Translator Disclaimer
1 June 2017 Frugivorous Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae, Lonchaeidae), Their Host Plants, and Associated Parasitoids in the Extreme North of Amapá State, Brazil
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

We conducted a survey of frugivorous flies (Diptera: Tephritidae and Lonchaeidae), their host plants, and associated parasitoids in the extreme north of Amapá State, Brazil. Fruit were collected from various plant species between May 2011 and Jul 2013. In total, 218 fruit samples were collected (3,915 fruits, 115.6 kg), from 33 plant species (12 native and 21 introduced) in 22 families. Infestation by fruit flies was observed in 69 samples, representing 17 plant species in 13 families. In total, 3,480 puparia were obtained, from which emerged specimens of Anastrepha Schiner (6 species; Tephritidae), Neosilba McAlpine (4 species; Lonchaeidae), and Bactrocera carambolae Drew & Hancock (Tephritidae), as well as wasp parasitoids in the family Braconidae (3 species). This work adds new records of frugivorous flies in the studied area and establishes new relationships between species of frugivorous flies and host plants in the Brazilian Amazon.

Fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) are globally known as pests of fruit crops, due to the direct and indirect damage they cause to production (Aluja 1994). The family Tephritidae is comprised of over 5,000 species grouped into 500 genera. Approximately 70 species are confirmed pests, whereas others may potentially cause damage to crops (White & Elson-Harris 1992; Uchôa 2012). The Anastrepha Schiner species, Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) and Bactrocera carambolae Drew & Hancock, cause considerable damage to both commercial and noncommercial fruit trees in South America (Zucchi 2001; Vayssières et al. 2013; Lemos et al. 2014).

In recent years, particularly in Brazil, frugivorous dipterans in the family Lonchaeidae have been reported to be primary invaders of commercial plant species. Neosilba zadolicha McAlpine & Steyskal, Neosilba pendula (Bezzi), Neosilba glaberrima (Wiedemann), and Neosilba perezi Romero & Ruppel, are currently viewed as pests due to the damage they cause to fruits or other structures of different plant species (Lourenção et al. 1996; Uchôa 2012; Lemos et al. 2015).

To date, 120 species of Anastrepha have been reported in Brazil. Among these, only 61 have known host plants, with Anastrepha fraterculus (Wiedemann) (110 hosts) and Anastrepha obliqua (Macquart) (48 hosts) as the most polyphagous species (Zucchi 2008). Ceratitis capitata and B. carambolae are the sole representatives of their genera in Brazil (Zucchi 2001). With regards to richness of Neosilba McAlpine, 25 species have been reported in the country.

In the Brazilian Amazon, multiple studies on frugivorous dipterans have been conducted in the past 10 yr, advancing knowledge on the biology and ecology of Tephritidae and Lonchaeidae (Silva et al. 2011). Seventy six species of Anastrepha and 14 species of Neosilba have been reported in the region to date (Adaime et al. 2016a; Pereira & Adaime 2016). Twenty-one host plants have been reported for B. carambolae, which has a distribution restricted to the states of Amapá and Roraima (Adaime et al. 2016b).

Although knowledge on frugivorous flies in the Amazon has increased significantly, some strategic areas in the region have not yet been duly studied. Among them is the extreme north of Amapá, Brazil, which includes the municipalities of Oiapoque and Calçoene, at the border with French Guiana. This region is extremely important to Brazil, as the flow of people and supplies crossing the border could facilitate the introduction of undesirable insect species. The introduction of the exotic species B. carambolae into Brazil exemplifies the vulnerability of this border area. Detected in 1989 in French Guiana, the species has been under official control in Oiapoque since 1996, when it was reported for the first time (Godoy et al. 2011).

Sugayama et al. (2015) stated that the risk of new pests being introduced through the Brazilian border is imminent. In Brazil, a constant concern exists regarding the potential introduction of Anastrepha suspensa (Loew), a quarantine pest that is absent in the country, but which is reported to occur in French Guiana. The introduction of this pest into Brazil would entail a closure of foreign markets, particularly for growers of mango (Mangifera indica L.; Anacardiaceae). Studies aiming to unveil the richness of fruit fly species and their host plants and natural enemies in this region are essential, as they will permit early detection of invading exotic species and offer supporting data for pest management.

