Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T08:35:49.941Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recaptures of feral Bactrocera dorsalis and B. umbrosa (Diptera: Tephritidae) males after feeding on methyl eugenol

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2019

K.-H. Tan
K.-H. Tan*
Affiliation:
Mobula Research Sdn. Bhd., 20, Jalan Tan Jit Seng, 11200 Tanjong Bungah, Penang, Malaysia Academy of Sciences Malaysia, MATRADE Tower, Jalan Sultan Haji Ahmad Shah, 50480 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
*
*Author for correspondence Phone: +0604 890537 E-mail: tan.kenghong@yahoo.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two major fruit fly pest species, Bactrocera dorsalis and B. umbrosa, are strongly attracted to methyl eugenol (ME) found in >450 plant species. They are, however, exclusive pollinators of certain daciniphilous (attracting Dacini fruit flies) Bulbophyllum orchids. A comparison between the recaptures of feral males after feeding ad libitum on 0.6 mg ME (simulating an average floral quantity of an orchid flower – Trial 1) and 480 mg in Trial 2 was investigated using the non-invasive capture-mark-release-recapture (CMRR) technique. Based on daily CMRR over a 16-day period, using a different colour enamel paint each day, percentages of B. dorsalis males recaptured in Trial 1 were significantly higher than those in Trial 2. However, for B. umbrosa, percentages of recaptures for different day-specific colours were highly variable due to low fly numbers captured/day. In Trial 1, of 756 B. dorsalis males released, 36.4% were recaptured once, 7.7 twice, 2.4 three times and 0.4 four times. While in Trial 2 of 1157 released males, 6% were recaptured once and 0.3% twice. Of 67 B. umbrosa males released, 28.4% were recaptured once and none more than once in Trial 1. Nevertheless, of 119 flies released in Trial 2, 25.2% were recaptured once and 3.3% twice. Overall, many marked males did return to a single ME-source to ‘refuel’ ME (a sex pheromone precursor). The results also show that a relatively high number of flies paid multi-visitations to a single 0.6 mg ME-source and indicate that the presence of natural ME-sources may impact area-wide IPM programmes.

Keywords

capture-mark-release-recapturemethyl eugenolrecapturesferal malesDacini fruit flies
Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 110 , Issue 1 , February 2020 , pp. 15 - 21
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Clarke, A.R., Balagawi, S., Cliffore, B., Drew, R.A.I., Leblanc, L., Mararuai, A., McGuire, D., Putulan, D., Sar, S.A. & Tenakanai, D. (2002) Evidence of orchid visitation by Bactrocera species (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Papua New Guinea. Journal of Tropical Ecology 18, 441–448.Google Scholar
Fletcher, B.S. (1987) The biology of Dacine fruit flies. Annual Review of Entomology 32, 115–144.Google Scholar
Froerer, K.M., Peck, S.L., McQuate, G.T., Vargas, R.I., Jang, E.B. & McInnis, D. (2010) Long-distance movement of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Puna, Hawaii: how far can they go? American Entomologist 56, 88–95.Google Scholar
Hee, A.K.W. & Tan, K.H. (2004) Male sex pheromonal components derived from methyl eugenol in the hemolymph of the fruit fly Bactrocera papayae. Journal of Chemical Ecology 30, 2127–2138.Google Scholar
Hee, A.K.W. & Tan, K.H. (2006) Transport of methyl eugenol-derived sex pheromonal components in the male fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part C 143, 422–428.Google Scholar
Hee, A.K.W., Ooi, Y.S., Wee, S.L. & Tan, K.H. (2015a) Comparative sensitivity to methyl eugenol of four putative Bactrocera dorsalis complex sibling species–further evidence that they belong to one and the same species B. dorsalis. ZooKeys 540, 313–321. https://zookeys.pensoft.net/articles.php?id=6099.Google Scholar
