Abstract
The olive fruit fly Bactrocera oleae (Rossi) (Diptera: Tephritidae) is a key pest species of wild and cultivated olive trees worldwide. Contrarily to most tephritid flies, in which males release the sex pheromone, in B. oleae the female is the sex responsible of attracting the opposite sex. However, and even though vast research has been done during the last decades, we are still far from understanding the chemical signals involved in the sexual communication of this species, including those produced by males. Here, we report for the first time the presence of two male-specific volatile compounds, namely γ-hexalactone and δ-hexalactone, with the former exerting a significant attraction upon both sexes under laboratory and field conditions. Volatile collections conducted on laboratory-reared virgin individuals of both sexes revealed the presence of these two compounds only in males, regardless of their age. In double-choice behavioral assays, γ-hexalactone resulted to be attractive for virgin males and females (7–14 days old), with no attractiveness reported for δ-hexalactone. Finally, in field assays traps baited with the binary blend of ammonium bicarbonate and γ-hexalactone yielded significantly more catches per week of both sexes than those baited with ammonium bicarbonate and ammonium bicarbonate plus 1,7-dioxaspiro[5.5]undecane, the major sex pheromone component. Altogether, our results shed light on the chemical ecology of the species and represent a promising experimental basis for the development of more innovative and effective mass trapping tools based on the use of γ-hexalactone.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Key message
Bactrocera oleae virgin males release two lactones, γ-hexalactone and δ-hexalactone.γ-Hexalactone elicits an attraction on virgin mature males and females in laboratory tests.
In field tests, the combination of ammonium bicarbonate and γ-hexalactone is highly attractive.
Our results might represent an innovative approach for improving ammonia-based baits in B. oleae.
Introduction
The so-called true fruit flies belonging to the family Tephritidae comprises more than 4000 species from 500 genera, with some of the species representing a serious threat for several agricultural and horticultural crops worldwide (White and Elson-Harris 1992). It has been estimated that direct and indirect economic losses attributable to tephritid flies exceed US $2 billion per year (Souza et al. 2021). In Europe, the Mediterranean fruit fly Ceratitis capitata Wiedemann and the olive fruit fly Bactrocera oleae (Rossi) are key pests regarded as the most harmful tephritid species in the continent, causing substantial damage (Enkerlin and Mumford 1997; Kampouraki et al. 2018). Bactrocera oleae, an endemic species to the Mediterranean Basin and Middle East, and currently also present in South and Central Africa, Pakistan, California and Mexico (Nardi et al. 2005), is considered as the most damaging insect to wild and cultivated olive trees worldwide (Daane and Johnson 2010). While adults are polyphagous and feed on different substrates, such as nectar, honeydew, fruit and plant exudates, bacteria and even bird faeces (Christenson and Foote 1960), larvae are mainly monophagous, and they breed and feed on the mesocarp of the fruits of some species within the genus Olea, especially on Olea europaea, but also on O. verrucosa and O. chrysophylla (Daane and Johnson 2010). The number of generations per year is variable and suggested to be related to the geographical region, the quality of the fruits, and agronomic and climatic conditions (Malheiro et al. 2015). Specifically, in the Mediterranean temperate areas three to four generations are usually reported, with up to six generations in the warmest Mediterranean areas where summer high temperatures may be a limiting factor for the development of the insect (Pappas et al. 2011). In this sense, B. oleae is highly dependent of temperature, with temperatures higher than 35 ℃ negatively affecting the life cycle of the insect (Johnson et al. 2011; Pappas et al. 2011). Similarly, at least four generations per year are observed in California, although an additional generation on fall is suggested (Rice et al. 2003). Gravid females lay their eggs in healthy olives, and upon hatching, larvae feed on the mesocarp. Larval development comprehends three instar stages, and during mid-autumn onwards third-instar larvae of the last generation leave the fruit for pupating in the soil, where they overwinter and emerge in the following spring. Due to the carpophagous feeding habit of larvae, the fruit oil content declines, the chemical composition is altered, and a premature drop of the olives is promoted (Bento et al. 1997; Gómez-Caravaca et al. 2008; Gucci et al. 2012). Additionally, the value of stung olives is reduced for table consumption (Malheiro et al. 2015). Altogether, the incidence of the olive fruit fly drastically affect the quantity and quality of table fruit and oil products, with average yield losses of up to 15% (Malheiro et al. 2015), and even 90% of crop losses may occur in the absence of control measures (Ordano et al. 2015). As a consequence, severe economic impact on olive production is produced. Losses attributable to olive fruit fly infestations are estimated to excess US $1 billion dollars per year in the Mediterranean Basin (van Asch et al. 2015). To cite an example, only in the island of Crete annual damage translates into more than 20 million euros (Kampouraki et al. 2018).
Over the last four decades, the management of B. oleae populations has been based on the use of wide-spectrum organophosphate insecticides and pyrethroids (Manousis and Moore 1987; Margaritopoulos et al. 2008). Drawbacks derived from the overuse of pesticides, such as residues prevalence (Cavanna and Molinari 1998; Amvrazi and Albanis 2009), development of insect resistance (Skouras et al. 2007; Kakani et al. 2010; Kampouraki et al. 2018), and potential side effects on beneficial insects (Pinheiro et al. 2020), have led to seeking more effective and eco-friendly approaches subjected to an Integrated Pest Management framework. These alternative strategies, with not satisfactory results in many of the cases, include the development of novel and safer insecticides (Canale et al. 2013a; Rizzo et al. 2020), research on natural enemies and entomopathogenic organisms as biological control tools (Daane and Johnson 2010; Shaurub 2023), the Sterile Insect Technique (Ant et al. 2012), symbiotic control strategies targeting its endosymbiont bacterium Candidatus Erwinia dacicola (Sinno et al. 2020), and mass trapping and attract-and-kill programs based on the use of food lures alone or in combination with the sex pheromone of the species. (Broumas et al. 2002; Mazomenos et al. 2002; Speranza et al. 2004; Yasin et al. 2014). In this sense, food lures, such as sugar and yeast baits, protein hydrolysates, and ammonium salts (e.g. ammonium phosphate, biammonium phosphate, ammonium carbonate, ammonium acetate, and ammonium sulphate), have been long time recognized as relevant attractants for true fruit flies, including B. oleae (for a historical review, see Epsky et al. 2014). Even though both sexes of many tephritid species are attracted to these kind of baits, field catches tend to be female-biased (Yokoyama et al. 2006; Martinez et al. 2007; Vázquez et al. 2022), since they require a protein source to complete egg maturation (Hagen and Finney 1950). The ammonia released from these baits is suggested to be the agent mediating this attraction, and therefore, the efficacy of different ammonium salts as an ammonia source has been tested on fruit flies for several decades (Bateman and Morton 1981; Mazor et al. 1987; Katsoyannos et al. 2000; Thomas et al. 2008). There is not still a consensus about the performance of ammonium salts in comparison to protein hydrolysates, since they have been referred to elicit a higher (Bateman and Morton 1981; Varikou et al. 2021) or lower (Haniotakis et al. 1998; Varikou et al. 2014) attraction than the latter, or even enhance the effect of hydrolyzed protein baits (Piñero et al. 2015, 2017, 2020). In the case of B. oleae, the co-release of ammonium bicarbonate and the major sex pheromone compound 1,7-dioxaspiro[5.5]undecane (= olean) (Baker et al. 1980; Mazomenos and Haniotakis 1981; Gariboldi et al. 1983) significantly increases male, and strikingly, female catches in comparison to ammonium bicarbonate alone (Haniotakis and Vassiliou-Waite 1987; Broumas and Haniotakis 1994). Nevertheless, male catches with this food lure-pheromone combination are often reported to exceed those of females in fall season, when the crop is more susceptible (Haniotakis and Vassiliou-Waite 1987; Yokoyama et al. 2006; Burrack et al. 2008), and therefore, the elucidation of novel chemical cues involved in the sexual communication of the species would allow to improve the performance of ammonia-based baits during this season.
