Content uploaded by Steve Broadbent
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Steve Broadbent on Aug 19, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Field Attraction of Termites to a Carbon Dioxide-Generating
Bait in Australia (Isoptera)
by
Steve Broadbent1, Michael Farr2, Elisa J. Bernklau3, Matthew S. Siderhurst4, David
M. James5, & Louis B. Bjostad5
ABSTRACT
Termite bait stations with or without a CO2-generating bait (Focus Termite
Attractant, produced by Brotica, Inc., Fort Collins, Colorado, and distributed
by Ensystex Australasia) were tested at tree and house locations in Australia.
e termite species Coptotermes acinaciformis (Froggatt) (Isoptera: Rhinoter-
mitidae), Schedorhinotermes intermedius (Brauer) (Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae),
Microcerotermes turneri (Froggatt) (Isoptera: Termitidae), and Nasutitermes
exitiosus (Hill) (Isoptera: Termitidae) discovered more monitoring stations
when the CO2-generating bait was present, and also discovered the monitor-
ing stations more quickly when the CO2-generating bait was present.
INTRODUCTION
e economic impact of termites may exceed $11 billion each year in the
United States (Su 2002) and $40 billion worldwide (Wiseman & Eggleton
1994). e majority of damage to homes and other structures is caused by
subterranean termite species in the family Rhinotermitidae (Su 1990).
Baiting strategies for termite control have recently gained popularity due
to the withdrawal of chlordane, chlorpyrifos and other termiticides from
the market (Kard 1999, Su & Scherahn 2000). Current eorts are focused
on improving specic aspects of these systems, including the addition of at-
tractants and/or bait enhancers (Pawson & Gold 1996, Lewis et al. 1998,
Potter et al. 2001, Lax & Osbrink 2003). In a baiting system, the pesticide
is typically introduced into a station only aer termites are detected in that
1Ensystex Australasia
2Amalgamated Pest Control, ueensland, Australia
3Brotica, Inc., Fort Collins, CO
4Dept. of Chemistry, Eastern Mennonite University, Harrisonburg, VA 22802
5Dept. of Bioagric. Sci. & Pest Management, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523
2 Sociobiology Vol. 48, No. 3, 2006
station, and depending on the species, weeks may pass before termites locate
a station and begin to feed (Lewis et al. 1998, Potter et al. 2001).
Baiting has been promoted as a more desirable method of termite manage-
ment. It is generally considered to more environmentally sound as baiting
uses very small amounts of insect specic toxicants that are administered
in stations that are targeted at the economically important termite species
only (i.e., it replaces the broad-scale application of liquid chemicals used to
poison the soil around a building). For baiting to work successfully, termites
must nd the bait stations so that the matrix with toxicant can be added for
termite consumption and transfer it back to the nest. ese requirements
are important, and a successful baiting program can take up to nine months
(e.g. 3-9 months Su, 1994; 7 months Tsunoda et al., 1998; 3-7+ months Su
& Scherahn, 2000), which is much slower than by other methods.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) has been reported as an attractant for the termite
species Reticulitermes avipes (Kollar) (Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae), R. vir-
ginicus (Banks) (Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae), and R. tibialis (Banks) (Isoptera:
Rhinotermitidae) in the United States (Bernklau et al. 2005). e most at-
tractive concentration of CO2 is 5 mmol/mol for R. tibialis and 10 mmol/mol
for R. avipes and R. virginicus. An attractant such as CO2 has the potential
to improve the eectiveness of termite baiting systems by reducing the time
interval between station placement and introduction of the pesticide.
