Spatial distribution of <i>Ceratitis capitata</i> in guava orchards and influences from orchard management

Nicácio, J.; Abot, A. R.; Oliveira, M. P.; Silva, J. L.; Garcia, F. R. M.

doi:10.1590/1519-6984.263741

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Brazilian Journal of Biology

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Original Article • Braz. J. Biol. 82 • 2022 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.263741 copy

Spatial distribution of Ceratitis capitata in guava orchards and influences from orchard management

Distribuição espacial de Ceratitis capitata em pomares de goiabeira e influências do manejo de pomares

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

The objectives of this research were: (i) to Estimate the quantitative occurrence of Ceratitis capitata captured in McPhail traps in cultivating guava; (ii) to investigate the spatial distribution patterns of C. capitata in guava orchards; (iii) to compare the index of the FTD (fruit fly/trap/day) to the type of spatial distribution of C. capitata with the Negative Binomial to set the best time for control of the population in the context of Integrated Pest Management; (iv) Verify the influence of the pruning, spraying, and mowing on the distributions of medfly in guava. Was used 30 McPhail traps installed in three commercial orchards of guava. The spatial distribution was evaluated by the regression model with the Taylor power method, from the log of variance to the log of the mean number of individuals. Ceratitis capitata has aggregated distribution behavior. The potential risk of economic damage is associated with aggregate distribution behavior. The beginning of this distribution indicates the most appropriate time for using control techniques.

Keywords:
medfly; aggregated distribution; populational monitoring; captures; management

