Home Fitness of Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae) on four economically important host fruits from Fujian Province, China
Article Open Access

Fitness of Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae) on four economically important host fruits from Fujian Province, China

  • Yunzhe Song , Jia Lin , Xinru Ouyang , Zhizhuo Ren , Yilin Luo , Qinge Ji , Yongcong Hong and Pumo Cai EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: January 22, 2025

Abstract

Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae) is a highly polyphagous fruit fly pest of economic importance in regions of the world where it occurs. This pest is now established in most parts of Fujian Province, an important fruit-production region in China. However, basic life history information of B. dorsalis on different fruits in this region, which is crucial for developing more effective control approaches, is poorly known. The demographic parameters of B. dorsalis on four fruit types: navel orange (Citrus sinensis Osb. var. brasliliensis Tanaka; Rutaceae), carambola (Averrhoa carambola L.; Oxalidaceae), loquat [Eriobotrya japonica (Thunb.) Lindl.; Rosaceae], and persimmon (Diospyros kaki Thunb.; Ebenaceae) were determined. Results showed that all tested fruit types were suitable for population persistence of B. dorsalis, but the suitability varied. The developmental rate, intrinsic rate of increase (R m), net reproductive rate (R 0), and finite rate of increase (λ) were significantly greater on persimmon compared with the other fruits. Under experimental conditions, fastest development, highest fecundity, highest survival, and heaviest pupal weight were observed on persimmon fruit, demonstrating that persimmon is a suitable host fruit for the growth and reproduction of B. dorsalis. The findings of this study will be valuable in the development of targeted control methods for managing B. dorsalis in orchards, with a particular focus on mixed orchards.

Resumen

Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae) es una plaga de mosca de la fruta altamente polífaga y de importancia económica en las regiones del mundo donde se encuentra. Esta plaga ahora está establecida en la mayor parte de la provincia de Fujian, una importante región productora de frutas en China. Sin embargo, se conoce poca información básica sobre el ciclo de vida de B. dorsalis en diferentes frutos en esta región, lo que es crucial para desarrollar enfoques de control más efectivos. Se determinaron los parámetros demográficos de B. dorsalis en cuatro tipos de frutas: naranja navel (Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck var. brasliliensis Tanaka; Rutaceae), carambola (Averrhoa carambola L.; Oxalidaceae), níspero [Eriobotrya japonica (Thunb.) Lindl.; Rosaceae] y caqui (Diospyros kaki Thunb.; Ebenaceae). Los resultados mostraron que todos los tipos de frutos probados eran adecuados para la persistencia de la población de B. dorsalis, pero la idoneidad varió. La tasa de desarrollo, la tasa intrínseca de aumento (R m), la tasa reproductiva neta (R 0) y la tasa finita de aumento (λ) fueron significativamente mayores en el caqui en comparación con las otras frutas. En las condiciones experimentales evaluadas, se observó un desarrollo más rápido, mayor fecundidad, mayor supervivencia y mayor peso de pupa en el fruto del caqui, lo que demuestra que el caqui es un fruto huésped adecuado para el crecimiento y reproducción de B. dorsalis. Los hallazgos de este estudio serán valiosos en el desarrollo de métodos de control específicos para el manejo de B. dorsalis en huertos, con especial atención en huertos mixtos.

1 Introduction

As one of the most destructive pests of Asian origin, Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae) can attack more than 250 host plant species belonging to 46 different families (Vargas et al. 2007), where internal feeding by larvae results in premature abscission of fruit (Vargas et al. 2015). First documented in China on Hainan island in 1934, this polyphagous pest has gradually enlarged its geographical range from southern to northern China due to rapid reproduction and high diffusion potential (Cai et al. 2020). So far, B. dorsalis has been detected in almost every region in China, where it threatens fruit production and agricultural product import and export trade (Cai et al. 2022). In southern China alone, the annual economic losses caused by this pest amount to approximately three billion USD (Wang et al. 2021).

The behavior of Bactrocera flies varies on different host plants (Moreau et al. 2017). Skin texture, shape, size, odor, and color of fruit, foliage, and twigs may influence the host selection behavior of fruit flies (Brévault and Quilici 2007; Drew et al. 2003; Ekesi et al. 2016; Rattanapun et al. 2009). In turn, these host plant differences influence the selection pressure on biological parameters in insects (Moreau et al. 2017). Fruit fly females tend to oviposit in soft-skin fruits (Pagadala Damodaram et al. 2014). Fruit fly larvae consume the flesh of fresh fruit from the inside and feeding injury promotes secondary pathogens that degrade fruit tissues (Xu et al. 2012). Studies have shown that the development and survival of fruit fly offspring were affected by the nutritional level of infested fruits, and also by different levels of toxins, latex and resin in the fruit (Pieterse et al. 2020; Syamsudin et al. 2022; Zhu et al. 2022).

Fundamental and detailed information on fruit fly survival, development and fecundity are necessary to establish reliable integrated pest management (IPM) programs, and are crucial for implementing prevention and control strategies against Bactrocera pests in orchards (Ekesi et al. 2016; Jaleel et al. 2018a). Development and survival of pests are often investigated using life table modeling, which is a tool for population dynamics and ecology research (Huang et al. 2018). To determine the fitness of B. dorsalis on different dominant fruits in southern China, a two-sex life table was applied to investigate demography on guava, mango, wax apple, jujube, pitaya, sweet orange, and pomelo in Taiwan (Huang and Chi 2014) and papaya, banana and guava in Guangdong Province (Jaleel et al. 2018b). Similarly, Zhu et al. (2022) used the two-sex life table to compare the fitness of B. dorsalis on peaches, apples, and oranges to assess the damage risk of B. dorsalis to the dominant fruits in northern China. Elevated fecundity, net reproductive rates, and intrinsic rates of increase in B. dorsalis were observed on prevalent fruits such as pomelo, guava, and peach (Huang and Chi 2014; Jaleel et al. 2018b; Zhu et al. 2022). These findings not only highlight adaptability of this pest in these regions but also underscore the historical difficulties in its management. Furthermore, these studies have demonstrated that population projections can effectively unveil population growth and stage structure. The age-stage, two-sex life table emerges as a promising and dependable tool for pest management and broader ecological studies (Huang and Chi 2014; Jaleel et al. 2018b; Zhu et al. 2022).

Well-known as the land of fruit in China, Fujian Province provides an opportunity of cultivating diverse fruit species due to its suitable climate conditions and agroecological diversity (Cai et al. 2022). However, the weather conditions in Fujian Province are also favourable for the survival, growth, and reproduction of B. dorsalis (Cai et al. 2023). Further, the space- and time-availability of the host crops in this region, as well as their quality and quantity, provide sufficient food resources for the colonization and propagation of B. dorsalis. Following an outbreak of B. dorsalis in 2005 in Fujian Province, great efforts have been attempted to study effective control methods for this pest in this region, e.g., chemical insecticides (Zhang et al. 2014, 2015], 2021]), fruit bagging (Xia et al. 2019), male annihilation technology (Gu et al. 2018; Ji et al. 2013); sprays of environmentally friendly protein bait (Wang et al. 2021), trapping technology (Lin et al. 2022, 2023]; Xia et al. 2020), sterile insect technology (Cai et al. 2018a; Zhang et al. 2021), and mass release of parasitoids (Cai et al. 2017, 2018b, 2019], 2020], 2022]; Lin et al. 2021; Yang et al. 2018). To build a solid ecologically oriented management system for a pest such as B. dorsalis, with a wide host plant range and geographical distribution, a complete ecological database of the pest characteristics on major hosts is required. However, demographic parameters of B. dorsalis on different host plants of economic importance in Fujian province have not been quantified.