Focus Termite Attractant (produced by Brotica, Inc., Fort Collins, Colo-
rado, and distributed by Ensystex Australasia) is a granular formulation that
reacts in soil to generate CO2 in the optimum concentration range for termite
attraction (Bernklau et al. 2005). Focus Termite Attractant is a non-toxic
formulation composed of natural materials, and it contains no pesticidal
components. We tested Focus Termite Attractant in combination with
Exterra uarterra Termite Stations (Ensystex Australasia) to determine the
ability of the attractant to enhance the ecacy of bait stations by creating a
larger ‘footprint’ for termite discovery. Specically, we were interested in three
ecological eects, (i) the time required for station discovery, (ii) the number
of stations discovered, and (iii) the rate at which stations were abandoned
by termites.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
3
Broadbent, S. et al. — Attraction of Termites to a Carbon Dioxide in Australia
Trial sites were established in the vicinity of known termite activity and/
or colonies of the species Coptotermes acinaciformis (Froggatt) (Isoptera:
Rhinotermitidae), Schedorhinotermes intermedius (Brauer) (Isoptera: Rhi-
notermitidae), Microcerotermes turneri (Froggatt) (Isoptera: Termitidae) in
ueensland, Australia, and Nasutitermes exitiosus (Hill) (Isoptera: Termi-
tidae) in New South Wales, Australia. Exterra uarterra Termite Stations
(Ensystex Australasia) were placed equidistant around the termite colonies
in holes 10 cm diameter by 20 cm deep, prepared using a Jarrett auger. Due
to the dry conditions encountered, the soil around each hole was moistened
with 100 ml water. For the CO2-baited stations, Focus Termite Attractant
granules (5 g) were added to each hole prior to station placement. A minimum
distance of three meters was maintained between any control station and
any Focus-treated station to minimise the chance of the CO2 gradient from
a Focus-treated station impacting the results at a control station. Stations
were inspected weekly for the presence of termites. Each station contained
six Eucalyptus delegatensis R. T. Baker timber interceptors for feeding by the
termites.
Coptotermes acinaciformis
ree colonies of C. acinaciformis were located in trees in a residential
park in Deception Bay, ueensland. Four control and four Focus Termite
Attractant stations were placed on either side of each colony. Stations were
placed in a line running east to west with one meter between each series of
four stations on either side, and four meters separating the line of control
stations from the line of Focus Termite Attractant stations. At two trees the
control stations were placed to the north of the colony and at one tree they
were placed to the south of the colony.
Schedorhinotermes intermedius
A domestic residence in a leafy suburb in Upper Caboolture, ueensland,
was selected due to the known long-standing presence of S. intermedius in
the garden. Evidence of Schedorhinotermes activity was noted in the garden
though no termites could be located. Stations were placed at three meter
intervals around the home. Sides were selected randomly, two sides with
Focus Termite Attractant stations and two with control stations. Nine sta-
tions for each treatment were placed.
4 Sociobiology Vol. 48, No. 3, 2006
Microcerotermes turneri
An inspection also revealed the presence of Microcerotermes turneri in
a timber gate post at the front of the same property in Upper Caboolture,
ueensland. Four stations were placed, two on the nature strip and two
in the front garden, equidistant at 1.5 meters from the post infested with
Microcerotermes, with three meters between the control and Focus Termite
Attractant stations.
Nasutitermes exitiosus
A mound of N. exitiosus was located in a garden bed at a domestic residence
in Maitland, New South Wales. Six Focus Termite Attractant stations and
six control stations were placed on either side of the mound.
Statistical Analysis
T-tests were used to analyze dierences in termite presence among stations
that contained or lacked CO2 baits (SAS 2000).
RESULTS
Exterra uarterra Termite Stations containing Focus Termite Attractant
were located more oen and also more quickly than control stations for the
four termite species that were tested (Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, Table 4).
Coptotermes acinaciformis
Termites were found signicantly more oen in Focus-baited stations than
in control stations (Table 1, P<0.05, t-test). Termites located 10 of the 13
Focus-baited stations, but only located 3 of the 13 control stations (Table
1). Over the course of the 9 week study, termites were found in Focus-baited
stations on 68 occasions, but termites were found in control stations on
only 12 occasions (Table 1). Two of the Focus-baited stations were found
by termites within the rst week aer installation, but none of the control
stations were located by termites until 4 weeks aer installation. On average,
of the stations located by termites, Focus-baited stations were found aer 3.20
+SE 0.57 weeks, but control stations were found only aer 6.00 +SE 1.15
weeks. None of the stations were abandoned by termites once the termites
were rst observed in them.
Schedorhinotermes intermedius
5
Broadbent, S. et al. — Attraction of Termites to a Carbon Dioxide in Australia
A Focus-baited station was the only station found to contain termites in
this test, and none of the 9 control stations were located by termites (Table
2). e Focus-baited station was located in Week 2 aer the stations were
installed. In Week 8 aer the experiment began, this station was found to
have been ooded by a broken pipe, and subsequent data was not available.
e station had not been abandoned as of the last reliable observation in
Week 7.