Hee, A.K.W., Wee, S.L., Nishida, R., Ono, H., Hendrichs, J., Haymer, D.S. & Tan, K.H. (2015b) Historical perspective on the synonymization of the four major pest species belonging to the Bactrocera dorsalis species complex (Diptera, Tephritidae). ZooKeys 540, 323–338. https://zookeys.pensoft.net/article/6028/.Google Scholar
Howlett, F.M. (1915) Chemical reactions of fruit-flies. Bulletin of Entomological Research 6, 297–305.Google Scholar
Jang, E.B., Dowell, R.V. & Manoukis, N.C. (2017) Mark-release-recapture experiments on the effectiveness of methyl eugenol-spinosad male annihilation technique against an invading population of Bactrocera dorsalis. Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society 49, 37–45.Google Scholar
Kawano, Y., Mitchell, W.C. & Matsumoto, H. (1968) Identification of the male Oriental fruit fly attractant in the Golden shower blossom. Journal of Economic Entomology 61, 986–988.Google Scholar
Khoo, C.C.H. & Tan, K.H. (2005) Rectal gland of Bactrocera papayae: ultrastructure, anatomy, and sequestration of autofluorescent compounds upon methyl eugenol consumption by the male fruit fly. Microscopy Research and Technique 67, 219–226.Google Scholar
Khoo, C.C.H., Yuen, K.H. & Tan, K.H. (2000) Attraction of female Bactrocera papayae to sex pheromone components with two different release devices. Journal of Chemical Ecology 26, 2487–2496.Google Scholar
Manoukis, N.C., Siderhurst, M. & Jang, E.B. (2015) Field estimates of attraction of Ceratitis capitata to trimedlure and Bactrocera dorsalis to methyl eugenol in varying environments. Environmental Entomology 44, 695–703.Google Scholar
McInnis, D.O., Hendrichs, J., Shelly, T., Barr, N., Hoffman, K., Rodriguez, R., Lance, D.R., Bloem, K., Suckling, D.M., Enkerlin, W., Gomes, P. & Tan, K.H. (2017) Can polyphagous invasive tephritid pest populations escape detection for years under favorable climatic and host conditions? American Entomologist 63, 89–99.Google Scholar
Metcalf, R.L. & Metcalf, E.R. (1992) Plant Kairomones in Insect Ecology and Control. New York/London, Chapman & Hall Inc. 168 pp.Google Scholar
Metcalf, R.L., Mitchell, W.C., Fukuto, T.R. & Metcalf, E.R. (1975) Attraction of the Oriental fruit fly, Dacus dorsalis, to methyl eugenol and related olfactory stimulants. Proceedings of the. National Academy of Science USA 72, 2501–2502.Google Scholar
Nishida, R., Tan, K.H., Serit, M., Lajis, N.H., Sukari, A.M., Takahashi, S. & Fukami, H. (1988) Accumulation of phenylpropanoids in the rectal glands of males of the Oriental fruit fly, Dacus dorsalis. Experientia 44, 534–536.Google Scholar
Nishida, R., Tan, K.H., Wee, S.L., Hee, A.K.W. & Toong, Y.C. (2004) Phenylpropanoids in the fragrance of the fruit fly orchid, Bulbophyllum cheiri, and their relationship to the pollinator, Bactrocera papayae. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 32, 245–252.Google Scholar
Shelly, T. (1994) Consumption of methyl eugenol by male Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae): low incidence of repeat feeding. Florida Entomologist 77, 201–208.Google Scholar
Shelly, T. (2000) Trapping male oriental fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae): does feeding on a natural source of methyl eugenol reduce capture probability? Florida Entomologist 83, 109–111.Google Scholar
Shelly, T., Nishimoto, J., Diaz, A., Leathers, J., War, M., Shoemaker, R., Al-Zubaidy, M. & Joseph, D. (2010) Capture probability of released males of two Bactrocera species (Diptera: Tephritidae) in detection traps in California. Journal of Economic Entomology 103, 2042–2051.Google Scholar
Shelly, T.E., Lance, D.R., Tan, K.H., Sucking, D.M., Bloem, K., Enkerlin, W., Hoffman, K., Barr, K., Rodriguez, R., Gomes, P.J. & Hendrichs, J. (2017) To repeat: can polyphagous invasive tephritid pest populations remain undetected for years under favorable climatic and host conditions? American Entomologist 63, 224–231. https://doi.org/10.1093/ae/tmx075.Google Scholar
