Agricultural and Forest Entomology (2001) 3, 41-47

18500

Pheromone-mediated mass trapping and population diversion as

strategies for suppressing Carpophilus spp. (Coleoptera:
Nitidulidae) in Australian stone fruit orchards

David G. James·, Beverley Vogelet, Richard J. Fauldert, Robert J. Bartelt:!: and Christopher J. Moore§
*Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center. Washington State University, 24106 Nonh Bunn Road. Prosser. Washington 99350.
U.S.A. tYanco Agricultural Institute. New South Wales Agriculture. PMB Yanco, New South Wales 2703. Australia, ~USDA Agricultural
Research Service. National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research. Bioactive Agents Research Unit 1815 Nonh University Street. Peoria.
Illinois 61604. U.S.A.. §Queensland Department of Primary Industries. Animal Research Institute. Locked Bag no. 4. Moorooka.
Queensland 4105, Australia

Abstract Five experiments were conducted during 1995-99 in stone fruit orchards on the
Central Coast and in inland New South Wales, Australia, on the use of synthetic
aggregation pheromones and a coattractant to suppress populations of the ripen-
ing fruit pests Carpophilus spp. (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae).
2 Perimeter-based suppression traps baited with pheromone and coattractant placed
at 3 m intervals around small fruit blocks, caught large numbers of CarpophiIus
spp. Very small populations of Carpophilus spp. occurred within blocks, and fruit
damage was minimal.
3 CarpophiIus spp. populations in stone fruit blocks 15-370 m from suppression
traps were also small and non-damaging, indicating a large zone of pheromone
attractivity.
4 Pheromone/coattractant-baited suppression traps appeared to divert Carpophilus
spp. from nearby (130 m) ripening stone fruit. Ten metal drums containing
decomposing fruit, baited with pheromone and treated with insecticide, attracted
CarpophiIus spp. and appeared to reduce populations and damage to ripening
fruit at distances of 200-500m. Populations and damage were significantly
greater within 200 m of the drums and may have been caused by ineffective
poisoning or poor quality/overcrowding of fruit resources in the drums.
5 Suppression of Carpophilus spp. populations using synthetic aggregation
pheromones and a coattractant appears to be a realistic management option in
stone fruit orchards. Pheromone-mediated diversion of beetle populations from
ripening fruit may be more practical than perimeter trapping, but more research
is needed on the effective range of Carpophilus pheromones and the relative
merits of trapping compared to attraction to insecticide-treated areas.
Keywords Aggregation pheromones, CarpophiIus spp. coattractant, mass
trapping. population diversion, stone fruit, suppression.

1997). The reduction in broad-spectrum pesticide inputs in

Introduction
Dried fruit. or sap. beetles in the genus Carpophilus.
primarily C. hemipterus (L.), C. mutilatus Erichson and C.
davidsoni Dobson, have recently emerged as major pests of
stone fruit production in Australia (James et al.. 1993, 1995.
Correspondence: Dr David G. James. Tel.: +1 5097869280; fax: +1
509 7869370; e-mail: djames@tricity.wsu.edu
stone fruit production following development of pheromonal
control of the key pest, oriental fruit moth. Cydia molesta
Busck (Vickers etal., 1985), appears to have been the
primary catalyst for elevation of these formerly secondary
pests (Hely etal., 1982) to major pest status. Carpophilus
beetles attack ripening fruit (principally peaches, nectarines
and apricots) causing rapid breakdown and also serve as
carriers of brown rot (Kable, 1969). Economic losses can