Microcerotermes turneri
A Focus-baited station was the only station found to contain termites in
this test, and neither of the 2 control stations were located by termites (Table
3). e Focus-baited station was located in Week 1 aer the stations were
installed.
Nasutitermes exitiosus
Table 1. Termite bait stations containing Coptotermes acinaciformis.
Stations Site Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9
CO2 bait Tree 1 - - X X X X X X X
CO2 bait Tree 1 - - - X X X X X X
CO2 bait Tree 1 X X X X X X X X X
CO2 bait Tree 1 - - X X X X X X X
CO2 bait Tree 2 - - X X X X X X X
CO2 bait Tree 2 - X X X X X X X X
CO2 bait Tree 2 - - - - - - - - -
CO2 bait Tree 2 - - - - X X X X X
CO2 bait Tree 3 - - - - - - - - -
CO2 bait Tree 3 - - X X X X X X X
CO2 bait Tree 3 - - - - - - X X X
CO2 bait Tree 3 X X X X X X X X X
CO2 bait Tree 4 - - - - - - - - -
Control Tree 1 - - - - - - - X X
Control Tree 1 - - - - - - - - -
Control Tree 1 - - - - - - - - -
Control Tree 1 - - - X X X X X X
Control Tree 2 - - - - - - - - -
Control Tree 2 - - - - - X X X X
Control Tree 2 - - - - - - - - -
Control Tree 2 - - - - - - - - -
Control Tree 3 - - - - - - - - -
Control Tree 3 - - - - - - - - -
Control Tree 3 - - - - - - - - -
Control Tree 3 - - - - - - - - -
Control Tree 4 - - - - - - - - -
6 Sociobiology Vol. 48, No. 3, 2006
A heavy infestation of termites was recorded in one of the Focus Termite
Attractant stations 16 days aer installation (Table 4). A light infestation of
termites was recorded in one of the control stations on the same date. Further
inspections each week thereaer revealed that the termites remained in the
Focus Termite Attractant station, but the termites vacated the control station
the week aer they were detected and did not return. Aer six inspections,
the trial was terminated to allow elimination of the termite colony and safe-
guard the property.
Table 2. Termite bait stations containing Schedorhinotermes intermedius.
Stations Site Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9
CO2 bait House - - - - - - - - -
CO2 bait House - - - - - - - - -
CO2 bait House - - - - - - - - -
CO2 bait House - - - - - - - - -
CO2 bait House - - - - - - - - -
CO2 bait House - - - - - - - - -
CO2 bait House - X X X X X X N/Aa N/Aa
CO2 bait House - - - - - - - - -
CO2 bait House - - - - - - - - -
Control House - - - - - - - - -
Control House - - - - - - - - -
Control House - - - - - - - - -
Control House - - - - - - - - -
Control House - - - - - - - - -
Control House - - - - - - - - -
Control House - - - - - - - - -
Control House - - - - - - - - -
Control House - - - - - - - - -
a In Week 8 aer the experiment began, this station was found to have been ooded by
a broken pipe.
Table 3. Termite bait stations containing Microcerotermes turneri.
Stations Site Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9
CO2 bait House - - - - - - - - -
CO2 bait House X X X X X X X X X
Control House - - - - - - - - -
Control House - - - - - - - - -
7
Broadbent, S. et al. — Attraction of Termites to a Carbon Dioxide in Australia
DISCUSSION
We conclude that the CO2 gradient from each Focus-baited station eec-
tively created a larger ‘footprint’, and that the termites then followed the CO2
gradient to the station. For the four termite species tested, the presence of
Focus Termite Attractant in Exterra uarterra Termite Stations increased the
number of stations that were found by termites. Termites did not abandon
any of the bait stations once they located them, whether baited with Focus
Termite Attractant or not, except for one of the control bait stations that
was abandoned by Nasutitermes exitiosus aer a single week of occupancy
(Table 4).
e presence of Focus Termite Attractant also decreased the time required
for termites to discover the stations. is point is of particular interest in the
development of baiting system technologies, because it has been observed that
weeks may pass before termites locate a bait station and begin to feed (Lewis
et al. 1998, Potter et al. 2001). In the present study, two of the termite spe-
cies located Focus-baited stations within the rst week aer installation (C.
acinaciformis and Microcerotermes turneri), and the other two termite species
located the Focus-baited stations within the second week aer installation
(N. exitiosus and Schedorhinotermes intermedius). In contrast, control sta-
tions were never observed to contain termites for two of the species tested
(Schedorhinotermes intermedius. and Microcerotermes turneri), and required
a minimum of 2-4 weeks for the two termite species that did nd them (C.