The semiochemistry of the mating system of tephritid flies involves complex intraspecific interactions (Scolari et al. 2021), in which male- and female-produced compounds are involved in the attraction of either one (Kobayashi et al. 1978; Haniotakis et al. 1986; Landolt et al. 1988; Carpita et al. 2012) or both sexes (Perdomo et al. 1976; Baker et al. 1990; Hee and Tan 1998; Būda et al. 2020). In contrast to other tephritid genera, in which pheromones are known to be released by males (comprehensively reviewed in Scolari et al. 2021), in some species of the genus Bactrocera Macquart chemical communication is more particular, with both sexes producing pheromone components (Haniotakis et al. 1986; Noushini et al. 2020), and females involved in pheromone communication in few species (Mazomenos and Haniotakis 1981; Zhang et al. 2019; Noushini et al. 2019, 2021a, b). Even though the characterization of the sex pheromone blend of the olive fruit fly was accomplished four decades ago (Baker et al. 1980; Mazomenos and Haniotakis 1981; Gariboldi et al. 1983), and the additional research conducted on the intraspecific chemical communication of the species (Baker et al. 1982b; Gariboldi et al. 1982, 1983; Carpita et al. 2012; Canale et al. 2013b, 2015; Fusini et al. 2018), the chemical ecology of the species still remains far from being completely understood. In the olive fruit fly the sex pheromone is released by females, and comprises a four-component blend, composed by the aforementioned olean, nonanal, ethyl dodecanoate, and α-pinene (Mazomenos and Haniotakis 1981, 1985). The emission of olean is produced close to the onset of the scotophase (Levi-Zada et al. 2012), in accordance with the time window in which mating occurs (Loher and Zervas 1979). Both sexes are reported to release olean since the first day after emergence, although quantitative and age-related differences are detected between sexes (Canale et al. 2012; Levi-Zada et al. 2012). In young males the maximal productivity is reached in few days after emergence (5–8 days), and the production ceases by the 11th day (Canale et al. 2012; Levi-Zada et al. 2012), in marked contrast to females, in which the emission peaks in the first 18 days and continues up to 35–45 days after emergence (Canale et al. 2012; Levi-Zada et al. 2012). In addition, the amount of olean released from females is ca. 1000 ng/h at the onset of scotophase, significantly exceeding that emitted by males (ca. 15 ng/h) (Levi-Zada et al. 2012). The role of male-released olean is still unknown. Benelli and coworkers discarded the emission of olean from young males as a chemical mimicry, suggesting that it may benefit them by keeping away older males, thus avoiding mating competence (Benelli et al. 2013). In addition to chemical signals, intrasexual communication is also mediated by additional sensory cues. Indeed, courtship and successful mating on males seem to be tightly linked to male wing vibration and associated behavior (f.i., abdomen rubbing with hind tarsus) (Benelli et al. 2012; Canale et al. 2013b), which in turn is related to the size of males (Benelli et al. 2016). Recently it has been determined that B. oleae males emit intermittent pulses of highly variable duration, at a frequency of ca. 350 Hz, and this wing vibration trait is suggested to be involved not only on courtship behavior, but also on male-male interactions (Terzidou et al. 2022). Similarly, the sexual communication of other tephritid species relies on a multimodal process based on the interaction of chemical and physical cues, highlighting the complexity of the mating system and courtship behavior of this dipteran family (extensively reviewed in Benelli et al. 2014).
In spite of all these advances on the intraspecific communication of the species, the identification of biologically active male-borne chemical cues is limited to some extent. To the best of our knowledge, only one male-specific active compound has been identified so far. Carpita and coworkers reported the presence of the unsaturated hydrocarbon (Z)-9-tricosene (“muscalure”) in rectal glands of mature males, and this compound resulted to be attractive for virgin females at close-range (Carpita et al. 2012). However, the efficacy of (Z)-9-tricosene on field has not been evaluated yet, and probably its low volatility makes unfeasible to lure conspecific females at a long-range. Hence, we questioned whether males may produce and release overlooked volatile cues that may be active on females, and therefore potentially strengthen the attractiveness mediated by an ammonium salt. To achieve our goal, we first focused on the volatile profile of sexually mature individuals, and determined the behavioral activity of two male-specific lactones on both sexes under laboratory conditions. Finally, the attractiveness of the binary blend composed by γ-hexalactone and ammonium bicarbonate was determined in field assays.
Materials and methods
Insects
Volatile collections and behavioral assays were conducted on insects from a permanent laboratory colony maintained at the installations of the Institute for Advanced Chemistry of Catalonia (Barcelona, Spain) since 2016. The parental generation for establishing this colony was obtained from a long-term colony (ca. 10 generations per year) cultured at the Joint FAO/IAEA Centre of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture (Vienna, Austria) since 2008. For egg production, larvae rearing and adult maintenance, previously described methodologies based on artificial oviposition and larvae-developing substrates were followed (Estes et al. 2012 and references therein). To obtain virgin individuals for being further tested, the presence of pupae was daily checked, and upon emergence, adults were sorted by sex, and those of the same sex were pooled in cubic Bugdorm© cages (30 × 30 × 30 cm). Adults were fed on a mixture of sugar, yeast hydrolysate, and egg yolk (75:19:6) (Tsitsipis and Kontos 1983), and water was provided ad libitum, by wetting a sponge strip. Both food and water were replaced every two days. All the developmental stages were kept at 24 ± 1 ℃, 55 ± 5% (relative humidity), and a L:D photoperiod of 16:8.
Chemicals
Racemic γ-hexalactone (98%) (hereafter referred to as γ-hexalactone) was purchased from Alfa Aesar (Heysham, United Kingdom), while racemic δ-hexalactone (98%) (δ-hexalactone) was acquired from Thermo Fisher Scientific (Madrid, Spain). Commercial suppliers of racemic olean (98%) and ammonium bicarbonate (98%) were Cymit Química S.L. (Barcelona, Spain) and Barcelonesa de Drogas y Productos Químicos S.A.U. (Barcelona, Spain), respectively. n-Hexane of GC purity (SupraSolv®, Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) was used as solvent for preparing the serial dilutions to be tested in behavioral assays. Kovats retention indices (KI) were calculated using a commercial series of saturated n-alkanes (C7–C40, Merck-Sigma Aldrich, Madrid, Spain).
Headspace collection and analysis
Volatile collection from B. oleae adults of both sexes was performed by solid phase microextraction (SPME), with a divinylbenzene/carboxen/polydimethylsiloxane (DVB/CAR/PDMS) coated fiber (50/30 μm; Supelco, Merck-Sigma Aldrich). First, a comparison of the volatile profiles released from males and females (7–14 days old) was conducted. A total of n = 6 collections per sex were performed. In each volatile collection, ten virgin individuals, either males or females, were introduced in a 40 mL screwed-cap vial (Supelco, Merck Sigma Aldrich), and left exposed to the SPME fiber for 6 h deprived of any food or water source. Next, virgin males of different ages (1, 5, 14, 19 and 23 days old) were sampled under the same conditions to determine whether the release of the specific compounds followed an age-dependent pattern. Two samples per age category were performed, each containing ten males. Prior to being used for the first time, SPME fibers were conditioned by inserting them into a GC injection port at 270 ℃ for 30 min. All the collections were done from 10:00 am to 18:00 pm at room temperature.
