Skip to main content
ARS Home » Pacific West Area » Hilo, Hawaii » Daniel K. Inouye U.S. Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center » Tropical Crop and Commodity Protection Research » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #336159

Research Project: Detection, Control and Area-wide Management of Fruit Flies and Other Quarantine Pests of Tropical/Subtropical Crops

Location: Tropical Crop and Commodity Protection Research

Title: Host plants of Solanum fruit fly, Bactrocera latifrons(Hendel)(Diptera: Tephritidae); and provisional list of suitable host plants of Bactrocera(Bactrocera)latifrons(Hendel)(Diptera: Tephritidae), Version 1.0

Author
item McQuate, Grant
item Liquido, Nicanor

Submitted to: USDA CPHST Online Database
Publication Type: Literature Review
Publication Acceptance Date: 9/12/2016
Publication Date: 9/12/2016
Citation: Mcquate, G.T., Liquido, N.J. 2016. Host plants of Solanum fruit fly, Bactrocera latifrons(Hendel)(Diptera: Tephritidae); and provisional list of suitable host plants of Bactrocera(Bactrocera)latifrons(Hendel)(Diptera: Tephritidae), Version 1.0. USDA CPHST Online Database. Available: https://coffhi.cphst.org/.

Interpretive Summary: Bactrocera latifrons(Hendel) is a tephritid fruit fly of primarily Asian distribution (e.g.,Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, Burma, China (Fujian, Yunnan, Hong Kong, Hainan), Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan, and Brunei), but its range has expanded through invasions of Hawaii, where it was first detected in 1983; Okinawa, Japan where it was confirmed to exist on Yonaguni Island in 1984; Tanzania, where it was detected in 2006; and Kenya, where it was first detected in 2007. Its recovery in detection trapping in California, along with the documented invasions into countries outside its native distribution, show that this species poses a risk of invasion into areas where it does not presently exist. As with other tephritid fruit fly species, establishment of B.latifrons can have significant economic consequences, including damage and loss of food production, as well as inspection of imported susceptible commodities and requirements for implementation of costly quarantine treatments to permit export of commodities susceptible to infestation by B.latifrons. We present here an overview of all host plants of B.latifrons as reported in worldwide literature and through interceptions of infested fruits and/or vegetables, with succinct summaries of reported laboratory and field infestation data. Also presented are lists of host plants with confirmed infestation records under natural field conditions and plant species with “undetermined host status.” Bactrocera latifrons infestation records summarized here are updated from that published in CoFFHI, version 1.0, in August 2015. A total of 59 plant taxa (57 have valid genus and species and two are identified as “sp.”), belonging to 25 genera in 13 plant families, were identified as hosts of B.latifrons, based on reported field infestation data. A total of 23 plant taxa, belonging to 17 genera in 13 plant families were identified as having “undetermined host status” for B.latifrons. The “undetermined host status” category is conferred to plant species devoid of record of infestation by B.latifrons under natural field conditions, and their suggested host status is based on laboratory infestation data, interceptions at ports of entry, or mere listings as hosts without any accompanying verifiable data. The predominant host plant family for which there is field infestation data is clearly the tomato family(Solanaceae) from which published field infestation data exists for 35 species (59.3% of recorded infested species). The family with the 2nd highest number of documented infested species is the squash family (Cucurbitaceae), for which there is published field infestation data for 9 plant species (15.2% of recorded infested species). Hosts of B.latifrons, based on reported field infestation data, are also identified from an additional 11 plant families: Combretaceae, Lamiaceae, Lythraceae, Myrtaceae, Oleaceae, Passifloraceae, Phyllanthaceae, Rhamnaceae, Rubiaceae, Rutaceae and Sapindaceae. Our summary will permit quarantine regulatory officials to better assess the risk of introduction of B.latifrons in imported or exported fruits and vegetables.

Technical Abstract: Bactrocera latifrons (Hendel)(Diptera: Tephritidae) infests many solanaceous plant species, some of which are important horticultural crop species. It has also been found to infest a number of cucurbitaceous plant species as well as a few plant species in other plant families. Bactrocera latifrons is of primarily Asian distribution (e.g., Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, Burma, China [Fujian, Yunnan, Hong Kong, Hainan], Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan, and Brunei), but its range has expanded through introductions into Hawaii, where it was first detected in 1983; Okinawa, Japan where it was confirmed to exist on Yonaguni Island in 1984; Tanzania, where it was first detected in 2006; and Kenya, where it was first detected in 2007. Its recovery in detection trapping in California, along with the documented invasions into countries outside its native distribution, show that this species poses a risk of introductions into other areas where it does not presently occur. As with other tephritid fruit fly species, establishment of B.latifrons can have significant economic consequences, including damage and loss of food production, as well as requirements for implementation of costly quarantine treatments to permit export of commodities susceptible to infestation by B.latifrons and inspection of susceptible imported commodities. We present here a synopsis of all host plants of B.latifrons reported in worldwide literature, with annotations on reported laboratory and field infestation data. Also presented are lists of host plants with confirmed infestation records under natural field conditions and plant species with “undetermined host status.” Bactrocera latifrons infestation records summarized here are updated from that published in CoFFHI, version 1.0, in August 2015. A total of 59 plant taxa (57 have valid genus and species and two are identified as “sp.”), belonging to 25 genera in 13 plant families, were identified as hosts of B. latifrons, based on reported field infestation data. A total of 23 plant taxa, belonging to 17 genera in 13 plant families were identified as having “undetermined host status” for B. latifrons. The “undetermined host status” category is conferred to plant species devoid of record of infestation by B.latifrons under natural field conditions, and their association with B.latifrons is based on laboratory infestation data, interceptions at ports of entry, or mere listings as hosts without any accompanying verifiable data. The predominant host plant family is Solanaceae, with documented field infestation data for 35 species (59.3% of recorded infested species). The family with the 2nd highest number of documented infested species is Cucurbitaceae, for which there is published field infestation data for 9 plant species (15.2% of recorded infested species). Two species (3.4% of recorded infested species) is the most number of species for which published field infestation data has been reported from any other plant family and that is recorded from four plant families: Lythraceae, Oleaceae, Rhamnaceae, and Rutaceae. An additional 7 families have one species each for which there is a published report of field infestation: Combretaceae, Lamiaceae, Myrtaceae, Passifloraceae, Phyllanthaceae, Rubiaceae and Sapindaceae. The highest reported field infestation rates (number of B. latifrons individuals per kg fruit) are all reported in solanaceous fruits, the top five being Solanum lasiocarpum Dunal (823.3/kg), Solanum trilobatum L. (705.3/kg), Solanum nigrum L. (643.4/kg), Solanum torvum Sw. (402.3/kg), and Lycianthes biflora (Lour.) Bitter (397.8/kg). The highest reported field infestation rate for any non-solanaceous fruit was 27.9/kg for Coccinia grandis (L.) Voigt, followed by 6.3/kg for Benincasa hispida (Thunb.) Cogn. It should be noted, though, that wide variation in methods of reporting infestation rat