In Oiapoque, although 20 species of Anastrepha, B. carambolae, and 5 species of parasitoids have been reported, knowledge of the associated hosts is minimal. In Calçoene, there have been reports only of B. carambolae and 4 species of Anastrepha, without any record of a parasitoid. In both municipalities, no species of Lonchaeidae have been reported to date.

Thus, we conducted a survey of frugivorous fly species (Tephritidae and Lonchaeidae), their host plants, and associated parasitoids, in the extreme north of Amapá State, Brazil.

Materials and Methods

CHARACTERIZATION OF STUDY AREA

The study area is located in the extreme north of the state of Amapá, at the Brazil—French Guiana border, and includes the municipalities of Calçoene and Oiapoque (Fig. 1). Together, these 2 municipalities occupy 25.88% of the total area of Amapá, which is 143,453.7 km2. Natural domains in the region include dense terra firme forest, floodable areas and savannas (Weiss 2011). The predominant climate in the region, as classified by Köppen, is Af (tropical rainforest), i.e., hot and wet, with a mean temperature of 25 °C, mean annual precipitation of 2,284 mm, and 60 mm or more of precipitation on the driest month. The rainy period is observed from Dec to Jul and the dry period is from Aug to Nov (SUDAM 1984; Diniz 1986).

SAMPLING PROCEDURES

Fruit were collected in the period from May 2011 to Jul 2013. Sampling was conducted at random, with the collection of intact fruits recently fallen to the ground. Geographic coordinates of each sampling site were recorded via a global positioning system device (GPSMAP®78s; Garmin, Schaffhausen, Switzerland). Each sample, comprised of multiple fruits, was stored in a plastic container, wrapped in a fine mesh bag, labeled and subsequently transported to the Plant Protection Laboratory at Embrapa Amapá, in the city of Macapá, Brazil.

ACQUISITION OF PUPARIA AND ADULT INSECTS

In the laboratory, the fruit were counted, weighed and arranged on plastic trays over a thin layer of moistened sand. The trays were covered with fine mesh, which was fastened in place with rubber bands. The fruit and sand were examined every 3 d, and any puparia found were removed and transferred into transparent plastic vials containing a thin layer of moistened vermiculite. The vials were covered with fine mesh and a vented lid before being placed in climate-controlled chambers (27 ± 0.5 °C; 70 ± 10% relative humidity (RH); 12:12 h L:D photoperiod). Fruit flies and parasitoids that emerged were stored in glass vials containing 70% ethanol, for subsequent identification.

IDENTIFICATION OF BIOLOGICAL MATERIAL

Specimens of Anastrepha were identified using the illustrated identification key published by Zucchi et al. (2011a). Identification of parasitoids (Braconidae) was based on the Canal & Zucchi (2000) and Marinho et al. (2011). Specimens of Neosilba were identified according to McAlpine & Steyskal (1982) and Strikis (2011).

To identify species of forest plants, we collected branches containing their reproductive structures (i.e., flowers and fruits), which were later processed into herbarium specimens using the mounting and preservation techniques described by Fidalgo and Bononi (1984). Plant species were identified through identification keys and comparison with specimens available at the Amapaense Herbarium (HAMAB), the herbarium at the Amapá Institute for Scientific and Technological Research (IEPA) in Macapá, Amapá, Brazil.

DATA ANALYSES

The data obtained were analyzed based on the following calculations: 1) infestation index = puparia obtained / mass of fruits collected, 2) emergence = (number of emerged flies + number of emerged parasitoids) / total number of puparia × 100, and 3) % parasitism = (number of emerged parasitoids / number of puparia) × 100.

Results

In total, 218 fruit samples were collected, a total of 3,915 fruits weighing 115.6 kg, belonging to 33 plant species (i.e., 12 native and 21 introduced) from 22 families (Tables 1 and 2). Infestation by fruit flies was observed in 69 samples (31.7%), belonging to 17 plant species from 13 families (Tables 1 and 2).