After each collection, the fiber was immediately injected at 270 ℃ in splitless mode (5 min) into a Thermo Finnigan Trace 2000 GC system coupled to a Trace MS quadrupole mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific). A non-polar TR-5MS column (30 m × 0.25 mm I.D. × 0.25 µm; Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used, and the following temperature program was set up: an initial temperature of 40° hold for 5 min, followed by an increase of 5 °C/min to 180 °C, and finally raised 15 °C/min to 300 °C, with a hold time of 5 min. The MS was used in the electron impact mode at 70 eV. The MS system was operated in the scan mode, from 40 to 500 amu, at 1.0 scan/s. Compound identification was achieved by comparison of mass spectra with those of synthetic standards (only in the case of γ- and δ-hexalactone) and a mass spectral library (The National Institute of Standards and Technology-NIST Mass Spectral Database), and by comparison of calculated KI values with those in literature, when available.
Behavioral activity
Walking response of virgin B. oleae males and females ( 7–14 days old) in response to γ-hexalactone (1, 10, and 100 µg) and δ-hexalactone (1 and 10 µg) was determined in a double-choice glass olfactometer (main arm 10 cm long × 18 mm I.D., arms 8 cm long × 1.8 mm I.D., angle between arms 90°) set in vertical position and suspended by a retort stand. In each trial, hexane-diluted γ-hexalactone or δ-hexalactone was confronted against n-hexane as solvent control. Testing quantities of each lactone were obtained from serial dilutions in n-hexane, and 10 µL of the corresponding dilution was loaded onto a filter paper disc (Whatman, 2.5 cm diameter, Merck-Sigma Aldrich), while 10 µL of hexane were loaded on another filter paper as solvent control. An incoming charcoal-filtered airflow at 350 ml/min was set for each arm. Filter papers were renewed every five insects, and the position of the arms were also switched to avoid any directionality. All the system was homogenously illuminated using a table lamp with white light (60 W) placed on a shelf ca. 30 cm above the olfactometer junction, providing a light intensity of approximately 500 lx. Prior to the beginning of each trial, flies were individually isolated in 15 ml Falcon tubes, and allowed to acclimate to room conditions for 1 h. A total of 40–80 flies of each sex were tested for each compound and amount, and each insect was used only once. A positive response was considered if the fly entered any arm at least 2 cm beyond the arm junction. If an insect did not make a choice after 5 min, it was considered as non-responding, and discarded for further statistical analysis.
Field tests
To test the efficacy of γ-hexalactone enhancing the attractiveness of ammonium bicarbonate under natural conditions, three field assays were carried out. In the first one, hereafter referred to as Assay 1, we assessed the attractiveness of the binary blend composed of ammonium bicarbonate (AB, 40 g) and γ-hexalactone (200 mg) in comparison to AB (40 g) alone. This assay was deployed in an olive orchard (41.45751, 1.81742; var. Arbequina) sited in Sant Llorenç d´Hortons (Catalonia, Spain), from 29th August to 28th November of 2018. In a second set of assays, namely Assays 2 and 3, the efficacy of the binary blend composed by AB (40 g) and olean (200 mg) was compared against the blend of AB (40 g) and γ-hexalactone (200 mg). The Assay 2 was conducted in the same olive orchard as Assay 1, and it started on 17th October and ended on 13th December 2019. On the other hand, the Assay 3 was conducted from 13th July to 23rd November 2021 in an olive orchard (43.81803, 4.05009; var. Picholine) located in Aspères (France). Both sampling sites were selected due to reported B. oleae attacks in previous years and their management by organic farming.
For all field trials, the same experimental design and methodology were followed. Cone yellow traps (FLYPACK®DACUS, SEDQ Healthy Crops, Spain) were baited with the corresponding lure, and hung up in the leaf canopy at a height of 1.4–1.8 m from ground level. Three trap blocks were deployed per assay, and each block contained one trap for each attractant tested. The dispenser for releasing olean and γ-hexalactone was a 2 mL-polyethylene capsule, which provides a constant release rate of approximately 0.80 and 0.14 mg/day respectively, while AB was released from a polyethylene-cellulose envelope, affording a release rate for ammonia of ca. 5 mg/day. All the release rates were estimated in a wind tunnel at 40 °C and an incoming airflow of 2 m/s during 169 days (Supplementary Figures S1 & S2). A minimum distance of 25 m between traps and blocks was set. Trap catches were weekly checked, and rotated clockwise within each block after fly counting and sex determination.
Statistical analysis
Walking response of males and females in the double-choice olfactometer was subjected to a Chi-square goodness-of-fit test, to test if the proportion of flies making a choice differed from a 50:50 distribution. The performance of the baits tested in each field assay was analyzed by comparing the mean catches of both sexes of B. oleae per week with the Mann–Whitney U nonparametric test. All the statistical procedures were subjected to a significance level of α = 0.05, and performed using SPSS Statistics 17.0 software (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA).
Results
Headspace collection
Analysis of the volatile profiles from males and females of 7–14 days old revealed the presence of γ-hexalactone and δ-hexalactone only in males, while no traces were detected in females (Fig. 1, Table 1). Apart from these two lactones, (Z)-9-tricosene and ethyl (Z)-9-octadecenoate (= ethyl oleate) were also detected, although the latter was also present in all the headspace collections from females. When comparing the volatile profiles from males of different ages, both lactones were detected in all sampling groups, i.e. from one to 23 days old (Fig. 2).
With regard to females, volatile collections included the major sexual pheromone component olean, its unsaturated form l,7-dioxaspiro[5.5]undec-4-ene, and tentatively identified hydroxy derivatives, viz. 3-hydroxy-1,7-dioxaspiro[5.5]undecane and 1,6-dioxaspiro[4.5]decan-2-methanol (Table 1). Six additional esters were also identified from females: ethyl decanoate, ethyl dodecanoate, ethyl tetradecanoate, ethyl hexadecanoate, ethyl (Z)-9-hexadecenoate, and the abovementioned ethyl (Z)-9-octadecenoate (Table 1).
Behavioral activity
Both males and females showed a positive response to γ-hexalactone at 1 µg (males, 71% of attraction, χ2 = 3.857, df = 1, p = 0.050; females, 69% of attraction, χ2 = 4.235, df = 1, p = 0.040), and 10 µg (males, 69% of attraction, χ2 = 3.846, df = 1, p = 0.050; females, 65% of attraction χ2 = 3.930, df = 1, p = 0.047) (Fig. 3), whereas the amount of 100 µg did not exhibit an attractive effect on neither of the sexes (males, χ2 = 1.385, df = 1, p = 0.239; females, χ2 = 0.053, df = 1, p = 0.819) (Fig. 3).
On the other hand, none of the sexes showed a positive response towards δ-hexalactone at neither 1 µg (males, 53% of attraction, χ2 = 0.118, df = 1, p = 0.732; females, 62% of attraction χ2 = 1.882, df = 1, p = 0.170) nor 10 µg (males, 50% of attraction, χ2 = 0.0, df = 1, p = 1.0; females, 54% of attraction, χ2 = 0.154, df = 1, p = 0.695) (Fig. 4).
