Abstract
Mango is the most widely cultivated fruit tree in tropical and sub-tropical Africa. However, the sustainability of this lucrative business is threatened by infestations of fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) that annually inflict heavy economic losses on the industry. The nutritional quality of different fruit species can influence the survival and fecundity of adult fruit flies. This host-insect interaction determines the species composition, distribution and abundance of the major frugivorous tephritids. The economic impact of fruit fly pest species includes direct yield losses and the loss of export markets due to quarantine restrictions implemented to prevent the entry and establishment of exotic fruit fly species in importing countries. The economically important tephritid fruit flies attacking mango in Africa can be divided into two major categories based primarily on their origin, i.e., invasive (Bactrocera dorsalis, Bactrocera zonata and Zeugodacus cucurbitae) and indigenous species (Ceratitis anonae, Ceratitis capitata, Ceratitis catoirii, Ceratitis cosyra, Ceratitis ditissima, Ceratitis fasciventris, Ceratitis quinaria, Ceratitis rosa [recent taxonomic advances have separated C. rosa into two species; C. rosa and C. quilicii], Ceratitis silvestrii, Dacus ciliatus and some unverified records of Ceratitis punctata and Dacus bivittatus). These species are known to have a wide host range and distribution across Africa. Their distribution is also influenced by competitive interactions between native and indigenous species. The host plant status and distribution of fruit fly species is an evolving phenomenon largely due to new invasions, misidentification and identification of hitherto unknown species. For this reason this review provides the current situation but should be updated on a regular basis.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
1 Introduction
Mango (Mangifera indica L.) is the most widely cultivated fruit tree in the Sahel and one of the most important tree crops in tropical and sub-tropical Africa. West Africa alone produces 1.4 million tonnes of mangoes per year – the 7th largest producer in the world. Although widely grown on the continent, mango is not indigenous to Africa, but native to South-East Asia, from where it was introduced to all other tropical regions. According to the FAO-Intergovernmental Sub-Group on Tropical Fruits, mango is one of the four major high-value commodities and ranks amongst the most internationally traded tropical fruit. FAO estimated mango production in 2013 to be around 42.7 million tons, which accounts for nearly 35 % of the world’s tropical fruit production (http://www.fao.org/). Mango world imports were forecast to increase by 1.4 % annually until 2014, 9 % of which would be obtained from Africa (accounting for 2.6 million tons). In Africa over 80 % of the produce comes from smallholders who produce for both local and export markets (Jayne et al. 2001). This provides the much-needed cash income to improve the households’ food and nutritional security as well as their overall livelihoods. Mango is a highly prized exotic fruit on the European market and one of the most important fruit crops grown in tropical and sub-tropical regions (Nakasone and Paull 1998).
However, several constraints hinder the sector from realizing its full potential, key amongst them being fruit flies (Ekesi et al. 2016). The key insect pests that prevent increased and sustainable production are tephritid fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) (Norrbom et al. 1999). Tephritid fruit flies have been recognized as one of the most economically important groups of insects that pose a serious threat to fruit production in Africa (White and Elson-Harris 1992; Ekesi and Billah 2006; De Meyer et al. 2012). Fruit fly infestation leads to heavy losses in yield and quality of fresh fruits. In Africa, between 30 and 40 % of the mangoes produced annually are lost to fruit flies (Ekesi et al. 2006; Goergen et al. 2011). Economically important tephritid fruit flies in Africa are distributed within three genera: Bactrocera Macquart, Ceratitis MacLeay and Dacus Fabricius (White and Elson-Harris 1992). Historically yield losses in mango were due to native fruit flies and estimated to range between 30 and 70 % depending on the locality, season and variety (Lux et al. 2003). However, in 2003, a new species, Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) invaded Africa from the Indian subcontinent (Lux et al. 2003; Mwatawala et al. 2004; Drew et al. 2005). Within only a few years the species had spread across Africa and was detected in more than 30 countries (West, Central, Eastern and Southern Africa) (Drew et al. 2005; Vayssières et al. 2005, 2014; Ekesi et al. 2006; Mwatawala et al. 2004; De Meyer et al. 2007; Correia et al. 2008; Rwomushana et al. 2008; Goergen et al. 2011; Hussain et al. 2015; Isabirye et al. 2015). Mango is considered a primary host of B. dorsalis (Drew et al. 2005; Ekesi and Billah 2006) and direct damage has been reported to range between 30 and 80 % depending on the cultivar, locality and season (Ekesi et al. 2006; Rwomushana et al. 2008; Vayssières et al. 2009). In addition to B. dorsalis, other Bactrocera species of Asian origin such as Zeugodacus cucurbitate (Coquillett), Bactrocera zonata Saunders and Bactrocera latifrons (Hendel) have also been introduced in to mainland Africa, and the islands of the Indian Ocean, thereby aggravating the economic significance of tephritid fruit flies in African horticulture systems (De Meyer et al. 2007; Mwatawala et al. 2004, 2010; Shehata et al. 2008; Elnagar et al. 2010).
In addition to direct losses, indirect losses attributed to quarantine restriction on fruit fly-infested fruits have been enormous and limit export to large lucrative export markets in Europe, the Middle East, Japan and USA, where the insects are quarantine pests. For example, the importation of fruit species that are hosts of B. dorsalis, such as mango, from Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda is currently banned in the Seychelles, Mauritius and South Africa. Trade of horticultural produce between Africa and the USA has been severely restricted by a federal order from the USA banning importation of several cultivated fruit species from African countries where B. dorsalis has been reported (USDA-APHIS 2008; Ekesi et al. 2016). Interceptions and rejection of African mangoes in the European Union (EU) due to fruit flies have been on the increase since the arrival of B. dorsalis (Guichard 2009) with 21 rejections in 2008 increasing to 38 by August 2009. Interceptions have been reported from countries such as Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Mali, Senegal, Cameroon, Central Africa Republic, Kenya and Egypt. The direct and indirect damage caused by B. dorsalis and other tephritid pests continues to have wide reaching socio-economic implications for millions of rural and urban populations involved in the mango value chain across Africa. This has been further compounded by the introduction of uniform and strict quarantine regulations and maximum residue level (MRL) by the EU which now jeopardizes export of mangoes from Africa estimated at 35,000–40,000 tons annually and worth over US$ 42 million (Lux et al. 2003). This value has gradually been eroded as a result of import bans by several countries due to fruit flies (Ekesi 2010).
2 Relationships Between Host Fruits and Fruit Flies
The relationship between host fruits and fruit flies can strongly influence their species composition and distribution. Usually tephritid fruit flies attack the mature fruit of their host plants that are still on the tree, although in some cases immature fruit are know to be attacked as well. Female fruit flies drill into the fruit using their ovipositor and lay their eggs under the skin. This behaviour causes blemishes on the fruit; the presence of such blemishes means that these fruit do not meet the stringent requirements of the export market. The larvae develop inside the fruit, feed on the tissue and then exit from the fruit completing their developmental cycle in the soil. Fruit fly damage may cause immature ripening and abortion in a wide variety of fruiting species (Stephenson 1981; Sallabanks and Courtney 1992). In many cases mature fruit that are harvested contain developing larvae. Fruits have many important ecological attributes that affect the insects that live, feed, mate, oviposit, grow, rest, and hide on them; these attributes determine whether they are suitable hosts for particular fruit fly species (Fletcher 1987; Robinson and Hooper 1989). Larvae cannot change host plant and therefore depend on both the efficiency of female host-choice and the nutritional quality of the fruit for survival. Fruits have a strong influence on fruit flies at this stage in their life cycle when the quality of nutrition they provide can affect the longevity and fecundity of subsequent adults (Bateman 1972). It is therefore important for any fruit fly species to be able to locate suitable hosts to ensure successful development of their progeny. Most fruit fly species in Africa are highly polyphagous and it is not surprising that mango is one of the fruits most commonly attacked by these pests. Although mango appears to be a preferred host for several fruit fly species on the continent, several other host fruit also act as refugia, often becoming important sources of inoculum at the onset of the mango season.
3 Species Composition of Major Mango-Infesting Fruit Flies in Africa
Globally, at least 5000 tephritid species in 500 genera have been recorded to date (Norrbom et al. 1999). The global species database lists 4710 tephritid fruit fly species (www.globalspecies.org), of which 1400 species are known to develop in fruits. Out of these, about 250 species are pests, inflicting severe damage to fruits of economic importance (White and Elson-Harris 1992; Thompson 1998). The number of recognized tephritid species is constantly evolving as a result of new descriptions, recategorization and genetic analysis. White and Elson-Harris (1992) described 915 fruit fly species in Africa comprising 148 genera, out of which 299 species developed in either wild or cultivated fruit. They belong, mainly, to four genera: Bactrocera (562 species), Ceratitis (92), Dacus (300) and Trirhithrum Bezzi (49), although the latter is not economically important. In recent years, the number of species known on the continent has increased largely due to new invasions and identification of hitherto unknown species, although they largely still fall within these four genera.
Most of the fruit fly species in Africa are highly polyphagous with their host ranges overlapping to a varying extent. Mango is one of the most commonly infested fruits that is attacked by a complex of fruit fly species. Several authors have clearly documented that mango is an important host. Economically important tephritid fruit flies attacking mango in Africa can be divided into two categories: invasive species such as the oriental fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel); the melon fruit fly, Zeugodacus cucurbitae (Coquillett); and the peach fruit fly, Bactrocera zonata (Saunders); and indigenous species such as Ceratitis anonae (Graham); the Mediterranean fruit fly (medfly,) C. capitata (Wiedemann); the Mascarenes fruit fly, Ceratitis catoirii (Guérin-Méneville); the mango fruit fly, Ceratitis cosyra (Walker); Ceratitis ditissima (Munro); Ceratitis fasciventris (Bezzi); the Natal fruit fly, Ceratitis rosa (Karsch); Ceratitis silvestrii (Bezzi); the five-spotted fruit fly, Ceratitis quinaria (Bezzi); the cacao fruit fly, Ceratitis punctata (Wiedemann); Ceratitis flexuosa (Walker); Dacus bivittatus (Bigot) and the lesser pumpkin fly, Dacus (Didacus) ciliatus Loew (White and Elson-Harris 1992; Mwatawala et al. 2004, 2009a; Vayssières et al. 2005, 2007; Rwomushana et al. 2008; Isabirye et al. 2016; Goergen et al. 2011; Nboyine et al. 2012; De Meyer et al. 2015). Of these, B. dorsalis, wherever it occurs on the continent is ranked as the most important pest of mango followed by C. cosyra. Other species of fruit flies are ranked as moderate, and are localized in their distribution with varying degree of infestation on mango depending on the agroecology.
