Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T23:44:18.033Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Newly imported larval parasitoids pose minimal competitive risk to extant egg–larval parasitoid of tephritid fruit flies in Hawaii

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

X.G. Wang  and
R.H. Messing
X.G. Wang*
Affiliation:
College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawaii, 7370 Kuamoo Road, Kapaa, HI 96746, USA
R.H. Messing
Affiliation:
College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawaii, 7370 Kuamoo Road, Kapaa, HI 96746, USA
*
*Fax: 1 808 822 2190 E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Competitive displacement of fruit fly parasitoids has been a serious issue in the history of fruit fly biological control in Hawaii. This concern regarding competitive risk of new parasitoids has led to an overall tightening of regulations against the use of classical biological control to manage fruit flies. Fopius arisanus (Sonan), an egg–larval parasitoid, is the most effective natural enemy of tephritid fruit flies in Hawaii. This study evaluated the competitive risk of two recently introduced larval parasitoids, Diachasmimorpha kraussii Fullaway and Psyttalia concolor (Szépligeti), to F. arisanus attacking the Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann). Fopius arisanus won almost all intrinsic competitions against both larval parasitoids through physiological suppression of egg development. 83.3% of D. kraussii eggs and 80.2% of P. concolor eggs were killed within three days in the presence of F. arisanus larvae within the bodies of multi-parasitized hosts. The mechanism that F. arisanus employs to eliminate both larval parasitoids is similar to that it uses against three other early established larval fruit fly parasitoids: F. vandenboschi (Fullaway), D. longicaudata (Ashmead) and D. tryoni (Cameron). It suggests that introduction of these larval parasitoids poses minimal competitive risk to F. arisanus in Hawaii.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 92 , Issue 5 , October 2002 , pp. 423 - 429
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2002

