS OF NEW soum WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 35


--------------------------------------------------------------.----

Elliott, H.J., Kile, G.A and Cameron, J.N. (1990). Biological threats to Australian plantations: Implications for research and management. In Prospects for Australian Forest Plantations. (Eds. J.Dargavel and N.Semple.) Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, AN.U. Canberra.

Farrow, RA, Floyd, RB. and Neumann,. F.G. (1994). Inter-provenance variation in resistance of Eucalyptus globulus juvenile foliage to insect feeding. Aust. For. 57: 65-68.

Floyd, R.B. and Farrow, RA. (1994). The potential role of natural insect resistance in the integrated pest management of eucalypt plantations in Australia. In Forest Pest and Disease Management (Biotrop Special Publication No. 53). (Eds. S.C.Halos et al.) pp. 55-76. Proceedings of the Symposium on Biotechnological and Environmental Approaches to Forest Pest and Disease Management. Quezon City, Philippines, 28-30 Apri11993. Seameo Biotrop, Bogor.

Floyd, RB., Farrow, RA and Neumann, F.G. (1994). Inter- and intra-provenance variation in resistance of red gum foliage to insect feeding. Aust. For. 57: 45-48.

Griffin,AR,Williams,E.RandJohnson,K.W.(1982).EarlyheightgrowthandfrosthardinessojEucalyptus regnans provenances in twelve field trials in south-east Australia. Aust. For. Res. 12: 263-279.

Hill, K.D. and Johnson, L.AS. (1995). Systematic studies in the eucalypts. 7. A revision of the bloodwoods, genus Corymbia (Myrtaceae). Telopea 6: 185-504.

Landsberg, J. and Cork, S. (1997). Herbivory: interactions between eucalypts and the vertebrates and the invertebrates that feed on them. In Eucalypt Ecology: From Individuals to Ecosystems. (Eds. J.Williams and J.Woinarsld). pp. 342-372. Cambridge University, Cambridge.

Landsberg,1. and Wylie, F.R (1988). Dieback of rural trees in Australia. GeoJournal17: 231-237.

Li, H. and Madden, J.L. (1995). Analysis ofleaf oils from aEucalyptus species trial. Biochem. Sys. Ecol. 23: 167-177.

Lowman, M.D. and Heatwole, H. (1992). Spatial and temporal variability in defoliation of Australian eucalypts. Ecology 73: 129-142.

Mackay, S.M, Humphreys, F.R Clark, RV. Nicholson, D.W. and Lind, P.R (1984). Native tree dieback and mortality on the New England Tablelands of New South Wales. For. Comm. NSW Res. Paper No. 3. 23 pp.

Noble, LR (1989). Ecological traits of the Eucalyptus L 'Herit. subgeneraMonocalyptus and Symphyomyrtus. Aust. J. Bot. 37: 207-224.

Ohm art, C.P. {l990). Insect pests in intensively-managed eucalypt plantations in Australia: Some thoughts on this challenge to a new era in forest management. Aust. For. 53: 7-12.

Ohmart, C.P. (1991). Role offood quality in the population dynamics of chrysomelid beetles feeding on Eucalyptus. For. Ecol. Manage. 39: 35-46.

Pryor, L.D. and Qarke, B. (1964). Reforestation of former farm sites on the north coast of New South Wales. Aust. For. 28: 125-135.

Raymond, C. (1995). Genetic variation inEucalyptus regnans and Eucalyptus nitens for levels of observed defoliation caused by the Eucalyptus leaf beetle , Chrysophtharta bimaculata Olivier, in Tasmania. For. Ecol. Manage. 72: 21-29.

EUCAL ¥PT PLANr A TION PESTS AND DISEASES . 32 CROP LOSS STUDY


Recher, H.F., Majer, J.D. and Ganesh, S. (1996). Seasonality of canopy invertebrate communities in eucalypt forests of eastern and western Australia. Aust. J. Ecol. 21: 64-80.

SAS Institute Inc. (1990). SAS/STAT Users Guide, Version 6, Volumes 1 and 2. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina.

Stanton, R. (1992). Eucalyptus plantations in New South Wales. State Forests NSW Res. Pap. No. 15. 29 pp.

Stone, C. (1993). Fertiliser and insecticide effects on tree growth and psyllid infestation of young Eucalyptus grandis and E. dunnii plantations in northern New South Wales. Aust. For. 56: 257-263.

Stone, C. and Bacon, P.E. (1994). Relationships among moisture stress, inSect herbivory, foliar cineole and the growth of river red gum Eucalyptus camaldulensis. J. Appl. Eco/. 31: 604-612.

Turnbull, C.R.A., Beadle, C. L., Bird, T. and McLeod, D.E. (1988). Volume production in intensivelymanaged eucalypt plantations. Appita 41: 447-450.

Turnbull, C.R.A., McLeod, D.E., Beadle, C.L., Ratkowsky, D.A., Mummery, D.C. and Bird, T. (1993). Comparative early growth of Eucalyptus species of the subgeneraMonocalyptus andSymphyomyrtus in intensively-managed plantations in southern Tasmania. Aust. For. 56: 276-285.

White, T.C.R. (1969) An index to measure weather-induced stress of trees associated with outbreaks of psyllids in Australia. Ecology 50: 905-909.

Woinarski, J.C.Z. and Cullen, J.M. (1984) Distribution of invertebrates on foliage in forests of southeastern Australia. Aust. J. Eco/. 9: 207-232.

Wylie, F.R. and Peters, B.C. (1993). Insect pest problems of eucalypt plantations in Australia. 1. Queensland. Aust. For. 56: 358-362.