4 Relative Abundance and Seasonal Phenology of Mango-Infesting Fruit Flies in Africa
There have been several studies in Africa examining the relative abundance and seasonal phenology of mango-infesting fruit fly species (Copeland et al. 2006; Mwatawala et al. 2006, 2009b; Virgilio et al. 2011; Ndiaye et al. 2012; N’depo et al. 2013; Rubabura et al. 2015; Vayssières et al. 2014). In general, there is a strong correlation between the availability of fruiting host plants and fruit fly populations. The relative abundance and seasonal phenology of fruit flies is highly dependent on the availability of host plants, prevailing weather conditions and the presence or absence of natural enemies that limit pest population growth (Mohamed et al. 2010). There is a distinct pattern in fruit fly population dynamics with numbers reaching a peak at fruit maturity and ripening stage and declining with fruit harvest. Temperature, relative humidity and rainfall are the major climatic factors influencing fruit fly populations.
In West Africa, fruit flies start appearing in orchards during the dry season (between September and January) reaching a peak in February or March and then a second peak in April or sometimes in June before decreasing in July (Vayssières et al. 2014). Furthermore, as precipitation increases from 50 mm in April to a peak of approximately 240 mm in September, there is a consistent increase in relative humidity (45.5–59 %) and a decrease in air temperature (34.9–29.8 °C). These conditions are very conducive to fruit fly population growth. In Ghana, populations of C. cosyra predominate during the period between January and April (Badii et al. 2015). The dominance of this fruit fly species at that time coincides with the fruiting of both early- and late-maturing mango varieties. Populations of C. anonae begin to build up in the middle of May and reach a peak in June before declining in August. In contrast, C. fasciventris and C. ditissima appear from late May to early June. It is also noteworthy that mango flowers can be attractive to Ceratitis adults, as already recorded for other fly species (Aluja and Mangan 2008) which influences pest abundance during the flowering period.
In West Africa, populations of B. dorsalis fluctuate in a similar fashion to native fruit fly species. In the dry season between November and January their populations decline considerably but at the beginning of the rainy season (March-April), populations rapidly build up to reach a peak in April and then a second peak in May or June. In the Guinea Savanna zone of Ghana the period between May and June when B. dorsalis populations are peaking coincides with maturation and harvesting of late-maturing mango cultivars such as Keitt and Kent (Badii et al. 2015). Thereafter the populations drop steadily to their lowest levels between October and December. The same trends have been reported in several West African countries (Vayssières et al. 2005, 2011, 2014; Hala et al. 2006; Ndiaye et al 2012; Nboyine et al. 2013; N’depo et al. 2013).
In Eastern Africa, as exemplified in a study in Lake Victoria Crescent, Uganda, B. dorsalis was present year-round and all stages of mango fruit development were susceptible to attack (Mayamba et al. 2014). Each year infestations peaked between June and July and again between January and February. Trap catches were larger during the major fruiting season than the minor fruiting season. The highest numbers of B. dorsalis were collected when mango was at the physiologically mature or ripening stage (Mayamba et al. 2014).
In Kenya, studies on the seasonal and annual population dynamics of B. dorsalis also showed that peak populations coincided with mango fruiting and maturity in the field (Rwomushana 2008). The availability of mango fruits was the most important factor governing population increase in this species. More B. dorsalis were captured during the season and throughout the year than any other fruit fly species; abumdance of B. dorsalis always significantly exceeded the abundance of the native fruit fly, C. cosyra, from all trap collections (Ekesi et al. 2006).
In Tanzania, the general trend of the population dynamics of fruit flies showed that B. dorsalis peaks at the end of January and mid February while the lowest abundance was observed between September and October (Mwatawala et al. 2006). This trend was influenced by weather as well as the phenological stage of the fruit (Mwatawala et al. 2006). Ceratitis rosa populations peaked between January and March while C. cosyra populations had the inverse pattern with a peak in abundance in November, corresponding with the early-mango season, and a second peak between August and September (Mwatawala et al. 2006, 2009b).
In Sudan, which experiences a winter period, fruit fly populations build up gradually from May with two peaks during the humid months of August and November. Thereafter, the populations decline from December until March (Fadlelmula and Ali 2014). The highest populations of B. dorsalis occur between July and August, which is associated with late-maturing varieties of mango, and the lowest populations occur in March. The highest population of C. cosyra were recorded in August while populations of C. capitata increased with the onset of rainfall during autumn, peaking in November. In the Blue Nile State, the seasonal phenology of B. dorsalis on mango at Damazine and Rosaries orchards were almost the same. The number of adult males captured was very low during the dry period (March – May) when no rainfall was recorded and temperatures were high (40–43 °C), but increased steadily from the start of the rains in May. Population peaks were observed between June and July and again between December and January, depending on temperature, rainfall and availability of the mango fruits (Fadlelmula and Ali 2014).
In Northern Africa, e.g. Egypt, populations of C. capitata occur throughout the year with population peaks reported between September and November and then again between May and June which coincides with ripening of mango, apple and peaches (Hashem et al. 2001). The lowest abundance of C. capitata was recorded in winter (between April and July) probably due to low temperatures. In Upper Egypt, Hashem et al. (1986) reported high C. capitata populations between August and December that had gradually been building up between January and July. In navel orange orchards, three peaks of B. zonata were recorded each year; the highest peak corresponded with the ripening of fruits in November while the other peaks were in April and May. Bactrocera zonata populations were completely absent in December and January.
In South Africa, the relative abundance and seasonal phenology of the three main species, C. capitata, C. cosyra and C. rosa were similar, with populations of all three species increasing during late spring (September and October), reaching a peak in the hot summer months (January to March) and declining into the winter (June to August) (De Villiers et al. 2013). Both C. capitata and C. rosa, population fluctuations varied significantly depending on whether samples were taken in home gardens or commercial orchards (De Villiers et al. 2013). Population peaks occurred earlier in the year in the home gardens (between January and March) compared with commercial orchards where populations peaked between March and May. The peak population levels were also higher for both C. capitata and C. rosa in home gardens than commercial orchards. Fruit fly populations, in particular C. rosa, were sustained in home gardens throughout the year, although during the winter months (June -August) population levels of both species was low.
5 Distribution of Mango-Infesting Fruit Flies in Africa
Regional integration between many African countries allows for trade and free movement of fruits; coupled with the many porous borders between countries, the continent is highly vulnerable to introduction of alien fruit fly species that attack mango. Both invasive and native fruit fly species have been reported to occur all year round, largely due to their ability to infest a wide range of wild host plants and overcome the challenges of geographical barriers (De Meyer et al. 2007; Lux et al. 2003; De Villiers et al. 2013). Here we describe the key fruit fly species that have been reared from mango and their geographic distribution on the continent.
5.1 Bactrocera dorsalis
Bactrocera invadens Drew, Tsuruta & White or the ‘African Invader Fly’, was the name given to the tephritid fruit fly that was introduced to East Africa from Sri Lanka and subsequently invaded the whole of Sub-Saharan Africa. With recent integrative taxonomic studies B. invadens was found to exhibit the same biological characteristics as B. dorsalis which is a complex of species known to cause extensive damage to fruits globally (Drew 1994). Consequently, B. invadens was synonymized with B. dorsalis in 2015 (Schutze et al. 2015). The pest arguably ranks first amongst all fruit fly species on the African continent, both native and exotic, and is responsible for causing the most extensive economic losses to horticultural crops. Losses sometimes exceed 80 % resulting in widespread trade restrictions and significant negative economic and social impacts to farming communities. Since its first report in Kenya in 2003 (Lux et al. 2003), B. dorsalis has spread rapidly and is now present in more than 30 countries beyond its native range.
In Africa it has been recorded from Angola, Benin, Bostwana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Cape Verde, Chad, Comoros Archipelago, Côte d’Ivoire, Mayotte, Republic of the Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Kenya, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Sudan, Swaziland,Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zimbabwe and Zambia (Drew et al. 2005; Vayssières et al. 2005; Mwatawala et al. 2006; Correia et al. 2008; Rwomushana et al. 2008; Goergen et al. 2011; Manrakhan et al. 2011; Virgilio et al. 2011; De Meyer et al. 2008, 2012; Ibrahim Ali et al. 2013; Aidoo et al. 2014; Fekadu and Zenebe 2015; Hussain et al. 2015; Isabirye et al. 2015; http://www.africamuseum.be/fruitfly/AfroAsia.htm). It was discovered in Sri Lanka soon after it was reported from Africa (Drew et al. 2005). For global distribution and predictions see De Meyer et al. (2010).
5.2 Bactrocera zonata
Bactrocera zonata is native to South and Southeast Asia. In Africa, it occurs in northern Africa (Egypt and Libya). Recently it has been reported from several regions in Sudan, suggesting a southward spread and potential risk of invasion for the Sub-Saharan region (De Meyer et al. 2007; Shehata et al. 2008; Elnagar et al. 2010; El-Samea and Fetoh 2006). It is also become established on the Indian Ocean islands of Mauritius and La Réunion (Quilici et al. 2005).
5.3 Ceratitis anonae
Ceratitis anonae is found in Cameroon, Central African Republic, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo (Brazzaville), Gabon, Ghana, Equatorial Guinea, Kenya, São Tomé and Principé, Guinea (Conakry), Mali, Nigeria, Togo, Tanzania and Uganda (White and Elson-Harris 1992; Copeland et al. 2006).
5.4 Ceratitis capitata
Ceratitis capitata is the most widely distributed indigenous fruit fly species. In Africa, it is recorded from Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Liberia, Libya, Malawi, Morocco, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, São Tomé and Principé, Mauritius, Sierra Leone, Seychelles, South Africa, La Réunion, and Zimbabwe (White and Elson-Harris 1992; De Villiers et al. 2013). For global distribution and predictions see De Meyer et al. (2008).
5.5 Ceratitis catoirii
This species has been reported in Mauritius, La Réunion and Seychelles (Duyck et al. 2004).
5.6 Ceratitis cosyra
This species is widespread in Africa and has been reported from Benin, Botswana, Central African Republic, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Guinea, Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe (Javaid 1986; White and Elson-Harris 1992; De Meyer 1998; Copeland et al. 2006; De Villiers et al. 2013).
