Skip to main content
ARS Home » Southeast Area » Miami, Florida » Subtropical Horticulture Research » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #292686
Title: Capture of Anastrepha suspensa and sterile male Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) in multilure traps versus phase 4 traps

Author
item Epsky, Nancy
item DEAN, DAVID - Animal And Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
item FOX, A - Animal And Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
item Kendra, Paul

Submitted to: Florida Entomologist
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 6/16/2013
Publication Date: 9/1/2013
Citation: Epsky, N.D., Dean, D., Fox, A., Kendra, P.E. 2013. Capture of Anastrepha suspensa and sterile male Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) in multilure traps versus phase 4 traps. Florida Entomologist. 96(3):1116-1124.

Interpretive Summary: Tephritid fruit flies are important target pests for trapping programs conducted by State and Federal regulatory agencies in the US. Traps that contain fluid to retain attracted flies (e.g., Multilure traps) are the standard female-targeted traps used by these programs. These traps are costly in both materials and personnel needed for maintenance and sampling. Substitution of these traps with open-bottom dry traps (e.g., Phase 4 traps) would decrease program costs, however they must be effective. Therefore, scientists at SHRS in collaboration with scientists at USDA/APHIS in Sarasota, FL and at FDACS/DPI in Gainesville, FL conducted research in south Florida to compare capture of caribflies and sterile male medflies in these two types of traps. Tests were conducted in an agricultural area with high caribfly populations, and in an urban area under preventative sterile male medfly release and with low caribfly populations. Results of this research found that although open-bottom dry traps captured relatively more sterile medflies than caribflies, capturing 20% fewer versus 1-10% fewer flies respectively, capture was too low to meet program needs. Thus, use of traps with fluid should be continued by trapping programs in south Florida. This information will be used in planning by regulatory agencies for fruit fly trapping programs in the US.

Technical Abstract: Field trials were conducted in south Florida to compare capture of wild Caribbean fruit flies, Anastrepha suspensa (Loew), and sterile male Mediterranean fruit flies, Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann), in Multilure traps, which are McPhail-type traps that use an aqueous solution to retain attracted flies, and Phase 4 traps, which are open-bottom dry traps that use a sticky insert to retain attracted flies. One study was conducted in a guava orchard and compared capture of A. suspensa in both trap types baited with ammonium acetate plus putrescine alone (two-component BioLure) or in combination with trimethlyamine (three-component BioLure). A second study compared captures of A. suspensa and sterile male C. capitata in traps baited with three-component BioLure in an urban area near the end of the eradication program for a C. capitata outbreak. In both studies, Multilure traps out captured Phase 4 traps baited with the same lure, and this ranged from 5:1 for sterile C. capitata capture and from ~10:1 to ~100:1 for wild A. suspensa. Large scale area wide deployment of fruit fly detection traps is costly in both materials and in the time and effort required in routine servicing Although a simpler and cheaper trap such as the Phase 4 trap would be a welcome relief to any large scale area-wide detection programs, it must perform effectively. These comparison trials of the Phase 4 trap indicate that it cannot currently be recommended for use under trapping conditions in south Florida.