A medium-long term bark beetle attractant and use thereof

Abstract

This invention provides an attractant for the bark beetle (S. spp.) and its application, relating to the field of green pest control in forestry. The attractant for the bark beetle in this invention is a hexyl acetate solution, prepared by mixing hexyl acetate with a volatile solvent at a volume ratio of 1:900-1100; the volatile solvent is a 70%-80% v / v ethanol solution. This invention uses hexyl acetate as the key component, combined with a volatile solvent in a specific ratio, to prepare the attractant, which exhibits good attraction effects on the bark beetle (S. spp.), is ecologically safe, and highly practical, effectively achieving green pest control in forestry. This attractant for the bark beetle (S. spp.) has excellent application prospects for population monitoring or large-scale killing of the bark beetle.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of green control technology for forest pests, and in particular to an attractant for the bark beetle and its application. Background Technology

[0002] Medium-sized bark beetle ( Euplatypus parallelus Belonging to the family Curculionidae, subfamily Platypodinae, and belonging to the order Coleoptera, this borer is a common and harmful boring insect in my country's forestry and landscaping sectors. It is also widely distributed in East Asia, posing a serious threat to the growth and survival of various trees. Domestically, it is found in multiple provinces including Liaoning, Hebei, Shandong, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Fujian, Guangdong, Yunnan, and Hainan. Internationally, it is found in countries such as Japan, South Korea, and North Korea. The Platypoda primarily infests weakened or newly felled trees such as camphor, oak, and rubber trees. Adults and larvae bore into the xylem, damaging the tree's vascular tissue and leading to tree death, severely impacting forestry production and ecological security.

[0003] Currently, the control of the Chinese bark beetle mainly relies on traditional chemical control measures, including trunk spraying with organophosphates or pyrethroid insecticides (such as lambda-cyhalothrin and deltamethrin), aluminum phosphide fumigation, or burning of infested wood. However, due to the Chinese bark beetle's high degree of concealment (its entire life cycle is completed within the xylem), chemical agents have difficulty effectively contacting the target insect, resulting in generally poor control effects. Furthermore, the large-scale use of chemical pesticides not only increases control costs but also easily leads to increased insecticide resistance, kills natural enemies in the forest, and pollutes soil and water sources, contradicting the current development direction of green control of forest pests.

[0004] Developing attractants using host plant volatiles or aggregation pheromones, and combining them with traps for population monitoring and mass killing, is an important technical approach for the green control of borers. This technology has advantages such as ease of operation, environmental friendliness, and strong targeting, and has achieved significant results in the monitoring and control of major forest pests. However, research on attractants for *Bartholin's spp.* remains very weak, and no highly effective and stable attractants for this insect have been reported in existing technologies. A few studies have attempted to use attractant formulations from other bartholinates (such as using ethanol or α-pinene alone), but field trials have shown unstable attraction effects, making it difficult to meet the needs of actual forest applications. Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop a method for screening attractants with highly effective attraction activity against *Bartholin's spp.* to obtain plant-derived volatiles with significant attraction effects and their optimal concentrations, providing technical support for the green control of *Bartholin's spp.* Summary of the Invention

[0005] In view of this, the present invention proposes an attractant for the bark beetle and its application, overcoming the lack of highly efficient attractants for the bark beetle in the prior art.

[0006] The technical solution of this invention is implemented as follows: An attractant for the bark beetle, wherein the attractant is a hexyl acetate solution, which is prepared by mixing hexyl acetate with a volatile solvent at a volume ratio of 1:900-1100; the volatile solvent is a 70%-80% v / v ethanol solution.

[0007] Furthermore, the n-hexyl acetate solution is prepared by mixing n-hexyl acetate with a volatile solvent at a volume ratio of 1:1000.

[0008] Furthermore, the ethanol solution is a 75% v / v ethanol solution.

[0009] In this invention, the attractant for the long bark beetle is used to trap the long bark beetle.

[0010] This invention also provides a method for trapping the bark beetle, comprising the following steps: (1) The attractant is sealed in a sealed bag; (2) Set up traps in forest areas where the bark beetle is harmful, with a sealed bag hanging from each trap; (3) Open the sealed bag to expose 6-7 mm of the volatile agent. 2 This allows the attractant to be released naturally.

[0011] Furthermore, in step (1), the sealed bag is an aluminum foil composite bag or an aluminum foil sealed capsule, and the amount of attractant packaged inside the bag is 2.5-10 mL / bag.