In total, 3,480 puparia were obtained, from which emerged specimens of Anastrepha (6 species), Neosilba (4 species), B. carambolae, and wasp parasitoids (3 species; Braconidae).

OIAPOQUE

In total, 126 samples were collected, consisting of 2,754 fruits (84.36 kg) of 29 plant species in 18 families. Infestation by fruit flies was observed in 45 samples (13 plant species in 10 families), from which 2,667 puparia were obtained (Table 1).

The species of Tephritidae obtained were: Anastrepha coronilli Carrejo & González, Anastrepha distincta Greene, A. fraterculus, Anastrepha leptozona Hendel, A. obliqua, Anastrepha striata Schiner, and B. carambolae (Table 1).

Fig. 1.

Fruit sampling sites in extreme north of Amapá State, Brazil (May 2011–Jul 2013).

f01_316.jpg

Anastrepha obliqua was obtained from Spondias mombin Jacq. (Anacardiaceae) and Averrhoa carambola L. (Oxalidaceae). Anastrepha striata occurred in Psidium guajava L. (Myrtaceae) and Syzygium malaccense (L.) Merr. & L.M. Perry (Myrtaceae). Anastrepha coronilli was obtained from Bellucia grossularioides (L.) Triana (Melastomataceae), A. distincta from Inga edulis Mart. (Fabaceae), A. leptozona from Pouteria caimito (Ruiz & Pav.) Radlk. (Sapotaceae), and A. fraterculus from P. guajava. Bactrocera carambolae was found in fruits of 4 plant species: A. carambola, Malpighia emarginata [Moc. & Sesse] ex DC. (Malpighiaceae), P. guajava, and S. malaccense (Table 1).

Anastrepha represented 61.3% of all tephritids obtained, followed by Bactrocera (38.7%). The greatest abundance of tephritids was observed in P. guajava, with A. striata as the predominant species (Table 1).

Neosilba represented 15.7% of all frugivorous flies obtained in Oiapoque. The species obtained were: Neosilba bella Strikis & Prado, N. glaberrima, Neosilba pseudozadolicha Strikis, and N. zadolicha (Table 1).

Neosilba glaberrima was obtained from 5 host species. Neosilba bella, N. pseudozadolicha, and N. zadolicha occurred in 3 hosts (Table 1). Only females were obtained from Byrsonima crassifolia (L.) Kunth (Malpighiaceae), I. edulis, and Moutabea chodatiana Huber (Polygalaceae), making species identification unfeasible.

Specimens of the parasitoid Doryctobracon areolatus (Szépligeti) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) were obtained from fruits of B. grossularioides, P. guajava, and S. malaccense infested by frugivorous flies. The highest percentage of parasitism was observed in B. grossularioides (11.4%) (Table 1).

CALÇOENE

In total, 92 samples were collected, consisting of 1,161 fruits (31.24 kg) of 19 plant species in 12 families. Infestation by fruit flies was observed in 24 samples (9 plant species in 7 families), from which 813 puparia were obtained (Table 2).

Table 1.

Rates of infestation of various plant species by frugivorous flies (Tephritidae and Lonchaeidae) in Oiapoque, Amapá, Brazil. May 2011 to Jul 2013.

t01a_316.gif

(Continued)

t01b_316.gif

Table 2.

Rates of infestation of various plant species by frugivorous flies (Tephritidae and Lonchaeidae) in Calçoene, Amapá, Brazil. May 2011 to Jul 2013.

t02_316.gif

Table 3.

List of frugivorous flies (Tephritidae and Lonchaeidae) and their host plants recorded in the municipality of Oiapoque, Amapá, Brazil.

t03_316.gif

The species of Tephritidae obtained were: A. coronilli, A. fraterculus, A. obliqua, A. striata, and B. carambolae (Table 2).

Anastrepha coronilli was obtained from B. grossularioides, A. fraterculus from P. guajava, A. obliqua from S. mombin, and A. striata from P. guajava. Bactrocera carambolae was found in fruits of 3 plant species: A. carambola, P. guajava, and S. malaccense (Table 2).

Species of Anastrepha represented 83.7% of all tephritids obtained, followed by B. carambolae (16.3%). The highest abundance of tephritids was observed in P. guajava, with A. striata as the predominant species (Table 2).