NF ♀♂	A.M	Aggregation Indexes				Frequency distribution						Type of management
		FTD	I	I δ	K-factor	Poisson		NB		PB		Type of management
		FTD	I	I δ	K-factor	χ^2Signf	g.l	χ^2Signf	g.l	χ^2Signf	g.l	Pg/Sp	LB/Mp
8	6	0.04	1.28^AL	4.29^AL	0.97^AG	2.15^NS	1	0.51	0ⁱ i Degree of freedom and calculated chi-square, being insufficient to adhere to the type of distribution; A.M = NA = Number of traps with C. capitata capture (Positive); NF = Number of flies (n = 3150); FTD index = Ratio of the number of flies per trap and the number of days of exposure of these traps; I = Average Variance Ratio Index; Iδ = Morisite Index; K = k-exponent calculated by the method of moments, with the value of χ2, corresponding to an error probability of 5% (α = 0.05), with the significance of the occurrence of the number of C. capitata for the indices: AG = aggregate distribution ; UN = Uniform distribution; AL = Random distribution; Poisson = “Random” frequency distribution; NB = Negative Binomial Frequency Distribution “aggregated or contagious” and PB = Positive Binomial Frequency Distribution “Uniform”. Pg = Pruned guava trees; Sp = Orchard sprayed; LB = Leaf biomass cover in; Mp = Weeds cut (mowing); S = type of management performed; N = type of management not performed; E = Period in which the cultivar was under the effect of the management implemented and; '- - -' = Decision-making thresholds at the security and control action levels.	2.56	0ⁱ	N/N	5/5
9	5	0.04	1.87^AG	5.83^AL	0.34^AG	6.84^ 1% error probability (p<0.01);	1	1.50	0ⁱ	7.06	0ⁱ	N/E	3/3
9	7	0.04	1.41^AL	2.50^AL	0.73^AG	0.10^NS	1	0.93	0ⁱ	0.11	0ⁱ	N/E	5/5
10	7	0.05	1.31^AL	2.00^AL	1.07^AG	3.56^NS	1	1.24	0ⁱ	4.37	0ⁱ	E/S	2/2
10	7	0.05	1.52^AL	3.00^AL	0.64^AG	1.09^NS	1	0.00	0ⁱ	1.16	0ⁱ	E/S	2/3
10	9	0.05	0.90^AL	0.67^AL	-3.22^UN	019^NS	1	0.01	0ⁱ	0.17	0ⁱ	N/E	5/5
10	7	0.05	1.52^AL	4.00^AL	0.64^AG	1.09^NS	1	0.00	0ⁱ	1.16	0ⁱ	N/N	5/5
11	9	0.05	1.03^AL	1.36^AL	11.70^AL	0.16^NS	1	0.10	0ⁱ	0.19	0ⁱ	N/N	2/3
12	10	0.06	0.97^AL	1.82^AL	-11.60^UN	0.01^NS	1	0.04	0ⁱ	0.02	0ⁱ	N/N	5/5
13	7	0.06	1.86^AG	3.27^AL	0.50^AG	5.81**	1	1.55	-1ⁱ	6.01	0ⁱ	N/N	4/4
16	11	0.08	1.52^AL	2.00^AL	1.03^AG	30.93**	1	0.31^NS	1	0.37	0ⁱ	E/S	¼
16	7	0.08	2.29^AG	3.50A^AG	0.41^AG	8.78**	1	2.76^NS	4	28.40	0ⁱ	S/N	½
17	12	0.08	1.18^AL	1.43^AL	3.17^AG	0.47^NS	1	0.08	0ⁱ	0.54	0ⁱ	N/N	5/5
18	12	0.09	1.79^AG	2.45^AL	0.76^AG	0.34^NS	1	1.52^NS	1	0.37	0ⁱ	N/S	4/5
22	10	0.10	3.00^AG	3.83^AL	0.37^AG	31.48**	2	0.86^NS	2	6.45**	1	E/N	1/4
26	13	0.12	2.37^AG	2.58^AL	0.63^AG	36.26**	2	1.95^NS	2	14.92**	2	S/N	1/1
34	15	0.16	1.63^AG	1.55^AL	1.81^AG	10.07**	2	4.33^NS	2	13.94**	1	E/N	1/4
37	15	0.18	2.67^AG	2.34^AL	0.74^AG	34.77**	3	1.48^NS	3	13.33**	2	N/S	5/1
37	20	0.18	1.27^AL	1.24^AL	4.60^AG	4.67^NS	3	2.14^NS	2	0.46^NS	1	N/E	4/4
40	12	0.19	5.29^AG	4.19^AG	0.31^AG	21.98**	2	5.59^NS	3	34.20**	1	S/S	1/4
46	18	0.22	2.10^AG	1.84^AL	1.39^AG	9.21^* * 5% error probability (p<0.05); g.l = Degree of freedom of the χ2 distribution; Signf = chi-square value and significance;	3	1.80^NS	1	12.89**	2	N/E	3/4
53	15	0.25	4.05^AG	2.70^AL	0.58^AG	27.64**	4	3.51^NS	3	30.27**	2	N/N	3/4
59	19	0.28	3.10^AG	2.05^AG	0.94^AG	11.50**	2	5.45^NS	2	21.69**	2	E/N	1/2
63	18	0.30	3.56^AG	2.20^AG	0.82^AG	30.73**	4	5.79^NS	5	32.38**	3	N/N	5/1
70	19	0.33	3.50^AG	2.05^AL	0.93^AG	45.91**	4	11.40^NS	6	52.72**	3	S/N	1/4
77	18	0.37	5.88^AG	2.86^AG	0.53^AG	54.40**	4	2.88^NS	4	62.49**	3	E/N	1/2
82	17	0.39	6.76^AG	3.06^AG	0.47^AG	77.05**	4	1.93^NS	5	126.61**	3	E/N	2/2
149	24	0.71	9.24^AG	2.61^AG	0.60^AG	50.67**	6	9.35^NS	8	47.33**	5	N/N	1/4
184	24	0.88	21.18^AG	4.20^AG	0.30^AG	181.68**	4	16.10*	6	260.2**	3	N/S	1/4
241	28	1.15	15.71^AG	2.78^AG	0.55^AG	210.45**	5	17.03*	8	196.21**	3	N/N	3/4
275	23	1.31	22.29^AG	3.25^AG	0.43^AG	73.17**	3	10.67^NS	8	109.15	1	E/N	2/3
450	29	2.14	28.91^AG	2.80^AG	0.54^AG	331.85**	2	16.95^NS	12	311.01	0ⁱ	E/N	2/3
764	29	3.64	42.76^AG	2.59^AG	0.61^AG	224.76**	4	21.36*	10	43.46	-1ⁱ	E/N	1/3
784	27	3.73	23.94^AG	1.85^AG	1.14^AG	285.03**	3	68.86**	11	153.94	0ⁱ	N/N	5/1
1035	25	4.93	93.70^AG	3.60^AL	0.37^AG	197.59**	6	24.97^NS	8	35.37	-1ⁱ	N/N	5/1
1117	30	5.32	40.67^AG	2.04^AG	0.94^AG	266.97**	6	12.68^NS	12	21.95**	2	E/N	1/2
5811	27	27.67	178.13^AG	1.88^AG	1.09^AG	206.81**	1	15.02*	6	0ⁱ	0ⁱ	N/N	5/2