[0012] Furthermore, in step (2), the spacing between the traps is 30-60 m, and the suspension height is 1.5-2.5 m above the ground.

[0013] Furthermore, in step (3), after the sealed bag is opened, its effective release time is 14 days, and after the effective release time is exceeded, a new sealed bag is replaced.

[0014] Furthermore, it is even more effective at trapping male bark beetles.

[0015] Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of the present invention are: (1) The present invention uses n-hexyl acetate as the key component and combines it with volatile solvents in a specific ratio to prepare a highly efficient attractant for the bark beetle. It has a good attraction effect on the bark beetle, especially on male bark beetles.

[0016] (2) The key component of the attractant for bark beetle in this invention, n-hexyl acetate, is a plant-derived volatile substance. It is ecologically safe, highly practical, and can effectively achieve green control of forest pests.

[0017] (3) The attractant for bark beetle in this invention can be used for population monitoring or mass killing of bark beetle, and has good application prospects. Attached Figure Description

[0018] Figure 1 The results are from the bioactivity evaluation test of different candidate attractants against the bark beetle at a concentration of 1:1000.

[0019] Figure 2 The results are from the bioactivity evaluation test of different candidate attractants against Bark Beetle at a concentration of 1:2000.

[0020] Figure 3 The results are from the bioactivity evaluation test of different candidate attractants against the bark beetle at a concentration of 1:4000.

[0021] Figure 4 The results of the bioactivity evaluation test of different candidate attractants against Bark Beetle at a concentration of 1:8000.

[0022] Figure 5 The results are from the bioactivity evaluation test of different candidate attractants against Bark Beetle at a concentration of 1:10000.

[0023] Figure 6 The results are from the bioactivity evaluation test of different candidate attractants against Bark Beetle at a concentration of 1:20000.

[0024] Figure 7 The results are from the bioactivity evaluation test of different candidate attractants against Bark Beetle at a concentration of 1:40000.

[0025] Figure 8 The results are from the bioactivity evaluation test of different candidate attractants against the bark beetle at a concentration of 1:80000.

[0026] Figure 9 The results of the bioactivity evaluation test of n-hexyl acetate at different concentration gradients (1:1000 to 1:80000) on the bark beetle.

[0027] Figure 10 This is a photograph of a portion of the bark beetles captured by the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0028] Unless otherwise specified, the experimental methods used in the test examples of this invention are all conventional methods; Unless otherwise specified, all materials and reagents used in the experimental examples of this invention are commercially available.

[0029] This invention uses 75% ethanol (analytical grade) as a 75% v / v ethanol aqueous solution.

[0030] In the experimental examples of this invention, the concentrations 1:1000, 1:2000, 1:4000, 1:8000, 1:10000, 1:20000, 1:40000, and 1:80000 are all volume ratios.

[0031] Example 1 An attractant for the bark beetle, wherein the attractant is a hexyl acetate solution, which is prepared by mixing hexyl acetate with a volatile solvent at a volume ratio of 1:1000; the volatile solvent is a 75% v / v ethanol solution.

[0032] This invention uses 75% ethanol as a blank control and (S)-cis-verbenol and 75% ethanol (volume ratio 1:6000) as positive controls. Hexyl acetate, β-ionone, 1-naphthaldehyde, cinnamyl acetate, hexanol, octanol, and geraniol are selected as candidate attractants. Multiple concentration gradients are set up, and a completely randomized field trial is conducted. The experimental methods and results are shown in Experiment Examples 1-9.

[0033] Experimental Example 1 - Attracting effect of different candidate attractants on *Bartholinae* at a concentration of 1:1000 The attractants prepared in this experiment were all commercially available n-hexyl acetate (purity ≥98%), β-ionone (purity ≥95%), 1-naphthaldehyde (purity ≥98%), cinnamyl acetate (purity ≥98%), (S)-cis-verbenol (purity ≥95%), n-hexanol (purity ≥99%), n-octanol (purity ≥99%), geraniol (purity ≥98%), and 75% ethanol (analytical grade), as shown in Table 1.

[0034] Table 1 Reagent Information

[0035] The following nine treatments were prepared according to the test requirements (the volume ratio of each candidate attractant to 75% v / v ethanol was 1:1000).