APPENDIX 1

SELECTED SPECIESIPROVENANCES AND THEIR ORIGIN.

Fridays Creek site (Coffs Harbour District), Symphyomyrtus species.

Altitude Suh-elot No. Seecies Common Name Loca1i~ ATSCNo. Latitude Longitude {m2

1 E. amplifolia Cabbage gum . NW of Mole ton 13323 30°08' 152°53' 47 2 E. amplifolia Cabbage gum Nerriga 15522 35°00' 150°06' 600 3 E. globulus subsp.

bicostata Southern blue gum Rylestone 16305 32°43' 150°13' 1100 4 E. botryoi des Southern mahogany Milton 16026 35°08' 150~4' 250 5 E. botryoides Southert1 mahogany Orbost 15303 3r39' 148°40' 210 6 E. badjensls Big badja gum Cathcart S.F. 17018 36°50' 149~1' 900 7' E~deanel Round leaved gum Watagan 11174 32°50' 151 °10' 120 8 E. deanei Round leaved gum Boonoo 16897 28°52' 152°07' 1000 9 E.dunnii Dunn's white gum CloudsCeek 17923 30°00' 152°41 ' 320 10 E. grandis Flooded gum Coffs Harbour S.O. routine 30°08' 153°07' 100 11 E.grandis Flooded gum Coffs Harbour S.O. routine 30°08' 153°07' 100 12 E. grandis Flooded gum Coffs Harbour S.O. routine 30°08' 153°07' 100 13 E.grandis Flooded gum Coffs Harbour S.O. routine 30°08' 153°07' 100 14 E.grandis Flooded gum Atherton 16583 17°18' 145°25' 1100 15 E. globulus subsp. Maiden's gum Yurammie S.F. 17769 36°49' 149°45' 250

maidenii 16 E. microcorys Tallowwood Kenilworth 17136 26°41 ' 152°35' 650 17 E. microcorys Tallowwood Kempsey 15609 30°53' 152°55' 30 18 E. nitens Tallowwood Majors Point 16636 30°25' 152°25' 1450 19 E. grandis Flooded gum Coffs Harbour S.O. routine 30°08' 153°07' 100 20 E. propinqua Grey gum Woolgoolga 13321 30°04' 153°06' 200 21 E. grandis Flooded gum Coffs Harbour S.O. routine 30°08' 153°07' 100 22 E. sabgna Sydney blue gum Armidale 13335 30°46' 152°02' 910 23 E. sallgna Sydney blue gum 40 km W of Coffs 13320 30°12' 152°49' 600 24 E. smlthii Gully gum Mt Dromedary 12559 36°22' 149°57' 600 25 E. viminalis Manna gum Kaputar N.P. 12570 30°18' 150°11 ' 1400

Fridays Creek site (Coffs Harbour District), Monocalyptus and Corymbia species

Altitude Suh-elot No. S~ies Common Name Loca1i~ ATSCNo. Latitude Lon~tude {m~

1 E. agglomerata Blue leaved stringybark Batemans Bay 15284 35°32' 150°10' 160 2 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' 100 3 C. citriodora Lemon scented gum Mareeba 15960 lrOY 145°32' 750 4 C. citriodora Lemon scented gum Irvine Bank 14850 17°26' 145°12' 900 5 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' 100 6 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' lOO 7 E. cloeziana Gympie messmate B1ackdown 12196 23°44' 149°07' 400 8 E. globoidea White stringybark Barcoongere S.F. 10853 29°58' 153°11 ' 60 9 E. globoidea White stringybark NowaNowa 15286 37°47' 148°13' 40 10 E.,globoidea White stringybark NE of Beg a 15927 36~6' 150°03' 50 11 E. laevopinea Silvertop stringybark S New England 14840 31°30' 151°06' . 186 12 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' 100 13 E. laevopinea S{lvertop stringy bark SE ofTenterfield 16000 29°09' 152°07' 1080 14 C. maculata Spotted gum Batemans Bay 16049 35°36' 150°14' 100 15 C. variegata Spotted gum Warwick 16360 28°23' 151°42' 750 16 C. maculata Spotted gum Moleton 16757 30°07' 152°54' 400 17 E. meullerana Yellow stringybark Cann River 15304 3r38' 148°48' 280 18 E. meullerana Yellow stringybark SW ofNarooma 15306 36°17' 149°58' 160 19 E. meullerana Yellow stringybark Orbost 15012 37°23' 148°37' 300 20 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' 100 21 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' 100 22 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' lOO 23 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' lOO 24 E. pilularis Blackbutt Grafton 13901 29°35' 153°15' 20 25 E. sieberi Silvertop ash NullicaS.F. 12127 37°07' 149°53 ' 360

EUCALYPT PLANTATION PESTS AND DISEASES - STATE FORESTS OF NEW SOUTH WALES 34 CROP LOSS STUDY RESEARCH PAPER NO. 35

Kennaicle Creek site (Urunga District), Symphyomyrtus species.

