Skip to main content
ARS Home » Northeast Area » Kearneysville, West Virginia » Appalachian Fruit Research Laboratory » Innovative Fruit Production, Improvement, and Protection » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #187531


item Brown, Mark

Submitted to: Annual Cumberland Shenandoah Fruit Workers Conference
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 11/22/2005
Publication Date: 3/1/2006
Citation: Brown, M.W., Alleman, R. 2006. Two new orchard pests in west virginia. Annual Cumberland Shenandoah Fruit Workers Conference. Vol. 31, p-32. 2005

Interpretive Summary:

Technical Abstract: The pear sawfly is a close relative of the apple sawfly and is similar in appearance and biology. We first noticed pear sawfly in pear orchards at the Appalachian Fruit Research Station in 2003, and specimens were confirmed to be H. brevis by David R. Smith (USDA, ARS, Systematic Entomology Lab) in 2005. Larvae bore into the center of the fruit, entering and exiting fruit near the calyx. Unlike apple sawfly damage, all damaged pears appear to abort leaving no evidence of damage at harvest. Adult pear sawfly is slightly smaller than the apple sawfly (4-5 mm compared to 6-7 mm in length, respectively) and has some slight coloration differences. The major difference is in host preference, only rarely will apple sawfly be found in pear or will pear sawfly be found in apple. The peach root weevil was listed in a checklist published in 1962 as occurring in CT, DC, MD, PA and VA. The first specimen collected in WV was at the Appalachian Fruit Research Station in 1983, and recently it has been reported in TN. The adult weevil will feed on foliage of all rosaceous plants that have been tested, but there is a preference for peach and pear foliage. It appears to overwinter as adults, becoming active in peach orchards at full bloom (10 April 2005). There are at least 2 generations per year, probably 3. Eggs are laid on the soil surface and larvae feed on small peach roots (feeding on pear roots has not been investigated). There seems to be no obvious adverse effects on tree vigor.