Field tests
Overall, 2,468 B. oleae were trapped in Assay 1, with an equal sex ratio for both baits (♂:♀ in AB, 0.98:1; AB plus γ-hexalactone, 1.02:1). Traps baited with the binary blend of AB and γ-hexalactone significantly lured more individuals of both sexes per week than those traps baited only with AB (males, U = − 23.0 z = − 2.043, p = 0.043; females, U = 22.5, z = − 2.080 p = 0.035) (Fig. 5).
In both Assays 2 and 3, the mean number of males and females per week of traps co-releasing AB and γ-hexalactone significantly differed from those traps baited with the blend AB and olean (Fig. 6). Specifically, in Assay 2 a total of 1,112 flies were trapped (♂:♀ in AB plus γ-hexalactone, 1.58:1; AB plus olean, 1.38:1), and the binary blend of AB and γ-hexalactone resulted to be more attractive than the combination of AB and olean (males, U = 12.5, z = − 2.051, p = 0.038; females, U = 11.5, z = − 2.155, p = 0.028) (Fig. 6a). The same response pattern was detected in Assay 3 (771 B. oleae trapped, ♂:♀ in AB plus γ-hexalactone, 1.60:1; AB plus olean, 0.75:1), being the binary blend AB plus γ-hexalactone the most attractive bait for both sexes (males, U = 72.0, z = − 3.176, p = 0.001 < 0.; females, U = 86.0, z = 2.765, p = 0.005) (Fig. 6b).
Discussion
In this work we report for the first time the presence of two male-specific lactones, namely γ-hexalactone and δ-hexalactone, in B. oleae virgin males, with the former exhibiting a significant attraction on virgin males and females in double-choice assays, and enhancing the attractiveness of the food bait ammonium bicarbonate upon both sexes in field tests. In contrast, the role of δ-hexalactone is still unclear, since no biological activity was observed in laboratory behavioral assays. Nonetheless, further research would be needed to determine whether the insect is capable of detecting the compound (i.e. by mean of electroantennographic and electropalpographic assays), and, if so, compare the biological activity of the compound alone and together with the additional male specific-chemical cues, viz. γ-hexalactone and (Z)-9-tricosene, in order to determine any possible synergism.
The relevance of the lactone motif in the intraspecific chemical communication of insects (Schulz and Hötling 2015), and specifically on tephritid genera, has previously been described, with the general pattern of males being the sex involved in their production and emission. In Rhagoletis spp., short-chain lactones have been reported as relevant intraspecific cues. For instance, males of Rhagoletis batava Hering release (-)-δ-heptalactone, and it results attractive for both sexes, therefore acting as an aggregation pheromone (Būda et al. 2020). Males of the walnut husk fly Rhagoletis completa Cresson also release δ-hexalactone, along with δ-heptalactone, and this binary mixture is highly attractive in field tests, although no information of the sex-ratio of the catches was provided by the authors (Sarles et al. 2018). With regard to Anastrepha spp., more complex lactones are suggested to be part of the sex pheromone blend. In three Anastrepha species, namely Anastrepha ludens (Loew), Anastrepha fraterculus (Wiedemann), and Anastrepha suspensa (Loew), the trivially-known lactones suspensolide, epianastrephin and anastrephin have been identified as components of the male sex pheromone (Battiste et al. 1983; Stokes et al. 1983; Chuman et al. 1988; Lima et al. 2001; Milet-Pinheiro et al. 2015).
Concerning subfamily Dacinae, in which genus Bactrocera is included, scant records of male-produced lactones are known (Ohinata et al. 1982; Baker et al. 1985; Ono et al. 2020). (E)-5-(3,6-heptadienyl)dihydro-2(3H)-furanone was identified from the volatile bouquet released by Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett) males (Ohinata et al. 1982). Recently, Ono and coworkers detected 3-hydroxy-decalactone in the rectal gland of both sexes of Bactrocera tsuneonis (Miyake), although the amount of compound detected in mature males was significantly higher than in immature males and females (Ono et al. 2020). However, no biological activity of any of the abovementioned compounds has been determined so far. Similarly, some lactones from host plants are reported as biologically actives for true fruit flies. In Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) and Bactrocera tryoni (Froggatt), γ-octalactone, a mango-released compound, is recognized as a strong oviposition stimulant (Pagadala Damodaram et al. 2014; Kempraj et al. 2019). Additionally, an aggregative response in B. tryoni is induced by this compound (Kempraj et al. 2019). Moreover, gamma- and delta-lactones of diverse chain length (C4-C12) from host fruits elicit electroantennographic responses on C. capitata (Light et al. 1988). Therefore, our findings represent the first report within this subfamily of a male-produced lactone biologically active on conspecifics.
Analytical procedures on the volatile fraction of B. oleae allowed to detect both lactones exclusively in virgin males, and although the stereochemistry was not determined, both sexes positively responded to the racemic mixture of γ-hexalactone. In a similar vein, racemic δ-hexalactone and δ-heptalactone are effective attracting R. completa (Sarles et al. 2018). Nonetheless, discrepancies in the response level related to enantiomeric composition are commonly reported. In fact, olean is produced as racemate by both B. oleae sexes (Haniotakis et al. 1986; Levi-Zada et al. 2012), and while sexually mature males are attracted to the (R)-(-) enantiomer in laboratory and field assays, females only respond to (S)-( +)-olean under laboratory conditions (Haniotakis et al. 1986). Conversely, males of R. batava only emit (-)-δ-heptalactone, and antennae from both sexes strongly responded to it, while anosmia was reported when stimulated with the opposite enantiomer (Būda et al. 2020). In this sense, as earlier stated, none of the sexes of B. oleae responded to δ-hexalactone in our laboratory assays, and a possible antagonistic effect between enantiomers may be masking any biological activity. Therefore, the determination of its enantiomeric composition and further biological tests would provide valuable foundation to assess the true role of the compound.
The emission of γ-hexalactone was detectable in all the sampling ages considered (from one to up to 23 days old), which suggests that the biological relevance of the compound may prevail throughout males´ lifespan. It is worth noting that the presence of γ-hexalactone was also detected in 7- and 14-day-old feral males reared from infested olive fruits, while only traces were found in samples from feral males of less than one week old (Supplementary Figure S3). With regard to δ-hexalactone, it was clearly detectable in feral males of 14 days old, while younger males showed either traces (7 days old) or lacked the compound (< 7 days old) (Supplementary Figure S3). Thus, these findings consistently demonstrate that the volatile profile of laboratory-reared individuals is similar to that of feral males. Different factors have been demonstrated to quantitatively and qualitatively modify the pheromone production in long-established laboratory insect colonies (Raina et al. 1989; van Bergen et al. 2013; Merli et al. 2018). For instance, major and minor sex pheromone components of C. capitata males are altered under different larvae diets (Vaníčková et al. 2012; Merli et al. 2018). Nevertheless, our volatile collections from feral males demonstrated that both lactones are naturally produced, and a potential influence of the artificial diet should be discarded. Further research on age-related production and release of γ-hexalactone in feral males would be of great aid to gain a better understanding of its natural role.