Altitude Sub-~Iot No. S~ecies Common Name Locali!X ATSCNo. Latitude Lonllitude {m2

1 E. amplifolia Cabbage gum NW of Moleton 13323 30°08' 152°53' 47 2 E. amplifolia Cabbage gum Nerriga 15522 35°00' 150°06' 600 3 E. globulus subsp. Southern blue gum Rylestone 16305 32°43' 150°13' 1100

bicostata 4 E. glob. bicostata Southern blue gum Mt Strathbogie 16370 35°56' 145°57' 700 5 E. botryoides Southern mahogany Milton 16026 35°08' 150°24' 250 6 E. botryoides Southern mahogany Orbost 15303 37"39' 148°40' 210 7 E. badjensis Big badja gum Glenbog S.F. 17774 36°36' 149°26' 1050 8 E. deanei Round leaved gum Watagan 11174 32°50' 151°10' 120 9 E.dunnii Dunn's white gum CloudsCeek 17923 30°00' 152°41 ' 320 10 E. glob. globulus Tasmanian blue gum Flinder's Island 17799 40°06' 148°00' 15 11 E. grandis Flooded gum Coffs Harbour S.O. routine 30°08' 153°07' 100 12 E. grandis Flooded gum Coffs Harbour S.O routine 30°08' 153°07' 100 13 E. grandis Flooded gum Coffs Harbour S.O. routine 30°08' 153°07' 100 14 E.grandis Flooded gum Coffs Harbour S.O. routine 30°08' 153°07' 100 15 E. grandis Flooded gum Atherton 16583 17"18' 145°25' 1100 16 E. glob. maidenii Maiden's gum Yurammie S.F. 17769 36°49' 149°45' 250 17 E. microcorys Tallowwood Kenilworth 17136 26°41 ' 152°35' 650 18 E. microcorys Tallowwood Kempsey 15609 30°53' 152°55' 30 19 E. nitens Shining gum Majors Point 16636 30°25' 152°25' 1450 20 E.propmqua Grey gum Woolgoolga 13321 30°04' 153°06' 200 21 E. quadrangulata White topped box Clouds Creek S.F. 17581 30°04' 152°38' 650 22 E. saligna Sydney blue gum Armidale 13335 30°46' 152°02' 910 23 E. saligna Sydney blue gum 40 km W of Coffs 13320 30°12' 152°49' 600 24 E. smithii Gully gum Mt Dromedary 12559 36°22' 149°57' 600 25 E. viminalis Manna gum Kaputar N.P. 12570 30°18' 150°11 ' 1400

Kennaicle Creek site (Unmga District), Monocalyptus and Corymbia species

Altitude Sub-~Iot No. S~ies Common Name Locali!X ATSCNo. Latitude Lon!l!tude {m~

1 E. agglomerata Blue leaved stringybark Batemans Bay 15284 35°32' 150°10' 160 2 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' 100 3 C. citriodora Lemon scented gum Mareeba 15960 17°05' 145°32' 750 4 C. citriodora Lemon scented gum lrvine Bank 14850 17°26' 145°12' 900 5 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' 100 6 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' 100 7 E. cloeziana Gympie messmate B1ackdown 12196 23°44' 149°07' 400 8 E. globoidea White stringybark Barcoongere S.F. 10853 29°58' 153°11 ' 60 9 E. globoidea White stringybark NowaNowa 15286 37°47' 148°13' 40 10 E. globoidea White stringybark NE of Bega 15927 36°36' 150°03' 50 11 E. laevopinea Silvertop stringybark S New England 14840 31°30' 151°06' 186 12 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' 100 13 E. laevopinea Silvertop stringybark SE ofTenterfield 16000 29°09' 152°07' 1080 14 C. maculata Spotted gum Batemans Bay 16049 35°36' 150°14' 100 15 C. variegata Spotted gum Warwick 16360 28°23' 151 °42' 750 16 C. maculata. Spotted gum Moleton 16757 30°07' . 152°54' 400 17 E. meullerana Yellow stringybark Cann River 15304 37°38' 148°48' 280 18 E. meullerana Yellow stringybark SW ofNarooma 15306 36°17' 149°58' 160 19 E., meullerana Yellow stringybark Orbost 15012 37°23' 148°37' 300 20 E. pilularis Blackliutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' ·100

21 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' 100 22 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' 100

23 E. pilularis Blackbutt Orara East S.F. routine 30°10' 153°06' 100

24 E. pilularis Blackbutt Grafton 13901 29°35' 153°15' 20

25 E. sieberi Silverto~ ash NullicaS.F. 12127 37°07' 149°53' 360



Cussacks Section site (Walcha District), Symphyomyrtus species.

Sub-2lot No. S2ecies Common Name Locali~ ATSCNo. Latitude Lonllitude 1 E. badjensis Big badja gum Glenbog S.F. 17774 36°36' 149°26' 2 E. gIobulus subsp. Southern blue gum Rylestone 16305 32°43' 150°13'

bicostata 3 E. glob. bicostata Southern blue gum Mt Strathbogie 16370 36°56' 145°57' 4 E. cypellocarpa Mountain grey gum BrownMt 16309 36°39' 149°26' 5 E. cypellocarpa Mountain grey gum Bonang 12655 37°12' 148°42' 6 E. darympleana subsp. Mountain gum EofWarwick 13348 28°14' 152°22'

heptantha 7 E.dunnii Dunn's white gum Clouds Creek 17923 30°00' 152°41 ' 8 E. glob. globulus Tasmanian blue gum OtwayS.F. 16851 38°45' 143°26' 9 E. glob. globulus Tasmanian blue gum Flinders Island 17799 40°06' 148°00' 10 E. glob. maidenii Maidens gum Yurammie S.F. 17769 36°49' 149°45' 11 E. glob. maidenii Maidens gum Black Range, Eden 17742 37"10' 149°41 ' 12 E. nitens Shining gum Macalister 17758 37"30' 146°26' 13 E. nitens Shining gum Majors Point, Ebor 16636 30°25' 152°25' 14 E. nitens Shining gum Majors point, Ebor 16636 30°25' 152°25' 15 E. nitens Shining gum Majors Point, Ebor 16636 30°25' 152°25' 16 E. nitens Shining gum Mt Toorongo Plat 16352 37"47' 146°16' 17 E.ovata Swamp gum 21 km S of Bomb ala 17285 37°06' 149°18' 18 E.ovata Swamp gum Port Huon 18390 43°09' 146°58' 19 E. quadrangulata White topped box Clouds Creek S.F. 17581 30°04' 152°38' 20 E. rummeryi Steel box Kangaroo S.F. 16829 41°05' 147°46' 21 E. saligna Sydney blue gum Armidale 13335 30°46' 152°02' 22 E. smllhii Gully gum Tallaganda S.F. 18284 35°26' 149°36' 23 E. smithii Gully gum Mt Domedary 12559 36°22' 149°57' 24 E. viminalis Manna gum Kaputar N.P. 12570 30°18' 150°11 ' 25 E. viminalis Manna gum Apollo Bay 16094 38°44' 143°26'

Cussacks Section site (Walcha District), Monocalyptus and Corymbia species.

