DIGITALNA ARHIVA ŠUMARSKOG LISTA
prilagođeno pretraživanje po punom tekstu
|ŠUMARSKI LIST 7-8/2013 str. 40 <-- 40 --> PDF|
between number of trapped beetles were statistically significant except for only the first checking (α = 0.05) – see Tab. 2. During spring swarming (checking May 10th to July 2nd) ECOLURE CLASSIC trapped 1.1–2.7 times more. The relative efficiency of ECOLURE CLASSIC continuously weakly grew in this period.
In contrary, relative efficiency swiftly very grew during second swarming (July 2nd to October 10th). ECOLURE CLASSIC trapped from 2.7 to 112.4 times more beetles in compare with ECOLURE MEGA.
Convenient transformation function for satisfy to parametric test assumption and statistical evaluations including p-values for all checks are presented in Tab. 2.
Istraživanje omjera spolova
The efficacy from this point of view was the same for both of dispensers’ type. In both samples were recorded 92 female and 8 males. This data was not tested due to missing differences between these results.
Two obvious generations per year was recorded during the survey season in this paper alike as recorded Nakládal and Sova (2010). This is common in Central Europe, except at higher elevations (Wermelinger and Seifert, 1999).
Overall, the results show that all season ECOLURE MEGA dispenser is not suitable in comparing with ECOLURE CLASSIC in common forestry conditions. These result strictly corresponded with conclusions published by Nakládal and Sova (2010), which tested ECOLURE CLASSIC in comparison to other type of all season pheromone dispenser ECOLURE TUBUS. In both of these studies, ECOLURE CLASSIC trapped always more beetles then all season types dispensers during the trapping season. The relative efficiency of ECOLURE CLASSIC went slowly up (moving from 1.1 to 2.7) during the spring swarming. Nakládal and Sova (2010) recorded rapid shrinkage of all season dispenser efficiency during second swarming (moving from