Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Vol. 12 No. sp3 (2025): Advances in Plant Health Improvement for Sustainable Agriculture

Damage potential of primary fruit-piercing moths Eudocima and Rhytia spp. (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and their biointensive management in guava and mandarin orange

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.10413
Submitted
2 July 2025
Published
17-12-2025

Abstract

Fruit-piercing moths belongs to the genus Eudocima spp. and Rhytia hypermnestra (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) are a major pests of ripening and semi-ripening fruits viz. citrus, guava, pomegranate, grapes, fig, sapota, mango, papaya and tomato in India. The damage potential of fruit-piercing moths (FPM) on number and weight basis revealed that the per cent damage in guava ranged from 0 %-22.64 % and 0 %-20.90 % respectively at Agricultural College and Research Institute (AC & RI), Madurai. In the field I of Palamedu area, per cent damage recorded in guava was 17.90 %-21.91 % (number basis) and 17.89 %-22.22 % (on weight basis) and in field II of Palamedu area, it was ranged from 17.22 %-22.65 % and 15.16 %-20.89 % respectively. Similarly, the mean per cent fruit damage was recorded to range from 13.29 %-24.46 % on number basis in mandarin orange at Lower Palani Hills. To manage the FPM, seven treatments viz. light trap, fruit trap, delta trap, neem oil 3 %, NeemSweet - P 60 EC at 0.24 %, Opuntia dillenii including untreated control were evaluated. The mean per cent fruit damage prior to first round of application in all the treatments were 23.89 %-25.91 %. The damage increased to 27.75 % in the untreated check during 14 days after treatment (DAT), however lesser extent of damage was recorded in treated plots. A minimum fruit damage of 15.35 % was recorded in the NeemSweet-P 60 EC-treated plot, followed by neem oil (3 %) with 16.67 % and fruit trap with 17.05 %. Considering the mean per cent reduction after the first round, it was significantly higher in NeemSweet-P 60 EC (44.18 %), neem oil (39.57 %) and fruit traps (38.23 %), as compared to the lesser reduction in Opuntia dillenii (13.74 %). Second round application significantly reduced the fruit damage, to an extent of 8.76 % at 7 DAT and 6.20 %-25.20 % at 14 DAT. The cumulative reduction was recorded low in NeemSweet-P 60 EC (11.42 %) and neem oil (13.16 %) whereas it was 30.75 % in the standard check. Corresponding mean per cent reduction over control was high in NeemSweet-P    (62.86 %), neem oil (57.20 %) and fruit trap (51.15 %).

