EVALUATION OF FORMULATED ATTRACTANT AGAINST INSECTS ASSOCIATED WITH STRAWBERRY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIG-ASAN, JEMALYN U. APRIL 2011. Evaluation of Natural Attractants in
Trapping Insects Associated with Strawberry. Benguet State University, Balili, La
Trinidad Benguet.

Adviser: Maria Ana C. Tanyag, MSc.

ABSTRACT

This study was conducted from November 2010 to March 2011 at Benguet State
University Experimental Station, Balili, La Trinidad, Benguet, to identify formulated
natural attractants that were effective in trapping strawberry insects, identify families of
insects associated with strawberry that were attracted to the attractants, categorize
trapped insects according to economic importance, to determine the total number of
insects attracted to the formulated attractants and to know the duration of the efficacy of
attractants.

All the different formulations of FPJ and VJ which were the following, 250 ml:
1000 ml, 350 ml: 1000 ml, 500 ml: 1000 ml, 1000 ml: 1000 ml, 1500 ml: 1000 ml, 2000
ml: 1000 ml and 2500 ml: 1000 ml were effective attractant. The highest number of
attracted insects was observed from 2000 ml formulated plant juice: 1000 ml vinegar
juice formulation.

Insects observed associated with strawberry were from the families of
Chrysomelidae, Noctuidae, Coccinelidae and Scatopsidae.

There were six families identified as insect pests such as Chrysomelidae,
Nitidulidae, Noctuidae, Scarabaeidae, Sphingidae and Tephritidae. Seven as beneficial
insects, they were from the families of Apidae, Braconidae, Carabidae, Coccinelidae,
Scatopsidae, Sepsidae and Tachinidae and eight visiting insects attracted to the trap set
from Calliphoridae, Chironomidae, Drosophilidae, Micropezidae, Muscidae, Plutillidae,
Sarcophagidae and Tipulidae families.
The total number of insects trapped on the different attractant formulations were
3, 694. Family Noctuidae had the highest number of insect pests trapped by all of the
formulated attractants.

The efficacy of all the formulated attractants lasted for eleven days with 5th day as
the peak day and declining up to 11th day.
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
Bibliography……………………………………………………………………… i
Abstract …….……………………………………………………………………
i
Table of Contents …………………………………………………………………
iii

1
INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………..
REVIEW OF LITERATURE …………………………………………………….
3
MATERIALS AND METHODS ………………………………………………..
6
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ………………………………………………..
10

Identification of Effective Ratios of
Formulated Natural Attractant …………………………………………
10

Identification of Strawberry Insects
and Other Arthropods Associated
with Strawberry …………………………………………………………
12

Families of Insects Trapped ……………………………………………..
13

Total Population of the Different

Kinds of Insects Trapped on the
Attractant …………………………………………………………………
18
Duration of Efficacy of the Different
Ratios of Formulated Attractant
in Catching Adult Insects ………………………………..........................
19

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND

RECOMMENDATION ……………………………………………………………
21
LITERATURE CITED …………………………………………………………….
23
APPENDICES ……………………………………………………………………..
24

1

INTRODUCTION

Progress in pest control technologies has contributed to the improvement of yield
and quality of food, fiber, and ornamental crops. However, the development and
widespread adoption of some pest-control technologies did not occur without
environmental impacts and societal concerns about food safety. The strawberry which is
a wholesome and delicious fruit and ranks foremost as a table delicacy among the
vegetables and fruits grown in Baguio city and vicinity is of no exception. While it is
very much in demand among vacationists and tourist in the Mountain Provinces the
strawberry is still costly (Coronel, 1983) due to limited supply. Some of the pressing
problems are of which is the lack of high yielding variety and the existence of insect pest
that affect the yield of the plant.
Insect traps and natural attractants are now being used as an alternative solution in
controlling insect pests. Various trapping devices, viz. light, bait color traps, chemical
attractants (pheromone), plant-based attractants are being used to attract insects. Yellow
sticky or pan water trap is used in daytime to catch aphids on various fruit crops. Traps
baited with some attractive material namely fermented sugar, molasses, etc. and poisoned
with chemicals have also been found effective in capturing fruit fly adults. Likewise,
freshly chopped pseudostems of banana when spread in the banana orchard during night
are found to be an effective practice of catching the adult weevils (Prasad, 2007).
Health and well-being are highly valued in societies around the world, resulting in
demands for a safe, wholesome food supply that is produced without harm to the
environment or hazards to those who work in agriculture as well as the consumers.
Pesticides have provided the primary means for limiting pest populations. However, the

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

2

use of pesticides is the most critical hazard to a food supply. Clearly, employing
formulated attractant in strawberry plantation is one way to meet the demand of people in
the community for a safe and nutritious strawberry fruit supply. Also, it helps farmers
decrease their increasing farm inputs for agrochemicals.
The study was conducted to identify formulated natural attractants that are
effective in trapping strawberry insects, identify families of insects associated with
strawberry that are attracted to the attractants, categorize trapped insects as pest,
beneficial and visiting insects , to determine the total number of insects attracted to the
formulated attractants and to know the duration of the efficacy.
The study was conducted at Benguet State University, Balili, Experimental
Station, Balili, La Trinidad Benguet from November 2010 to March 2011.

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

3

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Kinds of Attractant

Chemical attractant. Insects use many different semio chemicals that convey
message between organisms. Chemicals that acts as attractants or carry other message are
volatile (quick to evaporate) compounds when release in the air the component can be
detected by certain insects a few inches to hundreds of yards away. Chemicals that carry
messages over a considerable distance are most often used in the pest management.
Pheromones are semio- chemicals that are produced and received by members of the
same species, this has a great influenced on the behavior and biological processes of
insects. Pheromones are produced synthetically and are used in different ways. It can be
used as a lure in traps used to monitor pest populations. Pheromones also disrupt mating
(Birch and Haynes, 1982).
Visual lures. Visual lures used in insect management fall into three categories, (1)
light, that attracts insects from dark or dimly light surroundings, (2) colored that are
attractive because of their specific reflectance and (3) shape of silhouettes that stands out
against the contracting background (Weinzer and Koehler, 1997).
Using light to attract insects. A light trap is used to survey night-flying insects.
Most light traps use ultraviolet lamps and capture a wide range of moths, beetles, and
other insects. Placing outdoor lights several feet away from doors of homes and
apartments also concentrates insect activity away from the sites where they cause the
most annoyance. In addition, yellow light bulbs attract fewer insects than white
incandescent lights or fluorescent bulbs (Gilbert, 1984).