© 2001 Blackwell Science Ltd

42 David G. James et al.
be severe and instances of total crop loss have occurred in
a number of stone fruit growing areas in recent years.
Current management of Carpophilus spp. is based on the
use of broad-spectrum insecticides near harvest, although no
insecticide is specifically registered for Carpophiius spp.
and control is often poor.
Identification and synthesis of the male-produced aggre-
gation pheromones of C. hemipterus (Bartelt et aI., 1990a),
C. mutilatus (Bartelt etaZ.. 1993) and C. davidsoni (Bartelt
& James. 1994) and subsequent demonstration of field
activity (Bartelt et af.. 1992. 1994a. b; James et aZ.. 1993,
1994. 2000b). has highlighted the potential of these
semiochemicals for nitidulid management in stone fruit
orchards. James et aZ. (1996a) showed that perimeter-based
mass trapping using synthetic aggregation pheromones can
suppress Carpophilus spp. populations in stone fruit
orchards. This study reports the results of further orchard
experiments on the use of aggregation pheromones in
protective mass trapping cordons or as a diversionary tool
to suppress Carpophilus beetle populations in stone fruit
orchards.
Materials and methods
Synthetic pheromones
Pheromones for C. hemipterus. C. mutilatus and
C. davidsoni. the major damaging Carpophilus spp. in
Australian stone fruit orchards (lames et aZ.. 1993.
1994. 1995. 2oo0a). were used in these experiments. The
pheromone for C. hemipterus consisted of a 100: 31 : 11 : 8
blend of (2£. 4£. 6£. 8E)-3.5.7-trimethyl-2A.6.8-decate-
traene. (2£. 4£. 6£. 8E)-3,5,7-trimethyl-2,4,6,8-undecate-
traene. (2£. 4£, 6£, 8E)-7-ethyl-3,5-dimethyl-2,4,6.8.-
decatetraene. and (2£. 4£. 6£. 8E)-7-ethyl-3.5-dimethyl-
2.4.6.8-undecatetraene. respectively (Bartelt et ai., 1992).
The pheromone for C. murilatus consisted of a 100: 7 blend
ot D£. 5£. 7E)-5-ethyl-7-methyl-3.5.7-undecatriene and
(3£. 5£. 7£1-6-ethyl-4-methyl-3.5.7-decatriene (Bartelt et al..
1993). The pheromone for C. davidsoni consisted of a
100: 9: 31: 160 blend of (2£. 4£. 6El-5-ethyl-3-methyl-
2.4.6-non3tnene. <3£. 5£. 7E)-6-ethyl-4-methyl-3.5.7-deca-
tnene. (2£. 4£. 6£. 8£)-3.5.7-trimethyl-2.4.6.8-undecate-
traene. and C2£. 4£. 6£. 8E)-7-ethyl-3.5-dimethyl-2,4.6.8-
undec3tetraene (Bartelt & James. 1994). The synthetic
pheromones were purified only by distillation and open
end column chromatography on silica gel. These procedures
did nOI remove the small amounts of Z isomers produced in
the syntheses (Bartelt et al.. I990b). but there is no
eVidence that these (presently unavoidable) impurities are
detnmental to pheromonal activity (Bartelt et af.. 1992).
Pheromones were appropriately diluted with hexane and
stored 10 a freezer until needed. Concentrations of
components were determined by gas chromatography on
diluted ahquots (instrumentation as described by Bartelt
t'I af.. 19903 l. Pheromone solutions were applied to rubber
septa (II x 20 mm. red rubber. Aldrich Chemical Co..
Milwaukee. Wisconsin) followed by 3001ll- of methylene
chloride. Once the liquid had soaked into the septa. they
©2001 Blackwell Science ltd, Agricultural and Forest Entomology, 3. 41-47
were aired in a fume hood for 1h and stored in a freezer
in tightly closed bottles until needed.
Traps and coattractant baits
Magnet funnel traps (Agrisense. Pontypridd. Glamorgan. D.!)..)
were used to mass trap beetles in four experiments. This trap is a
simple funnel type designed primarily for trapping moths. For
trapping Carpophilus spp. we filled the trap with water to a depth
of 2-4 cm and the pheromone septum and coattractant were
taped to the inside of the downward projecting funnel. Water-
based funnel traps were shown by James et aZ. (1996b) to be very
effective in collecting large numbers of Carpophilus spp.
Monitoring of Carpophilus beetle populations was mainly
conducted using the wind-orientated pipe trap of Dowd et al.
(1992). This trap has been used in most Carpophilus spp.studies
to date and is considered to be the most sensitive in terms of
detecting changes in population density. A plastic bucket-type
trap with a perforated lid (Lucitrap. James et al.• 1996b) was used
in experiment 4 as a monitoring trap.
Fermenting whole wheat bread dough (e.g. James et aZ.. 1993.
1994) was used as the pheromone synergist (coattractant) in
experiments one and two, and fermenting apple juice in
polyacrylamide granules (James et al.. 1998) in the remaining
experiments. In experiments 4 and 5. ripe or decomposing stone
fruit was also used as a coattractant.
experimental design and sites
Five orchard experiments were conducted in New South Wales
during 1995-99. examining the potential and efficacy of
synthetic aggregation pheromones in suppressing intraorchard
populations of Carpophilus spp. by perimeter-based mass
trapping or attract and kill diversion.
Experiment 1. This experiment was conducted from 18
September to 29 November 1995 in an organic orchard at
Mangrove Mountain (33°30' S. 151°19' E). near Gosford on the
Central Coast of New South Wales. Synthetic aggregation
pheromones (5 mg each of C. davidsoni, C. hemipterus and
C. mutilarus pheromones per septum) were used to perimeter
mass trap beetles to minimize damage to ripening fruit in a
65 X 15 m block of peaches (cv. Maravilha). A total 810 mg of
Carpophilus spp. pheromone was deployed each fonnight. The
block contained 90 trees at 2.5 m spacing in three rows 4 m apart
and was surrounded by grassland on three sides and woodland on
the fourth. Suppression traps baited with pheromone and
coattractant were attached to the top of 54. 1.5 m steel posts
which were placed at 3 m intervals around the block. Posts and
traps were situated 5 m from tree canopies. To monitor
intrablock Carpophilus spp. populations. three pipe traps baited
with coattractant only were hung from trees 10 m apart in the
centre row. Three coattractant only baited pipe traps were also
used to monitor Carpophilus spp. populations in a nearby (15 m)
peach (cv. Sherman) block (80 trees). Carpophilus spp.
populations in the adjacent woodland were monitored using
two pheromone (5 mg each of C. davidsoni, C. hemipterus and
C. mutilatus pheromone) and coattractant-baited pipe traps hung
from trees 25 m from the suppression block. Monitoring and
suppression traps were initially baited on 18 and 27 September.