5.7 Ceratitis ditissima
This species is known to be localized mainly in West Africa, particularly Benin, Cameroon, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Mali, Mozambique Nigeria, Uganda, and Zimbabwe (Vayssières et al. 2007; Foba et al. 2012; Aidoo et al. 2014)
5.8 Ceratitis fasciventris
Ceratitis fasciventris occurs in Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Ghana, Equatorial Guinea, Kenya, Mali, Nigeria, São Tomé and Principé, Tanzania and Uganda (White and Elson-Harris 1992; Copeland et al. 2006).
5.9 Ceratitis flexuosa
This species occurs in Angola, Cameroon, Congo (D.R), Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Niger, Nigeria, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda (URL: http://ZipcodeZoo.com/index.php/Ceratitis_flexuosa)
5.10 Ceratitis punctata
This species is found in Cameroon, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea, Kenya, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe (De Meyer 2000).
5.11 Ceratitis quinaria
Countries with established infestations of C. quinaria include Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso,, Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea, Ghana, Namibia, Malawi, Mali, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan, Togo, Yemen and Zimbabwe (Hancock et al. 2001; White and Elson-Harris 1992; De Meyer 1998; De Meyer et al. 2002; Vayssières et al. 2005).
5.12 Ceratitis rosa
Ceratitis rosa is not highly invasive showing only limited expansion of its distribution beyond its historical native range, which includes Angola, Ethiopia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Malawi, Mali, Mauritius, Mozambique, Nigeria, Islands of Mauritius and La Réunion, Rwanda, Seychelles, Republic of South Africa (KwaZulu Natal), Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe (White and Elson-Harris 1992; Copeland et al. 2006; De Villiers et al. 2013). No reliable records from West Africa have been found (De Meyer et al. 2015), although some authors have reported the pest in Côte d’Ivoire (N’depo et al. 2013).
However, recent integrative taxonomy approaches using larval and adult morphology, wing morphometrics, cuticular hydrocarbons, pheromones, microsatellites, developmental physiology, geographical distribution, behavioural and chemoecological data of Ceratitis rosa have revealed that this species is made up of two entities: ‘R1’, ‘lowland’ or ‘hot rosa’, and ‘R2’, ‘highland’ or ‘cold rosa’ (De Meyer et al. 2015) with varying distribution patterns. The new data led to the conclusion that these two types should be considered as two different species. Taxonomically, the type material of C. rosa belongs to the R1 type (De Meyer et al. 2015), and the R2 type is considered as a new species, which hereinafter is referred to as Ceratitis quilicii (De Meyer et al. in press). We should stress here that many publications in the last decades refer only to C. rosa and were largely unable to differentiate between the two types as different species although they could have likely been referring to C. rosa, C. quilicii, or a mixure of the two. Therefore, C. quilicii is only used in this chapter where there is a clear distinction between R1 and R2 types of C. rosa from published works.
The two species can occur sympatrically in some regions (Malawi, South Africa and Tanzania), but also show a disjunct distribution that appears to be correlated with temperature (Tanga et al. 2015). Only in the Cape and central parts of South Africa is C. quilicii alone present, as well as in the adventive populations on the Indian Ocean islands (Virgilio et al. 2013). Therefore, it is likely that the high altitude types were C. quilicii and low altitude types probably a mix of the two species. The current distribution of the R2 type or C. quilicii includes Botswana, Kenya, La Réunion, Malawi, Mauritius South Africa, Tanzania and Zimbabwe. However, the distribution range of C. rosa and C. quilicii remains non-exhaustive given that samples from many localities in the above listed countries have not been assigned (De Meyer et al. 2015).
5.13 Ceratitis silvestrii
This species has been reported attacking mango in Nigeria, Senegal, Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger (Vayssières et al. 2005)
5.14 Dacus bivittatus
Dacus bivittatus is known from Angola, Benin, Cameron, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe (White and Elson-Harris 1992)
5.15 Dacus ciliatus
Dacus ciliatus is widely distributed in Africa occurring in Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Democratic Republic of Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe (White and Elson-Harris 1992).
5.16 Zeugodacus cucurbitae
Zeugodacus cucurbitae is an invasive pest species in Africa and has been recorded from Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique Niger, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Senegal, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, and Uganda (White and Elson-Harris 1992; Vayssières and Carel 1999; De Meyer et al. 2007, 2015).
6 Relative Abundance of Mango-Infesting Fruit Flies in Africa
Generally, the diversity and species richness of a number of fruit fly species have been shown to increase with altitude while it is the reverse for other species. In addition to climate change, ecological gradients in host plants, parasitoids and predators, as well as physical gradients in temperature, rainfall, and humidity that are encountered along an altitudinal transect can have an impact on the density, diversity and life history of insects including fruit flies; this demands phenotypic flexibility and genotypic adaptability in many species (Bale et al. 2002; Hodkinson 2005; Vayssières et al. 2008). Below we describe the relative density of the major mango infesting-fruit flies in Africa.
6.1 Bactrocera dorsalis
Wherever it is commonly found, B. dorsalis is the most abundant pest on mango and in mango orchards generally. In Uganda, 98.9 % of trap collections were of B. dorsalis (Isabirye et al. 2016) and 97 % in Tanzania (Mwatawala et al. 2009b). In Kenya, 15.3 flies/kg and 87.9 flies/kg were recovered from mango fruits in the lowland and the highland respectively (Rwomushana et al. 2008). In Benin, 53.03 % of adult fruit flies reared from mango were B. dorsalis (Vayssières et al. 2008) and 97.5 % of trap catches in Guinea Bissau were of B. dorsalis (Ousmane et al. 2014). In West and Central Africa (WCA), the pest infestation index for mango was 13.7 flies/kg (Goergen et al. 2011). Across Africa, B. dorsalis has a particuliar affinity for tropical almond and 72 flies/kg have been reported in WCA (Goergen et al. 2011), 264.5 flies/kg in Kenya (Rwomushana et al. 2008) and, in Tanzania, 95.1 % of fruit flies recovered from tropical almond were B. dorsalis (Mwatawala et al. 2009a).
Currently, B. dorsalis is continuing to spread, not only in latitude but also in altitude (Ekesi et al. 2006; Mwatawala et al. 2009a; Geurts et al. 2012). However, the continuous spread and colonization of higher altitudes seems to be limited by climatic conditions, host availability and suitability (Mwatawala et al. 2006; Geurts et al. 2012), and inter-specific competition with cold-tolerant species such as C. rosa (Mwatawala et al. 2006). Bactrocera dorsalis prefers areas at low altitudes with a warm and humid climate where its preferred cultivated host, mango, is present and where it achieves highest abundances (Rwomushana et al. 2008; De Meyer et al. 2010; Geurts et al. 2012; Vayssières et al. 2014).
6.2 Bactrocera zonata
Bactrocera zonata mainly attacks peach, guava and mango (White and Elson-Harris 1992; Allwood et al. 1999; Shehata et al. 2008). It is reported from some of the islands in the Indian Ocean (Mauritius and La Réunion) and is now widespread in northern Africa (Egypt and Libya). There is a potential risk of invasion for Sub-Saharan region (De Meyer et al. 2007). Ni et al. (2012) have predicted that, under current climatic conditions, B. zonata would be able to establish itself throughout much of the tropics and subtropics.
In Egypt B. zonata reaches significantly higher abundances than any of the other native fruit fly species (Elnagar et al. 2010). It appears to prefer warmer conditions and seems well adapted to hot climates. Since its introduction in Egypt, B. zonata has gradually become so widespread that it has surpassed C. capitata as the major fruit pest in Egypt. The abundance of B. zonata is significantly correlated with temperature and relative humidity and its population growth rate is higher than that of native species. The availability of suitable host plant species plays a role in the abundance of B. zonata. (El-Gendy and Nassar Atef 2014). In Mauritius, it mainly feeds on mango, guava, peach and jujube (Sookar et al. 2014). In Egypt, sour orange was the most susceptible host, followed by sweet orange and guava (Amro and Abdel-Galil 2008). At Fayoum governorate (Egypt), B. zonata infested 15.5 % of Navel orange, 10 % of grapefruit, 7 % of mandarin, 5.7 % of sour orange, 0.3 % of lemon and 0.6 % of Valencia orange (Saafan et al. 2005). Potato tubers collected from Giza governorate, Egypt, during 2004 were also found to be infested by B. zonata (El-Samea and Fetoh 2006).
6.3 Ceratitis anonae
Ceratitis anonae is widely distributed throughout western and central Africa and regularly occurs as far east as western Kenya (De Meyer 2001). Its absence from the central highlands of Kenya, an area containing several native and cultivated fruit species that it successfully exploits in western Kenya, suggests that C. anonae has become isolated from the common ancestor of all members of the FAR group sometime after the creation of the Gregory Rift. In Kenya, C. anonae was only successfully reared from fruit collected in the western highlands at altitudes between 1518 and 1630 m above sea level (a.s.l.), where it was sympatric with C. fasciventris (Copeland et al. 2006). Ceratitis anonae was the principal pest of mango in West Africa prior to the arrival of B. dorsalis (Badii et al. 2015). In Benin, 0.21 % of fruit flies successfully reared from mango were C. anonae (Vayssières et al. 2007) and in Uganda C. anonae has been successfully reared from mango, albeit only in low numbers (Isabirye et al. 2016). In Uganda, 0.3 % of trap collections from mango orchards were of C. anonae (Isabirye et al. 2016) and as low as 0.07 % in the Democratic Republic of Congo (Virgilio et al. 2011).
6.4 Ceratitis capitata
Ceratitis capitata, is native pest to sub-Saharan Africa. Because of its its ability to tolerate cooler climates better than most other species of tropical fruit flies, and its wide range of hosts, it is often ranked first amongst the economically important fruit fly species in more cooler climates on the continent. Ceratitis capitata has a widespread distribution in South Africa (De Villiers et al. 2013) and De Meyer (2001) has described its geographic distribution in Africa extensively, including modelling its potential geographic niches on the continent (De Meyer et al. 2008). In Kenya, the host plant relationships and the geographic distribution of the pest have also been described in detail (Copeland et al. 2002).