Both laboratory and field trials confirmed that the male-specific γ-hexalactone is attractive for males and females, either when singly presented (laboratory assays) or when co-released with ammonium bicarbonate (field trials). Indeed, the combination of γ-hexalactone with the food lure increases the number of catches of both sexes compared to the performance of ammonium bicarbonate and olean. Even though the male to female ratio in ammonium bicarbonate and γ-hexalactone bait was male-biased (ca. 1.6:1, with the exception of Assay 1), the number of females trapped was significantly increased in comparison to the other testing baits. Taken into consideration that the ammonium salt and the major pheromone component are primarily attractants of females and males respectively, the observed increase in catches level should be attributable to an attractive effect of γ-hexalactone upon both sexes. This is partially in agreement with previous observations, which addressed the role of males exerting attraction on females. Evidence of male-mediated attraction on females dates back from the decade of 1970s, when a particular odor emanating from males was reported when the mating activity of the insect peaks (Economopoulos et al. 1971). Later, it was described that “an oily substance from the glandular epithelium” resulted attractive to females in the laboratory (De Marzo et al. 1978), albeit the conclusions of this study generated some skepticism, due to some methodological weaknesses that may have led to artificial results (Mavraganis et al. 2010). Further evidence was provided by Mavraganis and coworkers, who tested the activity of male body extracts, which resulted to be attractive for mature virgin females in test cages (Mavraganis et al. 2010). In the last years, (Z)-9-tricosene has been isolated from the rectal gland of mature males, and it attracts virgin females in olfactometer tests (Carpita et al. 2012). As in many other tephritid species (Baker et al. 1982a; Perkins et al. 1990; Zhang et al. 2019; Noushini et al. 2019, 2021a, b), the rectal gland is regarded as the biologically-active compounds secreting organ in B. oleae (Gariboldi et al. 1983; Carpita et al. 2012; Canale et al. 2013b, 2015). In addition, male urotergal gland in the olive fruit fly males has been reported to be attractive for both sexes, with females attracted to urotergal glands from old males (15 days old), and males attracted to urotergal glands from young males (5 days old) (Canale et al. 2013b). However, it is remarkable that these previous works have not found any of the lactones reported by us when analyzing the content of male glands (Carpita et al. 2012; Canale et al. 2013b) and thus, the characterization of the production and release site of both lactones deserves further attention.
Interestingly, in our case γ-hexalactone was not only attractive for females, but unexpectedly also for males. We suggest that this male-male interaction mediated by γ-hexalactone might be related to lek formation. It is well known that B. oleae males form leks at dusk, and within these swarms they compete for female attraction, and courtship takes place. Similar lekking behavior has been reported for most tephritid species (Iwahashi and Majima 1986; Dodson 1986; Whittier et al. 1992; Segura et al. 2009). Cues involved in lekking are not fully understood in fruit flies, although intraspecific and host chemical cues, visual and acoustic signals are suggested to be relevant (reviewed by Benelli et al. 2014). In this sense, it would be plausible that γ-hexalactone, along with other undetermined signals, may contribute to lek formation by recruiting males at first instance, and afterwards, female conspecifics may be enticed towards swarming males by the action of additional cues, with a possible role of γ-hexalactone. Nevertheless, in the light of our results it is too premature to draw such conclusions, and hence in-depth research would be needed to test whether γ-hexalactone is attractive by itself under field conditions, along with determining its possible role as a potential lek formation elicitor.
In conclusion, our findings demonstrate that the combination of ammonium bicarbonate and γ-hexalactone is highly attractive for both sexes of B. oleae, and this bait even improves the performance of ammonium bicarbonate and olean. Therefore, the use of γ-hexalactone should be taken into consideration for replacing olean as a complement of this kind of food lure-based baits. Remaining challenges, such as determining the stereochemistry or γ-hexalactone, the role of δ-hexalactone as a potential synergist, and the optimum release rate (Navarro-Llopis et al. 2011), may contribute to gather pivotal information for the development of novel trapping strategies against B. oleae populations. Furthermore, the identification of reported male-specific lactones represents a novel step towards deciphering the chemically-mediated intraspecific interactions of B. oleae, supporting the idea that the sexual communication of the species is not governed only by the chemical cues released from females. Future work will be aimed to address the putative role of γ-hexalactone as an aggregative cue.
Author contributions
SL, PA and CQ conceived the study. SL and CCM reared the insect colony. SL conducted the volatile collections, behavioral tests, and data analysis. PA and AGZ designed and coordinated the field assays. SL wrote the initial draft. CQ and PA led the project administration. All the authors contributed to the edition, revision and approval of the final version of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the conception, design, and research of this study. The first draft of the manuscript was written by SL and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Data availability
Additional data will be provided by the authors upon reasonable request.
References
Amvrazi EG, Albanis TA (2009) Pesticide residue assessment in different types of olive oil and preliminary exposure assessment of Greek consumers to the pesticide residues detected. Food Chem 113:253–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2008.06.073
Ant T, Koukidou M, Rempoulakis P et al (2012) Control of the olive fruit fly using genetics-enhanced sterile insect technique. BMC Biol 10:51. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7007-10-51
Baker R, Herbert R, Howse PE et al (1980) Identification and synthesis of the major sex pheromone of the olive fly (Dacus oleae). J Chem Soc Chem Commun. 1980:52-53 https://doi.org/10.1039/c39800000052
Baker R, Herbert RH, Lomer RA (1982a) Chemical components of the rectal gland secretions of male Dacus cucurbitae, the melon fly. Experientia 38:232–233
Baker R, Herbert RH, Parton AH (1982b) Isolation and synthesis of 3- and 4-hydroxy-1,7-dioxaspiro[5.5]undecanes from the olive fly (Dacus oleae). J Chem Soc Chem Commun 1982:601-603. https://doi.org/10.1039/c39820000601
Baker R, Herbert RH, Grant GG (1985) Isolation and identification of the sex pheromone of the Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata (Wied). J Chem Soc Chem Commun. 1985:824-825 https://doi.org/10.1039/C39850000824
Baker P, Howse P, Ondarza R, Reyes J (1990) Field trials of synthetic sex pheromone components of the male Mediterranean fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Southern Mexico. J Econ Entomol 83:2235–2245. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/83.6.2235
Bateman MA, Morton TC (1981) The importance of ammonia in proteinaceous attractants for fruit flies (Family: Tephritidae). Aust J Agric Res 32:883–903. https://doi.org/10.1071/AR9810883
Battiste MA, Strekowski L, Vanderbilt DP et al (1983) Anastrephin and epianastrephin, novel lactone components isolated from the sex pheromone blend of male Caribbean and Mexican fruit flies. Tetrahedron Lett 24:2611–2614. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-4039(00)87958-7
Benelli G, Canale A, Bonsignori G et al (2012) Male wing vibration in the mating behavior of the olive fruit fly Bactrocera oleae (Rossi) (Diptera: Tephritidae). J Insect Behav 25:590–603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10905-012-9325-9
Benelli G, Bonsignori G, Stefanini C et al (2013) The production of female sex pheromone in Bactrocera oleae (Rossi) young males does not influence their mating chances. Entomol Sci 16:47–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1479-8298.2012.00538.x
