7/27/2019 Evaluation of Various Insecticides

1/4

Sarhad J. Agric. Vol.28, No.4, 2012

EVALUATION OF VARIOUS INSECTICIDES AS LURE

TOXICANTS FOR FRUIT FLY MANAGEMENT IN

GUAVA ORCHARDS

FARMAN ULLAH*, HAYAT BADSHAH**,KHAN ALAM***, AMANULLAH KHAN****,

QAMER ZEB***and MANZOOR AHMAD MASHWANI*****

* Department of Plant Protection, Agricultural University, Peshawar Pakistan.

** Entomology Section, Agricultural Research Institute, Tarnab, Peshawar Pakistan.

*** University of Ningrahaar, Nigrahaar Afghanistan.

**** Entomology Section, Nuclear Institute for Food & Agriculture, Peshawar Pakistan.

***** Department of Agriculture, Bacha Khan University, Charsadda Pakistan.

ABSTRACT

The present experiment entitled Evaluation of various insecticides as lure toxicant for fruit fly

management in guava orchards was conducted at district Kohat, KPK, Pakistan. The experiment was laid out in

RCB design with twelve treatments replicated four times in semi ripe fruit stage. Insecticides tested included

Chlorpyriphos, Thiodan, DDVP, Laser, Decies-D, Saprofan-SP, Cypermethrin, Karate, Methyl Parathion, Dimegro

(Dimethoate), Fyfenon and Amacon each with 5% concentration in the solution. The results achieved showed thatover all mean population of fruit flies captured during the course of experiment i.e. July-December with

Chlorpyriphos, Thiodan, DDVP, Laser, Decies-D, Saprofan-SP, Cypermethrin, Karate, Methyl Parathion, Dimegro

(Dimethoate), Fyfenon and Amacon was 655.0, 518.8, 455.8, 698.7, 902.5, 898.2, 893.8, 674.0, 490.7, 564.7, 920.7,

and 622.9 respectively, while in the standard (Saprofan sp) it was 898.2, followed by Fyfenon and Decies-D

statistically different from all the other treatments. During this period the highest population was recorded in

Saprofan-SP while lowest was recorded in DDVP. As for as relative abundance is concerned, two fruit flies species

Bactrocera zonata and Bactrocera Dorsalis were found in the Kohat district where B. zonatus was found as

dominant species (94.7%) while B. dorsalis 5.30% was less frequent. The overall results revealed that Saprofan-SP

proved to be the best toxicant followed by Fyfinon and Decies-D. It also showed that in case of non-availability of

the standard Saprofan-sp the other these toxicants can be used efficiently.

Key words: Fruit flies, Lure toxicant, Guava, Management

Citation: Ullah, F., H. Badshah, K. Alam, A. Khan, Q. Zeb and M.A. Mashwani. 2012. Evaluation of variousinsecticides as lure toxicants for fruit fly management in Guava Orchards. Sarhad J. Agric. 28(4): 617-620.

INTRODUCTION

Guava (Psiddium Guajava L.) is one of the important fruits extensively grown in Pakistan especially in

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK). It is grown on an area of 3.4 thousand hectares with a production of 33.4 thousand

tones in KPK, where the main growing areas are Bannu, Kohat, Haripur and Dargi (Malakand) (MINFAL, 2002-03).

Guava is grown all over the world for its dietary value and good taste. It is a very rich source of vitamin C.

(Mahmood, 1994)

Guava fruit is seriously damaged by different environmental factors and pests which include diseases,

birds, insects and mites. Among insects, fruit flies especiallyBactrocera app is the most important pest. According

to a survey conducted by the National Fruit Fly Research (NFFR) laboratory, Dera Ismail Khan, KPK, Pakistan, it

was observed that the percent relative abundance of the 3 economically important species, Bactrocera spp. B.

dorsalis hendel,B. Cucurbitea (cog) andB. Zonatus (saouders) in guava orchard was 3.22, 16.44 and 80.34 percent,respectively (Marwat and Baloch, 1986). This indicated that B. Zonatus might cause maximum loss to guava orchard

due to its high prevalence in the orchards and has greater economic importance. The oriental fruit fly Bactocera

dorsalis (Bezzi) causes 5- 100 percent losses to various fruits in Pakistan (Syed et al., 1970) . Losses up to 80

percent have been reported in guava fruits (Kafi, 1986) . Meanwhile, Kapoor (1993) reported that ber fruit fly could

cause 90-100 percent damage to ber fruit.

Adult flies are about the same size of houseflies with reddish brown to grayish black in color. The wings

are transparent having brown spots near the tips. The female has a pointed ovipositor; it flies and sets on the soft

portion of the fruit and punctures it through its ovipositor where it lays eggs under the fruit skin (Khattaket al. 2005

c). The same place of oviposition may also be used by another female for egg laying (Syed et al. 1970).

Among the various alternate strategies available for the management of fruit flies, use of Methyl Eugenol trap stands

as the most outstanding alternative (Khattaket al. 2005 b). Methyl Eugenol has both olfactory as well as

7/27/2019 Evaluation of Various Insecticides

2/4

Farman Ullah et al. Evaluation of insecticides as lure toxicants for fruit fly management in Guava Orchards 618

phagostimulatory action and is known to attract fruit flies from a distance of 800 m (Roomi et al., 1993). Methyl

eugenol when used together with an insecticide impregnated in to suitable substrate, form the basis of male

annihilation technique. This technique has been successfully used for the eradication and control of several

Bactrocera species (Cunningham, 1989). This technique is safe for environment and has no deleterious effect on the

agro-ecosystem. Methyl eugenol ether and cue lure are the two potent sex-lures used against the Bactrocera spp

(Anonymous 1986). Very little work on the male annihilation techniques of fruit flies been under taken in the target

area. Keeping in view the importance of guava fruit and huge losses due to fruit fly, the present study was conducted

for the evaluation of different insecticides to use as lure toxicant, at District Kohat with the objectives: To screen out

twelve different insecticides as lure toxicant with Methyl Eugenol baited traps and to find out different fruit fly

species and their relative abundance in the Kohat District.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was carried out in four guava orchards (3 acres each) in different locations of district Kohat

KPK, Pakistan. Experiment was carried out at semi ripe fruit stage starting from July 2004. Lure baited traps with 12

different insecticides comprising Chlorpyriphos, Thiodan, DDVP, Laser, Decies-D, Saprofan-SP, Cypermethrin,

Karate, Methyl Parathion, Dimegro, Fyfenon and Amacon as lure toxicants @ 4 traps acre-1 were installed in the

guava orchards, equidistantly. Data regarding numbers of male flies captured was recorded on weekly basis, brought

to the laboratory, counted and identified for relative abundance by using different taxonomic keys and already

available specimens.

Traps Preparation

A mixture of Methyl Eugenol, sugar and insecticides was used in the following ratios during the

experiment:

Methyl- eugenol Sugar solution Insecticides

85% 10% 5 %

After preparing the solution, a cotton wick approximately weighed 2 gm were made and 5 ml solution was

applied according to the recommended procedure then installed in the fruit fly trap, one replication of all twelve

toxicants randomly in all 4 orchards in July, 2004. The cotton wick in each trap was replenished after each month.

Data was recorded for the 6 months (July-December, 2004). The experiment was laid out in Randomized Complete

Block (RCB) Design with four replications. There were twelve treatments in each replication, with 3 acres orchard

per replication.. Data recorded on different parameter during these six months were subjected to statistical analysisby using M-state-C package and means were separated by using LSD test.

Table I Insecticides were used in the experiment

S.No Common Name Trade Name

1 Chloropiriphos Lorsban

2 Thiodan Endosulfan

3 DDVP Nogos, Benfos

4 Laser Laser(Cypermethrin+dimethoate)

5 Decis-D (Delthamathrin +dimethoate)

6 Cypermethrin Lianzi, Symbush7 Karate (Limbda sailothrin)

8 Methyl Parathian Folidol-M, Meptox, Parathion

9 Dimegro Cygon, Dentox, Dimethoate

10 Fyfenon Malathion 57 EC11 Amacon Imidacloprid

12 Saprofan-SP (Standard) Diptrix

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results of the experiment showed that mean population of fruit fly captured during July 2004 was

maximum (52.8) with Saprofan and minimum (10.5) with Thiodan, Methyl parathion captured 30.0 fruit flies,

Similarly the mean population of fruit fly captured during August 2004 was again maximum (171.4) with Saprofan

fallowed by Decis-D (151.0) while minimum number of fruit flies (24) was captured with Methyl Parathion.

Maximum population of fruit fly (323.5) captured during September 2004 with Fyfanon (Malathion) fallowed by

Decis-D (244) while (162.5) with Saprofan. Minimum number of fruit flies trapped (87.5) by each trap of DDVP

and Methyl Parathion. During the month of October 2004 maximum fruit flies (553.3) captured in traps again

with Saprofan sp (Diptrix, used as standard insecticide), followed by Cypermethrin. During November 2004 mean

7/27/2019 Evaluation of Various Insecticides

3/4

Sarhad J. Agric. Vol.28, No.4, 2012 619

population of fruit fly captured was also maximum with standard insecticide Saprofan followed by Cypermethrin

while mean population of fruit fly captured during July to December 2004 was maximum with standard insecticide

(Saprofan-sp) followed by Fyfanon (Malathion) and Decis D, respectively. Our finding are in agreement with,

Marwat et al. (1992) worked a bait traps with Diptrix against fruit fly which resulted in reducing the fruit flies

infestation. These results are also in agreement with work done by Samalo et al. (1995). Anjum et al. (2000) also

reported that Diptrix (Saprofan sp) and Decis D 2.5% in pheromone traps for the control ofBactrocera dorsalis in

mango orchards. The results do not coincide with Kalia (1995) who reported that methyl parathion is the most

active insecticide againstBactrocera dorsalis. Similarly, Mahmood et al. (1995) demonstrated that Fyfanon

(Malathion), when used in baited trap, significantly reduced Bactrocera dorslis population. While Logiswaran

(1993) and Cheng (1996) reported that DDVP is more effective against fruit fly.

Highest population was recorded in October and the dominant species was noted as Bactocera zonatus. These results

are completely concur with results achieved by (Khattaket al. 2005 a) at Kohat. According to a very detailed survey

conducted by the national fruit fly research (NFFR) laboratory, Dera Ismail Khan, it was observed that the percent

relative abundance of the 3 economically importantBactrocera spp.B. dorsalis hendel,B. Cucurbitea (cog) andB.

Zonatus (saouders) in a guava orchard was 3.22, 16.44 and 80.34, respectively (Marwat and Baloch, 1986,

Anonymous 1986). . This indicated thatB. Zonatus found in maximum numbers in Bannu that confirm our findings

as well.

Table II Total means population of fruit flies captured in different lure toxicant baited traps during July-Dec.ember,

2004 and relative abundance of Bactrocera zonata with respect to B. doraslis

S. No Treatments Mean no of flies capturedMonths Average

July August September October November DecemberJuly-

December

July-December

Mean %

relative

abundance of

B. zonatus

1 Chloropiriph

os 20.8 CD 98.3 DE 238.8 C 262.8 F 32.8BC 1.5 CD 555.0 CD 94.95 A

2 Thiodan 10.8 E 33.3 GH 152.8 EF 295.5 CDEF 24.9 BC 1.8 CD 518.8 D 94.68 A3 DDVP

34.3 B43.3FGH 87.5 F 266.0 EF 22.0 C 2.3 CD 455.8 D 94.82 A

4 Laser 32.0 B 49.8 FG 222.8 CD 356.5 BC 32.8 BC 4.8 BC 698.7 ABCD 94.25 A5 Decis-D 46.5 A 151.0 B 244.5 BC 422.5 B 34.7 ABC 3.3 BC 902.5 ABC 94.35 A6 Cypermethrin 27.0 BC 86.0 E 162.5 DE 553.3 A 51.8 A 8.5 A 998.2 A 94.62 A

7 Karatea 34.3 B 45.8 FG 311.8 AB 422.8 B 40.2 AB 6.0 AB 893.8 ABC 94.68 A

8 Methyleparathian

30.0 BC 24.0 F 231.0 C 338.8 CD 22.8 BC 1.3 BCD 674.0 ABCD94.52 A

9 Dimegro 16.5 DE 59.9 F 87.5 F 315.8 CDEF 30.1 BC 3.3 BCD 490.7 D 94.25 A10 Fyfanon 31.3 B 120.8 C 134.3 EF 333.0 CDFE 18.5 C 2.5 CD 564.7 CD 94.90 A

11 Amacon 26.0BCD

114.8CD 323. 5 A 411.3 B 23.3 BC 2.5 CD 920.7 AB 94.92 A

12 Saprofan-sp 52.8 A 171.4 A 179.8 CDE 275.5 DEF 24.8 BC 2.0 CD 622.9 BCD 95.47 A

LSD

value.

(0.01)=

(+,-)SE=

10.01

2.6

20.23

5.26

67.34,

17.51

68.06

17.7

10.00

2.59

3.307

0.86

348.4

90.6

Total Average

Mean

94.7

Mean followed by the same letters are not significantly different at 0.01 % level of probability.CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

It is concluded that Saprofan-SP proved to be the best toxicant followed by Fyfinon and Decis-D. It is also

recommended that in case of non-availability of the Saprofan-SP growers may use these toxicants efficiently.

Acknowledgment

Funds for research were provided by PARC under ALP fruit fly project similarly the cooperation of Mr.

Alam Zeb and Dr. Abid Farid Principal Scientists of NIFA are also thankfully acknowledged.

REFERENCES

Anonymous. 1986. Suppression of population and infestation of Dacus spp. by male annihilation in guava orchard. Ann.