Species of Neosilba represented 5.0% of all frugivorous flies obtained. The species obtained were N. glaberrima and N. pseudozadolicha (Table 2).

Neosilba glaberrima was found in Anacardium occidentale L. (Anacardiaceae) and Capsicum chinense Jacq. (Solanaceae). Neosilba pseudozadolicha was obtained from A. occidentale, C. chinense, Cucumis anguria L. (Cucurbitaceae), and S. malaccense (Table 2). Only females were obtained from A. carambola, Persea americana Mill. (Lauraceae) and P. guajava, making species identification unfeasible.

Table 4.

List of frugivorous flies (Tephritidae and Lonchaeidae) and their host plants reported in the municipality of Calçoene, Amapá, Brazil.

t04_316.gif

Specimens of the parasitoids D. areolatus, Opius bellus Gahan, and Utetes anastrephae (Viereck) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) were obtained from fruits of B. grossularioides, P. guajava, and S. mombin infested by frugivorous flies. The highest percentage of parasitism was observed in B. grossularioides (16.3%) (Table 2).

Discussion

Anastrepha striata was the predominant species in both municipalities, due to its association with P. guajava, an abundantly sampled plant species (Tables 1 and 2). This strong association between A. striata and P. guajava already has been reported in the Brazilian Amazon (Silva et al. 2011; Marsaro Júnior et al. 2013). Anastrepha striata also infested S. malaccense in Oiapoque, an unprecedented observation in the Brazilian Amazon.

Bactrocera carambolae was abundant, especially in Oiapoque. The species infested 4 hosts (A. carambola, M. emarginata, P. guajava, and S. malaccense) (Tables 1 and 2), all of which have already been reported in Amapá (Morais et al. 2016). Anastrepha obliqua was associated exclusively sampled with fruits of S. mombin, infesting all samples collected (Tables 1 and 2). Anastrepha obliqua is viewed as the main pest of this plant (Deus et al. 2016). This species also was found in A. carambola, an association already reported in Amapá (Zucchi et al. 2011b). Anastrepha fraterculus was obtained from guava fruits in both municipalities (Tables 1 and 2), always with a low abundance of specimens, confirming the results of other studies conducted in Amapá (Deus & Adaime 2013). Anastrepha coronilli was obtained only from fruits of B. grossularioides, in both municipalities (Tables 1 and 2). This association has been observed frequently in the Brazilian Amazon (Zucchi et al. 2011b). Anastrepha leptozona and A. distincta were observed only in Oiapoque (Table 1), associated with their most typical hosts in the region, namely P. caimito and I. edulis, respectively (Zucchi et al. 2011b). Among the Lonchaeidae obtained, N. glaberrima and N. zadolicha are the most polyphagous species in the Amazon region (Strikis et al. 2011; Lemos et al. 2015).

The highest infestation rates were observed in Myrtaceae host plants (Tables 1 and 2). Psidium guajava was infested especially by A. striata, and S. malaccense by B. carambolae. In Oiapoque, there was significant infestation of Annona muricata L. (Annonaceae), exclusively by species of Neosilba (Table 1).

Vayssières et al. (2013) conducted a survey using McPhail traps (1994–2003) and fruit sampling (2001–2003) in French Guiana, from the border with Brazil to the border with Suriname. The authors did not report the presence of A. suspensa, but obtained 21 species of Anastrepha, in addition to B. carambolae. It should be noted that all species of Tephritidae (Anastrepha and Bactrocera) obtained in the present work already have been reported in French Guiana. Also relevant is the fact that we did not detect A. suspensa in the studied area (extreme north of Amapá, Brazil) and all 4 hosts we reported for B. carambolae in Amapá are among those reported by Vayssières et al. (2013) in French Guiana.

Tables 3 and 4 show updated lists of frugivorous fly species already reported in Oiapoque and Calçoene, respectively. This work adds 5 new reports of frugivorous flies in the municipality of Oiapoque (A. leptozona, N. bella, N. glaberrima, N. pseudozadolicha, and N. zadolicha) and 3 in Calçoene (A. obliqua, N. glaberrima, and N. pseudozadolicha). In addition, 6 new associations between frugivorous fly species and their hosts were established for the Brazilian Amazon (Tables 3 and 4). This work also presents the first reports of parasitoids (D. areolatus, O. bellus, and U. anastrephae) in the municipality of Calçoene (Table 4).

This research contributes to the advance of knowledge on frugivorous flies, their host plants, and associated parasitoids in the extreme north of Amapá State, Brazil.

Acknowledgments

To our colleague Carlos Alberto Moraes, for support during sampling expeditions. To the Brazilian Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), for the Research Productivity Fellowships granted to R Adaime and MF de Souza-Filho. To the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Supply for authorizing publication of data pertaining to the carambola fruit fly, as provided in Normative Rule No. 52/2007.

References Cited

1.

Adaime R, Sousa MSM, Pereira JF. 2016a. Anastrepha species and their hosts in the Brazilian Amazon. Amazon Network for Research on Fruit flies, last updated 3 Oct 2016,  http://anastrepha.cpafap.embrapa.br (last accessed 18 Feb 2017). Google Scholar

2.

Adaime R, Jesus-Barros CR, Bariani A, Lima AL, Cruz KR, Carvalho JP. 2016b. Novos registros de hospedeiros da mosca-da-carambola (Bactrocera carambolae) no estado do Amapá, Brasil. Comunicado Técnico 146. Embrapa Amapá, Macapá, Brazil. Google Scholar

3.

Aluja M. 1994. Bionomics and management of Anastrepha. Annual Review of Entomology 39: 155–178. Google Scholar

4.

Canal NA, Zucchi RA. 2000. Parasitoides — Braconidae, pp. 119–126 In Malavasi A, Zucchi RA [eds.], Moscas-das-frutas de importância econômica no Brasil: conhecimento básico e aplicado. Holos, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil. Google Scholar

5.

Creão MIP. 2003. Moscas-das-frutas (Diptera: Tephritidae): espécies, distribuição, medidas da fauna e seus parasitóides (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) no Estado do Amapá. MS Dissertation, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia, Universidade do Amazonas, Manaus, Brazil. Google Scholar

6.

Deus EG, Adaime R. 2013. Dez anos de pesquisas sobre moscas-das-frutas (Diptera: Tephritidae) no estado do Amapá: avanços obtidos e desafios futuros. Biota Amazônia 3: 157–168. Google Scholar

7.

Deus EG, Pinheiro LS, Lima CR, Sousa MSM, Guimarães JA, Strikis PC, Adaime R. 2013. Wild hosts of frugivorous dipterans (Tephritidae and Lonchaeidae) and associated parasitoids in the Brazilian Amazon. Florida Entomologist 96: 1621–1625. Google Scholar

8.

Deus EG, Sousa MSM, Adaime R. 2016. Taperebá, pp. 260–265 In Silva NM, Adaime R, Zucchi RA [eds.], Pragas Agrícolas e Florestais na Amazônia. Embrapa, Brasília, Distrito Federal, Brazil. Google Scholar

9.

De AS Diniz TD. 1986. Caracterização climática da Amazônia Oriental. In Burger DM [ed.], Pesquisas sobre a utilização e conservação do solo na Amazônia Oriental. Centro de Pesquisa Agropecuária do Trópico Úmido, documento 40, EMBRAPA, Belém, Brazil. Google Scholar

10.

Fidalgo O, Bononi VLR. 1984. Técnicas de coleta, preservação e herborização de material botânico. Instituto de Botânica, São Paulo, Brazil. Google Scholar

11.

Godoy MJS, Pacheco WSP, Portal RR, Pires Filho JM, Moraes LMM. 2011. Programa Nacional de Erradicação da Mosca-da-Carambola, pp. 134–158 In Silva RA, Lemos WP, Zucchi RA [eds.], Moscas-das-frutas na Amazônia Brasileira: Diversidade, Hospedeiros e Inimigos Naturais. Embrapa Amapá, Macapá, Amapá, Brazil. Google Scholar

12.

Lemos LN, Adaime R, Jesus-Barros CR, Deus EG. 2014. New Hosts of Bactrocera carambolae (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Brazil. Florida Entomologist 97: 841–847. Google Scholar

13.

