title: Communication disruption of guava moth (Coscinoptycha improbana) using a pheromone analog based on chain length.
abstract: The guava moth, Coscinoptycha improbana, an Australian species that infests fruit crops in commercial and home orchards, was first detected in New Zealand in 1997. A four-component pheromone blend was identified but is not yet commercially available. Using single sensillum recordings from male antennae, we established that the same olfactory receptor neurons responded to two guava moth sex pheromone components, (Z)-11-octadecen-8-one and (Z)-12-nonadecen-9-one, and to a chain length analog, (Z)-13-eicosen-10-one, the sex pheromone of the related peach fruit moth, Carposina sasakii. We then field tested whether this non-specificity of the olfactory neurons might enable disruption of sexual communication by the commercially available analog, using male catch to synthetic lures in traps in single-tree, nine-tree and 2-ha plots. A disruptive pheromone analog, based on chain length, is reported for the first time. Trap catches for guava moth were disrupted by three polyethylene tubing dispensers releasing the analog in single-tree plots (86% disruption of control catches) and in a plots of nine trees (99% disruption). Where peach fruit moth pheromone dispensers were deployed at a density of 1000/ha in two 2-ha areas, pheromone traps for guava moth were completely disrupted for an extended period (up to 470 days in peri-urban gardens in Mangonui and 422 days in macadamia nut orchards in Kerikeri). In contrast, traps in untreated areas over 100 m away caught 302.8 ± 128.1 moths/trap in Mangonui and 327.5 ± 78.5 moths/ trap in Kerikeri. The longer chain length in the pheromone analog has greater longevity than the natural pheromone due to its lower volatility. Chain length analogs may warrant further investigation for mating disruption in Lepidoptera, and screening using single-sensillum recording is recommended.
authors.affiliation: The New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Limited, PB 4704, Christchurch, New Zealand, max.suckling@plantandfood.co.nz.
authors.forename: D M
authors.initials: DM
authors.lastname: Suckling
authors.forename: J J
authors.initials: JJ
authors.lastname: Dymock
authors.forename: K C
authors.initials: KC
authors.lastname: Park
authors.forename: R H
authors.initials: RH
authors.lastname: Wakelin
authors.forename: L E
authors.initials: LE
authors.lastname: Jamieson
mesh_terms: D000819:Animal Communication; D000818:Animals; D007300:Insect Control / Q000379:methods*; D039106:Macadamia; D008297:Male; D009036:Moths / Q000502:physiology*; D018034:Olfactory Receptor Neurons / Q000502:physiology*; D012724:Sex Attractants / Q000737:chemistry* / Q000502:physiology; D012726:Sexual Behavior, Animal / Q000502:physiology*
chemical_list: D012724:Sex Attractants
references.citation: J Chem Ecol. 2013 Jan;39(1):50-8
references.pmid: 23254379
references.citation: Pest Manag Sci. 2012 Jun;68(6):928-34
references.pmid: 22337555
references.citation: J Chem Ecol. 1992 Dec;18(12):2331-52
references.pmid: 24254874
references.citation: J Chem Ecol. 1995 Dec;21(12):1957-69
references.pmid: 24233899
references.citation: PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e41653
references.pmid: 22911835
references.citation: J Chem Ecol. 1994 Mar;20(3):489-503
references.pmid: 24242106
references.citation: J Chem Ecol. 2010 Jan;36(1):80-100
references.pmid: 20108027
references.citation: J Insect Physiol. 2004 Jul;50(7):647-55
references.pmid: 15234625
references.citation: J Chem Ecol. 1990 Mar;16(3):667-84
references.pmid: 24263583
references.citation: J Insect Physiol. 2002 Dec;48(12):1139-1145
references.pmid: 12770037
references.citation: J Chem Ecol. 2006 Jan;32(1):221-37
references.pmid: 16525879