Early detection of Dacinae (Diptera: Tephritidae) incursions is vital for quick and effective management. A key method for early detection is the implementation of trapping networks in risk areas. Australia relies on the use of extensive trapping networks at, and surrounding, major ports and fruit production areas to identity any fruit fly incursions. Therefore, improvements to the trap efficiency of these networks may result in earlier detection of incursions and hence more rapid response times for management and/or eradication. The current Australian standard, the Lynfield trap, is expensive and does not stack readily for transport. Here, we test the effectiveness of a new trap type, the Probodelt cone trap, compared to the Lynfield trap. We ran three separate trials: an experimental trial in an inland orchard and two field trials using the Sydney trapping network. At the orchard site, Lynfield and Probodelt traps had similar capture rates (within 10%) for Bactrocera tryoni. For the Sydney trapping network, no significant differences were found in the number of species caught or trap rates for B. tryoni, Bactrocera cacuminata, Dacus absonifacies, and Dacus aequalis. Thus, the Probodelt cone trap was at least comparable to the Lynfield trap. Given the economic advantages of the Probodelt cone trap (e.g. reduced shipping and storage costs), the use of the Probodelt trap may be preferred over the Lynfield trap.
Read full abstract