Sub-2lot No. Species Common Name

36

1 E. andrewsii subsp. andrewsii New England blackbutt

2 E. and. andrewsii New England blackbutt 3 E. and. campanulata New England blackbutt 4 E. and. campanulata New England blackbutt 5 E. delegatensis Alpine ash 6 E. fraxinoides White ash 7 E·fastigata Brown barrel 8 E·fastigata Brown barrel 9 E.fastigata· Brown barrel 10 E. fastigata Brown barrel II E. fastigata Brown barrel 12 E·fastigata Brown Barrel 13 E. fraxinoides White ash 14 E. globoidea White stringybark 15 E. laevopinea Silvertop stringybark 16 E. 'laevopinea Silvertop stringybark 17 E. muellerana Yellow stringybark 18 E. laevopinea Silvertop stringybark 19 E.oblIqua Messmate 20 E. oreades Blue Mountains ash 21 E.oreades Blue Mountains ash 22 E. regnans Mountain ash 23 E. regnans Mountain ash 24 E. sieberi Silvertop ash 25 E. sieberi Silvertop ash


Locali~ ATSCNo. Latitude Longitude

Winterbourne 11023 24°26' 150°59' Kroombit S.F, Calliope 13037 24°23' 151°00' Njangala District 11652 31 °17' 151 °24' Diehappy S.F. 16833 30°29' 152°40' Mt Gibbo, Vic 13110 36°37' 148°01 ' Pikes Saddle area 12115 35°59' 149°33' S ofOberon 15110 34°01 ' 149°58' Tallagandra S.F. 16302 35°52' 149°30' N ofRoberston 16303 34°33' 150°36' N ofRoberston 16303 34"33' 150"36' N ofRoberston 16303 34°33' 150°36' N ofRoberton 16303 34°33' 150°36' Nimmitabel 15526 36°29·' 149°19' NE of Beg a 15927 36°36' 150°03' Walcha District ll653 31°11 ' 151°26' 17km SE ofTenterlie1d 16000 29°09' ·152°07' 26km SW ofNarooma 15306 36°17' 149°58' S New England 14840 31°30' 151°06' Lavers Hill 15901 38°40' 143°21 ' Newnes S.F. 17344 33°24' 150°13' near Newnes 12228 33°10' 150°15' Strzelecki Ranges 16867 38°35' 146°30' Forester, Tas. 15178 41 °05' 147°46' NullicaS.F. 12127 37°07' 149°53' NE highlands, Tas. 13155 41°10' 147°45'


Altitude

~m~ 1050 llOO

700 940 860 900

320 160 15

250 320 1200 1450 1450 1450 900 750

5 650 200 910 900 600 1400 100

Altitude Cm)

88 860 910 700 1310 1250 1060 1105 700 700 700 700 1100 50

1070 1080 160 186 270 1000 1000 480 200 360 200

APPENDIX 2

EUCALYPT PLANTATION TRIALS - PEST AND DISEASE MONITORING SHEET.

STATE FORESTS OF NEW SOUTIl WALES RESEARCH PAPER NO. 35


TRIAL: REPLICATE: TREATMENT: DATE: OBSERVER: RECORDER:

LOCATION·

DISEASE INSECTS

GENERAL ImmFol Mat.Fol OldFol Bud/Growing Tip ImmFol MatFol

TREE TREE CROWN TREE COMMENTS spp ROW COL NO. HEIGHT DIAM DBH APP SEY. INCID SEV INCID SEV INCID TYPE SCRE ABUN TYPE SCRE ABUN TYPE SCRE ABUN

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3 I

4

I

5

1 I I

2 i

3 1

4

5

1

2 !

3

·4

5 ,

1

2

3

4

5

EUCALYPT PLANT A nON PESTS AND DISEASES - STATE FORESTS OF NEW SOUTH WALES 38 CROP LOSS STUDY RESEARCH PAPER NO. 35

APPENDIX 3

DISEASE AND INSECT DAMAGE ASSESSMENT CODES ASSOCIATED WITH THE MONITORING SHEETS.

General tree appearance and damage other than that by insects or fungi

Nil Entry A B

Nonnal Stunted Severely defoliated

FL Frost damage, light FM Frost damage, moderate FS Frost damage, severe

C D

Original foliage replaced by epiconnics Dead

FT Frost damage, tips only G Drought affected

E Grazed by vertebrates W Windfall

DISEASE SCORING

For both the disease and the insect damage scoring, use the comments column to indicate whether the specific damage is restricted to the juvenile foliage and not on the true adult foliage.

Disease severity

Scoring for the estimate ofleaf area showing symptoms of disease on immature, mature and old ,leaves. Separate score systems are to be used for either juvenile foliage and true adult foliage. To

assist in the assessment of disease severity a series of standard qiagrams depicting 0,3,6, 12,25,50, 75, 87 and 100% of the total leaf areas with disease symptoms can be obtained from Mr Jack Simpson (Forest Pathologist, State Forests of New South Wales).

Juvenilejoliage Adult joliage % leaf area infected Score % leaf area infected Score

o 0 o 0 0.1 - 3.0 1 0.1 - 3.0 1 3.1 - 6.0 2 3.1 - 6.0 2 6.1 - 12.0 3 6.1 - 12.0 3 12.1 - 25.0 4 12.1 - 25.0 4 25.1 - 100 5 25.1 - 50.0 5

50.1-75.0 6 75.1 - 87.0 7 87.1 - 100 8

Disease incidence

Scoring for the estimate of the proportion of leaves showing symptoms of disease on immature, mature and old leaves.

% foliage infected o

0.1- 6.0 6.1 - 25.0

25.1 - 50.0 50.1 -75.0 75.0 - 90.0 90.1 - 100


Score o 1 2 3 4 5 6

EUCALYPT PLANTATION PESTS AND DISEASES -CROPLOSSSTUDY 39

INSECT SCORING

Type of insect damage

Code describing the most common type of insect damage on the bud/growing tips, immature and mature foliage.

Leaves Stems Ibranches A Holes only K Galls B· Edge scalloping only L Cuts or lesions C Both holes and scalloping M Borer holes D Entire removal N Witches broom E Skeletonising F Blistering or mining G Galls H Necrosis (eg by Psyllids) I Wilting J Curling or Webbing

Insect damage scores

Scoring for the estimate of amount of foliage damaged by insects on the Buds/Growing Tips, Immature and Mature Foliage.

Nil entry I 2 3 4 5

None or very little damage About l/8th damaged About l/4th damaged About 1/2th damaged About 3/4th damaged Nearly all damaged

(approx. 0% to 5%) (approx. 10%) (approx. 25 %) (approx. 50%) (approx. 75%) (over 90%)

Insect abundance

Scoring for the estimate of the numbers of the insects present on the buds/growing tips, immature and mature foliage. Use the comments to provide insect names, if known, or identification codes used when labelling sampling jars.

Nil entry 1 2 3

None present Present Common Extreme

Definitions of leaf age classes

40

Bud/growing tip - Terminal end of shoot, leaves folded or just commencing to grow apart. Immature foliage - Leaves not yet fully expanded. Mature foliage - Leaves fully grown, during current season's growth. Old foliage - Leaves fully grown, from previous season's growth.



APPENDIX 4

UST OF POTENTIAL INSECT PESTS SAMPLED FROM EACH OF THE THREE TRIAL SITES.

Cussacks Section - Symphyomyrtus species. Host tree Insect pest Insect Family: Order E. cypellocarpa Chrysophtharta sp., Paropsis porosa Erichson (eucalypt leaf beetle) Cluysomelidae : Coleoptera

Pergidae : Hymenoptera Eurymelidae : Hemiptera E. dalrympleana ssp.

heptantha E. dunnii

E. globulus ssp. bicostata E. globulus ssp. maidenii

E. nitens

E.ovata

E. quadrangulata E. smithii E. viminalis

Perga sp. (black sawfly larvae) Eurymelidae sp. (treehopper)

Chrysoplztlzarta sp., C. cloelia SUiI (eucalypt leaf beetle) Cluysomelidae: Coleoptera Amorbus rubiginosl/s (Guerin-Meneville) (tip-feeding bug) Coreidae : Hemiptera Mnesampela privata (Guem\e) (autumn gum month) Geometridae : Lepidoptera Ctenarytaina eucalypti (Maskell) (bluegum psyllid) Psyllidae : Hemiptera Amorbus rubiginosus (tip-feeding bug) Coreidae : Hemiptera Mnesampela privata (autumn gum month) Geometridae : Lepidoptera Ctenarytaina eucalypti (bluegum psyllid) Psyllidae : Hemiptera Amorbus rubiginosus (tip-feeding bug) Coreidae : Hemiptera Heteronyx sp., Liparetrus sp. (tip-feeding scarabs) Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Paropsis porosa (eucalypt leaf beetle) Cluysomelidae : Coleoptera Mnesampela privata {autumn gum moth) Geometridae: Lepidoptera Paropsis porosa (eucalypt leaf beetle) Cluysomelidae : Coleoptera Opodiphthera helena (White) (emperor gum moth larvae) Saturniidae : Lepidoptera Paropsis porosa (eucalypt leaf beetle) Cluysomelidae : Coleoptera Opodiphthera helena (emperor gum moth larvae) Satumiidae : Lepidoptera Eurymelidae sp. (treehopper) Eurymelidae : Hemiptera Chrysoptharta cloelia, Paropsis porosus (eucalypt leaf beetles) Cluysomelidae : Coleoptera Gonipterus sp. (eucalypt weevil) Curculionidae : Coleoptera Mnesampela privata (autumn gum month) Geometridae : Lepidoptera

Frost tip damage observed on E. glob. bicostata, E. glob. maidenii, E. quadrangulata, E. smithii and E. viminalis.

