Table 5.
Area debarked (mm2) during 3 days of Bt‐treated food | Area debarked (mm2) during 5 days of Bt‐treated food | Area debarked (mm2) during 7 days of Bt‐treated food | Mortality after 7 days of Bt food + 7 days non‐Bt food in box | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
df | χ 2 | P | df | χ 2 | P | df | χ 2 | P | df | χ 2 | P | |
Treatment | 6 | 55.59 | <0.0001 | 6 | 61.93 | <0.0001 | 6 | 75.36 | <0.0001 | 6 | 15.4 | 0.02 |
Contrasts | df | t | P | df | t | P | df | t | P | df | z | P |
B vs BN | 104 | −1.23 | 0.88 | 104 | −1.04 | 0.94 | 104 | −0.83 | 0.98 | NA | 0.37 | 0.99 |
B vs BV | 104 | 5.51 | <0.0001 | 104 | 4.30 | 0.0007 | 104 | 3.65 | 0.007 | NA | −1.87 | 0.50 |
B vs BVN | 104 | 4.02 | 0.002 | 104 | 4.37 | 0.0006 | 104 | 4.29 | 0.0008 | NA | 0.37 | 0.99 |
V vs BV | 104 | −0.17 | 1.00 | 104 | 0.65 | 0.99 | 104 | 0.47 | 0.99 | NA | 0.38 | 0.99 |
V vs VN | 104 | −0.17 | 1.00 | 104 | −0.08 | 1.00 | 104 | 0.85 | 0.97 | NA | 0.73 | 0.99 |
V vs BVN | 104 | 1.55 | 0.71 | 104 | 1.37 | 0.81 | 104 | 0.70 | 0.99 | NA | −1.88 | 0.49 |
N vs BN | 104 | 1.08 | 0.93 | 104 | 0.005 | 1.00 | 104 | −0.93 | 0.97 | NA | 2.39 | 0.21 |
N vs VN | 104 | 3.29 | 0.02 | 104 | 4.57 | 0.0003 | 104 | 5.78 | <0.0001 | NA | −3.87 | 0.003 |
N vs BVN | 104 | −2.60 | 0.14 | 104 | −4.03 | 0.002 | 104 | −4.93 | 0.0001 | NA | 2.39 | 0.21 |
These models examined the effect of treatment (Bt galleriae formulation (B); Bt israelensis (V); Bt tenebrionis (N); combination of formulations BN, BV, VN, and BVN) on total Hylobius abietis consumption (mean area debarked, mm2) during 3, 5 and 7 cumulative days of feeding on Bt‐treated food (stem pieces of Picea abies) and total mortality (number of dead weevils) after these 7 days and an additional 7 days exposed to non‐Bt treated food in boxes. Pairwise comparisons (Tukey's multiple comparisons) examine differences among combinations and individual Bt formulations. Significant effects (P < 0.05) are shown in bold.