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

4

Using colored objects to attract insects. Specific colors are attractive to some day-
flying insects. For example, yellow objects attract many insects and are often used in
traps designed to capture winged aphids and adult whiteflies. Red spheres and yellow
cards attract apple maggot flies. Like other attractants, colored objects can be used in
traps for monitoring or mass trapping (Prasad, 2007).
Plant- based attractant. These are attractants which generally introduced to plants.
These hybrid plants can attract and kill insect pest that are attacking them. One example
is the attractin, a patented environmentally friendly, non-toxic, plant-based attractant
which effectively attracts fruit flies including olive and orange fruit fly pest, attractin
does not affect honeybees. attractin was developed by Natural- Agro in 2001. Scientist in
Beltsville, Maryland has now also identified and synthesized attractant is emitted as
volatile from potato plants. The chemical attracts not only the pest but also the predators
that attack the pest (Birch and Haynes, 1982).
Plant attractants. Plant can also be used as an attractant for insect and can be even
used to attract beneficial insects that predate the pest. American hoverfly (Metasyrphus
Americana) and toxomerous Hoverflies which feeds on aphids are attracted on sweet
asylum, baby blue eyes, morning glory, cosmos, coreopsis, oleander, candy tuff and
white yarrow. They also love the flowers of the Silver lace vine (Polygonoum aurbertii).
Also soldier beetles that wage war on grasshopper’s eggs, caterpillars, cucumber flea and
other small beetles and spider mites are attracted to Hydrangea, milkweed and golden rod
(Delfosse, 1999).
Natural insect attractant. Instead of pesticide, Natural farming uses various natural
insect attractants (fermented plant juice mixed with raw rice wine) to get rid of insects.

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

5

Insect’s keen sense of smell and taste is utilized to lure and catch insects into insect
attractant-containing plastic bottles with open side windows (Anonymous, 1985).
Duration of efficacy of the attractants. Regardless of the concentration of the
attractant, there was a decreasing number of insect caught with respect to time
(Sumingwa, 2004).
Strawberry plant. The strawberry (Fragaria chiloensis Duch.) is a wholesome and
delicious fruit and ranks foremost as a table delicacy among the vegetables and fruits
grown in Baguio City and vicinity. It is highly esteemed as a fresh fruit or as a preserve.
Today, commercial strawberry production is confined to Baguio and Benguet where the
crop is highly adapted and where the fruit is in great demand during the vacation season
in March to May (Coronel, 1983).
Insects of strawberry. The strawberry is attacked by many pests. Among those
observed in Baguio and surrounding areas are white grubs, mites, thrips, weevil, leaf
rollers, aphids and grasshoppers (Coronel, 1983).

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

6

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Materials
The materials used in the study were chopping knives, three pails, manila paper,
rubber bands. Triple beam balance, graduated cylinder, beaker, clean containers, pot,
electric stove, grab hoe, digital camera, scooping tool, clean cloth, scientific calculator,
record notebook, pencil and pen.
Methodology

Fermented Plant Juice (FPJ). Two kilos of banana trunk (cardava variety) were
chopped and mixed with 1 kilo muscovado sugar and were placed in pails. The pails were
covered with manila paper and tied with rubber bands. The pails were stored in a cool
place for fermentation for 7 days. The fermented juice were extracted and transferred to
clean containers.

Vinegar Juice (VJ). A gallon of crude vinegar was mixed with ½ kilo muscovado
sugar. The mixture was heated until it reach boiling point. The mixture was set aside to
cool and was used in preparing the attractants.

Preparation
of
Mixture. Two hundred fifty millimeters of the fermented plant
juice was measured and added to the cooled vinegar juice. The mixture was set aside for
testing.

Testing . Ten plots measuring 1mX5m was prepared and planted with strawberry.
The attractant, which were contained on 32 containers, were introduced on the area. A
volume of 300 ml was used for the attractant. Water was introduced in the area as

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

7

control. The attractant was replicated 4 times. The introduced attractant was observed
daily to determine the number of attracted insects. The different ratio of FPJ and VJ used
to serve as treatments (Figures 1 and 2) were the following:
Treatments FPJ VJ
T1 Water
T2 250ml: 1000ml
T3
350ml: 1000ml
T4
500ml: 1000ml
T5
1000ml: 1000ml
T6
1500ml: 1000ml
T7
2000ml: 1000ml
T8
2500ml: 1000ml

Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) was used in the statistical analysis
of the treatments. Figures 3 and 4 show the experimental set-up.

Figure 1. A 500 ml Beaker used for Figure 2. A 1.5 liter container used to
measuring the different ratio show level of formulation

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

8

Figure 3. Trap set approximately 6” Figure 4. RCBD lay-out of field traps
above the ground

Identification of the Effective
Formulated Attractants

The eight different ratios of the natural attractants were replicated 4 times and
were observed daily. The insect trapped were collected with a wire scoop and counted.

Identification of Strawberry
Insects Attracted to the Attractant

The collected trapped insects were identified visually. Minute and unidentified
insects were brought to the laboratory for further identification.

Determining the Most Attracted Insects

Using the data of the recorded insects of strawberry attracted to the formulated
attractant, the population was summed up using scientific calculator. The insect having
the highest population was then identified.

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

9

Identification of Strawberry Insects
Eight strawberry plants per block were randomly selected to represent each
replication. The observation was done daily within five days. The observed insects were
recorded.