[0036] Treatment 1 (Example 1): 1 part n-hexyl acetate + 1000 parts 75% ethanol; Treatment 2 (Comparative Example 1): 1 part β-ionone + 1000 parts 75% ethanol; Treatment 3 (Comparative Example 2): 1 part 1-naphthaldehyde + 1000 parts 75% ethanol; Treatment 4 (Comparative Example 3): 1 part cinnamyl acetate + 1000 parts 75% ethanol; Treatment 5 (Comparative Example 4): 1 part n-hexanol + 1000 parts 75% ethanol; Treatment 6 (Comparative Example 5): 1 part n-octanol + 1000 parts 75% ethanol; Treatment 7 (Comparative Example 6): Geraniol 1 part + 75% ethanol 1000 parts; Control treatment: Treatment 8 (blank control): 75% ethanol; Treatment 9 (positive control): 1 part (S)-cis-verbenol + 6000 parts 75% ethanol.

[0037] The attractant prepared in Application Experiment Example 1 was used to attract the bark beetle. The specific steps are as follows: (1) Preparation of lure cores: According to the above treatment dosage, mix each component in a 5 mL aluminum foil sealed bag (prepare 5 mL of mixed solution for each treatment) and seal by heat pressing. Prepare 3 duplicate lures for each treatment.

[0038] (2) Preservation of lure core: The prepared lure core is stored at 4°C and taken out to return to room temperature before use.

[0039] (3) Field applications: a. Experimental location: Rubber forest area of ​​the Experimental Farm of the Chinese Academy of Tropical Agricultural Sciences in Danzhou City, Hainan Province, where rubber trees are 15-20 years old and the medium-sized bark beetle occurs year-round.

[0040] b. Construction of the trap: A cross-shaped baffle trap is constructed according to patent CN201430278516.3. The lure is used in conjunction with the cross-shaped baffle trap. Construction of the cross-shaped baffle trap: Two plates are crossed to form a cross shape (380mm high, 230mm wide). The trap is secured to the top cover using a top clip, and connected to the funnel using a bottom clip. The insect collection bottle is directly connected to the funnel's flared opening below the funnel.

[0041] c. Suspension of the lure: One lure is suspended at the junction of the cross plates below the top cover of the cross-shaped baffle trap.

[0042] d. Field setup of the traps: Three duplicate traps were set up for each treatment, placed in an open area within the rubber plantation, spaced 30 m apart. The traps were secured to the rubber tree trunks with wire, suspended 1.5-2.5 m above the ground. The traps were arranged completely randomly. The sealed bags were opened using the wire on the traps, exposing approximately 6.6 mm of the volatile pesticide. 2 Allow the mixed solution or blank control to release naturally. Rotate randomly every 7 days.

[0043] e. Data collection and trap emptying: The number of bark beetles in the collection bottle was observed every 7 days, and the collection bottle was emptied after counting. The experiment lasted for 35 days, with a total of 5 surveys.

[0044] A field trapping experiment will be conducted in March 2025, and the results are shown in [the table below]. Figure 1 See Table 2. There was a significant difference in the number of males captured using n-hexyl acetate compared to other treatment groups (P>0.05). The highest number of females captured using β-ionone was followed by those captured using n-hexyl acetate (P>0.05). Significant differences were also observed between males and females using β-ionone and n-hexyl acetate. Specifically, n-hexyl acetate resulted in the highest capture rate (11.56 individuals / week), significantly higher than the control and other treatments (P<0.05); β-ionone was the second highest. These results indicate that n-hexyl acetate exhibits the best attraction effect at a concentration of 1:1000.

[0045] Table 2. Number of male and female adults trapped (heads / week) under different pesticide treatments (1000-fold dilution).

[0046] Note: Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation; differences in means between different treatment groups were analyzed using two-way ANOVA at a significance level of p < 0.05. Different letters are used to indicate significant differences between different drugs, while the same letter indicates no significant difference. For the same drug, females are capitalized to indicate significant differences between males and females.

[0047] Experimental Example 2 - Attracting effect of different candidate attractants on *Bartholinae* at a concentration of 1:2000 In this experiment, the volume ratio of each candidate attractant to 75% ethanol was adjusted to 1:2000. Other preparation methods, lure preparation, and field application procedures were the same as in Experiment 1. The experiment was conducted from March to June 2025.

