Impact of Fruit Fly Control Programmes Using the Sterile Insect Technique

  • W. R. Enkerlin

Summary

Measuring the impact of area-wide integrated pest management (AW-IPM) programmes, that use the sterile insect technique (SIT) to control fruit fly pests of economic significance, is complex. These programmes affect practically the whole horticultural food chain. In this chapter, the impact of the programmes is assessed by focusing only on the benefits generated to producers and traders of horticultural products, the direct beneficiaries. This is done first by describing the types of benefits accrued from these programmes, second by explaining the factors that shape programme benefits, and finally by presenting several examples to illustrate how the SIT technology, when properly applied for eradication, containment, suppression, or prevention purposes, can generate substantial direct and indirect benefits to the horticulture industry.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

8. References

  1. Barnes, B. N., and D. K. Eyles. 2000. Feasibility of eradicating Ceratitis spp. fruit flies from the Western Cape of South Africa by the sterile insect technique, pp. 449–455. In K. H. Tan (ed.), Proceedings: Area-Wide Control of Fruit Flies and Other Insect Pests. International Conference on Area-Wide Control of Insect Pests, and the 5th International Symposium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance, 28 May–5 June 1998, Penang, Malaysia. Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.Google Scholar
  2. Barnes, B. N., D. K. Eyles, and G. Franz. 2004. South Africa’s fruit fly SIT programme — the Hex River Valley pilot project and beyond, pp. 131–141. In B. N. Barnes (ed.), Proceedings, Symposium: 6th International Symposium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance, 6—10 May 2002, Stellenbosch, South Africa. Isteg Scientific Publications, Irene, South Africa.Google Scholar
  3. Braga Sobrinho, R., R. N. Lima, M. A. Peixoto, and A. L. M. Mesquita. 2004. South American cucurbit fruit fly-free area in Brazil, pp. 173–177. In B. N. Barnes (ed.), Proceedings, Symposium: 6th International Symposium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance, 6–10 May 2002, Stellenbosch, South Africa. Isteg Scientific Publications, Irene, South Africa.Google Scholar
  4. Cáceres, C., K. Fisher, and P. Rendón. 2000. Mass rearing of the medfly temperature sensitive lethal genetic sexing strain in Guatemala, pp. 551–558. In K. H. Tan (ed.), Proceedings: Area-Wide Control of Fruit Flies and Other Insect Pests. International Conference on Area-Wide Control of Insect Pests, and the 5th International Symposium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance, 28 May–5 June 1998, Penang, Malaysia. Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.Google Scholar
  5. Cáceres, C., J. P. Cayol, W. R. Enkerlin, G. Franz, J. Hendrichs, and A. S. Robinson. 2004. Comparison of Mediterranean fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata) (Tephritidae) bisexual and genetic sexing strains: development, evaluation and economics, pp. 367–381. In B. N. Barnes (ed.), Proceedings, Symposium: 6th International Symposium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance, 6–10 May 2002, Stellenbosch, South Africa. Isteg Scientific Publications, Irene, South Africa.Google Scholar
  6. (CASS) California Agricultural Statistics Service. 2002. 2001 County Agricultural Commissioners’ Data. August 2002.Google Scholar
  7. (CDFA) California Department of Food and Agriculture. 2002. Mediterranean Fruit Fly Preventive Release Program. March 2002. CDFA, Sacramento, CA, USA.Google Scholar
  8. (CNCMF) Campaña Nacional Contra Moscas de la Fruta. 2002. Internal report of campaign achievements. Direccion General de Sanidad Vegetal (DGSV), Servicio Nacional de Sanidad, Inocuidad y Calidad Agroalimentaria (SENASICA). México D.F., Mexico.Google Scholar
  9. Cayol, J. P., Y. Rössler, M. Weiss, M. Bahdousheh, M. Omari, M. Hamalawi, and A. Almughayyar. 2004. Fruit fly control and monitoring in the Near East: shared concern in a regional transboundary problem, pp. 155–171. In B. N. Barnes (ed.), Proceedings, Symposium: 6th International Symposium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance, 6–10 May 2002, Stellenbosch, South Africa. Isteg Scientific Publications, Irene, South Africa.Google Scholar