The major purpose of this study was, therefore, to investigate the development, reproduction, and survival of B. dorsalis on the main fruit types typically cultivated in Fujian Province, China. These data would yield a more comprehensive understanding of this pest with the ultimate goal being to contribute to constructing an area-wide management strategy for B. dorsalis where different host plants are cultivated.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Insect colony

B. dorsalis, initially collected from an orchard in Zhangzhou City (117.484167°E,24.487222°N), Fujian, China in 2020, have been continuously reared for approximate 60 generations at the Institute of Biological Control, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University. The B. dorsalis colony was raised using artificial feeding following the rearing method referred to in Lin et al. (2020). The diet used in the current study was slightly modified from Lin et al. (2020). The larval diet contained 120 g wheat bran, 60 g sucrose, 35 g yeast powder, 1 g sodium benzoate, 1 g citric acid, and 400 mL water. The adult diet consisted of 500 mL water, 2 g yeast hydrolysate, and 18 g sugar. Fruit fly rearing and experiments were conducted under constant environmental conditions of 25 ± 1 °C, 70 ± 10 % relative humidity (RH), and a 12:12 (L:D) photoperiod.

2.2 Tested host fruits

The selection of fruits for this study was based on their concurrent ripening periods in Fujian. Oranges mature in October, carambolas ripen from October to December, loquats from September to December, and persimmons from September to October. This research was conducted during the overlapping phenological stages of these fruits. The navel oranges (Citrus sinensis Osb. var. brasliliensis Tanaka), carambolas (Averrhoa carambola L.), loquats (Eriobotrya japonica (Thunb.) Lindl.) and persimmons (Diospyros kaki Thunb.) for the experiment were purchased as certified organic from Future Supermarket. To further ensure that no pesticide residues were present, the fruits were thoroughly washed and soaked in autoclaved-sterile water for 2 h after purchase and then maintained at 25 °C overnight before use. All fruit types used were at the mature ripe stage.

2.3 Life table parameters

Prior to the life table study, 10 pairs of newly emerged adults were initially separated from the colony and introduced into cages (15 × 15 × 15 cm) in pairs and provided with adult diet (see Section 2.1) and fresh fruit slices (fruit pulp, 6 cm in length, 6 cm in width, and 2 cm in height) of the respective host plants for oviposition. After three generations, 100 eggs laid within 24 h were collected and deposited onto the surface of the corresponding host fruit slices. The host fruit slices were placed in a Petri dish with a diameter of 120 mm, and three replicates were included for each fruit species, resulting in a total of 300 eggs being studied per treatment (fruit species). During the egg stage, the eggs were inspected under a microscope (Olympus SZ51) to record the hatch percentage every 2 h until all larvae had hatched or died, typically within a period of 1.5 days. Larvae newly hatched from eggs were numbered in sequence and individually moved into new Petri dishes (60 mm diameter) with small fruit slices of the corresponding host (fruit pulp, 2 cm length, 2 cm width, 2 cm height), and their survival was documented daily. Every 2–3 days, the larvae were transferred to new fruit slices using a brush as necessary. The Petri dishes were placed into a mesh-covered plastic cup (8 cm diameter, 10 cm depth), the bottom of which contained a layer of sandy soil (3 cm depth, 65 ± 5 % RH) that served as a pupating medium for the larvae. Water was added to maintain the humidity necessary for pupation. Larvae were monitored daily. Twenty-four hours after pupation, the pupae from each treatment were counted and weighed after gently cleaning the soil off the pupal case. For each fruit species, 10 pupae were selected randomly and weighed as a group with an electronic balance (PMK223ZH/E, Ohaus, Pine Brook, New Jersey, USA), making a total of 50 pupae per fruit species. Subsequently, each pupa was placed individually in a plastic Petri dish, with daily observations recorded for pupal emergence and survival. After emergence, a pair of adult flies (one female and one male) was introduced into a 350-mL mesh-covered plastic cup containing one slice of fruit (2 cm length, 2 cm width, 2 cm height) for the daily observation of their preoviposition period, oviposition period, fecundity, and survival until all adults had died. Preoviposition period referred to the time from when an adult fly emerged until it laid its first egg. The oviposition period spanned from the initial egg deposition to the last. Ten replications were conducted for each fruit species.

2.4 Life table parameter calculations

Based on the collected data from the second generation, life table parameters of B. dorsalis on each tested fruit were estimated, namely, net reproductive rate (R 0), the intrinsic rate of natural increase (R m), finite rate of increase (λ), mean generation time (T), and doubling time (DT). The net reproductive rate (R 0) was calculated using the following calculation formula (Carey 1982): R 0 = x = 1 t l x m x where x is expressed as female age in days, l x is the survival rate of females at age x, and m x is the total number of female progeny produced per female alive at age x. The mean generation time (T) was the time in days and measured using the following equation (Birch 1948): T = x l x m x R 0 . These values were subsequently used to obtain the intrinsic rate of natural increase (R m) using the following equation (Birch 1948): R m = ln R 0 T . Moreover, finite rate of increase (λ) was given by λ = e R m and DT in days was given by DT = ln 2 R m .

2.5 Morphometric traits

The impacts of different host fruits on the size of B. dorsalis adult males and females were determined using morphological parameters, including body length (BL), thorax width (TW), abdomen width (AW), and wing length (WL) based on the methods described by Zhang et al. (2021). Body size of fruit fly males or females from the second generation were measured by taking 10 individuals aged 12 days from each treatment. The morphometric measurement was conducted under a stereomicroscope fitted with Motic Images Plus software v.2 (Motic China Group Co., Ltd., Fujian, China).

2.6 Data analysis

To estimate the standard errors of developmental time, longevity, fecundity, and population parameters, the bootstrap technique was employed, with 200,000 bootstraps conducted for this analysis. The demographic characteristics among the various treated groups were assessed through a paired bootstrap test at a significance level of 5 %, with the bootstrap procedures and paired bootstrap test integrated into the TWOSEX-MS Chart (Huang and Chi 2012, 2013], 2014]; Tibshirani and Efron 1993). Furthermore, the standard errors and variances of pupae weight and adult body size were examined using the LSD test in SPSS (Version 22.0, SPSS, Inc., Chicago, Illinois, USA), while an independent t-test in SPSS was conducted to compare the disparities between male and female flies reared from each fruit species.

