The adverse effects of molluscicides applied for the control of the invasive apple snails, Pomacea spp., have led to the search for eco-based cultural, mechanical and biological control techniques. Therefore, a field study on the relative effectiveness of locally available and cost effective plant-based traps against Pomacea spp. was conducted. Results showed jackfruit skin (9.03 ± 0.60/m2 and 6.03 ± 0.60/m2) and damaged pomelo (9.00 ± 0.61/m2 and 5.78 ± 0.74/m2) were relatively more effective than tapioca leaves, water spinach leaves and old newspaper. Snails also displayed preference for fresh materials as compared to rotten materials. Thus, incorporating these findings in rice fields during early susceptible growth will ease the collection and destruction of snails

Gilal, Arfan Ahmed

Gnanasegaram, Manjeri

Muhamad Awang, Rita

R. B., Syamsul

Universiti Putra Malaysia Institutional Repository

Pertanika J. Trop. Agric. Sci. 39 (2): 137 - 143 (2016)ISSN: 1511-3701    © Universiti Putra Malaysia PressTROPICAL AGRICULTURAL SCIENCEJournal homepage: http://www.pertanika.upm.edu.my/Article history:Received: 19 August 2015 Accepted: 26 January 2016ARTICLE INFOE-mail addresses: jansrlois@gmail.com (Syamsul, R. B.),  rita@upm.edu.my (Muhamad, R.),  irfan_gilal@yahoo.com (Arfan, A. G.),  manjeri@upm.edu.my (Manjeri, G.) * Corresponding authorShort CommunicationEffectiveness of Various Botanical Traps against Apple Snail, Pomacea maculata (Gastropoda: Ampullariidae) in a Rice FieldSyamsul, R. B.1, Muhamad, R.1*, Arfan, A. G.1,2 and Manjeri, G.11Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia2Department of Entomology, Faculty of Crop Protection, Sindh Agriculture University Tandojam, Sindh, PakistanABSTRACTThe adverse effects of molluscicides applied for the control of the invasive apple snails, Pomacea spp., have led to the search for eco-based cultural, mechanical and biological control techniques. Therefore, a field study on the relative effectiveness of locally available and cost effective plant-based traps against Pomacea spp. was conducted. Results showed jackfruit skin (9.03 ± 0.60 / m2 and 6.03 ± 0.60 / m2) and damaged pomelo (9.00 ± 0.61 / m2 and 5.78 ± 0.74 / m2) were relatively more effective than tapioca leaves, water spinach leaves and old newspaper. Snails also displayed preference for fresh materials as compared to rotten materials. Thus, incorporating these findings in rice fields during early susceptible growth will ease the collection and destruction of snails.Keywords: Apple snail, Pomacea, rice, botanical trapINTRODUCTIONInvasive apple snails, Pomacea maculata Perry, 1810 and Pomacea canaliculata Lamarck, 1822 (Gastropoda; Ampullariidae) are  ser ious  pests  of  many aquat ic macrophytes including rice (Hayes et al., 2008; Horgan et al., 2014). These invasive snails were introduced into Malaysia around 1991 and spread to all rice growing areas of the country, causing heavy losses to rice yields (Yahaya et al., 2006; Arfan et al., 2014). Snails mostly feed on young rice seedlings and their severe damage could result in complete loss of rice crop (Teo, 2003). In Malaysia, growers often spend Syamsul, R. B., Muhamad, R., Arfan, A. G. and Manjeri, G.138 Pertanika J. Trop. Agric. Sci. 39 (2) 137 - 143 (2016)approximately RM 425 per hectare to control snails (Yahaya et al., 2006), whereas global cost of apple snail infestation could reach billion of US$ (Horgan et al., 2014). In an attempt to control snails, growers mostly apply chemicals which are often not specific molluscicides. These random chemicals are more preferred due to their easy application and fast action (Schnorbach et al., 2006). However, the adverse effect of chemicals on men and their environment always necessitate for alternative cultural, mechanical and biological control measures to manage apple snails (Yusa, 2006). To date, the effectiveness of botanical traps as an alternative control measure in the collection and destruction of snails have been evaluated in different countries with varying success (Joshi et al., 2001; Teo, 2003). However, such studies are still lacking in Peninsular Malaysia, with the only available work done by Amzah and Yahya (2014). Lettuce, jackfruit, papaya fruit and leaves, cassava leaves, sweet potato, tapioca, taro, water melon and aubergines are some of the botanical materials used as baits against apple snails, which are mainly to ease in their collection and killing so as to manage their population below the threshold levels (Glover & Campbell, 1994; Fukushima et al., 2001; Cagauan, 2003; Teo, 