Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T05:21:19.975Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improvement of survival of the house fly (Musca domestica L.) larvae under mass-rearing conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 October 2012

H. Čičková ,
M. Kozánek  and
P. Takáč
H. Čičková*
Affiliation:
Institute of Zoology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravská cesta 9, 845 06 Bratislava, Slovakia Scientica s. r. o., Hybešova 33, 831 06 Bratislava, Slovakia
M. Kozánek
Affiliation:
Institute of Zoology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravská cesta 9, 845 06 Bratislava, Slovakia
P. Takáč
Affiliation:
Institute of Zoology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravská cesta 9, 845 06 Bratislava, Slovakia Scientica s. r. o., Hybešova 33, 831 06 Bratislava, Slovakia
*
*Author for correspondence Fax: +421 2 59302646 E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two new approaches were examined, aimed at increasing survival of the house fly (Musca domestica L.) larvae under mass-rearing conditions of a biodegradation facility: modification of the larval substrate and dispersal of the eggs during inoculation. The two types of pig manure used in this study (manure with sawdust and manure without sawdust) differed in terms of larval survival and nutritional value for the house fly larvae. Larval survival in manure without sawdust in the control treatment was low (46.8 ± 2.1%) and its nutritional value for the larvae were high. Addition of 5.7% of previously biodegraded manure did not significantly affect larval survival (52.3 ± 1.9%), but larval development was faster and the pupae were significantly smaller (14.28 ± 0.4 mg) compared to the control (16.29 ± 0.5 mg). Using alternative substrate for incubation of eggs and first-instar larvae significantly increased larval survival (63.3 ± 3.3%) and decreased the mean weight of produced pupae (14.39 ± 0.71 mg). Overall, the weight of recovered biomass in the alternative substrate treatment increased by 14.3 kg ton−1 of manure compared to the control. Larval survival in manure with sawdust was generally higher than 70%, but its nutritional value for the larvae was lower than in manure without sawdust. Dispersal of eggs over the surface of manure with sawdust significantly affected larval survival and mean weight of pupae. Larval survival was significantly lower (59.2 ± 4.0%) and pupae were significantly heavier (18.45 ± 0.8 mg) when eggs were applied to a small area on the manure surface (spot treatment), as compared to diagonal, Z-line and multiple zig-zag dispersal (72.5 ± 2.4 to 74.6 ± 3.0% and 14.76 ± 0.6 to 15.97 ± 0.6 mg, respectively). No significant differences were observed in larval survival or mean weight of pupae when comparing the diagonal, Z-line and multiple zig-zag dispersal patterns. Implementation of the techniques which improve larval survival and increase the weight of produced fly biomass may decrease demand for production of house fly eggs and, therefore, reduce the maintenance costs of adult colony, as well as increase the revenue earned by selling the products.

Keywords

house flymass-rearingsurvivalegg dispersalsubstrate modificationbiodegradation
Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 103 , Issue 1 , February 2013 , pp. 119 - 125
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achiano, K.A. & Giliomee, J.H. (2004) Effect of crowding on fecundity, body size, developmental time, survival and oviposition of Carcinops pumilio (Erichson) (Coleoptera: Histeridae) under laboratory conditions. African Entomology 12, 209–215.Google Scholar
Achiano, K.A. & Giliomee, J.H. (2005) Diptera breeding in poultry manure and the abiotic factors affecting their numbers. African Entomology 13, 239–248.Google Scholar
Barnard, D.R., Harms, R.H. & Sloan, D.R. (1998) Biodegradation of poultry manure by house fly (Diptera: Muscidae). Environmental Entomology 27, 600–605.Google Scholar
Black, W.C. IV & Krafsur, E.S. (1987) Fecundity and size in the housefly: investigations of some environmental sources and genetic correlates of variation. Medical and Veterinary Entomology 1, 369–382.Google Scholar
Čičková, H., Pastor, B., Kozánek, M., Martínez-Sánchez, A., Rojo, S. & Takáč, P. (2012) Biodegradation of pig manure by the house fly, Musca domestica: a viable ecological strategy for pig manure management. PLoS ONE 7, e32798.Google Scholar
Farkas, R., Hogsette, J.A. & Borzsonyi, L. (1998) Development of Hydrotaea aenescens and Musca domestica (Diptera: Muscidae) in poultry and pig manures of different moisture content. Environmental Entomology 27, 695–699.Google Scholar
Fatchurochim, S., Geden, C.J. & Axtell, R.C. (1989) Filth fly (Diptera) oviposition and larval development in poultry manure of various moisture levels. Journal of Entomological Science 24, 224–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krafsur, E.S. (1998) Sterile insect technique for suppressing and eradicating insect population: 55 years and counting. Journal of Agricultural Entomology 15, 303–317.Google Scholar
Pastor, B., Čičková, H., Kozánek, M., Martínez-Sánchez, A., Takáč, P. & Rojo, S. (2011) Effect of the size of the pupae, adult diet, oviposition substrate and adult population density on egg production in Musca domestica (Diptera: Muscidae). European Journal of Entomology 108, 587–596.Google Scholar
Readshaw, J.L. & van Gerwen, A.C.M. (1983) Age-specific survival, fecundity and fertility of the adult blowfly, Lucilia cuprina, in relation to crowding, protein food and population cycles. Journal of Animal Ecology 52, 879–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rivers, D.B., Thompson, C. & Brogan, R. (2011) Physiological trade-offs of forming maggot masses by necrophagous flies on vertebrate carrion. Bulletin of Entomological Research 101, 599–611.Google Scholar
Sheppard, D.C., Newton, G.L., Thompson, S.A. & Savage, S. (1994) A value added manure management system using the black soldier fly. Bioresource Technology 50, 275–279.Google Scholar
Sorokoletov, O.N. (2006) Technological and ecological aspects of waste processing of poultry and swine farming by the larvae of Musca domestica. PhD thesis, Novosibirsk State Agrarian University, Russia.Google Scholar
St-Hilaire, S., Cranfill, K., McGuire, M.A., Mosley, E.E., Tomberlin, J.K., Newton, L., Sealey, W., Sheppard, C. & Irving, S. (2007) Fish offal recycling by the black soldier fly produces a foodstuff high in omega-3 fatty acids. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 38, 309–313.Google Scholar
Ward, P.I., Foglia, M. & Blanckenhorn, W.U. (1999) Oviposition site choice in the yellow dung fly Scathophaga stercoraria. Ethology 105, 423–430.Google Scholar
Zar, J.H. (2010) Biostatistical analysis. 5th edn. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, Pearson Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Zhemchuzhina, A.A. & Zvereva, E.L. (1985) The effect of some factors on the selection of oviposition site by females of the house fly Musca domestica L. Meditsinskaya Parazitologiya i Parazitarniye Bolezni 55, 55–57.Google Scholar