八棱瓜田不同实蝇引诱剂与诱捕器的田间诱捕效果比较

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.20250003

浙江农业学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (11): 2308-2314.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.20250003

八棱瓜田不同实蝇引诱剂与诱捕器的田间诱捕效果比较

王斯亮¹(), 陈金芝¹, 闫成进¹^,^*(), 郑永利²^,^*()

1.温州科技职业学院农业与生物技术学院,浙南作物育种重点实验室,浙江温州 325006
2.浙江省农业农村厅,浙江杭州 310025

收稿日期:2025-01-02 出版日期:2025-11-25 发布日期:2025-12-08
作者简介:王斯亮(1991—),女,浙江温州人,博士,讲师,主要从事农业害虫及其防治研究。E-mail:wsl512935@163.com
通讯作者: ^*闫成进,E-mail:ycj0685@163.com;郑永利,E-mail:Superbeetle@126.com
基金资助:
浙江省农业农村厅“三农九方”农业科技协作计划(2023SNJF036);温州市农业丰收计划(FSJH202307)

Comparison of trapping effects of different attractants and traps on fruit flies in the Luffa acutangula field

WANG Siliang¹(), CHEN Jinzhi¹, YAN Chengjin¹^,^*(), ZHENG Yongli²^,^*()

1. Southern Zhejiang Key Laboratory of Crop Breeding, College of Agriculture and Biotechnology, Wenzhou Vocational College of Science and Technology, Wenzhou 325006, Zhejiang, China
2. Zhejiang Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Hangzhou 310025, China

Received:2025-01-02 Online:2025-11-25 Published:2025-12-08

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为了对葫芦科蔬菜田间的实蝇进行有效理化诱控,本研究在浙江省温州地区八棱瓜(Luffa acutangula)田比较了4种不同厂家生产的实蝇引诱剂,以及黑色盖子、黄色盖子2种诱捕器对实蝇的田间诱捕效果。结果表明,YG(英格尔)、NL(宁录)、NK(纽康)、HZ(杭州欣禧)4种引诱剂均诱捕到了2种形态的实蝇,且均为雄性个体;经形态学和分子生物学鉴定,这2种实蝇为南亚果实蝇(Bactrocera tau)和具条实蝇(Bactrocera scutellata)。YG引诱剂的实蝇诱捕数量最多,其次是NL和NK,HZ引诱剂的诱捕数量最少。在不同诱捕器的比较中,黑色盖子诱捕器比黄色盖子诱捕器更能吸引实蝇。本研究结果为八棱瓜田实蝇的田间防控和预测预报提供参考依据。

关键词: 实蝇, 葫芦科蔬菜, 引诱剂, 诱捕器, 田间防效

Abstract:

To effectively trap and control fruit flies in Cucurbitaceae vegetable fields, four kinds of fruit fly attractants produced by different manufacturers, as well as two types of traps with either black cover or yellow cover, were compared for the field trapping effects in the Luffa acutangula field. The results showed that all four attractants, YG (Yinger), NL (Ninglu), NK (Niukang), and HZ (Hangzhou Xinxi), trapped two morphological forms of fruit flies, all of which were male individuals. Through morphological and molecular biological identification, these two fruit flies were identified as Bactrocera tau and Bactrocera scutellata. YG had the highest number of trapped fruit flies, followed by NL and NK, while HZ had the fewest. In comparison with different traps, traps with black covers were more attractive to fruit flies than those with yellow covers. This study is helpful for designing the field control strategy and population forecasting of fruit flies.

Key words: fruit fly, cucurbitaceae vegetable, attractant, trap, field control effect

中图分类号:

S433.9

王斯亮, 陈金芝, 闫成进, 郑永利. 八棱瓜田不同实蝇引诱剂与诱捕器的田间诱捕效果比较[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2025, 37(11): 2308-2314.

WANG Siliang, CHEN Jinzhi, YAN Chengjin, ZHENG Yongli. Comparison of trapping effects of different attractants and traps on fruit flies in the Luffa acutangula field[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(11): 2308-2314.