[0048] See results Figure 2 See Table 3. Analysis of variance showed that geraniol exhibited the best attraction effect, with the highest number of females (3.19 individuals / week), males (2.69 individuals / week), and total trapping (5.88 individuals / week) among all treatments. Significant differences were found in the number of females and males trapped compared to other treatments (P<0.05). (S)-cis-verbenol (positive control) had the second highest total trapping. In contrast, treatments such as cinnamyl acetate and n-hexyl acetate showed weaker attraction activity and lower trapping levels. Compared to a 1:1000 concentration, n-hexyl acetate showed a significant decreasing trend in trapping at the current concentration.

[0049] Table 3. Number of male and female adults trapped (heads / week) under different pesticide treatments (2000 times dilution)

[0050] Note: Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation; differences in means between different treatment groups were analyzed using two-way ANOVA at a significance level of p < 0.05. Different letters are used to indicate significant differences between different drugs, while the same letter indicates no significant difference. For the same drug, females are capitalized to indicate significant differences between males and females.

[0051] Experimental Example 3 - Attracting effect of different candidate attractants on *Bartholinae* at a concentration of 1:4000 In Experiment 3, the volume ratio of each candidate attractant to 75% ethanol was adjusted to 1:4000, while other preparation methods, lure preparation, and field application procedures were the same as in Experiment 1. The experiment was conducted from March to June 2025.

[0052] See results Figure 3 See Table 4. Analysis of variance showed no significant difference in the number of females trapped among the treatments (P>0.05), nor in the number of males trapped among the treatments (P>0.05). Only n-hexyl acetate showed a significant difference between males and females. Numerically, n-octanol and 1-naphthaldehyde had the highest total trapping rates (3.31 individuals / week), followed by n-hexyl alcohol (3.25 individuals / week). This result indicates that at a concentration of 1:4000, there were no significant differences between the candidate attractants and the control group, and no obvious synergistic effect was observed.

[0053] Table 4. Number of male and female adults trapped under different pesticides (4000 times dilution) (heads / week)

[0054] Note: Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation; differences in means between different treatment groups were analyzed using two-way ANOVA at a significance level of p < 0.05. Different letters are used to indicate significant differences between different drugs, while the same letter indicates no significant difference. For the same drug, females are capitalized to indicate significant differences between males and females.

[0055] Experimental Example 4 - Attracting effect of different candidate attractants on *Bartholinae* at a concentration of 1:8000 In this experiment, the volume ratio of each candidate attractant to 75% ethanol was adjusted to 1:8000. Other preparation methods, lure preparation, and field application procedures were the same as in Experiment 1. The experiment was conducted from March to June 2025.

[0056] See results Figure 4See Table 5. Analysis of variance showed a significant difference in the number of females trapped by 1-naphthaldehyde compared to other treatments (P>0.05), and a significant difference in the number of males trapped by 1-naphthaldehyde compared to other treatments (P>0.05), but no significant difference between males and females. Numerically, 1-naphthaldehyde had the highest total trapping number (4.93 individuals / week), followed by (S)-cis-verbenol (positive control) (3.12 individuals / week) and the blank control 75% ethanol (2.94 individuals / week), while cinnamon acetate had the lowest trapping number.

[0057] Table 5. Number of male and female adults trapped (heads / week) under different pesticide treatments (8000 times dilution)

[0058] Note: Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation; differences in means between different treatment groups were analyzed using two-way ANOVA at a significance level of p < 0.05. Different letters are used to indicate significant differences between different drugs, while the same letter indicates no significant difference. For the same drug, females are capitalized to indicate significant differences between males and females.

[0059] Experimental Example 5 - Attracting effect of different candidate attractants on *Bartholinae* at a concentration of 1:10000 In this experiment, the volume ratio of each candidate attractant to 75% ethanol was adjusted to 1:10000. Other preparation methods, lure preparation, and field application procedures were the same as in Experiment 1. The experiment was conducted from July to October 2025.

[0060] See results Figure 5 See Table 6. Analysis of variance showed significant differences in the trapping rates of each treatment (P<0.05). In this group of experiments, hexanol and cinnamon acetate exhibited the strongest attraction effects, with significantly higher female and male trapping rates compared to other treatments. Specifically, hexanol had the highest trapping rate (5.94 individuals / week), followed closely by cinnamon acetate (5.06 individuals / week). The attraction activity of the other treatments was relatively weak. 75% ethanol (1.74 individuals / week) and (S)-cis-verbenol (positive control) (1.56 individuals / week) were at low levels; while geraniol, hexanol acetate, β-ionone, octanol, and 1-naphthaldehyde were the least effective, showing no significant advantage over the control group.