6.5 Ceratitis catoirii
Ceratitis catoirii is reported to be an endemic species to Mauritius and La Réunion, found mostly in moist regions at low altitude (Duyck et al. 2006a, b). There are few studies on the distribution of this species although it is believed that its limited host range probably plays a role in determining its distribution and abundance. In La Réunion, C. catoirii is very rare and did not seem to have a specific niche, either in terms of climate or in terms of host fruit species. Indeed, there is evidence to suggest that C. catoirii is approaching extinction in La Réunion (Duyck et al. 2008). In recent years, there have also been no records of C. catoirii from Mauritius either from fruit or from area-wide trapping, suggesting that it might have become extinct there already (Sookar et al. 2008).
6.6 Ceratitis cosyra
Ceratitis cosyra is a native African species mainly found on mango. The economic importance of C. cosyra has been growing since the more widespread commercialization of mango and the introduction of exotic mango varieties. Late-maturing varieties of mango reportedly suffer the most due to C. cosyra infestation. Ceratitis cosyra is widespread in sub-Saharan Africa, occurring in at least 27 countries. It is highly adaptable being recorded from near sea level to 2100 m a.s.l. This makes C. cosyra the most widely distributed fruit fly species, particularly on mango (Ekesi et al. 2006). However, studies done in Tanzania by Mwatawala et al. (2006) have shown that C. cosyra was the most abundant species at 781 m and 1105 m a.s.l, and has also been reported from mango and marula at Nguruman, Kenya which is 700 m a.s.l (Rwomushana et al. 2008). The abundance of C. cosyra is correlated with high temperature, low relative humidity and the presence of mango (Geurts et al. 2012). Despite its wide geographical distribution compared to other Ceratitis species, C. cosyra has a restricted host range (Copeland et al. 2006). In South Africa and Swaziland, C. cosyra distribution generally follows a similar pattern to the distribution of marula, an important wild host (Magagula and Ntonifor 2014; De Villiers et al. 2013).
The abundance of C. cosyra is influenced by: the bimodal nature of rainfall in sub-tropical Africa; mixed cultivation of early- and late-maturing mango varieties that ensures mangoes are present in the field for a long time; the fact that mango fruits twice a year in some areas; and the proximity of wild hosts to mango orchards. In eastern Africa, C. cosyra is the most abundant fruit fly species on mango after B. dorsalis. Vayssières et al (2015) reported that C. cosyra was the most abundant species during the dry season in Benin and recovered > 50 pupae per kg of fruit from 15 different mango varieties. Displacement of C. cosyra by other mango-infesting species, especially B. dorsalis has been reported from Uganda (Isabirye et al. 2015), Tanzania (Mwatawala et al. 2009b) and Kenya (Ekesi et al. 2009). In Mali, C. cosyra represented 85.58 % of fruit flies recovered from mango (Vayssières et al. 2007) and 52.25 % in Benin (Vayssières et al. 2005). In Kenya, Copeland et al. (2006) recorded 1723 C. cosyra per 1000 fruits. Significant numbers of C. cosyra larvae have also been recovered from mango in Tanzania (Geurts et al. 2012).
6.7 Ceratitis fasciventris
In 2006, Copeland et al (2006) demonstrated that C. fasciventris was distributed widely throughout the Central Kenyan Highlands, at elevations of up to 2220 m a.s.l., but that it was absent from coastal areas. Populations of C. fasciventris on coffee, Coffea arabica Linnaeus, have also been reported from the Central Highlands of Kenya at Ruiru (1609 m a.s.l) and Rurima (1228 m a.s.l). Ceratitis fasciventris has been reared from fruit collected year-round and is known to be sympatric with C. anonae, both species often occuring together in the same sample of wild fruit (Copeland and Wharton 2006). In the Democratic Republic of Congo the largest numbers of fruit flies captured using lures were of C. fasciventris in the mid altitudinal areas of South Kivu (Rubabura et al. 2015).
6.8 Ceratitis quinaria
Ceratitis quinaria is widely distributed in West Africa and abundant in mango orchards (Vayssières et al. 2005; 2007; 2009; 2011). Trapping and rearing data indicate that C. quinaria is most abundant during the dry season, causing damage only to early-maturing cultivars of mango (Vayssières et al. 2005). There is a positive relationship between high temperature, relative humidity and rainfall with C. quinaria populations (Vayssières et al. 2005). In Mali 4.89 % of fruit flies reared from mango were C. quinaria (Vayssières et al. 2007) and 5.61 % in Benin (Vayssières et al. 2015).
6.9 Ceratitis rosa
Ceratitis rosa, which is also an indigenous African fruit fly has been reported in coast areas and the Central Highlands of Kenya (Copeland et al. 2006), in the Cape region of South Africa (De Villiers et al 2013) and on the islands of Mauritius and La Réunion (White et al. 2001). This species has also been reported as the dominant fruit fly species in temperate fruit species such as peach, apple and pear (Mwatawala et al. 2009b), which are only grown at high altitudes in Africa. High abundances of C. rosa occured during the wet months (February and March) in higher altitude areas in Tanzania (Mwatawala et al. 2009a). For example, at 1305 m there were seven fruit fly species with relatively similar abundances, whereas at 1650 m there were 11 species present but C. rosa was the most abundant. Several studies have also confirmed that C. rosa is a species that can withstand colder temperatures (Duyck et al. 2004, 2006a, b; Grout and Stoltz 2007; De Meyer et al. 2008, 2010; Duyck and Quilici 2002).
Interestingly, C. rosa is considered as potentially invasive as C. capitata and feared to be a global threat due to its cold tolerance and its presence at higher altitudes than C. capitata in Kenya and La Réunion (Copeland et al. 2006). Some studies have shown greater tolerance of C. rosa to lower temperatures than C. capitata and C. catoirii (Duyck and Quilici 2002). This could explain why C. rosa is regularly reared, in small numbers, from fruit of two indigenous plants, two naturalized invasive plants, and an exotic garden ornamental collected in four sites in the Central Highlands of Kenya at altitudes of 1533–1771 m a.s.l. (Copeland et al. 2006). Initially, C. rosa was limited mainly to coastal lowland habitats (5–436 m), where it often co-existed with C. fasciventris (Copeland et al. 2006). Using genetic algorithms for rule-set prediction (GARP), De Meyer et al. (2008) predicted that much of sub-Saharan Africa and Madagascar were highly suitable for C. rosa. In Swaziland, C. rosa was the dominant fruit fly species in guava orchards comprising 68.8 % of all fruit flies collected, and regularly co-exists in guava with C. capitata and C. cosyra (Magagula and Ntonifor 2014). In South Africa C. rosa is mostly found in the cooler regions of the country and positively correlated with precipitation (De Villiers et al. 2013). In Côte d’Ivoire, 0.02 % of fruit flies recovered from infested mango were C. rosa (N’depo et al. 2013).
As described earlier in this chapter (Sect. 5.12), the recently described species C. quilicii occurs sympatrically with C. rosa in some regions and does not show clear geographic isolation (De Meyer et al. 2015). It is therefore highly likely that some of the records of abundance of C. rosa particularly in the highland areas might indeed be of C. quilicii. In Tanzania, a gradual shift was observed with C. rosa and C. quilicii occurring at lower altitudes (with predominance of C. rosa) while only C. quilicii was observed at the highest elevations (Mwatawala et al. 2015). For instance, C. quilicii was more abundant at higher altitudes, reaching a peak at Langali (1268 m asl) while being absent at the lower elevation at Sokoine (550 m asl). However, when examined across an altitudinal transect, C. rosa was more abundant (61.2 %) than C. quilicii (38.8 %) (Mwatawala et al. 2015). It can be inferred that the impact of C. quilicii might be more pronounced on temperate fruits like peach, avocado and apple and earlier host plants records for C. rosa at higher elevations could possibly be C. quilicii.
6.10 Ceratitis silvestrii
Ceratitis silvestrii is an important pest of mango in several parts of West Africa, mainly found co-existing with C. quinaria (Ouedraogo et al. 2010; Sawadogo et al. 2013). Ceratitis silvestrii is most abundant during the dry season causing damage to early-maturing mango cultivars (Vayssières et al. 2005; Vayssières et al. 2009). In Mali, 7.28 % of fruit flies reared from mango were C. silvestrii (Vayssières et al. 2007) and in Benin 2.77 % of fruit flies were C. silvestrii (Vayssières et al. 2015).
6.11 Ceratitis punctata
There have only been records of C. punctata from mango in Cote d’Ivoire. Hala et al. (2006) reported 0.15 % of fruit flies reared from mango were C. punctata and N’depo et al. (2013) reported 0.18 % of of fruit flies were C. punctata.
6.12 Dacus and Zeugodacus species
On La Réunion (1996–1999), Z. cucurbitae (Coquillet) and D. ciliatus are reported to mainly infest a range of 16 cucurbit species (Vayssières and Carel 1999). However, there have been recent records of Z. cucurbitae also infesting mango (Vayssières et al. 2008; Mwatawala et al. 2010; De Meyer et al. 2015). The altitudinal limits of Z. cucurbitae and D. ciliatus are 1200 m and 1400 m, respectively during the dry season. These two species overlap on all cucurbit crops up to 600 m during the wet season and up to 1200 m during the dry season. At least one abiotic factor (altitude) and two biotic factors (host availability, interspecific competition) are responsible for the dominance of these species in La Réunion. Studies in Tanzania showed that Z. cucurbitae was either absent or less abundant at higher elevations along a transect from approx. 600 m a.s.l to 1650 m a.s.l (Mwatawala et al. 2010). However, the exact relationship between these biotic and abiotic factors and populations of Z. cucurbitae and D. ciliatus are currently poorly understood and require further investigation. Dacus bivittatus has also been reported from mango in Côte d’Ivoire. Approximately 0.42 % and 0.07 % of fruit flies reared from mango in Côte d’Ivoire were D. bivittatus, as reported by Hala et al. (2006) and N’depo et al. (2013) respectively.
