Relative Suitability of Eurasian Oaks for Spongy Moth (Lepidoptera: Erebidae)

Fredric Miller

Published May 2026 in International Oaks No. 37: 241–248

Abstract

Thirteen different Eurasian species in the genus Quercus, growing in The Morton Arboretum’s oak collection, were evaluated in a no-choice laboratory feeding bioassay study for suitability for spongy moth (Lymantria dispar dispar). Quercus cerris, Q. dalechampii, Q. dentata, Q. liaotungensis, Q. mongolica, and Q. pubescens were found to be the least suitable for larval development. Quercus acutissima, Q. aliena, Q. hartwissiana, Q. petraea, Q. robur, Q. serrata, and Q. variabilis were more suitable for larval development, pupation, and adult emergence. Larval longevity was highly related to dry frass production. Male and female percent pupation and adult emergence did not reflect host suitability. However, male and female pupal fresh weights were strong predictors of host suitability. Quercus taxa with significantly pubescent leaves were less suitable for larval development and pupation compared to those with less pubescent leaves. There does appear to be a number of Eurasian Quercus taxa suitable for tree-breeding programs where chronic spongy moth feeding pressure is absent or rare.

Keywords

Lymantria dispar dispar, host plant resistance, suitability, Quercus

References

Barbosa, P., and V.A. Krischik. 1987. Influence of Alkaloids on Feeding Preference of Eastern Deciduous Forest Trees by the Gypsy Moth Lymantria dispar. American Naturalist 130(1): 53-69.

Bosu, P.P., and M.R. Wagner. 2007. Effects of induced water stress on leaf trichome density and foliar nutrients of three elm (Ulmus) species: implications for resistance to elm leaf beetle. Environmental Entomology 36(3): 595-601.

Boukouvala, M.C., N.G. Kavallieratos, A. Skourti, X. Pons, C.L. Alonso, M. Eizaguirre, …and C.G. Athanassiou. 2022. Lymantria dispar (L.) (Lepidoptera: Erebidae): Current Status of Biology, Ecology, and Management in Europe with Notes from North America. Insects (9): 854. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13090854

Dalin, P., J. Ågren, C. Björkman, P. Huttunen, and K. Kärkkäinen. 2008. Leaf Trichome Formation and Plant Resistance to Herbivory. In Induced Plant Resistance to Herbivory, edited by A. Schaller, pp. 89-105. Dordrecht: Springer.

Dirr, M.A. 2009. Manual of Woody Landscape Plants: Their Identification, Ornamental Characteristics, Culture, Propagation, and Uses. Champaign: Stipes Publishing L.L.C.

Elkinton, J.S., and A.M. Liebhold. 1990. Population Dynamics of Gypsy Moth in North America. Annual Review of Entomology 35: 571-596.

Forbush, E.H., and C.H. Fernald. 1896. The Gypsy Moth. Porthetria dispar (Linn.). A Report of the Work of Destroying the Insect in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, together with an Account of its History and Habits Both in Massachusetts and Europe. Boston: Wright and Potter Printing Co., State Printers.

Foss, L.K., and L.K. Rieske. 2003. Species-specific differences in oak foliage affect preference and performance of gypsy moth caterpillars. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 108(2): 87-93.

Graça, M.A.S., and M. Zimmer. 2005. Leaf Toughness. In Methods to study litter decomposition: A practical guide, edited by M.A.S. Graça, F. Bärlocher, and M.O. Gessner. Dordrecht: Springer.

Hauer, R.J., and W.D. Peterson. 2017. Effects of emerald ash borer on municipal forestry budgets. Landscape Urban Planning 157: 98-105.

Jandel Scientific.1992. SigmaStat for Windows. San Rafael: Jandel Scientific.

Kariyat, R.R., S.B. Hardison, A.B. Ryan, A.G. Stephenson, C.M. De Moraes, and M.C. Mescher. 2018. Leaf trichomes affect caterpillar feeding on an instar-specific manner. Communicative and Integrative Biology 11(3):1-6.

Kovacs, K.F., R.G. Haight, D.G. McCullough, R.J. Mercader, N.W. Siegert, and A.M. Liebhold. 2010. Cost of potential emerald ash borer damage in U.S. communities, 2009-2019. Ecological Economics 69(3): 569-578.

Krüssmann, G. 1986. Manual of Cultivated Broad-Leaved Trees and Shrubs, Vol. III: Pru-Z, trans. M.E. Epp. Beaverton: Timber Press.

Lechowicz, M.J., and Y. Mauffette. 1986. Host preferences of the gypsy moth in eastern North American versus European forests. Revue d’Entomologie du Quebec 31(1/2): 43-51.

Liebhold, A.M., K.W. Gottschalk, R.M. Muzika, M.E. Montgomery, R. Young, K. O’Day, and B. Kelley. 1995. Suitability of North American tree species to the gypsy moth: A summary of field and laboratory tests. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-211. Radnor: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station

Martinat, P.J., and P. Barbosa. 1987. Relationship between Host-plant Acceptability and Suitability in Newly Enclosed First-instar Gypsy Moths, Lymantria dispar (L.) (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). Annual of the Entomological Society of America 80(2): 141-147.

