Splat-Mattm Spinosad Me: A New Control Strategy for Bactrocera Species Attacking Mango

Gomez, L. E.; Lysandrou, M.; Vargas, Roger I.; Dripps, James E.; XinPei, Huang; Yadav, Malu Ram; Venkata, N. Kumar Bobba

doi:10.17660/actahortic.2015.1066.19

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on the encouraging results of this study, further evaluations of SPLAT-CL þ spinosad against B. tryoni in Australia are warranted. In recent studies, SPLAT and CL or ME compared favorably with other standard formulations used against B. tryoni (Leblanc et al 2011), B. dorsalis (Vargas et al 2008a(Vargas et al , 2014bGomez et al 2015), and B. cucurbitae (Vargas et al 2008a) for up to 12 wk.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Efficacy of SPLAT formulations are thought to be enhanced as several hundred point sources per hectare can be achieved via spray application, compared with the physical placement of MATs at recommended rates for male annihilation (Hsu 2010). In Hawaii, SPLAT and CL or ME suppresses fruit flies for up to 12 wk (Vargas et al 2008a(Vargas et al , 2009(Vargas et al , 2010Gomez et al 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The few published studies demonstrating the efficacy of SPLAT-MAT against fruit flies have largely focused on the melon fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae Coquillett, and Oriental fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis Hendel, in Hawaii (Vargas et al 2008a(Vargas et al , 2009(Vargas et al , 2010(Vargas et al , 2014bGomez 2015), B. dorsalis in Taiwan (Hsu and Tan 2010), and the peach fruit fly, Bactrocera zonata, in Pakistan (Gomez et al 2015). Only a single study has included B. tryoni (and B. dorsalis), and it was in Tahiti (Leblanc et al 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Specialized Pheromone and Lure Application Technology as an Alternative Male Annihilation Technique to ManageBactrocera tryoni(Diptera: Tephritidae)

Reynolds¹,

Osborne²,

Crisp³

et al. 2016

J Econ Entomol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The results of this study suggest that a novel male annihilation technique (specialized pheromone and lure application technology [SPLAT] incorporating cue-lure [CL] plus spinosad) is as effective as industry standard male annihilation controls, and is worth exploring further to manageBactrocera tryoni(Froggatt) populations. Three lures were evaluated in a contact and feeding bioassay and a cage attractancy trial: 1) SPLAT-CL + spinosad; 2) SPLAT-CL without spinosad; and 3) wick-CL + malathion. In a field attraction trial, lures (1) and (3) were evaluated with a third treatment, caneite blocks-CL + malathion. Lures were weathered for 0, 1, 2, 4, or 8 wk, with an additional weathering treatment of 12 wk included in the field trial. In the contact and feeding bioassay, lures with SPLAT-CL + spinosad were >97% effective at 48 h for up to 2 wk weathering; however, wicks-CL + malathion killedB. tryoniwithin 2 h of exposure under all weathering periods. In the cage attractancy trial, SPLAT-CL + spinosad was as effective as, or performed better than, wicks-CL + malathion under all weathering treatments. The field study trap catches were similar for SPLAT-CL + spinosad and blocks-CL + malathion, and both had higher trap catches than wicks-CL + malathion at all weathering periods, except week 12. Overall, SPLAT-CL + spinosad compared favorably with current standard techniques for male annihilation and warrants further research. SPLAT-CL + spinosad may be a reduced-risk alternative for wicks-CL + malathion or blocks-CL + malathion forB. tryoniand other CL-responding fruit flies, such asBactrocera cucurbitaeCoquillett, because it contains a reduced-risk insecticide that poses a lower risk to humans and the environment and does not require labor-intensive handling and placement.

show abstract