Translator Disclaimer
1 August 2006 Effectiveness of Protein Baits on Melon Fly and Oriental Fruit Fly (Diptera: Tephritidae): Attraction and Feeding
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

Attraction and feeding responses of oriental fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel), and melon fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett), were determined for different protein baits. In separate choice attraction assays for each species, significantly more flies arrived at stations with bait than water, but no differences existed among baits of GF-120 Fruit Fly Bait, GF-120 NF Naturalyte Fruit Fly Bait, Provesta 621 autolyzed yeast extract, and Mazoferm E802. In comparison with B. dorsalis, B. cucurbitae had 2.8 times more responders and a 4.8 times better discrimination between baits and water. In a second attraction assay with only B. dorsalis, volume of bait was negatively correlated to numbers of flies alighting on the bait. Feeding assays for both species demonstrated that time spent feeding and duration on a leaf were both significantly affected by bait type. B. dorsalis fed the longest on Provesta 621, with significantly less feeding on the other baits, and with all baits resulting in more feeding than water. The longest feeding times for B. cucurbitae resulted with Mazoferm E802 and Provesta 621, and all baits except GF-120 NF resulted in eliciting a significantly longer feeding duration than water. In separate toxicology assays for each species, significantly higher mortality resulted from bait formulations containing spinosad compared with blank baits, but no differences existed between GF-120 and GF-120 NF formulations. The differences are discussed between the two Bactrocera species primarily in regard to bait preference, extent of response, and previous work on laboratory flies.

James D. Barry, Neil W. Miller, Jaime C. Piñero, Arthur Tuttle, Ronald F. L. Mau, and Roger I. Vargas "Effectiveness of Protein Baits on Melon Fly and Oriental Fruit Fly (Diptera: Tephritidae): Attraction and Feeding," Journal of Economic Entomology 99(4), 1161-1167, (1 August 2006). https://doi.org/10.1603/0022-0493-99.4.1161
Received: 13 December 2005; Accepted: 1 February 2006; Published: 1 August 2006
JOURNAL ARTICLE
7 PAGES

This article is only available to subscribers.
It is not available for individual sale.
+ SAVE TO MY LIBRARY

SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission
Back to Top