Population of Trapped Adult Insects

With the aid of the previous data on the insect trapped, the population was
summed up regardless of its kind.

Kinds of Insects Trapped on the Attractant

Having a closer view on the insect trapped, the insects were identified and
recorded whether the insects trapped were insect pests, beneficial or visiting insects.

Insects Trapped on the Attractant

The trapped insects were identified to what family do they belong and by their
scientific and common name.

Duration of the Efficacy of the Attractants

The duration of 300 ml volume of attractant placed in the designed container for
the set up was monitored daily until the formulated attractants were capable to trap.

Data Gathered.

1. Population of trapped adult insects The number of adult trapped was collected

and counted.
2. Strawberry insects trapped on the attractant The insects of strawberry were

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

10

identified and recorded.
3. Kinds of insects trapped on the attractant This insects was group into pest
insects, beneficial and visiting insects.
4. Duration of the efficacy of the attractants The number of days in which the
attractants ceased on trapping.

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

11

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Identification of Effective Ratios
of formulated Natural Attractant

It was presented in Table 1 that the treatment with a ratio of 2000 ml:1000 ml
trapped the highest number of insects having a total mean of 167.50 followed by 2500
ml:1000 ml ratio having a mean of 163.50 and 500 ml:1000 ml ratio have a total mean of
134.50. Likewise, 1500 ml: 1000 ml ratio trapped a total mean of 128.50; 1000 ml: 1000
ml had 127.50 mean insects trapped, respectively.

It was apparently shown in the table that all the formulated attractants were
effective in trapping insects of strawberry. Numerically, treatment 7 with a ratio of 2000
ml: 1000 ml trapped the highest number of insects having a total number of 670.
Nevertheless, statistical analysis revealed that all the formulated ratios were not
significantly different with each other except treatment 3 and the control treatment.

Table 1. Total number of trapped insects by the different formulations

RATIO OF
TOTAL NUMBER OF
MEAN NUMBER OF
FORMULATIONS
TRAPPED INSECTS
TRAPPED INSECTS
T1 Water
5 1.25c
T2 250 ml: 1000 ml
493 123.25ab
T3 350 ml: 1000 ml
405
101.25b
T4 500 ml: 1000 ml
538 134.50ab
T5 1000 ml: 1000 ml
509 127.25ab
T6 1500 ml: 1000 ml
514 128.50ab
T7 2000 ml:1000 ml
670 167.50a
T8 2500 ml: 1000 ml
654 163.50a
CV 25.43
Means with the same letter is not significantly different at 5% level of significance
(DMRT)

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

12

Identification of Strawberry Insects and Other
Arthropods Associated with Strawberry

At about five days scouting on the strawberry plant, the insects observed were
from the families of Aphididae (aphids), Aleyrodidae (whitefly), Chrysomelidae (elm
leaf beetle, flea beetle), Cicadellidae (plant hopper), Coccinelidae (lady bug beetle)
Formicidae (ants), Noctuidae (cutworm larvae), Scatopsidae (black minute scavenger
fly), and spiders and mites. With the given list of insects by Coronel (1983) only aphids
and mites were observed in the study.
On the other hand, insects associated with strawberry trapped on the attractant as
presented in Table 2 were from the family chrysomelidae and family noctuidae
specifically cutworm larvae. Moreover, the minute black scavenger fly, and lady bug
beetle categorized as beneficial insects were also observed on the attractant.

Table 2. Insects trapped on the attractants formulation

FAMILIES OF INSECTS
COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
TRAPPED
Apidae
Honeybee
Apis mellifera
Braconidae
Braconid wasp
Diachasmimorpha
longicaudata
Calliphoridae
Blowfly
Calliphora sp.
Carabidae
Carabid beetle
Calleida decora F.
Chironomidae
Midges
C. plumosus L
Chrysomelidae
Elm leaf beetle and
Pyrralta luteola M.
Flea beetle
Phyllotreta striolata
Coccinelidae
Lady bug beetle
Hippodamia convergens
Drosophilidae
Vinegar fly
Drosophila melanogaster
Micropezidae
Stilt-legged flies
Badisis ambulans
Muscidae
Housefly
Musca domestica
Nitidulidae
Sap beetle
Carpophilus sp.
Noctuidae
Cutworm
Heliothis spp.
Plutellidae
Diamond Back Moth
Plutella xylostella
Sarcophagidae
Flesh fly
Sarcophaga spp
Scarabaeidae
June beetle
Phyllophaga sp.
Scatopsidae
Minute black scavenger fly
Scatopse notata L.

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

13

Table 2. Continued …

FAMILIES OF INSECTS
COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
TRAPPED
Sepsidae
Black scavenger fly
Sepsis fulgens
Sphingidae
Hawk moth
Hyles lineata
Tachinidae
Tachinid fly
Lixophaga sp
Tephritidae
Fruit fly
Bactrocera sp.
Tipulidae Crane
fly
Tipula spp.

Categorized Families of Insects Trapped

The identification of the kinds of insects trapped by the different formulated
attractant was shown in Table 3. The insects trapped were categorized into three, insect
pests, beneficial and visiting insects.
The insect pests observed were under the family Chrysomelidae, Drosophilidae,
Nitidulidae, Noctuidae, Plutillidae, Scarabaeidae, Sphingidae and Tephritidae. On the
other hand, the beneficial insects trapped on the attractant were from the family Apidae,
Braconidae, Carabidae, Coccinelidae, Scatopsidae, Sepsidae and Tachinidae. Moreover,
the visiting insects observed from the attractant were Calliphoridae, Chironomidae,
Micropezidae, Muscidae, Sarcophagidae, and Tipulidae.