Lemos LN, Lima CR, Adaime R, Costa-Neto R, Jesus CR; Strikis PC. 2015. New findings on Lonchaeidae (Diptera: Tephritoidea) in the Brazilian Amazon. Florida Entomologist 98:1227–1237. Google Scholar

14.

Lourenção AL, Lorenzi JO, Ambrosano GMB. 1996. Comportamento de clones de mandioca em relação à infestação por Neosilba perezi (Romero & Rupell) (Diptera: Lonchaeidae). Scientia Agricola 53: 304–308. Google Scholar

15.

Marinho CF, Silva RA, Zucchi RA. 2011. Chave de identificação de Braconidae (Alysiinae e Opiinae) parasitoides de larvas frugívoras na região Amazônica, pp. 91–101 In Silva RA, Lemos WP, Zucchi RA [eds.], Moscas-das-frutas na Amazônia Brasileira: Diversidade, Hospedeiros e Inimigos Naturais. Embrapa Amapá, Macapá, Amapá, Brazil. Google Scholar

16.

Marsaro Junior AL, Deus EG, Ronchi-Teles B, Adaime R, Silva Junior RJ. 2013. Species of Anastrepha (Diptera: Tephritidae) captured in a guava orchard (Psidium guajava L., Myrtaceae) in Boa Vista, Roraima, Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Biology 73: 879–886. Google Scholar

17.

McAlpine JF, Steyskal GC. 1982. A revision of Neosilba McAlpine with a key to the world genera of Lonchaeidae (Diptera). The Canadian Entomologist 114: 105–137. Google Scholar

18.

Morais EGF, Jesus-Barros CR, Adaime R, Lima AL, Navia D. 2016. Pragas de expressão quarentenária na Amazônia, pp. 521–559 In Silva NM, Adaime R, Zucchi RA [eds.], Pragas Agrícolas e Florestais na Amazônia. Embrapa, Brasília, Distrito Federal, Brazil. Google Scholar

19.

Norrbom AL, Uchôa MA. 2011. New species and records of Anastrepha (Diptera: Tephritidae) from Brazil. Zootaxa 2835: 61–67. Google Scholar

20.

Pereira JF, Adaime R. 2016. Lonchaeidae from Brazilian Amazon. Amazon Network for Research on Fruit flies, last updated 7 Jan 2016,  http://lonchaeidae.cpafap.embrapa.br (last accessed on 18 Feb 2017) Google Scholar

21.

Ronchi-Teles B. 2000. Ocorrência e flutuação populacional de espécies de moscas-das-frutas e parasitóides com ênfase para o gênero Anastrepha (Diptera: Tephritidae) na Amazônia Brasileira. PhD Thesis, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia, Universidade do Amazonas, Manaus, Brazil. Google Scholar

22.

Ronchi-Teles B, Silva NM, Norrbom AL. 1996. New records of Anastrepha spp. (Diptera: Tephritidae) and their host in Rondônia and Amapá States — Brazilian Amazônia, pp. 32–33 In Proceedings of the 2nd meeting of the Working Group on Fruit Flies of the Western Hemisphere, Viña Del Mar, Chile. Google Scholar

23.

Silva RA, Lemos WP, Zucchi RA. [eds.]. 2011. Moscas-das-frutas na Amazônia Brasileira: Diversidade, Hospedeiros e Inimigos Naturais. Embrapa Amapá, Macapá, Amapá, Brazil. Google Scholar

24.

Strikis PC. 2011. Description of 11 new species of genus Neosilba (Diptera: Lonchaeidae) from Brazil, its hosts and geographical distribution. Trends in Entomology 7: 67–79. Google Scholar

25.

Strikis PC, Deus EG, Silva RA, Pereira JDB, Jesus CR, Marsaro Júnior AL. 2011. Conhecimento sobre Lonchaeidae na Amazônia Brasileira, pp. 205–215 In Silva RA, Lemos WP, Zucchi RA [eds.], Moscas-das-frutas na Amazônia Brasileira: Diversidade, Hospedeiros e Inimigos Naturais. Embrapa Amapá, Macapá, Amapá, Brazil. Google Scholar

26.

