Efficacy of the Lufenuron Bait Station Technique to Control ... - Iresa

400TreatedControl300Male/trap/week20010001 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23WeekFig. 2. Medfly captures/trap/week in the treated and control fields during 2006.100TreatedControl80Male/trap/week60402001 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23WeekFig. 3. Medfly captures/trap/week in the first field during 2007.Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 39Vol. 3, No. 1, 2008

400TreatedControl300Male/trap/week20010001 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20WeekFig. 4. Medfly captures/trap/week in the second field during 2007.50TreatedControl40Male/trap/week30201001 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23WeekFig. 5. Medfly captures/trap/week in the third field during 2007.Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 40Vol. 3, No. 1, 2008

Lufenuron effect on puncturingfruit damage. The impact of thetreatments on the percentage of puncturedfruits was assessed during three years ofthe study (Table 1). During the year 2005,total means punctured fruits oscillatedbetween 82.75 and 93.3 respectively in thetreated and control fields (31.25 at thebeginning and 121 at the end of the trial inthe treated field against 36 and 134 in thecontrol area). No statistical differenceswere obtained. The effect of the baitstation technique is thus comparable to theconventional farmer’s treatment.Table 1. Mean punctured fruits at the beginning and the end of the trial and the overall mean of punctured fruits during2005, 2006, and 2007*Year 2005TreatedControlP valueYear 2006TreatedControlP valueYear 2007Field 1TreatedControlP valueField 2TreatedControlP valueField 3TreatedControlP valueMean of punctured fruits at thebeginning of the trial31.25 a36 a0.36241.75 b18.75 a0.0350.5 a0 a0.362.25 b0 a0.040.5 a0 a0.14Mean of punctured fruits at theend of the trial121 a134 a0.629.5 b9.5 a0.057.25 a12.5 a0.0631.25 b9.74 a0.0045.5 a7.5 a0.11Overall mean ofpunctured fruits82.75 a93.3 a0.36719.28 b9.40 a0.00073 a4.03 a0.3310.08 b3.06 a0.00012.36 a2.75 a0.59* Within columns, means followed by the same letters are not significantly different (P=0.05) according to StudentTest.Lufenuron effect on the percentageof damaged fruits. Results shown in Fig.6 revealed that the percentage of puncturedfruit is comparable between the treated andcontrol field each year despite the littledifferences observed during the first andthe last year (field 3). Indeed, for the year2005, the percentage of punctured fruitwas 42.9% in the treated field against51.1% in the control area. Furthermore,during the year 2007, we observed 9.68%of fruit damage in the treated area against13.14% in the control plot.The statistical analyses of data duringthe three years (Student Test at P < 0.05)showed no significant differences in thepercentages of punctured fruits betweenthe treated and the control areas except forthe years 2005 and 2007 (field 3).Moreover, in the treated field, significantdifferences in the percentage of fruitpunctures were obtained between the firstand last year of the trial. Simultaneously,decreases of fruit punctures were observedin the control field (Fig. 6).Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 41Vol. 3, No. 1, 2008

6050TreatedControlDamaged fruit (%)4030201002005 2006 07 Field 1 07 Field 2 07 Field 3Year / FieldFig. 6. Percentage of fruit damage in the treated and control fields during 2005, 2006 and 2007.DISCUSSIONResults obtained from this studyshowed clearly that the lufenuron BaitStation technique could be involved as anappropriate strategy for the control of theMedfly in Tunisia. The Match Traptechnique may offer a viable, efficient andeconomic alternative. It could beincorporated with some of these existingmethods in an IPM approach. As reportedin this paper, important reduction of theinsect population and a visible decrease ofthe percentage of fruit damage had beenmade after three years trials in citrusorchards in north of Tunisia, comparableto standard farmer treatments. It may bethat the small size of the trial plots (1 hasurrounded by citrus orchards) influencedthe results due to influx of fertile flies fromsurrounding orchards. Working on largerplots of 5 ha, or even several hundredhectares in a wider campaign area, wouldprovide more significant improvements inthe level of control.Evaluations of fruit damage werelimited to fruit stings. Since lufenuron actsto stop eggs hatching and not to stopfemale flies from stinging fruits, it ispossible that the larval population in thefruits decrease. Future trials could includeincubation of damaged fruits to countpupation and adult emergence to detectthese effects.Similar work conducted in Spainusing the insect growth regulator lufenuronunder two application methods sprayingand hanging traps showed a reduction ofMedfly population of 80.4% in the sprayedfield and a reduction of 77.6% in the solidbait field. Moreover, percentage ofpunctured fruit was 38.8% in the innerzone against 68.6% in the outer zone (16).Furthermore, (5) showed that the lufenuronused as chemosterilizing agent at a dose ofTunisian Journal of Plant Protection 42Vol. 3, No. 1, 2008