3 Results

3.1 Impacts of different fruit species on fly immature development periods

As shown in Table 1, the developmental duration (days) of eggs reared on persimmon or carambola was significantly shorter than those on navel orange or loquat (F 3,332 = 19.38, P = 0.001), with the highest value of 34.32 h recorded on orange and the lowest of 32.64 h noted on persimmon. The larval duration of B. dorsalis did not differ among the four tested fruits (F 3,332 = 0.56, P = 0.525). Similarly, the longest duration of 7.64 days was documented on orange and the shortest period of 6.94 days was noted on persimmon. However, the pupal duration of B. dorsalis that developed in persimmon, at 9.08 days, was significantly shorter than those on loquat or carambola (F 3,332 = 56.30, P = 0.001), but it did not differ from that of pupae reared on orange, which was 9.47 days.

Table 1:

Developmental duration of Bactrocera dorsalis on different fruit species.

Parameters Persimmon Orange Loquat Carambola
Egg duration (days) 1.36 ± 0.01b 1.47 ± 0.01a 1.43 ± 0.10a 1.40 ± 0.14b
Larval duration (days) 6.94 ± 0.17a 7.64 ± 0.27a 7.47 ± 0.26a 7.52 ± 0.24a
Pupal duration (days) 9.08 ± 0.23b 9.47 ± 0.19ab 10.25 ± 0.14a 10.04 ± 0.15a
  1. Data are shown as mean ± SEM. Significant differences between different fruit species within rows are indicated by different lowercase letters (P < 0.05).

3.2 Impacts of different fruit species on survival of life stages

As shown in Table 2, the larval hatching percentage (F 3,353 = 8.75, P = 0.008), larval survival percentage (F 3,353 = 12.46, P = 0.003) and pupation percentage (F 3,353 = 25.47, P < 0.001) of B. dorsalis from persimmon were significantly greater than that of the other three fruit species at 91.33 % ± 2.40 %, 92.05 % ± 7.20 % and 96.39 % ± 1.70 %, respectively. However, there was no significant difference in the pupation rate of B. dorsalis among orange, loquat and carambola fruits. The percentage of adult emergence for B. dorsalis reared from carambola was lowest, at 87.97 %, and this was significantly different from all the other fruit types (F 3,353 = 15.82, P < 0.001). However, no significant difference was observed in emergence among persimmon, orange and loquat. The survival percentage of fruit fly immatures varied significantly among fruit types (F 3,353 = 23.73, P < 0.001), with the highest survival percentage recorded for persimmon at 72.32 % and the lowest for carambola at 49.51 %.

Table 2:

The hatching percentage, larval survival percentage, pupation percentage, adult emergence percentage, immature survival percentage, preoviposition period, oviposition period and fecundity of Bactrocera dorsalis on four fruit species. Data are shown as mean ± SEM. Significant differences between different fruit species are indicated by different lowercase letters (P < 0.05).

Parameters Persimmon Orange Loquat Carambola
Hatching percentage (%) 91.33 ± 2.41a 85.67 ± 1.80b 80.33 ± 3.52c 78.33 ± 4.12c
Larval survival percentage (%) 92.05 ± 7.05a 84.14 ± 2.80b 80.73 ± 4.33b 76.07 ± 7.22c
Pupation percentage (%) 96.39 ± 1.71a 85.22 ± 1.79b 86.33 ± 2.45b 82.33 ± 5.80b
Adult emergence percentage (%) 94.30 ± 2.22a 93.30 ± 3.31a 92.03 ± 2.03a 87.97 ± 0.98b
Immature survival percentage (%) 72.32 ± 4.78a 62.59 ± 5.11b 55.64 ± 2.84c 49.51 ± 3.12d
Preoviposition period (days) 16.00 ± 1.02a 15.67 ± 1.21a 16.15 ± 1.13a 16.67 ± 1.20a
Oviposition period (days) 93.33 ± 3.76a 82.00 ± 6.08a 85.33 ± 5.61a 88.00 ± 4.62a
No. of laid eggs per female per day 1.95 ± 0.09a 1.56 ± 0.13a 1.61 ± 0.13a 1.63 ± 0.15a
Total no. of laid eggs 178.61 ± 5.30a 127.82 ± 5.23c 156.71 ± 6.01b 133.84 ± 6.97c

3.3 Impacts of different fruit species on oviposition and fecundity

As for the reproduction of B. dorsalis, there were no significant differences in adult preoviposition period, which ranged from 15.67 to 16.67 days (F 3,57 = 4.97, P = 0.072, Table 2), or in the oviposition period, which ranged from 82.00 to 93.33 days (F 3,57 = 2.74, P = 0.197, Table 2) among the four fruit types. In terms of fecundity, the mean daily egg production number of a single B. dorsalis female was not significantly different among the four types of tested fruits (F 3,57 = 1.12, P = 0.187, Table 2), with 1.95 eggs recorded on persimmon and 1.56 eggs recorded on oranges. However, B. dorsalis females reared from persimmon produced the greatest number of eggs over their lifetime, with a total of 178.61 eggs, which was significantly more than the number of eggs produced by flies from the other three fruits (F 3,57 = 128.41, P < 0.001, Table 2).

3.4 Impacts of different fruit species on longevity

As shown in Figure 1, both males and females reared from persimmon lived significantly longer than flies reared from navel orange, loquat or carambola (male: F 3,332 = 20.80, P < 0.001; female: F 3,332 = 87.40, P < 0.001), with a lifespan of 147.65 days and 129.70 days, respectively. The lifespan of female fruit flies and the total population that emerged from loquat was the shortest, measuring 115.95 days for females and 110.00 days for the overall population. When comparing the lifespans of male and female fruit flies reared from the same type of fruit, it was observed that females exhibited a longer lifespan than males. However, significant differences were observed on persimmon (t = 3.865, df = 72, P = 0.003), navel orange (t = −3.845, df = 78, P = 0.004), and carambola (t = −2.178, df = 81, P = 0.011).

Figure 1: 
Longevity of Bactrocera dorsalis adults on different fruit species. Data are shown as mean ± SEM. Significant differences between different fruit species are indicated by different lowercase letters (P < 0.05). Asterisks indicate significant differences between female and male by an independent t-test at P < 0.05.
Figure 1:

Longevity of Bactrocera dorsalis adults on different fruit species. Data are shown as mean ± SEM. Significant differences between different fruit species are indicated by different lowercase letters (P < 0.05). Asterisks indicate significant differences between female and male by an independent t-test at P < 0.05.

3.5 Impacts of different fruit species on pupal weight and adult body size

The pupal weight was significantly greater in pupae from persimmon (17.3267 mg) than from orange (16.4300 mg), loquat (15.1067 mg), and carambola (14.2217 mg) (F 3,36 = 255.00, P < 0.001, Figure 2). As shown in Figure 3, there were significant differences in the size of flies reared from different fruits: body length (BL) (female: F 3,36 = 18.054, P < 0.001; male: F 3,36 = 28.984, P < 0.001), thorax width (TW) (female: F 3,36 = 218.715, P < 0.001; male: F 3,36 = 141.441, P < 0.001), abdomen width (AW) (female: F 3,36 = 143.874, P < 0.001; male: F 3,36 = 145.70, P < 0.001) and wing length (WL) (F 3,36 = 78.157, P < 0.001). The flies with the longest bodies were those reared on persimmon (male and female) and orange (female). In the other variables (thorax width, abdomen width and wing length) the results were more varied by sex and fruit species but males reared on persimmon had a wider thorax and longer wings.

