The melon fruit fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett) (Diptera: Tephritidae) is distributed widely in temperate, tropical, and sub-tropical regions of the world. It has been reported to damage 81 host plants and is a major pest of cucurbitaceous vegetables, particularly the bitter gourd (Momordica charantia), muskmelon (Cucumis melo), snap melon (C. melo var. momordica), and snake gourd (Trichosanthes anguina). The extent of losses vary between 30 to 100%, depending on the cucurbit species and the season. Its abundance increases when the temperatures fall below 32° C, and the relative humidity ranges between 60 to 70%. It prefers to infest young, green, soft-skinned fruits. It inserts the eggs 2 to 4 mm deep in the fruit tissues, and the maggots feed inside the fruit. Pupation occurs in the soil at 0.5 to 15 cm below the soil surface. Keeping in view the importance of the pest and crop, melon fruit fly management could be done using local area management and wide area management. The melon fruit fly can successfully be managed over a local area by bagging fruits, field sanitation, protein baits, cue-lure traps, growing fruit fly-resistant genotypes, augmentation of biocontrol agents, and soft insecticides. The wide area management program involves the coordination of different characteristics of an insect eradication program (including local area options) over an entire area within a defensible perimeter, and subsequently protected against reinvasion by quarantine controls. Although, the sterile insect technique has been successfully used in wide area approaches, this approach needs to use more sophisticated and powerful technologies in eradication programs such as insect transgenesis and geographical information systems, which could be deployed over a wide area. Various other options for the management of fruit fly are also discussed in relation to their bio-efficacy and economics for effective management of this pest.

/pdf/the-melon-fruit-fly-bactrocera-cucurbitae-a-review-of-its-11brdssq1u.pdf

The melon fruit fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae: a review of its biology and management.

The biological control of pest tephritid flies using parasitoids has been successful in relatively few subtropical and tropical regions. The best documented successes were in Hawaii and Florida, USA, Fiji and southern Europe. There were relatively limited successes in Australia, Costa Rica and Mexico. With the accidental establishment of new pest tephritids, such as Bactrocera latifrons (Hendel) in Hawaii or Bactrocera papayae Drew and Hancock in Australia, foreign exploration for new parasitoids is essential. A renewal of interest in classical biological control has recently occurred, although not at the same level as in the 1940s and 1950s. New parasitoid species are currently being obtained for several tephritids, such as Ceratitis capitata (Weidemann), B. latifrons and Anastrepha suspensa (Loew). The advances in mass rearing and quality control technology for parasitoids has enabled researchers to perform large-scale field testing of these parasitoids to determine the potential of augmentative releases. Numerous studies on the augmentative release of parasitoids have been done. Historically, the larval—pupal parasitoid Diachasmimorpha longicaudata (Ashmead) has been the most frequently studied parasitoid, due to the ease of rearing this species. However, recent successes in rearing other species with different biologies, e.g. the egg—pupal parasitoid Biosteres arisanus (Sonan), the gregarious eulophid, Tetrastichus giffardianus (Silvestri) and the pupal parasitoid, Coptera sp., will enable researchers to broaden the repertoire of parasitoid species for the future. Both successes and failures in augmentative releases have occurred. Without knowledge of the behavioural ecology of parasitoids, the reasons for success or failure can only be surmised. Recent research on the dispersal and host habitat finding of tephritid parasitoids will provide insights into improving augmentation and conservation strategies. The integrated pest management (IPM) of tephritid flies in the tropics has been less well-developed than research and programmes for tephritids in temperate zones. Significant emphasis is now being placed on the development of quarantine treatment methods that are environmentally sound; thus IPM will take a larger role. Several existing pest management strategies are reviewed which show the potential for compatibility with the activities of tephritid parasitoids. These include trap cropping, insecticides with selective toxicity to the target pests, mass trapping with parapheromones, the sterile insect technique and field sanitation.

Contribution of Biological Control to Integrated Pest Management of Tephritid Fruit Flies in the Tropics and Subtropics

:

Aqueous extract of neem seed kernel (NSKE) was tested for its effect on the fecundity and post-embryonic development of Bactrocera cucurbitae and Bactrocera dorsalis, when fed as water source. Comparisons were made with pure azadirachtin to ascertain its role as a compound responsible for these effects. Three oviposition dates (10, 15 and 20) after adult emergence were chosen. In the 10 day experiment no egg laying was recorded at a concentration of 0.25% NSKE for both the species. By the 20th day, mean number of eggs laid were 93 for B. cucurbitae and 100 for B. dorsalis at the same concentration as compared with 241 and 243 eggs in respective controls. This pattern of recovery was observed for the first time using neem extracts on B. cucurbitae and B. dorsalis. Effect on fertility were evident as the per cent egg-hatch in the 10-day experiment ranged from 56 to 72 and 61 to 75% for B. cucurbitae and B. dorsalis respectively, compared with 99 and 99% in controls. The overall egg hatch ranged between 56 and 85% for both the species, covering the reproductive age of the flies. There was no significant effect on pupation. Per cent pupation of the hatched larvae was >90%, while the adult emergence calculated from the number of larvae that pupated was >62%, for both the species, however, when calculated from the initial number of eggs laid the post-embryonic effects were evident. The effects on fecundity, fertility and adult emergence were confirmed with pure azadirachtin. As with NSKE, pupation was not much affected, however, significant effects on adult emergence and behaviour were recorded. The post-embryonic effects of neem seed kernel extracts on the two species of fruit flies was confirmed for the first time. Being safe, cheap and renewable, neem extract can be effectively used as an excellent alternative to synthetic insecticides.