respectively. with all traps examined weekly unti129 November.
Beetles in monitoring traps were forwarded to Yanco for
counting and identification using Dobson (1954. 1964). An
estimate of numbers of beetles collected in suppression traps was
provided by counting drowned individuals as water was emptied
from the traps. Coattractant baits were replaced in all traps
weekly and pheromone septa were replaced fortnightly. Beetle
damage to ripe fruit was assessed by examining. in situ. four
randomly selected fruit on every tree in the Maravilha and
Sherman blocks at weekly intervals during harvest (1-15
November). On 15 November, 120 fruit in a nectarine block
250 m from the suppression block, were also examined for
damage and presence of Carpophilus spp.
Experimenr 2. This experiment was conducted from 15
December 1995 to 5 January 1996 at Yanco Agricultural
Institute in inland southern New South Wales (34°60' S,
146°40' E). A cordon of 62 pheromone (5mg each of
C. davidsoni and C. mutilatus pheromone) and coattractant-
baited suppression traps on 1.5 m steel posts was used to
suppress Carpophilus spp. in a small (25 X 25 m. 26 trees).
unsprayed peach block (cv. Golden Queens). A total
620 mg of Carpophilus spp. pheromone was deployed.
Preliminary trapping indicated C. hemipterus was not
present. thus the pheromone for this species was not used.
Posts were spaced at 3 m intervals and were 10 m from the
trees. Five pipe traps (coattractant only), hung in adjacent
trees in the centre of the block, were used to monitor the
intrablock beetle population. Five pipe traps per site were
also used to monitor Carpophilus spp. populations in two
nearby prune blocks (200 (A) and 370 m (B) from the
peach block) and a citrus (cv Valencia) orchard. 650 m
away. Trees in all blocks carried immature fruit at the time
of the trial. Monitoring traps were deployed on 15
December and suppression traps on 22 December. All traps
were examined weekly and serviced as in experiment I.
Experimenr 3. This experiment was conducted from 12
September to 22 November 1996 at the same organic
orchard used in experiment 1. Once again, the intention
w~ to protect the ripening Maravilha peach block from
Carpophilus spp. infestation and damage by using a cordon
of pheromoneJcoattractant-baited suppression traps. Details
of traps. servicing and assessments of beetle damage to ripe
frull are the same as in experiment I. However. three
monllonng traps (coattractant only) were also employed in
the distant (250 m) nectarine block and in another stone
frull orchard approximately I km away. Insecticide sprays
were applied for Carpophilus spp. in the distant orchard.
Monllonng traps were initiated on 12 September and
suppression traps on 9 October. 2 weeks prior to com-
mencement of harvest.
Experiment 4. This experiment was conducted from 19
February to 26 March 1998 in a commercial stone fruit and citrus
orchard at Leeton. southern New South Wales (34°54'S.
146°43' E). In this experiment the aim was to attract/divert
Carpophilus spp. populations from a peach block (500 x 250 m,
c\'. Golden Queens) with ripening fruit to a high concentration
pheromone source in an adjacent citrus block (300 X 250m.
ev. Valencia). Four trees in the centre of the citrus block. 130 m
from the edge of the peach block. were chosen as the location for
©2001 Blackwell SCience Ltd. Agncultural and Forest EntomOlogy. 3. 41-47
Pheromones for suppressing nitidulids in orchards 43
pheromonelcoattractant baits. Eight suppression traps. each
containing 5 mg each of C. davidsoni. C. mutilatus and
C. hemipterus pheromones, were hung in each of the four trees.
Thus, a total of 480 mg of Carpophi/us spp. pheromone per
fortnight provided a relative point source of pheromone in the
orchard. Carpophilus spp. populations within the peach block
were monitored from 19 February using six 'Lucitraps'
containing six to eight ripe. damaged peaches. The traps were
placed randomly within the orchard and located in tree crotches.
Suppression traps were baited on 26 February and serviced as in
previous experiments. The Lucitraps were examined weekly,
beetles counted and identified and the fruit replaced. Peaches
ripened and were harvested between I and 12 March. One
hundred ripe fruit were examined in situ for beetle presence and
damage on 5 and 12 March.
Experiment 5. This experiment was conducted in a commer-
cial stone fruit/citrus orchard at Mangrove Mountain from 13
November 1998 to 13 February 1999. The aim was to attract or
divert Carpophilus spp. from blocks of ripening stone fruit to a
central insecticide-treated. high concentration pheromone
source in open grassland. The orchard property covered an area
of approximately 1000 X 500 m and comprised seven discrete
blocks of stone fruit (13 varieties of peaches and nectarines) and
three blocks of citrus (navel oranges) surrounding a 200 X 200 m
area of pasture. The various stone fruit cultivars ripened at
different times during November-February. The property was
surrounded by and contained some natural woodland. Ten metal
180 L drums filled with decomposing, fallen stone fruit
(coattractant), were placed in the pasture area. The drums were
positioned within a 9 X 9 m zone and spaced at approximately
1.5 m intervals. Each drum was baited with 20 mg each of
C. davidsoni. C. mutilatus and C. hemipterus pheromone, giving
a total of 600 mg of Carpophilus spp. pheromone per fortnight
for the 10 drums. Single. species-specific septa containing 5 mg
of pheromone each. were used during the first 6 weeks;
thereafter. single septa containing 5 mg of each of the three
species' pheromones were used (James etal., 2000b).
Pheromone septa were held in a plastic cup attached to the
inside of an upturned plastic plant pot suspended over each drum
on a piece of wire. Fruit was added to the drums as necessary and
a synthetic pyrethroid insecticide (tau-fiuvalinate) was applied
to the drums and ground in the drum zone at 1D-14 day intervals
to kill attracted beetles. Nineteen monitoring traps (coattractant
only) were placed in the seven stone fruit blocks (two per block),
in the two citrus blocks (three traps) and in open pasture just
outside the property perimeter (two traps). Ten of these traps
were within 200 m ofthe pheromone source. The other nine were
at distances 25D-5oo m from the pheromone source. From 24
December until the end of the experiment, these traps were
baited with coattractant and the pheromone of C. davidsoni
(500 J,lg) (the dominant species in this district, James et al.,
200 I). In addition, two pipe traps baited with pheromone septa
(5 mg each of all three species) and coattractant, were used to
monitor beetle populations in adjacent woodland during the
experiment. Drums, pheromones and monitoring traps were
deployed on 13 November. Pheromone septa were replaced and
traps serviced fortnightly. Estimates of fruit damage from
Carpophilus spp. for each stone fruit variety and block were
provided by the grower at the end of the experiment.
44 David G. James et al.

50000 , . . . - - - - - - - - - - - . . , - - - - - - . . ,
SUPPRESSION TRAPS
10 r-------,-------------.,
40000 8
I.l!l
..
.!!
30000 HARVEST

1o 20000 ci
Suppression traps
deployed
c c

:~=~~
c
! 10000 i
O'-'---------------'---J-----------'
4 Oct 110ct a Nov
18 Oct 25 Oct 1 Nov 15 Nov
22 Dec 29 Dec 5.h1n
Date
10 r:-=-:-::::-:=::-::===-:-:-r;:====:;.,
INTRA-BLOCK MONITORING Figure 2 Carpophilus spp. caught in coanractant-baited monitoring
TRAPS , traps (n:5) located in a Golden Queen peach block during perimeter-
based mass trapping (pheromone (total 620mg) and coanractant) and
Cl. 8 I in two nearby (200. 370m) prune blocks and a more distant (670m)
citrus block (five trapslbJock) (experiment 2).
HARVEST
ig · 4
Mun Fruit Dam.ge
O.iY.
.
c

i traps. However. there was a significant decline in captures after

2
o l:o:==f:f:::.~~J~~€::::~:::::::nJ
4 Oct 11 Oct 18 Oct 25 Oct 1 Nov 8 Nov
Date
Figure 1 CarpophJIus spp caught In pheromone (tolaI810mglfortnlght)
and coattractant·baited suppression traps (n: 54) placed around a
Maravilha peach block (3m SDaClng) and in coanraclant·barted
monrtonng traDS (three traps per block) located within the block and a
nearby (15m) Sherman peach block (experrrnenl 1).
Results
Expenmenr J. Perimeter suppression traps caught an estimated
94240 beetles during the 4-week trapping period prior to
commencement of the Maravilha harvest on I November. A
further 14200 were trapped during the harvest period (1-15
November) (Fig. I). Despite the large numbers of Carpophilus
spp. trapped on the perimeter of the Maravilha block. very few
beetles were captured in monitoring traps within the block
(Fig. I). In addition. mean (::: SE) fruit damage was 0.9% <0.4)
with most damage recorded on 15 November ( I. 7~). No beetle
damage was found in ripe fruit during harvest (15 October-l
November) in the nearby Sherman block. Very few beetles were
caught in monitoring traps in the Sherman block (Fig. I). No
beetles or fruit damage were found in the distant (250 m)
nectarine block on 15 November. The woodland monitoring
traps (pheromone plus coattractant) captured 50--300 beetles!
trap/week during the experiment. Most of these were
C. davidson; <>95%).
Experiment 2. A much smaller population of Carpophilus spp.
was present during this experiment. Suppression traps caught a
total of 984 and 1123 beetles on 29 December and 5 January.
respectively. Intra-orchard monitoring traps also captured small
numbers of beetles before and after deployment of suppression
one week in the protected peach block and after 2 weeks in the
two prune blocks (F=8.6. dJ. =3.19, P=0.007; ANOYA; Fig. 2).
No decline in numbers was observed in the distant citrus block.
15 Nov
Experiment 3. Perimeter suppression traps caught an esti-
mated 16740 beetles (> 95% C. davidsoni) from 9 October to 20
November (Fig. 3). Monitoring trap captures showed only a
small number of beetles present during the experiment in the
Maravilha and Sherman blocks. Numbers were lowest (0--2 per
trap/week) during harvest (Fig. 3). No beetles were captured in
the nectarine block, whereas an average of 27 beetles/trap/week
were collected in the nearby commercial orchard. No beetles or
beetle damage were detected in ripe fruit on 23 October and only
0.7% of examined fruit had beetles and damage at the end of
harvest on 6 November.
Experiment 4. A small population of Carpophilus spp. was
present during this experiment with only 752 beetles captured in
suppression traps during the 4-week trapping period. Similarly.
low numbers of beetles were collected from the Lucitrap fruit
baits in the peach block. However, significantly fewer beetles
were found in the baits after suppression trapping commenced
and numbers declined further during 5-19 March (F=6.7,
dJ.=4. P=O.OO5; ANOYA; Fig.4). No damage was detected in
ripe fruit examined on 5 and 12 March.
Experiment 5. At the commencement of this experiment on 13
November, Carpophilus beetle damage was already occurring in
early ripening fruit (harvesting began on I November). The
insecticide, fenthion. was applied by the grower in affected
blocks. 'Swarms' of Carpophilus were observed flying over the
fruit drums within hours of pheromones being deployed. No
beetles were captured in the coattractant-only monitoring traps
from 13 November to 24 December, prompting the use of
pheromone plus coattractant in these traps from 24 December to
13 February. From 13 Novemberto 16 January 100-150 beetles
per fortnight were trapped in the two pheromone!coattractant
traps in adjacent woodland. Economic losses from Carpophilus