Rep. Agric. Res. Instt. D.I. Khan. 46p.

7/27/2019 Evaluation of Various Insecticides

4/4

Farman Ullah et al. Evaluation of insecticides as lure toxicants for fruit fly management in Guava Orchards 620

Anjum, S., M. Razaq and M.S. yazadni. 2000. Studies on Seasonal activity and insecticidal control of fruit flies (Dacus

spp.) on mango (Mangifera indica L.) at Faisalabad, Pakistan. Arab J. Pl. Prot. 18(2): 121-123.

Agric. Statistics of Pakistan. 2002-2003. Ministry of Food, Agric. & Livest. Food & Agric. Livest. Div. Econ. Wing,

Islamabad, Pakistan.

Cunningham, R.T. 1989. Male annihilation. In World Crop Pests, Eds. Robinson, A.S. and G. Hooper. .Elsevier,

Amsterdam, Netherland. pp 78-81.

Cheng, Y.E., T.Y. KU. Kao and Y.B. Hunang. 1996. Instability of the currently used poison baits for the oriental fruit fly

and melon fly: the study un documentation of naled and cuelure. J. Agric. Res. of China. 45(4): 422-435.

Kaki, A. 1986. Progress and Problems in Controlling fruit fly infestation. Paper presented at FAO, RAPA, Bangkok. Dec.

16-19.

Khattak, S.U.K., Amanullah, A. Sattar and A. Zeb. 1987a. Monitoring and controlling of fruit flies by Male Annhilation

Technique in KPK. NIFA Annual Rep. pp.141-145.

Khattak, S.U.K., A.U. Khan, Alamzeb, A. Farid and H. Badshah. 2005 b. Fruit fly: An important problem in fruits and its

control by male annihilation. Res. Bullet. No. NIFA/Ento/ALP-2/ 2005. pp 6.

Khattak, S.U.K., A.U. Khan, Alamzeb, A. Farid and H. Badshah. 2005 c. Integrated management of fruit flies in Pakistan

(NIFA Component- III). Final technical report. ALP Project No. 01-01-01-03 March 2002 to June 2005. PARC,

Islamabad. NIFA Peshawar, Pakistan. 26p.

Khattak, S. U. K., A. U. Khan, Alamzeb, A. Farid and H. Badshah. 2005 d. Integrated control of fruit fly. Res. Bull. No.

NIFA/Ento/ALP-1/2005. 6p.

Kapoor . V.C. 1993. Indian fruit flies ( Insecta: Diptera: Tepritidae) Oxford & IBH. Publish. Co . Pvt. India. 228p.

Kalia,V. 1995. Chemical control of oriental fruit flyDacus dorsalis (Hendel). Indian J. Entomol. 57(1): 68-70.

Logiswaran, G. 1993. Evaluation of insecticides for the management of moringa fruit fly. Madras Agric. J. 80(12): 698-

699.

Marwat, N.K., N. Husain and A. Khan. 1992. Suppression of population and Infestation of Dacus spp. By male

annihilation in guava orchard. Pak. J. Zool. 24 (1): 82-84.

Marwat, N.K. and J.K. Baloch. 1986. Methyl Eugenol, a male sex attractant, Pakistan J. Agric. Res. 7:234.

Mahmood, Z., F. Ullah and M. Iqbal. 1995. Efficacy of various insecticides used in pheromone traps for the control of

oriental fruit fly Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera; tephritidea) in Bannu (KPK) Pakistan. Sarhad J. Agric. 11(2):181-187.

Mahmood, N.M. 1994. Horticultural Fruit Crops. National Book Foundation, Islamabad, Pakistan. 633p.

MINFAL. 2003. Agric. Stat. of Pakistan. Govt. of Pakistan. Ministry of Food, Agric. & Livest., Econ. Wing, Islamabad,

Pakistan. pp.4546.

Roomi, M.W., T. Abbas, A.H. Shah, S. Robina, A.A. Qureshi, S.S. Sain and K.A. Nasir. 1993. Control of fruit flies (

Dacus sp) by attractants of plant origin. Anzeiger fiir schdlingskunde, pflanzeschutz, Umwelschutz. 66: 155-157.

Syed, R.A., M.A. Ghani and M. Murtaza. 1970. Studies on trypetids and their natural enemies of West Pakistan. III Dacus

(Strumeta) zonatus (Saunders). Tech. Bullet. CIBC, Rawalpindi, Pakistan. 13:1-16

Samalo, A.P., C.R. Satapathy, R.C. Behere and T. Samal . 1995. Chemical control of the melon fruit fly. Dacus

Cucurbitae cog. (Diptera: Tepretidae). Current Agric. Res. 8(3.4:131-135).