Benelli G, Daane KM, Canale A et al (2014) Sexual communication and related behaviours in Tephritidae: current knowledge and potential applications for integrated pest management. J Pest Sci 87:385–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-014-0577-3
Benelli G, Donati E, Romano D et al (2016) Is bigger better? Male body size affects wing-borne courtship signals and mating success in the olive fruit fly, Bactrocera oleae (Diptera: Tephritidae). Insect Sci 23:869–880. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-7917.12253
Bento A, Torres L, Lopes J, Sismeiro R (1997) A contribution to the knowledge of Bactrocera oleae (Gmel) in Tras-os-Montes region (northeastern Portugal): phenology, losses and control. In: III International Symposium on Olive Growing. pp 541–544
Broumas T, Haniotakis GE (1994) Comparative field studies of various traps and attractants of the olive fruit fly, Bactrocera oleae. Entomol Exp Appl 73:145–150. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1570-7458.1994.tb01849.x
Broumas T, Haniotakis G, Liaropoulos C et al (2002) The efficacy of an improved form of the mass-trapping method, for the control of the olive fruit fly, Bactrocera oleae (Gmelin) (Dipt., Tephritidae): pilot-scale feasibility studies. J Appl Entomol 126:217–223. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0418.2002.00637.x
Būda V, Blažyte-Cereškiene L, Radžiutė S et al (2020) Male-produced (−)-δ-heptalactone, pheromone of fruit fly Rhagoletis batava (Diptera: Tephritidae), a sea buckthorn berries pest. Insects 11:5–8. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11020138
Burrack HJ, Connell JH, Zalom FG (2008) Comparison of olive fruit fly (Bactrocera oleae (Gmelin)) (Diptera: Tephritidae) captures in several commercial traps in California. Int J Pest Manag 54:227–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670870801975174
Canale A, Carpita A, Conti B et al (2012) Effect of age on 1,7-dioxaspiro-[5,5]-undecane production in both sexes of olive fruit fly, Bactrocera oleae (Rossi) (Diptera: Tephritidae). IOBC/WPRS Bull 74:219–225
Canale A, Benelli G, Conti B et al (2013a) Ingestion toxicity of three Lamiaceae essential oils incorporated in protein baits against the olive fruit fly, Bactrocera oleae (Rossi) (Diptera Tephritidae). Nat Prod Res 27:2091–2099. https://doi.org/10.1080/14786419.2013.784871
Canale A, Germinara SG, Carpita A et al (2013b) Behavioural and electrophysiological responses of the olive fruit fly, Bactrocera oleae (Rossi) (Diptera: Tephritidae), to male- and female-borne sex attractants. Chemoecology 23:155–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00049-013-0131-4
Canale A, Benelli G, Germinara GS et al (2015) Behavioural and electrophysiological responses to overlooked female pheromone components in the olive fruit fly, Bactrocera oleae (Diptera: Tephritidae). Chemoecology 25:147–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00049-014-0183-0
Carpita A, Canale A, Raffaelli A et al (2012) (Z)-9-tricosene identified in rectal gland extracts of Bactrocera oleae males: first evidence of a male-produced female attractant in olive fruit fly. Naturwissenschaften 99:77–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-011-0868-y
Cavanna S, Molinari GP (1998) Residues of fenthion and trichloron in olives and olive oil after olive tree treatments. Food Addit Contam 15:518–527. https://doi.org/10.1080/02652039809374676
Christenson LD, Foote RH (1960) Biology of fruit flies. Annu Rev Entomol 5:171–192. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.05.010160.001131
Chuman T, Sivinski J, Heath RR et al (1988) Suspensolide, a new macrolide component of male Caribbean fruit fly (Anastrepha suspensa [Loew]) volatiles. Tetrahedron Lett 29:6561–6563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-4039(00)82397-7
Daane KM, Johnson MW (2010) Olive fruit fly: managing an ancient pest in modern times. Annu Rev Entomol 55:151–169. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.54.110807.090553
Dodson G (1986) Lek mating system and large male aggressive advantage in a gall-forming tephritid fly (Diptera: Tephritidae). Ethology 72:99–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.1986.tb00610.x
Economopoulos AP, Giannakakis A, Tzanakakis ME, Voyadjoglou A (1971) Reproductive behavior and physiology of the olive fruit fly. 1. Anatomy of the adult rectum and odors emitted by adults. Ann Entomol Soc Am 64:1112–1116. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/64.5.1112
Enkerlin W, Mumford J (1997) Economic evaluation of three alternative methods for control of the Mediterranean fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Israel, Palestinian territories, and Jordan. J Econ Entomol 90:1066–1072. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/90.5.1066
Epsky ND, Kendra PE, Schnell EQ (2014) History and development of food-based attractants. In: Shelly T, Epsky ND, Jang EB et al (eds) Trapping and the detection, control, and regulation of tephritid fruit flies. Springer, pp 75–118
Estes AM, Nestel D, Belcari A et al (2012) A basis for the renewal of sterile insect technique for the olive fly, Bactrocera oleae (Rossi). J Appl Entomol 136:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0418.2011.01620.x
Fusini G, Barsanti D, Angelici G et al (2018) Identification and synthesis of new sex-specific components of olive fruit fly (Bactrocera oleae) female rectal gland, through original Negishi reactions on supported catalysts. Tetrahedron 74:4381–4389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tet.2018.07.003
Gariboldi P, Jommi G, Rossi R, Vita G (1982) Studies on the chemical constitution and sex pheromone activity of volatile substances emitted by Dacus oleae. Experientia 38:441–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01952628
Gariboldi P, Verotta L, Fanelli R (1983) Studies on the sex pheromone of Dacus oleae. Analysis of the substances contained in the rectal glands. Experientia 39:502–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01965176
Gómez-Caravaca AM, Cerretani L, Bendini A et al (2008) Effects of fly attack (Bactrocera oleae) on the phenolic profile and selected chemical parameters of olive oil. J Agric Food Chem 56:4577–4583. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf800118t
Gucci R, Caruso G, Canale A et al (2012) Qualitative changes of olive oils obtained from fruits damaged by Bactrocera oleae (Rossi). HortScience 47:301–306. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.47.2.301
Hagen KS, Finney GL (1950) A food supplement for effectively increasing the fecundity of certain tephritid species. J Econ Entomol 43:735. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/43.5.735
Haniotakis GE, Vassiliou-Waite Α (1987) Effect of combining food and sex attractants on the capture of Dacus oleae flies. Entomol Hell 5:27–33. https://doi.org/10.12681/eh.13944
Haniotakis G, Francke W, Mori K et al (1986) Sex-specific activity of (R)-(-)- and (S)- (+)-1,7-dioxaspiro[5.5]undecane, the major pheromone of Dacus oleae. J Chem Ecol 12:1559–1568. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01012372
Haniotakis GE, Broumas ΤΗ, Liaropoulos C (1998) Comparative field studies of various traps and attractants for the olive fruit fly, Bactrocera oleae. Entomol Hell 12:71–79. https://doi.org/10.12681/eh.14022
Hee AK-W, Tan K-H (1998) Attraction of female and male Bactrocera papayae to conspecific males fed with methyl eugenol and attraction of females to male sex pheromone components. J Chem Ecol 24:753–764. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022302605357
Iwahashi O, Majima T (1986) Lek formation and male-male competition in the melon fly, Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett (Diptera: Tephritidae). Appl Entomol Zool 21:70–75. https://doi.org/10.1303/aez.21.70
Johnson M, Wang X, Nadel H et al (2011) High temperature affects olive fruit fly populations in California’s Central Valley. Calif Agric 65:29–33. https://doi.org/10.3733/ca.v065n01p29
Kakani EG, Zygouridis NE, Tsoumani KT et al (2010) Spinosad resistance development in wild olive fruit fly Bactrocera oleae (Diptera: Tephritidae) populations in California. Pest Manag Sci 66:447–453. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.1921