7 Competitive Displacement Amongst Tephritid Fruit Flies in Mango Agroecosystems
The introduction of species into a new area can alter successional patterns, mutualistic relationships, community dynamics, ecosystem function and resource distribution (Mooney and Cleland 2001). Several studies have shown that, where exotic tephritid species have been introduced into areas already occupied by a native tephritid species, interspecific competition occurs that results in a decrease in numbers and niche shifts of the indigenous species, albeit without leading to complete exclusion (Duyck et al. 2004, 2006a; Ekesi et al. 2009; Mwatawala et al. 2009b). Reitz and Trumble (2002) defined competitive displacement as “the removal of a formerly established species from a habitat through superior use, acquisition or defense of resources by another species”. This can occur through many different mechanisms that are often broadly categorized as exploitation or interference. Factors such as superior competitive abilities, resource pre-emption, release from natural enemies and abiotic factors including temperature and anthropogenic disturbances, are amongst the reasons an invasive species could become dominant (Rwomushana et al. 2009). In many cases, larger body size, shorter developmental period and higher realized fecundity, coupled with superior behavioural traits and the absence of coevolved natural enemies, are major factors behind the competitive advantage of alien invasive species over native ones (Reitz and Trumble 2002). Another factor that influences competitive displacement is niche differentiation between tephritid fruit fly species. For example, the large populations of C. rosa found in the highlands of La Réunion and Kenya (although reported here and elsewhere as C. rosa, recent taxonomic advances suggest this species may be C quilicii), where no other species are found, are suggestive of a climate-dependent change in competitive hierarchy. Host fruit preference, although less well studied, might have similar effects.
The most notable examples of competitive displacement outside Africa include displacement of C. capitata by the Queensland fruit fly, Bactrocera tryoni (Froggatt) in the Sydney area in Australia (Debach 1966) and displacement of the same species by B. dorsalis from the coastal areas in Hawaii in 1945 (Duyck et al 2004). According to Vargas et al. (1995), in the latter case, the displacement was, to some extent, mediated by host fruit species in that C. capitata persists in the lowlands on coffee, their presumed ancestral host in Africa to which it is better adapted.
A well documented case of this phenomenon in Africa is from the Mascarene Islands where the indigenous species, C. catoirii, is reported to have been displaced by C. capitata and C. rosa in La Réunion occurring in small numbers on the east and south coast of the island, while in Mauritius it seems to have disappeared entirely (Duyck et al. 2004). In a series of fruit fly invasions of La Réunion, Duyck et al. (2006b) further reported that the invasive species B. zonata, tended to have a higher rank than the previously established invasive (C. rosa and C. capitata from mainland Africa) and native (C. catoirii) species in the hierarchy. Presumably, the invasion of B. zonata in Mauritius in 1987 and La Réunion in 1991 may have further compounded the displacement of the indigenous species. Duyck et al. (2006b) suggested that, because the endemic fruit fly species in La Réunion had no specific climatic niches, they had become very rare species, and could be at risk of extinction due to invasion (Duyck et al. 2008). Large body size and shorter developmental time of the exotic species, B. zonata, was associated with superior competitive ability, demonstrating the importance of these traits for its superior competitive response (scramble and interference) compared with all the Ceratitis species. (Duyck et al 2006a). Some data also suggest that C. capitata and C. rosa appear to leave detectable chemical signals that influence the laying behaviour of conspecifics. These two species commonly display the ‘dragging ovipositor’ behaviour that is classically associated with hostmarking in tephritids and leads to inhibition of oviposition by conspecifics subsequently visiting the same fruit (Nufio and Papaj 2004) in response to the host-marking pheromones that have been deposited (Roitberg and Prokopy 1983; Nufio and Papaj 2001). Interestingly, B. zonata is able to detect and avoid signals left by C. capitata and C. rosa, while the response of Ceratitis species to each other’s signals is not significant.
In Kenya, Ekesi et al. (2006) speculated that competitive displacement was ongoing because there was a shift in dominance between the native fruit fly C. cosyra and the invasive species B. dorsalis in mango orchards at Nguruman in the Rift Valley Province of Kenya. The results of their study clearly indicated rapid displacement of C. cosyra by B. invadens within 4 years of its detection in the country, and was corroborated by Rwomushana et al. (2008, 2009) who showed that B. dorsalis constituted up to 98 % of the total fruit flies reared from mango in Kenya. Ekesi et al. (2009) argued that displacement interference could be explained by the aggressive behaviour demonstrated between interacting females of these species at laying sites; this behaviour was highly asymmetrical and this gave B. dorsalis a competitive advantage over the resident fruit fly species. Aggressive behaviour has also been been observed by Shelly (1999) who demonstrated that females of B. dorsalis defended oviposition sites on mango against conspecific females by lunging at opponents and driving them off through threat displays; occasionally this escalated to head-butting and pushing. As such it is then perhaps not surprising that both sexes of B. dorsalis would launch several aggressive behaviours against Ceratitis species. In related laboratory experiments, B. dorsalis was observed to out compete C. capitata and inhibit its development by superior scramble competition (Keiser et al. 1974).
In Tanzania, the Relative Abundance Index (RAI) of B. dorsalis to C. capitata, C. cosyra, C. rosa in 19 evaluated hosts was higher (more than 0.5) and in favour of B. dorsalis; in some hosts (sweet orange, Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck; ambarella, Spondias cytherea L. and tropical almond, Terminalia catappa L.) it reached 1, implying that only B. dorsalis was present (Mwatawala et al. 2009a). Certainly, in fruit species such as tropical almond, only B. dorsalis emerged. This trend lends credence to the suggestion that the exotic species is slowly displacing other fruit fly species on the same hosts. Trapping data confirms the dominance of B. dorsalis (Mwatawala et al. 2004, 2006).
Despite these cases of displacement activity there are several reasons why Ceratitis species have not been completely displaced from the mango agroecosystem. Ceratitis species have some advantages that allow for some level of coexistence with B. dorsalis. Ceratitis species have a more specialized host-searching ability and have had close associations with several host plant species over a long period in Africa. Secondly, Ceratitis species have been recorded from several hundred plant species in Africa (Lux et al. 2003; Copeland et al. 2006) compared with the host range of B. dorsalis that currently stands at just over 40 known cultivated and wild host species, though this is growing (Vayssières et al. 2009). It is likely that Bactrocera species can switch to other suitable hosts when there is pressure on the carrying capacity, providing some niche on mango for Ceratitis species to survive. High infestations found on wild hosts like T. catappa, even when mango is present, attest to this. Generally, most Bactrocera species, including B. dorsalis, are believed to be lowland residents (Vargas et al. 1983; Wong et al. 1985; Harris et al. 1986; Ekesi et al. 2006), enabling B. dorsalis to successfully displace Ceratitis species in lowland ecologies. At higher elevations, such as Embu in the Eastern Province of Kenya, C. cosyra remains the dominant species, probably because of the poor tolerance of B. dorsalis to low temperatures (Ekesi et al. 2006). It is therefore probable that B. dorsalis may be restricting populations of C. cosyra to the highlands. Indeed, such phenomena have been reported from Hawaii, where B. dorsalis largely displaced C. capitata from the low-elevation coastal zones and restricted C. capitata populations to cooler climates at high altitudes where B. dorsalis does not occur (Vargas et al. 1995). Subsequently distribution and abundance of the major mango-infesting fruit flies in Africa will continue to be dependent of the competitive interactions between native and exotic species.
8 Host Plants of Mango-Infesting Fruit Flies in Africa
Despite the economic significance of tephritid fruit flies, the host spectrum throughout their distribution range remains limited or is continuously evolving to include hitherto unknown hosts. Several studies have documented the current fruit fly pests in Africa and their host plants (Liquido et al. 1991; White and Elson-Harris 1992; N’Guetta 1994; Copeland et al. 2002, 2004, 2006; Vayssières and Kalabane 2000; De Meyer et al. 2002; Ekesi et al. 2006; Vayssières et al. 2005; Ndzana Abanda et al. 2008; Rwomushana et al 2008; Vayssières et al. 2010). De Meyer et al. (2002) provided an annotated host check list for all Ceratitis species from Africa and Goergen et al. (2011) has provided a detailed listing of host plants for B. dorsalis in West and Central Africa. The host plants for each fruit fly species has been documented from published papers on host plants in Africa and insect records that are publicly available from the Royal Museum for Central Africa (http://projects.bebif.be/fruitfly/index.html Table 5.1). The authorities for each species follow the nomenclature of the International Plant Names Index (www.ipni.org) which was cross referenced with the Global Species Database (www.globalspecies.org), the Plant List (www.plantlist.org) and the Herbarium Catalogue www.kew.org/herbcat) (Global Species 2015; Herbarium Catalogue 2015; IPNI 2015; Plant List 2015).We present a summary of the host plant specialization of different fruit fly species, fruit fly species richness and abundance on particular hosts and the compartmentalization of the plant–fruit fly food web.
9 Future Perspectives
In most African countries, production of fruits and vegetables is recognized as a major source of income generation for rural communities and has been accorded high priority in national development plans. The domestic demand for fruits and vegetables continues to grow, thereby providing ready market outlets for increased domestic production and exports from Africa thereby generating opportunities for smallholder growers. Trade within Africa in agricultural commodities such as fruits has opened up in recent years due to regional integration that has largely removed many tariff and non tariff barriers that had hitherto restricted regional trade. Despite these inherent advantages, many countries in Africa do harbour a wide diversity of plant species that can support exotic tephritid fruit fly pests, and lack the quarantine and phytosanitary capacity to detect and restrict the entry of invasive insect species into their countries. Therefore, trade has become the principal means for unwitting introduction of invasive pests to new areas and constrained the potential growth of the horticultural industry (Ekesi et al. 2016). Owing to their high reproductive capacity coupled with the lack of competitors and efficient natural enemies, and further compounded with the poor quarantine infrastructure in Africa, invasive pests have spread widely to new locations with far reaching social and economic consequences.
Subsequently, many African countries have taken their own measures to address the fruit fly problem utilizing several Integrated Pest Management (IPM) technologies and innovations that have been tested and proven to be effective in field suppresion (Ekesi et al 2016). However, the resources required for fruit fly management remain enormous and elusive for the small-holder grower. Fruit fly management also requires an area-wide approach, particularly monitoring and surveillance to prevent new invasions (Manrakhan et al. 2011). Countries also need to continously scan the horizon for other emerging invasive fruit fly species already reported elsewhere to prevent their entry and establishment. Key among these is B. zonata which has been reported from some of the islands in the Indian Ocean (Mauritius and La Réunion), northern Africa (Egypt and Libya), several countries in the Arabian Peninsula (i.e. Oman, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Yemen) and recently from the Gezira region in Sudan, suggesting a southward spread and potential risk of invasion into the sub-Saharan region (De Meyer et al. 2007). The way that B. zonata has shown its dominance over B. dorsalis in some parts of India is alarming, as such, urgent phytosanitary measures should be enforced to limit further spread. Similarly, B. latifrons is another exotic pest only recently established in Tanzania and Kenya (Mwatawala et al. 2007) which has the potential to increase the complex of pests on Solanaceae. Zeugodacus cucurbitae recently invaded the African continent and is causing havoc to a wide range of cucurbits (Mwatawala et al. 2010; De Meyer et al. 2015). Therefore, trans-regional invasions by these alien invasive pests would require an integrated and system-wide regional approach for their early detection and management.