Table 3. Families of insect trapped on the attractants formulation
PESTS
BENEFICIAL
VISITING
Chrysomelidae Apidae Calliphoridae
Nitidulidae Braconidae
Chironomidae
Noctuidae Carabidae
Drosophilidae
Scarabaeidae Coccinelidae Micropezidae
Sphingidae Scatopsidae Muscidae
Tephritidae Sepsidae Plutellidae
Tachinidae
Sarcophagidae

Tipulidae

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

14

It was apparent in the table that insect pests were the least number of insects
collected. It could be that insects associated with strawberries were ground dwelling
insects. Moreover, flying beneficial and visiting insects were attracted on the attractant.

Insect pests. The population of trapped adult insect pests was presented in Table
4. All the treatments were not significantly different on the statistical analysis.
Though there were trapped Chrysomelidae (Figures 5 and 6) and Nitidulidae
(Figure 7) on the different formulations, the statistical result was not significant.
Moreover, treatment 8 trapping noctuidae family with a mean of 30.75 resulted highly
significant compared to the other ratios.

Based on the statistical analysis, the different formulations were not significantly
different in trapping Scarabaeidae, Sphingidae, and Tephritidae (Figure 8) though there
were numbers of the trapped insects, there were no significant differences observed
which indicates that they’re not common pest of strawberry plants.

Table 4. Mean population of trapped adult insect pests on the different attractants
formulation

RATIO OF
FAMILIES OF INSECTS
ATTRACT
CHRYSO
NITIDU
NOCTUI
SCARABA SPHINGI TEPHRI
ANTS
MELIDAE LIDAE
DAE
EIDAE
DAE
TIDAE
T1 water
0a
0a
0d
0a
0a
0a
T2 250:1000 ml
0.75a 1.75a
5.25cd
0a
0.25a
0.25a
T3 350:1000 ml
0.25a
1.75a
5.25c
0a
0.25a
0.25a
T4 500:1000 ml
1.00a
2.5a
9c
0a
0.25a
0a
T5 1000:1000ml
0.75a
2.5a
11.5c
0.25a
0.5a
0.25a
T6 1500:1000ml
0.5a
1.5a
17.5b
0a
0.25a
0.75a
T7 2000:1000ml
1.5a
1.75a
22.25b
0.5a
0.75a
0.75a
T8 2500:1000ml
0a
1.75a
30.75a
1.5a
0.50a
0a
CV
126.2 69.19 30.86 246.25 208.03 214.69
Means with the same letter is not significantly different at 5% level of significance
(DMRT)

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

15

Figure 5.Family Chrysomelidae Figure 6. Family Chrysomelidae
(Elm leaf beetle) (Flea beetle)

Figure 7. Family Nitidulidae (Sap beetle) Figure 8. Family Tephritidae (Fruit fly)

Beneficial
insects. Statistical analysis revealed that, Apidae, Braconidae (Figure
9), Carabidae, Coccinelidae (Figure 10), Sepsidae and Tachinidae families regardless of
the different rates yielded not significant result, indicative that the attractant was not a
threat on the population of these beneficial insects as shown in Table 5. However,
Scatopsidae family was observed to be highly significant best at 250 ml: 1000 ml ratio
having a total mean of 53.5 followed by treatment with ratio of 500 ml: 1000 ml with a
total mean of 50.5 respectively.

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

16

Table 5. Mean population of trapped adult beneficial insects on the different attractants
formulation

RATIO OF
FAMILIES OF INSECTS
ATTRACT API
BRACO CARA
COCCIN
SCATO
SEPSID
TACHINI
ANTS
DAE NIDAE
BIDAE ELIDAE PSIDAE AE
DAE
T1 water
0a
0a
0a
0.25a
1.25c
0a
0a
T2 250:1000 ml 0.25a
0a
0.50a
0.25a
53.5a
2.00a
0.75a
T3 350:1000 ml
0a
1.00a
0.25a
0.25a
34.75ab
1.25a
0.25a
T4 500:1000 ml 0.50a
0.50a
0.50a
0.50a
50.5a
2.00a
0.25a
T5 1000:1000ml
0a
0.50a
0.25a
0.25a
38.75ab
0.75a
0.50a
T6 1500:1000ml
0a
0a
0.75a
0a
36.25ab
1.00a
0.50a
T72000:1000ml 0.50a
0a
0.75a
0.25a
29b
0.75a
0.75a
T82500:1000ml
0a
0a
0.25a
0.50a
32.25ab
0.75a
1.00a

CV 301.06 308.06 153.41 176.18 33.70 132.11 141.42
Means with the same letter is not significantly different at 5% level of significance
(DMRT)

Figure 9. Family Braconidae Figure 10. Family Coccinelidae
(Braconid wasp) (Lady bug beetle)

Visiting insects. Among the group of insects trapped, visiting insects were
observed to be highly significant except Micropezidae family (Figure 11). On the other

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

17

hand, the Calliphoridae family was highly significant at treatments with a ratio of
2500ml: 1000 ml and 2000 ml: 1000 ml comparable to the other treatments. Moreover,
the different treatments were able to trap Chironomidae family and yielded highly
significant result regardless of the rates except the control treatment. Also, the number of
Drosophilidae attracted on the different formulations has no significant difference at all.
However the trapping effectiveness of 250 ml: 1000 ml up to 2500ml: 1000ml was
observed significant on the statistical analysis. Muscidae population was significantly
high at treatments with ratios of 2000ml: 1000ml, 2500ml: 1000ml, 1500ml: 1000ml, and
1000ml: 1000ml comparable to the other treatments that followed. Also, Sarcophagidae
was observed significantly high at treatments with ratios of 2500ml: 1000ml and 2000ml:
1000ml. Then, Tipulidae family (Figure 12) was trapped significantly on the different
formulations except at the control treatment however; the mean number of attracted
Tipulidae has no significant difference statistically.