1,000-ppm against C. capitata leaded to animportant sterilizing activity as hatchinginhibitors. In Morocco, El Moubariki (8)indicated that the system Match MedflyRB03 in small plot trials showed anefficacy comparable to the conventionalchemical control. The rates of Medflycaptures and the mean number of pupaeproduced by punctured fruits were greaterin the control field than in the treated area.He signaled that this technique could beassociated to the Sterile Insect Technique(SIT) in order to be more efficient (forexample in the Project Clean Fruit). In thiscase, the number of released malesrequired would be reduced. Citrus fruitsare an important and valuable exportcommodity for Tunisia but high infestationrates with the Mediterranean fruit fly arecausing significant economic losses. Afterthis study promising results are obtainedand the lufenuron baiting technique couldbe suggested as an alternative controlmethod in Tunisian citrus orchards.Nevertheless, demonstrations on largerareas are needed to further improve thesuppressive potential of this technique.Further research might focus on the doserate and performance in different cropsunder field Tunisian conditions.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTWe would like to extend our deepest gratitudeto Mr Ben Salah Hassine for his support. This workwas partly supported by Syngenta Crop ProtectionAG, Bioprotection S A-Tunisia and Agriconsulting-Tunisia. Thanks are due to farmers: MohamedAzaiez, Aslene Cherif, Promag and Somi Sghaeir._____________________________________________________________________________RESUMEBachrouch O., Mediouni-Ben Jemâa J., Alimi E., Skillman S., Kabadou T., et Kerber E. 2008.Efficacité de la technique d’appât au Lufenuron dans la lutte contre la mouche méditerranéennedes fruits Ceratitis capitata dans les vergers d'agrumes du Nord de la Tunisie. Tunisian Journal ofPlant Protection 3: 35-45.L’efficacité du piége à lufenuron en tant que composante d’une stratégie de lutte intégrée a été testéecontre la mouche méditerranéenne des fruits Ceratitis capitata dans trois vergers d’agrumes situés aunord de la Tunisie durant les années 2005, 2006 et 2007. La technique se base sur l’utilisation d’unrégulateur de croissance des insectes, le lufenuron, contenu dans un gel-appât pour empêcher l’éclosiondes œufs pondus dans les fruits et engendrer une réduction ultérieure du niveau des populations de lacératite. L’évaluation de l’effet des traitements a été mesurée par la réduction du niveau des populationsexprimée par le dénombrement hebdomadaire des mâles capturés dans les pièges de type McPhail appâtésavec l’attractif sexuel le trimedlure et l’insecticide et l’évaluation des dégâts sur fruits. Les résultatsindiquent que des réductions du niveau de capture des adultes de la cératite de 12.72% durant 2005,34.99% durant 2006 et respectivement 78.85%; 62.84% et 62.86% dans les vergers 1, 2 et 3 en 2007comparé au traitement chimique conventionnel. L’évaluation de l’infestation des fruits montre desdifférences généralement significatives entre les deux types de traitement dans la réduction dupourcentage des fruits piqués.Mots clés : Appât, Ceratitis capitata, citrus, lufenuron, stérilisant chimique, Tunisie_____________________________________________________________________________Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 43Vol. 3, No. 1, 2008

(Wied.) (Diptera, Tephritidae). Revista Brasileiradi Entomologia 28: 421-424.13. Gogi, M. D., Rana M. S., Lloyd, M. D.,Muhammad, J. A., Andrew, B. K., andMuhammad, A. 2006. Effectiveness of two insectgrowth regulators against Bemisia tabaci(Genndius) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) andHelicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera:Noctuidae) and their impact on populationdensities of arthropod predators in cotton inPakistan. Pest Management Science 62: 982-990.14. Hendricks, J., Ortiz, G., Liedo, P., and Schwarz,A. 1983. Six years of successful Medfly programin Mexico and Guatemala. Pages 353-365.Proceedings of the CEC/IOBC InternationalSymposium on Fruit flies of Economicimportance. November 16-19 1982, Athens,Greece. 642 pp.15. Licudine, J. A., Grant, T. M., Roy, T. C., Liquido,N.J., and Qing, X.L. 2001. Efficacy and residuesof phloxine B and uranine for the suppression ofMediterranean fruit fly in coffee fields. PestManagement Science 58: 38-44.16. Liquido, N.J., Shinoda, L.A., and Cunningham,R.T. 1991. Host plants of the Mediterranean fruit(Diptera : Tephritidae) An annotated world list.Entomological Society of America, MiscellaneousPublications 77: 1-52.17. Navarro-Llopis, V., Juan S.C., Ildefonso, A.,Victor, C. G., and Eduardo, P.Y. 2004. Efficacy ofLufenuron as chemosterilisant against Ceratitiscapitata in field trials. Pest Management Science60: 914-920.18. Rendon, P., Sivinski, J., Holler, T., Bloem, K.,Lopez, M., Martinez, A. and Aluja, M. 2006. Theeffects of sterile males and two braconidparasitoids, Fopius arisanus (Sonan) andDiachasmimorpha krausii (Fullaway)(Hymenopera), on caged populations ofMediterranean fruit flies, Ceratitis capitata(Wied.) (Diptera: Tephritidae) at various sites inGuatemala. Biological Control 36: 224-231.19. Rosseler, Y., Ravins, E., and Gomes, P.J.G. 2000.Sterile insect technique (SIT) in the near east, atransboundary bridge for development and peace.Crop Protection 19: 733-738.20. Sivinski, J., Jeronimo, F., and Holler, T. 2000.Development of a real releases ofDiachasmimorpha tryoni (Cameron)(Hymenoptera : braconidae) A parasitoid thatattacks the Mediterranean fruit fly Ceratitiscapitata Wiedmann (Diptera Tephritidae) in theGuatemalan highlands. Biocontrol Science 10: 15-25.21. Steel Robert, G. D. and Torrie, J. H. 1980.Principles and procedures of statistics. Abiometrical approach. McGraw-Hill BookCampany, New York, USA. 633 pp.22. Weems, H.V.J. 1981. Mediterranean fruit fly,Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) (Diptera :Tephritidae). Entomology Circular N o 230. FloridaDepartment of Agriculture & Consumer Services.Division of Plant Industry, Florida, USA. 12 pp.23. Wendell, W.K. and Ruth, R.P. 1964. Effect of thechemosterilisant Apholate on the synthesis ofcellular components in developing Housefly eggs.Biochemistry Journal 92: 353-357.----------------------Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 45Vol. 3, No. 1, 2008

Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 46Vol. 3, No. 1, 2008