The synomymization of B. invadens, Bactrocera philippinensis Drew and Hancock and Bactrocera papayae Drew and Hancock as part of the B. dorsalis species complex does suggest that all the ‘sub-species’ could inhabit similar environments and have the potential to establish if they were ever to invade the continent because they infest similar host plants. Additionally, resolution of the cryptic species within the FAR complex through integrative taxonomy approaches concluded that C. rosa belonged to the R1 type and that the R2 type was a new species, C. quilicii. This new information does require new research to understand the geographical limits of both species and resolve the host plant status that was, hirtherto, all attributed to C. rosa. The cases of B. dorsalis and C. quilicii will require a different approach to trade, quarantine and field control measures. Strategies and policies to deal with invasive pests need to be put in place to safeguard the entry of such species, but also to restrict the spread to new areas of those already established in Africa. It also calls for a need for regular surveillance and quarantine to restrict introduction. There should be a concerted effort in all African countries in addressing the fruit fly problem particularly with regards to fruit fly surveillance and management.
Significant gaps still exist in human capacity and technological application to the management of fruit flies that need to be addressed. There is also need for capacity building in taxonomy for both the fruit fly pests and their host plant species. Although, the fragmented structure of horticulture across Africa has greatly impeded the application of area-wide IPM, there still exists the potential for implementation in targeted agroecological zones. The use of Sterile Insect Techniques (SIT), for instance, in isolated ecologies is an approach that could be exploited more (Ekesi et al. 2016). The expansion of research activities on postharvest treatments and the need for standardized treatment regimes is crucial. Therefore, long-term protection of African horticulture against new invasive tephritids should be as important as the short-term suppression of invasive pests that are already present in Africa.
References
Aidoo OF, Kyerematen R, Akotsen-Mensah C, Afreh-Nuamah K (2014) Effect of some climatic factors on insects associated with citrus agro-ecosystems in Ghana. J Biodiversity Environ Sci 5:428–436
Allwood AJ, Chinajariyawong A, Drew RAI, Hamacek EL, Hancock DL, Hengsawad C, Jinapin JC, Jirasurat M, Kong Krong C, Kritsaneepaiboon S, Leong CTS, Vijaysegaran S (1999) Host plant records for fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in South-East Asia. Raffles Bull Zool Suppl 7:92
Aluja M, Mangan RL (2008) Fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) host status determination: critical conceptual, methodological and regulatory considerations. Ann Rev Entomol 53:473–502
Amro MA, Abdel-Galil FA (2008) Infestation predisposition and relative susceptibility of certain edible fruit crops to the native and invading fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in the new valley oases, Egypt. Ass Univ Bull Environ Res 11:89–97
Badii KB, Billah MK, Afreh-Nuamah K, Obeng-Ofori D, Nyarko G (2015) Review of the pest status, economic impact and management of fruit-infesting fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Africa. Afr J Agric Res 10:1488–1498
Bale JS, Masters GJ, Hodkinson ID, Awmack C, Bezemer TM, Brown VK, Butterfield J, Buse A, Coulson JC, Farrar J, Good JEG, Harrington R, Hartley S, Jones TH, Lindroth RL, Press MC, Symrnioudis I, Watt AD, Whittaker JB (2002) Herbivory in global climate change research: direct effects of rising temperature on insect herbivores. Glob Change Biol 8:1–16
Bateman MA (1972) The ecology of fruit flies. Ann Rev Entomol 17:493–518
Copeland RS, Wharton RA (2006) Year-round production of pest Ceratitis species (Diptera: Tephritidae) in fruit of the invasive species Solanum mauritianum in Kenya. Ann Entomol Soc Am 99:530–535
Copeland RS, Wharton RA, Luke Q, De Meyer M (2002) Indigenous hosts of Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Kenya. Ann Entomol Soc Am 95:672–685
Copeland RS, White IM, Okumu M, Machera P, Wharton RA (2004) Insects associated with fruits of the Oleaceae (Asteridae, Lamiales) in Kenya, with special reference to the Tephritidae (Diptera). Bishop Mus Bull Entomol 12:135–164
Copeland RS, Wharton RA, Luke Q, De Meyer M, Lux S, Zenz N, Machera P, Okumu M (2006) Geographic distribution, host fruit and parasitoids of African fruit fly pests Ceratitis anonae, Ceratitis cosyra, Ceratitis fasciventris, and Ceratitis rosa (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Kenya. Ann Entomol Soc Am 99:261–278
Correia ARI, Rego JM, Olmi M (2008) A pest of significant economic importance detected for the first time in Mozambique: Bactrocera dorsalis Drew, Tsuruta & White (Diptera: Tephritidae: Dacinae). Boll Zool Agraria Bachicoltura Serie II 40:9–13
De Meyer M (1998) Revision of the subgenus Ceratitis (Ceratalaspis) Hancock (Diptera: Tephritidae). Bull Entomol Res 88:257–290
De Meyer M (2000) Phylogeny of the genus Ceratitis (Dacinae: Ceratitidini). In: Aluja M, Norrbom AL (eds) Fruit flies (Tephritidae): phylogeny and evolution of behavior. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 409–428
De Meyer M (2001) Distribution patterns and host-plant relationships within the genus Ceratitis (MacLeay) (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Africa. Cimbebasia 17:219–228
De Meyer M, Copeland RS, Lux SA, Mansell M, Quilici S, Wharton R, White IM, Zenz NJ (2002) Annotated check list of host plants for Afrotropoical fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) of the genus Ceratitis. Koninklijk Museum noor Midden-Afrika Tervuren Belge, Zoölogische Documentatie 27:1–91
De Meyer M, Mohamed S, White IM (2007) Invasive fruit fly pests in Africa. Tervuren, Belgium, Royal Museum for Central Africa. http://www.africamuseum.be/fruitfly/AfroAsia.htm. Accessed 15 Sept 2015
De Meyer M, Robertson MP, Peterson AT, Mansell MW (2008) Ecological niches and potential geographical distributions of Mediterranean fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata) and Natal fruit fly (Ceratitis rosa). J Biogeogr 35:270–281
De Meyer M, Robertson MP, Mansell MW, Ekesi S, Tsuruta K, Mwaiko W, Vayssiéres J-F, Peterson AT (2010) Ecological niche and potential geographic distribution of the invasive fruit fly Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera, Tephritidae). Bull Entomol Res 100:35–48
De Meyer M, Quilici S, Franck A, Chadhouliati AC, Issimaila MA, Youssoufa MA, Abdoul-Karime A-L, Barbet A, Attié M, White IM (2012) Records of frugivorous fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae: Dacini) from the Comoro archipelago. Afr Invertebr 53:69–77
De Meyer M, Delatte MH, Mwatawala M, Quilici S, Vayssières JF, Virgilio M (2015) A review of the current knowledge on Zeugodacus cucurbitae (Coquillett) (Diptera, Tephritidae) in Africa, with a list of species included in Zeugodacus. ZooKeys 540:539–557
De Meyer M, Mwatawala M, Copeland RS, Virgilio M (in press) Description of new Ceratitis species (Diptera: Tephritidae) from Africa. Europ J Taxon
De Villiers M, Manrakhan A, Addison P, Hattingh V (2013) The distribution, relative abundance, and seasonal phenology of Ceratitis capitata, Ceratitis rosa, and Ceratitis cosyra (Diptera: Tephritidae) in South Africa. Environ Entomol 42:831–840
Debach P (1966) Competitive displacement and coexistence principles. Ann Rev Entomol 11:183–212
Drew RAI (1994) The Bactrocera dorsalis complex of fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae: Dacinae) in Asia. Bull Entomol Res Supplement Series Supplement 2, p 68
Drew RAI, Tsuruta K, White IM (2005) A new species of pest fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae: Dacinae) from Sri Lanka and Africa. Afr Entomol 13:149–154
Duyck PF, Quilici S (2002) Survival and development of different life stages of three Ceratitis spp. (Diptera: Tephritidae) reared at five constant temperatures. Bull Entomol Res 92:461–469
Duyck PF, David P, Quilici S (2004) A review of relationships between interspecific competition and invasions in fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae). Ecol Entomol 29:511–520
Duyck PF, David P, Guillemette J, Brunel C, Dupont R, Quilici S (2006a) Importance of competition mechanisms in successive invasions by polyphagous tephritids in la Réunion. Ecology 87:1770–1780
Duyck PF, David P, Quilici S (2006b) Climatic niche partitioning following successive invasions by fruit flies in La Réunion. J Anim Ecol 75:518–526
Duyck PF, David P, Sandrine P, Quilici S (2008) Can host-range allow niche differentiation of invasive polyphagous fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in La Réunion? Ecol Entomol 33:439–452
Ekesi S (2010) Combating Fruit Flies in Eastern and Southern Africa (COFESA): Elements of a Strategy and Action Plan for a Regional Cooperation Program. Available at:http://www.globalhort.org/network-communities/fruit-flies/
Ekesi S, Billah MK (2006) A field guide to the management of economically important Tephritid fruit flies in Africa. icipe Science Press, Nairobi, p 106. ISBN 92 9064 179 7
Ekesi S, Nderitu PW, Rwomushana I (2006) Field infestation, life history and demographic parameters of Bactrocera dorsalis Drew, Tsuruta & White, a new invasive fruit fly species in Africa. Bull Entomol Res 96:379–386
Ekesi S, Billah MK, Nderitu PW, Lux SA, Rwomushana I (2009) Evidence for competitive displacement of the mango fruit fly, Ceratitis cosyra by the invasive fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) on mango and mechanisms contributing to the displacement. J Econ Entomol 102:981–991
Ekesi S, De Meyer M, Mohamed SA, Virgilio M, Borgemeister C (2016) Taxonomy, ecology, and management of native and exotic fruit fly species in Africa. Ann Rev Entomol 61:219–238