Figure 11. FamilyMicropezidae Figure 12. Family Tipulidae (Cranefly)

( Stilt-legged fly)

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

18

Figure 13. Family Drosohilidae

(Vinegar fly)

Table 6. Mean population of trapped adult visiting insects on the attractants formulation

RATIO
FAMILIES OF INSECTS
OF
CALLI
CHIRO DROS
MICR
MUSC PLUTI SARCO
TIPU
ATTRAC PHORI NOMI
OPHIL
OPEZI
IDAE
LLID
PHAGID LID
TANTS
DAE
DAE
IDAE
DAE
AE
AE
AE
T1 water
0c
0b
0b
0.25a
0.25d
0a
0.25d
0b
T2
9.00b
8a
16a
0.50a
6.25cd
0a
14.5c
1.75a
b
250:1000ml
T3
5.25bc
11.50a
10ab
0a
7.50c
0.5a
12.75c
1.75a
b
350:1000ml
T4
7.50bc
8.50a
18a
0a
9..50bc
0a
16.25bc
2.50a
b
500:1000ml
T5
8.00bc
9.50a
21.75a
0a
11.25a
0a
12.00c
3.75.a
bc
1000:1000ml
T6
12.00b
8.50a
11.5ab
0.50a
12.75a
0.25a
16.50bc
4.00a
bc
1500:1000ml
T7
28.50a
6.25a
19.25a
0.25a
17.75a
0.25a
25.25ab
4.50a
2000:1000ml
T8
23.00a
5.75a
16.5a
0a
15ab
0a
28.5a
1.75a
b
2500:1000ml
CV 46.99 48.18 54.34 236.37 43.77 261.25 38.02 68.08
Means with the same letter is not significantly different at 5% level of significance
(DMRT)

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

19

Total Population of the Different Kinds
of Insects Trapped on the Attractant

Numerically, Scatopsidae family categorized as beneficial insect showed the
highest number of insect trapped having a total number of 1117 and a mean of 34.30 and
Drosophilidae from the visiting insects had a mean of 14.12 then Noctuidae family with a
mean of 12.84 from the insect pests as shown in Table 7.

Table 7. Mean population of the different kinds of attracted insects on the attractants

formulation

KINDS OF ATTRACTED
TOTAL MEAN
INSECTS
A. Pests Family

Chrysomelidae 20
3.62
Nitidulidae 54 1.62
Noctuidae 411 12.84
Scarabaeidae 15
0.46
Sphingidae 10 0.31
Tephritidae 9 0.28
B. Beneficial Insects Family

Apidae
5
0.15
Braconidae
8
0.25
Carabidae
14
0.43
Coccinelidae
9
0.28
Scatopsidae
1117
34.30
Sepsidae
34
1.06
Tachinidae
16
0.50
C. Visiting Insects Family

Calliphoridae
373
11.65
Chironomidae
232
7.25
Drosophilidae
452
14.12
Micropezidae
6
0.18
Muscidae
321
10.03
Plutellidae
4
0.12
Sarcophagidae
504
15.75
Tipulidae
80
2.50
TOTAL 3694

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

20

It was apparently shown in the tables that mean number of Scatopsidae family
highly differed from the mean numbers of other insect trapped. It could be that these
insects were abundant in the area because of the decomposing over ripe fruits.

Duration of Efficacy of the Attractant

The duration of effectiveness of formulated natural attractant was presented in
Table 8. Regardless of the concentration of the attractant, there was a decreasing number
of insect caught with respect to time except from day 1 to 4. The highest number trapped
was recorded at day 5, this served as the peak day then the advancing time of assessment
showed that the recorded insects decreases relative to the diminishing effectiveness of the
attractant that differed from Sumingwa (2004) in which day 1 trapped the highest number
and decreases chronologically until the last day.

Table 8. Duration (days) of efficacy of the different ratios of formulated attractants in

catching adult insects

DAYS
NUMBER OF INSECTS TRAPPED
TOT
MEAN
OF
WA
250: 350: 500: 1000: 1500: 2000: 2500:
AL
COLLE TER 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
CTION
ML
ML
ML
ML
ML
ML
ML
1
2 44 46 58 70 60 97 63 440 55
2
2 60 54 76 82 65 84 79 502
62.75
3
1 52 63 68 65 62 92 91 494
61.75
4
4 48 32 38 44 50 54 73 343
42.87
5
1 74 50 69 55 65 89 87 490
61.25
6
0 59 40 48 46 63 88 76 420 52.5
7
0 42 31 43 36 38 59 56 305
38.12
8
0 36 25 47 38 35 36 46 263
32.87
9
0 32 18 37 27 31 28 33 206
25.75
10
0 26 32 30 26 33 24 30 201
25.12
11
5 20 14 24 20 12 19 15 124 15.5

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

21

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary

The study was conducted at Benguet State University, Balili Experimental
Station, Balili, La Trinidad Benguet from November 2010 to March 2011.
The study aimed to identify formulated natural attractants that are effective in
trapping strawberry insects, identify insects associated with strawberry that are attracted
to the natural attractants, categorized trapped insects as pest, beneficial and visiting
insects, to determine the total number of insects attracted to the formulated attractants and
to know the duration of the efficacy of attractants.
All the formulations were significantly effective in trapping strawberry insects
except treatment 3 and the control treatment based on statistical analysis. Numerically,
highest number of insects was from the rate of 2000 ml: 1000 ml formulation of
attractant. Generally, the population of the counted insects’ decreases relative to
decreasing rates of formulated natural attractant.
Insects associated with strawberry trapped on the attractant were from the family
chrysomelidae and family noctuidae specifically cutworm larvae. Moreover, the minute
black scavenger fly, and lady bug beetle categorized as beneficial insects were also
observed on the attractant.
There were three groups of insects observed from the formulated natural
attractants. These were insect pests, beneficial insects and visiting insects. The insect
pests were from the family Chrysomelidae, Nitidulidae, Noctuidae, Scarabaeidae,
Sphingidae and Tephritidae. The trapped beneficial insects were from Apidae,
Braconidae, Carabidae, Coccinelidae, Scatopsidae, Sepsidae and Tachinidae families.