Figure 2: 
Pupal weight of Bactrocera dorsalis on different fruit species. Data are shown as mean ± SEM. Significant differences between different fruit species are indicated by different lowercase letters (P < 0.05, LSD test).
Figure 2:

Pupal weight of Bactrocera dorsalis on different fruit species. Data are shown as mean ± SEM. Significant differences between different fruit species are indicated by different lowercase letters (P < 0.05, LSD test).

Figure 3: 
Morphological parameters of Bactrocera dorsalis females and males reared from different fruit species: (A) body length, (B) thorax width, (C) abdomen width, and (D) wing length. Data are shown as mean ± SEM. Significant differences between different fruit species are indicated by different lowercase letters (P < 0.05, LSD test).
Figure 3:

Morphological parameters of Bactrocera dorsalis females and males reared from different fruit species: (A) body length, (B) thorax width, (C) abdomen width, and (D) wing length. Data are shown as mean ± SEM. Significant differences between different fruit species are indicated by different lowercase letters (P < 0.05, LSD test).

3.6 Impacts of different fruit species on life table parameters

As shown in Table 3, the life table parameters, net reproductive rate (R 0), the intrinsic rate of natural increase (R m), finite rate of increase (λ), mean generation time (T), and doubling time (DT) were significantly influenced by the host fruits (R 0: F 3,353 = 18.70, P < 0.001; R m: F 3,353 = 85.82, P < 0.001; λ: F 3,353 = 87.69, P < 0.001; T: F 3,353 = 284.80, P < 0.001; DT: F 3,353 = 16.80, P < 0.001). The R 0, R m, and λ values for flies reared on persimmon were significantly higher than those from the other three fruits. In contrast, the T and DT values for flies reared on carambola were significantly higher than those from the other three fruits.

Table 3:

Life table parameters of Bactrocera dorsalis on four different fruit species. R m, intrinsic rate of increase (day−1); λ, finite rate of increase (day−1); R 0, net reproductive rate (offspring individual−1); T, mean generation time (days); and, DT, doubling time.

Parameters Persimmon Orange Loquat Carambola
R 0 (offspring/individual) 106.80 ± 4.98a 76.69 ± 1.25c 94.03 ± 3.49b 80.30 ± 1.36c
R m (day−1) 0.1319 ± 0.0024a 0.1024 ± 0.0033c 0.1158 ± 0.0044b 0.0850 ± 0.0023d
λ (day−1) 1.1402 ± 0.0022a 1.1082 ± 0.0031c 1.1219 ± 0.0054b 1.0897 ± 0.0021d
T (days) 51.20 ± 0.81c 58.69 ± 0.65b 52.02 ± 1.31c 62.42 ± 0.22a
DT 5.15 ± 0.10d 6.78 ± 0.28b 5.98 ± 0.27c 8.02 ± 0.18a
  1. Significant differences between different fruit species within rows are indicated by different lowercase letters (P < 0.05).

4 Discussion

Life population parameters of insect pests are known to fluctuate with various biotic factors. Host plant is an important biotic factor influencing the survival, growth, development, and fecundity of herbivorous insects. Optimum host food for development of insect pests is characterized by the highest survival, shortest life cycles, and highest levels of fecundity (Awmack and Leather 2002). In this research, B. dorsalis could complete its growth, development, and reproduction on navel orange, carambola, loquat and persimmon, which are four dominant fruits of economic importance in Fujian Province. This indicated that the positive factor for the dispersal of B. dorsalis to Fujian Province, a renowned fruit-producing region in southern China, posed a significant risk to the local fruit industries. The detailed parameters of B. dorsalis on four different host fruits examined in this study demonstrated that B. dorsalis exhibited relatively high fitness on persimmon, with similar fitness levels on navel orange, carambola, and loquat. Notably, flies reared on persimmon showed short egg and pupal duration, highest hatching percentage, larval survival percentage, pupation percentage, immature survival percentage, greatest adult longevity, highest fecundity and heaviest pupal weight when compared to flies reared on other fruits. Although the suitability of other tested fruits was relatively lower, they still warrant attention as potential refuge hosts for B. dorsalis, allowing the species to survive until alternative food resource become available, particularly in mixed orchards of fruit with overlapping ripening periods. Furthermore, fruit preference was not investigated in this study and could play a major part in risk to orchards.

In this study, the use of fruit slices as surrogates for whole fruits may introduce some discrepancies when compared to real-world scenarios. Nevertheless, employing fruit slices currently stands as the most appropriate approach for evaluating the suitability of these fruits. This method offers enhanced experimental control by ensuring uniform size, ripeness, and environmental exposure among the samples (Jaleel et al. 2018b). Such consistency is crucial for isolating the effects of the independent variable on the dependent measure, specifically the fitness of the fruit fly larvae in our case. The practicality of using fruit slices is also noteworthy. Whole fruits inherently vary in size, shape, and quality, which could introduce uncontrolled variables into the experiment (Huang and Chi 2012, 2013], 2014]). Our preliminary studies indicated that fruit slices provided a reasonable approximation of larval fitness and host suitability relative to whole fruits. While this methodological choice might not entirely replicate natural conditions, it allows for a controlled assessment of the relative fitness of fruit fly larvae on different host fruits.

Developmental period, body weight, and body size are important key factors for investigating the population dynamics of insect pests, including Bactrocera fruit flies (Waseem et al. 2012). Generally, the developmental period of an insect can be described by the duration of each age-stage (such as egg stage, larval stage, pupal stage, and adult stage) (Ding et al. 2021). The development period of the immature stages seems to vary with food resource. For instance, on papaya, the egg, larval, and pupal periods were 1.72 days, 7.99 days, and 7.40 days respectively. Guava supported slightly different periods: 1.72 days for eggs, 7.72 days for larvae, and 6.07 days for pupae. Banana, on the other hand, exhibited the longest larval period at 9.54 days, with egg and pupal periods of 1.76 days and 7.97 days, respectively (Jaleel et al. 2018b). Furthermore, when B. dorsalis was reared on mandarin orange, the egg, larval, and pupal periods were 2.32 days, 7.84 days, and 10.62 days respectively. On peach, these periods were 2.40 days, 8.13 days, and 9.90 days respectively. And on apple, the periods were 2.72 days, 8.12 days, and 10.30 days respectively (Zhu et al. 2022). In this study, we noted that the egg, larval, and pupal periods of B. dorsalis differed when reared on various fruits. On navel orange, these periods were 1.47 days, 7.64 days, and 9.47 days, respectively. Carambola supported slightly different time frames: 1.40 days for eggs, 7.52 days for larvae, and 10.04 days for pupae. Loquat exhibited periods of 1.43 days, 7.47 days, and 10.25 days for the egg, larval, and pupal stages, respectively. Finally, persimmon showed the shortest egg period at 1.36 days, a larval period of 6.94 days, and a pupal period of 9.08 days. As demonstrated in the current study, differences in the developmental time of immature stages of B. dorsalis are likely due to differences in host plant suitability. The development of immature insect pests is influenced by a range of abiotic and biotic factors, including light, temperature and humidity, and food resource, predation, competition, and interaction of various factors (Chen et al. 2017; Shen et al. 2014). Specifically, when controlling for other factors, the optimal food resources for the development of insect pests are characterized by the shortest life cycles (Awmack and Leather 2002).

