Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-6grmk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T03:00:31.283Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Diversity, damage and pheromone specificity of fruit flies in the Forest-Savanna Transition zone of Ghana

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2025

Ernestina Narveh Awarikabey*
Affiliation:
Crops Research Institute -CSIR
Jakpasu Victor Kofi Afun
Affiliation:
Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana
Maxwell Kelvin Billah
Affiliation:
Dept. of Animal Biology and Conservation Science, University of Ghana, P. O. Box LG. 67, Legon, Accra, Ghana
Enoch Adjei Osekre
Affiliation:
Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana
*
Corresponding author: Ernestina Narveh Awarikabey; Email: enarveh@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Mango is a delicious tropical fruit with high economic value worldwide. The Forest-Savanna Transition zone of Ghana contributes significantly to the production of mangoes for both local and international markets. The zone is plagued with the fruit fly ‘menace’ like all mango-producing areas in Ghana. Not much has been done in terms of species monitoring. A 24- month fruit fly monitoring survey was conducted in eight mango orchards, to assess the composition of fruit flies associated with Mango and their damage levels. Four para-pheromone attractants (Methyl Eugenol, Terpinyl Acetate, Trimedlure, and Cuelure) were used to monitor fruit flies. Eight improvised water bottle traps (two per lure) were purposefully deployed in each orchard. A total of 18 tephritid species belonging to five genera were recorded. Bactrocera (one species), Ceratitis (six species), Dacus (eight species), Zeugodacus (one species) and Xanthaciura (two species). Bactrocera dorsalis was the most abundant species (90% of the collected samples), while the native mango fly, C. cosyra constituted 0.5%. Dacus fuscovittatus and Dacus pleuralis were for the first time captured and identified in Ghana. Dacus langi, Dacus carnesi, Dacus (diastatus?), Ceratitis silvestrii and C. quinaria were recorded for the first time in the zone. The zone recorded a diversity index of 0.41. Damage levels ranged from 41–91%. Ten out of the 18 species, are of economic importance on mango and must be watched. Periodic updates on seasonal fluctuations, species composition and new arrivals are key to the successful implementation of any management strategy.

Information

Type
Research Paper
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press.
Figure 0

Table 1. Global Positioning System (GPS) Co-ordinates of Study Sites

Figure 1

Figure 1. Water Bottle Trap.

Figure 2

Table 2. Species of fruit flies attracted by different pheromone (lures)

Figure 3

Table 3. Number of non-target organisms captured by different pheromone lures.

Figure 4

Figure 2. Percentage of tephritid fruit flies captured by the different pheromones.

Figure 5

Table 4. Means and relative fly densities of fruit fly species in the Forest-Savanna Transition zone of Ghana; (Nov. 2017–Oct. 2019)

Figure 6

Table 5. Percentage field infestation of fruit fly species in Keitt mango.

Figure 7

Table 6. Shannon Weiner's Diversity index for the composition of fruit flies in eight mango orchards

Figure 8

Table 7. Numbers and proportions of fruit flies captured in pheromone-baited traps in eight mango orchards in the Forest-Savanna Transition zone of Ghana.

Figure 9

Figure 3. Population fluctuations of B. dorsalis in the Forest-Savanna Transition zone of Ghana.

Figure 10

Figure 4. Population fluctuations of (A) Ceratitis species and (B) Dacus species in the Forest-Savanna Transition zone of Ghana.

Supplementary material: File

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 1

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material
Download Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 1(File)
File 292.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 2

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material
Download Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 2(File)
File 437.6 KB
Supplementary material: File

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 3

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material
Download Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 3(File)
File 434 KB
Supplementary material: File

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 4

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material
Download Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 4(File)
File 426.6 KB
Supplementary material: File

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 5

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material
Download Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 5(File)
File 365.4 KB
Supplementary material: File

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 6

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material
Download Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 6(File)
File 539 KB
Supplementary material: File

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 7

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material
Download Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 7(File)
File 377.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 8

Awarikabey et al. supplementary material
Download Awarikabey et al. supplementary material 8(File)
File 413.4 KB