Identification of male-borne attractants in Anastrepha fraterculus (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Abstract

The South American fruit fly is one of the most destructive polyphagous pests in South America. In this species, males gathered in aggregations emit volatiles that attract females; however, the compounds involved in this task remain unknown. In this study, we investigated the chemical composition of the volatile blend emitted by males aiming to identify the specific compounds within this blend that elicit behavioral responses in conspecific females. For this purpose, we performed chemical and electrophysiological analyses and bioassays. The chemical analyses revealed the presence of 29 compounds in headspace samples of A. fraterculus males, of which six compounds, i.e. a-pinene, limonene, (Z)-3-nonen-1-ol, (E,Z)-3,6-nonadien-1-ol, a-farnesene and (S,S)-(-)-epianastrephin, triggered antennal depolarization in conspecific females. In laboratory bioassays, five out of eight synthetic compounds tested individually elicited more behavioral responses than a hexane control, but only the synthetic mixture composed of all EAD-active compounds triggered behavioral responses in females similar to the responses to the headspace samples of conspecific males. In an experiment under semi-natural conditions, the synthetic mixture was more attractive to females than a hexane control and equally attractive to headspace extracts of males. This study reports the identification of male volatile compounds that act as attractant for A. fraterculus females, which may be useful for the control of this pest in infested orchards.

An integrative approach to unravel the Ceratitis FAR (Diptera, Tephritidae) cryptic species complex: a review

“…Many volatiles identified in Ceratitis FAR male emanation have been previously identified in other tephritid pheromones (Cruz-López et al 2006, Heath et al 1991, Lu and Teal 2001, Milet-Pinheiro et al 2014, Robacker 1988, Rocca et al 1993, Vaníčková 2012, Vaníčková et al 2012). Others, specifically isoprenoid geranyl acetone, aliphatic volatile ( E )-non-2-enal, and methyl (2 E ,6 E )-farnesoate, have not been reported before.…”

Evaluating mating compatibility within fruit fly cryptic species complexes and the potential role of sex pheromones in pre-mating isolation

“…In addition, females from the different morphotypes showed differences in their antennal response (Břízová et al 2013, Milet-Pinheiro et al 2014), i.e. while the antenna of Tucumán, Argentina (Brazilian-1 morphotype) females responded to ( Z , E )-a-Farnesene, ( E , E )-a-Farnesene, Epianastrephin, ( Z )-3-Nonen-1-ol and ( E , Z )-3,6-Nonadien-1-ol (Břízová et al 2013), the antenna of Alagoas (Brazilian-3 morphotype) females responded to a- Pinene, Limonene, ( Z )-3-Nonen-1-ol and ( E , Z )-3,6-Nonadien-1-ol, (S,S)-(-)-Epianastrephin (Milet-Pinheiro et al 2014).…”

“…In addition, females from the different morphotypes showed differences in their antennal response (Břízová et al 2013, Milet-Pinheiro et al 2014), i.e. while the antenna of Tucumán, Argentina (Brazilian-1 morphotype) females responded to ( Z , E )-a-Farnesene, ( E , E )-a-Farnesene, Epianastrephin, ( Z )-3-Nonen-1-ol and ( E , Z )-3,6-Nonadien-1-ol (Břízová et al 2013), the antenna of Alagoas (Brazilian-3 morphotype) females responded to a- Pinene, Limonene, ( Z )-3-Nonen-1-ol and ( E , Z )-3,6-Nonadien-1-ol, (S,S)-(-)-Epianastrephin (Milet-Pinheiro et al 2014). Although it has been shown that these compounds attracted females of the Brazilian-3 morphotype and that the females responded equally to an artificial blend of the synthetic compounds and to volatiles collected from males, it is still not known whether these differences observed at the chemical and electrophysiological level are translated into different behaviors, since the behavioral response to the pheromone of the Argentinean populations is not known yet.…”

“…1 – Cáceres et al 2009; 2 – Břízová et al 2013; 3 – Vaníčková et al 2015; 4 – Milet-Pinheiro et al 2014*1 2 = Břízová et al 2013 + Milet-Pinheiro et al 2014 – antennally active; *2 = Milet-Pinheiro et al 2014 – antennally active+++ = large amounts (³ 19%); ++ = medium amounts (7–19%); + = small amounts (1–7%); tr = traces (< 0.1%); - = no detectable amounts; wi = without information…”

“…1 – Cáceres et al 2009; 2 – Břízová et al 2013; 3 – Vaníčková et al 2015; 4 – Milet-Pinheiro et al 2014…”