[0061] Table 6. Number of male and female adults trapped (heads / week) under different pesticide treatments (10000 times dilution)

[0062] Note: Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation; differences in means between different treatment groups were analyzed using two-way ANOVA at a significance level of p < 0.05. Different letters are used to indicate significant differences between different drugs, while the same letter indicates no significant difference. For the same drug, females are capitalized to indicate significant differences between males and females.

[0063] Experimental Example 6 - Attracting effect of different candidate attractants on *Bartholinae* at a concentration of 1:20000 In this experiment, the volume ratio of each candidate attractant to 75% ethanol was adjusted to 1:20000. Other preparation methods, lure preparation, and field application procedures were the same as in Experiment 1. The experiment was conducted from July to October 2025.

[0064] See results Figure 6 See Table 7. Analysis of variance showed significant differences in trapping rates among treatments (P<0.05). In this experiment, (S)-cis-verbenol (positive control) exhibited an absolute advantage in attracting females (1.62 individuals / week) and males (2.00 individuals / week) compared to all other agents, with the highest total trapping rate (3.62 individuals / week). All other agents showed weak trapping activity. Specifically, the total trapping rates of hexanol, ethanol (blank control), and cinnamyl acetate hovered around 1.5–1.7 individuals / week; while the total trapping rates of 1-naphthaldehyde, β-ionone, hexyl acetate, and octanol were all around 1.1 individuals / week or less. Notably, geraniol, which performed exceptionally well in the previous group, completely lost its attracting effect in this group, resulting in the lowest total trapping rate (0.44 individuals / week).

[0065] Table 7. Number of male and female adults trapped (heads / week) under different pesticide treatments (20,000 times dilution)

[0066] Note: Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation; differences in means between different treatment groups were analyzed using two-way ANOVA at a significance level of p < 0.05. Different letters are used to indicate significant differences between different drugs, while the same letter indicates no significant difference. For the same drug, females are capitalized to indicate significant differences between males and females.

[0067] Experimental Example 7 - Attracting effect of different candidate attractants on *Bartholinae* at a concentration of 1:40000 In this experiment, the volume ratio of each candidate attractant to 75% ethanol was adjusted to 1:40000. Other preparation methods, lure preparation, and field application procedures were the same as in Experiment 1. The experiment was conducted from July to October 2025.

[0068] See results Figure 7See Table 8. Analysis of variance showed significant differences in trapping rates among treatments (P<0.05). In this experiment, (S)-cis-verbenol (positive control) exhibited the best attraction effect, with significantly higher female and male trapping rates than most treatments, reaching the highest total trapping rate (3.62 individuals / week). Cinnamyl acetate and n-hexanol showed moderate attraction activity. Both had a total trapping rate of 2.12 individuals / week. Their female trapping rate was not significantly different from (S)-cis-verbenol (positive control), but their male trapping rate was significantly lower. The attraction effects of the remaining agents were weak. The total trapping rates of 1-naphthaldehyde, n-hexanol acetate, ethanol (blank control), β-ionone, n-octanol, and geraniol were only between 1.1 and 1.6 individuals / week, indicating that they did not have a significant attraction advantage under the current experimental conditions.

[0069] Table 8. Number of male and female adults trapped (heads / week) under different pesticide treatments (40,000 times dilution)

[0070] Note: Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation; differences in means between different treatment groups were analyzed using two-way ANOVA at a significance level of p < 0.05. Different letters are used to indicate significant differences between different drugs, while the same letter indicates no significant difference. For the same drug, females are capitalized to indicate significant differences between males and females.

[0071] Experimental Example 8 - Attracting effect of different candidate attractants on *Bartholinae* at a concentration of 1:80000 In this experiment, the volume ratio of each candidate attractant to 75% ethanol was adjusted to 1:80000. Other preparation methods, lure preparation, and field application procedures were the same as in Experiment 1. The experiment was conducted from July to October 2025.

[0072] See results Figure 8 See Table 9. Analysis of variance showed significant differences in trapping rates among treatments (P<0.05). In this experiment, (S)-cis-verbenol (positive control) again demonstrated the best attraction effect, with significantly higher female (1.25 individuals / week) and male (1.75 individuals / week) trapping rates than most other treatments, and the highest total trapping rate (3.00 individuals / week). Hexyl acetate and ethanol (blank control) showed moderate trapping rates. The remaining agents exhibited extremely weak attraction activity, with total trapping rates hovering only between 0.6 and 1.4 individuals / week, ranking last.