Effects of aqueous extract of neem seed kernel and azadirachtin on the fecundity, fertility and post-embryonic development of the melonfly, Bactrocera cucurbitae and the oriental fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Laboratory-reared and wild adults of the melon fly,Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett, were tested for response to cue-lure at various ages. Virgin laboratory (4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 14 days old) and wild (10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, and 22 days old) flies were released into outdoor field cages and trapped from 0800 until 1600 hr. Response of males to cue-lure increased with age and corresponded with sexual maturity for each strain. Females of both strains were relatively nonresponsive to cue-lure. Failure to eradicate in past male annihilation programs againstD. cucurbitae may be explained in part by the fact that only older males, which may have already mated with gravid females, respond to cue-lure.

AGE-RELATED RESPONSE OF MALE MELON FLIES Dacus cucurbitae (DIPTERA: TEPHRITIDAE) TO CUE-LURE

The melon fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett) (Diptera: Tephritidae), is a widespread, economically important tephritid fruit fly species. Bactrocera cucurbitae infests fruits and vegetables of a number of different plant species, with many host plants in the plant family Cucurbitaceae, but with additional hosts scattered across many other plant families. Although thought to be native to India, its distribution has spread throughout many countries in Oriental Asia, into a number of Pacific Island nations, and into Africa. The documented introductions into countries outside its native distribution show that this species could establish in other countries where it does not presently occur, particularly through the movement of infested fruit. As with other tephritid fruit fly species, establishment of B. cucurbitae can have significant economic consequences, including damage and loss of food production, as well as requirements for implementation of costly quarantine treatments to permit export of commodities susceptible to infestation by B. cucurbitae and inspection of susceptible imported commodities. In order to avoid these adverse economic consequences, one needs to prevent the entry, establishment and spread of B. cucurbitae into a new habitat. To successfully achieve this, an accurate knowledge of the fly’s host plants is essential. Cognizant of this need, we prepared, and present here, a worldwide list of host plants for B. cucurbitae, with annotations on reported laboratory and field infestation data. Overall, 136 plant taxa from 62 plant genera and 30 plant families are identified as hosts of B. cucurbitae, based on reported field infestation data. The predominant family, as expected, is Cucurbitaceae, with 56 plant taxa (41.2% of all host plant taxa) in which field infestation by B. cucurbitae has been documented. The family with the 2nd highest number of documented infested plant taxa is Solanaceae, for which there are published field infestation data for 20 plant taxa (14.7% of plant taxa for which there is documented field infestation). Papers that list plants as hosts of B. cucurbitae based only on laboratory data, those that list plants as a host but do not report any field infestation data, and those that report interception data add an additional 137 host plant taxa, representing a total of 80 genera and 39 plant families, 20 of which are additional plant families beyond those for which there is field infestation data. These additional species must be considered “undetermined” hosts for which additional data are needed to document actual host status. This paper is a comprehensive documentation of host plants of the melon fly based on recorded infestations in laboratory and/or field, interceptions at ports of entry, or “listing only” associations. Host records presented here will be used in vetting and developing the official USDA list of host plants of the melon fly, which will be published by APHIS as a federal order.

/pdf/annotated-world-bibliography-of-host-plants-of-the-melon-fly-4ys5n5iif0.pdf

Annotated World Bibliography of Host Plants of the Melon Fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett) (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Distribution of the melon fly, Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett, was determined by trapping males at 100 sites throughout the island of Rota, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Melon flies were most numerous along the south coastal trap sites. Flies caught in traps were significantly correlated to pupal yield from samples of infested fruits of Momordica charantia L. for two of three years. Rainfall was significantly correlated with trap catches for the two low rainfall years of 1984 and 1987, but not for the two high rainfall years of 1985 and 1986. The highest trap catch of 5.8 flies per trap per day in 1986 was 100 times less than the number of flies caught in an earlier study in 1961 when the peak was 614 flies per trap per day and precipitated eradication efforts in 1963.

Seasonal distribution and abundance of Dacus cucurbitae (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Rota, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

J. E. Gilmore

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Seasonal distribution and abundance of Dacus cucurbitae (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Rota, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.