Table 4. Termite bait stations containing Nasutitermes exitiosus.
Stations Site Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6
CO2 bait Mound - X X X X X
CO2 bait Mound - - - - - -
CO2 bait Mound - - - - - -
CO2 bait Mound - - - - - -
CO2 bait Mound - - - - - -
CO2 bait Mound - - - - - -
Control Mound - - - - - -
Control Mound - - - - - -
Control Mound - - - - - -
Control Mound - - - - - -
Control Mound - - - - - -
Control Mound - X - - - -
8 Sociobiology Vol. 48, No. 3, 2006
acinaciformis and N. exitiosus).
e use of Focus Termite Attractant in association with Exterra uarterra
Termite Stations will provide added benets to pest managers using the
Exterra Termite Interception & Baiting System by detecting the presence
of termites within the vicinity of a property sooner. Early interception in a
Station further reduces the risk of termites entering a structure and enables
earlier placement of Requiem Termite Bait. Previous data has shown termites
are more likely to discover the Exterra uarterra Stations compared to other
commercial Stations due to the larger size and use of a more favored timber
source for the interceptors. Focus Termite Attractant will further enhance
the benets of the uarterra Stations.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Matthew Camper assisted with the statistical analysis using SAS 2000.
is assistance is gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES
Bernklau, E. J., E. A. Fromm, T. M. Judd & L. B. Bjostad 2005. Attraction of subterranean
termites (Isoptera) to carbon dioxide. Journal of Economic Entomology 98 : 476-
484.
Kard, B. M. 1999. Termiticides - e Gulfport report. Pest Control 67: 42-46.
Lax, A. R., & W. L. A. Osbrink. 2003. USDA-Agricultural Research Service research and
targeted management of the Formosan subterranean termite Coptotermes formosanus
Shiraki (Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae). Pest Management Science 59: 788.
Lewis, V. R., M. I. Haverty, G. M. Getty, K. A. Copren, & C. Fouche. 1998. Monitoring
station for studying populations of Reticulitermes (Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae) in
California. Pan Pacic Entomologist 74: 121.
Pawson, B. M. & R. E. Gold 1996. Evaluation of baits for termites (Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae)
in Texas. Sociobiology 28: 485-510.
Potter, M. F., E. A. Eliason, K. Davis & R. T. Bessin 2001. Managing subterranean termites
(Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae) in the Midwest with a hexaumuron bait and placement
considerations around structures. Sociobiology 38: 565-577.
SAS. e SAS system for Windows [V8]. 2000. SAS Institute, Inc. Cary, NC.
Su, N. Y. 1990. Economically important termites in the United States and their control.
Sociobiology 17: 77-94.
Su, N. Y. 1994. Field evaluation of a hexaumuron bait for population suppression of
subterranean termites (Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae). Journal of Economic Entomology
87, 389-397.
9
Broadbent, S. et al. — Attraction of Termites to a Carbon Dioxide in Australia
Su, N. Y. 2002. Novel technologies for subterranean termite control. Sociobiology 40:
95-101.
Su, N. Y. & R.H. Scheffrahn 2000. Control of Coptotermes havilandi (Isoptera:
Rhinotermitidae) with hexaumuron baits and a sensor incorporated into a monitoring
and bait program. Journal of Economic Entomology 93, 415-421.
Su, N. Y. & R.H. Scherahn 2000. Termites as Pests of Buildings, pp. 437-453. In T. Abe,
D. E. Bignell and M. Higashi [eds.], Termites: Evolution, Sociality, Symbiosis, Ecology.
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, e Netherlands.
Tsunoda, K., H. Matsuoka, & T. Yoshimura 1998 Colony elimination of Reticulitermes
speratus (Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae) by bait application and the eect on foraging
territory. Journal of Economic Entomology 91, 1383-1386.
Wiseman, S. & P. Eggleton 1994. e Termiticide Market. PJB Publications, Richmond,
Surrey, UK.