SUDAM (Superintendency for the Development of Amazonia). 1984. Atlas Climatológico da Amazônia Brasileira. Projecto de Hidrologia e Climatologia da Amazônia, publication number 39, Belém, Brazil. Google Scholar

27.

Sugayama RL, Iede ET, Stancioli AR, Alves GA, Oliveira IM, Dias JA. 2015. Ameaças fitossanitárias, pp. 449–471 In Sugayama RL, Silva ML, Silva SXB, Rangel LEP [eds.], Defesa Vegetal: Fundamentos, Ferramentas, Políticas e Perspectivas. Sociedade Brasileira de Defesa Agropecuária, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Google Scholar

28.

Trindade RBR, Uchôa MA. 2011. Species of fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in a transect of the Amazonian Rainforest in Oiapoque, Amapá, Brazil. Revista Zoologia 28: 653–657. Google Scholar

29.

Uchôa MA. 2012. Fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritoidea): biology, host plants, natural enemies, and the implications to their natural control, pp. 271–300 In Larramendy ML, Soloneski S [eds.], Integrated Pest Management and Pest Control: Current and Future Tactics. InTech, Rijeka, Croatia. Google Scholar

30.

Vayssières JF, Cayol JP, Caplong P, Séguret J, Midgarden D, Sauers-Muller A van, Zucchi R, Uramoto K, Malavasi A. 2013. Diversity of fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) species in French Guiana: their main host plants and associated parasitoids during the period 1994–2003 and prospects for management. Fruits 68: 219–243. Google Scholar

31.

Weiss BM. 2011. Plano Territorial de Desenvolvimento Rural Sustentável (PTDRS) Extremo Norte do Amapá. Programa Integrado de Ações Socioambientais da Amazônia Oriental, Macapá, Brazil,  http://sit.mda.gov.br/download/ptdrs/ptdrs_qua_territorio154.pdf (last accessed 18 Feb 2017). Google Scholar

32.

White IM, Elson-Harris M. 1992. Fruit Flies of Economic Significance: Their Identification and Bionomics. CAB International, Redwork Press Ltd, Melksham, UK. Google Scholar

33.

Zucchi RA. 2001. Mosca-do-mediterrâneo, Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) pp. 15–22 In Vilela EF, Zucchi RA, Cantor F [eds.], Histórico e Impacto das Pragas Introduzidas no Brasil. Holos, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil. Google Scholar

34.

Zucchi RA. 2008. Anastrepha species their host plants and parasitoids. Fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Brazil, updated 1 Dec 2016,  www.lea.esalq.usp.br/anastrepha/ (last accessed 18 Feb 2017). Google Scholar

35.

Zucchi RA, Uramoto K, Souza-Filho MF. 2011a. Chave ilustrada para as espécies de Anastrepha da região Amazônica, pp. 71–90 In Silva RA, Lemos WP, Zucchi RA [eds.], Moscas-das-frutas na Amazônia Brasileira: Diversidade, Hospedeiros e Inimigos Naturais. Embrapa Amapá, Macapá, Amapá, Brazil. Google Scholar

36.

Zucchi RA, Silva RA, Deus EG. 2011b. Espécies de Anastrepha e seus hospedeiros na Amazônia Brasileira, pp. 51–70 In Silva RA, Lemos WP, Zucchi RA [eds.], Moscas-das-frutas na Amazônia Brasileira: Diversidade, Hospedeiros e Inimigos Naturais. Embrapa Amapá, Macapá, Amapá, Brazil. Google Scholar
Ricardo Adaime, Maria do Socorro Miranda de Sousa, Cristiane Ramos de Jesus-Barros, Ezequiel da Glória de Deus, José Francisco Pereira, Pedro Carlos Strikis, and Miguel Francisco de Souza-Filho "Frugivorous Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae, Lonchaeidae), Their Host Plants, and Associated Parasitoids in the Extreme North of Amapá State, Brazil," Florida Entomologist 100(2), 316-324, (1 June 2017). https://doi.org/10.1653/024.100.0229
Published: 1 June 2017
JOURNAL ARTICLE
9 PAGES


SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
Back to Top