  10. Dantas, L., R. Pereira, N. Silva, A. Rodrigues, and R. Costa. 2004. The SIT control programme against medfly on Madeira Island, pp. 127–130. In B. N. Barnes (ed.), Proceedings, Symposium: 6th International Symposium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance, 6–10 May 2002, Stellenbosch, South Africa. Isteg Scientific Publications, Irene, South Africa.Google Scholar
  11. Dowell, R. V., I. A. Siddiqui, F. Meyer, and E. L. Spaugy. 2000. Mediterranean fruit fly preventative release programme in southern California, pp. 369–375. In K. H. Tan (ed.), Proceedings: Area-Wide Control of Fruit Flies and Other Insect Pests. International Conference on Area-Wide Control of Insect Pests, and the 5th International Symposium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance, 28 May–5 June 1998, Penang, Malaysia. Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.Google Scholar
  12. Economist (The). 2004. Ten years of NAFTA. 3 January 2004.Google Scholar
  13. Enkerlin, D., L. Garcia R., and F. Lopez M. 1989. Mexico, Central and South America, pp. 83–90. In A. S. Robinson and G. Hooper (eds.), World crop pests, Volume 3A. Fruit flies. Their biology, natural enemies and control. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  14. Enkerlin, W. 1997. Economic analysis of management for the Mediterranean fruit fly Ceratitis capitata (Wied.). PhD thesis, University of London, London, UK.Google Scholar
  15. Enkerlin, W. 2003. Economics of area-wide SIT control programs, pp. 1–10. In Recent trends on sterile insect technique and area-wide integrated pest management — economic feasibility, control projects, farmer organization and Bactrocera dorsalis complex control study. Research Institute for Subtropics, Okinawa, Japan.Google Scholar
  16. Enkerlin, W., and J. D. Mumford. 1997. Economic evaluation of three alternative methods for control of the Mediterranean fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Israel, Palestinian Territories, and Jordan. Journal of Economic Entomology 90: 1066–1072.Google Scholar
  17. (FAO) Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2002. Glossary of phytosanitary terms. Reference standard. ISPM/NIMP/NIMF, Publication Number 5. IPPC, FAO, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  18. Gutierrez, J. 1976. La mosca del Mediterraneo Ceratitis capitata, y los factores ecológicos que favorecerían su establecimiento y propagación en México. Secretaría de Agricultura y Recursos Hidraúlicos, Dirección General de Sanidad Vegetal. México, D.F., Mexico.Google Scholar
  19. Heath, R. R., N. D. Epsky, A. Guzman, B. D. Dueben, A. Manukian, and W. L. Meyer. 1995. Development of a dry plastic insect trap with food-based synthetic attractant for the Mediterranean and the Mexican fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 88: 1307–1315.Google Scholar
  20. Hendrichs, J., G. Ortiz, P. Liedo, and A. Schwarz. 1983. Six years of successful medfly program in Mexico and Guatemala, pp. 353–365. In R. Cavalloro (ed.), Proceedings, Symposium: Fruit Flies of Economic Importance. CEC/IOBC International Symposium, 16–19 November 1982, Athens, Greece. A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  21. (IAEA) International Atomic Energy Agency. 1995. Economic evaluation of damage caused by, and methods of control of, the Mediterranean fruit fly in the Maghreb. An analysis covering three control options, including the sterile insect technique. IAEA-TECDOC-830. IAEA, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  22. (IAEA) International Atomic Energy Agency. 1999. Development of female medfly attractant systems for trapping and sterility assessment. IAEA-TECDOC-1099. IAEA, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  23. (IAEA) International Atomic Energy Agency. 2001. Economic evaluation of three alternative methods for control of the Mediterranean fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syrian Arab Republic and Territories under the Jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority. IAEATECDOC-1265. IAEA, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  24. (IAEA) International Atomic Energy Agency. 2002. 2002 Annual Report, Technical Cooperation Project SAF/5/002. IAEA, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  25. (IAEA) International Atomic Energy Agency. 2005. Quantification of environmental benefits of medfly SIT in Madeira and their inclusion in a cost-benefit analysis (PC/4691). IAEA-TECDOC (in press). IAEA, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  26. Kakazu, H. 2002. Economic evaluation of the melon fly eradication project in Okinawa, Japan, pp. 31–54. In Co-operation on fruit fly control research and technology in the Asia-Pacific region. Research Institute for Subtropics, Okinawa, Japan.Google Scholar