Kampouraki A, Stavrakaki M, Karataraki A et al (2018) Recent evolution and operational impact of insecticide resistance in olive fruit fly Bactrocera oleae populations from Greece. J Pest Sci 91:1429–1439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-018-1007-8
Katsoyannos BI, Papadopoulos NT, Stavridis D (2000) Evaluation of trap types and food attractants for Rhagoletis cerasi (Diptera: Tephritidae). J Econ Entomol 93:1005–1010. https://doi.org/10.1603/0022-0493-93.3.1005
Kempraj V, Jean Park S, Taylor PW (2019) γ-Octalactone, an effective oviposition stimulant of Bactrocera tryoni. J Appl Entomol 143:1205–1209. https://doi.org/10.1111/jen.12711
Kobayashi RM, Ohinata K, Chambers DL, Fujimoto MS (1978) Sex pheromones of the oriental fruit fly and the melon fly: mating behavior, bioassay method, and attraction of females by live males and by suspected pheromone glands of males. Environ Entomol 7:107–112. https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/7.1.107
Landolt PJ, Heath RR, Agee HR et al (1988) Sex pheromone-based trapping system for papaya fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae). J Econ Entomol 81:1163–1169. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/81.4.1163
Levi-Zada A, Nestel D, Fefer D et al (2012) Analyzing diurnal and age-related pheromone emission of the olive fruit fly, Bactrocera oleae by sequential SPME-GCMS analysis. J Chem Ecol 38:1036–1041. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-012-0167-x
Light DM, Jang EB, Dickens JC (1988) Electroantennogram responses of the Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata, to a spectrum of plant volatiles. J Chem Ecol 14:159–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01022539
Lima IS, House PE, do Nascimento RR, (2001) Volatile substances from male Anastrepha fraterculus Wied. (Diptera: Tephritidae): identification and behavioural activity. J Braz Chem Soc 12:196–201. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-50532001000200012
Loher W, Zervas G (1979) The mating rhythm of the olive fruitfly, Dacus oleae Gmelin. Zeitschrift Für Angew Entomol 88:425–435. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0418.1979.tb02519.x
Malheiro R, Casal S, Baptista P, Pereira JA (2015) A review of Bactrocera oleae (Rossi) impact in olive products: from the tree to the table. Trends Food Sci Technol 44:226–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2015.04.009
Manousis T, Moore NF (1987) Control of Dacus oleae, a major pest of olives. Int J Trop Insect Sci 8:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742758400006858
Margaritopoulos JT, Skavdis G, Kalogiannis N et al (2008) Efficacy of the pyrethroid alpha-cypermethrin against Bactrocera oleae populations from Greece, and improved diagnostic for an iAChE mutation. Pest Manag Sci 64:900–908. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.1580
Martinez AJ, Salinas EJ, Rendon P (2007) Capture of Anastrepha species (Diptera: Tephritidae) with multilure traps and Biolure attractants in Guatemala. Fla Entomol 90:258–263. https://doi.org/10.1653/0015-4040(2007)90[258:COASDT]2.0.CO;2
De Marzo L, Nuzzaci G, Solinas M (1978) Studio anatomico, istologico, ultrastrutturale e fisiologico del retto ed osservazioni etologiche in relazione alla possibile produzione di feromoni sessuali nel maschio di Dacus oleae Gmel. Entomologica 14:203–266. https://doi.org/10.15162/0425-1016/528
Mavraganis VG, Papadopoulos NT, Kouloussis NA (2010) Extract of olive fruit fly males (Diptera: Tephritidae) attract virgin females. Entomol Hell 19:14–20. https://doi.org/10.12681/eh.11590
Mazomenos BE, Haniotakis GE (1981) A multicomponent female sex pheromone of Dacus oleae Gmelin: isolation and bioassay. J Chem Ecol 7:437–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00995766
Mazomenos BE, Haniotakis GE (1985) Male olive fruit fly attraction to synthetic sex pheromone components in laboratory and field tests. J Chem Ecol 11:397–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01411425
Mazomenos BE, Pantazi-Mazomenou A, Stefanou D (2002) Attract and kill of the olive fruit fly Bactrocera oleae in Greece as a part of an integrated control system. IOBC/WPRS Bull 25:137–146
Mazor M, Gothilf S, Galun R (1987) The role of ammonia in the attraction of females of the Mediterranean fruit fly to protein hydrolysate baits. Entomol Exp Appl 43:25–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1570-7458.1987.tb02198.x
Merli D, Mannucci B, Bassetti F et al (2018) Larval diet affects male pheromone blend in a laboratory strain of the Medfly, Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae). J Chem Ecol 44:339–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-018-0939-z
Milet-Pinheiro P, Navarro DMA, De Aquino NC et al (2015) Identification of male-borne attractants in Anastrepha fraterculus (Diptera: Tephritidae). Chemoecology 25:115–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00049-014-0180-3
Nardi F, Carapelli A, Dallai R et al (2005) Population structure and colonization history of the olive fly, Bactrocera oleae (Diptera, Tephritidae). Mol Ecol 14:2729–2738. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02610.x
Navarro-Llopis V, Alfaro C, Primo J, Vacas S (2011) Response of two tephritid species, Bactrocera oleae and Ceratitis capitata, to different emission levels of pheromone and parapheromone. Crop Prot 30:913–918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2011.03.007
Noushini S, Pérez J, Park SJ et al (2019) Rectal gland chemistry, volatile emissions, and antennal responses of male and female banana fruit fly Bactrocera musae. Insects 11:32. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11010032
Noushini S, Perez J, Park SJ et al (2020) Attraction and electrophysiological response to identified rectal gland volatiles in Bactrocera frauenfeldi (Schiner). Molecules 25:1275. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25061275
Noushini S, Park SJ, Jamie I et al (2021a) Rectal gland exudates and emissions of Bactrocera bryoniae: chemical identification, electrophysiological and pheromonal functions. Chemoecology 31:137–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00049-020-00335-z
Noushini S, Park SJ, Perez J et al (2021b) Electrophysiological responses of Bactrocera kraussi (Hardy) (Tephritidae) to rectal gland secretions and headspace volatiles emitted by conspecific males and females. Molecules 26:5024. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26165024
Ohinata K, Jacobson M, Kobayashi RM et al (1982) Oriental fruit fly and melon fly: biological and chemical studies of smoke produced by males. J Environ Sci Heal Part A Environ Sci Eng 17:197–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/10934528209375028
Ono H, Nakahira M, Ohno S et al (2020) Predominant accumulation of a 3-hydroxy-γ-decalactone in the male rectal gland complex of the Japanese orange fly, Bactrocera tsuneonis. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 84:25–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/09168451.2019.1664892
Ordano M, Engelhard I, Rempoulakis P et al (2015) Olive fruit fly (Bactrocera oleae) population dynamics in the eastern Mediterranean: influence of exogenous uncertainty on a monophagous frugivorous insect. PLoS One 10:e0127798. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0127798
Pagadala Damodaram KJ, Kempraj V, Aurade RM et al (2014) Oviposition site-selection by Bactrocera dorsalis is mediated through an innate recognition template tuned to γ-octalactone. PLoS One 9:e85764. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085764
Pappas ML, Broufas GD, Koufali N et al (2011) Effect of heat stress on survival and reproduction of the olive fruit fly Bactrocera (Dacus) oleae. J Appl Entomol 135:359–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0418.2010.01579.x
Perdomo AJ, Nation JL, Baranowski RM (1976) Attraction of female and male Caribbean fruit flies to food-baited and male-baited traps under field conditions. Environ Entomol 5:1208–1210. https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/5.6.1208
Perkins MV, Kitching W, Drew RAI et al (1990) Chemistry of fruit flies: composition of the male rectal gland secretions of some species of South-East Asian Dacinae. Re-examination of Dacus cucurbitae (melon fly). J Chem Soc, Perkin Trans 1:1111–1117. https://doi.org/10.1039/P19900001111
Piñero JC, Souder SK, Smith TR et al (2015) Ammonium acetate enhances the attractiveness of a variety of protein-based baits to female Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae). J Econ Entomol 108:694–700. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/tov046
Piñero JC, Souder SK, Smith TR, Vargas RI (2017) Attraction of Bactrocera cucurbitae and Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) to beer waste and other protein sources laced with ammonium acetate. Fla Entomol 100:70–76. https://doi.org/10.1653/024.100.0112
Piñero JC, Souder SK, Vargas RI (2020) Synergistic and additive interactions among components of food-based baits underlie female fruit fly attraction. Entomol Exp Appl 168:339–348. https://doi.org/10.1111/eea.12890
Pinheiro LA, Dáder B, Wanumen AC et al (2020) Side effects of pesticides on the olive fruit fly parasitoid Psyttalia concolor (Szépligeti): a review. Agronomy 10:1755. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10111755
Raina AK, Stadelbacher EA, Ridgway RL (1989) Comparison of sex pheromone composition and pheromone-mediated male behavior of laboratory-reared and wild Heliothis zea (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J Chem Ecol 15:1259–1265. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01014828
Rice RE, Phillips PA, Stewart-Leslie J, Sibbett GS (2003) Olive fruit fly populations measured in Central and Southern California. Calif Agric 57:122–127. https://doi.org/10.3733/ca.v057n04p122
Rizzo R, Lo Verde G, Sinacori M et al (2020) Developing green insecticides to manage olive fruit flies? Ingestion toxicity of four essential oils in protein baits on Bactrocera oleae. Ind Crops Prod 143:111884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2019.111884
Sarles L, Fassotte B, Boullis A et al (2018) Improving the monitoring of the walnut husk fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) using male-produced lactones. J Econ Entomol 111:2032–2037. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toy169
Schulz S, Hötling S (2015) The use of the lactone motif in chemical communication. Nat Prod Rep 32:1042–1066. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5NP00006H
Scolari F, Valerio F, Benelli G et al (2021) Tephritid fruit fly semiochemicals: current knowledge and future perspectives. Insects 12:408. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12050408
Segura D, Petit N, Sciurano R et al (2009) Lekking behavior of Anastrepha fraterculus (Diptera : Tephritidae). Fla Entomol 90:154–162. https://doi.org/10.1653/0015-4040(2007)90[154:LBOAFD]2.0.CO;2
Shaurub EH (2023) Review of entomopathogenic fungi and nematodes as biological control agents of tephritid fruit flies: current status and a future vision. Entomol Exp Appl 171:17–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/eea.13244
Sinno M, Bézier A, Vinale F et al (2020) Symbiosis disruption in the olive fruit fly, Bactrocera oleae (Rossi), as a potential tool for sustainable control. Pest Manag Sci 76:3199–3207. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.5875
Skouras PJ, Margaritopoulos JT, Seraphides NA et al (2007) Organophosphate resistance in olive fruit fly, Bactrocera oleae, populations in Greece and Cyprus. Pest Manag Sci Former Pestic Sci 63:42–48. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.1306
Souza AV, Miranda EA, Passos JF et al (2021) Predicting the invasion risk by Anastrepha sororcula (Diptera: Tephritidae) in distinct geographic regions. Neotrop Entomol 50:989–998. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13744-021-00907-w
Speranza S, Bellocchi G, Pucci C (2004) IPM trials on attract-and-kill mixtures against the olive fly Bactrocera oleae (Diptera Tephritidae). Bull Insectology 57:111–115
Stokes JB, Uebel EC, Warthen JD Jr et al (1983) Isolation and identification of novel lactones from male Mexican fruit flies. J Agric Food Chem 31:1162–1167. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf00120a007
Terzidou A, Kouloussis N, Papanikolaou G, Koveos D (2022) Acoustic characteristics of sound produced by males of Bactrocera oleae change in the presence of conspecifics. Sci Rep 12:13086. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-16888-8
Thomas DB, Epsky ND, Serra CA et al (2008) Ammonia formulations and capture of Anastrepha fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae). J Entomol Sci 43:76–85. https://doi.org/10.18474/0749-8004-43.1.76
Tsitsipis J, Kontos A (1983) Improved solid adult diet for the olive fruit fly. Entomol Hell 1:24–29. https://doi.org/10.12681/eh.13890
van Asch B, Pereira-Castro I, Rei FT, da Costa LT (2015) Marked genetic differentiation between western Iberian and Italic populations of the olive fly: southern France as an intermediate area. PLoS One 10:e0126702. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0126702
van Bergen E, Brakefield PM, Heuskin S et al (2013) The scent of inbreeding: a male sex pheromone betrays inbred males. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 280:20130102. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.0102
Vaníčková L, do Nascimento RR, Hoskovec M, et al (2012) Are the wild and laboratory insect populations different in semiochemical emission? The case of the medfly sex pheromone. J Agric Food Chem 60:7168–7176. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf301474d
Varikou K, Garantonakis N, Birouraki A (2014) Response of olive fruit fly Bactrocera oleae to various attractant combinations, in orchards of Crete. Bull Insectology 67:109–114
Varikou K, Nikolakakis A, Bitsakis D et al (2021) Choice response of the olive fruit fly, Bactrocera oleae, to various bait/insecticide combinations: hydrolyzed proteins or ammonium salts? Int J Pest Manag. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670874.2021.2010145
Vázquez A, Cloonan KR, Rohde BB et al (2022) Attraction and longevity of 2- and 3-component food cone lures for the Caribbean fruit fly, Anastrepha suspensa (Diptera: Tephritidae). J Econ Entomol 115:1231–1239. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toac102
White IM, Elson-Harris MM (1992) Fruit flies of economic significance: their identification and bionomics. CAB international, Wallingford
Whittier TS, Kaneshiro KY, Prescott LD (1992) Mating behavior of mediterranean fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in a natural environment. Ann Entomol Soc Am 85:214–218. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/85.2.214
Yasin S, Rempoulakis P, Nemny-Lavy E et al (2014) Assessment of lure and kill and mass-trapping methods against the olive fly, Bactrocera oleae (Rossi), in desert-like environments in the Eastern Mediterranean. Crop Prot 57:63–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2013.12.020
Yokoyama VY, Miller GT, Stewart-Leslie J et al (2006) Olive fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) populations in relation to region, trap type, season, and availability of fruit. J Econ Entomol 99:2072–2079. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/99.6.2072
Zhang X, Wei C, Miao J et al (2019) Chemical compounds from female and male rectal pheromone glands of the guava fruit fly Bactrocera correcta. Insects 10:78. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10030078
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Carlos Cáceres (the Joint FAO/IAEA Centre of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture, Vienna, Austria) for providing Bactrocera oleae pupae for rearing. We also thank Marta Melgarejo (SEDQ Healthy Crops) for preparing the formulations for field assays, Mireia Barrot (SEDQ Healthy Crops) for technical assistance and Carlos Motje for insect images. We are grateful to CIRAD (French Agricultural Research Centre for International Development) and to the Institut du Monde de l'Olivier for their help in field tests.
Funding
Open Access funding provided thanks to the CRUE-CSIC agreement with Springer Nature. The authors declare that this research did not receive external funding.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Communicated by Paul Becher.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
López, S., Acín, P., Gómez-Zubiaur, A. et al. A shift in the paradigm? A male-specific lactone increases the response of both sexes of the olive fruit fly Bactrocera oleae to the food lure ammonium bicarbonate. J Pest Sci 97, 965–978 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-023-01659-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-023-01659-9