Cussacks Section - Monocalyptus species Host tree Insect pest E. andrewsii ssp. andrewsii Chrysophtharta sp. (eucalypt leaf beetle) E. andrewsii ssp. campanulata Opodiphthera helena (emperor gum moth larvae) E. delegatensis Chrysophtharta sp. (eucalypt leaf beetle)

E. fastigata E. fraxinoides E. Jaevopinea

E. muellerana E.oreades E. regnans

Mnesampela privata (autumn gum moth) Glycaspis sp. (sugary lerps) . Chrysophtharta sp., Paropsis atomaria Olivier (eucalypt leaf beetles) Amorbus sp. (tip-feeding bug) Chrysophtharta spp., Paropsis porosa (eucalypt leaf beetles) Mnesampela privata (autumn gum month) Chrysoplztharta sp. (eucalypt leaf beetle) Eriococcus coriaceus Maskell (gumtree scale) Amorbus sp. (tip-feeding bug) Liparetnls sp. (tip-feeding scarab) Edusella sp., Paropsis porosa (eucalypt leaf beetles)

E. sieberi Chrysophtharta sp. (eucalypt leaf beetles) Fros~ tip damage observed on.E. andrewsii, E. fastigata, E. laevopinea, E. obliqua and E. sieberi.

.Insect Family: Order Cluysomelidae : Coleoptera Saturniidae : Lepidoptera Cluysomelidae : Coleoptera Geometridae : Lepidoptera Psyllidae : Hemiptera Cluysomelidae : Coleoptera Coreidae : Hemiptera Cluysomelidae : Coleoptera Geometridae : Lepidoptera Cluysomelidae : Coleoptera Eriococcidae : Hemiptera Coreidae : Hemiptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Cluysomelidae : Coleoptera Cluysomelidae : Coleoptera


EUCALYPT PLANTATION PESTS AND DISEASES-CROP LOSS STUDY 41

Fridavs Creek - Sympllyomyrtlls species Host tree Insect pest E. amplifolia Cardiaspinafiscella Taylor, C. maniformis Taylor (lace lerps)

Creiis liturata (Froggatt) (lerp)

E. badjensis E. botryoides

E. deanei

E. dunnii

E. globulus ssp. bicostata

E. globulus ssp. maidenii

E. grandis

E. nitens E. propinqua

E. saligna

E. viminalis

Anoplognathlls chloropyrus (Drapiez) (Christmas beetle) Hyalarcta huebnen· (Westwood) (bagmoth) Curculionidae sp. (weevil) Cardiaspinafiscella, C. maniformis (lace lerps) Phylacteophaga froggatti Riek (leaf blister sawfly) Anoplognathus poroslls (Dalman) (Christmas beetle) Cardiaspina maniformis (lace lerp) Chrysoptharta c10elia (eucalypt leaf beetle) Cardiaspina maniformis (lace lerp) Automolius sp. (tip-feeding scarab) Anoplognathus chloropyrus (Christmas beetle) Chrysophtharta c1oelia, Paropsis van·olosa Marshall (euc.leafbeetles) Mnesampela pn·vata (autumn gum month) Ctenarytaina eucalypti (bluegum psylJid) Mnesampela privata (autumn gum month) Ctenarytaina eucalypti (bluegum psyllid) Mnesampela privata (autumn gum moth) Cardiaspinafiscella, C. maniformis, C. albitextura Taylor (lace lerps) Creiis liturata (lerp) Ctenarytaina eucalypti (bluegum psyllid) Anoplognathus chloropyrus (Christmas beetle) Chrysophtharta c1oelia, Paropsis variolosa (eucalypt leaf beetles) Mnesampela privata (autumn gum month) Doratifera vulnerans (Lewin) (mottled cupmoth) Hyalarcta huebneri (bagmoth) Phylacteophaga froggatti (leaf blister sawfly) Auto~olius sp. (tip-feeding scarab) Cardiaspina maniformis (lace lerp) Phylacteophaga froggatti (leaf blister sawfly) Cardiaspinafiscella, C. maniformis, C. albitextw:a (lace lerps). Creiis liturata (lerp) Eurymela sp. (treehopper) Chrysoptharta cloelia, Paropsis variolosa (euc.leafbeetle) Doratifera vulnerans (mottled cupmoth) Mnesampela privata (autumn gum month)

Fridays Creek - Monocaiyptlls and Corymbia species Host tree C. citriodora C. maculata E. globoidea E. laevopinea E. muellerana

E. pilularis

E. sieberi

Insect pest Anoplognathus chloropyrus (Chris·tmas beetle) Anoplognathus sp. (Christmas beetle) . Automolius sp. (tip-feeding scarab) Paropsis atomaria (eucalyptus leaf beetle) Glycaspis sp. (sugary lerps) Anoplognathlls sp. (Christmas beetle) Glycaspis sp. (sugary lerps) Anoplognathus porosus (Christmas beetle) Paropsis variolosa (eucalypt leaf beetle) Anoplognathus sp. (Christmas beetle)

Insect Family: Order PsylJidae : Hemiptera Psyllidae : Hemiptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Psychidae : Lepidoptera Curculionidae : Coleoptera Psyllidae : Hemiptera Pergidae : Hymenoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Psyllidae : Hemiptera Chrysomelidae : Coleoptera Psyllidae : Hemiptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Chrysomelidae : Coleoptera Geometridae : Lepidoptera Psyllidae : Hemiptera Geometridae : Lepidoptera Psyllidae : Hemiptera Geometridae : Lepidoptera Psyllidae : Hemiptera Psyllidae : Hemiptera Psyllid : Hemiptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Chrysome1idae : Coleoptera Geometridae : Lepidoptera Limacodidae : Lepidoptera Psychidae : Lepidoptera Pergidae : Hymenoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Psyllidae : Hemiptera Pergidae : Hymenoptera Psyllidae : Hemiptera PsylJidae : Hemiptera Eurymelidae : Hemiptera Chrysome1idae : Coleoptera Limacodidae : Lepidoptera Geometridae : Lepidoptera

Insect Family: Order Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Chrysomelidae : Coleoptera Psyllidae : Hemiptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Psyllidae : Hemiptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Chrysome1idae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera



Kennaicle creek - SympltyomyrtlLv species Host tree Insect pest E. ampli/olia Eurymeloides sp (treehoppers)

E. botryoides

E. deanei E. dunnii

E. globulus ssp. globulus E. globulus ssp. maidenii E. grandis

E. microcorys E. nitens E. propinqua

E. quadrangulata E. saligna

E. smithii E. viminalis

Anoplognatltus chloropyrus, A. porosus (Christmas beetles) Paropsis sp. (eucalypt leaf beetle) Anoplognathus chloropyrus, A. porosus (Christmas beetles) Monolepta australis (Jacoby) (leaf beetle) Hyalarcta huebnerj (bagmoth) Anoplognathus chloropyrus (Christmas beetle) Anoplognathus chioropyrus, A. porosus (Christmas beetles) Paropsis atomaria, Chrysophtharta cloelia (leaf beetles) Anoplognathus chloropyrus (Christmas beetle) Anoplognathus chloropyrus (Christmas beetle) Cardiaspina mani/ormis (lace lerp) Anoplognathus chloropyrus, A. porosus (Christmas beetles) Paropsis variolosa,Chrysophtharta cloelia (euc.leafbeetles) Monolepta australis (leaf beetle) Anoplognathus chloropyrus (Christmas beetle) Anoplognathus chloropyrus (Christmas beetle) Eurymelidae sp. (treehopper) Anoplognathus chloropyrus, A. porosus (Christmas beetles) Euops sp. (weevil) . Anoplognatlllls chloropyrus, A. porosus (Christmas beetles) Anoplognathus chloropyrus (Christmas beetle) Chrysophtharta cloelia (eucalypt leaf beetle) Monolepta australis (leafbeetle) Anoplognathus chloropyrus (Christmas beetle) Anoplognathus chloropyrus (Christmas beetle)

Kennaicle Creek - MonocalyPtlLv and Corymbia species Host tree Insect pest C. citriodora Anoplognatus spp. (Christmas beetles)

C. maculata

C. variegata

E. meullerana E. pilularis

E. sieberi

Hyalarcta nigrescens (Doubleday) (bagmoth) Anoplognatus chloropyrus, A. porosus (Christmas beetles) Edusella sp. (leaf beetle) Hyalarcta nigrescens (bagmoth) Anoplognathus chloropyrus, A. porosus (Christmas beetles) Paropsis variolosa (eucalypt leaf beetle) Anoplognatus chloropyrus, A. porosus (Christmas beetles) Anoplognathus chloropyrus, A. porosus (Christmas beetles) Paropsis variolosa, Paropsistema liturata Marshall (leaf beetles) Teia anartoides Walker (painted apple moth) Anoplognathus chloropYrus, A. porosus (Christmas beetles)

Insect Family: Order Eurymelidae : Hemiptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Chrysomelidae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Chrysomelidae : Coleoptera Psychidae : Lepidoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Chrysomelidae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Psyllidae : Hemiptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Chrysomelidae : Coleoptera Chrysomelidae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleopter~ Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Eurymelidae : Hemiptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Attelabidae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Chrysomelidae : Coleoptera Chrysomelidae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera

Insect Family: Order Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Psychidae : Lepidoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Chrysomelidae : Coleoptera Psychidae : Lepidoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Chrysomelidae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera Chrysomelidae : Coleoptera Lymantriidae : Lepidoptera Scarabaeidae : Coleoptera



t

Q~ 0(') "1:1>

~§ ~§ ><>

d ~

m ~ ~ m > en rn

~ ~

~~ m'r1

~~ ::I: en ~g ~@ "'~ a> • t""' wm U.en

APPENDIX 5

liST OF POTENTIAL FUNGAL PATHOGENS SAMPLED FROM EACH OF THE THREE TRIAL SITES.

Cussacks Section

Symphyomyrtu£ speci(!s yonoc!!bPttts_~ecies

Host tree Pathogen Host tree Pa!hogen E. cypel/ocarpa Botrytis cinerea Pers.:Fr. E. andrewsii ssp. andrewsii Botrytis cinerea E. dalrympleana ssp. heptantha Pestalotiopsis sp. E. andrewsii ssp. campanulata Botrytis cinerea E. dll1l11ii Macrophomina phaseoli (Tassi) Goidanich E. delegatensis Aulographina eucalypti E. globlllus ssp. bicostata Botrytis cinerea E. fastigata Aulographina eucalypti

E. globlllus ssp. globulus

E. globllllls ssp. maidenii

E. nitells

E.ovata

E. quadrangulata

E. saligna E. smithii E. viminalis

Mycosphaerella cryptica (Cooke) Hansf. E.fraxinoides Armillaria luteobubalina Kile & Watling Botrytis cinerea Aulographina eucalypti Mycosphaerella cryptica Idiocercus australis (Cooke) H.J. Swart Botrytis cinerea E. laevopinea Aulographina eucalypti Mycosphaerella cryptica E. muellerana Aulographina eucalypti Botrytis cinerea Phaeothyriolum microthyrioides Harknessia sp. E. obliqua Aulographina eucalypti Mycosphaerella cryptica Idiocercus australis Harknessia sp. Coniothyrium sp. Pestalotiopsis sp. E. oreades Armillaria luteobubalina Botrytis cinerea Aulographina eucalypti Vemlisporium biseptatum H.J. Swart & M.A. Will. E. regnans Aulographina eucalypti Mycosphaerella cryptica E. sieberi Armillaria luteobubalina Pestalotiopsis sp. Aulographina eucalypti Aulographina eucalypyi (Cooke & Massee) Arx & E. MUll. Pestalotiopsis sp. Phaeothyriolum microthyrioides (G. Winter) H.J. Swart Vemlisporium biseptatllm

~~ ~trl ~<3 ~~ ?;~ ~o z"Xl

~~ (,I)

~ ~ ~

tI1

9 § ;g

~ g Z '"t:I t;5

~~

~~ 00 ~F;j (,I)tI1

d~ 0t;5 0-<:

~

Fridays Creek

Symphyomyrtus species Monocalyptus and Corymbia species Host tree Patho&en Host tree Pathogen E. amplifolia Aulographina eucalypti C. citdodora Pestalosphaeria sp.