©2OO1 Blackwell Science Ltd. Agricultural and Forest Entomology. 3. 41-47

 Pheromones for suppressing nitidulids in orchards 45

5000 r-----,------,..--------, 25rT---I-;::::========~

I
..... Lucitrap frvit bana

!s 20
HARVEST -0- SUPprMaion traps I
14000
.!!l -
j
)3500 i 15

3000 J
0
e j 10

~: --~
oc
t ---el •
e
:I
5

1500 _--L_~~
1,-,-. ~ _ _'_',I
0'-'--'----.........- _ _---'L..-_ _---'!lL- -W
15 Oct 23 Oct 30 Oct 6 Nov 13 Nov 20 Nov
Date 28Feb 5 Mar 12 Mar 19 Mar
Date
INTRA·BLOCK
10 T MONITORING TRAPS I Figure 4 Carpophilus spp. caught in 32 pheromone/coattractant·bailed
suppression traps (total 480 mg pheromone/fortnight) hung in four citrus
I trees. and in six funnel traps (Lucitraps) baited with ripe. damaged
c. 8
I!!
c
IHARVEST peaches in a nearby (130m) Golden Queen peach block
(experiment 4).
! 6 I
~
0
e
..
e
:IE
4
1

'....n
. FruIt
0.4% rge 140

2
I I c. 100
120

o L..-_--'-_~

18 sap 15 Oct
Date
.J:...._ _..;l.._.::..__..:J
13 Nov ij 80

Figure 3 Carpophilus spp. caught in pheromone (total 810 mglfortnight) 0 60

c
and coattractant·bailed suppression traps (n=54) placed around a c
Maravllha peach block (3 m spacing) and in coattractant·baited •
:t 40
monltorrng traps (three traps per block) within the block and In a
nearby (15m) Sherman peach block (experrment3). 20

damage continued from 13 November to 24 December as did Date

grower-applied sprays in an effon to manage populations. From FigureS Carpophilus spp. captured in pheromone/coattractant
24 December to 13 February. significantly greater numbers of mOnitoring traps located greater than 200m (n=9) and less than 200m
Carp(Jphilus spp. were trapped in monitoring traps located (n= 10) from a concentrated source of pheromone/coattractant (total
within 200 m of the concentrated pheromone source/fruit drums 600mg pheromonelfortnight) (experiment 5).