Steiner, L.F. (1955) Large-area tests of a male-annihilation method for Oriental fruit fly control. Journal of Economic Entomology 48, 311–317.Google Scholar
Tan, K.H. (1985) Estimation of native populations of male Dacus spp. By Jolly's stochastic method using a new designed attractant trap in a village ecosystem. Journal of Plant Protection in the Tropics 2, 87–95.Google Scholar
Tan, K.H. (2009) Fruit fly pests as pollinators of wild orchids. Orchid Digest 73, 180–187.Google Scholar
Tan, K.H. & Nishida, R. (1996) Sex pheromone and mating competition after methyl eugenol consumption in the Bactrocera dorsalis complex. pp. 147–153 in McPheron, B. & Steck, G.J. (Eds) Fruit Fly Pest, Florida, Lucie Press.Google Scholar
Tan, K.H. & Serit, M. (1998) Movements and population density comparisons of native male adult Dacus dorsalis and Dacus umbrosus (Diptera: Tephritidae) among three ecosystems. Journal of Plant Protection in the Tropics 5, 17–21.Google Scholar
Tan, K.H. & Nishida, R. (2000) Mutual reproductive benefits between a wild orchid, Bulbophyllum patens, and Bactrocera fruit flies via a floral synomone. Journal of Chemical Ecology 26, 533–546.Google Scholar
Tan, K.H. & Nishida, R. (2012) Methyl eugenol: its occurrence, distribution, and role in nature, especially in relation to insect behavior and pollination. Journal of Insect Science 12, 1–60. https://doi:10.1673/031.012.5601.Google Scholar
Tan, K.H., Nishida, R. & Toong, Y.C. (2002) Floral synomone of a wild orchid, Bulbophyllum cheiri, lures Bactrocera fruit flies for pollination. Journal of Chemical Ecology 28, 1161–1172.Google Scholar
Tan, K.H., Tan, L.T. & Nishida, R. (2006) Floral phenylpropanoid cocktail and architecture of Bulbophyllum vinaceum orchid in attracting fruit flies for pollination. Journal of Chemical Ecology 32, 2429–2441.Google Scholar
Tan, K.H., Wee, S.L., Ono, H. & Nishida, R. (2013) Comparison of methyl eugenol metabolites, mitochondrial COI, and rDNA sequences of Bactrocera philippinensis (Diptera: Tephritidae) with those of three other major pest species within the dorsalis complex. Applied Entomology and Zoology 48, 275–282.Google Scholar
Tan, K.H., Nishida, R., Jang, E.B. & Shelly, T. (2014) Pheromones, male lures, and trapping of tephritid fruit flies. pp. 15–74 in Shelly, T., Epsky, N., Jang, E.B., Reyes-Flores, J. & Vargas, R. (Eds) Trapping and the Detection, Control, and Regulation of Tephritid Fruit Flies. The Netherlands, Springer, Science + Business Media Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Wee, S.L. & Tan, K.H. (2001) Allomonal and hepatotoxic effects following methyl eugenol consumption in Bactrocera papayae male against Gekko monarchus. Journal of Chemical Ecology 27, 953–964.Google Scholar
Wee, S.L. & Tan, K.H. (2007) Temporal accumulation of phenylpropanoids in male fruit flies, Bactrocera dorsalis and B. carambolae (Diptera: Tephritidae) following methyl eugenol consumption. Chemoecology 17, 81–85.Google Scholar
Wee, S.L., Hee, A.K.W. & Tan, K.H. (2002) Comparative sensitivity to and consumption of methyl eugenol in three Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) complex sibling species. Chemoecology 12, 193–197.Google Scholar
Wee, S.L., Chinvinijkul, S., Tan, K.H. & Nishida, R. (2018 a) A new and highly effective male lure for the guava fruit fly Bactrocera correcta. Journal of Pest Science 91, 691–698.Google Scholar
Wee, S.L., Abdul Munir, M.Z. & Hee, A.K.W. (2018 b) Attraction and consumption of methyl eugenol by male Bactrocera umbrosa Fabricius (Diptera: Tephritidae) promotes conspecific sexual communication and mating performance. Bulletin of Entomological Research 108, 116–124.Google Scholar