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

22

The trap visiting insects were Calliphoridae, Chironomidae, Drosohilidae, Micropezidae,
Muscidae, Plutillidae, Sarcophagidae and Tipulidae.
The total number of insects trapped on the different attractants formulation were
3, 694 respectively. Among the insect pests trapped, family noctuidae had the highest
number of insect pests trapped by all of the formulated attractants.
The duration of efficacy of formulated natural attractant lasted 11 days. The fifth
day of collection yields the highest number of trapped insects. The numbers of trapped
insects decreases relative to the advancing time of assessment.

Conclusion and Recommendation

All the rates of formulated natural attractant evaluated were effective in trapping
strawberry insect pests and not a threat on beneficial insect population. The formulated
natural attractant was proven to be effective attractant of adult strawberry insect pests
such as Noctuidae and Chrysomelidae.; however the rate of 2000 ml: 1000 ml is
recommended being the most effective.
A follow up study could be done by increasing the amount of fermented plant
juice mixed with vinegar juice and setting them as pitfall and aerial trap.

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

23

LITERATURE CITED
ANONYMOUS. 1985. Gardening and Natural Farming. Retrieved September 10, 2010
from http://www.naturalfarming.org/.

BIRCH. M.C. and K.F. HAYNES.1982. Insect Pheromones. London. The Institute of
Biology’s Studies in Biology. Pp. 87-100.

CORONEL, R.E. 1983. Promising Fruits of the Philippines. University of the Philippines
at Los Banos College of Agriculture, College, Laguna, Philippines. Pp. 437-445.

DELFOSSE, A. 1999. Crop Protection and Quarantine, National Annual Report.
Beltsville. National Program Staff. Pp. 50-55.

GILBERT, D. 1984. Insect Electrecutors and Light Traps. St. Paul Minnesota. American
Association of Cereal Chemist. Pp. 87-108.

PRASAD, D. 2007. Sustainable Pest Management. Daya Delhi. Publishing House. Pp.
90-91.

SUMINGWA, S. 2004. Evaluation of formulated attractants against insects associated
with white potato and cabbage. BS thesis. Beguet State University, La Trinidad,
Beguet.

WEINZER, R., T. HENN and P.G. KOEHLER.1997. Insect Attractant and Traps.
University of Florida, Gainesville. Cooperative Extension Services. Pp. 190-210.

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

24

APPENDICES

Appendix Table 1. Total population of the adult insects trapped

RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water
2 1 0 2 5 1.25c
250:1000ml 93
87
155
152
487
123.25ab
350:1000ml
84 90 87 94 353
88.25b
500:1000ml
138 124 131 145 538
134.50ab
1000:1000ml 141
151
98
101
491
122.75ab
1500:1000ml
118 126 129 121 494
123.50ab
2000:1000ml
153 109 201 207 670 167.50a
2500:1000ml
197 203 111 143 654 163.50a
SUB-TOTAL
931 923 933 1001 3694

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7
75704.5 10814.93 11.93** 2.49 3.64
REPLICATION 3
493.0
164.33

ERROR 21
19030.0
906.19

TOTAL 31
95227.5

**- Highly significant CV 25.43%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

25

Appendix Table 2. Total population of trapped Apidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0
250:1000ml 0
1
0
0
1
0.25
350:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0
0
500:1000ml 2
0
0
0
2
0.5
1000:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0 0
1500:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0 0
2000:1000ml 0
0
1
1
2
0.5
2500:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0 0
SUB-TOTAL 2
1
1
1 5

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 1.4688 0.2098
0.95ns 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
0.0938
0.0313

ERROR 21
4.6563
0.2217

TOTAL 31

ns -Not significant CV 301.36%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

26

Appendix Table 3. Total population of trapped Braconidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0
250:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0
0
350:1000ml 4
0
0
0
4
1
500:1000ml 2
0
0
0
2
0.5
1000:1000ml 0
2
0
0
2
0.5
1500:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0 0
2000:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0 0
2500:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0 0
SUB-TOTAL 6
2
0
0 8

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 4.0000 0.5714
0.80ns 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
3.0000
1.0000

ERROR 21
15.0000
0.7143

TOTAL 31
22.0000

ns-Not significant

CV 338.06%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

27

Appendix Table 4. Total population of trapped Calliphoridae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0c
250:1000ml 9
2
23
2
36
9b
350:1000ml 10
7
3
1
21
5.25bc
500:1000ml 13
5
6
6
30
7.5bc
1000:1000ml 15
8
4
5
32
8bc
1500:1000ml 14
9
18
7
48
12b
2000:1000ml 33
33
31
17
114
28.5a
2500:1000ml 26
34
18
14
92
23a
SUB-TOTAL 120
98
103
52
373

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 2508.4687
358.3527
11.95** 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
316.8437
105.6146

ERROR 21
629.9062
29.9955

TOTAL 31
3455.2186

**- Highly significant

CV 46.99%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

28

Appendix Table 5. Total population of trapped Carabidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0
250:1000ml 1
1
0
0
2
0.5
350:1000ml 0
1
0
0
1
0.25
500:1000ml 0
1
0
1
2
0.5
1000:1000ml 0
1
0
0
1
0.25
1500:1000ml 0
0
2
1
3
0.75
2000:1000ml 0
1
0
2
3
0.75
2500:1000ml 0
0
0
1
1
0.25
SUB-TOTAL 1
6
2
5
14

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 1.9688 0.2813
0.72ns 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
1.5938
0.5313

ERROR 21
8.1562
0.3884

TOTAL 31
11.7188

ns-Not significant

CV 153.41%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

29

Appendix Table 6. Total population of trapped Chironomidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0b
250:1000ml 4
8
9
11
32
8a
350:1000ml 17
10
9
10
46
11.5a
500:1000ml 2
11
10
11
34
8.5a
1000:1000ml 4
14
15
5
38
9.5a
1500:1000ml 8
9
6
11
34
8.5a
2000:1000ml 9
6
3
7
25
6.25a
2500:1000ml 8
5
4
6
23
5.75a
SUB-TOTAL 52
63
56
61
232