  27. Knight, J. 2002. Economic analysis of oriental fruit fly SIT control in Thailand. Report, IAEA Expert Mission. Technical Co-operation Project THA/5/045. IAEA, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  28. Larcher-Carvalho, A., and J. Mumford. 2004. Cost-benefit analysis for the suppression of the Mediterranean fruit fly in the Algarve using the sterile insect technique, pp. 143–153. In B. N. Barnes (ed.), Proceedings, Symposium: 6th International Symposium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance, 6–10 May 2002, Stellenbosch, South Africa. Isteg Scientific Publications, Irene, South Africa.Google Scholar
  29. Larcher-Carvalho, A., C. Monteiro, C. Soares, J. Mumford, J. E. Fernandes, J. P. Carvalho, M. E. Madeira, M. Coelho, P. Elisário, R. Rocha, S. Mangerico, and V. Viegas. 2001. Caracterização da problemática da mosca-do-Mediterrâneo, Ceratitis capitata (Wied.), visando a aplicação da luta autocida no Algarve. Direcção Regional do Agricultura do Algarve, Algarve, Portugal.Google Scholar
  30. Lindquist, D., and W. Enkerlin. 2000. The Chile medfly programme: a review of the programme to prevent the medfly from becoming established in Chile. Report on expert mission. FAO TCP CHI9066. FAO, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  31. Liquido, N. J., L. A. Shinoda, and R. T. Cunningham. 1991. Host plants of the Mediterranean fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae): an annotated world review. Miscellaneous Publications of the Entomological Society of America 77.Google Scholar
  32. (MAG/SAG) Ministerio de Agricultura/ Servicio Agricola y Ganadero. 1995. Chile: a medfly-free country. Pamphlet. Government of Chile, Santiago, Chile.Google Scholar
  33. Mumford, J. D., J. D. Knight, D. C. Cook, M. M. Quinlan, J. Pluske, and A. W. Leach. 2001. Benefit cost analysis of Mediterranean fruit fly management options in Western Australia. Imperial College, Ascot, UK.Google Scholar
  34. Nigg, H. N., S. E. Simpson, and J. L. Knapp. 2004. The Caribbean fruit fly-free zone programme in Florida, U. S. A., pp. 179–182. In B. N. Barnes (ed.), Proceedings, Symposium: 6th International Symposium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance, 6–10 May 2002, Stellenbosch, South Africa. Isteg Scientific Publications, Irene, South Africa.Google Scholar
  35. Olalquiaga, G., and C. Lobos. 1993. La mosca del Mediterraneo en Chile: introduccion y erradicacion. Ministerio de Agricultura, Servicio Agricola y Ganadero, Chile.Google Scholar
  36. Orozco, D., W. Enkerlin, and J. Reyes. 1994. The Moscamed Program: practical achievements and contributions to science, pp. 209–222. In C. O. Calkins, W. Klassen and P. Liedo (eds.), Fruit flies and the sterile insect technique. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA.Google Scholar
  37. Pimentel, D., L. McLaughlin, A. Zepp, B. Lakitan, T. Kraus, P. Kleinman, F. Vancini, W. J. Roach, E. Grapp, W. S. Keeton, and G. Selig. 1991. Environmental and economic impact of reducing U.S. agricultural pesticide use, pp. 679–718. In D. Pimentel (ed.), Handbook on pest management in agriculture. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA.Google Scholar
  38. Pimentel, D., H. Acquay, M. Biltonem, P. Rice, M. Silva, J. Nelson, V. Lipner, S. Giordano, A. Horowitz, and M. D’Amore. 1992. Environmental and economic costs of pesticide use. BioScience 42: 750–760.Google Scholar
  39. Programa Moscamed. 2002. Summary financial report of the Moscamed Programme in Chiapas during the period 1997 to 2000. DGSV/SENASICA, México.Google Scholar
  40. Rendón, P., D. McInnis, D. Lance, and J. Stewart. 2000. Comparison of medfly male-only and bisexual releases in large scale field trials, pp. 517–525. In K. H. Tan (ed.), Proceedings: Area-Wide Control of Fruit Flies and Other Insect Pests. International Conference on Area-Wide Control of Insect Pests, and the 5th International Symposium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance, 28 May–5 June 1998, Penang, Malaysia. Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.Google Scholar
