Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-rvbq7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-09T19:04:44.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Field Tests of Some Hydrolyzed Proteins as Lures for the Apple Maggot, Rhagoletis pomonella (Walsh)1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

W. T. A. Neilson
Affiliation:
Plant Pathology and Entomology Section, Research Station, Canada Department of Agriculture, Fredericton, N.B.

Extract

During the past decade the attractiveness of various hydrolyzed proteins to several species of tephritid flies has been established and these materials have been used in poison bait sprays, in fly traps, and in studies on dispersal habits. Several workers have reported more satisfactory control when enzymatic yeast hydrolysates or acid hydrolysates of corn protein were added to malathion sprays: Steiner (1952, 1955a, and 1955b) for the Mediterranean fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata Wied.), the oriental fruit fly (Dacus dorsalis Hendel), and the melon fly (Dacus cucurbitae Coq.); Shaw (1955) for the Mexican fruit fly (Anastrepha ludens Loew); Orphanidis et al. (1958) for Dacus adults on olives; and Marucci (1958) for the blueberry maggot (Rhagoletis pomonella (Walsh). Orphanidis et al. have also reported that the addition of casein hydrolysate or the acid hydrolysates of corn protein to the recommended lure of ammonium sulphate increased the captures of Dacus as much as twelve times. Although most of the work with these attractants has concerned control, Barnes (1959) has used them to advantage in biological studies. He labelled natural populations of the walnut husk fly, Rhagoletis completa Cress., with a radioactive tracer by attracting the flies to feeding stations of Staley's insecticide bait No. 7 (acid hydrolysate of corn protein) plus the isotope P32 By subsequent trapping he determined the field movements of the adults in and out of walnut orchards.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1960

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

Barnes, M. M. 1959. Radiotracer labelling of a natural tephritid population and flight range of the walnut husk fly. Annals Ent. Soc. America 52: 9092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, R. W. 1935. Anatomy and post pupal development of the female reproductive system in the apple maggot fly, Rhagoletis pomonella (Walsh). New York State Agr. Expt. Sta. Tech. Bull. 229.Google Scholar
Gow, P. L. 1954. Proteinaceous bait for the oriental fruit fly. f. Econ. Ent. 47: 153160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodson, A. C. 1943. Lures attractive to the apple maggot. J. Econ. Ent. 36: 545548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodson, A. C. 1948. Further studies of lures attractive to the apple maggot, J. Econ. Ent. 41: 6166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockmillar, N. R., and Thomas, M. J.. 1957. Use of protein hydrolysates as insect attractants. Agr. Chem. 12(3): 34.Google Scholar
Marucci, P. E. 1958. Malathion bait sprays for control of blueberry maggot. New Jersey Agr. Expt. Sta. Rept. to 26th Annual Blueberry Open House, pp. 1921.Google Scholar
Orphanidis, P. S., Danielidow, R. K.Alexopoulou, P. S., Tsakmakis, A. A., and Karayannis, G. B.. 1958. Recherches expérimentales sur l'attractivité exercée par certaines substances proteinées sur le Dacus adulte de l'olive. Ann. Inst. Phypath. Benaki, Nouvelle Serie 1: 171198.Google Scholar
Shaw, J. G. 1955. Poison-lure sprays for Mexican fruit fly. California Citrograph 40: 188192.Google Scholar
Steiner, L. F. 1952. Fruit fly control in Hawaii with poison-bait sprays containing protein hydrolysates. J. Econ. Ent. 45: 838843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steiner, L. F. 1955a. Fruit fly control with bait sprays in relation to passion fruit production. Proc. Hawaiian Ent. Soc. 15: 601607.Google Scholar
Steiner, L. F. 1955b. Bait sprays for fruit fly control. Agr. Chem. 10(11): 3234, 113115.Google Scholar