Additionally, the pupal weight and body size of fruit flies are considered as an indicator of reproductive capacity. Previous studies have demonstrated a positive correlation between pupal body weight and female fecundity in various tephritid species (Brévault et al. 2008; Duyck et al. 2008; Jaleel et al. 2018c), which is consistent with our findings. In our study, we discovered that fruit flies reared on persimmon exhibited a notably higher pupal weight and laid a greater total number of eggs when fed on this particular fruit. In this study, differences were observed in the body length and width of B. dorsalis reared from four different host fruits, further confirming the influence of varying rearing mediums and food resources. Significant differences in adult longevity between males and females reared from fruit when food was not restricted have been documented elsewhere, where females tend to live longer than males (Huang and Chi 2014; Jaleel et al. 2018b, 2018c; Zhu et al. 2022). This is consistent with our study, where we found that the lifespan of female B. dorsalis reared on persimmon, orange, and carambola was significantly longer than that of male counterparts. The difference might be due to greater energy consumption by males during courtship-calling and mating (Carey et al. 2008).

The oriental fruit fly, an important pest in the genus Bactrocera, typically chooses to oviposit its eggs in fruits, resulting in the hatching larvae feeding on the fruit pulp, leading to the softening and browning of the flesh, ultimately causing fruit to become unmarketable and causing potential economic losses (Zhang et al. 2021). Thus, the parameters of immature duration (particularly larval duration) on different host fruits are important indicators of the direct damage attributed to the fruit-borer insect (Clavijo McCormick et al. 2019). Our research suggests that the larval developmental success of oriental fruit fly differed among fruit types that occur within its host range, which also has been demonstrated with other fruit fly species such as Bactrocera zonata (Saunders), Ceratitis catoirii (Guérin-Méneville), Ceratitis rosa (Karsch), Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann), Zeugodacus cucurbitae (Coquillett), Dacus demmerezi (Bezzi), and Neoceratitis cyanescens (Bezzi) (Hafsi et al. 2016). In this study, persimmon provided the best larval environment compared to other fruit species considering the numbers of larvae, pupae and adults produced and the immature survival.

Hafsi et al. (2016) suggested that the larval development of polyphagous fruit flies was influenced by the nutritional contents of fruit, especially the content of carbohydrates, lipids, and fiber. Moreover, an earlier study found that lipid and protein were constantly used in different phases of larval-adult transition for C. capitata (Nestel et al. 2003). Therefore, we speculate that this also likely would be the case for oriental fruit fly. Furthermore, it has been reported that the growth, development, and survival of fruit flies are inhibited by some nutrients, toxins, resin, and latex in the fruit (Birke and Aluja 2018; Dominiak and Follett 2024; Rattanapun et al. 2009). For instance, the presence of phenol in the resin in immature fruits of Anacardiaceae was found to reduce the survival of B. dorsalis immatures (Rattanapun et al. 2009). Also, the phenolic components in fruit have been shown to reduce larval development of Anastrepha ludens (Loew) through imposing an anti-nutritive effect (Birke and Aluja 2018). However, the specific effects of the substances in host fruits on B. dorsalis remains largely unknown, and future studies such as composition detection of fruit substances, feeding assays, and molecular studies are needed to enhance our understanding of the factors driving differences in fitness of B. dorsalis on different host plants.

Fitness of flies reared from the four hosts differed, based on the five life table parameters (R m, λ, R 0, T, DT). A possible explanation for this result is that the first oviposition attempt and oviposition peak value of B. dorsalis adults on these four tested host fruits varied. Based on demographic theory, if the intrinsic rate of increase (R m) is greater than zero (0), then it might be the most accurate population parameter to measure the adaptation of an insect to a host food (Southwood and Henderson 2009), which was supported by our results. Greater R m values also describe the susceptibility of a host to insect attacks, and vice versa (Musa and Ren 2005). The net reproductive rate (R 0) is an important indicator of population development, where the highest population increase rate is predicted by the number of eggs laid and the fecundity, development and survival of the insect (Huang and Chi 2012). In this study, significantly higher net reproductive rates were observed when fruit flies were reared on persimmon.

The detailed demographic parameters of B. dorsalis on four host fruits confirmed that this pest can successfully complete its life cycle on the four host fruit tested (persimmon, navel orange, loquat, carambola), but the suitability was different. Among these tested fruits, B. dorsalis reared from persimmon displayed relatively high fitness compared to other tested fruits. Persimmon, being extensively cultivated fruits in China, have a high likelihood of becoming new potential host plants for B. dorsalis in the country. Consequently, it is necessary to enhance the monitoring of B. dorsalis in China and conduct further research to investigate the fitness of B. dorsalis on other economically significant host plants, both locally and in other regions. This research endeavor aims to elucidate the mechanisms behind the continuous proliferation of B. dorsalis in recent decades. By doing so, a theoretical foundation can be established for the implementation of integrated pest management of B. dorsalis in orchards.


Corresponding author: Pumo Cai, Department of Horticulture, College of Tea and Food Science, Wuyi University, Wuyishan, Fujian Province, China; Key Lab of Biopesticide and Chemical Biology, Ministry of Education, Fuzhou, Fujian Province, China; and Institute of Biological Control, Plant Protection College, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou, Fujian Province, China, E-mail:

Funding source: Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program for College Students at National Level

Award Identifier / Grant number: 202310397025

Funding source: Key Technological Innovation and Industrialization Project

Award Identifier / Grant number: 2023XQ019

Funding source: Key Project of the Nanping Natural Fund

Award Identifier / Grant number: N2023J004

Funding source: Nanping Academy of Resource Industrialization Chemistry Project

Award Identifier / Grant number: N2023Z007

Acknowledgments

We are very grateful to Ms. Shumei Wang for rearing the fruit fly colony. Furthermore, we would like to express our appreciation to Mr. Chuanpeng Nie, Ms. Yanyan Li, and Mr. Litao Meng for their assistance in conducting some parts of the experiments. Furthermore, we sincerely thank the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments, which have greatly contributed to the improvement of our manuscript.