2003). Therefore, considering the potential of botanical traps in managing apple snail populations, the relative effectiveness of various locally available and cost effective botanical traps was thoroughly evaluated against Pomacea spp. in a rice field. The results of the study could be utilised in the management of apple snails in rice field by facilitating their easy picking and destruction, thus reducing damages to rice.MATERIALS AND METHODSStudy siteThe study was conducted at a 0.405 hectare farmer managed rice field in Kodiang, Kedah (6° 21’ 55.19” N, 100° 20’ 21.31”E) during the months of August-September, 2014. The field is under the management of MUDA Agricultural Development Authority (MADA). Rice variety MR220CL1 was cultivated by direct seeding.Botanical TrapsThe attractants used in this study were jackfruit skin (Artocarpus heterophyllus L.), tapioca leaves (Manihot esculenta Crantz), water spinach leaves (Ipomoea aquatic Forssk.), damaged pomelo (Citrus maxima Merr.) and old newspapers (Figure 1). The attractants were selected according to their local availability throughout the rice growing season and cost effectiveness. All the attractant materials were filled into individual containers of 17 cm x 12 cm x 5.5 cm size and covered with wire mesh to prevent attractant materials from floating into the field. All traps set up were fully submerged in the rice field to enhance their attractiveness to snails (Fukushima et al., 2001).Plant-Based Traps for Apple Snails139Pertanika J. Trop. Agric. Sci. 39 (2): 137 - 143 (2016)Experimental Design, Data Collection and AnalysisThe experiment was conducted in a Randomised Complete Block Design (RCBD). The rice field was divided into four blocks depending on the source of irrigation in the field. In each block, all five attractants were randomly placed at four locations (replicates) with a one meter distance between the individual attractants to avoid their interference in attracting the snails. The observations were started one week after sowing of rice and continued up to week four as snails are more destructive to young rice seedlings than older seedlings (Sanico et al., 2002). The observations were taken twice in a week i.e., day one (fresh attractant) and day four (rotten attractant). Materials were deemed as rotten when it deteriorated in shape after being set as traps. The attractants were replaced with fresh materials every week. On each observation, the total number of apple snails attracted were counted, identified and classified as juveniles and adults according to their life stages. The identification was done according to Cowie et al. (2006), Hayes et al. (2012) and Marwato and Nur (2012) based on the external morphology of the apple snails.Data col lected for  the level  of attractiveness of different traps were analysed using two-way analysis of variance. The means, with significant differences, were separated using Least Square Difference (LSD). All the analyses were done using SAS 9.3 statistical package (SAS Institute Inc. 2009).RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONSpecies IdentificationAll the snails collected during the study were identified as P. maculata according to their shell morphology Cowie et al. (2006), Hayes et al. (2012) and Marwato and Nur (2012). The presence of at least four apple snail species (P. canaliculata, P. maculata, P. scalaris and P. diffusa) has been reported in Southeast Asia, with former two being most abundant and widely distributed (Rawlings et al., 2007; Hayes et al., 2008). Higher abundance and wider distribution of P. canaliculata in comparison to P. maculata Figure 1. Different attractants used in the study (a) damaged pomelo; (b) tapioca leaves; (c) jackfruit skin; (d) water spinach (e) old newspaperSyamsul, R. B., Muhamad, R., Arfan, A. G. and Manjeri, G.140 Pertanika J. Trop. Agric. Sci. 39 (2) 137 - 143 (2016)in invaded areas including Malaysia have also been reported (Yahaya et al., 2006; Rawlings et al., 2007; Hayes et al., 2008). However, recent studies in Peninsular Malaysia confirmed the abundance and wide scale distribution of P. maculata as compared to P. canaliculata (Arfan et al., 2014).Level of Attractiveness of Different Botanical Traps Against Juveniles and Adult P. maculataResults showed that all the materials used have the potential to attract juvenile and adult snails (Figure 2). However, jackfruit skin (9.03 ± 0.60 / m2 and 6.03 ± 0.60 / m2) and damaged pomelo (9.00 ± 0.61 / m2 and 5.78 ± 0.74 / m2) showed significantly higher attractiveness for both juvenile and adult snails, respectively (P < 0.05), although no difference was recorded between them (P > 0.05). Similarly, no significant difference was also recorded in the relative attractiveness of tapioca leaves, water spinach and old newspapers (P < 0.05). Moreover, juveniles showed significantly more preference for fresh jackfruit skin (10.06 ± 0.60 / m2), damaged pomelo (9.81 ± 0.71 / m2) and tapioca leaves (7.69 ± 0.10 / m2) as compared to rotten traps of respective materials (P < 0.05; Figure 3). Moreover, no significant difference was recorded between fresh and rotten traps of water spinach and newspapers in attracting juveniles (P > 0.05; Figure 3). However, the adult snails only showed significant difference between fresh (6.50 ± 0.61 / m2) and rotten (5.06 ± 0.50 / m2) jackfruit skin (P < 0.05; Figure 4). Previous studies also highlighted the potential of various botanical materials such as lettuce, cassava, sweet potato, taro, tapioca, giliricidia and papaya to attract apple snails with varying success (Glover & Campbell, 1994; Cowie, 2002; Teo, 2003). Comparatively higher preferences for water melon, lettuce, aubergines and tomato in Figure 2. Relative effectiveness of different attractants against juvenile and adult P. maculata *Means followed by the same letters (small letters = juveniles; capital letters = adult) are not significantly different (P < 0.05)Plant-Based Traps for Apple Snails141Pertanika J. Trop. Agric. Sci. 39 (2): 137 - 143 (2016)comparison to rice have been reported for apple snails and have been suggested to be exploited for easy hand picking of snails (Fukushima et al., 2001; Cagauan, 2003). Jackfruit, papaya fruit and leaves, cassava leaves, water spinach, banana leaves and old newspapers have also been evaluated as potential attractants of apple snails, where jackfruit was found to show the highest attractiveness for the apple snails (Amzah & Yahya, 2014). As observed in this study, relatively higher attractiveness of jackfruit skin and damaged pomelo for apple snails could be due to their strong fragrance as Figure 3. Relative effectiveness of fresh and rotten attractants against juvenile P. maculata *Means followed by different letters against individual traps are not significantly differentFigure 4. Relative effectiveness of fresh and rotten attractants against adult P. maculata *Means followed by different letters against individual traps are not significantly differentSyamsul, R. B., Muhamad, R., Arfan, A. G. and Manjeri, G.142 Pertanika J. Trop. Agric. Sci. 39 (2) 137 - 143 (2016)compared to other attractants. Estebenet (1995) has also observed significant role of odour towards damage potential of snails to different macrophytes. The snails are highly dependent on their chemoreceptive ability in detecting macrophytes with strong odour that also supports their faster growth (Cowie, 2002; Van Dyke et al., 2013). In this study, fresh botanical trap materials showed higher attractiveness for adult and juvenile snails. Therefore for better attractiveness of traps, their freshness should be maintained as rotten traps may repel snails away from traps towards rice. It is also important that botanical traps used should be more attractive than rice to divert the snails towards traps (Cowie, 2002).In conclusion, all the traps studied have the potential to attract juvenile and adult snails. However, jackfruit skin and damaged pomelo were the most attractive botanical traps. In addition, fresh traps of individual materials were more attractive than their rotten traps. This study successfully highlights a variety of potential and effective botanical traps that can be incorporated into the management of Pomacea spp. to ease their collection and destruction. All the materials studied are easily available and cost effective for farmers. Fresh traps can be set up on a weekly basis for a better management of snails considering their higher attractiveness. Overall, the findings of this study can serve as an effective option against the commonly applied hazardous chemical control techniques.