Mauffette, Y., M.J. Lechowicz, and L. Jobin. 1983. Host preferences of the gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar (L.), in southern Quebec. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 13: 53-60.

McManus, M., and G. Csóka. 2007. History and Impact of Gypsy Moth in North America and Comparison to Recent Outbreaks in Europe. Acta Silvatica et Lignaria Hungarica 3(1): 47-64.

Milanović, S., J. Lazarević, Z. Popović, Z. Miletić, M. Kostić, Z. Radulović, …and A. Vuleta. 2014. Preference and performance of the larvae of Lymantria dispar (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) on three species of European oaks. European Journal of Entomology 111(3): 371-378.

Milanović, S., Z. Miletić, Č. Marković, D. Šešlija Jovanović, Z. Trailović, L. Jankovský, and J. Lazarević. 2022. Suitability of Turkey Oak, European Beech, and Hornbeam to Gypsy Moth Feeding. Forests 13(7): 1006.

Miller, J.C., and P.E. Hanson. 1989a. Laboratory Feeding Tests on the Development of Gypsy Moth Larvae with Reference to Plant Taxa and Allelochemicals. Station Bulletin 674. Corvallis: Oregon State University, Agriculture Experiment Station.

Miller, J.C., and P.E. Hanson. 1989b. Laboratory feeding tests on the development of gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar (L.) (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae), larvae on foliage of gymnosperms. Canadian Entomologist 121(6): 425-429.

Miller, F., and C. Rigsby. 2024. Host Plant Resistance of Viburnum Taxa for the Viburnum Leaf Beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). The Great Lakes Entomologist 57(2): 154-175.

Miller, F., and G. Ware. 2024. Palatability and Suitability of the Ulmaceae for Spongy Moth Larval Development (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). Journal of Environmental Horticulture 42(2): 85-100.

Miller, F., and S. Wiegrefe. 2021. Susceptibility, Preference, and Suitability of Carpinus and Ostrya Taxa for Gypsy Moth Larvae (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). Great Lakes Entomologist 54(1): 7-15.

Miller, J.C., P.E. Hanson, and D.N. Kimberling. 1991. Development of the Gypsy Moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) on Garry Oak and Red Alder in Western North America. Environmental Entomology 20(4): 1097-1101.

Montgomery, M.E. 1991. Variation in the suitability of tree species for the gypsy moth. In Proceedings, US Department of Agriculture interagency gypsy moth research review 1990. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-146, edited by K.W. Gottschalk, M.J. Twery, and S.I Smith, pp. 1-13. Radnor: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station.

Mosher, F.H. 1915. Food Plants of the Gipsy Moth in America. USDA Bull. No. 250. Washington: Government Printing Office. Paluch, G., F. Miller, J. Zhu, and J. Coats. 2006. Influence of Elm Foliar Chemistry for the Host Suitability of the Japanese Beetle, Popillia japonica, and the Gypsy Moth, Lymantria dispar. Journal of Agriculture and Urban Entomology 23(4): 209-223.

Paluch, G., F. Miller, J. Zhu, and J. Coats. 2009. Total Phenolic Content of Asian Elm Leaves and Host Plant Suitability for Gypsy Moth. Journal of Environmental Horticulture 27(2): 105-108.

Peter, A.J., T.G. Shanower, and J. Romeis. 1995. The role of plant trichomes in insect resistance: a selective review. Phytophaga 7: 41-63.

Raupp, M.J., A.B. Cumming, and E.C. Raupp. 2006. Street Tree Diversity in Eastern North American and Its Potential for Tree Loss to Exotic Borers. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 32(6): 297-304.

Sadof, C.S., L. Purcell, F.J. Bishop, C. Quesada, and Z.-W. Zhang. 2011. Evaluating Restoration Capacity and Costs of Managing the Emerald Ash Borer with a Web-based Cost Calculator in Urban Forests. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 37(2): 74-83.

Shields, V.D.C., B.P. Broomell, and J.O.B. Salako. 2003. Host Selection and Acceptability of Selected Tree Species by Gypsy Moth Larvae, Lymantria dispar (L.). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 96(6): 920-926.

Sjöman, H., S. Hannus, P. Bellan, T. Barblishvili, T. Darchidze, and S. Sikharulidze. 2019. Hunting for a Larger Diversity of Urban Trees in Western Europe – A Case Study from the Southern Caucasus. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 45(5): 221-235.

Southwood, T.R.E., and B.E. Juniper, eds. 1986. Insects and the Plant Surface. London: Edward Arnold.

Sydnor, T.D., M. Bumgardner, and A. Todd. 2007. The Potential Economic Impacts of Emerald Ash Borer (Agrilus planipennis) on Ohio, U.S., Communities. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 33(1): 48-54.

Vannatta, A.R., R.H. Hauer, and N.M. Schuettpelz. 2012. Economic Analysis of Emerald Ash Borer (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) Management Options. Journal of Economic Entomology. 105(1): 196-206.

Werker, E. 2000. Trichome Diversity and Development. In Advances in Botanical Research, Vol. 31, edited by D.L. Hallahan, and J.C. Gray, pp. 1-35. London: Academic Press.