Table 2.

Mean egg hatch inhibition (%) results from bark extracts against two ovine GIN species.

		Solvent	Water					Acetone–water					Methanol–water					Control
GIN	Bark	Season	1000	500	250	125	62.5	1000	500	250	125	62.5	1000	500	250	125	62.5
T. colubriformis	S1	S	25	16	15	12	14	100	100	54	28	24	100	95	56	18	13	14
		W	32	20	26	15	15	100	100	85	35	12	100	91	37	22	20
	S2	S	10	11	16	11	7	100	93	69	34	16	100	91	50	29	14
		W	59	40	21	18	21	100	100	99	56	30	100	100	68	29	25
	P	S	34	28	29	14	11	100	100	96	74	26	100	97	95	50	39
		W	59	55	40	22	18	100	100	100	100	94	100	100	100	92	50
T. circumcincta	S1	S	7	6	2	4	2	62	4	2	4	1	11	4	5	3	1	8
		W	38	21	15	16	15	98	56	14	14	19	97	28	17	10	22
	S2	S	4	4	5	3	5	25	5	3	4	3	16	3	4	4	2
		W	63	18	15	13	18	100	96	27	20	18	100	39	15	16	16
	P	S	35	4	3	4	4	95	44	5	4	3	93	24	2	4	3
		W	85	43	20	16	13	100	100	100	35	20	10 0	94	60	22	14

Mean egg hatch inhibition (%) of bark extracts (n = 3) tested against both T. colubriformis and T. circumcincta eggs. S1: spruce, sawmill, ring debarking; S2: spruce, pulp mill, drum debarking; P: pine, sawmill, ring debarking. Collection seasons from summer (S) and winter (W). Results in bold were significantly different from the control treatments (one-way ANOVA and post-hoc Bonferroni test for multiple comparisons, where P ≤ 0.05). Results highlighted in bold italic were considered highly active (≥ 99% inhibition), and those in italic considered active (90–98% inhibition).