References

  1. 1. Hargreaves E. Fruit-piercing Lepidoptera in Sierra Leone. Bull Entomol Res. 1936;27(4):589–605. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485300058685
  2. 2. Ayyar TVR. Notes on some fruit sucking moths of the Deccan. Indian J Entomol. 1944;5(I & II):29–33.
  3. 3. Sundara Babu P, David BV. A note on unprecedental occurrence of fruit piercing moths on grapevine. S Indian Hortic. 1973;21:134–36.
  4. 4. Waterhouse DF, Norris KR. Biological control: Pacific prospects. Melbourne: Inkata Press. 1987. p. 240–9.
  5. 5. Denton GRW, Muniappan R, Marutani M, McConnell J, Lali TS. Biology and natural enemies of the fruit-piercing moth Othreis fullonia (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) from Guam. Res Ext Ser Coll Trop Agric Hum Resour Univ Hawaii Coop Ext Serv. 1991.
  6. 6. Bhumannavar BS, Viraktamath CA. Proboscis morphology and nature of fruit damage in different fruit piercing moths (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Pest Manag Hortic Ecosyst. 2001;7:28–40.
  7. 7. Mohite AS, Tembhare DB, Umarkar SP. Biology and behaviour of developing stages of fruit sucking moth Othreis materna Linn. (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J Entomol Res. 2004;28(1):37–45.
  8. 8. Leong SCT, Kueh RJH. Seasonal abundance and suppression of fruit-piercing moth Eudocima phalonia (L.) in a citrus orchard in Sarawak. Sci World J. 2011;11:2330–38. https://doi.org/10.1100/2011/753484
  9. 9. Baptist BA. The fruit piercing moth (Othreis fullonica L.) with special reference to its economic importance. Indian J Entomol. 1944;6:1–13.
  10. 10. Lefroy HM, Hawlett FM. Indian insect life. Calcutta: Thacker, Spink & Co. 1909. p. 786.
  11. 11. Muller HRA. Overzicht van de belangrijkste citrus-ziekten in Nederland Indie. Meded Alg Proefsth Landb Buitenz. 1939;34:42.
  12. 12. Dodant R. Contribution à l’étude de Oospora citri-aurantii Ferr., parasite des agrumes en Nouvelle-Caledonie. Rev Pathol Veg. 1953;32:87–92.
  13. 13. Muniappan R, Silva-Krott IU, Lali TS. Distribution of larval host plants of the fruit piercing moth, Othreis fullonia. Chemoecology. 1995;5–6(2):75–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01259435
  14. 14. Bhumannavar BS, Viraktamath CA. Biology, ecology and management of fruit piercing moths (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Pest Manag Hortic Ecosyst. 2012;18(1):1–18.
  15. 15. Sandhu GS, Batra RC, Sohi AS. Note on the incidence of fruit-sucking moths in the Punjab. Indian J Entomol. 1980;42:531–32.
  16. 16. Nomura K, Oya S, Watanabe I, Kawamura H. Studies on orchard illumination against fruit-piercing moths. I. Analysis of illumination effects and influence of light elements on moth activities. Jpn J Appl Entomol Zool. 1965;9:179–86. https://doi.org/10.1303/jjaez.9.179
  17. 17. Whitehead VB, Rust DJ. Control of fruit-piercing moth, Serrodes partita (Fabr.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Phytophylactica. 1972;4:9–12.
  18. 18. Bosch JE. Fruit-piercing moth research. Rhodesia Agric J. 1971;68:19–21.
  19. 19. Bänziger H. Fruit piercing moths (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Thailand: a general survey and some new perspectives. Mitt Schweiz Entomol Ges. 1982;55:213–40.
  20. 20. Kumar K, Lal SN. Studies on the biology, seasonal abundance and host–parasite relationship of fruit sucking moth Othreis fullonia (Clerck) in Fiji. Fiji Agric J. 1983;45:71–77.
  21. 21. Singh S, Sharma RK, Sandhu RK, Kaur S, Siraj M. Bio-intensive integrated management of fruit piercing moths in citrus. Pest Manag Hortic Ecosyst. 2022;29(1):26–33. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-4541.2023.00004.8
  22. 22. Doreen SB. Identification and analysis of olfactory receptors from the light brown apple moth (Epiphyas postvittana). [PhD Thesis]. University of Auckland, New Zealand. 2011.
  23. 23. Kamala Jayanthi PD, Verghese A, Nagaraju DK, Jhansi Rani B. Studies on the possibility of managing fruit sucking moth, Eudocima (Othreis) materna L. using feeding repellents. Pest Manag Hortic Ecosyst. 2010;16:124–130.
  24. 24. Singh S, Rao CN, Deka S, Sonalka RV, Datkhile R, Kadam UK, et al. Insect and mite pests of Citrus in India. Bengaluru: ICAR-AICRP on Fruits, IIHR. 2016. p. 114.
  25. 25. Cowan T, Gries G. Ultraviolet and violet light: attractive orientation cues for the Indian meal moth, Plodia interpunctella. Entomol Exp Appl. 2009;131:148–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1570-7458.2009.00838.x
  26. 26. Sherlin RBB, Saranya B, Ravi M, Balakrishnan N, Ravi G. Integrated management of fruit sucking moths. Krishi Sci. 2022;3(1):28–30.
  27. 27. Muniappan R, Purea M, Tarilongi B, Berukilukilu L, Bule S, Reddy GVP. Fruit piercing moths and their management in Vanuatu. J South Pac Agric. 2002;9(1/2):16–27.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.