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSAuthors acknowledge the Research Grant Scheme LRGS (5525001) (Food Security) and Universiti Putra Malaysia for funding this research project.REFERENCESAmzah, B., & Yahya, H. (2014). Evaluation of Several Plant-Based Attractants for Apple Snail Management. Acta Biologica Malaysiana, 3(2), 49-57.Arfan, A. G., Muhamad, R., Omar, D., Nor Azwady, A. A., & Manjeri, G. (2014). Distribution of two Pomacea spp. in rice fields of Peninsular Malaysia. Annual Research and Review in Biology, 4(24), 4123-4136.Cagauan, A. (2003). Golden Apple Snail Pomacea spp. in the Philippines: Review on Levels of Infestation, Control Methods, Utilization and Future Research Directions. Journal of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 37(2), 7-32.Cowie, R. H. (2002). Apple Snails (Ampullariidae) as agricultural pests: their biology, impacts and management. In G. M. Baker (Ed.), Molluscs as crop pests (pp. 145-192). Wallingford: CABI.Cowie, R. H., Hayes, K. A., Thiengo, S. C., Joshi, R., & Sebastian, L. (2006). What are apple snails? Confused taxonomy and some preliminary resolution. In R. C. Joshi & L. S. Sebastian (Eds.), Global advances in ecology and management of golden apple snails (pp. 3-23). Nueva Ecija: Philippine Rice Research Institute.Estebenet, A. L. (1995). Food and feeding in Pomacea canaliculata (Gastropoda: Ampullariidae). The Veliger, 38(4), 277-283.Fukushima, Y., Nakamura, S.-i., & Fujiyoshi, N. (2001). Preference and feeding behavior of apple snail, (Pomacea canaliculata), for fruits and vegetables. Japanese Journal of Crop Science, 70(3), 432-436.Plant-Based Traps for Apple Snails143Pertanika J. Trop. Agric. Sci. 39 (2): 137 - 143 (2016)Glover, N., & Campbell, C. (1994). Apple snails in wetland taro. Pacific Islands Farm Manual, Taro Pest and Disease Leaflet, 5, 1-4.Hayes, K. A., Cowie, R. H., Thiengo, S. C., & Strong, E. E. (2012). Comparing apples with apples: clarifying the identities of two highly invasive Neotropical Ampullariidae (Caenogastropoda). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 166(4), 723-753.Hayes, K. A., Joshi, R., Thiengo, S., & Cowie, R. H. (2008). Out of South America: multiple origins of non-native apple snails in Asia. Diversity and Distribution, 14(4), 701-712.Horgan, F. G., Stuart, A. M., & Kudavidanage, E. P. (2014). Impact of invasive apple snails on the functioning and services of natural and managed wetlands. Acta Oecologica, 54, 90-100.Joshi, R., Delacruz, M., Martin, E., Cabigat, J., Bahatan, R., Bahatan, A., Abayao, E., Choy-Awon, J., Chilagan, N., & Cayong, A. (2001). Current Status of the Golden Apple Snail in the Ifugao Rice Terraces, Philippines. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 18(2-3), 71-90.Marwato, R. M., & Nur, R. I. (2012). Notes on the distribution of invasive freshwater snail Pomacea canaliculata (Lamarck, 1822) and P. insularum (d’Orbigny, 1835) in Indonesia. Biotropia, 18, 123-128.Rawlings, T., Hayes, K., Cowie, R., & Collins, T. (2007). The identity, distribution, and impacts of non-native apple snails in the continental United States. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 7(1), 97.Sanico, A. L., Peng, S., Laza, R. C., & Visperas, R. M. (2002). Effect of seedling age and seedling number per hill on snail damage in irrigated rice. Crop Protection, 21(2), 137-143.Schnorbach, H. J., Rauen, H. W., Bieri, M., Joshi, R., & Sebastian, L. (2006). Chemical control of the golden apple snail, Pomacea canaliculata. In R. C. Joshi & L. S. Sebastian (Eds.), Global advances in ecology and management of golden apple snails (pp. 419-438). Nueva Ecija: Philippine Rice Research Institute.Teo, S. S. (2003). Golden apple snail (Pomacea canaliculata Lamarck, 1819) in Sabah, Malaysia- Current situation and management strategy. In Proceedings of Seventh International Congress on Medical and Applied Malacology. Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines.Van Dyke, J. M., McGlynn, S. E., & Ingram, L. A. (2013). U.S. Patent No. 8,341,875. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.Yahaya, H., Nordin, M., Hisham, M., & Sivapragasam, A. (2006). Golden apple snails in Malaysia. In R. C. Joshi & L. S. Sebastian (Eds.), Global advances in ecology and management of golden apple snails (pp. 215-230). Nueva Ecija: Philippine Rice Research Institute.Yusa, Y. (2006). Predators of the introduced apple snail, Pomacea canaliculata (Gastropoda: Ampullariidae): their effectiveness and utilization in biological control. In R. C. Joshi & L. S. Sebastian (Eds.), Global advances in ecology and management of golden apple snails (pp. 345-361). Nueva Ecija: Philippine Rice Research Institute.

Effectiveness of various botanical traps against apple snail, Pomacea maculata (Gastropoda: Ampullariidae) in a rice field

http://psasir.upm.edu.my/29559/1/01%20JTAS-0784-2015%20%28Short%20Communication%29.pdf

Effectiveness of various botanical traps against apple snail, Pomacea maculata (Gastropoda: Ampullariidae) in a rice field

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Universiti Putra Malaysia Institutional Repository