[0073] Table 9. Number of male and female adults trapped (heads / week) under different pesticide treatments (80,000 times dilution)

[0074] Note: Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation; differences in means between different treatment groups were analyzed using two-way ANOVA at a significance level of p < 0.05. Different letters are used to indicate significant differences between different drugs, while the same letter indicates no significant difference. For the same drug, females are capitalized to indicate significant differences between males and females.

[0075] Experimental Example 9: The attraction effect of different concentration gradients of n-hexyl acetate on the bark beetle (Leymus chinensis). Based on the results of Experiments 1-8, this experiment further systematically evaluates the induction effect of n-hexyl acetate at eight concentration gradients to determine the optimal concentration for use.

[0076] The attractant prepared in this experiment used commercially available n-hexyl acetate (purity ≥98%) and 75% ethanol (analytical grade).

[0077] The following nine processes are prepared according to the testing requirements.

[0078] Treatment 1 (Example 1): n-Hexyl acetate: 75% ethanol = 1:1000; Treatment 2: n-Hexyl acetate: 75% ethanol = 1:2000; Treatment 3: n-Hexyl acetate: 75% ethanol = 1:4000; Treatment 4: n-Hexyl acetate: 75% ethanol = 1:8000; Treatment 5: n-Hexyl acetate: 75% ethanol = 1:10000; Treatment 6: n-Hexyl acetate: 75% ethanol = 1:20000; Treatment 7: n-Hexyl acetate: 75% ethanol = 1:40000; Treatment 8: n-Hexyl acetate: 75% ethanol = 1:80000; The lure preparation method, lure preservation, and implementation steps were the same as in Experiment Example 1. Three duplicate lures were set up for each treatment.

[0079] See results Figure 9 .from Figure 9It can be seen that the overall number of insects trapped decreased with decreasing concentration of n-hexyl acetate (increasing dilution factor). Treatment 1 (1:1000) trapped the most *Bartholinifera mesenteroides*, with a total of 185 insects, significantly higher than other treatments. Treatments 3 (1:4000) and 4 (1:8000) were next, with 48 and 38 insects trapped respectively, but significantly lower than treatment 1 (1:1000). Treatment 2 (1:2000) trapped 32 insects, treatment 6 (1:20000) trapped 25 insects, treatment 7 (1:40000) trapped 26 insects, and treatment 8 (1:80000) trapped 29 insects, showing little difference overall; while treatments 5 (1:10000) and 6 (1:20000) trapped only 18 insects, the fewest number of insects trapped. The results indicate that the optimal volume ratio of n-hexyl acetate to 75% ethanol is 1:1000.

[0080] The above description is merely a preferred example of the present invention and is not intended to limit the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc., made within the scope of the present invention should be included within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. An attractant for the bark beetle, characterized in that, The attractant is a hexyl acetate solution, which is prepared by mixing hexyl acetate with a volatile solvent at a volume ratio of 1:900-1100; the volatile solvent is a 70%-80% v / v ethanol solution.

2. The attractant for the bark beetle according to claim 1, characterized in that, The n-hexyl acetate solution was prepared by mixing n-hexyl acetate with a volatile solvent at a volume ratio of 1:1000.

3. The attractant for the bark beetle according to claim 2, characterized in that, The ethanol solution is a 75% v / v ethanol solution.

4. The use of the attractant for bark beetles according to any one of claims 1-3 in the trapping of bark beetles.

5. The application according to claim 4, characterized in that, The trapping method includes the following steps: (1) The attractant is sealed in a sealed bag; (2) Set up traps in forest areas where the bark beetle is harmful, with a sealed bag hanging from each trap; (3) Open the sealed bag to expose 6-7 mm of the volatile agent. 2 This allows the attractant to be released naturally.

6. The application according to claim 5, characterized in that, In step (1), the sealed bag is an aluminum foil composite bag or an aluminum foil sealed capsule, and the amount of attractant packaged inside the bag is 2.5-10 mL / bag.

7. The application according to claim 5, characterized in that, In step (2), the spacing between the traps is 30-60 m, and the hanging height is 1.5-2.5 m above the ground.

8. The application according to claim 5, characterized in that, In step (3), after the sealed bag is opened, its effective release time is 14 days. After the effective release time is exceeded, a new sealed bag is replaced.

9. The application according to claim 5, characterized in that, Used to trap male medium-sized bark beetles.

Images