E. badjensis E. botryoides

E. deanei

E. dunnii E. globulus ssp. bicostata


E. grandis

E. microcorys E. nitens E. propinqua E. saligna

E. viminalis

Botrytis cinerea Ramularia piterika Walker & Bertus

Harknessia spp. Vemlisporillm sp. Vemlisporillm spp. Harknessia spp. Sonderhenia eucalypticola (A.R. Davis) H.J. Swart &"I. Walker Botrytis cinerea Harknessia spp. Vermisporium spp. Botrytis cinerea Harknessia spp. Macrophomina phaseoli Botrytis cinerea Harknessia spp. Macrophomina phaseoli . Botrytis cinerea Sonderhenia eucalypticola Botrytis cinerea Macrophomina phaseoli Botrytis cinerea Phomopsis sp. Vermisporium spp. Botrytis cinerea Vermisporium spp.

C. maculata

C. variegata

E. agglomerata E. cloeziana E. globoidea E. laevopinea E. muellerana

E. pilularis

E. sieberi

Pestalosphaeria sp. Ramularia piterika Pestalosphaeria sp. Ramularia piterika Hainesia Iythrii (Desmaz) Hohn. Pestalotiopsis sp. Vermisporium spp. Coniella eucalypticola Nag Raj Botrytis cinerea Vemlisporium spp. Conie/la eucalypticola Hainesia Iythrii Vermisporium spp. Aulographina eucalypti Conie/la eucalypticola Macrophomina phaseoli

""" 0\

~~ '1:1>

~§ ~§ >-<>

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > en f;l

~ "I1

~ ~~ tIl"I1

~~ ::I: en ~g ~3 :;:d~ a> .l' wtIl U\en

Kennaicle Creek

Svmvhvomvrtus soecies Monocalvvtus and Corvmbia soecies Hos~ t;ee Pathogen Host tree Pathogen E. amplifolia Botrytis cinerea C. citriodora Endothiella gyrosa Sacc.

Harknessia spp. Pestalosphaeria sp.

E. badjellsis E. botryoides

E. deanei

E. dwmii E. globllllls ssp.bicostata

E. globulus ssp. globulus


E. grandis

E. microcorys

E. lIitens

Vemlisporium spp. Ramularia piterika Vemlisporium spp. C. maculata Pestalosphaeria sp. Botrytis cinerea Ramularia piterika Vemlisporium spp. C. variegata Cytospora eucalypticofa Phomopsis sp. Pestalosphaeria sp. Vemlisporium spp. Ramufaria piterika Hainesia lythrii E. agglomerata Botryosphaeria sp. Botrytis cillerea Coniella eucalypti Harknessia spp. Hainesia lythrii Macrop/lOmilla phaseoli E. cloeziana Hainesia lythrii Vemlisporium spp. E. globoidea Macrophomina phaseoli Botrytis cinerea Phomopsis sp. Cytospora eucalypticola van der Westh. Vermisporium spp. Hainesia lythrii E. laevopinea Aulographina eucalypti Harkllessia spp. E. muellerana Hainesia fythrii Macrophomina phaseoli Vermisporium spp. Phomopsis sp. E. pilufaris Conielfa eucalypti Vemlisporium spp. Cytospora eucalypti cola Botrytis cinerea Hainesia lythrii Kirramyces eucalypti (Cooke & Massee) J. Walker, B.C.Sutton E. sieberi Au/ographina eucalypti

& Pascoe Vermisporium spp. Botrytis cinerea Cytospora eucalypticola Fairmaniella leprosa (Fainn.) Petr. & Syd Hainesia lythrii Harknessia spp. Sonderhenia eucalypticola Vemlisporium spp. Botrytis cinerea Harknessia spp. Kirramyces eucalypti Vemlisporium spp.

Macrophomina phaseoli Phomopsis sp. Vermisporium spp.

~~ (I»

~@

8~ ?;Ci3 ~o z~

p~ ~~

~ g (I)

~ S; ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~

~Ci3

~~ 00 ~Cij (l)tIl

;:!f;; o~ ....:,

ti

Kennaicle Creek (cont.)

Symphyomyrtus species

Host tree E. propinqlla

E. qlladrangulata

E. saligna

E. viminalis

- .w ---- - l

Monocalyptus and Corymbia species

Pathogen Host tree Pathogen Colletotrichum gloeosporioides (Penz.) Penz. & Sacc. in Penz. Microsphaeropsis sp. Phomopsis sp. Botrytis cinerea Rhizoctonia solani KUhn Fairmaniella leprosa Hainesia lythrii Hainesia lythn·i Harknessia spp. Vermisporium spp.

\11I1I1I1I~ L0000438

The Forest Research and Development Division produces publications in Technical Paper, Research Paper and Forest Resources Series.

Copies and further infonnation are available from:

Publications Officer Forest Research and Development Division State Forests of NSW PO Box 100 Beecroft NSW 2119

Tel. (02) 9872 0111 Fax. (02) 9871 6941

. ;. -,I 1 , 1

·1 I I

this document has been scanned from hard-copy archives for

Documents