Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2006 Oct;62(10):933-9.
doi: 10.1002/ps.1259.

Feeding and attraction of non-target flies to spinosad-based fruit fly bait

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Feeding and attraction of non-target flies to spinosad-based fruit fly bait

Xin-Geng Wang et al. Pest Manag Sci. 2006 Oct.

Abstract

A spinosad-based fruit fly bait, GF-120, has recently become a primary tool for area-wide suppression or eradication of pest tephritid fruit flies. The present study assessed the attraction and feeding of five non-target fly species to GF-120 in Hawaii. These non-target flies include three beneficial tephritid species [Eutreta xanthochaeta (Aldrich), Tetreuaresta obscuriventris (Loew), Ensina sonchi (L.)] introduced for weed biological control, an endemic Hawaiian tephritid [Trupanea dubautiae (Bryan)] (all Diptera: Tephritidae) and the cosmopolitan Drosophila melanogaster Meigen (Diptera: Drosophilidae). All five non-target fly species were susceptible to GF-120, as was the target pest Mediterranean fruit fly Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann). Feeding on, or even brief tasting of, GF-120 killed all fly species within 2 h. When individual flies were provided with a choice of GF-120 or honey solution, there was no difference in the frequency of first food encounter by E. xanthochaeta, D. melanogaster or C. capitata. The other three non-target species approached honey more often than GF-120 in their first food encounter. Feeding times on GF-120 and honey were not significantly different for D. melanogaster and C. capitata, while the other four non-target species fed longer on honey than on GF-120. There was no significant difference in feeding time on honey versus GF-120 between males and females of each species. These results suggest that area-wide treatment using GF-120 for the purpose of eradication of pest fruit flies has potential negative impacts on these and other non-target fly species in Hawaii.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources