Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies 2017; 5(6): 481-489

E-ISSN: 2320-7078 P-ISSN: 2349-6800 Pest vs. predator communities in citrus orchards JEZS 2017; 5(6): 481-489 © 2017 JEZS under ecological conditions of district Toba Tek Received: 10-09-2017 Accepted: 14-10-2017 Singh (Punjab), Pakistan

Naureen Rana Department of Fisheries and

Zoology, University of Naureen Rana, Saira Javed, Muhammad Zafar Iqbal, Ushna Bashir Rana, Agriculture, Faisalabad, Abid Ali, Sadia Maalik and Somia Afzal Pakistan

Saira Javed Abstract Department of Fisheries and Kinnow (Citrus nobilis) and orange (Citrus reticulata) are fruits having significant economic, cultural Zoology, University of and social impact throughout the world. Orchards of these fruits serve as a host of many insects but Agriculture, Faisalabad, interaction of citrus host with insect fauna varies from pest to predator that show symbiotic relationship Pakistan and ultimately lowers fruit production. The present study was conducted from July to December, 2015 to record occurrence and interaction of pest vs. predator communities along the temperature gradient on Muhammad Zafar Iqbal citrus orchards under the ecological conditions of district Toba Tek Singh (Punjab), Pakistan. The Department of Fisheries and abundance of pest was found to increase rapidly in late July, and reached its first peak in late-August, Zoology, University of then followed by the second peak in mid-October among orange orchards. Few numbers of natural Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan enemy species were discovered and recorded highest in September in association with pest species. Among kinnow orchards, pest abundance was found to increase in late-August, than followed by the Ushna Bashir Rana second peak in early October: Dalbulus maidis (Cicadellidae) was recorded as an extraordinary Department of Fisheries and contributing pest species. However population densities of natural enemies were highest from September Zoology, University of to October and lowest densities were recorded in early July and in late-December. In case of natural Agriculture, Faisalabad, enemies, Raphidopalapa foveicollis (Chrysomelidae) was recorded abundantly. Findings from this study Pakistan suggested that under field conditions, various indigenous natural enemies (predators of different sizes) may act for suppression of pest species to great extent but they were quite low in number. However, Abid Ali results of analysis of variance regarding pest and predator densities among both orchards were not Department of Entomology, significant (F = 2.20; P = 0.1601 “orange” and F = 1.33; P = 0.2686 “Kinnow”). University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan Keywords: insect pests, natural enemies, citrus orchards, biological control

Sadia Maalik Department of Zoology, Introduction University of Sialkot, Pakistan Citrus fruit has been cultivated in an ever-widening area since ancient times. Depending on its ecological demands, it is cultivated throughout the tropical and temperate regions [17]. Lemons, Somia Afzal limes, grapefruits and oranges are eminent member of this family but sour kinnow and sweet Department of Fisheries and Zoology, University of oranges are the most important as fresh juicy fruits and contribute approximately upto 80% of [28] Agriculture, Faisalabad, the world’s citrus fruit production . Pakistan, cultivate 12.0 million tonnes edible crops Pakistan annually, among them citrus is at the top of list. Annually, 1.5 million metric tonnes of this major fruit production is done over the area of 160,000 hectares, from which 95% production is contributed from Punjab [2].

Being commercial fruit, citrus is damaged by various insect pests e.g. citrus white fly (Dialeurodea citri), citrus leaf miner (Phyllocnistis citrella), scale insect (Aonidella aurantii). aphids, mites, red scale (Aonidiella aurantii), black scale (Parlatoria ziziphi), red scale parasite (Aphytis lingnensis) and euonymus scale (Encarsia citrina), citrus mealy bug (Planococcus citri) [7, 16, 21]. Citrus leaf miner (CLM) is an eminent nuisance that make mines in [4] immature foliage of growing plants ; whereas fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata) is also one of the serious pests that damage the subtropical, tropical and deciduous fruits. They affect the fruit throughout the year but sometimes they serve as a source of fungal infection. Aphids like Ageniaspis citricola, Aphis gossypii and Toxoptera citricidus also reduce fruit production by Correspondence direct feeding and spreading sooty mold; and Asian citrus psyllid (Diaphorina citri) wa Naureen Rana Department of Fisheries and another nuisance that not only damage young shoots but also serve as a source of pathogens [33] Zoology, University of around the world . Natural enemies of citrus nuisance belongs to family Coccinellidae, prey Agriculture, Faisalabad, on aphid and scale insect [33]. Pakistan ~ 481 ~ Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

While, some other generalist predators such as Chrysopidae, Data collection Syrphidae and parasitoids wasps are also common in citrus The data was collected from each orchard with the interval of and they act as natural nuisance controlling agent [20, 23, 24]. two weeks as per planned schedule. The collection was made Ants are the major component of the citrus orchard fauna and from selected fields during 6:00-8:00 am. Sampling was indirectly show negative effects on citrus. Because, they show carried out with the help of sweep net and forceps. The sweep mutualistic association with homopterous pests such as net was used to collect flying insect. The sweep net was swept aphids, soft scales and mealy bugs [11] and collect honeydew back and forth through vegetation quickly turning the opening produced by homopterans and in return provide them with from side to side and following a shallow figure eight [8] protection from their natural enemies [31]. Role impact of pattern. Collected specimens were stored in jars containing predacious arthropods in natural communities and agricultural 70-30% alcohol and glycerin solution. The collected crops has received more attention in recent years. The specimens were then brought to the Biodiversity Laboratory, importance of natural enemies (parasites, predators and Department of Zoology, Wildlife and Fisheries, University of pathogens) as controlling agents is coming into closer focus, Agriculture Faisalabad and placed in separate glass vials. The based on modern investigations [3]. emerged specimens were identified upto species level with the Hence, the use of pesticides should be prohibited in order to dissecting binocular microscope, identification keys, conserve biodiversity. Integrated management program needs description available in literature [5] and on web site. Glass to be promoted as biological control as a best strategy to vials were labeled accordingly containing the date of minimize the pest population [13]. Insect play an important role collection, locality name, common name, scientific name in nutrient recycling not only as a source of food for specimens, temperature, humidity, to diversify their ecology. vertebrate animal but also to boost the pollination standard for the conservation of diversity. Honeybee is the dominant and Statistical Analysis eminent pollinator among all insects; however, others like Analysis of Variance was made to compare the population carpenter bee, syrphids, halictids and sphecids are also very means between kinnow and orange orchards. Wilcoxon Rank important [30]. Sum Test was used for the comparison of the occurrence Keeping in view the background information, the present regarding the population dynamics of the recorded orders viz. work was conducted (i) to evaluate the occurrence of pest and Coleoptera, Lepidoptera, Diptera, Hemiptera, Odonata, natural enemies’ communities among kinnow and orange Orthoptera, Araneae and Hymenoptera, among both orchards fields, (ii) to demonstrate the interaction between preys vs. for weighing up the population mean differences; either they natural enemies among citrus orchards along the ecological are distributed as conditioned by Null hypothesis [18]. gradient. Results Materials and Methods Orange (Pest): Total 07 pests’ orders were recorded form Field area orange orchards and among them, higher relative abundance This study was carried out w.e.f. July to December, 2015 to (52.83%; N= 420) was recorded for order Hemiptera, estimate the pest and natural enemies communities among followed by Pulmonata (16.98%; N = 420), Orthoptera citrus orchards pertaining to orange and kinnow orchards with (11.70%; N = 93), Diptera: (9.94; N = 79), Coleoptera an area of 100 m2 (65m×35m) for each field. The orchards (4.53%; N = 36) and Lepidoptera (2.77%; N = 22). However, were located at countryside of Gojra city (District Toba Tek least relative abundance (N ≤ 10) was recorded for order Singh) (710 ft., 31° 25 N, 73° 20 E). The boundary of Tehsil Hymenoptera (Fig. 1a). Gojra is joined on the eastern side with the Faisalabad District and in the west with the District Jhang. Its north boundary is Predator: Total 06 orders were recorded among orange joined with the Tehsil Chiniot and in the south with District orchards with regard to predators’ population, and maximum Toba Tek Singh. Eight to ten year old citrus trees (10 plants relative abundance 35.47% (N = 72) was recorded for order from each variety) were selected from each orchard. Coleoptera, followed by Hymenoptera: (29.06%; N = 59), and Harvesting starts from end-November extending up to April Araneae (28.57%; N = 58). However, least relative abundance while the season of availability of fruit starts from mid- (N ≤ 10) was recorded for order Orthoptera, Diptera and October and extends normally up to March. The selected Hemiptera (Fig. 1b). orchards were not treated with pesticide during the survey period.

Fig 1(a). Total counts of Pest’ orders observed in Orange orchard during July to August 2015. Dominant group of pests counted during entire 12 samplings were Hemiptera followed by Pulmonata, Orthoptera, Diptera and Coleoptera. Least abundance recorded for Lepidoptera and Hymenoptera. (b). Total counts of Predator orders observed in Orange orchard during July to August 2015. Dominant group of predators counted during entire 12 samplings were Coleoptera followed by Hymenoptera, Araneae. Least abundance recorded for Orthoptera, Diptera and Hemiptera. ~ 482 ~ Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

Kinnow (Pest): Total 07 pests’ orders were recorded among 13), Crambidae (1.26; N = 10), and Curculionidae (0.75%; N kinnow orchards, among them higher relative abundance = 06). However, least relative abundance (N ≤ 05) was 78.41% (N = 1151) was recorded for order Hemiptera, recorded for family Anisoplidae, Sphecidae, Geometridae, followed by Pulmonata (7.63%; N = 112), Orthoptera (4.90%; Tineidae, Phrrhocoroidae, Acanthosomatidae, Apidae, N = 72), Diptera (4.09%; N = 60), Coleoptera (3.00%; N = Hepialidae, Pentatomidae, Tephritidae, Braconidae, 44), and Lepidoptera (1.57%, N = 23). However, least relative Elateridae, Bombyliidae, Tiphiidae, Tieridae and Coreidae. abundance (N ≤ 10) was recorded for order Orthoptera and Among kinnow orchards, maximum relative abundance was Hymenoptera (Fig. 2a). Predator: Among kinnow orchards, recorded for Cicadellidae 70.57% (N = 1036), followed by total 07 predators’ orders were recorded and maximum Helicidae (4.29%; N = 63), Bothriembryontidae (3.34%; N = relative abundance 32.97% (N = 61) was recorded for order 49), Acrididae (2.52%; N = 37), Lophoidae (2.38%, N = 35), Hymenoptera, followed by Araneae and Coleoptera (30.27%; Lauxaniidae (2.25%; N = 33), Gryllidae, Alydidae (2.04%; N N = 56). However, least relative abundance (N ≤ 10) was = 30), Chrysomelidae (1.84%; N = 27), Membracidae (1.63%; recorded for order Hemiptera, Orthoptera, Odonata, and N = 24), Curculionidae (0.89%; N = 13), Calliphoridae and Mantodea (Fig. 2b). Heterogastridae (0.61%; N = 09), Geometridae (0.58%; N = 08) and Crambidae, Pieridae (0.41%; N = 06). However, least relative abundance (N ≤ 05) was recorded for family Raphidophoridae, Pyrrhocoroidae, Apidade, Pentatomidae, Acanthosomatidae, Coreidae, Anisopliae, Sphecidae, Scarabediae, Elateridae, Tineidae, Hepialidae and Canidae. While, family Braconidae, Tiphiidae, Bombyliidae, Culicidae and Tettigoniidae were not recorded among kinnow orchards (Table 1). Predator: In case of orange orchards, total of 26 families were recorded and among them, extra ordinary relative abundance (24.14%; N = 49) was recorded for Chrysomelidae family, followed by Formicidae (9.36%; N = 19), Salticidae (8.37%; N = 17), Coccinellidae (7.88%; N = 16), Clubionidae, Andrenidae (6.90%; N = 14), Oxyopidae (4.43%; N = 09), Eulophidae, Braconidae (3.94%; n = 08), Sparassidae (3.45%; N = 07), and Sphecidae, Tettigoniidae, Vespidae (2.96%; N = 06). However, least relative abundance (N ≤ 05) was recorded

Fig 2(a): Total counts of Pest orders observed in Kinnow orchard for family Carabidae, Asilidae, Ichneumonidae, Uloboridae, during July to August 2015. Dominant group of pest counted during Thomisidae, Miturgidae, Pompilidae, Tiphiidae, Araneidae, entire 12 samplings were Hemiptera followed by Pulmonata, Meloidae, Reduviidae, Lygaeidae, and Crabonidae. While, Orthoptera and Diptera. Least abundance recorded for Coleoptera, family Tetragnathidae, Pentatomidae, Staphylinidae, Lepidoptera and Hymenoptera. Geocoridae, Mantidae and Libellulidae were not recorded (b). Total counts of Predator orders observed in Kinnow orchard from fruiter orchards. In case of kinnow orchards, total 28 during July to August 2015. Dominant group of predator counted families were recorded and among them, extra ordinary during entire 12 samplings were Hymenoptera followed by Araneae relative abundance (19.46%; N = 36) was recorded for and Hymenoptera. Least abundance recorded for Chrysomelidae family, followed by Salticidae (9.73%; N = Hemiptera,Orthoptera, Mantodea and Odonata. 18), Formicidae, Araneidae (7.57%; N = 14), Braconidae

(7.03%; N = 13), Eulophidae (6.49%, N = 12), Sparassidae Relative abundance upto family level (5.95%; N = 11), Coccinellidae (5.41; N = 10), and Vespidae Pest: In case of orange orchards, total 30 families were (4.32%; N = 08). However, least relative abundance (N ≤ 05) recorded and among them, extra ordinary relative abundance was recorded for family Clubionidae, Ichneumonidae, (35.97%; N = 286) was recorded for Cicadellidae family, Tettigoniidae, Tiphiidae, Andrenidae, Oxyopidae, Carabidae, followed by Bothriembryontidae (8.68%; N = 69), Helicidae Staphylinidae, Reduviidae, Geocoridae, Odonata, Meloidae, (8.30%; N = 66), Acrididae (6.54%; N = 52), Lophoidae Pentatomidae, Miturgidae, Tetragnathidae, Crabonidae, (6.16%; N = 49), Alydidae (5.28%; N = 42), Lauxaniidae Sphecidae, Uloboridaea and Mantidae. While, family (5.16%; N = 41), Gryllidae (3.77%; N = 30), Chrysomelidae Lygaeidae, Thomisidae, Pomilidae and Asilidae were not (3.52%; N = 28), Calliphoridae (3.27%; N = 26), recorded from kinnow orchards (Table 2). Membracidae (2.26%; N = 18), Heterogastridae (1.64%; N =

Table 1: Pests’ relative abundance upto family level among orange and kinnow orchards

Total count %age within family Order Pest family Orange Kinnow Orange Kinnow Orthoptera Acrididae 52 37 6.54 2.52 Tettigoniidae 1 0 0.13 0

Rhaphidophoridae 10 5 1.26 0.34

Gryllidae 30 30 3.77 2.04

Diptera Lauxaniidae 41 33 5.16 2.25 Calliphoridae 26 9 3.27 0.61

Anisopliae 5 2 0.63 0.14

Tephritidae 2 16 0.25 1.09

Culicidae 4 0 0.5 0

Bombyliidae 1 0 0.13 0

~ 483 ~ Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

Hymenoptera Tiphiidae 1 0 0.13 0 Apidae 3 4 0.38 0.27

Sphecidae 4 2 0.5 0.14

Braconidae 2 0 0.25 0

Coleoptera Chrysomelidae 28 27 3.52 1.84 Scarabaeidae 0 2 0 0.14

Curculionidae 6 13 0.75 0.89

Elateridae 2 2 0.25 0.14

Lepidoptera Geometridae 4 8 0.5 0.54 Tineidae 4 2 0.5 0.14

Crambidae 10 6 1.26 0.41

Hepialidae 3 1 0.38 0.07

Pieridae 1 6 0.13 0.41

Pulmonata Helicidae 66 63 8.3 4.29 Bothriembryontidae 69 49 8.68 3.34

Hemiptera Cicadellidae 286 1036 35.97 70.57 Alydidae 42 30 5.28 2.04

Pyrrhocoroidae 4 5 0.5 0.34

Coreidae 1 3 0.13 0.2

Lophoidae 49 35 6.16 2.38

Pentatomidae 3 4 0.38 0.27

Membracidae 18 24 2.26 1.63

Heterogastridae 13 9 1.64 0.61

Acanthosomatidae 4 4 0.5 0.27

Canidae 0 1 0 0.07

Table 2: Natural enemies’ relative abundance upto family level among orange and kinnow orchards

Total count %age within family

Order Predator family Orange Fruiter Orange Kinnow Orthoptera Tettigoniidae 6 3 2.96 1.62 Diptera Asilidae 4 0 1.97 0 Hymenoptera Pompilidae 2 0 0.99 0 Vespidae 6 8 Jan-00 4.32

Tiphiidae 2 3 0.99 1.62

Formicidae 19 14 9.36 7.57

Eulophidae 8 12 3.94 6.49

Sphecidae 6 2 2.96 1.08

Braconidae 8 13 3.94 1.62

Crabronidae 1 2 0.49 1.08

Andrenidae 4 3 1.97 1.62

Ichneumonidae 3 4 1.48 2.16

Araneae Clubionidae 14 5 6.9 2.7 Sparassidae 7 11 3.45 5.95

Uloboridae 3 1 1.48 0.54

Tetragnathidae 0 2 0 1.08

Thomisidae 3 0 1.48 0

Salticidae 17 18 8.37 9.73

Oxyopidae 9 3 4.43 1.62

Araneidae 2 14 0.99 7.57

Miturgidae 3 2 1.48 1.08

Coleoptera Chrysomelidae 49 36 24.14 19.46 Carabidae 5 3 2.46 1.62

Coccinellidae 16 10 7.88 5.41

Pentatomidae 0 2 0 1.08

Staphylinidae 0 3 0 1.62

Meloidae 2 2 0.99 1.08

Hemiptera Reduviidae 2 3 0.99 1.62 Lygaeidae 2 0 0.99 0

Geocoridae 0 3 0 1.62

Mantodea Mantidae 0 1 0 0.54 Odonata Libellulidae 0 2 0 1.08

Relative abundance upto genera level Calliaopum (4.65%; N = 37), Metioche, Empoasca (3.77%; N Pest: In case of orange orchards for pests’ population, relative = 30), Plagiodera (3.14%; N = 25), Hyalymenus (3.02%; N = abundance was recorded extraordinary for genus Dalbulus 24), Phaenicia (2.77%; N = 22), Oxyrachis (2.01%; N = 16), 31.57% (N = 251). Then, genus Bothriembryon was recorded Melanoplus (1.64%; N = 13), Diestrammena, with utmost relative abundance 8.88% (N = 69), followed by Neomegalotomus (1.26%; N = 10), Evergestis (1.13%; N = Candidula (8.30%; N = 66), Pyrilla (6.16%; N = 49), 09), Oxy (1.01%; N = 08), Oxycarenus (0.88%; N = 07), and

~ 484 ~ Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

Achurum, Panchnaecus, Megaltomus (0.75%; N = 06). (1.77%; N = 26), Graminella (1.36%; N = 20), Bactrocera However, least relative abundance (N ≤ 05) was recorded for (1.09%; N = 16), Neomegalotomus (0.95%; N = 14), genus Sylvicola, Acrida, Cedarinia, Camtoprosopella, Culex, Schistocerca (0.82%; N = 12), Panchnaecus (0.75%; N = 11), Operophtera, Tineola, Cymus, Elasmosthephus, Schistocerca, Operophtera (0.54%; N = 08), Megaltomus (0.48%; N = 07), Omocestus, Apis, Chrysolina, Oxycanus, Ceratagellia, and Lucia (0.41%; N = 06). Whilst, least relative abundance Dysdercus, Dichromorpha, Chorthippus, Chortoicetes, (N ≤ 05) was recorded for Evergestis, Ascia, Hyalymenus, Arphia, Bactrocera, Disophyrous, Riptortus, Graminella, Cymus, Achurum, Apis, Riptortus, Oxyrachis, Dolyeoris, Heterogaster, Stethophyma, Chorthippus, Paulacridium, Acanthosoma, Omocestus, Phaulacridium, Camtoerosopella, Orchelimum, Geron, Myzinum, Kibunea, Jauravia, Phaenicia, Dysdercus, Homoeocerus, Oxycarenus, Cedarinia, Nomophila, Pieris, Cicadulina, Circulifer, Pyrrhopeplus, Oxy, Cerceris, Phyllotocus, Jauravia, Pyrrhocoris, Homoeocerus and Bansa. While, following genera: Dichromorpha, Crytobothrus, Sylvicola, Lycoriella, Cyrtomenus, Acanthosoma, Pyrrhocoris, Ascia, Chrysolina, Polydrusus, Ditiorhynchus, Hertogramma, Hertogramma, Ditiorhynchus, Polydrusu, Phyllotocus, Oxycanus, Pieris, Ceratagellia, Heterogaster and Lycoriella and Crytobothrus were not recorded from orange Cyrtomenus. However, following genera: Stethophyma, orchards. From kinnow orchards with regard to pests’ Chorthippus, Chortoicetes, Arphia, Orchelimun, Culex, population, relative abundance was recorded extraordinary for Geron, Myzinum, Disophyrous, Kibunea, Nomophila, genus Dalbulus 70.50% (N = 1035). Then, genus Candidula Empoasca, Cicadulina, Circulifer, Pyrrhopeplus, Bansa and was recorded with utmost relative abundance 4.29% (N = 63), Elasmothethus were not recorded from kinnow orchards followed by Bothriembryon (3.34%; N = 49), Pyrilla (2.38%; (Table 3). N = 35), Metioche, Calliopum (2.04%; N = 30), Plagiodera

Table 3: Pest relative abundance recorded upto genus level among orange and kinnow orchards

Total count % age within genera Order Pest genera Orange Kinnow Orange Kinnow Orthoptera Dichromorpha 2 1 0.25 0.07 Stethophyma 1 0 0.13 0

Melanoplus 13 8 1.64 0.54

Schistocerca 3 12 0.38 0.82

Acrida 4 1 0.5 0.07

Chorthippus 2 0 0.25 0

Cedarinia 4 2 0.5 0.14

Achurum 6 4 0.75 0.27

Chortoicetes 2 0 0.25 0

Crytobothrus 0 1 0 0.07

Chorthippus 1 0 0.13 0

Oxy 8 2 1.01 0.14

Arphia 2 0 0.25 0

Omocestus 3 3 0.38 0.2

Phaulacridium 1 3 0.13 0.2

Orchelimum 1 0 0.13 0

Diestrammena 10 5 1.26 0.34

Metioche 30 30 3.77 2.04

Diptera Calliopum 37 30 4.65 2.04 Camtoprosopella 4 3 0.5 0.2

Phaenicia 22 3 2.77 0.2

Lucilia 4 6 0.5 0.41

Sylvicola 5 1 0.63 0.07

Lycoriella 0 1 0 0.07

Bactrocera 2 16 0.25 1.09

Culex pipiens 4 0 0.5 0

Geron 1 0 0.13 0

Hymenoptera Myzinum 1 0 0.13 0 Apis 3 4 0.38 0.27

Cerceris 4 2 0.5 0.14

Disophyrous 2 0 0.25 0

Coleoptera Chrysolina 3 1 0.38 0.07 Plagiodera 25 26 3.14 1.77

Phyllotocus 0 2 0 0.14

Polydrusus 0 1 0 0.07

Ditiorhynchus 0 1 0 0.07

Panchnaecus 6 11 0.75 0.75

Kibunea 1 0 0.13 0

Jauravia 1 2 0.13 0.14

Lepidoptera Operophtera 4 8 0.5 0.54 Tineola 4 2 0.5 0.14

Evergestis 9 5 1.13 0.34

Hertogramma 0 1 0 0.07

Nomophila 1 0 0.13 0

~ 485 ~ Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

Oxycanus 3 1 0.38 0.07

Ascia 0 5 0 0.34

Pieris 1 1 0.13 0.07

Pulmonata Candidula 66 63 8.3 4.29 Bothriembryon 69 49 8.68 3.34

Hemiptera Dalbulus 251 1035 31.57 70.5 Empoasca 30 0 3.77 0

Ceratagellia 3 1 0.38 0.07

Cicadulina 1 0 0.13 0

Circulifer 1 0 0.13 0

Hyalymenus 24 5 3.02 0.34

Megaltomus 6 7 0.75 0.48

Neomegalotomus 10 14 1.26 0.95

Riptortus 2 4 0.25 0.27

Pyrrhopeplus 1 0 0.13 0

Pyrrhocoris 0 2 0 0.14

Dysdercus 3 3 0.38 0.2

Homoeocerus 1 3 0.13 0.2

Pyrilla 49 35 6.16 2.38

Dolyeoris 2 4 0.25 0.27

Banasa 1 0 0.13 0

Oxyrachis 16 4 2.01 0.27

Graminella 2 20 0.25 1.36

Heterogaster 2 1 0.25 0.07

Cymus 4 5 0.5 0.34

Oxycarenus 7 3 0.88 0.2

Elasmosthethus 4 0 0.5 0

Acanthosoma 0 4 0 0.27

Cyrtomenus 0 1 0 0.07

Predator: From orange orchards with regard to predators’ Henosepilachna, Tettigonia, Polistes, Methoche, Andrena, population, genus Raphidopalpa was recorded as an Thiodina, Oxyopes, Poecilus, Anegleis, Paederus, Geocoris, extraordinary contributing genus with relative abundance of Solenopsis, Chalybion, Disophyrus, Philanthus, Metellina, (19.21%; N = 39). Thereafter, genus Clubiona was recorded Coelophora, podisus, Lytta, Zelus, Crocothemis, Lasius, with utmost relative abundance 6.90% (N = 14), followed by Campyloneurus, Hyptiotes, Helpis, Micraspis, Reduvius, and Monolepta (4.93%; N = 10), Lycidas and Oxyopes (4.43%; N Hierodula. However, following predator genera: Efferia, = 09), Olios, Tetrastichus and Ceolophora (3.94%; N = 08), Aporinellus, Sceliphron, Allophatus, Pterocryptis, Thomisas, and Tettigonia (2.96%; N = 06). However, least relative Emathis, Thyeme, Cheilomenes, Brumoides, Lygaeus were not abundance (N ≤ 05) was recorded for Solenopsis, Chalybion, recorded from kinnow orchards (Table 4). Poecilus, Efferia, polistes, Andrena, Micraspis, Callibracon, To compute the precise level of significance among the Bracon, Hyptiotes, Thomisas, Thiodima, Chrieacanthium, recorded and identified number of taxa from both the Aporinellus, Ancistrocerus, Methocha, Thyene, orchards, analysis of variance (ANOVA) was made. After Henosepilachna, Lytta, Lygaeus, Sceliphron, Disophyrus, completing the analysis, it was observed that population mean Campyloneurus, Philanthus, Allophatus, Xanthopimpla, of recorded taxa among both orchards (orange and kinnow) Pterocryptis, Emathis, Helpis, Maevia, Cheilomenes, showed non-significant results (F = 2.20; P = 0.1601 “orange” Brumoides, Zelus and Reduvius. From kinnow orchards with and F = 1.33; P = 0.2686 “Kinnow”) (Table 5). To check and regard to predators’ population, genus Raphidopalpa was finalize the prediction with regard to null hypothesis that: recorded as an extraordinary contributing genus with relative weather the foliage fauna was inhabited similarly among both abundance of (16.22%; N = 30), thereafter, Araneus genus orchards or not, Wilcoxon Rank Sum test was applied. After was recorded with utmost relative abundance 7.57% (N = 14), completing the analysis, it was observed that population of followed by Tetrastichus (6.49%; N = 12), Camponotus, pest vs predator was not differ significantly between both Olios (5.95%; N = 11), Lycidas (4.32%; N = 08), Callibracon, orchards but habitat preference by invading insects was level Maevia (3.24%; N = 06). While, least relative abundance (N ≤ of significance (P-value ≥ 0.005) (Table 06). 05) was recorded for Clubiona, Bracon, Xanthopimpla,

Table 4: Natural check spaceenemies’ relative abundance upto genus level among orange and kinnow orchards

Total count %age within genera Order Predator genera Orange Kinnow Orange Kinnow Orthoptera Tettigonia 6 3 2.96 1.62 Diptera Efferia 4 0 1.97 0 Hymenoptera Aporinellus 2 0 0.99 0 Polistes 4 3 1.97 1.62

Ancistrocerus 2 5 0.99 2.7

Methocha 2 3 0.99 1.62

Camponotus 11 11 5.42 5.95

Solenopsis 5 2 2.46 1.08

Lasius 3 1 1.48 0.54

~ 486 ~ Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

Tetrastichus 8 12 3.94 6.49

Sceliphron 1 0 0.49 0

Chalybion 5 2 2.46 1.08

Callibracon 3 6 1.48 3.24

Bracon 3 4 1.48 1.08

Disophyrus 1 2 0.49 1.08

Campyloneurus 1 1 0.49 0.54

Philanthus 1 2 0.49 1.08

Andrena 4 3 1.97 1.62

Allophatus 1 0 0.49 0

Xanthopimpla 1 4 0.49 2.16

Pterocryptis 1 0 0.49 0

Araneae Clubiona 14 5 6.9 2.7 Olios 7 11 3.45 5.95

Hyptiotes 3 1 1.48 0.54

Metellina 0 2 0 1.08

Thomisas 3 0 1.48 0

Thiodina 3 3 1.48 1.62

Emathis 1 0 0.49 0

Thyene 2 0 0.99 0

Helpis 1 1 0.49 0.54

Maevia 1 6 0.49 3.24

Lycidas 9 8 4.43 4.32

Oxyopes 9 3 4.43 1.62

Araneus 2 14 0.99 7.57

Cheiracanthium 3 2 1.48 1.08

Coleoptera Raphidopalpa 39 30 19.21 16.22 Monolepta 10 6 4.93 3.24

Poecilus 5 3 2.46 1.62

Henosepilachna 2 4 0.99 2.16

Coelophora 8 2 3.94 1.08

Cheilomenes 1 0 0.49 0

Micraspis 4 1 1.97 0.54

Brumoides 1 0 0.49 0

Anegleis 0 3 0 1.62

Podisus 0 2 0 1.08

Paederus 0 3 0 1.62

Lytta 2 2 0.99 1.08

Hemiptera Zelus 1 2 0.49 1.08 Reduvius 1 1 0.49 0.54

Lygaeus 2 0 0.99 0

Geocoris 0 3 0 1.62

Mantodea Hierodula 0 1 0 0.54 Odonata Crocothemis 0 2 0 1.08

Discussion 26 families and 46 genera; and among kinnow orchards, total The present study was conducted to record occurrence of pest 07 predator orders were recorded belonging to 28 families and vs. natural enemies’ communities among citrus orchards 42 genera. Ebeling (1959) reported that citrus is a host for under the ecological conditions of district Toba Tek Singh many insect pests recorded over more than 850 species and (Punjab), Pakistan. After completing the whole research trials, mites have been recorded associated with it. Whereas, these it was observed that population density of pest vs. natural insects usually belong to order Hemiptera, Coleoptera, enemies correlate with each other positively. Among both Hymenoptera and Acari [6, 15]. orchards (Kinnow and Orange), their population densities Among both fields, total 2651 specimens were collected increased with effect from July onward and they attained during entire sampling (12 sampling from each category) and optimal frequencies during the flowering seasons (September maximum pest population was recorded from kinnow to October). Thereafter their population tends to decrease orchards 88.81% (N = 1468) and least pest population was gradually (Fig. 3a, b). In connection to plant life histories, recorded from orange orchards i.e. 79.66% (N = 795). insects are key motor of an ecosystem function and they can Wherein maximum predator population was recorded from live in various ecological circumstances e.g. peak, plus or orange orchards 20.34% (N = 203) and least predator negative temperature, humidity, and desiccation [14]. population was recorded from kinnow orchards i.e. 11.19% Ecological co-relation toward their diversity and density for (N = 185). Under the variable influence of biotic and abiotic primary production and ideal ecosystem functioning have factors, the interaction between predators and prey is difficult been acknowledged by [1, 9, 19, 25, 27]. to predict. However, controlled experiments have showed that Among orange orchards, total 8 pest orders, were recorded in 75% cases, the large group of predators reduces the number belonging to 35 families and 63 genera; whereas among of pest, significantly [29]. kinnow orchards, total pest 7 orders were recorded belonging Total 33 families were recorded from orange orchards and to 32 families and 55 genera. Whereas, among orange among them extra ordinary relative abundance was recorded orchards, total 7 predator orders were recorded belonging to for family Cicadellidae (35.97%; N = 286) and 26 predator ~ 487 ~ Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

families were recorded from orange and among them extra to order Hemiptera, Coleoptera, Hymenoptera and Acari [6, 15]. ordinary relative abundance was recorded for family To compute the precise level of significance among the Chrysomelidae 24.14% (N = 49). Total 30 pest families were recorded and identified number of taxa from the both recorded from kinnow orchards and among them, relatively orchards, analysis of variance (ANOVA) was made. After higher abundance (70.57%; N = 1036) was recorded for completing the analysis and it was observed that population Cicadellidae family. Total 28 predator families were recorded mean of recorded taxa among both orchards (orange and from kinnow orchards and among them extra ordinary relative kinnow) showed non-significant results (F = 2.20; P = 0.1601 abundance was (19.46%; N = 36) was recorded for “Orange” and F = 1.33; P = 0.2686 “Kinnow”) depicting that Chrysomelidae. These findings were an acknowledgement population of pest vs. natural enemies were inhabiting with [10, 12, 22, 26, 32]. variably between both orchards (Fig. 4) but habitat preference Form orange orchards, maximum pest abundance, was was level of significance (P-value ≥ 0.005). recorded for genus Dalbulus (Chrysomelidae) 31.57% (N = Moreover, from the entire observations it was concluded that 251); whereas, predator maximum abundance was recorded population of order Hemiptera was high among kinnow and for genus Raphidopalpa (19.21%; N = 39). Form kinnow orange. Dipterans population densities were recorded in orchards, maximum pest abundance, was recorded for genus conflicting contribution. To overcome the troubles induced by Dalbulus (Chrysomelidae) 70.50% (N = 1035). Whereas, pests, the awareness about the role of predators must be predator maximum abundance was recorded for boosted up among citrus growing communities to manage the Raphidopalpa (16.22%; N = 30). These insects usually belong present scenario.

Fig 3(a): Mean population dynamics observed in kinnow orchard during July to December 2015. Maximum population was recorded during 8th sampling (15-October) with 136 specimens. (b). Mean population dynamics observed in Orange orchard during July to December 2015. Maximum population was recorded during 7th sampling (02-October) with 136 specimens.

Fig 4. Mean population dynamics of pest and natural enemies recorded among both Kinnow and Orange orchards.

References reticulata) and rough lemon (Citrus jambheri). Pak. J Bot. 1. Afzal, S. Determination of ecological diversity of order 2008; 40:589-598. Diptera, Coleoptera and Siphonoptera among okra 3. Bailey WJ. Acoustic Behavior of insects: An Evolutionary Abelmoschus esculentus L. potato Solanum tuberosum L. Perspective. Chapman and Hall, New York, 1991. and cauliflower Brassica oleracea L. fields. M.Phil 4. Beattie A, Hardy S. Citrus leafminer. Agfact H2. New Thesis, Department of Zoology, Wildlife and Fisheries, South Wales Agri. 2004; 4:23-34. University of Agriculture, Faisalabad. 2015, 89-98. 5. Borror DJ, Delong DM. An introduction to the study of 2. Altaf N, Khan AR. Variation within Kinnow (Citrus insects. Columbus, Ohio, 2005.

~ 488 ~ Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies

6. Buker VRS, Manner HI. Citrus species. Elevitch, C. R. 25. Rana N, Rana SA, Sohail A, Siddiqui MJI, Iqbal MZ. and Smith, 2.1. Hawaii. Hōlualoa, (PAR), Resources Diversity of Soil Macrofauna in Sugarcane of high input Agriculture Permanent Agroforestry. Island Pacific for and low input nature: Past Finding and future priorities. Profiles S. pecies (Id.). C. R. Elevitch. In: Pak. Entomol., 28: 2006, 19-26. http://www.traditionaltree.org. 2006 26. Sanjeev R, Uma S, Bhagat RM, Gupta SP. Population 7. Ceballo FA, Papcek D, Watler GH. Survey of mealybugs dynamics and succession of fruit fly on sub-tropical fruits and their parasitoids in South East Queensland citrus. J under rainfed condition in Jammu Region. Indian J Entomol. 1999; 37:275-280. Entomology. 2008; 70:12-15. 8. Clarke GM. Fluctuating asymmetry of invertebrate 27. Sharma D, Rao DV. A field study of pest of cauliflower populations as a biological indicator of environmental cabbage and okra in some areas of Jaipur. Int. J. Biotech. quality. Environ. Pollut. 1993; 82:207-211. Pharma Res. Life Sci. 2012; 1:2250-3137. 9. Decaen T, Jimenez JJ, Barros E, Chauvel A, Blanchart E, 28. Sidana J, Siani V, Daphiya S, Nain P, Bala S. A review of Fragoso C, Lavelle P. Soil macrofaunal communities in citrus “The boon of nature. J Pharmaceut Sci. 2013; 18:20- permanent pastures derived from tropical forest or 27. savanna. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2004; 103:301-312. 29. Symondson W, Glen DM, Wiltshire CW, Langdon CJ. 10. Fappiah F, Nuamah KA, Ofori O. Abundance and Dynamics of the relationship between a polyphagous distribution of the Mediterranean fruit fly Ceratitis predator and slugs over five years. Ecol. 2002; 83:137- capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae), in late Valencia citrus 147. orchards in Ghana. Int. J Tropical Insect Science. 2009; 30. Thakur M. Bees as pollinators-biodiversity and 29:11-16. conservation. Res. J Agric. Sci. Soil Sci. 2012; 2:1-7. 11. Flanders SE. Coincident infestations of Aonidiella citrine 31. Way MJ. Mutualism between ants and honeydew- and Coccus hesperidum: A result of ant diversity. J Econ. producing Homoptera. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1963; 6:307- Entomol. 1945; 38:711-712. 344. 12. Forster P. Influence of pesticides on larvae and adults of 32. Yang Z, Cai P, Wang L. The occurrence and damage to Platynus dorsalis and adults of Tachyporus hypnorum in the fruit trees of citrus small fruit fly in Sizhou area, laboratory and semi-field trials. J Plant Dis. Prot. 1991; Jiangsu province. South China Fruits. 2009; 2:38-39. 98:457-463. 33. Zhang W, Swinton SM. Incorporating natural enemies in 13. Ghaffor A, Mahmood A. Population dynamics of the an economic threshold for dynamically optimal pest Arachnid fauna from district Gujranwala, Pakistan. J management. Eco. Model.ssss 2009; 220:1315-1324. Anim. Plant Sci. 2011; 21:812-816. 14. Gullan PJ, Cranston PS. The Insects: An outline of Entomology. Wiley-Blackwell, publisher, 2010. 15. Hashmi A. A. Integrated pest management: In Horticulture. Bashir and Bantel (Ed.). Pakistan Agric. Res. Council, Islamabad, Pakistan. 1994, 633. 16. Kamel AS. Insects attack citrus trees in Al-Qalyubiyah Governorate, Egypt. J Bio. Sci. 2010; 3:107-117. 17. Klein J. Citron Cultivation, Production and Uses in the Mediterranean Region. In: Z. Yaniv; N. Dudai. Medicinal and Aromatic Plants of the Middle-East. 2. Springer Netherlands. 2014, 199-214. doi:10.1007/978-94-017- 9276-9_10 18. Kerby DS. The simple difference formula: An approach to teaching nonparametric correlation. Innovative Teaching. 2014; 3:10-20. 19. Meyer JR. Social Impacts. ENT 425 Home Page. Last Updated: 21 January 2007. Department of entomology NC State University, 2007. 20. Michaud JP. Natural mortality of Asian Citrus Psyllid (Homoptera: Psyllidae) in central Florida. Biological Control. 2004; 29:260-269. 21. Moustafa M. Scale insects (Coccoidae: Hemiptera) infested citrus trees and their natural enemies, with a key of these pests in Egypt. J Bio. Sci. 2012; 5:1-23. 22. Nasir S, Akram W, Ahmed F, Sahi ST. Biodiversity of staphylinids in cropped area of the Punjab (Pakistan). Pak. J Agri. Sci. 2011; 48:125-128. 23. Qureshi JA, Stansly PA. Rate, placement and timing of aldicarb applications to control Asian Citrus Psyllid, Diaphornia citri Kuwayama Hemiptera: Psyllidae, in oranges. Pest Manag. Sci., 64: 2008, 1159-1169. 24. Qureshi JA, Stansly PA. Exclusion techniques reveal significant biotic mortality suffered by Asian citrus psyllid Diaphornia citri (Hemiptera: Psyllide) populations in Florida citrus. Biol. Cont. 2009; 50:129-136.

~ 489 ~