Response of the Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata (Wied.) and peach fruit fly, Bactrocera zonata (Saund.) to some food attractants | ||||
| Egyptian Academic Journal of Biological Sciences. A, Entomology | ||||
| Article 10, Volume 2, Issue 2, December 2009, Page 111-118 PDF (174.91 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/eajbsa.2009.15433 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Author | ||||
| Sameh A. Moustafa | ||||
| Plant Protection Research Institute, Agricultural Research Center, Ministry of Agriculture | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| The mean captured adults of the Mediterranean fruit fly (MFF), Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) per trap per day (CTD) in the traps containing Glan, Pro-lure 2%, Agrisense, Bioprox, Pro-lure 5%, Amadene, Buminal, Norlan and Agrinal were 11.04, 10.55, 10.22, 7.62, 6.56, 3.98, 3.16, 2.98 and 1.89, respectively. While, the effectiveness of the tested food attractants against the peach fruit fly (PFF), Bactrocera zonata (Saunders) adults comes in descending order as follows: Gla > Pro-lure 5 > Pro-lure 2% > Bioprox > Agrisense > Agrinal > Buminal > Norlan and Amadene; however, the CTDs of these preparations were 0.60, 0.60, 0.51, 0.49, 0.42, 0.22, 0.15, 0.13 and 0.13, respectively. The present results showed that, adding the pesticide, malathion to the food attractant preparations was obviously reduced the attractiveness of the lures to both MFF and PFF adults. All of the tested preparations were attracted MFF and PFF females with a significantly high numbers in comparison to males. Regression analysis illustrated that the tested food attractants exhibited high stability by the time passed, where the passed time had not any significant effect on the potentiality of the tested preparations. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Mediterranean Fruit Fly; Ceratitis capitata; Bactrocera zonata; food attractants | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 275 PDF Download: 384 |
||||
