PHEROMONE COMMUNICATION IN THE MEDITERRANEAN FRUIT FLY (Ceratitis capitata Weid.)

1986 ◽  
pp. 189-189
Author(s):  
P. E. Howse ◽  
M. E. Foda
Keyword(s):  
Ceratitis Capitata ◽  
Fruit Fly ◽  
Mediterranean Fruit Fly ◽  
Pheromone Communication ◽  
The Mediterranean

Effects of cold post-harvest treatments of sweet bell peppers on the development of the Mediterranean fruit fly ( Ceratitis capitata )

2016 ◽  
Vol 120 ◽  
pp. 16-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rossana Castro ◽  
Elazar Fallik ◽  
Esther Nemny-Lavy ◽  
Sharon Alkalai-Tuvia ◽  
Polychronis Rempoulakis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ceratitis Capitata ◽  
Fruit Fly ◽  
Mediterranean Fruit Fly ◽  
Post Harvest ◽  
Bell Peppers ◽  
The Mediterranean

scholarly journals Seasonal occurrence of the Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann, 1824) (Diptera: Tephritidae) in southern Syria

2016 ◽  
Vol 85 (3) ◽  
pp. 311-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Mansour ◽  
Fater Mohamad
Keyword(s):  
Ceratitis Capitata ◽  
Fruit Fly ◽  
Fruit Trees ◽  
Fruit Production ◽  
Small Population ◽  
Mediterranean Fruit Fly ◽  
Diospyros Kaki ◽  
Population Fluctuations ◽  
Sampling Studies ◽  
The Mediterranean

Abstract Population fluctuations of the Mediterranean fruit fly (medfly), Ceratitis capitata, were investigated between 1999 and 2001 at several locations representing fruit production areas in the southern part of Syria (Damascus Ghota, Zabadani, Sargaiah, Rankus, Orneh and Ain Al-Arab). Medfly adults were monitored weekly all year around using Jackson traps baited with trimedlure dispensers. Larvae were also sampled in Damascus Ghota by collecting fruits from ripe or ripening fruit trees and recording the number of larvae emerged from these fruits. In addition, suspected overwintering refuges were sampled at weekly intervals during the three coldest months of the year (December – February) and the number of collected larvae was recorded. The results of trap catches and fruit sampling studies showed a similar pattern of occurrence of medfly populations in the study areas, particularly in Damascus Ghota, during the three years of the study. In Damascus Ghota, flies were caught continuously from early June to late December with some variability between years. Two distinct periods of high fly activity were observed: the first one occurred in August and the second in November with a much higher amplitude. In general, seasonal fluctuations in the pattern of occurrence were influenced by differences in temperature and abundance of preferred host fruits. Traps on fig Ficus carica and oriental persimmon Diospyros kaki trees caught the highest numbers of flies, and fruits collected from these trees showed the highest level of infestation, reaching 100% for fig fruit late in the season. Sampling fruits (in Damascus Ghota) from trees during the three coldest months of the year showed that a small population of medfly larvae was able to survive winter conditions in prickly pear Opuntia vulgaris fruit left on the trees. In the other areas of the study (Zabadani, Sargaiah, Rankus, Orneh and Ain Al-Arab), only a few flies were caught.

scholarly journals Defining and Evaluating a Decision Support System (DSS) for the Precise Pest Management of the Mediterranean Fruit Fly, Ceratitis capitata, at the Farm Level

Agronomy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 608
Author(s):  
Andrea Sciarretta ◽  
Maria Rosaria Tabilio ◽  
Armando Amore ◽  
Marco Colacci ◽  
Miguel Á. Miranda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support System ◽  
Support System ◽  
Ceratitis Capitata ◽  
Central Italy ◽  
Fruit Fly ◽  
Mediterranean Fruit Fly ◽  
Conventional Management ◽  
Treatment Type ◽  
The Mediterranean

A Decision Support System (DSS) was developed and evaluated to control the Mediterranean fruit fly (medfly), Ceratitis capitata (Wiedermann), by incorporating a semi-automatic pest monitoring and a precision targeting approach in multi-varietal orchards. The DSS consists of three algorithms. DSS1, based on the degree days calculation, defines when the traps should be deployed in the field initiating the medfly population monitoring. DSS2 defines the areas to be treated and the type of treatment based on the number of adult medfly captures, harvesting time, and phenological stage of the host cultivar. DSS3 defines the spraying procedure considering the technical registration properties of the selected insecticide (e.g., withholding period and efficacy duration time) and weather conditions. The DSS was tested in commercial orchard conditions near Rome, central Italy, with a randomized complete blocks experimental design, comparing DSS-assisted and conventional management. In the DSS-assisted plots, a semi-automatic adult medfly monitoring system was deployed, composed of real-time, wireless electronic traps. The output of the functioning DSS is a map of spraying recommendation, reporting the areas to be treated and the treatment type (bait or cover insecticide spraying). The farmer was left free to follow, or not, the DSS indications. The first medfly captures were observed on June 30, whereas the DD threshold was reached on July 3 when the DSS started to operate. The field test produced 29 DSS decisions from July 3 to September 1 and confirmed that medfly management using the DSS substantially reduced the number of pesticide applications, the treated area, and the volumes of pesticide utilization. No significant differences in infested fruit were observed between DSS-assisted and conventional management. The level of acceptance of the DSS by the farmer was 78%. This evidence confirmed the requirement of fully involving farmers and pest managers during the evaluation process of DSS.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document