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

Bautista, R.C. & Harris, E.J. (1997) Effects of multiparasitism on the parasitization behavior and progeny development of Oriental fruit fly parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 90, 757–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bautista, R.C., Mochizuki, N., Spencer, J.R., Harris, E.J. & Ichimura, D.M. (1999) Mass-rearing of the tephritid fruit fly parasitoid Fopius arisanus (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Biological Control 15, 137–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bess, H.A. & Haramoto, F.H. (1972) Biological control of pamakani, Eupatorium adenophorum, in Hawaii by a tephritid gall fly, Procecidochares utilis. 3. Status of the weed, fly and parasites of the fly in 1966–1971 versus 1950 – 1957. Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society 21, 165–178.Google Scholar
Bess, H.A., van den Bosch, R. & Haramoto, F.H. (1961) Fruit fly parasites and their activities in Hawaii. Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society 17, 367–578.Google Scholar
Briggs, C.J. (1993) Competition among parasitoid species on a stage-structured host, and its effect on host suppression. American Naturalist 141, 372–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, M. (1954) Notes and exhibition. Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society 15, 270.Google Scholar
Clancy, D.W. (1950) Notes on parasites of tephritid flies. Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society 14, 25–26.Google Scholar
Clancy, C.P., Marucci, P.E. & Dresner, E. (1952) Importation of natural enemies to control the Oriental fruit fly in Hawaii. Journal of Economic Entomology 45, 85–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clausen, C.P., Clancy, D.W. & Chock, Q.C. (1965) Biological control of the Oriental fruit fly, Dacus dorsalis Hendel and other fruit flies in Hawaii. USDA Technological Bulletin 1322, 1–102.Google Scholar
Fisher, R.C. (1963) Oxygen requirements and the physiological suppression of supernumerary insect parasitoids. Journal of Experimental Biology 38, 605–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haramoto, F.H. & Bess, H.A. (1969) Recent studies on the abundance of the Oriental and Mediterranean fruit flies and the status of their parasites. Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society 20, 551–566.Google Scholar
Kimani-Njogu, S.W., Trostle, M.K., Wharton, R.A., Woolley, J.B. & Raspi, A. (2001) Biosystematics of the Psyttalia concolor species complex (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Opiinae): the identity of populations attacking Ceratitis (Diptera: Tephritidae) in coffee in Kenya. Biological Control 20, 167–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liquido, N.J., Shinoda, L.A. & Cunningham, R.T. (1991) Host plants of the Mediterranean fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae): an annotated world review. Miscellaneous Publication of the Entomological Society of America 77, 1–52.Google Scholar
Messing, R.H. (1995) Status and needs of biological control research for tephritid flies. pp 365–367. in McPheron, B.A. & Steck, G.J. (Eds) Fruit flies pest: a world assessment of their biology and management. Delray Beach, Florida, St Lucie Press.Google Scholar
Messing, R.H. (2000) The impact of nontarget concerns on the practice of biological control. pp 45–55. in Follett, P. & Duan, J (Eds) Nontarget effects of biological control. Norwell, Massachusetts, Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messing, R.H. & Ramadan, M.M. (2000) Host range and reproductive output of Diachasmimorpha kraussii (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), a parasitoid of tephritid fruit flies newly imported to Hawaii. pp 713–718. in Tan, K.H. (Ed.) Area-wide control of fruit flies and other insect pests. Penerbit University, Sains Malaysia, Penang.Google Scholar
Palacio, I.P., Ibrahim, A.G. & Ibrahim, R. (1991) Interspecific competition among opiine parasitoids of the Oriental fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel). Philippine Entomologists 8, 1087–1097.Google Scholar
Pemberton, C.E. & Willard, H.F. (1918) Interactions of fruit fly parasites in Hawaii. Journal of Agricultural Research 12, 285–296.Google Scholar
Purcell, M.F. (1998) Contribution of biological control to integrated pest management of tephritid fruit flies in the tropics and subtropics. Integrated Pest Management Reviews 3, 63–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purcell, M.F., Herr, J.C., Messing, R.H. & Wong, T.T.Y. (1998) Interaction between augmentatively released Diachasmimorpha longicaudata (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) and a complex of opiine parasitoids in a commercial guava orchard. Biological Science and Technology 8, 139–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rungrojwanich, K. & Walter, G.H. (2000) The Australian fruit fly parasitoid Diachasmimorpha kraussii (Fullaway): life history, ovipositional patterns, distribution and hosts (Hymenoptera: Braconidae:Opinnae). Pan-Pacific Entomology 76, 12–23.Google Scholar
Salt, G. (1961) The defence reactions of insects to metazoan parasites. Parasitology 53, 527–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sivinksi, J.M., Calkins, C.O., Baranowski, R., Harris, D., Brambila, J., Diaz, J., Burns, R.E., Holler, T. & Dodson, G. (1996) Suppression of a Caribbean fruit fly Anastrepha suspensa (Loew) (Diptera: Tephritidae) population through augmented release of the parasitoid Diachasmimorpha longicaudata (Ashmead) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Biological Control 6, 177–185.Google Scholar
van den, Bosch R. & Haramoto, F.H. (1953) Competition among the parasites of the Oriental fruit fly. Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society 15, 201–206.Google Scholar
Vargas, R.I., Stark, J.D., Uchida, G.K. & Purcell, M. (1993) Opiine parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) of oriental fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) on Kauai Island, Hawaii: islandwide relative abundance and parasitism rates in wild and orchard guava. Environmental Entomology 22, 246–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, X.G. & Messing, R.H. (2002) Intra- and interspecific competition by Fopius arisanus (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) and Diachasmimorpha tryoni (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), parasitoids of the Mediterranean fruit fly Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae). Biological Control (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wharton, R.A. (1989) Classical biological control of infesting fruit Tephritidae. pp 303–313 in Robinson, A. and Harper, G. (Eds) World crop pests. fruit flies: their biology, natural enemies, and control (Vol. 3b). Amsterdam, Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
Willard, H.F. & Mason, A.C. (1937) Parasitization of the Mediterranean fruit fly in Hawaii, 1914–33. United States Department of Agriculture Circular 439, 1–18.Google Scholar
Wong, T.T.Y. & Ramadan, M.M. (1987) Parasitization of the Mediterranean and Oriental fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in the Kula area of Maui, Hawaii. Journal of Economic Entomology 80, 77–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, T.T.Y., Mochizuki, N. & Nishimoto, J.I. (1984) Seasonal abundance of parasitoids of the Mediterranean and Oriental fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in the Kula area of Maui, Hawaii. Journal of Economic Entomology 73, 140–145.Google Scholar