El-Gendy IR, Nassar Atef MK (2014) Delimiting survey and seasonal activity of peach fruit fly, Bactrocera zonata and Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) at El-Beheira Governorate, Egypt. Egypt Acad J Biol Sci 7:157–169
Elnagar S, El-Sheikh M, Hashem A, Afia Y (2010) Recent invasion by Bactrocera zonata (Saunders) as a new pest competing with Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) in attacking fruits in Egypt. Asp Appl Biol 104:97–102
El-Samea SAA, Fetoh BEA (2006) New record of Bactrocera zonata (Saundera) (Diptera: Tephritidae) on potatoes in Egypt. Egypt J Agr Res 84:61–63
Fadlelmula AA, Ali EBM (2014) Fruit fly species, their distribution, host range and seasonal abundance in Blue Nile State, Sudan. Persian Gulf Crop Prot 3:17–24
Fekadu M, Zenebe T (2015) Status of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) in mango-producing areas of Arba Minch, Southwestern Ethiopia. J Insect Sci doi. doi:10.1093/jisesa/ieu166
Fletcher BS (1987) The biology of dacine fruit flies. Ann Rev Entomol 32:115–144
Foba CN, Afreh-Nuamah K, Billah MK, Obeng-Ofori D (2012) Species composition of fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in the citrus museum at the Agricultural Research Centre (ARC), Kade, Ghana. Int J Trop Insect Sci 32:12–23
Geurts K, Mwatawala M, De Meyer M (2012) Indigenous and invasive fruit fly diversity along an altitudinal transect in central Tanzania. J Insect Sci 12:1–18 available online: www.insectscience.org/12.12
Goergen G, Vayssiéres J-F, Gnanvossou D, Tindo M (2011) Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae), a new invasive fruit fly pest for the Afrotropical region: host plant range and distribution in West and Central Africa. Environ Entomol 40:844–854
Grout TG, Stoltz KC (2007) Developmental rates at constant temperature of three economically important Ceratitis spp. (Diptera: Tephritidae) from Southern Africa. Environ Entomol 36:1310–1317
Guichard C (2009) EU interceptions rising in 2009. In: Fighting fruit flies regionally in sub Saharan Africa. Information Letter No. 4 October 2009. COLEACP/CIRAD, p 4
Hala N, Quilici S, Gnago AJ, N’Depo OR, N’Da Adopo A, Kouassi P, Allou K (2006) Status of fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Côte d’Ivoire and implications for mango exports. In: Fruit flies of economic importance, from basic to applied knowledge. Proceedings of the 7th international symposium on fruit flies of economic importance, Salvador, Brazil 10–15 September 2006, p 233–239
Hancock DL, Kirk-Spriggs AH, Marais E (2001) An annotated checklist and provisional atlas of Namibian Tephritidae (Diptera: Schizophora). Cimbebasia 17:41–72
Harris EJ, Takara JM, Nishida T (1986) Distribution of the melon fly Dacus cucurbitae (Diptera: Tephritidae) and host plants on Kauai, Hawaiian Islands. Environ Entomol 15:488–493
Hashem AG, Saafan MH, Abdelghaffar M (1986) Population fluctuation and rate of infestation of Medfly, Ceratitis capitata in Upper Egypt. AlAzher J Agric Res 7:345–353
Hashem AG, Mohamed SMA, El-Wakkad MF (2001) Diversity and abundance of Mediterranean and Peach fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in different horticultural orchards. Egyptian J App Sci 16:303–314
Hodkinson ID (2005) Terrestrial insects along elevation gradients: species and community responses to altitude. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 80:489–513
Hussain MA, Haile A, Ahmad T (2015) Infestation of two tephritid fruit flies, Bactrocera dorsalis (syn. B. invadens) and Ceratitis capitata, in guava fruits from selected regions of Eritrea. Afr Entomol 23:510–513
Ibrahim Ali SA, Mahmoud MEE, Man-Qun W, Mandiana DM (2013) Survey and monitoring of some Tephritidae of fruit trees and their host range in River Nile State, Sudan. Pers Gulf Crop Prot 2:32–39
Isabirye BE, Akol AM, Mayamba A, Nankinga CK, Rwomushana I (2015) Species composition and community structure of fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) across major mango-growing regions in Uganda. Int J Trop Insect Sci 35:69–79
Isabirye BE, Akol AM, Muyinza H, Masembe C, Rwomushana I, Nankinga CK (2016) Fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) host status and relative infestation of selected mango cultivars in three agro ecological zones in Uganda. Int J Fruit Sci 16:23–41
Javaid I (1986) Causes of damage to some wild mango fruit trees in Zambia. Int Pest Control 28:98–99
Jayne TS, Yamano T, Nyoro J, Awuor T (2001). Do farmers really benefit from high food prices? Balancing rural interests in Kenya’s maize pricing and marketing policy. Tegemeo Working Paper 2B. Egerton University, Tegemeo Institute of Agricultural Policy and Development. pp 28
Keiser I, Kobayashi RM, Miyashita DH, Harris EJ, Schneider EJ, Chambers DL (1974) Suppression of Mediterranean fruit flies by oriental fruit flies in mixed infestations in guava. J Econ Entomol 67:355–360
Liquido NJ, Shinoda LA, Cunningham RT (1991) Host plants of the Mediterranean fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae): an annotated world review. Misc Publ Entomol Soc Am 77:1–52
Lux SA, Copeland RS, White IM, Manrakhan A, Billah MK (2003) A new invasive fruit fly species from the Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) group detected in east Africa. Insect Sci Appl 23:355–361
Magagula CN, Ntonifor N (2014) Species composition of fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in feral guavas (Psidium guajava Linnaeus) and marula (Sclerocarya birrea (A. Richard) Hochstetter) in a subsistence savanna landscape: implications for their control. Afr Entomol 22:320–329
Manrakhan A, Hattingh V, Venter J-H, Holtzhausen M (2011) Eradication of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Limpopo province, South Africa. Afr Entomol 19:650–659
Mayamba A, Nankinga CK, Isabirye B, Akol AM (2014) Seasonal population fluctuations of Bactrocera invadens (Diptera: Tephritidae) in relation to mango phenology in the Lake Victoria Crescent, Uganda. Fruits 69:473–480
Mohamed SA, Ekesi S, Hanna R (2010) Old and new host-parasitoid associations: parasitism of the invasive fruit fly Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) and five African fruit fly species by Fopius arisanus, an Asian opiine parasitoid. Biocontrol Sci Technol 20:183–196
Mooney HA, Cleland EE (2001) The evolutionary impact of invasive species. PNAS 98:5446–5451
Mwatawala MW, White IM, Maerere AP, Senkondo FJ, De Meyer M (2004) A new invasive Bactrocera species (Diptera; Tephritidae) in Tanzania. Afr Entomol 12:154–156
Mwatawala MW, De Meyer M, Makundi RH, Maerere AP (2006) Seasonality and host utilization of the invasive fruitfly Bactrocera dorsalis (Dipt., Tephritidae) in Central Tanzania. J Appl Entomol 130:530–537
Mwatawala M, De Meyer M, White IM, Maerere A, Makundi RH (2007) Detection of the solanum fruit fly, Bactrocera latifrons (Hendel) in Tanzania (Dipt., Tephritidae). J Appl Entomol 131:501–503
Mwatawala MW, De Meyer M, Makundi RH, Maerere AP (2009a) Host range and distribution of fruit-infesting pestiferous fruit flies (Diptera, Tephritidae) in selected areas of Central Tanzania. Bull Entomol Res 99:629–641
Mwatawala MW, De Meyer M, Makundi RH, Maerere AP (2009b) An overview of Bactrocera (Diptera: Tephritidae) invasions and their speculated dominancy over native fruit fly species in Tanzania. J Entomol 6:18–27
Mwatawala M, Maerere AP, Makund R, De Meyer M (2010) Incidence and host range of the melon fruit fly Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett) (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Central Tanzania. Int J Pest Man 56:265–273
Mwatawala M, Virgilio M, Joseph J, De Meyer M (2015) Niche partitioning among two Ceratitis rosa morphotypes and other Ceratitis pest species (Diptera, Tephritidae) along an altitudinal transect in Central Tanzania. ZooKeys 540:429–442
N’depo OS, Hala N, N’da Adopo A, Coulibaly F, Kouassi KP, Vayssières J-F, De Meyer M (2013) Fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) populations dynamic in mangoes production zone of Côte-d’Ivoire. Agric Sci Res J 3:352–363
N’Guetta K (1994) Inventory of insect fruit pests in northern Cote d’Ivoire. Fruits 49:430–443
Nakasone HY, Paull RE (1998) Tropical fruits. CAB International, Oxon, 443 pp
Nboyine JA, Billah MK, Afreh-Nuamah K (2012) Species range of fruit flies associated with mango in Ghana. J Appl Biosci 52:3696–3703
Nboyine JA, Abudulai M, Nutsugah SK, Badii B, Acheampong A (2013) Population dynamics of fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) species associated with mango in the Guinea savanna agro-ecological zone of Ghana. Int J Agric Sci 3:450–454
Ndiaye O, Vayssieres J-F, Rey JY, Ndiaye S, Diedhiou PM, Ba CT, Diatta P (2012) Seasonality and range of fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) host plants in orchards in Niayes and the Thiès Plateau (Senegal). Fruits 67:311–331
Ndzana Abanda FX, Quilici S, Vayssiéres JF, Kouodiekong L, Woin N (2008) Inventory of fruit fly species on guava in the area of Yaounde, Cameroon. Fruits 63:19–26
Ni WL, Li ZH, Chen HJ, Wan FH, Qu WW, Zhang Z, Kriticos DJ (2012) Including climate change in pest risk assessment: the peach fruit fly, Bactrocera zonata (Diptera: Tephritidae). Bull Entomol Res 102:173–183
Norrbom AL, Carroll LE, Thompson FC, White IM, Freidberg A (1999) Systematic database of names. In: Thompson FC (ed) Fruit fly expert identification system and systematic information database. Backhuys Pub. for the North American Dipterists’ Society, Leiden, p 524
Nufio CR, Papaj DR (2001) Host marking behavior in phytophagous insects and parasitoids. Entomol Expet Appl 99:273–293
Nufio CR, Papaj DR (2004) Host marking behavior as a quantitative signal of infestation levels in host use by the walnut fly, Rhagoletis juglandis. J Ecol Entomol 29:336–344
Ouedraogo SN, Vayssières J-F, Dabiré AR, Rouland-Lefèvre C (2010) Fruitiers locaux hôtes des mouches de fruits (Diptera: Tephritidae) inféodées aux manguiers dans l’ouest du Burkina Faso: identification et taux d’infestation/Wild fruit crops as hosts of mango fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in western Burkina Faso: identification and infestation rates (in French). Cereal Sci Bo 4:36–41
Ousmane ZK, Aboubacar K, Da Costa Correia ZA, Kadi Kadi HA, Abdourahamane TD (2014) Agro-ecological management of mango fruit flies in the northern part of Guinea-Bissau. J Appl Biosci 75:6250–6258
Quilici S, Duyck PF, Rousse P, Gourdon F, Simiand C, Franck A (2005) La mouche de la pêche sur mangue, goyave, etc. A La Réunion, évolution des recherches et des méthodes de lutte. Phytoma 584:44–47
Reitz SR, Trumble JT (2002) Competitive displacement among insects and arachnids. Ann Rev Entomol 47:435–465
Robinson AS, Hooper G (1989) Fruit flies: their biology, natural enemies and control, Vol. 3A and 3B. Elsevier, New York, p 81
Roitberg BD, Prokopy RJ (1983) Influence of host fruit deprivation on apple maggot fly response to oviposition deterring pheromone. Physiol Entomol 8:69–72
Rubabura KJA, Munyuli BMT, Bisimwa BE, Kazi KS (2015) Invasive fruit fly, Ceratitis species (Diptera: Tephritidae), pests in south Kivu region, eastern of Democratic Republic of Congo. Int J Innov Sci Res 16:403–408
Rwomushana I (2008) Bioecology of the new invasive fruit fly Bactrocera invadens (Diptera:Tephritidae) in Kenya and its interaction with indigenous mango-infesting fruit fly species. Ph.D thesis, Kenyatta University. http://ir-library.ku.ac.ke/handle/123456789/155/browse?value=Ivan%2C+Rwomushana&type=author
Rwomushana I, Ekesi S, Gordon I, Ogol CKPO (2008) Host plants and host preference studies for Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Kenya, a new invasive fruit fly species in Africa. Ann Entomol Soc Am 101:331–340
Rwomushana I, Ekesi S, Gordon I, Ogol CKPO (2009) Mechanisms contributing to the competitive success of the invasive fruit fly Bactrocera dorsalis over the indigenous mango fruit fly Ceratitis cosyra: the role of temperature and resource pre-emption. Entomol Exp Appl 133:27–37
Saafan MH, Foda SM, Abdel-Hafez TA (2005) Ecological studies on Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata (Wied.) and peach fruit fly, Bactrocera zonata (Saund.) in apricot orchards. Egypt J Agric Res 83:928–934
Sallabanks R, Courtney SP (1992) Frugivory, seed predation, and insect-vertebrate interactions. Ann Rev Entomol 37:377–400
Sawadogo A, Gnankine O, Badolo A, Ouedraogo A, Ouedraogo S, Dabiré R, Sanon A (2013) First report of the fruits flies, Ceratitis quinaria and Ceratitis silvestri, on yellow plum Ximenia americana in Burkina Faso, West Africa. The Open Ent J 7:9–15
Schutze MK, Mahmood K, Pavasovic A, Bo W, Newman J, Clarke AR, Krosch MN, Cameron SL (2015) One and the same: integrative taxonomic evidence that Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) is the same species as the Oriental fruit fly Bactrocera dorsalis. Syst Entomol 40:472–486
Shehata NF, Younes MWF, Mahmoud YA (2008) Biological studies on the peach fruit fly, Bactrocera zonata (Saunders) in Egypt. J Appl Sci Res 4:1103–1106
Shelly TD (1999) Defense of oviposition sites by female Oriental fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae). Fla Entomol 82:339–346
Sookar P, Permalloo S, Gungah B, Alleck M, Seewooruthun SI, Soonnoo AR (2008) An area wide control of fruit flies in Mauritius. In: Fruit flies of economic importance: from basic to applied knowledge. Proceedings of the 7th international symposium on fruit flies of economic 1mportance Salvador, Brazil, 10–15 September 2006, p 261–269
Sookar P, Alleck M, Ahseek N, Permalloo S, Bhagwant S, Chang CL (2014) Artificial rearing of the peach fruit fly Bactrocera zonata (Diptera: Tephritidae). Int J Trop Insect Sci 34:99–107
Stephenson AG (1981) Flower and fruit abortion: proximate causes and ultimate functions. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 12:253–279
Tanga CM, Manrakhan A, Daneel JH, Mohamed SA, Fathiya K, Ekesi S (2015) Comparative analysis of development and survival of two Natal fruit fly Ceratitis rosa Karsch (Diptera, Tephritidae) populations from Kenya and South Africa. ZooKeys 540:467–487
The Global Species Database (2015) Myers Enterprises II 2009–2015. Available from http://www.globalspecies.org. Accessed 16 Sept 2015
The Herbarium Catalogue (2015) Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. http://www.kew.org/herbcat. Accessed 16 Sept 2015
The International Plant Names Index (2015) http://www.ipni.org. Accessed 16 Sept 2015
The Plant List (2015). http://www.theplantlist.org. Accessed 16 Sept 2015
Thompson FC (1998) Fruit fly expert identification system and systematic information database. The international journal of the North American Dipteristsʼ Society, vol 9. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, 524 pp
USDA-APHIS (2008) Federal import quarantine order for host materials of Bactrocera invadens (Diptera: Tephritidae), invasive fruit fly species. USDA-APHIS, Riverdale, Maryland, USA
Vargas RI, Nishida T, Beardsley JW (1983) Distribution and abundance of Dacus dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) in native and exotic forest areas of Kauai. Environ Entomol 12:1185–1189
Vargas RI, Walsh WA, Nishida T (1995) Colonization of newly planted coffee fields: dominance of Mediterranean fruit fly over Oriental fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae). J Econ Entomol 88:620–627
Vayssières JF, Carel Y (1999) Les Dacini (Diptera: Tephritidae) inféodées aux Cucurbitaceae à la Réunion: gamme de plantes hôtes et stades phénologiques préférentiels des fruits au moment de la piqûre pour des espèces cultivées. Annal Soc Entomol France 35:197–202
Vayssières JF, Kalabane S (2000) Inventory and fluctuations of the catches of Diptera Tephritidae associated with mangoes in Coastal Guinea. Fruits 55:259–270
Vayssières JF, Goergen G, Lokossou O, Dossa P, Akponon C (2005) A new Bactrocera species in Benin among mango fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) species. Fruits 60:371–377
Vayssières JF, Sanogo F, Noussourou M (2007) Inventory of the fruit fly species (Diptera: Tephritidae) linked to the mango tree in Mali, and tests of integrated control. Fruits 62:329–341
Vayssières JF, Korie S, Coulibaly O, Temple L, Boueyi S (2008) The mango tree in northern Benin: cultivar inventory, yield assessment, infested stages and loss due to fruit flies (Diptera, Tephritidae). Fruits 63:335–348
Vayssières J-F, Korie S, Ayegnon D (2009) Correlation of fruit fly (Diptera Tephritidae) infestation of major mango cultivars in Borgou (Benin) with abiotic and biotic factors and assessment of damage. Crop Prot 28:477–488
Vayssières JF, Adandonon A, Sinzogan A, Korie S (2010) Diversity of fruit fly species (Diptera: Tephritidae) associated with citrus crops (Rutaceae) in southern Benin in 2008–2009. Int J Biol Chem Sci 4:1881–1897
Vayssières JF, Vannière GPS, Barry O, Hanne AM, Niassy A, Ndiaye M, Delhove G, Korie S (2011) Preliminary inventory of fruit fly species (Diptera, Tephritidae) in mango orchards in the Niayes region, Senegal, in 2004. Fruits 66:91–107
Vayssières JF, Sinzogan A, Adandonon A, Rey J-Y, Dieng EO, Camara K, Sangaré M, Ouedraogo S, Hala N, Sidibé A, Keita Y, Gogovor G, Korie S, Coulibaly O, Kikissagbé C, Tossou A, Billah M, Biney K, Nobime O, Diatta P, N’dépo R, Noussourou M, Traoré L, Saizonou S, Tamo M (2014) Annual population dynamics of mango fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in West Africa: socio-economic aspects, host phenology and implications for management. Fruits 69:207–222
Vayssières JF, De Meyer M, Ouagoussounon I, Sinzogan A, Adandonon A, Korie S, Wargui R, Anato F, Houngbo H, Didier C, De Bon H, Goergen G (2015) Seasonal abundance of mango fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) and ecological implications for their management in mango and cashew Orchards in Benin (Centre & North). J Econ Entomol 108:2213–2230
Virgilio M, Backeljau T, Emeleme R, Juakali J, De Meyer M (2011) A quantitative comparison of frugivorous tephritids (Diptera: Tephritidae) in tropical forests and rural areas of the Democratic Republic of Congo. Bull Entomol Res 101:591–597
Virgilio M, Delatte H, Quilici S, Backeljau T, De Meyer M (2013) Cryptic diversity and gene flow among three African agricultural pests: Ceratitis rosa, Ceratitis fasciventris and Ceratitis anonae (Diptera, Tephritidae). Mol Ecol 22:2526–2539
White IM, Elson-Harris MM (1992) Fruit flies of economic importance: their identification and bionomics. CAB International, Wallingford, p 601
White IM, De Meyer M, Stonehouse J (2001) A review of the native and introduced fruit flies (Diptera, Tephritidae) in the Indian Ocean Islands of Mauritius, Réunion, Rodrigues and Seychelles. In: Proceedings of the Indian Ocean commission regional fruit fly symposium, Mauritius, 5-9th June 2000, p15–21
Wong TMY, McInnis DO, Mochizuki N (1985) Seasonal distribution and abundance of adult male oriental fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Kula, Maui, Hawaii. J Econ Entomol 78:1267–1271
Acknowledgements
The icipe-led African Fruit Fly Programme (AFFP) received funding from GIZ/BMZ, Biovision, EU, and DFID for its activities.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rwomushana, I., Tanga, C.M. (2016). Fruit Fly Species Composition, Distribution and Host Plants with Emphasis on Mango-Infesting Species. In: Ekesi, S., Mohamed, S., De Meyer, M. (eds) Fruit Fly Research and Development in Africa - Towards a Sustainable Management Strategy to Improve Horticulture. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43226-7_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43226-7_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-43224-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-43226-7
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)