Type of management	Distribution of Ceratitis capitata					Multiple comparison
Type of management	Minimum Number (#)	Maximum	Median	Average	SD	Multiple comparison
Pruning and Spray	0	18	0.24	0.41	1.29	a
Spraying	0	30	0.34	0.85	2.53	a
Pruning	0	170	0.50	3.84	14.15	b
No pruning and no spraying	0	623	1.32	25.90	77.29	c

Treatment	Management		p(ɵ\|у)
Treatment	Pg/Sp	Lb/Mp	Pg	Sp	Lb	Mp
t1	E/N	1/4	0.038	0	0.050	0.251
t2	E/N	1/3	0.043	0	0.061	0.220
t3	E/N	1/2	0.052	0	0.072	0.176
t4	E/N	1/2	0.052	0	0.072	0.176
t5	E/N	2/3	0.038	0	0.104	0.189
t6	E/N	2/2	0.043	0	0.119	0.145
t7	E/S	1/4	0.033	0.008	0.047	0.220
t8	E/S	2/3	0.033	0.008	0.090	0.167
t9	E/S	2/2	0.038	0.008	0.104	0.128
t10	N/E	3/4	0	0.013	0.119	0.194
t11	N/E	3/3	0	0.015	0.137	0.167
t12	N/E	5/5	0	0.010	0.151	0.185
t13	N/E	4/4	0	0.012	0.144	0.176
t14	N/N	1/4	0	0	0.072	0.352
t15	N/N	2/3	0	0	0.144	0.264
t16	N/N	3/4	0	0	0.155	0.251
t17	N/N	5/5	0	0	0.180	0.220
t18	N/N	4/4	0	0	0.180	0.220
t19	N/N	5/2	0	0	0.256	0.128
t20	N/N	5/1	0	0	0.299	0.075
t21	N/N	5/1	0	0	0.299	0.075
t22	N/S	1/4	0	0.010	0.061	0.295
t23	N/S	4/5	0	0.006	0.144	0.220
t24	N/S	5/1	0	0.008	0.256	0.062
t25	S/N	1/4	0.022	0	0.061	0.295
t26	S/N	1/2	0.033	0	0.090	0.220
t27	S/N	1/1	0.043	0	0.119	0.145
t28	S/S	1/4	0.018	0.008	0.050	0.251
Probability	-	-	0.3600	0.0017	0.1792	0.4591
Chance of occurrences	-	-	0.9300	0.4475	2.5250	3.1050

Instituto Internacional de Ecologia R. Bento Carlos, 750, 13560-660 São Carlos SP - Brasil, Tel. e Fax: (55 16) 3362-5400 - São Carlos - SP - Brazil
E-mail: bjb@bjb.com.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] *e-mail: flaviormg@hotmail.com