Journal of Pest Science

, Volume 85, Issue 2, pp 239–245 | Cite as

Attraction of Lygus rugulipennis and Adelphocoris lineolatus to synthetic floral odour compounds in field experiments in Hungary

  • Sándor Koczor
  • József Vuts
  • Miklós Tóth
Original Paper


Field experiments were carried out to ascertain whether synthetic floral odour compounds were attractive for two pest bug species. The European tarnished plant bug (Lygus rugulipennis Poppius) has been reported to damage various crops (e.g. strawberry, sugarbeet, alfalfa, cucumber), and the alfalfa plant bug (Adelphocoris lineolatus (Goeze)) is considered as a pest of alfalfa and Bt-cotton. In our field tests, traps baited with phenylacetaldehyde caught significantly more L. rugulipennis than unbaited traps. In addition, A. lineolatus was also attracted to phenylacetaldehyde-baited traps. When testing other, EAG active compounds, (E)-cinnamaldehyde attracted A. lineolatus as well. This compound was also attractive for L. rugulipennis, however, to a lesser extent than phenylacetaldehyde. When the two compounds were presented in combination, no synergistic or inhibitory effect was detected in either species. By attracting both sexes of both species, these new attractants may prove to be useful and provide the basis for further development of new lures for agricultural use.


Heteroptera Miridae Phenylacetaldehyde (E)-cinnamaldehyde Synthetic floral odour compounds Field trapping 



The authors are grateful to Dr. Dávid Rédei (Natural History Museum, Budapest) for the advice given in the identification of mirid species and to Mr. Ferenc Kádár for his kind suggestions concerning statistical analyses. Our thanks are also due to Dr. Michelle Fountain (East Malling Research, UK) for her kind suggestions regarding the manuscript. This research was partially supported by OTKA grant K 81494 of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.