than In traps located more than 200 m away (means: 67.7 ::: 12.0.
17.3 ::: 4.0. P < 0.0 I: t = 3.92. d.f. = 18. P < 0.00 I; (-test; Fig. 5).
Carpophilus da\'idsoni was the dominant species trapped (72%
of captures) with Carpophilus gaveni Dobson and Carpophilus
mar1ilnellus Motschulsky comprising the remainder. Estimated
damage to ripening fruit was significantly greater in varieties
located within 200 m of the pheromone source (44 ::: 19%. n = 4)
than in varieties located 200 m or more away (14::: 6%. n = II:
t = 2.95. d.L = 14. P < 0.01; (-test).
Discussion
ThIs series of orchard experiments explored the potential of
synthetic aggregation pheromones in suppressing Carpophilus
spp. populations during fruit ripening in stone fruit orchards.
Two strategies were investigated: perimeter-based mass trap-
ping and attract and kill population diversion. Both strategies
appeared to result in lower beetle populations in stone fruit
blocks and minimal crop damage.
In an earlier study (James e( aI.. 1996a) perimeter-based mass
trapping (traps hung in perimeter trees) significantly reduced the
incidence of Carpophilus spp. in ripe fruit in the centre of a I-ha
apricot orchard. However, there was almost 100% infestation by
Carpophilus spp. in fruit on the trees in which the traps were
hung. Consequently, in the current study the technique was
modified so that suppression traps were situated 5-lOm from
perimeter trees. Two experiments (I and 3) were conducted in
the same organic Mangrove Mountain orchard under 'high'
(8Q00-43000 beetles trapped weekly in suppression traps
1995) and 'low' (2Q00-4250 beetles trapped weekly 1996)
Carpophilus spp. population pressure. Outcomes from both
experiments were similar, with less than 2 beetles/trap/week
captured in intrablock monitoring traps during harvest periods.
Fruit damage in both experiments was less than I %. This was
remarkable considering the very large numbers of beetles
trapped in suppression traps just 5 m from the fruit blocks.

~ 2001 BlaCkwell SCience Ltd. Agncultural and Forest Entomology. 3, 41-47

46 David G. James et al.
Unexpectedly, beetle numbers also appeared to be suppressed in
the peach (Sherman) block 15 m from the cordoned block.
negating the original intention to use this block as a ·control'.
Furthermore. the lack of beetles and fruit damage in a nectarine
block 250 m away. suggested an even greater zone ofpheromone
attractivity. By contrast. commercial stone fruit orchards in the
Mangrove Mountain district were badly affected by Carpophilus
spp. during September-November 1995 when experiment I was
conducted. A significant number of beetles (27 trap/week) were
caught in coattractant-only traps in a commercial orchard 1 km
away. Pheromone (500!!g septum) and coattractant-baited
monitoring traps in two other district orchards caught up to
300 beetles/trap/week during this period (James et al., 2oooc).
James et al. (1997) showed that mean pheromone (500 Ilg)
monitoring trap catches> 10 beetles per week are indicative of
populations likely to cause damage to ripening stone fruit.
A large zone of 'pheromone influence' was also indicated in
experiment 2 where, in addition to protecting the cordoned
block. the pheromone cordon also appeared to suppress
Carpophilus spp. populations in fruit blocks 200 and 370 m
away. However. a population 650m from the cordoned block
appeared to be unaffected.
The apparent large zone of Carpophilus spp. attraction
radiating from a concentrated source of synthetic aggregation
pheromones prompted the final two experiments where we
examined the potential of diverting beetles away from ripening
fruit. Experiment 4. although conducted under low Carpophilus
spp. pressure. suggested that a high concentration. pinpoint
source of pheromone could attract beetles out of and away from
ripening stone fruit. Experiment 5 was conducted under high
Carpophilus spp. pressure in a commercial Mangrove Mountain
orchard with fruit damage occurring at the outset. A concen-
trated source of pheromone and coattractant in an open area in
the centre of the orchard acted as an attractive 'beacon' for
Carpophilus spp. within the orchard and perhaps beyond.
However. fruit damage assessment and monitoring trap data
collected throughout the orchard indicated that larger popula-
tIOns of Carpophilus spp. occurred within 200 m of the
pheromone source. compared to locations more distant. The
failure of coattractant-only traps to capture beetles during the
first period of the experiment means we cannot be cenain that
thIS pallern of population density did not exist prior to
deployment of the pheromone source. However. a naturally
uneven population density of Carpophilus spp. in this orchard
would appear to be unlikely, given the even distribution of food
and shelter resources. Many of the fruit varieties in the outer zone
of trapping are known to be highly susceptible to Carpophilus
spp. damage and the grower expressed surprise at their relative
freedom from beetle damage in 1998/99. For example, two
varieties located 200-250 m from the pheromone source that
suffered 80-100% fruit loss in 1997/98 (Ruby Diamond.
Summer Bright) escaped with less than 5% damage in 1998/99.
Possible explanations for larger populations of beetles
occurring close to the pheromone source include insufficient
close-range stimuli for beetles to enter the drums. ineffective
poisoning of attracted beetles, low quality andlor overcrowded
food resources in the drums and possible repellency of tau-
fluvalinate to Carpophilus spp. Beetles attracted to the
'pheromone zone' may be unable to navigate successfully
©2001 Blackwell Science Ltd. Agricultural and Forest Entomology, 3. 41-47
towards the insecticide-treated fruit drums. similar to the
situation reponed by James etal. (1996a), where beetles were
attracted to trees with traps but did not necessarily enter the traps.
Once Carpophilus spp. enter an atmosphere with a defined level
of pheromone, point source searching may be reduced or
terminated. In addition, approximately 30% of the CarpophillJs
spp. population comprised C. gaveni and C. marginellus. which
are likely to be less attracted to a pinpoint C. davidsoni
pheromone source than C. davidsoni. A comparable (but less
pinpointed) pheromone source than that used in experiment 5
was used in cordon experiments 1 and 2, without evidence of
increasing nearby Carpophilus spp. populations and damage.
However, the major difference between the cordon experiments
and experiment 5 was that traps were not used in the latter
experiment It is possible that the 10-14day insecticide
treatment of fruit drums in experiment 5 was insufficient to
continuously kill incoming beetles during the experiment. The
rapid breakdown of fruit in the drums, and the high numbers of
beetles and ferment flies (Drosophila spp.) present, may have
presented a suboptimal food resource for incoming Carpophilus
spp. In addition, preliminary laboratory bioassays with the
synthetic pyrethroid insecticide used in experiment 5 (tau-
fluvalinate) (D. G. James and B. Vogele, unpublished observa-
tion), indicate some repellency to Carpophilus spp.
These experiments help to further define possible pheromone-
based strategies for population suppression of Carpophilus spp.
in stone fruit orchards. Perimeter-based mass trapping, as
indicated by James etal. (1996a) and confirmed here. can be an
effective way of keeping Carpophilus spp. populations below
damaging levels during fruit ripening and harvest. Howev.er, all
experiments to date have used pheromonelcoattractant-baited
traps positioned at 3-5 m intervals around the protected block.
Clearly, this son of trap/pheromone density would not be
practical andlor economic with large commercial stone fruit
blocks and orchards. We do not know how far apan pheromone
traps can be placed before intrablock populations of Carpophilus
spp. exceed damaging levels. It is possible that traps could be
placed 20 m or more apan without sacrificing control and this
clearly needs to be investigated.
Using concentrated pheromone sources to attract Carpophilus
beetles out of stone fruit blocks prior to fruit ripening and to
diven incoming beetles away from these blocks, may be the most
practical use of pheromones for suppressing Carpophilus spp.
populations. Deployment of a concentrated pheromone source
(600-800mg/formight) at a location away from the fruit to be
protected, commencing a few weeks prior to fruit ripening and
continuing until harvest is completed, has the potential to
minimize Carpophilus spp. populations and fruit damage.
Further research should investigate whether the use of
pheromonelcoanractant/insecticide point sources without traps
inevitably results in an increased beetle population in the
immediate vicinity as occurred in experiment 5. Carpophilus
spp. are readily mass trapped in any kind of funnel trap (James
et aI., I996b) and trapping at a point source may present less risk
to nearby fruit.
The effective attraction range of synthetic Carpophilus spp.
pheromones has not been reported., although unpublished studies
(D. G. James, in preparation) indicate beetles can orientate from
at least 500 m to pheromone traps baited with 5 mg ofpheromone

