| Literature DB >> 31597399 |
Hao Zhai1, Xian-Mei Yu2, Ya-Nan Ma3, Yong Zhang4, Dan Wang5.
Abstract
Sugar-acetic acid-ethanol-water mixture (SAEWM) trapping has initially shown the potential efficacy for monitoring or trapping insects. It is unknown how SAEWM-baited traps affect field number of oriental fruit moth (OFM), Grapholita molesta (Busck) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), the female/male ratio trapped, and the type of natural-enemy insects captured. This study investigated changes in seasonal population dynamics and diurnal flight rhythm of OFM, the number and female/male ratio of OFM and the numbers of Coccinellidae and Chrysopidae trapped by SAEWM in peach-apple mixed-planting orchards. The SAEWM performed well in trapping OFM, most of which were adult females, with the maximum trapping at 2.5 m above ground. The daily trapping peak occurred between 18:00 and 20:00, during each continuous monitoring period, with another peak occurring at 4:00-8:00, after the second monitoring period (2-5 July). However, the use of SAEWM also resulted in the trapping of Coccinellidae and Chrysopidae, of which peak trapping time partially overlapped with the second and third peak trapping times of OFM. We suggest the cessation of SAEWM trapping during the peak activity time of Coccinellidae and Chrysopidae, or application of alternative attractive mixture that do not trap the natural enemy insects, in order to protect the ecological balance in the field.Entities:
Keywords: female/male ratio; green pest control; natural enemy insects; sugar–acetic acid–ethanol–water mixture (SAEWM), oriental fruit moth; trapping efficacy
Year: 2019 PMID: 31597399 PMCID: PMC6843565 DOI: 10.3390/plants8100401
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Figure 1Seasonal changes in flight of Grapholita molesta (Busck) adults in the peach (a) and apple (b) orchards of Tai’an, China, in 2016.
Figure 2Diurnal flight activity of Grapholita molesta (Busck) adults in apple and peach orchards in Tai’an, China, in 2016. (a) 30/5–2/6; (b) 2/7–6/7; (c) 1/8–4/8; and (d) 3/9–6/9.
Trapping efficacy for female/male ratio of OFM adults by sex-pheromone-baited and Sugar–acetic acid–ethanol–water mixture (SAEWM)-baited traps hung at different heights in Tai’an, China, in 2016.
| Orchard Type | Trap Hanging Height (m) | Sex-Pheromone Trap | Sugar–Acetic Acid–Ethanol–Water Solutions Trap | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number Trapped (moths·trap–1) | Percentage of OFM Adults Trapped at Each Height (%) | Percentage of Adult Females Trapped at Each Height (%) | Number Trapped (moths·trap–1) | Percentage of OFM Adults Trapped at Each Height (%) | Percentage of Adult Females Trapped at Each Height (%) | ||
| Peach orchard | 0 | 33.50 ± 6.03d | 0.64 | 0.00 | 0.75 ± 0.50d | 0.08 | 100.00 |
| 1 | 330.00 ± 28.23c | 6.27 | 0.30 | 12.75 ± 2.50 d | 1.29 | 88.24 | |
| 1.5 | 999.00 ± 80.61b | 18.99 | 0.50 | 115.75 ± 15.52c | 11.75 | 89.85 | |
| 2 | 1986.75 ± 99.56a | 37.77 | 0.57 | 366.50 ± 34.28b | 37.21 | 94.13 | |
| 2.5 | 1911.00 ± 229.79a | 36.33 | 0.52 | 489.25 ± 22.68a | 49.67 | 93.56 | |
| Apple orchard | 0 | 62.50 ± 6.86e | 1.11 | 0.00 | 0.75 ± 0.96d | 0.09 | 100.00 |
| 1 | 632.50 ± 22.16d | 11.18 | 0.43 | 12.50 ± 2.08d | 1.53 | 84.00 | |
| 1.5 | 1070.25 ± 150.42c | 18.93 | 0.65 | 72.75 ± 5.85c | 8.93 | 87.97 | |
| 2 | 1711.50 ± 137.79b | 30.27 | 0.53 | 259.50 ± 27.23b | 31.84 | 89.88 | |
| 2.5 | 2178.25 ± 223.06a | 38.52 | 0.60 | 469.50 ± 12.15a | 57.61 | 91.85 | |
Different lowercase (within orchard) letters indicate a significant difference at the 5% level (Duncan’s NMR test).
Figure 3Dynamics of (a) Coccinellidae and (b) Chrysopidae trapped by SAEWM-baited traps in Tai’an, China, in 2016.
Effects of trap hanging height on the numbers of Coccinellidae and Chrysopidae trapped by SAEWM-baited traps in Tai’an, China, in 2016.
| Type of Natural Enemy Trapped | Trap Hanging Height (m) | Peach Orchard | Apple Orchard | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number Trapped (insects·trap–1) | Percentage of Insects Trapped at Each Height (%) | Number of Trapped (insects·trap–1) | Percentage of Insects Trapped at Each Height (%) | ||
| 0 | 6.00 ± 2.16 d | 0.92 | 39.75 ± 4.03 d | 2.76 | |
| 1 | 61.75 ± 3.30 c | 9.48 | 207.75 ± 3.20 c | 14.45 | |
| 1.5 | 167.75 ± 18.66 b | 25.75 | 342.75 ± 18.98 b | 23.84 | |
| 2 | 238.25 ± 16.72 a | 36.57 | 418.00 ± 18.60 a | 29.07 | |
| 2.5 | 177.75 ± 7.93 b | 27.28 | 429.50 ± 16.54 a | 29.87 | |
| 0 | 5.25 ± 1.89 d | 0.28 | 21.50 ± 3.51 e | 1.21 | |
| 1 | 282.75 ± 6.34 c | 15.22 | 360.50 ± 11.03 d | 20.31 | |
| 1.5 | 554.00 ± 20.05 a | 29.82 | 403.75 ± 13.15 c | 22.75 | |
| 2 | 560.75 ± 19.41 a | 30.18 | 547.25 ± 18.17 a | 30.83 | |
| 2.5 | 455.00 ± 22.41 b | 24.49 | 442.00 ± 18.67 b | 24.90 | |
Different lowercase (within orchard and insect type) letters indicate a significant difference at the 5% level (Duncan’s NMR test).
Figure 4Trapezoidal frame used to hang the traps at different heights.