  1. Research ethics: Not applicable.

  2. Informed consent: Not applicable.

  3. Author contributions: Methodology, Y.S., and P.C.; performed the experiments, Y.S., J.L., X.O., Z.R., Y.L., Q.J., Y.H., and P.C.; analyzed the data, Y.S., and P.C.; drafted the manuscript, Y.S., and P.C.; revised the manuscript, Y.S., and P.C. All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.

  4. Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning Tools: None declared.

  5. Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.

  6. Research funding: This research was funded by the Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program for College Students at National Level (202310397025), Nanping Academy of Resource Industrialization Chemistry Project (N2023Z007), Key Project of the Nanping Natural Fund (N2023J004), Key Technological Innovation and Industrialization Project (2023XQ019). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

  7. Data availability: The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

Awmack, C.S. and Leather, S.R. (2002). Host plant quality and fecundity in herbivorous insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 47: 817–844, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.47.091201.145300.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Birch, L. (1948). The intrinsic rate of natural increase of an insect population. J. Anim. Ecol. 17: 15–26, https://doi.org/10.2307/1605.Search in Google Scholar

Birke, A. and Aluja, M. (2018). Do mothers really know best? Complexities in testing the preference-performance hypothesis in polyphagous frugivorous fruit flies. Bull. Entomol. Res. 108: 674–684, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007485317001213.Search in Google Scholar

Brévault, T. and Quilici, S. (2007). Influence of habitat pattern on orientation during host fruit location in the tomato fruit fly, Neoceratitis cyanescens. Bull. Entomol. Res. 97: 637–642, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007485307005330.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Brévault, T., Duyck, P.F., and Quilici, S. (2008). Life-history strategy in an oligophagous tephritid: the tomato fruit fly, Neoceratitis cyanescens. Ecol. Entomol. 33: 529–536, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2311.2008.01006.x.Search in Google Scholar

Cai, P., Gu, X., Yao, M., Zhang, H., Huang, J., Idrees, A., Ji, Q., Chen, J., and Yang, J. (2017). The optimal age and radiation dose for Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae) eggs as hosts for mass-reared Fopius arisanus (Sonan) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Biol. Control 108: 89–97, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2017.02.006.Search in Google Scholar

Cai, P., Hong, J., Wang, C., Yang, Y., Yi, C., Chen, J., and Ji, Q. (2018a). Effects of Co-60 radiation on the activities of three main antioxidant enzymes in Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae). J. Asia Pac. Entomol. 21: 345–351, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aspen.2018.01.006.Search in Google Scholar

Cai, P., Hong, J., Wang, C., Yang, Y., Zhang, Q., Ji, Q., and Chen, J. (2018b). Radiation of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) eggs to improve the mass rearing of Diachasmimorpha longicaudata (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 111: 1157–1164, https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toy032.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Cai, P., Wang, Y., Yi, C., Zhang, Q., Xia, H., Lin, J., Zhang, H., Yang, J., Ji, Q., and Chen, J. (2019). Effects of varied temperatures on antioxidant enzyme activity in parasitized Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) larvae: optimizing the mass rearing of Diachasmimorpha longicaudata (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) by varying temperatures. Eur. J. Entomol. 116: 1–9, https://doi.org/10.14411/eje.2019.001.Search in Google Scholar

Cai, P., Song, Y., Huo, D., Lin, J., Zhang, H., Zhang, Z., Xiao, C., Huang, F., and Ji, Q. (2020). Chemical cues induced from fly-oviposition mediate the host-seeking behaviour of Fopius arisanus (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), an effective egg parasitoid of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae), within a tritrophic context. Insects 11: 231, https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11040231.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Cai, P., Peng, Y., Song, Y., Lin, J., Nie, C., Li, Y., Ma, C., and Ji, Q. (2022). Is Fopius arisanus (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) a suitable biological control agent of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) in multi-crop orchards? Int. J. Pest Manag. 70: 1470–1478, https://doi.org/10.1080/09670874.2022.2151055.Search in Google Scholar

Cai, P., Song, Y., Meng, L., Liu, R., Lin, J., Zhao, M., Nie, C., Li, Y., and Ji, Q. (2023). Climate warming affects phenology of Bactrocera dorsalis: a case study of Fujian and Guangxi, China. Bull. Insectol. 76: 73–81.Search in Google Scholar

Carey, J.R. (1982). Demography and population dynamics of the Mediterranean fruit fly. Ecol. Model. 16: 125–150, https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3800(82)90005-9.Search in Google Scholar

Carey, J.R., Harshman, L.G., Liedo, P., Müller, H.G., Wang, J.L., and Zhang, Z. (2008). Longevity fertility trade-offs in the tephritid fruit fly, Anastrepha ludens, across dietary-restriction gradients. Aging Cell 7: 470–477, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-9726.2008.00389.x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Chen, Q., Li, N., Wang, X., Ma, L., Huang, J.B., and Huang, G.H. (2017). Age-stage, two-sex life table of Parapoynx crisonalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) at different temperatures. PLoS One 12: e0173380, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0173380.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Clavijo McCormick, A., Arrigo, L., Eggenberger, H., Mescher, M.C., and De Moraes, C.M. (2019). Divergent behavioural responses of gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar) caterpillars from three different subspecies to potential host trees. Sci. Rep. 9: 8953, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-45201-3.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Ding, H.-Y., Lin, Y.-Y., Tuan, S.-J., Tang, L.-C., Chi, H., Atlıhan, R., Özgökçe, M.S., and Güncan, A. (2021). Integrating demography, predation rate, and computer simulation for evaluation of Orius strigicollis as biological control agent against Frankliniella intonsa. Entomol. Gen. 41: 179–196, https://doi.org/10.1127/entomologia/2020/1082.Search in Google Scholar

Dominiak, B.C. and Follett, P.A. (2024). Review of host use and host reproduction number for New World fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) to optimise surveillance, management and trade. Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci. 44: 595–635, https://doi.org/10.1007/s42690-023-01153-w.Search in Google Scholar

Drew, R.A., Prokopy, R.J., and Romig, M.C. (2003). Attraction of fruit flies of the genus Bactrocera to colored mimics of host fruit. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 107: 39–45, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1570-7458.2003.00039.x.Search in Google Scholar

Duyck, P., David, P., Pavoine, S., and Quilici, S. (2008). Can host-range allow niche differentiation of invasive polyphagous fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in La Réunion? Ecol. Entomol. 33: 439–452, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2311.2008.00989.x.Search in Google Scholar

Ekesi, S., De Meyer, M., Mohamed, S.A., Virgilio, M., and Borgemeister, C.J.A. (2016). Taxonomy, ecology, and management of native and exotic fruit fly species in Africa. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 61: 219–238, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-010715-023603.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Gu, X., Cai, P., Yang, Y., Yang, Q., Yao, M., Idrees, A., Ji, Q., Yang, J., and Chen, J. (2018). The response of four braconid parasitoid species to methyl eugenol: optimization of a biocontrol tactic to suppress Bactrocera dorsalis. Biol. Control 122: 101–108, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2018.04.002.Search in Google Scholar