  1. Benedek P, Erdélyi Cs, Jászai VE (1970) Seasonal activity of heteropterous species injurious to lucerne and its relations to the integrated pest control of lucerne grown for seed. Acta Phytopathol Hun 5:81–93Google Scholar
  2. Blackmer JL, Byers JA (2009) Lygus spp. (Heteroptera: Miridae) host-plant interactions with Lesquerella fendleri (Brassicaceae), a new crop in the arid southwest. Environ Entomol 38:159–167PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blackmer JL, Rodriguez-Saona C, Byers JA, Shope KL, Smith JP (2004) Behavioral response of Lygus hesperus to conspecifics and headspace volatiles of alfalfa in a Y-tube olfactometer. J Chem Ecol 30:1547–1564PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cantelo WW, Jacobson M (1979) Corn silk volatiles attract many species of moths. J Environ Sci Health A 14:695–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Creighton CS, McFadden TL, Cuthbert ER (1973) Supplementary data on phenylacetaldehyde: an attractant for Lepidoptera. J Econ Entomol 66:114–115Google Scholar
  6. Dunn OJ (1961) Multiple comparisons among means. J Amer Stat Assoc 56:52–64Google Scholar
  7. Erdélyi Cs, Manninger S, Manninger K, Gergely K, Hangyel L, Bernáth I (1994) Climatic factors affecting population dynamics of the main seed pests of lucerne in Hungary. J Appl Entomol 117:195–209Google Scholar
  8. Fountain M, Cross J, Jaastad G, Farman D, Hall D (2010) Developing an effective trap and lure to monitor Lygus rugulipennis. IOBC/wprs Bulletin 54:47–51Google Scholar
  9. Frati F, Salerno G, Conti E, Bin F (2008) Role of the plant-conspecific complex in host location and intra-specific communication of Lygus rugulipennis. Physiol Entomol 33:129–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fujii T, Hori M, Matsuda K (2010) Attractants for rice leaf bug, Trigonotylus caelestialium (Kirkaldy), are emitted from flowering rice panicles. J Chem Ecol 36:999–1005PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Games PA, Howell JF (1976) Pairwise multiple comparison with unequal n’s and/or variances: a Monte Carlo study. J Educ Stat 1:113–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gu SH, Sun Y, Ren LY, Zhang XY, Zhang YJ, Wu KM, Guo YY (2010) Cloning, expression and binding specificity analysis of odorant binding protein 3 of the lucerne plant bug, Adelphocoris lineolatus (Goeze). Chinese Sci Bull 55:3911–3921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Herbert DA, Ang BN Jr, Hodges RL (1996) Attractants for adult southern corn rootworm (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) monitoring in peanut fields and relationship of trap catch to pod damage. J Econ Entomol 89:515–524Google Scholar
  14. Holopainen JK, Varis AL (1991) Host plants of the European tarnished plant bug Lygus rugulipennis Poppius (Het., Miridae). J Appl Entomol 111:484–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Holopainen JK, Raiskio S, Wulff A, Tiilikkala K (2001) Blue sticky traps are more efficient for the monitoring of Lygus rugulipennis (Heteroptera, Miridae) than yellow sticky traps. Agr Food Sci Finland 10:277–284Google Scholar
  16. Innocenzi PJ, Hall D, Cross JV, Masuh H, Phythian SJ, Chittamaru S, Guarino S (2004) Investigation of long-range female sex pheromone of the European tarnished plant bug, Lygus rugulipennis: chemical, electrophysiological, and field studies. J Chem Ecol 30:1509–1529PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Innocenzi PJ, Hall D, Cross JV, Hesketh H (2005) Attraction of male European tarnished plant bug, Lygus rugulipennis to components of the female sex pheromone in the field. J Chem Ecol 31:1401–1413PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jaccard J, Becker MA, Wood G (1984) Pairwise multiple comparison procedures: a review. Psychol Bull 96:589–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jacobson RJ (2002) Lygus rugulipennis Poppius (Het. Miridae): Options for integrated control in glasshouse-grown cucumbers. IOBC/wprs Bulletin 25:111–114Google Scholar
  20. Jay CN, Cross JV, Burgess C (2004) The relationship between populations of European tarnished plant bug (Lygus rugulipennis) and crop losses due to fruit malformation in everbearer strawberries. Crop Prot 23:825–834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Knudsen JT, Eriksson R, Gershenzon J, Stahl B (2006) Diversity and distribution of floral scent. Bot Rev 72:1–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Labanowska BH (2007) Strawberry fruit damaged by the tarnished plant bug (Lygus rugulipennis L.). J Fruit Ornam Plant Res 15:147–156Google Scholar
  23. Lance DR, Sutter GR (1991) Semiochemical-based toxic baits for Diabrotica virgifera virgifera (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae): effects of particle size, location, and attractant content. J Econ Entomol 84:1861–1968Google Scholar
  24. Landolt PJ, Phillips TW (1997) Host plant influences on sex pheromone behavior of phytophagous insects. Annu Rev Entomol 42:371–391PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Peterson SS, Wedberg JL, Hogg DB (1992) Plant bug (Hemiptera: Miridae) damage to birdsfoot trefoil seed production. J Econ Entomol 85:250–255Google Scholar
  26. Roelofs WL, Cardé RT (1977) Responses of Lepidoptera to synthetic sex pheromone chemicals and their analogues. Annu Rev Entomol 22:377–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Subchev M, Toshova T, Tóth M, Voigt E, Mikulás J, Francke W (2004) Catches of wine bud moth Theresimima ampellophaga (Lep., Zygaenidae: Procridinae) males in pheromone traps: effect of the purity and age of baits, design, colour and height of the traps, and daily activity of males. Z Angew Entomol 128:44–50Google Scholar
  28. Szőcs G (1993) Pheromone traps on the Hungarian market. Növényvédelem 29:191–193 (in Hung.)Google Scholar
  29. Tóth M, Szőcs G (1993) One and a half decade of pheromone studies at the Plant Protection Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Növényvédelem 29:101–109 (in Hung.)Google Scholar
  30. Tóth M, Imrei Z, Szőcs G (2000) Non-sticky, non-saturable, high capacity new pheromone traps for Diabrotica virgifera virgifera (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) and Helicoverpa (Heliothis) armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Integr Term Kert Szántóf Kult 21:44–49 (in Hung.)Google Scholar
  31. Tóth M, Bozsik A, Szentkirályi F, Letardi A, Tabilio MR, Verdinelli M, Zandigiacomo P, Jekisa J, Szarukán I (2006a) Phenylacetaldehyde: a chemical attractant for common green lacewings (Chrysoperla carnea s.l., Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). Eur J Entomol 103:267–271Google Scholar
  32. Tóth M, Csonka É, Szarukán I, Vörös G, Furlan L, Imrei Z, Vuts J (2006b) The KLP + (”hat”) trap, a non-sticky, attractant baited trap of novel design for catching the western corn rootworm (Diabrotica v. virgifera) and cabbage flea beetles (Phyllotreta spp.) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Intl J Hortic Sci 12:57–62Google Scholar
  33. Tóth M, Szentkirályi F, Vuts J, Letardi A, Tabilio MR, Jaastad G, Knudsen GK (2009) Optimization of a phenylacetaldehyde-based attractant for common green lacewings (Chrysoperla carnea s.l., Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). J Chem Ecol 35:449–458PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Varis AL (1972) The biology of Lygus rugulipennis (Het., Miridae) and the damage caused by this species to sugar beet. Ann Agric Fenn 11:1–56Google Scholar
  35. Varis AL (1991) Effect of Lygus (Heteroptera: Miridae) feeding on wheat grains. J Econ Entomol 84:1037–1040Google Scholar
  36. Varis AL (1995) Species composition, abundance, and forecasting of Lygus bugs (Heteroptera: Miridae) on field crops in Finland. J Econ Entomol 88:855–858Google Scholar
  37. Vuts J, Szarukán I, Subchev M, Toshova T, Tóth M (2010) Improving the floral attractant to lure Epicometis hirta Posa (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae, Cetoniinae). J Pest Sci 83:15–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wagner E (1952) Blindwanzen oder Miriden. Die tierwelt Deutschlands und der angrenzenden meeresteile. Verlag von Gustav Fischer, JenaGoogle Scholar
  39. Whitbey RM (1999) Green bean extract-induced oviposition site preference in laboratory reared western tarnished plant bug (Heteroptera: Miridae). Environ Entomol 28:201–204Google Scholar
  40. Wu K, Li W, Feng H, Yuo G (2002) Seasonal abundance of the mirids, Lygus lucorum and Adelphocoris spp. (Hemiptera: Miridae) on Bt cotton in northern China. Crop Prot 21:997–1002CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Plant Protection Institute, HASBudapestHungary
  2. 2.Rothamsted ResearchHarpendenUK

Personalised recommendations