Silba adipata McAlpine: fully transparent trap inspection.
DISTRIBUTION
The catches were distributed throughout the season as follows: June 13 to July 8 (26 days): 1 female; July 9 to July 15 (7 days): 1 female; July 16 to August 3 (19 days): no capture; August 4 to 10 (7 days): 1 male; August 11 to 16 (6 days): 3 (1 female and 2 males); August 17 to 23 (7 days): 4 (3 females and 1 male); August 24 to 28 (5 days): 3 females.
We note the existence of two periods presenting a different catches level, although very low for both. A first period of 8 weeks (from June 13 to August 10), during which only 3 individuals (2 females, 1 male) were captured, i.e. 1 catch every 20 days. A second period of 2.5 weeks (from August 11 to 28), during which catches were regular, although remaining very low: 10 individuals (7 females, 3 males), i.e. 1 catch every 2 days.
ANALYSIS OF CATCHES VERSUS ATTACKS
On July 1st (i.e. after 19 days of trapping), I already realized that the transparent trap was really ineffective. Indeed, while the catches count was only 1 female, I had already collected on the tree 218 figs attacked by Silba adipata McAlpine. And these were only the attacked figs which could be detected on this date by the beginning of a color variation, or the presence of larvae exit holes. In fact, the analysis of the ovipositions distribution over the season showed that on July 1st the number of attacked figs was 301. I decided not to use the transparent trap baited with ammonium sulfate in the fight against Silba adipata McAlpine, but it seemed interesting to me to continue testing it until the end of the figs season.
The study of Silba adipata McAlpine attacks over the 2019 season on the 'Bellone' fig tree showed that they obeyed the 3-phase attack pattern of Silba adipata McAlpine, for a given fig tree of a given variety (see chapter).
Phase 1 (intense attacks) took place from June 17 to 28 (12 days), with an average of 25 attacked figs per day. It concentrated 301 ovipositions, which represent 90% of the season attacks (334). Analysis of the catches distribution (see previous subchapter) shows that only one individual of Silba adipata McAlpine (a female) was captured in the period from June 13 to July 8, which encompasses phase 1 of the attacks.
Phase 2 (weak attacks) took place from June 29 to August 6 (5 weeks), with an average of 1 attacked fig per day. It concerns 33 figs, i.e. 10% of the total figs attacked in the season (334). Analysis of the catches distribution shows that during the period from July 9 to August 6, included in phase 2 of the attacks, the transparent trap only captured 2 Silba adipata McAlpine individuals (one female and one male). Note: the male captured between August 4 and 10 is considered to have been captured on August 6 at the latest; if it was captured between August 7 and 10, it increases the number of catches made during phase 3.
Phase 3 (total absence of attacks) took place from August 7 to 28 (3 weeks). Being emphasized that during the phase 3, immature figs with the critical size for the attack of the Black Fig Fly were still on the fig tree, and there was a regular presence of feeding black fig flies on it. Analysis of the catches distribution shows that during the period from August 11 to 28, included in phase 3 of the attacks, the transparent trap captured 10 Silba adipata McAlpine individuals (7 females and 3 males).
In summary, successively: 1 catch for 301 attacked figs, 2 catches for 33 attacked figs, 10 catches for 0 attacked figs. The catches analysis covering the entire season confirms my decision of July 1st not to use the fully transparent trap baited with ammonium sulfate in the fight against Silba adipata McAlpine.
Note.
It seems important to me to remind that, as explained in a previous subchapter, the catches do not concern egg-laying females, but only females and males which come to feed on the fig tree. For example, the results above do not mean that the female captured during the intense attacks phase was an egg-laying female, taken from among thirty females which attacked the figs during this phase (I deduce from the average of 25 figs attacked per day that an average of 2 to 3 egg-laying females daily frequented the fig tree, and the phase lasted 12 days). It was a female that came to the fig tree to feed, and not to lay eggs.
The number of catches only measures the attractiveness of a trap (type of trap + bait), that can lead to a reduction in the overall pressure of the population of Silba adipata McAlpine individuals found on the fig tree, or passing near it (provided that there is no phenomenon of permanent renewal of this population). Without us being able to determine the exact correlation between the number of catches and the percentage drop in overall pest pressure, nor being assured that the latter will be sufficient to have an impact on the harvest level. Beyond the number of catches, to evaluate the effectiveness of a trap, it is necessary to determine the additional percentage of figs saved from Silba adipata McAlpine attacks that its implementation induces, compared to the harvests usually obtained in the absence of traps.
COMPARISON OF THE ATTRACTIVENESS WITH THAT OF A McPHAIL TRAP
On July 1, I placed next to the transparent trap a McPhail type trap with a yellow lower part, baited with the same attractant liquid (aqueous solution of ammonium sulfate at 40 g/l), to compare the attractiveness of one relative to the other.
Fully transparent trap and McPhail trap in a fig bush, against the Black Fig Fly.
At the end of the experiment (August 28), I noted that the McPhail trap captured 79 Silba adipata McAlpine individuals (over a period of 59 days), while the fully transparent trap only captured 13 individuals (over a period of 77 days). The McPhail trap therefore allowed a number of catches 6 times greater than the transparent trap, over a setting period representing 3/4 of that of the latter. And, by comparing the catches over the 59-day period of coexistence of the two traps, I deduced an average of 1.34 catches per day for the McPhail trap, and an average of 1 catch every five days for the fully transparent trap.
These results are clearly unfavorable for the fully transparent trap, and support the decision not to use this trap for the fight against Silba adipata McAlpine.
They also show that it is not ammonium sulfate which is responsible for the very low number of catches of Silba adipata McAlpine individuals, but the transparent trap (in terms of color and/or shape). We could also put forward the hypothesis that the very poor results of the transparent trap are due to the low height of the lid and of the upturned part of the bottom, which would allow a large part of the captured individuals to escape from the trap. But the number of Ceratitis capitata Wiedemann individuals captured in the transparent trap, 9 times greater than the number of Silba adipata McAlpine individuals, appears to contradict this hypothesis.