Hafsi, A., Facon, B., Ravigné, V., Chiroleu, F., Quilici, S., Chermiti, B., and Duyck, P.F. (2016). Host plant range of a fruit fly community (Diptera: Tephritidae): does fruit composition influence larval performance? BMC Ecol. 16: 40, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12898-016-0094-8.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Huang, Y.B. and Chi, H. (2012). Age-stage, two-sex life tables of Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett) (Diptera: Tephritidae) with a discussion on the problem of applying female age-specific life tables to insect populations. Insect Sci. 19: 263–273, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7917.2011.01424.x.Search in Google Scholar

Huang, Y.B. and Chi, H. (2013). Life tables of Bactrocera cucurbitae (Diptera: Tephritidae): with an invalidation of the jackknife technique. J. Appl. Entomol. 137: 327–339, https://doi.org/10.1111/jen.12002.Search in Google Scholar

Huang, Y.B. and Chi, H. (2014). Fitness of Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) on seven host plants and an artificial diet. Turkiye Entomoloji Dergisi-Turkish J. Entomol. 38: 401–414, https://doi.org/10.16970/ted.08838.Search in Google Scholar

Huang, H.W., Chi, H., and Smith, C.L. (2018). Linking demography and consumption of Henosepilachna vigintioctopunctata (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) fed on Solanum photeinocarpum (Solanales: Solanaceae): with a new method to project the uncertainty of population growth and consumption. J. Econ. Entomol. 111: 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/tox330.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Jaleel, W., Lu, L., and He, Y. (2018a). Biology, taxonomy, and IPM strategies of Bactrocera tau Walker and complex species (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Asia: a comprehensive review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 25: 19346–19361, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2306-6.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Jaleel, W., Tao, X., Wang, D., Lu, L., and He, Y. (2018b). Using two-sex life table traits to assess the fruit preference and fitness of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 111: 2936–2945, https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toy243.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Jaleel, W., Yin, J., Wang, D., He, Y., Lu, L., and Shi, H. (2018c). Using two-sex life tables to determine fitness parameters of four Bactrocera species (Diptera: Tephritidae) reared on a semi-artificial diet. Bull. Entomol. Res. 108: 707–714, https://doi.org/10.1017/s000748531700092x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Ji, Q., Chen, J., McInnis, D., and Guo, Q. (2013). The effect of methyl eugenol exposure on subsequent mating performance of sterile males of Bactrocera dorsalis. J. Appl. Entomol. 137: 238–243, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0418.2011.01686.x.Search in Google Scholar

Lin, J., Yamada, H., Lu, N., Ao, G., Yuan, W., Liu, X., Cai, P., Zheng, M., Yang, J., and Ji, Q. (2020). Quantification and impact of cold storage and heat exposure on mass rearing program of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) genetic sexing strain. Insects 11: 821, https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11110821.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Lin, J., Yang, D., Hao, X., Cai, P., Guo, Y., Shi, S., Liu, C., and Ji, Q. (2021). Effect of cold storage on the quality of Psyttalia incisi (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), a larval parasitoid of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae). Insects 12: 558, https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12060558.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Lin, J., Hao, X., Yue, G., Yang, D., Lu, N., Cai, P., Ao, G., and Ji, Q. (2022). Efficacy of wax-based bait stations for controlling Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae). Pest Manage. Sci. 78: 3576–3586, https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.7000.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Lin, J., Yue, G., Xiao, K., Yang, D., Hao, X., Zheng, M., Cai, P., and Ji, Q. (2023). Effects of low-concentration spinetoram wax-based bait stations on Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae). Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 197: 105705, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2023.105705.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Moreau, J., Desouhant, E., Louâpre, P., Goubault, M., Rajon, E., Jarrige, A., Menu, F., and Thiéry, D. (2017). How host plant and fluctuating environments affect insect reproductive strategies? Adv. Bot. Res. 81: 259–287.10.1016/bs.abr.2016.09.008Search in Google Scholar

Musa, P.D. and Ren, S.X. (2005). Development and reproduction of Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) on three bean species. Insect Sci. 12: 25–30, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1672-9609.2005.00004.x.Search in Google Scholar

Nestel, D., Tolmasky, D., Rabossi, A., and Quesada-Allué, L.A. (2003). Lipid, carbohydrates and protein patterns during metamorphosis of the Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 96: 237–244, https://doi.org/10.1603/0013-8746(2003)096[0237:lcappd]2.0.co;2.10.1603/0013-8746(2003)096[0237:LCAPPD]2.0.CO;2Search in Google Scholar

Pagadala Damodaram, K.J., Kempraj, V., Aurade, R.M., Venkataramanappa, R.K., Nandagopal, B., Verghese, A., and Bruce, T. (2014). Oviposition site-selection by Bactrocera dorsalis is mediated through an innate recognition template tuned to γ-octalactone. PLoS One 9: e85764, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085764.Search in Google Scholar

Pieterse, W., Manrakhan, A., Terblanche, J.S., and Addison, P. (2020). Comparative demography of Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) and Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) (Diptera: Tephritidae) on deciduous fruit. Bull. Entomol. Res. 110: 185–194, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007485319000592.Search in Google Scholar

Rattanapun, W., Amornsak, W., and Clarke, A.R. (2009). Bactrocera dorsalis preference for and performance on two mango varieties at three stages of ripeness. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 131: 243–253, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1570-7458.2009.00850.x.Search in Google Scholar

Shen, K., Hu, J., Wu, B., An, K., Zhang, J., Liu, J., and Zhang, R. (2014). Competitive interactions between immature stages of Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett) and Bactrocera tau (Walker) (Diptera: Tephritidae) under laboratory conditions. Neotrop. Entomol. 43: 335–343, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13744-014-0224-y.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Southwood, T.R.E. and Henderson, P.A. (2009). Ecological methods. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.Search in Google Scholar

Syamsudin, T.S., Kirana, R., Karjadi, A.K., and Faizal, A. (2022). Characteristics of chili (Capsicum annuum L.) that are resistant and susceptible to oriental fruit fly (Bactrocera dorsalis Hendel) infestation. Horticulturae 8: 314, https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae8040314.Search in Google Scholar

Tibshirani, R.J. and Efron, B. (1993). An introduction to the bootstrap. Monogr. Stat. Appl. Probab. 57: 1–436.10.1007/978-1-4899-4541-9_1Search in Google Scholar

Vargas, R.I., Leblanc, L., Putoa, R., and Eitam, A. (2007). Impact of introduction of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) and classical biological control releases of Fopius arisanus (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) on economically important fruit flies in French Polynesia. J. Econ. Entomol. 100: 670–679, https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/100.3.670.Search in Google Scholar

Vargas, R.I., Piñero, J.C., and Leblanc, L. (2015). An overview of pest species of Bactrocera fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) and the integration of biopesticides with other biological approaches for their management with a focus on the Pacific region. Insects 6: 297–318, https://doi.org/10.3390/insects6020297.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Wang, B., Huang, Z., Yang, D., Ji, Q., and Cai, P. (2021). Improvement of protein bait produced from beer yeast waste for controlling Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) in China. J. Asia Pac. Entomol. 24: 573–579, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aspen.2021.04.017.Search in Google Scholar