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 330.5000
47.2143
3.87** 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
9.2500
3.0833

ERROR 21
256.2500
12.2024

TOTAL 31
596.0000

**- Highly significant

CV 48.18%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

30

Appendix Table 7. Total population of trapped Chrysomelidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0
250:1000ml 1
0
2
0
3
0.75
350:1000ml 1
0
0
0
1
0.25
500:1000ml 2
0
1
1
4
1
1000:1000ml 1
1
0
1
3
0.75
1500:1000ml 0
0
1
1
2
0.5
2000:1000ml 2
3
0
1
6
1.50
2500:1000ml 0
0
0
2
2
0.5
SUB-TOTAL 7
4
3
6
20

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 5.9688 0.8527
1.24ns 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
0.8438
0.2813

ERROR 21
14.4062
0.6860

TOTAL 31
21.2188

ns-Not significant

CV 126.21%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

31

Appendix Table 8. Total population of trapped Coccinelidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
1
0
0
1
0.25
250:1000ml 0
1
0
0
1
0.25
350:1000ml 0
1
0
0
1
0.25
500:1000ml 0
0
1
1
2
0.5
1000:1000ml 0
1
0
0
1
0.25
1500:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0 0
2000:1000ml 0
0
0
1
1
0.25
2500:1000ml 0
2
0
0
2
0.5
SUB-TOTAL 0
6
1
2 9

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 0.7188 0.1027
0.42ns 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
2.5938
0.8646

ERROR 21
5.1563
0.2455

TOTAL 31
8.4687

ns- Not significant

CV 176.18%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

32

Appendix Table 9. Total population of trapped Drosophilidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0b
250:1000ml 11
15
26
12
64
16a
350:1000ml 10
7
14
9
40
10ab
500:1000ml 10
10
21
31
72
18a
1000:1000ml 13
12
42
20
87
21.75a
1500:1000ml 8
11
11
16
46
11.5ab
2000:1000ml 10
10
14
43
77
19.25a
2500:1000ml 10
13
20
23
66
16.5a
SUB-TOTAL 72
78
148
154
452

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 1328.0000
189.7143
3.22* 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
726.5000
242.1667

ERROR 21
1237.0000
58.9048

TOTAL 31
3291.5000

*- Significant

CV 54.34%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

33

Appendix Table 10. Total to population of trapped Micropezidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 1
0
0
0
1
0.25
250:1000ml 2
0
0
0
2
0.5
350:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0
0
500:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0
0
1000:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0 0
1500:1000ml 2
0
0
0
2
0.5
2000:1000ml 1
0
0
0
1
0.25
2500:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0 0
SUB-TOTAL 6
0
0
0 6

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 1.3750 0.1964
1.00ns 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
3.3750
1.1250

ERROR 21
4.1250
0.1964

TOTAL 31
8.8750

ns-Not significant

CV 236.37%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

34

Appendix Table 11. Total population of trapped Muscidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
1
1
0.25d
250:1000ml 16
5
1
3
25
6.25cd
350:1000ml 14
5
7
4
30
7.5c
500:1000ml 14
10
7
7
38
9.5bc
1000:1000ml 20
12
7
6
45
11.25abc
1500:1000ml 21
7
14
9
51
12.75abc
2000:1000ml 18
20
27
6
71
17.75a
2500:1000ml 19
14
20
7
60
15ab
SUB-TOTAL 122
73
83
43
321

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 839.2187
119.8884
6.22** 2.49 2.49
REPLICATION
3
398.8437
132.9479

ERROR 21
404.9062
19.2812

TOTAL 31
1642.9687

**- Highly significant

CV 43.77%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

35

Appendix Table 12. Total population of trapped Nitidulidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0
250:1000ml 2
3
0
2
7
1.75
350:1000ml 3
3
0
1
7
1.75
500:1000ml 5
2
2
1
10
2.5
1000:1000ml 1
3
3
3
10
2.5
1500:1000ml 2
2
1
1
6
1.5
2000:1000ml 2
1
0
4
7
1.75
2500:1000ml 2
1
1
3
7
1.75
SUB-TOTAL 17
15
7
15
54

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 16.8750 2.4107
1.77ns 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
7.3750
2.4583

ERROR 21
28.6250
1.3631

TOTAL 31
52.8750

ns- Not significant

CV 69.19%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

36

Appendix Table 13. Total population of trapped Noctuidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water
0 0 0 0 0 0d
250:1000ml 4
5
9
3
21
5.25cd
350:1000ml 7
8
9
2
26
6.5c
500:1000ml 10
8
9
9
36
9c
1000:1000ml 17
13
3
13
46
11.5c
1500:1000ml 20
12
21
17
70
17.5b
2000:1000ml 25
30
20
14
89
22.25b
2500:1000ml 33
30
27
33
123
30.75a
SUB-TOTAL 116
106
98
91
411

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 2840.9687
405.8527
25.83ns 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
43.3438
14.4479

ERROR 21
329.9062
15.7098

TOTAL 31
3214.2187

**- Highly significant

CV 30.86%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

37

Appendix Table 14. Total population of trapped Plutellidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0
250:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0
0
350:1000ml 1
1
0
0
2
0.5
500:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0
0
1000:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0 0
1500:1000ml 0
0
1
0
1
0.25
2000:1000ml 1
0
0
0
1
0.25
2500:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0 0
SUB-TOTAL 2
1
1
0 4

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 1.0000 0.1429
1.33ns 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
0.2500
0.0833