图/表 5

图1 本试验中使用的诱捕器

Fig.1 Traps used in this experiment

图2 标本样品S49(左)和样品S50(右)的形态特征

Fig.2 Morphological characteristics of specimen S49(left) and specimen S50 (right)

图3 基于COI基因序列构建的果实蝇属系统发育树

Fig.3 Phylogenetic tree of Bactrocera constructed based on COI gene sequences

表1 不同引诱剂与诱捕器组合的实蝇诱捕情况

Table 1 Trapping situation of fruit flies with different combinations of attractants and traps

引诱剂与诱捕器组合 Combinations of attractants and traps	南亚果实蝇数量 Number of Bactrocera tau	具条实蝇数量 Number of Bactrocera scutellata	单瓶7日最大实蝇诱捕数量 Maximum trapped fruit flies per trap in 7 days	每诱捕瓶实蝇总数 Number of total fruit flies per trap
NL-B	173	7	23	60.00±10.68 ab
NL-Y	83	2	7	28.33±3.49 b
NK-B	155	4	27	53.00±13.49 ab
NK-Y	78	1	16	26.33±11.71 b
YG-B	208	4	41	70.67±28.99 a
HZ-B	63	1	9	21.33±12.46 b

图4 不同引诱剂与诱捕器组合对实蝇田间发生动态的监测 NL-B,宁录黑盖诱捕器;NL-Y,宁录黄盖诱捕器;NK-B,纽康黑盖诱捕器;NK-Y,纽康黄盖诱捕器;YG-B,英格尔黑盖诱捕器;HZ-B,杭州欣禧黑盖诱捕器。

Fig.4 Monitoring of the field occurrence dynamics of fruit flies using different combinations of attractants and traps NL-B, Ninglu attractant with black-cover trap; NL-Y, Ninglu attractant with yellow-cover trap; NK-B, Niukang attractant with black-cover trap; NK-Y, Niukang attractant with yellow-cover trap; YG-B, Yinger attractant with black-cover trap; HZ-B, Hangzhou Xinxi attractant with black-cover trap.

参考文献 19

[1]	高媛惠, 盖云鹏, 李斌, 等. 我国口岸截获实蝇疫情分析[J]. 植物检疫, 2016, 30(5): 68-71.
	GAO Y H, GAI Y P, LI B, et al. Analysis of fruit flies intercepted in entry quarantine during 2013-2014[J]. Plant Quarantine, 2016, 30(5): 68-71. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[2]	李文阳. 南亚果实蝇引起果实腐烂的唾液腺微生物种类及其功能分析[D]. 南宁: 广西大学, 2024.
	LI W Y. Analysis of microbial species and their functional roles in the salivary glands of Bactrocera tau walker that cause fruit rot[D]. Nanning: Guangxi University, 2024. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[3]	汪宝如. 瓜实蝇不同寄主种群对杀虫剂的耐药性差异[D]. 南昌: 江西农业大学, 2022.
	WANG B R. Differences of insecticide resistance among different host populations of Zeugodacus cucurbitae[D]. Nanchang: Jiangxi Agricultural University, 2022. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[4]	曾宪儒, 覃江梅, 龙秀珍, 等. 我国主要瓜类实蝇的生物防治研究进展[J]. 应用昆虫学报, 2019, 56(3): 416-425.
	ZENG X R, QIN J M, LONG X Z, et al. Advances in research on the biological control of the major gourd fly species in China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Entomology, 2019, 56(3): 416-425. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[5]	林嘉, 杨德庆, 郝旭兴, 等. 实蝇引诱剂研究进展[J]. 环境昆虫学报, 2021, 43(6): 1398-1407.
	LIN J, YANG D Q, HAO X X, et al. Advance on the attractants of tephritid fruit flies[J]. Journal of Environmental Entomology, 2021, 43(6): 1398-1407. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]	林进添, 曾玲, 陆永跃, 等. 高度和地点对性引诱剂诱集桔小实蝇雄虫效果的影响[J]. 植物保护, 2005, 31(2): 67-69.
	LIN J T, ZENG L, LU Y Y, et al. Study on influence of the height and location on the methyl eugenol to attract oriental fruit fly males[J]. Plant Protection, 2005, 31(2): 67-69. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[7]	PARK S J, DE FAVERI S G, CHEESMAN J, et al. Zingerone in the flower of Passiflora maliformis attracts an Australian fruit fly, Bactrocera jarvisi(Tryon)[J]. Molecules, 2020, 25(12): 2877.
[8]	张鹤. 桔小实蝇雌虫性信息素合成通路研究[D]. 广州: 仲恺农业工程学院, 2016.
	ZHANG H. Research in female sex pheromone biosynthetic pathway of oriental fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis(Hendel)[D]. Guangzhou: Zhongkai University of Agriculture and Engineering, 2016. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]	BENELLI G, DAANE K M, CANALE A, et al. Sexual communication and related behaviours in Tephritidae: current knowledge and potential applications for integrated pest management[J]. Journal of Pest Science, 2014, 87(3): 385-405.
[10]	朱俐遐, 李桂珍, 尧美英, 等. 4种诱捕器对芒果园桔小实蝇的诱捕效果[J]. 热带农业科学, 2018, 38(9): 53-56.
	ZHU L X, LI G Z, YAO M Y, et al. Trapping effect of four trappers on oriental fruit fly(Bactrocera dorsalis) in mango plantations[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Agriculture, 2018, 38(9): 53-56. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[11]	涂华龙, 高旭渊, 田震亚, 等. 不同诱捕方法对苦瓜连作区内3种果实蝇的诱捕效果[J]. 中国瓜菜, 2022, 35(4): 92-96.
	TU H L, GAO X Y, TIAN Z Y, et al. Trap effectiveness of different trapping methods for three fruit flies in monocropping bitter gourd fields[J]. China Cucurbits and Vegetables, 2022, 35(4): 92-96. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]	廖永林, 张扬, 李燕芳, 等. 不同诱捕处理在苦瓜地上对瓜实蝇和桔小实蝇的诱捕效果研究[J]. 热带作物学报, 2013, 34(1): 142-145.
	LIAO Y L, ZHANG Y, LI Y F, et al. Trapping effects of different trapping methods to Bactrocera dorsalis and Bactrocera cucurbitae in bitter gourd field[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2013, 34(1): 142-145. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[13]	王敏, 夏声广, 李月红. 不同引诱剂和诱捕器对实蝇的诱杀效果[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2023, 64(4): 917-920.
	WANG M, XIA S G, LI Y H. Entrap effect of different attractants and traps on fruit flies[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 64(4): 917-920. (in Chinese)
[14]	崔灿, 管云, 宋琳玲, 等. 不同诱捕器对果实蝇的诱捕效果比较[J]. 南方农业, 2024, 18(15): 52-55.
	CUI C, GUAN Y, SONG L L, et al. Comparison of the trapping effects of different traps on Bactrocera[J]. South China Agriculture, 2024, 18(15): 52-55. (in Chinese)
[15]	袁伊旻, 张振宇, 张宏宇. 果实模型诱捕器外观及颜色对实蝇引诱特性的影响[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(3): 556-557.
	YUAN Y M, ZHANG Z Y, ZHANG H Y. Effect of trapper appearance and color on trapping efficacy for Bactrocera tau[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 63(3): 556-557. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]	李月红, 何陆芳, 叶良松, 等. 不同诱捕器与诱芯对柑橘小实蝇的诱捕效果[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2010, 51(6): 1337-1339.
	LI Y H, HE L F, YE L S, et al. Trapping effects of different traps and attractants on Bactrocera dorsalis[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2010, 51(6): 1337-1339. (in Chinese)
[17]	杨友莹, 池必文, 季清娥, 等. 斑翅果蝇对不同颜色的趋性反应以及田间诱捕器的优化[J]. 武夷科学, 2017, 33: 35-41.
	YANG Y Y, CHI B W, JI Q E, et al. The response of Drosophila suzukii to different colors and the optimization of field traps[J]. Wuyi Science Journal, 2017, 33: 35-41. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[18]	戴长庚, 段婷婷, 胡阳, 等. 不同方法对杨梅果蝇的防治效果研究[J]. 中国南方果树, 2017, 46(6): 81-84.
	DAI C G, DUAN T T, HU Y, et al. Study on the control effect of different methods on Myrica rubra Drosophila[J]. South China Fruits, 2017, 46(6): 81-84. (in Chinese)
[19]	代必丽, 孙芳查, 廖建康. 荧光黏板对瓜实蝇的引诱作用及田间防治效果分析[J]. 南方农业, 2018, 12(21): 38-39.
	DAI B L, SUN F C, LIAO J K. Attraction of fluorescent adhesive board to Bactrocera dorsalis and analysis of its field control effect[J]. South China Agriculture, 2018, 12(21): 38-39. (in Chinese)

八棱瓜田不同实蝇引诱剂与诱捕器的田间诱捕效果比较

Comparison of trapping effects of different attractants and traps on fruit flies in the Luffa acutangula field

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 5

参考文献 19

相关文章 3

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	冯帆1，2，陈建明2，，赵敏3，，李荣3，张珏锋2，张国忠3. 不同诱芯和诱捕器对梨小食心虫的诱捕效果比较 [J]. 浙江农业学报, 2014, 26(6): 1540-.
[2]	陈俊华;徐志宏;陈为民;金国龙;王志龙 . 浙江省五种实蝇记述[J]. , 2006, 18(1): 0-31.
[3]	皇甫伟国;陈若霞;王扬军;陆冬青;胡浩峰;姚红燕;孙永涛;周金波. 几种性信息素对小菜蛾的诱集效果及田间防效[J]. , 2005, 17(6): 0-397.