  41. Reyes F., J., G. Santiago M., and P. Hernández M. 2000. The Mexican fruit fly eradication programme, pp. 377–380. In K. H. Tan (ed.), Proceedings: Area-Wide Control of Fruit Flies and Other Insect Pests. International Conference on Area-Wide Control of Insect Pests, and the 5th International Symposium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance, 28 May–5 June 1998, Penang, Malaysia. Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.Google Scholar
  42. Reyes, O. P., J. Reyes, W. Enkerlin, J. Galvez, M. Jimeno, and G. Ortiz. 1991. Estudio beneficiocosto de la Campaña Nacional Contra Moscas de la Fruta. Secretaria de Agricultura y Recursos Hidraulicos (SARH), México.Google Scholar
  43. Schwarz, A. J., J. P. Liedo, and J. P. Hendrichs. 1989. Current programme in Mexico, pp. 375–386. In A. S. Robinson and G. Hooper (eds.), World crop pests, Volume 3B. Fruit flies. Their biology, natural enemies and control. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  44. (SAGAR/IICA) Secretaria de Agricultura Ganaderia y Desarrollo Rural/ Instituto Interamericano de Cooperacion Para la Agricultura. 2001. Campaña Nacional Contra Moscas de la Fruta. Government of México, México D.F., México.Google Scholar
  45. (SAGARPA) Secretaria de Agricultura, Ganaderia, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentacion. 2001. Diario official de la federación (primera seccion). Martes 17 de abril de 2001, Ciudad de México D. F., México.Google Scholar
  46. Seibert, J. B., and V. Pradham. 1991. The potential impact of the Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata (Wied.), upon establishment in California: an update. Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of California. Working paper Number 547.Google Scholar
  47. Tween, G. 2004. MOSCAMED-Guatemala — an evolution of ideas, pp. 119–126. In B. N. Barnes (ed.), Proceedings, Symposium: 6th International Symposium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance, 6–10 May 2002, Stellenbosch, South Africa. Isteg Scientific Publications, Irene, South Africa.Google Scholar
  48. (USDA/APHIS) United States Department of Agriculture/ Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. 1992. Risk assessment: Mediterranean fruit fly.Google Scholar
  49. (USDA/APHIS) United States Department of Agriculture/ Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. 1993. An economic impact assessment of the Mediterranean Fruit Fly Cooperative Eradication Program.Google Scholar
  50. (USDA/APHIS/PPQ) United States Department of Agriculture/ Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service/ Plant Protection and Quarantine. 2000. Effectiveness of SUCCESS 0.02 CB® for the control of fruit flies. Report of the Methods Development Station, Guatemala.Google Scholar
  51. (USDA/NASS) United States Department of Agriculture/ National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2002. Citrus fruits — 2002 summary. Fruit Notes 3-1 (03), September 2002.Google Scholar
  52. (USDA/NASS) United States Department of Agriculture/ National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2003a. Non-citrus fruits and nuts — 2002 preliminary summary. Fruit Notes 1–3 (03), January 2003.Google Scholar
  53. (USDA/NASS) United States Department of Agriculture/ National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2003b. Vegetables — 2002 summary. Vegetables 1–2 (03), January 2003.Google Scholar
  54. Villaseñor, A., J. Carrillo, J. Zavala, J. Stewart, C. Lira, and J. Reyes. 2000. Current progress in the medfly program Mexico-Guatemala, pp. 361–368. In K. H. Tan (ed.), Proceedings: Area-Wide Control of Fruit Flies and Other Insect Pests. International Conference on Area-Wide Control of Insect Pests, and the 5th International Symposium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance, 28 May–5 June 1998, Penang, Malaysia. Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.Google Scholar
  55. Vo, T., W. Enkerlin, C. E. Miller, G. Ortiz, and J. Perez. 2002. Economic analysis of the suppression/eradication of the Mediterranean fruit fly and other fruit flies in Central America and Panama. Report prepared by an ad hoc expert group. Presented to the Organismo Internacional Regional de Sanidad Agropecuaria (OIRSA).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IAEA. Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • W. R. Enkerlin
    • 1
  1. 1.Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in Food and AgricultureInternational Atomic Energy AgencyViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations