As a reduction of water and nutrients increased leaf loss and changed the colour of leaves in the same year when stress was imposed, future studies should investigate plant performance of almond experiencing pollination limitation in subsequent years after stress was imposed and after long-term limitations to plant resources.Worldwide, tephritid fruit flies are among the world’s most economically important crop pests, with at least 200 pest species. In sub-Saharan Africa, several highly polyphagous Africa-native species—belonging to the genera Ceratitis Macleay and Dacus Fabricius have been recognized as economically important pests of several cultivated and wild fruit species, particularly mango , guava , citrus , and several cucurbit and solanaceous vegetables. The traditional problems with tephritid fruit flies have been aggravated in recent years by the invasion of the African continent by the Oriental fruit fly Bactrocera dorsalis , gallon pot which was first detected in coastal Kenya in 2003 and has spread to at least 32 countries in continental Africa and adjacent island countries.
Since the detection of B. dorsalis in Africa, several studies have established the African host range of this species and quantified crop losses due to its infestations. At present, B. dorsalis has been found infesting fruits of 40 host plant species, with mango, guava, citrus, and loquat Lindl. being the major infested cultivated hosts. In addition to causing extensive fruit losses in the field, fruit flies greatly restrict mango and other host fruit exports from Africa, particularly to the European Union , which, for example, intercepted and rejected more than 141 shipments of Cameroonian mango from 2011 to 2018, resulting in substantial financial losses. While several control methods have been developed and deployed across the continent, the large majority of fresh fruit producers in Cameroon and throughout Central Africa continue to experience substantial yield losses caused by fruit flies and they do not yet have the necessary resources and knowledge to successfully use available and new fruit fly control methods. The prevailing agronomic and plant protection practices are of very low or no input type. Apart from the common occasional weeding, pesticide and fertilizer inputs are rare. Knowledge of fruit fly species composition and their respective seasonal abundance using complementary monitoring tools in relation to host plant phenology under different environments is crucial to the understanding of population dynamics of these insects and the subsequent development and implementation of interventions to limit their infestations and damage.
Such knowledge is predicated on proper fruit fly species identification and quantification of the levels of host infestation which are fundamental for establishing the economic status of the pests and ultimately for developing and adopting effective pest control interventions. Two approaches have been traditionally used to provide the aforementioned needed information: effective tools based on food baits and male lures for monitoring and estimating the abundance of adult fruit flies, and systematic fruit samplings to determine host range and quantify the levels and rates of fruit infestations by the various fruit fly species present in the systems. The latter is often complemented with random fruit sampling from areas outside the targeted cultivated fields to determine the fruit fly host range. Ideally, monitoring tools and host fruit infestations should be tested and used over several years and in multiple environments to establish sufficient details of the bio-ecological context where management options will be developed and implemented. Several commercially available male lures and food baits have been developed and used widely for fruit fly monitoring, but their performance has been shown to vary with factors such as climate, fruit fly species, and other factors that affect fruit fly populations. All available studies in Africa are from several agro-ecologies, but none are from the midaltitude, high rainfall agro-ecologies that are prevalent in much of the Congo Basin of Central Africa.
The male lures methyl eugenol and terpinyl acetate are known to, respectively, attract Bactrocera and Ceratitis species, while Culure is known to attract various Dacus species. For principally females, several food baits including Torula yeast, Mazoferm, and Nulure have been developed and used to attract and monitor several fruitfly species. To our knowledge, monitoring the performance of food baits and male lures on fruit flies under the various environments that are prevalent in Central Africa, is lacking. Similarly, compared with other regions of Africa, information on fruit fly species composition, host range, crop losses, and seasonality, as well as various trapping approaches and control measures in Central Africa, are scarce. The Congo Basin of Central Africa harbours a rich humid forest with a high diversity of wild fruit trees that could, at the same time, represent a reservoir for fruit flies and their natural enemies. Central Africa further includes the five key agro-ecologies encountered across the African continent, from desert and arid agro-ecologies to dense high-rainfall and humid forest zones. Preliminary information from fruit collections in Cameroon revealed the presence of several species including B. dorsalis, Ceratitis cosyra , Ceratitis anonae , Ceratitis capitata , Ceratitis quinaria , Dacus punctatifrons Karschand Dacus bivittatus. Continuing to be scarce, however, is multi-year quantitative information on fruit fly’s species composition and their seasonal dynamics, host utilization, and fruit infestation levels, particularly from the principal commercial fruit species mango and guava, and the performance of different monitoring tools in mid-altitude humid and high rainfall agro-ecologies from Central Africa. The broad objective of this study is to establish and validate basic multi-year data necessary for the development of integrated pest management programs of fruit flies across two agro-ecological zones in Cameroon with contrasting climate and farming systems, representing a cross-section of the mid-altitude agro-ecologies of Central Africa. The study has the following specific objectives: determine the diversity of fruit fly species and the level of their infestation of mango, guava and other common fruit hosts; compare the performance of male lures and food baits for monitoring the abundance and seasonality of fruit flies in mango and mixed fruit orchards; and determine the contribution of temperature, relative humidity, and rainfall amount to the variation in fruit fly abundance. The results from this Cameroon study can possibly be extended to the rest of the Congo Basin, gallon nursery pot as the southern half of Cameroon is widely considered agro-ecologically a close representative of much of the rest of Central Africa.The study was conducted over 5–6 years in 2 agro-ecological zones of Cameroon as delimited by the Cameroon Institute of Agricultural Research for Development. The two target AEZs included the western highlands, with a mono-modal rainfall pattern , and humid forest, with bimodal rainfall . Both AEZs differed in their topography, climate characteristics, and cropping systems. The choice of the two zones was based on the richness, diversity and availability of fruit tree species. One experimental site was established in each AEZ for fruit fly trapping using food baits and male lures, and for evaluation of fruit infestations by fruit flies. Because of the long-term nature of the experiments and the need to secure traps for continuous monitoring over a period of 6 years, the traps were installed in the experimental orchard of the IRAD research station in Foumbot, for the WH-MR, and at the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture in Nkolbisson, for the HF-BR . Each orchard was characterized according to the description of the area, climatic conditions, fruit species present and management options . A homogenous hectare of mango was used in Foumbot, while a mixed hectare of fruit species was selected in Nkolbisson .All traps were suspended from tree branches with a galvanized steel wire at ~2 m above ground and at least 20 m apart.