Waseem, M., Naganagoud, A., Sagar, D., and Kareem, M.A. (2012). Biology of melon fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett) on cucumber. BIOINFOLET-A Q. J. Life Sci. 9: 232–239.Search in Google Scholar

Xia, Y., Huang, J., Jiang, F., He, J., Pan, X., Lin, X., Hu, H., Fan, G., Zhu, S., and Hou, B. (2019). The effectiveness of fruit bagging and culling for risk mitigation of fruit flies affecting citrus in China: a preliminary report. Fla. Entomol. 102: 79–84.10.1653/024.102.0112Search in Google Scholar

Xia, Y., Ouyang, G., Ma, X., Hou, B., Huang, J., Hu, H., and Fan, G. (2020). Trapping tephritid fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in citrus groves of Fujian Province of China. J. Asia Pac. Entomol. 23: 879–882, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aspen.2020.06.005.Search in Google Scholar

Xu, L., Zhou, C., Xiao, Y., Zhang, P., Tang, Y., and Xu, Y. (2012). Insect oviposition plasticity in response to host availability: the case of the tephritid fruit fly Bactrocera dorsalis. Ecol. Entomol. 37: 446–452, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2311.2012.01383.x.Search in Google Scholar

Yang, J., Cai, P., Chen, J., Zhang, H., Wang, C., Xiang, H., Wu, J., Yang, Y., Chen, J., Ji, Q, et al.. (2018). Interspecific competition between Fopius arisanus and Psyttalia incisi (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), parasitoids of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae). Biol. Control 121: 183–189, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2018.02.003.Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, R., He, S., and Chen, J. (2014). Monitoring of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) resistance to cyantraniliprole in the south of China. J. Econ. Entomol. 107: 1233–1238, https://doi.org/10.1603/ec13294.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Zhang, R., Jang, E.B., He, S., and Chen, J. (2015). Lethal and sublethal effects of cyantraniliprole on Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae). Pest Manage. Sci. 71: 250–256, https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.3791.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Zhang, Q., Cai, P., Wang, B., Liu, X., Lin, J., Hua, R., Zhang, H., Yi, C., Song, X., Ji, Q., et al.. (2021). Manipulation of gut symbionts for improving the sterile insect technique: quality parameters of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) genetic sexing strain males after feeding on bacteria-enriched diets. J. Econ. Entomol. 114: 560–570, https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toaa294.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Zhu, Y., Qi, F., Tan, X., Zhang, T., Teng, Z., Fan, Y., Wan, F., and Zhou, H. (2022). Use of age-stage, two-sex life table to compare the fitness of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) on northern and southern host fruits in China. Insects 13: 258, https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13030258.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Received: 2023-01-03
Accepted: 2024-10-21
Published Online: 2025-01-22

© 2025 the author(s), published by De Gruyter on behalf of the Florida Entomological Society

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Genetic differentiation of three populations of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), in Mexico
  2. Frontmatter
  3. Research Articles
  4. Tortricidae (Lepidoptera) associated with blueberry cultivation in Central Mexico
  5. First report of Phidotricha erigens (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae: Epipaschiinae) injuring mango inflorescences in Puerto Rico
  6. Seed predation of Sabal palmetto, Sabal mexicana and Sabal uresana (Arecaceae) by the bruchid Caryobruchus gleditsiae (Coleoptera: Bruchidae), with new host and distribution records
  7. Genetic variation of rice stink bugs, Oebalus spp. (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) from Southeastern United States and Cuba
  8. Selecting Coriandrum sativum (Apiaceae) varieties to promote conservation biological control of crop pests in south Florida
  9. First record of Mymarommatidae (Hymenoptera) from the Galapagos Islands, Ecuador
  10. First field validation of Ontsira mellipes (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) as a potential biological control agent for Anoplophora glabripennis (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in South Carolina
  11. Field evaluation of α-copaene enriched natural oil lure for detection of male Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) in area-wide monitoring programs: results from Tunisia, Costa Rica and Hawaii
  12. Abundance of Megalurothrips usitatus (Bagnall) (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) and other thrips in commercial snap bean fields in the Homestead Agricultural Area (HAA)
  13. Performance of Salvinia molesta (Salviniae: Salviniaceae) and its biological control agent Cyrtobagous salviniae (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in freshwater and saline environments
  14. Natural arsenal of Magnolia sarcotesta: insecticidal activity against the leaf-cutting ant Atta mexicana (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)
  15. Ethanol concentration can influence the outcomes of insecticide evaluation of ambrosia beetle attacks using wood bolts
  16. Post-release support of host range predictions for two Lygodium microphyllum biological control agents
  17. Missing jewels: the decline of a wood-nesting forest bee, Augochlora pura (Hymenoptera: Halictidae), in northern Georgia
  18. Biological response of Rhopalosiphum padi and Sipha flava (Hemiptera: Aphididae) changes over generations
  19. Argopistes tsekooni (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), a new natural enemy of Chinese privet in North America: identification, establishment, and host range
  20. A non-overwintering urban population of the African fig fly (Diptera: Drosophilidae) impacts the reproductive output of locally adapted fruit flies
  21. Fitness of Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae) on four economically important host fruits from Fujian Province, China
  22. Carambola fruit fly in Brazil: new host and first record of associated parasitoids
  23. Establishment and range expansion of invasive Cactoblastis cactorum (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae: Phycitinae) in Texas
  24. A micro-anatomical investigation of dark and light-adapted eyes of Chilades pandava (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae)
  25. Scientific Notes
  26. Early stragglers of periodical cicadas (Hemiptera: Cicadidae) found in Louisiana
  27. Attraction of released male Mediterranean fruit flies to trimedlure and an α-copaene-containing natural oil: effects of lure age and distance
  28. Co-infestation with Drosophila suzukii and Zaprionus indianus (Diptera: Drosophilidae): a threat for berry crops in Morelos, Mexico
  29. Observation of brood size and altricial development in Centruroides hentzi (Arachnida: Buthidae) in Florida, USA
  30. New quarantine cold treatment for medfly Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) in pomegranates
  31. A new invasive pest in Mexico: the presence of Thrips parvispinus (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) in chili pepper fields
  32. Acceptance of fire ant baits by nontarget ants in Florida and California
  33. Examining phenotypic variations in an introduced population of the invasive dung beetle Digitonthophagus gazella (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae)
  34. Note on the nesting biology of Epimelissodes aegis LaBerge (Hymenoptera: Apidae)
  35. Mass rearing protocol and density trials of Lilioceris egena (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), a biological control agent of air potato
  36. Cardinal predation of the invasive Jorō spider Trichophila clavata (Araneae: Nephilidae) in Georgia
  37. Retraction
  38. Retraction of: Examining phenotypic variations in an introduced population of the invasive dung beetle Digitonthophagus gazella (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae)
Downloaded on 23.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/flaent-2024-0084/html
Scroll to top button