ERROR 21
2.2500
0.1071

TOTAL 31
3.5000

ns- Not significant

CV 261.86%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

38

Appendix Table 15. Total population of trapped Sarcophagidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water
0 0 0 1 1 0.25d
250:1000ml
19 14 13 12 58 14.5c
350:1000ml
10 21 10 10 51 12.75c
500:1000ml
19 18 10 18 65
16.25bc
1000:1000ml
4 25 6 13 48 12c
1500:1000ml
25 17 11 13 66 16.5bc
2000:1000ml
15 35 24 27 101
25.25ab
2500:1000ml
22 40 34 18 114 28.5a
SUB-TOTAL
114 170 108 112 504

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 2074.0000
296.2857
8.26** 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
325.0000
108.3333

ERROR 21
753.0000
35.8571

TOTAL 31
3152.0000

**- Highly significant

CV 38.02%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

39

Appendix Table 16. Total population of trapped Scarabaeidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0
250:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0
0
350:1000ml 0
0
0
5
5
1.25
500:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0
0
1000:1000ml 0
0
0
1
1
0.25
1500:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0 0
2000:1000ml 0
1
0
1
2
0.50
2500:1000ml 1
4
0
1
6
1.5
SUB-TOTAL 1
5
0
8
15

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 10.3750 1.4821
1.28ns 2.49
3.65
REPLICATION
3
5.1250
1.7083

ERROR 21
24.3750
1.1607

TOTAL 31
39.8750

ns- Not significant

CV 246.25%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

40

Appendix Table 17. Total population of trapped Scatopsidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water
0 5 0 0 5 1.25c
250:1000ml
82 31 56 45 214 53.5a
350:1000ml
33 42 37 27 139
34.75ab
500:1000ml
44 43 45 70 202 50.5a
1000:1000ml
39 51 29 36 155
38.75ab
1500:1000ml
49 25 26 45 145
36.25ab
2000:1000ml
22 39 19 36 116 29b
2500:1000ml
32 43 31 35 141
35.25ab
SUB-TOTAL
301 279 243 294 1117

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 7092.9687
1031.2812
7.32** 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
250.5937
83.5312

ERROR 21
2905.1562
138.3408

TOTAL 31
10248.7186

**- Highly significant

CV 33.70%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

41

Appendix Table 18. Total population of trapped Sepsidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0
250:1000ml 0
2
4
2
8
2
350:1000ml 2
0
3
0
5
1.25
500:1000ml 6
1
0
1
8
2
1000:1000ml 2
0
0
1
3
0.75
1500:1000ml 2
0
1
1
4
1
2000:1000ml 2
1
0
0
3
0.75
2500:1000ml 0
1
0
2
3
0.75
SUB-TOTAL 14
5 8 7 34

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 12.8750 1.8393
0.93ns 2.49
3.65
REPLICATION
3
5.6250
1.8750

ERROR 21
41.3750
1.9702

TOTAL 31
59.8750

ns- Not significant CV 132.11%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

42

Appendix Table 19. Total population of trapped Sphingidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0
250:1000ml 0
1
0
0
1
0.25
350:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0
0
500:1000ml 1
0
0
0
1
0.25
1000:1000ml 2
0
0
0
2
0.5
1500:1000ml 0
1
0
0
3
0.75
2000:1000ml 0
0
2
1
2
0.5
2500:1000ml 0
0
1
1
1
0.25
SUB-TOTAL 3
2
3
2
10

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 1.8750 0.2679
0.63ns 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
0.1250
0.0417

ERROR 21
8.8750
0.4226

TOTAL 31
10.8750

ns- Not significant

CV 208.03%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

43

Appendix Table 20. Total population of trapped Tachinidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0
250:1000ml 0
1
0
2
3
0.75
350:1000ml 1
0
0
0
1
0.25
500:1000ml 0
0
1
0
1
0.25
1000:1000ml 0
1
1
0
2
0.5
1500:1000ml 1
0
0
1
2
0.5
2000:1000ml 0
2
1
0
3
0.75
2500:1000ml 1
1
0
2
4 1
SUB-TOTAL 3
5
3
5
16

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 3.0000 0.4286
0.86ns 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
0.5000
0.1667

ERROR 21
10.5000
0.5000

TOTAL 31
14.0000

ns- Not significant CV 141.42%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

44

Appendix Table 21. Total population of trapped Tephritidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0
250:1000ml 1
0
0
0
1
0.25
350:1000ml 0
0
1
0
1
0.25
500:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0
0
1000:1000ml 1
0
0
0
1
0.25
1500:1000ml 0
0
1
2
3
0.75
2000:1000ml 1
2
0
0
3
0.75
2500:1000ml 0
0
0
0
0 0
SUB-TOTAL 3
2
2
2 9

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DF SUM
OF
MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 2.7188 0.3884
1.07ns 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
0.0938
0.0313

ERROR 21
7.6563
0.3646

TOTAL 31
10.4688

ns- Not significant CV 214.69%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

45

Appendix Table 22. Total population of trapped Tipulidae on the traps
RATIO OF
REPLICATION

FORMULATIONS
1 11 111
TOTAL
1V
MEAN
Water 0
0
0
0
0
0
250:1000ml 2
1
1
3
7
1.75
350:1000ml 0
3
4
0
7
1.75
500:1000ml 3
3
1
3
10
2.5
1000:1000ml 4
3
1
7
15
0.25
1500:1000ml 3
2
8
3
16
3.75
2000:1000ml 5
3
4
6
18
4.5
2500:1000ml 2
1
2
2
7
1.75
SUB-TOTAL 19
16
21
24
80

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DF SUM
OF MEAN
F
TABULATED F
VALUE
SQUARES SQUARES
VALUE
0.05 0.01
TREATMENT 7 63.0000 9.0000
3.11* 2.49 3.65
REPLICATION
3
4.2500
1.4167

ERROR 21
60.7500
2.8929

TOTAL 31
128.0000

*-Significant CV 68.00%

Evaluation of Natural Attractants in Trapping Insects Associated with
Strawberry / JEMALYN U. BIG-ASAN. 2011

Document Outline

Evaluation of Natural Attractants inTrapping Insects Associated with Strawberry
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- ABSTRACT
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- MATERIALS AND METHODS
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDICES