No abstract

No abstract

The application of pest risk analysis (PRA) decision‐support schemes, such as that used by the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization (EPPO), generates many ratings for likelihood or magnitude of risk factors, each with an associated uncertainty. In accordance with the international standard ISPM 11 (FAO, 2004), questions have been devised to assess the key elements of pest risk in the four main sections of pest risk assessment: Entry, Establishment, Spread and Impact. After completing each section, risk assessors are required to give a summary rating and an uncertainty score for that section. The large number of question ratings and uncertainty scores make the task of summarizing each section and its uncertainty quite difficult. Two graphical tools have been developed to aid this task: the PRA Risk score and uncertainty visualizer (Visualizer) and the Rule‐based matrix model (RBMM). The Visualizer presents a case summary graph on a single page in such a way that the risk assessors and peer reviewers can see rating scores and uncertainties in a pictorial manner; the RBMM integrates all the individual questions in the assessment through a hierarchy of rules that attempt to mimic the logic used by the assessors and are arranged in the form of a flow chart to give an overall rating with an accompanying expression of uncertainty.

The success of the sterile insect technique (SIT) for the control of the Mediterranean fruit fly or medfly, Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) (Diptera: Tephritidae), depends largely on the ability of sterile flies to spread in the target area and compete with the wild males for wild females. Our objectives in the present study were three‐fold: (1) to evaluate the dispersal ability of sterile male medflies and compare their spatial dispersion patterns with that of wild males, (2) to evaluate how different release methods affect subsequent spatial dispersal, and (3) to determine whether manipulating the pre‐release diet of sterile males affects their dispersal. To achieve these objectives, we conducted three experiments in the field where we quantified and analyzed the spatial and temporal dispersal patterns of sterile medflies and the dispersion of resident wild males. Overall, ca. 5% of the released sterile flies were recaptured 100 m from the release point, and ca. 2% were recaptured 200 m from the release point. The released flies rarely survived longer than 5–7 days. We repeatedly found that the spatial dispersion patterns of sterile males significantly correlated with those of wild males. Release methods strongly affected subsequent fly dispersal in the field as significantly more flies were recaptured following a scattered release vs. a central one. Finally, we show that enriching sterile fly pre‐release diet with protein did not affect subsequent dispersal in the field. We conclude that sterile males are able to match the dispersion patterns of wild males, an outcome that is highly important for SIT success. Large releases from central points distant from each other may leave many areas uncovered. Accordingly, scattered releases, repeated twice a week, will provide better coverage of all available aggregations sites. The spatial performance of protein‐fed males suggests that pre‐release diet amendments may be used without detriment as a sexual stimulant in SIT programs.

10