Field Assessment of the Mass Trapping Technique for the Control of the Chickpea Leaf Miner Liriomyza cicerina

Abstract

This work evaluated the chickpea leaf miner Liriomyza cicerina mass trapping technique as an alternative to insecticide spraying. A trap density of 2000 per ha was used. Trials were conducted in Beja during 2015 and 2016 using Nour variety. Leaves were sampled weekly from all treated and control plots and observed under binocular microscope. Regarding the reduction in infestation at harvest, results showed reductions of 20.11 and 18.13% respectively for chemical and mass trapping treatments compared to control. Efficacy also was assessed on the basis of captures and infestations reductions compared to control, the yield and 100-seeds weight. Results showed significant difference (at P < 0.05) between treatments, with 0.21 kg/m² grain yield for the control and 0.8 kg/m² for the chemical treatment and the mass trapping. Also, regarding the 100-seeds weight, it was 21.5g for the control and respectively 38.2 and 41.7 g with the chemical treatment and the mass trapping.

Full text

Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 107 Vol. 13, SI, 2018
Field Assessment of the Mass Trapping Technique for the
Control of the Chickpea Leaf Miner Liriomyza cicerina
Abir Soltani, Faculté des Sciences de Bizerte, Université de Carthage, 7021
Zarzouna, Bizerte, Tunisia, Moez Amri, International Center for Agricultural
Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), Rabat, Morocco, and Jouda Mediouni-Ben
Jemâa, Laboratoire de Biotechnologie Appliquée à l’Agriculture, Institut National
de la Recherche Agronomique de Tunisie, Université de Carthage, Tunis, Tunisia

ABSTRACT
Soltani, A., Amri, M., and Mediouni-Ben Jemâa, J. 2018. Field assessment of the mass
trapping technique for the control of the chickpea leaf miner Liriomyza cicerina.
Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 13 (si): 107-112.
This work evaluated the chickpea leaf miner Liriomyza cicerina mass trapping technique as an
alternative to insecticide spraying. A trap density of 2000 per ha was used. Trials were conducted in
Beja during 2015 and 2016 using Nour variety. Leaves were sampled weekly from all treated and
control plots and observed under binocular microscope. Regarding the reduction in infestation at
harvest, results showed reductions of 20.11 and 18.13% respectively for chemical and mass trapping
treatments compared to control. Efficacy also was assessed on the basis of captures and infestations
reductions compared to control, the yield and 100-seeds weight. Results showed significant difference
(at P < 0.05) between treatments, with 0.21 kg/m² grain yield for the control and 0.8 kg/m² for the
chemical treatment and the mass trapping. Also, regarding the 100-seeds weight, it was 21.5g for the
control and respectively 38.2 and 41.7 g with the chemical treatment and the mass trapping.
Keywords: Chickpea leafminer, deltamethrin, Liriomyza cicerina, mass trapping

The chickpea leafminer Liriomyza
cicerina is an important insect pest
attacking both spring and winter-planted
chickpea (Bouhssini et al. 2008). It is
widespread serious pest in Europe and
North Africa, particularly Morocco and
Tunisia (Çikman et al. 2008; Reed et al.
1987; Spencer 1976). The damage is
caused by the larvae, which feed on the
leaf mesophyll tissue, resulting in hole,
galleries and premature leaf fall (Çikman
2006). Chickpea leaf miner causes yield
reductions that can reach 40% (Reed et al.
Corresponding author: Abir Soltani
Email: soltany.abyr@gmail.com
Accepted for publication 01 February 2018
1987). This insect pest can be controlled
using various methods including
insecticides (Çikman et al. 2011) and
control practices like mass trapping
(Çikman and Kaplan 2008). The aim of
this research was to evaluate the impact
of mass trapping technique used at the
density of 2000 yellow sticky plastic
traps/ha on the reduction of the
infestation level and yield. Chemical
treatment using Deltamethrin 25 ml/100
liters water and untreated plots served as
control.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study site and plant material.
This study was carried out during
2015 and 2016 in Beja site (North-west

Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 108 Vol. 13, SI, 2018
Tunisia, 36°44'56.83''N 9°12'50.24''E).
Trials were conducted in the experimental
station of the Regional Center of
Research on Field Crops (CRRGC). The
experimental plan was identical for both
seasons. Inside the field, 30 m² plots were
randomly selected consisted of 30 rows
each 4 m long. Each treated and untreated
plot was replicated 3 times and trials were
carried out during two years 2015 and
2016. Total experiment area was 270 m².
There was no fertilization and no
watering application during production
period. The winter chickpea variety Nour
(Pedigree: X96TH61-A3-W1-A2-W1-
A1-W1-W1) was used for these trials.
Chickpea has been sown on 25 December
2015 and 15 January 2016 at a density of
30 seeds per m² and no fertilization was
applied during the season crop on both
years.
Mass trapping trials.
A density of 2000 traps/ha was
assessed. Traps were constructed from
yellow plastic boards (20 × 15 cm) with a
sticky coating. Traps were elevated 10 cm
above the top of the plants as described
by Çikman and Kaplan (2008) when
plants height was 10 cm. Traps were
checked once a week and changed
weekly. Moreover, 6 traps were placed
respectively in the field where 1 trap per
5 m² was placed in the middle (1 traps per
150 plants) to monitor L. cicerina adults.
Trials were carried out in 3 plots of 30 m2
each. Mass trapping efficacy was
assessed on pest infestation means of
larvae, emerged adults and chickpea
yield. The traps were placed on 1st
February on 2015 and 10 February on
2016. For treated plots with chemical
spray and untreated plots, 1 trap was
placed for the control of emerged adults’
number.
Chemical treatment.
Deltamethrin (Decis® EC 50,
Bayer Crop Science, France) was used at
the dose of 25 ml/100 l water. Treatments
were applied when the pest density
reached a level of 2-3 larvae/leaf in 50%
of plants in the field (Çikman and Kaplan
2008). Thus, three sprays were realized
on 23 April, 20 May and 4 June in 2015,
and 15 April, 15 May and 30 May in
2016. Untreated plots with no chemical
sprays served as control. Infestation
percentage, emerged adults and chickpea
yield were noted.
Infestation assessment.
Thirty leaves were randomly
sampled from each plot weekly starting
from March to June. Samples were
checked under binocular and the
infestation percentage was determined
according to the following formula
(Toker et al. 2010):
  
 *100


Yield assessment.
Grain yield per m2 (GY/m2) and
100-seed weight (100 SW) were
determined in three replications for each
plot.
Statistical analysis.
Statistical analyses were
performed using the "SPSS statistical
software version 20.0". Presented values
were the average of three replications and
were expressed as the mean ± standard
deviation (x
̅ ± SD). Significant
differences between the mean values (P ≤
0.05) were determined based on Duncan’s
Multiple Range test.

Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 109 Vol. 13, SI, 2018
RESULTS
Effect of mass trapping and chemical
treatments on chickpea leafminer
infestation
Infestation was recorded weekly
starting from the beginning of L. cicerina
attacks on the 1st week of March during
2015 and 2016. Table 1 reports the
average number of live larvae of L.
cicerina on chemically treated plots,
untreated plots and those with mass
taping during March, April and May in
2015 and 2016 years.
As shown in Table 1, the highest
infestations were recorded in control plots
during May for both years. Infestations
reached 50.6 and 57.3% for 2015 and
2016, respectively. However, plots treated
with mass trapping and insecticide
(Deltamethrin) showed lower infestations
(Table 1). As it can be seen from these
results, control plots’ infestation level
was 2-3 times higher than insecticide-
treated plots and 1.5 times than mass
trapping managed plots. Statistical
analysis revealed significant differences
between untreated (control) and treated
plots (mass trapping and insecticide).
Moreover, for results pointed out at the
beginning of the infestation (March for
both years), no significant differences
were detected between mass trapping and
insecticide-based treatment. However,
when the insect populations increased
during April and May, significant
differences were thus observed between
mass trapping and insecticide treatment.
Best performances were achieved for the
chemical control since infestations did not
exceed 24% while they reached 42% for
mass trapping treatment (Table 1).
Table1. Impacts of mass trapping and insecticide treatment on Nour chickpea variety infested by Liriomyza cicerina
in Beja during 2015 and 2016 (Mean of larvae ± Standard Error/leaf)
Treatment
2015
2016
March
April
May
March
April
May
Control
8.9 ± 1.3 b
27.2 ± 1.2 c
50.6 ± 2.4 c
8.0 ± 0.0 b
28.3 ± 0.55 c
57.3 ± 0.57 c
Mass trapping
6.4 ± 0.7 a
22.0 ± 0.3 b
35.3 ± 1.1 b
5.3 ± 0.57 a
17.3 ± 0.75 a
42.0 ± 0.0 b
Deltamethrin
5.1 ± 0.6 a
15.0 ± 0.7 a
23.4 ± 0.5 a
5.3 ± 0.57 a
15.3 ± 0.57 a
22.3 ± 0.57 a
In each column, means followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to Duncan’s Multiple
Range test at P < 0.05.
Effect of mass trapping and chemical
sprays on the reduction of L. cicerina
populations.
Table 2 reports the results of the
impact of mass trapping and insecticide
treatment on the chickpea leafminer
populations’ reductions.
Table 2. Impact of mass trapping and insecticide treatment on reduction of Liriomyza
cicerina infestation (%) on Nour chickpea variety in Beja during 2015 and 2016
Treatment
2015
2016
March
April
May
Marh
April
May
Mass trapping
2.52 a
5.18 a
15.32 a
1.79 a
6.97 a
15.04 a
Deltamethrin
2.23 a
12.25 b
29.44 b
2.22 a
15.03 b
34.92 b
Control
0 b
0 c
0 c
0 b
0 c
0 c
In each column, means followed by the same letter are not significantly different
according to Duncan’s Multiple Range test at P < 0.05.

Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 110 Vol. 13, SI, 2018
Results showed interesting
reductions in L. cicerina populations due
to mass trapping and insecticide
treatment. Furthermore, results indicated
that the reduction varied according to the
increase of the pest population. Indeed,
during March, when the infestation is still
at the beginning, reductions reached only
2.52 and 2.23% during 2015 and 1.79 and
2.22% during 2016, respectively, for
mass trapping and insecticide treatment.
However, reductions were more
interesting at May for insecticide
treatment with respective values of 29.44
and 34.92% during 2015 and 2016.
As shown in Table 2 for means
separated based on Duncan’s Multiple
Range test, there was no significant
difference on reduction percentage during
March for both years 2015 and 2016
between plots with mass trapping and
chemical spray. However, there was
significant difference between mass
trapping and Deltamethrin treatment
during April and May.
Effect of mass trapping and chemical
treatment on chickpea yield.
Effects of mass trapping and
chemical treatment on L. cicerina adult
density and chickpea yield (Grain yield
per m2 (GY/m2) and 100-seed weight
(100 SW)) are illustrated in Tables 3 and
4.
Table 3. Average number of Liriomyza cicerina adults by weekly count (lowercase letter) and Duncan groups
(uppercase letter) during 2015 and 2016
Treatment
2015
2016
March
April
May
March
April
May
Control
17.7±1.5 aB
52.6±3.5 bB
78±2 cB
15.7±1.5 aB
52.6±6 bB
81.3±6 cB
Mass trapping
9±1 aA
31±1 bA
47.3±1.5 cA
9.3±0.6 aA
29±1 bA
48.3±1.5 cA
Deltamethrin
7.6±1.5 aA
25.7±4.9 bA
45.3±3 cA
8.7±0.6 aA
27±3 bA
45±2 cA
In each column, means followed by the same letter were not significantly different according to Duncan’s Multiple
Range test at P < 0.01.
During March, the mean number
of fly adults was low in plots, and
increased progressively in April to reach
the peak in May for both years 2015 and
2016. As shown in Table 3 for Duncan
groups, it was determined that there was
no significant difference between years
(df = 1, F = 0.14, P > 0.05). A significant
difference was noted between months (df
= 2, F = 1148.61, P < 0.01) and between
treatments (df = 2, F = 345.9, P < 0.01).
Number of adults per traps was not
significantly different in mass trapping
and Deltamethrin treated plots, and there
was a significant difference between
control and treated plots in both years.
Table 4. Impact of mass trapping and insecticide treatment on Liriomyza cicerina on Nour
chickpea variety grain yield (GY) and 100-seed weight (100 SW) in Beja during 2015 and 2016
Treatment
2015
2016
GY (kg/m²)
100 SW (g)
GY (kg/m²)
100 SW (g)
Control
0.34 ± 0.02 a
21.56 ± 0.15 a
0.21 ± 0.02 a
23.13 ± 0.25 a
Mass trapping
0.80 ± 0.01 b
38.56 ± 1.33 b
0.81 ± 0.01 b
38.2 ± 0.41 b
Deltamethrin
0.83 ± 0.02 b
39.7 ± 0.55 b
0.82 ± b
41.7 ± 1.10 c
In each column, means followed by same letter were not significantly different according to
Duncan’s Multiple Range test at P < 0.05.

Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 111 Vol. 13, SI, 2018
Results showed that yield values
were higher for treated plots (mass
trapping and insecticide treatment)
compared to control. Statistical analysis
showed significant differences between
grain yield and 100-seed weight values of
control and both treatment. It appears that
mass trapping and insecticide treatment
preserve grain weight during 2015 and
2016. In this respect, no statistical
differences were observed between grain
yield and 100-seed weight values between
mass trapping and insecticide treatment.
Results indicated that L. cicerina
infestations had an effect on chickpea
yield that could be reduced by more than
50% using both management methods.
DISCUSSION
L. cicerina is an important insect
pest on chickpea plants (Çikman 2006).
Adults emerged from March until June
(Soltani et al. 2016). Previous works
indicated that L. cicerina is a serious pest
of chickpea in Tunisia (Soltani et al.
2016). Thus, control methods should be
implemented. Bouhssini et al. (2008)
reported that Deltamethrin had an impact
in limiting L. cicerina populations. On the
other hand, Arida et al. (2007)
demonstrated that yellow sticky board
traps could be incorporated in the
management strategy against leaf miner
adults under field conditions. The present
study revealed that both mass trapping
and Deltamethrin-based treatments
significantly reduced L. cicerina damage
on chickpea leaflets. However,
Deltamethrin significantly reduced more
the number of alive larvae compared to
mass trapping and control. Yield losses
are likely to appear due to damage caused
by L. cicerina larvae and adults which
could be eliminated by applying
insecticides (Çıkman et al. 2011). This
study pointed out that L. cicerina led to
significant yield loss on chickpea winter
crops (Nour variety). Additionally, this
study showed that insecticide and mass
trapping treatments displayed an
important role to reduce pest losses.
Regarding the above results, mass
trapping could well be used to control L.
cicerina populations. Mass trapping
should be taken into consideration in IPM
studies and recommended for farmers to
use when low pest populations densities
occur.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank the Regional Field Crop Research Center
of Béja (CRRGC) to allow us performing the field
work.
__________________________________________________________________________
RESUME
Soltani A., Amri M. et Mediouni-Ben Jemâa J. 2018. Évaluation aux champs de la
technique de piégeage de masse pour la lutte contre la mineuse du pois chiche Liriomyza
cicerina. Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 13 (si): 107-112.
Ce travail constitue une évaluation de la technique de piégeage de masse contre la mineuse du pois
chiche Liriomyza cicerina comme une alternative à la pulvérisation d’insecticide. Les essais ont été
menés à Beja en 2015 et 2016 en utilisant la variété Nour. Les feuilles ont été échantillonnées chaque
semaine à partir de toutes les parcelles traitées et témoins et observées sous loupe binoculaire. En ce
qui concerne la réduction de l'infestation à la récolte, les résultats ont montré des réductions de 20,11%
et 18,13% respectivement pour les traitements chimiques et de piégeage de masse par rapport au
contrôle. L'efficacité a également été évaluée sur la base des captures et les réductions d’infestations
par rapport au témoin, le rendement et le poids de 100 grains. Les résultats ont montré une différence
significative (à P < 0,05) entre les traitements avec un rendement de 0.21 kg/m² pour le témoin et 0.8
kg/m² pour le traitement chimique et le piégeage de masse. Egalement pour lepoids de 100 graines, il

Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection 112 Vol. 13, SI, 2018
était de 23.1 g pour le témoin et respectivement 38.2 et 41.7 g pour le traitement chimique et le
piégeage de masse.
Mots clés: Deltaméthrine, Liriomyza cicerina, mineuse du pois chiche, piégeage de masse
__________________________________________________________________________

 .2018 
 Liriomyza cicerina

. .211-13 (si): 107 ProtectionTunisian Journal of Plant
Liriomyza cicerina 


 
%20,11%18,03


P < 0,05    
 23.1    

Liriomyza cicerina
__________________________________________________________________________
LITERATURE CITED
Çikman, E. 2006. Population development of the
chickpea pest Liriomyza cicerina (Rondani,
1875) in Şanlıurfa province. Journal of
Agricultural Faculty Harran University 10: 1-6.
Çikman, E. Civelek, H.S., and Yildirim E.M. 2011.
Effects of spinosad on Liriomyza cicerina
(Rondani, 1875) (Diptera: Agromyzidae) and its
parasitoids in chickpea. Turkish Journal of
Entomology 1: 71-77.
Çıkman, E., and Kaplan, M. 2008. Effects of
azadirachtin a (Azadirachta indica a Juss
(Meliacea)) on larval serpentine leafminers
Liriomyza cicerina (Rondani, 1875) (Diptera:
Agromyzidae) in chickpea. Journal of Applied
Sciences Research 4: 1143-1148.
Çikman, E., Civelek, H.S., and Weintrub, P.G.
2008. The parasitoids complex of Liriomyza
cicerina on chickpea (Cicer arietinum).
Phytoparasitica 36: 211-216.
El-Bouhssini, M., Mardini, K., Malhotra, R.S.,
Joubi, A., and Kagka, N. 2008. Effects of
planting date, varieties and insecticides on
chickpea leaf miner (Liriomyza cicerina R.)
infestation and the parasitoid Opius
monilicornis F. Crop Protection 27: 915-919.
Arida, G., Punzal, B.S., Shepard, B.M., and Rajotte,
E.G. 2007. Sticky board traps for managing leaf
miner Liriomyza trifolii (Burgess), infestation in
onion. (Allium cepa Lin) Philippine
Entomologist 27: 109-119.
Reed, W., Cardona, C., Sithanantham, S., and
Lateef, S.S. 1987. Chickpea insect pest and
their control. Pages 283-318. In: The Chickpea,
M.C. Saxena, and K.B. Singh, Eds. CAB
International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.
Singh, K.B., Malhotra, R.S., Halila, M.H., Knights,
E.J., and Verma, M.M. 1994. Current status and
future strategy in breeding chickpea for
resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses.
Euphytica 73: 137-149.
Soltani, A., Amri, M., and Mediouni-Ben Jmâa, J.
2016. Dynamics of the populations of chickpea
leaf miner (Liriomyza cicerina) in the sub-
humid regions of Tunisia. Page 39. In: IV
Congress International congress of
Biotechnology and Valorization of Bio-
Resources March 24-27, 2016, Hammamet,
Tunisia.
Spencer, K.A. 1976. The Agromyzidae (Diptera) of
Fennoscandia and Denmark. Fauna
Entomologica Scandinavica 5:1-606.
Toker, C., Erler F., Canci, H., and Ceylan F.O.
2010. Severity of leaf miner (Liriomyza
cicerina Rond.) damage in relation to leaf type
in chickpea. Turkish Journal of Entomology 34:
211-226.
--------------------