The wire was coated at its middle length with a thick layer of Tanglefoot to prevent cursorial access to the traps by predators, particularly the common weaver ant Oecophylla longinoda . The number of traps varied according to the number of attractants used. For this purpose, 2 and 4 traps of each attractant were installed, respectively, at the Nkolbisson and Foumbot sites, for a total of 10 traps in Nkolbisson and 12 traps in Foumbot. For male lure-based traps, a dental cotton roll soaked with 2 mL of either methyl eugenol or terpinyl acetate was suspended from the centre of the trap lid. Two, 5 cm strips impregnated with 2, 2-Dimethyl dichlorovinyl phosphate were placed at the bottom of the trap as the killing agent. For food-bait traps, BioLure’s 3 components, packed individually in a sachet containing either ammonium acetate, trimethylamine, or putrescine, were adhered to the inside of the Multilure trap. Torula yeast was used as a liquid bait consisting of 2 pellets dissolved in 350 mL of water per trap. Similarly, the commercial product Mazoferm was diluted in 350 mL of water to obtain a 6% concentration, with 2 g of borax added to the solution as a preservative.Food bait and male lure traps were inspected in both orchards at weekly intervals. Torula yeast and Mazoferm baits were replaced weekly, while BioLure, male lures, DDVP strips, and cotton rolls were renewed monthly. Trap servicing techniques and regular rotation among trees followed those of. All the specimens were transferred and preserved in vials containing 70% ethanol. All samples were brought to the Entomology Laboratory of IITA in Yaoundé for identification. Meteorological data were collected at each location with a Hobo Pro v2 data logger for temperature and RH , and a Tru-Chek® DirectReading rain gauge . Temperature and RH were recorded at hourly intervals and the data were retrieved at monthly intervals, while rain amounts were collected between 7 and 8 am daily throughout the study periods.Fruit sampling was carried out from 2011 to 2015. Systematic random sampling was used in the two AEZs to determine the diversity of fruit flies associated with mango and guava fruits in orchards and home gardens. The mango variety “Camerounaise” and two varieties of guava were available at Nkolbisson orchard. At Foumbot orchard, mango varieties included Ruby, Zill, Irwin, Julie Nyombe, Palmer, and “Camerounaise”, and as in the Nkolbisson orchard, there were local and improved guava varieties of unknown names. Twenty mature fruits each of mango and guava—based on the varieties’ maturity status—were harvested randomly from all sampling sites, and up to 10 fallen mature fruits were collected from the ground at 2-week intervals from five trees of each fruit species. Fruits from other cultivated and wild plants were also collected during their fruiting periods from orchards, home gardens, and natural vegetation within a 70 km radius of each of the two experimental sites in WH-MR and HR-BR to determine the host range of fruit flies and the infestation levels. The number and size of fruit samples from the various plant species were primarily determined by the availability of fruits. Efforts were made to ensure a minimum collection of 20 fruits per sample at each location. Collected fruits were classified by species, known variety, date, and sampling area, then counted and weighed. All fruits were incubated in a screenhouse at the IITA station in Yaoundé. Incubation units consisted of 450 mL plastic containers and 1.5 L circular plastic basins. Owing to their larger size, fruits of mango, papaya, and Annona spp. Were individually incubated in plastic boxes. The other fruit species were incubated in the circular plastic basins, but in groups of 3–5 depending on their size. Fruits were placed on a dome-shaped galvanized steel wire grid which rested on a 2–3 cm layer of moist heat-pasteurized Sanaga river sand as fruit flies pupariating medium. Each incubation unit was then covered with a fine-mesh cloth and secured to prevent larval escape. The incubation units were arranged on metallic shelves. The supports of each shelf were placed inside pint-size containers which were maintained at full capacity with soapy water as barriers against ants and other cursorial insects. Fruit samples were incubated for up to 4 weeks to ensure that all live fruit fly larvae exited the fruits. Sand in each incubation unit was sieved twice at 12 days after the start of incubation, and at the end of incubation for the collection of fruit fly puparia. Collected puparia from each container were placed in 9 cm Petri dishes and transferred to an insectarium maintained at 25 ◦C, 70 ± 5% RH, and photoperiod of 12L:12D for adult emergence. Emergence dishes contained a wet mixture of table sugar and enzymatic yeast as food for full wing development of emerging adults.