Monitoring oriental fruit moth and codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) with combinations of pheromones and kairomones

Abstract

Experiments were conducted in North and South America during 2012–2013 to evaluate the use of lure combinations of sex pheromones (PH), host plant volatiles (HPVs) and food baits in traps to capture the oriental fruit moth, Grapholita molesta (Busck), and codling moth, Cydia pomonella (L.), in pome and stone fruit orchards treated with sex pheromones. The combination of the sex pheromone of both species (PH combo lure) significantly increased G. molesta and marginally decreased C. pomonella captures as compared with captures of each species with either of their sex pheromones alone. The addition of a HPV combination lure [(E,Z)‐2,4‐ethyl decadienoate plus (E)‐β‐ocimene] or acetic acid used alone or together did not significantly increase the catch of either species in traps with the PH combo lure. The Ajar trap baited with terpinyl acetate and brown sugar (TAS bait) caught significantly more G. molesta than the delta trap baited with PH combo plus acetic acid in California during 2012. The addition of a PH combo lure to an Ajar trap significantly increased catches of G. molesta compared to the use of the TAS bait or PH combo lure alone in 2013. Female G. molesta were caught in TAS‐baited Ajar traps at similar levels with or without the use of additional lures. Ajar traps baited with the TAS bait alone or with (E)‐β‐ocimene and/or PH combo lures caught significantly fewer C. pomonella than delta traps with sex pheromone alone. Ajar traps with 6.4‐mm screened flaps caught similar numbers of total and female G. molesta as similarly baited open Ajar traps, and with a significant reduction in the catch of non‐targets. Broader testing of HPV and PH combo lures for G. molesta in either delta or screened or open Ajar traps is warranted.

Improved monitoring of oriental fruit moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) with terpinyl acetate plus acetic acid membrane lures

“…Here, among our various studies, the mean catch in traps was consistently higher (3–5×) in traps baited with the 2‐PH lure vs. a standard sex pheromone lure, but these means were never statistically significant. Previously, we found that a significant trade‐off with using the combination sex pheromone lure was that male catch of C. pomonella was reduced in comparison with codlemone‐baited traps (Knight, Cichon, et al., ; Knight, Basoalto, et al., ). Conversely, studies reported from Argentina and Uruguay found that C. pomonella catch was similar in traps baited with either codlemone or the 2‐PH lure.…”

“…One prerequisite included in our development of new, low‐cost monitoring tools has been the manager’s ability to use any new lures in standard traps with removable sticky liners (Cichon et al., ). Development of the Ajar trap was an intermediate step that allowed bisexual monitoring using sticky liners with catches comparable to the bucket traps but with fewer nontargets to sort, but was still a cumbersome design due to the replacement of the liquid baits (Knight et al., ; Knight, Cichon, et al., ; Padilha et al., ). Our new results demonstrate that G. molesta can now be monitored with a combination of volatiles released by septa and membrane lures within standard sticky traps.…”

“…Also, the combination sex pheromone lure was significantly less attractive to C. pomonella than standard sex pheromone lures for this species, and this may limit its use in pome orchards managing both C. pomonella and G. molesta (Evenden & McLaughlin, ; Il’ichev et al., ; Steliniski, Il’ichev, & Gut, ; Steliniski et al., ). The addition of acetic acid, ( E )‐β‐ocimene, or pear ester with this combination sex pheromone only marginally increased moth catches, including female moths (Knight, Cichon, et al., ).…”

Response profile of pheromone receptor neurons in male Grapholita molesta (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae)

“…Whereas narrow variations in the ratio of the two acetates have a strong effect in male behavioral response (Baker et al, 1981;Knight et al, 2014a), males accept wide variations in the quantity of Z8-12:OH in the blend Linn and Roelofs, 1983;Linn et al, 1986), and in some locations Z8-12:OH is produced in trace amounts by females (Lacey and Sanders, 1992), or does not seem to play a role in attraction (Han et al, 2001;Jung et al, 2013). Furthermore, other alcohols affect the response of male G. molesta to the two acetates Cardé et al, 1975aCardé et al, ,b, 1979, including the sex pheromone of C. pomonella (Knight et al, 2014b), and Z8-12:OH inhibits males of closely related species (Grapholita funebrana (Treitschke) and Grapholita prunivora (Walsh)), that use a similar ratio of the Z/E acetates as G. molesta Guerin et al, 1986), so a reinvestigation of the role of alcohols in the olfactory communication of G. molesta is warranted.…”

Plant volatiles challenge inhibition by structural analogs of the sex pheromone in Lobesia botrana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae)

“…Plant volatiles infl uence insect behaviour and complement sex pheromone management (Szendrei & Rodriguez-Saona, 2010;Knight et al, 2011). This effect is particularly important under mating disruption conditions, in which plant volatiles, alone or in combination with the sex pheromone, may be more effi cient for monitoring than the sex pheromone alone (Knight et al, 2014). In this respect, it is known that plant volatiles synergize insect response to pheromones (Landolt & Phillips, 1997;Reddy & Guerrero, 2004;Deisig et al, 2014), and have the advantage of attracting both sexes, whereas sex pheromone traps attract only males.…”