and coattractant. Evidence presented in this study also indicates
that attraction may occur from 200 to 400 m.
Definitive information on the effective attraction range of
Carpophilus spp. pheromones is clearly needed before good
recommendations can be given concerning the location and
number of concentrated pheromone sources necessary to protect
ripening stone fruit.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Merv Graham. Sandra Hardy and
Geoff Popple for valuable assistance with servicing and
maintaining traps. Rowan and Helen Berecry. Ken and Ron
Aylett and Ian Woods are thanked for allowing us to use their
orchards in this research. The Australian Horticultural Research
and Development Corporation and NSW Central Coast stone
fruit growers provided partial financial support.
References
Bartelt. R.1 .. Carlson. D.G.. Vener. R.S. & Baker, T.e. (1993)
Male-produced aggregation pheromone of Carpophilus mutilatus
(Coleoptera: Nitidulidael. Journal of Chemical Ecology. 19,
107-118.
Bartelt. R.1 .. Dowd. P.F.. Planner. R.D. & Weisleder. D. (l990a)
Aggregation pheromone of dried fruit beetles. Carpophilus
hemiprerus: Wind tunnel bioassay and identification of two novel
tetraene hydrocarbons. Journal of Chemical Ecology. 16.
1015-1039
Bartelt. R.1 .. Dowd. P.E. Vener. R.1 .. Shorey. H.H. & Baker. T.e.
(19921 Responses of Carpophilus hemipterus (Coleoptera:
Nltidulidae I and other sap beetles to the pheromone of C. hemipterus
and host-related coattractants in California field tests. Em'ironmental
Entomology. 21. 1143-1153.
Bartelt. R.1. & James. D.G. (1994) Aggregation pheromone of the
Austrahan sap beetle. Carpophilus da"idsoni (Coleoptera:
S Itlduhdae). Journal of Chem/cal Ecology. 20. 3207-3219.
Banelt. R.J .. Vetter. R.S .. Carlson. D.G. & Baker. T.e. (I994al
Re'ron,es to aggregallon pheromone for five Carpophilus species
(Cole(lptera: Nltlduhdae I In a CalifornIa date garden. Environmental
En/omologl.23.1534-1543.
Banelt. R.J .. Vetter. R.S .. Carlson. D.G. & Baker. T.e. (l994b)
Influence of pheromone do~. trap height and ~ptum age on
e1lectJ\ene" of pheromones for Carpophilus mutilatus and C.
ht"m/f,rt"ru.1 (Coleoptera: Nitiduhdael in a California date garden.
Journal of Enmnmlc Entomology. 87. 667-675.
Banelt. R.J. We,\leder. D. & Plattner, R.D. (l990b) SyntheSIS of
OIl1duhd beetle pheromones: alkyl-branched tetraene hydrocarbons.
Journal (lfA!!nculrural Food Chemisrry. 38. 2192-2196
Doh",". R.M. (19541 The species of Carpophilus Stephens (Co!.
~llIduhdael a.o;soclated with stored products. Bulletin of
Em(lmoloji/cal Research. 45. 389-402.
D<'h",". R.M. ( 1964 I A new species of Carpophilus Stephens
(Coleoptera: Nluduhdae) from New South Wales. Proceedlnjis of
rh~ Roml Enromoloillcal Society of London (B J. 33. 71-72.
Om_d. P.F.. Bartelt. R.J. & Wickloy.. T. (1992) A novel insect trap
Supplied by the United States Department of Agriculture, National
Center for Agricultural Utilization Research, Peoria, Illinois.
;; 2001 BlaCkwell SCience lid. Agflcu/(ural and Forest Entomology. 3. 41-47
Pheromones for suppressing nitidulids in orchards 47
useful in capturing sap beetles (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) and other
flying insects. Journal of Economic Entomology. 85. 772-778.
Hely. P.C.. Pasfield. G. & Gellatley. J.G. (1982) Insect Pests of Fruir
and Vegetables in NSW. lnkata Press. Melbourne.
James. D.G.. Bartelt. RJ. & Faulder. RJ. (1994) Attraction of
Carpophilus spp. (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) to synthetic aggregation
pheromones and host-related coattraCtants in Australian stone fruit
orchards: beetle phenology and pheromone dose studies. Journal of
Chemical Ecology. 20. 2805-2819.
James. D.G.• Bartelt, RJ.• Faulder. RJ. & Taylor. A. (1993) Attraction
of Australian Carpophilus spp. (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) to synthetic
pheromones and fennenting bread dough. Journal of the Australian
Entomological Society. 32. 339-345.
James. D.G.. Bartelt. RJ. & Moore. C.1. (1996a) Mass-trapping of
Carpophilus spp. (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) in stone fruit orchards
using synthetic aggregation pheromones and a coanractant:
development of a strategy for population suppression. Journal of
Chemical Ecology. 22. 1541-1556.
James. D.G.• Bartelt. RJ. & Moore. CJ. (1996b) Trap design effect on
capture of Carpophilus spp. (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) using
synthetic aggregation pheromones and a coattractant. Journal of
Economic Entomology. 89. 648-653.
James. D.G.• Faulder. R.I. & Bartelt, R.I. (1995) Fauna and seasonal
abundance of Carpophilus spp. (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) in four
stone fruit growing regions of south-eastem Australia as determined
by pheromone-trapping. Journal of the Australian Entomological
Society. 34. 327-333.
James. D.G.. Faulder. R.I.. Vogele. B.• Bartelt. R.1. & Moore. C.I.
(1997) Phenology of Carpophilus spp. (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) in
stone fruit orchards as determined by pheromone-trapping:
implications for prediction of crop damage. Australian Journal of
Entomology. 36. 165-173.
James. D.G.. Faulder. RJ .• Vogele. B. & Moore. C.I. (2000a)
Pheromone-trapping of Carpophilus spp. (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae):
fauna. abundance and seasonality in some Australian honicultural
regions. Plant Protection Quanerly. 15. 57-61.
James. D.G.. Faulder. RJ.• Vogele. B. & Moore. CJ. (2000c)
Pheromone-trapping of Carpophilus spp. (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae)
in stone fruit orchards near Gosford. New South Wales: fauna,
seasonality and the effect of insecticides. Australian Journal of
Entomology. 39. 310-315.
James. D.G.. Moore. C.1.. Faulder. R.1. & Vogele. B. (1998) An
improved coattractant for pheromone-trapping of Carpophilus spp.
(Coleoptera: Nitidulidae). Australian Journal of Entomology. 37.
357-361.
James. D.G.. Vogele. B.. Faulder. RJ. & Moore. CJ. (2000b) Efficacy
of multispecies pheromone lures for Carpophilus davidsoni Dobson
and C. mutilarus Erichson (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae). Australian
Journal of Entomology. 39. 83-85.
Kable, P.E (1969) Brown rot of stone fruits on the Murrumbidgee
Irrigation area. I. Aetiology of the disease in canning peaches.
Australian Journal of Agricultural Research. 20. 301-306.
Vickers, R.A.. Rothschild. G.H. & Jones. E.L. (1985) Control of the
oriental fruit moth. Cydia molesra (Busck) <Lepidoptera:
Tortricidae) at a district level by mating disruption with synthetic
female pheromone. Bulletin of Entomological Research. 75.
625-634.
Accepted 14 November 2000