Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T10:59:58.055Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ATTRACTION OF RHAGOLETIS FLIES (DIPTERA: TEPHRITIDAE) TO RED SPHERES OF DIFFERENT SIZES1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Ronald J. Prokopy
Ronald J. Prokopy
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

When different size sticky-coated red spheres were positioned within the foliage canopy of sour cherry or apple trees, more Rhagoletis pomonella (Walsh) flies were always captured on 7.5-cm-diam. ones than on 3.4 or 1.5 cm ones. Early in the season, 7.5 cm spheres attracted fewer or about as many R. pomonella as 23 cm spheres, but later on, 7.5 cm spheres always attracted more. R. fausta (Osten Sacken) and R. cingulata (Loew) flies were always more attracted to 7.5 cm spheres than to any other size tested. However, both these species showed a proportionately greater attraction to smaller spheres than did R. pomonella. The phenomena of super-normal stimuli and learning are proposed as possible explanations of certain of these findings.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 109 , Issue 4 , April 1977 , pp. 593 - 596
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1977

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

Alloway, T. M. 1973. Learning in insects other than Apoidea, pp. 131–171. In Corning, W. C., Dyal, J. A., and Willows, A. O. D. (Eds.), Invertebrate learning. Vol. 2. Arthropods and gastropods. Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bush, G. L. 1966. The taxonomy, cytology, and evolution of the genus Rhagoletis in North America (Diptera, Tephritidae). Bull. Mus. comp. Zool. Harv. 134: 431–562.Google Scholar
Kring, J. B. 1970. Red spheres and yellow panels combined to attract apple maggot flies. J. econ. Ent. 63: 466–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, R. C. 1969. Attractiveness of baited and unbaited lures to apple maggot and beneficial flies. J. econ. Ent. 62: 1076–1078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oatman, E. R. 1964. Apple maggot trap and attractant studies. J. econ. Ent. 57: 529–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, R. J. 1968 a. Visual responses of apple maggot flies, Rhagoletis pomonella (Diptera: Tephritidae): Orchard studies. Entomologia exp. appl. 11: 403–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, R. J. 1968 b. Sticky spheres for estimating apple maggot adult abundance. J. econ. Ent. 61: 1082–1085.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, R. J. 1969. Visual responses of European cherry fruit flies — Rhagoletis cerasi L. (Diptera: Trypetidae). Polskie Pismo ent. 39: 539–566.Google Scholar
Prokopy, R. J. 1972. Response of apple maggot flies to rectangles of different colors and shades. Environ. Ent. 1: 720–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, R. J. 1975 a. Apple maggot control by sticky red spheres. J. econ. Ent. 68: 197–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, R. J. 1975 b. Selective new trap for Rhagoletis cingulata and R. pomonella flies. Environ. Ent. 4: 420–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, R. J., Bennett, E. W., and Bush, G. L.. 1971. Mating behavior in Rhagoletis pomonella. I. Site of assembly. Can. Ent. 103: 1405–1409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reissig, W. H. 1974. Field tests of traps and lures for the apple maggot. J. econ. Ent. 67: 484–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reissig, W. H. 1975. Evaluation of traps for apple maggot in unsprayed and commercial apple orchards. J. econ. Ent. 68: 445–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rivard, I. 1972. Piègeage de la mouche de la pomme à l'aide de pommes artificielles engluèes. Phyto-protection 53: 62–70.Google Scholar
Shervis, L. J., Boush, G. M., and Koval, C. F.. 1970. Infestation of sour cherries by apple maggot: Confirmation of a previously uncertain host status. J. econ. Ent. 63: 294–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar