Paper · 2023 · Journal of Applied Entomology

Preference of pear psyllid (Cacopsylla pyri) for specific colour inspires new application in plant protection

Bruna Czarnobai De Jorge; Rainer Meyhöfer; Andreas Jürgens; et al.

5
claims
10
verbatim quotes
11
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc

Abstract

Abstract Understanding the cues used by insects to select their hosts is essential for developing sustainable control strategies, particularly for plant disease vectors. Pear psyllids ( Cacopsylla pyri ) are vectors of the bacterial disease pear decline caused by ‘ Candidatus Phytoplasma pyri’. Yellow sticky traps are typically used to monitor pest insects, but they are non‐specific and capture many beneficial insects, too. Against the background of improving visual traps, this research aimed to investigate the colour choice behaviour of C. pyri . Our first approach was to screen insect colour preferences by performing choice assays with different LED colour wavelengths in a small‐scale choice arena under controlled conditions. Over six LEDs tested, there was a strong significant preference of C. pyri for green 1 (532 nm) followed by green 2 (549 nm). Yellow (576 nm), orange (593 nm), red 1 (619 nm) and red 2 (633 nm) were less attractive than green. Subsequently, the trapping of pear psyllids was tested in the field using newly developed traps covered with transparent‐coloured PVC sheets with a similar wavelength of the preferred LEDs. Red and completely transparent traps have been used as control and combined in randomized blocks in a pear orchard. Field trials revealed that green traps ranging from 525 to 537 nm attracted significantly more pear psyllids than longer wavelength green (543 nm), red and transparent ones. The construction of specific green‐coloured sticky traps seems promising for improving psyllid trapping, especially during an early infestation at low population densities. Thus, these visual traps should be considered in future and integrated into psyllid monitoring as part of integrated pest management.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 5

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

C. pyri significantly preferred green 1 LED at 532 nm.

Treatment
green 1 (532 nm)e0
Interactor
C. pyriCacopsylla pyrie0pest
Outcome
preferencee0
Value
532 nme0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Cacopsylla pyri
Cacopsylla pyri · InteractorMick E. Talbot · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“there was a strong significant preference of C. pyri for green 1 (532 nm) followed by green 2 (549 nm).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 760–863 · show in text ↑
t0

“pear psyllid”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 14–26 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Green 2 at 549 nm ranked second in C. pyri preference.

Treatment
green 2 (549 nm)e0
Interactor
C. pyriCacopsylla pyrie0pest
Outcome
preferencee0
Value
549 nme0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Cacopsylla pyri
Cacopsylla pyri · InteractorMick E. Talbot · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“there was a strong significant preference of C. pyri for green 1 (532 nm) followed by green 2 (549 nm).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 760–863 · show in text ↑
t0

“pear psyllid”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 14–26 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yellow, orange and two red LED wavelengths were less attractive than green to C. pyri.

Interactor
pear psyllidt0pest
Outcome
attractivee0
Direction
lesse0
Comparator
greene0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Yellow (576 nm), orange (593 nm), red 1 (619 nm) and red 2 (633 nm) were less attractive than green.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 864–964 · show in text ↑
t0

“pear psyllid”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 14–26 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Field traps at 525 to 537 nm attracted significantly more pear psyllids than 543 nm green, red or transparent traps.

Treatment
green traps ranging from 525 to 537 nme0
Interactor
pear psyllidse0pest
Outcome
pear psyllidse0
Direction
moree0
Comparator
longer wavelength green (543 nm), red and transparent onese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“green traps ranging from 525 to 537 nm attracted significantly more pear psyllids than longer wavelength green (543 nm), red and transparent ones.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1298–1444 · show in text ↑
t0

“pear psyllid”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 14–26 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend integrating green visual traps into psyllid monitoring.

Outcome
integrated into psyllid monitoring as part of integrated pest managemente0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“these visual traps should be considered in future and integrated into psyllid monitoring as part of integrated pest management.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1624–1751 · show in text ↑
t0

“pear psyllid”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 14–26 · show in text ↑

trap barrier · pest · Pyrus communis (pear)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.